Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09191990 CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD REGULAR MBETING SEPTEMBER 19, 1990 - 2,00 P~M. MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER BY VICE CHAIRMAN FISCHER AT 2~05 P.M. ROLL CALL .' PRESENT .' MRS. KOSTENBADER MR. NICOLINI MR. METCALF VICE CHAIRMAN FISCHER ATTORNEY LULICH MR. TOZZOLO MR. GILLIAMS EXCUSED, CHAIRMAN DEROBERTiS ALSO PRESENT, BRUCE COOPER, BUILDING OFFICIAL, ROBERT NICHOLSON, CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER RICHARD TORPY. ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY APPROVAL OF MINUTES~ MOTION WAS MADE BY MRS. KOSTENBADER AND SECONDED BY MR. TOZZOLO TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 15, 1990. CARRIED. ATTORNEY'S MATTERS, NONE OL__DBUS____INESS, LIEN (RAZZANO) CASE# 87-391 ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY RICHARD TORPY STATED THAT THE PROPERTY WAS FORECLOSED UPON AND THE CITY OF SEBASTIAN WAS MADE A PARTY TO THAT LAW SUIT. THE LIEN WAS INFERIOR TO THE MORTGAGE HELD BY THE PARTY THAT FORECLOSED AND WHAT HAPPENS IS ALTHOUGH WE FILED AN ANSWER AND WENT THROUGH THE PROCEDURE · MECHANISMS. THEY DID FORECLOSE AND GET THEIR JUDGEMENT AND OUR LIEN IS AUTOMATICALLY EXPUNGED. UNFORTUNATELY A CiTY CODE ENFORCEMENT LIEN DOES NOT TAKE A PRIORITY LIKE A TAX LIEN WOULD. THEREFORE, THIS LIEN IS CLOSED OUT. CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD - REGULAR ME~.?IN.G - SEPTEMBER 19, 199___~ PAGE 2 LiEN (WALSH) CASE# 88-1014 THE ORDER STATED MR. WALSH WOULD BE FINED $25.00 PER DAY FROM 3/14/89 FOR NOT PULLING A PERMIT AND NOT HAVING A LICENSE. APRIL 29, 1989 MR. WALSH SIGNED THE RETURN RECEIPT THAT HE DID RECEIVE THE ORDER. HE DID NOT COMPLY. ATTORNEY LULICH STATED THIS LIEN WAS NOT RECORDED. YOU HAVE TO HAVE A FIXED AMOUNT OF DOLLARS AND CANNOT SAY $25.00 PER DAY AND RUNNING. YOU HAVE TO CUT IT SHORT AND PLACE A FINE. ATTORNEY LULiCH STATED THAT MR. WALSH HAS ALTERNATIVES. JUST RECENTLY MR. KIGHT WHO THERE HAD BEEN OVER $4,000.00 WORTH OF LIENS ON HIS PROPERTY HAD COME BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL BECAUSE SOMEONE WAS GOING TO PURCHASE HIS PROPERTY AND THE PURCHASE WOULD NOT GO DOWN UNLESS THE LIEN WAS REDUCED AND THE CITY COUNCIL REDUCED THE LIEN TO $1,000.00 TO SEE SOMEONE ELSE IN THE CITY. BRUCE COOPER STATED THE SECOND ITEM WAS WHETHER OR NOT WE WOULD EVER COLLECT ON IT. A MOTION WAS MADE BY MR. METCALF AND SECONDED BY MR. NICOLiNI TO RECORD A LiEN IN THE AMOUNT OF $13,800.00 AGAINST MR. THOMAS WALSH AS OF SEPTEMBER 19~ 1990 IN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY AND BREVARD COUNTY. ROLL CALL~ MR. GILLIAMS - YES MRS. KOSTENBADER - YES MR. TOZZOLO - NO VICE CHAIRMAN FISCHER - YES MR. NICOLINI - YES MR. METCALF - YES CARRIED. JAMES WADSWORTH - CASE 90-3617 VICE CHAIRMAN FISCHER ASKED MR. NICHOLSON ABOUT THIS CASE. A LETTER OF NON-COMPLIANCE WAS GIVEN. MR. NICHOLSON CHECKED ON 8/20/90 AND THE SWAMP BUGGY WAS STILL THERE AND AS OF 9/19/90 WAS STILL NOT IN COMPLIANCE. MR. WADSWORTH DID NOT ATTEND THE MEETING. ATTORNEY LULICH READ THE ORDER TO THE BOARD MEMBERS. FINDINGS OF FACTS= THE BOARD DETERMINED UPON THE EVIDENCE CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD - REGULAR MEETING ~ SEPTEMBER 19, 1990 PAGE 3 PRESENTED THAT JAMES WADSWORTH WAS STORING A JUNK VEHICLE (SWAMP BUGGY) IN VIOLATION OF SECTIONS 12-30 & 12-31. THE CONCLUSION WAS THE ABOVE REFERENCED INDIVIDUAL WAS FOUND TO BE IN VIOLATION OF THE SAID ORDINANCE AND NO FINE WAS LEVIED. HOWEVER, THE VIOLATION WAS TO BE CORRECTED WITHIN 30 DAYS OF JUNE 20, 1990. MR. METCALF STATED THAT AT ONE TIME MR. WADSWORTH THREATENED TO SUE HIM AND HE MIGHT WANT TO ABSTAIN FROM THIS CASE. A MOTION WAS MADE BY MR. TOZZOLO~ SECONDED BY MR. NICOLINI WITH REFERENCE TO CASE # 90-3617 INVOLVING JAMES WADSWORTH THAT HE BE FINED $50.00 PER DAY UNTIL THE SWAMP BUGGY WAS REMOVED OR OPERABLE AS OF THE DATE OF RECEIPT OF THE ORDER. AFTER A BRIEF RECESS. ATTORNEY LULICH STATED THAT THERE ARE SOME PROBLEMS WITH THE ORIGINAL ORDER AND ALSO WOULD LIKE TO DEAL WITH WHEN YOU CAN ABSTAIN FROM VOTING AND WHEN YOU CAN NOT. AS LONG AS YOU DISCLOSE THAT YOU BELIEVE THAT THERE IS A CONFLICT. YOU NEED TO FILE THE CONFLICT WITH THE CITY CLERK AND SHOULD NOT ABSTAIN FROM VOTING. THE CONCLUSION OF LAW WAS THAT NO FINE WAS LEVIED. IT DOES NOT SAY THAT NO FINE IS LEVIED AT THIS TIME AND IF HE DOESN'T COMPLY IN 30 DAYS THEN THERE IS A FINE. IN A WAY YOU ARE REVISITING THIS CASE AND IN ADDITION TO THAT THE VEHICLE HAS BEEN MOVED SO IT MIGHT BE INTERPRETED THAT THERE iS A NEW CASE BECAUSE IT IS ON A NEW LOT. THE ORDER IS NOT CLEAR ENOUGH. BRUCE COOPER STATED THAT STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT WE RENOTIFY MR. WADSWORTH TO COME TO THE NEXT BOARD MEETING IN RELATION TO THIS VIOLATION AND HE CAN EXPLAIN THE SITUATION IF IT IS STILL THERE AT THAT TIME AND A NEW ORDER CAN BE DONE IF IT IS NECESSARY. MR. TOZZOLO MADE A MOTION TO WITHDRAW THE MOTION. NICOLINI WITHDREW HIS SECOND. MR. ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY TORPY STATED THAT STAFF iS REQUESTING THAT THIS CASE AT THIS POINT BE DROPPED COMPLETELY. STAFF WILL IF THE VIOLATION IS CONTINUING BRING IT BACK BEFORE THE BOARD AFTER PROPER NOTICE. THE BOARDS ORDER LAST TIME SIMPLY STATED THAT MR. WADSWORTH WAS FOUND IN VIOLATION HOWEVER. THERE WOULD BE NO FINE IMPOSED AND HE WOULD BE GIVEN 30 DAYS TO COMPLY. ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY TORPEY'S OPINION OF THAT ORDER IS SIMPLY THAT WAS YOUR ORDER. AS OPPOSED TO OTHER ORDERS WHERE YOU GIVE THEM X AMOUNT OF DAYS TO COMPLY OR, A CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD - REGULAR MEETING - SEPTEMBER 19. 1990 PAGE ¢ FINE OF X AMOUNT OF DOLLARS WOULD BE LEVIED. AT THIS POINT THE CITY IF THEY DETERMINE TO DO SO CAN BRING IT BACK BEFORE THE BOARD ON A CONTINUING VIOLATION (REPEAT VIOLATOR) WHICH HAS ENHANCED PENALTIES. ROBERT CLINEMAN - CASE # 90-3915 AN ORDER OF COMPLIANCE WAS GIVEN TO THE BOARD. NEW BUS~NESS, MR. NICOLINI READ A LETTER TO THE BOARD MEMBERS THAT HE WROTE DATED SEPTEMBER 14. 1990 CONCERNING HIS POSSIBLE RESIGNATION. ON SEPTEMBER 13. 1990 HE APPEARED BEFORE DEPARTMENT OF PROFESSIONAL REGULATIONS ON A MATTER OF FRAUD CONCERNING THE ISSUANCE OF A WORTHLESS CHECK FOR PAYMENT FOR HIS STATE LICENSE RENEWAL. AT THE APPEARANCE HE EXPLAINED THAT WHERE THE CHECK WAS ISSUED HE NO LONGER WAS ASSOCIATED WITH TME COMPANY THAT ISSUED THE CHECK AND THAT HE HAD NOT SIGNED OR KNOWN ABOUT THE CHECK. THE ABOVE WAS PROVEN BY LETTERS AND PAPERWORK BY HIM TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE ENTIRE D.P R. BOARD RESULTING IN A COMPLETE AND UNANIMOUS VINDICATION OF HIM. MR. NICOLINI WANTED TO BRING THIS TO THE BOARD'S ATTENTION IN THE EVENT THAT THEY MIGHT FEEL THERE MAY BE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST OR PREJUDICE ON HIS PART. IN THE RENDERING OF A DECISION WHILE ON THIS BOARD. NONE OF THE BOARD MEMBERS FELT THAT THIS WOULD BE A PROBLEM. BO__~RD ATTORNEY ~ AND REPORTS, NONE BUILDING OFFICIAL'S M_A_.TTERSs NONE GENERAL DISCUSSION, NONE PUBLIC INPUT, NONE ~OURN, A MOTION WAS MADE BY MR. METCALF. SECONDED BY MR. GILLIAMS TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 2,50 P.M. CARRIED. Minutes approved at the Donato Derobertis', Chairman ~e~ry Board Secretary