Special Magistrate Scott Clyman presided over a code-enforcement docket in Cooper City where he found violations in multiple cases, set compliance deadlines and imposed administrative fees and daily fines where violations were not cured.

The docket covered property-maintenance violations, unpermitted portable storage containers, delinquent local business tax receipts and multiple parking and screening violations. The most contested items included a portable storage unit at Cooper Square 26 LLC, delinquent business tax receipts at the Shops of Cooper City (tenant: Ellie's restaurant), and several residential maintenance citations. Magistrate Clyman announced time-to-comply deadlines, administrative fees and daily fines for uncured violations, and in some instances reduced or waived civil penalties when respondents came into compliance.

The Cooper Square 26 LLC matter (case no. 243082) began with an admission that a portable storage container was on-site without a permit. Lee Gonzales, the property manager, said the respondents were “working on getting a permit for it right now.” Inspector Mark Reali testified he inspected the property on Nov. 7, 2024, issued a notice of violation and found no site permit recorded. Clyman ordered the respondent to apply for the permit within one week, imposed a $150 administrative fee for the hearing and warned that if a permit was not applied for by January 15 the fine would run $200 per day until application. The magistrate said he would bring the case back on the February 5 docket to confirm the status.

In the Shops of Cooper City AP LLC matter (case no. 243-074), Inspector Reali reported the business (tenant identified as Ellie's restaurant) lacked local business tax receipts for multiple years. Clyman found a violation and set a $150 administrative fee, gave the respondent until Jan. 13 to cure by applying for the required tax receipt, and ordered a $250-per-day fine to run until compliance if the issue was not cured by that date.

Darlington Park Homeowners Association (case no. 241-269) came into compliance after repairs to a damaged chain-link gate; counsel said the association was about nine to ten days late in completing repairs. Clyman declined to waive the $150 administrative hearing fee but reduced the fine to $1,000, payable by the end of the month; failure to pay will return the case to the February docket for certification.

In multiple residential cases where respondents demonstrated compliance or said they had corrected the cited condition, Clyman generally required payment of the $150 administrative fee (or other specified administrative deadlines) and waived or reduced civil penalties. For example, in the case involving Carla Munoz and Misael Sabugo (case no. 55688) for a boat not screened from public view, the respondent acknowledged the violation and testified it had been corrected; Clyman waived the civil penalty but imposed the $150 administrative fee payable in 30 days.

Other cases on the docket resulted in certified fines and continuing daily accruals if not cured. For BMS Cooper City LLC (9495 Sheridan Street; case no. 242938), Inspector Reali documented dead and fallen trees; Clyman ordered a $150 administrative fee due by Jan. 22, set a compliance deadline (Jan. 10 was referenced during the hearing) and warned of a $250-per-day fine until the violation is corrected.

Clyman repeatedly reminded respondents that unpaid fines can be recorded in the public records of Broward County and may become liens on the real property. He also noted that when a permit application is filed it goes to the building department and the issuance timeline depends on the building department’s review; he said he would seek an explanation from building staff if permits were not issued despite timely applications.

Votes at a glance

- Case 243082 — Cooper Square 26 LLC (9630 Sterling Road #106): Violation found (portable storage unit without permit). Order: apply for permit within one week; $150 administrative fee (hearing); $200/day fine may begin if not applied for by Jan. 15; review on Feb. 5 docket. (Ruling by Special Magistrate Scott Clyman)

- Case 55688 — Carla Munoz & Misael Sabugo (9401 SW 50 St): Violation admitted (boat not screened). Order: civil penalty waived; $150 administrative fee imposed, payable in 30 days. (Ruling by Clyman)

- Case 241-269 — Darlington Park HOA (Darlington Place): Violation for damaged gate; association came into compliance. Order: $1,000 reduced fine payable by month-end; $150 administrative fee still owed. Nonpayment to return case for certification in February. (Ruling by Clyman)

- Case 242938 — BMS Cooper City LLC (9495 Sheridan St): Violation found (dead/fallen trees). Order: $150 administrative fee due by Jan. 22; compliance deadline discussed (Jan. 10 referenced); $250/day fine until compliance. (Ruling by Clyman)

- Case 243-074 — Shops of Cooper City AP LLC (12113/12397 Cherry St; tenant: Ellie's restaurant): Violation found (delinquent business tax receipts for multiple years). Order: $150 administrative fee; cure by Jan. 13 by applying for business tax receipt; $250/day fine until compliance. (Ruling by Clyman)

- Multiple residential parking, screening and maintenance cases (see docket): magistrate certified fines in several matters (typical pattern: $100–$250 base citation plus $150 administrative hearing fee; payment due within 30 days) and ordered accrual of daily fines where applicable until corrected.

Why it matters

These rulings affect property owners and businesses in Cooper City through monetary penalties and potential liens on real property. The magistrate’s orders typically require either immediate correction, timely application for permits or tax receipts, or payment of administrative fees to avoid return to the docket and possible escalation (daily fines or certification). Several respondents were given curative deadlines rather than immediate large penalties, while others had fines certified because no appeal or cure occurred.

What’s next

Clyman scheduled follow-up on uncured matters for the February 5 docket. Responses that require building-department review may be delayed pending that office’s permits and inspections. The magistrate reiterated that respondents should work with city building staff when applying for permits to ensure prompt processing.