Good morning. My name is Jeff Fuller. I'm the special magistrate who's been assigned to the agenda for today, June 8, 2026, of the Pinellas County Code Enforcement Special Magistrate Agenda. 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 that 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 while she is doing that, as we don't follow the order that they are on the agenda for a variety of reasons. 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. Nicole, would you please read item number three from the agenda? Item number three, department code enforcement. Matter zoning code violation. Case number CCM-26-00048. Officer B. Hughes, owner Todd William H. Notice address Todd William H. 11107-109th Way, Seminole, Seminole, Florida 33778-3327. And B. Hughes, special magistrate officer, Pinellas County Code Enforcement, 631 Chestnut Street, Colorado, Florida 33756. B. Hughes at Pinellas.gov. Violation address 11107-109th Way, Seminole, Florida 33778. Who's appearing for the county? Officer Hughes. And sir, would you state your name for the record? William H. Todd. All right. It's my understanding that an agreement or joint stipulation has been entered in this matter? Yes, sir. I have reviewed the joint stipulation and I will approve it. I will find that there is a violation of Code Section 138-90 required that the property be brought into compliance by July 8, 2026 at 5 p.m. Failing to do so will assess a fining amount of $100. I will find that there is a violation of Code Section 138-3505, order that the property be brought into compliance by July 8, 2026 at 5 p.m. Failing to do so will assess a fining amount of $100. I will find that there is a violation of Code Section 138-3702, order that the property be brought into compliance by July 28, 2026. Failing to do so will result in a fine of $100. I'm presuming that date's on purpose different because the first two were July 8th. The third one is July 8th. They should have all been July 8th, sir. July 8th? Yes, sir. Okay. Is that your understanding as well? Yes, sir. Yes, sir. So, for that one, the third violation, I will find a violation of Code Section 138-3702, order that the property be brought into compliance by July 8, 2026 at 5 p.m. Failing to do so will result in a fine of $100 per day. I will also assess court costs the amount of $225.16. She will be preparing an order. She can mail it to you or you can wait to get it. Thank you, magistrate. Thank you, sir. It's up to you. Give me a great day, sir. Bye-bye. Thank you. Nicole, would you please read item number four? Item number four, Department Code Enforcement. Matter code violation. Case number CCM-26-00051. Officer D. DeVall. Owner, Ronzo Christina A. Notice address, Ronzo Christina A. 1051 Point Seaside Drive, Crystal Beach, Florida, 34681. And D. DeVall, Special Magistrate Officer, Pinellas County Code Enforcement, 631 Chestnut Street, Colorado, Florida, 33756. D. DeVall at Pinellas.gov. Violation address, 1051 Point Seaside Drive, Crystal Beach, Florida, 34681. Who is appearing for the county? Officer DeVall. And would you please state your name for the record? Christina Ronzo. And you, sir? Liam O'Neill. It's my understanding that there is a joint stipulation and agreement in this case? That is correct. All right. I have reviewed it and will approve it. We'll find that there is a violation of Code Section 158-335, order that the property be brought into compliance by September 6th, 2026 at 5 p.m. Failing to do so will result in imposition of a fine of $100 per day. I will also assess court costs in the amount of $218.41 that are due on September 6th, 2026 as well. She will be preparing an order and you can wait for it for a few minutes or she can mail it to you. Thank you, Magistrate. 5-1. So, let's see your mailing list. 7-2. Yes. And then Crystal Beach, Florida, 34681. Perfect. So, we'll send you a copy for that, okay? And then you're welcome. Nicole, would you please read item number 8? Item number 8, Department Code Enforcement Matter, Commercial Minimum Housing Code Violation. Case number CCM-26-00055. Officer D. Duvall, owner, Ademi LLC. Notice address, Ademi LLC. PCPAO. Mailing address, 10546 Martinique Isle Drive, Tampa, Florida, 33647-2774. And Ademi LLC. Sunbiz mailing address, 1405 South 78th Street, Tampa, Florida, 33619. And Moorabi, Joda, Registered Agent for Ademi LLC, 1405 South 78th Street, Tampa, Florida, 33619. And D. Duvall, Special Magistrate Officer, Pinellas County Code Enforcement, 631 Chestnut Street, Colorado, Florida, 33756. D. Duvall at Pinellas.gov. Violation address, 11561 Walsingham Road, Largo, Florida, 33778. Who's appearing for the county? Officer Duvall. Sir, would you state your name? Judah Mugrabi. That's my understanding is a joint stipulation and agreement on this matter? That is correct. All right. I've reviewed the joint stipulation and will approve it. I will find that there is a violation of Code Section 22-231. Order that the property be brought into compliance by August 7th, 2026 at 5 p.m. Failing to do so will result in a daily fine in the amount of $250. I will also assess costs in the amount of $308.44 that are due August 7th, 2026. Okay. You'll be getting an order. You can wait for it or get it in the mail. It's up to you. Thank you, Madam Chair. All right. We will be in recess. That completes the joint stipulations before we start hearing the next cases. Communications, please stop recording. Nicole, would you read item number nine? Item number nine, Department Code Enforcement Matter Petitioners Motion to Initiate Demolition. Case number CCM-23-00018. Officer D. Duvall, Owner, Roiland Christopher C. Notice Address, Estate of Christopher Roiland, 7354-122, Oh, I'm sorry. 122nd Way, Seminole, Florida, 33772-5525. And Stephen Roiland, Personal Representative of the State of Christopher Roiland, 7354-122nd Way, Seminole, Florida, 33772-5525. And Stephen Roiland, Personal Representative of the State of Christopher Roiland, 8190-Lumbra Avenue, North Port, Florida, 34287. And David G. Bowman, Jr., Esquire, representing Stephen Roiland, 2750, Wrangling Boulevard, Suite 3, Sarasota, Florida, 34237. Bowman J. at bowmangeorge.com. And D. Duvall, Special Magistrate Officer, Plaintiff, Pinellas County Code Enforcement, 631 Chestnut Street, Colorado, Florida, 33756. D. Duvall at Pinellas.gov. Who's here for that case? Officer Duvall, Pinellas County Code Enforcement. Hi, David Barrera, Pinellas County Attorney's Office. I'm Attorney David Bowman from Sarasota, and this is my client, Steve Roiland, who's Personal Representative of the State of Christopher Roiland. All right. We are here on petitioner's motion to initiate demolition. Would the two people who aren't lawyers please raise your right hand? Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do. I'm presuming you're lawyering as opposed to a fact witness? I may be a little bit on the facts. Okay. That works. Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do. County may proceed. Thank you, Magistrate. So what we're going to have is, you know, we're governed by 22-278 of Pinellas County Code of Ordinances requiring the county attorney to be here. I'm going to have Officer Duvall walk through the packet and the applicable exhibits and facts and circumstances, and then I'll prepare a closing argument once she's presented everything. All right. Officer Duvall, you may proceed. Should we sit down while you're... Yeah. Go ahead and have a seat. Good morning, Magistrate. I'm going to be reviewing the documents for the motion for demolition. Property was originally supposed to be heard at the hearing for May 18th, those are the first three pages in that packet. We then had a continuance, so we had a new notice of hearing that was sent out on June 8th for today's hearing now at 1030. Those are these three pages of documents. We next have the motion to initiate demolition for this property located at 7354-122nd Way in Seminole, Florida, under the estate of Christopher Rowland as the owner. We have those three pages. As we move into the exhibits, we have showing ownership of the property by Christopher Rowland is Exhibit A from Property Appraiser. Exhibit B shows a quick claim deed back from June 21st of 2017 when Mr. Rowland purchased the property, signature page of that deed. Exhibit C, the notice of hearing, which was sent for the original magistrate hearing back in 2023. Three pages to that. The affidavit and request for hearing, page two, and then page three shows the violations that were brought before in that hearing in 2023 for minimum housing, trash and debris, and we had the utilization of a recreational vehicle as an accessory dwelling, which was a zoning violation. Then we have the order from the outcome of that hearing. The hearing was held on April 10th, and he was found in violation of all three of those violations. It was signed by Magistrate Fuller, or excuse me, Magistrate Matthew. Affidavit of Noncompliance is Exhibit E. Compliance was not meant for the minimum housing and the trash and debris. The RV as an accessory dwelling was a complied violation at that time, and the court costs were paid. We did file the lien for the two violations that continued to exist for the minimum housing and the trash and debris. This is our lien packet that went out. Exhibit D, or G, excuse me, is the designation as a dwelling as unfit for habitation. It was placarded as condemned. That was sent out by our housing official. Then we did have an order of the county's permanent injunction. Let's see, the order, Exhibit H here, was dated back for in November of 2024, and then we do have here the, uh, when, um, Mr. Roiland-Steven was appointed as the, uh, personal representative for the property. Or what is this? Who's this? So Magistrate J is a copy of the, uh, injunction. It was amended to instead of state just Christopher Roiland, it then named the estate of Christopher Roiland and personal representative Mr. Steven Roiland. So just further notice that the original underlying injunction was amended to name the estate. In March we have, uh, Exhibit K is just some photos to show. This property, um, has had, uh, actually two fires. Um, this, the latest fire was in March and just to show the condition is quite bad out there. This was before the county did go in and place a fence around the property for, uh, basically safety and security of the property so no one could wander up onto it because it's in a very dilapidated state. As you can see, severely fire damaged. And just some various pictures around the property. A few more pictures to show. And you can see this was a fence that was around the property and then we have now secured it with additional fencing that goes all the way around the driveway area so no one can wander up onto the property. Thank you, Officer Duvall. Um, Magistrate, I'm going to now walk through, uh, some of the actual things that are required under 22-278. Um, Your Honor, we have, or Magistrate, we have Pinellas County Orders 22-278 for unsafe structures to be secured, repaired, rehabilitated, and or demolished. Calling your attention to paragraph B, which specifically governs demolition of unsafe structures, uh, Magistrate, an unsafe structure where extreme hazard exists remains in continuous and hazardous non-compliance for 30 days following a court or special, special magistrate ruling. Uh, Magistrate, you've had, uh, Officer Duvall testify that there have been ongoing issues at the Royal and property for some time. Uh, the most important thing that I want to call to the magistrate's attention is the court's order signed by Judge Thane Covert. Uh, this order, which was a taxes exhibit H, specifically found that the structure needed to be secured as it was a condemned structure needing to be secured following fire damage as required by Pinellas County Code. Essentially, further confirming what the housing official had ordered when he condemned the structure and placarded the structure, but this was a follow, a following finding by a court of competent jurisdiction. Uh, so, Magistrate, for today, we had the notice of demolition hearing. We had the requirements, uh, that certified and regular mail at the address listed with the property appraiser and the tax collector that was provided, posting notice at the unsafe structure and posting notice notice on the county's official website. Uh, so, now that we've met the actual posting of notice, the contents of the notice, they did set forth the date and time of the hearing, inform all property owners, occupants, and interested parties, which is why I then referenced that we did amend the underlying injunction to name the estate of, so that the estate was aware of the prior orders from the injunction and everything for today's hearing. Uh, and the estate was noticed for today. Uh, so, we informed all property owners, occupants, and interested parties. Um, we stated the county's mailing address for any correspondence current concerning the demolition procedures and the basis upon which the county seeks demolition of the unsafe structure. Uh, so, Your Honor, the Magistrate, excuse me, the better, better requirement here to enunciate is the demolition hearing has three requirements, or, yes, four requirements, and those are the requirements that we're going to be asking you to impose today and, and find that the property structure needs to be demolished. So, first, a court or special magistrate previously found the property to be in non-compliance. We have the court's order from the injunction. Second, the property remained in non-compliance as an unsafe structure for 30 continuous days. That is a fact that has not been objected to and is evidenced by the, by the pictures. The property owners, occupants, and all interested parties were provided notice. Again, we've walked through the applicable notice, and the property has not been brought into compliance with respect to any hazardous violations. It's still not in compliance magistrate. So, at this point in time, the county seeks demolition of the applicable structure, and based on the county attorney's review of everything that's been filed and presented by Officer Duvall, the county believes that they are in compliance with the requirements of 22-278, and demolition should be authorized. All right. Counsel, do you have any cross-examination of Officer Duvall? Sir, if you're going to speak, can you come up and speak in the microphone? Thank you. Uh, yes, I do. All right. Uh, Officer Duvall, are you aware of the, um, the situation with the weir on the property? I am aware there's a situation in the back of the property. What is your, um, could, could you tell the magistrate, uh, what's the code violations were with that and what the status is? I did not have a code violation within this packet for the weir. So, I'm only aware simply because I was out there when there was a group of people that were from the county that were out, um, examining, uh, what was to be a repair that was done. But I, I did not, that was not part of the code packet that I put together. So, I was just simply present when they were doing a, um, inspection back there. Do you know what the result of the inspection was? At that time, there was no result. It was simply a, well, the county was going to go back and review what had been submitted to them by an engineer. And at that time, there was no result. It wasn't like, oh, this looks good. It was like, the county will review this. So, that, that, on that day of that, um, inspection, there was no final result. Okay. Thank you. Uh-huh. Yes. All right. So, if I could, I'd just like to give you the background of how we're here today. And, um, and then if... Officer, you may have a seat. Yes. And then if, uh, if you feel like there's a need for testimony, we can do that. So, as I said, I'm, uh, David Bowman, the attorney for the estate of, uh, Christopher Roiland. Um, the personal representatives here today, uh, Steve Roiland, he's the decedent's brother. Um, all of these, uh, violations except for the second fire occurred during Mr. Roiland's life. Uh, and the estate has inherited these problems. Um, I'm the attorney for the estate. Uh, Mr. Barrera, uh, reached out to me to, uh, substitute the estate in the, uh, the circuit court litigation, um, which I have done. And we have been diligently trying to, let me, let me go back. The, the estate has very limited funds, uh, to rehab the property to, to do anything. And has, uh, we've been seeking to sell the property, uh, diligently since, uh, since Mr. Roiland was appointed as personal representative. And we've had multiple contracts and they've all fallen through because of the pendency of this litigation. And there's a side issue that's really not before you today, that there was a, uh, the decedent made an unauthorized, um, modification to a weird, this pond, uh, that's been inspected by, it's been, and you know, we, we feel like it's been fixed, but the county hasn't signed off on that yet. So we still have this circuit court case pending. That's really mostly related to that. Um, and, uh, we have found buyers who are willing to buy the house to demo it, build new houses on it or a new house on it, but they can't get past the lawsuit. So we just want you to be aware that we have been trying to resolve this situation. We, we don't have, you know, the funds to, to tear the property down. At least one of our buyers, uh, received an estimate of $38,000 to demo the house. And the estate does not have that amount of funds. Uh, the estate did hire a civil engineer to address the county's concerns with the weir. And, uh, the county, uh, has not signed off on that yet. And the inspection of the weir was six months ago. Um, and so that's, that's the situation we're in. Um, and we do have a current contract, um, to sell the house. Do you like this? Or, uh, yes, please. We'll show it to, to. I have a copy. Okay. This was signed on Friday. So, you know, basically our, you know, we understand that the house, you know, needs to be torn down. We're not disputing that, but we're just, I suppose we're just asking for more time to hopefully have this contract go through and, and have, you know, the buyer close on the property. And, um, you know, they would be, you know, this is an investor that would be tearing the house down and, um, and building a new house. All right. Any response? Yes, magistrate. So to go through the motion to initiate demolition that's before us today, uh, when you saw the original violations, which were attached to exhibit C or for minimum housing, trash and debris and zoning and the zoning issue being the RV on the property, uh, the only legal finding that's relevant from the injunction case for today's hearing is from exhibit H where judge thing covert found that it was a condemned structure due to fire damage under Pinellas County code 22-299. Um, magistrate regarding the issues with the we're the we're was the subject of a injunction or a complaint for injunctive relief. The injunction was granted repairs were made to the we're without falling proper permitting. So the pond has since filled with water and we're only able to verify part of the repairs. And so I know that the county has to do additional repairs from beyond that structure. And those repairs are scheduled to occur sometime in this year, but I can't control staff and their ability to make those repairs. Again, the issues with the we are not the subject matter of today's demolition hearing, uh, today's demolition hearing deals with the fact that we have a fire damage property that has been fire damage for some time. Uh, noticeably magistrate, we've been dealing with issues at this property since 2024, March 2024. Um, there's been ample time for them to do what they need to do and sell the property. There was again, a second fire. Uh, it's the county's position that demolition is appropriate as required by 22-278 and that we followed every requirements under the ordinance. All right, anything further counsel? Just with regard to the, the, uh, we're situation. It wasn't actually my client that did the work on the we're. He did contribute, uh, along with several other neighbors and, uh, he did not perform the work on the we're. It was a, uh, contractor that was a relative to one of the neighbors. Again, magistrate, it was done without the proper procedures. We can't verify adequacy of the totality of the repairs. That's why that injunction is still, uh, basically still active in the, in circuit court. Um, and again, and until county, until you, the county does the repairs upstream or downstream from that control structure or the estate or a potential buyer wants to do the required work of draining the pond and verifying that the we're has been repaired as required. That's irrelevant for the demolition hearing. That is the problem that they have to face. Not a problem for here, for today, for demolition as required by 22-278. All right. Thank you. Um, I'm going to grant petitioners motion to initiate demolition. Uh, I'm a stop in the cog of this. Uh, the order of demolition will come from the board of county commissioners and my role in this is to review the demolition statute and see if procedurally due process has been followed and it has. Uh, the same arguments that were made to me, uh, by the petitioner can be made to the county commission when it's on the county commissions. Uh, and, and they've got, they've got more latitude than I do, uh, as far as, uh, whether to go ahead with the demolition, delay it, whatever. Uh, my order has a 30-day appeal provision, so nothing's going to happen as far as demolition until that's over. Uh, and then it's got to get put on the county commissioner's agenda. Uh, and, um, I gave up a long time ago predicting how long that type of thing is going to take. So we'll go ahead and grant the motion. Thank you, magistrate. Thank you for your attention, magistrate. Thank you. We will, on that case, we will admit the real estate purchase agreement as, uh, respondents exhibit A. Nicole, would you please go ahead and call item number 10. Item number 10 continued from May 18, 2026. Department code enforcement matter noise ordinance code violation. Case number CCM-26-00038. Officer D. Duvall, owner, Jungle Villas FLLLC. Notice address, Jungle Villas FLLLC. Property owner of violation address, 7381-114th Avenue, Suite 403B, Box 5127, Largo, Florida. Largo, Florida 33773-5105. And Northwest Register Agent LLC, Register Agent for Jungle Villas FLLLC, 7901-4th Street North, Suite 300, St. Petersburg, Florida 33702. And Happy Highway Management LLC, Manager of Jungle Villas FLLLC, 7381-114th Avenue, Suite 403B, Number 5127, Largo, Florida 33773. And D. Duvall, Special Magistrate Officer, Pinellas County Code Enforcement, 631 Chestnut Street, Clearwater, Florida 33756. D. Duvall at Pinellas.gov. Violation address, 2217 Lawton Drive, Clearwater, Florida 33764. Who's appearing for the county? Hi, Magistrate David Barrera on behalf of Code Enforcement. And would two of you in order state your name for the record? Yeah, Special Magistrate, good morning. Nikita Goldenberg, Attorney of Record. And I'm here with my client. Shailana Green. And she's one of the owners of Jungle Villas, Florida LLC, Magistrate. All right, I understand there were some continuance talks going on between the parties. Yes, Magistrate. So we received a legal motion to strike or exclude this morning. And the county attorney would like an opportunity to respond and file actual legal precedent as to why this needs to go forward. So we just need some time to get that to happen. Right now, I believe June 24th at 1.30 was one of the proposed dates. And there was also a date in July. I was just conferring with Officer Duvall. There is a complainant on this case. So we just need to confirm with him if he's available for the continuance dates. Special Magistrate, I would respectfully, I would never deny my colleagues an opportunity to review and respond to something that I spent my time drafting and thinking about myself. So I, and we also moved for a continuance initially. So we would not object. The county was respectful back when we moved for an initial continuance back on the 18th. So we would not object it. Okay, I'm going to continue this to June 24th, 2026 at, um, one 30. All right. Thank you. Thank you. And we'll be in touch. Yeah, of course. All right. We will go into recess for five minutes. Communications, please stop recording. I will include that as a data point for next month's meeting. So you can see the frequency at because we got some cities exactly like you said that don't really. Um, and so, you know, you want to have board members that, that, um, understand the process and the issue and the, that kind of thing. So, um, yeah, I just, thanks. Oh, I, I agree. Uh, again, just trying to give you a different perspective from what we've seen in the time I've been here. Um, so that is good on that one. Uh, the, Absolutely not. I object. We're live. We're live. Nicole, you please read item number one. Item number one, department code enforcement matter, minimum housing code violation, inoperable vehicle code violation, trash and debris code violation, zoning code violation, case number CCM-26-00040, Officer B. Hughes, owner Baggett Joan Estate, notice address Baggett Joan Estate, 5446 46th Avenue North, St. Petersburg, Florida 33709-3812, and B. Hughes, Special Magistrate Officer, Pinellas County Code Enforcement, 631 Chestnut Street, Clearwater, Florida 33756, vhughes at pinellas.gov, violation address 5446 46th Avenue North, St. Petersburg, Florida 33709. Do we have a hearing packet for this? Who's here for this case? Case number CCM-26-00040, Joanne Baggett Estate. I don't see anyone in the hearing room that I can't identify. Have you heard anything about this case as far as a voicemail or email? No, Magistrate. All right. Who's appearing for the county? Officer Hughes. You may proceed. Would you like to swear me in, Magistrate? Thank you. Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do. The property where the alleged violation exists is 5446 46th Avenue North and St. Petersburg 33709. It's located in unincorporated Pinellas County. The owner, Joanne Baggett Estate, is not present for today's hearing, and I've not had any communication with anyone. It does appear that someone is living at the property, but I've not had any communication from them. The violation has been an occurrence since Honor Before, September 9th of 2025, and I would like to enter the notice of hearing, affidavit of violation, and composite exhibit A into evidence. Composite exhibit A includes the notice of violations, Pinellas County tax collector and property appraiser documents, the deed, and the violation photos. Hearing no objection, exhibit A will be admitted into evidence. Okay. And would you like me to go through each document? Please. Okay. So the first notice is the notice of hearing for today. The next document is the affidavit of violation and request for hearing, showing that we're requesting the hearing for code sections 22299, 58-270, 58-304, and 138-3220. We've got the notice of violations that were mailed to the legal property owner in September of 2025 for all the violations. 22299, 58-270, 58-304, 138-3220. We've got the tax collector, Pinellas County tax collector document showing Joanne Baggett-State as the owner, property appraiser with the same, the warranty deed, and we've got the violation photos. We've got the first page represents the minimum housing violations. You can see the peeling paint. You've got windows that aren't present that have tarps over them. The entire roof is tarped. You've got the siding that is in poor condition. Just to get more photos showing that it's basically windows are missing, tarp-covered roof. Then you've got a vehicle that's parked under the carport that does not have a plate and appears to be in very poor disrepair. The next page are photos of the trash and debris that are present. You just have a board. You've got cardboard boxes, just all kinds of miscellaneous items present on the property. Same with outdoor storage. You've got different kind of chemicals and other items that are being stored around the property. So, Magistrate, the property was reinspected on May 27th of 2026, and all violations continue. Photos were taken on that date, and I would like to submit them as composite Exhibit B. Hearing no objection, Exhibit B will be admitted into evidence. Okay. So, again, since that date, I've left my card on the property. I've left the postings on the property and have had no contact, and there's been no change. The minimum housing violations continue with the rotted peeling paint, missing windows, tarp over the roof. The inoperable vehicle that does not have a current plate is still present. The trash and debris violations continue. It's all pretty much the same as the first time I went, and same with outdoor storage. All the items that were there before pretty much are still there. So, Magistrate, the county requests that you find the property in violation and issue an order to have the property brought into compliance. Okay. I have not seen anyone enter the hearing room since this hearing started. The hearing was scheduled for 9 o'clock, and it's now 20 to 12. Since we started the hearing, have you received any emails or voicemails concerning this? No, Magistrate. All right. Anything further from the county? Simply, the magistrate, the county is requesting an allowance for 30 days to comply, and if still found in violation, assign a daily fine amount of 100 per day for code sections 22299, 58-270, 58-304, and 138-3220, and award the county costs of $227.86. Nicole, when is 30 days? July 8, 2026. All right. I'm going to find that there is a violation of code section 22-299, order that the property be brought into compliance within 30 days, which is July 8, 2026, at 5 p.m. Failing to do so, we'll assess a fine in the amount of $100 per day. I'm going to find that there is a violation of code section 58-270, order that the property be brought into compliance within 30 days, which is July 8, 2026, at 5 p.m. Failing to do so will result in imposition of a fine of $100 per day. I'm going to find that there is a violation of code section 58-304, order that the property be brought into compliance within 30 days, which is July 8, 2026, at 5 p.m. Failing to do so will result in imposition of a fine in the amount of $100 per day. I'm going to find that there is a violation of code section 138-3220, order that the property be brought into compliance within 30 days, which is July 8, 2026, at 5 p.m. Failing to do so will result in imposition of a fine in the amount of $100 per day. I will also assess costs in the amount of $227.86. Thank you, Magistrate. Do we have a packet for item two? No, because that one was the one that was canceled. Okay, gotcha. Okay, Nicole, would you please read item number two? Item number two, department code enforcement matter, minimum housing code violation, trash and debris code violation, zoning code violation, case number CCM-26-00043, Officer B. Hughes, owner, Ward Linda J. Estate, notice address, Ward Julian G., 3100, 54th Avenue North, St. Petersburg, Florida, 33714-2420, and B. Hughes, Special Magistrate Officer, Pinellas County Code Enforcement, 631 Chestnut Street, Colorado, Florida, 33756, B. Hughes at Pinellas.gov. Violation address, 3100, 54th Avenue North, St. Petersburg, Florida, 33714. Okay, it's my understanding that this matter has been previously continued to the June 15th, 2025 Special Magistrate Agenda. Is that correct? Yes. We have a packet for item three. Item three is a joint stipulation. The next piece we have is item five. Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't follow my own. Do we have a packet for five? It could be there, yes. I saw it. We've got eight, nine, ten. Oh, they're in the wrong. I'm sorry, here it is. It's just, here are the items. We had to change the agenda of it. So when I did this, it was initially that. Here he is, the item number six. Nicole, would you please read item number five. Item number five, Department Code Enforcement. Matter, Minimum Housing Code Violation. Inoperable Vehicle Code Violation. Trash and Debris Code Violation. Case number CCM-26-00052. Officer B. Hughes, Owner, Anima Mensah-Bernard. Notice address, Anima Mensah-Bernard. 6251-143rd Avenue North, Colorado, Florida, 33760. And B. Hughes, Special Magistrate Officer, Pinellas County Code Enforcement. 631 Chestnut Street, Colorado, Florida, 33756. B. Hughes at Pinellas.gov. Violation address, 6257-143rd Avenue North, Colorado, Florida, 33760. Who is here for that case? Anyone here for case number CCM-26-00052. Anima Mensah-Bernard. I don't see anyone in the hearing room that I don't know. And have you heard anything, Caroline, as far as an email or a voicemail concerning this hearing? No, Magistrate. This hearing was scheduled to begin at 9 o'clock. It is now 1145. Who's appearing for the county? Officer Hughes. Can you please raise your right hand? Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do. The county may proceed. Thank you, sir. So, the property where the alleged violation exists is 6257-143rd Avenue North in Clearwater, Florida, 33760. Located in unincorporated Pinellas County. The owner, Bernard Mensah, is not present for today's hearing. And I've had communication with him for quite a few months. The violations have been in occurrence since on or before April 15th of 2026. This property was found in violation previously, but the ownership changed prior to the magistrate's deadline expiration date. The sales price was zero. And I have spoken, again, with Bernard, I don't know how to say his last name very well, and with his children several times under the previous case. So, he's very well aware of the violations. I would like to enter into evidence the notice of hearing, affidavit of violation, and composite Exhibit A into evidence, which includes the notice of violations, Pinellas County tax collector, property appraiser, the deed and violation photos. Hearing no objection, Exhibit A will be admitted into evidence. Thank you. So, Exhibit A, again, is the notice of hearing for today's date to the new owner of record. Then we have the affidavit of violation and request for hearing, which includes the same violations that had been previously cited for 22-299, 58-270, and 58-304. We have the notice of violation that was sent to the new owner of record for the minimum housing, the inoperable vehicles, and the trash and debris. We have a Pinellas County tax collector and property appraiser showing the new owner. We have the quit claim deed showing the new ownership. He does happen to live next door to this property, by the way. Okay. So, the minimum housing violation. The only thing that has moved forward at all is it's basically a trailer property or property that had a manufactured home on it. It's in complete disrepair. And there is actually now a building demo permit that has been applied for several months ago, but it has not been issued. They haven't completed what was required to get this issued. So, the trailer is in poor disrepair. Basically, one side of it is falling down. There's a boarded window. The front door isn't attached. Then you've got some inoperable vehicles. You have a trailer with a flat tire, a black truck that's been on the property that's pretty much buried in the ground and has an expired plate. And then you have a large amount of trash and debris on the property. There's a lot of building supplies, vegetative debris, and the like. So, magistrate, the property was re-inspected on May 27th and the violations continue. Photos were taken on that date and I would like to submit them as composite exhibit B. Hearing no objection, exhibit B will be admitted into evidence. So, again, there was an application for a demo permit. However, the permit still has not been issued as they've either, they've not submitted everything that is required by the county. Excuse me. Bless you. Again, you can see the truck that is an inoperable vehicle, the trailer with the flat tire. And you can also see there's another large box trailer that has no plate as well. And then the trash and debris violation continues. There's a lot of building materials, tires, just items in the right-of-way covered by a tarp. Again, more building materials. Again, more building materials and items as such. Just, it's basically the parcel's been used as a storage lot for the gentleman's company. So, Magistrate, the county requests you find the property in violation and issue an order to have the property brought into compliance. I have seen no one come in the hearing room. I've seen a couple people leave. Is there anyone here for case number CCM-26-00052 Bernard Anaman Mensah? Have we heard anything since the hearing started? No, Magistrate. All right, anything else from the county? Magistrate, the county is asking for the allowance of 30 days to comply and still found in violation to sign a daily fine amount of 250 per day per violation of Code Sections 22-299, 58-270, and 58-3004. And again, the reason for the higher rate than we usually ask for is it's already gone. He's been very well aware of the violations and has not brought them into complete compliance. So, again, requesting 30 days at $250 per day and also to award the county costs of $226.51. The goal is 30 days? Yes, sir. July 8, 2026. So, the reason you brought this was that within the compliance period of the previous magistrate order, they're claiming that the property changed hands. Yes, sir. They did a quit-claim deed. I'm not sure that's a valid quit-claim deed, but that's neither here nor there. I am going to, it's obviously their position that it changed hands. So, I'm going to find a violation of Code Section 22-299 order that the property be brought into compliance within 30 days, which is July 8, 2026 at 5 p.m. Failing to do so will assess a fine amount of $250 per day. I'm going to find that there is a violation of Code Section 58-270 order that the property be brought into compliance within 30 days, which is July 8, 2026 at 5 p.m. Failing to do so will assess a fine amount of $250 per day. I'm going to find that there is a violation of Code Section 58-304 order that the property be brought into compliance within 30 days, which is July 8, 2026 at 5 p.m. Failing to do so will assess a fine in the amount of $250 per day. I will also assess costs in the amount of $226.51. Thank you, Badger State. I'm just going to plow through, right? Yes. Is that the plan? The plan. Nicole, would you read item number six? Item number six, code enforcement matter. Minimum housing code violation. Trash and debris code violation. Case number CCM-26-00053. Officer D. Duvall, owner, Neptune Property Group, LLC. Notice address, Neptune Property Group, LLC. 6400, 17th Avenue North, St. Petersburg, Florida, 33710. And Neptune Property Group, LLC, 2630, 52nd Street North, St. Petersburg, Florida, 33710. And Nicholas Saltzman, registered agent for Neptune Property Group, LLC. 2630, 52nd Street North, St. Petersburg, Florida, 33710. And Saltzman, Nicholas A., manager for Neptune Property Group, LLC. 2630, 52nd Street North, St. Petersburg, Florida, 33710. And D. Duvall, special magistrate officer, Pinellas County Code Enforcement, 631 Chestnut Street, Clearwater, Florida, 33756. D. Duvall at Pinellas.gov. Violation address, 2181, 22nd Way, Southwest, Largo, Florida, 33774. Is there anyone here for this case? Case number CCM-26-00053, Neptune Property Group, LLC. I don't see anyone in the hearing room that I can't identify and know why they're here. Has anyone called or left a voicemail concerning this hearing? No, magistrate. F of Neptune. Who's here for the county? Officer Duvall. Would you please raise your right hand? Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do. You may proceed. Thank you, magistrate. The property where the alleged violation exists is located at 2181, 22nd Way, Southwest, in Largo, Florida, which is in unincorporated Pinellas County. The owner, Neptune Property Group, LLC, is not represented for today's hearing. This violation or these violations have been in occurrence since on or before February 9th of 2026. I'd like to enter the notice of hearing, affidavit of violation, and composite Exhibit A into evidence. Exhibit A includes the notices of violation, ownership confirmation through Pinellas County tax collector, property appraiser, and the deed. Inspection photos are also included. I'll be happy to go through this page by page. All right. Exhibit A will be admitted into evidence, having heard no objection. The first three pages are the notice of hearing sent to the property owner at the address of records for today's hearing. The next three pages are the affidavit of violation and requests for hearing. Last page will be addressing Code Sections 22299 for minimum housing and Code Section 58304 for trash and debris. This is the notice of violation sent for the minimum housing and the notice of violation that was sent for the trash and debris. We have here Pinellas County tax collector just confirming ownership for Neptune Property Group LLC and property appraiser confirming the same. The warranty deed for the property appears that it was purchased the 10th day of February of last year. Signature paid for that deed. We have SunBiz here confirming the LLC is active here in the state of Florida. We have the minimum housing photos just showing that down here in the lower right just a good street shot of the property itself. It is vacant. Looks like some renovations were started. We saw no or I saw no permits applied for. It looks like they've taken out a door here. We've got bare cinder block exposed. We've got a hole in the wall where a light fixture had been removed. Some very rough in of some stucco. We've got some exposed wiring here. We've got bare wood up on the overhang over the front door area. For the trash and debris we have overgrowth throughout the property. This is just a shot of the front of the property and this is a shot of the backyard area. Side area we've got some plywood in the cinder block. And then there is a very large pile of appears to be construction debris that had been pulled from the inside of the house. Magistrate the property was reinspected on May 29th and the violations continue. Photos were taken on that date. I'd like to enter him in as composite exhibit B. Hearing no objection exhibit B will be admitted into evidence. So again photos were taken on the 29th upon re-inspection and the conditions exist exactly as they were. Absolutely nothing has been done to try to abate any of the violations. We still have bare wood exposed, the hole in the wall, bare wire exposed. We've got cinder blocks that have been exposed. Trash and debris still remains and the overgrowth still exists. Magistrate, the county requests you find the property in violation and issue an order to have the property brought into compliance. All right. I haven't seen anyone come into the hearing room since we started this hearing. It is now two minutes after 12. The hearing was scheduled for 9 o'clock. During the hearing have we heard any by voicemail or email? No, Magistrate. All right. Anything else from the county? Magistrate, the county is asking for the allowance of 30 days to comply and if still found a violation, assign a fine in the amount of $150 per day per violation for Code Sections 22299 minimum housing and Code Section 58304 for trash and debris. Nicole wins 30 days. July 8th, 2026. Any costs that you're seeking? Yes, Magistrate. Thank you. The county is also looking for the cost of $301.69. All right. I'm going to find violation of Code Section 22-299 order that the property be brought into compliance within 30 days, which is July 8th, 2026 at 5 p.m. Failing to do so will assess a fine in the amount of $150 per day. I'm going to find that there's a violation of Code Section 58-304 order that the property be brought into compliance within 30 days, which is July 8th, 2026. Failing to do so will assess a fine in the amount of $150 per day. I will also assess costs in the amount of $301.69. Thank you, Magistrate. Nicole, would you read item number 7? Item number 7, Department Code Enforcement. Matter. Minimum Housing Code Violation. Case number CCM-26-00050. Officer B. Hughes, owner Aldridge John N. Notice address, Aldridge John N. 13623, 101st Terrace. Seminole, Florida 33776-1415. And B. Hughes, Special Magistrate Officer. Pinellas County Code Enforcement. 631 Chestnut Street. Clearwater, Florida 33756. B. Hughes at Pinellas.gov. Violation address, 13623, 101st Terrace, Seminole, Florida 33776. Is there anyone here for this case? CCM-26-00050, John Aldridge. I don't see anyone in the hearing room that I can't identify and know why they're here. Has anyone signed in for that case or left a voicemail or email concerning it? No, Magistrate. All right. It is now 5 after 12. It was scheduled to begin at 9 o'clock. Who's here for the county? Officer Hughes. Please raise your right hand. Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do. County may proceed. Thank you, sir. The property where the alleged violation exists is 13623, 101st Terrace in Seminole, Florida 33776, located in unincorporated Pinellas County. And the owner, John Aldridge, is not present for today's hearing. The violations have been in occurrence since on or before November 3rd of 2025. And I would like to enter into evidence the notice of hearing, affidavit of violation, and composite Exhibit A, which includes the notice of violations, Pinellas County tax collector and property appraiser, the deed, and the violation photos. Hearing no objection, Exhibit A will be admitted into evidence. Okay. So the first document is the notice of hearing for today's date to Mr. Aldridge. The next is the affidavit of violation and request for hearing for Code Section 22299. The next document is the notice of violation sent to the property owner on November 3rd of 2025. And then another one with just a few other violations sent on May 1st of 2026, just to include a few other violations that I noted when I did my inspection. It shows Pinellas County tax collector with Mr. Aldridge as the owner of record. The property appraiser showing the same. The trustee deed. The next document is a citation that was issued and adjudicated guilty prior to being referred to the magistrate office. And then the violation photos. Basically, there's a stagnant pool. There had been offense and disrepair. That was the only thing that has come into compliance since the original notices were mailed. And again, as I noted, when I did the inspection, I found more items other than just the stagnant pool. There was the soffit and disrepair. There was quite a bit of algae-like substance on the exterior walls. And of course, still the stagnant pool. So, magistrate, the property was reinspected on May 27th of 2026, and the violation continues. Photos were taken on that date, and I would like to submit them as composite exhibit B. Hearing no objection, exhibit B will be admitted into evidence. So, on May 27th, I went to the property, as I said, and pretty much the violations continue. There's some soffit and disrepair. There's algae-like substance, stagnant pools, and just the same photos showing the same. The one thing that I did find out, I'd left my card both times that I'd been to the property requesting a phone call and hadn't been contacted. However, when I was doing research before the hearing, I did find a case in the court records showing that there was a court case trying to have Mr. Aldridge's sister get, I forget the word, I believe, but I think it was just power of attorney to have legal representation for him and his affairs. So, I reached out to the attorney of that case for Mr. Aldridge, and he's the one that told me the person doing this case was his sister. And I requested that they have the sister get in touch with me and to, so that I could, and then I also sent pictures of the few violations. It's really mostly the stagnant pool, the bit of soffit, and then, you know, the house needs a pressure washing, basically, and requested that they forward my contact information to her. They thanked me for it and said they would do so. I have not yet reached out, or I've not yet heard from her or anyone from his family. So, that's kind of where we are with any kind of communication with the property owner. Again, I've reached out to the attorney, provided my contact information, and requested that someone from his family contact me. So, Magistrate, the county does request that you find the property in violation and issue in order to have the property brought into compliance for Code Section 22299. All right, since we've started this hearing, I've seen no one come or leave the hearing room. Have anything as far as voicemail or email that you've received on this? No, Magistrate. All right, anything further from the county? Yes, sir. In light of the information that I recently received regard to the person's health status, what I would like to request is the allowance of 90 days to comply, and, of course, if I do have the family member reach out, I can try to work with them if more time is needed, and just request the amount of $100 per day for Code Section 22299 and to award the cost of 22516. Nicole, when is 90 days? 90 days is September 6, 2026. All right, I'm going to find a violation of Code Section 22-299, order that the property be brought into compliance within 90 days. 90 days is September 6, 2026 at 5 p.m. Failing to do so will result in the imposition of a fine of $100 per day. I will also assess costs in the amount of $225.16. Thank you, sir. What do you read? Nicole, would you please read item number 11? Item number 11, continued from May 18, 2026. Department code enforcement. Matter, minimum housing code violation. Case number CCM-26-00033. Officer B. Hughes, owner, T4 Holdings IA-LLC. Notice address, T4 Holdings IIA-LLC. 1-8865 State Road 54, Unit 302. Lutes, Florida, 33558-8201. And T4 Holdings IIA-LLC. Principal address, 7901 4th Street North, Suite 300. St. Petersburg, Florida 33702. And T4 Holdings IIA-LLC. Mailing address, 7901 4th Street North, Suite 300. St. Petersburg, Florida 33702. And Northwest Registered Agent, LLC. Registered Agent for T4 Holdings IIA-LLC. 7901 4th Street North, Suite 300. St. Petersburg, Florida 33702. And F4B-711-LLC. Manager of T4 Holdings IIA-LLC. 530-B Harkle Road, Suite 100. Santa Fe, New Mexico 87505. And F4B-711-LLC. Principal address, 315 South Plant Avenue, Tampa, Florida 33606. And F4B-711-LLC. Mailing address, 301 West Platte Street, number 657. Tampa, Florida 33606. And Registered Agents, Inc. Registered Agent for F4B-711-LLC. 7901 4th Street North, Suite 300. St. Petersburg, Florida 33702. And B. Hughes, Special Magistrate Officer, Pinellas County Code Enforcement. 631 Chestnut Street, Clearwater, Florida 33756. B. Hughes at Pinellas.gov. Violation address, 5831 64th Street North, St. Petersburg, Florida 33709. All right. I don't see anyone here for case number CCM-26-00033. And there's no one in the hearing room that I can't identify and know why they're here. I have been handed a notice of appearance by Attorney Erin Rose Quinn. And a motion for continuance of the hearing. Who's here for the county? Officer Hughes. What's your position on the motion to continue? My position is that it should be heard today as they were given notice at the last hearing of this date. They were given the order on that date and the information was provided to the same gentleman that was here earlier today. Who was here earlier today? The gentleman, what was his name? Magistrate, if I may. So, Mr. James Talent, the one that came in last time that we handed the order to and then we mailed him out the order of continuance on May 18th. He came in again to our hearing room and he did not have any authorization paperwork. At that time, he notified us that there was an attorney, Ms. Erin Rose Quinn, on the case. However, our office never received any information on that. Not until I spoke with her and I told her she had to send it through email. She stated she was out of the state for seven days, no reason. And then the email that we received with the notice of appearance, the letter of representation and the motion for continuance will receive by our office at 1031 a.m. today. And the hearing was scheduled for 1030. And if I could provide a, if I could speak more before you make your decision as well. Okay, let's go ahead and swear you in now. Sure. You sort of tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. I do. Okay. You may continue talking about the motion to continue. Sure. So basically they, this is another property that I have been before the magistrate on multiple times, multiple cases. This property has been out of compliance with the exact same violation codes since 2024. I originally was here and did a foreclosure hearing motion that was approved. They did a, a deed change. And so that motion was no longer valid. So we brought the property again before the magistrate and it was again found in violation. Under the, the, the owners of that case, um, there was multiple unlicensed contracting and unlicensed, uh, work without permits that included a new roof and some plumbing. There was a stop work order, um, placed on the property, uh, due to that. It went before the magistrate. It was found in violation, um, again, before the compliance, uh, deadline. They did another name change. So now we're back again. We showed up, um, when they did the name change, it was a quick claim deed. The sales price was only a hundred dollars. So I'm under the, I have a feeling that there's somehow ownership is, um, somewhat related somehow and that the amount was, um, so low. And, um, again, we had the motion to continue to today, today's date. They received all the information, um, during the last hearing in the packet. They were told by you that, um, you would be heard today. We all agreed on the date. They've had more than enough notice. No one even contacted us prior to, um, today with any information, no attorney or anything else. Um, requesting again for it to be continued again. I feel like they had plenty of opportunity and have not moved forward. There are no permits in the system. Um, and additionally, when I came into work today, I had an email from one of the neighbors. And I get constant emails from the neighbors on how this property is a nuisance. Um, stating that there was, again, another homeless person, um, lying on the ground, that they had to, um, call the deputies to come remove. So, I would very much like to move forward with this case. They've had more than enough opportunity to get legal counsel and to be here for today. All right. I'm going to deny respondents motion for continuance of June 8, 2026 hearing. Um, do we have a hearing packet on this one? All I got was the stuff that came in today. I can print it out for you. Provided it's on the last one. Yeah. That's probably why I don't have it. Okay. Let me just, uh, print it out real quick. Okay. For you. I apologize for that. Probably put it in my other folder. No, because they provided, then provided the packet. This was a continuance. Yeah. Printing. Paper? No, it says printing. It's 18 pages, so it's probably... It's thinking. A little bit too long to think. It was shut off before. You don't have your computer, right? I do. It's not, it's not on. Okay. But I can turn it on. You want me to send it to you through email? Yeah, why don't you? Okay. Oh, is it doing you? So you're not going to make me work that hard. No, no. It's like, no, thank you. It was printing perfectly before. I don't know what happened. It's acting like it wants to do something. It wants to print, but it doesn't want it. It's like maybe. It's teasing us. Teasing. It just shut off. It shut off? It just died. Error printing. So now it said the printer couldn't print. It's blinking. Yeah, but the... You know that? Now it's... I don't know what it's doing. Maybe toner? I don't know. It would have said it. It doesn't... We don't even use this thing, really. Have you emailed them to me yet? I'm doing it right now as I speak. Is it doing it now? Just emailed it. Of course. As soon as I emailed it, it's going to print. I emailed the prior continuance as well as the packet. I got it. As soon as the magistrate received the order. Yeah, right. Or the email. Nope. I'll give you the copy of... The saga. I'm doing an order. I'm not doing the bigger one. Oh, now it is. Okay. I have it. Okay. All right. One of the alleged violations exist is 5831 64th Street North, St. Petersburg, Florida, 33709, located in unincorporated Pinellas County. The owner, T4 Holdings, IIA LLC, is not represented for today's hearing. Um, the violation has been in occurrence since on or before, February 17th of 2026 under this ownership. And I would like to enter the notice of hearing, affidavit of violation, and composite exhibit A into evidence. All right. Hearing no objection, exhibit A will be admitted into evidence. So the first document I have is actually the order, um, that, uh, allowing for the continuance from the hearing last month. That was also given to the gentleman that was here, um, I believe, right? He was given it in motion when he was here. Yes. Physically given it to him. Then, uh, we have the notice of hearing, um, that was originally scheduled for May 18th. We have the affidavit and, um, a violation request for hearing for the minimum housing violation, 22299. We have the notice of violation, um, for the minimum housing sent to the owner on February 17th of 2026. We have Pinellas County, um, tax collected document showing that, um, the ownership of record. Same with, um, Pinellas County property appraiser. And we have the quitclaim deed that was filed February 10th of 2026. Uh, we have the, uh, Sunbiz document showing the registered agent. So, uh, the violations, this, this property has pretty much been this way for years. Um, all the windows are boarded. You have a lot of rotted wood. Um, there is now vegetative debris on the property. They had at one point cleaned up the debris, but it's come back. However, rather than delay the hearing, um, we're just moving forward with the minimum housing. They have the soffit that's coming undone. Again, rotted wood, boarded windows and doors. Broken window glass. Um, the siding is falling apart. And that is getting, I've got some better pictures in a second, but the siding is getting to be even worse than it was, um, when I originally started doing. Um, it's really starting to fall apart where there's holes just right through the siding. Again, the whole property is boarded. So magistrate, the property was re-inspected on May 8th of 2026. The violations continued and photos were taken on that date. Um, and I would like to submit exhibit B to get on record, even though, um, they were actually prepared for the previous, uh, hearing that got continued. All right. Hearing no objection. Exhibit B will be admitted into evidence. Okay. So again, it's pretty much the same violations. The property hasn't changed all the broken glasses, boarded windows, soffit and disrepair, rotted siding or the siding that's in poor disrepair. Again, there is more trash and debris that's, um, showing up, but we're just moving forward with the minimum housing. You can see that the stop work order from, um, PCCLB is still there and has been there for quite some time now. So during, um, this, my inspection, um, I noted that two gentlemen were on the property. There was a Juan Diaz, um, who was there with his uncle who did not speak English. And I asked him basically why they were there. Um, he told me that his uncle was basically renting the property and using it as storage and that he sometimes lived there. He kind of was changing his story whether he was living there or just using it as storage. Um, but was basically given permission by someone enough so that he felt comfortable calling 911, um, to report that someone had broken through, um, one of the boarded windows or doors. Um, the property still had a, uh, stop work order posted, um, for the new roof and the complaining, um, and the plumbing completed without permits. So basically, um, they were given permission to use, or the uncle was given permission to use this property even though it's in very poor condition. There's no water. There's no power. Um, excuse me. There's no power. I'm not sure about the water. So, magistrate, the ownership had changed on January 6th of 2026 with a sales price of $100 before the order and the lien for the previous owner were recorded. The property has been in violation since 2024. Multiple orders were issued and recorded prior to the sale date and included in, um, an order assessing an administrative fine, a lien, a motion to initiate foreclosure. And I would like to submit those as a composite exhibit C into evidence. Hearing no objection, exhibit C will be admitted into evidence. Okay. Um, so basically when this initially went, um, in front of the magistrate, the property pretty much is in the same condition as it is now, um, barring some of the unlicensed work under DDDC holding. And there's, so these were all recorded. So any of the previous owners should have been able to see this when they were, or subsequent owners, excuse me, should have been able to see this. This was recorded in September of 2024. You then have the lien that was recorded, um, on November 21st of 2024 for that case under DDDC holdings. That just, the lien included the non-compliance and the order. And then I came before the magistrate, um, requesting the motion to initiate foreclosure, which was recorded in July of 2025 under the DDDC holdings. So again, this was all in public record. The property again, went under the new ownership and was recorded back on January 28th of 2026. So again, that was also recorded. And again, as I had stated, there are multiple stop work orders posted, um, under Pinellas County, um, unlicensed investigators. So Magistrate, on May of 2026, the property was posted condemned since Juan Diaz stated his uncle was possibly living at the property. And on May 27th, the notice of hearing was posted on the property for the continuance of the hearing on June 8th. I would like to submit into evidence the condemnation notice, condemned posting pictures, and the continuous postings as composite exhibit D. Hearing no objection, exhibit D will be admitted into evidence. So again, because it was, um, we were, I was unsure whether the people that were there were living there, being that it is not habitable, we posted the condemnation notice. Here's a copy of the notice that was mailed on May 19th of 2026, uh, both to the registered agent and to the owner of record. Um, there's the property posted condemned. Again, I posted it right under the stop work order. And I went ahead and, um, posted the continuance hearing as well. And just, you can see it, no changes. Again, there's now trash and debris, but, um, we're just going real forward with the housing. So Magistrate, the county is asking for the allowance of 30 days to comply and have still found in violation to assign a daily, to assign a daily fine amount of a thousand dollars per day per code violation of code section 22-299. Um, since they should have been well aware of the violations for this property. Right. Uh, no one has come in, um, to the hearing since it started. Anything else from the county? Um, no, sir. Again, the reason that I'm asking for such the large fine amount is simply because of the, um, the long standing problems with this property. Um, other than that, um, I've concluded my testimony. Thank you. All right. Any, um, costs? Thank you. Um, and I don't have the cost. Yes. It is, um, $523 and 47 cents. Thank you, Carolyn. You're welcome. Nicole, when is 30 days? July 8th, 2026. All right. I'm going to find a violation of code section 22 dash 299 order that the property be brought into compliance within 30 days, which is July 8th, 2026 at, um, 5 PM. Failing to do so, I will assess a fine in the amount of $1,000 per day. I will further assess costs in the amount of $523 and 47 cents. Thank you, Madam State. Nicole, would you read item number 12? Item number 12, Department Code Enforcement. Matter. Respondents' objection to affidavit of noncompliance. Case number CCM-25-00048. Officer B. Hughes, Owner, Technology Development Consultants, LLC Trustee. Strategic Trust Holdings, 74th Street North Land Trust. Notice address, Technology Development Consultants, LLC Trustee. Strategic Trust Holdings, 74th Street North Land Trust. Fuel Box 752. Donita, Florida, 34697-0752. And Technology Development Consultants, LLC Trustee. Strategic Trust Holdings, 74th Street North Land Trust. 18167 U.S. Highway 19 North, Suite 250. Clearwater, Florida, 33764. Chris at HicksLawGroup.com. N.Y. Kelly at HicksLawGroup.com. And International Technology Logistics, LLC. Technology Development Consultants, LLC Trustee. Strategic Trust Holdings, 74th Street North Land Trust. 18167 U.S. Highway 19 North, Suite 250. Florida, Florida, 33764. Chris at HicksLawGroup.com. N.Y. Kelly at HicksLawGroup.com. And International Technology Logistics, LLC. Technology Development Consultants, LLC Trustee. Strategic Trust Holdings, 74th Street North Land Trust. 18167 U.S. Highway 19 North, Suite 250. Clearwater, Florida, 33764. And B. Hughes, Special Magistrate Officer. Pinellas County Code Enforcement, 631 Chestnut Street. Clearwater, Florida, 33756. B. Hughes at Pinellas.gov. Violation address, 5100-74th Street North, St. Petersburg, Florida, 33709. We're here on respondent's objection to affidavit of noncompliance. And I'm just reading the materials that concern that. Mm-hmm. Is there anyone here for case number CCM-25-00048 Technology Development Consultants, LLC. Trustee for Strategic Trust Holdings, 74th Street North Land Trust. I don't see anyone in the hearing room that I don't know who they are and why they are here. Have we heard anything about the hearing other than the objection that was filed? No, Magistrate. Let's go ahead and swear you in. Mm-hmm. Do you sort of tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do. What's the county's position concerning the objection to the notice of noncompliance? So his objection made a lot of correct statements in that they initially had been working with us quite a bit. Mr. Hickson has been very communicative with me and has been very helpful. They did get the trash and debris violation and compliance at one point. They did remove the shed in that the homeless were sleeping behind it. And they did, albeit they knew this could not be a permanent solution, had boarded all the windows and doors as the homeless were using it to do illegal activity and just hang out in there. So initially, I felt like we were moving forward. However, recently, after the objection, I reached out to Mr. Hickson multiple times. There is a permit in the system, but it's not been issued and they have more things to do before it does get issued to complete the repairs. I have not had any communication back from Mr. Hickson. I had reached out to him in another email letting them know that, you know, we were working on getting it scheduled and basically requesting an update and didn't receive anything. And I haven't heard anything from him since. He did initially request a 30 days extension of time, which we did approve. My supervisor and I approved it because he was working or not he. He's their attorney, obviously, but they were working. The owner was working toward compliance, we felt, and had done some things. Part of the problem was is we didn't receive any more requests for an extension of time. So that was the reason that I went ahead and moved forward with the affidavit of noncompliance. As of currently, I have put all the violations in compliance except for the minimum housing. As the soffit's still in disrepair, the entire property is boarded, and we are starting to get some overgrowth now. I do have pictures if you would like to see the condition of the property now. And the only other thing is the permit's still in awaiting applicant action as of April 3rd of 2026, so basically two months ago. I believe I reached out to him letting him know that and that they needed to move forward. This property, the original order, was back in September of 2025. So I don't know if you would like me to submit the pictures of what the property looks like today, but I was kind of surprised Mr. Hickson wasn't here today, honestly, since he did initially submit the application or the objection. But it is not in compliance right now of 22-299, and I have not received any communication from him. All right. I'm going to deny respondents' objection to affidavit of noncompliance. And may I ask a question along with that? In all fairness, as I said, we had, my supervisor and I had agreed to a 30-day extension for the violation since they were working toward compliance. Do we need to adjust the... I'm sorry. Would we need to get on record that the new deadline date being that, you know, you've always requested if they request more time and we would work with them? I don't think it's necessary. The only thing I'm ruling on is their objection to affidavit of noncompliance. Okay. I just wanted to be sure. Thank you. And that is denied, of course. Thank you, Madam State. Nicole, would you please read item 13? Item number 13. Item number 13. Department. Code enforcement. Matter of respondents' objection to affidavit of noncompliance. Case number CCM-25-00053. Officer B. Hughes. Owner, Amada Francisco. Notice address, Amada Francisco, 7694 62nd Street North, Pinellas Park, Florida 33702. And B. Hughes, Special Magistrate Officer, Pinellas County Code Enforcement, 631 Chestnut Street, Clearwater, Florida 33756. B. Hughes at Pinellas.gov. Violation address, 3287 70th Avenue, St. Petersburg, Florida 33702. We are here on respondent's objection to affidavit of noncompliance. I don't see anyone in the hearing room that I don't know who they are and why they're here. Is anyone signed in for this case? No, Magistrate. And have you received any voicemails or emails concerning the hearing? No, Magistrate. All right. What's the county's position on the objection to affidavit of noncompliance? Let's go ahead and swear you in first. Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? I do. What's the county's position on respondent's objection to affidavit of noncompliance? Honestly, yes, sir. It's very similar circumstances in that the property owner pretty much brought all the violations into compliance over time. This is a property where multiple renovations were done without permits. They've added all kinds of structures and pretty much added to the house without any kind of permitting or licensed contractors. They did remediate the debris violation, the inoperable vehicle violation, but the minimum housing violation still continues. And I've not had any more communication from that. Actually, the owner's brother is the one that's been representing him. He did have a letter allowing him to represent him, but I've not had any communication with him. And again, this is a case that went before the court in September. They did apply for a permit as well, and that's still sitting in incomplete submittal status. So again, they seem to be working with us initially, but just never have finished it. And I have not had any communication with him recently either. All right. I'm going to deny respondents' objection to affidavit of noncompliance. Thank you, sir. Nicole, would you please read item 14 from the agenda? Item 14, Department Code Enforcement Matter, Respondents' Extension of Time Request. Case number CCM-25-00103, Officer D. Duvall, Owner, Serger Tatiana. Notice address, Serger Tatiana, 12689 Wilcox Road, Largo, Florida, 33774-1938. And D. Duvall, Special Magistrate Officer, Pinellas County Code Enforcement, 631 Chestnut Street, Clearwater, Florida, 33756, dduvall at pinellas.gov. Violation address, 12689 Wilcox Road, Largo, Florida, 33774. We're here on Respondents' Extension of Time Request. Carolyn DeWeed, do you have a copy of that request, written request, oral? I thought I had included it. Is there anyone here for case number CCM-25-00103, Tatiana Serger? I don't see anyone in the hearing room that I can't identify and know why they're here. Did anyone sign in for this case? No, Magistrate. Have you heard anything by email or voicemail concerning this hearing? No, Magistrate. Only that email. Okay. Let me take a look at this real quick. Email and then I'll give you the attachments. Welcome. Who's here for the county? Officer Duvall. What's the county's position on the request for extension of time? The county does not agree with the extension of time request simply because this property owner was given 90 days from the day of the hearing. They were given a 90-day compliance timeframe. This was heard at the hearing back in December of 2025 and they were given until, actually they were given 120 days. I believe they were given until April 16th to file all necessary documents, provide all information to the county, get things sorted out with their mortgage holder. It wasn't until the actual compliance due date of April 16th that they even initiated a request for extension making us aware of a situation of a change of mortgage holder. So, it appears that they somewhat sat on this for a while when they were given ample time to initiate getting this taken care of. Do we have the backup file that Magistrate Matthew entered an order and it recites that there was an exhibit? So, what I'm trying to find out a little bit about is based on what I have. Maybe I'll just get it through. Would you please raise your right hand? Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? I do. What's the violations we're talking about? This is an encroachment onto county owned property. There has been a small park that has been built right behind the property owner's backyard fence. The fence is encroaching into that park area. So, now, if I may, I can show you an aerial photo. It may speak a little better to the actual violation. The county reached out actually in July of 2025 and told the property owner, we are willing to work with you and move your property. If we can move the property boundaries, the county is willing to allow you to keep your fence. So, here is the, if you can see this, their property line is right here, Magistrate, this black line. The fence extends out to where the red dotted line is. So, what the county was going to allow them to do was encroach onto our property and then hence the property line in the front of the property was going to move backwards as it was like a shift of the entire property boundaries. So, the front would come back and the back would go more forward. And the county was willing to do this, but the property owner did not respond in the proper amount of time that was given. They were given 30 days to do this exchange. And if that didn't happen, then the county was going to deny it. They were going to say, no, if you don't want to work with us in this timeframe that we've given you, then we're going to make you remove your fence. So, this is long ago expired, the county's offer through this letter that was sent through real estate. Do I have a copy of that letter if you'd like to review it? Yes, I would like to review that. The magistrate, as the prior hearing with Magistrate Matthew was a joint stipulation. He did not see any evidence in that sense because it was just an agreement between the special magistrate officer and the respondent. Just to let you know that. All right, thank you. Yeah, I see it now. I didn't read the title of the order. That's okay. That's why I was looking and I went, wait. Do you have, it looks like the offer was an exchange. And I can see from what you were telling me that the respondents going to get property to make the fence in compliance. But they're giving up something and I can't tell from this what they're giving up. According to, if I'm understanding this letter correctly, it was a shift so that their front property then will shift inward more towards the house. So, it was a, the same distance. So, the front property line is going to come inward according to this letter. And then that, then allowing the back property line to go outward and allowing them to keep their fence and absorb then what was county property. Which they've had that as county property for a long time. And, but now it's more formalized because of the park behind it. Okay. I'm going to deny respondents extension of time request. Thank you, Madam Street. All right. That, that concludes the agenda. The next order of business is are there any county attorney matters? Hearing none, the hearing will be adjourned. Communications, please stop recording. Hello no, that's the recording. Ok. Now we go to the recording, Thank you super Thank you. I'll glaub on nosotros on the recording.