CLB Minutes 07/15/2015 CONTRACTORS
LICENSING
BOARD
Minutes
July 15 , 2015
T—ro ND cc_ ttl(i
July 15,2015
MINUTES
OF THE COLLIER COUNTY
CONTRACTORS' LICENSING BOARD MEETING
July 15, 2015
Naples, Florida
LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Contractors' Licensing
Board, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 AM in
REGULAR SESSION in Administrative Building "F," 3rd Floor, Collier County
Government Complex, Naples, Florida, with the following Members present:
Chairman: Patrick White
Vice Chair: Thomas Lykos
Members: Terry Jerulle
Richard Joslin
Kyle Lantz
Gary McNally
Excused: Michael Boyd
Robert Meister
ALSO PRESENT:
Michael Ossorio — Supervisor, Contractors' Licensing Office
Kevin Noell, Esq. —Assistant County Attorney
James F. Morey, Esq. —Attorney for the Contractors' Licensing Board
Rob Ganguli — Collier County Licensing Compliance Officer
July 15,2015
Any person who decides to appeal a decision of this Board will need a record of the
proceedings and may need to ensure that a verbatim record of said proceedings is
made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which any Appeal is
to be based.
I. ROLL CALL:
Chairman Patrick White called the meeting to order at 9:00 AM and read the
procedures to be followed to appeal a decision of the Board.
Roll call was taken and a quorum was established; six (6) voting members were
present.
Michael Ossorio noted Ronald Donino had resigned from the Contractors' Licensing
Board to serve on the Code Enforcement Board.
II. AGENDA—ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS:
(None)
III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
Vice Chairman Thomas Lykos moved to approve the Agenda as submitted. Richard
Joslin offered a Second in support of the motion. Carried unanimously, 6—0.
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES—MAY 20,2015:
Gary McNally moved to approve the April 15, 2015 minutes as presented. Terry Jerulle
offered a Second in support of the motion. Carried unanimously, 6—0.
V. DISCUSSION:
• Michael Ossorio requested the Board hear Item VII-A ("Old Business") first,
followed by Item VIII-A("Public Hearings"), and then resume following the
Agenda as previously approved.
Chairman White polled the Board; there were no objections to changing the order of the
Agenda.
VII. OLD BUSINESS:
A. Mikel G. Diehl—Review of Credit (3 Month)
(d/b/a: "Florida Hardscapes &Paver Maintenance, Inc.")
Chairman White noted Mr. Diehl's Attorney delivered a Memorandum to the Board
concerning the Agenda item prior to the Hearing.
William Hazard, Esq., of Coleman, Hazard and Taylor, represented Mr. Diehl.
He explained Mr. Diehl uses his middle name, Garrett, to distinguish himself from
his father, also named Mikel Diehl.
2
July 15,2015
Attorney Hazard stated:
• There has been a great deal of confusion regarding his client's credit report
since both he and his father are "Mikel" Diehl.
• His firm was hired by Garrett Diehl to help correct several errors on his credit
report.
• His firm will consult the three credit reporting agency to discuss how to
remove the items from Garrett Diehl's and his company's credit reports.
• Some of the areas of confusion:
o Garrett Diehl's company is Florida Hardscapes &Paver
Maintenance,Inc.
o Mikel Diehl's former company was M&C Florida Pavers, Inc.
o Mikel Diehl's company was dissolved in 2011.
o Garrett Diehl had previously worked for his father.
o Garrett Diehl opened his company prior to the dissolution of his
father's company.
• The two items on the credit report of concern to the Board: the tax liens and
the judgment. Mr. Hazard stated both items were related to Mikel Diehl's
company,M&C Florida Pavers, Inc.
• He noted the tax liens (See: Tabs 8, 9, and 10 of the Memorandum) recorded
by the Florida Department of Revenue referenced Mikel Diehl's company, not
Florida Hardscapes & Paver Maintenance, Inc.
• Relationship between the two companies: Mikel Diehl currently works for
Garrett Diehl.
• Attorney Hazard referenced Tab 11, stating the judgment was initially entered
in Lee County's Circuit Court (Case #12-CC-1727—May, 2012).
o Parties to the action: Tri-Circle Pavers, Inc. (Plaintiff) vs.M&C
Florida Pavers, Inc. and Mikel Diehl (Defendants).
o Amount of the judgment was $6,744.49.
• He further noted similarly named companies located in Margate and Coconut
Creek, Florida, were not affiliated with Garrett Diehl's company.
(See: "Corporate Linkage"—last page of Experian's Credit Report)
Chairman White asked who had been the Qualifier for M&C Florida Pavers,Inc.
Attorney Hazard answered Garrett Diehl was the Qualified until he left his father's
employment to form his own company (documents were filed with the Secretary of State
on 02/16/2010; effective 03/01/2010).
• It was noted the tax liens were recorded in 2011 and November, 2012.
Chairman White questioned whether Garrett Diehl had been an officer in M&C Florida
Pavers,Inc.; if he had been the Qualifier while serving as an officer of his father's
company, and if he continued to be an officer after he was no longer the Qualifier.
Attorney Hazard referenced Tab 4 of the Memorandum. He stated when Mikel Diehl
filed ("Detail by Entity Name") with the Secretary of State's Divisions of Corporations in
February, 2010 he was the only Officer and Director listed for M&C Florida Pavers, Inc.
He further stated Garrett Diehl removed "d/b/a Florida Pavers" when he removed
himself as the Qualifier for his father's company and formed his own business.
3
July 15,2015
Garrett Diehl stated when he switched his license to apply it to his company, Florida
Hardscapes & Paver Maintenance, Inc., he requested that the Division of Corporations
drop the d/b/a because he did not want his company to be associated with Florida Pavers.
Michael Ossorio noted in March, 2014, Garrett Diehl paid a re-instatement fee, a new
license fee, and back year fees (2011 —2013) to obtain his license.
Chairman White requested clarification concerning when the "d/b/a"was changed and
Garrett Diehl was no longer the Qualifier and Officer for his father's company.
Attorney Hazard referenced Tabs 2 through 5 of the Memorandum which traced the
dissolution of Mikel Diehl's company and the creation of Garrett Diehl's company.
Vice Chairman Lykos directed his questions to Attorney Hazard and Mr. Diehl:
Q. When was M&C dissolved?
A. In 2011 (see Tab 2)—specifically September 23, 2011. The entity stopped filing its
Annual Reports in 2010.
Q. When did Garrett stop acting as the Qualifier for M&C?
A. Florida Hardscapes &Paver Maintenance, Inc. was fowled in 2010.
Q. His company was established in 2010. But when did he stop acting as the Qualifier
for M&C?
A. (GD) Once the company was dissolved, I did not renew my license.
Q. You let your license become suspended and then void? You didn't formally
terminate your qualification of that company—you just let your license lapse?
A. (GD)Yes.
Q. When did that occur? Do we have that date?
Michael Ossorio stated it was sometime in 2011 —the license was suspended and then
was null and void. He did not renew in 2010. In September, 2010, his license became
delinquent for three months. In 2011, it was suspended and null/void in 2012. He
appeared before the Board in 2014 to request to have his license reinstated without taking
any exams and because of the credit issues.
Chairman White noted because Garrett Diehl's license did not become null and void
until January 1, 2012, liability could attach to him as the Qualifier of M&C up to that
point. He had not formally or affirmatively acted to end his role as Qualifier of his
father's company.
Attorney Hazard agreed it was possible.
Chairman White continued the only thing he saw was the Administrative Dissolution of
M&C—there was no formal termination of M&C as a corporate entity. If there had been,
it might have resolved the issues pertaining to the tax liens and other matters.
Attorney Hazard stated while he did not represent Mikel Diehl, he understood that Mr.
Diehl went through a personal bankruptcy. He was not aware of whether the judgment
had been discharged as a result of the bankruptcy.
Chairman White stated he was not convinced that Garrett Diehl did not have any
financial exposure or responsibility up to January 1, 2012. He noted the Board was being
asked to evaluate Garrett Diehl's credit-worthiness to go forward without any
4
July 15,2015
probationary period. He further stated he was not comfortable to do so, based on the
information that was only recently presented to the Board.
Chairman White asked Attorney Hazard if he and his client would like additional time
to resolve the matter.
Attorney Hazard suggested six months should be sufficient.
Chairman White suggested that the Board should be presented with a parallel tracking
of what happened with M&C's business dealings and a parallel track showing the points
in time when Garret's believed the negative credit reporting events took place.
Vice Chairman Lykos noted his other issue was that a Qualifier of a company carried
the responsibility and liability of the company—not until a credit report states that he/she
was finished—but when Collier County acknowledged that he/she no longer had that
responsibility. He stated Garrett Diehl was the qualifying agent for his father's company
up to the end of 2011; tax liens were filed during that reporting period. His responsibility
as a qualifying agent extended to the end of 2011.
Chairman White noted a mechanism existed to allow a qualifying agent to resign as the
Qualifier of a company. He stated nothing had been produced confirming that Mr. Diehl
had resigned. The only thing the Board was relying on was the status of his license.
Kyle Lantz stated that, in his opinion, since Garrett Diehl was the qualifying agent for
his father's company until it was dissolved, he is responsible for the tax liens and the
judgment. He further stated he hoped Mr. Diehl could provide clarification of when his
association with his father's company actually ended when returned in six months.
Richard Joslin stated because a license was not renewed did not necessarily remove a
qualifying agent from his/her responsibility as a Qualifier for a company.
Michael Ossorio confirmed that a Qualifier of a company could submit a letter to Collier
County, as well as to the company, stating he/she no longer wanted to remain as the
qualifying agent for the company. If the Qualifier did not have any ownership in the
company, his/her license would have been put into dormant status.
Gary McNally moved to approve requesting Garret Diehl produce a current credit
report when he appeared before the Board in six months.
Chairman White clarified the form of the motion was the Board would grant a six-
month extension of the probationary license issued to Garrett Diehl and he was
required to produce updated personal and business credit reports for the Board at the
end of the probationary period.
Richard Joslin offered a Second in support of the motion. Carried unanimously, 6—0.
VIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. Case 2015-03: Louis Bruno, IV, d/b/a "Bruno Air Conditioning of SW FL"
Michael Ossorio stated Attorney Patrick Neale had asked to address the Board prior
to opening the Public Hearing.
5
July 15,2015
Attorney Neal stated a Request for a Continuance had been filed with the Board on
Monday, July 13, 2015, because he had only recently been retained by Mr. Bruno to
represent him. He further stated he was in discussion with Collier County to try to
resolve the matter without the necessity of requiring a Public Hearing. He requested
a two-month continuance of the matter.
Michael Ossorio stated the County would not object if the Board granted a two-
month continuance to the Respondent.
Richard Joslin moved to approve granting Respondent Louis Bruno's Request for a
Continuance for a period of two months in Case#2015-03.
Attorney Neale stipulated the motion would serve as legally sufficient notice and the
Respondent must resolve the credit issues prior to September or appear before the
Board at the September hearing. /
, .R L 19,-V‘. 1�
' ��'"acknowledged he had a relationship with Bruno Air and would not
ug, vote on the motion. He stated he intended to disclose this information at the Public
Hearing.
Chairman White clarified the motion to grant the requested Continuance was
procedural and would not be affected by Mr. McNally's relationship to Bruno Air.
He suggested Mr. McNally discuss the issue with the Board's Attorney after the
meeting and prepare the appropriate paperwork for the September meeting.
Attorney James Morey, Attorney for the Board, confirmed there were no issues
preventing Mr. McNally from voting on the Continuance since substantive matters
were not addressed.
Chairman White called for a vote on the motion, asking if there were any
objections from the Board. There were none. Carried unanimously, 6—0.
VI. NEW BUSINESS:
(Note: With reference to the cases heard under Section VI, the individuals who
testified were first sworn in by the Attorney for the Board.)
A. Orders of the Board
Gary McNally moved to approve authorizing the Chairman to sign the Orders of
the Board. Vice Chairman Lykos offered a Second in support of the motion.
Carried unanimously, 6— 0.
B. Samuel Compere— Contesting Citation #09411
Citation: #09411 ("Working without a Building Permit")
Date Issued: June 2, 2015
Fine: $1,000.00
6
July 15, 2015
Description of Violation:
Commence or perform work for which a Building Permit is required pursuant to an
adopted State minimum Building Code or without such permit being in effect.
C. Samuel Compere—Contesting Citation #09412
Citation: #09412 ("Unlicensed Contracting—Fence Installation")
Date Issued: June 2, 2015
Fine: $1,000.00
Description of Violation:
Engage in the business or act in the capacity of a Contractor, or advertise self or
business organization as available to engage in the business of or act in the capacity
of a Contractor, without being duly registered or certified.
Chairman White stated the Board would hear the cases concomitantly.
Reverend Jim Yun Israel, who was Samuel Compere's Pastor, served as the
translator for him.
Attorney Morey advised Rev. Israel of the necessity to relay exactly what was being
said truthfully and accurately.
Rev. Israel responded, "Yes."
Joseph De Rival, the owner of 2571 47th Terrace SW,Naples, FL, was also present.
Chairman White asked Samuel Compere how he would like to proceed.
(Rev. Israel responded for Mr. Compere.)
A. The reason is because he did not know that he needed a permit or license—that's
why he did it—he does not like to have any problems. He said, "I was given two
tickets."
Q. Yes—we call them Citations or tickets.
Richard Joslin:
Q. What type of fence was installed?
A. (Joseph De Rival) A chain fence.
Q. A chain link fence?
A. Yes.
Q. Like the one in the picture?
Joseph DeRival: If you allow me to talk to you—we did not know if we need to
have a permit and license to do so. Then as soon as we know, we did stop doing the
fence. And me, personally, I go to the Building Office to get an application permit—
two days or three days after I'd been to 2571 47th Terrace SW. Someone meet me
there—Brother Samuel was not there—and he asked me, "Who is doing the job?"
Then I show him the permit application and he said I need to see Brother Samuel.
When I went to his office with Brother Samuel, he said to Brother Samuel that he
7
July 15,2015
needs to have a license to do so. Then he said, "I'm going to give you two Citations."
I said we did stop doing the job until we get the permit. He said, "Somebody called
me and talked to me about it, then I have to give you the Citation." I said, "Instead of
give the Citation—why you no give a warning because we don't do the job." Then as
soon as I know, I take away everything in my property. And I call someone else who
has a license to do my fence.
Q. Has the permit been pulled and the fence installed?
A. (Joseph De Rival) No.
Q. Has a permit been applied for?
A. No—I get a new licensed guy to do my fence. He said he will do —start to do my
fence by the 27th of this month.
Chairman White: Here is the Board's problem—the County's problem. We are not
in a position to be able to waive the Citation or act as if it wasn't issued unless the
violation has been abated ...meaning, the work was done before the Hearing. No one
has said they shouldn't have gotten a permit; no one has said they shouldn't have had
a license to install the fence. We are really—at this point, our hands are pretty much
tied. I appreciate the fact that an effort was made to abate the violation by talking to a
licensed fence contractor and trying to obtain a permit, but those things haven't been
done yet.
Terry Jerulle questioned Mr. De Rival:
Q. Did you pull an owner/builder permit?
A. It does have a permit license.
Michael Ossorio stated a building permit had been issued.
Rob Ganguli, Collier County Licensing Compliance Officer, confirmed while a
permit had been pulled, the work had not been completed.
Chairman White asked if a contract had been entered into and Mr. De Rival
responded, "Yes."
Kyle Lantz questioned Mr. De Rival:
Q. You had said you hadn't done any work on the fence yet—you hadn't started
installation yet?
A. No —on the 27th
Q. But the pictures we are showing have all the fence poles in. Did you put those
fence poles in?
A. We did start to do it but as soon as we know—I been to Building Office to make
an application but they said because I am not living in the property, then they
cannot give me a permit and I have to get a licensed guy to do so. For that reason
I call a Carter Fence to do it. And he make the application and the permit is there
—and the permit number is [on] my paper—and he said he will get my fence
installed on the 27th of this month.
Chairman White asked Mr. De Rival if he had paid the Contractor; he replied he
paid half to the Contractor.
8
•
July 15,2015
Q. When did you pay?
A. Three weeks ago.
Reverend Israel stated:
• Both men were members of his church.
• Samuel Compere had just lost his job.
• Mr. De Rival was trying to give him something to do.
• They were actually doing the job together, not realizing that they needed a
permit.
Reverend Israel stated he was not aware of the problem until after they received the
Citations. He understood they had agreed on a price while they were working on the
project together. Mr. De Rival gave Mr. Compere $300 which he returned once they
found out that this was not going to work. Those fences that you see have been
pulled up and a contract has been entered into with a Contractor to do the job.
Chairman White explained to Rev. Israel that Mr. Compere had offered to do work
as a Contractor ... a fence installer ... for compensation—for money—without
having either the permit that was required or a license.
Reverend Israel stated he understood and they both realized they were wrong but
they were not aware of it. He clarified that Mr. Compere did not offer to do the work.
Mr. De Rival knew Mr. Compere had been previously employed as a carpenter in
Haiti and had the ability to do those things. Mr. De Rival asked Mr. Compere and
they were both working together as brothers of the church. He continued they had no
idea but once they found out ...
Chairman White: Sometimes people come before the Board in this type of a
situation. They claim they were not doing it for compensation—"I was helping a
friend." And that is a valid defense. It is a valid defense— it's just usually not true.
Rev. Israel: I taught my members not to lie.
Chairman White: We appreciate that and if there's any way we can help get to a
place where the financial impact of paying the Citations is ... it doesn't seem to be
helping the community ... at least in my opinion. I don't know that a consumer was
harmed ... the gentleman is here ... he's trying to do the right thing ... he's pulled a
permit ... he's entered into a contract to have the work done—it just hasn't been done
yet. I would be interested in the other Board members' comments and perspectives
and also hearing from the County as to its position.
Rob Ganguli, Licensed Compliance Officer, stated:
• It was a complaint-driven investigation.
• He had the two components he needed to issue the Citations—he had proof of
compensation and work that required a building permit.
• He met with Mr. Compere and Mr. De Rival, there was never any denial of
having done the work.
• There was a request for some latitude in how he addressed the situation.
• The violations were addressed.
9
July 15,2015
Richard Joslin asked Mr. Ganguli if he took the pictures and saw the fence posts that
were in place which indicated that someone was doing the job.
Rob Ganguli responded, "Yes."
Mr. Joslin noted the paperwork that Mr. De Rival provided to the Board did not
constitute a contract—it was only an estimate, it was not signed and there was no
amount specified.
Joseph De Rival replied that he did have a contract but did not have a copy with him
to produce.
Chairman White pointed out Mr. De Rival testified he had paid the Contractor
money three weeks earlier.
Rob Ganguli requested to have the document(email)provided to the Board by Mr.
De Rival entered into evidence.
Chairman White asked Mr. De Rival if he wanted to enter the document into
evidence as "Respondent's Exhibit 1" and the reply was affirmative.
Kyle Lantz moved to approve entering the two page email entitled "Estimate for
1571 47th Terrace SW"from Jaimie Myers (Carter-fence.com) to Joseph De Rival
into evidence as Respondent's Exhibit 1. Vice Chairman Lykos offered a Second in
support of the motion. Carried unanimously, 6—0.
Kyle Lantz asked Attorney Morey to explain the Board's options.
Attorney Morey cited from Florida Statute 489, Section 127, entitled "Prohibitions
and Penalties" as follows:
"3. If the person who was issued the Citation, or his/her designated
representative, shows that the Citation is invalid or that the violation has
been corrected prior to appearing before the enforcement or Licensing
Board or designated Special Magistrate, the enforcement or Licensing
Board or designated Special Magistrate may dismiss the citation unless
the violation is irreparable or irreversible."
Kyle Lantz noted the language covered Citation for not obtaining a permit but did
not cover the Citation for contracting without a license.
Attorney Morey stated the Statute was applicable for anyone who was contesting an
issued Citation.
Vice Chairman Lykos moved to approve dismissing both Citations. Chairman
White offered a Second in support of the motion only as it applied to Citation #9411
(commencing work without obtaining a Building Permit).
Terry Jerulle agreed, stating that by hiring a Contractor to obtain a permit and install
the fence, the Citation had been abated.
Richard Joslin reiterated the Citation for unlicensed contracting should be upheld.
10
July 15,2015
Terry Jerulle noted a complaint had been made and it was investigated by Officer
Ganguli. He stated that, given the nature of the situation, he was not happy about
upholding the Citation for unlicensed contracting but there were rules in place.
He further stated he would not support the Vice Chairman's motion.
Vice Chairman Lykos cited the example of a previous action of the Board when he
and Mr. Jerulle had disagreed. He stated Mr. Jerulle had commented that the reason
why the Board existed was to review each case individually and make a decision
based on the merits of the case and not just follow the rules. He noted their positions
concerning the current care were reversed. He further stated he stood by his motion.
Terry Jerulle stated he understood and agreed with the Vice Chairman concerning
the permit Citation but stated he still needed convincing with regard to dismissing the
Citation for unlicensed contracting.
Vice Chairman Lykos replied the intent was not to avoid the Ordinances of Collier
County nor the intent was not to avoid paying a higher price by hiring a licensed
Contractor—the intent was between a gentleman who owned a piece of property who
reached out to a fellow member of his community to help him get through a hard
time. They worked on the project together based on their testimony. The intent was
not to avoid the law or to avoid the legitimate process.
He continued the reason why the Board was established was to take the intent into
consideration, under certain circumstances.
Chairman White noted Mr. Compere willingly returned the money he had been
given to Mr. De Rival.
Vice Chairman Lykos agreed stating a licensed Contractor had been hired, a permit
had been obtained, and the work would proceed when the Contractor's schedule
allowed. He stated both Mr. Compere and Mr. De Rival had been honest with the
Board and he did not think anything else could have been done to mitigate the
circumstances.
Kyle Lantz, while expressing sympathy for the parties involved, stated his concern
was for the Board. He asked if the Board could be violating Collier County's
Ordinances by negating the Citation for unlicensed contracting. He did not want the
Board to set precedence.
Chairman White stated, in his opinion, the question was whether or not the Board
had the authority or jurisdiction to do equity. He did not think the Board would be
establishing a precedent if a certain action were to be taken.
Vice Chairman Lykos noted anyone who had been served with a Citation had the
right to come before the Board to challenge it and to provide testimony to contest it.
Chairman White asked Michael Ossorio if the County had a position concerning the
dismissal of both or either Citations.
Michael Ossorio replied the County was indifferent—the Citations were issued but
the decision was the Board's to make.
Chairman White announced he was prepared to second the motion in its entirety
based upon the clearly demonstrated lack of intent. He stated the unlicensed
contracting case was tied into the permitting case. The efforts that were made to
11
July 15,2015
abate the violation were sufficient and in combination with the absence of intent as
evidenced by the return of the funds. He determined the more appropriate thing to do
under the circumstances—especially since no one was harmed—was to support the
motion.
Chairman White offered a Second in support of the motion in its entirety.
Richard Joslin again noted proof of a signed contract had not been submitted to the
Board.
Joseph De Rival reiterated a contract had been signed and he had a copy of it in his
car—just not with him.
Vice Chairman Lykos stated the Carter Fence Company had applied for and
obtained a permit from the County.
Chairman White called for a vote on the motion to dismiss both Citations.
Motion carried, 5— "Yes"/1 — "No." Richard Joslin was opposed.
D. Beker L. Escalante—Qualifying Second Entity
("MKA Finishing, Inc., d/b/a Tarpon Tile&Marble")
(Second Entity: "Marble.com, Inc."
Beker Escalante stated he was appearing before the Board to request approval to
qualify a second entity.
Michael Ossorio stated the Applicant currently qualified MKA Finishing, Inc. and
had applied to qualify Marble.com, Inc. for both tile & marble and for cabinet
installation.
Gary McNally referenced a State tax lien filed in October, 2011 in the amount of
$1,022 against Marble.com, Inc. He requested an explanation.
Beker Escalante stated he was not aware of an open lien against Marble.com, Inc.
Gary McNally explained it appeared that the lien had not been released and no
documentation had been provided to verify that it had been released. He stated it was
cited on the Experian Credit Report under"Legal Filings."
Beker Escalante stated he would look into the matter and see that the lien was
released. He reiterated he would fix it.
It was noted Mr. Escalante is a 51% owner of Marble.com, Inc. and has the authority
to sign checks.
Mr. Escalante confirmed he is the President of Marble.com, Inc.
Michael Ossorio asked Mr. Escalante if the Second Entity was Marble.corn, Inc. and
not a d/b/a as it appeared in other documents.
Beker Escalante reiterated the Second Entity was Marble.com, Inc.
Terry Jerulle:
A. Who is the current Qualifier of Marble.com, Inc.
12
July 15,2015
Q. The Qualifier was Juan Mendoza—Paul Mendoza. But he is not interested in the
marble business at all.
Mr. Escalante stated since he was the Qualifier for Tarpon Tile & Marble, he felt it
would be beneficial to buy Marble.com, Inc. because of the clients list and because
Tarpon Tile & Marble had successfully worked with Marble.com, Inc. in the past.
Terry Jerulle:
Q. You said Mr. Mendoza was the Qualifier. Is he no longer qualifying Marble.com,
Inc.?
A. It is my understanding he would still qualify the company until the end of this
month or until I can become the Qualifier.
Q. Why did you purchase Marble.com, Inc.?
A. I had done business with them before—their clientele is really great—they do a
lot of jobs with BCB Homes which is a very big company. Tarpon has also
worked with BCB but Marble.com has a bigger share of the market. I would buy
their assets and get a good share of the market.
Q. One of the concerns that I have is that Marble.com does flooring and your current
business also does flooring.
A. Yes, sir. What I was looking to do is have one company focus more on tile and
marble—doing floors and showers, and the other one focus more on just marble
... maybe pool decks and granite. That's what I want—have one focus on one
thing and one focus on another thing. So I would have two corporations doing
similar things but not exactly. They already have an established name in the
market which I believe would benefit me in the long run.
Q. I was on the Marble.com website this morning and it shows that they do flooring
just like your other company.
A. In order to clarify that, did you go to Marble.com or the website itself because a
lot of people get confused with that because the name is Marble.com—that we
own the website, which we do not.
Q. No, it was the website listing you as the president.
A. Okay.
Q. They do marble and tile flooring just like MKA does.
A. Yes, sir. Well, also, they've done it in the past before—Juan is a General
Contractor so he would do pretty much anything that comes to the field—so I
know at one point, he was doing it but then for the majority of the time, he would
tell us or hand out clients to us and rather us do it because we are rather more
experienced in that market than he was. So, that's the only explanation I have for
that.
Kyle Lantz:
Q. Can you tell me about the ownership of your existing company, MKA Tile?
A. MKA Finishing.
Q. And Marble.com ... who owns MKA Finishing?
A. I own 50% of MKA Finishing.
Q. And who owns the other 50%?
13
July 15,2015
A. We have two other officers-I don't remember the numbers exactly-they each
own less than 50%-but I'm the majority shareholder for MKA as well as for
Marble.com. (51%)
Q. As so for Marble.com-who owns Marble.com?
A. There are two of us-there's me and Lisette.
Q. And the other owner of Marble.com-is that also an owner of MKA Finishing?
A. No, sir. It's totally separate.
Q. So you're the only bond between the two?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. So is it safe tosay you wanted a separate company because there are different
owners involved and you didn't want to give ownership of Marble.com to the
people who own the minority stake in MKA Finishing?
A. In a way-it could be said that way. I mean, that's not the main reason. But
that's one of the things that could help me out ... benefit me, I guess.
Richard Joslin:
Q. On the credit report, I'm confused about the principals-on one page from
Experian, for MKA Finishing, I have three directors: Mario Osorio who is the
President ...
A. Vice President ...
Q. It says President ... and Beker, which is you, as the Vice President and then it
says Alex Delgado as Secretary. Then on the Merit credit report for MKA
Finishing, it has another person listed: Mario Osorio as the Vice President, and
Beker Escalante as the President, and then it has a Ronald Segura as a Director.
A. Yes, sir. I believe there is one more current than the other because I know Alex
was a Director before but then we switched it to Segura.
Q. Okay-so which one is-they both are in 2006-they both were listed on
11/10/2006. It's two different credit reporting agencies and I'm wondering who
is ... as Vice President and then we have Segura as the other Director also.
Q. Delgado ... ?
A. Yes, while I'll be able to tell you myself that right now it's me as President, Mario
A. No, he is not a Director any longer, so that must have been-I don't know how
they got that.
Q. It says 06/23/2015 -you might want to check that out.
A. Yes, I definitely will.
Attorney Morey noted the Secretary of State's printout, dated in June, coincided with
what Mr. Escalante said in terms of the current Officers. There was a disconnect
between the credit reports and the filing ...
Beker Escalante apologized for the confusion, stating he was unaware.
Chairman White stepped down from the dais and turned the gavel over to Vice
Chairman Lykos to chair the meeting.
(Chairman White left at 10:25 AM;five voting members remained.)
KPS -R-'- €-19-%S
Vice Chairman White referenced Mr. Escalante's signed Affidavit.
Q. As the Qualifier for MKA,you are responsible for the operations of the company?
14
July 15,2015
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Does that include the financial operations of the company?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. You have the same packet that we have— is that correct?
A. Yes, I believe so, sir.
Q. Okay. If you'll go the section with the MKA bank statements. There are some
electronic transactions for which we don't have a copy—the statement just lists
that it was either put into or taken out of your account. On the first month for
May 1 through May 31, there is an item on May 5th which says, "Customer
withdrawal image"—under withdrawals and other debits --
A. Yes, sir.
• Q. We don't know who the payee was or who that money went to. I found several
checks in your statement—for$300, $500, $800—I can't read who the payee is
on those ... can you tell me who the payee is on Check#2899 for$300?
A. Yes, sir. The first one would be for Mario Peres for$300—he was the one giving
that check.
Q. Who is Mario Peres?
A. I believe at the time, he might have been an employee. Jesus Sarrat and then
you've got Turquoise Trading, LLC.
Q. The first check is for Mario Peres and he was an employee?
A. I believe so.
Q. And what would that check be for?
A. Like I said, that is not my signature—so I wouldn't have known exactly.
Q. The first question I asked you was whether or not you were financially
responsible for the company.
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And you want me to authorize you to be financially responsible for another
company? So when you come before me, I expect you to know the answer to the
answers to these questions, okay?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. The next check—who is that made out to?
A. Jesus Sarrat.
Q. And who is he?
A. Also an employee.
Q. And can you tell me what that check was made out for? What the purpose of that
$500 was?
A. What the purpose was ...?
Q. Yes.
A. I'm pretty sure it must have been a job—I mean that's the only reasonable
explanation that I have.
Q, Okay— if you skip the "Turquoise" check, there's another check. Can you tell me
who that's made out to?
A. Also another employee, sir.
Q. Okay. Then you have another check—Check#2399 for$500.
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And is that ...
A. Santiago Sarrat.
Q. That's one of the names you had from before—correct?
15
July 15,2015
A. I believe this was his brother actually.
Q. Okay—so it's another employee?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. So, what I'm seeing is—going through your bank statements for May and March
and April, I saw a lot of these checks that were written to what appear to be an
employee for an exact dollar amount.
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What I didn't see were any transactions for payroll taxes, Workers' Compensation
insurance—so my question to you is: how are these employees being paid, and
how are you paying all of your payroll taxes for the company?
A. Yes, sir. We are—we have everybody under our Workers' Comp and on our
payroll and general liability. I don't believe I have any of that information here
but our payroll is First Payroll. We have our checks and General Liability and
Workers' Comp through them.
Q. You have your Workers' Comp through who?
A. I don't believe—they offer the Workers' Comp...
Q. Who?
A. The First Payroll Choice, I believe, is the company that we get it from.
Q. You have a company that processes your payroll?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Then why do you write individual checks to individual employees?
A. That's what I'm ... I want to be able to answer you, sir.
Q. I want you to give me the right answer.
Richard Joslin asked who signed the checks and the response was, "Mario Osorio."
A. And I actually had a couple of situations with that before ... and then with me
being able to transfer and leaving him not—with him as much anymore. But ...
all the signatures are Mario's.
Q. I understand but you're the ...
A. Yes, I know. I understand that, sir.
Q. Qualifier.
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Okay. So there are several checks—not only in the month of May but also in the
months of March and April where it looks like checks were written directly to
employees. Because you have electronic transactions I don't know what these other
withdrawals were for—I'm not accusing you of anything but what I do expect you
to is to be able to explain to me when I ask about the payroll, and how the
employees are being paid; how the taxes and Workers' Comp are being paid—I
can't find that within your bank statements so I need you to be able to tell me that.
A. Like I said before, everybody is on the payroll. We have everybody under
Workers' Comp and general liability but some of these checks that aren't signed by
me ... I know—I understand that I have a financial responsibility.
Q. If you look at the bank statements from Marble.com—the company that you want
to qualify—if you look through their bank statements, you'll see that every month
there is a check written to the IRS. Their bank statements show a paper trail of
taxes being paid on a monthly basis.
16
July 15,2015
A. Yes, sir.
Q. I don't see that paper trail for your current company.
A. Okay.
Q. That raises a red flag for me. So if you don't understand your company's finances,
if you can't explain to me how people are being paid; how the taxes are being paid,
and now you ask me to let you qualify a second company? The second company
looks like they are already paying their taxes—I'm going to give you the authority
to run a second company when you can't prove to me that you're running the first
company correctly?
A. I understand, sir. Like I said, I mean, I would honestly still want you to consider
me being able to qualify this. I know the people I'm getting into have done that for
a while, too, and they know exactly what they're doing. Here with MKA, I still feel
like I am responsible for everything that goes on, so I have to do a better job with
that. But anything that has to do with the IRS or taxes I could have my accountant
pull all the information and I could present it to you as well because we do pay for
that every year and it's a good amount.
Vice Chairman Lykos stated he would not support the application to qualify a second
entity because the Applicant was not able to explain how the taxes and Workers' Comp
were paid, as well as the payroll for his employees. He suggested the Applicant
consider rescinding his application and returning at the next Board hearing—if he were
able to answer the questions and provide detailed documentation at that time proving
that the company was being properly managed.
Beker Escalante agreed, stating he was willing to return. He stated he would contact
his accountant to provide the necessary documentation to the Board. He understood the
Vice Chairman's position and apologized for not bringing the required paperwork. He
stated he would wait until the following month for the Board to reconsider his request
and asked if there were anything that he could do to keep Marble.com running and not
lose its clientele.
Vice Chairman Lykos reiterated he was not accusing Mr. Escalante of anything other
than not being able to answer his questions. He stated he had additional questions to be
addressed by Mr. Escalante when he returned.
Q. On the "Questionnaire for Qualifying a Second Entity," your answers to Questions
9, 10, and 11 did not contain the level of detail I would like to see. If you are
already working at the company, what is your salary? Don't tell me what it is going
to be a"reasonable salary"—this is asking about the company you already own and
work with. As for the new company, if you have a financial plan for that company,
how much money are you going to take out of it? I want to know that you have
reasonable expectations and a reasonable plan for running the second company or I
can't support you to run a second company.
A. So you want a dollar amount or ...?
Q. If you say, "10% of the profits," or my salary will be $1,000 per week plus a
percentage of the profit ... but I want you to prove to me that you have a handle on
the financials of the company and that you know how you're going to run it and
how you're going to be compensated for that liability and that responsibility.
A. Understood, sir.
17
July 15,2015
Q. Also, Question13 asks you to list all partners and owners of the second entity and
their positions. You list yourself and Lisette but it is important to have the
application filled out completely.
A. So I should say who is President and Vice President?
Q. Right. It's important that this portion of the application be complete.
A. Okay, understood, sir.
Q. It might be a good idea for you to clear up that tax lien before you return.
A. Okay.
Michael Ossorio confirmed Marble.com was currently qualified as a tile and marble
Company.
Vice Chairman Lykos explained several options to Mr. Escalante, i.e., the Board
could vote to approve or deny his request to qualify a Second Entity, or he could
request to rescind his application to return at another time. He asked the Applicant
what he would like to do and the response was, "I'd like to rescind my application."
Vice Chairman Lykos reiterated the Board's areas of concern to be answered by the
Applicant:
• Status of the tax lien filed against Marble.com;
• How are the employees of MKA being paid; how the payroll taxes are being
paid, and how is the Workers' Comp insurance being paid.
• The name of the payroll company.
• A letter from the payroll company explaining how the payroll is processed.
We are seeing a number of checks to individuals but we're not seeing any
checks to the payroll company.
E. James R. Blackburn—Waiver of Examination
(d/b/a "Design Custom Millwork, Inc.")
Vice Chairman Lykos asked Mr. Blackburn to provide his background information
and why the Board should consider his request to waive the examination.
James Blackburn:
• His company was formed in 1999;
• We have done architectural millwork across the U.S. —from New York to
California.
• He previously had a license in Collier County to install his company's
products which were manufactured in Sanford.
• He sold his company and its assets to Ruth's Chris' Steakhouse and went to
work for them as Director of Millwork. They purchased his facility and
upgraded it. But then everything crashed in 2007 and all development
stopped.
• He then worked for Alleghany Millwork, Lawrence, PA. He managed the
installations and 60 to 70 installers. He ran the safety program,processed the
payroll, doing a"cost plus"under DCM.
18
July 15,2015
o His first job was an Indian Reservation Casino in Oklahoma ... it was
a$20M casino with a large hotel. He supervised the millwork
installation—running trim, etc.
o He also supervised installation at the Green Briar in West Virginia
which was an 80,000 square foot bunker with nine miles of running
trim.
o He went to NY City and worked in Manhattan on a Medical Center
and a restaurant.
• He has also worked in restaurants and country clubs in Naples in 2007 and
before.
• When he returned to Naples, he purchased a building to begin manufacturing
architectural millwork. He always has a contract to manufacture for a
construction company.
• He would like to perform the installation work and has applied to reinstate his
license.
• He has continued to remain active in the business.
• He has retained a payroll company to handle payroll, insurance, and file taxes
on a quarterly basis. He has also retained the services of a CPA in Orlando.
Vice Chairman Lykos requested information on Mr. Blackburn's previous license.
Michael Ossorio:
• It is a cabinet/millwork installation license.
• He passed the Business Procedures test.
• The County has no objection to renewing his license without requiring further
examination which would be superfluous to his work.
Mr. Blackburn stated he was prepared to pay the required fees of$760 to obtain his
license.
Vice Chairman Lykos asked the Applicant to confirm that during the time his
license was expired that he stayed active in his industry.
A. Yes, sir, that is correct.
Kyle Lantz asked why the Applicant did not want to take the test.
A. I didn't think it would be necessary. I did have a license here. I'm very qualified
to do what I do at a high level. I have million dollar contracts and I have a lot of
happy clients. I have a wonderful reputation from Boston to California, including
the State of Florida. My business is in Seminole County, north of Orlando, and I
have worked in every theme park over there.
Richard Joslin:
Q. Are you planning on working in other counties, besides Collier County?
A. Yes.
Q. You know this is just a County license—correct?
A. I have licenses in other counties, i.e., Seminole County, and I will be applying for
a license in Orange County. It will be based upon what jobs I have going on.
19
July 15, 2015
Richard Blackburn stated he was also licensed by the City of Sanford in Seminole
County.
Vice Chairman Lykos noted the only test required was the Business & Law exam; a
trades test was not required. He also noted the credit report reflected that the
Applicant was capable of managing his business.
Richard Joslin moved to approve granting the Applicant's request for a Waiver of
Examination and to reinstate his license. Gary McNally offered a Second in
support of the motion. Carried unanimously, 5—0.
IX. REPORTS:
(None)
X. NEXT MEETING DATE: Wednesday, August 19, 2015
BCC Chambers, 3` Floor—Administrative Building "F,"
Government Complex, 3301 E. Tamiami Trail, Naples, FL
There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned
by the order of the Vice Chairman at 11:30 AM.
COLLIER COUNTY CONTRACTORS'
LICENSING BOARD
1L�'t L LL
HOMAS LYKOS, ' ice Chairman
The Minutes were approved by the Committee Chair/Vice Chair on Aki'.or (q , 2015,
"as submitted" [ 1 OR "as amended" { ].
20