Special Magistrate Meeting Minutes

1.   Case 21-7974 — 211 Morningside Ave. — David Santoro and Jina Zabbara — Town of Lady Lake Code of Ordinances Section 7-46 — Storage of Junk, Etc., Prohibited; and Land Development Regulations Section 9-2(h)(1) — Outside Storage; Order of Enforcement (Lori Crain)

This case has come into compliance.

2.   Case 21-7998 — 224 Arlington Ave., Emigdio F. Jasso — Town of Lady Lake Code of Ordinances Section 17-26(b) — Parking of Commercial Vehicles Prohibited; and Land Development Regulations Section 9-2(h)(1) — Outside Storage; Order of Enforcement (Lori Crain)

Ms. Crain stated that she is working with the Respondent towards compliance and will not present this case today.

3.   Case 21-8083 — 354 S. Hwy 27/441, AA Castle, LLC — Town of Lady Lake Code of Ordinances Section 8-26 — License Required to Engage in Business, Profession or Occupation; Land Development Regulations Section 17-2 — Sign Permitting Required and Section 17-7 — Prohibited Signs; Order of Enforcement to Establish Repeat Offender/Violations (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 Respondents in violation of Town of Lady Lake Ordinances Section 8-26, Business Tax Receipt; and Town of Lady Lake Land Development Regulations Section 17-2, Sign Permitting Required; and Section 17-7, Prohibited Signs; impose an administrative fee of $87 and afford the property owners until June 15, 2021 to bring the property into compliance or a fine of $50 per day be assessed thereafter for each day the violations continue to exist. Complete compliance will be when all signs, banners, flags, snipe signs, ground signs, changeable copy signs and canopies have been completely removed. This includes banners being removed, not just turned around; and vehicles being utilized as signs. Staff also recommends, effective immediately, to cease all business conducted out of this location until fully and legally authorized by the State of Florida and the Town of Lady Lake. Due to the lack of cooperation and compliance from respondents, Staff further recommends that any future violations of stated sections be cited as repeat violations and the property owner be cited as a repeat offender.

The Special Magistrate verified that the photographs in the backup documents were taken by the Code Enforcement Officer.

The Special Magistrate asked if there was anyone present who wished to speak regarding this case.

Jerome Robinson stated that he is disputing the timeline of the photographs presented by Ms. Crain as well as, her testimony that he came into town hall and filled out the (business tax receipt) application. He stated that he has never been in town hall until today and that David Kinder, (acknowledged him in the audience) who has worked for him for approximately four and a half to five years completed the application.

Mr. Robinson stated at one time he operated a business under a DBA, Select Choice TV.  At the time he had multiple locations and he has since closed all the locations and is now located in Lady Lake with a new business name. Mr. Robinson stated that he was uncertain that he would stay at this location after the initial confrontation he had with Ms. Crain. He stated that the previous tenant did not clean up the property when they vacated.

Mr. Robinson stated that he did not tell Ms. Crain that they were having a yard sale and that it was another of his employees that argued with Ms. Crain. He stated that when Ms. Crain advised him that he cannot display a “now hiring” sign, he explained that portion of the sign is facing the building and the other side of that sign is “yard sale”. He stated that he is not hiring employees.

Regarding the Jeep, Mr. Robinson stated that it is registered and insured and that he is repainting the vehicle and he removed the rear tire on the back that holds the license plate holder.

Mr. Robinson stated that due to financial hardship he is painting houses every day and is not at the property. He admitted to saying that he heard that Lady Lake is tough to deal with regarding town codes.

He stated that there may be one or two (advertising) vans on the property, and his remaining fleet is not in Lady Lake. He stated that he complied when Ms. Crain requested that the signs be removed. The banners that are up are blank. He stated his other stores were kept pristine. He stated that he owned many Dish Network, Direct TV, Comcast, and Century Link stores all around. He stated that the front door to this structure does not open and that the inside of the store is cluttered; he stated that he has very expensive signs from all of the stores that he was going to utilize and has not put up any signs. He stated that Ms. Crain mentioned broken signs and clarified that those signs are called Channel Letters and they have not put them up because he is not doing business. He stated that he did put signs at his previous stores advising of the new location and admitted that he did make banners advertising a grand opening and was told he cannot display them, so he flipped them around.

Mr. Robinson stated that he has been slowly renovating the property himself as he cannot afford a contractor. He admitted that he is responsible for the incorrect application and assuming that he could start doing business and displaying the banners.

He stated that he believes that Ms. Crain has lied throughout her testimony.

Mr. Robinson stated no one is at the property during the day. Occasionally, there may be someone there at night. He stated that he is doing what he can and for the longest time he does not care where his vehicles are and reiterated that most of his vehicles are not at this property but will be in the future. He stated that he does not need to advertise because he cannot have customers there, which is why he had a tent set up in front of the structure when they first opened. He stated that he was informed to remove the tent and he complied.

The Special Magistrate asked Mr. Robinson in his opinion, how much time is needed bring the property into compliance.

Mr. Robinson stated that he estimates the property can be cleaned up in three weeks.

The Special Magistrate asked Mr. Robinson with if he can have the property in compliance in that amount of time, what has been happening between March 1 and today.

Mr. Robinson stated that after the initial site visit from Ms. Crain, he was not certain he would stay at this location. He stated that he has been renovating the outside and inside of the building. He stated that when he rented the property, he did not know that the structure was trailer and that it was in bad condition. He stated that he does not want to be noncompliant.

The Special Magistrate asked Ms. Crain once the business tax receipt application is received, what is the process for Mr. Robinson to bring the property into compliance.

Ms. Crain stated that per Town code when signs are prima facie evidence, indicating a business is being conducted, which is the initial reason the signs needed to be removed. Once they are authorized to operate their business, sign permits must be obtained.

The Special Magistrate confirmed with Ms. Crain that Mr. Robinson needs to apply for a business tax receipt and apply for sign permits.

Ms. Crain added that sign permits are issued over the counter.

The Special Magistrate confirmed with Ms. Crain that the prohibited signs need to be removed, and that the Jeep is not an issue.

Ms. Crain replied affirmatively and added that the Jeep is not an issue at today’s hearing.

The Special Magistrate reiterated to Mr. Robinson that he stated the Jeep is a registered vehicle and he removed the license and asked why it has not been replaced.

Mr. Robinson explained that he had painted the front of the vehicle and is now painting the back. He stated that he does not need to mount the license plate to the holder; he can use magnets to adhere the license plate to the vehicle. He stated that because the vehicle is not on public streets, he did not know that the plate needed to be on the vehicle during the painting process. He noted that he called the police when he noticed property had been stolen, they did not mention that the license plate was not on the vehicle.

The Special Magistrate advised this is a Town ordinance regarding the vehicle, not a criminal issue that the police would enforce.

The Special Magistrate confirmed with Mr. Robinson that he can bring the property into compliance in three weeks, noting that the signs must be removed.

Mr. Robinson stated the signs were removed a long time ago and questioned when Ms. Crain took the photographs.

The Special Magistrate asked Mr. Robinson if he has photos to present showing that the signs have been removed.

Mr. Robinson stated that he did not know that he needed to present photographs. He stated that Ms. Crain has presented photographs showing the that the signs were removed. He stated that if he had photographs it would be redundant.

The Special Magistrate advised Mr. Robinson that this is a quasi-judicial hearing and that he is compelled to look at evidence that is in front of him.

Mr. Robinson stressed that Ms. Crain presented the evidence.

The Special Magistrate acknowledged that he viewed the photographs.

Mr. Robinson stated that one of the photographs shows that the signs are flipped, there are no signs up.

The Special Magistrate specified that the signs have not been removed.

Mr. Robinson replied affirmatively. He stressed that no one can see through the signs. He stated that he can remove it and believes that will make the property look trashier until it is fixed. He stated that it is not serving him any purpose by having them up.

The Special Magistrate advised that he is obligated to enforce the code.

Mr. Robinson stated that he will cut down the signs as soon as he leaves today and the town will deal with it until it is cleaned up, some of which he inherited. He stated this whole thing should be dismissed based on Ms. Crain’s testimony, and that her photographs prove that her story does not match up. He stated if she puts the date stamp on her camera it will show that the photographs are from over a month ago. He admitted that Ms. Crain is correct in one photograph that shows small street signs that he overlooked. He stated that most of the communication regarding this issue has been between Mr. Robinson and Mr. Kupferman the landlord’s representative.

The Special Magistrate asked if there is anyone else present who wished to speak regarding this case.

The Special Magistrate asked Ms. Crain to clarify for the record which signs require permits and which signs are prohibited.

Ms. Crain advised that once the business is legally operational, Mr. Robinson can apply for feather banner permits and tied banner permits, and he can advertise on the changeable copy pole sign. She added that there are requirements for how many signs can be on a property at one time.

The Special Magistrate stated for the record that this section of the code states that “…any sign, advertising, occupancy of the commercial building or property indicating that trade or business is being located at the location…” triggers that provision. Therefore, whether the business was actually open and customers were being served, the advertisements and signs indicate otherwise.

Special Magistrate Joshua Bills stated that based on the sworn testimony and evidence presented on Case 21—8083, he finds the Respondent is in violation of the cited codes and that the Respondent was properly served with notice of these proceedings. The Respondent has until June 25, 2021 to successfully bring the property in to compliance or a fine of $50 per day be assessed commencing on June 26, 2021 for each day that the property is not in compliance and continue to accrue at the daily rate of $50 until such time as the property comes into compliance. An $87.00 administrative fee is imposed; all fines and fees to be paid to the Town of Lady Lake. Any future violations on this property will be cited as repeat violations and will result in the property owner being cited as a repeat offender. The Respondent will receive a copy of the full order (on file in the Clerk’s Office).

4.   Case 21-8087 — 106 Mark Ave., Michelle Howell and Joseph Kemmer — Town of Lady Lake Land Development Regulations Section 16—54(b)(2) — Expired Building Permits; Order of Enforcement (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 Town of Lady Lake Land Development Regulations Section 16-54(b)(2) — Expired Building Permit (two permits); impose $87 administrative fee and afford the property owner until July 10, 2021 to successfully bring the property into compliance or a fine of $25 per day be assessed thereafter for each day the violation continue to exist.

The Special Magistrate verified that the photographs in the backup documents were taken by the Code Enforcement Officer.

The Special Magistrate noted for the record that the Respondent or their agent did not appear for this hearing.

Special Magistrate Joshua Bills stated that based on the sworn testimony and evidence presented on Case 21—8087, he finds the Respondent is in violation of the cited codes and that the Respondent was properly served with notice of these proceedings. The Respondent has until July 10, 2021 to successfully bring the property in to compliance or a fine of $25 per day be assessed commencing on July 11, 2021 for each day that the property is not in compliance and continue to accrue at the daily rate of $25 until such time as the property comes into compliance. An $87.00 administrative fee is imposed; all fines and fees to be paid to the Town of Lady Lake. The Respondent will receive a copy of the full order (on file in the Clerk’s Office).

5.   Case 21-8089 — 323 W Lady Lake Boulevard, Andrew Bull — Town of Lady Land Development Regulations Section 16—52, Building Permit Required and Section 9—4(a) — Fences and Walls, Permit Required; Order of Enforcement (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 Town of Lady Lake Land Development Regulations Section 16—52(a) —Building Permit Required; impose $87 administrative fee and afford the property owner until June 30, 2021 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 verified that the photographs in the backup documents were taken by the Code Enforcement Officer.

The Special Magistrate asked if there is anyone present who wished to speak regarding this case.

Andrew Bull verified with the Special Magistrate the procedure to bring the property into compliance and the amount of administrative fee.

The Special Magistrate encouraged Mr. Bull to comply as soon as possible.

The Special Magistrate asked if there was anyone else present who wished to speak regarding this case. Hearing no one, he proceeded with his ruling.

Special Magistrate Joshua Bills stated that based on the sworn testimony and evidence presented on Case 21—8089, he finds the Respondent is in violation of the cited codes and that the Respondent was properly served with notice of these proceedings. The Respondent has until June 30, 2021 to successfully bring the property in to compliance or a fine of $25 per day be assessed commencing on July 01, 2021 for each day that the property is not in compliance and continue to accrue at the daily rate of $25 until such time as the property comes into compliance. An $87.00 administrative fee is imposed; all fines and fees to be paid to the Town of Lady Lake. The Respondent will receive a copy of the full order (on file in the Clerk’s Office).

6.   Case 21-8092 — 105 Maine Ave., Theresa Boisvert — Town of Lady Lake Code of Ordinances Section 7—67, Certain Conditions Accumulations Deemed Public Nuisance; Order of Enforcement (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 Respondents in violation of Town of Lady Lake Code of Ordinances Section 7—46; Storage of Junk, etc., Prohibited and Section 7—67 Certain Conditions Accumulations Deemed Public Nuisance; impose an administrative fee of $87; afford the property owners until June 30, 2021 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. Staff further recommends that any future violations of Code of Ordinances Section 7—46 and Section 7— 67 be cited as repeat violations and property owner cited as a repeat offender.

The Special Magistrate verified that the photographs in the backup documents were taken by the Code Enforcement Officer.

The Special Magistrate asked if there is anyone present who wished to speak regarding this case.

John Broda, presented photos of the property in its current condition. He noted that there are just a few items remaining that need to be removed.

Paul Borowsky, stated that he recently purchased the mobile home from his mother and he informed Mr. Broda to vacate the property and he has not done so. He stated that currently there is no power on the property. Mr. Borowsky advised that he has begun ejection proceedings and for the record he believes Mr. Broda is trespassing. He stated that the entire property is owned by his aunt and his mother has power of attorney. He stated that Mr. Broda does not have a lease. He agrees that the property is a mess, and it will be cleaned up once the home is vacated.

Ms. Crain stated that the property is partially in compliance. She stated that she will work with Mr. Borowsky.

Special Magistrate Joshua Bills stated that based on the sworn testimony and evidence presented on Case 21-8092, he finds the Respondent is in violation of the cited codes and that the Respondent was properly served with notice of these proceedings. The Respondent has until August 01, 2021 to successfully bring the property into compliance by or a fine of $25 per day be assessed commencing on August 02, 2021 for each day that the property is not in compliance and continue to accrue at the daily rate of $25 until such time as the property comes into compliance. Respondent shall appear at the July 27, 2021 Special Magistrate hearing at 10:30 to provide an update on compliance, if needed. Respondent will be granted the opportunity to request an extension of time if warranted. An $87.00 administrative fee is imposed; all fines and fees to be paid to the Town of Lady Lake. Any future violations on this property will be cited as repeat violations and will result in the property owner being cited as a repeat offender. The Respondent will receive a copy of the full order (on file in the Clerk’s Office).

7.   Case 21-8093 — 217 Skyline Drive, Steven Simpkins — Town of Lady Lake Code of Ordinances Section 7—67, Certain Conditions, Accumulations Deemed Public Nuisance; Order of Enforcement to Establish Repeat Offender and Repeat Violations (Lori Crain)

This case is now in compliance.

8.   Case 21-8116 — 111 Neil Court, Lake County Citrus Sales — Town of Lady Lake Land Development Regulations Section 16—52, Building Permit Required; Order of Enforcement to Establish Repeat Offender and Repeat Violations (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 Respondents in violation of Town of Lady Lake Land Development Regulations Section 16-52, Building Permit required; impose an administrative fee of $87; and request the property owner be cited as Repeat Offender and any future violations of LDR Section 16-52(a) be cited as repeat violations.

The Special Magistrate verified that the photographs in the backup documents were taken by the Code Enforcement Officer.

The Special Magistrate stated for the record that the Respondent or their agent did not appear for this hearing.

Special Magistrate Joshua Bills stated that based on the sworn testimony and evidence presented on Case 21-8116, he finds the Respondent is in violation of the cited code and that the Respondent was properly served with notice of these proceedings. An $87.00 administrative fee is imposed; all fines and fees to be paid to the Town of Lady Lake. Any future violations on this property will be cited as repeat violations and will result in the property owner being cited as a repeat offender. The Respondent will receive a copy of the full order (on file in the Clerk’s Office).