08-3801 - First Impressions AcademyWOU N_� M MMIm- 131"",
Police Department
� ������4�
"A CPA Accredited Law Enforcement Agency"
1ooEovynm/, Beach swumno"f
P.O. Box 310
uoy/`t6nomoch, Fl^ndu334z5-uazo
Phone: (561) 7+2'*100
aax�(os1) 7vc-o1a5
G. MatthnmDnonter, Chief oyPo lice
Code Compliance
Phone: t5a1/r4zszoo
azx (561) 742-6383
Date:
To:
From
RE:
October 12,2O12
City Commission
Code Compliance Division
Code Compliance Case #08
|n accordance with Ordinance number 0O1-O7,the enclosed "Final Lien Modification Order" is
hereby forwarded to you for review. As required by Ordinance number OO1-O7. the follow
procedures are tObefollowed:
O A City Commissioner has seven (7) days from the rendition of the Order to request the
City Manager's Office to place the case on a City Commission Agenda for review.
(Space provided below for transmittal purposes)
o Said naVi8YV must occur within thirty (30) days of the request for review.
O Upon such review, the City Commission may take one nJ the following actions:
8. Uphold the Code Compliance Board's recommendation infull.
b. Over-rule the Board's dec in full.
c. Modify the Board's Final Order.
j The City Commission shall direct staff to take action consistent with their review of the
"Lien Modification Order^
|. . hereby request the City Manager's
Office io place the above referenced case on the next available City Commission Agenda for
review,
Signed on this date, the day of .2011,
Anmr�cn's Gateway to the Gulfstrearn
Nfeeting Minutes
Code Compliance Board
Boynton Beach, FL September 19, 2012
Case No, )8-3801 First impressions Academy 3520 Old Boynton Rd.
of Boynton Inc.
Ms. Springer presented the case. The notice of violation was December 3, 2008,
regarding non-payment of excessive false alarm fees. The case was heard on January
21, 2009, and no one appeared. A compliance date and fine was set by the Board for
February 20, 2009, or a fine of $50 per day would be imposed thereafter. The violation
was corrected on April 25, 2012. She noted the next case pertained to the same
property.
N/Is. Springer explained she received a letter in April 2012 from the Respondent, Ms,
O'Keefe, requesting information about the liens she had discovered that were on the
property, Ms. O'Keefe was going through paperwork after an employee left and found
them. She indicated she was not aware of the excessive false alarm fee because the
information was never given to her. Staff had to do an extensive inspection on a
commercial property to qualify for the reduction and only found the parking lot needed to
be repaired. There were cracks in the concrete which were repaired.
Janice O'Keefe, 8867 SE Marina Bay Drive, Hobe Sound, explained she had health
problems in 2009 and she hired a general manager to run the three schools she
operates, in Boynton Beach, The first school in Boynton was in operation for 17 years.
The other two were in operation for nine years, and they never had a problem. The
schools are gold seal approved, they are accredited and for health issues, she had to
hirc; a general manager who was an employee for 15 years. Ms. O'Keefe included a
packet of naterials the employee left for Ms. O'Keefe by the employee for the Board to
pursue,
When Ms. O'Keefe realized there was a problem. she advised the school needed to call
a validafor. The next day when Ms. O'Keefe went to the school to call, the employee
had cleared everything out because she knew she would be caught. The employee
never turned in the accreditation papers. She explained she had spent the last year
saving her businesses. She had never signed anything regarding a violation. The
violations were mailed to the schools and the employee or Director signed for many of
them. She had worked diligently with Ms. Springer to conform the property to Code,
She requested the lien be reduced to administrative costs. She explained the violations
were a great burden and she appreciated the purpose of the ordinances. She wanted
to be a good citizen and believed she has been for the past 17 years. The schools
employ over 50 people and have provided care to City employees at their Seacrest
location,
Ms. Springer explained there were four false alarms three were free and one unpaid.
Had Ms. O'Keefe known about it, she could have had the opportunity to show the alarm
may have been caused by a malfunction. There was one actual false alarm caused by
an employee without the right code, which was a free one. Ms. O'Keefe did not know
10
Meeting Minutes
Code Compliance Board
Boynton Beach, FL September 19, 2012
about it, she did not have the opportunity to provide a work order to Ms. Springer within
30 days and have the fee waived. A copy of the letter the employee left for Ms. O'Keefe
was included in the meeting materials. The day after Ms. O'Keefe spoke with I\As,
Springer, she carne in and paid the fee of $175. Ms. O'Keefe explained she and her
husband were the sole owners.
Chair Costantino inquired why Ms. O'Keefe did not check with the General Manager or
double check on the operation, Ms. O'Keefe explained she was involved in the
business, but not in the day-to-day operations, and she had no reason to distrust the
employee. She had a 15-year history with the employee who was educated and
seemed to have Ms. O'Keefe's best interests at heart. Ms. O'Keefe explained she was
proactive. They had problems with the alarm company so they got another.
When prompted by the Board about whether money was taken, Ms. O'Keefe responded
she did not want to make accusations that were not proven. She had consulted an
attorney about unaccounted funds and with the verification needed, it would be cost
prohibitive. Her concern was to have her schools accredited, which were now both gold
seal accredited, Ms. O'Keefe did not file a police investigation and a suggestion was
made to her that the matter could J.De pursued criminally.
The members agreed this case had extenuating circumstances
M I
otion
Based on the testimony and evidence present ad in the aforementioned case, and
having been advised that the Respondent, First impressions Academy of Boynton, Inc..
has 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. Carroll moved that this Board
reduce the fine instituted in the aforernentioned case by virtue of this Board's Order of
Janluary 21, 2009, [a an amount of $1,038,09 including administrative costs, Mr, Foot
seconded the motion that unaninnously passed.
Case No. 09-3839 First impressions Academy 3620 Old Boynton Rd.
of Boynton Inc.
Ms. Springer presented the case which pertained to non-payment of Annual Fire
Inspection Fees. The case was heard on January 20, 2010, and no one appeared. A
compliance date was set for January 30, 2010, or a fine of $50 per day would be
imposed thereafter. The violations were corrected on April 25, 2012, Ms. Springer
explainea this case arose during the sarne time the employee was employed as the
general manager as in the previous case. She checked the record and explained every
fire inspection fee prior to and after the subject time period was paid in full and on time.
This fee was likely left on the desk unaddressed. Ms. O'Keefe had sent her copies of
11
CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD
CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH
Petitioner,
VS. CASE NO. 08 -3801
FIRST IMPRESSIONS ACADEMY OF BOYNTON INC.
Respondent's),
LIEN MODIFICATION ORDER
THIS CAUSE came before the City of Boynton Beach Code Compliance Board on the Respondent's application for
lien reduction on SeWember 19, 2012, pursuant to Chapter two, Article five of the City Code of Ordinances. The Board
having considered the application, all the facts regarding the specific code or codes the appealing party was in violation of,
the date of the original board hearing, the date the affidavit of compliance was issued, the current lien amount and all
pertinent information relating to the specific case and being otherwise duly advised in the premises, it is hereupon,
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that:
1. This Board has subject matterjurisdiction of this cause andjurisdiction over the Respondent.
2, The Respondent has met all the lien reduction procedures established by the City Code of Ordinances.
1 The lien imposed by the Board on January 21, 2009 on the Property located at 3520 Old Boynton Rd.,
Boynton Beach, Florida, with the legal description of
19- 45 -43, PB7P]9 TR 53 (LESS N 377.16 FT OF S 657.28 FT OF W 141.06 FT, S 260 FT, E 15 FT & TRGLR COR,
according to the plat thereof as recorded in Plat Book 7, Page 19, of the Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida,
PCN: 08- 43- 45 -19 -05 -053 -0010 is REDUCED TO $1,038.09.
The City shall prepare a release and satisfaction consistent with this Order.
The release and satisfaction shall be recorded in the public records of Palm Beach County at the Respondent's
expense.
6. This Order is not Final until the time period for appeal under the Code has elapsed and if appealed is properly
disposed by the City Commission.
7. In the event that the property owner does not comply with the Code Compliance Board order, as approved or
modified by the City Commission, within ninety (90) days of Commission's action, the Lien Reduction Order shall be of no
further force or effect, and the original lien shall remain on the property. No extensions of the ninety (90) day period shall be
permitted, and no further action by the Code Compliance Board or the City Commission shall be permitted regarding lien
reduction.
DONE AND ORDERED after hearing at City of Boynton Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida this 25 of
- 2012.
N l +� y
Michele Costantino, Chairperson
CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD
ATTEST:
e !C Y CLERK
copies furnished:
I lonorable Mayor and the City Commission
City Attorney
City Clerk k °)'; .
¢wl 1 1 .i�
Respondent
IT CLERK'S