Loading...
CEB Minutes 06/28/2018June 28, 2018 Page 1 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD Naples, Florida, June 28, 2018 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Code Enforcement Board, in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m., in REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: Robert Kaufman Sue Curley Ron Doino Gerald J. Lefebvre Herminio Ortega Ryan White Robert Ashton (excused) Lionel L'Esperance (excused) Kathleen Elrod (excused) ALSO PRESENT: Danny Blanco, Code Enforcement Specialist Jeff Letourneau, Manager of Investigations Tamara Lynne Nicola, Attorney to the Board Code Enforcement Board Hearing AGENDA Board of County Commission Chambers Collier County Government Center 3299 Tamiami Trail East, 3rd Floor Naples, FL 34112 June 28, 2018 9:00 AM Robert Kaufman, Chair Gerald Lefebvre, Vice-Chair Lionel L’Esperance, Member Ronald Doino, Member Robert Ashton, Member Sue Curley, Member Herminio Ortega, Member Kathleen Elrod, Alternate Ryan White, Alternate Notice: Respondents may be limited to twenty (20) minutes for case presentation unless additional time is granted by the Board. Persons wishing to speak on any agenda item will receive up to five (5) minutes unless the time is adjusted by the Chairman. All parties participating in the public hearing are asked to observe Roberts Rules of Order and speak one at a time so that the court reporter can record all statements being made. Any person who decides to appeal a decision of this Board will need a record of the proceedings pertaining thereto, and therefore may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. Neither Collier County nor the Code Enforcement Board shall be responsible for providing this record. I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE II. ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES V. PUBLIC HEARINGS/MOTIONS A. MOTIONS MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME B. STIPULATIONS C. HEARINGS 1. CASE NO: CEROW20180006391 OWNER: Eduardo Rodriguez and Maria L. Rodriguez OFFICER: Michele McGonagle VIOLATIONS: Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, Chapter 110, Article II Construction in Right of Way, Division 1, Section 110-31(a) and Section 110-32. Unpermitted culvert pipe and culvert pipe blocked with sand and dirt obstructing the flow of water. FOLIO NO: 22670600009 VIOLATION 3600 Poplar Way, Naples, FL ADDRESS: 2. CASE NO: CESD20170017332 OWNER: Donny J. Ridge and Riane C. Ridge OFFICER: Maria Rodriguez VIOLATIONS: Collier County Land Development Code, 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). An alteration/addition with electric and plumbing attached to primary structure constructed without first obtaining the authorization of the required permit(s), inspections and certificate(s) of occupancy as required by the Collier County Building. FOLIO NO: 37346240005 VIOLATION 1330 27th ST SW, Naples, FL ADDRESS: 3. CASE NO: CESD20180006398 OWNER: Eduardo Rodriguez OFFICER: Michele McGonagle VIOLATIONS: Collier County Land Development Code, 04-41, as amended, Sections 10.02.06(B)(1)(a), 10.02.06(B)(1)(e), and 10.02.06(B)(1)(e)(i), Florida Building Code 5th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 105.1, and Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, Chapter 110, Article II, Section 110-31(a). Unpermitted shed, fence/gate, and culvert pipe. FOLIO NO: 22670640001 VIOLATION 4718 Alladin Lane, Naples, FL ADDRESS: 4. CASE NO: CELU20180006133 OWNER: Jessica Nicole Thompson and Jennifer Diane Thompson OFFICER: Arthur Ford VIOLATIONS: Collier County Land Development Code, 04-41, as amended, Section 2.02.03. Prohibited outside storage of interior furniture, lamps, rugs, plastic bags/containers, construction materials, etc. FOLIO NO: 62764720004 VIOLATION 839 94th Ave N, Naples, FL ADDRESS: 5. CASE NO: CEV20180006947 OWNER: Jessica Nicole Thompson and Jennifer Diane Thompson OFFICER: Arthur Ford VIOLATIONS: Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, Article III, Chapter 130, Section 130-97(5). Commercial vehicles (pickup trucks with equipment/materials attached to the ladder racks extending beyond the length of the vehicle) parked in the driveway. FOLIO NO: 62764720004 VIOLATION 839 94th Ave N, Naples, FL ADDRESS: 6. CASE NO: CESD20170017526 OWNER: Michael Shane and Carole Shane OFFICER: Michele McGonagle VIOLATIONS: Collier County Land Development Code, 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a), Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(e), and 10.02.06(B)(1)(e)(i). Alterations/additions commenced prior to obtaining Collier County Building Permits. FOLIO NO: 82680002103 VIOLATION 110 Oceans Blvd, Naples, FL ADDRESS: 7. CASE NO: CENA20180002520 OWNER: Shelly F. Pike OFFICER: John Johnson VIOLATIONS: Collier County Land Development Code, 04-41, as amended, Section 1.04.01(A). Outside storage, furniture, household items, plastic totes, appliances and other goods stored in the front yard. FOLIO NO: 67492480006 VIOLATION 4110 Mindi Ave, Naples, FL ADDRESS: 8. CASE NO: CESD20160013970 OWNER: Cubesmart LP OFFICER: Jon Hoagboon VIOLATIONS: Collier County Land Development Code, 04-41, as amended, Sections 10.02.06(B)(1)(a) and 10.02.06(B)(1)(e)(i). Installation of garage roll-up doors without first obtaining any/all required Collier County Permits. FOLIO NO: 273760009 VIOLATION 3485 Domestic Ave, Naples, FL ADDRESS: 9. CASE NO: CEAU20180005841 OWNER: Roberto Scarpone and Rita Scarpone OFFICER: Arthur Ford VIOLATIONS: Florida Building Code 5th Edition (2014) Building, Chapter 1, Part 2, Section 105.1. Unpermitted 6-foot wooden fence in front of the property. FOLIO NO: 62423880007 VIOLATION 704 108th Ave N, Naples, FL ADDRESS: 10. CASE NO: CESD20160021004 OWNER: William Seebold, Lynne G. Seebold, Mikel S. Seebold, and Lori L. Seebold OFFICER: Jon Hoagboon VIOLATIONS: Collier County Land Development Code, 04-41, as amended, Sections 10.02.06(B)(1)(a) and 10.02.06(B)(1)(e)(i). Improvements made without first obtaining any and all required Collier County Permits. FOLIO NO: 38100400006 VIOLATION 11170 Livingston Rd, Naples, FL ADDRESS: 11. CASE NO: CESD20180002262 OWNER: CTPML LLC OFFICER: Michele McGonagle VIOLATIONS: Collier County Land Development Code, 04-41, as amended, Sections 10.02.06(B)(1)(a) and 10.02.06(B)(1)(e). Interior alterations commenced prior to obtaining proper Collier County Permits. FOLIO NO: 384600003 VIOLATION 213, 235, and 261 Airport Road South Naples, FL ADDRESS: 12. CASE NO: CELU20180005848 OWNER: Jeffery Kaulbars and Brenna Nipper OFFICER: Steven Lopez-Silvero VIOLATIONS: Collier County Land Development Code, 04-41, as amended, Section 1.04.01(A), Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, Chapter 126, Article IV, Section 126-111(b), and Collier County Code of Laws, Chapter 54 Environment, Article VI Weeds Litter and Exotic’s, Section 54-181. Business operation without first obtaining a Collier County Business Tax Receipt. Brought onto or placed on property without first obtaining Collier County Government approval for such use are the following but not limited to: industrial storage container(s), commercial operating equipment, vehicles and commercial vehicles, vegetative/tree debris and/or mulched/woody material brought from offsite location(s), etc. FOLIO NO: 00307920003 VIOLATION No Site Address ADDRESS: D. MOTION FOR REDUCTION OF FINES/LIENS VI. OLD BUSINESS A. MOTION FOR IMPOSITION OF FINES/LIENS 1. CASE NO: CELU20160015397 OWNER: G and E S Gonzalez Trust and Josue Daniel Gonzalez OFFICER: Steven Lopez-Silvero VIOLATIONS: Collier County Land Development Code, 04-41, as amended, Section 1.04.01(A). An unapproved fold trailer operating/parked on improved occupied commercial property. FOLIO NO: 25581000009 VIOLATION 102 S 4th ST, Immokalee, FL ADDRESS: 2. CASE NO: CEPM20160004343 OWNER: Union Road LLC OFFICER: Stephen Athey VIOLATIONS: Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, Chapter 22, Article VI, Sections 23-231(12)(b), 22-231(12)(i), and 22- 231(12)(c). Roof in disrepair, windows and doors missing and/or broken, exterior walls in disrepair. FOLIO NO: 01058920513 VIOLATION 12400 Union Road, Naples, FL ADDRESS: 3. CASE NO: CESD20160015133 OWNER: Esmerido Castro OFFICER: Steven Lopez-Silvero VIOLATIONS: Collier County Land Development Code, 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). New exterior door, a wall-mounted air conditioning unit, partitioned walls and plumbing fixtures installed/added to the existing attached garage on improved occupied residential property without obtaining a permit. FOLIO NO: 36378000007 VIOLATION 5260 21st PL SW, Naples, FL ADDRESS: 4. CASE NO: CELU20160010501 OWNER: Anthony V. Piccirilli EST OFFICER: Colleen Davidson VIOLATIONS: Collier County Land Development Code, 04-41, as amended, Sections 1.04.01(A), 2.02.03, 10.02.06(B)(1)(a), and 10.02.06(B)(1)(e)(i). Unpermitted alterations to the carport structure resulting in residential use of industrially zoned property. FOLIO NO: 249120000 VIOLATION 1891 Elsa ST, Naples, FL ADDRESS: 5. CASE NO: CESD20170011882 OWNER: Calcap LLC OFFICER: Steven Lopez-Silvero VIOLATIONS: Collier County Land Development Code, 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). An in-ground swimming pool and a frame addition existing without obtaining the required inspections and certificate of completion and occupancy on improved unoccupied residential property. FOLIO NO: 35646960003 VIOLATION 4365 23rd PL SW, Naples, FL ADDRESS: 6. CASE NO: CELU20170008971 OWNER: DJ Price LLC OFFICER: Michele McGonagle VIOLATIONS: Collier County Land Development Code, 04-41, as amended, Section 2.02.03 and Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, Chapter 130, Article III, Section 130-96(a). Recreational vehicles being stored on vacant lot. FOLIO NO: 61833080003 VIOLATION 2589 Terrace Ave, Naples, FL ADDRESS: 7. CASE NO: CESD20160007819 OWNER: Manfred S. Dunker OFFICER: Arthur Ford VIOLATIONS: Collier County Land Development Code, 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). Demolition of interior, sheet rock, plumbing, etc. witnessed on May 10, 2016 by Contractor Licensing Investigators Ian Jackson and Steve Kovacs. FOLIO NO: 27581000007 VIOLATION 400 Oak Ave, Naples, FL ADDRESS: 8. CASE NO: CESD20150017888 OWNER: Julien Francois LLC OFFICER: Steven Lopez-Silvero VIOLATIONS: Collier County Land Development Code, 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). Unpermitted interior and exterior improvements to a structure consisting of but not limited to new windows, doors, electrical wiring, plumbing lines and bathroom fixtures, and petitioned walls creating approximately 20 individual sleeping rooms. FOLIO NO: 00124960000 VIOLATION 305 S 3rd ST, Immokalee, FL ADDRESS: B. MOTION TO RESCIND PREVIOUSLY ISSUED ORDER C. MOTION TO AMEND PREVIOUSLY ISSUED ORDER VII. NEW BUSINESS VIII. CONSENT AGENDA A. REQUEST TO FORWARD CASES TO COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AS REFERENCED IN SUBMITTED EXECUTIVE SUMMARY IX. REPORTS X. COMMENTS XI. NEXT MEETING DATE - THURSDAY JULY 26, 2018 AT 9:00 A.M. XII. ADJOURN June 28, 2018 Page 2 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning, everybody. I'd like to call the Code Enforcement Board to order. Notice: Respondents may be limited to 20 minutes in case presentation unless additional time is granted by the Board. Persons wishing to speak on any agenda item will be given five minutes unless the time is adjusted by the Chairman. All parties participating in the public hearing are asked to observe Robert's Rules of Order and speak one at a time so that the court reporter can record all statements being made. Any person who decides to appeal a decision of the 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 any record includes any 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. Okay. I'd like to have everybody stand for the Pledge of Allegiance. (The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Start out with the roll call. MR. BLANCO: Mr. Robert Kaufman? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Here. MR. BLANCO: Mr. Gerald Lefebvre? MR. LEFEBVRE: Here. MR. BLANCO: Mr. Ronald Doino? MR. DOINO: Here. MR. BLANCO: Mr. Herminio Ortega? MR. ORTEGA: Here. MR. BLANCO: Mr. Ryan White? MR. WHITE: Here. MR. BLANCO: Ms. Sue Curley? MS. CURLEY: Here. June 28, 2018 Page 3 MR. BLANCO: Mr. Robert Ashton has an excused absence, Mr. Lionel L'Esperance has an excused absence, and Ms. Kathleen Elrod is absent. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That was Sue reporting to me that my wife has my phone at home. But for everybody else, if you could silence yours. MS. CURLEY: I tried to call him to tell him I was running a minute late, and his wife answered the phone. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Maybe she was going to sit in for me today. I don't know. Okay. Approval of the minutes: Anybody have any changes on the minutes? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hearing none, take a motion to approve the minutes. MR. DOINO: Motion to approve. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MS. CURLEY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. ORTEGA: Aye. MR. WHITE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Which brings us to any changes in the agenda today. MR. BLANCO: Yes, sir. Roman Numeral V, Letter B, stipulations, we have three additions. June 28, 2018 Page 4 Number 8 from hearings, Case No. CESD20160013970, CubeSmart LP. Number 1 from hearings, Case No. CEROW20180006391, Eduardo Rodriguez and Maria L. Rodriguez. Number 3 from hearings, Case No. CESD20180006398, Eduardo Rodriguez. Roman Numeral V, public hearings, motions, Letter C, hearings, Case No. CESD20170017332, Donny J. Ridge and Riane C. Ridge, has been withdrawn. Number 4 from hearings, Case No. CELU20180006133, Jessica Nicole Thompson and Jennifer Diane Thompson, has been withdrawn. Number 5 from hearings, Case No. CEV20180006947, Jessica Nicole Thompson and Jennifer Diane Thompson, has been withdrawn. Number 9 from hearings, Case No. CEAU20180005841, Roberto Scarpone and Rita Scarpone, has been withdrawn. Number 10 from hearings, Case No. CESD20160021004, William Seebold, Lynn G. Seebold, and Mikel S. Seebold and Lori L. Seebold, has been withdrawn. Number 11 from hearings, Case No. CESD20180002262, CTPML, LLC, has been withdrawn. Roman Numeral VI, old business, Letter A, motion for imposition fines/liens, No. 1, Case No. CELU20160015397, G and E S Gonzalez Trust and Josue Daniel Gonzalez, has been withdrawn. Number 6, Case No. CELU20170008971, DJ Price, LLC, has been withdrawn. Number 7, Case No. CESD20160007819, Manfred S. Dunker, has been withdrawn. And that's all the changes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Could I get a motion from the Board to accept the agenda as modified? MR. DOINO: Motion. June 28, 2018 Page 5 MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor? MS. CURLEY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. ORTEGA: Aye. MR. WHITE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. MR. BLANCO: Okay. First item on the agenda, it's No. 8 from hearings. Case No. CESD20160013970, CubeSmart LP. That's Item 5C8. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. You want to read the stipulation into the record. MR. HOAGBOON: Sure. For the record, John Hoagboon, Collier County Code Enforcement. Therefore, it is agreed between the parties that the respondent shall pay operational costs in the amount of 59.84 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing, abate all violations by obtaining all required county building permits or demolition permits and request all inspections through certificate of completion/occupancy for the installation of garage roll-up doors within 30 days of this hearing, or fine of $200 per day will be imposed until the violation is abated. Three, the respondent must notify Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance; Four, that if the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county June 28, 2018 Page 6 may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriff's Office to enforce the provisions of this agreement, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Could you repeat when this needs to be resolved; how many days? MR. HOAGBOON: Thirty days. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And this is -- MS. CURLEY: Yeah. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- a real oldie from 2016. MR. HOAGBOON: Yes, sir. They've extended the permit twice, but they've been working with us throughout this process. There's another issue that's kind of prevented this last-minute type of thing. But it should be able to be resolved in 30 days. And I can let him expand upon it if you want to. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Permits have already been pulled. You're just waiting for inspections? MR. HOAGBOON: Well, they expired. Everything's paid for, the job's done. There's 21 doors. The remaining four doors need to be done, but there's a problem with the remaining tenants. They're not providing access, so that's a civil dispute between CubeSmart and the remaining tenants. So we're looking to modify the permit to just go ahead and close out what's done, and they'll fix the last four remaining doors at a later date. So that's what we're looking to do within the 30 days. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. God bless you, whoever sneezed. MS. NICOLA: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. You understand the stipulation? MR. VALENTINE: I do, and I appreciate the extension. And we June 28, 2018 Page 7 just want to close this matter out. We're working closely with our legal department with these four tenants who just don't want to work with us, and we're going to enforce, through their agreement with us, to take care of these last four doors. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Any comments from the Board? THE COURT REPORTER: Can I get your name? MR. VALENTINE: John Valentine. MR. LEFEBVRE: So the 17 doors are going to be inspected, permits are going to be closed out, and then the remaining four doors -- MR. HOAGBOON: If they choose to do them. There's no -- you know, I think there might be some physical constraints on those last four remaining ones. MR. VALENTINE: There is. We're working to try to get the issue resolved, but there is -- what's happened is throughout the years, these tenants have built storefronts. These are commercial bays. And in order for us to have these garage doors installed, there would be some costs involved, so that's where we're going back and forth with them to make sure that we understand who's going to absorb those costs and that it works for both parties. Like I mentioned, our legal department's currently speaking to them. I think today there are some appointments and some calls being made. My legal department is aware of this hearing and, like I said, we're working closely to try to resolve this matter with these four, for lack of a better term, rogue tenants who just don't want to work with us. MR. LEFEBVRE: So no work's been done on those four units, correct? MR. VALENTINE: But the equipment's all there. The vendor is on standby to get the work done and has already been paid. So it's just a matter of getting those folks to work with us and allow us to get this June 28, 2018 Page 8 work done. And the vendor's on standby, pretty much. MR. ORTEGA: Is there a permit already applied for? MR. HOAGBOON: It is; it just has expired because of the situation with the last four. MR. ORTEGA: Has an extension been filed? MR. HOAGBOON: Not yet, just because they feel like they can't get anywhere. They've been trying to work with those last four tenants. If we just renew the permit, close it out for the work that's been done, just like -- as you said, there's no -- the last four, there has been no work completed, so... MR. LEFEBVRE: There would be no violation at that point. MR. HOAGBOON: Exactly. MR. LEFEBVRE: The doors are still within code and everything -- MR. HOAGBOON: Exactly. MR. LEFEBVRE: -- other than the four remaining units, so you just -- certificate of completion for the 17 doors, and whenever those get done, you just pull a permit for those, and -- MR. HOAGBOON: Yeah, should they choose to go that route with those last four. MR. LEFEBVRE: That makes sense. MS. CURLEY: So when they bought this property, the wrong doors were installed without a permit? MR. HOAGBOON: No. They were just upgrading the doors. It's an older property. MS. CURLEY: Oh, got it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. CURLEY: Good luck. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any other questions from the Board? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hearing none, anybody want to June 28, 2018 Page 9 make a motion? MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion to approve the stipulated agreement as stated with the operational costs being paid in 30 days in the amount of 59.84. MR. DOINO: I'll second that. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a motion and second. All those in favor? MS. CURLEY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. ORTEGA: Aye. MR. WHITE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Thank you, sir. MR. HOAGBOON: Thank you. MR. VALENTINE: Thank you. MR. BLANCO: Next item on the agenda, it's No. 1 from hearings, Case No. CEROW20180006319, Eduardo Rodriguez and Maria L. Rodriguez, Item 5C1. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Danny, could you do me a favor going forward; could you state the case number, SC1, or whatever it is, first, because all the other numbers don't mean much to us, to have to look through all of those. That will make it easier for the Board. MR. BLANCO: Will do. MR. LEFEBVRE: Is Case No. 1 and 3 related? MR. BLANCO: Yes. They're the same respondents. MS. McGONAGLE: But different properties. MR. LEFEBVRE: Different properties. Okay. Thank you. June 28, 2018 Page 10 (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. MS. McGONAGLE: Good morning. For the record, Investigator Michele McGonagle. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Michele, would you like to read the stipulation into the record? MS. McGONAGLE: Yes, sir. Therefore, it is agreed between the parties that the respondent shall: Number 1, pay operational costs in the amount of $59.70 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing; Number 2, abate all violations by obtaining all required Collier County right-of-way permits or demolition permit, inspections, and certificate of completion/occupancy for the unpermitted culvert pipe and remove all offending material from the right-of-way within 90 days of this hearing, or a fine of $100 per day will be imposed until the violation is abated; Number 3, respondent must notify Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance; Number 4, that if the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriff's Office to enforce the provisions of this agreement, and all cost of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Any questions of the county by the Board? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hearing none. Sir, could you state your name on the microphone. MR. RODRIGUEZ: Eduardo Rodriguez. June 28, 2018 Page 11 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. You understand the stipulation -- MR. RODRIGUEZ: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- that you agreed to? MR. RODRIGUEZ: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And you can make the time frames? MR. RODRIGUEZ: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Any comments from the Board? MR. LEFEBVRE: All the work has been done; is that correct? All the work's been done? MR. RODRIGUEZ: Yes. Whatever the days give me, I've done everything. MR. ORTEGA: Was there a permit applied for in this one? MS. McGONAGLE: No. MR. ORTEGA: Then how can the work be done? MS. McGONAGLE: The driveway is there, and the culvert pipe is there is what he means. MR. ORTEGA: But the culvert pipe will be installed per the right-of-way department, per their elevations, which means if he didn't have that, it's going to have to come out, probably. MS. McGONAGLE: Or he can get a permit. They can still come out and inspect it. MR. ORTEGA: Even if he gets a permit, the right-of-way department, when he applies for it, will establish the elevation for that culvert pipe. If he did it without a permit, that means he would not have the elevations. See what I mean? MS. McGONAGLE: I understand. MR. LETOURNEAU: It's in there but, yeah, the odds of it being correct, I'm not sure about. MR. ORTEGA: Exactly. June 28, 2018 Page 12 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Any other questions? MR. RODRIGUEZ: No. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hearing none, anybody like to make a motion? MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion to accept the stipulated agreement as stated -- MS. CURLEY: Second. MR. LEFEBVRE: -- with operational costs of 59.70 being paid within 30 days. MR. RODRIGUEZ: Yes, sir. MS. CURLEY: I'll second that. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do we have a second? We have a second from Sue. All those in favor? MS. CURLEY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. ORTEGA: Aye. MR. WHITE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Thank you. I think we'll see you shortly; is that correct, Michele? MS. McGONAGLE: Right now. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Right now. MS. McGONAGLE: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's pretty shortly. Don't go away. MR. BLANCO: The next item on the agenda, it's 5C3, No. 3 from hearings, Case No. CESD20180006398, Eduardo Rodriguez. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) June 28, 2018 Page 13 MS. McGONAGLE: Good morning. For the record, Investigator Michele McGonagle, Collier County Code Enforcement. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Would you like to read the stipulation into the record, Michele? MS. McGONAGLE: Yes, sir. Therefore, it is agreed between the parties that the respondent shall: Number 1, pay operational costs in the amount of $59.84 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing; Number 2, abate all violations by obtaining all required Collier County permits or demolition permit, inspections and certificate of completion/occupancy for the unpermitted shed, fence, gate, and culvert pipe with 120 days of this hearing, or a fine of $200 per day will be imposed until the violation is abated; No. 3, respondent must notify Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance; Number 4, that if the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriff's Office to enforce the provisions of this agreement, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Have any of the permits been pulled? MS. McGONAGLE: No, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So the 120 days should give the respondent enough time to pull the permits, get it inspected, approved, and a CO. Okay. You've heard the -- and signed the stipulation? MR. RODRIGUEZ: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You can make those dates? June 28, 2018 Page 14 MR. RODRIGUEZ: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Any questions of the respondent? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hearing none. MR. ORTEGA: There is one. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: There is? MR. ORTEGA: If no permits have been applied for, they're citing building code fifth edition. It's not the fifth edition. It's the sixth edition. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. ORTEGA: You might want to clarify that. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is that a scrivener's error? Michele's looking around for some help. MR. LETOURNEAU: I'm sorry. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. SHORT: Yes, so the Florida Building Code section, you are correct, Mr. Ortega, it should be the sixth edition, and that is only in reference to the unpermitted fencing. MR. ORTEGA: That's correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So we'll consider that a scrivener's error, I guess. MR. SHORT: If that satisfies the Board. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It satisfies me. Does it satisfy the rest of the Board? MS. CURLEY: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Any other questions of the respondent or the county? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hearing none, someone like to make a motion? June 28, 2018 Page 15 MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion to accept the stipulated agreement with the 59.84 being paid within 30 days, which are the operational costs. MR. RODRIGUEZ: Uh-huh. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. CURLEY: Second that. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. All those in favor? MS. CURLEY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. ORTEGA: Aye. MR. WHITE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. While I have this minute, I just wanted to point out that our alternate today is full voting rights because we have several people missing. Sorry I didn't say that earlier. But this way you get more limelight. Okay. Thank you. MR. RODRIGUEZ: Thank you. MR. BLANCO: Next item on the agenda, it's 5C7, No. 7 from hearings. Case No. CENA20180002520, Shelly F. Pike. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. MR. JOHNSON: Good morning, Code Enforcement Board. For the record, John Johnson, Collier County Code Enforcement. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. You get to present first. MR. JOHNSON: Yes, can I go? June 28, 2018 Page 16 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes, you can. MR. JOHNSON: This is in reference to Case CENA20180002520 dealing with violations of Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 1.04.01, Section A, outside storage, furniture, household items, plastic totes, appliances, and other goods stored in the front yard of the property located at 4110 Mindi Avenue; Folio No. 67492480006. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you have photos to show? MR. JOHNSON: Well, I thought I did, and I do, but I guess I don't based on we don't have a way to show them today? MS. PIKE: I do. MR. JOHNSON: Who does? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The respondent. MR. JOHNSON: Yeah, I mean she has photos, too. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. JOHNSON: Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Eric? MR. JOHNSON: This is my first time, so I beg the forgiveness of the Board. MS. CURLEY: You're doing great. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah. We're not going anywhere. Take your time. MR. LEFEBVRE: We have to first enter them. MS. CURLEY: Shelly, is it your first time here? MR. JOHNSON: There are 13. MS. PIKE: I'm sorry. I don't feel very well. MR. LEFEBVRE: Do we have a microphone where she can maybe sit down? MS. PIKE: I'm okay. I just don't feel very well. I apologize. MR. LEFEBVRE: Why don't you just take a seat. No, no, nothing to apologize for. Why don't you -- June 28, 2018 Page 17 MS. NICOLA: Sit here. They can still put the camera on you. Take my seat, please. MR. LEFEBVRE: Yes, just take a seat, please. MS. NICOLA: We want you to be comfortable. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You can sit next to our attorney. She probably won't bite. MS. NICOLA: Not today. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. How many photos do you have? MR. JOHNSON: I have 13. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And has the respondent seen those photos? MR. JOHNSON: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do you have any objection to him showing the pictures? MS. PIKE: No, because they've all been cleaned up. Everything that they're going to show you is gone. And I mean, in my defense, before we go -- I would like to explain who and what -- why this is like this. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You're going to have your chance. No problem. You can take a nap for now while he shows the pictures. No problem. Okay. Get a motion to accept the photos? MR. DOINO: Motion to accept photos. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have a second? MS. CURLEY: Second. MR. ORTEGA: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. All in favor? MS. CURLEY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. June 28, 2018 Page 18 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. ORTEGA: Aye. MR. WHITE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Okay. MR. JOHNSON: Okay, thank you. Service was given on March 1st, 2018, by Investigator Michele McGonagle. I have since inherited this case. Can you put No. 1 back up. Thank you, sir. This is the area of the property. It's the residential community near Sugden Park just west of Tamiami Trail. Next one. This area is zoned residential multifamily and, for any interest, it is in Penny Taylor's district. Next one, please. I'm going to give a little historic perspective here because these -- the situation here has been going on for a while. It's been happening, corrected, happening, corrected. In 2012, we had a case, CELU20120005919, first reported the picture that Danny just took away so quickly, was at issue, and that was abated, and Ms. Pike abated it and cleaned it and abated it. In 2016 the picture that you see here was another example of an illegal land use. Obviously, excessive debris. That was also abated. MR. LEFEBVRE: Abated prior to coming in front of Code Enforcement? MR. JOHNSON: It was abated prior to coming to a hearing. This property, to my knowledge, has not been to a hearing. MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay. MR. JOHNSON: Okay. Next one, Danny. The current case was started in February '13 by Investigator June 28, 2018 Page 19 Michele McGonagle, and this is one of her photos that was taken on February 13th. Next, please. And she continued to follow this case. On February 21st this photo was taken. And what you're going to see here, I think, is a pattern. Next one, please. April 3rd, Michele took this photograph. There's a pattern of debris, and then Ms. Pike cleans the debris, and then more debris comes back. Next one, please. I took over the case on May 7th, and this was one of my first photographs of the debris that we're facing there. Next one, please. June 27th is the next picture I took, and that is, obviously, a day or so ago, and you can see that the bulk, if not all, has been cleaned. Okay. Next picture, please. Now, also to be thorough, I took a site visit to the parallel street behind this address and went in and checked the backyard, and there are still some issues in the backyard, which I did not cite specifically to Ms. Pike, but I need to bring this to the attention of the Board. Next one, please. So there is some debris and weeds. Next one. And issues in the back that still need to be addressed as well. One more, please. One more, please. MR. LEFEBVRE: We're here to look at the litter. MR. JOHNSON: Right. And that's what I'm saying; there actually still is some litter in the back as well. I'm not sure if there's more litter, because the weeds are kind of high. So the idea here was to present a perspective of this case. This is a historic thing that has gone back for a number of years. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let me ask. Have you had conversations with Ms. Pike? MR. JOHNSON: I have. She's very willing to talk, and we've June 28, 2018 Page 20 talked a number of times. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Does she mention -- well, I'll ask her as well. MR. JOHNSON: You'll find out she operates a non-profit, a Wings of Hope thing, but I want her to explain that, because she does a real good job with that, okay? If that's okay with the Board. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Sure. MR. JOHNSON: Okay. Just a few highlights. And, again, why we're here is what is happening is we are getting more and more phone call complaints from that street from people complaining about these issues, and it's tough to, you know, to say, you know, she's working on it, although she is always working on it, and she is always trying to clean it up. But the way I understand it -- and I'll let Shelly explain it because, like I say, she's very good at it -- things come in and things go out. But as you can see from the nature of these pictures, it's certainly not a land use or a litter use that is permitted in our ordinances. So as I summarize this, Ms. Dunn (sic) operates Naples Wings of Hope, a non-profit entity, whose mantra is hope, healing, and rebuilding. The influx of donations, the storage of these donations outside in view of the public, and the pickups and outflow of these materials is not in compliance with the designated land use for this community. That's why we're here today. MR. LEFEBVRE: Well, you're here because of litter, if I'm mistaken (sic), not land use regarding a business. So those are two different issues. MR. JOHNSON: Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Are you done? MR. JOHNSON: I believe I'm done. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We may come back to you, but... June 28, 2018 Page 21 MR. JOHNSON: Okay. MS. CURLEY: I have a question. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Question. MS. CURLEY: So is there yard sales happening on this property also? MR. JOHNSON: I believe everything -- and I don't want to speak for Shelly, because she'll explain it, but I believe everything is donated. It's donated into her, and then she donates it out to the less fortunate. I believe that's the way that works. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. NICOLA: I have a question as the attorney. When you first made your presentation, you indicated that the violation had been either fully abated or partially abated; is that correct? MR. JOHNSON: Partially, yes. MS. NICOLA: And the debris that's left -- I mean, what I'm reading in the violation is that the violation is for the outside storage of items, for lack of a better use. So are we talking about litter? Are we talking about outside storage? I'm just trying to understand the essence of the violation that you're suggesting to the Board and, in particular, one of my concerns is I see the pictures. I understand the front yard violation, but I see the pictures of the outside backyard, and I'm wondering are we considering that to be a violation as well? Because, obviously, we look at the front yard when it's full of all that stuff, and that's a great concern, but it looks like we've got a fenced-in backyard which might have a few items in the back. And I'm wondering if you're suggesting to the Board to consider the totality of that backyard as well. MR. JOHNSON: Well, I'm really here to get help from the Board on all of that. To me, I see this as illegal outside storage. The problem with defining debris versus storage of things, I think somebody said one June 28, 2018 Page 22 man's -- is another man's treasure. So it's very hard for me to classify these items that are out there. You saw the pictures. I would take any help that you can give me in classifying those. From Code Enforcement's standpoint, like I say, we are getting a ton of complaints, more than ever. And, like I say, Shelly -- when I say in compliance, noncompliance, she does clean it, and then more comes. MR. LETOURNEAU: I would say at this point we cited them for illegal outside storage, Ms. Price -- Ms. Pike. So at this point, there's still some storage in the property, correct? MR. JOHNSON: Correct. MR. LETOURNEAU: Even if there wasn't any storage, we still would have brought it just because we want to get this case adjudicated because we would cite her, it would be removed, we would cite her, it would be removed. We wanted -- if there wasn't any storage there at all, we would still want to get a violation on this property so we had it as a repeat. Next time she did it, we could bring it back. She's still in violation. She's storing stuff outside. MS. NICOLA: Well, I guess that was what my question was, Jeff, because I figured that if she was in compliance and it was abated, how do we violate her? Because if she's brought it into compliance, there's no violation. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Why don't we let Mrs. Pike speak, okay. Instead of going back and forth, Mrs. Pike, why don't you tell us what you started to tell us before. MS. PIKE: Well, first of all, again, I did not know that some of these things were violations. Like, right now, one of the things I'm being told is -- I have a dollhouse outside for my 11-year-old granddaughter to play with. I did not know having a dollhouse out front was a violation, so that's one thing. I'm ignorant, and I'm very June 28, 2018 Page 23 naive to some of this stuff. My roof -- let me -- my roof was blown off. I still don't have a half a roof. And I reached out to the -- well, we had no help in our particular area, and we reached out on Facebook for help. And, sure enough, with Donna Fiala being involved, we started -- we started having people helping us outside the community. And then we moved on. They said, you did such a great job, you continue to help people. And what I did not understand is what happened is -- and I did not ever, ever expect the donations to come through that came through. They do, they'll come it -- like, somebody will drop things off at my house on a Saturday, and they're gone by Monday morning, because they move on. If you were to give me a living room set, I find somebody for that living room set, and it's gone. I did not ever expect the turnout. This is who we are. And, like, this past weekend, why there was so much stuff again is I just did this with the Fire Department, with the Sheriff's Department at the park. So tables came in, and a tent came in to go to the park. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Can you provide that for the Board to see close up? Because as good as my eyes are, I can't see it. (Multiple speakers speaking.) MS. PIKE: -- before you take it away, because I won't remember. MS. NICOLA: We'll give it back to you. MS. PIKE: I just want you to know we served 154 families, 645 individuals, and made 110 hurricane kits. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah. That's not our topic here. MS. PIKE: No, I understand, no, but I'm saying, that's why the amount of stuff. I did not know -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah. Put it up on the screen. MS. PIKE: -- having it dropped off and then picked up was -- because it wasn't stored for any -- I mean, it didn't have time to get dust June 28, 2018 Page 24 on it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: My concern is the perspective of your neighbors who see a pile of what they would consider stuff that's not supposed to be there come and go and come and go, and that's not proper. MS. PIKE: And, again -- and I do -- I agree -- and the ironic part of this, and it really is ironic, is those same neighbors that are complaining, at Thanksgiving, we service the whole street with turkeys, and at Christmas I gave everyone a roast, and every one of these people coming over and tapping on my door telling me what a good job I do. So that's just the nature of people. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. If you can put that up. MR. BLANCO: Mr. Kaufman, would you like to make a motion to accept this as evidence or -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes, I'd like to make a motion. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor? MS. CURLEY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. ORTEGA: Aye. MR. WHITE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. MS. CURLEY: So to the county's comment about the land-use violation, so Ms. Pike just self-reported that she is violating the land use there. So although the violation that she currently has is just for the outside storage of items that aren't allowed, she -- and it is including what you had originally said, but she just did admit that June 28, 2018 Page 25 she's, you know, having things dropped off and delivered and violating the land-use code there, so... MS. PIKE: Which I did not know if somebody dropped something off at your house it would be in violation of -- like I say, immediately leaving. Not stored, immediately leaving. And like I say, that's my ignorance, and that's why, I mean, I wish -- I did not -- I needed more of a clarification. I was told keeping it neat and clean -- and if you see the difference in the pictures -- I mean, we just even planted a garden so it would look better. I mean, I'm ignorant. There's where I made the mistake. Yes, I'm ignorant. MR. LETOURNEAU: Well, ma'am, have you been cited before for this? MS. PIKE: Not for this kind of -- not for this -- this, what happened -- it was years ago when I was cited. He told you, back to '12 or something. I was cited for debris. And, again, that was -- MR. LETOURNEAU: Okay. I mean, I think that at that point you should have realized you couldn't do it. MS. PIKE: But I never -- MS. CURLEY: 2016. MS. PIKE: The only thing that I'm saying, the word "storage," I'm ignorant to the fact what it means when you say something is stored. To me, I thought, you know, something stored means forever. These are things that were immediately cleaned up when they were -- anybody ever said. I am one person with -- a kidney cancer survivor; one kidney. My daughter lives in the house. My daughter is totally handicapped. My granddaughter lives in the house. My granddaughter has emotional issues. That's the three people living in the house trying to do our very, very best. I'm trying to -- in fact, I don't know what I'm going to do next because next year I'm going to gut the house and remodel it. The June 28, 2018 Page 26 first remodel the house has had since '71. I know I need permits, but what do you do with the stuff that you're going to take out of the house? I don't know. MS. CURLEY: Excuse me. Could we just stay on the topic. MS. PIKE: Being ignorant, I don't know. MS. CURLEY: Could we stay -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I'd like to know, based on what you've said, whether we have a violation or not. MS. CURLEY: I'll make a motion that a violation exists. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So we have a motion and a second that a violation exists. All those in favor? MS. CURLEY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. ORTEGA: Aye. MR. WHITE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Okay. So we know that there's a problem there and it is a violation. Now, how do we take care of that? That's the question. If you go back to the -- I think the February pictures -- MR. JOHNSON: February pictures would be 5 and 6. Number 5. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is that the one that shows the garage and all the stuff there? That's one. Go back again before that. Okay. MR. LEFEBVRE: That was prior. MR. LETOURNEAU: That's 2016. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. That's fine. Whatever it is. June 28, 2018 Page 27 That's the one I wanted to see. So that's what was there, and that's your house. MS. PIKE: That was years -- that was a long, long time ago. Years ago, a year ago maybe. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. But you can understand -- MS. PIKE: Absolutely, absolutely. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- that your neighbors -- MS. PIKE: And that can't even be seen. In fact, there's no -- that's all fenced in. There's nothing there. But I completely agree, and that's all gone. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. How do we resolve this so it doesn't happen again is the question. MS. PIKE: I just won't do it from that address. I guess I'm just -- you know, I'm defeated. I just won't be able to do what I was doing for everybody. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Unfortunately, that's -- that's what's fair for your neighbors. And they've vested their money in their houses, and they shouldn't have to look at that, whether it's three years ago or yesterday. So I think by you agreeing to not do it anymore would probably satisfy everybody. MR. LETOURNEAU: There's still some debris there. We want to find a violation. Obviously, you did. It's up to your discretion how you want to go about dealing with any type of fines or any amount of time to clean up what she's got left there. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So do you have any suggestions that you can do? You won't collect it anymore, or the big piles that come in, come in. When you request donations from whomever, they just drop them off at your house. If you didn't put that request out, then they probably wouldn't drop them off at your house, or you have another place to store this stuff, that would go a long way in resolving the situation. June 28, 2018 Page 28 MS. PIKE: They've been told not to bring me any more stuff. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. CURLEY: Do you think the county could discuss with her how operating a business, even a not-for-profit, and give her the parameters of the rules so we don't -- so she can understand that the incoming and outgoing and that sort of traffic -- can we educate her on that so she realizes what she's not supposed to be doing operating a business there? MR. LETOURNEAU: We can give her the home occupational license, which spells out everything you can and can't do at a residential property. MR. JOHNSON: Sir, Shelly actually does have a non-profit occupational license. I believe it's still current, right, Shelly? MS. PIKE: Yeah, I'm registered with the State of Florida. (Multiple speakers speaking.) MR. JOHNSON: Yeah. So she has -- she has that. MR. LETOURNEAU: So normally when they give them that, they give them the ordinance along with the receipt, I believe. MS. PIKE: I was not given anything like that. MS. CURLEY: So can that be revoked because she's in violation? MR. LETOURNEAU: Well, we're not -- I mean, we're not looking to revoke her license at this point, but we would like -- you know, we would be glad to educate her and go over the occupational license with her. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I think where we are right now is there's a few items on the property that need to be removed, and we need to provide sufficient time, whatever you think it takes, to remove those items. There are very few of them. For the most part, the property's cleared. And then if you would state that you're not going to June 28, 2018 Page 29 put the property back in the same position that it was prior to you cleaning it up or prior to what happened several years ago, I would think that the county would be pleased with that. I think we need to give you enough time to do it. I'd like a suggestion from the Board, and I'd like a suggestion that you have. MR. JOHNSON: Well, I like where you're going with that, but I would just hope that I would be -- or the Code Enforcement Board be given some type of, should it happen again, our steps are this. MR. LETOURNEAU: No, we're not -- no. MR. JOHNSON: No? MR. LETOURNEAU: No. We're just going to go with what the order is right now, and then we'll deal with that if it happens again. Obviously, our recommendation would change at that point if it was a repeat. MR. LEFEBVRE: Right. It would come back in front of us, and there would be a repeat offense with fines -- MS. PIKE: So like I say, I have -- I've tried very, very hard to bring it up and, if not, even make it better than it was. I mean, I have a little 11-year-old that -- like I say, we planted the garden. We cleaned up everything. I've never put down mulch in my damn life, and I put down mulch around to make everything look neat. A couple of things, like I said -- and I still -- this doesn't make -- this blows my mind. To bring -- I mean, we have no roof over her bedroom, so the ceiling is still being in the process -- I'm trying to get money, to be honest with you, and I'm working with FEMA. I'm on the FEMA board now. There is no money out there. I'm trying to get a roof repaired, so I don't let the kid play upstairs in her bedroom. So I brought her dollhouse downstairs. I did not know by bringing it downstairs and putting it in my yard, I'm storing a dollhouse and -- (Multiple speakers speaking.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I don't think this is a problem with June 28, 2018 Page 30 the dollhouse. MS. CURLEY: The dollhouse can go in the backyard. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah. This is a problem. From what it was the past, the neighbors see it come back, they file a complaint, and that's where we are. MS. PIKE: I'm understanding, sir. But what I'm saying is he did say the dollhouse had to be removed, and that blows my mind. MS. NICOLA: Wait. Is that true? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Would someone from the Board like to -- MS. PIKE: Mr. Johnson, you told me the dollhouse has to go, didn't you? MR. JOHNSON: What I told you is to store the dollhouse in the yard would be illegal storage. MS. PIKE: And that's what I'm saying -- (Multiple speakers speaking.) THE COURT REPORTER: I can only get one at a time. MR. JOHNSON: If the child is playing with the dollhouse, it's fine. That's what we discussed. If the child is playing with the dollhouse, I think that's wonderful. But if it's stored there, day after day, that's not proper storage. MS. PIKE: But it's a five-foot dollhouse. She goes -- I can't bring it in and out every day. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Let's stop. (Multiple speakers speaking.) MS. PIKE: I'll bring it in. I'll bring it in. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hold on. Time out. Do you want to make a motion? MS. CURLEY: I'll make a motion that Ms. -- I'm sorry? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: He has a suggestion right here. MS. CURLEY: Oh, I didn't know we had that. June 28, 2018 Page 31 The Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of $59.49 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by removing all unauthorized material from the property in sight intended for final dispension (sic) or stored items within a completely enclosed structure within 15 days of this hearing, or a fine of $150 per day will be imposed until the violation is abated. The respondent must notify code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using method (sic) to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriff's Office to enforce the provisions of this order, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do you want to leave that at 15 days or -- our meeting isn't for another 30 days. MS. CURLEY: Well, maybe if -- maybe if -- we could see them again next month. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. If it's not done? Okay. So we have a motion. Do we have a second on that motion? MR. ORTEGA: I have a question, if I may. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. LEFEBVRE: We have to have a second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I'll second it for point of discussion. Okay. Your question? MR. ORTEGA: Dollhouse. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. MR. ORTEGA: It's not a structure. It's not attached to anything. Why is it a violation? It's a toy. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Right. MS. CURLEY: It's five foot-tall, and it was the same thing as June 28, 2018 Page 32 those dollhouses you've seen before. MR. ORTEGA: But if it's her grandkids, how is it a violation? It's not a structure. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I don't think that this has anything -- there's no dollhouse written there. It's stuff that's stored illegally. I doubt whether this young lady is going to be cited for having a dollhouse there. MR. LETOURNEAU: Can I say something? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes, you can. MR. LETOURNEAU: The dollhouse was a small percentage of what was out there. I doubt that the neighbors would have called in if that was all that was out there. At this point, if she cleans up everything else and you -- your grandchild plays with it or whatever and you pull it close to the house, we're not going to cite that illegal outside storage. If everything else is gone that shouldn't be there, we're not going -- we're going to say, yes, she's in compliance at this time. I mean, the dollhouse is a small percentage of what was out there. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Was the dollhouse permitted? MR. LETOURNEAU: I never saw the dollhouse, and, you know, we're not going to consider it a violation as itself. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So we have a motion, and we have a second. Any discussion on the motion? MR. ORTEGA: One final question. One final thought. We're here right now at this moment. And the problem is cured within 10 days, 15 days, 30 days, I get it, but she's not going to have any control over people bringing things overnight. She can wake up in the morning, and there's a truck filled with items. My suggestion would be if that would occur -- if I may, that you contact the investigator and let him know. You understand? MR. LEFEBVRE: Well, any -- June 28, 2018 Page 33 MS. CURLEY: Well, there's a lot of things that any resident in this county can do to stop dumping. She can put a "no dumping" sign. She can put notices out. If she has a way to communicate to get items, she has a way to communicate for them to discontinue doing things and to let them know that she's offending her neighbors and the county ordinance and the land use. She self-reported that she's violating the land use -- MR. ORTEGA: Agreed. MS. CURLEY: -- by using is as a dump zone for her collection facility. MR. ORTEGA: Agreed. MS. CURLEY: Imagine living on Mindi Drive. This is not nice, since 2012; '13, '14, '15, '16, '17, 2018. MR. LEFEBVRE: I think what she needs to do is find another facility where the items can be dropped off. MR. ORTEGA: No question. MR. LEFEBVRE: And, obviously, in any future material she has, advertising material, it needs to be stated where it could be dropped off, and it can't be her house. MR. ORTEGA: Agreed. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So we have a motion in front of us. We've had the discussion. All those in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye. MS. CURLEY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. ORTEGA: Aye. MR. WHITE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) June 28, 2018 Page 34 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. And let me say a few things: So if you clean up the little miscellaneous stuff that's there in the next couple of weeks, everything's done. And if you can just let the folks know that have been dropping stuff off that you have to find another place, or whatever it is, that would go a long way into resolving the situation not only for you but for your neighbors as well. Okay. Jeff, you wanted to say something? MR. LETOURNEAU: No. I just wanted to tell them -- give him some advise here, and then we'll be on our next case. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Thank you very much, Mrs. Pike. You understand the situation. If you need any help, he's available to help you. Okay? Thank you. MR. BLANCO: Mr. Chairman, just clarification; it's 15 days, not 30, correct? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Fifteen. That was the motion. MR. BLANCO: Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's why I said around two weeks. MR. BLANCO: Okay. Next item on the agenda, it's 5C12, No. 12 from hearings, Case No. CELU20180005848, Jeffrey Kaulbars and Brenna Nipper. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You want to hold the noise down over there in the peanut gallery. MS. NICOLA: Somebody handed me a mike. That was a bad idea. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. Could you state your name on the microphone for the record. MS. CURLEY: Jeff Kaulbars. MS. NIPPER: And Brenna Nipper. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. You may want to move the June 28, 2018 Page 35 microphone up; you're taller. There you go. Is there anybody else that's going to be testifying in this case besides you? Okay. He would need to be sworn in then. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Well, we will let the county testify first. MS. LOPEZ-SILVERO: Good morning. For the record, Steven Lopez-Silvero, Collier County Code Enforcement. This is in reference to Case No. CELU20180005848 dealing with a violation of Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 1.04.01(a), Collier County Code of Laws, Chapter 126, Article IV, Section 126-111(b), and Collier County Code of Laws, Chapter 54, environment, Article VI, weeds and litter -- weeds, litter, and exotics, Section 54-181. Business operation without first obtaining a Collier County business tax receipt brought onto or placed on property without first obtaining Collier County Government approval for such use are the following, but not limited to, industrial storage containers, commercial operating equipment, personal vehicles, and commercial vehicles; vegetative/tree debris and/or wooded -- correction, mulched/woody material brought to offsite location, et cetera. The site is located at, no site address, near Pheasant Roost Trail, Naples, Florida, 34117. Folio 00307920003. Personal service was provided on May 3rd, 2018. I would like to present case evidence in the following exhibits: Four pictures taken by myself and Investigator Michael Odom on April 6th, May 3rd, and May 11th, 2018. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Has the respondent seen the photos? MR. LOPEZ-SILVERO: No, they haven't. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Why don't you show them to them. June 28, 2018 Page 36 MR. LOPEZ-SILVERO: Will do. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you have any objection to those photos being introduced? MR. KAULBARS: No. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Can I get a motion from the Board to accept the photos? MR. DOINO: Motion to accept the photos. MR. WHITE: Second. MR. ORTEGA: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MS. CURLEY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. ORTEGA: Aye. MR. WHITE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Okay, Steven. I know the sky is going to be on the top. Can I ask a couple of questions before we go on? MR. LOPEZ-SILVERO: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: What is the zoning here? MR. LOPEZ-SILVERO: Agricultural. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And how much property are we looking at here? MR. LOPEZ-SILVERO: Plus or minus 20 acres. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. ORTEGA: Is that agricultural or bonefide agricultural? June 28, 2018 Page 37 MR. LOPEZ-SILVERO: Agricultural. MR. ORTEGA: Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you want to explain what you're showing us as you go through the pictures? MR. LOPEZ-SILVERO: Yes. In the background of the picture there, you'll see -- if you can zoom in, Danny -- tree stumps or tree trunks piled there in the back. This is at the entrance of one of the drives of the property. It's on a private road. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. LEFEBVRE: Then to the left, was that a dump truck or something? MR. LOPEZ-SILVERO: They have -- the respondents have a tree service, stump grinding service where they store their vehicles, commercial vehicles, personal and commercial. And it's a little gritty in the picture, but there's mulch spread out on the property. Go to the next picture, Danny. And these are the mounds of mulch which have since been removed. And then these are the next two pictures. More pictures of personal and commercial vehicles. This is the second and third drive at the property. They have three drives to access the property. MS. CURLEY: That a Port-o-let? MR. LOPEZ-SILVERO: It is. And to the right of it you'll see a gray storage container and then some utility trailers on the left. MS. CURLEY: Are those blue containers storing fuel or something, or do you know? MR. LOPEZ-SILVERO: I don't know if those drums are empty or not. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. The permitted use on this piece of property is what? I know that it's a big list, but -- MR. LETOURNEAU: Well, basically, agricultural type of stuff, June 28, 2018 Page 38 single-family home; however, you possibly could get a conditional use for this type of operation. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And is the county's position that permitted use can exist there but they have not applied for it? MR. LETOURNEAU: It is the position that they could get this use, but they have not gone through the hoops needed to do so. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. I understand. MR. LOPEZ-SILVERO: And just to add, the respondents have completed a pre-application meeting. What they propose to do is a wholesale nursery. They just need to start either the conditional-use process or the site approval/site plan process approval. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do you have anything else to present? MR. LOPEZ-SILVERO: That's all. My recommendation. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Not yet. We have to -- MS. CURLEY: May I ask how you learned about this violation? MR. LOPEZ-SILVERO: It came into our office as a complaint. It was complaint-driven. And this was back in -- April 9th, 2018, this case was initiated. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I have a feeling we might get an answer to your question when we go to the respondents. Okay. MR. KAULBARS: Good morning. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Tell us what you have to tell us. MR. KAULBARS: Well, I can go into a brief history of why we got to this point, or I could just, you know, let you know what we're willing to do or what our plan is going forward. I don't know if you want some background history of how we got here. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: If you could, a quick summary, that would be fine. MR. KAULBARS: We were operating in Bonita. We've been a tree service for 20 years in Lee and Collier County. But we were in June 28, 2018 Page 39 Bonita, and when Hurricane Irma came, the location we were at was completely flooded three feet under water. So all our trucks -- we had to move to Naples. My brother allowed us to park on his property, which he has a commercial property here, but we were just packed in. At the same time, we were working all the time trying to find another place to go, and then we found this property, which is near our home. We live in Golden Gate Estates. We found this 20 acres. And I came down to the county, checked with the desk, and told them what we were looking to do. And in Bonita we had -- we were leasing the property, and we were dumping our mulch there under the fact that we couldn't dump more than three feet at a time, because then it turned into compost or dirt anyway, and that's what we had intended to do here at this property. And I was given the okay by -- at the desk but no -- you know, no paperwork, but they did give me that, so we went ahead and purchased the property. We moved all our trucks out there. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let me stop you one second. "The desk" meaning Horseshoe? MS. NIPPER: Yes. MR. KAULBARS: Yeah, sorry. So we decided to go ahead and purchase that property. Then we moved our trucks out there. Then we contacted Michael to start going through the process of getting a permit out there and getting a module and all the things that we need to do to be in compliance for tax -- you know, for a license there. And at that time is whenever we received a complaint from the neighbor. There is a few complaints. One we feel like we kind of know who that is that's upset with what we're doing because it kind of disturbs their peace in the mornings and the evenings with our trucks coming and going. June 28, 2018 Page 40 But we are attempting -- we've been -- I mean, that's why we have Michael Ramsey, to go through the process, but then it kind of got on hold once the code violations started. Then we had the preapp meeting, but it was hard to get any feedback of what we actually could do, what we couldn't do. And it's nice to hear -- because we've had this a couple times that, like, he said that we could get a conditional use for that property and that they would not take a position -- or they would take the position that they would approve that. But then someone else would tell us something different. So what we're here asking for is 10 months, because I feel like, from talking with Michael, in 10 months we could get all the permits we need for that property. We're willing to take all the logs -- we had no intention of keeping those logs on the property, so we will take and removal all those logs, and we can have that done in 120 days. So we're just asking for 10 months to allow us to get our license and everything up to code so that -- but continue to be able to operate that and -- but we'll be getting that process done. Because we have -- you know, we have trucks. We have guys, and that was our intention of buying that. It's just with the hurricane and everything at one time, it was just a perfect storm for us. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. The first thing the Board will need to do is to see whether a violation exists. Then we can get into -- MR. KAULBARS: Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: If it doesn't exist, it's done. MR. KAULBARS: Yeah. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: If it does exist, then what are the remedies. MR. KAULBARS: Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So would someone like to make a motion at this point whether a -- June 28, 2018 Page 41 MS. CURLEY: I'll make a motion that a violation exists. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. WHITE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And we have a second. All those in favor? MS. CURLEY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. ORTEGA: Aye. MR. WHITE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Okay. Now, you need a certain amount of time to -- MR. KAULBARS: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- resolve the situation. During that period of time, are you going to be conducting business there? Will the county -- MR. KAULBARS: That's what we're asking to do. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Which isn't something that we can do. Jeff? MR. LETOURNEAU: Well, when you say 10 months, does that mean the operation ceases until all approvals are done and you don't use that property until then? MR. KAULBARS: What we're asking is just -- I mean, we're not -- they asked us not to dump any mulch or any more logs, and which we have not done. All we're asking is just to be able to operate our business, you know, with our trucks and everything parking there while we're going through the process of getting that permit that -- you June 28, 2018 Page 42 know, that we've been told that we can receive. MR. LETOURNEAU: Well, when I said that it's a possibility, you know, there's a lot of hoops to jump through. The neighbor's got to approve and everything else. The county would object to any kind of business activities until total approvals were done on this piece of property. He's already stated that he might be bothering the neighbors driving in and out of there, so that's our position. MR. KAULBARS: And the reason for that is really the road. And we talked to Michael Ramsey about -- there's another two other properties out there that have conditional use, and they've just agreed to water and fill, because it's a dirt road, and fill in the ruts, which we would be happy to do starting immediately. MS. CURLEY: I have a question. Was the property cleared like that when you purchased it? MR. KAULBARS: Yes, it was. We're only using a small part of the property. It's 20 acres, but we're only using the front section, and it was cleared that way already. MS. CURLEY: And so why would it take four months to remove those logs if you own a tree company? MR. KAULBARS: Three -- 120 days. I just, there's -- it's -- MS. CURLEY: That's four months. MR. KAULBARS: Yeah, it's four months. I meant three months, but -- MS. CURLEY: If you own a -- MR. KAULBARS: We have a tree service, but it's -- like, I'm going to have to have a subcontractor actually come and haul those logs out, because we're still very busy right now. But, I mean, I'm willing to -- I mean, whatever you -- I mean, obviously, whatever you say, I've got to do, but I'm just asking for those three months as a courtesy. June 28, 2018 Page 43 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I think what the county is saying, Jeff is saying, is that the reason that this case was brought to a hearing was one of the neighbors was objecting to the noise or whatever it is. MR. KAULBARS: Correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And they did their research and found out that you didn't get the proper authorization to do that. So I think, unless Jeff is -- he ran away, okay. You're going to need to probably placate the neighbors in some fashion, and maybe we can resolve this so that all the parties are happy, if you will. MR. KAULBARS: Yeah. And that's where I think with the road and getting the logs out of there, that seems -- Michael's talked to the neighbors, and that seems to be the two biggest issues is the logs and the road being repaired, which we're willing to do that. That's already being done by another conditional use as well. MS. CURLEY: Can you tell me what's in those blue containers? MR. KAULBARS: I don't know. I think they're empty. MS. CURLEY: So are you storing any fuel or anything? MR. KAULBARS: No, no. We have fuel on our truck, on a different truck. MR. RAMSEY: Good evening, board members. My name's Mike Ramsey. I am a consultant with Ramsey, Inc. And the Kaulbars, they've hired me to assist them trying to figure out how to resolve this issue. So in the code enforcement violation, they have three or four violations. The first one is that they have commercial trucks and containers on the property, because it's not currently permitted for that in the license. That's the first issue. The second issue is, the mulch on the property is considered litter because it was brought in off site, and it's on there. Number three is the tree stumps, and number four was? MR. LOPEZ-SILVERO: Their business tax. June 28, 2018 Page 44 MR. RAMSEY: Oh, no occupational license. Okay. So they've hired me to assist them with that. So on May 16th we had a Growth Management meeting for a site plan development. We went through all the issues with code enforcement in attendance, and they told us what we had to do to resolve the issue. Number one was take care of the issue with the mulch and the tree stumps on the property. We have a couple of options on that working with Code Enforcement and other issues. Traditionally, mulching operations, when you take horticultural vegetation off a site, grind it into a four-inch square mulch, and then compost, it takes 16 to 18 months. Now, what you do is you pile it up, put some water on it, and then you turn it, and you turn it into mulch. DEP allows this. It's a current operation in some other areas in the county. It's a very desirable business because the landfill does not want horticultural material taking up its lined cells, so they'd rather it go off site, be recycled, and then reused in the community. That's a plant material. In the LDC, mulch is not considered an agricultural product; therefore, it requires conditional-use permitting to do that. And this is what they sought to do but didn't understand the process in Collier County when they came down. On this property, it is allowed. Now, the issue now is before we can go through conditional use, we need to abate the current issue. So we have two options with the mulch. Mr. Jeff is willing to take the stumps off now, and then we'd have this other area. And we're allowed to either spread the mulch out and let it dissipate, which would be allowed as an abatement under the mulch issue and the litter; that would take care of it? MR. LETOURNEAU: Correct. MR. RAMSEY: So one of the options is, we could remove the stumps, clear that additional area, spread the mulch down below two June 28, 2018 Page 45 feet. MR. KAULBARS: Right. MR. RAMSEY: That would come into compliance? MR. LETOURNEAU: As long as the county engineer's fine with it, yeah. You know, what'd you say, two feet? I can't speak for him. He'd have to probably come out there and take a look at it but, yeah, it sounds look it would be in compliance. MR. RAMSEY: So that could be one remedy. The stumps will be removed, and then we would respread the mulch out and bring it back to an acceptable level, and that would accelerate the removal of it from the property. No more being brought on; no more stumps. Moving the trucks: Now, commercial operation, commercial trucks on a property, all the equipment, currently, that's a violation. The only way to take care of that is to remove the vehicles from the property. Is that the only way to resolve that? MR. LETOURNEAU: Correct. But I thought he said he had a brother down here that had an operation close by. MR. RAMSEY: No. My question is, the only way to resolve commercial vehicles on this property, they have to be removed? MR. LETOURNEAU: Yeah, unless you had a primary structure on the property, then -- and, you know, you'd still need a business tax receipt. So, yeah, right now that's the only way we're going to be able to take care of this. MR. RAMSEY: Okay. So we understand that. MR. LETOURNEAU: Okay. MR. RAMSEY: So it's difficult to find a place to do that right now because there's a lot of businesses going on and places are tight, but they're in the process. So the third issue: Occupational license permit. We have gotten the information for an occupational license permit to proceed with that. We were advised by Code Enforcement not to do that until we apply June 28, 2018 Page 46 for a Site Development Plan, because in the occupational license, it will not be granted because in the back pages of the application it says, "Are you in compliance with your current zoning?" So we were advised not to do that. We're working on all the aspects of it. So the first thing we need, when you said about the primary structure, we have to have a Site Development Plan. I have to have a place for an office or a building. I have to have a well. I have to have power, and I have to have parking. We went through all this. And we're working on that now. The first thing they said we had to have was a certified boundary survey. So we put out a request for bid proposals for five -- to five contractors. Three came back, said they couldn't do it because this is sectional surveying, which is different from platting, because you have to understand the history of all the section corners. And we found two surveyors that could do it. One rejected it because he was too busy. We have one working on it now. So we're getting a certified boundary survey, which is the first peg in a Site Development Plan. Second, we had to have a title abstract done because they have to know if there are private easements or government right-of-ways that border their property. If it's a private easement, they don't have to comply with right-of-way permitting; am I correct? MR. LETOURNEAU: That is correct. MR. RAMSEY: Okay. So once I get that certified boundary survey, right-of-way, or that title abstract, I can proceed with a Site Development Plan to get a structure, a well, and power to proceed with permitting of the container nursery to allow the commercial trucks back on site. MR. LETOURNEAU: Sounds good so far. MR. RAMSEY: We talked to everybody involved. We think we've got a good plan. And I've been going back and forth with this. So the issue is the timing, how much time we can do this. June 28, 2018 Page 47 All the contractors I'm talking to are busy as heck. Everybody has got me five to six weeks out. My surveyor, I talked to him four weeks ago. He's going to get started next week. So we're trying to comply with all the issues to abate it. So at this point the applicants would like to abate the issues, we'd like to take the mulch, remove the stump, spread it out, work that down, if we get approval to do that, then proceed with the Site Development Plan. MR. LETOURNEAU: What about the vehicles? MR. RAMSEY: Now, the vehicles, you got any ideas, Jeff? MR. KAULBARS: Well, you've mentioned my brother. My brother is going through a divorce now, so -- and his property was too small for our operation. I mean, we were crammed. It was just an emergency situation, because it's really difficult to find a place for vehicles like ours. I've made a couple contacts this week of looking at purchasing another either tree service or another business that we can move our trucks to, but it's a very difficult -- it's very difficult to find parking for our vehicles. It's a very tough thing in Collier County. It's hard to find. That's why we need some time; either I need time to find a place, or if we can get the 10 months, I feel -- or even less. I mean, we're going to speed on this as fast as we can with Michael, but we need some time to be able to locate a place to move if that's the -- if that's what you're asking us to do. MR. LETOURNEAU: Okay. It's not just the vehicles itself parking there. It's the driving back and forth to the property. And I understand you're going to have to do some of that to spread the mulch around and whatever, but the county would still object to any kind of parking of the vehicles on this property at this time during this -- during you trying to get your application in. June 28, 2018 Page 48 MR. RAMSEY: Now, as I understand the operations on ag zoned property, they could actually -- the vehicles out there wouldn't be involved with spreading the mulch around. There would be a time when probably dump trucks would come on to remove stumps. But spreading the mulch around would involve a backhoe or a front-end loader on site, which would be allowed, I believe. MR. LETOURNEAU: And we understand that, yeah. But I'm talking about parking vehicles overnight on that property. MR. RAMSEY: Just the commercial vehicles. We can spread the mulch out and take care of that issue without violating that component because they're two separate things. MR. LETOURNEAU: So you're separating the vehicles from the equipment? MR. RAMSEY: The vehicles and the equipment that are considered commercially oriented to his current operation we understand are not legal. MR. LETOURNEAU: Right. MR. RAMSEY: But the removing of the stumps and the spreading of the mulch out is allowed. MR. LETOURNEAU: How long is that going to take? MR. RAMSEY: Well, what Mr. Jeff has explained to us is that he's trying to remove the vehicles and spread the mulch out. Now, let me go back to the thing about the mulch. We can spread the mulch out fairly easily with tractors once the stumps are removed and we have more open space, okay. Moving the commercial vehicles to an allowed legal location might take a little longer. That's where he's coming up with the 10-months issue. Finding an appropriate place to store and put those commercial vehicles would take longer than spreading mulch out and making it come into compliance. MS. CURLEY: There is other options for that mulch. You can June 28, 2018 Page 49 remove it. MR. KAULBARS: Yeah. We don't have an issue with the -- MR. RAMSEY: On that issue -- MS. CURLEY: I'm just saying, there's other -- I mean, so the burden is on you to -- MR. RAMSEY: Right. MS. CURLEY: -- mitigate that, not on us to help you extend your time for you to do it the way you want to. MR. RAMSEY: Now, I want to bring this up because we've been involved with this. Does everybody in here remember the mulch fire near the fairgrounds? MS. CURLEY: Well, yeah, and that's what made me think about, there's licenses and business permits that you need to prevent fires and a variety of other safety factors. So this is serious, and you're out in a place where the fire district is large, and there's not, you know, the facilities there. And in order for this business to be safe, we have all of these things in place, which probably should have been looked at before they moved in. MR. RAMSEY: There might be a bigger issue going on here. Environmental Turnkey Solutions, over five to eight years, there had evolved a process in Collier County that I believe that 80 percent of all horticultural waste, as of last year, was going to Environmental Turnkey Solutions. North Collier Fire District, I think, along with Code Enforcement, they have shut that business down. It has ceased and desist, and it has to move. That has caused an upturn in where all this material's going. Everyplace that's legal has just been overrun with volume. So there's a problem there. And on top of that, I believe after talking with Ray Bellows, Collier County's going to reconsider the conditional formatting use for this, for the appropriate activities. So this is kind of in limbo where you can take it. So there -- we June 28, 2018 Page 50 may have to look outside the county to find an appropriate place, or compost it on site may be more of a suitable remediation to this. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So it seems to me, listening to all of this, that your major problem is where do you put the vehicles. You can take care of the mulch, you can take care of the tree stumps, you can take care of applying for whatever you need to apply for so that you can conduct business there. The stumbling block here appears to be where do you put the trucks. Is that more or less correct? MR. KAULBARS: Correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you have a solution for that? MR. LETOURNEAU: Well, I can make a statement here. And it's going to be hard for Code Enforcement to determine what they're using to spread the mulch and take the stumps off and/or if there's any employees coming over with vehicles and they're using it as, you know, a staging area for the vehicles for the business. I would suggest giving -- asking them how long it's going to take to spread the mulch and get the stumps removed to come into compliance that way, and then after that point, they can't bring any more vehicles on the property. That would be the county's solution. MS. CURLEY: Jeff, to your point is that he already mentioned that the stumps will be removed by somebody other than company that he owns and that the mulch will be spread by backhoes which, again, won't be using vehicles. MR. LETOURNEAU: Well, they're going to need vehicles to bring the equipment in, and there's going to be -- there's going to have to be a certain leeway of, you know, trusting them that they're using the right equipment to come into compliance; however, I would ask them for a time period that they think they can do that, and at the end of that time period, it's got to go. They can't put any more on there. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So we're back to, you can get rid of the mulch in a rather short time frame and you can remove the June 28, 2018 Page 51 stumps? MR. KAULBARS: Uh-huh. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And do you want to try to put a date, time, days that it would take to do those two items? MR. KAULBARS: Okay. And then what about -- and then we'll deal with the trucks. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We'll get there. MR. KAULBARS: Okay. I asked for -- I'm asking for three months for the stumps and the mulch. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So 90 days for the stumps and to spread the mulch out. You take the stumps out first. MR. KAULBARS: Correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Spreading the mulch can't take too long, you would think. MR. KAULBARS: I think three months. I mean, 90 days should be good. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, the problem with that is if you start with 90 days and you're going to spread the mulch in the place where the stumps are, that becomes 180 right there; 90 and 90 if you're going to put the mulch where the stumps are. MR. KAULBARS: Well, if I get the stumps out, I could probably get the mulch in 30 days after that. So that would be 120. It will probably take me -- the mulch, I think I could do that in four weeks. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is there any reason why it's going to take 90 days to get the stumps out? MR. KAULBARS: It's very difficult right now to get debris anywhere. Like Mike said, ETS was -- they were taking 80 percent of all horticultural debris in this county, and now it's really tough to get -- and especially stumps. It's just -- it's tough. It's hard to find people to haul anything right now. June 28, 2018 Page 52 MR. LETOURNEAU: Mr. Kaufman? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. MR. LETOURNEAU: The county's comfortable with four months on this issue. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So in four months you can get the mulch and the stumps taken care of? MR. KAULBARS: Yes. MS. NIPPER: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. I was going to ask Steven if he had a suggestion on this with some time frames. Do you have any, Steven, before we -- MR. LOPEZ-SILVERO: Whatever the Board recommends. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. CURLEY: And, Jeff, so the operation of the business out there should stop today. MR. LETOURNEAU: The business needs to stop as soon as you walk out this door right here as far as bringing any more mulch/debris on the property, stumps, whatever. The whole thing is that you're cleaning up the property, spreading the mulch, and you're taking the stumps out, and then during that process you are trying to come into compliance by getting a conditional-use permit. So bringing anything else on that property at this point the county's not okay with. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So the conditional-use permit -- MR. LETOURNEAU: Or employees coming back and forth unless they're helping with the spreading of the mulch and stuff like that. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. The conditional-use provision can be done in parallel with the removal of the stumps and the spreading of the mulch? MR. LETOURNEAU: It can, but I think it's going to be a lot June 28, 2018 Page 53 longer process than the actual -- that part of it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. But at that point, 120 days, the neighbors should be satisfied? MR. LETOURNEAU: I can't speak for the neighbors. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I understand that. But if the concern originally was the noise of the vehicles, that will be done within 120 days. MR. LETOURNEAU: We'll explain it to the neighbors what has to be done to come into compliance, and I'm hoping they're going to be okay with it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So this becomes a complicated motion to come up with. MS. CURLEY: Well, the provision -- I mean, that's not really this board's decision. How they manage that when they leave is their business. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I understand, but we have to come up with a motion that -- MS. CURLEY: Well, let's do it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. I'm all ears, Sue. Go ahead. MS. CURLEY: Well, I can fill in those blanks. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. CURLEY: I make a motion that the Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of $59.63 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by: Number 1, obtaining Collier County approval to operate such business activity from property in question and removing all business-related materials/items from the property and return it to its original state within -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Jeff said 120 days was -- excuse me -- yeah, 120 days. June 28, 2018 Page 54 MS. CURLEY: This -- number one -- MR. LETOURNEAU: Yeah. We're going to have to -- that's not going to -- MS. CURLEY: That needs to be rewritten because the first sentence is in conflict with the second sentence. So I can't put a timeline on how long it's going to -- obtaining Collier County approval to operate such business activities from the property. If you can strike that, then I'll do -- No. 1 will be removing all business-related materials/items from the property and return its (sic) original state within 120 days of this hearing, or a fine of $150 per day will be imposed until the violation is abated. So just as a clarification, on Item No. 1, I'm striking "obtaining Collier County approval to operate such business activity from the property in question." MR. LETOURNEAU: Can I also add something here? I would say -- rather than saying the "original natural state," I would say to a permitted condition, because they're not going to return it to the original state. They're going to spread mulch around, so that would be a permitted condition. MS. CURLEY: So should I just re-read 1 as -- MR. LETOURNEAU: This thing we probably can throw out the window because it's not going to pertain to anything that we've discussed the last half an hour. MS. NICOLA: Are one of you guys going to draft this order, by the way? MS. CURLEY: Can you mark it? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let me try something; let me see if I can do something simple. MS. CURLEY: Tamara's got it. MS. NICOLA: I'm marking it up as we go. MS. CURLEY: Okay. So then also correct the word "original June 28, 2018 Page 55 natural state" to -- MS. NICOLA: A permitted condition. MS. CURLEY: -- permitted condition. MR. LEFEBVRE: What permitted condition? MS. NICOLA: Allowed slash permitted? Everybody jump in. Come on, help me with this. MS. CURLEY: No, no. The Board's writing the motion. Number 2, obtaining and displaying the required local business tax receipt for each geographical location, business, and operation if such business activity is approved within -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you have a suggestion, Jeff? MR. LETOURNEAU: Well, I said we're comfortable with four months; however, we need to -- I mean, is there also in there that they need -- MS. CURLEY: Oh, so this has nothing to do with whether they're allowed to operate there. You want them to get their company up and -- MR. LETOURNEAU: I need them to -- our suggestion is to cease all business activity immediately. MS. CURLEY: Okay. So No. 2 really isn't -- strike -- MR. LEFEBVRE: This has to be rewritten in its totality. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah. Let me say something to see if I can come up with something. One hundred twenty days to remove the stumps. You can put this in any language you want. One hundred twenty days to remove the stumps and spread the mulch. At that point, no more vehicles on the property, okay. That leaves us one last item, and the last item is to get a conditional use. MR. LEFEBVRE: Leaves two items. MR. LETOURNEAU: Okay. But is it still in there that they can't be running the business during that four months? June 28, 2018 Page 56 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We're getting to that. MR. LETOURNEAU: Okay. All right. All right. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Go ahead, Gerald. MR. LEFEBVRE: No. Finish up what you were going to say. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So I guess the big sticking point we have right here is how much time we can grant to get their building -- their conditional use. MR. LETOURNEAU: I believe Mr. Ramsey asked for 10 months in the beginning. MR. RAMSEY: Let me clarify here a little bit. We have a couple options here. What we'd like to do first is apply for a wholesale nursery and Site Development Plan. Three months for the stumps and the mulch. Simultaneously we will be working on a Site Development Plan for a wholesale container nursery which does not require conditional-use permitting. MR. LETOURNEAU: Correct. And the parameters of that, I believe, would be only the owners could operate. They can't have employees coming over. MR. RAMSEY: They can. MR. LETOURNEAU: Oh, they can? Oh, okay, all right. MR. RAMSEY: Yes. We went through this with Growth Management. MR. LETOURNEAU: Oh, okay. Whatever zoning tells them, yeah. MR. RAMSEY: But we have to complete the permitting process that would then allow the employees and the trucks back on there under a wholesale operation. After that's acquired, we would then pursue the conditional-use permitting. MR. LETOURNEAU: I would say at that point, if you get a wholesale nursery and you spread everything out, you would be in June 28, 2018 Page 57 compliance at that point. Would you agree, Steven? MR. LOPEZ-SILVERO: Yes, sir. MR. RAMSEY: Okay. I want to make sure I understand this. The 120 days, removing the mulch and the stumps -- moving stumps and spreading the mulch. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's correct. MR. RAMSEY: The trucks can be on there. MS. CURLEY: No. I mean -- no. The trucks -- there can be vehicles on that property that are facilitating the mulch and the stump removal. It can't be used as a storage place for X business because there's no license, and it's not a properly -- MR. RAMSEY: So that's the general understanding for the 120 days? MR. LETOURNEAU: I'll let Mike speak here. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. OSSORIO: I've just got a couple of questions. First of all, Mike Ossorio, Director of Code Enforcement. It's pretty simple. These respondents are seeking compliance. It's going to take four months to get in compliance. We're not going to go ahead and go to the job site and see which employee is working on the property, which employee is going to another property. My thought would be is this respondent is coming in good faith and saying that I'm going to clean this property in four months, I'm going to be on this property for four months every single day working on this property, and there's going to be commercial vehicles, there's going to be some trailers, there's going to be some employees coming and going. And so I'm pretty comfortable as a -- you know, since the rainy season's here, there's no health-safety issue, and there's an end date, and I'm pretty confident that within four months they should either have all the conditional use as a wholesale nursery or they're going to June 28, 2018 Page 58 have all the trailers, all the Port-o-potties, all the, you know, whatever it is out there as a widget, been removed within four months, and there's no more commercial vehicles, employees coming and going. So with that said, I'm pretty comfortable with four months. I think -- Mr. Chairman, I think you were hitting it pretty good about four months. After that, no more commercial vehicles. You're working for compliance. There's a similar case with ETS. There's a huge site on Immokalee Road that there's employees and they're seeking compliance, and it's going to take a while. This is a big, 20-acre piece of property. One acre has been impacted. Mr. Ramsey's a good citizen of Collier County. He'll tell you that he's -- he's going to try to get in compliance. These homeowners are here to tell you that it's going to take four months. They're going to have their employees. They might have subcontractors on the job. So with that said, we're not really understanding (sic) about the particular business. So I'm pretty comfortable, Mr. Chairman, with what you're saying, 120 days either get everything removed and no more commercial vehicles. After that particular date, fines will start accumulating. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is that a motion from you? MR. OSSORIO: As simple as that. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. You want me to continue? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The 150 commences after the 120 days for noncompliance. And somehow our illustrious attorney will be able to put this in language and read it back to us, right? MS. NICOLA: Well, I'm wondering what we're doing with No. 2. I mean, I think I understand No. 1, which is going to be removing all business-related materials/items from the property and return to a June 28, 2018 Page 59 permitted condition. Mr. Ramsey had a question about whether that also meant in an authorized condition, is that what you said, Mr. Ramsey? What did you say? MR. RAMSEY: We're talking about the occupational license? MS. NICOLA: No, sir. I'm talking about the property itself, removing all business-related material/items from the property and return to -- and the suggestion from the Board was a permitted condition. I want to make sure this is right so that everyone understands it. MR. LETOURNEAU: How does a county-approved position -- MS. NICOLA: A county-approved position, yes. MR. LETOURNEAU: How does that sound? MR. RAMSEY: Yeah, that sounds -- what I understood was for the 120 days, that's a county-approved position. MS. NICOLA: Got it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. That's no stumps; spread the mulch. MR. RAMSEY: Then after that, the equipment has to be off the property, and we'll be pursuing an SDP and simultaneously, or right after that, a conditional use. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And what I'm looking at -- MS. NICOLA: You know what, you need to change it. Number 1 should be the removal of the mulch and the stumps within 120 days. Followed by No. 2 would be the removal of the business-related material/items. So how do we want to approach that after the 120 days? Because it's -- is it immediate? Are we going to say within seven days? How are we going to write No. 2? MR. LETOURNEAU: Can we just make it -- I think Mike was trying to simplify it by just putting it all together in four months. June 28, 2018 Page 60 MS. NICOLA: Everything? MR. LETOURNEAU: The whole thing. Get the wholesale nursery done, get everything, ground up. At the point they get it ground up, stumps removed, wholesale nursery's taken care of, in county eyes, they're in compliance. Now, if they want to go forward with the conditional use after that and do other things, they're fine to do it at that point. If they don't get it done, and they start doing illegal activities again, I'm sure we'll be right back in here, you know, the following month. MR. RAMSEY: Let me try to redefine that. In 120 days, the four months, we will come into compliance. MR. LEFEBVRE: If you have the whole -- oh, yeah, you're right. MR. RAMSEY: No, that's removing the stumps, spreading the mulch. The property has now been brought into compliance, and the equipment has to be removed. MR. LETOURNEAU: That is correct. MR. RAMSEY: Those three things would bring us into compliance. MR. LETOURNEAU: It would, yes, sir. MR. RAMSEY: So in four months, we'll come compliance. After the four months, we will proceed with an SDP for a plant whole nursery. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: What you do after that, that's up to you. MR. LETOURNEAU: Right. Our case will be closed at that point. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's not part of our order. MS. CURLEY: You also have to remember that this property is owned by these two individuals. It's not owned by a company. So they can -- after 120 days, as long as that business is moved off that location, then the violation doesn't exist. June 28, 2018 Page 61 MR. LETOURNEAU: That's correct. That's what Mr. Ramsey just said. So those three things that he said right there -- so to simplify it, spread the mulch -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Get rid of the stumps. MR. LETOURNEAU: -- get rid of the stumps, get rid of the vehicles within four months. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Makes everybody happy. The neighbors will be happy. Everything will be fine. MR. LEFEBVRE: And one other item is no more deliveries. We have to put in there a certain period of time. MR. RAMSEY: That's automatic. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, as Mr. Ossorio has stated, you can't check at the gate who's doing what during this period of time. MR. LEFEBVRE: But you can tell if someone's bringing stuff in. MR. RAMSEY: We've already been told to cease and desist. It's in the current order. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. NICOLA: Question: What are we doing with No. 2, which is obtaining and displaying the required local business tax receipt? MR. LETOURNEAU: They don't need that if they clear the property. MS. NICOLA: Get rid of that. MR. LETOURNEAU: Yeah. And once they clear the property and get rid of the trucks and blah, blah, blah, we're going to close the case out, and what they do after that is up to their own business. MS. NICOLA: Okay. So we have 1, 2, and 3 seems to be something that would be part of the No. 2 as we read it previously, or do you guys want to address No. 3, which is unauthorized accumulation of litter/outside storage of items? MS. CURLEY: That would include -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's included in the four months. June 28, 2018 Page 62 MS. NICOLA: Right. Do you guys want me to write that up as a separate item is what I'm asking you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: No. You can include that there as well. It makes it simpler. MS. NICOLA: In No. 2. Okay. We've got it. Great. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So that's the motion. Any discussion on the motion? MR. LEFEBVRE: Can you just repeat the motion before -- MS. NICOLA: I can repeat it. Okay. Number 1 would be that the respondents would remove all mulch and stumps from the property within 120 days which, for the record, would be October the 25th of this year, or a fine of $150 per day until the violation is abated; No. 2 would be removal of all business-related materials/items from the property and return to a county-approved use within 120 days or a fine of $150 per day, and then the remainder, Items 2 and 3 that are up on the Board would be removed, and the rest of it would remain. The respondent must notify the Code Enforcement, et cetera. MS. CURLEY: And I have one other -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. MS. CURLEY: Should we not put in there that the property owner should cease and desist from operating a business there without a license? MS. NICOLA: That's a question for -- MS. CURLEY: We've not -- MR. LEFEBVRE: Mr. Ramsey stated that they already have a cease and desist order on the property; is that correct? MR. RAMSEY: We're talking about the licensing? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. MR. RAMSEY: Okay. Currently, we have a cease and desist order. No more business activity on the property until it's brought into June 28, 2018 Page 63 compliance. Number 2, in conference, Code Enforcement, at our May 16th meeting for a Site Development Plan, we were advised not to apply for an occupational license until we apply for the Site Development Plan. We can't be considered in zoning until -- we can't get an occupational license until the Site Development Plan's approved. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. RAMSEY: It's a logical falling of blocks. MR. ORTEGA: You mentioned before, or it was mentioned before, that you already attended a preapp meeting? MR. RAMSEY: Yes, sir. MR. ORTEGA: Did you attend a preapp meeting with any type of plan? MR. RAMSEY: We discussed all options based on the current code violation. MR. ORTEGA: Was this a formal meeting where you pay $550, blah, blah, blah? MR. RAMSEY: They did. MR. ORTEGA: Okay. MR. RAMSEY: We had all of Growth Management in attendance and Code Enforcement advising the proper steps to take to come into compliance and pursue the wholesale plant nursery. MR. ORTEGA: Were you given an indication as far as how long it would take? MR. RAMSEY: No. That was left up to this meeting. MR. ORTEGA: No, no. Once you submit, how long the process would take to get your SDP. MR. RAMSEY: That depends on when the application is deemed complete. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That doesn't have anything to do with what we're doing right now. That's after the fact. How they do June 28, 2018 Page 64 whatever they do after the 120 days is up to them as long as it meets the code. MR. WHITE: So after 120 days, they're not going to be operating on the property until they apply for their SDP, but they can't go back on the property until their SDP's approved? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: No, no, no, no, no. They become in compliance after 120 days. They remove the logs, they spread the mulch, the vehicles are gone. There's no more code violation. Okay. MR. RAMSEY: If I might add, on the issue with the commercial vehicles, could I have it reworded to say that all commercial vehicles and equipment need to be off the property by October 25th, which is what we said? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. What's the difference? MS. CURLEY: Well, you just authorized him to leave the business trucks stored there for the next three months, which is -- MR. LETOURNEAU: We're not going to be monitoring. Mr. Ramsey, like Mr. Ossorio said, knows the laws. There's a stop work order at this point. If -- we're not going to be able to monitor -- it's way out there. I don't have the manpower to just sit out there and stake out the property for four months. So I think that we're comfortable with what we've got right now. The county's comfortable. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Only thing I would ask for is that you discuss this somehow with the people who filed the complaint saying it's all going to be taken care of; this is what was decided by the Board. MR. LETOURNEAU: We will definitely be in discussions with the complainant. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. What else can you ask for? MS. NICOLA: I thought you were suggesting that to the respondent. I was thinking how well that was going to go. June 28, 2018 Page 65 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: No. We're going to send you out. MR. RAMSEY: No. We will still have to talk to them during the conditional-use issue, because we've NIMs. I'd like to add, too, making sure that the issue with the mulch and the stumps is done so that the editor here on this issue is that in our discussion in the 120 days we can -- we're going to remove the stumps from the property, but we spread the mulch out and let it decompose on the property which would bring us into compliance. MR. LETOURNEAU: Correct. MR. RAMSEY: Okay. But not removal of the mulch. I just want to make sure that technically or legally -- MS. NICOLA: I'm supposed to be in charge of technically and legally here. MR. RAMSEY: You don't want to be called in that I didn't remove the mulch from the property. MS. NICOLA: See, then you're in trouble with them, not with me, so -- MR. LETOURNEAU: I think the whole key is county approved; we're going to tell you exactly what you need to do, and if you follow the orders, we're good to go, okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Mr. Ossorio? MR. OSSORIO: Just to go ahead and finish a quick topic here is that if they do get a wholesale nursery, there's going to be vehicles coming and going with employees. I think the neighborhood is probably about life-safety, fire concerns. There's going to be employees out there seven days a week. They might be mulching, they could be spreading, they could be doing some other items. And I'm pretty confident that these individuals will get in compliance within four months. And so we're looking for life safety. They're seeking compliance. They've got to get a business tax receipt within four months. They need to go ahead and clean the June 28, 2018 Page 66 property up. I'm pretty comfortable with that, so... CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Since there are no other questions on the motion, all those in favor, say aye. MS. CURLEY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. ORTEGA: Aye. MR. WHITE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Okay. Good luck. MR. RAMSEY: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We need to take a few-minutes fingers break, right? Take 10 minutes. (A brief recess was had.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I'd like to call the Code Enforcement Board back to order. Twice I've used this in the last eight years or so. MR. BLANCO: Mr. Kaufman -- Mr. Chairman, I'm sorry. We have an additional change to the agenda. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: A change? MR. BLANCO: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. BLANCO: It's Roman Numeral VI, old business, Letter A, motion for imposition of fines and liens, No. 5, 5C5, No. 5 from -- Case No. CESD20170011882, Calcap, LLC, has been withdrawn. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Can we get a motion to modify the agenda? MR. DOINO: Motion to modify the agenda. MR. WHITE: Second. June 28, 2018 Page 67 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And a second. All those in favor? MS. CURLEY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. ORTEGA: Aye. MR. WHITE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. MR. BLANCO: Okay. Next item on the agenda, it's Roman Numeral VI, old business, Letter A, Item No. 6A3, No. 3, Case No. CESD20160015133, Esmerido Castro. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: SC what? MR. BLANCO: 6A3. THE COURT REPORTER: Can I get your name. MS. CHABEEM: My name is Juliette Chabeem (phonetic). (The interpreter was duly sworn to translate from English to Spanish and Spanish to English to the best of her ability and indicated in the affirmative.) (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Could you state your name on the microphone for us. MS. CHABEEM: Yes. Juliette Chabeem. MR. FUENTES: Jorge Fuentes representing Esmerido Castro. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Steven? MR. LOPEZ-SILVERO: Good morning. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. It seems like I just saw you recently. MR. LOPEZ-SILVERO: Do you want me to read through the imposition-of-fines summary? June 28, 2018 Page 68 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. MR. LOPEZ-SILVERO: Okay. Violation is for -- or under Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). Location: 5260 21st Place Southwest, Naples, Florida; Folio 36378000007. The description: New exterior door, a wall-mounted air-conditioning unit, partition walls and plumbing fixtures installed and/or added to the existing attached garage on improved occupied residential property without first obtaining a permit. Past order: On March 23rd, 2017, the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of facts, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See attached order of the Board, OR5377, Page 511, for more information. On February 22nd, 2018, a continuance was granted. See the attached order of the Board, OR5485, Page 2803, for more information. The violation has been partially abated as of July 21st, 2017. Fines and costs to date are as follows: Part B of the order: Fines have accrued at a rate of $200 per day for the period from July 22nd, 2017, to June 28, 2018, for a total of 342 days, and a total fine amount of $68,400. Part C of the order: No fines have accrued. Fines continue to accrue on Part B. Previously assessed operational costs of $65.01 have been paid. Operational costs for today's hearing is $59.56 for a total amount of $68,459.56. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And you are here to? MS. CHABEEM: Myself, I'm here to translate for the gentleman. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Could you ask him why he is June 28, 2018 Page 69 here. MR. FUENTES: (Through the interpreter) Good morning. So I'm here today because I came previously to resolve a situation that had arose with a wall, and I went ahead, and I took care of it. I asked for the corresponding permits; however, I was notified recently that I had other issues that I had to rectify, which came out of the first problem that I went ahead and remedied. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: This goes back to March of -- over a year old. And what I'm reading here, it said that there was a new exterior door, a wall-mounted air-conditioning unit, partition walls, and plumbing fixtures were installed to the existing garage -- sounds like a garage conversion -- on an improved occupied residential property without obtaining a permit. Do you have or have you pulled a permit? MS. CHABEEM: So in terms of the garage and the A/C, that's always been there and been -- when he brought the property. It used to be an office. So what he did is that he incorporated a wall in order to make the property connect with each other. So it wasn't something that he added on. This was present when he brought the property initially. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Steven, can you help me out on this? This was -- I don't quite understand what we have in front of us. Is it an air-conditioning unit? Plumbing fixtures? All that was installed without a permit; is that correct? MR. LOPEZ-SILVERO: That's correct, sir. And this all took place withinside the attached garage of the dwelling. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It was a garage conversion? MR. LOPEZ-SILVERO: Correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And to this date have any permits been pulled? MR. LOPEZ-SILVERO: Yes, sir. MS. CURLEY: Well, this letter -- is there a date error on this? June 28, 2018 Page 70 Because the hearing date, June 28th, 2018, we see that. Then we scroll down to the past orders, and that says the violation has been partially abated as of July 21st, 2017. So have you not gone back there since last summer? MS. LOPEZ-SILVERO: Yes, ma'am. The two parts of the order -- Part C of the order was to cease and desist using that converted garage or occupying it, and disconnecting or securing utilities. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Right. And the first part was no permits on all of the changes. MR. LOPEZ-SILVERO: Correct. That was for Part B. MS. CURLEY: The matter's been resolved; is that not true? MR. LEFEBVRE: The occupancy of the place. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Just Part C. Part C says -- MS. CURLEY: Part B of the order, fines have accrued July till June, till today, for a fine of 68,400. MR. LEFEBVRE: Right. MS. CURLEY: But has it been fixed? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hold on. Hold on. MR. LEFEBVRE: The order states in B that the respondent must abate by obtaining all required building permits. That's what they have not gained. They have -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: They stopped using it. MR. LEFEBVRE: Satisfied C. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: They stopped using it. MR. LEFEBVRE: Right, exactly. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's C. That happened immediately. MS. CURLEY: I understand that. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you see that it's B and C? MS. CURLEY: I see that -- what's confusing me is the one that June 28, 2018 Page 71 says, "The violation has been partially abated as of July 21st." What is the current state of the affairs today? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, let me go back. July 21st they stopped using it. MS. CURLEY: Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay? So that was abated. MS. CURLEY: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. The rest of it, permits, et cetera, have not been abated as far as I am being told by Steven; is that correct? MR. LOPEZ-SILVERO: That's correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So to date there has been no permit issued for the plumbing work or any of the other work in converting this garage. MR. LOPEZ-SILVERO: Issued, not yet. It's still in the review process. It's actually in "rejected" status. Still in the planning stages. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And this goes back to over a year ago. MR. LOPEZ-SILVERO: That's right. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Go ahead. MS. CHABEEM: So, basically, this information is newly obtained. Over a year ago the first issue that Mr. Fuentes had to deal with was the wall, which he went ahead and he resolved. He was -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hold on. Hold on. He resolved it how? MS. CHABEEM: He went ahead and obtained the corresponding permit for that. So that is why, partially, it has been abated. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: No, no, no, no, no. Let me stop you a second. It's been partially abated because they were not being able to use this garage to live in. MS. CHABEEM: Absolutely. June 28, 2018 Page 72 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. That was what the order says in front of me, so it was partially -- that is the only part that I see. MS. CHABEEM: Well, no. I would also like to add that there was a permit taken out for the wall. So that was also an application that was previously designed to be fixed. And I think Mr. Steve can attest to that; that we had to go ahead and get a permit for the wall, and we did that. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Let me stop you. Steven, I'm trying to keep this orderly. Has a permit been -- was a permit issued to take care of the wall portion of the violation? MR. LOPEZ-SILVERO: It hasn't been issued yet. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So -- MR. ORTEGA: Could I step in? MS. CHABEEM: One second. I think he has a receipt. MR. ORTEGA: We have a garage conversion. So we're talking about walls. Which one is it? MR. LOPEZ-SILVERO: The violation, as it stands now, that's in effect, is for the work that was done to the garage. There was a partition wall put up; there was a restroom added. MR. ORTEGA: Again, being converted. MS. WHITE: Interior. MR. ORTEGA: Right, to a habitable space, whether it's a bedroom or office. Doesn't matter, single-family home, it's going to be habitable space. MR. LOPEZ-SILVERO: Okay. Yes. MR. ORTEGA: But I keep on hearing a permit for a wall. I don't understand that. MR. LOPEZ-SILVERO: That's initially what the respondent applied for. On the description of the permit application, it states "additional wall on both sides of garage. MR. LEFEBVRE: Was that to connect the house to the garage? June 28, 2018 Page 73 MR. FUENTES: Yes, to connect everything in the house. MR. WHITE: Exterior, then. MR. LEFEBVRE: Right. It's exterior. MR. ORTEGA: Exterior. MR. LEFEBVRE: Right. Is that what you're talking about? MR. LOPEZ-SILVERO: The partition wall or the addition to the wall is inside the garage. MR. ORTEGA: It's a hallway. MR. LOPEZ-SILVERO: Yes. MR. LEFEBVRE: It sounds like -- if I'm -- hold on. MR. FUENTES: Inside the house. MR. LEFEBVRE: Can I please finish? The garage is completed prior to you taking ownership. Then you built a wall to connect the garage to the house; is that what you're saying -- stating? No? Okay. It's an attachment. MR. FUENTES: (Through the interpreter) That is correct. MR. ORTEGA: Is this an attached garage or detached garage? MR. LOPEZ-SILVERO: It's attached. MR. ORTEGA: It is attached. MR. FUENTES: (Through the interpreter) Si, it's connected. It's attached. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let me keep this simple. This was a garage conversion. No permits were pulled. MR. LOPEZ-SILVERO: That is correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The Code Enforcement Board heard the case, found the respondent in violation, and this is what was done. Since that time, since whatever the last date is, no permit has been issued. MR. LOPEZ-SILVERO: Correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Now, any comments from the Board on that? June 28, 2018 Page 74 MS. CURLEY: I have a -- I don't see the paperwork that we did last year in this batch of documents. So you had said that there was an order? MR. LEFEBVRE: Yeah. MS. CURLEY: So I guess I wonder why they're here. MR. LEFEBVRE: Order of Code Enforcement Board. I'm looking at it right now. It's page -- Packet Page 161. MS. CURLEY: No. I see that page, but I thought you said there was a stipulation or something last summer. MR. LEFEBVRE: In July there was a stipulation. Actually, it might have been later than that. Hold on. Page -- order of the Board -- Code Enforcement Board, Page 1 -- it says Package 164 -- where it states, "Granted until May 23rd, 2018," and that was in February of 2018. It's probably about four pages past the order, the original order, and it's the top of the page. It says 6A.3A. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Steven, did this garage conversion include electrical? MR. LOPEZ-SILVERO: From my observation -- MR. LEFEBVRE: There's a bathroom in there, so... MR. LOPEZ-SILVERO: The respondent's claiming he used the existing electrical. I didn't observe or didn't verify if he added electrical. MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hold on. Plumbing? MR. LOPEZ-SILVERO: Plumbing, yes. He claims also, the respondent, that he used the existing plumbing. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: There was plumbing in the garage? MR. LOPEZ-SILVERO: Yes, for the washer and dryer, and then used the same plumbing for the restroom that he added. MS. CHABEEM: That is correct. MR. LEFEBVRE: Unlikely. Because the toilet drain requires a June 28, 2018 Page 75 larger pipe than a -- MR. ORTEGA: Agree. MR. LEFEBVRE: Yeah, thank you. Okay. What are you looking for? That's why we're here. MS. CURLEY: Another year continuance? MS. CHABEEM: Right. So, basically, he wants to resolve the problems, and he wants to make it right; however, he does have concern issues that have risen due to Irma. At the moment, his roof, it's being repaired. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I'm sorry. This has nothing to do with -- MS. CHABEEM: Right. No. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- the original case which was in March of '17, long before Irma. MS. CHABEEM: Right. No, no, absolutely, but he's just speaking about the status quo and mitigating factors, which they're not, obviously, an excuse for that. But he's just explaining the situation as of now. He has a lot of financial burdens. He actually doesn't have an A/C in the property as we speak. It's defective. His roof is also defective as well as some mold in the property. So, basically -- in other words, not to excuse the whole issues, but what the least is -- he's taken a lot on his financial aspect, so he would like some time in order to recoup and make it right, because this will take some money and definitely cost him. So he wants to make it right, but he would like some reasonable time to do so in order to handle both costs. MR. LEFEBVRE: I have a question. When was the permit submitted and when was it denied or rejected? MR. ORTEGA: Applied for. MR. LEFEBVRE: Yeah. When was it applied for, yes, and June 28, 2018 Page 76 when was it rejected? MR. LETOURNEAU: Hold on. I'm getting that up right now. MR. LEFEBVRE: Thank you. MR. LETOURNEAU: Okay. It appears that it was applied for in March of this year, and it was rejected April 9th of this year. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So a permit was applied for in March. The following month it was rejected. Do you know the reason for the rejection, Jeff? MR. LETOURNEAU: I can look that up. Hold on. MR. ORTEGA: That would explain a lot. MS. CHABEEM: Yeah. And he actually -- MR. LETOURNEAU: Hold on one second here. MR. LEFEBVRE: It would explain a lot, but it also -- I'm trying to get a time frame. It literally took a year for him to go ahead and apply for a permit. That's an excessive amount of time. And I know there's financial hardships and so forth regarding Irma, but I still feel that, in good faith -- originally it was supposed to be done in three months. We gave him more time several months ago, and I think it was in February. And in February he hadn't even applied for the permit. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Correct. MR. LEFEBVRE: So we've given them ample time, but I want to find out what the -- MR. LETOURNEAU: All right. There's a ton of them, okay, but the main one that I came across down here -- MR. ORTEGA: What's the description for -- MR. LETOURNEAU: Well, "It appears that a portion of the garage is being converted to living space. Please verify that the finished floor is at least 18 inches over the crown of the road, provide the existing home finished floor elevation and the new living space finished floor elevation to verify the two areas are equal in height." June 28, 2018 Page 77 Okay. Then back up to the top here, they need window and door details, they have to clarify, as the code case photos show, new windows, doors, and air-conditioning along with the rear lanai being closed and house being stuccoed. So there's all sorts of stuff going on here. MR. ORTEGA: But under the description of work, does it say anything about a partition wall, or is it for the conversion of the garage? MR. LETOURNEAU: It's like Steven said; it was -- what did you say? It was -- MR. LOPEZ-SILVERO: Additional wall on both sides of garage. MR. LETOURNEAU: Yeah. It doesn't -- it appears that he put in an insufficient permit application for what he needs to have done. So he's a long way from being in compliance. MR. ORTEGA: Right. That's what I wanted to establish. MS. CURLEY: Go ahead. MS. CHABEEM: No, I'm sorry. You go ahead. Well, just to add to that, he is a long way from being in compliance, but there is good faith -- there is good faith in trying to do so. He's had -- he's telling me right now that he has two -- I guess, he has two -- he had to endure two different scenarios in which his house was struck. In 2015 there was a tornado that -- he has pictures that basically pretty much did a lot of damage to the property. So that was one thing that he had to take care of. He has proof of that. He brought evidence. And then, once again, 2017. So it's been a financial burden after the other which, once again, doesn't excuse the fact that he hasn't been as proactive as he could have for the permits. But they are factors to be considered when it comes to the financial burden. June 28, 2018 Page 78 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let me just -- we're here to -- and it's still not into compliance. We are here to apply the fine to the property right now. So Mr. Lefebvre's question before was, what are you here to request? MS. CHABEEM: Right. So in a nutshell, from what I gather is that he needs time. And it seems to be a reoccurring theme but, definitely, he needs time. He needs to, first of all, figure out what he has that is incorrect. He got a letter with the description that the gentleman just said, and the letter was dated back in April 26th. So here we have an outline of the things that he must take care of, and now he has a more clear idea of how to handle and tackle this issue step by step based on the corrections, because they outline the things that are incorrect or that are not under permit, so that's good. Now he knows exactly, okay, this is what I need. I do have a feeling that in the past he knew that there were things that were not under code, but he wasn't really sure exactly as to what. So that's why he submitted permits that, perhaps, were not eloquent or they were not correct, and I think now, based on this, he has a better idea of how to go about it and tackle this. But he needs time to get this done and to find the funds to do it. But there's definitely a good-faith attempt on his side to want to, obviously, fix this. MR. LEFEBVRE: What has he done since April 26th or so when he got that letter to correct? I mean -- MS. CHABEEM: Sure. He's been trying to actively look for someone to help him do this type of task, but he has to be honest. And to be truthful he said that, you know, the roof, it's a main concern for him that he's been trying to work out the permits for that, trying to get the people to do that. He's also without A/C in his property. June 28, 2018 Page 79 So, yes, he's been trying to pay attention to this for sure, but that -- right now the priorities lie in other areas and aspects of the property, so he doesn't want to come forward untruthfully with that. MR. LETOURNEAU: I do see that he did get a permit for a roof, and it just got finalled -- well, I don't know when it got finalled, but in the last couple months. MR. FUENTES: It's a permit for the roof. No A/C now in my house. Maybe one week or more. It's too much to pay, for me, for the A/C. More fix it for the kitchen, my room. It's everything -- MS. CHABEEM: Yeah. He said that -- in other words, he said that he's waiting hopefully, within a week, to get some sort of insurance payment. In the meantime, he's had to cost and pay out-of-pocket, and it's just difficult just to have everything under one person, so... MR. ORTEGA: Mr. Chairman, may I ask a question? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Sure. MR. ORTEGA: If he had somebody design the plans -- MR. FUENTES: (Through the interpreter) Of the walls or -- MR. ORTEGA: Whatever permit was submitted had to have some type of plan. MR. FUENTES: (Through the interpreter) No. I went ahead and I made the plans for the wall and I submitted them to Collier County. MR. ORTEGA: Okay. So revising the plan, since he did it himself, will not cost a dime, and at least he can get that process going. MS. CHABEEM: He would like to know what's the plan that you would like from him now. MR. ORTEGA: I don't. I would suggest that he meets with the Building Department on that, with one of the staff, the plans examiners. MR. LOPEZ-SILVERO: And if I may add something when there's a moment. The Building Department, when they received this June 28, 2018 Page 80 building permit application, they added more requirements than what we were citing the respondent for. Code Enforcement was just concerned with the attached garage or the modification thereto. The Building Department, they went into our case, and they looked up pictures that were in there, and they also added -- they included the lanai in the rear of the home, which is separate from the garage, and stucco that the respondent had added on the exterior of the home, and windows and doors that were added to the lanai, which is separate from what we cited the respondent for. So now there's additional requirements that the respondent now has to comply with. MR. LETOURNEAU: Was that during the determination or during the permit process? MR. LOPEZ-SILVERO: This was during the permit review process. One of the plans reviewer took it up to the building official, and they determined everything else needed permits as well. MS. CHABEEM: Yeah. That is basically what we were trying to get at, and so sorry that it got lost in translation. That's why he said, you know, I came for something. I was trying to work on that, and then I ended up getting more things that now have been added to the process. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, in summary, what we have is a violation that goes back to March 23rd. And since March 23rd, it took just about a year to apply for a permit, and now the permit was turned down in April, and since that time, there's been a lot of trying but no results. Correct me if I'm wrong, but that's, I think, where we are right now. And the respondent is asking for more time; is that correct? MS. CHABEEM: Correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let me just ask how much more time you're asking for. June 28, 2018 Page 81 MS. CHABEEM: In considering the fact that now he has more things to deal with, at least four months, 120 days. MR. FUENTES: Me work every day. One day come for the people looking, help you. MS. CHABEEM: He's saying that, basically, he works six days a week, and he only has one spare day to basically get the people in there and have them work on the property. MS. CURLEY: I have a question. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Go ahead. MS. CURLEY: Could we just deal with these fines and let this go back to them? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Say it louder. I can't hear you. MS. CURLEY: Like, I was thinking about doing a motion to deny the county these fines and just ending this. MR. LEFEBVRE: Well, you can do an extension, extending the time, then the fines would stop, or you can do a continuance, like we did last time in February; the fines kept on running, and we gave him more time. MS. CURLEY: I think what's difficult here is that he's not even brought up that $68,459 that is going to, you know, offend him. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Are you aware of the current fine? MS. CHABEEM: No, he was not. And we were just looking at that right now, and pretty impacted by that. So, no, that was not a number that we had any knowledge of. So, yeah. MS. CURLEY: This was delivered to him, though, in the mail. MS. CHABEEM: It doesn't -- the letter that he received -- and I can show it, bring it up to the Board. MR. BLANCO: Mr. Chairman, I can answer that question. The executive summary does not get mailed out to the respondents. MS. CHABEEM: Right. So we had no idea. We're just looking at this number, and we're blown away with this. June 28, 2018 Page 82 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The original -- in Paragraph B on Page 161, it points out how much per day the fine is. MR. BLANCO: Correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So those -- you know, over a year -- there's 365 days in a year times, I think it was, $200 a day. You must be aware of that. You just can't continually say "I don't know," "I didn't do it," et cetera. You lose credibility with the Board. MS. CHABEEM: No, absolutely, sir. But, once again, I mean, you're right about that, but I guess we -- as we saw this number -- and I'm speaking for Mr. Fuentes, we're pretty shocked. And I know that probably doing the math, that would be something that we could have ascertained, but that number is quite -- MR. LEFEBVRE: What the Board is looking at now it -- MS. CHABEEM: -- impactful. MR. LEFEBVRE: -- we're 15 months out from the original case. Back when we heard the original case, there was no issues regarding the air conditioner, Irma, and so forth. Now if we look at it again and say, okay, we're going to push it out four more months, is he going to be back in front of us? There wasn't really a good-faith effort to resolve this issue because it took a year for him, and he came back to us asking for a continuance in February. So that -- what we look for is good-faith effort to try to correct the problem. We haven't seen that. And we still, two months ago, the permit was rejected, and we haven't heard anything definitive saying that he's done this to try to move forward. You know, what steps has he taken? So that's why we're struggling on, in fact, imposing the fines or extending this again. That's why we're sitting here and asking as many questions as we are. MS. CURLEY: So I did some math on this also, and so let's just -- the fine -- the problem was started in March 23rd of '17. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Move your microphone closer. June 28, 2018 Page 83 MS. CURLEY: So, really, he had July, August, and September of last summer, so that was 90 days to address whether he was going to revert the garage back to its normal state or bring it up to the current requirements with permits. And that really doesn't seem like that should have taken too long, but then we have September. So October, November, and December, we all know what happened here with the storm. And now we're six months into the new year, and he's just getting his roof. So to be fair, I mean, I think whatever happened before, you've got to just minus six months because he's had to get off track, get a roof over his house, abate mold, and he's -- I mean, it's July next week, and he's getting a roof. So we have -- MR. LEFEBVRE: He's had a roof for a few months. MS. CURLEY: He just -- the roof is complete? MR. LETOURNEAU: The permit's finalled. MS. CURLEY: Okay. So -- all right. MS. CHABEEM: He's getting the reimbursement for that, though. He had to pay that out-of-pocket. He had to get the reimbursement now from the insurance. MS. CURLEY: I'm just trying to make a little bit of clarity on the gravity of the issue here, and I think as a board of peers to people, we want to be helpful. And I think there's probably some learning that takes place when you apply for a permit, and this probably isn't something that he can do by himself. So you might need a professional, or you're going to get worse fines. MS. CHABEEM: That's correct. That's another issue that's been taking place here. The language barrier has been an issue. The lack of knowledge of what to do or when to do it, that's also an issue. And, obviously, it's not an excuse, we don't want to use this as an excuse, but it is something that is truthful that has been hindering with the whole process. June 28, 2018 Page 84 I asked him what he, basically, suggests based on your opinions, and he respectfully requests if we can go ahead with your advice, which -- your suggestion was to hopefully terminate the fines. If we can even get six months of those fines taken out, that would be stellar. And he said that he would try and remedy -- or not try. He will remedy this event in four months. And if that's too long, then 90 days. Whatever the Board decides. MR. LEFEBVRE: There's three ways we can go. We can impose the fines now, which means that there will be a fine imposed and until the fine is taken care of, or until it's abated, the problem's taken care of; we can continue -- like we did in February, continue the case and give him additional time, but the fines keep on running; or we can do an extension of time, which the fines will stop at that point, correct? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Correct. MR. LEFEBVRE: I just have a problem that, yes, all these things happened, but it took him prior to the hurricane, which was six months after he came in front of us, almost six months after. Nothing was done except he took care of one of the issues. Nothing was done. So six months he could have been working on this, and it wasn't -- it wasn't being worked on. And then it came -- he came in front of us again. MS. CURLEY: Let her interpret. MR. LEFEBVRE: And then he came in front of us in February, and then it took roughly three weeks for him to submit for a permit. I think we've spent enough time on this case. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And I can't support abating anything until this thing is resolved. MR. LEFEBVRE: I make a -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Go ahead. MR. LEFEBVRE: I make a motion that we continue for 90 days. And what that means is that the fines will keep on running, and then if it's not taken -- if it's taken care of, we can review the fines and June 28, 2018 Page 85 possibly reduce them. If it's not taken care of, I'm going to be very hard-pressed -- and I tell this a lot of times, most times, I'm going to be very hard-pressed to give another continuance. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I agree with you. MR. LEFEBVRE: Thank you. Is that a second? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That is a second. MS. CHABEEM: Sir, one thing, please. He's a little bit confused. Sorry for -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's okay. Let me -- one second. We have a motion, and we have a second. We're not negotiating the motion. MR. LEFEBVRE: I make a motion -- I'd like to amend my motion to 120 days. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. LEFEBVRE: Which is what he's asking for. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And I second your change. MR. LEFEBVRE: Continuance. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: As a continuance. That's correct. MS. CHABEEM: So basically he understands, but what he doesn't understand is he needs to fix the issues with the garage or the issues with the lanai? What -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: He needs to -- MR. FUENTES: Lanai is different problem. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: He needs to come into compliance with all of the issues that are in this, and he can check with Steven, who will be glad to point out what needs to be done. Okay. Now, we have a motion, a second. Any discussion on the motion? Jeff, you have something? MR. LETOURNEAU: I do. Just pointed out to me, are you Esmerido Castro? June 28, 2018 Page 86 MR. FUENTES: That's my brother. MR. LETOURNEAU: Oh, okay. I'm just wondering, did we ask him if he had the authority to talk -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: No, we didn't. Do you have your brother's permission to talk in his behalf? MS. CHABEEM: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. LETOURNEAU: Okay. I just wanted to clarify that before we got done here. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a motion and a second. Any discussion on the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hearing none, all those in favor? MS. CURLEY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. ORTEGA: Aye. MR. WHITE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. You have 120 days to get on this and try to resolve as much as you can. If you want to know what needs to be done, Steven will be glad to help you with that, and -- MS. CURLEY: You said the fines are still being accrued? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's correct. It's a continuance. After 120 days, hopefully you have everything done, you come back here, and you can request a reduction in the fine. MS. CHABEEM: Yes. And can we take into account what Madam Curley said about the six months, that perhaps we can dismiss June 28, 2018 Page 87 that? I mean, not today, but maybe that date? No? MR. LEFEBVRE: I'm not going to remember that from three months, but that's when you explain. MS. CHABEEM: Okay. MR. LEFEBVRE: We want to see -- we want to see abatement. We want to see the problem taken care of. MS. CHABEEM: Makes sense. Okay. Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Thank you. MR. LEFEBVRE: I'm going to have to excuse myself. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. NICOLA: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a special request. In the three years that I have been here, I've never been in a bind with a 12 o'clock deadline, but I have kids at camp. And I have been trying desperately to find someone to pick them up and have been unsuccessful. So I would request, if we could, that we would take Union Road, LLC, out of the order, because we have a legal question on that and request that I be allowed to be excused. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Motion to modify the agenda? Mr. Lefebvre has to leave. We still have a quorum. Okay. (Mr. Lefebvre left the boardroom for the remainder of the meeting.) MS. NICOLA: I would, of course, be available by phone if you needed me to, but I appreciate it. My apologies. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Oh, we can fight on. MS. NICOLA: Of course, you can. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Get a motion to modify the agenda? MR. ORTEGA: Make a motion to modify the agenda. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Get a second? MR. WHITE: Second. June 28, 2018 Page 88 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. All those in favor? MS. CURLEY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. ORTEGA: Aye. MR. WHITE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. MR. BLANCO: Next item on the agenda: It's 6A2, Roman Numeral VI, old business, Letter A, motion for imposition of fines/liens, No. 2 Case No. CEPM20160004343, Union Road, LLC. MR. LETOURNEAU: Before we get going, the legal matter we want to talk about, I believe there was an incorrect number that was transferred onto the order regarding one of the ordinances or maybe more than one of the ordinances. MR. BLANCO: Mr. Chairman, the Board issued a financial fact order on June 23rd, 2016. One of the ordinances that was cited on the order is incorrect. We spoke with your attorney, and we can -- in her opinion, we can proceed with our motion for imposition of fines and amend the order and change that particular ordinance. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is that a scrivener's type error? MR. LETOURNEAU: Correct. MR. BLANCO: Correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. MS. NICOLA: My recommendation would be that we modify the order nunc pro tunc to the date of the order, and then once that is voted on, if it is approved, then the next step would be to vote on whether to impose the fines. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. June 28, 2018 Page 89 (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. LETOURNEAU: Before we go, Steve, let's point out the -- we're going to do the amendment first or the -- MS. NICOLA: I believe we need to do the amendment first. In order to proceed on the violation, the order has to be correct. MR. LETOURNEAU: Okay. Danny's going to point out exactly what was wrong up here on the screen, right? MR. BLANCO: Okay. So this is the notice of the violation that the respondent received. You can -- if you see section -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Can you make that bigger? Ah, good. MR. BLANCO: This is the particular ordinance that needs to be corrected on the financial fact order. Section 22-231(12)(b) on the financial fact order. The error, it has 23-231. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. I'll take a motion from the Board to modify that. MR. DOINO: Motion to modify. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And a second? MR. ORTEGA: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor? MS. CURLEY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. ORTEGA: Aye. MR. WHITE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. So now you can leave. MS. NICOLA: Thank you. I apologize. (Ms. Nicola left the boardroom for the remainder of the meeting.) June 28, 2018 Page 90 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We're dwindling here. Okay, Steve, you're up. MR. ATHEY: Proceed with the imposition? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: This is 6A2. MS. CURLEY: Thank you. MR. ATHEY: For the record, Stephen Athey, Collier County Code Enforcement. This is in regards to violations of Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, Chapter 22, Article VI, Sections 22-231(12)(b), 22-231(12)(i), and 22-231(12)(c). The location is 12400 Union Road, Naples, Florida; Folio 01058920513. The description is roof in disrepair, windows and doors missing and/or broken, exterior walls in disrepair. Past orders: On June 23rd, 2016, the Code Enforcement Board issued a findings of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached order of the Board, OR5209, Page 3461, for more information. On August 26th, 2016, a fine of $2,000 was imposed, and an extension of time to comply was granted. See the attached order of the Board, OR5311, Page 1588, for more information. On November 17th, 2017, a continuance was granted. See the attached order of the Board, OR5456, Page 1378, for more information. The violation has not been abated as of June 28th, 2018. Fines and costs to date are as follows: Fines have accrued at a rate of $150 per day for the period from February 23rd, 2017, to June 28th, 2018, 491 days, for a total fine amount of $73,650, and fines continue to accrue. Previously assessed operational costs of $67.11 have been paid. June 28, 2018 Page 91 Fine imposed of $2,000 has been paid. Operational costs for today's hearing, $59.77. Total amount: $73,709.77. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Have you been in contact with these folks? MR. ATHEY: I have not, Mr. Chairman. The last contact I had with -- MS. CURLEY: Mr. Shapiro, Marc Shapiro. I'm surprised he's not here. MR. ATHEY: Was in November of '17. MS. CURLEY: Well, when they were here last time, we knew they were -- basically said if we didn't help them, then they were going to just walk away from the property, which is what they've done. Because Mr. Shapiro stated on behalf of the property owner that they had nothing to keep them attached to the trust of the company. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. It says a fine of $2,000 were imposed; not exactly in English but -- and the extension of time to comply was granted. They paid $2,000? MR. ATHEY: They did pay the civil penalty, yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I guess that gave them enough time to decide whether they wanted to keep this or not. Okay. So if they've walked away from this now, I guess the only thing left for us to do is to impose the fine. MS. CURLEY: I just have one question of clarity. Is this the bunkhouse, or is this the hotel? MR. ATHEY: This is what's referred to as the staff quarters, the smaller building. MS. CURLEY: The other one they've already left. This was the one they actually wanted to invest in. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Right. They're not here. MR. ATHEY: They are not. June 28, 2018 Page 92 MS. CURLEY: I make a motion to allow the county to impose the fine of $73,709.77. MR. DOINO: I'll second that. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a motion and a second to impose. All those in favor? MS. CURLEY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. ORTEGA: Aye. MR. WHITE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. MR. ATHEY: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you, Steve. MR. BLANCO: Next item on your agenda, it's 6A4, Case No. CELU20160010501, Anthony V. Piccirilli Estate. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. MULLER: Good morning, Board. My name is Mark Muller. I represent the estate of Anthony Piccirilli. We have, unfortunately, been here before asking for a continuance. I believe we're here asking for the last continuance. And hopefully 60 days so that if we were in front of the Board again it would be at the September meeting. Very briefly, there's an estate that owned this property. It's a commercial property where there was a metal building that had a second floor that was built out and was being used for residential purposes. Since there was a code violation cited, we have stopped all residential uses in that space. The beneficiary of the estate has now turned 18. Over the last June 28, 2018 Page 93 several months, we had two construction dumpsters out there, and he was literally out there filling up two construction dumpsters with furniture and debris that was up in that second floor. The personal representative of the estate was trying to hire an engineer to get drawings done so that we could go in for a demolition permit, which is all we need, and he just wasn't successful in getting an engineer hired to do that. I think everybody is very busy, and they looked at this and just simply didn't want to handle it. So I've now taken over the responsibility for getting all of this done. I've leaned on David Corbin, who's an architect in town, who's also a personal friend. He's agreed to take this over. He will have people out next week to do basically the on-site measurements and do as-built drawings. I contacted Renald Paul, who is sort of the liaison between Code Enforcement and permitting, yesterday, and requested that we have a coordination meeting between the architect, our contractor, me, and permitting and Code Enforcement so that during the week of July 9th -- because we'll have our drawings done by next week -- and we'll be ready for a pre-application meeting so that we are all on the same page as to exactly what needs to be demoed. I think some of the issues, the capping off plumbing, terminating electric, those kinds of things, so that we know when we go in for the demo permit that if we do that work, we'll be in compliance. We're pretty confident that once we have the permit, it will only take us about a week to get that actual demolition done. So we're pretty confident that if we're back in front of the Board in September, we'll have it done, assuming that the permit doesn't take an inordinate amount of time. And it's simply a demolition permit, so it shouldn't take long. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So you're requesting a continuance? June 28, 2018 Page 94 MR. MULLER: We're requesting a continuance, and then we'll deal with the fines at that time. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: At that time. Okay. Continuance of 60 days will be sufficient? MR. MULLER: As long as we're back in front of the Board for a September meeting and not the August meeting. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Is that okay with you, Jeff? MR. LETOURNEAU: I'm sorry. I was out in the hallway. I wasn't listening. If it's okay with Colleen, it's okay with me, though. MS. DAVIDSON: For the record, Colleen Davidson, Collier County Code Enforcement. The county has no objection. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Can we get a motion from the Board to grant a continuance on this? MS. CURLEY: So if you do a 60-day continuance, it will be August 28th. MR. MULLER: And that would put us past the August meeting, so then we would be at the September meeting; that would be fine. MS. CURLEY: What's the date of the August meeting; the 23rd? MR. BLANCO: Yeah, August 23rd. September's meeting is on September 27th. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Unless there's another hurricane, but hopefully not. Okay. So do we get a motion from the Board to grant a 60-day continuance? MR. DOINO: Make a motion for 60 days. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a motion. MR. WHITE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And we have a second. All those in favor? MS. CURLEY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. June 28, 2018 Page 95 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. ORTEGA: Aye. MR. WHITE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Thanks, Colleen. MS. DAVIDSON: Thanks. MR. MULLER: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you. We'll see you in September. Sounds like a song title. It is. Okay, Danny. MR. BLANCO: Next item on the agenda is 6A8, Case No. CESD20150017888, Julian Francois, LLC. The respondent is not present, Mr. Chairman, but we do have a representative from the Immokalee CRA and MSTU that would like to say a few words. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Could you state your name on the mike. MS. HALDEMAN: Sure. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You can bring it down; people of my height. MS. HALDEMAN: My name is Andrea Haldeman. I'm a resident of Immokalee. I have been there about 11 years. We at the MSTU and the CRA are concerned about some of the conditions out in Immokalee, and so we would like to come before the Board whenever we have situations, code violations, that need to be heard here and to let you know that we need your help in cleaning up some of the areas out there. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, you're always welcome in front of this board, that's for sure. June 28, 2018 Page 96 MS. HALDEMAN: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you want to -- do you have any information on this particular case? MS. HALDEMAN: This one -- the first one with the -- which one are we looking at? MR. LOPEZ-SILVERO: 305 South Third Street. MS. HALDEMAN: South Fourth (sic)? This one has been going on for quite a while, and he continues to move this trailer from spot to spot. So we are asking that -- if there's some way we can keep him from playing the system, actually. MR. LOPEZ-SILVERO: Ms. Haldeman, if I may, this is the Francois. MS. HALDEMAN: Oh, Francois. Yes. They have made a building -- made 12 rooms out of one building, and we would like to stop that from happening in Immokalee. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Well, the Board voted on this in the past, in July of 2016, that they were in violation. We are hearing this case today to decide whether we impose a $104,000-plus penalty. MS. HALDEMAN: We would hope you would. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Steven, do you want to read this into the record? MR. LOPEZ-SILVERO: Yes, sir. Good morning. For the record, Steven Lopez-Silvero, Collier County Code Enforcement. The violation is Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06.(B)(1)(a). The location is 305 South Third Street, Immokalee, Florida. The folio is 00124960000. The description: Unpermitted interior and exterior improvements to a structure consisting of, but not limited to, new windows, doors, electrical wiring, plumbing lines, and bathroom fixtures, and partition June 28, 2018 Page 97 walls, creating approximately 20 individual sleeping rooms. The past order: On July 28th, 2016, the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of facts, conclusion of law -- correction -- conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation for the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached order of the Board, OR5301, Page 946, for more information. The violation has not been abated as of June 28, 2018. Fines and costs to date are as follows: Fines have accrued at a rate of $200 per day for the period from January 25th, 2017, to June 28, 2018, for a total of 520 days and a total fine amount of $104,000. Fines continue to accrue. Previously assessed operational costs of $65.43 have been paid. Operational costs for today's hearing is $59.35, for a total amount of $104,059.35. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Steven, have you heard from the respondents on this at all? MR. BLANCO: Mr. Chairman, we did receive a letter from the respondent yesterday. She submitted it to the investigator. Would you like for me to present the letter? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Sure. MR. BLANCO: Would you like to make a motion to accept that as evidence or... CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Get a motion to accept this as evidence? MR. DOINO: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MS. CURLEY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. June 28, 2018 Page 98 MR. ORTEGA: Aye. MR. WHITE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. If I can make the writing out -- if you make it bigger, I'll see it. I'm requesting a 180-day to complete some inspection for four -- I can't make out that handwriting. MS. CURLEY: Who is the letter signed by? MR. LOPEZ-SILVERO: Ms. Jessula Francois. MR. LETOURNEAU: The woman that has been here before. I don't know if you guys remember her, but, yeah. MS. CURLEY: Yeah, I know who she is, but this is her son who owns it, the Juliene Francisco, LLC. Is she signing his name? MR. LETOURNEAU: Well, I don't know. Maybe he did. MR. LOPEZ-SILVERO: His name's not on that letter, ma'am. She's acting on his behalf. MS. CURLEY: She's not. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, we have a case that's -- no. No permits; is that correct? MR. LETOURNEAU: No, there is a permit. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And? MR. LETOURNEAU: It is in inspect status; however, I spoke with Supervisor Perez recently about this piece of property, and we feel that there's no way that the Building Department's going to pass all the inspections once they get inside the structure, because it's obviously that there's been other shenanigans going on there of blocking off individual units, egress/ingress, all sorts of other stuff going on. There's definite evidence of, what would you say, 20 people living in that thing, easily, in a single-family unit. MS. HALDEMAN: Yes. I think there are about 20 separate June 28, 2018 Page 99 rooms in there. MR. LETOURNEAU: And the county strongly recommends that you guys impose fines on this. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. CURLEY: I just have one question. Is that -- is this building being occupied now, to your knowledge? MS. HALDEMAN: I think it is. I think -- we drove by yesterday, and it was -- it was still occupied. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Didn't we, when we heard this over the years now -- it's two years old -- didn't we request that the Sheriff visit this and make sure everybody's out of it? I thought that -- MR. LETOURNEAU: I can't recall, to be honest with you. MR. LOPEZ-SILVERO: The respondent was trying to have -- or from what she stated back then, to have the folks occupying the building evicted but, to our knowledge, there's no order of eviction. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Right. Okay. MR. LOPEZ-SILVERO: And I can attest that there are people occupying the building today. MR. ORTEGA: Have you been inside? MR. LOPEZ-SILVERO: I have. MR. ORTEGA: Is there a life-safety issue? Because if we're blocking egress, it obviously is a life-safety issue. MR. LOPEZ-SILVERO: Yes. For that amount of people in that building, yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. All we can do at this stage is impose the fine. I guess Code could take it to the Sheriff's Office since it is a safety -- MR. LETOURNEAU: We can talk it over with our County Attorney and see what options we have at this point. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do we want to make a motion? June 28, 2018 Page 100 MS. CURLEY: I'll make a motion to impose the county's fine of $104,059.35. MR. DOINO: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And we have a second. Any discussion on the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hearing none, all those in favor? MS. CURLEY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. ORTEGA: Aye. MR. WHITE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. MS. HALDEMAN: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you. MS. CURLEY: So they can foreclose on this. Right, Jeff? Could they -- MR. LETOURNEAU: Pardon? I can't hear you. MS. CURLEY: Could they send this to foreclosure for the lien, for the -- MR. LETOURNEAU: That's an option. We're going to see what we have and see what the County Attorneys recommend, and we'll go from there. I'm not sure if this is homesteaded. I doubt it's homesteaded or not so, yeah, I mean, that's always an option, yeah. MS. CURLEY: It's an LLC, so it's not. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Which brings us to the next case. I assume that you're going to hang in there with us for one more case. MS. HALDEMAN: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Which is the next case, Danny? June 28, 2018 Page 101 MR. BLANCO: Ma'am, that's all for today. MS. HALDEMAN: Okay. MR. BLANCO: All right. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The other one was pulled? MR. BLANCO: Correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. HALDEMAN: I'll be back. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We look forward to seeing you. MR. BLANCO: Next item on the agenda, Roman Numeral V, public hearings, motions, Letter C, hearings, Item 5C6, Case No. CESD20170017526, Michael Shane and Carole Shane. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. BLANCO: Mr. Chairman, before we begin, we had a change in policy. We would like to put the notice on the record, if you don't mind. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The notice of what? MR. BLANCO: Of mailing the notice of hearing. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do we need a motion for that? MR. BLANCO: No, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Then we won't give you one. MR. BLANCO: For the record, Danny Blanco, Code Enforcement. Notice of hearing was mailed on June 14th, 2018. Property and courthouse were both posted on June 15th, 2018. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. The respondent -- let the record show the respondent is not present. And, Michele, have you had any contact with them? MS. McGONAGLE: I have not. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. McGONAGLE: Good morning. For the record, Investigator June 28, 2018 Page 102 Michele McGonagle, Collier County Code Enforcement. This is in reference to Case No. CESD20170017526 dealing with a violation of Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a), 10.02.06(B)(1)(e), and 10.02.06(B)(1)(e)(i); alterations/additions commenced prior to obtaining Collier County building permits. Violation location: 110 Oceans Boulevard, Naples, Florida, 34104; Folio 82680002103. Service was given on November 14th, 2017. I would now like to present case evidence in the following exhibits: Four pictures taken by Investigator Davidson on November 8th, 2017; two pictures taken by me June 2nd, 2018, and the property sketch from the Property Appraiser's website. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Can we get a motion to accept the exhibits? MR. WHITE: Motion to accept those into the record. MR. DOINO: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And a second. All those in favor? MS. CURLEY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. ORTEGA: Aye. MR. WHITE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. MS. McGONAGLE: It might be easier if we show the property sketch first so that you have a little bit of an idea what you're looking at. On November 8th, 2017, Investigator Davidson met on site with property owner, Mr. Shake, who stated that the lanai was previously June 28, 2018 Page 103 enclosed; however, due to the hurricane, it came down. He and his son rebuilt this part of the mobile home. Can you put that back up. I'm going to point out the area that has been enclosed. All of this. Okay, Danny. MR. ORTEGA: Was that incorporated into the mobile home? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Why don't you put it back up, Danny. So that section was the lanai area, if you will. MS. McGONAGLE: Yeah. It's an aluminum screen porch, that 400-square-foot part, and then the aluminum open porch along the rear of the property, or along the rear of the mobile home. I'm sorry. It was all part of that, yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. ORTEGA: The other area, the top area, that was now enclosed, you said? MS. McGONAGLE: That's what the -- it stands for aluminum open porch. MR. ORTEGA: No. But I thought you said it was enclosed. MS. McGONAGLE: Yes, that has been enclosed now. MR. ORTEGA: Okay. So having said that, has that become part of the mobile home? MS. McGONAGLE: You'll see from the pictures. Okay, Danny. That is the rear of the mobile home or, I'm sorry, the left side of the mobile home. Looking toward -- so you're looking from the front toward the back of it. That is the rear of the mobile home, what was the open porch. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Was that permitted? MS. McGONAGLE: They have a permit that has since expired. It wasn't -- I'll go on to the rest of that. June 28, 2018 Page 104 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. McGONAGLE: On November 14th, 2017, a notice of violation was served to the property owner, Mrs. Shake. On November 20th, 2017, a permit was issued for damage from Hurricane Irma replacing two walls and roof to the lanai. That's another picture of the rear of the mobile home. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So the original violation was an addition? MS. McGONAGLE: Alteration/additions commenced prior to obtaining Collier County building permits. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. No permit. Gotcha. MS. McGONAGLE: Right. On November 20th is when they got -- they applied for the permit, and it was issued on the 20th. This is a picture that I just took yesterday. You can see beyond the little pillars there, that whole left side used to be screen porch, and it is now all enclosed. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: This is behind the garage area? MS. McGONAGLE: Correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. That was -- was that part of that permit? MS. McGONAGLE: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: To enclose it? MS. McGONAGLE: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And did they get a CO on that? MS. McGONAGLE: No. That's why we're here. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. McGONAGLE: On November 20th, the permit was issued. On May 2nd, 2018, I attempted to contact the property owner, but no one was home, and his phone number was no longer in service. I wanted to notify him that his permit was about to expire. The permit June 28, 2018 Page 105 expired on May 19th, 2018, and the case was prepared for a hearing on June 12th, 2018. I've not had any contact from the property owners, and the violation remains as of today. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I'm sure there's some sort of an HOA there. Is that where the initial complaint came from? MS. McGONAGLE: It actually came from Contractor Licensing. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Ah, okay. MS. CURLEY: So you said that the -- they put in a permit to repair hurricane damage, and -- but I guess -- and they got the permit that day because of, obviously, the state of affairs then. But we don't know if this was screened then or had been -- MS. McGONAGLE: No. He had already admitted that it was enclosed. So when he went to the Permitting Department, he's getting it permitted the way that it is now. MS. CURLEY: Even though it was unpermitted before the storm? MS. McGONAGLE: Yes. MS. CURLEY: Probably why it didn't last through the storm. Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any other pictures? MS. McGONAGLE: No, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, we need to find if they are in violation or not. Does a violation exist? MS. CURLEY: I make a motion a violation exists. MR. DOINO: Second. MR. WHITE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MS. CURLEY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. June 28, 2018 Page 106 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. ORTEGA: Aye. MR. WHITE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. And do you have a suggestion for us? MS. McGONAGLE: Yes, sir. That the Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of $59.70 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by: Number 1, obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition permit, inspections, and certificate of completion/occupancy for the unpermitted alterations/additions within blank days of this hearing, or a fine of blank dollars per day will be imposed until the violation is abated; Number 2, the respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any methodology to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriff's Office to enforce the provisions of this order. All costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: My -- this is Herminio's rule. If they cause the problem, they can't get an affidavit. MR. ORTEGA: That's correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's correct? And it appears that they did cause this. MR. ORTEGA: They would have to do what they call inspections in lieu of by an engineer or architect. June 28, 2018 Page 107 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So this is not just a walk in the park that you go to an architect and revamp it. MR. LETOURNEAU: Well, I'd like to remind you, there is a permit issued; it's just expired. So that part of it's done right there. MR. ORTEGA: That first line under No. 1 which might need to be altered, obtaining all required Collier County building permits. Well, there is a building permit. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, if it's expired, there is none. MS. CURLEY: Well -- so you can apply for a permit. So maybe it expired because -- does it show that they failed the final inspections? Because if this is -- MR. LETOURNEAU: No. Hold on. I think they -- well, let me look. I'll find out. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You can pull a permit, then you don't do anything, there are no inspections. It just -- MR. ORTEGA: One hundred eighty days. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Right. MR. LETOURNEAU: Yeah. He -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, November -- MR. LETOURNEAU: It looks like there wasn't any inspections. They just got the permit issued back in November, and they didn't get any inspections, and because they didn't get anything done in six months, it expired at that point. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So it's over 180 days. There is no permit. MR. LETOURNEAU: Well, they could -- what I'm trying to say is it would be easier to get it reinstated rather than going through the whole ball of wax again, yeah. MR. ORTEGA: They could extend it, yeah. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah, okay. Well -- so this is a fill in the blanks. Anybody like to try it, or should I? June 28, 2018 Page 108 MS. CURLEY: You do one today. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I'll do one today. Okay. 59.70 to be paid within 30 days. Before I go to the next step, you have not been in contact with them? MS. McGONAGLE: No, sir. They live in Canada, and they're snowbirds, so I've not been able to get in contact with them. They're not at the home. And they must put their cell phone on temporary because there's no service to the number that I have. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. But this was mailed to Canada, I am assuming. MS. McGONAGLE: Whatever the address of record -- the legal address of record would be for that property. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Right. Do you know the address of record, Danny? MR. CURLEY: The Canadian address is on this -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. BLANCO: We mailed the notice of hearing to Canada, correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: But that was done recently. MR. BLANCO: We mailed it out on June 14th, 2018. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Right. So they may have just gotten it a couple of weeks ago or whatever. I'll give them 90 days or a fine of $200 a day. MR. DOINO: I second it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. Any discussion on the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The reason I did 90 days is maybe we can try again to contact them in Canada. It's in their best interest to reply; hence the 90 days. Okay. All those in favor? June 28, 2018 MS. CURLEY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. ORTEGA: Aye. MR. WHITE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. MS. McGONAGLE: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thanks, Michele. MR. BLANCO: I believe that's all for today, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That sounds good to me. We are adjourned. ***** There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 12:13 p.m. gIIir ORC NT BOARD .N:eP r k A N, CHAIRMAN These minutes approved by th- I oard on (I ' a 6, 20 ( {� , presented c/ asor as corrected . TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC., BY TERRI LEWIS, NOTARY PUBLIC/COURT REPORTER. Page 109