Minutes 03-23-06
MINUTES OF THE CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD LIEN REDUCTION MEETING
HELD IN THE COMMISSION CHAMBERS, CITY HALL,
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, ON THURSDAY, MARCH 23, 2006 AT 3:00 P.M.
Present
Kathy Cook, Vice Chair
Bob Foot
Lisa Simshauser
Richard Yerzy
David Tolces, Assistant City Attorney
Scott Blasie, Code Administrator
Absent
Michele Costantino, Chair
Kathleen Carroll
Chris DeLiso
I. Call to Order
In the absence of Chair Costantino, Vice Chair Cook presided and called the meeting to
order at 3 p.m.
II. Approval of Agenda
Mr. Foot asked to add a discussion on the time of the lien reduction meetings.
Motion
Mr. Yerzy moved to approve the agenda as amended, seconded by Mr. Foot, and
passed 4-0.
III. Swearing in of Witnesses and Introduction
Mr. Tolces swore in the witnesses who would be speaking at the meeting. Mr. Tolces
advised the Board, and the Respondent for Case No. 97-427, that any decision with
only four Board members had to be unanimous. He offered an opportunity for the
respondent to proceed with the four Board members present or opt to postpone the
meeting to a date when the Board was fully present. The Respondent, Pamela Harvey
Patterson, chose to proceed at this meeting.
Meeting Minutes
Code Compliance Board
Lien Reduction Hearing
Boynton Beach, Florida
March 23, 2006
IV. New Business
A. Lien Reduction
Imagination Homes of Parkland Case No. 05-929
Not Present
Skip Lewis
Pamela, Mildred &. Berdia Harvey Case No. 97-427
Pete Roy
Mr. Blasie reported the property had originally been cited on January 27, 1997 for
Community Appearance Code issues such as the repair of a driveway and installation of
grass in the yard and swale. A Code Compliance Board hearing was held on April 16,
1997 and no one appeared. The Board set a compliance date of June 16, 1997 and
proposed a fine of $25 per day for non-compliance beyond that date. Staff documented
compliance on May 21, 2004.
Mr. Blasie showed photographs of the subject property taken on April 14, 1997 and
today. After showing them to the Respondent, the pictures were viewed by the Board.
Vice Chair Cook asked Mr. Blasie how compliance was documented in 2004. Mr. Blasie
responded there had been several cases at this property over the years, none of which
came before the Board. In all of the other cases, compliance was achieved before a
Board hearing became necessary. The Code Officers do not go out every thirty days to
assess compliance and this case had existed since 1997. When this happens and there
are other cases on the same property, Code Compliance is able to use the compliance
date for the same issue in that subsequent case and this happened here.
Pamela Harvey Patterson, 1861 Waldorf Street, Royal Palm Beach, explained
that she owns the subject property along with her mother and sister. Until recently, the
property was a rental property, but now her son was living in the property and they did
not plan to use the property for rental in the future.
The gist of Ms. Patterson's plea was that she had never received any of the notices sent
from the City since she was not living at the property, nor had her mother and sister.
Mr. Blasie showed Ms. Patterson a signed receipt for one of the notices, but Ms.
Patterson did not recognize the signature, saying it probably came from a renter.
Ms. Patterson contended she would have definitely taken care of the violations if she
had been aware of them. She admitted to having trouble with the tenants, who did not
want to run up their water bills by watering the lawn, which subsequently died. She
now had the water bill in her own name, so this would not happen again.
2
Meeting Minutes
Code Compliance Board
Lien Reduction Hearing
Boynton Beach, Florida
March 23, 2006
Mr. Tolces advised Ms. Patterson that the Code Compliance Office was not required to
do more than send notices to the address on record with the Palm Beach Property
Appraiser's Office. Ms. Patterson was counseled to contact that office to correct the
address situation as soon as possible. Ms. Patterson responded she had already done
this recently in response to an earlier conversation with Mr. Blasie, but the record did
not yet reflect it. Mr. Blasie confirmed the Palm Beach County Property Appraiser's
records still showed Ms. Harvey Patterson's address as 231 N.E. 9th Avenue.
Mr. Foot questioned whether a mortgagor or herself paid the taxes. Ms. Patterson
responded up until about a year ago, the mortgagor had paid the tax and insurance
payments on the property, so she was not concerned about not getting a tax bill. Last
year, she paid the mortgage off and went to the Tax Collector's office and paid her tax
bill in person.
Board Comments
Mr. Foot believed it was the property owner's responsibility to record a valid address
with the Property Appraiser's office and to be aware of the taxes owed on a property.
He thought Ms. Patterson was indicating the whole situation was not her problem
because she had not gotten proper notification, which she actually had, according to
the stated responsibilities of the Code Compliance Department. Mr. Foot also believed
the homeowner had harmed the community by the appearance of the property.
Because of that, he wanted the Board's decision to send a message to other
homeowners that there are consequences to not keeping their properties up to the
standards of Boynton Beach. Mr. Foot proposed a fine of $800 including all costs.
Ms. Simshauser did not agree with Mr. Foot's reasoning and statements to the
Respondent, although she would support a fine of $730.15 including all costs. A back
and forth negotiation between Mr. Foot and Ms. Simshauser took place.
Motion
Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case #97-427, and having been
advised that the Respondents have complied with all lien reduction procedures set forth
in Section 2-84 through 2-89 of the City of Boynton Beach Code of Ordinances, Ms.
Simshauser moved that this Board reduce the fines instituted in Case #97-427, by
virtue of this Board's Order of April 16, 1997, to an amount of $730.15, including
Administrative Costs. The motion failed for lack of a second.
Motion
Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case #97-427, and having been
advised that the Respondents have complied with all lien reduction procedures set forth
in Section 2-84 through 2-89 of the City of Boynton Beach Code of Ordinances, Mr. Foot
3
Meeting Minutes
Code Compliance Board
Lien Reduction Hearing
Boynton Beach, Florida
March 23, 2006
moved that this Board reduce the fines instituted in Case #97-427, by virtue of this
Board's Order of April 16, 1997, to an amount of $800.00, including Administrative
Costs. Mr. Yerzy seconded the motion that failed 3-1, Ms. Simshauser dissenting.
Mr. Foot wanted the record to reflect the motion failed because a super-majority was
needed for this vote. Further discussion ensued. Some felt the reduction in fine to $800
was a significant reduction, and just barely sufficient in light of the length of time the
property may have been in violation. Ms. Simshauser believed Ms. Patterson had not
received notice of the violation and that in light of that, $800 was too much.
Motion
Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case #97-427, and having been
advised that the Respondents have complied with all lien reduction procedures set forth
in Section 2-84 through 2-89 of the City of Boynton Beach Code of Ordinances, Ms.
Simshauser moved that this Board reduce the fines instituted in Case #97-427, by
virtue of this Board's Order of April 16, 1997, to an amount of $750.00, including
Administrative Costs. Mr. Yerzy seconded the motion that passed 4-0.
Discussion about Lien Reduction Meeting Times
Mr. Foot asked why the 3:00 p.m. time had been chosen for the lien reduction hearings.
Mr. Blasie responded it had been chosen because adding the lien reductions to the
normal monthly meeting made the meetings go on too long. Also, Vice Chair Cook
commented the female Board members preferred to hear Sexual Predator cases during
the daylight hours. Mr. Tolces added this meeting time had been in existence for about
two years. The 3:00 p.m. meeting time is not convenient for Mr. Foot, who asked for
this to be put on the agenda so the full Board could determine whether the lien
reduction hearings could be held during the evening, even if on a different evening than
the regular meeting.
v. Adjournment
Motion
Mr. Yerzy moved to adjourn the meeting at 3:40 p.m., seconded by Ms. Simshauser,
and passed 4-0.
Respectfully submitted,
~j?a~~J
Susan Collins
Recording Secretary
(032406)
4