[{"_1":2,"_87":-5,"_88":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6536502,"mediaKeyId","3789539-bc4b67da7569110f9da9c53004e2dfe8","parentId",3789539,"title","Special magistrate issues orders, fines and correction deadlines in multiple Wellington code cases","audioSeconds",4181,"startMs",3878000,"endMs",8059000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3789539-bc4b67da7569110f9da9c53004e2dfe8&start=3878&end=8059","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3789539-bc4b67da7569110f9da9c53004e2dfe8/thumbnail_3878000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6536502/Wellington/Palm-Beach-County/Florida/Special-magistrate-issues-orders-fines-and-correction-deadlines-in-multiple-Wellington-code-cases","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6536502-a81bcb2a467f7e628026aa0a167cce53/orig.mp4?Expires=1771134469&Signature=UwWxN0pKO22yWV76QsA0EDPEhgC0SuUgAXVdwrOOW7-Ha4NrYVs9XDCavogYtE-DXho7HeR4kP9D2XJDCO-DvKhcrZG4reD2-6XyqEOSwvxTBoRdQ9XVovPWrt4ElZeOQgpkswprCrqYjaQXFRwyBgY0e-fJcy9CGIXyiWzsrIk5OF4d5jszb7OrZZZaQniHK5yGcGO748JVZZqF0pmqoxuwxyJwlMWynNZnjJtIJzh4DkQPdmP3qcUY1gQCTEo4cNRwIE-pCbXpqRM5qtn9m8-FCNFs4LkbRZ043BtebuvgL-57Hw1q0jOOy1Nf~W3qwqU24rj~3GusZsW8Nes8ag__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Wellington","date","2025-06-12T00:00:00Z","article","The Village of Wellington Special Magistrate heard a series of code‑enforcement cases June 12 and issued findings, correction deadlines, and assessed costs across multiple properties for violations including unscreened garbage cans, overpruned or invasive trees, missing business tax receipts and landscaping deficiencies.

Key outcomes (selected):

- Jian Chang Chen (NOHCC‑4895‑2024, 13892 Folkestone Circle): Found in violation of Wellington Code §13‑3.B.1 (solid‑waste storage not screened). Magistrate imposed $35 per day for each day the violation existed, counting three days (May 22, June 5 and June 9), assessed costs of $46.08, and issued a five‑year cease‑and‑desist order.

- Sydney Pager (NOHCC‑4391‑2024, 11681 Anhinga Drive): Case initially for over‑pruning/‘hat‑racking’ under LDR §7.8.7.c. Magistrate dismissed the hat‑racking violation based on evidence the tree had regrown, but directed staff to send a notice that the tree is an invasive species and must be removed and replaced under applicable ordinances; owner instructed to apply for required vegetation permit within 30 days. Costs of $44.06 were assessed.

- Aaron/Arian Holdings LLC (CC‑1902‑2023): This longer contested BTR (business tax receipt) matter involving equestrian stall rentals was continued for written briefing (see separate article).

- Lisonbee South LLC (NOHCC‑4942‑2024, 14415 Palm Beach Point Blvd.): Found in violation of Chapter 21, Article 2 (business tax receipt). Magistrate ordered payment of the applicable local business tax fee, a 25% penalty of the license due, an additional $250 penalty, and costs of $11.65; a five‑year cease‑and‑desist was entered.

- Multiple landscaping and vegetation cases (selected): Cases for dead fronds, missing mulch, removed trees without permit or overgrown/weeded lawns were found in violation and owners were generally given until July 17, 2025, to correct or face fines up to $25 per day and assessed small administrative costs (commonly $11.65–$13.03). Examples include 14526 Horseshoe Trace (NOHCC‑4424‑2024), 13639 Exotica Lane (NOHCC‑5402‑2024) and 12507 Guilford Way (NOHCC‑1255‑2025).

- Fine certifications: Where previous extension orders were not followed, the magistrate imposed or confirmed daily fines. Examples: Case CC‑4133‑2024 (Fawn and Steven Diage) — magistrate reduced the proposed $25/day fine to $15/day commencing May 16, 2025, based on partial corrective effort, plus $46.08 in costs. Case NOHCC‑4788‑2024 (Stefan Heeman) — a fine of $35/day was imposed for unscreened garbage-cans with $34.43 in costs; the magistrate counted specific days observed in violation.

Magistrate rulings typically included: a correction deadline (commonly July 17, 2025), assessment of administrative costs (usually between $11.65 and $46.08), and a five‑year cease‑and‑desist order. Where property owners had not been reachable, magistrate findings noted failed service attempts and posted notices.

Why this matters: The orders affect property owners across Wellington and emphasize enforcement of landscaping, waste‑storage, roofing and business‑licensing rules. Several cases also flagged the potential for follow‑up fine‑certification hearings if violations are not corrected by the stated dates.

What to watch: Fine‑certification hearings are scheduled for late July–August dates listed in the magistrate’s orders; owners who do not correct violations or who disagree with rulings can seek the legal remedies available under Wellington code and state law.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Wellington - Special Magistrate Hearing on 2025-06-12 9:00 AM - Jun 12, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","At a June 12 special magistrate hearing, Wellington found numerous property owners in violation of local codes — ordering corrections, assessing costs or imposing fines for issues ranging from unscreened garbage cans to tree and landscaping violations.","taxTitle","Wellington, Palm Beach County, Florida","taxId",8863,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6536506,"Wellington magistrate pauses business-tax case, asks parties for legal briefs on farm-product exemption",3843,1399000,5242000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3789539-bc4b67da7569110f9da9c53004e2dfe8&start=1399&end=5242","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3789539-bc4b67da7569110f9da9c53004e2dfe8/thumbnail_1399000.jpg","/articles/6536506/Wellington/Palm-Beach-County/Florida/Wellington-magistrate-pauses-business-tax-case-asks-parties-for-legal-briefs-on-farm-product-exemption","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6536506-29fc1a44ffefd0f9824d523a6de063a0/orig.mp4?Expires=1771134469&Signature=UYb3d5EvTERwEs30CmBcoO3a-RHKfWu2P4Iy8eC0isV8AXreDOqSkAah5joyPBNsGXJFnEQuP~NxjY2ZG1~skl2ilDdbQ66-29N7L4LtiN6Lni27DRlja2e~VM7FmZPDsgdZPekZ73UjwLxv7HIvGvdDdgRgy5OZ2pP0Nd9UC~auvoUMzweeW~Lm6XiN1Btn2NdmoL8GMNFdvW16k0CibxUqKRNGILXQ2cEOpkITXQCIh~01IWBOgzh5oqyH2fNcbh70enFtO4Uw1X7bMq~Oqg6nll4eH3Fp1EeW-VWbX1pk3abLL7rFS1Xlu4xT0oMX23bL3lln7taO~CzNg7Xyzg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Village of Wellington Special Magistrate deferred a final decision June 12 after a contested hearing over whether a property that rents horse stalls must hold a local business tax receipt. The magistrate asked both sides to submit written briefs within 10 days addressing statutory exemptions and other legal authorities before issuing a final ruling.

The dispute centers on case CC-1902-2023, brought by code compliance after a staff-initiated inquiry found a business operation renting stalls at a property on 15000–46 Lane South (listed in the record as a barn/stable). Christopher Prasad, a Village code compliance officer, presented the village’s case and recommended the property be required to obtain a business tax receipt (BTR) and pay any outstanding fees and penalties.

Samantha Candela, senior permitting and licensing technician for the Village, testified she received a phone call in 2023 about businesses in the area and, after checking Village records, found no BTR at the property. Candela said she sent an initial courtesy letter in May 2023 and later a formal notice when no application was received.

Attorney Katie Edwards Walpole, representing the property owner (Arian/Aaron Holdings LLC in the record), argued the rental activity falls within exemptions under state law and that the Village’s later 2024 ordinance clarifications should be considered in context. She questioned whether the Village’s BTR requirement was applied consistently and whether county-level operational permit requirements for animal care and control were being conflated with Village licensing.

The Village called senior staff including Samantha Candela and Tim Stillings, the Village planning, zoning and building director, who said the Village amended its BTR code through Ordinance 2024‑13 to clarify that rental activities — including equestrian stall rentals and other rental properties — should be treated as permanent business locations for licensing purposes. Stillings said the change addressed recurring confusion among applicants and staff about how rentals are classified.

Property owner Maria Aurora Rangel de Alba testified that she had rented stalls on a limited, informal basis and told the magistrate she had been unable to rent consistently since a nearby manure-processing operation began operating. Rangel de Alba said that issue had prompted litigation against the neighboring business and that she had lost rental income; she told the magistrate, “since then it's been hell for me.”

Counsel and staff debated the applicability of several Florida statutes during cross-examination: Florida Statutes §205.064 (farm-product exemptions to local business tax), §823.14 (definition of farm product), and §604.5 (exemption for certain farm structures from the Florida Building Code and local code/fees). Magistrate rulings during the hearing noted that §205.064 exempts sales of farm products but does not clearly encompass rental of stalls. The magistrate also observed that §604.5 relates primarily to construction and building-code exemptions and does not by itself remove tax or licensing obligations.

After extended argument, the magistrate said she would not decide the exemption question on the record that day. She instructed both sides to file concise written briefs within 10 days pointing to the specific statutory or ordinance authority they rely upon and to attach the statutory text or other exhibits they cite. The magistrate said she would review the briefs and issue a written ruling and explained the submission process and format for the briefs.

Pending that ruling, no fines or formal license penalties were imposed at the hearing. The magistrate left the underlying notice of violation on the docket and scheduled further administrative follow-up as needed.

Why this matters: Wellington’s equestrian industry includes many private and commercial barns; how the Village interprets state exemptions and applies local licensing could affect dozens of property owners and the local licensing regime.

What’s next: Both sides must submit written briefs within 10 days to the magistrate, who will issue a written ruling after reviewing the materials.

","During a contested hearing over whether equestrian stall rentals require a Wellington business tax receipt, the special magistrate deferred a final ruling and ordered both sides to submit written legal explanations within 10 days on statutory exemptions cited by the respondent.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Special magistrate issues orders, fines and correction deadlines in multiple Wellington code cases

Wellington magistrate pauses business-tax case, asks parties for legal briefs on farm-product exemption