A new, powerful Citizen Portal experience is ready. Switch now

Special magistrate sets March 18 compliance deadline after city alleges too many unrelated occupants at Port St. Lucie house

March 11, 2026 | Port St. Lucie, St. Lucie County, Florida


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Special magistrate sets March 18 compliance deadline after city alleges too many unrelated occupants at Port St. Lucie house
Special Magistrate Keith Davis found on March 11 that proper notice had been given and that the house at 332 Northwest Dorchester Street was in violation of city occupancy rules after city staff presented inspection photos and investigator testimony.

City testimony described an inspection on Jan. 23, 2026 that showed multiple beds and common‑area sleeping arrangements. A building inspector and law-enforcement follow-up documented between four and six unrelated adults occupying the single‑family dwelling, exceeding the city limit for unrelated persons. A notice of violation was issued Jan. 26 and service of the notice of hearing was completed by posting.

The city asked the magistrate to order the respondents to bring the property into compliance by March 18, 2026. An agency official noted there is no state licensure or reasonable‑accommodation request on file that would authorize operation as a licensed group or recovery residence.

Respondents Maria Asson and Keith Arundel (as stated for the record) were sworn and told the magistrate that several related household members had moved out after the inspection and that the owner subsequently rented to a single tenant. Maria Asson said she and three relatives left the property and that “I moved out 10 days after…I left the place clean, empty with all compliances done.”

Magistrate Davis said he would accept the city’s recommendation and set a compliance date of March 18 to allow the city to re‑inspect and close the file if violations are corrected; he reserved the city’s ability to re‑notice the matter for further proceedings if compliance is not verified.

The magistrate’s order is limited to the enforcement and compliance steps described at the hearing; no fines or other penalties were imposed at the March 11 session pending the city’s inspection on or after the compliance date.

Don't Miss a Word: See the Full Meeting!

Go beyond summaries. Unlock every video, transcript, and key insight with a Founder Membership.

Get instant access to full meeting videos
Search and clip any phrase from complete transcripts
Receive AI-powered summaries & custom alerts
Enjoy lifetime, unrestricted access to government data
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee