CEB Minutes 01/22/2015 January 22, 2015
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
COLLIER COUNTY CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD
Naples, Florida, January 22, 2015
LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Code
Enforcement 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:
CHAIRMAN: Robert Kaufman
Gerald J. Lefebvre
James Lavinski
Lionel L'Esperance
Larry Mieszcak
Robert Ashton
Susan J. Curley
Tony Marino (Excused)
Lisa Chapman Bushnell (Excused)
ALSO PRESENT:
Jeffrey Wright, Code Enforcement Director
Kerry Adams, Code Enforcement
Tamara Lynne Nicola, Board Attorney
Page 1
CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COWER COUNTY,FLORIDA
AGENDA
Date: January 22, 2015
Location: 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Naples, FL 34104
NOTICE: THE RESPONDENT MAY BE LIMITED TO TWENTY (20) MINUTES FOR CASE
PRESENTATION UNLESS ADDITIONAL TIME IS GRAN II BY THE BOARD. PERSONS
WISHING TO SPEAK ON ANY AGENDA ITEM WILL RECEIVE UP TO FIVE (5) MINUTES
UNLESS THE TIME IS ADJUSTED BY THE CHAIRMAN.
ALL PARTIES PARTICIPATING IN THE PUBLIC HEARING ARE ASKED TO OBSERVE
ROBERTS RULES OF ORDER AND SPEAK ONE AT A 'rum SO THAT THE COURT
REPORTER CAN RECORD ALL STATEMENTS BEING MADE.
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 THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO
BE BASED. NEITHER COLLIER COUNTY NOR THE CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD SHALL
BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING THIS RECORD.
1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
2. ROLL CALL
Robert Kaufman,Chair Lionel L' Esperance
Gerald Lefebvre,Vice Chair James Lavinski
Larry Mieszcak Robert Ashton
Tony Marino Lisa Chapman Bushnell,Alternate
Sue Curley,Alternate
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. NOVEMBER 21,2014 Hearing
5. PUBLIC HEARINGS/MOTIONS
A. Motions
Motion for Continuance
Motion for Extension of Time
B. Stipulations
C. Hearings
1, CASE NO: CEROW20140007406
OWNER: GUILLERMO GODOY JR AND MARIA C.GODOY
OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR RALPH BOSA
VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES,CHAPTER 110 ROADS AND
BRIDGES,ARTICLE II,CONSTRUCTION IN RIGHT OF WAY, DIVISION I GENERALLY,
SECTION 110-32(L).THE CULVERT/DRAINAGE PIPE HAS FAILED,THAT IS,IT HAS
COLLAPSED OR RUSTED THROUGH.
FOLIO NO: 98480001
VIOLATION
ADDRESS: 974 SANCTUARY ROAD,NAPLES
2. CASE NO: CESD20120000572
OWNER: JUAN CAMPBELL AND NORA CARILLO
OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR WELDON WALKER
VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE 04-41.AS AMENDED, SECTION
10.02.06(B)(I)(A). BUILDING PERMIT EXPIRED WITHOUT THE COMPLETION OF ALL
RELATED INSPECTIONS AND ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF
COMPLETIONIOCCUPANCY,
FOLIO NO: 63912040001
VIOLATION
ADDRESS: 1101 N 11TH ST, IMMOKALEE
'
3. CASE NO: CES1)20140015359
OWNER: CHILE CALIENTE LLC
OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR ED MORAD
VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE 04-41,AS AMENDED, SECTION 10.02.06
(B)(I)(A). A COMMERCIAL BUILDING ALTERED AND ADDED TO WITHOUT FIRST
OBTAINING THE AUTHORIZATION OF THE REQUIRED PERMIT(S), INSPECTIONS AND
CERTIFICATE OF OCUPANCY.
FOLIO NO: 25630440002
VIOLATION
ADDRESS: 208 BOSTON AVE,IMMOKALEE
4. CASE NO: CEROW20140005406
OWNER: CHRISTOPHER M.SULLIVAN& KATHLEEN SULLIVAN
OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR ERIC SHORT
VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES, CHAPTER 110 ARTICLE II
SECTION 110-32(1). CULVERT CONSISTS OF UNAPPROVED PVC PIPING
FOLIO NO: 00094960004
VIOLATION
ADDRESS: 678 SANCTUARY RD,NAPLES
S. CASE NO: CELU20140016851
OWNER: PETER HELFF
OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR RALPH BOSA
VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE;04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTION 1.04.01 (A)
AND SECTION 2.02.03. PROHIBITED STORAGE OF RECREATIONAL VEHICLE ON II IL
PROPERTY NOT OWNED BY THE PROPERTY OWNER.
FOLIO NO: 45965080007
VIOLATION
ADDRESS: 2080 21ST ST SW,NAPLES
6. CASE NO: CEVR20140014030
OWNER: CAMBRIDGE SQUARE OF NAPLES LC
OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR DAVID JONES
VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE 06-01 SECTION 10.5(E).PRESENCE OF BRAZILIAN PEPPER
AND EARLEAF ACACIA WITHIN DRAINAGE.
FOLIO NO: 38452120005
VIOLATION
ADDRESS: 3449 PINE RIDGE RD,NAPLES
7. CASE NO: CELU20140016289
OWNER: FRANK CIVALE
OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR ERIC SHORT
VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY I.„AND DEVELOPMENT CODE:04-41, AS AMENDED,SECTION 1.04.01 (A)
AND SECTION 2.02.03. ESTATES ZONED PROPERTY BEING UTILIZED AS MUIJI-FAMILY
BY RENTING THE GUEST HOUSE AND OTHER ACCESSORY STRUCTURES.
FOLIO NC): 38051800001
VIOLATION
ADDRESS: 3800 29TH AVE SW,NAPLES
3
8. CASE NO: CENA20140022780
OWNER: TARPON IV LLC
OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR DAVID JONES
VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES CHAPTER 54, ARTICLE VI,
SECTION 54-185 (D). PRESENCE OF COLLIER COUNTY PROHIBITED EXOTIC SPECIES
INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO JAVA PLUM
FOLIO NO; 76210840000
VIOLATION
ADDRESS: NO SITE ADDRESS, NAPLES
9. CASE NO: CEROW20140002816
OWNER: SAMMY R.GOBER&JO ANN GOBER&STANLEY R.GOBER
OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR RALPH BOSA
VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES CHAPTER 110, SECTION 110-31 (A).
A DAMAGED/FAILED CULVERT PIPE.
FOLIO NO: 00761280004
VIOLATION
ADDRESS: 11380 TRINITY PLACE,NAPLES
10. CASE NO: CESD20140008607
OWNER: GLADYS TRWILLO
OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR ERIC SHORT
VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE 04-41, AS AMENDED,SECTION
10.02.06(13)(I)(A). REPLACEMENT OF BAY WINDOW, PLUMBING IN BATHROOM
GurriNG OF WALLS AND MODIFICATION IN ROOMS WITHOUT PERMIT,
FOLIO NO: 45971240006
VIOLATION
ADDRESS: 2020 I7TH ST SW, NAPLES
II. CASE NO: CESD20140011748
OWNER: KEITH P HARTMANN
OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR TONY ASARO
VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE 04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTION 10.02.06
(B)(I)(A). STRUCTURES ERECTED IN THE REAR PROPERTY AREA WITHOUT FIRST
OBTAINING COLLIER COUNTY BUILDING PERMIT(S),
FOLIO NO: 37446400004
VIOLATION
ADDRESS: 1420 16TH AVE NE,NAPLES
12, CASE NO: CESD20140015244
OWNER: EVELYN FAYE THOMPSON
OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR COLLEEN DAVIDSON
VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE 04-41 AS AMENDED. SECTION 10.02.06
(B)(1)(E),ADDITION TO'THE REAR OF THE STRUCTURE WITH WINDOWS AND DOORS
WITHOUT OBTAINING COLLIER COUNTY BUILDING PERMIT.
FOLIO NO: 35764320004
VIOLATION
ADDRESS: 1773 43RD TER SW, NAPLES
4
13. CASE NO: CESD20140004266
OWNER: CARMEN B CINTRON EST
OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR WELDON WALKER
VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE U44} A8 AMENDED, SECTION |00Z.00
(B)(1)(A).FOUR STRUCTURES ERECTED WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING COLLIER COUNTY
BUILDING PERMITS.
FOLIO NO: 63858720003
VIOLATION
ADDRESS: 908 GLADES ST, IMMOKA LEE
14. CASE NO: (�RLO20140016371
OWNER: KEVIN P. MCCORMICK& KATHY MCCORMICK
OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR ERIC SHORT
VIOLATIONS: COL HI R COUN 1 Y I AND DEVIL OP\IFNF CODE 04 41 AS AMFNDFD SEC lION 1 0401 (\)
AND SECTION 2.0.03, PROHIBITED OUTSIDE STORAGE O}CAR PARTS, LAWN MOWERS,
BICYCLES,CANOPY TENT8, VEHICLES, PLASTIC CONTAINERS, WOOD, YARD
FURNITURE, WOOD TIE BEAMS,METAL EQUIPMENT. ETC
FOLIO NO: 30714040003
VIOLATION
ADDRESS: 357j 3RD AVE NW,NAPLES
15. CASE NO: CDSB20140017094
OWNER: JOSE F.GARCIA
OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR TONY AS&KO
VIOLATIONS: COLL}£K COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE 044} AS AMENDED, SECTION |O.02.06
(B)(\)(A). INCOMPLETE HOME,
FOLIO NO: 40420400004
VIOLATION
ADDRESS: 2087 DESOTO BLVD N, NAPLES
6. OLD BUSINESS
A. Motion for Imposition ofFin*s/Lieon
1. CASE NC): C2SQ20130014804
OWNER: ANTONE C. MENDES
OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR ERIC SHORT
VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE 844|. A8 AMENDED, SECTION \002.06
(B)(|)(A)AND COLLIER COUNTY CODE 0F LAWS,CHAPTER ilO. SECTION ||O'3|(A).
UNPERMITTED FENCING, REFRIGERATED S...RUCTURE. AND OTHER OFFENDING
MATERIAL IN THE COI.LIER COUNTY R1GI IT OF WAY.
FOLIO NO: 51690680009
VIOLATION
ADDRESS: 2260T8MIAMl 'FRAIL b. NAPLES
5
2. CASE NO: CESD20120018259
OWNER: GILVERTO GENDEJAS
OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR WELDON WALKER
VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE 04-41,AS AMENDED, SECTION
10.02.06(B)(I)(A). DEMOLITION PERMIT HAS EXPIRED FOR REMOVAL OF UNPERMITTED
ALTERATIONS WITHOUT HAVING RECEIVED REQUIRED INSPECTIONS AND
CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY/COMPLETION AS REQUIRED,
FOLIO NO: 63859120000
VIOLATION
ADDRESS: 325 NEW MARKET RD W, IMMOKALEE,FL
3. CASE NO: CESD20140018277
OWNER: BLACK RIVER ROCK,LLC
OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR MICHAELLE CROWLEY
VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE 04-41,AS AMENDED, SECTION
10,02.06(B)(I)(E)AND 3.05.01(B). AN UNDEVELOPED PARCEL OF 1.3 ACRES HAS BEE.N
CLEARED OF VEGETATION WITHOUT REQUIRED BUILDING OR OTHER PERMIT; 54
LOADS 0 1 1 ILL DIRT/ROCK HAVE BEEN GRADED AND/OR PLACED ON SITE WITHOUT
ANY BUILDING PERMIT OR OTHER AUTHORIZATION.
FOLIO NO: 726724107
VIOLATION
ADDRESS: NO SITE ADDRESS,NAPLES, FL
4. CASE NO: CESD20140012087
OWNER: RAMIRO E.& MARTHA R. LLERENA
OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR JAMES KINCAID
VIOLATIONS: BUILDING AND LAND ALTERATIONS PERMITS (PERMITS , INSPECTIONS.CERTIFICATE
OF OCCUPANCY REQUIRED)COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE 04-41,AS
AMENDED, SECTION, 10.02.06(B)(I)(A). ALTERATIONS TO COMMERCIAL PROPERTY
WITHOUT APPLICABLE COLLIER COUNTY PERMIT(S)(INSTALLATION OF
KITCHEN AREA WITH NEW PLUMBING AND ELECTRIC).
FOLIO NC): 62090200007
VIOLATION
ADDRESS: 11263 TAMIAMI TRAIL E, UNIT: D,NAPLES, FL
5. CASE NO: CESD20130001292
OWNER: CHRISTOPHER S. ESENBERC
OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR SHIRLEY GARCIA
VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE 04-41, AS AMENDED,SECTION
10.02.06(B)(1)(A).ADDITION/ALTERATIONS MADE TO STRUCTURE WITHOUT FIRST
OBTAINING A COLLIER COUNTY BUILDING PERMIT'.
FOLIO NO: 47871280009
VIOLA'HON
ADDRESS: 3315 GUILFORD R.D,NAPLES, FL
6
6. CASE NO: CE9D20140006864
OWNER: JEFFREY CALLUCCl, DEBORAH L GAL[0CC] 84. MARY PSTEVENS
OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR SHERRY PATTERSON
Y|OLATlQNS: -THE 2D10 FLORIDA BUILDING CODE,CHAPTER | SCOPE AM)ADMINISTRATION. PART |
SCOPE AND APPLICATiON, SECTION 105.1 REQUIRED. COLLIER COUNTY LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE 04-41 AS AMENDED, BUILDING ANL) LAND ALTERATIONS.
SECTION \8.0Z.00(8)(|)(A). FENCE INSTALLED VVlTHOUT REQUIRED PEVM|T(S). LANAI
ADDED TO(MH)MOBILE HOME WITHOUT REQUIRED PEDMJT(S). SHED INSTALLED
WITHOUT REQUI RED PERMIT(
FOLIO NC): 49580760009
VIOLATION
ADDRESS: 39 HENDERSON DR.NAPLES, FL
7. CASE NO: CESD20130019399
OWNER: DOROTHY GILL
OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR JOSEPH GIANNONE
VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE 04-4\. AS AMENDED, SCCT(ON
10.02.06(B)(1)(A). 10.02.00(B)(1KE)AND COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND
ORDINANCES,CHAPTER 22. ARTICLE II, SECTION 22'26(8)({O4j.|.4.4}.'TWO
DNPEKK8|TlED SHEDS ON8|OBT SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, PO8Sl8LEGARAGE
CONVERSION AND&TT]C CONVERSION "TO SMALL APARTMENTS, AND THE STAIRCASE
MOVLD 10 RICH! SIDE 01 IHF S[RUCThRF FROM I REAR 01 THE PROPFRIY
FOLIO NO: 36455080005
VIOLATION
ADDRESS: jV093lRT&V.S SW,NAPLES
8. CASE NO: CE8Q201400I2494
OWNER: LYNNE VCADENHCAD
OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR SHIRLEY GARCIA
VIOLATIONS: C0Li.lER COUNTY CODE 01'LAWS AND ORDINANCES.CHAPTER 22, ARTICLE Vi,
SECTION 22-236 AND COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE 04-41,AS
AMENDED, SECTION !A.02.06(B)(\>(A). A PRIMARY STRUCTURE WITH UNP8<M|T[ED
'U II RA I IONS IN POOR CONDI[ION AND ANDNPEDK1|1TEDTVVU-QT08YSTORAGE
STRUCTURE IN POOR CONDITION.
FOLIO NO: 74413200009
VIOLATION
ADDRESS: 3417 CHEROKEE ST,NAPLES, FL
9. CASE NO: CEPM20140011205
OWNER: BRENT R PARKER
OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR JOHN CONNETTA
VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES CHAPTER 22 BUILDINGS ANI)
BUILDING REGULA'liONS,ARTICLE VI PROPERTY MAINTENANCE:CODE,SECTION 22.
23| SUB-SECTION (\2)(0. BROKEN WINDOWS 0MG/S UNIT OFDUPLEX.
FOLIO NO: 24533040005
Y10LAD0N
ADDRESS: 85 7TH ST, BONITA SHORES, FL
10. CASE NO: CESD20140005957
OWNER: YISLEN DE LA 0 AND ROESMEL RUA
OFFICER: INVESTIGA'FOR JOSEPH GIANNONE
VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.04-41, AS AMENDED, SECTIONS
10.02.06(B)(1)(A), 10.02.06(3)(1)(E),AND 10.02.06(13)(1)(E)(1). BUILDING A REAR DOCK,
WITHOUT niE PROPER COLLIER COUNTY PERMITS.
FOLIO NO: 36451600007
VIOLATION
ADDRESS: 2883 50TH TER SW,NAPLES, FL
11. CASE NO: CEPM20140000515
OWNER: GRANT& TAMMY ARTHUR
OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR JOHN CONNETTA
VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES CHAPTER 22 BUILDINGS AND
BUILDING RE(jULATIONS„ARTICLE VI PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE, SECTION 22-
231 SUB SEC (I 2)(N)AND(I 5). PRIVATE SWIMMING POOL NO BEING
MAINTAINED CREATING AN UNITEAUFHY CONDITION AND ACCESSORY STRUCTURE
SCREEN ENCLOSURE IN DISREPAIR.
FOLIO NO: 81216013305
VIOLATION
ADDRESS: 702 GRAND RAPIDS BLVD,NAPLES, FL
B. Motion for Reduction of Fines/Lien
C. Motion to Rescind Previously Issued Order
D. Motion to Amend Previously Issued Order
7. NEW BUSINESS
8. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Request to Forward Cases to County Attorney's Office as Referenced in Submitted Executive Summary.
9, REPORTS
10, COMMENTS
11. NEXT MEETING DATE- FEBRUARY 26,2015
12. ADJOURN
8
January 22, 2015
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. I'd like to call the
Code Enforcement Board to order.
Notice: The respondent may be limited to 20 minutes for case
presentation unless additional time is granted by the board. Persons
wishing to speak on any agenda item will receive up to five minutes
unless the time is adjusted by the chairman.
All parties participating in the public hearing are asked to observe
Robert's Rules of Order and speak one at a time so that the court
reporter can record all statements being made.
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 the testimony and evidence upon which the
appeal is to be based. Neither Collier County nor the Code
Enforcement Board shall be responsible for providing this record.
I'd like everybody to stand for the pledge.
(The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Good morning. Anybody
have a cell phone that's on may want to consider turning the ringer off
so that we don't embarrass you during the meeting, or should I say I
won't embarrass you during the meeting.
Just so we -- I know this is a little bit out of order. Anybody have
any comments on the minutes from the last meeting?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: If not --
MR. MIESZCAK: I make a motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion to approve the
minutes.
MR. LEFEVBRE: Second.
All those in favor?
Page 2
January 22, 2015
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. MIESZCAK: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. ASHTON: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
Okay. Why don't we start with the agenda. Any changes?
MR. MIESZCAK: Roll call?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Oh, yeah, roll call. Let's start with
that.
MS. ADAMS: Okay. Mr. Robert Kaufman?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Here.
MS. ADAMS: Mr. Gerald Lefebvre?
MR. LEFEVBRE: Present.
MS. ADAMS: Mr. Larry Mieszcak?
MR. MIESZCAK: Here.
MS. ADAMS: Mr. Lionel L'Esperance?
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Here.
MS. ADAMS: Mr. James Lavinski?
MR. LAVINSKI: Here.
MS. ADAMS: Mr. Robert Ashton?
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Here.
MS. ADAMS: And Ms. Lisa Chapman Bushnell has an excused
absence, Mr. Tony Marino has an excused absence, and Ms. Sue
Curley is absent.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Moving right along to the
agenda. We have some changes.
MS. ADAMS: Number 5, Public Hearings, Motions, A, motions,
Page 3
January 22, 2015
Motion for Continuance, we have one addition: It's No. 6 from
Imposition of Fines, Tab 21, Case CESD20140006864, Jeffrey
Gallucci, Deborah L. Gallucci, and Mary P. Stevens.
Motion for Extension of Time. We have one addition, it's No. 5
from imposition of fines, Tab 20, Case CESD20130001292,
Christopher S. Esenberg.
Letter B, stipulations, we have one addition. It's No. 3 from
hearings, Tab 3, Case CESD20140015359, Chili Caliente, LLC.
Letter C, hearings, No. 1, Tab 1, Case CESROW20140007406,
Guillermo Godoy, Jr., and Maria C Godoy, has been withdrawn.
Number 4, Tab 4, Case CEROW20140005406, Christopher M.
Sullivan and Kathleen Sullivan, has been withdrawn.
Number 6, Tab 6, Case CEVR20140014030, Cambridge Square
of Naples, LC, has been withdrawn.
Number 10, Tab 10, Case CESD20140008607, Glady Trujillo,
has been withdrawn.
Number 11, Tab 11, Case CESD20140011748, Keith P. Hartman,
has been withdrawn.
Number 12, Tab 12, Case CESD20140015244, Evelyn Faye
Thompson, has been withdrawn.
Number 15, Tab 15, Case CESD20140017894, Jose F. Garcia,
has been withdrawn.
Number 6, old business, Letter C, motion to rescind previously
issued order. We have one addition. It's Case CEROW20140005480,
Keito Holdings, LLC. And that's all the changes.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. I'd like to have a motion to
accept the agenda as modified.
MR. LEFEBVRE: So moved.
MR. MIESZCAK: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second.
All those in favor?
Page 4
January 22, 2015
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. MIESZCAK: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. ASHTON: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
Let the record show that we have another board member who has
joined us. Good morning.
MS. CURLEY: Good morning.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Where would like to start,
Kerry?
MS. ADAMS: Motion for continuance from imposition of fines,
No. 6, Tab 21, Case CESD20140006864, Jeffrey Gallucci, Deborah L.
Gallucci, and Mary P. Stevens.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Before we continue, I just
want to note that Sue's going to be a full voting member today. Okay.
(The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
MR. SNOW: Good morning.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning.
MR. SNOW: For the record, Kitchell Snow, Collier County
Code Enforcement.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning, Kitchell.
I see that you're standing up there and there's nobody over here.
MR. SNOW: That is correct.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: This is a request for an extension?
MR. SNOW: That is correct, sir.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let me just read the letter that they
wrote. They're requesting a continuance.
Page 5
January 22, 2015
Have the operational costs of 63.57 been paid?
MR. SNOW: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Based on that alone, without
hearing anything else, I'll accept a motion to deny their request.
MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to deny.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second.
All those in favor?
MS. CURLEY: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. MIESZCAK: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. ASHTON: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
Thanks, Kitchell.
MR. SNOW: Thanks, sir.
MS. ADAMS: Next case, motion for extension of time from
imposition of fines, No. 5, Tab 20, Case CESD20130001292,
Christopher S. Esenberg.
(The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Give us a minute to read.
Sue, that should be behind Tab 20.
MR. SNOW: If I may, for the record, I do believe that Mr.
Esenberg has been diligent in trying to come into compliance with
what the board wants him to do. There's just been a lot of issues with
the permitting and resubmitting rejections that he's had to go through,
and he has been diligent. He just needs more time.
Page 6
January 22, 2015
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah. My concern on this is it
started in 2013, which is, as we say on the board, a long time ago.
MR. SNOW: Well, there were more factors involved than just
this one.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Right, I understand.
MR. SNOW: He's done a lot more in others that haven't been
heard before you. So this is only the one that's been heard before you.
So he has been working and completing other things, and this is just
involved with the process.
MR. ESENBERG: The engineer held me up. That's what delayed
everything so long, and --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Are you making progress now
towards this?
MR. ESENBERG: Yeah, very good. I'm working with FEMA
now, and Pelican Bay Contracting is getting all the bids. And I think
he's going to re-file it next -- in one week, next week, and then I'll be
ready -- I'll have my permit then. And then finally --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So you're asking for -- is it 60 days,
did I see?
MR. ESENBERG: Or three months, because I don't know -- we
have to pour concrete and then do electrical and plumbing, and just to
finish that room in the bathroom. So I think -- I don't know, a good
maybe 90 days or -- be on the safe side, because I don't know how long
it's going to take to get the permit yet. And maybe -- maybe a couple
weeks, you know, and I'll have the permit, I hope.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Comments from the board?
MR. MIESZCAK: Is this a continuance or days (sic)?
MR. SNOW: I would assume it's a continuance, because --
MR. LAVINSKI: It should be a continuance.
MR. MIESZCAK: That's what I think.
MR. SNOW: Yeah, it's a continuance.
Page 7
January 22, 2015
MR. LEFEBVRE: For clarification for the new member,
continuance means that the fines are still running where extension
means the fines stop.
MR. SNOW: That is correct, sir.
MR. LEFEBVRE: I make a motion -- and this will be, for me,
the last time that I will agree to an extension. I make a motion for an
extension for 150 days, and that should take care of any issues that
may arise.
MR. MIESZCAK: That sounds reasonable to me. I'll second that
motion.
MR. LAVINSKI: You want to make that a continuance, not an
extension?
MR. LEFEVBRE: Sorry, a continuance, yes, sorry.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a motion and a
second to grant the 150 days which is, again, a long time. Hopefully,
since the ball has started to roll, you should probably have no problem
completing it on time. If not --
MR. ESENBERG: I don't think so.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- you know, the -- what's required --
MR. LEFEBVRE: He's been diligent. He's been coming in front
of us each time --
MR. ESENBERG: Thank you.
MR. LEFEBVRE: -- and I think 150 days would be warranted.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a motion and a
second.
All those in favor?
MS. CURLEY: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. MIESZCAK: Aye.
Page 8
January 22, 2015
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. ASHTON: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Hopefully we
won't see you in 150 days.
MR. SNOW: Just for clarification, gentlemen, fines are
continuing -- ladies and gentlemen, my apologies. The fines are
continuing to accrue, and once he comes into compliance, he can come
back before this board and seek a reduction or an elimination?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's correct.
MR. MIESZCAK: Correct.
MR. SNOW: Thank you.
MS. ADAMS: The next case from Letter B, stipulations, No. 3
from hearings, Tab 3, Case CESD20140015359, Chili Caliente, LLC.
(The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning.
MR. MORAD: Good morning.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Your name for the record, on the
mike.
MR. GALLEGOS: Jacob Gallegos.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And you are?
MR. GALLEGOS: Owner of Chili Caliente.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. MORAD: Senior Code Enforcement Investigator Ed
Morad.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Why don't you read the
stipulation into the record, and we'll go from there.
MR. MORAD: The respondent agrees to pay operational costs of
the amount of$65.84 incurred in the prosecution of the case within 30
days of this hearing; abate all violations by obtaining a permit,
Page 9
January 22, 2015
inspections, and CO within 120 days of this hearing date or a fine of
$200 a day will be imposed until the violation is abated.
The respondent must notify code enforcement within 24 hours of
abatement of the violation, request the investigator perform a site
inspection to confirm the compliance; that -- the respondent fails to
abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any
method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the
assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the
provisions of this agreement, and the costs of abatement shall be
assessed to the property owner.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Good morning.
MR. GALLEGOS: Good morning.
THE PETITIONER: You have agreed to the stipulation; you
understand all the terms of it?
MR. GALLEGOS: Yes, yes.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And you think you can get
everything done in 120 days?
MR. GALLEGOS: If I could use -- I mean, financially, if I could
use a little bit more days, I could appreciate it but, I mean --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Any comments from the
board?
Now, if we change that, we have to redo the stipulation, by the
way, the days.
MR. MIESZCAK: Didn't they work this out before?
MR. GALLEGOS: I mean, 120 days should be sufficient.
MR. MIESZCAK: So that's the date I would stick with.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Any comments -- other
comments from the board?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: If none, I'll accept a motion to accept
the stipulation as written.
Page 10
January 22, 2015
MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to accept.
MR. MIESZCAK: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second to
accept the stipulation as written.
All those in favor?
MS. CURLEY: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. MIESZCAK: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. ASHTON: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
Thank you.
MR. MORAD: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Again, if you run into problems
down the road, you know where to find us.
MR. GALLEGOS: Thank you.
MS. ADAMS: We have another stipulation added to the agenda.
It's No. 2 from hearings, Tab 2. Case CE -- I'm sorry?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We need to modify the agenda then.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Well, we're going to do that right now.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Oh, we are? That's the next case?
Okay. So it changes, though, to a stipulation from a hearing. Okay.
MS. ADAMS: Case CESD20120000572, Juan Campbell and
Nora Carillo.
(The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Could you give us your name for the
record.
Page 11
January 22, 2015
MR. CAMPBELL: Juan Campbell.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And Weldon?
MR. WALKER: Weldon Walker, Collier County Code
Enforcement.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Why don't you read the
stipulation, and we'll go from there.
MR. WALKER: Yes. Therefore, it is agreed between the parties
that the respondent shall pay operational costs in the amount of 66.27
incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing;
abate all violations by obtaining all required Collier County building
permits or demolition permits, inspections, and certificate of
completion within 90 days of this hearing, or a fine of$200 a day will
be imposed until the violation is abated.
The respondent must notify code enforcement within 24 hours of
the abatement of the violation and request that the investigator perform
a site visit -- site inspection to confirm compliance; and that if the
respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the
violation by using methods to bring the violation into compliance and
may use the assistance of Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the
provisions of this agreement, and all costs of abatement shall be
assessed to the property owner.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Good morning.
MR. CAMPBELL: Good morning.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you understand the stipulation as
it's been written?
MR. CAMPBELL: Yes, sir, I agree.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And you -- you think you can get
everything done within 90 days?
MR. CAMPBELL: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Any comments from the
board?
Page 12
January 22, 2015
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Am I correct this goes all the way back to
2013? It was supposed to have been corrected in December of 2013?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's correct.
The date the violation was first observed was January of 2013
which is two years ago, obviously. It was reinspected in October. A
violation still remains. It's an expired building permit that never got a
CO.
MR. LEFEBVRE: How many permits are needed to get the CO?
MR. CAMPBELL: Two.
MR. LEFEVBRE: To receive the CO, is it -- have all the -- or
inspections, sorry; inspections.
MR. CAMPBELL: Two inspections.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Now, generally speaking, the
building permit has a time frame on it where you have to start all over
again.
MR. WALKER: Yes. What happens is, is with this particular
permit he pulled, he had six months in order to receive inspections.
Once he received an inspection, if it's within that six months, it
automatically takes that permit up to another six months dealing with
the nature of what he has to put there.
So over the time frame, there was a series of inspections that went
to six months. And this last inspection that actually brought the permit
to a place where it was no longer valid was what brought us here
today.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I think that was Mr. Ashton's
concern, that the building permit expired. But it's still valid?
MR. WALKER: He would have to re-act that permit or he would
have to re-open that permit to get the remaining two inspections.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And 90 days should -- it's
strictly a paperwork -- all the items except for the inspections have
been completed?
Page 13
January 22, 2015
MR. CAMPBELL: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Any other comments from
the board?
MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion to accept.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion to accept.
MR. LAVINSKI: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And a second.
All those in favor?
MS. CURLEY: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. MIESZCAK: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. ASHTON: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Thank you.
MR. WALKER: Thank you very much.
MS. ADAMS: The next case is No. 5, Tab 5, Case
CELU20140016851, Peter Helff.
(The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Could you state your name on the
mike for the record.
MR. HELFF: My name is John He1ff.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. BOSA: For the record, Ralph Bosa, Collier County Code
Enforcement.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Why don't you start us off.
MR. BOSA: Yes, sir. Good morning.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning.
Page 14
January 22, 2015
MR. BOSA: For the record, Ralph Bosa, Collier County Code
Enforcement.
This is in reference to Case No. CELU20140016851 dealing with
the violation of Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as
amended, Section 1 .04.01A and Section 2.02.03, prohibited storage of
a recreational vehicle on the property not owned by the property
owner.
This is located at 2080 21st Street Southwest, Naples, Florida,
34117 with a folio number of 45965080007.
Service was given on September 26, 2014.
I'd like to present case evidence in the following exhibits. One
photo dated August 22, 2014, and two more photos dated December 2,
2014.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Ralph, has the respondent seen the
photos?
MR. HELFF: I've seen the damage done to my property. I
actually initiated this way back when.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let me just -- have you seen these
photos?
MR. HELFF: Probably not these particular photos.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Why don't you show him the photos
first, then I'm going to ask you if those are real photos, then we can
accept them into evidence.
MS. NICOLA: Can I request a point of clarification?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Sure.
MS. NICOLA: Sir, is your name Peter or -- do you go by John?
MR. HELFF: I'm John. I'm the son.
MS. NICOLA: Thank you. Appreciate it.
MR. HELFF: My father lives up in New Jersey, and he's in no
health condition to come down here.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And you have his permission to
Page 15
January 22, 2015
testify on his behalf?
MR. HELFF: Absolutely. I've lived here. He -- yeah, absolutely.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. HELFF: And, really, we're kind of just asking for a
continuance for 30 days. I'm very sick today.
The problem was a squatter on my property, and the item has now
been moved forcefully yesterday with the help of sheriffs department
and everything.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We'll get -- first we want to
hear code enforcement's comments on the case, and then we'll come to
you, and we'll go from there.
We need a motion to accept the --
MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to accept the photos.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we --
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And a second to accept the photos in
evidence.
All those in favor?
MS. CURLEY: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. MIESZCAK: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. ASHTON: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Thank you.
Okay. That is a photo of?
MR. BOSA: It's a photo of the trailer there. That's where his
tenant was living on the property.
Page 16
January 22, 2015
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. BOSA: This is a more recent photo. You can see that they
even put up a camp after that previous photo, which was an older
photo than this one. So it's very hard to see, but there are wires, like
orange extension cords running to the camper there.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: From where?
MR. BOSA: You can see it -- yeah, you can see where Kerry was
pointing there.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: In other words, where are the
extensions -- where's the hot end?
MR. BOSA: Right there where it connects to the trailer --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So --
MR. BOSA: -- and in the home.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So the electricity to that trailer's been
provided by the homeowner of the property?
MR. BOSA: Correct, sir.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Have you been out there in
the past week or so?
MR. BOSA: Yeah. My investigators have been out there. This
is a case that's been going back since 2012. Actually, at first the
previous case, which has already been to hearing, was in regards to an
unlicensed camper, and we were found -- he was found in violation for
unlicensed motor vehicle for the camper.
And now it turned out to be somebody was living there full time
as a tenant. And, like Mr. Helff had stated, he just recently got rid of
the tenant and is in the process of removing the trailer.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So the trailer, as far as you know, is
still there?
MR. BOSA: Yes, as far as I know, is still there.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Mr. Helff?
MR. HELFF: First of all, the gentleman was never given
Page 17
January 22, 2015
permission to live there or anything. The first violation was due to
registration. I work up in Lake Placid in the summers. He moves into
it when I'm not home. He stayed there. He then said it was registered.
And I thought nothing of it.
He steals my mail, so I didn't even know about the case until a
few months ago that there was a hearing already and everything.
For a couple years it sat empty. I heard nothing from the county
because he said he registered it. And the county never came out. And
every other month it would be, I'm moving it this month, I'm moving it
this month. Another excuse. The police would be called again while
he's allowed to keep it here. He'll have to move it out.
You know, he says he's moving it next month. We went away for
the summer last summer to Lake Placid again. I came home, and he
was living in it again. The only electricity that was provided for him
was he was supposed to fix it up the first two months he lived there.
He then buried a cable. He's an electrician. Buried a cable, literally
went under my house, came up under my house, because it's up on a
lift, it's not a cement pad, and wired into the wiring of my house and
was stealing electricity for two and a half years. I'm wondering why
my electric bills are $350 a month for a 160-dollar-a-month house.
I was told about -- I'm violation again in September. Told them
they need to move. There's no questions they need to go away. They
were never invited here, they're not allowed to be here. The Collier
County Sheriffs Department comes out many times. They make a
living out of squatting. They said that they are very good at this and
they know what they're doing.
They finally -- I turned off-- made sure because I found out about
the stolen electricity. I turned off the breaker boxes and removed their
electricity, to which they responded by coming back with a generator.
Police department once again, the whole 9 yards. The generator,
unfortunately, broke down that night. They moved out the next day.
Page 18
January 22, 2015
They were gone.
And for 45 days I'm calling them up telling them they need to
remove their property from my yard. They'd come by and get a couple
items. I'm thinking they're moving, finally. He goes to move the
camper the other day, flat tire, leaves it on my front yard.
So a neighbor came by, and with a little help of the Collier
County Sheriffs Department, the camper was finally moved away. So
it's gone. I'm going to clean it all up. I never wanted any of this. I
called the county originally to help me out to try to get rid of him.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So you're saying that the
trailer is now gone?
MR. HELFF: It's now gone, and my yard will be spotless in a
week.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. I wonder what's the best way
to handle this, if we even put this to next month; if the trailer's gone,
the trailer's gone. Do you have any suggestion, Ralph?
MR. BOSA: Well, last time we went, we went out there two days
ago, the trailer was still there, so that's why --
MR. HELFF: It's gone down. Go by today.
MR. BOSA: If he had called me yesterday and we checked it
then, you know, we probably wouldn't have proceeded with the
hearing.
But I would say -- my suggestion would be, give him maybe a
couple weeks so I can go out there, or a couple days, and check and see
if the trailer's gone, and then he'll be compliant, and we can just --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Why don't -- our next meeting is in
30 days or so. Why don't we come up with a motion to give him 30
days or X amount of dollar fine, et cetera, et cetera. There are going to
be some --
MR. HELFF: Fines?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- court costs, around $60, or
Page 19
January 22, 2015
whatever it is, that need to be paid. But if they go out within the next
month and it's gone, it's gone. There's no violation. Go ahead.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Let's make a motion that there is either a
violation or there isn't.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Right.
MR. LEFEVBRE: Then we can talk about the fines and so forth.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Would it be cleaner to suggest that we
have a motion for a continuance?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Maybe the county can just pull this
until next month.
MR. LEFEVBRE: Well, I'd like to actually have a full hearing so
then if this happens again, then the fines are --
MR. HELFF: Oh, it won't happen again. He's gone. I've wanted
this man gone for two years now. This has been -- he's kept me
prisoner in my own home.
MR. LEFEVBRE: Mr. Wright, what's your thoughts?
MR. WRIGHT: My thought is that he's here for a hearing. He's
admitted the violation. I think that he should be found in violation. It
will be an easy fix. He's already fixed it. And so the fines probably
won't even begin to accrue if you give him a certain amount of time to
correct.
MR. LEFEBVRE: I make a motion that a violation does exist.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion --
MR. LAVINSKI: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- and a second.
All those in favor?
MS. CURLEY: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
Page 20
January 22, 2015
MR. MIESZCAK: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. ASHTON: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
Okay. You're in violation, and now the remedy to that violation,
would someone like to make a motion on that?
MR. BOSA: I can read, really quick, the --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Go ahead, what your suggestion is.
MR. BOSA: -- suggestion.
That the Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay
all operational costs in the amount of$65.01 incurred in the
prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by, one,
cease the storage of any and all recreational vehicles not owned by the
property owner and/or disconnect any and all utility hook-ups and
cease using recreational vehicle for living, sleeping, or housekeeping
purposes within X amount of days of this hearing, or a fine of X
amount per day will be imposed until the violation is abated.
The respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator
when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final
inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate the
violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to
bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the
Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this order,
and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Would somebody like to fill
in the blanks.
MR. HELFF: That was a year ago.
MR. LAVINSKI: Yeah. I'll make a motion that the 65.01
administrative costs be paid within 30 days and that the violation be
Page 21
January 22, 2015
corrected within 30 days, or a fine of$50 a day be imposed.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do we have a second for that
motion?
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second.
All those in favor?
MS. CURLEY: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. MIESZCAK: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. ASHTON: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
So it's going to be $65.01 to be paid within 30 days, and they'll
get out there, make sure it's gone, and hopefully he won't return.
MR. HELFF: Beautiful.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you.
MR. HELFF: Thank you very much.
MS. NICOLA: Can I get a good address for you. Is that the right
address? Okay. I was concerned about your mail being stolen. Send
it there?
MR. HELFF: They're not there anymore, so it will never happen
again.
MS. NICOLA: Thank you.
MS. ADAMS: The next case is No. 7, Tab 7, Case
CELU20140016289, Frank Civale.
(The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning, Eric.
Page 22
January 22, 2015
MR. SHORT: Good morning. For the record, Senior
Investigator Eric Short, Collier County Sheriffs Office.
This is in reference to Case No. CELU20140016289 regarding
violations of the Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as
amended, Section 1.04.O1A and 2.02.03, Estates zoned property being
utilized as multifamily by renting the guesthouse and other accessory
structures.
This is located at 3800 29th Avenue Southwest, Naples, Florida,
34117; Folio 38051800001 .
Service was given on November 4, 2014.
I would like to present case evidence in the following exhibits:
Two photographs taken by Investigator Kinetta on August 18, 2014.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Could I have a motion to
accept the photos.
MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to accept.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I have a motion.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And a second.
All those in favor?
MS. CURLEY: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. MIESZCAK: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. ASHTON: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
MR. SHORT: This case originated as a public complaint for
housing standards and property maintenance issues on August 18,
Page 23
January 22, 2015
2014. Initial site visit was conducted by Investigator Kinetta the same
day.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You're not going to tell me that
Santa is the one who's the illegal -- okay.
MR. SHORT: Investigator Kinetta made a site visit -- or made
contact with the tenants on the property and described that they were
living in small cottages in the rear of the property.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's plural, small cottages?
MR. SHORT: Correct.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So there's more than one?
MR. SHORT: More than one structure that they're living in.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. SHORT: On August 29th, Investigator Ambach made
contact with one of the tenants, which was also a complainant at the
time.
Due to the obvious land use issues, the investigation continued.
And on November 4th, I took over the case, and my investigation
revealed that the structures were actually permitted; however, the issue
today is the multi use -- the land use issue. The structures are
permitted, not for living.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You spoke with the owner of the
property, Mr. Civale?
MR. SHORT: I have not. I have made attempts to contact him.
The tenants do tell me that he lives in the main structure. Attempts
have been unsuccessful.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And the service was given to
that main residence there, Kerry, the letter and --
MS. ADAMS: I can give you that information. Certified mail
was sent on January 7, 2015, and the property and courthouse were
both posted on January 6, 2015.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: When you send the certified, do you
Page 24
January 22, 2015
get a return receipt request?
MS. ADAMS: We do.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Was is delivered?
MS. ADAMS: If it's delivered, we get the card back. If not, we
get the whole thing back.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So you got -- it was delivered?
MS. ADAMS: I don't know if it was delivered or not. I just have
that we did send it certified on that day.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. All right. Well, any
comments from the board?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any motions? Do we see that a
violation exists?
MR. MIESZCAK: Motion a fine (sic) exists.
MR. LAVINSKI: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second that
MR. MIESZCAK: Violation exists.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- a violation exists.
All those in favor?
MS. CURLEY: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. MIESZCAK: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. ASHTON: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
Okay. You have a suggestion for us, Eric?
Page 25
MR. SHORT: Yes. The county recommends that the Code
Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs
in the amount of$64.59 incurred in the prosecution of this case within
30 days and abate all violations by, one, ceasing all unpermitted
lodging activities, including advertisements associated with the Estates
zoned property, within blank days of this hearing or a fine of blank
dollars per day -- I'm sorry -- a fine of blank dollars will be imposed
for each day the violation continues;
Two, the respondent must notify the code enforcement
investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a
final inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate
the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to
bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the
Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this order,
and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. One of the things, I think,
that we need to take into consideration, these structures are all
occupied.
MR. SHORT: Correct.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So a certain amount of time needs to
be provided to have these apartments, if you will, vacated.
MR. SHORT: Right. Maybe sufficient time for eviction and so
on and so forth.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Right.
MR. LEFEBVRE: The other thing that isn't in here is what were
they originally permit as, like storage?
MR. SHORT: Right, storage facilities.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Shouldn't they be returned back to a storage --
I mean, like, if there's any plumbing in there, shouldn't the plumbing be
removed, and electrical?
MR. SHORT: Right. And I wasn't able to gain access inside. I
Page 26
January 22, 2015
don't know if it -- I would assume -- and I don't feel comfortable
assuming -- however, I do --
MR. LEFEBVRE: Because right here -- right now as it's written,
all they have to do is cease lodging activities, but a year from now they
can start again. But if they -- if we -- if they have to remove all the
plumbing, electrical, so forth, then it would be a lot harder to do that.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I think if it was built and it was
inspected and they have a CO, they can have electricity and water in
these buildings that are on the property. I don't think that's the
problem.
MR. LEFEVBRE: But what is it CO'ed as, is what I'm saying. Is
it CO'ed --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Storage.
MR. LEFEVBRE: If it's CO'ed as storage, then it wouldn't be
built out as, like, a guest home, is what I'm trying to get at.
MS. CURLEY: What was the original permit, for water and
electricity?
MR. SHORT: It was for just simply a storage. There was no
electric. However, just to draw us back to this case, the violation -- the
notice of violation was served under a land use issue. I did not address
any building or permitting activity.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You said that one of the tenants is
the one who is the complainant?
MR. SHORT: Correct.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: What was their complaint?
MR. SHORT: It started out as minimum housing standards, bugs,
your typical property maintenance issues.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. These are difficult cases to
establish; you know, this is my cousin who lives here or my
brother-in-law, et cetera, et cetera --
MR. SHORT: Right.
Page 27
January 22, 2015
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- going forward. But obviously a
violation exists. The board has confirmed that, and we're up to the
time frame and the imposition of fines.
MR. LEFEVBRE: I've got another -- I still have another
question. The tenant didn't allow access to the unit that he was in?
MR. SHORT: To the guest home, yes. And the guest home is
permitted as a guest home.
MR. LEFEBVRE: A guest home, oh, okay.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And he's not related to the owner?
MR. SHORT: No.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Anybody like to take a stab at
the motion?
MR. LAVINSKI: Well, my concern here is that if we have a
minimum housing standard issue, our guidelines say that ought to be
taken care of in seven days.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. SHORT: If I may, the minimum housing standards were
handled in a different case. And again, clearly, all I want to focus on is
the land use issue using the Estates zoned property as multifamily.
MR. LAVINSKI: What did we do about the minimum living
standards?
MR. SHORT: The minimum housing standards or property
maintenance issues are being handled in an adjacent case --
MR. LAVINSKI: Oh, okay.
MR. SHORT: -- that you may see at a later date.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Would you like to take a shot
at the time frames and the fine?
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Mr. Chairman, I'll be glad to do that.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: For No. 1, we'll say within 30 days of this
hearing or a fine of$200 will be imposed for each day the violation
Page 28
January 22, 2015
continues with -- 30 days sufficient for eviction?
MR. SHORT: I believe per statute. I would seek legal advise for
that, though.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Jeff, is 30 days sufficient time to
remove the tenants?
MR. WRIGHT: I think you'd probably need more time than 30
days. I'm not positive. And I really don't care about the relationship
between the landlord and the tenant. I'm worried about the public
safety threat of this --
MR. MIESZCAK: I think that's the issue, is a safety factor.
MR. WRIGHT: So I don't think -- if you're looking for my input,
I would say base your order on the safety concerns rather than the
tenant and the landlord relationship.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, let me talk about safety for a
second. If the structure was CO'ed, is there a safety violation?
MR. LEFEVBRE: We're not talking about --
MR. L'ESPERANCE: One of the structures was CO'ed.
MS. CURLEY: They're not lawnmowers. They're humans.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: The other structures were not.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I don't think. That's not part of this
case. This case is you have somebody who is not related -- is not a
bonified guest, if you will, who is living on the property where it's
zoned for only single-family.
MR. SHORT: Correct.
MR. WRIGHT: And living in structures that are supposed to be
for storage. I think that's the biggest concern safety-wise, that a
storage place is not a place to live, and there's a lot of safety issues and
health-related issues that would come up, I would think.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, we have the motion for 30
days and $200 and the court costs being paid within 30 days. Do we
have a second on that motion?
Page 29
January 22, 2015
MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second the motion.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second on the motion.
Any more discussion on the motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hearing none, all those in favor?
MS. CURLEY: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. MIESZCAK: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. ASHTON: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
Thanks, Eric.
MS. ADAMS: The next case is No. 8, Tab 8, Case
CENA20140022780, Tarpon IV, LLC.
(The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
MR. JONES: Good morning. For the record, David Jones,
Collier County Code Enforcement.
This is in reference to Case No. CENA20140022780 dealing with
violations of Collier County Ordinance Chapter 54, Article VI, Section
54-185(D) located at an unimproved property with a parcel number of
76210840000.
Service was given on November 14, 2014.
I would now like to present case evidence in the following
exhibits which are simply two photos of the exotic vegetation that
we're dealing with.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Motion to accept the photos.
MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to accept.
Page 30
January 22, 2015
MR. ASHTON: Motion to accept.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Second.
MR. LAVINSKI: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. All those in favor?
MS. CURLEY: (No verbal response.)
MR. LEFEBVRE: (No verbal response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. LAVINSKI: (No verbal response.)
MR. MIESZCAK: (No verbal response.)
MR. L'ESPERANCE: (No verbal response.)
MR. ASHTON: (No verbal response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
Thank you.
MR. JONES: The details of the case are as follows: On
November 13, 2014, I responded to a complaint regarding exotic
vegetation located upon unimproved property, Folio 76210840000.
While on site, I did observe several species of prohibited exotic
vegetation, including java plum and the typical stuff, Brazilian pepper,
earleaf acacia, and that does constitute a violation of the
aforementioned ordinance.
On November 13, 2014, the same day that I saw the violation, I
was able to make contact with the registered agent for this property,
which is Gulf Group Holding, Incorporated.
I informed David from Gulf Group Holding of the situation and
that I would be issuing a notice of violation to him and the property
owner.
David stated that he would look into the situation and get back
with me. I had not heard back from him, so on December 15, 2014, I
contacted him again, and the registered agent stated that he hadn't been
Page 31
January 22, 2015
able to contact the property owners.
My last conversation with him was on December 30, 2014, and at
that time he stated that he was meeting with the property owners on
January 5th and will inform them of the issue.
Since that time, I've not heard anything back, and there's been no
effort toward compliance on behalf of the property owner or the
registered agent.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Where is this property located? I see
no site address.
MR. JONES: Yeah, it's -- sure. I have an aerial image. It's
located off Bayshore Avenue (sic).
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It looks like there's a commercial
property next door. I see white lines.
MR. JONES: Yeah, there's commercial properties next door, but
this particular one is zoned residential multifamily as it stands now.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. How large a parcel is it?
MR. JONES: It's under an acre. You know what, I don't have the
exact acreage. It wasn't on this page, but it's under an acre.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. JONES: And the original complaint came in -- I spoke to
the complainant. His concern was that people were kind of hanging
out in there making bonfires and things like that because it's so dense
with cover, and that's really how the complaint came about.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. LAVINSKI: Motion that a violation exists.
MR. MIESZCAK: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion that a violation
exists and a second.
All those in favor?
MS. CURLEY: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
Page 32
January 22, 2015
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. MIESZCAK: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. ASHTON: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
You have a suggestion for us, David?
MR. JONES: I do, and that is that the Code Enforcement Board
orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of
$65.01 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and
abate all violations by: Must obtain any necessary permits,
inspections, and certificate of completion for the removal of all Collier
County prohibited exotic vegetation. The prohibited exotic vegetation
base/stump must be treated with a U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency-approved herbicide and visual tracer dye applied when the
prohibited exotic vegetation is removed but the base of the vegetation
remains.
This order of the board shall be completed within blank days of
this hearing, or a fine of blank dollars a day will be imposed until the
violation is abated.
And, finally, the respondent must notify the code enforcement
investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a
final inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate
the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to
bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the
Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this order,
and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Approximately, just a guess,
how much of the property is covered with the exotics versus --
Page 33
January 22, 2015
MR. JONES: I would say 90 percent.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So basically you're talking about
clearing the whole lot?
MR. JONES: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Probably heavy equipment to get in
there and --
MR. JONES: Yeah, it will be the whole -- if they can get a
vegetation removal permit issued, to use heavy equipment. They may
not be able to obtain that, so they'd have to use hand removal methods.
Either way, it's going to be a big job, expensive job, so, yeah.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And the time frame would probably
reflect that.
Okay. Any comments from the board?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Anybody like to take a shot at the
motion?
MR. LAVINSKI: Yeah, I'll take a shot at it. I make a motion that
the 65.01 admin costs be paid in 30 days, that the violation be abated
within 30 days, or a fine of$100 a day be imposed.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do we have a second on that?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let me give you my comment. I
think 30 days might be too short a time frame to do the scope of work
that needs to be done.
MR. JONES: Well, if you could look at it as -- well, yeah, I
guess you're right. I mean, since it's gone to hearing in 30 days, it
needs to be in compliance at that time, so that -- I agree. It's quite a bit
of work to do in that time frame. But, again, I haven't really heard
anything back from the property owners. In my opinion, you know,
they're not very eager to jump on the issue and correct it.
MR. LAVINSKI: If we make it 60, nothing's going to start until
Page 34
January 22, 2015
60. If you make it 90, nothing will start till 90.
MS. CURLEY: I'll second -- I'll second your motion.
MR. LAVINSKI: So I think the 30 days gets their attention.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a second on the
30-day motion by Sue.
Any comments on the motion?
MR. ASHTON: Yes. Do you think $100 a day is --
MR. LAVINSKI: Yes.
MR. ASHTON: -- enough to get them going, or --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's part of the guidelines that we
generally follow.
MR. ASHTON: This has been going on, you know. When they
see it's going to cost them more money, they might jump on it quicker.
MS. CURLEY: Or put a for-sale sign up.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Uh-oh. The hammer just fell. Is that
a sign?
MR. LAVINSKI: If the board agrees, I would extend the fine,
but I'd like to hear what the board feels. One hundred dollars, that's
our guideline for exotic removal, but --
MR. L'ESPERANCE: I think $100 is reasonable for this case.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah. The real penalty in this is
going to be -- and it's just to come into compliance. It's going to cost a
lot of money to get the lot into compliance.
Okay. Any other comments on the motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: If I hear none, all those in favor?
MS. CURLEY: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. MIESZCAK: Aye.
Page 35
January 22, 2015
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. ASHTON: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
Thanks, David.
MR. JONES: Thank you.
MS. ADAMS: The next case is No. 9, Tab 9, Case
CEROW20140002816, Sammy R. Gober, Jo Ann Gober, and Stanley
R. Gober.
(The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning, Ralph.
MR. BOSA: Good morning. For the record, Ralph Bosa, Collier
County Code Enforcement.
This case is in reference -- this case is in reference to Case No.
CEROW20140002816 dealing with the violation of Collier County
Code of Laws and Ordinances, Chapter 110, Section 110-31(A), a
damage/failed culvert located at 11380 Trading Place, Naples, Florida,
34114 with a folio number of 00761280004.
Service was given on October 17, 2014.
I'd like to present case evidence in the following exhibits: Three
photos taken February 24, 2014.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Have a motion to accept the photos?
MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to accept the photos.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And a second.
All those in favor?
MS. CURLEY: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
Page 36
January 22, 2015
MR. MIESZCAK: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. ASHTON: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
MR. BOSA: This first photo here is showing -- to verify the
location. You can see the fish there is 11380.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: He must have escaped from the
water.
MR. BOSA: Here you can see where the culvert begins and then
the collapse of the -- collapse of the driveway there, starting to
collapse.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is that a paved driveway or dirt?
MR. BOSA: Yes, sir, it's a paved driveway.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. BOSA: The next photo should show it a little better. Shows
it right there where it's starting to give way into the culvert.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you know whether or not water
can actually pass through this, or --
MR. BOSA: As far as I know, water can pass through it. I think
it's just -- eventually it's going to fail and just come crumbling down
into the culvert itself.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. You've been in contact with
the homeowner?
MR. BOSA: Yes, we have. We have been in contact numerous
times with the homeowner by myself and the investigator himself He
assured us that he was going to get a permit for the culvert. Numerous
times he's said, I will get it, I'm getting a contractor, used different
excuses but no -- still no permit has been applied for as of yesterday;
I've checked.
Page 37
January 22, 2015
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And he's not here today?
MR. BOSA: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Anybody have a comment
whether a violation exists or not?
MR. LAVINSKI: I'll make a motion a violation does exist.
MR. ASHTON: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second that
a violation exists.
All those in favor?
MS. CURLEY: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. MIESZCAK: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. ASHTON: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
From what I understand, roads and bridges has been going around
checking the culverts. When these things fail, it backs up water all
over the place and causes severe problems.
MR. BOSA: Yes, it does.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And they generally at that time,
when they find the problem, notify the homeowner.
MR. BOSA: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: If the homeowner doesn't comply,
then Code Enforcement Board is notified; is that correct?
MR. BOSA: Exactly.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And code enforcement then
contacts the homeowner as well.
Page 38
January 22, 2015
MR. BOSA: Yeah. We try to work with them. I mean, it's an
added expense that they didn't expect at the time, so we give them a lot
of leeway. But this particular case, he just wouldn't -- wouldn't budge.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do you have a suggestion for
us, Ralph?
MR. BOSA: Yes, sir, I do.
That the Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay
all operational costs in the amount of$65.43 incurred in the
prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by
obtaining all required Collier County right-of-way permits and
inspections through final approval within X amount of days of this
hearing, or a fine of X amount per day will be imposed until the
violation is abated.
The respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator
when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final
inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate the
violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to
bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the
Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this order,
and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Anybody want to take a shot
at a motion?
MR. LAVINSKI: Yeah. I'll take another shot.
I make a motion that the operational costs of 65.43 be paid within
30 days. And since we're sort of in the dry season, that the violation be
corrected within 30 days or a fine of$200 per day be imposed.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do we have a second?
MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And we have a second.
Any discussion on the motion?
(No response.)
Page 39
January 22, 2015
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I think that 30-day time frame will
probably be a motivational tool to the homeowner.
All those in favor?
MS. CURLEY: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. MIESZCAK: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. ASHTON: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
Thanks, Ralph.
MR. BOSA: Thank you.
MS. ADAMS: The next case is No. 13, Tab 13, Case
CESD20140004266, Carmen B. Cintron Estate.
(The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I didn't hear you.
MR. CINTRON: I do.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Can you state your name for
the record.
MR. CINTRON: Luis Alberto Cintron.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. WALKER: Weldon Walker, Collier County Code
Enforcement Board.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, Weldon. Why don't you start
us off.
MR. WALKER: Good morning. For the record, Weldon J.
Walker, Jr., Collier County Code Enforcement.
This is in reference to Case No. CESD20140004266 dealing with
Page 40
January 22, 2015
the violation of Collier County Land Development Code
10.02.06(B)(1)(a), shed structures installed without obtaining Collier
County building permit.
The location is at 908 Glades Street, Immokalee, Florida, 34142.
The folio number is 63858720003.
Service was given on July 18, 2014, in the form of affidavit
posting at 908 Glade Street, Immokalee, Florida.
I would like to enter into exhibit I think it's 12 photographs.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Has the respondent seen the
photographs, Weldon?
Have you seen the photographs?
MS. NICOLA: No, sir.
MR. WALKER: He hasn't.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Why don't you show the respondent
the photographs first.
MS. NICOLA: If I can ask a point of clarification, sir. Your
name is Luis.
MR. CINTRON: Alberto Cintron.
MS. NICOLA: Luis Alberto. And you are not the respondent.
How are you related to him?
MR. CINTRON: It's my mother.
MS. NICOLA: It's your mother.
MR. CINTRON: She's deceased.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You have your mother's permission
to testify?
MR. CINTRON: She's deceased.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Or she passed away, is that what --
MR. CINTRON: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. CINTRON: I'm just trying to straighten everything out, you
know, the best I can.
Page 41
January 22, 2015
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you know whether or not you're
the executor of her estate or not?
MR. CINTRON: Well, I'm her son. I mean, I'm the one paying
the taxes right now and trying to take care of everything.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you have any brothers or sisters
or anybody that --
MR. CINTRON: I have a brother that just passed away, too, on
November 14th. I'm just trying --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So you're the whole family right
here?
MR. CINTRON: Right.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to accept the photos; is that proper
here?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes.
MR. MIESZCAK: He saw them, right; he agrees?
MR. LAVINSKI: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And a second.
All those in favor?
MS. CURLEY: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. MIESZCAK: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. ASHTON: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
The photos, by the way, those are the photos of the property,
okay.
Page 42
January 22, 2015
MR. CINTRON: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. WALKER: What we have here is a structure that's there that
is in existence.
As you can see, there's electric attached to that particular structure
that pretty much goes to the inside of the structure and provides
electricity.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is that the main structure, Weldon?
MR. WALKER: No, actually, that's one of the sheds/living
quarters that was placed in the backyard.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: One of the four?
MR. WALKER: One of the four.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. WALKER: This is another one of the four that was just
there, I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. WALKER: That also was used as living quarters as well.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. WALKER: That photo just shows where they had actually
made septic running from the two different locations on two different
sheds.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. WALKER: That's actually a trailer of which there were two.
That particular trailer has been removed.
That's another structure there that was also used as living quarters.
As you can see, there's a gas hookup as well as electric.
And that was also a trailer that was on the property. Actually, at
the time that I took the photos, two -- both of the sheds were being
used as storage, so they contained stuff
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is this trailer still there, or is that
gone?
Page 43
January 22, 2015
MR. WALKER: No. That trailer has been removed as well.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So, in other words, there are two
remaining structures there out of the four?
MR. WALKER: No. Actually, there's -- there was three
structures that remain. There's two shed-type structures and an actual
shed-carport structure that he's used to keep stuff in.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. WALKER: And, again, that's one of the main structures
there with the gas and so forth. That's how that structure actually looks
from the front.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. WALKER: And, again, that just shows how the two were
kind of combined to create one. That's it.
MR. MIESZCAK: Can I just see that propane tank once more in
the picture. Is that used for heating?
MR. WALKER: No. Actually, that's used for a stove, gas stove.
MR. MIESZCAK: Stove.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. MIESZCAK: And that goes inside the structure?
MR. WALKER: Yes, it does.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So I don't think there's much
discussion of whether a violation exists or not, so let's tackle that first.
MR. LEFEBVRE: We have to talk to the respondent?
MR. MIESZCAK: I'll make a motion that we --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, hold on a second. Do you
understand what's going on here?
MR. CINTRON: Yes, sir, I do.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And that's how --
MR. CINTRON: I'm trying to fix everything I can, you know, to
my power. Like I say, I'm trying to clean the whole place up.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Well, we'll certainly work
Page 44
January 22, 2015
with you. Let's find out whether a violation exists now and then go
forward.
MR. MIESZCAK: Motion a violation exists.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion.
MR. ASHTON: Second.
MR. LAVINSKI: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And a second.
All those in favor?
MS. CURLEY: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. MIESZCAK: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. ASHTON: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
Okay. I understand that -- difficult situation. You're stepping in
where years worth of stuff has happened and you're trying to clean
everything up; is that correct?
MR. CINTRON: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you have any idea how long it's
going to take you to remove those structures and clean up the area?
MR. CINTRON: Well, it will not take me too long, just a week.
I can tear it down, you know, it's just -- I just don't have permits, you
know.
CHAIR_VIAN KAUFMAN: Right.
MR. CINTRON: I can't pull no permits because it's not under my
name, and I don't have the money to, you know, hire a contractor or
whatever. And, I mean, I'm trying to clean it up, you know, just -- you
Page 45
January 22, 2015
have to work with me.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, the -- as far as cleaning it up,
that's the removal of the structures that are there, and you need a demo
permit, if I'm not mistaken, to remove those. I don't know how
expensive the demo permit would be nor do I know how much time
you would need to get everything done.
MR. WALKER: I think one of his limitations is is that in order
for anything to be done there, because the property still is in probate,
he could not pull permits, but he would have to hire a contractor, and
in hiring a contractor, he would incur additional costs as well as what it
would cost to actually do the demolition itself with the permit.
So he's taken steps in his behalf to remove as much as he could
remove with regards to the trailers, and he's made significant progress
in terms of physically cleaning the property up because there were
other cases attached to it that had to do with litter, but he's done that.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Are the structures now unoccupied?
MR. WALKER: Well, as of our last conversation, there was one
structure that was still occupied, which he had assured me that he was
moving them out. So I would have to defer to him as regards to
whether or not there's somebody in there today.
MR. CINTRON: My niece was staying there, but she's out
already. I told her she cannot live there no longer, that I have to tear it
down and they'd have to move.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So there's nobody there.
That's my major concern with this particular case. So there's nobody
living on the entire property. How about the main house?
MR. CINTRON: I am.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Oh, you're living there. Okay.
MR. CINTRON: Yes.
MS. CURLEY: I have a question.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Sure.
Page 46
January 22, 2015
MS. CURLEY: So is Angel and Carmen both deceased?
Everybody in title?
MR. CINTRON: Yes.
MS. CURLEY: And you said it is in probate?
MR. WALKER: Yes. They're still trying to determine, I guess,
what they're going to do with the property.
MR. CINTRON: I'm trying to get it all under my name so I can
take care of everything, you know. And if I can get it under my name, I
could, you know, get a permit, and I'll tear it down myself, do the work
myself, and just try to do it, you know, the best I can, you know, as Mr.
Walker's, you know --
MS. CURLEY: So probate takes at least three months from start
to finish.
MR. WALKER: Yeah. And I think that one is actually extended
a little bit. And for what reasons, I'm not sure. But I've had the case
with him probably for about four months now, and that status hasn't
changed, to my knowledge.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So the Court has it. They're
working on resolving the ownership details?
MR. CINTRON: Well, not -- it's not in court yet. But I need to
have my brother -- I mean my two sisters sign; that's it. And they're
willing to do it, you know. I mean, I can go today and just bring them
and just have them sign over; that's all I need, you know.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And then you take that to the Court?
MR. CINTRON: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MS. NICOLA: Sir, I don't think it's that easy.
MS. CURLEY: No.
MS. NICOLA: I'm looking -- as you know, I'm an attorney. I've
done some probate. I'm looking at the probate cases on the clerk's site
right now online. There is not, that I see, an open probate in Collier
Page 47
January 22, 2015
County. So when your mother died, you did not hire a lawyer to open
a probate estate for her so you could get the deed transferred; is that
correct?
MR. CINTRON: No, ma'am, because there were four of us at the
time, you know.
MS. NICOLA: So the difficulty, I think, that this man is going to
have is that until somebody -- and he's -- I believe it's going to be
difficult. He's going to need an attorney. There needs to be a probate
open, and there's going to need to be some legal work done before he's
ever going to be able to even get the permit. And I, personally, don't
know how long that takes, but I don't think it's going to be a quick fix.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Are you going to get an
attorney to help you resolve the ownership?
MR. CINTRON: I'm going to try, you know. Money-wise it's
not, you know --
MS. NICOLA: I would suggest you call the Bar Association.
That's a suggestion. There is a --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Pro bono.
MS. NICOLA: Well, there's a lawyer referral program, and I
don't know if there's a pro bono program for probate, but until he
addresses the title property with the -- you know, the title issue with
the property, we can't even make one step forward in this, not even --
he can't even begin to tackle this problem until Problem No. 1 is
tackled, which is the deed to the property.
MR. CINTRON: Well, what I've heard is, you know, since
there's a will, like, all I have to do is take it to the Court. One of my
friends works with the Collier County told me you have to go there
with the will and have your two sisters that's left now sign, and that's it.
I mean, that's what they told me. I mean --
MS. NICOLA: Respectfully, sir, I don't know that it's that easy. I
believe that he needs to get --
Page 48
January 22, 2015
MR. CINTRON: Except for if you have a will, it's a lot easier, so
MR. MIESZCAK: Can I ask the homeowner a question? Sir?
MR. CINTRON: Yes, sir.
MR. MIESZCAK: Do you plan on -- in other words, this land,
every building on it you plan on demolishing, or are you leaving --
nothing, right? It's just going to go back to --
MR. CINTRON: Just the house, just the house.
MR. MIESZCAK: You're going to take everything out but the
house?
MR. CINTRON: Every building that you-all want me to take
down, I'll take down. I'll work with you-all as much --
MR. MIESZCAK: But you're always going to just have the
house is what you're saying?
MR. CINTRON: Yeah, just the house.
MR. MIESZCAK: Okay. And that's worth saving?
MR. CINTRON: Yes, sir.
MR. MIESZCAK: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I'm curious as to if he would be able
to pull a permit as the son whether he owns it or not.
MS. NICOLA: That's a question for the permit department. I
mean, if that was true, anybody could go in and say, you know, I'm the
son or this is my mother. I mean, I think there has -- my opinion is that
he's probably going to have some roadblocks because of the legalities
of this property and the way it's titled. I mean, currently the way it's
titled, I think it's going to be problematic.
MS. CURLEY: Is it a homestead?
MS. NICOLA: I can find that out.
MR. LEFEBVRE: I think we're getting into way too much detail.
MS. NICOLA: Yeah. I think it's complicated no matter what.
MR. LEFEVBRE: There's -- there are a few things --
Page 49
January 22, 2015
MS. NICOLA: It sounds like he wants to do the right thing. He
just has to take Step No. I, which is to deal with the title issue.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So what we need to do is to provide
sufficient time for the owner to -- or the prospective owner to get the
paperwork done so that he can pull the permits to come into
compliance. Since there's nobody living there now, I don't think it's a
big deal to provide sufficient time to do that.
MR. LEFEVBRE: There's certain things he can do without
demolishing the buildings to make it safer, like the propane tanks,
removing them. That's not -- that won't require a demolition permit.
MR. CINTRON: I can do that.
MR. LEFEBVRE: I saw some water heaters there. I don't know
if he can remove those. But there are certain items he can do -- certain
things he can do to minimize people potentially living there and so
forth, or a danger of having a propane tank.
So I think we need to rule on what the facts are and not what -- it's
up to him to take care of it outside of this venue. The other item is to
get it titled in his name.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Mr. Chairman, do we have a motion?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Not yet. Would you like to make
one?
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Yes. Can we put -- well, actually --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Here's a suggestion from --
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Have you read through the
recommendation already? I really forget.
MR. WALKER: No, I haven't. I can read through it, though, for
you.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Please.
MR. WALKER: The Code Enforcement Board orders the
respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of 65.43 incurred
in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations
Page 50
January 22, 2015
by obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition
permits and inspections and certificates of completion/occupancy
within blank number of days of this hearing or a fine of blank number
of dollars per day will be imposed until the violation is abated.
The respondent must notify the Code Enforcement Board
investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a
final inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate
the violation, the county may abate the violation using any methods to
bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of
Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this order,
and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Mr. Chairman, for Point No. 1, I would
submit that we allow 60 days of this hearing or a fine of$100 per day.
MR. LEFEVBRE: I -- is there a second?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hold on. Is there a second?
MR. ASHTON: I think you ought to extend that to at least, I'll
say, 120 days, because it seems like there's going to be a lot of legal
problems that he's got to go into.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well --
MR. L'ESPERANCE: What's the feeling of the board?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is that a motion to -- a second to
discuss the motion?
MR. ASHTON: I'd like him to amend his motion from 60 to 120
days.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Motion maker, Mr.
L'Esperance?
MR. L'ESPERANCE: I will amend it to 120 days.
MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second the motion.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So we have a motion and a
second. And what is the fine per day, $100?
MR. L'ESPERANCE: One hundred.
Page 51
January 22, 2015
MR. MIESZCAK: One hundred.
MS. CURLEY: Is that the motion?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Any discussion on the
motion?
MR. LEFEVBRE: Yes. I think 120 days is going to be way too
short of a time. He hasn't even retained an attorney to probate this yet,
if an attorney is needed.
I think we should extend it to 180 days and have an update every
60 days to see where he's at with this case and also put in there that,
like, the propane tanks, to have those removed, maybe have as another
line item, have those removed in a certain period of time, a shorter
period so at the minimum there would be a little bit more safety there.
MS. CURLEY: I also have a comment that, you know, to impose
a fine on two deceased people is not really what we're thinking. I
mean, he is property manager right now, so we're fining the person that
owns it.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The fine doesn't go on the people. It
goes on the property, the fine or lien, so --
MR. L'ESPERANCE: We have the ability to not actually impose
a fine if these things are accomplished.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's right. It becomes a lien on the
property so that if the respondent were to sell the property six months
down the road and you bought it, the fine would be on you, okay? So I
don't think that's a problem. I happen to agree with Mr. Lefebvre, at
least 180 days. I'd even entertain more than that, but to get going.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: I will accept the suggestion of 180 days as
an amendment to my motion.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And the second?
MR. MIESZCAK: Same.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. LEFEVBRE: Any discussion regarding an update every 60
Page 52
January 22, 2015
days?
MR. L'ESPERANCE: I will accept the same.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So we have a motion. We
have a second. And the motion basically says the $65.43 will be paid
within 30 days. You're giving 180 days, six months, for lack of a
better term, and if you don't comply within six months, it would be
$100-a-day fine after that.
In addition to that, for some of the cleanup of the dangerous
things on the property, you're given 60 days to remove the propane
tanks. And if they permit you to remove the water heater, whatever,
that would be looked at after 60 days. Do I have it right?
MR. LEFEVBRE: And an update every 60 days.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah. And code enforcement will
go out there and check on your progress, see that everything's going
well. And let me just -- before we vote on it, after 180 days, if this gets
tied up in the court or whatnot, you can always come back and ask for
more time. The most important thing is that you show that you're
doing something to resolve the situation. Okay.
MR. CINTRON: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any other comments on the motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hearing none, all those in favor.
MS. CURLEY: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. MIESZCAK: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. ASHTON: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
No response.)
Page 53
January 22, 2015
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Okay.
MR. CINTRON: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So hopefully -- good luck on your
quest through the courts.
MR. CINTRON: Thank you, sir.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And we'll see you in six months, or
maybe not.
MS. ADAMS: The next case is No. 14, Tab 14, Case
CELU20140016371, Kevin P. McCormick and Kathy McCormick.
(The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning.
MR. McCORMICK: Good morning.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Your name for the record?
MR. McCORMICK: Kevin McCormick.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Eric, why don't you take us
down the road.
MR. SHORT: All right. Good morning. Senior Investigator Eric
Short, Collier County Code Enforcement.
This is in reference to Case No. CELU20140016371 regarding
violations of the Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as
amended, Section 1.04.01(A) and 2.02.03, prohibited outside storage
located at 3575 3rd Avenue Northwest, Naples, Florida, 34120; Folio
36714040003.
Service was given on August 19, 2014.
I would like to present case evidence in the following exhibits.
The respondent has not seen these photos. I'd like to show them to him
at this time.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Please.
Mr. McCormick, do you have any objections to those
photographs being entered?
MR. McCORMICK: No.
Page 54
January 22, 2015
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to accept the photos.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion.
MR. ASHTON: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And a second to accept the photos.
All those in favor?
MS. CURLEY: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. MIESZCAK: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. ASHTON: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Thank you.
MR. SHORT: This case originated as a public complaint on
August 19, 2014. Investigator Ambach initiated the investigation and
found multiple items being stored on the property without a principal
use or structure.
Investigator Ambach was able to make contact with the property
owner, and some compliance efforts were made.
On October 22, 2014, the case was assigned to myself, and after a
few site visits, I confirmed that the violation still remained even after
significant efforts.
I received a phone call from Mr. McCormick on January 13th
stating he has most of the violation taken care of.
A site visit was made on January 20th, which is one of the recent
photos that I have there. And the violation still does remain.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Can you point out on the
photo the violation -- do you have a picture from the 20th?
Page 55
January 22, 2015
MR. SHORT: Yes. It's that photo there. Kind of hard to see --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The date on it, yeah. And what am I
-- I looked at -- I'm looking at some potted plants.
MR. SHORT: Some potted plants. If you look at -- above that
little sand mound there, there was also a previous picture from July
where it showed that same dolphin structure and the pile -- the pallet of
pavers.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: What do I see in front of the dolphin,
to the left of it in the photo, the buckets? Are those plants or -- no, not
there. Up higher to the left of the mound. Yeah, right there.
MR. SHORT: That's the leftover pavers that are still on site.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And the issue simply is that
you have a piece of Estates zoned property where this type of storage
is recognized in other zoning districts, however, not in the Estates
without a principal structure, which is a house.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Was there a principal structure there?
Because there's a lot of pavement there.
MR. SHORT: At one time there was. The home was
demolished. I'll let Mr. McCormick --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Address that. Okay.
Mr. McCormick?
MR. McCORMICK: How are you?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. McCORMICK: Yes, I demolished the house. I got the
permit. And I had some health issues. I'm a first responder from the
terrorist attacks in New York, and I had to get an extension on a
permit.
So I got the extension on a permit, removed the house, had the
health department sign off on -- the septic was removed, and the house
was removed. And I did have the stuff removed. I have pictures of the
stuff that I removed.
Page 56
January 22, 2015
And I do have the pavers there and that statue. That dolphin there
is about 200 pounds. I didn't remove it because I'm not capable unless
I have to destroy it. I do plan to build a new house. I had the loan for
the house, but the contractor didn't get the actual workout of the new
house to me in time, and the bank pulled the loan.
So now I'm with -- do you know the name of the bank? Preferred
Community Bank. I'm being preapproved, and I'm going to a
contractor. And I'm going to go to permitting to build another house,
and that's what my plans are. But the pavers I wanted to reuse for the
new house.
And also, you know, the dolphin, if I have to have it removed, I'll
remove it but, you know, I'm saying it's 200 pounds. And I do have
doctors' notes here showing what I've gone through since I've had this
permitting, you know. And I do have pictures, as I said, as it stands
now.
I removed most of the exotics that I had a violation for. So I
really tried to clean up the property. I'm there nearly every day, you
know, when I'm in town, you know.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Are you in town often?
MR. McCORMICK: Yeah, I live here, you know. Yeah, but I
was in New York a week ago, and --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. If I'm -- correct me if I'm
wrong. Once you pull a building permit on there, I assume that you
can start to accumulate the --
MR. SHORT: Yes. The building materials will be able to be on
site once a permit is in issued status.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And you're in the process of pulling
that permit?
MR. McCORMICK: I destroyed all the roof trusses that I was
going to use for that building because I wasn't allowed to store them,
so I cut them all up and I carted away what I could so far. I have
Page 57
January 22, 2015
maybe 20 pieces at the most, two-by-fours. And everything there,
except the plants -- if I have to remove the plants, I could do that
today, you know, or plant them, you know.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Any comments from the
board?
MR. LAVINSKI: Did you get an answer as to whether a permit's
been pulled or --
MR. McCORMICK: The permits aren't pulled because I don't
have a contractor because that contractor made me lose the loan, so I'm
going to a different contractor, and it's very hard getting bids because
it's so busy.
Right after this hearing, I'm going down to Radio Road to a
contractor to see if I can get a bid from him. I have the plans in my
car. The plans are all made up. They haven't been signed off by an
architect yet, but a drafter did the plans, you know. I'm ready to go,
you know, but --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Just how much stuff needs to be
removed? I understand the fish out of water, the porpoise out of water
probably needs to go. The pavers, is that --
MR. McCORMICK: Yes. Anything that wouldn't naturally be
there, any man-made accumulation, basically.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. What we need to first
determine is if-- whether a violation does exist.
Any comments or motion on that?
MR. ASHTON: Make a motion a violation exists.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a motion that a
violation exists.
MR. LAVINSKI: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And a second.
All those in favor?
MS. CURLEY: Aye.
Page 58
January 22, 2015
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. MIESZCAK: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. ASHTON: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
So a violation exists. And now how do we put the baby back
together? What can be done to resolve this situation?
MR. SHORT: Before I read the recommendation, I do want to
reiterate that significant amount of effort has been put into this, and a
lot of items have been removed.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I think that should certainly be taken
into consideration as to how much time is given the respondent to get
his building permit, and I think that will take care of everything once
he has the building permit. But why don't you continue with your
suggestion.
MR. SHORT: The county recommends that the Code
Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs
in the amount of $65.01 incurred in the prosecution of this case within
30 days and abate all violations by: One, cease all prohibited outside
storage on the property and remove all items to a site intended for final
disposal within blank days of this hearing, or a fine of blank dollars per
day will be imposed until the violation is abated;
Two, the respondent must notify the code enforcement
investigator when the violation has been abated and ordered to conduct
a final inspection to confirm abatement.
If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate
the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance
Page 59
January 22, 2015
and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to
enforce the provisions of this order, and all costs of abatement shall be
assessed to the property owner.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you.
One of the comments I'd like to make is -- and I am somewhat
familiar on how long it takes to pull a building permit. Once you have
the plans and they're approved by an architect and the architect's
schedule, et cetera, et cetera, it could probably take three or four
months to get everything done before you have the building permit.
Once the building permit has been issued, then the violation goes
away. That's probably the way that this case will ultimately work out.
Any comments from the board?
MR. LEFEBVRE: Not all the violations (sic) go away. Anything
related to the construction of the building --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Right.
MR. LEFEBVRE: -- of the items there will go away. But if
there's, like, a statute, I mean --
MR. SHORT: The decorative items, like the statute, you may be
able to articulate that into being --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: If it's on the prints.
MR. LEFEVBRE: Is it used in the construction of the home'?
No. But, I mean, what I'm trying to get at, a bicycle is not used for
construction of the home, and I see that, too.
MR. SHORT: Right. And that was in the description, I
understand, and a lot of those items have been removed.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Basically what's left right now is --
MR. SHORT: Is what you saw in the photos.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- the porpoise -- the pavers --
MR. ASHTON: Plants.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- some potted plants.
MR. SHORT: And there's some accumulated mulch piles that --
Page 60
January 22, 2015
you know, man-made accumulations there.
MR. LEFEBVRE: I make a motion that the respondent pays the
65.01 within 30 days, 180 days of this hearing, and a fine of $75 a day.
MS. CURLEY: I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second.
You need to move your mike over.
MS. CURLEY: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Louder.
MS. CURLEY: I second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Any discussion on the
motion?
MR. LAVINSKI: Yeah. Is there any way we could ensure that
junk-type items be removed within the seven days under our litter
guidelines?
MR. LEFEBVRE: There's very little there. All there is is that --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The porpoise.
MR. LEFEBVRE: -- porpoise, thank you, and everything else is
a sand pile, which could be used for the construction.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Pavers.
MR. LEFEVBRE: The pavers and a few other items, so --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And you continue to work on
removing odds and ends.
MR. McCORMICK: Yes, I do. I just had a heart catheterization
about a month ago so, you know, it takes two men to carry that statute.
So just if you give me a couple of days, I'll be able to get someone to
remove it.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And 180 days should be --
MR. McCORMICK: Plenty.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- plenty of time to pull the building
permit, et cetera.
Okay. Did we vote on this motion?
Page 61
January 22, 2015
All those in favor?
MS. CURLEY: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. MIESZCAK: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. ASHTON: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
So hopefully we won't see you in six months.
MR. McCOR_MICK: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah. We're going to take a break
now for -- we'll call it a fingers break, right. We'll be back in, I don't
know, five minutes. We'll be back at 10:30. We'll be back in seven
minutes.
(A brief recess was had.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I'd like to call the Code Enforcement
Board back to order.
We have some changes to the agenda, Kerry. Can you go through
those quickly.
MS. ADAMS: Well, we're just going to take some of the cases
out of order.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, why don't we just take them as
they come, as you have them listed, and we'll modify the order that
way.
Any problems from the board doing that?
MR. MIESZCAK: That's fine.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Next case?
MS. ADAMS: The next case will be No. 10 from imposition of
Page 62
January 22, 2015
fines. It's Tab 25, Case CESD20140005957, Yislen de la 0 and
Roesmel Rua.
(The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Could you state your names on the
mike for the record.
MR. RUA: My name?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes.
MR. RUA: Roesmel Rua.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And?
MR. ROMANO: And my name is Harry Romano.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. This is the imposition of
fines.
So in this particular case, tell us what you want us to consider,
because we're at that stage. We're not going to hear the case again. We
just want to know what the concerns are.
MR. ROMANO: If I may, we -- when we first arrived here, we
met with the code enforcement and worked out something, and we
need an extension of time. We're going to pull the permit and try and
get the structure permitted.
And it's a safety issue, and we want to keep the permit because it's
safer that way. And they've agreed, so we're just going to go on and do
the permitting, and I think we're in agreement with everything with the
county at this point.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Joe?
MR. MUCHA: If I could explain a little better. For the record,
Joe Mucha, Collier County Code Enforcement.
Basically Mr. -- is it Rua?
MR. RUA: Yeah.
MR. MUCHA: -- has had a hard time getting a permit because
the dock was partially built on Mr. Romano's property. So now Mr.
Romano -- they've come to an agreement that Mr. Romano's going to
Page 63
January 22, 2015
sign whatever papers, or if he has to put the permit in his name or for
his property. They're going to work together, basically, to get this dock
permitted. So this is a good thing, I guess, but this finally came
together today.
So if you guys want to grant them more time, the county wouldn't
have an objection to that.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Would the county like to pull this
and hold it in abeyance? Jeff?
MR. WRIGHT: I'll defer to the board. We don't have a
preference. I would say -- Joe, do you have a preference on how to
handle it?
MR. MUCHA: It's not a health and safety matter, so whatever
the board feels is the best way.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I understand that, but we're at the
point now we're imposing the fines, and there's 20,000 -- $19,262
worth of fines there.
MR. MUCHA: Continue it; would that be better so the fines
continue to run?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I think it would be -- it would be best
if the county just pulls it and either brings it back at such time when a
permit's been pulled or there's some activity on it.
MR. MUCHA: Okay. We can do that.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Because if we rule right now, it's still
in violation.
Go ahead, Mr. Lefebvre.
MR. LEFEBVRE: We typically hear a case to impose it or not
after the time frame has elapsed, which is the -- I think it's 150 days we
gave him or 120 days. I think it would be better to make a decision to
continue the case or not. I think it be better for this board to hear the
case and continue it or not.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: To continue the case.
Page 64
January 22, 2015
MR. LEFEBVRE: Continue. So the fines keep --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes, a continuance.
MR. LEFEBVRE: But it sounds like if they're in agreement,
they're going to have to probably get some kind of easement for that
property, for that -- so there's going to be some work to be done.
We have a person that does titles right next -- to the right of me.
So there's going to -- still going to be a lot of work that needs to be
hammered out before they can actually get a permit.
I mean, is there -- is there a way to buy a -- where that property --
where that dock is, can you buy that from him?
MR. ROMANO: We've agreed to just let them use it.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. ROMANO: I was in the hospital when this all started, but I
came out, and there's a dock on my backyard. And I went over and
talked to him, and I told him you've got to get a permit. And now he's
agreed to all that. And I don't think there's a problem. I don't know
why we would even -- we'll work it out, him and I, and -- whatever
they need us to do, and it's solved. I mean, if that's okay with you
guys, we'd just as soon the whole thing go away.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Tammy, do you have any
comments?
MS. NICOLA: (Shakes head.)
MR. LEFEBVRE: I'm wondering how long this will take, is what
I'm --
MS. NICOLA: I have no idea. I wish I knew. It sounds
complicated like the other one, to tell you the truth.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I'd say three or four months, I mean,
to pull the permit to get the land use transferred, the ability to do that
or whatever, probably three or four months.
Yes, Jeff.
MS. NICOLA: I wish I practiced a little more land use law than I
Page 65
January 22, 2015
have. My experience in that is minimal.
MR. LEFEBVRE: You also have to -- he'll have to file for an
easement, probably, correct --
MS. NICOLA: Right.
MR. LEFEVBRE: -- so he can use -- legally use that, so that's
going to take --
MS. NICOLA: I think so. I think you would be wise to talk to a
real estate attorney to find out what you need to do, because it's just --
MR. LAVINSKI: Well, we had a stipulated agreement back in
June. What's happened since then?
MR. ROMANO: I've been sick. I have a heart attack, and I have
a pacemaker. I'm handicapped, and I've been in and out of the
hospital. So it's very -- that's why I asked you to move this up today. I
don't feel very good, and that's been holding it up, and that's what's
been taking so long.
MR. LAVINSKI: So nothing has happened since this stipulated
agreement?
MR. ROMANO: Not from my side.
MR. MUCHA: I know the gentleman has met with the county. I
mean, we've had meetings, and he just couldn't get the permit because
it wasn't on his property, the dock, or maybe it's partially on his
property but mainly on Mr. Romano's property; is that correct?
MR. ROMANO: It's mainly on my property.
MR. MUCHA: Mainly on your property.
MR. ROMANO: I don't believe he has any property there.
MR. MUCHA: Okay.
MR. WRIGHT: Mr. Chairman?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes.
MR. WRIGHT: I think that whether we pull it or a continuance is
granted, the fines will continue to accrue.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's correct.
Page 66
January 22, 2015
MR. WRIGHT: So the only difference would be that we would
be able to recoup the costs of bringing this to a hearing today. So my
preference would be to continue it and to have an order that says that.
That way we recoup the costs of today's hearing and also the fines
continue to accrue. As we all know, if they get it done, then they can
come back here and request a reduction of those fines, that would be
my preference.
MR. LEFEBVRE: I make a motion that we continue for another
120 days.
MR. MIESZCAK: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second to
grant a 120-day continuance, which means the fines continue to
accrue.
Any comment on the motion?
MR. LEFEBVRE: And operational costs paid within 30 days.
Sorry.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. The 63.44, the previously
assessed costs, have been paid. The cost for today's hearing is 62.60,
okay. That needs to be paid within 30 days.
MR. RUA: All right.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. All those in favor?
MS. CURLEY: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. MIESZCAK: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. ASHTON: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
Page 67
January 22, 2015
So you've got 120 days to do your permitting and whatnot, and if
you don't get it done in 120 days, you need to come back ahead of
time, et cetera, okay?
MR. RUA: All right. Thank you.
MS. ADAMS: The next case is No. 1 from imposition of fines,
Case CESD20130014804, Antone C. Mendes.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Tab? Tab number?
MS. ADAMS: I'm sorry. Tab 16.
(The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
MR. SHORT: For the record, Investigator Eric Short, Collier
County Code Enforcement.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And your name, for the
record.
MR. MENDES: Antone Mendes.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And I see by this it looks like
this thing has been abated, previously addressed costs have been paid,
today's hearing costs are 64.40, and there's a total amount that's due of
$27,864.40. So why don't you give us what you'd like us to do.
MR. MENDES: Well, it's been educational for me, this process,
with this commercial property, letting the tenant -- or me assume that
they are getting things done properly and they have not.
So it's been educational. It's been a long road, but after time --
and I've taken over and working with Eric and everybody, got things
done, and -- I don't know. I can assure you that this -- hopefully you
won't see me here again with these type of issues with code -- you
know, people not getting permits, telling me they're getting permits
and everything.
And, if we could -- I got that taken care of and if we can abate
the fines, it would be much appreciated. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. You're asking for an
abatement of the fines.
Page 68
January 22, 2015
Any comments from the board?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Eric, any comments from the
county?
MR. SHORT: Like Mr. Mendes said, I think it was an
educational process, and he does realize now that when you're a
landlord, that you have certain accountability, you know; you still have
a certain amount of accountability for code violations and how that
works, so --
MR. LAVINSKI: It this same tenant still there?
MR. MENDES: Yes, he is, but I monitor him all the time. I'm
always over -- my office is pretty much next door also, so -- I know
they're wanting to do certain things, and I don't allow it to happen
without them giving me the proper paperwork and who they're doing
business with, and I contact them to make sure they're licensed and
everything, so they definitely -- and my other tenants -- won't do that
again.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So you've learned -- your
educational costs were considerable on this.
MR. MIESZCAK: I make a motion to abate the fine.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a motion. Do we
have a second?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I'll second it.
Any discussion on the motion?
(No response.)
MR. ASHTON: Mr. Chairman, here we go again with these
fines. I mean, you're up to almost $28,000, and it's -- somebody -- I
mean, there's a lot of work that goes into these things, and people can
just walk away scot free, and the county's on the hook for, you know,
all the time and effort that went into these cases. I think that we should
Page 69
January 22, 2015
-- there should be a certain amount that should be imposed.
MR. LAVINSKI: I agree with that, and he has the option of
letting the tenant pay that portion of the fine because he didn't -- the
owner didn't create this problem; the tenant did.
MR. LEFEVBRE: The operational costs are what the county
incurs for costs. And I somewhat agree, but it sounds like once he
took over, it did get moved along and get corrected. There would be
no operational costs for today, correct?
MS. ADAMS: Not if the fines are abated.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Mr. Chairman, I call the question for your
motion.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And let me just see if there's
any more discussion.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. All those in favor say aye.
MS. CURLEY: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. MIESZCAK: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. ASHTON: Opposed.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have two opposed. The
ayes have it. Fines are abated.
Okay. I think we have some discussion to do on this maybe after
the meeting today regarding that particular issue, Mr. Ashton.
Okay. Thank you.
MR. SHORT: Thank you.
THE PETITIONER: Thank you for your time.
MS. ADAMS: The next case is No. 2, Case CESD20120018259,
Page 70
January 22, 2015
Gilverto Gendejas. It's Tab 17.
(The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Could you put your name on the
record.
MR. SILGERO: Yeah. Jenaro Silgero (phonetic).
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. I have one question before
we begin.
MR. WALKER: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Have the operational costs been
paid?
MR. WALKER: We have the operational costs that I've just
turned over to Ms. Adams in the form of a cashier's check.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The 65.01?
MR. WALKER: That's correct, sir.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. That was my first question.
Okay. It appears from the write-up that we have that the violation
has not been abated. What do you have to say?
MR. SILGERO: Well, I'm here, first of all, representing the
client. They weren't able to be here. They don't live here. They live
further up north. So they asked me, the contractor, to represent them.
It was the tenant of the building that originally pulled the permit.
He was in the one that got fined for putting a small shed on the side of
the store and hired me to pull a demo permit and remove it.
I pulled the permit. I went and removed it and never got paid, so
I submitted a letter to the county saying that I was out for nonpayment,
that I wasn't going to do any more work to it.
And somewhere along the line, by the time that the actual owners
of the property found out what was going on, that took some time, and
then they contacted me, because I -- they found out that it wasn't
because of me, it was because of the tenant, that it didn't get done, so
they contacted me since I was the one that knew what was going on.
Page 71
January 22, 2015
So at that point I re-filed to re-open the permit, and that took a
while. And then by the time that I went and -- I never got the response
from the -- usually the county will send me an email saying the
permit's ready for pickup.
I didn't -- Weldon called me and said, hey, you know, the
deadline's tomorrow, so I called, and actually it was ready, although I
hadn't been notified, and I wasn't able to pick up the permit, but I
called in for inspection. The inspector came the next day, and
everything was done, but he refused to sign off on it because I didn't
have the actual permit with me.
So that was right before New Year's, and that was on Tuesday.
Wednesday I think they didn't work. I did re-call it in. They didn't
give it to me until the next Tuesday, so right there we lost seven days.
But it was just a matter of miscommunication between the tenant
and the property owner. But as soon as they found out, they contacted
me and I -- we did it as quick as possible.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And it says here that the
violation has not been abated; is that true or --
MR. WALKER: That stands to be corrected. It has been abated.
At the time that I submitted the actual affidavit of abatement, it had not
been done. But within the next, I think it was nine to 10 days it was
satisfied. And it was a holiday period which created some discrepancy
so that I can attest to that, too, so --
MS. ADAMS: Mr. Chairman, you should have updated
documents.
MR. LAVINSKI: Yeah. This document says it was abated as of
December 3 1st.
MR. WALKER: That's correct.
MR. LEFEVBRE: I make a motion to abate the fine.
MR. LAVINSKI: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second to
Page 72
January 22, 2015
abate the fine.
Any discussion on the motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor?
MS. CURLEY: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. MIESZCAK: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. ASI-ITON: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Okay.
MR. SILGERO: Thank you very much.
MR. WALKER: Thank you, gentlemen and ladies.
MS. ADAMS: The next case for the people, out of the people
that are present, is No. 4 from imposition of fines. It's Tab 19, Case
CESD20140012087, Ramiro E. and Martha R. Llerena.
(The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And your name for the record, sir?
MR. SORBARA: George Sorbara (phonetic).
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. According to the paperwork
that I have, it says that the violation has not been abated. Have the
previously assessed operational costs been paid?
MR. SNOW: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. I'll entertain a motion to
deny.
MR. ASHTON: Motion to deny.
MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second that motion.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor?
Page 73
January 22, 2015
MS. CURLEY: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. MIESZCAK: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. ASHTON: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
If you don't pay the operational costs within 30 days, we don't
even hear anything after that, so the fines are imposed.
MS. ADAMS: Mr. Chairman, should --
MR. SORBARA: I'm not the owner. I'm here representing the
owner.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MS. ADAMS: Should Kitchell read the --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Read it into the record.
MR. SNOW: Yes, sir. I need to read it in the record.
Sir, before we read into the record, do you have something you
want to say to the board? They've already told you that they are not
going to hear any request for leniency but, for the record, if you have
something to say, I think you need to say it.
MR. SORBARA: I was contacted by an engineering firm who I
believe the owner contacted, and I have documentation stating their
intentions to pull the building permit and rectify the situation. It has
time-specific information and whatnot.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The problem revolves around they
haven't responded to the order that was done -- this goes back to
October of 2014. They haven't paid the court costs, if you will. And
it's a longstanding practice of the Code Enforcement Board that if you
Page 74
January 22, 2015
don't pay the court costs, we don't hear it.
MR. SORBARA: Oh, okay.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So it doesn't much matter whether
they contact an engineering firm or whatnot. I understand you're just
representing what they're trying to do, and they should go ahead and do
that and get it done, but --
MR. SORBARA: Well, the -- what's the next step? Do we -- do
I tell the owner to pay the court costs or whatever the fines would be?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, they should have paid it within
30 days of the original order. What you have now is they have a total
amount assessed at $12,326. They can go and they can go before the
County Commissioners and ask for an abatement or a reduction.
That's up to them. But as far as the board is concerned, the lien will be
imposed.
MR. LEFEBVRE: But you have to abate the fine -- abate the
violation --
MR. SNOW: Abate the violation first.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's first.
MR. LEFEBVRE: -- before you can go to the County
Commissioners.
MR. SNOW: I will discuss this with him after we get this.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Have you ever been in touch with
the owner, by the way?
MR. SNOW: Yes. Investigator Kincaid has been in touch with
the owner, and the owner initially wondered why he was responsible,
and it was explained to him he's the property owner. And I don't
believe the business is exist -- in existence any longer. I believe it's
been -- they've moved out of that suite, but the violation still remains.
And there hasn't been any permits submitted, and there's been little, if
any, compliance efforts until this point made by the property owners.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
Page 75
January 22, 2015
MR. SNOW: So let's read this into the record.
For the record, Kitchell Snow, Collier County Code Enforcement
Board. The location of the violation is 11263 Tamiami Trail East, Unit
D, Naples, Florida. The folio number is 62090200007.
And the description is alterations to commercial property without
applicable Collier County permits. Installation of a kitchen area with
new plumbing and electric.
Past orders: On October 23, 2014, the Code Enforcement Board
issued a finding of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent
was found in violation of the referenced ordinance and ordered to
correct the violation. See the attached order of the board, OR5092 and
Page 3971, for more information.
The violation has not been abated as of January 22, 2015.
Fines and costs to date are as follows: Fines accrued at the rate of
$200 per day for the period between November 23, 2014, to January
22, 2015, 61 days, for a total fine amount of $12,200. Fines continue
to accrue.
Previously assessed operational costs of$64. 17 have not been
paid. Operational costs for today's hearings are $62.31.
Total amount to date is $12,326.48.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Thank you, Kitchell.
MR. SNOW: Thank you, sir.
MS. NICOLA: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to request a point of
clarification, if I may.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Sure.
MS. NICOLA: I understand that it's the policy of the board not to
go forward with a hearing -- to go forward -- I'm sorry -- not to go
forward on an imposition of fines when -- and allow evidence and
testimony when the fines haven't been paid.
My question would be, you know, should we ask if it's been an
intentional violation or what the circumstances are before we just
Page 76
January 22, 2015
summarily deny it? I mean, me, as an attorney, I'm concerned about
the due process implications particularly when I hear some indication
from our investigator that perhaps the owners were unaware, you
know, that it was their responsibility.
And in certain circumstances, my question would be, would it be
appropriate to ask the reasons behind the nonpayment of fine.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: If the respondent was here today, I
could understand that. The respondent is not here today --
MS. NICOLA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- so we can't ask them anything.
MS. NICOLA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Am I right, Jeff?
MR. WRIGHT: Maybe his representative could answer.
MR. MIESZCAK: I'd just like to make a comment. This was in
the newspaper and has no address on here. I know exactly where it is.
Those 54 loads of dirt is a pile of junk next to a nice business, and it's
also next to another nice business. And it's still there, and nothing's
been done. So I make a motion to impose the fine.
MR. LEFEVBRE: Different case.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's a different case. That's okay.
MR. MIESZCAK: Wait a minute. You said 50, the loads.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: No, that's a different case. This is
the one where there's an alteration to the commercial property.
MR. LEFEVBRE: Totally different case.
MR. MIESZCAK: Oh, I apologize.
MR. SNOW: That's okay, sir. I'm with you.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Sometimes when you get old, you
know --
MR. MIESZCAK: It's my last day; that's okay.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: No, it isn't.
MR. SNOW: No. And just for the record, counsel, it was
Page 77
January 22, 2015
explained to the folks back in November when the conversation was
had with the property owner that they were responsible, so obviously
they've chose to hire -- chosen to hire a contractor and realize it's their
responsibility.
And orders get mailed to them. There has been conversation with
them. And I think that at this point they've chosen to be noncompliant
until they understand the seriousness of the situation, and that's why
everything has taken place.
MS. NICOLA: Okay. I misunderstood. When I heard you
testifying before, I had understood that perhaps you had a conversation
with them and they didn't understand it was their responsibility. So I
just wanted to be sure that it wasn't just a policy to summarily deny it if
there were certain circumstances that might mitigate it.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Counsel, the order that they received tells
them they're responsible because their name's there. It says, this is
what you have to do to correct the problem. First of all, within 30
days, you have to pay the operational costs. That's Step No. 1 . They
didn't even follow that step.
MS. NICOLA: Right.
MR. LEFEBVRE: So they're aware. It tells them that they have
to pay that, and they didn't even pay it. So it's -- I could see maybe if it
was before the case was heard, but this is after the case was heard, and
they've been notified several times that they were supposed to appear
in front of us.
Could I ask, what is your role in -- are you a contractor or --
MR. SORBARA: I'm general contractor that does the work for
the engineering firm that he has tried to hire to do the drawing permits.
MR. LEFEBVRE: He's trying to retain you.
MR. SORBARA: Yeah. Just to throw my two cents in, I was
contacted by the owner saying, hey, I have a tenant who put a little
kitchen area in without a permit. The tenant, obviously, didn't do the
Page 78
January 22, 2015
proper thing.
I was called in. I said, hey, you need to, you know, hire a
licensed architect, engineer, someone because it's a commercial
building. I'm a commercial -- I'm a contractor that can do work in a
commercial building. But you need to hire someone so we can submit
some plans here to get moving. So that's why I'm here.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: When were you in contact with the
owner? Do you remember the time frame?
MR. SORBARA: I spoke with him yesterday.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. The first -- so you spoke to
him yesterday. I wonder what happened between October 23rd --
MR. SORBARA: I spoke to him; yesterday was the latest I spoke
to him.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Right.
MR. SORBARA: I did speak to him, I would say, maybe a
month ago, and he said he was going to get with his tenant and sort of
hash things out.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, he has --
MR. SORBARA: So we're -- you know, I can submit the
building permits tomorrow, but if you're telling me that that's not going
to make a difference, then --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, it still has to be done.
MR. SORBARA: Understood, understood.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: In order for them to resolve the lien
that's going to be placed on here, they need to abate the situation,
number one. Then they, at this point in time, since the board is now
done with this case, they would need to go to the County
Commissioners to plead their case, if you will. Am I correct, Jeff?
MR. WRIGHT: Yes. And I think there's one thing that I wanted
to point out. He never requested, that I'm aware of, a reduction in his
fine. We're just here to impose.
Page 79
January 22, 2015
And in your rules, there's some things that -- and we have it
incorporated into our recommendation that you're supposed to
consider. None of them really says whether they've paid operational
costs or not. I totally understand what the counsel's concern is. But
really, for today's hearing, we just need to go through the factors and
whether or not those factors influence the number that we're going to
impose. That's -- I just wanted to clarify that. Because he never
requested a reduction. That could be a mitigating factor if he's looking
for a reduction of fines. The fact that he's paid off his fines could be a
mitigating factor, but we're not dealing with that right now. We're
looking at imposition. There's certain factors that you're supposed to
consider, and we have them ready to present to you.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I know the board also takes into
more consideration when the respondent is present. That shows a
certain concern that they have for what's going on. But when they
don't come, to your point, Tammy, it's hard to ask them, you didn't
understand -- or they're not here. Okay.
MR. LEFEVBRE: I think we --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Talked this to death.
MR. LEFEVBRE: Yes.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I agree.
Thank you, Kitchell.
MR. SNOW: Thank you.
MR. ARNOLD: Thank you, sir.
MR. SORBARA: You're welcome. Thank you.
MS. ADAMS: The next case is No. 7, Tab 22, Case
CESD20130019399, Dorothy Gill.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I don't have Tab 22. I must have
thrown it away. Which one is it?
MR. LAVINSKI: Dorothy Gill.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We're here today to impose
Page 80
January 22, 2015
the fines, but you have your day in court to say, so -- you did pay the
previously assessed operational costs of S127. The paperwork that we
have says that the violation has not been abated. Can you update that
for us?
MS. GILL: Yeah. I'm trying to understand everything. And
when I was here last time, I had no idea what I was doing; didn't even
know I had to come up here. So I'm still trying to understand
everything.
We have -- the sheds is one of the issues.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MS. GILL: And one of the sheds was removed, and I just
misunderstood Mr. Paul, Reynald Paul. I thought that he was doing
the inspection when he came to look at some of the stuff at my house.
And I guess I have to call the inspection line and have them come and
do the inspection after it was removed, so I understand that now. So
we have to call and do that.
We paid for the permits to remove it and the permit for the -- or
for the inspection thing, so I just have to do that.
Regarding the staircase, I'm still waiting for Mr. Paul to let me
know what's happening with that. We have blueprints that show -- like,
the staircase was in the back of the house when it was the original
blueprints, but there's other blueprints that were made that were revised
blueprints, from what I understand, that the staircase is supposed to be
on the side of the house, not the back of the house.
So when the house was originally built, they had moved the
staircase in the proper place because that's where the bonus room is.
So they just had it in the wrong place.
From what I understand, there's supposed to be an approval for
that permit to remove it. We just don't know where the approval is.
And I, again, am learning. So I was in the -- under the impression that
we wouldn't have been able to get the certificate of occupation (sic) to
Page 81
January 22, 2015
move into the house if we hadn't had the approval to move those steps,
but I could be wrong. So something that I'm still trying to understand.
The other shed, there's another one on the property that my dad
had put in, and they want us to attach it -- they want us to attach it to
the columns that are part of the beams for the house, and we just have
to turn in a drawing as to where they're supposed to go and how to
attach them. So we just have to take them down to growth
management to the building department and, again, something that,
luckily, I have my fiancee who knows how to do some of this stuff,
because I wouldn't have any idea.
Other than that, they had an issue with the garage. It was
supposed to be -- it was a garage conversion. And, now, I don't know
exactly everything. The house was built by my parents. They put it in
my name. They used my name to get the loan with my brother and
sister-in-law, but all those years I had no idea what was going on,
didn't pay attention to what was going on.
And when my dad had a stroke in 2011, I had to take over, and I
am still to this day learning what exactly goes on and how to keep a
house going. So I'm trying to figure that out.
My dad had changed things in the garage, like put in tile, and he
put in a shower, like one of those one-piece shower stalls. And I guess
he was supposed to have a permit to do that, and I don't think that he
got the permit to do that.
Now, the toilet and the sink that are in there, from what I
remember, what I understand, is that that stuff was built with the
house, so I don't know what the deal is with that.
So those are the things that I'm still trying to understand and
figure out what exactly Code Enforcement Board wants me to do
regarding those things.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Why don't we find out from
code enforcement --
Page 82
January 22, 2015
MS. GILL: Okay.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- their comments on this case.
MR. MUCHA: For the record, Joe Mucha, Collier County Code
Enforcement. As she stated, she is -- there has been some progress on
some things, you know, as far as the shed goes. But, yeah, the garage
is still an issue. I still haven't been provided with anything that says
that the staircase was permitted the way it is so, you know, we're still
kind of looking into that for her. But the garage is still an issue, and
the shed. Obviously she has to attach one of the sheds to the house and
has to have the final inspection on the permit.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So the garage was a -- is a garage
conversion?
MR. MUCHA: Yes, sir. Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So that hasn't been permitted. I'm
trying to think of the outstanding issues right now. The garage hasn't
been permitted. You have a question regarding the stairs.
MR. MUCHA: The question about the stairs-and-the-attic
conversion.
MS. GILL: It was a bonus room that was built with the house,
and I found the --
MR. MUCHA: They have blueprints that show it, but I haven't
seen a permit yet that shows that that was permitted and finalized. So
I, again --
MR. LEFEBVRE: When were the blueprints stamped? Were
they stamped prior to the construction of the home?
MR. MUCHA: I don't remember exactly. They were --
MR. LEFEBVRE: I'm just saying, that would determine that --
MS. GILL: Yeah. I can't remember. It was, like, last month or
so, and I can't remember, and I didn't bring the papers with me this
morning.
MR. LEFEBVRE: But that would simply tell -- if it was built
Page 83
January 22, 2015
prior to the house being built, then it probably should have been part of
-- I mean, do they keep somewhere the original blueprints to a house?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Depends on the age.
MS. GILL: It was built in '97.
MR. MUCHA: That would be part of the permit file.
MR. LEFEVBRE: How old is the house?
MS. GILL: '96 to '97 is when it was built. It was finished in
September.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I know sometimes you have to go
and they have to pull the microfiche on it because they don't have hard
copies of the paperwork. So I don't know the situation here. What
concerns me on this particular case is in April was the original case.
You were back here before the board, I believe, in September when a
continuance was granted at that time.
MS. GILL: Right.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So since September to now, have we
had any significant progress on bringing this into compliance?
MR. MUCHA: I would say having one shed removed, but even
that permit hasn't been finaled yet, and obviously they still have to
work on stuff for the other shed. So as far as I know, that's really about
the only progress.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I mean, we like to work with you,
but you have to have some idea of when everything is going to be done
so that we can adjust -- that's what we did the last time. We thought
that by now everything would be done, and we granted a continuance
at that time in September for how many days it was that brought us to
now. So do you have a contractor that's working with you to --
MS. GILL: No.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I think maybe that's what you need.
MS. GILL: I don't have the funds to hire a contractor.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's a problem, because you
Page 84
January 22, 2015
probably are never going to get to the answer if you try to do it all
yourself. It takes a long time to figure out this stuff, as you've found
out.
Any comments from the board?
MR. LAVINSKI: Well, here again, we had a stipulation signed
back in April, almost a year ago.
MS. GILL: Right.
MR. LAVINSKI: One hundred twenty days extension there, and
here we are.
MS. GILL: Yeah. And I didn't even understand what that truly
meant. Again, this was a house that I was just basically thrown into,
and I just didn't understand, and I'm trying.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So Dorothy is -- was your mom?
MS. GILL: Yeah, my mom. And then Ron, Ronald is my father.
And they were the ones who, like I said, built the house. I did
whatever -- they had asked me to sign a paper; I signed it. I was 18 at
the time, so --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We're in a situation here where if
you said to me, we'll get everything done in three months or six
months, we could certainly consider granting a continuance for that
period of time. But what you're saying, in essence, is I don't know
when this is going to be done.
MS. GILL: Well, yeah. I mean, you were saying that I might
need a contractor, I don't know -- like I said, I wouldn't be able to hire
one, so --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You need somebody who can -- who
knows the ropes, if you will --
MS. GILL: Okay.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- that can resolve the situation --
MS. GILL: Okay. And how --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- whether it's a contractor or your
Page 85
January 22, 2015
brother-in-law or whomever --
MS. GILL: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- to do it. But it's hard for the board
not to impose --
MS. GILL: Right.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- without knowing where the end of
the tunnel is, the light at the end of the tunnel.
MS. GILL: And that's the thing, too, is that my house is
technically in the process of going into foreclosure, and we have been
offered a modification, but I wasn't able to do the modification. They
gave me five days to make a payment, so that didn't happen.
But I would like to modify it, but I don't know if I'll be able to
unless I get all these things done. And I just need a little bit of help on
figuring out who to find, like you said, a contractor or someone; I don't
have anyone who -- you know, no family members who do that, so --
and I don't know who to find.
Is there, like, a company that does pro bono work or something?
Because I don't know, I really don't. I don't understand it.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Jeff, do you know --
MR. LEFEBVRE: There is. I can't think of the name of it.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is it Cholanda (phonetic) that --
MR. LEFEBVRE: We talked about it at government issues.
There is an organization that does it, and it's Florida Home or
something. I can't think of the name of it off the top of my head.
MR. WRIGHT: Legal Aid, and also I think the Golden Gate's
Legal.
MR. LEFEBVRE: But there's a group that specifically works
with people that have problems trying to retain their homes and so
forth and --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Why don't I suggest this, that we
grant a continuance of X amount of time -- we can figure that out --
Page 86
January 22, 2015
and try to work with the respondent to find out what that organization
is to see if they can get on board with that. I don't know what to tell
you about your situation with your bank. That's --
MS. GILL: Well, that's just -- I have to try and figure out what
the modification -- I have a family friend who is an attorney who has
been helping me with that, thank goodness, but I still have to figure out
what to do regarding getting this stuff taken care of so that I can then
talk to them about doing the modification, so --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I understand.
MR. LAVINSKI: Why don't we impose the fine, and hopefully
that will spur some action on the issue.
MR. LEFEVBRE: Yeah. I think if we impose a fine, then there's
going to be an additional lien on the property, and modification is
pretty much not going to happen.
MS. GILL: Yeah, not going to happen.
MR. LEFEBVRE: I'm willing to give some more time to try to
resolve some of these issues. I think, again, she's going to need to
retain the proper personnel to get her there. So I'd be willing to grant a
120-day continuance.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: I'll second that, Mr. Chairman.
MS. GILL: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any discussion on the motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Hearing none, all those in
favor?
MS. CURLEY: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. MIESZCAK: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. ASHTON: Aye.
Page 87
January 22, 2015
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
MR. LAVINSKI: No.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have one no.
MR. LEFEVBRE: I'm going to try to reach out and find out the
name of that company that does -- they're a nonprofit, and when I do,
I'll get in touch with probably Jeff and pass the name on.
MS. GILL: All right. My fiancee's a handyman, and he used to
work for a construction company, so I'll ask him if he can maybe make
comes calls.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: There's a certain amount of work
you can do as an owner/builder --
MS. GILL: Okay.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- that doesn't require you to hire an
outside contractor. The reason that we kind of thought a contractor
might be in order is you have so many issues that need to be resolved.
At least get someone who can say if you fix A, B, and C, you'll be into
compliance, pull the permits on those, et cetera. So you have 120 days
to, A, figure it out --
MS. GILL: Right.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The fines are going to continue to
accrue --
MS. GILL: Right.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- but you have more time to get this
thing resolved.
MS. GILL: Okay.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And if Mr. Lefebvre can find out the
company, he'll get that to Jeff, Jeff will get that to you, and hopefully
things could work out for the best.
MR. LEFEBVRE: They used to be located on the corner of
Airport-Pulling Road and Bailey Lane, if you know where that is.
South of Pine Ridge Road, probably about a mile -- where Hawksridge
Page 88
January 22, 2015
is. They're in that building there on, like, the second floor. But I'll get
the name. Florida something. I'll get the name for you.
MS. GILL: Okay. Thank you. Appreciate it. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Thank you.
MS. ADAMS: The next case is No. 8, Tab 23, Case
CESD20140012494, Lynne B. Cadenhead.
(The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Could you give us your name on the
record, sir.
MR. CADENHEAD: Bobby Cadenhead.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. You're before us because we
have -- the imposition of fines has come before us on this case. I have
one question on the operational. They have been paid?
MR. SNOW: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. MIESZCAK: Second sheet.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. All righty. Why don't you let
us know what's going on.
MR. CADENHEAD: Basically in July of 2'14, the county
notified us that the house at 3417 Cherokee Street was found to be
unsafe. And at that time I met with Jeff Letourneau with the code
enforcement that there was pending and also met with the building
department.
The building department at that time said that -- told me that in
order to even obtain a permit to do anything, I had to show the house
was not in a floodplain. And so at that point, that was where our
meeting with the county building department ended, and we hired a
surveyor to do a -- it's called -- it's called an elevation certification.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Right.
MR. CADENHEAD: In that period of time, I was meeting with
the building department. And even though the property's in Lynne's
Page 89
January 22, 2015
name, the county was dealing with me. I was meeting with the
building department and trying to get the issue resolved what we
needed to do.
The -- Jeff-- I think Eric Short was the investigator. He even
notified him that I was dealing with the subject.
And at no time were we -- was I notified that there was a hearing
that you had on 9/25/2' 14, or I would have been here.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let me stop you for one second.
Was the notification -- do you have that documentation?
MS. ADAMS: I don't have it from the previous hearing, no. I
just -- I have it from just -- from this hearing.
MR. SNOW: Notification sent -- was sent to the registered
property owner, which is Lynne Cadenhead. He has since
subsequently retained permission to represent her in this matter. That's
what I understand.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Different address?
MR. SNOW: I'm not certain of the addresses, but she was
notified. I don't believe that they are living -- residing at the same
address.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. CADENHEAD: Long story short, she didn't get no
certification that there was a hearing, or I would have -- I would have
been here. The main part of that --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let me stop you a second. When
they send out the certification, if it's not delivered, they get it back. So
she probably got it and maybe misplaced it or whatnot, but I
understand what you're saying. Go ahead.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Well, the main part about it is the
county, through the building department and through code, knew I was
handling this for her, and there was no notification.
But since then -- in other words, since this happened, I went
Page 90
January 22, 2015
ahead and got an authorization letter from her authorizing me to handle
anything with the county that pertained to property that's in her name.
The county submitted a -- the building department submitted an
untrue affidavit that on July the 18th, that the building structure has
collapsed and moved off foundation support -- ground necessary to
support it. And had I had a copy of this letter from the building
department on July 18th, we would have already had a structural
engineer to -- hired to dispute this fact.
So what we've done is, I've submitted to the county the
certification of-- elevation certification and a survey of the property.
I'm in the midst of hiring Daryl Marsh with American Engineering to
make a rebuttal that the house is not off the foundation and the house is
safe.
So what I'm asking for is basically -- I wrote a letter to Kerry
Adams, and I'm asking for six months of this deal to get everything
resolved, whatever permits that the building department's got to issue,
or if the engineer certifies that the county's July the 18th letter was
totally incorrect.
So we're just looking for a little more time to get the thing
resolved and do what the county wants us to do.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: When you say a little more time,
could you be more specific?
MR. CADENHEAD: I'm asking for six months because I don't
know exactly what it's going to take with the permitting process.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Mr. Kitchell?
MR. SNOW: I don't know how to respond to that, to be honest
with you but, gentlemen, please -- ladies and gentlemen, please
remember that the purpose of-- we're here is for the imposition of
fines, not to rehear this case.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's correct.
MR. SNOW: There is -- the charge was a primary structure with
Page 91
January 22, 2015
unpermitted alterations and poor conditions and unpermitted
two-storage (sic) structure in poor condition. Those were the charges.
Now, he has made significant progress, and he has made attempts
to alleviate the situation. He has secured the structure. So the
health-and-safety issue as far as that is concerned has been alleviated.
He has paid your operational costs. So there appears to be no
health-and-safety issue with this right at the present time, and he has
cleaned up the property.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Comments from the board --
or, Kerry, you had mentioned you received a letter --
MS. ADAMS: A letter was submitted, but I didn't receive it until
two days ago which was too late to formally submit a written request
for continuance or extension of time, so that's why you don't have that
in your packet.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And you're asking for a
continuance on this, I assume?
MR. CADENHEAD: That's correct, in order to get everything --
I've met with code, and I'm trying to work very closely with code to
get whatever they need done and to do it.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Mr. Ashton, this is another
case where the fines are almost $42,000.
MR. SNOW: At present.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: At present. And they will continue
to accrue if we grant a continuance. So that particular question arises
once again.
Anybody have any comments from the board regarding this?
MR. LEFEBVRE: Is there anyone living in the structure?
MR. SNOW: No, sir.
MR. LAVINSKI: And what's going to happen to this? Are you
reclaiming the property or --
MR. CADENHEAD: Oh, no. We're reclaiming the property.
Page 92
January 22, 2015
And the statement that the building department made was totally
incorrect, and the civil engineer will go through the process that he has
to to prove that it was an incorrect statement to start with.
MR. LAVINSKI: So your intent is to make this habitable?
MR. CADENHEAD: It's totally going to be habitable once we
redo all the permits that the county wants.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. You think it's going to take
six months to redo that?
MR. CADENHEAD: I've lived here all my life, and it used to be
we could write on a napkin and turn it in to the building department
and get a permit. In today's time, you ask for six months in order to
say hello to them. So that's the reason we've asked for the six months.
MR. LAVINSKI: I'd make a motion that we continue this for 120
days, whatever six months is.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's 180.
MR. LAVINSKI: Hundred eighty.
MS. CURLEY: I second that.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I'd like to see -- we have a motion
and a second.
I'd like to see you add to that motion that at some point between
now and 180 days, that code enforcement reviews to see that there's
progress on this, that we don't wake up on the 179th day and find we're
in the same situation that we are today.
MR. SNOW: Ninety days, we could come back and report to the
board, half. We are in contact with Mr. Cadenhead quite often.
Investigator Garcia and Supervisor/Manager of Investigations
Letourneau are -- I wouldn't say constantly, but they remain in contact
with them. So I'm confident in 90 days we could give you -- come
before the board and give you a report.
MR. LAVINSKI: I would add that to my motion.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And would you add that to your
Page 93
January 22, 2015
second?
MS. CURLEY: Yes.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Any comments on the
motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor?
MS. CURLEY: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. MIESZCAK: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. ASHTON: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
MR. SNOW: Thank you, sir.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You're welcome.
MS. ADAMS: The next case is No. 9, Tab 24, Case
CEPM20140011205, Brent R. Parker.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Which tab was that?
MR. PARKER: Good morning.
(The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
MR. PARKER: Good morning.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. Could you state
your name for the record.
MR. PARKER: Brent R. Parker.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And we're here to hear this --
have the operational costs been paid?
MR. SANTEFAMIA: No, they have not. And I believe Mr.
Parker was going to request a continuance.
Page 94
January 22, 2015
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I won't accept any request for
anything until the operational costs have been paid. Do you
understand that?
MR. PARKER: I just now understand it.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. PARKER: This is the first notice I've got, sir, was just two
weeks ago, of any matters with regard to this property, so I'm
completely unaware of any procedural issues with -- being heard
before this board.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. This was heard in August.
There was an order generated in August. Do you have the information
as far as notification?
MS. ADAMS: Not for the August hearing, no. I only have for
today's hearing. But he was properly noticed; otherwise, we wouldn't
have been able to proceed with the hearing at the time.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Let me ask a question. This is the first time
there's been a case -- that you heard of anything about the case two
weeks ago; is that correct?
MR. PARKER: That's correct. This is the first time I've --
MR. LEFEBVRE: Well, when were you by the property?
Because it was boarded up in October. Wouldn't that give you a clue
that something happened?
MR. PARKER: I'm sorry to say, but I was in prison for two
years. I just got out, so you couldn't have noticed me.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay. So someone -- but no one told you that
your house was boarded up?
MR. PARKER: No. I had no clue. The problems began when I
left. It was because I was not available was the reason these problems
and issues developed. So I'm here now to try to correct those
problems.
MR. LEFEBVRE: When did you get out?
Page 95
January 22, 2015
MR. PARKER: October 31, I believe it was, of this last year.
MR. LEFEVBRE: Okay. But the house was boarded up.
MR. PARKER: Yeah.
MR. LEFEBVRE: It was boarded up on the 29th.
MR. PARKER: Of October?
MR. LEFEBVRE: Of October, that's correct. That's what the date
of the invoice is here for $1,434.
MR. PARKER: Which I don't have any problem with that cost at
all.
MR. LEFEBVRE: But what I'm saying is, you probably went by
the house and saw that it was boarded up, correct?
MR. PARKER: Well, not until after, yeah. I discovered that it
was boarded up. I didn't know who boarded it up. I didn't get this
notice until they put -- the code enforcement officer came by, and I
guess it was -- and I don't live there, by the way -- the first of this last
month, January, was when I first learned --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Before we continue, are you going to
pay the 63.29 today?
MR. PARKER: I have money in my pocket. I can pay it.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Because we generally don't --
as you've heard --
MR. PARKER: I didn't know to pay it, or otherwise I would
have.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I understand.
MR. PARKER: I can give you cash right now.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, don't give me cash. My wife
will only take it away from me. No.
But, John, why don't you get with --
MR. SANTEFAMIA: He actually showed up late for the hearing,
so I had no opportunity to speak to him beforehand.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
Page 96
January 22, 2015
MR. SANTEFAMIA: And he was, in fact, in prison, so I'm
aware of all of that history.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Let me just ask a couple of
quick -- what's left to do on this to bring it into compliance'?
MR. SANTEFAMIA: For the record, John Santafemia, Collier
County Code Enforcement.
For this case, the front window just needs to be repaired. We had
it boarded because it was unsecure.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. SANTEFAMIA: It is still is -- it is still boarded, but he has
hired somebody to go to the property and clean the property up. They
have been working to do that. Power's been restored and water's
restored, so he is actually making a good-faith effort in that
department.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let me suggest -- this seems to be, in
the whole realm of things, one of the easier ones to resolve. If we were
to grant the 30-day continuance, I would assume that the window
would be fixed, the $63.29 for the past violation would be paid, and
then you have today's hearing is $63.75, that would be paid, and
everything would be fine.
MR. PARKER: I could pay the fees today. I have that money.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The second amount you don't have
to pay within 30 days, or if you ask for more time, we certainly would
entertain that, so --
Mr. Lefebvre, you have something?
MR. LEFEBVRE: The second fee, you mean the boarding costs.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah. The other thing that you said
that you could pay is the invoice.
MR. PARKER: Yeah. I can't pay it today, but if you'll work with
me, I can get that paid. I'd have no problem with that. I agree with
what was done. It needed to be done.
Page 97
January 22, 2015
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you think you can get that done
within 30 days?
MR. PARKER: No. I don't have that kind of money right now.
I'm just getting started back in business. I got -- they let me out with
$50. I had no money.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. How long do you think it will
take you to pay the invoice off, the 1,434?
MR. PARKER: I would like as much time as possible, at least --
maybe six months tops, but maybe sooner than that. I don't know. I'm
working. I'm starting, but I can't tell you if the phone's going to ring or
not. I've got an ad in the paper, and I'm trying to get back in business.
And so, you know, money is an issue, certainly, but I agree fully with
paying it.
I have another piece of property that I have up for sale. As soon
as it sells, I'll pay what I can pay to pay these costs off. I'll do
whatever I can to work with you if you'll work with me. I'm just now
discovering these issues. I just spent $3,000 to get the electric turned
on, fixed. I had to have an electrician come out and have the -- they
came in and cut the entire electrical system out of the home. I had to
have all that replaced so that I could get the power restored.
I don't even have a place to live. I'm living in somebody else's
house right now. So if you can work with me --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well --
MR. PARKER: -- I can pay the --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- the problem with the 1 ,434 is that
if we grant a continuance, the fines continue to accrue. If we did it for
30 days and somehow you could get your hands on that money, this
whole thing disappears.
MR. PARKER: Well, I will attempt to do that. My son maybe
has some wherewithal that I'm not aware of. Certainly that would be a
better opportunity than no opportunity.
Page 98
January 22, 2015
MR. LAVINSKI: What are you suggesting?
MR. LEFEVBRE: Does the county ever do a payment plan for
something like this? No.
MR. SANTEFAMIA: I'm not aware of that.
MR. LEFEVBRE: Okay. I was just wondering.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: They do; it's called a tax certificate
when you don't pay your taxes, but that's another story.
MR. LEFEBVRE: I just wasn't sure if they --
MR. SANTEFAMIA: I know a guy.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Why don't we do this: It's not a big
deal to -- I mean, it's a broken window. It probably would have been
more efficient to replace the window than to board it up, based on the
cost. Why don't we make it a 60-day continuance, give you twice as
much time to come up with it.
MR. PARKER: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And at that time if you have a
problem, come back before the board and show some progress that
you've --
MR. PARKER: Right. I would guess that the window will be
replaced so that we can at least abate that issue.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Right.
MR. PARKER: The financial side of it, I can't guarantee
anything, but I'm certain that I'll have made some effort with regard to
that by that time, maybe even completely have satisfied your financial
requirement.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Anybody --
MR. PARKER: John knows that I'm out -- we've worked out
there to clean the place up and turn it around as it sits. The only thing
left to be done is the window, is my understanding. And I have to pull
a permit for that, so I'll have the cost of pulling a permit. I'm not even
certain, because it's a two-unit, if I personally, as an owner, can pull a
Page 99
January 22, 2015
permit, or do I have to hire a general contractor. If so, that would be
additional cost.
So I appreciate all your help.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. LEFEVBRE: Is it just one window or several windows,
because the boarding --
MR. SANTEFAMIA: It's one window. We had -- there's history
to this property. Because he was away for so long, a lot of people were
using that property just to crash in and stuff, and the Sheriffs
Department had a lot of calls for service there. There was a lot of
illegal activity going on during his absence.
So we provided -- we preferred that they actually board -- it's a
duplex. And it's only one side that -- the county boarded the entire
thing so that nobody could get back into it. But, really, the broken
window needs to be repaired, and that actually abates this violation.
I am not aware -- and I did mention this before to him that -- if
there's any other open cases for other issues on this property, so --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. SANTEFAMIA: But I'll check as soon as I get back to the
office. There might be a property maintenance case open by another
investigator.
MR. LEFEBVRE: So we have a motion for a 60-day
continuance?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes.
MR. LEFEBVRE: I'll second that motion.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a motion and a
second.
Any discussion on the motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor?
MS. CURLEY: Aye.
Page 100
January 22, 2015
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. MIESZCAK: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. ASHTON: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIR_MAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
So 60 days. If you have the money and you pay all of this, we
won't even see you again, most likely, except to -- you request to
handle the balance of the fine. You can come back and ask for a
reduction in that or to have it eliminated.
Again, we --
MR. PARKER: I would hope that you guys would work with me
and have that abated if I take care of everything. That's my intent
anyway. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, thank you.
MS. ADAMS: The next case is imposition of fines, No. 3, Tab
18, Case CESD20140018277, Black River Rock, LLC.
(The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning.
MS. CROWLEY: Good morning.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Twice in one week. Wow.
MS. CROWLEY: We're both lucky.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's right.
Well, it looks like we have -- the time has come to address this
item that Larry had started to talk about earlier. Why don't you give us
a couple of-- first of all, have the operational costs been assessed, been
paid?
MS. CROWLEY: No.
Page 101
January 22, 2015
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, that's kind of easy.
Anybody want to make a motion to deny this?
MS. CROWLEY: Well, let me just give you a little bit of
information for the record and for the board's edification as well.
On January 13th, the owner did submit to the county a Site
Development Plan insubstantial change request. That's to the original
Site Development Plan 91-34C. And if approved, it would address the
property owner's desire to fill a previously cleared tract within the
referenced Site Development Plan.
This application approval will allow the property owner to fill and
stabilize the site per the original approved SDP permit. So that is
pending right now at the present time.
They want to continue to leave the total of 54 dump truck loads
full of fill on the property rather than remove it. I did a site inspection
at 5 p.m. on Tuesday. They remained.
I have seen the additional litter. It looks like somebody is
continuing to use it as a dumping ground just because it looks
unmaintained. So they have taken some steps to try to get approval
from the county to leave the fill where it is.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I would expect two things. Number
one, I would expect that they would have paid the assessed operational
costs from the last hearing, number one. And, number two, I would
expect if they didn't want us to impose the fine, they would be here
today, neither which have happened.
MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to impose.
MR. LEFEBVRE: I've got another question.
If I remember this case correctly, you said that there was some
water retention that might be part of this property.
MS. CROWLEY: That was the information that I had been
given, that --
MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay.
Page 102
January 22, 2015
MS. CROWLEY: And I will say that as far as the reviews for
that pending SDPI application, several of them have passed and been
completed, but the ones that remain would include the stormwater. The
engineering stormwater review was a pending, as is zoning review.
MR. LEFEBVRE: All right. I don't take lightly that -- it's a
commercial property. They should know the requirements to go ahead
and build on this property. You haven't been in contact with them at
all?
MS. CROWLEY: Other than with their engineer who had --
there was an exchange of email shortly after our last hearing where
they were under the impression that the county was just going to allow
them to keep that there without any kind of a development order,
without any kind of other review process. So there may have been a
misunderstanding.
MR. LEFEBVRE: So we have a -- well, the engineer should
have told them that.
We have a motion.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion.
MR. LEFEVBRE: I'll second that motion.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second.
MR. MIESZCAK: I just had one comment --
MR. LEFEVBRE: Okay.
MR. MIESZCAK: -- because I jumped out on that before. Those
54 loads of dirt, who knows where they came from? Somebody said
they came out of state and stuff. How do we know it's not
contaminated? I'm sure they're going to check that. But I certainly
think that that dirt being there left like it was is a sin.
MS. CROWLEY: I don't believe --
MR. MIESZCAK: Next to eating places.
MS. CROWLEY: -- it came from out of state. When I first
arrived, when the case was assigned to me, the gentleman who had the
Page 103
January 22, 2015
contract to haul in the dirt was actually on site, and he was the one who
gave me the information that he had as far as how many loads were
there, how many had been brought in, how many had been leveled off.
MR. MIESZCAK: He said where from?
MS. CROWLEY: I believe he indicated that it came from off of
Vanderbilt Drive. Possibly where the Aqua is --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I know that there's a lot of
construction, a lot of dirt there.
We have a motion and a second. Any other discussion?
MS. CROWLEY: I haven't read it yet into the record.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. I just wanted to say maybe on
future correspondence to respondents in big bold letters we should
state, since this is like the third case where there's been no response as
far as the operational costs have been paid, that we'll not hear the case.
If that's the first thing that's in an order, and it generally is, it doesn't
much matter what comes after it if you haven't paid the operational
costs. Maybe we can make that bolder.
MS. ADAMS: Well, that's why we're here to impose the fines
and the operational costs, so that's what Michelle is going to read into
the record.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Right. Why don't you read that into
the record.
MS. CROWLEY: This is a violation of Land Development Code
04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(e) and 3.05.01(B).
There is no site address. It's located in Naples, Florida, near
intersection of Man -- correction -- Collier Boulevard and Tamiami
Trail East; Folio 726724107.
The description: Undeveloped parcel of 1 .3 acres that has been
cleared of vegetation without required building or other permit; 54
loads of fill dirt and/or rock have been graded and/or placed on site
without any building permit or other authorization.
Page 104
January 22, 2015
Past orders: On October 23, 2014, the Code Enforcement Board
issued a findings of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent
was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to
correct the violation. See the attached order of the board, OR5092,
Page 3954, for more information.
The violation has not been abated as of January 20, 2015.
Fines and costs to date are as follows: Fines have accrued at a
rate of$250 per day for the period between November 23, 2014, to
January 22, 2015, 61 days, for a total fine amount of S15,250.
Fines continue to accrue.
The previously assessed operational costs of 65.85 have not been
paid, and the operational cost for today's hearing, $62.31, for a total
amount to date, $15,378. 16.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a motion to impose
and a second.
All those in favor?
MS. CURLEY: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. MIESZCAK: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. ASHTON: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Thank you.
MS. CROWLEY: Thank you.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Mr. Chairman, I have another meeting to
attend in about 10 or 15 minutes.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I think we'll be done before then.
MR. MIESZCAK: We're about to adjourn.
Page 105
January 22, 2015
MS. ADAMS: Yeah, we're almost done.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Are we close?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We're close.
MS. ADAMS: The next case is No. 6, Tab 21, Case
CESD201.40006864, Jeffrey Gallucci, Deborah Gallucci, and Mary P.
Stevens.
(The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
MR. SNOW: For the record, Kitchell Snow, Collier County
Code Enforcement.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hi, Kitchell.
MR. SNOW: Sir.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Why don't you read the case into the
record, and we'll see where we go.
MR. SNOW: I can, sir.
The violation is 2010 Florida Building Code, Chapter 1, Part 1,
Section 105. 1, Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as
amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a), and the location is 39 Henderson
Drive, Naples, Florida; the folio is 49580760009, and description is
fence installed without required permits, lanai added to mobile home
without required permits, and shed installed without required permits.
Past orders: August 28, 2014, the Code Enforcement Board
issued a finding of fact and conclusion of law and order. The
respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and
ordered to correct the violation. See the attached order of the board,
OR5078, Page 3524, for more information.
The violation has not been abated as of July -- I'm sorry --
January 22, 2015.
Fines and costs to date as follows: Fines have accrued at the rate
of$100 per day for the period between December 7, 2014, to January
22, 2015, 47 days, for a total fine amount of $4,700.
Fines continue to accrue.
Page 106
January 22, 2015
Previously assessed operational costs of $63.57 have not been
paid. Operational costs for today's hearing are $62.60.
Total amount to date is $4,826.17.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Have you been in contact
with these folks?
MR. SNOW: Yes, ma'am (sic). This is the one that requested a --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I'm not a ma'am.
MR. SNOW: I'm sorry. Yes, sir. I was looking. Yes, sir, I have.
I've talked to her personally, and she submitted a letter. This is the
case that you heard previously requesting a continuance or extension,
and they're not here. So I don't know of any excuse, or they didn't
elaborate on any excuse or why they haven't complied with the board's
order.
MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to impose the fine.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion to impose.
MR. LAVINSKI: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And a second.
All those in favor?
MS. CURLEY: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. MIESZCAK: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. ASHTON: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
Thanks, Kitchell.
MR. SNOW: Thank the board.
MS. ADAMS: The next case is No. 11, Tab 26,
Page 107
January 22, 2015
CEPM20140000515 (sic), Grant and Tammy Arthur.
(The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
MR. SANTEFAMIA: For the record, John Santafemia, Collier
County Code Enforcement.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hi, John. Why don't you read the
order.
MR. SANTEFAMIA: The violations in this case are of Collier
County Code of Laws and Ordinances, Chapter 22, buildings and
regulations, Article VI, property maintenance code Section 22-231,
Subsection (12)(N) and (15).
Location of violation is 702 Grand Rapids Boulevard, Naples,
Florida; Folio No. 81216013305.
Description of violations are a private swimming pool not being
maintained, creating an unhealthy condition, and accessory structure --
accessory screen structure enclosure in disrepair.
On April 28, 2014, the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding
of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in
violation of the referenced ordinance and ordered to correct violation.
See attached order of the board, OR5078, Page 3543, for further
information.
The violation has not been abated as of January 22, 2015.
Fines and costs to date are as follows: Fines are accrued at a rate
of$200 per day for the period between September 28, 2014, to January
22, 2015, 117 days, for a total fine amount of$23,400.
Fines continue to accrue.
Previously assessed operational costs of$64.12 have not been
paid. Pool abatement costs of $1,804.20 have not been paid.
Operational costs for today's hearing are $63.20. For a total amount
due of$25,331 .52.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Have you been in contact with the
respondent at all?
Page 108
January 22, 2015
MR. SANTEFAMIA: Not at all. This is a foreclosure property.
The bank is aware of it, but they've chosen not to do anything with it.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to impose the fine.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion.
MR. LAVINSKI: Second.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And a second.
All those in favor?
MS. CURLEY: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. MIESZCAK: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. ASHTON: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
MR. SANTEFAMIA: Thank you.
MS. ADAMS: The next case is Letter C, letter to rescind
previously issued order. Case CEROW20140005480, Keito Holdings,
LLC.
(The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. This is the case where they
weren't in violation; they just want to rescind the order; is that correct?
MR. SNOW: Not exactly.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. SNOW: What happened is we received a notice from our
technical expert in the right-of-way that there was a right-of-way
violation. Subsequent to our issues -- issuance of a notice, there was
Page 109
January 22, 2015
repair work done in the right-of-way, but it wasn't -- it didn't meet the
standards of code, and it needed a permit.
After we came to the board -- and if you remember, the
constituent or the respondent was adamant about she didn't understand
why she couldn't pull a permit. She was a contractor. And it was a
residential property. She had to get a contractor to do the work.
So part of the board's recommendation was that we needed to
meet on site, as we had previously done, and have the experts out here
and tell her what she needed to do. So we did that.
Unfortunately, in that day I had a personal matter. I was ill, and I
couldn't go out and do that.
So our subject matter expert showed up. When the subject matter
expert showed up, the same person who said that there was a violation
said, okay, you're fine now. There's no further violation, no permit
required, and he documented that and gave it to her.
So for me to appear before this board and suggest that there's a
violation when we have a county official -- even though we have
subsequently found out that a permit was possibly required, she would
present it and say, what do you want me to do?
So, in essence, you are correct, there is no violation according to
our technical expert at this time.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So we need to vote on
whether to rescind this or not; is that correct?
MS. ADAMS: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Anybody like to make a motion to
rescind it?
MR. ASHTON: Make a motion to rescind.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And do we have a second?
MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second the motion.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second.
All those in favor?
Page 110
January 22, 2015
MS. CURLEY: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. MIESZCAK: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. ASHTON: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
MR. SNOW: Thank the board.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thanks, Kitchell.
Which brings us to --
MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to adjourn.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Not yet. Don't rush it.
MS. ADAMS: The consent agenda.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: This is not your last meeting.
You've got your February meeting.
MR. LEFEBVRE: No, this is -- the appointment's up on the 14th.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It's going to be a swan song. We
can't have that.
Okay. We've done all the tabs. Jeff has snuck out early.
We have a request to forward cases to the county's attorney
office.
MR. LAVINSKI: I'll make a motion we forward those cases to
the county's attorney's office.
MR. LEFEVBRE: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And a second.
All those in favor?
MS. CURLEY: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
Page 111
January 22, 2015
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. MIESZCAK: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. ASHTON: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
Okay. Which brings us to, among other things, the next meeting
is February 26th. We have a new person to welcome. You should
introduce her, Kerry.
MS. ADAMS: Annie San Roman. She will be prepping the
cases for Code Enforcement Board, the same as what Teresa used to
do.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And I thought you did a
sterling job, whoever prepped these, with the tab numbers. They
worked out really well. Very easy to find.
Any -- oh, this is Sue's first meeting. Welcome.
MS. CURLEY: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And this is Larry's, according to
Larry, last meeting. Is that right, Larry?
MR. MIESZCAK: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: After 10 years.
MR. MIESZCAK: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I don't know what we're going to do
without him.
MR. MIESZCAK: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We may have to continue the
meetings late into the night because Larry's the one who makes the
motions to adjourn all the time.
MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to adjourn.
Page 112
January 22, 2015
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: See what I mean? We are
adjourned.
*****
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 11 :54 a.m.
CODE ENFORC1MENT BOARD
rtiAltL
RO :ERT . MAN, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST
DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK
Attest as to Chairman's
signature only,
These minutes approved by the Board on s> 2� 2 vi 5
as presented ,/ or as corrected
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY COURT
REPORTING SERVICE, INC., BY TERRI LEWIS, NOTARY
PUBLIC/COURT REPORTER.
Page 113