All right, I hereby call this meeting to order. This is the special magistrate for the city of Delray Beach. Cases will be called in the order in which they appear on the agenda. When you hear your case called, go ahead and proceed to the podium on my left-hand side. Right over there, the city will present the case and its testimony and evidence. You'll have an opportunity to review any evidence the city has submitted and ask questions of any of the city's witnesses, after which time you can present your own testimony and evidence, and I will make a ruling. This hearing is a quasi-judicial hearing. It is not the formal rules of evidence you do not apply here. However, all testimony is taken under oath, under penalty of perjury. So if you're going to testify today, or you think you might testify, or there's a possibility that you might testify, I ask that you rise and raise your right hand so that you can be sworn in. By the authority vested in me as a notary of the state of Florida, do you swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? You may be seated. Do we have any changes to the agenda? We do not. Okay. So they can call their first case. Case number 123-1614, the owner's name is Celia Smith-Ellis. Property address is 45 Southwest 12th Avenue, and Code Officer Connor Lee. Okay, time you're ready. Good afternoon. My name is Clean and Safe Officer Connor Lee, and I am here regarding a maintenance of building for an unsecured structure violation located at 45 Southwest 12th Avenue. On September 10th, 2025, I, Clean and Safe Officer Connor Lee, was notified by Delray Beach PD that the property 45 Southwest 12th Avenue is in an unsafe and unsecured condition with an individual occupying the space. I arrived at the property meeting with the on-site police officers and the property owner where I gained access to the property. Upon my inspection, the property was determined to be a duplex where one of the units, 43, was observed to be unsecured and illegally occupied at the time of my inspection. There was an interior fire within the damaged unit in 2023, leaving most of the ceilings charred black, the interior walls damaged, and the interior door and window frames damaged as well. There was no visible evidence of any interior repairs to the unit at the time. Additionally, there were no utility service connected to the unit during the inspection, so the individual occupying the space was running water through a garden hose to the toilet and using multiple extension cords powered by an external power source. There was also visible damage to the exposed electrical panel for the unit. The property is in violation of Delray Beach Code Section 7.8.3, which states all buildings or structures, both existing and new, and all parts thereof, including all materials, fixtures, or appliances installed therein, shall be maintained in a safe, secure, and sanitary condition. A notice of formal hearing was issued on September 11, 2025. The violation was mailed first class and certified on September 12, 2025. We did not receive a confirmation of receipt, and the violation was posted to the property and City Hall on September 15, 2025. As of the last year inspection, on September 16, 2025, the violation does still exist. I have 12 photographs and two videos taken of the property in question, and I would like to introduce these photographs as evidence. You said that you initially went to the property on September 10, 2025, correct? Yes. And that was due to a complaint of an authorized individual being in the property? Yes, but it was more for the property just being unsecured as far as... Correct, right? But you responded with, and the police were there, and a representative from the property was there as well, correct? Yes. And they provided you with access to go in and take some of these photos that you're going to see shortly. Yes. All right, thank you. All right, I'm not showing you has been listed as City's Exhibit 1 for identification purposes. When was this taken, and what does it detect? This was taken September 10, at the beginning of the inspection. It's actually a video. It's just a general video of the ceilings within the property throughout it, just showing the unsafe manner of the structure. City's Exhibit 2 for identification purposes. This is still an image of one of the ceilings within the rooms of the property. All right, City's Exhibit 3. This was also, all of the evidence was taken on September 10. This is another ceiling. As you can see, the wood is a little charred just from the fire back in 2023. And on September 10? Yes. Same date, Exhibit 4? Yes. This is another ceiling and another angle just showing the damage throughout the property. City's Exhibit 5. This is showing the doorways mentioned within the script, just to give a visual. Also taken on September 10th. What about Exhibit 6? This is to show where the property needs to become secured at. As you can see, the window is open and unboarded up, and you can see the garden hose coming from the window. The garden hose. City's Exhibit 7? Just another angle to show that the garden hose was connected to, it was an external pump within the toilet. And that's on September 10th as well? Yes. All right, what about City's Exhibit 8? This is, well, just a video to get a closer image of the hose. And as you can see, the hose does go into the tank of the toilet to help bring water and help when it flushes, because there were no connected utilities. Oh, so there's no utilities. To my knowledge. City's Exhibit 9? Just wanted to show the damaged electrical panel that was mentioned in the script and also taken on September 10th. Okay, what about City's Exhibit 10? These are the extension cords that were being used to power whatever devices were within the property, and it was coming from an external power source. City's Exhibit 11? This is an outside. I did this during the, I took these photos during the re-inspection on September 16th, and just wanted to give a visual that the house has, there has been steps taken to secure the property. They just need to take a few more to make it fully secured. City's Exhibit 12? Just another angle showing the front, and to show that the windows have been secured and that there is also a door in the entrance to show that it can be locked. It came under maintenance of buildings, correct? It's a violation. So what's still outstanding? If you go to the next one. Oh, 13? Yes. You'll see it's really just the unsecured window right there where the hose was coming through. You can see it on the ground right there. And then any other that are deemed unsecured. So this was taken on September 6th, which was the compliance date, correct? Yes. What about City's Exhibit 14? It's just another angle showing where some parts of the property are still unsecured and just need to be remedied to come in compliance. All right. At this time, the City would like to introduce the 14 exhibits into evidence. Sir, can you tell me your name, please? I'm Terrence Elvis. David Smith is my mother. And she's out of town right now. She left on the 14th and won't be back to the 21st. Mr. Ellis, do you have any objections to the photographs the City would like to put into evidence? No, sir. Not at all. And without objection on the separate evidence. Can we ask him if he has authority to present? No. No, she doesn't. She's not even answering the phone. I don't have authority. Do you reside in the property? Yes, on the other side. But they did say when we pulled the permits, which we've been going through for two years now. It'd be a fact witness. Yes. We've been going through like two years. Okay. Thank you. Do you have knowledge of the property? No, not extensively like that. I live there, yes, but not like what's all this. All I know is she pulled the permits two years ago. We've been waiting ever since. Does the City have anything else they want to present? No, the City doesn't have anyone. What's the City seeking? The City suggests seven days to secure the property or a daily fine of $200 to be imposed. Do you know who secured the property or at least tried to secure the property? No, but I would have someone do it or I will myself. I can't have you represent your mom if she didn't authorize you to do so, but I will tell you that I'm inclined to follow the City's recommendation here. Which is to give seven days for the property to be secured or a fine. It's dangerous to have a property that's in that condition. As you well know, I probably don't want people coming in there and trying to live in there either. No, wait two years. They have all this resolved anyway, sir. So, yes, we're in compliance. Is there anything else you want to tell me? No, sir. Is there anything else the City needs to present here? No. In case 23001614, I make the calling. Findings of fact in my fine notice is sufficient. I find the property in violation of 7.8.3, the unsafe condition of the property. I order the respondent to bring it into compliance by securing the property within seven days or a fine of up to $200 per day may issue. Did you say you found proper notice, too, is what I'm sure. I did. Okay, thank you. Did I not say it? I thought I said it. Yeah, did I say it? All right, for the record, I find the notice is proper. Speak faster than I know. Case number 2, 2500-0183. Owner's name is Rettig and Trudy Talbot. The property address is 515 Northwest 12th Street and Code Officer Susan Frischman. Good afternoon. My name is Code Enforcement Officer Susan Frischman. I'm here regarding the illicit discharge of swimming pool water into the City Street and sewer system located at 515 Northwest 12th Street on August 29, 2025. I investigated the property at 515 Northwest 12th Street after Enrique Fernandez, Code Enforcement Administrator, was notified by the City of Delray Beach Engineering Department via email that the Engineering Department witnessed illicit discharge coming from the swimming pool going into the City Street and sewer system. The Engineering Department took the photos. On August 29, 2025, I did not observe illicit discharge at the property. I met with the resident and he said on August 28, 2025, his hired contractor and feed the pool water to repair pool tiles. A magistrate notice of violation was issued on August 29, 2025. The violation was mailed first class and certified on August 29, 2025. A certified confirmation of receipt was received on September 4, 2025. Regular mail was not returned. The notice of hearing was posted at City Hall on September 4, 2025. I hand-delivered the notice of hearing on September 4, 2025. I have three photographs taken at the property in question. I would like to introduce these photographs into evidence. Thank you. Before we get there, we have another witness. Sir, could you make sure the microphone is on? Thank you. Hello? Yes. Could you please state your full name for the record? Yes. My name is Dion Bass. I am a public works engineer and inspector. And how long have you been here with the city? I've been with Derry Beach here eight years and eight months. Okay. And as a part of your duties and responsibilities, do you at time indicate or report any elicit discharge that you may see throughout the city? Yes. And on or about August 27th, before 28th, did you notice anything at the property located at 515 Northwest 12th Street in Derry Beach, Florida? Yes. Okay. And what, if anything, did you observe when you were in the area? Well, driving through the neighborhood in the Lake Valley area, I was coming up with Swinning and went into the neighborhood and I noticed they blew about two-inch plastic holes in the road at first. And I just looked to see where it was actually coming from. And once realizing where it was coming from, I got out of my building and took a few pictures. And did that look odd or atypical to you? It looked at all because the city doesn't allow any initiative charges into our storm drain system. So we always want to look out for those type of violations, which are NPDES violations. Okay. Thank you. I'm now showing you what has been previously marked as City's Exhibit 1 for identification purposes. Do you recognize this? Yes. Is this a fair and accurate depiction of the home located at 515 Northwest 12th Street? Yes. Did you take this picture as you say you were driving in the area and you noticed the item? Yes. City's Exhibit 2 for identification purposes. Is this an accurate representation of what you observed that day that you reported to code enforcement? Yes. And what does it depict? It shows the blue hole that's about two inches in diameter, maybe about 100 or so feet coming from out of the backyard. And as you can see, we see this photograph, but you got out of your car and you were able to fully see what was happening through the gate? Yes. And could you see it coming from, what did it appear that it was coming from? From the back of the home or a circle. So it looks like a pool to you. All right. City's Exhibit 3 for identification purposes. What does this depict? This shows the continuation of the blue hole. So the blue hole that you're referring to, is this on the, I know you have some greenery here, not any of these cones or anything, right? No. So this item coming from the side, kind of like going on the side here. Yes. Described that looks blue in nature. Yes. Like a hose. Yes. And where is this going to in the photograph? It is in the middle of the street and into the storm drain on the south side of the street. And in this photo as well, is there a pool of water? How did you know that it was streaming into the storm? Because it was actively coming out of the hose and I observed it going into the storm drain. So that's what you personally saw with your eyes, correct? Yes. At this time, the city would like to introduce the three photographs into evidence. Sir, can you tell me your name, please? Reddick Talbot. And you're the owner of the property, sir? Yes. Do you have any objections to these three photographs being put into evidence? No. Not objection, except those photos into evidence. I'm going to let them finish and then you can tell me. So the last question, is this type of discharge prohibited in the city? Yes, it is. Okay. And after that, you reported it either to your supervisor or the code enforcement department? Yes. Okay. Thank you. I don't have any further questions. I don't know if the witness has any questions. I'm sorry, the respondent has any questions. Sir, do you have any questions for either of the city's witnesses? I'm just curious, at the time that they took the pictures, it does not appear to me that the hose is going into the storm drain. Did you ever see the hose going into the storm drain itself? When we say into the storm drain, because of where the hose is placed and the direction of the water, which leads to the storm drain. Okay. So in this picture here, there's a big puddle of water at the end of the hose, correct? Yes. And that's near the storm drain? Yes. Okay. Some of that water was going into the storm drain, and some of that water would stand out on the road. The puddle, because of how the roads are made and there were the crowns, all the roads are designed to go to the soil area and pitch to the drain. So even though that was a pond of water, all that water would eventually end up in the soil area. Any further from the city? No further questions at this time. The gentleman? I was having pool rehabilitation done, hired contractors to do the work. According to their explanation to me, this was the way that they felt was appropriate to discharge the water. The city asking for him? The city suggests a one-time fine of $5,000 to be paid within 30 days. Tessa? In that, I hired a contractor. I mean, I suppose I probably, with a little bit more information, probably would have dragged that contractor along with me. I suppose any fine that I get, I'm going to have to go back to the contractor and try to extract some remuneration from him. I have discharged water into my driveway, which has run out into the street in the past. So I don't disagree that this is a little excessive, but it was not, to the information that it was given to me by the contractor, this was an appropriate way for them to dealt with it. I'm not a contractor, and I don't do repairs on pools, but I've been sitting in this seat long enough to know that the city of Delray Beach takes discharges into their stormwater system very seriously, for any number of reasons, including the most basic of which is, of course, the quality of the water in the city. But even if they weren't so concerned about that, the city is also responsible to the state for making sure that their stormwater system is maintained properly, and so they can get in trouble if they don't enforce these rules as well. Fundamentally, it's not really, I mean, as a magistrate, I really only have a very specific job, which is I read the code section, and I hear the facts, and I determine whether the facts constitute a violation of the codes, and there's really no dispute factually here. It's just pretty clear that a violation occurs. Normally, in a code enforcement matter, I would give the respondent a certain amount of time to correct. In other words, they did something. There's two weeks to fix it, or a fine happens, which you may have noticed is sort of how I formulated the first version of this. So the city didn't expressly say it. What they're asking here is for me to make a determination that this bell can't be unwrung. You know, the chemicals or whatever was in your pool, and that water went into the storm drain, and that's there, and you can't fix it. So they're asking me to find. Point of information, there have been no chemicals in the pool for a period of time. So if that has any bearing in the matter, I mean, this was a pool that was getting prepared to be repaired, so there was no reason to have any kind of chemicals in it. It had been, they had not put chemicals in it for a week or two. So it was limited chemical discharge, I would say. Let me ask the city, how did you arrive at that fine amount, the basis for that? I think just based on the severity of it, I mean, it was an entire pool in discharge into the storm water system, you know, so it wasn't just like, you know, sometimes it's a little bit of water or a bucket, but with chemicals, that he admittedly saying, well, the respondent is saying it wasn't as much chemicals as it would have normally been, but it did have chemicals in it. So that is a significant amount of water. So that's why we presented that fine. Mr. Talbot, I can't let you off the hook here because the city's case is sound. I will give you a little bit of a break because I sense that you did not know that you were doing this wrong. It's not a defense per se, but it does weigh on me a little bit about what the appropriate fine is. I'm going to reduce the city's fine to $3,500, but yeah, you can't do this. It's, you can't discharge pool water into the, so in case, case number with me, 25-000-183, I'm going to find findings in fact, and while I find notices sufficient, I find a violation of 53.012A occurred, which is a discharge into the sewer system from the pool. I'm going to issue, the nature of that discharge is irreparable in nature, and I'm going to issue a one-time fine in the amount of $3,500. I can give you time. I can't take, I can't take, I can't take comments from the crowd. And at this point, I've already ruled, so there's no, there's no testimony more to take. I can give you additional time, sir. Additional time to do what? I can't remedy this. It's not as if I'm capable of going back and taking the water back. To pay the fine. To pay the fine before the city is authorized to pursue other measures. What would the other measures be? Well, potentially they could put a lien on the property. To make an appeal to this, I need to have a recording of this. And is this, and I thought about making a recording with my phone and I didn't. So is there, is there any record being made of this proceeding? Yes. Okay. So I can, I can get access to transcript or recordings of this if I choose to make an appeal. And what's the appeal process? Sir, I suggest you consult the lawyer. I can't give you legal advice. Like I said, I can give you time. Your ruling is final. You see no other way than to charge me $3,500 for an error that, unfortunately, I was, did not, was not aware of in terms of what this pool contractor told me. Sir, at the end of the day, the way that code matters work is the owner of the property ultimately is responsible for what happens. Like I said, I can give you time. You just have to ask me. I would like to request time. How much time do you need? Six months. Ms. Warren? Six months. We would object to six months, whatever you think is fair, but six months up here. I'll give you three, 90 days. Appreciate you. Case number three, 25-000214. Owner's name is Lidore Seisinger. Property address is 347 Northwest 6th Avenue, and the code officer is Mark Woods. Good afternoon, sir. I'm the code officer, Mark Woods, with the city of Delray Beach, and I'm presenting case number 25-0214. The address of recurrence was 347 Northwest 6th Avenue in Delray Beach, and I became involved in the case on 9-16-25. A community residence at that address failed the assessment by the Florida Association of Recovery Residents, and the certification was revoked by their board on 9-11-25. This certification is required for approval for a permit to operate a community residence in the city of Delray Beach through our development services department. The development services department notified the code enforcement department, and a violation was issued on September 16, 2025. The violation was mailed first class on September 16, the compliance date was required by the 17th of September, 9-17-25. No confirmation receipt had been received yet, and regular mail was not returned yet. The violation was ordered for the next day due to the welfare and concern for the occupants of the residents in this certification maintenance process. The compliance was not achieved in the 24 hours given, so the city is going to suggest that the owner of the property be ordered to cease operations on the property of this recovery residence by the safe house organization. And as of tomorrow, at this time, we'll face a fine of $500 a day. For clarification, the compliance was for 24 hours from yesterday. We'll present our recommendation once we go through the hearing. I just want to present some other testimony. I got you. Yes. Yes. Thank you. At this time, the city, I don't know if the respondent or representative who was here has any questions for Mr. Woods before I proceed to the next witness. Hi. Yeah, I'm the landlord, Lido. Schlesinger? Yes. You said it correctly. Good. Schlesinger, are you the owner of the property? Yes, I am. Do you have any questions for the officer? I wanted to see how much more time can we get in the 12 hours. That's a debate for a little bit later. I'm just asking if you have any factual questions. I understand, yes. Thank you. At this time, the city would like to call Ms. Amy Alvarez. The position is here with the assistant development solvers and director. And as part of your duty and responsibility, yes, our department processes those. And 6th Avenue? Yes. And was the city advised that the control had lost their FAR certification? Yes. Can you tell us what FAR certification is? Well, FAR stands for the Florida Association of Recovery Residences, so it provides certification that they're allowed to legally operate. They go through a review process to make sure everything is good for the residents. And I'm now showing you that it has a response to the city to visit one FAR certification purposes. Do you recognize this? Mm-hmm. And what do you recognize this? It's a letter from FAR dated September 12th, providing a formal notice to the safe house, over living operators, that their FAR certification has been revoked effective immediately. And is it within the normal course of business? Is it within the normal course of business for the city to receive these types of letters or BCC on these types of letters so that FAR could notify the city if a property is no longer certified? When there is a certification issue, yes. Okay. So in this particular case, this letter was then added to the file for this property, correct? Correct. And in this particular case, there were some concerns regarding this property, and FAR indicated why the revocation was there, correct? Correct. And some of the concerns were background screening issues and other issues with the property, correct? Yes. Based on that, there were also some life and health safety concerns, correct? Mm-hmm. Yes. And what was that based on the letter? The letter from FAR indicates the male property remains in a state of disrepair as documented during a field assessment by FAR staff on September 11th, 2025, and previously noted during your suspension period. So there were some concerns with the operation of that property, correct? Correct. Ms. Lessinger, do you have any objection to this? I did read it before. You want to look at it? Yeah. The city would like to introduce city's exhibit one into evidence. Thank you. Ms. Lessinger, do you have any objection to this document? Objection, so admitted I'm marking it as city's exhibit one. And this is, and prior to an actual revocation, FAR does notify and let the city notify if properties are suspended or having other issues, correct? Yes. You have to use the microphone. Correct. And had we received any information regarding this property before? Yes. On August 7th, FAR copied the city on an email to the safe house sober living email indicating that they were suspended. The suspension is referenced in the revocation letter. And based on this, the loss of the certification, is that a violation of the city's Code of Ordinance 2.411E10A that states that the properties who operate in this manner must have that certification? They must have that certification. Okay. Thank you. And so under the city code, a recovery residence is required to have a FAR certification to operate as a recovery residence? Yes. So they have to not only have that along with the certification, they have to obtain the necessary zoning and licenses, business licenses as well in the city. The city has additional requirements. We have separation requirements actually. It's necessary but not sufficient. They need it, but they need more things too. No, well, yeah. That's one of the things that they need. It's one of the things that they need. One of the requirements, correct. It's the primary. We don't have any further testimony. Thank you, Ms. Alvarez. Mr. Schlesinger, it's your turn. I was not aware. It's expired. And I wanted to see what is in 12 hours. I think, sir, just to make sure that we're talking about the same things, I don't think it expired. I think it was revoked. Revoked, sorry. Which is a meaningful difference, I think, right? Yes, revoked. And I wanted to know, you said that I have 12 hours to evict them. Okay. When I cease operations of that business on your property. Meaning that how much time I have until they will get out from the property. There's several ways to achieve compliance here, and we're going to discuss this a little bit further. Okay, why don't we, since apparently that's where Mr. Schlesinger wants to go, why don't we discuss what the city is asking here, and then maybe we can get some understanding about what it is that Mr. Schlesinger is... The essence of it is the business that leases your property has lost its ability to operate in the city of Delray Beach. So you need to take care of that problem on your property by ceasing operations by that business. That doesn't mean that another business that's certified to operate and qualified and approved can operate that business on your property. Okay, I understand. But for the purposes of the health, safety, and welfare of the people that are tenants in that property, they have to be overseen by somebody who's certified to do so. Okay, I understand. Officer, what is the city's asking for? What are you asking me to do? So we're asking to cease operations or, like, stop what they're doing, acting in that manner, or come into compliance with the code at this point. And how much time? Hold on. I mean, presumably they could be in the code one of two ways, right? They could cease operation or they could obtain the necessary certifications and documents, right? One or the other would be compliance, right? Correct. So how much time is the city asking? One month. As soon as possible. And that's where the difficulty we're having. Because the welfare of these people are dependent upon getting the care from somebody who's certified to deliberate in the state of Florida. Yeah, I mean, I understand sort of the dilemma here, right? Because the city wants them to operate lawfully, right, so that it's safe. On the other hand, if I give them, say, 12 hours, I mean, where are these residents going to go? Can you move them out? So what we have done, and this is a side note, because typically, you know, we don't really discuss or provide those type of specific recommendations during a hearing. We always ask them to talk to staff. But we have reached out to FAR and city staff. We also have trained city staff members who do have resources that can help the individuals. So, you know, really, I guess if you want some numbers here, right, cease operation, which would mean assisting these people find somewhere else to go, because they can't, it's unpermitted for them to be in that property, you know. I mean, we can probably give them another 24 hours since this was yesterday. So I have to put a compliance data. Right, exactly. So I would say cease operations, but if they, again, want to continue with that, then if we want to, say, cease operations and give them a chance to try to come into compliance in another manner, 90 days, maybe? Let me just ask, while you guys figure that out. Mr. Schlesinger, what are you trying to do here? I would say usually an eviction process takes 30 to 60 days to evict someone that didn't pay a landlord. So if we have two options to fix the certifications, we'll ask for more time. That is much more than 24 hours. Well, the concern is for 90 days, you know, we have these individuals living in these conditions, which have been outlined by staff and FAR. I mean, there's two different issues, right? One is a resident issue, right, which is you have residents and that can take time, but you also have a facility that has to be overseen under very specific circumstances. And so if I gave you a lot of time, let's say I gave you 30 days hypothetically, right, then I would be essentially allowing this facility to operate unlicensed for an extended period of time. And I'll be honest, Mr. Schlesinger, I'm not prepared to do that. But is there a maximum that you are willing to? So what specifically is the city asking me to do? So I would say 24 hours of cease operations, and we do have staff and FAR that are prepared to assist. Do cease operations mean move the people off the premise? Because they're not allowed to be resigning there in that manner based on this type of residence. What is the concern? That's what I have. What is unsafe? Sir, I can't, like I said in the previous case, I can't take tests. If Mr. Schlesinger or the city wants to, hold on a second. If Mr. Schlesinger or the city wants to call additional witnesses, I can hear them. But I can't just take people yelling from seats. So Nick is the manager of the sober living. Do you want him to testify for you? Yes, he can. For me. He will give his version so you can hear all the facts. It's your case. So if you think he'll help your case, you can call him. Yes, and then we can hear all the facts. Have we sworn in, sir? Yeah, I'll do it again. You don't have to do it again. Once is more than enough. My name is Nick Connor. I own Safe House Sober Living, and I opened it five years ago. I had 347 Northwest 6th Ave. I had 129 Central Ave in Delray Beach. I can see your properties in the letter. 324 Sterling. What I'm asking is to call any complaints, any overdoses, any unsafe measure. And those guys in there. Just for clarity, because I just want to save us some time. I'm not a judge. Yeah, no. I'm not holding you in criminal trial for anything. I'm a city special magistrate. I have a very limited role. As I explained in the previous case, I listen to the facts, and I look at the evidence, and I compare it to what the city code requires. In this particular case, what the city is telling me, it's not a judgment on you personally or your business or any of that. What the city is telling me is that this business being operated in the city without the FAR certification is in violation of the code. And as I understand it, I believe that is accurate. So whether or not it's a good business or a bad business, whether or not you're doing good, I don't know. I just know that it can't operate without the certification. So the reason they took the certification is because I can't pass a Level 2 background check, which they knew five years ago when they gave me the certification. So when it came up for renewal, somebody put my Level 2 background check through, and I got arrested when I was 18. All that's already been adjudicated. Yeah, and they all, what I'm asking is for, not even me, I want to hand the business over to her, and the guys in the house, they don't have nowhere to go. Okay, and nobody's asking them to... I'll step away from it. Is there somebody, is there somebody that's certified? You can't get certified that fast. It's in the process. It's in the process. The new LLC in her name, because I can't pass a Level 2 background check, but I did it for five years. How long would it take you to get somebody certified? Well, you have to do that CRA. I can get a CRA. I can get one today. I can get somebody that will be a CRA. How come you haven't? Because I want to go a different route. I don't want to go far. That's not the only governing body that you can have a community living. Because, unfortunately, the FAR certification states that you can only take people with substance abuse. It's not just substance abuse people that come to my house. It's not. And it's coming from the treatment centers. So if I get a guy that says I'm on opiates, but he's really got a severe mental health problem, I can't help him under that FAR certification the proper way, because he really has a mental health problem. So my inclination is to do 48 hours here to give him a chance to come into compliance or cease operation. Does that work for the city? Or is there a reason why that? That's fine. That's fine or fine of how much? What was the city asking? We were asking for, I believe it was. We were asking for $500 a day on this property. All right, Mr. Cannon, I'm going to give you 48 hours to figure out how to bring this into compliance with the city. I hope you're able to manage that. But if you're not, then you have to stop until you can figure out how to do it in a way that complies with the city code. Do you understand? All right. All right, and just for the record, in case 25000214, I'm going to make the following findings of fact and lie. If I notice it's sufficient, I find the property in violation. If you're going to have a conversation, please take it outside. I will. Find the property in violation of 2.4.11 E10A, which is operating facility without proper certifications. I'll give the respondent 48 hours to bring the property into compliance or cease operation or a fine of up to $500 per day may issue. Good luck. Can I ask for more than 48 hours or no? What would you ask me for? A week, because you have to get the EIN number. An EIN number could take up to three days. That's the only reason I'm asking. It's already in the process. I just have to call and say transfer. Let's see what does the city think. I'll tell you what, I'll give you 72, but you'll have to move quickly because I can't just let it continue if it's not certified. It's inherently problematic, but I'll give you 72 hours. Case number 4, 25-0-0-0-2-1-5. Owner's name is Dorit and Harrion Wittenstein. Property address is 14947 Watley Road. And the code officer is Mark Woods. Before we begin, can we see who's here on behalf of the respondent so we don't have an issue? Ma'am, can you tell me your name, please? You have to speak into the microphone. A little louder into the microphone, please. Dorit Wittenstein. So you're one of the owners of the property, ma'am? I want to say something before we start. I'm not so familiar with what's going because my mom died and I keep spending a lot of time overseas with my 94-year-old dad. So I need my daughter who's taking care of it. You can bring her up. Hi. And your name, ma'am? I'm Steve. And that's your mom? Correct. All right, I'm going to let the city present the case and then I'll let you guys respond, okay? Afternoon. My name is Mark Woods, code enforcement officer with the city of Delray Beach, and I'm presenting case number 25-0215. A community residence was identified as Hollywood Sober Home, 14947 Watley Road, was found to be advertising for sober clients in recovery on social media. The community residence is not registered with the city of Delray Beach, nor is it certified to provide recovery housing by the Florida Association of Recovery Residences. I don't have any photos to present as evidence. The magistrate violation was issued on September 16, 2025. The magistrate violation was mailed first class and certified mail on 9-16-25. The property was posted on 9-16-25, and the compliance date was required by 9-17-25. Confirmation not received, regular mail was not returned, and the violation was posted on the property, as I said, on 9-16-25. The community residence is not registered or certified to provide recovery housing, and compliance was not achieved. I made contact with the owner yesterday. I contacted her on the phone and ensured that she would be here for the- And how did you know it's operating as a recovery residence? Saw it on Facebook, advertising for sober clients on Cash Pay Halfway House website on Facebook. So we also have another witness. We have a copy of the advertisement from Development Services. They're the ones who initially- Sorry, jumped the gun a little there. Go ahead. Sorry, you can finish, Mr. Woods, and then- That's it. Okay. We'll get to the- So at this time, the city would like to call Ms. Amy Alvarez. Yes. Please stay cheerful. What position do you hold with the city? Assistant Development Services Director. And are you familiar with the property located at 5800 Northwest 63rd Way? Oh, I'm so sorry. 1499-47 Watley Road in Dollar Beach, Florida? Yes. And is that- We've heard the testimony of Mr. Woods. Is this a property related to the unauthorized- Community residence. Community residence in the city of Dollar Beach without bar certification? Yes. And did someone in your department investigate whether this home was attempting to operate as a community residence? Staff was notified that there were online posts regarding the operation of a community residence. All right. So you received notice, and did the staff view the notifications? The information that was posted online, yes. Yes. And now showing what's been previously marked as City's Exhibit 1 for identification purposes. Do you recognize this? Yes, from our records. And on or about, when did staff receive this or obtain this or view this? April of this year. So is that on or near April 22nd, 2025? Yes. And is this the public advertisement for a new men's sober home with five bedrooms opening as of May 1st? Yes. All right. And in that notification, it had specifications, the costs, and how this property would operate? Yes. Okay. And in that, as well, there was a Mr. Scott Westcott who has indicated that they were trying to get certified, but they weren't as far certified, correct? Yes, correct. All right. Thank you. The city will like to introduce cities to Exhibit 1 and 2.0. Do either of you have an objection to this? No. All right. Without objection, this will be Exhibit 1, so mark this session. And then upon, you know, receiving this information and conducting the investigation and looking at the post, does staff look into the status of that property as a community residence in the city records? Right. Our records indicate there's never been an application submitted for a community residence at this address. And did you also contact FAR to confirm that this is also not a FAR certified residence? Yes. We have no intention of applying for FAR. Okay. It's not what we... Ma'am, I'll let you present your side, but please let the city finish before you interrupt, okay? And based on your review of the records, the investigation of Mr. Woods, would this be the type of property that would have had to apply for application under city code 4.33 I-1 and obtain FAR certification to operate in that manner? Based on the advertised information, yes. Okay. Thank you. I don't have any... And Mr. Woods, did you also go to the property and talk to any individuals living there? Yes, I'm familiar with the property. I didn't speak to anybody there, but I'm familiar with the property and I went by it recently. Okay, so can you... It's a five-bedroom home that would support up to 10 people. Okay. Thank you. That's it. Thank you. No further testimony from the witnesses. Okay. Your turn. Yes. I see that there was an ad there by one of the occupants that manages the home. So, is the next step to do an application for the community residents to continue? I don't give you next steps. Like, I mean, if it's in front of me, I have a very simple task. Is the operation of this home in violation of the city code? If it is yes, then I find a violation. If it is no, I find that there is no violation. Okay. The time to do the steps is long before it shows up in front of me. Sorry, we weren't aware that there wasn't the proper applications in place at the time. But we're happy to be in compliance and take whatever measures we need to. When I spoke with the gentleman yesterday, I told him that we have no intention. We don't do just a – we don't deal with any side of alcohol or drug treatment. We just provide the shelter. We have some rules, but we make sure that they go to the meeting and stuff like that. Who is Scott Westcott? He's the manager. He basically just oversees the house. There are only three residents, two of which are in their 70s. We drive them to dialysis every Monday, Wednesday, Friday. And then the other resident is a veteran, Navy veteran. Can I ask some questions? Yeah, please. Okay. So I just wanted to get clarity on the type of arrangement. It's easier to talk to. This microphone is a little easier. I just wanted to get some clarification on the type of arrangement. This is a single-family home, correct? Correct. And within there, you're providing – you do have people living there that have substance abuse issues? The older gentlemen, the two older gentlemen have a previous in past years, but they're clean and sober. Okay, and they need some type of rehabilitative help or any help? I mean, they go to meetings. So they go to substance abuse meetings? AA meetings. AA meetings. And then you also say that you also provide transportation to take them to different appointments? Just the gentleman who requires dialysis and doesn't have enough funds to Uber himself over there. Okay. And they're not related? They're not family members? The three gentlemen? Yeah. No. Okay. Hold on one second. Thank you. And they have to pay to be there, correct? Just like any other tenant would, yes. And just for the record, the city's definition of family when it comes to a single-family home that you purchase, that you don't live in, that you're renting out to tenants, it's up to three unrelated adults. After three unrelated adults, they have to come into the city to get a permit from our planning and zoning department for whatever kind of group home you're going to do. Okay. So, rooming houses aren't legal to just put 10 people in a five-bedroom house. So, anything you're doing with sick people or people in recovery or any of that is going to require some kind of permission from our planning and zoning department and development services. Thank you for the clarification. Thank you, Mr. Wood. Yes. I just, I don't have any other questions. Is the city asking for them? The city's asking that they cease operations as a sober, as a recovery residence and a community residence, providing any kind of care for people that are at risk from the addiction problem. And stop advertising and do all that until the point that you come in and register with the city and get everything approved because our development services department has to look at the layout of your house, the number of parking spaces, and all this different data before they can tell you how many people can live in the house. So, please don't open the business before you get your business license. And we're asking that that would be done within 24 hours, ceasing the operations. You know, as mentioned before, two of the gentlemen are in their 70s, and the other one requires dialysis care. I don't know if we're going to be able to find them other arrangements in 24 hours. However, we are willing and able to go into compliance, do the proper application measures needed. There's no intention of having 10 individuals in the home, although there are five bedrooms. It's not how it's currently operating. I'll give you 72, like I gave the other one, to either come into compliance or cease operations. Who do I see now when we leave? Yeah. And how long does the application take to be processed? I'm going to direct the city to, you know, we're basically done here, so you can grab the city officials and talk to them about how to comply. But, you know, as in the case of all things like this, you just can't operate this unless you have the proper licenses. You know, and it's not just because the city wants to, you know, to prevent you from doing business. No, I get it. Because the city wants to make sure you're safe. Yeah, we just feel bad for the old guys. I do, too. On the other hand, I don't want to be the one where they ask, well, the magistrate let this go on, and then something bad happened, right? Okay, thank you. Yeah. All right, I'm going to give 72 hours a fine of up to $500 per day. We're going to, I'm going to note that notice is good and sufficient. All right, for the record, I have the minutes from June 18th and August 20th, and they're hereby deemed approved. That's all I got to do today, right? Yes. There being no further business before us, we're adjourned. Thank you.