Dade City magistrate amends order, sets March compliance date for 37825 Martin Luther King Blvd.; fines run from Aug. 28

A special magistrate in Dade City ruled March 3 that a property at 37825 Martin Luther King Boulevard is in compliance as of the date the city received documentation showing trailer registrations, and he ordered an amended administrative order to reflect fines running from Aug. 28, 2025 through the date of compliance.

Special Magistrate Eric Cogela opened the hearing on case number 2328 and explained that the city bore the burden of proof. Kenneth Allen, representing the city’s code enforcement department, told the magistrate the final administrative order issued Aug. 27, 2025 found violations of the Land Development Code and required removal of outdoor storage and either an after‑the‑fact fence permit or removal of the fence and posts. Because the respondent did not meet the order’s deadlines, Allen said the special magistrate previously imposed a $50 daily fine beginning Aug. 28, 2025; the city reported an outstanding balance of $9,550 as of the hearing.

Allen told the magistrate the city received trailer registration documents by email on March 2, 2026, but said some submitted registrations showed expirations or lacked expiration dates and that code enforcement had not yet inspected the property or received a fence permit to verify compliance. Allen asked the magistrate to authorize the city to record a lien on the property to secure unpaid fines and associated costs.

The respondent’s counsel responded that registrations had in fact been obtained earlier (counsel said some registrations dated to October 2025) and that there had been ongoing communications with code enforcement. The property owner, Mr. Hughes, testified that the specific registrations for the trailers in question were filed (he referred to registrations dated Oct. 21–22) and that fence panels were removed and donated; Hughes said fence posts had been taken out and placed in a pile but could not recall the exact date.

Magistrate Cogela reviewed his prior orders, noted that the November 21 deadline required the respondent to provide proof of registration to the city by that date, and emphasized that compliance requires either an after‑the‑fact permit or complete removal of the fence and posts. The magistrate said the city had received registration documentation on March 2, 2026 and—based on testimony and the documents he had reviewed—found the property to be in compliance as of that date.

"Based on the evidence and credible testimony, the property came into compliance as of March 2, 2026," Cogela said. He instructed that the daily running fine of $50 per day would be assessed from Aug. 28, 2025 through March 2, 2026 and said he would issue an amended order reflecting that compliance date and the fine computation. Cogela noted that the city may pursue recording a lien under chapter 162 if fines remain unpaid and deferred procedural details about lien recording to the city attorney.

The owner said he agreed with the magistrate’s ruling and wanted to resolve the matter; the magistrate closed the hearing and said he would circulate the amended order to the parties.

What happened next: the magistrate will prepare and send an amended written order documenting the compliance date and the assessed fines. The city attorney will decide whether to record a lien and how to proceed on collection if the fines remain unpaid.