How do I hereby call this meeting to order? This is the Special Magistrate for the City of Delray Beach. Cases are going to be heard in the order in which they appear on the agenda, unless we otherwise note it. When you hear your case called, go ahead and proceed to the podium here on my left-hand side. The City is going to put on its testimony and evidence. You're allowed to ask questions of the City's witnesses and to review any of the evidence that the City presents. Afterward, you can give me your own testimony and evidence, and then I will make a decision. This is a quasi-judicial hearing, which means the formal rules of evidence do not apply here. However, all testimony is taken under oath, under penalty of perjury. So if anyone is going to testify today, or you think you might testify, or even if there's just a possibility that you might testify, I'd ask that you rise, 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? Thank you. Please have a seat. Consent agenda. Requesting approval of the consent agenda as written. So approved. Thank you. All right, we have the minutes of August 6, 2026, which I've already reviewed, and they are approved. Thank you. All right, let's call the first case. Case number one, code 26, 000983. The property owner is Roy A. and Geraldine Farland. The property address is 728 Avenue, Chamont. And the code officer on the case is Chantel Jean-Baptiste. Good afternoon. My name is Chantel Jean-Baptiste, code enforcement officer for the City of Derry Beach. This property 728 Avenue, Chamont, was issued a notice of violation on August 4, 2026. Service was accomplished by certified and regular mail on August 6, 2026. In addition, both the property and City Hall were posted on August 7, 2026. An affidavit of posting is attached to this case. I have been in contact with the property owner. The property was cited for 100.08 subsection A, subsection B, exterior building walls. As of September 9, 2026, the property has not come into compliance. I have nine photographs of the property to this case that I would like to introduce into evidence. The City is asking for an additional 30 days, which will be October 17, 2026, for them to come into compliance. If they do not come into compliance, then the City is asking $100 a day until compliance is achieved. Get these photos as evidence. Exhibit 1, photos taken of the exterior walls on August 4, 2026. There's mildew on the wall. Are we talking about that big black mark just above the roof? Yes, on the upper top of the roof, correct. Exhibit 2, showing the left side of the property. Taking a photo taken on August 4, 2026. There's debris, and it needs to be painted. Exhibit 3 is taking a photo of the front of the property. And the full address, taken on August 4, 2026. Exhibit 4 is when I posted a notice of violation on property on August 7, 2026. Exhibit 5 is a posting of affidavit. Exhibit 6 is when I re-inspected a property photo taken from the street view on September 10, 2026. Exhibit 7 is showing another photo of re-inspection taken on September 10, 2026. Exhibit 8 is showing the same debris photo taken from the street view on September 10, 2026. Exhibit 9 is a non-compliance affidavit. These are my photos. I'm submitting as evidence. Sir, can you tell me your name, please? My name is Roy Farland. F-A-R-L-A-N-D. Mr. Farland, you're the owner of the property? Yes, I am. Do you have any objection to the photographs or documents that the city is presenting? Yes, because right now, if you take a picture, I'll give you a different picture. I didn't do the paint, the walls yet, but all the awnings has been taken down. I'll straighten out. I mean, you can certainly tell me what the property is not. I just have to know if there's anything wrong with them at the time they were taken. Yes, at the time they were taken, yes, there was. Okay, and what is that? You still want to know what was wrong with the property the time the picture was taken? Is that what you're asking? I mean, they want to put these into evidence, so I have to know if you have an objection to them, which is that there's something wrong with them, they don't accurately look at the property at the time they were taken, something like that. No, I have no objection. What I'm looking at, it's there. Okay, so I'm going to admit those into evidence. All right, so tell me what's going on with your property. What's going on? Well, I'm trying to get it straightened out the codes that they're there. I'm trying to straighten the codes out. Well, there's one problem. I mean, in fact, there's a couple of problems. Well, it's hard trying to find someone to do the upper level, the paint, you know. And when I do find someone, the price is outrageous. Yeah, I bet. So what I'm doing, I'm shopping around, trying to get someone to do the paint that exterior of the wall. Like I said, the awnings. Hold on one second. Is the only issue remaining on this property, those dark spots above the roof? Right, for the painting. And I had explained to him the day I posted on property, we spoke. Sir, how much time would you need to get that taken? At least 60 days. At least 60. So you're asking for 30. He asked for 60. What's the city's position on 60 days? We can proceed with 60 days. That'll be November 17, 2026. I have my new day sheet here. Sir, I'm going to give you the 60 days to get it clean. But, you know, still, you got to get on it, right? I understand that. You don't give me 60 days for it to remain the same. All right. I'll give you the 60 days. All right. All right. In case 26-000-983, I make the following findings of fact and law. I find notice is sufficient. I find the property in violation of 100.08 A and B. Specifically, I note that there is discoloration on the walls above the roof. I give the respondent 60 days to come into compliance, which will be 11-16-2026, or a fine of up to $100 per day may issue. Good luck, and thank you for coming in, sir. Thank you. Thank you. Case number two, code 26-000-993. The property owners are Ronald E. and Casey M. Sanchez. Property address is 4935 Northwest 6th Court, and the code officer on the case is Chantel Jean-Baptiste. Good afternoon. My name is Chantel Jean-Baptiste, code enforcement officer for the city of Derry Beach. This property 4935 Northwest 6th Court was issued a notice of violation on August 6th, 2026. Service was accomplished by certified and regular mail on August 10th, 2026. In addition, both the property and City Hall were posted on August 10th, 2026. I have not been in contact with the property owner. This property was cited for 100.07 subsection A, subsection B, yard and landscape area. As of September 9th, 2026, the property has not come into compliance. I have attached seven photos of the property to this case that I would like to introduce into evidence. And the city is asking for an additional 30 days, which will be October 17, 2026, for them to come into compliance. If they do not come into compliance, then the city is asking $100 a day until compliance is achieved. I would like to submit these photos as evidence. Exhibit 1 is a photo of the front property where there was grass in the landscape area. Exhibit 2, on August 4th, 2026, photo taken from the sidewalk, showing that the landscape was removed and placed with rocks. Exhibit 3, I was in the area, I took a second photo of the property on August 7th, 2026, from the street view, still showing rocks on the landscape area. Exhibit 4 is when I posted the notice of violation on property on August 10th, 2026. Exhibit 5 is the affidavit of posting on property. Exhibit 6 is when I re-inspected the property on September 9th, 2026, photo taken from the street view. Exhibit 7 is a non-compliance of affidavit. These are my photos I'm submitting into evidence. Is anyone here on behalf of the respondent? I believe it's Ronald and Kesey Sanchez. Seeing no one without objection, I'll accept the documents and photographs into evidence as a city's composite exhibit. So the issue, I mean, the issue here is missing sod? Yes, they removed the sod and placed with rocks. The area that that car is currently parked on, is that supposed to be sodded as well, or is that actually part of the driveway? That is not part of the driveway. Are you speaking to the left side? Where the car is parked. It's supposed to be all sod. In the initial photos, that vehicle wasn't there. Magistrate, are you talking about the black car that's there? Yeah. No, that's a driveway. That is a driveway. Yeah, the other side is, on the left side of it is the rock. Where they put the white rocks down? Okay. And presumably they're parking on it, but you didn't cite them for that. You just cited them for the sod. Correct. And do you believe 30 days is a reasonable amount of time for them to bring this into compliance? Yes. So you've had no contact with the owner? I have no contact at all. Have you seen any evidence that they're attempting to comply? I don't think so. All right. Case 26000993, I make the following findings of fact in life. If I notice it's sufficient, I find the property in violation of code section 100.07 A and B. There is sod missing from the landscaping. I order the respondent to come into compliance within 30 days, which would be October 17th. That's right, right? 2026 or a fine of up to $100 per day, Mish. Thank you. Case number three. IR code 26001081. The property owners are Thomas Spitalny and Lydia Spitalny Joint Revocable Trust, where Lydia and Thomas Spitalny are the co-trustees. The property address is 1000 Secret Drive. The code officer on the case is Randall Straughn. I need to note here that there is a stipulation on this case. Yes. Magistrate, my colleague, Ms. Warren, had drafted a proposed order and provided it to the council for the property owners. They've agreed to the full fine of $15,000 to be paid within 30 days, which is October 17th, 2026. Council for the property owners has seen and approved the agreed order that's in your packet. All right, based upon the representation of council, in case 26001081, I hereby approve the stipulation between the city and the respondent and issue it as an order of the special magistrate on the 17th day of September, 2026. Thank you. Case number four. Code 26001004. The property owner is Delray Beach Associates, Inc. Marsha Stocker Evans Law is the registered agent. And the property address is 814 East Atlantic Avenue. The code officer on this case is Reggie Williams. However, data will be presented by Code Officer Hainez Hernandez. Good afternoon. My name is Hainez Hernandez, Code Enforcement Officer with the City of Delray Beach. I'm here regarding the property located at 814 East Atlantic Avenue. Case number code 26001004. The property was issued a notice of violation on August 9. Service was accomplished by certified and regular mail and posting at City Hall on August 12, 2026. In addition, the property was posted on August 12, 2026. An affidavit of posting and mailing and a first affidavit of noncompliance are attached to the case. I have been in contact with the owner at the property. This property was cited for a sidewalk cafe, permit section 6.3.3, subsection B, fees, site plan applications, section 2.4.10, subsection A, and certify of appropriateness, section 2.4.12, subsection A, subsection 1, subsection 6. Certificate of appropriateness, right? Yes, sorry. No worries. For making unpermitted and unapproved modifications to the property by adding four additional tables, 16 additional shares, and a tent that are not part of the approved sidewalk cafe application. As of September 17, the property has not come into compliance. I have attached nine photos of the property to the case that I would like to submit into evidence. The city is asking for an additional 30 days until October 17, 2026 for the property to come into compliance. If the property does not come into compliance, the city is asking for a $150 daily fine until compliance is achieved. Exhibit 1 is the front of the business. That's what their sidewalk cafe looks like. It was taken on August 3, 2026. Exhibit 2 is the addition to the sidewalk cafe, which is actually not on the sidewalk. It's on the side of the business. That was taken on August 3, 2026. Exhibit 3, it's another side of the addition, and you can see the tables in the back of the business. Exhibit 4, it's the posting. Exhibit 5, it's the affidavit of posting. Exhibit 6 is another picture of the business. It was taken on September 14. Did they take the front cafe down? The mic side. I don't think the mic is working. This one's on. Is there anyone here on behalf of the respondent, Delray Beach Associates, Inc.? Seeing no one without objection, I'll accept the documents and photographs and evidence as a city's composite exhibit. Officer, you said you had conversations with the owner. Can you tell me what's going on here? I personally have not been in contact since I'm not the main officer on the case, but I do know that the officer has been in contact with him, and he explained that if he removes the addition, his business won't make the same as he's making now, that he was not going to remove it. But based on the city's inspections, as far as you know, as of today, the addition is still there? Yes, sir. And do you believe that 30 days is a reasonable amount of time to bring this into compliance? Yes. All right. In case 26001004, I make the following findings of fact-in-law, if I notice is sufficient, I find the property in violation of the three listed code sections, site plan, certificate of appropriateness, and sidewall cafe. Specifically, the respondent is operating a sidewall cafe without proper permits, site plan, or certification. I'm going to give the respondent 30 days to come into compliance, which would be October 17, 2026, for a fine of up to $150 per day measure. Thank you. Case number five, code 26001005. The property owner is Delray Trio, LLC. The registered agent is Jason M. Lazar, and the property address is 220 Northeast 1st Street. The code officer on the case is Reggie Williams. However, the case will be presented by Haney's Hernandez-Batista. Case number, code 26001005. The property was issued a notice of violation on August 9, 2026. Service was accomplished by certifying regular mail and by posting to City Hall on August 12th. In addition, the property was posted on August 12th. An affidavit of posting and mailing and a first affidavit of noncompliance are attached to the case. I have been in contact with the parking management. The property was cited for violations related to building permits and temporary parking lots, specifically for operating a paid parking business and installing signage without the required permits, and operating a business tax receipt. On September 10, 2026, applications were submitted for that required signed permit and business tax receipt, BTR. As of today, the BTR application remains under review and the signed permit application is currently on hold. As of September 17, 2026, the property has not come into compliance. I have attached 10 photographs of the property to the case, which I would like to show and submit into evidence. The city is requesting an additional 30 days until October 17 for the property to come into compliance. If compliance is not achieved by then, the city is requesting a fine of $150 per day to compliance as a shift. Exhibit 1 is the front of what the parking lot is. And in there, you can see the signs in the front. There's like three different signs of parking. Exhibit 2, it's inside of the property towards the parking lot, and that's another sign there. Exhibit 3 is on the other side, and there you can see two other extra signs. There's that one, and there's another one, I'm not sure, but towards the back. Exhibit 4 is the day of the posting. That's the affidavit of posting. It was posted on the grass, on the sidewalk. Exhibit 5 was also the affidavit of posting. It was posted to the business. Exhibit 6 is the affidavit of posting. Exhibit 7 was the re-inspection, and the affidavit, you could still see it there on the floor. Exhibit 8, it's another picture of the sign. These are the re-inspection exhibits. Exhibit 9 was September 13. Exhibit 10, this is the affidavit of noncompliance. Those are the exhibits I would like to submit into evidence. Is anyone here on behalf of the respondent, Delray Trio? Seeing no one without objection, I'll accept the documents and photographs and evidence of the city's composite exhibit. So I guess the issue here is they're operating essentially commercial parking without a business permit or a permit for the signs that they're using to operate this lot? Yes, sir. And I think if I understand your testimony correctly, they've applied for both, but one is pending and one is on hold? Right. The one on hold, I saw yesterday that there's corrections to be made, but they haven't responded. Do you believe that 30 days is a reasonable time for them to bring this into compliance? Yes, sir. That the city can get these responded? On my end, I believe the city's already working on it. They replied, so I believe 30 days is sufficient. Yeah, I guess what I was asking is obviously if they fail to reply, that's on them. I just want to make sure that what's required of the city is doable within the time frame so they can comply if they take action. Is that what you're representing to me? All right. In case 26001005, I make the following findings of fact and lie. If I notice is sufficient, I find the property in violation of the listed permits, of the listed code sections for permits and temporary parking lots. I give the respondent 30 days to come into compliance until October 17th, 2026 or a fine of up to $150 per day mission. Thank you. Case number six, code 26001059. The property owners are Dorotha R. McMullen Estate. The property address is 26 Southwest 4th Avenue. Code officer on the case is Reggie Williams. However, the case will be presented by Code Officer James Easley. Good afternoon, Special Magistrate. My name is James Easley, code enforcement officer for the city of Delray Beach. I'm here regarding property address 26 Southwest 4th Avenue, case number code 26001059. The property was issued a notice of violation on August 23rd, 2026. Service was accomplished by certified and regular mail and posted at City Hall on August 24th, 2026. In addition, the property was posted on August 24th, 2026. An affidavit of posting and mailing and first affidavit of noncompliance is attached to the case. The city has not had any contact with the property owner. This property was cited for minimum maintenance for overgrown landscaping and loose trash on the property. As of September 17th, 2026, the property has not come into compliance. I have attached nine photos of the property that I would like to enter into evidence. Exhibit 1, taken August 18th, 2026, shows the overgrown landscaping. Exhibit number 2, taken August 18th, 2026, is a zoomed-in photo of the property showing overgrown landscaping. Exhibit number 3, taken August 18th, 2026, is a zoomed-in photo showing loose debris. You can see the debris here. Exhibit number 4, taken August 18th, 2026, shows the post-in of the notice of violation. Exhibit 5 is the affidavit of posting and mailing. Exhibit number 6, taken September 8th, 2026, shows overgrown landscaping. Exhibit number 7, taken September 8th, 2026, is a zoomed-in photo of the property showing the overgrown landscaping. Exhibit 8, 2026, and the property was still not in compliance. A notice of violation was issued on August 26th, 2026. Service was accomplished by certified and regular mail and posted at City Hall on August 28th, 2026. In addition, the property was also posted at the property on August 27th, 2026. An affidavit of posting and mailing and first affidavit of noncompliance is attached to the case. The city has had contact with the property owner. This property was cited for having abandoned vehicles on private property and parking commercial vehicles on private property, for storing a trailer on the property without screening on three sides, and storing a vehicle with an expired registration. As of September 17th, 2026, the property has not come into compliance. I have attached 12 photos of the property to the case that I would like to introduce into evidence. Exhibit 1, taken July 29th, 2026, shows a zoomed-in photo of the expired vehicle registration. Exhibit 2, taken July 29th, 2026, is a photo of the vehicle that has the expired vehicle registration. Exhibit 3, taken July 29th, 2026, shows a black pickup truck with a flat front tire and a white unscreened trailer. You can see the black pickup truck with a flat tire. You can see the trailer, not meeting code, being screened on three sides. Exhibit 4, taken July 29th, 2026, shows the issued courtesy notice. Exhibit 5, taken August 4th, 2026, shows a zoomed-in photo of the expired vehicle registration. Exhibit 6, taken August 4th, 2026, shows a vehicle with an expired vehicle registration and a vehicle with a flat tire and an unscreened trailer. You can see it. You can see the sealed black truck, flat tire, and the trailer still not screened on three sides to meet city code. Exhibit 7, taken August 27th, 2026, shows the posting of the notice of violation. Exhibit 8, shows the affidavit of posting. Exhibit 9, taken September 8th, 2026, shows a zoomed-in photo of the expired registration. Exhibit 10, taken September 8th, 2026, shows the vehicle with the expired vehicle registration. Exhibit 11, taken September 8th, 2026, shows the unscreened trailer, but also depicts that the black truck has been removed. Exhibit 12, is the affidavit of noncompliance. The city is asking for an additional 14 days, which would be on October 1st, 2026, for this property to come into compliance. If they do not come into compliance by that date, the city is asking for a $50 fine until compliance is achieved. Is anyone here on behalf of the respondent in this case, William Edmond and Carolyn L. Young? I assume you want to submit those into evidence? Yes, I would like to submit these 12 photos into evidence. Without objection, so admit it. You said you had some contact with the property owner here? Yes, and some work has been done. As you can see, the black truck has been moved, but the expired registration, the vehicle is still on the property, and the trailer not screened on all three sides that meet city code means it is still in violation. Did they give you a sense of how much time they need to bring this into compliance? They have not, but we believe that based on the fact that this was first brought to their attention in July of this year, and compliance has not been achieved in September, that 14 days would be enough time to bring the property into compliance. So compliance here would just be the removal of those two vehicles? Yes, sir. All right, in case 26001072, I make the following finding. In fact, on the life I notice is sufficient, I find the property in violation of 4.6.1382 commercial vehicles on private property and 90.03. Give the respondent 14 days to come into compliance or find a $50 per day mission. For the record, that would be 10-1-26. Thank you. Thank you. Case number 8, code 26001073. Property owners are Herschel C. Ford Jr. and Herschel C. Ford Sr. Property address is 39 Southwest 8th Avenue. The code officer on the case is Reggie Williams. However, the case will be presented by Haines Hernandez-Baptista. Good afternoon. My name is Haines Hernandez, code enforcement officer with the city of Delray Beach. I'm here regarding the property located at 39 Southwest 8th Avenue, case number code 26001073. This property received a courtesy notice on August 19, 2026 for storing parking or leaving abandoned property on private property and for parking vehicles on the landscape. The property was given five days to comply with the violations and inspection was conducted on August 25, 2026 and the property was still not in compliance. A notice of violation was issued on August 23, 2026. Service was accomplished by certified and regular mail and by posting at City Hall on August 28, 2026. In addition, the property was posted an affidavit of noncompliance are attached to the case. I have not been in contact with the property owner. This property was cited for abandoned vehicles on private property, maintenance of buildings, and vehicular enforcement for storing and unlicensed vehicle on the property, maintaining a fence in need of repair and parking vehicles on the landscape. As of September 17, 2026, the property has not come into compliance. I have attached 13 photos of the property to the case I would like to introduce into evidence. The city is requesting an additional 14 days until October 1, 2026 for the property to come into compliance. If they do not come into compliance, the city is requesting a fine of $50 per day until compliance is achieved. Exhibit 1 is the front of the property where you could see the car to the left, to my left, doesn't have a tag. Exhibit 2, you could see that other vehicle in the back and you could see the grass overgrown. Exhibit 3, you could see the other vehicle back there, the white vehicle, and it's parked on the grass and also the fence needs repair. Exhibit 4 is the courtesy notice was posted on August 19th. Exhibit 5, you could see that they actually covered the car that didn't have the license plate. Exhibit 6, the other side of the property remains the same. Exhibit 7, it remains the same on this end as well. It was taken on August 26th. Exhibit 8 was the posting on the property and that was on August 27th. Exhibit 9 is the affidavit of posting. Exhibit 10 was taken on September 8th, which was the re-inspection. Exhibit 11 was the affidavit of non-compliance. Sir, can you tell me your name, please? My name is Herschel Ford. Ford, you're the owner of the property. Yes, and my father is no longer with us. Do you have any objections to the documents or photographs that the officer just showed? Yes, they're not current to the day standard and the grass was cut and the car was moved. Okay, I'm going to admit those, so you can tell me what the condition of the property is now. The condition of the property, the lawn is mowed, the cars have been moved off the grass area, and what happened is they keep stealing the car covers. Even when I put my address on the car covers, they still, because I'm right off Atlantic Avenue, so we have vagrants go in and out all day long. At 5 o'clock in the morning, you have people walking in and out. So if you notice on the last picture, the car cover has been replaced, but I didn't put my address on it. And that's a classic car that's owned by me. Yeah, I don't think the city's concern is whether it's covered or not. I think the city's concern is whether or not it's registered or not. It's registered. Does it have a current registration? Not with me. What about the fence? The fence belongs to you guys. You need to penalize yourself because my name. It doesn't belong to me. Well, let's put it away. It belongs to them. Let's put it away. I'm going to be honest with you. They have a bunch of rats running in my house. The grass is up to your knees. You can take a picture of that. No, this guy, Richard Williams, he's doing a great job, but he needs to be here. To make a long story short, the back fence belongs to the back neighbor. Here, this side, the south side fence belongs to that neighbor. The north side fence belongs to you guys, and that grass belongs to you guys. We have no fence on that property ever because our neighbors got fence. And if you notice on the picture, the fence area is the lot. The fence area is the lot. I doubt seriously if the city owns a fence on a random property. Like a CRA owner. Who is CRA? Who is CRA? Because they put a sign on the property, and they got no trust passes. Community redevelopment agents? Yes. Who is CRA? That's correct. Community redevelopment agents. Y'all need to have them in here and charge them $1,000 a day. And those rats that's running in my house, I need to charge them rent. Counsel, do we have any idea who owns the fence? The fence. The fence specifically, no, Your Honor. I did. I will represent. I pulled up PAPA, Palm Beach Property Appraises website, and the vacant lot just north of the subject property is owned by the Delray Beach CRA. But I do not know if that fence is on the CRA property or on the subject property. I don't personally know that. I don't have anybody on code enforcement or any staff that could confirm specifically at this time. All right, so what I'm going to do here, I'm not going to make a finding on the fence, because I can't. But I'll give you 30 days to get whatever cars are on the property registered and or moved off the grass. If you've already done it, then you're in good shape. If not, you have 30 days to get it done. I've done it. Let the code officer know. What else is outstanding besides the grass is cut, right, and we had a fence and the cars, right? Right. All right, so I'll give you 30 days. Just stay in contact with the code officer. Let her know. Okay. You know, and where's your miller or her? It could be either or, but. Well, I need telephone millers. Yes. Once we're done here, I'll step outside with you, and I'll give you all the information you need, sir. Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you. All right. Case 26001073, with the exception of the fence, I found the property in violation as to the cars, cars that are unregistered, cars parked on private property, and the preexisting grass, which may or may not be cut by now, but wasn't in compliance at the time of the inspection. Give the respondent 30 days or October 17th to bring the property in compliance for a fine of up to $50 per day, and I'll ask the officer to go outside and give you all the contact information you need. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Case number nine, code 26000966. The property owner is M&B Development Enterprises, LLC. The registered agent is Blaine C. Dickinson, Esquire. The property address is 1000 Old Dixie Highway, and the code officer on the case is Rubenson DeJaden. Good afternoon, Special Magistrate. My name is Rubenson DeJaden, code enforcement officer of the city of Daryl Beach. I'm here for case number 26000966. The property address is 1000 Old Dixie Highway. It was issued a notice of violations, a violation, whether, on July 27th, 2026. Service was accomplished by certified regular mayor sent on July 30th, 2026. In addition, both the property and city hall were posted on July 31st, 2026. An affidavit of posting is attached, and the case as well. I have been in contact with the general contractor. The property was cited for building permits, 2.4.13, subsection B. As of today, September 17th, 2026, the property has not come into compliance. I have attached six photographs of the property to the case that I would like to introduce as evidence. Exhibit number one was taken on Monday, July 27th, 2026. This is just showing new work has been done inside the property without a building permit. Exhibit number two was taken on Monday, July 27th, 2026. This is just different angles from the property, from interior. Exhibit number three is just the affidavit of posting that was taken on July 31st, 2026. Exhibit number four, this is, well, actually, this was taken on the same date, Monday, July 27th, 2026. This is just showing you from exterior of the property. Exhibit number five, this is just showing you the affidavit of noncompliance. This was taken on, except with it, it's too small. I believe it was September 9th, 2026, the affidavit of noncompliance. Exhibit number six, just showing you that on Friday, July 31st, 2026, I posted the property. The city is asking for an additional 30 days, which is October 17th, 2026, for them to come into compliance. If they do not come into compliance, then the city is asking $100 until the compliance is achieved. Sir, can you tell me your name, please? Yes, my name is Tony Morrow with Morrow Brothers. We're the general contractor for the site. We've been in permit with the city since March, and we think we're getting close. We think we're very close. We just had an issue. It's a sad district. It's kind of complicated. It's actually a business and a residence together. We thought that we could get it done just as a residence. Anyway, that's the latest issue. We just had a meeting. Let me just ask you before you keep going. Do you have any objections to the photos or documents? I don't. All right. Those are admitted. I'm sorry. Keep going. Yes, sir. And the city's been very, very helpful. I appreciate it very much. Most of what we did was just really clean up. The owner just bought the building. It was just an enormous amount of garbage. There was a lot of fire damage from a previous fire, so we just cut away just the garbage, just kind of prepping for anticipating that permit any day. I really believe 30 days would be enough. After our meeting this week, I'm a little bit concerned. I would ask for 60 if that's possible. I really feel confident 60 days will have the permit issues resolved and have it. Your Honor, Mr. Wagner, it's up to you. I believe that he's been working with the city, and we've been in contact via email. It's always up to me. Yes. And, yeah, due to the fact that. I'll give you the 60 days. Thank you. Thank you very much. And, again, thank you for your help in working with us. I really appreciate it. Absolutely. The city couldn't have been more professional on it. It doesn't mean you have to take 60 days. No, no. Listen, if I could get it. We're biting at the bit. If I could do it in five days, we'll have it in five days. All right. But thank you very much. It's 26-0-0-0-0-9-6-6. I make the following fine. It's a fact in life. If I notice it sufficient, I find the property in violation 2.4.13b, required building permits for the work. I give the respondent 60 days to come into compliance or a fine of up to $100 per day may issue. 60 days would be 11-16-26. Thank you very much. Thanks for coming in. Thanks for waiting. Thank you. Now we're switching into noncompliance cases. Case number 10, code 26-0-0-0-6-9-2. The property owner is Strong Island Real Estate Holdings, LLC. The registered agent is Raquel Dreher, Esquire. The property address is 125 Southwest 13th Avenue. And the code officer on the case is Supervisor Latoya Thompson. Good afternoon, Special Magistrate. This case was originally found in violation of Section 1.5, Correction 7.1.5, Numbering of Building and Structure on April 22, 2026, for failure to display address character on the structure. On May 21, 2026, magistrate order was issued requiring the property owner to bring the property into compliance by May 28, 2026 or be subject to a daily fine of $50 per day. On June 1, 2026, a magistrate order re-inspection was conducted and the property remained out of compliance. On August 28, 2026, a noncompliance hearing notice was mailed first class, certified mail, and posted to City Hall. As of September 17, 2026, the property remains out of compliance and the assessment of fines remain outstanding. I have four new photographs as evidence along with one previous photo from the initial hearing to present in the case. This is the original photograph taken from the hearing from 5-21-2026. Exhibit 1 is still no characters on the building, taken on August 28th. Exhibit 2 is the noncompliance. Exhibit 3 is the posting of the noncompliance hearing. And Exhibit 4 is the affidavit of posting. The City is recommending a lien to be placed on the property in the amount of $5,400 and that the daily fine continue of $50 until compliance is achieved. Is anyone here on behalf of Strong Island Real Estate Holdings, LLC? Seeing no one, I will accept the new photograph and documents into evidence as City's Composite Exhibit 2. Any contact with these people at all? No contact. I really hate to give such a stiff fine for something so simple, but I don't know what else we can do here. All right, case 2600692, I make the following findings of fact and law. I find notices sufficient. I find the property continues to be in violation of code section 7.1.5, which is numbering. I assess a fine in the amount of $5,400 at $50 a day since May 29th, and I'm continuing at $50 a day until the property comes into compliance. Thank you. Moving on to all business, I have three cases that are of the same. Case number 11, 2025, 004, 685. I also have case number 12, IR, 2025, 004, 908. And case number 13, IR, code 25, 00, 00, 00, that's four zeros, 10. The property address for all of them is 302 North East 6th Avenue, and the property owner is 302 North East 6th Avenue, LLC. And the registered agent is law office of Paul A. Krasker. This is a status update here in case. Is anyone here on behalf of 302 North East 6th Avenue, LLC? I guess it's just you, counselor. Yes, Your Honor, you're probably very familiar with these, but these all involve the same business, subculture. Two of the code cases involve special events that are irreversible violations, and the third had to do with parking, striping, and permit violations on the subject property, which was a 30 days to correct, and then a $250 daily fine. The respondent in those cases did file an appeal to the circuit court. The circuit court did issue an opinion and then also issued their mandate. The mandate was just to remand back to this proceeding or to Your Honor to allow for written findings of facts and conclusions of laws to be incorporated into an amended order. For the magistrate, you set a status hearing on September 3rd. At that date, you directed the parties to each submit proposed orders by September 10th. The city submitted theirs. To my knowledge, subculture, the respondent in all three cases has not provided any proposed orders at all. So at this time, without there being any competing orders, and those proposed orders, your order directing the parties to submit their case, their proposed orders, was hand-delivered to both the subculture that's here locally in Delray as well as their location in West Palm. So they were hand-delivered the orders directing them to provide their proposed competing orders and also that you would be taking the matter up today in front of a hearing. So they have not appeared and they have not submitted any competing orders, so we would ask that the court or your magistrate enter the orders that have been drafted and submitted as the city's proposed orders. And I only have some small changes here. I think the city's orders are accurate representations of my findings and conclusions during the time period. The order orders it to be paid within 30 days of the 2025 hearing. Since this is an amended order, it should be from today. I can't order them to pay something in the past. So the only counterargument I might provide to your honor, the circuit court acting as the appellate court did not find any insufficiencies in the finding of a violation or the amount of the violation or the amount of fines, merely that the orders needed to also include some findings affecting conclusions of law. So I do think that underneath the mandate issued by the circuit court, this is appropriate for them to be not pro-tunc, that they were in violation of that day. They were provided notice. They were provided 30 days to correct. And that the fine should certainly start after the 30 days they were provided to correct. And then on the irrevocably reversible as well, the payments were due. They elected not to pay them. The circuit court did not stay the payments. The circuit court did not stay the orders. They merely remanded solely so that the orders could be amended to include findings of fact and conclusions of law. And I think it would be appropriate for the deadlines to remain in place as ordered by this magistrate in the previous hearings. Yeah. I mean, I think you have an argument there because the appellate opinion does not stay anything. It does – it asks for – it asks for findings of fact, findings of law, and it asks for a disposition on their notice issue, though that wasn't a footnote. Yeah. All right. I'll agree to you to these orders as written. And that was all three items that were under old business. That is correct. And we've heard nothing from the respondent – or I guess technically they're not the respondent here, I guess. Well, I guess they still are the respondent, aren't they? Because we've heard nothing, they've submitted nothing, and they've made no filings that we know of? I'm not aware of anything. Nothing that we are aware of. All right. Well, I tried to give them a chance to make an argument, but I can't make them make an argument. So I'm going to accept the proposed orders of the city as fair representations of the findings of fact and law from the original hearing, and I will issue them as the amended order as required by the circuit court. Thank you. I think that's it, right? Yes. All right. No further business before us. We're adjourned.