Loading...
CLB Minutes 11/16/2006 R November 16, 2006 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE CONTRACTOR LICENSING BOARD Naples, Florida, November 16, 2006 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Contractor Licensing Board in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:02 a.m. in REGULAR SESSION at Collier County Development Service Center, 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: Les Dickson Syd Blum Michael Boyd William Lewis Eric Guite' Lee Horn Richard Joslin Ann Keller ALSO PRESENT: Patrick Neale, Attorney for the Board Robert Zachary, Assistant County Attorney Tom Bartoe, Licensing Compliance Officer Allen Kennette, Licensing Compliance Officer Andrew Wuhrer, Licensing Compliance Officer Page 1 November 16,2006 CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Good morning. I'd like to call to order the meeting of the Collier County Contractor's Licensing Board. Anyone who wishes to appeal a decision of this board will need a verbatim record which is being taken. I'd like to start 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. HORN: Lee Horn. MR. BOYD: Michael Boyd. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I'd like to now ask Mr. Bartoe, any additions or deletions to the minutes? MR. BARTOE: Good morning, Mr. Chairman and board members. For the record, I'm Tom Bartoe, Collier County licensing compliance officer. And staff has no additions or deletions. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. I'd like to have a motion to approve the agenda as written. MR. LEWIS: So moved. MR. JOSLIN: Second, Joslin. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: All those approve? MR. LEWIS: Aye. MR. BLUM: Aye. MS. KELLER: Aye. MR. DICKSON: Aye. MR. JOSLIN: Aye. MR. HORN: Aye. MR. GUITE': Aye. MR. BOYD: Aye. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Minutes from the last meeting, the smallest I've ever seen. I need to have a motion to approve those. Page 2 November 16, 2006 MR. BLUM: So moved, Blum. MR. LEWIS: Second, Lewis. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: All those in favor? MR. LEWIS: Aye. MR. BLUM: Aye. MS. KELLER: Aye. MR. DICKSON: Aye. MR. JOSLIN: Aye. MR. HORN: Aye. MR. GUITE': Aye. MR. BOYD: Aye. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: No discussion. Immediately moving on, new business. Mark Dunstan, I know you're here, sir. If you would come up here to this podium, I need for you to state your name, and the court reporter will swear you in. MR. DUNSTAN: My name is Mark Dunstan. (Mr. Dunstan was duly sworn by the court reporter.) CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Good morning, sir. MR. DUNSTAN: Good morning. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Your contract -- or your license expired. You didn't renew it. I need the dates. MR. DUNSTAN: The last time I had an official license, I guess, was in 2003. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: So that would be September 1 of two thousand and -- MR. DUNSTAN: '3. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Well-- or August 31, 2003? MR. DUNSTAN: Right. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: And you just became aware that you didn't renew it? MR. DUNSTAN: Right. Well, I knew I hadn't -- technically, I thought I still had a license because I thought just by passing the test Page 3 November 16, 2006 that you were officially licensed, and I thought that I had just gotten behind on the -- the payments and the information that was requested of me. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: How long had you been in business? MR. DUNSTAN: Since 2001. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: For two years? MR. DUNSTAN: Uh-huh. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Did you renew it the previous years? MR. DUNSTAN: Yes. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. Any other questions from the board? MR. JOSLIN: Did you get any kind of notice in the mail or anything that would have told you -- MR. DUNSTAN: What happened was in two thousand -- when I -- I sent everything in on time to renew for 2004, and a while later I realized I hadn't gotten my license in the mail or anything like that, so I called Maggie, and she said that she had no record of anything ever being sent in, so the only proof that I had of having sent anything in was my checkbook registry, and I brought that and showed her that I had written the checks for -- that were required of me for the various fees and stuff. And she said, you know, there was nothing she could do, that, you know, they didn't have anything showing that I had sent everything in, so -- and I was -- it was stupid for me at the time. I just, you know, figured, well, I did what I was supposed to do; it's not my fault that somebody else lost what I had sent in, and that's kind of how I left it. And then in 2005 when I called to get my renewal stuff Maggie told me I needed to incorporate, so I went about doing that, and for -- I don't know how long that's supposed to take, but for whatever reason it took, like, several months for me to get all that stuff back. And then -- then I got hurt, and then I had to go back up North Page 4 November 16, 2006 for a while to help my parents out with something. And I know it's no good reason, but it just kind of slipped my mind, and -- and, like I said, I thought I was technically licensed. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Does the business -- is he required business in law also? MR. ZACHARY: No. MR. JOSLIN: Just the occupational license. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: He's requesting a waiver not to take a test to reinstate his license and to start it all over, so it would be business in law and the painting. MR. BARTOE: Correct. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Correct. Okay. MR. BLUM: Have you been operating with your license as a licensed contractor with your own business during this time? MR. DUNSTAN: Yes. MR. BLUM: So, I mean, have you been pulling permits? MR. DUNSTAN: Well, I don't -- for painting, no, you don't have to have permits. MR. BLUM: Oh, sorry about that. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Anybody else? MR. JOSLIN: Are there any complaints against him or anybody that has called? MR. BARTOE: No, sir. I was looking through his folder. I didn't hear when he said his last license had expired. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: August 31,2003. MR. DUNSTAN: September 30th, 2004, is when it expired. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. So I didn't -- MR. DUNSTAN: So they do have a record of the 2004 license? I was aware that -- or I thought they -- MR. BARTOE: This record -- this record showed being paid October 9th, 2003, and expiring on September 30th when -- on 2004, and all county licenses expire on September 30th. Page 5 November 16, 2006 CHAIRMAN DICKSON: So your check did get in. MR. DUNSTAN: Right. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: It did get posted. MR. DUNSTAN: Although I still haven't gotten it back for whatever reason. MR. JOSLIN: Also in the packet I have a blank page in here that shows your original test scores. Do you -- we know what they are? CHAIRMAN DICKSON: It's in here, ADA. MS. KELLER: They were good. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Yeah, it's in here. If I remember right, I saw some. MS. KELLER: Actually, it was the other one. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Am I confusing the file? MR. JOSLIN: Do you have any employees in your company? MR. DUNSTAN: As of right now, I don't. It's just me. And hopefully by the first of the year I was planning on hiring somebody. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Anybody else have any questions? If not, does anyone have a motion? MR. BLUM: I want to ask Mr. Bartoe, do you have a thought on this matter, Mr. Bartoe? MR. BARTOE: I'm sorry? MR. BLUM: Do you have a thought on this matter? Staff -- does staff have a thought? MR. BARTOE: Yes, sir, reinstate it with -- with the proper -- everything being proper. I think the board has received my thoughts on that painting test in the past. MR. BLUM: That's why I asked you. MS. KELLER: Yeah. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: But is that true with Gainesville Testing? MR. BARTO E: I have no idea about their tests, sir. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Yeah, you were speaking of Experior. Page 6 November 16, 2006 MR. BARTOE: Correct. MS. KELLER: I don't think I see enough evidence of -- that would make me feel like he met the test that we usually go through to exempt testing. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Is that a motion? MS. KELLER: No, it's a comment. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I'll make a motion. I make a motion that we deny the request. MR. LEWIS: I'll second that motion. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Any other discussion? Call for a vote. All those in favor? MR. LEWIS: Aye. MR. BLUM: Aye. MS. KELLER: Aye. MR. DICKSON: Aye. MR. JOSLIN: Aye. MR. HORN: Aye. MR. GUITE': Aye. MR. BOYD: Aye. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN DICKSON: You will take the test. The reason we feel the way we do -- it's two years. You went back North. You let your license lapse. That's not the way it works. MR. DUNSTAN: I understand. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: The test is available every two weeks from Gainesville Testing. MR. DUNSTAN: Uh-huh. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: We have approved them as one of the testing. They have it available for you in Fort Myers, so you can very quickly go get those two test grades done, fill out your packet, get back to Mr. Bartoe, and be back in business. Page 7 November 16,2006 MR. DUNSTAN: Okay. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. I wish you well. MR. DUNSTAN: Thank you. Now, do I go through Maggie to take the test or -- CHAIRMAN DICKSON: She can tell you how to contact them, what test to take, yes, sir. MR. DUNSTAN: Okay. Thank you. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Alan Drake, are you present? If you'll come up and state your name, I'll have you sworn in. MR. DRAKE: Alan Drake. (Mr. Drake was duly sworn by the court reporter.) CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Mr. Drake, you're here to reinstate a license. Are -- and we need to review a credit report. I've looked over your file. Let's go straight to the matter. Explain the two tax liens. MR. DRAKE: Okay. The nine -- the '91 tax lien was released in '98. I had gone into an agreement in '91. I don't have a copy of that release. It shows a release at the county, but I'm trying to go back through with the IRS, and, obviously, it's a -- an old, old lien, and they're having a lot of trouble. It doesn't show on the computer. So it basically, through an agreement that I had in '91, I believe, is completely paid off. I know I got a release for that particular tax lien in '98. The second one is filed in 2001, I believe. That tax lien -- what happened was I -- I was working as -- not incorporated, still the same company, for Wayne Wiles Carpet. An after-year audit brought up 46,000 and change in extra income. Now, I wasn't personally working for Wayne Wiles, nor was I an employee of them. They sent me a 1099 for $46,000 yet Knox, Incorporated, at that time got the 1099 also -- excuse me -- at the same address. The IRS has been unable to get any documentation from them. I am adversarial with them, so I can't get any documentation from them, and we're at the process now of trying to figure out do I go ahead and Page 8 November 16, 2006 redo my 1999 taxes and claim 46,000 of which I have nothing to charge off against that would show all income or do I go back into Knox and redo Knox. And I've got -- Marc Shapiro's my attorney, and we have been trying to deal with the IRS, but, obviously, it's just a drawn-out affair. I did let it go the first year with -- thinking that, you know, this is ridiculous; somebody used my -- my Social Security or something because I didn't receive any personal money from them. That's where I stand. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. Let me ex -- let me clarify something real quick because you did mention Wayne Wiles, which everyone here knows him and -- MR. DRAKE: Right. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: He's respected in the community. Were you a subcontractor? MR. DRAKE: Right, I was a subcontractor. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: So when you say worked for him you contracted from him? MR. DRAKE: Exactly. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. MR. DRAKE: Okay. Now I am aligned with Hadinger Carpets, so Mark and I don't see eye to eye right now, so I'm -- I'm having -- I can't really contact him and sit him down to -- to facilitate this thing. And if I have to I have the wherewithal to pay the thing. It's just a matter of is it the right amount, is it the wrong amount, am I getting charged for something that I have no -- I have no history of, so it's -- that's where the problem arises. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Mr. Bartoe, you look like you have a comment. MR. BARTOE: No, sir. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. Anybody else have any questions? Page 9 November 16,2006 MR. JOSLIN: Alan, I think-- MR. LEWIS: Excuse me. MR. JOSLIN: Go ahead. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: All right. MR. LEWIS: Alan, Bill Lewis. How are you doing? MR. DRAKE: Good. MR. LEWIS: Just so the board knows, I've known Mr. Drake for a long, long time. I've had the pleasure of having him subcontract for me in the past. What are you asking for here? Are you changing your -- your -- your company? MR. DRAKE: No, I'm going -- Knox, Incorporated's been in business. I had a license from 1978 to 1991 in Collier County. MR. LEWIS: Uh-huh. MR. DRAKE: I let it go in limbo because I moved into RDC Distributing for seven years. At that time is when I got into these issues with the IRS. They did not renew my license at that time. When my son came back into Naples, we -- I kind of retired for three years, then we went back into the tile business with him in nineteen, actually, '98, incorporated in '97. And he is no longer in it, but I am looking -- I had a qualifier that was part and parcel of the business. He went on his own. I am now looking to be the qualifier. I've taken the test. I've got the insurances. My personal credit is good, so I'm -- that's where I stand. I just want to qualify myself so I don't have any outside influence in it. MR. LEWIS: Thank you. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I will state for the record there's no other mar on your credit except these two items. MR. DRAKE: Right. MR. BAR TOE: Yes, that's the only reason the gentleman's here is because staff cannot approve this with the tax liens. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Uh-huh. Mr. Neale, do you want to weigh in? Page 10 November 16,2006 MR. NEALE: You know, the test is -- is that the board does not believe that the public will suffer any harm from this person being granted a license and that he has the financial stability to ensure that no one will sustain economic loss resulting from him being a contractor, so, I mean, that's the -- the board's decision to make and if the -- based on the evidence that's presented. MR. JOSLIN: You mentioned that you were dealing with Marc Shapiro as far as trying to get this handled for you. MR. DRAKE: Marc Shapiro's my -- the attorney of record on the corporation and, also, my personal attorney and -- MR. JOSLIN: How -- how long has this been ongoing? MR. DRAKE: Actually, Marc has just gotten into it about six months ago with Jeff Bluestein that's in his office, so it's -- I let it go until it show -- it really started to cause a problem for me because I didn't -- I did not know where any of this $46,000 went or came from or if somebody else used it or whatever because all the checks that were received from Wayne Wiles Carpet went directly into Knox, Incorporated's account at Orion Bank. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: How long do you think this will-- until it's resolved? MR. DRAKE: Well-- CHAIRMAN DICKSON: What I'm looking --let me explain. MR. DRAKE: Okay. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Ifwe give you a temporary approval, one, that you come up with documentation to give to the county, Maggie's office, contractor licensing, that the first one's been resolved and then we have a relatively short period of time until the second one's been resolved. MR. DRAKE: I -- I think at this point I can do everything within six months without a problem, and that is -- I've been to the IRS a number of times, and it's just -- you've got two different divisions that are not gelling together with -- so I -- I'm very confident even if I have Page 11 November 16,2006 to pay it off -- even if I have to just pay the $20,000, which, you know, it's really 13,500, but I can pay that off if I have to, so I -- I -- I can honestly say by at the very latest the 1 st of April I would be able to have the items in hand. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Is that agreeable? I mean, is that something we can do, Mr. Bartoe, temporarily approve it? MR. BARTOE: I would say if the board's looking at temporarily let it go till September 30th when the rest of the licenses expire, and that will give him an extra few months. MR. JOSLIN: I'll make the motion that we grant this -- Mr. Drake a temporary license until September 30th. MR. BARTOE: Of2007. MR. JOSLIN: And under the circumstances his liens will be taken care of or dismissed off of your credit record? MR. DRAKE: Yes. MR. JOSLIN: If they are, then everything continues; you don't have to come before the board. But I would like to have a report back September 30th if this has happened or not, so we need to tag this file. MR. DRAKE: Absolutely. MR. JOSLIN: Okay. Motion. MR. BLUM: I'll second it. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Any discussion? All those in favor? MR. LEWIS: Aye. MR. BLUM: Aye. MS. KELLER: Aye. MR. DICKSON: Aye. MR. JOSLIN: Aye. MR. HORN: Aye. MR. GUITE': Aye. MR. BOYD: Aye. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Opposed? (No response.) Page 12 November 16, 2006 CHAIRMAN DICKSON: You got it-- MR. DRAKE: Thank you. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: -- based upon your past history in the community and the fact that you are a good businessman. I wish you well. MR. DRAKE: Thank you. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I know what it's like to deal with those people. MR. DRAKE: Thank you. MR. JOSLIN: We all do. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: We all do, unfortunately. MR. JOSLIN: Yes. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Next on the agenda, old business. There isn't any. Public hearings, Michael Wayne Griffin with Gale Construction Services, Incorporated. Sir, are you present? He's not, so we shall go ahead and hold the case. Mr. Bartoe, he was given proper notice? MR. BARTOE: According to both investigators, both cases, yes. The license holder's a Mr. Griffin. I just received a letter that Mr. Gale just called and said he's on his way and should be here shortly. Well, we did not file any charges against Mr. Gale. I'm sure he'll be welcome to speak when he gets here, but the county would like to continue with the cases on Mr. Griffin. And I believe the -- the case that we would like to hear first is Case No. 2006-11. Is that correct, Andy? MR. WUHRER: That's correct. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Let me ask you this: Is there any problem doing the other case first so that Mr. Gale at least can hear what happens? MR. BARTOE: We -- we can go with the case on Storm Systems first. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Do you want to do that? Page 13 November 16,2006 MR. BARTOE: That's fine. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: It's the same amount of time. MR. JOSLIN: That will give him a little bit of time to get here. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Yep. Donald Day -- Dale Paron or Paron, are you present? Nobody's showing up today. There he is. Good morning, sir. MR. EDWARDS: Good morning. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: If you would for right now have a seat right here on the front row. MR. BARTOE: I was -- I was just told that these guys don't know who Mr. Gale is, even though we have Gale Construction. Maybe it's his attorney. I don't know. MR. EDWARDS: My name is Burke Edwards. I'm an attorney in Fort Myers. I represent Storm Safe, but I am -- I don't know who Mr. Paron is. I'm not Mr. Paron. I have with me Mr. Chuck Henderson who's the COO of Storm Safe. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Who is Storm Safe? MR. EDWARDS: We were notified of a hearing by Mr. -- a complaint by Mr. Vitale that was set for hearing this morning. Are-- are we here on the right docket? MR. BARTOE: May I ask who Mr. Vitale is. MR. WUHRER: Can I answer that? Mr. Vitale is a customer that the company you're representing did work for. MR. EDWARD: Correct. MR. WUHRER: That is going to be set up for January 17th. I don't know how it got on -- got to you on today's docket. MR. EDWARDS: Yes, because we actually received a letter from the licensing officer October 4 setting this matter for hearing this morning at 9 a.m., so that's what we're present on. But as far as Mr. Paron for Storm Safe we don't know who that is. MR. WUHRER: That's not the right company. Mr. Paron's a different company. Page 14 November 16, 2006 MR. EDWARDS: Okay. So we have nothing on -- nothing on the agenda today? MR. BARTOE: No, sir. The case we have today is Mr. Paron. MR. EDWARDS: Okay. MR. BARTOE: Storm Systems. MR. EDWARDS: All right. When has it been rescheduled for, the Vitale hearing? MR. WUHRER: The 17th of January. MR. EDWARDS: January 17th. MR. WUHRER: Right. MR. HORN: Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Gentlemen, I apologize. Just to let -- we're having a slew of these, so all of the sudden their case loads have tripled and quadrupled. MR. EDWARDS: Not a problem. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: So we appreciate your time. We apologize. Second call. MR. BLUM: Case No. 10 or 12? Which one are we on? CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Twelve. Still calling No. 12, Donald Dale Paron, Jr., Storm Systems, Incorporated. Okay. He's not here. Forget it. We go back to Case No. 10. Let's hear it. For those of you that are present, let me explain how -- MR. BLUM: Mr. Dickson. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Yes. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Yes, sir. I'm not Paron, but I'm here as a complainant. I think most everybody else is. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: The rest of you are as well? UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Pardon me? CHAIRMAN DICKSON: The rest of you are complainants in the other case as well? UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Probably are. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Yeah. Go ahead and have a seat. I'm Page 15 November 16,2006 going to go back to Case No. 10. MR. BARTOE: Eleven, please. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Eleven? MR. BARTOE: Yes. We'd like to hear -- have 11 heard first. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. Brief explanation so that you know what's going on. We will hear these cases even though the charged party is not present because they were notified that the case would take place today. They were properly notified by certified mail; correct, gentlemen? MR. KENNETTE: Yes. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Did you take any other additional steps? MR. KENNETTE: Yeah. We personally went to the residences posted. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Personally went to the residence, posted the hearing notice, have a photograph of it posted to their front doors. So we will hear the case today. The way the case will go is -- the county is the complainant. They will present their case. In this case you won't hear any rebuttal because there isn't anyone to -- to rebut it. Then there will be a closing argument by the county, then we will close the public hearing. When you hear the board -- we will discuss among ourselves, first of all, the charge, if they're guilty -- after we find -- if -- if we find they are guilty, then we discuss what the penalty will be, and that charge and penalty will be issued. So with that, Mr. Bartoe, first let me enter into Exhibit -- make sure you get the right case. Case No. 2006-11; is that correct? MR. BARTOE: That is correct. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I'd like to move that this be entered in as an exhibit. Do I have a second? MR. JOSLIN: I'll make a second. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: All those in favor? Page 16 November 16,2006 MR. LEWIS: Aye. MR. BLUM: Aye. MS. KELLER: Aye. MR. DICKSON: Aye. MR. JOSLIN: Aye. MR. HORN: Aye. MR. GUITE': Aye. MR. BOYD: Aye. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Mr. Bartoe, it's yours or whoever's going to present. MR. BARTOE: I will turn -- I will turn it over to Investigator Andy Wuhrer. MR. WUHRER: For the record, my name is Andy Wuhrer, Collier County county licensing compliance officer. I'm here on the Case 206-11 (sic) against Gale Construction, Mike Griffin, qualifier. (Mr. Wuhrer was duly sworn by the court reporter.) MR. WUHRER: Briefly, this case was initially contracted in January of2006. The job itselfwas started -- in spite of what I've put down there, April. It was actually started the end of February and completed the end of February by Gale Construction. It was noticed that there were no permits pulled for that cage, and that would probably mean the -- the addendums to that permit being the engineering, et cetera, was not done as well. That leaves the homeowner in a situation where they have a structure to that residence that is not -- has not been C.O.'d and may have some future problems with that. Part of those problems may be that she would have to go out and find somebody again to do engineering, to do the other studies, the setbacks, all the required paperwork for that case. We've had several calls made to everybody within the company of Gale Construction starting from the salesman all the way up to and including the qualifier, had them in -- in the office, explained the situation to them, and they gave us several promises that these were Page 1 7 November 16,2006 going to be taken care of. To date, of course, nothing has been done or we wouldn't be here. We've had somebody who was trying to assist Gale Construction, a Mr. Larry Larson, trying to get this coordinated as well, and we still haven't had any -- any benefits from that. I do have with me today the homeowner should you need some testimony from her regarding her attempts to get these calls made to get people to come in as well. And I have taken some additional photos just to -- just to show that the completion of the cage is done. And I can't attest, of course, to -- to whether it was done according to engineering specs or not, so I can't -- I can't make that determination. And that's why she may have to do engineering studies as well to -- to make sure of that; however, the case in point here is that no permit has been pulled, and that's a violation. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I would like to talk to her. I don't know about the rest of the members. MR. WUHRER: Certainly. Mrs. Fess. Would you like her at the podium? CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Yeah. We only have the one podium, so you're going to have to share that. Good -- good morning. If you would state your name. I need to have you sworn in. MS. FESS: Yes. My name is Carol 1. Fess. COURT REPORTER: Can you spell your last name? MS. FESS: F-e-s-s. (Ms. Fess was duly sworn by the court reporter.) CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Good morning, Mrs. Fess. The questions I have for you -- do you have records? I'm sitting here specifically looking at your contract. MS. FESS: Yes. I have a copy of the original contract which I was given in January. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I need for you to speak directly into that mike. Page 18 November 16,2006 MS. FESS: In -- January 21st, and it's -- CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. Here's my questions. MS. FESS: Yes. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Check No. 4298, which you have listed -- it says deposit. What's the date on that check? MR. LEWIS: January 2nd of'06. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Where are you finding that, Bill? MR. LEWIS: It's right on the next page. MS. KELLER: On the next page. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Oh, okay. That's the date you signed it. MS. FESS: Uh-huh. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. Is the next one on here too? MS. KELLER: Yeah, 2/21. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: 2/21. Okay. With the 2/21 check, had anything happened at your house yet? MS. FESS: They dropped some material off, and I needed to give them this check. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: But they dropped some material off? MS. FESS: Yes. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Your total contract was how much? MS. FESS: $8,852. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: That's how much you paid? MS. FESS: Yes. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: So you paid in full? MS. FESS: Yes. At the end I gave them a final payment on 2/27/06 for 4,852. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. So your initial $2,000 deposit was far in excess of 10 percent of the total contract; is that correct? MS. FESS: To start the project. The next one was materials that were due. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. If everyone in the audience Page 19 November 16,2006 would listen to me, I'm going to take the floor for a minute. And I'm trying as hard as I can to get this out into the public. Lisa Koehler, who is the community relations director for the county, she's tried as well. There is a state law. It's in front of me, Section 489 -- Section 489.126 -- and contractors need to hear this as well -- that you may not take more than 10 percent deposit on any deposit from the contract total. Number 1, homeowners and citizens have got to stop paying these outrageous deposits that are in the tune -- I've seen them as high as $30,000 and higher for nothing happening. 489 goes on to say that if a contractor takes more than 10 percent deposit here's what has to happen. Within 30 days the permit has to be issued. Within 60 days of the permit being issued, work has to begin. Now, that's anything over -- Mr. Neale, protect me here. That's anything over 10 percent. So if you go over 10 percent, within 30 days is the permit, within 60 days work begins or else -- MR. JOSLIN: Mr. Dickson, it's 90 days. MR. NEALE: Ninety days. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Ninety days. Thank you. Ninety days after the permit work begins or else -- the very last line of 489, Section -- Chapter 126 is, "Any person who violates any provision of this section is guilty of theft," not that they may be prosecuted. They are guilty. So -- which is a felony. Contractors have got to stop these large deposits, and homeowners have got to stop giving these large deposits. That's why I'm specifically asking the dates here. There are other remedies available to you, but they fall under the criminal range that this board can't look at. Hopefully this gets to somebody. Anyone else have any questions of the homeowner? MR. JOSLIN: I see on the pictures that you presented that Mr. Wuhrer presented that this cage that was put up, or this aluminum Page 20 November 16,2006 structure that was put up was, I guess, an addition to enclose the back of a house, and it appears that there was another portion of a cage put up to cover a spa; is that -- or a fish pond maybe. MR. WUHRER: We have -- we have a lanai out there which I think may have had some screening already, which I'm not 100 percent sure, but the addition was past that to the pool -- to cover the pool. MR. JOSLIN: Oh, okay. MS. FESS: I don't have a pool. MR. WUHRER: No, it wasn't a pool, but the main -- MS. FESS: It was a spa, and I had it taken out when I moved in. MR. JOSLIN: I see. Okay. So the picture shows a spa in it originally. I see. Okay. This was all app -- this was all the cage that was redone, though, or put back up for you. Okay. MR. BLUM: Mr. Bartoe, Gale -- Gale Construction had an in-force and active license at this time? MR. BARTOE: It's not my case, sir. MR. BLUM: Oh, excuse me. MR. BARTOE: Ask Andrew or-- MR. BLUM: Andrew. I'm sorry. MR. WUHRER: Yes, there is -- there is a state license on here, and there's some -- they've had some difficulties, so the current availability to pull permits in Collier has been put on hold. MR. BLUM: So he couldn't have pulled it no matter what? MR. WUHRER: Not at this point. MR. BLUM: So he took money under false pretenses? MR. WUHRER: Correct. MR. BLUM: I don't suppose Mrs. Fess called to check on the potential -- MS. FESS: I did. MR. BLUM: You did? MS. FESS: Yeah. And he had the proper identification. Page 21 November 16, 2006 MS. KELLER: Who did you call? MS. FESS: The Collier County licensing board, I believe it was. And I checked up on Gale Construction. In fact, the men that came to my home to give me the proposal brought up Gale Construction on the computer and showed that they were legit. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: In January of'06 they were. MR. LEWIS: Yeah. Are you not pleased with the job, or there's -- there's just not a permit? What's the situation? MR. WUHRER: The -- the job visibly looks to be fine, but there is no permit pulled, so we do not know whether the job has met current codes, whether it would pass and get a certificate of occupancy of completion which they can't get without the permit, so I guess there are additional things that must be put on that. According to Miss F ess, there are no cross cabling for the -- for the wind -- to meet the wind requirements and some other things, which, again, I'm not familiar with, but without having the appropriate engineering, without having the C.O.s we don't really know. MR. BLUM: I'm -- I'm a little bit confused. Mrs. Fess -- it sounds like she did her due diligence and checked on this man's veracity. MR. WUHRER: Yes. MR. BLUM: And evidently was given the proper answers to -- to give her a comfort level to proceed. So where does it come about that he does not have the right credentials? MR. WUHRER: Because he never pulled the permit. MR. BLUM: No, I understand. But he does have a -- you didn't -- did you just say that he's had prior problems? MR. WUHRER: He's had problems subsequent to what we're coming up with. MR. BLUM: Oh, subsequent. MR. WUHRER: Yeah. MR. BLUM: Okay. Oaky. Page 22 November 16,2006 MS. KELLER: So the contract says in the last section that he would pull a permit. MS. FESS: Yes. And I -- MR. BLUM: And there was no permit posted? MS. FESS: No. In fact, I didn't know -- I thought he had already pulled a permit until my neighbor said to me, "Oh, do you have a permit?" And I said, "I've never had this happen to me before." And I just moved into the house. My husband passed away, and I thought what do I know. And then my neighbor said, "You have to have a permit." And then there was no permit. The job was done. And I kept on calling Gale Construction, "Oh, we're going to get your permit next week," blah, blah, blah, blah, and it never happened. MR. BLUM: Was any reason ever given why they didn't -- when you guys contacted them, why they didn't pull the permit? MS. FESS: They were always going -- in the process of-- MR. WUHRER: They were always going to. MS. FESS: But it never happened. MR. WUHRER: Yeah. Mike Chaffee was the salesman involved, and there was supposedly some -- some -- an understanding of a -- of a portion of -- or the company was going to be purchased by Michael, and -- and he just sort of made several of these same types of -- of situations subsequent to that that we find -- found out about. If they don't pull the permit in February, until the homeowner complains, I don't know about it. MR. BLUM: Sure. MR. WUHRER: You come in and you can get out, and we just don't know about it. So once we start to look into it then we find that there are more problems, more problems, more problems. So although I can't -- I can't state this equivocably (sic), but it looks to me like -- Mr. Griffin has some health -- had some health -- health issues, and they just maybe pulled the company when he had the original problems. Page 23 November 16,2006 MR. BLUM: Do you think the company's folded now? MR. WUHRER: I believe it's probably through. MR. BLUM: Have they pulled -- when's the last time they pulled a permit as a corporation? MR. WUHRER: They've pulled some permits that -- I don't have the listing here, but I think -- I believe there was some pulled in 2006. A lot of them are in inspect status and that sort of thing. MR. JOSLIN: Have permits been pulled since this job has taken place? MR. WUHRER: I can't answer that from where I am. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. Mr. Bartoe. MR. BARTOE: I would like to get back to the charge here, which is willfully violating applicable building codes or laws of the state, city, or Collier County. And what the county is attempting to prove here is that this needed a permit and that the company was told to get a permit and they said we will get a permit and they have not gotten a permit, and at this time I would like to call Collier County chief structural inspector, Mr. Gary Harrison, to testify as to whether this job in his mind needed a permit or not. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Mrs. Fess, if you would just have a seat right there in case we need you. Good morning, sir. MR. HARRISON: Good morning. For the record, Gary Harrison, chief structural inspector, Collier County. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I'd like to have you sworn in. (Mr. Harrison was duly sworn by the court reporter.) CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Mr. Bartoe. MR. BARTOE: Mr. Harrison, you've heard the testimony this morning, and I believe earlier this morning you looked at the pictures of the construction on this job; is that correct? MR. HARRISON: That would be correct. MR. BARTOE: And with what you saw would this job require Page 24 November 16, 2006 building permits? MR. HARRISON: It would. MR. BARTOE: I thank you. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Let in me --let me ask you a question, sir. What do we do in this situation for the homeowner? Do we have to tear it down and start over? Can we get -- can someone come in and get a permit and rectify what's there? You've seen the structure. MR. HARRISON: I've -- I've seen part of it. I -- you know, I didn't see the whole -- you know, a lot of different shots of it, but I would say the easiest way out of this thing right now would be do what we call a permit by affidavit. We could have somebody come in and -- an engineer and architect, and they could look at it, and they would just give us a letter saying it meets all the criteria of the Florida building code. And I think since this was January the 2nd of2006 it would have to be the Florida Building Code 2004, but regardless of the fact, since there was never a permit pulled, it would have to go to the building code in force now, which is the FBC 2004. And then we can kind of clear it off the books. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: And that's the one that requires the engineering as well; correct? MR. HARRISON: That would be correct. He would have to, basically, attest, sir, that it meets all of those criteria. And since there's doors it would have to meet the wind-load requirements, product-approval information, that all the -- all the products that were used do meet the criteria of the Florida Building Code and any structural details that were done, you know, meet that code also. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: What's the status of the enclosure now? Is it screened? Is it finished? MR. HARRISON: I -- I don't -- I have not been out to the job site, sir, so I don't know what the status of it is. MR. WUHRER: Yes, it is. It's screened and finished. You have Page 25 November 16, 2006 photos of that. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I just couldn't see ifit was screened. Just one second. That's all the questions I have. Anyone else have any other question? No. Thank you for your time, sir. MR. HARRISON: Thank you. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: We appreciate it. MR. JOSLIN: I think as far as the account goes as far as this gentleman it's pretty much cut and dry. There is no permit, so I don't know what the discussion is for. He is definitely guilty of this charge. Now, what sort of implications as far as getting the permit -- the -- permitted and what cost it's going to be to the homeowner, you know CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Well, Mr. Wuhrer, do you have anything else to present? MR. WUHRER: That's all I can -- all the physical stuff that I have for the case. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. And nobody's -- second call -- third call. Nobody from Gale Construction ever appeared; correct? No response from anyone in the audience. Mr. Wuhrer, if you would, sum it up and give us your recommendations. MR. WUHRER: Yes. Mr. Chairman, because of the -- of the ordinance that was violated, our recommendation is that the ability to pull permits within cou -- Collier County be suspended and that a fine of $5,000 be imposed. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: What about restitution? MR. WUHRER: Whatever expenses are going to be incurred by the homeowner, I believe, should also be reimbursed. We just don't have a dollar figure at this time. It will probably -- to actually get a structural engineer and so forth out there, it may be more than I can estimate. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: What about prosecution, investigative Page 26 November 16, 2006 charges? MR. WUHRER: Well, no, no charges. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. MR. NEALE: One point I'd like to make is that it's my understanding that this is a state licensed contractor. MR. BARTOE: Yes, sir. Any action taken by this board we would like to see forwarded to the state. MR. NEALE: Yeah, which means that the only action this board can take is to deny him the ability to pull permits in this county. The board can recommend action to the state board, and we have to recommend said action within 15 days, but the only action that this board has power to do over state contractors is to deny them the ability to pull permits. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: And, unfortunately, Mrs. Fess, you don't qualify for the state recovery fund because they took pool enclosures, pools, and a couple of other things out of it two years ago when they were going bankrupt in the fund, so they eliminated the things that we see the most often. I do have a big complaint with what they did, but, unfortunately, you can't recover from that fund now. Okay. Do I hear a motion to close the public hearing? MR. JOSLIN: So moved, Joslin. MR. BLUM: Second. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: All those in favor? MR. LEWIS: Aye. MR. BLUM: Aye. MS. KELLER: Aye. MR. DICKSON: Aye. MR. JOSLIN: Aye. MR. HORN: Aye. MR. GUITE': Aye. MR. BOYD: Aye. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Mr. Neale, would you give us your Page 27 November 16, 2006 guidance? Mr. Neale, for those of you that are watching today, he is the attorney for the board and represents us to keep us out of trouble. Mr. Zachary is the attorney for the county, who is the complainant in all of these cases, and he represents the county of Collier County. Go ahead, Mr. Neale. MR. NEALE: Thank you. In deliberating on this case, the board shall ascertain whether fundamental fairness and due process were afforded to the respondent; however, pursuant to the Collier County ordinance and the state statutes the formal rules of evidence as set out in Florida statutes do not apply. The board shall consider solely the evidence presented at this hearing in consideration of the matter. It shall exclude from its deliberations irrelevant, immaterial, and cumulative testimony. It shall admit and consider all other evidence of the type commonly relied upon by a reasonably prudent person in the conduct of their affairs. This is whether or not the evidence so admitted would be admissible in a court of law or equity. Hearsay, as noted, may be used to explain or supplement any other evidence; however, by itself hearsay is not sufficient to support a finding in this or in any other case unless it would be admissible over obj ection in civil court. The standard of proof in this type of case normally would be the burden of proof must be in a clear and convincing manner; however, in this instance, since the complainant cannot lose his license, the preponderance-of-evidence burden is the one that must be met. The standards affecting those for his license for the sanctions are also the same as those for finding guilt or innocence. The standards in evidence are to be weighed solely as to the charges set out in the complaint as Ordinance 90-105, Section 4.2.2 of the Collier County code of ordinances, which is willfully violating the bill -- applicable building codes of the state, city, or Collier County. In order to support a finding that the respondent is in violation of Page 28 November 16,2006 the ordinances, the board must find facts that show the violations were actually committed by the respondent. The facts must show to the above standard at the legal conclusion that the respondent was in violation of the ordinance. The charges that I have just read are the only ones that can be decided upon by this board because they're the only ones to which the respondent would have had the opportunity to prepare a defense. As noted, damages in this case that can be rewarded -- awarded by this board, because of the fact that he is a state licensed contractor, are limited to the ability to -- as noted in our ordinance, the board may design -- decide the issuance of Collier County or city building permits or require issuance of permits with specific conditions. The decision made by this board shall be stated orally at this hearing and is effective upon being read by the board. The respondent, if filed -- found in violation, has certain appeal rights to this board, the courts, and the state construction industry licensing bureau as set out in the Collier County ordinance and the Florida statutes and rules. If the board is unable to issue a decision immediately following the hearing because of questions of law or other matters of such a nature that a decision may not be made at this hearing, the board may withhold its decision until a subsequent meeting. The board shall vote based upon the evidence presented on all areas, and if it finds the respondent in violation, adopt the administrative complaint which is contained in the composite exhibit. The board shall also make findings of fact and conclusions of law in support of the charges set out in the complaint. So the board may now proceed to deliberate on the guilt or innocence. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Any discussion? Or do we go straight to a motion? MS. KELLER: I have a question. MR. BLUM: Discussion. Page 29 November 16, 2006 CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Go ahead. MR. BLUM: Well, I'll try it. It didn't work the first time. Maybe it will. I make a motion that we find for the county in its prosecution of the contractor, that we recommend to the state that they be fined the appropriate amount, and that we rescind all privileges for pulling permits. I would equally add that if there's any way we can let the public know that this company's privileges have been pulled for permits hopefully we can maybe help some -- some potential customers avoid Mrs. Fess's fate. Maybe Miss Lisa can see to it that the public is made aware of this. MR. JOSLIN: By forwarding the same information to other municipalities, other counties, that may work here. MR. BLUM: Or to any and all -- MR. JOSLIN: Or maybe we could -- MR. BLUM: Wherever we think they may be doing business. We've got to get this information out to the public to prevent this from happening. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Mr. Zachary, does that lib -- we've never done that before. Does that libel the county? MR. ZACHARY: It's factual information. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Yes, sir. Defendable? MR. ZACHARY: Yeah, I think it is. And certainly I see him as doing business here and at least in Fort Myers and Sarasota. I don't know if it's the same -- the same qualifier. MR. BLUM: Ifwe can get it out to any and all surrounding counties just to help the public. MR. ZACHARY: It's public information. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Mr. Neale, I'm going to let the penalty -- the findings of fact on the charges and the penalty phase all go together on this case. No problem? MR. NEALE: That would be fine. Page 30 November 16,2006 CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. So just to repeat what I hear, suspension of all permit privilege -- pulling privileges in Collier County, forward to the state with a recommendation for revocation -- MR. BLUM: Revocation, absolutely. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: -- and with a recommendation for fine MR. BLUM: Fines in the amount of $5,000 is recommended. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: -- and that we also notify all surrounding counties of the action taken here today so that they can be on alert. MR. BLUM: Correct. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Anything else? MR. JOSLIN: Restitution to the homeowner for costs she may Incur. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: The state could do that. MR. JOSLIN: Right. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: But we can't. MR. JOSLIN: But a recommendation. MR. BLUM: I mean, we can recommend it. MR. HORN: Question. Should we recommend looking into the 441 violation? CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I threw that out there. 489.126 is a felony charge that the criminal division of the State of Florida would have to pursue. MR. HORN: Yeah. MR. LEWIS: Do we need to mention anything about the City of Naples and, also, City of Marco permit-pulling privileges? MR. NEALE: Yes. MR. LEWIS: Could we add those to them as well? CHAIRMAN DICKSON: So we will add -- MR. BLUM: City of Marco and City of Naples. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: -- revocation of City of Naples and Page 31 November 16,2006 City of Marco permit-pulling privilege as well. Have I got it all? Okay. I've got the motion. Do we have a second? MR. LEWIS: Second, Lewis. MR. JOSLIN: Second. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. Jump on that one. Any more discussion? All those in favor? MR. LEWIS: Aye. MR. BLUM: Aye. MS. KELLER: Aye. MR. DICKSON: Aye. MR. JOSLIN: Aye. MR. HORN: Aye. MR. GUITE': Aye. MR. BOYD: Aye. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: It is done. He is out of business in Collier County . We will notify the counties that surround us, and we'll make our recommendations to the state. More than one person got hurt here. Mrs. Fess, I apologize. And I'm -- I have sympathy for your loss, and then you walk into something like this. I wish we'd have gotten to him before you got here. MS. FESS: Thank you. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: But maybe the state can get some fines. I don't know if there's any money to be had. Maybe the state can get some fines and restitution for you. I know the county here will bend over backwards to work with you and help you out of this mess. MS. FESS: Thank you. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: So -- and if we can help you at all we'd be glad to. That's -- that's what the board here does. We look after the citizens, so -- that case is now closed. Mr. Neale. MR. NEALE: Yes. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: The fact that we just did this on one case -- there's a lot of people here for the second one on this same Page 32 November 16, 2006 individual. It's superfluous, isn't it? MR. NEALE: Well, I'm not sure whether the people are here for the further cases on Mr. Griffin or whether they're here for the Paron case. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Yeah, but we probably should go ahead so we can send the same recommendation for that individual -- there's a second case. MR. BLUM: I would agree. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Yeah. MR. NEALE: The second case on Mr. Griffin? CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Yes, sir. Mr. Bartoe, that's Case No. 11. I didn't read the legalese. Am I okay? MR. NEALE: You're fine. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. MR. ZACHARY: Yeah. Mr. Chairman, now we have Case No. 2006-10. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Ten. Okay. MR. LEWIS: Eleven was done first. MR. ZACHARY: And that's Mr. Kennette's case. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Mr. Kennette, if you'd go forward. While you're doing that, I'd like to -- MR. ZACHARY: I move the Composite Exhibit A into evidence. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Thank you. Do I hear a second? MR. JOSLIN: Second. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: All those in favor? MR. LEWIS: Aye. MR. BLUM: Aye. MS. KELLER: Aye. MR. DICKSON: Aye. MR. JOSLIN: Aye. MR. HORN: Aye. Page 33 November 16,2006 MR. GUITE': Aye. MR. BOYD: Aye. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Done. If you would state your name, and I'll have you sworn in. MR. KENNETTE: My name is Allen Kennette. I'm with the contractor licensing and compliance office for Collier County. (Mr. Kennette was duly sworn by the court reporter.) CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Good morning, sir. MR. KENNETTE: Good morning, chairman and board members. This case is also about the willful violation of a code violation in the county. Mr. and Mrs. Richard Welch of2213 Royal Lane in King's Lake, Unit No.4 hired Gale Construction to rebuild their pool cage that was lost during the last storm, Wilma. Our contract was signed on 12/19 of'05 with a 30-day promise to get the cage started. Within that time no building permit was pulled until February 6th of '06 to go ahead and replace the pool cage, which was done in a proper manner at that time. On 4/25/06 a final inspection was done on the pool cage, which was called in by Gale Construction. The inspector went out. Mr. Fox -- Inspector Fox went out there and failed the pool cage for -- which shows a corrected work order for several violations, which is on page 8 which you can't read, but on page 9 at the bottom it explains what all the violations are to that pool cage. The homeowner at that time made several calls to Gale Construction, not receiving any call-backs from them, which a complaint was filed with us at that time. On 8/22 of '06 they came in and filed a complaint with us. I also made several attempts to call Gale Construction, not getting ahold of Mr. Griffin but talking to the owner, Joe Conway, and he promised that that correction would be taken care of. And as -- to date nobody has ever been out there. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: When was that? Page 34 November 16, 2006 MR. KENNETTE: That would be on -- CHAIRMAN DICKSON: You finally talked to someone. MR. KENNETTE: Yes, I did. On 8/22 is when the formal complaint was filed, and on 8/23, the following day, is when I got ahold of Joe Conway, who is the owner of the company, because I could not get through to anybody -- Mr. Wayne Griffin because he was unavailable every time I called. So I did talk to the owner. He said he would look into that and take care of that problem as -- as soon as possible. By the end of May there was nothing going -- nothing had happened yet. Mr. Michael Wayne Griffin was in our office for our violations talking to our -- our supervisor, Mr. Greg Ossorio, and at that time I notified him of the violations, and he said, yes, he was aware of it and that he would -- he'd get somebody out there to correct those code violations for the construction of the pool cage. He was given a copy of all the work orders and the problems with the pool, which was on the bottom of page E-9, to correct those problems. After that nothing was ever done. I made one more call to Gale Construction. Most of their numbers were disconnected, and the only line that was available went to an answering machine to leave a message, which was left, and that was the end of that. No response was called back to me. Then on October 3rd of '06 Larry Larson, who is the foreman for Gale Construction, was also at our office trying to correct some problems. He was given a notice at that time for the hearing set for today. He signed for it. And we made other attempts to go out to Mr. Wayne Griffith's residence, who lives in Cape Coral. We went to their main office, which is listed as 4085 Hancock Bridge Parkway, which there is no such office in that plaza for Gale Construction, never has been one in there, and we could not locate anything that showed up a change in that address of -- of a business. So at that time we went out to 3908 Citrus Parkway, and we took Page 35 November 16, 2006 this off of the licensing of myflorida.com, which gives the address of the qualifier. We served both notices out there. No one was home. We posted them on the door at 3908 Citrus Parkway, Cape Coral. Then we also went to the license location of 5035 Southwest Eighth Place, Cape Coral, posted two notices on there. At that time the residence was up for sale, and there was no furnishings in the building. We have photographs that show that. So we made several attempts to contact him, but he never would return our calls. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Mr. Neale. MR. NEALE: Yes. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: As he was talking, I was sitting here thinking -- and this is a discussion between you and I right now, sir. Everyone's seen that we can only touch the license holder, but yet the owner of the company is the one that took these deposits that are in violation of Florida statutes, so the Florida statutes in this particular case would not be interested in a license holder, would they? MR. NEALE: Well, you know, the -- as this board minds the license holders when they get a license, it's the license holder's ultimate responsibility, and so if the license holder was working for a crook he still is on the hook for it so ... CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Does -- but does -- 489.126, does that only apply to the license holder, or can these people go to someone who might own a company and hire a qualifier and do his dirty work? Do you see where I'm going? MR. NEALE: I see where you're going, yeah. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: That's why it's a discussion between you and me in a public forum. Mr. Bartoe? MR. BARTOE: I have a question. Did we introduce this case into evidence? MR. JOSLIN: Yep. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Yes. Page 36 November 16, 2006 MR. BARTOE: Case No. 10? CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Yes, sir. Mr. Zachary did. MR. BARTOE: Thank you. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I could let you research that, but I'd kind of like to hear that answer in a public forum so others could hear it as well. Anyone have any questions? MR. NEALE: Unfortunately, Mr. Dickson, the language as -- as written in 489.126 applies solely to contractors. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Oh. Anyone have any questions for Mr. Kennette? MS. KELLER: Is the homeowner here? MR. KENNETTE: No. He had a medical emergency this morning. MS. KELLER: Okay. Because I'm looking at the checks, and they're written to different people. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Oh, my. MS. KELLER: And -- Michael Diaz and there's another one with Roy or -- I can't exactly read what that says, but -- and Roberto Walsh. MR. BARTOE: I saw that. I believe the -- the homeowner scratched those out. That's probably the way they received them back from the -- MS. KELLER: Oh, okay. MR. BARTOE: -- financial institution, like, three or four per pages. MS. KELLER: Oh, okay. MR. BLUM: Just -- just as a comment it's unfortunately -- it's unfortunate that if they'd have pulled Mrs. Fess's permit when they pulled this one he wouldn't have been here for the first case. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Right. MR. KENNETTE: This permit was pulled. He did have a valid permit for it. Page 37 November 16, 2006 MR. BLUM: Yeah. Ifhe pulled this one in February, why didn't he pull Mrs. Fess's? He could have avoided a whole big -- one -- one problem would have gone away just by pulling it. It doesn't make sense. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I'm looking at checks also. Did he pay MR. KENNETTE: He paid in full. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: He paid in full? MR. KENNETTE: Yes, $16,416 he paid in full. MR. JOSLIN: And as of the date right now the screen enclosure is -- basically is completed? MR. KENNETTE: It's completed. MR. JOSLIN: But it's not been permitted or not been -- MR. KENNETTE: It hasn't been -- MR. JOSLIN: I mean, it's been permitted but not been final inspected? MR. KENNETTE: Right. It hasn't been corrected. The violations out there have not been corrected. MR. JOSLIN: In your opinion -- I'm looking at these work order items from the inspection reports, and there's some pretty serious items on here -- MR. KENNETTE: Yes. MR. JOSLIN: -- that -- I think almost to the point where the screen may have to come down. MR. KENNETTE: It may have to. I'm not -- that's why we have the chief inspector here. He's the -- MR. JOSLIN: Is it possible that we can -- MR. KENNETTE: Yes. MR. JOSLIN: -- call him -- call him to ask him a question -- MR. BARTOE: Mr. Joslin, I was going to request Mr. Harrison to come back because we have the same charge here, willfully violating the building codes. And I wanted to point out on page E-9 Page 38 November 16, 2006 everything was found wrong with this cage on April 25th, and I'd like Mr. Harrison to tell us if that's a violation of building codes to not get them corrected. MR. HARRISON: For the record, Gary Harrison, chief structural inspector, Collier County. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: You're good. Go ahead. MR. HARRISON: Okay. I don't see just by looking at what I see here that the cage would probably have to be removed; however, there's issues here that would have to be corrected, and it doesn't appear that they're major issues, but it's -- it's enough here that, yeah, it should have been failed. And it was a good fail. It was a good call by the inspector. And these items must be corrected to make that screen cage -- I'm just trying to look and see what engineer they used. MR. JOSLIN: The most -- the most important one -- what I was looking at that led me to believe that beginning was the fact that the structure had to be three inches in from the edge of the concrete, and I'm finding it difficult to say if it has to be three inches in then the screen now must be on the edge, so how it's going to be moved in without moving a wall or tearing something down and moving it to make it perpendicular to the -- MR. HARRISON: All right. He used -- he was, obviously, licensed under ALl, which is aluminum structures master plan. Now, there are ways to correct that situation, and they do have details; however, in a -- in a case like that usually what they would have to do is get a letter from AL 1 specifying how that situation would have to be corrected. Sometimes they allow them to put clips underneath to support depending on how much bearing they have on that bottom runner and -- but that you'd have to get a letter from AL 1 specifying in detail how that would be done. Now, if ALl says, no, they can't do it that way, then, yes, it would -- might have to be removed because in screen cages -- screen cages are not in the Florida Building Code. They are separate, and Page 39 November 16, 2006 since they're separate that's why these -- this -- the manufacturers are generally mastered under either AL 1, Lawrence Bennett or -- or separate engineering. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Anybody else? Thank you again, sir. MR. HARRISON: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Mr. Kennette, do you have anything else to present? MR. KENNETTE: No, I don't at this time. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Anyone have any further questions? Bill. MR. LEWIS: Mr. Kennette. MR. KENNETTE: Yes, sir. MR. LEWIS: The packet that we have, Exhibit A for Case No. 2006-10, was this entire packet presented or left somewhere or signed for? MR. KENNETTE: The packets were left at Mr. Gilbert's residence. MR. LEWIS: Okay. So we could-- MR. KENNETTE: We couldn't get him to sign it. The only one that we could get to get -- get the notice to to have signed was that Larry Larson who was the foreman for that company at that time. MR. LEWIS: Okay. But the entire packet, Composite A-- MR. KENNETTE: Both -- both -- they were left at the residence. MR. LEWIS: Thank you. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Anybodyelse? Okay. Do I hear a motion to close the public hearing? MR. BLUM: So moved, Blum. MR. JOSLIN: Second, Joslin. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: All those in favor? MR. LEWIS: Aye. MR. BLUM: Aye. Page 40 November 16,2006 MS. KELLER: Aye. MR. DICKSON: Aye. MR. JOSLIN: Aye. MR. HORN: Aye. MR. GUITE': Aye. MR. BOYD: Aye. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Thank you, Mr. Kennette. Mr. Neale, I know you're going to ditto the remarks of this last case. Can we ditto -- well, let's go back to Mr. Kennette. What was -- what are the county's recommendations? MR. KENNETTE: The recommendations would be the same as the previous case: building privileges pulled, a $5,000 fine, an additional payment, if possible, to the homeowner for additional costs to get the -- CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Restitution-- MR. KENNETTE: Restitution. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: -- recommendation? MR. KENNETTE: Yes. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Can we ditto the same motion? MR. NEALE: You can use the same motions and take a vote on it. It does have to be -- the board can just reiterate that the findings of fact and conclusions of law are the same as in the previous case and that the -- then take a vote on those findings of fact and conclusions of law so that we can -- you can just refer back to them and incorporate them by reference. MR. BLUM: I would make a motion that the findings of fact and motion for conviction from the previous case of Mrs. F ess be re -- reiterated for Case No. 2006-10. MR. JOSLIN: Second. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: And the same -- and add to that the same disciplinary action? MR. LEWIS: Exactly. Page 41 November 16, 2006 MS. KELLER: And notification. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: And notification to the other-- MR. BLUM: The strongest possible terms. MR. JOSLIN: I'll second that. MR. LEWIS: So that -- that would include denying permit-pulling privileges in Collier County, City of Marco, City of Naples and notifying the adjacent counties as much as we possibly can within the legal limits, also notifying the state board with our recommendations of disciplinary actions. MR. JOSLIN: Yes. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: You're all on board? That's your motion? MR. BLUM: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Your second? MR. JOSLIN: Yes. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN DICKSON: All those in favor? MR. LEWIS: Aye. MR. BLUM: Aye. MS. KELLER: Aye. MR. DICKSON: Aye. MR. JOSLIN: Aye. MR. HORN: Aye. MR. GUITE': Aye. MR. BOYD: Aye. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Done. I hope the state can move somewhat quickly. Unfortunately, sometimes it takes the state three to four years. Quit giving out big deposits because the state will -- it takes a long time to react. MR. BLUM: Is this a good time to take a quick break? CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I've had a request for a 10-minute Page 42 November 16, 2006 break. It's now 10 after 1 O. We will start promptly back at 20 after 10. (Recess held.) CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I'd like to call back into session and order the continuation of the meeting of the Collier County Contractor's Licensing Board. Let the record show that Eric Guite' had a situation come up, one of our board members, that he did have to excuse himself. We still do have a quorum, so it will not affect us continuing. With that -- MR. NEALE: Mr. Dickson. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Yes, sir. MR. NEALE: I just have one note before we get rolling. I did make an error in the last hearings in that the state has now changed the amount of the fine, the maximum. Maximum permissible is now 10,000 instead of 5,000. So if the board would like to amend its previous findings it can as far as the recommendations to the state. MR. BLUM: Absolutely. I would like very much to have the opportunity to amend the fine amount to $10,000 on each case. MR. NEALE: You'd need to reopen the hearings on each of those, re-make the motion, then close the hearing. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. Pull -- pull them back out, No. 10 and 11. Make a motion to reopen 10 and then make a motion to reopen 11, and we'll do the motion for both at the same time. MR. BLUM: Okay. I would make a motion to reopen Case 2006-10 and 2006-11. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. Do I hear a second on that? MR. JOSLIN: I'll second the motion. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: All those in favor? MR. LEWIS: Aye. MR. BLUM: Aye. MS. KELLER: Aye. MR. DICKSON: Aye. Page 43 November 16,2006 MR. JOSLIN: Aye. MR. HORN: Aye. MR. BOYD: Aye. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Done. MR. BLUM: I would like to amend the fine amount as per state guidelines to $10,000 on each case. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Is there a second? MR. JOSLIN: Second, Joslin. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: All those in favor? MR. LEWIS: Aye. MR. BLUM: Aye. MS. KELLER: Aye. MR. DICKSON: Aye. MR. JOSLIN: Aye. MR. HORN: Aye. MR. BOYD: Aye. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Done. So amended. Close them both back now. MR. JOSLIN: Make a motion that we close Case No. 2006, No. 10, and 2006, No. 11. MR. BLUM: Second. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: All those in favor? MR. LEWIS: Aye. MR. BLUM: Aye. MS. KELLER: Aye. MR. DICKSON: Aye. MR. JOSLIN: Aye. MR. HORN: Aye. MR. BOYD: Aye. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Why do we do that? Is that a magic door here? MR. NEALE: Huh? Page 44 November 16,2006 CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Is that a magic door that we have to open and close? MR. ZACHARY: Yep, that's it. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: You attorneys. MR. ZACHARY: It's my fault. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: That's all right. I'm sorry, Mr. Zachary . Next we have -- Board of Collier County Commissioners, Collier County, Florida is the petitioner versus Ronald Dave (sic) Paron, Jr., d/b/a Storm Systems, Incorporated. Mr. Paron, are you present? If you would, sir, come up here to this front row and have a seat. Are you represented, or are you representing yourself? MR. PARON: I'm representing myself. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: All right, sir. Let me explain to you how this works. You weren't here before when we did those other cases. I saw you walk in. What will happen is the county will first present their case. You will be able to cross-examine any witnesses that they call, and then once they have finished with their case -- I'm avoiding opening remarks. Is that okay? MR. NEALE: What I'd -- because of the -- the nature of this case, I'd -- what I'd prefer is if we followed a more strict procedure, which is with the opening remarks, and then -- CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. MR. NEALE: -- proceed to a presentation. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Then we will be a little stricter. We will start with opening remarks first by the county. That's just what you did, who you are, and why you think, you know, things are not the way that they seem to be. Don't get into evidence or anything else. Then the county will present their case. They will call witnesses. You can cross-examine them. When the county finishes, then you can present your case, and you can call witnesses which the county can cross-examine. This is all in a quasijudicial fashion. We do accept Page 45 November 16,2006 hearsay in here. It's not a court of law nor am I an attorney or a judge. It is quasijudicial. Once all of that has happened, the county will make closing remarks. You will make closing remarks. We will make a motion up here to close public hearing, which means we're finished unless -- and we'll talk about the case. You'll hear what we're going to say. And we will come up with a -- findings of fact whether you're guilty of the charge or not guilty of the charge. If you're not guilty of the charge, it ends right there. If you're guilty of the charge, then we go into a penalty phase, which you'll hear that as well. Kind of clear on how things go? MR. PARON: Yes. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. With that, Mr. Bartoe, if you would give opening remarks. MR. BARTOE: First I would like to introduce Case No. 2006-12 into evidence. And it's Collier County versus Ronald Dale Paron doing business as Storm Systems, Incorporated. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Do I hear a second on that? MR. JOSLIN: Second, Joslin. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: All those in favor? MR. LEWIS: Aye. MR. BLUM: Aye. MS. KELLER: Aye. MR. DICKSON: Aye. MR. JOSLIN: Aye. MR. HORN: Aye. MR. BOYD: Aye. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Done. MR. BARTOE: And, also, I did talk with Mr. Paron on the phone yesterday. He advised me that he was going to bring some packets of his own for the board. I don't know if he did that or not. Did you, sir? Page 46 November 16,2006 MR. PARON: Sure. MR. BARTOE: Do you have enough copies that we can pass them out? MR. PARON: I've got -- I've got 12. MR. BARTOE: Okay. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Do we want to do that now or when he presents his -- MR. NEALE: When he presents -- when he presents his case. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: When he presents his case. MR. BARTOE: Okay. Very well. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. MR. BARTOE: What the county is going to show here is that Mr. -- Mr. and Mrs. Erickson contracted with Storm Systems for shutters on March 22nd, 2006, and the total price for the job was $21,724.08. A deposit of 8,800 was given on May 23rd, 2006. Storm System -- Systems had a permit issued by the City of Marco on July 20th, 2006. No action has been taken by Storm Systems by means of work or correspondence with the homeowner, and all attempts by myself and Investigator Ian Jackson have met with negative results with Mr. Paron up until last Tuesday when I went to his house to present him with his copy of the packet in this case. Then I got to talk to him. And that's the first that I had any contact with him. And at this time I'd like to call Mrs. Erickson to the stand. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Mrs. Erickson. Oh, I'm sorry. Thank you. Just one minute. Give me a minute. Opening remarks only. Okay. Go ahead, Mr. Paron, if you'd step up to the podium. MR. PARON: Yes. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I need for you to state your name, and I'll have you sworn in. MR. P ARON: I'm Dale Paron. (Mr. Paron was duly sworn by the court reporter.) CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Just give us a quick overview. Page 47 November 16,2006 MR. P ARON: A quick overview would be the company, basically, has gone out of business, but to save face with these customers there has been an extreme effort made in conjunction with Clear Choice Shutters. I have a letter of agreement here which I brought for everybody, and the agreement is for them to help fulfill every single contract that Clear Choice -- or that Storm Systems had with any customer without them losing their deposit. That was the goal from -- from the moment that I realized the company was not going to continue. I reached out. I reached out to a couple of different people, and I was un -- unlucky, but I found Clear Choice. They're around the comer. We knew each other. We bought parts from them. They bought parts from us over the past. And, you know, they were willing to help out with the case. And, unfortunately, businesses go under. I was in business for five years. I built a great company . We -- we had great relationships with general contractors, property managers, customers. We pulled our permits. We got our inspections. We did things right. Unfortunately, things got really bad over the summer, and it was to the point of no return, and I had no help or no option to go any other way but reach out for Clear Choice. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Did you own -- were you the owner of Storm Systems? MR. PARON: Yes. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. MR. P ARON: Yeah, I'm the -- I'm the sole owner. In that sense, the -- the whole objective was to not have people lose their deposits. The whole idea between myself and Clear Choice was to have a smooth transaction, no bumps -- you know, hopefully just a little bump to where we'd get the customers converted over to Clear Choice, they don't lose their deposits, and everybody's taken care of. And that was the goal. That was the idea. That was my only Page 48 November 16, 2006 option. I had no other option but to shut the doors, bum the files, leave town, and file bankruptcy. I didn't do that. You know, I -- I chose the right path. At the time there was no other -- other way to go. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I understand. MR. JOSLIN: Mr. Paron, I'm sitting here listening to you say that there's a customer -- or not a customer but a -- another company that you're recommending which is Clear Choice. MR. P ARON: Right. I made an agreement with Clear Choice. MR. JOSLIN: Is there anyone here from Clear Choice -- MR. PARON: Yes, there is. MR. JOSLIN: -- to substantiate your -- MR. P ARON : Yes, there is. And I have a letter of agreement that we wrote back in October. I also have a letter here that is in your exhibit that, you know, was mailed out as far as I know. I signed, you know, around 100 copies of this letter to notify each and every customer of the situation. I don't know if every customer got it. I don't know -- you know, a lot of customers may not agree with it, but it was sent out. I did sign up to 100 copies. What happened to it from that point I don't know. MR. ZACHARY: Mr. Dickson, we're getting past opening remarks. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. We're getting past opening remarks. Okay. Go ahead and have a seat. We may -- I may have a couple of questions. Mr. Bartoe, were you aware of this? MR. BARTOE: Of what, sir? The letter? CHAIRMAN DICKSON: This plan of action. It doesn't affect your proceeding with the case? MR. BARTOE: It does not affect our proceeding with the case. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. That's all I needed to know. Go ahead and present your case. Page 49 November 16, 2006 MR. ZACHARY: We're going to call Mrs. -- Mrs. Erickson. Would you come back up, please. Could you state your name and be sworn in, please. MS. ERICKSON: Yes. My name is Patricia Erickson. (Ms. Erickson was duly sworn by the court reporter.) CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Good morning. MS. ERICKSON: Good morning. MR. ZACHARY: Mrs. Erickson, could you relate to the -- to the board here your experience with Storm Systems? Did you contract -- come to contract with them for storm shutters at some point? MS. ERICKSON: Yes. MR. ZACHARY: Could you explain that to the board, please? MS. ERICKSON: My husband met with Jerry Grogan, who was the sales representative. And I believe the date is -- let me get my glasses on. He signed a contract, I believe, on March 22nd in -- or sometime before that and wrote a check on March 23rd for $8,800. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. Is the-- MS. ERICKSON: Way more than 10 percent. MR. ZACHARY: And the -- and the total for the job was apparently $21, 724.08? MS. ERICKSON: Yes. MR. ZACHARY: And your husband wrote a check to Storm Systems on March 23rd for $8,800? MS. ERICKSON: Yes. MR. ZACHARY: To this date has any work been done -- MS. ERICKSON: No. MR. ZACHARY: -- on your house? MS. ERICKSON: Nothing. MR. ZACHARY: Okay. Have you tried at any time to contact Storm Systems, Inc., or any of their representatives? MS. ERICKSON: Yes. We were advised to start calling in July to set up a date. Because we are in Chicago in the summer, my Page 50 November 16,2006 husband was going to plan to come back down here to be in the house -- excuse me -- in the house when the job was done, and he was advised to start calling in July to get a date. He was led to believe that it was going to be the end of July. That didn't happen. He called at the end of July. He was told August. And when he called back again to finalize that date there was nobody there to receive the call. MR. ZACHARY: So -- so you haven't talked to anybody since the -- since before July? MS. ERICKSON: Correct, not anybody with Storm Shutters. MR. ZACHARY: All right. And there -- no work to date has been done? MS. ERICKSON: Nothing. MR. ZACHARY: Okay. I don't have any further questions. Anybody on the board? CHAIRMAN DICKSON: You met -- I do. According to your affidavit or what was put in here, you were on November 2nd going to meet with Ed Hingley of Clear Choice. Did that meeting take place? MS. ERICKSON: I believe it did. My husband met with him. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Can -- I can accept hearsay. Can you tell me what happened in that meeting? MS. ERICKSON: Yes. I think they discussed what the job would entail and reworked all the figures and so forth, and I believe my husband signed a contract with them. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: With Clear Choice? MS. ERICKSON: I believe so. I -- he is not here, so -- and that question didn't come up this morning. MR. JOSLIN: Do you know if any other money has exchanged hands besides the deposit originally that you gave them? MS. ERICKSON: No, I -- I don't know. MR. JOSLIN: All right. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. Anybody else have any other Page 51 November 16,2006 questions? Okay. If you'd -- MR. JOSLIN: I just have one quick question. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Yes. MR. JOSLIN: Regarding Clear Choice -- now, this is maybe before the fact, but can staff let me know is -- is Clear Choice a licensed contractor to do the same job that Storm Systems is going to do? MR. BARTOE: No, sir. MR. JOSLIN: They do not have a license. MR. BARTOE: Unless they got licensed this morning and I missed it. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. Thank you very much. MR. JOSLIN: I don't know where that came from, but okay. MR. BARTOE: I do understand Mr. Ossorio -- CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Oh, I'm sorry. Mrs. -- I'm sorry. MR. ZACHARY: Erickson. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: -- Erickson, would you come back up, please. I'm sorry. Did you have any questions of her? MR. PARON: Well, no. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I've got to somehow get you on a microphone. And I hate to have customers and someone else side by side. Bill, is there a mike -- something else we can arrange here? MR. P ARON: This has -- this doesn't have anything to do -- CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. But you've got to be on a mike. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Okay. You have to turn it on. MR. PARON: Okay. I believe there might be some misunderstanding. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: If -- okay. I don't want to get into that issue. Directly to you right now -- you can bring this up later -- do you have any questions of Mrs. Erickson? MR. PARON: No. Page 52 November 16, 2006 CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. Then that's it. Thank you, Mrs. Erickson. MS. ERICKSON: You're welcome. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Go ahead and turn that mike off. Okay. Mr. Zachary, anybody else? MR. ZACHARY: No more questions for her, no. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. No more witnesses? MR. BARTOE: No more witnesses, but I would like to add something to this case. Due to the fact that nine days ago Mr. Paron told me he's going -- he's out of business, today he told you he's out of business, and -- I got in our computer, and since February 8th of 2005 when he switched -- when he -- because he had an aluminum license, he was one of these people who was grandfathered in and had to get a shutter license to install shutters anymore, if you remember that happening to all of the contractors -- CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Uh-huh. MR. BARTOE: Since that time with this license, there have been 162 permits issued to this shutter company, and only 66 are C.O.'d. We have 90 in the inspector-issued stage and 6 cancelled. I'm -- I'm sure out of these 90 in the inspector-issued stage -- they haven't been out there long enough -- a lot of them probably should be cancelled too. And this man says he's out of business, and the county's going to have a lot of work to do to notify every one of these people that, you know, we -- we've got to find a way to get this matter corrected. And I've got a feeling in January we're going to have -- by looking at the audience and what I'm receiving when we take a break, we're going to have many, many, many complaints. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. Anybody else? (No response.) CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Mr. Paron, the floor is yours. Present your case. Page 53 November 16, 2006 MR. PARON: Do you want me to hand out these-- CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Yes, sir. MR. PARON: --letters? CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Do we need to mark those at all, Mr. Neale? MR. NEALE: Yeah, the clerk will have to mark those as probably Respondent's Exhibit A. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. What I need to have a motion for is -- we're having marked as Respondent's Exhibit A -- I need to have a motion to introduce it into the packet. MR. JOSLIN: So moved, Joslin. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Second somebody? MR. HORN: Second, Horn. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. All those in favor? MR. LEWIS: Aye. MR. BLUM: Aye. MS. KELLER: Aye. MR. DICKSON: Aye. MR. JOSLIN: Aye. MR. HORN: Aye. MR. BOYD: Aye. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Done. Okay. We got them and we're reading, so go ahead. MR. P ARON: As far as presenting my case goes, I believe that -- you know, you can see the agreement. It's, you know, very short but to the point. As far as I know, several dozen customers have already converted over from Storm Systems to Clear Choice, and it is the goal for Clear Choice to continue working that stage until, you know, most, if not all, customers convert over to Clear Choice so, in fact, they don't lose their deposit, so, in fact, everybody gets taken care of. Whether or not it's behind schedule -- you know, that's inevitable. They've got -- CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Let me ask you a question so that my Page 54 November 16, 2006 ears can open up. Does Clear Choice have a license? MR. P ARON: That -- that is some -- they have a qualifier. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: The county knows that they don't. MR. PARON: Well, they have a-- CHAIRMAN DICKSON: So I have a -- MR. PARON: Obviously, they work under a license because, you know -- CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Clear Choice Shutters, Incorporated, does not have a license; true, Mr. Bartoe? MR. BARTOE: Clear Choice does not. I understand Mr. Ossorio has been in contact with people at Clear Choice. And Clear Choice is here. They might want to tell you what they've talked about. I have no idea what might have been said as far as their ability to do this work. I know it's a possibility they could list in their contract who the installer would be as -- as long as they have a licensed company. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Because it is illegal by Collier County statutes to contract without a license. MR. P ARON: Well, let's get Ed up here. He can answer that question. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I'd like to go right there first. MR. PARON: Okay. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Who -- this is your witness? MR. PARON: Yeah. I'm sorry. This is Ed Hingley from Clear Choice Shutters. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. Good morning, sir. MR. HINGLEY: Good morning. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: If you would, state your name, and I'll have you sworn in. MR. HINGLEY: Ed Hingley, Clear Choice Shutters sales manager. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: England? MR. HINGLEY: Hingley, H-i-n-g-I-e-y. Page 55 November 16,2006 CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Hingley. Good morning. MR. HINGLEY: Good morning. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: You're the owner of Clear Choice Shutters, Incorporated? MR. HINGLEY: No, sir, I am not. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: What is your position with that company? MR. HINGLEY: I'm the sales manager. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: You're the sales manager. MR. JOSLIN: Should we have him sworn? CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Who owns Clear Choice Shutters, Incor -- MR. ZACHARY: He has to be sworn in. MR. JOSLIN: He's got to be sworn in. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Oh, I'm sorry. MR. JOSLIN: He needs to be sworn. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I'm sorry. Sorry. We need to have you sworn In. (Mr. Hingley was duly sworn by the court reporter.) CHAIRMAN DICKSON: You are the sales manager? MR. HINGLEY: Yes. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Who is the owner of Clear Choice Shutters, Incorporated? MR. HINGLEY: Jerry Wheaton. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Jerry who? MR. HINGLEY: Wheaton, W-h-e-a-t-o-n. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Does he live in Naples? MR. HINGLEY: Yes. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. Are you aware if Clear Choice Shutters, Incorporated, is licensed in Collier County? MR. HINGLEY: Yes, I am aware. It's not licensed. If I could explain that one, please. Page 56 November 16, 2006 CHAIRMAN DICKSON: There's no explanation, sir. MR. HINGLEY: Oh. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Have you been selling contracts? MR. HINGLEY: I'm not 100 percent certain that I understand the licensing part. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Do you have signed contracts with homeowners? MR. HINGLEY: Yes. And on the-- CHAIRMAN DICKSON: That's a violation of -- MR. HINGLEY: On the contract it clearly states all installation by CNP Construction, and there's a number of the license on CNP Construction. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Do you have one of those with you? MR. HINGLEY: No, but I could get one within five minutes. I'm sure someone else has got one. No? CHAIRMAN DICKSON: CNP? MR. HINGLEY: CNP. MR. KENNETTE: Who's the -- who's the owner ofCNP? MR. HINGLEY: Pat Venno (phonetic). MR. LEWIS: Mr. Chairman. MR. HINGLEY: It's a general contracting license. MR. LEWIS: Are we getting off course here? CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Yeah. MR. HINGLEY: Quite a bit. But if you want I can always get one of these contracts for you. It is, as far as I know all the way through the lawyers, to be legal and above board. We deal -- predominantly Clear Choice Shutters deals with all the -- the developers and the builders. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. MR. HINGLEY: Clear Choice Shutters is a sales and marketing company that -- all the installations and the crews all work for CNP Construction. Page 57 November 16,2006 CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. Thank you very much. MR. HINGLEY: Okay. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Have a seat. Mr. Paron, back up because I did get off choice, but this letter of agreement that you gave us, should it have had any effect on us whatsoever, it really doesn't. So let's go back to the case. And we're dealing with the job on Marco Island and the fact that you took a deposit and you haven't put the shutters in and that you're out of business. Did you file bankruptcy, Chapter 7? MR. PARON: No, I haven't. The reason being is because I had an agreement with Clear Choice, and the whole point behind it was to try to get them to convert each and every customer so they don't lose their deposit almost as -- as if it were to be a sale of a business, one business to another. Instead of Storm Systems doing the job, Clear Choice does the job, basically, almost like selling a contract. What I did -- and my full intention was to get these contracts into the right hands that could provide and do the work and get it done, and -- and really that's all I can say. As far as going out of business, that's inevitable. I went -- you know, I'm under. I -- I -- I can't rebound. The -- the only other alternative was to file bankruptcy, shut the doors, and -- and, you know, that -- that wouldn't have been a very good alternative. I think we can all agree on that. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Anything else you want to present? MR. PARON: No, that's it at this time. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Anybody on the board have any questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Do you have any witnesses -- other witnesses you want to call? MR. PARON: No, none at this time. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Excuse me. I did file a contractor's and licensing complaint on November-- Page 58 November 16,2006 CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I'm sorry, but -- yeah, there's other cases. Mr. Bartoe. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Okay. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I'm not used to taking one from the floor. Can you find out what she's talking about, or should I just ignore that, Mr. Neale? MR. NEALE: At this point, you know, the -- if the county so decides to call as witnesses other potential complainants -- MR. ZACHARY: No. MR. NEALE: But I -- I don't believe that's what's -- what the plan is. I mean, you're -- you're hearing one case today. From my discussions with Mr. Ossorio, there may be additional cases brought at subsequent hearings, but that's -- you know, the -- the only case you're hearing today is this one. You know, if the board so wishes -- CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I'm sorry. I wish I could. MR. NEALE: I mean, if -- if you wish to hear it as testimony should you find the person in violation and wish to hear this testimony as far as what sanctions to impose, you probably could -- could do that. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: What I think she was doing, though, Mr. Neale -- she's signed a contract with Clear Choice Shutters, Incorporated, and she's got it in her hand. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: No. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: No. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: It's a request for a complaint to the county permitting. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. All right. Okay. Okay. MR. ZACHARY: Mr. Chairman, I have a question. Mr. Paron, you said either here this time or earlier in your opening statement that you sent letters to your various customers. MR. PARON: Yes. MR. ZACHARY: And you stated that was in October? Page 59 November 16,2006 MR. PARON: Correct. MR. ZACHARY: Mr. Bartoe, does -- does Mr. Paron have a copy of this -- the county's packet today? MR. PARON: Yes, I do. MR. BARTOE: Yes, I gave it to him. MR. ZACHARY: Okay. And that -- that letter would be at E9. Is that the letter that you sent out? MR. P ARON: Correct, the one that says "do not use." MR. ZACHARY: Yes. Okay. Thank you. I have no other questions. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: So I assume that all the people in this audience represent 20 percent of his customer base of 90. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: There's a big dispute. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Sir, I'm sorry. I can't take you. I know who you people are at this point. Anything else? MR. JOSLIN: I would just -- CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. MR. JOSLIN: Just for the -- just for the sake of knowing, are -- all the people in the audience at this point have -- have at some point contracted with-- UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Let's just stand up. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Yes, sir. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Let's just stand up everybody that's here for him. And we have questions that the board hasn't asked of him. MR. JOSLIN: Okay. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I don't -- I could have asked a hundred questions and -- UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Well-- MR. JOSLIN: We understand. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Just wait until you see him. Page 60 November 16,2006 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: There's more -- UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: There's more of you out there. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Yeah, there's only a dispute, I'm saying, on what -- the testimony that they just said between the two of them. There's a very big dispute. And I've had contact with the person that has the dispute with me, and he's not telling the truth under oath. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Well-- and we can only deal with the licensed contractor that's being charged at this point, but be patient with us. Any-- MR. P ARON: Well, the only -- the last thing that I would like to say is I understand that, you know, a lot of stress has been caused, and I'm very sympathetic towards that. It did not -- it was not my intention. I built a -- like I said earlier, I built a good business over five years. I did a lot of good things, but this is the reality. Now, I've reached out to find the best answer to the problem. Whether you agree or not, it was the best solution that I could find, and that was in Clear Choice Shutters helping me to get these customers taken care of. If they work with Clear Choice and if they agree to have Clear Choice consult with them, they're not going to lose their deposits, and -- and that is what this is about, them not losing their deposits. So that was the purpose of the letter of agreement, and that's the purpose of me being here at this time, to show you that there is effort being made in the proper way, in the ethical way, and as long as people agree to at least have them come and consult with them on a case-by-case basis, you know, they're not going to be happy. They're not going to be satisfied. This is a bad situation, and what we're trying to do -- and what I'm trying to do is make the best of it as I can. MR. BLUM: I have a question. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Syd. MR. BLUM: You know, it's really not related, but I've got to Page 61 November 16,2006 know. Mr. Bartoe was telling us that since February you've -- you've pulled 160-some-odd permits in addition. MR. PARON: Well, basically, every -- every job we've, you know -- MR. BLUM: Is that true or not? MR. PARON: I -- I -- I don't know how many permits. We've pulled -- MR. BLUM: Many permits? MR. PARON: Yeah, we've pull many permits. I mean, we permit every job. MR. BLUM: So we can probably believe Mr. Bartoe's assessment. And is it safe to assume that you took deposits on all 160-some-odd of those? MR. PARON: Absolutely. MR. BLUM: Absolutely. Thank you. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: More than 10 percent too. MR. BARTOE: Might I add we still have to check with the City of Marco and the City of Naples for pending permits. MR. BLUM: So you were well aware that you -- you had a serious financial problem. You couldn't -- you couldn't handle the contracts that are represented here. You continued to sell. You continued to take deposits, and -- and the reality is you had no expectation of fulfilling them. MR. P ARON: Absolutely not. That's not true. MR. BLUM: Okay. MR. P ARON: You know, deposits are required in this business. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Let me ask you -- let me ask you a question. I am safely assuming there's over a million dollars worth of deposits. MR. PARON: Absolutely not. No way. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Eight thousand dollars -- MR. PARON: No way. No way. No way, shape, or form. Page 62 November 16,2006 CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Haifa million? MR. PARON: No way. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Seven hundred and fifty thousand? MR. PARON: No way. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Well, the math is easy to do. MR. PARON: No. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Where did the deposits go? MR. PARON: You know, we're not here to talk about what I went -- where I went wrong. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Well, that's true. We're not. MR. PARON: We're here to talk about the -- what we've done to take care of the customers, and that is what the important thing is. Every -- every single customer has the opportunity to be taken care of and will not lose their deposit. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: We already lost our deposit. MR. BLUM: Sir, we've heard you ad nauseam at least a half a dozen times repeat yourself. We don't need to hear it again. It's that simple. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. Call to order. Do you have anything else to present? MR. PARON: No, sir. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Mr. Bartoe, closing comments, please. I don't think we need those figures. The 160, is that what you mean? MR. BARTOE: I -- I just had a question for-- CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Oh, okay. MR. BARTOE: He did advise that he's out of business. I want to ask, is that Storm -- No.1, is that Storm Systems, Incorporated, that's out of business? MR. PARON: Yes. MR. BARTOE: And, No.2, does that include your Collier-County-issued aluminum license and your Collier-County-issued garage door installation license? Page 63 November 16,2006 MR. PARON: Yes. MR. JOSLIN: So this man has more than one license, I assume. MR. BARTOE: Three, sir. MR. JOSLIN: Three licenses. MS. KELLER: What are the three, Mr. Bartoe? MR. BARTOE: I'm sorry? MS. KELLER: What are the three licenses? MR. BARTOE: The -- the hurricane shutter installation, which is the one we're dealing with today, and an aluminum license, and a garage -- garage door installationallicense. Now, I -- I might add that he did not -- did not renew these licenses. They expired September 30th, but he still has the right to if he wants to. MR. P ARON: I don't want to renew them. I'll voluntarily revoke my licenses. I'm not -- that's not an issue. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I don't think we'll worry about that right now. Okay. Anything else to present? (No response.) CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Closing statements. Go ahead and have a seat. Closing statements, Mr. Bartoe. MR. BARTOE: I believe -- Mr. Zachary, do you want to give the closing statement or -- CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Yeah. Well-- MR. ZACHARY: We're -- we're here for -- the charge against Mr. Paron is 4.1.3, abandoning a construction project in which he is engaged or under contract as the contractor. The proj ect may be presumed abandoned if the contractor terminates the proj ect without just cause or fails to notify the owner in writing of the termination of the contract and the basis for the same or fails to perform work for 90 days without just cause and no said notice to the owner. You've heard from Mrs. Erickson that she contracted with Storm Systems, Inc., on March 22nd of 2006. On that date or shortly Page 64 November 16,2006 thereafter, the next day, a check was written to Storm Systems, Inc., in the amount of $8,800 for a deposit, and you've heard her testimony that to this date no work has been done on that proj ect. You've also heard that -- that a letter was written by Mr. Paron of Storm Shutters, Incorporated, in October, and you could do the math. From October -- from March to October is over 90 days, so my argument would be that no work has been done, the project has been abandoned, and although there was a notification given to the owner it was after the 90 days stated in our ordinance, and that no just cause was given, and that -- and that letter basically said that they were not going to be doing business and they were going to have an effort for some other company to take over the work. At this -- at this time the -- the county would have that the board find Mr. Paron in violation of our ordinance and nothing further. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Closing comments, Mr. Paron. MR. PARON: (Mr. Paron shook head.) CHAIRMAN DICKSON: None? MR. PARON: No. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. Recommendation of the county, Mr. Zachary. MR. NEALE: I would suggest that recommendations for sanctions not be done until after you've deliberated on the -- CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Good point. Thank you, Mr. Neale. MR. NEALE: -- violation and then we'll go forward after that. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I have a motion to close public hearing. MR. BLUM: So moved, Blum. MR. JOSLIN: So moved. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: All those in favor? Did you get the first and second? COURT REPORTER: (Nodded head.) CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Wishes of the board. Page 65 November 16, 2006 MR. NEALE: Well, let me just go through because there are some differences in this one from the previous cases. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Okay. Mr. Neale. MR. NEALE: The -- the standards here are different than the previous case because in this instance the licensee may lose his right to practice his profession because of the decisions of this board, so, therefore, the standard in this particular case is that the county must present its case in a clear and convincing manner. That's greater than that for just a simple preponderance of the evidence. That is because someone stands to lose their possibility of practicing their profession. The only charge which you can review at this point and the only charge that has been brought is that under 4.1.3 which in full reads, "Abandoning -- abandoning a construction proj ect in which he or she is engaged or under contract as a contractor, a project may be assumed abandoned if the contractor aban -- terminates the proj ect without just cause or fails to notify the owner in writing of termination of the contract and basis for same or fails to perform work for 90 consecutive days without just cause and no said notice to owner." So all of those elements have to be found for the contractor to be found in violation of that -- of that section of the ordinance. Any damages that may be found should he be found in violation must be directly related to these charges in this case. Damages found in -- that may have occurred in other cases cannot be imposed because this is only for this particular case. The decision made by the board at this -- on this case, as stated before, will be stated orally at this hearing. He has certain appeals rights and so forth should he be found in violation. If the board is unable to issue a decision immediately because of questions of law or other matters of such a nature that the decision may not be made at this hearing, the decision may be withheld until a subsequent meeting. All the other items that were set forth before are still valid and still in -- in point. When the board makes its decision, if it -- if they Page 66 November 16, 2006 find him in violation, we can then -- I'll then talk about disciplinary sanctions. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Anybody? Charge only, charge of abandoning -- abandoning this job. MR. JOSLIN: There's no doubt he's guilty. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I'll entertain a motion. MR. JOSLIN: I'll entertain the motion to find Case No. 2006, No. 12, License No. 26902, Ronald Day -- Dale Paron, Jr., d/b/a Storm Systems, Inc., found guilty of Count I of 4.1.3, abandoning a construction proj ect for which he or she is engaged or under contract as a contractor. The proj ect may be presumed abandoned if the contractor terminates the project without just cause or fails to notify the owner in writing of termination of the contract and basis for the same or fails to perform work for 90 days consecutive without just cause and no said notice to owner. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Can I have a second? MR. LEWIS: Second, Lewis. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Discussion? (N 0 response.) CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Call for the vote. All those in favor? MR. LEWIS: Aye. MR. BLUM: Aye. MS. KELLER: Aye. MR. DICKSON: Aye. MR. JOSLIN: Aye. MR. HORN: Aye. MR. BOYD: Aye. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Passed. The vote was 5 to zero. Should I read on this one, Mr. Neale? MR. NEALE: Six to zero. Page 67 November 16, 2006 CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Sir? MR. NEALE: Six. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Six. I'm sorry. Do you want -- we should read this order, shouldn't we? MR. NEALE: Uh-huh. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Board of Collier County Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, is the petitioner versus Ronald Dale Paron, Jr., d/b/a Storm Systems, Incorporated, Case No. 2006-12, License No. 26902. Order: This cause came for public hearing before the contractor licensing board, herein called board, on 11/16/06 for consideration of administrative complaint filed against Ronald Day (sic) Paron, Jr. The service of the complaint was made by certified mail in accordance with Collier County Ordinance No. 90-105 as amended. The board having heard testimony under oath received evidence and heard arguments respective to all the appropriate matters thereupon issues its finding of fact, conclusions of law, and order of the board as follows: Findings of fact: that Robert Dale Paron, Jr., is the holder of record of Certificate of Competency No. 26902; No.2, that the Board of Collier County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, is the complainant in this matter; No.3, that the board has jurisdiction of the person -- of the respondent and that Ronald Dale Paron, Jr., was present at the public hearing and not represented by counsel; No.4, all notices required by Collier County Ordinance No. 90-105 as amended have been properly issued; 5, the violations of fact as set forth in the administrative complaint are proved, adopted, and incorporated herein by reference -- reference as findings of facts. So the conclusion of law is, one, the conclusions of law alleged and set forth in the administrative complaint are approved, adopted, and incorporated herein. Now, the penalty phase after Neale -- Mr. Neale's directions. Page 68 November 16, 2006 MR. NEALE: All right. The -- as the board has found the respondent in violation of the Collier County ordinance, it has to decide on the sanctions to be imposed. The sanctions are set out in the codified ordinance in Section 22-203.B.1 and in the revised ordinance in Section 4.3.5. The sanctions which this board may impose include revocation of the respondent's certificate of occupancy, suspension of the certificate of occ -- competency, denial of issuance or renewal of the certificate of competency, probation of a reasonable length not to exceed two years during which time the contractor's contracting activities shall be under the supervision of the contractor's licensing board and/or participation in a duly accredited program of continuing education -- the probation may be revoked for cause by the board at a hearing noticed to consider said purpose -- restitution as proven in this case, a fine not to exceed $10,000, a public reprimand, a re-examination requirement, denial of issuance of permits or requiring issuance of permits with conditions, and reasonable legal and investigative costs. The sanction -- in determining these sanctions, the contractor licensing board shall consider five elements: No.1, the gravity of the violation; No.2, the impact of the violation on the -- the complainant and the person who had the contract; No.3, any actions taken by the violator to correct the violation; No.4, any previous violations committed by the violator; and, No.5, any other evidence presented at this hearing by the parties relevant as to the sanction that is appropriate for the case given the nature of the violation. This board also shall issue a recommended penalty to the state construction industry licensing board. That penalty may include a recommendation for no further action or a recommendation of suspension, revocation, or restriction of the registration or a fine to be levied by the state construction industry licensing board. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Anybody have any questions? MR. LEWIS: Yeah. Mr. Neale. Page 69 November 16, 2006 MR. NEALE: Yes, sir. MR. LEWIS: We've heard testimony that the respondent has other licenses and other -- other competency cards. Is there anything at this point that can be considered by the board directing action towards those other -- other licenses? MR. NEALE: It would be my opinion that -- without doing further research, but my opinion off the cuff that since he was found in violation of a Collier County ordinance then one of the things in which you can do is revoke his license. If he's found in violation in -- in a gross enough manner to cause a revocation of a license, I would suggest that the board could revoke all licenses at the same time. MR. LEWIS: And that -- that would be okay? MR. NEALE: Uh-huh. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Mr. Zachary, what's the county's recommendation? MR. ZACHARY: I'll defer to Mr. Bartoe on that. MR. BARTOE: Go ahead. MR. ZACHARY: I said I'd defer to you, Mr. Bartoe. MR. BARTOE: Oh, I'm sorry. Staff would recommend revocation of license. As -- as far as a fine, the man's out of business. I don't know what the county would be able to collect in fine. As far as restitution, we -- we have not been able to see a new contract to see how much the homeowner might be out with this new contract versus the old contract. I just can't picture Clear Choice doing the job for the same pnce. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Time out. Mr. Neale. MR. NEALE: Yes. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Is it legal for an unlicensed company to be selling construction-related work that will be installed by a licensed company? MR. NEALE: Not to the best of my knowledge, no. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I didn't think so. So that had -- so that Page 70 November 16, 2006 has no bearing here. MR. BLUM: We haven't determined that he's actually selling these contracts. We don't know that. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Correct. MR. BLUM: He's -- he stated that he's turned it over. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: But it has no bearing on the county's recommendation. MR. BLUM: No. MR. BARTOE: If that be the case, it appears to me that the-- that the complainant in this case is out $8,800, and the county would ask for that restitution. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Do you have any recommendation of fine? MR. BARTOE: No, sir. MR. NEALE: I would -- I would caution the board in that the county is making an assumption that the homeowner is out $8,800. There's no evidence been presented that I am aware of. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: In her -- in her packet is a cancelled check for $8,800, and nothing has happened at her house. MR. NEALE: Just whether -- but there's no evi -- been no evidence presented whether she has a new con -- well, she said she had a new contract but no evidence presented as to whether this was applied to that contract, whether she was out additional monies, whether she was out that deposit. MR. BARTOE: But staff looks at it that she and her husband are out $8,800 to this respondent, and she -- and they got nothing from this respondent. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: What's your guide? MR. NEALE: If the -- if the funds are applied to the new contract, then there's no additional damage. I would suggest -- and Mr. Zachary may have a different opinion, but I would suggest that if they're not out any additional monies ordering restitution is making Page 71 November 16,2006 him pay twice for -- for something. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Well, here's my point. If that -- all public -- this is a closed hearing. There is -- MR. NEALE: Now, you -- you could call the -- well, there's several options. The board could call the -- the complainant for additional testimony. The board could reserve judgment on restitution until additional evidence is presented. You know, those are -- those are options for the board. MS. KELLER: We don't even have the person who signed this contract here, so I don't even -- I'm not even looking at it. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: But I have an unlicensed company selling construction-related services that are going to be installed by supposedly a licensed company, which I haven't verified. MR. NEALE: Uh-huh. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: If I do restitution -- and the reason with -- this board has always liked restitution is that becomes an order of Collier County which is enforced by Collier County to include, am I not correct -- how does Collier County enforce the restitution if it's not made, Mr. Zachary? Have we not filed -- the county -- haven't we filed liens in the past? MR. ZACHARY: I think that would be the enforcement mechanism by the county. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: That's why restitution is important to me, and if we do restitution we've got 90 more cases to hear. MR. BARTOE: Very possibly. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: So it's a big issue. MR. NEALE: The -- the other issue for the board that -- that is now -- I mean, if this -- if the respondent's license is revoked at this hearing, there's still a question as to whether the board has jurisdiction after the revocation of his license. Now, there's a possibility I could -- I could argue -- I'd want to research it, but that I could argue that the board still would have Page 72 November 16,2006 jurisdiction because the offenses were committed while he was a licensed contractor, so you would still have a tail of jurisdiction going forward on that, but, you know, that's -- that's an initial opinion without doing further research. So revocation is an issue at this point. MR. JOSLIN: Could we -- we -- could we make a determination to revoke the license and then hold on the penalties or the -- or the reimbursement parts of it till you did this research? MR. BLUM: We can -- we can -- we can suspend decision on-- on the $8,800 until such time as the plaintiff lets us know that she has, in fact, solved -- signed a valid contract with a licensed contractor in that amount. MR. NEALE: The issue that I'm -- I'm trying to bring forth is that if this license is revoked does the county still have jurisdiction on the other 90 cases that potentially could be brought. MR. JOSLIN: Oh, I see what you're saying. MR. LEWIS: So the idea would be to suspend the license until further information is given. MS. KELLER: And revoke it later. MR. BLUM: So if we suspend his operations -- MR. NEALE: I -- in my opinion, if you suspended his license as opposed to revoke it, you would still have the ability to hear further cases without any question. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Well, you've got -- this is confusing. So we're talking about the suspension of all permit-pulling privileges, suspending the license -- MR. NEALE: Well, suspensions of the license -- CHAIRMAN DICKSON: -- so that we can hear all these other people and get further into it. MR. NEALE: Do you have the ability to just -- you do have the ability to just suspend the license, which would suspend permit-pulling privileges. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: I like that because if we do restitution Page 73 November 16, 2006 -- and we've done it in the past -- the county has -- they're the respondent, not 90 people, but they're the respondent. The county has actively pursued property in an effort to get that restitution, and that's the only way I can help people out -- we can help the citizens out on this board. There may not be anything there. MR. BLUM: By the same token, let's say the other 90 don't come forward. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Well, they're here. MR. BLUM: Well-- MR. NEALE: There's -- there are other complaints that have been filed. MR. BLUM: Yeah. I mean, we -- we don't know they're going to file. MR. NEALE: Well, certainly -- certainly one person in the audience has already stated that she has filed a complaint so ... MR. BLUM: Okay. MR. NEALE: And Mr. -- and Mr. Ossorio has informed me that there are other cases -- MR. BLUM: Okay. MR. NEALE: -- in process so ... MR. BLUM: It kind of bothers me because we should take this case on its merits and not be concerned with what comes after, yet we're almost forced to do that. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: That was your first guideline-- MR. NEALE: Uh-huh. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: -- this case only on its merits. MR. NEALE: Right. MR. BLUM: We've never done that before. It's -- I'm not totally comfortable with that. I mean, I'd like to decide this and -- MR. JOSLIN: Well-- and the other -- the other part of it is that we don't have another meeting until -- CHAIRMAN DICKSON: January. Page 74 November 16,2006 MR. JOSLIN: -- January-- MR. BLUM: Yeah. MR. JOSLIN: -- which leaves another 30 days or 60 days to go by. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Mr. Bartoe. MR. BARTOE: Sir. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Weigh in on -- I'd like to hear from staff on -- MR. BARTOE: Mr. Ossorio and I both recommend revocation, and if that's accomplished then the county's going to have to send out letters to everybody with pending permits to help them -- get them squared away, and if other people wish to take action against this person then I guess they could proceed civilly. MR. BLUM: Because civil -- civilly with a conviction would be a lot more definitive than what we could do, so I really think we have to do this on its own merits. This lady was the one that brought it to us. This is what we're looking at. This is what we have to go forward. MS. KELLER: There's only so much we can do. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: The prices have come down drastically. MR. JOSLIN: I mean, let's face it. If -- if -- if the bill right now that he owes to IRS, the terrible things that he's telling this company, there's not going to be any assets for -- for any -- for anyone anyway, chances are. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Let's hear a motion. Mr. Lewis. MR. LEWIS: I'd like to make a motion, please. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Go ahead. MR. LEWIS: So it please the board -- MR. NEALE: Mr. Zachary would like to make one point. I -- I support him in this. MR. ZACHARY: As far as restitution goes, I believe this board, if it so wishes, could order the restitution to the complainant in this Page 75 November 16, 2006 case. If Mr. Paron could come in later and show this board that that restitu -- that that amount for the deposit was applied to a new contractor, a licensed contractor, the board could then do -- do what is equitable if that has been applied and forgiven that restitution at that point. I think that's a possibility you could do too. Do a restitution order now and then if he could show that it was applied then you could fix that later. MR. JOSLIN: Would that take his license then out of revocation and -- or a suspension, whichever -- MR. ZACHARY: Not necessarily, no. MR. NEALE: All that does is modify that. MR. ZACHARY: Modify the restitution order. MR. NEALE: That's all it would do is modify the restitution portion of the order. It wouldn't modify the rest of the order unless the board so saw fit to do so. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Go ahead, Bill. MR. LEWIS: Thank you. If it please the board, in Case No. 2006-12 against License No. 26902, I'd like to make a motion of the revoke -- revocation of License No. 26902 and all other licenses issued to a Mr. Ronald Dale Paron, Jr., d/b/a Storm Systems, Inc., and any other d/b/a's there noted. And along with a revocation I would appreciate a public reprimand to be made, also restitution in -- to the -- the complainants, Mrs. Erickson, in the amount of $8,800 -- that's $8,800 -- and if Mr. Paron shows that the $8,800 that was taken as an original deposit from Mrs. Erickson is -- has been returned to her through Clear Systems or some other contractor and that she is totally satisfied with the restitution amount that -- that that be removed from him at that time and that there be no other -- no other requirements for re-examination and no other license given and that reasonable investigative and legal costs for the prosecution of this violation be issued in the amount of $1,000. Page 76 November 16,2006 MR. NEALE: Any fine amount? MR. LEWIS: Excuse me? Pardon me? MR. NEALE: Fine. MR. LEWIS: Fine. No fine. MR. JOSLIN: How about recommendations to any other counties or -- MR. LEWIS: He's only county licensed. MR. JOSLIN: All right. MR. NEALE: Well, there still needs to be the same recommendation made. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Yeah. Yeah, there sure does. Yes. There does -- there does -- a state recommendation -- MR. BLUM: Notify the state. MR. LEWIS: I think that's automatic. MR. NEALE: The board still needs to advise what recommendations to make to the state. There's three -- three possibilities that can be recommended to the state, and those are sus -- recommendation of no further action, suspension or revocation or restriction of the registration, or a fine to be levied by the state board. MR. LEWIS: Item B, which would the sus -- suspension or revocation of other licenses. MR. JOSLIN: Joslin, second the motion. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Any discussion? (N 0 response.) CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Call for the vote. All those in favor? MR. LEWIS: Aye. MR. BLUM: Aye. MS. KELLER: Aye. MR. DICKSON: Aye. MR. JOSLIN: Aye. MR. HORN: Aye. MR. BOYD: Aye. Page 77 November 16,2006 CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Opposed? (N 0 response.) CHAIRMAN DICKSON: One more document you've got to read here. Order of the board: Based upon the foregoing findings of fact and conclusion of law and pursuant to the authority granted in Chapter 489 Florida Statutes and Collier County Ordinance No. 90-105 as amended 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 upon the holder of Collier Contractor's Certificate of Competency No. 26902; one, that this license be revoked; two, that all other license -- licenses held by Ronald Day (sic) Paron, Jr., be revoked; three, that restitution to the homeowner in the amount of $8,800; and, four, that $1,000 be paid for the cost of legal and investigative fees encountered by the county. MR. NEALE: And also a public reprimand. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Pardon me? MR. NEALE: Public reprimand. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Five, public reprimand. Do I have a motion to close? Well, this case has been closed. I don't really have anything to say except you got in too deep. You say it's not lost, but it's lost. So I wish you all well. MR. JOSLIN: At this -- also, at this point I don't think that it's an issue for us to determine whether or not the other company that you've recommended is -- is -- is a good or bad company or if these people take it or not take it. It's totally up to the people. But I think by this particular hearing it would be very advisable for you to do some real serious checking and find out exactly what you're going to be getting. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: All I can say to end this meeting, because we're going to have many more cases like this, do not pay more than 10 percent of the contract. MR. BLUM: This gentleman wants to be heard. Page 78 November 16, 2006 MR. HINGLEY: Please -- please may I make a statement? CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Yeah, I'll let you do that. MR. HINGLEY: I feel that you've attacked -- you've attacked our company, and I'd like to defend that, please. MR. BLUM: We haven't got anything to say about you one way or another. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: You're -- you're not licensed. MS. KELLER: Other than you're not licensed. MR. HINGLEY: You've made that implication. And when we first went into business with the system that we chose of using a general contracting license we came to the county. We talked with the county. We studied with the county. We got all -- everything -- every duck was in a row so that we became a -- we -- our contract clearly states all installation by CNP Construction, 100 percent legal by the county . Your implication that we're not legal, please -- that is from you the county arguing with the county, not with us. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Let me make --let me make a statement here. MR. HINGLEY: The second thing is -- the second thing is-- CHAIRMAN DICKSON: No, I've got the microphone. The company that we saw here today was Clear -- MR. JOSLIN: Choice. MR. HINGLEY: Clear Choice. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: -- Clear Choice Shutters, Incorporated. MR. HINGLEY: Correct. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: This is a licensing board. Clear Shutters -- Clear Choice Shutters, Incorporated, is not licensed, so we don't recognize you. MR. HINGLEY: Okay. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: It's a licensing board. Page 79 November 16, 2006 MR. HINGLEY: Fair enough. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: That's all -- MR. HINGLEY: Fur -- further to that, we said that we would try to help people. We are still a commercial company. We can't help people if we're -- it is beyond our means to help them where monies have been paid in excess of what the job will cost to us. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Very well. I've -- I've heard -- I've heard enough. MR. HINGLEY: Furthermore, anyone that does -- anyone that does contract with us pays -- CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Is there any other-- MR. HINGLEY: -- zero deposit. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: -- business to come before this board? MR. HINGLEY: Anyone that contracts with us pays no deposit, so that's another thing in our favor. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Mr. Neale. MR. NEALE: One -- one point for everyone is because these packets do contain people's bank account numbers and everything else CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Could I hear a motion to adjourn? MR. JOSLIN: So moved, Joslin. MR. HORN: Second, Horn. CHAIRMAN DICKSON: Have a wonderful day. ***** There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 11: 19 a.m. Page 80 November 16, 2006 COLLIER COUNTY CONTRACTOR LICENSING BOARD LES DICKSON, CHAIRMAN Transcript prepared on behalf of Gregory Court Reporting Service, Inc., by Karen Blockburger. Page 81