good morning my name is jeff fuller i'm the special magistrate who's been assigned to the pinellas county code enforcement special magistrate agenda for today august 10th 2026 welcome to pinellas county code enforcement special magistrate hearings the special magistrate is charged with conducting hearings to determine whether an alleged violation of the county code has occurred in order to meet that obligation all parties or their representatives will be allowed an opportunity to be heard on matters relevant to the alleged violations all witnesses offering testimony or presenting evidence will be required to swear or affirm the testimony they provide is the truth the order of presentation will begin with the county presenting their evidence of the alleged violations and then the respondent shall present his or her case both parties shall have an opportunity to cross-examine all witnesses the special magistrate may question any witness the clerk will announce the names of the cases from the agenda listen for your case for a variety of reasons we don't always follow the number on the agenda today for example we have a mix of hearings for code enforcement and pinellas county construction licensing board and we will be taking the code enforcement hearings first for the nine o'clock docket there's also a 1 30 docket today when you hear your case called please respond by coming to the podium with your representative and or any witnesses to be sworn in when addressing the special magistrate please speak clearly into the microphone any person who decides to appeal the decision of the code enforcement special magistrate with respect to any matter considered at this hearing will need a record of the proceedings and for such purposes may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is based the record is not provided by pinellas county lynette would you call uh item number one department code enforcement matter right away zoning code violations case number ccm-26-00060 officer d deval owner mclean children 1 llc notice address mclean children 1 llc 400 harborview lane largo florida 337 largo florida 337 770 4009 and mclean children 1 llc 307 south willow avenue 307 south willow avenue suite 200 tampa florida 33606 and mclean wayne a registered agent for mclean children 1 llc 307 south willow avenue suite 200 tampa florida 33606 and mclean wayne managing member of mclean children 1 llc 307 south willow avenue suite 200 tampa florida 33606 and mclean elaine registered agent for mclean children 1 llc 307 south willow avenue suite 200 tampa florida 33606 and t walker pinellas county public works 22211 u.s highway 19 north clearwater florida 33756 tj walker at pinellas.gov and c smith pinellas county public works 22211 us highway 19 north clearwater florida 33756 or 765 c smith at pinellas.gov and d deval special magistrate officer pinellas county code enforcement 631 chestnut street clearwater florida 33756 d deval at pinellas.gov violation address 400 harborview lane largo florida 34685 all right who do we have appearing for the county officer deval pinellas county code enforcement we also have sean tipton pinellas county public works chris smith pinellas county public works tom washburn pinellas county public works and who do we have appearing for the mclean children 1 llc my name is clint morrell i'm counsel for mclean one mclean children 1 llc and who else do you have with you all right uh with the exception of counsel i'm presuming that you are lawyering as opposed to a fact witness correct yes all right so everyone else that's going to testify please raise your right hand do you swear to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do all right the county may proceed okay thank you magistrate good morning the property where the alleged violation exists is located at 400 harborview lane in largo florida which is in unincorporated pinellas county the owner mclean children 1 llc is represented for today's hearing this violation has been in occurrence since on or before march 16th of 2026 i'd like to enter into evidence the notice of hearing affidavit of violation um composite i'd like to enter into evidence composite exhibit a which includes the notice of violation ownership confirmation through pinellas county tax collector property appraiser and the deed i've also included uh reports from uh public works department there is a report from uh chris smith who is here to testify if necessary and also a sightline visibility report from tim walker who is not present today but sean tipton will be able to speak to that report i've also included uh inspection photos so happy to go through exhibit a page by page all right any objection to exhibit a no exhibit a will be admitted into evidence okay page by page sir please okay the first four pages are the notice of hearing that was sent uh for today's hearing actually this is the hearing that was originally in july and then we had a new hearing that was a new notice of hearing that was sent out uh notifying for today's hearing then we have the affidavit of violation and requests for hearing in this uh we will be addressing code section 154 231 it is uh unlawful for any person to construct install remove relocate perform other work activities for installation or improvements or in place place temporary items or structures or make improvements within on under above the right-of-way without first obtaining a right-of-way permit it is also also unlawful for any person to utilize the right-of-way in a manner that impedes the public access restricts vehicular access and sightline or poses a risk of damage to public infrastructure including but not limited to landscape materials or landscaping debris we have the notice of violation that was sent out to the property owner at the address of record back in march and then we have proof of ownership through pinellas county tax collector showing mclean children one llc is the owner of this property and pinellas pinellas county property appraiser confirming the same with an aerial shot showing here uh this property is a corner property here so we will be addressing things um in front of the property the warranty deed dated from october of 2025 and sunbiz confirming uh mclean children one as a registered um llc this is the interagency complaint form that was received from pinellas county code enforcement or to from public works that was sent to pinellas county code enforcement stating that there was a violation of chapter uh 154 231 this is the uh report that was sent to the property owners by uh mr chris smith who is from public works identifying the issues of things that are placed in county right-of-way that were um going to need to be removed he can speak in more detail to this report the site site distance evaluation report that was generated in april a lot of specifics regarding uh sightline visibility and the specifics with distance markings and so on and what was determined to be in the sightline triangle again uh sean tipton from public works can speak to the specifics in this report when necessary as you can see a lot of vegetation in front of the house is the concern and then these are just some pictures that were taken back in june when uh pinellas county code first received the complaint we went out and just took initial photos um the specifics again of the violation can be uh spoken to by public works individuals they are the subject matter experts but these are just shots of the front of the house showing uh the vegetation that exists and then this just showing this is a corner property here so magistrate the property was re-inspected on july 17th just a couple of days before the original july hearing and the violations continued at that time there were photos taken at that time i'd like to submit them in as composite exhibit b any objection to exhibit b exhibit b is recent photos they were they were back on the 17th of july they were included they were included in the packet that was uh given to you or given uh on the day of the hearing these are dated june 2nd face of them is that they're a different set of photos i'm not sure we have that but it's just updated photos um do you have a copy i would like to see them but we don't object that's straight i'll give you my copy here once i just speak to it briefly let him have a minute to look at it in the very back it was just paper clipped of that exhibit a so um and this is just showing on the 17th a couple of days before the hearing that the violation still existed the vegetation was still uh on county right of way okay exhibit b will be admitted into evidence would you like this copy yes please so magistrate we do have um testimony that can be given to the specifics of the reports that were submitted in exhibit a if further explanation is needed um if not then the county requests that you find the property in violation and issue an order to have it brought into compliance council do you have cross-examination a the composite exhibit a if you can please come up to the microphone thank you part of exhibit a there's uh an affidavit is this an affidavit that you signed yes it is and i believe it was brought to our attention that there was a scrivener's error on that is that correct there are uh yes um the notary block is august 2024 okay when was this uh document actually signed document was signed back when i generated it which would have been let me look at the date that i generated the affidavit that that is simply a scrivener's error we use a template and it was just i didn't go in and change the date did the notary sign this affidavit or yes she signed it she just she did not pay attention to the date so that is definitely an error on the third page the description of what is the violation at issue here um it says code section 154 231 for the cited code section the location is a property at issue on the violation where does this uh language come from that's under violation it comes from the code of ordinances for pinellas county is that meant to be a verbatim um recitation of the code requirements i don't know if it is verbatim or if the parts of it that were relevant were taken out okay so the first part talks about needing a right-of-way permit correct um the there's no permit required for landscaping in the right-of-way that is that accurate there is a excuse me say that again why don't i i'll move to another uh another question here that'll that'll help us this is a copy of the ordinance um that requires a permit in the right-of-way is that correct 154 231 54 231 is the code section correct and you see here there's an exception for landscaping isn't that correct right here in compliance with code section b code section b comes down here and talks about the need of the right-of-way permit well that's or use as temporary construction or landscaping access without first obtaining a right-of-way permit the second part of your affidavit the second part here that talks about um it being unlawful uh to actually read the statute so unlawful for any person to utilize the right-of-way in a manner that impedes the public access restricts vehicular access and sight lines or poses a risk of damages to public infrastructure what um what is the problem with the landscaping issue in this case i will i will refer you to our public works individuals as they are the ones who did the reporting okay let's let's finish your cross-examination and then i can't call him as a witness okay public works will have to give you the specifics they are the ones that did the inspection and they are the ones that wrote the report okay so the substance of this case is public works correct okay they are the complaint the photos that you um okay i think you may now have the date that you uh prepared the affidavit that's part of exhibit a what was that date may 4th of 2026 the photos that i believe you had admitted as exhibit b were taken on july 17th correct correct three days before the hearing that was originally scheduled on the 20th has there been any uh re-inspection since that time to your knowledge no there has not not by me public works i believe has been out there okay have the um the property owners representatives um communicate with you in this matter he's uh mr mclean has sent me a couple of emails asking me different things um we were pretty much told that if you had representation then we needed to we needed represent note to know if he was being represented if he was then we need to communicate with you so that was kind of my response back to him and then i did tell him that was imperative that he speak with public works because they were they would be the ones to be able to specifically tell him what needed to be done to be able to bring the property into compliance okay are you aware of any uh code violations on similar grounds for landscaping in the right of way uh nearby this property that are that are also pending right now no none have been brought to code enforcement no further questions thank you all right call your next witness okay um sean tipton he's going to speak uh to the questions that came up on the uh line of sight he can uh refer to the report that was submitted by tim walker tim is unavailable today so you want to do you want to redo this yes so so the the applicants council africans council asked about um the code section as far as the line of sight um and can you remind us as you ask the question again it was section 154 231 um uh it was talking about 154-231b it says it is unlawful for any person to utilize the right of way in a manner that impedes the public access restricts vehicular access and sight lines or poses a risk of damages to public infrastructure my question was which one of those so is the the vegetation that your clients planted is restricting vehicular access not only for their own driveway use but also for phones could be silent oakwood drive to see any vehicles approaching northbound as well as their neighbor to the immediate south the vegetation is blocking their line of sight as they try to exit their driveway so it's the second one then it restricts vehicular access yes sir the county is not claiming that it impedes the public access or poses a risk of damages to public infrastructure it does pose risk to public infrastructure the there is existing uh energized power lines in front of this parcel that uh duke energy i had them go out and look at it because your client said they had a duke energy engineer on site and they said that the power lines are not energized it's a guy wire i have here which i can submit into evidence directly from duke energy from mr nicholas esposito which is their vegetation manager and he did provide detail that you can have a copy of this to you sir yeah i want to back off let you do your yes sir yes sir and that could be for magistrate but as as you can see here uh mr esposito did review the location on june 28th of 26 and state c confirmed his uh statement the the lines are energized above the area where the vegetation was planted say stating that the palms will grow tall enough and contact our lines become a power reliability threat and cannot be maintained for any significant period due to their growth um they would also likely become a fire risk once they start crossing multiple phases of the primary lines um he provided a link to right trees right place it's a web page that duke energy has um and then he also says the main takeaway when planting within 20 feet of an overhead distribution line you should choose large shrubs or small trees that grow no more than 15 feet at maturity um again as you go through you will see he has photos clearly demonstrating that this is an energized line that's a transformer and a fuse hanging off not a guy wire as uh the uh parcel owner previously made a statement in the last hearing um and then again here is uh from their gis showing where the lines are their transformers based off the symbols and so forth um and then you can see my email reaching out to him asking for his clarification to determine whether the vegetation is a concern for duke energy or not and again on the first page it is a concern to duke energy for the placement of those also um regarding the line of sight that tim provided um the line of sight for the neighboring driveways is limited um which is why they did receive the violation from tim need to be silenced please thank you council do you have any questions i do don't go too far all right the tico lines at issue um is it the duke energy sorry duke energy is it the area in the circular driveway the area off to the side or both that are at issue both anything that can grow vertical into their power lines and potentially disrupt power is their concern okay would that include the uh the large palm trees or are those clear of the line i i don't i'm not duke i don't know what their line clearance is offset from their power lines um but as he put in in there 20 feet minimal is the best location okay so without actually seeing what the offset is today in the field i can't speak to that and the letter from duke to paperwork now when was that inspection uh june july 28th i'm sorry okay of 26 following our last hearing in the beginning of july last month these are um updated photos of the property um taken in the last couple of weeks after some of the vegetation was removed such as this tree the taller trees around have you been back out to look at the site i have not okay do you know if it's currently compliant i just said i've not been out there so i couldn't tell you if it is or not okay yeah i was not i was not notified that any work had been performed um yeah the last the last i was just recently done the last i was told was that um your client was directed to reach out to public works for direction and to date there has not been any correspondence and you said duke energy said if the plants continue to grow they may become an interference correct that's correct so they're not currently an interference again i'm not going to speak on duke's behalf whether they are or not in interference if the landscaping was provided you if the landscaping was pruned and taken care of from time to time could it be avoided to interfere with the power lines that yeah again a question for duke okay duke's not here no sir okay i'll turn now to uh what was your exhibit a the uh the report that mr walker prepared um i think this was prepared by chris smith chris smith it's my understanding just so we can clarify the first three pages of this were chris smith's work yes sir and then we go to the sightline report correct okay and this is by t walker by tim walker who is who is tim walker tim walker works for me he is one of our traffic investigators does line of sight investigations any any traffic related study is assigned to him and another uh employee okay and he prepared this back in april of 2026 correct okay so he's not gone out to the property since that time no sir the report starts off with an aerial picture on the first page on the second page there's this diagram and it indicates it's from the pinellas county transportation design manual yes sir um that is part of the land development code yeah can you show me this is the transportation design manual can you show me that that diagram see the one that you provided please i think i've got them actually side by side right uh so that's the page from the report yep and the next page is this this is in the design manual as well as this is also in there um on the very last i believe it's on the very last page this is the whole document that's posted on the county website okay can i take a look on the computer and then the next page says page not used there it's the same and now it's it's not that one so the this diagram that's been cited in the report relates to roadway intersections correct that's correct um this is that one relates well this is copy in the the copy of the diagram in the report indicates it's for driveways that's correct but this driveway standard isn't actually contained in the traffic design manual is it it does not seem to be so what is the standard and where is it written down for driveway site triangles anything over three feet in vegetation is which is a dot standard it cannot exceed three feet that's just the general rule of thumb across the board for vegetation height clearance for a line of sight um tim's not here we had that diagram created back in sorry march of oh seven it looks like um based off of the that version for driveways for these instances to apply tim mr walker's determination that there was a violation of the code was based on that diagram that wasn't it that and that the vegetation exceeded three feet in height and height in general and that it was limiting the line of sight the three feet standard comes from the fdot yes sir okay show me in this report where it cites the fdot standard and that mr walker confirmed it wasn't met no because i didn't see it in there just neither did i okay have you had any communications with my clients on this matter no they've sent some emails to our public works director um asking questions and that's about it we've we've pretty much told them that it's blocking the line of sight it needs to be removed for uh safety of the public do you know when the when those uh the foxtail trees the tallest ones were installed i do not i don't live out there i don't go out there we're we're generated by complaints who generated the complaint for this uh public works employee sharon morris which your client is well aware of because they did a public records request and what is mrs morris's uh role with public she is a coordinator under our road and bridge which formerly was a traffic investigator under traffic engineering prior to her uh role um to a project to a coordinator position would she be the individual who would deal with complaints about the bridge construction that you just mentioned no she was out there based off of a uh complaint for curb and while she was out there she noticed that the vegetation was there it was restricting access and she physically watched the neighbor to the south of them have trouble backing out of their uh driveway the morning that she was there has she been out there since the my clients made modifications to the property no she was out there for a curb complaint and that was her only issue uh she referred it to us to take a look at because of her past experience with vehicular and pedestrian line of sites um from her position when she was within traffic engineering okay did she uh review any other properties in the vicinity of my client's property no not to my not my knowledge thank you yep pictures of the modification do you have those to share with the county yes i do um are you you have any more witnesses or is that uh no i do have anything more that we need to no i mean i've got tom washburn um which is trapped in here in case there's any more traffic any more engineering related questions that he might be able to speak on and clarify to uh help both parties out these are photos of the the property that have been submitted and uh this is from back in april it's probably very hard to see that sorry is that yours yeah this one's fine when was the property on the right this was taken in the last couple of weeks after my clients received the visibility study prior to that there was just a lack of understanding of what the issue even was um so the the larger trees have been removed the sight lines have been improved there were some other plantings here that have been removed these have been removed you can see the cone there which is meant to sort of mimic this the study that was done can you can you not see vehicles approaching i think i've blown up one of the picture we already looked at i mean looking at a photo without going out there and properly measuring and laying out the the sight distance triangle i i couldn't say whether it needs under brushes has been removed last couple of weeks do we have a more specific date in the last couple of weeks if you're speaking you have to do the microphone thank you over the last couple weeks we've made these changes with the exception of the where the power lines were those were always that way as the foxtails have been there since way before we moved there but around the wire lines it's been like that since the get-go the only thing that we've really changed is around the shrubbery because when those pictures were taken was after cold snap and there was a lot of dead foliage and we moved a couple trees as well just with what we could go off of could not interpret the triangle we talked to a couple surveyors because what they provided in the line of sight evaluation was not in the transportation manual and nobody could tell us where to find that so they could re-duplicate it so we did the best that we could when did you purchase the property we purchased it in april of 2025 and when you purchased the property what landscaping was in place and specifically in relation to what's the subject of this case uh what's still there is the big two uh foxtails there was a lot of other shrubbery that was in the center section that was very bulky and overgrown we removed that and put smaller plants and then with the intent was to mimic a couple of the properties down the road from us that are heavily foliage um that's in line with the rest of the neighborhood so this was already here there was a big tree here big mounds here we took all the big mounds out because they were had critters living in them and they were unsafe for us uh but these were always uh there uh the line of sight or anything around the um lines has never there's never been anything around that if i may the trees all along that right away have always been whoever planted a long time ago has duke energy ever asked you to tram or remove trees in this area and and the the issue is not what she was talking about it's not the upper wire she said well the reason we put that there all the way up on there is the guide wires holding the pole and we just planted the tree in front of where the guide wires hold that pole up yeah wire coming off the other side of that pole see if i can find the letters which is what our neighbors had done throughout the neighborhood we just rode around to see what the neighbors did and we went ahead and complied that we did that the end of last year that was done in the last fall this didn't happen until shortly after my conversation with mr tipton complaining about the uh the safety on the bridge which is abutting my property that's when this happened virtually days after and then when she wrote a letter my fiance wrote a letter in to public works director which we do have a copy to show you and that's when we got the citation from public works we went ahead and we went down and even asked about public works citations and asked for copies did all records check we could we and we have copies of that to show you your honor there are no records of anything from any complaint on public record on anywhere so if there's some private database it is not privy to us and we asked for it we got the public record search for you we went down just like she was told last week to do their last hearing sorry so we followed the rules we have gone and we've asked on three occasions to meet with code enforcement code enforcement is refusing has refused to come out and show us exactly what trees they're talking about we went to our neighbors neighbors says they have no problem with our landscaping we're not abutting and the design criteria they showed us is a design criteria for design it's not existing condition that's new construction design and it's in it they attached the drawing that doesn't even apply to they substituted a drawing and said it's in the design manual and it's not the drawing that's in the design manual we have right here to show you the full manual is a part of evidence so this whole thing has been but retaliation from public works kelly levy and i'm going to say mr tipton because my conversation with mr tipton i've only had one and my conversation was mr tipton was i complained about the safety because the hooks were on my dock my dock's 15 16 feet away from his bridge and i asked look i've got hooks back there i can't sit i can't walk i got stuff in my yard we've got food we got late night flashlights please for safety put up a no trespasser no fish mr tipton said he'd send an inspector out so matter of fact he told me he was going to send uh mr tim wall or walker or whatever and we never heard crickets they never came out the only thing they came out and did was the inspection on the front yard i guess i don't know but i know that we didn't see anybody and we haven't heard anything we've never heard never got direction from code enforcement exactly what trees we have given nothing but this is nothing but retaliation and you can figure it out by the dates of the letters we wrote and the responses accordingly i want to close uh for our side with some photos you know showing on the bottom the property at issue and then uh some other ones in the neighborhood uh surrounding it and these were i think inspiration yeah this was the inspiration and we did not see any permits pulled on any of these as well there's 21 homes on our street alone that has just as much or more foliage in the right of way nobody has permits pulled that we can see there's no record of permits or are there any records just citations and this is just a sampling it's not an exclusive so that's the crux of it is you're not here to to thumb you know put the thumb in the eye of the of the county since the beginning they've been seeking information because things just were not adding up um there's citations to transportation requirements that when we look into it aren't there there's issues with the affidavits um i guess now there's an attempt to to say it's the fdot or some three feet but none of that's called out in any of the documents that we've put forward to you um and there was also um confusion about you know whether or not a permit was actually needed for landscaping in the right of way uh given all of these other issues um so we request um that you find there's there's not a violation um the power lines in particular um we've got one letter from duke that says it could be a problem at some point in the future of thing you know if it becomes a problem but nobody's actually said there is a problem or there's going to be a problem these two large trees that you're seeing here were planted at least as early as 2008 you go back on google maps and you see little trees little foxtail palms there that have grown up uh in the intervening you know 18 years have never been a problem until my clients start making complaints to public works about the issues they're having with the bridge at which point there becomes you know either in good faith or not in a worst case scenario um enforcement against them while they're looking around and seeing other properties that are not having uh enforcement actions brought against them so we request that you find that there's not a violation um if you don't feel like you can make that determination i think the county really needs to get its ducks in a row uh present some some evidence in the record um and uh we'll commit to working with them in the meantime to try and resolve the violation uh but i just don't uh i don't see it here thank you does county have any cross-examination for uh either of the three well don't cross-examine the attorney um not so much cross-examination county does object to those pictures being shown they're irrelevant to what's going on at that property um every every property has different boundaries different areas of what is considered county right away those those pictures they're not relevant to what we're talking about at the property at 400 harborview that's that's what we're here for today so i was not shown any of this other documentation um i don't know if mr tipton has further information to give but uh we do object to that because it's not relevant to to what we're doing today for that property so um none of the a lot of those photos if not most of them were not date and time stamped we don't know what what we're looking at for time wise um he said they have done a lot of work we never received the updated photos uh i just had initial communication um with the attorney here on friday afternoon he sent me an email he asked me if i had anything additional and i said no he did not volunteer that they had additional information um to present to us with work that had been done we there was no photos attached to the emails so um and and as for the other information that mr mcclain was talking about that again is irrelevant we're we're here to talk about the issues for the items that were planted and have continued to grow in the county right of way do you have anything further like dad no i just i just want to clarify that we don't go out looking for this we're complaint driven again this email was the complaint from a county employee and it's dated february 17 2026. the statement that mr mclean says that this was retaliation because i wouldn't put a no trespassing sign up is irregardless it has nothing to do with that i didn't even know the two were together at the time so that that again irregardless to this case has nothing to do with what we're here for today um yeah we're complaint driven they provided addresses red tags were issued those five or six addresses and one of them 119 has come into compliance they cut their hedges down so um again if they were looking for direction they would have reached out to public works as mr mclean said he had my contact information he could have reached out to me and asked for what what type of direction he needed to resolve this it never happened so i i just reiterate that and agree with what uh officer deval just stated there were communications uh i don't know to uh to you individually but to code enforcement generally um i'm not sure if photos were provided previously or a list of addresses but it was made known that there were these other properties all right um as far as the photographs um the the objections that officer deval made really go to the weight as opposed to the admissibility of those photographs so i will admit them into evidence um i'm going to do something i've never done um i'm going to uh continue this and caroline i want you to arrange a view um which will have me and them and the county people out there okay so coordinate that unless council you have objections to that i mean it's it's their property yeah because it's just running out some money you need to come to the microphone to speak your honor we've already put enough resource into obviously you have documentations out of it substituting okay i'm listening for a legal objection i mean oh i'm sorry i i really can't sorry i i don't i don't think they have an objection so we have availability august 26 which you're scheduled for at 1 30. that we could go out there wednesday i mean if there's any objection to that is that something you guys are okay with that so 26 august 26 at 1 30 it's wednesday and we have 9 30 hearings that day right no our our hearings since it's on a wednesday that wednesday we're scheduled at 1 30. yeah so i'm scheduling it at the time right okay do we have other ones scheduled you no date yet no we do not okay well then we'll protect that yeah that's wednesday the 26th correct at 1 30. i also have i don't know what time you were thinking i have another uh city of st pete code hearing uh scheduled that day at what time it's uh starts at 8 30. i've got it on my calendar to 11 30. you never we have at 1 30. what is that um because i'm a magistrate for city of st pete it's um bay point preserve it must be something different than i do then because i'm always they're the second wednesday of every the code enforcement i do there is the second wednesday of every month i'm looking at the 26th it's possible that i calendared it wrong or it may be something something different than code violation i mean because you run into things like deserted vessels for example are a code no this is code compliance for the related to condominium and maintenance issues that the the county's raised or city rather um 130 is what she's looking at when when the 26 doesn't sound like it's going to work for them all right um is mr mclean available on the 26th are you so would you be available do we have to have both present you've got to have council president no president yeah but his is done early he said he'd be done by 11 30. well maybe depending on how long it goes i think we'd prefer miss nobles has been the one that's primarily dealing with these issues and would prefer to be to be present august do august 21st which is a friday i don't know if the magistrate is available the 21st is good for me what time what time magistrate august 21st i'm open the 21st okay so what time would you what time would you like at 9 a.m or um um since that's not a regular day we're not going to be having any hearings or anything no i don't have any hearings scheduled for that then let's make it for 1 30. 1 30 okay county is fine with that officer devall that's fine with the county yes county has no objection to that that's fine what do we do about pete trying to yeah that's what i need to coordinate as well um let me see pete can you hear us if you can please come to the hearing take a moment for him to magically appears um so that's a big issue for communications if we're going to do a viewing out uh on the property how how can how can we do that how about if we um can i get with the magistrate afterwards to figure out what we're looking to try to accomplish when we get out there okay because we have everything all the technology in here i'm not sure what what you're looking to be able to capture out there i just wanted to be a public record of it uh do you work with the courts at all no we don't because the close okay because the closest thing i've ever personally come to this is a jury view right i mean we do have a video ability i just need to get with my supervisor and we can make a video copy of the inspection that you're going to do out there but i want to make sure that we're doing the proper way okay we're just straight you know camera that you would use like you would shoot an interview out in the field so you would have audio video obviously we need to make sure that whoever's speaking is going to be mic'd up so in case you need minutes from the meeting if you want to challenge it you have the ability to go back and go here's what was said on that day appreciate it does that work for the magistrate yes it does okay we can get back to you say within the week possibly to give that information to caroline and yourself and counsel as well caroline and everybody and that works yeah okay deal so we will meet august 21st 1 30 at the property let's wait for the time to see how communications will work because i don't know if we'll be able to do it in the i don't know if it's better in the morning pete or i i think we'll be flexible with the time that you that you're setting right now that's not going to be issue it's just going to be getting people out there and making sure that everybody's on the same page okay 30 august 24th just same with you guys that everybody has the same thing perfect all right you go with me mr councilman i'm done with you pete thank you very much mr master just so i we're not done in a second just so that we know so we're doing a view for continuance and then are we going to have an actual special magistrate hearing for this case as well after your view should we schedule that now on the docket why don't we do the view and if either side requests then we'll set okay all right so we don't have to set it okay i mean frankly what i i'll let everybody know the thing that concerns me is the sight lines and the pictures i saw don't give me a real clear idea of what we're talking about as far as the sight lines um and so i think this is obviously real important this is the second hearing i've had on this it's obviously real important to both parties so i want to get it right we're set for august 21st at 1 30 i will be we'll be issuing an order if you want to wait for the order or we'll be also sending it to you guys if you can just send us a copy okay all right thank you thank you magister way too much thank you okay lynette would you read item number seven department code enforcement matter commercial minimum housing code violation case number ccm-26-00001 officer d deval owner tunisia upel neilam tre notice address tunisia upel neilam tre po box 1002 largo florida 33779-1002 and d deval special magistrate officer pinellas county code enforcement 631 chestnut street clearwater florida 33756 d deval at pinellas.gov violation address 1521 south missouri avenue clearwater florida 33756 who's here for that case officer deval anyone here for an asia upel neilam trustee all right we're here on a written respondent's opposition to notice a violation and motion to dismiss this concerns an order that i entered on february 9th of 2026 in that order i denied the motion to dismiss and a motion to strike and i found violations and ordered compliance by june 1 of 2026 officer deval would you please raise your right hand do you swear to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do on or after june 1 2026 have you inspected the property at all yes magistrate i did inspected the property on june 17th what was the status found the property to still be non-compliant with the commercial minimum housing code section 22 231 i am going to deny respondents opposition to notice of violation and motion to dismiss thank you magistrate when that would you read item number eight department code enforcement matter commercial minimum housing code violation case number ccm-26-00002 officer d deval owner sheena investment living trust tunisia upel neilam tre notice address sheena investment living trust tunisia upel neilam tre po box 1002 largo florida 33779-1002 and d deval special magistrate officer pinellas county code enforcement 631 chestnut street clearwater florida 33756 d deval at pinellas.gov violation address 1527 south missouri avenue clearwater florida 33756 and who is here for that case officer deval pinellas county code is anyone here for the sheena investment living trust tanija upel neilam or dr neilam perry all right we're here on respondents opposition to notice of violation and motion to dismiss i entered an order february 9 2026 finding among other things a violation of code section 22-231 in order that the property be brought into compliance at 5 p.m on june 1 2026 officer deval would you please raise your right hand do you swear to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do have you inspected this property since june 1 yes magistrate property was inspected on june 17th and what did you find property was still non-compliant uh in violation of code section 22-231 commercial minimum housing all right i'm going to deny uh respondents opposition to notice of violation and motion to dismiss that concludes the code hearings so we're ready to go into the if we can have um yeah break like 10 minutes okay we'll be in adjournment for uh 10 minutes and then we will start on the uh construction licensing board hearings communications please stop recording