arrive. In the meantime, please silence your phones, put them on mute or vibrate. And if you've not been here before and you haven't heard my spiel, when you come to speak, please state your name and keep your mouth close to the microphone so the people transcribing the hearing are able to clearly understand you. Thanks. Okay, we're going to get started now. It is now 2.13. This is the March 3rd, 2026 meeting of the Dunedin Code Enforcement Board. For those of you who arrive late, please silence or mute your cell phones. And if you are going to be speaking, please speak as I am with your mouth close to the mic. And for the sake of the transcriber, state your name. We're going to have a call to order. Mr. Baldwin. I now call to order this meeting of the Dunedin Code Enforcement Board for March 3rd, 2026. 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 Dunedin has occurred. In order to meet that obligation, all parties or 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 person presenting the City's case, or the City Attorney may question any witnesses before the board. The respondent or his, 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, conclusions of law, affirmative action to be taken. The order will be forwarded to the respondent by certified mail. We will now continue with our hearings. Thank you. The next item on the agenda is citizen input. This is an opportunity for people who are here from the public to address the board on matters that are not on the agenda. I see two folks in the room here. Do either of you want to speak? No? Okay. Okay. The next item on the agenda is a consent agenda. It would be the approval of a minute, draft minutes, of our last meeting in February 2026. I'll entertain a motion. I'll motion. Dan Bolduc. Second, Walter Sweetser. Broco. Thank you. Mr. Bolduc. Aye. Mr. Walensky. Aye. Mr. Sweetser. Aye. Chair Stone. Aye. And the motion passes. The next item on our agenda would be swearing in the staff, anyone from the public who's going to be testifying before us this afternoon. If you're going to be testifying, please stand so you can be sworn in. Okay. We have no affidavits of compliance today. Okay. We have no old business today. Is that correct? Okay. Brings us to the first item of new business. I'm going to have to recuse myself. My property abuts that of Mr. Ritter's. At this point, I think the board will take a short recess. Counsel? Our board chair does have a voting conflict. He successfully completed the voting conflict form and turn it in to board council. At this time, we do not have a quorum to hear this item. We do have confirmation that our board member number five is scheduled to arrive in the next five minutes. So we'll take a five-minute recess and allow for that board member to arrive so we can reassess quorum. Thank you. For an additional five-minute recess, all in agreement? Okay. Yep. And that should take us to 2.29 p.m. Okay. Counsel, do you want to advise us on the process for selecting someone to chair in the absence of our vice chair who's not here today? So we don't have a formalized process. However, we can choose the most senior board member to proceed with leading the hearing as we will not have the chair present or the vice chair present. So if any of our board members is interested in proceeding with leading the hearing, you may speak now. Okay. So we need a motion for a chair. Yeah. I would prefer to have a motion in a second. Yes. Okay. I'll entertain a motion. I'll motion to chair Dan Wolder as the most senior on the board outside of the chair and vice chair. May I have a second on that? Lisa Hunt, second. Thank you. And you don't have to do a roll call. Just, yeah, if you can. Yeah, just all in favor. All in favor. Yeah. All in favor. All in favor. Aye. Aye. So at this time, we had our board member, Lisa Hunt, join us. We will be moving forward with the new business item number, case number 252138, the city versus David Ritter. Can I have your last name? Bulldog. Our board member Bulldog will be leading the hearing for this item. We do have a quorum right now with four members and we have our board chair step down as he, you know, has admitted to have a voting conflict. Like I stated before, we do have a successful voting conflict form that has been submitted to board council. Now, before we move forward with this item, I want to say a couple of things. I'm not sure if you had voting conflicts before, but essentially we're going to treat this code enforcement case just like we've treated every other code enforcement case before. Each party to the hearing, the city and David Ritter will have an opportunity to present testimony, introduce evidence, present any witnesses. If they do have any witnesses, the opposing party will have an opportunity to question that other party's witnesses. We might have a video, potential video as part of our, the respondent's evidence. I'm not sure if you're familiar with the video, evidentiary record, but I want to emphasize that the Florida rules of evidence do not apply to code enforcement boards. So I can't really entertain objections as to the relevance of the video or any so forth. However, I may have questions about the contents of any of the party's evidence. It doesn't necessarily just have to be the respondent. Okay. So I might jump in and have some questions. The board member may have some questions in regards to the evidence as well. So you're welcome to kind of pose those questions before the evidence is shown. Okay. And with that being said, I'll hand it over to our intern board chair for today. Thank you. So at this time, the city code enforcement, Julie will present, and then Mr. Ritter will give you an opportunity after the evidence is presented to come up and speak and provide any additional information that you have for the board. Good afternoon, board. Julie Phillips, code compliance supervisor for the city of Dunedin. I will be doing a PowerPoint presentation for 1776 Pasadena Drive, case 25-2138. The respondent in this case is Dave Ritter. He resides at 1776 Pasadena Drive in Dunedin, 34698. And this is a single-family home located in the R-60 zoning district. There's one violation at this property, which violates DCO Section 34-1 Environment Offensive Accumulation. It shall be unlawful for any person to accumulate, leave, dump, or store openly on any premises within a residential zoning classification, any building materials, automobile tires, inoperable vehicles, any and all other articles of personal property which may be seen from the public right-of-way or abutting properties for a period greater than three days, unless the storage of such articles on residential premises is specifically allowed under the provisions of the code. I also have supporting code IPMC 302.8 motor vehicles as adopted by the Dunedin Code of Ordinances. Except as provided in other regulations, no inoperative or unlicensed motor vehicle shall be parked, kept, or stored on any premises, and no vehicle shall at any time be in the state of major disassembly, disrepair, or in the process of being stripped or dismantled. Painting of vehicles is prohibited unless conducted and signed approved spray booth. I posted the property in City Hall with an affidavit of posting and notice of violation. The copy was also sent certified mailed to the owner on December 17, 2025, with a compliance date of January 30, 2026. I did not receive the signed certified mail receipt. It's showing that it's still in transit. I posted the property in City Hall with an affidavit of posting and a notice of today's hearing, and a copy was sent certified to the owner of record on February 20, 2026. This is a copy of the certified mail that was sent for the notice of violation and the notice of hearing. On December 5, 2025, I received an online complaint from the neighbor to the west, Phil Stone. The complaint spoke to the offensive accumulation in the front of the property located 1776 Pasadena Drive. The unregistered vehicles behind the six-foot fence, construction debris, and automobile tires. I phoned the owner, David Ritter, and advised him of the complaint. Mr. Ritter stated he was cleaning out his garage and the property would be cleaned up by Monday. On Monday, December 8, 2026, I met Mr. Ritter at his property. Excuse me, 2025. I met Mr. Ritter at his property. We discussed the complaint, items stored outside, such as car parts, cushions, coolers, buckets, wood, cement blocks, and a variety of other personal items. Mr. Ritter stated that he was going to apply for a permit and screen in his front porch. I asked Mr. Ritter if he wanted to show me what was in his backyard in response to the complaint, and he declined. And as you can see out front, there's cushions, there's wood, there's car parts, empty bottles, and accumulation of personal items. The items stored by the garage include white fencing, buckets, car parts, coolers, a blue tarp, and other various items. I advised Mr. Ritter I would circle back with him next week. On December 17, 2025, sorry for the typos, I drove to the location and there was no change. There were still many personal items, such as car parts, cushions, tops to plastic bins, signs, chemicals, and cement blocks, etc. I posted the property with an affidavit of posting and notice of violation. There was a large accumulation of personal items stored on the front porch. There was also, I don't know, I'm going to say maybe a 10-foot ladder stored in front of the garage. There's also a vehicle in the backyard. Mr. Stone resides in the property to the west, so I asked him if I could come take pictures from his property. This is standing in Mr. Stone's driveway, looking at the van in the backyard. There's also two slats of fencing that are not attached on the west side of the property that are not securely attached. They allow me to legally see a portion of Mr. Ritter's backyard and some of the items in it from the complainant's property. There was some pilings, wood piling on the ground. Looks like an old taxi, but I'm not sure. Yellow vehicle in the back doesn't look like it's been driven in a while. So, there's lattice, old fencing, crates, cushions, PVC, and some dead vegetation. On January 13, 2026, I reached out to Mr. Ritter and asked him how progress was going. Mr. Ritter stated that he is working on it. On February 2, 2026, I went back to the property after the compliance date to do a re-inspection. There's still a surfboard behind the picnic table, a large tree limb under the table, and fence posts and random wood on the ground. There was still a large amount of personal items that can be seen from the street. Items the left of the garage still present, such as buckets, a tarp, white fencing, igloo cooler. Items to the right of the garage are still present. Car parts, a file cabinet. The vehicle in the backyard is still present. On February 5, 2026, I reached out to Mr. Stone and asked him if I could take updated photos from his property. Mr. Stone agreed and Inspector Gilbert and I drove to the location and there had been no improvements from what I could see to the backyard. Again, I was able to see a portion of the backyard through the slats that are not secure. Vehicles still parked there. Same lattice, crates. There was also some tires stored in, I'm going to assume it's a shed, and some sort of cooler in front of it. Let's see, on February 20th, I posted for today's hearing, there was a bed frame that was added to the front porch. The bins that were originally stored in the driveway were moved to the front porch and all other items still remain. The surfboard and the wood pile are still present on the left side of the property. The items in the driveway remain, such as parts, cushions, concrete blocks, empty containers, a mop bucket. The items in front of the garage include a blue tarp, a variety of hoses, a dolly, file cabinet, car parts, buckets, and white fencing. To the left of the garage, there's a large blue desk, a gaming chair, or some sort of chair, igloo cooler, a tarp, and a mop bucket. And this, I just wanted to show you the neighborhood. They both live in a well-maintained neighborhood that has clean lines. So if you're looking to the north of Mr. Ritter's property, down Pasadena, I just wanted to give you a visual of what the neighborhood actually looks like. They're very clean properties. And this is looking to the south of Pasadena Drive. On March 2nd, 2026, I went back to the property yesterday to get updated pictures. There's surfboard behind the picnic table, the tree limbs still under the table, and other pieces of wood are still present. The items remain in the driveway. All items remain out front and on the front porch. All personal items still remain in the driveway on the left and right of the garage. And I did go back to see if anything changed in the backyard. Slats are still not attached. I could still see tires from the backyard, some wood, yard debris, cement blocks. The vehicle is still present. Lattice, crates, PVC, and dead vegetation. And that concludes my PowerPoint presentation. Thank you, Julie. Mr. Ritter, would you like to come up and speak? One sec. Please state your full name and address. David Ritter, 1776 Pasadena Drive. Thank you. Taking pictures in my backyard is a violation of my Fourth Amendment right. Taking pictures over the fence is a violation. This is the fifth or sixth time that Dunning has violated those rights. I have emails from Joe May asking people to go in the backyard, take pictures over the fence. This is a violation of my rights. So you guys don't need to be looking in my backyard. As far as my property, I've been there 25 years probably. I bought the house and code immediately jumped on me. Had no sighting on it for three years. Completely have updated it. Ten years ago, Phillip Stone moved behind me. Bought the house behind me. Sight unseen from Massachusetts. He was an attorney up there. He was disciplined up there. So then he came down here. He bought the house sight unseen for $211,000 when nothing was selling for $211,000. Proceeded to put $300,000 into the house. So now he thinks he's in a $500,000 house when his house, my house, and most of the houses in the neighborhood are shitholes. Wood frame, 1,000 square foot, asbestos siding houses. But he thinks he's in charge of the HOA. Goes around, takes pictures, damages my property every chance he gets. Pulls pickets down off my fence. Piles leaves three foot high on my fence. Came in, put invasive bamboo along my fence, right under his own power lines. Well, anyone that's from Florida knows, you put bamboo, you're going to have rats. Puts a swimming pool in with no cage. Now we've got more rats. I buy buckets of rat poisoning. And I've got cats over there to keep the rats because he's just feeding them and watering them and everything else. So he comes in. He's an anti-government. Has resistance stickers on his thing. Has people in and out of that thing all day long. He's put gay pride flags on my fence. He does everything he can just to piss me off. And I have not retaliated once against him. But I'm also not going to cooperate with him when he asks for stuff. He goes around, takes pictures of the neighborhood, wears body cams around, has drones, takes pictures of the girls, lets his dog. Can we pause for a second, sir? Yep. Can we go back to the start of why we're here today? Which is your yard and... Correct. And my yard's the way it is because of Philip Stone, too. And I want to be able to give my evidence about Philip Stone, which I have a 30-minute video that I intend to watch the whole thing of, of him protesting, being a paid protester on the streets of Dunedin. He's a terror to Dunedin. And he does nothing but aggravate me, aggravate me, aggravate me. You know, so all those things that she shows you pictures of are my stuff. It's my yard. I pay taxes on my yard. I can keep it any of the way I want. I'll put 500 lawn chairs out there if I want. It's my yard. That's what I'm going to do. Part of the reason it is, I went and got a permit to put a patio in my backyard. Just a patio, a little concrete patio. I had labor to do it. For 40 days it took me to get a permit, and my labor walked on me. They weren't going to do it. They are sick of Dunedin. They're not going to do it. So that's one reason my backyard is in disarray. It's because I ripped everything out so I could put a patio in. Well, then the hurricane came. So I got an insurance claim active for the roof. They've paid part of it. They haven't paid it all. So I'm fighting the insurance claim. Well, I'm not going to do the patio until I finish my roof. But as far as my front yard, if I want decoration, she talks about cushions so I can't have a bench in my front yard. That's a Ford bench that's sitting in my front yard. My benches have cushions on them. The chair, I have a table there. I use my front yard like my living room. I hang out there all the time. I talk to the neighbors all the time. All the neighbors that have complained. I couldn't list you how many people have complained about Philip and his nosy ass, telling people what to do, leaving notes, just being a general jackass. Sure. So this is my evidence. If you want to dismiss this, then I won't give you my evidence. But as long as we're talking about it, I'm going to give you my evidence on what a piece of shit Philip Stone is. So the violations that are before us today are for offensive accumulation, motor vehicles, and site standards for houses and duplexes. Let's back up to motor vehicles. She just verified every vehicle in there has license plates on it. Only in the front yard. Front yard. Not the backyard. You don't belong in my backyard. And the offensive accumulation that's in the front. Yeah. Who's it offensive to? I like it. I don't like Philip's yard. Do I come down here and complain about all the stuff he puts in his yard to attract rats? No. It's his yard. It's my yard. I pay taxes on it. You guys aren't there when the mortgages do. You aren't there when the utilities are due. You aren't helping pay. If I want to put stuff that I like in my yard, I'm going to put stuff that I like in my yard. I get people stop every day, say they like it. However, we do have codes, and code enforcement has shown you the codes on what you're violating. So it doesn't matter whether you like it or anybody else like it. If it's against the code, it's against the code. And who's it offensive to? It's not offensive to me. Show me what's offensive. Saying that there's cushions in the yard. Saying I can't have a picnic table. I can't have my surfboard out there. That's part of the process that we go through, is if there is a formal complaint from a neighbor, that is their right to complain about the codes that the city has put forth. And everything in that yard has been up in front of this board before, and they said it was all okay. They had me remove one bench that they didn't like. It was a big Cadillac bench, and they thought it was too much. They considered it a car part, and this was done. Everything else was there. I can have a chair in my yard. I can have a table in my yard, you know. Part of the reason that a lot of that stuff's in my yard, we had a different nasty neighbor that would call the fire department every time I cooked in the backyard. So I brought my barbecue out front yard. I had nine different times the fire department came pounding on my door for cooking a steak in the backyard. And so now you guys want me to take everything from the front yard, go to the backyard, and then they'll be calling the fire department if I cook a steak in the backyard. So is there a record of a past case brought up before the board? Funny that you ask. So unfortunately, this location, 1776 Pasadena, has had violations since 2002. I've only been here four years, but in 2005, it was brought for an offensive accumulation, and there was a lien put on it at that time. Because Mr. Ritter has lived there so long, that lien just kind of went away. Liens go away after 20 years. After that, he was brought back before the board for front yard parking, and that was 2018, and there's a current lien for $5,400 that has not been paid. How much again is it? $5,400. And we've also discussed that that lien was put on before we even went to court. That was back when you had the two criminals running code enforcement. I wasn't present at that time. Yeah, exactly. They put the code on before we even came in here. It's a BS violation. I'm homesteaded, which means you guys aren't even supposed to fine me by statute. You can't fine a homesteaded property. I'm homesteaded. That's incorrect. That is an incorrect statement of law, in fact. At this time, Mr. Ritter will have the time that he would like in front of the board to present testimony, but I want to address a couple things because he alluded to Fourth Amendment violations. I just want to let the board know that any determinations as to constitutional rights that may be infringed upon during the city's prosecution of the case is outside of this board's determination, right? He has recourse in front of a state circuit court if he wants to move forward with that route to present those constitutional violations. Now, just a little recap on what the Fourth Amendment does protect individuals, their homes, and papers from unreasonable searches and seizures. But these unreasonable insistent and seizures have to be done by a governmental actor. And under 162, any one single member of this board acting on its own will not constitute the actions of a city of the board. The board has to act as a whole to be considered essentially state action, which is what you need for potential Fourth Amendment infringement claims. But once again, that's outside of the scope of determination for this board. What this board needs to determine is whether a violation has occurred for the code section cited under the Notice of Violation. If the board determines a violation has occurred, you then move forward with determining a reasonable time for compliance and assessing the appropriate fine amount. And I can give you those factors if you determine the violation has occurred to determine the appropriate fine amount, okay? Now, second thing, he's alluded that he submitted a video. I believe so, Mr. Ritter. There is a video that you submitted to the board secretary. Like I stated before, the fraud rules of evidence do not apply. So he's, you know, if we have a copy of the video that we can play, we're more than welcome to play that video for Mr. Ritter. I do have some questions if that's Mr. Ritter's request that he would like to play the video. If you choose not to, we don't have to proceed with doing that. But if you want to make that part of the evidentiary record, we can do so. I disagree with that, Walensky. The video has nothing to do with him showing that he's cleaned up anything. How do you know what the video says? Therefore, it does not apply. So, no, we don't want to see the dumb video. It's my evidence. Your evidence of what? Of what a jackass this guy is right next to me. Say the attorney, you need to address this. Thank you. The video has nothing to do with that. Well, we have not seen the video. Have any of you seen this? We don't want to see it. We do not want to see it. Then drop the case. In your hands. Then drop the case. Thank you, Mr. Walensky. I can pose questions as to the contents of the video, and the board can order me that they do not want to see the video. I can't make that determination. Do you follow what I'm saying? Sure. Thank you. We don't want to see the video. So, if you would like to present the video at this time, Mr. Ritter, I have some questions for you. I want to back up here. The whole board saw our pictures, which were peeking through my fence, which is a violation. So, the whole board did see that is a violation of my rights. Sir, it is my position under Florida law that the city officer had consent from the neighboring property. That was her testimony to go on the neighboring property. Anything that's visible, that's on plain sight from the neighboring property. Peeking through fences is not plain sight. The court officer may take images of whatever is on plain sight. Peeking through fences is not plain sight. So, Mr. Ritter, you admitted earlier that the vehicles in the front yard are licensed, but the vehicle in the backyard is not. It's my backyard. It says right here in the code that no vehicle that is unlicensed shall be stored on a premise. I didn't say they were licensed or unlicensed. You've got to abide the code, bud. I didn't know if they're, I haven't stated if they're licensed or unlicensed. It's my backyard. It's my privacy. It is in disarray because I'm trying to put a patio in, and now I've got some roof damage, and I've got to address the roof first. But it's my backyard. I don't go in your backyard, you know. And, yes, I do want to see the video. When we have an anti-government infiltrated as the head of the department in Dunedin, it needs to be out there. So, Mr. Ritter, you don't plan on removing any of the trash in your front yard? Because most of it is trash. I work on my house every day. Well, get rid of the tree stumps. Why do you have tree stumps logs in there? Listen, if I cut too many trees. When was the last time you used the surfboard? Listen, every time I cut down trees, they come and say, I've got too many trees. So, now, when I don't put them out there. Nobody says to you, you have too many trees. In fact, you have to permit to remove trees, okay? Especially big trees like we're showing on the pictures there. That's why it's not on the curb. It's because it was too big to go on the curb. Well, whoever cut the tree down should have taken it away. We can ask her when Dunedin says, don't I pick up my tree? We're not going to get anywhere with you. I can see that right now. You do have everything that states on your offensive accumulation. Some of it might be eclectic yard art, but 80% of it's junk. That's your opinion. Are you a registered Cadillac dealer? Yeah. And you're operating a Cadillac dealership out of your home? No, I'm not. Okay, so then why do you have a Cadillac sign on the part of your house? Decoration. I can decorate my house any way I want. He can decorate his house any way he wants. But you understand what the offensive accumulation we're speaking about, right? Is we eat chemicals? Chemicals? That's a safety hazard for kids? Where's there chemicals? In the pictures she showed, there was chemicals. If there was chemicals there, they were coming or going. I don't have chemicals sitting out in front of my yard. And the whole reason that this whole thing started was not the accumulation. His wife, who doesn't like, said that there's rats. Well, there's rats because they've got an open pool. They've got bamboo. They've got any other fruit tree. When I first bought my house, I had rats too. I came in and cut down all the fruit trees, and I started taking care of them. If they had taken care of them, we wouldn't be here. But she's blaming it on me. Sir, we've had many people come before this board that have had offensive accumulation, and it is a pest problem. And that's not just rats. Well, I don't got a pest problem. He does. What we're saying here is the accumulation, you don't know what's under there because you can't see it. Well, I still want to see the video, and I'm still going to argue and argue and argue. And I can decorate my house any way I want to. Okay. You know. That is your testimony. We are going just by what was presented to us, the violations of offensive accumulation, motor vehicles, site standards for houses and duplexes, which is a violation of the city code. Okay, so if I... One more, just one more comment before we watch this video. The fence alone is, no one's peeking through. If you can see through it... You can see through it. You can see through it. Pulling pickets off of it. If you can see through it, nobody is violating your rights. Listen. It would be the same as if you had a white picket fence in the front. And I drive by, I can see through it. I've put more money and more time in my house than the entire block combined. The fence that is on Buena Vista is the most expensive fence in the whole damn city. It's a Cypress fence. And I would finish that fence on his side, but he ruins my fence. He smashes it with garbage cans. He breaks the poles. He breaks the pickets. He's just a fuckhead to be a fuckhead. Okay. That's what he is. Okay. And so... I believe the city attorney has some questions for you before we entertain. Yeah. So just a few questions, Mr. Ritter, before we show. Can you please tell the board how the video shows a violation or non-violation for Section 34-1, which is the offensive accumulation that you were cited for, and Section IPNCM 3028, which is the inoperable vehicle violation? Can you tell us? It shows it, but it shows what kind of person Philip Stone is, what kind of anti-government controlling person he is. And it's my evidence. I can play Bugs Bunny if I want. It's my evidence, and I want 30 minutes playing that video. Thank you, sir. Can you tell us if the video shows the property at any time? No. Okay. Then why do we need to see it? Because we need to know what kind of person Philip Stone is. And it's my evidence. I could play Bugs Bunny for 30 minutes. So I hear the... I could play it for 24 hours. It's my evidence. Mr. Ritter, can you let me speak? He spoke to me. So I... So the Florida Rules of Evidence do not apply to this board. I said that over and over again. And I appreciate the board's member's comment, because you're raising a really good issue. And this is the same issue an attorney would raise in a court of law. Now, this is not a court of law. So this is his evidence. He has an opportunity under our code to show evidentiary, you know, to make any images, photographic evidence, or video evidence as part of his evidence to his record. So at this time, if we do have a copy of the video that could be displayed for the board, we can go ahead and proceed. Unless you want to drop it. I'm not paying any fine anyway. And I'll clean up the property as I have time to. You know, I've had $700,000 worth of fines with Dunedin. All they've been to me is a jackass. You can ask her. I mean, I'm homesteaded. It's my forever home. I'm never selling it. I'm never refinancing it. When you guys find me, all you do is protect me. If someone comes to sue me, guess what? Dunedin's got $600,000 against this house. What are we going to get out of it? Zero. So, I've been a good neighbor in this neighborhood. I've brought that house back into compliance when I first got it. It's still one of the nicest houses in the neighborhood. I mean, we're in a neighborhood that is shitholes. Wood frame, asbestos sided. They do nothing because they can't get a permit on the thing. And so, I'm a great neighbor. This fuckhead's not. So, you can find me all you want, but let's watch the video. Can we cut the language, please? If Mr. Ritter is finished, I have some information. So, yeah, we'll finish with his portion, his presentation of the evidence, and then we'll allow for public comment. And that's when anybody in the audience may have three minutes to speak on the matter. Okay? Okay. I have a question. Yes, Ms. Hunt. You said we have a right to say we do not want to see the video? So, first, we need to ascertain the contents of the video. So, we need to watch some portion of the video. At that time, based on the testimony that we've heard from Mr. Ritter that, you know, the video is likely not to display any portions of the property at that time, if the board would like to request to stop the video and ask any further clarification questions of Mr. Ritter, we can go ahead and do that. Okay? Okay. Walensky, I'll be asking seat attorney that I be absent during the video. I don't want to see it, and I'll leave the room. So, Ms. Walensky, you know, the video is part of the evidentiary record, so if there's anything... You've already admitted that the video has nothing to do with this agenda today. Therefore, it's not presentable. It is not to be allowed. If you want to see it, you do it in your private company with Ritter or whatever, but this board member is not going to watch a silly video about something that has nothing to do with this violation. I won't do it. I hear you, Mr. Walensky. I think the best way to approach this is to be amicable, to adhere to our procedures, to allow the respondent to present his evidentiary. Mr. Walensky, unfortunately, relevancy does not apply to this board. Then why do we have to watch it? Because relevancy does not apply to this board, unfortunately. No, the video has no relevance. Okay, sweet sir. What's confusing here is that Mr. Stone made the complaint. We could poll people that a vast majority would agree with what's visible from the street. The fact is, beyond that, his attack on him is hurting his case, number one. And number two, the staff, all they do is follow the rules and follow it up what they're supposed to do to clean up all these ordinances and these problems with stated here. Watching the video, I agree with Matt that what's the gain, trying to disperge Mr. Stone? It's got nothing to do with this. Zero. Because the violations are there, regardless if Mr. Stone filed the complaint, regardless, it could easily come to the attention to the staff. It's not always has to be a neighbor or another Dunedin resident. It could be a staff member. The staff has compiled all this information, not Mr. Stone. So, diverting our attention and trying to muddy the waters is a waste of time. It's black and white. I've seen the photos. If you want to look at them again, there is probably, like Mr. Wineski said, there is some yard art. We want to call that. Fine. I saw a few pieces. It might be neat. The vast majority is junk and trash. And there are codes and violations, and this is where we stand. So, I personally think the video is what's going to do. I requested three to four hours and was going to bring much more tape. I can bring 24 hours of evidence. It's my evidence. What does it have to do with the violations? If you want to drop the case, drop the case. Drop the video. Lisa Hunt, I have a question. Sir, could you come back up so I could ask you something, please? I'd appreciate it if you don't curse at me. That's how I talk. She invited me here. About the photos that have been shown, do they look like any of them? Does it look like any of them have been doctored? I don't know. I don't have that good of a vision. Does it accurately describe your yard? What we saw with our own eyes, was that your yard? I can't answer that. I don't know. It wasn't your yard that we saw pictures of? Well, yeah, it was. But was it a good depiction? Or did they take the pictures that they wanted to take? I'm definitely not going to have you tell me that what I see with my own eyes is not what I see. You may have disrespect for other people, but I am a veteran, and I have earned the right to also have homestead. And if I move next door to you and I decided I didn't like what I saw, it would be my right to complain. Your right to buy it. If you want to buy it, you can make it any way you want. All I'm saying is these are violations. We know what we saw, and that's it, period. That's all there is. I still have a right to give my evidence. Sir, yes. But no matter who's next to you or lives around you, because I used to live down the street from there, too. No matter who it is, if they feel that way, they have a right to bring up accusations, and you have a right to do the same. But this is not the time for that. You would have to file a formal complaint. Yeah, I'm just not a guy that files complaints. Well, that's the only time that you should be bringing that kind of evidence against someone else, the same as they have for you. It's my evidence. And I'm talking about if you're telling us that they are the reason, then you should file the complaint against them. And that's that. But we'll see what you have. Yeah. Thank you. City Attorney, how much time until we're allowed to stop watching? Apologies. I couldn't. How much time until we're allowed to? We have to watch the entire video. Is that correct? No, sir. That's not at all what I'm saying. I'm saying the best way to ascertain the contents of the video is to allow to play at least, you know, the first 30 seconds, minute or two. Okay. Thank you. Now, if the board wants to make a finding that this video is not relevant and does not pertain to confident, substantial evidence that supports the violations, the board may do that. My press film will be to play the first few minutes just to ascertain the contents. But if the board wants to make that finding, we can go ahead and make that finding as a form of a motion to formalize it. However, I do suggest that you watch the first few minutes in order to make a finding based on those things. Because right now all you have is the testimonial evidence, his responses to my questions. That really, that's the only evidence you really have as to what this video is showing. It's my evidence. I request you we watch it all. It's my evidence. With that being said, how would the board would like to proceed? Thank you, Mr. Belinsky. Um, so our IT director advised me that, um, I believe it's just a YouTube video so it can be pulled up on the staff laptop. That's what he, um, had advised me of. I'm plugging the, um, so we don't see, uh, email and everything just until the video comes up. Yeah, just pull the HDMI out. Thank you. Just to remind the board at any moment, you may request to stop the video. Oh, it's a little bit different than that. I really love your sign. Will you stop? Hi puppies. How are you? Get away from my dogs. Get away from my dogs. Go. Dan Bolduck, I request to stop the video. Dogs will bite you. Back up. They're threatening to have the dogs bite me. You're breaking my daughter's dog. I, Willinsky, I recommend the chair go ahead and, um, give the advice of the, uh, code compliance and that, so we can make a motion. Uh, first, uh, do we want to give the public a chance to? Yes, we'll allow the public to speak under that three minute. Um, but before we do that, I would like to have a motion in regards to the finding of relevance of this video. Like I stated before, one of you members can move to make the finding that the video is not relevant, since based on the testimony and what you've seen, the subject property is not shown during the video and it does not support, it's not part of the competent substantial evidence of the violations. So if I, I could have a motion for that. Uh, Willinsky, I'll make a motion that, uh, the video having to do with restricting, whatever, human rights or whatever, uh, is, is, is a conflict, uh, to what we have for us on the, uh, docket, uh, and therefore will not be allowed as evidence. Not that it wouldn't be allowed as evidence, but it's, it's, we do not need to proceed with watching the entire video since it's, um, it's not relevant because it does not show the subject property. Is that an, is that an okay amendment to your motion, Ms. Willinsky? Thank you. Second. Okay, can we have a, can we have a, uh, yeah. Mr. Boldock? Aye. Mr. Walensky? Aye. Ms. Hunt? Aye. Mr. Sweetser? Aye. Thank you. The motion passes now. Now we, we proceed with public comments. So if we have any members in the audience who would like to speak, just a reminder, you do have under, you have three minutes. Um, if I can get the clock, Catherine, that would be great. During those three minutes, you may present photographic evidence. Okay. I was not sworn in earlier. Yeah. Do you want to swear Mr. Stone in, please? Yeah. Yes, it is. I do. For the record, Phil Stone, 335 Buena Vista Drive South. I want to put before the board some photographs. Those that are marked with Sharpies in black were taken on January 12th, 2026. Those that were marked with green numbers were taken on March 2nd, 2026, which I believe was yesterday. I also have a thumb key here, which will have the digital watermark with the date and timestamps. Um, these are my copies. And I would ask that the clock be paused while they get the computer up and running for me, please. Catherine, can you go ahead and stop the clock? Because we're addressing some technical issues. Yeah, one's from Jim. Yeah. Do we have to somehow? Okay, so what you see on the screen and what I put in front of you are a series of photographs I took. Uh, they were taken, uh, they were taken, the ones that were marked in black were taken on January 12th, 2026. Um, I'm going to spool through it really quickly, but basically what you see here is you're looking, uh, you're, you're standing up Buena Vista Drive South in my driveway and you're looking towards Pasadena Drive South where the respondent resides. I'm not familiar with this computer here and I don't know how to advance the photos. Okay, so, oopsie. So there are a number of vehicles in the back of the car, as you can see on the side of the garage there. You've got one vehicle where I have my cursor, um, and then there's the van that, um, Ms. Phillips alluded to earlier. As we go around the side of the house, you can see the fence. Uh, that's David Ritter's fence. You can see that he, um, has different pieces of property. Some of what you've seen before, uh, this is another vehicle, um, the white attachment here is actually, I think, a, uh, a cooler or a trailer. Uh, these items have been on that property for as long as I've owned my house. Over here you see the inside of the shed with the tires, uh, the bed frame, PVC furniture, uh, looking forward again, uh, close up. And also I draw your attention to what really prompted the filing of this complaint, which is the fact that Mr. Ritter has moved in two very large commercial trailers onto the property, which are visible from, from the back of my house. Um, the close up of his treasures, um, okay, so here you have one trailer over here, and you see the second trailer, which has rust around the door. He's got three cameras mounted on it. I'm not sure what the purpose of having cameras on the trailers are, uh, continuing on. That's another close up of the trailer. Uh, this is the backyard that he referenced where he said he was going to have his patio. Um, you can see here a third trailer, okay, and that's the third trailer. And I want to put on the record that, um, I take issue with the fact that I am being identified as a member of the public and limited to three minutes because I am the complainant in this matter. Thank you, Mr. Stone. He did have a few more seconds due to those technical issues, so we will consider it part, um, those last few seconds as part of your testimony. I'm sorry, I couldn't hear you. I couldn't hear you. It's okay, Mr. Stone. I just wanted to clarify for the records that those last few seconds of your testimony were, um, were, were okay since we had some technical issues and the clock was still running, okay? Okay. That's all. And then the second photos were taken yesterday, and they show no change in the condition. Oh, okay. Excuse me, Lisa Hunt. Mr. Stone? In one of your pictures... Can you tell me which one? Yeah, it... It has a number on the back. Oh, the, well, the one I, I was looking actually on the, uh, screens, I don't know which one. It looks like a well. Is there a well? I don't, I don't know if there's a well back there. Um, there is what I think was at some point, uh, a hot tub. Um, but if you tell me the number on the photo, I'd be better able to describe it. I'm sorry, I don't see it on the photos. I only saw it on the video. Okay. That is a propane tank, right? Can you tell me again which one? Number two? In green or black? Green. Yes, I believe that's a propane tank. And that also has the photographs of the three vehicles in the back on that side of the house. All these pictures are a violation of my Fourth Amendment, and you know it. Sir, at this time, it's, we're open public comment, so if we can, you know... They were all taken over the fence. We can finalize with the board's questions to the public comments, and then we can reopen the hearing to allow for closing. Okay. That police officer couldn't do that. Any additional comments from the board? Oh, one more. Sorry, I'm still... Um, black 22, I'm getting the hang of... Do you have any idea what's in those tanks? Those barrels? Yes, um, the... Those are barrels. I believe they have the brand name of an oil company named Total on them. I believe there are a dozen or so of them in the back fence there. I don't know what's inside them, obviously. Okay, thank you. There's nothing further. Thank you. Sweet, sir. I have a question for staff. Is there any codes via violations when it comes to abandoned vehicles for, obviously, years? They emit oil, radiant fluids. It's just a question. If it's not inoperable... Our code speaks to inoperable vehicles. All vehicles should require to have a current tag registration and be operable. Because the latest count is like four or five, I'm assuming. I understand that. Unfortunately, I could, from my pictures, I could only see what's there. Okay. From your pictures through the fence. Thank you. Legal pictures. No. Yes. Sir, I think we've seen any other questions from the board? Any further? Okay. So, we can close the hearing at this time, deliberate, and then we can present motions. Okay. Okay. Are there any closing testimony from either parties before we do that? I have a recommendation from the city. Yeah. Can you please go ahead? So, my recommendation for case 25-2138 for one violation which violates DCO section 34-1 offensive accumulation and supporting code IPMC 302.8 motor vehicles and requesting compliance on or before April 3rd, 2026 or a fine in the amount of $250 per day for each day the violation continues to exist. Thank you. Do we have any closing testimony from the respondent, Mr. Ritter? Thank you, Mr. Ritter. However, if the board members don't have any further questions, we can go ahead and close the hearing portion. Anyone like to make a motion? No. I had a question. So, those are the two violations. The third violation, the DCO. There were only one violation, one's a supporting code. I'm sorry. The one, are you referring to the 105-27? Yes, I am. That was an error on my part. I apologize. Stop. Sorry about that. Thank you. Lisa Hunt, is this, what's the date? The start date for this fine? April 3rd. Well, I'm requesting compliance on or before April 3rd. So, this is a first order matter. This is a first order. Okay. So, you're setting a compliance date. Gotcha. Thank you. Correct. Any further questions? Would you like to make a motion? I'll move in case number 25-2138 for the property located at 1776 Pasadena Drive. Find the respondent, David M. Ritter, in violation of the City of Code, sections number DCO, section 34-1, and IPMC, section 302-8. Order the respondent, David Ritter, to come into compliance by April 3rd, 2026 by removing the offensive accumulation and the motor vehicles before the date of April 3rd, 2026. If not compliance, a fine of $250 per day will be imposed until the compliance is met. The respondent is ordered to contact the Code of Compliance Office for a re-inspection of the property to verify compliance with this order. Do we have a second? Lisa Hunt, second. Thank you. Mr. Bolduck? Aye. Mr. Walensky? Aye. Ms. Hunt? Aye. Mr. Sweetser? Aye. And the motion passes. Next on the agenda, other business. Any code enforcement board member comments at this time? Any comments from the city attorney? No. I think you guys did a great job today, so thank you for bearing with me. Okay. Actually, I'm going to go back one real quick. I just wanted to comment the Causeway Plaza renovation that has taken place because of, you know, a couple years of hard work. So I just wanted to compliment you all for bringing that before the board to get that accomplished because it looks great. Thank you. Appreciate that. Oh, quick question regarding the same thing. So did he ever finish putting the siding up? Yes, he did. Oh, yes, sir. You were asking. And it's all painted brand new. Oh, good. Yeah. It took him a little longer to paint because of the wind and rain and everything, but it looks great. Take a drive-by. Yeah. Yeah. So thank you. Any additional city staff comments? No, sir. And we'll set the next meeting date of April 7th, 2026, 2 p.m. So at this time, meeting adjourned. Thank you all. I'll make a motion for adjournment. Yeah. Let's motion to adjourn, please. Second. Lisa Hunt. Third. Third.