Loading...
CLB Minutes 09/20/2000 RSeptember 20, 2000 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE CONTRACTORS' LICENSING BOARD Naples, Florida, September 20, 2000 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Contractors' Licensing Board, in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m. in REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRPERSON: Gary Hayes Walter Crawford, IV Les Dickson Bob Laird Carol Pahl Sara Beth White NOT PRESENT: Daniel Gonzalez Richard Joslin Arthur Schoenfuss ALSO PRESENT: Patrick Neale, Attorney for the board Robert Zachary, Assistant County Attorney Thomas Bartoe, License Compliance Officer Bob Nonnenmacher, License Compliance Officer Paul Balzano, License Compliance Officer Page I AGENDA COLLIER COUNTY CONTRACTORS' LICENSING BOARD DATE September 20, 2000 TIME: 9:00 A.M. ADMINISTRATION BUILDING COURTHOUSE COMPLEX ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO, AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THAT TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. I. ROLL CALL II. ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS: Ill. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: DATE: August 16, 2000 NEW BUSINESS: 1. Norman J. Jagielski - request to qualify 2n~ entity. 2. Bradley M. Harger - request to be approved with grades from Broward County, not the same test offered by Collier County. 3. Clifton Lockhart - request to qualify 2nd entity with Drywall & Plastering licenses. 4. Sandra Stiger - request to obtain excavating license with 1 hour administration exam only taken in 1986. (3 hour exam for excavating is required now) 5. Thomas R. Williams - regarding grandfathering for pond and paver installation licenses, wants full paving license. 1. 2. VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS: Vllll REPORTS: IX. DISCUSSION: X. NEXT MEETING DATE: OLD BUSINESS: Bob Dunn - request to get restricted license for General Contractor. Mike Rowen - request to reinstate painting license without re-testing. October 18, 2000 September 20, 2000 CHAIRMAN HAYES: I want to call to order Collier County Contractors' Licensing Board, 9:00 a.m., September the 20th. Any person who decides to appeal a decision of this board will need a record of the proceedings pertaining thereto and, therefore, may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes that testimony and evidence upon which an appeal is to be based. I'd like to start with roll call to my right. MR. LAIRD: Bob Laird, public member. MR. CRAWFORD: Walter Crawford. MR. DICKSON: Les Dickson. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Gary Hayes. MS. PAHL: Carol Pahl. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Do we have any delitions (sic) -- additions or deletions to the agenda? I'm just trying to get it out in one word. MR. BARTOE: Good morning, Mr. Chairman, board members. For the record, I'm Tom Bartoe, Collier County licensing compliance officer. Under new business, Item No. 5, Mr. Williams. Besides what is already written there, at his request, he's also requesting a hearing on a second citation that was issued to him August 28th. CHAIRMAN HAYES: So are we going to put him under public hearings? MR. BARTOE: I think it's good where it is. Just add the hearing, which was not on there. MR. NEALE: But it will be a public hearing, for purposes of the -- CHAIRMAN HAYES: It will be a public hearing. Very well. MR. BARTOE: Also, under old business, Item No. 1, Mr. Dunn, you can delete that item. (Ms. White enters boardroom.) MR. BARTOE: If the board has any questions in regards to that item, I think Mr. Neale or Mr. Zachary can answer your questions. MR. DICKSON: Can we do away with the paperwork? Will it come back up? MR. BARTOE: I'm sorry? MR. DICKSON: Do we need to keep the paperwork? MR. BARTOE: On Mr. Dunn? Page 2 September 20, 2000 MR. DICKSON: Yeah. MR. BARTOE: No. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay, for the record, I want to show Sara Beth White has made it to our meeting. Any other deletions or additions? I need a motion to approve the agenda. MR. DICKSON: So moved. Dickson. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I have a motion. I need a second. MS. PAHI.: I'll second it. MR. LAIRD: Second. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I have a motion and two seconds. MR. LAIRD: I'll withdraw my second, Mr. Chairman. CHAIRMAN HAYES: All in favor? Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN HAYES: Very well. Approval of last month's minutes. We have them of August 16th. I assume everybody's read them and concurs. MR. DICKSON: Yeah, I see they got big print for Mr. Nonnenmacher. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I need a motion for approval. MR. DICKSON: Dickson, so moved. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I need a second. MR. CRAWFORD: Second. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I have a motion and a second. All in favor? Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay, under new business, I'm not quite sure how to pronounce that. Norman J. Jagielski, request to qualify second entity. Are you here, sir? MR. NEALE: Jagielski. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Jagielski. MR. DICKSON: I got his picture. He isn't sitting out there. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Perhaps he'll come in later. Before we get out of new business, we'll call it again. No, that's not him. Bradley M. Harger, request to be approved with grades from Broward County. Are you here, sir? Page 3 September 20, 2000 MR. HARGER: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Would you come up to the podium, please. I'm going to have to ask you to be sworn in. Good morning. (Speaker was duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN HAYES: Good morning, sir. Your name, for the record. MR. HARGER: Bradley M. Harger. CHAIRMAN HAYES: And your reason for being here this morning? MR. HARGER.' I'm trying to move from the Broward County area to Chokoloskee Island. I've been in business in Fort Lauderdale and worked Broward, Palm Beach and Dade counties for the last 14 years. I do hold a license in Broward for rough carpentry, carpentry framing, concrete placing, concrete finishing, steel placing, and the general concrete construction area. I have filled out all the application process with the county, the licensing department. We did compare test scores, and I -- on October 19th of 1991, I -- the examination I took in Broward was a 76 percent was the score that I received on that test. You'll find that if you do have my application in front of you, that the ladies from the building department said that you would have all that. There's attached letters of recommendation and so forth for that thing. And I also have an extra letter here, if I could give that to the board, if you need it. The thing, to bring it in front of the commissioners, was they were requesting a comparison grade score from the testing company which I took the test from in Broward back in 1991. The only thing that I really had a problem with was -- and I have this letter here, and I have one for everyone. How many do I need? MS. PAHL: Six. MR. HARGER: Six? What the letter states is the comparison takes nine to 12 weeks for the results, and another fee of $175. And I thought that with my years of experience in the construction business, the idea is to move to Chokoloskee. I already have a home there. And I wanted to bring my family to Collier County and make this my residence. So I'd like to work and stay in Collier. Page 4 September 20, 2000 CHAIRMAN HAYES: What did this test consist of? MR. HARGER: The test consisted of -- it was a three-hour, I believe, 50 or 60-question examination. It went over some construction aspects of the specific trades. And then it also has a business law part to it, which teaches you how you're supposed to know how to comply with the law with your Social Security contributions as an employer, your Unemployment Compensation taxes, Medicare, Medicaid contributions and stuff like that as an employer in the State of Florida. MR. CRAWFORD: How is that different from our test? MR. HARGER: Pardon? MR. CRAWFORD: How is that different from our test? Do you know? I don't know. MR. HARGER: Not really. They offer the same exam in Collier County. It's a three-hour, 60-question exam. And it's just -- I really had a beef with the $175 and the nine to 12 weeks. I think that's -- CHAIRMAN HAYES: If I'm not mistaken, in the past I don't believe we've had reciprocity with Dade and Broward counties. MR. NEALE: Well, he's not really looking for reciprocity here. He's making a new application. CHAIRMAN HAYES: That's correct. But even at the fact that new application, I believe we still reciprocate~ or have been with a lot of the other counties in the state. But Dade and Broward has not been one of them. They've generally had a different testing structure and a different licensing structure. MR. NEALE: True. What our ordinance says as far as examiners goes is in Section 22-185. It says that the approved examiner for the purpose of administering proctored exams is experior (sic) in any other testing agency with comparable testing standards, recognized and approved throughout the State of Florida, and also approved by the Collier County's Licensing Board. What this -- to my interpretation what this says is this board could determine that this examination by National Assessment Institute is an equivalent examination to the Collier County exam and permit this score to be accepted. He did reflect a score above this minimum 75 percent that is required here in this county. MS. WHITE: Is this the only issue we're looking at is just the Page 5 September 20, 2000 MR. DICKSON: No, I can tell you that right now. MS. WHITE: This is a new application; is that correct? So also we're looking at credit reports? MR. NEALE: ¥eah, it's a full new application. MS. WHITE: Which I have even more of a question about. And your company's been in business since '92? MR. HARGER: Yeah, I believe we were incorporated in '92. MS. WHITE: But the credit report has no record of any business being carried on. MR. HARGER: We-- MR. BARTOE: I have a question. I'd like to know the test that Mr. Harger did take, what does it have to do with concrete form, place and finish? Because he's attempting to get two licenses, carpentry and concrete forming and placing. MR. HARGER: If you'll look in our letter of recommendations that are attached with some of the affidavits, you'll see that our work as subcontractors or general contractors shows that there's a broad range of carpentry work. Not only carpentry framing, roof trusses and sheathing, you have concrete formwork which you actually do the concrete formwork and place the concrete in the said forms. CHAIRMAN HAYES: That may be true, but I do believe that we have two separate licenses for that. MR. HARGER: I believe one is a concrete place and finish. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Right, and one is a carpentry. MR. HARGER: One is a carpentry. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Which one are you asking for? MR. HARGER: Well, I would like both of them. But I'd be happy with one. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay. And your exam that you said you took back in '91, what was on that exam besides the business -- MR. HARGER: That exam, that's culled out in Broward County, and I have my license here, I don't have copies for everyone, but it says it's a specialties builder. It's rough carpentry and formwork. Rough carpentry would fall under roof trusses, framing, geez, basically roof trusses, framing, interior framing, exterior framing. Then the formwork goes with the concrete formwork, which is also a type of framing work for -- to place concrete in the forms. Page 6 September 20, 2000 CHAIRMAN HAYES: I would have thought that the license as it is worded, rough framing and formwork, is basically just that, rough framing as it relates to forming, concrete forming. I know that in bridge work, some commercial work, that there's an awful lot of wood framing involved to frame up or form up for concrete. In no way have I ever realized that just because you can form it up means that you understand the concrete substance and the finishing itself. Perhaps in Broward they figure it's all one thing. But I would say that you either have one discipline or another. You're either a concrete finisher, in which case you're a concrete finisher. Or you're a framing carpenter, in which case you're not a concrete finisher. MR. CRAWFORD: Mr. Chairman, the license as we have it reads concrete forming and placing, which would contradict what you just said. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay. MR. CRAWFORD: And then that would allow you to form it -- MR. HARGER: And place the concrete. MR. CRAWFORD: -- and place it. We also have a license that reads concrete place and finish, which I guess would only allow you to place the concrete and finish it. So if we do give him his license, it would include the forming and the placing. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Well, that's correct. But what I'm saying is that it's not a framing carpenter's license either. MR. CRAWFORD: Correct. CHAIRMAN HAYES: That's what I'm trying to separate. MR. NEALE: Well, the problem I think, if I can -- is the license as stated in the letter from Broward County states that he is a rough carpentry contractor. The problem is we have a carpentry contractor license and we have a concrete forming and placing ¢ontractor's license. It appears from the references that the primary -- the majority of Mr. Harger's work was in concrete forming and placing -- MR. HARGER: Yes. MR. NEALE: -- during his experience. CHAIRMAN HAYES: That's exactly what I see. Mr. Zachary? Page 7 September 20, 2000 MR. BARTOE.' If I may, they are two completely different tests. CHAIRMAN HAYES: That's exactly right. MR. ZACHARY: Mr. Chairman~ I've got a question for Mr. Harger, if I might. Robert Zachary, county attorney's office. Mr. Harger, are you working now in Ghokoloskee? MR. HARGER: Yes. MR. ZACHARY: Have you been in contact with the Code Enforcement Board down there? MR. HARGER: Yes~ I have. MR. ZACHARY: Okay. You want to tell the -- MR. HARGER: Well, what happened was -- MR. ZACHARY: - board about that? MR. HARGER: - a friend of mine had some -- he wanted to do some repair work to his home, and we actually did the work for the owner. And code enforcement did come by. And I have complied with code enforcement. That's why I'm here today. The idea was just to help Mr. Johnson with his house. And code enforcement came by just a couple of days later. We complied with code enforcement. We did -- we have -- we are in the permitting process right now. And that is why I am here for my license. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay. At that time -- MR. ZACHARY: Those citations have been taken care of then? MR. HARGER: Those citations are currently being taken care of. They have not come full circle yet. But we do have an engineer -- or Mr. Johnson has retained an engineer, and we have stopped work on the project. MR. ZACHARY: Okay. CHAIRMAN HAYES: All right, my concern there is twofold. One, you say that you were cited. Were you cited for code violations? MR. HARGER: We were cited for -- I thought that I was working for Mr. Johnson as the homeowner. Mr. Johnson paid me in a payroll check. So I considered that I was working directly for him. I have talked with code enforcement a bunch of times. Dennis Mazzone is the code enforcement inspector, and we have spoke a bunch of times on this issue, and we're trying to get this Page 8 September 20, 2000 thing cleared up with the owner, code enforcement and the county. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay, my concern, Mr. Harger, is you are operating as an unlicensed contractor. Were you cited for that? MR. HARGER: Yes. CHAIRMAN HAYES: So you have two citations. MR. HARGER: Yes. I didn't -- the way I understood it is I was working for Mr. Johnson. I was not contracting. I come to Chokoloskee to fish. Mr. Johnson asked me if I'd help him with his deck. I said sure. We worked there a couple of weeks and that was it. We've stopped the work. MR. DICKSON: Mr. Harger, if you're a licensed contractor in Broward County, you know better than that. MR. HARGER: Well-- MR. DICKSON: And every one of us up here on this board aren't going to fall for that. MR. HARGER: Okay. We didn't -- I didn't look at it as a contracting thing. Mr. Johnson ordered all the materials. We weren't -- we didn't have a lump sum for the project or anything like that. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Was there a permit on the job? MR. HARGER: No, but the permit is in for permitting right now. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay, no permitting, so you got caught, so now you're in for a permit. No license, so you got caught, so you're in here for a license. And code violations because you didn't have a permit to begin with. MR. HARGER: Yes. MR. DICKSON: And we haven't even touched the credit problems, which there's nine write-offs as late as June of this year, and there's two that have been placed for collection as late as May of this year. Mr. Chairman, I'm ready to make a motion. CHAIRMAN HAYES: That's your privilege. MR. DICKSON: I move that the request to accept this other test be denied, and that Mr. Harger follow present Collier County laws in gaining a license in this county, which would include testing and filling out new applications. MS. WHITE: Second. Page 9 September 20, 2000 CHAIRMAN HAYES: further discussion? All in favor? Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN HAYES: the rules. I have a motion and a second. Any It's unanimous, sir. You need to follow Next item, Clifton Lockhart, request to qualify second entity with drywall and plastering licenses. Are you here, sir? MR. LOCKHART: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Would you come up to the podium, please. I'm going to have to ask you to get sworn in first. (Speaker was duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN HAYES: Good morning. Your name, sir? MR. LOCKHART: Clifton B. Lockhart. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Mr. Lockhart, you're here for what reason? MR. LOCKHART: I want to use my license to qualify two separate corporations. MR. DICKSON: I think the better way to put that, Mr. Lockhart, you already qualify one, right? You're just here to qualify a second one. MR. LOCKHART: Second one. CHAIRMAN HAYES: What company do you qualify now? MR. LOCKHART: C&I Drywall. CHAIRMAN HAYES: What's your affiliation with C&I Drywall? MR. LOCKHART: It's a partnership I have. It's kind of a labor-based drywall company that we just started this year. CHAIRMAN HAYES: You just started that company this year? MR. LOCKHART: Yes. CHAIRMAN HAYES: And what's your reason for wanting a second one? MR. LOCKHART: Well~ the other -- my other company that I work with, Absolute Plastering, we've been in business for four years, and I'd like to use my license to qualify that company in Collier County, too. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Both of them your businesses? Page t0 September 20, 2000 MR. LOCKHART: I own 50 percent of C&I Drywall, 30 percent of Absolute Plastering. MR. DICKSON: Do you hold a position in Absolute Plastering as a corporation? MR. LOCKHART: Yes, vice-president. MR. DICKSON: Vice-president. Do you also have check signing privileges? MR. LOCKHART: Yes. MR. DICKSON: Okay. And you're aware of the finances of the company? MR. LOCKHART: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I've got -- I need to know -- I don't see a corporate -- you say you're 30 percent owner of Absolute? MR. LOCKHART: Yes. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I'm going to say that not being the majoral (sic) owner, that I probably need a resolution from that company declaring you -- MR. LOCKHART: It should be in the file there. You don't have it? CHAIRMAN HAYES: I haven't found it yet. MR. NEALE: There's an articles of amendment that makes Mr. Lockhart the vice president of the company. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Being vice president of the company carries with it all those responsibilities required by a qualifter. Is that correct, Mr. Neale? MR. NEALE: Well, it at least makes him an officer of the corporation, so he does have some liability. As to how that complies with the licensure, that's the board's decision. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Why do you really want to do two companies? MR. LOCKHART: Well, Absolute Plastering's a company I've been working with for four years. And I got my own license now. And being the vice president, we're more of a contracting sort of company. You know, we're a multi million dollar corporation, and I'm a 30 percent owner of that. And we usually sub most of our labor out. And my other company, C&I Drywall, that started this year, is like a labor base company, so it gives me a little diversity. And now I'm actually subbing from one of my companies to myself to enable to give a little more control in some property, Page 11 September 20, 2000 too. So I'm looking for some financial gain is basically what I'm looking for. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Mr. Bartoe, does staff have any questions or concerns with this? MR. BARTOE: No, sir, not to my knowledge. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Any complaints? MR. BARTOE: That, I don't know. Mr. Lockhart, has your company ever received a citation from Collier County for contracting without a license? MR. LOCKHART: No. MR. BARTOE: I would just like to add one thing I forgot to say earlier regarding Mr. Lockhart and anyone else whose request might be granted today. You will not be able to come into our office, if your request is granted, and receive your new license until tomorrow, because I have all your paperwork here, and I have no idea what time I'll get it back to the office today. MR. DICKSON: You got a Federal tax lien for $7197 MR. LOCKHART: From 1991 or something. It was paid. MR. DICKSON: Aren't those thrilling people? MR. LOCKHART: Pardon? MR. DICKSON: Aren't those thrilling people? CHAIRMAN HAYES: They are wonderful. MR. LOCKHART: They're a pleasure to work with. CHAIRMAN HAYES: What's the pleasure of the board? MR. DICKSON: I'm just looking at the credit report real quick. Anybody see anything? MS. PAHI.: No. MR. DICKSON: Except for that one thing from our favorite -- MS. PAHI.: Favorite agency. MR. DICKSON: -- favorite bunch, yes. MS. PAHL: Your tax dollars at work. MR. DICKSON: Mr. Chairman, I move to approve the request. His record's clean and his credit report's good. MR. LAIRD: Second. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I have a motion and second. Any further discussion? All in favor? Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN HAYES: Very well, sir, done deal. Page t2 September 20, 2000 MR. LOCKHART: Thank you very much. MR. DICKSON: Only thing I didn't see, insurance. You know you're going to have to -- it wasn't in the packet. I know we -- you ain't going to get that license without it. MR. LOCKHART: Okay. MR. DICKSON: So that's the only thing I'll add to the motion. MR. NEALE: He does have a certificate in the back -- MR. DICKSON: Does he? I'm sorry. MR. NEALE: -- from TMG Staffing Services. It appears that he's leasing his employees; is that correct? MR. LOCKHART: Payroll. MR. DICKSON: Do you have any employees? There's no Workers' Comp on here. MR. LOCKHART: Next page. MR. NEALE: The last page is Workers' Comp. MR. DICKSON: I'm happy. Make lots of money. MR. LOCKHART: Thank you very much. MR. BARTOE: I didn't think office staff would let you have that without the insurance. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Sandra Stiger, request to obtain excavating license with one-hour administration exam only taken in 1986. Three-hour exam required today. Are you here, Ms. Stiger? Any information on this, Mr. -- MR. BARTOE: None. MR. DICKSON: Cool. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I don't know that they need to be present, do they, Mr. Neale? MR. NEALE: I certainly think it's appropriate for the board to have them being present before action. Because you can't take testimony where there's no -- typically this board asks questions as to reasoning and so forth, so -- CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay, we can put that one away. Thomas R. Williams, regarding grandfathering of pond and paver installation license. Are you here, sir? MR. WILLIAMS: Yes, I am. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I need to have you sworn in, sir. (Speaker was duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN HAYES: Your request this morning, Mr. Williams? MR. WILLIAMS: Well, I was here the last board hearing, and Page 13 September 20, 2000 requesting the same thing. I was granted the pond installation license and part of the paver license. But at the last minute or so of our meeting, I was trying to reiterate that I had work in progress as far as pavers were concerned, and that I did specifically need the driver -- I'm sorry, the driveway license, as well as putting pavers in around the yard. Somehow it was eliminated from the license. And the board pretty much abruptly ended the meeting at that time. Those two things I thought very important. Now, in the meantime, I have been cited on the job that I had in progress, prior to our previous meeting, because we didn't have a driveway permit. I was hunting after that meeting for a contractor who would take out the license for me and found one and permitted it and completed the work. But the other purpose I'm here is to eliminate that citation, as well as to get the rest of the con -- I'm sorry, I'm not talking very well this morning -- to get the rest of the license for installing pavers, complete job of pavers, driveway and patios and so forth. Again, at the last meeting you approved everything but driveways. MR. CRAWFORD: As I recall it -- right here. As I recall it, the -- you explained to us that most of your driveways are subcontracted out anyway, and that the small sidewalks and incidentals be picked up as part of your paving package. And that's kind of why we drew the line. MR. WILLIAMS: And they are. However, driveways constitute a pretty good size portion of our business. And I like -- the reason I'm in pavers is that I have the option to install them versus subcontracting them. Simply when my landscape crews are not busy, I'm liable to do that installation myself. And we've done that for years and many, many years. MR. BALZANO: Mr. Hayes? CHAIRMAN HAYES: Yes. MR. BALZANO: If you look at Page 69 of the minutes from last month, specifically Mr. Williams said, I do -- ! don't do a lot of driveways. My work primarily is walkways, patios and small decks. MR. WILLIAMS: Well, I question whether that should exempt me from installing driveways or not. It constitutes 10 percent of our business. That's 300, $400,000 a year. Page t4 September 20, 2000 MR. BALZANO: And if you'll read the following paragraph, you said you sub out 99 percent of the time. MR. WILLIAMS: And that's a fact, we do. MR. BALZANO: I caught you doing a driveway three days after you were in here. MR. WILLIAMS: That driveway was in progress -- MR. BALZANO: Well, you were -- MR. WILLIAMS: -- long before. And prior to our first citation, that driveway was in progress. I had no idea that I was breaking the law installing a driveway like I've been installing for years. This happens to be the slowest portion of my year, and my landscape crews were installing it. But they have tremendous experience at doing so. MR. BALZANO: If I might, I request to get admitted into evidence Collier County building review and permitting Citation No. 0662, which was issued to Mr. Williams for contracting to do this driveway at 5656 Crayton Road. This citation was issued by Mr. Ossorio, and he should be here in a few minutes for any testimony that you would require. MR. WILLIAMS: The address was 3636 Crayton Road. MR. BARTOE: I can't read his writing. MR. WILLIAMS: I think I said that in the letter. MR. DICKSON: Dickson. I move that this be admitted into evidence. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I have a motion. I need a second. I'll second it. MR. CRAWFORD: Second. CHAIRMAN HAYES: All in favor? Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN HAYES: Very well. Did you try to speak? MS. WHITE: Yeah, I do have a question. After our meeting last month, and you knew you weren't supposed to do driveways and then within the next week you were on Crayton, had you already hired somebody to take over that job, or did you in the end hire somebody to take over that job on Crayton? MR. WILLIAMS: When I left this office, I was surprised that I couldn't install driveways. At that moment I began calling and I canvassed every person in the paver business who is licensed in Collier County. I was amazed to find out in the county that there Page 15 September 20, 2000 are like 26 people installing pavers and only five who could install it that particular day, through the licensing board, you know, at the courthouse on Horseshoe. There were only five companies who actually were legitimately installing driveways at that time. I went through those five very quickly and finally found a person who would do it who was licensed. And he finished the installation for me. MS, WHITE: He did finish the installation. MR. WILLIAMS: Yeah. MS, WHITE: But he did not do it until you received the citation; is that correct? MR. WILLIAMS: No. I think he was working at the time when the citation was given. It was, you know, either the day before or the day after. However -- MS. WHITE: So when you received the citation, you had already -- MR. WILLIAMS: Yeah. Well, we had spent -- MS. WHITE: You had already subbed out the work for the driveway; is that correct? MR. WILLIAMS: I'd subbed it out. But I don't know whether he was there installing it at that moment or whether we were. But it was -- MS. WHITE: I think that's a critical issue. MR. WILLIAMS: -- an incomplete project. To clarify, it was an incomplete project that had been in progress for five weeks at that time, first to take out the driveway, then all the pavers had been purchased. You can't just go purchase pavers, you have to have them made or bring them from the other coast, in which takes four to five weeks. The pavers were sitting on the job in the easement in a fairly hazardous situation. I thought that when I came before the board after the first citation that I would be allowed at that point to complete the job that I had already started. And at the end of the board meeting, I was trying to say that when Mr. Hayes ended it and said you've said enough now and that's it. But I thought it was important at that point to clarify that. I don't know whether it would have helped me from getting a citation or not, because I'm very much a pleaser of clients, and Page 16 September 20, 2000 once something is ripped out, like a driveway in a client's home, it's got to be finished, whether I have a contractor there or not, and that's what I was doing at that time. CHAIRMAN HAYES: That's correct, you needed to finish your commitment, there's no question about it. But at this meeting, you were clear on the fact that you couldn't do it. But it didn't hurt you from subbing it out like you have done many, many times in the past. Which after you were caught finishing it up and cited, you hired that subcontractor. MR. WILLIAMS: At or before. I was hunting that -- from the moment I left this pulpit here to -- you know, I -- MR. BALZANO: Mr. Hayes? MR. WILLIAMS: -- I don't know whether they were on the job that day or not, but it was right there. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Mr. Balzano. MR. BALZANO: I was at the site and the people working there work for Tree Wizard. All the equipment there was Tree Wizard's. I shut the job down because there was no right-of-way permit issued by the City of Naples. They had already cut the sidewalk up. They had gone right out to the street. So they started the work without a permit. There might be a license, he was commenced on the job without a permit being issued. Then it was the next day or the day after that that he got a licensed contractor to pull a right-of-way permit with the City of Naples. But the people working there that day we observed the work in progress were all employees of Tree Wizard. I spoke to one gentleman that spoke English, and he said that they were all employees of yours. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Mr. Williams, what stops you from getting a payer's license straight up legitimately? MR. WILLIAMS: I've installed pavers without a formal license and not knowing that there had to be a license up until this very moment. From the day the first truckload ever arrived in Naples I've installed pavers. With landscape crews and with hired crews and subcontracted, and it's always been a part of my work. CHAIRMAN HAYES: What stops you from going ahead and getting a license for it now? MR. WILLIAMS: You. The board. Page 17 September 20, 2000 CHAIRMAN HAYES: No. I'm taking pardon. You can apply for a license and go through the normal due process. MR. WILLIAMS: I don't want to do that. CHAIRMAN HAYES: You don't want to do that. MR. WILLIAMS: I believe that after I've been here this many years in a proven healthy business installing these pavers, that I should be grandfathered in and push that to the absolute limit. Maybe it's just a thing. Rather than to take out a week of my time to read all the information and then another day to go and take the test, there's just a lot more other very productive things I can be doing. And I'd rather be grandfathered. MR. CRAWFORD: Didn't we ask -- MR. WILLIAMS: I think that's my privilege, after doing this -- I feel you owe it to me, you know. That's just the way it is. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay. MR. CRAWFORD-' Didn't we ask that of the other paving contractors that have been doing it since the first truckload came to Naples, to take pause, take the test and keep going? CHAIRMAN HAYES: I think as our industry, construction industry and licensing rules evolve throughout time, they change from time to time. I don't think there's a single individual that carries some kind of a contracting license that hasn't had to do some kind of a modification or evaluation of their licensing practices. Yes, we did that. MR. NEALE: And further, what I could suggest to the board is this board does, subject to a proper application~ have the ability to waive either testing requirement -- waive testing requirements. So if it was this board's pleasure, they could do that, if they got a proper application from Mr. Williams. Not saying that the board would do that or whatever, but that is something that is within the board's power. MR. WILLIAMS: I request that you do that. MR. DICKSON: Let me ask a couple of questions. First of all, the citation, you were wrong, you know you were wrong. MR. WILLIAMS: I felt I had no choice -- MR. DICKSON: No excuse. MR. WILLIAMS: -- but to continue the job. MR. DICKSON: But at the same time I'm sitting here in defense of you. Page 18 September 20, 2000 MR. WILLIAMS: Well, come over here then -- MR. DICKSON: Just listen. That, you know, you've had all these changes. You've been here how long? MR. WILLIAMS: I've been a licensed contractor for 31 years. MR. DICKSON: In Collier County. Your original license was what? MR. WILLIAMS: Landscape construction and irrigation. MR. DICKSON: And irrigation. MR. WILLIAMS: And that encompassed fences, decks, patios, arbors, gazebos, walks, concrete and pavers, stepping stones, asphalt paving, lime rock, rock gravel driveways. And has to this moment included those things, as far as I know. Especially pavers. Again, when the first load came into town, it went to Tin City. The City of Naples, a man named Sandy, who was the manager of the -- the city manager at that time asked me personally would I follow the instructions and help the people at Tin City install them, because they didn't have the knowledge or the installer to put them in. And we at that very time became paver installers. And after that Vernon Allen and many of the other contractors in town hired us for that purpose. MR. DICKSON: I'm curious to get feedback from the county. First of all, put the permit out of it. I'll fight bloody murder for that thing not to be rescinded. He's been here 31 years, he's a licensed contractor, he didn't have a permit. He knew better, there's no excuses. But how do you feel on someone who's here that long and used to it and here we go changing the ordinances? MR. NONNENMACHER: Well, Mr. Chairman, members of the board, for the record, my name is Bob Nonnenmacher, licensing compliance officer. And I'd like to take the opportunity to answer Mr. Dickson on a roof cleaning and painting license. If he started repairing roofs and never got caught and he did that for 30 years, would you consider giving him a roofing license because he did something illegal for 30 years? I think if the board decides to issue a paver's license, it would make a mockery out of our ordinance. It would allow people to come in here and say I've been doing things illegal for 30 years, and I should be grandfathered in. I'm sure I speak for staff, we are strongly opposed to issuing Page 19 September 20, 2000 a license just because someone has been doing it illegally for 30 years. MR. DICKSON: When did we start the paver license? MR. NEALE: 1999. MR. BALZANO: No, no, we changed it -- we have some members of the paving industry here. Maybe they'd like to speak to you -- CHAIRMAN HAYES: Well, that's correct. MR. BALZANO: -- how long they've been in business and what they had to do. CHAIRMAN HAYES: One at a time. Mr. Neale. MR. NEALE: The paving blocks contractor license specifically was added in the 1999 amendments to the ordinance. CHAIRMAN HAYES: But it all -- before that it was included with another license, wasn't it? MR. NEALE: It's my memory that when it was added, and maybe somebody else can correct me, but my memory was it was added because there were a number of firms that had started up who were doing paving contract -- paving blocks contracting only. And it was very -- this board had difficulty in determining what type of license that type of contractor had to have. Was it a paving license, was it a concrete form and finish, what kind of license was it? And so therefore this was added in general to cover those firms that were doing paving blocks contracting only. Because -- and it's my memory that there were some firms who came in and appealed the fact that they were only doing paving blocks, they were not doing pouring of concrete, they were not doing laying of asphalt. And they did not want to have to go and get the full paving license to be able to just put blocks down. CHAIRMAN HAYES: That's correct. MR. NONNENMACHER: But ! believe that was a masonry license. CHAIRMAN HAYES: That's correct. MR. NEALE: That's correct. CHAIRMAN HAYES: That's the point I'm trying to make. It had always required a license to do so. And prior to 1999, you had to have a concrete mason's license to do it; is that correct? Page 20 September 20, 2000 MR. NONNENMACHER: That's correct. CHAIRMAN HAYES: So even prior to 1999, Mr. Williams, when you put in concrete pavers, you're in violation of the county ordinance for licensing. MR. WILLIAMS: Okay. I wish you guys would send letters out when you change rules and laws. At least let it be known throughout the industry, through suppliers or whatever, of this product. I've bought from Hank Krehling since the day he made the first paver and installed it. I'm not a big contractor, I only do it with my landscape work. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay. MS. WHITE: I believe, Mr. Williams, that many industries have to do continuing education. Mr. Neale and Mr. Zachary have to do their CLE stuff, or whatever it is, every three years. And I don't understand why, since the rules are a little different here, you can't go ahead and get your paving contractor's license. MR. WILLIAMS: Well, I have no problem with the education of it. It's just the taking of the time, that's all. It seems that -- I hate to say it, it seems the county owes it to me after doing it this long. MS. WHITE: I'm real concerned about the disregard for what the law is. MR. WILLIAMS: Well, believe me -- MS. WHITE: What you were told. MR. WILLIAMS: -- there's no disregard. MS. WHITE: I'm very concerned about that. MR. BALZANO: Mr. Williams, you're saying that you weren't aware that there was a license to do paving blocks. MR. WILLIAMS: I'm under oath -- MR. BALZANO: But you also knew -- MR. WILLIAMS: -- that's what I said, yes. MR. BALZANO: You knew you couldn't pull a permit to do it. Because if you went to the City of Naples~ they'd want to see your paving license to pull -- MR. WILLIAMS: I've never had to pull a permit for it. I've installed pavers all over the place for years. CHAIRMAN HAYES: And working -- MR. WILLIAMS: Replacement driveway. CHAIRMAN HAYES: -- in the zoned area and not getting a Page 21 September 20, 2000 permit for a driveway that goes through the zoning required areas for elevations, for culverts that needs an inspection, you've never had a permit for that? MR. WILLIAMS: We've always filed for that inspection, had it inspected and the culverts laid out, and the pipes. We installed the pipes. CHAIRMAN HAYES: When you file for inspection, it has to come under a permit; is that correct? MR. WILLIAMS: Never did. Never did. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Never did. MR. WILLIAMS: Never did. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay, Mr. Neale-- MR. WILLIAMS: It's been a couple of years before -- since I've done it, but it never did. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Mr. Neale, aren't we in public hearing? MR. NEALE: Uh-huh. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I think that we have in the audience some gentlemen that would like to speak. Any one of you want to come up and talk at this point, I'd like to recognize you. (Speaker was duly sworn.} CHAIRMAN HAYES: Good morning. MR. DELDUCA: Anthony Delduca, D-E-L-D-U-C-A. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Good morning, Mr. Delduca. MR. DELDUCA: Good morning, Gary. I'm a member of a couple of organizations, subcontractors organizations in town. Member of ICPI, which is a national -- actually, world known interlocking paver institute organization. And basically what they stand for is the proper installation of brick paving. A lot of people think they can just throw brick paving down and sand and, you know, put a little concrete around or a little wood around and it's going to last forever. It is a system. It requires the proper base, the proper installation of that base. And I also own Interlocking Pavestones, in Naples, and been doing it in Naples for seven years. We take a lot of pride in our work. You know, we go to these national conventions to learn more about pavers and understand the soil conditions and the different climates, and basically the proper installation of brick paving. And this gentleman here, it's great that he's a landscaper Page 22 September 20, 2000 and that he feels that he should be able to do brick paving. On the other hand, this is what we do for a living. We do it every day. We do a lot of the square footage. You know, we're going to do two million square feet this year. We do a lot of brick paving. We've got -- this is what we do for a living every day. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Hold on just a minute, Mr. Delduca. Is that in the speakers? MR. DELDUCA: So I guess, you know, the feeling of some of the other contractors -- and Mr. Keyes is here from Keyestone Interlocking Paving -- is that, I mean, if we're going to grant -- start granting people -- grandfathering people in for doing pavers because they did it in the past or they did a sidewalk, I mean, I'd like an irrigational landscape license, too. CHAIRMAN HAYES: That was one of my thoughts, Mr. Delduca. MR. DELDUCA: I mean, I do hardscape, and, you know, I can plant trees and bushes. And I've got the same guys as -- if his landscapers can do pavers, mine can do landscaping. So -- MR. WILLIAMS: Have you done it for 31 years? The same way in the same -- CHAIRMAN HAYES: Mr. Williams -- MR. DELDUCA: I haven't been alive for 31 years. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Mr. Williams, this is hearing time. It's his turn. You just please -- MR. DELDUCA: I understand where you're coming from, sir. But the masonry license in Collier County has been in effect for probably 15 to 18 years. When pavers first started here, I believe the Ritz-Carlton was probably one of the major paver jobs that was put in in '85, I believe. And I believe Collier County's had a license requirement for brick paving for that long. I mean, if you didn't know that and you were putting driveways in the county, I mean, we've been -- you've got to have a license to do it in Collier County and the City of Naples. A right-of-way permit needs to be pulled. So, I mean, if the board's decision is to grant this gentleman, you know, the -- to be able to do brick paving, basically you're granting him a masonry license is what -- the way I would take it. Then I would definitely want a landscape license and an irrigation license. I think it would go both ways. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay, Mr. Nonnenmacher. Page 23 September 20, 2000 MR. NONNENMACHER: Number one, sir, is your company a licensed paving company? MR. DELDUCA.' Yes. Yes, it is. MR. NONNENMACHER: And are you the license holder? MR. DELDUCA: Yes, I am. MR. NONNENMACHER: And what did you have to do to become licensed? MR. DELDUCA-' I went to school actually for three years. I graduated with building construction. I have an A.S. degree in building construction. Then I took a three-month course and passed the general contracting exam in the State of Florida. So I spent a lot of money and time doing that. MR. NONNENMACHER.' That's all I have. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay. Mr. Delduca, are you -- MR. DELDUCA: Yeah. I mean, that's really all I have to say. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay, thank you, sir. MR. DELDUCA: Thank you. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Anyone else like to say anything? (Speaker was duly sworn.) MR. KEYES: My name is Kevin Keyes. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Good morning, Mr. Keyes. MR. KEYES: Good morning. I'm a paving contractor, interlocking brick paving contractor here in town. And I started my business in 1982. And I object strongly to grandlathering anything in for someone who's done brick pavers before. A like situation, I opened several businesses when I became a landscaper. I took a landscape license before I started my business. I had a pressure washer company, and I looked up in the codes that I had to have a pressure washing license to do that. I've been cutting lawns since I was six years old and I've been pressure washing driveways in my home, you know, as long as I've been alive, and that didn't give me the right to go out and just start working for the general public without going through the right procedures to get licensing. So, you know, he's got a valid point, but I just object strongly to just allowing anybody to do anything they want without going through the proper procedures. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Due process. Anybody have any questions of Mr. Keyes? Page 24 September 20, 2000 MR. NONNENMACHER: I do. Yes, Mr. Keyes, are you a licensed company? MR. KEYES: Yes, I am. MR. NONNENMACHER: And what is your license? MR. KEYES: I have a masonry license. MR. NONNENMACHER: And that was previous to the institution of paver bricks, right? You were required to have a masonry license to do pavers? MR. KEYES: Yeah, when I started I looked up to find out what kind of license I had to have before I started my business. And it was a masonry license. And I had to go take a block exam for -- I believe it was a three-hour exam and a one-hour business and law exam. In every county that I go to do work in, you know, my first stop is to the county building to find out what I have to do to perform my work in their county. A lot of times it's reciprocal, other times I have to take their exam to classify (sic) the different categories. MR. NONNENMACHER: Let me ask you this: Did this take time out of your busy schedule to do? MR. KEYES: Well, it's what I do for a living. MR. NONNENMACHER: No, when you were applying for the test, did you have to study and -- MR. KEYES: Yes. MR. NONNENMACHER: -- did you have to go someplace and take that test? MR. KEYES: Yes, I did. MR. NONNENMACHER: And in the meantime, you had a business going? MR. KEYES: No, I couldn't start my business without the license. MR. NONNENMACHER: Well, you said you were doing landscaping and things like that. MR. KEYES: No, since I started that business, I find that a lot of my customers have landscape needs too, so, you know, just maintaining those properties, I wanted to start up a landscape maintenance business. So when I did, I had to go down and find out what type of licensing I needed, go back and get the testing and qualify for that before I started that business. MR. NONNENMACHER: Okay. So you were in the paving Page 25 September 20, 2000 business first, then decided to go into landscaping? MR. KEYES: Yes. MR. NONNENMACHER: So when you had your paving business and you went into the landscaping, that took you time out of your busy schedule -- MR. KEYES: Sure, it did. MR. NONNENMACHER: -- to study, go someplace and take a test? MR. KEYES: But, you know, I take the licensing and the codes in this county and any county I work in seriously, and that's what you've got to do, you know, to be in business in that particular area, here in Collier. MR. NONNENMACHER: Thank you. MR. BALZANO: Mr. Keyes, how long have they been installing brick pavers in Collier County? How long have they had brick pavers? Let's put it this way. MR. KEYES: You know what, Hank Krehling probably made pavers -- he used to make pavers on the block machine. I worked there and got introduced to brick paving and brought the first paver plant to Collier County while I worked with Hank. But prior to that, he made brick pavers on his block machine. Probably started that in 1980, '79. MR. BALZANO: So it wasn't 30 years ago. MR. KEYES: You know what, no, I don't believe it was. But pavers have been around for decades. You can buy pavers from other counties or other manufactures. MR. BALZANO: When you knew you wanted to go in business, you went to find out if you needed a license to install them? MR. KEYES: Yes, sir, I did. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Mr. Williams. MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you. I respect both of these gentlemen and their businesses, and they're both landowners and righteous opponents and so forth in the business. We don't compete, thank goodness, because they do the bigger business. I only do yards. However, we used concrete brick prior to paver manufacturer. Even with Hank, we imported gray brick and used them with and without a grout edge to make pavers. Right across the street from this 3636 Crayton Road just happens to be Page 26 September 20, 2000 an installation that we did 28 years ago for Rutenberg Homes. That's the gray concrete bricks, but installed like pavers. And boy, after all these years, it's moved around a little, but it's substantially there. And both these fellows came into the business to start a business of pavers. I assumed it from the very beginning. And I'm sure there's a big difference there. I still am steadfast in my request. Until you say no, I'll do what I have to to get a license, because I'm going to continue doing what I'm doing. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay. Let me ask you this real quickly, then, Mr. Williams: Do you pour your own driveways and sidewalks as well? MR. WILLIAMS: Upon occasion. We've put in sidewalks. I've never done a driveway. I've included them in our contract, but I've never -- big areas like that are not much fun. CHAIRMAN HAYES: The results are the same. You end up with a hard surface driveway completed, whether it be made up of poured concrete or poured molded concrete. The results are the same. You've installed a driveway. Whether -- I'm just surprised that you haven't -- aren't requesting that we grant you a masonry license so you can pour your own driveways as well. MR. WILLIAMS: No, actually, I'm replacing poured concrete driveways in most cases that were ill poured and broken and scattered and without steel that have been there for years and people can't stand them anymore. Or they were poorly designed, in most cases, and people want a wider, you know, footprint of the driveway and a better looking overall entry. That's our main purpose is just to make things better looking. We're not out competing with these guys doing streets in the middle of Pelican Bay or, you know, projects like condo parking lots or the hotel he mentioned or anything. We're strictly doing landscape installation. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Thank you. Anybody got any other questions? MR. BALZANO: Yes. He says he's not competing. And I feel if I wanted to change my concrete driveway to paving blocks, if I called him to request a bid, I'd get one. The same as if I called Mr. Keyes, I'd get a bid from him. And that's competing, in my Page 27 September 20, 2000 mind. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Anybody got any other questions of Mr. Keyes? MR. DICKSON: I think we can wrap it up. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Do you have anything else to say, sir? MR. WILLIAMS: No, sir, I just thank you for your time. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I do appreciate you gentlemen taking your time to come down here today. It is always a pleasure to hear from the community. It's very difficult for us to act sometimes on behalf of other license holders from their perspective. Any time we can get input like this is greatly appreciated. Thank both of you gentlemen. MR. KEYES: Thank you. MR. DICKSON: Mr. Chairman, I'm ready to make a motion. It all boils down to a simple thing, that -- whether the county owes him a license. The county doesn't owe me anything, so I don't think we owe this gentlemen anything either. If the business is important enough to him, he can go take a five-hour exam. I move that the motion be denied. MS. WHITE: Second. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I have a motion and a second to deny request for grandfathering. Any other discussion? MR. CRAWFORD: One item. Is it appropriate to perhaps to -- it's a five-hour test, three hours of construction knowledge and two hours of business and law. Does it make any sense, or is it appropriate to exempt the two-hour business law from the test? That knowledge is obviously there. MR. NEALE: I would suggest to the board that that's more appropriately done when and if he comes forward with a new application. CHAIRMAN HAYES: That's correct. MR. CRAWFORD: Okay. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Calling for the vote, all in favor? Opposed? MR. LAIRD: Opposed. CHAIRMAN HAYES: We have one opposed. Okay, Mr. Williams, obviously you understand what we said here so far. I do believe we have another order of business with you as well, and that is the review of your citation. Page 28 September 20, 2000 MR. WILLIAMS: I requested by letter that they both be removed from my record. MR. NEALE: Just for a note to the board, this board did issue Mr. Williams a citation, which is still being drafted, at the last meeting. It was a citation. He was found in violation of -- he was found -- the citation was found to be valid, he was found to have been in violation of the rules last meeting, except no penalty was imposed. This is a new citation after that previous finding. So this is citation number two. MS. WHITE: Mr. Neale, I'm looking at the older citation, 637. Refresh my memory, we did not impose a fine on that? MR. NEALE: There was no fine imposed, but he was found to be in violation. The citation was found to be valid, and it was entered -- it will be entered into his record. MS. WHITE: But he was exempted the $300? MR. NEALE: The fine was waived. MS. WHITE: Thank you. MR. WILLIAMS: I have stopped taking on contracts for driveways. My equipment is idle, my men are idle. At that point I requested that both these gentlemen finish the installation that I was on. Both declined, along with the other five who were on the list, and was lucky enough to find a fairly newcomer who installed it and was happy to do so. CHAIRMAN HAYES: But that was only after you were issued the citation. MR. WILLIAMS: Yes -- well, no, wait a minute now. I'm hunting constantly. And if you want to check their record, both of their offices were called prior to the citation, requesting someone to come and help me come finish -- I personally appeared at every one. That's what gave them the information that I would be here, and brought them here today. And I'm sure if I were in their shoes, I'd be doing the same thing. But I request that these be -- I have a perfect record. I've been here all these years, I've never done anything wrong, never had to be before the board before, unless it was to get permission to do something that was a little unusual, which usually the board complied with. And I just don't want that hanging around on my record for something as silly as this. CHAIRMAN HAYES: i'm going to tell you that you have normally -- you request in your letter -- we all do read these Page 29 September 20, 2000 things. In your letter it says please help me get back to normal as soon as possible. Well, normal has been illegal. And we're not inclined to say because you didn't know. I don't think that if you don't see a speed limit sign on the highway, it's no excuse by the law either. Normally you have been operating illegally. You've never had a paver's license, you've never -- which is a new license. But you've never had a masonry license, and you've been doing masonry work by virtue of a description of pavers in the masonry license, at your own admittance, for 30 years. This board is not inclined, I don't believe, to issue you a grandfathering of those licenses. And after our communication and per the minutes of last month's meeting, knowing that you were in violation, you couldn't find anybody to help you with this, at that point in time you continued to work with your own employees. We didn't give you any penalty. We just kind of upheld the last citation with no penalty. We have in front of us another citation, Mr. Williams, and you're asking us to throw that one out as well. Any other discussion on the board? MR. LAIRD: Well, I would like to have our attorney repeat what he said. It is within the legal bounds, as far as a waiver of our part. MR. NEALE: Well, the board can, upon proper application, waive testing requirements and so forth. That can be done. MR. LAIRD: Right, okay. Thank you. MR. NEALE: But as I say, it's my interpretation of the code that it would be upon proper application only. So, you know, you can waive the testing requirements. MR. LAIRD: Thank you. MR. WILLIAMS: I think application's been made. Has it been delivered to your office, the application for both licenses? MR. BARTOE: I have no idea. MR. WILLIAMS: I'm sure it has. But -- CHAIRMAN HAYES: I do believe, Mr. Neale, that for us to take an action on this citation, we have to have a finding of fact and conclusion of law. MR. NEALE: Uh-huh. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I don't think in any of our packets is Page 30 September 20, 2000 that paperwork. MR. NEALE: No, obviously I did not know there was a citation extant until today. So, you know, we didn't have an opportunity to -- I do have a previously used form, so if someone wants to make a motion on that matter one way or the other, I can provide the form and we can work through it. It's something we probably -- whenever we have a citation on the agenda, I think I'd ask staff to make sure that a blank form is in the packet. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Yes. Any time that we have a citation~ we need to review -- apparently we need to find a finding of fact and conclusion of law. So stick that paperwork with that. If we're asked to act, we have to ask one way or another whether it's imposing something or denying it. So if we can do that from now on, MR. BARTOE: So noted. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Thank you, sir. What's the pleasure of the board on this citation in front of us? Do we need to discuss it further? Do we need to act on it? MS. WHITE: I think we need to act on it while Mr. Williams is here. MR. NEALE.' Yeah~ some action needs to be taken by the board, because this is a citation issue that he has appealed. And it appears -- one of the issues that needs to be determined is whether it was appealed in a timely fashion. Based on the date on the letter -- there's no receipt stamp or anything, but based on the date on the letter attached to the notice of hearing that was mailed to him, which is August 31st, it appears that he did appeal within the 10-day period. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Mr. Crawford, got your feet wet last month finding of fact and conclusion of law. You thought it was as simple as making a motion, didn't you? MR. CRAWFORD: Yes, I did. MR. NEALE: But he's become an expert now. CHAIRMAN HAYES: He's had some practice. MR. CRAWFORD: I'm more quiet this week. CHAIRMAN HAYES: We do need to make a motion and move forward with this. Do you have the form of an old cite? MR. NEALE: Yes. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay, so we've got something we can Page 31 September 20, 2000 read from. MR. DICKSON: Let me ask a question and discuss it here with the board. I'd be more inclined to make a decision one way or the other to see what he does about getting his license. Would it be proper to defer?. MR. NEALE: The board can defer action on this citation, if they wish. I mean, the board can decide to defer action until the next regular meeting to see what -- MR. DICKSON: How does the rest of the board feel about that? MR. CRAWFORD: I think it's a good idea. MS. WHITE: I think this is the second citation that was issued. We didn't charge him the $300 last time. The one I'm looking at now is $500. And he was given the citation, knowing full well he couldn't do what he was doing. MR. WILLIAMS: It had to be finished. I had no choice. The whole thing was -- if I made a mistake, I had to finish the mistake, but I shouldn't be cited twice for the thing, so -- MS. WHITE: Well. CHAIRMAN HAYES: What's your intentions, Mr. Williams, on maybe applying for a mason's license? Are you planning on -- today you are obviously aware that we have denied your request for grandfathering, so you have two options: You either have to go and try to apply for one and pick up that license, or you have to stop doing those pavings. MR. WILLIAMS: Driveway pavers. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Driveways. And that includes -- MR. WILLIAMS: I've been approved for driveways -- for everything but driveways. CHAIRMAN HAYES: As a matter of clarification, last month when we denied driveways, one of the biggest reasons we did is because of the right-of-way permitting and the complication for elevations. It also occurs to me that sidewalks in the right-of-way are just as critical in needing those permittings, I believe, as they are the driveways. MR. WILLIAMS: They're inspected as well. CHAIRMAN HAYES: That's exactly correct. So I would almost consider the possibility that we amend our findings that we did last month to not only include the denial of driveways, but Page 32 September 20, 2000 to include right-of-way sidewalks. MR. CRAWFORD: It's almost assumed, I think. CHAIRMAN HAYES: As long -- if it's assumed, that's fine. But I'm concerned that if we just use the word driveways, that we perhaps may be misleading someone. And they come in here thinking well, you didn't say anything about sidewalks. So I'm concerned with that. But okay, getting back to the point, Mr. Williams, you've got two options: Either get a license or stop doing it. MR. WILLIAMS: Well, three. The third one being hire a subcontractor to install it. CHAIRMAN HAYES: You're absolutely right. MR. WILLIAMS: That's the way I'll go until such time that I get the license, have the time for the -- CHAIRMAN HAYES: Do you think you have an intent to get a license? MR. WILLIAMS: Yeah, I do. MR. NEALE: If I can bring to the attention of the board, in 489.127d3 regarding citations, which is the section of the 489 that is relevant to this matter, it states that if the person issued the citation or his or her designated representative shows that the citation is invalid or that the violation has been corrected prior to appearing before the enforcement or licensing board or designated special master, the enforcement or licensing board or designated special master may dismiss the citation, unless the violation is irreparable or irreversible. So the board, if it makes a finding that the violation has been corrected prior to this, may dismiss the citation. Couple of other points on this, prior to the board beginning deliberation, is in the same 489.127f, if the enforcement or licensing board or designated special master finds that a violation exists, the enforcement or licensing board or designated special master may order the violator to pay a civil penalty of not less than the amount set forth on the citation, but not more than $1,000 per day for each violation. In determining the amount of the penalty, the enforcement or licensing board or designated special master shall consider the following factors: One, the gravity of the violation; two, any actions taken by the violator to correct the violation; three, any previous violations committed by the violator. Page 33 September 20~ 2000 So those are some matters that this board should consider. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I think at this point I need to close the public hearing and we will deliberate on the board. MR. DICKSON: I'd like to move -- a motion to clear -- I move that we close the public hearing. CHAIRMAN HAYES: hearing. Any second? MS. PAHL.' Second CHAIRMAN HAYES: I have a motion to close the public it. All in favor? (Unanimous vote of ayes.) CHAIRMAN HAYES: All right, we -- MR. DICKSON: We talk among ourselves. CHAIRMAN HAYES: We will take a few minutes here, Mr. Williams, and deliberate on what we're going to do with you. MR. DICKSON: My thoughts to the board members~ our purpose is to get him licensed. That's already been accomplished, and he's going to pursue that. As he was saying that he called these other people, I did look at Kevin Keyes and Kevin Keyes was nodding his head yes. I just -- I think if -- my attitude is I don't want to add insult to injury if he goes ahead and gets his license. That's why I was thinking defer, get his license and then we deal with it after that. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Ms. White, you've got a particular position? MS. WHITE: That's not a bad idea. He suggested we defer the discussion of the citation until after he has the license? MR. DICKSON: Uh-huh. MR. NEALE: Uh-huh. MS. WHITE: That's fair. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Till after he applies for a license or receives a license? MR. DICKSON: Well, all he has to do is if he gets passing grades on the test, we'll never see him again. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Well, I think he may have a point with his experience. I think he can attest to the experience, there's no question, I think, that there's some affidavits that could be issued from some satisfied customers, so -- MR. NEALE: He could apply for a waiver. MR. DICKSON: His credit's good. All he has to do is get the test done. Page 34 September 20, 2000 MS. WHITE: Can we give him a certain amount of time so that this doesn't drag on? How long, 60 days? I mean, I don't know how long it would take to do it. MR. DICKSON: It's going to be up for the board to remember that. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Somehow or another, yes. If we -- we do need to put a time limit on it. But I think it needs to be enough time, like Mr. Williams has stated, that he's a very busy man and he doesn't want to have to drop his whole world and start on this thing. So I'm sure you'd like some time to be able to get everything together and apply for it. And we're not -- MR. DICKSON: And I kind of think, yeah, if we owe him anything -- the thing that changed my attitude was that he did try to get these other guys to come in and take it over. I can see that he was trapped. He has been here for 31 years. If anything, we owe him some courtesy, you know, in that regard. MS. WHITE: And if he's cited again, we triple the fine. MS. PAHL: Mr. Williams did indicate that this is a slow time of the year for him right now and that he's got idle crews, so perhaps it would be an opportune time for him to study and go ahead with the paperwork. MR. DICKSON: There's really no slow time. MS. PAHL: Well, I understand that. But he indicated it was kind of a slow time. MR. WILLIAMS: August and September are fairly slow in the landscape business. Hurricanes scare people. MR. NEALE: Too much rain from the hurricane. MS. WHITE: You know, on second thought, I do think we ought to impose some sort of fine. It was a $500 fine, the first time it was 300. We let him off. We -- the first time we enforced the citation and waived the fine. So now we have another citation for 500. I would like to suggest that we enforce this citation and charge him $300. I think he needs to have something. MR. NEALE: the board. MS. WHITE: than -- MR. NEALE: Unfortunately, that's not an option available to Oh, that's right. You just said it couldn't be less It can't be less than -- Page 35 September 20, 2000 MS. WHITE: You just read it, didn't you? MR. NEALE: -- the amount stated on the citation. MS. WHITE: Duh. MR. CRAWFORD: Yeah, I'm in agreement with Mr. Dickson in that he had an obligation to the owner, who had paving blocks sitting in his driveway, sitting in the easement, sitting in the driveway. He made phone calls, tried to get them fixed with the appropriate subcontractor. Couldn't seem to do that, so he went ahead and finished that project. I don't think he started any other projects, at least that have been discussed today. MS. WHITE: What was the start date of that Crayton Road project? Was it before or after our meeting last month? MR. WILLIAMS: It was at least three weeks prior to our meeting and before the citation last time. Because when I came in to find out what Mike wanted to talk about, we were well into that job and had the driveway torn up and hauled away in dumpsters at that point. MS. WHITE: So it was even prior to your first citation? MR. WILLIAMS: The first citation was not for installing driveways, it was for advertising the fact that we install pavers. MS. WHITE: I know, I just wanted -- MR. WILLIAMS: Which is really not correct either, simply because I can subcontract pavers, you know, and that doesn't mean you can't advertise them, if you subcontract. MS. WHITE: I just want to know if the first citation which was issued August the 7th, was that prior to your taking on the Crayton Road job? MR. WILLIAMS: No, ma'am, it was after. MS. WHITE: Well, why did you not apply for a permit for the Crayton Road job? MR. WILLIAMS: I have never required one before. The road did not require swale or for the pipe in the swale, and it was strictly straight down to a valley gutter, which doesn't require any inspections. As a matter of fact, the city waived the inspection until the whole job was complete, simply because there was no swale and no -- MS. WHITE: But it went into the right-of-way, so does it require -- MR. WILLIAMS: A final, yes. MR. BALZANO: He cut out the -- Page 36 September 20, 2000 MR. BARTOE: If you're not licensed, you cannot obtain a permit. CHAIRMAN HAYES: But a paving contractor knows he needs a permit for that. MR. BARTOE: Correct. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I need a motion from the board. MR. DICKSON: Mr. Chairman, I move that we withhold the adjudication on this second fine for a period of six months and revisit this issue at that six-month period and see if this individual has obtained his license at that time. MR. LAIRD: I second that, Mr. Chairman. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I have a motion and second on the floor. Any further discussion before we vote? Calling for the vote, all in favor? Opposed? MS. WHITE: Aye. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Very well, we have one nay. I guess, Mr. Williams, you do understand what we just finished doing. Within six months we're going to bring your citation back up before this board, and if you have made duly effort to do a license, perhaps then we will make adjudication at that point. MR. WILLIAMS: In the meantime, I decide to subcontract that work and not take a license, then will I have to pay the fine? CHAIRMAN HAYES: We didn't say anything about subcontracting. We said if you want to get a license, we'll give you six months to do so, and then we will act on this citation on the penalty. Subcontracting it isn't getting a license. MR. WILLIAMS: Okay. Thank you for your time. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Thank you, Mr. Williams. MR. WILLIAMS: Are you done with me? I'll go back to work. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Do we need a break? How about about a 10-minute break. We'll reconvene at 10:30. (Recess.) CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay, I'd like to call this meeting back to order. Norman Jagielski, are you here yet? MR. JAGIELSKI: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Would you come up to the podium, please, sir. Page 37 September 20, 2000 I'm going to have to ask you to get sworn in, sir. (Speaker was duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN HAYES: Good morning, Mr. Jagielski. Your reason for being here this morning? MR. JAGIELSKI: Qualify a second entity. CHAIRMAN HAYES: What's your reasoning for want (sic) to qualify a second entity?. MR. JAGIELSKI: Well, because they obviously need a license. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay. What business do you qualify currently? MR. JAGIELSKI: Well, currently I'm qualifying Woodright Cabinets, in Cape Coral, and I'd like to qualify Mike Geary Cabinets in Ft. Myers. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Woodright? MR. JAGIELSKI: Woodright. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Under the application form that you filled out, Item No. 9 says list all businesses, firms, entities and contracting businesses you have been associated with during the last 10 years, and you said not applicable. Why wouldn't you write Woodright Cabinetry down? MR. JAGIELSKI: What, you mean -- I guess I misunderstood the question. CHAIRMAN HAYES: How long have you been qualifying Woodright Cabinets? MR. JAGIELSKI: Just recently. Probably three, four months ago. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Is that your business? MR. JAGIELSKI: No~ I'm basically a cabinet installer. CHAIRMAN HAYES: And what's Woodright Cabinets do? MR. JAGIELSKI: Well~ I was previously employed by them. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Were you their qualifying agent while you were employed by them? MR. JAGIELSKI: No, I didn't need to be, you know~ because I was the installer, so I was the one that needed the license, they didn't. CHAIRMAN HAYES: And now you've opened your own. Is this your business? MR. JAGIELSKI: No, sir, it's -- I'm employed by Mike Geary Cabinets. Page 38 September 20, 2000 MR. DICKSON: Let me ask you a couple of questions. Go back to Woodright, in Cape Coral. Is that a corporation? MR. JAGIELSKI: They are incorporated. MR. DICKSON: Are you an officer or director? MR. JAGIELSKI: I'm neither. MR. DICKSON: Do you have any check signing privileges? MR. JAGIELSKI: No, sir. MR. DICKSON: And I see with Mike Geary Cabinets that you're not an officer or director. MR. JAGIELSKI: That's correct. MR. DICKSON: And do you have check signing -- MR. JAGIELSKI: No, sir. MR. DICKSON: So you have no control over either one of these companies. MR. JAGIELSKI: No, sir. CHAIRMAN HAYES: There's a resolution in the packet, Mr. Dickson, that he specifically says but not responsible for any legal or monetary expenses of said business. So he is not taking on any responsibility of this business either. For starters, do you recognize the fact that they're -- part of the responsibility of being a qualifying agent is being legally responsible for the finances of a business, and in the absence of a state appointed financially responsible officer, you are the one responsible? They cannot -- by virtue of them and their resolution to say you are not responsible for any legal or monetary expenses of said company means that they must have, by state law, a financially responsible officer. Do we have anything on the record that says they have a financially responsible officer? MR. BARTOE: Whatever you have in front of you, sir. MR. BALZANO: It says here he's not. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I don't think this board has the power to allow you to be a qualifying agent for any company unless there is a duly authorized financially responsible officer in place. Isn't that correct, Mr. Neale? MR. NEALE: That's correct. I'm just looking at the issue right now, so I apologize, I wasn't paying attention. But the qualifying agent has to be -- is responsible for all contracting activities of the corporation. They have the Page 39 September 20, 2000 authority to supervise construction undertaken by the business organization. Proof includes not limited to authority to sign checks, training and supervision of employees, hiring and firing of employees, or other action indicating active involvement in the business organization. Doesn't necessarily mean that they are financially responsible for contractual obligations of the corporation, but it does mean that they are responsible for the contracting operations of the corporation. That is, that they have to -- they are the person who has to supervise all the jobs and be responsible for the quality of work done, and if the work is not done to standard quality, they would be subject to discipline by this board. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Are you a state registered license holder or certified contractor? MR. JAGIELSKI: Neither. I'm just a sole proprietor, actually. CHAIRMAN HAYES: What kind of license do you hold? MR. JAGIELSKI: The cabinet installation license. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Issued by who? MR. JAGIELSKI: By Collier County. MR. BARTOE: Right. That is not a state license. CHAIRMAN HAYES: That's a registered license? MR. BARTOE: No. MR. DICKSON: No, it's county license only. MR. NEALE: It's county license. MR. DICKSON: Do you hold -- does Cape Coral accept your Collier County license? MR. JAGIELSKI: Pardon me? MR. DICKSON: Does Cape Coral accept your Collier County license? MR. JAGIELSKI: To my knowledge. I really don't know. MS. WHITE: Does Mike Geary have a license? MR. JAGIELSKI: I believe he does not. That's why he wants me to qualify him. MS. WHITE: Yeah, because it says here, this resolution is to clarify that Norman Jagielski will be paid the annual fee for his license per year and the cost of liability insurance. MR. JAGIELSKI: That's correct. MR. DICKSON: Mr. Norman? MR. JAGIELSKI: Well, not an annual fee, just he's employing Page 40 September 20, 2000 me right now. So that's -- you know, we just kind of worked it out amongst ourselves. MR. DICKSON: Okay. So that you understand, an employee cannot come in and qualify a business unless they have some authority over the company. It doesn't have to be 100 percent. But that company is what you heard read, and financial affairs to the company. Lacking that, you would still have to have some control over the company and contracting work being done. And if you didn't have any financial authority whatsoever, there would have to be what you call a financially responsible officer. What I'm saying is what you've given us here, you cannot qualify this company, given what we have here now. MR. JAGIELSKI: Okay. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Mr. Neale, also, I think in this resolution I see the words, this resolution is to clarify that this individual is Mike Geary Cabinets, Inc., qualifying agent, and is involved in the day-to-day operations. Doesn't say he's in control. It says he is involved but is not responsible for any legal or monetary expenses. The way I see this, Mr. Jagielski, is that you're selling your license, and this guy wants to use it, and he's going to pay you for using so. MR. JAGIELSKI: Well, he's not going to pay me monetarily. You know, being employed by him is sufficient for me, you know. MR. DICKSON: But see, what happens with Collier County, if there's a problem, the only person we go to is the license holder. And in your case, you have no control over the company. You have no interest in the company. You see the problem? CHAIRMAN HAYES: If there happens to be a citation, if there happens to be a case hearing, if there happens to be a finding of fact and conclusion of law of a violation, it is you that we're going to look at your license, not Mike Geary and not these other people in this other company. It is you. Your license is the one that is in jeopardy, completely. MR. JAGIELSKI: Exactly. MR. NEALE: If I may, just for the board's information. Under 489.1195ta, it delineates the responsibilities of a primary qualifying agent, which is what this gentleman would be. And it states that all primary qualifying agents for a business organization are jointly and equally responsible for supervision of Page 41 September 20, 2000 all operations of the business organization, for all field work at all sites, and for financial matters, both for the organization in general and for each specific job. MR. DICKSON: You understand that? MR. JAGIELSKI: Yes, I do. MR. DICKSON: It's your protection as well. MR. JAGIELSKI: I understand. CHAIRMAN HAYES: This resolution actually denies your ability to be the legal qualifying agent. It doesn't authorize a thing. MR. DICKSON: Mr. Chairman, I move that the application be denied. MS. PAHL: I'll second it. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? All in favor? Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN HAYES: Very well. Mr. Jagielski, you need to review the licensing descriptions of your license, and if this Mike Geary wishes to have you qualify his company, he's going to have to go a little bit further with allowing you responsibilities before this board will consider it again. MR. JAGIELSKI: Okay. CHAIRMAN HAYES: All right? Thank you, sir. MR. JAGIELSKI: Thank you. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay, I believe that concludes our new business. Under old business, we have a couple of things we need to mop up. I understand that Bob Dunn has been deleted from the agenda, but I would like to discuss the final conclusions of Mr. Dunn's request, if there's not any objections. MR. DICKSON: Well, did they take it off the agenda? CHAIRMAN HAYES: Deleted it. I'm understanding that the issues have been settled. That was the request for coming up. One of the things I think that was occurring last month was county was citing him for doing commercial work. And I believe that there's not anything in the ordinance that separates residential from commercial work. You're either licensed to perform aluminum specialty work or you're not. I would have thought it was similar to my license as a Page 42 September 20, 2000 plumbing contractor. It doesn't separate whether I can do commercial work or residential work, it just says do plumbing work. And I believe we settled that at the county attorney's office. Mr. Zachary? MR. ZACHARY: Yes, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Neale, Mr. Bartoe and Mr. Perico and I sat down and talked that out for a little while. Help me out here if I missed some of it. But we did decide exactly that. If Mr. Dunn in particular or any contractor in particular is licensed to do a particular job and holds a particular license, then we didn't see any difference between doing that on residential or commercial property. Specifically Mr. Dunn, I think he was licensed to do aluminum and concrete on grade. And there was another question as to whether condominiums were residential or commercial. And we decided that it was -- a better definition of a condominium is residential. Of course there's going to be certain condominiums that are commercial that have businesses only, or maybe a big mix of business and residential. But on the whole~ if you think somebody's living in a condominium~ that interpretation, we decided that they should be residential. As far as Mr. Dunn's license, it really didn't make any difference, because he followed -- or expanded on that and said well, a license holder, if he's qualified to work on a residence, he's qualified to exercise that license on any kind of building at all, commercial or residential. MR. NEALE: Yeah, that's in essence what the conclusion was is that he -- as long as he operates within the scope of his license, that he can do it on any type of building, be it residential, commercial, multi-family, whatever. Because that is within the scope of his license. We could see -- and Bob and I both looked at law, and we could not see any distinction that was made under specialty licenses for that. That said, there's one -- two other issues that I'd like to address. Number one is Mr. Dunn brought up the issue of subcontracting other trades to perform work for -- under his license. After review of 489, we came to the conclusion that as long Page 43 September 20, 2000 as it was less than 50 percent of the value of the job, he could subcontract other trades to do work within the structure that he was building within the scope of his license. So if he was putting -- the example that we used, and we talked about it for quite a while, was if he was putting this aluminum room on the outside of a -- on the lanai of a condominium, for example, and it was a $7,000 job, that he could subcontract electrical work and so forth up to an amount of $3,499 -- MR. CRAWFORD: In aggregate. MR. NEALE: -- in aggregate, and still be able to do it as the primary license holder. Part of the reason was a public policy. The reason we also looked at this was that by doing such, by permitting Mr. Dunn or people similarly situated to pull the license and get subcontractors is that then when they pull that permit, they would also have to list those subcontractors, so that it would allow this board the ability to obtain enforcement action, if necessary, against both the primary contractor and the subs that he had working underneath him within the scope of his license. So in effect, it increases the enforcement authority of this board, or at least the ability for this board to review and enforce. So that was one area that we thought was pretty significant and pretty important. The other area that we looked at was just what -- where this whole issue of commercial and multi-family came in. And it really comes in under the general building contractor and residential contractor designations where a general contractor of course can work on anything, anywhere, any time, basically. A building contractor is limited to buildings that do not exceed three stories in height. So that's -- that's the difference between a general and a building contractor. Then the residential contractor can only work on one, two and three-family residences, not exceeding two stories in height. So that was -- Mr. Zachary and I and Mr. Perico all talked about it, and Mr. Bartoe to some extent, how did this four-family magic number come up? And we think it had something to do with an interpretation by probably someone at the front desk years ago that if it's over three families and it's good enough for a residential contractor, it's good enough for anybody else, and Page 44 September 20, 2000 so it's commercial and they don't get to do it. So Mr. Perico was going to clarify that with staff and let them know how it works. One issue that did come up that we suggested that the board look at as we go through the ordinance amendment cycle is to look at the residential contractor limitation of two stories in height, and look at how that's governed by 489. Simply because of the fact that there seem to be an awful lot of single-family residences that are going up three stories nowadays. And does this mean that if you're going to have a single-family residence, two stories or more -- more than two stories, that you have to have either a building contractor, a GC, run the job as opposed to a residential contractor? It's an issue that -- you know, a strict interpretation of the ordinance says if it's a residence -- single-family residence over two stories, it's got to be either a building contractor or a GC. So that's an issue that, you know, this board probably should look at as we go forward and look at the ordinance amendments. But that's -- Bob, do you remember anything else? MR. ZACHARY: Just one more issue that we looked at was the problem of since condominiums were classified as commercial, a lot of contractors were getting the owner to come in under that exception, that $25,000 exception, doing work on your own in a commercial building. I think -- and if you had a problem with the contractor, that the owner would have been the one pulling the permit. I think that's tightened that up a little bit now by classifying condominiums as residential, you won't have the owner coming in and pulling permits for the work. It will be the contractor that came to do the work pulling his own permits. And we'll have a little bit more control over that. I think there's a limitation of one or two-family structure is the limit for an owner to come in. Can you clarify that for me? I can't think of -- I don't have it in front of me. MR. NEALE.' I'm looking for it right now. But basically owner/builders are only permitted I think on one or two-family -- I'm looking for the citation. They are -- owner/builders cannot pull a permit on multi-family. So therefore, on condominiums -- MR. ZACHARY.' It's limited to a one or two-family structure. MR. NEALE: -- on condominiums where there are greater than two units in the building, owner/builder permits are not Page 45 September 20, 2000 permitted, they're not allowed. It must be a licensed contractor. Which once again -- MR. ZACHARY: I think it reads owner/builder one or two-family structure or commercial. MR. NEALE: Right. MR. ZACHARY: So that would be the limit for a condominium. MR. NEALE: And once again, there's a public policy kind of thing where it makes it better for the board to be able to enforce against, you know, the unlicensed contractor who works under an owner/builder kind of thing, as this would require it to be a licensed contractor to pull the permit. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay. Any other discussion on Mr. Dunn's situation? Okay, some more unfinished business. Mike Rowen, request to reinstate painting license without retesting. Mr. Rowen, are you here again? MR. ROWEN: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN HAYES: You want to come back up to the podium? I'm going to have to ask you to get sworn in again, sir. (Speaker was duly sworn.} CHAIRMAN HAYES: As per last month, I think that we concluded that aside from some current affidavits and a current personal credit report, that we could act on your license. MR. ROWEN: Yes. CHAIRMAN HAYES: In your packet we have the credit report and some current affidavits. I personally am at a loss. I can't read this credit report. MR. DICKSON: Do you want to explain? First of all, just for bankruptcy that's shown up in February of '91, quite honestly, I was under the impression by credit reporting regulations that that was off of his record after seven years. I'm surprised it's on this report. You may want to check into that. MR. ROWEN: Yeah, actually, I think it ends in February. MS. WHITE: You have t0 years. It's not seven, it's 10. MR. DICKSON: It's 107 Okay. But you're showing a judgment here in September of '96 for a foreclosure. MR. ROWEN: I sold a house to a gentleman, and when I was out of town painting, he didn't pay the taxes on it and they took the house away from him. I had basically just sold him the house Page 46 September 20, 2000 in, you know, good faith that he would pay the bills, and he didn't. So I lost the house as well as $27,000. MR. DICKSON: So what you're saying is you did not transfer ownership. MR. ROWEN: It was new to me. We did a wraparound mortgage, they call it. And in all intent, I thought he owned the house, and he was paying the bills, and he didn't. MR. DICKSON: You did an assumption? MR. ROWEN: Well, yeah. MR. DICKSON: You did an assumption, which still leaves you responsible. MR. ROWEN: Right. And I lost the money for it. $27,000 I lost out on that deal, and the house. MR. DICKSON: But -- okay, that's an easy explanation, but they obviously notified you as well is the problem. MR. ROWEN: No, I've never been notified to this day. Actually, I didn't know about the foreclosure until I got back in town, I was at a laundromat and the guy come up to me and started giving me a rash of garbage over it, that he lost his house and he didn't do this. And I asked him, well, why? And he said, well I went down to the -- a Haitian man, couldn't speak English real well. He said I went down to the tax office, the lady said my taxes were paid, and that's what he told me. And then he complained, well, how can I get my house back. I said I have no idea. And I had actually turned it over to a mortgage company, Brown & Brown. They were supposed to be in charge of it, out of Fort Myers. And I just assumed that everything was being handled properly. MR. DICKSON: Something stinks in Denmark. MR. ROWEN: Absolutely. I understand. MR. DICKSON: I'm not the attorney, you guys are, but -- MS. WHITE: Yeah, it looks like the case number for that judgment was filed in '95. So that's a lot of time. MR. ROWEN: Yeah, I wasn't in town at the time. I had been gone for several months. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I got Specific Creditors, account seriously past due. Account assigned to attorney, collection agents or credit grantors internal collection department, Harry and Company? Page 47 September 20, 2000 MR. ROWEN: I have no idea what that is. CHAIRMAN HAYES: That's three months ago. MR. ROWEN: Yeah, I have no idea what that is. And as far as the other one, the $400 one, I have no idea was that is. MR. NEALE: Looks like Harborside Animal Clinic. MR. ROWEN: Yeah, I have no idea what that is. And as far as I understand, I guess I could find out about it, but I have really no idea what it is. I don't make a habit of charging things, as a rule. MR. DICKSON: I wasn't here, so I defer. MR. ROWEN: Also, I understood that my personal credit report had really nothing to do with my business report. And my business report came back blank, because I've never charged anything on it. MR. NEALE.' Well, but if you're not an incorporated business, they look to both, the personal and the business. MR. ROWEN: Oh, understandable. But still. CHAIRMAN HAYES: My concern is that with no credit report of any substance, a couple of things on a credit report that don't show anything, even personally, except three or four items, and part of those items are up for collections. You haven't been in business and practiced in your business for quite some time now. For me to consider granting you a license -- MR. ROWEN: I don't understand that, sir, about not being in business. CHAIRMAN HAYES: You don't have any credit report on your not being -- on your business is what you said. MR. ROWEN: I never have. CHAIRMAN HAYES: A credit report. You don't ever buy material? MR. ROWEN: Well, I do, but I pay cash. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Always paid cash. MR. ROWEN: Um-hum. Easiest way. Avoid another bankruptcy. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I find it very difficult to be in business without having some accounts. Otherwise, I'm pretty well not in business. MR. ROWEN: I have no need. All I need is paint. CHAIRMAN HAYES: And you haven't actually been in Page 48 September 20, 2000 business for how long now? MR. ROWEN: Well, legally I haven't been in business legally, I guess -- I don't know. CHAIRMAN HAYES: A long time. MR. ROWEN: Quite a while. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I can't remember the minutes. MR. ROWEN: But only because of the fact that I had a bankruptcy, and at the front desk the lady told me being I had a bankruptcy, that I wouldn't be able to reapply or get my license. And that's why it's been such a long time period. And -- you know, it's not from lack of not wanting it. It was under the impression of I truly couldn't get it. You know, it's -- for the amount of money it costs for a license, it's just absolutely ridiculous for me not to have it. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I can't remember the details, Mr. Rowen. How long ago was your license issued to you? MR. ROWEN: Oh, about 15, 16 years ago, 17 years ago. CHAIRMAN HAYES: And how long has it been expired? MR. ROWEN: That's a good question as well. Seven, eight years, nine years? CHAIRMAN HAYES: You've actually not even been in the community. MR. ROWEN: Well, on and off, yes, I have. But I've been out of the community here and there. Just after a divorce I went off, traveled, painted historical sites. I've been in several different states and painted. And I've been back here now about three and a half years. CHAIRMAN HAYES: And I believe your original license didn't include a business and law portion of that. MR. ROWEN: Oh, no, I believe it did. CHAIRMAN HAYES: It did? MR. ROWEN: Yes. It was a pretty complete test. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Does anybody remember 15, 16 years ago, was business and law part of a specialty trade license? MR. DICKSON: Yeah. MR. BARTOE.' It was in '87. I took it. MS. WHITE: When did the license expire? MR. BARTOE: I believe September 30th, '92 was the last active. MS. WHITE: I would think you'd have to start over, Mr. Page 49 September 20, 2000 Rowen. My teaching certificate expired and the state won't give it back unless I start over. I mean, that's a long time. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Ms. White, in reviewing the minutes of last month's meeting, we discussed that. It took me reading the minutes to remember what we had concluded on doing. We had asked for current valid experience, we had asked for an additional credit report, because the credit report we had had no information on it at all, and it was a company credit report, which he wasn't in business. I believe his application is complete and his application process is pretty well complete. I don't completely disagree with you, that having a license 15 years ago, letting it lapse eight years ago, we should just simply waive our hands and say not a problem. The ordinances are clear in defining what you must do when you let your license lapse. One of the concerns we had last month, if you remember, he said that he tried to go down and get it reviewed and admitted to having a bankruptcy, and he said that staff told him that because of his bankruptcy he couldn't renew his license. I don't know that staff would have actually put it just like that as well. MR. BARTOE: There is a note in the file stating that he was in to attempt to reinstate in 9-29 of '94. That must be when he was told. MR. ROWEN: So I honestly did try to, you know, reacquire it. It wasn't that I wanted it to be lapsed eight or nine years. I truly did call and ask and that's what I was informed. And due to lack of information, you know, being said, you know, I need a business one and not a personal one, it would have been a totally different situation. But understanding that what the lady told me that was no, you can't. So I assumed at that point, well, gee, I'm out of luck. Otherwise, I would have at that point in time. MS. WHITE: But it had been expired for two years when you made that attempt, right? MR. ROWEN: Well, I was out of town, like I say, after a bad divorce. I just went off traveling, came back and assumed I'd pick up my job where I left off. I've been in this county 32 years painting. MR. DICKSON: Let me get the -- forgive me for iust a minute, but I have read the minutes. Your license expired seven or eight years ago. Have you been painting in Collier County since that Page 50 September 20, 2000 time? MR. ROWEN: Absolutely. MR. DICKSON: On a regular basis? MR. ROWEN: No, not on a regular basis. Not like I'd like to. Of course, old customers. I actually work for General Concrete right now. I'm a sweep-up man. I'd truly like to go back to work. I have lots of commercial jobs and what have you and excellent references and excellent work, and basically would just like to go back to work. MR. DICKSON: What prompted you to come before this board? Did you get caught? MR. ROWEN: Well, when Mr. Bartoe and I met, and Mike, he informed me that, you know, in fact I could come back. So here I am and here -- MR. DICKSON: Did you get a citation? MR. ROWEN: Oh, yes. But it wasn't due to the citation, it was due to the information that well, gee, this was wrong and now you can come in. You can come before the board and you can do this. Before I was under the assumption that gee, until the bankruptcy thing is gone, I'm out of luck. And that was pretty much how it worked. MR. DICKSON: So what's wrong with his license that he had seven or eight years ago? Nothing. It's just that he let it expire. And now the county laws require that he start back over. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Well, yeah, any license that you let expire, there's statutes involved on reinstatement of licenses. And we have some of the same thing. We require that he go through the complete process again after -- I think it's like two years I think we've been allowing. In the new ordinance, Mr. Neale, isn't it something like that? MR. DICKSON: Are you looking at that? What is the statement? MR. NEALE: The way the ordinance works, and it's in 22-191i. It says any individual who fails to renew his/her certificate of competency prior to December 31 of the year following its expiration shall thereby automatically have a certificate of competency that is null and void. To acquire a valid certificate from the county, the official must pay the then applicable full application fee in accordance with the schedule of fees and charges, and must submit an entire Page 51 September 20, 2000 new application. If as of the date of the receipt by the county of said new application three years have passed since the date of his/her most recent examination that the individual passed to acquire the former certificate, that individual must pass all then applicable testing requirements. If the request is to reactivate a dormant certificate, the retesting requirement can be waived by staff if the applicant proves that he/she has been active in the trade in another jurisdiction, or has been active as an inspector or investigator in the trade, or for other valid reason that would render such testing superfluous. Now, the dormant certificate is a specific class of certificates. That's where they have to notify the county that they're putting their certificate in dormant status and so on, so forth. MR. DICKSON: So what's the question here? It's been over three years. It says he must test unless you've been active in another area in this trade or you've been active as an inspector in that trade with another company, or something to that effect. Which neither of those two apply, correct? MR. ROWEN: Well, I've been active in my trade somewhat. MR. DICKSON: Yeah, Collier County. So why don't you want to go take the test? Piece of cake. MR. ROWEN: It's really not a piece of cake. And I'm really not that great with the reading and the writing. It took every bit of energy I had last time to do it. I'm a painter. I'm a craftsman. I work with my hands. MR. DICKSON: You work with your son? MR. ROWEN: Yeah. MR. DICKSON: He could knock that test down. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I can't have it that way. If you're going to come up here and testify, you have to come up to the mike. And your boy must be sworn in as well. (Speaker was duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN HAYES: I need your name for the record. MR. MATTHEW ROWEN: Matthew J. Rowen. CHAIRMAN HAYES: And what did you have to say, sir? MR. MATTHEW ROWEN: My father did take the test and he did score an 82. In -- the papers you have in there are from our Page 52 September 20, 2000 customers, just showing that we are capable of doing our work. And there's why we did that, the credit report and the papers, to show that we're capable of doing the work. We showed that to you so we could get our license back. CHAIRMAN HAYES: That's correct. It also shows that you've been capable of doing your work illegally. MR. MATTHEW ROWEN: But now we're trying to be on the straight and narrow. We're trying to come forth and do everything that we're supposed to. CHAIRMAN HAYES: That's why taking the test and filing application. MR. MATTHEW ROWEN.' That just prolongs the situation. He's taken the test and passed it. We want to go back to work. We'll pay all our things and stuff. We just want to go back to work legally. MR. DICKSON: But see, we hear that all the time. Everyone gets caught, then they want to make it right and go on. I mean, that happens in all cases. MR. ROWEN: As you can see from the files, sir, I did call and I did try to bring things up to date at that point in time. MR. DICKSON: What date was that, Tom? MS. WHITE: 9-29-94. MR. BARTOE: Yes, 9-29-94. MR. DICKSON: That's when he found out he couldn't do it. MR. ROWEN: That's when I came back to town and called and they said yes. CHAIRMAN HAYES: And was informed, however correct or incorrectly, that he couldn't -- MR. BARTOE: Also, we did not have the retesting in our ordinance until a year or two ago, is that correct, Mr. -- MR. NEALE: Yeah, that was added in -- I think it was the '97 revision. I'd have to take a look. I don't think it was added in the '99. CHAIRMAN HAYES: There's an awful lot of people that believe that all of us should have to follow the rules. All of us. You believe that you shouldn't have to follow the new rules because you already did it once. I don't totally deny that that's a possibility, because you did make an attempt by going down to the county and trying to renew. But you're still about two years from when it expired, I believe, not two years from when it was Page 53 September 20, 2000 due to expire. I believe at that time also that there was some kind of a leeway in the timing. It's due for renewal in '92, and there was perhaps six months or something in there that you have to renew it before it lapses. I can't remember exactly. You know, date of renewal is not time that your license expires without you being able to come in so many months afterwards and renew -- MR. BARTOE: I believe Mr. Neale read it. It's null and void after December 31st. CHAIRMAN HAYES: That's the new ordinance. I'm questioning what was in effect in 1992. I don't know. It's very difficult to -- just to not have a license, operate illegally for six, seven, eight years and then say well, I think because I used to have a license a long time ago, I think you should renew my license today. MR. ROWEN: Well, no, I don't feel that way about it. I feel that by my background and by me coming in at that point in time and being -- given, say, not enough information, that perhaps you'd all be a little lenient to get me back to work. I'm gung ho. It's not that I didn't want it or didn't want to comply. It's that I was -- I kind of had my hands tied. I have to still pay my bills. I've been a painter ever since I've been a teenager in high school. I used to wash roofs by hand. And that's what I do. And I'm just coming before you to say hey, guys, help me out. MR. DICKSON: Here's what I'm looking at. You're a nice guy, I'm sure you're a great painter, and I'd love to do nothing more. But to use Mr. Laird's comments in a discussion that's come up before, this board is not a regulatory agency. Correct? We serve at the pleasure of Collier County Commissioners, and they're the ones that make the laws. And that's why I had Mr. Neale read that, because my understanding is we don't have the right to make an exception to that -- MR. ROWEN: As far as I understood -- MR. DICKSON: -- unless you read something that tells me I have the right to make an exception. MR. NEALE: What the board has the ability to do under 122-184c, which is the portion on referral of application to Contractor Licensing Board for decision, it says when an application is referred to the Contractor Licensing Board, the board shall take testimony from the applicant and shall consider Page 54 September 20, 2000 other relevant evidence regarding whether the application meets the requirements of this division. Upon the evidence presented by the applicant and the contracting supervisor, the Contractors' Licensing Board shall determine whether the applicant is qualified or unqualified for the trade in which application has been made. Finding of fact and the conclusions of law regarding the approval or denial of the application shall be made by the Contractors' Licensing Board. The board may consider the applicant's relevant recent experience in this specific trade, and based upon such experience may waive testing requirements if convinced that the applicant is qualified by experience, whereby such competency testing would be superfluous. MR. DICKSON: Okay. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay, Mr. Dickson, real quick, I think there's a point of issue here that we've forgotten, perhaps. This gentleman tried to reapply for his license in '94, found out he -- what he found out -- or what he understood was that he could not reapply. Didn't stop you. Didn't stop you from contracting without a license, though, did it? MR. ROWEN: Well, actually, when we left the state again, we were gone for a couple more years. Basically when we came back, the town -- people -- like, for instance, I was staying at The Inn out on Pine Ridge Road. One of my customers saw me in a restaurant, who called another customer who said well, gee, Mike's in town. So of course I went to work. That's what I do. I mean, I don't want to stand here and lie to you. CHAIRMAN HAYES: How long has your son been working with you? MR. ROWEN: Since he's been three. MR. MATTHEW ROWEN: Full time more than 10 years now. But I've been off and on my whole life. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay, my point to that is that you knew you couldn't get a license, in your opinion. You could have, but your information from the county was that you couldn't. MR. ROWEN: Right. CHAIRMAN HAYES: What stopped him? MR. ROWEN: Well, he hasn't been working with me that long, as far as actually being with me. I mean, once in a while I'll Page 55 September 20, 2000 call him, if I need help. We've been working more together lately, and he wants to become part of this, but at one time he had no interest in being a painter. MR. MATTHEW ROWEN: I wasn't going to be a painter. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Now you've decided to be a painter? MR. MATTHEW ROWEN: Yes. That's really my experience. That's really-- CHAIRMAN HAYES: Well, what stops you from getting your own license? MR. MATTHEW ROWEN: Time and money. ! have to do something in the meantime to get the license. I can get a license, but we have to go to work. MR. ROWEN: It truly doesn't have anything to do with my son. I'd like to have my license back, personally. If he wants to get his own license -- we've been talking about getting him a building license, you know, as far as a contractor's license. But this is personal for me. It really doesn't have anything to do with him. CHAIRMAN HAYES: That makes sense, and I understand that. Then I'm going to also say it's personal for you that you knowingly operated without a license for at least the last five to seven years. MR. ROWEN: Well, three and a half, to be honest. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Until you got caught. MR. ROWEN: Well, no, actually, it had nothing to do with the getting caught. It was the fact that I couldn't. I was told that I couldn't. If you said to me Mike, come in and get your license, I'll bring in the money, I'll come in. I wrote the test. Originally I could have been grandfathered in from the old days. I wrote the test with everybody else. I complied all the way around. I was told I couldn't. This is what I do. I'm a painter. And there's nothing else I can say other than I'm a painter and that I work hard and I'd just like to have my license reinstated to go back to painting. MR. DICKSON: Okay, he took the test, he made an 82, right? MR. ROWEN: Yes, sir. MR. DICKSON: He's got the experience. We looked at his credit. So he meets all the categories and we have the right to do that. And if he is licensed, we could control him. MR. ROWEN: Absolutely true. Page 56 September 20, 2000 MR. CRAWFORD: That was my point last month. MR, DICKSON: Yeah. It's not like he's asking us to waive the test or waive experience. He's proven both of them are -- or waive credit. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Then what is the purpose of the written law that we amended it to deny renewal, if you've let it lapse, that you must take the written exams again? What is the purpose of the law, if it's not a big deal? MR, NEALE: Well, that's not the case. What it says is it says that the person has to retake the exam unless this board, as it can do in any case when an application's referred to it, determines that the person has adequate relevant recent experience, based on evidence, that would make the retaking of this test superfluous. MR, BARTOE: And I might add, the day he was caught, he advised Mike Ossorio and myself the same exact thing he has told the board here, that he attempted to, and the record shows he did in '94 and was told he couldn't because of bankruptcy, and that's why he never attempted since, until he ran into us and we explained well, possibly you can. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay. In the same wording, Mr. Neale, in the ordinance that says we have the right to waive, what if there wasn't a board? We wouldn't have the right to waive. Then he would have to follow the letter of the law. MR. NEALE-' Uh-huh. CHAIRMAN HAYES: My question is, why is the law written as it is? Why didn't it just say instead of the board, if -- go ahead and say you've got to take the test, except if that testing seems to be superfluous, we don't care that he takes the test. Why wasn't the ordinance written like that? MR. CRAWFORD: I would assume that the ordinance refers to someone that was out of the business for more than two years. I think I have the answer, is that someone that was out of the business for two years, and maybe now he's in a different profession, comes back to the business, he needs to get back up to speed. In this particular case, that might not apply. He has painted. Legally or illegally, he has been painting. He's still up to the current standards. I think that's the -- MR. NEAI. E: And the reason this is -- Page 57 September 20, 2000 MR. CRAWFORD: -- reason he -- MR. NEALE: -- really in part, it's also to comply with 489. Because 489 has that very specifically for state registered or certified contractors, that if they let their license lapse for that same period of time, for three years, they have to go back and retake the test. They also have the same appeal ability. CHAIRMAN HAYES: My concern is to be construed of rewarding this individual with a license, since he's been operating the last few years without a license, just give him a license and say now you're legal. Well, how many more people can construe that as saying, well, you know, we won't use the license until we get caught and then we'll go to the licensing board and they'll issue us a license and we don't have to worry about it. MR. ROWEN: But that wasn't the case. I was honestly told that I couldn't, you know, confront anybody. I had no idea. I'm not up to date on all these things. I paint houses. That's where my mind is, painting houses. And all this business stuff here, I really don't know about. Until Mr. Bartoe informed me that hey, you know, you have other options, I had no idea. And we do leave town on instance a couple of years at a time, and we'll have several more references for you, if you need those as well. I don't think it's a reward, I think it's something that was oversighted eight years ago and perhaps we could bring it up to date. I don't see it as a reward, I see it as us going back to work. MR. DICKSON: I don't see it as setting precedence, unless another man comes in here who's expired eight years, had his license before, scored an 82 on it and went into the county and it's in his file that he checked on reinstatement and was told that he couldn't reinstate it for something that he could have worked around. And he could have worked around it then, but got that information. CHAIRMAN HAYES: That seems to be the extenuating circumstance in this particular case. Mr. Laird, on the state board, if you were to hear a condition, situation like that, what would have been your response? MR. LAIRD: I'm not going to comment. I'm not sure. I think he's done everything he could do. Page 58 September 20, 2000 CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay. I just don't want -- like you say, Mr. Dickson, I just don't want it to be construed that you can operate without a license and whenever you get caught, you just come to the 'ol boys down here and the girls at the Contractors' Licensing Board and they'll just go ahead and give you a license. As long as the stipulation is maintained that he in fact has documented proof that in 1994 he did attempt to reapply and the information he got at the time was because of his bankruptcy he could not renew his license, then that is documented evidence that there is some extenuating circumstances here. MR. LAIRD: Mr. Chairman, I think that should be considered, certainly. MR. DICKSON: Yeah. And the thing I like about it is he got a citation, which you paid~ right? MR. ROWEN: Yeah. Paid one, yeah. My son got one. MR. DICKSON: Okay. If anything else, the citation is also serving the second purpose, to get people like this back on the books to where they are -- I see nothing but positive. I'll make a motion, if no one else will. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Any other discussion? I'd like to entertain a motion. MR. DICKSON: I move that this gentleman's -- let me get this right -- Mike Rowen's painting license be reinstated without retesting. MR. LAIRD: I will second that, Mr. Chairman. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I need a second -- I'm sorry, I have a second. I have a little discussion with it. I'm not so sure that I'm real happy about reinstating his license. I like the idea that he go through the standard normal application for a new license, except he does not have to retake the exam, that we accept his old exam results as enough. I'm not sure I just want to reinstate his license. MR. DICKSON: But you've got a motion on the floor that you have to deal with first. CHAIRMAN HAYES: We can do that. I'm just discussing. Any other discussion? MS. WHITE: I also think, too, we're not giving a license for electrical or plumbing or anything life threatening. Unless -- MR. NEALE: It's just a painting license. MS. WHITE: -- you use lead-based paint. Page 59 September 20, 2000 MR. ROWEN: No. MS. WHITE: You know, so I look at that as well. But I like Gary's suggestion, you know, that he take the exam, but I think he needs to reapply for a license. MR. NEALE: Well, if I may, the -- my interpretation of the ordinance is that because of the fact that he has not had a license for an extended period of time, that I don't see anything in the ordinance that allows the board to waive the application procedure. It can waive the testing requirement, so -- CHAIRMAN HAYES: That's what I'm thinking. MR. NEALE: I don't know if Mr. Zachary has a different opinion on that, but that's -- that's my read on that. I think he still has to reapply, which -- MS. WHITE: And he has to retake the exam? MR. NEALE: -- it appears he's done most of. I mean, we've already got affidavits and credit reports. And I'd have to look at last month's. MR. BARTOE: We have the application on file. MR. NEALE: Okay, so it's a full package. MR. BARTOE: It was just last month that the board wanted new affidavits of his painting and the credit report. CHAIRMAN HAYES: That's correct, as far as a new application is concerned. New application, not a reinstatement. MR. DICKSON: Well, and once we've dealt with this retesting issue, that's something that's held by the county and doesn't come before this board anyway. Correct, Mr. Bartoe? MR. BARTOE: I'm sorry, sir, I did not hear you. MR. DICKSON: I said once we have this retesting issue out of the way, that's something that's handled by the county and wouldn't come before this board anyway. MR. BARTOE: Correct. MR. DICKSON: Correct. So you'll get the application and follow the procedure that you would follow anyway. MR. NEALE: Yeah, in fact, if I may, and Mr. Bartoe, correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that Mr. Rowen has filed a full application already. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay. But the wording of the motion is to reinstate an old license. I just want everybody to understand that. Okay, I'm going to call for a vote on the motion. All in favor? Page 60 September 20, 2000 MR. LAIRD: Aye. MR. CRAWFORD: Aye. MR. DICKSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN HAYES: MS. PAHL: Aye. CHAIRMAN HAYES: MS. WHITE: Aye. Opposed? Aye. CHAIRMAN HAYES: 3 to 3. We have a deadlock. MR. DICKSON: Well, let's see. Let's check the rules. Now, does the chairman have to drop out? MR. NEALE: No. MR. DICKSON: Okay. MR. CRAWFORD: Can we reinstate (sic) the motion to -- CHAIRMAN HAYES: You can restate the motion to accept the old license -- old test results as sufficient and allow him to reapply for a new license. MR. NEALE: What I would say and what I would recommend to the board is as opposed to accepting the old testing requirements is to use the language set out in 22-184 in the statutes, which states that the board has considered the recent experience in the trade and based upon such experience is waiving the testing requirements because it's convinced that he's qualified by experience that such testing is superfluous. That would be the better language, I would suggest. MR. DICKSON: May I borrow it? MR. LAIRD: You mean you can't repeat that? MR. DICKSON: I'll wait, I'll wait. I know the rules. But you have a full application already? MR. NEALE: It's here in the packet from last month. MR. DICKSON: So we don't need to do a new application. Mr. Chairman, I move that Mr. -- help me. MR. NEALE: Rowen. MR. DICKSON: -- Rowen, that his application be accepted and that we waive the testing requirements because we have reviewed the applicant's relevant recent experience and specific trade, and based upon such experience have waived testing requirements because we were convinced that the applicant was qualified by experience, whereby such competency testing would be superfluous. CHAIRMAN HAYES: That's your new motion? Page 61 September 20~ 2000 MR. DICKSON: Yep. MR. LAIRD: And I'll second that, Mr. Chairman. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Calling for the vote, all in favor? Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN HAYES: Very well. Just a matter of procedure. MR. ROWEN.' Thank you. My phone number's on the back. CHAIRMAN HAYES: As Mr. Bartoe will tell you, if he hasn't already~ you can't come down today, he's got his packet with you (sic). It will be tomorrow. MR. ROWEN: Super. Thank you very much. My phone number's in the packet, if you need painting. Thank you all. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay, any public hearings besides the ones we've finished with? Any reports? MR. BARTOE: No, sir. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Under discussion, I had that letter from this Mrs. Potter that I wanted to discuss a little bit. Any time that the board receives any communication, I think that we owe it to the public to review it and let the public know and understand that we are in receipt and we have reviewed it, and as best of our efforts, we're hoping to abide and uphold the laws as best as possible in Collier County. We are not legal eagles. We on this board are individual contractors and individual citizens in this county. And from a legal standpoint, we have staff people on staff with us that are our advisors. From a practical standpoint is about all we have going for us, and from our experience in the industry, and we do our very, very best to abide by the laws, the regulations. We have ordinances in front of us that we are not actually enforcing, but adjudicating, if you will. And we do our best with it. We can't do everything to please everyone all the time. However, as long as we can maintain the laws of Collier County and the integrity thereof, then I feel that we are doing our best to do our job. Does anybody have any other discussion on this issue? MR. LAIRD: No, Mr. Chairman, I suggest you write that letter Page 62 September 20, 2000 and answer with that information. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay. MR. DICKSON: The only thing I would add to that is the charge of this board is the protection of the citizens of Collier County. What we did here today and have done in the past nine years that I've been on this board does not put the citizens at risk. MR. LAIRD: Not what? MR. DICKSON: Does not put the citizens at risk, by giving an individual like this a license. Her letter was directly relating to this case. MR. LAIRD: I assumed it was. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay, any other discussion on that issue? Any other issues for discussion? MR. NEALE: Only one additional and, board members, is once again, we had a number of second entity qualifters in front of this board. And again, the same questions as always are raised. And what I would suggest, as I suggested before, is that the board adopt in essence, which I thought had been done, the format and form used by the state for the additional business organization. Simply because an awful lot of the questions that this board asks during that time are included in there, and it might allow the board prior to the meeting to have reviewed the information and just get affirmation of it from the applicant. So -- MR. DICKSON: I thought that had already been done. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I was under the impression that we already made that -- MR. NEALE.' I thought it had been done, too. And I notice that all the packets that came through still had all the old forms. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Had the old forms. Mr. Bartoe, a couple of months ago I thought we had suggested that since we had decided, I guess, that we don't grant second entities, the state actually does, but we have to -- we hear it first on the local level and then send it up to the state for approval. Because of that, we wanted to adopt the format that the state has for requesting second entity. MR. BARTOE: You may have done that, but was I here? I don't know. I don't-- CHAIRMAN HAYES: I don't know, I'm just asking -- MR. BARTOE: -- remember doing it. Page 63 September 20, 2000 CHAIRMAN HAYES: -- how can we -- MR. NEALE: Yeah, because I remember that even we had a mock-up form presented here, and I remember the board adopting it, and yet it hasn't been done, and I'm just, you know -- MR. DICKSON: I think what happened, if I remember correctly, Mr. Palmer took that form and was going to review it and implement it into the county. MR. NEALE: Yeah, and I think that may have been when it dropped. MR. BARTOE: Then that's where it probably is. MR. NEALE: Yeah, because-- CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay, that makes sense. MR. NEALE: -- in looking at the state form again, it just makes it so much simpler for this board. Because it's got such a detailed list of questions that -- MR. BARTOE: If Mr. Zachary could check with Mr. Palmer then and review it and get it to staff, we'll include it with these applications for second entities. MR. NEALE: Just, you know, simply because a lot of the questions that this board would like to ask is, you know, how are you being paid by the businesses you presently qualify; how will you be paid by the business you are applying to qualify; what percentage of ownership do you have in the present business; what percentage of ownership do you have in the business you want to qualify. It is -- a lot of issues that this board typically likes to bring forth are already there. So if the form's filled out fully, it could expedite those kind of reviews. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I think the state would move a little more rapid on it, too, perhaps, if their own format was already reviewed. MR. NEALE: At least for the ones to get kicked up to that. You know, the ones that are purely local. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Purely local. MR. NEALE: It at least gives this board a good grip on it. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Mr. Zachary, would that be fine with you? MR. ZACHARY: That's fine with me. I'll do that. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Any other discussions? MR. DICKSON: I have one directed at staff. I'm noticing a new form that I've never seen before, and it Page 64 September 20, 2000 specifically is in a file of a case we did not handle today. It's Sandra Stiger. And there's a form in there on Page 9, if you want to look at it. There's another one on Page 8. This affidavit of integrity and good character? I've never seen that form before, don't really know how it came about. But if you sit here and read this form a little bit, that's about the most worthless piece of paper I've ever seen. I can get someone on the street corner to sign this thing. MR. NEALE: If I can, to come to the support of staff on that one, the ordinance and the statute both say that you have to have people swear to your integrity and good character. MR. DICKSON: Really? MR. NEALE: Yeah. Is that not the case? MR. DICKSON: Is this new? MR. NEALE: It's actually been in other packets. I looked back and yeah, we've seen it before. You may be correct on its validity, but that's what the rules say you've got to do, so you've got -- MR. BARTOE: And I would -- MR. DICKSON: Like a two-year old child. MR. BARTOE: And I would have to ask office staff why they're in some packets and not in others. MR. DICKSON: Yeah. If you miss a few, I won't bring it up. MR. NONNENMACHER: And don't hold anything back, Mr. Dickson. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay, one other item of discussion I want to make sure we're clear on is we have to hopefully going to do some homework prior to our October the 11th workshop (sic). There really needs to be a good bit of work done into that workshop. Make sure you're prepared to roll up your sleeves, because we've got a lot of review and a lot of questions. I think, Mr. Neale, you've probably got quite an extensive list compiled by now of things we need to go over. We've been quite public to inform everyone that we need input from the industry, and that may be part of the results of why we see people from the industry coming in to testify today. We're quite public these days, and so our issues are on the tongues of a lot of people. And I'm hoping to get some feedback from those people at that public hearing on October the 11 th, and it will be right here in the county building, same place we are Page 65 September 20, 2000 today. We plan on putting some work out and making sure that we can clarify some of the problems, ambiguities, inconsistencies in the ordinances. Yes, Mr. Bartoe. MR. BARTOE: I have a question for Mr. Neale or Mr. Zachary. If we hold this workshop, which we do have the room reserved, I was thinking our normally scheduled meeting day is the following Wednesday, the 18th. My question is, should we have one or two items such as second entities or this person that we had a no show today, would we be able to have the board entertain those on October 11th and then we would not have to have a meeting on the 18th? MR. NEALE: My sense is it would have to comply -- we'd have to comply with all the notice requirements that would normally be for a regular meeting, so public notice and all that would have to be had. And I'd have to do a check of the statutes to see exactly what the requirements are. But, you know, if someone's going to be brought here for a public hearing, they'd have to get adequate notice. I'm not sure what the rule is on that. But, you know, all the notice things would have to be complied with. MR. ZACHARY: Yeah, that's the first thing that popped into my mind is the notice requirement. I mean, you all, it's your prerogative to change the date of meetings any time you want, so if you want to move that meeting up, that's the first thing that popped into my head. CHAIRMAN HAYES: That's what I was going to say. MR. NEALE: If you're going to do it, I'd suggest that it be done today. MR. ZACHARY: I'm not crystal clear on the time for the notice, but it's coming right up. MR. NEALE: Well, the thing is if -- what I would say is if the board wishes to do that, give Mr. Zachary and I the leeway to not accomplish that, because if there is a 30-day notice provision, we would not meet the 30 days for an 11th meeting. CHAIRMAN HAYES: That's correct. However, I think that that might be an issue or factor. If you're talking about a couple of individuals that want to get in and out of here, if they didn't have any objection to the shorter notice, then it probably Page 66 September 20, 2000 wouldn't be an issue anyway. But once again, I don't want to turn that meeting into a heavy regular meeting, but if we've got a couple individuals like the individual that didn't show up today, they don't have a problem making that time with us as well, then I don't see a problem. MR. BARTOE: That's what I was looking at. In case this no show would want to come, and supposedly we were going to have a little bit of an emergency situation today where a qualifter passed away and the company is trying to get another qualifter, and just couldn't get everything together quite in time for today. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I don't see a problem with that. Does anybody on the board have a problem with that? MS. WHITE: No. MR. NEALE: As I say, if you just give Mr. Zachary and I the leeway, if we have notice problems statutorily, that we can say it has to be split, it has to be two meetings. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Right. MR. NEALE: That's the only thing I would request. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I don't have a problem with that at all. Once again, I'm all for the idea that if we got 15 minutes of meeting, not having to convene a full-blown meeting for 15 minutes work. MS. PAHL: I agree. MS. WHITE: Why don't we postpone the workshop till the 18th? CHAIRMAN HAYES: A little bit late. We've already got announcements out all over the place. MS. WHITE: Oh, okay. CHAIRMAN HAYES: People have been adjusting their schedules already for that. MR. DICKSON: What time are we starting October 11th? CHAIRMAN HAYES: 9:00 a.m., I believe. MR. DICKSON: And you're expecting to go to 4:00 or 5:00? CHAIRMAN HAYES: I'm expecting to go more than one day, so yes. MR. LAIRD: Do we need a doctor's excuse? CHAIRMAN HAYES: Well, that you get paid so well, I don't need to hear any complication. MR. DICKSON: Do we get overtime? Page 67 September 20, 2000 CHAIRMAN HAYES: Overtime, yeah, I'll give you overtime. Any other discussions? MR. DICKSON: You think we should block out October the 12th or do you -- CHAIRMAN HAYES: No, we'll have to put together another date at that time. No, I don't -- MR. BALZANO: If you don't discuss the discussions too much, we can get out of here in one day. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Right. Okay, I need a motion. MR. LAIRD: Motion for adjournment, Mr. Chairman. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Motion for adjournment. MR. DICKSON: Second. CHAIRMAN HAYES: All in favor? (Unanimous vote of ayes.) There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 11:45 a.m. CONTRACTORS' LICENSING BOARD GARY HAYES, CHAIRMAN TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC., BY CHERIE' R. LEONE, RPR Page 68