Loading...
CLB Minutes 11/15/2000 RNovember 15, 2000 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE CONTRACTORS' LICENSING BOARD Naples, Florida, November 15, 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 Daniel Gonzalez Richard Joslin Bob Laird Arthur Schoenfuss Carol Pahl Sara Beth White ALSO PRESENT: Patrick Neale, Attorney for the board Robert Zachary, Assistant County Attorney Bob Nonnenmacher, Chief License Compliance Officer Thomas Bartoe, License Compliance Officer Michael Ossorio, License Compliance Officer Paul Balzano, License Compliance Officer Page1 AGENDA COLLIER COUNTY CONTRACTORS' LICENSING BOARD DATE November 15, 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: III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: DATE: October 11,2000 V. NEW BUSINESS: 6. VI. OLD BUSINESS: VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS: VIII.REPORTS: IX. DISCUSSION: 1. WORKSHOP: Ordinance Amendments X. NEXT MEETING DATE: 1. Woody S. Ryan wishes to contest citation #0707 issued to him by Mike Ossorio. 2. Mario Rodriguez - request to qualify 2"d entity with Masonry license. 3. Fred W. Rogers - request to get paving restricted to patching license, has sealing & striping license and was grandfathered in. 4. Charles D. Walton - would like a Master Plumber's license without taking trade exam, passed business & law. Mike Olson - request to qualify 2® entity. Hector Ortegon - request to qualify 2nd entity. December 20, 2000 November 15, 2000 CHAIRMAN HAYES: I'm going to call this meeting to order. 9:04 a.m., November the 15th, Contractors' Licensing Board. Any person who decides to appeal a decision of this board will need a record of the proceedings pertaining thereto and, therefore, may need a -- 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'd like to start with roll call to my right. MR. CRAWFORD: Walter Crawford. MR. LAIRD: Bob Laird, public member. MR. DICKSON: Les Dickson. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Gary Hayes. MR. JOSLIN: Richard Joslin. MS. PAHL: Carol Pahl. MR. SCHOENFUSS: Arthur Schoenfuss. MS. WHITE: Sara Beth White. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Do we have any additions or deletions to the agenda? MR. BARTOE: Good morning, Mr. Chairman, board members. For the record, I'm Tom Bartoe, licensing compliance office. Staff has no additions or deletions at this time. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I need a motion to approve the agenda. MR. LAIRD: So moved, Mr. Chairman. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I have a motion. MS. PAHL: I'll second it. CHAIRMAN HAYES: And I have a second. All in favor? Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN HAYES: Very well. Approval of the minutes of October the 11th. We have them in front of us, such as they are, as thick as they are. Could be that the type size was grown so some of us can read it. MR. BARTOE: This is thanks to computers. CHAIRMAN HAYES: To computers. MR. DICKSON: It's kind of like the ballot in Palm Beach, bigger print. MS. PAHL: We don't have any hanging chats, do we? Page 2 November 15, 2000 CHAIRMAN HAYES: I need a motion for approval. MR. SCHOENFUSS: I move we approve the minutes of the last meeting. MR. JOSLIN: Second. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? All in favor? Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN HAYES: Motion carries. Very well. MR. BARTOE: Mr. Chairman, before I forget, I would like to advise the board and everyone that Mr. Nonnenmacher now has a new position in supervision. He is called the chief licensing compliance officer. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Congratulations. MR. NONNENMACHER: Thank you, sir. MR. DICKSON: Does that mean that the two of you work for him? MR. BARTOE: Correct. I did before, anyway. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Did they just create that for you? MR. NONNENMACHER: Yes. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Are you acting? MR. NONNENMACHER: Am I acting? No. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Oh, you are the permanent? MR. BALZANO: No one else wanted it. MR. NEALE: He wasn't at work that day, is that what happened? MS. PAHL: He drew the short straw. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay, under new business, Woody S. Ryan wishes to contest a citation issued to him by Mike Ossorio. Mr. Ryan, are you here? MR. RYAN: Yes. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Would you come up to the podium, please, sir. As this is a public hearing, I'm going to have to ask that you be sworn in. (Speaker was duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN HAYES: I don't believe we're going to have to have our officers and staff members sworn in, are we? MR. DICKSON: Yes, you will, Mr. Hayes. (Speakers were duly sworn.) Page 3 November 15, 2000 CHAIRMAN HAYES: Mr. Ryan, you've requested a hearing on a citation? MR. RYAN: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Would you care to elaborate on that? MR. RYAN: First, I'd like to thank the ladies and gentlemen of the board. I'd like to thank you for granting this hearing. I realize that the board has a very busy schedule; therefore, I will be as brief as possible. I come before the board for two reasons: I would like to make the case for my doing only the fire caulking on the head wall systems, which is part of my rated wall system. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Mr. Ryan, would you get a little bit closer to the microphone~ please. MR. RYAN: Okay. Is that better? CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay, fine. MR. RYAN: I'd like to make the case for my doing only the fire caulking on the head wall system, which is part of my rated wall system. I've been working with Collier County for seven years, and each of the dry wall contractors I worked for, before starting my own business, always did their own fire sating on their rated wall. This particular item is always found in the scope of work of the dry wall contractor. It's also found in the dry wall contract. When the process of fire sating and the new fire caulk was instituted for the metal roof or rib decking, I was instructed by Mr. Jim Quigley, the fire inspector, of the changes and exactly what would be accepted, including leaving a copy of the UL applications, manufacturer's product, and the MSDS which I have complied with for the last two, two and a half years. I have never been apprised that this scope of work was outside the scope of my license. Mr. Jim Quigley has been the fire inspector on at least 25 or 30 of the jobs that I have completed. He's the same person that lodged the complaint against my company. That is why I was surprised. And I ask you to debate my fine and leave me with a clean license. I have no other violations on my license. I also would -- I also would like the board to write into the scope of work of the dry wall license the ability for fire sating and/or fire caulking that is part and parcel of our rated wall system so that all the dry wall contractors will not be in violation Page 4 November 15, 2000 of working outside their scope of their license. And I sincerely would like to thank you for your time and consideration in this matter. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Mr. Ryan, I'm looking --you're absolutely right. In the carpentry license, in the Ordinance 99-45, Section 1.6.3.6, the carpenter contractor's license does not mention fire sating as part of its scope of work. Also, the same thing applies for the dry waller, it does not mention it in a dry wall contractor's license either at this point. MR. RYAN: That's correct. But I truly was unaware of the fact that we weren't allowed to do it, because as I explained previously, for the last seven years I've worked in Collier and Lee County and I've worked for three or four other dry wall contractors before I opened my own business, and we always did it, as a matter of fact. And since I've gone into business for myself, I've noticed that every single bid document that I get always includes -- under the dry wall always includes the fire safing on the rated wall. As well as the fact that when I do get a contract, it's included in the contract as part of my scope of work. MR. OSSORIO: Mr. Hayes, it should be noted it's under the insulating contractor for fire-stopping. CHAIRMAN HAYES: That's what I was looking for. We don't have a specific license. MR. OSSORIO: There is a license in the state for a 489 for gypsum dry wall, and that does not include it either. Fire-stopping is not permitted as well. CHAIRMAN HAYES: So we don't have a specific license for fire sating? MR. OSSORIO: Insulation. CHAIRMAN HAYES: If we have to -- if you do fire sating, you must be a licensed insulation contractor. MR. OSSORIO: That is correct. It should be noted that even the fire marshal is the one that called this complaint. So, you know, it's kind of hard to believe. I wish Mr. Quigley was here from fire. But he's the one that actually called it in in the first place. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Historically, I've seen that everyone that needs to patch a hole patches their own holes in some of the contracts out there. I, as a plumbing contractor, have been Page 5 November 15, 2000 requested to fire safe my penetrations. Well, I'm not licensed for anything but plumbing. So I don't know that if -- if we're running into a little situation here that heretofore we haven't even noticed and maybe we need to address it. MR. CRAWFORD: I think we do, Mr. Chairman. I've spent four and a half years employed by Wall Systems, one of the major dry wall contractors in Collier County. And it's very typical for dry wall contractors to do their own fire caulking and their own fire sating. Typically the MEP contractors like yourselves will seal their own penetrations. Although sometimes dry wall contractor does it. I think that perhaps we need to look at updating the code -- or the ordinance to allow dry wall contractors to do that. Because this is very common. MR. OSSORIO: But you're absolutely right. But you have to understand something, that we didn't have a choice but to bring it in front of the board. You know, I recommended to Mr. Ryan, you know, to come in front of the board to do this -- CHAIRMAN HAYES: For that reason. MR. OSSORIO: -- application for this reason. But it should be noted that in 489, the state statute for dry wall, gypsum, it doesn't mention fire-stopping. I don't know if that's a -- CHAIRMAN HAYES: It does not mention it? MR. OSSORIO: No. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Well, that's my point. It does not mention it in any of the trades that do their own fire caulking. Not even in the state level, in 489. Mr. Neale? MR. OSSORIO: That is correct. MR. NEALE: Just looking at it, fire sating is really only mentioned in the insulation contractor's section, of our code at least. CHAIRMAN HAYES: So technically everyone that has done their fire sating without an insulation license are in violation technically of the licensing code. MR. NEALE: And theoretically what should be done is that the dry wall contractor should have to bring in another sub, an insulation contractor, just to do the fire sating to be precise -- CHAIRMAN HAYES: I wonder if that was the original intent. Page 6 November 15, 2000 I think maybe not. I think maybe it was an oversight. I mean, if it was the original intent, maybe we need to study as to why it was intended to be that way before we act on it. However, if it was an oversight, then maybe we can act on it and correct it. MR. NONNENMACHER: Mr. Chairman, if I may, would we be allowed to correct that without the state adding it to their gypsum dry wall license? Can we be more lenient than the state is? The state, it is not included in their category of dry wall and gypsum. Now, the county feels that maybe it's an inadequacy and we should do it. Are we permitted to do that if the state doesn't do it? CHAIRMAN HAYES: Well, I think just the opposite would be my approach to it. And that is, that if it -- that if we added it, we would be more restrictive because now we're focusing on the fact that if you don't have it specifically written into your license to do, we need to cite you for it. You're not supposed to do it. So I think it's the opposite might occur. By adding it to the dry waller's license, we've actually restricted the ability to do it by anybody that doesn't have it in their license. So what I'm scared of is that if that's the case, should we add that wordage to every single license that could penetrate a floor and require -- or wall and require fire sating before we'd be legal across the board. MR. NONNENMACHER: Well, exactly how much fire safety is involved in dry wall? MR. BARTOE: Quite a bit. MR. NONNENMACHER: And the reason why I bring that up is because you brought your point when you penetrate, you fireproof your hole. Most trades do have incidental to. Roofers, you know, incidental to replacing any wood or anything. I think there's quite a difference in what you do when you fireproof a hole that you've made and the extent of complete fireproofing that a dry waller does. CHAIRMAN HAYES: That's true. I see what you're saying. MR. RYAN: Could I add a comment? CHAIRMAN HAYES: Sir. MR. RYAN: Basically speaking, what we're talking about is it's an integral part of our wall system. In order for me to provide a one-hour wall or a two-hour wall with the rating that it requires, it really turns out to be part and parcel of my wall. When you Page 7 November 15, 2000 start bringing other additional subcontractors in to perform a portion of the scope of work that I really should be doing, I'm in some respects losing the ability to control that process and make sure that it's absolutely right. The other thing is that if I'm having to do that, then it means that every other contractor for every little hole is going to have to hire somebody special to come in, it's going to drive the price up, MR. DICKSON: What's the testing difference between the two contractors? MR. NEALE: I don't know exactly what the difference is. MR. DICKSON: Between the insulation contractor that can do fire sating. MR. NEALE: I don't know what the block exams exactly contain for each of those. MR. ZACHARY: The insulation contractor, I'm looking at the ordinance, it requires 36 months experience, a passing grade on a three-hour test, and a passing grade on a two-hour business and law exam. MR. NEALE: Dry waller also requires a three-hour test, but obviously we don't have the information as to what each of those tests are comprised of. It would appear, just from a reading of the definitions, that the insulation contractor's license exam does include questions on fire sating and fireproofing; whereas, there's nothing, at least in the text of the definition of the contractor, to say that the dry wall contractor's license exam does include the same kind of questions. MR. BALZANO: Mr. Hayes, if you do your own fire stopping and -- CHAIRMAN HAYES: You're going to have to have a microphone. MR. BALZANO: You do your own fire stopping when you penetrate a firewall and when you penetrate a two-by-four or a two-by-six, and they make you put the foam around it so that you don't get drafts through it. Because you could end up with a plumber, an electrician, a mechanical contractor, an air conditioning contractor, all going through this firewall, and you're going to put in their license that they can all come in and do their fire stopping. I would rather have one person Page 8 November 15, 2000 responsible for all the holes that are in that wall than five or six people. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I agree. And I think it does make sense as well that the person that covers and finishes the wall is the one that experiences the inspection. And that if it is isolated to a specialty license and the wall installer's license, then it probably makes sense to leave it at that. I agree. MR. CRAWFORD: That makes sense. That's just not the precedent in Collier County. MR. BALZANO: But it's illegal what you've been doing. MR. CRAWFORD: It could be. It's been done that way for 10 years. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Well, I agree, it's as illegal as this gentleman is this morning. MR. RYAN: The other problem that you have with that is there's no way that a dry wall contractor could possibly bid -- MR. CRAWFORD: That's the real issue. MR. RYAN: -- the fire sating in a building when you've got nine different trades doing penetrations, making holes and doing whatever. There's no way that a dry wall contractor could sit down and figure out what the cost would be on the finished product. Because we don't know going into it what they're going to do. MR. CRAWFORD: That's right. MR. OSSORIO: Mr. Ryan, have you ever subcontracted out an insulating contractor for doing fire stopping on one of your jobs? ever here MR. RYAN: I haven't to date. MR. OSSORIO: Have you ever seen an insulating contractor do fire stopping on any of your jobs? MR. RYAN: Never. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I just wish, Mr. Ryan, you'd have been last month. MR. RYAN: I wish I would have been here last month myself. It is a kind of thorny issue. And the problem is it seems like it would be cut-and-dry, but it's really not as cut-and-dry as it seems. Because like I just said, if you put the onus on the dry wall contractor to do it, then what you've got is you've got a scenario where there's no possible way he can figure out how many holes the plumber's going to leave him with, and how many Page 9 November 15, 2000 holes the electrician's going to leave him with, how many holes the sprinkler system people are going to do, the HVAC. I mean, you've got all those trades and every one of them has a separate requirement. If a pipe penetrates a wall, in some cases, you can use fire caulk around it. In other cases, you have to put a collar around it. In other cases, you have to box the whole thing out. I mean, it's a fairly complicated issue. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Mr. Crawford, another thing that concerns me is the fact that if in fact we were to do something like add it to the dry waller's license who has done it and been understood to do it for quite some time now, he definitely has more skill and knowledge to do it than my plumbers have and some people's electricians have. I mean, it's almost like we pretty well need a specialist crew within our individual discipline to do that fire caulking. I know that I refuse to take it on in my contracts because I for one have no skill in that whatsoever. And two, I'm not real thrilled about being lifesaving in my work. I'm a plumber. MR. CRAWFORD: It's definitely a skill. And it's -- we're talking about commercial work only. You're involved in commercial work as well? MR. RYAN: Yeah. MR. CRAWFORD: All I know is that today the plumber typically seals his own holes, fire sprinkler seals his own holes, dry wall contractor picks up the joints at the top of the wall, at the bottom of the wall and the incidental areas. And for the reason he stated, that dry wall contractors are not knowledgeable enough to figure out where all the pipes for the four other different trades go, and it just becomes complicated. That's -- the system we have in Collier County now, it works in the field. It doesn't sound like it applies to the ordinance, though. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay, let me ask you, the system we have that works, is it multiple fire inspections, or is there one? Each trade, once they fire wrap, fire safe their penetration -- MR. CRAWFORD: It's essentially one inspection. It's the fire inspection. It's the fire marshal's inspection. CHAIRMAN HAYES: So am I understanding this then, that a contractor, if he has eight specialty tradesmen that penetrate firewalls, he has eight people to chase down to try to put the fire Page 10 November 15, 2000 sating in, and eight people to have approve or fail by the fire marshal's whim. MR. CRAWFORD: That's correct. And you bring up a good point in that typically a fire marshal likes to see it done one way and there's different systems, different manufacturers, different types of caulk. A lot of projects now have a special meeting with the fire marshal to say okay, on this project we're all going to use 3M caulk, we're going to do it this way. So there is some coordination involved, but I -- CHAIRMAN HAYES: That's what I'm questioning. Perhaps maybe we need to consider the possibility of standardizing it then. MR. CRAWFORD: We could. I just -- I'm afraid we're turning the world upside down by doing that. CHAIRMAN HAYES: That makes sense. And you're right, for 10 years we've been doing it that way. But it's like everything else, I guess, we have to look at our evolution. MR. RYAN: Either that or maybe we need to get a separate category and let all of the different trades go and get that specialty. Make it a specialty license and just make it for that particular issue, fire caulking, fire sating. They have books, programs that you can get into. And I'm sure a few of the major manufacturers would probably be more than happy to set you up with some sort of program that might provide the basis to put a test together in an individual specialty license. And that way we could all still be responsible. We go take the test, we get the license, and then we continue doing what we've been doing, only we now have another license. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Mr. Dickson? MR. OSSORIO: Or you can just take the insulating contracting license, which is a three-hour exam. MR. RYAN: That would work well, too. MR. DICKSON: Obviously we've opened Pandora's box. As soon as I think we've got everything covered, something like this comes up. And the fire marshal's obviously aware of it, and it's a good point. But we're not going to resolve this here today. MR. NEALE: If I may, the reason that this gentleman is here, the reason Mr. Ryan is here, is because he's appealing a citation. MR. DICKSON: I understand. MR. NEALE: So the first order of business this board has to Page 11 November 15, 2000 do, has to tend to really in this matter is resolving the matter of the contest of the citation. MR. DICKSON: That was -- MR. NEALE: I'm sure you were going there, but -- MR. DICKSON: My recommendation is, one, that we put this on hold till people, professionals and experts in the field, wall systems, I think of Russell Budd and some others, because this is a big issue. It's a bomb going off. Let me finish, Mr. Balzano. Right now is not the time or the place to do this. And we're not capable of doing it today. And so I would recommend that, one, we put this on hold. Two, we get together professionals within the field to come up with a solution to the problem. Number three, we continue operating like we have been operating until that happens. And four is I would be in favor of deleting or cancelling this fine because -- dismissing this fine. Because yes, in the letter of the laws, the way it's written, he's in violation. But you also have to consider the fact it's common knowledge, this has been precedent in Collier County for at least 10 years. And precedent also sets guidelines and rules, as well as what's written. I don't know how the rest of the board feels about this, but we can be here till 5:00 and we're not going to get anywhere. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Mr. Balzano, do you have something to add to that? MR. BALZANO: If his problem was as large as what Mr. Dickson is saying, we'd have every insulation contractor calling us every day complaining about these people doing their work, and we don't. If Mr. Dickson had general contractors doing new roofs, he'd be calling. We don't have these people calling. So I don't think the problem is as big as he says it is. I mean, there are big insulation companies out there and you see them on all of your high-rises, and they're doing fire stopping and insulation, and they took an exam for it. If he wants to do fire stopping, we already have an exam. Why are we going to have another category? It's under insulation and fire-stopping. I mean, we're just spinning our wheels going to put another license in this ordinance that's already an inch thick. MS. WHITE: I have a suggestion. Why don't we forgo the fine if he will take this insulation exam. Page 12 November 15, 2000 MR. CRAWFORD: I think because it's a bigger problem than that. He's one of hundreds of dry wall contractors that are fire sating and fire caulking as we speak. MS. WHITE: I agree, but we're only dealing with this one issue right today. CHAIRMAN HAYES: That's all I'm trying to do. We need to focus on the citation, the resolution of the citation only, and then we can discuss maybe holding a workshop or adding this to a workshop that we were supposed to have already had. MR. NEALE: It's within this board's power, if I may, to hold -- take this matter under advisement and hold any enforcement of this citation until such time as you're able to give further evidence on the matter. So what the board could do is stay the enforcement of this citation until such time as the board feels comfortable in ruling on the matter, or dismissing it, however the board may see fit. So that is one alternative that the board can take. MR. SCHOENFUSS: I think this whole thing has been a revelation. I think we should commend Mr. Ossorio on his vigilance, and keep it up. But I agree with Mr. Dickson, I think we should just dismiss the citation. This gentleman didn't know he was doing anything wrong, he didn't intend to do anything wrong, and there's a lot of confusion here as to the status of it. I think we ought to dismiss the citation but recognize that we learned something and future action on the part of the board may be required. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Is that in the form of a motion? MR. SCHOENFUSS: I make that a motion. MR. DICKSON: Dickson, I'll second it. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? MR. JOSLIN: I would just like to say one thing. What is going to happen now in the future if this particular motion falls into play with Mr. Ossorio out in the field now and he finds other dry wall contractors that are doing the same type of work and he tickets those people? CHAIRMAN HAYES: I think we can discuss that after this motion. MR. OSSORIO: Okay, just one quick motion before you deliberate. This was called in by the fire marshal. I believe that Page 13 November 15, 2000 the insulating contractors are getting more in-depth in fire stopping and it's getting more detailed. 10 years ago it was easy to caulk something, but now it's getting more and more in-depth. And that's why he called in, because he's tired of all of these dry wall contractors -- not Mr. Ryan himself, but other contractors -- doing the wrong job and he has to go back and replace or do some remedying, you know, for violations courtesy from the fire marshal. And that's what the whole issue is. He has no problem with the insulating contractors, just the dry wall contractors not doing the application right in the first place. So there's a problem in the installing. CHAIRMAN HAYES: But I believe at this point in regard to the citation, it has served its purpose. We are definitely aware of the problem and we are definitely going to make further action on it. MR. OSSORIO: My recommendation is, is that you find him -- you adjudicate him guilty and go ahead and dismiss the fine. MR. NEALE: There's a motion and a second on the table. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I'm aware of that, Mr. Neale. MR. BARTOE: May I make one more opinion from staff? I agree with Mr. Ossorio, because according to the ordinance, Mr. Ryan cannot do that. So I feel he should be adjudicated. He should be in violation, but staff would not object to dismissing the fine. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I think you also make an excellent point, because he is technically and legitimately in fact in violation of our ordinance as it is written. And for it to be the case that sets a precedent, we probably need to act properly on it. MR. DICKSON: But I have a problem with that. Like you said, we're aware of the problem, we're going to act on the problem, so the citation has served its point. To make this gentleman a sacrificial lamb, when I've got hundreds of people out there doing it -- MR. OSSORIO: Then what's going to stop from someone going tomorrow, like the fire marshal, which he's going to do, call in tomorrow and he wants me to address the problem and it's written in the ordinance, it's black and white, that the dry wall contractors are doing fire stopping? MR. JOSLIN: And because they've been doing it for the past Page 14 November 15, 2000 10 years makes it okay? MR. NONNENMACHER: I believe you're putting staff in quite a position here. And I'm not trying to make this gentleman a sacrificial lamb by any means at all. But if you have a problem with people doing things they shouldn't be doing, then change the ordinance. They change speed limits all the time, they remove stop signs, they put stop signs up. And to just come out and say yes, he is in violation but we're not going to find him in violation, I don't know what kind of liability that leaves the board with. You're asking this man to go out and enforce our ordinance, which he does, and he does very well. And then when he comes in here, you're telling him yeah, this gentleman is in violation, he shouldn't have done that, you're 100 percent right, but we're going to dismiss it because we feel everybody else is doing it, too. I don't agree with that. MR. DICKSON: Let me ask a question -- MR. NEALE: If I may, just from a legal point on this, is 489.127(D)(3) is the ordinance -- or the statutory provision that I think covers this. And it reads, 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 grounds under which a citation may be dismissed are either that it's invalid or that the violation was corrected prior to this hearing. CHAIRMAN HAYES: So the record would show, after it's all said and done, that Mr. Ryan was the precedent setting case that we had to act on to amend the ordinance to be more applicable. And that is the only thing on record that will be is that he was the contractor that was cited to get this issue remedied. I don't think that's going to serve as a black eye. MR. DICKSON: That was my question for staff. If it comes down that Mr. Ryan has to get a second license or a specialty license, would the fact that he has a citation for acting like this citation is stating, with that being on his record, with an adjudication of guilty, would that affect him on getting another Page 15 November 15, 2000 license? MR. NONNENMACHER: Not at all. MR. BARTOE: No, sir. MR. SCHOENFUSS: It's still not going to do his reputation any good. MS. WHITE: Would -- Mr. Ossorio, would you be happy with the trade-off if we deferred the fine in exchange for him taking the -- MR. OSSORIO: I have no problem with Mr. Ryan. I've talked to him several times. MS. WHITE: -- exam? MR. OSSORIO: And he understands that the black letter law is that he can't do it. Maybe in the real world, you know, the dry wall contractor must do it. And that's something that's going to be decided in six months. But for right now, I think you should find him in violation, adjudicate him and withhold the fine. I have no problem with that. MR. DICKSON: What if we postpone any adjudication? What does that do to you, until this matter is resolved? MR. OSSORIO: My job is complete when I've issued the citation. It's up to the board what they want to decide. But you have to realize, when you're out there and we're on TV, we have to make sure that we follow the procedures and be very consistent on how we conduct business out there in the field, or in this office as well. MR. NEALE: If I may, if the -- as Mr. Dickson suggests, if the board postpones any action on this matter, it then can fall under the provisions that I read earlier, 489. Whereby, if the board postpones action on this, Mr. Ryan gets his additional license as an insulation contractor, reappears in front of the board, at that point in time he has corrected the violation and the board may dismiss the matter at that point. MR. DICKSON: And that doesn't tie the hands of county in the interim. MR. NEALE: It does not tie the hands of the county in enforcement in the interim period, because it does nothing to the matter, so -- MR. NONNENMACHER: If I may, if the board is considering that, I would strongly recommend that a time limit be put on the Page 16 November 15, 2000 respondent. And if it isn't done in that amount of time, then the citation is brought before you again and a decision is made. MR. RYAN: I'd be happy to take the very next test. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I have a motion and a second on the floor. I need to call for the vote. All in favor? Opposed? MR. DICKSON: Explain the motion. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay, the motion on the floor -- all right, since there is confusion on the vote, the motion on the floor is to dismiss this citation 100 percent at this point, period. That's all the motion is for. MR. NEALE: And please note what I had read you from 489. CHAIRMAN HAYES: And we can continue to debate and we can make other motions afterwards. MR. NEALE: But if you dismiss it, it's dismissed. MR. DICKSON: If you dismiss it, it's dismissed, correct. MR. NEALE: So you vote you just took dismissed this citation. MR. DICKSON: Then I withdraw my second. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay, so I have a motion and a withdrawn second. MR. LAIRD: Am I allowed to make a second? CHAIRMAN HAYES: Yes, sir. MR. LAIRD: I second. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Now I have a motion and a second second. Any further discussion? Starting at my right, I'm calling for the vote. All in favor? MR. CRAWFORD: Aye, Walter Crawford. MR. LAIRD: Bob Laird, aye. MR. DICKSON: Nay, Dickson. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Nay, Hayes. MR. JOSLIN: Nay, Joslin. MS. PAHL: Carol Pahl, aye. MR. SCHOENFUSS: Aye, Schoenfuss. MS. WHITE: Sara Beth White, nay. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I didn't do the math. MR. RYAN: 4-4. CHAIRMAN HAYES: What is the vote, aye -- MR. NEALE: It's 4-4. Page 17 November 15, 2000 CHAIRMAN HAYES: Aye was 4, nay was -- MR. DICKSON: 4. MR. NONNENMACHER: And I believe if you look in your ordinance, the chief licensing investigator gets the final vote. MR. NEALE: According to rules of order, the motion -- if it's a tied motion, the motion fails. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Tied motion has to fail, that's correct. Okay. MR. DICKSON: Dickson, I'd like to make a motion. I move that any action on this citation be suspended until this board resolves whether it's going to be a specialty contractor or an insulation contractor. But in no case should this issue not be resolved any longer than 120 days from now, four months. It may be that he will go get an insulation contractor, it may be there'll be another avenue after we have some meetings with the other professionals in the field. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay, in making that motion, you're still leaving the door open that the citation could in fact be levied against Mr. Ryan in the future. MR. DICKSON: It could be leveled against him, or it could be dismissed following the guidelines as were read to us by the statute; whereas, he would have remedied the situation, or gotten the appropriate license. MR. BARTOE.' Mr. Chairman, I think with what Mr. Dickson proposed, if Mr. Ryan came in and took a test and received his insulation license within that 120-day period, that staff could come here and recommend dismissal, because he came into compliance, and Mr. Ryan would not have to come back before you. MR. NEALE: That's correct. CHAIRMAN HAYES: And if I'm not mistaken, Mr. Ryan, you don't have a problem with that either? MR. RYAN: I have no problem whatsoever. I'd be happy to take the test. CHAIRMAN HAYES: All right. I have a motion. I need a second. MR. JOSLIN: I'll second that one. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Calling for the vote. Page 18 November 15, 2000 MR. CRAWFORD: Crawford, aye. MR. LAIRD: Laird, aye. MR. DICKSON: Dickson, aye. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Hayes, aye. MR. JOSLIN: Joslin, aye. MS. PAHL: Pahl, aye. MR. SCHOENFUSS: Schoenfuss, no. MS. WHITE: Sara Beth White, aye. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay, motion carries. That's the way we'll leave it, Mr. Ryan. We will have it in suspension at this point up to 120 days so that we may act on it, and you may also apply and take your insulation license exam at this point. MR. DICKSON: May I add a comment? I do think it's a bigger issue, because we've got hundreds of people out here doing this right now, and we have major stucco and dry wall companies that are doing this now. I'd like Mr. Crawford's guidance. Do you believe that it's worthwhile that the industry leaders in this field in Collier County, that we get them together and decide -- MR. CRAWFORD: It needs to be resolved. And it's probably a joint effort with the fire marshals and the dry wall contractors. The point is that Tom was making, it is a specialty field and there's some skill to doing this fire rating, but I think the dry wall contractors are just as skilled at doing it as the insulation contractors. So it needs to be resolved. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Mr. Ryan, you had something to say? MR. RYAN.' I was just going to say, I'd like to thank the board for their forbearance in this matter. CHAIRMAN HAYES: You're welcome, sir. Thanks for making our life smooth. MR. RYAN: Thank you. At least this is over temporarily. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Yes, sir. We have a box open. Thank you, sir. MR. RYAN: Thank you. MR. BALZANO: Mr. Hayes? CHAIRMAN HAYES: Yes. MR. BALZANO: I make a recommendation that maybe at the next meeting we contact some of the insulating companies and see what their thoughts are on this. Because if these people are Page 19 November 15, 2000 doing all the work that Mr. Crawford says they are, I don't know how the insulation companies are staying in business. Because there's more dry wall companies than insulation. And if you read the ordinance, if general contractors are allowing this to happen, then they're aiding and abetting an unlicensed contractor or a contractor working outside the scope of his license. And number three, when people come in to apply to take an exam for a certain trade, they know, right in that ordinance it tells them what they can and can't do under that license. So to say that for 10 years or 15 years I've been doing it, well, you've knowingly been doing it. Because when you apply, it tells you you can't do it. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Well, not necessarily, Mr. Balzano. Some of the licenses -- in fact, in one of our cases later on has the same kind of example. Just merely because it doesn't mention that you can do it doesn't make it illegal for you to do it. MR. BALZANO: I have to sit down on that one, Gary. MR. DICKSON: And these licenses get changed quite often from the time that they originally applied. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay, can we move along? Mario Rodriguez requests to qualify second entity with masonry license. Mr. Rodriguez, are you here? MARIO RODRIGUEZ: Yes, sir. MR. BARTOE: Mr. Hayes, if I may have a second. I want anyone that's here to know, who is requesting to qualify a second entity or has any other special requests of the board as far as obtaining a license, that should the board grant your wish, you are not automatically licensed. You will have to come into our office and complete the paperwork. And you will not be able to do that today. I will not -- I have everyone's folder here, and I will not be able to get it back to the office till late today. So it will have to be -- everything would have to be completed after today. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Thank you, sir. I'm going to have to ask you to get sworn in, sir. (Speaker was duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN HAYES: Your names, for the record? MARIO RODRIGUEZ: Mario Rodriguez. Page 20 November 15, 2000 JUAN RODRIGUEZ: Juan Rodriguez. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Yes, sir. First, Mr. Rodriguez, your reason for being here? MARIO RODRIGUEZ: I want to qualify a second company under my masonry license. CHAIRMAN HAYES: What's wrong with the first company? MARIO RODRIGUEZ: Well, the first company, which is KC Tile and Marble, is made up of two partners, both of them friends of mine. This is one of them. They've decided to go their separate ways. We're still subcontracting from the same people, doing the same work, but they've split up the employees and they want to work under two different companies. So basically we're going to be functioning the same, it's just going to be two different entities as far as companies. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay, I'm a little bit confused. In the application I have applicant's name as Juan Rodriguez. And in the application part one I have Mario Rodriguez. MARIO RODRIGUEZ: I am the qualifying agent. Juan is -- maybe there was some confusion in the paperwork. He's from Stones of Time. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Let me ask you this: You are? MARIO RODRIGUEZ: Mario Rodriguez. CHAIRMAN HAYES: You are Mario. And Mario, your brother, Juan, owns this company? MARIO RODRIGUEZ: Well, he's not my brother. Same last name. We're just friends. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay, so -- JUAN RODRIGUEZ: CHAIRMAN HAYES: JUAN RODRIGUEZ: You really know how to complicate life. Mr. Chairman, if I may explain it to you. Yes, sir. Myself and Guimell Doreste own KC Marble. That's the original company that Mario took the test for and qualified. And now Guimell and I are separating and we have two separate companies now, it's KC Marble and my company, Stones of Time. So what Mario whats to do is qualify my company as well, since we're going to be billing the contractors separately. We have separate bank accounts now, and we're going to be billing separately. I do need the license in order to be able to be licensed and insured in order to bill my contractors. Page 21 November 15, 2000 CHAIRMAN HAYES: I am clear on that. Thank you, sir. Mario Rodriguez, are you aware of your responsibilities of your qualifying this individual entity now? MARIO RODRIGUEZ: I sure am. CHAIRMAN HAYES: It's the same requirements as your previous qualification is, legal, financial. MARIO RODRIGUEZ: I understand that. MR. DICKSON: I'm sitting here looking over the Articles of Incorporation, and Mario Rodriguez, who holds the license, I do not see that he is an officer, director or has any financial responsibility. Is that incorrect? MARIO RODRIGUEZ: No, that's correct, sir. I was appointed the qualifying agent for Stones of Time. MR. DICKSON: I understand qualifying agent, but that's not a director, that's not an officer, nor does that give you any financial responsibility for Stones of Time. JUAN RODRIGUEZ: If I may answer that question? MR. DICKSON: Yes. JUAN RODRIGUEZ: We took a resolution. In Stones of Time, we held a board meeting, and we elected him to be a qualifying agent for the company. And he is responsible economically and any other way for Stones of Time. And all the members agreed that he would be. MR. DICKSON: Okay, I see it. Any complaints against Mario Rodriguez? MR. BARTOE: No, sir. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I don't see any substantial problems in the credit report. I need a motion. MR. LAIRD: I move for approval, Mr. Chairman. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I have a motion. I need a second. MR. DICKSON: Second, Dickson. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? All in favor? Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN HAYES: Very well, go forward and do masonry. JUAN RODRIGUEZ: Thank you very much. MR. BARTOE: After you come in the office tomorrow. MARIO RODRIGUEZ: Thank you. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Fred W. Rogers requests to get paving Page 22 November 15, 2000 restricted to patching license, has sealing and striping license and was grandfathered in. Mr. Rogers, are you here? MR. ROGERS: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Would you come up to the podium, please, sir? Your name, sir, for the record? MR. ROGERS: Frederick William Rogers. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I'm going to ask you to be sworn in. MR. ROGERS: Yes, sir. (Speaker was duly sworn.} CHAIRMAN HAYES: Good morning, Mr. Rogers. Your reason for being here this morning? MR. ROGERS: I would like to have a patching license to go along with my seal coating license. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Do you know what license that is? MR. ROGERS: I'm not 100 percent sure. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I'm not aware there is one. MR. BALZANO: I don't know why he isn't up here, he's the chief. We have a couple others that were granted to sealing and striping contractors. Mr. Rogers has been licensed in the county for about 16, 18 years. And what's happening, if I may speak for him, is he had called me and he's turned down a couple of contracts because they want him to patch potholes while he was doing the sealing. Now, Bonay's (phonetic) or any asphalt company is not going to come in and fill in a one-foot hole in a parking lot. And we did this for another contractor that does the sealing and striping, that they can patch a pothole or a crack in the parking areas. He called before he even went out and did it. He said I can't do it, but I can't get the job, and they can't get anybody to fill the hole. So that's why he's here. CHAIRMAN HAYES'- Okay, I did a little bit of research, and our Licensing Ordinance 99-45, Section 1.6.3.31 under paving contractor, it does not mention patching. It mentions experience and skill to construct roads, airport, runways, aprons, et cetera. It has nothing to say about repair. And in section -- the same, 1.6.3.3 under sealing and Page 23 November 15, 2000 striping, it mentions no repair there as well. My question is that if it doesn't specifically mention something, whether you can or cannot, does that make you unable to perform that activity? MR. BARTOE: Mr. Hayes, if I may. As Paul Balzano said, I believe it was a couple of years ago we had a gentleman before you, I believe his last name was Mr. Stanley, and he had the same license, sealing and striping. And the board gave Mr. Stanley approval to do patching. And office staff has created -- if you would give approval of this gentleman, office staff has created a restricted license to patching. CHAIRMAN HAYES: So from that perspective, we feel in Collier County that to patch a pothole, you should be -- have taken an exam to be able to patch a pothole? MR. NONNENMACHER: I think what we're saying, Mr. Hayes, is that if this gentleman is qualified to do his sealing work, then when he comes upon a crack or a hole or some kind of deformity in the material he's patching, he should have the right to repair that before sealing it. It would be ludicrous to expect him to seal over a crack or a small hole or -- and yet we don't want to just arbitrarily give him a paving license. But the patching is incidental to the work that he's doing. And although we have issued a restricted paving license for patching only, and I have no objection to this one being issued, I would like to see wordage put in the ordinance as we're in the process of amending, similar to other categories where they can do minor work incidental to their major category. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I most assuredly agree. So you're saying that if we added the words minor patching to the ordinance under sealing and striping, we would completely eliminate this problem. MR. NONNENMACHER: I believe we would. Yeah, I don't think you'd even have to put minor patching. You would just -- any necessary work incidental to his. Whether it be a crack, whether it be patching or any way you want to word it. It just seems very foolish for a man to go out and try to do his job and run across a hole or a crack and seal over it. MR. DICKSON: I would -- to me, the language would be and minor repairs incidental to the work described. Otherwise, you create a guy that can go out here and patch a hole on a runway, Page 24 November 15, 2000 because he wasn't sealing, striping or painting. You follow what I'm saying? MR. NONNENMACHER: Yeah, and I agree with Mr. Dickson fully. It has to be incidental to the work that he's doing. He cannot go out and contract a patch. But as he's sealing, he runs across a deformity and it's incidental to him sealing, then he can repair it. MR. BARTOE: And also, I believe that probably 99 percent of your companies that are licensed to do paving, you know, are not interested in patching at all. MR. ROGERS: That's right. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay, so we're looking at adding another effort to our completed workshop once again, so this ends up with three items. MR. CRAWFORD: I think this is an easy one, though. I think we could all agree today that we add that -- when someone calls this gentleman out to do work, you're sealing a beat up old parking lot typically and there's going to be minor patching that's required. This is probably something that happens all the time. CHAIRMAN HAYES: So if we were to make a recommendation to add the words minor incidental patching -- MR. NONNENMACHER: Or repairs. CHAIRMAN HAYES: -- or repairs, then that probably would settle the issue and this gentleman wouldn't have to try to apply for another license or ask for a restricted license in any other field. MR. CRAWFORD: Yes. MR. SCHOENFUSS: Makes sense. MS. WHITE: Makes sense. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay, is that something that we want to act on right now? MS. WHITE: Let's do it. MR. NEALE: Just an issue, and I know this is probably ludicrous, but that's what I'm here for. Does the board want to consider how large of a hole that he can patch, or that someone could patch? I mean, a patch can be that big or a patch can be something the size of this desk. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I think that if we use the word minor, that most of us, even without a formal written definition, could probably get away with just differentiating between a minor Page 25 November 15, 2000 patch and repair and a re-blacktopping job. MR. NEALE: And I'm just anticipating the person that gets cited by our officers for doing what he considers to be minor because there's a five-acre parking lot and he's doing 100 square feet. That's minor in terms of a five-acre parking lot, but it's not so minor in terms of a minor patch. MS. WHITE: I agree with Mr. Neale. I think -- what do you think? MR. CRAWFORD: Mr. Rogers, what do you think is a reasonable -- MR. ROGERS: Well, if you put, let's say, a bottom line, a ton of asphalt because you may have a hole over here, another hole over here and one over here and you'd have a patch here and there all over. That will would add up. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I would say minor would be defined under no equipment other than hand and wheelbarrow. And then most of your repairs, your minor repairs, don't take a roller. MR. ROGERS: A hand roller you would need and you also need a tamper. CHAIRMAN HAYES: That's correct. Hand is what I'm getting at, by hand. If you had to bring roller equipment, spreading equipment, et cetera, in there to do it, that's not minor. MR. ROGERS: You do need a gas operated plate tamper to do any kind of repair that's going to last at any time. CHAIRMAN HAYES: This is a hand machine. MR. ROGERS: Yeah. You start it up and you hand drive it. MR. BARTOE: I can see adding this to the sealing and striping license. But how many months before this ordinance gets approved and possibly Mr. Rogers has some jobs lined up that he would like to do prior to this ordinance getting amended, and that's why he's here requesting to do this restricted patching. MR. DICKSON: We issued a license to Mr. Sullivan and called it restricted patching. MR. BARTOE: To who, sir? MR. MR. MR. MR. DICKSON: To Mr. Sullivan who was here before. BARTOE: Mr. Stanley, I believe. DICKSON: Stanley? BARTOE: Yes, we did. Page 26 November 15, 2000 MR. DICKSON: And did restricted patching. See, I don't like what we're doing here, because I see it growing as well. And it's not ludicrous to Mr. Neale. You know that's going to happen, I guarantee it will happen. I make a motion that upon a full application, something more than just a letter that would be given to county that Mr. Rogers be approved to have the same restricted patching license that we gave the other gentleman two years ago. MR. BARTOE'. Yes, sir. We can have him update his folder. MR. DICKSON: And no changes to the ordinance. MR. SCHOENFUSS: Well, then maybe the same issue will come up again and again and again. Maybe the ordinance does need to be changed, if we can solve a problem by adding two or three words. MR. NEALE: Well, except this board doesn't have the power to add it to the ordinance. That has to go through the County Commission. CHAIRMAN HAYES: All he's going to do is settle this issue today on that. I'm going to suggest that we can make other motions immediately following and more recommendation on the ordinance amendment itself. MR. CRAWFORD: Contrary to what Mr. Dickson says, I'm just worried that every parking lot you go to seal has some kind of minor repair, whether it's this big or this big or cracks. There's always a little bit of repair before you seal a parking lot typically. MR. ROGERS: Most parking lots, you look anywhere you bit on, the asphalt is only put in about this thick, and when you try to repair it you physically can't repair it because the stones and the aggregate are too big, and you have to almost dig the hole to put in a proper patch. Yes, most of the times whenever you run into a private driveway, you're going to see a little bit of a patch that needs to be done. MR. CRAWFORD: And that's the right thing to do is to fix it before you seal it. MR. ROGERS: Otherwise the customer is not getting a good job. And then the customer says well, we'll have to get this repaired, and then they call in a paving contractor and they want to saw cut and take out big areas. MR. CRAWFORD: I think when you minor repair, I share your Page 27 November 15, 2000 concern that someone may get carried away with it, but -- MR. DICKSON: Someone will get carried away with it. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I have a motion on the floor. I need a second. MR. LAIRD: What was the motion, Mr. Chairman? I'm sorry. CHAIRMAN HAYES: The motion, I believe, if I understood it, was to grant Mr. Rogers this restricted paving license, period. MR. DICKSON: Patching license. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Patching -- no, there is no patching license. It's a paving license restricted to patching. MR. BARTOE: Correct. MR. NONNENMACHER: That's correct. MR. LAIRD: I would second that. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? MR. NONNENMACHER: Yes, Mr. Chairman. I agree with Mr. Schoenfuss. As I stated before, staff has no objection whatsoever to this man being granted a restricted patching license. My feeling was exactly like Mr. Schoenfuss', that maybe we should look at our ordinance and include incidental to minor repairs and patching. But staff has no objection whatsoever of this gentleman getting a restricted paving license restricted to patching. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay, I have a motion and a second. We'll call for the vote. All in favor? Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN HAYES: Very well. Then we're going to allow you the application for the restricted paving license to make your repairs. MR. ROGERS: Thank you very much. I appreciate it. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Thank you, sir. Okay, further on that issue, shall we at this point discuss that, or put that under discussion under our workshop toward the end of this meeting? MR. BARTOE: Mr. Hayes, my own opinion, we have the discussion -- workshop discussions scheduled here, and I feel we should do it then. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Excellent. Then we'll continue with new business. Page 28 November 15, 2000 Charles D. Walton would like a master plumbing license without taking the trade exam. Mr. Walton, would you come in? MR. DICKSON: We've got two cases, and both of them have resulted in workshop items. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Aren't you glad I didn't already have the workshop? MR. CRAWFORD: Two out of three. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay, I'm sorry. name for the record. sir. Mr. Walton, I need your MR. WALTON: It's Charles D. Walton, Sr. CHAIRMAN HAYES: And I'm going to ask you to be sworn in, (Speaker was duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN HAYES: And your reason for wanting -- or for feeling that you qualify for a license without taking the trade exam? MR. WALTON: Well, it's my understanding there's provisioning in the licensing law that says that if the person can show he's well qualified, that he can be grandfathered in. And I've been in business for -- well, in New Jersey. I've just moved down here recently. I've been doing business for over 20 years in New Jersey as a plumbing contractor. I'm a licensed plumbing inspector, sub-code official and mechanical inspector also. So I mean, you know, I just -- you know, I did take the test and I failed it by -- I got a 68.8 on the plumbing part. And I passed the business and law section of it. I had a little problem with the one part of the test as far as the drawing goes, you know, the venting and everything else on it. Only because our codes are a little bit different here than it is for the national plumbing code in New Jersey. And down here is the standard plumbing code. And it kind of through me off. But, you know, I don't know, based on my qualifications, I'd appreciate it if I could get a license. If not, it's up to the board. MR. NONNENMACHER: Mr. Chairman, if I may. We interviewed every one of our plumbing inspectors and showed the credentials that are submitted to you, and we're recommending that this does fit under the category that testing would be superfluous. His credentials are excellent. In fact, they're quite impressive, according to our plumbing inspectors. Page 29 November 15, 2000 So staff would have no objection whatsoever of this license being issued, if that's what you decide. MS. WHITE: My question is you said that the plumbing here is different than it is in New Jersey? MR. WALTON: No, New Jersey is based on the national standard plumbing code and down here is the standard plumbing code in this state. There's just slight differences as far as venting goes, sizing, you know, that type of thing. Which like I say, it through me a curve ball when the testing came up, you know. MS. WHITE: And it's not necessary that Mr. Walton is aware of Collier County's codes? MR. WALTON: Well, I am aware of them now. Since I took the test, I'm very aware. In fact, I have all the books and everything. You know, I purchased and reviewed and -- but like I say, you know, that part of the testing is what I failed, because I wasn't really up on it at the time I took the test. I want to start a small service business, basically just myself, sole proprietorship, to supplement my income, basically is what it boils down to. MR. DICKSON: When is the next test? MR. WALTON: I'm really not sure, to tell you the truth. I mean, I -- you know. MR. DICKSON: You've taken it one time? MR. WALTON: Yes. MR. DICKSON: How often is the test given? MR. NONNENMACHER: It's given any day of the week, if you want to go to Gainesville. But every month, it's either given in Lee County or Collier County. MR. DICKSON: Why don't you just take it again? MR. WALTON: Well, I guess I could, quite frankly. But I mean, I don't know, it just seems like the older I get, the harder the test is to pass. You know what I mean? So I -- you know, I guess I could, but, I mean, I -- you know, like I say, I'm more than well qualified. I guess the reasoning for the testing and everything else is to see that the person is qualified to do his job. MR. DICKSON: Were you taking the county? MR. WALTON: County test, yes. And, you know, therefore, I feel that I'm well qualified. I've been in business -- I mean, I've been in plumbing all my life, basically. And if I'm not qualified, then -- Page 30 November 15, 2000 CHAIRMAN HAYES: You were an inspection official? MR. WALTON: Yes, a sub-code official and mechanical inspector also. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay. Mr. Walton, I would ask you, thinking on the terms of an official, if you had a plumber or a person that wanted to do plumbing and you were the inspector in an area but he didn't want to take the exam because he couldn't pass it, how quick would you give him his license? MR. WALTON: Well~ like I say, you know, I would have reviewed his qualifications, and if the man is well qual -- I mean, there are a lot of people around that, you know, they can basically -- they could be a great plumber but that doesn't -- because they can't pass the test doesn't mean they're a good plumber. If they don't know what they're doing, they're not qualified. I would grant it myself, but, you know, that's my personal opinion. MR. DICKSON: What's the -- Mr. Balzano, maybe you can -- or Nonnenmacher, maybe you all could answer this. Maybe you can't. On the county plumbing license, what is the percentage of people that pass the test the first time? MR. NONNENMACHER: I cannot answer that. MR. DICKSON: I know on a state level for certified licenses that pretty much across the board the first time pass is 17 to 20 percent. The number one reason for that is people that have been in the trades for years and years do not prepare for the test, don't buy the necessary books, they walk in thinking they're going to breeze through and therefore they fail it. And that's why they give it numerous times a year. And you do what everyone else did who fails it the first time, you don't come before the board and ask for an exemption, you go take the test again. And that's my feelings on this matter. I see no hardship. I see no reason to make an exception for this gentleman. Go take the test again. MR. SCHOENFUSS: Mr. Walton, you must have taken any number of tests in New Jersey to get all these very impressive credentials. MR. WALTON: Yes, I did. MR. SCHOENFUSS: How do you account for the fact that you did so poorly on the local test? MR. WALTON: Like I said, you know, the -- well, actually the Page 31 November 15, 2000 part of the test is -- what I failed on, the part was the drawing part, and that was like on drainage fixture units, sizing, you know, things of that nature. I don't know. I mean, I studied. I got the books. And I really thought I would pass the test. I didn't go there with the assumption that, you know, I was going to walk in and bingo, you know, ace it. I mean, I just I did assume -- I did study for, I guess, probably three weeks prior to that. And like I say, I got all my books and everything else and I failed it. I mean, you know, I don't know-- MR. DICKSON: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion that the request be denied. MS. WHITE: Second. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I have a motion and second. Any further discussion? All in favor? Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN HAYES: Very well. Mr. Walton, we do have the power to grant you that license, but I think there has to be some circumstances, some evidence of some hardship, some reason for it. I do know that the plumbing code here is very different than it is in New Jersey. For me to -- or any of us apparently to be able to feel that you're as qualified to do code according to the standard -- sub and standard code just because you were in the national code in New Jersey doesn't really make you qualified to do it. 57.4, I believe, was your results on that exam. The combination was 70 -- or 69. I personally came down here quite a few years ago as a state certified teacher in the industry and a master plumbing license holder myself and failed the test twice. So I felt -- I didn't study. I just felt that me being a certified teacher, me having the license for half my life, this has got to be a breeze. And you probably felt the same way. It turned out not to be a breeze. The southern standard code has a whole lot of quirks different from the national code. So I believe that for you to be able to actually do plumbing by the southern standard code, you need to study a little bit, qualify for it, so -- MR. WALTON: All right, then I appreciate your time. Thank you. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Thank you, sir. Mike Olson request to qualify second entity. Page 32 November 15, 2000 Mr. Olson, are you here? MR. OLSON: Yes. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Apparently you have more than one individual here. I'm going to ask for your names one at a time. Your name, sir? MR. OLSON: Michael Eric Olson. CHAIRMAN HAYES: And your name, sir? MR. KESSLING: Gerald R. Kessling, III. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I'm going to ask you both to be sworn in, (Speakers were duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN HAYES: Mr. Olson, your reason for being here this morning? MR. OLSON: To qualify Gerald Kessling as a second entity on my carpentry license. CHAIRMAN HAYES: You wish to qualify Off The Wall Construction? MR. OLSON: Yes. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Who do you qualify currently? MR. OLSON: Just myself. CHAIRMAN HAYES: And yourself is what? MR. OLSON: Michael Olson Custom Carpentry. CHAIRMAN HAYES: As we have seen on prior applications in review of your application on Section 6, it says list all businesses, firms, entities or contracting businesses you have been associated with in the past 10 years and you wrote no, none applicable. So that's why I brought it up. MR. OLSON: I must have read the question wrong. CHAIRMAN HAYES: One of those things that were missed. What's your reason for wanting to do this? MR. OLSON: I'm known as a framing contractor, and Gerry is known as a trim carpenter, and if I went to put the two under my name, it wouldn't -- you know, it kind of gives contractors different -- you know, they don't want a framer coming in and putting baseboards down. So Mr. Kessling wants to do trim CHAIRMAN HAYES: carpentry? MR. OLSON: Yes. CHAIRMAN HAYES: kind of carpentry? And he doesn't have a license to do any Page 33 November 15, 2000 MR. OLSON: Right, correct. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Now, from what I understand, he is not a corporation, he is strictly a sole proprietor, and that's what you are as well? MR. OLSON: Yes. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Well, not having any corporate minutes approving this gentleman to do any of the legal business rulings of the entity, how do we know, short of an affidavit, that he's able to do that, Mr. Neale? MR. NEALE: You can take his sworn testimony. MS. WHITE: I have a question for Mr. Neale. Off The Wall -- it's called Off The Wall Construction Company. Can you have the name construction company when it's not like a GC thing? MR. NEALE: Yeah. I mean, it doesn't-- MS. WHITE: It doesn't matter? Just curious. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay, Mr. Olson has signed the affidavit that was identical to the request prior for the second entity, stating that the qualifter license holder understands that all the contracting matters, he will be held strictly accountable for any and all activities involving his license. So he has that affidavit, Mr. Neale. MR. NEALE.' Yes, he does. And there's also an affidavit signed by Mr. Kessling, appointing him as the qualifying agent. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I'm going to ask Mr. Olson, do you remember why Mr. Kessling submitted a credit application? MR. OLSON: I think it was a little confusion from the licensing office. As far as I know, he didn't need to turn in a credit application, correct? CHAIRMAN HAYES: No, because you're not a corporation. You are a sole proprietor and so is Mr. Kessling. And I'm going to assume that that's the reason that you were both asked to submit credit applications. And I very much appreciate that. However, review of your credit application, I see no blemishes of any substance, but Mr. Kessling's is a little different story. MR. DICKSON: Do you realize, Mr. Olson, that you're responsible for everything he does? MR. OLSON: Me and Mr. Kessling have worked side by side for about seven years now. MR. DICKSON: And if he does anything wrong, that your license is the one in that's in jeopardy? Page 34 November 15, 2000 MR. OLSON: Right. MR. DICKSON: And you could lose both companies? MR. OLSON: Yes. CHAIRMAN HAYES: paying his bills. MR. OLSON: Right. That includes not paying your-- he not The blemishes on his credit came from a messy divorce a couple of years ago. Some of the stuff was out of his control. MR. DICKSON: I'd also -- whatever we do, I'd like for county to verify insurance for Off The Wall, Gerald Kessling. I've never seen a handwritten certificate of insurance before. I can't imagine an insurance agent putting one out like this. I'm not saying it's false, I'm just saying -- have you seen those before? MR. BALZANO: (Nods head.) MR. DICKSON: Really? I've never seen one. It's all handwritten. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Yes, I have seen them. MR. DICKSON: Have you? MR. NONNENMACHER: And yes, we will verify it, Mr. Dickson. MR. DICKSON: Okay. MR. LAIRD: Mr. Chairman, I move for approval. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I have a motion. I need a second. MR. CRAWFORD: I'll second it. Crawford. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? All in favor? Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN HAYES: Very well. Mr. Olson, you've been approved. As staff had mentioned at the beginning of this meeting, if you weren't here, you cannot go down today and have your license and paperwork taken care of. Your file is here. It will have to be -- the earliest will be tomorrow. MR. OLSON: Not a problem. Thank you. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Thank you, gentlemen. Hector Ortegon, are you here, sir? MR. ORTEGON: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN HAYES: We have individuals, two again. I'm going to ask both of you for your name first and then ask you to be sworn in. Your names, sir? Page 35 November 15, 2000 MR. ORTEGON: Hector Ortegon. MR. ALAMO: Eliezer Alamo. (Speakers were duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN HAYES: Good morning, gentlemen. Mr. Ortegon, your reason for being here? MR. ORTEGON: Yes, sir. I would like to request for approval to qualify Mr. Alamo with my painting license. CHAIRMAN HAYES: The business that you currently qualify, what's its name? MR. ORTEGON: Four Seasons Painting. CHAIRMAN HAYES: And the new business that you want to qualify, what is its name? MR. ORTEGON: Four Seasons Painting Services. CHAIRMAN HAYES: So you currently qualify Four Seasons Painting? MR. ORTEGON: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN HAYES: And is that a corporation? MR. ORTEGON: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN HAYES: So that's Four Seasons Painting, Incorporated? MR. ORTEGON: Correct. CHAIRMAN HAYES: And you want to now qualify Four Seasons Painting Services? MR. ORTEGON: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Is that a corporation? MR. ORTEGON: No, sir. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay, you -- MR. DICKSON: Can I ask why? MR. ORTEGON: Why it's not a corporation? MR. DICKSON: Why you're doing the second entity. MR. ORTEGON: Oh, yes. He just wants to go in business on his own and I would like to help him out. He's been a friend of mine for many, many years, and I have no problem with trusting him or anything. CHAIRMAN HAYES: First, Mr. Ortegon, am I saying your name correctly? MR. ORTEGON: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN HAYES: On your application, again, Section Item No. 9, list all businesses, firms, entities, contracting businesses you have been associated with in the last 10 years, and you write Page 36 November 15, 2000 none. MR. ORTEGON: Maybe we misunderstood the question. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay. Then you went further and stated a minute ago that your Four Seasons Painting Services was not a corporation. MR, ORTEGON: Correct. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I have your application that says Four Seasons Painting Services, a Florida corporation. Is it a corporation or is it not a corporation? MR. ALAMO: I'm sorry, I guess -- CHAIRMAN HAYES: Your name, sir? MR. ALAMO: Eliezer Alamo. Mr. Hayes, I apologize, we probably didn't understand the question correctly, and we were kind of a little bit confused about that. But I will in the future incorporate. At this time, it's not incorporated. CHAIRMAN HAYES: You personally are going to be a sole proprietor. At this point in time you are not a Florida corporation, you are a sole proprietor. MR. ALAMO: Correct. CHAIRMAN HAYES: That's the clarification I needed. We will have to make that modification, Mr. Balzano, on the application. He has got a sworn -- MR. BARTOE: It's Bartoe. I am looking through his folder. I'm confused. His license that he already has at present, I believe he said he -- it is incorporated. And I can't find that. CHAIRMAN HAYES: That's what Mr. Dickson was pointing out. There's no Florida corporations involved anywhere with Mr. Ortegon or Mr. Alamo. Not that that's a big deal either way, you just need to understand the difference between the entities. MR, ORTEGON: Yes, sir. MR. DICKSON: So the one company is Four Seasons Painting, not a corporation. The second company is Four Seasons Painting Services, not a corporation. Why did you make it so confusing? I mean, serious -- that's a serious issue. People aren't going to distinguish between Four Seasons Painting and Four Seasons Painting Services. MR. NEALE: Well-- MR. DICKSON: Did you get a fictitious name registration? Page 37 November 15, 2000 MR. ORTEGON: Yes, sir. MR. DICKSON: Okay. CHAIRMAN HAYES: It's in the packet. MR. DICKSON: Wow. MR. NEALE: I guess Four Seasons -- and I must have been obviously as confused as everybody here. Four Seasons Painting is or is not incorporated? MR. ORTEGON: I guess we're not. MR. NEALE: So neither of the entities are incorporated. MR. ORTEGON: That's correct. MR. DICKSON: I'm surprised the fictitious name was approved. MR. NEALE: That's the second question, is did you register a fictitious name for both entities? MR. ORTEGON: Originally when I got my license 18 years ago, I did. And it was also registered this time. MR. DICKSON: I don't see that. MR. NEALE: Well, what may have happened is a fictitious name registered that long ago, it may have gotten loss in the mall of the state government when you refile. Because the state will catch them. They'll -- CHAIRMAN HAYES: That's the old one. The new fictitious name was filed for on 11-6 of this year. MR. NEALE: Right, but as I say, I have -- it's been my experience, dealing with the department of state, that I would find it unlikely that they would allow two names this similar in the same county. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay. Well, the Department of State had nothing to do with it. See, the fictitious name thing is not necessarily a because you're a corporation and you're operating an individual as a corporation. These people are wanting to put a formal name to their company without their personal name in it. That means that they've created a fictitious name. Not a problem whatsoever. No state registration. Strictly they're not operating under their personal name and they're filing a fictitious ad in the paper to let the public know that's the case. MR. NEALE: But you're still supposed to file a fictitious name with the state. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Oh, the fictitious name requirement filing by the state as well. Page 38 November 15, 2000 MR. ALAMO: Mr. Hayes, if I may. Before applying to the state of Tallahassee (sic) for the fictitious name, I called personally to make sure that there would be no problem if we just added the word Services. And I went further to ask if I could add the word Services, Inc., and they said there is no problem by adding the Services period, one twice. Second, you cannot add Inc. unless you're incorporated. So they said once you get incorporated, which takes a little bit more longer time, then you could resubmit, that it will read Four Seasons Painting Services, Inc. at that time. MR. NEALE: Probably what the Tallahassee opinion was is that since they're both under the same ownership, apparently, they would be able to create two entities with very similar names. CHAIRMAN HAYES: They are not under the same ownership, though. MR. NEALE: Well, that's an issue that may or may not have been revealed to the folks in the Department of State, so -- MS. WHITE: They're the same owner on this fictitious name application. MR. NEALE: If you note, the fictitious name application indicates that both these gentlemen own the name Four Seasons Painting Services. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Well, for starters, whatever we do, I'm going to suggest that their applications be brought back, Mr. Bartoe, to properly reflect the description of their business entered. MR. BARTOE: I have found in Mr. Ortegon's folder an affidavit of publication with notice of intention to register the fictitious name Four Seasons Painting, and it was in the paper May 24th, 31st, June 7th, and 14th, 1982. MR. DICKSON: Say the name again? MR. BARTOE: Four Seasons Painting. MR. NEALE: It was registered in '82? MR. BARTOE: 1982. MR. NEALE: If they did it, they did it. MR. DICKSON: Okay. The reason I brought that up and I'm worried about it, there have been scams -- and I'm not accusing you guys, but there have been scams and con games that have taken place around here and other parts of the state with similar Page 39 November 15, 2000 names like that. People get so confused they can't trace it, they can't follow it. Whatever. I can't -- you both got fictitious names on both. It's not for us to say. And I wasn't accusing you guys of doing that, please understand that. MR. ORTEGON: Right. MR. ALAMO: Understand. MR. BARTOE: I can add that according to our records, Mr. Ortegon has been properly licensed since 1982. I've been with the county since 1988 and know of no complaints against him. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Only thing I'm concerned about is their application be corrected on Page 2 where it says that they are in fact swearing that they are a Florida corporation. In fact, Mr. Alamo is the one who called himself president. MR. DICKSON: Mr. Chairman, I move that the application with the corrections noted be approved. MR. LAIRD: I'll second. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I have a motion and second. Any further discussion? All in favor? Opposed? (No response.} CHAIRMAN HAYES: Very well. As bad as it sounded, it's okay. MR. ALAMO: Thank you very much. MR. ORTEGON: Thank you very much. MR. BARTOE: What do you want corrected? CHAIRMAN HAYES: Their application. You have an application firm, part one. The name of the firm and Item No. 1 says Four Seasons Painting Services. Do you have that application, Page 1, Collier County, City of Naples, City of Marco, application, building review and permitting contractor's license section? MR. BARTOE: I have that. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay, second page, bottom of the page where it says State of Florida, county of. Forgoing instrument is acknowledged before me this date by Eliezer Alamo, president of Four Seasons Painting Services, a Florida corporation, on behalf of the corporation. That is not a corporation. And I think it happens again on the part two under the affidavit on Page 4 -- no, it doesn't, I apologize. Page 40 November 15, 2000 MR. BARTOE.' We will get that corrected. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I think that's all there is. Okay, thank you, Mr. Bartoe. Okay, that concludes our new business. Do we have any old business other than our discussion for the workshop? Do we have any public hearings? MR. BARTOE.' No, sir. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Do we have any reports? MR. BARTOE: No, sir. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay, under discussion, our workshop. MR. BARTOE: Should we take a break before -- CHAIRMAN HAYES: Well, my concern is that Mr. Neale said he had to get out of here by 11:00. MR. NEALE: We could take a break for 10 minutes. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay, let's take a break for 10 minutes. (Recess.) CHAIRMAN HAYES: I want to call our meeting back to order. Under discussion, the workshop ordinances. As I see at this point, we have three items to go over, the glass and glazing wordage that I want to apologize to the board for not calling a meeting. This past month has been quite hectic, and I haven't been able to bring it up in a meeting. But at this point I guess I'm not too sorry, because we have two more items to perhaps review. We can attempt to try to do that at this meeting or we can perhaps try to put together another formal workshop. We have the glass and glazing wordage that we were looking at to possibly add the integrated shutters, the hurricane shutters with it. Now after today we have the fire sating issue with the dry wall contractors and the minor patching to deal with under the paving or the sealing license. It's up to the pleasure of the board as to how we want to handle this. I would suspect that we're probably going to need a little bit more input on maybe each and every one of these, as Mr. Dickson stated in last month's meetings, from the trades themselves before we etch in the new words. Perhaps some of these we can maybe agree to add a few words to the ordinance or make a recommendation to add a few words to the ordinance here today on some of these. It's just to the pleasure of the board. Page 41 November 15, 2000 MR. DICKSON: The last meeting, there was going to be a meeting between the county and specialists in the field of glass and glazing. Did that happen? CHAIRMAN HAYES: No, sir, Mr. Dickson, it did not happen. MR. NEALE: What Mr. Bartoe suggested, and I think makes some sense, is that we've now got -- and I actually counted four issues that we really have to do some more work on. Because we've got the glass and glazing with the integrated window systems. The board also wanted to consider the whole issue of whether to create a license category for shutter contractor. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Mr. Neale, if you look at the minutes, I believe we agreed to do that already. So that's a done deal. That's behind us. We agreed to go ahead and put that license -- or make that recommendation to the board, or to the commission. MR. NEALE: And then of course the other two issues that you brought up is the striping and sealing and fire sating. And what Mr. Bartoe suggested is that since we're going to need some more input on those, at least two of those items, and really, glass and glazing, we still need more input on, is possibly take them all up next month at a workshop to be held. And Mr. Bartoe suggested maybe holding the workshop a week earlier than our normal board meeting, holding it on the 13th instead of the 20th, because there's no other pending matters that Mr. Bartoe is aware of for next month. CHAIRMAN HAYES: So that perhaps that we can make next month's meeting strictly the workshop final? MR. BARTOE: On these issues and anything else that might come up, if we can get conference room E in our building on that day, I will check on it. That's a Wednesday, the 13th. If not, possibly the Tuesday or Thursday, 12th or 14th. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay. My concern is, is that enough notice to put out to the general public? Because we do expect to hear from specific tradesmen in these disciplines. MR. BARTOE: We do expect to invite different trades to get their input. Yes, normally you people get your packets a week early, and so I feel it's plenty of notice. MR. NEALE: I mean, there would have been five weeks between the two regular meetings, now we've only got -- it's still a four-week window. Page 42 November 15, 2000 CHAIRMAN HAYES: So we have plenty of time to do that. MR. NEALE: It's a month until then, basically. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I have strictly a workshop on December the what, the 11th? MR. BARTOE: 12th, 13th or 14th, whatever is available in our conference room E up on Horseshoe Drive. CHAIRMAN HAYES: 12th, 13th. MR. BARTOE: Preferably Wednesday, the 13th. MR. DICKSON: But if I understood, do we have anything scheduled for next month's meeting yet? MR. BARTOE: We have nothing. That's why I feel we should not -- the board should not meet on the 20th. You're getting awful close to holidays. And I also want the board aware, January of next year, the third Wednesday, which is the 17th, was not available for this room. And I'm sure we will have to have a meeting for second entities, because of the good work Mr. Ossorio is doing. And we do have the date reserved for the following Wednesday, the 24th. January 24th. I would assume there will be another board meeting here. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay. So if we do that workshop and specifically focus on the workshop perhaps on the 13th of December, then we'll have our second entity and our regular meetings or whatever needs to bring up on -- MR. BARTOE: On January 24th. And possibly we can final the ordinance amendments that day also and get it forwarded. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Mr. Neale, do you see any problems with that timetable? MR. NEALE: No, I don't. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Mr. Zachary? MR. ZACHARY: No. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Anybody on the board want to discuss that? MR. DICKSON: Okay, so the December 20th meeting we're going to cancel? MS. PAHL: Right, it's going to be the 12th, 13th or 14th. MR. DICKSON: And you'll let us know when the conference room is available the week prior to that? MR. BARTOE: Sooner than that. As soon as I can get a date, hopefully the 13th, we'll have office staff call each one of you and let you know. Page 43 November 15, 2000 CHAIRMAN HAYES: What day is the 13th? MS. PAHL: Wednesday. MR. DICKSON: Can you be -- can we be specific what trades you're going to invite to come? CHAIRMAN HAYES: Glass and glazing, I'm assuming. Hurricane shutters, I'm assuming. Aluminum contractors, I'm assuming. Fire safe contractors. Drywall contractors. Maybe paving contractors. And sealing contractors. MR. DICKSON: Okay. MR. NONNENMACHER: Mr. Hayes, I know there was quite a bit of concern expressed by Mr. Neale and Mr. Dickson as far as the amount of work these asphalt restricted licenses would be doing. And I -- as the board is considering which way to go on this, whether you add the words restricted to patching to the paving license or whether you add incidental to their work on the sealing license, you still have the same problem as to how far are they going to go. If they're going to do a parking lot that's five acres, and they're doing an acre of patching, is that too much? That problem will still come up whether you give them a restricted paving license restricted to repair or patching, or you add the incidental to the sealing license. So I think the best way staff would like to look at this is what is less work for the girls inside and staff on the outside. CHAIRMAN HAYES: We'll need that input -- MR. NONNENMACHER: And at this point, I really don't know what is less work, whether it be just add words to our sealing license or leave it alone in the restricted paving license. But you're going to have the same problem no matter where you put it, how much work is incidental, how much work is minor repair, so on and so forth. I don't think that should be an issue to be considered as to where we're going to put this as to how much work is going to be done. Because you're going to have that problem, no matter where you put it. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Well, that's one of the reasons why I mentioned that we needed to invite paving contractors to this as well. I believe you're absolutely right, but that is a realm that not very much of us in this room today could address with any legitimacy on what kind of complications and where this patch would be stopped, versus major repair. But a paving contractor could probably sit here in front of us and enlighten us to how we Page 44 November 15, 2000 need to word that. MR. NONNENMACHER: I do honestly believe if you do give a restricted paving license restricted to repair work, a gentleman could go out and contract to do asphalt work only and claim it's a repair. I think if you put it in the sealing license where it's incidental to his sealing, that would stop a lot of problems, rather than allow him to go out and bid on fixing potholes and parking fields and cracks in parking fields. CHAIRMAN HAYES: That makes perfect sense. MR. NONNENMACHER: That's my personal opinion. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay. So if we were to formally announce this meeting and invite specifically those trades -- not to deny anyone else, but specifically those trades, and have a workshop specifically on these issues. And perhaps, Mr. Neale, if there's any other ambiguities that we've already gone over, I'm hoping that between last month and this month that there are some things that you -- between you and Mr. Zachary that you've gone over already. And if there's anything that is ambiguous or questioning, that would be a good time to bring that up as well? MR. NEALE: I've got about three pages of notes and we've got some 489 mandated kinds of changes that need to be made. And between now and next month, Mr. Zachary and I will come up with a punch list for the board to be able to have it all on one page or -- you know, it will be more than one page, but have proposed amendments so the board can take a look at them. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Any suggestion or concerns from the board? MR. CRAWFORD: Yes. I'd like to make sure that we at least invite the local fire marshals. I believe there's five of them. Carl Reynolds and those folks for the fire safety issue. Those are the people that actually inspect the work and are knowledgeable about it. We could also just send a general invitation to the Collier Building Industry Association, CBIA, and also to the subcontractors organization. They'll get the word out. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Mr. Bartoe, if you could get that? MR. BARTOE: Yes, sir. MR. DICKSON: I would like to -- I want to hear what Michael Pedone has to say. If you would make sure that he's specifically invited. Page 45 November 15, 2000 MR. NEALE: Yeah, Michael would be a great one to have come. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Perhaps we'll add insulation contractors to that as well? MR. BARTOE: I have that written down, sir. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay. For my information, would you summarize what we have as invited -- specific invited trades? MR. BARTOE: Aluminum contractors, glass and glazing, and shutter contractors, insulation and dry wall contractors, and Mr. Pedone, paving and sealing contractors, fire marshals, CBIA. Anyone else? MR. CRAWFORD: What is the subcontractor's association called? CHAIRMAN HAYES: ASCF. MR. CRAWFORD: ASCF. MR. BARTOE: Mr. Hayes, are you in charge of that? CHAIRMAN HAYES: No, I'm not anymore, but I can get the word to them. MR. BARTOE: Would you, please. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay. And also sealing contractors. MR. BARTOE: Yes, I mentioned that. CHAIRMAN HAYES: You did? Okay, very well. I'll just -- I wanted to make sure of this as well so I can get the words specifically out to those. MR. BARTOE.' Will conference room E be big enough? CHAIRMAN HAYES: That's my concern when you first mentioned it. Because if one person from every one of those comes in and this full board comes in, we have filled that room. MR. BARTOE: Let me go check right now on availability of this room -- CHAIRMAN HAYES: That's a better idea. MR. BARTOE: -- on the 12th, 13th or 14th. CHAIRMAN HAYES: At least we have plenty of space if we need it. And you can check on that right now before we adjourn. Any other items of discussion while we're waiting for that? I haven't heard any other input from any of the tradesmen regarding our last month's workshop that brought up anything that we should have addressed or haven't at this point myself. I just didn't know if anybody else has heard any input. With this thing appearing on television as often as it does, Page 46 November 15, 2000 there's -- it's a good possibility that the -- someone from the public will be able to hear what we're talking about other than specific notices to some of the tradespeople that we're aware of. But so far I haven't heard any input outside of what we've already experienced. Has anybody else heard from any interest group or any trade? Got to be doing somewhat of a satisfactory job. I guess perhaps short of Mr. Ossorio's citations being active out there, people are generally pretty comfortable with the way the licensing ordinance at least reads. I don't know that they're real happy with the way it's being enforced from time to time, based on the volume of some of the citations we've been hearing about. But apparently it's not in that bad of shape as it's written. MR. DICKSON: Mr. Ossorio is doing a phenomenal job. CHAIRMAN HAYES: He sure is. MR. NEALE: I think staff in general is. I got a complaint directed to me by a citizen on Marco Island a couple of weeks ago about a roofing problem that they had, and it was a -- I won't mention the gentleman's name, but it's someone that if he hadn't been well satisfied, it would have been all over the newspapers and everything else. And staff got together with him and the person against whom he was complaining and managed to come to a resolution and it ended up not showing up in front of us. So I think it's -- you know, I think this board and the public probably doesn't appreciate sometimes how much behind the scene's work is done by the licensing staff to satisfy the public and make sure that the ordinances are properly enforced without having a lot of matters come this way. And I know from speaking with the state, they're surprised at how few matters they see come from Collier County. And when I talk to them about it, I attribute that to the fact that we've managed to -- our staff manages to enforce the code without a whole lot of hearings and trials and prosecutions. So it's just, you know, a pat on the back to the staff from this point of view. Makes it a whole lot easier. CHAIRMAN HAYES: That is not a matter of lack of enforcement either. MR. NEALE.' No. And that's the thing is the state asked the question, are you enforcing your laws at all? And I said, you Page 47 November 15, 2000 know, our staff issues literally hundreds of citations and things like that, but they manage to get matters settled without having to resort to prosecuting the contractors. And, you know, the state statute very clearly says that the whole purpose of the statute is compliance, it's not punitive. And so the whole issue that this board needs to look at from time to time is that this staff does what they're supposed to be doing, which is make sure that people are in compliance with the ordinance and the statutes. So they do the job that they're assigned to do and do it very well. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I had a phone call from an individual. Actually, it was a visit from a potential employee that was working for a specific trade contractor that outright told him that he was renting his license -- he was renting a license to be in business. Apparently that's -- as long as you maintain some form of legitimacy within the wording of the ordinance, that seems to be a standard procedure. MR. NEALE: It's just so hard to catch. That's -- I find it unlikely that that same person would be willing to come up here and say that under oath on television. MR. DICKSON: Well, I can say this, I hired two people in the last 60 days that for over 10 years have been working illegally in this county as subcontractors without a license. And now they're on my payroll full-time, with benefits, the whole -- and both of them said I'm tired of getting citations and running from the county. MR. NEALE: Great endorsement. MR. DICKSON: And they're two great employees. I'm thrilled to have them. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Mr. Bartoe? MR. BARTOE: The only thing available that week is Friday, the 15th from 1:00 p.m. on. I seriously do not think Horseshoe Drive will be big enough. CHAIRMAN HAYES: If we could resolve the election problem by then, perhaps the election room? We've had meetings there before, right next door to us here. MR. NEALE: Yeah, the auditorium in the -- or whatever it is, the big meeting room in the supervisor of elections office. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Supervisor of elections office, yes. MR. NEALE: We did have a workshop there several years Page 48 November 15, 2000 ago. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Do you know anybody that would answer that question? MR. BARTOE: I'm sorry? MR. NEALE: Just call Jennifer. MR. BARTOE: Yes, I can check into that. And Tuesday, Wednesday or Thursday of that week, preferably Wednesday, correct? CHAIRMAN HAYES: I think so. MR. BARTOE.' Preferably 9:00 a.m., correct? CHAIRMAN HAYES: Yes. MR. BARTOE: Okay. I will check into that. And we will call everybody as soon as we have something. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay. Is that satisfactory with the board? Do we have any other orders of discussion? MR. DICKSON: I move that we be adjourned. MR. LAIRD: Second. CHAIRMAN HAYES: I have a motion and a second for adjournment. All in favor? Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN HAYES: Very well. There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 11.'05 a.m. CONTRACTOR LICENSING BOARD GARY HAYES, CHAIRMAN TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC., BY CHERIE' R. LEONE, RPR Page 49