Deltona magistrate sets deadlines and fines across multiple code and fire‑safety cases

The City of Deltona Special Magistrate on May 27, 2026 reviewed a docket of property‑maintenance, building‑permit and fire‑safety cases and entered multiple findings of violation with deadlines for correction and daily penalties for noncompliance.

The magistrate received testimony and exhibits from city code and fire inspectors and from several property owners or their representatives. The hearing produced repeated outcomes: findings of violation, a short compliance window, and a per‑day fine starting the day after the deadline if problems remain uncorrected.

Actions at a glance: the magistrate found violations and set compliance dates and fines as follows: DE26027 (2113 Laredo Drive) — compliance by June 26, 2026; $50/day fine beginning June 27 if unresolved. DE26025 A–E (241 Fort Smith Blvd) — compliance by June 10, 2026 for counts A, D and E and by June 26, 2026 for counts B and C; $100/day per outstanding violation. DE2619 (1995 Monfort Lane) — fence out of compliance; compliance set for June 26, 2026; $100/day thereafter. DE260001 (2638 N Juliet Drive) — continued $25/day fine (already running) until resolved. DL26030 A–E (Deltona Wellness LP) — repeat work‑without‑permit findings; compliance set for June 10, 2026; $100/day per violation to begin June 11 if not corrected. FIRE‑028‑2026 (1240 Providence Blvd, plaza) — label electrical disconnect; compliance June 26, 2026; $50/day thereafter. FIRE‑030‑2026 (1240 Providence Blvd, Suite 3) — extension cord/ceiling tile issues; compliance June 26, 2026; $50/day per violation thereafter. FIRE‑031‑2026 (1229 Providence Blvd, Suite A) — fixed‑fire‑suppression permit pending; compliance by July 13, 2026; $50/day starting July 14 if unresolved. DE250054 A–C (916 Shorerest Ave) — lien reduction request taken under advisement; order to follow in writing.

Several respondents requested leniency, extra time or stayed fines. Philip Oldberg said financial hardship had delayed repairs; the magistrate denied a stay and reiterated that reduction requests are considered after compliance is achieved, while noting the city’s reduction process remains available once violations are corrected. Property manager Michael Mather asked for 30 days to finish final inspections on commercial tenant work; the magistrate instead set a 14‑day deadline (June 10) but said the additional time was a compromise to allow correction without immediate fines.

In one contested exchange, resident Travis Picker told the magistrate that a permit had been issued and later revoked, leaving him liable for corrective work; the magistrate found the fence out of compliance, set a June 26 deadline and explained the hearing lacks jurisdiction to resolve the separate question of whether the city is financially liable for the cost of repairs. Picker said he had relied on city staff guidance and called the requirement to pay to fix the fence “unfair.” The magistrate replied that the tribunal can determine compliance but not award damages or order the city to pay.

The magistrate noted when violations had been corrected before the hearing (several fire code items and other counts) and repeatedly encouraged property owners and managers to work with inspectors to schedule final inspections and close out permits. Written orders with the formal findings, fines and next steps will be prepared and mailed to respondents. The magistrate adjourned the session after directing staff to circulate draft orders.

Why this matters: code‑enforcement orders impose daily financial pressure meant to prompt repairs that address safety, nuisance, and zoning compliance; the hearings also highlight limits on the magistrate’s power (it can order compliance and fines but not resolve private liability claims).