Skip to main content

Tag: Holmes Beach Code Compliance

Special magistrate postpones rat case

Special magistrate postpones rat case

Written by SUN contributor on . Posted in Community News, Holmes Beach.

HOLMES BEACH – Residents – one with a rat problem – expressed their disagreement with two of Special Magistrate Michael Connolly’s rulings during a late April code compliance hearing. Lois Huntington objected to the postponement of a case concerning whether or not a home at 2918 Gulf Drive meets minimum property standards, saying she would not be able to attend the subsequent hearing.

Huntington said she believes the Gulf Drive home has been abandoned for about 10 years and does not have basic utilities such as electricity and water turned on. She said that at her home, which backs into the property, she’s had severe issues with rats due to neglect at the property. The abandoned fruit trees on the property feed the rats, which come over to her home and have to be removed from her home, pool and car, she said.

The property is owned by Jeanette Heider and her daughter, who requested that the hearing be postponed until May 18 so that she is able to attend, due to her mother’s advanced age. Connolly granted the continuance and agreed to take Huntington’s statement into consideration when ruling on the code compliance issues at the Heider property.

Another case that didn’t sit well with residents was the variance request of Jerry Hepler for his property at 3104 Avenue E. Hepler said he submitted plans to the city’s building department to demolish the existing home and half of the garage, addressing a non-conformity on the property. The garage, built in 1946, was constructed across the property line and is shared with the owner to the rear of the Avenue E property.

After Connolly ruled in favor of Hepler, granting the variance to allow him to build a new home on the property and demolish his half of the existing garage, nearby property owners took to the podium to speak, with several speaking against Connolly granting the variance.

Connolly told the assembled residents that Hepler had met all of the conditions outlined in the city’s codes to be granted a variance, therefore the variance legally should be granted.

Related coverage

City triumphs in noise violation hearing

Bali Hai owners hit with more code fines

City triumphs in noise violation hearing

City triumphs in noise violation hearing

Written by SUN contributor on . Posted in Community News, Holmes Beach.

HOLMES BEACH – It was a win for Holmes Beach police officers when Special Magistrate Michael Connolly ruled in favor of upholding a noise violation citation, assessing a $175 fine.

Property owner James Daniel Clark appeared during a Feb. 10 hearing to contest a noise violation citation received by his son, Justin Clark, on Nov. 27, 2021.

HBPD Officer Michael Van Horne testified before Connolly about the incident, which happened at a home Clark owns at 240 S. Harbor Drive in Holmes Beach. Van Horne said he responded to a noise complaint at the address. When he got out of his vehicle about 200 feet away from the home on the street, he said loud music was plainly audible. Upon walking up to the gate to the backyard, Van Horne and Sgt. Thomas Fraser say they saw several young people in a hot tub. Justin Clark responded to their summons to the gate and, with his father on the phone, answered police questions and received the noise violation.

Body camera footage from the two officers confirmed their version of events, also bringing to light that Justin Clark admitted that underage drinking was taking place on the property.

Speaking on behalf of James Daniel Clark was attorney Michele Grantham. Grantham argued that the neighbor who reported the incident had called multiple times since 2019 to report issues at the property and that the November incident was the only time that a citation was issued. She also argued that the police responding to the call had previously used a decibel reader to determine if a noise violation had taken place and did not use it this time, instead using the plainly audible portion of the city’s noise ordinance, along with seven standards outlined in the ordinance to determine that a violation had taken place. Grantham said the plainly audible language and seven standards were too subjective.

Tokajer disagreed. He testified on behalf of his officers and said the noise ordinance allows officers to determine if a violation occurs based on reasonableness and their own common sense, even if that noise takes place during the day, as this one did. With the body cameras unable to amplify sound, what was heard on the camera footage was an accurate depiction of the noise at the time of the citation, he said.

“This is clearly a violation,” Tokajer said of the music, which caused the disturbance.

Though he wasn’t onsite at the time of the incident, James Daniel Clark testified during the hearing on behalf of his son, saying he believed the group of college sophomores were watching a football game and that was the source of the noise. While being questioned by Augello, he admitted that the noise heard in the body camera footage did not sound like a football game.

After hearing testimony on both sides, Connolly ruled that a violation had taken place and ordered Clark to pay a fine of $175 plus a $10 administrative fee.

Related coverage

 

Bali Hai owners hit with more code fines

 

Fines levied for Coconuts owners

 

Builder, city head back to court

Bali Hai owners hit with more code fines

Bali Hai owners hit with more code fines

Written by SUN contributor on . Posted in Community News, Holmes Beach.

HOLMES BEACH – The fight between city leaders and the ownership of the Bali Hai Beach Resort is continuing, with the Holmes Beach special magistrate levying fines in excess of $1,000 per day against the beachfront property, topping $176,000 so far with no end in sight.

Special Magistrate Michael Connolly vacated an order imposing fines against the property during a November hearing due to an issue with the proceedings not being recorded at a mid-2021 hearing. At a Jan. 19 code compliance special magistrate hearing, Connolly ruled against the resort in seven separate cases with hefty fines assessed.

In a case alleging change of use on the property – the operation of a bar/lounge without an approved site plan from the city – Connolly ruled in the city’s favor, imposing a $500-per-day fine from Oct. 12, 2021, until the property is brought into compliance by either obtaining an approved site plan, including the bar/lounge as an approved use on the property or demolishing the bar/lounge and returning it to its previous state. As of Jan. 30, the fines had reached $54,500. Connolly also assessed $127.24 in administrative costs.

Speaking on behalf of the property’s ownership, which includes local developer Shawn Kaleta, was attorney Louis Najmy. Najmy argued that the bar/lounge wasn’t a change of use, that it had been an existing use on the property, and therefore wouldn’t require a site plan approval.

In late 2021, Najmy took a site plan before the Holmes Beach city commission, requesting that it be approved to include the bar/lounge and the installation of a spa for the use of hotel guests. While commissioners approved a site plan, it didn’t include the bar/lounge requested by Najmy. That site plan approval has since expired due to not being accepted, signed and recorded by the property owners, meaning that the site plan approval process would have to begin again before it could potentially be approved by commissioners.

The conditional site plan approval is being used as an example of the city’s alleged “blackballing” against Kaleta and his business dealings in the city in his ongoing federal lawsuit.

Other code compliance cases heard by Connolly during the Jan. 19 hearing include repeat violations of work done without permits and work done in violation of a stop-work order.

In the case of work being done without permits, Najmy said, “The Bali Hai’s hands are tied” by the city because after-the-fact permits for the work on the property cannot be issued until a site plan is approved by commissioners.

Speaking on behalf of the city, attorney Erica Augello said that Najmy was “asking for forgiveness instead of permission” and argued that if his client had gone through the proper channels before doing construction work at the Bali Hai, neither party would be in this place where fines were being assessed. She also noted that the resort’s ownership had the opportunity to accept an approved site plan from the city and refused.

Connolly assessed fines of $500 per day from June 11, 2021, until the property is brought into compliance, which is $116,500 as of Jan. 30, plus administrative fees of $127.24.

In the repeat violation case of doing construction in violation of a stop-work order, Connolly ruled that the violation was irreparable because the work has already been completed, assessing a flat $5,000 fine, the maximum allowed under city codes for an irreparable code violation, and $127.24 in administrative fees.

In the case of operating a bar/lounge and spa without a business tax receipt (BTR) issued by the city, Connolly also found a violation. Since it wasn’t a repeat violation, Connolly didn’t assess a fine but ordered that the property come into compliance and receive its BTRs for the two uses by Jan. 31 or face future fines. He did assess administrative costs of $127.24.

The issue that Najmy noted with receiving the BTRs from the city is that the property cannot have any outstanding code violations and receive a BTR. Connolly said he wouldn’t hold on fines due to any pending litigation.

“The cost of doing business in Holmes Beach is complying with the law,” Augello said.

“I really just want this to end,” Najmy said, arguing that the city has placed his client in an impossible situation.

Augello said that if the resort’s owner wants issues with the city to end, they should comply with city codes and cease operations of the bar/lounge and spa until they fix the code issues on the property and can receive the BTRs.

In three cases concerning electrical, plumbing and A/C work done without a permit, Connolly ruled that there was a violation and gave the Bali Hai’s ownership until Jan. 31 to obtain the three required permits or face additional fines at an upcoming code compliance hearing. He assessed $127.24 in administrative costs in all three cases.

For those keeping score, that’s the city of Holmes Beach at seven with the Bali Hai at zero, though Najmy has more than one court case pending appealing the decisions of the city’s representatives and alleging wrongdoing against Kaleta.

Connolly said that while he did assess fines against the resort and its ownership, he doesn’t believe that continuing to assess fines is going to remedy the issues between the city and the resort. He encouraged both parties to meet and try to work out a feasible way forward that would remedy the code violations instead of both sides continuing to pursue the matter through hearings.

Related coverage

 

Builder, city head back to court

 

Special magistrate reconsiders fines

Coconuts owner faces off with city code officers

Coconuts owner faces off with city code officers

Written by SUN contributor on . Posted in Community News, Holmes Beach.

HOLMES BEACH – The October code compliance special magistrate hearing featured eight cases and they were all issues occurring at the same complex, The Coconuts.

The property, located at 100 73rd St. in Holmes Beach, has four units managed by Coconuts Management Inc. and 11 units owned by local builder Shawn Kaleta. While the four units managed by Coconuts Management Inc. are rented weekly in compliance with the city’s codes and ordinances, Holmes Beach code compliance officers allege that some of the units owned by Kaleta are being rented in violation of the city’s vacation rental ordinance. Attorney Louis Najmy was on hand to represent Kaleta during an Oct. 20 code compliance hearing held at Holmes Beach City Hall.

Wanda Bell of Coconuts Management Inc. stated in an email to The Sun that Kaleta bought a number of units in The Coconuts complex and forced the management company to vacate the onsite office Dec. 19, 2020 after firing the company in favor of his own AMI Locals group. Bell added that the four onsite units still managed by Coconuts Management Inc. are owned by other owners.

Code Compliance Supervisor James Thomas presented the case in front of Special Magistrate Michael Connolly. Thomas alleged that units in the complex are being rented without valid vacation rental certificates (VRC) and advertised for improper lengths of stay, specifically stays for less than seven days.

The property is located in the beachfront A-1 district which, while a residential district, is also home to some of the city’s hotels and motels, along with several condominium units. Thomas argued that The Coconuts is a condominium complex and is subject to the seven-day minimum stay requirements for residential properties in the A-1 district. To rent the units, he said, would also require a valid VRC issued by the city.

Thomas said the infractions before Connolly were repeat violations because a citation had been issued to the units’ owner in June. Attorney for the city, Erica Augello, said the citation had been paid and there had been no challenge submitted to the city by the property owner.

She added that all of the units previously had VRCs but that they expired in June, except for one unit, which she said still has a valid VRC.

Thomas asked Connolly to levy costs for each of the eight cases of $127.24 against the property owner and to charge $250 per day fines in each case retroactive to Sept. 24 until the units are brought into compliance with city codes.

City Planner Bill Brisson said that The Coconuts, and specifically the units in question, do not have a hotel/motel license from the Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation.

Najmy argued that the resort’s management has a license from DBPR that is interchangeable with a hotel/motel license and that the property was built to be a resort, not a residential condominium complex. He added that the property’s units have been regularly rented for nightly stays since The Coconuts was built in the early 1970s. For the one unit that has a VRC, he said he feels that it’s improper for the unit to have one and for the city to require it. Out of the 18 units on The Coconuts property, Najmy said 11 of them are rented nightly.

As to the violation of city codes, Najmy argued that there are no minimum night stay requirements in the A-1 district and that every property should be able to be rented nightly.

Connolly said that he would have to rule in all eight cases based on the city codes. He instructed Brisson to forward the sections of code he referenced to determine rental regulations for the A-1 district to himself, Najmy and Augello and for the two attorneys to prepare and email arguments to him based on the sections of code provided.

With a ruling in the eight cases not planned to be issued until at least mid-November, Connolly warned Najmy that if the cases are decided in the city’s favor, his client risks fines of up to $250 per day dating back to Sept. 24 until the units are brought into compliance.

Related coverage

 

Election candidates speak out on balance in Holmes Beach

 

Introducing the 2021 Holmes Beach commission candidates

 

Holmes Beach leaders and Bali Hai owners face off

Special magistrate to levy fines in October

Rental property owners could be fined in October

Written by SUN contributor on . Posted in Community News, Featured, Holmes Beach.

HOLMES BEACH – Special Magistrate Michael Connolly is offering one last chance for property owners to come into compliance with his previous rulings on code violations before he levies fines in October.

Code compliance officers presented several cases before Connolly during a Wednesday, Sept. 16 hearing held at Holmes Beach City Hall. Seven of the cases presented were continued to a future hearing for reasons including pending potential changes to the city’s sign ordinance.

While those cases are set to be heard at a future special magistrate hearing, the cases that most concerned Connolly are the five in which he’s already ruled on alleged code violations and property owners have yet to come into compliance with local and state codes or his rulings.

During the September hearing, he gave the property owners a warning – if they don’t come into compliance before the next special magistrate hearing, scheduled for 10 a.m. on Wednesday, Oct. 21, he’s going to start instituting fines.

Anna Maria Island Inn

Three cases involve The Anna Maria Island Inn, 3501 Gulf Drive.

Speaking for the city, attorney Erica Augello said that the property’s sign, advertising daily rentals in a short-term rental zone, has been changed, but that the property’s advertising had not been brought into compliance. According to the special magistrate order, the resort’s owner, Shawn Kaleta, had until Sept. 18 to achieve full compliance with the order.

The order also states that the owner needs new, valid vacation rental certificates for the new units and to apply for demolition permits and demolish two illegally-constructed rental units on the bottom floor of the building. During a previous hearing, it was determined that the two ground floor units, located beneath the flood level established by the Florida Building Code, were constructed by a prior owner without permits, however, it was ruled that they’re now the current owner’s problem and cannot be rented.

Najmy argued that the owner has applied for the permits but the applications didn’t meet the city’s requirements for approval. He said he felt the requirements for approving the permits supplied by Schwartz are “overreaching.”

Augello also said that city code compliance officers have photographs alleging that the units are still being rented in violation of city codes and the special magistrate order. Speaking on behalf of the owner, Najmy said that the units are not being rented but that there are owners using the property. Connolly advised that Najmy may want to have those owners testify during the next special magistrate hearing when he’ll consider the fines.

Bali Hai

Two of the cases involve the Bali Hai Beach Resort, which is also the subject of a lawsuit with the city of Holmes Beach. The first case concerns work done on an accessory building without permits in violation of local and state building codes. The second case concerns selling alcohol on the premises without an approved site plan from the city; the alcohol sales are taking place in the accessory building.

The September special magistrate hearing was held two days before the deadline Connolly gave the property owner to submit a site plan for review and get the required building permits.

Augello said that the site plan has been submitted and is currently under review. To be approved, she said the site plan has to first go through a development review committee, then go to city commissioners for a work session and then a public hearing.

“There’s no way that they could’ve come into compliance by that date,” she said of the Sept. 18 deadline given by Connolly.

Where the property owner is still out of compliance, Augello said, is that none of the required building permits for work already done have been granted.

Representing the property owner, Bali Hai JV LLC, and manager Shawn Kaleta, was attorney Louis Najmy. Najmy argued that the permits have been applied for, but the applications were denied by the city’s building official. Building Official Neal Schwartz said that additional information is needed and the permit applications have to be resubmitted to be considered for approval.

Related coverage

 

City leaders, resort owner face off in court

 

Special magistrate rules on seven code issues

 

County judge leaves Holmes Beach case

Holmes Beach logo OLD

Holmes Beach budget questions answered

Written by SUN contributor on . Posted in Community News, Holmes Beach.

HOLMES BEACH – City leaders began budget talks for the 2019-20 fiscal year beginning in July. With two budget hearings now set for September, The Sun is taking your questions to city leaders to get answers to items that concern community members.

Where did the City Planner’s salary go?

Some changes have come to city hall in the current fiscal year regarding City Planner Bill Brisson. Brisson went from a contract employee with Holmes Beach to a part-time employee and is making the move to a full-time position for the 2019-20 fiscal year beginning Oct. 1. In previous years, the monies paid to the planner were logged under the building department’s budget in the overall city budget. For the coming year, the planner’s salary and benefits have been moved out of the building department and are in the general government budget. The general government budget includes the city clerk’s office, the city treasurer, the development director position and human resources as well as the planner. The total amount for salaries for eight full-time employees is budgeted at $586,140, up from $415,395 in the current fiscal year. Including benefits, the total amount for employees increases to $828,112, up from $602,951 in the current fiscal year ending Sept. 30.

Should we replace bulletproof vests every three years?

The short answer to this one is yes, the bulletproof vests supplied to Holmes Beach police officers do need to be replaced regularly. The reason why is because the vests degrade over time due to heat, the environment and just regular wear and tear, according to Police Chief Bill Tokajer. Just like a child’s car seat, the vests also have an expiration date. Tokajer said he tries to stagger the replacements so that only a few are replaced per year but that replacing the vests is mandatory in order to make sure every officer has adequate protection when on patrol. HBPD officers typically wear their bulletproof vests when outside of the police station as a part of their uniform. In the budget for the 2019-20 fiscal year, Tokajer lists that four bulletproof vests are scheduled to be replaced at a cost of $1,000 each.

Why does Code Compliance have a budget outside of the HBPD?

Code Compliance, previously known as Code Enforcement, has its own budget because the department is its own entity within the departmental framework at Holmes Beach City Hall. With the expansion of the department to three officers and a budget to add a fourth officer, along with a move from the HBPD side of city hall to the public works barn, the department incurs its own expenses that need to be recorded outside of the police department. Currently, Code Compliance Officer James Thomas serves as the department’s leader. This is not the first year that the department has had its own budget. The proposed budget for the department for the upcoming fiscal year is $481,644, including $309,818 for salaries and benefits for four full-time employees, compared to a total of $290,396 with $212,496 budgeted for employee salaries and benefits in the current fiscal year.

Why is there no increase in the beach patrol income from Manatee County?

Manatee County gives the city $10,000 annually to help cover the costs associated with HBPD officers patrolling the county-owned beaches. Tokajer said he approaches county leaders every year to increase the amount paid to the city but so far has been unable to get the amount increased. During budget hearings, he said that he’s keeping statistics on the amount of people coming to the beaches in Holmes Beach and how much the city actually spends on beach patrol to help bolster his position when the opportunity arises to attempt to renegotiate with the county.

Related coverage

Holmes Beach budget talks begin