Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09181996:.? CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD REGULAR MEETING SEP MBER 1996 Chairman Generazio called the meeting to order at 2:10 p.m. ROUX. PRESENT: Mr. Oliver Mr. Costa, Alternate Mr. Connelly Mr. May Chmn. Generazio Mr. Neglia Mr. Cosco EXCUSED: Mr. Goelz ALSO PRESENT: Ms. Valerie Settles, City Attorney Mr. Steven Lulich, Board Attorney Kenny Schmitt, Code Enforcement officer Randy Bonar, Code Enforcement officer Dorri Bosworth, Secretary ANNOUNCEMENTS: Mr. Costa would be voting in place of the absent regular member, Mr. Goelz. APPROVAL OF MINU~ES: Mr. Neglia made a motion to approve the minutes from last meeting of August 21, 1996. Mr. May seconded the motion. Roll call was taken. 7-0 motion carried. OLD BU~NESS: CASE #96-11527 - 1473 SEAHOUSE STREET - JAMES DOLLINS - REVIEW FOR APPEAL Mr. Dollins was present. Mr. Lulich reviewed that most appeals were made directly to the Circuit Court. In the past, however, the Board has reconsidered their Orders, or amended them, and reconsidered their fines. The state statutes or city ordinances had no references to the Board's ability or non-ability to reconsider their decisions. CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD REGULAR MEETIng, OF SEPTEMBER 18, 1,~9,6 RAGE TWO Ms. Settles stated the case was again before the Board because there was a discrepancy between the van described in the violation notice and the actual van in the photograph used as evidence. As she represented the City, she stated the they had no problems with the Board reviewing the case again. Chairman Generazio re-opened Case #96-11527. Mr. Lulich swore in all parties who were speaking including Mr. Dollins. Mr. Connelly, new member on the Board, questioned the Chairman if he needed to step down from the hearing because he was not present for the first hearing? Mr. Generazio stated no, since the case was going to be re-heard in its entirety with the proper evidence. Mr. Generazio then reviewed that at the first hearing Mr. Goelz had excused himself from the hearing due to a conflict of interest. Mr. Goelz was not present at today's meeting. Mr. Generazio asked the Board if any other member now needed to excuse themselves from the second hearing because of any additional knowledge of the case? None of the members stepped down. The previous approved Order was put on hold until after the re- hearing. Ms. Settles presented the case to the Board calling Kenny Schmitt, Code Enforcement Officer, to testify, and questioned him if he was familiar with Mr. Dollins' property? Mr. Schmitt stated yes, a complaint was received that there were empty drywall compound buckets lying around, junk, and an unregistered van on the side of the house. He went to the property on 6/10/96 and spoke with Mr. Dollins explaining why he was there and what violations could be seen from the street. He told Mr. Dollins the junk had to be cleaned up and then asked him if the vehicle was registered and insured. Mr. Dollins stated no. Exhibit "A" was presented to the Board which was the Notice of Violation hand-delivered to Mr. Dollins on 6/10/96 in reference to the unregistered vehicle. Exhibit "B" was a photograph of the van in question located on the side of the house. The exhibits were presented to the Board previously at the first hearing. Mr. Schmitt then explained he periodically passed Mr. Dollins' house and saw the van in the same location as depicted in the photograph. Exhibit "C" was the Summons served to Mr. Dollins' house on a Saturday by another Code Enforcement Officer, Randy Bonar, after Mr. Sckmitt could not find Mr. Dollins home during the weekdays. Mr. Costa questioned Mr. Schmitt who the complainant was? Mr. Schmitt stated he did not receive the phone call personally but that the complaint form listed Mr. A1 Goelz. CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD REGULAR MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 18, 1996 PAGE THREE Mr. Costa questioned if Mr. Goelz directly stated the van was unregistered? Mr. schmitt stated that there was a question if the van was registered or not and the complaint was written down as a "junk truck" on property. Mr. Costa asked Mr. Schmitt if he checked to see if the vehicle was registered or not thru the Department of Motor Vehicles? Mr. Schmitt stated no, he had asked Mr. Dollins personally. Mr. Costa also wanted to know why the photo showed a Chevy van and the Summons referred to a Ford. Mr. Schmitt stated he was not required to be versed in vehicle identification but the van in the picture was the one he cited for being in violation. Mr. Dollins stated when Mr. Schmitt came to see him on 6/10/96, he was told a complaint had been received regarding an unregistered van on his property -- before he even told Mr. Schmitt the van was unregistered. Mr. Schmitt stated that was correct. Mr. Dollins said the van had not been moved in three months until yesterday when he drove it off the property (it was operable, not junk) to be fixed. He questioned how anyone could have known that the van was not tagged parked as it was on the property. The tag was on the rear of the van and the van was backed up to the side of the house. It would have been impossible for any neighbors to the rear of the property to see that the vehicle was un-tagged because of the heavy vegetation around his property. Mr. Dollins questioned Mr. Schmitt who, Mr. Goelz or somebody else, verified that the van was not tagged? Mr. Schmitt stated he had no personal knowledge of how it was ascertained that the van was not registered. Randy Bonar was sworn in and testified that he did deliver the Summons on Saturday (7/29/96) after Mr. Schmitt had tried and the Police Department had made a couple of attempts. Mr. Dollins asked both Officers if he was belligerent to either one of them when they were at his residence? Mr. Schmitt and Mr. Bonar stated no. He apologized for not being at the last meeting as he had to work out of town. Mr. Dollins stated he had an idea of how the vehicle was determined to be unregistered. He said two times someone had trespassed on his property. He wasn't sure if the person was affiliated with the Board but, knew he was friends with Mr. Goelz, seen talking together at the end of the street. Mr. Generazio questioned if the Police were notified. Mr. Dollins stated he wasn't home but, his girlfriend was at the house and saw the person walk behind the house two different times. Mr. Generazio stated he did not think the Board should consider heresay evidence. Mr. Dollins said it was not heresay as he had two witnesses. He also said the trespasser must have thought Mr. Dollins was not home because his CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD REGULAR MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 18, 1996 PAGE FOUR car was not in the driveway. right. Going onto his property was not Mr. Dollins then explained he could not afford to pay the fines from the previous Order. He was surprised at the steepness of the fines. The vehicle in the picture was a Chevy van and not a Ford as indicated in the Order. He asked the Board to reconsider their Order. Mr. Generazio asked Mr. Dollins if he had told Mr. Schmitt the van was not registered? Mr. Dollins stated yes, after Mr. Schmitt said {at the time of the first visit}, "I was told this vehicle was not registered. Is it or is it not?" Mr. Generazio stated that was the violation that was before the Board, not any trespassing. If Mr. Dollins felt his rights were being violated from trespassers, a criminal act, he should take that matter up with the proper authorities. The City Attorney stated the City's recommendation was, since this was a new hearing, to find that the respondent was in violation and issue an Order so stating for the records, that there be no fine, and the previous Order be rescinded. Mr. May questioned how long the van was sitting on the property? Mr. Dollins stated since May. Mr. Neglia asked Mr. Dollins if anyone from the Code Enforcement Board got in touch with him, came to see him or call on the telephone? He stated no. Mr. Neglia then asked if anyone had told him he could appeal the original Order? Mr. Dollins stated he talked to several people about appealing and mentioned he spoke to the Board secretary, calling her on the telephone and speaking to her in the office. Mr. Cosco also questioned Mr. Dollins on why it took so long to have the van removed. Mr. Dollins stated he had to save enough money to have the van repaired. Mr. Lulich reviewed procedures and what options the Board had: 1. Let the existing Order stand. 2. Rescind the previous Order and make a new Order by motion. Mr. Costa questioned if shouldn't all the witnesses and all statements be heard first before any decisions were made. Mr. Lulich stated only evidence in regards to the violation should be heard by the Board. Mr. Costa was concerned the violation was brought about wrongfully and would like to find out who went on Mr. Dollins' property. He felt if a Board member or City official had acted illegally it should be brought out. CODE ENFORCEMENT BOAR~,, REGULAR.~.E~ING OF SEPTEMBER 18, 1996 PAGE FIVE Mr. Generazio stated the Board and Mr. Dollins were here for a hearing on the parking violation. If Mr. Dollins had a complaint on trespassing or on a Board member he should file a complaint in the proper place. Mr. Lulich stated Mr. Costa and other Board members assessment of the evidence and hearing would be voiced in their vote. Mr. Costa stated he wanted to hear all the witnesses. Mr. Dollins stated his witness was in regards to the trespassing which was not the violation being heard before the Board. But he felt the violation was brought up incorrectly by trespassing and a Board member was involved. Mr. Oliver asked who was the Board member. Mr. Dollins stated Mr. Goelz, who excused himself from the hearing. Mr. Neglia stated when Mr. Goelz made the complaint he did not go on Mr. Dollins' property. Mr. Dollins said no, he had someone else go on his property. Mr. Neglia asked if this happened recently? Mr. Dollins stated no, this was before Mr. Schmitt came to talk to him. Mr. Generazio explained that Mr. Goelz acted properly in removing himself from the previous hearing. If the hearing today could not be resolved it should go to court. Mr. Lulich stated no, the Board needed to make a decision today, whether it be a new Order or to keep the old. They needed to determine if there was a violation, finding of facts, and if there was to be a fine. Mr. Cosco made.a motion to rescind the previous Order. Mr. Neglia seconded the motion. Roi1 call was taken: Mr. Connelly YES Mr. Cosco YES Mr. May YES Mr. Costa YES Chmn. Generazio YES Mr. Oliver YES Mr. Neglia YES Motion carried 7-0. Mr. Cosco then made another motion to find Mr. Dollins guilty as charged and rescind all fines. The city attorney again reviewed their recommendation in that the motion should find "Mr. Dollins in violation of the charges in the Notice of Violation and an Order entering such a determination and provisions that if there is a further violation that there will be a fine of $250 a day for each day of the continuing violation." CODE ENFORCEMENT BOAP~ REGULAR.MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 18, 1996 SIX Mr. Cosco changed his motion to be to accept the City's recommendation. Mr. May seconded the motion. Mr. Costa stated he still had a problem with not hearing all the testimony before a motion was made and wanted to hear all witnesses before he voted on the motion. Mr. Lulich stated all witnesses had to be presented either by the City or Respondent and asked Mr. Dollins if he had any other witnesses? Mr. Dollins stated yes, but she was in regards to the trespassing. Mr. Lulich stated it was up to the Chairman to hear the witness or not. Mr. Neglia asked Mr. Costa what he was trying to get at? Mr. Costa stated he wanted to know if there was a criminal act involved in this hearing, if this man {the trespasser} was charged with abuse of authority, and wanted to know if anyone went on Mr. Dollins' property and then charged him. Mr. Lulich asked Mr. Dollins if his witness could testify she saw a specific person go behind his vehicle to see the license plate number? Mr. Dollins stated yes. Mr. Lulich again asked Chmn. Generazio if he wanted to hear the witness? Chmn. Generazio stated he didn't think the witness was relevant to the case. Mr. Costa stated he thought any matter involving a Board member should be out in the open. Chmn. Generazio stated this wasn't the Board to hear complaints regarding Board members, perhaps City Council should. Mr. Costa stated he was going to bring the issue to the State's Board of Ethics Committee in Tallahassee. Mr. Oliver asked to see a definition of trespassing vs. criminal trespassing. Chmn. Generazio stated he was going to call a roll call and if the vote was close, he would call another hearing. If not he wanted to close this case. Roll call was taken on the motion: Mr. Connelly YES Mr. Cosco YES Mr. May YES Mr. Costa NO Chmn. Generazio YES Mr. Oliver YES Mr. Neglia YES Motion carried 6-1. CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD REGULAR MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 18f 1996 PAGE SEVEN Mr. Costa apologized to Mr, Dollins for the whole Board missing the concept of the hearing. Chmn. Generazio told Mr. Costa he could not speak if he was going to apologize for the Board. Mr. Lulich passed out a copy of Florida Statute 162.09 regarding administrative fines, costs of repairs, and liens. He reviewed the information with the Board concerning the set fine of $250 they ordered in the previous hearing. Mr. Costa stated he was aware of something going on in that there was an abuse of power by someone to get back at someone else. There was a violation of law when someone went on Mr. Dollins' property before the summons was written to get information to write the summons. The person that went behind the house was a member of another Board, but a friend of a Code Enforcement Board member. He also stated he thought there was a lot of collusion and revenge for some matter that happened in the neighborhood with some of the kids. Mr. Costa thought the whole thing stunk and he was going to recommend to Mr. Dollins or do it himself to file a complaint with the Board of Ethics. He was going to ask Mr. Dollins to press charges against the board member for trespassing. He stated it was not the fault of this Board or the officer Kenny Schmitt. Mr. Schmitt was used in this matter. He had no knowledge of what was going on or if the van was registered. He was taking the word of an another individual. Mr. Schmitt asked to speak but was put on hold. Cb_mn. Generazio asked Mr. Costa how he knew all this information? Mr. Costa stated he asked questions and investigated. Chmn. Generazio asked to whom did he speak to? Mr. Costa said the question was mute now. Chmn. Generazio stated it was wrong to investigate a case outside of a hearing and Mr. Costa ought to turn himself in also to the Board of Ethics. He asked if Mr. Costa had called Kenny Schmitt at home? Mr. Costa stated yes. He asked Mr. Costa if he had talked to Mr. Dollins? Mr. Costa said it was irrelevant now. He investigated this case outside of the hearing because he felt there was something wrong with it. Mr. Neglia made a motion to adjourn the meeting. seconded it. Mr. Oliver Chairman Generazio closed the meeting at 3:12 p.m. Mr. Schmitt stated he had asked to speak and was not allowed. He was annoyed at the implication made by Mr. Costa that he was used in this case and did not get to defend himself. Minutes approved at the , 1997 Meeting. ' Chairman Dorri Boswor%h, Secretary Code Enforcement Board