Magistrate finds property owner in violation for outdoor storage and fill; compliance deadline set

Special Magistrate Amity Barnard on Aug. 4 found the property at 2241 A Road in the Town of Loxahatchee Groves in violation of multiple town code sections for keeping fill, prohibited uses and outdoor storage, and ordered the respondent to come into compliance by Sept. 5, 2025.

John Suarez, code enforcement officer for the Town of Loxahatchee Groves, presented the town’s evidentiary file and testified the notice of violation and notice of hearing were mailed by certified mail and posted on the property on July 10, 2025. Suarez told the magistrate the town documented imported dirt and equipment on the lot and identified an active hay-transfer operation and a dirt-sifting operation on what the town’s records list as vacant land.

Deanna Thomas, code enforcement officer, testified she personally served the notice and attested to hand-delivery and certified mailing records. Thomas described photographs and inspections showing exterior storage containers on the property and ongoing transfer and sifting of fill. “The property use code is vacant,” she said, and the town’s position was that the activities on-site required a change of classification before they could lawfully occur.

Respondent Jose Villarino told the magistrate he had cleared the land, paid for a land-clearing permit in 2022 and had applied for a business tax receipt and related permits to operate a nursery; he said two tenants were operating on the site to offset startup costs. Villarino denied operating a hay-transfer business himself and said he believed the county property-appraiser classification permitted the intended nursery use. “I paid $250 to clear it, which I did legally,” Villarino said. “I can sell dirt. I can sell soil. I can sift it.”

Barnard reviewed the town code sections cited by the town—Section 30-6 (prohibition on keeping fill), Section 20-017 (prohibited uses), and Section 20-010(g)(1) (outdoor storage rules)—and admitted evidence from both sides, including photographs, the town’s notice documents, a local business-tax receipt, and copies of lease agreements between Villarino and two tenants.

Based on the testimony, photographic evidence and documents in the case file, Barnard found Villarino in violation of the cited code sections and ordered full compliance by Sept. 5, 2025. The magistrate assessed administrative costs of $234.05 for the hearing and ordered that, if compliance is not achieved by Sept. 5, a $150-per-day fine will begin Sept. 6 and a fine-assessment hearing will be held Sept. 17, 2025, at 9 a.m. Barnard instructed Villarino to work with town staff and the permitting department and to pursue a change in the property-appraiser classification if needed.

Barnard also clarified that the town’s business-tax receipt is a tax/license document that does not certify zoning compliance: issuance of a business tax receipt, she said, “does not give you authorization to violate the town zoning code.” Suarez and Thomas told the magistrate the town’s permitting and zoning processes must be followed to obtain authorization for a nursery or other permitted uses on the parcel; the town does not change property-appraiser classifications.

The magistrate entered the town’s evidentiary file and the respondent’s exhibits into the record and encouraged ongoing communication between Villarino and town staff to avoid further hearings if compliance is achieved.