[0:03] >> Everyone, I'm going to call the order the code enforcement hearings for today for the
[0:06] village of Wellington today is Thursday, August, 20th. And the time is 9 o'clock. My name
[0:13] is Holly Han and I'm the special magistrate for today's hearings. Do we have any
[0:17] opening comments? Mr. Yes. Good morning. The special magistrate with here all cases
[0:22] and gender. The meeting is recorded in televised 11th and government Access Channel 18?
[0:27] Comcast cable. That's the money for rent and staff. And respondents would be under
[0:34] oath of the farmer. Rule of evidence. Do not apply. Fundamental due process should
[0:36] be observed. >> A special magistrate may ask questions of either party
[0:40] determine pertinent facts, the code compliance officer present his or her case to the
[0:46] special Magistrate Service of require noticed associated with the case in a photograph
[0:51] presented by the code compliance officer would be entered as evidence unless
[0:55] otherwise disputed of a completion of the presentation. The respondent
[0:58] will have an opportunity to come in to cross examine a special magistrate will issue
[1:03] findings of facts based on the testimony presented as the special magistrate determine
[1:07] their water, more violation of Wellington codes of ordinances. He or she may
[1:10] issue an order requiring the respondent to correct violation by a specific date a
[1:16] special magistrate may also says cars that have been incurred in the prosecution of
[1:19] the case. In most cases, Casa says by the special magistrate or due and payable to
[1:24] Wellington within 30 days from the date of this hearing. For at them. And are the members
[1:29] May may result the end been filed against the property. In the event violation is not
[1:33] corrected by the date specify article also for a final certification hearing. No
[1:41] additional notice will be provided to the respondent. Eileen of the fight against
[1:44] the property of the SS fines are certified by the special Magistrate. Especially
[1:49] tremendous issue, a cease and desist order if issued, the respondent is placed notice
[1:54] that if the same violation reoccur within 5 years staff notify to respond of a hearing
[1:58] for repeat violations. The hearing staff Lucas, the special Magistrate assess a
[2:03] fight. The primary objective hearing is not on Tom Dooley penalize anyone but thing
[2:10] complies with one in court and ordinances in a timely manner. Cases where the respondents
[2:14] the president will be heard. First when they responded comes to the podium. Please
[2:18] sign state your name and indicate if you have been sworn in, please ensure cell
[2:23] phones are turned off or silent mode at this time. Special magistrate with no
[2:27] swearing of persons who will testify. All right. If everybody excuse me stand who
[2:32] will be offering testimony at today's hearing? >> And raise your right hand.
[2:38] Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony about to give is the truth?
[2:40] Whole truth and nothing but the truth. All right. Thank you very much. You may be
[2:44] seated. Are there any additions or deletions to the agenda? Yes, we have one
[2:49] deletion item number 6 on the new business 8 C c 7, 0, 8, 2026.
[2:55] >> All right. Great. Thank you. All hearing no other additions there. Deletions. I
[3:02] hereby approve the consent agenda and now we are ready to move on to new business.
[3:08] >> We're going to go respondent's. We have item number one on the final
[3:11] certification ACC 18, 91 to under 25 find a Vegas is the court officer. Officer Stephen
[3:26] Villegas, code compliance village Wellington. Good morning.
[3:31] >> Case number. And we just SEC dash 18. 91 dash 2025. respondent names given a
[3:35] village association incorporated. Property address 9, 7, 6, 8, Slash 9, 7, 4, 4
[3:44] Scrivener lane Wellington, Florida. The hearing date was may 21st 2026. The respondent
[3:50] was ordered to correct violation of onto Land development regulation
[3:54] sections. Wellington, 7 8.7 dot C 100 trees and SWAT area in front of various
[3:57] properties. Several properties found a violation and 7 8 dot to dot ag missing required
[4:03] street trees, property, not for the development approval on or before July. 17th 2026
[4:09] or pay a fine not to exceed $25 per day per violation. The order was scheduled. Find
[4:14] certification hearing on August. 20th 2026. if the coca plants division was not
[4:20] contacted as required and or the violation was not corrected. Inspection on
[4:26] 7/20/2026, from the property. Still violation of onto land development regulation
[4:31] sections, 7 DOT a DOT 7 dot seen and 7.8 dot to dot ag. A follow-up inspection on August
[4:37] 10th and August 17th from the violations to exist. But as we're taking, the actually
[4:41] are. For taking the represen, the condition of the property at the time of the various
[4:47] inspections. course, the footage be entered as evidence. So entered a peace
[4:52] research from the response does not have a pending bankruptcy action or pennants
[4:54] finally gets his property. Contact with Representative staff has been in contact with
[4:58] the property manager and contractor step provided the property manager, contractor
[5:02] with the information that they needed. It was communicated that information about the
[5:07] work that needs to be done by the contracting to be provided to staff as they do not have
[5:09] an approved permit. There was a previous vegetation move apartment apply for on August
[5:18] 7th 2025. That's 2025. Dash 0, 3, 3, 4, BRP due to no plan being submitted. It was
[5:25] administratively withdrawn. No European has been applied for or plan submitted on August
[5:30] 18th 2020, 60 attorney, Mister Cortez asked for additional time. However, due to the
[5:34] nature of this case, how long it's been active in a lack of any planting submitted. His
[5:37] request was denied by management, Mr. Cortez was advised to attend today's
[5:42] hearing to state his case. And that's the measured for additional time. Okay, great.
[5:47] Thank you. And in the matter of Wellington versus Scrivener Village Association.
[5:51] >> Case number aged SCC dash 18. 91 dash 2, 0, 2, 5, Is there anyone here on the
[5:58] matter? >> Larry Cortez on behalf of Scrivener Village. Okay,
[6:01] Great. Thank you. All right. So what is it you want to tell me about this? The there's no
[6:08] factual dispute. So the complexity the Scrivener village has and this is that
[6:16] it's I think of it in terms of wagging a dog or attenuated process in that each of these
[6:22] trees is as between Scrivener village and the homeowners as a homeowner, responsibility.
[6:29] So it's Grimner village is done. They have not ignore this. And I know from the
[6:33] village of Wellington's point of it you know, gun for an extended period of time. But
[6:37] what they've done is they've attempted to compel homeowners in order to to correct these
[6:45] violations on their own because these trees are their responsibility. Some
[6:50] homeowners have complied. Some of the COVID have complied perhaps half heartedly and
[6:55] some, as you can see in some of the photos have not yet complied. So in that part of
[6:59] that process, now that they've declared those violations and his violations on cured again,
[7:02] as between Scrivener in the homeowner, Scribner village is now said, OK, now we're going
[7:07] to enter. We're going to cure it and do it on its own on July, 12th script ability
[7:12] enter into a contract with vendor sanctuary gardens who a local tree installer. They had
[7:21] been in some initial discussions with with the village of Wellington staff at
[7:28] it. And I become forsman officer acknowledge that. But as I'm understanding it this
[7:32] morning that there hasn't been any recent communication. So what I'm asking for in. So
[7:38] what we're getting from century gardens is that they can install and be prepared to
[7:42] install within 2 to 3 weeks to start the project. I think we're talking about 12 trees
[7:47] and related work so what we would ask special magistrate for isn't for an extension of
[7:54] either 30 or 45 30 or 45 days in order to accomplish that work. But again, no factual
[8:02] dispute with what's been presented to the to the special Magistrate. All right.
[8:05] Thank you, Mr. Cortez for that. There was a mention that the whole scope of work for
[8:11] this is 12 trees. Is that accurate? >> believe I couldn't. Damien
[8:22] window. Good Morning, Amy. plan and zoning. Okay. We do have a list of trees that we
[8:32] provided to them. As the number. >> I guess my question is, is
[8:38] it like around 12 tries that they have to replace OK? So it's around 12 trees. Just
[8:44] want to make sure I understand that. And then on if you could refresh my recollection
[8:51] officer, when did the first notice go out to scrivener that that this work needed to
[8:57] be done. As far as when did this. I guess when did when did this H go out to them when
[9:05] where they first aware that there was an issue? That they were in violation of the code.
[9:12] The property was posted. I believe sometime in May as far as the exact Okay?
[9:16] >> No, I just I just kind of want to get a ballpark figure this. So in May of 2026,
[9:21] Scribner was advised that, hey, 12 trees against that because I've got here that the
[9:29] violation is that is it that trees need to be removed and then replaced?
[9:34] >> Sorry, a correction. It was posted on April 22nd 2026. So we're just going April.
[9:40] >> Okay. So maybe I'm a little confused. So because I'm looking at looking at the
[9:44] violation and it says so. What is it for Land Development regulations? Section 8007.7
[9:51] points. E. What is that violation? Is it that there? Yeah. What's the violation?
[9:58] >> So that relations would be had wrecked reason, the swell area and for the various
[10:04] properties. I have list of those addresses. >> Okay. So there's hat
[10:08] wrecked trees. And what's the remedy for that? >> So
[10:13] >> they were advised. By last hearing, too. I believe remove the trees. Okay. So the hat
[10:22] rack trees that requirement is for Casement. Okay. this property has street tree
[10:28] requirements so they have to meet make sure that meeting those standards. Okay.
[10:33] >> So once a tree's been hat rack because I'm thinking, yeah, there's not much you can
[10:35] do so it has to be then you have to remove it and then replace it occur pursuant
[10:42] whatever the your regulations are for replacement, the threat of tree and all that
[10:45] stuff. Okay. So is that the is that what constitutes that violation? Just that they were
[10:51] hat rack trees and they have to be replayed removed and replaced rent. Okay. So let me
[10:56] go to the other violation missing required street trees. Not so explain to me what that
[11:04] violation is. violation is some locations that trees remove previously and they're
[11:12] currently hasn't been replaced, OK? And in one instance, there is.
[11:15] >> Palms which were installed, which are not meet the requirement for the kind of
[11:21] petri trees. So OK, don't have to remove and replace those. Okay.
[11:26] >> And then one other question is the trees that are have racked are they included in
[11:32] this the pre the other violation of the missing require trees or they're
[11:35] they're completely separate thing. They're completely separate. Thank I appreciate
[11:40] you clarifying all this for me. Ok? So. Mr. Cortez, if you could, because I I think very
[11:49] simply. And if you could explain to me what is the position what your client's
[11:53] position on this land development regulations? Section 7.8 point to a point G
[11:58] the missing required street trees acknowledged, OK, so you acknowledge it. And and so is
[12:04] that part of the agreement that you have with this firm that's going to come in and
[12:12] replace those trees. That is correct. So they're there no. It even simpler. In my mind,
[12:18] there's one violation. bunch of trees need to installed in get that means removing the
[12:25] one the bad one. This there just needs to be installed. >> So yes, the contract is to
[12:29] address both violations. Okay. >> And in order to replace the trees. Well, I'm actually
[12:35] this. So for the hat rack trees. Is a permit required to remove the trees. Yes, okay.
[12:43] And is is is a separate permit required plant the trees, Pelley new trees or is it all
[12:49] part of one? >> I believe it could be doing one permit. One permit. Okay.
[12:57] >> And so for the first violation, a permit would also be required to plant the trees
[13:00] where they're missing. >> That would be included. We include everything in the one
[13:07] per minute. Okay, Connie, just like okay. So in a permit has not been applied for a permit,
[13:12] was applied for, however, it was withdrawn because we then receive Henry some So it's
[13:21] administrator withdrawn after 90 days, OK? So there was a permit and it was there. It's
[13:28] good for 9th at the application is active for 90 days.
[13:31] >> And when did that application expire? >> I don't know the expiration
[13:38] date, but I know it was applied for August of 2025. Okay. Some OK? So he 25. And
[13:48] what is your client's position as far as >> applying for a new permit
[13:55] to remove and replace all these trees. So Mike landing on they have to do that. And
[14:00] that's part of the part of the of the agreement of the contractors, a contractor.
[14:03] >> Obviously, my client legally a place where but the contractor does the legwork I
[14:11] don't want to over speak that. the contract has been in contact with Mr. Noel, what
[14:17] I'm learning this morning as there's apparently confusion my clients and in terms of the
[14:20] contractor. My client believes that they that a contractor needs to hire an architect in
[14:28] order to do this and speaking with Mr. Newell this morning and based on my past
[14:34] experience is if we're if we're simply putting the trees back exactly where they need
[14:39] to be permits required, but not the landscape architect. If we're if we're wanting to
[14:45] move them and I got out of a desire necessarily. But if there's something a city where
[14:50] we say okay, what that rate the tree needs to be removed. Then a landscape architect.
[14:55] What needed to draw that to propose a to Mister Dole? What I what I can tell the special
[15:00] magistrate is why that last conversation, I believe sometime in July as I sit here
[15:04] in has not followed up in occurred. So so my request for the additional time is to make
[15:09] that happen. But also to get the to get that reason stalled.
[15:14] >> And so my what I'm hearing from my questions is that there was application made
[15:21] back in August a year ago that expired. And now we had the notice of violations that
[15:29] occurred in August or in April. And here we are today in August and it appears that
[15:35] your client has some type of arrangement with a landscaping company yet the landscaping
[15:40] company has not gone through the next logical step, which is the application process.
[15:46] And I guess, you know, looking at all the time that your clients had and nothing's
[15:53] really moved. I'm I'm trying to figure out how giving them an extra 30 days would make
[15:57] something move. Because it's nothing's moved in a year. understood don't I don't know.
[16:05] That's entirely for the to say the contractor has done something.
[16:09] >> I think Mr. Nolden knowledge. They've contacted them. But obviously
[16:14] >> there's less diligence than we would want in terms of taking Mr. Knowles,
[16:19] information and going back and making the permit application accordingly.
[16:26] >> If I could, the contractor a part of the process, the contract that does have to do
[16:31] locates for underground utilities, right? So that is something that's added to it.
[16:36] The only information don't how it currently is. If they have done that Because that would
[16:42] also that was one of the questions I with them. you know, based on are you doing a
[16:47] removal and replacement in the same location and have you done the locates? I haven't
[16:51] received an update on that. So that would be something that's important police if they have
[16:55] done that. They're moving along in the process of doing the actual work.
[17:01] >> Okay. And does the village have a position on granting I guess a continuance on this
[17:07] for 30 days? >> Based on the information I have, yes in that that the 30
[17:15] days acceptable to the village >> Mr. Cortez, I appreciate you being based upon the
[17:25] foregoing, I guess I'm just going to continue the fine certification hearing. We will
[17:30] continue it to the next hearing date and which is going to be September.
[17:36] September 17th, but I'm not sure. It is September 17th. All right. We will go ahead
[17:46] and continue this find certification hearing in this matter to September 17th 2026,
[17:55] 09:00AM here. And I again, thank you for being here. Thank everyone for being here
[17:57] and hopefully your client can get all of the ducks in a row and get this project moving.
[18:03] Thank you. I appreciate everyone's time. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. The move
[18:07] to item number 12, a new business ACC 17 68 when the 26 Johnson's as it was the code
[18:13] officer.
[18:31] >> Good morning. Johnson, Joseph Code compliance officer for the village of Wellington.
[18:36] The case numbers CC. That's 17, 68 dash 2026. >> The respondent name past
[18:41] and my just 1, 5, 4, 3, 0, meadowood drive Wellington, Florida. This case was
[18:51] established internal complaint. And again, will survive posters. Notice on
[18:55] 8/12/2026. At the property at the Village Hall. And I think those clerks office, a copy of
[19:00] the Post, a notice was most of the property owner. I request that the service of units
[19:04] being. So there's evidence so entered the question. It was on July, 13th 2026. An
[19:10] inspection on July 14th 2026. Found the following items you may be in the time given and a
[19:15] notice violation of Wellington Code. Section 13 DASH to Point B 0.1 was gavel staying and
[19:19] just call it 13 dash. 2 point the driveway and sidewalk staying in or discarded and 13
[19:26] dash. 2 point people in 4 lawn and swell contains dead in areas and Wilmington and
[19:33] development regulations. Section 7.8, 7 point the broken sprinkler system and
[19:36] between Khaleesi a hedge. What it would take and a fairly and accurately represent a
[19:42] violation at the time. I would quest at the photos be entered into evidence so into
[19:46] follow-up inspection on August 8.11, 15th 16th and 19th 2026. 1 of found that one ton code
[19:53] section 13 dash 2 point people. and 13 dash. 2002.4 come into compliance and the
[19:59] only remaining violations are once and code. Section 13. Dash 2002.4 along welcome
[20:05] saying state and areas and want and then development regulations. Section 7 POINT
[20:08] 8, 7 Point broken sprinkler systems be in between the KUSI, a hedge, a piece of
[20:15] sorts from respondent does not have anything cross section or this penance filed against
[20:18] this property. Contact with the owner and or representative. Multiple
[20:25] attempts were made to contact the owner via e-mails and by living donors at the property.
[20:30] On 8/19/2026. A representative of the property owner and cousin of the property owner,
[20:36] Mister Verb called in response to post a notice at the property. Mr. stated that he
[20:41] did understand nature of the cold case. Staff had explained the violation and details and
[20:46] later emailed Mr. 4 for the information and the date of the hearing. As of today, the
[20:53] staff has not received response and devotion still remains correct. It. The Code
[20:58] Compliance Division recommends that the respondent be fun involved of Wellington Code
[21:01] Section 13 Dash 2002.4 and once and then development regulations. Section 7 POINT
[21:06] 8, 7 Point It is recommended that the respondent be given until September 17th 2026. To
[21:14] correct the violations would be charged a fine not to exceed $24 per day per
[21:17] violation for each did have a motion continues to exist. It is also recommended that the
[21:22] costs incurred by the code compliance division and amount of $14.19 The U.S. says in
[21:28] order to be paid within 30 days of the date of this meeting. It says, and this is
[21:32] sort of for Peter 5 uses requested. And event the code compliance division is not
[21:37] contacted as required and order violation is not corrected. It is recommended
[21:40] that a fine. So the commission hearing be held before the special magistrate on. October
[21:46] 15, 2026. At 09:00AM at at the Wellington Municipal Complex once with 0, 0, 4, a symbol of
[21:52] Florida once in Florida. It is also recommended that no additional notification but
[21:57] then set to impose trying to get them. All right. Thank you very much, Mr. Jones of.
[22:03] >> All right. In the matter of Wellington versus Natalie bus teen. Month periods which is H
[22:10] Dash, C C 17, 68 to 6. Is there anyone here on this matter? And that best him
[22:15] okay. Thank you. right. Did you sign And there's a little I years. didn't. It's easy
[22:23] thing to forget.
[23:01] All right. Thank you. Just a reminder, we are here only about the broken
[23:09] sprinkler and the lawn. Swale contains dead and bear area. is best seen. What would you
[23:13] like to tell me about that? a few clarification. This part here is not caused by a broken
[23:23] sprinkler. And I have pictures from this morning, too. So >> we need reins. There are 2
[23:28] areas on my property. The water stays. The the middle part that he should. you go to
[23:37] the next picture. Most like to be is a sprinkler that spreading the long way. But it
[23:44] doesn't cause just like you nation of water that you see over there. I have also in
[23:47] front of my first driveway. And an area where when it rains. The water stays there.
[23:59] The properties. You can see that after a deal with too. The clears mines stays there.
[24:05] And that's one of the reasons why the driveway, no matter how often we do. We. We
[24:16] pressure wash driveway. It was 10, so we try to find another way too. To come out of it. I
[24:23] have with people there and he told me this is something that I need to bring up to city and
[24:26] I we do that. So. And despite here, this is not I don't have a sprinkler can reach the Just
[24:33] paint water. We would have to actually turn on this been critical of the deal of the
[24:40] direction of the Jets. And this morning when I went there, most of that, you can
[24:46] see some sprinkle of water over you know, that Quest says to that area, but it's not
[24:55] enough water to cause stagnant water. And I have videos also and pictures and I would share
[25:01] with you if it's possible. It also shows the water that's tease with does to a from the
[25:10] rain and it doesn't go and it causes and you can you walk to meadowood, you can see a lot
[25:14] of order areas might like that. And I have some videos and pictures of them. It is
[25:17] causing a mosquito problem. In any case I have hired different people to come and
[25:23] that's why webs recalled yesterday. I guess they had a hard time understanding what
[25:30] needed to be done. I definitely. Weaning to work with the Kool-Aid and forced
[25:41] her to make sure that allegations and addressed. I want to also verify want you
[25:46] address the have for me because I haven't received any money. meals regarding
[25:54] violations. They letters sent to the House. I have given them 2, the people who help
[26:01] with the landscape, one of the is with my mom and I have been dealing with illnesses. So
[26:07] he's been very difficult like Ray Thompson was to get a doctor's appointment. And I'm
[26:14] here, but there is no neglect to address to coats. I have had a major the branching in
[26:20] may. And they did not do what they were supposed to do. So that's what I shared yesterday
[26:26] when Wentz called because I share the exact notes with him. I said you need to find
[26:31] out exactly what you need to do because I have spent a lot of money trying to get things
[26:38] done and it's still not The requirements of I mean to to fix the violations. All right.
[26:49] Thank you. I just have a couple questions. And this is a great picture to stay on.
[26:54] >> So if I understand the basis for the violation of the broken sprinkler, is this what
[27:00] we're looking Yes, exactly. Okay. And so. Based on this picture, it appears that it
[27:06] would be a sprinkler that is near the hedge and that it that it's leaking water that
[27:12] is then going into I'll call it the swale area. And Erik, a and you when you took this
[27:22] photograph and can you tell me what you observed that we're seeing here? Yeah, not only
[27:29] that I had multiple cannot just go out doing the weekends.
[27:32] >> Around 06:07AM, ish to what was going on and from what they have told me is that
[27:40] every time Israel turn on, you can see the water dripping slowly and as well. It's not
[27:45] like we do have evidence. We have evidence of it happening, but willing to work with you
[27:49] as you guys actually show me proof that the water that's coming through the head just
[27:53] not actually point to well and the fact that is sometimes when I go out there, it's
[27:59] weeks. been raining. So it's not the reigning that's causing the issue.
[28:04] >> Let me ask you another question in that Swale area. Are there any sprinklers?
[28:09] >> That I'm aware K? >> And have you been to this area when the sprinklers have
[28:15] been on? Yes, okay. And is it your testimony that when the spring when you were there and
[28:22] the sprinklers were on, you could see that the water was coming back towards the swale
[28:29] area. >> Yes, I have photos the specific time when spring
[28:32] returns on. Of course, I just have proof the watermark of the water coming from that
[28:37] hedge and that area foreign to us. Well. >> Right. And you personally
[28:41] have observed when the sprinklers were there and that the water than is. Going back
[28:47] into the going into the swale area. Is that correct? Yes, okay. All right. Now moving to
[28:53] the violation of the law Well contains dead bear areas. I'm going to assume based on this
[28:59] photograph that the area to the left there. That is the bear area that's constituting
[29:05] this violation. Chris. This testing, what is it. You do have anything else you want to
[29:13] add right now. I just want to focus on this dead bear area other than what you sow plans.
[29:20] And after they called him is a local coming to the House this weekend to address all that
[29:24] and more things. >> And I told him to just go ahead and cap whatever spring
[29:28] cause the arches kept them. And then let's see what happens. And that's what will
[29:33] be done. Okay. And what are what are your plans for remedying the dead bear area
[29:38] that we see here in the photograph? >> I just need to know exactly
[29:44] what needs to be done because the will be there this weekend. And I know exactly
[29:48] what needs to be done and they have the officers number, the Woodworth, Iran, the will send
[29:55] him and we have someone else's e-mail. That's an email to weather yesterday. So the
[29:59] Wilson them and if they see that. This is not a number, what else to be done, they
[30:05] would take care of it. They have the full authority to do that. Okay. And if I
[30:09] understand your testimony correctly, you're telling me that you already have an
[30:13] agreement that a firm is going to come out to your home tomorrow or I'm sorry this
[30:16] weekend this weekend, OK? >> All right. And is there anything else you'd like to
[30:20] add? >> I will. I mean, I don't want to take more time than
[30:28] necessary because we're in agreement that anything that needs to be fixed would be
[30:32] fixed. And then there would be better communication to ensure that the people doing the work
[30:36] on the stand. The scope and >> The >> requirements I have. Some.
[30:50] People want to submit for what I think the city needs to help with in metal wood and that
[30:54] would be separate. I don't think we need to take time for that. Ok? I just want to, you
[30:59] know, number one, encourage you to work closely with code enforcement.
[31:05] >> I you know, you mentioned something about not having a correct email. So today would
[31:09] be an excellent opportunity for you to provide an e-mail. I want to let you know that I
[31:14] am going to enter an order. Finding you in violation. However you have until
[31:23] September 17th to correct the violation and there will be no fine assessed. So I do
[31:27] encourage you since you do, you know, have a plan and that you work closely with code
[31:34] enforcement and that you know, get this done before the 17th so that you will have. I
[31:39] think, you know, no financial, no significant financial impact just that. All right.
[31:46] Based upon the evidence, testimony and photos in this matter. I find that the notice
[31:50] of violation in hearing for today was properly served further that the owner is
[31:56] present. I do make the following conclusions of law that the respondent is in
[32:00] violation of land development regulations. Section 8007.7 Point D Code Section 13 point
[32:09] Dash 2 dot be dot for. The respondent is ordered to correct these violations by
[32:15] September 17th 26, a fine in the amount of $25 per day will be assessed against the
[32:21] respondent, which will begin on September 18th costs in the amount of $14.19 are assessed
[32:27] against the respondent, a cease and desist order will be issued and that in the event
[32:33] you do not correct these violations. We will have a fine certification hearing
[32:37] back here on October. 15th. I will follow that up with a written order of everything I
[32:45] have ruled here today. But I again encourage you to work with code enforcement so that
[32:49] you can get this matter, taking care of. Thank you very much. And my best to your
[32:52] mother. Thank you. And a few staff I have to get outside. Go ahead and call those cases.
[33:06] >> Item number 2 and a new business HCC 6, 0, 4, 8, 1, to 25 would put loves the code
[33:11] officer.
[33:27] Good morning. We're putting All Co compliance officer for the village of
[33:32] Wellington. Case number is CC Dash 6, 0, 4, 8 dash, 2, 0, 2, 5 respondents name.
[33:38] >> South Shore Partners, LLC. Property addresses, 1, 2, 1, 6, 0, South Shore Boulevard
[33:43] unit 105, Wellington, Florida. This case was established based on internal complaint,
[33:51] the end of an array truss or by certified mail return receipt received request the
[33:55] service of the interview. No HB entered as evidence. So entered correction date was
[33:58] July 13th 2026? and Inspection on July 14th 2026 found the following items remain be on
[34:06] the time given in the notice violation of Wellington code sections chapter. 21 article
[34:11] 2, no business tax receipt for piece of pizza. Photos and screenshots were taken that
[34:18] fairly and accurately represent the violation. At that time. request of
[34:20] photographs and screenshots be entered into evidence. So enter follow-up inspection on
[34:25] August, 5th and 13th 2026. Found the violations still exist. Staff conducted a Pacer
[34:33] church found the respondent is not every pending bankruptcy action research found. There's
[34:36] not a list pennants filed against this property staff contact with the owner
[34:41] representative on May 19th 2026. While dropping off a door hanger. I spoke to one of
[34:44] the staff behind the counter. I asked for them to have the owner contact me regarding the
[34:49] business tax receipt. No response has been given. Code compliance. Division
[34:54] recommends respondent be found in violation of Wellington Code Section chapter. 21
[35:00] article 2, is recommended that the respondent be found in violation in order to be paid.
[35:03] The local business tax fee. Plus, a penalty of 25% of the license determine to be due
[35:09] and a penalty of $250. There's also recommended that the cost incurred and the amount of $13
[35:14] and $0.54 be assessed in order to be paid within 30 days of the date is meeting seas and
[35:21] desist order for a period of 5 years as requested. All right. Thank you very much. In the
[35:25] matter of Wellington versus South Shore Partners, LLC aged FCC.
[35:32] >> 6, 0, 4, 8 dash 2, 0, 2, 5, Is anyone here on this matter? All right. Seeing no hit
[35:37] present and the time being 9.36, based upon the testimony, evidence and photos
[35:41] in this matter. I find that the notice of violation and hearing for today was properly
[35:46] served on the respondent and that the respondent is not here based upon the foregoing.
[35:53] I find that the and that the respondent is in violation of chapter. 21 article to failure
[36:00] to have a business tax receipt respondent is hereby order to obtain and pay for a business
[36:06] tax receipt a penalty in the amount of $250. Plus, 25% of the business license fee is
[36:12] also assessed against the respondent costs in the amount of $13 and $0.54 is assessed
[36:20] and cease and desist order will also be issued. And I will follow that up with a
[36:22] written order. Thank you. move to item number 3 in the new business. ACC 6, 0, 6, 5, 225
[36:30] Christopher percent of the code officer.
[36:53] >> Good morning. Krista Person, Co compliance officer for the village of Wellington.
[36:57] Case number CC 6, 0, 6, 5 dash, 2, 0, 2, 5, responders named Betsy Caesar Jean Robert
[37:04] Caesar property address 8, 6, 0, right. Woodway Wellington, Florida. This case was
[37:11] established based on a neighborhood improvement inspection. The end of Vienna,
[37:16] which was served by certified mail return receipt received request the service of the end
[37:21] of no HB Intron as evidence so entered a correction date July 27th 2026. inspection on July.
[37:30] 28th 2026. found the following item be on the time given a notice of violation of wanton
[37:36] code section chapter. 21 article 2, no business tax receipt for rental property
[37:43] and 0, wrightwood. Late aunt and Florida. A follow-up inspection on August, 7th
[37:48] 2026. found a following and a violation still does exist. Staff conducted a pace
[37:55] instructors from respondent does not have a pending bankruptcy action. Research
[37:59] found is not of the spending filed against property. Staff made multiple attempts to
[38:04] contact the property owner regarding the business tax receipt, including tough
[38:08] telephone calls and email correspondence. also contacted the tenant. The property, the
[38:16] 10 and that advise staff that he would reach out to the landlord. I request the
[38:19] landlord to contact us. As of today. Staff has not received any communication from the
[38:24] property owner. The Co Compliance Division recommends respond to be found in
[38:30] violation of Walton Coach Section Chapter. 21 article 2. It is recommended that the
[38:35] respondent be found in violation and ordered to pay the local business tax fee.
[38:41] Plus, a penalty of 25%. Of the lice determined to be due and a penalty of $250. It is also
[38:51] recommended the costs incurred in the amount of $12.76 the SS in order to. To be paid within
[38:57] 30 days of the end of this meeting a season. This is for a period of 5 requested. All
[39:04] right. Thank you. Okay. In the matter of Wellington versus. >> That's a Caesar. And Jean
[39:11] Robert Cesar case number aged SCC 6, 0, 6, 5 dash, 2, 0, 2, 5, Is anyone here on that?
[39:15] This matter? All right. Seeing none and noting the time of 9 9.40 I do have a arpa side how
[39:24] is it that you determine that this was this the property at 8, 6, 0, brightwood was being
[39:32] used as a rental. >> So this started with the property maintenance case that
[39:39] had before and when a left a door hanger, the person came out and inquire. What I was
[39:43] doing. And I told sidewalk needs to be clean. And he said. There are some of the
[39:51] things I need to be done and he said he would let the property owner day. He's just
[39:53] a tenant. So from there that's from this case was opened. >> I guess I'm I'm struggling
[40:03] with just somebody saying that their attendant. Is not what I see is E really strong basis.
[40:12] I do see somebody coming up that may be able to provide some additional evidence on
[40:18] that. >> Smith, the candle, a business tax official with the
[40:20] village. Thank you. Utilities Department has a tenant on record. If you want to okay.
[40:27] is that for this, this current period? Yes, okay. And is it on that application for
[40:34] utilities that the person has Indy Kay did that they are a tenant at 8.60, Brightwood
[40:39] way. Yes. All right. Thank you very much. I appreciate that. All right. Based upon the
[40:45] testimony, evidence and photos in this matter. I find that the notice of violation and
[40:48] hearing for today was properly served on the respondent. I find that the respondent is
[40:52] not present here. I further find that the respondent is in violation of chapter. 21
[40:59] article to failure to have a business tax receipt. Therefore, I find that are
[41:07] there for I order that the respondent must obtain and pay for its business tax fee. It
[41:12] also I'm going to assess a penalty in the amount of $250. Plus, 25% of the business
[41:19] license fee further costs in the amount of $12.76 are assessed and a cease and
[41:26] desist order will be issued follow that up with a written order to the respondent. Thank
[41:29] you. Thank you. We're gonna move to item number 4 on the new business HCC 86 dash 2026.
[41:37] >> The front of the cases, the court officer. >> Stephen of filtering into
[41:50] compliance. This case number is and I wish that does she see. Dash 6, 8, 6 dash 2026.
[42:00] respondent names James l a pair of was and Victor h Perry was. Probably get addresses
[42:06] 2059 Guadalupe Drive one to Florida. The case was to establish based on an Inter
[42:12] complaint, the interview in which was served by certified mail return receipt received
[42:16] request the service and Vienna which evidence so entered correction date was July 13th
[42:21] 2026. inspection on 7/14/2026, from the following items remain beyond that. I'm given
[42:27] the notice of violation of Alton code sections. Shepherd. 21 article 2, no business
[42:31] section. She for one to most Restates plc screen us on this page. We're taking a fairly
[42:38] actually represent violation. At that time. I request Screech Open to the evidence.
[42:40] So entered a follow-up inspection on July. 21st 2026 July 30th August 6, August
[42:47] 10th and 17th 2026 for the violations to continue to exist. Staff can take it up. A
[42:52] which follows spotted doesn't have a pending bankruptcy action or Luz Pena spoken
[42:55] property. has been communicating. Staff have been communicating with the
[42:59] homeowner through a, you know, explain the violation how to come into compliance and phone
[43:04] calls. Staff was informed that your son, some this has been changed. However, the address
[43:08] for means unchanged as 20 59 up a drive. The coca plants to vision recommends respond to
[43:13] be fun in violation of onto Code Section chapter. 21 article 2, it is recommended
[43:19] that the respond fund a violation in order to pay local business tax feet. Plus
[43:22] a penalty of 25% of the license determined to be do. And a penalty of $250. It is
[43:28] also recommended that the costs incurred in the amount of $12.76 be assessed in order
[43:33] to be paid within 30 days of the date of this meeting. But he this order for Pierre 5
[43:36] years requested. >> All right. Thank you very In the matter of Wellington
[43:42] versus James l Para Victor h Para was h dash CC 8, 6 dash 2, 0, 2, 6, Is anyone here on
[43:50] this matter? Alright, noting no one is here and the time is 9.44, I have a question.
[43:58] >> The the sunbiz that was entered into evidence here. When was that taken?
[44:06] >> This screen shot was taken. I believe. >> Because I can see kind of
[44:09] the whole thing not saw. Because usually will know if zoom back. Usually on. I think
[44:16] the top left. It'll tell you, you know, when it was. >> I believe it was on the
[44:20] 17th. And we have have a copy of one for one. >> That's fine. said I just I
[44:28] like to see the date when it was printed. That's fine. Okay. This and then the other
[44:31] question I have is on the officers just curious are either of the property owners
[44:38] listed as officer of or up of these are partners listed in this Wellington Luxury
[44:43] Estates. Plc. As officers. Yeah, you see Kuz it says authorized person details. I I
[44:50] can't see the bottom of it. That's all. Would you like the screenshot that if you wanted
[44:56] to show it to me, that's fine. Like I said, it's I I just always like to see if it's.
[45:02] Ok, so it is somebody okay. All right, OK, so is one of them to us also OK, that's all
[45:11] I needed. All right. Thank you very much for the clarification based upon the
[45:17] evidence, testimony and photos in this matter. I find that the notice of violation for
[45:21] today was properly served. I find that the respondent is not here further. I conclude
[45:28] that the respondent is in violation of chapter. 21 article to failure to have a
[45:33] business tax receipt as a result. I hereby order them to obtain and pay for a business
[45:39] tax relief. Receipt further a penalty in the amount of $250. Plus, 25% of the business
[45:46] license fee is also assessed against the respondent and costs in the amount of $12.76
[45:53] I will follow this up with a written order to the respondent. Thank you. With a
[45:59] move to item number 2 and a fine certification HCC 3, 6, 6, 9, 2, 125 head of archers.
[46:06] The court officer. >> Good Morning. Helen Archer Court officer for the village
[46:17] of Wellington case number Z, C 3, 6, 9, 6, 6, 9, 2025. respondent's name is Kpi
[46:24] Equity Holdings, LLC, Latitude, Property Investments, LLC. Property
[46:29] addresses that 1, 5, 7, 5, 6, ocean breeze thing. Wellington, Florida. Hearing
[46:33] date was June 18th 2026. The respondent was ordered to correct the violations of
[46:39] algae are 7001.2 expired engineering permit. Angie 23 Dash 0, 0, 3, 9, for scrapping
[46:48] lot development. Installation of driveways, both temporary and permanent on or before
[46:51] February 1920. 26 or pay a fine not to exceed $50 per day. The order also scheduled
[46:58] find certification hearing on 3/19/2026. The Code compliance division was not contacted as
[47:03] required and are the violation was not corrected. Research on February 23rd 2026. From the
[47:10] property was to in violation of Ldr. 7001.2 contact was made with representative and
[47:16] they request a continuance of the case until August. Since then, I have made several
[47:21] attempts to email left phone messages with the representative, but no contact
[47:24] has been made Pacer search from the representative that the respondent does not have a
[47:29] pending bankruptcy auction Orleans pendants filed against this property. The Code
[47:34] Compliance Division recommends respond to be found in violation of the order of Ldr.
[47:38] 7001.2 and that the respondent be assist to finding the pursuant. To section 2 Dash 3,
[47:44] 8, a 2, the court of Code of Ordinances and Section one. 62 dash. 0, 9, to be the Florida
[47:52] statutes in determining the amount of the fine, the special magistrate Musk and
[47:56] it's considered the following factors. One, the gravity of the violation to the actions
[48:00] taken by the violator to correct the violation and 3, any previous violations of the
[48:05] same code section committed by the violator on the same property. As to the gravity of
[48:10] the violation. Unexpired engineering permit as to the actions taken by the visor to
[48:14] correct the violation permit. Angie? 23 Dash 0, 0, 3, 9, has not been renewed. As to any
[48:22] previous violations. So the same code section committed by the violator on the same
[48:25] property. There is no prior record. Based on these factors. The code compliance
[48:30] Division recommends that the respondent be a set is assessed to find the amount of
[48:33] $50 per day commencing on February, 20th 2026 and in addition cost in the amount of
[48:40] $35 and $0.26, does include costs SS in the order. Both continuing to accrue into the
[48:44] violation is corrected. All right. Thank you. And in the matter of Wellington versus
[48:50] Kpi Equity Holdings, LLC. >> Latitude, Property Investments, LLC, which is
[48:57] case number H Dash C C 3, 6, 6, 9, dash, 2, 0, 2, 5, Is anyone here on this matter?
[49:05] Seeing And noting the time of 9.49 >> I just had a few questions
[49:10] just to make sure I understand this. So on. This was. So respondents are hereby order
[49:18] to correct. There was order entered by the special magistrate on January 15th of
[49:25] 2026. Is a correct. That's correct. Okay. Because I'm like I'm seeing here. The
[49:30] respondent. Okay. All right. So OK, so I'm I got it. All right. your review of the
[49:38] records is that the expired engineering permit still expired. Correct? Correct? All
[49:42] right. Thank you very much. based upon the evidence, photos and testimony in this
[49:48] matter, I find that the notice of find certification and hearing for today was properly
[49:51] served on the respondent and that the respondent is not here. I see and and see in the
[49:58] record that on January, 15th 2026, the special magistrate entered an order requiring the
[50:06] respondent to correct the violation of land Development regulations. Section 1.7 point
[50:11] 2, I further find that this violation has not been corrected as of today's date.
[50:20] After hearing the testimony, evidence and photos with the requirements of Florida
[50:25] statute and Wellington code. Given the gravity of violation, which could be a
[50:31] safety violation in the foot in the respect that this is an expired engineering permit and
[50:38] that the respondent has made no efforts to correct these violate the violation and that
[50:43] the respondent does not have a history of a violation at the property. I determined that a
[50:48] fine in the amount of $50 is appropriate and is assessed against the respondent and it
[50:55] will begin began assessing on February. 20th 2026. They further order cost in the
[51:02] amount of $35 and $0.26 are assessed against the respondent. And I will follow
[51:07] this up with a written order. Thank you, Thank Change opens. Okay. July 17 because they
[51:15] order. Okay. That's what you're trying to tell. got yard. So we'll do.
[51:19] >> July 16th, OK? All right. So I will reopen recall the case just to correct that
[51:27] based upon in order for extension. That was entered by the magistrate on March 19th,
[51:32] which I didn't see pay attention to. >> That the fine will not
[51:40] begin in February. Instead, it will begin on. 7/17/2026. A fine in the amount of $50 will
[51:50] be assessed against the repression against the respondent which began on July
[51:55] 17th 2026. follow that up with a written order. Thank you. >> move to item number 9 and a
[52:03] new business. And ACC 15. 0, 3, 2026. Nicholas Kristof was a court officer.
[52:22] >> Good Morning Code. Officer Nicholas with the village of Wellington presenting case
[52:26] number HCC Dash 15. 0, 3 dash 2026. respondent names. Halle Cairo, Ben Trustee, Matthew,
[52:35] you, Terry and Trustee and Matthew, you, Terry. In 2000, a living trust property
[52:40] address, 1, 4, 2, 9, 0, Calypso lane Wellington, Florida. This case was
[52:44] established based on the complaint, Vienna, which was served by post a notice on
[52:50] July 23rd 2026. At the property at Village Hall and at the village Clerk's office,
[52:54] a copy of the post. A notice was mailed to the property owner. I request the service
[52:58] of the interview. No HB entered as evidence. So entered. Correction date was
[53:04] 8/3/2026, and inspection on August 4th, 2026 found about following items remain beyond
[53:08] that. I'm in but the given a notice violation of Wellington code sections. 5 dash one,
[53:16] 105, 0.5 expired building permit BP. 23 Dash 46 96 replace existing windows and
[53:25] doors. Screenshot was taken fairly and accurately represents the violation. At
[53:28] that time. I request the photo graph The screenshot be entered evidence. So entered.
[53:34] A follow-up inspection on August 12 and August. 18th 2026 from the violation still
[53:38] exist. Staff conducted a pace research which found the respondent does not have a
[53:43] pending bankruptcy Action. Orleans pendants filed against this property. On May 4th,
[53:48] 2020's it May 4th 2026. an email was sent to the property owner regarding the expired
[53:54] permit on May 14th door Hanger was left at the property May 22nd 2026. I spoke with the
[54:01] property manager Lawrence. He stated that the windows and doors were inspected under
[54:07] permit BP. 23 dash. 29, 29 after review from the building department, Lawrence was asked
[54:12] to submit a copy of the permit card for vacation for verification of inspection. No
[54:18] further response was received the Code Compliance Division recommends the respondent be
[54:24] found in violation of Arlington Code. Section 5 Dash 1, 1, 0, 5.5 It is recommended
[54:29] that the respondent be given until September 17th 2026. to correct the violation or be
[54:35] charged fine not to exceed $50 per day for each day. The violation continues to exist.
[54:41] It is also recommended that the cost incurred by the Coke plants, a vision in the amount
[54:44] of $14 and $0.19 He assessed in order to be paid within 30 days of the date of this
[54:50] meeting, the cease and desist order for a period of 5 years as requested. In the event,
[54:55] the code compliance division is not contacted as required and or the violation is not
[55:00] corrected. It is recommended that a fine certification hearing be held before the
[55:03] special magistrate on October. 15th 2026. at 09:00AM at the Wellington Municipal Complex.
[55:08] 12, 304 still boulevard, Wellington, Florida. It is also recommended that no
[55:13] additional notification of intent to impose find to get in.
[55:17] >> All right. Thank you very much. And in the matter of Wellington versus Holly,
[55:20] Carbone trustee, Matthew, yet teary and trusty. And Matthew, you get teary 2008 living
[55:27] trust, case number age, Dash, C, C 15, 0, 3, 2, 0, 2, 6, is anyone here on this matter?
[55:33] All right. Seeing none and noting the time of 9.56, I just want to make sure I
[55:40] understand your testimony correctly. It was once the property owner said, oh, yeah,
[55:44] it's already been inspected. And you said, hey, can you send me the documents that
[55:47] support that? If you didn't hear anything after that? That's correct. Okay. Thank
[55:51] you very much. Alright, based upon the testimony, evidence and photos in this matter, I
[55:58] find that the notice of violation and hearing for today was properly served on
[56:02] the respondent further that the respondent is not present. I find that the respondent is
[56:09] in violation of code section one dash. sorry, 5 dash one, 105, 0.5 The permit has
[56:18] expired and has not been renewed are closed out respondent is hereby order to
[56:25] correct this violation by September 17th 2026. A fine in the amount of $50 per day is
[56:30] also assessed against the respondent and cost and cost and the amount of $14.19 are
[56:37] assessed. The cease and desist order will also be issued and that in the event the
[56:43] respondent does not correct these violations of find certification hearing will be
[56:46] held back here on October. 15th and I will follow that up with a written order to the
[56:50] respondents. Thank you. Thank you. We're gonna move to item number 10 and the new business
[56:56] ACC 15, 13, 226. >> Nicholas Kristof was a good officer.
[57:01] >> Good Morning Code Officer Nicholas with the village Wellington present in case
[57:05] number H dash. You see ash 15, 13 dash 2026. respondent name is Chad. Noel and know just 1,
[57:17] 9, 3, 4 South Club drive Wellington, Florida. This case established based on a
[57:23] complaint. The end of underage was served by certified mail return receipt received a
[57:26] request. The service of Novi HB entered as evidence so entered correction date was
[57:30] July 13th 2026. Inspection on July 14th 2026. From the following items from a be on
[57:38] the time given a notice of violation of Wellington Code. Section 5 Dash 1, 1, of 5.5
[57:41] expired building permit BP 20 dash 35. 94 remodeled kitchen and bathrooms. Photos screen
[57:50] shot was taken the fairly and accurately represent a violation of the time. I
[57:53] request a screenshot be entered into evidence. So enter the follow-up inspection
[57:58] on July 28th August, 11th and August 18th 2026 found violations still exist. Staff
[58:05] conducted a pace research which found the respondent does not have a pending
[58:07] bankruptcy action or those pendants felt against this property. On May 4th 2026. I
[58:12] sent an email to the owners regarding the expired permit. On May 14th 2026. I left the
[58:18] door hanger at the property on July 6, 2026. I spoke with Mister know regarding the code
[58:25] case in the mail. The stipulation agreement on August 13th 2026. I sent an
[58:30] e-mail reminder to Mister know regarding the submission of the stipulation agreement. No
[58:32] further response was received. The Code Compliance Division recommends the respondent be
[58:37] found in violation of Wellington Code Section 5 Dash 1, 1, 0, 5.5 It is recommended
[58:42] that the respondent be given until September 17th 2026. To correct the violation or be
[58:48] charged a fine not to exceed $50 per day for each day. The violation continues to exist.
[58:53] It is also recommended that cost incurred by the code compliance division in the
[58:56] amount of $12 and $0.76 be assessed in order to be paid within 30 days. The data this
[59:02] meeting and and desist order for a period of 5 years as requested in the event, the
[59:07] code compliance division is not contacted as required under the violation is not
[59:10] corrected. It is recommended that the final certification hearing that be held before
[59:14] the special magistrate on October. 15th 2026 09:00AM at the Wellington Municipal
[59:19] Complex. 12, 304 still boulevard, Wellington, Florida. There's also
[59:23] recommended that no additional notification of the intent to oppose funding given. All
[59:26] right. Thank you very much. In the matter of Wellington versus Chad, Noel.
[59:31] >> And Lorne a noble HDR CC 15, 13 dash 2, 0, 2, 6, Is anyone here on this matter?
[59:40] All right. Seeing noting the time of 10:00AM based upon the testimony, evidence and photos
[59:44] in this matter. I find that the notice of violation and hearing for today was properly
[59:50] served on the respondents and that the respondents are not here. I make the following
[59:55] conclusions of law that the respondents are in violation of code Section 5 dash one.
[1:00:01] 105, 0.5 permit expiration. The respondent is hereby order to correct this violation by
[1:00:11] September 17th 2026. In the Sorry, a fine in the amount of $50 per day per violation is
[1:00:16] assessed against the VI against the respondent and costs in the amount of $12 and
[1:00:21] $0.76 are assessed as well. The cease and desist order will be entered. And in the
[1:00:28] event that the respondent does not correct this find certification hearing will be
[1:00:33] held back here on October. 15th 2026. follow that up with a written order to the
[1:00:39] respondents. Thank you. Thank you. We're gonna move to item number 13 and in the business
[1:00:44] ACC 18? 55 2026. >> Nicholas Kristof was a court officer.
[1:00:50] >> Parting could Officer Nicholas Kristof over the village of Wellington
[1:00:52] presenting case number HCC Dash 18, 55 dash 2026. respondent names Linda ISU and
[1:01:01] Stephen W let us too. Property just to 5.32 Stone Gate Drive going to Florida. This case
[1:01:09] was a step based on a complaint. The end of the unknown which was served by
[1:01:11] post a notice on July 23rd at the property at Village Hall and at the votes clerk's
[1:01:15] office, a copy of the Post. A notice was mailed to the property owner request the
[1:01:20] service of the end of the underage be entered as evidence. So entered
[1:01:25] correction date was 8/3/2026, and inspection on August. 4th 2026. found the following item
[1:01:31] remain be on top of that. I'm given a notice violation of Lillington Code Section 5 dash
[1:01:34] 1, 2, 1, 0, 5.5 expired building permits PP. 21 Dash 0, 9, 5, 3, pool spa and DEC
[1:01:43] installation and building permit BP. 22 Dash 0, 9, 3, to pull barriers slash right
[1:01:51] privacy, vinyl fence with to 5 foot Kates and one for Fugate. Photos are taken Screech up a
[1:01:58] screen test for taking that fairly and accurately represent the violation that
[1:02:02] the time I request a vote of the screenshots be entered as evidence. Thank you. Yes. A
[1:02:07] follow-up inspection on August, 13th and August 18th found a violation still exist.
[1:02:13] Staff conducted pace research which found the respondent does not have a pending
[1:02:16] bankruptcy action or those pendants filed against this property on May 29th 2026. And
[1:02:20] email was sent to the property owner regarding the expired permits on the June 8th door
[1:02:26] hanger was left at the property. No response received. The Code Compliance
[1:02:31] Division recommends the respondent be found in violation of Arlington Code.
[1:02:34] Section 5 Dash 1, 1, 0, 5.5 It is recommended that the respondent be given until
[1:02:39] 9/17/2026. to correct the violation. a fine not to exceed $50 per day for each
[1:02:44] day. The violation continues to exist. It is also recommended that costs
[1:02:49] incurred by the code compliance division and the amount of 14 0 isn't $0.19 the
[1:02:53] assessed in order to be paid within 30 days of the date of this meeting, the cease and
[1:02:57] desist order for a period of 5 years as requested in the event, the code compliance
[1:03:03] division not contacted as required under the violation is not corrected. It is
[1:03:07] recommended find certification hearing be held before the special magistrate on October.
[1:03:10] 15th 2026. At 09:00AM at the one to municipal complex. 12, 304 still boulevard going to
[1:03:16] Florida is also recommended that no additional notification of the intent to
[1:03:20] impose time be given. All right. Thank you very much. And in the matter of
[1:03:24] Wellington versus. >> Linda, and Stephanie W H Dash D C 18, 5, 5, 2, 0, 2, 6,
[1:03:32] Is anyone here on this matter? Alright, noting the time of 10:00:04AM, based upon the
[1:03:40] testimony, evidence and photos in this matter. I find that the notice of violation in
[1:03:44] hearing for today was properly served on the respondents and that the respondents are not
[1:03:49] here. I make the following conclusions of law that the respondents are in violation
[1:03:54] of code Section 5 dash one 105, 0.5 permit exploration. The respondent is ordered to
[1:04:03] correct these violations by September 17th 2026, a fine in the amount of $50 per day is
[1:04:11] also assessed against the respondents and cost and the amount of $14.19 is also
[1:04:16] assessed a cease and desist order will be issued and that in the event, the respondents
[1:04:22] failed to correct this Find certification hearing will be held back here on October.
[1:04:27] 15th 2026 a written order will be sent to the respondents with my ruling. Thank you.
[1:04:33] We're going to move to item number 5, undefined certification HCC 5, 7, 3, 3,
[1:04:39] >> 2 and a 25 Nicholas Kristof was the code officer. >> Good Morning. Cut Officer
[1:04:43] Nicholas Kristof full with the village of Wellington presenting case number and a
[1:04:48] wage that she's he dashed. 57. 33 dash 2025. Respondent names. Michael Kamber. It and
[1:04:53] chanting again variety. Property. Just 1, 3, 8, 4, Primrose lane Wellington,
[1:05:00] Florida. Hearing date was June 18th, 2026. The respondent was ordered to correct the
[1:05:05] violation of Arlington Code. Section 5 Dash 1, 1, 0, 5.5 It's part of building permits
[1:05:09] PP. 23 Dash 0, 6, 22 and 18 dash 20 to 96 wood fence double gates and replace 16
[1:05:17] windows and 4 doors with impact on or before July 16th 2026. or pay a fine not to
[1:05:22] exceed $50 per day. The order was also scheduled to find certification hearing on
[1:05:29] August. 20th 2026, if the code compliance division was not contacted as required under
[1:05:33] the violation was not corrected inspection on 7/17/2026, found the property
[1:05:38] still in violation of Arlington Land. The herb sorry on to coach Section 5 Dash
[1:05:43] one, one of 5.5 building permit BP. 23 Dash 0, 6.22 Wood fence double Kate was
[1:05:51] renewed, however, permit 18 dash. 22 96 replace 16 windows and 4 tours with impact
[1:05:58] remained at expired. A follow-up inspection on July 31st. August 12 and August
[1:06:04] 18th 2026 and found a violation still exist. For a screen. Shots were taken that
[1:06:10] represent the condition of the property at the time of the various inspection requests.
[1:06:13] The screenshot be entered as evidence, so entered. Pace, research found the respondent
[1:06:19] does not have a pending bankruptcy Action. Orleans pendants filed against this
[1:06:22] property. On November. 21st 2025 stuff up to play. Smelled of Mister again. Variety on
[1:06:30] December 4th, 2025 staff spoke to Mr. Kimber it by phone and referred them to the building
[1:06:34] to permit for further assistance on February 6, 2026 staff. It sent email to the
[1:06:40] property owner on March. 20th 2026. the door hanger at the property on April 6 2026. I
[1:06:47] spoke with Mr. Graham Brady by phone for Dino in the stipulation agreement event.
[1:06:52] additional time would be needed to correct the violation beyond the a
[1:06:54] previous May 18th correction date on May 20th 2026. I know the stipulation agreement Mr.
[1:07:04] Kimber already on June. 11th 2026. I called Mister Kamber Kamber already and left a
[1:07:09] voicemail. No further response received. The Code Compliance Division recommends the
[1:07:14] respondent be found in violation of the order. Wellington Code Section 5 Dash
[1:07:17] 1, 1, 0, 5.5 and that the respondent be assessed a fine pursuant to section 2 Dash, 3,
[1:07:24] 8, a 2 of the code of Ordinances and Section 1, 6, 0, 9, to be of the Florida
[1:07:30] statutes. In determining the amount of the fine the special magistrate must consider the
[1:07:36] following factors. The gravity of the violation, any actions taken by the violator to
[1:07:40] correct the violation and any previous violations of the same code section committed by
[1:07:45] the violator on the same property. As to the gravity of the violation permit 18 dash.
[1:07:52] 22 dash 18 dash 20 to 96 remains expired. As to the actions taken by the violator
[1:07:59] to correct the violation, a permit 18 dash 20 to 96 has not been renewed. As to any
[1:08:06] previous violations of the same code section committed by the violator on the same
[1:08:08] property. There's no prior record. Based on these factors. The Coke plants
[1:08:14] Vision recommends the respondent is assessed a fine in the amount of $50 per day
[1:08:18] commencing on July 17th 2026. And in addition to causing the amount of $46.70, which does
[1:08:27] include cost the system, the order both continuing to accrue into the violation is
[1:08:30] corrected. All right. Thank you very much. >> And in the matter of
[1:08:36] Wellington versus Michael Gambhir Yadi Shannon Gabriel. It case number aged ACC. 5, 7,
[1:08:43] 3, 3, 2, 0, 2, 5, Is anyone here on this matter? right. Seeing none in noting the time
[1:08:48] of 10, 0, 9, based upon the testimony, evidence and photos in this matter. I find that
[1:08:54] the notice of find certification. and hearing for today was properly served on
[1:09:00] the respondent further that on June 18th 2026, the special magistrate entered an order
[1:09:06] requiring the respondent to correct the violations of code Section 5 dash one 105, 0.5
[1:09:13] permits expiration. I do find that the building permit in 2020 2023 has been a resolved.
[1:09:25] However, there is the outstanding permit of 18 dash, 2, 2, 9, 6, which is still
[1:09:31] outstanding after hearing the testimony, evidence and photos in this matter. And the
[1:09:40] reviewing the requirements of Florida law and Wellington code reviewing the gravity of
[1:09:46] the violations that the one permit is still it is still at has not been resolved in
[1:09:51] closed out and has further. I find that the respondent has made no effort to correct
[1:09:59] these violations and that there is no history of this violation at this same
[1:10:05] property. I do determine that a fine in the amount of $50 per day is assessed against
[1:10:10] the respondent which will begin on which began on July 17th 2026. Costin. The amount
[1:10:16] of $46.70 is also assessed and this will be followed up with a written order to the
[1:10:22] property owner. Thank you. Thank you. going to move to item number one on the new
[1:10:28] business H C C 3, 8, 3, 7, 2025. >> As couple was a court
[1:10:32] officer.
[1:10:49] >> As a coca plants officer for the village of Wellington. Case numbers H. Cc 3, 8, 3, 7
[1:10:56] dash, 2, 0, 2, 5, responding name is Herbert J Grimshaw the second property address is 1,
[1:11:02] 8, 4, 6 Lindsay Court Wellington, Florida. This case was established based on the
[1:11:07] complaint Vienna waits was served by posted a notice on July 23rd 2026. at the
[1:11:14] property Village Hall and at the village clerk's office, a copy of the post a notice was
[1:11:17] mailed to the property owner request. The service of them will be in a way be answered.
[1:11:21] Is evidence so entered? The correction date was August second 2026. and inspection on
[1:11:28] August. on the following items remain beyond that. I'm given a notice of violation
[1:11:33] Wellington Code Section 9 Dash 3 point nuisance declared stagnant swimming pool. Photos
[1:11:40] were taken in a fairly and accurately represent a violation at the time Cuesta
[1:11:42] photographs be entered into evidence. So entered. Follow-up inspections on
[1:11:48] August. 10th 13th 15th, 16th 18th and 19th from violation still exists. Staff conducted
[1:11:56] a pacer search was found responded does not have a pending bankruptcy action or
[1:11:59] less dependence fight against this property. Staff contact with the owner Slash
[1:12:05] representative staff is maintain ongoing. Communication with the owner
[1:12:08] Representative Anthony regarding the state is swimming pool beginning on
[1:12:10] July, 30th 2025. and continuing throughout the duration of this case during
[1:12:16] multiple conversations, Anthony was advised that the swimming pool pump we need to
[1:12:19] be repaired or replaced to eliminate the stagnant water condition. Anthony repeatedly
[1:12:24] stated that he had scheduled a repair technician to repair the poor point. Based on
[1:12:28] representations that the issue had been corrected. Staff at one point determine the case
[1:12:32] could be closed. However, a neighboring property owners subsequently contacted the
[1:12:37] village reported that the poor remain stagnant. The water had turned black and at the pool
[1:12:41] pump was now operating. Staff confirmed the violation remained on May 14th 2026.
[1:12:47] staff advise Anthony that the swimming pool cover would need to be properly votes secure to
[1:12:51] prevent it from becoming displaced and exposing the stagnant water. Anthony
[1:12:56] acknowledges requirement on June 10th 2026 staff again reminding Anthony that the
[1:13:00] poor cover would need to be properly voted unsecured during that inspection,
[1:13:05] Anthony. So the swimming pool pump in advised that he continuously becomes clogged
[1:13:08] leaves preventing it from operating properly staffed documented the condition
[1:13:13] photographs despite ongoing communication, repeated opportunities to achieve
[1:13:18] compliance. And owner representatives acknowledgment of the condition staying
[1:13:21] swimming pool violation as remain unresolved. The coach K the code compliance Division
[1:13:27] recommends the responded be found in violation of one Code section 9 dash 3 point it is
[1:13:31] recommended that the respondent be given until September 3rd to correct the
[1:13:34] violations or be charged a fine not exceed $50 per day for each day. violation
[1:13:38] continues to exist. It is also recommended costs incurred by the code compliance division
[1:13:44] in the amount of be assessed in order to be paid within 30 days of the date of this
[1:13:49] meeting, cease and desist order for a period of 5 years as requested in the event, the
[1:13:54] code compliance division is not contacted as required in or the violation is not
[1:13:58] corrected. It is recommended that he finds certification hearing be held before the
[1:14:01] special magistrate on September 17th 2026 09:00AM at the one to municipal complex.
[1:14:08] 1, 2, 3, 0, 0, 4 still boulevard of Florida. It is also recommended that no
[1:14:13] additional notifications. So of the intense will post fun to give up.
[1:14:15] >> All right. Thank you very much. In the matter of Wellington versus Herbert J
[1:14:21] Grimshaw the second aged FCC. 3, 8, 3, 7 dash 2, 0, 2, 5, Is anyone here on this matter?
[1:14:31] Seeing noting the time of 10, 15. Based upon the evidence, testimony and photos in this
[1:14:37] matter. I find that the notice of violation and hearing for today was properly served on
[1:14:42] the respondent who is not present here today. I further find that the respondent is in
[1:14:48] violation of code section 9 Dash 3 F unsecured, stagnant pool. Respondent is order to
[1:14:56] correct this violation by September. 3rd, 2026. A fine in the amount of $50 per day
[1:15:02] per violation is assessed against the property which will begin on September 4th
[1:15:08] costs in the amount of $14.19 are further assessed and to cease and desist order will be
[1:15:13] issued in the event that the respondent does not correct this Find certification
[1:15:18] hearing will be held back here on September. 17th 2026. And I'll follow that up with a
[1:15:24] written order to Mr. Grimshaw. We're gonna call the second case under item number one HCC
[1:15:32] 6, 5, 1, 226 as it covers the court officer. >> Good morning as it
[1:15:37] compliance officer for the village of Wellington. Case numbers HCC Dash 6, 5, one
[1:15:43] dash 2026. respondent name is Herbert J Grimshaw the second property address is 1, 8, 4, 6
[1:15:50] Lindsay Court Wellington, Florida. This case was established based on a
[1:15:54] complaint. The end of Ian awaits was served by certified mail return receipt received
[1:15:59] request the service of the in a way to be answered. Is evidence so entered the
[1:16:02] correction date was July 13th 2026. and Inspection on July 14th 2026. found the following
[1:16:11] items remain beyond that. I'm given the notice of violation of Wilmington Code Section 13
[1:16:14] DASH to Point B 0.2 driveway staying in or discolored sidewalk staying in or
[1:16:20] discolored and Wellington Land Development regulations. Section 2008007.8 through gene
[1:16:26] missing shrubs and vegetation and landscape along foundation of the property. Photos were
[1:16:31] taken at fairly and accurately represent a violation at that request of photographs be
[1:16:35] entered into evidence. So entered. Follow-up inspections on July 22nd July 29th August
[1:16:42] 3rd, August 10th, August 16th and August 18th of 2026. from the violation still exist.
[1:16:48] Staff conducted a pacer search which found the respondent does not have a pending
[1:16:52] bankruptcy action or lisp and its fight against property. Staff contact with Donuts.
[1:16:56] That's representative I have spoken to and communicated with Anthony on multiple
[1:17:00] occasions and advised him of the violations found on the property Anthony's primary
[1:17:05] concern was regarding the stagnant pool water located at the rear of the home. I've
[1:17:10] also advise Anthony on numerous occasions that the front of the property requires
[1:17:13] vegetation in that the driveway and sidewalk requires cleaning. Anthony has not
[1:17:17] taken corrective action regarding the required vegetation in the driveway and
[1:17:20] sidewalk was scrapped rather than cleaned since our last communication. I have not
[1:17:25] received any further contact or updates from Anthony regarding the remaining
[1:17:29] violations. The Co Compliance Division recommends to respond to be found violation of
[1:17:33] Wellington code sections. 13 DASH to Point B 0.2 and one to land Development regulations.
[1:17:38] Section 7.8 point to point a through G it is recommended that the respondent be given
[1:17:43] until September 17th 2026. to correct the violation or be charged a fine not to exceed
[1:17:48] $25 per day per violation. For each day. The violation continues to exist. It is also
[1:17:54] recommended that costs incurred by the code compliance division in the
[1:17:56] amount of $12.76 the assessed in order to be paid within 30 days of the date of this
[1:18:01] meeting, a seasoned. The cease and desist order for a period of 5 years is requesting in
[1:18:07] the event. The code compliance division is not kind of take it as required and or the
[1:18:11] violation is not corrected. It is recommended that the fine certification hearing be held
[1:18:15] before the special magistrate on October. 15th 2026 09:00AM at the Wellington Municipal
[1:18:20] Complex. 1, 2, 3, 0, 0, 4 still boulevard, Wellington, Florida. It is also
[1:18:25] recommended and no additional notification of the post. Fun to give.
[1:18:29] >> All right. Thank you very much, OK? And in the case of Wellington versus Herbert J
[1:18:36] Graham shot aged ACC 6, 5, 1, dash 2, 0, 2, 6, Is anyone here on this matter? Alright,
[1:18:43] noting the time of 10, 19 based upon the evidence, testimony and photos in this
[1:18:49] matter. I find that the notice of violation hearing for today was properly served on the
[1:18:53] respondent and that the respondent is not here. I further find that based upon
[1:18:58] the evidence that the respondent is in violation of land development regulations,
[1:19:03] Section 8007.2 A 3G and code section 13 dash 2 dot be 0.2 respondent is ordered to
[1:19:15] correct these violations by September 17th 2026. a fine in the amount of $25 per day per
[1:19:21] violation is assessed and will begin on September. 18th costin the amount of $12. And
[1:19:27] $0.76 is assessed the cease and desist order will be entered and that in the event
[1:19:32] that the respondent does not correct these violations of find certification hearing
[1:19:36] will be held back here on October. 15th 2026. and this also will be forwarded to Mr.
[1:19:42] Grimshaw, thank. Thank you. move to item number 5 on the new business and HCC 2, 9, 3,
[1:19:50] 22 in 6 Vegas's got officer. >> Officer Stephen Villegas field. You want to coca
[1:19:59] plants. Case number each dash EC dash 2, 9, 3, 2026. >> Excuse me. Respond a name
[1:20:09] change East. You'll go. Property address 10, 6, 7, 9 old him equate want to
[1:20:16] Florida. The case was established based on a neighborhood improve an
[1:20:19] inspection. The end of, you know, which was served by certified mail return receipt
[1:20:23] received, of course, the service. you know, we should be entered as evidence. So
[1:20:26] entered. Christian Day was July 13th 2026. And inspection on July 14 26 for the
[1:20:34] following items remain beyond that. I'm given in the notice violation of Alton Code
[1:20:36] Section. 13 dash 2 debido one walls are stained discolored trim a stand-in or discolored
[1:20:44] won't and ldr code section 6.4, 8001004006.6 AC unit not screened from view. The roof
[1:20:52] was found to be cleaned. Photographs are taken a fairly accurately represent a
[1:20:59] violation at that time request of photographs be entered into evidence. So entered. A
[1:21:03] follow-up inspection on July. 21st, 30th August 6th and August 17th 2026 fun of
[1:21:07] violations to exist. Pace research which found the respondent does not have a
[1:21:12] pending bigger Section Orleans pendants fight against this property. Staff contact with
[1:21:16] the owner presented staff reached out to phone calls and door hangers. The violation
[1:21:18] has been explained. The violations have been explains. He's being the owner has
[1:21:22] acknowledged, but the compliance has not been met. The code compliance Division
[1:21:27] recommends that the respond to be funded violation of to code section. 13 dash 2 DOT the DOT
[1:21:35] ltr sections. 8004006.6 It is recommended that those spot to be given until September 17th.
[1:21:39] 26 to correct the violations. Will be charged a fine not to exceed 20 $25 per day for
[1:21:45] violation for each of the violation continues to exist. It's also recommended that the
[1:21:50] costs incurred by the code compliance division in the amount of $12.76 be assessed
[1:21:54] or to be paid within 30 days of the date of this meeting, a cease and desist. Order for a
[1:21:59] period of 5 years required. In the event, the code compliance division has not contacted as
[1:22:05] required under the violations corrected. is recommended find certification hearing be held
[1:22:09] before the special magistrate on October. 15th 2026. at 09:00AM at the one. To me,
[1:22:12] that's one complex. 1, 2, 3, 0, 0, forced to Boulevard one to Florida. those are
[1:22:20] commended that no additional are vacation of the 10 to impose a fine to get in. All
[1:22:23] right. Thank you very much. And in the matter of Wellington versus Ha.
[1:22:28] >> East, you go case number H Tash CC 2, 9, 3, dash 2, 0, 2, 6 is anyone here on this
[1:22:35] matter? All right. Seeing noting the time of 10. 23, I just want to ask one question
[1:22:43] if I understand the violations as they relate to 13 dash 2 dot be 0.1 is that the walls
[1:22:49] are stained and that rim is staying correct. Yes, was sustained in that Sting, OK,
[1:22:54] great. All right. Thank you very much for that clarification. Okay. Based
[1:22:59] upon the evidence, testimony and photos in this matter. I find that the notice of
[1:23:03] violation and hearing for today was properly served I further find that the
[1:23:07] respondent is not here based upon the foregoing. I find that the respondent is in
[1:23:13] violation of code section 13 dash 2 dot be 0.1 and land development regulations.
[1:23:18] Section 1004006.6, I order the responded to correct these violations by September 17th
[1:23:29] 2026. A fine in the amount of $25 per day per violation is also assessed against the
[1:23:35] property or the homeowner cost and the amount of $12.76 are also assessed the cease and
[1:23:42] desist order will be issued prohibiting future violations. And that in the event the
[1:23:48] respondent does not correct these violations of find certification hearing will be
[1:23:51] held back here on October. 15th. And I follow that up with a written order to the
[1:23:55] respondents. Thank you. Thank you. The move to item number 7 and in the business and ACC 9
[1:24:00] to 9 2026. >> Julie occult, there's a court officer.
[1:24:13] >> Good morning. Case number HCC 9 to 9 2026. respondent named Jacqueline Kennedy,
[1:24:20] Richard Kennedy, property actress 1, 1, 9, 7,000 more terrace, Wellington, Florida.
[1:24:27] The case was established based on a neighborhood improvement action. The end of Vienna, was
[1:24:31] served by post a notice on July 23rd 2026. at the property at Village Hall and
[1:24:37] at the village clerk's office, a copy of the post. A notice with smell to the property
[1:24:43] owner. I request the service of the end of the an ohp entered as entered. Correction
[1:24:49] date was August first 2026. and inspection in its path. And inspection on August. 3rd,
[1:24:58] 2026 found the following items remain beyond the time given and notice of violation of
[1:25:03] Wellington code sections. 13 dash 2 DOT beat out one roof was and drip. Fed stained and
[1:25:10] discolored. 13 dash 2 dot the 0.2 driveway and sidewalk stained and or discolored
[1:25:20] Wheaton driveway and sidewalk. 13 dash 3 dot beat out one garbage and or recycling
[1:25:26] container, not screened from Wellington Land Development regulations, Section 7 that 7
[1:25:35] DOT P landscape is not being maintained and in need healthy, orderly manner.
[1:25:39] Plantings, overgrown and need to be trend. 7, not 8 dot to dot a through G missing
[1:25:46] vegetation to assure every in front of House 6 top for one that 5 that h missing hedges
[1:25:52] in front of fences. Photos, rotation that fairly and accurately represent the
[1:25:59] violation. At the time I request of photographs be entered into evidence. So
[1:26:03] entered a follow-up inspection on August. 5th 10005th 12 17 found a violation still exist.
[1:26:12] Conducted a piece of from the respondent. Does not have a pending bankruptcy action
[1:26:18] research found there is a list pennants filed against this property. Staff contact with
[1:26:24] Honor Representative door Hanger was left that the property on August 6, but no
[1:26:28] contact was made on August 18th. I received an email from Mr. Kennedy stating he just
[1:26:33] saw the posting as he does not live at the property anymore. They are trying to sell the
[1:26:39] property and one and wants to pressure wash. I emailed him back letting him know that
[1:26:44] there are other violations also and offered a stipulation agreement and he can come in
[1:26:48] and come. He can come in and sign the agreement on the 19th he called the Code hotline and
[1:26:59] spoke to a fellow code officer. The code officer discussed other violations but
[1:27:03] Mr. Kennedy was not aware. He asked about the solid waste and was briefly explain the
[1:27:09] violation, Mr. Kennedy Acts for me to call him. I called Mister Kennedy back and spoke
[1:27:14] with him about the cold case. I informed him that previous in Miles who are sent and was
[1:27:20] notified about the violations. I explained that he can come in to speak to the match fee,
[1:27:24] but he would not be able to attend. I informed him about the process following the
[1:27:29] hearing today and offered to meet with him that property. He stated he would contact me.
[1:27:35] The code compliance Division respondent be found in violation of Wellington code
[1:27:40] sections. 13 dash 2 dot the DOT one, 13 dash 2 dot the 0.2 and 13 dash 3 dot be 0.1
[1:27:50] Wellington Land development, regulation sections 7 that 8 that 7 B 7, 8, dot to dot a
[1:27:56] through and 6 top 4.1 that fight that H. It is recommended that the
[1:28:03] respondent be given until September 17th 2026. To correct the violations. But
[1:28:09] charge a fine not to exceed $25 per day per violation. For each day. The violation
[1:28:14] continues to exist. It is also recommended that the costs incurred by the code
[1:28:20] compliance ovation and the amount of $14.19, the SS in order to be paid within 30
[1:28:24] days of the date of this meeting a season. This is order for a period of 5 years
[1:28:30] is requested in the event. The Co compliance division has not contacted as required and or
[1:28:36] the violation is not corrected. It is recommended that a fine certification
[1:28:42] hearing be held before the special magistrate on October. 15th 2026. At 09:00AM the
[1:28:49] Wellington into Bull complex. One to 300 far as how boulevard Wellington, Florida.
[1:28:53] It is also recommended that no additional notification of the intent to impose find be
[1:28:58] given. Thank you very right. In the matter of Wellington versus Richard Kennedy and
[1:29:02] Jacqueline Kennedy aged ACC. >> 9, 2, 9 dash, 2, 0, 2, 6. Is anyone here on this matter?
[1:29:10] All right. Seeing none and noting the time of 10. 29, I just had one question and the
[1:29:17] violation of code section 13 DASH 3 DOT be 0.2, which is the garbage can. Is that
[1:29:23] still? Is that still part of the violations or has that been taken care?
[1:29:29] >> And it's a part of the violations as still visible from the street. Okay. I just
[1:29:34] want to make sure because I was checking off as you are seeing huge mansion and I miss
[1:29:36] that one. So. >> User air, but I just want to make sure are. Thank you
[1:29:40] very right. Based upon the evidence, testimony and photos in this matter. I find that
[1:29:47] the notice of violation and hearing for today was properly served on the respondents and
[1:29:51] that the respondents are not here further. I find that the respondents are in violation
[1:29:57] of land development regulations. Section 7. 0.2, I'm sorry. 8007.2 Point a
[1:30:05] through G Code section 13 DASH 3 dot be 0.1 land development regulations. Section
[1:30:15] 8001004006.5 point H Land Development regulations. Section 8007.7 Point B Code
[1:30:23] section 13 DASH 3 dot be done to code section 13 dash 2 dot be 0.1 and code section 13
[1:30:32] dash 2 dot the 0.2 The respondents are further order to correct these violations by
[1:30:40] September 17th 2026. A fine in the amount of $25 per day per violation will begin
[1:30:47] thereafter and found a fine and I'm sorry costs in the amount of $14.19 or further
[1:30:52] assessed a cease and desist order will be entered and that in the event the respondents
[1:30:57] failed to correct these find certification hearing will be held back here on October.
[1:31:02] 15th 2026 and all follow that up with a written order to the respondents. I do have a
[1:31:08] question. Also, it's 13 dash 2 dot beat out one. >> Okay. 13 dash 2 dot 0.2
[1:31:15] Very teen dash 3 beat out one and then land development 7 DOT 8 at 7 P 7 that 8 dot to
[1:31:26] dot a through G and 6 dot for about one to find that age, correct.
[1:31:29] >> Yeah. Whatever is in the okay. order that sometimes I think right. But what we're
[1:31:36] going to do is we're going to take the the notice of violation hearing and those of
[1:31:42] the violations because none of them have been corrected right? Correct? Yeah. I just
[1:31:46] wanted to make sure because I thought I heard a different code section.
[1:31:51] >> That one's corrected. Yes. Okay. That's I think that's where I about overtime where
[1:32:00] he's OK. So that was all right. So the garbage can has been corrected from the street
[1:32:05] up for being at the curb. Yes. And left at Kirby out outside allowed time. Yes, that's been
[1:32:12] corrected. >> All right. So the the >> order will reflect that.
[1:32:16] That violation will not be part of the order that I will enter.
[1:32:20] >> Perfect. Thank you. Thank She ate everything. >> What a move to item number
[1:32:26] 8 on the new business HCC 13. 63 2026 work. But those the code officer. What we're
[1:32:37] putting off Co compliance officer for the village of Wellington. Case numbers, CC
[1:32:42] Dash, 1, 3, 6, 3, dash, 2, 0, 2, 6 respondent's name Raman Marja. Property addresses 1,
[1:32:53] 2, 6, 3, 0, white coral drive Wellington, Florida. This case was established based on
[1:32:56] neighborhood improvement inspection, the intervene or H was served by posted notice on
[1:33:02] July 23rd 2026. at the property at Village Hall in village clerk's office copy.
[1:33:09] The posted notice was mailed to the property owner request the service of the interview.
[1:33:12] No HB entered as Entered correction date was August second 2026. and inspection on
[1:33:18] August. 3rd, 2026. on the following items remain beyond that. I'm given in the notice
[1:33:23] violation of Wellington code sections. 13 Dash 2 DOT beat out one stand and or
[1:33:29] discolored was staying and or discolored photos are taken that fairly and accurately
[1:33:34] represent a violation at that time. request of photographs be entered into evidence. So
[1:33:39] in turn a follow-up inspection on 8/12/2026, from the violations still exist. Staff
[1:33:47] conducted a pacer on the respondent is not heavy pending bankruptcy action
[1:33:50] research found there's not a list pendants filed against this property staff contact
[1:33:53] with the owner. Representative on 4/28/2026. While dropping off a door hanger. I spoke to
[1:34:00] the tenant. I explained the violations to him and he complained that the lights
[1:34:03] were not on. I explained that the holiday lights could not remain after January. He said
[1:34:09] he would remove the light but needed more time to correct the violations. Granted him a
[1:34:15] courtesy extension until May 28th 2026. Code Compliance Division recommends the
[1:34:19] respondents be found in violation of Wellington Code. Section 13 dash 2 DOT beat out
[1:34:24] one. It is recommended that the respondent be given until September 17th 2026. To
[1:34:28] correct violation or be charged time not to exceed $25 per day. For each day. The
[1:34:34] violation continues to exist. He's also recommended that costs incurred by the code
[1:34:40] compliance division and the amount of $14 and $0.19 the assessed in order to be paid
[1:34:46] within 30 days of the date of this meeting, the cease and desist order for a period of 5
[1:34:49] years as requested. In the event, the code compliance division has not contacted as
[1:34:55] required and or the violation is not corrected. It is recommended that a fine
[1:35:00] certification hearing be held before the special magistrate on October. 15th 2026. at
[1:35:05] 09:00AM at the Wellington Municipal Complex. 1, 2, 3, 0, 0, 4 still boulevard,
[1:35:12] Wellington, Florida. also recommended that no additional notification of the intent to
[1:35:15] impose find be given. >> All right. Thank you very much. And in the matter of
[1:35:21] village of Wellington versus remind my case number aged ACC 13. 63 dash 2, 0, 2, 6, Is
[1:35:27] anyone here on this matter? Alright, noting the time of 10 36 based upon the testimony,
[1:35:36] evidence and photos in this matter. I find that the notice of violation in hearing for
[1:35:40] today was properly served on the respondent who is not here. I further find that the
[1:35:46] respondent is in violation of Wellington Code. Section 13 dash 2 dot be 0.1 The
[1:35:54] respondent is order to correct this. These violations by September 17th 2026. a fine in
[1:36:01] the amount of $25 per day per violation is assessed against the respondent, which will
[1:36:07] begin thereafter costin the amount of $14.19 are assessed against the respondent. A
[1:36:13] cease and desist order will be entered and that in the event they responded does not
[1:36:19] correct this find certification hearing will be held back here on October.
[1:36:24] 15th 2026 and I will send the respondent written order with my ruling. Thank you. Thank
[1:36:29] you. >> The move to item number 11 and in the business ACC 17. 27
[1:36:33] 2026. As a vehicle was a court officer.
[1:36:50] >> Good morning as it Cook, let's officer for the village of Wellington. Case numbers
[1:36:55] HCC 1, 7, 2, 7, dash, 2, 0, 2, 6, respondent name is Martin Borgias. Property address is
[1:37:02] 2, 6, 3, 8 Bedford News drive Wellington, Florida. This case was established based on a
[1:37:06] neighborhood improvement inspection. The end Ian awaits was served by certified mail
[1:37:11] return receipt receive request the service of the end Vienna wage be answered in as
[1:37:15] evidence. So entered. The correction date was July 14th 2026. and inspection on July.
[1:37:23] 15th 2026 from the following items remain the on the time given in the notice of
[1:37:28] violation and willing to land development regulations. Section 8007.2 point a through
[1:37:32] G missing vegetation at the front plane of the home. 8001004006.6 mechanical
[1:37:38] equipment, not completely screened from view and 8001004006.5 point. The
[1:37:44] defense is in a state of deterioration with broken boards. Photos were taken in
[1:37:50] fairly and accurately represent the violation. At the time request of
[1:37:52] photographs be entered into evidence. So entered. Follow-up inspections on July
[1:37:57] 23rd July 27th August 4th, August, 11th in August 18th of 2026 from the violations to
[1:38:03] exist. Staff conducted a pacer search was found. The respondent does not have a
[1:38:07] pending bankruptcy action or list pendants filed against property. Staff contact with
[1:38:11] the onus last representative staff attempted to establish contact with borgias on
[1:38:17] multiple occasions by leaving door hangers and attempting to contact him by cellular
[1:38:22] device. Steph, make contact on one occasion through through his ring doorbell camera while
[1:38:25] leaving a door hanger at the property. During that conversation, staff advised
[1:38:30] Mr. Borgias of the outstanding violations and provide instructions on how to contact
[1:38:34] staff. Should he need additional information or clarification regarding the
[1:38:38] violations as of today, I have not received any further communication from our in
[1:38:41] regarding the violations or this case. The Code Compliance Division recommends to respond
[1:38:46] to be found a violation of Wellington Land Development regulations. Section 2008007.8
[1:38:52] through Gene 8001004006.6 and 4006.1 48 POINT 5 Point B B, it is recommended that the
[1:39:01] respondent be given until September 17th 2026. to correct the violations or be
[1:39:05] charged a fine not to exceed $25 per day per violation for each state of violations
[1:39:09] continue to exist. It is also recommended that costs incurred by the code
[1:39:14] compliance division in the amount of $12.76 the assess in order to be paid within 30
[1:39:19] days of the date of this meeting, a cease and desist order for a period of 5 years
[1:39:23] is requested in the event, the code compliance division has not contacted as required and
[1:39:27] or the violation is not corrected. It is recommended that if and certification
[1:39:31] hearing the hope for the special magistrate on October 15th, 2026 09:00AM at the to
[1:39:37] municipal complex. 1, 2, 3, 0, 0, 4 still boulevard when it's in Florida. It is also
[1:39:43] recommended an audition. A notification of the post fun to get.
[1:39:47] >> Thank you very much. And in the matter of Wellington versus Martin, G's SEC 17, 27
[1:39:55] to 0 to 6 is anyone here on this matter? Seeing none noting the time of 10, 40, I
[1:40:03] just had one question. And that if you could show me the photographs as they relate to
[1:40:09] the fence in a state of deterioration, broken boards. >> This is a good photo. If
[1:40:14] I'm men on the fence, you can see. More towards the bottom of the gate portion. There is
[1:40:19] one section right there that is broken. They put it back, but it's not it's not
[1:40:24] corrected its OK? >> And so are these 0 lot line houses so that the house to
[1:40:31] the left, their property actually begins at the house because I'm trying I'm trying
[1:40:36] to figure out is this the homeowner, the responded they're responsible for for
[1:40:42] this entire gate. So property, what's on the left side of the House is what their response.
[1:40:47] >> Okay. >> The the homeowner that's on the left, they're not
[1:40:54] responsible for the gate. That's to their right to know they have. They have their own
[1:40:58] section of fencing. That is to the left of their house as well. Gotcha. Okay. Got you.
[1:41:02] Alright. Appreciate the clarification. Alright, based upon the testimony, evidence
[1:41:08] and photos in this matter. I find that the notice of violation in hearing for today
[1:41:12] was properly served on the respondent who is not here based upon the evidence, photo
[1:41:18] and testimony. I further find that the respondent is in violation of Wellington Land
[1:41:25] Development regulations. Section 7.8 point to point a through G Land Development
[1:41:29] regulations. Section 8001004006.5 Point B B and Land Development regulations.
[1:41:38] Section 4006.0 8001.6, the respondent is ordered to correct this via these
[1:41:46] violations by September 17th 2026. a fine in the amount of $25 per day per violation is
[1:41:52] assessed against the respondent and and costs in the amount of $12.76 or also
[1:41:59] assessed cease and desist order for 5 years will be entered and that in the event
[1:42:04] the respondent fails to correct these violations, a certification, a fine
[1:42:09] certification hearing will be held back here on October. 15th 2026. follow that up with
[1:42:13] a written order. Thank you. We're gonna move to item number 14 HCC 1957. 2026.
[1:42:22] >> Staff entered into this stipulation agreement with compliance date of November.
[1:42:26] 1920, 26, if not corrected to find certification hearing in December 10th 2026. and fine
[1:42:32] not to exceed $25 per day per violation. 14 0 K.
[1:42:55] the item number 15 HCC. 22. 22. 22 86 work. Put those the code
[1:43:00] officer. putting all code compliance officer for the village of Wellington.
[1:43:09] >> Case number ACC, Dash 2, 2, 2, 2, dash, 2, 0, 2, 6, respondent's name Ruth Graham.
[1:43:17] Property address is 6.39 Lake Wellington Drive Wellington, Florida. This case was
[1:43:20] established based on a neighborhood improvement inspection. The end of a
[1:43:24] underage was served by certified mail return receipt received request the service
[1:43:28] of the Nrv under HB enters evidence. So in 2 correction date was 8/3/2026, and
[1:43:34] inspection on August. 4th 2026. found the following items remain beyond that. I'm
[1:43:40] given the notice violation of Wellington Code Section 13 dash 2 dot the that too
[1:43:44] driveway stand and or discolored land development regulations. Section 7 POINT
[1:43:50] 8.7 Point B hedges and rear property encroaching into over public right of way missing
[1:43:55] dying hedges and rear property dead fronds and palm tree. Code. Section 13 dash 2 dot
[1:44:01] beat out. One has been corrected. Voters were taking the fairly and accurately
[1:44:08] represent the violation at that time. I request of for the rest being hurt in an
[1:44:11] evidence. So interred follow-up inspections on August 5th and 13th 2026. From
[1:44:17] the violations still exist. Staff conducted a pacer search are trying respond to is not a
[1:44:23] deep get bankruptcy action research found there's not a list pendants filed against
[1:44:26] this property. Staff contact with the owner representative on June, 18th door Hanger was
[1:44:32] left at the property on August. 5th 2026. I sent an email to the property owner
[1:44:37] explaining the remaining violations and the hearing date of August. 20th 2026. No
[1:44:41] response was given. Codifies Division recommends respond to be found in violation of
[1:44:47] Wellington code sections. 13 Dash 2 DOT beat out 2 and land development regulations.
[1:44:54] Section 8007.7 Point it is recommended that the respondent be given until
[1:45:00] September 17th 2026. To correct the violations or be charged a fine not to exceed
[1:45:06] $25 per day per violation for each day. The violations continue to exist. He's also
[1:45:11] recommended that the costs incurred by the code compliance division, the
[1:45:14] amount of $13 and $0.54 be assessed in order to be paid within 30 days of the day.
[1:45:19] This meeting the cease and desist order for a period of 5 years as requested. In the
[1:45:25] event there, code compliance division has not contacted as required under the violation
[1:45:28] is not corrected. It is recommended that he finds certification hearing be held
[1:45:33] before the special magistrate on October. 15th 2026. and 09:00AM at Wellington
[1:45:40] Municipal Complex. 1, 2, 3, 0, 0, 4 still boulevard, Wellington, Florida. It is
[1:45:46] also recommended that no additional notification of the intent to impose find be
[1:45:48] given. All right. Thank you very much. >> And in the matter of
[1:45:52] Wellington versus reach 8 Trahan case number aged SCC. 2, 2, 2, 2, dash, 2, 0, 2, 6.
[1:45:59] Is anyone here on this matter? All right. Seeing noting the time of 10. 46 based upon the
[1:46:07] evidence, testimony and photos in this matter. I find that the respondent was properly
[1:46:12] served the notice of violation and hearing for today and they are not present based upon the
[1:46:19] evidence testimony and photos. I find that the respondent is in violation of land
[1:46:25] development regulations. Section 7 POINT 8 points. 7 Point B and Wellington Code
[1:46:29] section 13 dash 2 dot be 0.2 The respondent is ordered to correct these violations by
[1:46:36] September 17th 2026. a fine in the amount of $25 per day per violation will begin
[1:46:44] thereafter. Costin the amount of $13.54 are further assessed. A cease and desist
[1:46:50] order will be entered and that in the event the respondent does not correct these
[1:46:55] violations of find certification hearing will be held back here on October.
[1:46:59] 15th and I will follow this up with a written order to the respondent. Thank you. move to
[1:47:04] item number 16 HCC. 22 landed to try to 26 staff and turn it into a stipulation agreement
[1:47:12] with compliance date of September. 17th. >> 2026, if not find
[1:47:17] certification hearing October. 15th 2026. find out that exceed $25 per day. We're
[1:47:26] going to move to item number 17 HCC. 26. 0, 9, 2026. Why put those the court officer?
[1:47:33] Good morning. >> We're putting all code compliance officer for the
[1:47:38] village of Wellington. Case number is CC Dash. 2, 6, 0, 9 dash, 2, 0, 2, 6, respondent's
[1:47:45] name Srp Sub LLC property addresses 1, 6, 1, 3 Farmington Avenue, Wellington,
[1:47:52] Florida. This case was established based on a neighborhood improvement
[1:47:57] inspection, the intervene or waitress, or by certified mail return, receipt return.
[1:48:00] Receipt received. Her quest to service. Have the intervene or HB enters evidence. So entered
[1:48:08] correction date was July 27th 2026 and inspection on July. 30th 2026 found the following
[1:48:14] items remain beyond that. I'm given in the notice violation of Wellington code sections.
[1:48:18] 13 dash, 2 dot. Be that too driveway and sidewalk stand and or discolored weeds
[1:48:24] growing in driveway and sidewalk. 13 dash 3 that see that to household items on
[1:48:29] side and in front of house visible from the street land Development regulations.
[1:48:35] Section 7 POINT 8.7 Point B landscape not being maintained any meat healthy. early
[1:48:41] appearance, grass ground. needs to be moan dead fronds and palm trees hedges
[1:48:45] overgrown and need to be trimmed debris dead from Juan Area Code section. 22 dash 9
[1:48:52] DOT beat out 2 was in compliance. Photos are taken that fairly and accurately
[1:48:57] represent the violations at that time, request of photographs be entered into
[1:49:00] evidence. So entered follow-up inspections on August 6th and 13th 2026. Found the
[1:49:07] violations still exist. Staff conducted a pacer from the respondent is not heavy
[1:49:14] pending bankruptcy action research found there's not a list pendants filed against
[1:49:16] this property. Staff contact with the owner representative on June 10th door Hanger was
[1:49:22] left of the property. No response was given. Coca Vice Division recommends respond to
[1:49:27] be found in violation of Wellington code sections. 13 Dash 2 DOT beat out 2, 13 dash
[1:49:31] 3. That seat up to and land development regulations. Section 8007.7 Point B, it is
[1:49:39] recommended that the respondent be given until September 17th 2026. to
[1:49:43] correct the violations or be charged a fine not to exceed $25 per day per violation for
[1:49:48] each day. The violations continue to exist. It is also recommended that the costs
[1:49:53] incurred by the code compliance division. The amount of $13.54 be assessed
[1:49:59] in order to be paid within 30 days of the date of this meeting cease and desist order
[1:50:02] for a period of 5 years as requested. In the event, the code compliance division
[1:50:08] contacted as required under the violation is not corrected. It is recommended
[1:50:12] that a fine certification hearing be held before the special magistrate on October.
[1:50:16] 15th 2026. At 09:00AM at the willing to municipal complex. 1, 2, 3, 0, 0, 4 so boulevard,
[1:50:24] Wellington, Florida. There's also recommended that no additional notification of the
[1:50:28] intent to impose find be given. Thank you very right. In the matter of Wellington
[1:50:35] versus Srp Sub LLC H Dash D C. >> To 6 0, 9 dash 2, 0, 2, 6, Is anyone here on this matter?
[1:50:44] All right. Seeing noting the time of 10. 51 based upon the evidence, testimony and photos
[1:50:51] in this matter. I find that the notice of violation in hearing for today were
[1:50:56] properly served on the respondent that the respondent is not present further. I find
[1:51:01] that the respondent is in violation of Wellington Land Development regulations.
[1:51:06] Section 8007.7 Point B Code section 13 dash 2 dot the 0.2 and code section 13 dash 3 DOT
[1:51:15] C 0.2 I further find in order that the respondent correct these violations by September
[1:51:25] 17th 2026. thereafter a fine in the amount of $25 per day per violation is assessed
[1:51:28] against the respondent. Also assessing costs in the amount of $13 and $0.54 entering
[1:51:35] cease and desist order and that in the event the respondent does not timely,
[1:51:41] correct. These find certification hearing will be held on October. 15th 2026 and
[1:51:47] this will be followed up with a written order to the respondent. Thank you. Thank
[1:51:51] you. gonna move to item number 18 the business HCC. >> 29 57 2026 as a couple as a
[1:51:58] court officer.
[1:52:16] >> Good morning. Isaac Moe, Code compliance officer for the village of Wellington.
[1:52:20] Case numbers H C C dash 29. 57 dash 2026. Respondent names are Bruce t Holland, more jury
[1:52:28] and Helen? Property just as 1, 3, 1, 8, 3 Halifax court Wellington, Florida. This case
[1:52:35] was established based on a complaint. The end of Ian awaits passerby post a notice
[1:52:40] July 23rd 2026. at the property Village Hall and at the Villas Kirk's office, a
[1:52:45] copy of the Post. A notice was mailed to the property owner request. The service of the
[1:52:49] end will be in a way be entered as evidence. So entered correction date was
[1:52:53] August second 2026. and inspection on August. 3rd, 2026. from the following items
[1:53:00] remain the on the time given in the notice of violation and Wilmington code sections, 13
[1:53:03] DASH to Point B 0.1 Roof in a state of deterioration. Rufus stained in or discolored was
[1:53:09] in the state of deterioration. Well, staying in or discolored. Garage door in a
[1:53:15] state of deterioration chimney won the state of deterioration, garage side
[1:53:18] door, staying in or discolored 13 dash to point B 0.2 driveway staying in or
[1:53:25] discolored corrected, sidewalk stand and Discolored corrected and willing to land
[1:53:29] development regulations. Section 7 POINT 8 points. 7 Point that France in the palms
[1:53:33] need to be removed, corrected. Hedges are did disease and her dining areas still in
[1:53:38] violation. And land development regulations. Section 8007.1, 4 th missing
[1:53:44] most within the landscape areas. Photos are taken a fairly and accurately
[1:53:49] represent a violation at the time, a request to photograph incident. Evans so entered.
[1:53:54] Follow-up inspections on August 10th. 11th 13011th and 18th found a violation still
[1:53:59] exist. Staff conducted a pacer search which found the part that's from the respondent
[1:54:04] does not have a pending bankruptcy action Orla spend its fight against property.
[1:54:07] Staff contact with the owner. that's representative. remain in communication A
[1:54:13] representative of the H.O.A. and Joshua Asset per Survation coordinator regarding the
[1:54:17] outstanding violations at the property. Josh, a recently advised that he has obtained
[1:54:22] access to the property in their work orders have been open to the just incorrect,
[1:54:27] outstanding violations. Communication with Diane has also remain ongoing regarding
[1:54:30] the property and efforts efforts towards compliance. The CO Compliance Division
[1:54:34] recommends to respond find a violation of Wellington Code. Section 13 DASH to Point B 0.1
[1:54:40] Wellington Land Development regulations Section 7. 48.7 fully be in some 48.1, 4 th it
[1:54:47] is recommended that the respondent be given until September 17th 2026. To
[1:54:52] correct the violations or be charged the fine not to exceed $25 per day per violation for
[1:54:56] each day to violations continue to exist. It is also recommended that costs
[1:55:00] incurred by the code compliance division in the amount of $14.19 be assessed
[1:55:05] in order to be paid within 30 days of the date of this meeting. cease and desist
[1:55:09] order for a period of 5 years is requested in the event. The code Compliance division is
[1:55:14] not coming taken as required and where the violation is not corrected. It is recommended
[1:55:18] that he finds certification hearing be held before the special magistrate on October.
[1:55:21] 15th 2026. and 09:00AM at the women to municipal complex. 1, 2, 3, 0, 0, 4, stove or
[1:55:27] dwelling to Florida. It is also recommended and no additional notification of the
[1:55:31] intention pokes fun begin. All right. Thank you very much. >> in the matter of Wellington
[1:55:39] versus Bruce D who lend or Marjorie Hula in case number which the SEC? 29, 57 dash 2,
[1:55:46] 0, 2, 6, is anyone here on this matter? Alright, noting the time of 10 56 and based
[1:55:54] upon the evidence, testimony and photos in this matter, I find that the notice of
[1:55:59] violation and hearing for today was properly served on the respondents and that the
[1:56:02] respondents are not here. I further order that the respondent further find that
[1:56:09] the respondents are in violation of land development regulations. Section 8007.7
[1:56:14] Point B Wellington Code. Section 13 dash 2 dot be 0.1 and land development
[1:56:21] regulations. Section 8007.1 point age. I further ordered the respondents to correct
[1:56:26] these violations by September 17th 2026. a fine in the amount of $25 per day per
[1:56:34] violation is assessed against the respondents and costs in the amount of 30 $14.19 is
[1:56:41] also assessed. I will enter cease and desist order for 5 years and that in the event
[1:56:47] the respondent does not correct these find certification hearing will be
[1:56:50] held back here on October. 15th 2026 and a written order will go to the respondents
[1:56:56] with these rulings. Thank you. gonna move to item number 3 and a fine certification it CC
[1:57:03] 4, 6, 9, 0, 22 5. >> Christopher person as the court officer.
[1:57:21] >> Good morning. Krista Persaud coca hopes are for village of Wellington. Case
[1:57:25] number CC, 4, 6, 9, 0, 2, 0, 2, 5, Responders name Emily modeling Brett modeling
[1:57:34] property address one for 4 to 2 Blackberry drive on Florida. They are in date was April
[1:57:40] 16th 2026. The respondent was ordered to correct. The violation of long Coat
[1:57:45] section. 13, dash 2 dot be that one. 13 dash 2 beat out 2. 13 Dash 3 got beat out one
[1:57:55] and one to land development, regulation, action. 7 that set 7 the 7 died be 6 to 4.1 0.5
[1:58:05] BB. >> 6th forgot one 0.5 That H. 6 top 4.1 got he got 5 that X.
[1:58:20] 7 that 8. Not too. Dash on where before July 16 or pay a fine not to exceed $25 per day
[1:58:30] per violation. The order also. Schedule of provocation. Here on August. 20th 2026 Indico
[1:58:40] Division was not. Contacted, has required an order by nation. We're not corrected.
[1:58:48] And this reaction on July 17th 2026. Found the property still in violation of wanton coach
[1:58:53] Section. 13, dash 2 dot the 0.1, the garage door in the state of deterioration. All
[1:59:02] other violations were correct. A follow-up inspection on July. 21st 2026. And August
[1:59:12] 11, 2026 found violations still do exist. Photos are taken. They represent the
[1:59:17] condition of the property at the time of the various inspections. I request a
[1:59:20] photograph speed in Turin as evidence. So entered. Pacers. Church founder responded does
[1:59:26] not have a pending bankruptcy action or a list and then filed against a property.
[1:59:33] Staff has been in contact with the property. Owner since the beginning of the case. During
[1:59:40] the most recent communication. The property owner was advised that only item that remain. To
[1:59:45] be correct. It was a deteriorate to garage door. As of July 17th. 26. Since that
[1:59:52] time staff has received no response from the property owner and the property remains
[1:59:57] a violation. Hochul division recommends respond to be found in violation of the order.
[2:00:06] team coach Section 13 Dash 2 DOT beat out one. And respond to be assessed a fine pursuant
[2:00:11] to section. 2 Dash 3, 8, too. The Cold Ordinance and Section 1, 6, 2, 0, or 9 to be. Of the
[2:00:22] Florida statute. And determination and determine in the fine amount. special
[2:00:29] magistrate must consider the following factors. The gravity of the violation actions taken
[2:00:34] by violator. To correct the violation. And previous violation of the same coach
[2:00:41] Action Committee. By the violent at the same property. Has via lesion of the. As a
[2:00:48] drafted, the violation, the violation is moderate. The garage door is visibly
[2:00:54] deteriorated with peeling and damage material along the lower portions of the door.
[2:00:59] The condition negatively impacts to X 2 appearance and maintenance of the property.
[2:01:04] As to the actions taken by violator. The property owner was of eyes. The remaining
[2:01:11] violation as of July, 17th 2026. And the most. Recent inspection. No corrective
[2:01:18] action has been observed. Has received no response from the property owner of the property
[2:01:27] remains a violation. any previous violation of the same section committed by violator
[2:01:32] on the same property. This is the first violation of this court's action. Based on these
[2:01:39] factors. Koch, I'm playing division recommends response and the SS the fine in amount
[2:01:44] of $25 per day convention on July 17. And in addition the cost and amount of $49 and
[2:01:55] $0.69, which includes the cost assess and the order both continue accrue into the
[2:01:59] violation is correct. All right. Thank you very much. >> All right. In the matter of
[2:02:05] Wellington versus Emily J Modlin and Brent See Modlin H Dash C C 4, 6, 9, 0 dash, 2,
[2:02:12] 0, 2, 5, Is anyone here on this matter? All right. Seeing none and noting the time of
[2:02:22] 11, 0, 3, based upon the evidence, photos and testimony in this matter. I find that on
[2:02:30] February 19th 2026. That the respondent in the special magistrate entered into a
[2:02:36] stipulation where in among the many violations, specifically the respondent agreed to
[2:02:42] correct the violation of Wellington Code. Section 13 dash 2 dot be 0.1 Further. I
[2:02:48] find that the respondent has not corrected this violation when hearing the testimony
[2:02:55] evidence and photos and the requirements of Florida statute and Wellington code
[2:02:59] when I consider the gravity of the violation and >> garage door and this
[2:03:07] violation have a negative impact on the neighborhood and the property. This particular
[2:03:11] property respondents efforts to correct these violations. And while the respondent has
[2:03:16] made efforts to correct violations of the other, correct the violations of the
[2:03:22] other items they have not made despite being advised that the garage door still in
[2:03:28] violation, they have not made any efforts to correct that violation. And as far as the
[2:03:35] specific garage door violation, there is no history of that. Taking those matters
[2:03:40] into consideration. I determined that a fine of $25 per day for this violation is
[2:03:44] assessed against the respondent which began on July 17th 2026. costs in the amount
[2:03:52] of $49.69 are also assessed. And I will follow that up with a written order to the
[2:03:57] respondents. For the item. Number 4, undefined certification HCC 5, 0, 1, 1,
[2:04:06] 225 Christopher percent of the code officer. >> Good morning, Chris
[2:04:08] herbicide. >> Come ICE officer from village of One-tenth. Case
[2:04:14] number CC, 5, 0, 1, one, dash, 2, 0, 2, 5, Responders name. Michelle Schumer, Steven
[2:04:22] Schumer, property address. to lemon grass lane wounds in Florida. The hearing date was
[2:04:29] April 16th 2026. The respondent was order to correct the violation of one
[2:04:36] 10 code Section 13 dash 2 DOT beat up one. 13 Dash 3 derby that 3 and won't in land
[2:04:43] development regulations sections. 6 DOT for 0.1 that 0.1 6 thought for about one
[2:04:52] that he got K. >> 6 to 4.1 that he that 5 that BB. 6 that for 0.1, that
[2:05:02] he got 5 that H. 7, that 8 that too, that G. 7 that he 7 not be on or before July. 16th
[2:05:19] 2026 or pay a fine not to exceed $25 per day per violation. No, we're also
[2:05:24] schedule a fresh indication here on August. 20th 2026. the code compliance division was
[2:05:29] not. Contacted as require an order violation that corrected. Inspection on
[2:05:37] 7/17/2026. Find a violation. In violation of land of regulations. Section 7 that 7
[2:05:48] that be MS in motion. The landscape. All other violations have been
[2:05:51] corrected. A follow-up inspection on July. 24. August August 7. August 11 found the
[2:06:01] violations still does exist. Owners were taken to represent the condition of the and that
[2:06:07] time of diverse inspections. I requested photographs be entered into evidence. So
[2:06:14] entered a pacer search. Found respondent does not have a pending bankruptcy Action.
[2:06:18] Orleans pendants filed against a property. Staff has been in contact with the property
[2:06:22] units throughout the case during the course of the case, the property owner was granted
[2:06:27] several extensions as well as a stipulation agreement, providing additional time to
[2:06:33] bring the property into compliance. On July 12, 2026 the property owner. a staff
[2:06:41] request in a one-month extension to complete required most. Due to the case have
[2:06:45] hoping for more than 9 months. Several previous extensions of stipulation agreement have
[2:06:50] already been granted the request. 4 additional extension with the night. The
[2:06:55] property owner was of eyes that if the remaining violation cannot be corrected
[2:07:00] prior to hear. Staff recommend that property 10 August 2020. 26 Karen requested additional
[2:07:10] time for compliance from the magistrate. The Koch, a positive vision recommend the
[2:07:16] respondent be found in One of the order along to Land Development regulations
[2:07:22] section 7 that 7, that be. And the respondent be assessed a fine pursuant to section. 2
[2:07:30] Dash 3, 8, that. 2 of the total were in this and the section 1, 6, 2, 9, 0, 9, 2,
[2:07:41] the of the Florida statute. And determinant find now special magistrate must
[2:07:48] consider the following factors. The gravity of the violation and the actions
[2:07:53] taken by violated to correct the violation and his previous violation of the same code
[2:08:00] section committed by violent at on the same property. Has set a gravity of the
[2:08:03] violation. The violation is minor. That absence of the require mulch and the
[2:08:09] property. Does that mean a village established landscape and property maintenance
[2:08:13] standards? As actions taken by violator to correct the violation. The proper the
[2:08:21] property owner has taken steps to address other violations associated with the case.
[2:08:29] Several extensions stipulation agreement provide additional time to achieve compliance.
[2:08:35] despite additional time provided the most violations to remains. Any previous. And
[2:08:42] the previous violation of the same code section committed by the violator on the same
[2:08:45] property. This is the first violation of this court's action. Based on these
[2:08:50] factors. Cool complies Division recommends respond to be assessed the fine in the
[2:08:55] amount of $25 per day. Convention on July 17th 2026. And the addition to the cost
[2:09:01] them out of $47 and $0.48, which doesn't include the costs, the sesame order both
[2:09:10] continue to accrue into the violation was corrected. >> All right. Thank you very
[2:09:15] Right. In the matter of Wellington versus Michelle. >> Schwimmer and Stephen K
[2:09:21] Schwimmer case number aged SCC 5, 0, 1, 1, dash 2, 0, 2, 5, Is anyone here on this matter?
[2:09:29] >> All right. Seeing none and noting the time of 11, 10 based upon the evidence,
[2:09:34] testimony and photos in this matter. I find that the notice of find certification in
[2:09:38] hearing for today was properly served on the wrist and it who is not present further that on
[2:09:45] April 16th 2026 respondent and the special magistrate entered into a stipulation where in
[2:09:52] the respondent agreed to correct numerous violations, including but not limited to
[2:09:58] lent Wellington Land Development regulations. Section 8007.7 Point Further
[2:10:03] based upon the evidence and testimony and photos. I find that the respondent has not
[2:10:07] corrected that violation after hearing the testimony, evidence and photos and
[2:10:14] considering the requirements of Florida law and Wellington Code and looking at the
[2:10:19] violation first, the gravity of the violation, the negative in visual impact of the
[2:10:23] property and the negative impact to the neighborhood that the respondents efforts
[2:10:28] to correct the violation while the respondent has made efforts to correct the other
[2:10:34] violations, they've been advised and have not moved to correct the violation of of
[2:10:41] Wellington Land Development regulations. Section 8007.7 Point And the history of that
[2:10:48] specific violation at that property is none considering those. I determined that a
[2:10:52] fine in the amount of $25 per day per violation is assessed against the respondent which
[2:10:58] began on jet or July 17th 2026 cost and the amount of $47.48 are further assessed and I
[2:11:06] will provide a written order to the respondents with my ruling. Thank you. Thank you.
[2:11:11] The move to item number 6 in the final certification ACC 7, 1,
[2:11:15] >> That's right. A 26 staff is requesting an extension to the September 17th 2. And a 26
[2:11:22] hearing would have fined certification hearing scheduled for October 15,
[2:11:28] 2026. potential fine of $25 per So granted, thank you. we're gonna move to item
[2:11:33] number 7, undefined certification ACC 2, 0, 5, 2, And a 26 doesn't just as the
[2:11:38] court officer. Johnson, Joseph Quick compliance officer for fallen son. Case numbers and
[2:11:53] stashed CC Dash 2, 5 dash 2026. >> The respondent names are
[2:11:57] Chadwick J Walters and Kimberly, tranquil Waters the Friday at just 1, 5, 1, 7, 0
[2:12:03] matter would drive Washington, Florida. The respondent was order to correct the
[2:12:08] violations of Wellington Code Section 13 DASH to Point B, 1, 1, the roof, the mailbox and
[2:12:13] the full stain. And this color and 13 dash to point B point to driveway and sidewalk
[2:12:19] stained and discolored and a driveway is in a state of deterioration. Tried worries.
[2:12:24] Kraken is to be repaired in a long Then development regulations. Section 7 POINT 7
[2:12:31] Point B mulch missing from the landscape area on or before July 16, 2026. Or pay if I
[2:12:38] exceed $25 per day per violation. The order also scheduled find Safety
[2:12:44] Commission hearing on August 20th 2026. If the code compliance division was not
[2:12:48] contacted as required and order violation was not corrected on inspection on
[2:12:54] July, 17th 2026. From the probably still in violation of Warrington section 13 dash 2,
[2:12:59] the and 13 dash. 2 point. The 0.2 and a long tunnel in development regulations.
[2:13:05] Section 7.8 from 7 Point B. If follow-up inspection August 13th and 18th 2026 from the
[2:13:12] virus since exists. For his foot as we take in represent the condition of the property
[2:13:18] at the time of the inspections request that the photos be entered as evidence. So
[2:13:23] entered a pace assist from the respondent does not have that penny because the action or
[2:13:26] this pennants filed against this property contact with the property owners last
[2:13:32] representative. I have been in contact with the property owner, Mr. Chadwick who I have
[2:13:36] met at the property on July 17th 2026. during our meeting, I had explained all the
[2:13:42] outstanding violations and Mr. Chadwick stated that he that the surfaces are not dirty,
[2:13:47] but are simply just how they are. He had mentioned that he previously attempted to
[2:13:52] address the violations through pressure, washing and other methods without any success.
[2:13:56] And he requested. I speak with mice with Pfizer to see what could be done. I later emailed
[2:14:02] Mr. Chadwick on August 14th 2026. To confirm that the violation are indeed valid.
[2:14:08] After speaking my supervisor and if he opposes the violations, he will need to
[2:14:11] attend the hearing to contest this case. And as of today, I have heard back from had
[2:14:15] weakened the father's, you know, still present. The code compliance Division recommends
[2:14:20] that the respondent be funded violation of Williamson. I'm sorry of the Order will
[2:14:23] instead go Section 13 DASH to point B. 0.1 13, stupid be point to and want and then
[2:14:31] development regulations. Section 7 POINT 7 Point and that the respondent be assess
[2:14:35] if and pursuant to this section to 3, a point, a point to a the code of the ordinance
[2:14:42] and Section one. 62, 0, 9, to be of the Florida statues. Undetermined amount of the
[2:14:53] fine. The special magistrate must consider the following factors. One, the gravity of
[2:14:58] the violation to any action taken by the violators to correct the violations and 3,
[2:15:03] any previous violation of the same section committed by the violator on the property. Has
[2:15:08] gravity of the violations. The violations are unsightly and effects this wrong. The
[2:15:13] properties Hastert action taken by the violator to correct the violations. No
[2:15:18] action has been taken to bring to nation into compliance has We've is why wasn't the same
[2:15:24] code section committed by the violator on the same property? There are no prior violations
[2:15:28] of this code section on record on this property. Based on these factors, the code
[2:15:33] compliance Division recommends that the respondent is assess a fine amount of $25 per day
[2:15:38] per violation commencing July 17th 2026 in addition to cost and the amount of $34.48 Which
[2:15:46] does include costs, assess and order. Both continue to accrue to the auditions, corrected.
[2:15:52] All right. Thank you very much. >> All right. In the matter of
[2:15:56] Wellington versus Chadwick J Walters, Kimberly Walters H C C Dash 205, dash 2, 0, 2, 6,
[2:16:05] is anyone here on this matter? All right. Seeing none and noting the time of 11, 16
[2:16:13] based upon the evidence, testimony and photos in this matter. I find that the notice
[2:16:17] to find certification in hearing for today was properly served on the respondents who
[2:16:21] are not present further. That on June 18th 2026, the special magistrate entered an order
[2:16:30] requiring the respondents to correct the violations to Wellington Land Development
[2:16:34] regulations. Section 8007.7 Point B. Wellington Code. Section 13 dash 2 dot be 0.1
[2:16:42] and code section 13 dash 2 dot be 0.2 further. Based upon the evidence, testimony and photos
[2:16:48] in this matter. I find that these violations have not been corrected after hearing the
[2:16:54] evidence and testimony and photos and considering the requirements of Florida
[2:16:58] statutes and Wellington Code, I reviewed the gravity of this violation and it is a visual
[2:17:06] negative impact to the property as well as the neighborhood. The respondent
[2:17:11] has not made any efforts to correct these violations. And the respondent does not have a
[2:17:16] history of violations at address based upon the foregoing, I determined that a
[2:17:22] fine in the amount of $25 per day per violation is assessed against the responded to begin
[2:17:28] on July 17th 2026. further costs in the amount of $34.48 are assessed and that written
[2:17:36] order will go to the respondent with this ruling. Thank you. Thank you. What a
[2:17:41] move to item number 8 undefined certification HCC 11. 42 2026.
[2:17:47] >> Staff is requesting an extension to the 9/17/2026 herring. Find certification
[2:17:52] hearing scheduled for October 15, 226, what a potential fine of $50 per day. Thank you
[2:18:00] taken them a kind and ACC 15. 36, 2026 as they come a court officer.
[2:18:18] >> Has it co compliance officer for the village of Wellington? Case numbers H C C
[2:18:24] 5, 3, 6, dash, 2, 0, 2, 6, Responding name is Daniel Rosario. Property addresses 1,
[2:18:31] 2, 9, 4, 0 Buckland court Wellington, Florida. The hearing date was July 16,
[2:18:37] 2026. The respondent was order to correct the violation of Wellington code sections. 13
[2:18:41] Dash 3 point. The 0.1 garbage container, not completely screened from view in. 22
[2:18:48] dash, 9 point commercial vehicle parked in driveway and can clean the screen from
[2:18:50] view. On or before July. 22nd 2026 or pay a fine not to exceed $25 per day per
[2:18:59] violation. The order also scheduled fight certification hearing on August, 20th 2026
[2:19:04] if the code compliance division was not contacted as required in where the
[2:19:07] violation was not correct. Inspection on July 23rd 2026. From the property. Still in
[2:19:14] violation of Wilmington code sections. 13 DASH 3 point. The 0.1 And 22 dash 9 point
[2:19:19] Follow-up inspections on July 28th August 3rd, August 10th August 12 13th 14th, 15th,
[2:19:27] 16015th 18th and 19th of 2026. from the violation still exists. Photos were taken
[2:19:34] represent the condition of the property at the time of the various inspections request.
[2:19:36] The photos be entered into evidence. So entered. Pacer. Search from the respondent
[2:19:42] does not have a pending bankruptcy action or enlist pendants filed against this
[2:19:45] property contact with the representative. I have communicated with Daniel
[2:19:49] regarding the violations on the property on April 16th 2026. Daniel advised that he
[2:19:54] ordered a car cover for the commercial vehicle which was expected to arrive on April
[2:20:00] 23rd 2026, advised that a follow-up inspection would be conducted to verify compliance
[2:20:05] on May 12 2026. are we going spoke with Victor who advised that Daniel was unavailable. I
[2:20:13] left a message requesting that will contact me regarding the cold case. I have not received
[2:20:16] any further communication from Daniel and subsequent inspections found that the
[2:20:20] violations remain. The Co compliance Division recommends to respond to be found
[2:20:25] violation of the order. Wellington code sections. 13 Dash 3 point. The 0.1 in 22
[2:20:30] dash 9, 1, C and that the respondent be assessed the fund pursuant to section 2
[2:20:35] DASH 3, 8, a 2 of the code of ordinances in Section 1, 1, 6, 2.0, 0, 9, to be of the
[2:20:44] Florida statues in determining the amount of the fine. The special magistrate must
[2:20:47] consider the following factors. The gravity of the violation. Any actions taken
[2:20:52] by the violated to correct the violation in any previous violations of the same code
[2:20:56] section committed by violator on the same property. As to the gravity of the violations,
[2:21:02] the on-screen garbage container in commercial vehicle are visible from the
[2:21:05] street negatively impacting the residential appearance of the property and surrounding
[2:21:09] neighborhood as to the actions taken by the violated to correct the violation. Can you
[2:21:14] advise the to cover had been ordered for the commercial vehicle? However, subsequent
[2:21:18] inspections found that the commercial vehicle and garbage container remained on screen
[2:21:21] and the property remains in violation as to the previous as to any previous violations
[2:21:26] of the same code section committed by the violator on the city property. There was a
[2:21:31] previous violation involving a commercial vehicle that was not completely screened from
[2:21:34] view. No previous violations were found regarding the screening of the garbage
[2:21:38] container based on these factors, the code compliance Division recommends that the
[2:21:42] respondent is assessed a fine in the amount of $25 per day per violation commencing on
[2:21:46] July 23rd 2026. and in addition to costing the amount of $48 and $0.67, which does
[2:21:54] include costs, assess in the order, both continuing to accrue into the violation is
[2:21:58] corrected. >> All right. Thank you very much. And in the matter of
[2:22:01] Wellington versus Daniel Rosario aged SCC 15, 36 2026. Is anyone here on this matter?
[2:22:10] All right. Seeing none and noting the time of 11. 22, based upon the testimony,
[2:22:15] evidence and photos in this matter, I find that the notice of find certification in
[2:22:20] hearing for today was properly served on the respondent who is not here further. That on
[2:22:26] July 16th 2026, the special magistrate entered an order requiring the respondent to
[2:22:30] correct the violations of Wellington Code. Section 13 DASH 3 dot the 0.1 and code
[2:22:39] section. 22 dash 9 dot C further that these violations are ongoing and have not been
[2:22:46] corrected. And after hearing the evidence, testimony photos and considering the
[2:22:51] requirements of Florida law and Wellington Code, I reviewed the gravity of the
[2:22:56] violations, which is the negative visual impact to not only this residential
[2:23:02] neighborhood but to the entire surrounding neighborhood and that the respondent has not
[2:23:07] made any efforts to correct the violations and that the respondent does not have a
[2:23:14] history of the same violations at the same location based upon that, I determined that a
[2:23:21] fine in the amount of $25 per day per violation is assessed against the respondent which
[2:23:27] began on July 23rd 2026. cost in the amount of $48.67 are assessed against the
[2:23:35] respondent. And I will follow this up with a written order. Thank you. Thank you. That's
[2:23:38] the end of the agenda. All right. Thank you very much for everything. And this meeting