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 violation or violations. All witnesses offering testimony and 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 violation, 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 name of the cases from the agenda. 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. Such record is not provided by Pinellas County. Good morning. My name is Nicole Riley, and I am the deputy clerk for Pinellas County Code Enforcement. Item number seven, department, code enforcement, matter. Minimum housing code violation, trash and debris code violation, zoning code violation. Case number, CCM-25-00076. Officer, D. DeVall, owner, Rotustini Cora, Horrigan, Eric. Notice address, Rotustini Cora, Horrigan, Eric, 224 West 35th Street, Suite 500, PMB 120, New York, New York, 1-0-0-0-0-1. Email address, B-L-L-B-4-2-0-9-5 at gmail.com, and Eric Horrigan, 7-1-0-1 Colonial Road, Brooklyn, New York, 1-1-2-0-0-9. Violation address, 7-2-2 Seneca Street, Clearwater, Florida, 3-3-7-5-6. Identify yourself with the record, please. Good morning, Officer Duvall for Pinellas County. Officer. Good morning, Ryan Schmidt, attorney on behalf of respondent Eric Horrigan. Good morning, John Rickert here on behalf of Cora Rotustini. I guess that we have a joint stipulation. We do, magistrate. We've given 120 days for these two gentlemen as representatives of the owners to work through another issue. They're going to be working on, they'll be filing with the court, allowing them enough time to get on the court's calendar and get resolution through whatever they are doing with the two owners. We've come to that agreement 120 days or February 14th of 2026 for a compliance due date for the three violations that do exist at the property. It'll be a $100 fine on each one if they don't. Correct. Okay, and court courts are $435. Yes, sir, payable in 30 days. Gentlemen, is that the agreement? I see you signed it. Agreed, yes, Commissioner Strickman. Yes, we're in agreement. Okay. We're going to mail in the order since we don't have a printer here. You'll get the order. Can I have your information for the 30 days? Okay. Thank you. All right. Appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you, gentlemen. Just keep me informed. All right? Thank you. We can. We're ready, yeah. Item number four, department code enforcement matter, minimum housing code violation, zoning code violation, case number CCM-25-00073, officer B. Hughes, owner Marsh Rex T. Notice address, Marsh Rex T., 3931, 55th Avenue North, St. Petersburg, Florida, 33714-1727. Violation address, 118th Avenue, Pinellas Park, Florida, 33782, and parcel ID 08-30-16-70974-400-1202. Rex Marsh? You're Rex Marsh, right? Yes. Okay. Officer, just for the record, identify yourself. Officer Hughes, Pinellas County Code Enforcement. I understand you've reached an agreement? Yes, sir. Can you just give me the details? I mean, I have it as, on both citations, the zoning and the minimum housing, $100 fine, but that could be abated if there's compliance by December 18th, 2025? Yes, and I also understand they can request an extension should they need more time. Understood. And they're paying the court costs? Yes, sir. Okay. Mr. Marsh, is that correct? Yes. I'll accept this stipulation, and we'll get you in order as quickly as we can get a printer here. I'll be able to mail it to you, okay? She'll tell you how you get it. Whenever you're ready. Item number one, department code enforcement matter. Minimum housing code violation. Trash and debris code violation. Case number, CCM-25-00071. Officer, B. Hughes, owner, Natal Pasquale. Notice address, Natal Pasquale, 1991, Nursery Road, Clearwater, Florida, 33764-2566. Violation address, 1983, Nursery Road, Clearwater, Florida, 33764-2566. Pasquale, Natale? Pasquale, Natale, yes. Pleasure, sorry. Officer, if you could identify yourself. Officer, he is Pinellas County Code Enforcement. Do I understand you have an agreement? Yes, sir. Okay, that would be on both violations, the minimum housing as well as the trash and debris. There will be a fine of $100 per day, but that will be abated if there's compliance by December 18, 2025? Yes, sir. And the same thing, if they need a little more time, they can request an extension prior to the deadline. And there will also be... Yes, sir. Good luck, okay? You'll get the order in the mail, I believe. Thank you. Yes. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Okay. I'm needed to do the order. Oh, I'm just going to write. I'll go back to that. Oh, okay. Just keep it on. I'll be happy to do that. Oh, thank you. He was. He was. I saw him. He's gone. Okay. I don't know. I don't know. But he's the next case? Yeah, whatever. Okay. I thought it was me. I saw him when I first came in and I see who's outside. I thought it was me. I thought I'm getting a little crazy, huh? Oh, he was here. Well, why don't you do that other one you were talking to me about? Well, I think he... He left, too? Well, I think she went from Officer DeVall. I mean, Officer Hughes went to get him. Okay. So, do you want to do the other one? Or... No. It's up to you. You can wait. You want to wait? Which item is this? 11. Here you go. Yeah, that's what I'm doing. Item number 11, Department Code Enforcement. Matter. Special Magistrate ordered a continuance for 22-298 Minimum Housing. Case number CCM-25-00019. Officer B. Hughes, owner, Driscoll Daniel D. Jr., trustee. Notice address, Driscoll Daniel D. Jr., trustee, 3043-58th Avenue North, Land Trust, 5761-75th Avenue North, Pinellas Park, Florida, 33781-3335. And Law Office of Jossick and Kulianos, PA. Attention, Dan Jossick, Esquire, Attorney for Respondent, 2999-19-North, Suite A, Palm Harbor, Florida, 34683. Email address, dan at jociclaw.com. And Pinellas County Sheriff's Office, Deputy J. Holm, witness for petitioner, 10750, Allmington Road, Largo, Florida, 33778. Email address, jhulme at pcsonet.com. Violation address, 3043-58th Avenue North, St. Petersburg, Florida, 33714. Officer, state your name for the record. Officer Hughes. Attorney Nick Bocci for Dan Jossick. Nick, last name, spell it. B-O-C-C-I. This is a motion for continuance, correct? No, this is the continuance hearing. Continance hearing, right. With regard to just the minimum housing standards under, I believe it was the 22298. Right, with the continuance of the motion. Correct. The status as of today is all of the tenants has successfully been evicted. The courts did not give a writ of possession because once they were handed with the eviction notices, they all willingly left. So there currently is nobody on the property or premises. Therefore, the statute would, or the code rather, would not be in violation. So they did have the evictions. I did verify that they were filed. They were processed. The last time I went to the property, the only structure that was still there with items was the green trailer. If he's testifying that there's no one present, I did not see anyone present, just the belongings. If they're telling me that, then I would stipulate that that 22298 would then be in compliance. It's in compliance. Well, it would be in compliance as if they haven't restored power, which was the violation code. However, if no one's dwelling at the property and everyone's been removed, then the evictions have been filed. They were opened on September 18th. Then I would agree that 22298 would no longer be in violation. It's no longer in violation now. If no one's dwelling there, they're not required to have power. Okay, so we're willing to now process that at this point in time. Just the 22298. Just this. And then we have the 60 days with a no hearing for November 18th with regard to the other compliance issues. I'd already done that, right? Yes. Yes, sir. Yeah, just on this one. Just on this. So you not only file it and had a docket on it, they actually did it. Surprise, surprise. The one time we actually want something to prove that it was out, everybody willingly left. So, yes. Super. All right. Thank you very much. Good. Thank you. We're going to do an order on that one later. We're going to do an order on that. Okay, let me, just give me a second here. Okay. I'm going to. I review them both. Yeah, I'm going to go ahead. Is it going to be one? You've got to figure out who it is. No, I don't know. No, I don't know. No, I don't know. Yes, sir. Okay, sir. They're there. They couldn't reach it. Got it. Let's see. Okay. Well. Yes, please. Item number nine, department code enforcement matter. Petitioner's motion to initiate foreclosure. Case number, CFC-25-00012. Officer, D. DeVall. Owner, JKG Real Estate Investments, LLC. Notice address, Singleton, Katarzyna, and or Gato Joseph, 510, George Street South, Tarpon Springs, Florida, 34688. And JKG Real Estate Investments, LLC, 510, George Street South, Tarpon Springs, Florida, 34688-8413. And Gato Joseph, registered agent for JKG Real Estate Investments, LLC, 510, George Street South, Tarpon Springs, Florida, 34688-8413. And Gato Joseph, president for JKG Real Estate Investments, LLC, 510, George Street South, Tarpon Springs, Florida, 34688-8413. Violation address, 2620 Trent Road, Palm Harbor, Florida, 34684. Officer, state name for the record. Officer Duvall, Pinellas County Code Enforcement. And your name, sir? Joseph Gatto. Would you both please raise your right hands? Do you swear or affirm that any testimony you give today concerning facts be the truth, nothing but the truth? I do. I do. Okay. Officer, I understand this is your motion to, you're objecting to the motion? Yes. Okay. You can stand there. Okay. Magistrate, have you seen the motion packet? I reviewed it, yes. Okay, I'd like to go through and go ahead and formally present this, if I may. Yes, have you received a copy? Yes. Okay, you have exactly what I'm going to go through here? Okay. Okay. So, good morning, magistrate. My name is Senior Officer Duvall. I am a magistrate officer with the Code Enforcement Division of Pinellas County. Pursuant to Chapter 2, Article 8 of the Pinellas County Code and Chapter 162 of the Florida Statutes, Pinellas County is seeking a motion to initiate foreclosure against the following, Caterzina Singleton and Joseph Gatto. The property the county is seeking foreclosure action against is located at 2620 Trent Road in Palm Harbor, Florida. This is a non-homesteaded property, which is located in unincorporated Pinellas County. The county would like to submit into evidence the motion to initiate foreclosure, which consists of a history of the case and attached exhibits. I can go through it page by page, or I can go direct to our summation. What would you prefer? You can go right to the summation. Summation. I have that as opposed to Mr. Gatto has a copy of it. Okay. I've read it. Let's call the whole package, you know, an exhibit. We'll just call it the motion. Okay. That works. That's perfect. So, basically, as a conclusion of this, this property continues to be owned by the same respondents, the Caterzina Singleton and Joseph Gatto. Property has not been declared to be homesteaded by the respondent. Petitionary has an interest in the property by virtue of Pinellas County Code Enforcement Special Magistrate Lien in the amount of $20,186.65 as of September 25th of 2025. This lien is accruing daily fines in addition to interest. Petitioner provided respondent with notice that the property was found to be in violation of county ordinances. Petitioner provided respondent with the notice that the property remained in violation of county ordinance after respondent was afforded due process and given a period in which to cure or remedy the violation of the county's ordinance at the property. Respondent has actual or implied knowledge of the process and procedures employed by the petitioner. It's Code Enforcement Division, Special Magistrate for imposition of the Code Enforcement Lien. So, Magistrate, basically, based on the evidence provided in this motion, the county requests that you issue an order granting Pinellas County the ability to initiate foreclosure. Mr. Gatto, your position? On September 10th of this year, I transferred the property. It's no longer owned by Ms. Singleton. I purchased the property out from her. We closed and I transferred the property into strictly JKG real estate investments. This was a case where I had invested to renovate a property and there was an issue with the FEMA 50% rule and in getting a permit. I have been working since the 10th with the building department to rectify how I can bring the property violations up to standard, which is mostly exterior paint and stucco repair, and they agreed to let me to paint the house. You said they. Who's they? The building department. Okay. So, they said I don't need a permit to paint the house, so I have gone forward and hired a painter to repair the stucco and paint the exterior of the building, furthermore, am getting the property reassessed so that I can get a permit to renovate the interior of it and essentially sell it. In the closing on the 10th at Brown and Kempton, I put $30,000 in escrow for this fine, which is in escrow with Brown and Kempton, until we rectify this ordeal, and then I was hoping to come back and reassess the fine after the repairs have been made. But if we could stay this for 60 days, I will have the repairs made and hopefully move beyond this. Officer? So, you said that the money is already in escrow? Yes. So, why then is the fine then just not handled, just taken care of? Because it's an escalating fine. The fine is right now at $20,186. And there's $30,000 in escrow. Right. So, more than enough to cover the, to, when, when I contacted, after I purchased Ms. Singleton out, I contacted, actually I think your office, but, but, and they said that once the violations were taken care of, that we could negotiate with the fine ones. That's why they put it in escrow and not, and didn't pay it outright. They said that typically if it's brought into code that we can negotiate the amount of the fine. So, as a new ownership reflected very recently, when did that take, take place? September 10th. Okay, because I printed this from property appraiser on the 9th. And you're saying the 10th had been changed ownership? We closed, yes. It's just in JKG real estate investments. Okay. So, you assume then that lien, and instead of just paying it, you're still just trying to bring the property into compliance. Yes. That's what you're saying. Yes. And then you're going to try to apply for a lien reduction? Yes. Okay. How long is it going to take you to bring this property into compliance as new owners? It should be within 30 days. If we could set a date for 60 days, I'm sure that it will be done. Okay. Can I ask a couple of questions? Might make this easier. Yes, sir. Do you have any proof on the escrow with you? No, but we could call Brown and Kempton. I'm not going to have to call anyone here today. Who has the, who is holding the escrow? Brown and Kempton. And are they a title company? Yeah, it's a title company and real estate attorney. This is their information. If you'd like to write it down, you could certainly contact them. Okay. It is reflected in property appraiser, the new ownership. So, that is reflected. They have code lien payoff for Pinellas County code enforcement. $31,500 is what they're holding. Okay. You knew, you knew of the lien. So, I mean, my feeling is why it wasn't just paid off. I don't quite understand why. Well, because it was my intent to repair the property, bring it up to code, and then request the negotiation of the lien. I understand that, but. So, if I paid the lien, I can't go back and negotiate it after and ask for a rebate or a refund. No, I understand that, but you knew that there was a lien on the property when you decide to buy out your other person. I absolutely did, and it's because I invested with somebody that was not qualified to do the repairs or to handle the renovation. In essence, I was just an investor to start in this. Now, I'm sole owner, and we'll take responsibility and make sure it's brought up the code. All right. Well, magistrate, the county's stance is the lien is true. It is, you know, it was there when he purchased the property. He was well aware of it, or when he solely bought out his partner. It was put into escrow. If you feel the need to give him the time to bring it. The motion to initiate foreclosure, there's been no defenses with the lien, okay? I don't doubt anything that, you know, he's stating here. I guess the answer is you can proceed, do you understand what I mean? If you want to, you could continue it 30 days to see where it is, and you could contact the title company to make sure they're still holding it, do you understand what I'm saying? Yes, I did see it on when he showed me on his phone the closing statement. I don't doubt it at all, but, I mean, I can grant the motion to foreclosure. It's in order, do you understand? I mean, there's no right to. We have done as we needed to do, so the county would like this to be granted. Now, can he still negotiate? In other words, you're not going to put this on a shelf list tomorrow or anything? No, he can still come back. If he ends up doing as he says he's going to do, then we can move forward in another direction. Does he, do you understand that, in other words? Well, I can't order her to do it, I guess, if you understand what I mean. If paper's in order, you're in violation, if you understand what I mean. And if you haven't presented anything that's a defense to this motion, there's a lien, it's been there for a long time, it hasn't been paid, and I'm going to grant it until, you know, there's no defenses. But I would highly recommend that you keep in contact with, do you have your contact information? I've not spoken with you, so I'll be happy to give you my card. Yeah, you know, and as far as settling the liens, you know, it's a practice they have here, but what the rules are, I don't get involved in any of that. Okay, all right. Okay, so for the record, we're going to, I'm going to grant the motion, okay? And you might want to sit down with her, give them a few minutes, all right? Yes, let's talk for a second before you leave, okay? All right, thank you, Matt Street. Okay, we'll do that motion later, I mean that order later. Okay, unless she's, unless Duvall's going to be on the case. Yeah, do the next case. I just want to give her a second. Magistrate, can we have about, like, ten minutes, because she is on the next case. Okay, yeah, give her a few minutes. Communications, please stop recording. Go ahead. Item number three, department, code enforcement, matter, trash and debris code violation. Case number, CCM-25-00075. Officer D. Duvall, owner, TTGC-LLC. Notice address, TTGC-LLC, 111 South Armenia Avenue, Suite 202, Tampa, Florida, 33609-3337. And TTGC-LLC, 701 South Howard Avenue, Suite 106-350, Tampa, Florida, 33606. Ann Barnes, Robert L., Jr., registered agent for TTGC-LLC, 111 South Armenia Avenue, Suite 202, Tampa, Florida, 33609-3337. Violation address, 11832-66 Avenue, Seminole, Florida, 33772. Is anyone here regarding 11832-66 Avenue, Seminole? Hearing none. Officer, if you could state your name for the record. Officer Duvall, Pinellas County Co-Enforcement. Raise your right hand, please. Do you swear a firm at any testimony you give today? Be the truth and nothing but the truth? I do. You may proceed. Good morning, Magistrate. The property where the alleged violation exists is located at 11832-66th Avenue, Seminole, Florida, which is in unincorporated Pinellas County. The owner of the property, TTGC-LLC, is not present for today's hearing. The violations at this property have been in occurrence since on or before August 13th of 2025. The property was re-inspected on October 13th, and the violations continue. I'd like to enter into evidence, the notice of hearing, and composite exhibit A's as we start. You may proceed. Magistrate, you have this packet, correct? I've had it and reviewed it, yes. Okay. I'm going to go straight to the photos that are included within this packet. This is from September 11th's inspection of the property. First, just to give a little bit of history, this is formerly known, this property, as the Tides Golf Course. It is a very large, 124-acre property. It was purchased and was originally going to be developed. That development has not happened as of yet, so the property has been, by the request of the county, has a fence put around it. The owners have put some fencing up around the perimeter to try to keep illegal activities off of the property. Okay. You give me that as a matter of background. Yes, just a little bit of background on this property. Take your time. So, as we're looking at the picture here, when I went out there, the complaint came in. We are receiving complaints from the neighboring properties that are adjacent to what used to be the golf course. It is extremely overgrown. There is a very large debris pile up here in this first picture that I'm showing you in the upper left-hand corner. Very large debris pile that is accumulated there. This lower corner just shows, and it may not look like it, but this grass is extremely overgrown. These pictures over here on the right side are up in the area. The clubhouse, which existed, has been demolished, but the asphalt from where the parking lot was for this facility still exists. And up along, they have run fence line into the ground there. There are poles and chain-link fencing running along that whole line of the property for the parking lot. We've got a lot of trash up in the corners, almost like we've got some people hanging out. I'm not quite sure. We've got some dumping of some bags of trash. There's just another picture here showing that it's not being maintained. This is another picture here on the bottom left. This is right up all around the parking lot area. So not only do we have all of the areas that are visual from the properties that are adjacent to the tides, to what used to be the fairways, but we also have the area up around where the clubhouse used to be. It's just not being maintained. So the county is looking for the property owner to mow. So they had come into an unofficial agreement with the property owner to maintain the perimeter, cut the perimeter. This was a couple of years ago, early on. They were originally asking that a 150-foot perimeter be maintained. That did not happen. So that's when the county now has proceeded with enforcing our code for the trash and debris and requesting that the 50-foot perimeter on this undeveloped property be maintained. Okay. I just have one question. You say that I'm reading from the violation. The required 50-foot cut perimeter is part of the code? Yes. It is part of the code. Okay. So you're just giving me background on that. Again, yeah, just trying to give you a little bit of the history here. This has been going on for a couple of years. So what's the violation of the 50-foot cut perimeter? The 50-foot cut perimeter is not being maintained. Oh, you mean the grass cut? From the grass, correct. And we have a very large debris pile that is accumulated in one area. And all of the trash and debris up along the fence line of what used to be the old parking lot. Okay. So I did revisit the property. I have Exhibit B's here I'd like to present, if I may. For the record, I'm accepting the package marked Exhibit A into evidence. Okay. Yes, please. So, again, just reinforcing here that I went back to the property on the 13th of October and took pictures. Again, as we look through the fence line, the upper left-hand corner, this is looking down the chain-link fence, down what used to be one of the fairways. It's all very, very overgrown. We've got, in the bottom right, the debris pile still exists. It's very large. And then these two top and bottom pictures here on the left and right are pictures up around the parking lot area of the trash, debris, a lot of vegetation debris. I think we've had a little illegal dumping here. I'm not sure, but a very large palm pile of palm fronds. And, again, as you can see, this is the fence line up by the clubhouse I described in my previous pictures. A lot of black garbage bags. I'm not sure if we've got illegal dumping going on there or not. But most certainly the property is not being policed and maintained by the property owner. Right. Even if somebody else dumped it there, it's still their issue to maintain the property, keep it clean. This bottom area is just another spot out in front by the parking lot area. And just reinforcing, this is all deeply embedded in a residential area. So not only do we have the homes that are overlooking what used to be very well-groomed fairways are now very overgrown areas. They're complaining very regularly about vermin and snakes and things. They being the neighbors, right? Yes, yes, sir. And overlooking what used to be a nice clubhouse in a parking lot, and now they've got some dumping going on. So, Magistrate, the county requests that you find the property in violation of Code Sections 58304 and issue an order to have the property brought into compliance within 30 days or assign a fine in the amount of $500 per day per violation, which is the one violation, again, 58304 for trash and debris. And also, the county requests the costs of $455.20. I'm accepting Exhibit B into evidence. Anything else, officer? No, Magistrate. Okay. Consider the public portion of the hearing closed. But a fine that the defendant is in violation and impose a fine of $500 a day, that fine can be abated if there's compliance within 30 days, which would be? Sunday, November 16, 2025. Thank you. By 5 p.m., that fine can be abated if there's compliance within the 30 days and imposing costs for the county. Thank you, Magistrate. Thank you, officer. Whatever one you want to do. Item number two, department code enforcement matter, trash and debris code violation, zoning code violation. Case number CCM-25-00072, officer B. Hughes, owner Lanham William E. Estate. Notice address, Lanham William E. Estate, 4624, 24th Street North, St. Petersburg, Florida, 33714-3206. And all unknown spouses and heirs of Lanham William E. Estate, 4624, 24th Street North, St. Petersburg, Florida, 33714-3206. Violation address, 4624, 24th Street North, St. Petersburg, Florida, 33714. Officer, if you could place your name on the record, please. Officer Hughes, Pinellas County Code Enforcement. And your name, sir? Brian Wilson. And what's your connection to the property? I have adverse possession on it. You say adverse possession. Explain that a little bit, what's your connection? Sure. You could please. I have a document. I can't see that. Let me see you. County records, if you look. It shows it right on there. On the county record, it says adverse possession. It's an adverse possession claimant. I don't know that this is anything that's actually, you're at 4626, 24th, the neighborhood property? Yep. So, sir, I'll let you determine whether this allows him to have the right place. Just give me a second. My understanding is you can apply for adverse possession, but it doesn't actually take it. I'm familiar with adverse possession. Good. Mr. Wilson, this is a ruling by the Department of Revenue, and as it says clearly at the top, this return does not create any interest enforceable by law in the described property. Okay. So, now, your adverse possession claim, have you filed in court and got in an order that you own the property? I had to file that. Then I have to wait seven years, which is coming up next year. And then you go in front of the court and say, we've had it for 70 years, and provide that I pay the taxes, and I have. I mean, you can clearly see that taxes are correct, they're being paid by me. I understand the procedure, but right now you don't own the property. No, I do not own the property. I have control of the property. I understand it, but you don't own it. Correct. And if there weren't violations, we wouldn't be here. Oh, I understand that. At minimum, we're going to proceed with the violations. I'm just trying to make a decision. I'm going to let Mr. Lanham represent the property. Yes, sir. Thank you. Okay. So, in other words, you've just done this, filed this with the Department of Revenue? No, 2019. I have to wait. It has to be done seven years before you can go through the court system. So, you don't have anything from the court showing that you have a legal interest in this property? I have that right there, and on the public property records, it says I have adverse possession. What records? Pull up right here on this property. It says right there, adverse possession. And then also, when you look right back here, it says adverse possession. You can find that right on the property appraiser's website. Wouldn't it show his name somewhere? It took me two minutes to call them and have them fax that paper to me when I couldn't find it or email it to me. You can easily call them and say, hey, who's paying the tax on this property, and they'll give it to you right over the phone. Just give me a, I think the previous one got it from the tax case application. No, I paid all the, I had to pay all the, I'm sorry. Give me a second. I'm talking to my clerk. I'll give you a second to go through all that. You never put this, you never contacted me. I finally got this one. It's put on the, put to the gate. I mean, it's been a while. Well, all that's been cut. Have you been by there? I just paid them this morning. Okay, sir. Sir, just don't discuss the case until the magistrate decides if you can speak or not. Yeah, let me just, okay, son. Let's see. Tax deed application here. It's just been. Yes. What? It was paid, yeah. Yeah. It was paid. I presume you did, yeah. I'm trying to see what the bill is. Yeah, I'm trying to figure if someone's filed as the owner yet. He hasn't done it yet. Yeah, that's right. We haven't, yeah. Officer, is there anything you want to state? As far as whether he can represent? No, just on this issue of the standing, you two are speaking. Is there anything you learned? Oh, no, I was just asking him why he hadn't contacted me previously. I didn't even know that he was, why he was here until a few months ago. Understood. So you've gone through the proper process is what you're telling me. You're just not the owner yet? Correct. I paid back taxes from 2011, I think it was, 2012. When I took over possession of it in 2019, I had to pay all the back taxes. They had all the tax deeds since he was dead. I understand the process. So, yes, I've done everything up until this point and just wait for the seven years to pass. I understand adverse possession very well. Anything else? Okay, well, I'm going to determine that you don't have standing here to represent as the property owner until such time as your claim has come to fruition and the property has been ordered into your name by the court. Okay, you don't own it yet. You've done all the right things, but you're not there yet. Yep. I know that. They don't have it for seven years. Okay, sir. So I'm not going to let you, you know, she's going to put her case on. You can talk with her. Do you have any problems dealing with me? Not at all. I would be more than happy to deal with them and explain what needs to be done. Yeah, so I'm not going to let you put this in the case, but my recommendation is just stay and listen to what the order is, and we can give them a copy, too. I'll send them a copy. If you just provide your mailing address, then I can go ahead and do that for you. I'm going to leave you my card before I forget, too. Okay. Okay, sir. Yeah, my recommendation, you don't have to stay, you know, is you'll see what the order is going to be. Okay? Just so that you know, if it goes past that we put a lien on the property or anything like that, the Special Magistrate Division, which is separate from code enforcement, then until you are the owner, we cannot handle with you unless you have authorization from the estate saying that you can handle the matter, okay, if the estate's still the owner, just to let you know, okay, because I don't want you to go through the entire process. If the property's not brought into compliance within the time it needs to, and then you come and say, you know, it was a lien that was placed, I want a reduction, or I need something, we can't assist you on that, okay? Thank you. Okay. I'm going to ask you to step back from the podium. Okay. No, please, raise your right hand, officer. Do you swear, affirm, that the testimony we'll give today be the truth and nothing but the truth? I do. And you reflect that in the standing issue, okay? Yes. You may proceed, officer. I have the package, by the way. Okay, great. Thank you. So the property where the alleged violation exists is at 4624 24th Street North, St. Petersburg, Florida, 33714, located in unincorporated Pinellas County, and the owner is William E. Lanham Estate. So the violation has been on occurrence since on or before July 15th of 2025, and I would like to enter the notice of hearing and composite Exhibit A into evidence. You may proceed. Okay. So basically, oops, sorry, I'll start with this one. So the property is a vacant parcel, and a fence has been erected around the property. Along the outside of the property, it is overgrown. Just to show the aerial photographs, it shows that, excuse me, I've got it upside down. So back in 2018, you can see that there was no fence. In 2019, a fence was put around the property, which I guess coincides with the adverse possession date that it was filed, and things are starting to be stored on the vacant parcel. So you can see just the images that from where it was in the beginning, there was no fence, nothing being stored on the property, to the fence installed, and then now there's boats and trailers. There's two intermodal containers on the property as well. You can see along the front, there's overgrowth and debris. This is outside the fence? This is outside the fenced area. This is the street, 24th Street right here. Again, there's debris all along the fence, and there's overgrowth present. You can see the two intermodal containers, one's on one side, one's on the other. You say on one side. I'm sorry. There's an intermodal container. I guess it's the east and the west side or the north and south. I'm not sure which. But basically, there's two large intermodal containers on the property in addition to the trailers, and it looks like boats and things in there. Is the zoning violation what you're doing? Yes. Could I just back you up a second? Sure. On the trash and debris, is that all outside the fence? So I can't see what's inside the fence. It's just basically what's on the exterior. Okay, so the violation on the trash and debris is what's outside the fence? Yes, sir. Okay, and I interrupted you. You're in the middle of the zoning violation. No, that's fine. So the zoning violation is basically installing the fence, installing the intermodal containers. And the fence too, right? There was no... There was no fence prior, correct. No, but I'm saying the violation was installing the fence, you said. So there was no permit for the fence? Yes. So not only was the fence installed on the vacant property, but they're using it as basically a storage lot with the intermodal containers and the trailers and items. Good. So the use of the property is not what I'm asking. I'm asking, you said they, somebody, installed the fence. Is that part of the violation, the installation of the fence? Yes. Any fence that's installed adjacent to a right-of-way would require a zoning clearance. I do. That's over three feet tall. Okay. I'm just wondering if that's part of your zoning claim here. Yes, sir. Okay. Okay. Oh, here it is right here. Placing and installing a fence. I missed it when I was reading the narrative. Go ahead. So, magistrate, the property was re-inspected on October 6th of 2025, and the violations continue. Voters were taken on that day, and I would like to submit them as composite exhibit B. I'm accepting composite exhibit A of the evidence. We had that already, and yes, you may proceed with B. Okay. So on October 6th, we still had the trash and debris and overgrowth outside of the fenced area along the road, along the right-of-way. The intermodal containers are still there, and the items that were in there, you can see that there's a trailer. I believe this is part of the boat or the other trailer. So, basically, the violations continue. So, magistrate, the county requests that you find the property in violation and issue an order to have the property brought into compliance for Code Sections 58-304 for the trash and debris and 138-90 for the zoning violation. We're asking for the allowance of 30 days to comply and if still in violation to assign the daily fine amount of $100 per day per code section. Testing costs? Yes, sir. And, Caroline, I'm sorry, I don't have the cost. Oh, yes. The cost is $524.75. 30 days? I forgot already. November? Sunday, November 16th, 2025. Thank you. You're welcome. Accepting Exhibit B into evidence. Anything else, officer? No, sir. Thank you very much. Thank you. I'm going to consider the public portion of the hearing closed. I'm going to fine the defendant in violation. I'm going to impose a fine of $100 per day on violation of 58-304, the trash and debris, and that can be abated if there's compliance within 30 days, which is November 16th, 2025, by 5 p.m. I'm awarding the county courts, which is $524.75. We have two more plus a motion, right? Yes. We have four more, so item five. Three more plus a motion. Good. Yeah. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Item number five, department code enforcement matter, minimum housing code violation, case number CCM-25-00077, Officer D. DeVall, Owner, Druitt Dwayne, Notice Address, Druitt Dwayne, 2490 Grove Ridge Drive, Palm Harbor, Florida, 34683-3219. Officer Dwayne, Violation Address, 2490 Grove Ridge Drive, Palm Harbor, Florida, 34683-3219. Officer, if you could state your name and raise your right hand. Officer DeVall, Pinellas County Code Enforcement. Is anyone here for 2490 Grove Ridge Drive? Manager, I just wanted to make mention, I did receive a phone call from Mr. Druitt's yesterday in the afternoon. He stated he's in an assistant living facility, so he was not able to make it out because he didn't get the notice on time. However, I did inform him that it was delivered, I believe it was October, approximately October 2nd to his address, but he's not there. He did say that his brother, out of state, I cannot remember which state right now, has power of attorney. However, he didn't notify his brother, so I gave him our email address so he can send a request for continuance. I told him it had to be in our office. We had to receive it by 9 a.m. today before the hearings. I checked the emails. We don't have an email by 9 a.m., and I don't have any other emails, and it's 1120 right now. So that's all the information. I appreciate that information. Does that change your proceeding, be proceeding forward today in any way? It's your choice. I would still like to move forward, magistrate. That's fine. Oh, I guess I need to be swallowing. Do you swear or affirm, officer, that the testimony you give today be the truth and nothing but the truth? I do. You may proceed. So, magistrate, the property where the alleged violation exists is 2490 Grove Bridge Drive in Palm Harbor, which is in unincorporated Pinellas County. The owner, Dwayne Druitz, is not present for today's hearing. The violation has been in occurrence since honor before, March 27th of 2025. The property was reinspected on 1013, and the violation continues. I'd like to enter into evidence, notice of hearing, and composite Exhibit A. You may proceed. Since you do have the hearing packet, I will go directly to the photos from Exhibit A. Yes, for the record, I will. Okay. So, for the minimum housing up in the upper left, we just have an overview of the house just as I'm standing in front of it from the street. As up to the front door, this upper right-hand corner picture is mildew or staining on the wall that is right by the front door. We have continued diminished paint on the side of the house, as you can see here up on the windowsills and on the actual exterior wall. Continued pictures from the back of the house. This is a corner property, so there is no fencing. It's all visible. As you walk down the side, you can see into the backyard area. The screened-in porch has multiple panels of the screening that is ripped or torn away and is hanging. It's displayed here in these upper, the top pictures, both left and right, is the screens. And then we have more diminished paint on the upper areas of the house and some rotten wood. And then we have more staining, diminished paint on one of the back walls of the house, or back side walls. This is all visible from the side property again. So, magistrate, again, I did, I know I'm repeating myself here, but I did visit the property on October 13th, and I would like to enter into evidence my Exhibit B's. Okay, I'm accepting the composite Exhibit A into evidence, and yes, you may proceed off. When I was out there on the 13th, I tried to take similar pictures, showing, again, the condition has not really changed, just a picture from the front of the house. I believe he has hired a lawn service, so at least we're not dealing with an overgrowth situation, which is great. But we do... Do you think he's done that since this was filed? Yes, sir, because trash and debris was a case that we actually complied because he did... Oh, okay. Yes. So... No, go ahead. I didn't mean to interrupt Josie's. No, that's fine. I'm glad you mentioned that because it would have been presented today if he had not done that. Right. So, again, the condition of the exterior of the house is exactly as it was. We have several areas where we have diminished paint and rotten wood just displayed in the upper area here. We've got this on the other side of the house. I noticed a big piece of rotten wood or area or section that is rotten wood. This is just standing, looking from the driveway area to the left of the house. Same picture here showing the diminished paint in the windowsill and so on from the other side of the house. The screens are exactly as they were. Nothing's been repaired. The mildew on the wall by the front door, diminished paint here on the wall, and same picture from the Exhibit A showing that nothing's been done to deal with the diminished paint and staining on the other walls of the house. So, magistrate, the county requests you find the property in violation of Code Section 209. 22-299 for minimum housing, an issue in order to have the property brought into compliance within 30 days, or assign a fine in the amount of $100 per day for this violation. Are you seeking costs? Yes, magistrate. I have costs in the amount of $405.47. Anything else, officer? No. Thank you. Consider the public portion of the hearing closed. I find a defendant in violation of Section 22-299, Minimum Housing. Opposing a fine of $100 a day, that fine can be abated if there's compliance within 30 days, which is November 16th, 2025, by 5 p.m. I'm awarding the county costs of $405.40. Thank you. Item number six, department, code enforcement, matter, minimum housing code violation, trash and debris code violation, zoning code violation. Case number CCM-25-00074, officer B. Hughes, owner, USA Federal National Mortgage Association. Notice address, USA Federal National Mortgage Association, 1100 15th Street NW, Washington, D.C., 20005-1707, and USA Federal National Mortgage Association, P.O. Box 650043, Dallas, Texas, 75265-0043, violation address, 11680, 129th Avenue, Seminole, Florida, 33778. Hang on. This is case item which on the agenda? Six. What? Six. Six. And this actually is no longer on the agenda in that the property ownership changed prior to the hearing. Yeah, that was canceled. So it's been canceled. We canceled, yeah. You're just testing her, right? Yes, I was testing her. And I, we did not remove it. I apologize, Mrs. Riley. I'm so sorry. I looked at it now and I said, it looks familiar. And then I'm like, I saw the email and I was like, oops. Yeah, that's it. So we closed it. So we are on number eight. Number eight, Moran. Patricia Moran. Okay. Item number eight, department code enforcement matter. Trash and debris code violation. Case number, CCM-25-00070. Officer, B. Hughes. Owner, Moran Patricia A. Notice address, Moran Patricia A. 2739 Kumquat Drive, Clearwater, Florida, 33759-2310. Violation address, 2739 Kumquat Drive, Clearwater, Florida, 33759. Anyone here for 2739 Kumquat Drive? Hearing none. Officer, if you could state your name. Officer Hughes. Raise your right hand. Do you swear, affirm that any testimony you give today be the truth and nothing but the truth? I do. You may proceed. I reviewed the packet. Go ahead. Okay. Thank you so much. So the property where the alleged violations exist is 2739 Kumquat Drive, Clearwater, Florida, 33759, located in unincorporated Penelope County. The owner, Patricia Moran, is not present and I've had no communication from her. The violation has been on occurrence since on or before January 14th of 2025, and I would like to enter the Notice of Hearing and Composite Exhibit A into evidence. You may proceed. Okay, great. The only thing I wanted to point out also before I get to showing the violations is this property had been in violation previously. I saw the order, 2016 or something. Yeah, so I just wanted to point that out because I will be asking for a fine a little bit larger than I normally ask for. Yeah, I read it. That's not it. It was previous magistrate. Go ahead. Okay, so basically the property is very overgrown. It's overgrown along the right of way in addition to just there's a large amount of vegetative debris. You can see that next to the neighbor's fence, it's as tall as the six-foot fence on that bottom right picture. There's packages that have been delivered. There's actually a sidewalk here in front of the door, but there's so much vegetative debris over the top of it, you can't even see it. The garage is half-grown over. Again, the overgrowth on the side is as tall as the six-foot fence. There's a large amount of debris on top of the roof. So magistrate, the property was re-inspected on October 6th, and the violations continue. Photos were taken on that date, and I would like to submit them as composite exhibit B. I'm accepting exhibit A into evidence, and yes, let me proceed with B. So again, the overgrowth just continues. There's been no change in the overgrowth along the right of way of vegetative debris. Again, in front of the door, the boxes are still present. The debris on top of the roof is still present. The overgrowth, again, is as tall as the six-foot fence. And again, more debris on top of the roof. It's growing into and over the sidewalk. So magistrate, the county requests that you find the property in violation of Code Section 58-304 and allow 30 days to comply and still in violation to assign a daily fine amount of $500 per day. I'm sorry, did you say 30 days? 30 days, and we're requesting $500 per day since this is the second time it's gone before the magistrate. Well, there's two orders in here. There's two previous orders. Have you any contact with the owner? Absolutely none. I've gone multiple times, hoping that I've left my card at the door, posted the property, and no communication at all. Thank you, officer. Yes, sir. I'll consider the public portion of the hearing closed. I'm going to find the defendant to be in violation of 58-304, the trash and debris. I'm proposing a fine of $500 per day. That fine can be abated if there is compliance within 30 days, that being November 17th, right? 16th. 16th. November 16th at 5 p.m. They're seeking costs, I presume? Yes, sir. You know what they are? Yes, the costs are $425.75. Thank you. We'll get you the order. Thank you, sir. Item number 10, Department Code Enforcement, matter, petitioner's motion to initiate foreclosure. Case number, CFC-25-00013, Officer D. Duvall, Owner, Floyd Benjamin D. II. Notice address, Benjamin D. Floyd II, 12600 Palm Drive, Largo, Florida 33774. Violation address, 1600 Palm Drive, Largo, Florida 33774. Officer, if you could state, is there anyone here for Palm Drive and Largo? Officer, state your name for the record. Officer Duvall, Pinellas County Code. Officer, could you raise your right hand, please? Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you give today be the truth, nothing but the truth? I do. I have the motion, this monthly motion, and I have read it. Okay, I will go through my standard opening here. Good morning, Magistrate. I'm Officer Duvall, Magistrate Officer with Pinellas County Code Enforcement. Pursue it to Chapter 2, Article 8 of Pinellas County Code and Chapter 162 of Florida Statute. Pinellas County is seeking a motion to initiate foreclosure against Benjamin D. Floyd II. Second, the property the county is seeking foreclosure against is located at 12600 Palm Drive in Largo, Florida, which is a non-homesteaded property located in unincorporated Pinellas County. The county would like to submit into evidence a motion to initiate foreclosure, which consists of a history of the case and all attached exhibits. You may proceed. Okay, Magistrate, I'm going to go directly to the conclusion of my packet since you have had it and have said you have reviewed it. So concluding here that the property continues to be owned by the same respondent. Property has not been declared to be homesteaded by the respondent. Petitionary has an interest in the property by virtue of a Pinellas County Code Enforcement of the Special Magistrate Lien in the amount of $23,414.97 as of September 25, 2025. The lien is accruing daily fines in addition to interest. Petitioner provided respondent with notice that the property was found to be in violation of county ordinance. Petitioner provided respondent with notice that the property remained in violation of county ordinances after respondent was afforded due process and given a period in which to cure or remedy the violations of the county ordinance at the property. Respondent had actual or implied knowledge of the process and procedures employed by a petitioner. It's Code Enforcement Division, Special Magistrate for imposition of the Code Enforcement Lien. So with that being said, Magistrate, based on the evidence provided in the motion, the county requests that you issue an order granting Pinellas County the ability to initiate foreclosure. So to the public point of the hearing closed, I'm accepting your motion. And I reviewed the motion, and I'm granting the motion, and an order will be entered. Thank you, Magistrate. That's it, ma'am. Communications, please stop recording.