Special Magistrate on 2026-02-25 5:30 PM - Feb 25, 2026

can you all turn your mics up just a bit one two three all right that's good i can hear you better

all right let's go ahead and call this proceeding to order this is the city of deltona's uh special magistrate agenda for code compliance and we're getting underway uh as scheduled um at 5 30 p.m on wednesday february 26 2026 my name is john van lanningham i am the city's special magistrate for code compliance i'll be conducting the hearings on this evening's agenda uh before we get started with the individual cases we do have some preliminary matters to attend to um let me ask first uh i will call the role and i just confirm this will be the the roll call of the the code officer daniel ron

code compliance manager mark gibson code compliance supervisor todd mead code compliance supervisor

renee kearney code compliance supervisor jessica cotterman hearing clerk all right very good

um at this time let me ask everyone who's able to do so to stand with me so we can say the pledge of allegiance if you would please all rise i 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 thank you you may be seated um the next item on the agenda here is disclosure of ex parte communications uh i as the special manager have had no communications with any any party or any person with regard to any of the matters on tonight's agenda um and uh seeing as this is my first time running these hearings for the city of deltona is there anything else that the city needs for me to

disclose yeah your honor i just want to mention that we did skip a couple of the um officers for

the roll call i'm sorry let's finish that then my apologies i can't see everybody uh at the angle on

that yeah sharon shivers fire marshal lisa nadeau fire inspector is there anyone else that's it all right

thank you um and is there anything else that uh that i need to place on the record with respect to the ex parte communications disclosure piece no sir all right are there uh i have uh for approval the uh agenda and minutes i think from the last uh uh meeting of the code compliance special magistrate are there any objections to approval of the minutes no objective all right without objection then i will approve those minutes uh are there any other announcements that need to be made on the record at this time

yes it is your honor um we'd like to uh a couple cases we have that's going to be withdrawn well actually one and three taste cases that we'd like to continue all right um the first case that needs to be withdrawn is going to be del 25093 that's a massey case and it's at 1145 giovanni street the compliance was on february 25th all right we'd like to continue fire case zero zero three dash two zero two six that's at 2472 el cam boulevard we'd like to continue that to the march 25th hearing all right very good i'll grab that the next one will be fire zero zero seven two zero two six which will be 414 deltona boulevard we'd like to continue that one to march as well i mean march 25th as well all right granted continue um fire zero one six two zero two six that'll be 1240 east normandy boulevard and we'd like to continue that to march 25th also all right so we'll continue that one as well

that'll be all all right thank you uh at this time let me go ahead and swear in all the uh officers and other witnesses uh present at this time in the meeting if you would please all of you raise your right hands for me do you swear or affirm the testimony to give this evening will be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth you do right if there's no other uh uh preliminary uh uh business to attend to we can proceed with the cases starting with the old

business okay your honor the first case will be del two five zero four two it's a massey case the address will be one one one four cambridge street deltona florida three two seven two five right

good afternoon your honor jennifer cockcroft is here on behalf of the city attorney's office as well and i believe the council for the uh respondent is on as well all right could i get your name again jennifer cockcroft how do you spell your last name c-o-c-k-c-r-o-f-t very good and i do have

uh so we've got mr kelly and then mr huggins uh you're the attorney yes arthur huggins on behalf of

dr kelly who resides at 1114 cambridge street all right thank you the city is ready to proceed with

this case please proceed good evening my name is joe samar jimenez i am employed by the city of deltona as a code compliance officer this will be massey case number del 25042 the city of deltona versus fred a kelly ii the property address is 1114 cambridge street deltona florida 32725 the parcel id number is 813-009-160-140 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 the property appraiser's records in addition both notices were posted 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 it was ruled on june 25th 2025 that the property owner has was given 180 days to comply the owner did not come into compliance within those 180 days and has been receiving a fine of 25 a day since january the 10th 2026 as of today the property has accrued a total fine of 1175 in 47 days the city is requesting that

the fines continue at 25 per day and i'm just flipping through this the uh this obviously is not a case that i heard you know previously it's a seawall was it unpermitted yes your honor this um originally

started in june 25th of 2025 um we presented the case it was for a no permit for a seawall retaining wall um until this uh the options were to obtain a permit or demolish the uh the structure uh so either

an after the back permit or does it need a demo permit to take it down yes your honor all right can i ask

her um a brief follow-up question your honor sure um when was the last time that you re-inspected the

property i re-inspected the property um january the 30th of 2026 okay um and did you submit that photo

to the magistrate yes i did have you been out there since that date to determine whether compliance has

been obtained yes i have i was actually there this afternoon um and there's a photograph of the exhibit today at uh 123 122 pm today okay thank you um are you um of any knowledge do you have any knowledge

or information that a building permit was applied for or issued with respect to this structure yes i was

informed by our building official who is present today as well to testify um no permits have been

applied for okay but just if you could testify only to what you know and so has it

you're not aware of any uh the email was sent out to the building official and he responded back

saying that no okay thank you um to so to the best of your knowledge um this order is still currently in effect and you've not found any evidence of compliance yes ma'am okay thank you i don't have any further

questions for miss jimenez all right just the the city have any anything else that you wanted to present

uh yes i do your your honor i have additional witnesses oh okay let me ask uh mr huggins do you

have any questions for the uh for the officer um no questions at this time all right and just so i have an idea of the nature of the dispute if there is a dispute in fact here are does the uh respond um take the has there been of any permit activity is there an application for permit or anything yes so so he attempted to apply and this was the same issue uh had in the original hearing um which

is why the magistrate actually gave us an extension um in order for him to apply the city needs to actually allow him to apply so and every time dr kelly comes in to apply they are denying him the right to apply uh for the permit and not only that as uh dr kelly pointed out in the original proceeding in order for him to demolish it he would also need to be able to apply um and this is the issue that the city is not allowing that to happen uh the the uh your predecessor um was advised that we will be uh attempting to get this rectified in a civil suit um so that was the purpose of of giving us some time um unfortunately we still have not been able to make it through the court system yet uh we we are working on getting a survey but the request that the city is making is for a riparian survey and it's just not possible uh to get that uh done so um we're currently um going to be filing a a civil uh suit asking for some declaratory relief as well as a quiet title suit so your honor if i can please address and object to

that um information um so the city those are all facts that issue from the prior hearing the only issue before the magistrate today is whether or not the prior magistrates um order was complied with these um subsidiary arguments that he's making were made at the prior hearing and that magistrate already made a determination on those she gave them since june of last year to come into compliance and so we're here today to determine whether or not they came into compliance with that magistrate's order they were given time to um either get a permit or tear it down and i have testimony and substantial competent evidence to present that they did not in fact do that your honor yeah i mean i agree

with what you're saying um i just wanted to find out if there was anything in the works in terms

of a permanent application i mean the city i can present you building officials testimony relating to that he's here and i can testify as the city attorney that there's no pending litigation at this

time right well i i think mr huggins has indicated there is no permanent i mean they have an argument that they haven't been able to apply for some reason or another i'm not sure i i understand why but the bottom line is the prior order the underlying order finding the violation and establishing 180 day compliance period uh uh already set the violation and established the compliance date it sounds like there's no dispute that compliance has not been achieved um is that i mean isn't that where we are ms huggins there's no dispute that the property is not in compliance in in uh in in the terms that

were called for in the order of finding the violation yes the city has not allowed us to apply for the

permit we object to that well yeah i mean that that's sort of a separate issue uh and i think there are other vehicles or other processes for challenging permit conditions that well i guess what you're saying was talking is there's some condition that you're not able to meet you're not being physically precluded from applying for a permit it's just

yeah yes we physically deny the right to apply for the permit that's a mischaracterization your

honor your honor can i speak on that and i would object we would ask that we be allowed to present

our witnesses before they give their argument please let's go ahead and do that again i'm trying to really hone in on what the disputed issue is um there's no dispute that permits that the property is not in compliance isn't that the only issue before me today the only issue before you today is

whether they came into compliance with that magistrate order from june of last year right and there's no

dispute that they have not not from the city's standpoint well but i mean mr just admitted that much uh i mean they have an argument it seems perhaps why they're not in compliance but they're not in compliance isn't that the bottom line to the city yes all right what what else did the city

want to present on the on the issue well i can present the billing official to testify um that there's been no permits issued or applied for i think do we need her for cross any further your honor do we

need can we um miss jimenez step down yeah just is there any any any cross examination that you you would like mr huggins um no cross examination okay all right why don't we have her step down if you want to present the billing official let's go ahead and do that the city um at this time will present

mr chad tate sir if you could state your name and title my name is chad tate holding official for

the city of deltona thank you sir are you responsible for issuing building permits in the city of deltona yes and are you familiar with the permitting requirements for retaining walls or sea walls yes and does construction of this type require a permit yes and is a permit required before construction begins yes um would constructing without a permit be a violation yes did you search city records for a permit at 114 1114 cambridge street yes to your knowledge has a permit ever been issued at this location for a seawall no has there been a permit issued since june 25th of 2025 no have you when's

the last time you checked into that last hearing so that would be in june who who can apply for a building permit on a property to the best of your knowledge either the homeowner or a contractor can apply

for a permit okay um so after the magistrate's order did the property owner submit a completed permit application no or any approved plans no okay so um to the best of your knowledge what was required to be issued by the building permit in order to come into compliance with the judge's magistrate's order from the last hearing were you present at that hearing yeah i was present at that

hearing what we needed was a survey of the lake showing that the the wall that was constructed was not on the gentleman's property i would need a survey to issue a permit a set of engineered plans

for the construction of the seawall those two things and can you construct a structure on property other than your own no and would you issue a permit for that no okay thank you that's all

i have for uh mr tate all right any cross-examination yes i have a few cross-examination uh mr tate you you just testified that you have not been out uh physically to uh dr kelly's property is that correct

no you have not been there i have been there okay when's the last time you were there met dr kelly there

after the wall was built i can't give you a date for it okay that would have been last year sometime right yes sir okay and at that time did you make any determinations as to whether where that seawall

was located was on dr kelly's property or not i was there with phyllis wallace we determined that it was

not on his property from the survey that he gave us so you made that determination based on the survey that was provided to you by uh dr kelly i believe so yes sir so and i object to this line of questioning

your honor what's your objection is is that the court or is that the lawyer well what is the the

objection is what did it's uh to this line of questioning um because we are solely limited to

whether or not the compliance has been obtained we're not here to discuss or decide who owns the

property i mean i i will sustain on that one it seems to me that uh the the forum here isn't to collaterally attack the order finding a violation uh which was you know previously entered um i mean there's an appeal process for that if uh if you think the magistrate errant in that decision but this sounds like you're relating to the merits you know the issue of whether the wall is on the subject property or not it seems to me that's a merits issue um yeah i like i like to get uh all of these questions out for appeal purposes well was there an appeal taken of the order establishing the

violation not to the city the city has not been noticed of any i mean isn't it too late

to take an appeal at this point is it an appeal to the certain court the the city there would be a 30

day appeal period your honor and that expired back uh last year last year right last year all right

well i'll sustain i mean really the issue right now is is the property in compliance pursuant to the

terms of the order establishing the violation again um so mr tate i guess i'll uh finish my line of question if she wants to object she can object um mr tate you uh testified that a survey is needed to apply for for a permit is that correct can't answer i'm sorry what was that i i continue to object

to that testimony i mean the question now is whether a survey is required to get a permit is that what

you're asking i didn't hear that from him i'm sorry i didn't understand yes it's the same question she

just asked i'm confirming if that's his testimony i don't think i asked him if he needed a survey i didn't say anything about a survey he didn't testify about uh mr dr kelly needing a survey in order

to apply for a permit no i mean he gave a list of things that were needed but but really uh mr huggins i i don't think that it's relevant since the special manager doesn't determine permit conditions if uh the the order was that there was a violation that there's a permit needed either to you know after the fact permit the the seawall or you know to demolish the seawall um there may be conditions that need to be met to get that permit but compliance requires getting the permit um i don't determine the conditions um i'm not sure where you're going with it i mean it seems to be kind of a cut and dried issue either there's a permit and after the fact permit or the wall's been taken down pursuant to a permit and neither of those things has happened as a matter of fact as i understand

it isn't that right he's been denied he's been denied the uh opportunity to do so so what i need to get on record from uh mr tate is why is the city denying uh mr kelly the right to apply for the

permit objection well i'll overrule i mean the witness can answer that okay so what is the question

sir yes why are you denying uh dr kelly the right to apply for the permit because dr kelly is trying to

put a wall or did put a wall that is not on his property you cannot apply for a permit to build

something that is not on your property so you've so uh so the city has the does your predecessor again has uh ordered dr kelly to do something that he's not able to do he had two choices both of them require him to apply for a permit is that correct he has never applied for a permit you said that he

can't apply for a permit is that correct he cannot apply for a permit to put the wall in he's never come talk to me about maybe possibly removing it so in effect he can't apply for a permit he can come and apply for a permit for a demo we will not give him a permit to put a wall off his property sir

no further questions all right thank you uh uh mr huggins any other questions for this witness not from the city yes sir all right the city have any other witnesses present um mr danny ron your honor danny

ron co-compliance manager sir are you familiar with this case yes i am and have you um any observations relating to whether or not this matter has come into compliance i am aware that no compliance has been met at this location that's you all okay and you did you check the records of the city to determine that

that is correct i checked the database today just before coming into the hearing so to the best of

your knowledge um do you have anything to add relating to this um order and coming into compliance

i'm sorry no ma'am just that the property is not compliance with the order that was given back and from june and you physically observed it i physically observed when the first k code case was was open i initially took the photos to provide it to the court officer that was assigned the case okay anything else

i don't have any questions any other any cross examination yes uh you you said that you physically observed the violation when you uh originally went out that was sometime last year correct yes i observed the seawall okay have you been back out since no i have not okay so you don't know

if he's demolished the seawall or not correct i i got testimony from my court officer that said that she

she she still sees the seawall so that i'm gonna object to that that's hearsay but do you did you do

you have any no i do not personal knowledge no personal knowledge that uh that has come to compliance

okay no further questions all right see anybody anything else um just to follow up so you were you were the reporting officer on this violation is that what you said yes i um pretty much i was there to observe

and uh to determine if it was a violation or not um and yes i was the initial person to open up the

cold case and all right what is your relationship um in terms of supervisory capacity with um miss

menes she's one of the leads for does she report on her yes she reports to supervisor supervisor reports

to me okay so as your supervisor are you familiar with her cases and whether or not they're in compliance

correct yes thank you that's all all right uh any other witnesses no sir all right well i'll receive the city's exhibits and evidence mr huggins do you have any testimony evidence you'd like to present

yes uh we'll call mr uh kelly proceed dr kelly do you reside at 1114 cambridge yes sir and um have you attempted uh to go into the city and apply for a permit uh multiple times sir and since um the magistrate uh previously ordered you to go in and apply for the permit have you attempted to do so

yes sir and what was the result of that attempt i was not even allowed to uh submit the application

and did they give you any reason why you weren't allowed to submit the application uh the the um they

sent me over to zoning and then after going back over to zoning zoning said that it's um this is not on my

property so i'm not allowed to apply for a uh permit and did you also contact uh anybody from the city

council i did i i've sent out uh numerous messages to my city commissioner to uh ask to be heard in

front of the city commission uh to no response objection relevance and have you uh made contact

with any other city commissioners uh my um my engineer made contact with a another city commissioner who tried to present this at a city commission um and it was briefly discussed in that in that city commission at that time but uh nothing was done from that okay this is have you had objection this is

outside the the realm of the um the order by the special magistrate all right well well yes so the point of

this question is is to show that uh dr kelly has been making the attempts to come into compliance however

he's been denied uh again the opportunity to do so i mean is it i mean from what i gather uh and again i didn't hear the you know the original violation case but uh what i'm hearing is that the wall uh the retained wall slash seawall is not actually on his property but i'm assuming that he built it is that

what happened so they they the city has no proof that it's not on this property they were unable to present that during the original hearing which is why the special magistrate denied uh that claim that the city was trying to make was that it was on their property they cannot they do not have any uh property deed or otherwise or survey that's going to show that it's on the city's property

and the city checks to that mischaracterization all right well in any event the i mean the magistrate

that heard the case found a violation and established the compliance date um and you know i'm not here to entertain an appeal or a collateral attack of that order i mean i'm here to determine if compliance has been achieved at this juncture and it sounds like it hasn't i mean you've got a lot of you've got reasons why you think that non-compliance is either uh reasonable or unavoidable um but non-compliance it is um it seems like these arguments that you're raising are arguments that should either be addressed via the process for challenging the down the permit or an appeal although an appeal of the underlying order apparently wasn't taken um but um a violation was found uh i was trying to understand why it was found if it's not on the if it's not on the property of the respondent i suppose if he built a wall on the city's property that that that would be the problem and the city wants him to take it down and from what i understand the building officials testimony that's that's maybe the only option open to get into compliance get a demo permit and take it down but the bottom line is there's been no permit issued for this unpermitted wall that was determined to be in violation i'm not sure what other issues there are for me to decide so the city would agree with

that judge and ask you to enter an order um finding that they're not coming to compliance all right

mr huggins is there anything else you wanted to present or any additional argument that you wanted

to make no the color do you have any other statements you need to make i mean the at the the

the the special magistrate last time uh had had pulled me to reach out to the city commission

that was discussed in in extensive detail all right all right well again the order says what it says i mean uh uh and a violation was found in a compliance date of january nine uh of this year was was set um and a day with you know pretty and finally twenty five dollars was established uh if not compliant if not brought into compliance by the day and it's it's undisputed uh that the property is not or that the the violation has not been corrected um it's not my purview at this juncture to decide why it hasn't been corrected um it seems like those are issues that would have been wrapped up in the merits determination at the previous hearing because really we're just deciding now whether the property is in compliance and if it's not then i enter an order setting the fine and and that's that um is there anything else mr huggins i mean again it seems to me that we kind of run the run this one out i don't know what else there is for me to hear on this because there's something else we decide

i mean your honor i i can't come into compliance if i can't even apply for the permit and and it was issued that that i i i either apply for the permit or or apply to have it tore down before i can even apply for the permit they're telling me no they're not even giving me the due process to apply and deny me they're just telling me in this court case that they're going to deny me there's no due process in that i have it engineered i have everything there but they're they're not even looking at any of those things all right so it's not even allowed me to apply so how can i come into compliance

mr kelly i hear what you're saying but this hearing uh is is really not the forum to dispute permit conditions or issues you're having with getting a permit or what kind of permit you can get um those are usually handled there's usually separate administrative process for that and uh you may be able to go to court i mean i'm not here to tell you what your potential remedies are i'm just here to tell you that as a special magistrate uh uh in this code enforcement proceeding after a violation has been found uh i'm not the one who sets permit conditions or uh decides whether or not a permit should issue i mean i heard the testimony of the building official the same as you did i thought he said you could maybe get a demolition permit um i mean if it's truly the catch 22 years describing then maybe that's something that should have been taken up on an appeal or or you know maybe you still can but it's really not before me tonight i again i hear what you're saying but it's it's not part of the it's not within the scope of the present hearing sure um all right does the city have anything else no sir thank you all right well you know based on the testimony and the uh the the uh the other evidence presented i'm going to find because i think there's no dispute that the violation that was found in the in the previous order uh has not been brought into compliance or not been corrected pursuant to the terms of that order and therefore at this time uh an order uh imposing the fine uh is is appropriate uh my understanding is the retroactive the approved fine is one thousand one hundred seventy five dollars that is accrued at twenty five dollars per day since the compliance they passed and then continues to accrue at twenty five dollars per day do i have those numbers correct i believe so yes all right well so ordered then is there anything else the city needs on this one uh no sir thank you all right well thanks for coming in mr huggins and mr

kelly i mean you're you're all free to go thank you okay your honor our next case will be eel two five zero eight six a through c and it's a massive case the address will be 679 vicksburg street

deltona florida 32725 all right and do we have anyone here we have to respond yes who's here good

evening your honor my name is here turkey i'm employed by the city of deltona as a code compliance officer this will be case massey case number del 25 86 abc city of deltona versus borges caesar and pinero tamara pita the property address is 679 vicksburg street deltona florida 32725 parcel id number is 81 30 04 38 03 50. the statutory requirements for notification of this hearing have been met by the notice of hearing and the notice of code violation being sent certified mail to the property owner at the address listed with the property appraiser's 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 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 on the day that were taken it was ruled on october 22nd 2025 that the property owner was given 90 days to comply the owner did not come into compliance within those 90 days and has been receiving a fine of 150 a day since january 20 2026. as of today the property has accrued a total fine of 5 400 over a period of 36 days the city is requesting that the fines continue at 150 per day actually have been no permits issued on any of these uh any violations uh not as of today no permit has been issued uh however an application has been submitted online okay all right and who's here on behalf of the

the respondents i am caesar i'm the owner of the property uh see the board just all right do you

have any questions for the code officer no no questions uh yeah i was trying my my best to get

everything resolved and then uh it's just a matter of fact that uh the company that i hired before uh just slack on me uh i was just like uh trying to call them like a three four times a week to try to get everything resolved it's been like a two or three months uh but uh i gave up on the company i and i finally hires uh different cg and a new company and i met about two weeks and they got everything uh no the plan sealed and submitted to the city uh and the permit being applied for uh and hopefully the uh the city uh department of building now uh approved that and uh we got everything you know uh in compliance as soon as possible and uh i was trying to uh see if the fine could be now reduced or waived but uh i don't

know if that would be a possibility well it's it's not a possibility at this juncture um uh i'm and uh i'm i'm not uh yet familiar with what the city's process is for uh uh any sort of mitigation or fine reduction uh down the road does it does the city have that sort of process i know we don't have

any on the agenda for tonight sir we do have a process reduction in fine but first they must come

into compliance before that gets started right i was going to say mike in my experience most jurisdictions you need to be in compliance before you can seek a reduction of the fine um mr borges so um uh the uh the immediate uh uh uh a goal uh for you should be to go ahead and complete that permitting process and get the property in compliance as soon as possible to uh to stop the bleeding as it were and uh uh after that's been done the property's been deemed compliant you're no longer improving fines uh there there's a process uh that uh that you uh that you might pursue for uh seeking a reduction based on various equitable equitable considerations but we can't get to that point until you brought the property into full compliance okay i understand that and i guess

uh it's just a matter of fact that the uh the city building apartments just reveal and approve that

plans and then uh we the violation is no permit so once that permit has been issued right um we can stop the fine and then look at reduction and fine from there okay yeah okay yeah we must be in compliance first with with um with all cases pretty much absolutely on the property all right thank you all right

mr borges uh anything else do you have any questions no no question your honor all right so i'll receive the county's exhibit evidence based on the exhibits and testimony i will uh find that uh the property is uh not in compliance and uh and and has accrued at 150 dollars per day uh a fine uh to this date of five thousand four hundred dollars uh in addition will continue to accrue 150 dollars per day in fines until this until these violations have been fully corrected uh so i will enter an order imposing imposing those fines is there anything else the city needs on this one no that'll be all thank you honor all right mr board just uh i'm just board just uh um again uh uh try to get this uh get this corrected as quickly as you can and then uh then maybe we can take a look at uh a reduction depending on the facts and circumstances all right yes honor thank you all right thanks for coming in you're free to go

your honor our next case will be del 26010 it's a massey case property address is going to be 617 south anchor drive deltona deltona florida 32725 good evening your honor good evening

my name is jeff scott i'm employed by the city of deltona as a co-compliance officer this will be massey case del 26010 city of deltona versus fkh sfr prop go glp in care of first key homes llc property address is 617 anchor south anchor drive deltona florida 32725 parts id is 813-003-410-570 the statutory requirements for notification of this hearing have been met by the notice of hearing and notice of code violation was sent certified mail to the property owner at the address listed with the property appraisals record 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 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 observed the day they were taken it was ruled on january 28 2026 that the property owner was given 21 days to comply the owner did not come into compliance within those 21 days and have been receiving a fine of 250 dollars since february 18th 2026 as of today the property has accrued a total fine of two thousand dollars over eight days the city is requesting that the fines continue

at 250 dollars per day right very good and do we have anyone here on behalf of the respondent no your honor so i'll receive the city's exhibits and evidence based on the exhibits and the testimony i will find that the property remains non-compliant as of today's date and has accrued at 250 dollars per day fines totaling two thousand dollars and those fines will continue and the fine will continue to accrue at 250 dollars per day until the property has been brought fully into compliance so i will enter an order imposing the imposing the fine uh is there anything else the uh the city needs on this one

no your honor i don't know if you hear me no sir uh what's that no your honor we're all right

i didn't hear you i think that was right thank you all right thank you i appreciate that we can call the

next case next case will be fire zero three nine two zero two five it's a massive case property address is going to be 1878 providence boulevard that's deltona florida 32725 good evening for the

record my name is sharon shivers and i'm employed by the city of deltona as the fire marshal this will be case number fire zero three nine two zero two five the city of deltona versus fast lane 1878 investments inc the property address is 1878 providence boulevard suite s deltona 32725 parcel id 813-015-16-0060 and this is a massey case 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 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 on the day they were taken this was initially a case of 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 1.7.12.2 which states no construction work shall proceed until the hj has reviewed the plans for compliance with the applicable codes and standards and the applicable permits have been issued it was ruled on october 22nd 2025 that the property owner was given 90 days to comply the owner did not come into compliance within those 90 days and has been receiving a fine of 50 a day since january 21st 2026 as of today the property has accrued a total fine of 1 800 over 36 days permit bldc 25 dash 0025 was applied for on april 24th of 2025 and sat as an incomplete application until october 3rd of 2025 when the contractor provided a full submittal packet on october 24th 2025 building and fire plan reviews were conducted with a resubmittal required to date no response from the contractor has been received the city is requesting that the fines continue at 50 per day until such time that the property owner has notified the city of compliance and compliance is verified by

a fire safety inspector all right thank you is there anyone here on behalf of the respondent no all right um so uh i received the city's exhibits and evidence based on the exhibits and the testimony i will find that the violation continues and has not been corrected um as of today's date and uh which is 36 days after the compliance date uh at fifty dollars per day a total of eighteen hundred dollars and fines have already accrued uh fines will continue to accrue at fifty dollars per day until the property has been brought fully into compliance so i will order that fine to be imposed is there anything else the city

needs on this one no your honor all right thank you thank you okay your honor this will be new business and it will be case del 26012 property address will be 33 42 vancouver avenue deltona florida

three two seven three eight all right is there anyone here on behalf of the respondent yes your honor the property owners are here property yeah can i start your honor yes and who's here on behalf of the

the property owner is there anyone is here for that yes i am um my mother is gloria brathwaite she's the owner of the house but my husband and i he's leon hodge i'm levon hodge we are the ones that pay the mortgage and everything on it and i also have a limited power of attorney from my parents that they gave me from 2014 that i handle everything with the house all right you're the daughter yeah i'm her daughter she's 88 she doesn't live here in florida they live in the u.s virgin

islands okay all right uh very good but let me hear from the city and then we'll come back to you

good evening my name is joseph marjimenez i am employed by the city of deltona as a code compliance officer this will be case number del 26012 the city of deltona versus gloria brathwaite the property address is 3342 vancouver avenue drive deltona florida 32738 the parcel id is 813-035-070-120 this is a violation of city of deltona ordinance section 110-831 which states a temporary portable storage unit is allowed on properly on property solely for the loading and unloading and temporary storage of goods the maximum time for a temporary portable storage unit to remain on property shall be 30 consecutive days with a maximum of two occurrences per year per lot not to run consecutively may be placed on any paved driveway area but must be a minimum of five feet from the edge of any right away and six feet from any sideline the corrective action for said violation is to remove the portable storage unit from the property the statutory requirements 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 of 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 december 12th 2025 i noticed an industrial connex storage unit placed throughout the right-of-way area of this property i knocked on the door and rang the doorbell i received a voice from the ring camera a female homeowner answered i explained to her that these types of portable storage units are not allowed in residential property or on the city's right of way i then left a courtesy notice along with my card in hopes of receiving contact from the homeowner the next few days i then made made a re-inspection date on january the 3rd 2026 i arrived at the location still in violation the portable storage unit was still present on the property i was able to speak with a male homeowner he explained to me that it would cost him eighteen hundred dollars to move the connex box i informed him that that is not allowed that it is not allowed within city limits and it has to be removed he said he wasn't going to remove it and that he wants to take it to court i posted a notice of violation and informed him that i will be back after the compliance date and if it's still in violation we will take it to special magistrate i re-inspected the property again on january the 14th after the 10-day notice of violation and the storage unit was still present i also rechecked the property again on january the 30th and it was still present i proceeded in posting a notice of hearing on february the 5th 2026 and as of today the property continues to be in violations of this ordinance the city would like to request 10 days for the property to come into compliance or a fine of a hundred dollars per day to be imposed until such time that the property owner has notified the city of compliance very

good um besides do you have any questions for the uh for the officer not any questions do you have any questions yet i don't have any questions over all right um does the city have any anything else that it wants to present on this one no your honor all right so i'll receive the city's exhibits and evidence and miss hodge um is there any evidence or argument that you all would like to present at this

time well um seeing as uh we retired and we decided to move and put the house up for sale and what happened was we got an offer on the house and i guess we might have jumped it prematurely or order it because we were leaving we're moving overseas we had a date so we had we had a date to close so we ordered the container to put it in there and i guess like i said we probably jumped the gun because it was within the 10 day i guess that they can rescind the offer and that's what happened they rescinded the offer and then we headed into the holidays and what's going on with the economy i don't know but as january came around we're starting to pick up now with uh viewing of the house as a matter of fact and i don't know if anybody heard it and i excuse myself but my phone was blinging a lot and that was my realtor tell me we have an offer on the house so um if we would like probably a little bit consideration more consideration to get some time to get it out um um you said um if we could possibly get 30 because it's kind of hard to schedule that truck to pick it up uh if we have to move it then we'll move it but um we're just hoping you know everything

goes through with this offer yeah i mean i i'm i'm sympathetic to what you're saying uh but uh the uh the the total time that you can have the trailer there is 30 days and you're you're well beyond that at this point um based on the length of time that that connex trailer has been on the property in the right of way um and uh uh and i believe there's no dispute that it's still there is that right i mean the trailer is still there yes it is all right so um uh all right so based on on that um there's there's no factual dispute about the violation um the the connex trailer sitting there in the right of way the temporary storage it has exceeded the uh 30 consecutive day maximum uh that the code allows and uh uh so therefore the the property is in violation so i will um make a finding of a violation as the charge set forth in the notice violation i'm going to set the compliance date uh as uh recommended to 10 days i'm looking at the uh the sheet here it looks like 10 days falls on a saturday so i'll go ahead and make it monday march 9th which is i guess 12 days um and uh uh we'll set the fine at a hundred dollars per day as recommended that would be a daily fine that would start to accrue starting the day after the compliance date the property remains out of compliance so that would be uh starting on march the uh on march the 10th and that would run until the property has been brought into compliance so i do want to urge you to remove that trailer i i understand there's some cost involved uh and and you've obviously got some other things going on but you need to get the trailer off the property because it's violating the code um is there anything else that city needs on

this one no your honor besides do you have any any questions yes your honor i i just want to say okay you mean there's no kind of leniency because i already we already have items in there and it's going to be a problem trying to secure those items and it's not complete we're not having fully loaded and we have a few more items in the house to put in the container and have the shipping unit company come and take it away now if i have to move it it's going to be that amount of money put it somewhere put a stuff in and the same amount of money eighteen hundred dollars again because once they come in your area whatever it is they're going to charge you eighteen hundred dollars so it'll be eighteen hundred dollars to put it somewhere else that it might be accepted and then another 18 just to pick it up again to take it to the ship so that's why i told her i really don't have that to do it i'm right now on a fixed income as a retired soldier and i cannot just throw out eighteen hundred dollars for somebody to come and put it somewhere else it's another eighteen hundred coming back i understand but where it is it's a area that i i dug out when i first moved there and have it crushed like paved somewhat and i thought it was okay and i put cones all around it so i can clear and that area is not a heavy heavily traffic type area it's a home it's quiet you hardly have vehicle going up and down you know flying by like a busy other street and right now it might only be another 30 days i'm gonna be honest it might be another 30 days and we out of there yeah yeah i understand what you're saying

um but you know the original violation notice from just from december 11th gave you that courtesy compliance deadline of january 13th that was a 30-day period and here we are uh now uh uh more than 60 or 70 days from that original notice i mean that's that was a lot of time to get in compliance before we got to this point again i'm not unsympathetic but the violation is there and it needs to be corrected um that's just the bottom line but uh um the county has suggested i i think it's reasonable to give you 10 12 more days here to get this taken care of uh but but we do need to set this deadline um it's it's been a long time and it's long past the uh legally permitted um 30 consecutive days

uh although i'll be not hurting anything other than the statue and nothing is no no no problem there no damage other than the statue of 30 days yeah well that may be um sergeant i hear what you're

saying again but the the coding and the you know the law is what it is um and uh the uh commissioners have decided that uh that uh there should be regulations as to these kinds of temporary storage containers um which uh you know i mean i can think of a number of reasons why they might have established that but that's a that's a city policy that's city law um and that's set by the elected officials not by me but uh the uh the law is what it is um i'm just here to enforce it but uh but we do have a violation and we do need to get it corrected and i think you know the period of time suggested here and giving you compliance by march 9th this should be plenty of time to to get this into violation without accruing any fines all right um any other questions mr hodge miss hodge no your

honor that's it because what i have to say all right well thanks for coming in you all are free to go

thank you honor our next case will be del 26013 the property address will be 1068 eagles nest avenue that's deltona florida 32725 do we have uh anyone here for the respondent property no your honor all

right you may proceed my name is janice pelasic and i am employed by the city of deltona as a code compliance officer this will be case number del 26-013 the city of deltona versus melissa a frascotti and alexander j lakono the property address is 1068 eagles nest avenue the parcel id number is 813-010-060-180 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 to cause any such work to be done shall first make application to the building official and obtain a required permit corrective action for said violation is to obtain a permit for the garage conversion or restore it back to its original state and obtain permits if necessary the statutory requirements 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 of 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 on the day that they were taken this case was opened on september 24th 2025 for a garage that was being closed off without a permit contact was made with the resident and it was explained to him what needed to be done to come into compliance the resident did go to the building department and and he was explained that he would need engineer drawings in order to obtain the permit on october 23rd 2025 25 the property was still in violation notice of violation was posted to the garage door as well as sent certified mail to the property owner listed with the property appraisers on february 9th 2026 after verifying that no permit was on file the notice of hearing was posted to the front door as well as an affidavit of service was completed the notice of hearing was also sent certified mail to the property owners listed on the property appraisers as of today february 25th 2026 the property is still in violation the city would like to request 30 days or until march 27 2026 at 4 pm for the property to come into compliance or a fine of 25 per day to be imposed until such time that the

property owner has notified the city of compliance i'm sorry to catch what's the uh the property and

fine you're recommending 25 per day okay and march 26th what time march 27th 2026 at 4 pm got it all right

i see you there on the list very good all right all right um so i will uh receive the city's exhibits and evidence and based on the exhibits uh and the testimony presented we'll make a file filing violation as to the charges set forth in the notice of violation uh we're going to set the compliance date to march 27 2026 as recommended that's 30 days from today uh and we'll set the daily fine at 25 per day to begin running on march 28 2026 if compliance has not been achieved by the compliance date and we'll run that fine until the property has been brought fully into compliance is there anything else the city needs on this one no thank you your honor all right thank you

your honor our next case will be del 26014 property address will be 15 56 east normandy boulevard

deltona florida 32725 good evening my name is jeff scott i'm employed by the city of deltona as a co-compliance officer this will be case number del 26014 the city of deltona versus yma investments llc the property address is 15 56 east east normandy boulevard deltona florida 32725 the parts id is 813-011-230-020 this is a violation of city of deltona ordinance section 185 adopting the latest edition of the international property maintenance code section 303.1 which states that swimming pools shall be maintained in clean and sanitary condition and in good repair corrective action for said violation is the pool must be maintained either drained or water a water must be chemically treated to remove algae water should be cleared and sanitized the statutory requirements for this for the notice notification of this hearing have been met by the notice of hearing and notice of code violation was sent certified mail to the property owner listed with the property appraisers record in addition both notices will posted on the property in that city hall at least 10 days prior to this hearing all of the exhibits 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 the day they were taken this case was open as a complaint and started by another officer on december 31st 2024 for a sanitary pool the case was heard at the november 25th hearing but sometime in the middle of january the there was a change in ownership so this case had to be brought back to magistrate with new with the new owners as of today the property remains in violation the city would like to request 14 days march 11 for the property to come into compliance or a fine of 25 dollars per day for this violation to be imposed until such a time that the property owner notified the city of compliance all right thank you anything else

that's it all right so i will receive the city's exhibits and evidence at this time based on the exhibits and the testimony i'm going to make finding violation as the charter set forth in the notice concerning the unsanitary pool which is clearly visible in the photographs and i will accept the recommendations regarding the compliance and the penalties will set the compliance date to march 11 2026 that's 14 days out to bring that pool into compliance with the the sanitary regulations if compliance is not achieved by that date we'll start running a fine at 25 per day on march 12 2026 and run that fine each day until the property has been brought fully into compliance is there anything else the city needs on this one no your honor that's it all right thank you

your honor our next case will be del 26015 property address will be 323 cloverleaf boulevard

that's deltona florida 32725 all right your honor my name is jeff scott i'm employed by the city of deltona deltona as co-compliance officer this will be case number del 26015 the city of deltona versus deborah a.b taylor property address is 323 cloverleaf boulevard deltona florida 32725 parcel id is 813-022-230-4450 this is a violation of city of deltona ordinance section 38 110 subsection b2 which states that accumulation of waste yard trash rubble and or debris are declared to be a nuisance and must be abated in their tidy corrective action for said violation is to properly dispose of it or store in an enclosed building and this in reference to the cardboard boxes on the rear porch area the statutory requirements for a notification of this hearing have been met by the notice of hearing and notice of code violation was sent certified mail to the property owner at the address listed with the property appraiser's record in addition both notices were posted on the property and at least city hall and at city hall at least 10 days prior to this hearing all of the exhibits in this case including photographs have been marked as exhibits and submitted to the special magistrate clerks i certify any and all photographs to be true and accurate portrayals of what i observed today they were taken this case was started as a complaint on june 9 2025 for cardboard boxes on the rear porch notice of violation was issued on december 29 2025 notice of hearing was posted on february 9 2026. as of today the property remains in violation for the debris the city would like to request 14 days march 11 for their property to come into compliance or a fine of 25 dollars per day for this violation to to be imposed until such a time that the property owner notified the city of compliance all right thank

you thank you do we have anybody here for the property owner no your honor all right so i'll receive the city's exhibits in evidence based on the testimony and the exhibits i'm going to make a filing violation as the charge set forth in the notice concerning the accumulation of debris on the property in particular the cardboard boxes on the rear porch uh we will uh set the compliance date as recommended to march 11 2026 which is uh 14 days out uh if compliance is not achieved by that date we'll start running a daily fine of 25 starting on march 12 2026 and running until the property has been brought fully into compliance is there anything else the city needs on this one no your honor that's all all

all right you're on our next case will be fire zero four six two zero two five the property address will be 2031 saxon boulevard deltona florida 32725 all right we have somebody here for the

responded property owner i'm the property manager of saxon plaza property manager all right what's your name

sandra johnson sandra johnson all right good evening miss johnson let me hear from the city

first then we'll come back to you good evening again for the record my name is sharon shivers and i'm employed by the city of deltona as the fire marshal this will be case number fire dash zero four six dash two zero two five the city of deltona versus shaffer investments llc the property address is 879 mason avenue daytona beach florida and the parcel id is 802-3011-20090 this is a violation of the city of deltona ordinance chapter 42 article 4 fire codes chapter 42-186 which adopts the most recent addition of the florida fire prevention code as adopted by the state fire marshal for the following violation florida fire prevention code 8th edition nfpa 1 chapter 1.7.12.10 no construction work shall proceed until the hj has reviewed the plans for compliance with the applicable codes and standards and the applicable permits have been issued corrective action for the said violation is to obtain an issued permit for the installation of the magnetic locking device permits can be applied for at the city of deltona 2345 providence boulevard deltona florida 32725 and contact our office with 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 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 i certify any and all photographs to be true and accurate portrayals of what i observed the day they were taken on august 13th 2025 fire safety inspector a jury bailey conducted a fire safety inspection at this address where he observed and documented the above noted violation the property owner the property owner was notified in writing of the violations and given a time frame for correcting said violations subsequent re-inspections on october 1st 2025 october 7th 2025 october 28th 2025 november 6th 2025 found the locking device still in place and no permit applied for on december 1st 2025 on december 1st 2025 on december 1st 2025 on january 6th 2026 on february 10th 2026 found the locking device still in place and no permit issued the city would like to request 90 days for the property to come into compliance with the violation or a fine of 50 per day until such time that the property owner has notified the city of compliance all right um very good um miss johnson do you have

any questions for uh for the witness i don't honestly because i just kind of got thrown into this i've only been property manager of this plaza and it is just kind of my understanding that each individual unit in there you know is responsible for its own so my understanding since i've been there since december is i've actually got with the owner of that unit several times and been on him and asking him hey did you apply for that you know did you apply for the permit did you apply for the permit and the gentleman that's came out you know the one that she spoke of was very nice and i've been you know cordial with him and everything and i'm really just standing in here today to go back and tell my corporate office

what's going on okay all right i understand um very good um all right so i'll receive the city's exhibits and evidence based on the testimony and the exhibits i'm going to make a final violation with regards to the charge in the notice it has to do with the unpermitted installation of a locking device we're going to set the uh compliance day on this one uh 90 days out to may 26 excuse me uh of uh of 2026 and uh if compliance is not achieved by that date we'll start running a daily fine of fifty dollars per day starting on may 27th and we'll run that fine every day until the property has been brought fully into compliance is there anything else the city needs on this one no your honor all right thank

you you're on our next case will be fire zero zero four two zero two six the property address will be one eleven howland boulevard that's deltona florida three two seven three eight and do we have

anyone here for the property owner i don't see anybody all right then you may proceed thank you

good evening your honor 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 zero zero four dash 2026 the city of deltona versus fairwinds credit union the property address is 111 howland boulevard deltona florida 32738 parcel id is 920-604-000-040 this is a violation of city of deltona ordinance chapter 42 article 4 fire codes chapters 14-186 which adopts the most recent edition of the florida fire prevention code as adopted by the state fire marshal for the following violations excuse me florida fire prevention code 8th edition violation a nfpa 1 chapter 13.1.6 fire protection system tests and maintenance paperwork required detailed records documenting all systems and equipment testing and maintenance shall be kept by the property owner and shall be made available upon request for review by the ahj violation b has come into compliance which is nfpa 1 chapter 13.1.8 violation c nfpa 1 13 or chapter 13.1.9 fire sprinkler impairments deficiencies not repaired whenever impairments critical deficiencies or non-critical deficiencies are identified in water-based fire protection systems maintained in accordance accordance with nfpa 25 they shall be corrected in a time frame approved by the ahj violation d nfpa 1 13 chapter 13.1.1 permit required fire protection system the ahj shall have the authority to require that construction documents for all fire protection systems be submitted for doc for review and approval and a permit be issued prior to the installation rehabilitation or modification corrective action for said violations are as follows violation a please provide a copy of the current fire alarm inspection maintenance report and current backflow inspection maintenance report and current fire sprinkler inspection maintenance report um and they'll they can just send the copies to us at fire prevention at deltonafl.gov the noted violation for for compliance for violation b has been repaired sorry violation c backflow system is red tagged indicating the efficiencies to the system please contact your fire sprinkler service provider to have all deficiencies corrected violation d obtain a permit for the removal of the fire alarm cellular communicator and newly installed fire alarm control panel the statutory requirements for this 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 any and all photographs to be true and accurate portrayals of what i observed on the day they were taken on july 29th 2025 i conducted a fire safety inspection and on september 24th 2025 i conducted a consultation fire safety inspection at this at this address where i observed the above mentioned violations the property owner was notified of the violations and given a time frame to correct said violations subsequent re-inspections on september 19th 2025 october 21st 2025 november 10th 2025 november 11th or november 19th 2025 december 9th 2025 december 19th 2025 january 21st 2026 and february 10th 2026 found no progress on the noted violations 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 violations a and c and 90 days to come into compliance with violation d due to the extended time requiring for permitting or a fine of 50 dollars per day per violation until such time that the property owner has notified the city of compliance 50 50 hours per

day for each of the three violations per day yes yeah all right all right very good and just to confirm there's no one here on behalf of the uh respond property owner no sir all right so i received the city's exhibits in evidence at this time and based on the testimony and the exhibits i'll make a finding violation with respect to the three violations in the notice that remain outstanding and uncorrected that would be violations a c and d violation b having been brought into compliance before today's hearing as for uh violations a and c we will set the compliance date to march 27 2026 which is 30 days out uh and with regards to uh violation b we'll set the compliance date as recommended to uh may uh 26 2026 that's uh 90 days out uh if compliance uh as to these violations is not achieved by the applicable compliance date we will run a daily fine of 50 per day per each non-compliant count starting on march 28 2026 for violations a and c and may 27 2026 for violation d and those fines will run until the property is brought fully in compliance with respect to each of the violations uh respectively uh is there anything else the city needs on this case no sir all right thank you thank you your honor our next case will be

fire zero zero six two zero two six property address will be one zero zero one alabaster way that's deltona

florida three two seven two five good evening again this will be a long one just a pre pre-warning

for the record a long one because there are a lot of violations yes your honor do we have a uh a a respondent anyone here for the respondent i do not see anyone okay i'm just looking through so you've got violations a through j um that would be correct right let's go let's go okay

for the record my name is sharon shivers i'm employed by the city of deltona as the fire marshal this will be case fire dash zero zero six dash two zero two six the city of deltona versus snr 24 sterling court owner llc the property address is one zero zero one alabaster way deltona 32725 and the parcel id number is 813-07-80-000-030 this is 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 versions of nfpa 1 fire code and nfpa 101 life safety code violation a nfpa 1 chapter 12.4.1 the installation and maintenance of assemblies and devices used to protect openings and walls floors and ceilings against the spread of fire and smoke within into or out of buildings shall comply with section 12.4 and nfpa 80 i'd like to note that fire doors in the second floor corridor near room 240 and the third floor corridor were brought into compliance prior to this hearing violation b nfpa 1 chapter 13.5.3.1 backflow prevention devices shall be inspected tested and maintained in accordance with the requirements of nfpa 25 violation c nfpa 1 chapter 10.13.2.1 cut or uncut weeds grass vines and other vegetation shall be removed when determined by the age j to be a fire hazard and i'd like to note that that violation was brought into compliance prior to this hearing that was b you said that would be violation c oh c yeah came into compliance violation d nfpa 1 chapter 13.1.8 all fire protection systems and devices shall be maintained in a reliable operating condition and shall be repaired or replaced or repaired were defective or recalled violation e nfpa one oh one sorry chapter 8.3.3.3.3.1 required fire door assemblies shall be installed inspected tested and maintained in accordance with nfpa 80 violation f nfpa 1 chapter 13.1.9 whenever impairments critical deficiencies or non-critical deficiencies are identified in water-based fire protection systems maintained in accordance with nfpa 25 they shall be corrected in a time frame approved by the ahj violation g nfpa 1 chapter 11.7.5.1 stationary generators used for emergency or legally required standby power shall be tested and maintained in accordance with nfpa 110 and nfpa 37 violation f h nfpa 1 chapter 13 13.3.3.3.3.2 a sprinkler system installed in accordance with this code shall be inspected tested and maintained in accordance with nfpa 25 violation i nfpa 1 chapter 13.3.3.1 a sprinkler system installed in accordance with this code shall be properly maintained to provide at least the same level of performance and protection as designed the owner shall be responsible for maintaining the system and keeping it in good working conditions violation j nfpa 101 chapter 7.9.3.1.1 testing of required emergency lighting systems shall be permitted to be conducted as follows number one functional testing shall be conducted monthly with a minimum of three weeks and a maximum of five weeks between tests for not less than 30 seconds except as otherwise permitted by 7.9.3.1.1.2 number two the test interval shall be permitted to be extended beyond 30 days with the approval of the authority having jurisdiction number three functional testing shall be conducted annually for a minimum of one and a half hours if the emergency lighting system is battery operated number four the emergency lighting equipment shall be fully operational for the duration of the tests required by 7.9.3.1.1 parentheses one and 7.9.3.1.1 parentheses three and number five written records of visual inspections and tests shall be kept by the the owner for inspection by the authority having jurisdiction corrective action for said violations violation a as i had noted previously um there were two of the fire doors that had already come into compliance so the corrective action action in violation a is to repair the first floor corridor fire rated doors to completely close and latch violation b please contact your backflow service provider to repair all noted violations in your july 31st 2025 backflow inspection report violation c had come into compliance violation d please contact your fire alarm service provider to repair all noted deficiencies in your july 30th 2025 fire alarm inspection report violation e please provide the manufacturer's specification for the decorative door panel covering that's on the fire rated door violation f f please contact your fire sprinkler service provider to repair all noted deficiencies in your july 30th 2025 and october 22nd 2025 fire sprinkler inspection reports violation g please contact your generator service provider to repair or replace the generator violation h please contact your fire sprinkler service provider to recreate the hydraulic calculation plates based on the actual fire sprinkler system design violation i please re-secure the loose fire sprinkler escutcheon plates in violation g please provide documentation of the testing of the emergency lighting system for the last 12 months 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 any and all photographs to be true and accurate portrayals of what i observed on the day they were taken on july 12th 2025 fire safety inspector a jury bailey conducted an inspection at this address where he observed and documented the above noted violations the property owner was notified in writing of the violations and given a time frame to correct said violations subsequent re-inspections were conducted on september 11th 2025 december 2nd 2025 december 31st 2025 and february 9th 2025 in closing the city would like to request 90 days for the property to come into compliance with the remainder of the violations or a fine of 50 dollars per day per violation until such time that the property owner has notified the city of compliance

all right thank you uh and i will receive the city's exhibits and evidence at this time based on the exhibits and the testimony i will make the finding violation as to the charges set forth in the the notice uh as follows violation a is partially in compliance uh and violation c has been brought uh into compliance um and otherwise the remaining violations uh through violation j uh are established so i'll make the finding violation as to all of them again except for uh c which is fully compliant we'll set the compliance date at 90 days out as recommended to may 26 uh 2026 if compliance is not achieved by that date uh and there are violations outstanding we will run 50 per day uh uh fines uh as to each violation outstanding those fines would begin to run on may 27 2026 and run until the violation is fully corrected is there anything else the city needs on this one no your honor all right very good

thank you your honor our next case will be fire zero zero nine two zero two six property address will be 915 doyle road deltona florida 32725 good evening your honor good evening 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 zero zero zero zero nine dash 2026 the city of deltona versus tcb deltona llc the property address is 915 doyle road it's for the plaza deltona florida 32725 parcel id is 910-609-000-010 this is a violation of the city of deltona ordinance chapter 42 article 4 fire codes chapters 40 42 42-186 which adopts the most recent code recent edition of the florida fire prevention code as adopted by the state fire marshal for the following violations by or florida fire prevention code eighth edition violation a nfpa chapter 13.1.6 detailed records documenting all systems and equipment testing and maintenance shall be kept by the property owner and shall be made available upon request for review by the ahj 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 egress and other building safety features violation c nfpa 1 chapter 11.1.7.3.1 each disconnecting means shall be legibly marked to indicate its purpose unless located and arranged so the purpose is evident in other than one or two family dwellings the marking shall include the identification of the circuit source that supplies the disconnecting means the marking shall be of sufficient durability to withstand the environment involved violation d nfpa 1 chapter 10.11.1.6 address numbers for suite units etc within a multiple tenant building or complex shall be individually identified in a manner approved by the ahj however shall be at least six inches one point or 152.4 millimeters in height for all other building structures or portions thereof corrective action for said violations are violation a please provide copies of the current fire alarm fire backflow and fire sprinkler systems inspection maintenance reports for buildings 100 and 300 please provide a copy of the inspection record for the fire hydrants on site please send and to please send the copies of the inspection records to fire protection at deltonafl.gov violation b please replace the faded facp inside signage on the fire alarm control box on the exterior of building 100 violation c please identify and relabel the meter boxes with the missing suite numbers for buildings 100 and 300 violation d provide maintain a minimum of six inch height numbers which are clearly visible from the street for suite 301 306 numbers shall be contrasting with background replace the suite number on the rear of quest diagnostics to read 305 and not 303 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 any and all photographs to be true and accurate portrayal portrayals of what i observed on the day they were taken on october 16 2025 i conducted a fire safety inspection and october 27 2025 i conducted a consultation fire safety inspection at this address where i observed the above mentioned uh sorry violations the property owner was notified of the violations and given a time frame to correct said violations subsequent re-inspections on november 21st 2025 december 2nd 2026 december 16th i'm sorry 25 not 26 um december 16th 2025 january 6th 2026 january 2nd or 20 i'm sorry january 21st 2026 and september february 11th 2026 found no progress on the noted violations upon today's site visit no progress was roommate 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 per violation until such time that the property owner has notified the city for

compliance all right thank you and is there anyone here for the respondent no no sir all right so i will uh receive in evidence the city's exhibits and based on the testimony and the exhibits i will make a filing violation with respect to the charges set forth in the notice of violation those being identified as violations a b c and d uh and i will set the compliance date uh at uh 30 days out which will be uh march 27th of 2026 if compliance is not achieved by that date we'll start running a 50 per day per count fine um and run those fines until each of the violations has been brought into compliance is there anything else that the city needs on this one no sir thank you all right your honor our next

case will be fire zero one zero two zero two six property address will be 915 doyle road suites 103 or 105 deltona florida 32725 all right good evening your honor for the record my name is lisa nadeau i am

employed by the city of deltona as a fire safety inspector this case will be number fire dash zero one zero dash 2026 the city of deltona versus tcb deltona llc the property address is 915 doyle road suites 103 through 105 deltona florida 32725 parcel id is 910-609-000-010 this is a violation of the 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 for the following violations florida fire prevention code 8th edition nfpa 1 chapter 17.12.10 permit required 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 obtain an issued permit electrical permit for the installation of new emergency lighting permit can be attained but from the deltona building department building services located at 2345 providence boulevard permit must be applied for by a licensed electrician contact our office with the permit number once it has been obtained once a permit number has been obtained the statutory requirements for this notification 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 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 october 13th 2025 i conducted a fire safety inspection at this address where i observed the above mentioned violation the property owner was notified of the violations and given a time frame to correct said violations subsequent re-inspections on november 19th 2025 december 11th 2025 january 6th 2026 january 20th 2026 and february 11th 2026 found no progress on the noted violation upon today's site visit no progress remains 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 all right thank you

is there anyone here for the respondent yes sir yes your honor it's celine vasquez i was here sent here by the tenant the tenant doesn't own the property there's a different landlord the tenant is dollar tree what's your name celine vasquez

miss vasquez do you have any questions for the uh for the fire inspector uh no your honor i just like

to add um and counter the recommendation by the inspector go ahead um yes as i mentioned i'm here on behalf of um the tenant um based on my understanding the tenant did request that the person in the area um pull the permit but i understand there's issues with that um in coordinating with the landlord and whoever they actually hired um to pull the permit um they were told that the original installer will have to provide those documents if there's a permit or or whatnot um the original installer hasn't um provided that yet so they're trying to get those documents from them um and it's kind of sort of what has been the hold up um also they don't the landlord took you know it went to chicago and took a moment for the landlord to advise uh the tenant as to what was happening so instead of 30 days we would request 60 days so we could file that uh permanent application and um make sure it gets approved and come into compliance with it

all right does the city have any response to the request for a longer compliance period

to emergency lights without permits on aisles two and five well we would we would allow for 45 days

your honor all right well um all right let's do this then um i'm based on i'm going to receive the city's exhibits and evidence based on the testimony and the exhibits i'll make a finding violation with respect to the installation of the uh emergency lights without a permit uh i'll go ahead and set the compliance date then out uh 45 days to uh uh well it looks like it'll be 47 days to uh monday april the 13th um and that will give the um property owner a little additional time to get this uh get this corrected get permits issued for those lights uh if compliance is not achieved by that date however uh we will start running a daily fine of 50 per day and run that fine until the property has been brought fully into compliance uh that fine will start running on april the 14th of 2026 does the city need anything further on this one no sir all right do you have any questions uh

asbestos yeah i just have two um if we come in or if the tenant comes into the compliance do we have to come back no one like lives in this area so i had to travel here from south florida and i think everyone else lives in chicago um so or is there like a zoom option or how does that work once you're

in compliance with the permits there's no no need within the 45 days now if it's a violation of the fourth day we there is an appearance date and we'll definitely send notice then and does that appearance have to be in person or could it be over zoom it can be over zoom but please reach out to us you know as soon as you know that it's going to be a zoom so we can coordinate with our it department so

they can uh make that available is there a particular person we should reach out to i just

want to make sure i like walk away with all the information it'll be on the notice um our special

master clerk the number will be on there okay okay thank you yeah the important thing is to get you know get in compliance if at all possible that way you avoid one having to come back to having to pay a fine understood your honor all right thanks for coming in have a good night you too you know our next

case will be fire zero one two two zero two six the property address will be 951 doyle road that's

deltona florida 32725 good evening all right good evening your honor um 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 012-2026 the city of deltona versus exchange right net least all cash to the address is 951 doyle road deltona florida 32725 prop parcel id is 910-605-000-010 this is a violation of city of deltona ordinance chapter 42 article 4 fire codes chapter 14 or 42-186 which adopts the most recent edition of the florida fire prevention code is adopted by the state fire marshal for the following violations florida fire prevention code 8th edition violation a nfpa 1 chapter 13.7.3.1.1.4 all apparatus requiring rewinding or resetting to maintain normal operations shall be restored to normal after each abnormal condition and if our violation b is nfpa 1 chapter 13.1.8 all fire protection systems and devices shall be maintained in a reliable operating condition and shall be replaced or repaired were defective or recalled violation c nfpa 1 chapter 13.5.4.2 a private service main installed in accordance with this code shall be inspected tested and maintained in accordance with nfpa 25 the corrective actions for said violations are as follows violation a restore fire alarm control panel to normal status please contact your fire alarm service provider violation b contact your fire alarm service provider to repair the smoke alarm noted in the november 8th 2025 fire alarm report and violation c please contact your fire hydrant sprinkler contractor to conduct the annual inspection maintenance on the private fire hydrant located on your property the statutory requirements for this notification of the hearing of this hearing have been met by notice of hearing and notice of code violations um we're sent we're sent certified mail to the property owner at the business or at the location 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 any and all photographs to be true and accurate portrayals of what i observed on the day they were taken on october 27th 2025 i conducted a fire safety inspection at this address where i observed the above mentioned violations the property owner was notified of the violations and given a time frame to correct said violations subsequent re-inspections on december 3rd 2025 december 31st 2025 january 15th 2026 january 27th 2026 and february 11th 2026 found no progress on the noted violations upon today's site 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 dollars per day per violation until such time that the property owner has notified the city of

compliance all right do we have anyone here for the property owner no sir no all right so i'll receive the city's exhibits and evidence based on the testimony and the exhibits i'll make the finding of violation as the charges set forth in the notice and identified uh herein is violations a violation b and violation c we'll set the compliance date as recommended to 30 days out that falls on friday march 27th 2026 if compliance has not been achieved by that date with regard to some or all of these violations we'll start running a daily fine of 50 hours per day per count starting on march 28th 2026 and running until all of the violations have been corrected is there anything else the city needs on this one

no sir you have me for two more 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 fire zero sorry you're on our next case will be

fire zero one three two zero two six property address will be 2187 howland boulevard that's deltona florida

three two seven three eight all right thank you good evening your honor 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 one zero one three dash twenty twenty six the city of deltona versus cvs five eight five four florida llc the property address is 2187 howland boulevard deltona florida three two seven three eight parcel id is 811-402-000-010 this is a violation of the city ordinance deltona ordinance chapter 42 article 4 fire codes chapter 42 through 186 which adopts the most recent addition of the florida fire prevention code as adopted by the state fire marshal for the following violations florida administrative code 69a-46.041 a new inspection tag must be attached to the system's main water control valve each time an inspection and test service is performed corrective action please contact your fire hydrant company to add an inspection tag to the fire hydrant the statutory requirements for this notification of 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 i certify any and all photographs to be true and accurate portrayals of what i observed on the day they were taken on september 16th 2025 i conducted a fire safety inspection at this address where i observed where i observed the above mentioned violation the property owner was notified of the violations and given a time frame to correct said violations subsequent re-inspections on october 27th 20th 2025 november 20th 2025 october or december 8th 2025 december 18th 2025 january 6 2026 january 20th 2026 january 27th 2026 and february 11th 2026 found no progress on the noted violation upon today's site visit no progress was made on the violation the city would like to request 30 days for the property to come into compliance with the remainder of the violation with the remaining violation or a fine of 50 per day until such time that the property owner has notified the city of compliance all right

thank you is there anyone here for the property owner no sir all right so i've received the city's exhibits in evidence at this time based on the testimony and the exhibits i'll make a finding violation as the charge in the notice concerning the need for an inspection tag to be attached to this uh well the system's main water control valve uh if that violation is not brought into compliance by march 27 2026 which is 30 days out we'll start running a 50 per day fine starting on march 28 2026 and running until the violation has been corrected is there anything else the city needs on this one

no sir all right your honor our next case will be fire zero one four two zero two six property address will be 890 north state road 415 that's deltona florida 32764 good evening your honor

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 zero one four dash two zero two six the city of deltona versus brg real estate investments the property address is 890 north state road 415 deltona florida 32764 parcel id is 920-605-000-010 this is a violation of the 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 for the following violations um florida fire prevention code uh eighth edition violation a the emergency lights they were brought into compliance prior to this meeting today violation all right and then violation b no construction work or i'm sorry chapter nfpa 1 chapter 17.12.10 no construction work shall be shall proceed until the ahj has reviewed the plans for compliance with the applicable codes and standards and the applicable permits have been issued um the corrective action for violation b um permit building bldc 26-018 has been applied for and is currently under review but not issued as of today 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 at 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 any and all photographs to be true and accurate portrayals of what i observed on the day they were taken on july 23rd 2025 i conducted a fire safety inspection at the address where where i observed the following or the above mentioned violation the property owner was notified at of the violations and given a time frame to correct said violations subsequent re-inspections on september 25th 2025 october 21st 2025 december 2nd 2025 december 16th 2025 january 13th 2026 january 27th 2026 and february 11th 2026 found no progress on the noted violation upon today's site visit progress has been made on the violations no progress has been made the city would like to request 90 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 all right and so uh so clear violation a is in compliance violation b is the only outstanding at this time yes sir very good all right and there no one here for the responding correct no sir all right so i will receive the the city's exhibits in evidence at this time and based on the exhibits and the testimony i'll make a finding violation as to the remaining uh charge uh that has not been corrected as of today's date that's violation b and we'll set the compliance date for that violation to correct that violation to uh may 26 2027 that's 90 days out if compliance is not achieved by may 26 we'll start running a 50 per day fine for that violation and run that from may 27 2026 until the property has been brought fully into compliance is there anything else the city needs on this one no sir all right thank you thank you that was the last case sir all right um so we we have uh nothing under item 11 other and repeat business no sir all right very good um before we adjourn uh let me just ask in terms of uh your uh the posterior process here um do you all submit to me proposed uh uh orders on these cases or how do you how you typically handle that yes sir i will prepare the orders and send them over to you all right great so you'll just put them up in that in one of those folders and share that with me excellent very good all right uh i will uh look at those and get them turned around i'm sure fairly quickly once they're once they're up in the in the share folder um and there being no other business we are adjourned i will see you all next time thank you very much thank you

sir have a good evening all right you too