![youtube image](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/25KyWafq9ag/mqdefault.jpg)
►
From YouTube: Code Enforcement Board June 10, 2021
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
A
A
C
C
A
Call
thank
you.
Our
board
attorney
will
give
the
invocation
and
lead
us
in
the
pledge
of
allegiance.
E
A
The
intention
of
this
board
to
promote,
protect
and
improve
the
health,
safety
and
welfare
of
the
citizens
of
tarpon
springs
by
providing
an
equitable,
effective
and
inexpensive
method
of
enforcing
various
codes
within
the
city
of
tarpon
springs.
Any
aggrieved
party
may
appeal
a
final
administrative
order
of
this
board
to
the
circuit
court.
Such
appeal
shall
be
filed
within
30
days
of
the
execution
of
the
order
to
be
appealed.
A
A
A
A
Before
we
begin
the
public
mirroring
meetings,
we
will
have
all
potential
witnesses
stand
and
be
sworn
in
by
the
secretary
of
the
board.
Sir,
are
you
presenting
today
you're
going
to
present
testimony?
Yes,
please
stand
and
she'll
swear
you
in.
C
A
H
I
E
So
a
motion
for
continuance
can
be
made
in
writing
or
it
could
be
made
verbally,
it's
being
made
verbally
here
today,
so
you
can
determine
whether
or
not
that
you
want
to
grant
the
continuance.
I
haven't
heard
any
reasons
why,
at
this
point
other
than
some
something
is
that
the
courthouse
you
may
want
to
delve
into
that
a
little
bit
further.
But
ultimately,
madam
chair,
you
need
to
make
the
termination
whether
you
want
to
continue
the
hearing
or
have
it
proceed
as
as
it
is
listed
on
the
agenda.
H
A
I
Okay,
my
name
is
beth
hughes,
I'm
the
face
certified
co-inspector
for
the
city
of
tarpon
springs
exhibit.
Excuse
me.
This
is
for
case
number
21-800-107
for
743
sunset
drive
for
mr
john
durso
property
owner
exhibit
one
are
all
the
photographs
exhibit.
Two
are
all
the
notices
to
include
the
notice
of
violation
and
notice
of
hearing
exhibit
three.
Are
the
administration
documents
to
include
the
case?
Summary
property,
appraiser
and
tax
collector
records
exhibit
four?
Is
the
affidavit
posting
and
the
copy
of
the
sign.
A
C
F
I
Okay,
so
we
have
had
contact
with
the
owner,
mr
durso,
and
on
february
23
2021
we
conducted
the
initial
inspection.
My
inspection
results
were
the
recreational
vehicle
on
the
east.
Side
is
not
two
feet
from
the
property
line.
Many
items
in
the
backyard
were
not
being
stored
properly
properly,
so
there
was
what
would
be
considered
debris.
The
shed
was
dilapidated
and
needs
to
be
properly
repaired.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
The
building
department
at
that
point
had
not
received
any
permit.
Applications
for
the
shed
and
the
property
owner
had
been
emailed
so
to
an
attempt
to
set
up
an
appointment
to
verify
the
remaining
violations
were
in
compliance
and
we
we,
mr
gerso,
did
not
set
up
a
date
and
time
for
another
re-inspection.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
think
so,
can
you
guys
see
those
okay
now
better?
I
know
when
we
were
doing
with
the
zoom
they
showed
up.
Clearly
this
was
making
a
kind
of
okay.
So
anyway,
again
this
is
the
shed
another
picture
of
the
shed.
I
I
I
Front
of
course,
dead
palms
and
vegetation
behind
the
shed
and
again,
you
can
see
the
condition
of
the
side
of
the
shed
there.
Trash
cans
in
public
view,
a
pallet
leaning
against
the
house.
I
Pictures,
okay,
so
as
it
is
right
now
what
I
would
like
the
code
code
board
members
is
to
find
the
property,
in
violation
of
8-52
the
nuisance
prohibitions
in
violation
of
city
code,
8-40,
the
duty
to
maintain
private
property
because
of
the
condition
of
the
shed
and
also
city
code,
4
42.
I
I
Just
a
side
note
and
the
reason
I'm
putting
those
three
and
not
the
others
is
the
others
are
pretty
much
in
compliance
and
depending
on
whether
mr
durso
repairs,
the
shed
per
with
permits
necessary
or
is
able
to
do.
The
repair
and
maintenance
without
the
necessary
permits
is
the
reason
why
I'm
not
citing
6-1
or
105.1
right
now,
because
he
may
be
able
to
repair
it
without
having
to
get
a
permit.
So
again,
I'm
only
asking
for
8-52,
8-40
and
42.00
to
be
found
in
violation.
A
H
I
H
I
H
H
A
I
H
That's
actually
from
the
surveillance
cameras
and
it
can't
be
altered
or
anything.
It
has
a
time
and
date
stamp
right
on
them.
A
A
G
H
A
E
So
if
he's
going
to
present
evidence,
he
should
show
it
to
the
city
and
determine
whether
or
not
they
have
any
objections.
If
they
don't
have
any
objections,
then
you
should
just
receive
it
if
they
do
have
objections,
you're
going
to
need
to
hear
from
both
of
them
as
to
you
know
whether
that's
objection
should
be
sustained
or
overruled.
Okay,
okay,.
H
H
H
The
the
one
you
see
of
the
front
yard,
with
all
the
debris
in
it
or
nuisance
vehicles.
H
I
think
it
was
written
up
for
because
I
couldn't
determine
what
you
meant
by
rvs
and
vehicles.
But
if
you
notice
the
time
frame,
the
neighbor
literally
waits
for
me
to
move
something
in
my
yard
and
then
ghost
takes
a
picture
and
complains
the
code
enforcement
and,
of
course,
it's
going
to
be
a
violation.
But
it's
only
within
a
matter
of
hour
and
a
half
and
it's
a
consistent
problem
I
am
having,
which
is
very
well
known.
Through
code
enforcement
and
the
police
department.
G
H
I'm
just
trying
to
establish
why
this
keeps
happening,
because
if
you
look
at
the
history,
it's
like
this
big
and
it's
usually
from
one
or
two
people
only
and
it's
my
backyard,
my
personal
space
and
I
was
trying
to
just
show
a
timeline
that
my
backyard's
been
the
same
ever
since
I've
owned
it.
It's
only
when
my
neighbor.
G
H
I
This
picture
is
showing,
I
guess
his
backyard.
The
the
issue
I
would
have
is,
I
really
don't
have
an
objection
to
you
seeing
his
backyard.
The
point
that
I
would
like
to
make
is
that
at
the
day
and
time
I
do,
an
inspection
is
all
I
can
determine.
I
don't
know
what
happened
in
the
past.
I
don't
know
what
happens
in
the
future.
All
I
can
determine
is
the
day
and
time
that
I
am
there
when
I
receive
the
complaint,
so
I
have
no
objection.
E
E
H
Okay,
all
this
one
is
is
to
show
another
timeline
that
every
time
I
move
something
he
comes
out
of
his
house
takes
a
picture
and
calls
code
enforcement
of
yes,
I'm
it's
a
violation,
but
you
got
to
look
at
the
time
frame.
He
deliberately
waits
there
because
he
has
six
cameras
pointed
on
my
property.
As
soon
as
I
move
something
carl's
code
enforcement
takes
a
picture,
but
you
can
see
him
right
there
taking
the
pictures.
I
So
again,
I
really
don't
think
it's
relevant.
However,
I
won't
object
I'll,
let
his
evidence
go
in
again.
I
do
want
to
make
the
point,
however,
that
my
job
code
enforcement
is
there's
a
violation
at
the
time
I'm
there
or
there
there
isn't.
If
it
comes
into
compliance
by
the
deadline,
it
doesn't
come
to
code
board.
A
H
I
So
there
is
a
picture
of
me
and
mr
antoniades
property
the
picture
below
it,
whether
his
neighbor
trespassed
on
his
property
or
not.
It's
definitely
not
at
the
same
time,
time
stamp
time
when
I
was
there,
so
that
would
be.
I
H
A
H
A
H
A
F
K
H
And
I
did
call
ed
miller
and
asked
him
to
come
out
and
he
refused
to
come
out
when
you
have
a
problem
with
somebody
in
the
chain
of
command.
You
go
to
their
boss,
which
was
recommended
by
beth.
She
says
if
you
have
a
problem
with
me,
contact
my
boss,
I
contacted
him
for
reinspection.
He
refused
to
come
out.
I
Documented
okay,
so
do
it
the
board,
have
any
questions
for
the
oh.
I
think
beth.
I
Okay,
so
we
can
set
up
a
day
in
time
when
you.
H
H
H
It's
been
repaired,
but
originally,
if
you
look
the
original
complaint
was
it
cannot
be
repaired,
it
must
be
torn
down.
It
was
only
two
days
ago
I
received
an
email
from
beth,
which
I
got
yesterday
that
says
I
can
repair
it
so
for
violations,
a
violation,
make
up
your
mind
what
you
want.
You
either
want
it
torn
down
or
you
want
it
fixed,
and
I
was
only
received
that
notice
two
days
ago
which
she
could
verify
with
her
email,
but
the
original
complaint
was
it
has
to
be
torn
down,
no
exceptions.
A
So,
at
the
at
the
current
time
the
shed
is
still
there
so
that
to
be
in
compliance,
we
either
need
to
bring
the
shed
into
compliance
or
tear
it
down
and
have
you
made
application
to
do
one
or
the
other
of
those
with
the
city?
You
can.
H
H
I
Do
you
have
any
closing
statement
just
that
that
the
violation
was
not
from
me
from
code
enforcement
was
told
to
repair,
remove
or
replace
the
shed
per
the
building's
department's
instructions,
so
that
was
what
the
violation
was
and
then
determining
what
the
building
department
required
for
the
repair.
I
I
personally
did
a
bunch
of
research
and
did
speak
with
the
building
official
and
the
planning
and
zoning
official,
because
it
is
an
old
shed.
It's
been
there
since
1959
and
we
did
get
some
clarification.
He's
correct.
I
sent
an
email
which
was
probably
very
helpful
to
him
in
order
to
try
and
get
the
repairs,
but
again
it's
always
been
per.
What
the
building
department
official
deems
is
appropriate,
because
that
is,
he
is
the
expert
in
that
area
with
the
city.
I
I
A
Do
you
have
any
other
summary
that
you
need
to
make
mr
durso.
B
L
J
A
B
H
H
L
A
A
Has
been,
the
motion
has
been
made
and
seconded
so
now
we're
ready
for
the
roll
call.
L
J
E
A
C
E
E
If
you
don't
know
what
you
need
to
do
to
bring
the
property
into
compliance,
you
can
contact
code
enforcement
after
the
meeting
and
I,
as
from
what
I've
heard
tonight,
there
obviously
is
going
to
be
an
inspection
fairly
quickly
and
then
you'll
be
able
to
ask
those
questions
at
the
inspection
as
to
what
would
be
required
to
bring
it
into
compliance.
The
board
is
going
to
enter
an
order
that
order
will
be
in
writing
and
it
will
be
sent
to
you
within
about
the
next
10
days.
A
I
I
So
this
is
case
number
17-800748
for
119
east
lime,
street
the
property
owner
is
alternative
capital,
qualified
zone
fund,
llc
registered
agent
bush
ross,
registered
agent
services,
llc
exhibit
1
or
all
the
photographs
exhibit
2
or
all
the
notices
to
include
the
notice
of
violation
and
notice
of
hearing
exhibit
3
are
the
administrative
documents
to
include
the
case.
Summary
property,
appraiser
and
tax
collector
records
exhibit
four?
Is
the
affidavit
posting
and
a
copy
of
the
sign?
I
I
I
The
reason
I
went
back
out
there
was
officer
boone
had
asked
me
to
meet
him
at
the
property
due
to
his
concerns
with
a
lot
of
criminal
activity
occurring
in
on
that
property,
as
well
as
in
the
area,
and
it
has
continued
to
deteriorate
over
many
years.
This
building
was
actually
condemned
a
long
time
ago
by
the
building
official
and
has
gone
through
a
foreclosure
process.
So
the
reason
you
see
that
17
is
the
case
is
we?
I
I
So
basically
the
the
property
was
still
in
very
dilapidated
condition.
I'm
going
to
show
you
pictures,
it's
still
considered
unsafe
and
uninhabitable
and
property
was
overgrown
and
had
lots
of
trash.
I
So
when
we
discovered
that
there
was
again
a
new
owner
on
march
24th
of
2021,
the
notice
of
violation
was
mailed
and
the
green
card
was
returned
signed
covet
19.
on
april
30th
after
we
had
already
extended.
The
contractor
for
the
property
owner
had
requested
an
extension
that
we
did
grant
from
april
9th
to
april
30th,
and
we
had
been
told
that
the
we
would
be
emailed
pictures
once
the
initial
work
was
was
completed,
which
we
never
did
receive.
I
So
therefore,
I
did
the
induct
the
reinspection
on
april
30th,
the
property
still
had
trash
and
debris.
The
fence
was
in
disrepair
overgrown.
In
many
places
the
building
had
not
been
repaired,
no
permits
had
been
pulled
and
we
had
not
heard
from
tracy.
Who
was
the
person
that
had
emailed
us
stating
she
would
update
us
on
the
status
of
the
property,
so
on
may
19th
the
notice
of
hearing
was
mailed.
The
green
card
was
returned,
signed,
coveted
19.
I
I
A
final
inspection
was
conducted,
the
yard
had
been
cut
and
some
of
the
or
a
lot
of
the
trash
had
been
removed,
at
least
on
the
lime
street
side.
There's
an
alley
behind
the
property
is
the
reason
I
put
it.
That
way,
the
house
is
still
in
disrepair,
boarded
up
and
still
no
permits
have
been
pulled
for
the
repair.
I
I
I
I
I
This
trash
has
been
cleaned
up,
just
overgrowth
and
more
windows,
there's
more
just
showing
the
overgrowth
and
the
buildings
and
disrepair.
You
can
see
that
at
one
point
there
had
been
a
tarp
over
the
roof
and
that's
it.
Those
were
just
the
pictures
taken
in
the
most
recent
pictures
taken
in
march.
I
B
What
kind
of
violations
are
the
same
violations
then,
as
they
are
now,
because
I
remember
this
case
a
long
time
ago
and
we
asked
the
owner
to
go
ahead
and
put
up
a
fence
around
it,
and
we
were
happy
with
that.
As
I
remember
it,
just
as
I
remember
it,
don't
forget.
I
I
Right,
no,
it's
just
it's
my
understanding
that
that
abs,
that
nothing
other
than
the
just
very
recently
that
they
had
cut,
cut
the
grass
and
has
have
removed
some
of
the
trash
is
the
only
thing
that's
been
remediated.
Probably
since
the
last
time
you
saw
it.
I
I
Well,
we
had
known
that
the
property
had
changed
hands.
We
had
sent
them
a
notice
and
then,
when
officer
boone
asked
me
to
come,
take
a
look
at
it
again.
I
realized
that
the
property
he
had
asked
me
to
look
at
was
one
this,
this
property
with
this
code
case
and
realized
there
was
then
again
another
new
owner.
So
that's
when
I
again
started
sent
the
notice
of
violation.
L
D
C
L
L
A
I
A
E
D
E
I
So
this
is
the
problem
I
haven't
had
communication
with,
in
fact
brian,
if
you
could
did
she
say
whether,
when
she
had
communication
with
you
whether
she
was
going
to
demolish
or
repair
with
permits,
that's
the
problem.
If
they
they
know
that
we
were
having
this
hearing
today
and
I
was
hoping
they
would
actually
be
here.
It's
hard
for
me
to
answer
that,
because
if
they
were
to
do
the
repairs,
it's
obviously
going
to
take
longer
to
pull
the
permits
and
do
the
repairs
if
they
were
to
demolish
it.
I
I
I
I
would
definitely
like
to
give
them
a
reason
to
bring
this
into
compliance
quickly.
It's
been
going
on
for
a
long
time
and,
as
I
said,
the
criminal
prevention
officer
is
the
reason
that
pulled
me
out
there
to
take
a
look
at
it
again,
which
fortunately,
he
did
because
again
the
ownership
had
changed.
G
D
I
move
that
the
respondent
shall
have
until
july
I'll,
give
him
one
month
july,
9
to
bring
the
property
into
compliance
of
the
said
coach
said:
emotions
of
violations,
rather
violation
of
8-52
8-40,
36.03
105.1
of
the
florida
building
code,
city
code,
6-1
and
city
code
8-22,
or
suffer
a
fine
of
50
per
day
thereafter.
K
A
J
I
address
the
board
first.
Thank
you.
Okay.
I
just
wanted
to
inform
the
board
that
this
morning
I
ran
into
mr
gary
upchurch,
who
is
the
property
manager
for
mr
tamilo's
property,
at
which
time
you
know,
I
told
him
point
blank
that
I
will
not
discuss
ex
parte
code
board.
How.
A
N
I
Brian
did
they
get
a
chance
to
see
the
exhibits?
Yes,
okay
and
I
don't
know
if
they
have
any
objection
to
the
exhibits
or
not
ask
them.
A
I
A
I
So
my
name
is
beth:
I'm
the
certified
face
code
inspector
for
the
city
of
tarpon
springs.
This
is
case.
Number
21-800284
for
1673
seabreeze
drive
for
mr
peter
to
peter
to
milo,
exhibit
one
or
all
the
photographs
exhibit
two
or
all
the
notices
to
include
the
notice
of
violation.
The
notice
of
hearing
the
exhibit
three
are
the
administration
documents
to
include
the
case.
Summary
previous
board
orders,
property,
appraiser
and
tax
collector
records
exhibit
four
is
the
affidavit
of
posting
and
the
copy
of
the
sign
exhibit
five?
I
Is
the
affidavit
of
prosecution
cross
all
of
the
photographs
and
exhibits
that
were
given
to
the
violator,
exact
copies
of
what
is
being
presented
to
the
board?
All
notices
were
mailed
to
the
property
owner
of
record,
as
determined
by
the
pinellas
county,
property,
appraiser
and
tax
collector
databases.
I
I
Okay,
so
we
have
had
contact
with
the
owner,
mr
tamillo,
by
email
on
may
6
2021.
I
conducted
an
initial
inspection.
Mr
rich
snyder
was
outside
the
property
when
I
drove
by
I
stopped
and
asked
him.
If
I
could
ask
him
a
few
questions.
He
stated
he
and
his
wife,
mary
marianne
schneider,
were
staying
at
the
house
monday
through
sunday,
which
was
may
3rd
to
may
8th
and
trish's
name
was
on
the
lease
his
he
gave
me
his
phone
number
also
on
may
7th.
I
I
When
I
arrived,
it
appeared
there
was
a
different
car
in
the
driveway
and
from
when
I
spoke
to
with
mr
schneider.
It
was
a
different
tag
of
fl,
a
florida
tag
of
lcxx52,
and
when
I
ran
the
tag
it
was
a
lease
vehicle.
I
knocked
on
the
door
with
no
answer,
so
I
left
a
door
hanger
asking
for
the
occupant
to
call
our
office
on
may
12th.
We
received
an
additional
complaint
on
may
13th.
We
received
another
additional
complaint
and.
I
On
may
17,
an
amended
repeat:
violation
notice
was
mailed.
The
only
reason
that
notice
was
mailed
brian.
Can
you
confirm
this
was
to
let
them
know
that
we
weren't
doing
hearings
by
zoom
anymore,
okay,
so
that
was
the
only
reason
the
amended
notice
was
mailed
and
on
may
18th
I
conducted
another
re-inspection
the
complainant
stated
there
were
people
present
in
the
morn
present
that
morning,
when
I
arrived
at
4
30,
no
one
was
present.
I
So
what
I'm
asking
is
for
the
code
board
members
to
find
the-
and
let
me
finish
the
history-
I
apologize
I'm
getting
ahead
of
myself,
so
on
may
20th
an
email
was
sent
to
the
property
owner,
letting
them
know
that
we
were
going
to
put
the
property
in
compliance
as
of
may
12th,
and
on
may
28th.
I
The
sign
was
posted
and
the
affidavit
of
posting
was
signed
so
basically
to
go
back
to
what
I
was
trying
to
explain
that
the
the
dates
were
looking
for
this
property
to
be
in
violation
would
be
from
the
date.
Mr
snyder
said
that
he
was
there,
which
was
on
may
3rd
until
the
last
screenshot
that
we
had
showing
that
the
advertisement
was
still
listed
as
being
short
advertised
short
term,
which
was
may
11th,
so
they
would
actually
be
in
compliance
as
fate
as
may
12th.
I
I
This
was
just
the
door
hanger
that
I
left
when
when
I
was
asking
the
occupant
to
give
me
a
call
back,
this
was
just
a
picture
of
the
car
that
was
the
least
vehicle.
I
This
would
be
the
fifth
repeat:
violation
case
for
this
property
if
it
is
found
in
violation
case,
the
previous
repeat,
violation
cases
were
21-800197
in
violation
of
225.02
his
previous
fine,
for
that
case
was
a
hundred
dollars
a
day.
Totaling
1
124.50,
approximately
it
has
not
been
paid
yet.
I
I
20-800-00735
and
violation
of
25.02
those
fines
were
25
a
day.
Totaling
550
he's
paid
140
of
those
fines.
The
other
repeat
violation
case
was.
I
20.800229
in
violation
of
25.02,
it
was
complied
prior
to
the
deadline
and
had
been
assigned
50
a
day.
So
basically
he's
had
four
previous
cases.
This
would
be
the
fifth
and
it's
gone
between
from
25
to
50
to
100
a
day,
and
this
has
all
been
since
2020.
I
A
N
Gary
of
church,
no,
I
don't
have
any
questions.
I
just
I
just
have
a
few
things.
I
want
to
say
gary.
A
N
Up
church
up
church,
thank
you
like
that
place.
Your
mom
makes
you
go
on
sunday.
So,
first
of
all
to
rich's
statement,
I
am
not
a
property
manager
of
this
property.
I
know
that
you
guys
think
I
am,
but
I'm
not.
I
make
no
decisions.
I
have
no
control
over
anything.
I
pick
up
the
trash,
I
make
sure
there's
water
in
the
pool.
I
fix
broken
faucets
and
that's
about
it.
N
I
let
contractors
in
and
out
and
other
people
and
yes,
riches
are
one
of
our
neighbors
and
we
all
had
coffee
this
morning
down
at
panera
bread,
and
we
talked
about
things
like
government,
overreach
and
stuff
like
that.
But
we
didn't
talk
about
this
property.
He
made
it
very
clear
that
that
would
be
unethical
of
him
and
he
did
not.
N
I
want
to
say
that
I
really
feel
like
you
guys
are
doing
a
disservice
to
the
city.
The
people
of
this
city.
N
I'll
be
brief
and
then
I'll
be
gone
because
you
guys
are
going
to
do
what
you're
going
to
do
and
it's
not
going
whatever
I
say,
is
not
going
to
make
a
difference.
But
I
just
want
to
go
on
the
record
of
saying
you
guys
are
really
doing
a
disservice
to
the
city.
The
people
in
this
town,
people,
like
pete
camillo,
he's
a
great
neighbor
he's.
N
E
E
A
M
M
You
I'm
a
neighbor,
I
know
mr
tamillo
much
like
gary
said:
pete
improved
the
property,
it
was
basically
a
tear
down,
I'm
surprised
he
saved
it.
He
did
a
great
job
on
it.
I
understand
the
laws
of
law.
We
can't
change
the
law
here.
We're
going
to
be
under
state
guidance.
Is
that
correct?
M
As
far
as
code
enforcement?
You
know
this
is
what
I
was
told.
If
we
would
make
changes
to
our
code
in
tarpon
springs,
then
we'd
fall
under
the
state
guidelines
for
temporary
rentals
and
you
could
even
rent
for
one
night
to
people.
Is
that
true.
M
I
didn't
know
that
either
man,
so
he
asked
me
to
come
down
here.
I
thought
he'd
be
here
today
and
that's
why
I
came
so
as
far
as
I
don't
have
a
whole
lot
to
give
you
as
far
as
evidence,
I
I
don't
inspect
the
property,
I
walk
by
there
twice
a
day.
That's
it.
Thank.
A
A
D
I
That's
correct,
I
neither
I
nor
the
board
can
change
the
munich
code.
Yes,
ma'am.
I
It's
a
minimum
of
it
goes
by
the
definition
of
tourist
home,
so
under
this
zoning
they
if
they
can
rent
as
long
as
it's
more
than
six
weeks
so
43
days,.
I
So
you're
you
should
have
a
lease
that
you're
renting
for
six
weeks
and
mr
trust
feel
free
to
stop
me
if
I'm
saying
this
incorrectly
but
from
what
I
understand
is,
is
you
know
things
happen
people
might
have
to
leave
before
then?
But,
yes,
it
would
be
a
violation
if
you
then
rent
to
another
person
within
that
time
frame,
because
it's
a
six
week
minimum.
I
I
This
zone
does
not
allow
tourist
home
as
a
permitted
use
which
is
allowed
outright,
nor
as
a
conditional
use
where
you
can
get
approval
through
the
through
the
city.
So
because
it's
not
allowed
you
just
cannot
do
it
period
and
the
definition
of
a
tourist
home
is
basically
anything
if
someone's
staying
there.
If
someone
is
renting
the
property
for
anything
less
than
six
weeks,
so
the
property
is
not
zoned
to
be
a
tourist
location.
So,
basically,
what's
happening.
Is
it's
being
used
as
a
tourist
location?
I
Right
so
there's
other
areas
where
it's
absolutely
permitted,
there's
some
areas
where
it's
permitted
outright,
there's
some
areas
where
it's
been
permitted.
If
you
apply
for
a
conditional
use,
permit
the
board
of
commissioners
just
approved
one
last
this
week,
but
that
property
is
allowed
in
that
zone
for
that
location.
I
K
I
Told
well
when
you
purchase
a
property,
it's
pretty
much
up
to
the
owner.
I
I
believe
I
don't
think
the
city
can
is
responsible
to
tell
an
owner
what
they're
allowed
to
do
when
you
purchase
a
property.
I
would
assume
that's
upon
the
owner
to
to
understand
what
they
can
and
cannot
do
with
the
property.
But
at
this
point
this
is
the
fifth
case.
A
J
A
It
was
a
similar.
I
know
this
is
off
the
thing,
but
there
was
a
similar
case
where
two
residents
at
the
end
of
encloat
there's
an
island
community
at
the
end
of
the
sponge
docks
and
they
were
listed,
but
nobody
knew
it
as
a
rentable
community.
But
the
whole
group
of
homeowners
said
this
is
not
what
we
want
and
they
had
the
zoning
changed
so
that
it
could
not
be
rented
under
any
circumstances
and
the
two
people
who
had
purchased
for
that
reason
got
out
voted.
A
K
K
B
A
B
Fine
of
500
a
day
per
day
shall
be
imposed
until
compliance
is
met.
In
addition,
the
city
is
awarded
the
127
dollars
for
the
cost
that
incurred
in
prosecuting
the
case.
I
Yes,
I'm
sorry,
he
was,
in
my
opinion,
in
violation
from
may
3rd
and
was
in
compliance
on
5
12.
right.
I
B
A
I
So
my
name
is
beth
hughes,
I'm
the
face
certified
code
inspector
for
the
city
of
tarpon
springs.
This
is
case
number
21-800.
I
For
1673
sea
breeze
drive
for
mr
peter
tamillo
exhibit
one
are
all
the
photographs
exhibit.
Two
are
all
the
notices
to
include
the
notice
of
violation
and
notice
of
hearings
exhibit
three
of
the
administrative
documents
to
include
the
case.
Summary
previous
board
orders,
property,
appraiser
and
tax
collector
records
exhibit
four
is
the
affidavit
of
posting
and
a
copy
of
the
sign
exhibit
five?
Is
the
affidavit
of
prosecution
costs?
All
of
the
photographs
and
exhibits
that
were
given
to
the
virulator
are
exact
copies
of
what
is
being
presented
to
the
board.
I
All
notices
were
mailed
to
the
property
owner
of
record,
as
determined
by
the
pillars:
county,
property,
appraiser
and
tax
collector
databases,
all
notice
of
violation
and
notice
of
hearings
are
sent
return,
receipt
requested
in
first
class
mail.
Please
accept
all
exhibits
into
the
record
as
evidence.
I
I
I
She
lived
in
ohio
and
there
were
several
adults
and
several
children
present.
She
stated
she
had
spoken
with
the
property
owner
when
she
had
made
the
reservation
on
may
20th
of
2021.
The
repeat:
violation
notice
of
hearing
was
mailed
postal
tracking
states
that
the
notice
was
left
and
no
authorized
recipient.
I
I
The
short-term
rental
advertisement
was
still
short-term
on
three
websites
that
we
checked
on
may
28.
The
sign
was
posted.
An
affidavit
of
posting
was
signed
on
june
2nd.
We
received
an
additional
complaint
that
a
new
tenant
was
present
on
june
7th.
We
had
received
another
additional
complaint
that
another
new
person
was
present
on
june
7th.
I
did
do
a
physical
re-inspection.
I
I
So
on
june
9th
2021
I
did
conduct
another
reinspection.
The
bucket
of
toys
was
gone.
There
was
no
car
in
the
driveway.
The
trash
can
was
still
out
front.
I
did
attempt
to
knock
on
the
door
to
see
if
anyone
would
answer
and
nobody
did
answer.
I
I
He
is
aware
that
that
that
this
is
going
to
the
boar
is
being
presented
and
that
we
do
consider
it
in
violation.
Airbnb
still
shows
it
as
a
minimum
of
six
nights
and
I'll
go
ahead
and
pull
up
the
exhibits
right
now.
I
And
I
don't
believe
we
have
not
been
told
it's.
Mr
tamil
has
not
stated
this
in
compliance
right.
Brian
yeah
we've
not
been
instructed
that
it's
in
compliance.
I
That
says
that,
let
me
read
what
it
says,
as
I
can't
see
it
from
there.
I
I
That's
basically
what
these
are
showing.
Like.
I
said
the
last
time
I
went
out
to
do
an
inspection
trash
cans
hadn't
been
out
previously,
so
I
I
kind
of
am
making
the
assumption,
or
it
leads
me
to
believe
that
someone
put
the
trash
out.
I
Again,
the
short-term
rental
was
still
so
with
this
property.
We
basically
have
gotten
to
the
point
where
we're
just
checking
daily,
so
the
entire
time
that
that
this
case
was
opened,
we
have
checked
daily
and
that
it
has.
There
has
been
a
short-term
advertisement
the
entire
time.
I
So
I
basically
am
asking
the
code
board
members
to
find
this
property
in
violation
of
25.02,
and
I
believe
that
the
property
was
in
violation
from
the
date
the
tenant
told
me
they
arrived
on,
may
17th
and
is
still
in
violation
today.
I
did
verify
today
that
the
short-term
rental
advertisement
has
not
been
changed,
and
that
concludes
my
testimony.
The
10th.
G
I
It's
my
opinion,
because
the
the
short-term
rental
advertisement
has
not
been
changed.
It
is
still
in.
My,
in
my
opinion,
is
still
in
violation.
L
I
have
a
question
when
you
were
going
through
the
evolve
website.
Did
you
check
to
see
if
evolve
was
made
aware
of
the
city
code
concerning
a
minimum
stay.
L
Let's
see
here,
that's
it
if
if
they
were
not
no,
if
I
wanted
to
know
if
they
were
notified
of
a
minimum
state,
but
if
you
don't
know,
it
might
be
interesting
to
check
out
to
see
if
their
contract
requires
that.
L
L
L
D
L
F
A
I
I
This
is
a
repeat
violation
case.
The
repeat:
violation
case
number
was
21.800189
and
there
was
no
previous
fine.
It
was
simply
established
at
that
time
exhibit
one
are
all
the
photographs
exhibit
two
or
all
the
notices
to
include
the
notice
of
violation
and
notice
of
hearings.
Exhibit
three:
are
the
administration
documents
to
include
the
case?
Summary
previous
board?
Orders,
property,
appraiser
and
tax
collector
records
exhibit
four?
Is
the
affidavit
of
posting
and
a
copy
of
the
sign
exhibit
five?
Is
the
affidavit
of
prosecution
costs?
I
I
I
So
on
may
17th,
the
repeat:
violation,
notice
of
hearing
was
mailed
and
the
postal
tracking
states
it
was
delivered
left
with
an
individual
on
may
20th.
We
received
an
additional
complaint.
I
received
a
voicemail
stating
that
the
commercial
trailer
was
parked
in
front
of
the
residents
again
on
may
24th
21st
21st
I
conducted
a
re-inspection
because
the
owner
had
called
saying
that
it
was
ready
in
the
afternoon
of
the
of
may
20th.
I
I
We
did
this
case
not
long
ago
and
the
reason
I
had
established
it
was
because
this
has
happened
multiple
times
before,
where
it
was
there
and
then
it
wasn't
there
was
there
wasn't
there,
so
I
had
a
feeling
it
was
going
to
come
up
again
anyway.
So
this
is
just
a
picture
of
the
the
trailer
they
can
park,
the
trailer
behind
their
fence
and
that's
no
problem
and
just
a
picture
of
the
small
excavator
in
the
driveway
and
that's
that's
all
I
have
when
I
went
out
again.
They
both
had
been
removed.
I
B
J
K
I
They
were
in
compliance
when,
when
it
was
established
for
the
violations,
so
there
was
no
fine
assessed.