03-05-96 CEB Agenda PacketCall to
CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH
CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD AGENDA
7:30 P. M., MARCH 5, 1996
order
Pledge to the Flag.V
Roll Call v
Approval of the minutes of the regular meeting of January 9,
996 and the special meeting of January 30, 1996.
2./ Recognition of Visitors and Guests regarding any matters that
are not listed on agenda.
3. Old Business:
Code Enforcement Officer will report on the following case:
Case No. 0097 - Billy M. Arzie - owner of property located at 770
East Coast Drive, in violation of Florida State Statute 767 and
Section 4.28 of the Code -(The Board found Billy M. Arzie, 770 East
Coast Drive, Atlantic Beach, to be in violation of Section 4-28 of
the Atlantic Beach Code and Florida State Statute 767.12, and Mr.
Arzie's dog, a black male lab named JR was found to be vicious and
dangerous. The Board voted that Mr. Arzie must conform to Florida
State Statute 767.12, and that a final solution to the problem
must be resolved at the end of 30 days, by February 8, 1995, or a
fine of $250 per day would be implemented.)
Case No. 0100 - Willie E. Davis - owner of property located at 60
Dudley Street - in violation of Sections 22-74, 22-90, and 22-71 -
(Willie E. Davis was found to be in violation of the Code in that
his septic system was not functioning at one time. :The Board
voted to allow Mr. Davis to have a licensed septic tank company
certify that the system was operational; certification to be
completed by January 30, 1996. If it was found that the system was
not operational, Mr. Davis was required to apply to the City of
Atlantic Beach to connect to the public sewer by February 15, 1996.
If Mr. Davis did not make application by February 15, 1996 a
$250.00 per day fine will be levied against the property).
Case No. 0102 - Jule Champ Kaufmann, owner of American Pit Bull
dogs: KAYA, male and KIRRA, female, in violation of Florida State
Statute 767 and Section 4.28 of the Code - (Jule Champ Kaufmann,
809 11th St. S., Jacksonville Beach, was found to be in violation
of Section 4-28 of the Atlantic Beach Code and Florida State
Statute 767.12, and Mr. Champ's dog, a male American Pit Bulldog
Page 2, March 5, 1996
Code Enforcement Board Agenda
named Kaya was found to be vicious and dangerous pursuant to
Section 4-28 of the Atlantic Beach Code and Florida State Statute
767.12.)
A. New Business:
Case No. 0106 - Wadie Bakkar - owner of property located at 31
Royal Palms Drive - in violation of National Fire Protection
Association 58, Section 3.2.4.1(c), and Standard Building Code,
Sections NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION ASSOCIATION 58, SECTION
3.2.4.1(0), AND STANDARD BUILDING CODE, CHAPTER 1, SEC3:ION 103.8.4
AND 103.8.6 : in violation of the following: (1) WHERE PHYSICAL
DAMAGE TO LP GAS CONTAINERS OR SYSTEMS, OF WHICH THEY ARE A PART,
FROM VEHICLES IS A POSSIBILITY, PRECAUTIONS SHALL BE TAKEN AGAINST
SUCH DAMAGE. EXAMPLE: INSTALLATION OF CONCRETE FILLED PIPE TO
PREVENT SUCH POSSIBLE DAMAGE; THIS PROTECTION IS NORMALLY PROVIDED
BY YOUR GAS SUPPLIER; (2) FAILURE TO REQUEST A FINAL INSPECTION
FOR CONSTRUCTION UNDER PERMIT #9138.
Case No. 0105 - Donald T. Moses - owner of property located at Lot
8, Ocean Breeze, in violation of Chapter 24, Section 82 and 151 -
in violation of the following condition(s): THE INSTALLATION OF AN
OFF-SITE SATELLITE DISH IS NOT PERMITTED BY ATLANTIC BEACH CODE
CHAPTER 24, SECTIONS 82 AND 151. THE DISH IS CONSIDERED AN
ACCESSORY STRUCTURE ONLY TO THE PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE WHICH DOES NOT
EXIST ON LOT 8. ACTIONS TO COMPLY HAS CREATED OTHER POSSIBLE
VIOLATIONS PRESENTED IN MY REMARKS.
Case No. 0103 - James Smith - owner of property located at 85
Edgar Street, in violation of Section 12-1-7; in violation of the
following condition(s): OPEN STORAGE OF BUILDING MATERIAL, PIPES,
TIRES, ABANDONED VEHICLES, MISCELLANEOUS TRASH AND DEBRIS ON THE
FRONT, SIDES, AND REAR YARD TO ROBERT STREET.
Case No. 0104 - Harry L. Caine - owner of property located at 449
Mako Drive, in violation of Section 12-1-3; in violation of the
following condition(s): Miscellaneous items scattered around the
yard, area inside and outside of fence is littered with small
pieces of paper and other debris.
CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH
CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD MINUTES
JANUARY 9, 1996
Call to order: PRESENT: Edward Martin, Chairman
Heywood Dowling, Jr.
Kathleen Russell
Ken Rogosheske
Theo K. Mitchelson
Richard S. Mann
Lou Etta Waters
AND: Suzanne Green Prosecuting Attorney
Alan Jensen, Legal Counsel
Karl Grunwald, Code Enf. Officer
Trudy Lopanik, Secretary
1. Approval of Minutes of November 14, 1995
A motion was made, seconded, and passed to approve the minutes of November 14, 1995.
2. Recognition of Visitors and Guests regarding any matters that are not listed on agenda.
No one wished to speak.
3. Old Business:
Case No. 0039 - Cynthia Watson Sutton - owner of property located at 702 Cavalla Road, was
in violation of Section 12-1-3, weeds growing against rear of building and east side and along
fence; tires, electrical, and timbers stored on east side of property. (The Board at its meeting
of November 14, 1995 gave Ms. Sutton until Friday, November 17, 1995 to bring the property
into compliance).
Karl Grunewald, Code Enforcement Inspector, reported the property had been brought into
compliance. The Board accepted Mr. Grunewald's report.
4. New Business:
Mr. Martin asked that Case No. 0099, Hung H. Vo, owner of property located at 457 Mako Drive,
be removed from the agenda. Mr. Grunewald reported the property had been brought into
compliance and it was his desire to remove the case from the agenda.
Case No. 0097 - Billy M. Arzie - owner of property located at 770 East Coast Drive, in violation
of Florida State Statute 767 and Section 4.28 of the Code - vicious dogs. Mr. Arzie's's dog,
"JR", is being declared dangerous due to his unprovoked behavior to persons and other
animals when off the property of 770 East Coast Drive.
Minutes, Page 2
Code Enforcement Board
January 9, 1996
Mr. Martin read the case hearing procedure for Case No. 0097 and all witnesses were sworn in.
Suzanne Green, Prosecuting Attorney, reported Billy M. Arzie's was represented by William Noe,
Attorney. She explained Mr. Arzie was brought before the board because he was in violation of
Florida State Statute 767 and Section 4.28 of the Code (FSS 767 and Section 4.28 attached hereto
and made a part hereof- Exhibit A). She indicated Karl Grunwald would report concerning the
matter, but that William Noe wished to address the board prior to Mr. Grunewald's testimony. The
Board concurred.
William Noe, 599 Atlantic Boulevard, Suite 6, Atlantic Beach, Florida, explained Mr. Arzie had
faxed a note to him over the past weekend indicating that he had experienced chest pains. Mr. Noe
explained Mr. Arzie had had two heart by-pass operations in the past. Mr. Noe indicated he had not
had any other messages from Mr. Arzie's and that Mr. Noe was not able to locate Mr. Arzie. Mr.
Noe added Mr. Arzie was willing to get rid of his dog.
Karl Grunwald indicated the board was being asked to determine if the dog "JR" was "dangerous"
according to FSS 767. He indicated the dog had been declared dangerous by the Police Department
and by the Animal Control Officer.
Suzanne Green proceeded to call witnesses as follows:
Terence D. Holt, Apartment 4, 724 East Coast Drive, Atlantic Beach - Mr. Holt indicated on
November 11, 1995 he was bitten by the dog JR. He added when he was bitten by the dog, Mr. Arzie
told Mr. Holt that he had been chasing the dog for an hour. Mr. Holt indicated at the time he was
bitten he was outside his residence. He explained the bite just barely broke the skin, and that a police
officer insisted that he go to the hospital. Five days later, Mr. Holt explained, his leg was yellow and
green from the bruise. Suzanne Green displayed an affidavit and asked Mr. Holt if he had signed it
to which Mr. Holt replied that he had signed the affidavit (attached hereto and made a part hereof -
Exhibit B).
Dave Miller, Apartment 3, 724 East Coast Drive, Atlantic Beach - Mr. Miller indicated he had
seen Mr. Arzie driving around the neighborhood over the past weekend smoking a big cigar, and that
he did not appear to be sick.
Mr. Miller indicated on several occasions the dog had "gone wild." During the spring there was a
pack of dogs nipping at people and the dog JR was the leader of the pack. The dog, Mr. Miller
explained, would corner a person against a car or against a wall. Mr. Arzie, Mr. Miller reported, had
no control over the dog, and the dog will not come to Mr. Arzie. Mr. Arzie, Mr. Miller reported, let
the dog out at 10:00 p. m. Suzanne Green asked Mr. Miller if the dog was ever chained or leashed,
to which Mr. Miller replied the dog was never chained or leashed. Mr. Miller indicated the dog
barked at children who played across the street, and that he was kept on a porch that was about 4'
x10'. Ms. Green asked Mr. Miller if he had been threatened by the dog to which Mr. Miller replied
Minutes, Page 3
Code Enforcement Board
January 9, 1996
in the negative. Ms. Green asked Mr. Miller if any signs were posted on Mr. Arnie's property to
which Mr. Miller indicated here were no signs on the property.
Suzanne Green displayed an affidavit and asked Mr. Miller if he had signed it to which Mr. Miller
replied that he had signed the affidavit (attached hereto and made a part hereof - Exhibit Q.
Mr. Miller indicated the bruise that Mr. Holt had was a big bruise. When asked how many dogs Mr.
Arzie had, Mr. Miller indicated two or three, and that in the spring the dogs ran loose in a pack.
At this time Mr. Martin referred to the remaining witnesses who also had submitted affidavits to the
city, and he asked if the affidavits could be accepted by the board without have the witnesses give
testimony.
Suzanne Green displayed the sworn affidavits to the witnesses and asked each witness if the
affadavits were signed by themselves to which all witnesses replied in the affirmative, as follows: Bee
Jay Lester, Rene Anderson, Susan A. Condon, Robert G. Gascaigne, Tina Downs, Lyman Fletcher,
and Joanna Fletcher (Lyman Fletcher indicated Joanna Fletcher had signed the affidavit). (Affidavits
attached hereto and made a part hereof - Exhibit D).
Suzanne Green indicated copies of the affidavits had been presented to William Noe.
William Noe indicated Mr. Arzie would like the opportunity of offering the dog to the Humane
Society. He explained the dog was 11 months old and Mr. Arzie did not feel the dog was dangerous.
He indicated Mr. Arzie would like to give the dog a home, but if it was declared "dangerous" it
would have to be put to sleep. Mr. Noe referred to the State Statue 767.11 (a), and a discussion
ensued concerning the language of the Statute. Mr. Martin referred to Section 767. (d), and he felt
the dog fell under the language of that section.
A motion was made, seconded, and passed to find Billy M. Arnie, 770 East Coast Drive,
Atlantic Beach, to be in violation of Section 4-28 of the Atlantic Beach Code and Florida State
Statute 767.12, and Mr. Arnie's dog, a black male lab named "JR" was found to be vicious and
dangerous.
A motion was made, seconded, and passed that Mr. Arzie must conform to Florida State
Statute 767.12 (attached hereto and made a part hereof - Exhibit A). A final solution to the
problem must be resolved at the end of 30 days, by February 8, 1995, or a fine of $250 per day
will be implemented. Compliance must be verified by the Animal Control Officer of the City
of Atlantic Beach who must be satisfied that proper action has been taken.
Mr. Martin read case hearing procedures for the following cases: 0098, John L. Green, 0100, Willie
E. Davis, and 0101, Laurette lbarreche, and all witnesses were sworn in.
Minutes, Page 4
Code Enforcement Board
January 9, 1996
Case No. 0098 - John L. Green - owner of property located at 525 Atlantic Boulevard, in
violation of Section 12-1-(7) - outside storage of miscellaneous building material; refrigeration
units, stoves, and other restaurant equipment in the rear of the property.
Suzanne Green indicated Karl Grunewald would testify that Mr. Green was in violation of Section
12-1-(7) - outside storage of miscellaneous building material; refrigeration units, stoves, and other
restaurant equipment in the rear of the property, but that the property now was in compliance.
Mr. Grunwald explained the type of debris that was outside the property, but he indicated the debris
had been removed by January 1, 1996. He passed out photographs.
Mark Shields indicated he was the new manager of the property, and was representing Mr. Green,
who was out of town. He reported Mr. Green was the new owner of the property and that the
previous owner had left the debris, which Mark Shields removed from the property. Mr. Sheilds
indicated this situation would never happen again.
A motion was made, seconded, and passed to find John L. Green in violation of Section 12-1-7
of the Code.
A motion was made, seconded, and passed to withhold any fine because the property had been
brought into compliance to the satisfaction of the Code Enforcement Officer. If the property
is found to be in violation in the future, a fine will be imposed.
Case No. 0100 - Willie E. Davis - owner of property located at 60 Dudley Street - in violation of
Sections 22-74, 22-90, and 22-71 - connection to public sewer required within ninety (90) days, i.e.,
the septic tank and system has failed; depositing of human excrement on public or private property;
and Chapter l OD - 6.042 Fl. Dept. Of Health.
Suzanne Green indicated the property had not been brought into compliance.
Karl Grunwald indicated Mr. Davis was in violation of Sections 22-74, 22-90, and 22-71 -
connection to public sewer required within ninety (90) days, i.e., the septic tank and system has failed;
depositing of human excrement on public or private property; and Chapter l OD - 6.042 Fl. Dept. Of
Health. He passed out photographs of the failed septic tank system. He indicated Mr. Davis was
originally sent a notice on August 24, 1995 which he received on August 26, 1995. Mr. Grunewald
indicated he spoke to Mr. Davis some time after August 24th and Mr. Davis indicated he had not
received a notice from the city, and Mr. Grunwald sent Mr. Davis another notice. Mr. Grunewald
indicated a tenant, Lisa Williams, who lived at 60 Dudley Street called and asked him to investigate
the property. Mr. Grunewald indicated to date Mr. Davis had not tapped into the city sewer system.
Minutes, Page 5
Code Enforcement Board
January 9, 1996
Willie E. Davis indicated he was the owner of 60 Dudley Street. He indicated he was not in
agreement that the septic tank system had failed. He indicated what actually happened was that there
was a fine that was stopped, but that he refused to fix it because the tenants would not pay their rent.
Right now, he added, he was working on the place. He indicated he intended to hook into the city
sewer, but that he did not feel that the charges that had been brought against him were justified. He
indicated the tank did not fail, but that there was a stoppage and that at the present time the stoppage
was fixed and the system was open and was working. He indicated he wanted the renters to move
because he was not able to collect the rent and that was why he did not fix the system.
Mr. Martin asked Mr. Davis if the septic tank system was now working to which Mr. Davis replied
that the system was working. He indicated it was fixed a week ago, and that it had been stopped but
now it was unstopped.
Lisa Williams, previous tenant, indicated she had rented the property but had been forced to move
because the septic tank system was not working.
Mr. Grunewald passed out photographs which depicted a hole in the ground. Mr. Davis indicated
the pictures were misleading because the pipe was repaired and the system was working.
A discussion ensued and it was felt that Mr. Davis should be given an opportunity to prove that the
system was working. If indications were that the system was inoperable, it was felt Mr. Davis should
be required to tap into the city's sewer system.
A motion was made, seconded, and passed to find Willie E. Davis to be in violation of the Code
in that the septic system was not functioning at one time.
A motion was made, seconded, and passed to allow Mr. Davis to have a licensed septic tank
company certify that the system is operational; certification to be completed by January 30,
1996. If it is found that the system is not operational, Mr. Davis will be required to apply to
the City of Atlantic Beach to connect to the public sewer by February 15, 1996. If Mr. Davis
does not make application by February 15, 1996 a $250.00 per day fine will be levied against
the property.
Case No. 0101 - Laurette Ibarreche - owner of property located at 297 Pine Street - in violation
of Sections 12-1-7 and 12-1-3 - grass and vegetation over 12 inches; outside storage of miscellaneous
items.
Suzanne Green reported the property was in compliance as of December 28, 1996.
.Xi r / - 6a Nu n e w a Ij- indicated he had received an anonymous complaint from a neighbor against
Minutes, Page 6
Code Enforcement Board
January 9, 1996
the 297 Pine Street property. He indicated the property had been brought into compliance.
Laurette Ibarreche reported she had been out of town and some furniture that was supposed to be
picked up by the Salvation Army had not been picked up, and that she had given away the furniture.
A motion was made, seconded, and passed to find Laurette Irarreche to be in violation of
Section 12-1-7 of the Code.
A motion was made, seconded, and passed to withhold any fine because the property had been
brought into compliance to the satisfaction of the Code Enforcement Officer. If the property
is found to be in violation in the future, a fine will be imposed.
ne time.
There being no further business the chairman adjourned the meeting at 9:20 p. m.
G. E. Martin
Chairman
Code Enforcement Board
ATTEST:
Trudy Lopanik
Secretary
CHAPTER 767
DAMAGE BY DOGS
767.01 Dog owner's liability for damages to persons or
domestic animals.
767.02 Sheep -killing dogs not to roam about.
767.03 Good defense for killing dog.
767.04 Dog owner's liability for damages to persons
bitten.
767.05 Dog owner's liability for damages by dog that
kills, wounds, or harasses dairy cattle.
767.07 interpretation.
767.10 Legislative findings.
767.11 Definitions.
767.12 Classification of dogs as dangerous; certifica-
tion of registration; notice requirements; con-
finement of animal; exemption; appeals;
unlawful acts.
767.13 Attack or bite by dangerous dog; penalties;
confiscation; destruction.
767.14 Additional local restrictions authorized.
767.15 Other provisions of chapter 767 not super-
seded.
767.16 Bite by a police or service dog; exemption from
quarantine.
767.01 Dog owner's liability for damages to per -
or domestic animals.—Owners of dogs shall be
liaole for any damage done by their dogs to sheep or
other domestic animals or livestock, or to persons.
History.—RS 2341; ch. 4979, 1901; GS 3142; RGS 4957: CGL 7044.
767.02 Sheep -killing dogs not to roam about.—It is
unlawful for any dog known to have killed sheep to roam
about over the country unattended by a keeper. Any
such dog found roaming over the country unattended
shall be deemed a run -about dog, and it is lawful to kill
such dog.
History.—s. 1, ch. 4185, 1893; GS 3143; RGS 4958; CGL 7045.
767.03 Good defense for killing dog.—In any action
for damages or of a criminal prosecution against any
Person for killing or injuring a dog, satisfactory proof that
said dog had been or was killing cattle or sheep shall
constitute a good defense to either of such actions.
History.—$. i, ch. 4978.1901; GS 3144; RGS 4959: CGL 7046; s. 1, ch. 79-315.
767.04 Dog owner's liability for damages to per-
sons bitten.—The owner of any dog that bites any per-
son while such person is on or in a public place, or law-
fully on or in a private place, including the property of the
owner of the dog, is liable for damages suffered by per-
sons bitten, regardless of the former viciousness of the
dog or the owners' knowledge of such viciousness.
I1wever, any negligence on the part of the person bit -
.,n that is a proximate cause of the biting incident
reduces the liability of the owner of the dog by the per-
centage that the bitten person's negligence contributed
to the biting incident. A person is lawfully upon private
Property of such owner within the meaning of this act
when he is on such property in the performance of any
Ulv imnncA`i r k;—k_ fkin-tc nr thiC StntP,, nr hV
when he is on such property upon invitation, expressed
or implied, of the owner. However, the owner is not lia-
ble, except as to a person under the age of 6, or unless
the damages are proximately caused by a negligent act
or omission of the owner, if at the time of any such injury
the owner had displayed in a prominent place on his
premises a sign easily readable including the words
"Bad Dog." The remedy provided by this section is in
addition to and cumulative with any other remedy pro-
vided by statute or common law.
History.—s. 1, ch. 25109, 1949: S. 1, ch. 93-13.
767.05 Dog owner's liability for damages by dog
that kills, wounds, or harasses dairy cattle.—An owner
or keeper of any dog that kills, wounds, or harasses any
dairy cattle shall be jointly and severally liable to the
owner of such dairy cattle for all damages done by such
dog; and it is not necessary to prove notice to or knowl-
edge by any such owner or keeper of such dog that the
dog was mischievous or disposed to kill or worry any
dairy cattle.
History.—s. 2, ch. 79-315: s. 482, ch. 81-259.
767.07 Interpretation.—Section 767.05 is supple-
mental to all other laws relating to dogs not expressly
referred to therein and shall not be construed to modify,
repeal, or in any way affect any part or provision of any
such laws not expressly repealed therein or to prevent
municipalities from prohibiting, licensing, or regulating
the running at large of dogs within their respective limits
by law or ordinance now or hereafter provided.
History.—s. 2, ch. 79-315.
767.10 Legislative findings.—The Legislature finds
that dangerous dogs are an increasingly serious and
widespread threat to the safety and welfare of the peo-
ple of this state because of unprovoked attacks which
cause injury to persons and domestic animals; that such
attacks are in part attributable to the failure of owners
to confine and properly train and control their dogs; that
existing laws inadequately address this growing prob-
lem; and that it is appropriate and necessary to impose
uniform requirements for the owners of dangerous dogs.
History.—s. i, ch. 90-180.
767.11 Definitions.—As used in this act, unless the
context clearly requires otherwise:
(1) "Dangerous dog" means any dog that according_ •_
to the records of the appropriate authority:
(a) Has aggressively bitten, attacked, or endan-
gered or has inflicted severe injury on a human being on
public or private property;
(b) Has more than once severely injured or killed a
domestic animal while off the owner's property;
(c) Has been used primarily or in part for the pur-
pose of dog fighting or is a dog trained for dog fighting;
or
(d) Has, when unprovoked, chased or approached
a person upon the streets, sidewalks, or any public
arounds in a menacing fashion or apparent attitude of
;worn statement by one or more persons and dutifully
nvestigated by the appropriate authority.
r^\ "Unprovoked" means that the victim who has
)E conducting himself peacefully and lawfully has
)een bitten or chased in a menacing fashion or attacked
)y a dog.
(3) "Severe injury" means any physical injury that
esults in broken bones, multiple bites, or disfiguring lac-
erations requiring sutures or reconstructive surgery.
(4) "Proper enclosure of a dangerous dog" means,
vhile on the owner's property, a dangerous dog is
;ecurely confined indoors or in a securely enclosed and
)eked pen or structure, suitable to prevent the entry of
,oung children and designed to prevent the animal from
!scaping. Such pen or structure shall have secure sides
.nd a secure top to prevent the dog from escaping over,
ender, or through the structure and shall also provide
)rotection from the elements.
(5) "Animal control authority" means an entity acting
Ione or in concert with other local governmental units
nd authorized by them to enforce the animal control
aws of the city, country, or state. In those areas not
erved by an animal control authority, the sheriff shall
arty out the duties of the animal control authority under
-iis act.
(6) "Animal control officer" means any individual
mployed, contracted v:,ith, or appointed by the animal
ontrol authority for the purpose of aiding in the enforce -
,t of this act or any other law or ordinance relating to
icensure of animals, control of animals, or seizure
nd impoundment of animals and includes any state or
)cal law enforcement officer or other employee whose
uties in whole or in part include assignments that
evolve the seizure and impoundment of any animal.
(7) "Owner" means any person, firm, corporation, or
rganization possessing, harboring, keeping, or having
ontrol or custody of an animal or, if the animal is owned
,y a person under the ace cf 18, that person's parent
.r guardian.
History.—s. 2. ch. 90-180. s. 2, cn. 93-Q.
767.12 Classification of dogs as dangerous; certifi-
ation of registration; notice requirements; confine-
ient of animal; exemption; appeals; unlawful acts.—
(1)(a) An animal control authority shall investigate
-3ported incidents involving any dog that may be dan-
gerous and shall interview the owner and require a
worn affidavit from any person, including any animal
ontrol officer or enforcement officer, desiring to have a
:og classified as dangerous. After the investigation, the
nimal control authority shall determine if a dog is to be
lassified as dangerous and shall immediately provide
mitten notification by registered mail or certified hand
lelivery to the owner of a dog that has been classified
dangerous. A dog shall not be declared dangerous
.e threat, injury, or damage was sustained by a Per-
on who, at the time, was unlawfully on the property or,
✓hile lawfully on the property, was tormenting, abusing,
r assaulting the dog or its owner.
(b) The owner may file a written request for a hearing
appeal the classification within 10 business days after
�ceipt of the written notice and must confine the dog
tion of his appeal. Each applicable local governing
authority must establish appeal procedures that con-
form to this paragraph.
(2) Within 30 days after a dog has been classified as
dangerous, the owner of the dog must obtain a certifi-
cate of registration for the dog from the animal control
authority serving the area in which he resides, and the
certificate shall be renewed annually. Animal control
authorities are authorized to issue such certificates of
registration, and renewals thereof, only to persons who
are at least 18 years of age and who present to the ani-
mal control authority sufficient evidence of:
(a) A current certificate of rabies vaccination for the
dog.
(b) A proper enclosure to confine a dangerous dog
and the posting of the premises with a clearly visible
warning sign at all entry points that informs both children
and adults of the presence of a dangerous dog on the
property.
(c) Permanent identification of the dog, such as a
tattoo on the inside thigh or electronic implantation.
The appropriate governmental unit may impose an
annual fee for the issuance of certificates of registration
required by this section.
(3) The owner snail immediately notify the appropri-
ate animal control authority when a dog that has been
classified as dangerous:
(a) Is loose or unconfined.
(b) Has bitten a human being or attacked another
animal.
(c) Is sold, given away., or dies.
(d) Is moved to another address.
Prior to a dangerous dog being sold or given away, the
owner shall provide the name, address, and telephone
number of the new owner to the animal control authority.
The new owner must comply with all of the requirements
of this act and implementing local ordinances, even if
the animal is moved from one local jurisdiction to
another within the state. The animal control officer must
be notified by the owner of a dog classified as danger-
ous that the dog is in his jurisdiction.
(4) It is unlawful for the owner of a dangerous dog
to permit the dog to be outside a proper enclosure
unless the dog is muzzled and restrained by a substan-
tial chain or leash and under control of a competent per-
son. The muzzle must be made in a manner that will not
cause injury to the dog or interfere with its vision or res-
piration but will prevent it from biting any person or ani-
mal. The owner may exercise the dog in a securely
fenced or enclosed area that does not have a top, with-
out a muzzle or leash, if the dog remains within his sight
and only members of his immediate household or per-
sons 18 years of age or older are allowed in the enclo-
sure when the dog is present. When being transported,
such dogs must be safely and securely restrained within
a vehicle.
(5) Hunting dogs are exempt from the provisions of
this act when engaged in any legal hunt or training pro-
cedure. Dogs engaged in training or exhibiting in legal
sports such as obedience trials, conformation shows,
`_u ._._i_ w.- __ :-- -4 1rin1C PrP.
FS_ 199:3
UKM/AUr_ U r
exempt from the provisions of this act when engaged in
,ny legal procedures. However, such dogs at all other
.nes in all other respects shall be subject to this and
local laws. Dogs that have been classified as dangerous
shall not be used for hunting purposes.
(6) This section does not apply to dogs used by law
enforcement officials for law enforcement work.
(7) Any person who violates any provision of this
section is guilty of a noncriminal infraction, punishable
by a fine not exceeding $500.
History.—s. 3, ch. 90-180; s. 3, ch. 93-13.
767.13 Attack or bite by dangerous dog; penalties;
confiscation; destruction.—
(1) If a dog that has previously been declared dan-
gerous attacks or bites a person or a domestic animal
without provocation, the owner is guilty of a misde-
meanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s.
775.082 or s. 775.083. In addition, the dangerous dog
shall be immediately confiscated by an animal control
authority, placed in quarantine, if necessary, for the
proper length of time, or impounded and held for 10
business days after the owner is given written notifica-
tion under s. 767.12, and thereafter destroyed in an
expeditious and humane manner. This 10 -day time
period shall allow the owner to request a hearing under
s. 767.12(1)(b). The owner shall be responsible for pay-
ment of all boarding costs and other fees as may be
;quired to humanely and safely keep -the animal during
any appeal procedure.
(2) If a dog that has not been declared dangerous
attacks and causes severe injury to or death of any
human, and the owner of the dog had prior knowledge
of the dog's dangerous propensities yet demonstrated
a reckless disregard of such propensities under the cir-
cumstances, the owner of the dog is guilty of a misde-
meanor of the second degree, punishable as provided
in s. 775.082 or s. 775.C83. In addition, the dog shall be
immediately confiscated by an animal control authority,
placed in quarantine, if necessary, for the proper length
of time or held for 10 business days after the owner is
given written notification under s. 767.12, and thereafter
destroyed in an expeditious and humane manner. This
10 -day time period shall allow the owner to request a
hearing under s. 767.12(1)(b). The owner shall be
responsible for payment of all boarding costs and other
fees as may be required to humanely and safely keep
the animal during any appeal procedure.
(3) It a dog that has previously been declared dan-
gerous attacks and causes severe injury to or death of
any human, the owner is guilty of a felony of the third
degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s.
775.083, or s. 775.084. In addition, the dog shall be
immediately confiscated by an animal control authority,
placed in quarantine, if necessary, for the proper length
of fime or held for 10 business days after the owner is
given written notification under s. 767.12, and thereafter
destroyed in an expeditious and humane manner. This
10 -day time period shall allow the owner to request a
hearing under s. 767.12(1)(b). The owner shall be
responsible for payment of all boarding costs and other
fees as may be required to humanely and safely keep
the animal during any appeal procedure.
(4) If the owner files a written appeal under s.
767.12(1)(b), the dog must be held and may not be
destroyed while the appeal is pending.
(5) If a dog attacks or bites a person who is engaged
in or attempting to engage in a criminal activity at the
time of the attack, the owner is not guilty of any crime
specified under this section.
History.—s. 4, ch. 90-180, S. 4, ch. 93-13.
767.14 Additional local restrictions authorized.—
Nothing in this act shall limit any local government from
placing further restrictions or additional requirements on
owners of dangerous dogs or developing procedures
and criteria for the implementation of this act, provided
that no such regulation is specific to breed and that the
provisions of this act are not lessened by such additional
regulations or requirements. This section shall not apply
to any local ordinance adopted prior to October 1, 1990.
History.—s. 5, ch. 90-180.
767.15 Other provisions of chapter 767 not super-
seded.—Nothing in this act shall supersede chapter
767, Florida Statutes 1989.
History.—s. 6, ch. 90-180.
767.16 Bite by a police or service dog; exemption
from quarantine.—Any dog that is owned, or the service
of which is employed, by a law enforcement agency, or
any dog that is used as a service dog for blind, hearing
impaired, or disabled persons, and that bites another
animal or human is exempt from any quarantine require-
ment following such bite if the dog has a current rabies
vaccination that was administered by a licensed veteri-
narian.
History.—s. 1, ch. 91-228.
s. 767.13
CHAPTER 767
DAMAGE BY DOGS
1994 SUPPLEMENT_.TO-ELOAIDA STATUTES 1993
767.01 Dog owner's liability for damages to persons,
domestic animals, or livestock.
767 03 Good defense for killing dog.
767.12 Classification of dogs as dangerous; certifica-
tion of registration; notice and hearing
requirements; confinement of animal,
exemption; appeals; unlawful acts.
767.13 Attack or bite by dangerous dog; penalties;
confiscation; destruction.
767.01 Dog owner's liability for damages to per-
sons, domestic animals, or livestock.—Owners of dogs
shall be liable for any damage done by their dogs to a
person or to any animal included in the definitions of
"domestic animal" and "livestock" as provided by s.
585.01.
History,—RS 2341: ch. 4979, 1901; GS 3142; RGS 4957: CGL 7044; s. 1, ch
94-339.
767.03 Good defense for killing dog.—In any action
for damages or of a criminal prosecution against any
person for killing or injuring a dog, satisfactory proof that
said dog had been or was killing any animal included in
the definitions of -domestic animal" and 'livestock" as
provided by s. 585.01 shalt constitute a good defense to
either of such actions.
History.—s. 1, ch. 4976. 1501; GS 3144: RGS 4959: CGL 7046: s. 1, ch. 79-315.
s. 2, ch. 9ti 339.
767.12 Classification of dogs as dangerous; certifi-
cation of registration; notice and hearing require-
ments; confinement of animal; exemption; appeals;
unlawful acts.—
(1)(a) An animal control authority shall investigate
reported incidents involving any dog that may be dan-
gerous and shall, if possible, interview the owner and
require a sworn affidavit from any person, including any
animal control officer or enforcement officer, desiring to
have a dog classified as dangerous. Any animal that is
the subject of a dangerous dog investigation, that is not
impounded with the animal control authority, shall be
humanely and safely confined by the owner in a securely
fenced or enclosed area pending the outcome of the
investigation and resolution of any hearings related to
the dangerous dog classification. The address of where
the animal resides shall be provided to the animal con-
trol authority. No dog that is the subject of a dangerous
dog investigation may be relocated or ownership trans-
ferred pending the outcome of an investigation or any
hearings related to the determination of a dangerous
dog classification. In the event that a dog is to be
destroyed, the dog shall not be relocated or ownership
transferred.
(b) A dog shall not be declared dangerous if the
threat, injury, or damage was sustained by a person
who, at the time, was unlawfully on the property or, while
lawfully on the property, was tormenting, abusing, or
assaulting the dog or its owner or a family member. No
dog may be declared dangerous if the dog was protect-
ing or defending a human being within the immediate
vicinity of the dog from an unjustified attack or assault.
(c) After the investigation, the animal control author-
ity shall make an initial determination as to whether there
is sufficient cause to classify the dog as dangerous and
shall afford the owner an opportunity for a hearing prior
to making a final determination. The animal control
authority shall provide written notification of the suffi
cient cause finding, to the owner, by registered mail.
certified hand delivery or services in ,.,,11,
me provisions of chapter 48 relating to service of proc-
ess. The owner may file a written request for a hearing
within 7 calendar days from the date of receipt of the
notification of the sufficient cause finding and, if
requested, the hearing shall be field as soon as possi-
ble, but not more than 21 calendar days and no sooner
than 5 days after receipt of the request from the owner.
Each applicable local governing authority shall establish
hearing procedures that conform to this paragraph.
(d) Once a dog is classified as a dangerous dog, the
animal control authority shall provide written notification j
to the owner by registered mail, certified hand delivery
or service, and the owner may file a written request for
a hearing in the county court to appeal the classification
within 10 business days after receipt of a written deter- i
mination of dangerous dog classification and must con-
fine the dog in a securely fenced or enclosed area pend- 1
ing a resolution of the appeal. Each applicable local gov-
erning authority must establish appeal procedures that
conform to this paragraph.
(2) Within 14 days after a dog has been classified as
dangerous by the animal control authority or a danger-
ous dog classification is upheld by the county court on
appeal, the owner of the dog must obtain a certificate
of registration for the dog from the animal control author
ity serving the area in which he resides, and the certifi- i
cate shall be renewed annually. Animal control authori-
ties are authorized to issue such certificates of registra-
tion, and renewals thereof, only to persons who are at
least 18 years of age and who present to the animal con-
trol authority sufficient evidence of:
(a) A current certificate of rabies vaccination for the ;
dog. i
(b) A proper enclosure to confine a dangerous dog ,
and the posting of the premises with a clearly visible ;
warning sign at all entry points that informs both chil-
dren and adults of the presence of a dangerous dog on
the property.
(c) Permanent identification of the dog, such as a
tattoo on the inside thigh or electronic implantation.
The appropriate governmental unit may impose an
annual fee for the issuance of certificates of registration
required by this section.
(3) The owner shall immediately notify the appropri-
ate animal control authority when a dog that has been
classified as dangerous:
(a) Is loose or unconfined.
(b) Has bitten a human being or attacked another
animal.
(c) Is sold, given away, or dies.
(d) Is moved to another address.
i
Prior to a dangerous dog being sold or given away, the `
owner shall provide the name, address, and telephone
number of the new owner to the animal control authority.
The new owner must comply with all of the requirements
of this act and implementing local ordinances, even if
the animal is moved from one local jurisdiction to
another within the stale. The animal control officer must
be notified by the owner of a dog classified as danger-
ous that the dog is in his jurisdiction.
(4) It is unlawful for the owner of a dangerous dog
to permit the dog to be outside a proper enclosure
unless the dog is muzzled and restrained by a substan-
tial chain or leash and under control of a competent per-
son. The muzzle must be made in a manner that will not
cause injury to the dog or interfere with its vision or res-
piration but will prevent it from biting any person or ani.
mal. The owner may exercise the dog in a securely
fenced or enclosed area that does not have a top, with-
out a muzzle or leash, if the dog remains within his sight
and only members of his immediate household or per-
sons 18 years of age or older are allowed in the enclo-
sure when the dog is present. When being transported.
such dogs must be safely and securely restrained within
a vehicle.
(5) Hunting dogs are exempt from the provisions of
this act when engaged in any legal hunt or training pro-
cedure. Dogs engaged in training or exhibiting in legal
sports such as obedience trials, conformation shows.
field trials, hunting/retrieving trials, and herding trials are
exempt from the provisions of this act when engaged in
any legal procedures. However, such dogs at all other
times in all other respects shall be subject to this and
local laws. Dogs that have been classified as dangerous
shall not be used for hunting purposes.
(6) This section does not apply to dogs used by Ia%-,,
enforcement officials for law enforcement work.
(7) Any person who violates any provision of th s
section is guilty of a noncriminal infraction, punishable
by a fine not exceeding $500.
History.—s- 3, ch. C* -16;x, s. 3, ch. 93-13, s. 3. ch 9:-339
767.13 Attack or bite by dangerous dog; penalties;
confiscation; destruction.—
(1) If a dog that has previously been declared dan-
gerous attacks or bites a person or a domestic animal
without provocation, the owner is guilty of a misde-
meanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s
775.082 or s. 775.083. In addition, the dangerous dog
shall be immediately confiscated by an animal control
authority, placed in quarantine, if necessary, for the
proper length of time, or impounded and held for 10
business days after the owner is given written notifica-
tion under s. 767.12, and thereafter destroyed in an
expeditious and humane manner. This 10 -day time
period shall allow the owner to request a hearing under
s. 767.12. The owner shall be responsible for payment
of all boarding costs and other fees as may be required
to humanely and safely keep the animal during any
appeal procedure.
(2) if a dog that has not been declared dangerous
attacks and causes severe injury to or death of any
human, the dog shall be immediately confiscated by an
animal control authority, placed in quarantine, if neces-
sary, for the proper length of time or held for 10 business
days after the owner is given written notification under
s. 767.12, and thereafter destroyed in an expeditious
and humane manner. This 10 -day time period shall alloy:
the owner to request a hearing under s. 767.12. The
owner shall be responsible for payment of all boarding
costs and other fees as may be required to humanely
and safely keep the animal during any appeal proce
dure. In addition, if the owner of the dog had prior knowl-
edge of the dog's dangerous propensities, yet demon-
suated a reckless disregard for such propensities under
the circumstances, the owner of the dog is guilty of a
misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as pro-
vided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
(3) If a dog that has previously been declared dan-
gerous attacks and causes severe injury to or death of
any human, the owner is guilty of a felony of the third
degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s.
775.083, or s. 775.084. In addition, the dog shall be
immediately confiscated by an animal control authority,
placed in quarantine, if necessary, for the proper length
of time or held for 10 business days after the owner is
given written notification under s. 767.12, and thereafter
destroyed in an expeditious and humane manner. This
10 -day time period shall allow the owner to request a
hearing under s. 767.12. The owner shall be responsible
for payment of all boarding costs and other fees as may
be required to humanely and safely keep the animal dur-
ing any appeal procedure.
(4) If the owner files a written appeal under s. 767.12
or this section, the dog must be held and may not be
destroyed while the appeal is pending.
(5) If a dog attacks or bites a person who is engaged
in or attempting to engage in a criminal activity at the
time of the attack, the owner is not guilty of any crime
specified under this section.
History.—c _. Ch x-1&9. 5 t. Ch 93-13: s 4, ch. 94-339.
ANIMALS § 4-29
(b) If any dog or cat shall wander or stray upon the property of any person within the
corporate limits of the city and shall cause damage thereon, proof of the damage and the
identity of the dog or cat shall be sufficient to convict the person owning or having charge of
or control of the dog or cat violating the terms and provisions of this article.
(c) If any dog or cat shall defecate on or cause damage to any of the public streets, parks,
playgrounds, alleys, or beaches in the city, the owner of said dog or cat shall be subject to the
penalties of this article unless such defecation or damage is immediately removed. Dog owners/
handlers shall carry some sort of material or utensil in all cases where their animals are being
walked on the beach in Atlantic Beach and shall be required to remove from the beach (not
bury) any and all defecation taking place. This provision shall also apply to dog owners whose
dogs defecate on people's lawns, on the street ends to the beach, in the public parks, and public
rights-of-way.
(d) Anyone who takes an animal on the beach must have an Atlantic Beach tag.
(Code 1970, § 4-4(d); Ord. No. 95-86-30, § 3, 7-28-86; Ord. No. 95-88-33, § 5, 4-25-88)
State law reference—Damage by dogs, F.S. Ch. 767.
Sec. 4-27. Disturbing the peace.
It shall be unlawful for any person, whether owner, or anyone having charge, custody or
control thereof, to keep any dogs or cats within the limits of the city which bark or howl so as
to disturb the sleep or peace and quietude of any inhabitants of the city unless otherwise
provided by state law.
(Code 1970, § 4-4(e))
Sec. 4-28. Vicious dogs.
It shall be unlawful for any owner or keeper of any vicious dog to permit such dog to run
at large or without the enclosure of the owner or keeper thereof within the corporate limits of
the city without being properly muzzled. Any dog known to have bitten any person is hereby
defined as a "vicious dog" but the term vicious dog" shall not be limited to only those dogs who
are known to have bitten any person.
(Code 1970, § 4-5(d))
Sec. 4-29. Rabies suspected.
(a) If a dog or cat is suspected of having rabies, or has been bitten by a dog or cat suspected
of having rabies, such dog or cat shall be confined by a chain on the owner's premises and the
humane society -or licensed veterinarian notified at once. The dog or cat shall then be removed
to the proper place for observation for a period of two (2) weeks at the expense of the owner.
(b) If any person is scratched or bitten by a dog or cat within the corporate limits of the
city then it shall become the duty of the person or the owner of the dog or cat with knowledge
thereof, to report the incident to the police department within twenty-four (24) hours there-
after.
Supp. No. 12 303
§ 4-29 ATLANTIC BEACH CODE
(c) Any animal reported to have bitten a person shall be kept in quarantine for such
period of time and place as may be designated by the city manager for the purpose of testing
the dog for disease. Any animal suspected of being infected with rabies shall be released by its
owner or custodian to the city manager for laboratory analysis by a licensed veterinarian. No
liability for compensation to the owner of the animal shall attach to the city by virtue of any
procedure in this article by the city manager. All costs in connection with this section shall be
borne by the owner of the animal.
(Code 1970, § 4-5)
State Iaw reference—Authority of state department of health and rehabilitative services
to adopt rules regulating quarantine or destruction of domestic pets or wild animals infected
with rabies, F.S. § 381.031(1)(g)l.
Sec. 4-30. Citations authorized; penalties provided.
(a) The city animal control officer or his designee as approved by the city manager shall
have the authority to issue citations to those people whose pets are found to be in violation of
this article and sections herein.
(b) Violations of this article shall be punishable by fines as follows: Twenty-five dollars
($25.00) for the first offense, forty dollars ($40.00) for the second offense, and seventy-five
dollars ($75.00) for the third and subsequent offenses each and every occasion wherein a
citation is issued.
(Ord. No. 97-86-30, § 4, 7-28-86)
Supp. No. 12 304 [The next page is 353]
SWORN AFFIDAVIT TO DECLARE THE FOLLOI`,ING DOG "DANGEROUS" UNDLR
FLORIDA STATUTE 767.12 and Atlantic Beach Animal ordinance
Sec. 4-28 "Vicious Dogs." 6
1atlantic Beach, FL. 32233
Tel. ���c� " S i 3 do hereby wish to have
the herein described dog declared dangerous as outlined in
the above ordinance.
The dog has threatened, charged, bitten and has aggressive
behavior on public ground and in residents yards
The dog is a male, black lab named "J.R.", owned by Billy
Ni. Arzie 770 East Coast Drive, Atlantic Beach, FL. Tel. 249-4526.
Signed: ��� c _) %v3'
Date 1 -'�ih N C,
Witness{
Notaryr-ol00AL OT SEAL:
1.n, 5A -1 1 FL.L'TCHUR
J --,_,AR y Fi " ,1,1C ti rm'e O? &OR1D ".
:w:0N `7C. CC:0,-8 5
\4Y CY1P.it�4tti�GN F'I:'. SFr,a I' y.��O3
Comments- Mr. Holt said that Mr. Arzie told him ''...I've been
chasing my dog for an hour.., couldn't catch him. "...got
more important work -to be doing...`' ... embarassed that my
dog is the neighborhood..."
terrorizing
Mr. Holt was bitten by this dog on Sat, Nov. 11. 1995 Police
report 95-017717. The bite occurred in the 700 block of East
Coast, The dog was loose and unattended and bit Mr. Holt as
he was on thesidewalk an&1was headed across the street to the nark.
Vii^,.,
C
x:
�xh, b f
SWORN AFFIDAVIT TO DECLARE THE FOLLOI.'ING DOG "DANGEROUS" UNDBR
FLORIDA STATUTE •767.12 and Atlantic Beach Animal Ordinance
Sec. 4-28 "Vicious Dogs."
of
-71
:atlantic Beach, FL, 32233
Tel. �Y �% k do hereby wish to have
the herein described dog declared dangerous as outlined in
the above ordinance.
The dog has threatened, charged, bitten and has aggressive
behavior on public ground and in residents yards
The dog is a male, black lab named "J.R.", owned by Billv
M. Arzie - 770 East Coast Drive, Atlantic Beach, FL. Tel. 249-4526.
1
Signed•
Date: ---
Witness
OMCIAL N A t S .AL
Notary, L- LYMAN T FLEI`CHER
NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF FLORIDA
COMMISSION NO. CC390295
MY COMMLgSION EXP. SEPT 9,1998
Comments: Mr. "tiller said he has been threatene by tliis
dog on his property. (��,�, U-RUP -
Ov`.
.l �
6z4o
61�-e Clk CA,—
0)(h411- D
JVEMBER 18, 1995
TO: BEE JAY LESTER, ID #300
FROM: ANIMAL CONTROL
RE: DOG BITE INCIDENT
TONIGHT I MADE CONTACT WITH MR. TERRY HOLT IN REFERENCE TO A
REPORTED DOG BITE INCIDENT THAT OCCURRED SOMETIME DURING THE SUMMER MONTHS
TO ONE OF HIS NEIGHBORS. MR. HOLT TOLD ME THAT HE WAS ALSO A VICTIM OF A
DOG BITE RECENTLY BY THE SAME DOG.(REF. REPORT 95-17717) MR. HOLT WANTED
TO KNOW WHY THE FIRST INCIDENT INVOLVING A JUVENILE CHILD WASN'T EVER
DOCUMENTED AND FORWARD TO YOU. I ADVISED MR. HOLT THAT I DID SPEAK WITH
YOU VERBALLY ABOUT THE INCIDENT BUT NOTHING WAS EVER WRITTEN DOWN.
MR. HOLT SAID THAT SOMETHING NEEDS TO BE DONE ABOUT THIS DOG AND
YOU HAVE STARTED TO TAKE THE NECESSARY ACTIONS AGAINST THE DOG'S OWNER.
-�. HOLT DID MAKE A COMMENT THAT IF THINGS WEREN'T DONE TO PREVENT THIS
..JG FROM ATTACKING ANOTHER PERSON THEN HE MIGHT NEED TO GET A GUN AND TAKE
CARE OF THE PROBLEM HIMSELF IF HE IS ATTACKED AGAIN.
BEE JAY I'M NOT REALLY SURE WHY MR. HOLT CALLED EXCEPT TO INQUIRE
WHY A REPORT WASN'T WRITTEN ON THE FIRST INCIDENT WHICH I TOLD HIM THAT I
DID RELAY THAT INFORMATION VERBALLY TO YOU. ANY QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS
PLEASE DON'T HESITATE TO CONTACT ME REGARDING THIS MATTER.
PTLM. W.A. BULL #1480
0416
SWORN AFFIDAVIT TO DECLARE THE FOLLOI:'ING DOG "DANGEROUS" UNDER
FLORIDA STATUTE •767.12 and Atlantic Beach Animal Ordinance
Sec. 4-28 "Vicious Dogs."
I of
31�O ;atlantic Beach, FL. 32233
Tel. �% C� ��v do hereby wish to have
the herein described dog declared dangerous as outlined in
the above ordinance.
The dog has threatened, charged, bitten and has aggressive
behavior on public ground and in residents yards
The dog is a male, black lab named "J.R.", owned by Billy
M. Arzie - 770 East Coast Drive, Atlantic Beach, FL. Tel, 249-4526.
Signed:
Date :---
h'itness;
Notary;
Comments= This dog was loose in the yard and driveway at 310 8th St.
on Nov. 4, 1995, Police report 9S.-17307, Mrs. Anderson said the dog
lunged -at her and growled and barked, She said the dog tries to go
into her house, -It was also loose in May 1995 and ran after
her child and jumped at his .face. The child -out a towel uD to his face
and the dog grabbed the towel,
SWORN AFFIDAVIT TO DECLARE THE FOLLOi`:ING DnG "DANGEROUS" UNDER
FLORIDA STATUTE -767.12 and Atlantic Beach Animal Ordinance
Sec. 4-28 "Vicious Dogs."
of
,'atlantic Beach; FL, 32233
' to have -
Tel. � 3.� _ %#hereby ieish
the herein described dog declared dangerous as outlined in
the above ordinance.
The dog has threatened, charged, bitten and has aggressive
behavior on public ground and in residents yards
The dog is a male, black lab named "J.R.", owned by Billy
M. Arzie - 770 East Coast Drive. Atlantic Beach, FL. Tel. 249-4526.
Signed: -
Date: ---
Witness
Notary;
Comments: On Sat. 3/25/95 this dog bit her daughter, Megan, while
they were walking east on 7th St. at Ocean Blvd. Mr. Arzie told
the victim's mother that it was probably his dog that did this
and he apologized and said he was thinking of giving the dog array.
Police Reno -rt 95-004239
14 NOV 95
ROBERT G.GASCOIGNE
314A 8TH ST.
ATLANTIC BEACH, FL
32233
(904) 249-6435
To whom it may concern;
On Saturday, October 21 at approximately noon time, a large Black
Labrador dog attacked my dog while I was walk him on a leash on
the street in front of my home. The dog in question charged out
from behind the house in which it was kept. The attack was
unprovoked and extremely vicious.
Once I separated the dogs, the Lab then started to growl and
began taking a threatening posture with myself. The animal did
not back down until a cat distracted its attention long enough
for us to retreat to the safety of Mayor Lyman's property. The
owner of the dog was immediately called but could not be reached
for 30 minutes. During this time.the dog continued to roam the
neighbourhood in an aggressive manner until the owner secured it
in his home.
My dog received a puncture wound in the hind quarter and was
treat at the Total Pet Complex with anti -biotics. The owner of
the Black Lab paid for the Veterinarian bill, which came to 49
dollars.
If any further information is required, I can be contacted at the
above address after 5:00 pm.
cerely,
R . G,ASCOIGNE
SWORN AFFIDAVIT TO DECLARE THE FOLLOtJNG DOG "DANGEROUS" UNDER
FLORIDA STATUTE 767. 12 and Atlantic Beach Animal Ordinance
Sec. 4-28 "Vicious Dogs."
of
3z�-- �i � 4 Atlantic Beach- FL, 32233
Tel. Cfr `���^ p�%Cj' i� �/, do hereby wish to have -
the herein described dog declared dangerous as outlined in
the above ordinance,
The dog has threatened, charged, bitten and has aggressive
behavior on public ground and in residents yards
The dog is a male, black lab named ",7.R.", owned by Billy
M. Arzie - 770 East Coast Drive, Atlantic Beach, FL. Tel, 249-4526.
Signed:
Date
I9itnes:
Not ary 4' -- OFFICIAL N�. ,Y SEAL
LYNIAN T FI.rrCHER
NOTARY PLsLIC STATz OF FLOP.IDA
COMI-MiSSION NO. CC39028b
Comments: Police reuort 95416420 Sat. Oct.. YW954 �i�ldywr9,1938
Fletcher reported a vicious dog at large, The above coma ainan
was walking his dog and Mr. Arzie's dog attacked it.viciously.
0-6.
j v���
SWORN AFFIDAVIT TO -'DECLARE THE FOLLOIIING DOG "DANGEROUS" UNDER
FLORIDA STATUTE .767.12 and Atlantic Beach Animal Ordinance
Sec. 4-28 "Vicious Dogs."
of
:atlantic Beach, FL, 32233
Tel.�-6 �J�� do hereby wish to have
the herein described dog declared dangerous as outlined in
the above ordinance.
The dog has threatened, charged, bitten and has aggressive
behavior on public ground and in residents yards
The dog is a male, black lab named "J.R.", owned by Billy
1`1. Arzie - 770 East Coast Drive, Atlantic Beach, FL. Tel. 249-4526.
Signed: L!i1il
Date
1!'itnessy FFICIALN WSE-AI,
LYMAN T FLfi�
Not ary j NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF FLORIDA
COMh4ISSION NO. CC39Ms5
MY COMMISSION EXP. SEPT 9,1998
Comments- Mrs. Downs. witnessed the dog bite that occured to Terence
Holt on Nov. 11. 1995
/ L AA
S190RN AFFIDAVIT TO DECLARE THE FOLLOIt'ING DOG "DANGEROUS" UNDER
FLORIDA STATUTE .767. 12 and Atlantic Beach Animal Ordinance
Sec. 4-28 "Vicious Dogs."
I ..- of
:atlantic Beach, FL, 32233
Tel. �3- do hereby wish to have
the herein described dog declared dangerous as outlined in '
the above ordinance.
The dog has threatened, charged, bitten and has aggressive
behavior on public ground and in residents yards
The dog is a male, black lab named "J.R.", owned by Billy
M. Arzie - 770 East Coast Drive.. Atlantic Beach, FL. Tel. 249-4526.
Signed: - -
Date:---
h'.itness,
Notary;
Comments: Por. Fletcher called the answering machine of Atlantic Beach
Animal Control to say that at 7 u.m. Saturday Nov. 4 1995 that Mr.
Arzie's black lab charged his wife in the 8th Street nublic street.
SWORN AFFIDAVIT TO DECLARE THE FOLLO1 ING DOG "DANGEROUS" UNDER
FLORIDA STATUTE • 767.12 and Atlantic Beach Animal Ordinance
Sec. 4-28 "Vicious Dogs."
'
Atlantic Beach, FL, 32233
Tel. 3 �� Z� do hereby wish to have
the herein described dog declared dangerous as outlined in
the above ordinance.
The dog has threatened, charged, bitten and has aggressive
behavior on public ground and in residents yards
The dog is a male, black lab named "J.R.", owned by Billy
M. Arzie -- 770 East Coast Drive. Atlantic Beach, FL. Tel. 249-4526.
Signed: G�
Date ^'
Witness;
Notary;
OFFICIAL NOT Y SEAL
LYMAN T FLET'CHER
NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF FLORIDA
COMMISSION NO. CC39M85
My COMMISSION EXP. SEPT 933
Comments: At 7 D.m. Saturday Nov. 4, 1995 this dog charged
Mrs. Fletcher on 8th St., Atlantic Beach. He was running loose
in the area. /�
G!/ ui✓ Gt,7 z e -e. 2-Y
J I.
CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH
CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD MINUTES
JANUARY 30, 1996
Call to order: PRESENT: Edward Martin, Chairman
Heywood Dowling, Jr.
Kathleen Russell
Ken Rogosheske
Theo K. Mitchelson
Richard S. Mann
AND: Suzanne Green Prosecuting Attorney
Alan Jensen, Legal Counsel
Karl Grunwald, Code Enf. Officer
Trudy Lopanik, Secretary
ABSENT: Lou Etta Waters
1 Approval of Minutes of January 9, 1995
Mr. Martin indicated that since this was a special called meeting that approval of the minutes would
be deferred until the next regular meeting.
2 Recognition of Visitors and Guests regarding any matters that are not listed on agenda.
No one wished to speak.
3. New Business:
Case No. 0102 - Jule "Champ" Kaufmann, owner of American Pit Bull dogs: KAYA, male and
K1RRA, female, in violation of Florida State Statute 767 and Section 4.28 of the Code - vicious
dogs. Above reference dogs are being declared dangerous due to their unprovoked behavior
to a person and another animal when off Mr. Kaufmann's property, unleashed, on the beach
in the City of Atlantic Beach.
Mr. Martin read the case hearing procedure for Case No. 0102 and all witnesses were sworn in.
Suzanne Green, Prosecuting Attorney, indicated Mr. Kaufmann was represented by attorney, Robert
S. Willis, 317 6th Street, Atlantic Beach. She indicated that she and Mr. Kaufmann had been working
on the case and desired to come up with a disposition that would be satisfactory to the City, the
Board, and Mr. Kaufmann, and that she had made an offer to Mr. Willis and discussed the possibility
of the following agreement:
(1) that Mr. Kaufinann would admit he violated section 4.6 of the ordinance, but not other ordinances
as cited by the city
(2) that Mr. Kaufinann would give the board his assurance in writing that the dog would not be
Minutes, Code Enforcement Board
Special Meeting of January 30, 1996
Page 2
brought into the limits of Atlantic Beach,
(3) that the dog would be properly enclosed as required by the statute
(4) that Mr. Kaufinann would pay medical and hospital bills that were a result of the incident,
(5) that there may be a fine assessed by the Board.
Ms. Green indicated she recommended that the board accept the proposal. She added that Mr.
Kaufinann resided in Jacksonville Beach, and at the
time
but the dogs occurrence
were the
leashed.were under the
care of Mr. Kaufinann, a Jacksonville Beach resident,
Mr. Martin indicated Mr. Kaufmann was found to be in violation of Sections 4.6 and 4.28 of the Code
of the City, and Florida State Statute 767.
Karl Grunewald, Code Enforcement Inspector, gave a chronology of events that had transpired
(Attached hereto and made a part hereof - Exhibit A). He recommended that the following action
be taken by the board:
...that the dog be classified as dangerous under FL
SS 767 and vicious under Atl Beach Code 4-28,
and that the requirements of 767.12 be required of the owner.
...that since the owner resided in Jacksonville Beach that proper notification be given to that
jurisdiction.
...that should the dog be found in the City of Atlantic Beach in violation of any of its animal
ordinances, an immediate fine of $250 per day be levied against the owner of the dog.
Mr. Willis asked to be apprised of the citations that were brought against Mr. Kaufinann, to which
it was explained sections 4-26(d) no dog tag; and 4-29(d) dog bite, were the citations brought against
Mr. Kaufmann.
Betty D. Chinnis, 701 Beach Avenue #103, indicated that on December 27, 1995 she was walking
her 9 3/4 lb miniature schnauzer on the beach shortly after 7:00 a. in. She heard a man yelling and
looked up to see that two dogs were racing towards her. She indicated she picked up her dog and
the two dogs attacked her. They were up on their hind legs and bit her on both arms, and bit her dog
on his paw. One wound required three stitches. She indicated she had on winter clothes and a long
winter coat, otherwise the wounds would have been much worse. She indicated blood was coming
through her coat sleeves. Ms. Chinnis indicated she was screaming and the man had to pull the dogs
off her. After the dogs were leashed, she indicated the man began to leave the beach When she asked
him his name, he did not answer her, and, finally, she screamed for him to at least tell her if his dogs
had been vaccinated, to which he replied they had been vaccinated. At this time, Ms. Chinnis
explained, neighbors stopped the man and obtained his name and address.
Suzanne Green asked Ms. Chinnis who was the owner of the dogs, to which Ms. Chinnis replied the
owner was Champ Kaufmann. Ms. Green asked Ms. Chinnis if Mr. Kaufmann was present in the
audience, to which Ms. Chinnis indicated she was only able to see the back of his body at the time
Minutes, Code Enforcement Board
Special Meeting of January 30, 1996
Page 3
of the attack, and thus did not see his face. It was determined Mr. Kaufinann was in fact present in
the audience.
Ms. Green asked Ms. Chinnis if Mr. Kaufinann had paid her medical bills, to which Ms. Chinnis
replied Mr. Kaufinann paid some bills but not all the bills.
Mr. Willis asked Ms. Chinnis if the dogs were trying to go after her dog, to which Ms. Chinnis replied
she did not know but that she was bitten three times and her dog was bitten one time.
Mr. Willis asked Ms. Chinnis if, when she was screaming, was Mr. Kaufmann walking away, to
which Ms. Chinnis replied Mr. Kaufmann was dragging the dogs away. Ms. Chinnis indicated Mr.
Kaufinann did not give his name to the first witness but that he gave his name to the second witness.
It was determined the dogs were in the city limits of Atlantic Beach and that the dogs were not on
a leash.
BeeJay Lester, Animal Control Officer, City of Atlantic Beach, explained she was not able to cite
Mr. Kaufinann for not having the dogs on a leash because she did not actually see the dogs unleashed,
but that she had already previously told him to get a tag because she thought Mr. Kaufmann lived on
6th Street. She cited Mr. Kaufinann for having no dog tag and for a dog bite. She indicated she
called Shoreline Veterinarian and was told the dogs were up to date on getting their rabbis shots. She
also explained the dogs were placed in quarantine at Shoreline.
Ms. Lester explained she had previously had custody of Mr. Kaufmann's male dog on a separate
occasion. She indicated neighbors of Mr. Kauf nann's mother on 6th Street in Atlantic Beach found
a pit bull dog and tied the male dog in their yard, and then proceeded to call the Animal Control
Officer to pick up the dog. She indicated shortly after she picked up the dog and placed it in custody,
Mr. Kaufmann and his mother came to get the dog and at that time Mr. Kaufinann bought a dog tag.
At that time, Ms. Lester indicated, she told Mr. Kaufinann that he needed to get a tag for the other
female dog.
Mr. Willis asked Ms. Lester if recently she had noticed Mr. Kaufmann in his car with the male dog
and if she pet the dog, to which Ms. Lester replied in the affirmative. Mr. Willis asked if the dog bit
her to which Ms. Lester indicated the dog did not bite her because the owner was with the dog, and
that at the time she had no other dog in her arms.
Mr. Willis asked Ms. Lester if when she cited Mr. Kaufinann she told him if he did not appeal to the
Code Enforcement Board his dog would be declared dangerous, to which Ms. Lester indicated she
was sure she told Mr. Kaufmann that he had a right to appeal.
Minutes, Code Enforcement Board
Special Meeting of January 30, 1996
Page 4
a witness was
Sally H. Vermillion, 701 Beach Avenue 4204, indicated her husband r. Kaufmaso his van and
not able to attend the meeting. She indicated her husband had fo Mr. Kaufinann indicated he
that when he indicated to Mr. Kaufinann thatknew
c d torMhe
Vermillion that he was taking care
e
would tell him where he lived. Mr. Kaufmann. she s awn to
r someone else and that they were not his dogs. M, ri a d begging n indicated she saw
of the dogs fo was
dogs attack Ms. Chinnis. She indicated Vermillion s. sindicated she had seen the same dogs running
tell her if the dogs had their shots.
unleashed on other days, and specifically on December 25, 1995.
t thin e to the meeting to try to do the right g He
Willis
Mr. indicated he and Mr. Kaufinann cam
e city
their view that the board had no jurisdiction over t e another matter fore he board
indicated it was th vicious or
had jurisdiction over the day the he territorial climits of Atlantic Beach to declare thedov and that
to assume jurisdiction beyond twas "animal aggressive" and had beendestroyed,
dangerous. He indicated the female dog the board to endorse the
d never been involved in a similar situation. He dicated the female dog le
the remaining animal had
the male dog toward the small dog belonging to Ms. Chinnis. He urged
and himself.
agreement sponsored by the Prosecuting Attorney
Board members indicated the following comments: oat with terrible results .
ould be remiss if it did not bring action, as the dog would still be able to dot e
...that the board w rab someone by th
same thing in another Community, and perhaps g action against the dog since the attack occurred
...that Atlantic Beach did in fact have a right to bring
in the city of Atlantic Beach.
...that if the victim had been a child an entirely different situation would have occurred which coin
llowing the attack.
Kaufmann did not act app p
have a tragic outcome. ro riately fo
...that the evidence was clear that Mr. Kaufm0911th Avenue
passed
to find Jule Champ Kaufmann, 8
A motion was made, seconded, and p named Kana
Beach, to be in violation of Section 4-28 ofheptt Bulldog ch Code an
South, Jacksonville's do a male American
Florida State Statute 767.12, and Mr. Champ g�
' ious and dangerous pursuant to Section 4-28 art hof). Beach Code
was found to be vac
and Florida State Statute 767.12 (attached hereto and made a P t the City of vine Beach was
r discussion, Mr. Martin indicated he would ensure terhindicated she had notified the Animal
Under
notified of the results of the Jacksonville. ion. Ms.
Control Officer in the CityCity Attorney,
lace a fine against Mr. Kaufmann, but Alan Jensen ,
The Board indicated its desire to p a fine at this hearing, as the matter under discussion
explained it was not possible for the board to levy
was to declare the dog dangerous and vicious, only.
Minutes, Code Enforcement Board
Special Meeting of January 30, 1996
Page 5
Since there was no further business to discuss Mr. Martin adjourned the meeting at 8:30 p.m.
G. E. Martin
Chairman, Code Enforcement Board
ATTEST:
Trudy Lopanik
Secretary
1/3ol q& t1�� efidj
CHRONOLOGY OF EVENTS
Subject: Case No. 0102
Jule "Champ" Kaufmann
TO: Code Enforcement Board Members
FROM: Karl Grunewald, Code Enforcement Officer
SUBJECT: Declaration of Dangerous Dog
On December 27, 1996 at approximately 7:20 a. in. Mrs. Betty Chinnis reported to the Atlantic
Beach Police Department that she had been attacked by two Pit Bull dogs while she was walking
her own dogs on the beach in the City of Atlantic Beach. (Please refer to the attached Police
Incident Report).
On this date the Animal Control Officer of Atlantic Beach issued a citation to the dog owner, Jule
"Champ" Kaufinann for failure to have an Atlantic Beach dog tag and for a dog bite. (See
attached citation).
Both dogs were placed in quarantine at a veterinary facility for observation. Following an attack
on another dog while quarantined the female dog was euthanized. The male dog continued to
be quarantine at the residence of the owner.
On January 2, 1996 Mr. Kaufinann was notified by the Animal Control Officer that both dogs
were being declared "dangerous" under Fl S. S. 767 and Atlantic Beach Code 4-28, "Vicious
Dog." (See attached letter).
On January 2, 1996 sworn statements were taken from Betty Chinnis, the complainant, and Sally
Vermillion, Charles Vermillion, and Lauren Am, witnesses to the incident (sworn statements
attached).
On January 8, 1996 Mr. Kaufmann submitted a written appeal of the dangerous dog declaration
as provided for in FL SS Supplement 767.12(c). (Attached)
An appeal date was set for January 30, 1996.
On January 8, 1996 Betty Chinnis appeared before the City Commission. Her statement is
attached herewith. Please note that she received continued medical attention at Beaches Baptist
Hospital.
Page 2
Jules "Champ" Kaufinann
We recommend the following:
...that the dog be continued to be classified as "dangerous" under FL SS 767 and "vicious"
under Atl. Bch Code 4-28, and that the requirements of 767.12 be required of the owner.
...that since the owner resides in Jacksonville Beach that proper notification be given to that
jurisdiction.
...that should the dog be found in the City of Atlantic Beach in violation of any of its animal
ordinances, an immediate find of $250.00.per day will be levied against the owner of the dog.
CHAPTER 767
DAMAGE BY DOGS
767.01 Dog owner's liability for damages to persons or
domestic animals.
767.02 Sheep -killing dogs not to roam about.
767.03 Good defense for killing dog.
767.04 Dog owner's liability for damages to persons
bitten.
767.05 Dog owner's liability for damages by dog that
kills, wounds, or harasses dairy cattle.
767.07 Interpretation.
767.10 Legislative findings.
767.11 Definitions.
767.12 Classification of dogs as dangerous; certifica-
tion of registration; notice requirements; con-
finement of animal; exemption; appeals;
unlawful acts.
767.13 Attack or bite by dangerous dog; penalties;
confiscation, destruction.
767.14 Additional local restrictions authorized.
767.15 Other provisions of chapter 767 not super-
seded.
767.16 Bite by a police or service dog; exemption from
quarantine.
767.01 Dog owner's liability for damages to per -
ons or domestic animals. -Owners of dogs shall be
liable for any damage done by their dogs to sheep or
other domestic animals or livestock, or to persons_
History. RS 2341; ch. 4979, 1901. GS 3142; RGS 4957; CGL 7044.
767.02 Sheep -killing dogs not to roam about. -It is
unlawful for any dog known to have killed sheep to roam
about over the country unattended by a keeper. Any
such dog found roaming over the country unattended
shall be deemed a run -about dog, and it is lawful to kill
such dog.
History. -s. 1, ch. 4185. 1893; GS 3143: RGS 4958: CGL 7045.
767.03 Good defense for killing dog. -In any action
for damages or of a criminal prosecution against any
person for killing or injuring a dog, satisfactory proof that
said dog had been or was killing cattle or sheep shall
constitute a good defense to either of such actions.
History. -s. 1, ch. 4978,1901: GS 3144: RGS 4959; CGL 7046; s. 1, ch. 79-315.
t767.04 Dog owner's liability for damages to per -
ons bitten. -The owner of any dog that bites any per-
son while such person is on or in a public place, or law-
fully on or in a private place, including the property of the
owner of the dog, is liable for damages suffered by per-
sons bitten, regardless of the former viciousness of the
dog or the owners' knowledge of such viciousness.
However, any negligence on the part of the person bit-
ten that is a proximate cause of the biting incident
reduces the liability of the owner of the dog by the per-
centage that the bitten person's negligence contributed
to the biting incident. A person is lawfully upon private
Property of such owner within the meaning of this act
when he is on such orooerty in the performance of any
when he is on such property upon invitation, expressed
or implied, of the owner. However, the owner is not lia-
ble, except as to a person under the age of 6, or unless
the damages are proximately caused by a negligent act
or omission of the owner, if at the time of any such injury
the owner had displayed in a prominent place on his
premises a sign easily readable including the words
"Bad Dog." The remedy provided by this section is in
addition to and cumulative with any other remedy pro-
vided by statute or common law.
History. -s. 1, ch. 25109, 1949: s. 1, ch. 93-13.
767.05 Dog owner's liability for damages by dog
that kills, wounds, or harasses dairy cattle. -An owner
or keeper of any dog that kills, wounds, or harasses any
dairy cattle shall be jointly and severally liable to the
owner of such dairy cattle for all damages done by such
dog; and it is not necessary to prove notice to or knowl-
edge by any such owner or keeper of such dog that the
dog was mischievous or disposed to kill or worry any
dairy cattle.
History. -s. 2, ch. 79-315: s. 482, ch. 81-259.
767.07 Interpretation. -Section 767.05 is supple-
mental to all other laws relating to dogs not expressly
referred to therein and shall not be construed to modify,
repeal, or in any way affect any part or provision of any
such laws not expressly repealed therein or to prevent
municipalities from prohibiting, licensing, or regulating
the running at large of dogs within their respective limits
by law or ordinance now or hereafter provided.
History. -s. 2, ch. 79-315.
767.10 Legislative findings. -The Legislature finds
that dangerous dogs are an increasingly serious and
widespread threat to the safety and welfare of the peo-
ple of this state because of unprovoked attacks which
cause injury to persons and domestic animals; that such
attacks are in part attributable to the failure of owners
to confine and properly train and control their dogs; that
existing laws inadequately address this growing prob-
lem; and that it is appropriate and necessary to impose
uniform requirements for the owners of dangerous dogs.
History. -s. 1, ch. 90-180.
767.11 Definitions. -As used in this act, unless the
fo
ntext clearly requires otherwise:
1) "Dangerous dog" means any dog that according
the records of the appropriate authority:
(a) Has aggressively bitten, attacked, or endan-
gered or has inflicted severe injury on a human being on
public or private property;
(b) Has more than once severely injured or killed a
domestic animal while off the owner's property;
(c) Has been used primarily or in part for the pur-
pose of dog fighting or is a dog trained for dog fighting;
or
(d) Has, when unprovoked, chased or approached
a person upon the streets, sidewalks, or any public
I . -------.4 ..14:4...4.. -f
;worn statement by one or more persons and dutifully
nvestigated by the appropriate authority.
(2) "Unprovoked" means that the victim who has
oeen conducting himself peacefully and lawfully has
peen bitten or chased in a menacing fashion or attacked
:)y a dog.
(3) "Severe injury" means any physical injury that
-esults in broken bones, multiple bites, or disfiguring lac-
arations requiring sutures or reconstructive surgery.
(4) "Proper enclosure of a dangerous dog" means,
Nhile on the owner's property, a dangerous dog is
Securely confined indoors or in a securely enclosed and
ocked pen or structure, suitable to prevent the entry of
young children and designed to prevent the animal from
ascaping. Such pen or structure shall have secure sides
ind a secure top to prevent the dog from escaping over,
ender, or through the structure and shall also provide
xotection from the elements.
(5) "Animal control authority" means an entity acting
done or in concert with other local governmental units
end authorized by them to enforce the animal control
aws of the city, county, or state. In those areas not
;erved by an animal control authority, the sheriff shall
;arty out the duties of the animal control authority under
his act.
(6) "Animal control officer" means any individual
employed, contracted with, or appointed by the an
;ontrol authority for the purpose of aiding in the enforce-
nent of this act or any other law or ordinance relating to
he licensure of animals, control of animals, or seizure
fnd impoundment of animals and includes any state or
Kcal law enforcement officer or other employee whose
futies in whole or in part include assignments that
-ivolve the seizure and impoundment of any animal.
(7) "Owner" means any person, firm, corporation, or
)rganization possessing, harboring, keeping, or having
;ontrol or custody of an animal or, if the animal is owned
)y a person under the age of 18, that person's parent
)r guardian.
History.—s. 2, ch. 90-180; s. 2, ch. 93-13.
767.12 Classification of dogs as dangerous; certifi-
:ation of registration; notice requirements; confine-
nent of animal; exemption; appeals; unlawful acts.—
(1)(a) An animal control authority shall investigate
eported incidents involving any dog that may be dan-
lerous and shall interview the owner and require a
;worn affidavit from any person, including any animal
:ontrol officer or enforcement officer, desiring to have a
log classified as dangerous. After the investigation, the
animal control authority shall determine if a dog is to be
:lassified as dangerous and shall immediately provide
vritten notification by registered mail or certified hand
iefivery to the owner of a dog that has been classified
is dangerous. A dog shall not be declared dangerous
the threat, injury, or damage was sustained by a per -
on who, at the time, was unlawfully on the property or,
chile lawfully on the property, was tormenting, abusing,
r assaulting the dog or its owner.
(b) The owner may file a written request for a hearing
appeal the classification within 10 business days after
tion of his appeal. Each applicable local governing
authority must establish appeal procedures that con-
form to this paragraph.
(2) Within 30 days after a dog has been classified as
'dangerous, the owner of the dog must obtain a certifi-
cate of registration for the dog from the animal control
authority serving the area in which he resides, and the
certificate shall be renewed annually. Animal control
authorities are authorized to issue such certificates of
registration, and renewals thereof, only to persons who
are at least 18 years of age and who present to the ani-
mal control authority sufficient evidence of:
(a) A current certificate of rabies vaccination for the
dog.
(b) A proper enclosure to confine a dangerous dog
and the posting of the premises with a clearly visible
warning sign at all entry points that informs both children
and adults of the presence of a dangerous dog on the
property.
(c) Permanent identification of the dog, such as a
tattoo on the inside thigh or electronic implantation.
The appropriate governmental unit may impose an
annual fee for the issuance of certificates of registration
required by this section.
(3) The owner shall immediately notify the appropri-
ate animal control authority when a dog that has been
classified as dangerous:
(a) Is loose or unconfined.
(b) Has bitten a human being or attacked another
animal.
(c) Is sold, given away, or dies.
(d) Is moved to another address.
Prior to a dangerous dog being sold or given away, the
owner shall provide the name, address, and telephone
number of the new owner to the animal control authority.
The new owner must comply with all of the requirements
of this act and implementing local ordinances, even if
the animal is moved from one local jurisdiction to
another within the state. The animal control officer must
be notified by the owner of a dog classified as danger-
ous that the dog is in his jurisdiction.
4"(4) It is unlawful for the owner of a dangerous dog
to permit the dog to be outside a proper enclosure
unless the dog is muzzled and restrained by a substan-
tial chain or leash and under control of a competent per-
son. The muzzle must be made in a manner that will not
cause injury to the dog or interfere with its vision or res-
piration but will prevent it from biting any person or ani-
mal. The owner may exercise the dog in a securely
fenced or enclosed area that does not have a top, with-
out a muzzle or leash, if the dog remains within his sight
and only members of his immediate household or per-
sons 18 years of age or older are allowed in the enclo-
sure when the dog is present. When being transported,
such dogs must be safely and securely restrained within
a vehicle.
(5) Hunting dogs are exempt from the provisions of
this act when engaged in any legal hunt or training pro-
cedure. Dogs engaged in training or exhibiting in legal
..--,4,. _-k — -1-4;--- o frinkc rnnfnrmAtion ;hOWS.
F.S. 1993
UAM/AUr— C) T UIJl.1J
exempt from the provisions of this act when engaged in
any legal procedures. However, such dogs at all other
times in all other respects shall be subject to this and
local laws. Dogs that have been classified as dangerous
shall not be used for hunting purposes.
(6) This section ':toes not apply to dogs used by law
enforcement officials for law enforcement work.
(7) Any person who violates any provision of this
section is guilty of a noncriminal infraction, punishable
by a fine not exceeding $500.
History.—s. 3. ch. 917-180: s. 3, ch. 93-13.
767.13 Attack or bite by dangerous dog; penalties;
frounfiscation; destruction.-1)If a dog that has' previggs been declared dan-
s attacks or bites a person or a domestic animal
without provocation, the owner is guilty of a misde-
meanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s.
775.082 or s. 775.083. In addition, the dangerous dog
shall be immediately confiscated by an animal control
authority, placed in quarantine, if necessary, for the
proper length of time, or impounded and held for 10
business days after the owner is given written notifica-
tion under s. 767.12, and thereafter destroyed in an
expeditious and humane manner. This 10 -day time
period shall allow the owner to request a hearing under
s. 767.12(1)(b). The owner shall be responsible for pay-
ment of all boarding costs and other fees as may be
required to humanely and safely keep -the animal during
any appeal procedure.
(2) `X If a dog that has not been declared dangerous
attacks and causes severe injury to or death of any
human, and the owner of the dog had prior knowledge
of the dog's dangerous propensities yet demonstrated
a reckless disregard of such propensities under the cir-
cumstances, the owner of the dog is guilty of a misde-
meanor of the second degree, punishable as provided
in s. 775.082 or s. 775.C83. In addition, the dog shall be
immediately confiscated by an animal control authority,
placed in quarantine, if necessary, for the proper length
of time or held for 10 business days after the owner is
given written notification under s. 767.12, and thereafter
destroyed in an expeditious and humane manner. This
10 -day time period shall allow the owner to request a
hearing under s. 767.12(1)(b). The owner shall be
responsible for payment of all boarding costs and other
fees as may be required to humanely and safely keep
the animal during any appeal procedure.
(3) If a dog that has previously been declared dan-
gerous attacks and causes severe injury to or death of
any human, the owner is guilty of a felony of the third
degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s.
775.083, or s. 775.084. In addition, the dog shall be
immediately confiscated by an animal control authority,
placed in quarantine, if necessary, for the proper length
of time or held for 10 business days after the owner is
given written notification under s. 767.12, and thereafter
destroyed in an expeditious and humane manner. This
10 -day time period shall allow the owner to request a
hearing under s. 767.12(1)(b). The owner shall be
responsible for payment of all boarding costs and other
fees as may be required to humanely and safely keep
the animal during any appeal procedure.
(4) If the owner files a written appeal under s.
767.12(1)(b), the dog must be held and may not be
destroyed while the appeal is pending.
(5) If a dog attacks or bites a person who is engaged
in or attempting to engage in a criminal activity at the
time of the attack, the owner is not guilty of any crime
specified under this section.
History.—s. 4, ch. 90-180: s. 4, ch. 93-13.
767.14 Additional local restrictions authorized.—
Nothing in this act shall limit any local government from
placing further restrictions or additional requirements on
owners of dangerous dogs or developingprocedures
and criteria for the implementation of this act, provided
that no such regulation is specific to breed and that the
provisions of this act are not lessened by such additional
regulations or requirements. This section shall not apply
to any local ordinance adopted prior to October 1, 1990.
History.—s. 5, ch. 90-180.
767.15 Other provisions of chapter 767 not super-
seded.—Nothing in this act shall supersede chapter
767, Florida Statutes 1989.
History.—s. 6, ch. 90-180.
767.16 Bite by a police or service dog; exemption
from quarantine.—Any dog that is owned, or the service
of which is employed, by a law enforcement agency, or
any dog that is used as a service dog for blind, hearing
impaired, or disabled persons, and that bites another
animal or human is exempt from any quarantine require-
ment following such bite if the dog has a current rabies
vaccination that was administered by a licensed veteri-
narian.
History.—s. 1, ch. 91-228.
ANIMALS § 4-29
(b) If any dog or cat shall wander or stray upon the property of any person within the
corporate limits of the city and shall cause damage thereon, proof of the damage and the
identity of the dog or cat shall be sufficient to convict the person owning or having charge of
or control of the dog or cat violating the terms and provisions of this article.
(c) If any dog or cat shall defecate on or cause damage to any of the public streets, parks,
playgrounds, alleys, or beaches in the city, the owner of said dog or cat shall be subject to the
penalties of this article unless such defecation or damage is immediately removed. Dog owners/
handlers shall carry some sort of material or utensil in all cases where their animals are being
walked on the beach in Atlantic Beach and shall be required to remove from the beach (not
bury) any and all defecation taking place. This provision shall also apply to dog owners whose
dogs defecate on people's lawns, on the street ends to the beach, in the public parks, and public
rights-of-way.
(d) Anyone who takes an animal on the beach must have an Atlantic Beach tag.
(Code 1970, § 4-4(d); Ord. No. 95-86-30, § 3, 7-28-86; Ord. No. 95-88-33, § 5, 4-25-88)
State law reference—Damage by dogs, F.S. Ch. 767.
Sec. 4-27. Disturbing the peace.
It shall be unlawful for any person, whether owner, or anyone having charge, custody or
control thereof, to keep any dogs or cats within the limits of the city which bark or howl so as
to disturb the sleep or peace and quietude of any inhabitants of the city unless otherwise
provided by state law.
(Code 1970, § 4-4(e))
Sec. 4-28. Vicious dogs.
It shall be unlawful for any owner or keeper of any vicious dog to permit such dog to run
at large or without the enclosure of the owner or keeper thereof within the corporate limits of
the city without being properly muzzled. Any dog known to have bitten any person is hereby
defined as a "vicious dog" but the term vicious dog" shall not be limited to only those dogs who
are known to have bitten any person.
(Code 1970, § 4-5(d))
Sec. 4-29. Rabies suspected.
(a) If a dog or cat is suspected of having rabies, or has been bitten by a dog or cat suspected
of having rabies, such dog or cat shall be confined by a chain on the owner's premises and the
humane society -or licensed veterinarian notified at once. The dog or cat shall then be removed
to the proper place for observation for a period of two (2) weeks at the expense of the owner.
(b) If any person is scratched or bitten by a dog or cat within the corporate limits of the
city then it shall become the duty of the person or the owner of the dog or cat with knowledge
thereof, to report the incident to the police department within twenty-four (24) hours there-
after.
Supp. No. 12 303
§ 4-29 ATLANTIC BEACH CODE
(c) Any animal reported to have bitten a person shall be kept in quarantine for such
period of time and place as may be designated by the city manager for the purpose of testing
the dog for disease. Any animal suspected of being infected with rabies shall be released by its
owner or custodian to the city manager for laboratory analysis by a licensed veterinarian. No
liability for compensation to the owner of the animal shall attach to the city by virtue of any
procedure in this article by the city manager. All costs in connection with this section shall be
borne by the owner of the animal.
(Code 1970, § 4-5)
State Iaw reference—Authority of state department of health and rehabilitative services
to adopt rules regulating quarantine or destruction of domestic pets or wild animals infected
with rabies, F.S. § 381.031(1)(g)l.
Sec. 4-30. Citations authorized; penalties provided.
(a) The city animal control officer or his designee as approved by the city manager shall
have the authority to issue citations to those people whose pets are found to be in violation of
this article and sections herein -
(b) Violations of this article shall be punishable by fines as follows: Twenty-five dollars
($25.00) for the first offense, forty dollars ($40.00) for the second offense, and seventy-five
dollars ($75.00) for the third and subsequent offenses each and every occasion wherein a
citation is issued.
(Ord. No. 97-86-30, § 4, 7-28-86)
Supp. No. 12 304 (The next page is 3531
s.767.13 1994 SUPPLEMENT. TO ELMOA STATUTES 1993
CHAPTER 767
DAMAGE BY DOGS
767.01 Dog owner's liability for damages to persons,
domestic animals, or livestock.
767.03 Good defense for killing dog.
767.12 Classification of dogs as dangerous; certifica-
tion of registration; notice and hearing
requirements; confinement of animal;
exemption; appeals; unlawful acts.
767.13 Attack or bite by dangerous dog; penalties;
confiscation; destruction.
767.01 Dog owner's liability for damages to per-
sons, domestic animals, or livestock.—Owners of dogs
shall be liable for any damage done by their dogs to a
person or to any animal included in the definitions of
"domestic animal" and "livestock" as provided by s.
585.01.
History.—RS 2341; ch. 4979, 1901; GS 3142; RGS 4957: CGL 7044; s. 1, ch.
94-339.
767.03 Good defense for killing dog.—In any action
for damages or of a criminal prosecution against any
person for killing or injuring a -dog, satisfactory proof that
said dog had been or was killing any animal included in
the definitions of "domestic animal" and "livestock" as
provided by s. 585.01 shall constitute a good defense to
either of such actions.
History.—s. 1, ch. 4978, 1901; GS 3144: RGS 4959; CGL 7046; s. 1, ch. 79-315:
s. 2, ch. 94-339.
767.12 Classification of dogs as dangerous; certifi-
cation of registration; notice and hearing require-
ments; confinement of animal; exemption; appeals;
unlawful acts.—
(1)(a) An animal control authority shall investigate
reported incidents involving any dog that may be dan-
gerous and shall, if possible, interview the owner and
require a sworn affidavit from any person, including any
animal control officer or enforcement officer, desiring to
have a dog classified as dangerous. Any animal that is
the subject of a dangerous dog investigation, that is not
impounded with the animal control authority, shall be
humanely and safely confined by the owner in a securely
fenced or enclosed area pending the outcome of the
investigation and resolution of any hearings related to
the dangerous dog classification. The address of where
the animal resides shall be provided to the animal con-
trol authority. No dog that is the subject of a dangerous
dog investigation may be relocated or ownership trans-
ferred pending the outcome of an investigation or any
hearings related to the determination of a dangerous
dog classification. In the event that a dog is to be
destroyed, the dog shall not be relocated or ownership
transferred.
(b) A dog shall not be declared dangerous if the
threat, injury, or damage was sustained by a person
who, at the time, was unlawfully on the property or, while
lawfully on the property, was tormenting, abusing, or
assaulting the dog or its owner or a family member. No
dog may be declared dangerous if the dog was protect-
ing or defending a human being within the immediate
vicinity of the dog from an unjustified attack or assault.
(c) After the investigation, the animal control author-
ity shall make an initial determination as to whether there
is sufficient cause to classify the dog as dangerous and
shall afford the owner an opportunity for a hearing prior
to making a final determination. The animal control
authority shall provide written notification of the suffi
cient cause finding, to the owner, by registered mail.
certified hand delivery, or service in conformance with
lite provisions of chapter 48 relating to service of proc-
ess. The owner may file a written request for a hearing
within 7 calendar days from the date of receipt of the
notification of the sufficient cause finding and, if
requested, the hearing shall be held as soon as possi-
ble, but not more than 21 calendar days and no sooner
than 5 days after receipt of the request from the owner.
Each applicable local governing authority shall establish
hearing procedures that conform to this paragraph.
(d) Once a dog is classified as a dangerous dog, the
animal control authority shall provide written notification
to the owner by registered mail, certified hand delivery
or service, and the owner may file a written request for
a hearing in the county court to appeal the classification
within 10 business days after receipt of a written deter-
mination of dangerous dog classification and must con-
fine the dog in a securely fenced or enclosed area pend-
ing a resolution of the appeal. Each applicable local gov-
erning authority must establish appeal procedures that
conform to this paragraph.
(2) Within 14 days after a dog has been classified as
dangerous by the animal control authority or a danger-
ous dog classification is upheld by the county court on j
appeal, the owner of the dog must obtain a certificate
of registration for the dog from the animal control author-
ity serving the area in which he resides, and the certifi-
cate shall be renewed annually. Animal control authori-
ties are authorized to issue such certificates of registra-
tion, and renewals thereof, only to persons who are at j
least 18 years of age and who present to the animal con-
trol authority sufficient evidence of:
(a) A current certificate of rabies vaccination for the
dog.
(b) A proper enclosure to confine a dangerous dog
and the posting of the premises with a clearly visible
warning sign at all entry points that informs both chil-
dren and adults of the presence of a dangerous dog on
the property.
(c) Permanent identification of the dog, such as a
tattoo on the inside thigh or electronic implantation.
The appropriate governmental unit may impose an
annual fee for the issuance of certificates of registration
required by this section.
(3) The owner shall immediately notify the appropri-
ate animal control authority when a dog that has been
classified as dangerous:
(a) Is loose or unconfined.
(b) Has bitten a human being or attacked another
animal. i
(c) Is sold, given away, or dies.
(d) Is moved to another address.
Prior to a dangerous dog being sold or given away, the
owner shall provide the name, address, and telephone
number of the new owner to the animal control authority.
The new owner must comply with all of the requirements
of this act and implementing local. ordinances, even if
the animal is moved from one local jurisdiction to
another within the state. The animal control officer must
be notified by the owner of a dog classified as danger-
ous that the dog is in his jurisdiction.
(4) It is unlawful for the owner of a dangerous dog
to permit the dog to be outside a proper enclosure
unless the dog is muzzled and restrained by a substan-
tial chain or leash and under control of a competent per-
son. The muzzle must be made in a manner that will not
cause injury to the dog or interfere with its vision or res-
piration but will prevent it from biting any person or ani-
mal. The owner may exercise the dog in a securely
fenced or enclosed area that does not have a top, with-
out a muzzle or leash, if the dog remains within his sight
and only members of his immediate household or per-
sons 18 years of age or older are allowed in the enclo-
sure when the dog is present. When being transported.
such dogs must be safely and securely restrained within
a vehicle.
(5) Hunting dogs are exempt from the provisions of
this act when engaged in any legal hunt or training pro-
cedure. Dogs engaged in training or exhibiting in legal
sports such as obedience trials, conformation shows.
field trials, hunting/retrieving trials, and herding trials are
exempt from the provisions of this act when engaged in
any legal procedures. However, such dogs at all other
times in all other respects shall be subject to this and
local laws. Dogs that have been classified as dangerous
shall not be used for hunting purposes.
(6) This section does not apply to dogs used by law
enforcement officials for law enforcement work.
(7) Any person who violates any provision of this
section is guilty of a noncriminal infraction, punishable
by a fine not exceeding $500.
History.—s. 3. ch. 90-180; s. 3, ch. 93-13; s. 3. ch 94-339
767.13 Attack or bite by dangerous dog; penalties;
confiscation; destruction.—
(1) If a dog that has previously been declared dan-
gerous attacks or bites a person or a domestic animal
without provocation, the owner is guilty of a misde-
meanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s.
775.082 or s. 775.083. In addition, the dangerous dog
shall be immediately confiscated by an animal control
authority, placed in quarantine, if necessary, for the
proper length of time, or impounded and held for 10
business days after the owner is given written notifica-
tion under s. 767.12, and thereafter destroyed in an
expeditious and humane manner. This 10 -day time
period shall allow the owner to request a hearing under
s. 767.12. The owner shall be responsible for payment
of all boarding costs and other fees as may be required
to humanely and safely keep the animal during any
appeal procedure.
(2) If a dog that has not been declared dangerous
attacks and causes severe injury to or death of any
human, the dog shall be immediately confiscated by an
animal control authority, placed in quarantine, if neces-
sary, for the proper length of time or held for 10 business
days after the owner is given written notification under
s. 767.12, and thereafter destroyed in an expeditious
and humane manner. This 10 -day time period shall allow
the owner to request a hearing under s. 767.12. The
owner shall be responsible for payment of all boarding
costs and other fees as may be required to humanely
i and safely keep the animal during any appeal proce-
dure. In addition, if the owner of the dog had prior knowl-
edge of the dog's dangerous propensities, yet demon-
strated a reckless disregard for such propensities under
the circumstances, the owner of the dog is guilty of a
misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as pro-
vided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
(3) If a dog that has previously been declared dan-
gerous attacks and causes severe injury to or death of
any human, the owner is guilty of a felony of the third
degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s.
775.083, or s. 775.084. In addition, the dog shall be
immediately confiscated by an animal control authority,
placed in quarantine, if necessary, for the proper length
of time or held for 10 business days after the owner is
given written notification under s. 767.12, and thereafter
destroyed in an expeditious and humane manner. This
10 -day time period shall allow the owner to request a
hearing under s. 767.12. The owner shall be responsible
for payment of all boarding costs and other fees as may
be required to humanely and safely keep the animal dur-
ing any appeal procedure.
(4) If the owner files a written appeal under s. 767.12
or this section, the dog must be held and may not be
destroyed while the appeal is pending.
(5) If a dog attacks or bites a person who is engaged
in or attempting to engage in a criminal activity at the
time of the attack, the owner is not guilty of any crime
specified under this section.
History.—s 4, ch. 90-180: S. 4. Ch. 93-13: s- 4, ch. 94-339.
CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH
CEB Case #
0106 Respondents: W&21 BAKAR-
CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD
CASE PRESENTATION SHEET
Mister/Madam Chairman:
property in question, which is located at
X 1. I inspected the prop Y p was determined
ROYAL PALMS DR . ownership of the property
by a check of the:
X tax records public records deed title search
other
scovered
X 2. The code #(s) and nature LPGBOTTLESloAND STANDARDBUILDING
are: NFPA 58 PROTECTION OF
T rTnr TCl CAT T FOR INSPECTION
3. The inspection was made as a result of a: complaint
X routine area inspection
other
4. A violation notice was issued to the owner/occupant on:
NOV
S 5. Notice to the owner -occupant was achievedof property
X certified mail -,_,_ hand delivery
_postingPolice
t,�„nTr NpTTA_`T'O
6. 12, did did not speak with the owner or someone in
xconcerning violations. Brief
charge of the property _ TAT �m muTp p(C'A0 TANS _MB. _
description of conversation: ON
PERMIT
BAKKAR WAS TOLD TO CALL ,FOR Q FINAL
v� MTT 491-38I
9 38IoAS 0 SS TED ON
x 7. The latest inspection was made on:
2-22-96
x_ 8. The violation(s) that was/were still occurring on that
date was/were:---S=E
ro ert into compliance, it is necessary to:
9. To bring the p p Y ON TP WRIST STDF OE
..tet ft,
TS-TF. T,PC, BOTTL s' `i
BUILDING
10. Imo_ do _ Do not have pictures/slides of the property.
These were taken on These pictures/slides are a
fair and accurate representation of the property at the time
they were taken.
11. I would estimate that F; day(s) of time is necessary
to correct the violations. Therefore, the City recommends
that the Board find the respondent guilty.and give r days
to comply.
Respectfully submitted,
Karl W. Grunewald
Code Enforcement Officer
MR. BAKKAR HAS CONTINUOUSLY IGNORED OUR REQUESTS FOR THE FINAL
INSPECTION. HE HAS PLACED THE LIVES OF CITIZENS WITHIN THE
VICINITY OF 31 ROYAL PALMS DRIVE IN DANGER BY FAILING TO PROVIDE
PROPER PROTECTION IN FRONT OF THE LPG BOTTLES; I. E. STEEL PIPE
FILLED WITH CONCRETE.
CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD
CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH, FLORIDA
NOTICE OF HEARING
February 21, 1996
MR. WADIE BAICKAR
6135 PRATHER DRIVE NORTH
Jacksonville Fl 32216
Dear MR. BAKKAR:
The Code Enforcement Board of the City of Atlantic Beach was
created pursuant to Florida Statutes and exists for the purpose of
facilitating the enforcement of the Code of Ordinances. It is
comprised of seven citizens, residents of Atlantic Beach, who meet
regularly to hear allegations of code violations.
You are hereby notified and ordered to appear at the next
public hearing of the Code Enforcement Board on TUESDAY, the 5TH
day of MARCH, 1995 AT 7:30 P. M. at Atlantic Beach City Hall, 800
Seminole Road, to answer and be heard to the alleged violations of
the following Sections NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION ASSOCIATION 58,
SECTION 3.2.4.1(C), AND STANDARD BUILDING CODE, CHAPTER 1, SECTION
103.8.4 AND 103.8.6. It -is alleged that you are in violation of
the above enumeratedcode section(s) in that there exists on the
premises located at 31 ROYAL PALMS DRIVE, ATLANTIC BEACH, FLORIDA,
the following condition(s): (1) WHERE PHYSICAL DAMAGE TO LP GAS
CONTAINERS OR SYSTEMS, OF WHICH THEY ARE A PART, FROM VEHICLES IS
A POSSIBILITY, PRECAUTIONS SHALL BE TAKEN AGAINST SUCH DAMAGE,
EXAMPLE* INSTALLATION OF CONCRETE FILLED PIPE TO PREVENT SUCH
POSSIBLE DAMAGE; THIS PROTECTION IS NORMALLY PROVIDED BY YOUR GAS
SUPPLIER• (2) FAILURE TO REQUEST A FINAL INSPECTION.
The Code Enforcement Board has the power to levy fines up to
$250.00 per day for the first offense and $500.00 for the second
offense against the property, if a violation is found to exist
beyond the date set by the Board for compliance.
You have the right to obtain an attorney at your own expense
and to present witnesses in your behalf. If you desire to have
witnesses, subpoenaed or if you have questions regarding the
procedure, please contact Trudy Lopanik, Secretary of the Code
Enforcement Board within five days of the receipt of this notice at
247-5821. Please note the presence of a court reporter for the
purpose of insuring a verbatim record in the event of an appeal
should be secured at your expense.
Sincerely,
ATTEST:
SECRETARY G. E. MARTIN
Chairman, Code Enforcement Board
CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD
CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH, FLORIDA
CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH, FLORIDA, ) VIOLATION NO.
Petitioner, )
VS. ) SUBPOENA
WADIE BAKKAR
Respondent. )
-------------------------------- )
TO: NAME: WADIE BAKKAR
STREET 6135 ••ATHE• DRIVE NO.
CITY JX, FL. 32216
STATE FL
YOU ARE HEREBY COMMANDED to be and appear before the Code
Enforcement Board of the City of Atlantic Beach, Florida at City
Hall, 800 Seminole Road, Atlantic Beach, Florida on Tuesday, the
5TH day of MARCH 1996 at 7:30. p. m. in reference to
violation of Section: NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION ASSOCIATION 58,
SECTION 3.2.4.1(C); -STANDARD BUILDING CODE VIOLATION; LOCATION OF
VIOLATION: 31 ROYAL PALMS DRIVE -
Failure to appear subjects you to penalty of law.
Dated this-212T—day of FEBRUARY, 1996.
CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD
CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH, FLORIDA
BY
Sc retary
CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD
CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH, FLORIDA
CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH, FLORIDA, ) VIOLATION NO.
Petitioner, )
VS. ) SUBPOENA
Respondent. )
-------------------------------- )
• NAME: DON FORD, BUILDING OFFICI
STREET 800 SEMINOLE ROAD
CITY ATL BCH FL. 32233
STATE FL
GREETINGS:
YOU ARE HEREBY COMMANDED to be and appear before the Code
Enforcement Board of the City of Atlantic Beach, Florida at City
Hall, 800 Seminole Road, Atlantic Beach, Florida on Tuesday, the
5TH day of MARCH 1996 at 7:30, p. m. in reference to
violation of Section: NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION ASSOCIATION 58,
SECTION 3.2.4.1(C); -STANDARD BUILDING CODE VIOLATION; LOCATION OF
VIOLATION: 31 ROYAL -PALMS DRIVE -
Failure to appear subjects you to penalty of law.
Dated this-212T—day of FEBRUARY, 1996.
CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD
CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH, FLORIDA
BY
�' Secretary
November 29, 1995
Wadie Bakkar
6135 Prather Drive North
Jacksonville, FL 32216
Dear Sir:
800 SEMINOLE ROAD
ATLANTIC BEACH, FLORIDA 32233-5445
TELEPHONE (904) 247-5800
FAX (904) 247-5805
Our records indicate that you are the owner of the following
property in the'City of Atlantic Beach, Florida:
31 Royal Palms Drive
a/k/a B De Castro y Ferrer Grant OR Book 46
RS#177611-0000
Investigation of this property discloses that I have found
and determined that you are in violation of National Fire
Protection Association 58, Section 3.2.4.1(c) Where physical damage
to LP gas containers or systems, of which they are a part, from
vehicles is a possibility, precautions shall be taken against such
damage. Example: Installation of concrete filled pipe to prevent
such possible damage. This protection is normally provided by your
gas supplier.
You are hereby notified that unless the condition above
described is remedied within fifteen (15) days from the date of
your receipt hereof, this case will be turned over to the Code
Enforcement Board.
Under Florida Statute 162.09, the Code Enforcement Board may
impose fines of up to $250.00 per day for a first violation and
$500.00 per day for a repeat violation.
Sincerely,
arl W. Gr ewald
Code Enforcement Officer
KWG/Pah
cc: City Manager
VIA CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH
CEB Case # 0103 Respondents: .TAMES SMITH
CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD
CASE PRESENTATION SHEET
Mister/Madam Chairman:
X 1. I inspected the property in question, which is located at
85 EDGAR ST . ownership of the property was determined by a
check of the:
X tax records public records deed title search
other
X 2. The code #(s) and nature of the violation(s) discovered
are: CHAPTER 12, SEC. 12-1-7; OUTSIDE STORAGE.
3. The inspection was made as a result of a: X complaint
routine area inspection other
�. 4. A violation notice was issued to the owner/occupant on:
JANUARY 16, 1996,
X 5. Notice to the owner -occupant was achieved by:
X certified mail _ hand delivery _Posting of property
Police
x 6. I did X did not speak with the owner or someone in
charge of the property concerning violations. Brief
description of conversation:
x 7. The latest inspection was made on: 2-22-96
x_ 8. The violation(s) that was/were still occurring on that
date was/were: ARANDONFD VEHTCLEq WERE REMOVED; THE
PROPERTY IS STILL SCATTERED WITH TRASH AND DEBRIS
2L- 9. To bring the property into compliance, it is necessary to:
RRMOVE TT.T. TRASH AND DEBRIS AND LEVET. MULCH PILES
10. Imo_ do _ Do not have pictures/slides of the property.
These were taken on I*1 6196 These pictures/slides are a fair
and accurate representation of the property at the time they
were taken.
11. I would estimate that -9; day(s) of time is necessary
to correct the violations. Therefore, the City recommends
that the Board find the respondent guilty and gives days
to comply.
Respectfully submitted,
Karl W. Grunewald
Code Enforcement Officer
This is a repeat violation. The previous fine was not paid which
resulted in a lien on the property.
CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD
CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH, FLORIDA
NOTICE OF HEARING
February 21, 1996
MR. JAMES SMITH
85 EDGAR STREET
ATLANTIC BEACH FL 32233
Dear MR. SMITH:
The Code Enforcement Board of the City of Atlantic Beach was
created pursuant to Florida Statutes and exists for the purpose of
facilitating the enforcement of the Code of Ordinances. It is
comprised of seven citizens, residents of Atlantic Beach, who meet
regularly to hear allegations of code violations.
You are hereby notified and ordered to appear at the next
public hearing of the Code Enforcement Board on TUESDAY, the 5TH
day of March, 1996 AT 7:30 P. M. at Atlantic Beach City Hall, 800
Seminole Road, to answer and be heard to the alleged violations of
the following Section 12-1-7 of the Code of the City of Atlantic
Beach. It is alleged that you are in violation of the above
enumerated code section(s) in that there exists on the premises
located at 85 EDGAR STREET, ATLANTIC BEACH, FLORIDA, the following
condition(s): OPEN STORAGE OF BUILDING MATERIAL, PIPES, TIRES.
ABANDONED VEHICLES, MISCELLANEOUS TRASH AND DEBRIS ON THE
FRONT, SIDES, AND REAR YARD TO ROBERT STREET.
The Code Enforcement Board has the power to levy fines up to
$250.00 per day for the first offense and $500.00 for the second
offense against the property, if a violation is found to exist
beyond the date set by the Board for compliance.
You have the right to obtain an attorney at your own expense
and to present witnesses in your behalf. If you desire to have
witnesses, subpoenaed or if you have questions regarding the
procedure, please contact Trudy Lopanik, Secretary of the Code
Enforcement Board within five days of the receipt of this notice at
247-5821. Please note the presence of a court reporter for the
purpose of insuring a verbatim record in the event of an appeal
should be secured at your expense.
ATNJ�,ST:
�L-lam.
SECRET �
Sincerely,
G. E. MARTIN
Chairman, Code Enforcement Board
CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD
CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH, FLORIDA
CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH FLORIDA, ) VIOLATION NO. 01-93
Petitioner, )
vs_ ) SUBPOENA
JAMES SMITH
.Respondent. )
-------------------------------- )
• NAME: • ut: u y.
STREET 85 EDGAR ST
CITY ATLANTIC BEACH 32233
STATE FL
YOU ARE HEREBY COMMANDED to be and appear before the Code
Enforcement Board of the City of Atlantic Beach, Florida at City
Hall, 800 Seminole Road, Atlantic Beach, Florida on Tuesday, the
5TH day of MARCH 1996 at 7:30. p, m. in reference to
violation of Section: SECTION 12-1-7
Failure to appear subjects you to penalty of law.
Dated this 21ST day of FEBRUARY, 1996.
CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD
CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH, FLORIDA
BY
Secretary
i
CITY OF
/*�Utt.'c
James Smith
85 Edgar Street
Atlantic Beach,
Dear Mr. Smith:
800 SEMINOLE ROAD
_ ATLANTIC BEACH, FLORIDA 32233-5445
TELEPHONE (904) 247-5800
FAX (904) 247.5805
FL 32233
January 16, 1996
Our records indicate that you are the owner of the following
property in the City of Atlantic Beach, Florida:
85 Edgar Street
a/k/a Lot 11, Block 4, Donner Replat
RE#172244-0000
Investigation of this property discloses that I have found
and determined that you are in violation of City of Atlantic Beach
Ordinance Chapter 12, Section 12-1-(7) i.e., open storage of
building material, pipes, tires, abandoned vehicles, miscellaneous
trash and debris on the front, sides and rear yard to Robert
Street.
You are hereby notified that unless the condition above
described is remedied within fifteen (15) days from the date of
your receipt hereof, this case will be turned over to the Code
Enforcement Board.
Under Florida Statute 162.09, the Code Enforcement Board may
impose fines of up to $250.00 per day for a first violation and
$500.00 per day for a repeat violation.
Sincerely,
it -r -W-. Grunewald
Code Enforcement Officer
KWG/Pah
cc: Public Safety Director
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH
CEB Case # 0104 Respondents: HARRY L. CAINE
CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD
CASE PRESENTATION SHEET
Mister/Madam Chairman:
X 1. I inspected the property in question, which is located at
449 MAKo DRIVE ownership of the property was determined
by a check of the:
X tax records public records deed title search
other
_X 2. The code #(s) and nature of the violation(s) discovered
are: CHAPTER 12, SECTION 12-1-3. TRASH AND DEBRIS
CONTINUOUSLY PRESENT.
-X 3. The inspection was made as a result of a: X complaint
routine area inspection other
--X 4. A violation notice was issued to the owner/occupant on:
JANUARY 30, 1996
X 5. Notice to the owner -occupant was achieved by:
X certified mail _ hand delivery _Posting of property
Police
2L- 6. I 2L- did did not speak with the owner or someone in
charge of the property concerning violations. Brief
description of conversation: MR - ('RD TC CATNE (,SON) S'T'ATED HIS
FATHER WAS ILL AND HE WOULD CLEAN UP PROPERTY.
7. The latest inspection was made on: 2-22-96
x 8. The violation(s) that was/were still occurring on that
date was/were: SAME
X. 9. To bring the property into compliance, it is necessary to:
RAKE THE YARD AND PLACE ALL TRASH IN A GARBAGE CONTAINER FOR
PICK UP AND NOT LET THE PROPERTY FALL BACK INTO VIOLATION.
10. Ix do _ Do not have pictures/slides of the property.
These were taken on 2/5/96 These pictures/slides
are a fair and accurate representation of the property at the
time they were taken.
11. I would estimate that 5 day(s) of time is necessary
to correct the violations. Therefore, the City recommends
that the Board find the respondent guilty and give 5 days
to comply.
Respectfully submitted,
Karl W. Grunewald
Code Enforcement Officer
THERE ARE SEVEN COMPLAINTS REGARDING THIS PROPERTY DATING BACK TO
1993. THE PROPERTY IS GENERALLY BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE AND THEN
DRIFTS BACK TO ITS UNSIGHTLY AND UNHEALTHY CONDITION.
CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD
CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH, FLORIDA
NOTICE OF HEARING
February 21, 1996
Dear Mr. Caine:
The Code Enforcement Board of the City of Atlantic Beach was
created pursuant to Florida Statutes and exists for the purpose of
facilitating the enforcement of the Code of Ordinances. It is
comprised of seven citizens, residents of Atlantic Beach, who meet
regularly to hear allegations of code violations.
You are hereby notified and ordered to appear at the next
public hearing of the Code Enforcement Board on TUESDAY, the 5th
day of MARCH, 1996 AT 7:30 P. M. at Atlantic Beach City Hall, 800
Seminole Road, to answer and be heard to the alleged violations of
the following Sections: Section 12-1-3, of the Code of the City of
Atlantic Beach. It is alleged that you are in violation of the
above enumerated code section(s) in that there exists on the
premises located at 449 Mako Drive in the City of Atlantic Beach,
the following condition(s): Miscellaneous items scattered aroLnd
the yard, area inside and outside of fence is littered with small
pieces of paper and other d bris.
The Code Enforcement Board has the power to levy fines up to
$250.00 per day for the first offense and $500.00 for the second
offense against the property, if a violation is found to exist
beyond the date set by the Board for compliance.
You have the right to obtain an attorney at your own expense
and to present witnesses in your behalf. If you desire to have
witnesses, subpoenaed or if you have questions regarding the
procedure, please contact Trudy Lopanik, Secretary of the Code
Enforcement Board within five days of the receipt of this notice at
247-5821. Please note the presence of a court reporter for the
purpose of insuring a verbatim record in the event of an appeal
should be secured at your expense.
Sincerely,
ATTEST:
SECRETAJkY G. E. MARTIN
Chairman, Code Enforcement Board
CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD
CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH, FLORIDA
CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH, FLORIDA, ) VIOLATION NO.C/ 0
Petitioner, )
vs. ) SUBPOENA
Respondent. )
-------------------------------- )
TO: NAME: HARRY L. CAINE
STREET 449 ..• DRIVE
CITY ATLANTIC -•.«• 32233
STATE FL
GREETINGS:
YOU ARE HEREBY COMMANDED to be and appear before the Code
Enforcement Board of the City of Atlantic Beach, Florida at City
Hall, 800 Seminole Road, Atlantic Beach, Florida on Tuesday, the
= day of MARCH 1996 at 7:30. p. m. in reference to
violation of Section: SECTION 12-1-3
Failure to appear subjects you to penalty of law.
Dated this 21ST day of FEBRUARY, 1996.
CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD
CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH, FLORIDA
BY
Secretary
a
CITY OF
>*:c
January 30, 1996
Mr. Harry L. Caine
449 Mako Drive
Atlantic Beach, FL 32233
Dear Sir:
800 SEMINOLE ROAD
ATLANTIC BEACH, FLORIDA 32233-5445
TELEPHONE (904) 247-5800
FAX (904) 247-5805
SUNCOM 852-5800
Our records indicate that you are the owner of the following
property in the City of Atlantic Beach, Florida:
449 Mako Drive
a/k/a Lot 20, Block 12, Royal Palms 2A
RE171463-0000
Investigation of this property discloses that I have found and
determined that you are in violation of City of Atlantic Beach
Ordinance Chapter 12, Section 12-1-3 i.e., miscellaneous items
scattered around the yard, area inside and outside of fence is
littered with small pieces of paper and other debris.
You are hereby notified that unless the condition above
described is remedied within fifteen (15) days from the date of
your receipt hereof, this case will be turned over to the Code
Enforcement Board.
Under Florida Statute 162.09, the Code Enforcement Board may
impose fines of up to $250.00 per day for a first violation and
$500.00 per day for a repeat violation.
Sincerely,
Z arl W. G unewald
Code Enforcement Officer
KWG/pah
cc: Public Safety Director
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED