As I do every month, I remind you, please turn off or silence your digital devices. Dan, do you want to read the purposes, please? I'll now call to order this meeting of the Dunnean Code Enforcement Board for April 1st, 2025. Before proceeding, I'll set forth the purpose of this board. The Code Enforcement Board is charged with conducting hearings to determine whether a violation of the codes and ordinances of the City of Dunnean has occurred. In order to meet that obligation, all parties and their representative will be allowed the opportunity to be heard on matters relevant to the alleged violation. All witnesses offering testimony or presenting evidence will be required to swear or affirm that the testimony they offer is the truth. The City, through its staff, will present its evidence of the alleged violation. After the City has completed its presentation, the respondent shall be afforded the opportunity to present its evidence. Any members of the board, the persons presenting the City's case, or the City Attorney may question any witnesses before the board. The respondent or his or her representative shall also be permitted to question any of the witnesses before the board and present brief opening and closing statements, if so desired. The board will then openly deliberate, considering only the evidence presented, the law, and common knowledge. By motion duly made and seconded, discussed and approved by at least four members of the board, an order will be issued. The order will contain findings of fact, conclusion of law, affirmative action to be taken. The order will be forwarded to the respondent by certified mail. So, we will now continue with our hearings. Do we have anybody here in the room who wishes to speak about an item that is not on the agenda? Ma'am, do you want to come on in? This is a meeting of the Code Enforcement Board. Is that what you're here for? Do you have a case on before us today? You do. Okay. Okay. Well, we're just getting started. So, have a seat. And we'll call on your case in just a moment. So, no one else is here. Everybody else looks familiar. First item on the agenda, approval of the draft minutes of our February meeting. We did not meet in March. They were sent to members of the board by email. Are there any corrections or edits that need to be made? If not... It was a February meeting. We didn't have a March meeting. That's what I said. It was February 4th. That's what I said. And I said we didn't meet in March. These are February minutes that we're referring to. Thank you. Okay. Do I have a motion to approve? Jeremy Reynolds, so moved. Thank you. A second, please. Second. Thank you, Mr. Gillette. Okay. Do we need a roll call or can we do it all? No. Okay. All those in favor? Aye. Aye. All those opposed? Hearing none. The minutes are approved as written. Okay. We now move on now to the testimony of the staff and anyone else who will be testifying. So, if you're going to be testifying, please stand and raise your right hand. Are either of you planning on speaking today? No? If you're planning on speaking, you need to be sworn in. If you're just here to spectate, you don't need to get up. Okay, Joan. Okay. We have what? Okay. Is the gentleman who just came in going to be testifying? Okay. Then you need to stand up and be sworn. You can stay where you are. You can stay where you are. Where I'm at? Back there in this chair. Yep. Okay. I think that's everybody who's going to be testifying. So, we have some affidavits of compliance. Who on the staff is going to be presenting them? Well, I'll do the first one there. The first case, 24-246. Yes. City of Dunedin versus Michael Patrick Benjamin. So, I'm Michelle Gilbert, the City of Dunedin Code Compliance Inspector, testifying in reference to case 24-246 for the property located at 101 Diane Drive in Dunedin, Florida. At the February 4th, 2025 hearing, the board ordered correction of the violation by May 4th of 2025 or a fine of $250 a day would be imposed. I checked for the permit for the property on February 20th of 2025, found that the violation was corrected. It was issued on the 20th of February. I'm submitting an affidavit of compliance to this board for the board's approval. Okay. Thank you. You're welcome. Do we need a motion to accept? Matt? Matt, I move in case 24-246 for the property located at 101 Diane Drive to find the respondent, Michael Patrick Benjamin, in compliance for correcting the violations and to accept the affidavit of compliance. Thank you. A second, please? Chairman Reynolds, I second. Thank you. Roll call. Mr. Gillette? Aye. Mr. Boldock? Aye. Mr. Walensky? Aye. Mr. Sweetser? Aye. Mr. Reynolds? Aye. Ms. Hunt? Aye. Chair Stone? Aye. The motion passes. Thank you. The next case under item 3, affidavits of compliance, is case 24-315, City of Dunedin v. Walbecker, Florida Properties, Inc., concerning the property at 2602 Bayshore Boulevard. Good afternoon, board. Julie Phillips, co-compliance supervisor. And this is for the property located at 2602 Bayshore Boulevard. Case came before you on December 3, 2024. The board ordered a correction date of February 13, 2025, or a fine in the amount of $250 per day. The property was inspected on February 17, 2025, and the violation was corrected. So I'm requesting that you accept the affidavit of compliance. Thank you. Any questions? No? A motion to accept? Someone needs to make a motion? I'll motion. Thank you. Dan Bolduc. I move in case number 24-315, City v. Wavecaller, Florida Properties, LLC, for the property located at 2602 Bayshore Boulevard to find their respondent in Wavecaller, Florida Properties, in compliance for correcting the violations and to accept the affidavit of compliance. We have a motion. We have a motion. We need a second. Lisa Hunt, second. Thank you. Joan. Okay. Mr. Gillette? Aye. Mr. Bolduc? Aye. Mr. Walensky? Aye. Mr. Sweetser? Aye. Mr. Reynolds? Aye. Ms. Hunt? Aye. Chair Stone? Aye. Aye. Motion passes. And the affidavit is accepted. Item 3C on the agenda, case number 24-865, the City of Dunedin v. Greg Maison concerning the property at 1750 Pinehurst Road. Who is speaking to that? Good afternoon, Board. Julie Phillips, Code Compliance Supervisor. This is in regards to the property located at 1750 Pinehurst Road. The hearing was held on January 7, 2025. The Board ordered the correction date of February 18, 2025, or a fine the amount of $150 per day. The property was inspected on February 18, 2025, and the violation was corrected, and I'm requesting that you accept the affidavit of compliance. Okay. Thank you. Any questions for the inspector? No? A motion to accept the affidavit, please? Jeremy Reynolds, I move in case 24-865, City v. Greg Mason, for property located at 1750 Pinehurst Road. Define the respondent Greg Mason in compliance for correcting the violations to accept the affidavit of compliance. I so move. Thank you. We have a motion. We need a second. Lisa Hunt, second. Thank you, Lisa. Joan? Mr. Gillette? Aye. Mr. Bolduck? Aye. Mr. Walensky? Aye. Mr. Sweetser? Aye. Mr. Reynolds? Aye. Ms. Hunt? Aye. Chair Stone? Aye. The motion passes, and the affidavit of compliance is accepted. The last affidavit of compliance before us this afternoon is in case number 24-666, City of Dunedin v. 745 Main Street, LLC, concerning the property at 1018 New York Avenue. Who is speaking to that? I'm Michelle Gilbert, City of Dunedin co-compliance inspector, testifying in reference to case 24-666, property located at 1018 New York Avenue in Dunedin, Florida. At the Tuesday, February 4th, 2025 hearing, the board ordered a correction of the violation by Tuesday, March 4th of 2025, or a $250 per day fine which should be imposed. I expect that the property, Thursday, February 27th of 2025, found the violation was corrected. I'm submitting an affidavit of compliance to this board for the board's approval. Do any members of the board have any questions for the inspector? No? If not, then I'll entertain a motion. I move in case 24-666, City v. 745 Main Street, LLC, located at 1018 New York Avenue, that we finally respond at 745 Main Street, LLC, in compliance for correcting the violations and accept the affidavit of compliance. I so move. Thank you. We have a motion. I need a second. I'll second. Thank you. Joan? Okay. Mr. Gillette? Aye. Mr. Bolduck? Aye. Mr. Walensky? Aye. Mr. Sweetser? Aye. Mr. Reynolds? Aye. Ms. Hunt? Aye. Chair Stone? Aye. And the motion passes and the affidavit of compliance is accepted. I believe that is the last of the affidavits of compliance. We're moving. No, that was the last one, wasn't it? That's the last one. This is now old business. It's under old business, I believe. That's old business. Okay. In case number 24-754, the City of Dunedin v. Robert Miller, concerning the property located at 1-9-4-0, Canadian Court, who is going to speak on that one? Julie Phillips, Code Compliance Supervisor, and this is regards to the property located in 1940, Canadian Court. The hearing was held on December 3rd, 2024. The board ordered a correction date of January 3rd, 2025, or a fine in the amount of $250 per day. On February 4th, the respondent showed up and we gave him an extension until March 4th to come into compliance. An inspection was done on March 12th, and unfortunately, the property still remains in violation. So I'm requesting that you accept the affidavit of noncompliance. And if you need to see pictures, I have them available for your review. Sure, if you'd like to make your presentation on the screen. Is Mr. Miller in the room? You came in late. You have not been sworn in. Are you planning on speaking? Do you want to? Okay. Would now be a good time to swear him in, or should we wait, Joan? Okay. Let's do the presentation first. Julie Phillips, Code Compliance Supervisor, and this is in reference to Case 24-754. There was one violation at this property for DCO Section 34-1, Offensive Accumulation, and two supporting codes, DCO Section 34-32, Premises to be Kept Clean of an Offensive Accumulation, and International Property Maintenance Code Section 302.8, Motor Vehicles. So this is what the property looked like when I first visited and posted it with a notice of violation. This was September 20th of 2024. He had the two inoperable vehicles located in the driveway. There was an accumulation of debris and trash and outdoor storage. This is on the right side of the property on September 2024. This was looking through the complainant's backyard, Mr. Nick Brovovich. I could not see over the fence. Deputy Skypack came with me. There was a break in the fence where he could get a legal picture of what the backyard looked like. I went back to the property on March 12th, 2025. This was the front of the property. He did get rid of the two inoperable vehicles that were located in the driveway. He cleaned up the right side of the property, which looks fantastic. Looking through the same picture of the backyard from Nick's property, you can see there's quite a bit of debris that's been removed. You couldn't even walk through the property before. Still some items in the backyard that need to be cleaned up. This was on the left side of the home, again, on March 12th, 2025. An accumulation of bicycles in the backyard. A lot of building materials, storage bins. I did ask Steve what some of this was today, and he identified it as trash. So I'm just going to say some of it is trash and items that are covered up by tarps. I went back to the property today, and this is what the front of the property looks like. The right side is still pretty clear. He's been working on the backyard. There's just still a lot of bends and things that need to be removed from the ground. This is what's located against the house. It looks like a bunch of different dog crates, cleaning supplies. We still have some fencing. It looks like possibly some doors, some shutters. Accumulation of fishing poles, fishing tackle. We still have a large accumulation of bikes. Several have been removed, but that's what's left. These are some items that still need to be removed, which he classified today as trash. This is the items on the south side in the backyard. Still a lot of bends, just things that need to be moved out. He's getting there. He's almost there, but he's just not quite there yet. And this is on the left side of the home. And that concludes my presentation. Okay, and I believe you said that the respondent had previously requested an extension update to comply. What was that date extended to? On February 4th, the respondent came, and we gave him until March 4th, 2025. And today is April 1st? Correct. Okay. Questions for the inspector from the board? No? Okay, sir, do you want to come up? I do. Steve Miller, 1940, Canadiana Court. So, Mr. Miller, you heard the inspector's report this afternoon. What do you have to say? I thought that it would have been done by now. I also take care of two disabled parents, one of which is Brokefeld, Broker Hip. I just haven't had a lot of time, but I do work on it every day. You know, besides that, that's about all that I have. Well, you realize you got a free ride because the board didn't meet in March, and you've had an extra four weeks to clean up, and she's shown us photographs that were taken today. You've still got quite a bit of work ahead of you. In all fairness, I mean, she's been coming there twice a week, twice a week, and I walk her through the property, and every time she tells me how much I've done, how much has changed, you know, every time. I'm doing the best I can, and by myself, you know, it's just hard taking care of them. And, you know, there's doctor's appointments. There's, you know. And the first notice was issued in September of last year. Right. Well, we also had two hurricanes come through the yard, plus I got hit by a car, had a compound fracture in my arm, you know. So, Ms. Phillips, what was the prior board order as to the fine that was to begin to be assessed? $250 per day. As of commencing when? March? The compliance date was March 4th. Do you have a recommendation for the board? My recommendation is that you accept the affidavit of noncompliance, and it would go back to that date. Okay. You heard what the inspector said. Do you have anything that you wish to say in response? No. I mean, if I can get even another week or something, I'm sure I could finish it. You've had six months. Well, yeah. Yeah. Okay. So, what we have before us now is an affidavit of noncompliance. We'll need a motion. Can we ask a question first before we move forward? So, the property's listed under Robert H. Miller? Yes. That's your father? Yeah. So, that's the property owner? Yeah. Okay. Do you have authority to speak for him this afternoon? He's got Alzheimer's and dementia, and it's my stuff, so. Has he been legally declared incompetent? Not incompetent. I don't know. Is he under any form of guardianship? Not yet. But you're here representing him, and you have authority to do that? I do. Okay. Other questions from the board? Any question, any concern from the attorney about that? You need to speak up. We would need a written, notarized form by your father to authorize you to speak on their behalf. Once again, the board can consider his testimony, but it wouldn't be binding on this case. Okay. That's all. Did everybody hear that? Okay. So, what's back before the board is whether or not to accept the affidavit of noncompliance. We need a motion, if that's the way we're going forward. Matt? Yes. And one more thing to say. Like, three years ago, I came before you another time, and the code inspector then told me to put everything behind the fence and said, your neighbors might not like it, but you'll be in compliance. And just so now, I've taken everything away from the fence, from the back, which that's where I was told to go last time. Well, I'm not sure how you heard what the inspector said, but the statute reads on the property. The fact that you put it behind a fence doesn't make it magically disappear. That's where she told me to put it, though. Okay. Well, we've seen the photographs here, and it needs to be addressed. Right. It needed to be done. I mean, I don't disagree with that. It just was a lot to take on. What would it take from today to get you there? I'm sorry? What would it take from today to get you there, and how long would it take to get it? More importantly, could we— You give me another week, and I can about finish it. I mean, we could always—could we do a contingent order with the reinspection, where if he's not in compliance, it automatically retroacts back to the 4th of March? That's not how we customarily do it. We would have to have a recommendation from the city staff to extend the compliance date, which we've already done, to March, to March 4th. And then the respondent has had an additional month to clean up the property, because we did not meet in March. So, I mean— Yeah, I'm with you. I'm saying if there's a no-harm way to possibly get him into compliance without being fined, why not do it? I have no problem with that, but I think that given the history, it's probably unrealistic to expect him to complete it in a week. Yeah, in which case we've done no harm and done our best to, you know, give the public as much, you know, flexibility as we have. Okay. Any other questions or comments from members of the board? Yeah. Lisa Hunt. And I have to—I happen to agree with— Sorry. Reynolds. Sorry, Mr. Reynolds. I don't think there's any harm in another 30 days. Okay. So then if that's the case, then we need a motion to extend the compliance date. And that would be until when, Ms. Phillips, to give us time to get it back before us for the May meeting? Excuse me, Chair. You were in the middle of a motion earlier. Do you want to cancel that one? I'm sorry? You were in the middle of a motion with Mr. Walensky when you all started talking. Do you want to cancel that first motion? Well, Mr. Walensky can withdraw it if he's inclined. Okay. So we have a motion to accept the affidavit of noncompliance. Do we have a second? Second. Thank you. Joan, roll call, please. Okay. Mr. Gillette. Aye. Mr. Bolduck. Aye. Mr. Walensky. Aye. Ms. Hunt. Nay. Mr. Sweetser. Aye. Mr. Reynolds. Nay. Chair Stone. Aye. And the motion passes and an order will issue. Thank you, sir. Or the other thing is we didn't finish that motion and there was no second. There was a second. I'm sorry. Who made the second? I second. But you're right. We did not complete the motion with the fine and the new date. Right. He was in the middle of the violation when you stopped it. Okay. So the... How's that? Okay. Let's do that. All right. Yes, please. So I move in case number 27-754 for the property located at 1940 Canadian Deanna Court to find the respondent Robert Miller to in repeat violation of the city code section 105-27.1.1.1f and is currently in noncompliance. The respondent shall suffer a fine of $250 per day from date of March 4th, 25 until such time as the property is brought into compliance. The respondent is hereby ordered to contact the Code of Compliance Office for a re-inspection of the property to verify compliance with this order. We now have a complete motion before us. We need a second. Second. Thank you, Mr. Bolduc. Okay. I'll go through the... Okay. Mr. Gillette. Aye. Mr. Bolduc. Aye. Mr. Walensky. Aye. Ms. Hunt. Mr. Sweetser. Aye. Mr. Reynolds. Aye. Chair Stone. Aye. And the motion passes and an order will issue. Thank you, sir. Board, if I may, quickly, the complainant, Nick Brozovich, who wanted to come and speak, he was here at the last Code Board meeting at the last minute, could not make it, so he would like me to read you a quick email that he sent, if that's okay with the board. It says, unfortunately, I cannot make it today's meeting. I would have liked to speak to the board to express my view of the situation and my frustration. Please let the board know that the Brozovich family, located at 1950 Canadiana, are very frustrated and happy with what has been done so far. Seven months is far too long for this property to have so much junk. There is still a long, long way to go. From our perspective, the offenders are not taking seriously and are taking advantage of the leniency of the board as given. Thank you for all you've done it to this point, Nick Brozovich. Thank you. Okay. Perhaps next time you should share that before we get to the motion stage. I had a problem jumping in. Thank you. Thank you. Is that part of your official record? Yes. Okay. I believe that is all of the old business. We have some new business before us as well. I see three deputies in the back of the room. Are you here for educational purposes? Okay. And someone came in, several people came in after we've sworn in, people who will be testifying? Are any of you planning on speaking before the board? Okay. All right. New business. Case number 24-966, City of Dunedin versus Phyllis and Julie Williams, concerning the property located at 50 Squire Court. Which of the inspectors will be speaking? My name is Michelle Gilbert, co-compliance inspector for 50 Squire Court, case 24-966. The respondent is Phyllis Williams and Julie Williams, and it's zoned R-60. Number of violations present at this property are four. The first violation is the Florida Building Code 105.1, permits required, any owner or 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 impact-resistant coverings, 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 the required permit. Second violation is the International Property Maintenance Code, Section 304.13, exterior structures, windows, skylight, and door frames. Every window, skylight, door, and frame shall be kept in sound condition, good repair, and weather tight. Violation 3, International Property Maintenance Section 304.13.1, windows, broken glazing. All glazing materials shall be maintained free from cracks and holes. Repair or replace window or glazing materials to ensure that it is free from cracks or holes. And 4, violation 4, is International Property Maintenance Code, Section 601.2, Mechanical and Electrical Requirements. The owner of this structure shall provide and maintain mechanical and electrical facilities and equipment in compliance with these requirements. A person shall not occupy as owner-occupied or permit other persons or person to occupy any premises that does not comply with the requirements of this chapter. The notice of violation was sent certified mail to the owners and posted to the property and emailed on January 9, 2025, with a compliance date of March 3, 2025. Notice of hearing was sent certified mail to the owners and posted to property and emailed on March 13, 2025. Received certified mail to the owner, 2025, received certified mail to the owner, 2025, at 3.004 p.m. And the Dunedin address was returned to sender February 12, 2025, at 3.002 p.m. I received certified mail delivery confirmation for the notice of hearing to the Clearwater address March 15, 2025, at 3.38 p.m. The Dunedin address was attempted delivery on March 15, 2025, at 12.22 p.m. A notice was left because there was no authorized recipient available to accept it. This is the posted notice of violation to the door on January 9, 2025. The yellow arrow depicted on this photo shows a window in the back that was damaged and broken. And that was, before it was removed, December 30th of 2024. This is the complainant's photo that was sent. At that time, we received a call out and the two deputies that are in the back, Deputy Skypack and Deputy Brooks, were with us because they had multiple transient people staying in sheds in the back, in the rear of the house. At time of inspection, there was many things going on, you know, open fire, they found narcotics, just many things. The owner, the mother, did tell the people who were there at the time that they had to leave, they were living in all the sheds and had built little shanties and such in the back. On the January 9th, when we were there, we noticed the rear window was removed at the home and it was boarded up. This is another window that was removed and replaced without a permit. This is January 9th of 2025. Another window that was replaced without a permit, January 9th, 2025. Window replaced without a permit, January 9th, 2025. Glazing materials were missing from the original metal-framed windows, January 9th, 2025. This is how the transient people's, when the door's locked in the front, this is how they get in and out. Front window was replaced with no permit, January 9th, 2025, you can see there. There's additional evidence of the windows being removed and replaced without permits, January 9th, 2025. And these are the older style. There's some more additional evidence of the windows being removed and replaced without permits, January 9th, 2025. Another one on the side from January 9th, 2025. One at the back by the gate, same date, January 9th, 2025. There was evidence of the Duke Energy Meter being tampered with. This has happened on more than one occasion. They removed the locks on it and then they bust in and try and get the electricity to the home, which has been shut off for a very long time now. Same with the water. They have no water there either. Just recent, as of March 17th, I had confirmation from the utilities department that there was no water at the property. It is dormant. I had to call Duke Energy to re-secure the meter. And that was on March 5th, 2025. So they had to put a new one because you could see at the bottom where they were trying to get it off or they got it off. And the meter remains secured now. When I went back March 13th of 2025. And this is the posting to the notice of hearing to the front door from March 13th, 2025. This is the email from our utility department confirming that utility account is dormant and shut off at the meter. A recommendation for case number 24966 for these four violations. Florida Building Code Section 105.1, permits required. International Property Maintenance Code Section 304.13, exterior structures, windows and skylight, and door frames. International Property Maintenance Code Section 304.13.1, windows broken, glazing. International Property Maintenance Code Section 601.2, mechanical and electrical requirements. Requesting compliance on or before May 6th of 2025. We're giving the severity of these violations as major. I'm requesting a fine on the amount of $250 per day per violation. For each day the violation continues to exist. And I just need to speak also because we get calls all the time and complaints all the time about this property. The mother tries very hard to keep her daughter in line. But this house is a home for transient people. They come and they go as they please and they move around. I have multiple properties that are the same and they're all together in that area. When one house is taken away and they don't have access to it anymore, they move on to another one. This one, they happen to be staying and squatting at 50 Squire now. And the neighbors are done with it. They don't want to have to deal with it anymore. So I'm going to leave this to you guys to deliberate. So before we open it up to the board for questions, first I need to ask, to clarify, who is Phyllis and who is Julie? Phyllis is the mother. Julie is the daughter and she's currently in the hospital. She was hit by a car. Which one was hit by the car, Julie? The daughter, Julie. And do we, I assume neither are residing at this property? She resides there. Julie resides there. Yes. The mother lives in Clearwater. Okay. Okay, is there anyone here who wants to speak on behalf of the respondents? Can we ask questions of city staff first? Well, I just want to find... Phyllis is here. She's here. I have tried for a while to get Julie out of the house. Ma'am, can you tell us your name? Phyllis Williams. Your address? My address is 2370 Jamaican Street, number 42, Clearwater, Florida, 33763. And your interest in this case? That is where my daughter is staying presently, at 50 Squire Court. Okay. So you are one of the named respondents? Yes. Correct. Okay. Jeremy asked if there were any questions for the staff at this point. Yeah, I have some questions for staff. We usually do that before the respond test. Yeah. The woman came in later. I wasn't sure why she was here. Can we sit down? Let's hear from you, and then we'll open it up to questions from the board directed to either of you. What do you have to say, ma'am? What I have to say is I had bought this house, and I had put my daughter's name on it so that if anything happened, she would have it. I didn't realize it was going to be such a problem. I spent all my money on this house. She has not spent a dime on it. My problem was I put both names on the deed. I am trying to get a lawyer to take care of it. I've contacted Gulf... Gulf... Legal services. Yes, Gulf services. Legal system. I've gone through paperwork for the last three days trying to get everything together, and I filled out the application, and I lost it, so now I'm going to have to go there and just bring everything. But, yes, I've been trying. I can't get through her head. Ma'am, I need a little clarity here. What is it you're hoping a lawyer can assist you do? Get her name off the deed so that I can sell the house. I've paid her taxes. I've paid her water. I'm not paying anymore. I can't afford it. She's put me in the hole. All right. So we heard code and compliance staff testify that your daughter is in the hospital. She was in the hospital. I'm not sure. She's back not. Okay. What sort of communications do you have with your daughter? Not a whole lot. She's broken I don't know how many phones. If I get a call from Michelle, I get over there. If there's people there, I get them out. Last time I got a call, nobody was there. Yeah, nobody was there. There was one person there. Oh, that's right. That one fellow. And I told him he had to leave. But there wasn't anybody in the backyard. There wasn't anything being constructed again. And I'm at fault for the windows. I did not know we needed a permit. And I had one replaced. Okay. Well, since you're at the podium and you've been sworn in, have you been sworn in? I believe you were. Okay. Do any other members of the board have questions? Phyllis Williams? I do. Dan Bolduc. So just to understand, so the reason you're both names are on the deed, correct? That is correct. So in order for you to restrict her from the property, her name has to be removed from the deed, correct? That is correct. So she can still come and go as she pleases until that happens? Until that happens. Okay. And did they give you a time frame once you fill out the application with the county on when that will go through? No. Okay. Just for a note for the board, usually takes about 30 to 45 days to get someone's name removed from the deed. If they cooperate. If everything is submitted properly, yeah. Other board members have questions? I have a couple. State your name, please, just to make it easier for the transcribers. A couple questions I have. This started the first inspections in January. Am I correct? Yes. Okay. And that's when, I can't remember all the photographs, that the windows had been replaced. Well, they had been replaced along the way. On the way. Yeah. I'm sure they were done a long time before that. You can see that they're all different. Okay. Has there been any application for a building permit? Not yet. Okay. So, it's going to have to be an after-the-fact billing permit. Mm-hmm. That's, you take that for the billing department. The question I also have is, we're into the fourth month starting. This has been three months. And my concern is, I understand you're looking for legal counsel, trying to do something with your daughter. But in the meantime, I don't see, the two are connected, but I also see that there's two issues here. There's your legal standing with trying to sell the property, which you stated. But it's also the ongoing condition of the property. And so, I'm just curious, do you have anybody in mind to help you correct those issues? I have somebody that will help, but I have to get the permits. I don't know how much the permits are. Yeah. We'll help her with that. Okay. Yeah. We'll help her get that. It's the other issues that we need to. Okay. Yeah. I mean, what I'm seeing is kind of a mixture here of issues, the condition of the property and then these legal ramifications. It'd be nice to be able to separate it somehow. Maybe anybody else on the board has any questions or input on that. It would be kind of make clarity for her condition. So, we have one case with one case number and we have, under that case number, violations of both the building code and the International Property Maintenance Code. Four separate violations. It seems like the controlling one is the absence of permits. Is that correct? Yes. The other three are supporting codes for the permit. Yes. Okay. Yeah. And the fact that the house has had no electricity and no water now for a very long time, which International Property Maintenance Code states you have to have water, electricity, and heat. Heat. If it's to be occupied. Correct. And she's living in it. And the daughter is living there. Correct. Without electricity or water. Correct. Okay. So, I have a question about the per day fine. Mr. Reynolds? Yes. Is there a conflict? I know that the Florida statute limits it on a per day, but does it specify the limit per day or limit per day per occurrence, counsel? Yes. You may do per day per violation. That is authorized on the Florida statute. So, we could fine 1,000 per day per violation at the first go around this one? No. For a first-time violator, you can fine up to 500 per day per violation. And I believe the city has recommended 250 for this case per violation. Was the recommendation of 250 per day for all of the violations or each of them? Per day per violation. Per day per violation. For violation, $1,000. $1,000 a day? Okay. How much is the property worth, roughly? Does anybody know? Well, I'm not sure we need to go there, but it sounds like Ms. Williams has financial challenges already. I'm not sure that fines are really going to help ameliorate this situation. I'm merely making a recommendation. That's why you guys are deliberating for that. If you choose to change it, that's up to the board. Okay. Any other board members with questions? Dan Bolduc, one more question. So, once you get the permits, how long do you think it would take for you to get everything that is required here and the violations fixed? Before we try and answer that, I think we need to be clear on what compliance would entail. It seems like the windows have been replaced already. Some are replaced. Some are not replaced. Some don't have glazing at all. So, they're being replaced with probably not the correct windows. Some are toenailed ones. Some are put in. Like, it's just... Okay. They need to be looked at by a contractor. They need to be installed by a professional person. Right. And what is the city's position regarding occupancy without utilities? We can quote it in the International Property Maintenance Code. We recommend that nobody stay in there. Um, but we can't force somebody not to live in their home. Why not? And another issue is, is, you know, she... Mrs. Williams does her best. Every time she goes there, everybody gets kicked out. Right. But the second she leaves, it's not even within a week. And the daughter is inviting them back in. So, she trespasses them off the property. And then the daughter invites them back in, which negates hers. Because every time she brings somebody in, and then the next person brings a person in, and it's like the domino effect, which we're trying to... We've been trying to help her as much as we can. I mean, I've looked up legal things so that she can call, maybe get assistance. Well, the deputies apparently are familiar with the property. Very, very familiar. But none of those issues about squatters or invitees are before us right now. That's because we can't. And you yourself have said that the people who are staying in the back have been invited by one of the property owners to be there. But since then, the only shed that's there is a permitted shed that did have a permit for it. And they were told they couldn't live in it. The last time Mrs. Williams was there, there was nobody in it. And last time I was there, she kicked somebody out of it. And the deputies were there with us at the time, and my supervisor was with me. So I have a question for the deputies. You can decide who wants to answer it. When you get a call saying that there's a trespasser on the property, what do you require in order to ask the person to leave? You can come up here, please. And just for the record, state your name. Deputy Joseph Brooks. Okay, you need to speak closer to the mic. Deputy Joseph Brooks. Okay, so if you get a call from Ms. Williams saying that there are people on the property without her permission, what is your customary response? We try to ascertain whether Julie Williams invited them to stay there or not, and if she did for how long. I haven't run into anybody there yet who wasn't invited by Julie Williams. We can ask them to leave. Sometimes they do. But that tends to be a civil issue, as she said, because Julie Williams invites them over. Are you seeing the same people there? Sometimes. Sometimes it's the same people. Sometimes it's new people. There was a guy there back in September, October. We were in the process of getting him evicted. He ended up, I believe, leaving voluntarily right before the eviction went through. And now there's new people. I'm familiar with who most of them are. Sometimes they're there. Sometimes they're not. My understanding is they're always invited. They tell you that they're invited? Yes. Do you have a question? Yes, please. Has the staff or the sheriff's department, have anyone ever met Julie Williams? Oh, yes. Many times. You have? I've talked to her many times. Has anybody actually been inside the house? I haven't been inside. I've been in the backyard. We're not, we don't, we have to be invited in the house. Okay. Last time I spoke to Julie, she wouldn't even come to the door. She talked to me through a window with it open this big. What about the sheriff's department with, with knowing that there's no power, no water? Can you guys get some type of document to let you in the house so somebody can actually see the conditions in the house? And based on those, I don't know that those conditions, she could be evicted out of the house, even though it's, it's in her name, right? I don't know that the absence of water and power allows us to just go into the house. Um, we've been invited and I've been in there several times. I've been invited in several times. And can I ask the question? Does it look as bad as the inside look as bad as the outside? In what regard? Um, filth, garbage. It's not the worst house I've ever seen, but it is pretty dirty. It's pretty dirty. Yeah. There's no water or power. So at what point do you consider BA 52 with this individual? Julie Williams has been bankrupted many times. Okay. Um, question, Lisa Hunt. Sure. Um, if somebody called in a welfare check, would you be able to go in? Circumstantial. Depends on what we have. Sure. It would depend on the information that we were given going up to there. Does it, does anybody else have questions for the deputy? No. No. Thank you. Thank you guys. So, so Ms. Williams, what, um, what Ms. Gilbert said was that you need to apply for a permit. Yes. To address the windows issue. Do we have any sort of timeline as to how long that might take? I'm thinking maybe about six weeks to get it done properly. When she, once she, um, gets a contractor on board, usually they handle all the permitting for them. Uh, permits turn around timer right now, uh, five to 10 business days, usually not that long. And then they would have to go, obviously there's a lot of windows that would have to be taken out, reinstalled to code. None of them would pass, uh, the wind, the wind loads regulation for the building code. So, um, they'd have to be removed and put back in, uh, according to, um, the Florida building code. But we're willing to work with her for that. She just needs to obtain her, her permit for that. Um, as far as the electricity being turned back on and the water being turned back on, those are fines that are, that have been ascertained by, uh, Duke Energy and the city. So they, to get them put back on, they have to be paid, but she can't keep paying every single time the daughter gets in trouble. Right. We, we, we understand the family situation and we're not unsympathetic. Um, but what people have said this afternoon is that if someone who's a legal owner chooses to live in a house without utility service, that's not necessarily a violation of any code. If they were to try and rent a property in that condition, then that would be a different situation. I guess the concern is where are they using the bathroom? How are they bathing? You know, these are, these are life, like mean, well, you know, obviously the person who, who, who isn't here. Well, um, they should. I think that's the bigger point is they're not here. So we don't even ask, we don't even approach the question. Right. Okay. So I think if we just stick to the violations and then let's look at this as just the violations for the permits, right. And, and then, you know, Phyllis, my recommendation to you would be first is to get her name off that deed. So then you can do the proper things to restrict her from the property, which would then alleviate the sheriff's from having to go there. No trespassing signs, et cetera, et cetera, which will allow you to fix up the property and sell it. Right. So I'm trying to do. Yeah. Okay. So what I'm hearing from Ms. Gilbert is six weeks to get a contractor and a permit for the glazing issues, the window issues. Does that sound about right to you? I can help her too. I'll help her with it. Okay. Is six weeks enough? Um, I, I, I, I asked you earlier how we can schedule these compliance dates so that there's enough time so that if they're not in compliance, it gets on the agenda with notice. We usually give 30 days to obtain a permit. So if we give her, let's give her 30, so 45, uh, give, give, we can give her two months. That should be sufficient. Two months? That should be sufficient. That should be sufficient. Is the new date June 6th then? Yes. Thank you. As a recommendation? Yes. Thank you. Okay. So we need a motion. Are there any other questions? No. Okay. So we need a motion. Someone needs to make a motion. Who would like to try? I'll motion. Thank you. I move in case number two, four dash nine, six, six city versus Phyllis and Julie Williams for the property located at 50 Squire court in violation of the city of Dundee code sections 105.1, 304.13, 304.13.1, and 601.2. Will the respondent Phyllis and Julie Williams to come into compliance before June 6th of 2025? If not in compliance, a fine of $250 will be imposed until the compliance is met. The respondent is hereby ordered to contact the code and compliance office for a re-inspection of the property to verify compliance with this order. Just to verify that's $250 per day per violation. Do you understand that, ma'am? Yes. Okay. I'd like to amend your motion to include the number of violations. You specify it's 250 days per violation, but in the motion, you specialize how many violations? Total of four violations at $250 per day per violation. So you are talking about $1,000 total per day? Total per day, $1,000. Okay. That's the motion before us. Do we have a second? Jeremy Reynolds, I'll second. Second. Thank you. Joan? Mr. Gillette? Aye. Mr. Bolduck? Aye. Mr. Walensky? Aye. Ms. Hunt? Aye. Mr. Sweetser? Aye. Mr. Reynolds? Aye. Chair Stone? Aye. The motion passes and an order will issue. And ma'am, you understand that this is going down a parallel track to your efforts to obtain legal assistance to clear the title? Yes. Okay. Thank you. Thank you for coming. Okay. We have one more item of new business. Who was it who said we had an easy agenda today? Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Okay. Case number 25-1135. The City of Dunedin v. Luigi Collage Revocable Trust. Luigi Collage Trustee concerning the property at 2855 Long Putt Court. Is anyone here in the room responding? Have you been sworn in, sir? Okay. Have a seat. We'll hear from the city first and then we'll hear from you. Okay? Who is presenting on this? Good afternoon, board. Julie Phillips, Code Compliance Supervisor. I'll be doing a PowerPoint presentation for 2855 Long Putt Court, case 25-1135. And this property is currently in compliance, so I'll be requesting a declaration of violation. The respondent in this case is Luigi Collage. I hope I'm saying that properly. Revocable Trust and Luigi Collage Trust. The address is 2855 Long Putt Court, and this is a single-family home located in the R200 zoning district. There's one violation at this property, which violates DCO Section 103-14.4, transient uses within certain zoning districts, prohibition. Rentals under three months in duration are not allowed in residential neighborhoods or other districts, not specifically allowing for such uses. There's also the supporting code, DCO Section 103-14.6.B, prima facie evidence, advertising or holding out a dwelling unit for tourist housing or vacation rental use. I posted the property in City Hall with an affidavit of posting and notice of violation and sent a copy certified mail on March 6, 2023, with a compliance date of March 16, 2025. Pardon me. I see you see the 2023. I'm going to correct that to 2025. And I received the certified mail delivery confirmation on March 11, 2025. I posted the property in City Hall with an affidavit of posting and notice of hearing on March 17, 2025. This is the property that's listed on Airbnb. It's advertised as wedding and events, sleeps 35, salt-heated pool near the beach. And this was taken on, excuse me, the 5th. So, when I went to book the property, I noticed in March, you can see the property has already been booked three times in March for about four days and then once in April for three days. So, I went ahead and tried to book the property for April 1st through the 3rd, which was two nights, and it took me to the payment page. In this zoning district, of course, you can only rent four times a year. It's only 90 days or more. Again, in May, they have the property booked for two days, and in June, again, for three days. I checked the rest of the year, and so far, it was clear. This is the affidavit of posting and notice of violation that was posted on the door on March 6, 2025. And this is a closer view of that posting. I went back to the, well, first I spoke to Chris. His stepson called me. He said he wasn't aware that it was a violation because they're an R200, I guess, where they're located, which is north off Curlew Road. They're surrounded by county property, and he thought that he would be able to get it rezoned or be able to rent. Once he asked me what he needed to do to comply, he said that he would get it taken care of immediately. I went back to the website on the 17th. I tried to book the property. It still allowed me to do it for seven nights. So I tried to book the property June 16th to the 23rd, and it gave me a weekly discount and then took me to the payment page. These are two reviews that I found. One stayed one night. Another stayed one night. This is my affidavit of posting and notice of hearing. That was done on March 17th, 2025, and there's a closer view of my posting. I went back to the website on the 18th. Again, I was able to book the property for one night, March 25th through the 26th, and it took me to the payment page. Same reviews. There was no additional reviews. And then I went back to the property on the 26th, and it had been changed to meet the 90-day requirement. And I'll let the board deliberate. So I have a question. The slides you just presented indicate that the property is in Palm Harbor. That's their listing? On property appraiser, it's located in Dunedin. The gentleman is shaking. He said, okay. Questions from board members for Ms. Phillips? So, yeah. So I caught that, too. So it looks like the actual address is Long Putt Court. Yes. Right. Which is in Dunedin. But they're listing it as Palm Harbor, potentially, too. But it's Dunedin. Yeah. Okay. Other board members with questions? Sorry, Jeremy Reynolds. Whenever we accept an affidavit of compliance, there are an order from the board that goes out accepting it. I'm sorry. Can you speak a little slower? Oh, sure. When we accept an affidavit of compliance, is there an order created from the board that gets recorded, created, based on our action? It's not an affidavit of compliance. She's asking for a declaration of violation. Oh. Yeah. I thought she said it was in compliance. It hasn't been heard before the board yet until today. Okay. Currently, it is now in compliance, but she's asking for a declaration of violation. Okay. Okay. Well, why can't we do both today? Okay. Are there, like, notice requirements to accept an affidavit of compliance after the fact? It's a declaration of violation. It's a finding by this board that they were in violation and that the violation has currently or has presently been abated. So it's a finding that we're making. They came into compliance, but after the compliance date. So I'm requesting the declaration. So if they come in violation again, it would be a repeat violation. Yes, and the reason for my question is, is there something we could physically mail to Airbnb as a copy of our order saying that this place was on their platform operating impermissibly? That hasn't been looked into. It's something that probably could be discussed in the future, but I don't deal with Airbnb when I take cases to the code board. Okay, so currently the city is requesting a declaration of violation, and we've heard from the city that the property is now in compliance. The listings have been amended to reflect the 90-day minimum. So would someone care to make a motion? I'll motion. Thank you, Dan. I move in case number 25-1135, City vs. Luigi Collage Revocable Trust, for the property located at 2855 Long Putt Court. Find the respondent did correct the violation on or before the compliance date of March 16th. They are now in compliance. This declaration of violation serves as notice that if the respondent is found in violation of code section 103-14.4, again, within five years from the date of this order, an immediate fine of up to $500 per day may be imposed. We have a motion. Do we have a second, please? I'll second it. Thank you, Matt. Joan? Mr. Gillette? Aye. Mr. Bolduck? Aye. Mr. Walensky? Aye. Ms. Hunt? Aye. Mr. Sweetser? Aye. Mr. Reynolds? Aye. Chair Stone? Aye. Motion passes. Thank you all. I see no other new business on the agenda. I see under other business an opportunity for city staff comments. Does the staff have anything they wish to say? No, sir. Does the city attorney have something they wish to share? No. Anybody on the board have something they want to share with us? No? Okay. So our next meeting date will then be on May 6, 2025. I'll entertain a motion to adjourn. Jeremy Reynolds, so moved. Thank you. Second. Second. All those in favor? Aye. Aye. Thank you. I'll see you next month.