Special Magistrate Meeting Minutes

6. Case 19-010958 — 32432 Quiet Harbor Avenue, Apt. 104, Leesburg — Loreli and Alfred Aguda — Town of Lady Lake Code of Ordinances, Section 4-40 — Animal Cruelty (Denise Williams)

The case summary was as follows:

August 16, 2019 — Ms. Williams reported that she responded to the Oakleaf Village Apartment Complex at 423 CR 466 to pick up a cat that a resident left behind after being evicted from the apartment complex. She advised that the cat was tame and docile, that she was able to pick it up without a problem and place him into a cage. She stated that the cat was underweight, but not emaciated, slightly dehydrated, not wearing a collar or tags, and he was not neutered. Ms. Williams stated that she impounded the cat. She stated that the assistant property director, Andrew Grunther, provided her with a forwarding address and contact phone number for the former renters, Mr. and Mrs. Aguda.

Ms. Williams was informed that Mr. and Mrs. Aguda’s last day of gained access to the apartment was on August 1, 2019. The maintenance team began clearing out the apartment, but they did not find the cat inside until August 15, 2019 due to the number of items they had to sort through and remove from the apartment. She stated that Mr. Grunther advised that Mrs. Aguda called and spoke with the office management staff multiple times inquiring as to when she could obtain her remaining furniture, and that she never once mentioned anything about the cat. Mr. Grunther stated that the office management staff shared photos that were taken by the maintenance team. The photos attached to this case file show a cardboard scratch box, a food bin filled approximately half-way with cat food, another plastic container filled with kitty litter, and a blue kitty litter box. The maintenance team advised that there was an unopened new bag of cat food in one of the closets that the cat did not have access to. According to the maintenance team, upon making entry and evaluating the apartment, no cat food was found to be left down for the cat. They also were not able to find a water source left for the cat and all of the toilet lids were down. At that point, the maintenance team contained the cat and offered him food and water and held him for impoundment.

Ms. Williams stated that Mr. Grunther informed her that the maintenance team had been clearing out the apartment and that a lot of items had to be thrown away, but he offered to walk her through the apartment so that she could take pictures if needed and to make an evaluation of the living conditions. He stated that management was having their maintenance team place any salvageable items into a garage so Mrs. Aguda could pick them up.

Ms. Williams reported that upon entering the apartment, there was an obvious and overwhelming amount of debris and feces. She stated that she took pictures of every room in the apartment and every single room had feces and urine throughout with the exception of the master bedroom closet, which was clean. There were two empty silver bowls on the floor of the kitchen that could have possibly held cat food or water at one time. There was a single, empty plastic pet food bowl in the guest bathroom on the floor next to the toilet.

Ms. Williams stated that she attempted to contact the owners on August 19, 20, and 21, 2019 with no response.

• August 22, 2019 — Ms. Williams stated Mr. Grunther contacted her and advised that Mrs. Aguda was on the property to collect her remaining belongings. Ms. Williams stated that when she arrived, she introduced herself to Mrs. Aguda and asked her if she had received any of her messages. Ms. Williams stated that Mrs. Aguda replied that she had gotten them all that day. Ms. Williams stated that she asked Mrs. Aguda what her intentions were with the cat. Mrs. Aguda stated that she did not own a cat. Ms. Williams stated that a cat was found alone in her apartment after she moved out. Mrs. Aguda stated that her husband must have let the cat in the apartment right before they left. Mrs. Aguda stated that they did not share a room and that she was not aware if he had a cat. She stated that he has been in rehab as he was mentally unstable. Ms. Williams stated that she asked Mrs. Aguda about the cat supplies that were found in the apartment. She stated that Mrs. Aguda did not respond. Ms. Williams asked Mrs. Aguda if she was her husband’s caretaker; she stated that Mrs. Aguda replied affirmatively. Ms. Williams explained to Mrs. Aguda that as caretaker, she could be held accountable for his actions.

Ms. Williams stated that she issued a citation to Mrs. Aguda, listing her and Mr. Aguda as the respondents because both of them were listed on the apartment lease and both had access to the apartment and control and care of the cat. She stated that she explained the citation to Mrs. Aguda as well as the Special Magistrate hearing.

• August 23 — September 20, 2019 — Ms. Williams reported that the cat, now named Romeo, was very ill. She took him to the Animal Clinic of Lady Lake where he was seen by Dr. Merritt. She stated that Dr. Merritt ran medical tests, prescribed medications and special cat food during this time period. Dr. Merritt explained that when an animal goes without food and water for a length of time, the pancreas could be compromised which could affect how the digestive system absorbs food, and the potential is present for the animal to be on medication for the remainder of its life.

Staff’s recommendation is to find the respondents, Loreli and Alfred Augda, in violation of the Town of Lady Lake Code of Ordinances, Section 4-40, Animal Cruelty, and impose full fines of $250.00, plus an administrative fee.

The Special Magistrate asked Ms. Williams if the cat items were found in a closed room.

Ms. Williams stated those items were removed before she was contacted about the cat. She stated the maintenance team is present to testify.

Andrew Grunther, Assistant Property Director of Oakleaf Villages Apartments, stated that he did not enter the apartment prior to escorting Ms. Williams through the apartment. He clarified that Mr. and Mrs. Aguda were not evicted from the apartment; their lease was not renewed.

The Special Magistrate explained to Mrs. Aguda that she has the right to cross-examine anyone who is testifying.

Gary Wages, Maintenance Supervisor at Oakleaf Villages Apartments, testified that the cat items were in the second bedroom closet. The cat was found in the first bedroom closet. The items were not removed until the fourth or fifth day.

The Special Magistrate asked if the cat was locked in the bedroom.

Mr. Wages stated the cat was not confined; just hiding. He stated that he began working on the apartment periodically three or four days prior to the other maintenance employees. He stated that the bedroom doors and closet doors were always open. He stated he did not see food or water in a bowl.

The Special Magistrate asked Mr. Wages if he had any discussions with Mr. or Mrs. Aguda regarding the cat.

Mr. Wages stated that he did not speak to Mr. or Mrs. Aguda.

The Special Magistrate asked Mrs. Aguda if she had any questions.

Mrs. Aguda replied from the audience that she did not have any questions.

John Williams, Maintenance Technician at Oakleaf Village Apartments, testified that he noticed the cat while he was in the apartment to remove items. He stated the cat was on top of a tote box and that it meowed then hissed at him. He explained that he got a cage, took the cat to the maintenance building and gave him food and water.

The Special Magistrate asked Mr. Williams if he saw any food or water available for the cat in the apartment.

Mr. Williams replied that he did not see any cat food or water.

The Special Magistrate asked Mrs. Aguda if she had any questions.

Mrs. Aguda replied from the audience that she did not have any questions.

The Special Magistrate asked ACO Williams where the cat is presently.

Ms. Williams replied that the cat is at the Lady Lake Animal Control facility. She stated that Romeo will be released for adoption if his health continues to improve.

The Special Magistrate asked if Mrs. Aguda has expressed her desire to keep the cat or if that is permitted.

Ms. Williams explained that Mrs. Aguda claimed that she did not own a cat. Because of that statement, Mrs. Aguda relinquished any type of ownership she had at that time.

The Special Magistrate thanked Mrs. Aguda for attending. She asked Mrs. Aguda if she had any further input regarding the evidence presented by the animal control officer and the apartment complex employees regarding the cat that was found in her previous residence.

Loreli Aguda stated that her husband has dementia. She stated that she knew that he had been friendly with an outside cat but had no idea that he had these cat items. She stated he does not drive. Mrs. Aguda stated that between taking care of her husband, taking care of their dogs, and her job, she did not know that there was a cat in the apartment. She questioned whether the maintenance employees could have let the cat in the apartment after she left.

The Special Magistrate asked Mrs. Aguda if she heard the testimony regarding bags of unopened cat food, bowls put out and a cat litter box.

Mrs. Aguda replied that she never went into her husband’s bedroom.

The Special Magistrate stated there was a comment that Mr. Aguda has not been there since June.

Mrs. Aguda stated that he had hip replacement surgery and she would bring him home from the rehab facility a few times during the week.

The Special Magistrate asked Mrs. Aguda if she never saw, heard, or smelled a cat during those few months that she would periodically bring her husband home from the rehab facility.

Mrs. Aguda replied that she cannot smell anything.

The Special Magistrate asked if there was anyone present who wished to speak. There were no comments.

The Special Magistrate asked Ms. Williams if Mrs. Aguda’s testimony created any doubts that she knew the cat was in the apartment.

Ms. Williams stated it does not.

The Special Magistrate stated that based on the documents presented, including photographs, and testimony from two witnesses who were in the apartment after Mrs. Aguda moved out stating that all of the doors were open and the cat was not hidden, and from the testimony of Mrs. Aguda that she was alone in the apartment while her husband was in a rehab facility, she does find Mrs. Aguda in violation of the Town of Lady Lake Code of Ordinances, Section 4-40, Animal Cruelty, specifically for abandoning the cat. The Special Magistrate imposed a fine of $250, as well as an $87 administrative fee, both to be paid within 60 days from today’s hearing date. Mrs. Aguda will get a copy of this order.

3. Case 19-7139 — 524 Rainbow Blvd., Joyce A. Brinson Estate — Town of Lady Lake Code of Ordinances Chapter 7-67, High Grass (Lori Crain)

Code Enforcement Officer (CEO) Lori Crain presented documents relative to her cases to the Special Magistrate (on file in the Clerk’s Office).

The case summary was as follows:

• August 7, 2019 — Initial inspection and photos taken of high grass; left courtesy notice door hanger.
• August 17, 2019 — Compliance date left on courtesy door hanger.
• August 19, 2019 — A re-inspection of the property was completed; the property is not in compliance. A violation notice was sent via certified mail.
• August 24, 2019 —The certified mail was returned Not Deliverable at the Address, Return to Sender, Unable to Forward.
• August 28, 2019 — Compliance date of violation notice.
• August 29, 2019 — A re-inspection of the site was completed; the property remains non-compliant. A Notice of Hearing was sent vial certified mail and the property was posted.
• September 19, 2019 — A re-inspection of the property was completed; the property remains non-compliant.
• September 23, 2019 — A re-inspection of the property was completed; the property remains non-compliant.
• The Property is currently assessed at $114,328 per the Lake County Property Appraiser

Staff’s recommendation is to find the owner in violation of the Town of Lady Lake Code of Ordinances 7-67, Certain Conditions, Accumulation Deemed Public Nuisance — High Grass; Impose an administrative fee of $87 and afford the property owner or their agent 10 days to successfully bring the property into compliance or a fine of $25 per day be assessed thereafter for each day the violation continues to exist.

The Special Magistrate asked if there was anyone present who wished to speak on this case. Seeing no one, the Special Magistrate continued with her ruling on this case.

Special Magistrate Valerie Fuchs stated that based on the testimony and evidence presented, including photographs on Case 19-7139, that the property owner is found in violation of the Town of Lady Lake Code of Ordinances Chapter 7-67, High Grass. The Special Magistrate stated the property owner, or their agent has 10 days to successfully bring the property into compliance or a fine of $25 per day be assessed thereafter for each day the violation continues to exist. An $87.00 administrative fee is imposed, to be paid within 10 days of today’s hearing date.

The violator shall contact Code Enforcement to confirm compliance. Upon notification by the code inspector that this Order of Enforcement has not been complied with by the time stated above, the Special Magistrate may execute an Order of Imposing Fine in the amount set forth above. A copy of the Order Imposing Fine shall be mailed to the Violator. A certified copy of the Order Imposing Fine may be recorded as a lien against the property. A hearing is not statutorily required for the issuance of the Order Imposing Fine. The violator has a right to request a hearing on the fine imposition by written request to the Town of Lady Lake within twenty days of the commencement of the fine. The Order Imposing Fine shall advise the Violator of that right. When requested, such a hearing will be heard by the Special Magistrate. The property owner will get a copy of this order.

4. Case 19-7144 — 454 Winners Circle, Kenneth J. LaFrate — Town of Lady Lake Code of Ordinances Chapter 7-67, High Grass.

Code Enforcement Officer, Lori Crain (CEO), presented documents relative to her cases to the Special Magistrate (on file in the Clerk’s Office).

The case summary was as follows:

• July 31, 2019 — Initial inspection and photos taken of high grass and underbrush deemed a public nuisance.
• August 12, 2019 — Received email from the property owner, Ken La Frate, stating it would be best to go in front of the Special Magistrate. Sent reply email to Mr. La Frate with no response.
• August 12, 2019 — A re-inspection of the property was conducted; the property remains non-compliant.
• August 13, 2019 — A Notice of Violation was sent via certified mail.
• August 21, 2019 — Certified mail signed for by Ken L Frate.
• August 23, 2019 — Compliance Date of Violation notice.
• August 26, 2019 — A re-inspection of the property was conducted; the property remains non-compliant.
• August 28, 2019 — A Notice of Hearing was sent via certified mail.
• September 9, 2019 — The Notice of Hearing was posted on the property at 9:59 a.m. A re-inspection of the property was conducted; the property remains non-compliant.
• September 18, 2019 — A re-inspection of the property was conducted; the property remains non-compliant.
• September 23, 2019 — A re-inspection of the property was conducted; the property remains non-compliant.
• The property is currently assessed at $73,136 per the Lake County Property Appraiser.

Staff’s recommendation is to find the owner in violation of the Town of Lady Lake Code of Ordinances 7.67 Certain Conditions, Accumulations Deemed Public Nuisance; Impose an Administrative fee of $87 and afford the property owner, or their agent 10 days to successfully bring the property into compliance or a fine of $25 per day be assessed thereafter for each day the violations continues to exist.

The Special Magistrate asked if there was anyone present who wished to speak on this case. Seeing no one, the Special Magistrate continued with her ruling on this case.

Special Magistrate Valerie Fuchs stated that based on the testimony and evidence presented, including photographs on Case 19-7144, that the property owner is found in violation of the Town of Lady Lake Code of Ordinances Chapter 7-67, High Grass. The Special Magistrate stated the property owner, or their agent has 10 days to successfully bring the property into compliance or a fine of $25 per day be assessed thereafter for each day the violations continue to exist. An $87.00 administrative fee is imposed, to be paid within 10 days of today’s hearing date.

The violator shall contact Code Enforcement to confirm compliance. Upon notification by the code inspector that this Order of Enforcement has not been complied with by the time stated above, the Special Magistrate may execute an Order of Imposing Fine in the amount set forth above. A copy of the Order Imposing Fine shall be mailed to the Violator. A certified copy of the Order Imposing Fine may be recorded as a lien against the property. A hearing is not statutorily required for the issuance of the Order Imposing Fine. The violator has a right to request a hearing on the fine imposition by written request to the Town of Lady Lake within twenty days of the commencement of the fine. The Order Imposing Fine shall advise the Violator of that right. When requested, such a hearing will be heard by the Special Magistrate. The property owner will get a copy of this order.

5. Case 19-7177 — 919 Hwy 27/441 — RBM Capital Investments, Inc. and Mattress One, Inc. — Town of lady Lake Land Development Regulations Chapter 17-5(d)(1) – Temporary Signs and Banners

Code Enforcement Officer, Lori Crain (CEO), presented documents relative to her cases to the Special Magistrate (on file in the Clerk’s Office).

The case summary was as follows:

• April 23, 2019 — Case 18-6977 — An Order of Enforcement was issued for the violation listed above.
• August 25, 2019 — Lady Lake Police Officer Bilbrey sent a photo of the violation via email.
• August 26, 2019 — An initial inspection of the property was conducted; the property is found to be non-compliant.
• August 27, 2019 — A re-inspection of the property was conducted; the property remains non-compliant.
• August 28, 2019 — A Notice of Repeat Violation and a Notice of Hearing was sent via certified mail to the property owner, to the Mattress One corporate office and hand-delivered to the store manager, Jeff Wilensky at 10:53 a.m.
• June 13, 2019 — The Notice of Violation was returned, “Temporarily Away-Unable to Forward”.
• August 29, 2019 — A re-inspection of the property was conducted; the property remains non-compliant.
• September 4, 2019 — A re-inspection of the property was conducted; the property is compliant.
• September 4, 2019 — The return receipt from RBM Capital Investments was received, signed by Milene Vallejos on August 30, 2019.
• September 12, 2019 — Return mail from Mattress One Corporate marked, “Refused”.
• September 19, 2019 — A re-inspection of the property was conducted; the property is compliant.
• September 23, 2019 — A re-inspection of the property was conducted; the property is compliant.
• The property is currently assessed at $1,729,360 per the Lake County Property Appraiser.

Staff’s recommendation is to find that the owner was in violation of the Town of Lady Lake Land Development Regulations Chapter 17-5(d)(1) — Temporary Signs, Banners, Feather Flags and Other Promotional Signs; Impose a fine of $250 for the Violation of Order of Enforcement 18-6977, to be paid within 30 days and an $87 administrative fee to be paid within 10 days; and a fine of $100 per event for each future offense for which no further hearing shall be necessary.

The Special Magistrate stated that she cannot make a ruling for future events; a hearing is required for each repeat offense.

The Special Magistrate asked if there was anyone present who wished to speak on this case. Seeing no one, the Special Magistrate continued with her ruling on this case.

Special Magistrate Valerie Fuchs stated that based on the testimony and evidence presented, including photographs on Case 19-7144, that this is a repeat violation and the property owner is found in violation of the Town of Lady Lake Land Development Regulations Chapter 17-5(d)(1), Temporary Signs and Banners. The Special Magistrate imposed a $250 fine to be paid within 30 days in violation of the Order of Enforcement 18-6977. The fine will be recorded as a lien if not paid. An $87.00 administrative fee is imposed, to be paid within 10 days of today’s hearing date.

The violator shall contact Code Enforcement to confirm compliance. Upon notification by the code inspector that this Order of Enforcement has not been complied with by the time stated above, the Special Magistrate may execute an Order of Imposing Fine in the amount set forth above. A copy of the Order Imposing Fine shall be mailed to the Violator. A certified copy of the Order Imposing Fine may be recorded as a lien against the property and or business. A hearing is not statutorily required for the issuance of the Order Imposing Fine. The violator has a right to request a hearing on the fine imposition by written request to the Town of Lady Lake within twenty days of the commencement of the fine. The Order Imposing Fine shall advise the Violator of that right. When requested, such a hearing will be heard by the Special Magistrate. The property owner will get a copy of this order.

5. Case 19-011511 — 928 Jacaranda Drive — Gwendolyn and Neville Muirhead — Town of Lady Lake Code of Ordinances Section 4-4, At Large Animal (Denise Williams)

Denise Williams, Animal Control Officer (ACO), presented documents regarding her case to the Special Magistrate (on file in the Clerk’s Office).

The case summary was as follows:

• August 28, 2019 — Ms. Williams reported that while on a call at 990 Hibiscus Street, she witnessed a stray Boston Terrier type dog running at large. She stated that she attempted to catch him, but he continued to run away from her. She stated that she followed him back to his home at 928 Jacaranda Drive, where she contacted Gilligan’s owner, Neville Muirhead. Ms. Williams stated that Mr. Muirhead did not seem to believe that it was an issue that his dog was running at large. She stated that Mr. Muirhead informed her that he let the dog out to go potty. Ms. Williams stated that she explained to Mr. Muirhead that there is a leash law within the Town limits and that his dog needed to be confined to his property or on a leash. She stated that she explained that he will be receiving a citation for the dog running at large as they were previously given a written warning. Ms. Williams stated that Mr. Muirhead’s minor daughter caught their dog and confined him in the house. She advised Mr. Muirhead that according to her records, Gilligan’s rabies vaccination expired this day and he needed to be re-vaccinated and provide proof of such within ten days. Ms. Williams issued a citation to Mr. and Mrs. Muirhead for 4—4, At Large Animals, along with a written warning for 4—36.
• September 6, 2019 — Ms. Williams stated that she received a voicemail from Mrs. Muirhead advising that Gilligan received a rabies vaccine at the low-cost Leesburg 441 Pet Hospital. Ms. Williams called the pet hospital and verified that Gilligan received a one-year rabies vaccine on September 6, 2019, Tag 001731. Ms. Williams stated that she called Mrs. Muirhead and left a voicemail advising her that she was able to verify that Gilligan received his rabies vaccine. She stated that she asked Mrs. Muirhead if she would return her call and advise if she would pay the citation or if she would be attending the Special Magistrate hearing.
• Williams noted that Mr. and Mrs. Muirhead received a written warning for the same violation in 2018, Case 18-009971; those documents are included with this case’s packet.

Staff’s recommendation is to find the respondents, Gwendolyn and Neville Muirhead, in violation of the Town of Lady Lake Code of Ordinances, Section 4—4, At Large Animal, and impose full fines of $35.00

The Special Magistrate asked if there was anyone present who wished to speak on this case. Seeing no one, the Special Magistrate continued with her ruling on this case.

Special Magistrate Valerie Fuchs stated that based on the testimony and evidence presented, including photographs on Case 19-011511, that Gwendolyn and Neville Muirhead, owners of the dog, are found in violation of the Town of Lady Lake Code of Ordinances Section 4-4, At Large Animal. The Special Magistrate imposed a fine of $35.00, as well as an $87.00 administrative fee, both to be paid within 10 days of today’s hearing. The owner will receive a copy of this order.