Daytona Beach code board sets compliance deadlines, fines dozens of properties; Beatrice Sims estate hit with $300-per-day order

The Daytona Beach Code Enforcement Board on April 9 ordered dozens of property owners to correct code violations by upcoming cutoff dates and imposed daily fines in several cases, including a $300-per-day order for the Beatrice Sims estate that will continue until the property is brought into compliance or the $20,000 cap is reached.

At the start of the meeting Chair (read by the agenda book) outlined hearing procedures and the secretary summarized corrections to case listings and inspection results. Inspectors and attorneys then took the podium to present individual matters; the board typically either amended prior orders to a future cutoff date or found noncompliance and set fines if violations persisted.

Why it matters: Code enforcement decisions affect property safety, neighborhood livability and, in repeated noncompliance, taxpayers (through lien processes). Several respondents said they were waiting on permits or contractor availability; inspectors and the board distinguished permit-related delays from failures to address life‑safety hazards.

Votes at a glance

- Case CEB032659 (Beatrice Sims Estate, 873 Madison Ave.): Inspector Lawanda Tamango reported outstanding structural and life‑safety violations and uncertainty about ownership. The board found the estate in noncompliance and ordered a fine of $300 per day, commencing immediately and continuing until compliance or a $20,000 maximum is reached. The motion passed unanimously. (Motion language: board orders $300/day up to $20,000; mover/second recorded on the transcript.)

- Case CEB0721223 (Tracy Smith, 605 Willie Drive): Staff recommended and the board approved amending the prior order to allow the respondent to bring the property into compliance by the July cutoff (return for consideration of a fine up to $5,000 if not compliant). Motion passed unanimously.

- Case CEB012617 (CNN Properties LLC, 527 Mark Ave.): Attorney Alanna Smith (Cobb Cole Law Firm) asked for 30 days to work with the building department after an inspection failure related to roof-deck nailing and an inspection affidavit; the board amended the order to the May cutoff (hearing May 14; cutoff May 6). Motion passed unanimously.

- Case CEB032660 (Lewis Corp. of Florida, 362 N. Frederick Ave.): Inspector reported life‑safety issue (missing landing at sliding door) plus unpermitted renovation. The board ordered two separate $100/day fines — one for the life‑safety violation (dating from March 22), and one for other work‑without‑permits — each capped at $15,000; the two orders were entered as separate findings. Motion passed unanimously.

- Case CEB032643 (Kitchener/related trust, 114 N. Gardner Ct.): The board amended the prior noncompliance order to allow compliance by the next cutoff, or return for consideration of a fine up to $5,000. Motion passed unanimously.

- Multiple other properties (cases CEB042664, CEB042679, CEB042666, CEB042668, CEB042673 and others): inspectors recommended findings of noncompliance; the board routinely ordered respondents to comply by the May 6 cutoff or return May 14 for possible fines (typical caps cited: up to $1,000 per day or specified amounts). Several respondents were granted longer deadlines (often to June 3) where inspectors reported pending permits or demonstrated progress.

Key exchanges and context

- Ownership and standing: In several estate/probate matters staff emphasized that the board can only recognize the owner reflected in the property appraiser’s records; alternate claims to ownership must be resolved in probate or quiet-title actions. The board advised respondents to pursue lien review or appeal once ownership is legally established.

- Permits vs. unresolved violations: Inspectors routinely distinguished items that could be finished only after permit review (which can justify additional time) from ongoing life‑safety hazards (which the board treated with stricter schedules or immediate fines).

- Procedural debate: City counsel and some board members urged asking respondents, at their first appearance, a single framing question — whether they admit the violations listed — to create a clear administrative record and reduce appeal risk. Some members worried the change could curtail board discretion; the board agreed to adopt a more structured first question going forward and to discuss the approach further under miscellaneous business.

Quotes

"The City of Daytona Beach Code Enforcement Board hereby orders that the previous order of noncompliance . . . be amended to allow the respondent to bring the property into compliance or return to proceeding before the board on July 9 for consideration of a fine up to $5,000," the court reporter recorded after the board approved the amendment in the Tracy Smith matter. (Board motion approved.)

Inspector Lawanda Tamango told the board the Beatrice Sims property still had damaged roof elements, missing smoke detectors and no documented ownership, and recommended a $300-per-day fine until compliance. "We are not able to recognize ownership until the property appraiser's records are updated," counsel added, noting probate remains the proper venue for competing ownership claims.

What’s next: The board set multiple compliance cutoff dates (the most common being May 6 cutoff with hearings May 14, and June 3/June 11 for respondents needing permit time). Inspectors were instructed to stay in contact with respondents and report back at the designated cutoffs. The meeting concluded with a procedural agreement to refine first‑appearance questioning and an adjournment motion to close the docket.

Speakers quoted or referenced in this report: Chair (meeting chair), Secretary (board secretary), City attorney (staff counsel), Inspector Roosevelt Butler (city inspector), Inspector Lawanda Tamango (city inspector), Inspector Sarah Kirk (city inspector), Alanna Smith (attorney, Cobb Cole Law Firm), John Davis (property owner/owner testimony), and various respondents and board members whose names are recorded in the transcript.