I'm called to Syrian to order. I have a statement to read first. First item though, if you have a cell phone, please put it on silent or turn it off. So it doesn't interrupt the proceedings. Welcome to the August 1st, 2024 meeting of the Lachua County Code Enforcement Special Magistrate hearing. The purpose of this hearing is to hear microphone pick it up. The purpose of this hearing is are ledger code violations filed by the various departments of the Lachua County Florida. The code enforcement special magistrate was established by Florida Statutes, Chapter 162, and a Lachua County ordinances. To obtain compliance with various county ordinances and regulations. The magistrate, which is me, has no authority to change the ordinances or any of the regulations we will be addressing today. These changes can only be done by the Latvia County Board of County Commissioners. The Code Enforcement Magistrate can determine if a violation has occurred, set a date for full compliance and levied fine for non-compliance. The decisions of the Latvia County Code's enforcement special magistrate can only be appealed to the courts and not to the board of county commissioners. The basic procedure we'll follow today is the secretary we'll call the case and we have a new secretary today. Jack, I'm Trent Oso. Welcome. Thank you. The county staff will present its case to the magistrate. The respondent shall have the opportunity to present its defense to the case. I will make a decision at a future date and the respondent will be notified by mail of that decision and if you prefer email All persons who testify will do so under oath by swearing or affirming they will tell the truth Any evidence in the form of documents or photographs must be submitted to the court for inclusion of the record and if you have documents We can put them on the overhead projector So the first item is I'd like to get Secretary to swear in the staff. We're going to be testifying today on behalf of the county. You don't have to. Okay, county staff please stand, raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give in these cases today will be the truth and the whole truth. Thank you. All right. I believe we have cases for closure. First item. Secretary will read those into the record. Cases reported to the board as close for compliance after being heard by a special magistrate. Number one, case SM24-029, allotted with versus Gables 2017 holding LLC. Number two, case SM24-031, Alachua County versus Gables 2017 holding LLC. Number three, case SM24-032, Alachua County versus Gables 2017 holding LLC. Number four, case SM24-033, Alachua County versus Gables 2017 holding LLC. Number five, case SM24-034, Alachua County versus Gables 2017 holding LLC. Number 6, Case SM24-035, Alachua County versus Gables 2017 holding LLC. Number 7, Case SM24-036, Alachua County versus Gabel's 2017 holding LLC. Number eight, case SM24-037, Alachua County versus Gabel's holding, Gabel's 2017 holding LLC. Number nine, case SM24-038, Alachua County versus Gables 2017 holding LLC. Number 10, case SM24-040, Alachua County versus Gables 2017 holding LLC. Number 11, case SM24-042, Elatua County versus Gables 2017, Holding LLC. Number 12, Case SM24-042, Elatua County versus Gables 2017, Holding LLC. Number 13, Case SM24-043, Elatua County versus Gables 2017, Holding LLC. And number 14, case SM24-044, a Latua County versus Gabel's 2017 holding LLC. Okay, those cases are closed. All right, so our next item, I believe, is noncompliance. Let me read this statement before we start with the noncompliance of items. Noncompliance hearings are strictly to evaluate if an order that has been created by the special magistrate has been followed or has not been followed. I will not rehere the case as the special magistrate has no authority to revisit its previous action. Special magistrates policy for conducting a noncompliance hearing is as follows. Determine if the respondent is compliance or noncompliance. Give the county and the respondent an opportunity to speak on the compliance or noncompliance, make a decision regarding noncompliance or noncompliance if found in noncompliance placement of a lien will occur. So if you can call the first noncompliance case, please. Number 15, case number SM23-064, a Latua County versus Joshua Lymas. Is someone here representing responded? Joshua Lyman, somebody here? Okay. If you want to have a seat over there by that podium, I'll let the county's going to speak first and I'll let you speak. Okay? Councillor, good morning. Good morning. My name is Diana Johnson. I'm a senior assistant attorney the council. Councillor Cormor. My name is Diana Johnson. I'm a senior assistant attorney for a Lachua County. Case number 15 for noncompliance case number SM23-064. The property is owned by Mr. Lyme is located at 10919 Southwest 177th Street in Urcher, Florida. There was an order that was entered against their respondent. In this case, founding their respondent in violation of section 74.20a and 74.2, sorry, 0.29. And a reasonable time to come into compliance was provided. At that time, there was an order to cover the cost, the amount of $420 payable to the county. And if not complied with the code section, simply subject to a fine in the amount of $100 a day, the affidavit is in the file which indicates that the property is not in compliance with the magistrates order. We're asking for the authority to impose a lean on the property for there to be an order of fine entered and the county have the authority to record the order as a lien. As of August 1st, 2024, the dollar amount due is 17,620 dollars, which continues to accrue to the property comes into compliance. And that's at $100. It is, yes sir. For the special matter streets order. And the code officer is here if you have any questions. Okay, at this point, let me hear from the respondent. If you want to go to the podium there. Hey, here. All right, and she let her swear you in, and then she'll get you to identify herself. You'll raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give in this case is a truth and the whole truth? Yes, I do. Would you please state your name and residents address for the record? My name is Bertadini's Washington. My address is 109.119. I'll put the 170th degree. Okay, Archipelago. Okay, was it Miss Washington? Yes. Okay, what's your relationship to Mr. Alimus? I'm his granddaughter. Okay, he just sees. Okay, so he's just he's I'm going to be able to do a lot of work. I'm going to be able to do a lot of work. I'm going to be able to do a lot of work. I'm going to be able to do a lot of work. I'm going to be able to do a lot of work. I'm going to be able to do a lot of work. I'm going to be able to do a lot of work. I'm going to be able to look at getting the property into compliance? Yes. I've been dying the morning. I it's clean up on there. Okay. And all you need to be mold again from the right. Okay. Um, can we have some of the officer come up and talk about? Good morning. Good morning. Yes, so the property was found to be in violation due to the structure on the property and the mass amount of junk on the property. I have spoken to a Mr. Abrams, Ms. Bertha throughout this whole process and you know did everything I could to advise them how to alleviate the violation, but unfortunately due to my last re-inspection, it was still in violation of the structure still being on the property. And when was your last re-inspection you came down? Um. No, so not at the moment. OK. You have a general month or is it this month or I mean we're going to be this month but last month? Probably like August. Yeah, okay. It's been a while. So before I hit me one of the things that would help your case is if you can stay in touch with the officer and if you get it cleaned up You need to let them know so they can come out and inspect it and make sure that it's in compliance. Have you been in touch with her? I was trying to call them, but no one had never asked my phone to call me. And I left message on the phone. Nobody returned to my call. Okay. What phone number are you using, do you know? I did attempt to get in touch with Ms. Washington, but every time there was no answer and I did leave a voicemail. So it sounds like a miscommunication problem. My phone was off. Okay, so you're both here. So if we can make an arrangement today, you can get in touch with her. And if you're in compliance, you need to get her out there because that stops the fine on the compliance. Okay so I'm gonna make a ruling on the last the other thing that you should know and you'll find this in the paper where it comes. Once you get into compliance you'll have an opportunity to come back before me to seek a reduction in fine if you have a valid reason to get the fines reduced, okay? Okay. Okay. County have anything else at this point? Is that it? Okay, thank you for coming, Miss Washington. Okay. And make sure you get in touch with her and coordinate with her, okay? I just have an officer that has a few more cases, but then she'll be able to communicate with the sponsor. Okay, I just want to make sure they get together. Okay. I just want to make sure they get together. Okay. Okay. So would you please read the next case for non-compliance? Number 16, case number SM24-003, a Latua County versus Jack Rogers. Is someone here representing Jack Rogers? Well, I recognize him from last time. You can stay sitting for a little bit if you want. I'm not going to make you stand the whole time. Okay, can he would you proceed please? Yes sir. So there case against Mr. Jackie Rogers came before you in February of 2024. He owns property located at 10108 southeast County Road 2082 in Keynes, O'Florida. The order that was entered in February, found the responded in violation of the Latchow County Code Section 74.20A and 74.20B, as well as a land development regulation section 404.82.5 in regarding of parking trucks, RVs, or trailers. He was provided a reasonable time to compliance with order to pay the county's cost in the amount of $420 and the fine was to accrue at $50 a day if not comply. There is an affidavit of non-compliance in the file. Officer Webb is here if you have any questions. The fine has continued to accrue at $50 a day and as of today the amount owed is $4,670 which continues to accrue. The county's request is for an order of fine and authorization for the county to record the order of Dr. Zaline. Okay. Can we, when was the last date of inspection on this property? Leave the affidavit of non-compliance was in May, but I'll have to ask. Okay, we've had anybody been back there since May? Good morning again. Good morning again. Yes, my last inspection was in the month of April. April? Yeah, and that was for the special Magistrate Williams section. OK. All right. All right. Mr. Wright, your turn. I'm going to let Jackie swear you in and get your information. Will you raise your right hand please? Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give in this case is the truth and the whole truth? And nothing but truth I do. Would you please state your name and resident address for the record? Jack L. Wood Rogers, one on one on eight, South East County Road, 2082. So Mr. Rogers, what have you done since April to get the property in compliance? Well, my son did the most of it because I'm disabled. I made it one year old. You don't look it, but I'll take your phone. I don't look it. No. Thank you. Anyway, my son, Trace, does the best he can. And he moved about 14 vehicles off the property that belonged to my oldest son. What else do you have to do? You know? Well, you have listed the last time I was here, you listed my pole bar. And I told you that I worked in construction for 42 years. When I moved on the property, I wanted to build a pole barn for my tractor. So I came in and spoke with Bob Holton. And Bob told me, he said, Jack, you don't need a permit for the pole barn. And I said, why? And he said, because your property is the own dagger culture, You say you build a full barn without a permit. You told me you were gonna check on that. Yeah, and we did, I remember the case, and did we check on that? And yes, sir, that's been updated. You're not in violation for the pole barn. So they've corrected that. You're not being in the whole of the motion. At the same time I was in Bob Olton's office. I had a pole barn and that semi-trailer and a container. Now that container somehow, that y'all missed that because you didn't put that on the citation. But Bob approved all three of those at the same time. Okay? Okay. Okay. I'll be the first to admit I don't I didn't like the cars and trucks they belong to my oldest son and my oldest son. Well that's alright we don't you don't have to go any further than that just you know what I'm saying I understand. Anyway, my youngest son, Trace, got all the vehicles off of the property, except two. There's two still on the property. And they're missing. One's missing a front axle, and the other one's missing the rear spring, where my son Lance put all that I do not know, and as I told you the last time I was here, I would have to either go to a jump yard and buy springs and axles to be able to move those vehicles. I'm on a Social Security check. I have no money. I only have eight to ten dollars left out of my Social Security check after I pay my light bill, my phone bill and my barrel insurance. That don't leave me much. If it wasn't for humanity, giving me a grocery allowance, I'd starve to death. I mean, I get a grocery allowance of 250 a month from humanity on a pledge card and go to Walmart and I buy that in groceries and that's the only reason I'm alive. Okay. Yeah. Would you look, would you like it if your son could to testify a little bit? Does he mind? I? Don't know what he tested back to well I'm trying to figure out what it would take to get you to the point where you could call the county and they could come out and say okay Think you take care of I want to ask some questions and I don't know if they can give me the answer or not Whatever happens to grandfather and in something that's been there plus 30 years, what happened to that? There used to be a law that things were grandfathered in. Nobody's mentioned that. And what are you trying to grandfather in? Because the pole barn's not an issue anymore. I know that trailer, the semi-trailer and the RV that my son trace lives in and the RV that my son Lance lives in, that they listed those two RVs. County want to respond? Yes. the city. County want to respond? Yes, question. I just say, you know, the the Lachor County officers do a great job of just enforcing the provisions of the code. You are correct and as the officer stated, he was not found in violation for the improvement of the property of that apartment. We're not here today on the pole barn. All it remains was the violations for the answerable vehicles, the junk and the parking of the recreation vehicle. Fortunately, that's the code that we have and that's the code that the officers enforce. Right, so. So, the problem you've got is that the recreational vehicles are not permitted to be lived in on the property for the fall on full-time basis. And the last time I was here, I was told if I would go over to the building department, they would issue me a permit. I did that. I don't know the latest name, but the lady that I was instructed to see, the first thing out of her mouth was your ladder. And I said, man, why, why, why, why, why, I come here and tell such a story. I said, I said, what's the head of Coge of Horseman, Mr. Blooning or? Well, that was their secretary, former secretary. Well, anyway, I said, they sent me over here, and she said, that's a lie. And I said, well, I'm sorry you feel that way. And she said, besides that, I don't handle RVs. That's Ms. So-and-So-and-So. So she put me on the phone to this other lady and the other lady was quite as bad. But for public servants I considered it to be rude. I'm not rude like that to my worst enemy. But the second lady she put me in touch with, she says to me, well it'll take me two and a half hours to figure out what the charge is. And I said, well do you want me to come back tomorrow? And she said, well it'll still take me two and a half hours tomorrow. And I think in the world? And so that's the way it got left. In other words, they just kind of left me open the air. Back to the county is, is there a way to get a permit for a recreational vehicle on a piece of property? I'm not aware of it. I'm just some curious. I firstly don't have knowledge, but there's others in the room that do from our first management office. When I first bought the property, did we she sworn in? Okay, so go ahead, you just sworn in. Okay, please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give in these cases today will be the truth and the whole truth? So question you use. He's indicated he was told to try to get a permit for the two RV vehicles which are being lived in. Is that possible? So one RV can be permitted on an agricultural property. OK. Not two. I do not know what's already on his property. I'm assuming a house. Let me ask you. I'm assuming a house. Let me ask you, do you have a mobile home? Well, that's where I live. Okay. You can potentially get the R1 RV then as an accessory living unit. As soon as you finish your discussion, I would like to talk to the gentleman and get some information about his interaction with growth management. And we can see how to get that moving forward. You cannot have both of them though. Yeah so you're hearing so you can have the mobile home in one RV but not two RVs. I got you. Okay and she wants to meet with you and talk about what happened to you and how you felt about the cost of the same highway which still has my construction materials. Now you had indicated that you had spoken to somebody in the building department who you said somebody in the building department who you had talked to about that trailer. Over on what is it second average? And how long ago was that? It was right after I was up here, February and March. No, no, no, I'm talking about permission for the trailer. I think you said Bob somebody. Bob. Yeah, he was the head of the coach enforcement then. Okay. He was actually the head of all of it. Okay. He owned an encode to the enforcement back then. Yeah, did you get anything in writing from him about permission to have the trailer? I trust his Bob. Okay. He was a good man. He was a good man. He was a Christian. He was a good man. Do you know what year that was, roughly? Yeah. Oh, it would have been, well, 30 years, 24 years. It would be around 93, 94, somewhere along in there. All right. Mr. Magister, I have to look into this a little more, get familiar with the case, but he has not been cited for the 18-wheeler trailer, but for unserviceable vehicles and accumulation of junk. Yeah, so the trailer is not the issue because it's serviceable vehicle from what we can tell, so that's not the issue. What are we talking about? The RVs and the accumulation of junk. And if you've taken a look on them letters they sent me its sites are V's. Well RV is yeah there's but you just heard she said there's it's possible to ferment one RV. I need to look at the side. Yeah so what we're gonna do is gonna ask you to get together all right okay and I'm gonna hold my decision in a bay answer this until we get Something sorted out here in terms of figuring out what you need to do And the last time I was here I Explain to you. I was on a small sub security check understood and you told me That you're suggesting was for me to give them $5 a month. They sent me a letter saying, I had to get them $420 or they would start finding me, charging me fees and fines. That's not quite accurate, but if you come into compliance and penalty stop. Okay? And right now, as of the yesterday, $4,670 has accumulated. All right? And that's because you were not in compliance. Now, that's not because of the poll barn. That's been taken away. It was the accumulation of junk, and it was the RV. Is that correct, Councillor? And the unsurfaceable vehicles. Now you've told us that the vehicles are gone except for two. That still leaves you a noncompliance with two unsurfaceable vehicles. Well, if I had a call several people that I knew that was in record service had records. Because if you had a record you could pick up the end that was missing and pull out it. Everybody promises they'll come and they don't ever show up. I can't get nobody out there to do that. I mean I was actually, when I left here I I said, well, I don't honestly go and just take those to one service of vehicles and get them off the property. This is what you're going to be. I would be given them to somebody, just move. They don't belong to me. I really don't have the legal right to give them to somebody. They belong to my oldest son, but he's incarcerated. And he won't be out the next year. The other thing was the same thing with the semi-trailer. Even if I said, well, I'll give it to somebody to move They would have to bring a tractor or semi-trailer. So just so you know the trailer is not an issue The semi-trailer is not an issue. Okay, okay All right, so right now we've got two unserviceable vehicles and a one RV that can't be permitted another one that probably can be permitted But I need to have you get together with the county growth management folks. Okay. And we'll hold this in a bans until we get this sorted out in terms of everything sits. Okay. Anything else from the county at this point? The record Missy Daniels assistant county manager. Okay, thank you. So if you get with Mr. Daniels, Mr. Roger. You're done. You're good. Oh, she walked out. Miss, Miss Daniels is our assistant county manager. She's right here. Maria. Yeah, I'll let you hold that conversation outside, okay? Thank you for coming, Mr. Rogers. And thank you for coming. Thank you, sir. All right. I believe we have said it for non-iance. We have another one. That's right. Okay. So we have one more case. Please call the case then. Number 17, case number SM23-058, a lot to what county versus Sally Wasney. And somebody here representing Sally Wasney. Somebody here representing Sally Wasney. and I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. in 2023 and she was found in violation for Lachua County Code Section 74.20B for un-service vehicles and 74.36 for nuisance overgrowth. She was provided a reasonable time to come and took clients in order to pay cost and amount of $350. The daily fine if she didn't comply was in the amount of $50 a day. There's an affidavit in the file indicating that there has been non-compliance with the magistrates order and the amount of fine that's accrued since the time given is $7,400. Our request is the in order find me entered for that amount and that the county be authorized to record the order as a lien. Okay. What was the latest inspection? The affidavit was issued in April of 2020. Has anybody been in property since then? I do not have knowledge, but officer web just stepped outside. Yeah, so I'll base on it. Speaking of it. Oh, she came back in. Officer Web, here she comes. Yeah, so I did a recent inspection this weekend. She's still out of compliance. So yeah. Okay. I believe that concludes the non-compliance hearings. So we'll start with new business. These are new cases. So if you can call the first new business case, please, Jackie. Number 18, case number SM24-064, Alachua County versus Betty Badgent. Is somebody here representing Betty Badgent? All right, if you want to have a seat over by that podium, if you wish to speak, what we're going to do is let the county present its case and then I'll let you present your case. That's fine. She can go with you and we'll have her get sworn in as well. And you can have a seat over there at the end of that pew and when we're ready for you we'll have you stand up and speak. Okay county proceed. Yes sir. The respondent owns property located at 2 3 2 0 north west 116th place. It was found in violation for a Latvia County Code section 74.20A for junk. The recommendation of the county is to provide the respondent with 30 days to come into compliance and if not then pay a fine in the amount of $100 a day. The county is also seeking its cost in the amount of $490 in bringing this case. And I'll call officer Kelly here to testify. We ask that the case file and the photographs be emitted in evidence. Good morning. The junk was taken off the case so now it's just prohibited which is the structures. Okay so the junk is gone all right. And so it's now just a prohibited structure. And what is the nature of the prohibited structure we're talking about? There is semi-trailer and another trailer. So two trailers on the property. And when you say a semi-trailer, is that something pulled by a semi-truck kind of, is it a large trailer? Okay. And what was the other trailer then? Actually, it looks like a little RV. RV? Back of the property. Okay. We'll let the owner talk about that. Okay. And when was your last time at the property? I was there on July 30th. Okay. I'm sorry, inspection. Okay. Anything else? No. Do you like me to read there? No. That's fine. to read there? No. No. That's fine. Okay. Okay. If you can let Jackie swear you in, Ms. Bady. And your daughter as well if she wishes to speak. If you want me to raise your hand. Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give in this case is the truth and the whole truth? Yes. Would you please state your name and residence address for the record? Betty Bajin, 1609 North East, 33, O'Call, 4. Okay. Did you want to talk to me? Do you swear or firm that the testimony you are about to give in this case is the truth in the whole truth? Would you please state your name and resident address for the record? You're good near the microphone so that because it's being recorded so we want to About the records that's right Christina Bagen 16 on on northeast 30th Street, O'Cala, Florida. Okay, and you're her daughter, just so the record of college, that's fine. Okay, so can you tell me, the county wants you to remove the two structures or bring them into compliance, and they're proposing to give you 30 days. What I need to know is that adequate. How many days? 30 days. 30 days, two. So my question for her is is that an adequate amount of time for her to become into compliance? Do you have a nine? Long enough 30 days. No. And how long do you think it would take? 60 days. 60 days. We have two trailers to move and they'll be in sold. Okay. So they will be moved. Okay. And we're just from that point we'll just have to go with the whole property and we can't really do anything until the trailers are gone understood so you're trying to sell the property is okay so it's County having a problem with 60 days so they they have no problem with you having 60 days so what my order would hold is that you have 60 days to come into compliance. If you get it done sooner, call the county. Don't wait until the last minute. So if you get somebody to come and you sold them and they're gone, let the county know right away because that brings you into compliance and there will be no fines accruing. If you don't meet it in the 60 days, then the fines would start. We'll let her refine I assess. All right. OK. OK. So are you comfortable with that? Yes. OK. All right. And I did hear you. OK. Good. OK. Maybe I speak loud. OK. Thank you for coming. Can we get her contact? Yes. Yeah. Can we get her contact? Yes, she's going to get with you and get you the contact information. Appreciate you coming. Some people don't have to stay if you don't want to. Thank you very much. You're welcome. Who's going to the case? I believe it's number 19. Number 19, case number SM24-067, a Lat of a county, versus Nidale Bougnam. Somebody representing me. We just kind of know the procedure if you want to have a seat over there by the podium. All right. Can you read it, proceed? Yes, sir. I'm going to get some. The respondent in this case owns a piece of vacant property. We identify it by parcel number 0667803038. Since the property is vacant, I don't have a 911 mailing address to give you in this particular case. But it is a vacant lot. And it was found by Elatio County Code in our Goeth Management Department to be in violation by Elatio County Code and in our Goeth Management Department to be in violation of Elatio County Code Land Development Regulation Sections for 06.12.5 and 406.15. Those particular sections are regulated tree provisions and they do provide that regulated trees cannot be removed or damages without a permit. Here to testify, a senior forester and landscape inspector, Ms. Jessica Heng, we asked that the case file be admitted into evidence as well as any photographs that we're gonna present on the overhead. The county's recommendation in this case is that the respondent be found in violation of the code sections and that he be required to pay the county's cost in the amount of $210 in bringing this case before you. Our recommendation is to provide him with 30 days to come into compliance and to come into compliance in this particular case you would have to obtain the proper approvals as well as submit a tree mitigation plan and a forum acceptable to the county. And once that plan is approved, the recommendation is then to provide him with 60 days to fulfill that plan is approved, their recommendation is then to provide him with 60 days to fulfill that plan by completing any plantings or whatever is required within the plan. There's also ability under our code section, as you well knows, especially on how to straight where you can do a mitigation by fee and low. That is still an option in this case and it could be part of your order if you so choose. If he does not comply with your order we're asking for a hundred dollars a day fine until there is compliance to be made. So I'm going to call Inspector Hong. Good morning. My name is Jessica Hong, Senior Forester and Landscaping Inspector for Alachua County. In this code case, SM24-067, the county was conducting a tree evaluation for a pre-design onsite meeting for a development project. During the pre-design onsite meeting, I found regulated trees removed a 22-inch longleaf pine, a 17-inch longleaf pine, and a 16 inch lural oak, which again was found to be in violation of the following sections of the Latvia County Code of ordinances 406.12.5 application requirements and 406.15 unauthorized removal. And I have some photographs. So this property, this is just an aerial snapshot. Just to give you some. Give me a shift to the general locations. Reference. We have a parcel number right now. Right. So this property is located by Tower Oaks Glen apartment near Southwest 24th Avenue and Southwest 75th Street. This is a snippet cut from the tree survey of the trees removed. And we had a tree survey because of the tree evaluation and the tree survey was provided or conducted in August 2022. These are some photos of the trees removed. I took these photographs, yes. And when were these taken? There's a date on there. Okay, thank you. So they were taken in February 22, 2024. Okay. So through the correspondence with the respondent and ongoing inspections conducted to date have determined the respondent remains in violation of the Elatua County Code sections. My last inspection of the property was on March 21, 2024. I have a good service of notices and statement of violations to respondents sent by certified mail or posting. And copies have been provided to the magistrate, and I request they be entered into evidence. Okay. Well, all that will go into evidence, all right? And I believe that is all. Okay. Your turn. Left, Jack. Jackie, so are you in? Please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give in this case is the truth and the whole truth? I do. Would you please state your name and residence address for the record? I need all, Buganum, 3206, North-Flast 57, Terrace. And what's your relationship to the property? I'm the owner. 30206, Northwest 57 terrorists. And what's your relationship to the property? I'm the owner. You're the owner. OK. Just want to make that clear for the record. So tell me your side of things here. I got noticed from this hang about the tree was cut. It looks like three trees were cut, actually. Too long leaf in them. But you was concerned more about that long leaf. Long leaf? Yeah. So I met her in there and I told her, look, I'm not aware. I didn't cut the tree. And from the pictures you see is that it's been cut for a while. You can see from the stem and the growth around the stem plus with all the leaves and the branches that are on the ground, that it's been cut down for a while. And the tree is located, if you notice, on one of the photos, it's right on the border with neighbors. I don't know if they cut it because it was dead, fearing maybe it's gonna fall onto them. But I have no idea that the tree was cut and I did not cut the tree. Okay, so you didn't cut the tree and... I didn't cut the tree, but... Your suspicion is that maybe the neighbor did it? Could be, yes. That's all the reason because it's a dead tree and it's on their fence. Maybe that's the reason they cut it. Right. Did you talk to your neighbor at all? No, I didn't talk to them. Okay. And do you know who your neighbor is? They're not, no, I don't know those people. There's a lot of condos over there. I don't know the people. If you notice on one of the pictures, my property backs up to a whole long list of, uh, is that a condominium for the counties? That a condominium group? Um, tower. Is it may, if it was, it may have been the homeowners association that actually did the deed. Howard Oaks Glen. Howard Oaks Glen. Howard Oaks Manor is our lot adjacent to this property. Okay. Do we know if that's a condominium associated with Homeowners Association there? I do not. Okay. So how do you want counting my prison if he didn't cut the trees down? And the neighbor did. He seems to me he's not the right party to be here. Because somebody arguably trespassed on his property and committed a crime, but cutting his trees down. County attorney, what do you want to? Well, we don't have any evidence one way or the other of whether it was or not. The trees are down. So our code says what it says and the responsible party that we bring forward is usually the property owner. Right. I understand. But you know, if it's a crime to be in the committee, it'll be dismissed the case if that's a true house. No, I'm not, but it seems to be further investigation should be done because if a culpable party was the Jason property owner or homeowner association there are the ones that haveability here your honor. Yeah, I just like to say I have no benefit of cutting the street No, I know I'm trying to figure out why would I go the extreme links to cut a tree and drop it down? What benefits is it to me? Yeah, no, because you submitted a plan. That's what I'm confused about. You submitted a plan for tree-mitted and stuff. So yeah, so I have no reason to doubt you that you didn't do it. I'm just trying to figure out what's the best avenue for the county because I would like the culpable party to be responsible rather than the person's not. Does county have any objection to going and investigating this a little further? It starts me talking to the adjacent property owner? One more thing, you're on there. Just like to mention, the neighbors all along there, they throw all kind of trash. And I got cited for that with the code enforcement. But because I'm the owner, I went in compliance and cleaned the whole property and it's in compliance now. So it wasn't only three issues. There's a lot of other issues. They just throw all junk, all TVs, all the appliances, just throwing behind their fence. Well, that is something that you, I don't know if you tried to contact the Sheriff's Department because that is, if you throw a certain amount, that is a felony in Florida, the tragedy. Yeah, but I don't roam the property. It's overgrown all the, but anyway, I cleaned it all up. It took like 12 trailers to get all the junk out. I mean, what a further the pleasure of this special magistrate. OK. Well, and for you, I would suggest you talk with the adjacent property owners and find out what happened know, what happened. They may also have been under the mistake that they owned that tree because unless they had a survey, they may not necessarily know where their property line is. Is your property been surveyed? Yes. Okay, so you can... So I don't know the three, honestly, I don't know if it's on my property even. It's so close to the fence. I mean, it could be theirs, because. Yeah. That raises a whole nother issue, because the tree's not on your property. I mean, it might not even be my tree. We have a boundary survey, and I have the full survey. Here, this is just a portion of it. So those trees are located on the property. There is also a fence. I have a copy of the survey and the trees are in them. So the stump is actually within the boundary survey. Okay. All right. Let's clear. Okay. I like to get this issue resolved. So what if I talk to people and they denied whatever? What do we go from there? I mean. Well, my condom is that if you did not take the act, undertake the act you didn't call the trees to come down that wasn't sure you, I'm not sure where I go with that, because while you are the property owner, I don't know that the code would allow for someone who comes on your trespass on your property and commits damage to your property, make you then responsible for the loss of the trees. I would be responsible. Well, the county would like you to be responsible. I'm not sure that that's where I'm going to have to do some research on that, to be honest with you and look at the law and see where that sits in terms of improper trespass. And then whether you can be held responsible for the actions of somebody who trusts passes on your own. I wait for their hearing from you. Yeah, well, I'm going to have to take this under consideration and take a look at it. But in the meantime, I would encourage you to talk with your neighbors and find out if they did that. Okay, I'll do that. Okay, and it seems to me you have a recurring problem with them. Not only with one, it's like a problem. I don't understand, but I'm trying to figure out as whether that's a homeowners association that's doing it or individuals who own the properties that are doing it. Because this is from what I can tell the trees are back onto two different lots on the adjacent property. We placed a copy of the tree survey and you can see the trees and relation to the lots that are behind. Yeah, so it looks like two of the lots, 122 and 121 were the ones affected potentially by the trees. Is it possible to get a copy of that so I know what property to. Oh, sure. Yeah, this is all public information they can give. So you can find out if somebody did that. Those are substantial trees. So it would take somebody with some knowledge of tree cutting to do that. So I don't know, they may have even paid a company to do it, basically. So at this point, I'm going to have to do some research. I'll hold my decision and advance until I can do further research on this. Thank you. Thank you. And if the county can find some information about the adjacent properties in terms of status, whether those are individuals, lots, or whether that's a home under association. According to the survey that we have, there are just lots in a subdivision. So those would be individually owned. There is a condominium association if you look at that. Yeah, because a lot of times those they have the common grounds then handled through. There is other condominium associations. Like for example, there's an apartment complex over here. But these individual ones are each individually owned. Okay, so the individual lots, okay. For example, there's an apartment complex over here. But these individual ones are each individually a lot. OK, so they're individual lots. OK. You know, a lot number four, each division. All right. That would not be a condo association. They may have an HOA. But yeah, that's my question is the HOA. Is there an HOA? Yeah. OK. All right. Well, that would be easy to find out because it would be in the public records. One last question for the officer. I'm sorry. Where the indications, any indications that the trees were dead, any of them dead, at the time they were cut. Because his indication was that he thought that one tree was dead. The trees did not look dead prior to being removed. And from the long leaf pine pictures, the leaves were still there. Yeah, so I'm not worried about worried about more about the Laura look was it the Laura look it was a smaller one and I I saw the stump but maybe not the rest of it because it was pretty overgrown. Okay so long leaf pine clearly alive. Okay. Thank you. All right. And just to clarify for the record. I actually just luck, but did you want us to schedule it for further date? Yeah, let me. Yeah, let's. I think probably the next meeting. up again by that time hopefully he will have information maybe about who other responsible parties are because we can bring him back but also if there is a responsible party we can bring them as well potentially or he can. He also of course if he can find out what happened he may have a civil action appropriate for his own take undertaking. So we will then notice it for yeah, I would say if you can notice it again for next month and then by that time we'll have information about what perhaps happened at that point. Yes sir, thank you for the clarification. Okay, at this time we're going to now I believe that's all new business. We're moving into reduction hearings. Let me read a statement. The code enforcement special magistrate will now hear requests for reduction of fines and rescission of leans. The decision to grant or deny your request is solely within my discretion in making my decision. I may consider recommendations from the Lachua County Code Administration. Please state precisely what you are requesting and why you believe that I should grant your request. You may present any information that is relevant to your request. The only purpose of this hearing is to consider a reduction of fine or residual lean. This is not an opportunity to discuss the original finding of guilt for the violations. Please refrain from commenting on the original proceeding since I have no authority to revisit the final action. Policy is to hear the reduction request in maximum of two times. And since these are the first requests, but you do have the right for a second request, however, at that time you must present new information that the special magistrate has not previously heard of having a compelling reason for making the request. So if you can call the first case in the direction of hearing. Number 20, request for a reduction of fine and release of lean case number SM23-013, a lateral account versus petrov of Latislav. Okay, Petrov's passlaw here. No, he's not here. He's not here. Okay. Well, the thing I read about the second request. All right. Let's go to the so number one, not present. Okay. And make sure, sir, he's not by zoom. He's not. Okay. Nope. Okay. Good. Number 21, request for a reduction to find in a release of lean case number C-E-B-12-011 Alachua County versus Michael Roth and Betty Taylor Roth. All right. It's a little different procedure. You get to go first. So it's your opportunity. Yes, let her get up there, swear you in. And then I have your letter in the file as well. Okay, given me. I have raised your right hand. Sorry. Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give in this case is the truth and the whole truth? I do swear. Would you please state your name and residence address for the record? My name's Michael J. Roth. I live at 651 southeast, 73rd terrace. The address is a Gainesville location, but it's out near Nunez Lake, estates. I'm a nurse and I was working full time at RMC and June 5th of 2023 I retired and I started receiving monthly checks of 1,817 cents and when and I was working then I excuse me. I then went backward on, well I changed my employment there from full time to part time or what they call PRN is which means as needed. So I got myself on the schedule for Saturday night each week and I would receive about $800 for the month and that would give me enough money to pay my mortgage and all my other necessary needs. So at that point we were working on part-time staff. In other words, when I started there, we had a full hospital, a full infirmary, and we had enough staff to fully commit to the work that needed to be done so that the patients were taken care of. But since COVID, that went, that the population of the inmates, which came into the hospital and the infirmary, dropped off very much. It went from 100% down to about 25. And so people would back out and not come back to work anymore. So I was still there working once a week, and they decided they would try and ramp up their job and fill the hospital again. So to do that, they hired a lot more full-time employees. And what usually happens there I hear and I saw this in the past is that they will ignore, let go whatever the PRNs and the My last date of working there was November 25th of 2023. So, at that rate then, I lost the monthly $800 and found out that I could not make the payments on the mortgage. And I notified Mr. Cooper my mortgage holder. And so let's see my Social Security checks have been that same amount, 1817 through April. And my birthday for me to become 65 was May the 30th. And after that they started, social security started taking out the payments for Medicare. And so my payments are now 1640-30. So obviously I can't do anything about making payments on the mortgage. And I talked with the VA loan department, Kevin Cots there. And I also talked with various people in the at Mr. Cooper to tell them how things are going. And I said that instead of having my house go to foreclosure, I would prefer to sell the house. Now the lean on my house is so exorbitant, 79,000, that basically realtors back away right off the bat. And pretty much it seems when I'm talking with them just about any kind of lien they don't want to worry about. So in other words I'm asking for a release of the lien. Now in your letter you had mentioned that it was your belief that you were in compliance in the on November 1 of 2013. That's right. What happened to me there was I figured that when law enforcement and state attorney's office came in that they had taken over and taken it from codes, I was under that misunderstanding. So I did not appropriately call codes and say, hey, I got rid of them. The ristors. That's right. So there was that eight months period of time and I didn't know that I should have called. I don't know. Record. What was the daily fine on this council? Do you know? Yes sir. The daily fine was $100 a day. This is way back in 2012. Yes, sir. Back with the code board. And so, um, okay. And so why I say what you're asking for is release of lean. Typically we don't go to zero. But we have not had problems with leans that have been reduced substantially. Okay. And interfering with the sale of the property. Okay. Okay. So I'm going to look at this. Does the county have any reason to disbelieve that he actually wasn't complied since 2013, but just because of the state prosecution and stuff figured it was concluded? I have no idea. I'm sorry. I don't know because it's such an older case that this staff here doesn't even have been the staff that was here at that time. I was here but I don't have personally no sir the county doesn't have any objection just because we're without knowledge. Yeah okay you're on County have a position on this in itself. We do not have a recommend. I know you don't I decide to buy any DAS for the record. So. Your honor. If I could also make a comment. So at the time that law enforcement came and serviced me with the warrant, which was in October of 2013, they had also come in April on request of the complainer. So law enforcement came with their hearing device. They told me that the house, two doors down, had roosters and they were growing at above the range that would have been, you know, they would have been cited for a noise disturbance and also the house two doors above. So they would have been cited. But my chickens, my roosters at the time were very young and were not that loud. In October, they were fully mature. So they were, they did get an excess of the noise. And- Well, it's not so, the noise is part of the issue, but also it was, you were not allowed to have roosters basically. That's right. Yeah. Yeah. So, okay. All right. Anything else from the county? No, sir. Take it under seat. I will do a reduction, but I'll have to give us some decision and thought to it. And we will get that to you in the mail within the next week or so. Okay. Thank you sir. Appreciate it. Okay. I think that concludes all the cases for today. All right. We'll close this hearing at 10 o'clock, let's say.