Deltona special magistrate sets deadlines, continues fines and grants targeted extensions after Jan. 28 hearing

Kristen Ike, the special magistrate for the City of Deltona, presided over a Jan. 28 code enforcement hearing and issued rulings affecting more than a dozen properties, ranging from 14‑day compliance orders to 90‑day repair deadlines.

The hearing opened with a reading of procedures and parties’ rights under Chapter 162 of the Florida Statutes. For each case the city presented evidence, including case files and photographs, and the magistrate admitted those exhibits into the record.

Most immediately notable was a 90‑day compliance order in DEL26‑001 (North Juliet Drive) after the city presented deterioration of exterior siding under City Ordinance 18‑5 (IPMC 304.2). Janice Palacic, a code compliance officer, presented the city’s case; a person appearing on the record as Philip Holford acknowledged the violation but said financing efforts had failed and offered credit‑denial letters, a waiting‑list email for owner‑occupied rehabilitation, and law‑enforcement documents related to an unlicensed contractor. Magistrate Ike ordered correction by April 28 and admitted the denial letters and related documents into evidence.

In DEL26‑011 (637 South Glancy Drive), the magistrate found an unpermitted garage conversion and set a 61‑day deadline (to March 30) for submission of engineer drawings and a permit, with a $50‑per‑day fine thereafter. Theresa Brown, the resident, said her late husband had believed a licensed worker would handle the permitting, and the city reported a permit application submitted Nov. 4 remained under review.

A Massey enforcement matter for Life Fellowship Church (DEL25‑103) drew extended discussion. Enrique Rios said the city had not received required corrections to a fence permit; Joel Newman, the church’s senior pastor, said the church paid fees and submitted plans and asked that accrued fines be negated. The magistrate declined to impose fines accumulated to date and granted two additional weeks (until Feb. 11) for the building department and church to resolve outstanding review comments, with a written order to follow. As Newman told the court, “I personally walked in here, paid the applicable permitting fees and charges as requested, submitted plans and drawings as the fence was erected.”

Public‑safety concerns prompted short deadlines in several cases. After a neighbor testified that a large rotten tree branch had smashed a shed and left her exposed to termites, the magistrate found the property owner in violation and ordered removal within 21 days (Feb. 18) with a $250‑per‑day fine for continued risk to neighbors. Complainant Nicole Driscoll described the incident: “It smashed down on the top of my shed.”

Other rulings included: • 30 days to repair missing siding at 2900 Beckwith Street (DEL26‑002), with a $25‑per‑day fine if not completed; • 61 days (to March 30) for an unpermitted concrete addition at 128 Champlain Drive (DEL26‑008); • 14 days to clear vehicles and trailers from a vacant lot owned by RDG Investment LLC (DEL26‑007), and a $100‑per‑day fine if not corrected; • Two separate compliance deadlines for 1330 El Camp Boulevard for an unsanitary pool (14 days) and exterior decay (30 days), with $25‑per‑day fines per violation; • 30 days to repair fire‑protection equipment and hydrants at 1200 Deltona Boulevard (Fire0502025) and 1382 Howland Boulevard (Fire0542025), with fines of $50 per violation per day where the code requires.

Janice Palacic also reported a long‑running Massey case (DEL25‑096A) where fines have been accruing for months; she told the magistrate the property had accumulated substantial ongoing fines. The magistrate found the owner had failed to comply and ordered the previously assessed fines to continue until the property is brought into compliance.

Magistrate Ike emphasized that written orders will be prepared and mailed to affected parties and reminded respondents of the right to appeal to circuit court under Florida Statutes Section 162.11. “I find respondent in this case in violation of the city code as charged,” she said routinely while issuing deadlines and fines.

The hearing produced a mix of short‑term deadlines for public‑safety risks, longer windows for complex permitting work and a narrowly tailored decision to pause the imposition of accrued fines in one church case while the permit review is completed. Several respondents were directed to stay in contact with code compliance staff; the magistrate adjourned the hearing after asking staff to expedite a small number of orders.