CLEWISTON — Can Hendry County residents be fined for having old cars on their property?

At the regular meeting of the Hendry County Board of Commissioners on Tuesday, March 10, the discussion continued about the definition of what constitutes an “inoperable vehicle."

At the Feb. 24 meeting Planning and Community Development Director Ryan Alexander presented a request to amend Hendry County Land Development Code to insert language that would define what qualifies as an inoperable vehicle. At present, there is no definition written into the code, leaving residents room to argue should they be fined for having vehicles on their property that are not being maintained, and making it difficult for code enforcement to enforce restrictions.

The definition Alexander proposed at the February meeting included four criteria:
(1) Any disassembled or partially disassembled vehicle from which parts, including, but not limited to, the chassis, engine, wheels, or tires have been removed; and/or;

(2) Any vehicle without a valid, current registration and displayed tag; and/or;

(3) Any vehicle on jacks, blocks, or lifts with flat tire(s) or which is otherwise incapable of movement under its own power and will remain so unless major repair or reconstruction occurs.

(4) Does not include farm equipment provided it meets the requirements in F.S. 604.40.

The board did not reach a decision on whether to adopt the amendment at the first hearing and the discussion resumed at the March 10 meeting.

John Clarke, a member of the public, spoke at the meeting in opposition of the proposed definition. “Nearly every property owner currently has at least one car, if not numerous, that will pass this definition,” he stated. He suggested some alternatives to the definition if its purpose was to remove potential “eye sores." One of those suggestions was car covers, provided the grass and surrounding area is well-maintained, explaining that a covered car would lose its distinction to the casual observer making it impossible to tell if the vehicle was operable or not. He also suggested permits that would allow an individual to have a certain number of vehicles based on the size of their property.

“We need to give a strong definition to code enforcement so they can deal with the truly derelict vehicles,” Commissioner Randy Howard said. “There’s two big reasons that we want to control derelict vehicles. One is on the fire hazard side. I can’t tell you how many wildlife fires that I was going in to do structure protection and get behind the house and find that it’s a derelict vehicle that’s actually burning. There’s a fair amount of that in the county. Then on the other side there’s the health hazard. Derelict vehicles end up holding rain water which breeds mosquitoes. You have feral cats and other animals that breed inside those vehicles. At some point it becomes a hazard to the community.”

Commissioner Michael Atkinson once again brought up his previously expressed concern that the suggested definition would inhibit hobbyist from building things such as buggies and race cars or car enthusiast who simply enjoy rebuilding cars on their property.

Alexander explained that currently there is no code stating that a person cannot have any sort of inoperable vehicle on their property but current code for auto salvage and junk yards covers the sort of circumstances that Commissioner Atkinson is worried about. The code states: “Storage of more than three inoperable vehicles constitutes a junk yard. In addition an individual who is restoring, not for profit, a classic or antique vehicle may have three inoperable vehicles parked on his premises in a fully enclosed building or a back yard completely enclosed by opaque fencing as long as they are the same make and model of the vehicle he is restoring.”

In other words, property owners may have inoperable vehicles so long as they fit stipulated criteria.

All present were in agreement that a definition needs to be put in place to clean up the community and prevent fire and health hazards but were still worried that it was too broad a definition.

Alexander said he would take the board’s and Clarke’s comments into consideration and continue to work on defining what constitutes an “inoperable vehicle” and the discussion was tabled until the next meeting.