City of Clermont code enforcement board imposes fines, approves reductions and sets deadlines across dozen cases

The City of Clermont Code Enforcement Board on May 18 heard a full docket of property cases, imposing or confirming fines in multiple matters and approving reductions in several, while setting firm correction dates for outstanding violations.

The board opened by confirming procedural rules for quasi‑judicial hearings and swearing in witnesses before taking evidence on a series of property cases. City code officers presented findings that many properties remained noncompliant after previously set deadlines.

Andrew Snodgrass, a city code enforcement officer, urged the board to enter an order imposing a $36,000 fine in case C24100015 for a Winter Garden property after multiple permits were rejected and variances denied; the board approved the motion to impose the accrued fine. "Staff recommendation is just to approve the request to enter an order imposing a fine in the amount of $36,000," Snodgrass said.

At 550 Distant Avenue (case 2502‑0006) the owner, David Buckles, told the board the pool became noncompliant after repeated power interruptions he attributed to Duke Energy and that he had since worked to bring the property into compliance. "It was extenuating circumstances beyond our control," Buckles said in defense of his filed reduction request. Staff recommended $7,800 in accrued fines; the board imposed that figure but then voted to reduce the payable amount to $1,000 if paid by June 15, 2026, with the original amount to revert if unpaid.

The board also entered orders in several other individual matters:

Votes at a glance

- Case C24100015 (3262 Hanging Tide St.): Ordered an accrued fine of $36,000 to continue accruing until compliance; motion approved by voice vote. (staff presentation: Andrew Snodgrass)

- Case 2502‑0006 (550 Distant Ave.): Staff calculated accrued fines of $7,800; board approved imposition and then reduced the amount to $1,000 if paid by 06/15/2026 (reverts to $7,800 if unpaid). (owner: David Buckles)

- Case C2409‑0026 (Kendra Elam): Board entered order imposing $55,050 in accrued fines for permits and associated violations; motion passed. (staff: Joshua Cortez)

- Case C2507‑0007 (Grupo Cinco LLC): Staff reported the property now compliant; owner requested waiver; board reduced the original $7,200 fine to $3,500, payable by 06/17/2026 (revert if unpaid). (respondent: Andre Sorens)

- Cases C2312‑0028 & C2402‑0057 (FCH Properties LLC): After testimony about financial hardship and post‑compliance work, the board approved reduced stipulated payments ($15,000 and $20,000 respectively) payable by 08/17/2026; original larger fines will be reinstated if unpaid.

- Case 25‑000149 (Pop Florida Properties LLC): Board ordered correction of rubbish, prohibited signage and an unrepaired channel drain by 06/17/2026 and warned $250/day fines would commence after that date.

- Case 25‑000090 (Sayulicus Properties LLC): For high grass and debris, the board ordered correction by 07/17/2026 with $150/day in fines thereafter.

Signage and sidewalk dispute

A longer, contested exchange focused on two commercial parcels owned by R and M Retail LP (cases 25‑000203 and 26‑000083), where staff cited prohibited signage and problems with sidewalks. City staff showed maps and a survey on file suggesting the sidewalk sits within the private parcel line; the property manager, Shawna Martinez, provided development surveys and said her team had spent money to repair sections and needed clearer, stamped survey evidence before proceeding further. "We cleared everything out...we actually replaced the whole section of the sidewalk that he requested," Martinez said, arguing the respondent had acted in good faith.

After an extended review — including a brief recess while the board printed its survey — the board found the respondent in violation of the cited code sections (except for subsection 15 as noted) and ordered correction by 06/17/2026; failure to comply would trigger $250/day fines for each case.

Why it matters

The board’s orders enforce local safety, maintenance and permitting standards and signal that the city will pursue both homeowner and commercial property matters through fines and corrective deadlines. Multiple decisions included stepped reductions for prompt payment or proof of good‑faith corrective work; others resulted in full accrued fines where staff showed prolonged noncompliance.

What’s next

Most orders include explicit compliance dates and instructions to contact code enforcement for inspection. Several matters include reversion clauses that restore original fines if reduced payments are not made by the deadlines. The board also held its annual governance housekeeping (nominating and confirming chair and vice chair) and received a training briefing on financial disclosures, Sunshine Law and ex parte communication rules for quasi‑judicial bodies.

(Reporting based on the City of Clermont Code Enforcement Board hearing transcript of May 18, 2026.)