Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Business Tax Receipt topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Magistrate defers decision on zoning and business tax receipt for property linked to 'Minglers Social Club'
Summary
The special magistrate continued a zoning and business tax receipt (BTR) dispute tied to a property where a social club has operated; non-zoning violations must be corrected by June 4, while zoning and BTR issues are set for review June 10.
The City of Daytona Beach special magistrate deferred a decision on whether a social club operating at a private property violates local zoning and whether a business tax receipt is required, continuing the legal questions to the magistrate’s June 10 hearing.
The magistrate ordered that non-zoning items in the notice of violation — including trash removal, exterior repairs and vehicle registration issues — be brought into compliance by June 4, 2025. But he said he would postpone any determination about the zoning classification and the need for a business tax receipt (BTR) until the June 10 hearing so he could review records and clarify applicable rules.
William Dennison Sr., who spoke at the hearing and identified himself in relation to the property, said the site has been used for about nine years as “Minglers Social Club.” Dennison said he previously met city staff before renting the building and was told there would be no problem. “When I came here and talked to Mr. Jeffries in the historical department, it’s who I had to talk to. He had no problem with us,” Dennison said. He and others said a prior licensing decision had denied a BTR after staff reviewed advertising and other records.
City staff noted there is an entry in the licensing record from April 2016 stating the proposed business resembled one or more prohibited uses — “bottle club, adult theater, or nightclub” — and that some of those uses are not allowed in the property’s T2 zoning district. The city’s exhibit binder included prior permit and licensing notes and online advertisements that city staff said reflected ongoing promotion of the establishment.
The magistrate said he was not prepared to make a zoning determination at the hearing: “I don’t know who’s calling it adult entertainment, but I obviously have to refresh my understanding as to what the rules are that come into play,” he said. He continued only the zoning/BTR questions to June 10 and ordered the remainder of the violations corrected by June 4 or the property would return for consideration of fines of up to $1,000 per day.
The city requested the property owner produce additional documentation for the record if there were prior determinations; the magistrate invited the parties to submit any material through the city attorney before the June 10 session.
