CLB Minutes 01/24/2001 RJanuary 24, 2001
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
CONTRACTORS' LICENSING BOARD
Naples, Florida, January 24, 2001
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
Les Dickson
Daniel Gonzalez
Arthur Schoenfuss
Carol Pahl
Sara Beth White
Not Present:
Richard Joslin
Walter Crawford, IV
Bob Laird
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
Page I
AGENDA
COLLIER COUNTY CONTRACTORS' LICENSING BOARD
DATE January 24, 2001
TIME: 9:00 A.M.
ADMINISTRATION BUILDING
.C. OURTHOUSE 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: November 15, 2000
V. NEW BUSINESS:
1. Jenfdt Silva - request to quality 2~ entity.
2. Thomas Nathen (Nat) Drace, Jr. - request to be granted a Plastering license without passing exam.
(Has taken the exam four times.)
3. Douglas W. Nichels - request to qualify 2nd entity.
Vt. OLD BUSINESS:
V~i.PUBLIC HEARINGS:
VIII.REPORTS:
IX. DISCUSSION:
Code Enforcement Investigator Alex Sulecki RE: Tree Removal & Trimming
X. NEXT MEETING DATE: February 21, 2001
January 24, 2001
CHAIRMAN HAYES: I'd like to call this meeting to order,
Collier County Contractors' Licensing, January 24th, at 9:09 a.m.
Any persons who decide to appeal a decision of this board
will need a record of the proceedings pertaining thereto and,
therefore, may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the
proceedings is made; which record includes that testimony and
evidence upon which an appeal is to be based.
I'd like to start with roll call to my right.
MR. GONZALEZ: Dan Gonzalez.
MR. DICKSON: Les Dickson.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: Gary Hayes.
MS. PAHL: Carol Pahl.
MR. SCHOENFUSS: Arthur Schoenfuss.
MS. WHITE: Sara Beth White.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: Are there any additions or deletions to
the agenda?
MR. BARTOE: Good morning, Mr. Chairman, board members.
For the record, I'm Tom Bartoe, licensing compliance officer.
Under approval of minutes, we do have listed November
15th, 2000. And staff would like to add our December 13th, 2000
workshop. Those minutes also need approved. And staff has no
other additions or deletions.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: Anyone else have any additions or
deletions to the agenda?
I need a motion to approve the agenda.
MR. SCHOENFUSS: I approve -- I move we approve that
I'll second it.
I have a motion and a second.
agenda.
MS. PAHL:
CHAIRMAN HAYES:
favor? Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HAYES:
All in
Okay, approval of the minutes. We do
have two sets of minutes in our packet, one of them being the
last Contractors' Licensing Board meeting of November the 15th,
and then our workshop on December the 13th. You have both
those minutes in your packets.
Do we want to approve both of those minutes, or we want to
approve them one at a time? Anybody?
MR. SCHOENFUSS: I move we take them together, both of
them, and approve both sets of minutes as stated.
Page 2
January 24, 2001
CHAIRMAN HAYES: I have a motion.
MS. PAHL: I'll second it.
CHAIRMAN HAYES:
favor? Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HAYES:
Need a second.
I have a motion and a second. All in
Very well.
Okay, under new business, Jenfrit Silva, request to qualify
second entity. Are you here? We have his packet in our -- his
application in our packet. I don't know if we want to consider it
without his presence. He was aware of the meeting.
MR. BARTOE.' Yes, and he wanted a request to appear here;
is told when the next meeting will be. They have been advised.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: Is there anything stopping us from
reviewing it and approving or disapproving it in their absence?
MR. BARTOE: That would be up to Mr. Neale to decide.
MR. NEALE: Certainly any of these second entity approvals
are based on testimony from the applicant, so, you know,
because you always -- the board always holds it as their practice
to examine the applicant and ask them questions. So I would
say that it would be more appropriate for the board to defer this
until -- for further action. Particularly if the board were so
inclined as to propose denial of the application, I think the
applicant would have an argument of not having been afforded
due process.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: Well, I've reviewed the packet and I
didn't see anything extraordinary or out of the ordinary. I guess
there are always some questions, I think you're right, Mr. Neale,
that we like to ask just to clarify that this applicant knows his
responsibilities, et cetera.
MR. NEALE: If the board's so inclined, I think the board
could -- the Chair could take a sense of the board to see if there
was a sentiment among the board members to approve this
matter. If the board seemed as though it were so inclined to
approve it, then you could probably take it up in that fashion and
avoid the possibility of a challenge by the applicant, and then if
the board -- there was a sense that there was some contention,
then I would suggest deferring it.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: Anybody on the board have a feeling on
this?
MS. WHITE: I just had one comment. I didn't understand the
Page 3
January 24, 2001
name change.
MR. DICKSON: I move that we not hear this.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: You make a motion we don't hear it
today?
MR. DICKSON: I make a motion we do not hear it unless
he's running late, he or she, I didn't see the name. If they come
in later, we could do it then; otherwise, we postpone it.
MR. GONZALEZ: I second.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay.
MR. GONZALEZ: Is that a motion, Les?
MR. DICKSON: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: I have a motion, I have a second. Any
other discussion? All in favor? Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HAYES: Very well, we'll put it off at least till the
last of the meeting, and perhaps if they show up, then we can
hear it then; otherwise, we'll put it off, postpone it, until they
come back and request again.
MR. DICKSON: We did have one back in October that didn't
show up and we postponed, and we haven't seen him since.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: That's true.
Okay, next order of business, Thomas Nathen Drace, request
to be granted a plastering license without passing exam. He has
taken the exam four times.
Mr. Drace, are you here? Would you come up to the podium,
please, sir.
I'm going to ask you to be sworn in, sir.
(Speaker was duly sworn.)
CHAIRMAN HAYES: Your name, for the record?
MR. DRACE: Thomas Nathen Drace, Jr. I go by Nat.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: And what seems to be the problem with
passing the exam?
MR. DRACE: I wrote a letter; I don't know if you have copies
of it. I hold a business license right now, I hold my drywall
license right now. I thought I could breeze through the
plastering license fairly easy. I've taken the test four times. I
think my close -- highest score is probably a 68, I think, I'm not
real sure.
The problem I have with the test is that it's outdated, it asks
Page 4
January 24, 2001
stuff that is not relevant to the business that we do here, it
doesn't ask things that are part of what Collier County does,
such as the EIFS systems and stuff like that, which we're seeing
more and more of now. There's questions on the test like -- I
can't remember all of them, but questions like what is the staple
spacing for veneer tape on a wall, which you don't even -- I mean,
staple spacing for veneer tape's been out for probably 15 or 20
years. It's a self-stick tape now.
They ask you how many questions -- or how many pounds
does a few sheets of lathe require, a box weighs 50 pounds, stuff
like that. I feel I know this -- the plastering trade as good if not
better than a lot of my competitors. I was a estimator for AA
Stucco & Drywall for seven years, the head estimator for them
for four years by myself. I took them from a six million dollar
company up to a 23 million dollar company before I left.
Seemed like everything to do with this test is a matter of
money. If you want to get a -- if you want to get your grades
back early, you pay money for it. If you want to get a review of
your test, you pay money for it. If you want a big review of your
test, you pay money for it. But they don't tell you any of the
answers, they just say this is what you got wrong.
I've never taken the review. I've been with people that have
taken the review, and they say it's just a waste of time, really. I
don't know why I can't get through this. I know the business, I
know it well, and I know my request is probably a little out of the
ordinary, but I would like you to consider it. And if you have any
questions as to my capability, I mean, I would, you know, take
any questions on that way.
But I do know this trade. I just can't get through the test.
Just me answering a couple of questions doesn't mean that I
don't know this business.
MR. SCHOENFUSS: What marks did you get on the test?
MR. BARTOE: You have it in your packet.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: Results are the second page from his
letter.
MR. BARTOE: I believe the last time was in December, the
highest score of 64.
MR. GONZALEZ: Excuse me, you say you've never attended
a review?
MR. DRACE: I've never attended a review after the test, no.
Page 5
January 24, 2001
MR. GONZALEZ: I know in my personal experience, it took
me two times to pass my state certified test. But if I hadn't have
taken the review after my first try, I probably would have taken it
three or four times, too. The review was crucial in me passing it
the second time for me.
MR. DRACE: But my objection -- it's not even an objection.
The thing is they're asking questions on that test, and I don't
know if anybody's reviewed it, that don't pertain to anything
anymore.
MR. GONZALEZ: That's irrelevant what they ask you. It's
required that you get those questions right, regardless of, you
know, if you think they're pertinent or not. And if you go to the
review, you'll know how to answer them, even if they're -- you
know, whether you think they're pertinent or not. If you take the
MR. DRACE: Are they telling you in these reviews -- are they
giving you the correct answers?
MR. GONZALEZ: I know that when I took it, yes, they did.
MR. DRACE: I mean, they tell you upfront, we won't give you
the answers. We'll tell you what you missed, but we're not going
to tell you what's right. I mean, this is what they tell you upfront.
And I've been in Collier County for about between 11 and
112 years. And I've been in the stucco drywall business for
probably 20, 25 years.
MR. SCHOENFUSS: Is this the examination that's prepared
by what used to be Block and now it's Experior, or whatever it
is?
MR. BARTOE: Yes, sir.
MR. SCHOENFUSS: Do we have any information as to when
this test was last upgraded? MR. BARTOE: No, sir.
MR. SCHOENFUSS: Do we have any information as to what
the passing grade was? What happened all the other people that
took the test?
MR. DRACE: I'll tell you what, I asked the question the last
couple of times that I've taken it and no one passed it. No one
passed this test the last few times that I took it.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: Mr. Drace, just as a matter of curiosity,
I'm not understanding why there is a drywall contractors' license
and a plaster and stucco license. Why aren't they the same?
Page 6
January 24, 2001
What differentiates --
MR. DRACE: I mean, they're two separate trades.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: It is two separate trades?
MR. DRACE: It is two separate tra -- I mean, they're listed as
two separate trades, but they go kind of hand-in-hand. I mean, I
know, Gary, you're in the plumbing business and stuff and you
know that part of it, but it's like with drywall, you know, it's -- you
almost have to package the drywall and stucco to -- down here it
just seems like drywall and stucco are to go together as a --
when you're bidding work and stuff like that you have a much
better chance of obtaining a job if you can handle both the inside
and outside of them.
MR. NEALE: It appears, just if you look at the description of
the two trades in the ordinance, that drywall, the way our
ordinance is written, is a subset of plastering and stucco. A
drywall contractor is a more tightly defined contractor license
than is plastering and stucco. Plastering and stucco, in relevant
part, says those who are qualified to coat surfaces with a
mixture of sand or other aggregate gypsum, plaster, Portland
cement or quicklime and water, or any combination of such
materials such as to create a permanent surface coating,
including lathing and drywall. Whereas the drywall contractor
says those who are qualified to install gypsum drywall products
to wood and metal studs, wood and steel joists, and metal
runners in buildings of unlimited area and height. The scope of
the work shall include the preparation of the surface over which
the drywall product is to be applied, including the placing of
metal studs and runners and all necessary drywall preparation
trim.
Now, if you remember, there were some recommendations
on the board to make some minor tweaking to that to add wood
studs and so forth, but you can see that, at least the way the
ordinance is written, drywall is a subset of plastering, so
plastering is a broader license, at least in my interpretation.
MR. DRACE: And plastering, too. They consider veneer hard
coat plaster. And we do veneer plaster in our drywall. That's
acceptable. And the same guys that do the veneer are the same
guys that do the stucco. I don't know why they call it plastering.
And they're asking questions about rock lathe and stuff like that
in the stucco test, which I haven't seen that around in years and
Page 7
January 24, 2001
years and years.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: I'm just having trouble wondering how
they could engineer and design two separate exams. Now, it's
obviously a significant enough separation that even the state
figures it should have two different exams. But, you know, you
go in there and you pass the drywall exam but you can't pass the
plastering exam, what's the difference between the two exams?
What do they do into in the drywall --
MR. DRACE: Honestly, the drywall is fairly current, as far as
I'm concerned, you know. And it's -- the questions that they ask
are, you know, semi normal questions that somebody might ask
you about how to do drywall and metal framing and veneer hard
coat and stuff like that; whereas, the stucco is -- and I'm just
telling you my own opinion and the fact that I've been in this for
so long. It's an outdated test. It just asks stuff that doesn't
pertain to what we do anymore. I mean, there are certain things
in it that are relevant, yes.
MS. PAHL: Mr. Drace, let me ask you a question about the
exam. Did you say nobody passed it or nobody you new passed
it?
MR. DRACE: No, when I took -- the last two times I took it, I
specifically asked, when I went up to find my grades, if anybody
had passed it that took it that particular time, and both times I
was told the last two times, nobody passed it.
MS. PAHL: How many people took it, do you have any idea?
MR. DRACE: No, I don't have any idea how many took it.
MR. SCHOENFUSS: Is there any equivalent state license or
state examination?
MR. NEALE: There is one for the drywall, I believe.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: Do you know, Mr. Neale--
MR. SCHOENFUSS: Is there one for stucco?
MR. NEALE: I'm not sure about that, but I believe there is
one for drywall.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: Do you have a copy of 489 with you?
MR. NEALE: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: Would you perhaps look at the drywall
and see if it includes stucco within it? MR. NEALE: I will do that.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: That may be a factor. If they're
combining both of them, we may have to look at that and see
Page 8
January 24, 2001
why we have two separate licenses.
Mr. Bartoe, you got any input on why there are two separate
licenses?
MR. BARTOE: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: I'm just trying to confirm -- just trying to
ask the question of what is the science difference between the
two that you could pass the drywall exam and not pass the
plastering exam. Is plastering more like a concrete exam rather
than a hanging drywall?
MR. DRACE: Yeah, I mean, the method of putting it on is
different, where drywall you're using drywall boards and stuff like
that, where --
CHAIRMAN HAYES: You do tape the joints and drywall,
don't you?
MR. DRACE: You tape the joints. And veneer hard coat is a
finished kind of like stucco, in a sense, because you're mixing it.
And it's a -- you have to cover the drywall surface. Or if you're
even doing it on wire lathe, which you can do, it's the same
thing. Whereas, stucco is a cementitious product, and, you know
MR. SCHOENFUSS: It seems like --
MR. DRACE: -- knowing the codes and the county and stuff
like that.
THE COURT REPORTER: Could you repeat your question,
please?
MR. SCHOENFUSS: I wonder what specific exams we're
talking about. On this printout we have plastering listed three
times. And is that the same examination each one of the three
times, or are they different examinations?
MR. BARTOE: Mr. Schoenfuss, it's on there four times. That
one with the dark black line is also a -- if you'll notice, the first
time he took the test was December of '97. On that day, he took
all three tests, drywall, plastering, business and law. And he
passed drywall, business and law. Then he retook plastering
July 8th of 2000, November 4th of 2000 and December 2nd of
2000.
MS. PAHL: What is the passing score?
MR. BARTOE: 75 in our county. Some jurisdictions I believe
allow 70.
MR. GONZALEZ: Mr. Drace--
Page 9
January 24, 2001
MR. SCHOENFUSS: Well, it seems to me that if we deny this
gentleman's application, we may be doing him an injustice; and if
we accept it, we may be setting quite a precedent. It will come
up again and again and again from everybody that takes an
examination four times that doesn't pass it.
And it seems that we're developing two separate issues
here: One is the circumstances of a particular applicant and the
other one is challenging the validity of an examination that's
been accepted by the state and is being given to a number of
applicants. Can we separate the challenge in the -- whether or
not it's a good examination from the circumstances of this one
particular gentleman?
MR. NONNENMACHER: Well, if I may, this board has heard
cases like this many times before, and we have in our ordinance
that if this board feels experience is that great that makes
testing superfluous, they can grant a license.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: Well, that's what I was concerned. In
his letter of request here, he cites the fact that Borah, Craig and
Barber he's done considerable amount of work for. But had you
brought us in an affidavit from them attesting to that, I think it
would have leant a little more credibility to it.
I think you're exactly right, before I'm able to do anything
with it, I'm going to have to have a little bit more testimony to
your experience in lieu of it. You're exactly right.
MR. NEALE: Right. The board, as Mr. Nonnenmacher
correctly points out, has ruled on this before. And under Section
22-184(C), this is a referred application, what we're -- what it's
called in the ordinance.
And as Mr. Nonnenmacher correctly points out, there are
parts that is relevant, says the board may consider the
applicant's relevant experience in the specific trade, and based
upon such experience may waive testing requirements if
convinced that the applicant is qualified by experience, where
such competency testing would be superfluous. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Quite simple.
MR. NEALE: Quite simple. The board must consider
evidence presented by the applicant and the contractor licensing
supervisor, and shall determine from that evidence whether the
applicant is qualified or unqualified for the trade in which
application has been made. The board also must issue findings
Page 10
January 24, 2001
of fact and conclusions of law, which the board has always done,
so that's --
CHAIRMAN HAYES: Anybody--
MR. GONZALEZ: Yeah, I have another question for Mr.
Drace. Where have you been working since AA Stucco & Drywall?
MR. DRACE: I went with Wall Systems for awhile. I know
Russell Budd pretty well. And when his estimator, which was my
best friend, passed away, I took his position and helped Russell
for about a year or so.
I started a company called Mudslingers, which I still hold
the license for. And I hold a license for a company called R&B
Enterprises.
MR. NEALE: What I would suggest to the board, if they feel
they have inadequate evidence to make the decision today, is to
request that Mr. Drace come back with some affidavits and -- for
another hearing.
MR. BARTOE: May I make a suggestion? Would it be
possible for the board to approve this plastering license if Mr.
Drace showed to staff affidavits of experience of "X" amount of
years?
MR. NEALE: I'd have trouble with that, simply because it's
evidence that's presented to the board that they have to rule on.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: I agree. Anybody feel like anything any
different on the board?
MR. DICKSON: I'd like to add one thing. If it's possible to
get it, and I'm not doubting your word, please don't take it this
way, but I'd like to get a letter from the testing agency of how
many people took this test and how*many passed so that we've
got -- we have a responsibility to verify what he's saying.
Normally --
MR. DRACE: And I'm only saying Collier County. When I
went up to the -- you know, here to check my grades in Collier
County, nobody passed it at that point.
MR. DICKSON: See 15 percent -- in the range of 15 percent
is normal. That's why we see a lot of them four and five times.
There's a lot of, you know, people that had to take the test six
times or more to get the test. People don't prepare initially, so
we do get about a 15 percent pass rate. But I like that also,
because everyone appreciates their license a lot more.
MR. BARTOE: Mr. Dickson, I do believe possibly that our
Page 11
January 24, 2001
office staff does receive a list after every test of everyone's
scores. I will check into that.
MR. DICKSON: I mean, if no one passed it, it just promotes
the validity of his claim.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: That's a good idea.
MR. DRACE: Well, and the person I, you know, talk to all the
time over there is Maggie and that's who -- you know, she gives
me the grades. I mean, she tells me whether I passed it or not.
And I ask her at the time, I said, did anybody pass the stucco
part or the plastering part of this trade for the last two times I've
been here, and she said no, nobody's passed it.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: In your business activities with
Mudslingers, Mr. Drace, Mudslingers are just drywailers?
MR. DRACE: Drywall, metal framers.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: No stucco.
MR. DRACE: You have to understand, they are not a stucco
contractor, but we did do a stucco job during that time.
MR. GONZALEZ: Mr. Drace, you are currently doing interior
plastering, which is hard coat.
MR. DRACE: Yes, hard coat. Which is no different than -- I
say it's no different, there is a difference, but it's basically the
same as stucco.
MR. GONZALEZ: Well, the crews that do the hard coat
plastering are the same crews that do the stucco?
MR. DRACE: Yes, same crews. Those -- the veneer hard
coat people are the same people that do stucco.
MR. GONZALEZ: And those guys don't tape and finish
drywall. Are they in different --
MR. DRACE: They tape and hard coat. With veneer hard
coat you're using a blue board, you're putting a what we call
sticky tape over the joints and put in a finish that's pretty much
mixed like stucco and stuff like that. It's a hard surface.
MR. GONZALEZ: Well, that's not my question. My question
is are those the same -- if you have a job that just calls for taping
and drywall finishing, are those the same guys that do the hard
coat?
MR. DRACE: No. The drywall people are separate from your
veneer people, veneer plasterers.
MR. GONZALEZ: So you already have plasterers that work
for you.
Page t2
January 24, 200t
MR. DRACE: Yes.
MR. GONZALEZ: That was my line of questioning here.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: I'm going to suggest that if the board
wants to go any further with this or deny it, that Mr. Drace, if
you'll bring us in here nothing less than four affidavits from
customers and contractors that you've worked with, including AA
Stucco, attesting to your experience in the trade.
And Mr. Bartoe, if you're going to bring us the last test
results, percentage of pass and failure?
MR. BARTOE: We're trying to find out right now.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: It's not going to help us today. I don't
think that's going to be a big factor with anybody here. If we
don't have some physical testimony in front of us attesting to his
qualifications, I don't know that anybody here would be
interested in approving a license on that level. So if you could --
MR. DICKSON: Could I make a suggestion? Maybe while --
because it's going to be, you know, a little bit of time before we
meet again, try one of those preparation courses. I have found
they're excellent. Try one of the --
MR. DRACE: You're talking about the preparation course. I
don't think there is a preparation course for plastering and
stucco. There's a course after you take the test, and it's the
review of the test that you've already taken. That's the --
MR. DICKSON: You mean contractors' exam and places like
that don't have --
MR. DRACE: No. And I did specifically call to see if there
was a thing that you could take ahead of time for this to prepare
for that. There's nothing that I'm aware of that allows to you do
that. The only thing they offer is after you've taken the test and if
you didn't pass it, they'll let you come in, as long as you pay
them some money to -- there's a $10 review and then there's a
$50 review and neither one of those tell -- all they do is tell you
what you've missed but not what the answers are.
MR. GONZALEZ: If you'll get -- if I remember correctly on my
review, they tell you what you missed and then they go over the
problem, and then when you go over the problem, you see right
where you messed up. I mean, that's where it helped me. I said
-- I mean, it like rang a bell, right when they're doing the problem
on the overhead projector. I could see exactly where I messed
up. And then when I took the test, I knew just what to do.
Page 13
January 24, 2001
MR. DRACE: I mean, it's still questions, though. It's like
shots and -- you know, questions about shots and pins. What's
the lightest load, a green, a brown, a red or a gray. Well, brown
is pretty much the lowest that we ever used. I never heard of a
gray. I finally found somebody after this that have ever heard of a
gray shot.
And I guarantee you, I asked every drywall and stucco
contractor that I know of. Nobody knew what a gray shot was.
Well, one -- finally one supplier said yeah, they do supply it. It's
like shooting in a styrofoam. So, I mean, that is an answer that I
know I missed. It's a gray shot. But nobody had heard of it.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: Anybody on the board have any other
input? Is anybody--
MR. SCHOENFUSS: Is this a multiple choice test?
MR. DRACE: A good part of it's multiple choice and a good
part -- well, I guess it's all multiple choice, but some of it is
they'll give you a room that's got doors in it and sizes and tell you
to figure out how many pieces of lathe you need to -- to lathe this
room, walls and ceilings and take out for doors or not take out
for doors, or if doors are over two feet, you know, take it out, and
if they're under, leave them there, and different questions like
that.
MR. SCHOENFUSS: Are there four choices for every test?
MR. DRACE: I think it is four choices, yes.
MR. SCHOENFUSS: On one of these tests you got a score of
28.
MR. DRACE: That was my first test, I think. I thought that I
would breeze through that thing.
MR. SCHOENFUSS: But if there were four questions and four
possible answers to every question, and you didn't know
anything about it at all, or if I took the test and I didn't know
anything about it, and I guessed at every one of them,
theoretically I'd come out with a score of 25.
MR. DRACE: Yeah. I also took two other tests that day. Not
that that's an excuse, but that was an eight-hour, nine-hour day,
too.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: Anybody on the board have any other
suggestions?
Mr. Drace, did you understand what I suggested for you?
MR. DRACE: You'd like to get some kind of--
Page 14
January 24, 200t
CHAIRMAN HAYES: Get me four affidavits --
MR. DRACE: Four affidavits.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: -- from customers and contractors that
you've worked with, AA Stucco being one of them.
MR. DRACE: Only problem I have, and I'll try and get that,
Gary, but Larry Andrews and I, because we parted ways, and I
was in direct competition with Larry in the drywall business,
especially with BCB, Larry and I don't have real strong feelings
for each other.
MS. WHITE: So you can't get a recommendation from BCB?
MR. DRACE: I could probably get one from BCB, yes. Yeah,
but that would only be one. I can get -- I mean, I can get Carlson
Harris, probably Kraft. I've got a lot of people I can --
CHAIRMAN HAYES: We just need something physical to
attest to your experience, Mr. Drace.
MR. NEALE: And the staff has affidavit forms, so --
MS. WHITE: And I'm more interested in recommendations
from the larger companies than I would be from individual
homeowners.
MR. DRACE: No, I will give you reputable companies here.
That's all I deal with anyways, so --
CHAIRMAN HAYES: Any other thoughts on it?
Very well, Mr. Drace, we'll just -- we'll hold off on acting on
this today.
MR. DRACE: You need these, I assume, when -- if I get them
to you, Gary, when -- would I wait till the next meeting, or what?
CHAIRMAN HAYES: At the next meeting we'll review it
again.
MR. DRACE: All right, thank you.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay.
MR. DRACE: And where do I get these affidavits?
MR. BARTOE: You can get the forms from Maggie. Tell her
you just need affidavits for your experience in your plastering.
And after you get those filled out, bring them back in to Maggie
and tell her they're for my attention.
MR. DRACE: Okay. I appreciate your time.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: Thank you.
Okay, moving along, Douglas W. Nichols, request to qualify
second entity.
Mr. Nichols, are you here? Would you come up to the
Page 15
January 24, 2001
podium, please, sir?.
I'd like to have you sworn in.
(Speaker was duly sworn.)
CHAIRMAN HAYES: Your name, sir?.
MR. NICHOLS: Douglas Nichols.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: And your reason for looking for a
second entity qualifying?
MR. NICHOLS: I just want to qualify Jerry for a short period
of time. He was working at a company called R&H Electric. He
was going to buy that company and the owner died, and Jerry
needs to make a living. So I've known Jerry for 20 years. He
come to me, says, "Doug, can you license me for awhile?" He's
going to start his own company called Emergency One. I said,
"No problem, Jerry, I'd rather license you and work with you than
a lot of people in town, so --"
CHAIRMAN HAYES: What business do you qualify now?
MR. NICHOLS: The Electric Connection.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: Is that an ongoing electrical contractor
business?
MR. NICHOLS: That's me -- yes.
MR. GONZALEZ: Are you going to be an officer of
Emergency One?
MR. NICHOLS: If I have to be. You know, whatever I have to
do. I consider this to be a short period of time this thing going to
happen. So, you know, whatever legalities I have to do, yes.
But he took his test in November, didn't get a passing grade,
he's going to take his test again in March, and I expect him to
pass at that time and be licensed and on his own.
MR. NEALE: There's a resolution of authorization in the
packet from Lee County -- which I have to say is a pretty
interesting form that we may want to look at for our county --
that authorizes Mr. Nichols to -- that he is legally empowered to
act for Emergency One in all matters connected with his
contracting business and has the authority to supervise
construction, using exactly the language from the ordinance.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: You're saying that you'd like to see
something like that in our second entity packet 'application?
MR. NEALE: Make everybody's life easier. But it also does,
at least as to Lee County licensing authorities, authorize him to
act.
Page 16
January 24, 2001
CHAIRMAN HAYES: I like that better than requiring him to
be an officer.
MR. NEALE: This precisely reflects the language in the
ordinance.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: Mr. Bartoe, are you looking at that?
MR. BARTOE: Is this the resolution --
MR. NEALE: Authorization.
MR. BARTOE: -- of authorization?
MR. NEALE: Yeah.
MR. BARTOE: Yes.
MR. SCHOENFUSS: Could we repeat, please, the name of
the company you're qualifying now?
MR. NICHOLS: The Electric Connection of Southwest
Florida, Incorporated.
MR. SCHOENFUSS: And who is currently qualifying
Emergency One Electric?
MR. NICHOLS: I am qualifying him right in Lee County right
now. We have to come before you before we -- Collier County.
He's real close.
MR. DICKSON: Question for you. Looking at your insurance
certificate, of course I see the one for the liability, but the one
for the Workmen's Comp is something outsourcing, Inc.
MR. NICHOLS: Omni Outsourcing.
MR. DICKSON: What's that?
MR. NICHOLS: It's a payroll company that I run all my
employees through.
MR. DICKSON: Oh, okay.
MR. NEALE: It's employee leasing.
MR. DICKSON: Okay, I just hadn't heard of it.
MR. $CHOENFUSS: The letter from the Florida Department
of State is addressed to Thomas Wanderon & Associates. What
type of company is that?
MR. NICHOLS: I don't understand.
MR. NEALE: I would guess it's their attorney.
MR. SITZLAR: Accountant.
MR. NEALE: Or accountant.
MR. SCHOENFUSS: The letter in the packet referencing the
Articles of Incorporation --
MR. NEALE: Yeah, that's--
MR. SCHOENFUSS: -- for Emergency One Electric.
Page t7
January 24, 2001
MR. NEALE: Yeah, that's either their attorney or their
accountant.
MR. SCHOENFUSS: Okay. Just wondering.
MR. DICKSON: Mr. Chairman, I see everything in order. I
move that the request be approved.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: I have a motion, I need a second.
MR. SCHOENFUSS: Second.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: I have a motion and a second. Any
further discussion?
All in favor?
Opposed?
(No response.}
CHAIRMAN HAYES: It's a done deal.
MR. NICHOLS: Cool.
MR. BARTOE: Not yet, it isn't. I have his paperwork.
Mr. Nichols, I -- staff would prefer if you wait till tomorrow
and come in and see Maggie, because I have to get your folder
back to her and everything else.
MR. NICHOLS: Okay. Do I have to come in or can Jerry
come in and take care of it?
MR. BARTOE: I believe you would have to come in.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: You're the qualifying agent.
MR. NEALE: Go ahead.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay?
MR. NICHOLS: So go see Maggie tomorrow.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: Thank you, Mr. Nichols.
MR. NICHOLS: Thank you.
MR. NEALE: While we're on the topic, though, what I would
suggest to the board, having seen this resolution of
authorization, is I would propose that staff have Maggie or Judy
type it up and bring it back to this board for approval as part of
this board's procedures. And then they could utilize it for second
entity packets. We're going to be moving more towards this
direction with having the -- you know, once we're finished,
revising the state second entity form.
But I think this resolution here done in this fashion does a
very good job of answering the question of are you legally
qualified to act for the company. Well, he's -- the company has
signed that he is, and we've got him --
CHAIRMAN HAYES: Seems to make life a lot simpler. A lot
Page 18
January 24, 2001
of the questions we ask are answered right there with this one
form.
MR. NEALE: And then give -- you know, if the board, once it
adopts the, which it already has, the other form for second entity
application and then add this as part of the procedures, I think
second entities will go a lot smoother than they have.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: Any other thoughts on that, staff?
MR. BARTOE: I agree. I'm one step ahead of you, I had that
note written down.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: Super. Okay, we can move along with
the agenda.
Under old business, I think the only old business that we had
was reviewing our amendments to the ordinance, to the licensing
ordinance, and the only thing I want to do is make sure that we
keep bringing it up until we finally get those written up.
MR. NEALE: Mr. Zachary and I both got -- we exchanged
them by E-mail, so we both have the same copy of the ordinance,
and we've started making some revisions. We just weren't able
to get all the revisions done. He and I are going to get together
sometime in February and plow through it, you know, essentially
spend the whole day going through and getting it done, and then
we'll have it for you at the next meeting.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: I got a lot of input outside of our
meeting after our meeting about how there were people that
were impressed with us actually making such an effort to get
with the public on ordinance revisions. There's not a whole lot of
laws, statutes or ordinances in the county, city, state or nation
that there's that much willingness to ask for public support and
comment. And so it's kind of nice to know that the public does
have a little level of comfort in the fact that they do have some
input to an ordinance revision. And it was kind of nice to hear
some of the comments and appreciation from some people.
Okay, public hearings, we have none.
Reports? Mr. Bartoe, are there any reports of any kind?
MR. BARTOE: Staff has none.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: We keep asking for reports. I don't
know how often we've ever heard a report, but we keep asking
for them.
And under discussion, we've got a code enforcement
investigator regarding tree removal and trimming. We have some
Page 19
January 24, 2001
paperwork in our packet regarding that, and I believe, Mr. Bartoe,
did you hand us this information?
MR. BARTOE: Yes. That was part of your packet that Alex
Sulecki from code enforcement, provided. And we can move her
to reports from discussion, if you'd like to. CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay. Hi.
MS. SULECKI: Good morning. How are you? For the record,
my name is Alexandra Sulecki, I'm an environmental specialist in
the Code Enforcement Department. And for purposes of our
discussion today, I'll also tell you that I'm a certified arborist. I
don't know if you're familiar with that designation. Anybody have
any questions about that?
CHAIRMAN HAYES: I think we're about to get familiar with
it.
MS. SULECKI: Okay. The certified arborist has to attend
some training sessions and undergo -- it's approximately a
three-hour test and maintain that certification with continuing
education credit units. And the -- what is taught in order to be a
certified arborist is the biology of trees, pruning techniques,
cabling, climbing, anything to do with trees. It's a national
standard, it applies all over the United States.
Well, what I'm here today to discuss with you are some
problems I'm having with landscapes. We have had our current
landscape code that I think I provided a copy of the pertinent
sections in there. It's the pruning and maintenance code since
1991. And these codes apply to required vegetation. This would
be trees and shrubs on condos, anywhere there's common
ground. There was a landscape plan that was required or on
commercial property where you know there are landscape plans.
The purpose of these codes is to protect our urban forest.
And how it's done is the application of the national standards
that were developed by the National Arborist Association. And I
have enclosed these in the packet as well. That's the NCA 300
standards.
There's lots of good reasons for these standards and
applying them on our urban trees. In my experience, what
happens to urban trees is that they are -- when they're put in,
because they're required, they sometimes are maintained, but
often they are not maintained. And over time they decline and
they die and they're not replaced. That's why we have these
Page 20
January 24, 200t
standards, so that trees that are required to be there stay there
and they stay there in a healthy way.
So today I'm here to ask for your help in enforcing these
standards with licensed contractors.
Hatracking occurs for different reasons. I don't know how
familiar you are with the term hatracking, what it means. I have
passed something out about hatracking. But does anybody have
any questions about that before we go, so I'm not saying things
you don't understand?
MR. DICKSON: I do. And I understand hatracking and
topping. My question is, though, like I'm in a commercial district
where we have power lines, and every year every tree on that
block is topped and not allowed to grow to what would be its
normal height. So how does that differ from what you're talking
about?
MS. SULECKI: We do have problems out there. And that's
one of the problems. Trees are not supposed to be planted under
power lines, but they often are. Generally these are older
properties where we didn't have the kind of oversight and review
that we do today. 1991, for example, power lines were required
to be reported on landscape plans. But before that they weren't.
So we have a lot of problems.
Florida Power and Light has a special dispensation to top
trees, because it's for health and safety reasons for the electric
line. When property owners top trees that are directly under
power lines, that's a special situation that I work with the
property owner to see that there are ways to do that, to maintain
that line clearance without topping the whole tree.
And that's not the particular situation that I'm here to
discuss with you today. That would be an extenuating
circumstance.
Well, hatracking occurs for different reasons. In my two and
a half years of enforcing these codes, the county, what I've come
to see, is that there are lots of problems in the tree trimming
industry. One of them is that there's a lot of semi skilled or
unskilled labor. We have property managers and condominium
boards that don't have the urban forest as their primary goal in
trimming or maintaining their landscapes. It's often based on
economics. They're looking for the low bidder. And they often
tell the tree trimmer to cut it back hard so we don't have to do it
Page 21
January 24, 2001
for a long time. I hear that a lot. Or the way we did it up north.
And the tree trimmers tell me that they have to do what the
customer says or the customer is going to hire somebody else.
So we have kind of a multi-pronged problem here that --
trying to work with through education. I have written articles for
our contractors through our Development Services bulletin. I
have a letter that I passed out to you too that I would like to
send to all licensed contractors. Because I would like them to
be aware of the rules before we -- you know, we don't want to
blind-side them here with the rules. I want them to know what
the rules are and we want them to follow them.
The case that I'm here today to discuss with you is a little
bit different in that I sometimes hear property owners who
contract with a tree trimmer to do some tree trimming, and they
assume the tree trimmer who is licensed understands the
regulations in this county. And the tree trimmer, through various
reasons, my guess is because he's got semi-skilled labor or
because he's trying to do the job fast to make more money to get
to the next job, and it takes time to properly trim a tree, that he
damages the trees of a commercial or condo association on that
property. And what happens then, if the trees are severely
damaged, the code requires that the property owner replace the
trees.
Now, I don't require people to replace every single hatrack
tree. It depends on what kind of tree it is, where it is, how
extensive the damage is. That's where I use my arborist
experience. But some trees are damaged to the point where
they're not going to function for the property, they're going to be
ugly for a long time, they're sitting on our major corridors, they
have to be replaced.
And I included in your packet a particular case that I'm
working on right now where this very thing happened. And I
received a fax from the tree trimmer this morning, and I'd be
happy to pass you out a copy of it here, too. He agrees with my
assessment, and he has voluntarily agreed to replace four of the
trees on that property. This is a good businessman. But I often
run into people who do not want to do that because the codes
say that the owner, the property owner, has to replace the tree.
I don't think that's fair.
So what I'd like to do is to be able to bring a licensed
Page 22
January 24, 200t
contractor before this board, if he has done work where the
property owner has simply asked him to trim the trees and he
has done this type of work, damaged the trees where the
contractor will be responsible for replacing the trees.
This is not in every situation. Sometimes the property
owner bears some responsibility if, you know, he's told the
contractor to do this work. And in that case, I would split the
responsibility up between the tree trimmer and the property
owner and perhaps cite the tree trimmer and work with the
condo or commercial manager to maybe replace several
extremely damaged trees and educate them about what the
codes are.
MR. NONNENMACHER: Alex, if I can interrupt for one
minute. I believe we should go one step further with this. If we
asked the general contractor -- if a customer asked the general
contractor to violate the code and he did in fact violate our code,
we would certainly define that as a willful and deliberate code
violation, and he would be before this board or before a state
board.
I believe education is the best procedure to follow, and by
example, if we would bring some of these tree trimmers in here
after a certain grace period when this information is handed out
to them, I think the word will get around that they are obligated
to follow county code, whether it be a building code or a Land
Development Code. And I think faulty workmanship would be the
proper section to bring them in here under.
I don't think it's any excuse that a tree trimmer can say
well, the people told me to do that. He's got to have
responsibility in his trade. He is licensed and is required to know
all the codes of this county.
So I would go a step further. I couldn't excuse a contractor
if a customer said, you know, do it this way and do it that way.
And yeah, he might lose the job and another one will get it, but
that other one would be here before you. And that word will get
out, and finally the customer will not rule the contractor, just as
in the building areas.
MR. NEALE: But I'd suggest there's really three different
avenues whereby contractor licensing staff could approach this,
three different sections of the ordinance. I'll use the codified
version, just for simplicity sake. It's 22-201, sub-paragraph 6,
Page 23
January 24, 2001
which says that this is a -- this is a list of the violations that --
things that are considered violations and may bring someone
before this board for discipline.
Sub-paragraph 6 is disregards or violates in the performance
of his contracting business in the county any of the building,
safety, health, insurance or Workers' Compensation laws of the
state or ordinances of this county. So that's one. They don't
even have to do it willfully, if they disregard them, or violate
them, they're automatically subject to discipline by this board.
Number two is the section that was brought forth before,
which is sub-paragraph 10, which is failing to promptly correct
faulty workmanship or promptly replace faulty materials installed
contrary to the provisions of the construction contract.
That one I would suggest, even though it was brought
forward as being the primary one to go under, I would suggest is
the one that's most difficult to bring forth a case, because in that
instance, there would have to be shown that it was faulty
workmanship in that it does not meet the accepted standards of
Collier County. Well, accepted standards are harder to prove
than violations of code. And so in paragraph six you have the
violation of codes, if they violated the code, then they
automatically are subject to discipline.
Faulty workmanship is commonly used, as this board knows,
in front of this board for something where -- and Ms. Sulecki
brings forth one of the points. If they perform a job in violation of
the code and the owner is required then to replace the tree, that
would certainly be faulty workmanship or faulty workmanship in
such a way that it costs the owner money. Well, as this board
has set forth as its policy, costing the owner additional money is
always something that this board goes after. So I'd suggest
that's number two.
And then number three is the one Mr. Nonnenmacher
suggests, which is sub-paragraph 24, which is misconduct on the
practice of contracting, defined as willfully violating applicable
building codes or laws.
So the board really could have, if it so chooses, three ways
of approaching this: Either for departing from -- disregarding or
violating the codes, failing to correct workmanship, i.e., after
they're cited and are forced to replace trees, that the contractor
would be liable for that, and number three, misconduct in the
Page 24
January 24, 2001
practice of contracting, willfully violating codes. So that's just
my take on that.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: Mr. Neale--
MR. NONNENMACHER: I also would like to point out one
more thing. That doesn't mean they'll be a barrage of licensed
tree trimmers in here. What will happen is what is happening
right now. We will bring them into the office and we will advise
them of what they did wrong and how to correct it and give them
an opportunity to correct it. The only people that you will see in
here are people who fail to correct.
MR. NEALE: And following on with what Mr. Nonnenmacher
brings up there under Section 22-202, sub-paragraph 2 of our
ordinance, that's the minor violations provision, whereas the
contractor licensing supervisor designee first is required to issue
a notice of noncompliance to get -- because the whole purpose of
the statute and the ordinance is to say make people comply, not
to punish them. And so this is the first step of the contractor
licensing office, which they do already is issue the notice of
noncompliance, try and get people into compliance, and then if
they don't, bring them before the board. I believe I'm correct,
aren't I, Mr. Nonnenmacher, that's the process? MR. NONNENMACHER: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: I think that's what I'm trying to get at. I
don't want this board to be utilized as a tool for enforcing tree
trimming ordinances throughout Collier County. I would suggest
before it's over with, that would be all that we would have on our
agenda. There's probably often enough violations that it keeps
you quite busy chasing them around to begin with. And if we
were the instrumental tool to enforce the ordinance every single
time, I'm sure that we would probably have way more activity
than we bargained for.
MS. SULECKI: Only on a limited number of cases would I be
coming to you for assistance.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: Well, as we were stating on repeated
offenders, persistence that they refuse to come in compliance,
and it's becoming a real hazard, of course, there's no question
about that.
Mr. Balzano?
MR. BALZANO: Paul Balzano, contractor licensing officer.
Going along with what Alex is saying, in fairness, though, to
Page 25
January 24, 2001
the contractors, in 1994 somebody in power decided that we
were going to license these gentlemen. Up until '94, they had an
occupational license. So like everything else we've done, we
said you're going to be licensed. All they take is a business and
law exam. While we're rewriting the ordinance, why don't we put
in there that they take in that exam on how to trim trees? They
just take an exam on business and law. They do not answer one
question on how to cut a tree, because we wanted to license
them.
So -- and we have numerous licenses like this where they
just take a business and law exam. There isn't any practical
questions in that exam. So while we're doing the ordinance over,
maybe we should see if we can change that exam.
MS. SULECKI: I don't know how deeply you want to go into
this, but I did bring some pictures just to show you what I'm
seeing out there and what the problems are.
MR. NEALE: Just if I may, Mr. Balzano, do you know if there
is a block exam or Experior exam for tree trimming?
MR. BALZANO: I have no idea. All I know is that when they
come in and request a license for tree trimming and I believe
landscaping, too, it's just a two-hour business and law exam.
MR. NEALE: Would it be possible, because, you know, as
you know, Mr. Zachary and I are going to be working on drafting
it, if it's the board's pleasure, we'd be happy to put that into the
drafting, if you could let us know if there's an exam.
MR. BARTOE: I will guess, before we look, there is no exam
for tree trimming. And if we want to come up with an exam, I
would think it would have to be some type of a county exam that
Alex Sulecki could help us with.
MS. SULECKI: Broward County is in the process right now of
licensing tree trimmers, and they are using certain certifications
for a Class A and a B license. An A license, you can get that if
you have some sort of degree in horticulture, if you have some
sort of certificate in horticulture, or if you're a certified arborist.
And a B license, I believe they are getting some sort of a test
together for.
MR. DICKSON: Can I take the floor for a minute?
Let me for just a minute be a friendly adversary, okay, and
give you three cases. First of all, I wasn't aware that this even
existed. Number two, I wasn't aware it was a problem. But for
Page 26
January 24, 2001
example, one case, I mean, I live in Collier County, but I have
property interest in Lee County. I had two lots that had over 70
pine trees that the property's over 30 years old and all of a
sudden pine trees grow together and there's hazards, there's
problems. I hired a licensed tree trimming company of
substantial size and we went in there and we took out in excess
of 30 trees, to include grinding up the stumps.
I guess what I'm hearing today is I did something that I
could be responsible for, unless the -- are you saying -- what is
the point of demarcation here?
MS. SULECKI: Well, a couple of different things here. For
one thing, it's Lee County it's not Collier County and the laws are
different. But -- and you're also discussing tree removals, and
that's a little bit different. But we do have an ordinance in Collier
County which they also have in Lee County that requires you to
get a tree removal permit to remove any trees. So if you didn't
have a permit, it's possible there was a problem.
In Collier County, the line of demarcation is required
vegetation for the pruning ordinance. For example, I'm not going
to come to your single-family lot and say you pruned your trees
wrong. I'm going to come to commercial properties and to areas
where there's common ground.
MR. DICKSON: Ah, that's what I was looking for. So it's only
commercial and common ground, like in a condo.
MS. SULECKI: It pertains to required trees. So if you have a
landscape plan that's been approved by this county, you're not
only required to plant it but to maintain it.
MR. DICKSON: But it doesn't apply to a single-family home.
MS. SULECKI: I would say that technically it could, but we
do not enforce on single-family, because there are required trees
even on single-family properties. There's like two. For a regular
standard size lot, you would have to have two shade trees.
Technically, if you damage them beyond repair, I could come and
say replace them. We don't do that.
MR. DICKSON: Yeah, because see, I see -- my trade is I'm a
roofing contractor. You would not believe how many roofs are
destroyed and severely damaged by tree growth.
MS. SULECKI: The whole idea of this is not to prevent
people from maintaining buildings. It's to prevent them from
damaging landscape. Trees oftentimes cause problems with
Page 27
January 24, 2001
buildings. There are correct ways to deal with those problems
and incorrect ways. It's the incorrect ways that we're trying to
stop people from --
MR. DICKSON: Okay, and my third case, let me throw this at
you. I'm looking at this picture that you include. Yeah, I see just
chomped the heck out of those trees, but I see why. MS. SULECKI: Of course. I see why, too.
MR. DICKSON: Here we have a tree that grows up and hides
all the signs on the building, but at the same time, we have a
sign ordinance that the signs can't be higher than the trees.
MS. SULECKI: Well, if you read the pruning section in the
ordinance that I gave you, it says that the trees are considered in
advance of signs.
Now, in that particular case, I had gone to that property
sometime last year on the request of one of those sign owners in
an adjoining building, and she had wanted to know how she
could trim the trees so the signs would be visible. And what I
told her was what our code says, that you cannot reduce those
trees and maintain them at a reduced height and spread. You
can't do that.
What she could do was hire an arborist, she could possibly
thin them out. They had been damaged before. And that creates
a certain structural look about a tree, you can tell. And I could
tell that had been done before. She could slightly thin them out,
but that -- she wasn't going to be able to get that tree from out in
front of her sign.
My advice to her was to move the sign. I know that sounds
harsh to a business owner, and I often get that reason from
them. But the tree actually comes before the sign.
And in this particular case, what I did to resolve this was
the tree trimmer agreed to replace the trees, so I approved
replacement with a smaller tree. Instead of an oak being planted
there where it's really not a good place for an oak, there's too
narrow a space and you're going to always have these problems
with the signs, I approved a tree that's not going to get to the
point where it's going to interfere with those signs.
So these are the things as an arborist that I would make
judgments about on the property; not to enforce our tree
trimming codes in a way that's just "we're going by this letter of
this law and I don't care what it does to your property." We want
Page 28
January 24, 2001
to find the best solution for everybody, but at the same time
maintain the integrity of the urban forest.
MR. NEALE: I guess I have a question, if I may. Does this
effectively outlaw tree-based topiary in Collier County? MS. SULECKI: On required trees it does.
MR. DICKSON: What was the question, tree based what?
MR. NEALE: Topiary. You know, the trees that are carved
into shapes.
MS. SULECKI: It's called pollarding. And they do it along
Gulf Shore Boulevard, on the ficus trees there. You really can't
do that on a required tree in Collier County. You can't maintain it
at a reduced height and spread.
The reason for this is that part of the function of that tree on
a property is to provide shade. You're not going to get shade.
You have this little umbrella thing. It's a decoration. MR. NEALE: But it's also aesthetic.
MS. SULECKI: It's -- well, our aesthetic is to provide the tree
in its--
MR. NEALE: Your aesthetic.
MS. SULECKI: -- healthy-- I'm sorry, the aesthetics that are
considered in these are to provide the tree in its natural, healthy
form. That is a certain different type of aesthetic, yeah. And you
can do that on your trees at home.
MR. NEALE: But it's your focus that you want to impose
your aesthetics --
MS. SULECKI: Well, it's not mine.
MR. NEALE: -- on Collier County.
MS. SULECKI: It's a focus that was imposed through these
codes in 1991, way before I came. And it does limit that, yes,
because it does not allow the tree to provide the shade to the
property that's one of the functions.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: What importance is the shade?
MS. SULECKI: Helps reduce air conditioning cost. Have you
gone to a shopping center where there's no trees in the summer?
It's not a great place to park. It --
CHAIRMAN HAYES: Yeah, but--
MS. SULECKI: When the tree --
CHAIRMAN HAYES: Well, the tree can also still provide
polyps and sap and bird waste on my car as well. So I don't
particularly care to park under a tree in a public parking lot.
Page 29
January 24, 2001
MS. SULECKI: Well, I mean, that's life. We're on the planet
and living things shed stuff. There's nothing we can do.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: Well, that's what I'm curious about the
importance of the requirements of shade when you say it --
MS. SULECKI: That's one of them. That's one of them.
It also provides a buffer, a visual buffer, sort of to soften
urban lines. It provides a buffer that filters particle matters out
of the air. We have a lot of construction going on in this county.
Trees filter and stop those particle matters from moving around.
They also provide urban runoff absorption. Trees take up a
lot more runoff Than no tree areas.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: Well, I don't think there's any question
anything I'm hearing here that any of us deny the desire to have
foliage trees, bushes, et cetera and so forth. I'm just concerned
that when we enforce our tree ordinances for the sake of the
trees more than for the stake of the welfare of the community --
MS. SULECKI: That's what it's for.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: Well, in your mind I need a tree in my
lot.
MS. SULECKI: It's not a personal thing.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: -- where in my mind I need a sign.
MR. NEALE: It's a very personal thing.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: You know? And so --
MS. SULECKI: It's actually the standard that's defined
nationally and that was accepted by the county in 1991. I
learned under that standard, so yes, I see the reasons for it, but
I'm not out imposing my personal will in the community.
MS. WHITE: I have two questions. First of all, in regards to
the pruning of the ficus trees, is it okay if the business owner
just provides two additional shade trees? I mean, if the
requirement is two shade trees per business, then --
MS. SULECKI: That's for single-family properties.
MS. WHITE: So that's single-family. Because I like those
trees. And I just -- if the concern is shade, why couldn't they just
provide additional trees on the property for shade and still be
allowed to continue to do that?
MS. SULECKI: Pollarding, you mean?
MS. WHITE: And my other question is, on this photograph
that we have in our packet, would this business owner not have
been allowed to move the trees and to plant a hedge under the
Page 30
January 24, 2001
signs?
MS. SULECKI: Well, it's possible. He'd have to come in with
a variance. That's the standard landscape plan for commercial
properties. It includes a tree buffer between -- on the property
line. I would say if they wanted some kind of variance, they
should come in and talk to the landscape architect.
You know, we have certain standards for landscaping in the
county. It's very well defined under our landscape ordinance
that there has to be a certain number of trees, they have to be
spaced a certain way, there has to be a hedge. And these things
don't always work in real life. So yes, there are circumstances
where people can come in and say look, I've only got this much
space.
But the answer, I will tell you, if you're developing a
property, is not to develop it to the limit and say I can't put the
trees there because I don't have the space. You're supposed to
leave the space for those trees. And that's part of urban
planning rules that the county adopted.
MS. WHITE: I think from this point forward, you're probably
a lot better off than dealing with an older situation like this.
That's where your problems come up.
MR. NEALE.' If I may, just so we can focus this on what the
board's role is here, there's three ways any of these issues can
come before the board. And they could have before Ms. Sulecki
came here today and they still can in the future.
Number one is if it's an unlicensed contractor operating,
then a contracting licensing staff can issue them a citation.
Number two, if it's deemed a major violation after the minor
violation notice, the contractor licensing supervisor or his
designee may initiate disciplinary proceedings against the
licensed contractor by filing a sworn complaint with the clerk to
the Collier County Board of County Commissioners. Just like any
other hearing or process.
Third way is that any person who believes that a contractor
holding a certificate of competency has violated this article, may
submit a sworn complaint to the contracting licensing
supervisor, pay a $50 fee, and then the contracting licensing
supervisor shall conduct a preliminary investigation to determine
whether the complaint submitted warrants the final filing of
formal charges. If the charges are warranted, the complaints
Page 31
January 24, 2001
shall be filed with the clerk, and then sent by certified mail and
we go through the normal hearing process.
So those are the three manners in which this can be brought
forward. So the process doesn't change, no matter what the
board does here today. It's just, frankly, I see it as an
informational item more than anything else.
MR. DICKSON: I wouldn't want your job. In fact, you may
think that you've walked on unfriendly territory, and that's not
the case. You know, we're here to support you, but -- and I can
sit here and think of all the exceptions. Like while we were
talking, I thought about the Port Royal what the City of Naples
does to the banyan trees every three or four years. They cut the
heck out of them. And those are worse than topped.
MS. SULECKI: Some species take that treatment better
than others. Ficus is a species that does.
MR. DICKSON: Ficus is like a pack of rats, it never quits
growing.
MS. SULECKI: But I do have some pictures here that show
you what happens inside trees when this is done, if you're
interested.
MR. DICKSON: Like banyans and ficus, they can be chopped
back like that and meets the codes.
MS. SULECKI: I would -- no, no. What I would say is if it was
a banyan or ficus -- and by the way, those trees are not permitted
as required landscaping anymore on newer properties, so it
would be older properties. That would be one of the
considerations that I would make when I'm looking at a tree,
what species is it. Will it tolerate this, will it recover. These are
the things I look at.
The only cases that I require actual replacement of trees or
on species that will not tolerate it, that the damage is really too
bad to recover. The rest of the time I rely on education, and I do
provide people with how to treat the tree afterwards. I provide
them with some instructions as far as restoration pruning.
MR. DICKSON: What do you do with the maintenance people
of condos and, you know, half of them have their own chain saws
and cutters? How do you deal with these people?
MS. SULECKI: I do go speak before condo boards and try to
educate them about their landscapes. If you're going to cut
trees commercially in this county, you have to have a license.
Page 32
January 24, 2001
So they shouldn't be having their maintenance person up there
trimming trees. That's something they need to know. That's a
liability issue and it can bring them problems with improper
pruning.
Pruning trees is part science and part art. You can't teach
people art. But in my experience, most of the people in this
community don't even know the science. They don't know what
happens to trees when they prune them. They're just out there --
they know how to operate the equipment.
MR. SCHOENFUSS: I have a question. You've stated there
are certain areas where trees are required and there are certain
areas where trees are not required. Are there any cases -- any
places where trees are required in areas where the power
company or any other public utility has an easement?
MS. SULECKI: As of 1991 they are required not to be placed
there. However, mistakes happen. And they're all over the place
under power lines.
MR. SCHOENFUSS: So I think the question was brought up
earlier, when the power company itself or subcontractors
working for the power company go around the tree to trim trees
in the vicinity of power lines, they appear to ignore completely
the rules that you're trying to recommend.
MS. SULECKI: You're right, they do. And they are allowed
to. They have a special dispensation to cut in their easements
for health and safety. And I don't have authority over what they
do.
MR. SCHOENFUSS: Thank you.
MR. DICKSON: Next time you do one of those seminars,
would you notify this board? I personally would be interested in
hearing it.
MS. SULECKI: I don't have one scheduled right now, but if
you know of a group that would be interested, I'd be happy to
schedule one.
MR. DICKSON: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay. Anything else?
MR. BARTOE: I just might add that, you know, I know that
Alex is a very well qualified investigator, and I don't feel you will
see, as Bob mentioned, you will see very many cases at all
before you. Licensing staff will work with her to assist her. And
if the need be that she needs to file a formal complaint, we will
Page 33
January 24, 2001
assist her in getting that case here before you. CHAIRMAN HAYES: That makes sense to me.
MR. BARTOE: And some of the board members might have
been here when Alex testified in a case that Mr. Nonnenmacher
had, and that case went quite successfully.
MR. SCHOENFUSS: Now, despite the fact that most of the
county tests are prepared by Experior, supposing -- I'm sure there
are all kinds of legal complications here, and it will take about
four years to accomplish it, but supposing the county authorizes
Alex to prepare a test for which she is qualified to prepare,
which test will become a required item before -- after a certain
date anyone can get a license for tree trimming? What's wrong
with starting a program like that?
CHAIRMAN HAYES: I don't see any problem in it, as long as
we have a reasonable exam that we can apply.
MR. NEALE: Yeah, it would take some ordinance
amendments. We'd have to amend the language in the
ordinance.
MR. SCHOENFUSS: Well, we'll let her prepare the test --
MR. NEALE: That's -- maybe staff can look into that,
whether the state has an approved exam. Because our current
language says that it has to be an exam approved throughout the
State of Florida and also approved by Collier County Contracting
Licensing Board.
MR. DICKSON: Because if the state doesn't have one, then
we can not become more restrictive than the state.
MS. PAHL: Well, what about Broward County? I thought
Alex just said Broward County was --
MR. DICKSON: Yeah, Dade and Broward are right there on
the --
MR. NONNENMACHER: We can be more restrictive.
MR. NEALE: We can be more restrictive in a specialty
contractor that is not registrable by the state. This is not
registrable by the state.
MR. DICKSON: Okay.
MR. SCHOENFUSS: We'll have her prepare the test, and if
the first four people that take it don't get anything more than 28
as the score, we'll know there's something wrong with the test
and we'll start all over.
MR. NEALE: Just as a comment, Mr. Schoenfuss, after you
Page 34
January 24, 2001
were looking at that, I did look at when he took that test. And
the test he got the 28 on was taken all by itself in the year 2000.
So he just had a very bad day.
MR. BARTOE: I believe our testing agency in the ordinance
is Experior, or someone equivalent?
MR. NEALE: Yes, it's Experior, or any other testing agency
With comparable standards, recognized and approved throughout
the State of Florida. And actually, we're changing that in the
new ordinance, because the testing agency has been acquired or
changed and we're having to revise that language, based on 489.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: Ms. Sulecki, I appreciate you coming in
today. It was an enlightenment to listen to you. We will be happy
to work with you on any complaints that we can all put together.
Do we have any other items of discussion?
MS. SULECKI: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay, next meeting, we have at this
point in time February the 21st. Do we have -- MR. BARTOE: That is tentative.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: Tentative. At this point, do we have
anything signed up for that meeting?
MR. BARTOE: No. And I believe Mr. Drace that was before
you can wait a couple of months. He's been trying to pass the
test since '97.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: Okay. If that were the case, when is
the -- what date in March would be the next meeting? Does
anybody --
MR. BARTOE: I do not have it with me. Does anyone have a
calendar?
MR. NONNENMACHER: I believe it's the 21st also.
MS. WHITE: Third Wednesday.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: I'm just concerned. I will be out of town
starting the 21st of March, so I won't be able to be here for that
meeting.
MR. BARTOE: Do we have a vice-chairman?
CHAIRMAN HAYES: Yes, we have.
MR. DICKSON: Yes, and I will be here.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: You will be here. Very well.
Any other items of discussion? Any other items of business?
Then I need a motion for adjournment.
MR. DICKSON: Dickson, so moved.
Page 35
January 24, 2001
MR. SCHOENFUSS: Second.
MR. GONZALEZ: Second.
CHAIRMAN HAYES: We have a motion and a second.
favor?
(Unanimous vote of ayes.)
CHAIRMAN HAYES: We're done.
All in
There being no further business for the good of the County,
the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 10:30 a.m.
COLLIER COUNTY CONTRACTORS'
LICENSING BOARD
GARY HAYES, CHAIRMAN
These minutes approved by the Board on
presented or as corrected
, as
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY COURT
REPORTING SERVICE, INC., BY CHERIE' R. LEONE, RPR
Page 36