Christian Waugh, the Citrus County special master, presided over a marathon code‑compliance hearing on Dec. 15 that produced a mix of negotiated settlements, administrative rulings and monetary penalties across dozens of cases.

The most immediate outcome was a six‑month extension granted to Data Holdings (case 2024846) while county staff and the applicant continue coordinating site‑improvement plans and agency reviews with FDOT and the Southwest Florida Water Management District. The special master conditionally admitted the applicant’s exhibits and reversed previously imposed daily fines pending the extended compliance period.

The hearing included several routine no‑contest resolutions: Timothy Robert Bevel and Sarah P. Grogan each agreed to 90 days to abate violations with a $50‑per‑day penalty if they fail to comply. Multiple other property owners were given cure periods ranging from 7 to 90 days with daily fines set between $50 and $350 depending on the case history and severity.

Two contested matters drew more extensive record‑building and longer deliberation. In one, the owner of a vacant lot at 4335 E. Garden St. (Deer Trust Management Investment LLC) disputed county allegations that the site had been graded or filled without a development order. After admitting aerial photos, affidavits and public‑records materials into evidence, the special master concluded the county’s grading/site‑modification claim was supported and assessed a one‑time fine of $2,500.

In a separate contested case about temporary occupancy of recreational vehicles and animals at 6817 West Jessica Court, the special master heard neighbor testimony describing noise and odor complaints, reviewed inspection photos, and imposed a 20‑day abatement period with a $50‑per‑day fine if the property remained in violation.

The hearing also resolved several accessory‑use disputes on vacant parcels. For one owner, Christopher Nielsen, the special master allowed an original permitted shed footprint to remain but ordered removal of unpermitted additions and other accessory items; Nielsen was given 60 days to comply and warned $350 per day would follow if the order was not satisfied.

Special master Waugh closed the docket after entering written orders that reflect the day’s rulings and noted many decisions include administrative costs and the usual right to appeal.

Votes at a glance

- Data Holdings (2024846): six‑month extension granted; prior fines reversed pending compliance. (Christian Waugh granted; county staff recommended extension based on submitted exhibits.)
- Deer Trust Management Investment LLC (20251403): one‑time fine assessed, $2,500. (Special master ruling after evidentiary dispute.)
- Victor Shahid (CE20251785): saplings/trees in a former pool ‘crater’ found to violate chapter 20; 30 days to comply; $250/day after deadline.
- Christopher Nielsen & Janelle Centora (CE202500501): removal of unpermitted outbuildings/vehicles ordered; 60 days to comply; $350/day after deadline.
- Multiple owners (dozens of cases): abatement periods set between 7 and 90 days; fines on noncompliance from $50–$350/day; several one‑time fines at $2,500 where alleged site changes were found.

Why it matters

The hearing illustrates how Citrus County enforces land‑use and nuisance rules: routine cases are typically resolved by negotiated cure periods and modest daily fines, while disputed technical matters about grading, fill, or site modification draw a heavier evidentiary record and can lead to larger one‑time penalties. The results create enforceable timelines and potential liens that property owners may appeal in court.

What’s next

The special master said written orders will follow each oral ruling; affected owners retain the right to appeal. County staff indicated that several cases will require follow‑up inspections and that some contested matters may lead to additional hearings if compliance is not achieved.

"If you do not timely fix the violation, you will be responsible for additional costs as well as the cost of the lien imposed," Waugh reminded those present during his opening instructions and in several rulings, underscoring the practical consequences of noncompliance.

(Reporting note: direct quotes and case outcomes are drawn from the Dec. 15, 2025 Citrus County code‑compliance hearing transcript and the meeting record.)