Municipal Code Enforcement Board on 2026-09-23 1:30 PM - Sep 23, 2026

Yeah, I'm watching the clock. I've got 15 seconds.

No, sir.

I do.

All right.

All right.

Here we go.

Okay.

Good day. Today's meeting of the Municipal Code Enforcement Board is called to order on September 23, 2026. Welcome, everyone. Please rise for the Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for the stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Please be seated. Agendas of today's meeting are on the wall at the entrance to chambers. Please remember to turn off your cell phones. The Municipal Code Enforcement Board consists of seven members who are appointed by the City Council. We serve voluntarily. It is this board's intention to promote, protect, and improve the health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of Clearwater by providing this equitable, effective, and inexpensive method of enforcing certain codes within the city. The board considers new business items in two parts. First, the violation, and then affirmative relief. Formal rules of evidence do not apply. Each side is limited to 15 minutes. The board may grant additional time. All proceedings will be conducted in a calm, civil manner. Now, individuals who conduct themselves otherwise will be asked to leave. If necessary, they will be escorted from the chambers. Now, I ask all who plan to speak to please rise and be sworn in by the clerk.

Thank you.

Our first order of business is to review and approve the minutes of last month's meeting. May I have a motion to approve the minutes?

Motion to approve the minutes, Mr. Chairman.

May I have a second? Second. All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Motion carries. Next on the agenda are the new business items. Our first case on our agenda, 3.1, continued from March 25th, April 22nd, May 27th, June 24th, and July 22nd. Case 64-26, fine respondents Kevin and Melissa Hazlid at 1423 Embassy Drive in violation of code for permits. An issue in order with a compliance deadline and fine if compliance is not met. Is there anyone here to speak on this case? Seeing none, Ms. Reese, you have the floor.

All right. Good afternoon, code board. I'm Inspector Kat Reese with the City of Clearwater. This is going to be for 1423 Embassy Drive, case number 64-26. So this is going to be for one violation, permits required. This violation is specifically for the fence that was installed on the property without a permit. There's multiple notice of violation sent, the first one being February of 2024, and we've had multiple extensions given to this property. Certified mail was signed on December 11th of 2024, and this is going to be just east of Embassy Drive and north of Nursery. And this is the property for the violation. This is a Google photo in 2022, and this is a Google photo for February of 2025. As you can see, the vinyl fencing on both sides of the property. This is the original pictures from the initial inspector. So compliance can be met by obtaining a permit and an issued permit and completing said permit with inspections. Requesting compliance, excuse that date, I'm not sure why my stuff did not save correctly, but compliance can be met by obtaining a permit on or before October 23rd of 2026, and completion of said permit six months from the issuance of said permit. So this is a little different because they do have an approved permit, and you'll see why I still brought it. They have not paid the fees for that permit, so it technically is not an issued permit. I have been going back and forth with this property owner for quite some time. They have another permit, which I'll be presenting next. That still has not been issued. There are still conditions that need to be met. So just to have the actual date on record of compliance, I'm certain that they can probably get that done at this point, but just to not drag this on any further, I believe I've had at least four continuances on this case trying to work with the property owner. Any questions?

Board? So there's a permit that has been applied for and is ready to be issued, just needs to be paid for, and I believe per your comments, you've been in touch with the homeowner, property owner?

Yes. Okay. So the next case I present will kind of bring this all together.

Understood. On this particular one, all they need to do is pay for it, and provided it meets the building code, get it inspected.

That is correct.

So that's the simplicity of this one, but they've not done that.

Right. And I was very clear that we must have an issued permit before code board, given the amount of time that has been given. It's not an issued permit, therefore it's still in violation.

Understood. And it's not issued because they haven't paid for it, although they are doing work under it, and they are able to do work under it, or?

No, it's already after the fact. So this is a matter of just getting it permitted so that way that inspections can be done to ensure that it's up to code.

And just for clarification, based on your comment, you've shown us a building code before that states no work shall commence without a building permit. That is correct. The fact that anything occurred without a permit is a violation. Correct.

And so the files are continuing daily because they don't have a permit?

No, because I have no affidavit of noncompliance filed. This is being brought before you today after multiple continuances of trying to get them in compliance since 2024.

So you're asking for a date in October?

Correct. October 20, sorry, 23rd.

Any other questions from the board? I thought permits were good until 12 months. Well, so shouldn't that be 12 months?

Well, do you need me to change that?

Let me just say as a general rule, based on my knowledge as a contractor, and, counsel, I'm not here to testify. I'm just going to offer a piece of data because the building code has changed, and not everybody is aware of it. But up until recently when you got a building permit, it was valid for six months. The legislature or whatever, the statute changed, and now they're good for 12 months. I'm good with six months based on this case simply because of the amount of time that's gone into this thing and the number of extensions that have been granted. And since it was going on well before that statute changed, even though the statute has changed, I think six months is fair on this one.

That is the reason I kept it at six months because the violation existed long before that House bill took effect.

So the newer ones will be 12 months. I see.

So just because you only get them six months wouldn't mean they don't have 12 months to move on their permit under the building code. It would just be you're going to go ahead and institute fines on this particular case after six months, even though their permit would still be valid. Right. Right.

I mean, it's really a separate issue in terms of what the current statute is. What we're ruling here today is what is in force on this particular, on our ruling.

Yeah, because you're not saying, like, well, in six months your building permit's no longer good. You're just saying in six months we're going to go ahead and start issuing fines.

Right. Six months is actually gracious considering it's after the fact.

So that was – I thought we were just doing it for one month, what, they have one month to pay their permit, and then the fines start going, right?

Let's back up a second. She's asking for compliance by October, which is two months away, and there's a reason for that we'll get into here a little bit. The permit, the life of – or the completion date is a different matter. We're looking at – we want compliance. We want the permit issued within two months.

Right.

And completion within six months of obtaining the permit.

Right. So if they have an issued permit, it's my discretion to continue working with them beyond that six months if, you know, they don't have completion of the permit. There's reasons, many reasons I don't file affidavit of noncompliances, and I hold off because they are making progress. So I would never file a noncompliance if progress is being made.

Okay.

Chair, why don't we do the first motion? Yes.

All right.

May I have a first motion, please?

I move to find the respondent in violation of the code as referred to in the affidavit in this case.

May I have a second?

Second.

All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Motion carries. May I have a second motion, please?

I move to enter an order requiring the respondent to correct the violations on or before October 23rd. If the respondent does not comply by that date, the board may order a fine of $150 per day per violation for each day each violation continues to exist. If fines and fees remain unpaid three months after such lien is filed, the city is authorized to foreclose, collect, or settle such lien.

May I have a second? Second. All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Motion carries. Thank you, Inspector. Moving on to agenda item 3.2, continued for March 25th, April 22nd, May 27th, June 24th, and July 22nd, 2026. Case 65-26, fine respondents Kevin and Melissa Hazlett at 1423 Embassy Drive in violation of code for permits. And issue an order with a compliance deadline and fine if compliance is not met. Having asked previously, the owner's not here, so Ms., I'm sorry, Inspector Reese, you have the floor.

Okay, code board, thank you. This is Inspector Catherine Reese with the City of Clearwater. This is also for 1423 Embassy Drive, case number 65-26. I apologize. This is my old slides. My updates did not take, but I have full knowledge of where the permits are at this time. This is going to also be for one violation, four permits required. This is, oh, I'm sorry, I'm on the fence again. Well, it is for a remodel. One second. So the interior remodel includes new drywall, shower pans, sliding doors, changing sliding doors to French doors. This is also an old case from the previous inspector and has started, it began December 4th of 2024. With the last notice of violation that was sent, May 30th of 2025. So these do have different dates than the fence because the inspector can physically see the violation on the fence. It took some time. She had no access, and I do have her notes here. If you'd like me to project them, I can. So we can't violate something that we can't prove. The owner then reached out to the inspector in admittance as well as the contractor. We have the e-mails on that as well. So there's not going to be pictures with this one because there was admittance, and the inspector did not physically go there to see since they admitted to what work was done. She just required that be, you know, be brought into compliance. So there was no signs, there was nothing signed for the notices that were given, so we have posted to the property on May 30th of 2025. And this is going to be for the exact same property, and that is the posting. So this is one of the e-mails. There's been a lot of people involved. This one was for CCing to Kevin Hazley, the property owner, as well as Dana Roots. Given that he had admitted to this work, he explained he was going out of the country. She gave him multiple continuances to get this in compliance. He received a permit, but then that permit was voided, so we're back to square one. At the current date today, they do have a permit that has been submitted. There are still conditions that need to be met on that, so it cannot be issued. Notice of commencement has not been filed yet at this time. There's just quite a few conditions that still have not been met to gain compliance for an issued permit. So compliance can be met by obtaining an issued permit with inspections and completing said permit. And I'm asking for requesting compliance by obtaining a permit on or before October 23rd and completion of permit six months from issuance of said permit. If the violation continues to exist, impose a fine of $150 per day each day the violation continues to exist. I apologize for the slides. I feel terrible about that.

We get the gist of it. So Inspector Reese, they're doing the work, then applying for the permit, but not paying for the permit. In her notes, have she said why they're doing this?

I mean, the work is already done. It just was never permitted to begin with, so it's an after-the-fact. We have had communication with his attorney, with their contractor, and it's just ongoing.

Well, I know it's after-the-fact, but if they've applied for the permit, that's what I don't understand. If they've done the work, it's after-the-fact, okay, they've applied for the permit, but they've never paid for it. That's the issue, the main issue. Have they said why they haven't paid for it?

Well, they can't pay for it until it's an approved permit. It can't be approved until they've provided all the documents to have that permit approved. So we're stuck on not being approved.

I think that was just the fence.

I thought there was a prepaid price when you applied for the permit.

Well, there is. Okay. But you'll pay more fees later on. Okay. You mentioned that there was a permit issue and then voided. Was that just improperly approved, or do you know anything about that?

I wish I had the real slides on here, but it is a voided permit, so it's irrelevant at this time. But they are working on getting the new one in so they can gain compliance. So today is really just to set the date, so that way if this doesn't happen, and the pattern that they've shown since 2024, that I'm able to move forward with the case and relieve that burden from the city.

Okay. I have another question for you. Normally on these, we're seeing pictures and evidence, and it gives us a basis for a ruling. In this case, all we have is an admission by the owner that this had occurred. Is that something that you have in writing?

Yes. Well, I do have an entire stack of e-mails with Mr. Hazlett, the contractor, and their attorney, assuring us that these violations would come in compliance and that has not occurred. I can project them here if you'd like. It's quite a bit. But, yes, I, in fact, have the admittance on e-mail between myself, Mr. Root, as well as the previous inspector.

Okay. Yeah. Is that part of your packet? Yes, sir.

Yes, I do always submit any communication I've had as additional information.

Okay. Good questions. May I have a first motion, please?

I move to find the respondent in violation of the code as referred to in the affidavit in this case.

May I have a second? Second. All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Motion passes. May I have a second motion, please?

I move to enter an order requiring the respondent to correct the violations on or before October 23, 2026. If the respondent does not comply by that date, the board may order a fine of $150 per day per violation for each day each violation continues to exist. If fines and fees remain unpaid three months after such lien is filed, the city is authorized to foreclose, collect, or settle such lien.

May I have a second?

Second.

All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Motion carries. Thank you, Inspector.

Thank you, Inspector.

Next on our agenda, number 3.3, continued from July 22, 2026, Case 148-26, Fine Respondents True Blood, Cheryl Trustee, Street Dreams, Irrevocable Trust at 1320 Springdale Street in violation of code for permits, and issue an order with a compliance deadline and fine if compliance is not met. Is there anyone here to speak on this case? Yes. Sir, please come forward. Sir and ma'am, I'm sorry. Sir, please give us your name and your relation to the property. Name and address.

Julius Cunning.

Julius Cunning. Yes, sir. What's your address?

1320 Springdale Street.

Okay. And ma'am?

Cheryl True Blood, Trustee, 911 North Garden Avenue, Clearwater, Florida, 33755.

Okay. So you're the trustee of the property? Okay. The way our process works, we're going to ask you if you admit or deny the violation, then we'll ask the inspector to speak, and then we'll have you back up. Okay? So do you admit or deny the violation?

Well, I don't know. Ma'am, were you sworn in when everybody stood up and raised? Okay. Yes. Okay, gotcha. Just want to make sure.

They haven't admitted.

So hang on. We have to ask you, do you admit or deny? No, I do. Okay. Thank you very much. May I have a first motion, please?

I move to find the respondent in violation of the code as referred to in the affidavit in this case.

May I have a second? Second. All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Motion carries. Inspector, you have the floor.

Good afternoon, Co-Board. I'm Inspector Cat Rees with the City of Clearwater. This is for 1320 Springdale Street, case number 14826. I'm happy to advise this case is updated. This is going to be for one violation, permits required, specifically for an interior model, full stucco on the exterior, window installation, including dimension changes, new door frame, and new door installations. So the first notice of violation, I did post to property. I did make contact with workers on site alongside PCLB. That was posted on August 8th of 2026. And then I've had two more notice of violations go out since then. Certified mail was signed November 15th of 2025 with multiple compliance dates. So this is going to be just west of Betty Lane and north of Overly. And this is the property on Google Photos, February of 2025. And this is a picture of it today. Oh, I double on that one. Okay. So these are just a lot of the pictures of when I made contact on August 8th with PCCLB. And there's a lot of work going on. There is a new roof, but that was permitted, so great for that. So there's quite a bit of new windows on the property. And this was the contractor let us go around back with him, and this is what was there. See the windows, the old windows on the lawn there. And that was in the back portion. So you could see the drywall, the doors, windows. This is all the stucco work that was occurring. I'm not going to – so here we are today. So they did gain semi-compliance. They did not meet the full scope of work in this permit that was pulled. I, in my most recent notice of violation before bringing it forward to the board, did provide them another notice to state that it did not meet the full scope, that they would have to then pull additional permits to meet the full scope. This permit has since expired, and we do have a canceled final inspection that was set for June 22nd – June 24th, and it was canceled by Julius Cooney, according to the notes on the permit.

I'm sorry, by who?

Julius Cooney, which is – Okay. So this is another permit for the windows. There's still additional information required. We haven't had any movement on that since July 13th. So I've had communication with Julius, and although I sympathize, like, we need to have progress of some kind. And that's why I advise him to – you know, like, I did give continuances on this case, multiple, to allow him to come into compliance. But at this time, I think it's best that we just bring it before the board to set a true date of compliance to relieve that burden off the city. So compliance can be met by obtaining an issued permit for the full scope of work with final inspections. Requesting compliance by obtaining a permit on or before October 23rd and completion of the permit six months from the issuance of said permit. If the violation continues to exist, impose a fine of $150 per day, each day the violation continues to exist. I will just add this – not in my packet. I received an email from Julius this afternoon just before Code Board, where he sent me photos of the window product IDs. I don't accept those. I buy some of that. It needs to go through the general contractor, so that way it could be updated correctly inside the permit. So he is aware of it this time.

I have a question for you, Inspector. Yes. Just on your presentation. At the very beginning, the first date you listed for the stop work order was in 26, and then you had some prior things on there, and I'm a little confused about the timeline.

Let me see.

Stop work order on –

Oh, that's my typos. It's all in 2026. Wait, no. I'm sorry, 2025.

2025. Yes, correct. Because we're not in November and December yet.

Well, I'm a mess today.

So the original stop work order was in 8, 2025. Correct. And then the subsequent violations were after that in November and December. Correct. Okay. Thank you. Sorry about that. Wait a minute. What am I missing here? Okay. All right. Questions from the board for Inspector Reese for the moment? Okay. Thank you, Inspector. Sir, please, I'm going to have you come up where we can hear you, if you don't mind. There's a microphone there, and we're happy to assist you how we can. Here we go. What would you like to share with us on all of this?

I had been in the hospital and out of the hospital. That's why I went complying with it. I just got out of the hospital again.

Okay.

And we paid the county for 3,000 books.

The county is separate from us. Okay.

We had paid the county like $3,000 for a workaround permit.

Okay.

And I got in the windows. I just got to have a contract to turn it in. I thought I could turn it in.

Yeah. Understood. Yeah, there's a whole process for that that Inspector Reese can help you with on that. So what is your, you know, one of the questions I might have for Inspector Reese, I don't want to go back and forth too much, but what is remaining in terms of the scope that needs to be permitted, and have you spoken with him about that process?

I have talked with multiple people, aside from Julia's contractors came in back in the 580 temporary building. It's been stated multiple times, signed and sealed engineer plans are required. I'm not sure.

I'm not sure.

Was that submitted?

Yeah, that's the guy that came to see her that worked on the house, and he took our money. Sir, this is another kind.

I got you. So you have a new contractor? Yeah. All right. And you discussed with him what about?

Yeah, he pulled the permits.

Okay. Is he in the process of pulling those permits now? Sure, he pulled it. Okay. Now, if I'm not mistaken, I'm trying to wrap my head around this, so forgive my confusion here. If I'm not mistaken, you said permits have been applied for, but the full scope of work is not there?

Correct, because the original permit that's now expired is just for stucco repair. Okay. So that's not going to meet the scope of the work. It needed to include the windows, the drywall, the doors, the windows, with everything that's required to get an issued permit for that, which he's been advised through the guidance of the permit technicians that it does require the signed and sealed engineer plans, the product IDs. Multiple things need to still be met for this permit that's still in the status of additional info required that will need to be addressed with the permitting department.

Okay. Mr. Julius, do you understand what the work that needs to be permitted? Yes, sir. Do you understand that you need an engineer or an architect to provide drawings for them?

My contract is supposed to do that when I'll be in the hospital side. Okay. But I'll call him when I leave here.

But you're confident that he knows what to do with all of that? Okay. All right. Do you have any idea how much time you need to get in compliance with this between?

Talk on yours. Yeah.

Do you? No longer than 30 days. It shouldn't even be that long. 30 days.

Okay. Counsel, I have some input on this based on my knowledge that I don't think 30 days is enough.

But that's what they're asking for. If the board's comfortable with offering more time, there's nothing wrong with that. You don't have to follow. Although that's just a request, the board can do whatever you've determined to do.

Understood. I will say to the board, based on my experience in the business, that our purpose here is to provide an equitable and fair solution for all involved. I want the city to be able to proceed with their cases as they feel they need to. The other portion of that is in terms of the homeowner, based on my experience, I don't believe 30 days is adequate to achieve and get the product that he needs in terms of acquiring architectural drawings, submitting those to the city, handling any revisions that need to be made, and getting a permit issued. And then once that is done, there's the business of having all of this various work inspected and approved and signed off all the way to final building permit before you're out of the woods.

Yeah.

And so 30 days, I will tell you flat out, 30 days is not enough. I don't want you to be paying a penalty for your lack of knowledge in the matter. From my position as chair, I would be more comfortable with, I'm going to say, 60 or 90 days. I think that that would allow enough time for the owner of the property to do the things he needs to do and yet allow the city to pursue their case. If they see no progress or it's not obtained by them, then I think the onus is on the homeowner for compliance.

How do you feel about that?

I'm not opposed to extending the time. I just want him to gain compliance and make sure if things are up to code, that's the ultimate goal for the city. So I'm fine with 60 or 90 days, whichever you prefer.

Okay. I propose a motion for, I would ask for a motion for 90 days unless somebody has a differing opinion that they care to offer.

No, I'm fine with that. All right.

Sir, we're going to go ahead and move forward and may I have a second motion, please?

Second.

We'll need a, I'm sorry, we'll need a second motion read, but we need to establish the date. December. Madam Secretary, can you give us a date or Ms. Reeves, a date that would be 90 days out?

December 23rd.

Okay.

That's cutting it pretty close to.

Very close to the holiday, yes. I mean, we can revisit in the new year. I believe the first Monday of January would be January 4th, if I'm not mistaken, of 2027.

All right. By me, unless somebody objects. All right. May I have a second motion on this case, please?

I move to enter an order requiring the respondent to correct the violations on or before January 4th, 2027. If the respondent does not comply by that date, the board may order a fine of $150 per day per violation for each day each violation continues to exist. If fines and fees remain unpaid three months after such lien is filed, the city is authorized to foreclose, collect, or settle such lien.

May I have a second? Second. All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Sir, do you understand what we've done here? We've given you more time than you've asked for because I think it's going to take you longer than the 30 days based on everything you need to do. And so I would suggest that you speak with your code enforcement officer as much as needed to get an understanding of what you need and the building department. There are officials here today that you can speak with so that you get a full understanding of what it is you need to satisfy it. And good luck. Yes, sir. Thank you. Thank you for coming today. We appreciate you. Next on our agenda, item 3.4, continued from July 22, 2026, Case 151-26, fine respondents 2930 Gulf to Bay Boulevard, LLC, at 2930 Gulf to Bay Boulevard, in violation of code for permits and issue an order with a compliance deadline and fine if compliance is not met. Is there anyone here to speak on this case? Sir, please come forward and give us your name and address in relation to the property.

My name is Russell Miller. I am the contractor for Home Left Construction. My address is 8033 Paper Bark Lane, Port Ritchie, Florida.

And my first question is whether this gentleman has authorization to speak on this case as he's not the homeowner.

What authorization do you have? Sorry, what? What authorization do you have to speak on behalf of the owners?

They've contracted us to pull the permit.

If it's good for counsel, I'm good with it as well. Thank you. So we'll hear from the code and compliance officer and have you back up to enlighten us on what's going on.

Do you have, like, a signed contract?

So this is going to be much like the other cases where we do have permits in place. So I guess I'll just go forward with it, and then it'll explain everything.

Okay. Very good.

Okay. So this is going to be for 2930 Gulf to Bay Boulevard. Inspector Cat Reese with the City of Clearwater. Case number 15126. This is going to be one violation for permits required specifically for the site work to include masonry, wall installation for a patio, two tree boxes, decorative columns, front entrance pavers, and turf. First notice of violation was sent September 10th of 2025. Multiple notices have been sent since then. Multiple compliance dates have been given as well. Certified mail was signed September 29th of 2025. So this is going to be what you all probably know as Valentino, so of Gulf to Bay. I'm not sure if any of you have been there. It's a nice property. This is the property September of 2022, as you can see up here. This is some of the photos I've taken on August 13th of 2025. So this is the new wall that was built. So if you look back here, it had the entrance. And so that has some of these railings have been removed to build that wall, as well as the extension out from the entrance over here. This is the other – this would be, I believe, the north side of the building, still right next to the front entrance. This is a photo from 2022, and this is what it looks like as of August 13th and still today. These are cement tree blocks that have been added, boxes. I don't quite know what to call them, but just decorative. And you could also see the pavers and the artificial turf that has been installed as well. This is the back of the property, September of 2022, and this is the current photos, also another tree box towards the rear. This is the – this is looking at – from the property looking east of 2022. As you can see here, it's just that wrought iron fence that's visible throughout. And today, it has these decorative columns all along that east side of the property. So they did get a building permit to come in compliance. That has since been voided. There was a void letter submitted. We now have an understanding today of what needs to occur. This will need to be reopened again. He thought that this needed to be voided because everything needed to be separated, but he still needs a building permit because of those cement tree blocks and that wall by the patio. So we'll get this – I've already talked to the permit techs about this, and we're going to work this out with home construction so that way they can get in the right direction. As of today, we do have a permit that was submitted for the turf and the pavers only, and that is still requiring additional information and is not an issued permit as of today. And then we also have the signs permit, which is going to be my second one. The signs also need to be permitted, but it needs to be on a separate permit, which is why it's a separate violation. But just so you could see the timeline of both of what they've been working on. So compliance can be met by obtaining an issued permit, pass required inspections, and finalize said permit. We're requesting compliance by obtaining a permit on or before. I originally had October 23rd after speaking with the contractor. He's going to request 60 days. 60 days. The city is not opposed to that, so that would bring it to November 23rd of 2026. With completion of the permit, six months from the issuance of said permit. If the violation continues to exist, impose a fine of $150 per day each day, the violation continues to exist. Oh, sorry. So going back to it, we – I don't know what I do with my slides this time around. This is my first time speaking with him in reference to a timeline. If I had communication, I wouldn't have brought it forward. So that is why we're here today. I'm happy to work with him. He's going to come into the office so we can all understand what his realistic timeline will look like to get everything that's needed to get an issued permit and get this closed out.

When you say him, you refer to Mr. Miller. Yes, sir.

Sorry.

Okay. Before we do anything on a first motion, I'd like to hear from the contractor.

Oh, yeah.

What would you like to tell us about all of this?

Not that it's relevant to the fact that work was done without the permit, but the current owners of the restaurant, even though the name hasn't changed and the owners have changed, they actually purchased this can of worms. So financially speaking, paying us, paying the arborists, paying the fees associated with this unexpected expense has taken them a while to – so just a little understanding on the side of the big down payment, what have you, and running a restaurant at the same time. They've also had some issues with the timelines initial time.

Who was the owner at the time that the unpermitted work was done? Was it the current owner or the previous owner? The previous owner. So the current owner – and Inspector Reese, you're welcome to speak to this as well – did the current owner do any unpermitted work is the question, or did they assume somebody else's –

I've asked them several times if they did any work. They said no, because I've asked them material for the turf and stuff that they haven't done. Okay. Thank you.

Okay.

But they do understand their response. It's not – just to hedge up on the situation anymore.

I have comments and questions, but I'd like to defer to the board first to see it.

How long do you think it'll take to get what you need?

Listen, I think I can get the permit within the 60 days. I think we'll just keep them know the urgency of it as patients. We need to get this thing done, so relay that to them. As far as getting the work done, we may need to actually put it out. That's when we take a look at getting that. We may even be able to – we've still got to determine the zoning. Can we keep the base? The base has been there since 2010 edition. But as I understand, the sign is a separate case number that we're going to hear,

so we'll leave the sign as a – I get what you're saying about the data on the sign. We'll leave that as pertaining to the second case here. What's your best estimation in terms of once you receive a permit, how long it will take to get everything in compliance and inspections completed and work done?

I thought once the permits are submitted and approved, they have a year, basically, to measure.

They do per the statute these days in terms of how long of life the permit has, the building permit has. But that's separate and distinct as a state statute in terms of how long they have before the permit expires. What we're talking about here today is how much time we decide to give in before we start imposing fines for the work not being done.

I got you.

So that's kind of the difference there. It's easy to –

Okay.

You could be more restrictive because this is a code violation.

Right. Right. Gotcha. Okay, good.

The only reluctance I have from the Chair's position in terms of a first motion is stating that the current owner is in violation. I would entertain – unless I'm out of line, Council, I would entertain a motion that the previous owner cannot do.

Whoever owns the property is the one who's responsible. I get that. Even if they bought it with a condition that the other person is responsible, the only person that this board could levy a fine on is the current owner. So basically they get what they get when they buy it. Exactly.

Yeah. Okay. All right. Any other discussion or questions?

Do you know what you're going to require them for the artificial turf correction?

Sorry, I couldn't hear you.

I'm asking the inspector. What are you going to require them for permitting?

I don't require anything other than an issued permit be obtained. That would have to be met with the zoning department. I just go ahead and I always encourage they come in, especially for his case. Let's come in. We'll work alongside zoning. So I'm aware of the timeline. That's my only reason for being there. I do not discuss the requirements of that permit. That would be zoning and permitting. Although I can't answer the question.

They're requiring that we have the installation instructions and the information.

Makes sense. Are you able to supply that then?

We don't know what it is. So I'm trying to ask some of that type of work. And it will probably be best guess. Provide that information for them. But that will suffice. Everybody agrees we have to respond.

I guess the other day if the inspectors are happy, we're happy.

Okay, good. So do we want to give them?

Well, we need to do a first motion.

Okay, so I move to find the respondent in violation of the code as referred to in the affidavit in this case.

I'm sorry. I should ask the owner's representative to admit or deny. Right.

That doesn't matter at this point.

He's really a witness, I think.

You can make the motion that way. I'm sorry? You can make the motion the way it is. Okay. It's fine. All right. Thank you. Okay, good.

So I'm sorry, what are we giving them?

We did the first motion. We did? But no one seconded that. No one seconded that. All right. May I have a second? All right. All in favor? Aye. All opposed? We're getting there, folks. All right. And I believe they wanted 60 days to obtain a permit. I think it was longer.

What did you ask for, sir?

60 days to obtain the permit and then another six months for the permit.

Yeah. And basically, I think the way it typically reads is six months from the date of issuance of permit is what you're requesting. Is that right, Ms. Reese?

That is correct.

All right.

So November 23rd is the 60 days? Great.

Okay.

I move to enter an order requiring the respondent to correct the violations on or before November 23rd, 2026. If the respondent does not comply by that date, the board may order a fine of $150 per day per violation. For each day, each violation continues to exist. If fines and fees remain unpaid three months after such lien is filed, the city is authorized to foreclose, collect, or settle such lien.

I have a second. Second. All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Motion carries. Thank you, sir. Now we have our next case, we're going to jump to 3.16 because we have a case on the same property. Madam Secretary has requested we do this one next. So this is case 197-26, fine respondents, 2930 Gulf to Bay Boulevard, LLC at 2930 Gulf to Bay Boulevard, in violation of code for permits, an issue an order with a compliance deadline and fine if compliance is not met. We know we have a representative here to speak to us, and he stated who he is. Ms. Reese, would you like to continue?

Yes, I'm Inspector Kat Reese with the City of Clearwater. This is for 2930 Gulf to Bay Boulevard, case number 197-26, specifically for these signs. So that is the violation is for two signs installed on the property without a permit. These were the compliance dates that will match the previous case, and these are the same photos. So I'm going to just jump to, for the sake of time and everything, to the signs itself. So we have one very small sign here, but nonetheless, it is still in a fixed sign onto the structure. And we have this sign here, which this is what it looked like in 2022, and that is what is there today. Mr. Miller and I have spoke about this today. If I say they are going to, he did email me prior to Code Board, if I say you're going to remove that sign, we have some questions about the base, and if that needs to remain, he's going to come to the permitting department to get the answers to those questions. That should bring that violation into compliance, because if it's removed, then I can just go ahead and close it in compliance and submit the affidavit. So at this time, the signs permit that was pulled is still requiring additional information, but it's not going to really be relevant at this point, since they have decided to just remove them and then move forward with new signs later on, and they are aware that that will need to be permitted. So compliance can be met by obtaining an issued permit, pass required inspections, and finalize the permit, or remove the signs. Requesting compliance by obtaining a permit on or before November 23rd, 2026, just to keep it aligned with the other case. And completion of the permit, six months from the issuance of said permit. Any questions?

So it's one permit for both signs?

Correct. They are going to just remove those signs. I'll be able to go back, re-inspect, take pictures that they're removed, and then move on from that violation.

Any questions for the inspector? We'll recall Mr. Miller. Mr. Miller? Mr. Miller, anything you care to offer on this other than we've heard?

Only that they would love, obviously, to be able to keep the sign, but we've been running into some stumbling blocks with getting everything in the line. So if we can save it, we're going to, but they are prepared to remove the sign, you know, everything but the base necessary in order to get it handled quickly.

Okay. Based on the previous case of us giving you 60 days to get a permit pulled on the other case, do you think 60 days is adequate for the sign work? I would hope. In terms of just getting the permit and then six months?

I spoke to the billing department to have us come in and do things in person, and they happen so that we can meet with somebody to get questions answered quickly, and we don't have that delay, and we can kind of close the loop.

Okay. Any questions? Inspector Reese? All right. Very good. I have a second. Can we do a first motion? I don't recall. We haven't got a first motion. All right. Let's do a first motion, then.

I move to find the respondent in violation of the code as referred to in the affidavit in this case.

May I have a second? Second. All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Aye. Motion carries. May I have a second motion, please?

I move to enter an order requiring the respondent to correct the violations on or before November 23rd, 2026. If the respondent does not comply by that date, the board may order a fine of $150 per day per violation for each day each violation continues to exist. If fines and fees remain unpaid three months after such lien is filed, the city is authorized to foreclose, collect, or settle such lien.

I have a second. Second. All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Motion carries. Thank you, Inspector Reese. Thank you, Mr. Miller. All right. We're going to go back up our agenda.

Back to the clock. 3.7.

3.5 has been withdrawn. Per Madam Secretary, 3.6 is going to be continued until November. 3.7, Case 188-26, fine respondents IAGG Investments, LLC, at 118 South San Remo Avenue in violation of code for fences, and issue an order with a compliance deadline and fine if compliance is not met. Is there anyone here to speak on this case? Yes, ma'am. Please come forward. Please give us your name and address in relation to the property.

Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. I'm Sharon Barber. I live at 4061 58th Avenue North in St. Petersburg, Florida. I pastor a church in Lillman, and Sheila is a member of my church. She is a traveling nurse, and so she has given me permission to speak today on her behalf as needed.

Okay. Is that the written permission she gave me? Excellent. Thank you. So, counsel, being that the owner has a representative here, should we ask her on the admit-deny? Yes, sir. All right. So, ma'am, please come back up. So, do you admit or deny the violation on the property?

The violation. So, we admit that there is an issue with the fence. All right.

Thank you very much. Appreciate it. May I have a first motion, please?

I move to find the respondent in violation of the code as referred to in affidavit in this case.

May I have a second, please? Second. All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Motion carries. Inspector, you have the floor.

Hello. Vicki Sutteth with the City of Clearwater Code Compliance. This is for property at 118 South San Remo Avenue, case number 188-26. There is one violation here that's not supposed to say roof maintenance. It's supposed to say for the fence. Code section 3-803B and 3-808A1-2345 and 6. Notice the violation was sent on July 2nd, 2026 with a compliance date of 731. The certified mail was received on July 17th. This is a picture of the fence along the back, which is the part that's in violation. These were taken back in July, these were taken in August, these were taken in September, these were actually taken yesterday, and then this one was taken this morning, that the fence is still in violation. Compliance can be met for the fence by removing the fence or replacing it. Requesting compliance on or before October 23rd, 2026, or a fine of $150 per day per violation if the compliance is not met.

Thank you. Questions for the inspector?

I guess, have you talked to the owner? I have. I've talked to her several times. She keeps telling me she's out of the country and she doesn't have time for it. She did tell me that a permit was pulled. It was not pulled. And then when I spoke to her today, she told me that the owner told her that a permit had been pulled. So Sarah and I looked right before we started this, and a permit was pulled yesterday, but they aren't going to issue the permit until she sends in a copy of the survey of the property.

So that's the last step. So they did apply for a permit then?

Yesterday. Okay. Somebody did. I don't know. But it was for that property. It was applied for with it. But there is a note on there that says they have to have a survey, which I told her that two months ago when she told me she had pulled the permit, but actually had not pulled the permit.

Okay. And this case started when?

July. Well, the notice of violation was sent in July, but her first notice went out in May.

Okay.

Her courtesy notice.

Okay. Ma'am, what would you like to share with us? I'm going to ask you to come up to the microphone to make sure we can hear you.

I feel what I'd like to share with you is the human story that many of us, all of us being human would be familiar with. The properties that she owns were with her husband, and they've since divorced, and all the burden of them has fallen to her, including renting them. And this one has not been rented in full, and so there's no income coming in. She is a nurse, Filipina. She's a traveling nurse, and right now she is in California trying to, not trying because they do pay well, the traveling nurse. She is earning money in order to pay the mortgage and all the other things that are needed to maintain a business as well as provide for her children. Which, who are adults, but, you know, the human story. And so I guess I'm asking that the date be pushed forward, because she is in California working, trying to communicate with contractors and permit staff, and Ms. Vicki here, who I just met today, and is very kind. And just let it be pushed back to give her time, now that I'm involved, to, and can help her to get this taken care of.

Understood. Has the owner discussed with you what kind of time she has in mind that she would want?

Sure. She's actively working on this now, and she said maybe the beginning of December, the beginning of December, she has to, that would give her enough time. And she does plan to come back here, to physically be here, to sort it all out.

Okay. I appreciate you coming today.

I have a question for her.

Yes.

Ma'am?

Ma'am. One of our gentlemen has a question for you.

Is she willing to get a site plan submitted soon?

Well, I'm told today that she has the option of getting the survey done and submitting a plan to repair, replace the fence, or simply take it down, and then she'd be in compliance. So I'm going to have a conversation with her, not knowing if she is aware of that or not. But then, but then there is the issue of the consequences of taking it down that she just made me aware of. So there's something that she has to, has to decide, and quickly.

Do we know if we have, if there's a survey on the property or whether she needs to obtain one?

I did tell her that two months ago, that she had to have a survey that would be required, so she is aware that she needs it. But I did give her the option, too, to remove the fence. But as I was telling her, it just so happens that that, this real property backs up to a strip store on Gulf of the Bay, and there is a lot of homeless activity around there. So I did tell her, you know, it's entirely up to her, but if she did take down that fence, that might, may create havoc for the people that are running it currently. So.

Okay. The reason I ask about the survey is it might affect timelines somewhat, and that if, if the owner decides to move forward with the fence, a survey would be required, and there's a time element in that as well. And so that.

Originally, when I told her, she had another contractor come, but he was not a licensed contractor. Thank you. So then she found that out the hard way, and after she's supposed to have already paid him, and then now she's supposed to have a legitimate contractor.

Strang them up. All right. Any other questions from the board? As a comment, you're looking, you're requesting compliance on or before October. While I understand the fact that you asked for a survey two months ago or indicated they needed to get one, I also understand the owner's circumstances as a traveling nurse, making money, divorce, et cetera, et cetera.

Okay.

Thinking with the process in terms of having to acquire a survey, submit drawings, get a permit issued, would you be opposed to 60 days as opposed to the 30 days?

That's probably after you guys will decide.

Welcome comments from the board in that regard or suggestions otherwise?

Well, that's not going to get her to December when she's planning on coming back.

But I'll get her to the end of November, which is close enough. It doesn't take that long to get a survey. No. They really shouldn't get it.

She can get a third.

That's all they need. They have the permit. They just need the survey. So it's...

Well, it's a reasonable amount of time to get a survey and then mark it up as a drawing and submit it and acquire a permit. And then the inspector also has a discretion about when she comes back. And by that time, she should see some movement and progress. And if not, then it puts a certain timeline on it.

Sure.

Unless there's an objection.

No objection. All right.

May I have a second motion, please?

Mr. Chairman, I move it to enter an order of requirement to respondent to corrective violations on number 4, November 23, 2026. If the respondent does not comply by that date, the Board may order a fine of $150 per day for a violation for each day. Each violation continues to exist. If fines and fees remain unpaid three months after such lien is filed, this city is authorized to, or close, collect, or settle such lien.

May I have a second? Second. All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Motion carries. And do you understand what we've done here? Yes. All right. And you'll talk with, if you or the owner can talk with code enforcement officials and even the building department to make sure they get you what you need and you give them what they need, everything should be fine.

So you have 16 done? Yeah. Yes.

Thank you very much, and we appreciate you coming today.

Yeah.

Case 3.8 has been withdrawn. 3.9 on our agenda has been withdrawn. 3.10 has been withdrawn. Next case on our agenda, 3.11, case 192-26. Fine Respondents Love Management at 1116 Amble Lane in violation of code for fences and exterior storage and issue an order with compliance deadline and fine if compliance is not met. Is there anyone here to speak on this case?

I think so. Thank you.

Is there anyone here to speak on Amble Lane? All right. Apparently not. Mr. Kasman? Yes. Inspector Kasman, you have the floor.

Thank you, board. Daniel Kasman, code enforcement inspector for the city of Clearwater. This is case number 192-26 for 1116 Amble Lane. There's two violations here for code section 3-1502, G1, G2, and G3 for exterior storage, and code section 3-808, A1 through 6 for fence maintenance. These are the dates of notice of violation went out with a compliance date, due to an affidavit of posting, and a notice of hearing. Recently, I have been in contact with the owner, and I think we got it down pat what he needs to do, but he wasn't able to get it done in time, and I think he just needs some more time, but you'll see. This came as a complaint from neighbors. If you look in the middle of those two houses, those two duplexes, there's some sort of black structure being erected. A closer look, it was some sort of shop being created by one of the tenants at the property. They were working on some mini bikes in there, so I got called out to go take a look. This was the backyard once I got back there. A bunch of stuff back there, shopping carts, tires, random items. This was me trying to get a good photo of the fence, but it's mostly obscured by all the stuff. You do see there's some slats missing, some minor damages, but it'll become more apparent that the fence needs some work later on. This was just what was going on inside and there. So these were the postings for the notice of violation on the 10th of August. It did get a little bit better. There was some improvement back there, but items were still strewn about the rear of the property. I went back on the 27th, and the fence, you can see a little bit better, but it's in rough shape, and a lot of items are still back there. It's a better look at the fence at that time. It's leaning over. It's got some slats attached to it and a small little pallet being used to bolster up the bottom there. This was on the 9th of this month. It did get a lot better. This was after I spoke with the owner, but there are still some items lingering on the property. This is a better look at the fence and the shape it's in. And then this was this morning. Still some stuff back there, but overall, it seems like they're almost done, but there's still some things that have to be taken care of. So compliance will be met for the exterior storage by removing from the grounds of the property all items not meant for outdoor use, such as bins, boxes, construction materials, indoor furniture, carpets, and other miscellaneous items. And compliance will be met for fence maintenance by repairing existing fence or removing it. Repair means ensuring it is upright, panels are securely attached, and missing slats are replaced. And I'm requesting compliance on before October 23rd, 2026, or a fine of $150 per day per violation for each day the violations continue to exist.

Thank you. Questions? May I have a first motion, please.

I move to find the respondent in violation of the code as referred to in the affidavit in this case.

May I have a second? Second. All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Motion carries. I have a second motion, please.

I move to enter an order requiring the respondent to correct the violations in honor before October 23rd, 2026. If the respondent does not comply by that date, the board may order a fine of $150 per day per violation for each day each violation continues to exist. If fines and fees remain unpaid three months after such lien is filed, the city is authorized to foreclose, collect, or settle such lien.

May I have a second? Second. All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Motion carries. Thank you very much. Thank you, Inspector Kasman. Next on our agenda, item 3.12, case 193-26. Find respondents El Dorado Beach LLC at 1000 El Dorado Avenue in violation of code for short-term rental and residential rental business tax receipt and issue an order with a compliance deadline and fine if compliance is not met. Inspector Green.

Aye. This property is coming to compliance. We're seeking a declaration of violation.

All right. Is there anyone here to speak on this case? All right. Very good. May I get a declaration of violation, please?

I move to find the respondent was in violation of the code. As referred to in the affidavit in this case, the violation was corrected prior to today's hearing and to enter an order that no fine be imposed. If the respondent repeats the violation, the board may order a fine of up to $500 for each day the violation continues to exist.

May I have a second? Second. All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Motion carries. Thank you, ma'am. 3.13, case 194-26. Find respondents Mark G. Sikorsky at 3601 Brigadoon Circle in violation of code for exterior surfaces and roof maintenance and issue an order with a compliance deadline and fine if compliance is not met. Is there anyone here to speak on this case? Sir, please come forward and give us your name and address in relation to the property.

Yes, sir. My name is Mark Sikorsky, 3601 Brigadoon Circle, the owner.

Got it. Thank you, sir. Sir, do you admit or deny the violation?

I admit. There's some stuff I'm taking care of and still going to take care of very soon.

Understood. In our process, we're going to go ahead and make a motion, then we'll hear from the inspector, and then we'll have you back up to let us know whatever you want to tell us. Yes, sir. All right. Thank you. May I have a first motion, please?

I move to find the respondent in violation of the code as referred to in the affidavit in this case.

May I have a second? Second. All in favor? Aye. All opposed? All right. Inspector Danielson.

Good afternoon. Good afternoon, board. I got 3601 Brigadoon Circle, Jared Daniels, code inspector for the city of Clearwater, case number 194-26, and it's only one violation here.

Which is going to be either exterior surfaces or whatever. All by exterior surfaces. Okay.

Froze up here. So we got one violation here for code section 3-1502B for exterior surfaces. The notice of violation was sent out at 04-15-25 with a compliance date of 05-21-25. Certified mail was received on December 23rd, 05-25, and this is the property. Some rotten wood, missing wood, or like some mildew and rotted wood. Tension. And these were all on the date of the inspection. This was just July, and this was this morning. Compliance can be met for exterior surface by replacing any defective structural and decorative elements of any building wall and ensure all exterior surfaces are free of mildew, rust, loose materials, and faded and peeling paint. For the one violation for exterior surfaces, we're requesting compliance on or before November 1st, 2026, or a fine of $150 per day per violation if not in compliance.

Thank you, Inspector. Questions for the inspector?

Is this a single-family home? Yes. Okay.

Is this one of the many townhouses we've heard about over the last few months? Yes. Yes. That are individually owned? Yes. As individual residences. Yes. So we're treating it, even though it's a townhouse, we're treating it as a single-family dwelling.

Yes, because they're individually owned.

Correct. Okay. All right. Any other questions for the inspector? Sir, please come forward. What'd you like to tell us?

Obviously, there's some issues with the mildew and stuff like that. I have since purchased the pressure washer, so I'm going to start getting that done. Obviously, fix the wood, the paneling and all that, and then the side of the gutter that's coming down on that. I was hoping until, like, December, if I could possibly get timed till, but obviously, if I have to do it until November, then I will get it done. It's just something that I was waiting for a program to approve us to have work done on the home, but just recently I got denied for it. So it took a while for the program to get approved or denied, and then it finally got denied. So now I'm fixing it myself.

Understood. Have you had any discussions with the building department in terms of whether or not any permits are required for this work and what it would take to approve it?

That I have not, and since I've been listening to everything going on, that's what I've been wondering. So obviously, I'm going to do my due diligence and find that out as well before anything gets done. So I didn't know if pressure washing needed a permit, but obviously I will find out.

Pressure washing does not require a permit, neither does any type of maintenance, so he could just move along with the work.

Painting? As long as you're here?

What's that?

The exterior paint?

Does not require a permit.

All right. Thank you very much. Thank you. All right. Now your due diligence is done. It may not be the building department, but it's a pretty dependable source of information. All right. I'll take it. Very good. All right. So you said December. Do you have a... It's possible, but... I got you.

You know, beginning of December, middle, January 4th, I heard.

20-30.

Any input from the board regarding a timeline? Any objection to 60 days?

No. No, I think 60 days is fine.

60 days would be, what, November 23rd?

November 23rd, yeah.

All right. Sure. Should that work for you?

Yeah.

Okay. All right. Excellent. All right. May I have a... Any other questions? Any other input before we make a motion? May I have a second motion then, please?

I move to enter an order requiring the respondent to correct the violations on or before November 23rd, 2026. If the respondent does not comply by that date, the board may order a fine of $150 per day per violation for each day each violation continues to exist. If fines and fees remain unpaid three months after such lien is filed, the city is authorized to foreclose, collect, or settle such lien.

May I have a second, please? Second. All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Motion carries. Thank you. A moment, please.

3.1.

We heard that that was Ms. Green. That was their declaration of violation.

This is a rental term.

Right. Short term rental term. Right. We did that one. Ms. Green presented it, and we made a motion for...

Oh, she said it was corrected.

Yeah. So it was abnormal in terms of what we normally do on a case, but because that's what she'd request, that's what we do. I gotcha. All right. Good. Moving on, 3.14 on our agenda, case 195-26, fine respondents Xenia M. Luna at 4104 Brigadoon Circle in violation of code for fences and exterior surfaces. An issue and order with compliance deadline and fine of compliance is not met. Is there anyone here to speak on this case?

Yes.

All right. Ma'am, give us your name and address in your relation to the property.

My name is Xena Luna, and I live at 4104 Brigadoon Circle here in Clearwater.

You're the owner, correct?

Yes, I'm the owner.

Okay. Ma'am, do you admit or deny the violation?

I admit.

Okay. Very good. Let's do a first motion, please.

I move to find the respondent in violation of the code as referred to in the affidavit in this case.

Do I have a second? Second. All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Motion carries. Ma'am, we're going to have you take a seat, and we're going to hear from the inspector and have you back up to see what you'd like to tell us. Okay? Thank you.

Good afternoon, board. I'm back with 4104 Brigadoon Circle, Jared Daniels, Sr., code inspector for the city of Clearwater, case number 195-26. We got one violation here for code section 3-1502.B for exterior surfaces. The notice of violation was sent out on April 18th, 25, with a compliance date of May 21st, 25, and certified mail was received on May 5th, 2025. So, this is on the initial inspection date. So, this was July when I went out to the property. So, wood had been replaced, but it's still the building needs to be pressure washed and maybe painted still the same. And this was from this morning with peeling paint on the front, mildew and peeling paint on the side, and the back still is mildew. Compliance can be met for the exterior surface by replacing any decorative structural and decorative elements of any building wall and ensure all exterior surfaces are free of mildew, rust, loose materials, and fading and peeling paint. For the one violation for exterior surfaces, requesting a compliance on or before November 1st, 2026, or imposing a fine of $150 per day per violation, if not in compliance.

All right. Board, do you have any questions for the inspector?

No.

Ma'am, what would you like to tell us about all this?

I'm able to, I did, Lord, I'm nervous right now. I will be getting a pressure washing company. They will be out next weekend, is the next available. And I will go ahead and get a painting company to come out to my house. But if I can be given time so I can paint my house, because I just got a new roof. I'm doing it little by little. But I just got a new roof and a brand new bathroom. I will get the pressure wash to come out next weekend. But if I could get just a little bit more time for the painting, because I do want to paint the exterior of the house on a professional level.

Understood. Right now the inspector is asking for compliance on November 1st. That's about five or six weeks from now. What kind of time do you have in mind?

For the painting, if I can get until next year, or December 31st, or?

It would be January 4th.

January 4th. Okay.

Any discussion or comments about that from the board? Any objections? That's fine.

No, I'm not going to do that.

January 4th, is that what they were talking about? Okay. No objection from the chair. Any other questions? All right.

Would that help you out, January 4th? That would help me out, yes, sir.

All right. Any objections from the inspector? All right. Very good. Can I have a second motion, please?

I move to enter an order requiring the respondent to correct the violations on or before January 4th, 2027. If the respondent does not comply by that date, the board may order a fine of $150 per day. For violation, for each day, each violation continues to exist. If fines and fees remain unpaid three months after such lien is filed, the city is authorized to foreclose, collect, or settle such lien.

Can I have a second? Second. All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Motion passes. Thank you both for coming to speak to us today. I appreciate you coming.

Thank you.

Thank you. Good luck to you. 3.15 has been withdrawn. 3.16 we've heard. 3.17 has been withdrawn. 3.18, Case 199-26, Fine Respondents, 19042, U.S. Highway 19 North. That's been withdrawn. Case 3.18 has been withdrawn? Yes, sir. Well, okay. For the record, Item 3.18, Case 199-26 has been withdrawn. Item 3.19.

What's that?

What did I miss?

She makes a strange noise.

Okay. 3.19, Case 200-26, Fine Respondents, please forgive me for if I butcher this, Gandra Rabshane Khan and Joan Khan at 1855 Diane Drive in violation of code for camper and hauling trailer parking and issue an order with a compliance deadline and fine if compliance is not met. Is there anyone here to speak on this case?

Yes.

Yes.

All right. Sir, give us your name and address in relation to the property.

I'm Kevin Whitcomb. I'm the renter at Vandasha Baines. Thank you.

Do you have – what permission do you have to speak on behalf of the owners? I have a letter from here. Can we get that?

Let's give that to the secretary there and let her see that. Madam Secretary, are you satisfied?

Nope. She will be if she picks it up.

Yes, it's fine. Thank you. Sir, we'll gather some data from you here in a minute.

Admit or deny. Yeah. I'm getting there.

Okay. Counsel, this gentleman is a representative, but he's not the property owner. He's the tenant. Is it appropriate to ask him if he admits or denies?

Yes, because he's speaking on behalf of the owner.

All right. Sir, do you admit or deny the violation?

Can I plead no contest? I'm sorry. I pulled some permits.

We just need to know whether you admit or deny the violation. If you say no, that's fine. We'll present the case. We're not forcing you one way or the other. If you feel the violation has occurred, then –

I am responsible for what has happened. Is that a good answer?

Let me – That's very interesting. Admit or deny.

Let me offer up the violation again as far as what the violation actually is, and then you can tell us if you want to admit or deny it.

Okay? Can I have an excuse? You can have an excuse. I have a problem. But that's the second part.

The violation – I'm sorry. There's two parts here.

Okay.

The determination of a violation exists, and then the second part is how much time you need to come in compliance before a fine takes effect. So the first one is a violation exists. If it does, that's an easy motion.

The violation is there.

Okay. We have an admission. All right.

Thank you very much. I had a permit. You'll do it?

I'll do a second part. All right. So at this point, can I get a first motion, please?

I move to find the respondent in violation of the code as referred to in the affidavit in this case.

May I have a second? Second. All in favor? Aye. All opposed?

What happened?

Okay. Now, what we did is – all we did was we made a finding that there is indeed a violation, okay, based on your statement. What we're going to do at this point, the way our process works, we're going to have you take a seat for a minute. We're going to hear from the inspector and then call you up and let you tell us what the game plan is and what you have to offer, okay?

Yes. Thank you.

All right. Thank you, sir. Inspector.

Good afternoon, board. Brian Simon, City of Clearwater Code Compliance. This is case 1855 Diane Drive. Case number 200-26. It's one violation. It's basically an RV parked in front of the residence. Notice of violation was mailed and posted on 5-5-26 with a compliance date of 5-22-26, and a registered mail receipt was returned on 5-19-26. As you can see here, there was, at the time of the initial inspection, two RVs out there. One has been removed, as you can see here, and that one remains. And this was yesterday. It was there yesterday. So compliance can be met by removing the RV from the front of the property. So we are requesting compliance on or before 10-226, which we have already agreed upon, or pay a fine of $150 a day per violation if compliance is not met.

I have a question for you. Is there a size ruling or a size limitation on what you can park and what you can't?

Not when it comes to trailers and RVs.

Say again?

Not when it comes to trailers or RVs.

Okay.

Thank you. They just can't be there. It would be 10 feet.

Can it go behind the fence?

That one would not fit on. And he already has a boat on the other side. Any questions for the inspector? And I have been in contact with the property owner, in case that was questioned. We did advise some of the violation, and I've been in contact with the tenant owner.

Excellent. Any other questions for the inspector? Sir, come on up.

I can't explain. No? It's been really good to me. Very patient. It's nice to know. I thought because of the hurricanes, there might be a little bit of a – I think I had read in papers and different things that there was some leeway in where you could live and the size of the RV because what happened, I had three trees land on the roof. And what was supposed to be fixed in 60 days or 90 days, I had to hire another roofer six months later. And then I had to start dealing with water coming through the roof, and it just turned into a real nightmare. But since I had my RV there, we did a new pull pump, new pull filter, new roof, new gutters, and some sheetrock work. I also ran out of money. And I moved the RV today. It's not there anymore, and the small one was gone a long time ago. I think I could be caught up. He's been really good to me. Okay. The small one was for my son. I have a 16-year-old son. We were kind of crowded in the big one. Well, that was one excuse anyway.

Understood. So you're saying that you've moved the large one as well?

Yes, sir, I did. It moved – it's out front behind my truck. But I have a place to take it to. Yes, I'm going. It's not at home. It won't be at my home anymore.

So it's for all intents and purposes you've resolved it?

It is done. Okay. Yes. Thank you so much. No, I was so busy I was done with food.

I have a question, sir. How soon do you anticipate moving? Moving? You said you have a truck. It's still there behind your truck.

Oh, it's on its way to storage right now. I just ran out of time. I was in a bad accident. It's not going to my home, sir.

But when do you anticipate actually moving it?

When am I going to do what?

When are you going to move it?

When are you going to move it? It's already in the process of moving. It's already hooked to my truck. It's on the way to the storage unit. As soon as I walk out of here, my son is with me. We have a place to put it. Okay. We're able to stay. All right. Thank you. Thank you, sir.

So we do the – just give them the –

Unless we have any other questions from the board.

Did there be a declaration of violation?

I think we did one.

Did they do it?

Yeah. Very – we did a declaration of – well, I mean, that's not what they're asking. That's not what the inspector is asking. No, because we don't have the information.

Yeah. I don't have the proof that it's been in compliance yet. Right. So we will go forth with this until the second. Okay.

Good. Any other questions? Second declaration, please. Second motion, please.

I move to enter an order requiring the respondent to correct the violations on or before October 2nd, 2026. If the respondent does not comply by that date, the board may order a fine of $150. Is it – is this a vehicle, so it's $150, or it's $50 for a vehicle?

$150. What is showing there?

Okay, perfect. $150 per day per violation for each day. Each violation continues to exist. If fines and fees remain unpaid three months after such lien is filed, the city is authorized to foreclose, collect, or settle such lien.

Can I have a second?

Second.

All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Motion carries. Thank you. Thank you, sir, for coming in today. We appreciate it. Thank you, Inspector. Thank you, Inspector.

All right.

Moving on. We have a whole business item. I'm seeing Inspector Dixon up here. Is this for the fine reduction?

No. I'm going to show you some pictures for the lien reduction.

Oh, okay. Good. I was wondering. I thought maybe I missed –

Oh, I thought you said something about fire or something. No, no.

I'm used to seeing you present a new business item, and I didn't. So, next on our agenda, Item 4.1, Case 71-25, consider a request by Petitioner's Data Group, LLC, at 1877 Springtime Avenue to reduce the fine regarding roof maintenance, door and window opening, and exterior surfaces, and, if approved, issue an order that specifies a fine that includes administrative costs, administration costs, and establishes a date payable, or the lien will revert to its original amount. Sir, you're here to speak on this as well? So, please step up and give us your name and address and your relation to the property.

Yes. My name is Luis Pantoja. Luis Pantoja. Okay. I'm the owner of the property.

Okay. With my wife. Luis. Luis. Yeah. I'm a guy with my wife.

Okay. Excellent. Okay. So, I believe we're going to hear from the inspector, and then we'll speak with you. Okay.

I'm doing board, Inspector Dixon, from the City Clearwater Public Appliance Office. This is Case 71-25-1877, Springtime Avenue. This property is a problem for multiple years. It was in an estate. The individual that was living there indicated that he was related to the estate owner. There's inoperable vehicles, trash, garbage, tarps. All the windows were boarded up. The places pretty much are left. So, in the spring of last year, we wrote the property up, and we brought it before the Code Board and started some fines. And once they accrued to a certain amount, we initiated a foreclosure case. And this is what the property looks like today. He bought the property in May, and he's already complied all the violations. He's got a new roof. It's painted. The window coverings are removed. There's no junk. There's no broken down cars. So, I would support a major reduction of those problems. Thank you.

Very good.

Well, the obvious question is, piece of bed that we need is what the administration costs are. $1,317.20.

Sir, would you like to come up and share with us what you've had in mind, what you've done with the property?

Well, we, my wife bought it like in May. We bought it. We had a property. So, we're going to just pay to find whatever it costs.

Okay. Yeah. So, you've done all the work on the property and cleaned it up. We appreciate that.

Yep.

Okay. Any questions for either the inspector or the new owner? All right. As the board, I would entertain discussion regarding a fair lien reduction.

I think we suggest the administrative costs. Yeah.

Any objections to the administrative costs? No. No.

He's done a beautiful job.

I would support that. The gentleman bought the property and cleaned it all up, and he's not the fellow that committed the violation, so.

It looks very nice.

May I have an appropriate motion to reduce the lien amount to the administrative costs of 1317.20?

I move to enter an order reducing the amount of the lien to administrative costs of $1,317.20 within 30 days, or the lien will revert to its original amount.

May I have a second?

Second.

All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Very good. Thank you, Inspector. Thank you, sir, for cleaning up the property. Thank you.

All right.

Next, we have the acceptance of affidavits of compliance as listed. As a reminder, we typically do all of these in one group.

Yes.

And so I would entertain a motion to accept the affidavits 5.1.1 through 5.1.7 to be accepted.

I move to accept the affidavits of compliance as listed.

May I have a second?

Second.

All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Motion carries. Next on our agenda, item 5.2, case 127-25, accept the affidavits of noncompliance for respondents Jeffrey Thaler at 1022 Iroquois Street for permits. Inspector Reese?

Property is not in compliance. If you want me to elaborate, I can. He did get an issued permit on the time, but he has failed inspections and the permit hasn't expired.

Okay.

Fair enough. I have a motion to accept the affidavit of noncompliance, please.

I move to accept the affidavit of noncompliance and issue an order that uncloses fines and states the fines and fees remain, sorry, let me give that to you again, fines and states, if fines and fees remain unpaid three months after such lien is filed, the city is authorized to foreclose, collect, or settle such lien.

Can I have a second? Second. All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Motion carries. Item 5.3 on our agenda has been withdrawn. 5.4, case 05-26, accept the affidavits of noncompliance for respondent Thomas Rizkowski at 1384 Seabree Street for parking lot surfaces. Inspector Jensen.

And we're not going to have property exchanges, still not in compliance. Council?

Sir.

If there's a question, I see that we still have public in the room, should we ask for? I mean, we could generally ask, is anybody here on the affidavits of noncompliance?

Yes.

Which one?

They will be here for 2021 North Betty Lane.

Which is?

Case number? 5.8. 5.8. 5.8. Okay. Okay.

Then we could just do the rest of these, I mean the ones right in front of them because they're pretty quick. Okay. And then go to that one.

Good. All right. On case 78-20.

We need to vote on 5.4.

Somebody in the audience has something. Chair, I'm sorry. I have to. I'm here for 5.5.

Okay. 5.5.

All right. We're not at 5.5 yet, are we? No. We're at 5.5. You're up next, sir. You're up next. Thank you for letting us know. All right. So on 5.4, the inspectors indicated that this is not in compliance. May I have a motion, please?

I move to accept the affidavit of noncompliance and issue an order that imposes fines and states if fines and fees remain unpaid three months after such lien is filed, the city is authorized to foreclose, collect, or settle such lien.

May I have a second, please?

Second.

All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Motion carries. Item 5.5, case 11-26, accept the affidavits of noncompliance for respondents Hannah Bajara and Madiha Ibrahim at 4004 Brigadine Circle for exterior surfaces. Sir, would you give us your name and address?

Pierre Daniel, 4004 Brigadine Drive Circle. I'm the son of the Madiha and Hannah.

Okay. Have we seen you here before?

A couple times.

Yeah, I thought so. So what the inspector is asking for is an affidavit of noncompliance because the work's not been done or completed? What can you share with us on this?

I just sent him like an email with a couple pictures, probably like on the 21st. He didn't respond to my email, so I don't know if he saw it yet or not. I went today and completed some of the work, too.

Okay.

And I have pictures as well. Some or all? All, I'm only missing the pressure washer. I went today, but the older, the past tenants just moved away, so there was no, like, power in the house. So until I get the power, I'll go ahead and do the pressure washer.

Thank you, sir. Inspector Daniel, I'd like your end to it all on this one.

Defense, they're washing it. Defense case is closed. Okay. Defense case is closed.

Next to your needs washing, the pressure washer.

And I just have a question. You said the owner passed away, so there's no power? This is not your property? No, left. Moved away.

The tenants, they just moved away, so in the order of, like, transferring the power back to, like, my mom and dad, there is no power yet. So I'm still trying to contact Duke Energy, so hopefully I'll get that power, like, in a couple days, and then I'll go do the pressure washer.

Okay, thank you. Before you leave, sir, I just want to ask if the board, if the board considers to give you additional time, how much time would you need to get this?

Probably, like, 30 days.

Can we do that? This is just an affidavit of noncompliance.

Well, what you would do in this case is not accept the affidavit of noncompliance, maybe direct staff to put it on for next month for consideration.

So my next question would be for Inspector Daniels, if he has any objection to kicking the can 30 days down the road, so it would appear from where I sit that the gentleman has done some work on the property's corrective defense. I understand the legitimate barriers that you've had in terms of power and tenants in the property that have kept you from performing this,

but it would seem to me he's demonstrated some willingness to get this thing corrected. Just so the board is aware, the meeting, we are not going to have a meeting in October. Right. So it would be your next meeting in November.

Bonus. Understood.

So we would basically, because we're not meeting next month, we'd be picking the can 60 days down the road, which I assume is adequate for your needs. That would be great. Thank you. Any objections, Inspector? Any objections from the board?

No.

Any comments? Corrections? Criticisms? All right. May I have a motion, please?

Can we do a motion or does this continue anyway?

Just do a motion to continue to be heard at your next meeting.

I put in a motion to continue this affidavit of noncompliance until November 20th.

Second?

Second.

All in favor? Aye. All opposed?

Aye. Have a good day. Thank you. Sorry I was listening. Thank you very much.

All right. Number 5.6 has been withdrawn. 5.7, case 78-26, accept the affidavit of noncompliance for respondents, Anna Torres Pavan, at 1450 Franklin Street for permits. Anyone here on that property? All right. Inspector Reese?

This property is not in compliance. There have been no permits pulled for the work that was done. Still remains the same.

Questions? Motion. I have a motion.

I move to accept the affidavit of noncompliance and issue an order that imposes fines and states if fines and fees remain unpaid three months after such lien is filed, the city is authorized to foreclose, collect, or settle such lien.

We have a second. Second. All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Motion carries. 5.8, case 80-26, accept the affidavit of noncompliance for respondents, Andres Perez and Zoila Perez at 2021 Betty Lane for permits. I believe we have owners here? Yes. Sir, please come forward. Sir, can you give us your name in relation to the property address?

Honor Perry, 2021 Norbury Lane.

Okay. Thank you, sir. If you don't mind, give us a minute to talk with the inspector, and then we'll talk with you about where things are and what you'd like to tell us. Okay?

I need to interpret. I don't understand very well English.

All right.

If I may speak on that. This property is not in compliance. The permits are still expired with failed inspections. I have gone above and beyond with this property to multiple continuances. He fell ill on the first hearing. We sent him home. I spoke with the translator. He was well aware of what needed to be done to come in compliance. I then set the continuance due to translation. He did not show up. At this point, I feel that the burden should be on him to do a lien reduction once the property is in compliance.

Thank you, Inspector. Sir, I'm sorry for the language problem in that we're not speaking a language that you can understand. And I hope you get that. Questions or discussion from the board on this one? We've heard the inspector.

I guess do we have a legal requirement to provide an interpreter for him?

Well, we're just having that discussion.

This. Leave the notice of hearing. It says if you need additional.

But if you can't read the notice to. Yeah, I was going to say that. That's a catch for you.

Well, I mean, if you've got to know this.

But he was provided before a trap for a certain line. Yes. Correct.

He's been, and I've not, I've been in communication with him here. I have not had communication other than when he shows up for the hearings. I have extended my grace to him feeling ill the first time, meeting a translator the second time. I have directly talked to his son, who speaks perfect good English. He was aware of what needed to be done to come in compliance. I spoke extensively today with the gentleman here, and we had no language barrier at that time.

It sounds like he's been informed.

I would, just from my viewpoint, based on everything that's occurred, I would be inclined to go with the inspector's recommendations and let him pursue it as a lien release. If he needs to get additional help in terms of translations or language or, you know, communications with the building department or the code inspectors, it would seem to me that the code inspectors have performed their duty. I see no failings in that, unless I have objection from members on the board. All right. May I have a motion, please?

I move to accept the affidavit of noncompliance and issue an order that imposes fines in states if fines and fees remain unpaid three months after such lien is filed. The city is authorized to foreclose, collect, or sell such lien.

May I have a second?

Second.

All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Thank you, sir, for coming. Much is good. Thank you. Okay. 5.9 on our agenda. Case 108-26, accept the affidavit of noncompliance for respondents Hugo Paz Mateos and Anaji Mejia at 405 North Highland Avenue for exterior storage. Inspector Kasman. Seeing no other public here, I'm going to assume or see that there is nobody else remaining to speak on our cases. No other public?

I was Daniel Kasman, Code Enforcement Inspector for the City of Clearwater. This is for 405 North Highland Avenue for the affidavit of noncompliance that was out there at the property today, and they're still in violation for exterior storage.

Okay. Thank you, Inspector. Questions?

No. I move to accept the affidavit of noncompliance and issue an order that imposes fines and states that fines and fees remain unpaid three months after such lien is filed. The City is authorized to foreclose, collect, or settle such lien.

May I have a second?

Second.

All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Motion carries. Thank you, Inspector. Case 5.10 has been withdrawn. Item 511 on our agenda is discuss cancelling the October 28th, 2026 Municipal Code Enforcement Board meeting. What's to discuss other than the city has some other obligations that they feel would interfere?

There's a lot going on, but mainly what is happening is this will be our last meeting in this chamber. Our city hall is moving to a new location, which will include a council chambers. So this whole thing is moving, and we need time to get all our paperwork to reflect the new location. And that's just, it's not as simple as it sounds with all our programs that we use. So we just need to take some time to get that all wrapped up. Exciting.

So this, if that goes as planned, our next meeting in November would be at the new location.

Correct, and so I know that I reached out to those of you on the board that have your terms expiring. If you're available, I will need you at that November meeting because the agenda item for them to consider will come in December. So if you're still able to, please, I think, please.

Please.

Please? Sure. It's exciting.

Any questions or any discussion needed on that? Are we need the board members? No, I agree. Anybody else present?

And I will forward all the new information as for parking and where we're at and how to get there and room temperature. I'll get you as much information as I can.

Awesome.

Okay, are we going to get a slightly higher platform?

Our pedals as we walk up.

All right. No questions, no discussion on that, and then we'll move on.

I'm sorry. Yeah, could we have a motion to cancel the opportunity? Yes, we need a motion and a second. All right.

Yes, thank you. I will take a motion. Somebody.

I would like to put in a motion to cancel the October meeting and postpone it until November 20th.

It's November 18th.

November 18th.

So also, just as a reminder, our November and December meetings bump up a week because of the holidays, so it'll be the second Wednesday of the month. Third Wednesday of the month? Second.

Yes, third. Third.

Wednesday of the month instead of the fourth Wednesday of the month.

All right. May I have a second on the motion, please? Second. All in favor? Aye. All opposed?

Thank you, everyone.

The meeting is postponed until November. All right, moving on to nuisance abatement lien filings. Case 219-26, accept the nuisance abatement lien for respondents, Zem, Zem, Enterprises LLC at 1472 Gulf of the Bay Boulevard for inoperative vehicle and issue an order with a compliance deadline and authorize the city to mitigate the violation if compliance is not met. Inspector Suddeth.

Hello, Vicki Suddeth with the City of Clearwater. This is for case number 219-26 for 1472 Gulf of the Bay Boulevard. There is one violation here for inoperable vehicle outdoor storage nuisance. Notice the violation was posted and mailed on 8-27-2026 with a compliance date of 9-6-2026. I did not receive the green card, so I did post the property on 8-27-26. This is a copy of the posting on 8-27. This is just standing back a little bit. The truck that you see there did not have a tag on it, and there is a trailer next to it that did not have a tag. There's a close-up picture of the truck. The tag, the trailer did get a tag on it, but it is, it's still expired. It's expired in 2025. This was yesterday, a close-up picture of it, and then again this morning.

Can I ask you a question about that? Did you confirm that that tag actually belongs with that trailer?

I did not.

Okay.

There was no tag on it when I originally was there, and then it showed up, but compliance can be met for the trailer by removing the trailer and making sure the trailer has a current tag and registration. Requesting compliance five days after the board renders its order.

Questions from the board? I have a motion, please.

I move to enter an order of funding the respondent in violation of code and requiring the respondent to correct the violations within five days of the board's written order. If the respondent does not comply within the time specified, the city may take all reasonable actions, including entry onto the property, to abate and maintain the nuisance, and charge the respondent with the reasonable cost, which will become a lien on the property. If cost, fines, and fees remain unpaid three months after such lien is filed, the city is authorized to foreclose, collect, or settle such a lien.

May I have a second? Second. All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Motion carries. Item 6.2 on our agenda, case 220-26, accept the nuisance abatement lien for respondents' Black Mountain Home Solutions LLC at 617 South Glenwood Avenue for light clearing. An issue an order with the compliance deadline and authorize the city to mitigate the violation if compliance is not met. Inspector Siddick.

Vicki Siddick, the city of Clearwater, this is for case number 220-26 at 617 South Glenwood Avenue. So there's one violation here, and this is for code section 3-1503-B7-B8-B10-B5A for lot clearing. Notice the violation was posted and mailed on 8-27-2026 with a compliance date of 9-6-2026. Certified mail was not received, so again, it was posted on 8-27. This picture was taken on 8-27 of the overgrowth. Here's a copy of the posting. This picture was taken on 9-14. Again, this was taken yesterday.

Looks like it's been a while.

Yeah. This was also taken yesterday, and then this one was taken this morning.

Okay.

Compliance to be met for the lot clearing by clearing all trash, debris, and overgrowth from the property. Requesting compliance five days after the board renders its order.

Questions from the board? Can I have a motion, please?

I'm moving. Oh, go ahead. Go ahead, Pam.

I move to enter an order finding the respondent in violation of code and requiring the respondent to correct the violations within five days of the board's written order. If the respondent does not comply within the time specified, the city may take all reasonable actions, including entry onto the property, to abate and maintain the nuisance, and charge the respondent with the reasonable costs, which will become a lien on the property. If costs, fines, and fees remain unpaid three months after such lien is filed, the city is authorized to foreclose, collect, or settle such lien.

May I have a second?

Second.

All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Motion carries. Thank you, Inspector.

There's got to be a way to shorten that.

I was thinking the same thing.

What's that?

No, there's got to be a way to shorten that.

Yeah.

I mean, honestly, we used to do these just in mass, but one of your predecessors said we couldn't.

Oh, okay. I wonder if it was me. No. No. That's fine. Oh, is it Jared? No.

The quicker we go through, the quicker we go home.

Okay.

Moving on. Item 6.3 on the agenda. So it's really up to you. Okay. Case 221-26, accept the nuisance abatement. Lean for respondents Caprice Rezuloska at 207 South Duncan Avenue for an operative vehicle and issue an order with a compliance deadline and authorize the city to mitigate the violation if compliance is not met. Inspector Suttis, you have the floor.

Hello. Vicki Suttis with the City of Clearwater. I'm Vicki. This is for Case 221-26 at 207 South Duncan Avenue. Some of these pictures are going to look a little weird just to give you a little back story. The house on the left, where you see that white SUV, is where this WaveRunner belongs to. And when I originally seen it at their property, I explained to them that it had to have a tag or it had to be removed from the property. So they took it upon themselves to remove it from their property and put it on the neighbor's property. So that's why you see it in the next door.

Too literal. Too literal.

And so that picture was taken on August 12th. On August 17th. So in the midst of that, that same day, I did get a hold of the neighbor, and I asked them, you know, was that theirs or did they give them permission to put it there? And they said no. They've asked them to remove it. And if they didn't remove it, they were going to put it back on their property for them. So the next day it ended up where it belonged. But it does not have a tag on the trailer. That's what the violation is.

No tag on the trailer.

And then a couple days later, they moved it out into the middle of their front yard with a for sale sign on it. Again, it's still sitting there on 821. On 824, it was moved back over to the side of the driveway. On August 8th is when I, or September 8th is when I put the notice on there. You can see the orange sticker around the front of it. 914, still sitting there, still no tag. 922, same thing. And again, this morning, it's still sitting there. Compliance can be met by removing the trailer or making sure a trailer has a current tag in registration. Requesting compliance five days after the board renders its order.

Questions from the board?

Yes, sir.

I don't know a lot.

No questions, ma'am. There's no land models. Motion, please.

I move to enter an order finding the respondent in violation of code and requiring the respondent to correct the violations within five days of the board's written order. If the respondent does not comply within the time specified, the city may take all reasonable actions, including entry into the property, to abate and maintain the nuisance and charge the respondent with the reasonable cost, which will become a lien on the property. If cost, fines, and fees remain on page three months after such lien is filed, the city is authorized to foreclose, collect, or settle such lien.

We have a second. Second. All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Motion carries. Thank you, Inspector.

And I have a question for City Council. Is it acceptable?

What? Pardon? What is it acceptable to?

To do them all at once?

I'd have to think about that a little bit. Okay. I'm not prepared to answer that on the spot. I was just thinking, like, just the speech seemed very long. I understand.

Okay. Thank you.

I want to make sure that, just from the chair's position, whatever we do is full and proper, even if it takes an extra few minutes, so that nobody, including the board or the city, has any exposure or anything.

No, and I think that was the prior opinion, just to make sure that due process, even though no one's here, that at least the minimum is heard before the board, before you render here.

Well, and I think it's valid to get a little bit of data on these two, to see, you know, to hear from the inspector and know that it truly meets the bar for a nuisance abatement, you know, handling.

Well, we can ask the city not to put 19 of them on. Well, that's okay. But send the pictures help, too. Yes, it does.

All right. Let's move forward and get done. And number 6.4 on our agenda, case 222-26, accept the nuisance abatement lien for respondents, Joel W. Gumares at 2088 Camilla Drive for lock clearing and issue an order with a compliance deadline and authorize the city to mitigate the violation if compliance is not met. Inspector Suttis.

Vicki Suttis with the city of Clearwater. This is for 2088 Camilla Drive, case number 220-26. There is one violation here for lock clearing, code section 3-1503-B7-B8-B10-B5A. The notice of violation was posted on 9-10 of 2026 with a compliance date of 9-20-26. I did not receive the green card back. This is a picture of the property on 9-9, a picture of the posting on 9-10, the overgrowth on 9-10, again yesterday on 9-22, and then this morning, or I'm sorry, that one was yesterday, too. So was that one. These were this morning. Grass still hasn't been cut. And there's compliance to be met for the lock clearing by clearing all trash, debris, and overgrowth from the property. We're requesting compliance five days after the board renders its order.

Questions from the board? I have a motion, please.

Anybody? I move to enter an order finding the respondent in violation of code and requiring the respondent to correct the violations within five days of the board's written order. If the respondent does not comply within the time specified, the city may take all reasonable actions, including entry onto the property, to evade and maintain the nuisance, and charge the respondent with the reasonable cost, which will become a lien on the property. If costs, fines, and fees remain unpaid three months after such lien is filed, the city is authorized to propose, collect, or settle such lien.

May I have a second, please?

Second.

All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Motion carries. Number 6.5 on our agenda has been withdrawn. Item 6.6, Case 224-26, accept the nuisance of a lien for Respondent's Garrido Family Trust at 818 Chestnut Street. For lock clearing, you can issue an order with the compliance deadline and authorize the city to mitigate the violation and compliance is not met. Inspector Suttin.

I think you said it, but the city of Clearwater, this is for 818 Chestnut Street, case number 224-26. There is one violation here for lock clearing, Code Section 3-1503, B7, B8, B10, and B5A. Notice a violation was posted and mailed on 9-10-2026 with a compliance date of 9-20-26. Here is a copy or a picture of the posting from Overgrowth on the south side of the building. This is the back side of the property. This is the parking lot of the property, other side view. There is also a homeless camp in the back area where all their items are being stored. And again, just the overgrowth on the side. Compliance can be met for the lock clearing by clearing all trash debris and overgrowth from the property. And we are requesting compliance five days after the board renders its order.

Thank you, Inspector. Questions from the board?

Have you spoken to the owner on that property? No, ma'am.

Anybody else? May I have a motion, please.

Mr. Chairman, I move to enter an order finding the responding violation of code and requirement of the response is correct. It arrives within five days of the board's written order. If the respondent does not comply with the time specified, the city may take all reasonable actions including entry into the property to evade and maintain the nooses. In charge, the respondent would the original cost which will become a lien on the property. The cost fines of fees remain up aided after three months after such a lien is filed. The city is authorized to foreclose, collect, or settle such a lien, blah, blah, blah.

May I have a second, please? Second. All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Motion carries. Thank you, Inspector. 6.7 on our agenda, Case 225-26, accept the nuisance abatement lien for Respondent Randy Rainbolt at 1500 Elwood Street for lock clearing, and issue an order with a compliance deadline and authorize the city to mitigate the violation if compliance is not met. Inspector Kasman.

Good afternoon, Board. Daniel Kasman, Code Enforcement Inspector for the City of Clearwater. This is Case 225-26 for 1500 Elwood Street for a nuisance abatement. There's one violation here for Code Section 3-1503-B5A-B7-B8 for lock clearing. These are dates of notice of violation when it went out with the FDA posting done on the same date. This is 1500 Elwood Street, a large blue house there in Highland and Elmwood. Anyone who might be driving by might be noticing it doesn't look like they're mowing the grass very well. Went back after the compliance date. It's getting a little bit worse. And then this morning, it looks like no one's bought any gas for the lawnmower. So, compliance been met for lock clearing by mowing the lawn, edging the curb and sidewalk, removing all the trash and debris from the grounds. I'm requesting compliance on it before five days from the date the Board renders its order.

Questions from the Board?

No.

I will just say I'm glad, I'll be glad to see this one mowed. It's right around the corner from the house. Yeah. May I have a motion, please? There you go.

I move to enter an order finding the respondent in violation of code and requiring the respondent to correct the violations within five days of the Board's written order. If the respondent does not comply within the time specified, the City may take all reasonable actions, including entry onto the property, to abate and maintain the nuisance, and charge the respondent with the reasonable costs, which will become a lien on the property. If costs, fines, and fees remain unpaid three months after such lien is filed, the City is authorized to foreclose, collect, or settle such lien.

I have a second, please. Second. All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Motion carries. Thank you very much. Inspector. Number 6.8, case 226-26, except the nuisance abatement lien for respondents JJJ Family LLLP at 2171 Beecher Road for lot clearing. And issued an order with the compliance deadline and authorized the City to mitigate the violation if compliance is not met. Inspector Kasman.

Good afternoon again, Board. Daniel Kasman, Code Enforcement Inspector for the City of Clearwater. This is case number 226-26 for 2171 Beecher Road. It's a nuisance abatement. There's one violation here for Code Section 3-1503B5A for lot clearing. These are the dates of notice of violation went out with the posting done at the same date of notice of violation. This is 2171 Beecher Road, and it looks like they've been having some issues with tree dropping branches. Luckily, they've at least organized them all in the driveway, but they have not gotten rid of them. I went back into the compliance date, and the pile is still there in the driveway. Little sticks on the side. And I went back this morning, and the pile is still there. So, compliance for lot clearing by removing all dead branches and sticks from the premises. Request a compliance time before five days from the date the Board renters its order.

Questions from the Board?

Maybe that so far would be.

Yeah. May I have a motion, please?

I move to enter an order finding the respondent in violation of code and requiring the respondent to correct the violations within five days of the Board's written order. If the respondent does not comply within the time specified, the City may take all reasonable actions, including entry onto the property to evade and maintain the nuisance, and charge the respondent with the reasonable cost, which will become a lien on the property. If costs, fines, and fees remain unpaid three months after such lien is filed, the City is authorized to foreclose, collect, or settle such lien.

May I have a second, please? Second. All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Motion carries. Thank you very much. Thank you, Inspector. Item 6.9 has been withdrawn. Item 6.10, Case 228-26, accept the nuisance abatement lien for respondents' land tower, Clearwater-Tampa LP at 2551 Drew Street, for lot clearing and issued an order of compliance deadline and authorized the City to mitigate the violation if compliance is not met. Inspector Daniels.

Good afternoon, Board. This is 2551 Drew Street for nuisance abatement. Jared Daniels, code inspector for the City of Clearwater, case number 228-26. There's one violation at this property for code section 3-1503.B7, B8, and B58 for lot clearing. The notice of violation was sent out and posted on 8-25-26 with a compliance date of 9-4-26 with certified mail being received on 9-11-26. So this is the property. It's just overgrown. It's an initial date. They're not doing anything to the property. The shop in Plaza was tore down, and since it's been tore down, they don't take care of the property. Falling down, these from this morning, tree fell. And I had a case earlier in May. They did cut. They collected all the debris, sacked it in the pile. It took them probably another month to pick that pile up. But right after they picked that up, it's just the overgrowth again.

Gotcha.

So compliance can be met for the lot clearing and instruction of the right-of-way by clearing all overgrowth from the property to include overgrowth around the street and sidewalks and remove all loose debris from the property. For the one-lot clearing violation, requesting compliance five days after the board renders this order.

Thank you, Inspector. Questions from the board? I have a motion, please.

I move to enter an order funding the respondent in violation of code and requiring the respondent to correct the violations within five days of the board's written order. If the respondent does not comply within the time specified, the city may take all reasonable actions, including entry onto the property to abate and maintain the nuisance, and charge the respondent with the reasonable cost, which will become a lien on the property. If cost fines and fees remain unpaid three months after such lien is filed, the city is authorized to foreclose, collect, or settle such lien.

May I have a second, please? Second. All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Motion carries. Thank you, Inspector. Item 6.11, Case 229-26, accept the nuisance abatement lien for respondent right to ULLC at 1016 LaSalle Street for a lot of clearing and issue an order with compliance deadline and authorize the city to mitigate the violation if compliance is not met. Inspector Dixon. The case is withdrawn. All right. So we will not do anything with Case 229-26 and move on. Case number, our agenda item 6.12, Case 230-26, accept the nuisance abatement lien for respondents Veronica Zerman at 1943 Overbrook Avenue for a lot of clearing and issue an order with the compliance deadline and authorize the city to mitigate the violation if compliance is not met. Inspector Dixon.

Inspector Dixon, co-compliance office at the City of Clearwater. This is Case 230-26 for 1934 Overbrook Avenue. There is one violation at the property for overgrowth. Notice the violation was posted in mail at the beginning of August, and they were given 10 days to come into compliance. It's a fake at home. I haven't had any contact. It's a day of posting. The property's overgrown. And here's the property this morning that's still overgrown. So compliance can be met by clearing all overgrowth and debris from the property and requesting compliance five days after the board renders its order.

Questions from the board? May I have a motion, please.

I move to enter an order of refining the respondent in violation of code and requiring the respondent to correct the violations within five days of the board's written order. If the respondent does not comply within the time specified, the city may take all reasonable actions, including entry onto the property, to evade and maintain a nuisance and charge the respondent with the reasonable costs, which will become a lien on the property. If costs, fines, and fees remain unpaid three months after such lien is filed, the city is authorized to foreclose, collect, or settle such lien.

Second. Second. All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Motion carries. Item 6.13 on our agenda, Case 231-26, accept the nuisance abatement lien for respondents Lily James and Ruthie Taylor and 901 Jergen Street for lock clearing and issue an order with a compliance deadline and authorize the city to mitigate the violation if compliance is not met. Inspector Dixon.

Inspector Dixon, City Clearwater Co. Compliance Office, Case 231-26 for 901 Jergen Street. There's one violation for overgrowth and debris. Notice was posted and mailed at the beginning of August. They were given 10 days to come into compliance. It's a vacant lot that's overgrown, that has a small amount of dumping on the property. Small amount? It's still that way today. So compliance can be met for the lot clearing by clearing all overgrowth and debris from the property. And we're requesting compliance five days after the board renders its order.

The board have any questions? I have a motion, please.

Mr. Chairman, I move to enter an order of finding the respondent in violation of code and requiring the respondent to correct the license within five days that the board has written an order. If the respondent does not comply within the time specified, the city may take all reasonable attributes, including entry, home to the property to evade and maintain the new system charged to the respondent with a reasonable cost, which will become a lien on a property. If files to find the fees, remain unpaid three months after such a lien is filed, the city is authorized to foreclose, collect for several such a lien.

May I have a second, please? Second. All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Motion carries. Item 6.14, Case 232-26, accept the nuisance abatement lien for respondents Emma Guzman and Gail Guzman at 505 Pennsylvania Avenue for lot clearing and issue an order of the compliance deadline and authorize the city to mitigate the violation. If compliance is not met, Inspector Dixon.

Inspector Dixon, City Clearwater for Compliance Office, Case 232-26 for 505 Pennsylvania Avenue. There's one violation for overgrowth and debris. Notice the violation was posted in mail on 9-9. They were given 10 days to come into compliance. I think this home maybe has been recently vacated. I don't know. I tried to make some phone calls. I didn't get any response. But the property is overgrown on the day of hosting. It's still overgrown. To compliance, we met for lot clearing by removing all overgrowth and debris from the property. Request compliance five days after the board renders its order.

Questions from the board? Yes. May I have a motion, please?

I move to enter an order finding the respondent in violation of code and requiring the respondent to correct the violations within five days of the board's written order. If the respondent does not comply within the time specified, the city may take all reasonable actions, including entry onto the property, to abate and maintain the nuisance, and charge the respondent with a reasonable cost, which will become a lien on the property. If cost fines and fees remain unpaid three months after such lien is filed, the city is authorized to foreclose, collect, or settle such lien.

May I have a second? Second. All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Motion carries. Item 6.15, Case 230. Thank you, Inspector. Case 233-26, accept the nuisance payment lien for respondents, Killarney Sixth Investments Group, Inc., at 1104 North Garden Avenue, for lot clearing. In issue an order with a compliance deadline, and authorize the city to mitigate the violation if compliance does not commit. Inspector Maddox.

Good afternoon, Board, Inspector Kevin Maddox for the city of Clearwater, case number 233-26. This is 1104 North Garden, kind of nuisance abatement. It's for lot clearing one violation, 1503-B7-B8-B5A. These are the notice dates, and the green card was not received back, but it was posted. This is a very small lot in this area, but it is overgrown, and as we continue through the pictures, it just gets longer until we get to today, which is the longest. And the compliance can be met by cutting all the grass and vegetation to include the curb line, removing all the trash and debris, keeping it clean, requesting compliance five days after the Board renders its order.

Questions? May I have a motion, please?

I move to enter an order finding the respondent in violation of code and requiring the respondent to correct the violations within five days of the Board's written order. If the respondent does not comply within the time specified, the city may take all reasonable actions, including entry onto the property, to abate and maintain the nuisance and charge the respondent with the reasonable costs, which will become a lien on the property. If costs, fines, and fees remain unpaid three months after such lien is filed, the city is authorized to foreclose, collect, or settle such lien.

May I have a second, please? Second. All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Motion carries. Thank you, Inspector. Good afternoon.

Good afternoon, Board.

Item 6.16, Case 234-26. Accept the nuisance abatement lien for respondents Bay Haven Resort Condo Association, Inc. at 64 Bay Esplanade for lock clearing. And issue an order of a compliance deadline and authorize the city to mitigate the violation of compliance is not met.

Good afternoon, Kevin Maddox, Code Compliance Inspector, City of Clearwater. Case number 234-26 for 64 Bay Esplanade, nuisance abatement for lock clearing under this code section. These are the dates and time, or dates of the notices that were sent out that green card is not received back, but it was posted. This is a very large lot. My pictures are kind of combined to show all of them, but they're taller than the sign, and it just continues to get longer until we get to today, which is pretty long. Compliance can be met by cutting all grass and vegetation to include the curb line, sidewalk continuing to maintain it, removing all trash and debris and continuing to keep it clean. We are requesting compliance five days after the board renders its order.

Maybe you're going to need a brush hog on that one. Yeah. Questions from the board? I have a motion, please.

I move to enter an order of finding the respondent in violation of code and requiring the respondent to correct the violations within five days of the board's written order. If the respondent does not comply within the time specified, the city may take all reasonable actions, including entry onto the property to abate and maintain the nuisance and charge the respondent with a reasonable cost, which will become a lien on the property. If cost fines and fees remain unpaid three months after such lien is filed, the city is authorized to foreclose, collect, or settle such lien.

May I have a second? Second. All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Motion carries. Number 617 on our agenda, case 235-26, accept the nuisance of payment lien for response Carol Dossier and Mark Dossier at 927 Bruce Avenue for lock clearing and issue an order with a compliance deadline and authorize the city to mitigate the violation if compliance is not met. Inspector Maddox?

Kevin Maddox, code compliance inspector for our city of Clearwater. This is for case number 235-26, 927 Bruce Avenue, nuisance of payment. It's for lock clearing under this code section. These are the dates of the notices. The green card was not received back, but it was posted. This is the posting, and the yard, you can kind of see where it's separating and it's getting taller, and it's a little worse over on the other side here with the trees in the way. And it got a little bit longer as I went back out there and worse. Today I found it starting to be mowed, but still the grass is long on sections of it with a tree branch laying in the driveway. Compliance can be met for lock clearing by cutting all grass vegetation to include the curb line sidewalk and continuing to maintain it, removing all trash and debris and continuing to keep it clean, and requesting compliance five days after the board renders its order.

And that tree's laying in the driveway?

It's still there. Yes. That was as of this morning. Okay.

Any other questions from the board? Do you have a motion, please?

Mr. Chairman, I move there in order of finding a respondent and violating the code and requiring the respondent to correct the violation from the five days of the board's written order. If the respondent does not comply with the time specified, the city may take all reasonable actions, including an entry into the property, to abate and retain the nuisance. In charge the respondent with a reasonable cost, which will become a lien on property. If Cox finds the fees remain on paper three months after such lien is filed, the city is authorized to propose to collect or settle with the social lien.

May I have a second?

Second.

All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Motion carries. Item 6.18 has been withdrawn. Item 6.19, Case 237-26, accept the nuisance abatement lien for respondents, Serena Matulikova and Robert Matulik at 933 Bay Esplanade for lot clearing, initial order with compliance deadline, and authorize the city to mitigate the violation if compliance is not met. Inspector Maddox.

Last one. Kevin Maddox, code compliance inspector for the city of Clearwater, case number 237-26. This is for 933 Bay Esplanade, nuisance abatement. Under this code section, it's for lot clearing. These are the dates of the notices sent out. Green card was not received back, but it was posted. This is the posting. In the background is beautiful water behind this lot, but it is an empty lot. Still needed to be cut. It's long. It continues to be long. And this is as of this morning. It was long, but the sailboat moved into the background. Now, compliance can be met for lot clearing by cutting all grass and vegetation to include the curb line, sidewalk, and continuing to maintain it, removing all trash and debris and continuing to keep it clean, requesting compliance five days after the board renders the order.

Any questions from the board on this? I'd like to know more about the sailboat.

Sailboat, yes.

I'll let you speak with the inspector after the meeting. We're not going to sit and entertain your questions at the moment. If you don't mind. All right. May I have a motion, please?

I move to enter an order finding the respondent in violation of code and requiring the respondent to correct the violations within five days of the board's written order. If the respondent does not comply within the time specified, the city may take all reasonable actions, including entry onto the property, to evade and maintain the nuisance, and charge the respondent with the reasonable costs, which will become a lien on the property. If costs, fines, and fees remain unpaid three months after such lien is filed, the city is authorized to foreclose, collect, or settle such lien.

I have a second, please. Second. All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Thank you. Carries. Madam Secretary, I presume you will inform Jasmine, our missing member, today of our canceled meeting and our new meeting location. Yes. Any questions or comments before we adjourn? Our meeting's adjourned. Thank you all.

Yay.

Yay.