The URL can be used to link to this page

CEB Minutes 11/20/2015 November 20, 2015 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD Naples, Florida, November 20, 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 Robert Ashton Ron Doino Gerald J. Lefebvre James Lavinski Lionel L'Esperance Tony Marino Lisa Chapman Bushnell (Alternate) Sue Curley (Alternate) ALSO PRESENT: Kerry Adams, Code Enforcement Tamara Lynne Nicola, Attorney to the Board Page 1 CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AGENDA Date: November 20, 2015 at 9:00 A.M. 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 GRANTED 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 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. 1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 2. ROLL CALL Robert Kaufman, Chair Gerald Lefebvre, Vice Chair Lionel L' Esperance Tony Marino 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. October 22, 2015 Hearing 5. PUBLIC HEARINGSIMOTIONS A. Motions Motion for Continuance Ron Doino James Lavinski Robert Ashton Lisa Chapman Bushnell, Alternate Sue Curley, Alternate Motion for Extension of Time 1. CASE NO: CESD20150009967 OWNER: ANTONIO BARAJAS & VIRGINIA BARAJAS OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR JAMES KINCAID VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE 04 -41, AS AMENDED, SECTION 10.02.06 (B)(1)(A).UNPERMITTED STRUCTURES /IMPROVEMENTS ON IMPROVED RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY CONSISTING OF BUT NOT LIMITED TO ADDITIONS TO REAR OF PROPERTY, NEW STRUCTURE AT FRONT OF PROPERTY AND CANOPIES. FOLIO NO: 62042080000 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 5341 MCCARTY ST, NAPLES 2. CASE NO: CEV20150009209 OWNER: ANTONIO BARAJAS & VIRGINIA BARAJAS OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR JAMES KINCAID VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY CODE LAWS AND ORDINANCES, CHAPTER 130, ARTICLE III, SECTIONS 130 -97(2) AND 130 -97 (3). COMMERCIAL TRUCK(S) AND TRAILER(S) STORED/PARKED ON IMPROVED RESIDENTIAL ZONED PROPERTY IN VIOLATION OF COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCES. FOLIO NO: 62042080000 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 5341 MCCARTY ST, NAPLES 3. CASE NO: CELU20150010274 OWNER: ANTONIO BARAJAS & VIRGINIA BARAJAS OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR JAMES KINCAID VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE 04 -41, AS AMENDED, SECTION 2.02.03. OUTSIDE STORAGE OF ITEMS CONSISTING OF BUT NOT LIMITED TO CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL, VEGETATIVE DEBRIS, PALLETS, TIRES, APPLIANCE(S), PLUMBING FIXTURE AND SCRAP METAL ON IMPROVED RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY. FOLIO NO: 62042080000 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 5341 MCCARTY ST, NAPLES B. Stipulations C. Hearings 1. CASE NO: CESD20140006223 OWNER: HENRY PEREZ OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR ERIC SHORT VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE 04 -41, SECTION 10.02.06 (B)(1)(A).A VACANT UNFINISHED HOME WITH AN EXPIRED PERMIT. FOLIO NO: 39895880008 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 2665 OIL WELL RD, NAPLES 2 2. 3. 4. CASE NO: CELU20150013042 OWNER: N -A PROPERTIES LLC OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR DELICIA PULSE VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE 04 -41 AS AMENDED, SECTION 2.02.03 AND SECTION 4.02.12(A). VEHICLES BEING STORED ON PROPERTY (NO SCREENING). FOLIO NO: 34758000043 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 4273 ENTERPRISE AVE, NAPLES CASE NO: CESD20150011591 OWNER: JOSE G CUEVAS OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR ERIC SHORT VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE 04 -41 AS AMENDED, SECTION 10.02.06 (B)(1)(A) AND 10.02.06 (B)(1)(E)(I). A VACANT UN- OCCUPIED HOME WITH NO CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. FOLIO NO: 39592820002 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 4230 8TH ST NE, NAPLES CASE NO: CESD20130003491 OWNER: OASIS AT NAPLES, THE A CONDOMINIUM OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR JONATHAN MUSSE VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE 04 -41,AS AMENDED SECTION10.02.06(B)(1)(A)& 2007 FLORIDA BUILDING CODE, CHAPTER 1, SECTION 110.4. 12 EXPIRED BUILDING PERMITS ON PROPERTY AS LISTED PRBD20120101429, 20120101430, 20120101431, 20120101432, 20120101433, 20120101434, 20120101435, 20120101436, 20120101437, 20120101438 ,20120101439,2012010145. FOLIO NO: 238446009 VIOLATION ADDRESS: ARBOUR WALK CIR, NAPLES 5. CASE NO: CEVR20150017400 OWNER: SALVATORE AGRUSA & VIVIAN AGRUSA OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR MICHAELLE CROWLEY VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE 04 -41, SECTION 3.05.08(C). PROHIBITED EXOTIC VEGETATION, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, BRAZILIAN PEPPER AND AIR POTATO, UPON A PROPERTY DEVELOPED AFTER 1991, AND FOR WHICH THERE IS A REQUIREMENT TO KEEP THE PROPERTY EXOTICS -FREE IN PERPETUITY. FOLIO NO: 41933880000 ADDRESS: 6157 GOLDEN OAKS LN, NAPLES 6. CASE NO: CENA20150006292 OWNER: CCF LP OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR MICHAELLE CROWLEY VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY CODE LAWS AND ORDINANCES, CHAPTER 54, ARTICLE VI, SECTION 54- 185(D). PRESENCE OF PROHIBITED EXOTIC VEGETATION, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO EARLEAF ACACIA AND BRAZILIAN PEPPER, LOCATED UPON UNIMPROVED PROPERTY WITHIN 200 -FOOT RADIUS OF IMPROVED RESIDENTIALLY PROPERTY. THIS PARCEL CONTAINS A UTILITY EASEMENT TO FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT. FOLIO NO: 292960000 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 220 GARFIELD ST, NAPLES 7. CASE NO: CENA20150008263 OWNER: 333 INVESTMENTS LAND TRUST, OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR MICHAELLE CROWLEY VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY CODE LAWS AND ORDINANCES, CHAPTER 54, ARTICLE VI, SECTION 54- 185(D). PROHIBITED EXOTIC VEGETATION, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO EARLEAF ACACIA AND BRAZILIAN PEPPER, LOCATED UPON UNIMPROVED PROPERTY WITHIN 200 -FOOT RADIUS OF IMPROVED RESIDENTIALLY PROPERTY. FOLIO NO: 288040002 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 1450 WHIPPOORWILL LANE, NAPLES 8. CASE NO: CEV20150013943 OWNER: JACK O'CONNOR OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR PATRICK BALDWIN VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY CODE LAWS AND ORDINANCES, CHAPTER 130, ARTICLE III, SECTION 130- 95.SEVERAL UNLICENSED VEHICLES AND TRAILERS ON THE ESTATES ZONED PROPERTY. FOLIO NO: 37164160008 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 230 5TH ST SW, NAPLES 9. CASE NO: CESD20150013948 OWNER: JACK O'CONNOR OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR PATRICK BALDWIN VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE 04 -41 AS AMENDED, SECTION 10.02.06 (B)(1)(A) AND 10.02.06 (B)(1)(E)(I).TWO UNPERMITTED STRUCTURES, A STEEL BUILDING AND TED SHED TYPE STRUCTURE WITHOUT COLLIER COUNTY BUILDING PERMITS. FOLIO NO: 37164160008 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 2305 TH ST SW, NAPLES B. Motion for Reduction of Fines/Lien. 6. OLD BUSINESS A. Motion for Imposition of Fines/Liens 1. CASE NO: CESD20150009967 OWNER: ANTONIO BARAJAS & VIRGINIA BARAJAS OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR JAMES KINCAID VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE 04 -41, AS AMENDED, SECTION 10.02.06 (B)(1)(A).UNPERMITTED STRUCTURES /IMPROVEMENTS ON IMPROVED RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY CONSISTING OF BUT NOT LIMITED TO ADDITIONS TO REAR OF PROPERTY, NEW STRUCTURE AT FRONT OF PROPERTY AND CANOPIES. FOLIO NO: 62042080000 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 5341 MCCARTY ST, NAPLES 2. CASE NO: CEV20150009209 OWNER: ANTONIO BARAJAS & VIRGINIA BARAJAS OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR JAMES KINCAID VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY CODE LAWS AND ORDINANCES, CHAPTER 130, ARTICLE III, SECTIONS 130 -97(2) AND 130 -97 (3). COMMERCIAL TRUCK(S) AND TRAILER(S) STORED/PARKED ON IMPROVED RESIDENTIAL ZONED PROPERTY IN VIOLATION OF COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCES. FOLIO NO: 62042080000 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 5341 MCCARTY ST, NAPLES 3. CASE NO: CELU20150010274 OWNER: ANTONIO BARAJAS & VIRGINIA BARAJAS OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR JAMES KINCAID VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE 04 -41, AS AMENDED, SECTION 2.02.03. OUTSIDE STORAGE OF ITEMS CONSISTING OF BUT NOT LIMITED TO CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL, VEGETATIVE DEBRIS, PALLETS, TIRES, APPLIANCE(S), PLUMBING FIXTURE AND SCRAP METAL ON IMPROVED RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY. FOLIO NO: 62042080000 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 5341 MCCARTY ST, NAPLES 4. CASE NO: CEROW20150001263 OWNER: 5681 DOGWOOD LLC OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR VIRGNAIE GIGUERE VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, ORDINANCES, CHAPTER 110 ROAD & BRIDGES, ARTICLE II. CONSTRUCTION IN PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAYS, DIVISION 1 GENERALLY SECTION 110 -30. CULVERT PIPE HAS FAILED AND IS RUSTED THROUGH. FOLIO NO: 38341320000 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 6 81 DOGWOOD WAY, NAPLES 5. CASE NO: CESD20150009975 OWNER: JOHN L ROBERT CIPOLLA & LESLIE RICCIARDELLI OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR DELICIA PULSE VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE 04-41, AS AMENDED, SECTION 10.02.06 (B)(1)(A)AND(E).ACTIVE CONSTRUCTION OF ADDITION AND NO COLLIER COUNTY BUILDING PERMIT OBTAINED. FOLIO NO: 24120480007 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 264 BURNING TREE DR, NAPLES 6. CASE NO: CESD20150002839 OWNER: KENNETH M SECHRIST & JANET M SECHRIST & MARJORIE A CUNNINGHAM TR M. A. CUNNINGHAM REV TRUST, OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR STEVEN LOPEZ- SILVERO VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE 04-41, AS AMENDED, SECTION 10.02.06(B)(1)(A). AN ENCLOSED LIVING SPACE ADDED TO AN EXISTING SINGLE -WIDE MOBILE HOME WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE REQUIRED PERMIT(S), INSPECTIONS, AND CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. FOLIO NO: 30055001422 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 414 PAPAYA ST UNIT C, GOODLAND 7. CASE NO: CESD20140025741 OWNER: STEVEN R CUIFFO OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR PATRICK BALDWIN VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE 04 -41, AS AMENDED, SECTION 10.02.06 (13)(1)(A). A MOBILE HOME TYPE STRUCTURE WAS ADDED TO THE PROPERTY BETWEEN 2012 AND 2013 WITH NO VALID COLLIER COUNTY PERMITS. FOLIO NO: 436720006 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 308 MORGAN RD, NAPLES 8. CASE NO: CEPM20140025426 OWNER: LYNNE V CADENHEAD OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR CHRISTOPHER AMBACH VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES, CHAPTER 22 BUILDINGS AND BUILDING REGULATIONS, ARTICLE VI PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE, SECTION 22- 231(12)(Q) AND SECTION 22 -236. A VACANT RESIDENTIAL HOME DECLARED DANGEROUS BY THE COLLIER COUNTY BUILDING OFFICIAL. FOLIO NO: 74414040006 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 3414 CHEROKEE ST, NAPLES 9. CASE NO: CESD20140012494 OWNER: LYNNE V CADENHEAD OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR SHIRLEY GARCIA VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES, CHAPTER 22, ARTICLE VI, SECTION 22 -236 AND COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE 04 -41, AS AMENDED, SECTION 10.02.06(B)(1)(A). A PRIMARY STRUCTURE WITH UNPERMITTED ALTERATIONS IN POOR CONDITION AND AN UNPERMITTED TWO -STORY STORAGE STRUCTURE IN POOR CONDITION. FOLIO NO: 74413200009 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 3417 CHEROKEE ST, NAPLES B. Motion to Rescind Previously Issued'Order C. 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 - January 29, 2016 12. ADJOURN November 20, 2015 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. I'd like to call the Code Enforcement Board to order. If you have a cell phone, you may want to silence it at this time. And if you'll all rise for the Pledge. (The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. 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 require 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. And if we can start with the roll call. MS. ADAMS: Mr. Robert Kaufman? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Here. MS. ADAMS: Gerald Lefebvre? MR. LEFEBVRE: Here. MS. ADAMS: Mr. Lionel L'Esperance? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Here. MS. ADAMS: Mr. Tony Marino? MR. MARINO: Here. MS. ADAMS: Mr. Ron Doino? MR. DOINO: Here. MS. ADAMS: Mr. James Lavinski? Page 2 November 20, 2015 MR. LAVINSKI: Here. MS. ADAMS: Mr. Robert Ashton? MR. ASHTON: Here. MS. ADAMS: Ms. Lisa Chapman Bushnell? MS. BUSHNELL: Here. MS. ADAMS: Ms. Sue Curley? MS. CURLEY: Here. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. A little bit out of order. Let's do the approval of the minutes from the last meeting. Any comments from the Board or any motions on the minutes from the last meeting? MR. ASHTON: Make a motion to approve the minutes. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second to approve. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. ASHTON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Thank you. We're up to the approval of the agenda. Do we have any changes? MS. ADAMS: Yes. No. 5, public hearings, motions, Letter A, motions, motion for extension of time. We have one addition. It's from imposition of fines No. 4, Tab 13, Case CEROW20150001263, 5681 Dogwood, LLC. Page 3 November 20, 2015 Letter B, stipulations, we have six additions. The first is No. 1 from hearings, Tab 1, Case CESD20140006223, Henry Perez. The second is No. 4 from hearings, Tab 4, Case CESD20130003491, Oasis at Naples, the A Condominium. The third is No. 3 from hearings, Tab 3, Case CESD20150011591, Jose G. Cuevas. The fourth is No. 8 from hearings, Tab 8, Case CEV20150013943, Jack O'Connor. The fifth is No. 9 from hearings, Tab 9, Case CESD20150013948, Jack O'Connor. And the sixth is No. 7 from hearings, Tab 7, CENA20150008263, 333 Investments Land Trust. Letter C, hearings, No. 2, Tab 2, Case CELU20150013042, N-A Properties, LLC, has been withdrawn. Number 6, old business, Letter A, motion for imposition of fines/liens. Number 6, Tab 15, Case CESD20150002839, Kenneth M. Seacrest, Janet M. Seacrest, and Marjorie A. Cunningham, Trustee, M.A. Cunningham Revocable Trust, has been withdrawn, and that's all the changes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Can I get a motion from the Board to accept the modified agenda? MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to accept. MR. MARINO: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. Page 4 November 20, 2015 MR. ASHTON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Which brings us to the motions for extension of time. We have three of them. We'll probably hear them one at a time and vote on them separately. MS. ADAMS: Okay. The first one is from Tab 10, Case No. CESD20150009967, Antonio Barajas and Virginia Barajas. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. Could you mention your name on the microphone so we can -- MS. BARAJAS: Virginia Barajas. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And? MR. BARAJAS: Antonio Barajas. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. I see that you're requesting an extension of time. Why don't you let us know what the story is. MS. BARAJAS: We have requested an extension for these fine citations that we received. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Can you pull the microphone down a little bit. There you go. Now I can see you and hear you. MS. BARAJAS: The purpose of it, because we still need a little bit more time. I already went to code enforcement and applied for the application for demolition, and they told me it takes about a week for it to get approved. So we're waiting on that because they told us I can't demolish anything without the permit. We have cleared up some of the debris, and we've cut down the ficus and all that, but we're doing it little by little, but we are doing as much as we can as fast as we can. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. I wanted to -- God bless you. Put that in the minutes. Page 5 November 20, 2015 The first case, Tab 10, for the Board is different than the other two. One of the cases was for debris, another case was for vehicles, et cetera. And I see that in your request for time you're looking for six months. MS. BARAJAS: Correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It's going to take you six months to clean up the debris? MS. BARAJAS: No, no. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So -- and this has been going on since August. MS. BARAJAS: Correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: What has been done as far as -- MS. BARAJAS: We pretty much cleaned up in the backyard. It's -- I don't know if Mr. Kincaid has come through the other side of the street and saw. I didn't take any pictures, but the canopies are gone also. We've pretty much taken out everything. We're like -- I would say we've done, like, 60 percent of it cleaning it up, and we are still cleaning up more. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Now, the first case is the unpermitted structures. You spoke to that. MS. BARAJAS: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You have applied for a -- MS. BARAJAS: Yes. Yes, I did. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. BARAJAS: And I'm just waiting for them -- because they told me once I put in the application, they have to look at it, and then they decide if they approve it or not. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You're trying to get a permit after the fact; is this it? MS. BARAJAS: For -- to demolish. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: For the structures. What are they, Page 6 November 20, 2015 sheds -- or are you going to take them down? MS. BARAJAS: We're going to take them down, yeah. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So let's just stay on this one case now. We're going to hear from the county, and then we'll go to the next case, okay? Mr. Kincaid? Good morning. MR. KINCAID: Good morning, Board Members. They have applied for a permit on the 16th of this month. The permit is to include the demo of the carport storage room on the left and right and demo of an extra shed on -- I believe it's on the right. It's under review status, so it should be -- I don't see any reason why it wouldn't be approved, so it should be ready to go. They should be able to start. It's true, they technically are not supposed to do anything before the permit's issued. So the county has no objection to extending it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is this an -- I don't think -- you can build a house in six months. I don't think it takes that much time to do the demo. Do you have any idea of how long do you think it would take to do the demo? MR. KINCAID: I don't know how they're going to approach it. I don't know if they're going to try to do it themselves or if they're going to do it with a contractor. I think the permit was an owner contract, so I'm assuming that they're going to try to do it themselves and save the money to do that. I think the larger structure on the front, kind of the carport structure that was built should be something that could be taken down quickly. The others I think are storage areas, so I'm assuming they're going to have to find someplace to put whatever they have in them. So maybe a little bit more time on that, but some of it could be done quickly. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So on this particular case as Page 7 November 20, 2015 far as the permits that you have for the demo, how long do you think it's going to take to do that, this one portion? MS. BARAJAS: Of demolition? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. MS. BARAJAS: Four months. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Four months? Okay. Comments from the Board? MR. ASHTON: I've got a question. This was back in August. You knew you had to get a permit for the demo, and you're just taking it now? You took it out this month? MS. BARAJAS: For the application? MR. ASHTON: For the demo permit. MS. BARAJAS: As you can see on the request, that I had asked because I have been sick, and it's just us two, so we can't do it altogether. And I have been struggling with my illness, and now I'm getting back better, so that's why I'm asking for this extension. MR. ASHTON: The question is why it took you so long to get the permit since you knew in August you had to do this. MS. BARAJAS: I understand. That -- I can take the fault for that. But like I said, I haven't been able to get up and around, but now lam able to. MR. KINCAID: Sir, if I could add, they actually hired somebody, a Mr. Sarmiento, that was working with them, and I think at the beginning they were trying to salvage at least one of the storage areas, and he was working on the possibility of getting a permit and leaving that on the site, so I think that may have taken -- you know, I'm not trying to influence anything here, but I think that they actually were working at least to determine what their options were as far as taking something down or being able to keep it. MR. MARINO: I'd like to go ahead and give them the six-month extension. Page 8 November 20, 2015 MR. L'ESPERANCE: I'll second that. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a motion to provide six months continuance. I guess that's what you're asking for? MR. MARINO: Continuance on this particular case, yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any comments on the motion? MR. LEFEBVRE: I think six months is very excessive. I'd be more agreeable to three. MR. LAVINSKI: Yeah. I agree, six months is a little on the long side under the circumstances. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I agree as well. Any comments from any of the other board members? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Would the motion maker be willing to amend his motion? MR. MARINO: I'll make it four months, but I kind of believe that she was ill and took a little bit of time, and they're trying. And as the county says, they did have somebody there and they were doing something. I'll drop it to four months, but I won't go to three months. MR. L'ESPERANCE: I'll second the motion for four months. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Any further discussion? MR. LAVINSKI: I would agree that's reasonable. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. ASHTON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So for this particular case, to Page 9 November 20, 2015 finish those permits, four months. MS. BARAJAS: Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you have the dates, by the way, on -- for 2016, we have no meeting in December. The January meeting is what date? MS. ADAMS: The 29th. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So March 24th would be the date, if I figured this out correctly. MS. ADAMS: That's correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So you'll have this one done by March 24th. Okay. That moves us to Tab 11 for us, the second case. MS. ADAMS: The next case is from Tab 11, Case CEV20150009209. (The speakers were previously duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. This is the case that has commercial trucks/trailers stored on the property. Are they still stored there? MS. BARAJAS: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And you need how much time to remove them? MR. BARAJAS: I don't know that one because I know a lot around in the neighbors, and I don't have a place to put it. And I have -- I don't have a lot of work. I don't have a lot of people work for me, just one, and I don't know why I can't keep it there. I make room in the back, and I think I have room to put in the back of the house. And I finish cleaning all the stuff. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, you'll find that $100 a day or whatever the fine would be is an expensive parking spot. So you may want to find a place to put this. Page 10 November 20, 2015 Now, these have been there since August, and all they need to be is driven off the property. So to have six months to remove the vehicles, I think, is out of line. These need to be done sooner, in my estimation. Mr. Kincaid, your comments? MR. KINCAID: I think I would just let you-all decide. I mean, it -- I don't know what their financial abilities are, but it's a violation of the code, and that's -- we've established that. They've got to move them somewhere at some point in time. MR. BARAJAS: You clean all the neighbors or just my house? This personal or this for everybody? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Everybody. MR. BARAJAS: Yeah, when it start everybody, I can do. That's right. MS. BARAJAS: What he's trying to say, that there's a lot of vehicles, company trucks out there, and -- MR. BARAJAS: There's a lot of people around. I don't know if this personal. I don't know what happened. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, we can only -- MS. BARAJAS: I understand. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- work on the cases that are before us. Because everybody else has it or many, many other people have it, we can't base this response on all the others. At one time or another they'll probably come before the Board for resolution. MR. MARINO: You've tried finding places, storage lots all over Naples? MS. BARAJAS: Yeah. They charge too much and -- MR. MARINO: J&C Boulevard, Trade Center, there's empty lots that are looking for people. MS. BARAJAS: We've asked around and, of course, we have to pay monthly. Not only they charge for the truck, they also charge for Page 11 November 20, 2015 the trailer, so -- MR. MARINO: Yeah. MR. DOINO: Right. MR. MARINO: How many vehicles are you talking about? MS. BARAJAS: It's just two. MR. BARAJAS: Two. MR. MARINO: Just two? MS. BARAJAS: Uh-huh. MR. MARINO: Have you tried J&C Boulevard, Trade Boulevard where the empty lots are for storage? I mean, you know, like he said, $100 a day for a fine compared to what you're going to pay per month, you know, it's not going to cost you $3,000 a month to store a trailer and a truck. I would try to find a place to have somewhere down there. MS. BARAJAS: We'll remove them today. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So how about on this particular one if we give you till January to resolve this situation? That's our next meeting. MS. BARAJAS: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You should be able to get them moved. Maybe Santa needs a truck or something that you can lend him. MR. LEFEBVRE: I make a motion for 60 days continuance. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. MR. MARINO: Second. MS. BARAJAS: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a second. Any comments on the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. Page 12 November 20, 2015 MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. ASHTON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Okay. Which brings us to Tab 12. MS. ADAMS: The next case is Tab 12, Case CELU20150010274. (The speakers were previously duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And this one is outside storage of items, vegetable debris, pallets, tires, appliances, plumbing fixtures, et cetera. You said that you've cleaned up a lot of that? MS. BARAJAS: We've cleaned up a lot of that, yeah. He can tell you -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. You know that when you clean this stuff up, you should call so that they can come out and look and see -- if it's abated, it's abated. Okay. MR. KINCAID: They have done a lot of work. Like she said, they have cut down the hedges and pulled a lot of the litter out of the hedges, and then all the stuff that was on the back property line, that's been cleaned up. And they've pretty much confined most of the storage, like, to one area now, and so the rest of the lot's been worked over pretty well. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So you'd say it's 80 percent done? MR. KINCAID: I'd say 70 to 80 percent. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And you need some time to Page 13 November 20, 2015 do the other? MS. BARAJAS: Yes. MR. LEFEBVRE: I make a motion that we grant a 60-day continuance. MR. MARINO: Second. MR. DOINO: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second to grant 60-day continuance on this. Any comments on the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. ASHTON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Thank you. So just to -- in summary, the first case, you have until March, March 24th. The next two cases you have till January. MS. BARAJAS: Right. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And the date of January is the 29th, I believe. Okay. MS. BARAJAS: Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you. MS. ADAMS: The next motion for extension of time is from imposition of fines, No. 4, Tab 13, case CEROW20150001263, 5681 Dogwood, LLC. Page 14 November 20, 2015 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a revised page that was sitting at our seat when we got here. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. This is a case of a culvert pipe that has failed, rusted through. Respondent is not here to request this. Can you tell us what they're looking for? MS. PEREZ: Good morning. For the record, Cristina Perez with code enforcement. When I spoke to Gary Haim, the property owner -- he's the registered agent and property owner for 5681 Dogwood, LLC -- he wasn't specific in how much time he needed, just said a couple of weeks. He was hoping to get the work done by this past weekend. I did receive an email from him; I was copied on an email that he sent to staff, what he was trying to communicate with the right-of-way department, and I wasn't copied on any responses. So I didn't speak with him yesterday to see if he was able to get the information he needed from staff. He was asking for some clarification as to what exact repairs they were requesting of him. He does have a permit. The permit has been issued. It was issued in July of 2015. And when he first came, his reasoning for wanting a lengthy time frame was because of the rain, and he wanted a dry culvert -- or dry swale to be able to do the work he needed to do. When I spoke with him last week, he did tell me he -- there was still some water in his swale from a recent rain, so he wasn't able to complete the work as needed, so his permit is still open. He hasn't received any inspections. And the expiration date for this permit is January 11, 2016. You know, if you do grant some type of continuance or extension, his time is around the corner for that permit. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Is this a typical culvert pipe that goes underneath the driveway entrance to the property? Page 15 November 20, 2015 MS. PEREZ: Yes. On the owner's behalf, he is working on five different permits. He purchased this property with several permitting violations already. He has another code case that is also -- has been brought before you and is accruing daily fines, and that is a much bigger, you know, code case than this one. So just in his defense, he does have a lot of stuff going on financially and, you know, just with all the work that needs to be done on this property. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And he said he was looking for two or three weeks? MS. PEREZ: He just said a couple weeks, so -- MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion for 60 days. MR. DOINO: Second. MR. MARINO: Second. MR. LEFEBVRE: That way the permit will be hopefully -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Permit on the 11th and our meeting on the 29th, okay. Any comments on the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do we have a second on that motion? MR. DOINO: Yep. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. ASHTON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? Page 16 November 20, 2015 (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Thanks, Cristina. MS. ADAMS: The next case is from Letter B, stipulations, No. 1, Tab 1, Case CESD20140006223, Henry Perez. MR. SHORT: For the record, Senior Investigator Eric Short, Collier County Code Enforcement. It is agreed between the parties that the respondent shall pay operational costs in the amount of$65.43 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing and abate all violations by obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition permit, inspections, and certificate of completion or occupancy within 90 days of this hearing or a fine of$200 per day will be imposed until the violation is abated. Respondent must notify Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance. That 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 agreement, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Is there any -- is this property vacant right now, or is it occupied? MR. SHORT: It is vacant. MR. LEFEBVRE: Construction. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Well, that doesn't mean anything. MR. LEFEBVRE: A couple questions. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Go ahead. MR. LEFEBVRE: I'm sorry for interrupting. Page 17 November 20, 2015 Why so long between when it was originally observed, the first violation, March 27, 2014, to the reinspection, Question No. 1? MR. SHORT: He has had three 90-day extensions on the permit, so the permit was valid in between. MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay. And it has since expired? MR. SHORT: It has since expired. MR. LEFEBVRE: How far along is the house? MR. SHORT: There's a lot of inspections remaining. MR. LEFEBVRE: Give me a description. Is it blocked in? Is it weather tight? MR. SHORT: It's the shell with a roof MR. LEFEBVRE: So 90 days probably is not a -- MR. SHORT: Probably not. If he were to reapply, he would get a 90-day extension and -- on the permit. MR. LEFEBVRE: Right. But why only 90 days for the stipulation? MR. SHORT: Like you had mentioned, this case has been going on for a while, and we want to get a record in place -- or an order in place and -- MR. LEFEBVRE: Put his feet to the fire? MR. SHORT: That's right. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Technical term. MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay. I'm usually on the other end where I'm looking for a shorter time frame, not a longer time frame, but okay. MR. LAVINSKI: Is it realistic to think this is going to be in 90 days? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: No. MR. SHORT: No. MR. MARINO: How much time do you think he needs? MR. SHORT: He needs quite a bit of time. Like I said, it's a shell with a roof. There's some framing done inside. A lot of inspections to Page 18 November 20, 2015 go. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Was he here today? MR. SHORT: Yesterday, actually. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: No, no, no, I mean today. MR. SHORT: Oh, no. No. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So he agreed to the stipulation prior to today. MR. SHORT: Yeah. He was going out of town for the holidays. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. LEFEBVRE: Oh, so that makes 90 days even less likely. MR. DOINO: Definitely. MR. SHORT: Just for next week, I guess. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, I would think if we provided some time and then the fines start accruing, that's the ultimate motivational tool that seems to move projects along quickly. MR. MARINO: I'd make a motion for 120 days and see what happens. MR. LEFEBVRE: Well, we can't amend, if not I'm mistaken, the stipulation without him agreeing to it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's correct. MR. LEFEBVRE: So we probably should stick to the stipulated agreement. MR. LAVINSKI: Well, at least the fine would start after 90 days, right? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's correct. MS. NICOLA: Why not? MR. LEFEBVRE: Because he would have to agree to it. MS. NICOLA: I don't think that -- I mean, maybe I'm wrong about this, but I can't imagine that somebody would object to a longer period of time. I would say that if you were suggesting a shorter period of time, sure, but a longer period of time? I mean -- Page 19 November 20, 2015 MR. LEFEBVRE: Probably not. MS. NICOLA: -- I don't know why you couldn't amend it to extend it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I disagree with you because let's say that this is a neighbor that reported this, so 90 days -- or to make it longer than 90 days may make this respondent more satisfied, but it may make somebody else less satisfied, so I agree with Mr. Lefebvre. MS. NICOLA: That's always true. Isn't that always true? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: What's here is here, and we either need to approve this or not approve that. MR. LEFEBVRE: Do we have a motion for 90 days? MR. MARINO: I'll make a motion for 90 days. MR. LEFEBVRE: I'll second that motion. MR. MARINO: I'll drop it to 90. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second to agree to the stipulation as written, which is 90 days. Any discussion on the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hearing none, all those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. ASHTON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. MR. SHORT: Thank you. MS. ADAMS: The next case is No. 4 from hearings, Tab 4, the Page 20 November 20, 2015 next stipulation, Case CESD20130003491, Oasis at Naples, the A Condominium. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. MR. MUSSE: Morning. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. MR. ORTEGA: Members of the Board, ladies and gentlemen, I'm here to represent the Oasis Condominium. We're requesting a 60-day extension for permits that were expired. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Most of us know you, but state your name for the record. MR. ORTEGA: My name is Herminio Ortega. I apologize. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And I say that because this gentleman was on the Board in his past life here. Okay. You're requesting 60 days. One of the things that I'm noticing on this is that this violation goes back 33 months, which is quite a long time, and it was an expired -- I guess, an expired permit. MR. ORTEGA: This particular project -- we just got involved about a couple months ago -- it started in 2012. The case started in 2013, I believe. So for whatever reason, this continuing act, nobody knew what to do, how to go about it. And I think it's like the right hand trying to tell the left hand what to do. We've done in one month what they haven't been able to do in two years. MR. LEFEBVRE: What are these permits for? MR. ORTEGA: They are for inspections by engineer, because they did the work, and it was never inspected by the Building Department. MR. LEFEBVRE: What kind of work? MR. ORTEGA: It's all renovation work, repair work. MR. LEFEBVRE: Was it when they purchased the community? MR. ORTEGA: No. This was lanais. So it has to do with the Page 21 November 20, 2015 association, not the individual owners. MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Any problem with safety on this? MR. ORTEGA: Not at all. The work is done. All that's needed right now is to turn in the engineer's letter, which is occurring on Monday. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So that's the permit by affidavit? MR. ORTEGA: It's not really a permit by affidavit because there was a permit pulled. So what we did instead was what they call inspection in lieu of building department by engineer. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And the county says? MR. MUSSE: It is agreed between the parties that the respondent shall pay the operational costs in the amount of$65.43 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/occupancy within 60 days of this hearing, or a fine of$100 per day will be imposed until the violation is abated. Respondent must notify the Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the investigator to perform a site inspection to confirm compliance. That 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 assist of the 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. Any comments from the Board? MR. ASHTON: I make a motion to accept the stipulation as written. Page 22 November 20, 2015 MR. DOINO: Second. MR. MARINO: Second. MR. LAVINSKI: (Raises hand.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and several seconds. Pick one. Any discussion on the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hearing none, all those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. ASHTON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Thank you. MR. ORTEGA: Thank you. MR. MUSSE: Thank you. MS. ADAMS: The next stipulation is No. 3 from hearings, Tab 3, Case CESD20150011591, Jose G. Cuevas. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. SHORT: Again, for the record, Senior Investigator Eric Short, Collier County Code Enforcement. It is agreed between the parties that the respondent shall, one, pay operational costs in the amount of$64.59 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing and, two, abate all violations by obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition permit, inspections, and certificate of completion or occupancy within 90 days of this hearing, or a fine of$200 per day will be imposed until Page 23 November 20, 2015 the violation is abated; Three, the respondent must notify code enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request that the investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance; Four, that 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 agreement, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Just a -- this was a home with no CO? MR. SHORT: Yes. A little different than the previous case. This home is near completion. Just the final inspections remain. He has a little holdup with LCEC running the power down to his home. Other than that, he's good to go. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Any comments from the Board? MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to accept the stipulation as written. MR. MARINO: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. ASHTON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Page 24 November 20, 2015 Thank you, Eric. MR. SHORT: Thank you. MS. ADAMS: The next stipulation is No. 8 from hearings, Tab 8, Case CEV20150013943, Jack O'Connor. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. MR. BALDWIN: Good morning. Therefore, it is agreed between the parties that the respondent shall, one, pay operational costs in the amount of$65.85 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing; Two, abate all violations by obtaining and affixing a valid license plate for each vehicle/trailer or removing unlicensed vehicle, unlicensed and/or inoperable vehicles from the property or store vehicles/trailers within the confines of a completely enclosed permitted structure within 30 days of this hearing, or a fine of$50 per day will be imposed until the violation is abated; Three, respondent must notify Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance; Four, that 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 assist of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this agreement. All costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. For the record, Investigator Patrick Baldwin. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Patrick, is this a case where just -- they just need to be driven off the property or trailered off? MR. BALDWIN: Yes. I spoke with the owner this week. He's trying to get everything off the property. He said it should be done by this weekend, but he signed the stipulation agreement just in case. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Comments from the Board? Page 25 November 20, 2015 MR. DOINO: Make a motion. MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to accepted as written. MR. MARINO: Second. MR. DOINO: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Motion and second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. ASHTON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Thanks, Patrick. MS. ADAMS: The next stipulation is No. 9 from hearings, Tab 9, Case CESD20150013948, Jack O'Connor. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. BALDWIN: For the record, Patrick Baldwin, Collier County Code Enforcement investigator. Therefore, it is agreed between the parties that the respondent shall, one, pay operational costs in the amount of$64.59 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing; Two, abate all violations by obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition permit, inspections, and certificate of completion/occupancy within 180 days of this hearing, or a fine of $200 per day will be imposed until the violation is abated; Three, the respondent must notify Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the investigator Page 26 November 20, 2015 perform a site inspection to confirm compliance; Four, that 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 assist of the 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. A couple of quick questions. Number one, this is six months to have this permitted; is that correct? MR. BALDWIN: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Number two, these buildings are being used for storage or -- MR. BALDWIN: The owner owns an asphalt company over on the east coast, so I'm told, Fort Lauderdale area. He's got a big metal quasi, I think they call it, hut in the back that has not been permitted and has been there for years. So he's going to -- he's trying to get bids to get a permit by affidavit, and he's going to remove the Ted Shed type structure because it's just small, and he has no use for it. But he did say he is going out of town for a little bit, and I thought the six months would be fair to get the quasi metal hut completely permitted. MR. LEFEBVRE: Is there a primary structure on this property? MR. BALDWIN: Yes, and a guesthouse, sir. MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: What's the zoning here? MR. BALDWIN: Estates. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is this a permitted use in the Estates? MR. BALDWIN: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Any comments from the Board? MR. ASHTON: You're giving 180 days mainly for the demolition of the shed or for having the structure -- Page 27 November 20, 2015 MR. BALDWIN: He's going to get two permits, yes. He's going to get a demolition permit for the shed, and he's going to get the other metal structure -- it's a pretty big structure -- permitted, and he's going to have to do that by permit by affidavit. He doesn't know anyone over here that will do it, so he's going to try to find people. He wasn't aware it was a violation when he bought the property. MR. DOINO: Make a motion. MR. MARINO: Second. MR. DOINO: Stated as it is. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You're making a motion to -- MR. MARINO: One hundred eighty days. MR. DOINO: One eighty days, yep. MR. MARINO: I'll second it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a motion and a second. Any discussion on the motion? MR. LAVINSKI: It just seems like a long time, especially where he's on the east coast. I'm not sure this is high on his priority list. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Call the question. MR. BALDWIN: Once he got the hearing notice, it became pretty high on his priority list, and I started to get the calls from him. We've been in contact. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Call the question, Mr. Chairman. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. ASHTON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? Page 28 November 20, 2015 (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Thanks, Patrick. MR. BALDWIN: Thank you. MS. ADAMS: The next stipulation is No. 7 from hearings, Tab 7, Case CENA20150008263, 333 Investments Land Trust. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. CROWLEY: For the record, Michaelle Crowley, Collier County Code Enforcement environmental specialist. I've met this morning with Ms. Shima Amini, who is the daughter of the owner of the property, who I have worked with since the beginning of this case at the direction of her father in his absence. He said that she had full authority to represent him and the corporation, and she is here today with the stipulation. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Why don't you read the stipulation into the record. MS. CROWLEY: Thank you. It is -- therefore, it is agreed between the parties that the respondent shall pay operational costs in the amount of$65.01 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of the hearing, abate all violations within 60 days of this hearing or pay a fine of$100 per day by removing all Collier County prohibited exotic vegetation that exists upon the property. When prohibited exotic vegetation is removed but the base of the vegetation remains, the base shall be immediately treated with a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency approved herbicide, and a visual tracer die shall be applied. Mechanical clearing of Collier County prohibited exotic vegetation shall require a vegetation removal permit. Respondent must notify code enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance and, lastly, that if the respondent Page 29 November 20, 2015 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 all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you. Good morning. MS. AMINI: Good morning. Good morning, Board Members. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Have you taken a close look at this? You can get this all done in 60 days? MS. AMINI: I sure have, yes, absolutely. I'm thinking that it will be less than that now that I've been working with Michaelle very closely, working with the contractor on site and everything. So I actually now work here. I live in Fort Lauderdale but work here, so I can go to the site once a week to check on it and make sure everything is getting done properly. MR. LEFEBVRE: It's partially cleared already. MS. AMINI: It is. It sure is. It's just over 10 acres. So we just want to make sure for unforeseen circumstances that we have 60 days instead of 30 just to make sure. MR. LEFEBVRE: Parcel just south of Mariposa,just north of Stratford. MS. AMINI: Correct, yes. MR. LEFEBVRE: With the power lines. MS. AMINI: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Any comments from the Board? MR. ASHTON: Motion to accept the stipulation as written. MR. MARINO: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. Any discussion on the motion? Page 30 November 20, 2015 (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hearing none, all those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. ASHTON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. MS. AMINI: Thank you. Have a wonderful day. MS. CROWLEY: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Moving right along. We probably should take an hour -- no. MS. ADAMS: Mr. Chairman, the investigator has requested that we take -- she has the next two cases. She requested that we take Tab 6 first -- it's just a little bit out of order -- if that's okay with the Board. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Motion to change the agenda? MR. MARINO: Make a motion to change the agenda. MR. ASHTON: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: A motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. Page 31 November 20, 2015 MR. ASHTON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It passes unanimously. MS. ADAMS: So the next case will be No. 6 from hearings, Tab 6, Case CENA20150006292, CCF LP. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. CROWLEY: I would just inform the Board this had come before the -- on the agenda for the previous month. This is the one that was also an FP&L easement. The owner of the property had been surprised to learn that they still owned the property. This is off Radio Road adjacent to the South Winds Mobile Home Park. Since the hearing notice, they have done their research and have confirmed that I was accurate, they do own the property still, the acreage. It's about 3.98 acres. And they have -- they have a representative here. The corporate office directed her to be here on their behalf. They have obtained two bids so far and are awaiting two additional bids and expect to hire a contractor within a very short period of time and will be addressing correcting the violation. So at this point, Ms. Feeney, Tammy Feeney is here and wants to request a continuance or -- for approximately 60 days to allow them to complete the clearing of the exotics. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. You made the trip. You might as well speak. MS. FEENEY: Good morning. I'm Tammy Feeney. I am actually a community manager in Naples for Hometown America. And they have asked me to represent them, since our corporate office is in Chicago. Basically, once they determined that they did own the property, they kindly asked me to get into the Yellow Pages and contact a bunch of tree services and see what I could do to get this Page 32 November 20, 2015 done very quickly, and we are hoping to have all bids in by today and to be able to pick a contractor by next week and hopefully, depending on the contractor's schedule, get this whole thing started back in -- next month, in December. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So you think it will be done by January 29th? MS. FEENEY: Oh, I have no doubt but, again, we're as good as the contractor who can fit us into his schedule. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Comments from the Board? MR. ASHTON: Michaelle, do you think in 60 days they can get this done? MS. CROWLEY: I do, primarily because in 2005 there was a previous code case that was abated for exotics, so at that time all the exotics were gone. So all we've got is 10 years regrowth. So it's not near the volume it had been on the previous parcel, the previous case, and it's very doable. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. ASHTON: Make a motion. MR. MARINO: I'll make the motion for the 60 days. MR. ASHTON: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So we have a motion to grant a continuance for 60 days. Any comments on that? (No response.) MR. LEFEBVRE: I just have a comment. So if it's abated, they don't need to come back in front of us; is that correct? MS. CROWLEY: That's correct. MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay. But if we hear the case again -- let's say if we didn't continue it and we were to hear the case, would it be better if there's a repeat offense, or is this considered a repeat offense now? Page 33 November 20, 2015 MS. CROWLEY: It did -- it did go to hearing. I didn't present that previous case. MR. LEFEBVRE: I can't remember that case. MS. CROWLEY: I don't have a lot of records from that, to be honest with you. I would feel uncomfortable, given the passage of time. I do believe, to be honest with you, in looking at the record, their previous violation was abated not by the corporate owner but by FP&L, so I'm not sure that they even were aware that they owned the property and have owned it for all these years. They believed it had been transferred along with the mobile home park after owning it for about four months. It was inadvertently omitted from the legal description when they conveyed the acreage for the mobile home park. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Well, hopefully this will be resolved by the January 29th meeting, and that will be the end of it. MR. LEFEBVRE: But if we don't -- if we don't hear the case and then they come in front of us again, then it's not a repeat offense. MS. CROWLEY: I do not believe so. Like I said, in looking at the material, we don't have a hard copy of the file anymore; I don't. And I can't prove that they were actually notified. There was nobody here on their behalf at the hearing. I would feel uncomfortable saying that they had prior notice. MR. LEFEBVRE: But I'm saying, if we don't have this go to hearing this time and we don't rule against -- you know, let's say -- if we leave it as it is, they technically didn't have a hearing and they clear the site, and three years down the road there's more exotics on the site, it's not going to be a repeat offense at that point. MS. CROWLEY: That would be correct, but I think -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I think it's -- a site to have a reoccurrence is not the same thing as an individual who has the reoccurrence. I may be wrong. Page 34 November 20, 2015 MS. CROWLEY: I know that judging by how responsive both the president has been and Tammy, the local representative, once they confirmed that, hey, we do own this property, they jumped on it immediately. I do not believe that there's going to be a recurrence. And I now have all their contact information, so -- you know, it's close to the office. When I drive by, I can just give them a call. MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay. MS. CROWLEY: And I don't believe it would ever have to resort to a follow-up hearing. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Any other comments on the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hearing none, all those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. ASHTON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Hopefully we won't see you in January. Have a good holiday. MS. FEENEY: Thank you. You as well. MS. ADAMS: The next case is No. 5 from hearings, Tab 5, Case CEVR20150017400, Salvatore Agrusa and Vivian Agrusa. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. CROWLEY: Good morning. For the record -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. MS. CROWLEY: -- again, Michaelle Crowley, Collier County Page 35 November 20, 2015 Code Enforcement environmental specialist. This is in reference to Case No. CEVR20150017400 dealing with a violation of Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 3.05.08.C, the presence of prohibited exotic vegetation including, but not limited to, Brazilian pepper and air potato upon a property developed after 1991 for which there is a requirement to keep the property free from exotics in perpetuity, located at 6157 Golden Oaks Lane, Naples, Florida, 34119; Folio No. 41933880000. Service was given on September 3, 2015. I would now like to present case evidence in the following exhibits: Three photographs taken by me on September 1, 2015, and one aerial photo taken from the Property Appraiser's website. MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to accept. MR. ASHTON: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. ASHTON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. MS. CROWLEY: The first is -- we have an aerial photograph showing the parcel. I will tell you that the red lines from the Property Appraiser's Office are slightly off the mark. You can see it. This is the worst I've ever seen. It actually includes part of the house next door. That's not accurate, but the subject house is the one on the left, not the one that's split in half by the red mark. Page 36 November 20, 2015 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is that a 1.14-acre, 75 by 660 property? MS. CROWLEY: It is your -- it is. There it is; 1.14 acres, yes, it is. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: What a guess. Okay. MS. CROWLEY: The exotic vegetation exists between the two properties. The complainant is on the right. The subject house is on the left. And then the second -- the second, third, and fourth photographs show -- this is the view from the complainant's side of the house of the Brazilian pepper and the air potato to the left growing over and arcing over approximately 15 feet into his property. The next photograph is taken from the driveway of the subject property showing the air potato almost completely covering the hedge, and then the third is just a closeup as well of the exotic vegetation that exists in the landscape buffer between the two properties adjacent to the fence. Code Enforcement received a complaint from the neighbor to the right about overhanging vegetation coming over the fence line. My inspection on September 1, 2015, found Brazilian pepper and a very dense air potato vine throughout the fence line shrubbery and elsewhere on the property. The home was built in 2006. Although the tax mailing address for the owner is the subject house, my investigation found that the property is occupied by a tenant -- and has been for several years -- who rents the house through an attorney's office, that being part of Collier Trust Group Management. According to the tenant, her rent includes lawn care and yard maintenance at the property. The house is in foreclosure with Deutsche Bank filing a lis pendens in October of 2013. It has not gone beyond filing a lis pendens, however. The tenant provided me with contact information for the leasing agent who is an employee of the office of Attorney Mark Shapiro. Page 37 November 20, 2015 I have reached out several times by phone and by email to try to get the violations corrected, but apparently they have not gotten approval from the bank to abate the violation, and the violation remains as of 4 p.m. yesterday. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The bank probably won't do anything until they take possession of the property. MS. CROWLEY: At this point that's not likely to happen anytime soon. It's rented out, and they're getting the income from that. So I don't expect that they're going to pursue the foreclosure at anytime. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, when fines start accruing -- MS. CROWLEY: That might get their attention. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- that might -- the one item that -- I don't know if people are aware of this. There was a beetle out -- I think you're the one who came up with it -- that eats air potatoes, and I know several properties that were completely engulfed with it, and they put a few of these beetles there, and all of the air potatoes have disappeared. MS. CROWLEY: Yes. That's in -- they're -- it's in the testing process right now. They have brought some in. The Florida -- State of Florida has brought them in at several test locations. They have spread naturally, and if you look at the paragraph closely of showing the air potato, it does evidence some of those holes, those little tiny round holes that makes it lacey. But in the concentration that I've seen, it's not enough to address it. But eventually they hope to do that. MR. MARINO: Could we see that photo again? And being ignorant on vegetation, can you tell me which one is an air potato and which one's the Brazilian? MS. CROWLEY: That's the air potato. It's a very pronounced heart-shaped leaf with very deep veins. It always grows as a vine. It Page 38 November 20, 2015 needs support. It cannot grow on its own. And it's called a potato because -- you can't see any in this picture. This was taken earlier, several months ago -- it actually has potatoes that can get to be the size of your head if the plant's old enough and large enough. MR. MARINO: I've got a big head, so I can imagine that. MS. CROWLEY: I've seen them. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And the content is also very similar to a potato. MS. CROWLEY: Yeah. If you cut them open, it smells starchy, but it's not edible. MR. MARINO: Yeah. I can see the -- I can see some holes in some leaves in the photograph also, so probably -- MS. CROWLEY: I do believe that there have probably been some naturally recruiting air potato beetles, which is -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I've seen it this bad. Once the air potato beetles go in, they're all gone. And I'm not talking about years. I'm talking about months. MR. LEFEBVRE: So we'll give them 60 days? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah. Well -- MR. LEFEBVRE: Let the beetle at it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, they won't take care of the Brazilian peppers, however. MR. MARINO: Better get some beetle juice out of it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: There you go. Okay. Anybody like to take a shot at a motion? First, does a violation -- is there a violation on this? MR. LAVINSKI: I make a motion a violation does exist. MR. DOINO: Second. MR. LEFEBVRE: (Raises hand.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. Page 39 November 20, 2015 All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. ASHTON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Okay. Anybody like to take a shot at a motion on this? MR. LAVINSKI: Yeah. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Your suggestion? MS. CROWLEY: I do have a recommendation, that the Code Enforcement Board order 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 within blank days, or a fine of blank per day shall be imposed by -- and it's the standard -- removing all Collier County prohibited exotic vegetation that exists upon the property. When prohibited exotic vegetation is removed but the base of the plant remains, the base shall be immediately treated with a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency approved herbicide with a visual tracer die. Mechanical clearing of Collier County prohibited exotic vegetation shall require a vegetation removal permit. And the respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated. MR. MARINO: Michaelle, excuse me. You've been -- they've been notified, and they have not done anything or responded to anything on this? Page 40 November 20, 2015 MS. CROWLEY: No. I mean, I know that from both -- the property management -- representative that I've worked with in Mr. Shapiro's office had meetings set up with bank representatives to try to get approval, and I've also heard from the tenant that the meeting was held. They just haven't gotten the green light to go ahead. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Typically we have seen, when this occurs, the bank will not do anything to resolve the violation until they finish taking possession of the property. Right now the property is not owned by the bank, so that's why they don't. So this is the tool that the county uses to motivate the owner of the property or the future owner of the property to take their necessary steps; otherwise, the fines will continue to accrue. MR. MARINO: I'll say 30 days and a fine of$150 a day. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's your motion? MR. MARINO: That's my motion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do we have a second? MR. DOINO: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a motion and a second. Any discussion on the motion? MR. LAVINSKI: Typically our standards are $100 a day fine on exotic removal. Do we want to vary from that? MR. MARINO: I think $150 will make them move a little quicker. It's up to the Board. MR. LEFEBVRE: Yeah. I think in this particular case it is impeding onto another person's property, which is a driveway, so I know I wouldn't want to have some potatoes the size of a head hanging over my driveway. I think $150 would be -- I think that's sufficient. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Any other discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hearing none, all those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. Page 41 November 20, 2015 MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. ASHTON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Thank you, Michaelle. MS. CROWLEY: Thank you. MS. ADAMS: The next case is from No. 6, old business, Letter A, motion for imposition of fines/liens, No. 5, Tab 14, Case CESD20150009975, John L. Cipolla, Robert Cipolla, and Leslie Ricciardelli. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. MR. RICCIARDELLI: Hello, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You look familiar. Why don't we begin by your request, since you're requesting something. MR. RICCIARDELLI: Oh. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Your name, for the record? MR. RICCIARDELLI: It's Robert Ricciardelli, not Robert Cipolla. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And you have the permission of the -- MR. RICCIARDELLI: I am an owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You're the owner, okay. MR. RICCIARDELLI: Yes, sir. To make it -- less talk as possible, I just need a little bit more time. Page 42 November 20, 2015 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. RICCIARDELLI: We've submitted for permit, and all the paperwork's been submitted, all the fines and whatever payments I've had to make have been paid. And the real reason was -- for needing a little more time was just I didn't have enough time to get the actual paperwork in because I've just been so slammed, number one, and, number two, we've decided that when we do the roof on this little shed that we put on the side of the house, we're going to do the whole roof. And we've had to -- need a little bit of time to get those permits and get the roofers hired. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: How much time do you think you need? MR. RICCIARDELLI: Whatever the Board feels. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, do you think you'll be done in 60 days? MR. RICCIARDELLI: Yeah, 60 days will be fine. MR. LEFEBVRE: You don't want to say that, because we can give you 30. MR. RICCIARDELLI: I would appreciate as much time as possible, but I feel that 60 days would be sufficient. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And the county? MS. PULSE: For the record, Dee Pulse, Collier County Code Enforcement Investigator. We have no objection. MR. LEFEBVRE: I make a motion that we grant a 60-day continuance. MR. DOINO: Second. MR. ASHTON: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a motion and a second. Any discussion on the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hearing none, all those in favor? Page 43 November 20, 2015 MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. ASHTON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Thank you. MR. RICCIARDELLI: Thank you very much. MS. PULSE: Thank you. MS. ADAMS: The next case is No. 7 from imposition of fines, Tab 16, Case CESD20140025741, Steven R. Cuiffo. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. BALDWIN: For the record, Patrick Baldwin, Collier County Code Enforcement investigator. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You still look familiar. MR. RICCIARDELLI: Sorry about this. This particular case was the trailer/house/manufactured home that was on the property. I work for J.C. Kozinski Engineering, and we were hired to try to come up with a system, for lack of better words, that would allow this trailer to be able to stay on the property. We had every assurance from planning staff that this could be done. We submitted all the architecturals and engineering that were required and, ultimately, when it came right down to it, they decided they weren't going to allow it to happen. At that point I got in touch with Patrick, and he said that we needed to remove the trailer any way possible. We submitted for a demolition permit, which is ready to be picked up. The owner's been in touch, and he has hired Mr. Blevins, who is a Page 44 November 20, 2015 manufactured home mover, to move the house. They just couldn't get it done by today. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Just for the record, state your name in the mike even though you were just here. MR. RICCIARDELLI: Yes, sir. Robert Ricciardelli. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you think the time frame on doing that would be around what? MR. RICCIARDELLI: Thirty days. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thirty days? MR. RICCIARDELLI: Yes, sir. MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion to grant -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hold up. Let Patrick go. MR. BALDWIN: I spoke with the owner's daughter, who actually was living in the mobile home structure on the property, and she said they're actually going to move the property today. And as Mr. Ricciardelli stated, the permit is ready for issuance. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Now. MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion to continue for 30 days. MR. DOINO: Second. MR. MARINO: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. Any discussion on the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. ASHTON: Aye. Page 45 November 20, 2015 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Thank you. MR. RICCIARDELLI: Thank you. You guys have a good holiday. MR. MARINO: You, too. MR. BALDWIN: Thank you. MS. ADAMS: The next case is No. 8 from imposition of fines, Tab 17, Case CEPM20140025426, Lynne V. Cadenhead. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. MARINO: He looks familiar also. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. MR. CADENHEAD: Good morning to you, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I see the two magical words on this sheet "has been," but why don't you take us through. MR. CADENHEAD: Okay. The permit has been issued to put new siding and fix the thing, and we've paid the $67.95 of the county's -- code enforcement's request. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. MARINO: When was that paid? It says on here not paid. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a sheet that -- MR. CADENHEAD: It was paid yesterday. MR. MARINO: Sony. MR. CADENHEAD: And there is a permit to do the work. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And it says the violation has been abated as of October 15th, which brings us to the county. MR. SANTAFEMIA: Good morning. For the record, Supervisor John Santafemia, Collier County Code Enforcement. The county is going to defer to the Board on this as far as any reduction or waiving of fines. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. This case goes back. And I Page 46 November 20, 2015 know there was a lot of discussion on what was and what wasn't in violation and if it was an unsafe house, if I'm not mistaken. MR. CADENHEAD: The permit -- in other words, we went through -- went through the permitting process. The permitting process took longer than what is allowed by the permit. It finally was issued. And so everything is going to be taken care of. And we're asking you to -- I don't think -- I don't know exactly how much fines have accrued to this point in there, but it is what it is working with the county to get the permit. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. The fines that are listed on the paperwork that we have show $13,563.75. MR. CADENHEAD: Well, it's way more than what -- by the time we get the improvements to the house and stuff, it's not -- it's not affordable to put -- impose those kind of fines on somebody. I mean, we've paid -- we've paid the administration costs, we've paid -- we've paid the money to get the permit, which permit -- by the time you got the permit, it ended up -- is over $1,000 of just getting it submitted, and 400-some-odd dollars just for the permit, so -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I don't want to put words in your mouth, but I think what you're saying is you would like the Board to consider abating the fine. MR. CADENHEAD: I would very much appreciate the Board abating the fines. MR. LEFEBVRE: Let me ask a question. Since this was a dangerous -- considered dangerous, by getting a permit and everything, that abates the violation, correct? Unlike most of the times, abating a violation requires a CO or completion -- certificate of completion. MR. SANTAFEMIA: The way that the Board originally drafted the order in this case, I don't believe it was required to get a CO. MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay. MR. SANTAFEMIA: He was required -- he was instructed by Page 47 November 20, 2015 the Board to obtain a permit by a specific date, but the language for the CO was not included in the order. So at this point I would say no, that I would not say that the safety issue has been abated. He has complied with the Board's order. And the -- he did meet with the building official, Jonathan Walsh, and they did figure out a way for him to keep part of the building that was safe, but he had to get rid of the other part that was not safe. I would also add that most of the time that the fines did accrue on this case were not due to the permit being reviewed or anything like that. The permit was actually ready to be issued, but Mr. Cadenhead just never went in and paid the fee and picked it up. MR. LEFEBVRE: When was it ready to be issued? Do you know when it was ready to be issued? MR. SANTAFEMIA: I don't -- MR. LEFEBVRE: Because that would be -- if the fines started on August 23rd -- MR. SANTAFEMIA: Right. MR. LEFEBVRE: -- that would be critical to us making a decision. MR. SANTAFEMIA: Right. The date that it's showing as in compliance, the August -- the October 15th date, is the date the permit was actually issued. That means he went in there, paid the fees, and picked it up. Prior to that -- MR. LEFEBVRE: But when was it ready to be picked up? MR. SANTAFEMIA: Looks like September 11th was an approval date for that permit. He applied -- he applied August 20th. It was ready -- it was approved on 9/11/15, and he picked it up on October 15th. MR. MARINO: So he didn't go pick it up when it was ready; he waited a month? MR. SANTAFEMIA: Correct. Page 48 November 20, 2015 MR. MARINO: Not the county's fault on this. MR. LEFEBVRE: Right. MR. LAVINSKI: Well, my question on this would be if we're considering any kind of abatement, the problem still exists. The hazardous house is still there or a portion of it. MR. LEFEBVRE: But we can't do anything about that because our order does not specifically say that it needs to get a CO or certificate of completion. So we have to just abide by our order. MR. LAVINSKI: Yeah. But I certainly think it would be negligent on our part to waive all the fines and allow a hazardous house to exist. MR. LEFEBVRE: Yeah. I mean -- MR. LAVINSKI: Regardless of what our order said. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Would a continuance be possible to put on the table? MR. SANTAFEMIA: It wouldn't really affect this order. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It says the violation has been abated as of October 15th, so -- MR. SANTAFEMIA: Correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So the abatement -- MR. SANTAFEMIA: He's in compliance with the order. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The order, which said that you had to have a building permit. MR. SANTAFEMIA: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Now, would they issue a building permit on an unsafe building? MR. LEFEBVRE: Yes. MR. SANTAFEMIA: They have. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: They have. And this is still an unsafe building? MR. CADENHEAD: That's not correct. Page 49 November 20, 2015 MR. SANTAFEMIA: Correct. Until he demolishes the parts of the building that he's required to demolish per the agreement with the building official and the permit that he did obtain, then that unsafe matter won't be abated. We will, of course, monitor the progress of that to make sure that it does get done. But once he has the permit, then he's good until the permit expires. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And you're going to remove those portions that were deemed to be unsafe? MR. CADENHEAD: Yes, that's correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And you're going to do that in what type of time frame? MR. CADENHEAD: The whole building will be complete as to the permit within approximately 60 days. In other words, we'll be CO'ing the building within 60 days. Now, if you want to -- in order to show good -- if you want to postpone this -- because we've got another case that's got to be handled with the county also. If you want to postpone it through the holidays to somewhere in February, we'll have the building ready -- this building ready, CO'ed, with all the stuff done on it and the other building with the permit on it in that period of time. MR. LAVINSKI: I certainly would feel more comfortable with that. I can't, in my right -- MR. CADENHEAD: I have no problem postponing this here, the abatement on this here, for 60 days to where we CO the building and totally in compliance with the spirit of what we talked about. MR. MARINO: How long is it going to take this unsafe piece to be -- MR. CADENHEAD: The unsafe part is nothing but a carport that's got -- that has weathered with the rain and stuff, and you've got basically -- MR. MARINO: Well, it might be a carport, but it's still unsafe. Page 50 November 20, 2015 How long -- MR. CADENHEAD: But the building -- the house itself is not unsafe. In other words -- and it's not unsafe to occupy -- there's nobody occupying the building right now, and the carport is not -- is unsafe to the weathered boards that's on top. MR. MARINO: I understand that, but I'm just -- I'm not talking about the house. I'm talking about the carport that's unsafe. How long is it going to take to get that down? MR. CADENHEAD: The carport -- basically once we come back -- once I meet the requirements that Jonathan has given me on another building and we come back -- once I've got the permit on this here -- I put this one on hold to work on the other building that we've been working on. So I've agreed to the Board today to have this building -- what we have CO'ed within 60 days, and we'll come back before the Board with the CO. MR. LEFEBVRE: What I think we have to look at -- we have a very narrow scope. We have to look at imposing a fine or abating a portion of it based on our order, not based on if the house is completed or not. That's not what our original order was. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Correct. MR. LEFEBVRE: Unless he's sitting here right now and unless there's some way we can amend our order to say that it has to be completed, I think we have to look strictly at what our order says. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Or we can grant a continuance for 60 days, and then you'll see the entire scope -- not only this, but the entire unsafe condition hopefully disappear. MR. LEFEBVRE: Yeah, but our order doesn't say that -- it doesn't -- it doesn't say that he has to get a CO. I mean, are we going to change -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I understand that. MR. CADENHEAD: This is what I'm agreeing to right now. In Page 51 November 20, 2015 other words, in order to show good faith in what we're trying to do and show good faith what I came before the Board to talk about to start with, continue this here for 60 days, the building, all the -- any unsafe part the county will be able to come before and say there's no unsafe situation. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: As far as the Board is concerned right now, to Mr. Lefebvre's comment, it says the violation has been abated. So we could close this out right now and either impose the fine or not -- impose the fine or abate it, and that would be the end of this case, and then in the meantime the county would continue to follow the progress that's being made on the existing permit, or we could do a continuance on this until January 29th, at which time everything should be resolved; this and the entire building. So I think that's what's before us right now. MR. LAVINSKI: In due conscience, I'd like to make a motion we continue this for 60 days. MR. MARINO: Will the fine continue? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It's a continuance. They will. MR. DOINO: Second. MR. MARINO: I'll second it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Any comments on the motion? Hearing none... MR. DOINO: Go ahead. MR. LEFEBVRE: I just don't know in 60 days from now, if he's not done with what he says he's going to do -- we have to strictly look at what our -- what our order says, and it doesn't compel him to get a CO or a certificate of completion. My question was going to be, could we modify our agreement, our order, where we could include a certificate of completion -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I don't think you can do that, but what you could do is suspend any further accruals of the fine from now Page 52 November 20, 2015 until January 29th since this portion isn't in abeyance. MR. LEFEBVRE: But even if he's not in -- even if he's not in compliance or not -- I shouldn't say compliance. If he doesn't finish in 60 days, we still have no -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: In 60 days you will be able to impose the total fine that's listed here today. MR. LAVINSKI: Right. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So -- MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have another warm body at the microphone. I think it's warm. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. LETOURNEAU: I've got a pulse. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. LETOURNEAU: I just want to make it clear that there is no fines accruing at this point. Mr. Cadenhead is in compliance with the Board's order. I think Mr. Santafemia did say that we would monitor his permit, and if he doesn't -- if he doesn't take care of it, we'll open a new case on it, and we'll bring it back to the Board. I think -- I don't know if another 60 days is going to do anything other than just see if he's got the thing done or not. I think Mr. Lefebvre's totally right he's in compliance at this time. MR. LEFEBVRE: But the only thing we're doing by -- we're holding this $13,500 fine over his head to complete it. In other words, we're saying we want a certificate of completion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We'd like it. MR. LEFEBVRE: Or occupancy. MR. LETOURNEAU: I just wanted to be clear that he's not being fined right now. MR. LEFEBVRE: Tamara, if he isn't in compliance, can we Page 53 November 20, 2015 impose a fine based on him not being in compliance? Because that's what we're going to do in two months from now. MS. NICOLA: I can't see why not. If he's not in compliance, that's what you do. MR. LEFEBVRE: Well, what I mean by "in compliance" -- let me reword what I'm trying to get at. He's in compliance now, but what we're saying, if he doesn't get a certificate of completion or occupancy, we're going to impose this fine or potentially have the ability to impose that fine, but we're not asking him to get a certificate of completion or occupancy. So in two months from now, basically, we're going to penalize him if he doesn't get what he needs to get done even though we're not requiring it. MR. L'ESPERANCE: I think you need to initiate a new case in order to do that. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah. I don't think we're penalizing him. The fine is what it is right now. It can be imposed right now or it could be abated right now. What the respondent is saying is he's going to have everything done, and we won't have this dilemma at that time. At that time you can either impose the fine that's listed, the 13,000, or not, and that would be in 60 days. I don't see what harm that would do by postponing 60 days. MR. ASHTON: Mr. Chairman, the violation has been abated that we -- the order we wrote. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I understand. MR. ASHTON: Then how can you continue if a violation's been abated? MR. CADENHEAD: To help the Board, basically what I'm here today is to ask for the abatement of-- the fine to be abated. What I'm -- what I've agreed to today is, to show good faith, in 60 days to come Page 54 November 20, 2015 back before the Board and show that the work has been done and to show that there's good faith on my side. In other words, there's got to be good faith on both sides. There's no way that a fine like this on a piece of property that's worth 70-, $80,000, it's a justified fine. MR. LETOURNEAU: Would it help if the county just withdrew it at this time to bring it back in 60 days? Would that make it easier on you? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I think so. MR. LETOURNEAU: We'd be willing to do that. We'd be willing to withdraw this case until January. MR. LAVINSKI: I don't see what's going to make it easier. If the respondent agreed to the 60 days, and that's what our motion is, to extend this for 60 days, what's the issue? Why withdraw it? Why do anything else? He agreed. MR. LETOURNEAU: Okay. MR. LAVINSKI: We want to work with him. MR. LETOURNEAU: Fair enough. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We do have a motion and a second to extend it 60 days. MR. LAVINSKI: Sixty days. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any other discussion on the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hearing none, all those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. ASHTON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. Page 55 November 20, 2015 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. It passes. We'll see you in January. MS. NICOLA: So this is the extension, not a continuance, right? MR. CADENHEAD: We've got one more. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. It's a continuance. MS. NICOLA: Bob, you just said extension, so I wanted to make sure. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Continuance. MS. NICOLA: Okay. Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Although, the fines -- on a continuance, the fines would continue to accrue, except in this case they're not. MS. NICOLA: Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So. It's kind of a moot point. Okay. One down, one to go, right? MS. ADAMS: Next case is No. 9 from imposition of fines, Tab 18, Case CESD20140012494, Lynne V. Cadenhead. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. CADENHEAD: Do you want to go? MS. GARCIA: For the record -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Why don't -- give us your name for the record. MS. GARCIA: For the record, Shirley Garcia, Collier County Code Enforcement. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And, Mr. Cadenhead, why don't you MR. CADENHEAD: Bobby Cadenhead. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And why don't you let us know what you are requesting. MR. CADENHEAD: Okay. Here's what I'm requesting, basically the same thing, for another 60 days on this one here. Page 56 November 20, 2015 Jonathan Walsh has come to the property. I had American Engineering come in and do a total appraisal of the property, found it not to be a dangerous property, and he found it to be all on the foundation. Jonathan met me on the property and made a suggestion that he wanted to see the total house gutted from the inside out, in other words, all the rafters exposed, all the electric taken out, all the flooring taken out to where he could come back and make evaluation. Now, we're working on that for him. American Engineering has come every month since July and have done their essay -- not their essay, but their survey on what's -- what we're doing. We're taking the house to where the county can look from the structure, from the bottom of it all the way up through the rafters. And I would say within the same 60 days that we should be able to have an agreement with Jonathan Walsh that we can go through the permitting process. The plans for the house has already been drawn, ready to submit, but we can't submit nothing until I come back with Jonathan and he makes an on-site inspection just like he did on the house across the street. He came and made an inspection of that and deemed it safe other than the carport. And he has to come back on this here. So basically what I'm suggesting to you or asking you for, we've got the holidays that are right here, but I'd say the 60 days puts us in the middle of January so the holidays will be over for Jonathan to be able to get back to make a decision. And the decision on this here, if his decision comes different than what my engineer is, it could actually end up in court. And at that point -- in other words, we'll see, because I'm not going to tear the building down. That's the reason I agreed to go through all the process of gutting it, going all the way to -- getting it to the structure right on Page 57 November 20, 2015 up back through the other. So I'm asking for 60 days on that. And just the same thing as the good faith on this other, I'll show you that the other building's done, and we will have Jonathan to the site by that time. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Now, County? MS. GARCIA: It's up to the discretion of the Board. This has been going on for quite some time. But he did get it gutted for Jonathan Walsh's walk-through. He's not in compliance with your original order. Back in September 25, 2014, demo or permit all the way through CO's; he's not in compliance. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. The fine on this has accrued to be almost $163,000 at this point. MS. GARCIA: That's correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. LEFEBVRE: This case has two major differences from the prior one. Number one, it's not been abated, and the reason it's not been abated -- because in No. 2 it says, must receive completion or occupancy. Question. Is there any way to look in our previous minutes to see if we did actually include certificate of completion or occupancy on the previous. MS. GARCIA: It is in the findings of fact of the original order. MR. LEFEBVRE: Not in this order, but on the previous case. MS. GARCIA: On this 3417 Cherokee Street? MR. LEFEBVRE: No, on the previous case that we had, was it omitted that he needed to get a certificate of completion or occupancy? MS. GARCIA: Are you talking about 3414, the previous -- MR. LEFEBVRE: The previous case. I said that three times. MS. GARCIA: 3414, no. It was not, because it was brought before you for -- as a property maintenance case. Page 58 November 20, 2015 MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay. MS. GARCIA: It was deemed at that time -- on your original order it was deemed at the time as a dangerous structure. MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay. MS. GARCIA: So that's why you didn't include it, because there was no choice of getting a permit, inspection, and CO. It was a demo only. MR. LEFEBVRE: So the point I was trying to get at is -- thank you for that clarification. MS. GARCIA: You're welcome. MR. LEFEBVRE: Basically, 60 days, we're not going to be any -- he's not going to be in compliance? We're not going to be in compliance? MS. GARCIA: No. There's no way it will be in compliance. MR. CADENHEAD: No, no. The 60 days -- let me put this case very plainly, okay. There's a case where the county come in and said the building was unsafe. MR. LEFEBVRE: I remember the case. MR. CADENHEAD: Now, my engineer came in and said that the building's not. MR. LEFEBVRE: I know. MR. CADENHEAD: I'm trying to work with Jonathan to -- and he's trying to work with me. He asked me to do all this disclosure of taking everything apart to see. At that point the only thing that I can guarantee you in 60 days, that Jonathan will either agree that we can get a permit or there will be a court case on this building to go to court. In other words, we're not tearing it down. In other words, it's very simple. So it's two things. It's either a civil engineer -- structural engineer who's certifying something or it's the county. I'm trying to go the less of two resistance (sic) and working with Page 59 November 20, 2015 Jonathan to do -- and get him back out and do exactly what he asked me to do. So all I'm asking you to do -- in other words, you're imposing the fines -- in other words, you're looking at a lot that's worth -- to tear it down, you're looking at a lot that's worth $60,000, and you've got over $100,000 worth of fines there now, so -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. My question would be, let's turn the clock ahead 60 days and we're back here again and your engineer is going to say either, A, it can be permitted -- MR. CADENHEAD: That's correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- and you could finish the job, or it can't be. MR. CADENHEAD: That's correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. If he comes back and says it can't be, what are you going to do at that time? MR. CADENHEAD: No. Here's what I've got right now. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's a -- MR. CADENHEAD: I've got an engineer who says that the job can be permitted now. Jonathan Walsh has asked for certain things to be done before he comes back and makes a determination. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. What I'm asking is -- again, it's hard to be in the future right now. But if you turn the clock ahead and we're back here and he says it can't be saved, for whatever reason, what are you going to do at that time? MR. CADENHEAD: At that point we will leave this room and go to the top -- the second floor, whichever other floor, to the Court and ask the Court to decide whether it is a safe building or -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have nothing to do with you going to the Court. MR. CADENHEAD: I understand. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: At that point -- Page 60 November 20, 2015 MR. CADENHEAD: All I'm trying to do is get the thing resolved within the 60 days that we've got and get some kind of agreement to do what we need to do. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So right now there's no difference doing it today or doing it in January. MR. CADENHEAD: That's correct. MS. GARCIA: That's correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. LAVINSKI: I'll make a motion we extend it for 60 days. MR. MARINO: Second. MR. LEFEBVRE: Extend or continue? MR. LAVINSKI: Continue. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Continue; the fines continue to accrue. MR. MARINO: Second it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So we have a motion for a 60-day continuance. Any discussion on the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hearing none, all those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. ASHTON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Have a good holiday. Page 61 November 20, 2015 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Are we done with cases? MS. ADAMS: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let's see what we're up to. Any cases that need to be forwarded to the County Attorney's Office? MS. ADAMS: No, sir, not this month. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. The next meeting date is January 29th. We're both wrong. I thought we'd be out of here by 11:15, and I missed it by 45 minutes. MR. MARINO: Are you buying breakfast? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I'll take a motion to adjourn. MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to adjourn. MR. MARINO: Second it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Done. ***** There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 10:31 a.m. CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD r 14,1eAlreiw R•' ERT lir AN, CHAIRMAN These minutes approved by the Board on(TnL �f, ?J1( , as presented or as corrected Page 62