Code Enforcement Board Meeting

Meeting Minutes
February 13, 2025
A meeting of the Code Enforcement Board Workshop of the City of Cocoa was held on Thursday, 
February 13, 2025 in the Council Chambers at 65 Stone Street, Cocoa, as publicly noticed.
OPENING MATTERS:
Chairman Roberts called the meeting to order at 5:05 P.M. The Board Secretary called the roll.
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Lloyd Roberts                                Chairman 
George Brown Jr. Vice-Chairman
Sharri Scott Board Member 
Josue Otero Board Member
Dik Muller Board Member
MEMBERS ABSENT:
Michael Simpson Board Member -excused
Melissa Acosta Board Member - excused
Gloria Weatherspoon 1rst Alternate - excused
OTHERS PRESENT:
Tom Wilkinson Code Enforcement Manager
Micheal Mack Code Enforcement Officer
Justin Simpson Code Enforcement Officer
Jason Brimm Code 
Kristin Eick Board Attorney
Darla Crowl Recording Secretary 
        Evander Collier IV Police Chief
APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND MINUTES:
1.Approval of Meeting Workshop Agenda:  February  13, 2025
Motion by Ms. Scott , seconded by Mr. Otero, to approve to the workshop agenda of April 18, 2024.  Vote 
on the motion carried unanimously. 
ITEMS:
1.  Notices of Violation
Code enforcement case is initiated by code enforcement officer (remember, not members of the Board) 
by issuing a notice of violation (NOV).
“Code inspector shall notify the violator and give him or her a reasonable time to correct the violation.”  
Sec. 162.06(2), F.S.


Code Enforcement Board
Workshop Agenda
February 13, 2025
Page 2
a. Except: Reasonable time to correct not required for: 
i. Repeat violations 
ii. Violation presents a serious threat to the public health, safety, and welfare
iii. Violation is irreparable or irreversible in nature 
NOV must specifically notify the violator by citing the specific code section at issue and providing a 
description of the manner in which the violation can be corrected.  There may be multiple code 
violations cited in the NOV. 
Board can find a violation of all, some, or none of the cited violations.  That is the BOARD’s decision. 
Discussion amongst Board Attorney and staff.
2.   Notices of Violation - Multiple violations
New case: Violator/owner appealed from a final judgment of foreclosure of a municipal lien in favor of the 
City of Largo in the amount of $590,295.  Code Enforcement Board imposed $250 per day fine after 
finding multiple violations including:
Business Tax Receipt
IPMC Roods and Drainage
IPMC Exterior Structure; Handrails & Guardrails
IPMC Exterior Structure; Stairways, Decks, Porches & Balconies
IPMC Plumbing Systems
IPMC Heat Supply Required
IPMC Exterior Structure; Windows, Skylights & Door Frames
IPMC Exterior Structure; Protective Treatment
Building without permits
Inoperable vehicles
Argued at the time of foreclosure (6 years after the liens imposed) that it had remedied most or all of the 
violations and the City assessed the fines without breaking down what the specific violations were or 
dropping the fines for each matter corrected.
Midway through the case, filed counterclaims against the City and the CEB, including claim that the 
imposition of a single fine for multiple violations and failure to have a mechanism to reduce the $250 daily 
fine as the property owner corrects individual code violations amounted to a violation of the Due Process 
Clause of the Florida Constitution.
Court of Appeals ultimately found the Owner/violator waived its arguments by failing to timely appeal the 
CEB’s order.  
After this case, Board Attorney has recommended the Board impose a separate fine for each 
violation listed in the NOV for which sufficient evidence is presented by the code officer to 
demonstrate a violation. Board may also impose different dates for compliance for each violation 
listed in the NOV.
Discussion amongst Board Attorney and staff.
3.  Determining Fine Amounts
For each violation the Board will consider factors:
1) The gravity of the violation;
2) Any actions taken by the violator to correct the violation; and 
3) Any previous violations committed by the violator.
Max Fines: $250/day; $500/day repeat violation; $5,000 for irreparable, irreversible violation.
No Fine
Find violation but impose no fine where the violation was corrected after the reasonable time provided by 
the code inspector but before the Board hearing.
Recurring Violations
If a notice of violation is issued and the violation was corrected but recurs before the time to correct in the 
NOV, the case can be presented to the Board.


Code Enforcement Board
Workshop Agenda
February 13, 2025
Page 3
Serious Threat Violation
Pursuant to 162.06(4), F.S., if a violation presents a “serious threat to the public health, safety, and 
welfare or if the violation is irreparable or irreversible in nature,” the officer need only make a reasonable 
effort to contact violator and can immediately request a code hearing. If the code board makes a finding 
of serious threat, the City Council determines whether or not should do the repairs. 
Discussion amongst Board Attorney and staff.
4.  Massey Hearings
Purpose of a Massey hearing is to provide the Violator the opportunity to contest the imposition of the fine 
by asserting that they did in fact timely come into compliance as Ordered by the Board.  (Due Process)
Massey v. Charlotte County, 842 So.2d 142 (2
nd
 DCA 2003).  CEB violated property owner’s procedural 
due process rights when it summarily approved imposition of fines and lien based solely on an affidavit 
from the code inspector that the owner had not corrected the violation, without notice to the owner or 
providing an opportunity for the owner to be heard.  No avenue for owner to challenge statements of the 
code inspector.  Lack of process created serious risk of deprivation of property.
If the code inspector agrees that compliance is achieved in a timely manner, not brought back to the 
Board because no need to give owner chance to contest the officer’s testimony.
If the code inspector believes Owner/Violator does not bring the property into compliance (for some or all 
of the violations) by the date set forth in the order, the case comes back to the Board for a “Massey” 
hearing.  The code enforcement officer presents evidence the property has not come into compliance.
Previously listed on the CEB agendas as “Non-Compliance” Cases.  Will be labeled as “Massey 
Hearings” going forward.  It is not a “given” that every violation failed to come into compliance in a timely 
manner as previously ordered by the Board.
Discussion amongst Board Attorney and staff.
5.  Massey Hearings – Multiple Violations
May find that Owner failed to comply within the time specified by the Board in its Order for all, some, or 
none of the violations.  That is the BOARD’s decision.  Code inspector presents evidence that after the 
time provided for compliance in Board’s order, some or all of the violations remained in noncompliance.
For cases in which daily fine imposed per violation, the CEB must determine whether or not compliance 
was achieved for each violation listed. Owner must be given opportunity to challenge officer’s testimony 
regarding noncompliance for each violation. 
For multiple violations, the Code officers can announce at the beginning of the Massey case whether any 
of the violations found came into compliance within the time ordered by the Board.  Board does not need 
to make further findings on those.
Discussion amongst Board Attorney and staff.
6.  Examples
Staff will introduce Massey hearings as follows in the future (example):
On August 15, 2024, the Code Enforcement Board found the following violations: 
Accessory Structure, Sec 6-1001(g)
Accumulation of Trash and Litter – Sec 6-900(b)(1)
Storing Junk or Autos – Sec 6-902(b)
The Board ordered the Respondent to come into compliance by September 26, 2024. The Code 
Enforcement Officer believes the Respondent failed to come into compliance within the time period 
ordered for the violation of Sec 6-1001(g) Accessory Structure for the following reasons and that the fine 
should be imposed as provided in the Board’s Order. 


Code Enforcement Board
Workshop Agenda
February 13, 2025
Page 4
The Respondent timely complied with the Board’s Order for Violations of Sec 6-900(b)(1) and Sec 6-
902(b).
Staff Request/Recommendation at conclusion of Massey hearing presentation:
Staff is requesting that the Board find the property owner failed to comply with the Board’s prior Order for 
the following violations listed below and that the fine be imposed as set forth in that Order.
Sec 6-1001(g) Accessory Structure
Discussion amongst Board Attorney and staff.
7.  Quasi-Judicial Procedures
Quasi-judicial decisions have an impact on a limited number of individuals and are “contingent on facts 
adduced at a hearing and where the decision can be functionally viewed as policy application rather than 
policy setting.” Board of County Com’rs of Brevard County v. Snyder, 627 So.2d 469 (Fla. 1993).
3 Requirements for a Quasi-Judicial Hearing – (1) Afford procedural due process; (2) observe essential 
requirements of law; (3) decision must be based on competent and substantial evidence.
1. Procedural Due Process:
Due Process requires reasonable notice of the hearing and an opportunity to be heard on the matters 
(should inquire about whether proper notice has been given).  Florida statutes establishes required notice 
for code enforcement cases.
Parties must be able to present evidence, cross-examine witnesses (participants), and be informed of all 
facts presented to the quasi-judicial body (evidence presented in the record).
Impartial decision maker – approach in an unbiased and fair manner, without prejudgment of the issues 
(recusal). 
Ex parte communications – contacts made by an interested party to a proceeding with a decision maker 
outside the presence of the other parties – must be disclosed on the record at the beginning of the 
hearing.  Undermines the concept of an impartial, neutral decision maker.  TIP:  If approached by an 
interested party, ask them to come to the meeting and      provide comments there.  Let them know you 
should not be receiving information outside of the hearing.
Discussion amongst Board Attorney and staff.
8.  Ex-Parte Communications
The Board should avoid ex-parte communications concerning the cases.
The Board members may not knowingly initiate or consider ex-parte communications not disclosed on the 
record which concern the merits of quasi-judicial cases before the Board.
Direct non-city staff contacting Board members to discuss cases to the City Manager or Code 
Enforcement Manager.
If the Board receives or sends any ex-parte communications, the communications must be publicly 
disclosed.
Written communications should be disclosed by forwarding the communication to the Code Board Clerk. 
Verbal communications shall be disclosed by announcing to the Board prior to the commencement of a 
case hearing the name of the contact person, date of the communication, and substance of the 
communication.


Code Enforcement Board
Workshop Agenda
February 13, 2025
Page 5
The substance of ex-parte communications will be placed on the record when the application is heard.
Discussion amongst Board Attorney and staff.
9.  Don’t Forget 
1. Sunshine Law
2.Public Records
3.Code of Ethics
10.  Questions
Chairman Roberts had questions about what was and wasn’t on the Power Point.  He liked the way it was 
presented before with more pictures.  Chairman Roberts wants changes to the Power Point and the 
Agenda.
Chief Collier IV explained the he wanted things to move forward with the way Code Board is running 
(Power Point, Agenda). 
Chairman Roberts had questions about the Board Orders and the way they used to be done and the new 
way.  He didn’t understand before it was one fee on the old Board Orders and now the Board Orders 
there is a fine with each violation.  Kristen explained that if a violation comes into compliance that fine 
would stop for that violation so not to charge the one fee for all fees even if others had been corrected.  
More discussion between the Board Members and the Board Attorney.  
NEXT MEETING:
The next regular meeting of the Code Enforcement Board will be held on February 20, 2025 at 6:00 P.M.
ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business the meeting adjourned at 6:30 PM.
Approved on this ______ day of ___________________, 2025.
______________________________
Lloyd Roberts, Chairman
______________________________
Darla Crowl, Recording Secretary