08-19-1999
......
.."""
CITY OF EDGEWATER
CITIZENS CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD
REGULAR MEETING
AUGUST 19, 1999
COMMUNITY CENTER
5:30 P.M.
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairman Anthony Fowler called to order the regular meeting of the Citizens
Code Enforcement Board at 5:30 p.m., Thursday, August 19, 1999.
ROLL CALL:
Members present were Chairman Anthony Fowler, Linda Johnson, Maureen
Borner, George Ann Keller, Frank Roberts, Sonja Wiles and Ben DelNigro. Also
present were Beverly Kinney-Johnson, Code Enforcement Officer; John Williams,
Code Enforcement Officer; Dennis I. Fischer, Building Official; and Tonya L.
Elliott, Board Coordinator.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Mrs. Borner moved to accept the minutes of July 15, 1999. Seconded by Mr.
Roberts. Motion CARRIED 7-0.
Before continuing, Chairman Fowler asked the board members when they had
received the meeting packet and if they felt it contained adequate information. It
was the consensus of the members that they had received their packets two
days prior to the meeting and it did not contain adequate information.
CASES IN COMPLIANCE:
None at this time.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
Chairman Fowler said there were nine cases under unfinished business with a
total of almost $150,000.00 in liens. He said with the untimely receipt of the
packet and no information concerning the violations that date back to 1991, he
was uncomfortable reviewing the cases. Also, in light of the fact the City
Attorney was not in attendance to represent the board. He asked the members
how they would like to proceed.
Ms. Johnson moved to continue the cases until the next meeting so they could
get more background information and make a more educated decision.
Seconded by Mr. Roberts. Discussion followed.
1
......
...",
Mr. Mark Hall, Attorney, 124 Faulkner Street, New Smyrna Beach, FL,
representing Jimmy Owensrrrustees on the nine cases said it was unfortunate
the board did not receive their packets in a timely matter, or have legal council,
however he said this was only a fine reduction hearing. He said that after Staff's
presentation and his if the board was not comfortable making a decision he
would agree to a continuance. Chairman Fowler said he only found out late in
the afternoon that the City Attorney would not be in attendance. He said there
was a motion on the table, which should help determine the outcome of the
meeting, and asked for a roll call.
Motion FAILED 2-5. Chairman Fow/er, Ms. Johnson, Mrs. Keller, Ms. Wiles and
Mr. De/Nigro voting to proceed with the unfinished business.
SWEARING IN OF WITNESSES:
Chairman Fowler requested Beverly Kinney-Johnson, Code Enforcement Officer,
and anyone else with statements or comments pertaining to any of the cases
stand and be sworn in. Mrs. Johnson was sworn in at this time. Mr. Jimmy
Owens, Ft. Wayne, IN, was sworn in before giving testimony in case numbers
91-CE-2374, 91-CE-2375, 92-CE-0202, 92-CE-0734, 94-CE-0339, 96-CE-0624,
96-CE-0010(B), 96-CE-0139(B), and 96-CE-0771 (B). Mr. Robert Power, 2752
Date Palm Drive, Edgewater, FL, was sworn in before giving testimony in case
number 99-CE-0035(A)(B). Mr. Fischer, Building Official, and Mr. Kevin Patch
were sworn in before giving testimony in case number 99-CE-0059.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
Case # 91-CE-2374. 91-CE-2375. 92-CE-0202. 92-CE-0734. 94-CE-0339. 96-
CE-0624. 96-CE-0010CBl. 96-CE-0139CBl. 96-CE-0771CBl - Attorney Mark
Hall/Jimmy Owens. Mrs. Johnson distributed then read a memorandum, which
gave a brief history on all the unfinished business cases. She said that on June
14, 1999, Mr. Hall faxed a request for a hearing before the Board to reconsider
the fines/liens against Mr. Jimmy Owensrrrustee. Mrs. Johnson said they
agreed the cases were in compliance and needed to be brought to the board for
Closure. She said the fineslliens for all nine cases totaled $148,280.00,
however, the cost to the City was $1,257.50. She explained that foreclosure
procedures on case numbers 94-CE-0339 3327 Silver Palm Drive; 96-CE-
0010(B), 96-CE-0139(B), and 96-CE-0624, 2417 Unit #1 Guava Drive; 96-CE-
0771 (B), 1 north of 2417 Unit #1 Guava Drive, extended the compliance time and
compounded the amount owed. She said Mr. Owens could not abate the
violations of the tenants or mortgagees until they had been legally evicted. Then
the properties were brought in compliance within one week after the evictions
were complete.
Mrs. Johnson said in reference to case numbers 91-CE-2375, and 92-CE-0734,
Eaton Road between 502 & 506; the liens totaled such a large amount
2
....
....",
($44,720.00) because prior to 1994 the City did not have an Ordinance that
allowed the City to enter private property to abate grass and weed violations.
_ Violators were taken to the board who issued compliance dates and fines. The
fines continued until the grass and weeds were cut. Now such cases are
handled internally by issuing a work order to have the lot cut and the owner is
billed. Mrs. Johnson recommended in settling the nine cases the board accepts
the total cost to the City of $1,257.50. She said this has been the practice of the
board in the past.
Mr. Fowler asked why the memo said case #96-CE-0139(B) was heard on July
18, 1996 but ordered the violator to abate the violation no later than March 19,
1996. Mrs. Johnson explained that it was a repeat violation and therefore the
fine becomes retroactive to when the violation was first observed which in this
case was March 19,1996. Mr. Roberts asked how she came up with the cost to
the City. Mrs. Johnson said the cost come from comparing these cases with
previous cases, secretarial fees, recording of the lien, photographs and other
miscellaneous code enforcement fees, and attorney fees.
Mr. Hall said that Mr. Owens was an absentee landlord and did not know about
the violations. Mr. Hall said the purpose of code enforcement was to bring the
violator in compliance and it is fairly typical to just assess cost in a fine reduction
hearing. He said once the liens are filed the City has no obligation to continue to
notify the violator. There was a lengthy discussion on the violations on Eaton
Road and Dayton Street. Mr. Hall said he suggest the board recommend
approval of Staff proposal or wait until the next meeting if they are not
comfortable in making that decision.
Mr. Fowler said he agrees it is the board's job to bring cases in compliance and
agreed most of the cases had extenuating circumstances. However, when he
sees a property that has two violations in one year (referring to Eaton St.), the
board is not bringing violators in compliance. He said the board would be the
laughing stock of every city in the country if they reduce such a large fine to a
small amount. Violators will not bring properties in compliance if they see a four-
year-old case with large fines only cost them $107.00. He said he would like to
speak to the City Attorney and get her advise before making a final decision. Mr.
Fowler asked Mr. Owens if he had any comments.
After being sworn in, Mr. Owens stated that his understanding was that vacant
lots did not need to be mowed if they had never been maintained. He also said
at the time he was not notified of the violations. But, when he did learn about
them his son signed an affidavit stating that they had never maintained the lots
on Eaton Street. Mrs. Johnson said that was true. She said most of the
properties had to be posted because Mr. Owens never signed for the certified
notices. She said legal ads were placed in the newspaper stating the violation
and the date they would come before the board. Mr. Owens said that the house
3
.....
....,
at 3327 Silver Palm Drive was sold on a contract for deed. He said the tenants
quit paying First Federal and they foreclosed on the property. He said it was
brought in compliance at that time. He said the structure at 2417 Unit #1 Guava
Drive took him seven months to get the tenant evicted, then also was brought in
compliance. Mr. Fowler said he understood those circumstances. He asked Mr.
Owens if he was aware the property on Eaton Road was found in violation of
grass and weeds on March 19, 1992, and then found in compliance on June 2,
1992. Mr. Owens said he was not aware of the situation or how it came in
compliance.
After a lengthy discussion, Ms. Wiles moved to strike the five offenses that
involved tenants and foreclosures, and have the Board deal with the fine
amounts on the remaining cases. Motion DIED do to a lack of a second.
Mrs. Borner moved to continue the cases until the next meeting. Seconded by
Mrs. Keller. Ms. Johnson said she would also like to recommend that the legal
department review the procedures taken by the code enforcement officer and
Board's actions to make sure they hadn't done anything wrong. Motion
CARRIED 5-2. Chairman Fowler and Ms. Wiles dissenting.
NEW BUSINESS:
Chairman Fowler once again asked the board if they wanted to continue with
new business. Discussion followed on the lack of legal council.
Mrs. Borner moved to continue with new business. Since there was no second
Chairman Fowler threw the motion out and said if there were no other motions,
the Board would proceed with new business.
Mr. Roberts moved to table new business until the Board had legal advice.
Seconded by Ms. Johnson. Motion FAILED 2-5. Chairman Fowler, Mrs. Borner,
Mrs. Keller, Ms. Wiles and Mr. DeINigro voted not to table new business and
proceed with the meeting.
Case #99-CE-0035CA) and 99-CE-0035CB) - Robert Power, tenant, 2752 Date
Palm Drive; and Shirley and Danny Doss, owner. Storing Boatsffrailers on
City right-of-way. Section 18-4 of the Zoning Code of the City of Edgewater.
Code Enforcement Officer Beverly Kinney-Johnson reported her first visit to the
property was on May 19, 1999, at which time she observed the violation. She
said violation notices were sent to the tenant Mr. Power; the boat and trailer
owner Mr. Jack Wood; and the property owners Shirley and Danny Doss on May
21,1999 setting a compliance date of June 7, 1999. Mrs. Johnson re-inspected
the property on June 29,1999 and observed a boat and trailer parked on the
right-of-way. A notice of violation hearing was sent on July 8, 1999. She
revisited the property on August 12,1999 and determined that the property was in
compliance. However, she said Mr. Power has been the subject of code
4
'-'"
..."",
enforcement action in the past so she felt it was important for the board to hear
the case. Mrs. Johnson said several complaints have been reported on the
property dating back to 1997. Mrs. Johnson said the boat and trailers change
everyday, and she continues to receive complaints. In conclusion she
recommended "the violator be found to have been in violation of Section 18-4
and ordered to refrain from future violations or risk code enforcement action as a
repeat violator. "
After being sworn in, Mr. Power stated he currently repairs boats at his home but
is hoping to be able to relocate to a business location soon. A brief discussion
followed. Chairman Fowler asked Mr. Power if he had looked at other options to
avoid so many boats being parked on the right-of-way. Mr. Power said yes. He
also said that he is a commercial fisherman and gets home at 4:00 AM. He
doesn't want to disturb his neighbors so he parks his boat by the street. Mr.
Power said he would make sure he is not in violation in the future. Chairman
Fowler asked for a decision from the Board.
Ms. Wiles moved in reference to case #99-CE-0035(A) & 99-CE-0035(B) to
accept Mrs. Johnson's recommendation. Seconded by Mrs. Bomer. Motion
CARRIED 6-1. Mr. Roberts voted no.
CASE #99-CE-0041 - Thomas & Deanna Tipton, 464 Palmetto Street.
Numerous discarded items on property, Section 717.03, of the Zoning Code of
the City of Edgewater. Code Enforcement Officer Beverly Kinney-Johnson
reported that her first visit to the property was on February 25, 1999 at which
time she observed five-gallon buckets, wood, plastic bins, clear plastic tarp and
other miscellaneous items discarded on the property. She left a courtesy notice
at that time allowing 10 days to correct the violation. A re-inspection was made
on March 05, 1999. No corrective action had taken place and a courtesy notice
was left. An extension was request by the resident until March 30, 1999. Upon
re-inspection on March 30, 1999, Mrs. Johnson observed that the property had
been substantially cleaned up and extended the time until April 08, 1999. An
inspection was made on April 20, 1999, and there were still items left on the
property. A courtesy notice and verbal warning was given to the resident. On
April 30, 1999, Mrs. Johnson observed no change had taken place. A courtesy
notice of violation was sent to the resident on May 03, 1999 setting May 31, 1999
as the date for compliance. An inspection was made on June 01, 1999 and no
further corrective action had taken place. A notice of violation was sent on June
02, 1999, setting June 13, 1999 as the date for compliance. On inspection June
30, 1999, Mrs. Johnson found that no further corrective action had been taken. A
notice of violation hearing was sent on July 08, 1999. Mrs. Johnson presented
one photograph taken on August 19, 1999 to the Board. During the course of the
case, Mrs. Johnson stated she had several conversations with the resident,
Charles Puckett who always said he was working on correcting the violation.
Mrs. Johnson said the property owner, Deanna Tipton, contacted her on August
19, 1999. Mrs. Tipton said she had not received the certified letter and had
5
'w'
...
heard about the case from a friend who read it in the newspaper. Mr. Puckett
received and signed for the notice of violation hearing and did not relay the
information to the owner. Mrs. Tipton stated she had not been on the property in
some time. She said she would make sure the violation was corrected by
September 01, 1999. In conclusion Mrs. Johnson said because cardboard
boxes, plastic bins, an automotive seat and other items are discarded on the
property, Section 717.03 of the Zoning Code of Ordinances has been violated.
She recommended the violators, Thomas and Deanna Tipton, be given until
September 01, 1999 to correct the violation or a fine of $50.00 a day be imposed
for everyday the violation continues beyond that time.
Chairman Fowler asked Mrs. Johnson if the Tiptons lived at the property in
violation, and if no they had not been notified. Mrs. Johnson said the Tiptons live
in New Smyrna Beach and at the time the notices were sent out she was not
aware that Mr. Puckett was not the property owner. She said in the past she has
always dealt with whoever was at the residence. She said when courtesy notices
are sent out they are addressed to residenUproperty owner. Mrs. Johnson said it
was an error on her part when she sent the notice of violation hearing to the
Tiptons at the address in violation instead of their address in New Smyrna
Beach. She said that is when Mr. Puckett signed for the notice and did not notify
the Tiptons. Mrs. Johnson said when she spoke with Mrs. Tipton she indicated
she would not be able to attend the meeting, but assured her the violation would
be corrected by September 01, 1999.
After a brief discussion, Ms. Wiles moved to accept Mrs. Johnson's
recommendation to give until September 01, 1999 to abate the violation or a fine
of $50.00 a day fine be imposed for everyday the violation continues past that
date. Seconded by Mr. Roberts. Motion CARRIED 6-1. Chairman Fowler voted
no.
CASE #99-CE-0059 - Kevin Patch, tenant, 506 Sparrow Drive. Boat and boat
trailer on driveway. Section 18-4 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of
Edgewater. Code Enforcement Officer Beverly Kinney-Johnson said that
Building Official Dennis I. Fischer would be presenting this case. Mr. Fischer
was sworn in at this time. Mr. Fischer said the present code for boats and boat
trailers and their location is to the side or rear property. If the side or rear
property cannot be easily attained than the exception to that rule is to allow the
boats on the driveway and the front of the property. Mr. Fischer said there have
been numerous complaints from the adjacent property owners regarding Mr.
Patch and the parking of his boat on his driveway. A photograph and site
drawing was presented to the board for observation. Mr. Fischer said that the
boat is forward of the dwelling line setting on a circular driveway with a side entry
garage. Mr. Fischer said,he was bringing the case to the board because this is a
code interpretation problem. He said the dwelling line is the forward most line of
the house which is equal to the other adjacent houses front setback line. Mr.
Fischer said what he was requesting from the board was an interpretation of the
6
'-'
....,
front dwelling line of Mr. Patch's property. Was it the actual dwelling line of the
front of the garage or the dwelling line at the front door? Also, where does the
side yard begin and is parking the boat on the driveway behind the garage
dwelling line a violation of Section 18-4. Mr. Fischer said that Mr. Patch has
stated he can not park the boat on the side property because of small plants and
an irrigation system.
Chairman Fowler said before he heard from Mr. Patch, he wanted to know if the
Board was hearing the case or going by an inter-office memorandum from the
City Attorney. The memo stated that this was and interpretation to be made by
the Building Official and should not be addressed as a code enforcement issue at
this time. Mr. Fischer said his intention was for the Board to act on it as a case.
Chairman Fowler said he did not feel it is up to the board to make an
interpretation and asked Mr. Fischer what his interpretation was. Mr. Fischer
'said he considered the front dwelling line to be at the front door and in his opinion
no violation existed. However, complaints have been received and the issue
needs to be resolved. He said this issue has been addressed in the new land
development codes which should be adopted by the end of October and
eliminate this kind of interpretation problem in the future. Discussion followed on
how to proceed. It was determined to finish this case.
After being sworn in, Mr. Patch stated that if he parks the boat on the side yard it
will damage his sprinkler system. He said he has done everything possible to put
the boat in a good location but his neighbors continue to complain because they
just don't want the boat in the neighborhood.
Chairman Fowler allowed Mr. Robert J. Lundberg, 413 Sea Hawk Court,
Edgewater, FL to address the board. Mr. Lundberg said what has not been
mentioned is the size of the boat. He represents a group of people from his
development that oppose the boat and where it is parked. He said the members
have a petition they would like the board to look at. Mr. Roberts asked Mr.
Lundberg if there was a homeowners association. He said yes. Chairman
Fowler asked if the homeowners association has a problem with the boat. Mr.
Lundberg said yes and he was not sure why they have not addressed the issue.
Chairman Fowler said he understood their concerns, however, all neighborhoods
have these kind of situations. He said the board has to go by city ordinances,
and at this point in time Mr. Fischer has determined that no violation exist.
Chairman Fowler asked for a motion from the board.
Mrs. Bomer moved in reference to case #99-CE-0059 that a violation of Section
18-4 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Edgewater does not exist.
Seconded by Ms. Johnson. Motion FAILED 2-5. Chairman Fowler, Mr. Roberts,
Mr. Keller, Ms. Wiles, and Mr. DelNigro voted no.
Mr. Roberts moved to table the case for clarification of the ordinance. Seconded
by Mrs. Keller. Motion CARRIED 6-1. Mrs. Bomer voted no.
7
'w'
...""
Chairman Fowler called for a recess at 7:50 P.M. He called the meeting back to
order at 7:58 P.M.
DISCUSSION ITEMS:
Chairman Fowler asked Mr. Fischer if he had received any other interpretations
concerning the boat situation. Mr. Fischer said no. He said the situation would
be rectified when the new land development code is adopted. Mr. Fischer said
he would work with Mr. Patch to keep the boat in compliance now and when the
new code is adopted. Discussion followed on this issue.
Mr. Fischer introduced the new Code Enforcement Officer Jon Williams. He said
Mr. Williams and Mrs. Johnson will be working together to bring violators in
compliance.
There was discussion on the need for legal representation, and receiving
adequate case information in a more timely manner.
ADJOURN:
There being no other business to come before the board, a motion was made
and accepted to adjourn. Meeting adjourned at 8:20 P.M.
Minutes respectfully submitted by:
Tonya L. Elliott, Board Coordinator
h:\tonya\codeminutesaug 19.99.doc
8