ANNA MARIA – City commissioners rejected homeowner Dena Dalquist’s request to waive $1,614 in building permit fees that included a $1,076 triple penalty for home repairs made without a permit.
A staff memo included in the city commission’s April 10 meeting packet said a stop work order was issued for Dalquist’s property at 137 Crescent Drive which resulted in a $1,076 fine, which equates to three times the normal permitting fee. The staff memo states that Dahlquist paid the triple fee fine and other permitting costs on March 3 when submitting a permit application, but her permit application did not indicate the work was done in response to hurricane damage.
On March 26, Dahlquist sent a letter to city officials requesting a waiver of the fees and fine she paid.
“I understand the importance of proper permitting, but I faced exceptional circumstances that led to this oversight,” her letter said.
The letter states her home sustained significant damage during Hurricanes Helene and Milton last year and needed immediate repairs at a time when she was still dealing with the loss of her husband in May.
“This personal tragedy compelled me to take a leave of absence from work, further complicating my situation,” she wrote.
“Given my circumstances, I relied on the kindness of friends and neighbors to help restore my home. I was unaware that the work required a permit, as my focus was on making my home habitable again while coping with my loss,” she wrote.
Her letter mentions the city’s now-expired hurricane damage permit fee waiver program.
“While my situation may not precisely match the criteria, I believe the spirit of this program applies to my case, considering the multiple hurricanes that affected my property. I assure you that I am now fully aware of the permitting requirements and will comply with all necessary regulations for any future work on my property,” she wrote.
The city commission discussed Dahlquist’s fee and fine waiver requests on April 10. Mayor Mark Short noted the city’s hurricane damage fee waiver program expired on Jan. 31 and the pending expiration was posted on the city’s website and Facebook page.
Short said a code enforcement officer noticed the work taking place, determined no permit had been issued and a stop work order was later issued.
Without providing specifics, City Planner Ashley Austin said the work done at Dalquist’s ground-level home required a permit, but a permit would not have been required had her home been elevated. Austin said this may have contributed to the homeowner’s confusion.
Commissioner Charlie Salem asked Short if city staff had a recommendation regarding Dalquist’s requests. Short said city staff had no recommendation and the decision was solely in the commission’s hands.
“I feel the city did nothing wrong in issuing the fine and I feel the fees are just,” Commissioner Kathy Morgan-Johnson said.
Johnson said waiving fees for one homeowner might result in other homeowners seeking similar waivers.
Commissioner Gary McMullen initially supported the city’s actions and he suggested waiving the triple fee fine but not the original permitting fees. Salem agreed with waiving the additional fine due to the hardships Dahlquist cited in her letter.
Participating by phone, Commissioner John Lynch shared Johnson’s concerns about setting precedent and opening the city up to additional hardship claims.
“The requirements are clear, and I understand there was some hardship with the applicant’s concerns, but what are we opening ourselves up to with respect to hardships for other folks who may not be compliant in the future?” Lynch said.
Short agreed and said at least 30 other stop work orders had been issued.
“I know we issued a number of stop work orders that resulted in triple permit fees,” Short said. “Potentially, it does open the door that anybody who got a triple permit fee could come in here and claim a hardship. I’m not saying that’s not legitimate, but it does have the potential to open that door.”
Lynch questioned how the commission would determine whether to grant relief for other homeowners.
“The criteria is pretty clear on what the requirements are. I understand the situation this applicant had to endure, but you also have contractors that you’re working with. It’s unfortunate, but it is the policy. I think we’re just opening Pandora’s box, potentially,” Lynch said.
Taking a contrary position, Salem said, “The hardship expressed here seems fairly significant to me and I appreciate that we might have to evaluate additional claims on a case-by-case basis.”
Salem asked City Attorney Becky Vose if granting Dahlquist’s requests would set precedent for additional fee and fine waiver requests from other homeowners.
Participating by phone, Vose said, “We clearly aren’t setting a precedent because everybody’s reason for not pulling a permit would be different, so it would have to be dealt with on a case-by-case basis.”
After learning that many other stop work orders had been issued, McMullen, a former code enforcement officer, changed his position and said he was no longer in favor of waiving Dalquist’s fine and fees.
Salem made a motion to waive the triple fee fine but his motion died without a second from another commissioner and Dalquist’s fees and fine will not be waived.
