HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981 01 19 Code Enforcement Board Regular Minutes
.
.
.
~
,
Code Enforcement Board Meeting
January 19, 1981
The Code Enforcement Board Meeting was called to order by Chairman Gary Hunt at
7:06 p. m.
Roll Call:
Chairman Gary Hunt, present
Code Prosecutor Jack Cooper, present
Code Inspector J. R. Bradshaw, present
Jay Alpert, present
George Schrader, present
William Daucher, present
J. R. Hattaway, present
Victor Suarez, present
Discussion of rules:
One correction to Sec. 2.5B sub-paragraph 4 - to read: the alleged violator
personally or through counsel will present their evidence to the Board.
Motion was made by Daucher, seconded by Suarez to accept these rules as presented
tonight as corrected. Vote: Alpert, yes; Schrader, yes; Hunt, yes; Daucher, yes;
Hattaway, yes; Suarez, yes; motion carried.
Election of Chairman:
Motion by Daucher to nominate Hunt Chairman. Seconded by Hattaway. Discussion.
Vote: Alpert, yes; Schrader, yes; Hunt, yes; Daucher, yes; Hattaway, yes; Suarez,
yes; motion carried.
Nominations for Vice Chairman:
Mr. Suarez nominated the present Vice-Chairman Mr. Alpert. Seconded by Daucher.
Vote: Alpert, yes; Schrader, yes; Hunt, yes; Daucher, yes; Hattaway, yes; Suarez,
yes; motion carried.
Chairman Hunt called the Hearing Case No. 11-01-80 to order. Mrs. Lee Filteau
was present. The complainant was not present.
The Prosecutor said this case concerns a violation of the Code Sec. 44.77 of the
ordinances. Mr. Chairman was asked to mark Exhibits A, B & C for identification
purposes.
Mr. Bradshaw was sworn in by Mr. Cooper. Mr. Cooper asked Mr. Bradshaw if Exhibit A
was the complaint filed by Wilda Williams. Mr. Bradshaw said that it was.
Mrs. Filteau was asked if she recognized this as a complaint - she said yes.
Exhibit B was the Notice of Violation which Mr. Bradshaw and Mrs. Filteau acknowledged
the Notice of Violation. Mr. Bradshaw and Mrs. Filteau acknowledged the Exhibit C,
Notice to Appear.
The exhibits were introduced into evidence.
Mr. Cooper asked Mr. Bradshaw: I show you again the Notice of Complaint - did you
work that complaint? Yes. Did you go to the residence wherein the complaint has its
basis? Yes. Is it within the City limits and did you address Mrs. Filteau on the
issue? Mr. Bradshaw answered that it is within city limits but that no one was
home, she answered the letter by phone. Did you advise her that a complaint had been
lodged? Yes. Mr. Bradshaw, did you get an indication that Mrs. Filteau would comply with
the Code~ No. Did she advise you that she would remove the chickens from the
premises? No. Did you then, continued on Page 2.
.
.
.
l
Code Enforcement Board Meeting
January 19, 1981
Page 2
advise her by registered mail that she was in violation of the Code? Yes. Did she
remove the chickens at that time? No. Did you then advise her that she would
appear before the Board in order to comply with the Code? Yes. Did she acknowledge
that she would appear? Yes. Are the chickens still on the premises? Yes. In your
opinion is that a violation of Sec. 44.77 of the Code? Mr. Bradshaw answered -
in the strict sense of the code, yes.
Mrs. Filteau was sworn in by Mr. Cooper. Mr. Cooper asked Mrs. Filteau to tell the
Board her side of the story.
Mrs. Filteau: we have two hens. They are my son's pets. He received them a little
over a year ago as Easter pets. They were raised in the utility room in a box.
When they got big enough a friend of ours helped build a coup - I have a 6' cypress
fence around my back yard - I also purchased another fence to go around the coup -
so there are three enclosures. They stay in their pens. They are Rhode Island Reds.
My son cleans them and takes good care of them. They are never allowed out of their
coup. They are my son's pets.
Mr. Alpert: was it clean Mr. Bradshaw?
Mr. Bradshaw - I didn't go in the yard - no one was home.
Mr. Daucher - has any other neighbor voiced a complaint - No.
Mrs. Filteau's son was asked if they had names. He said Henny and Penny.
The Hearing was closed at 7:55 p. m. Mrs. Filteau was informed that she would get
a notice of the Board's decision within ten days.
Mr. Cooper said the City has proven that chickens are kept on the premises.
Keeping chickens on the premises is a violation of Municipal Code Sec. 44.77.
The findings of those two facts constitutes a prima facie case and request that
the Board finds as a matter of law that Sec. 44.77 of the Municipal Code of the
City of Winter Springs has been violated by Mrs. Lee Filteau.
The Board agreed to the fact that chickens are kept on the premises.
The Board agreed that keeping chickens on the premises is a violation of Municipal
Code Sec. 44.77.
There was discussion of the fact that these were household pets. The Board
discussed what constituted a household pet.
Mr. Alper, Hunt and Hattaway felt this was excluded by the ordinance and Mr. Schrader,
Daucher and Suarez felt this was not allowed by the Code.
Discussion followed.
Another vote was taken and Mr. Alpert said he would change his vote if Mrs. Filteau
was given some time to get rid of her chickens.
Motion was made by Alpert that they have three months (90 days) to remove the
chickens or that they be brought back before the Board if they do not comply.
Seconded by Suarez. Discussion. Vote: Schrader, yes; Hunt, yes; Daucher, yes;
Hattaway, yes; Suarez, yes; Alpert, yes; motion carried.
.
.
.
. . '.
Code Enforcement Board Meeting
January 19, 1981
Page 3
Mr. Cooper was asked to prepare a relief order.
Mr. Cooper was instructed to prepare forms for subpoena of witness and subpoena of
evidence.
Discussion of advising Board of events to come before the Board:
The Board requested that the case number, section of the code being violated, name
of violator and nature of violation be listed on the agenda. Then at the meeting
a package containing the complaint, notice of violation and notice to appear be
given to each Board member. Schedule meetings for 7:00 p. m. but the Hearings for
7:30 p. m.
All exhibits to be pre~rked.
Meeting adjourned 9:42 p. m.
Respectfully submitted,
Mary T. Norton,
Secretary to the Board