CLB Minutes 02/15/2006 R
February 15,2006
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
COLLIER COUNTY CONTRACTOR'S LICENSING BOARD
Naples, Florida, February 15,2006
LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County
Contractor's 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
Sydney Blum
Ann Keller
Richard Joslin
Michael Boyd
ALSO PRESENT:
Michael Ossorio, Licensing Comp Officer
Tom Bartoe, Licensing Comp Officer
Patrick Neal, Attorney for the Contractor's Licensing Board
Robert Zachary, Assistant County Attorney
Page 1
AGENDA
COLLIER COUNTY CONTRACTORS' LICENSING BOARD
DATE: FEBRUARY;15, 2006
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: January 18, 2006
V. DISCUSSION:
VI. NEW BUSINESS:
Charles S. Seeker - Request to qualify a 20d entity.
Claudia A. Sacacian - Request to qualify a 20d entity.
VII. OLD BUSINESS:
VIII PUBLIC HEARINGS:
Case # 2006-03
Collier County vs Santos G. Guevara, Jr.
D/B/A Tropical Shield of Florida Inc.
Case # 2006-04
Collier County vs Todd Grupp
D/B/A TAG. Professional Carpentry, LLC.
IX. REPORTS:
X. NEXT MEETING DATE:
Wednesday, March 15, 2006
February 15,2006
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Good morning to all of you. I'd like to
call to order the meeting of the Collier County Contractor Licensing
Board for February 15, 2007 -- '06. How about that one. Hope
nobody forgot Valentine's Day. Welcome to you. If you want to
make an appeal for a case that's heard before this Board, you will need
a verbatim record of the -- of the proceedings of this Board, which is
being taken. I'd like to start first with roll call to my right.
MR. LEWIS: William Lewis.
MR. BLUM: Syd Blum.
MS. KELLER: Ann Keller.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Les Dickson.
MR. JOSLIN: Richard Joslin.
MR. BOYD: Michael Boyd.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: And next I need Mr. Bartoe. Any
additions or deletions to the agenda, sir?
MR. BARTOE: Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Board members.
For the record, my name is Tom Bartoe, Collier County Licensing
Compliance Officer. First addition I have is not to the agenda. I want
to introduce an addition to staff. We have a new member to replace
Juan Lopez, and it's Andrew Wuhrer, and it's W-U-H-R-E-R. Andy,
stand up so they can see you.
MR. WUHRER: Good morning.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Good to meet you, Andrew. Good to
have you with us.
MR. WUHRER: Good to be here.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Thank you. And additions to the
agenda under new business, Mr. Balzano and I received a phone call
yesterday from a man we want to put on the agenda, George
Gutierrez. He wanted to discuss Pro Metrix roofing exam that he took
in January. He advised he got a 74, and he advised the one question is
wrong. He tried to discuss it with them and there is no discussing it
with them. And I checked in the computer, and it did show a 74. It
Page 2
February 15,2006
did show a 90 that he got for the business and law. And with alot of
our members being roofers, maybe the Board might have the ability to
give the man go ahead to proceed to obtain a license.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Tell me the name again.
MR. BARTOE: George Gutierrez, G-U-T-I-E-R-R-E-Z.
MR. JOSLIN: Was this a case that we heard before possibly?
MR. BARTOE: I'm sorry?
MR. JOSLIN: Is this a gentleman that came before the board
before?
MR. BARTOE: Not to my knowledge. He just took this test last
month.
MR. JOSLIN: I got you. All right.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Anything else?
MR. BARTOE: And staff has no other additions or deletions.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. I need a motion to approve the
agenda as changed.
MR. JOSLIN: So moved, Joslin.
MR. BLUM: Second, Blum.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: All those in favor?
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Aye.
MR. LEWIS: Aye.
MR. BLUM: Aye.
MS. KELLER: Aye.
MR. JOSLIN: Aye.
MR. BOYD: Aye.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Next is the minutes of the last
meeting.
MR. BARTOE: I have a number of things on the minutes. And I
noticed this in a few older minutes also after looking back. You
people have become commissioners, if you look at the minutes.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Then where is our paycheck?
MR. BARTOE: You'll have to ask the people who appointed
Page 3
February 15,2006
you, sir, not me.
MR. JOSLIN: I want a raise right now.
MR. BARTOE: Also in the minutes on page 112, on a motion to
find Mr. Bravo guilty on his charges, it has that Ms. Keller voted, and
she left -- and she can correct me if I am wrong -- she left before this
came up; is that correct, Ms. Keller?
MS. KELLER: Yes.
MR. BARTOE: And also they show her voting again on page
121, which is wrong. And also page 127, besides Ms. Keller voting to
adjourn, Mr. Lewis you did too, and I don't believe you were here.
MR. LEWIS: That is correct.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Mr. Bartoe, I'm absolutely blown
away that you read all the minutes like that.
MR. BARTOE: Yes.
MS. KELLER: That's what I said.
MR. BARTOE: I figured someone had to.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I'm proud of you. Okay. And unless
I'm not aware of it, no, we're not commissioners, but it would be nice
to receive a paycheck occasionally. Especially since I show it's
Chairman Dickson and the rest of you are commissioners. With those
changes, did anybody else find any? That's very thorough.
MR. BARTOE: I heard they were going to double your pay.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Good. Okay. Do I have a motion to
approve the minutes as amended?
MR. BLUM: So moved.
MR. JOSLIN: Joslin, second.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: All those in favor.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Aye.
MR. LEWIS: Aye.
MR. BLUM: Aye.
MS. KELLER: Aye.
MR. JOSLIN: Aye.
Page 4
February 15,2006
MR. BOYD: Aye.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. Moving right along.
MR. JOSLIN: Does that mean that we are not really
commissioners? Just checking.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Thank you. What do we call it, just
board member?
MR. BARTOE: Usually when you read the old minutes it was
Mr. Ms. Mrs.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. I don't think we need a title.
MS. KELLER: You are chairman though.
MR. BARTOE: It would be less typing also. MR instead of
Commissioner.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: And last name wouldn't offend
anybody. There is no discussion. New business, moving right along.
Charles Secker, Request to qualify second entity. Are you present?
MR. SECKER: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: If you would come up here to this
podium. I need for you to state your name and if you'd spell the last
name, and then the court reporter will swear you in.
MR. SECKER: Charles Shawn Secker, S-E-C-K-E-R.
(Sworn)
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Give us a brief overview of what you
qualify now, what you're wanting to qualify, and what your reasons
are.
MR. SECKER: Right now I'm qualifying my electrical
contracting business to do new construction, some remodel, and a little
service. I'm trying to qualify another business which will be directed
towards installing generators, gensets for new businesses and
residences.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: That's a big business now isn't it?
MR. SECKER: It looks that way.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Especially when you don't have
Page 5
February 15,2006
power for weeks.
MR. SECKER: Everybody is crying.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Good point. You don't live in the
county, do you?
MR. SECKER: I just moved up to Punta Gorda in October after
I got divorced from my wife.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay.
MR. JOSLIN: Why do you look familiar? Have you been up
here before?
MR. SECKER: I've lived here since 1980. I've had my business
since '99.
MR. JOSLIN: You have never been before this board before?
Seen you on the street?
MR. SECKER: No. Uh-huh. We know each other through
friends, and we have also worked together years ago.
MR. JOSLIN: I thought so. Okay.
MS. KELLER: I just have a question on page 5K. It says, what
percentage of ownership do you have in the present business. You are
qualifying. What percentage of ownership will you have in the
business you are attempting to qualify. And you put 100 percent. Can
you answer that in two parts?
MR. SECKER: As far as the business that I currently have, yes, I
am the sole owner of Selector Incorporated.
MS. KELLER: And the proposed?
MR. SECKER: I will be 10 percent owner of that business.
MS. KELLER: Ten percent. Okay.
MR. BLUM: My question was, you asked -- there's a question
about check writing authority for president of the proposed entity, you
said, no, you don't have any?
MR. SECKER: Not at this time.
MR. BLUM: For either one?
MR. SECKER: No, no. Only for the new business.
Page 6
February 15,2006
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: What do you have, an investor?
MR. SECKER: Actually, I'm going in partnership with
somebody on this new venture.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. Any complaints at all with the
county against the existing company?
MR. BARTOE: What did he say?
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Complaints.
MR. BARTOE: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. Credit report looks nice.
MR. SECKER: I try to keep it that way.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: It does help.
MR. JOSLIN: Unless anyone else has any questions, I'll make
the motion.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Feel free.
MR. JOSLIN: I'll make the motion that we approve this
application.
MR. BLUM: I'll second it.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Discussion?
(N 0 response)
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: All those in favor?
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Aye.
MR. LEWIS: Aye.
MR. BLUM: Aye.
MS. KELLER: Aye.
MR. JOSLIN: Aye.
MR. BOYD: Aye.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Against? You've got unanimous.
We wish you very well.
MR. SECKER: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: You'll do well here. However, all of
your records are here, so don't go to the county today.
MR. SECKER: Okay.
Page 7
February 15, 2006
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: This will apply to the other person
that is here as well, but you can go there tomorrow and finalize
everything.
MR. JOSLIN: One last thing in the packet, I see you have a
workman's comp exemption form in there. You do realize that if you
have employees, you do have to carry workman's comp?
MR. SECKER: Yes, sir. With my present business, I have 12
employees right now, my present business. And even though I'm in
that business, I've got workman's comp on myself.
MR. JOSLIN: Okay.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: It's cheap for the owner. I've never
understood people that exempt the owner. It just makes no sense
whatsoever. It's the cheapest insure in the world.
MR. SECKER: With this new company, I'm going to be more of
the figurehead and overseeing the business aspect of it, so I won't
actually be in the field as much like I am with my present business.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Uh-uh. Okay. I hope you do well.
MR. SECKER: All right. Thanks.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Thank you. Claude Sacacian?
MR. BLUM: Claudia.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Claudia. I'm sorry. I didn't see that. I
just saw -- I thought it was an E, that's why I put the glasses on.
Excuse me. Claudia.
MS. SACACIAN: Good morning.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: If you would state your name. You
can pull that down. Just reach up and pull that down.
MS. SACACIAN: Claudia Sacacian, S-A-C-A-C-I-A-N.
(Sworn)
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: If would you, Ms. Sacacian, tell us
what you qualify now, and what you want to qualify.
MS. SACACIAN: I want to qualify ICB -- yeah, International
Carpet and Blinds like a second entity to work under my license.
Page 8
February 15,2006
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: You're wanting to qualify what?
MS. SACACIAN: So they can do it -- they can install floors and
all that. I have a license, a tile and marble license, so I want to qualify
them so they can install floors.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. So you do -- you qualify
carpet and blinds right now, right?
MR. NEALE: No. Classics and Designs.
MS. SACACIAN: No, Classics and Designs I am, Classics and
Designs.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Does that really require your license?
Is it flooring?
MS. SACACIAN: Yes.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. And so now you want to do
the marble and stone. Okay.
MS. KELLER: I have the same question for you actually on
page 4K. It asks what percentage ownership do you have in the
present business you're currently qualifying, and that what percentage
of ownership will you have in the business you're attempting to
qualify. You wrote 50 percent. And there's two questions there.
MS. SACACIAN: Yeah, 50 percent.
MS. KELLER: For both?
MS. SACACIAN: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: And I assume the husband is the
other?
MS. SACACIAN: Yeah, yeah. I'm just, you know -- he's in the
field all the time, not me.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I got you. Another one of those funny
credit reports. What happens with this, Mr. Bartoe, is this one credit
report that shades every other line when they make copies of it, we
can't read through it. I don't know if hitting a lighter button would
help us at all, but essentially for me, maybe you guys have x-ray
vision, but it takes out 50 percent of what is on there as being legible.
Page 9
___._.._....___..._. _. 'n_'____,.,_._.
February 15,2006
No complaints against this business?
MR. BARTOE: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. Anybody else?
MR. LEWIS: Do we have an actual license number? I notice
there's not one on the application.
MR. BARTOE: There's one written here and her folder is here.
The one for Classic Stone is written on the report on the front page,
23539.
MR. JOSLIN: Any other questions? I make the motion that we
approve the application.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Do I hear a second?
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Got a motion to approve. Do I hear a
second?
MR. BOYD: Second, Boyd.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Discussion?
(No response)
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: You guys ready?
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. I have a motion to approve and
a second. All those in favor?
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Aye.
MR. LEWIS: Aye.
MR. BLUM: Aye.
MS. KELLER: Aye.
MR. JOSLIN: Aye.
MR. BOYD: Aye.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Opposed?
(N 0 response)
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: You're approved.
MS. SACACIAN: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Tomorrow remember.
MS. SACACIAN: Okay.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Hope you do well.
Page 10
February 15,2006
MS. SACACIAN: Thanks.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: George Gutierrez. Are you here?
MR. GUTIERREZ: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: If you would come up to the podium
and please state your name. And I know she's going to need you to
spell your last name for her.
MR. GUTIERREZ: Good morning. My name is George
Gutierrez. I live in Collier County Florida. My last name is
G-U-T-I-E-R-R-E-Z. First name is George.
(Sworn)
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. You took the test, got a 74,
and --
MR. GUTIERREZ: Trade exam.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Yeah. I had an issue with--
MR. GUTIERREZ: Experior assessments that was formerly
known as -- well, Thompson Prometrix formerly known as Experior.
Many of the questions were ambiguous. They asked about on center
spacings, thickness of metal. But it did not specify according to what
RAS of the Florida building code the question should be pulled from.
And I wrote a letter explaining to them that it's hard as a test taker to
know, when they ask you what the minimum width of a valley metal
is, whether they're talking about a high velocity zone, non-high
velocity, NCRA manual, or FBC manual. So a series of these
questions in the steep slope section of the exam, I was forced to guess
on, and they wont' let me know what I passed and what I did not pass
on, but it was so marginal at a 74 that it came down to the portion of a
question, being that each question is two points per question. I
couldn't get any specificity from them at all. A lot of the questions
were ambiguous. I've been in this business for almost 20 years. I
moved here from Miami-Dade County Florida. Where, since you
know, since Hurricane Andrew in 1992, we've had a massive revision,
to not only the South Florida Building Code, but to the Florida
Page 11
February 15,2006
building code. And I moved over here with a lot of experience, and I
was just disapointed with the particular exam that I took. It's not that
I'm a sore loser, it's just that a lot of half the steep slope questions on
the exam could have gone one way or the other.
They indicated one specific answer and three distracters,
however I argue, that there is more than one specific answer with
regard to the metal flashing questions, particularly the drip edge,
whether it's laid, under, in between, or over the under-Iayments.
Depending on different manufacturers Notice of Acceptance approvals
from the PCA Board in Miami-Dade County, it can be done a number
of ways. It can be done between a 30-90 HOBMOB system, it can be
stripped in over the cap sheet or with a new polystick TU, which was
recently introduced into the market. It's mandated that the edge metal
actually goes over the under-Iayment system to hold down the edge.
So, the test did not specify according to what manual to derive your
answer from. It just asked vague questions. And it happened to be
that portion of the exam that I did the worst on that I happened to
know the most of. So I contacted Experior. They sent me back a
written response that they stand behind their 74 percent. I spoke to the
building official, Paul, and he advised me to come today and possibly
get some leniency from the Board to be considered for my roofing
license.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. Now I know your name from
somewhere. You're working with who?
MR. GUTIERREZ: I work for a roof tile manufacturer in Miami
called Artizano's, Inc, and I'm a material sales representative for
Artizano's. I work between roofing contractors and building officials
and help explain to people how our system is to be installed. I'm
involved in numerous TAS and RAS 120 protocols to have our
materials submitted quarterly for testing. And I have been involved in
roofing since I was 17 years old. And I've ran crews, I've run
installation crews, I've done the office, I've done sales for tile. And I
Page 12
February 15,2006
am interested in obtaining my roofing license in Collier.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Are you going to contract, or still stay
with Artizano?
MR. GUTIERREZ: No. Artizano is owned by state licensed
roofing contractor. He's been licensed since 1993. I believe the year
following Hurricane Andrew, which I happened to have gone through
in Country Walk. A little community which was pretty much wiped
off the map. I lived there with my mother and father. And I know
what a category six hurricane can do. I've been through one. I was
under a mattress in my mom's closet. And I saw the codes at the time
and what they represented is our house came down around us. So I
understand quality work and what needs to be done. And it's my
intention to do just that. And I will not engage in any work that's not
beyond my immediate supervision as a qualifying agent. I will not
subcontract work out, and I will not perform any work that I'm not
directly responsible for supervising, whether it's an hour throughout
the day, or the entire day. But it will not be at the control of a
telephone call to my superintendant. I will be involved. I will be on
the site. And if my name is on it, I will back up what's done.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Any questions from the Board? What
he's saying is correct. There is a lot of ambiguity. Of course that
happens with a GUC license too.
MR. LEWIS: Yeah, but how does anybody pass it ifthere's that
much ambiguity? Question. Mr. Gutierrez, are you currently licensed
in Miami-Dade County?
MR. GUTIERREZ: No, sir.
MR. LEWIS: Broward County?
MR. GUTIERREZ: No, sir.
MR. LEWIS: Do you hold any licenses in the State of Florida?
MR. GUTIERREZ: No, sir.
MR. LEWIS: Thank you.
MR. BLUM: I have to look to Mr. Dickson. He's saying this, his
Page 13
February 15,2006
-- most of his expertise is in the areas that were controversial, so --
MR. GUTIERREZ: May I just site some things to the Florida
Building Code while we're on the subject? If you look at RAS 115 in
the Florida Building Code. In Collier County, I'm assuming that we're
in a high velocity hurricane zone, being that we're a coastal
community such as Miami-Dade County and Broward and Palm
Beach. As you all know, as members of the commission, even within
the Florida Building Code itself lies different protocols within the
State of Florida. Some on center spacings are allowed like in frost
proof Florida at two inches. We require here four inches. Shingles can
be four, nail -- four nails per shingle throughout different regions of
Florida. In Collier County, we require six. Head lapse range from
two to four inches depending on what part of the State of Florida you
reside in. But the one common denominator is that with most high
velocity zones, I understand that coming from Miami-Dade County
Florida. And being that I've been involved in this since 1991, I've
looked at the RAS 115 protocol, RAS 118 mechanically fastened. By
the way, I might add, there was not one single tile question on my
exam pertaining to roof tile. There were a lot of questions about cedar
shakes and shingles, which I know are not common place in many
counties in Florida. They're high maintenance and they're difficult to
do. But I was disappointed that I didn't even find on the steep slope
portion of the test, I don't recall a single question about roof tile.
Concrete, clay, nailed, mortar, pollyfoamed. I spent a lot of time
reading these manuals. I've read them page for page. I own the
National Roofing Contractor's Association, Fifth Edition manuals one
through four. I've read them in their entirety. I've read all the RAS
code 115's through 120's. I pretty much -- these all validate my
argument that the drip edge metal can be installed a number of ways.
According to Thompson Prometrix, there was only one correct answer
and there were three distracters, and I just don't agree with that. And I
can retake the exam if need be, but being that I scored a 74 and a 90
Page 14
February 15,2006
on the business law, I'm just asking for a little bit ofleniency, even if
it's on a probation period or limited in scope of what I can do, but I
just want a chance to prove myself.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. Speaking as a roofing
contractor for the benefit of the Board, and I'm state certified, which is
what you should have tried to go for. It really bothers me if Experior
doesn't have question on tile, which is the number one cause of
damage on other buildings in a hurricane because they become flying
missles. I'm not concerned about one question. If he went to Dade
County or Broward County he would be mildly approved because
their passing grade is 70. Collier County, we do think we're better
than anybody else and we require a 75. He made a 90 on his business
and law, which is exceptional. So, to hold him, hold him up for one
point, I don't really have a problem with it.
MS. KELLER: But we also have looked at Experior and we
waived in previous cases. But it's kind of concerning that somebody
with as much experience and knowledge as you had had trouble with
the test. So, I think -- I don't know what you can do about that, but --
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Well, we've approved another testing
agency. The state is much -- you should go for your state -- of all the
contractors in the State of Florida, ten percent are state certified. That's
a shocking figure. But most people just don't go do it. It's not that
they couldn't pass it, they just don't do it. So here you are passing
through four or five counties, why would you do county license. You
can do reciprocity.
MR. GUTIERREZ: My intention is to apply for that next. I was
going to try for the county exam first with the intent of original -- later
on at a later time. It's expensive to take the State exam. It's over
$3,000. Even though I purchased the majority of the books, the
schools that advise you to take the seminars to prepare you. Because a
lot of people say the trade exam doesn't gauge your ability of practical
knowledge, it's how fast you can flip through pages to find
Page 15
February 15,2006
information. I don't necessarily agree with that.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: No.
MR. GUTIERREZ: But they do tell you how to go through the
pages in a fast manner since it is a timed exam. And my father -- by
the way, I didn't mention, my father has been state licensed as a
general contractor in Florida since 1972.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: That's not pertinent.
MR. GUTIERREZ: He advised me to also take a seminar in the
state exam. That's what my point is. Being that that's said, being that
it may, it's expensive and it's been considerably more cost wise than
the county process has been. And that's why I'm trying to be
compliant with the county process and work on later to go for state
licence. But I do reside in Collier County. It is my intention to pretty
much work within Collier County and, you know, that's what I'm
starting out with at first.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. Any other questions of the
Board?
MR. JOSLIN: I think with the comments that you made
regarding the testing and the answers if you're telling us -- the
questions you took are probably correct in the method that they test,
and I don't think I have a problem with making a motion to approve.
MR. NEALE: What I suggest to the board because you're going
to be modifying the testing requirement here, is that the Board needs
to make a finding of fact that the applicant has demonstrated sufficient
knowledge that a retaking of the test would be superfluous. I think
that finding needs to be made.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. I still need to go forward with
a motion though.
MR. LEWIS: I was going to suggest that we get some direction
in regard to what the requirements are for us in order to waive the
testing requirements from Mr. Neale, please.
MR. NEALE: It's under the codified Ordinance in Section
Page 16
February 15,2006
22-184. And it says that the Board shall take testimony from the
applicant, and shall consider other relevant evidence regarding
whether the application meets the requirements of this commission.
Upon the evidence presented by the applicant and the contractor
licensing supervisor, the Board shall determine whether the applicant
is qualified or unqualified for the trade in which application has been
made. Findings of fact and conclusion of law regarding the approval
or denial of the application shall be made by the Board. The Board
may consider the applicant's relevant recent experience in the specific
trade, and based upon such experience, may waive testing
requirements if convinced that the applicant is qualified by
experience, whereby such competency testing would be superfluous.
MR. BARTOE: Mr. Neale, today the Board with this decision
will only be giving him permission to proceed. He has not filled out
an application yet or anything. Mr. Palzano and I suggested he come
here and possibly he could get this approval and then proceed.
MR. NEALE: Yes. It would still require a complete application
and the approval of that application.
MR. JOSLIN: So at this time all we're doing is allowing him to
apply?
MR. BARTOE: To proceed, yes.
MR. LEWIS: Is it my understanding that after filing a complete
application that he would still need to come back before this Board in
order to gain the testing requirement waiver?
MR. BARTOE: I say no, he wouldn't have to. You're giving him
the okay. And as long as staff finds his complete application in order
later, staff should be able to issue a license, am I correct?
MR. NEALE: Yes.
MR. LEWIS: My suggestion to the Board would be to see some
proof. Mr. Gutierrez has been very eloquent in his speaking and
telling us all the things that he's been through, but we have nothing but
his hearsay at this point. Although it is testimony, he is under oath, I
Page 17
February 15, 2006
would like to see something in writing. I would not be opposed to
granting a waiver, but I would like to see some backup to it, to the
requirements.
MR. BARTOE: I'm sorry, what do you want to see, sir?
MR. LEWIS: Some backup requirements. Some backup
paperwork as stated in 22-184.
MR. BARTOE: Oh, he'll have to submit a complete application.
MR. LEWIS: I don't care about the application. I want to see his
MR. BARTOE: Experience?
MS. KELLER: Experience.
MR BARTOE: That has to be there or he doesn't get a license.
That's automatic. The ordinance says for roofing you must show X
amount of years experience. I believe it's three years.
MR. NEALE: I would agree with Mr. Lewis in that for the
board's protection, for this Board to grant the waiver, I think it would
be appropriate for the Board to get the Affidavits and such that are
required in the ordinance to prove such experience.
MR. LEWIS: For the waiver of the testing.
MR. NEALE: Yeah. And just under Section 22-183 of the
ordinance, it would be, just for your information Mr. Guiterrez,
Affidavits from former employers with specifics as to the number of
years of experience, work performed, and other relevant information.
Copies of other Certificates of Competency, Affidavits from any
building director and locations where the applicant worked, and
affidavits from any other source within the trade applied for. So, it
would be appropriate for the Board to see that kind of information.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Mr. Neale?
MR. NEALE: Yes.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Can we not put that responsibility on
county officials? Otherwise it's superfluous for us to take an action.
MR. NEALE: Well, the Board is making a determination that
Page 18
February 15,2006
the testing requirements can be waived because they would be
superfluous. And at this point the Board's only evidence to that point
is Mr. Guiterrez very eloquent testimony. I would suggest that the
Board may want to review further evidence before they make such
determination. Typically this Board in cases similar to this have
reviewed fairly extensive information, including written copies of the
test results, and other Affidavits of experience and so forth.
MR. JOSLIN: I think that would probably be something be, in
line -- I think probably if we have to -- going to a motion to grant that
he can continue the process, I think I would still like to possibly put
him on the agenda for next month and bring a full packet before us
and let's take a another look at it before we grant the license. Without
just letting -- going through staff. I can see you have some concern.
Does that need to be in the form of a motion?
MR. NEALE: A motion has be made, but I don't believe a
second -- or, you were considering a motion. I don't think you made
one.
What would be is just the Board can make a statement to Mr.
Guiterrez as to what's going on and this can be tabled until next month
and staff can be requested to put it on the agenda for next month so
there's a time certain for Mr. Gutierrez so he knows when it's going to
be heard.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: March 15th, Mr. Guiterrez.
MR. GUTIERREZ: Fine.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Let's go ahead and do the motion first.
MR. JOSLIN: Okay. The motion is going to be to approve his
ability to be able to take the test -- oh, I'm sorry -- to apply for his
license and we, the Board here, is going to waive the testing
requirements for his experience.
MR. NEALE: I would suggest that the motion not include the
waiver of testing requirements at this point because of the lack of
evidence. So I would suggest if you're going to make a motion, make
Page 19
February 15,2006
a motion to allow him to proceed with the application and to return to
this board for review of the testing portion -- review of the full
application at next scheduled meeting.
MR. LEWIS: Excuse me. Point of order. I don't think we really
need a motion here because the gentleman is just coming up as a
discussion question. He was added to the agenda to ask us if he could
be able to proceed. I think if the Board so feels, tell Mr. Guitterez to
go ahead and proceed with the full application and it will come before
the Board next month anyway.
MR. JOSLIN: Exactly. That's what I think too.
MR. NEALE: I agree with Mr. Lewis on that one. It can just be
direction.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: In a nutshell, we're not going to hold
you up for the 74, but we want to see the full application. And
understand the caution that we take. We do -- we live by 75 percent
or better. And if we just flippantly open it up and immediately pass it,
we'll have a line out that door. So, next meeting is March 15th. Go
ahead and put the whole packet together, and come before us and we'll
take action at that time.
MR. GUTIERREZ: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay.
MR. LEWIS: Mr. Gutierrez? Be understanding that we have to
be careful here, like the chairman says. Please make sure you have
these Affidavits as directed in 22-183 and I think you'll be fine.
MR. GUTIERREZ: I will. Thank you.
MR. LEWIS: Thank you.
MR. GUTIERREZ: I have a silly question. Where do I get the
application?
MR. BARTOE: At our office on Horseshoe Drive.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Contractor Licensing.
MR. GUTIERREZ: It's a generic form, I just go and ask for it
and fill it out and submit it?
Page 20
February 15, 2006
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: It will take you a month to put it
together.
MR. GUTIERREZ: Okay. Thanks for the month.
MR. BARTOE: One thing sir that takes a little bit of time, you
have to order a credit report sent to our department.
MR. GUTIERREZ: Okay.
MR. BARTOE: From a credit reporting agency.
MR. LEWIS: Is it not Maggie he needs to see at Contractor
Licensing?
MR. GUTIERREZ: That's who I usually speak to.
MR. BARTOE: Maggie will give you everything necessary.
MR. GUTIERREZ: Thank you for your time. I appreciate it.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: See you soon. For those that we've
already taken -- done something with, we're not as entertaining as
Judge Judy, but you're welcome to stay if you want, but you can leave.
MR. JOSLIN: We don't yell either.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I say that very carefully because
Judge Judy lives here.
MR. LEWIS: I was enjoying the company.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: In fact, Judge Judy is welcome any
time. Might be an interesting Board meeting. Not that they aren't
already.
Okay. Moving on to public hearings. Case number 2006-03,
Collier County versus Santos Guevara, Jr, D/B/A Tropical Shield of
Florida, Incorporated. Are you here?
MS. KELLER: That's the letter.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: That's the letter. Oh boy. We've all
got the letter. Mr. Neale, I'll give you the stage, sir. Should I read the
letter first, and let you --
MR. NEALE: I don't know whether I've actually brought the
letter with me.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Let me read the letter.
Page 21
February 15,2006
MR. NEALE: Here it is. I've got it. There's a letter from Mr.
Robert Vaughn, Esquire, an attorney, representing Mr. Guevara, who
states that he represents -- I'll read it for the record, and we'll provide a
copy to the court reporter for the record.
I represent Santos Guevara, Junior and Tropical Shield of Florida
in a Chapter 13 and Chapter 7 bankruptcy respectively. I'm in receipt
of your correspondence to my clients dated January 23, 2006
regarding complaints by various individuals. I have enclosed notices
which were sent to each individual listed on the aforementioned
correspondence. Please review the notice carefully and pay special
attention to the box labeled creditors may not take section actions. As
you can see, an automatic stay is in place and prevents any action
against Mr. Guevara and Tropical Shield of Florida, Inc. Please direct
all inquiries and other complaints to legal counsel of their choosing to
assist in the understanding of the automatic stay and preparation of the
proof of claim. Please be governed accordingly.
Mr. Zachary and I both reviewed this over the course of the last
month. We did some research and we also analyzed it from a logical
and legal point of view, which isn't necessarily the same thing
sometimes. It's my opinion, and Mr. Zachary I'm sure will weigh in
with his opinion. It's my opinion that an automatic stay granted by the
bankruptcy court does not stay licensure application -- actions
regarding a person's professional licensure. It might, if he were found
in violation of the code and was assessed a fine or other damages, it
might stay the collection actions for those damages. But it's my
opinion that it would not stay the actual licensure application -- or
licensure action. The analogy that I would use is it would be as if a
doctor was being pursued for malpractice and he was being pursued
by the state DBPR for his license, and that by filing bankruptcy the
doctor could stay the action against getting his medical license
removed. Or similarly an attorney could stay any action taken by the
Bar to disbar him simply by filing a bankruptcy action. It is not the
Page 22
February 15,2006
intent of the bankruptcy code in any way that I've ever interpreted it or
read it to stay professional licensure actions, or any action such as
that.
The other analogy that Mr. Zachary and I used, it would be a
very convenient way to get out of a murder charge. Is if it stays all
actions against a person, then someone could murder someone and
simply file for bankruptcy and it would stay the prosecution of the
murder charge. So, its our opinion that Mr. Guevara still is subject to
the jurisdiction of this Board for actions against his license. Mr.
Zachary, you might want to comment.
MR. ZACHARY: I just want to add that I'm looking at section
362 of the bankruptcy code and it says -- I'll paraphrase -- that a filing
of a petition does not operate as a stay for the withholding, suspension,
or restriction of a professional or occupational license. And then it
goes on. That in particular is what we're doing here. We're taking an
action against his license. We're not trying to enforce any liens or any
claims against the estate -- not the estate, but against the bankrupt, the
one that filed bankruptcy. So, it's my opinion that we can proceed
against his license.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: That's all I need to hear. And proper
service was given as evidenced by the letter from the attorney. And I
assume they felt that letter was all they had to do, and they're not
going to show up. We are going to hear this case today. And we are
going to take action on this case today even though they're absent.
However, as chairman of this Board, I'm going to show the courtesy to
the people that are here waiting for the next case. And should
someone be watching, you need to get in the car and get here real
quick, because this case, we're just going to table it for the moment
and I'm going to the second case.
MR. ZACHARY: Just as a side, Mr. Chairman, I think staffhas
been in contact with the attorney subsequent to this letter and
informed him that we were -- it was our intention to proceed; is that
Page 23
February 15,2006
correct?
MR. BARTOE: I'm sorry?
MR. ZACHARY: You've been in contact with the attorney?
MR. BARTOE: Alan Kennette left a message, I believe, with the
attorney yesterday that we definitely do plan to proceed today.
MR. ZACHARY: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. Moving on for the moment.
Case number 2006-041 Collier County versus Todd Grup, D/B/A
T.A.G. Professional Carpentry, LLC. Are you all present?
MR. GRUP: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. If everyone would come
forward. Who are your people, Michael?
MR. OSSORIO: Good morning, Mr. Chairman. Michael
Ossorio, Collier County Contractor Licensing. Before we get --
before we get started --
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I just want to know who your people
are. I don't want you to start yet.
MR. OSSORIO: Well, I just want to make sure we get this into
evidence before we proceed.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay.
MR. OSSORIO: We have -- Mrs. Cruz is here, Mr. Grup is here.
But I believe Mr. Grup will probably want to make a statement, an
opening statement to the fact that he is -- understands what the
ramifications are what he did and he wants to go ahead and go to the
penalty phase, if there is such a thing as a penalty phase.
MR. JOSLIN: I'd like to hear the evidence before we do that so
we know what the penalties are going to be.
MR. OSSORIO: Well, ifhe stipulates to the evidence that he
violated the section 4.1 --
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: That will come out.
MR. OSSORIO: That will come out in his testimony.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Let me gain control here. First of all,
Page 24
February 15,2006
the public hearing the way it's held, county will present their evidence
-- you both make opening statements. I might go with you first this
time. No, I won't. I'll stay with the county in an opening statement so
we have an overview, then you can make your opening statement. If
you want to admit to the problem and go straight to the penalty phase,
that's something we can decide at that time if we want to do. It will be
our decision. Then both of you will present your case, introduce
witnesses, whatever. You will have a chance to ask questions of any
witness and vice versa. Then we'll make closing statements. We will
close public hearings. Once we close public hearings we have a
discussion here and decide what we're going to do with the case and
you just listen.
MR. GRUP: Okay. Very good.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: So let's do this. Mr. Ossorio, go ahead
and give us an opening statement as to the case so we have an
understanding of it.
MR. OSSORIO: Before we get started with the opening case,
can we have this admitted into evidence, please?
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Yeah. Exhibit A composite, case
number 2006-04. Need a motion to introduce this as evidence.
MR. JOSLIN: So moved, Joslin.
MR. BLUM: Second, Blum.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: All those approved?
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Aye.
MR. LEWIS: Aye.
MR. BLUM: Aye.
MS. KELLER: Aye.
MR. JOSLIN: Aye.
MR. BOYD: Aye.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Done. Continue.
MR. OSSORIO: Good morning. On January 16, 2006, Mrs.
Letich of 320 Neapolitan Way entered into a contract with
Page 25
February 15,2006
TAG. Professional Carpentry, LLC. The company was hired to
repair the tile roof areas that were damaged by the hurricane. The
homeowner was assured by TAG that all permits and inspections
would be issued. On January 23,2006, homeowner was notified that
T.AG. Professional Carpentry wasn't a licensed state or local roofing
contractor and no permits were pulled and no inspections. Indeed Mr.
Grup's qualifier of TAG. Professional Carpentry only has a license
for cabinet installing, which is a two-hour exam.
MR. LEWIS: Mr. Chairman, do we need to have Mr. Ossorio
sworn in?
MR. NEALE: Uh-huh. Ifhe's going to be giving testimony,
which he has just done.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Yeah. We have to go ahead and have
him sworn
(Sworn)
MR. OSSORIO: 400 -- Is that it, Mr. Ossorio?
MR. OSSORIO: That's it, Mr. Dickson.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. Mr. Grup. I'm seeing two
spellings here. Is it G-R-U-P-P.
MR. GRUP: G-R-U-P, sir.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: GRUP?
MR. GRUP: Yes.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: If you would state your name and I'll
have you sworn in, sir.
MR. GRUP: My name is Todd Grup, G-R-U-P.
(Sworn)
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. Opening statement. Go ahead.
MR. GRUP: I would just like to say that we did a few roof
repairs after Hurricane Wilma not knowing that our roofing license
was required to do the tile repairs. We have a cabinet and millwork
license and a handyman license and we were unaware that there was
an exam required to repair the tiles. I've since this incident signed up
Page 26
February 15,2006
to take the exam on the 18th -- the roofing exam, so that we can
comply with the county requirements. That's all I have to say.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: So basically you agree that you were
working without a license; is that it?
MR. GRUP: Yes, I am at fault. But I'd like to add that the work
was completed and there was no transfer of payment. The contract
was $4,400, and we didn't receive any money for the work. We'd like
to continue doing roofing before we take the exam.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Give me an idea of the scope of the
work? What was involved? How many tiles?
MR. GRUP: The scope of work was repairing the hip and ridge,
regluing it, color matching it. Remortoring where necessary on the hip
and ridge, and then there were field tiles that were also damaged that
were reglued. Number of tiles -- I don't know how many tiles were
repaired or replaced.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: How long were you on the job?
MR. GRUP: Approximately four days. Four to five days.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: How many men?
MR. GRUP: Three men.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay.
MR. JOSLIN: How was the -- how was the contract arrived at?
How did you meet the complainants here?
MR. GRUP: At the time I had a salesman that had contracted the
work for our company.
MR. JOSLIN: So as a cabinet installer you were out trying to
canvass work to do roofing repairs?
MR. GRUP: That's correct. It was -- after the hurricane we had
done a couple repairs for a builder and, unknowingly we thought that
our handyman license would cover us to do the minor repairs on tile
roofing, and we discovered that that was not the case. All we want to
do is comply and continue doing the roof repairs.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I really don't buy that. How would
Page 27
February 15,2006
you feel if I as a roofing contractor was doing cabinet work, and I
said, oh, I thought my roofing license applied to cabinetry.
MR. GRUP: Well, there was a moritorium.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: There is no moritorium.
MR. GRUP: Well, I was misunderstood. I thought there was a
moritorium.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: And I know from my licensing, plus
the other contractors up here know from their licensing what their
license approves and doesn't approve and what the limitations of their
license are. It's pretty weak. Don't say you didn't know, you were out
looking for hurricane work outside of the scope of your license.
MR. GRUP: I can honestly tell you I didn't know. I didn't know
it was required, sir.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: And I don't believe that.
MR. GRUP: Okay. Very good.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Mr. Neale.
MR. NEALE: Yes.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Direction. Just go ahead and do a
finding of fact and without presentation of evidence, since he has
admitted that.
MR. NEALE: You can. However, you're going to need
evidence to decide on the sanctions. So, you know, you can do the
findings of fact and I'll, you know -- we can discuss -- you can discuss
what the sanctions would be based on the things that need to be
considered. If you want, I can go through the charge, if not, you can
go straight ahead.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I think I really need to hear more
because there's so many questions, like did someone else work on it
afterwards? Have there been problems? Does the Board agree?
MR. LEWIS: I agree.
MR. BLUM: Yeah. I'm curious to know -- I mean, he sounds
like he knows a little bit about rooves. He's saying some of the right
Page 28
February 15,2006
buzz words here. I mean, where did he get his expertise as a
carpenter, framer type of person, and know enough to glue and mortar
and ridges and valleys and all those things with tiles, get the tile and
match. I mean, he's got to be doing this for a while to know this stuff.
MR. OSSORIO: Mr. Chairman?
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Yes, sir.
MR. OSSORIO: We do have Terry Cruz. She's the
granddaughter of the complainant, Ms. Leidich, and she will probably
shed some light on that what you're trying to derive at.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Let's go ahead and do the case, Mr.
Ossorio.
MR. OSSORIO: Very well.
DICKSON cHAIRMAN: If you would, go ahead and have a
seat. At this time the county will come forward and present their
evidence. Mr. Grup, you can just have a seat right there if you want.
MR. GRUP: Okay.
MR. OSSORIO: The county calls Terry Cruz.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Mrs. Cruz, if you want, you can come
over here to this podium.
Michael is going to do this?
I need for you, if you would, state your name and then I'll have
you sworn m.
MS. CRUZ: My name is Terry Lopez Cruz.
(Sworn)
MR. OSSORIO: Good morning, Ms. Cruz.
MS. CRUZ: Good morning.
MR. OSSORIO: Ms. Cruz, for the Board members, can you
please shed some light on, have you -- do you know TAG.
Professional Carpentry, and do you know, did they work on your
grandmother's house for a period of time in January oflast year?
MS. CRUZ: Yes. I didn't know anything about this company
prior to my grandmother calling me and complaining about one of the
Page 29
February 15, 2006
representatives harassing her for a payment after they did a job on her
roof. So, I contacted the salesperson that was trying to get payment to
get an estimate, because she didn't have an estimate or a proposal.
And that's when I met with the representative from their company
personally and was able to -- he wasn't able to provide me with a copy
of the original. So he wrote me out one after the work had already
been completed. My grandmother had given the go ahead on the
work, and she had asked for the proper permits and credentials and she
was assured that she would have this. And when they asked -- when
he asked for $1,000 down, she said, well, I'm not going to be able to
do that. So she just assumed that the job wasn't going to be done. She
came home from the grocery store one day and she said that they were
all over her roof and she was surprised to see this. And then after that
the representative from TAG was at her house virtually every day
asking for payment. I heard that this gentleman over here said that
they had spent four days on the roof, and I wasn't there to see this, but,
according to my grandmother, they were in and out of there so quickly
her head was spinning. And she was in a panic about the way this guy
was approaching her for payment afterwards, so, that's when I became
involved.
I do have another comment to make. And that's, prior to this
whole incident, State Farm Insurance Company sent an adjuster __
excuse me -- sent an adjuster out that determined that the whole roof
needed to be replaced. And they have awarded her monies to get that
done. We are in the process of obtaining estimates for that.
MR. JOSLIN: That was after the repair was made?
MS. CRUZ: The adjuster made this statement before the repair
was made. And right now we're trying to get roofers out there to give
us an estimate.
MR. OSSORIO: Mrs. Crews, so you're telling the Licensing
Board as of January 23rd, TAG professional Carpentry employees, or
salesmen, were up and down the street knocking on doors to repair
Page 30
February 15,2006
roofs?
MS. CRUZ: This is what my grandmother said. I asked her if
she thought they were legitimate, and she goes they must be because
they're doing the whole neighborhood. So, I said, well, make sure you
ask for the proper credentials because this was before she talked to me
on the 16th, or somewhere around there, and she said that that's what
was going on. And I said, well, make sure they're legitimate. And so
she did ask all the right questions.
MR. OSSORIO: Thank you, Ms. Cruz. The county has no other
questions.
MS. CRUZ: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Mr. Grup, do you have any questions
of the witness?
MR. GRUP: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. Thank you very much.
MS. CRUZ: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Mr. Ossorio.
MR. OSSORIO: We're ready to proceed on to closing argument.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. At this time Mr. Grup, do you
have any evidence you want to present?
MR. GRUP: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. Go ahead, Mr. Ossorio. This
is going to be a quick one.
MR. OSSORIO: On January 24, '06 we had a meeting with Mr.
Grup, qualifier for carpentry LLC, T.AG. He was notified that he
was in violation of Section of the 2002-21 ordinance of Contractor
Licensing Sections 4.1.2. He acknowledges it. He's here today to face
his sanctions, and we believe that you should find him guilty of those
charges and assess penalties in the penalty phase.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Mr. Grup, do you have a closing
statement?
MR. GRUP: No, sir.
Page 31
February 15,2006
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. This is going to be the quickest
one on record. I need a motion to -- unless you all have any questions
of anyone. Anybody have any questions? I need a motion to close
public hearing.
MR. LEWIS: So moved.
MR. JOSLIN: Second.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: All those in favor.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Aye.
MR. LEWIS: Aye.
MR. BLUM: Aye.
MS. KELLER: Aye.
MR. JOSLIN: Aye.
MR. BOYD: Aye.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. At this point basically, we've
heard all we're going to hear and we'll just deliberate among ourselves.
First issue off the bat, let's look at the charge itself and then we'll
go into the penalty. The question I have here -- Mr. Neale jump in
here real quick, personally I think this is a state charge. A felony
charge of working without a license.
MR. NEALE: That's up to the state to bring those charges and--
MR. OSSORIO: This case is going through DBPR but there is, I
believe there's going to have to be some kind of financial harm, aspect
of money being paid. And that's a good thing for Mr. Grup that he not
received any payment for work being done. So with that said, DBPR
is probably going to let us handle it from our licensing Board for
working out of the scope of his license, and I'm sure the state has
many things to do besides this.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. So what we need to do first get
the charge. Are we in agreement there? Is that what -- everyone is
nodding heads at me. I need a motion then on the charge.
MR. JOSLIN: I make the motion that we find Mr. Todd Grup
guilty of Count One, Section 4.1.2, contracted to do work outside the
Page 32
February 15,2006
scope of his competency as listed in his competency card and defined
in this ordinance, whereas restricted by the Contractor Licensing
Board.
MR. LEWIS: Second, Lewis.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Any discussion? Okay. Call for a
vote. All those in favor.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Aye.
MR. LEWIS: Aye.
MR. BLUM: Aye.
MS. KELLER: Aye.
MR. JOSLIN: Aye.
MR. BOYD: Aye.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Opposed? Findings of fact. Let me
read it real quick here. Finding of fact. Conclusions of law decision of
the Board of Collier County Contractor Licensing Board, case number
2006-04. Board of County Commissioners, Collier County Florida
versus Todd Grup, D/B/A TAG. Professional Carpentry, LLC.
License number 26457. This cause came on for public hearing before
the Contractor Licensing Board on February 15, 2006. Stand by one
minute. I've got it Mr. Neale.
MR. NEALE: Okay. I can bring it up.
MR. BLUM: While you're doing that, can I ask one question of
Mr. Grup?
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Yeah. Oh, we've got to reopen.
MR. BLUM: Oh, I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Not now.
MR. BLUM: All right. Nevermind. Let me know when.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay.
MR. NEALE: And I'll address it at the penalty phase once you're
finished with the findings phase.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Here we go. For consideration of the
administrative complaint filed against Todd A Grup, service of
Page 33
February 15,2006
complaint was made by certified mail in accordance with Collier
County ordinance 90-105 as amended. The board having heard
testimony under oath, received evidence, heard arguments respective
to all appropriate matters, thereupon issues its finding of fact
conclusions of the Board, in order of the Board, as follows: That
Todd A Grup is the holder of Certificate Of Competency number
26457. That Board of Collier County Commissioners of Collier
County Florida is the complainant in this matter. That the Board has
jurisdiction of the person of the respondent and that Todd Grup was
present at the public hearing and was not represented by counsel. All
notices required by Collier County ordinance 90-105 as amended have
been properly issued. The allegations set forth in the administrative
complaint are approved, which are One Count 4.1.2, contracting to do
work outside the scope of his competency as listed on the competency
card and defined in this ordinance or as restricted by the Collier
County licensing Board. Incorporated herein, findings of fact is that
he is guilty. Conclusions oflaw allege and set forth in the
administrative complaint are approved by a vote of six to zero.
Now we can go into the penalty phase. Mr. Neale.
MR. NEALE: Right. Since you found the respondent in
violation of the Collier County ordinance, the Board must decide the
sanctions to be imposed. The sanctions are set out in the codified
ordinance in Section 22.203, and in the revised ordinance in Section
4.3.5. The sanctions which may be imposed include one, revocation
of the Certificate of Competency; two, suspension of the Certificate of
Competency; three, denial of issuance or renewal of a Certificate of
Competency; four, probation of a reasonable length, not to exceed two
years, during which time the contractors contracting activities shall be
under the supervision of the Contractor 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
for such purpose. Five, restitution. Six, a fine not to exceed $5,000.
Page 34
February 15,2006
Seven, a public reprimand. Eight, a re-examination requirement.
Nine, denial of the issuance of permits orrequiring issuance of permits
with conditions. And ten, reasonable legal and investigative costs.
In reviewing the sanctions to be imposed, the Contractor
Licensing Board shall consider, first the gravity of the violation.
Second, the impact of the violation. Third, any actions taken by the
violator to correct the violation. Four, any previous violations
committed by the violator. And five, any other evidence presented at
the hearing by the parties that is relevant as to the sanction that is
appropriate for the case given the nature of the violation. The Board
also shall issue a recommended penalty to the State Contractor
Licensing Board, and that penalty may include a recommendation of
no further action, a recommendation of suspension, revocation or
restriction of the registration, or a fine to be levied by the board.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Couple of questions, Mr. Neale, that
are going to go come up. The license at issue here has nothing to do
with the work that's been done. And so how do we react to that?
That's one question. And number two, since he was paid nothing,
there's no monetary loss.
MR. JOSLIN: And three, since their State Farm Insurance has
now offered, to, or attempted to do, completely redo the whole roof in
it's entirety. There's no damages.
MR. NEALE: And the issue is there mayor may not be any
monetary damages. That evidence showed -- appears to indicate there
were none. However, there was still a violation of the ordinance in
that he was operating outside the scope of his license. So, therefore,
while restitution may not be appropriate, basically all the other
sanctions would be available.
MR. BLUM: To my mind, there's a four. He's now applying to
be a roofing contractor with another license with another opportunity
and I'm troubled by that.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Yeah.
Page 35
February 15, 2006
MR. BLUM: And I don't know what we can do about it, but I'm
just raising that spectre, that's all.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I hear that all the time. I don't know if
that bridge will ever be crossed.
MR. BLUM: I just had to bring it up.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: It doesn't eliminate what I think is the
gravity of the situation. I've got a group of unlicensed people. I don't
care if he has another license. He's unlicensed in this trade. Walking
down a street ringing a door bell doing work without a signed
proposal, which I never do work without a signed proposal.
MR. BLUM: Nobody does.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: And then strong arming people for
payment when it's a verbal contest as to whether they approved the
work. I'm really bothered by that.
MR. BLUM: Well, the other part, this gentleman Brian, my
initial thought was, maybe Brian just happened on this house and tried
to help this lady out unknowingly. I'm giving the guy the benefit all
the way down the line. Then I'm hearing that potentially Brian has
been canvassing the neighborhood. And Brian's got to know his
company does carpentry, it doesn't do rooves. So who is Brian? He's
operating with Mr. Grup's knowledge and consent. Is he operating
outside the scope? Is he still there? Has he been reprimanded? Has
this been a mistake that been taken care of? Brian to me is the key
part of this situation. How is he operating?
MR. JOSLIN: Maybe that's something we can maybe open the
public hearing back up again and hear Mr. Grup's comments.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Let's think about it for a minute before
we do that. Again, you're just listening to our deliberations. I've
already got the license holder admitting that he did it. He's aware of
who Brian is. He's aware he was an agent acting on behalf of the
license holder. It's a moot issue.
MR. BLUM: To my mind the penalty part has got to do with
Page 36
February 15, 2006
intent as much as anything else.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: But even his testimony said he wasn't
paid.
MR. BLUM: Not for that job, but how many did he do that he
did get paid for that we don't know about? To me that's a lot to do
with Brian and how he operated and whose consent was he operating
under. That's why I have a problem with it. I don't know what else is
done that we don't know about.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Yeah, but we don't have that in front
of us.
MR. BLUM: No, I know. I just got to bring it up.
MS. KELLER: I have a problem with the business practice.
That you see even if he was licensed, if you were to pass the test and
apply for a roofing license, I mean, the business practice of starting
work without a contract is just something that really concerns me.
MR. JOSLIN: I think if all Board members remember, there was
an emergency meeting that was called when this hurricane hit this
town. And at that time, I know Contractor Licensing went out and put
up signs all over the county that doing unlicensed work in this county
was a felony. Now I think that right off the top, this has to be treated
just that way. The gentleman was wrong, he knows he was wrong.
He admitted he was wrong. So, I don't think there's anything else
except to try to impose the penalty as Collier County would want us to
do. Or those signs don't mean a thing.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Mr. Ossorio, what's the county's
recommendation?
MR. OSSORIO: $500 penalty, and one year probation. And
with that one year, we want to see him get licensed as a roofing
contractor.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Or else what?
MR OSSORIO: Well, ifhe can't pass the exam, he can't pass the
exam. I mean, I'm not a fortune teller. The reason why we brought
Page 37
February 15,2006
this case to the Board is we want it to be on TV so people can see it,
and ifthere's any concerns that TAG. Carpentry did, maybe we'll
shed some more light on that and we'll be back in front of the Board
again. You know, he's only one person to me, it's only one person. I'm
in the city. I can't canvass the area. I can't knock on every single door,
but it's something that needs to be heard and addressed.
MS. KELLER: Are there other complaints against him or his
company?
MR. OSSORIO: Not that I know of. But I know he's done work
out there in the past.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I'm always bothered that someone
would contract with someone who knocks on their door. When
someone knocks on your door, it just throws up so many red flags.
MS. KELLER: But there was no contract.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Yeah, but that's it. They knock on
your door, why are they knocking on your door? I'm back logged a
year as a licensed contractor. They have to be unlicensed. But here,
and then they go ahead and do the work without approval. I know
what he said he did, but -- And then I've got elderly people that are
intimidated and scared when people are trying to strong arm
collection. So that's what the county wants on this case, and then
you're sending it to the state, is that my understanding?
MR OSSORIO: The state has copies. We only can do what we
can do. The state has their own method and their own procedures. If
they feel that this case will go forward to the State Attorney's Office,
they will. It's an uphill battle when there's no payment. There's only
advertisement. Advertising without a licenses is a misdemeanor and a
felony. Depends if it meets that threshold. But this gentleman is
licensed with us. We have a duty to bring it to your attention. He's
taken a two hour exam to be a cabinet installer. He's not even a full
blown carpentry license contractor. He's a cabinet installer.
Millwork, trim.
Page 38
February 15,2006
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: My recommendation is, to the Board,
that we follow county's recommendation.
MR. JOSLIN: I think we ought to follow--
MR. BLUM: I categorically disagree.
MR. JOSLIN: The fine should be more.
MR. BLUM: Excessively more. Ifthere's some way we can put
his yet to be determined roofing license on probation, when and if he
does it, I'd like to do that. I certainly want him to be on probation a lot
longer than a year, and I positively want a bigger fine. This to me is
blatant.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Mr. Neale, guidance, legally.
MR. NEALE: Yes. Maximum probation is two years. The fines
can be up to $5,000, subject to the pleasure of the Board. There is a
consideration to be brought in the consideration of sanctions as to the
efforts by the violator to correct the violation, which in this case
would be getting the roofing license. He's attempting to correct what
he did wrong in the future. But certainly it's within the purview of this
Board to impose the maximum fine if they so see fit and the maximum
probation length. And the Board can also request that, require that any
future licensure applications would come before this Board for further
reView.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Would you also review what our
options are for recommendations to the State?
MR. NEALE: Sure. You have three possibilities of
recommendation to the state. One is a recommendation of no further
action. Second is a recommendation of suspension, revocation or
restriction of the registration of his license, or a fine to be levied by
the State Construction Industry Licensing Board.
Now the state has the ability, because of the amendment to 489,
which has not yet been incorporated in Collier County ordinance to
impose a fine of up to $10,000 now.
MR. BARTOE: If! may.
Page 39
February 15,2006
MR. NEALE: Uh-huh.
MR. BARTOE: Carpentry license is not registered with the state.
MR. NEALE: So they have no jurisdiction over him.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: So there is no recommendation to the
state in our order?
MR. BARTOE: Not in this situation, I believe.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Thank you.
MR. OSSORIO: The finding of facts will be delivered to DBPR
for their investigation of Mr. Grup being not licensed. But the hurdle
is still there because there's no monetary money taken. So, with that
said, I'll walk it up to Fort Myers myself and hand deliver it. And
we've done that in the past.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I'm thrilled for your grandparents that
no money was exchanged.
Okay.
MR. JOSLIN: I'm make a motion.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Ready for a motion? Let's go.
MR. JOSLIN: I'm going to recommend that we go to the full
extent of this case. I'm going to recommend that we have a $5,000
fine imposed and his cabinet license be placed on probation for a
period of two years, and that any future roofing license, or any other
licenses he should apply for will come before this Board before it's
approved by staff or anyone else.
MR. BLUM: I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Discussion.
MR. LEWIS: Can you run that by my again? Was there any
penalty?
MR. BLUM: $5,000.
MR. JOSLIN: $5,000.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: You've maxed everything. That's the
maximum in all categories, is it not, Mr. Neale?
MR. NEALE: All the relevant ones, yes.
Page 40
February 15,2006
MR. JOSLIN: Did I miss anything?
MR. NEALE: Nope.
MR. BLUM: Good job.
MR. LEWIS: Mr. Neale, can you give us one more time the
criteria for our consideration in the penalty phase?
MR. NEALE: Certainly. The criteria -- the Board has five
criteria to consider. The gravity of the violation, the impact of the
violation, actions taken to correct the violation, previous violations
committed and any other evidence presented by the parties relevant to
the sanction that is appropriate to the case, given the nature of the
case.
MR. LEWIS: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: So, repeat, we're calling for a $5,000
fine, which is maximum, two year probation, which is maximum, and
the third issue is, review by this Board of any other applications for
licenses in other categories. Is that correct? And we cannot make a
recommendation to the state because his current license is not
something that is covered by the state licensing.
MR. BLUM: Mr. Ossorio will make the state aware of our
findings.
MR. OSSORIO: They will be.
MR. BLUM: Absolutely. Thank you.
MR. NEALE: And just so this Board knows, every one of these
orders gets transmitted to the state, Construction Industry Licensing
Board so they get a copy.
MR. BLUM: I like the hand delivered to the appropriate
authorities. I like that.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Any further discussion?
MR. BOYD: I have some. I have to weigh in on this situation. I
think we're on a witch hunt here and I apologize to all the parties
involved. But I just don't see it here. That's why I asked Mr. Neale to
read again the criteria for our decision. Our decision has to be the
Page 4]
February 15,2006
gravity. I agree the gravity of the situation here and the committing of
the action of working outside the scope of his license is severe and
needs to be duly punished. The impact is minimal at best. The lady
has a roof. As far as we know, there's no leaks. I can't see from the
pictures whether it's good, bad or indifferent. It looks like it's
complete. The job was done in a timely fashion and manner. It
appears that from case summary that from composite A that the
homeowner actually did contract with the quote, unquote contractor at
this point with the T.AG. Group to do the roof repairs. Evidently
there was a sum discussed. Evidently there was a sum agreed upon.
They asked for a down payment. She said she didn't have it. They
went ahead and proceeded with the work. I know as a general
contractor, I've done that myself. People don't have the down
payment, I go ahead and do the work and we'll work it out in the end.
So the impact I think is minimal at this point. The action that the
gentleman from T.AG. is taking is that he has applied to take a
roofing license. He is trying to correct his actions. He swears that he
didn't know before, I can't argue that point against him. Previous
actions, as far as we're aware, there are no previous actions against
him. Nothing has been brought since this notice, or prior to this
notice. And we have no other evidence that he's been doing what he's
doing except for Mr. Ossorio saying that he's been in the
neighborhood, and Ms. Cruz saying that he's been in the neighborhood
canvassing the neighborhood. If there was a problem, I think the
neighborhood would have found out about it by now and brought it to
someone's attention. So I can't see any other impact to the
neighborhood. I think what we're doing here, I can't agree with it
personally. Five thousand dollar fine. And the fact that he's done the
work, evidently it's been done properly because there's no complaint
about the work that I've heard, and he's not accepted any monies for it.
He's already down $4,400, and I don't see that as an unjust amount of
money.
Page 42
February 15,2006
MR. JOSLIN: I totally disagree with you.
MS. KELLER: Well, he's not down $4,400, because a lot of that
was his profit. So what were his materials, and what were his costs.
MR. LEWIS: Well, I disagree. If you've got guys running
around on the top of a roof for four days, I guarantee you, by the time
that you pay -- and I have to assume the man's got his worker's comp
because nothing has been brought against us -- or to us that says he
doesn't. I have to assume that he has liability insurance because
nothing has been brought to us or presented to us that he doesn't. By
the time he pays his manpower, pays his insurances, pays his Federal
taxes, pays his state unemployment, and all the other things that he has
to pay, I'll guarantee you, he doesn't have a whole lot of profit on this
job.
MS. KELLER: Which actually brings up another point, because
if he's not licensed to have the workers up on the roof, does the
workman's comp cover if something had happened to one of the
people who was injured?
MR. LEWIS: It doesn't come into play. It's not part of our
charge.
MS. KELLER: Actually, there is--
MR. BLUM: Yeah, it is. All relevant information.
MR. LEWIS: Contracting outside his competency license.
MS. KELLER: And the homeowner was put in a position where
people were not covered being on the roof doing work. So, it didn't
happen, but it put the homeowner at risk.
MR. LEWIS: It's not part of what we're here to hear. We're here
to hear Count One 4.1.2 contracting to do work outside the scope of
his competency.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: If! can weigh in. The old timer on
this Board that's been on it for longer than I want to remember, this is
the first time I can remember that the Board has gone for a
substantially stricter and harsher penalty than what county has
Page 43
February 15,2006
requested. In fact, a lot of times we are more lenient than county
requests for reasons, but I'm tempted here -- that's why I asked Mr.
Ossorio what the County's recommendation was. I want to stay with
that recommendation. Specifically that's what the county wants, that's
what Mr. Ossorio feels that he needs to proceed on to the state with.
And, Bill, your point is well taken also.
MR. BOYD: Well, I'll agree with Mr. Lewis. I'll go along with
the probation for two years, but I'm not voting for a $5,000 fine, that's
just way too -- way too harsh. I mean, the gentleman showed up. He
could have just said, you know, thumb his nose and go about his
business, but he is here. He admitted he did it. That goes along way
with me. I mean, last month we let somebody off that nailed a
homeowner for $30,000. We just, you know, let him kind of walk
away, and I'll bet he never pays that. Now we've got somebody that's
here. He admitted he did wrong. Whether he goes for his roofing
license or not, I think he's probably learned his lesson, and I will not
vote for $5,000 fine.
MR. JOSLIN: Well, I think the fine's got to be more than $500.
That's a slap on the wrist for anybody who wants to do work in Collier
County here and go do roofing repairs -- go out and do masonry wall
and fix a roof, and it's okay and we're going to let it happen. I don't go
for it now. I might reduce the motion for the amount, but it's not
going to be $500. No way.
MR. BLUM: I don't have a problem with the lowering of the
dollar amount. To my mind, this was blatant taking advantage of a
situation, i.e. hurricane repairs. This man, to my mind, knowingly
sent a representative out canvassing a neighborhood -- and we all
know where this neighborhood is. It's more or less affluent homes.
People can afford to make repairs. Maybe he was a little bit slow. I'm
all speculation, I agree. I haven't heard anything to the contrary. And
what I hear leads me to think this way. I can't help it. He had to know
what his salesman was doing. Mr. Ossorio has indicated that there are
Page 44
February 15, 2006
more than one, possibly several that have had this work done. The
reason they don't come forward, who knows. They're part-time
residents. They're not even here. They don't even know about it. If
the roof isn't leaking, they don't give a damn. We've run into this
apathy many, many times before. The point that people haven't come
forward, doesn't do anything for me. He took advantage of a situation,
knowingly and blatantly didn't get a contract, because he couldn't get a
permit and everybody knew it. I think this is just a blatant excuse to
take advantage of a situation which is what we're here to prevent.
MR. JOSLIN: Exactly. I agree with you totally.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. I'm going to go call for the
vote. We have a motion on the board -- on the floor and a second.
$5,000 fine, two-year probation, and review by this board of any
future license applications.
MR. BLUM: Maybe Mr. Joslin will lower the dollar amount
and that will make it more amenable to all of us. If he wants to lower
it to say $1,000 as part of his motion. Would you like to amend your
motion?
MR. JOSLIN: Tell you what I'll do, for the comments made by
Mr. Lewis and Mr. Boyd, I'll go for the benefit of the doubt and split it
in half for $2,500. I'm going to make an example of this case, or then
I'll be voting the wrong way. That's all. I'm not going to let this slide
through. I just can't do it.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. I have an amendment for
$2,500 fine, everything else stays in place.
MR. JOSLIN: Yes.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Can I have a second to the amended?
MR. BLUM: I second.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: All those in favor?
MR. BLUM: Aye.
MS. KELLER: Aye.
MR. JOSLIN: Aye.
Page 45
February 15,2006
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: How many? All those opposed?
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Aye.
MR. LEWIS: Aye.
MR. BOYD: Aye.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: It dies for lack of a majority. I need a
new motion. I'm going to make a motion. $500 fine, one year
probation. I'm not going to say anything about any future licenses,
because we have a phenomenal county staff, and they'll take care of
that. That's my motion, $500 fine and one year probation. I need a
second before we can discuss.
MR. LEWIS: I'll second that motion.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Otherwise it dies for lack ofa second.
Okay. Second. Discussion.
MR. LEWIS: Just the discussion on that, I agree with that only
to the extent that when I look at the case summary and the evidence
presented, I find it hard to believe that within one week's time we can
have a $4,000 roofing job done, completed, accepted, and no monies
given out to anybody. And then a report made that all of a sudden we
have unlicensed contractor activities. It just boggles my mind. Seems
like there's more probably to this than meets the eye, or that was
presented. Mr. Grup is, like Mike had said, he's here. He's willing to
face the penalties. He's accepted whatever the Board determines to
him, and I think we're being more than just in all phases. And I don't
want this to seem like I'm a very easy person on unlicensed contractor
activity. I think certainly the staff can let you know that even as of
this morning, I brought in an investigative report that Mr. Bartoe is
going to look into of a possible unlicensed activity. So I'm not -- I'm
actually quite a hard nose on that. But I think the remedy for this
situation is just.
MS. KELLER: You said that you think there's more than what
we've seen. Can you maybe ask some more questions about that?
MR. LEWIS: No, I can't.
Page 46
February 15,2006
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: No. And I know this -- first of all, I'm
a state certified license roofing contractor, I of anybody should be the
one most upset. But I know the staff for the licensing Board, Collier
County Contractor Licensing, and there is more going on here than
what's been presented, and that's why I'm following staffs
recommendation because I have so much confidence in them and I'm
going to let them handle it.
MS. KELLER: I have a problem with that. I can't make a
decision at all now, because I've been told that there's something I
don't know about, but I'm supposed to made a decision, and I can't do
that.
MR. NEALE: Well, just to note, the Board has to make the
decision solely on the evidence presented at this hearing on this
charge, period.
MR. BLUM: Not let innuendos --
MR. NEALE: Rumors, innuendos, anything else or something
that the Board cannot consider.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: But based on all the stuff that Mr.
Lewis said also, that's why I couldn't vote for the previous motion.
Because there's not a lot of hard data, and there's not a monetary loss.
MR. JOSLIN: Actually, good that it's not hard data or monetary
loss, because then the fine would have been a whole lot more dollars.
Then we'd be talking about damages.
MR. LEWIS: I can agree to that. And in this case, there doesn't
appear to be any financial loss to the client, only financial gain at this
point.
MR. BLUM: That doesn't alter the fact that a man obviously
knowingly didn't even come close to any of our statutes for licensing,
sent a salesman out knowingly to recruit business he was not licensed
or insured to do. The fact that this didn't turn into an absolute disaster,
is a miracle. And a slap on the wrist and go ahead about your business,
sorry, just doesn't do it. Now, maybe we can agree to some kind of a
Page 47
February 15,2006
compromise here, but, we're at both ends of the spectrum, and I'm
afraid with six people on the Board, the obvious is alot liable to kick
into play here. So can we come to some agreement that we can -- all
can make to get one more person to go along. That's the way we're
headed.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I don't know where it stands right
now, but I'm going to call for a vote. Motion on the floor, $500 fine,
one year probation. All those in favor.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Aye.
MR. LEWIS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: You and me. Two. All those
opposed?
MR. BLUM: Aye.
MS. KELLER: Aye.
MR. JOSLIN: Aye.
MR. BOYD: Aye.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Four opposed. It's dead. give me one
we can fly with.
MR. BOYD: I pose a motion, two year probation and $1,000
fine.
MR. BLUM: And bring -- can I suggest that we bring before--
any new license before this Board before it's -- I personally would like
to review a new license that this gentleman mayor may not get.
MR. BOYD: Well, wouldn't we have to do that anyway?
MR. BLUM: No, no, no. And it's not that I don't trust staff --
MR. BOYD: Ifhe passes the test, he doesn't have to fill out a
packet?
MR. BLUM: No. Yeah, he does a packet, he does all that, but
staff can review it and approve it.
MR. BOYD: Ifhe's under probation, they're going to review it
anyway.
MR. BLUM: Only the license that he now has. Ifhe gets a new
Page 48
February 15,2006
license, we won't have anything on it until and unless he has a
problem with. Between you and me, when I see a new license, I want
to put that one on probation, or I'd like to at least propose that. I'd like
that opportunity is what I'm saying.
MR. BOYD: I'll make that part of the motion then. Ifhe does
receive a new license, that it is still under, that license would be under
probation also.
MR. BLUM: He needs to come before us, and then as a Board
we need to decide that. That's what we're here to do. So if you can
make your motion that his new license application comes before this
Board to be approved.
MR. BOYD: I'll include that if we can get everybody to agree.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: So your motion does include the
third?
MR. BOYD: Coming before the Board for approval.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. Do I have a second?
MR. BLUM: I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. Discussion.
MR. LEWIS: Just clarify the motion. We've got two year
probation, $1,000 fine, and review by the Board of any new license.
MR. BLUM: Yes.
MR. JOSLIN: Still seems like a slap on the wrist. $1,000 he
made probably in ten houses, other houses in other developments I bet
he's done on the roof repairs.
MR. BLUM: Yup.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: It could be on one. All those -- call
for the vote. All those in favor.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Aye.
MR. LEWIS: Aye.
MR. BLUM: Aye.
MS. KELLER: Aye.
MR. BOYD: Aye.
Page 49
February 15,2006
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Opposed?
MR. JOSLIN: Nay.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. Order of the Board, based
upon the foregoing finding of facts and conclusion of law and
pursuant to the authority granted in 489 Florida Statute, Collier
County ordinance number 90-105, as amended by a vote of five in
favor and one opposed, it is hereby ordered that the following
disciplinary sanctions in related order are hereby imposed on the
holder of contractors certificate of Competency number 26457, one,
$1,000 fine; two, one year probation.
MR. BLUM: Two years.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I'm sorry, it was two years. Two year
probation. Three, any applications for future licenses come before this
Board for review. And that's it. Mr. Grup.
MR. GRUP: Pardon me, sir.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Mr. Grup, the case is hereby closed.
You have heard what the action of the Board was?
MR. GRUP: Yes, I did.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Andjust, I know you're probably not
doing this anymore.
MR. GRUP: Pardon me?
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I know you're probably not doing this
anymore.
MR. GRUP: No, but I intend to when I get my roofing license. I
intend to continue doing it.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. We thank you for your time.
We thank the county for their time. This case is closed.
Moving on, public hearing case number 2006-03. Collier County
versus Santos G. Guevara, Jr, D/B/A Tropical Shield of Florida,
Incorporated. Mr. Ossorio, the county is prepared to present their
case?
MR. BARTOE: Mr. Chairman, do we want to take a little break
Page 50
February 15,2006
to relieve the -- do you need a break reporter?
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: This is going to be quick.
COURT REPORTER: That's fine. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay.
MR. NEALE: Mr. Chairman, you're going to handle that?
MR. ZACHARY: I'll handle some of it, and Mr. Balzano will
handle some of it.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Would you introduce the exhibit,
please?
MR. ZACHARY: The county will introduce the packet, and
since there's no one here, there will be no objection, I assume. No one
showed up. This is the packet that's in case indication number
2006-03, Collier County versus Santos G. Guevara, Junior, D/B/A
Tropical Shield of Florida, Inc.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: And just to reiterate, Mr. Guevara was
properly notified. He's represented by counsel. They are aware that
we were having this hearing today, and we are moving forward with
him being absent.
MR. BARTOE: Mr. Chairman, staff would also like to introduce
the letter from attorney Robert Vaughn as composite Exhibit B
because staff feels that that is proof that they were properly notified
because he said they were. He said he is in receipt of the
correspondence from Mr. Kennette
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Let's do this on the Board. Would
someone make a motion to accept composite Exhibit A and the letter
which would be Exhibit B.
MR. LEWIS: So moved, Lewis.
MR. BLUM: Second, Blum.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: All those in favor?
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Aye.
MR. LEWIS: Aye.
MR. BLUM: Aye.
Page 5]
February 15, 2006
MS. KELLER: Aye.
MR. JOSLIN: Aye.
MR. BOYD: Aye.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Approved. County if you'd proceed.
MR. ZACHARY: Mr. Chairman, I'll make a quick opening and
then I'd like to call a witness here that has so graciously stayed around
for --
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I didn't know there were witnesses for
this one.
MR. ZACHARY: Well, I thought it was going to be 15 minutes,
and then a poor judge of time, it turned into 45. I appreciate them
staying. Mr. Chairman, from May through August of 2005, Santos
Guevara, Junior doing business, or the qualifier for Tropical Shield of
Florida Incorporated took deposits from several customers to install
hurricane shutters on their homes. Several months have passed since
those deposits were taken. To date, no work has been done. As of
January, middle of January, the cell phones for the company are out of
service and a check was done on the premises where the business is
located, and it appears that the unit where the business is located has
been vacated. To date, no customers have received any of their
deposits back. The county alleges that the company violated Section
4.1.3 of our ordinance, abandoning a construction project which he is
engaged, or under contract as a contractor. I will read the whole
charge. You have it there in front of you in Count Two section
4.1.8.1, fails to fulfill their contractural obligations to a customer --
contractor has abandoned the customer's job. Basically the county
would ask the Board to find this company and this individual guilty of
those two counts, and the county at this time would recommend that
the license for this company be revoked and any other appropriate fine
that might be, or sanction that might be recommended by county staff.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Do you have a total amount for the
restitution?
Page 52
February 15,2006
MR. BARTOE: Excuse me. For the record, Tom Bartoe. I
believe I should be sworn in along with Mr. Kennette, and -- do we
want to swear everybody in at the same time?
MR. NEALE: Swear in everybody that's going to testify.
MR. ZACHARY: These kind folks that decided to stay, call
them first and --
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Let's do that. Go ahead and call them
up.
MR. ZACHARY: Mrs. Segal, could you come forward? I think
she's the --
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: If you would, state your name, and
then I'll have you sworn in, please.
MS. SEGAL: My name is Ursula Segal.
MR. ZACHARY: Mrs. Segal, did you contact--
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Wait. I have to have her sworn
(Sworn)
MR. ZACHARY: Mrs. Segal--
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Go ahead.
MR. ZACHARY: Mrs. Segal, did you on the 26th of May of
2005 contract with Tropical Shield of Florida to install hurricane
shutters on your home?
MRS. SEGAL: Yes.
MR. ZACHARY: I'm going to show you what's in the packet as
E5. Is this the contract, or a copy of the contract?
MRS. SEGAL: Yes, this is copy.
MR. ZACHARY: And your signature, or your husband's
signature?
MRS. SEGAL: Yes, my husband's, yes. And this is the
salesman.
MR. ZACHARY: The salesman. And is this the amount, the
$7,850.
MRS. SEGAL: $7,850.
Page 53
February 15,2006
MR. ZACHARY: Is that the amount you gave them for deposit?
MRS. SEGAL: Yes.
MR. ZACHARY: And have you received any of that deposit
back?
MRS. SEGAL: No, never.
MR. ZACHARY: Has any work been done at all?
MRS. SEGAL: No, nothing was. And we wrote him a lot of
times letters, and we tried him to call him, but he never, he never
called me back. It was a problem. And he swore -- one time I met
him unexpectedly because I was in the morning with my husband and
he was in his office, so he swore to me that he was done the job, but
he never did it.
MR. ZACHARY: Okay. Do you remember about what date that
you talked to him?
MRS. SEGAL: Yes, it was in November. In November, yes. He
gave me a lot of appointments to do that and I wrote him a letter that I
would like to have some money back when the job is not done until
10th of December. And I called him a lot of times. Every day
sometimes.
MR. ZACHARY: Thank you. I don't have any other questions.
MRS. SEGAL: He was lying every time.
MR. ZACHARY: Does the Board have any questions?
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Does the board have any questions of
her?
(N 0 response)
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: First of all, I apologize to both of you.
In my effort to try to be kind and not waste your time, I wasted your
time.
MRS. SEGAL: Yeah, this is okay. He was lying every time.
Now I have time because so much money, so --
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Sorry.
MRS. SEGAL: I think that is a crime because he was lying. And
Page 54
February 15,2006
I know that he had about --
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Step forward just a little bit.
MRS. SEGAL: I know that he, from another worker that he has
about 260 estimates and he got about $500,000 now he's done nothing.
It's crime I think.
MR. ZACHARY: Thank you. Does the board have anything
else?
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Nothing further?
MR. ZACHARY: Nothing further for this witness.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Go ahead then.
MR. ZACHARY: Mr. Bartoe, the Board will take notice, besides
the --
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Has Mr. Bartoe been sworn in once?
MR. BARTOE: No, I have not been.
MR. NEALE: He needs to be sworn
(Sworn)
MR. ZACHARY: Mr. Bartoe, we have several other estimates
from Tropical Shield. Have you -- have you spoken to these other
people that have contracted with this company to have their hurricane
shutters installed?
MR. BARTOE: I have spoken to some ofthem as late as
yesterday, and the ones I haven't, Mr. Kennette has. I do want to bring
out of the seven that we have in this packet, it totals up to -- total
deposits of $24,477.50. And Mr. Kennette and I are like Mr. Ossorio.
We can't canvass door to door. God only knows how many of those
are out there that never came to us.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Has any ofthe work been done?
MR. BARTOE: On these, none. And getting on the computer
this morning, the last permits pulled by Tropical Shield were in
September, approximately four or five, with absolutely no inspections,
other than the day after they were pulled. Next day was a Notice of
Commencement and after that nothing.
Page 55
February 15,2006
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: This is a condo project?
MR. BARTOE: No.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: These are all single family homes?
MRBARTOE: Yes.
MR. BLUM: September of '05 you're talking about?
MR. BARTOE: September '05, yes.
MR. BLUM: Nothing since September, no permits at all?
MR. BARTOE: No, sir. Plus after that, I myself put him on
hold.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: This looks like willful theft.
MR. BLUM: No question.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: By section 489.126, if! am right--
MR. BLUM: Wow.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: It's already defined by Florida state
statute that it is theft, because any deposits in excess of 10 percent
over the contract amount, permit must be pulled within 60 days and
work must be completed within a period of time -- I forget the period
of time. So when he took a 50 percent deposit, he was committing
theft unless you sign away that regulation. So we have numerous
felony charges.
MR. NEALE: I can read the statute.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Am I correct?
MR. NEALE: You hit it right on by the way. Congratulations.
Thank you for helping me find it. Pursuant to 489126 Subsection two,
the contractor who receives as initial payment money totaling more
than 10 percent of the contract price for repair, restoration,
improvement or construction to residential real property must A, apply
for permits necessary to do the work within 30 days after the payment
is made, except where the work does not require a permit, and B, start
the work within 90 days after the date all necessary permits for work
are issued. A contractor who receives money for this shall not with
intent to defraud the owner, fail or refuse to perform any work within
Page 56
February 15,2006
90 days, and if the contractor does not do any of these things, it gives
rise to an inference that the money in excess of the value of the work
performed was taken with the intent to defraud.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Then it goes on in there to say he's
guilty of theft, which all contractors should have this in their contracts.
My company does. If I ever have to take a deposit that's more than
10 percent, then I write in there 489.126 that you are aware of that,
and you allow this, which there is provision in there that that is
allowable if it's explained to the homeowner, or whoever is giving the
deposit, and they consent.
MR. NEALE: Now, there is a requirement within the statute that
a certified letter must be sent to the address of the contractor
indicating the contractor has failed to perform any work for a 60 day
period, that the failure to perform was not the result of the owner's
termination or material breach by the owner, and the contractor must
recommence construction within 30 days after the date of the mailing
of the letter. So there is a notice provision required of the contractor,
which mayor may not have been done in this case. We have no
evidence either way. But if a person -- the fourth subsection of this
statute is that any person who violates any provision of this section is
guilty of theft and shall be prosecuted and punished under Florida
statute section 812.014, which I would imagine is the statute for grand
theft. I did not research that.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: So do you have communication with
the state on this for future felony charges?
MR. BARTOE: We have not up 'till now.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Thank you.
MS. KELLER: So, should the homeowners need to send this __
MR. NEALE: In order to fully comply with 489.126, they need
to send a certified letter as outlined in the statute to the contractor.
Then he has 30 days to do something in this instance. It seems likely
that there would be little reaction by the contractor, but we'll maintain
Page 57
February 15,2006
the rights and then they would be able to go to the state attorney with
it and push the case.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Would you do me a favor and make
sure county staff has that requirement? And you can pass it on to
these people. Because then we can validate felony charges that the
state can follow up on.
MR. OSSORIO: No problem. What we'll do is get the finding of
fact and ship it to you. Detective White, he's with Economic Crime
Unit with Brock's office and we'll coordinate with them.
MR. NEALE: Okay. And then if you get the notices, get the
ordinance to send notices, then --
MR. OSSORIO: That's fine.
MR. NEALE: It's prima facie evidence.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Contractors need to be very, very
careful on deposits. If you've got to have a deposit -- I'm saying this
because we're on television, but you don't -- you've got to be careful
what you take. And it's better not to take any deposits.
MRS. SEGAL: This is not possible because --
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I know, it's not possible, but not every
company requires a deposit.
MRS. SEGAL: He had five --
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I don't have you on the thing so I can't
MRS. SEGAL: Sorry.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. No further evidence?
MR. NEALE: Other than just take note of the packet and the
deposits were taken, and that none have been returned. No work has
been done. No further evidence.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Did you want Mr. Kennette to enter
into this?
MR. BARTOE: I don't believe he needs to -- I don't think he has
anything more to add. If you want to look at E21 through to the end,
Page 58
February 15, 2006
it's photographs taken by Mr. Ossorio and I when we were up to his
last known address on January 25th, and it was completely vacated,
and you can see that the mailbox was full of mail, including certified.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: The question I have though Mr.
Bartoe is, in going through this packet in August and in October, this
was -- he was acting like a responsible company.
MR. BARTOE: I put that in there to show you acting like, yes.
Acting.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Well, that takes some level--
MR. BARTOE: Plus buying time is the way I looked at it.
MR. BLUM: Me too.
MR. ZACHARY: Mr. Chairman, as an aside, I consulted the
Department of State website yesterday or the day before. Tropical
Shield Of Florida, Inc. was administratively dissolved on 9/16/05. So
the company was no longer registered in the State of Florida at that
point. It was a dissolved corporation.
MR. BLUM: How do you dissolve a Chapter 7?
MR. NEALE: Administratively.
MR. ZACHARY: Administratively dissolved for annual report.
So evidently he didn't file an annual report for 2005.
MR. BLUM: This is premeditated all the way.
MR. JOSLIN: Which--
MR. BARTOE: Dissolved in September?
MR. ZACHARY: Yes.
MR. BARTOE: And then we have these, Mr. Chairman, these
letters of October 29th.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: This case is more for criminal court
than what we can do here today.
MR. BARTOE: Staff -- staff, if found in violation, is not looking
for a fine. We're looking for revocation.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I don't think there was ever any
question.
Page 59
February 15,2006
MR. BARTOE: We're looking for restitution, if that can be
awarded, with the Bankruptcy proceedings. You'll have to consult
counsel.
MR. NEALE: The board could -- it's my opinion, and Mr.
Zachary can weigh in. The Board could, in my opinion, find for
restitution, then the county would became a creditor on the bankruptcy
estate and would have the ability then to file a claim against the
bankrupt estate, is my opinion.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Can we do -- and we haven't closed
public hearing yet. But can we do restitution for future or unknown,
or just what's in front of us?
MR. NEALE: Pardon me?
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: We can only do restitution for what's
in front of us, correct?
MR. NEALE: Correct, you can only do for that which is proven
in front of you,and you can also impose a fine.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. Any more evidence to present?
Any more questions? Do I hear a motion to close the public hearing?
MR. JOSLIN: So moved, Joslin.
MR. BLUM: Second.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: All those in favor?
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Aye.
MR. LEWIS: Aye.
MR. BLUM: Aye.
MS. KELLER: Aye.
MR. JOSLIN: Aye.
MR. BOYD: Aye.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Let's first go for the charge folks.
MR. JOSLIN: Pretty obvious.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Two charges.
MR. LEWIS: Three?
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Yeah.
Page 60
February 15,2006
MR. BLUM: I'd like to make a motion.
MR. NEALE: That's actually Two Counts.
MR. LEWIS: Two counts.
MR. BLUM: I make the motion that the Two counts be
approved as stated and we find the defendant guilty on all counts.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Do I hear a second?
MR. JOSLIN: Second, Joslin.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: All those in favor.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Aye.
MR. LEWIS: Aye.
MR. BLUM: Aye.
MS. KELLER: Aye.
MR. JOSLIN: Aye.
MR. BOYD: Aye.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: So done. Quick, let me do the
administration here and we'll move onto the penalty phase, Mr. Neale.
Board of Collier County Commissioners is the petitioner versus
Santos G. Guevara, Junior, case number 2006-03. License number
25007. This cause came before public hearing before the Contractor
Licensing Board on February 15,2006 for consideration of many
administrative complaint filed against Santos G. Guevara, service the
complaint was made by certified mail which is acknowledged by the
attorney representing Mr. Guevara and in accordance with Collier
County ordinance 90-105 as amended. The Board having heard
testimony under oath, received evidence, heard arguments perspective
to all appropriate matters thereupon issues it's finding of fact
conclusion of law and order of the Board that one; Santos G. Guevara,
Junior is the holder of record of certificate of Competency number
2006-03. Two, that the Board of Collier County Commissioners of
Collier County Florida is the complainant in this matter. Three, that
the Board had jurisdiction of the person of this respondent and that
Mr. Guevara was not present at the hearings, and, therefore, not
Page 6]
February ]5,2006
represented by counsel. Number four, all notices required by Collier
County ordinance number 90-105 as amended have been properly
issued. And five, the allegations of fact as set forth in the complaint to
include 4.1.3, abandoning a construction project in which he is
engaged or under contract as a contractor. Number two for -- I don't
have to read the whole thing, do I, Mr. Neale?
MR. NEALE: No.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: 4.1.8.1, the contractor fails to fulfill
his contractural obligation to a customer, and three, 4.1.8.1B, the
contractor has abandoned a customer's job, and the percentage of
completion is less than the percentage of the total contract paid to the
contractor at the time of abandonment. By a vote of six in favor and
zero against, he was found guilty in all three complaints.
Next is penalty phase. Mr. Neale, if you'll guide us.
MR. BARTOE: Mr. Chairman, one correction. His license
number is 25007. You quoted the case number.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Thank you.
MR. JOSLIN: Also there's two complaints -- Two Counts.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Is it not -- doesn't really count as
three.
MR. NEALE: No, it's two counts. Because the 4.1.8.1, the first
section states that they neglected to do it, and then the following
circumstances. The circumstances under which they neglected to pay
the creditors and so forth.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I can probably go through 489 and
come up with a whole lot mor.
MR. NEALE: Well, as noted before, the Board can only find on
the violations that are alleged in the complaint.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Exactly. Tell us what we can do.
MR. NEALE: Well, this respondent has been found in violation
of the ordinance and the Board must decide the sanctions to be
imposed. The sanctions which may be imposed include revocation of
Page 62
February 15, 2006
the certificate of competency, suspension of the certificate of
competency, denial of issuance or renewal of that certificate,
probation of a reasonable length, not to exceed two years. Restitution.
A fine not to exceed $5,000, a public reprimand, a re-examination
requirement, denial of the issuance of permits or requiring issuance of
permits with conditions, and reasonable legal and investigative costs.
The Board in determining what sanctions to impose, shall consider the
gravity of the violation, the impact of the violation, actions taken by
the violator to correct the violation, previous violations committed by
the violator and any other evidence presented at the hearing by the
parties which is relevant as to the sanction that is appropriate for the
case given the nature of the violation. The Board shall also issue a
recommended penalty to the State Construction Industry Licensing
Board. This penalty may include a recommendation of no action, a
recommendation of suspension, revocation or restriction of the
registration, or a fine to be levied by the State Construction Industry
Licensing Board.
MR. BARTOE: Mr. Neale, I might add his license is not
registered with the state either.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Hurricane shutters?
MR. BARTOE: He does not have a hurricane shutter license.
This was under an aluminum speciality license and he has failed the
hurricane test.
MR. BLUM: It gets better and better.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I saw he was not pulling any permits
for any of this work either?
MR. BARTOE: Not after it came to our attention.
MR. NEALE: I would note to the Board that that has been
presented as evidence, is in evidence that may be considered by the
Board.
MR. BLUM: I'm ready to make a motion.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Go.
Page 63
February 15,2006
MR. BLUM: I recommend that we revoke the license for
Tropical Shield of Florida, Inc. I recommend a maximum $5,000. I
recommend that we do send all the company paperwork to the state in
the off chance that this gentleman does decide to go for state license.
I'd like to make a side here. This letter that we got says in Chapter 13
and Chapter 7 bankruptcy respectively. Now Tropical Shield is gone.
It's a Chapter 7. Creditors get what they get. But Mr. Guevara is
only in an Chapter 13, which he can come out of. Which will enable
him to put his license on another business. So as part of my motion, I
want -- I would like to see his name flagged should he ever decide
under Mr. Santos Guevara, Junior to apply for any license in Collier
County, it comes before this Board. That's what I'd like to add to my
motion.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Keep going. You haven't addressed
restitution or cost.
MR. BLUM: Restitution -- full amount as described by Mr.
Zachary. I don't remember the amount.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: $24,400 and change.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: $477.50.
MR. BLUM: Exactly.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Cost?
MR. BLUM: Estimated cost in the amount of --
MR. BARTOE: Staff would recommend $500.
MR. BLUM: $500 in cost.
MR. JOSLIN: Is that it?
MR. JOSLIN: Second.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. I've got -- tell me if! am--
we've got full revocation of the license, revoked, gone. Restitution
$24,477.50. And Collier County would be the collector of that for the
individuals. A fine of $5,000. Administrative cost of the investigation
and the hearing. $500. You guys work cheap. Recommendation to
the state to send the entire packet to the state with the recommendation
Page 64
February 15,2006
that they review -- help me if I've got this right -- that they review for
possibility of a state fine.
MR. BLUM: Well, he doesn't have a state license, but my
personal recommendation would be that they hold this in abeyance
until such time as this gentleman may decide to go for state license
since he lost his Collier license. He could go up to the state and look
for a license and nobody would know anything about it.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: We send it to state with the purpose of
making them aware of the actions that he has committed down here?
MR. BLUM: Yes.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: And was that all?
MR. BLUM: No. And that any future license that he may try to
pull in his name be brought to our attention immediately.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: This Licensing Board. Everybody
clear? Discussion. Oh, I need a second first.
MR. JOSLIN: I did one. You have a second.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Got a second. I need discussion? Are
we witch hunting, Mr. Myers?
MR. LEWIS: Who's Mr. Myers?
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I mean, Bill.
MR. LEWIS: No. In light of the case that was just before us, as
you can see, I think the gravity and the impact of this situation is just
ridiculous. And I think the motion is well within reach.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: This borders on premeditated.
MR. LEWIS: Exactly.
MR. BLUM: Fraud.
MS. KELLER: Fraud.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I mean --
MR. LEWIS: It's terrible. I mean, it hurts the consumers, and it's
just a shame. I apologize to all the consumers involved.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I'm sorry. I don't know where I got
Myers.
Page 65
February 15, 2006
MR. BLUM: I wish there was more we could do. CHAIRMAN
DICKSON: What scares me is how many -- this company -- you'd be
surprised how many people watch this on TV. Must be a bad TV
night, but this is Tropical -- when we went prime time -- do you
remember that? We got bumped for the impact or something and we
were on at 8:00, my gosh, I had more people--
MR. BLUM: My phone rang off the hook.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Yeah. I was at Kmart the next day
and, I saw you on TV. I just want to repeat the name of this company.
Tropical Shields.
MR. BLUM: Tropical Shields.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Tropical Shields of Florida, Inc. I've
got a feeling there's a ton of people out there that have given deposits
and don't even know about this yet. Or hoping that they some day
show up and they're not going to show up. The business is dissolved
and they filed bankruptcy. So I hope that word can get out to the
public.
MR. BLUM: My big fear is based on this letter that this guy
intends -- why would he do a Chapter 13 in his own name? He's just
out there. He did it once he's going to do it again in another name.
And we've got to flag it. We've got to know when this guy comes out
here in Collier County that we're looking for him.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I would like to -- if there's some way I
could get Lisa -- I don't know her last name, who is the public
information --
MR. BARTOE: Kohler.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I would like for Lisa Kohler, if she
would, to make some kind of release about this case to the news
media.
MR. BARTOE: We will ask her to do that.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: So that -- I know what's happening
out there is everyone one is backlogged past a year. I've got a ton of
Page 66
February 15, 2006
people out there that have given deposits that are still thinking this
company is going to show up. So at least get the word out there that
they've got a problem.
MR. BARTOE: Because in that industry, I do understand, there's
a big aluminum shortage also.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. I've got a motion and a second.
Any more discussion? All those -- call for the vote, all those in
favor?
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Aye.
MR. LEWIS: Aye.
MR. BLUM: Aye.
MS. KELLER: Aye.
MR. JOSLIN: Aye.
MR. BOYD: Aye.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: All right. Opposed?
(No response)
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: It's unanimous. Let me read it into the
book. I hate it when I lose my place. I've got too many papers up
here, Mr. Neale.
MR. NEALE: It's one ofthose days.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Here we go. Order of the Board:
Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and conclusion oflaw and
pursuant to the authority granted in Chapter 489 Florida statutes and
Collier County ordinance number 90-105 as amended, and by a vote
of six in favor and zero opposed, it is hereby ordered that the
following disciplinary sanctions and related order are hereby imposed
on the holder of contractors certificate of competency number 2 --
MR. JOSLIN: 25007.
MR. NEALE: 25007.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: 25007. Number one, this license shall
be revoked. Number two, restitution shall be ordered in the amount of
$24,477.50. Number three, that a maximum fine of$5,000 be
Page 67
February 15,2006
imposed. Number four, that administrative cost for investigation and
hearing of $500 be assessed. Number five, that this file be sent on to
the State of Florida for their information purposes should any action in
the future need to be taken or license application be received by this
individual. And number six, that any future licenses or license
applications by this individual come before this licensing Board prior
to any approval or disapproval. Did I get it all? Case is closed. I got
a feeling we got more of these coming.
MR. LEWIS: Mr. Chairman, is there some way that staff can
notify adjacent counties too, because obviously he must have been
licensed in Lee county because his business address is in Lee County?
You know, Hendry, DeSoto, Charlotte, all these counties that are
looking for these things, we can notify them of our actions here today.
MR. BARTOE: Lee County has cases.
MR. JOSLIN: He could still go to Lee County ifhis license --
and still be doing work.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: You've already talked to Lee County,
haven't you?
MR. BARTOE: Yes.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: We appreciate your time. We're very
sorry that you probably have lost money.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Ifthere's any way we can help you get
it back though, we will.
MRS. SEGAL: Yeah, we know that, yeah.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. Thank you again very much.
MRS. SEGAL: Things happen.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Ladies and gentlemen, I've got a
feeling that the two cases we saw today is the tip of the iceberg.
MR. BARTOE: We brought those people in so that we had more
than just hearsay just in case somebody wanted to argue the fact that
hearsay is all we had.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: How are you doing on complaints
Page 68
February 15,2006
from Hurricane Wilma? Both of these were pretty much part of it.
MR. BARTOE: It doesn't appear to be any bigger work load
right now, does it?
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: That's amazing. That's also a lot of
preventative patrolling and watching of work that's going on, which
you guys have done a wonderful job of.
MR. BARTOE: It was a little bit hectic, but it was only for two,
three weeks and it calmed down.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: And your signs have been
phenomenal. There's five of them broken right now on 951 and off of
75. I guess some people got tired oflooking at them. They did the
trick, so staff has done a wonderful job. You should be commended.
Any other action, comments? March 15th, everybody here?
MR. BARTOE: I just want to comment June 21st the meeting
date, there will be no meeting. We lost this room for budget
workshops. And should it be necessary to have a meeting, we'll find a
place up on Horseshoe Drive and notify everybody. As of right now
we're planning on no June meeting.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: May 17th, I won't be here.
MR. BARTOE: Mr. Joslin?
MR. JOSLIN: Yes.
MR. BARTOE: You heard him, correct?
MR. JOSLIN: Yes, I did.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: You will be here?
MR. JOSLIN: I will have to be. Where are you going to be?
Back in Germany?
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: No, Italy. Are we meeting in July? I
imagine we are?
MR. BLUM: Probably.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: No June meeting. July is a go.
MR. BARTOE: Do we know off the top of our head who expires
June 30th?
Page 69
February 15,2006
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Yes, I do. I have the list.
MR. ZACHARY: I wouldn't put it that way, Mr. Bartoe.
MR. JOSLIN: And I've raised my hand.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Richard Joslin, Sydney Blum.
MR. BLUM: Blum.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Oh, you're going to go back on, right?
MR. BLUM: If you want me.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: We do. And Mr. Lewis is going to
reup, isn't he?
MR. LEWIS: Am I up in June?
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Yup. Yeah.
MS. KELLER: Time flies.
MR. LEWIS: Absolutely.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: What I need for all three of you to do
is just write a short letter or something to Tom -- or really Sue Filson.
MR. BARTOE: To Sue Filson advising that you would be
interested in another term serving on the Board.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: It's just a one liner. She still has to
advertise, but she also follows recommendations with what the county
wants also.
MR. JOSLIN: By the way, Mr. Lewis, after ten years we get a
raise for sure.
MR. LEWIS: For sure.
MR. JOSLIN: Just letting you know.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Any other business? Do I hear a
motion, if not, to adjourn.
MR. LEWIS: Move to adjourn, please.
MR. JOSLIN: Second.
CHAIRMAN DICKSON: So moved. That's everybody.
*****
Page 70
February 15, 2006
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 11:12 a.m.
CONTRACTOR'S LICENSING BOARD
LES DICKSON, Chairman.
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY COURT
REPORTING SERVICES, INC., BY DANIELLE AHREN
Page 7]