Item S3 S.3
� � �, BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
County of Monroe � ��r�i
�r � s�� Mayor Heather Carruthers,District 3
The Florida.Keys Mayor Pro Tem Michelle Coldiron,District 2
Craig Cates,District 1
David Rice,District 4
Sylvia J.Murphy,District 5
County Commission Meeting
August 19, 2020
Agenda Item Number: S.3
Agenda Item Summary #7224
BULK ITEM: Yes DEPARTMENT: County Attorney's Office
TIME APPROXIMATE: STAFF CONTACT: Peter Morris (305) 289-2584
No
AGENDA ITEM WORDING: Approval of a settlement agreement in Monroe County v. Keith
Munt, CA-K16-330 regarding two lots on Long Beach Road, Big Pine Key and approval to pay off
the approximately $8,000 to redeem the unpaid taxes to ensure the County receives clear title to the
properties.
ITEM BACKGROUND: The County has been litigating against Keith Munt to enforce code liens
arising from the unfinished and abandoned construction of a house at 1238 Long Beach Road. The
County recently prevailed at trial. In order to resolve the matter, Mr. Munt's attorney and the
County Attorney's Office have negotiated a proposed settlement agreement. Under the proposed
agreement, Mr. Munt would deed the two parcels over to Monroe County within 30 days of the
BOCC's approval of the proposed Settlement Agreement. In exchange, the County would release
Mr. Munt from any further liability for $2,472,800.00 in code enforcement fines. Mr. Munt is a
Canadian citizen who owns no other property in the county so collection of any deficiency judgment
would be expensive to pursue with little hope for return on the effort. The Monroe County Property
Appraiser has assessed the two properties at having a just market value of approximately
$291,860.00.
The property taxes have not been paid since 2018. The arrearage is approximately $8,000. A tax
deed sale is anticipated to occur before the end of the year. Separate and apart from the settlement,
staff requests authorization to redeem the two tax certificates through a payment to the Monroe
County Tax Collector. Payment would permit the County to take title free of any clear any cloud on
the title and would eliminate the possibility of the County from having to defend any claims buy a
purchaser at the tax deed sale. If the taxes are not paid, a purchaser at a tax deed sale may assert a
property right's claim against the County due to the growth limits on Big Pine. While the County
should ultimately prevail in such a suit, the costs of defending against such a suit would easily
exceed $8,000. The County Attorney recommends that the BOCC accept the proposed settlement
agreement to take title to the two properties and to redeem their unpaid taxes to avoid further
litigation. Once the County owns the property, the abandoned structure would need to be
demolished. Code compliance has a budget to cover those costs.
Packet Pg. 3487
S.3
PREVIOUS RELEVANT BOCC ACTION: N/A
CONTRACT/AGREEMENT CHANGES:
N/A
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval.
DOCUMENTATION:
Settlement Agreement
Lien
Final Judgment Order
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
Effective Date: Upon approval
Expiration Date: N/A
Total Dollar Value of Contract:
Total Cost to County: Approximately $8,000
Current Year Portion:
Budgeted: Yes
Source of Funds:
CPI:
Indirect Costs: N/A
Estimated Ongoing Costs Not Included in above dollar amounts:
Revenue Producing: N/A If yes, amount: N/A
Grant: No
County Match: No
Insurance Required: No
Additional Details: N/A
N/A
REVIEWED BY:
Bob Shillinger Completed 08/11/2020 3:46 PM
Peter Morris Skipped 08/11/2020 3:51 PM
Purchasing Skipped 08/11/2020 3:53 PM
Budget and Finance Completed 08/11/2020 3:58 PM
Maria Slavik Skipped 08/11/2020 3:45 PM
Kathy Peters Completed 08/11/2020 4:12 PM
Board of County Commissioners Pending 08/19/2020 9:00 AM
Packet Pg. 3488
S.3.ai
IN THE SIXTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA,
IN AND FOR MONROE COUNTY
MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA, Case No.: 2016-CA-330-K
a political subdivision of the State of Florida,
Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant, Hon. James M. Barton II
V.
0
HAROLD KEITH MUNT,
Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff.
0
2
C
0
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN
PLAINTIFF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA
AND DEFENDANT HAROLD KEITH MUNT E
Plaintiff Monroe County, Florida ("Monroe County" or the "County"), and
0
Defendant Harold Keith Munt ("Munt" or the "Defendant"), hereafter collectively 0
referred to as the "parties," hereby agree to forever settle the above-captioned
litigation as follows:
1. WHEREAS, Munt currently owns those certain below-described parcels of
a
real property, and took title to them pursuant to those certain deeds recorded
v)
in the Official Records of Monroe County on or about August 25th, 1998, at
Book 1533, Page 2433, Document Number 1081423, on or about June 5"h,
2001, at Book 1700, Page 796, Document Number 1238468, and on or about
September 26', 2005, at Book 2153, Page 829, Document Number 1542773.
1 of 8
Packet Pg. 3489
S.3.ai
Lot 33, Section A, Long Beach Estates, according to the Plat thereof,
recorded in Plat Book 5, Page 38, Public Records of Monroe County,
Florida, currently bearing Parcel Identification No. 00317050-000000,
and presently having an address of 1258 Long Beach Drive, Big Pine
Key, FL 33043.
Lot 34, Long Beach Estates, Section "A", according to the plat thereof
of record in Plat Book 5, Page 38 of the Public Records of Monroe
County, Florida, currently bearing Parcel Identification No. 00317060-
000000 and presently having an address of 1238 Long Beach Drive, Big
Pine Key, FL 33043.
("Property")
0
U
2. WHEREAS, the parties desire to forever compromise and settle and hereby
0
C
0
stipulate and bindingly agree to the following:
NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the adequacy of E
which is hereby expressly acknowledged and attested to by the parties, Munt and U)
0
the County hereby agree as follows:
Section 1 - Recitals. The foregoing recitals are true and correct and are hereby `-'
incorporated as if fully set forth herein.
Section 2 - Settlement. The parties have entered into this Settlement
E
Agreement knowingly, freely, and voluntarily, having determined that they have
v)
adequate information upon which to make informed decisions and having decided
that it is in their best interests to amicably resolve this action.
A. Neither party is under coercion or duress. Neither has been forced into
this Agreement or threatened in any way.
2 of 8
Packet Pg. 3490
S.3.ai
B. Neither party knows of any fact or circumstance, which would cause this
Agreement to be void or unenforceable.
C. Except as provided herein, the parties agree that each party shall bear its
own attorneys' fees, costs and expenses arising out of, in connection
with, or related to, this litigation, whether such fees, costs or expenses
0
have been incurred prior to the execution of this Agreement or will be
incurred after its execution.
0
U
D. Munt warrants and represents he has not conveyed the Property or any
2
r_
0
interest therein to any person or entity. Munt agrees to, within thirty (30)
calendar days of the County's approval of this Agreement, convey the E
two above-described parcels over to Monroe County,' such approval )
4-
0
being evidenced in the form of the undersigned Assistant Monroe
County Attorney's executed approval of this Agreement and ratifying
approval by the County's Board of County Commissioners. After the CD
County's receipt and recordation of said Quit Claim Deed,' the County
E
shall within five calendar (5) days thereafter issue and convey unto Munt
v)
a recordable release and satisfaction of judgment ("Release") forever
i Via one Quit Claim Deed conveying Munt's interest in the two above-described parcels to the
Board of County Commissioners of Monroe County, Florida.
2 Upon receipt of the Quitclaim Deed, the County shall promptly move to have the Monroe
County Clerk of Court record said Deed, and the cost of recording it shall be borne entirely by
the County.
3 of 8
Packet Pg. 3491
S.3.ai
releasing him and any other assets, monies, or property owned or held
by him from the County's Final Judgment issued against him in this case
on July 10'h, 2020, in the interest-bearing amount of$2,472,800.00, and
from any award of attorney's fees and costs or deficiency judgment
provided for by or under that Final Judgment ("Final Judgment"). Such
Release shall specifically state that Munt is forever released from said
Final Judgment and from the County's code compliance lien recorded in
0
the Official Records of Monroe County on or about November 3rd, 2009,
2
C
0
at Book 2438, Page 1511, Document Number 1765325 and on or about
October 20', 2011, at Book 2538, Page 1685, Document Number E
1855245. )
W_
0
E. Munt shall have the unilateral right to cancel this Agreement if the
County fails to approve or ratify same prior to the expiration of the time `-'
period for the taking an appeal of such Final Judgment.
Section 3 - Continuing Jurisdiction. The Court shall retain jurisdiction of
this case for the sole purpose of enforcing the terms of this Settlement Agreement.
v)
Section 4 - Good Faith. These settlement negotiations have been
undertaken by the parties in good faith.
Section 5 - Choice of Law; Governing Law; Jurisdiction; Venue. This
Agreement is not subject to arbitration and shall be governed by, and construed
4of8
Packet Pg. 3492
S.3.ai
and enforced in accordance with, the laws of the State of Florida, and venue for all
claims, controversies, or disputes relating to this Agreement shall remain in the
Circuit Court of the Wh Judicial Circuit in and for Monroe County, Florida.
Section 6 - Binding Effect. It is agreed and understood that this Settlement
Agreement shall be and is forever binding upon the parties, including their
0
successors-in-interest.
Section 7 - Construction of Agreement; Divisions and Headings.
0
U
Captions and paragraph headings, where used herein, are inserted for convenience
2
r-
0
only and are not intended to descriptively limit the scope and intent of the
particular paragraph or text to which they refer. E
a�
Section 8 - Inconsistency, Partial Invalidity, Severability, and Survival
4-
0
of Provisions. If any condition, provision, reservation, restriction, right, or term of
this Agreement, or any portion(s) thereof, is/are held to be invalid or unenforceable
by any administrative hearing officer or by a court of competent jurisdiction, the
invalidity or unenforceability of such condition, provision, reservation, restriction,
E
right, or term, or any portion(s) thereof, shall neither limit nor impair the operation,
v)
enforceability, or validity of any other condition, provision, reservation, restriction,
right, term, or any remaining portion(s) thereof. All such other conditions,
provisions, reservations, restrictions, rights, terms, and remaining portion(s)
thereof shall continue unimpaired in full force and effect.
5 of 8
Packet Pg. 3493
S.3.ai
Section - InLegration. This Settlement Agreement constitutes the entire
ee ent y representation or understanding of y n preceding the ate
of theparties' written final approval of this Agreement not specifically and
expressly memorialized herein is not binding on either of the parties except to the
extent that it has been specifically and expressly memorialized in this Agree et.
Non-Reliancey Third-Parties. No non-signatory person(s)
or entity(ies) shall be entitled to rely upon any conditions, provisions, or terms of
0
this A_ ee ent to enforce or to attempt to enforce any third-party claim(s) or
2
C
0
entitlement(s) to orbenefit(s) from any conditions, provisions, or terms hereunder.
Section - Execution in Counigrnarts. The parties acknowledge and
agree that this Settlement Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts,
0
each counterpart shall be considered original portion of this Aggeement, and all
of which shall constitute a single instrument.
Section - Effective Date. Once fully and finally executed by Munt and
e County, this Agreement shall be considered legally effective and forever
binding on the parties.
i es o. 1 (Print Name Ha Harold ( i tore)
Witness No. 1 (Signature)
6 of 8
Packet Pg. 3494
S.3.ai
''� 0, k
s��
Witness No. 2 (Print e)
Witness No. 2 i a e)
MOWE OF r
V M-
e foregoing Settlement Agreement, was acknowledged and attested before me
is ay of July 2020, of eit t, who is personally known to me
or produced as proof of identification i e
an oath.
0
Notary Public (Print Name) C
,17
Public i
0
2
CD
2
remainder i s been intentionally e
7of8
Packet Pg. 3495
S.3.ai
ON BEHALF OF PLAINTIFF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA:
Peter H. Morris Date
Assistant Monroe County Attorney
FBN: 104101
Morris-Peter((LMonroeCo nty-FL.,gov
Monroe County Attorney's Office
1111 12th Street, Suite 408
Key West, FL 33040 0
Telephone: 305-292-3470
Telefax: 305-292-3516
MONROE COW ATTonNEY
APP
,RON,rc; TO FORM
�.
PETER MORRIS
ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY
Date.
CD
2
8 of 8
Packet Pg. 3496
S.3.b
BEFORE THE COUNTY COO!ENFORCEMENT BPKW MAGWMTE
INGNME COUNTY,FLORIDA
MONROE COUN7Y�FLORIDIfr } Comm Now CB r_-._....,,._—. - .__._
}
ve. )
Bu Pmwq Red BNMeHum,w,,
311 �--
F110d a mmorldod in ofdlolal R000rs yr
- H Y L. XOLHAGg
d�gaL ) DwaM allem
s 24.7E Po 1911
FINAL OW9l
Hevbq 0*coeakered the eddana p umW at hmft,badudbg IMIYIwny of the Code Errkmeeeaa Inspecloo(s)mmolkirwIlnmumunderaWk the IbAoalnB
Findings of Fad and CondlWro of Law am ORDERED:
The R k"tad R aati d �eebRo_nil
l arml 0Aff4j2opWdW to YW#kc4o)set koth In to Noft d Vbk§wJNdm of Hm*G which Is bmrpmetad hreb a d W wd brh
(l�la I(a)talam hha wwar(el dpmpwry rdSfn tdmava rid brl'g ohihaiwri�.TTw s) +ere b+dohtlon d
ho Ceunly Coda(s)as lush am ftm to da Woo*d wbkNNAM d Mae"Rod In ftbr OW WW 08WAAK to SPdW 10107 at RONA U111111011 00ftl eh an
*mum to be d to 00AM of d am revied Act Ba of to Imo d and kwmdp&q two mow.Cob
ml conwwe to owto vadt convorom IN amf Furth the R )BW cwn*m0h fto,COW#)mloamd ID In Oho NaOao d
VloisfimOloilm at Nowirg on o r bakm E E DAMT
(w4 e.end Bn*kftn(al*am or am rM an TW COMPLIANCE DATE PREMUSLY ORDERED or an THE CtlNp oce DATE sarr FORbH
HMO,Ir e)in Orel at.
"
- 1 -1 Pao
v
�.
for each day bgbnlno an THE DAYAFM THE COWLIANCE DATE Od On RaapmdaM(e)Islam In vlddbn Wem h al"ORDERED.
( )•ns tlme titer d I® —,,,,,,,,, Is ORDERED,and the condlln audnB the*kdon(e)In bhmd to pa mmil a Bueat b the
*6 huM,ealdy and well m.It Is bhthar ordehad,Itwt Nw Cmmty Is hw*y nAhodaed to make all namable mpabe which we m WW b WE Nw pmpoty Nhb u
compliance erd dams be mope denge)with coat of mpdm Wudtg edmedvbWhv maiw y of to coeb of poeenNhg Bad Irnnalplbq bM MOW, O)
0
( )TM Fhaoporhdard(e)Idem otdwsl b aOohM a aomplY hawhq b taller a 20_,
0
l I
_.. PER WAUNR2"ll MAN ODLE WA: -
In Bra mod of non ____ all Iba end aera tnWmW an Fl epondoft■cmAW copy af dit Order may be nmmwdW In On public meetft end oholl
dwooftvaoeaBttb a Naa agabwf Oa Fend on etb sh the eldoikn or Adibne o M Cad upon any odw rW or pwoad properly oomd by Bm Aol*t.
The Counfy may bwNhrla FarWeewe promm"s N Bra Beer mmd w unpdd far U manft Ploome_ moue d=M pgmbie to Nomaa Coo*Code
nd a and tar� rd,Anree Cam*Cob Enbroaan m: oFBw LWaear lhU Oaemaoa May,Bulb 330, _ FL 33M E
( )The Rm po&"s)woo in vlalallon d the MONROE COUNTY Codop)a hEF ad fadh In So Noft d ViolaMOM7e1a d Hawing fad In it&aw and did not
Come Into cwVUw a an or bdme THE COMPLIANCE DATE huh are now In compliance.The daeaa)00 pert ft tolal mnoA of Wit ard"Anon
b Mantua County Code EnbhamwhwNin tlhhlp(30)days d Ordw.
4—
( 1
DATEONo r�Ul dsy—POI 35e -;EnL"VN( +y
ty
M b
AFPT�LPROCET)URE67 + Yk , Maw
Reepalidenf(e)elwil have 30 dalw Naln fin dono d the f OnW of der to a by filing■NW-d Apprd,iWW M
tha Reepaulonf(o). ANY AODRIEVED PARTY,INCLUDING MONROE I AY HAVE AFFLU,ATL RIGHTS WffH REGARD TO THIB ORDER W
PURWAW TO N 1BT:11,FL A STA AMY SUCH APPEAL } 86 WITTED TO APPELLATE REYM OF THE RECORD CREATm
0UOU THE WIMU TE.ANY tNE RUM+tV"CIRCUIT MWWM030 DAYS OF THE ERECUTW N OF TM ORDER �
�(�T1FfiCATE 0€ H
I Iwreby soft OW Wa is a bue al at rvw oidal and w a t ao ryy hav tsowh llvntvned b aw e)rullaT Aulmrbd
R hvo ' lr :_..:p to addtaaa of recand with der Cvu*Rppmly AppaiWo Ofto on ft &Y of
Nomw C
OFF%C%AL RECOW
T'T# NT
Packet Pg. 3497
S.3.b
Oc # 18.1L101Z91all 91050
NROE COUNTY DANNY L, KOL cordsof
■ TH■COUNIYODDi T�iTI glad ��rdad In Oiftwal ft�o
[COUIRY,PL
Cw■aC1-
3
we. 1
f�eaa 171E 11/Sa/ 9:
PpAad Ra Nao®r"d in Q(tJ*Aal farare, 0/
TY DANNY L. KOLKW
Y 17ad3n
■lat 2436 Pa 1111
HerMq AAIf w _ a1 - dlhe Cade _ y eedlow urker weM,IM
kT oTfwdord d3,ww
The R* hftfWR
Dte : r(4I eM bAr b 1oe +� ra} wadi r Rnoorpartd hgeYr 1 fwy rwaYt.
(t�" 01 f+a }d 41 Cawry end litl d dow Tyr e] r h a �
Dw Nm. 0-*Cod*)ev fitly 00%rM In d of _ fiad Indbomen w4pumait ID Won WX of in on
000 rD le e1 Da w4WO of DO as fw ter d Me onto d pw a*1 and ft ID Cad
wo w■wwla tow we wnd ! Da a oy etd m*so ow whned 0 In 1M No"a
Dn of Memnon or behm COWt,4Wii DAM.
(VIO' mn wr IM Not (t)am m w not moodod oo INS C ■CAT11 PREVIOUSLY 0111111041RED or on THE CONPIAWCA CATE SIT FORTH
HERBN,frw(y fn Diw o
s ild
Doc# 1855245
Bk# 2538 Pg# 1685
0
br each dey wn M DAY TM• R1 MT§Md 1a ra*y ORDERED.
( )4on*tWwfMqf1_ h ORM0,oW to Dw *4 M Yaund Io pupw a end to Sop
puldn hWh,to"wd w6M.14 bOw ovival,Ili Dow Coxq r W mob d m000noliio rqwft uft w In airy Da _ r,d
end c jVMe ewwt(e(WON owMd IM&&V o"neitWx MOMY or*0 OM of Moomillingund : ft m0wr.
( The o►rV.MWW to awmoan=AW#Wwhmft In InWor 20
in on.went dwprfmvd of Iew and Im w 4ww A(,a WNW an d tide opoin,wq immoviow In Ire pubb ad ohm
ao a lee a■eirM 1M Ywwd ew 11M MerleNerr enrtw eeYrR eed athee rea ar P h■re wf
The County neP kw#bft twookem P qp R on_■w RMWM WOW In -_ Flow meta 41owelio b CmwIT Cede
EnkronooM and adl le:' Coop Wavanwo.Aft Onow off VON Oovivom Noyt,Idb3U f1T
( )TW %)w*loybiodmotwk NROGCOUftfl:'eki*o)wAaywo lltiiow d ai ftft Rod Inftcowo and dMnot
ooww wre comgrww an or 4Wn TH2 90WUANCI OATS:hd we,now In w0limm ft Ropoixionlo)Md W the bbl enrplr0 wt ow vo&W onn 2
- tomomocmm coo 1 ' rlggdegrwdldt
DAM" dya
Aa'aWAMW - ...
R000Xwe"o)*A hove 11 dry.Ewer fhe deb of Ib fwepinl Order of We AWN momoaveii,ww `
the w�. AN nderdjY AOORIEVED PARRY,INCLUDW4 COUNTY,YAy HW■Af TE pXHT■MTN a=t0 TN{I O
PBEFORE TWO 1PICNL I GWRAIVE A Y RW
ANY AfPEK MUD fl WWA MWW COW ]0 DAYI Of THI &no%Of TN' OROM -�
.._ „
C ^rtifl.� � No
hereby wwlf f ow We It w wu t w nWrd Ne wW thdelb na wwneA Yew:hr copy has mYhed Io w
Comely PM" o OMm wn w
iO
ppgyHf Terr
^
4PPTItL Rt -U4WWWWWAUW CWUAW r
13 MONROE COUNTY
OFFICIAL RECORDS
Packet Pg. 3498
S.3.c
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 16""C JUDICIAL
CIRCUIT IN AND FOR MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA
CAST,NO.: 201 h-CA-330_K
MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA.
a political subdivision of the State of Florida,
Plcrintr`ff Counter-Defendant;
v. w
HAROLD KE1TH MUNT,
0
Defindanll(.'otinlei Plaint ff.,
FINAL JUDGMENT
THIS CAUSE was tried by the Court, Senior Judge James M. Barton 11 presiding, on
November 14, 2019. Attorneys for the Plaintiff and Defendant presented witness testimony and
other evidence to the Court during the trial as well as written closing arguments, submitted by
the parties on,Tune 15, 2020.
The Court, being fully apprised of all the factual circumstances and the legal issues at
0
issue, males the following: >
FINDINGS OF FACT
Plaintiff Monroe County, Florida("the County") filed this action against Defendant
Harold Keith Munt ("Munt") to enforce its code enforcement lien. Munt owns the subject real
property and unfinished structure (residence), located at 1238 Long Beach Drive, Big Pine Key,
Monroe County, Florida. The County issued a building permit in 1998 which was twice '-
extended. Munt also received in 1998 a development allocation required by the state of Florida
and governed by Monroe County's Rate of Growth Ordinance ("ROGO"). In 2008, the County �
inspected the incomplete structure and found deficiencies which, after administrative
proceedings, resulted in the filing of a lien and this lawsuit. The County seeks injunctive relief, a
lien foreclosure judgment, a writ of execution, and monetary damages. Munt's counterclaim
requests a declaratory judgment and quiet title relief.
Packet Pg. 3499
S.3.c
Among the deficiencies revealed by an inspection and photographs taken in 2009 of the
structure on Munt's property are: an incomplete roof, balconies without required railings,
exposed rebar, an unsecured staircase, and several uncovered electrical cables. As a result of the
inspection, the County declared the partially finished structure unsafe, determined that, pursuant
to provisions of the Monroe County Code and the Florida Building Code, Munt's building permit
and allocation had expired and issued a Notice of Violation. The County posted the Notice on the
property and sent to Munt at his declared Ontario, Canada address via certified mail a copy of the a,
Notice of Violation and the notice of administrative hearing. The certified mail receipt, bearing
0
Munt's signature, was returned to the County.
At the scheduled October 29, 2009 hearing before a Special Magistrate, the County
appeared and presented sworn testimony and other evidence supporting the alleged deficiencies
U
contained in the Notice of Violation. Munt did not appear at the hearing. In the final
2
administrative order, signed the day of the hearing, the Special Magistrate found that the
structure was unsafe, indicated that fines of 1,100 per day would be imposed unless the
deficiencies were corrected on or before November 25, 2009, and advised Munt of his right to �
appeal. A copy of the final administrative order was mailed to Munt who did not appeal the final
order. The County recorded a certified copy of the final order and lien in the public records of
Monroe County.
2
In 2010, with Munt having failed to take corrective action, the County scheduled
another hearing before a Special Magistrate to finalize the accumulated fines and its lien. Notice �
of the hearing was mailed to Munt at two different addresses. At the April 29, 2010 hearing, 0
attended by the County but not Munt, the Special Magistrate considered evidence that supported
the requested fine amount and the lien. A final administrative order was executed, and a copy
was mailed to Munt. No appeal was taken. The County filed the instant lawsuit in 2016.
The deficiencies described in the 2009 Notice of violation and the final administrative -
order remained in existence at the time of the November 14, 2019 final hearing in this case. At �
that hearing, witnesses testified that the unfinished building poses a significant safety hazard,
with dangers arising to persons, especially children. from the virtually nonexistent roof, blown
out windows, and lack of guardrails. Witnesses also testified that, while Munt could apply for
and potentially re-acquire the required building permit and ROGO allocation, he has not done
Packet Pg. 3500
S.3.c
so, According to Munt, he suffered a series of personal, financial, and health setbacks which
halted construction of the residence long before it could be completed (Defendant's written
closing argument, p. 3).
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Munt, while not offering evidence challenging the County's conclusion that has
0
unfinished residence constitutes an unsafe structure, raises constitutional and statutory issues in
his written closing argument which, if established, would bar the County's claim for relief and
entitle Munt to the remedies requested in his counterclaim. Each of Munt's legal theories will be
discussed, below.
0
First, Munt, a Canadian citizen, asserts that the County did not obtain personal
jurisdiction over him in the administrative proceedings. thereby prohibiting the County from
obtaining an in per°.scanam judgment against him. 'Specifically, Munt argues that no Florida statute �
allows personal jurisdiction over a non-resident for administrative proceedings. Munt's argument
misses the mark. The County has not acquired an in per°sonant judgment in administrative
proceedings, but has obtained the right to seek a money judgment in this circuit court action. The
2
0.
constitutional minimum contacts requirement is satisfied by virtue of Munt's ownership of real 0.
property in Monroe County. F.S. § 48.193(1)(a)(3) DvCk-O'Neal, Inc. v. Rgjas, 197 So.3d 100 �
(Fla. 5"' DCA 2016).
Second, Munt alleges that he was denied procedural due process based on the
County's failure to send him proper notice of the administrative hearings. The evidence
presented at trial belies Munt's argument. Before the first hearing, the County sent Munt a copy
of the Notice of Violation and the notice of hearing by certified mail. The County received the
return receipt bearing Munt's signature. Prior to the second administrative hearing, the County
nailed a copy of the hearing to Munt at two separate addresses.
Procedural due process requires fair notice which must be reasonably calculated,
under all the circumstances, to apprise interested parties of the pending action and afford them
the opportunity to voice objections and present evidence. l ej)s C'itizensjbr ReAsymnsible Gov't,,
3
Packet Pg. 3501
S.3.c
Inc, v. Florida Keys Aquaduct Authority, 795 So. 2d 940, 948 (Fla. 2001). 1n the instant case,
the above-stated procedural due process standard applicable to notice has been net.
Finally, Munt claims that the County has failed to comply with the requirements
of Chapter 162, Florida Statutes which describe the process by which a county may enforce its
Code provisions. Ile argues, citing F.S. 162.09(3}, that the County failed to record a certified
copy of the order imposing fines and a lien, and that various sections of Chapter 162 require that
two administrative hearings must be conducted before fines may be imposed. a�
Examination of the language contained in F.S. 162.49(3) indicates that, while
0
the final administrative order "nay" be recorded, it is the `'filing" of the order that allows the
County to take appropriate action to collect fines and enforce its lien. Here. the County properly
filed the two administrative orders before initiating the instant lawsuit.
U
The County also followed the procedures imposed by Chapter 162 in securing
r_
the administrative orders challenged by Munt. The Monroe County Code Enforcement Board, e
pursuant to F.S. § 162.06(2), notified Munt of Code violations and sent him a notice of hearing.
At the initial hearing, conducted in conformity with F.S. § 162.07, the Special Magistrate E
considered evidence, found that Munt's partially built residence constituted a safety hazard, and ,
indicated that a daily fine would be imposed unless Munt brought the structure into compliance
by a specified date. At the second hearing, authorized by F.S. § 162.09, the Special Magistrate
0
heard testimony that the existing deficiencies had not been cured and entered an order finalizing
the fines described in the order entered after the first hearing. Munt's complaint that he was
denied the right to present evidence contesting the fines rings hollow, given the fact that he chose 0
not to attend either of the two hearings.
Based on the foregoing, the County has established its right to enforce the lien
against Munt's property. While the County has advanced other arguments in support of its
position, including res judicata, issue preclusion, and Munt's failure to exhaust administrative
remedies, the Court has chosen to considerMunt's defenses and counterclaim on the merits.
RE+'LIEF
4
Packet Pg. 3502
S.3.c
The amount of accrued and unpaid tines contained in exhibits and sworn
testimony is $2,472,800.00 (Trial transcript., p. 112). Plaintiff is entitled to a money judgment
as well as alien foreclosure judgment. Entry of a money judgment entitles the County to a writ
of execution from the cleric of court.
The County's request for injunctive relief poses a more difficult question.
Taking into account all of the pertinent circumstances to determine whether the Court should
exercise its equitable powers and issue an injunction, the Court declines to do so. The Court ,
believes that the County is being afforded other adequate remedies, as outlined above,. which
0
should protect the interests and safety of Monroe County residents. The more than 8 year gap
between the initial inspection which revealed the unsafe condition of Munt's uncompleted
residence and the filing of the instant lawsuit is puzzling. The: passage of so many years
U
undercuts the County"s claim of irreparable; injury and the risk of imminent harm. Moreover, the
2
particular injunctive relief requested (ordering Munt to correct the long-standing structural
defects) is not likely to produce positive results, in light of the fact that for more than a dozen
years Munt has failed to correct the defects in his partially built residence, despite having been
ordered to do so on multiple occasions.
4-
0
CONCLUSION >
It is hereby ORDERED and ADJUDGED:
1. Plaintiff Monroe County, Florida shall recover from defendant Harold Keith Munt the sum of 0
2,472,800.00 on principal, that shall bear interest at the rate of 6.03 % a year, for which let
execution issue.
2. Plaintiff holds a lien for the total sum contained in Paragraph I of this Judgment on the
fallowing described non-homestead property in Monroe County, Florida:
Lot 34, Long Beach Estates, Section "A" according to the plat thereof of record, as recorded in
Plat Book 5, Page 38, of the Public Records of Monroe County, Florida. Also known as 1238
Long Leach Drive, Big Pine Key, Florida 33043, presently having Property Identification
Number 00317060-000000.
5
Packet Pg. 3503
S.3.c
If the total sums with interest at the rate described in Paragraph 1 of this Judgment are not
paid, the clerk of this court, pursuant to F.S. § 45.031 shall sell the property at public sale on
September 15,2020, to the highest bidder for cash at the courthouse located at 302 Fleming
Street, Ivey `hest, Florida at 11:00 a.m.
IF THIS PROPERTY IS SOLD AT PUBLIC AUCTION, "THERE MAY BE ADDITIONAL
MONEY FROM THE SALE AFTER PAYMENT OF PERSONS WHO ARE. ENTITLED TO
FEE PAID FROM THE SALE, PROCEEDS PURSUANT TO TFIIS FINAL JUDGMENT.
0
IF YOU ARE:A SUBORDINATE LIENHOLDER CLAIMING A RIGIIT TO FUNDS
REMAINING AFTER THE SALE, IF ANY, YOU MUST FILE A CLAIM WITH THE CLERK
U
NO LATER THAN THE DATE. THAT THE CLERK REPORTS THE FUNDS AS
2
UNCLAIMED. IF YOU FAIL. TO FILE A TIMELY CLAIM, YOU WILL NOT BE
EN`ITLED TO ANY REMAINING FUNDS.
3. Plaintiff Monroe County, Florida's request for injunctive relief is DENIED. E
4, On the counterclaim, Defendant/Counterclaimant Harold Keith Munt shall take nothing b
W
this action and Plaintiff/Counterdefendant Monroe County, Florida shall go hence without
day. >
5. The Court reserves.jurisdiction to enter further orders that are proper including,
without limitation, an award of attorney's fees and costs, deficiency judgment, and
writ of possession.
DONE and ORDERED in Monroe County, Key West, this a day of July, 2020. �
Hon. JAMES M. BAR I ON IF"11
,Senior Circuit Court Judge
(,7opie filrnished:
Russell A. Yagel, Esq. C unsel fi)r Lielcndant.,C'oi.inter-Plciintiff
[L-vagel hlylaw.com: velunzaglll..Ylaw.com
Peter II. Morris, Esq., Cminsel.for 1'Icr r2t ff'C o unlera-Dele,ndant Mknr oe ('o uqv, Floricla
[Morris-Peter(cuMonroeC'ounty-FI.f. ; astugue-Laurie'i.l, onroeCounty-FL. ov}
Packet Pg. 3504