Loading...
CLB Minutes 09/21/2005 R September 21, 2005 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY CONTRACTOR LICENSING BOARD NAPLES, FLORIDA, September 21, 2005 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Contractor Licensing 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: Les Dickson William Lewis David Beswick Sydney Blum Rich Joslin Lee Horn Mike Boyd ALSO PRESENT: Patrick Neale, Attorney for the Board Michael Ossorio, Licensing Compliance Officer Page 1 AGENDA COLLIER COUNTY CONTRACTORS' LICENSING BOARD DATE: September 21,2005 TIME: 9:00 A.M. W. HARMON TURNER BUILDING (ADMINISTRATION BUILDING) COURTHOUSE COMPLEX 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 THAT TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. I. ROLL CALL II. ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS: III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: DATE: August 17, 2005 V. DISCUSSION: VI. NEW BUSINESS: Thomas E. Snyder- Request to qualify a 2nd entity. VII. OLD BUSINESS: VIII PUBLIC HEARINGS: Case # 2005-01 Collier County vs James Johnston D/B/A The Aluminum Craftsman, LLC IX. REPORTS: X. NEXT MEETING DATE: Wednesday, October 19, 2005 September 21, 2005 CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I'd like to call to order the meeting of the Collier County Contractor Licensing meeting, September 21, 2005. 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 insure that a verbatim record is being taken, which it is. Which record includes that testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is based. I'd like to start with roll call to my right, please. COMMISSIONER BESWICK: David Beswick. COMMISSIONER BLUM: Syd Blum. COMMISSIONER KELLER: Ann Keller. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Les Dickson. COMMISSIONER JOSLIN: Richard Joslin. COMMISSIONER HORN: Lee Horn. COMMISSIONER BOYD: Mike Boyd. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Also looking over the agenda, Mr. Ossorio, you have additions? MR. OSSORIO: Yes. For the record, my name is Mike Ossorio, Collier County Contracting Licensing Office. We do have an addition on new business. it's Mr. Brian Morse. He wishes to reinstate his license, and he'll state the facts when he gets called. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: That's it? MR. OSSORIO: That's it. Everything else is -- CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Wonderful. I need a motion to approve the agenda as amended. COMMISSIONER BESWICK: So moved, Beswick. COMMISSIONER BLUM: Second, Blum. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: All those in favor? CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Aye. COMMISSIONER LEWIS: Aye. COMMISSIONER BESWICK: Aye. COMMISSIONER BLUM: Aye. Page 2 September 21, 2005 COMMISSIONER KELLER: Aye. COMMISSIONER JOSLIN: Aye. COMMISSIONER HORN: Aye. COMMISSIONER BOYD: Aye. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: So moved. The minutes, if you've had a chance to read those, which I did, I need a motion to approve those. COMMISSIONER JOSLIN: So moved, Joslin. COMMISSIONER BLUM: Second, Blum. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: All those in favor? CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Aye. COMMISSIONER LEWIS: Aye. COMMISSIONER BESWICK: Aye. COMMISSIONER BLUM: Aye. COMMISSIONER KELLER: Aye. COMMISSIONER JOSLIN: Aye. COMMISSIONER HORN: Aye. COMMISSIONER BOYD: Aye. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: So approved. No discussion. New business. Mr. Thomas Snyder, are you present? He is not. But I know that Brian Morris is here. If you would come up to this podium, I need to have you sworn in. Please state your name and then we'll go from there. State your name. MR. MORSE: Yes. Brian Morse. BRIAN MORSE, having been first duly sworn, upon his oath, testified as follows: COMMISSIONER KELLER: Mike, do you have another packet? CHAIRMAN DICKSON: We can share one. COMMISSIONER KELLER: Okay. Great. Thank you. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. Mr. Morse, tell us what you're here for and why you're wanting to reinstate a license. Page 3 September 21, 2005 MR. MORSE: I had a tile license that lapsed several years ago. Actually, I even had my company going and wasn't aware because I had a lot of people in my office at the time taking care of such things and I wasn't even aware that it lapsed. And by the time I go to reinstate it, it had been too long and they said I needed to come before the board. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. Go back and be a little more specific. When did you realize that it had lapsed and was the company still operating? MR. MORSE: No, the company wasn't operative. I had to file bankruptcy in 2003. I was working for -- I primarily was working for Keystone Custom Homes and they were giving me all their work at the time and I was working in Rookery Point and I had vested a lot in working there. It was about 95 percent of my work. And it was Christmas of that year, it was Christmas week I went in to get my check because they paid every week, and they said this is your last check. We sold the company. So I lost all the work I had and I kind of had so much overhead that I crumbled from there. And then I didn't mess with tile for a while. I got out of it because it was -- didn't want to do it, but now I just tried to get back into it and get my license activated so I can work n my own. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. So you took a bankruptcy Chapter 7, I assume? MR. MORSE: Uh-huh. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Was that company or personal? MR. MORSE: Company. Both. Both. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. Now, you're wanting to reinstate the license? COMMISSIONER BLUM: So when did it actually lapse? How long ago? MR. MORSE: I think like 2000 I think it was. COMMISSIONER BLUM: Okay. Going on six years you Page 4 September 21, 2005 haven't had an active license? MR. MORSE: Correct. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. So as we're looking at this credit report, which we know some of the things that are on it, the bankruptcy was in January 8th of '04; is that correct? MR. MORSE: Yes. COMMISSIONER KELLER: What was the date you stopped working for the other company? You said it was-- MR. MORSE: Which one? COMMISSIONER KELLER: What year was that? MR. MORSE: Oh, Keystone? COMMISSIONER KELLER: Yeah. MR. MORSE: The week of Christmas '03. COMMISSIONER KELLER: Okay. But if you're licensed lapsed -- MR. MORSE: My licensed actually was already -- my license was already - hadn't been -- COMMISSIONER KELLER: So you were working without a license? MR. MORSE: I was and I didn't even know it. Because I just hadn't renewed it. It wasn't a matter of -- I never lost it, I just never renewed it and I didn't know it. Because I had people, like I said, in my office that were taking care of it at the time and I didn't know they hadn't done it. COMMISSIONER KELLER: Oh, okay. MR. MORSE: I actually got approved in Lee County for my license because I was working in Lee County -- because it was family that was working for me at the time and they never actually picked it up. I had an approved Lee County license that just never got picked up. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Mr. Ossorio, you've got that information, don't you? Were your offices in Collier? Page 5 September 21, 2005 MR. MORSE: I was in Collier then it was in Bonita for awhile too. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. Mr. Ossorio, you want to add anything? MR. OSSORIO: No. I think I've met his brother before and he's a good contractor and I don't think Brian Morse should be denied, as long as his credit is good, I don't think this office has any problems. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Well, that was the only-- MR. OSSORIO: The only issue was the credit report. MR. NEALE: There was one thing on the credit report that, actually Maggie at the county building was asking me to get some information on it. It was cleared up and I had the letters of -- it shouldn't be on the report, and I have some paperwork that clarified all that. I'd just like to bring to the board's attention the ordinance that would pertain to this and it's section 22.191, renewals of certificate of competency. And it's any individual who fails to renew his or her certificate of competency prior to December 31 of the year following its expiration shall automatically have a certificate of competency that is null and void. To acquire a valid certificate from the county, the individual must pay the then applicable full application fee, according with the schedule of fees, and must submit an entire new application. If as of the date of the receipt by the county of the new application, three years have passed since the date of his or her most recent examination that the individual passed to acquire the former certificate, that individual must pass all then applicable testing requirements. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Say that again? MR. NEALE: I'll put it in English. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Randy. MR. NEALE: Basically what -- Randy. I'm Randy today. Basically what it says is, if the certificate had lapsed for more than a year and it's been more than three years since the applicant took the Page 6 September 21, 2005 last test, he has to retake the test and submit a full application. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: And we don't have those dates. MR. OSSORIO: No, we don't. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: So, not given those dates, we can't hear this case, because I need to know the date that the license expired, not about or from testimony, I need from Maggie to tell us when it expired, and if it's been more than one year, Mr. Neale? MR. NEALE: More than one year since the license lapsed which, by his own testimony he says it's been. And it's been more than three years since he took the examination, he's got to submit a new application and take the test over again. MR. OSSORIO: I always assume it was three years as to when it was expired, not three years over the last exam. MR. NEALE: The way the ordinance reads is, if as of the date of the receipt by the county of the new application three years have passed since the date of the examination, the individual must take a new exam. So, if he submits the new -- if he submitted this new application, whatever date it was last week, that's the date that counts three years back. COMMISSIONER JOSLIN: There's no way we can contact Maggie and maybe find this out so we can settle this? MR. OSSORIO: We can find out. I'll have Alan call the office. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: When did you take the test? It's been more than three years? MR. MORSE: Oh, definitely. Like eight or ten years ago I took it. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: And your license expired more than a year ago? MR. MORSE: Yes. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: So you understand the statute? MR. MORSE: Yeah. So I have to retake the test? CHAIRMAN DICKSON: You have to take the test. Page 7 September 21, 2005 MR. MORSE: Now, am I able to retake the test and go through that? Is there anything stopping me from doing that? CHAIRMAN DICKSON: There is nothing stopping you. The thing that is going to come up is after you -- you basically have submitted a packet. The only thing that's probably going to come back before this board is the credit report. But we have to look at that credit report after January 8th '04. Is that correct, Mr. Neal? MR. NEALE: Uh-uh. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Because that was the date of the bankruptcy. MR. NEALE: Uh-huh. Exactly. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: From what I'm seeing -- and board please go with me on this -- I'm not seeing anything negative after January 8, '04. Do you all agree? (All affirm.) CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Go ahead. MR. NEALE: It might come back in front of the Board at staffs discretion. But it's clear that he has to retake it. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Are you following all that we're saYIng. MR. OSSORIO: I understand. Yup. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: We don't see anything negative after the bankruptcy. I cannot consider the bankruptcy. So basically you're going to need to take the test. MR. MORSE: Okay. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: And this doesn't require a motion or anything, does it Mr. Neale? MR. NEALE: No. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. COMMISSIONER KELLER: And pay attention to your credit because we're going to look at that when you come back. MR. MORSE: Okay. So I go take the test again and I don't Page 8 September 21, 2005 have to come back before the board to get my license. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: At the discretion of the Board. The discretion of the county. If county looks at it, which they're sitting here -- after the date of the bankruptcy, and it's clean, then it's up to them whether it comes back before us. MR. MORSE: All right. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: And there's two testing authorities that we now use. So you could take this test real quick. MR. MORSE: What do you mean, two authorities? CHAIRMAN DICKSON: There are two different testing companies that we use. MR. MORSE: Okay. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: So it's not just one anymore, there are two of them. You have a choice. MR. MORSE: Oh, okay. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: So you should be able to find that real quick. MR. MORSE: Oh, okay. Cool. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Just bone up and go do it. MR. MORSE: All right. I will. MR. OSSORIO: Brian, just to let you know, that it was September of '03. Two years that it lapsed. MR. MORSE: Yup, two years. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: It's been two. Okay. MR. MORSE: It's been too long. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Yeah, we can't do anything, we cannot go against a county ordinance. MR. MORSE: No, that's fine. Thanks. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Thank you. Thomas Snyder, is that you that came in? MR. SNYDER: Yes, sir. Page 9 ...-- September 21,2005 CHAIRMAN DICKSON: If you come up to the podium, please. I need for you to state your name and then the court reporter will swear you In. MR. SNYDER: Thomas E. Snyder, III. THOMAS SNYDER, having been first duly sworn, upon his oath, testified as follows: CHAIRMAN DICKSON: If you would tell us why you're here and what you're doing. MR. SNYDER: I'm here to qualify as a second entity. We've sold the division of my company to a fabricating company across the street. And I'm here to get them a license to do business until they can obtain their own. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. So you sold your company? MR. SNYDER: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Are you involved in it anymore? MR. SNYDER: Yes. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Just for a period of time and then you're out? MR. SNYDER: For a year, sir. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. Nice going. And you want to do this again? MR. SNYDER: Well I have two phases of my business. One is flooring, tile, marble, granite, carpet, that kind of thing. The other division was fabrication, granite countertops. I've sold the countertop division to a company across the street and they need a license until they can obtain their own. So I'm still involved in the granite division with them, running it and doing the sales for them and overseeing it, and then I run my flooring company across the street. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I got you. I am familiar with your company. MR. SNYDER: Thank you. Maggie Wright asked me to bring Page 10 September 21,2005 15 copies of the credit report. The day we filed the credit report, there was not enough time to get it here. I guess she called down to the board and asked me to bring 15 copies of the principals and the corporation's credit reports, which I do have with me. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. Do we need to have those entered, Mr. Neal? MR. NEALE: Yes. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Do we need to mark them? It's not a case. MR. NEALE: No. COMMISSIONER JOSLIN: Has he been sworn in? CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Yes. I heard her that time. I need a motion to approve these credit reports for being handed out. COMMISSIONER BLUM: So moved. MR. NEALE: Actually, just a motion to accept them into evidence. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Accept them into evidence. I got -- I have Mr. Blum. COMMISSIONER BLUM: Yes, to accept, yes. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: All those in favor? CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Aye. COMMISSIONER LEWIS: Aye. COMMISSIONER BESWICK: Aye. COMMISSIONER BLUM: Aye. COMMISSIONER KELLER: Aye. COMMISSIONER JOSLIN: Aye. COMMISSIONER HORN: Aye. COMMISSIONER BOYD: Aye. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Done. Can I ask you a question? MR. SNYDER: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Stop me, Mr. Neal, if I'm out of line. Why did you go to bankruptcy court for $25,000? Page 11 September 21, 2005 MR. SNYDER: That was back in '94. I was just a tile installer at the time. What I was doing was paying my employees as subcontractors and I came down to it, the escalated fees and penalties back then had escalated to about $120,000. By advice of counsel, they suggested to file bankruptcy to get out of the payroll taxes. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Because IRS came calling, right? MR. SNYDER: Bingo. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: That was in '94? MR. SNYDER: Yes, and discharged in '96. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: How many employees do you have? MR. SNYDER: Between 50 and 70. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Who do you carry your worker's comp with? MR. SNYDER: Brown and Brown, I believe. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Everyone is listed, right? MR. SNYDER: Absolutely. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: It just takes once. You look good after that. Anybody else pipe in any time you want. MR. NEALE: In a case like this where he's been in business for that period of time, you should primarily also look at the corporate report. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: You got some people that haven't paid you, didn't you? MR. SNYDER: Yes, sir. Lots of them. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Just making sure I'm not doing business with any of them. That's why I'm reading them. High credit line. I don't see anything past due. Okay. Now, West Coast, that's the new one, right? MR. SNYDER: Yes, sir. It's the old West Coast Marble Fabricating. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. Any complaints with the county? Page 12 September 21, 2005 MR. OSSORIO: None. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. Questions of the board? Wow, you guys are quiet today. COMMISSIONER KELLER: Well, we have all this stuff we didn't get to do our homework on and we have to read it now. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. COMMISSIONER KELLER: I'm kind of -- I kind of like to ask some questions about these, the litigation because I really don't understand. I'm looking at the report and I have no idea of the magnitude of these instances. So, particularly the one that is still pending. MR. SNYDER: Royal Marble? COMMISSIONER KELLER: This is with Innovative Flooring, which is your current company. MR. SNYDER: Yes, ma'am. COMMISSIONER KELLER: Which you're already qualified. MR. SNYDER: Yes. COMMISSIONER KELLER: Okay. And the filing date is 3/11/05 with the plaintiff, Century 21, Sunbelt Realty. MR. SNYDER: They're a realty company. It's a dispute over a sale of a building that I had. They were employed to sell a building that we owned. The year was up to sell the building. They hadn't sold the building. They brought a renter in to see if they could rent it. I ended up selling the building to that company and he's disputing whether or not he gets a commission for the sale of the building, which is the contract that expired. COMMISSIONER KELLER: Okay. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: You've got a couple other lien foreclosures, right? MR. SNYDER: Lien foreclosures? CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Uh-huh. MR. SNYDER: Filed by my company? Page 13 September 21, 2005 CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Uh-uh. MR. SNYDER: Oh, yeah. COMMISSIONER JOSLIN: These are people that didn't pay you? MR. SNYDER: They hire their contractors, they get in a fight, they fire the contractor and nobody wants to pay the bills, you know, or they step up to the bar and order their drinks, and when it comes time to pay they've got a song and a dance. So, being in business here as well as Tennessee for 20 years, I just got to the point where I'm going to take them to court. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: It's getting worse. I never filed one in 30 years of business. MR. SNYDER: In the last two years I've had to file them. In 18 years before that, never had to. CHAIRMAN DICKSON I've done the same thing. This year has been the first year. MR. SNYDER: And back to that bankruptcy thing. I mean, there's current companies that are employing tile installers and just 1099-ing them. Those are employees, unless they have their license, workman's comp and liability. It's done all over this town; they just 1099 their men, or put them on a payroll service for minimum wage. And there is actually a company that's paying them $40,000 and listing it on their 1099's as tips for tile setters. It's just getting harder and harder to do business, and the ones that do the business don't want to pay their bills. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: He's found some of them. MR. SNYDER: I can lead you to them. Guys like us that have to pay all the taxes, workman's comp liability, there's a cost of doing business and overhead. It runs the prices up and it's hard to find clients that can afford those kinds of prices. COMMISSIONER JOSLIN: Seems likes this is running rampant this way in a lot of places. Page 14 September 21,2005 CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Well, they just caught a guy in Miami that his worker's comp fraud exceeded $50 million. MR. OSSORIO: There is a full-time worker's comp agent in Naples now. Gas was so high that they had to buy her a vehicle because she didn't want to come down because she lives in Cape Coral. So, she's down here and she's working. I've talked to her daily. But you're absolutely right; you have to really get into the tile business to really understand how it actually works. They might be employees and only get $5 an hour, but then they get a huge bonus at the end, including tips. Is that legal? I don't know. It's not for me to decide. We just care about the insurance and make sure that they're actually bona fide employees. If you're getting paid minimum wage for laying tile, there's nothing we can do. Tips are tips. It's something for the fraud people to look into. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Then the IRS gets involved. MR.OSSORIO: It's going to catch up to them. It just takes a couple years. MR. SNYDER: They're also renting licenses right and left. People that are qualifying other companies that never had anything to do with the company. I've got past employees that have left to go start their own companies and they're renting licenses. The qualifier has nothing to do with the business, and isn't even gainfully employed in that business and they're renting their licenses for $1,000 a month. You know, it's that kind of stuff that's going to hurt this community. I mean, I sat on the Board of American Specialty Contractors for three years. I'm familiar with the whole case scenario of this. MR.OSSORIO: When you say renting, you know, that's a bigger issue, because the fact is, state law says, you know, you're under supervision, that's a phone call. So, you know, it's probably one of the hardest things to prove is renting or fraud. MR. SNYDER: I understand. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Now because I worked for the state Page 15 September 21,2005 to catch two guys after 2004 hurricanes who had newspaper ads for $300,000, they qualify you. MR.OSSORIO: I mean, obviously, if it's written down on paper, sure, I mean, that's pretty simple. Advertising for it, you're just looking for it, but you're not seeing that in the paper for tile and marble. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Yeah. Okay. Let's get back. Guys; anymore questions? What's the pleasure of the board? COMMISSIONER JOSLIN: If someone else has any questions, I'll make a motion that we approve this. COMMISSIONER BESWICK: Second, Beswick. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: A motion and a second. Any discussion? All for the vote, all those in favor. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Aye. COMMISSIONER LEWIS: Aye. COMMISSIONER BESWICK: Aye. COMMISSIONER BLUM: Aye. COMMISSIONER KELLER: Aye. COMMISSIONER JOSLIN: Aye. COMMISSIONER HORN: Aye. COMMISSIONER BOYD: Aye. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN DICKSON: You got it. MR. SNYDER: Thank you. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Keep in mind, all of your stuff is here so don't go to Maggie today. She'll have everything tomorrow and she'll have the order of the board. MR. SNYDER: So then I take that order of the board and how __ is it registered with the county you're then qualified. Is there a certificate or something at that point? CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Yeah. In other words, we approved it Page 16 __,,_ . ._~..w,,^_...~_~..,_._.,.~..,,._.~--_.~----'-_.~-' "m"_""'__' September 21, 2005 so then you go through the registration process. MR. SNYDER: Back to Maggie after tomorrow. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: She'll guide you after today. MR. SNYDER: Got you. Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: You're welcome. Okay. That ends new business. Old business; none. Public hearings, here we go. And I don't see Mr. Johnston, so we're going to hear this case without Mr. Johnston being present. I just need to verify that proper service has been given and you have record that he received service. MR. OSSORIO: For the record, Mike Ossorio, Collier County Contractor Licensing again. I'd like to go ahead and submit Composite Exhibit A for evidence before we discuss it. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. Need a motion to -- oh, you're talking about the packet? MR.OSSORIO:: Yes, Exhibit A. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. I need a motion to accept as evidence the packet that you have. We'll call it Exhibit A. This is Collier County case number -- is that right? 2005-01? Collier County versus Jan Johnson, D/B/A The Aluminum Craftsman, which is an LLC. We need a motion to accept this into the case. COMMISSIONER JOSLIN: So moved, Joslin. COMMISSIONER BLUM: Blum, second. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: All those in favor? CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Aye. COMMISSIONER LEWIS: Aye. COMMISSIONER BESWICK: Aye. COMMISSIONER BLUM: Aye. COMMISSIONER KELLER: Aye. COMMISSIONER JOSLIN: Aye. COMMISSIONER HORN: Aye. COMMISSIONER BOYD: Aye. Page 1 7 September 21,2005 CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Done. Mr. Ossorio. MR.OSSORIO: Just to give you an overview of the service, Mr. Johnston came in the office and we served him on July 25, 2005, and then we served him again on August 25th by certified mail, which was signed August 27th, and then we delivered the packet two weeks later for the hearing, which he signed for and his wife signed for. Actually, his wife signed for at his place of known residence. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I do see that on E4. Then you must have another one that we don't have in the packet. Mr. Neal, any comments or guidelines? MR. NEALE: You know, he has been served. He's not appeared now, obviously, he's not -- he was afforded an opportunity to defend himself. He didn't avail himself of that opportunity so I would say the board can proceed. COMMISSIONER BLUM: I agree. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. I'll give it to the county at this point. MR.OSSORIO: Well, I just want to go ahead and open up with an opening statement. It's going to be probably pretty simple. I probably don't need Mr. Zachary here telling me that. Mr. Johnston worked without a building permit on a particular day. On the exhibits you can see at E7, he did the work. You can see in E5 the invoice. And there is a formal complaint that was lodged against Mr. Johnston, and as of today, there is no building permit. Pretty straightforward. And we'll probably call our first witness, will probably be Jeff Kucko, chief building inspector. COMMISSIONER KELLER: I just have one question. You said that his wife signed for when you served him. MR.OSSORIO: Yes. COMMISSIONER KELLER: Doesn't he have to sign it? MR. OSSORIO: He wasn't there, so, I mean, I talked to his wife. She said she would give it to him. He stepped out and -- thee Page 18 September 21, 2005 packet doesn't have to be signed for. We just have to drop that off actually. COMMISSIONER KELLER: Okay. I just wanted to make sure that wasn't going to come back to us. MR.OSSORIO: He's been served -- we served him personally. I've talked to him personally. I've sent him a certified letter signed and returned. And this was a courtesy bringing the packet to him a month in advance. Let him know that this is what we need from you and advise him to show up on this date and she said she would give to it him. It's all we can do. COMMISSIONER BLUM: What's your sense, Mr. Ossorio? Why is this guy just saying the heck with it? I mean, that's the appearance anyway. MR.OSSORIO: Is the appearance. It's a pretty simple case. I didn't think it would be coming this far to the licensing board, but I believe this contractor is tired; he's been in business for many years. I don't think he's able to do it anymore. I think he did this job on a whim and he got caught. And he's been caught before. You can look at the exhibits through the history that it is actually getting worse in '03 and '04 and then finally something happened in '05 that he just -- just moving out of town and let the homeowner bear the burden. This case came from us from Code Enforcement. Code Enforcement was out there and issued a notice of violation of the homeowner. The homeowner put his hands up and said, hey, listen, I didn't do the work, and this contractor did. That's how we got involved. Mr. Ridall has been informed that if he doesn't show up, he's going to be responsible to get the necessary building permits and comply with the codes. COMMISSIONER BLUM: So if we find Mr. Johnston guilty of not filing the proper permits -- he is a licensed contractor, right? MR. OSSORIO: He is indeed. COMMISSIONER BLUM: So he now stands the potential of losing his license; is that correct? Page 19 September 21,2005 MR. OSSORIO: That's correct. COMMISSIONER BLUM: And then the burden falls on Mr. Ridall if he doesn't get, what, an owner builder permit? MR. OSSORIO: He can get an owner building permit, but problem with that is, the engineering, you know, it's not like going out and getting the footer inspection or something simple. This has to be engineered. It's a small, you know, small screen enclosure and it's over $1,000 so it requires a building permit. It requires engineering. And either Mr. Johnston doesn't have it, or he just doesn't have the will to do it anymore. He's very -- well, when I discussed with him back in June that if this didn't get solved within two months that we were going to go ahead and do everything we can to put you out of business basically. And he knew it. He said I'm tired. I'll do my best, but, obviously, the best is not good enough and here we are. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: You said his health is bad too? MR. OSSORIO: I think so. COMMISSIONER BLUM: And the homeowner, Mr. Ridall, he was short of getting engineering which will cost a lot more than 1,000 bucks, I'm sure. MR.OSSORIO: Well, it's going to be a domino effect, unfortunately. You might hear of another case of this kind. This case is in Walden Oaks. And when I was doing, or taking the photographs, as is depicted on the screen, that there are similar ones that look just like this. And it looks like maybe he did more than one. He might have done ten. We haven't got confirmation from either code enforcement or from, you know -- we derive our complaints from homeowners. We're waiting. There could be more. But right now I just hope that he can find another company that is small enough to be able to pull some engineering to get this thing done. And he's well aware of that. He understands what he needs to do, the homeowner. COMMISSIONER BLUM: So he very well may have to tear this thing down?v Page 20 September 21,2005 MR.OSSORIO: Very well possibly could, yes. But we have to follow procedure. COMMISSIONER BLUM: Sure. MR.OSSORIO: Ifhe makes a complaint, we have to come to a conclusion and do what we can as a county and county officials so that's what we're doing. COMMISSIONER BLUM: Is it encumbered on you if you suspect there's more in the same area to go look at them, or do you need somebody to complain to go after the other ones? MR. OSSORIO: I'm sure code enforcement is doing that. I'm not really a knocking-on-door kind of person. I'm sure code enforcement is working with them. There might be one contractor willing to go in. I'm not saying this contractor did this, but it looks very similar. Jeff maybe can tell you a little more about it. He was out there. I'm sure there's four or five in the area that look just similar. COMMISSIONER KELLER: There were no permits pulled for those? MR.OSSORIO: I have no idea. I have not checked. Walden Oaks, it's a huge complex. You really have to get into the complex and find the address, look at the address and then you got to find out who the owner is, then you have to search the data base. And that's how we derive, get our information from. I'm not saying they don't have any permits, but I got a feeling that that's what he's basing -- Mr. Johnston is basing his conclusion on that, you know what, you got me once, but I probably did ten in there so I'm going to get caught so I might as well give up on the first one. That's why we need to take action against this contractor and let him know. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I don't see how he did it for $1,000. MR. OSSORIO: Yup. And he didn't get paid the whole amount. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. Let's proceed. Let's hear it. Page 21 September 21, 2005 MR. OSSORIO: I guess the county would call Jeff Kucko, chief building inspector. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Mr. Kucko, if you'd state your name. MR. KUCKO: The correct pronunciation is Kucko and that's spelled Kucko. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. Randy, I need to have you sworn In. RANDY KUCKO, having been first duly sworn, upon his oath, testified as follows: CHAIRMAN DICKSON: You have -- give us the information that you know about this case. MR. KUCKO: Basically there has been an enclosure constructed as depicted in the pictures that Mike presented. In viewing it, I can't attest to as to how it's built without engineering being available. Based on what I've looked at, compared with other engineering that I've seen over the years, it would be missing some anchor clips, angle clips, brackets, stuff like that that would make it come in compliance with the current standards for an aluminum structure. There was no engineering available and no permit pulled, and it would have been required by the county for the dollar value I believe when a contract was over $1,000, and Collier County requires anything over $750, so it required a permit. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: When you say engineering, they usually just submit a pre-printed engineering form from the manufacturers or something like that, or off a computer, is that correct? MR. KUCKO: There is -- they can either provide site specific engineering, or there are several firms, I believe AI-I, or AL Aluminum is one, and Lawrence Bennett is another one who has comprised a manual that has engineering for basically every situation that you can encounter in erection of a screen enclosure. And most aluminum contractors will pay them a certain fee to be allowed the use Page 22 September 21, 2005 of that manual. When they submit for a permit, they include the applicable pages of that manual along with the application of the permit to say this is what we're going to build and these are the specifications for it. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: So it's not a major expense? MR. KUCKO: I could not attest to what you have to pay Mr. Bennett or AL Aluminum for the use of their manual. If it was individually engineered specific to a site, I imagine it would be more than a user fee would be. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. And if we don't get engineering on this, which it's possible, I guess the homeowner may be able to come up with it, although if we got tie down issues, I also don't see a tie down. Pictures wouldn't show it, but it's kind of like a screen enclosure. It requires a wire tie down too; does it not? MR. KUCKO: That's all part of the engineering. Comer stays, angle bracing, and that's all within specifications. This is a three-sided structure, so it would require some sort of bracing for lateral movement. They consider the sides and being attached to a rigid structure as not requiring braces, but the face of it would require some sort of bracing. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: And if he doesn't get engineering, the homeowner will have to tear it down at his expense and suffer that expense plus $500 that he paid as an initial payment, correct? MR. OS SO RIO: That's correct. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. And then find somebody else? MR.OSSORIO: That's correct. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Any other questions of the board? COMMISSIONER JOSLIN: This was a complete new enclosure, right? This wasn't enclosed before and they added on new screening? MR.OSSORIO: The slab was there, that was it. COMMISSIONER KELLER: I would like to hear testimony Page 23 September 21,2005 from the owner of the home as to what they were told about whether or not a permit was required. MR. KUCKO: That would not be -- it might be out of whack. COMMISSIONER KELLER: For penalty purposes, you know, that would be something that I would want to hear. I don't know how anybody else feels, but -- CHAIRMAN DICKSON: It's such a small case. COMMISSIONER KELLER: Well, it might be a bigger case if there's ten more of them. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: And I'm sure Mr. Ossorio, like you stated, is shocked that it even got here. MR. OSSORIO: I talked to -- just to backtrack a little bit to answer Ms. Keller's question. I did talk to Mr. Ridall, and unfortunately, he's a school teacher and he can't take off work. This is such -- like we said, it's a small job. The county is actually a complainant and Mr. Ridall's party to it. But I actually signed the affidavit saying the county is taking action, not the homeowner. So it's going to be what we decide, what we want to do to this contractor. COMMISSIONER BLUM: As far as I'm concerned, this is pretty clear cut and I think we need to just rule on it. Whatever comes after this, comes after this and we'll deal with it when it happens. MR.OSSORIO: I got a feeling that we'll take care of those others. If they come through the pipeline, we'll take care of it. If it requires a engineer to sign off on these sites, then that's what these homeowners are going to have to do. If we get one engineer to sign off on one, it's just a matter of getting a domino effect going down the line. But I haven't heard anything. I'm kind of leery that it could happen. COMMISSIONER BOYD: Is this a fabric top or a hard top? MR. OSSORIO: There is a fabric top on there. Like a sun Page 24 September 21, 2005 shade. MR. KUCKO: It's a fabric top and has rigid members that go across for support. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: This is a buy of a lifetime. COMMISSIONER KELLER: No kidding. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Of course I'm sure his competitors are not real happy with it either. MR. OSSORIO: Desperate people do desperate things when they need money. Maybe this might have been leftover material of what he had on his site for months, so this could be another reason why he knows it's not going to meet engineering. COMMISSIONER BOYD: This guy did the fabric top and everything? MR. OSSORIO: No. Another company did. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. COMMISSIONER KELLER: That's why. COMMISSIONER BOYD: And did they pull a permit? MR. OSSORIO: Permit is not required for that. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: It's under $1,000 anyway? MR.OSSORIO: Exactly right. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Comment from legal staff? Either one of you? MR. NEALE: The only thing I suggest is I'll do the -- read the board instructions that we normally do in a case. Everybody is clear on that and we can go from there. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: You can go ahead and have a seat if you want. You want to add anything? MR. ZACHARY: I don't have anything to add. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: All yours. MR. OSSORIO: Mr. Neale, can we just close real quick? MR. NEALE: Sure. MR.OSSORIO: The county, with the evidence presented on Page 25 September 21, 2005 Exhibit A, that we find that 6660 Hex Circle, that we believe that Mr. Johnston worked without a building permit, and we ask, request the board to take action against this license holder. We'll close with that. Penalties will be determined on the penalties phase. All right. MR. NEALE: Just as normal, I'll read these instructions for the board. The board shall ascertain in its deliberations that fundamental fairness and due process were afforded to the respondent. However, pursuant to Section 22-202G5 of the Collier County ordinance, the formal rules of evidence is set out and Florida statute shall not apply. The board shall consider solely evidence presented at the hearing in consideration of this matter. It shall exclude from its deliberations irrelevant, immaterial and cumulative testimony. Shall admit and consider all other evidence of a type commonly relied upon by a reasonably prudent person in the conduct of their affairs. This is whether or not the evidence so admitted would be admissible in a court of law or entity. Hearsay may be used to explain or supplement other evidence, however, hearsay by itself is not sufficient to support a finding in this or any other case, unless it would be admissible over objection in civil court. The standard of proof in this case wherein the respondent may lose his privileges to practice his profession, is that the evidence presented by the complainant must prove the complaint's case in a clear and convincing matter. This burden of proof on the complainant is a larger burden under the preponderance of the evidence standards set for regular civil cases. The standard established for sanctions, other than those affecting the license is that of a preponderance of evidence. The standard of evidence is to be weighed solely as to the charges set out in the complaint at ordinance 90-105, Section 4.1. 18 of the Collier County code of ordinances, those charges being, proceeding on a job without obtaining applicable permits or inspections from the City Building & Zoning Division, or the Building Review & Permitting Department. In order to support a finding that the respondent is in violation of the Page 26 September 21, 2005 ordinance, the Board must find facts to show that the violations were actually committed by the respondent. The facts must show to a clear and convincing standard the legal conclusion that the respondent was in violation of the relevant section of the ordinance. The charges as set out in the complaint are the only ones the board may decide upon, as they are the only ones to which the respondent has had the opportunity to prepare a defense. The damages must be directly related to those charges and may not be for matters not related. The decision made by this board shall be stated orally at this hearing and is effective upon being read by the board. The respondent, if found in violation, has certain appeal rights to this board, the courts, and the state's construction industry licensing board as set out in our ordinance in the Florida statute and rules. If the board is unable to issue a decision immediately following the hearing, because of questions of law or other matters of such a nature, that a decision may not be made at this hearing, the board may withhold its decision until a subsequent meeting. The board shall vote based upon the evidence presented on all areas, and if it finds the respondent in violation of the ordinance, adopt the administrative complaint. The board shall also make findings of fact and conclusions of law in support of the charges set out in the complaint. If the respondent is found in violation of the ordinance, the board shall consider an order of sanctions under parameters as set out in the ordinance. And once the board makes their decision, I'll review the sanction procedure. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. So we need to do two phases here. Just as a reminder, the first phase we'll do a discussion and then a vote. If he is in violation of the count that's been brought against him, which is proceeding on any job without obtaining applicable permits, or inspections from the city Building and Zoning Division, or Building Review and Permitting Department. That's the first issue at hand. Then we'll discuss penalties after we decide that. Let's open to the floor for discussion. I'm not used to not having someone here, so, Page 27 September 21,2005 first of all I need a motion to close public hearing. COMMISSIONER JOSLIN: So moved, Joslin. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Second? COMMISSIONER BLUM: Second, Blum. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. All those in favor? CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Aye. COMMISSIONER LEWIS: Aye. COMMISSIONER BESWICK: Aye. COMMISSIONER BLUM: Aye. COMMISSIONER KELLER: Aye. COMMISSIONER JOSLIN: Aye. COMMISSIONER HORN: Aye. COMMISSIONER BOYD: Aye. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Now, we can deliberate. COMMISSIONER BLUM: The evidence is pretty clear cut. Every opportunity has been given. I would move to agree with Mr. Ossorio's findings and ask my fellow commissioners to vote accordingly. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Is that a motion? COMMISSIONER BLUM: Yes. CHAIRMAN DICKSON and -- okay. Just board members. COMMISSIONER BLUM: Board members. Sorry about that. Where did I get that from. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: They get paid. COMMISSIONER BLUM: Yeah. COMMISSIONER JOSLIN: That was a motion? CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Yes. COMMISSIONER JOSLIN: I'll second the motion. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Any discussion? CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I will state on behalf of everybody here that I'm extremely sorry that Mr. Johnston is not present. This is something we don't like doing. I would like to hear from Mr. Page 28 September 21, 2005 Johnston. It's an unfortunate situation, but our hands are tied. We have to go forward. So with that understood -- MR. NEALE: And just so that the board can note this, I'll get this order over to contractor licensing staff by the end of the week. They will mail. He has 20 days from the date of mailing to appeal for a rehearing to the board. So, Mr. Johnston does get another bite at the apple, so to speak. If he feels he was wrongly convicted, he can request this board to rehear the matter. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. With that in mind, if there's no discussion, I'll call for the vote. All those in favor of the motion? CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Aye. COMMISSIONER LEWIS: Aye. COMMISSIONER BESWICK: Aye. COMMISSIONER BLUM: Aye. COMMISSIONER KELLER: Aye. COMMISSIONER JOSLIN: Aye. COMMISSIONER HORN: Aye. COMMISSIONER BOYD: Aye. Opposed? (No response.) COMMISSIONER KELLER: Hit the -- CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Zero. So I'm not going to hit that thing. I need to read this order. Board of Collier County Commissioners, Collier County Florida is the petitioner versus James M. Johnston, Senior, case number 2005-01, License number 16585. This cause came on for public hearing before the Contracting Licensing Board on September 21, 2005 for consideration of the complaint filed against James M. Johnston, Senior. Service of the complaint was made by certified mail and delivery. MR.OSSORIO: Hand delivered. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Hand delivery. In accordance with Collier County ordinance number 90-105 as amended. The board having heard testimony under oath, received evidence, and heard Page 29 September 21, 2005 arguments respective to all appropriate matters, thereupon issues its finding of fact, conclusions of law and order of the board as follows: lowed: That James M. Johnston, Senior is the holder of record of certificate of competency number 16585. That the Board of Collier County -- Number two, that the Board of Collier County Commissioners of Collier County Florida is the complainant in this matter. That the board -- Number three, that the board has jurisdiction of the respondent, and that James M. Johnston, Senior was not present at the public hearing and was not accordingly represented by counsel. Number four, all notices required by Collier County ordinance number 90-105 as amended have been properly issued. Number five, the allegations of fact as set forth in the administrative complaint are approved, adopted, and incorporated herein by reference of the finding of fact. Conclusions of law: The conclusions of law alleged and set forth in the administrative complaint are approved, adopted, and incorporated herein. Order of the board: Based upon the foregoing findings of fact and conclusion of law pursuant to the authority granted in Chapter 489, Florida statutes and Collier County ordinance number 90-105 as amended by a vote of seven -- or eight? Is it seven? COMMISSIONER BLUM: Yeah. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Seven in favor and zero oppose, it is __ I went too far. I need to put in there, read the complaint. That we -- guide me, Mr. Neale. That we did find that-- MR. NEALE: Found in violation as set out-- CHAIRMAN DICKSON: In violation of count number one, to wit, 4.1.18 proceeding on a job without obtaining applicable permits or inspections form should be from the city building or zoning division for the building review and permitting department. That Page 30 September 21, 2005 was the only charge and he was found guilty. MR. NEALE: Right. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. Now, Mr. Neale, if you'd like to read penalty phase. MR. NEALE: Yes. As the board has found the respondent in violation of the ordinance, it has to decide on the sanctions to be imposed. The sanctions are set out in the codified ordinance at section 22-203, and in the revised ordinance in section 4.3.5. The sanctions which may be imposed include, number one, revocation of the certificate of competency of the respondent. Number two, suspension of that certificate. Number three, denial of issuance or renewal of the certificate. Number four, probation of a reasonable length not to exceed two years during which the contractor's contracting activities shall be under the supervision of the Contractors' Licensing Board and/or participation in a duly accredited program of continuing education. Probation may be revoked for cause by the board at a hearing noticed to consider such purpose. Number five, restitution. Number six, a fine not to exceed $5,000. Just make a note to the board, actually that has been changed. Not in our ordinance, but in the state statute to $10,000. Number seven, a public reprimand. Number eight, a reexamination requirement. Number nine, denial of the issuance of permits or requiring issuance of permits with conditions. Number ten, reasonable legal and investigative costs. In coming up with the sanctions to be imposed, the board shall consider, number one, the gravity of the violation; number two, the impact of the violation; number three, any actions taken by the violator to correct said violation; number four, previous violations committed; and number five any other evidence presented at the Page 31 September 21, 2005 hearing relevant to the sanction that is appropriate. Finally, the board shall issue a recommended penalty for the state construction industry and licensing board, and that penalty may include a recommendation for no further action, suspension, revocation or restriction of the registration or a fine be levied by the state board. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Discussion from the board. What's your feelings? COMMISSIONER BLUM: Well, my feeling is it was flagrant, blatant and premeditated; made no effort whatsoever. I do feel that the homeowner probably had some culpability. However, he's got a chance to come out of this. He hasn't paid the man. I would vote to revoke the man's license. I would vote that he pays a $500 administrative cost and investigative fine, and I would not tell the state to take further action. That's my position. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: The only thing I'll make a comment about is culpability of the homeowner. I really doubt it. I agree sometimes they do, but this is kind of like a fence or something else, you hire a licensed contractor, you expect him to fulfill his end of the law. And he probably didn't look for permits, or didn't even think to look for it. So I have a problem with culpability of the homeowner. He stands to lose money. COMMISSIONER BLUM: Yeah. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: He's already lost $500. He stands to gain money if he gets engineering. COMMISSIONER BLUM: In this day and age, living where he lives and his neighbors and all the things going on, I find it hard to believe he wasn't aware that the proper procedures weren't met. I have a difficult time believing that. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Yeah. I'm sure the word spread like wildfire through the division how much these things were costing. COMMISSIONER BLUM: He knew full well what he was Page 32 September 21,2005 doing, and he knew full well what he was trying to get away and he was going to let it happen. That's just personal opinion based on what I'm hearing. But, in either case, Mr. Johnston is the guy. He did the wrong thing. He didn't try to make it right. He's not even showing up here. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: So your move is revocation, $500 fine? Was there anything else? COMMISSIONER BLUM: And as far as to the state, I would not ask the state to take any further action. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: He can't do anymore. COMMISSIONER BLUM: Well, Mr. Neale just mentioned that we can to the state. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Ifwe revoke it, that takes care of it at the state level. MR. NEALE: No further action necessary by the state at that point. COMMISSIONER KELLER: I'd actually like to put a bigger dollar number on it just to catch his attention to maybe get him to come in and defend himself, so -- but I agree that we should take away his, revoke his license. MR. OS SO RIO: On this day and age, the aluminum license is a gold mine. $500 is nothing. He can all of a sudden come back in and pay his -- COMMISSIONER KELLER: Well, he already paid all his other fines, so, you know, he's perfectly willing to pay these fines and keep on going and getting more citations. So, he's already shown that $500 doesn't make him blink an eye, so I would put a large figure on there and then -- COMMISSIONER BLUM: Well, revoking the license, he's out of business. MR. OSSORIO: We just don't want him to pay the fine and come in front of the board a year or two from now and you not Page 33 September 21, 2005 remember. So we have to make a statement to him that, you know, we've asked the board, sent you a letter, the county sent you a letter asking you to be here. He didn't want to show up. He's been known to not pull building permits as shown in the exhibits. You know, this is not a time for a $500 penalty, that's for sure. COMMISSIONER BLUM: Well, I meant to cover administrative costs, but now I understand what you're saying. I totally agree, let's make it $5,000. Let's go to max. COMMISSIONER KELLER: $10,000. MR. NEALE: Unfortunately, in our ordinance, we're only permitted to go to $10,000 -- or, $5,000 at this point. COMMISSIONER KELLER: $5,000. COMMISSIONER BLUM: Okay. $5,000, I amend it to $5,000. MR. OSSORIO: He's pulled -- after we caught him, he's gotten permits, but that's after, so. How many has he done, we haven't been out there. There's only three of us. COMMISSIONER JOSLIN: Do you know of any other permits he has out right now at this point? MR. OSSORIO: He has one in hold. MR. JOSLIN: From this situation? MR. OSSORIO: No, from another situation. MR. JOSLIN: Another one. MR. OSSORIO: And that's it. COMMISSIONER BLUM: So he has done more work since this screw up? CHAIRMAN DICKSON: One at a time, please. MR. OSSORIO: He has a permit in the applied status, but it's been there for a while. And unfortunately, I can't communicate with him, so, therefore, I don't have any information on that. COMMISSIONER BLUM: After this job? MR. OS SO RIO: During the course of our issuing these, you Page 34 September 21,2005 know, the letters that he still conducts business. So that's where we are right now. COMMISSIONER BLUM: So he's still out there doing his thing. MR. OSSORIO: Could be. I highly doubt it. I think that he's basically put his hands up. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: He's not -- has he pulled permits on some of the other jobs? MR. OSSORIO: Yes. We issued fines to things he's pulled building permits on. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: But has he pulled other permits besides the ones he got caught on? MR. OSSORIO: He has pulled some permits, but he's not -- for a contractor who's been in business as many years as he's been in business, that doesn't seem a lot. There's not a lot out there. COMMISSIONER JOSLIN: It just sounds odd, if I'm getting it right, that he would pull permits after the fact for this job. But yet, why wouldn't he go and get his building permit for this job to even have an older permit; something that would at least stop this from happening. Just throw his hands up and just walk away. MR.OSSORIO: That's a combination of things. I know that I had discussions with him referencing this particular enclosure and he says I don't think it's going to meet code. Obviously we can't charge him for code violation because we can't send the inspector out there. So the first thing we have to do is establish there a violation of a building permit. And then if the board wanted to go ahead and give him 30 days to get the permit, then we could come back with a code violation if he didn't correct it. We have to give him an opportunity to correct a code violation. So this is the first step. But I don't -- I think taking his license away today is fine; a $5,000 penalty. The homeowner can surely get an engineer out there for $300, $400 bucks to sign off on it, and then we'll finish it. Page 35 September 21, 2005 MR. JOSLIN: And he has how long to appeal it? How many days did you say? MR. NEALE: He has 20 days from the mailing of the order to him to appeal. To request a rehearing. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. Let me throw the kind side out there. I heard some people go, oh boy. COMMISSIONER BLUM: I said why. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I haven't met this guy. I haven't heard his side of the story. He's got some thousand dollar screen enclosures that he missed pulling a permit on because he was $43 above $1,000. Why did all of a sudden does he take care of all the others and not take care of this one. I know you say there might be others out there, but the only thing we can consider this is one because that's the only thing that's before us. I hear that the guy is in bad health. I see the homeowner suffering possible loss. I don't know. You know, he's done it right before and he's been in business a long time. I'm more inclined to go for a suspension of all permit pulling privileges and give him a time to make this correction. And if he doesn't make it correct, then within that time frame, at the end of the time frame his license is revoked. I'd rather save a contractor then immediately chop his head off. COMMISSIONER JOSLIN: For a thousand dollars. COMMISSIONER KELLER: I think we just want to get him in here so we can hear what his side of the story is. Like you said, you look at things from his side of the story. So I don't think it's -- you know, we haven't been able to get him to respond, so-- CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I mean, I could see a 90-day period where he makes this right, and if he doesn't, then there's a revocation, but I'd rather take a little bit of a chance to let everybody come out of this thing whole and then maybe go on down the road without future problems. I'm real reluctant to a guy that I haven't met or heard from to take his livelihood away from him. I think that's -- Page 36 September 21,2005 COMMISSIONER KELLER: Well, he took it away from himself by not showing up today, or not responding. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Yeah, but I don't know why he's not here. I hear he's in bad health. MR. JOSLIN: Could be a good reason why he's not here. COMMISSIONER BLUM: He hasn't even responded in writing. He's made no effort, none. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: But we're going for the dealt penalty right off the bat over a $1,000 screen enclosure. MR. OSSORIO: Yeah, I don't know if past experience has anything to do with it, but this is not a contractor that's not been in trouble before. We have case history on him. We have a couple of cases that were ongoing that he worked without building permits and was fined for. So it's not like the first time. It's not his first time getting a permit either. He knew exactly what he was doing working out there without a permit. COMMISSIONER KELLER: I, as a consumer, find it very unnerving that there is a licensed contractor out there who is doing this consistently. And if I were to call and find out if this licensed contractor was -- or if this contractor was licensed and they said, yes, you know, I think that I would want to know that they've been -- they had, you know, four citations and they just pay the citations and just keep doing business. You Imow. I don't know. COMMISSIONER BLUM: To me it's a flagrant disregard, premeditatedly set out to fraud. I see no reason for any kind of leeway here. And he's not here. He could have been here. His wife could have come. Instead he could have written a letter; I'm sick. I want to come again. He did nothing whatsoever to further his own course. Nothing. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Are you introducing new evidence? We closed the public hearing. MR. OSSORIO: This is just -- Page 37 September 21, 2005 CHAIRMAN DICKSON: We would have to reopen. MR. OSSORIO: No problem. I understand. MR. NEALE: Depends on what it is. He may -- since you are in the penalty phase, he could probably introduce evidence to -- as to the gravity of the situation or any of the factors that the board should consider for penalties, so -- CHAIRMAN DICKSON: So, should I reopen public hearing? MR. NEALE: That's at your discretion, but there is the opportunity. Because you would give the respondent the opportunity to introduce evidence in mitigation at this point. MR. OSSORIO: Mr. Dickson, it's not a big deal. We'll just leave it. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. I got to play by the books. MR.OSSORIO: I understand. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay we have split feelings. Any other feelings. COMMISSIONER BESWICK: Mr. Chairman, as a property manager, I have to deal with all these kinds of situations all the time, especially at a place like Village Walk. I just had two recent experiences this summer with the same type of thing. People without proper license or without pulling permits building screen enclosures on the homes. I'd like to send a message; this stuffs got to stop. It puts a person like myself in a really bad position, when I have a homeowner coming into the office screaming and hollering and yelling at me because we wouldn't allow something like this to proceed because no building permit has been pulled. It's been my experience over this past summer that the contractors get caught with dirty hands on this thing and they run to the homeowner and complain. I'd like to send a message. I agree with Mr. Blum on this. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: And the other problem is we have the worse problem of unlicensed contractors. MR. ZACHARY: Mr. Dickson, I'd like to remind the board too Page 38 September 21, 2005 that you heard testimony that the enclosure as built probably wouldn't pass inspection anyway. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Would not? MR. ZACHARY: Would not. I think the building inspection for that -- CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Yeah. Okay. Any other comments? What we do is fight it out in a motion. I need one. COMMISSIONER BLUM: I already made it. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Oh, okay. That was the motion. COMMISSIONER BLUM: Revocation. $5,000 fine and nothing further to the state because it's not warranted. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. COMMISSIONER BESWICK: I'll second that. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Motion and a second. Any discussion? COMMISSIONER JOSLIN: No kind of -- how about to give a leeway, to give the man say 30 days to -- COMMISSIONER BLUM: Again, he has 20 days to come back. All of us are reasonable people. Ifhe should come back and say, hey, da-da-da-da, we'd be more than happy to listen to him. MR. JOSLIN: On the other hand though, if we give him 30 days, what would happen would be maybe he'll get the message that this is going to happen to him. Maybe he'll go get the permit, tear that cage down and rebuild one with the permit and all this goes away. COMMISSIONER BLUM: Mr. Ossorio has stated on no uncertain terms on numerous occasions that he's talked to him, he's written to him, and he has sent him registered letters. He's talked to the wife. We've got the guy we entrust to do this going -- bending over backwards to help this man. We need to send a message to him now clearly without any remorse. That's my feeling. CHAIRMAN DICKSON question for legal. Assuming that he may even be watching, I don't know. He has 20 days after the order of Page 39 September 21, 2005 the board. Now that is 20 days from today? MR. NEALE: Twenty days after the order is mailed. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: After the order is mailed, which is going to be a couple of days. MR. NEALE: Right. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: If he wants to appeal it and he has that 20 days to appeal, if he makes his wishes known to appeal it, then that stays the order? That puts the order on hold, because we're not going to meet within 20 days. MR. NEALE: Well, there's no provision for a stay of the order in the statute or anything else. I mean, it's a request for rehearing, and that's all it is. So he's under this order until the board reverses it. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: So ifhe comes back in the next meeting, he basically has a revoked license? MR. NEALE: Yup. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. That changes my opinion on it because I want a time period in there. That's why I will vote against this motion. COMMISSIONER BLUM: Okay. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Any other discussion? Call or the vote. All those in favor? COMMISSIONER LEWIS: Aye. COMMISSIONER BESWICK: Aye. COMMISSIONER BLUM: Aye. COMMISSIONER KELLER: Aye. COMMISSIONER HORN: Aye. COMMISSIONER BOYD: Aye. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: All those opposed? COMMISSIONER JOSLIN: Opposed. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Opposed. Passes. Order of the board, based upon the foregoing findings of fact and Page 40 September 21,2005 conclusions of law, and pursuant to the authority granted in chapter 49 Florida statutes and Collier County ordinance number 90-105, as amended, by a vote of six in favor and two opposed, it is hereby ordered that the following disciplinary sanctions and related order are hereby imposed upon the order of contractor certificate of competency number 16585: Number one, revocation of license. Number two, $5,000 fine payable to -- MR. NEALE: Payable to the clerk of the courts. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Clerk of the courts. And number three, that no further action be taken by the state. COMMISSIONER JOSLIN: Is there a time period for that $5,000 should be dictated? MR. NEALE: Yeah, I mean the board can set a time period. It's normally a reasonable period of time, but the board can -- CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I'll leave that up to the clerk of courts, don't we? Or do we have to put a time period? MR. NEALE: Literally, I mean, the fine becomes due as of the time the order is issued. So the fine becomes due as soon as the board adjourns its meeting today. COMMISSIONER BLUM: So, at what point -- okay, if he doesn't pay it in 30 days, what happens? MR. NEALE: The county does have the ability to go out after him and enforce it to collect the fine. $5,000, the county -- I don't want to speak for the county. The attorney's office, but for 5,000 bucks, they may go after him for it. COMMISSIONER BLUM: At what point in time would that happen? MR. NEALE: It's discretionary to some extent. COMMISSIONER JOSLIN: That's what I was trying to get at, a time period. MR. ZACHARY: I think we can lien the property. Foreclose Page 41 September 21, 2005 on the lien. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Can you hear him okay? COMMISSIONER BLUM: Thirty days, 60 days. When is it like, okay, you've had your chance, now we're going to get you? MR. ZACHARY: It's discretionary. COMMISSIONER BLUM: Okay. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: That ends the order. Reports; none. Anything else to be brought before the board? COMMISSIONER BLUM: Can I ask a question? Mr. Ossorio and Mr. Kucko, I'd like -- do you gentlemen feel that this is -- this decision we just made, are you comfortable with our decision? MR.OSSORIO: I am totally. COMMISSIONER BLUM: Mr. Kucko? MR. KUCKO: No. COMMISSIONER BLUM: Okay. I'm curious because I get input from you. And you're professionals so I'm curious to know your reaction. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I need, Jeff, if you would come up here. MR. KUCKO: Back to the podium there. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Yeah. MR. KUCKO: Just a little note. I don't hear that well, but did I say -- hear you say there was six for and two opposed? CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Yeah. MR. KUCKO: I've been counting and it's just, you know -- COMMISSIONER BLUM: Yeah, there are only seven people. CHAIRMAN DICIZSON: That's what I said. COMMISSIONER BLUM: Five and two. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. I need to change those records. It was five for and two opposed. I guess that's why you have the job, and the other vote was seven to zero. Didn't I say seven before and someone said eight, or corrected me. Page 42 September 21, 2005 COMMISSIONER KELLER: You just have a good seat. You can count. COMMISSIONER JOSLIN: Did you automatically type in seven and zero? CHAIRMAN DICKSON: She covers us dummies. MR. KUCKO: I think on a matter, I have to agree with Mr. Dickson. I hate to see anybody lose their livelihood. The work that this person does, you know, and what I viewed on site, it's, you know, we're not allowed to go by quality anymore. They took the word quality-like workmanship out of our code back, I think it was in 1991, but the person does not do a bad job. You know, it was tied down, the anchors were spaced out in accordance to most engineering that I received. You know, it was a well built structure. It's not like it was a rip-off job. I hope the guy has enough sense, if he's watching this on TV or something that -- COMMISSIONER BLUM: Come on in. MR. KUCKO: Yeah, come on in. It seems like a very minute thing to lose my license over if I was in his situation. But, you know, it's still taking his livelihood away. COMMISSIONER BLUM: I agree. It's less than we want to do. So, the county is as split as we are. MR. KUCKO: So actually you can amend that back to five for, three again, but -- CHAIRMAN DICKSON: At the same time when you see diversity like this, it has nothing to do with our relationship or support for the investigators of the licensing board. Mike is fully aware of how much I support him and everybody that is over there, but diversity is good. And I've always in 15 years taken the attitude that I will do a revocation of a license as absolute last resort because it is livelihood. MR. KUCKO: The other thing that I would note, earlier you said it was like only $43 over. The ordinance still is $750. Page 43 September 21, 2005 CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Oh, is it? MR. KUCKO: They are going to amend that fee to like $1,000, I believe, when they do the new fee ordinance. I'm not positive on that. You know, so, if we'd done this next year, it would have been $43 over the amount for the permit, as you said. It might not have been such a big deal. As it is, it's a very small enclosure. As Mike also noted, there are multiple -- I think every unit there had one when I looked. They -- from the other ones it appears to have been there for sometime. I didn't see anything that was really new. There's, you know, already corrosion on the fasteners and stuff that happens with aluminum that's been exposed for a while. Mold, mildew, that kind of stuff from sprinkler systems, you know. Yes or no, he mayor may not have done other enclosures in there. I didn't see anything in the surroundings. I only looked at two buildings that were adjacent to that. I didn't see anything that was brand new other than that one. You know, still clean aluminum, all that stuff. So, I don't know. CHAIRMAN DICKSON Okay. Interesting case. COMMISSIONER BLUM: Thank you. I like to hear the professional's opinion. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Any other discussion? Do I hear a motion to adjourn? MR. JOSLIN: So moved. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Second? COMMISSIONER I(ELLER: Second, Keller. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Next meeting, before I take the vote, October 19th. Assume we're still a go? Thank you, Mr. Kucko. MR. JOSLIN: Thank you, Mr. Kucko. MR. KUCKO: Kucko. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Kucko. COMMISSIONER KELLER: Kucko. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Just like the food, right? MR. KUCKO: Right. Page 44 September 21, 2005 CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Couscous. Do you have stuff for the 19th, or do you know yet? MR. OS SO RIO: I have no idea. We'll find out in a couple of days. COMMISSIONER KELLER: Hopefully, we'll be having an appeal on this case. COMMISSIONER BLUM: Yeah, I'd love to see the guy come back. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: October 19th. Anybody know that they're not going to be here? (N 0 response.) CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. We have a motion and a second to adjourn. All those in favor? CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Aye. COMMISSIONER LEWIS: Aye. COMMISSIONER BESWICK: Aye. COMMISSIONER BLUM: Aye. COMMISSIONER KELLER: Aye. COMMISSIONER JOSLIN: Aye. COMMISSIONER HORN: Aye. COMMISSIONER BOYD: Aye. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: So done. Thank you. ** * * There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 10: 17 a.m. COLLIER COUNTY CONTRACTOR LICENSING BOARD LES DICKSON, CHAIRMAN Page 45