Built from the City's minutes records — no AI-written textBriefing final
The City's record
What the City's record shows
Built only from the City's minutes (1495_CE_Reg_Minutes_02_15_2024.pdf). Page numbers are the minutes' own. Discussion is in the minutes' text; it is not summarised here.
Attendance (the roll call)
Listed present when the roll was taken: Lloyd Roberts, George Brown, Josue Otero, Melissa Acosta, Dik Muller
(Checked against the ballots and the printed roll lines; no independent membership list of this board is available to confirm that the roll is complete.)
Listed absent: Michael Simpson, Sharri Scott; staff listed absent: Chris Davis (Board Member-unexcused)
Also listed as present (staff and other roles): Augusto Gonzalez (Interim Code Enforcement Manager), Chris Moderson (Sergeant), Micheal Mack (Code Enforcement Officer), Michael Folger (Code Enforcement Officer), Debra Babb-Nutcher (Board Attorney), Darla Crowl (Recording Secretary)
Adopted actions (7)
to approve to the agenda of February 15, 2024 (moved by Brown, seconded by Otero); CARRIED — the City's minutes, p. 1
to approve to the minutes of January 18, 2024 (moved by Brown, seconded by Otero); CARRIED — the City's minutes, p. 2
to amend staff's recommendation to City Council the lien reduction be in the amount of fifteen thousand three hundred thirty- two dollars and fifty cents ($15,332.50) (moved by Otero, seconded by Acosta); CARRIED 4-1 — the City's minutes, p. 4
to approve Staffs recommendation and find the Property Owner in violation (moved by Otero, seconded by Acosta); CARRIED — the City's minutes, p. 5
to approve staff's recommendation to City Council the lien reduction be in the amount of four thousand eighty-five dollars and forty-two cents ($4,085.42) (moved by Brown, seconded by Acosta); CARRIED 3-2 — the City's minutes, p. 6
to amend staff's recommendation to City Council the lien reduction be in the amount of one thousand five hundred dollars ($1,500.00) (moved by Acosta, seconded by Roberts); CARRIED — the City's minutes, p. 8
to approve staff's recommendation to City Council the lien reduction be in the amount of three thousand thirty-three dollars and twenty-six cents ($3,033.26) (moved by Acosta, seconded by Roberts); CARRIED — the City's minutes, p. 9
Motions not adopted (1)
to approve staff's recommendation to City Council the lien reduction be in the amount of two thousand six hundred fifty-four dollars and seventy-seven cents ($2,654.77) (moved by Brown, seconded by Otero); FAILED 2-3 — the City's minutes, p. 8 Corrected to match the minutes, page 8.
Money named in the minutes' motions (what each motion did with the amount, in its own words)
$15,332.50 — Code Enforcement: recommended to another body (City Council decides; not a final approval). “amend staff's recommendation to City Council the lien reduction be in the amount of fifteen thousand three hundred thirty- two dollars and fifty cents ($15,332.50)” (motion result: CARRIED; the City's minutes (1495_CE_Reg_Minutes_02_15_2024.pdf, p. 4); fiscal period not recorded)
$4,085.42 — Code Enforcement: recommended to another body (City Council decides; not a final approval). “approve staff's recommendation to City Council the lien reduction be in the amount of four thousand eighty-five dollars and forty-two cents ($4,085.42)” (motion result: CARRIED; the City's minutes (1495_CE_Reg_Minutes_02_15_2024.pdf, p. 6); fiscal period not recorded)
$1,500.00 — Code Enforcement: recommended to another body (City Council decides; not a final approval). “amend staff's recommendation to City Council the lien reduction be in the amount of one thousand five hundred dollars ($1,500.00)” (motion result: CARRIED; the City's minutes (1495_CE_Reg_Minutes_02_15_2024.pdf, p. 8); fiscal period not recorded)
$3,033.26 — Code Enforcement: recommended to another body (City Council decides; not a final approval). “approve staff's recommendation to City Council the lien reduction be in the amount of three thousand thirty-three dollars and twenty-six cents ($3,033.26)” (motion result: CARRIED; the City's minutes (1495_CE_Reg_Minutes_02_15_2024.pdf, p. 9); fiscal period not recorded)
$2,654.77 — Code Enforcement: named in a motion that was not adopted. “approve staff's recommendation to City Council the lien reduction be in the amount of two thousand six hundred fifty-four dollars and seventy-seven cents ($2,654.77)” (motion result: FAILED; the City's minutes (1495_CE_Reg_Minutes_02_15_2024.pdf, p. 8); fiscal period not recorded)
Agenda (the City's wording)
The City's agenda for this meeting is on file (CE_Reg_Agenda_02_15_2024), but its item list has not been read reliably by machine yet, so no outline is shown.
Transcript Partial transcript
Machine transcription of the meeting recording. The words are the recognizer's, except where a passage is marked as corrected or machine re-recognized; most have
not been checked against the audio, so words, numbers and names can be misheard.
It describes what was said. It cannot establish who voted how, an amount or an outcome — the City's
minutes do that (above).
A time links to its passage, and “Copy link” copies that link. No recording can be started from here.
272 suspect passage(s) marked in place; inspection incomplete: language review; 2 stretch(es) where a voice was detected and no words were recognized.
How this transcript was made. New machine transcription of the whole recording, with 14 voices separated from the audio.
27 short machine repair(s) (28 word(s)) are labelled in place, with the original words beside them: an ordinary word was replaced only where two further machine readings agreed on a different one.
Checks run on this transcript: the recognizer's own warning signs and whether a voice was detected where the words are. Not completed: language review.
A second, independent machine reading was compared with it word by word: the same words for 92.6% of 11,347 content words.
Dotted words (293 places) are ordinary wording differences: hover or tap to see the other reading.
272 passages (23% of the words) are marked suspect: their words are not shown ("unclear audio") and support no statement: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ; the language review questioned them; or no voice was detected there.
Agreement between two machine readings is not verification.
Inspection is incomplete: language review.
Voice detected, no words recognized (2 stretches). Something may have been said here that the transcript does not have:
00:00:08 (10 s) — neither reading has words
01:08:34 (7 s) — neither reading has words
Speakers were separated by voice. A plain name rests on evidence tied to that voice; “provisional” is a name from an earlier text-only pass and is not verified; “Speaker N” is an unidentified voice.
pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, ‸ indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 00:01:44–00:01:47 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
I'd like to ask one thing on the board. Yes, sir. If possibly we could talk about people in the audience and also our members here discuss different things that are on our mind that has to do with the codes and all. I'd like to see if we could talk about stuff because we got a lot of new people here, too, that might not have all the information we have of being on the board for a while. And they could ask questions and all. And the same with people that came before our board many a time that wanted to speak to us, but there was no agenda that they could speak to the board. And I'd like to see if we could possibly have a section that if anybody wants to discuss something with board members and then open it to the public.
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:03:27–00:03:27 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
can't bring that up right now. That's something we'll have to visit before and then ‸ bring it to the board at that point and then we vote on it to go forward. But just coming up with it right now, I don't think it would be the best time.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:04:07–00:04:09 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:04:21–00:04:24 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:04:38–00:04:39 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:05:03–00:05:09 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:05:34–00:05:36 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
But the officer had some errors in the testimony that he gave in terms of the numbers. So we'd like to reread that in the record to have the board order corrected. Okay. Is that something,
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:05:50–00:05:50 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Um, this was a lean reduction that you all heard last time. And because the fine amount was incorrect, you did a, I believe you did a 50% reduction and the fine amount was wrong. That was presented to you. So I had recommended that once we knew the correct amount, it should come back to you because the amount you were told is much higher than the actual fine amount. So you don't need to take new testimony, unless you, I guess, unless you want to, but it's just that you need to know that the fine amount is actually much less than you were told last time. So I believe it's appropriate for you for that to be.
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 00:06:54–00:07:07 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
For the record, the testimony I gave with dates and amounts were incorrect, but the testimonies given by staff and Mrs. Fuller were correct. At this time, I would like to reread the correct information on the record.
at which time the board found the owner, Harold and Risa Fuller, in violation of the following. Business tax receipt, section 12-1-AB. Rental business tax, section 6-2003.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:07:55–00:07:59 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
The Code Enforcement Board provided the owner sufficient time to correct said violations. Therefore, consistent with Code Enforcement Board orders, ‸ a non-compliance hearing was held November 18th, 2021. The lien ran at $75 per day from October 16th, 2021, until compliance was achieved on October 29th, 2022.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:08:26–00:08:28 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:08:34–00:08:39 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
The current owner, Risa R. Fuller, is requesting the lien be reduced to zero. Staff utilized the following factors in making the recommendation to reduce the lien. Whether the current owner owned the property at the time the violations occurred? Yes. Applicant resides at the property? No, this is a rental property. The number of violations related to the subject lien? There were three. The number of inspections performed? 29. Property taxes. Taxes are paid through 2023.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:09:18–00:09:19 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:09:27–00:09:30 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:09:30–00:09:33 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:09:45–00:09:48 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:09:57–00:10:05 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:10:07–00:10:11 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
which is the cost of staff to prosecute the case. This reduction is based on the gravity of the violations, the length of time it took the property to come into compliance, and the total amount of the city's cost.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:10:35–00:10:37 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:10:38–00:10:40 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:10:52–00:10:55 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:11:20–00:11:24 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:12:44–00:12:46 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:12:54–00:12:55 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:12:58–00:13:00 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said) · 00:13:01–00:13:04 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
So I appreciate everybody taking the time tonight to... Rehear this case and to rehear. We... I know in the staff report it said that Ms. Fuller requested zero. We would change ‸ what we're asking for to be the same as what city... The city is asking for. The violations here and... And the board may have already heard this, but I just want to flush out the record to be clear.
one that normally took care of all the properties and she had to kind of figure out what was going on. And she was also told that it was closed out by a code enforcement officer who is no longer with the city. We're...
And we think that in fairness and because of the extenuating circumstances with Mr. Fuller's medical condition and the stroke, we're asking ‸ this board and the city to reduce it to just the staff costs. And then I can have... If the board wants to hear it,
Fuller can testify as to her husband's medical conditions, why there were... 29 visits to the property and answer any other questions that the board has.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:14:18–00:14:22 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
do want to point out for clarity that my understanding is that the vote from the last meeting was four to three, so it wasn't a unanimous recommendation is what my understanding is.
knowledge, ‸ I want to make sure I'm correct. So if we're rehearing it, that means we're reopening it. So essentially to me, that's whatever that was is off the board.
And, um, you know, one of the reasons is because we, that we discussed last time was because of what the city council is requesting of us to do, to take all the information and come up with a good solution for the city and for the resident.
one of the things that we looked at last time was with this case, was the amount of days that the neighborhood was facing these violations, these disruptions to the, to the quietness of the, of the residents.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:18:03–00:18:05 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:18:06–00:18:13 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
pool's exposed, and this, and we have all kinds of cases that come to us. This one here was a site problem with some cars and a truck that loads and unloads and we got a little noise involved but the property is nice the problem that I see with it there was 29 inspections. That means the officer went out there 29 times, correct? Throughout the life of the case, yes, sir. Yeah. So we got a lot of problems trying to just get this done. ‸ But as far as the the the seriousness of the I can't see the having ‸ a fine like we that was suggested so I'm going to make a motion that we settled this for forty five hundred dollars and the reason I have the little bit extra was the extra amount for all
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:19:27–00:19:27 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
running around out there and all but I would like to see this case solved and and put aside because the house is real nice we got no problems and boy I can't see laying like the amount that was put on there before. We're not here to punish anybody. We want them to get the property back on the rolls, paying the taxes, looking good.
offices so we still have our offices to do the work I don't get paid that much to do this but I'll I would like to make that motion well before we go forward I'm
just gonna ‸ say this ‸ the thing is I understand what you're saying but we cannot downplay how the neighbors feel because they want a peaceful environment. Those people are paying their taxes also. So we can't downplay how the neighbors feel about the neighborhood because of this one house
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:20:55–00:20:55 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said) · 00:21:03–00:21:09 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
was shining through their light while they're trying to sleep. That's irresponsible. Whether it's the tenant or the owner, it doesn't matter. Someone has to be held accountable for something. Now, does it have to be that high amount? Probably not. But does it have to be that lower amount? Neither. Because we still have to take in consider. ‸ It is a beautiful property. There's no denying that. But still you have 29 days that these neighbors were not okay. They had to constantly see this stuff they had to constantly hear it and those two neighbors are the ones we heard about because
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:22:03–00:22:11 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:22:45–00:22:45 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
okay thank you um first of all I want to say that this neighbor that you're talking about um my neighbors are Cuban this is the same neighbor that keeps telling them to go back to Cuba and do all this stuff so don't I don't want you to get the impression that the neighbor across the street that's harassing my renter is this you know wonderful little neighbor that um you know that um isn't rude as well. itIt is a conflict. I've tried to get him to just mediate and you know just be nice uh so she's called the police on him several times the police have been out there they find nothing wrong so I feel that she's the one that harasses my renter and he feels the same so with that being said I don't think we we could argue whose fault this neighbor is, um number one. Number two,
out which incidentally I had no notices no notices whatsoever I when I found out about this I started complying immediately I didn't sit there and let days go by the Vince gave me his cell phone I called him many times I said could you please come out and see I asked for those inspections many of them and he said oh no you need to paint the eaves that's all he said I had the eaves painted
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:24:30–00:24:30 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:24:34–00:24:34 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:24:36–00:24:39 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
about visit number five and I called east coast fence east coast fence come out there and said, you don't need a new fence. There's nothing wrong with your fence. We don't know what they're talking about
That's not what's in question here is whether your house is nice or not. and from what I understand from the last testimony it's not only the front neighbor but a corner neighbor Are they racist as well? Because per your testimony last time, you said that your client was denied a business license because he was Cuban this has nothing to do with race
no I don't believe I said that but anyway we were denied a business license because he said he wasn't running a business out of the out of the house. That was the whole premise of the of the lien reduct or the lien the
or staff sit there and say that this guy in the neighborhood is a watchdog quote unquote for them. And he tells everybody what and he tells thethe police department what's going on in the neighborhood period
about this watchdog and the neighbor across the street that has had confrontations I guess you know there with with my renter I would like to see the pictures of what they're claiming
on reducing a fine, which is totally within the board's discretion. Things like how long it took to bring into compliance, the cooperativeness of of the owner, the seriousness of the violation. Sometimes you all will consider the value of the house. Those are the things at this stage that are important.
don't want the board to get distracted by re-hearing the violations. It's really the point of, do you want to reduce it? And if so, under the criteria, how much do you want to reduce it or recommend reducing? The
to clarify the case closed comment that was also mentioned last month in testimony there was a duplicate case we created when this lien was running. Because that was created, that officer was advised to close that case. That case, this case particularly continued to run until compliance was achieved. Okay. And to clear the record on the visits, the 29 visits occurred from the beginning of the case up to the completion of the lien reduction. So if somebody applies for a lien reduction and they haven't met and the property is not in full compliance, that will often expect it again. We also inspect the case or the property anywhere from every 30 to 45 days once they're running liens on a property to verify whether compliance has been achieved and we just weren't told of it or if it continues to run. so ‸ that's the purpose for the 29 visits as well
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:29:09–00:29:13 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:29:13–00:29:19 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:29:36–00:29:38 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
think that's not quite true that you're re-hearing the entire case it was there was an incorrect amount of the total fine that had been presented. It didn't really change anything other than the amount that they were told the fine was.
mean the case has already been heard so that's why there's a running lean this is thelean reduction request. So at this point they're potentially hearing the facts of the case it's already occurred and at some point here they'll agree to a reduction amount. If that helps clarify that.
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:30:41–00:30:42 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:31:01–00:31:02 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:31:08–00:31:12 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:31:25–00:31:30 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
I'm submitting a packet of documents and photos associated with this case the photos accurately depict the property during my visits and show my findings of accumulation of
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:32:21–00:32:28 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
including cans, pallets boxes green waste and miscellaneous trash exterior general condition section 6-1003 A through P for the disrepair of the roof. In addition to the roofing and disrepair,
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:32:59–00:33:00 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:33:06–00:33:07 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
I found the property in violation of the above mentioned sections of the city code. I have attempted to gain voluntary compliance in this case, but as ‸ my last inspection this morning on February 15, 2024, the property remains in violation. I have been working
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:33:30–00:33:34 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
had contact with the property owner after several attempts. I brought this case for the code enforcement boards. i've been working this case for 367 days and the violations have not been fully resolved. I set the notice of hearing on February
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:33:46–00:33:47 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
2024, and it was sent certified and posted on the property in violation. Due to longevity of this case and no progress made, staff finds in case 23-186 that the owner is in violation and
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:33:59–00:33:59 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:34:00–00:34:00 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
compliance, or a fine of 25 for the accumulation of trash and litter, 50 for exterior general condition, 25 for business rental business tax receipt, and 25 for storing outdoors be imposed for each day. The violations remain until compliance is achieved.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the machine readings disagree here; a language review questioned the wording · 00:34:17–00:34:38 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:34:50–00:34:57 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:35:44–00:35:51 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:35:51–00:35:55 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:36:08–00:36:08 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:36:26–00:36:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:36:42]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified)
for the record my name is Michael Mack and this is a
[00:36:50]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:05]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:36:50–00:36:54 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:36:54]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified)
number is 17-761
[00:36:57]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:07]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:36:57–00:37:04 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:37:04]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified)
at which time the board found the owner motorworks LLC in violation of the following accumulation
[00:37:11]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:05]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:37:11–00:37:17 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:37:17]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified)
storage of
[00:37:17]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:09]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:37:17–00:37:26 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:37:26]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified)
Enforcement Board provided the owner sufficient time to correct said violation. Therefore, consistent with the Code Enforcement Board's order and non-compliance
[00:37:34]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:09]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:37:34–00:37:43 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:37:43]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:10]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:37:43–00:37:53 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:37:53]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified)
show on-site
[00:37:54]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:07]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:37:54–00:38:00 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:38:00]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified)
case was
[00:38:00]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:04]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:38:00–00:38:05 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:38:05]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified)
the current owner motorworks LLC is requesting that the lien be reduced to cost of staff. Staff utilize the following factors in making its recommendation to reduce the lien. Whether the current owner owned the property at the time the
[00:38:23]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Machine re-recognized
violations
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:38:23–00:38:24 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
[00:38:24]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified)
occurred, ‸ yes. Applicant resides at the property, no. This is a commercial building.
[00:38:31]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:08]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:38:31–00:38:39 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:38:39]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified)
15.
[00:38:40]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:08]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:38:40–00:38:48 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:38:48]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified)
no outstanding liens on the property, no water liens.
[00:38:51]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:02]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:38:51–00:38:53 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:38:53]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified)
the property was inspected this morning February 15th 2024 and was in compliance before the code board hearing
[00:39:04]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:13]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:39:04–00:39:17 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:39:17]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified)
as a general commercial building
[00:39:24]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:39:24–00:39:26 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:39:25]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]
[00:39:27]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified)
4085.42
[00:39:28]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:10]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:39:28–00:39:38 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:39:38]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified)
the cost of staff to prosecute this case This reduction is based on the gravity of the violations, the length of time it took the property to come into compliance, and the total amount of the city's cost. And the...
and You can come up. uh for Mr. Chair, um just to clarify on the storing of uh recreational vehicles violation, it wasn't necessarily the storing. It was the housekeeping nature of that RV. uh The tenant at the time was living out of the trailer. um So that was the reasoning for that violation. at the time
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:40:15–00:40:32 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:40:35]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:06]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:40:35–00:40:41 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:40:52–00:40:53 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:40:54–00:40:58 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
costs um I'm half owner of the building and I was unaware of uh any violations on the property uh I didn't find out for over five years after it was cited um the uh notices apparently went to the um address on the appraisers site and not the Sunbiz registered agent which I am
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:41:29–00:41:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
the registered agent and I never did get any notices but they told me that they had gone to the property where the tenant was taking the notices ‸ keeping them and it's a unique situationand
um uh the tenant also happens to be the other half owner of the building I had to sell my half of the building or the i'm excuse me the business but I still kept half ownership of the building um and it was a unique situation that I worked out a buyout agreement where he got to lease the building as a tenant and then I am the main manager, though, of the of the building. And coincidentally, I've been fighting for eight years to get dissolution of the company that owns the building to have the property sold. And I've been battling him in courts for eight years. So I finally got it about three years ago. Approximately three years ago, it was ordered to be sold. And I've had a lot of contempt hearings and different things where he has interfered with the sale. I finally have the building under contract, uh finally, and it's supposed to close next week. So on Friday. So and I have a very good uh kayak uh business, uh kayak uh retail shop is coming in there, who um coincidentally has helped me uh to pay for some of these repairs. He's a really nice guy and wants to come in and do well for the city and keep the property nice and has helped me uh to pay for some of these things. As soon as I found out and got the notice,
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:43:02–00:43:06 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:43:07–00:43:08 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:43:08–00:43:09 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
was when I'm fighting to get this thing sold, right? And i have I have put everything that I own into this building, right? I have hundreds of thousands of dollars in renovations I had spent in this building. I have all my retirement. I'm a single mom of two little boys. I get no child support. I have everything
for us to live on and retire in this building and been trying to get it sold for eight years. I have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars in lawyers' fees to get this far. And the eviction part, I got a lawyer right away and I have spent probably over $40,000 just on this eviction to get him evicted. I had given
Flag: the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 00:43:24–00:43:45 · gap filled by a machine re-reading (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:43:45–00:43:47 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
the property and get it into compliance with a settlement agreement. He failed inspection. He violated the settlement agreement. I was able to get him legally evicted out. And with that, he took a lot of his violations with him because he was legally living there, which I didn't know, as well as some of the other violations he had created on the property. So many of them went with him. And the ones that he didn't take with them, I've been trying feverishly to get done. But money was very tight for me. I don't have enough. And thank goodness this buyer has helped work out some things and has helped me put it into compliance. So we made it. So I'm ‸ begging you guys to please consider a reduction because it's a lot of equity for me that I
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:44:32–00:44:32 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:44:42–00:44:43 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:44:44–00:44:51 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 00:45:04–00:45:14 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:45:29–00:45:29 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording; numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:45:34–00:45:54 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:46:13]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified)
This is a lien
[00:46:14]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:04]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:46:14–00:46:18 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:46:19]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified)
The case number is 21-250. The code enforcement board
[00:46:25]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Machine re-recognized
held
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:46:25–00:46:25 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
[00:46:25]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified)
a public hearing on September 16, 2021. At the time which the board found the owner, Rufus R. Murphy Jr. and Janine L. Murphy in violation of the following.
[00:46:42]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:18]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:46:42–00:47:00 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:47:00]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified)
code enforcement board provided the owner with sufficient time to correct said violation. Therefore, consistent with the code board's order, a non-compliance
[00:47:07]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:04]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:47:07–00:47:11 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:47:11]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:08]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:47:11–00:47:19 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:47:19]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified)
on 12-26-2023. Code records show on-site
[00:47:24]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:04]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:47:24–00:47:28 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:47:28]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:05]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:47:28–00:47:33 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:47:34]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified)
The current owner, Rufus R. Murphy Jr. and Janine L. Murphy, is requesting that
[00:47:41]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:03]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:47:41–00:47:44 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:47:46]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified)
Staff utilized the following factors in making
[00:47:48]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Machine re-recognized
his
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:47:48–00:47:48 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
[00:47:48]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified)
recommendation to reduce the lien. Whether the current owner owned the property at the time the violations occurred, yes. Applicant resides at the property, yes. The number of violations related to the subject lien, three. Number of inspections performed, 21. Property ‸ taxes, taxes are paid through 2023. Other liens, records show no outstanding liens on the property, no water liens. Property inspection, the property
[00:48:16]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:03]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:48:16–00:48:19 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:48:19]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified)
It was in compliance before the code board hearing. An inspection would also occur prior to the council meeting.
[00:48:25]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:06]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:48:25–00:48:32 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:48:33]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:05]
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said); the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 00:48:33–00:48:38 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:48:38]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified)
Staff submits their cost sheet and the total amount be $2,654.77. Staff recommendation is that the fine and lien be reduced to $2,654.77, which is the cost of the staff to prosecute this case. This reduction is based on the gravity of the violations, the length of the time it took the property to come into compliance, and the total amount of the city's cost. And the owner, Mr. Murphy is here, sir.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:49:15–00:49:21 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:49:15]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:49:26–00:49:28 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:49:27]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio
[00:49:29]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:06]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:49:29–00:49:34 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:49:37–00:49:39 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
I just have a quick question, Officer Mack. Just out of curiosity, so the two sheds, I guess there was two sheds prior. Were those just taken out and then just that one shed replaced it or?
[00:49:53]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
I believe if ‸ my regulation, they was just replaced by the permit and I think if I'm correct, he can correct me if I'm wrong here, that Lowe's came in and put it in through their whole ‸ system. He replaced the whole thing. Yeah, the whole shed ‸ and the gates, the accessory structures. Thank you. Let's get Mr.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:50:21–00:50:22 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:50:24–00:50:32 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Thank you. I'm here today to try to get this resolved, to explain the extenuating circumstances around how this came to be and how it's been resolved. I've been a contractor for many years. The last since February 2015, I was in the Middle East working at nuclear plants in the Middle East.
I did not know there was a running lean. I did not ‸ know that there was any lean at all on the property. My wife was in late stage multiple sclerosis and she provided me no information as far as the condition. Since then, unfortunately, she has passed away and everything that was cited has been recovered and more. The 2 little sheds that were out there were demolished and
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:51:43–00:51:49 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
the sheds that were on the site. So that's all gone. All the weeds, both sides have been removed. The whole time I was in Abu Dhabi almost, it was COVID. COVID has taken a lot from me over the last few years. I had COVID twice when I was over there and was not able to come back to the United States. They would not allow me back in the States because of the COVID pandemic. My wife came over to visit me twice between 2015 and 2017.
But $57,000, I'm retired now. I don't have that kind of income. There's no way I can repay that. And since I've been home since 2022, I have made this into a stellar piece of ‸ property. No weeds, the grass is growing great.
decrepit barns or sheds or whatever they were called. But those things were things that I fixed just because I felt they needed to be fixed. They needed to be rectified. I had no idea about the lien. The lien didn't matter. To me, it was, this is my home. Being a retired military officer, personally, I could not allow that to continue. So since I've been home in 2022, I have completely gone through the entire yard, the entire house and fixed it.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:54:09–00:54:10 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Well, hold on. Check this out. Hate to say it like that, but it's, it's bothering me right now. All right. There's no way we're going to come up with a figure of half of this when we just let a business go off with what we just let them go off with. So I'm going to tell you just like this. We will
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:54:33–00:54:36 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:54:51–00:54:57 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
you will not because that is just unfair because we're, we are not setting a good precedent if we tried to do something like that because that's, we're being totally unfair to the resident.
the violations even before the officers could confirm it. So if, if that's the testimony and it's unrebutted testimony, then that fine total fine should actually be a lot less.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:55:57–00:55:59 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Uh, I had my daughter who was part time carekeeper for her who also worked full time. Uh, I actually hired a guy to come over and fix, uh, some of those things. Subsequently, I found out he went to jail. Nobody let me know that until I was back in the United States. So it's, I could have fixed these things very quickly if I had knowledge.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:56:47–00:56:48 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Never rented it out. It's my personal. Um, ‸ and it was shocking and embarrassed to see what condition it had gone into. ‸ But I did not know there was a lien. I did not get the letter. The first letter I received was in December of 2023. Uh, not saying that the letters didn't go out, not saying that my wife didn't get them or someone in transient got the letters.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:57:27–00:57:30 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:57:32–00:57:33 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:58:14–00:58:17 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
totally understand. I just want to make sure that there's a plan in case you go on a long vacation that you're going to have somebody come take care of your lawn so that the neighbors don't complain again about it. Yeah, that's it.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:58:54–00:58:56 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
And, uh, he has agreed to take on that responsibility. Until I, until I leave. And I make no bones. I plan to move back to Virginia in the next year. Because my house too big.
pool and five lots. I don't want to take care of that. So rather than take care of something that I know is going to be difficult, I would rather someone younger, someone, whatever, young,
Thank you. And then the other question, ‸ just want to ask the officers, if I get another one. Uh, the, how did you guys come about this issue? Was it a neighbor complaint or just drive by?
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:59:48–00:59:50 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Mr. Brown. I wanted to address what you said. You said that businesses should not get a break like residents. Well, I want to tell you something now. This is what I got to tell you. I own almost the whole block on 520
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:00:18–01:00:18 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
81 years old. I do all the work myself. I can't hire anybody because they won't do the work like I want it. Should I get penalized as a business or living there? If I happen to have a violation, it's not right. It's not right.
With all due to respect, we just heard a situation. He was gone. His wife was very sick. Do you expect her to get out the wheelchair and start working on this stuff? We have
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:01:10–01:01:10 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Well, I'm going to make a motion for this gentleman, but I just want to state what I've got. And every case is different. Every case is different. You don't rubber stamp everything. I don't just rubber stamp because the city wants to do this or that. I will make motions
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:01:38–01:01:38 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:01:51–01:02:01 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:02:02–01:02:05 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:02:13–01:02:22 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:02:27–01:02:37 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:03:18–01:03:49 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:03:49–01:03:54 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Thanks. ‸ Okay. As I said before, this property is amazing. Per his testimony, he fixed it before he even knew anything happened. First of all, my condolences to you. Also, thank you for your service. um I recommend that the amount be 1500. The lien be reduced 1500. My apologies. I
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said) · 01:04:50–01:04:54 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:04:57–01:05:02 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:05:13]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified)
CE
[01:05:16]Speaker 12 (introduced as “Michael Mack” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:02]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:05:16–01:05:18 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
ma'am. I was going to address that later. Yes, ma'am. I was going to address that because I missed my opening, but I still had it on myon my agenda for, yes, ma'am. So we're going to discuss that at the end so we're going to ensure we get to that. So we're going to take care of that, I promise you. All right.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:06:01–01:06:09 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:06:12–01:06:16 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:06:16–01:06:18 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:06:18–01:06:22 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
plan approval required, Appendix A, Article 13, Section 1B. ‸ Code Enforcement Board provided the owner sufficient time to correct said violation. Therefore, consistent with the Code Enforcement Board's order, a non-compliance hearing was held on September 15, 2022.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:06:52–01:07:02 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:07:02–01:07:06 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
in making its recommendation to reduce the lien. Whether the current owner owned the property at the time the violations occurred, yes. If the applicant resides to the property, no, this is a vacant residential land. The number of violations related to the subject lien, one. Number of inspections performed, 21. The property taxes are paid through 2023. Other liens, records show no outstanding liens on the property and no water liens. This is a vacant land. Property inspection. The property
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:07:38–01:07:42 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
compliance before the Code Enforcement Board hearing. And ‸ inspection will also will also occur prior to the Council meeting. The current market value of the subject property, the current market value is 66 000
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:07:54–01:07:57 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
staff's recommendation is that the fine lien be reduced to 3033.26 which is the cost of staff to prosecute this case. This reduction is based on the gravity of the violations, the length of time it took the property to come into compliance, and the total amount of city's costs. The property owner is here, sir.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:08:32–01:08:46 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:08:49–01:08:54 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
so I know virtually nothing except where it is, and my husband is in the hospital, so I'm here in his place. At the time that you all had the first hearing and about this, we were actually out of the country, and we did contact, my husband contacted somebody and told them we weren't able to be at the hearing. And after that, we've we corrected the problem with much difficulty. it's it's a The grade of the lot is very steep, and a lot of the contractors wouldn't even touch it. So we we finally did get it um cleared and graded by ABC,
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:09:41–01:09:43 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:09:43–01:09:45 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
watered it for us because we had no way of watering it. He used reclaimed water. What a guy. Truly, truly what a guy. So um it looks great now, and hopefully
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:09:57–01:09:57 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:10:11–01:10:16 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
that You all had asked for a permit, an application for a permit, and my husband went to three different departments, and nobody knew what to do with it. And so so that's why it is dragged on for so long. And then finally, I think you just said, just do it, just fix it. And then
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:11:07–01:11:13 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Yeah, it started with the neighbor to the north and south of us were fighting, andand they used our property to make some um improvements on the north lot. ‸ And that's what caused the erosion. there At one time, there was all kinds of vegetation on there, that so there was no erosion. And when that fence was put up, it you all can see that's when the erosion started. And and it was significant. We're not claiming it wasn't.
Thethe property, had what led to the erosion was a contractor who was allowed permission to be on there, began doing land clearing. um He didn't do it correctly. He wasn't permitted. um
He removed a lot of natural plants that were helping retain that corrosion area. As he removed it, cleared the land, dropped pebbles, it created a large amount of erosion on the property. uh So essentially,
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:12:19–01:12:23 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:12:31–01:12:32 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:13:06–01:13:13 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:13:37–01:13:49 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
staff update. uh So staff just wanted to provide a ‸ staff update to the board. uh Dennis is no longer with the city. uh He resigned, effective February 7th. um He's taken a position with another municipality. uh So uh we'd like to also thank uh take this opportunity to thank him for his service and dedication
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:14:13–01:14:13 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:14:15–01:14:17 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
and everything related to code. and was a huge asset to not only the police department, but also the city and citizens. um So we're grateful for his contributions. um
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:14:44–01:14:47 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
um as a board, we have to stay as a board. They have their board, their council. We have our board. So that stays with us. And that is a big no, no. So we have to ensure that we are up on that and understand those things because we don't want those problems. We've been, no, I'm the only person that's, um been tried to be sued anyway.
So just to be sure anything we discuss here could not be shared with another member of the city council board. Is that what you're saying? In reference to the
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:16:02–01:16:03 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:16:04–01:16:04 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
So you wouldn't want a judge going around talking to other judges about, um hey, what do you think of this guy? So if you see yourself as a judge, you have to have, um make sure that the cases that you have before you don't get talked about afterwards because they will probably possibly come back to you and you don't want to have a predisposed notion about what's going on in a case.
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:16:59–01:16:59 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
They're going to look at our recommendation. They're going ‸ to either be happy with it or not. I mean, but they have, they have to do the same thing we did and say, okay, I think the code board did a good job and say, okay, we'll go with that because they don't have to. They'll say, hey, no, no, there's no
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:17:57–01:17:59 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Well, if we have nothing else, um and it's on the record that the code enforcement officer said they're going to have some donuts afterwards. So I'm just saying.
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said) · 01:18:30–01:18:40 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said) · 01:18:52–01:18:57 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
We have a lot of new members here and I'm sure they don't know all the violations and I sure as heck don't know all of them. But with the experience that I've had on the board, I learned how to go with the meeting and all.
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:19:22–01:19:23 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
We've had many people come, sit through a whole meeting and hope that to say something. Now, I know they can't say certain things about certain cases, but they'd have to be, uh you write out a card, just like delegations.
would know exactly what they're going to bring up. And that would give, because there's no way our people can talk to this board here, our city people, you know, uh residents and all.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:20:18–01:20:23 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:20:29–01:20:31 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
or catch these guys, I don't think they answer all the questions. So, I mean, um essentially, um when you get on the board, when you get on a board, you're going to research and see what ‸ board is all about. Because
So you're going to, you uh you want to be on the code board. or Darla is the coordinator. So I would think they're going to call Darla as far as a new member, um and have those discussions because, uh when I first got on,
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said) · 01:21:03–01:21:08 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
It's not designed for public comment and it's not appropriate for public comment. But what would be appropriate is to have a presentation by me or, or someone in our office to come and do a workshop because we have so many new members to go through. This is, this is what the code enforcement process is like. This is what the sunshine rules say about what you can and can't do. This is what, as you're sitting up there, you have to listen to all the evidence presented. You can't rely on anything you've heard outside of the of this room. um There's lots of things we could do in kind of a training workshop um that I would recommend.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:22:41–01:22:47 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:23:10–01:23:16 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:23:44–01:23:46 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:23:55–01:23:57 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:23:59–01:24:00 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording