Fort Lauderdale code board grants extensions, imposes fines across dozens of property cases

The Fort Lauderdale Code Enforcement Board on March 25, 2025, voted on dozens of code-enforcement cases across the city, granting time-limited compliance extensions in most matters and imposing monetary fines in several older or unresolved files.

The board, chaired by Terry Nolan, heard presentations from city inspectors and property owners or their representatives. Senior inspectors Jorge Martinez, Jose Saragusti and Andrew Gebbia presented the bulk of the city’s cases, repeatedly citing work performed “without obtaining the required permits” under the Florida Building Code. City staff most frequently sought 63-day or 119-day extensions for property owners to obtain permits and finish corrective work; where the case record showed repeated noncompliance or no contact with the owner, the board sometimes voted to impose fines that will continue to accrue until the work is completed.

Why it matters: Code-enforcement orders affect property owners’ legal exposure and, where fines accrue or liens are pursued, can lead to financial penalties or sale complications. Many homeowners who told the board they had bought properties after unpermitted work said they were unaware of earlier violations and asked for time to obtain permits.

What the board did: In brief, the panel's actions fell into three patterns: (1) grant a time-limited extension and pause fines while permits are processed; (2) find violations exist, set a compliance deadline and allow fines to accrue if owners do not comply; (3) in some long-standing matters, impose fines and send the case to collection or further legal action.

Selected examples and outcomes (Votes at a glance)

- Case BE24060003 — 1700 Northeast 50 Seventh Street (Owner: Hilda E. Iglesias Gonzales). Motion to grant a 63-day extension for compliance. Mover: Alex Schneider; second: Don Kearney. Outcome: passed; 63-day extension granted.

- Case BE24070060 — 1333 Northeast First Ave (Owner: Jonathan E. Braetz). City reported permit applications under review. Motion to grant a 63-day extension. Mover: Don Carney; second: not specified on record. Outcome: passed; 63 days.

- Case BE24080086 — 1716 Northeast Fifteenth Ave (Owner: Stella Armador). Board found violations and ordered compliance by 07/22/2025 or a fine of $50 per day; motion passed (mover Alex Schneider; second Justin Beecham).

- Case BE24070285 — 5120 Northeast 20 Sixth Ave (Owners: Carmen Liz and Daniel J. Quintala). Board found violations and ordered compliance by 07/22/2025 or a fine of $50 per day; motion passed (mover Justin Beecham; second Alex Schneider).

- Case VE24070170 — 3410 Southwest Sixteenth Street (Owner: Antonio Lupari Keenan). Motion to grant a 63-day extension. Mover: Carlos Lang; second: Alex Schneider. Outcome: passed; 63 days.

- Case BE24020193 — 2610 East Marina Bay Drive (Owner: Falls at Marina Bay LP). City requested imposition of accrued fines ($5,500 reported). Board voted to assess fines as requested. Mover: Gordon Massey; second: Justin Beecham. Outcome: fines imposed; matter proceeds (lien/amnesty procedure discussed by city attorney).

- Case BE24040208 — 1617 Southwest Fifth Street (Owner: Broward Luxury Properties LLC). Owner reported progress and asked to stop fines; board paused fines and granted 63 days. Outcome: fines stopped; 63-day extension granted.

- Case BE23100214 — 301 Southwest Second Street (Owners: 1129 Van Brunt LLC, et al.). Historical-review delays cited; board granted a 119-day extension to pursue historic approvals. Mover: Alex Schneider; second: Justin Beacham. Outcome: 119 days.

- Multiple owner-occupant cases where petitioners said they had purchased homes after unpermitted work and requested time: the board commonly granted 63-day extensions and in several cases longer periods (119 days or, in a few matters, 182 days) while permitting reviews continued. Notable homeowner extensions included BE24080133 (2321 SW 14th Court — first-time buyer Giselle Mays; board set 182 days) and BE24080250 (231 SW 20 Third Street — Milton Forster; board set 119 days).

- Cases with stops to fines pending compliance: where city staff reported active permitting and owner cooperation, the board frequently paused fines while permits were processed (examples recorded across the hearing).

- Cases sent toward collection or with fines imposed: for long-open cases with repeated noncompliance or limited owner contact (for example, BE24020193 and several older files noted in the record), the board voted to impose existing fines and advised owners that lien-amnesty is available once full compliance is achieved.

What owners and city staff said: Several owners told the board they purchased their property after unpermitted work was done and asked for time to obtain permits. For example, Janet (owner in VE23090199) told the board she had been “in continuous contact with Inspector Martinez” and asked for more time to resolve a single outstanding requirement. Inspector presentations consistently cited Florida Building Code obligations and identified which permits or reviews remained outstanding.

Legal and procedural notes: City staff repeatedly cited the Florida Building Code (2023) — specifically section 105.1 (work without permit) — as the basis for the violations. One attendee read language from Florida Statute 162.06 during public comment; the city attorney (Ronald Montoya Hassan) advised the board that that state statute does not change the city’s enforcement obligations and that any private recourse against a seller or title company lies outside the board’s authority.

Next steps and compliance monitoring: The board recorded compliance deadlines on each matter and in many instances required respondents to reappear if permits were not filed. Where the board paused fines, staff said fines would resume if owners fail to meet the compliance dates. For matters where fines were imposed, the city attorney explained owners can apply for lien amnesty after full compliance.

Ending note: The board’s March 25 docket was heavy: inspectors presented many cases and the panel handled extensions, fines and a series of procedural issues. As several new owners told the board, permit histories are often revealed after purchase; the board’s routine response was to allow time for permitting while reserving the authority to reinstate fines or pursue liens if compliance is not achieved.