all right good evening my name is kristen ike i am the code enforcement special magistrate for the city of deltona i'm calling the special magistrate hearing of august 27 2025 to order first thing on the agenda is roll call so i will have all of the code compliance officers introduce themselves mark gibson code compliance supervisor danny wrong code compliance manager sharon shiver sorry sharon shivers fire marshal sam shaller assistant fire marshal lisa nadeau fire inspector jessica cotterman hearing clerk tyler russell code compliance customer service renee kearney code compliance administrative supervisor todd mead code compliance supervisor thank you please join me in the pledge of allegiance pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands one nation under god indivisible with liberty and justice for all next on the agenda is my statement about how the hearing is going to proceed tonight i am going to read this so i don't forget anything we are here tonight because the city of deltona has contended that there are violations of the deltona city code that exist this is a public meeting which means that no general public comment will be accepted but each of the respondents and the code compliance officers here tonight and any witnesses each of you call will be able to present evidence to me regarding each case and the violations of the deltona city code that are being alleged i am an attorney and appointed by the city commission to render decisions in these code enforcement matters to determine if a violation of the city code exists and what fine will be imposed if any if you are here for a massey case you might see that next to your case number on the agenda that means that i will be determining solely whether you have come into compliance in a timely manner in accordance with the previous order the special magistrate issued in your case and will not be reopening the case to determine whether or not a violation existed in the first instance any decision i make this evening will be put into a written format in the form of an order a copy of my written order will be provided to the city and then mailed to you as well it is important to note that for any order i issue you may appeal by sending or excuse me filing a written notice of appeal to with the circuit court within 30 days of the execution of my order pursuant to florida statutes section 162.11 the procedure of the hearings today will be governed by chapter 162 florida statutes formal rules of evidence shall not apply but fundamental due process shall be observed and shall govern the proceedings hearsay is admissible but only to support other competent and substantial evidence if you are a respondent you will be able to testify tell me what you think i need to know about your case present evidence and witnesses your testimony will be under oath so i will be swearing you in and this hearing is being recorded for each case i will call the case number and the city will proceed first the city has the burden of proving that the code violation exists then you will be allowed to respond for each case i intend to admit the case file and the powerpoint presentation that will be shown this evening you should have received a copy of your case file when you came in this evening if you did not please let me know when it is your case is is called but i do intend to admit the case file and powerpoint into evidence unless a specific objection is received i will take the cases in the order that you signed in first come first served i do have a list of cases that have been withdrawn or continued so let me announce those uh the withdrawn cases are del 24-072 massey case 2912 thalita terrace del 25-079 725 west 9th street del 25-081 928 halsted street del 25-084 1109 eagles nest avenue del 25-085 1223 west wellington drive fire 018-2025 massey massey 1200 del tona boulevard fire 031-2025 1681 providence boulevard and the continued cases are del 25-082 1223 whitewood drive and fire 035-2025 1240 east normandy boulevard so if you are here for any of those cases that i just read out you do not need to stay your case will not be heard this evening i will go ahead and swear in everyone who intends to testify today as a group which includes the code compliance officers so if please stand if you're able and raise your right hand do you swear to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth if so please say i do i do thank you all right i have no ex parte communications to disclose and um we will proceed on with the cases all right first case is fire uh 34-2025 11 excuse me 114 courtland boulevard for the record my name is lisa nadeau i am employed by the city of deltona as a fire safety inspector this will be case number fire dash 034-2025 the city of deltona versus fellowship baptist church of deltona inc the property address is 114 courtland boulevard deltona florida 32738 parcel id is 813-060-000-010 this is a violation of the city of deltona ordinance chapter 42 article 4 fire codes chapter or chapter 42 through 186 which adopts the most recent recent edition of the florida fire prevention code is adopted by the state fire marshal which contains the florida specific version of nfpa 1.7.12.10 no construction work shall proceed until the ahj has repeat has reviewed the plans for compliance with the applicable codes and standards and the applicable permits have been issued violations b and c have been resolved prior to this hearing corrective action is to obtain a permit for the installation of the new shed and associate electrical or remove the shed and restore electrical to its original condition and to contact our office with a permit number once obtained the statutory requirements for notification of this hearing have been met by the notice of hearing and notice of code violations were sent certified mail to the property owner at the address listed with the property appraiser's records in addition both notices were posted on the property and at city hall at least 10 days prior to this hearing all of the evidence in this case including the photographs have been marked as exhibits and submitted to the special magistrate clerk i certify that any and all photographs to be true and accurate portrayals of what i observed on the day they were taken on january 29th 2025 i conducted a fire safety inspection at this address where i observed a newly constructed shed with electrical inside the property owner was informed a permit would be required for the installation of the shed the property owner was notified in writing of the violation given a time frame to correct said violation subsequent re-inspections on april 1st 2025 may 12 2025 june 6 2025 june 24 2025 and august 4th of 2025 found no progress on the noted violation upon today on upon today's site visit the shed remained in place the city would like to request 90 days for this property to come into compliance with the remainder of the violations or a fine of 50 per day until such time that the property owner has notified the city of compliance all right thank you um so just a question uh are there multiple sheds or just one there are multiple sheds but that was the newest that's the newest one that we're we have no permit for so the others have a permit is what you're saying the other ones are older sheds from way back and we don't have records for those okay so that's why i said a and b were okay b and c okay and so what we're focusing on is the new shed that was yes installed okay thank you um sir uh can you state your name and address for the record not sure that it is my name is robert arnold and i'm the chairman of the board of trustees for fellowship baptist church all right uh what excuse me uh what would you like to tell me about the case well the uh the three sheds have been there for a number of years the first two that are not in question at this time have been there in excess of 15 one of them 22 years i believe um they were probably installed by members of the church uh the third shed went up i think about uh six years ago and again it was done by members of the church um excuse me it took a quite a bit of time and discussing things with chad tate with the uh permitting department on all of these issues and i think we finally got them resolved by um getting a permit i don't have the permit yet but the application was taken for a permit to have the shed in question uh removed and the electrical capped okay so you're proposing to remove the shed that is correct okay all right and that permit has been submitted already the application is in yes ma'am but the permit will not be ready until tomorrow morning sure okay all right um anything else before i make the ruling no ma'am i can't think of anything okay all right um i'm going to go ahead and find a respondent in this case in violation of the city code as charged and that respondent correct the violation before four o'clock pm on that would be uh november 25th which is 90 days so hopefully that's plenty of time to to get the work done so um november 25th of 2025 and um in the event respondent does not comply by the state a fine in the amount of fifty dollars per day will be imposed for each day the violation continues past the forced day to date the respondent is further ordered to contact the code compliance inspector to verify compliance with this order i'm admitting the case file and powerpoint uh into as exhibits into evidence and i find the notices properly given in this case um so sir please stay in contact uh with miss nadell um to let her know the status and when you've come into compliance yes ma'am thank you thank you all right the next case is fire zero three two twenty twenty five thirteen ten maximilian street good evening your honor for record my name is samuel schaller i'm employed by the city of deltona as the assistant fire marshal should be case number fire 32 is 2025 city of deltona versus thomas g wensky and bishop diocese of orlando property address is 1310 maximilian street deltona florida 32725 parcel id is 812-901-02-0010 it's a violation of city of deltona ordinance chapter 42 article 4 fire codes chapter 42-186 which adopts the most recent edition of the florida fire prevention code as adopted by the state fire marshal which contains the florida specific version of nfpa 1 fire code section 13.1.8 which states all fire protection systems and devices shall be maintained in a reliable operating condition and shall be replaced or repaired where defective or recalled corrective action for said violations is to contact the fire alarm service provider correct the deficiencies noted on the april 11 2024 and october 15 2024 fire alarm inspection reports statutory requirements for notification of this hearing have been met by the notice of hearing and notice of code violations were sent certified mail to the property owner at the address listed with the property appraisers records in addition both notices were posted on the property and at city hall at least 10 days prior to this hearing all of the evidence in this case including the photographs have been marked as exhibits and submitted to the special magistrate clerk certify any and all photographs to be true and accurate portrayals what was observed on the day they were taken april 9 2025 while conducting a follow-up to initial fire inspection fire safety inspector jory bailey received two fire alarm inspection reports one was dated april 11 2024 the other october 15 2024 both listed numerous deficiencies with the fire alarm system the property owner was notified of these deficiencies requested to contact their fire alarm service provider for repair subsequent follow-up inspections conducted on may 14th june 30th july 28 2025 found no documentation of completed repairs had been provided closing the city would like to request 30 days for the property to come into compliance with the violation or a fine of 50 per day until such time that the property owners notify the city of compliance all right um can you just is it possible to briefly describe what the deficiencies consist of yes your honor um you'll see them both uh exhibit b will be the most recent fire alarm inspection report if you'd like to read along yes um right here on exhibit b uh right on the almost to last page um they've got a list it has five items uh north slope center sanctuaries labeled as vice 16 um another smoke was was improperly labeled um one smoke detector needs to be remounted the key lock to the main fire alarm panel's broken um and there are two heat detectors uh that were not tested because of no access they're also too close to ac vents and then exhibit c also has um a few other items outlined on the third to last page um a few of these items are repeats has two smoke detectors that are mislabeled um another smoke duct smoke detectors falling off of the duct work um one air handling unit did not shut down upon activation of the duct smoke alarm northeast duct detector is not mounted properly loose on the duct work um key lock to the main fire alarm control panel is broken um south air handler mechanical room had multiple junction boxes open um in general none of the exposed wiring secured by code wiring is just draped over mechanical equipment northwest and west sanctuary duct detectors and return ducts do not signal to the fire alarm panel um two heat detectors at 22 feet in center of sanctuary were not tested due to no access too close to ac vents within 36 inches thank you sir can you state your name and address for the record my name is robert urutia urutia i'm the business manager for our lady of the lakes catholic church at 1310 maximilian street okay what would you like to tell me about the case today everything is working properly the fire alarms the detectors up in the ceiling have been moved the everything that was they said was hanging out or loose has been repaired we do have one little issue that's going to be fixed tomorrow and i do have a copy of the work order that the ceiling was done and i also have a copy of the billing that i'm getting the smoke detector actually does work shutting off the system uh the problem is it was only shutting off the fan which i know is not fully operational because the ac unit was still kicked in but it wasn't really kicked in because the um calibrator or whatever the well all the electric part goes into the ac unit malfunctioned so tomorrow they're coming out to fix that and we're getting re-inspected on friday okay so and that re-inspection would cover the other things as well that you say have already been already been done okay they uh j and j security are a company that has done it they did actually most of the work um i don't know how their company works but they're the ones who inspected and they're the ones who had to come and fix it and except for the ac unit which is going to be repaired tomorrow okay um it sounds then that the 30 days seems like it would be a reasonable time for you to wrap this up it sounds they you should have a copy of the report friday afternoon okay otherwise i'm going to go over to j and j and yeah um is there anything else you'd like to add before i make the ruling nope that's it thank you um all right i'm going to find respondent in this case in violation of the city code as charged and that respondent correct the violation before four o'clock pm on uh september 26th which is 30 days uh in the amount in the event respondent does not comply by this date a fine in the amount of 50 per day will be imposed for each day the violation continues past the aforestated date the respondent is further ordered to contact the co-compliance inspector to verify compliance with this order i'm going to admit the case file and powerpoint as exhibits into evidence and i find the notices properly given in this case so please stay in contact with mr schaller so he is kept up to date as to your all the efforts you're making towards compliance yes ma'am thank you all right the next case is del 25-083-667 killian circle oh there you go good evening good evening my name is my name is joseph margimenez i am employed by the city of deltona as a code compliance officer this will be del case number del 25-083 the city of deltona versus lissandro and grace perez the property address is 667 killian circle deltona florida 32738 the parcel id number is 813-019-040-010 this is a violation of the city of deltona ordinance section 18-3 adopting the latest edition of the florida building code section 105.1 which states that any owner authorized agent who intends to construct enlarge alter repair move demolish or change the occupancy of a building or structure or to erect install enlarge alter repair remove convert or replace any electrical gas mechanical or plumbing system the installation of which is regulated by this code or the cause of any such work to be done shall first make an application to the building official and obtain the required permits the corrective action for said violation is to obtain a permit for the deck applications must be submitted to the city of deltona the structure must meet all requirements of the city and to be approved on final inspection the statutory requirement for notification of this hearing have been met by the notice of hearing and notice of code violation were sent certified mail to the property owner at the address listed with the property appraisers records in addition both notices were posted on the property and at city hall at least 10 days prior to this hearing all the evidence in this case including the photographs have been marked as exhibits and submitted to the special magistrate clerk i certify any and all photographs to be true and accurate portrayals of what i observed the day they were taken this case originally was opened on january 30th of 2025 by a different officer where a complaint was made of a pool deck being erected at this location upon checking records the officer noticed no permit has been issued on file with the city the officer made contact with the resident at this property a miss elizabeth who informed the officer that the deck was built by a professional company and that a permit should have been applied for by them our records showed no such permit was ever applied for the resident was given time to come into compliance i took over this case on april 25th 2025 and went to the location and saw the deck was still present with no permit still issued on file i proceeded to post a notice of violation as well as sending it out certified mail along with leaving my card for point of contact i was able to get in contact by phone with a company lifetime fence who was hired to do the engineer drawings for the deck and spoke with alinda decay who informed me that an engineer was hired and the drawings are still being processed i informed her that a notice of violation has been given to the property owner and the compliance date on may 8th i received a call from the company informing me that a permit application has been submitted to the city i then verified with the permitting department that the application was being reviewed on may 23rd the permitting department sent a notification to the company that the permit was denied because the city had left notes for the engineer to respond and changes that would have to be made in order to continue the process of obtaining the permit which were never done i spoke with miss linda decay again from the company on june 6 about the denial and she informed me that with engineers it does take time sometimes a few weeks i informed her that i understand it is a process with engineers but that i have given plenty of time at this point and permits have to be issued in order for the property owner to come into compliance she requested i give her a few more weeks for the engineer to respond and fix all corrections requested by the city with the multiple extensions given and no more communication from any party at this point i proceeded in posting a notice of hearing on august 13th 2025 i was able to speak with the residents in the home that day and miss elizabeth and mr brown informed me that the homeowner is the son and that they will personally reach out to the company to try to get this resolved and we were made aware of and were made aware of the special magistrate date still today permit has not been finalized and issued and the property has not come into compliance the city would like to request 30 days for the property to come into compliance or a fine of 50 per day to be imposed until such time that the property owner has notified the city of compliance thank you um you said the last time you spoke with the engineering company was when um june 6th okay and there's been no further movement on the permit since then right i gave i gave from june 6 and i gave even more time and um yeah okay i haven't received any all right uh ma'am can you state your name and address for the record my name is elizabeth reyes i'm a 667 killian circle deltona florida 32738 okay and you are the mother of the owner okay all right um what would you like to tell me about the case i don't know why it's taken so long we've done everything in our power to get this corrected right now i have linda from the company the fencing lifetime fencing company here maybe she can give you a better outlook than i can because i really i can't understand why i'm going through all this i mean the engineer has been paid for everything and so you have a witness you'd like to bring up yes please my name is linda crookenberg uh do you need my address or my the business address is fine 681 south charles richard boulevard deltona i'm sorry to bury thank you all right and what would you like to tell me about the case this evening there as you can see the the application for the permit had been submitted the city wanted some more information they wanted some corrections that didn't meet their standards it was submitted to the engineer and there was a miscommunication between the engineer and myself and so when this arose uh today well it arose earlier but anyway today i was able to get in contact with the engineer i don't ordinarily have much direct uh contact with the engineer but i was able to get in contact with him and i sent him a copy of the violation papers and so he has contacted me and he knows now what needs to be done and he will i feel assured he will be getting on it immediately so hopefully you know if we can get an extension i believe we can solve this yeah within you know soon okay that's good good to hear um and the city's requested 30 days so and you know there would be assuming that you can come into compliance by by 30 days there would be no fines imposed so um i did you have anything else to add before i make the ruling no okay all right thank you uh the only other thing i would mention i mean and hopefully it doesn't come to this but the i don't think the at least the agenda doesn't say that possible corrective action is removing the structure i know that's not the ideal situation but that's also an option for you so with that i will go ahead and make my ruling i find respondent in this case in violation of the city code is charged and that respondent correct the violation before four o'clock pm on september 26th which is 30 days in the event respondent does not comply by the state a fine in the amount of and and i'm going to say 25 dollars per day will be imposed for each day the violation continues past the force stated date respondent is further ordered to contact the code compliance inspector to verify compliance with this order um i reduce that fine because i it does appear that you're working diligently um and i hope that you can come into compliance within that 30 days um i'm going to finally admit the case file and powerpoint uh in um into evidence and i find the notice is properly given in this case thank you thank you thank you your honor all right the next case is fire 033-2025 1200 deltona boulevard for the record my name is samuel schaller applied by the city of excuse me employed by the city of deltona as the assistant fire marshal this will be case number fire 33-2025 city of deltona versus deltona wellness lp the property address is 1200 deltona boulevard deltona florida 32725 parcel id is 813-006 000020 it's a violation of city of deltona ordinance chapter 42 article 4 fire codes chapter 42-186 which adopts the most recent addition of a fortified prevention code as adopted by the state fire marshal violation a would be nfpa 1 chapter 1.7.12.10 which states no construction work shall proceed until the authority having jurisdiction has reviewed the plans for compliance with the applicable codes and standards and the applicable permits have been issued violation mr charles sorry before you read everything is are we still saying that a through f are all not in compliance yes your honor okay all right thank you go ahead violation b nfpa 1 chapter 4.1.3.2.2.5 building shall be designed and constructed to provide reasonable signage and lighting to identify hazards exits means of aggress and other building safety features violation c nfpa 1 chapter 13.1.1 the authority having jurisdiction shall have the authority to require that construction documents for all fire protection systems be submitted for review and approval and a permit issued prior to the installation rehabilitation or modification thereof further the authority having jurisdiction shall have the authority to require that full acceptance tests of the systems be performed in the authority having jurisdiction's presence prior to final system certification violation d nfpa 1 chapter 11.1.8 all panel boards and switchboards pull boxes junction boxes switches receptacles and conduit bodies shall be provided with covers compatible with the use or conduit body construction and suitable for the conditions of use violation e nfpa 1 chapter 11.1.2.2 less determined to present to present an imminent danger existing electrical wiring fixtures appliances and equipment shall be permitted to be maintained in accordance with nec 70 in effect at the time of the installation violation f nfpa 1 chapter 11.1.2.1 all new electrical fixtures wiring appliances and equipment shall be installed in accordance with nfpa 70 corrective action for said violations is violation a obtain an issued permit for the newly installed exterior door on the rear of unit 53 violation b installed room identification signage the exterior of the door on the rear of the building containing electrical panels labeled electrical room violation c obtain an issued permit for the removal of the fire alarm control panel modification of the tamper and water flow switches violation d provide an approved cover plate for the junction box and water flow switch violation e provide a neat workmanship like manner for the remaining telephone low voltage and electrical wiring resulting from the removal of the fire alarm control panel to remove all wiring no longer in use violation f provide an approved junction box for the exposed spliced wiring going to the water flow switch statutory requirements for notification of this hearing have been met the notice of hearing and notice of code violations were sent certified mail to the property owner at the address listed with the property appraisers records in addition both notices were posted on the property and at city hall at least 10 days prior to this hearing all the evidence in this case including the photographs have been marked as exhibits and submitted to the special magistrate clerk i certify any and all photographs to be true and accurate portrayals of what was observed on the day they were taken on february 2nd 2023 fire safety inspector jerry bailey conducted an inspection at this location during said fire inspection he observed a door leading to an electrical room missing signage and an exterior door that was installed without a permit follow-up inspections conducted on march 8th 2023 june 7th 2024 december 19th 2024 march 31st 2025 june 27th and july 28th 2025 on the violations still in place no corrections made or permit issued permit um bldc 250060 for the replacement of the exterior door was applied for on july 23rd 2025 and has been ready to issue since august 4th 2020 25 but has yet to be picked up and issued so violation a it just hasn't been picked up that's correct july 29th 2025 while conducting a site visit for a tenant this location fire safety inspector bailey observed the fire alarm control panel which was monitoring the fire sprinkler system serving suites 40a and 40b to crunch fitness and the family health source removed in addition to modifications done to the monitoring of the fire alarm sprinkler system's tamper switch and water flow switch work appeared to be left in an incomplete state numerous covers and junction boxes missing due to the gravity of this violation no longer being sure of how a fire sprinkler system serving a pretty large place of public assembly and a health care clinic that's why this portion of the case was also immediately referred to the special magistrate hearing there was a permit fire 250051 was applied for this work on august 21st 2025 however a completed permit application was not attached in the submittal therefore it's unable to be processed staff has had communication with property manager mr mather regarding removing this fire alarm panel and altering the monitoring of the fire sprinkler system to the fire alarm control panels that serve the individual occupants however it was iterated numerous times that a permit would be required prior to this modification happening so that was so sorry i'm trying to keep up so the permit for violation c was submitted but incomplete that's correct your honor okay and you said there was this one was brought directly to me without providing a notice of violation we we provided a notice of violation and notice of hearing oh you did okay okay go ahead um in closing staff would like to request 14 days to come into compliance with the violations or fine of 50 dollars per violation per day until such violations are corrected okay um for violation e this is the one about uh basically maintaining uh maintaining the electrical wiring in accordance with nfpa 70 in effect at the time of the installation do you have any information about the nfpa 70 at the time of installation um your honor i don't have that copy of nec 70 with me um however seeing as this uh actually we have the picture right here of it there's two yellow circles surrounding the wiring that was altered um seeing as this wiring was altered um and it also does present potentially an imminent issue of a fire alarm system not functioning um that's the code that was cited however uh due to representing that the imminent hazard and it being altered we would we fell back to the most current edition of nec 70 um however i can assure you i've gone through altered yeah because it was recently altered yes your honor um i did go through every single edition of nec 70 that i could get my hands on um every single edition going back to the 1990 edition that i have um all requires wiring to be maintained in a workmanship like manner that's the language from the nfpa okay yes your honor all right and so are you you're saying that at this time you don't know whether the fire protection system is actually functional we're not sure if the devices are functional anymore um on some of the pictures i could even walk you through the wiring um and what what brought that into into question you can briefly do that yes um so right here this is violation f but it's also connected the fire alarm system um this was a water flow switch uh it appears someone has altered the wiring that's going to it to the panel that it sends signals to oh to the panel that sends signals in the event of a fire being detected yes your honor it's a it's a two-sided switch um i'm not familiar with this exact brand of water flow but this side generally will go to a um 120 that sets off a bell on the outside of the building and then this side here with the red and white wirings is the low voltage side that sends the signal to the panel let it know water is flowing we have an issue panel receives a signal interprets it how computers interpret signals and sets off the fire alarm system okay um so you see it's missing there should be a large red cover of it to where none of those connections the paddle should be visible and then the um connection itself should have been in a junction box okay all right and then on the that way to e yeah here are a few picture a few pictures um of the wiring that was left inside the panel yeah the next one thank you um again this is the other side of the panel they actually left the physical metal housing for the panel there but they removed the motherboard oh so it's basically just a really expensive piece of metal housing now okay um yeah next picture here's an overall picture of all the loose wiring left uh remaining in place next picture i apologize go back to d the picture labels violation d thank you and then here's a tamper switch uh for the fire sprinkler system um also appears to have been modified uh they left all the the low voltage wiring hanging out um appears also been altered all right thank you sir can you state your name and address for the record good evening my name is michael mather i'm the owner's representative and i'm at uh 2837 county road 776 in webster florida all right thank you what would you like to tell me about the case um we are not in argument with with any of the violations or the corrective action requested um it's my understanding it's probably not really relevant to the timing on this but uh mr shallers suggested that that permit was issued august 4th but we haven't picked it up yet i only just today received a notification from the city that the permit was available today the confusion might be that the permit was approved but the contractor had to update his insurance license information and that took a little time for i think his insurance company to get get that properly done so it may have been approved but not technically um given notification that is available but i'll simply pick that up tomorrow um the company that we've engaged to do all this other work it's my understanding they actually completed most of this on monday and or tuesday they were held up on the permit by waiting on an affidavit from the owner authorizing them to pick up these permits that affidavit uh became available this evening so i'll be filing that tomorrow so i don't i don't think there's gonna be any problem the only thing i will say for the record is i've been i've attended an unfortunate number of these hearings and i've never heard of 14 days so i don't think that's going to be a problem but i want to state for the record that it seems to me that 30 days is a little bit more justified but i'll ask yes to your decision yeah i guess i'll have the city comment on that um i'll go ahead and let you comment on on that request um your honor i'm not sure if you're familiar these are both repeat violations um and i'm sure you're well aware of the provisions of statute 162 when it pertains to repeat violations um and the eminent fines so staff was uh was willing to work with the property owner and give them 14 days instead of requesting the immediate fine for the repeat violations um but this being a fire sprinkler system serving a pretty large place a public assembly it's a gym um has an occupant load of four or 500 people and then a um you know a medical clinic um we we that's why we're requesting the 14 days and would like to stick to it all right can i can i add to that comment yes this building used to be i believe a win dixie and that fire riser room served one entire building since then that building was split into two units each unit has their own fire alarm active um and to my knowledge certified fire alarm panel that is shown to be working so i don't really believe safety in his issue is an issue here it's been more of a conversation back and forth for a long time about whether that panel in the rear is necessary to the system whether it should be removed and all that we were finally able to get cooperation between the two tenants so as owners we do have a little bit of a little bit of a handcuff waiting for them to to try to get some cooperation until we're justified to step in and take over the issue i i absolutely respect what the fire department is doing here they've always cooperated with us and and again i don't anticipate a problem with 14 days but i just i just want to say for the record that yes it's been a long time but i don't believe that there's been a real true safety issue here so i think 14 days is a little punitive just for the record but i'll i'll accept whatever you guys want to do are there um so are you saying sir that there are working uh fire alarm systems that are separate for each tenant now and that that's not being shown in the pictures is that essentially what you're telling me that's exactly what i'm telling you that they're they are operational panels they are being monitored by a professional service and there's been there's been nothing to show that that panel was necessary or that it technically was necessary to remove we we agreed that it just should be cleaned up and removed it was removed but obviously there needs to be some wires buttoned up and the panel closed up and some covers placed on we we we take no offense from this we uh we we have no no argument about the about whether this should or should not be done my right i just wanted to make the record clear about the 14 days all right um i think that and so mr schawler which um violations are repeat can do you know which one specifically yes your honor um nfpa 1 chapter 1 7 12 10 um for no construction work shall proceed so ah days review the plans for compliance and then nfpa 1 chapter 13.1.1 pertaining to the permitting of the fire protection system okay can i comment on that this has been a repeat violation about whether we should or should not do this and for instance the first violation about the door that has been that has been something that's brought to our attention for quite some time but no work was done on this panel until just a couple of months ago so this is not something that's been repeated over and over the work was done without a permit because they were waiting for an owner owner's affidavit but i i do i do object to the to the argument i actually brought the order from the case um your honor it was fire zest uh 015 2023 uh in which this property was found in violation of both those okay yeah so what mr schawler is referring to is not this particular work but that this property has been found in violation of these sections previously in the last five years um and so that's what constitutes a repeat violation so you know under florida statute that would that would allow me to actually impose a fine beginning at the point that the um the code inspectors found the violation uh i'm not going to do that because it wasn't uh brought to me really as a repeat violation and that's not what they're asking for but i think they're saying that that should weigh in on how much time is given to comply um and i think given i understand there's kind of a dispute about whether or not there's functional fire alarm systems in the building obviously i can't you know determine that sitting here um but given that safety concern um and that uh you're not i know you're concerned about 14 days but not entirely objecting to it i'm going to keep the 14 days um and so so i am going to to do that um and it sounds like some of the some of these hopefully you can come into compliance i mean very soon you're ready to pick up the permits and things like that so i'm going to do that anything else before i make the ruling no ma'am thank you all right um i'm going to find respondent in this case in violation of the city code as charged and that respondent correct the violations before four o'clock pm on september 10th which is 14 days in the event respondent does not comply with this date a fine in the amount of 50 per day per violation will be imposed for each day the violations continue past the aforestated date respondent is further ordered to contact the code compliance inspector to verify compliance with this order i'm going to admit the case file and powerpoint as exhibits into evidence and i find the notices properly given in this case thank you thank you this next case is fire 14-2025 a massey case 1380 howland boulevard evening again your honor the record my name is samuel shaller i'm employed by the city of deltona as the assistant fire marshal this would be case number fire zero one four twenty twenty five city of deltona versus circle case stores inc property address is 1380 howland boulevard deltona florida three two seven three eight parcel id is eight one three zero three eight zero zero zero zero six zero this is a massey case statutory requirements for notification this hearing have been met the notice of hearing and notice of code violations were sent certified mail to the property owner the address listed with the property appraisers records in addition both notices were posted on the property and at city hall at least 10 days prior to this hearing all the evidence in this case including the photographs have been marked as exhibits and submitted the special magistrate clerk certify any and all photographs to be true and accurate portrayals of what i observed on the day they were taken this is initially a case for a violation of chapter 42 article 4 fire codes chapter 42-186 which adopts the latest edition of the florida fire prevention code in specific the florida edition of nfpa 1 chapter 1.7.12.10 states no construction work shall proceed until the ahj has reviewed the plans for compliance with the applicable codes and standards and the applicable permits have been issued it was ruled on april 23rd 2025 property owners given 90 days to comply the property owner did not come into compliance within those 90 days has been receiving a fine of fifty dollars a day since july 22nd 2025 as of today the properties accrued a total fine of one thousand eight hundred and fifty dollars cities requesting that the fines continue at fifty dollars per day until such property owners notified the city of compliance compliance is verified by fire safety inspector you said the amount was the current amount that it's accrued one thousand eight hundred and fifty thank you um and so this was for uh yes getting a permit for newly installed cooking equipment and electrical and then there was an interior wall correct yes ma'am correct correct and so is there a permit um have they submitted an application at this point there has been a permit applied for um i can't speak on what the plan review comments are um i just know it's pending resubmittal um after plan review rejected the the submittal that was no last turned in okay all right um sir what would uh sorry state your name and address jd morton and the address is going to be 1380 holland boulevard deltona florida um three things real quick um unfortunately the construction company that filed for that permit has uh removed themselves from the project i there along with the other violations took over this these projects for circle k i worked with the fire marshal went through it on one of the violations on another store i got pulled off of the project put on a different project recently found out yesterday that in conversation with uh uh fire inspector bailey about these violations on here circle k was notified about it we're not going to argue about that what has happened as of right now we've reconsolidated everything the architect and engineering group is with me along with circle k project manager our intent is number one i spent a great deal of time here yesterday at the building department to get everything that we needed and find all the uh information that we needed we found the the the permitted drawings we have to resubmit it has to go through review again have to present it to the fire marshal and all of that through the building department i'm asking for a 90 day continuance to give me at least 90 days because there's going to have to be some fixes done on the permit side because it was issued under harris construction services and they're no longer there so we have to reapply for that permit which means i have to get an nlc get everything else i can't speak for anything other than that but where i'm at right now our intent is to file for a permit tomorrow it does take time but i've also need we're going to submit what we have it does take time it's got to go through there i need the 90 days because once this portion gets approved and i take the walls out and all of that and show them show the inspectors and the fire marshal this is what we have here um there's been some questions brought up from the fire marshal in regards to the equipment we had to get all of that information also to the equipment that is shown there and the installation of that so our intent is to stop the fines if we can get a 90 day stop the fines we are going to work on that along with and there's several others that i have to take care of in conjunction and working with the architect and circle k's project manager um that i've been tasked with taking all of these over unfortunately i got pulled off um i didn't know anything and i dug my heels in yesterday with the building department got a lot of information that i wasn't aware of so well i appreciate that um however this is a massy hearing which means i've already found the violations i've already issued a date to comply which was july 22nd with a 90-day allowance which is um frankly uh quite a bit of time i mean you've you've been in the audience you've heard that we've given some people 14 days tonight to comply and so i'm not going to grant an extension um it seemed i mean it's clear that you haven't come into compliance but you're well on your way so i just would encourage you to work as quickly as possible um you know if it becomes uh you know necessary for you we do have you know a lien reduction process that you can request at the end but you know i've already provided my ruling on when compliance was was um was due so uh i i appreciate that you're working diligently at this point but we did provide quite a bit of time to come to compliance so um is there anything else before i make the ruling we'll take care of it all right thank you um so i'm going to go ahead and find that respondent in this case failed to correct the violation by the time specified in the special magistrate's prior order in this case and the fine will be imposed as set forth in that order and will continue to run until the property is brought into compliance and an affidavit of compliance has been filed by the code compliance inspector respondent shall notify the code inspector to verify compliance i'm admitting the case file and powerpoint as exhibits and i find the notices properly given in this case thank you uh this is del 25-063 a massey case 1713 concert road good evening good evening my name is janice pelasic and i am employed by the city of deltona as a code compliance officer this will be massey case number del 25-063 the city of deltona versus hector enrique and narisara jutaris toro the property address is 1713 concert road the parcel id number is 813-045-330-050 the statutory requirements for notification of this hearing have been met by notice of hearing and notice of code violation sent certified mail to the property owners listed at the address with the property appraisers records in addition both notices were posted at city hall at least 10 days prior to this hearing all of the evidence in this case including photographs have been marked as exhibits and submitted to the special magistrate clerk i certify any and all photographs to be true and accurate portrayals of what i observed on the day that they were taken it was ruled on june 25 2025 that the property was given 16 days to comply the owner did not come into compliance within those 16 days and has been receiving a fine of 50 a day since july 11 2025 as of today the property has accrued a total fine of 2 400 over 48 days the city is requesting that the fines continue at 50 per day all right can you um remind me so this was uh for parking improperly parked boat on the side of the driveway yes and it's still there today yes yes ma'am all right um sir can you state your name and address for the record i appear as hector hectorino enrique torre de iberia living man ecclesiastical custodian my private domicile is 1713 concert road deltona and trust without the united states all right can you uh tell me or what would you like to tell me about the case for the record please answer this into the file it's one for special magistrate and one for the state attorney well i don't accept um uh papers for the state attorney but if you i got one for the special magistrate if you would like can mr ron can you bring it forward for the record this matter has been transferred into equity jurisdiction by recorded filing all administrative actions must be frozen we do not consent to join her here this is not a court of record there is no lawful standing this property is not residential residential is a legal fiction our our our dwelling is private ecclesiastical homestead and domicile outside administrative jurisdiction under article 4 under article 5 section 21 of the florida constitution no tribunal may defer to agency or staff interpretation any ordinance must be de novo by the text only no verified claim or sworn complaint has been presented without it there is no lawful case this proceeding is without lawful foundation our business here is concluded we reserve our rights and remedies under equity natural law and constitutional protection all right sir were you here at the initial hearing on june 25th i had sent you a letter saying that we're not gonna i was gonna have a special non-appearance and you guys never rebutted anything i don't recall seeing that letter but nevertheless um i'm finished the uh okay well i i will admit this um into the record thank you thank you okay you're not gonna stay to hear my ruling all right i'm gonna decline to do that um you will see the not me but uh city of deltona can respond to that nevertheless the florida statutes do provide um authority for special magistrates to hear these cases so i'm not going to speak further on that um i'm going to go ahead and make my ruling i find that respondent in this case failed to correct the violation by the time specified in the special magistrate's prior order in this case and the fine will be imposed as set forth in that order and will continue to run until the property is brought into compliance and an affidavit of compliance has been filed by the code compliance inspector respondent shall notify the code inspector to verify compliance i'm admitting the case file and powerpoint as shown today as exhibits and evidence and i find the notices properly given in this case i will also admit into as an exhibit the um papers that he just turned in which are titled notice of equity jurisdiction objection to proceedings and demand for freeze of administrative action thank you thank you your honor all right this is del 25-049 a b c d and e a massey case 1197 acorn court good evening my name is tina pagan i am employed with by the city of deltona as a co-compliance officer this will be massey case number del 25-049 a b c and e bld 25-049 that's zero two six seven b is bld 25 0268 c is bld 25 that's zero two six nine and e is ltm 25 that's zero one five seven d was also was one of them but due to um a repeat is straight for violation i mean straight for fines okay yeah d d was a repeat so it's just the fine is accruing at this point correct yes the city of deltona versus brian brumagen the property address is 1197 acorn court drive deltona florida 32725 the parcel id number is 813-0022-00270 statutory requirements the statutory requirements for this notification of this hearing have been met by the notice of hearing and notice of code violation were sent certified mail to the property owner at the address listed with the property appraises record in addition both cases were posted on the property and at city hall at least 10 days prior to this hearing all of the evidence in this case including photographs have been marked as exhibits and submitted to the special magistrate clerk i certify any and all photographs to be true and accurate portrayals of what i observed on the day they were taken it was ruled on may 28th 2025 that the property was given 61 days to comply the owner did not come into compliance within those 61 days and have been receiving a fine of 25 per violation for a total of hundred dollars a day for all four cases since july 29th 2025 as of today the property has accrued a total fine of three thousand dollars over 30 days the city would like to request that the fines for continue for continue for 25 per day for violation a b c and e totaling a hundred dollars per day all right thank you so i just have to go through these in order here so violation a was related to an accessory structure correct and um there was a screen enclosure yeah screen enclosure disrepair okay and is that am i seeing a picture of that oh yeah that's today today's photo is more down there you go okay all right and then b was collapsing roof yeah that was the shed that's it right there yeah uh okay that's the shed yeah the shed is in the back let me see if i could show you exactly where is that it's just hard to see it's here i know because of all the um the trees and grass going all around this is the shed here still there and there's still stuff hanging all around it okay is that vegetation um it's gonna be if you don't cut yeah okay all right um and then um we had c was a fence yep on the property okay that's today's photo all right so it is uh missing still missing panels yeah and then this repair mm-hmm and e will be the vegetation vegetation state the veg yes okay all right thank you okay any anything oh oh thank you all right so is all of this the vegetation in the foreground of this picture correct that all that's on his property yes okay all right thank you you're welcome all right i'm going to find that respondent in this case failed to correct the violation by the time specified in the special magistrates prior order in this case and the fine will be imposed as set forth in that order for violations a through c and e and will continue to run until the property is brought into compliance and an affidavit of compliance has been filed by the code compliance inspector respondent shall notify the code compliance inspector to verify compliance i'm admitting the case file and powerpoint as exhibits into evidence and i find the notices were properly given in this case thank you ronna thank you all right and this is del 25-061 massey case 2515 howland boulevard go ahead my name is janice pelasic and i am employed by the city of deltona as a code compliance officer this will be massey case number del 25-061 city of deltona versus rafael sales est the property address is 2515 howland boulevard the parcel id number is 8 1 1 5 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 the statutory requirements for notification of this hearing have been met by the notice of hearing and notice of code violation sent certified mail to the property owner at the address listed with property appraisers records in addition both notices were posted at city hall at least 10 days prior to this hearing all of the evidence in this case including photographs have been marked as exhibits and submitted to the special magistrate clerk i certify any and all photographs to be true and accurate portrayals of what i observed on the day that they were taken it was ruled on june 25th 2025 that the property owner was given 30 days to comply the owner did not come into compliance within those 30 days and has been receiving a fine of 25 per day since july 25th 2025 as of today the property has accrued a total fine of 850 over 34 days the city is requesting that the fines continue at 25 per day thank you okay so this is today yeah there's a lot of overgrowth in vegetation it's a wrought iron fence that's basically split in half in a lot of sections it's it's rusted all right thank you um i'm going to find that respondent in this case failed to crack the violations violation by the time specified in the special magistrates prior order in this case and the fine will be imposed as set forth in that order and will continue to run until the property is brought into compliance and an affidavit of compliance has been filed by the code compliance inspector respondent shall notify the code inspector to verify compliance and i'm going to admit the case file and powerpoint as exhibits and i find the notices properly given in this case thank you thank you all right the next case is del 25-077 a massey case 597 fort smith boulevard deltona florida 32738 parcel id is 813-403-00 0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0 statutory requirements for notification of this hearing have been met by the notice of hearing and notice of code violation sent certified mail to the property owner had the address listed with the property appraisers record in addition both notices were posted at city hall at least 10 days prior to this hearing all of the evidence in this case including photographs have been marked as exhibits and submitted to the special magistrate clerk i certified any and all photographs to be true and accurate portrayals of what observed the day they was taken it was ruled on july 23rd 2025 that the property owner was was given 14 days to comply the owner did not comply did not come into compliance within those 14 days and have been receiving a fine of 50 a day since august 6 2025. as of today the property has accrued a total fine of 1100 over 22 days the city is requesting that the fine continue at 50 per day and this was the commercial outdoor storage okay so um yes so oh i see an affidavit of compliance in the file so that was for violation b yes ma'am and that was for the uh the vehicles yes okay and so remind me uh what was the commercial yeah commercial equipment like that's a hydraulic lift right there and okay the other today photo it's kind of hard to see it but he has a tractor behind that uh permit box okay all right thank you um i find respondent in this case failed to correct the violation by the time specified in the special magistrate's prior order in this case and the fine will be imposed as set forth in that order and will continue to run until the property is brought into compliance and an affidavit of compliance has been filed by the code compliance inspector respondent shall notify the code inspector to verify compliance of admitting the case file and powerpoint as evidence and i find the notices properly given in this case thank you thank you all right the next case is fire 019 2025 the massey case 1382 howland boulevard for the record my name is samuel schaller i'm employed by the city of deltona as the assistant fire marshal this will be case number fire 019 2025 city of deltona versus ege holdings llc property address is 1382 howland boulevard deltona florida 32738 parcel id is 813-038-00-0080 this is a massey case statutory requirements for notification this hearing have been met the notice of hearing and notice of code violations were sent certified mail to the property owner the address listed with the property appraisers records in addition both notices were posted on the property and at city hall at least 10 days prior to this hearing all of the evidence in this case including the photographs have been marked as exhibits submitted the special magistrate clerk certify any and all photographs to be true and accurate portrayals what i observed on the day they were taken this was initially a case for violation of chapter 42 article 4 fire codes chapter 42-186 which adopts the latest edition of florida fire prevention code in specific the florida specific edition of nfp1 fire code section 13.1.9 which requires whenever impairments critical deficiencies or non-critical deficiencies are identified in water-based fire protection systems maintained in accordance with nfp25 shall be corrected in a time frame approved by the authority of jurisdiction it was ruled on june 25th 2025 the property owner was given 30 days to comply the owner did not come into compliance within those 30 days has been receiving a fine of 50 a day since july 25th 2025 as if today the property has recruited a fine of 1 700 in closing city is requesting the fines continue at 50 per day until such property owner has notified the city of compliance and compliance verified by fire safety inspector all right so this had to do with a fire hydrant that was not functioning correct correct your honor and so is it still not functioning are there did you i didn't see pictures there are no pictures your honor this was based off of a report we received by the fire protection company um if you have your exhibit packet handy it would be exhibit b okay but this was from from december of 2024 correct your honor okay and so they were required to have a new inspection essentially demonstrating that it was functional correct your honor and then submit the paperwork to us okay and they haven't submitted anything correct okay um but you haven't inspected it yourself no your honor um it states did not flow due to corrosion and mo excuse me did not flow due to corrosion and moisture on bonnet recommend rebuild possibly replace um reading that sort of throws a flag to me that i wouldn't try and turn that hydrant on myself um they're under a great deal of pressure if the fire protection contractor isn't flowing it due to corrosion um and recommending a rebuild i i certainly wouldn't feel comfortable trying to flow it either myself um without being told that it's been repaired and it works okay all right um i'm going to uh find that respondent in this case failed to correct the violation by the time specified in the special magistrates prior order in this case and the fine will be imposed as set forth in that order and will continue to run until the property is brought into compliance and an affidavit of compliance has been filed by the code compliance inspector respondent shall notify the code inspector to verify compliance i'm admitting the case file and powerpoint as exhibits and i find the notices properly given in this case thank you next case is fire 023-2025 2135 howland boulevard for the record my name is lisa nadeau i am employed by the city of deltona as a fire safety inspector this will be case number fire dash 023-2025 the city of deltona versus scarpello development llc the property is 2135 howland boulevard suite 105 deltona florida 32738 parcel id is 813-074-000-100 this is a violation of the city of deltona ordinance chapter 42 article 4 fire codes chapter 42 through 186 which adopts the most recent addition of the fire code prevent fire code sorry florida fire prevention code as adopted by the state for state fire marshal which contains the florida specific version of nfpa 1 12.3.3.1 fire resistive construction not maintained fire barriers fire walls required fire resistive construction including fire barriers fire walls exterior walls due to location on property fire resistive requirements based on type of construction draft stop partitions and roof coverings shall be maintained and shall be properly repaired restored or replaced where damaged altered breached penetrated removed or improperly installed we're asking that the for them to provide the ul system that was utilized to repair the damaged fire rated wall in this location statutory requirements for notification of this hearing have been met by the notice of violate the notice of hearing and notice of code violations were sent certified mail to the property owner at the address listed with the property appraisers records in addition both notices were posted on the property and at city hall at least 10 days prior to this hearing all of the evidence in this case includes the photographs which have been marked as exhibits and submitted to the special magistrate clerk i certify any and all photographs to be true and accurate portrayals of what i observed on the day they were taken on january 7th 2025 i conducted a fire safety inspection at this address where i observed unprotected penetrations in the firewall between the stock room and storefront the property owner was notified in writing of the violation and given a time frame to correct said violation a re-inspection was conducted on march 19th 2025 and found the penetrations were sealed but no ul details were provided for how the penetrations were sealed and protected this information was requested from the business and property owners subsequent re-inspections on april 11th 2025 april 29th 2025 and may 8 2025 found no progress on the noted violation and no ul detail submitted upon today's visit no progress was made on the violations the city would like to request 30 days for the property to come into compliance with the remainder of the violations or a fine of 50 per day until such time that the property owner has notified the city of compliance okay so this is um what just what kind of uh business is this uh right now it is a mercantile okay and um okay and then there's oh i see so these are like patches that were filled and just you don't know essentially what material was used to fill it no we don't know if it was um repaired to ul standards as for a firewall for a fire yes okay all right um i will go ahead and make the ruling i find respondent in this case in violation of the city code as charged and that respondent correct the violation before four o'clock pm on september 26th in the event respondent does not comply by this date a fine in the amount of 50 per day will be imposed for each day the violation continues past the aforesaated date respondent is further ordered to contact the code compliance inspector to verify compliance with this order i'm admitting the case file and powerpoint as exhibits and i find the notices properly given in this case thank you thank you all right fire 036-2025 1878 providence boulevard the record my name is samuel shaller employed by the city of deltona as the assistant fire marshal this would be case number fire 36 2025 city of deltona versus fast lane 1878 investments inc property address is 1878 providence boulevard suite t deltona florida 32725 parcel id is 813-0151-60060 it's a violation of city of deltona ordinance chapter 42 article 4 fire codes chapter 42-186 which adopts the most recent addition of florida fire prevention code as adopted by the state fire marshal which contains the florida specific version of nfpa 1 fire code section 1.7 point 12.8 authority having jurisdiction should be authorized to require permits for conditions listed in 1.7 point 12.2 1.7 point 12.5 1.7 12.6 unless otherwise permitted by 1.7 12.9 corrective action for said violations is to obtain an issued change of occupancy permit contact our office permit number once obtained statutory requirements for notification of this hearing have been met notice of hearing and notice of code violations were sent certified mail to the property owner the address listed with the property appraisers records in addition both notices were posted on the property and at city hall at least 10 days prior to this hearing all the evidence in this case including the photographs have been marked as exhibits and submitted to the special magistrate clerk certify any and all photographs to be true and accurate portrayals of what i observed on the day they were taken march 27 2025 while conducting a fire safety inspection at this location inspector jerry bailey observed and determined that the use of this suite had changed from its previous occupancy classification of business to now being utilized as a mercantile occupancy business owner was informed that a change of occupancy classification permit was required during follow-up inspections on may 5th june 3rd june 30th and july 28th 2025 no change of use permit had been applied for in the space still in use as a mercantile occupancy on august 15 2025 change of occupancy classification permit was submitted was rejected due to an insufficient submittal in closing the city would like to request 45 days for the property owner to come into compliance with the remainder of the violations fine of 50 per day until such time that the property owner has notified the city of compliance all right um i guess sort of out of curiosity is there much of a difference between business and mercantile as to what they would need to do to to obtain that um to obtain it to actually obtain the permit um is is relatively easy um they just submitted a you know a drawing a scaled drawing of the space um you know showing a general layout of it where merchandise will be fire extinguishers um the the the biggest factor that comes into play is the wall right there on the left it's a tenant separation wall um the fire rating of it uh may come into play with the change of occupancy um all right but we don't know that until you know we get the full set of plans to be able to look at and determine that right okay um and then the can you help direct me so it says the ahj shall be authorized to require permits for conditions listed in and then multiple sections which section are we looking at here uh your honor it would be section one point seven point twelve point five okay um that's for change of occupancy correct uh it states and i'm sorry i'm reciting this off memory of the code book but it states that plan shall be submitted to the ahj prior to the change of occupancy in any building and then one point seven point twelve point eight further expands on that by saying we can require a permit for that all right thank you all right i will go ahead and make the ruling um i find respondent in this case in violation of the city code as charged and that respondent correct the violation before four o'clock pm on this is actually 47 days because of the weekend so it would be october 13th in the event respondent does not comply by the state a fine in the amount of 50 dollars per day will be imposed for each day the violation continues past the force stated date the respondent is further ordered to contact the code compliance inspector to verify compliance with this order i'm admitting the case file and powerpoint as exhibits and i find the notices properly given in this case thank you all right that's all the cases all right anything for the go the order before we adjourn no i will sign these i do have a couple of minutes here from june and july that i will sign otherwise we're adjourned thank you thank you