Special Magistrate Hearing Minutes

4. Case 22-8697 — 230 Lake Griffin Rd., Virgil a. Smith, Estate — Town of Lady Lake Code of Ordinances Section 7-46, Storage of Junk, etc., Prohibited; Sections 20-18(e) and 20-18(f), Minimum Standards Sanitation; Town of Lady Lake Land Development Regulations Section 16-5(a), Building Permit, Required; Order of Enforcement (Lori Crain)

This case will not be presented.

5. Case 22-8726 — 127 Shiloh Ave., Tuan T. Pham — Town of Lady Lake Code of Ordinances section7-67 and Section 7-46, Nuisances; Section 20-19(f), Minimum Standards; Order of Enforcement (Lori Crain)

Ms. Crain presented the background summary for this agenda item (on file in the Clerk’s Office).

Ms. Crain testified that the grass has remained mowed, yet much debris continues to be on the property.

Staff recommendation is to find the Respondent in violation of Town of Lady Lake Code of Ordinances Section 7-46, Unlawful Storage of Junk, Debris; Section 7-67, Certain Conditions, Accumulations Deemed Public Nuisance; Section 20-19(f), Exterior Structure Maintenance/Repair; impose $150 administrative fee and allow Respondent until January 30, 2023, to bring property into compliance or a $25 fine will begin to accrue for every day until complete compliance is obtained.

The Special Magistrate confirmed with Ms. Crain that the photos in the packet were taken by her.

Ms. Crain advised that she and Ms. Williams took the photos dated December 1, 2022. Ms. Crain advised that she specifically took the photo of the posting.

The Special Magistrate stated for the record that no one is present to speak on this matter.

Special Magistrate Bills stated that based on the evidence provided, including pictures and testimony, an Order of Enforcement is warranted. The Respondent shall pay all costs associated with this matter in the amount of $150.00, and have until 5:00 PM January 30, 2023, to successfully bring the property into compliance or a fine of $25 per day will begin accruing on January 31, 2023 and will continue to accrue thereafter for each day the violation continues to exist. A copy of the full order will be mailed to The Respondent.

6. Case 22-8779 — 223 Gibson St., Cynthia L. Hines-White — Town of Lady Lake LDR Section 16-52(a), Building Permit Required; Order of Enforcement (Lori Crain)

This case will not be presented.

7. Case 22-8785 — 306 West Lemon St., Barbara Kleinschrodt — Town of Lady Lake LDR Section 16-52(a), Building Permit Required; Order of Enforcement (Lori Crain)

This case has come into compliance.

8. Case 22-8788 — 732 S Hwy 27/441, Ronald B. Moussette, Jr., Trust — Town of Lady Lake LDR Section 16-52(a), Building Permit Required; Town of Lady Lake Code of Ordinances Section 7-47, Fire Hazards; Order of Enforcement (Lori Crain)

This case has come into compliance.

9. Case 22-8793 — 413 S Hwy 27/441, Blue Marlin Stations, LLC — Town of Lady Lake LDR Section 17-5(d), Temporary/Special Event Signs; Order of Enforcement; Establish Repeat Offender (Lori Crain)

Ms. Crain presented the background summary for this agenda item (on file in the Clerk’s Office).

Staff’s recommendation is to find the Respondent in violation of the Town of Lady Lake Land Development Regulations cited codes; impose administrative fee of $150; Establish properties and owners as Repeat Offenders. Any subsequent violation will result in Hearing Notice to Special Magistrate to recommend fines be assessed.

The Special Magistrate stated for the record that no one is present to speak on this matter.

Special Magistrate Bills stated that based on the evidence provided, including pictures and testimony, an Order of Enforcement is warranted. The Respondent shall pay all costs associated with this matter in the amount of $150.00, and have until 5:00 PM January 5, 2023, to successfully bring the property into compliance. The Respondent is established as a Repeat Offender. A copy of the full order will be mailed to The Respondent.

10. Case L22015616 — 11796 SE 141^st, Ocklawaha, FL, Charles Hill — Town of Lady Lake Code of Ordinances, Section 4-11, Confinement of Animal in Vehicle (Denise Williams)

Ms. Williams presented the background summary for this agenda item (on file in the Clerk’s Office)

Ms. Williams testified that on October 25, 2022, she was called to Sam’s Club and observed a dog locked in a vehicle. She advised that the outside temperature was 85 degrees and utilized a digital infrared temperature gun to read the inside temperature of the vehicle, which read 105 degrees. Ms. Williams advised the dog owner to start his vehicle with the air conditioner to cool the inside of the vehicle.

Ms. Williams advised that the responding police officers are present.

Ms. Williams testified that Mr. Hill has had a previous case where he was issued a written warning.

Staff’s recommendation is to find the Respondent, Charles Hill, in violation of the Town of Lady Lake Code of Ordinances Section 4-11, Confinement of an Animal in Vehicle; impose full fines of $100.

The Special Magistrate verified with Ms. Williams that the picture before him of the temperature reading is the picture she referenced in her report.

The Special Magistrate advised that he will hear testimony from the dog owner prior to hearing the police officers’ testimonies.

Charles Hill stated that at the time of the incident he asked Ms. Williams to provide certification of the thermometer that she used to read the inside temperature of the truck. He stated that he tried again on two separate occasions to obtain a copy of the certification. He stated that he was in construction for many years and weather was an important factor and that he can tell the difference between 85 degrees and 105 degrees. He stated that when he opened the truck door while the dog was inside, the temperature inside the truck did not feel like 105 degrees.

The Special Magistrate confirmed with Mr. Hill that his main concern is the calibration of the equipment, and that the temperature reading was accurate. He advised Mr. Hill that a thermometer reading is not necessary to know that it is wrong to leave an animal, a child, or anything in a car on a hot day. He stated Ms. Williams’ testimony is that it was 85 degrees outside, the car was parked in the sun with the barely “cracked”, and the dog was barking.

The Special Magistrate confirmed with Mr. Hill for the record that his main concern is the accuracy of the thermometer reading.

Mr. Hill stated that the dog, Lucky, and his female companion have a unique bond due to her health issues, and that he does not do anything to harm the dog. He stated that the accuracy of the thermometer reading is an important item.

The Special Magistrate asked Mr. Hill if he had scientific proof to present that shows that cars do not heat up in sunlight. He stressed and reiterated that the accuracy of the equipment is not relevant in this case.

Mr. Hill stated that Ms. Williams’ case is based on the inside temperature of the vehicle.

The Special Magistrate clarified that Ms. Williams’ case is based on observing the car parked on a hot day, and that dog was inside the car and the windows were barely “cracked”.

The Special Magistrate stated to Mr. Hill that he has not shown any remorse for this violation.

Mr. Hill stated that he thought he would have been able to ask Ms. Williams questions and acknowledged that the majority of his questions are based on the accuracy of the equipment.

Cpl. Bilbrey with the Lady Lake Police Department testified that her first interaction with Mr. Hill was June 7, 2022 when she responded to a call at Circle K, 3 La Grande Blvd. A complainant called advising that a male left his dog inside a vehicle, that the windows were open approximately an inch, the dog was barking and panting heavily, and the male was inside the store playing lottery. She testified that when she arrived on scene, she observed the truck that matched the description provided, with the dog inside. Cpl. Bilbrey acknowledged that the dog Mr. Hill brought with him to today’s hearing is the dog she observed in the truck. Cpl. Bilbrey stated that the vehicle is registered to Mr. Hill’s wife. She advised that she was unable to communicate with Mrs. Hill based on the health issues Mr. Hill described in his testimony. She then turned her attention to Mr. Hill who was at the counter scratching lottery tickets and asked if it was his dog inside the vehicle. She testified that Mr. Hill responded affirmatively.

Cpl. Bilbrey explained to Mr. Hill that the air conditioning needed to be turned on because it was very hot outside. She stated that Mr. Hill responded that his dog was fine. Cpl. Bilbrey stated that it was her observation that Mr. Hill did not seem concerned about his dog. She stated Mr. Hill explained that he cannot be without his dog because the dog is for his wife, who was inside the store with him.

Cpl. Bilbrey testified that she advised Mr. Hill that he cannot leave his dog in a hot truck. She stated that Mr. Hill’s response was that he would continue to bring the dog with him because the dog was there for his wife. At that time, Cpl. Bilbrey contacted the Animal Control Officer and prior to Ms. Williams’ arrival, she was able to convince Mr. Hill to turn on the vehicle and turn on the air conditioning. She noted that it was 86 degrees outside that particular day and the vehicle was parked in the sunlight as there is no shade where the vehicle was parked.

Cpl. Bilbrey testified that her second encounter with Mr. Hill was the day the citation was written, October 25, 2022 (clarified). She stated Mr. Hill was given the citation because it was his second offense of this violation.

Officer Doran testified that he responded to a call of an unattended dog in a vehicle at Sam’s Club. He stated that he talked with the complainant who advised that they had been there approximately 30 minutes prior to calling the police, and that they had not seen anyone with the vehicle. Officer Doran referenced the dog in attendance and confirmed that is the dog he observed in the vehicle. He stated that when they approached the vehicle the dog was barking very loudly, shaking the vehicle.

Officer Doran observed Ms. Williams take the temperature of the inside of vehicle and he confirmed that the reading was initially 104 degrees and increased to 105 degrees.

Officer Doran met the Respondents coming out of the store and verified that the dog in the vehicle was theirs. He stated that he left the scene once Cpl. Bilbrey arrived.

Mr. Hill stated that it is important to know that on the day of the Circle K incident, he voluntarily started the vehicle. He stated that he did not know that Officer Doran discussed this issue with the complainants and that they gave inaccurate information regarding the time the dog was inside the vehicle. He stated that he was at Sam’s Club approximately 15 minutes.

Ms. Williams stated that her narrative and the police report reflects that the call was dispatched at 14:31 hours and Officer Doran met Mr. Hill at the front of the store at 1500 hours, which is 29 minutes.

Special Magistrate Joshua Bills stated that based on information provided through the evidence and testimony regarding this case he finds the Respondent in violation of the cited code. The Respondent shall pay a fine of $100.00. The Respondent shall pay administrative fee of $150.00; all fines and fees are to be paid within 14 days from the date of this Order, December 15, 2022.

The Respondent will receive a copy of the full order.