Magistrate finds 2680 Northwest 20th Court operating as boarding house; owner given inspection and 56 days to comply or face fines

A Fort Lauderdale special magistrate on Feb. 20 found that the property at 2680 Northwest 20th Court was being operated as a boarding house and ordered the owner to allow an inspection within 14 days and to apply for required permits or demolition within 56 days, or face fines of $100 per day.

The finding came after Senior Inspector Jose Saragusti presented photographs and an eyewitness report that, he said, showed multiple beds inside the house and confirmed the property had been the subject of an earlier code case. "This property have been cited by city ordinance in section nine-two 59 for building is unfit for human habitation," Saragusti said during his presentation. He also told the magistrate the state agency that inspected the site corroborated that the building was being used for boarding.

The order matters because operating a boarding house without required permits can trigger daily fines and, if owners do not act, city-initiated demolition at the owner's expense. The magistrate told the owner she would be allowed 14 days to provide access for reinspection; if problems remained, the owner would then have 56 days to submit signed, sealed plans or a demolition permit.

During the hearing, owner Mabel J. McCoy and her son, Anthony Jackson, said the house had been repaired and presented that they believed the property complied. McCoy said inspectors had visited multiple times and that electrical work had been paid for and completed; Jackson spoke in support. The magistrate responded that the inspector must be permitted access to verify completed work and ordered the 14-day inspection window.

City staff stressed the rule-based nature of the process. Rhonda Montoya Hassan, assistant city attorney, told the magistrate, "without an active permit and a letter from an engineer, to allow an additional time extension, we would respectfully ask that the fines be imposed." Chief building staff and an assistant building official were listed as having inspected or been involved in previous site visits.

Inspector Saragusti testified that his on-site supplement report documented beds and other signs of boarding; he estimated the property contained "30 beds" in stacked sleeping areas and said the state agency's on-site check confirmed boarding activity. Based on the photos, eyewitness statements and the inspection record, the magistrate concluded the use met the city's boarding-house criteria and entered the compliance orders.

Practical next steps given at the hearing: McCoy must let the inspector into the property within 14 days for verification of repairs. If the inspector finds outstanding violations, she will have 56 days from that inspection date to either file signed and sealed plans and obtain permits to bring the building into code compliance or to apply for a demolition permit. The magistrate scheduled a reappearance in 56 days and warned that fines of $100 per day would begin if the deadlines were missed.

The magistrate also explained that, if the owner brings the property into compliance, the city offers an administrative amnesty process that can substantially reduce accrued fines; that reduction is handled by paperwork once full compliance is confirmed. The case record will reflect the magistrate's orders and reappearance date.

The hearing record shows the city's citations relied on local code sections cited by staff (city ordinance sections 9-259 and 9-260a). The city recommended the 56-day compliance timeline; the magistrate's orders track that recommendation.

The magistrate hearing continued through a full docket of building-code matters after the McCoy case. Several other property owners at the same hearing received compliance deadlines or fines; those matters were handled separately on the docket.