Loading...
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