Citizen Portal
Sign In

Special master finds owner liable in multi-case dispute but reduces fines amid ownership transfer questions

Citrus County Code Compliance Special Master Hearing · November 20, 2025

Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts

Subscribe
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

After contested hearings over junk, inoperable vehicles and a makeshift fence, the special master found Thomas Smale liable as owner but set modest daily fines and cure periods, citing a recent deed transfer recorded days before the hearing and concerns about shifting liability.

The Citrus County special master heard multiple related enforcement cases against Thomas Smale and determined Smale can be held legally liable as owner, but adjusted penalties in light of an ownership dispute and apparent efforts to transfer responsibility immediately before the hearing.

County staff had requested substantial fines in the repeat-junk matter and high daily amounts for ongoing violations. The special master accepted the county’s authority to enforce but, citing evidence and representations on the record, imposed a retrospective $20-per-day fine for the county’s supplied violation period and set a $10-per-day continuing fine on the junk case going forward. For the inoperable-vehicle and fence cases the special master granted 15 days to abate and set $10-per-day fines thereafter.

The hearing included conflicting testimony about when ownership transferred to the Nashes; the deed recording occurred shortly before the hearing. The special master expressed concern that a deed recording shortly before the hearing raised questions about whether the transfer was intended to avoid enforcement, noting: “I do think there was some misleading of the court” but stated he would still proceed with liability findings for the owner on the record while leaving higher fines possible if the Nashes do not correct violations.

The order treated the cases separately: the junk matter was treated as a repeat violation with higher historical accrual but reduced going-forward penalty; the vehicle and fence concerns received short cure periods. The special master reminded parties of appeal rights and urged the county to pursue cases against the Nashes if compliance is not achieved.