Special Magistrate Amity Barnard continued two related code-enforcement cases against a property in the Town of Loxahatchee Groves to Sept. 17 after finding the record did not show a required affidavit of noncompliance had been recorded.

The cases, numbered 23010003 (alleged prohibited use) and 23010006 (alleged tree removal permit violations), were the only matters on the hearing agenda. Barnard said the town had shown proof of certified mail service and a signed return receipt from the property owner, Lantana Holdings LLC, but that the first-amended stipulation dated June 27, 2023, requires the town to record an affidavit of noncompliance before the stipulation automatically terminates and fines are imposed.

Jeff Kurtz, town attorney for the Town of Loxahatchee Groves, told the magistrate the parties had entered a stipulation and a first amendment that set a compliance schedule and fixed fines that would apply if the agreement dissolved. Kurtz said paragraph 6 of the amended stipulation contemplated fines retroactive to the date of the amendment and estimated a potential assessment of $196,500 tied to the use violation (described in the file as $250 per day running roughly 786 days). He also said the tree-violation case carries a much larger daily assessment tied to the vegetation-permit requirement and the town had not received a required bond.

Cody German, attorney appearing remotely for the tenant operating on the property (identified in the record as FERP Holdings), told the magistrate his client is agreeable to terminating the stipulation but asked that any determination of fines be deferred. German said his client is pursuing an option to purchase the property that expires Sept. 1 and has been coordinating with the landowner's counsel; he said he was not previously advised that the town intended to seek termination of the stipulation or to require cessation of use immediately.

Barnard read into the record the first-amended stipulation language that says an affidavit of noncompliance, if recorded, will terminate the agreement but that paragraphs 6 and 7 survive termination and permit the town to seek fines and to require removal of unpermitted improvements within 90 days. Because the town had not shown a recorded affidavit of noncompliance, Barnard said the matter was not ripe for entry of any order imposing fines or other relief.

Procedurally, the town submitted the prior order dated Aug. 4 and a certified-mail return as a composite exhibit, which German did not oppose; Barnard admitted that materials as composite exhibit 1. After hearing from counsel, Barnard continued the matters and said she would issue an order resetting the hearing for Sept. 17 at 9 a.m.

The magistrate emphasized the effect of lengthy continuances, saying the parties' repeated delays had prolonged resolution and could have deferred imposition of fines that were already set in earlier orders. German said his client wants the property brought into compliance and reserved the right to seek mitigation of any fines later. Kurtz said the town will prepare and, if appropriate, record an affidavit of noncompliance and then return the matter to the magistrate for further proceedings.

The hearing was adjourned after the continuance was entered; Barnard said she would issue the reset order and the town would provide copies to counsel.

Ending: The next scheduled hearing on cases 23010003 and 23010006 is Sept. 17 at 9:00 a.m.; the town will issue an order resetting the matter and the parties may pursue additional filings before that date.