Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Repeat Violation Disaster Program topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Magistrate finds 9140 Gulf Boulevard in compliance; no fines assessed

5382893 · July 14, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

After city inspectors and the property representative presented evidence, the magistrate found the property at 9140 Gulf Boulevard in compliance with the repeat‑violation code section and declined to assess fines; the order will note that state disaster program instructions limited property disturbance.

Special Magistrate Erica Augello on Monday found that the property at 9140 Gulf Boulevard, owned by respondents identified in the hearing, had come into compliance with the repeat‑violation portion of the code and declined to assess fines.

Code enforcement presented photos showing prior overgrowth and dead trees, and advised the magistrate that the site had been cleaned up by July 3. The city recommended only the administrative cost of $330 because the property had been brought into compliance.

Respondent Albert Badalian told the magistrate he had not received mailed notices and explained the property is presently uninhabitable pending federal/state disaster program (FDEM) decisions; he said agency instructions prohibited disturbance of soil or structural elements that could jeopardize program eligibility. He also said he had removed weeds and dead trees to the extent allowed and had been awaiting the program’s inspection.

Augello said she would include the respondent’s explanation in the order to assist future consideration by code enforcement if the city inspects the property again. The magistrate noted that compliance at the hearing meant no fines or costs would be assessed beyond the administrative recommendation; she directed the city to prepare an order documenting the compliance and the circumstances described by the respondent.

Augello said the record would reflect the limited scope of the repeat‑violation charge under local code and that her order would include the respondent’s representation about federal/state program constraints on disturbance of the site.