02-02-1984 Regular Meeting•
aiami Jhores9IlIage
F L OR ID A
CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD MEETING
FEBRUARY 2, 1984
regular meeting of the Miami Shores Village Code
Enforcepent Board w s held on February 2, 1984, 7:30 p.m., at the
Village Mall with the following Board members present:
Julie A. S, Williamson, Chairman
Donald L. Bednar
Kenneth Cutchens
Franklin E, Grau
Santos F, Rivero
Barry K, Asmus - Tardy
Arthur H, Taylor
Also present: L, R, Forney, Village Manager
Frank LuBien, Code Enforcement Director
1. MINUTES:
Ws, Williamson, Chairman announced, at the request of
Mr, LuBien, Director of Code Enforcement, the hearing
of the minutes will be deferred for later in the meeting.
The Board then proceeded with item 1 A of the agenda.
1A, REVIEW OF CASE NO 83-811-042
AUDLEY CLABKSON, `9438 N, 'W, 2n,d Court
Mr, LuBien re -stated this case for the Board, Mr. Clarkson
was in violation for the construction of an unlawful
accessory building in the side set back, There were sub-
sequent hearings at which Mr, Clarkson had an attorney
present to represent him, Mr, Clarkson has since obtained
a permit for the demolition of the structure. It has been
demolished and replaced with a similar structure in a law-
ful, location on the property,
Mr. LuBien further stated that the amount of fine outstand-
ing on 11/23/83 (at the time the permit was issued) was
$2,620,00, On 1/23/84 (date the structure was removed) the
accumulated fine was $3,820,00.
A request was made that this case be reviewed before the
Board and Mr, Forney, Village Manager will speak for
Mr, Clarkson.
•
•
CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD MEETING - 2 - 2/2/84
Mr. Forney stated that he is aware of and concurres with
the sentiment of this Board, as expressed at the previous
meeting; that it is necessary that these f{npS not be
waived lightly. However, this particular case is an ex-
ception to that point of view, Mr, Clarkson had been
victimized by an unscrupulous contractor, who was aware of
the rules and regulations, but who did his work, took his
money and disappeared. The case was further complicated
by Mr. Clarksonls inadequate legal council. Following
communication between the Village and Mr. Clarkson, he made
every effort, and in fact did comply with the code. The
unfortunate experience has cost him a considerable sum of
money and in view of these facts, Mr. Forney recommended
the fine be suspended.
Mr. Bednar stated, though he was a principal advocate
against waiving of fines, it would be prudent in this
unusual case to recommend the fine be waived.
Much discussion followed with regard to assessment of fines.
Mr. Rivero moved, in view of the fact, the Board has no fee
schedule on the exact cost of hearing, that 100% of the
accrued fine be waived, in this particular case, and that
Mr. Clarkson be held in compliance, seconded by Mr. Bednar.
Following further lengthy discussion Mr. Bednar refused to
accept an amendment by Mr. Grau that the fine be reduced to
$50.00. Mr. Bednar felt that Mr. Clarkson has spent an
exorbitant amount of money and effort to correct this situa-
tion and the expenses are punitive enough.
Vote on Mr. Rivero's original motion was as follows:
Mr. Cutchens No
Mr. Taylor Abstained
Mrs. Williamson Yes
Mr. Bednar Yes
Mr. Grau No
Mr. Rivero Yes.
The motion failed.
Mr. Cutchens moved the fine levied be reduced to $50.00,
seconded by Mr. Grau,:liesults of this vote follows:
Mr. Cutchens Yes
Mr. Taylor Abstained
Mrs. Williamson No
Mr, Bednar No
Mr, Grau Yes
Mr, Rivero No
The motion failed,
CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD MEETING
- 3 - 2/2/84
Mk, Bednar made a motion to access a $10.00 fine, seconded
by Mk. Rivero.
The vote follows:
Ir. Cutchens No
Mr. Taylor Abstained
Mrs. Williamson Yes
Mr. Bednar Yes
Mr. Grau Abstained
Mr. Rivero Yes
Mr. Taylor abstained because he is not fully knowledgeable
of the case.
Mr. Grau abstained because he feels the motion ridiculous.
The motion failed
(Mr. Asmus arrived at this point).
Following further discussion, Mr. Rivero moved the fine be
waived, seconded by Mr. Bednar, the motion carried with the
following vote:
Mr. Cutchens No
Mr. Taylor Abstained
Mr. Asmus Abstained
Mrs. Williamson Yes
Mr. Bednar Yes
Mr. Grau Yes
Mr. Rivero Yes
Mr. Asmus abstained for lack of full knowledge of the case.
Mrs. Williamson thanked Mr. Clarkson for his cooperation and
efforts to rectify his problem,and advised him to pass the
word of caution to anyone who might find himself in such a
situation.
2. AFFIDAVIT OF VIOLATION, CASE NO. 84-1812-069
MICHELE SCHRAM, 1065 N. E. 97 Street
INOPERATIVE VEHICLE AND BROKEN WINDOWS
Director of Code Enforcement, Mr. LuBien stated the facts of
violation and passed photographs of.the.broken windows and
inoperative vehicle for review. The violation continues as
of this date, 2/2/84.
Mr. LuBien stated that Mrs. Schram advised him that,Mr. Gados
died and this property is in the probating process. For the
purpose of clarification of identity, Mrs. Gados and Michele
Schram are the same person. It is believed that she re-
married following Mr. Gados death about a year ago, as a
gentleman there was introduced as her husband. The tax rolls
show the property listed:in.:the name of Mr. Gados.
CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD MEETING - 4 - 2/2/84
2. Continued
Following discussion, Mrs. Willaimson moved to proceed to
the next step with the request that, by the next meeting
the Board be advised as to the identity of who the Board
is dealing with, seconded by Mr. Rivero, and carried
unanimously.
3. AFFIDAVIT OF VIOLATION, CASE NO. 84-1787-070
EDWARD N. ARECO, 9326 N. W. 2 Avenue
MILDEW AND PEELING PAINT
The facts of this case were outlined and photographs were
reviewed. Mr. LuBien noted Mr. Areco has not complied wth
the ordinance, nor has he responded to the Notice of
Violation.
Mr. Grau moved to proceed to the next step, seconded by
Mr. Asmus and carried unanimously.
4. AFFIDAVIT OF VIOLATION, CASE NO. 84-1839-071
NANCY C. BLAKE, 164 N. E. 100 Street
MILDEW AND SCALING PAINT
Facts behind the violation and current photographs of the
property were outlined by Code Enforcement Director,
Mr. Grau moved to proceed to the next step, seconded by
Mr. Rivero and carried unanimously.
5. REPORTS OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS:
A. CASE NO. 83-410-064
EDWARD A. SWING, 1323 N. E, 104 Street
VARIOUS VIOLATIONS
Code Enforcement Director, Mr. Lubien read the report
on this case and advised the Board that today inspection
revealed only 2 motors, which is acceptable, An affidavit
of compliance has been issued to Mr. Swing. It was further
noted that Mr. Swing had been accumulating a fine of $20.00
per day for 61 days for a total of $1,220.00.
Mr, Swing related to the
a 30 day extension was granted,
comply, Mr. Swing stated he is
the imposed fine and pleaded to
Board since his request for
he has worked endlessly to
financially unable to pay
have this fine suspended,
Mr. Asmus requested reference on the date of original
affidavit of violation, which was 7/1/81, He admonished
Mr, Swing for attempted compliance and continued intermittent
backsliding.
Mr. Cutchens moved to handle this case in the same
manner as the previous case, (Mr. Clarkson), seconded by
Mr, Taylor, for discussion.
•
•
CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD MEETING - 5 - 2/2/84
5. A - Continued
B,
It is the general consensus of the Board that each case
should be heard and determined on its individual merits,
with a need for consistancy in judgement, The feasibi-
lity of placing lien on properties in continued violation
was discussed. Mr. Forney advised the Board that accord-
ing to stature a lien may be filed against a property for
a period of one year before it comes before the Village
Attorney for a final decision.
Mr. Bednar made a motion to reduce the fine for Mr, Swing
to $50.00, seconded by Mr, Taylor.
Discussion followed concerning future violations by
Mr. Swing, He was reprimanded and well advised, by all
Board members, that any future violations, will be dealt
with in a much harsher manner and stronger fine.
Mr. Asmus offered an amendment to reduce the fine to
$220.00. Mr. Bednar refused any amendment to the motion
on the basis that this is an on-going problem of Compli-
ance and non-compliance since 1981. Mr. Bednar/s
original motion carried with the following vote:
Mr. Ctuchens Yes
Mr. Taylor Yes
Mr. Asmus No
Mrs, Williamson Yes
Mr. Bednar Yes
Mr. Grau No
Mr. Rivero Yes
Mr, Swing was advised to come into the office the next day,
(2/3/84) to pay this fine of $50.00,
CASE NO. 83-1748-067
MERNA MATHEWS, 150 N. W. 109 Street
VARIOUS VIOLATIONS
Mr. LuBien reported since the last meeting, at which time he
reported that a small portion of the roof was incomplete, the
work is now complete and Merna Mathews is in compliance,
C. CASE NO, 83-1709-066
JUNE BECKLEY, 1331 N, E. 103 Street
OVERGROWN HEDGE
Director of Code Enforcement reported that June Beckley is now
in compliance and a letter stating this fact has been sent to
her.
CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD MEETING - 6 2/2/84
D.
CASE NO, 83-1775-068
NELSON B.. ALDERMAN STUNT, 1032 :N, : ' 98 Street
VARIOUS VIOLATIONS
Mr, LuBien stated that Mr. Alderman Hunt has not complied
with the ordinance, Certified mail has been returned un-
claimed, also a copy was sent by regular mail which was
not returned, Mr. LuBien is prepared to issue Affidavit
of Non -Compliance and file a lien in the amount of the
fine against said property,
E. CASE NO. 83-1444-063
FELIX ATILES-FIGUERQA, 262 N. E, 103 Street
VARIOUS VIOLATIONS
Report was given by Mr, LuBien, that a final inspection
of this property was made at the request of the Board,
It was found that one item had not been complied with as
of 1/23/84. However, after a strong warning, and subse-
quent inspection by Code Enforcement Director,
Mr. Figueroa is now in compliance,
1. MINUTES:
Mr. LuBien advised the Board regarding a point of order,
on page 2, item 2, (recording of vote).
According to ordinance this is a non action vote. A yes
vote is required from four members -of the Board for action.
The ordinance stipulates that, "The findings shall be by a
motion approved by majority of those present and voting,
except that at least four members of the Board must vote
for the action to be official",
Mr. LuBien stated it does not, now, affect the particular
outcome of this case, The Board, in the future, should be
aware of the fact there should be no abstainence from voting.
Vote should be no or yes, In case of conflict of interest,
a vote may still be registered with the conflict of interest.,.
stated, A no vote is a requirement when the voter is not.
fully knowledgeable of the facts of.a case.
The members were further reminded, as Mr. Forney previously
stated, when a case has been continued for a period of one
year a recommendation must come from the Board to refer the
case to the Village Attorney for filing of lien for
forclosure.
6. The forgoing particular statement refers to the particular
case, not on the agenda,
PETER'J, HYDE, HEDGE VIOLATION.
Mr. LuBien stated he sent Mr, Hyde a Notice of Violation
and he did not comply. Other notices of lien were sent on
CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD MEETING 7 N 2/2/84
6. PETER J. HYDE - Continued
11/8/83 and again on 1/12/84, advising him of this lien
in the amount of $900.00, is one year old, Mr, LuBien
asked for recommendation from the Board to proceed with
forclosure on the lien, Mr, Forney stated that Mr, Hyde
is also $1,300.00 in the arrears on his garbage fee, and
he should see no compassionate reason not to take action.
Following discussion, Mr, Asmus moved the Village Manager
or Village. Attorney write Mr. Hyde a letter explaining
in no uncertain terms the consequence of what may transpire,
by the Boards action, and -give him an opportunity to be
heard at next month meeting, at a date certain and a time
certain (March 1, 1984, 7:30 p ,t,) , Motion was seconded
by Mr. Bednar and carried unanimously.
7. Mr. Grau requested research and a final analysis of process-
ing cost of hearings as soon as possible.
Mrs. Williamson, agreed with Mr. Forney's suggestion that a
lien be placed on the property for a one year period. She
further stated that the Board must be absolutely certain,
procedure is built in, whereby, no lien can be forclosed
before it comes before the Board, And even as a vote is
made the Board will be reminded that this is a case con-
sidered in such a manner; so that, should it be necessary
for the Board to deal with a number of these cases in the
future, it could not just slide through. Also, a
Board would have a sense of the current Board's feelings.
Mr. Forney agreed that, he will at the next meeting supply
The Code Enforcement Board with procedural cost for
hearings.
The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p,m.
•
•
ecretary