WEBVTT

METADATA
Video-Count: 1
Video-1: youtube.com/watch?v=k72ATGxmoGA

Part: 1

1
00:02:22.400 --> 00:02:39.680
We're going to go ahead and call the uh special magistrate hearings for um July 9th um to order. Um first order of business is the approval of the minutes for uh May, but we also

2
00:02:39.680 --> 00:03:01.680
have the approval of the minutes for April as well. I'll go ahead and approve both of those. Um, okay. So, both of the um cases that are here are under our uh fine reduction

3
00:03:01.680 --> 00:03:17.280
requests. So, I'm going to go ahead and call those first. And since you've been here before, I don't need to um tell you how the process works. Um, we'll go ahead and call uh Antonio Chandler.

4
00:03:17.280 --> 00:03:37.360
Um, the 1508 CESM case. >> You doing PowerPoint >> for fine reduction? >> They do. >> Oh, where? >> In the PowerPoint folder. I'm high speed now, buddy. Got

5
00:03:37.360 --> 00:03:53.280
fancy powerpoints. >> But where did you put them? The special master one. >> Yeah. Okay. And then before we get started, any let's go ahead and swear in all county witnesses. So any county witness giving testimony, if you'll raise your right hand, do you solemnly swear affirm the

6
00:03:53.280 --> 00:04:09.280
testimony you're about to give to be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> I do. >> Okay. I'll go ahead and swear you all in. Anyone that are you both providing testimony? >> He's the only one really. I was just in case he need some fill in or something. But >> moral support.

7
00:04:09.280 --> 00:04:24.000
>> Yes. >> Okay. So, if you'll raise your right hand, do you solemnly swear affirm the testimony you're about to give to be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> Yes, ma'am. >> Can you state your name for the record, please? >> Antonio Trey Chandler. >> Okay. >> Roger Willford.

8
00:04:24.000 --> 00:05:48.720
>> Thank you. >> Technical difficulties. >> Oh, >> one second. Yeah. There we go. Oh, good morning, Madam Magistrate. Um, John Martin, manager of code enforcement

9
00:05:48.720 --> 00:06:06.400
for Semino County. And this is case 1508, CESM, Antonio Chandler, and Gloria Day. The inspector who put this case in compliance is Chris Smith. Initial inspection occurred 114204. Notice mailed to respondent in 85205.

10
00:06:06.400 --> 00:06:26.960
Compliance date of 1112 2015. follow-up inspection 62921 and 62426 where it was placed in compliance as a final inspection. The uh violations cited on this case were for 105.1

11
00:06:26.960 --> 00:06:47.840
appendix A of chapter 40 and it was unpermitted construction. Clicky clicky clicky clicky. Thank you. Well, in this case, the the requested action is on February 18th, 2016, an order was issued imposing a lean on the property in the

12
00:06:47.840 --> 00:07:03.120
amount of $1,750 for 35 days of non-compliance to continue to acrew at a rate of $50 a day until brought into compliance. An affidavit of compliance was filed after verifying the permit was obtained through the online seminal county

13
00:07:03.120 --> 00:07:18.160
permitting system. On June 24th 26, a request for reduction on application was filed by the applicant and the fee of $250 to process the application was paid. The applicant, Antonio Chandler, is requesting a reduction of the total

14
00:07:18.160 --> 00:07:36.160
acrude lean of $187,850 to $1,000 and is allowing the applicant to 30 days in order to pay. The county is in full support of this request. And that concludes this presentation. >> Mr. Chandler, do you have anything you'd

15
00:07:36.160 --> 00:07:51.280
like to add? >> No, sir. No, ma'am. So, you you're comfortable with paying $1,000? >> Yes, ma'am. >> Okay. And you know that you you're not going to allow something like this to happen again on the property or any

16
00:07:51.280 --> 00:08:06.720
other properties that you own? >> Yes, ma'am. >> Okay. Then I will go ahead and reduce the fine to $1,000 um with um payment within 30 days. If payment is not made within 30 days, the fine will revert

17
00:08:06.720 --> 00:08:24.840
back to $187,850. Okay. >> Yes, ma'am. >> All right. Thank you. >> Thank you, Antonio. >> Okay, it is. Okay. For the record, I'm going to correct Gloria Day is actually Gloria King.

18
00:08:25.280 --> 00:08:58.000
>> Thank you. >> We're good. >> Yeah, >> it's Gloria King. >> Yes. >> Okay. Okay. The next case 2452 CESM Sergio Salazar. >> Hello there. >> Good morning.

19
00:08:58.000 --> 00:09:12.560
>> Can you state your name, please? Sergio Salazar. >> I'm going to swear you in. Do you solemnly swear affirm the testimony you're about to give to be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> I do. >> Thank you. >> Good morning, madame magistrate. This is case 2452 CESM. The respondent's name is

20
00:09:12.560 --> 00:09:29.120
Sergio R. Salazar. The inspector who placed this case in compliance is Supervisor Christopher Smith. The initial inspection was 114 of 23. Notice to respondent was 8824 with a board-ordered compliance date of 109204.

21
00:09:29.120 --> 00:09:48.880
Follow-up inspection occurred on December 3rd, 2024 and a final inspection which placed this case in compliance occurred on March the 19th, 2026. The property in question is 3572 Jericho Drive in Castleberry located unincorporated Seminal County. the

22
00:09:48.880 --> 00:10:05.920
violation charges chapter 40 appendix A section 105.1 unpermitted construction the requested action in this case is on December 12th 2024 magistrate ordered was imposing a lean on the property in

23
00:10:05.920 --> 00:10:21.200
the amount of $100 for each day until brought into compliance an affidavit of compliance was filed after verifying the permit was obtained through the online seminal county permitting system on June 1st 2026 a request for reduction application was filed by the applicant

24
00:10:21.200 --> 00:10:38.560
in the fee of $100 to process this application was paid. The applicant Sergio Salazar is requesting a complete waiver of the total lean of $51,800 and the acred admin cost of $76276 to zero. Based on the respondent's

25
00:10:38.560 --> 00:10:54.640
financial inadequacies, the county is requesting a reduction to $200 minus the previous application paid by the respondent of $100, resulting in a remaining fee of $100 to be paid over a 30-day time frame. That concludes this

26
00:10:54.640 --> 00:11:14.320
presentation. >> What is the what what was the delay? Why did he um did it take so long? >> Um during that time I I and I came into some uh health issues. Um and then finding somebody that could uh a

27
00:11:14.320 --> 00:11:30.880
contractor that would do the drawing for me so I can pull the permit at at the what I had available financially. Just couldn't find someone to do it. I finally I asked everyone and I just couldn't find anyone that could do the prints cuz I believe the prints were all

28
00:11:30.880 --> 00:11:48.240
I needed. Um but I was also going through some other personal and mental health issues as well at the time. >> Okay. I my concern is that you were able to financially do the actual work and

29
00:11:48.240 --> 00:12:05.760
that you did the work and that was fine, but doing what needed to be done, >> right? Absolutely. >> To get it to where it was, um, proper, >> right? >> So, um, >> what started everything was actually so I walked out of my front deck and fell

30
00:12:05.760 --> 00:12:22.800
through um because it was so rotted. So, I just patched it through and then started putting new boards every time I could get some money, put in a new board, new board until everything was just kind of replaced. Um, it wasn't done like >> um I I didn't have the money right away

31
00:12:22.800 --> 00:12:39.600
to do all of it. >> Okay. So, do you understand that you cannot do >> Oh, absolutely. Okay. I absolutely understand. Yes. Um, >> and the other thing that concerns me is the county has incurred costs of6 $762

32
00:12:39.600 --> 00:13:04.959
>> in its so the taxpayers of the county are are footing the bill then for >> you know the the length of time that it took Um, so what I'm going to do with you is I'm

33
00:13:04.959 --> 00:13:23.519
going to split the costs. So the county's costs are $762. Somebody who's better at math than me, what's half of that? 350 380 >> 381

34
00:13:23.519 --> 00:13:39.040
>> 762 >> 38138 >> Yeah. Okay. You paid $100 though toward an application fee. I'm going to take that off of that amount

35
00:13:39.040 --> 00:14:02.880
and then leave you with $28138. But what I'm going to do is give you 90 days to pay that amount. And so you can pay it in payments, you can pay it at one time in 90 days. Um,

36
00:14:02.880 --> 00:14:18.079
but I need you to understand the seriousness of this and the impact that it has on others >> if you if you don't follow through with what the requirements are. Um, so I'll order you to pay um I'll reduce your

37
00:14:18.079 --> 00:14:34.000
fine of $51,800 to $281 well actually to $381.38 with credit for $100 application fee, leaving a total of $28138

38
00:14:34.000 --> 00:15:05.920
to be paid within 90 days or will revert back to $51,800. >> Okay. >> Thank you so much. >> Thank you. Okay. So, do you all need me to tell you how the process works or are we good to go with

39
00:15:05.920 --> 00:15:23.920
new cases? You guys understand it. I don't need to waste that breath. Okay. All right. Well, then we will start at number one 25 375 Mabel Hill and Harry Hill and Bernice

40
00:15:23.920 --> 00:15:56.560
McKenna and Cheryl Hardy. >> You're looking so good today. I needed you to go first. >> Yeah, >> I put it on today. >> Okay. So, I am CEO Jamal Jackson. Case number is 25375. Respondent's name Mabel Hill. Harry Hill Bernice McKenna the Air

41
00:15:56.560 --> 00:16:17.440
Cheryl M. Hardy. Partial ID 32193130000005400000000. Address 2054 Cypes Avenue Sanford Florida. uh within unincorporated seminal county, Florida. No homestead. The description of violation is dilapitated dilapidated, I'm sorry,

42
00:16:17.440 --> 00:16:34.160
unsafe vacant structure. Again, my name is presented. The complaint was a citizen complaint. Initial inspection was October 20th, 2025. Notice was mailed to respondent October 21st, 2025. Compliance date was

43
00:16:34.160 --> 00:16:50.000
November 21st, 2025. Follow-up site inspections were November 21st, 2025, January 6, 2026, February 9th, 2026, May 6th, 2026, and July 8th, 2026. Results

44
00:16:50.000 --> 00:17:05.439
of reinspections violation cited remain on the property. Violations are as follows. Uh, chapter 95.5 section 107 abatement of violation. Uh 109.1.1

45
00:17:05.439 --> 00:17:19.919
unsafe structures 109.1.3 unfit structures 109.1.5 subsection 5 hazardous structures subsection 7 hazardous structures and

46
00:17:19.919 --> 00:17:35.840
subsection 9 hazardous structures 109.5 unauthorized tampering 109.8 8 Prohibited occupancy 109.9 Restoration of Abatement

47
00:17:35.840 --> 00:17:53.200
110.1 imminent danger 110.5 cost of emergency repairs 111 demolition 111.3 failure to comply. So, the next 10 slides are the

48
00:17:53.200 --> 00:18:33.520
compliance schedule that was sent out to owners. So here you have the property appraisers page showing the property and ownership information. The deed showing the current owners of this property.

49
00:18:33.520 --> 00:18:49.280
Following photographs you are about to see are true and accurate to what what I observed on the dates noted. So as you see this is the front porch of the house. The middle photograph shows that the front porch is completely gone. That is the entry into the house. Those two

50
00:18:49.280 --> 00:19:06.280
beams that you see there, you walk across those to get into the home. The the third picture is the outdoor storage of trash, junk, and debris scattered around the left side of the house and a makeshift piece of fencing material.

51
00:19:06.320 --> 00:19:25.760
I next inspection out I no changes were made. Um, as you see on that front porch, that side portion to the left in the middle picture is now gone. The roof is still in disrepair. Next status inspection, pretty much the same status. Nothing was changed to the

52
00:19:25.760 --> 00:19:46.039
house. No contact with anyone. Same same as of the next follow-up inspection, the next status inspection rather. There were no changes to the property. Outdoor storage still remained. Some stores it was just moved further to the back of the property. No other changes.

53
00:19:46.960 --> 00:20:05.120
Status inspection showing that no changes have been made. That is the those are the photographs of me posting the property for this hearing. Now, my last inspection, no changes have been made. The rear roof still in disrepair. As you still see the walkway

54
00:20:05.120 --> 00:20:21.799
in the picture to the far right, the walkway is still the same as it was, the two beams across the front. This is a copy of the title search that was done to make sure that all all owners were notified.

55
00:20:21.840 --> 00:20:37.840
The return mail, this is these are copies of the return mail that I received. All certified letters that went out were returned. So all ownership the mail was returned >> and the letters were sent to the address that is on file with the property

56
00:20:37.840 --> 00:20:53.280
appraiser. >> That is correct. >> Based on the testimony evidence presented in this case 25375. It is determined that responded is Mabel Hill Harry Hill Bernese McKen Cheryl M. Hardy. the record owner of the

57
00:20:53.280 --> 00:21:09.840
property located at 2054 sites a Sanford Florida 32771 Simol County as determined by the property appraisers record in possession or control of the property and in violation of seminal county code chapters 95.5 section 107 109.1

58
00:21:09.840 --> 00:21:25.919
109.1.3 109.1.5 subsection 5 subsection 7 subsection 9 109.5 109.6 109.8 8, 109.9, 110.1, 110.5,

59
00:21:25.919 --> 00:21:44.240
111, and 111.3. At this time, I would like to submit this digital and case file into evidence. >> I'll accept the electronic case file into evidence. Um the can you tell me

60
00:21:44.240 --> 00:21:59.520
one of the violations I think that you um have cited was unauthorized tampering. >> So we place a I placed a placard on the property in the very beginning of the process showing that the property is

61
00:21:59.520 --> 00:22:15.600
unsafe and once you put the placard on the property it doesn't come off until the property is in compliance. The pro is not to be removed. It was removed. >> Okay. Now, usually in that instance, I would put another one up there. They just kept taking them down. >> Okay. All right.

62
00:22:15.600 --> 00:22:30.159
>> So, that's that's what was happening. >> Okay. >> And um what are one of these um codes that you have provided me for junk and debris?

63
00:22:30.159 --> 00:22:46.720
>> Um no. It would just all fall under the uh guise of I I spoke on the trash junk and debris. I did not site the trash, junk, and debris. I just cited the structure because once we go out to do a demolition, if we get to that point, we're going to take everything that's

64
00:22:46.720 --> 00:23:02.480
there. >> So, but but if you're demoing the structure, separate and apart from the demo of the structure, there could be other the other junk and debris that is on the property. >> Everything will be cleared on the

65
00:23:02.480 --> 00:23:20.880
property. >> Is the demolition regulation. Does it cover clearing of the property or is the clearing of the property separate and apart in

66
00:23:20.880 --> 00:23:36.240
>> No, it will cover the clearing of the property all the way down through the to the apron right to the sidewalk. >> But when you But demoing a property and removing junk and debris are two different >> correct >> things. Correct. There is a separate

67
00:23:36.240 --> 00:23:52.799
violation under um you can do it as a lot cleaning to remove the the trash, junk, and debris or it can be done under a housing and it would still need to be removed. Now, under the housing standards, it would be up to the owner to remove it. So, we didn't want to go

68
00:23:52.799 --> 00:24:09.200
that route by just allowing it to be there for the owner to remove it because there's nothing being done at the property. But my concern is one man's junk is another man's treasure. >> Correct. >> If there's something in that junk and

69
00:24:09.200 --> 00:24:28.880
debris that's and the curtilage of the actual structure, we we probably need to have them violated for the junk and debris removal as well. It could be cited for a lot cleaning for

70
00:24:28.880 --> 00:24:46.240
that. But the problem that we may run into is if they don't allow the lock cleaner to go onto the property, then we'll be right back to square one. >> But I can order the lock clean. Um,

71
00:24:46.240 --> 00:25:02.080
but I don't know if I can if you haven't cited them for it. Are there any of the things that you have cited them for that the lot clean would fall under too?

72
00:25:02.080 --> 00:25:19.039
>> We'll just we'll we'll do a lot clean and then this will the demolition will just be for the structure and then we'll deal with the lock clean inse because it's this is the start of the process for the demolition. It's not going to happen immediately. >> Okay. >> So Chris Smith, supervisor code

73
00:25:19.039 --> 00:25:35.520
enforcement. Um what's going to happen is we're going to this is going to get um determined that it's in violation obeyment order. We're not going to demo for you know months. We have to get approval and go yes. So the lot cleaning takes 15 days.

74
00:25:35.520 --> 00:25:50.480
>> If they don't comply we we take it. So we're going we can we can do a separate case on lock clean. You won't even have to worry about the trash just the uh the structure. >> Okay. So yeah, if you will initiate that lock clean separate just because >> they >> sounds good. Yes.

75
00:25:50.480 --> 00:26:07.679
>> Yeah. So okay, good deal. Um then I'm going to um >> still got a slide or two to read. >> Okay. I'm sorry. Yes, I will accept the electronic case file into the record. And now that's where we were.

76
00:26:07.679 --> 00:26:23.600
>> Right. So the recommendation is comply with code section site within 15 days or a fine of $500 per day thereafter. I want to also add 16208. These violations pose a serious threat to the health and safety of welfare of the general public and because of these

77
00:26:23.600 --> 00:26:38.240
violations we are asking for a health and safety tag on this property for securing the property until violations are corrected either by permitted repair or permitted demolition. Also uh section 109.6 transfer of ownership. It shall be

78
00:26:38.240 --> 00:26:54.159
law unlawful for the owner of any dwelling, unit or structure who has received a compliance order or upon whom a notice of violation has been served to sale transfer mortgage lease or otherwise disposed of such dwelling, unit, or structure to another until the

79
00:26:54.159 --> 00:27:10.559
provisions of the compliance order or notice of violation have been complied with or until such owner or the owner's authorized agent shall first furnish the grantee, transfere, mortgage, or lease a true copy of any compliance order or notice of violation issued by the code

80
00:27:10.559 --> 00:27:27.600
official and shall furnish to the code official a sign a notorized statement from the grantee transfer mortgage or leasey acknowledging the receipt of such compliance order or notice of violation and fully accepting the responsibility without condition for making the corrections or repairs required by such

81
00:27:27.600 --> 00:27:44.480
compliance order or notice of violation. This concludes my presentation. >> Madam Magistrate, may I make a comment on record, please? Yes, >> John Martin, Seminal County Code Enforcement Manager. The reason that we did not include the housing violation of

82
00:27:44.480 --> 00:27:59.039
trash, junk, and debris in this case, or that I didn't insist upon it already, is because there is already a current case against this property that the magistrate had ruled on previously um back in 212

83
00:27:59.039 --> 00:28:15.520
um April 24th, 2025 and the compliance date of May 8th, 2025 for trash, junk, and debris and a fine of $100 for each day thereafter has been recurring on property regarding the trash, junk, and debris on this parcel. So, it's already

84
00:28:15.520 --> 00:28:29.679
in amount >> and at the point of demolition, it will be collected and disposed of as well, which will put both of these cases in compliance. >> Okay. So under my prior order,

85
00:28:29.679 --> 00:28:47.919
did I give the authority to clean up um the property or no obligation but the ability to clean up the property or was it not my prior order? Was it a code enforcement board order?

86
00:28:47.919 --> 00:29:03.279
>> It was your order. >> Okay. >> You still want to do a lot of cleaning that will stop the fines? We can we can do a lot of cleaning and it'll stop the fines on this case and it'll get rid of the trash before demo. But it's >> and because I mean >> it's going to wait because we have to do

87
00:29:03.279 --> 00:29:18.880
an asbestous survey. We have to do another title search and we'll have to do an asbestous removal and then demolition quotes and >> well and my concern was the junk is all around the house. So you go to demolish the house, you're going to hit the junk also. So

88
00:29:18.880 --> 00:29:35.520
>> yeah, and a lot a lot of the junk is pieces and parts of what used to be the house. So it it's >> but as long as both orders are there then I think >> they're they're both they both exist and this >> okay >> uh this was under um

89
00:29:35.520 --> 00:29:52.240
I get the case number so I can see it. This is under case 25 uh- 000036. It would have a different SM case number but um the case was brought in April. It

90
00:29:52.240 --> 00:30:08.880
was found to be a non-compliance May 8th and it's been occurring a daily fine of $100 for each day thereafter uh since then. >> I generally put in there in the order that they have the right but that you have the right but not the obligation to clean it up. So you might have that

91
00:30:08.880 --> 00:30:24.480
right also um with that and then those quotes could be done together. >> All right. >> Perfect. Okay. Um, the other thing that I $500 a day, is this a repeat violation? >> No, it is not. It's just the severity of

92
00:30:24.480 --> 00:30:41.919
the property. There are um right across the street from there is another abatement property. And so what I don't want to happen is to feel as though well nothing is happening there that I can do what I want to do here. And this is to

93
00:30:41.919 --> 00:30:58.000
kind of push the owners into this trying to make something happen because I've had no contact with the ownership. >> The other the other property is theirs as well. >> It is not, but it's in the vicinity of this property and most times when you see a property that's not being taken care of, well, that one's not being

94
00:30:58.000 --> 00:31:14.080
taken care of. I I don't have to take care of this one. Not they not knowing that I have a case open on that one already as well and it's already running fines. And so to prevent that from happening because that property across the street is already further along in

95
00:31:14.080 --> 00:31:31.760
the process. It's next steps is uh as best is removal and demolition for that property. But to the untrained eye that is not known. >> Right. I just I don't think I have the authority to go $500. >> You can go up to a thousand if you'd like based on the ordinance change that

96
00:31:31.760 --> 00:31:47.159
we made. >> You will have the ordinance. >> Yes, ma'am. changed the ordinance back in um August of 2025 >> based on the change is based on population. I guess you can go as high as a thousand. >> Okay. Okay.

97
00:31:48.080 --> 00:32:07.519
>> Well, that makes me happy and I was that will give me a lot a lot better. Um what's the um property appraiser value on this property? Do you know on the card does it say yeah

98
00:32:07.519 --> 00:32:35.120
>> offh hand >> I don't mean to put you on the spot that was kind of an unfair question but you know >> is it 2054 >> 20 54 >> okay so about 32,000 >> oh 320 so 300 100 for

99
00:32:35.120 --> 00:33:01.279
this. >> No worries. No worries. That was an unfair question. I kind of >> No, no, no. So sprung it on you >> on the on the property card. It's it's assessed at 102,000. >> Okay. >> 228. >> Okay. um

100
00:33:01.279 --> 00:33:22.799
taxable is 50,415. >> Okay. >> As of 2026. >> Okay. Because it save our homes probably. Okay. >> Okay. I'm going to find that the respondents Mabel Hill, Harry Hill,

101
00:33:22.799 --> 00:33:38.559
Bernice McKenna, and Cheryl M. Hardy have been properly noticed to be here today and they are not here. Um I'm going to find that uh the property is in violation of the

102
00:33:38.559 --> 00:34:05.440
cited Seminal County codes. Um, and I'm going to order that the property be brought into compliance uh within 15 days, which is >> should be July 24th.

103
00:34:05.440 --> 00:34:25.040
>> July 24th. Yes, sir. Thank you. Um, and if not, um I I have a a problem. Just I want to place

104
00:34:25.040 --> 00:34:42.560
on the record the fact that the placard was removed multiple times is very um problematic to me and um shows willful behavior um related to this and the fact

105
00:34:42.560 --> 00:34:59.119
that there's already another um another case um and I'm assuming someone is living >> that is correct >> on the property. Um, so I'm actually going to um go

106
00:34:59.119 --> 00:35:17.760
$750 a day um based on the willful um acts of the individuals who are occupying the premises um if the property is not brought into compliance by July 24th. Um, I'm also

107
00:35:17.760 --> 00:35:33.920
going to order that, um, due to the health, safety, and welfare issues on the property that the prop the property may be uh, secured by the county. It may be um,

108
00:35:33.920 --> 00:35:50.320
cleaned up, demolished, um, any of the things that the county can do in order to make the property safe um, to the public. uh since this is not uh safe for

109
00:35:50.320 --> 00:36:05.680
um human habitation. Um and I'm also going to recognize in my order uh chapter 25 chapter 95.5 109.6

110
00:36:05.680 --> 00:36:36.640
related to the transfer of the property. Um and that is all. Thank you. >> Thank you. Okay, the next case 25408 Katherine Baker. It's all guy. Some uh code enforcement

111
00:36:36.640 --> 00:36:57.040
officer Shannon Henson, case number uh 25408. The respondent's name is Katherine E. Baker. The parcel ID is 3321305 0D00000090. Uh the address is 1862 Willow Lane in Winter Park, Florida in unencorporated

112
00:36:57.040 --> 00:37:12.160
Seminal County, Florida, and it has no homestead. The description of the violation is junk vehicle uh trash, junk, and debris in the yard. um Inspector Shannon Henson. And this complaint was self selfinitiated by

113
00:37:12.160 --> 00:37:27.440
myself. The initial complaint or initial inspection was October 24th, 2025. Um the first notice I mailed out was um in November the 20th, 2025. And the compliance the final compliance date uh

114
00:37:27.440 --> 00:37:44.240
for the uh scheduled compliance schedule was April 13th, 2026. and the property was found to be in compliance on July 8th, 2026. My following up inspections were November 20 uh 19th 2025,

115
00:37:44.240 --> 00:37:59.760
December 9th, 2025, January 5th, 2026, February 26th, 2026, March 11th, 2026, May um sorry, April 14th, 2026, May 4th, 2026, and then yesterday, July 8th,

116
00:37:59.760 --> 00:38:15.920
2026. Uh the violation cited no longer remains on the property. This violation was uh seminal county code chapter 95.5, section 302.8 motor uh or drunk vehicles and uh

117
00:38:15.920 --> 00:38:32.720
chapter 95.5 section 308.1 accumulation of rubbish or garbage. This was um my final not uh compliance schedule and the first one was mailed in November to 2020 25 and then this is my

118
00:38:32.720 --> 00:38:48.560
final one with a compliance date of April 13, 2026. This is the property appraisers um showing the property owner the property appraisers site and this is also the deed showing who

119
00:38:48.560 --> 00:39:05.760
the current owners are of this property. The following photos you are about to see are true and accurate to what the officer observed on the dates noted. Uh this is my first inspection. This is the front yard. Um the sideyard and the front of the house.

120
00:39:05.760 --> 00:39:23.119
This was November 19th, 2025. This is the front yard and also you can see the junk vehicle. This was the front of the yard and the junk vehicle. Uh December 9th, 2025. And this was January 5th, 2026.

121
00:39:23.119 --> 00:39:40.320
This was um February 26, 20 uh February 26, 2026, the front of the yard and the vehicle. And this was the front of the yard in March 11th, 2026. And then this was April 14th, 2026.

122
00:39:40.320 --> 00:39:56.720
This was May 4th, 2026. And this was when I posted for uh the hearing. And I did an inspection on June 6th, 2026. And this was posted for the hearing that was scheduled for July 9th, 2026.

123
00:39:56.720 --> 00:40:14.200
And this was my inspection yesterday. You can see the property's been cleared off. The junk vehicles are gone. And that was July 8th, 2026. These are the notices that I mailed out, the certified mail, and shows the delivery um

124
00:40:14.320 --> 00:40:30.240
based on the testimony and evidence presented in the case. 25408. It is determined that the respondent is Katherine E. Baker Air, the record owner of the property located at 1862 Willow Lane, Winter Park, Florida in Simol County, as determined by the property

125
00:40:30.240 --> 00:40:46.240
appraisers record in possession or control of the property and was in violation of the Seminal County Code 95.5 302.8 8 junk uh motor or junk vehicles and 308.1 accumulation of rubbish or

126
00:40:46.240 --> 00:41:01.839
garbage. And it is current this property is currently in compliance. Due to the history of the trash, junk, debris on this property, the county would like to find that a violation did exist and that the case and that this case it and that

127
00:41:01.839 --> 00:41:18.400
this case judicated if it comes out of compliance in the future, a repeat violation will be issued. At this time, I'd like to submit that uh this as digital and case file into evidence. >> I will accept the uh electronic and case file into evidence.

128
00:41:18.400 --> 00:41:36.720
This concludes my presentation. Okay. I'm going to find that the uh property owner, Katherine Baker, was properly noticed to be here and she is not present. I'm going to find that um the property was in violation of um Simino

129
00:41:36.720 --> 00:41:54.160
County Code Chapter 95.5 308.1 and 302.8 uh related to the accumulation of uh junk and debris and motor vehicles. Um I'm going to find that the property

130
00:41:54.160 --> 00:42:09.200
owner is in compliance at this time. however, has um I'm going to find that because of the prior the violations that have existed on the property that any uh future violation on the property of this type will be treated as a repeat

131
00:42:09.200 --> 00:42:39.200
violation. Thank you. Thank you. Next case 255 564 Samford Hangar LLC code enforcement officer Kina Hill case number 25564. The respondent is Sanford Hangar LLC.

132
00:42:39.200 --> 00:42:57.839
Parcel ID 331931509 0D 0050 address 3730 East SR46 Sanford Florida 32771 located within unincorporated

133
00:42:57.839 --> 00:43:13.599
semino county there's no homestead uh violation of description is unpermitted construction um inspector Cina Hill. This complaint came from the building department. The initial inspection was conducted

134
00:43:13.599 --> 00:43:29.680
December 2nd, 2025. Notice mailed to responded April 2nd, 2026. Um compliance date was given of May 7, 2026. My follow-up inspections were 129 2025

135
00:43:29.680 --> 00:43:49.280
1 9 20 26 25 of 26 41 2026 and my last inspection was yesterday July 8th 2026 and at that time the violation sited remains on the property. The Simino County Land Code Chapter 40

136
00:43:49.280 --> 00:44:08.119
unpermitted construction. This is a compliance schedule that was mailed um to the LLC telling him um what he needed to do to be in compliance.

137
00:44:08.400 --> 00:44:25.440
This is the property appraiser for the um Hangers LLC showing the current owner owner of the property. This is the deed that shows the current owner of the property. This is the sunbiz. It shows the

138
00:44:25.440 --> 00:44:41.280
registered registered agents of the property and they were also noted. The following photographs that you're about to see are true and accurate representation on what this officer observed on the day they were noted. This is the initial inspection when I

139
00:44:41.280 --> 00:44:56.319
went. the um stop work order was placed by the building department for the structure that is outside of the um building and that was in December. This was my follow-up inspection. Um the

140
00:44:56.319 --> 00:45:11.200
structure was still there and in February I went by it was also still there and then in April it was still there. I posted a notice of hearing for the

141
00:45:11.200 --> 00:45:27.839
July SM hearing at the property and my last inspection um 78 2026. It was still there. And just to note, I have been in contact with the owner of the property. We've spoken um his final

142
00:45:27.839 --> 00:45:44.400
result is he has to remove this structure entirely. So, he has been informed of that. >> There's no way for him to get a permit for it. >> No. after talking with um Caitlyn um because it's non-conforming, he's not able to have it on the front, the side,

143
00:45:44.400 --> 00:46:01.160
or the back of the property. So, he was given some options to maybe annex it into the city and see if they will allow him to have it. This was the mail that was mailed. It was returned

144
00:46:01.440 --> 00:46:17.839
and the tracking hasn't been updated since May of 26 that I sent to Robert Based on the testimony and evidence presented in case 25564, it is determined that the respondent Sanford Hangar LLC and the owner of the

145
00:46:17.839 --> 00:46:33.839
property located at 3730 ES SR46 Sanford, Florida 32771 in Simino County as determined by the property appraiser and in possession and control of the property in violation of Simino County

146
00:46:33.839 --> 00:46:53.440
Simino County Land Code Chapter 40105.1 unpermitted construction and at this time I would like to submit this digital case file into evidence. >> I will accept the digital and case file into evidence >> and my recommendation to comply with code section cited within 10 days or a

147
00:46:53.440 --> 00:47:10.800
fine of $250 per day after thereafter. This concludes my presentation. So is his only um recourse then in unincorporated county to remove the structures that he's >> Yeah, he said he built it out there to

148
00:47:10.800 --> 00:47:26.400
have a place for people to come to smoke. Um he did go through the process went through got the engineering traffic and then after consulting with the planning it was determined that because it's non-conforming he's not allowed to

149
00:47:26.400 --> 00:47:42.319
have it there. So I did speak with him via phone. He is currently out of town or out of the country right now, but he said he would have someone remove that altogether. >> Okay. Does he have to have any kind of permit to remove it or can he just remove it? >> Just remove it.

150
00:47:42.319 --> 00:48:00.079
>> Okay. All right. Then I'm going to find that Sanford Hangar LLC and Robert Canerie were um properly noticed to be here today. and um there is not a representative of

151
00:48:00.079 --> 00:48:16.800
Sanford Hangar LLC present. I'm going to find that um the property is in violation of seminal county code chapter 40 appendix A section 105.1 and I am going to uh order that the property be brought into compliance

152
00:48:16.800 --> 00:48:37.920
within 10 days um or by July 19th and if not that a fine in the amount of $250 a day will be imposed. Thank you. >> Thank you. Next case 26593

153
00:48:37.920 --> 00:49:01.839
Sandy Torres and Michael Torres. Code enforcement officer Chris Smith. Case number is 26593. The respondent is Sydney N. Torres and Michael E. Torres. Parcel ID is 0321 29505

154
00:49:01.839 --> 00:49:19.119
0 F 0060. Address is 121 Alma Drive Alto Springs, Florida 32714 within unincorporated Semino County, Florida and it has a homestead. Description of violation is weeds in

155
00:49:19.119 --> 00:49:34.880
excess of 12 in windows and doors in disrepair and accumulation of rubbish and garbage. Little background on this. Um, we posted it for a lot cleaning, um, trash, junk, and debris and high grass and weeds. But on the May 25th when we sent our contractor out there, they were

156
00:49:34.880 --> 00:49:51.200
denied access to cut and remove. So, we had to change this to a housing case, uh, the next day and mail out a notice of violation and compliance schedule. Um, and after that, we posted it for this hearing on June 3rd, 2026.

157
00:49:51.200 --> 00:50:07.359
I initiated this case um on initial inspection 428, 2026. Notice me respondent May 26, 2026. Compliance date that was given was June 1st, 2026. Follow-up inspections on May 19th, June

158
00:50:07.359 --> 00:50:25.119
3rd, and July 8th, 2026. Um the results of the reinspections, the violations cited still remain on the property. Uh the violations under seminal county code chapter 95.5 section 302.4 weeds 304.13

159
00:50:25.119 --> 00:50:42.640
window skylight and door frames and then 308.1 accumulation of rubbish and garbage. This is the compliance schedule that was mailed with the notice of violation on May 26, 2026. This is the Semino County property appraiser showing that the current

160
00:50:42.640 --> 00:51:00.800
owners of the property are these owners. And this is the deed showing the current ownership of the property. The following photographs you're about to see are true and accurate to what this officer observed on the dates noted. Uh the initial lot cleaning um

161
00:51:00.800 --> 00:51:16.960
shows the trash, junk, and debris and the front and side of the property. And in the next inspection, the followup in May, the grass was growing back with the trash. And on June 3rd, trash is still there and the junk, trash, and

162
00:51:16.960 --> 00:51:34.079
debris. And then I posted this for a special magistrate hearing this July 9th hearing on June 3rd, 2026. And my last inspection, the grass is growing back again with the trash underneath and then the two windows that

163
00:51:34.079 --> 00:51:52.079
are missing slashdamaged, boarded up. I have not had any contact with the owner since the very first time we ever been in this neighborhood and the person, we don't know his name, stated that he would clean the property and haven't had any contact since. Um, the mail was

164
00:51:52.079 --> 00:52:11.280
returned to send original sender on both individuals, both owners. And I ended up mailing it to the address that was on property appraiser and found another address of Michael E. Torres/classen just to see if somebody would get it. And that was also delivered to original

165
00:52:11.280 --> 00:52:28.160
sender. Based on testimony and evidence presented in the case number 26-593, it is determined that the respondent is Cindian Torres and Michael E. Torres, which is the recorded owner of the property located at 121 Alma Drive, Altoont Springs, Florida, 32714 in

166
00:52:28.160 --> 00:52:43.440
Semino County, as determined by the property appraisers records in possession or control of the property and in violation of Semino County Code 95.5 section 302.4 for weeds, 304.13 windows, skylight, and door frames, and

167
00:52:43.440 --> 00:52:59.920
308.1 accumulation of rubbish and garbage. At this time, I would like to submit the digital and case file into evidence. >> I will accept the digital and electronic or the electronic and the case file into the record as evidence. >> Uh, the county's recommendation is to comply with the code section cited

168
00:52:59.920 --> 00:53:17.119
within 10 days or a fine of $250 per day thereafter. This concludes my presentation. >> Going to find that uh Cindy Torres and Michael Torres have been properly noticed to be here today and they are not here. I'm um going to find that they

169
00:53:17.119 --> 00:53:33.839
are in violation and the property is being kept in violation of Simino County Code Chapter 95.5 sections 302.4, 308.1, and 304.13. Um, I'm going to order that the respondent bring the property into

170
00:53:33.839 --> 00:53:50.960
compliance within 10 days or by July 19th, 2026 or they will incur a fine of $250 a day. I'm also going to order that um the county is permitted to go in and um

171
00:53:50.960 --> 00:54:06.400
clean up the property, uh board the windows, and um mow the grass if it chooses. It's not required, but it um is permitted to uh bring the property into compliance for the health, safety, and

172
00:54:06.400 --> 00:54:26.760
welfare of the citizens and um surrounding properties in the area. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Next case, 25 618 BMS Holdings LLC.

173
00:54:30.640 --> 00:54:53.040
Officer Kina Hill, case number 25, 618. Respondence: BMS Holdings LLC. Parcel ID 331931507 000000750. Address 2340 Broadway, Sanford, Florida 32771.

174
00:54:53.040 --> 00:55:08.400
This is within unincorporated Simino County, Florida. There is no homestead. Description of violation. Exterior walls, roof, drainage, stairs, and all walking services all in disrepair and

175
00:55:08.400 --> 00:55:25.520
require fixing and replacement and no smoke alarms are installed. Um, this was a citizen complaint. The initial inspection was conducted December 30th, 2025. Notice was mailed to the respondent

176
00:55:25.520 --> 00:55:42.079
January 8th, 2026 with a comply by date of February 8th, 2026. My follow-up inspections were February 23rd, 2026, April 28th, 2026, and my last inspection was July 8, 2026. And as

177
00:55:42.079 --> 00:55:58.000
a result, those violations remain on the property. Simino County Code Chapter 95.5 304.6 Exterior wall chapter 95.5 section 304.7

178
00:55:58.000 --> 00:56:16.119
roof and drainage chapter 95.5 section 305.4 Four, stairs and walking services. Chapter 95.5 605.1 electrical systems and chapter 95.5 section 746.1.2

179
00:56:16.720 --> 00:56:31.119
smoke alarms. This was a compliance schedule that uh was mailed with the notice of violation um outlining the violations were mailed on January 8th,

180
00:56:31.119 --> 00:56:47.920
2026. And this was mailed to the um LLC. The Simino County Property Appraisers show the current owner of the property. This is the registered um this is the Sunbiz registered agent is um Mr.

181
00:56:47.920 --> 00:57:02.720
Spivey. Um, and a letter was mailed to him as well. And this is the deed showing the current current owners of the property. The following photographs that you are about to see are true and accurate representation of what this officer

182
00:57:02.720 --> 00:57:20.240
observed on the date they were noted. This was an interior inspection that was conducted of the home. The walking surfaces in the home. This was conducted on 12:30 2025. Um, these are pictures again depict the

183
00:57:20.240 --> 00:57:36.880
condition of the home. Um, when I went to inspect the walking surfaces, the floors, this is the outside of the property. The exterior wall has a crack and then there's also a hole on the side of the wall.

184
00:57:36.880 --> 00:57:54.880
And this is the outside. The placer was placed for unsafe because there were no smoke detectors inside the home on my visit. This is the um follow-up inspections. Again, the walking surfaces in the bathroom, the exterior wall, the

185
00:57:54.880 --> 00:58:11.599
uh picture is the outside porch ceiling that's not um in good repair. And then on my follow-up inspection on the 28th, those same conditions remained at the property.

186
00:58:11.599 --> 00:58:27.440
Um, I posted a notice to hearing was posted on April 28, 2026, and that was posted for the today's hearing. My last inspection, the tenant that resides there has since moved. So, I'm

187
00:58:27.440 --> 00:58:45.200
not able to access the property and I've had no contact with the owner of the property since certified mail. Um, one was delivered, one was returned with no service. Based on the testimony and evidence

188
00:58:45.200 --> 00:59:00.960
presented in case 25618, it is determined that BMS Holding LLC is the owner of record of the property located at 2340 Broadway, Sanford, Florida 32771 and is Simino County as determined by

189
00:59:00.960 --> 00:59:15.680
the property appraiser records is in possession and control of of the property and the violations in Simino County Code Chapter 95 um 304.6 6 exterior walls. 304.7 roofs

190
00:59:15.680 --> 00:59:33.520
and drainage 305.4 Stairs and walking surfaces 605.1 electrical equipment and 704.6.1.2 smoke detectors or smoke alarm, sorry. At this time, I would like to submit the

191
00:59:33.520 --> 00:59:49.520
digital and case file into evidence. I'll accept the electronic um case file into the record >> and my recommendation is to comply with the code section cited within 15 days or a fine of 250 per day thereafter. And

192
00:59:49.520 --> 01:00:07.760
this concludes my presentation. >> Can you go back to the the slide um that showed the number of times you had been out there? The initial slide I think. Okay. And no, at no time did the um

193
01:00:07.760 --> 01:00:23.440
property owner have you made contact with the property owner? >> I only I have haven't talked to them. They have to go through different people to talk to them or whatever. But >> like property managers, >> there's a property manager with Sunb

194
01:00:23.440 --> 01:00:39.200
Belt, but when you call them, you get you don't get anybody. >> Okay. And then um the tenant is who let you in. Yes, the tenant currently let me in and the she's since moved and the property is now up for rent, but it only

195
01:00:39.200 --> 01:00:56.160
shows the outside of the property. It doesn't show the inside. >> Merry to make a comment on the record. >> Yes. >> John Martin, code enforcement, seminal county manager. >> Uh Mr. Benjamin Michael Spivey of BMS Holdings is a long customer of uh the

196
01:00:56.160 --> 01:01:12.720
magistrate, the code board in both this county and in Orange County. He has a tendency to keep his condition, his properties in this condition. Um, often times he waits till the final minute to call and make contact and go, what do I have to do? And then he scurries around

197
01:01:12.720 --> 01:01:30.000
and tries to gain compliance. Um, and that's why we're asking for such a short time frame and and the fine amount we're requesting is that he is a habitual repeat offender in revol in respect to housing cases throughout multiple counties. Well, then I will do you one better. I'm

198
01:01:30.000 --> 01:01:46.799
going to um find that BMS Holdings LLC has um been properly noticed to be here today. Um, I'm going to find that he is not present and he has not had any contact with the officer and that by

199
01:01:46.799 --> 01:02:04.559
trying to rent a um property under these conditions which are clearly in violation of Semino County Code Chapter 95.5 section 7046.1.2 304.6 304.7

200
01:02:04.559 --> 01:02:20.160
605.1 and 305.4 four. And I'm going to um order that he bring uh the property into compliance within 10 days or by July 19th, 2026.

201
01:02:20.160 --> 01:02:37.599
And I'm also going to 1 2 3 4 5 now that I have a new tool, $500 a day. Um 100 for each violation. Um but as a whole, um I'm not separating them out. Um, so

202
01:02:37.599 --> 01:02:58.640
$500 a day until all of the violations are brought into compliance. Um, and that's all. Thank you. >> I think that is the last case. >> Okay. >> Go ahead and

203
01:02:58.640 --> 01:03:07.319
>> set the next hearing date for August 13, 2026. And we are adjourned.