Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Code Enforcement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City of Newberry holds compliance hearing in case against Matthew and Kimberly McElhaney
Summary
A City of Newberry hearing revisited a January 31 compliance order for Matthew and Kimberly McElhaney after staff said the property remained out of compliance; the transcript excerpt does not record a final determination.
An unidentified hearing official opened a City of Newberry compliance review involving Matthew and Kimberly McElhaney, saying the matter returns to the docket to determine whether the respondents had complied with an order issued Jan. 31.
The official summarized the case on the record: "City of Newberry versus Matthew and Kimberly McElhaney," and said the Jan. 31 order "said that the respondent shall cure the violation ... by March," (transcript phrasing: "park boat in either the side of the backyard") noting the property previously was found not in compliance.
The nut graf: The hearing segment in the transcript focuses on whether the McElhaneys satisfied a prior compliance order; the excerpt does not include testimony from the respondents, evidence of remediation, or a final ruling.
In the portion of the hearing captured in the transcript, the presiding official asked whether the parties were ready to proceed and indicated the docket would move through items involving people present. The official confirmed the prior finding that the property was not in compliance and recited the terms of the Jan. 31 order, including a compliance deadline set for March. The transcript text describes the violation using the phrase "park boat in either the side of the backyard," which is unclear in the excerpt and is recorded here exactly as spoken in the transcript.
The excerpt does not record any new motion, a vote, or a formal determination of compliance. The transcript ends after the official restated the Jan. 31 order and asked whether the parties were ready to proceed; no outcome or additional directions appear in the provided excerpt.
Because the available transcript excerpt is limited, details that are not in the text — including whether the respondents presented evidence of remediation, the owner’s response, or a final ruling — are not reported here. The hearing may have continued beyond the provided segment; the excerpt does not specify next steps or a date for any further action.
Ending: The transcript excerpt shows the compliance review was underway but does not record a final decision. The full meeting minutes or a longer transcript are needed to confirm whether the Jan. 31 order was enforced, modified, or vacated.
