ASSESSMENT OF DUNEDIN’S CODE ENFORCEMENT PROCESS

ASSESSMENT OF DUNEDIN’S CODE ENFORCEMENT PROCESS

01/10/2019 Last Revision

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Code Enforcement Processes 2

Release/Relief Processes 3

Stipulated Settlement Agreements 5

Tiered Violations 5

Processes for Repeat Offender Cases/Nuisance Abatement Programs/Capping of Fines 6

Code Enforcement Board Procedures 7

Amnesty Programs 8

Fine Mitigation Examples (Process, Forms, Criteria) 10

APPENDIX A - City of Lake Worth –Tiered Violation Fine Penalty 11

APPENDIX B - City of Winter Springs – Civil Penalty Categorized in Classes/ Code Lien 12
Procedure
APPENDIX C - City of Miami – Capping of Fines 17

APPENDIX D - Cooper City - Fine Reduction Procedure 18

APPENDIX E - City of Lauderdale Lakes – Code Enforcement Trust Fund 21

APPENDIX F - City of West Park – Amnesty Program 23

APPENDIX G - City of Clermont – Penalty Amounts Categorized by Ordinance Chapter 24

APPENDIX H - City of Riviera Beach- Fine Reduction Application 25

APPENDIX I - City of Pompano Beach – Fine Reduction Relief Form 30

APPENDIX J - Sample Stipulated Settlement Agreement 34

Page 1 of 34 
 ASSESSMENT OF DUNEDIN’S CODE ENFORCEMENT PROCESS

The city of Dunedin currently issues citations for a variety of alleged offenses of its code of
ordinances. Common examples include construction debris, overgrowth, dismantled vehicles, fences
in disrepair, presence of garbage or refuse, accumulation of stagnant water, unlicensed vehicles,
parking vehicles on unpaved surfaces, etc. These efforts are aimed at preventing or eliminating
blighted and unsafe properties. Although many violations are remedied simply through issuing
warnings to property owners, when property owners fail to comply, they are ordered to appear before
the Code Enforcement Board and comply or face fines.

Over the past months, we have reviewed your code processes and procedures to bring to light
any issues that may hinder a complete due diligence process, or any unfair practices. Our
recommendations are options that the City can utilize to improve code processes and procedures. This
assessment includes examples from cities comparable in population to Dunedin including Lake Worth,
Panama City, Winter Springs, Aventura, Clermont, Cooper City, Parkland, Estero, Riviera Beach,
Deland, Lauderdale Lakes, and Pompano Beach.

1. CODE ENFORCEMENT PROCESSES:

ASSESSMENT
The code enforcement process presently used by the city of Dunedin meets the requirements of Florida
Statute 162 and the City’s ordinances. The code board is thorough and transparent with case processes
and procedures. Strong points include no administrative fees associated with the case, approval of
affidavits of compliance/non-compliance that go through the board ensuring a means of checks and
balances, accurate case records with detailed summaries provided by code inspectors, and knowledge
of code enforcement by code board members.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Development Services Management Team:
It is imperative to have a liaison with the police/sheriff’s office. With a liaison in place, concerns can
be addressed in a timely manner, such as the utilization of police information detailing history on a
particular property.

Code Inspector Team:

The code team should be led by a code supervisor who would report to the Assistant Director of
Planning & Development. A supervisor plays an important role as the link between the company
executives and individual teams, and they oversee the day-to-day performance of employees.
Without a skilled and efficient supervisor, overall productivity may be hampered.
Dunedin’s code officers should be required to complete certifications from the Florida Association
of Code Enforcement (FACE levels I through IV). These trainings promote the safety, personal
awareness, and education of code officers. Seventy five percent of code enforcement agencies
(city, county, and private) in the state of Florida, require at least one of the four certifications be
earned and maintained by employees.
Page 2 of 34 
 ASSESSMENT OF DUNEDIN’S CODE ENFORCEMENT PROCESS

Legal Notices and Constitutional Notices:

As they stand, all Notices related to the Code Enforcement process meet the requirements of F.S.
Chapter 162.
In an abundance of caution, it is recommended that the following sentence is included in the Notice
of Violation and Notice of Hearing: “A Code Enforcement Lien cannot be used to foreclose upon
real property which is a homestead.”
To include the certified mail item number in all notices mailed out via Certified Mail and ensure the
method of service and date of such service is provided to the Code Board (i.e. Service achieved by
Certified Mail / Posting / Hand Delivered) at the time the case is presented.

To address concerns with service when Citified Mail and First-Class mail is returned undelivered,
it is our recommendation to cross-reference with the City’s Utility Department’s database, and/or
retain the services of a private investigator to locate the property owner.
In the City’s ordinance, Chapter 22-101 (b) it states that “prior to issuing a citation, a code
enforcement officer shall provide notice to the person that the person has committed a violation of a
code or ordinance and shall give such person a reasonable time period within which to correct the
violation. Such time period shall be no more than 30 days”. But, in a news article published by ABC
Action News.com, when the City was asked, “How long do homeowners typically have to fix a
violation?” The answer was “Code enforcement officers use their discretion, based on the nature of
the violation, to determine an initial compliance date. Extensions are given liberally to owners who
are working to resolve violations”. To avoid ambiguous meanings regarding “reasonable time”, it
might be conducive to amend the ordinance as such.

2. RELEASE/RELIEF PROCESS:

ASSESSMENT:

Dunedin Release/Relief Process

After a fine has been imposed by the Board and within thirty (30) days after the violation is brought into
compliance, a violator may petition for reconsideration of a fine. The petition must be in writing signed
by the violator and include a copy of the affidavit of compliance executed by the code officer. The
Petition must include conclusive evidence showing extreme or undue hardship in the payment of the
fine or preventing the violator from coming into compliance within the time period established by the
Board's order. The Board Clerk shall schedule the petition to be considered. The City may present, in
written form, a response to the petition for reduction of fine. The Board shall make its determination
based solely upon the written petition and the City's written response, unless the Board determines that
it is necessary to hear oral argument from the violator and/or the City. The Board may request
information from the Code Officer. The Board Clerk shall notify the violator by regular mail of the
determination made by the Board. No petition for the reduction of a fine will be considered prior to the
Board's acceptance of an affidavit of compliance.
Page 3 of 34 
 ASSESSMENT OF DUNEDIN’S CODE ENFORCEMENT PROCESS

Under no circumstances may the amount of the fine be reduced below the costs of the action. Under no
circumstances may the amount of the fine be reduced once a foreclosure action is instituted.
Additionally, under no circumstances may the amount of a fine for a repeat violation be reduced.

EXAMPLES:
Cooper City:
a. Relief application submitted after the property is compliance.
b. Civil penalty reduced by order of Special magistrate.
c. Fees (reduced civil penalty and recording costs) paid by the date ordered.
d. Certified copy of the order reducing the civil penalty recorded in public records. (Full
process included in Appendix D)
City of Winter Springs:
a. Relief application submitted after compliance and must be approved by city manager.
b. The city manager shall collect at minimum, all administrative and out-of-pocket costs incurred
by the city.
c. If the city manager approves the application and the approval is conditioned upon the applicant
paying a reduced penalty, fine, or any other condition, the satisfaction or release of lien shall not
be prepared or recorded until the condition(s) placed by the city manager have been satisfied.
(Full process included in Appendix B)

City of Riviera Beach:

Terms of Fine Reduction:
a. Eligible property owners will pay 5% of the total fine as settlement for the outstanding fine owed
to the City.
b. The City of Riviera Beach will issue a Satisfaction of Lien to the property owner after payment
has been processed.
c. A $75 non -refundable Admin Fee is due at the time of submittal for each property.
(See Appendix H)
RECOMMENDATIONS:
In Dunedin, a fine reconsideration for a new property owner with an outstanding lien, is a partial lien
release settlement. The new owner will typically pay 10% of the total penalty. The original lien amount
remains in full (minus the 10% paid) attached to the original homeowner.
Our recommendation is to discontinue partial lien settlements. From our experience, it becomes
difficult to follow up once the property is released. Chasing the former owner will require time, money
and effort and may not be worth the trouble.

Page 4 of 34 
 ASSESSMENT OF DUNEDIN’S CODE ENFORCEMENT PROCESS

3. STIPULATED SETTLEMENT AGREEEMENTS:

ASSESSMENT:
The City of Dunedin does not entertain a Stipulated Settlement Agreement for abatement of code
violations by others than the current person or entity in possession of the property.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
In an effort to facilitate transfer of ownership of certain distressed properties, it is recommended to
create a process by which an agreement is reached with a potential buyer allowing a stipulated
timeframe and hard cost recovery prior to the transfer of the title. This process will be governed by a
document drafted by the City Attorney’s Office and acknowledged by all interested parties (City,
Seller and Buyer). A sample verbiage can be fund under (See Appendix J)

4. TIERED VIOLATIONS:
ASSESSMENT:
Code violations can be categorized via a tiered system. This technique is used by other cities to
categorize violations by severity.
a. The City of Lake Worth groups violations into four different classes depending on the severity of
the violation. Civil penalties start at $50 for class I, $75 for Class II, $125 for Class III, $250 for
Class IV (See Appendix A).
b. The City of Winter Springs groups violations into four different classes. Civil penalties start at
$50 for class I, $100 for Class II, $200 for Class III, $300 for Class IV, (See Appendix B)
Both cities place Repeat Violations in Class IV.
c. City of Clermont classifies violations by code chapter. Each code chapter has a specific fine
amount (See Appendix G).
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Categorizing violations can be an option to consider. It helps to ensure no one is targeted or singled
out as all violators will receive the same fine amount.

Page 5 of 34 
 ASSESSMENT OF DUNEDIN’S CODE ENFORCEMENT PROCESS

5. PROCESSES FOR REPEAT OFFENDER CASES/NUISANCE ABATEMENT

PROGRAMS/CAPPING OF FINES:
ASSESSMENT
In cases where a property owner fails to appear before the Code Enforcement Board or fails to
comply with Code Enforcement Board orders, daily fines of up to $250.00 per day for a first violation
and $500.00 per day for a repeat violation. If the code enforcement board finds the violation to be
irreparable or irreversible in nature, it may impose a fine not to exceed $5,000.00 per violation.

Fines continue to accrue daily until compliance is achieved. This daily accrual of fines means that
a non-compliant property owner can easily accrue several thousand to hundreds of thousands of
dollars.

The severity of the “rolling fine” is intended to and generally does, act as an effective incentive
for compliance. However, in circumstances when compliance is not achieved because there is an
absentee owner who refuses to comply or the property owner lacks the financial means to correct the
violation(s), the rolling fines become economically unfeasible and the system breaks down. In either
of the foregoing scenarios, the goal of attaining compliance is not achieved and properties remain a
blight on neighborhoods.

The City of Miami utilizes a cap for any, one (1) continuing violation. The fines are fixed at twenty
(20) times the original penalty amount. Every penalty (violation) has a specific fine amount. (See
Appendix C).
In Bradenton City, a new ordinance was enacted (September 2019) to include a cap for running fines.
First time violators fees will not exceed $75,000 while fees for repeat offenders will not exceed
$150,000. This ordinance is retroactive for all properties with fines previously imposed.
RECOMMENDATIONS
An ordinance adopted to allow for a capping of fines, could be a good option for the City of Dunedin.
Capping helps to eliminate outrageous fines and ensures a standard procedure is followed for all cases.
It also shows a willingness to soften the aggressive blow of extremely high fines.

Page 6 of 34 
 ASSESSMENT OF DUNEDIN’S CODE ENFORCEMENT PROCESS

6. CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD PROCEDURES

ASSESSMENT: The City’s ordinance detailing the Code Enforcement Board Rules of Procedure is
well written and conveys all pertinent procedures. The term limit for any board member’s tenure is
three consecutive years.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
a. Per Chapter 162.05 --The membership of each enforcement board shall, whenever possible, include
an architect, a businessperson, an engineer, a general contractor, a subcontractor, and a realtor.
Dunedin’s Code Enforcement Board has a member with knowledge and experience with code
enforcement, but it does not have the addition of a realtor. This would be beneficial.
b. Ensure that the Code Enforcement Board Rules of procedure are followed including Section 4 which
states that “when considering the reduction of a fine, the Board may make its determination based
solely upon the written petition and the City’s written response, unless the Board determines that it is
necessary to hear oral argument from the violator and/or the City”. It is always in the best interest to
allow oral argument from the violator if requested.
c. In Section 4, it mentions after a fine has been imposed by the Board and within 30 days after the
violation is brought into compliance, a violator may petition for reconsideration of a fine. Please
explain the reasoning behind this time frame. Most cities comparable to Dunedin, allow for a petition
for reduction any time after the property has been brought into compliance.
Of the eleven cities comparable to Dunedin in population, only one still uses a code enforcement
board (see Table 1). Although having a code enforcement board allows local members of the
community to volunteer, and saves the City little to no expenditure, finding members to fill board
vacancies can take time, and without attendance a quorum cannot be met, the code board cannot
conduct business, and code violations can go unaddressed for months. Also, it can be difficult to find
volunteers with code experience as well as ensuring no biases, predetermined loyalties or vendettas
that would influence unfair enforcement.
A well-functioning code enforcement board, one with a regular membership that fairly and unbiasedly
apply local laws, is valuable. However, there are alternatives, such as the use of a special magistrate
when the local government finds that its volunteer board is not meeting the needs of the community.

Page 7 of 34 
 ASSESSMENT OF DUNEDIN’S CODE ENFORCEMENT PROCESS

TABLE 1
City Population Hearing
City of Lake Worth 38,856 Special Magistrate
Panama City: 38,055 Special Magistrate
City of Winter Springs 38,000 Code Enforcement Board
City of Aventura 37,970 Special Master
City of Clermont 37,125 Special Magistrate
Cooper City 36,104 Special Magistrate
City of Parkland 36,004 Special Magistrate
City of Lauderdale Lakes 35,312 Special Magistrate
City of Deland 35,082 Special Magistrate
City of Riviera Beach 35,051 Special Magistrate
City of Estero 34,870 Special Magistrate

7. AMNESTY PROGRAMS
ASSESSMENT:

To date the City has over 300 active code cases. The approximate book value of all cases combined is
significant. The Code Board, on average, settles the outstanding fine for a portion of the book value.

RECOMMENDATIONS:
We recommend that the City establish a Code Amnesty Program.

Program Parameters:

1) Reduction of lien to 25% of the face value of the Code Enforcement lien, or $1000.00,
whichever is less.
2) 180 days to pay the full reduced amount after an applicant is qualified for participation
in the Program.
3) Available only for cases in which all violations cited in a case have been placed in
compliance and which remain in compliance as of the time of application during the time
period the program is in effect.
4) In addition, no additional code enforcement cases that are not in full compliance may
be pending on a property in order to qualify for the Amnesty Program.
5) The program will be in effect for a six (6) month period.

Page 8 of 34 
 ASSESSMENT OF DUNEDIN’S CODE ENFORCEMENT PROCESS

The benefits of the Amnesty Program are (1) it will result in properties with outstanding non-compliant
issues being brought into compliance thereby eliminating additional blight; (2) it will generate a lot of
positive publicity for the City and extend an olive branch to residents; (3) it will allow residents a final
opportunity to comply and satisfy their obligation to the City thereby preventing us from having to
pursue more aggressive collection measures such as garnishment or foreclosure actions; and (4) it will
allow the City to close out some cases, thereby avoiding court filing fees which the City would have to
front should a determination be made to initiate litigation.

The success of an Amnesty Program will hinge on the City’s ability to get the word out. I propose the
following mediums of communication:

• Press Release
• TV Channels
• Social Media
• City website
• Newspapers
• Note on City water bill
• Letter Mailing and public campaign mentions City's website address whereby property owners may
search the database to identify outstanding violations.
• Notices posted at City Hall
• Get the word out through workshops and other community Organizations meetings

Amnesty Program Examples:

Winter Springs, FL will start a six-month amnesty program next year 2020. The total lien would be
reduced by 90% if a delinquent property owner comes into full compliance with any outstanding code
violations. Owners would need to pay the remaining 10% of the lien amount up to $1,000, plus a $250
administration fee, within 30 days.

Cooper City, FL has a current amnesty program for fines associated with work done without permits. It
gives property owners one year to come into compliance with permits and building codes while avoiding
daily fines.

Lauderdale Lakes, FL offers a Trust Fund to assist persons suffering unique hardships who have been
cited for violations but who cannot come into compliance because of an inability to the fines. violations
concerning the appearance of lawns and irrigation systems, exterior of buildings, including roofs, broken
windows, unprotected swimming pools, stagnant water, deteriorated exterior doors, or deteriorated
fences and walls shall be within the scope of the code enforcement trust fund program. (See Appendix E
for further information).

City of West Park, FL- has a current amnesty program for Code Enforcement Liens and Accrued Fines.
Applications are being accepted from now until July 31, 2020 and payment of all liens must occur prior to July
31, 2020. After verifying that the property owner is eligible for participation in the program, the City will
approve the application and administratively reduce the amount required to satisfy the eligible liens or fines to
fifteen percent (15%) of the face value of the liens or fines, plus the cost of lien preparation and recording.
(See Appendix F for further information).

Page 9 of 34 
 ASSESSMENT OF DUNEDIN’S CODE ENFORCEMENT PROCESS

8. FINE MITIGATION EXAMPLES (PROCESS, FORMS, CRITERIA)

Examples:
Cooper City:
Summary: Mitigation of fines process:
Once all violations are corrected, and the case complies, the violator or violator’s successors may file for
a reduction of the civil penalty. (See Appendix D)
The guidelines for reduction are as follows:
Length of time from the Final Order compliance Maximum
date to compliance Reduction
3 months 95%
<3 months - > 12 months 75%
12-18 months 50%
<18 months 25%

City of Estero:
The mitigation reduction amount is reduced to a standard 10% of the balance in most cases.

City of Riviera Beach:

Terms of Fine Reduction:
a. Eligible property owners will pay 5% of the total fine as settlement for the outstanding fine owed
to the City.
b. The City of Riviera Beach will issue a Satisfaction of Lien to the property owner after payment
has been processed.
c. A $75 non -refundable Admin Fee is due at the time of submittal for each property (See Appendix
D).

Page 10 of 34 
 ASSESSMENT OF DUNEDIN’S CODE ENFORCEMENT PROCESS

APPENDIX A –
CITY OF LAKE WORTH –TIERED VIOLATION FINE PENALTY

 Sec. 2-87. - Civil penalties.

The maximum civil penalty for a civil infraction cited under this article shall be five hundred dollars
($500.00). A civil penalty may also be referred to as a citation fine. The fee set for a reinspection
under this section shall be set by resolution of the city commission.
If the person who has committed a civil infraction does not contest the citation and pays
the penalty and complies the property in accordance with the citation, the civil penalty shall be as
follows:
For a Class I infraction, fifty dollars ($50.00) plus a reinspection fee, if required.
Class I.
Violations of the building code of the city,
Violations involving recreational vehicles or boats.
Obstruction of public right-of-way.

For a Class II infraction, seventy-five dollars ($75.00) plus a reinspection fee, if required.
Class II.
Violations of the Property Maintenance Code.
Violations involving solid waste, refuse, garbage, rubbish or trash.
Violations involving fences, walls or hedges.
Violations of the sign code.
Abandoned property on private property.
Violations involving landscaping.

For a Class III infraction, one hundred twenty-five dollars ($125.00) plus a reinspection fee, if
required.
Class III.
Performing work without a required permit.
Violations of the Code of Ordinances not specifically enumerated in this section.
Violations of the zoning ordinance,
Violations of Chapter 14 of the Code of Ordinances (use and occupancy certificates, business tax
receipts, and business regulations).
Prohibited or unsafe signs.
Violations involving a required visibility triangle.

For a Class IV infraction, two hundred fifty dollars ($250.00) plus a reinspection fee, if required.
Class IV.
Violations of "cease and desist" or "stop work" orders.
Repeat violations.

Page 11 of 34 
 ASSESSMENT OF DUNEDIN’S CODE ENFORCEMENT PROCESS

APPENDIX B –
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS -

Sec. 2-61.5. - Application for satisfaction, reduction, or release of code enforcement liens.

Where a certified copy of an order imposing a penalty or fine, as described in this division, has been
recorded in the public records of Seminole County, Florida, and has become a lien against the land
and/or property of the violator, such violator, or the violator's successors or assigns, who has an
ownership interest in the encumbered property (collectively the "applicant") may apply for a
satisfaction, reduction, or release, of such lien as follows:

Upon full payment by the applicant of the fine or penalty imposed in accordance with this division,
the city manager is hereby authorized to execute and record on behalf of the city a satisfaction of lien
in the public records of Seminole County, Florida. The applicant shall be responsible for paying all
costs of recording.
Upon request for a reduction or release of a fine or penalty imposed in accordance with this division,
the applicant shall submit a written application to the city manager or designee.
The application for reduction or release of lien shall be in written form, typed or handwritten, by the
applicant and shall be submitted to the city manager, or designee. The application shall be executed
under oath and sworn to in the presence of a notary public, and shall include, but may not be limited
to, the following:
A copy of the order imposing a lien upon the property including the code enforcement case number;
The date upon which the applicant brought the subject property into compliance with the Code;
The factual basis upon which the applicant believes the application for release or reduction of lien
should be granted;
The terms upon which the release or reduction of lien should be granted;
The reasons, if any, compliance was not obtained prior to the order of penalty or fine being recorded;
The reduction in penalty or fine sought by the applicant;
A statement verifying whether the applicant was issued any title policy or policies for the subject
property encumbered by the lien after the date the lien was recorded in the public records of Seminole
County, Florida. If such a policy or policies were issued to the applicant, a copy of any such title
policy shall be submitted with the application;
Any other information which the applicant deems pertinent to the request, including but not limited to
the circumstances that exist which would warrant the reduction or satisfaction of the penalty or fine.
The applicant shall submit, at the time of application, payment to the city in the amount necessary to
reimburse the city for its costs associated with recording the order imposing a penalty or fine and the
requested reduction or release of lien. These costs are nonrefundable, without regard for the final
disposition of the application.

Page 12 of 34 
 ASSESSMENT OF DUNEDIN’S CODE ENFORCEMENT PROCESS

Upon receipt of the application for reduction or release of lien and payment provided above, the city
manager or designee shall confirm through the code enforcement department that the violation which
resulted in the order imposing penalty or fine has been brought into compliance. If the violation has
been brought into compliance and there is no current code violation upon the property in question, the
city manager shall review and consider the application. Additional information shall also be required
to support the application if the city manager deems such information is relevant and necessary to
make a final decision on the application. The city commission hereby delegates to the city manager
the authority to review and consider applications for release or reduction of liens and make
determinations as provided herein.
The city manager shall review and consider the following factors in making a determination to reduce
or release the lien:
The amount of any administrative and out-of-pocket costs incurred by the city which are directly
associated with the underlying code enforcement case and lien including, but not limited to, code
enforcement staff and attorney time, postage, advertising and recording costs, and other city expenses
related to any measure taken by the code enforcement board or special magistrate or city to abate a
nuisance caused by the violation;
The gravity and number of the violation(s);
The amount of the requested reduction;
Whether the applicant was responsible for the violation which caused the lien;
Whether the applicant is or will be a bona fide purchaser of the subject property and is filing or has
filed for a homestead exemption evidencing a desire to reside within the city on a non-transient basis,
or whether the property is or will be acquired for investment or other purposes;
Whether the applicant acquired the subject property with knowledge of the subject lien;
The time in which it took to bring the property into compliance;
The accrued amount of the code enforcement fine or lien as compared to the current market value of
the property;
With respect to a speculator, non-homestead purchaser of the subject property, the accrued amount of
the code enforcement fine or lien as compared to the investment/profit that will be gained as a result
of the purchase or sale of the property and the reduction or satisfaction;
Any previous or subsequent code violations pertaining to the property unless an order finding a
violation is under appeal at the time of determination;
Any previous or subsequent code violations of the applicant pertaining to other properties owned
within the city, unless an order finding a violation is under appeal at the time of determination;
Any relevant information contained in any title policy required to be submitted to the city under this
section;
Any financial hardship;

Page 13 of 34 
 ASSESSMENT OF DUNEDIN’S CODE ENFORCEMENT PROCESS

Any other mitigating circumstance which may warrant the reduction or satisfaction of the penalty or
fine; and
Any other administrative review criteria relevant to whether it is equitable to reduce or release a lien
which are adopted by the city manager, in writing, and are intended to be applied to all applications on
a uniform basis.
The city manager may, in writing, approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application to reduce
or release of lien. To the maximum extent feasible, the city manager shall collect, at a minimum, all
administrative and out-of-pocket costs incurred by the city as specified in subsection (e)(1). If the city
manager approves the application and the approval is conditioned upon the applicant paying a reduced
penalty, fine, or any other condition, the satisfaction or release of lien shall not be prepared or
recorded until the condition(s) placed by the city manager have been satisfied.
The applicant shall have thirty (30) days in which to comply with the conditions imposed by the city
manager or submit a written appeal as provided herein. Failure of the applicant to comply or timely
appeal will result in the automatic denial of the application and the original amount of the fine,
including costs, shall be automatically reinstated. After the appeal time period has run or is waived by
the applicant, in writing, the city manager may, for good cause shown, grant additional time in the
form of a written estoppel letter to a closing agent for purposes of facilitating a pending closing of the
subject property.
If the application is denied, or if the application is automatically denied due to the failure of the
applicant to comply with the conditions imposed by the city manager or timely appeal, the applicant
shall thereafter be barred from applying for a subsequent reduction or release of lien for a period of
one year from the date of denial. During the one-year period, the lien may only be satisfied and
released upon full payment of the fine or penalty imposed in accordance with this division.
The applicant may appeal the city manager's decision to the city commission, by filing a written
appeal within thirty (30) days of the date of the decision with the city clerk. The notice of appeal shall
state the decision that is being appealed, the grounds for appeal, and a brief summary of the relief
being sought. A nonrefundable filing fee of $100.00 shall accompany the notice of appeal. Upon
submittal of a timely appeal and filing fee, the city manager shall place the appeal of the determination
upon the agenda of the next regularly scheduled city commission meeting to the extent practicable.
The city commission shall render a final decision on the application based upon the sworn application
and determination of the city manager and any other relevant information or testimony provided to the
city commission at the meeting by the applicant, city manager or any other interested party. Any
decision made by the city commission pursuant to this section shall be deemed final and not subject to
any further administrative review by the city. The applicant shall have thirty (30) days in which to
comply with any decision of or condition imposed by the city commission or the application shall be
deemed automatically denied and thereafter, the applicant shall be barred from applying for a
subsequent reduction or release of lien for a period of one year from the date of the city commission's
decision. During the one-year period, the lien may only be satisfied and released upon full payment of
the fine or penalty imposed in accordance with this division.
When a lien is satisfied as a result of reduced payment or release as ordered by the city manager or
city commission, the city manager is hereby authorized to execute and record in the public records of
Seminole County, Florida, a satisfaction of lien on behalf of the city.

Page 14 of 34 
 ASSESSMENT OF DUNEDIN’S CODE ENFORCEMENT PROCESS

Under appropriate circumstances determined by the city manager or city commission to be in the best
interests of the city, the city manager or city commission may approve an application conditioned
upon a partial release of lien that releases a city lien from a specific piece of property. However, the lien
will remain in effect and will encumber any other properties which are subject to the lien pursuant to
law. Partial releases of lien may also be authorized by the city manager or city commission to account
for any funds paid to the city to reduce the amount owned on the lien. In addition, nothing herein shall
prohibit the city manager from releasing a lien, in whole or part, which was recorded in error by the city
or foreclosed by a superior lien or mortgage in a judicial proceeding. The city manager may impose an
administrative charge to release a lien recorded in error or foreclosed to recover the city's costs
associated with the subject lien. An application shall not be required to release a lien recorded in error.
(Ord. No. 2015-21, § 2, 10-12-15)

Page 15 of 34 
 ASSESSMENT OF DUNEDIN’S CODE ENFORCEMENT PROCESS

APPENDIX B –
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS -
Sec. 2-69.3. - Violation classification and civil penalty.
Violations of city codes or ordinances and the applicable civil penalties shall be classified as follows:

Class I $ 50.00
Class II $100.00
Class III $200.00
Class IV $300.00
Sec. 2-69.4. - Schedule of violations.
Violation of the following city codes or ordinances is a civil infraction for which a citation may be issued:

Title Class
Illegal signs--
Handicap, Ads, Snipes, ROW, I
Erected signs, Garage Sale
For sale/repairs on R.O.W., RV, Boat and trailer, Camper,
Work trailers, Parking between lines, Abandon on ROW, I
Parking/standing street, Prohibited vehicles, Disabled vehicles
Outdoor storage, Trash, Junk and debris,
Equipment strewn around yard, Stagnant pool, I
Tree trimmings and yard trash, Unsafe/unsanitary
House and building numbers, Loud party, Loud music,
Animal and bird noises, No garage sale permit,
I
Illegal handbills, Handbills on autos, Cast periodicals,
Littering on ROW, Littering private property
Open burning, Obstruction of hydrants,
Use of air/guns/slingshot/etc. by a minor, Soliciting I
Animal control violations—
Barking dog, Loose cat or dog, Animals defacting or urinating,
I
Over two cats or two dogs, Loose animals,
All other animal violations
Hazards (obstructions) R.O.W., Fireworks and explosives I
I (except §§ 17-104, 17-105, 17-109, 17-
City parks and other public recreation areas 110, 17-114, and 17-115 shall be class III)

Improper use of fertilizers I

All second offenses of class I II
No building permit, No local business tax receipt,
No arbor permit, Spreading fire, Failure to notify fire II
No meter backflow
All second offenses of class II III
Third offenses of class I III
No pool enclosure, Site plan violation,
III
Building maintenance to code
Additional offenses to class I, II, and III IV

Page 16 of 34 
 ASSESSMENT OF DUNEDIN’S CODE ENFORCEMENT PROCESS

APPENDIX C
CITY OF MIAMI

The maximum total penalty for any one (1) continuing violation shall be fixed at twenty (20) times the original penalty
amount, provided, however, that continuing violations of the provisions of Section 33-107 relating to murals s
A SAMPLE OF PENALTY AMOUNT FOR VIOLATIONS (The full listing is 129 pages)

8-1 2007 FBC § 105.1: Failure of owner-builder or contractor to 500.00

obtain permit

17-27(2) Trash, debris, refuse, or garbage on premises 100.00

17-27(4) Excessive growth of weeds, grass, or other flora 100.00

19-11 Unlawful storage of construction materials without having 250.00

active building permit

19-12(B) Failure to remove junk vehicle after notice 250.00

19-13(A) Failure to perform lot maintenance in residential district 250.00

19-13(B) Failure to maintain right-of-way swale area abutting private 250.00

property

Failure to maintain landscape in accordance with approved site 250.00

19-15.11 plan

21-28 Excessive noise violations 100.00

21-30(2) Destroying, damaging or vandalizing public property, 500.00

including public right-of-way

21- Failure to remove graffiti from non-commercial property 50.00

30.01(d)

Failure to grade or maintain exterior premises to prevent 50.00

17-27(9) accumulation of stagnant water
17-63(9)

Page 17 of 34 
 ASSESSMENT OF DUNEDIN’S CODE ENFORCEMENT PROCESS

APPENDIX D
COOPER CITY
Recovery of unpaid civil penalties and cost of repairs; unpaid penalty and cost of repairs to
constitute a lien; foreclosure; lien reduction.

(a) The City may institute proceedings in a court of competent jurisdiction to compel payment of civil
penalties or cost of repairs authorized herein.
(b) A certified copy of an order imposing a civil penalty may be recorded in the public records and
thereafter shall constitute a lien against the property on which the violation exists and upon any other
real or personal property owned by the Violator; upon petition to the circuit court, such order may be
enforced in the same manner as a court judgment by the sheriffs of this state, including execution and
levy against the Violator's personal property, but such order shall not be deemed to be a court judgment
except for enforcement purposes. A civil penalty imposed pursuant to this chapter shall continue to
accrue until the Violator complies or until judgment is rendered in a suit to foreclose on a lien filed
pursuant to this chapter, whichever occurs first. After three (3) months from the date of filing of any
such lien, which remains unpaid, the City may foreclose or otherwise execute on the lien. Alternatively,
the City may initiate legal proceedings to recover a money judgment for the amount of the Code
enforcement lien plus accrued interest.
(c) A certified copy of a notice of assessment of cost of repairs may be recorded in the public records
and thereafter constitute a lien on the property on which the repairs were performed; upon petition to the
circuit court, such notice of assessment may be enforced in the same manner as a court judgment by the
sheriffs of this state, including levy against the Violator's personal property, but such order shall not be
deemed to be a court judgment except for enforcement purposes. After three (3) months from the date of
filing of any such notice of assessment, which remains unpaid, the City may foreclose or otherwise
execute on the lien. Alternatively, the City may initiate legal proceedings to recover a money judgment
for the amount of the lien plus accrued interest.
(d) No lien provided under this chapter shall continue for a period longer than twenty (20) years after
the certified copy of an order imposing a fine or notice of assessment has been recorded, unless within
that time an action to foreclose on a lien is commenced in a court of competent jurisdiction. In an action
to foreclose on a lien, the prevailing party may recover interest and all costs, including a reasonable
attorney's fee, incurred in the foreclosure. The continuation of the lien affected by the commencement of
the action shall not be good against creditors or subsequent purchasers for valuable consideration
without notice, unless a notice of Lis pendens is recorded.
(e) A certified copy of an order finding a violation or an order imposing a civil penalty or notice of
assessment of cost of repairs recorded in the public records shall constitute notice of the violation and
any civil penalty or costs imposed therein to any subsequent purchasers, successors in interest, or
assigns if the violation concerns real property. The findings therein shall be binding upon the Violator,
and if the violation concerns real property, any subsequent purchasers, successors in interest or assigns.
(f) If an order is recorded in the public records and it is complied with by the date specified, the
Special Magistrate shall issue an order acknowledging compliance that shall be recorded in the public
records. A hearing shall not be required to issue such an order acknowledging compliance.
(g) A lien arising from a civil penalty or notice of assessment runs in favor of the City, and the City
may charge the Violator for all costs incurred in recording, researching the public records and satisfying
a valid lien. Upon payment of the civil penalty or notice of assessment by the Violator or the

Page 18 of 34 
 ASSESSMENT OF DUNEDIN’S CODE ENFORCEMENT PROCESS

successor(s), assign(s) or heir(s) of the Violator, the City Clerk is authorized to execute and record in the
Public Records of Broward County the appropriate release of lien document.
(h) The Violator, or the Violator's successors or assigns (the "applicant") who have an ownership
interest in the property encumbered by a lien for civil penalties, may file a request for a reduction of the
civil penalty with the City Manager only after a compliance inspection is completed during which a
Code Enforcement Officer finds that all violations were corrected. Upon receipt of a written request for
reduction of civil penalty, and the filing of an affidavit of partial compliance by the Code Enforcement
Officer which sets forth that all outstanding violations of the Special Magistrate's order have been
corrected, except for payment of any outstanding civil penalties, the City Manager or his or her
designee, shall set the matter for penalty reduction hearing by the Special Magistrate. However, if the
City Attorney has commenced action to obtain compliance with the order of the Special Magistrate,
including but not limited to an action for injunctive relief, foreclosure, or money judgment, no hearing
shall be held for a reduction of civil penalty unless consented to by the City Attorney.
(i) At the hearing, the fact-finding determination of the Special Magistrate shall be limited to
evidence establishing:
(1) Good cause for a reduction of the civil penalty,
(2) The amount of the reduction, and
(3) Any equitable considerations raised by the applicant or the City relating to good cause for the
amount of the reduction. Said hearing shall not be an opportunity to appeal any finding of fact or
conclusions of law set forth in any prior order of the Special Magistrate or any administrative
determination of the City.
(j) The Special Magistrate may reduce a civil penalty once the applicant has otherwise complied with
an order of the Special Magistrate based on a showing of good cause, but in no event shall the civil
penalty be reduced below the costs incurred by the City in its prosecution of violations, including but not
limited to any attorney's fees and staff time. In no event, however, shall any administrative fees
previously ordered by the Special Magistrate or court order be waived or reduced.
(k) In determining good cause, and the amount of the reduction, if any, the Special Magistrate shall
consider:
(1) The gravity of the violation.
(2) Any actions taken by the Violator or applicant to correct the violation.
(3) Any previous, or other outstanding violations whether committed by the Violator, or pertaining
to the property to which the lien attaches, unless an order finding a violation is under appeal at the time
of the determination.
(4) Whether the violation is irreparable or irreversible in nature.
(5) Whether the Violator's failure to timely comply with an order of the Code Enforcement Officer
or the Special Magistrate is due to an inability to comply based on factors beyond the control of the
Violator.

Page 19 of 34 
 ASSESSMENT OF DUNEDIN’S CODE ENFORCEMENT PROCESS

(l) Upon a finding of good cause, the Special Magistrate has the sole discretion to grant or deny the
request for a reduction of civil penalty according to the following guidelines, provided the reduction is
not less than the costs incurred by the City:
(1) If compliance occurs within three (3) months of the date for compliance set forth in the order of
the Special Magistrate, a maximum reduction of ninety-five (95) percent of the total civil penalty (the
original civil penalty plus the continuing civil penalty amounts);
(2) If compliance occurs more than three months but less than twelve (12) months from the
compliance date, a maximum reduction of seventy-five (75) percent of the total civil penalty amount;
(3) If compliance occurs from twelve (12) months to eighteen (18) months of the compliance date,
a maximum of fifty (50) percent of the total civil penalty amount; and
(4) If compliance occurs more than eighteen (18) months after the compliance date, a maximum of
twenty-five (25) percent of the total civil penalty amount.
(m) The Special Magistrate has the authority where there is a demonstrated showing of financial
hardship or other good cause to reduce the civil penalty below the civil penalty reduction guidelines.
The Special Magistrate shall exercise this authority with great caution and only in documented and
exceptional circumstances. A Violator alleging financial hardship has the burden of presenting evidence
of inability to pay the civil penalty.
(n) If a civil penalty is reduced, the order of the Special Magistrate shall provide that, if the Violator
fails to pay the reduced civil penalty by the date ordered by the Special Magistrate, then the original
amount of the civil penalty shall be automatically reinstated. The Special Magistrate may impose
conditions on the granting of a request for reduction of the civil penalty and may allow additional
hearings upon request if necessary to establish compliance with said conditions before an order reducing
the civil penalty is entered.
(o) A certified copy of the order reducing the civil penalty shall not be recorded in the public records
unless the terms of the order reducing the civil penalty are fully complied with and the order shall so
provide.
(p) Upon receipt of timely payment in full of the amount of the reduced civil penalty, and the
recording costs, the City Manager, or his or her designee, shall record a copy of the order reducing the
civil penalty and a satisfaction of lien.
(q) A reduction of civil penalty may only be granted once as to any violation of an order of the
Special Magistrate.

Page 20 of 34 
 ASSESSMENT OF DUNEDIN’S CODE ENFORCEMENT PROCESS

APPENDIX E
CITY OF LAUDERDALE LAKES

 ARTICLE III. - CODE ENFORCEMENT TRUST FUND

30-88. - Purpose. It is the purpose of the regulations hereunder to provide a revolving fund to assist
persons suffering unique hardships, who have been cited for violations of the city regulations, but who
cannot come into compliance with those regulations, because of an inability to pay the costs of such
undertakings as would render the person's property compliant and to assist those with unique
hardships to avoid the loss of property through the foreclosure of code enforcement liens and, thereby,
to improve the general prosperity of the city for the benefit of all of the citizens thereof.

Sec. 30-89. - Scope of review. The program established hereby and the benefits to be provided
hereunder are limited to those violations pertaining to single-family homes and condominium units,
which involve the aesthetic appearance of the exterior of real property or which constitute an eminent
threat of the loss of property or bodily harm. By way of example, but not way of limitation, violations
concerning the appearance of lawns and irrigation systems, exterior of buildings, including roofs,
broken windows, unprotected swimming pools, stagnant water, deteriorated exterior doors, or
deteriorated fences and walls shall be within the scope of the code enforcement trust fund program.
For those eligible, the cost to cure shall not exceed $2,500.00. The city may provide one-time
financial assistance to eligible program participants to correct code violations.

Sec. 30-90. - Application for trust fund benefits. An applicant for a trust fund award shall be by the
owner, who must be an occupant of the property, which is the subject of the violation(s) and shall
make application therefor on such forms as the city manager shall provide, from time to time.

Sec. 30-91. - Criteria for conferring benefits of the trust fund. In order to be eligible for a trust fund
award, the affected property must be owner-occupied, a homestead property within the meaning of
Section 4 of Article X of the Florida Constitution and the applicant shall be required to show, by
substantial, competent evidence, in the record, that the applicant meets the income guidelines
established by a resolution of the city commission, and in compliance with at least one of the
following:

Senior citizen (62 years of age or older);

The death of the applicant's spouse or significant-other, who provided for substantially all of the
applicant's support within a one- year period immediately prior to the filing of the application
contemplated in section 30-90;
A debilitating illness, physical or mental condition of the applicant's spouse or significant-other, who
provided for substantially all of the applicant's support within a one-year period immediately prior to
the filing of the application contemplated in section 30-90;
Unemployment of the applicant's spouse or significant other who provided for substantially all of the
applicant's support for a period of three or more months next preceding the date of application as a
result of a physical or mental impairment; or

Page 21 of 34 
 ASSESSMENT OF DUNEDIN’S CODE ENFORCEMENT PROCESS

Applicant has conceded the propriety of the violation.

The cause of the violation being entirely out of the property owner's control and the direct result of a
violation of this Code by an unrelated third party.

Sec. 30-92. - Affect on code enforcement process. The filing of an application in connection herewith
shall not constitute a defense to or the basis for the delay of the enforcement of the regulations of the
city. The staff shall inform the special master or the code enforcement board, as applicable, of the
filing of the application under section 30-90. Upon the finding of a violation, the special master shall
nevertheless, determine an appropriate fine and a time for compliance, which shall be no sooner than
ten days of the date of the determination of eligibility under section 30-94.

Sec. 30-93. - Security. Any applicant receiving an award under section 30-95 shall give the city a
security interest in the subject property, in a form recommended by the office of the city attorney, and
such evidence of such security interest shall be recorded in the public records of Broward County,
Florida. Such security interest will constitute a lien on the property, superior in dignity to all other
liens, save and except liens running in favor of the state or federal governments. In the event that the
applicant shall occupy the property, on a continuing basis, as the applicant's homestead property, as
provided in subsection 30-91(2), for a minimum period of one year from the date of the award, such
lien shall be deemed forgiven and the same shall be satisfied of record.

Sec. 30-94. - Procedure. An application for code enforcement trust fund benefits shall be filed with
the office of the city manager. The city manager shall determine the sufficiency of the application. If
an application is not deemed sufficient, the application shall be returned to the applicant with a written
explanation as to the deficiencies. In the event an application is deemed sufficient, the application
shall be referred to such designee(s) as the city manager shall determine sufficient.

Sec. 30-95. - Award. In the event that an applicant shall be found entitled to an award, such award
shall be made within ten business days from the date of the determination that the applicant is eligible.
A determination that an applicant is not entitled to an award shall be final and non-appealable. No
award shall exceed $2,500.00.

Sec. 30-96. – Funding. A funding source for the code enforcement trust fund shall be established by a
resolution adopted by the city commission.

Page 22 of 34 
 ASSESSMENT OF DUNEDIN’S CODE ENFORCEMENT PROCESS

APPENDIX F
CITY OF WEST PARK AMNESTY PROGRAM.

The following are the City’s criteria for the Code Enforcement Liens and Accrued Fines Amnesty
Program:
1. Applications will be accepted from now until July 31, 2020 and payment of all liens must occur prior
to July 31, 2020.

2. All property violations on the property must be in compliance and there cannot be any other active
code enforcement cases with ongoing violations on the subject property owner in the City.

3. All Unsafe Structures Board liens on any property owned by the property owner in the City must be
paid in full prior to being approved for participation in the program.

4. Eligible liens or fines must exceed $1,000 and the liens or fines must not have been under an order of
the City’s Special Magistrate to reduce the subject liens or fines.

5. The property owner must submit a Code Enforcement Liens and Accrued Fines Amnesty Program
Application and Participation Agreement for each lien or fine on the property by July 31, 2020. The
property owner shall pay a $50 non-refundable application fee per property.

6. After verifying that the property owner is eligible for participation in the program, the City will
approve the application and administratively reduce the amount required to satisfy the eligible liens or
fines to fifteen percent (15%) of the face value of the liens or fines, plus the cost of lien preparation and
recording.

7. The property owner must pay the City by cashier’s check or money order only and the total
sum of the following must be paid by July 31, 2020:
a. The reduced value of the eligible lien(s) or fine(s) on the property; and/or
b. The unreduced face value of any lien under $1,000; and/or
c. The full amount due for any lien or fine that was reduced by order of the Special Magistrate;
and/or
d. The cost per lien of lien preparation and recording

8. After the property owner has paid the total sum due prior to July 31, 2020, the city will execute and
record a release of lien(s).

9. Failure of the property owner to pay the total sum due to July 31, 2020 shall result in the approved
lien reductions being null and void, and the property will be liable for the entire face value of the liens(s)
or fines(s) as if no reductions had ever been imposed.

Page 23 of 34 
 ASSESSMENT OF DUNEDIN’S CODE ENFORCEMENT PROCESS

APPENDIX G
CITY OF CLERMONT
Reduced Civil Penalty

Chapter 6—Alcoholic Beverages $200.00

Chapter 10—Animals $100.00

Chapter 18, Article II—Solicitors, Peddlers and Itinerant Vendors $200.00

Chapter 34—Environment $250.00

Chapter 38—Mobile Homes and Recreational Vehicles $200.00

Chapter 42—Offenses $250.00

Chapter 54—Streets, Sidewalks $200.00

and Other Public Places

Chapter 102—Signs $250.00

Page 24 of 34 
ASSESSMENT OF DUNEDIN’S CODE ENFORCEMENT PROCESS

APPENDIX H
CITY OF RIVIERA BEACH

Page 25 of 34 
ASSESSMENT OF DUNEDIN’S CODE ENFORCEMENT PROCESS

Page 26 of 34 
ASSESSMENT OF DUNEDIN’S CODE ENFORCEMENT PROCESS

Page 27 of 34 
ASSESSMENT OF DUNEDIN’S CODE ENFORCEMENT PROCESS

Page 28 of 34 
ASSESSMENT OF DUNEDIN’S CODE ENFORCEMENT PROCESS

Page 29 of 34 
ASSESSMENT OF DUNEDIN’S CODE ENFORCEMENT PROCESS

APPENDIX I
CITY OF POMPANO BEACH

Page 30 of 34 
ASSESSMENT OF DUNEDIN’S CODE ENFORCEMENT PROCESS

Page 31 of 34 
ASSESSMENT OF DUNEDIN’S CODE ENFORCEMENT PROCESS

Page 32 of 34 
ASSESSMENT OF DUNEDIN’S CODE ENFORCEMENT PROCESS

Page 33 of 34 
 ASSESSMENT OF DUNEDIN’S CODE ENFORCEMENT PROCESS

APENDIX J
Sample Stipulated Settlement Agreement

Dear…………………,

Subject to the terms and conditions set forth herein, this confirms the City’s settlement
offer on Code Compliance Case # ……………. which will continue to accrue a $........ daily fine
until the City is able to document the violations cited therein have been complied.
Provided that by …………, 20…, all work approved under Permits #.................... completed
and verified by the City’s inspectors as being in compliance pursuant to the requisite of all
disciplines requiring final inspections, the City agrees to recommend the Code Board / Special
Magistrate reduce the lien arising from Code Case #..................which totals $.............. as of
……………., 2020, to $................

Upon satisfactory performance of the terms and conditions set forth above and the property
being placed in compliance, the subject Code case and the City’s recommended settlement
sum of $............. will be placed on the next scheduled Relief Agenda of the Code Board /
Special Magistrate for formal approval.

Please confirm your written acceptance of the foregoing offer by responding in writing to this
offer letter.

Page 34 of 34