Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Code Enforcement topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Titusville magistrate orders repairs, sets deadlines and fines after multiple code-enforcement hearings

3004268 · April 16, 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

A specially appointed magistrate entered written orders for several Titusville properties after evidence and testimony showed building, health and safety violations; the orders set compliance deadlines, administrative costs and potential daily fines that may be recorded as liens.

A specially appointed magistrate at a City of Titusville code-enforcement hearing issued written orders requiring repairs, removal of hazardous conditions and payment of administrative costs for multiple properties after city inspectors presented photos and sworn testimony documenting building- and health-safety violations.

The orders address problems ranging from missing smoke alarms, exposed wiring and malfunctioning heating to boarded windows, accumulated junk and alleged pest infestations. For each property the magistrate found notices were properly provided, set compliance deadlines (most June 6, 2025), and imposed administrative costs; unpaid costs and continuing violations were made subject to daily fines and the possibility of recording certified orders as liens on the properties.

Why it matters: Code-enforcement rulings set deadlines that affect tenants’ living conditions and property owners’ costs, and certified orders can become liens that affect future sales. Several cases involve tenant complaints about heat, leaking ceilings, electrical hazards and infestations that pose immediate health and safety concerns.

Most significant rulings and deadlines

- 1121 Second Avenue (case 25-09): The magistrate found the property remains in violation for overgrowth, damaged windows, roof and drainage problems and accumulation of junk. A fine of $100 per day per violation was imposed commencing April 12, 2025, and administrative costs of $216.58 were assessed; a certified copy of the order may be recorded as a lien.

- 2671 Susana Lane — TPK Investments LLC (case 25-11): City staff reported the site had been regraded and seeded but that the contractor invoice required to confirm work had not yet been provided. The registered agent, Darlene Tyndall, said the contractor would provide an invoice the same evening; the magistrate gave two days for submission. If the invoice is provided as promised, the case will be closed; otherwise fines ($100 per day per violation) and the administrative cost of $234.19 will remain subject to enforcement.

- 1435 Brook/Deandra (Deandra) Mateo (case 25-27): Officer Flanagan reported roof and drainage violations and demonstrated service issues. The magistrate found the property not in compliance, ordered correction by noon June 6, 2025 (60 days), and assessed administrative costs of $251.80. The magistrate said a $100-per-day fine would be imposed and backdated to April 12 if the property is not brought into compliance.

- 1091 South Kelly Avenue — Vermont LLC (initial inspection): City staff documented multiple violations including sealed/boarded windows, exterior and interior damage, heating failure, missing smoke alarms and a bee infestation in wall cavities. The magistrate ordered repair or replacement of windows and doors, roof and soffits repair, removal of trash, restoration of heating and smoke alarms, removal of bees, and required permits as needed. Deadline: noon June 6, 2025. Administrative costs of $216.58 were assessed; a $100-per-day-per-violation fine will be imposed for noncompliance.

- 1545 Kings Court — Vermont LLC (separate unit/address): City staff identified a long list of violations including exposed electrical wiring, nonfunctional heating, leaking roof, damaged interior surfaces and missing smoke alarms. The magistrate set a compliance deadline of noon June 6, 2025, assessed administrative costs of $146.14, and warned fines of $100 per day per violation thereafter.

- 990 Alfred Street — JL Miami Homes LLC (case 25-32): Inspections found missing electrical cover plates, roofing and permit issues, an incorrectly installed water heater with an overflow spray near electrical equipment, no working smoke alarms and no functional heating. The magistrate ordered permits be obtained for prior work, hazardous mechanical installations be corrected, smoke alarms installed, and heating restored. Deadline: noon June 6, 2025. Administrative costs were assessed (amount in file: $128.53); failure to comply will trigger $100-per-day-per-violation fines.

- 925 Cleveland Street — Robert Clay Kirk and Crystal Kirk Cook (case 25-33): Staff documented junk and debris, boarded/damaged windows, and use of porches and living areas for sleeping. Owner Robert Clay Kirk, sworn and present, described recent health and family emergencies and said contractors had been contacted to replace several badly damaged windows. The magistrate ordered removal of exterior trash and cessation of sleeping in porches/living-room areas by noon June 6, 2025, and allowed an additional 30 days (to mid-July 2025; the magistrate stated July 11 in the ruling) to complete window repairs. Administrative costs of $216.58 were assessed. For junk/debris and porch/bedroom use the magistrate directed the June 6 deadline; for window repairs the longer deadline applies. The magistrate said fines would be $50 per day per violation for the initial items and $100 per day per violation for the window violations if not corrected.

Process notes and evidence

City code-enforcement officers presented affidavit packets, photos taken during inspections and updated photos showing unchanged conditions in multiple cases. In the TPK Investments matter the officer reported visible remediation (regrading and seeding) but required an itemized contractor invoice to confirm work. In multiple cases staff credited tenant complaints as the basis for inspections (no heat, leaks, pests). Magistrate rulings consistently noted that notices were properly provided and that certified copies of orders may be recorded in Brevard County public records.

Quotes

Robert Clay Kirk, property owner at 925 Cleveland Street, testified: "I can get this done," and described recent medical and family hardships that he said had delayed repairs.

Officer Flanagan, code enforcement officer, summarized conditions at multiple addresses, noting missing smoke alarms, exposed wiring and other hazards that require correction or permits.

What happens next

Owners were ordered to notify code enforcement when corrections are complete so officers can confirm compliance. Where invoices or other documentation were requested (for example, 2671 Susana Lane), the magistrate allowed short additional time for submission; where no corrective action had occurred, daily fines were set to begin or to be retroactive to April 12, 2025, per earlier hearing orders. Certified orders and unpaid costs may be recorded as liens in Brevard County records.

Ending

Magistrate rulings conclude the administrative hearing process for these matters; owners who fail to meet the deadlines face escalating daily fines and potential liens. Several cases will require follow-up inspections, submission of permits or contractor invoices and, in some instances, additional hearings if compliance is not demonstrated.