The special magistrate confirmed on Aug. 14, 2025, that a backyard shed built without a permit remained out of compliance with an earlier order requiring an after‑the‑fact permit. City staff reported the building department had requested a signed owner-building affidavit and a site plan; those required documents had not been provided and the permit was still in reference mode.

Why it matters: an after‑the‑fact permit process requires owners to submit documentation demonstrating the structure meets code; failure to submit required materials exposes owners to fines and prosecution costs and allows the city to place a lien if assessments are recorded.

Evidence and timeline: the magistrate reviewed an order that required the respondents to cure the violation by April 19, 2025. The building department’s permit technician provided a status update: on July 31 the department sent the owners an owner-building affidavit and requested a site plan; the permit remains unissued pending those materials. City staff recommended the magistrate assess the previously ordered $150 prosecution cost and $50-per-day fines from the April 19 deadline.

Magistrate’s action: the magistrate issued an order finding the respondents remained in violation, assessed $50 per day beginning April 19, 2025, and ordered the $150 cost of prosecution. He noted that the respondents may later petition the city commission for relief from assessed fines but that as of the hearing the permit remained incomplete and the lien authority and fines stood. He advised staff to provide the respondents with a copy of the order and the documentation requirements so they could proceed.

Next steps: owners must submit the owner-building affidavit and the site plan to the building department to complete the after‑the‑fact permit application and request final inspection; if compliance is achieved the $150 prosecution cost may be waived per the original order.