Loading...
CEB Minutes 04/07/2004 STRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD Naples, Florida April 7, 2004 April 7, 2004 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Code Enforcement Board in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m. in REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: Clifford Flegal Raymond Bowie Roberta Dusek Gerald Lefebvre ALSO PRESENT: Jean Rawson, Attorney for the Board Shanelle Hilton, Code Enforcement Coordinator Page 1 CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA Date: April 7, 2004 at 9:00 o'clock a.m. Location: 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida, Community Development and Environmental Services, Conference Room 610 NOTE: ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL ,4 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. NEW BUSINESS Request for Imposition of Fines/Liens 1. BCC vs. Monika Van Stone 2. BCC vs. Southern Development 3. BCC vs. Southern Development 4. BCC vs. Pacacios B. Request for Reduction/Abatement of Fines 1. BCC vs. Moise Wesner CEB NO. 2003-048 CEB NO. 2003-005 CEB NO. 2003-006 CEB NO. 2003-052 Request for Foreclosure 1. BCC vs. Ponce Realty 2. BCC vs. Dixie Higginbotham 3. BCC vs. Ironwood Golf Club 4. BCC vs. Barbara Galloway CEB NO. 2003-053 D. Rules and Regulations 4. OLD BUSINESS CEB NO. 2003-042 CEB NO. 2003-022 CEB NO. 2003-039 CEB NO. 2003-035 A. Affidavits of Non-Compliance 1. BCC vs. Southern Development 2. BCC vs. Southern Development 5. REPORTS CEB NO. 2003-005 CEB NO. 2003-006 A. County Attorney Office Quarterly Report B. BCC vs. Steven Johnson CEB NO. 2003-057 COMMENTS NEXT MEETING DATE April 22, 2004 8. ADJOURN April 7, 2004 CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: Okay, we'll call the special meeting of the Code Enforcement Board to order, please. You all bear with me, I forgot my glasses and I'm borrowing Bobbie's, so this shall be interesting. 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. May we have a roll call, please? MS. HILTON: Yes. Clifford Flegal? CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: Present. MS. HILTON: Bobbie Dusek? MS. DUSEK: Here. MS. HILTON: George Ponte has an excused absence. Gerald Lefebvre? MR. LEFEBVRE: Here. MS. HILTON: Sheri Barnett has an excused absence. Albert Doria has an excused absence. Raymond Bowie? MR. BOWIE: Here. MS. HILTON: And I've not heard anything from Mr. Dowling. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: Approval of our agenda. Changes and additions. MS. HILTON: Yes, we have four changes. We're going to move the rules and regs to the next meeting so that we have a full quorum. And staff is requesting that Southern Development, 2003-005 and 2003-006, be continued to the April 22nd hearing. He's out of town. Page 2 April 7, 2004 And staff is also requesting that Pacacios, 2003-052, be continued to the next hearing, April 22nd, for imposition of fines. MS. DUSEK: I make a motion that we accept the agenda as amended. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: I have a motion and a second to accept the agenda as amended. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. (Unanimous votes of ayes.) CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: Okay, first item is new business. Request for imposition of fines. First case, 2003-048. MS. HILTON: Yes, this is BCC versus Monika Van Stone. The case was heard November 13th, 2003. The violation was wooden horse stable, a wooden shed with electric and an apartment/guest house with electric, plumbing, air conditioning and septic improvements without permits or COs. Ms. Van Stone was ordered to submit for a permit within 90 days February l lth. And then afterwards, after obtaining the permits within 45 days, get the permits and obtain a CO, or there would be a fine of $50 per day. And Ms. Van Stone is present in the courtroom. And staff was requesting fines be imposed in the amount of $700 for the period of February 12th through February 26th at a rate of 50 per day, plus $1,183.50 for the operational costs. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: Ms. Van Stone? MS. VAN STONE: Yes, hello. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: Do you want to say anything to us about this? MS. VAN STONE: Yes. In fact, I have some information compiled which I think will be quite informative, quite concise. And these were all preexisting buildings when I purchased this property. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: Okay, first let's us get you sworn in and Page 3 April 7, 2004 then you can tell us what you'd like. (Speaker was duly sworn.) UNIDENTIFIED MEMBER OF THE AUDIENCE:Has the board reviewed this letter that we sent to Shanelle Hilton? MS. HILTON: It was included in your packet. MS. DUSEK: The original packet? MR. LEFEBVRE: The original packet? MS. HILTON: The original packet when she was asking for a continuation. MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay. MS. VAN STONE: If you don't, I'd be happy to pass that onward to you for reading purposes, if you don't have it. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: Go ahead, you can tell us what you want, ma'am. MS. VAN STONE: I don't know what else to elaborate upon other than this is precise and concise, and I'm-- and in essence I feel that I'm the victim. I had a very reputable attorney in Porter, Wright, Morris and Arthur, and I anticipated that everything be done with the I's dotted and the T's crossed. And when I purchased this, I never ever foresaw that I would be in this position. It's harrowing, it's a terrible experience, and I had again given it to them to look after, hoping that -- and I had to be out of town for my mother's illness, this is why there is such a delay in this. I'm here now, I'm making every effort to deal with this to the best of my ability. In fact, I have also tried to obtain many people who could carry this onward. I'm referring of course to permitting and drafting. I haven't even had return calls, other than this gentleman, who was kind enough to be here today. MS. DUSEK: You haven't had remm calls from the county -- MS. VAN STONE: No, not-- MS. DUSEK: -- or from other people? MS. VAN STONE: -- from the county, I'm referring now to Page 4 April 7, 2004 drafting individuals so that it could even be permitted. I presume that's the proper stage that one goes. Again, not having ever been in this position, I wouldn't have ever known -- I didn't even know the procedures to take. And this gentleman is here now who would probably be able to, I hope, continue this. MR. BOWIE: Now, you had indicated in your statements submitted here that at the time you were in the process of purchasing this property, various understandings were conveyed to you regarding the permissible uses of this property. Who conveyed those understandings to you? The seller? MS. VAN STONE: Premiere Properties. MR. BOWIE: Premiere Properties. MS. VAN STONE: That is correct. MR. BOWIE: And they were representing you? MS. VAN STONE: They were representing myself, yes. And I purchased this as a horse farm. MR. BOWIE: And they told you all this was permissible and you -- MS. VAN STONE: Absolutely. THE COURT REPORTER: I'm sorry, I need to swear you in if you're going to testify. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: You have to wait, sir, otherwise we need to swear you in. MS. VAN STONE: This is again very, very important. But regardless, I realize now we have to delve on. And whatever you'd like me to do in addition to what I'm trying to attempt -- or attempting to do here. MR. BOWIE: Could you tell us a little bit what you are attempting to do? MS. VAN STONE: I'm attempting now to have -- and I need a little more information. I believe -- I wish Jeff Letourneau had been Page 5 April 7, 2004 here, or would be here. He had mentioned he would be, but obviously couldn't be due to scheduling. But I'm attempting to have some architectural drawings drawn for this purpose. I've inherited this issue. MR. BOWIE: And when you get those drawings done, you intend to apply for what, a rezoning? MS. VAN STONE: No, permitting. I have no intention of doing anything else. MR. BOWIE: Permitting? MS. VAN STONE: Permitting, yes, with regard to the drawings at hand that are in question. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: Okay, we gave you 90 days to submit your applications to get permits. During that 90-day period -- because that's when the fine starts, at the end of the 90 days, that's what they're asking us to impose. So during that first 90 days, what have you done? I mean, why -- where are you and why haven't you done it? I guess that's what -- MS. VAN STONE: I've already mentioned that I had to be with my mother because of illness and I had given it to my attorney, Porter, Wright, Morris and Arthur, so they could deal with this issue. And obviously it wasn't done. MS. DUSEK: What did you ask your attorney to do, to start the permitting process? MS. VAN STONE: Yes. If necessary. I didn't know how to go about it, so I just -- I naturally contacted him, because he was the closing individual on this property. And if there weren't any permits 30 years ago, which obviously did not occur, this is not-- this is an ancient property. I didn't feel at the time I was responsible. But obviously I am. Again, I psychologically. Stressful. MS. DUSEK: feel pretty victimized, both monetarily and Because it's had a major effect on my health, too. Jean, I have a question. Page 6 April 7, 2004 MS. RAWSON: Yes. MS. DUSEK: Today we're supposed to impose fines. MS. RAWSON: Correct. MS. DUSEK: Other than a reduction of fines, can an imposition be postponed until a later date? MS. RAWSON: Well, it would be in the nature of a motion for continuance, I think. I think you can listen to her explanation and apply all those factors in determining the fines but, I mean, you've already got an order that says you're going to do it by this day or these fines are going to be imposed. So you can't really go back and change that order. All you can do is listen to the gravity of the offense, the efforts that she's making at compliance, whether she's been before the board before, all those factors that are in the statute, in determining whether or not to reduce the fines. But I don't think you can change the original order. MS. DUSEK: You mean changing the original order to a date? I'm not asking that we change the order, but I know that we're supposed to impose the fines today. I mean, they've asked us to impose the fines. MS. RAWSON: Right. MS. DUSEK: And that date, if-- I mean, can we say we'll impose the fines 30 days from now? MS. RAWSON: Well, it doesn't change the date on which the fines would be imposed. The original order says the date on which thereafter the fines would be imposed. If you continue the case, what you're continuing is your administrative hearing on the imposition of fines. You're not continuing the date on which they should be imposed, because that's in your first order. MS. DUSEK: Okay. MS. RAWSON: So your first order tells you when they should be imposed. What she's asking you is to give her more time, that she's telling you what efforts she's made at coming into compliance, so you Page 7 April 7, 2004 can consider all those things in determining the amount of the fine, but I don't think you can change that original date that you put in your original order. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: Jean, in imposing the fines, could we -- we have the fine which started at $50 a day and we have the operational costs. Could we impose the operational costs and not at this time impose the fine? The fine keeps running until we decide to impose it. MS. RAWSON: Yes, you can do that. Of course, the operational costs continue until the property comes into compliance as well. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: Right. What I'm looking for is if we don't impose anything, okay, there's no -- a lien on the property doesn't start. MS. RAWSON: I hear you. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: And without a lien on the property, she could walk out of here and sell the property tomorrow and the county's not protected. MS. RAWSON: Yes, you can do that. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: So what I want to do is protect the county because there's -- based on our order, it's not in compliance and there's money owed and I don't want something to happen where the county's not protected. MR. BOWIE: Yeah. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: So I'm looking at if I don't impose the $50 a day portion but I impose the operational costs portion, I at least get a lien on the property so someone is aware if she decides to sell it that there's something attached to it. And maybe we can impose the actual fine portion at a later date when she could come forth and give us more sufficient information, okay, I actually did this and-- because the reasons I've heard so far really don't, in my own personal opinion, warrant not imposing the fine. I'm looking for a way to try to help her Page 8 April 7, 2004 and, you know, this is the only way I can do it by maybe giving her more time. MS. RAWSON: You can do that. MS. VAN STONE: I don't understand. What more can I say other than the fact that -- CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: I understand, ma'am. It's just what you told me isn't leading me to believe that whether it's your fault or your attorney's fault, whoever's fault, that enough has been done during that 90 days that we gave you to do something, okay? That's what I'm looking at. MS. VAN STONE: If you can imagine, I've been calling -- CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: I understand, ma'am. It's -- you know, I'm just saying that -- MS. VAN STONE: Many people are busy. They won't even return a call, or will they accept a case. CHAIRMAN FLEGAIJ: I understand what you're saying. I'm just trying to tell you that I've heard it, and in my opinion it's just not enough for me. MS. VAN STONE: I am not going to be selling this property. I have no desire to. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: That's neither here nor there, I mean, at this point. I'm just looking to protect the county. MS. DUSEK: So Jean, if we postpone, as Cliff said, the 50 day, but they -- but we impose the operational costs today, those operational costs could change? CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: No. MS. RAWSON: Yes. Well, you know, there's always a part of the order that says the operational costs will continue until the property comes into compliance. You can impose the operational costs today. You can ask Shanelle if she has a number today. If not, you know, when we come back later to impose the fines, you could find out what that number is. Page 9 April 7, 2004 CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: Jean, my understanding of operational costs were that's the cost to bring it up to the day we issued our order. Beyond that, operational costs don't apply. Unless we get the county to make the change that we're recommending to a higher value, then everything after the imposition of a -- the board order, then that applies, too. MS. RAWSON: That's true. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: because -- MS. DUSEK: Okay. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: MS. RAWSON: Right. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: MS. DUSEK: MS. HILTON: MS. DUSEK: MS. HILTON: MS. DUSEK: So the operational costs are already set They're already set, right? Okay. So that is a firm number. So the 700 is a firm number. No, the 700's the fine. The operational costs -- Oh, excuse me. -- are $1,183.50. Right, right. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: Yeah. So they can't build up any more costs and apply them to the property. They're done, as far as operational goes. That ended the day we made the order. MS. VAN STONE: You're not willing to forego on any of this, what you're telling me, monetarily? CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: Well, right now we haven't made that determination amongst ourselves. I'm just giving you my own personal feeling. We have to talk about it, once you're done telling us your side. MS. VAN STONE: Well, we're talking a property here with buildings that have existed for numerous, numerous years. Three decades. And now this is now -- it's necessary for me to bring it up to par. But why -- I could say -- this is a vicious argument. We're going Page 10 April 7, 2004 around in circles here. I've not been the most recent purchaser. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: That's a question answer. MR. BOWIE: No, we can't answer that. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: That's not our authority. MR. BOWIE: running a red light caught me before? But how was this not caught before? I mean, this board can't It would be the same as a person gets caught and asking the officer, how come you haven't MS. VAN STONE: But I'm not the one who ran the red light. MR. BOWIE: All I'm saying, it's the same logic as -- MS. VAN STONE: I mean, I anticipate when I employ a law that everything will be done to the letter. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: Well, that's something you need to take up with them, not us. MR. BOWIE: That's another issue altogether. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: Again, that's something we can't deal with. All we're allowed to deal with is when you were before us before, the county said there was a violation, and you're allowed to state why there -- you feel there isn't a violation, then we make a determination. That's what the law lets us do, that you're either, for lack of a better word, guilty or not guilty. Okay, we've made that determination and we issued and order and told you to do something. Now what the law lets us do, since you haven't done it, they say we can impose the fine as we ordered the fine to start in our order, and that's what we're here to do. Beyond that, we don't have any authority to say this person made a mistake and they didn't do their job. We just don't have that authority. You have to take that up somewhere else. MS. VAN STONE: I just don't -- I mean, what protection is there for the consumer? UNIDENTIFIED MEMBER OF THE AUDIENCE: Where's the somewhere else? Page 11 April 7, 2004 MS. VAN STONE: Exactly. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL' Well, you -- you need to go talk to your attorney, you know, and if you feel the county's done something wrong, then I guess you need to talk to the county. I mean, we can't help you with the county. MS. VAN STONE: Aren't you the county? CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: That's not what we're -- no, we're a board appointed by the county to determine right and wrong, and that's all we're allowed to do. And we did that, okay? MS. VAN STONE: There's no grey area in here, there's only a black-and-white, it would appear. MR. BOWIE: Well, at this point. See, the merits of this have already been heard and a determination has already been made on the merits. MS. VAN STONE' I couldn't be here, unfortunately. MR. BOWIE: I'm saying, nonetheless, that did transpire, so we're at a different stage now. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: I mean, when the order was issued, and I don't know what date that was, but obviously 90 days has passed, so it must have been sometime last year. MR. LEFEBVRE: November 13th. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL' November, okay. November is when we made that determination. MS. VAN STONE: And there's absolutely no flexibility beyond that? MR. BOWIE: Not on hearing the merits of it, no. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: No, we don't rehear the case. MS. VAN STONE: One can't appeal that? CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: No, time's up for appeal. MS. DUSEK: All of this -- I'm assuming the county did follow through with all of the notification and explanation that you could appeal within a certain amount of time, but that has passed. Page 12 April 7, 2004 MS. VAN STONE: Again, as I said, I had to be away because of health issues. MS. DUSEK: Well, I don't know if you were away for 90 days. MS. VAN STONE: I was, yes. MS. DUSEK: Well, somehow with the communication, perhaps you should have contacted the county by telephone or in some way postponed it, continued the case until you -- MS. VAN STONE: Having left that with the attorney, I hoped that everything would be resolved or at least that the ball -- MS. DUSEK: It seems the issue is with your attorney, and that's unfortunate, but-- MR. BOWIE: Well, I'd like to make a motion and the motion would be this, that-- CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: Well, let's finish with her first. Excuse me, Ray. Do you have anything else to tell us, ma'am? MS. VAN STONE: Other than the fact that I feel completely victimized here. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: Okay, we understand. Thank you. Anybody have any questions for her? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: Thank you, ma'am. Do you have anybody else that wants to speak on your behalf?. MR. CATUZZI: Yeah, I'd like to ask a question. MR. BOWIE: The speaker needs to be sworn, I believe. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: She needs to swear you in, if you want to make a statement. MR. CATUZZI: Peter Catuzzi. C-A-T-U-Z-Z-I. (Speaker was duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: And you are who, sir? MR. CATUZZI: We have a design firm. We just came in last week. Page 13 April 7, 2004 cHAIRMAN FLEGAL: To help this lady? MR. CATUZZI: Yes, sir. Yes, sir. The reason -- what I'm asking, realistically I understand that you're not going to lower the fine or anything like that, but what's going to happen now is that it's probably going to take us 30 days to get this compliance going. We hate to be the people that are going to be responsible for more fines on her. So I'm asking -- I understand what your ruling is going to be, but the thing I'm asking is that if you could give some relief to where at least it gives us time to put this all together. I mean, it's something that's not done overnight, especially in construction, as you know. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL' Okay. You need to understand, which you probably don't, back in November -- MR. LEFEBVRE: November 13th. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: -- we had a hearing because this problem was brought forth to the board that said these violations exist. The county presented their side. I can't remember back to November, I'm sorry, that's a lot of cases ago. And there was a side maybe from the respondent. And we the board -- don't remember how many of us were there that day, probably seven or more -- listened, made a determination and said okay, there in fact is a violation, there's something wrong with this property, it doesn't meet the law. We issued an order that said we're going to give you 90 days to submit whatever it takes to get the permitting started, okay? Now, that didn't happen, so now the county has come and said time limit's up, the $50 a day you imposed runs. However long it takes her to get it done, unfortunately it's her problem. We gave her 90 days and she didn't meet it. We're not going to change that. So the clock's running, the $50 keeps going until she does what we ordered her to do. MR. CATUZZI: Okay, I understand. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: That's it. Page 14 April 7, 2004 And we've heard from her side about her circumstances, and now you're trying to help her saying you just got on board. And we understand that. The sooner you can help her, the sooner she gets in compliance and the fine will stop. MR. CATUZZI: Absolutely. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: You know. Now, however long that takes, whether it's 30 days, 60, I honestly don't know. But back then is when we set the time limit, based on all the information we had, and we thought 90 days was more than sufficient. The fact that some circumstances -- I don't know if they were beyond her control, maybe they were -- hurt her, it's just the way it is. Obviously she didn't have people looking out for her best interest. MR. CATUZZI. No, she hasn't. But, you know, being -- CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: But we can't help that. MR. CATUZZI: -- in this business for many years myself, I've seen so much garbage being put out there, and people do buy it. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: Well, that's not our purview either. MR. CATUZZI: I understand that. But it's too bad that the last person always gets blamed for something. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: Unfortunately. Do you have anything else to tell us, sir? MR. CATUZZI: No, that's it. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: Thank you, sir. Anybody else want to speak for Ms. Stone (sic)? MS. VAN STONE: I have one other, since I've already been sworn in? CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: Yes, ma'am. MS. VAN STONE: There's so many grey areas here as to what are the violations based on, meaning again it's vague. Yes, there hasn't been a permit taken out for this shed or that particular area. What precisely -- who do we get ahold of to -- MR. CATUZZI: I'll do that. Page 15 April 7, 2004 CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: I mean, the case has been heard, we're not going to hear it again. But the violations were brought forth back in November, and I'm sure you were issued a notice of violation of what you -- what ordinances you were in violation of and what sections of those ordinances. That's how it works. I don't have the case file in front of me, but normally when we see it, there are copies of those documents in there that were either left on your property or mailed by certified mail to you. So all that -- you should have had all that information. You need -- if you don't or if for some reason you lost them, you need to get with the county and get other copies so that you know specifically what those violations were. But that was all done back in November and before, before it ever got to the board. MS. DUSEK: Jean, I have another question. MS. RAWSON: Yes. MS. DUSEK: If we follow the path that Cliff has suggested, then if she -- whatever time limit we set for her to come back for the imposition of fines, not the operational costs, we've had some discussion in our -- among us on the board about when a reduction can be asked for. And it is that day, is it not, before we impose the fines? MS. RAWSON: Yes. MS. DUSEK: Okay. MS. RAWSON: So what you can do, if you decide to do the operational costs today, you can decide among yourselves in your discussion about when you want her to come back to the -- for the imposition, and at that time she can report to you about what's been done and you can make a decision based on all those factors in the statute about what the fines should be, if you want to change the number that you have put in your original order by reducing or abating. MS. DUSEK: Okay. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: Any other questions to Ms. Stone or the Page 16 April 7, 2004 other gentleman? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: ourselves for-- to impose. If none, we'll open it up among I guess my only recommendation, after listening to Jean, is probably to try to offer some assistance and give Ms. Stone a chance to come back and possibly ask for a reduction, based on events, would be that we do a motion to impose the operational costs and set the imposition of fine to be represented to us at our May meeting, because we have another meeting in two weeks, which is not going to give her much time. So I'd say, you know, bring it back to us in May, have the county bring it back to us in May to impose the fine portion, but we impose the operational costs today. That gives her not quite 45 days to -- MR. BOWIE: Show something. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: -- do something and present some kind of facts that she's made this effort, and then we can consider whether we want to reduce the fine. How does that sound? MS. DUSEK: That sounds fine. MR. BOWIE: I'd like to make that motion as follows: That the lien be imposed for operational costs in the amount of $1,183.50; and that the hearing, as to the imposition of fines, be continued until our May, 2004 meeting, whatever that date might be. MS. DUSEK: I second. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: We have a motion and a second to impose the operational costs and set the imposition of fines until our May meeting. Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: All those in favor, signify by saying (Unanimous votes of ayes.) CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: Any opposed? aye. Page 17 April 7, 2004 (No response.) CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: Ms. Stone, do you understand what we're saying? MS. VAN STONE: Comparatively. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: We're going to impose the operational costs, which is basically like court costs, if you go to court, okay? But the fine portion, we're not going to impose that today. You have until our May meeting, which is normally the fourth Thursday of the month -- I don't have a calendar in front of me -- when at that time the county's going to come back to us and say okay, now we want to impose these. Of course, it's going to go up, because it's going to be another 45 days, but at that time you come to us and tell us why we should reduce that amount, because of "X", because you have people working and all those factors. You need to present to us to try and get us to reduce whatever that number is to a smaller number, okay? MS. VAN STONE: What am I to say? CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: I mean, right now that's the best we can do for you. We're giving you basically another 45 days. MS. VAN STONE' And with regard to the operational costs, when are those due? CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: We've imposed them, they're due now. You need to talk to the county as to when you want to pay them. And it's how much, Shanelle? MR. BOWIE: $1,183.50. MS. HILTON: You can set payment arrangements. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: Yeah. You just need to work that out with the county. But we're imposing them today. So what will happen now is the board's attorney will write up an order for me to sign imposing that. I will sign it. Our attorney will file it in the courthouse as a lien on your property until it's paid. MS. VAN STONE: I hate that term lien. Page 18 April 7, 2004 MR. CATUZZI: Well, let me ask you something: If she does pay that right now, though, is there still a lien? CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: Well, I'll have to -- I have to sign the order and it will get recorded. But if you pay it now, there won't be a lien on the property because you've paid it. MR. CATUZZI: Right, that's what-- CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: But the order will be recorded. MR. CATUZZI: Yeah, absolutely. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: But it will be paid. MR. CATUZZI: I understand. MS. VAN STONE: I'll pay it today, obviously. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: Next item, Southern Development, 2003-005. MR. LEFEBVRE: Continued. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: No, this is -- the imposition of fines, you want to continue that, too? MS. HILTON: Yes, to the April 22nd hearing. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: And you want-- the next one, you want to continue that, too? MS. HILTON: Yes. Now we're skipping down to -- CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: Abatements. MS. HILTON: Yes, or reduction. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: Ms. Westner. MS. HILTON: No, I had spoke to her on the phone the other day. She doesn't speak very good English, but -- CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: That's this one. MS. HILTON: I spoke to her on the phone and she knew of the date and she knew where to come, but she's not here. I don't know. Her case involved litter. She had a lot of litter and she had some junk vehicles out in the Estates. Her case involved junk. She had some junk cars that she got rid of. She got things improperly tagged, improperly tagged. And she had litter and she cleaned up. Page 19 April 7, 2004 She did everything in time so she doesn't have any fines, she just has operational costs. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: Oh, she just has operational costs? MS. HILTON: I told her that-- CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: The board has no authority to reduce operational costs under the statute. MS. HILTON: I explained that to her, but she requested. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: That doesn't help. The statutes don't give us any power to reduce operational costs, so they just stand. We can only reduce fines. So that's an item we can't even deal with. I didn't understand it that way, but thanks for telling us. There's nothing we can do about that. Operational costs are operational costs. MS. HILTON: We can contact her and set up payment arrangements to fit her budget needs, so -- CHAIRMAN FLEGAL' So now it gets down to request for foreclosures. MS. HILTON: Yes, we have four of them. We had BCC versus Ponce Realty, 2003-042. Case was heard in October, 2003 regarding landscape violations. And fines were imposed in December. The fines are still accruing. There's non-compliance. Fines at the time of imposition were $4, 200, and the operational costs were $1,156.50. The fines are 150 per day. The second case, Dixie Higgenbothom, CEB 2003-022. Her case was heard, I'm sure you're familiar, May of 2003. Continued a few times. The fines were imposed in December. Violation has not been abated. The fines continue to accrue at 40 per day. And at that time of imposition, $4,480 and $920.75 for operational costs. MS. DUSEK: Wasn't there -- on this particular case, wasn't she either selling it or the mortgage was foreclosing? MS. HILTON: The bank is still in the process of foreclosing. She actually went to court and proved they did not have sufficient service. It stalled the proceeding. But it's back in the court system Page 20 April 7, 2004 again, so -- MS. DUSEK: Okay. MS. HILTON: Next one is Ironwood Golf Club, 2003-039. This was a weed violation on the golf course. Case was heard in October, 2003. And impositions were -- the fines were imposed in December. It has not been abated. We continue to receive phone calls as well on the violation. Violation accrues at 50 per day. At the time of imposition, the fines were $850, and the operational costs were $1,025.60. And then Barbara Galloway, 2003-035. She was heard August-- the case was heard August, 2003. It's an abandoned trailer down in Copeland. And she is also currently, I found out, in jail. I don't know why. The fines were imposed in December. And her fines were 100 per day, due to some of the safety hazards of the trailer sitting down there abandoned. Fines were 7,300 in December. And the operational cost was $1,202.25. And that violation has not been abated either. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: On all of these, we've imposed fines and everything and we're down to our final step, correct? MS. HILTON: Yes. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: So if I remember correctly, Jean, didn't way back a long time ago we had the county request, and I think they got a change to the ordinance, and I don't know whether it was the statute or not, where we got the county in a different position on our liens so that we're -- MS. RAWSON: Super priority. MR. BOWIE: Super priority. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: Right, we're up there with the tax people. MS. RAWSON: County ordinance, not state statute. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: Okay. So since this one's being worked Page 21 April 7, 2004 this? on as a foreclosure, I would recommend to my colleagues that we pass this forward to the county attorney's office for foreclosure, all four of them. MR. KI,ATZKOW: May I say something? CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: Yes, sir. THE COURT REPORTER: I'm sorry, you're -- could you just -- CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: He's the county attorney. MR. KLATZKOW: I'm Jeff Klatzkow, County Attorney's Office. I handle the foreclosures. Higgenbothom, I think there may be some questions as to the actual order. You might want to get some clarifications on them. So that I would ask that the board defer the decision sending it to the county attorney's office until the next meeting so that we could take a look at that and perhaps recast the orders so that it would be easier for the county attorney to actually foreclose on the property. MS. DUSEK: Just on that one case? MR. KLATZKOW: Just on that one case, yes. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: Okay. Have you talked to Jean about MR. KLATZKOW: No. I just -- I took a look at the order yesterday and had some questions on it. And it may stand as it is, but I'm just asking the board to defer its decision till its next meeting. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: Okay, we meet again in two weeks. Do you think you could resolve it by then? MR. KI~ATZKOW: Yes. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: Okay, then let's -- MS. RAWSON: Let me know if I need to amend the order. MR. KLATZKOW: Yes. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: Let's set aside the Higgenbothom to our regular meeting on the-- what is it? MS. HILTON: April 22nd. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: -- the 22nd? And recommend that the Page 22 April 7, 2004 other three be forwarded. MS. DUSEK: I make a motion that we recommend to the county attorney's office to go ahead with the three foreclosures: Ponce Realty, Ironwood Golf Club and Barbara Galloway. MR. BOWIE: Second. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: recommend foreclosure to the discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: aye. We have a motion and a second to county attorney's office. Any other All those in favor, signify by saying (Unanimous votes of ayes.) CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: Okay, rules and deferred to our regular meeting. Old business. Affidavits of non-compliance. MS. HILTON: Yeah, we had Southern -- the three cases that you continued, Southern Development and Pacacios. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: Okay. Reports? Quarterly report from the county attorney's office. MS. HILTON: I put one there for you in case you -- CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: If I remember, there was a copy somewhere. MR. KLATZKOW: Again, Jeff Klatzkow, County Attorney's Office. We started off the year with 40 open cases. Your report has us having closed with pending settlement eight. Since that time, there are another four cases that are pending settlement. Last quarter the settlements have resulted in approximately $22,500 in fines being paid. The board may want to know with respect to Barbara Galloway, I regulations are Page 23 April 7, 2004 already received two calls from people trying to buy that property. Apparently word got out. I'm not entirely sure how to go about this, since she's incarcerated, but we'll work that one out. Apparently Copeland is an up and coming area. So -- and other than questions, that's -- I'm giving the board the reports at each quarter so you can see what's happening. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: Thank you, appreciate it. We have a BCC versus Steven Johnson as a report. MS. HILTON: He's very detailed, as you directed him to be. He has removed 1,000 bolts; 750 nuts; 500 washers flat; 200 lock washers; a pontoon boat trailer, 24-foot; a 1985 Mitsubishi pickup, red and white; 24-foot travel trailer, 1952 model; an 18-foot aluminum feed-bottom boat, five horsepower outboard; a two and a half horsepower Mercury outboard; 52 spare tires for assorted trailers; a 1985 Honda motorcycle; a 17-foot feed-bottom boat trailer, galvanized; 14-foot feed-bottom boat trailer galvanized; 22-foot feed-bottom bass boat trailer; one high-wheel mower, push type; three riding mowers; two push-wheel mowers; one John Deere backhoe front end loader, 1962-63 model; picnic table and benches; 10 Miami windows; 15 mobile home windows; seven jalousie windows; eight aluminum mobile home doors with jalousie windows; and two two-man canoes, aluminum style. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: He's making headway. MR. BOWIE: He didn't find a partridge in a pear tree amongst all that stuff?. It was obvious he was keeping inventory. He got rid of his inventory. That wasn't junk to him, that was inventory. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: He's making history. Thank you. Okay, that concludes our reports. Comments. I have a comment. I had to go before the Board of County Commissioners and make an annual report on what the board has done over the last year. Michelle and I worked on it and made a presentation. Part of the presentation was there are currently, I think, Page 24 April 7, 2004 five ordinances that govern the Code Enforcement Board, and we asked the county commissioners if they would be so kind as to condense those down into one ordinance. I got a commissioner from -- a letter from Commissioner Fiala, the chair person, and she has stated that based on the recommendations, staff has been directed to draft an ordinance to consolidate the board's five current governing ordinances. So they're going to do that. MS. POWERS: May I speak on that? CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: Yes, ma'am. MS. POWERS: Janet Powers, operations manager. Yes, that is in fact happening. However, we are bound by leaving one of those ordinances intact, 2001-55, which is the ordinance that mandates that you give reports to the Board of County Commissioners. Because that's an all-inclusive ordinance for any board, advisory board, for quasi judicial. So that one is going to be staying as is. So we're compiling four into one and including the special master process for hearing of citations. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: Anybody have any comments? MR. BOWIE: It's a good move. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: Our regular meeting is April 22nd, which is in two weeks, I think, or something like that, close. Anything else? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: Hearing none, I would entertain a motion to adjourn. MS. DUSEK: So moved. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN FLEGAL: We have a motion and a second to adjourn. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. (Unanimous votes of ayes.) Page 25 April 7, 2004 There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 9:45 a.m.) CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD CLIFFORD FLEGAL, Chairman TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY COURT REPORTING SERVICE, 1NC. BY CHERIE NOTTINGHAM Page 26