CEB Minutes 05/23/2002 R1
1
1
1
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0
1
2
3
4
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD
OF COLLIER COUNTY
Naples, Florida, May 23, 2002
Page 1
LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the
Enforcement Board, in and for the County
having conducted business herein, met on
9:00 a.m. in REGULAR SESSION in Building
Government Complex, East Naples, Florida,
following members present:
CHAIRMAN:
Peter Lehmann
Clifford Flegal
Roberta Dusek
Code
of Collier,
this date at
"F" of the
Kathleen Curatolo
Kathryn M. Godfrey-Lint
George Ponte
Rhona Saunders
ALSO PRESENT-
Jean Rawson, Attorney, Code Enforcement Board
Michelle Arnold, Code Enforcement Director
Patti Petrulli, Enforcement Official
ORIGINAL
CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
AGENDA
Date: May 23, 2002 at 9:00 o'clock a.m.
Location: 3301 E. Tamiami Tr., Naples, Florida, Collier County Government Center,
Administrative Bldg, 3rd Floor
NOTE: 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. ROLL CALL
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - April 25, 2002
MINUTES
4. PUBLIC HEAR1NGS
BCC vs. Manatee Resort Condominium Association, Inc., Attn. Jim Allen, Ra.
Manatee Resort Condominium Association, Inc., Atm. Austin White, Atty
Joseph T. And Janet C. Smith; Peter G. And Deborah K. Smith; James D. Allen, Jr.,
Edna Roth; Cecil J. And Sharon K. Petitti, II; Anthony P. And Lynn R. Palladino
Daniel J. And Diane R. Gavin; Eithne Fulton, Cyril E. Fulton;
Gordon E. Ens and Carol J. Dormer; James R. and Joan M. Devote
171625 Canada, Inc., William R. Borbely; Larry J. And Marcelene A. Gode
Gary L. Alderman and Mary J. Alderman; Robert J. and Sue A. Massey,
Frederick P. Nader; Carol A. Cowell; Gayle Hillman
CEB NO. 2001-086
B. BCC vs. Shad Davis Inc. (Salvator Rijna)
C. BCC vs. Moises Castillo
D. BCC vs. Colin S. Flinn, Agent / Audubon Joint Venture
E. BCC vs. David and Zenaida Felato
F. BCC vs. Victor A. and IsabelValdes
NEW BUSINESS
Request for Imposition of Fines/Lien
A. BCC vs. A.L. Dougherty Co.., Inc. / Abbott/Lodge LLC
B. BCC vs. Rocco Lacquaniti
C. BCC vs. William Bryan Seward
D. BCC vs. Quail Crossing Property Owners Association
E. BCC vs. Stanley W. White Jr.
F. BCC vs. Joe Dimassimo Jr.
CEB NO. 2002-009
CEB NO. 2002-010
CEB NO. 2002-011
CEB NO. 2002-012
CEB NO. 2001-013
CEB NO. 2001-061
CEB NO. 2002-001
CEB NO. 2002-002
CEB NO. 2002-005
CEB NO. 2002-006
CEB NO. 2002-007
Request for Reduction/Abatement of Fines
A. BCC vs. Mc Alpine Briarwood, Inc.
and Charles W. Hitchcock (Briarwood Golf& Practice Center)
OLD BUSINESS
Affidavits of Compliance
A. BCC vs. A.L. Dougherty Co.., Inc. / AbboWLodge LLC
B. BCC vs. Rocco Lacquaniti
C. BCC vs. William Bryan Seward
D. BCC vs. Quail Crossing Property Owners Association
E. BCC vs. StanleyW. White Jr.
F. BCC vs. Joe Dimassimo Jr.
CEB NO. 2001-075
CEB NO. 2001-061
CEB NO. 2002-001
CEB NO. 2002-002
CEB NO. 2002-005
CEB NO. 2002-006
CEB NO. 2002-007
Affidavits of Non Compliance
7. REPORTS
8. COMMENTS
9. NEXT MEETING DATE
June 27, 2002
10. ADJOURN
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 2
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: The Code Enforcement Board
of Collier County is called to order.
Please note, 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.
Roll call, please.
MS. PETRULLI: For the record, Patti Petrulli,
Code Enforcement Supervisor.
Peter Lehmann.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Present.
MS. PETRULLI: Roberta Dusek.
MS. DUSEK: Here.
MS. PETRULLI:
MR. FLEGAL:
MS. PETRULLI:
Clifford Flegal.
Present.
George Ponte.
MR. PONTE:
MS. PETRULLI:
MS. SAUNDERS:
MS. PETRULLI:
Here.
Rhona Saunders.
Here.
Kathleen Curatolo.
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
.... 24
25
Page 3
MS. CURATOLO:
MS. PETRULLI:
MS. GODFREY-LINT:
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN:
Here.
Kathryn Godfrey-Lint.
Here.
Thank you.
Approval of the minutes from our prior
meeting. Are there any changes, additions or
deletions?
MS. SAUNDERS: I move for approval.
MS. DUSEK: Second.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: We have a motion and a
second. Ail those in favor, signify by saying aye.
MS. DUSEK: Aye.
MR. FLEGAL: Aye.
MR. PONTE: Aye.
MS. CURATOLO: Aye.
MS. GODFREY-LINT: Aye.
MS. SAUNDERS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Aye.
Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Motion passes.
If we can proceed into the public hearings.
Michelle, if you'd like to proceed.
MS. PETRULLI: Our first case today is the
Board of County Commissioners versus Manatee Resort
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 4
I'd like to ask if there is anyone present to
represent Manatee.
MR. WHITT: Yes. Good morning. Michael
Whitt, with Becket and Poliakoff, on behalf of
Manatee.
MS. PETRULLI:
MS. ARNOLD:
The alleged violation --
We have a request from the
respondent for a continuance. So if we can go
ahead and hear that request first.
MR. WHITT: We have filed a request for
continuance in this matter. We have been in
discussions with the county attorney. They do not
object to the continuance of this case.
The board may recall the last hearing, I guess
was three or four months ago, we had a really
contentious motion for continuance that was heard
at that time.
Manatee and the individual owners have filed a
petition for variance with Collier County on one of
the issues. There are three main issues in the
code enforcement charge. One was that the resort
was not properly licensed.
While Manatee does not believe that it needed
to be licensed, it was exempt under state law, went
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
-- 24
25
Page 5
ahead it was easier to go ahead and get the
license than to fight it. We got the license.
Second is the issue related to use. We're
discussing that issue with the County Attorney's
Office, trying to get affidavits from the owners
with respect to their use. We believe we comply.
And the third is the issue related to the size
of the rooms, which were alleged to be in excess of
500 square foot maximum. That is what is being
addressed in the variance.
We had hoped that the variance could be heard
by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners
within 120 days, that the county would be able to,
quote, fast track the variance petition and get it
moved through the system. Unfortunately that did
not happen.
As we set out in our motion, it's been filed,
Manatee Resort and the owners have done everything
timely to move that through the system. They've
not caused any delay. It is not scheduled, though,
to go before the Planning Department, the Planning
Commission, until July 18th of this year. And then
it's scheduled to go before the County Commission
for consideration on September 10th of this year.
Now, I understand the reason for that is that
-- 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
-- 24
25
Page 6
we were placed on the agenda, along with La Playa,
because there was a petition -- I guess there was
some setback issue or something with La Playa. It
was moving through the system.
As the board I think is well aware, this is a
relatively politicized issue. There's a group of
residents on Vanderbilt who have organized and are
pushing some of these matters.
So I think that it was -- it was decided that
it would be best to get the issues that concern
that group addressed at the same time, which is why
they married us together with La Playa.
Now, I understand La Playa has since come to
some agreement with the county; they're going to
tear down the structure that was violating the
setback. But that leaves us still placed on the
docket for July and September.
So that's basically it. I mean, we are where
we were last time. We don't believe that any code
violations exist because of the county's prior
approval of the site development plan and the
issuance of the permit that allowed for the rooms
to be constructed the size that they currently are.
But again, laying that issue aside, it becomes
moot if we get a variance from the County
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 7
Commission. So that's basically where we find
ourselves.
It is moving through the system. I know that
the resort's planner met again yesterday with some
of the county staff, going through reports and
trying to assist them and having the staff finalize
their recommendation to be able to get their
documentation together for the Planning Commission.
So we would ask that this matter be continued
then until after the Board of County Commission has
a chance to review this and act upon the variance
petition at its meeting on September 10th.
And again, we're kind of at the mercy of other
persons scheduling. If for some reason we get
bumped off of that agenda and the County Commission
is unable to consider it, it may need to be pushed.
But right now it looks -- since it's obviously far
enough down the road, that everything will be in
order for the county to move forward and Manatee to
move forward and make its presentation to the
County Commission at that point.
MS. DUSEK: Michelle, I have a question. Can
you give us some idea after the September meeting
with the Board of County Commissioners
approximately how much time it would take them to
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
-' 24
25
come to a decision? Is it a month, two months?
MS. ARNOLD: They would make a decision at
that particular meeting.
MS. DUSEK: At that meeting.
MS. ARNOLD:
MS. DUSEK:
would be fair?
MS. ARNOLD:
Thursday, so it could be our September meeting.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Michelle, the county's
position on this?
MS. ARNOLD:
assistant will
MS. BELPEDIO:
Yes.
So a continuance into October
Or September?
Our meeting is usually the fourth
Good morning. I'm Jennifer
Belpedio. I'm with the county attorney's office.
This morning I received a memorandum from our
division administrator of the community development
environmental service division. You may have a
signed copy before you.
After extensive discussions with him and with
county staff, it's our position that we're not
objecting to the continuance for the same reasons
that Mr. Whitt has informed you of, with a few
qualifications.
He had mentioned that he is now in compliance,
Page 8
Jennifer Belpedio, our legal
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
P~e 9
or Manatee Resort is now in compliance. We have
not received any record evidenced to that effect,
so at a later point in time we're desiring to meet
with Manatee and its representatives to see exactly
what evidence they can bring forward to us and we
can make that determination. Possibly, if we
receive the appropriate documentation, we may
dismiss certain counts if we believe we have enough
information.
I believe that speaks to his paragraph four
and five in his motion. He's stating in his motion
that he is in compliance and, as I mentioned, we
don't believe that's the case.
Essentially the circumstances of the case have
not changed since the last meeting, 120 days before
the variance application is in.
What Mr. Whitt has asserted regarding La
Playa/Manatee is also my understanding, and I
believe that Manatee is acting in good faith and
moving forward to get to where they need to be.
Based on that, we're not objecting to the
continuance today. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Any discussion from the
board?
MR. FLEGAL:
Yes, I have a comment.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 10
I don't know why we continue to be -- have
this case brought before us. I think the county
should withdraw it. And when you get everything
solved, or not solved, then issue new NOV's.
This came before us in January, we granted a
continuance. Now we're back, we want another
continuance. Hypothetically something could happen
in September, there could be another con I think
it's a waste of this board's time.
I'm not for a continuance. I think the county
should just withdraw it. If they're working with
them, resolve everything and quit bothering this
board. Let us do other things besides just
continue and continue and continue. I think that's
a drastic waste of our time.
MS. DUSEK: I make a motion that we give the
continuance to Manatee.
MR. PONTE: Given that everything is
scheduled, I concur and think that we should
continue this case.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: We have a motion and a
second. Ail those in favor -- first off, any
further discussion on the motion?
Ail those in favor, signify by saying aye.
MS. DUSEK: Aye.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
25
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN:
MR. FLEGAL: Aye.
MR. PONTE: Aye.
MS. GODFREY-LINT:
MS. CURATOLO:
MS. SAUNDERS:
Aye.
Aye.
Aye.
Page 11
Aye.
MR. WHITT: May I also in the prior orders
for continuance, we have in there that the
subpoenas previously issued by the board will
remain in effect so that we can have the witnesses.
Can we include that in the order as well?
MS. DUSEK: Yes.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Yes.
MR. WHITT: Okay, thank you.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Thank you.
Proceed to the next case, please.
motion.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN:
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Any opposed?
MR. FLEGAL: No.
MS. GODFREY-LINT: No.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Motion passes 5-2.
MS. RAWSON: The date would be September 26th,
if you wanted to -- is that part of your motion?
MS. DUSEK: Yes, it would be part of the
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MS. PETRULLI: Our next case is Board of
County Commissioners versus Shad Davis, Inc.
like to ask at this time if the respondent is
present.
MS. ARNOLD: He is.
res.
Page 12
I'd
MS. PETRULLI: Let the record show that the
Dondent is present.
The violation -- the alleged violation of the
ordinance is No. 89-06, amended by 2002-5, Section
5, paragraphs 1, 2, 5, 7, 12-C, 12-I, 12-L, 12-0,
12-P, 12-Q, 16-A and B, and Ordinance No. 91-102
amended, Sections 2.7.6, paragraphs 1 and 5.
Section 1.5.6, Section 2.1.11, Section 2.1.15,
paragraph one, and Section 3.3.11 of the Collier
County Land Development Code.
Description of the violation is a garage
facility consisting of a makeshift kitchen, bedroom
and bathroom. Same garage facility having
undergone renovations resulting in additional
sleeping quarters and additional facilities not to
Collier County code. There is not a Collier County
site improvement plan on record, and no Collier
County permit for improvements that have been made
on record.
Housing violations consisting of broken and
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
~-- 24
25
Page 13
missing bathroom fixtures, inoperative stove,
leaking roof over the kitchen and living room
areas, broken and missing windows throughout, and
an overall lack of basic maintenance resulting in a
nuisance and fire hazard to the occupants.
The location and address where the violation
exists is 2820 Davis Boulevard, Naples, Florida,
more particularly described as Folio No.
0000070820080007, Rock Creek Pines, unit 2, lots 6
through 14.
The name and address of the person in charge
of where the violation is, its company, Shad Davis,
Inc, and a Mr. Salvatore -- I hope I get the
pronunciation right -- Rijna of 280 North Collier
Boulevard, Marco Island, Florida.
I would like to add that this is a repeat
violation, that this previous case has been with
the CEB board previously.
At this time, I'd like to ask that the
investigator handling the case, Ms. Cathy
VanPoucke, take the case over.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Swear the witness, please.
Please, both at the same time.
THE COURT REPORTER: Would everyone testifying
raise your right hand, please?
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 14
MR. RIJNA: What is it for?
THE COURT REPORTER: I'm going to swear you
in. Please raise your right hand.
MR. RIJNA: Well, I'll tell you why I refuse,
the reason is. Because the President of the United
States put his hand on the Bible and he swore up
and down, but if that's the case
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Sir, sir, we haven't --
MR. RIJNA: That's your Commander-in-Chief.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: we haven't even started
the case yet, so you're getting a little ahead.
What we'd like to do right now is swear your
testimony in, if you would, please. If you could
please proceed.
THE COURT REPORTER: Mr. Rijna, are you
refusing to be sworn in then?
MR. RIJNA: I don't see any point, but I'll
raise my hand.
(Whereupon Investigator VanPoucke was duly
sworn, and Mr. Rijna did not respond.)
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Before we proceed again, do
we have an evidence package that needs to be
entered into evidence?
MS. VanPOUCKE: A packet has been given to the
board and also to the respondent. And I'd like to
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
enter it as Composite Exhibit A.
MS. DUSEK:
exhibit.
MS. CURATOLO: Second.
Page 15
I make a motion that we accept the
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: I have a motion from Ms.
Dusek. Do I have a second?
MR. FLEGAL: Second.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: I have a second from
Mr. Flegal. We have a motion and second.
Ail those in favor, signify by saying aye.
MS. SAUNDERS:
MS. CURATOLO:
Aye .
Aye.
MS. GODFREY-LINT:
MS. DUSEK: Aye.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN:
MR. FLEGAL: Aye.
MR. PONTE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN:
(No response.)
Aye.
Aye .
Any opposed?
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Motion passes. Thank you.
MS. ARNOLD: And I just wanted to note for the
record that there was no response from Mr. Rijna
with respect to being sworn.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Thank you.
MR. FLEGAL: Mr. Chairman, can I ask our
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 16
counsel a question before we begin?
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Certainly.
MR. FLEGAL:
MS. RAWSON:
MR. FLEGAL:
Ms. Rawson?
Yes, sir.
Based on the evidence packet
submitted and obviously a repeat violation, but
under our ordinance in Section 11, since the
previous order of the board has not been complied
with, i.e., there are people living there and we
ordered them to vacate the premises, and all these
other items which match what were previously, do we
in fact have to have a hearing to find a violation?
MS. RAWSON: I think you need to have a
hearing to find whether it's a repeat violation.
MR. FLEGAL: Even though he still is occupied
when our previous order said he should vacate the
property?
MS. RAWSON: Well, I think you need evidence
to determine that fact. Whether it's in the
evidence package or not, I think you need evidence
to corroborate what's in your evidence package to
determine whether or not there's a repeat
violation.
Yes, Ms. Dusek?
MS. DUSEK: I have a question. The fact that
-- 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
.... 24
25
Mr. Rijna did not respond when he
does that affect his testimony?
Pagel7
was sworn in,
MS. RAWSON: That's going to be duly noted on
the record. You have to -- as any other witness,
you have to weigh the credibility of the testimony
that you hear, and that's just one factor that you
could consider in weighing the testimony.
MR. RIJNA: Mr. Chairman?
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Yes, sir.
MR. RIJNA: Could you please have the speaker
go a little louder? I have a little difficulty in
hearing. If it's possible.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: That's fine.
MR. RIJNA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: If you would proceed,
please.
MS. VanPOUCKE: For the record, my name is
Cathy VanPoucke, I'm a Collier County Code
Enforcement investigator.
On April 18th of this year, I opened a case on
the property at 2820 Davis, just based on the
general lack of maintenance to the structure.
While I was at the location, I met two
individuals who indicated to me that they were
living in the garage. I did observe a couple beds
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 18
in the garage and a makeshift kitchen.
While I was at the location, a tenant that
resides in the house came out and complained to me
about the living conditions inside the house, so I
had her sign an entry consent form and did a
minimum housing inspection at that time.
And at that time I found that there were
individuals living in the garage. Parts of the
garage had been turned into had been boarded
off, closed off into dwelling areas. Also, a room
inside the living room which would probably be
described as a den had been closed off and made
into a sleeping area.
Also observed a toilet and sink that did not
function properly. Several broken or missing
windows, broken doors, stove that did not work, and
just a basic overall lack of maintenance to the
whole building.
I did meet with Mr. Rijna and served him a
notice of violation and gave him until May 17th to
come into compliance, which he has.
As previously stated, he has been in front of
the board prior to this for these same violations
and additional violations, and that was back in
July of 2000.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
25
Page 19
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN:
board?
MS. DUSEK:
Any questions from the
I do have a question that just
came across my mind. Ms. Rawson, I think it's
probably more for you.
MS. SAUNDERS: Talk louder, if you can, Bobbi.
MS. DUSEK: Okay. The fines have not been
paid on the first violation?
MS. RAWSON: That's correct.
MS. DUSEK: And a lien was put against the
property. After six months do we not start to
foreclose on the property?
MS. RAWSON: I think that's probably what the
county attorney -- that's probably about the time
limit that they do to start to foreclose on the
property.
MS. DUSEK: And this first case was in the
year 2000 --
MS. RAWSON: Correct.
MS. DUSEK: -- and it's now 2002. Do we know
of any foreclosure proceedings?
MS. RAWSON: I'm not positive if that was on
the list, and the last report, I believe it was.
MS. ARNOLD: Yes, it's one we forwarded to the
County Attorney's Office for proceedings.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1t
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 20
MS. DUSEK: But we don't know for sure whether
they've actually started the proceedings?
MS. ARNOLD: At the last report, I don't
believe that there has been proceedings started.
MS. DUSEK: So in this case, since they have
not been started, we would hear this repeat
violation.
MS. RAWSON: I think you need to hear the
repeat violation and determine whether or not you
think there's a violation, and if so, whether or
not you're going to find and/or assess costs. That
will be then -- if that order would also be
forwarded to the county attorney for foreclosure.
MS. DUSEK: And did I understand you, Cathy,
to say that he has come into compliance?
MS. VanPOUCKE: He has.
MS. DUSEK: So all of these items --
MS. VanPOUCKE: Yes, ma'am.
MS. DUSEK: -- on this repeat violation have
now been taken care of?
MS. VanPOUCKE: Yes.
MS. RAWSON: Is there an affidavit of
compliance?
MS. ARNOLD: No, that hasn't been filed at
this point. But the investigator has testified
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
25
P~e21
that the property is now in compliance.
MR. PONTE: Ms. VanPoucke, the respondent has
come into compliance before, has he not?
MS. VanPOUCKE: Yes, sir.
MR. PONTE: So this is simply a --
MS. VanPOUCKE:
MR. PONTE:
MS. VanPOUCKE:
The previous case, you're
repeat of the same pattern.
Yes, sir.
MR. PONTE: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Again, when did you say the
compliance was achieved?
MS. VanPOUCKE: May 17th, which was the date
he was given to come into compliance.
MS. DUSEK: Ms. Rawson, I have a question. If
he has come into compliance, how do we hear -- are
we hearing it because it was repeated, even though
it's now in compliance? Is that what we're
hearing?
MS. RAWSON: I think we're almost to the point
where you have to determine whether or not there
are any costs to be assessed.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: We can hear a case, whether
or not the respondent has come into compliance or
not. Because regardless of the hearing, according
to Florida statute and our codes.
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
25
Page 22
MS. RAWSON: That's correct. And it's not the
first time that somebody may have not come into
compliance like the day before, and it's on the
docket and we -- and the agenda, and we're still
going to hear it.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: So we basically have a case
where the respondent has been cited for repeat
violation, has come into compliance prior to the
hearing, and we are here to determine whether a
repeat violation exists, as part of a finding of
fact?
MS. RAWSON: Let me just read you 162.063. If
you find a repeat violation, the case may be
presented to the enforcement board, even if the
repeat violation has been corrected prior to the
board meeting. And then the board retains the
right to determine costs and impose the enforcement
fees. So I think that's where we are.
MR. FLEGAL: Cathy, you're telling us that on
the NOV, all the items that you've cited, on the
date of 5-17, he complied with everything?
MS. VanPOUCKE: Yes, he did.
MR. FLEGAL: Okay, good.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Any other discussion from
the board, or questions for the investigator?
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 23
Any other testimony from the county's side?
MS. VanPOUCKE: The recommendation that we're
making is that the board find the respondent as a
repeat violator and charge him with prosecution
costs and a $500 fine for being a repeat.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: You're saying a $500 fine
lump sum, period?
MS. VanPOUCKE: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Thank you.
Mr. Rijna?
MR. RIJNA: Mr. Chairman, I was away to New
York for three weeks to see my grandson, Christian.
And believe me, when I came back, this all
happened. I was appalled what really happened.
And I think the county was right, you know, in
what they did to go out there, inspect it.
I would also state to the board that whatever
the irons were there, I was going to do them
anyway.
We have a problem as in this county, in
this area, from the landowner, the homeowner and
the enforcement agent and this board and the
police. There is an element in this area, okay, of
these homeless people, which it seemed like last
time I was here, all the burden was put on the
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
P~e24
landlord.
I think we all got to work together, okay, the
enforcers, the police department, this board, and
cooperate. I mean, I don't know if this board is
aware, there is a group of people in this area,
they have no home, they've got a home or not, but
they sleep anywhere. I have chased these people
out. And they work like beavers.
I had the place very secure. Garage door
broken, they came through my pool area, which is
very secure with corrugated metal. I've got
pictures to show you. And I've been chasing these
people. But they break in at night and they work
like beavers, they move furniture in, they move
microwaves, they set up shop. It's unbelievable.
When I -- the picture they showed me, I hadn't
seen the room because I just came from New York. I
was appalled what I saw, okay? Believe me, I was
appalled. And the fact that the garage door was
open and broken, I could see that without seeing
the pictures.
As a matter of fact, I went out cleaning the
rooms where they had destroyed. Two days later,
Mr. Chairman, again they broke through corrugated
metal. I called the police, which is part of the
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2O
21
22
23
-- 24
25
Page 25
record, twice, okay? And these people again, they
moved in microwaves, sofas, bicycles, hardware,
cooking hardware. And I caught them into the unit.
They broke the glass. That's how they get in.
They broke the corrugated metal, then they broke
the glass, through the pool, they took over the
garage and they took over the rooms again.
So I called the police department. I went
through the garage, I didn't see nobody there. In
fact, when the policeman came, and all of a sudden
I'm showing him, you know, the situation, there was
one guy in there, which I'd missed him.
What do you think they did? They gave him a
warning of trespass, not a break of entry. That's
their procedure, okay? So this is part of the
I've got the record. I'll give you a
record.
copy.
The following day, two days later, two more
people are in there sleeping with mattress and
everything else. I call the police, I say listen,
because my wife called the police department, and
they made it clear to her -- she said you have to
give a violation of breaking of entry. And you
know what the policeman said? I can't give you
that kind of -- even though the people there, they
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 26
broke the glass, which is fresh glass, he said I
can't give you that kind of violation, I only could
give them a first warning.
So I can't argue with the police department if
that's their procedure, okay? They don't arrest
these people. If they come back again, I guess
they do arrest them.
So this all happened after. When I'm around
the job cleaning daily, I try to catch them. I go
over there during the day. I mean, I can't stay
there at night with a flashlight.
A matter of fact, I have an individual which
lives in my unit. Actually, he's a guard at the
building where I'm at, the summer house. I said to
him, at night because he lives there -- I said,
go around flashlight (sic) and see what's going on.
He couldn't catch anybody.
So these people, they don't work, but when
they do work, they work like beavers. I mean, they
move in like you can't believe. And this is going
on in the area.
To give you an idea, I don't rent to anybody
unless they have a job. Yes, I do have minority
people on my job, but they all work. They all pay
the rent.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 27
And it's been an education for me to own (sic)
these buildings to these minority. There's nothing
wrong with these people, but they need an education
in cleaning, picking up garbage.
picking up garbage off the site.
I'm constantly
I'm constantly
going after them to keep the place clean. Don't
store any garbage, don't store any junk. And it's
like training a child. But you know what? If you
go on my job like lately, in the last two, three
months, I've been getting a great response. I
don't see nobody on the job, because they all work.
I don't see any paper on the job, because I'm
constantly out there and pursuing to keep it clean.
My intention is not to have a place -- because
I know, I'm a showcase in a poor area because of
the main drag. And I understand all that. And I
think -- I like to see the place clean. You know,
there's a difference between poverty and
cleanliness. But these people here, they don't
have a system. They -- you buy them a stove -- I
don't buy them a new stove because I don't dare.
Two, three days, you know, they burn -- it looks
like they're burning charcoal. But that's the type
of people.
But I'll tell you what, they all pay their
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
P~e 28
rent, they all are working people.
So I have a situation that I'm proud of what I
did so far, okay? When I took over the place, to
give you an idea, Mr. Keller was the owner, he had
a four-yard container for garbage pickup once a
week. Not only did I increase to a six-yard
container, but twice a week, okay? That's twice
the cost. Because I recognize the type of people
that I have out there.
It's going to take some education, and you
know what, they're taking responsibility, and they
see it's better to be clean than not to be clean.
Okay, for example, I got pictures of even the
house. I only have four tenants now in that whole
house. To eliminate -- I lock certain rooms
because I don't want them to, you know, bring
people in and out.
And now at this time I only have two tenants,
but you know what? I show them how to clean the
tub. There's nothing wrong with the tile, there's
nothing wrong with the bathroom. It's just the
cleanliness. Now they feel better about
themselves. So it's an education that -- you know,
that these people have to have some guidance.
There is nothing wrong with these people,
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 29
because these people provide your service for all
our people here, okay? Car wash, serve you,
maintenance of lawn. It's cheap labor, for
example, okay? But they have no place to go. The
rent is reasonable and I try to keep it reasonable
because I understand it. They're working people.
That's all they could afford.
So I'm doing the best I can out of the
situation. When I bought that piece of property, I
never was a landlord. I had no idea that I was
running into these situations. Otherwise, I would
never even touch it. I don't care about the money.
Because my wife is the type of person, it's
breaking her heart all these meetings. She thinks
I'm going to go banana. And I don't need this
anymore.
But when I bought that piece of property, only
for one reason, to upgrade that area, okay?
Mac'Kie, which was a proponent of that area, and
when she saw my rendering and my approval, she
almost freaked out. She said to me, this is what I
need for that area.
So there's been tremendous interest in that
area, which the county themselves, you know,
through the Triangle, they spend a lot of money
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
P~e 30
through the planning department, you know, outside
planner, to do something there. There was a taker
for that corner, but evidently it's still a little
bit too early, premature. Across the street they
just put a hotel. And it's going to happen, but I
don't know when.
The only thing I could tell you is that I
didn't have any institution to show any interest to
give me the money because of the situation that is
in that area. You're looking at a 16 million
dollar job of the approval I got. But the
institution, at this point they're not interested.
Our guess now, with the hotel that maybe, you
know, we're a different attitude toward that
Triangle, maybe, you know, the institution would be
interested in doing it.
And that's the right thing what I had in
mind was the right thing for that area. I mean,
this is so close to the municipal. Everything
should happen right in here. But right now there's
no interest.
So my interest is to see -- I saw a vision,
this is at the first job that I did, to put a new
project. Not to be a landlord, not to rape the
people as somebody said, you know, because of the
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 31
condition and everything. That's not true.
And I'd like to cooperate with this board, I'd
like to cooperate with the code enforcement. And
I'd like to cooperate with the police department.
But I think, for God's sake, we all should pool in
our efforts and not to say hey, I'll fine you so
much and leave it at that.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: I'm a little confused, and
maybe you can help me on this particular case.
MR. RIJNA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN:
Thank you very much.
You're saying and I
don't mean to put words in your mouth, but you're
telling us that
MR. RIJNA:
I can't hear. I'm sorry, sir.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: You're telling us that the
tenants you have living there --
MR. RIJNA: Yes, they're all working people.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Please, just let me ask the
question.
The tenants that are living there --
MR. RIJNA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN:
problem?
-- have created this
MR. RIJNA: No, not the tenants. The problem
was created through the homeless people, okay? The
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 32
people I got there, they all pay their rent and
they respect -- in other words, they got to live
with my law, okay? So I don't have any problem
with the renters. I don't have any problem
whatsoever. The only problem I got is I've got to
constantly teach them and, you know, reinforce
them. Even the kids.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Was this particular
location, was it boarded from entry?
MR. RIJNA: What?
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN:
It boarded --
Was it a boarded --
MR. RIJNA: Yes, yes.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: -- secured entry?
MR. RIJNA: Yes, everything was secure when I
left, okay? The doors, the garage doors which were
in other words secure, the glass in the back was so
secure. They broke the door and they also broke
the glass in the back.
Now, at this point I sealed everything off,
okay, again. Wood is so solid. I mean, they can
break in, don't get me wrong, okay, this group of
people. But I don't think they're going to break
in for one reason, because they understand the law.
A second offender, that means maybe they go to
jail. I don't know if it means anything to these
'--[ 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
t0
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
-- 24
25
people or not.
MR. PONTE:
MR. RIJNA:
MR. PONTE:
Page33
I don't know.
Mr. Rijna, clarification, please.
Yes.
Are we talking about two
properties? In other words, are the renters living
in one building and the trespassers living in the
garage? Is that what you're saying?
MR. RIJNA: It happened at the same time when
I was aware. In other words --
No, no, just --
-- I had the main house.
The main house, are your tenants
MR. PONTE:
MR. RIJNA:
MR. PONTE:
there?
MR. RIJNA:
MR. PONTE:
rent
MR. RIJNA:
okay?
MR. PONTE:
place?
MR. RIJNA:
Yes, the --
That is, the people who pay you
MR. RIJNA: -- other ones were trespassers.
THE COURT REPORTER: Excuse me --
The other ones were trespassers,
And they're living in the same
Were they living in the -- it's
a -- the unit complex, which I'll show you a
picture, if you've ever seen it --
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
is
MR. PONTE:
MR. RIJNA:
Page 34
Were they living in the garage?
Okay, the garage, okay, which
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: I'm sorry, Mr. Rijna, if
you would, please, just go back to the podium.
We'll have somebody put that on the screen.
MR. PONTE: Are the tenants who are paying you
rent living in one structure and the trespassers
living in another?
MR. RIJNA: They broke -- they broke through
the pool area and two of the rooms were vacant,
okay, with a lock on it. They broke the glass and
they move into those rooms, okay? From there,
there's access to the garage and they got into the
garage. You understand what I'm saying?
The house, in other words, is around 1,500
square feet. Then you got this garage, which is
approximately another 2,000 square feet. So what
they did, they broke through the corrugated metal
through the pool area. Then they broke through the
main house glass, okay, which rooms they broke
the glass. And then from there they got direct
access through the garage.
MR. PONTE: Did the tenants who were living
there, those who were paying the rent
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
- 24
25
Page 35
MR. RIJNA: No, not the tenants.
MR. PONTE: Did the tenants who are living
there, those who are paying you rent, did they
complain to you and say that there are trespassers
on that property and were fearful?
MR. RIJNA: Yes. When I came back, yes, they
did. Okay, the individual -- matter of fact, they
secured the sliding door with a chain, okay?
There's a sliding door which opens through the
pool. And that unit there not only was locked up,
they closed it with a chain, the individual that
was there. These are responsible people, the
people that are in there.
So I said to them, I'll call the cops. One
person said well, you know, I don't speak English,
I'm Spanish. Matter of fact, the cop, when he
interviewed him, when he caught the individuals in
the other unit, he said why don't you call us? He
said, well, I don't speak -- he said well, we speak
Spanish.
So in other words, this is part of all the
report in here. In other words, when -- even when
I was here daily, these people still broke in. And
the only reason why I was able to get them out,
because through the cops, they're violators. And I
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 36
was able to force them out instantly.
MS. DUSEK: Mr. Rijna?
MR. RIJNA: Yes.
MS. DUSEK: The trespassers only go into the
units which are empty; is that correct?
MR. RIJNA: Correct. The unit the house is
one unit, okay, which have bedroom, bedroom and
bedroom. But certain bedroom, I had them locked
from inside. But there is access from the swimming
pool area, which has glass.
broke in.
MS. DUSEK:
That's where they
Okay.
MS. SAUNDERS: Mr. Rijna, who put in -- can
you tell me who installed the makeshift bathroom
and kitchen in that area?
MR. RIJNA: No, no. I have installed
everything. They moved themselves. These people,
they moved the appliance -- these homeless people,
they set up a little shop.
MS. SAUNDERS: They put a bathroom in?
MR. RIJNA: No, the bathroom was always there.
The bathroom was when I bought that place,
Mr. Keller, that's the only bathroom that he had,
in other words, to go to the bathroom, because he
had an office in the garage. So that bathroom was
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
25
Page 37
always there. I never installed that bathroom.
And matter of fact, that bathroom right now is
locked. The garage is locked.
only have my car in that garage.
Everything in -- I
My wife told me,
if anybody gets into that garage, she's going to
burn the building down. Okay?
that. Everything is sealed off.
So that's simple as
But that doesn't
mean that these people can't go back in the way
they came in.
MS. GODFREY-LINT: Mr. Rijna, you're
constantly saying you're going there and checking
and cleaning up and doing all that.
MR. RIJNA: Yes.
MS. GODFREY-LINT: How come you didn't note
this?
MR. RIJNA: How come what?
MS. GODFREY-LINT: How come you did not note
the garage --
MR. RIJNA: I was away three weeks. This all
happened in three weeks. I was away to New York,
okay?
MS. GODFREY-LINT: These pictures show a
little bit more than three weeks of --
MR. RIJNA: Well, to you. You would be
surprised how fast these people work. I'm telling
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
25
Page 3 8
you -- I'm not telling you the truth is, she
came in, showed me the picture of one of the rooms
in the back, which I hadn't been in, okay, because
I just got back.
Believe me or not, I cleaned that room almost
the same day. Do you know what? Three or four
days later when these people -- here, I got the
report of the trespassers; I'll give you a copy,
okay, with the police department -- they made
themselves a home again. Not only did they
bring they bring microwaves, they bring
utensils, they -- I don't know where the hell they
get them all.
Okay, to give you an idea, I threw out another
container of 12, 15 yards of all garbage. And they
bring it back. I don't know what they work like
beavers. To you it might seem impossible, but to
them it's possible. What I'm saying to you is they
don't work, but when they want to do something,
they do it.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Mr. Rijna, would you
explain to me or try to give me a better feel for
what this complex looks like? Is it a
single-family house with a pool attached to it
and
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 39
MR. RIJNA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: a 2,000 square foot
garage attached to it?
MR. RIJNA: Okay, let me explain to you. This
house I guess was there prior to the other houses.
The house is solidly built. The person who built
it originally, that pool, I don't think even
million dollar homes have a pool like that. What
I'm saying to you --
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Ail I'm interested --
MR. RIJNA: the house originally -- and I
think the garage was part of it during, you know,
the original owner. So it's solidly built.
There's nothing wrong with it, it's just been
neglected over the years. But the house is solid.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Mr. Rijna, please, try to
just answer the question that I'm asking you.
The layout of this property
MR. RIJNA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN:
single-family house --
MR. RIJNA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN:
foot --
MR. RIJNA: Garage.
-- is it just a
-- with a 2,000 square
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page40
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: -- garage attached to it?
MR. RIJNA: Yes, as you see it there.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: With a pool in the back?
MR. RIJNA: It's all together. Ail together.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: How many tenants are in
there? Paying tenants.
MR. RIJNA: Right now I originally when
I rented, I'll tell you what, because there was so
many rooms, I used to have as many as eight
tenants, okay, which the room could carry. Then I
made a deal with them, I says I only want four
tenants and that's all. I don't want any more,
because they brought people in and out, in and out.
You can't keep track of it.
And I closed -- after that happened, you know,
with this board, I locked the rooms. I locked -- I
put some of the units I put the lock on it. I
don't want any more people in there because it
brings problems.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN:
getting confused.
and you have units.
MR. RIJNA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN:
house have?
And this is where I'm
You keep saying you locked rooms
How many bedrooms does this
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
-- 24
25
Page 41
MR. RIJNA: Well, you've got one which, in
other words, the guys that was in there converted
like a little -- I guess it was a study, and they
converted it to a bedroom. So if you even
eliminate that, there's got to be at least four
bedrooms.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: So you have basically a
four-bedroom house
MR. RIJNA: That's right.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: -- you have a pool in the
back of it and you've got a
MR. RIJNA: The garage.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: 2,000 square foot
garage.
MR. RIJNA:
It's all one piece, one unit.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: The issues that we're
looking at are pertaining specifically to the
garage?
MS. VanPOUCKE:
the two gentlemen that I spoke with that were
living in the garage told me that they each paid
$125 a month --
MR. RIJNA:
MS. VanPOUCKE:
MR. RIJNA:
Right.
I would just like to add that
He's the --
in rent.
That is correct.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 42
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: So we have tenants
physically living in the garage.
MR. RIJNA: In reality, Mr. Chairman, they
didn't pay even the people the cops yeah, I
pay my rent. I say, who do you pay your rent to?
These are the homeless people. That's what they
claim.
Why would I hire -- why would I, you know, go
through all the trouble to collect that kind of
money? And that's what they -- and the guy says
yeah, yeah, I gave him the money. Who the hell is
that guy, I said?
these people out.
MS. SAUNDERS:
But the cops were able to throw
Did they indicate who they paid
the rent to, by any chance?
MS. VanPOUCKE: Mr. Rijna?
MR. RIJNA: Never got anybody.
MS. SAUNDERS: Do you verify do you think
the 1,500 square foot is an approximate size,
appropriate -- about the size of the house?
MS. VanPOUCKE: Yes.
MS. SAUNDERS: I never heard of a 1,500 square
foot four-bedroom house. They must be
three-by-five rooms.
MS. VanPOUCKE: I'm only aware of two
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
bedrooms.
MS. SAUNDERS:
MS. VanPOUCKE:
MS. SAUNDERS:
MS. VanPOUCKE:
Two bedrooms?
Yes.
Thank you.
Other rooms that have been
Page 43
converted to bedrooms --
MS. SAUNDERS: Converted to bedrooms.
MS. VanPOUCKE: -- but legally two bedrooms.
MR. RIJNA: My dear, Westchester County, 1,500
square feet years ago was a super house. You all
are spoiled down here, you know, what do you got,
40,000 square feet, you only have one bedroom.
MS. SAUNDERS: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Just one second, Mr. Rijna.
MS. SAUNDERS: One more question for the
county. Is there -- isn't there a regulation or a
law that indicates how many unrelated individuals
can live in a property?
MS. ARNOLD: There's a regulation pertaining
to the number of persons per household. I mean,
there's it's been now up to 200 square feet for
the first person and then 150 square feet for each
person thereafter, so we have that regulation.
There is also something saying that no more
than I believe it's four, but I'm not certain, for
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page44
unrelated persons, other than group home designated
facilities or other types of those types of
facilities, then there's an exception to that rule.
MS. SAUNDERS: I thought it was three, but I'm
not certain of that.
MR. PONTE: Investigator, is the house now
empty?
MS. VanPOUCKE: No. He has from what he
tells me, he has four renters in the unit.
MR. RIJNA: At the present, there's only two,
because two walked out.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: In the house portion?
MS. VanPOUCKE: Yes.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: And you're concerned --
MR. PONTE: And none in the garage.
MS. VanPOUCKE: None in the garage.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: And your concerns are
specifically with the garage, or with the house as
well?
MS. VanPOUCKE:
MS. CURATOLO:
Both.
The people that you spoke to
said they rented in the garage?
MS. VanPOUCKE: Yes. And you I mean, they
had beds and a refrigerator and a hot plate and
their clothes were all there.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 45
MS. DUSEK: Cathy, these pictures that we're
looking at, are they both from the house and the
garage?
MS. VanPOUCKE: Yes.
MS. DUSEK: Mr. Rijna, you've seen this
package that the county has given us with pictures?
MR. RIJNA: I saw the package. I didn't --
tell you the truth, I tried to hire a lawyer again.
You know what his words were? He said why waste
your money and time? That's what he told me, okay?
I seen the package. Pictures doesn't tell the
whole story, okay?
They made up -- first of all, those are
appliances that they had. I don't know where they
got them. They were not connected because they had
no electric there, okay, because the garage is
under my meter service, and that's cut off. So the
microwave, yeah, they got probably somehow an
irregular unit because it has electric, you know,
that's ll0-amp, so they were able to plug that in.
MS. DUSEK: Mr. Rijna?
MR. RIJNA: Yes.
MS. DUSEK: It's been so testified that these
pictures are pictures also of the house.
MR. RIJNA: I under -- I understand that.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
25
MS. DUSEK:
MR. RIJNA:
So
I understand that.
Page 46
And it's part
of the house, but they came in through the pool
area, these people, and those doors were locked
originally.
MS. DUSEK: I'm not talking about those who
trespass.
MR. RIJNA: Yes.
MS. DUSEK: I'm talking about those who live
there. If these pictures indicate that this is
also what it looks like inside of the house,
then --
MR. RIJNA: Believe me, it doesn't take much.
Like, for example for example, I mean, it's not
their fault. They came in, they took a picture of
a faucet that looked like leaked, but didn't leak.
The other one, they had it taped off, because these
people don't understand drainage. It was plugged
by hair. So in other words, not to use the water,
okay, and overflow, they taped everything.
So I didn't replace any of the fixtures, all I
do is flush it out. So basically the knowledge
they have is not of today's accepting of drainage
and all that. So I -- you know
MR. PONTE: Mr. Rijna, I have one final
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
question for you.
MR. RIJNA:
MR. PONTE:
Page 47
Yes.
Even though you're not under oath,
are you asking us to believe that the photo of the
toilet and the sink and all that plumbing work was
established in the garage by people who broke in?
MR. RIJNA: No, the garage -- you're talking
about two I think the pictures you refer is to
the one in the main house, the toilet.
MR. PONTE: I'm looking at the picture that
says bathroom in garage.
MR. RIJNA:
MR. PONTE:
MR. RIJNA:
the people? Yes.
Bathroom in the garage.
Bathroom in garage.
Right, okay. Was it broke in by
The toilet -- I mean, they still
operate. I didn't do anything to that room. I
haven't done anything. I just closed the door and
I put the -- I put a lock into it. I haven't done
anything to that room. I have no intention of
going in the garage.
So the one -- the pictures that she's got I
think is the main house, okay? And you believe me
or not, I didn't do anything, I just put Drano.
The one where she shows with the bowl underneath
there, I didn't even touch it because it's not
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
leaking.
bowl there.
So, I mean, this is the truth.
Page 48
The bowl, I don't know why they had the
Whatever you want
Mr. Rijna, I think it would
probably give the board a little more confidence in
your testimony if it was under oath.
MR. RIJNA: Yes, I am under oath, and I
believe in almighty God. And I believe in the
truth, believe me or not. I mean, the joke -- that
MS. DUSEK:
MR. RIJNA:
protested.
wrong.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN:
was a joke what I said at the beginning. And this
happened to this country, okay, and it's sad.
MS. DUSEK: Mr. Rijna, when you were sworn in,
you did not respond. Did you not hear?
MR. RIJNA: No, I did -- I responded in a
different way because the President, what he did.
It was what it is, it ain't what it was. And I
just want to show, you know, what does it mean?
Ail right.
And that's the only reason why I
I believe in the truth, don't get me
Jean, are we to infer that
Mr. Rijna's testimony now is under oath or not?
You believe it
or not, I raise my hand or not.
to believe, you believe.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN:
~ 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
-- 24
25
Page 49
MS. RAWSON: I don't think you can infer
anything. We can have the court reporter swear him
in again, if you'd like.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Please.
MR. RIJNA:
is the truth, okay?
goes back a long way.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN:
I swear. I swear that everything
I don't believe -- my family
Mr. Rijna, would you please
let the court reporter just swear you in and answer
her question.
(Speaker was duly sworn.)
MR. RIJNA: That is the truth.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Now, Mr. Rijna, I'm looking
at some photographs here. This is Page 26 of the
package, if you want to follow. And it is broken
windows and doors.
MR. RIJNA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Is this the house, the
garage, or what is this?
MR. RIJNA: Which one where are they?
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: It's Page 26, if you could
put that up.
MS. SAUNDERS: You could look on the screen.
MR. RIJNA: Bottom of the garage, okay?
That's the door to the garage, okay? That's the
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
door they broke.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN:
Page 50
This bottom picture here.
MR. RIJNA: The bottom picture, that's part of
the house. They broke that also, okay?
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: So you're saying that these
people had broken into your house.
MR. RIJNA: This one they didn't -- they broke
the glass, but there was nobody in the unit, okay?
There was nobody into that unit.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Okay, if we go to Page 27
of the package, the center photograph. I have
broken and missing windows again in the center
picture.
MR. RIJNA: Okay, that actually -- the one
piece -- there's two of them. Do you have both of
them on that? There was two opening. Okay, one --
MS. VanPOUCKE: That's the garage.
MR. RIJNA: One without a piece of plywood,
and they took it out. The other one had a piece of
plywood and a screen, and they took it out.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: But this is the garage?
MR. RIJNA: Yeah, that's the garage area.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: If you go to Page 28, the
bottom picture, broken windows and doors. Is that
the house or the garage?
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
P~e 51
MR. RIJNA: That's the house, okay? It had a
broken I replaced that glass probably three,
four times. And the people put a piece of plywood
on it, okay, to protect it. It's a piece of
plywood up on top. And since then I replaced that
glass again. And that glass has been replaced
maybe three, four times already.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN:
the garage.
MR. RIJNA:
But this is the house, not
That's the house, that's correct.
It's yellow right now, but I just painted it white,
last picture that you see.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Okay, go back to Page 29 of
the packet, the top photograph. These are bedroom
windows, broken --
MR. RIJNA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: -- boarded up. Is that the
house?
MR. RIJNA: That was all -- when I left for
New York, everything was fine. When I came back,
they were broken, okay? Matter of fact, I think
one of the windows, which doesn't show now, I think
the people themselves did it because they put an
air condition (sic) on one of the windows. That's
where they broke the window, okay? It doesn't show
t
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 52
on this, but I believe on the other -- I don't know
if -- there's a later picture which they put a new
air condition in there.
But anyway, the glass has been replaced.
There's one unit there right now which is air
conditioned. So the people, maybe they did break
that one window. The other one I replaced. So
let's hope it's taken care of.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: So you're saying that
everything that we've seen just with the house
alone is caused by transients?
MR. RIJNA: That was what? I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: That was caused by homeless
people breaking into the home?
MR. RIJNA: Not these. I don't know if
these -- I can't swear they did. This is not the
area that I'm talking about. It's the area by the
pool. If you've got any pictures by the pool, I'll
show you the area where they broke in.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: I'm just referring to the
photographs we've just seen.
MR. RIJNA: No, this here, I can't swear that
the homeowners did it. This probably -- like I
said, one window, they maybe had -- was a tenant
that he had to put -- you know, install an air
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
conditioner.
So, I mean, I never saw it broken.
Page 53
The only
time I saw it broken, when I came back and she
pointed it out. I know, I was going to take care
of it anyway. I don't like to see it like that.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: And again, when did you
leave and head up north and come back again? What
were your travel dates?
MR. RIJNA: I'm sorry?
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: When did you leave to go up
north and come back?
MR. RIJNA: I've got to look at the it was
the beginning of the last month, which would have
been -- this is May, it would have been April,
okay? And then I came in towards when just
about, I think a day or two before in other
words, that she notified me. So I got to look at
the you know, I would have to ask my wife.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Okay. And again, if we
look at the rest of the pictures in the photograph,
you're saying that everything that we see in the
package, bathroom sinks, toilets, appliances, areas
converted into living areas, garage areas converted
into living areas, that was all done by people
breaking into the home and doing what they want?
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 54
MR. RIJNA: Repeat that? I'm so sorry.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: What we're saying is that
all the rest of the photographs in our evidence
package --
MR. RI JNA:
Yes.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: -- such as broken sinks,
leaking toilets, people converting garage areas
into living areas, are all caused by people
breaking into your home and setting up shop by
themselves.
MR. RIJNA:
the ones that she has some pictures of where the
bathrooms, the fixtures, I don't know, you might
That is correct. The major part,
In other words, that was
They taped -- all they
did is they taped the knobs.
But the rest of the stuff was all damaged
through the the corrugated metal which protects
the pool, from there they got access -- they broke
doors inside the house to get in through the
garage. Which also there's a door in one of the
units that goes directly to the garage. And that's
how all the other -- how they moved in there. Then
eventually I guess they must have broke the garage
door. I don't know what the hell they were doing.
have that picture there.
done by the tenant, okay?
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
But if you
copy of these.
the police department. It shows the record of
these people being in there after the day which
was I believe the 7th the 12th of -- the 7th, I
think it was. 05-06-02. Twice, different
occasions, after this that they broke in. I'll
give you a copy, if you want to make copies.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Mr. Rijna, do you have any
other testimony you'd like to give?
MR. RIJNA: What?
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Anything else you'd like to
say on behalf of your case?
MR. RIJNA: No, pretty much, you know, this is
the way the situation is. And I hope that, you
know, they don't come back, because I think they
prob -- they're still around the area, these
people. And they're going to hit somebody else,
I'm sure. And I don't know how far spread it is.
I know it was about seven or eight people. And
they all walk around now they even trespass me.
And the same person I kicked out I said, "What are
you doing there? That's my property."
"Oh," he says, "I didn't know this was your
property." Because I happen to own the property
Page55
want, sir, I mean, I'll give you a
These are a copy that I got from
-- 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
~23
~-~ 24
25
Pa~ 56
next to the St. Vincent, okay, de Paul. He says --
he starts cursing at me. And he's going to take my
property away, he's going to take me to court, he
wants to kill me. I said, "Go ahead, kill me."
Because he was already once contested. If I would
have called the cops again, you know, then they
I don't know if they would have done anything.
So the group of people and they -- you
know, they go across the street, they cut through
the prop -- but not anymore. I tried it, you know,
to oversee, you know, what situation. I tell the
neighbors, if you see these people, call the cops,
call the cops.
MS. RAWSON: Mr. Rijna, would you like for me
to have this marked as your exhibit?
If you need it, if you want it,
MR. RIJNA:
yes, go ahead.
MS. RAWSON:
MR. RIJNA:
And pass it through the board?
Yeah, sure. I've got my own
pictures, which if you want to mark them, you could
keep them.
MR. PONTE:
MR. RIJNA:
there's nobody on the job during the day.
work, these people. There's nobody there.
I think Mr. Rijna --
I'll tell you, Mr. Chairman,
They all
There's
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
P~e 57
never anybody there.
MS. RAWSON: You have to be real quiet while
she marks this, because she can't take down
everything you're saying.
MR. RIJNA: Ail right, thank you.
MR. PONTE: I think Mr. Rijna has done an
extensive job in attempting to confuse us.
MS. RAWSON: Hold on.
(Respondent's Deposition Exhibit 1 marked for
identification.)
(Respondent's Deposition Exhibit 2 marked for
identification.)
MR. PONTE: I think Mr. Rijna has done an
extensive effort in attempting to confuse this
board, and we've got to focus on what we were here
to evaluate in the first place and that's whether
or not this is a repeat violation. That's what
we're talking about.
MS. RAWSON: Do you want your pictures marked
as well?
MR. RIJNA: If you want to, yes, go ahead.
MS. RAWSON: For the record then, we'll mark
Respondent's Exhibits 1, 2 and 3. If you'll give
the court reporter a second, we'll mark the
pictures.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page58
(Respondent's Deposition Exhibit 3 marked for
identification.)
MS. RAWSON: For the record, we've marked 10
pictures as Respondent's Exhibit 3. And I will at
this time pass through the board Respondent's
Exhibits 1, 2 and 3.
MR. FLEGAL: I'll make a motion we accept
Respondent's Exhibits 1 through 3.
MR. PONTE: So moved.
MS. DUSEK: Second.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: We have a motion and a
second. Ail those in favor, signify by saying aye.
MS. DUSEK: Aye.
MS. SAUNDERS: Aye.
MR. PONTE: Aye.
MR. FLEGAL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN:
MS. CURATOLO: Aye.
MS. GODFREY-LINT:
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN:
(No response.)
Aye .
Aye.
Opposed?
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Motion passes.
MS. SAUNDERS: Mr. Rijna, I have one I hope
final question for you. You have an outstanding
fine of $11,408. What are you doing to pay that?
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 59
MR. RIJNA: My dear, I'm a little short right
now. I'm hoping to sell something so I can pay it
off. My wife, you know, we don't want those things
over our heads. Our intention is to pay it. I
mean, as they say, bye-bye is bye-bye, you know
So let bygones, bygones. So that's
what they say?
history.
MS. SAUNDERS: So you own a number of other
properties; is that right?
MR. RIJNA: That's the only piece that I own
down in here. I own a piece in Cape Coral which I
had it since 1970.
I'm a permanent resident, by the way, of this
county, okay? So my interest is in the people, in
the county. My interest is in the little people,
the high people, the middle people.
MS. SAUNDERS: Thank you.
MR. RIJNA: And that's what it's all about.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Mr. Rijna, do you have
anything further to add before we close to
MR. RIJNA: No.
MR. PONTE: I have just one quick question.
have one question.
MR. RIJNA: Mr. Chairman
MR. PONTE: I have one question.
I
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
them.
took them about a couple days ago.
P~e 60
When were these photos taken?
MR. RIJNA: I just took those after I painted
I just painted the apartments, so I just
Those are --
MR. PONTE: I see.
of the apartment now?
MR. RIJNA: Yes.
So this is the condition
Matter of fact, I even
sprayed the glass and they cleaned it up, okay?
MR. PONTE: Okay.
MR. RIJNA: So we're doing that clean-up now.
So I sprayed the whole thing.
And matter of fact, the people who are mn
there, they even going to paint the inside. They
seem like they have some care towards the unit.
They cleaned up the kitchen, they spruced it up,
they cleaned the bathroom. So there's good
intention, it seems like.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Mr. Rijna?
MR. RIJNA: The only thing I got to add to
you, and I think back to the beginning,
Mr. Chairman and members of the board, I am sorry
the situation, that it isn't the first time, okay?
And I am sorry that
doesn't recognize it.
I'm not saying this board
I think the police
department made it very clear to me, and they said
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 61
yes, we've got to work together.
These homeless people, for example, the only
reason why they hang around a condition like that,
and I understand there's housing for them. The
only reason why they hang around there they made
me aware of the situation they're able to take
drugs and they'd be able to drink on the -- you
know, on my site. And they're not able to drink
and do that where they live.
So there is a problem. And it's everybody's
problem. These are all kids. I caught a guy in
there, to give you an idea, Mr. Chairman, a lawyer.
He was a lawyer, young man. Lawyer. I said, "What
are you doing?" I said, "Why don't you get a job?"
He said, "I came down, moved to the county, I was
hoping to, you know, get a job. I don't have a
job."
But he said to me, "I am an educated man, a
college man, I'm a lawyer." And that's not saying
there's something wrong with these people. They
need a lot of help, lot of assistance. They
some are on drugs, some are alcoholics. And it's a
community problem.
So that's all I can say to you. And I am
willing to work with anybody and help anybody.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 62
That's my way I was brought up. So if there's a
way of helping these people, I'll pitch in, I'll
help. You know, I give them my time, the money and
whatever.
But it's a problem that it's recognizable
here, and something's got to be done. These could
be your kids, they could be my kids being out
there. They're kids, a lot of them. So they're a
little mixed up.
into the routine.
educated people.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN:
much.
MR. RIJNA:
They fell into drugs, they fell
And you're talking about
Mr. Rijna, thank you very
Thank you.
But again, we're getting
If you
Mr. Rijna?
then.
MS. DUSEK:
the case of the Board of County Commissioners
versus Shad Davis, Incorporated, CEB Case No.
2002-009, that there is a repeat violation. The
violation is of Ordinance No. 91-06, amended by
I'd like to make a motion that in
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN:
very far off base on this particular case.
could have a seat, please.
Any questions from the board for the county or
None? Open the floor for discussion
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 63
2002-5 Section 5, Paragraphs 1, 2, 5, 7, 12(c),
12(i), 12(1). And at this point I pause, because I
don't have a copy of 12-(o), 12-(p) and 12-(q). I
don't know whether that can be read to us or if I'm
the only one missing that.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: No, I'm missing it as well.
MS. DUSEK: I'll include those in the motion
once they've been read, but I'll continue at this
point.
16(a) and (b) .
And Ordinance No. 91-102, amended, Sections
2.7.6, paragraphs 1 -- and again I pause, I don't
have 5. And I'll wait for that to be read.
MS. RAWSON:
MS. DUSEK:
MS. RAWSON:
Which ones are you missing?
12-(o), (p) and (q).
12-(o), interior doors. Every
interior door shall be properly fitted within its
frame.
(p), interior floor walls and ceilings.
dwelling or dwelling unit shall have a permanent
floor of approved material prescribed by the
building code. Every floor and interior wall shall
be kept free from infestation and in good repair,
and shall be capable of supporting the load which
normal use may cause to be placed thereon.
Every
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 64
Did you say (q)?
MS. DUSEK: And (q) .
MS. RAWSON: Structural supports. Every
structural element of a dwelling or dwelling unit
shall be maintained in good repair and show no
evidence of deterioration which would render it
incapable of carrying loads which normal use may
cause to be placed thereon.
MS. DUSEK: Ail right, I include those in the
motion.
And then it was Section 5 it was section
2.6 -- 2.7.6, Paragraph 5.
MS. RAWSON: Of the Land Development Code,
right?
MS. DUSEK: Yes. 91-102.
MS. RAWSON: Would you give me those sections
again?
MS. DUSEK: It was Ordinance No. 91-102,
Section 2.7.6, Paragraph 5.
MS. RAWSON: Paragraph 5, improvement of
property prohibited prior to issuance of building
permit. No site work removal of protected
vegetation, grading, improvement of property or
construction of any type may be commenced prior to
the issuance of a building permit where the
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 65
development proposed requires a building permit
under this Land Development Code, or other
applicable county regulations. Exceptions to this
requirement may be granted by the community
development and environmental services
administrator for an approved subdivision or site
development plan to provide for distribution of
fill excavated on-site or to permit construction of
an approved water management system. To minimize
stockpiles or hauling off-site, or to protect the
public health, safety and welfare, where clearing,
grading and filling plans have been submitted and
approved, meeting the warrants of Section 3.2.3.6
of this code, removal of exotic vegetation shall be
exempted upon receipt of a vegetation removal
permit for exotics, pursuant to Division 3.9.
I think that probably we're talking about the
first part, no improvement of property or
construction of any type prior to the issuance of a
building permit.
MS. DUSEK: Is that part of his citing?
MS. ARNOLD: And I'll have the investigator
confirm this. I believe that there was some
permitted type of work constructed inside the unit
without permits.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
P~e 66
MS. DUSEK: Okay. I'll include that.
And continuing, Section 1.5.6, Section 2.1.11.
Section 2.1.15, Paragraph 1. Section 3.3.11 of the
Collier County Land Development Code.
And do you want me to go ahead and read the
description of the violation, Ms. Rawson, is
that
MS. RAWSON:
MS. DUSEK:
Yes, I think so.
Description of violation:
Garage
facility consisting of a makeshift kitchen, bedroom
and bathroom. Same garage facility having
undergone renovations resulting in additional
sleeping quarters and additional bathroom
facilities not to Collier County code.
There is not a Collier County site improvement
plan on record, and no Collier County permit for
improvements on record.
Housing violations consisting of broken and
missing bathroom fixtures, inoperable stove,
leaking roof over kitchen and living room areas,
broken and missing windows throughout, and an
overall lack of basic maintenance resulting in a
nuisance and fire hazard to occupants.
MR. FLEGAL: Bobbi, I'd make one comment,
since we've now heard it. One of the items Ms.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 67
Rawson read had to do with structural -- I've read
nothing in this package and heard no evidence, have
seen no pictures, anything to do with a structural
member of this property being in jeopardy.
MS. DUSEK: I think that was 12-(q). But I
believe that it continued to say that anything that
might lead to structural damage. Because I --
MR. FLEGAL: Well, based on what they've
submitted to us, what is that? A missing bathroom
fixture? Doubtful. An inoperable stove?
Doubtful. The window --
MS. ARNOLD: Well, the roof is a structural
item. And if there's leaking over the roof,
there's possibly an effect to that structural
member of the
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Is the building envelope
not considered a structural element also --
MS. ARNOLD: Yes.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: -- such as windows, doors
and so forth?
MS. ARNOLD: Any windows or doors and those
types of things are also structural.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Okay. So the lack of
windows or windows in disrepair would be considered
proper under that code issue?
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2O
21
22
23
24
25
MS. ARNOLD: Correct.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Thank you.
MS. DUSEK:
MR. FLEGAL:
MS. SAUNDERS:
Is that acceptable, Cliff?
Sure.
I would second that motion.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: We have a motion and a
second. Any further discussion?
Ail those in favor, signify by saying aye.
Aye .
Aye.
Aye.
Aye.
MR. FLEGAL:
MS. DUSEK:
MS. CURATOLO:
MS. SAUNDERS:
Aye.
Aye.
Page 68
MS. GODFREY-LINT:
MR. PONTE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN:
Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Motion passes unanimously.
Order of the board?
MS. SAUNDERS: I move that a fine of $500 for
a repeat violation be imposed, and as well as all
costs for prosecution of this case.
MS. DUSEK: I second.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: We have a motion and a
second.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 69
Ail those in favor, signify by saying aye.
MS. CURATOLO: Aye.
MS. DUSEK: Aye.
MR. FLEGAL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Aye.
MS. SAUNDERS: Aye.
MS. GODFREY-LINT: Aye.
MR. PONTE: Aye.
Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Motion passes.
Mr. Rijna, do you understand what position the
board has taken on this?
I'm sorry, would you please come to the podium
again?
MR. RIJNA: I don't agree with the fine,
Mr. Chairman. But if that's what the board
chooses, that's your privilege. And I can't do
anything about it, okay, so basically you made your
case, in other words, and why you fine me. If
that's what you decided, what can I do? I mean,
that's the way it is, life.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: The more important issue on
this particular case is the fact that we have a
repeat violation.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page70
MR. RIJNA: I understand that, sir, but this
had nothing to do with in other words, on my
doing. And believe me, I tried. I can't do any
more, as my wife says, than I have done. That's
all, Mr. Chairman, that's all I can tell you. I
did everything I consciously could do, and
physically and mentally. That's all I could say to
you.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Thank you, sir.
Let's take a 10-minute break before we go on
to the next case, please. We'll recess.
(A recess was taken.)
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: I'd like to call the board
back from recess.
case, please.
MS. PETRULLI:
If we can proceed with the next
Our next case is CEB Case No.
2002-010, Board of County Commissioners versus
Moises Castillo.
I would like to ask, for the record, if
Mr. Castillo is present.
Let the record show that Mr. Castillo is not
present.
We have provided the board and the respondent
with a packet of information, and at this time I'd
like to enter it as Composite Exhibit A.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 71
MS. DUSEK: I make a motion that we accept the
Composite Exhibit A from the county.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Do I hear a second?
MS. CURATOLO: Second.
MR. PONTE: So moved.
MS. PETRULLI: The alleged violation
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: One second, please.
MS. PETRULLI: I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Ail those in favor, signify
by saying aye.
MS. DUSEK: Aye.
MS. SAUNDERS: Aye.
MR. PONTE: Aye.
MS. GODFREY-LINT: Aye.
MS. CURATOLO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Aye.
MR. FLEGAL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Thank you.
MS. PETRULLI: The alleged violation is of
Section 2.7.6.1 and 2.7.6.5 of Ordinance No. 91-102
of the Collier County Land Development Code.
The description of the violation is a
converted garage into a living area without first
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 72
obtaining building permits, inspections, or
certificate of occupancy.
The location and address where the violation
exists is 5378 Carolina Avenue, Naples, Florida;
more particularly described as Folio No.
0000062201120002, Naples Manor, Block 4, Lot 8.
The name and address of the owner, person in
charge of the location where the violation exists,
is Moises Castillo, 5378 Carolina Avenue, Naples,
Florida.
The date the violation was first observed was
February 21st of 2001.
The date that the owner was given a notice of
violation was November 6th of 2001. And the
violation was to have been corrected by November
20th of 2001.
Date of reinspection, December 14th of 2001,
January 4th, 2001, February 7th and April 18th of
2001 (sic). And Investigator Jason Toreky was
there yesterday, May 22nd of 2002. The results of
the reinspection show that the violations remained.
At this time I would like Investigator Jason
Toreky to take over the case and present it to the
board.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Would you swear the
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 73
witness, please.
(Speaker was duly sworn.)
MS. RAWSON: Mr. Castillo is present.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Thank you. Would you
please swear Mr. Castillo in, please.
(Speaker was duly sworn.)
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Thank you.
Please proceed.
MR. TOREKY: Okay. My name is Jason Toreky,
I'm an investigator with code enforcement.
And to give you a brief summary here, I
received an anonymous citizen's complaint on
February 21st, 2001. A garage located at 5378
Carolina Avenue in Naples Manor subdivision was
converted to living space without building permits.
Upon arrival of the first visit, I observed
two wall type air conditioners, two windows which
appeared to be newly installed in the garage area.
On site I spoke to Danny Marriquin who advised
garage was occupied and -- was occupied and he
would obtain the required building permits for the
owner. An NOV was issued to Danny at that time.
Some time lapsed after that. I met Danny in
the office several times to try to assist him in
the permitting process to obtain a permit for the
1
2
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
P~e 74
garage. A good portion of that time was held up
due to them getting a survey, trying to get a copy
of the previous survey when they purchased the
property. They were unable to get that, so they
obtained a survey themselves.
On July 18th, it was determined that a survey
was obtained. Mr. Castillo and Mr. Marriquin, they
were still working on the permit.
It was also determined with the survey that
the garage can be permitted for a living space,
that it did meet the required elevation.
On October 6th, NOV was issued to the actual
owner, Moises Castillo, with a compliance date of
October 20th. Owner advised he was trying to --
trying again to finish the process of getting a
permit.
On October 21st, met with owner and
Mr. Marriquin in office with a customer service
rep., and found that the process is -- was a very
involved process, and it was advised a contractor
should possibly be hired to obtain a permit for the
improvements. Mr. Marriquin advised he knew of
some contractors in town and advised he would
contact them.
October 21st, 2001, was advised that Mr.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
P~e 75
Marriquin and Mr. Castillo have contacted a
contractor. They advised the contractor to contact
me in the next few weeks.
Did not receive any contact from that
contractor. And they advised they were still
working on trying to get a different contractor to
finish up the paperwork and everything, and they
did not.
Several months went by and then the case was
prepared for the CEB. And the violation still
remained as of yesterday, and we're here today.
MR. PONTE: Investigator Toreky, I have a
question. As we read the executive summary here,
there seems to be a question of confusion and not
understanding. And as a matter of fact, it states
that they didn't understand what was required, what
was needed. What -- after all the meetings that
were held, what was not to be understood?
MR. TOREKY: The problem is they -- the
permitting process is what was not understood.
They've been in our office several times with our
permitting staff to try to obtain their permits.
And the information that was provided to them, they
didn't understand some of it and they went back and
forth. So they were required to do a drawing, so
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 76
they did the drawing, they brought the drawing in.
It lacked, you know, key information. So they
re-did it again, they brought it in again, and they
were missing something else. They've been in our
office several times trying to obtain a permit
themselves.
And it was determined the last time they were
in there that a contractor should possibly be
contracted for it, due to the extensive amount of
information that was required for it.
Is there a second language problem
MR. PONTE:
here?
MR. TOREKY:
That, too. They're Spanish. And
Danny Marriquin is the -- he lives in the household
with them. He's friends of the family. He speaks
English and he was the one that was trying to
originally obtain the permit.
The actual properly owner does speak English,
but it's a little bit broken up.
MR. PONTE:
MS. DUSEK:
MR. TOREKY:
Thank you.
Exactly what does he need now?
At this point the law has changed
regarding the wind loads and things like that. His
drawings that he has, they possibly might need to
be amended and he would have to have a surveyor --
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 77
I shouldn't say surveyor -- engineered drawing or
certified architect stamp those drawings saying
that they would meet the wind load. That's what
he's missing at this time.
MR. PONTE: Why was he not advised of that
closer to the date, rather than having all of the
work finally getting -- get completed and then say
you've got to revise your drawings.
MR. TOREKY: We've been around and around
with -- I've been trying to deal with them, and
they just -- every time they come in they don't
have the proper paperwork that's required.
MS. ARNOLD: Jason, did you advise them that
the law was going to change --
MR. TOREKY:
MS. ARNOLD:
MR. TOREKY:
MS. CURATOLO:
Yes, I did.
-- around March?
Yes.
That was my question.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: And again, do we have any
permit application that's on file?
MR. TOREKY: No, we do not.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: So we don't even have an
application at this point?
MR. TOREKY: No. They wouldn't -- the packet
that they put together, the -- it would not have
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 78
said that. They wouldn't take it in to even apply
for a permit. It didn't have enough information
that was required.
MR. FLEGAL: Did they -- I don't know how to
phrase the question. Does Mr. Castillo fully
understand everything he has to give the county to
start the permitting process?
MR. TOREKY:
MR. FLEGAL:
Yes.
I mean, rather than make 75 trips
down there and then be missing a piece of paper,
does he understand now that he has to come with "X"
and he can get started with the paperwork process?
MR. TOREKY: The last time he was in there and
we had the meeting with the customer service reps
there, which is the individuals that give the
permits, a list was provided to him totally what he
needed to do.
him.
MR. FLEGAL:
MR. TOREKY:
MR. FLEGAL:
And we haven't heard anything from
And this was when, approximately?
October 21st.
Okay. At that time he was
advised of everything he had to bring?
MR. TOREKY: Exactly. He was given a total
list and he was advised that, you know, it was very
involved and it may be a good idea to contact
--- 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
-- 24
25
you know, contract a contractor to do that.
MS. CURATOLO:
understand?
MR. TOREKY:
In your opinion, did he
Yes, he understood.
I've even
the board?
MR. PONTE:
Just one. Is it your impression
that the respondent was just wasting everybody's
time, was just killing us with kindness and it
looked as if he was working toward completing the
job to be done, or --
MR. TOREKY: I think in the beginning that was
the case. I think it's -- since the beginning of
this year, it's kind of been idling is the way I
feel.
MR. PONTE: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Mr. Castillo, do you have
something you would like to say?
MR. CASTILLO: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: You don't have anything you
would like to present for your side of the case?
MR. CASTILLO: Well, what can I say? I was
talking to these guys and I tell them if you guys
Any further questions from
Page 79
had translators explain to them the situation as
well.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
P~e80
give me some time, I can drop everything, you know,
off and make the garage. It's my first property,
and I don't know what's the kind of problems, you
know.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Well, they've already given
you some time since March 5th
MR. CASTILLO: Yeah, I know.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: -- of 2001.
MR. CASTILLO: Well, he just come yesterday,
you know, that I had a court. And I didn't know
that.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Any questions for
Mr. Castillo from the board?
MS. DUSEK: Mr. Castillo, are you going to be
getting a contractor to help you, or an engineer
or --
MR. CASTILLO: No, no, I don't have that kind
of money too, either, you know. I got to take
everything down and make the garage working again,
you know. Like I tell Jason first time that I buy
the house, it was -- the garage was already a wall
right in the middle in the garage. I can put my
car all the way in there, you know. There was
already a big wall in the middle in the garage when
I bought the house.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
own?
MS. DUSEK:
MR. TOREKY:
original
MS. DUSEK:
P~e 81
Will he be able to do this on his
To convert it back to its
Well, I realize he could do that.
I don't know if -- is that your intent, to convert
it back?
MR. CASTILLO: To a garage.
MS. DUSEK: To a garage.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Bear in mind, sir, if that
is your intent, you will probably need a demolition
permit, which is much easier to get. Just bear in
mind, you'll probably need a permit for that, or we
might be seeing you here again saying you did
something, you know, without a permit.
MS. CURATOLO: Do you understand that you need
a demolition permit?
MR. CASTILLO: Yes.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Any other questions?
Thank you, sir.
Comments, discussion?
I would entertain a motion for a finding of
fact, if we don't have any further discussion.
MS. DUSEK: I make a motion that in the case
of the Board of County Commissioners versus Moises
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Castillo, in the case CEB No. 2001-010,
is a violation, and the violation is of
2.7.6.1, and 2.7.6.5 of Ordinance 91-102,
Collier County Land Development Code.
The description of the violation:
garage into a living area without first
Page 82
that there
Sections
the
Converted
obtaining
building
permits, inspections, certificate of
Do I hear
second
occupancy.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN:
MS. SAUNDERS: I'll
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: We have
second. Any further discussion?
favor, signify by saying aye.
MS. DUSEK: Aye.
Aye.
Aye.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN:
MS. SAUNDERS: Aye.
MS. GODFREY-LINT:
MR. FLEGAL: Aye.
MS. CURATOLO: Aye.
MR. PONTE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Motion passes.
May we have an order of the board?
MR. PONTE: I'd just like to find
a second?
that.
a motion and a
Ail those in
out, is
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 83
there anything that the county can do to help the
respondent find a contractor or someone who is
going to help him through the permitting process,
the new permitting process that he faces if he
attempts to in fact come into compliance?
MS. ARNOLD: We can't recommend a contractor.
The only thing that we can do is provide him a list
of licensed contractors in Collier County.
MR. PONTE: And I think that had been done
before and he still for whatever reason -- well, he
said he couldn't afford one.
I'm afraid if we follow the recommendation,
that we're just going to create a never ending
circle and be back again.
MS. ARNOLD: Well, and he's indicated that his
intent is to remove the improvements, so --
MR. PONTE:
right?
MR. FLEGAL:
that permit?
MS. ARNOLD:
demolition permit.
MR. FLEGAL:
MS. ARNOLD:
MR. FLEGAL:
But he needs to have a permit,
Michelle, how hard is it to get
It's a simple process to get a
Okay, he can do that himself
Yes.
-- he doesn't need anybody else?
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 84
MS. ARNOLD: Yes.
MR. FLEGAL: Has that been explained to him so
he understands that?
MS. ARNOLD: We can explain it to him again,
that whole process.
MR. FLEGAL: Okay. I'm looking, because if
we -- if the board orders him to do one or the
other, come into compliance or remove it, he needs
to fully understand
MS. ARNOLD:
MR. FLEGAL:
Correct.
what he can do to remove it,
which would probably be the easiest.
MS. ARNOLD:
MR. FLEGAL:
Correct.
So if you can see that that
happens, that will help.
MS. ARNOLD: We will.
MS. DUSEK: I'd like to make a motion that the
CEB order the Respondent to pay all operational
costs in the prosecution of this case and come into
compliance within 60 days, or a fine of $50 per day
will be assessed and imposed each day the violation
continues.
MR. PONTE: Well, I agree with your reduction
in terms of -- from the recommended amount of $100
a day. I'd like to see it reduced a little bit
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MS. DUSEK:
MR. PONTE:
motivating bite to it.
$25 a day.
MS. DUSEK:
Page 85
more to something -- even 25 is going to be steep.
I'll go along with that.
But I think it has to have some
So I guess I would suggest
I'll amend the motion to $25.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Do I hear a second?
MR. PONTE: I'll second.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: I have a motion and a
second. Ail those in favor, signify by saying aye.
MS. GODFREY-LINT: Aye.
MS. SAUNDERS:
MR. FLEGAL:
MS. CURATOLO:
Aye .
Aye.
Aye.
MR. PONTE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN:
MS. DUSEK: Aye.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN:
(No response.)
Aye.
Any opposed?
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Motion carries. Thank you.
Mr. Castillo, do you understand what the order
of the board is?
MR. CASTILLO: Yes, sir, yeah, I understand.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Okay, you have 60 days
basically to achieve compliance with the code by
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 86
whatever means you choose, whether it's to permit
what you have now, to take out what you have,
whatever method you have. And staff will work with
you to explain the procedures on whichever
direction you intend to go. If that does not occur
in 60 days, you have not complied with the code,
then a fine of $25 per day will start accruing, all
right, as well as the prosecution costs in the case
as well. Those are due unfortunately now. Okay?
MR. CASTILLO: Ail right. Thanks.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Thank you.
Next case, please.
MS. PETRULLI: Our next case is CEB Case No.
2002-11, Board of County Commissioners versus
Audubon Joint Venture, Colin S. Flinn, vice
president and agent.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Okay, Patti, before you go
any further on this particular case, I'm going to
recuse myself from this case, turn the board over
to our vice chair, and enjoy yourself.
MS. PETRULLI: For the record, I would like to
ask if Mr. Colin Flinn is present.
MR. FLINN: I'm Doug Flinn.
representing him.
MS. PETRULLI:
I'm in his place,
Let the record show that
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Mr. Doug
S. Flinn.
Page 87
Flinn is present, representing Mr. Colin
We have provided the respondent and the board
with a packet of information, and at this time I
would like to enter it as Composite Exhibit A.
MS. DUSEK: Do I hear a motion that we accept
the county's
MS. SAUNDERS: So moved.
MS. DUSEK: Do I hear a second?
MS. GODFREY-LINT: Second.
MS. DUSEK:
Aye.
MS. SAUNDERS:
MR. FLEGAL: Aye.
MS. CURATOLO:
Ail in favor?
Aye.
Aye.
MR. PONTE: Aye.
MS. SAUNDERS: Aye.
Any opposed?
(No response.)
MS. DUSEK: Continue.
MS. PETRULLI: The alleged violation is of
Section 3.9.3, 2.7.6, Subsection 5 of Ordinance
91-102, as amended, of the Collier County land
development ordinance.
The description of the violation is a lot
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 88
cleared of vegetation and no permits obtained or
posted, as required.
The location address -- there is a
typographical error, I would like to correct -- is
of Lots 9, 10 and 11 of Naples, Florida, more
particularly described as Folio No.
0000022510001506. Audubon Country Club, Unit 2,
Tract A. Less Audubon Country Club Unit 3.
The name and address of the person in charge
of the location is Mr. Colin S. Flinn, vice
president and agent, Audubon Joint Venture, 15725
Tamiami Trail, North Naples, Florida.
The date the violation was first observed was
February 26th of 2002. A notice of violation was
given on March 26th of 2002, and the date on which
the violation was to have been corrected was
April 22nd of 2002. The date of reinspection was
April 29th of 2002, and also the investigator was
there yesterday, May 22nd of 2002.
As of this time, the violation still remains.
At this time, I'd like to ask Investigator
Alex Sulecki to present the case for the county.
MS. DUSEK: Alex, would you be -- raise your
hand to be sworn in.
And Mr. Flinn, would you raise, and also we'll
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 89
swear you in.
(Speakers were duly sworn.)
MS. SULECKI: Good morning. Investigator
Summer Brown actually had this case, but I assisted
her. She's unable to be here this morning, so I'll
be presenting the case for her.
In February, our department received a
complaint of a vegetation removal near the nest of
a bald eagle. That's considered an engaged
species. It's protected.
A site visit showed that in Audubon Country
Club, Unit 2, Lots 9 and 10, were in the process of
being cleared. A stop work order was issued at
that point.
And then a couple days later U.S. Fish &
Wildlife advised us that nothing further should be
done on those lots until after eagle nesting
season, not even the removal of the downed
vegetation. And they still sit in that condition.
In March, Investigator Brown and I went to the
lots to calculate what amount of vegetation was
removed. We used a forester's method. I think
it's described in the summary that you have.
And at that point we looked and we saw that
there were some cleared lots adjacent to these two
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 90
lots, both to the south and to the north.
And I'm going to put an aerial photograph up
here for you so you can just get an idea of what
the areas that we're talking about.
The top of the picture is north, and I~m sorry
I can't get the whole picture in there, but the
lots at the top of the picture, some of them are
hatch marked. There's even lots that extend above
that. And the ones that are marked 9, 10 and 11,
10 and 11 I believe were the two lots that we went
to. Those are in Audubon Country Club Unit 2.
Below that you'll see a hatched in area that
is Audubon Country Club Unit 3, or Warwick Way.
And so when we stood on the lots here, we noticed
that there was clearing there and clearing all the
way up this street.
And so at that point, in addition to looking
at those two lots, we tried to determine what the
permit status was of all of those cleared lots, to
make sure that there were permits for them as well.
So we sent at that point a notice of violation
for all the lots that we could not find a permit
for, including those two.
We subsequently found that there was a
clearing plan that had been approved for Audubon
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 91
Unit 3, the Warwick Way area, and we removed that
from our violation status.
And later well, we knew that there was an
application for clearing on the lots in Audubon
Unit 2 at the top of this picture, Lots 1 through
8, but no permit had actually ever been issued.
And recently we did receive a copy of a permit
issued after the fact by the engineering
department. Apparently not issuing that was an
oversight, and so they went ahead and issued that.
So we are left at this point with three lots
in violation, Lots 9, 10 and 11.
And I think we sent a new notice of violation,
which you have in your packet, that required
several things. We required the developer to do as
per the code; he could resolve these violations in
several ways: He could obtain building permits for
those lots; submit a mitigation plan to restore the
native vegetation; or, if that was not feasible, to
donate lands or funds to a public agency.
And since they're developable lots and they're
not -- it's not a feasible option to mitigate them,
restore the vegetation on them.
The code regarding the donation of lands or
funds reads -- says that the donation of lands or
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
P~e 92
funds to a public agency may be made if none of the
above are viable alternatives, which we determined
was the case. The donation of lands or funds shall
be equal to or greater than the total sum it would
cost to mitigate for the violation, according to
the sections pertaining to mitigation plans,
including consulting fees for design, monitoring,
installation costs, vegetation costs, earth moving
costs, irrigation costs, replanting and exotic
removal.
So we required that the developer submit that
mitigation plan, showing and evaluating what those
costs were to be, and then make a donation to a
public agency of his choice in that amount. That
would resolve the violation for clearing on those
lots.
We also asked that a new eagle management plan
be submitted, because we determined that the eagle
management plan in place only really concerned this
Warwick Way area, while the actual zone of
protection for the nest, which at that point was up
here, also included areas up there that were not
included in the plan.
At this time, it was also noticed, I think it
was about the 13th of March, that the eagle moved.
t
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
P~e 93
It was an older nest located down here near the
Warwick area. And apparently this nest, while it
was mostly built, was abandoned at some point and
the eagle moved back to an older nest and began
rebuilding that and nesting in that older nest.
So at that point U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service,
Andy Eller, he advised us that a new management
plan must include both nests, because the U.S. Fish
& Wildlife Service considers even inactive nests
protected for I believe it's five years. And so at
that point we asked the developer to resubmit a
plan that would encompass both nests.
So at this point, where we are in the
compliance, we asked for them to submit a copy of
the mitigation plan, justifying the donation
amount, which they have done. The amount of the
mitigation for the lots in violation was determined
to be $55,096.
We asked them to -- oh, before I go any
further than that, I'll say that we did have a
meeting on April 23rd with some of the residents in
Audubon who had been concerned about the eagle nest
and the activity around it. And they were also
concerned that all of these lots up and down here,
the clear lots, were essentially left with no
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2O
21
22
23
24
25
Page 94
vegetative cover. And there were some wind erosion
and things were getting dirty, the dust was blowing
everywhere.
And so as a result of that meeting, we decided
to agree with the developer that the cost for
hydro-seeding and stabilizing those lots could be
deducted from the entire mitigation cost amount.
So that -- the plan for the mitigation for
that amount was submitted. We received a bid
proposal for hydro-seeding some lots, and we
deducted that amount from the total mitigation
cost. And we have received a copy of a receipt
showing that that donation in the amount of $49,080
was made to Collier County Parks and Recreation.
The one thing that we are lacking at this
point is a new eagle management plan to include all
the properties within 1,500 feet of both nests.
We're working with another agency here, so we had
not required the approval of that through the U.S.
Fish & Wildlife Service, who provides technical
assistance to the developer in making that plan.
But we've required him to submit it and he has
indicated that he is willing to do so.
We've received a -- this is -- this actually
was a plan submitted by Mr. Flinn and included some
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
lots.
hydro-seeded lots.
and 11.
And we discussed that -- 10 and 11 right
there. We've discussed that prior to this hearing,
and determined that we would attempt to retrieve
some of that money paid to parks and rec. back so
that those lots can be hydro-seeded as well.
So at this point we have most of the
compliance that we have required. We are asking
that a new eagle management plan as submitted to
U.S. Fish & Wildlife, understanding that there
would be perhaps technical assistance that would
change that at some point before it was submitted
to the county as the official plan.
We are asking that that be submitted to us so
that we know that the process is in -- is ongoing.
And we've asked that those lots be hydro-seeded by
June 6th. We would ask that those things occur on
a fine of $150 per day be put in place. Thank you.
MS. DUSEK: Alex, just to more or less recap,
what you're asking for now is the eagle plan to be
submitted, and that they're going to -- you're
going to take money back from the Collier County
parks and rec. in order for them to hydro-seed.
Page 95
The hatched lots on there were to be the
They did not include Lots 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 96
But you want them to actually do the work, the
hydro-seeding; is that correct?
MS. SULECKI: That is my understanding. And
we also would like that to be done by June 6th.
MR. PONTE: Just items of information. What
is hydro-seeding?
MS. SULECKI: It's a technique where grass,
seed and water are essentially sprayed onto a lot,
and that's how it's seeded. It's not seeded by
hand with dry seed.
MR. PONTE: Would it -- rather than having a
date of June 6th, an absolute date, would it not be
better for trying to grow grass, wait till the
rainy season establishes itself.
MS. ARNOLD: That's -- the time frame that we
came up with is based on the contract that
Mr. Flinn indicated he has to do the lots that he's
got contracted for.
MR. PONTE: I was just thinking about the
success of the seeding.
The other question I had was, please, what is
a VRSFP?
MS. SULECKI:
permit.
MR. PONTE:
Vegetation and site fill removal
What is it again?
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
P~e 97
MS. SULECKI: Vegetation -- let's see, VR --
vegetation removal and site fill permit. It's a
permit generally issued by the engineering
department in advance of development for certain
reasons.
MR. PONTE:
as
meant.
MS. SULECKI:
MR. PONTE:
MR. FLEGAL:
Okay, it's in the packet just
with the initials, and I had no idea what it
Sorry.
Thank you.
There's three lots involved, is
that what we're talking about, 9, 10 and 117
MS. SULECKI: At this point, yes.
MR. FLEGAL: And we have I'm getting
confused in listening to you, so that's why I'm
asking these questions.
In looking at Page 3, we talk about location
where this exists, with the folio number. That
folio number is of what?
here. What is --
MS. SULECKI:
MR. FLEGAL:
MS. ARNOLD:
Since we don't have it
I'm not exactly certain.
-- 22510001506.
I think Patti stated for the
record when she doing the statement of violation,
the corrected legal description.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2O
21
22
23
24
25
Page 98
Did you not? What should that be?
MS. SULECKI: I would tell you that we
received the permit for some of the other lots, the
after-the-fact permit just recently, and it's
possible that all the information was already
prepared there and didn't get changed.
MR. FLEGAL: Okay. I'm looking at your
amended notice of violations, and I couldn't find
that folio --
MS. SULECKI:
MR. FLEGAL:
That's was way before.
-- number. The three lots have
different folio numbers, so --
MS. SULECKI: There are a number of notices
that were sent out for each lot, so I think you'll
find there's a whole group of notices in your
packet.
MR. FLEGAL:
MS. SULECKI:
Correct.
And some of those have been
withdrawn. So just the three are remaining.
MR. FLEGAL: Yeah. And the three lots we're
talking about
MS. ARNOLD: You can find the legal
descriptions and the property I.D. numbers on Page
19. And that's for Lot 9. On Page 12 for Lot 11.
And unfortunately they're all mixed up. And Page
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
13 for Lot 10.
MR. FLEGAL:
figure out is, where is this violation?
we've got this number that I can't find.
That's -- what I'm trying to
Since
So
MS. ARNOLD: It's on Lots 9, 10 and 11.
MR. FLEGAL: Okay. Because when the board
decides if there is or is not a violation, we need
to know where it is.
MS. DUSEK: Other
MR. PONTE: So we're just saying there are
just three lots now, 9, 10 and 117
MS. ARNOLD: Correct.
MR. PONTE: How big are they?
How many acres
are involved here?
MR. FLINN:
MS. SULECKI:
MR. FLINN:
MS. DUSEK:
Alex? Thank you.
MS. SULECKI:
MS. DUSEK:
MR. FLINN:
MS. DUSEK:
tell us.
MR. FLINN:
Three acres? More?
Less?
I think it's 1.56 acres.
Total?
Yes.
Are there any other questions for
Thank you very much.
Mr. Flinn?
Do you have any questions for me?
It's now -- whatever you want to
Okay. Well, we seem to be in
Page 99
I
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2O
21
22
23
24
25
P~e 100
hope we're in compliance. We've done everything
that this -- the county has asked us to do.
In regards to Andy Eller, at Fish & Wildlife,
we've done everything that they've asked us. Andy
Eller has not gotten back in contact with us to
tell us to submit a second eagle management
plan. But I have spoken with Ms. Sulecki, and we
are more than willing to submit something like
that.
Basically we want to develop our land and
leave. So if that's what we have to do, then we're
more than willing to do that. We weren't prepared
that the eagle would be nesting in a dead nest.
That's basically it.
MS. DUSEK: When did you when were you
notified about having to submit an eagle nest plan?
MR. FLINN: I got an E-mail from Summer Brown,
I believe it was yesterday or the day before,
saying that --
MS. DUSEK: And that was the first time that
you were notified that you had to do this?
MR. FLINN: That is I believe. I could be
incorrect, but I believe that is correct.
But again, this is county code enforcement
telling us that we have to submit something, when
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2O
21
22
23
24
25
Page 101
it has to do with Fish & Game. And we've submitted
something to Fish & Game, and they haven't gotten
back in touch with us. They haven't said that we
need to submit this extra plan. So -- but if
that's what we have to do, then we're willing to do
it. But we're a little at a we're at a loss
because one county agency is telling us to do one
thing and the other county agency is not saying
anything at all.
MS. DUSEK: Alex, why did you all ask for this
plan?
MS. SULECKI: Just to clarify, we did ask for
this. If you'll look on let's see, we'll find
one of the -- notice of violation for Lot 10 on
Page 13 that was issued on March 26th. The third
order to correct advises them to obtain technical
assistance to prepare a new eagle management plan
for both eagles nests that are considered active,
and to include all the properties within 1,500 feet
of either nest.
MR. FLINN:
MS. DUSEK:
MS. SULECKI:
I stand to be corrected.
And --
Oh, excuse me, I'm sorry. I
just wanted to add that the reason we asked for
that is that the Land Development Code requires
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 102
that we have a plan in place for endangered species
that's been reviewed by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife
Service.
MS. DUSEK:
MR. FLINN:
That was my next question.
Just to note, I am working with
our -- with Boylan Environmental to revise our
eagle management plan.
MS. SAUNDERS: May I ask a basic question?
Are the eagles nesting on one of these lots right
now?
MR. FLINN: The eagles have nested in Warwick
Way, which is Phase III.
MS. SAUNDERS: And is there any development or
anything going on right there right now?
MR. FLINN: Well, we want to be able to start
developing that land. We put in the infrastructure
and have all the permits, so we're hoping that our
eagle management plan gets approved and we'll be
able to start building.
MS. SAUNDERS: But nothing starts on --
nothing disturbs them until after a plan is
approved?
MR. FLINN:
MS. DUSEK:
for either party?
That's correct.
Any other questions from the board
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 103
Ail right, the order of the board? Do I have
a motion that there is or is not a violation?
Since I'm acting as chairman
MS. SAUNDERS: I will move -- I never do the
violation as thoroughly as Bobbi Dusek does, but I
will move that there is indeed a violation of the
Code Enforcement Board, and I will ask Ms. Rawson
to fill in all the appropriate language.
MS. RAWSON: Section 3.9.3 and 2.7.65 of
Ordinance 91-102, the Land the Collier County
Land Development Code, as amended.
MS. SAUNDERS: Thank you.
MS. DUSEK: Do I hear a second to the motion?
MS. GODFREY-LINT: I'll second it.
MS. DUSEK: Is there any discussion?
Ail those in favor, signify by saying aye.
MR. FLEGAL: Aye.
MS. CURATOLO: Aye.
MR. PONTE: Aye.
MS. SAUNDERS: Aye.
MS. DUSEK: Aye.
MS. GODFREY-LINT: Aye.
MS. DUSEK: Any opposed?
(No response.)
MS. DUSEK: Motion carries.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 104
And now what does the board recommend?
MR. FLEGAL: Michelle, let me ask you a
question before we get into that. What is it
exactly the county wants these folks to do? Okay,
I is all they have to do is this reseeding? Do
they need to donate any money? Has that been done
and that's out of the question now, that's over
with, so we're just down to reseeding within a
specified time limit, that's the only thing you
need?
MS. DUSEK:
MR. FLEGAL:
MS. ARNOLD:
MR. FLEGAL:
MS. ARNOLD:
MS. SAUNDERS:
motion?
MR. PONTE:
an eagle plan?
accurately.
MR. FLINN:
Eagle plan.
And the revised eagle plan.
Right.
That's two items you need.
Yes.
Would you like to make the
How long does it take to draw up
An eagle management plan, more
I believe that we'll be able to
get a revised plan within two weeks.
MR. FLEGAL: Now, the submission is all you
want of this plan, you don't need an approved plan,
because that might take --
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
we.
one.
MS. ARNOLD:
MR. FLEGAL:
MS. ARNOLD:
MR. FLEGAL:
MS. ARNOLD:
MR. FLEGAL:
MS. DUSEK:
the motion?
MR. FLINN:
MS. DUSEK:
MR. FLEGAL:
MR. FLINN:
Page 105
Right.
-- who knows how long.
He has no control of it, nor do
So we just want him to submit
Right. And provide us a copy.
Okay.
Ail right, who would like to make
May I just interrupt once more?
Yes.
Sure.
The hydro-seeding contractor told
me that he'd be in on the 6th. Well, you know that
if you've dealt with contractors before, they tell
you one thing, they do another. So I don't want to
be told that we have to do it by the 6th and if the
guy comes in on the 7th --
MS. DUSEK: Mr. Flinn, we want to work with
you, because we can see that you have worked very
diligently to remedy all the other parts of this
violation. So you give us some guidelines and
we'll work with you.
What would be a reasonable time for the
1
2
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Pagel06
hydro-seeding, in your estimation?
MR. FLINN: I believe I can get it done by the
6th. That's what the gentleman --
MS. DUSEK: But let's give some leeway to
that. Do you want us --
Why don't you give me two weeks
MR. FLINN:
after that?
MS. DUSEK:
MR. FLINN:
MS. DUSEK:
MR. FLINN:
MS. DUSEK:
Would June 30th be acceptable?
June 30th would be perfect.
Okay.
Thank you.
The recommendation from the board?
MS. SAUNDERS: Well, I will make a motion that
the respondent pay all operational costs incurred
in the prosecution of this case and submit an
amended eagle management plan within 30 days -- is
that what we wanted? And complete the
hydro-seeding no later than June 30th, or a fine of
$150 per day will be imposed for each day the
violation remains.
MS. DUSEK: I like your motion. I am feeling
a little bit more lenient in the cost of the fine,
because these people have worked quite effectively
and diligently with the county. So if the
recommendation of another amount --
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
$100.
MR. FLEGAL: How about $1007
MS. DUSEK: That's acceptable.
MS. SAUNDERS: I certainly will
amend it to
Page 107
made
June
be
MR. PONTE: I'll second the motion.
MS. DUSEK: It's been -- the motion has been
that the hydro-seed will be completed by
30th, and that the eagle management plan will
submitted to the county within 30 days from
today, or
that time.
Is
Ail
MS.
MR.
MS.
MS.
MS.
MR.
MS.
{No
MS.
You
MR.
MS.
a fine of $100 per day will
And it has been seconded.
there any more discussion?
in favor?
GODFREY-LINT: Aye.
Aye .
Aye.
Aye.
Aye.
Aye.
Any
opposed?
FLEGAL:
DUSEK:
SAUNDERS:
CURATOLO:
PONTE:
DUSEK:
response.)
DUSEK: Motion carries.
understand, Mr. Flinn?
FLINN: Yes, I do. Thank you very
SAUNDERS: Take care of our eagles.
incur after
much.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 108
MS. DUSEK: We'll proceed to the next case, as
our chairman approaches the board again.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Okay.
MS. PETRULLI: Our next case is CEB Case No.
2002-013, Board of County Commissioners versus
Victor and Isabel Valdes.
For the record, I'd like to ask if the
respondents are present.
Let the record show that they are present.
We have provided the respondent and the board
with a packet of information. And at this time, I
would like to ask that that packet be entered as
Composite Exhibit A.
MS. DUSEK: I make a motion that we accept the
county's Composite Exhibit A.
MR. FLEGAL: Second.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: We have a motion and
second. Ail those in favor, signify by saying aye.
MS. DUSEK:
MR. FLEGAL:
MS. CURATOLO:
MS. SAUNDERS: Aye.
Aye.
Aye.
Aye.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN:
MS. GODFREY-LINT:
MR. PONTE: Aye.
Aye.
Aye.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 109
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Motion carries. Please
proceed.
MS. PETRULLI: The alleged violation is of
Section 2.7.6.1, and 2.7.6.5 of Ordinance No.
91-102 of the Collier County Land Development Code,
Subsection 104.1.1 of Ordinance No. 98-76, Section
103.5, Safety.
The description of the violation is adding an
addition to a residential home and closing in a
garage, creating additional dwelling space to the
home without first obtaining Collier County
building permits.
The location where the violation exists is
5349 Holland Street, Naples, Florida, more
particularly described as Folio No.
0000062205720000, Naples Manor, Block 7, Lot 35.
The name and address of the owners in charge
are Victor A. and Isabel Valdes, 5349 Holland
Street, Naples, Florida.
The date the violation was first observed was
July 9th of 2001. The notice of violation was
issued on July 9th of 2001. And the violation was
to have been corrected by August 1st of 2001.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
P~e 110
A reinspection was done on April 23rd of 2002.
And the inspector was out there yesterday, and as a
result the violations still remain.
Excuse me. The investigator for this case is
Investigator Jason Toreky, and this time I would
like to turn the case over to him.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: One second, please.
May we swear the witnesses in, please.
Mr. Valdes, would you rise, please, and be sworn in
for your testimony.
seat.
MR. VALDES: Yes.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Thank you.
(Speakers were duly sworn.)
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Thank you, you can have a
MS. ARNOLD: If I may interrupt the testimony
of the investigator first. We received a fax from
the County Attorney's Office yesterday, and it's a
request from Mr. Valdes. And it notes, "For the
means of the present letter, I'm requesting a
continuance of the hearing set forth on May 23rd,
2002 for 60 days. The reason for this continuance
is I'm in the middle of a federal case that will
end on June 21st, 2002. At this moment it is very
economically difficult due to two years of legal
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 111
struggling, expending of all my money and time on
this task. I'm working to be done with the
compliance in this case, and come back with
everything accomplished at the end of 60 days.
Respectfully, Mr. Victor Valdes, Sr."
And I just wanted to note that for the record.
That wasn't provided to you. The County Attorney's
Office just furnished us with this copy, again, and
if he wants to speak to that request, it's our
position that we have been working with Mr. Valdes,
and we're recommending -- we're not in favor of the
continuance.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Mr. Valdes? Real quick,
you are requesting a continuance of the case?
MR. VALDES: Yes. I am requesting the
continuance because for a years (sic) and a half --
it's nothing to do with the staff or the board, but
I need that you understand my request.
For years and a half, I have been accused of
something falsely. This will be finished on
June 21st. I said falsely because after the
deposition, the testimony of the deputy accusing me
of lying under oath came in several, maybe 300 page
of lie under oath of the deputy.
Today is under investigation and I will submit
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
P~e 112
a letter from the Sheriff Department that my
allegation is under investigation, and an amendment
notice of hearing from the federal judge,
rescheduling the Friday, June 21st, 2002, for my
case. I will be finished in June. I need 60 days
to come back, because I have everything prepared.
What I have is to find -- I have the --
everything prepared, including the survey. But I
need only the signature from the architect or
engineer, and I will do. What I need is 60 days,
and I will, I promise, I will come back with
everything.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Okay. The county's
position on this request?
MR. VALDES:
records?
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN:
Excuse me, the letter for the
That's all right.
MR. VALDES: No, don't need?
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: We're all set. We're just
here right now just to determine on whether or not
we're going to continue the case or hear the case.
County's position on this issue?
MS. ARNOLD: Our position is that we wouldn't
recommend the continuance. We've been working with
Mr. Valdes for some time and we don't see any
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
much progress towards compliance.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN:
board?
MR. FLEGAL:
Page 113
Okay. Discussion from the
Well, it seems Mr. Valdes has
some paperwork that he's been working on. Whether
he has shared that with the county or not, I don't
know, but he's obviously I think really involved in
his other case and he's trying to do two things at
one time. I don't have a problem with the
continuance. We do it for other people.
MS. DUSEK: Michelle, has he submitted any
papers to you prior to today? Has he done -- has
he tried to do anything toward getting this permit?
MR. TOREKY: He has been in several times
with I would say with the exception of probably
the last month. He prepared a packet to apply for
his permit, and he missed the deadline for the wind
loads for the new laws, and now he has to have an
engineer's stamp or an architect seal his drawings.
But he does have everything to get his permit,
he just needs those drawings sealed and stamped.
Other than that, he has all the required surveys
and everything else.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: So it appears the
respondent is working with you at this point in
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
P~e 114
time, even though it has been quite a while.
MR. TOREKY: It's been I'm not sure, as of
30 days ago he had all the required information.
MS. SAUNDERS: What is involved in getting
those documents sealed and stamped?
MR. TOREKY: He needs to go to an engineer or
an architect, have them review his drawings, and if
everything is to today's standards, then they'll
seal it, or they'll draw it themselves and, you
know, have their own drawings, one or the other.
MR. PONTE: So the real complication is
getting an engineer or an architect to do this
small job.
MR. TOREKY:
MR. PONTE:
Exactly. That would be the --
That's the big problem, finding
somebody to do the small job.
MS. CURATOLO: But if he had followed what he
should have, he would not have had to have an
architect's stamp.
MR. TOREKY: Another issue is his survey. He
had a survey completed a week before that. And
there was a little misconfusion (sic). And he came
in the day after that new law had changed. He came
in on the next day.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN:
Again, before the board
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 115
right now is whether or not we grant the
continuance or hear the case.
MR. PONTE: I think that given Mr. Valdes's
willingness to cooperate, we should take that into
consideration. Also, in this case, there is again
an area of confusion where things were not fully
explained. And for the county to have let it go to
the point where he was off mark, he was late by one
day with the wrong drawings, he should have been
advised before that, I would have thought, drawings
were going to have to be changed.
MS. ARNOLD: I would have to object to that
comment, because we did in fact advise Mr. Valdes
several times of the upcoming change to the code,
and we had been working with him several times.
And I'm not sure that there is the language problem
that we had with the prior case in this case.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: And again, remember, it is
the respondent's duty to find out what is required
from the county. It is not the county's duty to
inform everyone in the general public on specifics.
MR. PONTE: I just have a question for
Mr. Valdes, whether or not he understood it.
MR. VALDES: During the past six months, I was
involved in my case in Federal Court in Tampa.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 116
Going to Tampa, come back, going to Tampa, come
back.
I met several times with Mr. Toreky. He was
very professional, correct. But two days before
I'm not complaining about him, he was -- I repeat,
he was very professional and correct. But the day
was I think it was Wednesday or Thursday that I
went to Tampa, and I met with him. I called to
his -- I called to the answering machine looking
for him, and I found him. My wife and my daughter
was with me in the car. I was going to Tampa. And
I found him two blocks from my home.
And I ask him, "Mr. Toreky, is Monday the last
day for present with the present system, now the
old system?" He told me, "Yes, your last day will
be Monday."
"Well, I have appointment with my attorney in
Tampa, but this Friday I shall spend my visit with
my attorney." He told me, "Your last chance is
Monday.
It's true, Mr. Toreky, or no?
MR. TOREKY:
MR. VALDES:
It was Friday, right?
Or Friday.
And then I went to Tampa, trying to go to --
the other day. When I went this date, I missed the
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 117
time. I was confused by his information. I am not
complaining about him, he was correct. He make a
mistake, and I make the mistake because of this
information.
MS. DUSEK: I just would like to make a
comment personally, that I don't have a problem
with what the county has said. I'm sure that they
have informed him. And I hear Mr. Valdes's side.
I don't have a problem giving him a continuance.
Maybe not for the 60 days but
MR. TOREKY: Can I set something straight real
quick? Mr. Valdes was notified previously that the
law was changing a month before that and that he
needed to get in to get his information submitted
as soon as -- you know, before the laws changed.
What had happened, Thursday was the last day
of that law change. And Mr. Valdes came to me.
And I was in a parking lot doing paperwork and he
came to me and he said, you know, do I have time,
or whatever it may be. And I wasn't thinking at
the time and I said, "Yeah, you've got to get in
there as soon as possible by tomorrow." And the
next day was the day past the deadline.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Well, it seems regardless
of what -- this has been going on since August of
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
2001.
Page i 18
MR. TOREKY: July 9th, actually.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: I stand corrected. You're
correct. So one day here or there doesn't really
make a difference anyway. Again, the pleasure of
the board? Do we have a motion?
MR. FLEGAL: I make a motion we grant the
continuance for 60 days.
MR. PONTE: I second that motion.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: We have a motion and a
second. Any further discussion?
Hearing none, all in favor signify by saying
aye.
MR. FLEGAL: Aye.
MS. CURATOLO:
MR. PONTE:
MS. DUSEK:
Aye.
Aye.
Aye.
MS. SAUNDERS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN:
MS. GODFREY-LINT:
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN:
(No response.)
Aye.
Aye.
Any opposed?
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: No opposed, motion passes.
Mr. Valdes, you now have a continuation for 60
days.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 119
MR. VALDES: I promise I will comply with the
60 days. Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: This closes the public
hearings. Let's go back on to new business.
And just for the benefit of the public that
are still here, business from here on in is not a
rehearing, it's an administrative task.
Michelle, if you'd like to proceed.
MS. ARNOLD: Yes. First item on the agenda is
Board of County Commissioners versus A.L. Dougherty
Company, Inc./Abbott Lodge LLC. And that's Code
Enforcement Board Case 2001-061. This is for an
imposition of fine.
The board heard the case on July 16, 2001, at
which time the respondent was found in violation
and ordered to obtain approved mitigation plans and
re-vegetate the property in accordance with the
plans by April 1st, 2002, or fines of $50 per day
would be imposed each day the violation continued
past that date.
On March 6th, the respondent requested
modification of that order to allow for an
alternate compliance, and the board did amend the
order to allow for that alternate compliance, but
did not amend the date with respect to compliance.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
P~e 120
There is an outstanding amount of $1,200 for
the days April 1st through April 24th at a rate of
$50 per day. And at this time we would request
that the board impose those fines.
MS. DUSEK: I make a motion that we impose the
fine.
MR. PONTE: I'll second.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: We have a motion and
second. Ail those in favor, signify by saying aye.
MS. DUSEK: Aye.
MS. GODFREY-LINT:
MR. FLEGAL: Aye.
MS. SAUNDERS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN:
MR. FLEGAL: Aye.
MS. CURATOLO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN:
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN:
Next case?
MS. ARNOLD:
Aye.
Aye .
Any opposed?
Motion passes.
The next item is BCC versus Rocco
Lacquaniti, Case No. 2002-001. The board heard
this case on March 28th, 2002, and found the
respondent in violation and ordered the respondent
to come into compliance by April 28th, or a fine of
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 121
$150 per day would be imposed.
The respondent was also ordered to pay
prosecutional costs for the case.
The respondent is now in compliance and was in
compliance as of April 29th, 2002, and staff is at
this time requesting the board impose fines for the
amount of $568.10 for prosecution costs and another
$150 for the days that the respondent was out of
compliance with the board's order.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: I would entertain a motion
to impose fines.
MR. FLEGAL: So moved.
MS. DUSEK: Second.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Motion and a second. Ail
those in favor, signify by saying aye.
MS. CURATOLO: Aye.
MS. DUSEK: Aye.
MR. FLEGAL: Aye.
MR. PONTE: Aye.
MS. SAUNDERS: Aye.
MS. GODFREY-LINT:
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN:
Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN:
Aye.
Aye.
Hearing none, the motion
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 122
passes.
Next item.
MS. ARNOLD: Board of County Commissioners
versus William Bryan Seward. Code Enforcement
Board Case 2002-002. This case was heard again on
March 28th, 2002 and the respondent was found in
violation and ordered to correct the violation by
April 28th.
The respondent was also ordered, if not in
compliance by that date, to pay $50 per day, as
well as prosecutional costs incurred for that case.
The respondent did come into compliance on
April 26th, and at this time staff is requesting
that the board impose prosecutional costs for
$633.50.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: I would entertain such a
motion.
MR. FLEGAL:
MS. DUSEK:
So moved.
Second.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: I have a motion and second.
Ail those in favor, signify by saying aye.
MR. FLEGAL: Aye.
MS. GODFREY-LINT: Aye.
MS. DUSEK: Aye.
MS. SAUNDERS: Aye.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MS. CURATOLO:
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN:
MR. PONTE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN:
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN:
Next item.
MS. ARNOLD:
Aye .
Aye.
Any opposed?
Page 123
Motion carries.
Is
-- a second? We have a
All those in favor, signify
amount of $574.70.
MS. SAUNDERS:
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN:
there --
MS. DUSEK:
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN:
motion and a second.
Second.
So moved.
We have a motion.
Commissioners versus Quail Crossing Property
Owners, Case No. 2002-005. This case was also
heard on March 28th, 2002, and again the respondent
was found in violation and ordered to correct the
violation by April 28th or a fine of $50 per day
would be imposed, in addition to ordering the
respondent to pay prosecutional costs.
The respondent is in compliance and complied
with the board's order, and at this time staff is
requesting imposition of prosecutional costs in the
This is Board of County
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
by saying aye.
MS. SAUNDERS: Aye.
MS. DUSEK: Aye.
MS. CURATOLO: Aye.
MS. GODFREY-LINT:
MR. FLEGAL: Aye.
MR. PONTE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN:
Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN:
passes.
Next item.
Page 124
Aye.
Aye.
Hearing none, motion
MS. ARNOLD: The next item is Board of County
Commissioners versus Stanley W. White, Jr., Case
No. 2002-006. The case was heard on -- I believe
that should say the 28th -- or was it the 25th?
And the respondent was found in violation and
ordered to correct the violation by May 5th, or
fines of $75 per day would be imposed.
The respondent was also ordered to pay
prosecutional costs.
Respondent did comply with the board's order
by May 2nd. And at this time, staff is requesting
prosecutional costs of $854.70 be imposed.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN:
to do so.
MR. FLEGAL: So moved.
MS. DUSEK: Second.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Motion and a second.
those in favor, signify by saying aye.
MR. PONTE: Aye.
MR. FLEGAL: Aye.
MS. SAUNDERS: Aye.
MS. DUSEK: Aye.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN:
MS. CURATOLO: Aye.
MS. GODFREY-LINT:
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN:
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN:
passes.
Next item.
MS. ARNOLD:
Page 125
I would entertain a motion
Aye.
Aye.
Any opposed?
Hearing none, motion
Ail
Okay, this is Board of County
Commissioners versus Joe Dimassimo, Jr. And this
case is 2002-007. This case was heard on the 25th
of April, and the respondent was found in violation
but given till May 9th to remove the violation.
And if they did not comply with the board's order,
prosecutional costs would be imposed, as well as a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 126
$75 per day fine.
The respondent has complied with the board's
order, so therefore there are no fines to be
imposed.
MR. PONTE: I'd just like to ask a question
here, or suggest something to all of us. Unless
I'm missing a point here, this happened, that is,
the no reimbursement to the county for operational
costs, because of the way we worded it. Is that
not it?
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: No, it is specifically that
in the motion that part of the motion was
specifically omitted from the order.
MS. ARNOLD:
MR. PONTE:
MS. ARNOLD:
NO, no, no
That's what I mean.
It was contemplated and your
motion said if they complied by that time, there
would be no costs.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: That's correct.
MR. PONTE: So I guess what I'm saying, in
fairness to all who come before this board, maybe
we ought to have a formalized way of -- after the
finding of fact and what we recommend, we tend to
throw in the operational costs. Maybe it ought to
be something that is formalized so we don't miss
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 127
it. Because it's not -- there ought not to be an
occasion, I don't feel, where some respondent
doesn't pay the operational costs.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: In this particular case --
first off, in all the cases we have that procedure
already in line and we typically do it for all
cases.
In this particular case we added in the cost
as well. And then in discussion it was decided
that for this particular respondent we were going
to take those costs out if he came into compliance.
So this is an exception to a general rule that we
usually follow.
MR. FLEGAL:
operational costs.
I think everybody should pay
The idea that the county had to
go through the trouble to bring them here is the
respondent's fault. So he's cost the county money
to get here. Whether he comes into compliance or
not is immaterial. He should have been in
compliance and never ever have got this far.
should pay.
MS. CURATOLO: But if I understand correctly,
it was a decision made by this board.
MS. DUSEK: Yes.
MR. FLEGAL: I understand. That's correct.
So he
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
P~e 128
MR. PONTE: Yes, but all I'm suggesting to the
board is that we watch ourselves a little bit more
closely.
MR. FLEGAL: What we're saying is we shouldn't
do that for any reason.
MS. CURATOLO: I would agree with you, but
this is after the fact.
MR. PONTE: Yeah, I know, but if we don't
bring it up, when are we going to bring it up?
We're having general discussion
MS. DUSEK:
right now.
MR. FLEGAL:
We say this on another case and
we say, oh, well, it sounds like a good idea. What
we need to understand is there is no good idea.
They should always pay, period.
MS. CURATOLO: I would agree.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: And my memory on this
particular vote was it was a very, very close vote.
One vote swayed it one way or the other.
MR. FLEGAL: Right. Yeah, it wasn't
unanimous.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN:
anyway.
MR. FLEGAL: 4-3 or
was 4-2 or something like that.
It was a very debated issue
I can't remember. It
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page129
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Anyway, now that we've kind
of hashed that out and we don't have to take a vote
on imposing fines or operational costs, let's go to
the next item.
MS. ARNOLD: The next item was placed on the
agenda at the request of the respondent. That was
a case Board of County Commissioners versus
McAlpine Briarwood, Inc., and Charles W. Hitchcock,
which is the -- I guess the owner of the practice
range off of Radio Road.
present
MR. FLEGAL:
MS. ARNOLD:
The respondent is not
No action.
-- so staff is not going to
present the case for him.
MR. FLEGAL: Good idea.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: So noted. Let's move to
the next item, old business.
MS. ARNOLD: These are standard reports, most
of which were compliance cases that were previously
noted under new business for imposition of fines.
I'll just read those quickly.
The first one is Board of County Commissioners
versus A.L. Dougherty Company, Inc./Abbott Lodge
LLC. And that's affidavit of compliance.
The next item is Board of County Commissioners
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
versus Rocco Lacquaniti.
compliance.
Page i 30
That is also affidavit of
Board of County Commissioners versus William
Bryan Seward.
The next item is Board of County Commissioners
versus Quail Crossing Property Ownership
Association.
The next item is Board of County Commissioners
versus Stanley W.J. -- W. White, Jr.
And the final item is Board of County
Commissioners versus Joe Dimassimo, Jr.
Ail are affidavits of compliance for the
board's order.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Very good. Any other
business that anyone wants to bring up before the
board?
MR. FLEGAL: I would like the maybe next
time we meet, if the County Attorney's Office could
tell us the status of the possible foreclosure
process on Shad Davis.
MS. RAWSON: Okay.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN: Next meeting date is set
for June 27th in this room at 9:00. I would
entertain a motion to adjourn, if there's no other
discussion.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
MR. PONTE: So moved.
MS. DUSEK: Second.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN:
Page 131
I have a motion and second.
Ail those in favor, signify by saying aye.
MS. DUSEK: Aye.
MS. CURATOLO: Aye.
MS. GODFREY-LINT: Aye.
MS. SAUNDERS: Aye.
MR. PONTE: Aye.
MR. FLEGAL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN:
Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEHMANN:
much.
Aye.
No opposed. Thank you very
Meeting adjourned.
(Proceedings concluded at 11:45 a.m.)
20
21
22
23
24
25
1
2
3
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 132
COURT REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF COLLIER
I, CHERIE' R. NOTTINGHAM, Notary Public, State of
Florida at large, certify that I was authorized to
and did stenographically report the Code Enforcement
Board meeting; and that the transcript is a true and
complete record of my stenographic notes.
I further certify that I am not a relative,
employee, attorney, or counsel of any of the parties,
nor am I a relative or employee of any of the parties'
attorney or counsel connected with the action, nor am
I financially interested in the action.
DATED this 5th day of June, 2002.
CHERIE' R. NOTTINGHAM
Notary Public - State of Florida
FORM 8B MEMORANDUM OF VOTING CONFLICT FOR
COUNTY, MUNICIPAL, AND OTHER LOCAL PUBLIC,.OF_' . S
.AME or .CARD. COUNC,L. COMM,SS,ON.
LAST NAME--FIRST NAME--MIDDLE NAME
MAILING ADDRESS
C~TY COUNTY
DATE ON WHICH VOTE OCCURRED
THE BOARD. COUNCIL. COMMISSION. AUTHO~0R ~ ;Mt',~E ~
WHICH I SERVE IS A UNIT OF: ii,~ * ~.~';* ~"
El CITY ,.~-C.,DUNTY n OTHER LOCAL AGENCY
NAME OF POLITICAL SUBDIVISION:
MY POSITION IS:
n ELECTIVE ~,~APPOINTIVE
WHO MUST FILE FORM 8B
This form is for use by any person serving at the county, city, or other local level of government on an appointed or elected board, council,
commission, authority, or committee. It applies equally to members of advisory and non-advisory bodies who are presented with a voting
conflict of interest under Section 112.3143, Florida Statutes.
Your responsibilities under the law when faced with voting on a measure in which you have a conflict of interest will vary greatly depending
on whether you hold an elective or appointive position. For this reason, please pay close attention to the instructions on this form before
completing the reverse side and filing the form.
INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION .112.3143, FLORIDA STATUTES
A person holding elective or appointive county, municipal, or other local public office MUST ABSTAIN from voting on a measure which
inures to his or her special private gain or loss. Each elected or appointed local officer also is prohibited from knowingly voting on a mea-
sure which inures to the special gain or loss of a principal (other than a government agency) by whom he or she is retained (including the
parent organization or subsidiary of a corporate principal by which he or she is retained); to the special private gain or loss of a relative; or
to the special private gain or loss of a business associate. Commissioners of community redevelopment agencies under Sec. 163.356 or
163.357, F.S., and officers of independent special tax districts elected on a one-acre, one-vote basis are not prohibited from voting in that
capacity.
For purposes of this law, a "relative" includes only the officer's father, mother, son, daughter, husband, wife, brother, sister, father-in-law,
mother-in-law, son-in-law, and daughter-in-law. A "business associate" means any person or entity engaged in or carrying on a business
enterprise with the officer as a partner, joint venturer, coowner of property, or corporate shareholder (where the shares of the corporation
are not listed on any national or regional stock exchange).
ELECTED OFFICERS:
In addition to abstaining from voting in the situations described above, you must disclose the conflict:
PRIOR TO THE VOTE BEING TAKEN by publicly stating to the assembly the nature of your interest in the measure on which you
are abstaining from voting; and
WITHIN 15 DAYS AFTER THE VOTE OCCURS by completing and filing this form with the person responsible for recording the min-
utes of the meeting, who should incorporate the form in the minutes.
APPOINTED OFFICERS:
Although you must abstain from voting in the situations described above, you otherwise may participate in these matters. However, you
must disclose the nature of the conflict before making any attempt to influence the decision, whether orally or in writing and whether made
by you or at your direction.
IF YOU INTEND TO MAKE ANY ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION PRIOR TO THE MEETING AT WHICH THE VOTE WILL BE
TAKEN:
· You must complete and file this form (before making any attempt to influence the decision) with the person responsible for recording the
minutes of the meeting, who will incorporate the form in the minutes. (Continued on other side)
FORM 8B - REV. 1/98
PAGE 1
APPOIN.. ?F~DJOE~RS (continued)
C;:v ,"
· A.z;:~a~l~e {-6tm must be pjovided immediately to the other members of the agency.
' The form_ ' ' E:~u~t~e ~ pba~y at the next meeting after the form is filed.
IF Y~,'~AKE ~O A~EMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION EXCEPT BY DISCUSSION AT THE MEETING:
· You must disclose orally the nature of your conflict in the measure before padicipating.
· You must complete the form and file it within 15 days after the vote occum with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the
meeting, who must incorporate the form in the minutes. A copy of the form must be provided immediately to the other members of the
agency, and the form must be read publicly at the next meeting after the form is filed.
DISCLOSURE OF LOCAL OFFICER'S INTEREST
I, '.r~-/"~ ~.¢/~-14~.~ hereby disclose that on
,
(a) A measure came or will come before my agency which (check one)
inured to my special private gain or loss;
inured to the special gain or loss of my business associate.
inured to the special gain or loss of my relative,
inured to the special gain or loss of
whom I am retained; or
inured to the special gain or loss of
is the parent organization or subsidiary of a principal which has retained me.
(b) The measure before my agency and the nature of my conflicting interest in the measure is as follows:
~'~ ~--,)~- /,..to. ,,2.~:,~..-,C,l/
,,J.c~'-~/- i./~-.~
, which
Date Filed
Signatur~
NOTICE: UNDER PROVISIONS OF FLORIDA STATUTES §112.317, A FAILURE TO MAKE ANY REQUIRED DISCLOSURE
CONSTITUTES GROUNDS FOR AND MAY BE PUNISHED BY ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING: IMPEACHMENT,
REMOVAL OR SUSPENSION FROM OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT, DEMOTION, REDUCTION IN SALARY, REPRIMAND, OR A
CIVIL PENALTY NOT TO EXCEED $10,000.
CE FORM 8B - REV. 1/98
PAGE 2