CESM Minutes 01/05/2007
January 5,2007
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY
SPECIAL MASTER
Naples, Florida, January 5,2007
LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Special Master in and for the
County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 AM
in REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex, Naples,
Florida, with the following members present:
SPECIAL MASTER:
Honorable Brenda Garretson
Sue Chapin - Secretary to the Special Master
COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: Dennis Mitchell- Code Enforcement Supervisor
Jeff Wright - Assistant County Attorney
HEARING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY SPECIAL MASTER
AGENDA
Date: January 5, 2007 at 8:30 A.M.
Location: 3301 E. Tamiami Trail, Naples, Florida, Collier County Government Center
Administrative Building "F", 3rd Floor
NOTE: ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THE SPECIAL MASTER WILL NEED A
RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO, AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A
VERBA TIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND
EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. NEITHER COLLIER COUNTY NOR THE CODE
ENFORCEMENT BOARD SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING THIS RECORD.
I. CALL TO ORDER - Special Master Brenda Garretson presiding
A. Hearing rules and regulations
II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - November 17,2006
IV. MOTIONS FOR CONTINUANCE
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Stipulations
B. Hearings
I. CASE NO:
OWNER:
OFFICER:
VIOLATIONS:
SO 141210
ENIOR JIMENEZ
D/S RJ. STEED
ORD. 130-67
HANDICAPPED SPACE
2. CASE NO: SO 149562
OWNER: JOE ALGIRE
OFFICER: CPL. A. ST AND FORD
VIOLA TIONS: ORD. 130-66
UNLA WFUL AREA
3. CASE NO: SO 141777
OWNER: RAMESH GUDUR
OFFICER: D/S LOTHROP
VIOLATIONS: ORD. 130-66
UNLAWFUL AREA
4 CASE NO: SO 141792
OWNER: DAVID AGOSTON
OFFICER: D/S LOTHROP
VIOLATIONS: ORD. 130-66
UNLAWFUL AREA
5. CASE NO: SO 141793
OWNER: DANIEL CARR
OFFICER: D/S LOTHROP
VIOLATIONS: ORD.130-66
UNLAWFUL AREA
6. CASE NO: SO 153885
OWNER: JOSHUA BROWN
OFFICER: D/S LOTHROP
VIOLATIONS: ORD.130-66
UNLAWFUL AREA
7. CASE NO: SO 153918
OWNER: MARK BRODERICK
OFFICER: D/S LOTHROP
VIOLA TIONS: ORD.130-66
UNLA WFUL AREA
8. CASE NO: SO 153929
OWNER: MARK BRODERICK
OFFICER: D/S LOTHROP
VIOLATIONS: ORD.130-66
UNLAWFUL AREA
9. CASE NO: SO 150141
OWNER: IRIS PAUL
OFFICER: D/S L. GARZA
VIOLATIONS: ORD.130-66
UNLAWFUL AREA
10. CASE NO: SO 150121
OWNER: CHARLES CARR
OFFICER: D/S L. GARZA
VIOLA TIONS: ORD.130-66
UNLAWFUL AREA
11. CASE NO: SO 134475
OWNER: MARK BAKER
OFFICER: D/S PERRY MAPES
VIOLATIONS: ORD.130-66
UNLAWFUL AREA
12. CASE NO: SO 137448
OWNER: ALEXIS P ALOMEQUE
OFFICER: D/S CANDICE HARMON
VIOLATIONS: ORD. 130-67
HANDICAPPED SPACE
13. CASE NO: FA 012381
OWNER: BAY COLONY BEACH CLUB
OFFICER: D/S TINA MULLEN
VIOLATIONS: ORD. 2004-48 SEC 5-24
EXCESSIVE FALSE ALARMS
14. CASE NO:
OWNER:
OFFICER:
VIOLATIONS:
PR 115
RAY RUSSELL
OFFICER CAROL BUCKLER
ORD.130-66
UNLAWFUL AREA
15. CASE NO:
OWNER:
OFFICER:
2006090425
JESUS & MARIA MARTINEZ
INV. CARMELO GOMEZ
VIOLATIONS: 2004-41 SEC 2.01.00(A), 2.02.03 & 1.04.01
UNLICENSED/INOPERABLE VEHICLES
v. NEW BUSINESS
A. Request for Imposition of Fines:
1. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS,
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, Case: 2005040823
Plaintiff, A. SORRELS, Issuing Officer
v.
BANK OF AMERICA. N.A., Respondent
2. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS,
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, Case: 2005040822
Plaintiff, A. SORRELS, Issuing Officer
v.
HOME DEPOT USA, INC, Respondent
3. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS,
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, Case: 2005030725
Plaintiff, S. ATHEY, Issuing Officer
v.
JOHN LAFONTANT & PIERRE NOUNNUDE, Respondent
4. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS,
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, Case: 2004090706
Plaintiff, R. GANGULI, Issuing Officer
v.
GUILLERMO MARTINEZ, Respondent
5. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS,
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, Case: 2005080413
Plaintiff, R. GANGULI, Issuing Officer
v.
PAUL-MICHAEL J. CONROY, Respondent
6. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS,
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, Case: 2005040921
Plaintiff, C. GOMEZ, Issuing Officer
v.
ASHLEY & DENISE GILKENSON, Respondent
7. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS,
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, Case: 2005030878
Plaintiff, G. KARR, Issuing Officer
v.
STEPHEN SCHLESSLER, Respondent
8. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS,
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, Case: 2005030060
Plaintiff, C. AMBACH, Issuing Officer
v.
JOAN HANDSHA W, Respondent
9. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS,
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, Case: 2005020443
Plaintiff, J. MUCHA, Issuing Officer
v.
RAFAEL MORALES & JUANA PEREZ, Respondent
10. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS,
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, Case: 2005020698
Plaintiff, E. YBECET A, Issuing Officer
v.
NAPLES SOUTH REALTY, Respondent
II. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS,
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, Case: 2005041113
Plaintiff, M. BONO, Issuing Officer
v.
JOHN MC ELWAIN, Respondent
12. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS,
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, Case: 2005120195
Plaintiff, J. MARSH, Issuing Officer
v.
STPETIM RAMKU, Respondent
13. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS,
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, Case: 2004100731
Plaintiff, S. PATTERSON, Issuing Officer
v.
ADVANCED MERCHANDISING COMPANY, INC., Respondent
B. Request for Reduction of Fines:
VI. OLD BUSINESS
A. Request to forward case for Collections / Foreclosure:
VII. REPORTS - Executive Summary for recommendation to approve the Imposition of Liens for owners of record,
who have failed to pay invoices resulting from Nuisance Abatement Code violation enforcement actions.
VIII. ANNOUNCEMENTS
IX. NEXT MEETING DATE - January 19,2007
X. ADJOURN
January 5, 2007
I. CALL TO ORDER
A. The Meeting was called to order by the Honorable Special Master Brenda
Garretson at 9:00 AM. All those testifying at these proceedings today
did so under oath.
B. Hearing Rules and Regulations were given by Special Master Garretson.
Special Master Garretson noted that, before conducting the Hearing, the
Respondents had an opportunity to speak with their Investigating Officer
for a Resolution by Stipulation; looking for Compliance without being punitive.
II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Dennis Mitchell proposed the following amendments:
· Case No. FA 012381. Bay Colony Beach Club
The Citation was withdrawn by the County due to payment.
· Case No. 2005040823. Bank of America, N.A.
The Request for an Imposition of Fines was withdrawn by the County due to
payment.
The Special Master approved the agenda as amended.
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - November 17,2006
· The reference listing Ms. Chapin as Secretary to the Special Master on page 1 has
been relocated;
· Case No. 2006070802, correct spelling Doak (page 7);
· Case No. 2006060433, the violation is changed from Vehicles on the Grass to Rental
Registration (page 9);
· Case No. 2006080581, the date is changed to 2007 (page 10);
· Case No. 2006011099, the violation is changed from Rental Registration Fines to
Rental Registration Late Fees (pages 10 and 11);
· Case No. 2005090849, dates are changed to 2007 (page 11); and
· Case No. 2006050618, the Investigator's last name is corrected to Mucha (page 17).
The Minutes o/the Special Master Hearing for November 17, 2006 were reviewed by the
Special Master and approved as amended.
IV. MOTIONS FOR CONTINUANCE
1. Case # SO 141210 - BCC vs. Enior Jimenez
The Special Master DENIED the Request for a Continuance since the Respondent's
Request did not comply with the requirement of the County's Ordinance for a minimum
of ten days prior notice.
2
January 5,2007
9. Case # SO 150141 - BCC vs. Iris Paul
The Deputy Sheriff was not available but had submitted a Request for a Continuance
within the time period specified by the County's Ordinance. The Respondent and her
witnesses were present.
The Special Master determined that since the Respondent had not been notified of the
request for a Continuance, the Respondent's witnesses would be allowed to give a
written statement in lieu of appearing at the next hearing.
The Special Master GRANTED the Request for a Continuance. The Respondent will
be notified of the new Hearing date.
10. Case # SO 150121. BCC vs. Charles Carr
The Deputy Sheriff was not available but had submitted a Request for a Continuance
within the time period specified by the County's Ordinance. The Respondent was
present.
The Special Master determined that since the Respondent had not been notified of the
request for a Continuance, the Respondent would be allowed to submit his documents
to the Special Master's Secretary for review by the Deputy prior to the next hearing.
(Note: The documents were submitted by Mr. Carr.)
The Special Master GRANTED the Request for a Continuance. The Respondent will
be notified of the new Hearing date.
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Stipulations - None
B. Hearings
2. Case # SO 149562 - BCC vs. Joe Al2ire
The Hearing was requested by the Respondent who was not present.
Collier County Deputy Sheriff A. Standford was also present.
Violation(s): 130-66
Unlawful area
Finding the notice of hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUILTY of
the alleged violation(s) and was ordered to pay afine of $30. 00 and citation fee of $5. 00 on
or before February 5, 2007.
The Respondent was ordered to pay Operational Costs in the amount of $50.00 incurred
during the prosecution of this case on or before February 5, 2007.
1. Case # SO 141210 - BCC vs. Enior Jimenez
The Hearing was requested by the Respondent who was not present.
Collier County Deputy SheriffR. J. Steed was also present.
3
'^'~~'~-~<"-~"""'~._---",--~,......,~._~-
January 5,2007
Violation(s): 130-67
Handicapped space
Deputy Steed presented two photographs which were entered into evidence as the County's
Composite Exhibit "A".
Finding the notice of hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUILTY of
the alleged violation(s) and was ordered to pay a fine of $250.00 and citation fee of $5.00 on
or before February 5, 2007.
The Respondent was ordered to pay Operational Costs in the amount of $50. 00 incurred
during the prosecution of this case on or before February 5,2007.
3. Case # SO 141777 - BCC vs. Ramesh Gudur
The Hearing was requested by the Respondent who was present.
Collier County Deputy Sheriff Lothrop was also present.
Violation(s): 130-66
Unlawful area
Finding the notice of hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found NOT
GUILTY of the alleged violation. The Citation was DISMISSED.
4. Case # SO 141792 - BCC vs. David Aeoston
The Hearing was requested by the Respondent who was present.
Collier County Deputy Sheriff Lothrop was also present.
Violation(s): 130-66
Unlawful area
Finding the notice of hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found NOT
GUILTY of the alleged violation(s). The Citation was DISMISSED.
5. Case # SO 141793 - BCC vs. Daniel Carr
The Hearing was requested by the Respondent who was present.
Collier County Deputy Sheriff Lothrop was also present.
Violation(s): 130-66
Unlawful area
Finding the notice of hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found NOT
GUILTY of the alleged violation(s). The Citation was DISMISSED.
The Special Master noted the delay in completing construction of the County's parking
facility, and the resulting confusion as to where parking was and was not allowed during that
period, was the basis for dismissing the previous Cases cited under Ordinance 130-66.
4
January 5,2007
11. Case # SO 134475 - BCC vs. Mark Baker
The Hearing was requested by the Respondent who was present and was represented by
Attorney Michele Hill.
Collier County Deputy Sheriff Perry Mapes was also present.
Violation(s): 130-66
Unlawful area
Attorney Hill referred to the County's Interoffice Memorandum, dated June 16,2004, which
was offered to support the Respondent's position that the County's Ordinance is sufficiently
vague and should be clarified.
Finding the notice of hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found NOT
GUILTY of the alleged violation(s). The Citation was DISMISSED.
14. Case # PR 115 - BCC vs. Rav Russell
The Hearing was requested by the Respondent who was present.
Collier County Park Ranger Carol Buckler was also present.
Violation(s): 130-66
Unlawful area
The Respondent contended that the government failed in its duty to properly illuminate the
boat ramp launch area so that the signs were visible during darkness, especially for someone
arriving at the facility during non-daylight hours. There were no gates preventing access to
the boat ramp. The Respondent stated that ifhe had known there was a fee to park there, he
would have paid it. He fishes in Estero Bay where there is no fee to park. That boat ramp is
similar in layout to the Collier County site.
The Respondent presented the following photographs to the Court which were entered into
evidence as Respondent's Exhibits "1" through "4":
Exhibit 1 - photograph of truck
Exhibit 2 - photograph of manatee sign
Exhibit 3 - photograph of ladder
Exhibit 4 - photograph of second ladder
The Park Ranger stated that a vehicle's headlights would reflect the signage at the site. She
also stated that Collier County's boat launch facilities have been charging a fee for the past
four years.
The Special Master stated that she would take this case under advisement because she
wanted to personally inspect the site. She would issue a ruling by the middle of the following
week.
RECESS: 10:40 AM
RECONVENED: 11:02 AM
5
January 5,2007
Before the Hearing resumed, the Special Master stated for the record:
· In Case # SO 134475, the Respondent's copy of the County's Interoffice Memo dated
June 16, 2004 was entered into evidence as Respondent's Exhibit "A ";
· The following Cases were also in the same category (unlawful parking while the
County's parking garage was under construction) under Ordinance 130-66 and,
therefore, were being dismissed: Case #. SO 153885, BCC vs. Joshua Brown;
Cases # SO 153918 and # SO 153929 - BCC vs. Mark Broderick.
· Deputy Sheriff Lothrup can advise the Special Master if she has erred concerning the
location of where the citations were issued, and she would reconsider the dismissals.
· Case # SO 150141 - BCC vs. Iris Paul, and Case # SO 150121 - BCC vs. Charles Carr
are continued to the February 2, 2007 Hearing.
The Agenda was reinstated.
12. Case # SO 137448 - BCC vs. Alexis PalomeQue
The Hearing was requested by the Respondent who was present.
Collier County Deputy Sheriff Candice Harmon was also present.
The Respondent stated she needed a translator. Code Enforcement Investigator Carmelo
Gomez served as translator for the Respondent.
Violation(s): 130-67
Handicapped space
Address of violation: 4849 Golden Gate Parkway, Collier County
The Respondent, through her translator, stated the area next to the handicapped parking space
in the Winn-Dixie lot was used by Winn-Dixie for additional storage of its shopping carts.
The Deputy showed photographs to the Respondent and stated that the Respondent had
parked her vehicle in the access aisle adjacent to the marked handicapped parking space and
that the area was, in fact, part of the handicapped parking space.
Finding the notice of hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUILTY of
the alleged violation(s) and was ordered to pay afine of $250. 00 and citation fee of $5. 00 on
or before February 5,2007.
The Respondent was ordered to pay Operational Costs in the amount of $50. 00 incurred
during the prosecution of this case on or before February 5, 2007.
The Respondent was advised to contact Code Enforcement to arrange for a payment plan.
6
January 5,2007
15. Case # 2006090425 - BCC vs. Jesus & Maria Martinez
The Hearing was requested by Code Enforcement Investigator Carmelo Gomez was present.
The Respondent was also present.
Violation(s): 2004-41, Sec. 2.01.00(A), 2.02.03 and 1.04.01
Unlicensed/inoperable vehicles
Investigator Gomez stated that this case was a repeat offense. He asked that a civil penalty
be assessed in the amount of $500.
The Respondent stated that he had a series of personal situations which kept him from
correcting the violation. The Special Master suggested the Respondent could have sold the
car he was unable to license, rather than continuing to violate the ordinance.
Finding the notice of hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUILTY of
the alleged violation(s) and was ordered to pay a repeat violation civil penalty of $500.00 on
or before February 5,2007. The Respondent was ordered to license, remove, or store the
unlicensed/inoperable vehicles on or before January 8, 2007, or a fine of $1 00 per day will
be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter.
The Respondent was ordered to pay Operational Costs in the amount of $97.15 incurred
during the prosecution of this case on or before February 5,2007.
The Respondent is to notify the Investigator within 24 hours of a workday to concur the
violation has been abated.
The Special Master further advised the Respondent if the same violation were to occur
again, afine of$1,000 would be assessed.
V. NEW BUSINESS
A. Request for Imposition of Fines
The following case was taken out of order because the Respondent was represented by his
attorney.
11. Case # 2005041113 - BCC vs. John McElwain
The Hearing was requested by Code Enforcement Investigator M. Bono who was present.
The Respondent was also present and represented by Attorney Philip Hamilton.
The Investigator stated to the Court that there has been no compliance with the terms of the
agreed-upon Stipulation since December 15, 2006. He asked the Special Master to impose
the per-day fine of $50 from December 15,2006 to January 5,2007. The Investigator also
stated that he was unable to walk the property to view the degree of compliance due to the
Respondent's dogs.
Attorney Hamilton stated that his client has been trying to clear the property for some time,
but that an acquaintance of the Respondent's had, without permission, parked a boat and
trailer on the property. Mr. Hamilton informed this individual that he must remove these
7
----_.".~._........,_._"._..~---"_.__._._._~--
January 5, 2007
vehicles from the Respondent's property but has refused to do so. It will be necessary for the
Respondent to institute a lawsuit against this individual in order to remove the vehicles.
The Respondent stated that he did not recall being present at a prior hearing and was
confused about which County entity was requiring him to clean up his property.
Attorney Hamilton requested a reduction of fines for his client due to financial hardship.
The Special Master GRANTED the County's request and imposed afine of $21, 550 plus
Operational Costs of$174.82 for a total of $21, 724.82 subject to Investigator Bono being
allowed onto the property to determine the extent of compliance that has occurred.
Investigator Bono was instructed that he could return to the Special Master with a new
recommendation ifhe feels it is justified and the Special Master would consider a rehearing
or reduction of the fine.
The Special Master stated that the application of the Order would be delayed for ninety
days, and the Order would not be recorded during this ninety-day period.
Attorney Hamilton was directed to submit a written request for reduction of the fines to Ms.
Chapin, Secretary to the Special Master, with a copy to be provided to Code Enforcement.
2. Case # 2005040822 - BCC vs. Home Depot USA. Inc.
The Hearing was requested by Code Enforcement Investigator A. Sorrels who was present.
The Respondent was not present.
The Investigator stated that Respondent had received proper notice of this hearing by means
of a posting on the front door of the Airport Road store. The Respondent had previously
entered into a Stipulation, the terms of which were to be complied with by December 6,
2005. An affidavit of non-compliance was filed by the Investigator, based on a site visit
conducted on December 7, 2005. The Respondent remained out of compliance from
December 7,2005 through June 13,2006.
The amount of the fine is $14,175 and the Operational Costs of$191.88 for a total of
$14,366.88.
An individual who identified himself as the manager ofthe Airport Road store contacted
Dennis Mitchell after the posting and informed Mr. Mitchell that he would refer this matter
to Home Depot's corporate office.
The Special Master GRANTED the County's request and imposed a fine of $14,175
together with Operational Costs of$191.88for a totalfine of $14,366. 88. The County was
instructed to proceed with lien enforcement.
3. Case # 2005030725 - BCC vs. John LaFontant & Pierre Nounnude
The Hearing was requested by Code Enforcement Investigator S. Athey who was present.
The Respondents were not present.
8
January 5, 2007
The Investigator stated that the Respondents entered into a Stipulation, the terms of which
were to be complied with by July 8, 2005. The property was re-inspected on July 10, 2005
and it was found that the violation remained. The property was again re-inspected on July 6,
2006 and the violation was abated.
Dennis Mitchell explained that the violation could only be verified for the two days beyond
the order date. It was undetermined as to when it was abated prior to July 6, 2006.
The Special Master GRANTED the County's request and imposed a fine of$200 together
with Operational Costs of $204.65 for a total fine of $404.65. The County was instructed
to proceed with lien enforcement.
4. Case # 20040990706 - BCC vs. Guillermo Martinez
The Hearing was requested by Code Enforcement Investigator Ganguli who was represented
by Code Enforcement Supervisor Dennis Mitchell.
The Respondent was also present.
Mr. Mitchell stated that the Special Master's prior Order required compliance by March 11,
2005. There was non-compliance from March 22, 2005 through December 20,2006. The
County is requesting a lien of $32, 100 and Operational Costs of $98.66 for a total fine of
$32,198.66.
Mr. Mitchell further stated that the Respondent had been advised of the lien by a title
company and that the situation had been explained to him in detail. Mr. Mitchell stated that
he thought the money is being held in escrow by the title company as part of the refinancing
process.
The Respondent could not give an adequate explanation as to why the shed was either not
demolished or permitted in 2005. The Special Master stated that there was no sufficient
reason as to why the County's request for fines should not be granted. Mr. Mitchell stated
that the County did not have justification to support a request for a reduction in fines.
The Special Master stated to the Respondent that one of the responsibilities and obligations
of owning property is being able to communicate with people. It was the Respondent's
responsibility to bring a family member or friend with him ifhe had a problem understanding
the legal proceeding. The Special Master further stated that there was no legal reason not to
impose the fine requested by the County. She suggested that perhaps the Respondent should
consult an attorney for guidance.
The Special Master GRANTED the County's request and imposed afine of$32,100
together with Operational Costs of $98. 66for a total fine of $32, 198. 66. The County was
instructed to proceed with lien enforcement.
5. Case # 2005080413 - BCC vs. Paul-Michael J. Conroy
The Hearing was requested by Code Enforcement Investigator Ganguli who was represented
by Code Enforcement Supervisor Dennis Mitchell.
The Respondent was also present.
9
"'''....._..._.~.,.,...,'"',.,."_., . ---'--""._'"'-'-'-"''"-''--~~-''
January 5,2007
Mr. Mitchell stated that recent site inspections of the property were conducted with a result
that the violation of accumulation of litter still remains to some degree, which Mr. Conroy
admitted to Mr. Mitchell. The County is requesting an Order imposing a fine of $23,550
together with Operational Costs of$158.92 for a total fine of$23,708.92.
The Respondent stated that he had no idea that there were any ongoing fines against his
property. He did not attend the hearing in 2005. He was recently able to pull his house out
of foreclosure. He admitted leaving some of his construction equipment, i.e., paint cans and
ladders, on the side of the house. He admitted he knew he had been ordered by the County to
remove the violation by cleaning his property. He also stated that he had forgotten about the
violation and did not think he was required to call the County to have the property inspected.
Mr. Mitchell confirmed the Respondent had received proper notice of the previous hearing
which he did not attend.
The Special Master asked the Respondent ifthere was any justification that he could give as
to why a fine should not be imposed. She stated that the only way that he would have known
he was required to do "something" was because he received her written Order which clearly
outlined that he would have to abate the existing violation by September 21, 2005, or a fine
of $50 per day would be imposed until such violation was corrected.
The Special Master GRANTED the County's request and imposed afine of $23, 550
together with Operational Costs of $158. 92 for a totalfine of $23, 708.92. The County was
instructed to proceed with lien enforcement.
6. Case # 2005040921 - BCC vs. Ashlev & Denise Gilkenson
The Hearing was requested by Code Enforcement Investigator Carmelo Gomez who was
present.
The Respondent was also present. (Respondent's name is spelled "Ashby".)
The Investigator stated the location of the violation is 5960 Green Blvd., Collier County.
The Respondent was found in violation on March 17,2006. The violation was not abated
during the period from June 16,2006 through January 5,2007, which is 203 days. The
recommendation is to issue a lien in the amount of $50,750 for fines, with Operational Costs
of $238.18, for a total of $50, 988.18.
The Respondent stated that he purchased the property with the illegal improvements from a
former Commissioner. He attempted to obtain a variance on the building. He met with
Dennis Mitchell and Brenda Warren in December, 2005.
When asked by the Special Master exactly what he had done to come into compliance, he
stated he had removed the plumbing, the kitchen countertops and the water heater. The
Special Master inquired why the fee was set at $250.00. The Investigator stated the
Respondent had previously entered into a Stipulation, but that he still was not in compliance
with the terms of the Stipulation. The Investigator produced a copy of the document for the
Special Master.
10
January 5,2007
The Special Master asked the Respondent ifhe was aware that the fee of $250 a day was
running. She asked the Respondent ifhe had any documentation to support his efforts to
abate the violation. The Respondent did not have any records with him. The Respondent
stated that he did request an inspection. His permit was available on October 19,2006 and he
picked it up on October 20, 2006.
The Special Master determined that this hearing would be CONTINUED to January 19,
2007 to allow Investigator Gomez to re-inspect the property and determine if the property is
in compliance. The Respondent was requested to produce written proof of his efforts to
come into compliance prior to obtaining the permit.
8. Case # 2005030060 - BCC vs. Joan Handshaw
The Hearing was requested by Code Enforcement Investigator C. Ambach who was present.
The Respondent was also present.
The Investigator stated the case was initially heard on March 8, 2006. The Respondent did
not attend the hearing. The Respondent was ordered to abate the violation by obtaining a
demolition permit and removing the structure within sixty days or a fine of $100 a day would
be imposed. The violation still has not been abated. Operational Costs are $353.27, and the
fine is now $30,300.
The Respondent stated that she had left a voice mail message requesting an extension of time
in order to obtain an attorney. The Respondent was unaware of the seriousness of the
situation. She stated her only income is from Social Security. She also stated that she has
been trying to correct the situation since she received the notice of this hearing.
The Respondent owns both her own property and her late mother's property, which she is
preparing to rent. When she rents that house, she will have funds available to repair the shed.
The Special Master determined that this hearing would be CONTINUED to February 2,
2007. The Special Master advised the Respondent that if she obtained an attorney, she
should instruct her attorney to contact Code Enforcement directly. The Special Master
stated that she is considering revising her current Order and asked the County Attorney to
provide the County's opinion on how this could effect the Order.
10. Case # 2005020698 - BCC vs. Naples South Realtv
The Hearing was requested by Code Enforcement Investigator E. Ybaceta who was present.
The Respondent was also present.
The Investigator stated that several continuances requested by the Respondent in order to
come into compliance, and the requests for extension of time were granted. On November 1,
2006, an Affidavit of Non-Compliance was issued and the fine began to accrue. The
Investigator is requesting the issuance of a lien in the amount of $3,300 for fines, with
Operational Costs in the amount of$110.10, for a total of$3,410.1O.
The Respondent stated the property would be in compliance by the end of January, 2007. He
requested that the accrual of the fine be stayed until completion of the work.
11
January 5, 2007
The Investigator suggested that the Special Master allow sixty days for completion.
The Special Master GRANTED the County's request and imposed afine of$3,300 together
with Operational Costs of$110.10for a totalfine of $3,41 O. 10. Based on substantial
compliance with the previous Order, the fines will not accrue and will be stayed for a sixty-
day period to allow completion of the balance of the work on the property. lfthe work has
not been completed at the end of the sixty-day period, the fine of $50 per day would be
retroactive, imposed and added to the previous figure of $3,41 0.1 O.
The Special Master stated that the application of the Order would be delayed for sixty days,
and the Order would not be recorded during this sixty-day period.
7. Case # 2005030878 - BCC vs. Stephen Schlessler
The Hearing was requested by Code Enforcement Investigator E. Ybaceta who was present.
The Respondent was not present.
The Investigator requested an Imposition of Fines in the amount of$28,750 ($50 a day for a
period of575 days) together with Operational Costs in the amount of$127.47 for a total fine
of$28,877.47.
The Investigator verified that the Respondent was given proper notice of this hearing
according to the County's Ordinance.
The Special Master GRANTED the County's request and imposed afine of $28, 750
together with Operational Costs of$127.47 for a totalfine of$28,877.47. The County was
instructed to proceed with lien enforcement.
9. Case # 2005020443 - BCC vs. Rafael Morales & Juana Perez
The Hearing was requested by Code Enforcement Investigator Joe Mucha who was present.
The Respondent, Juana Perez, was present earlier, but left before the Hearing was heard.
The Investigator stated that the Respondent could not be present at the Hearing because she
was having a final inspection of her property today. He suggested that the Respondent could
come back to apply for a reduction in fines if the property is in compliance as of today.
The Investigator requested an Imposition of Fines in the amount of $28,900 ($50 a day for a
period of 579 days) together with Operational Costs in the amount of $143.75 for a total fine
of$29,043.75.
The Special Master GRANTED the County's request and imposed afine of $28, 900
together with Operational Costs of$143. 75 for a totalfine of $29, 043. 75. Based on
substantial compliance with the previous Order, the fines will not accrue and will be stayed
for a sixty-day period to allow completion of the balance of the work on the property. If
the work has not been completed at the end of the sixty-day period, the fine of $50 per day
would be retroactive, imposed and added to the previous figure of $29,043.75.
12
January 5, 2007
The Special Master stated that the application of the Order would be delayedfor sixty days,
and the Order would not be recorded during this sixty-day period.
The Order is to reflect that if the Respondent wishes to submit a Request for a Reduction of
Fines, such Request is to be in writing and is to be filed with the Secretary to the Special
Master within the sixty-day period.
12. Case # 2005120195 - BCC vs. Stpetim Ramku
The Hearing was requested by Code Enforcement Investigator John Marsh who was present.
The Respondent was not present.
The Investigator stated that this case was initially heard on May 19,2006. The violation
accrued fines in two parts: from June 8 through September 7,2006 for a total of91 days at
$50 per day which amounts to $4,550, and from September 7 through November 1,2006 for
a total of 55 days at $200 per day which amounts to $11,000. The Operational Costs are
$178.80. The total amount of the fines requested to be imposed is $15,728.80.
The Investigator further stated the Respondent had received proper notice of this Hearing
according to the County's Ordinance.
The Special Master GRANTED the County's request and imposed a fine of $15,550
together with Operational Costs of $178.80 for a total fine of $15,728.80. The County was
instructed to proceed with lien enforcement.
13. Case # 2004100731- BCC vs. Advanced Merchandisin2 Company. Inc.
This Hearing was requested by Code Enforcement Investigator Sherry Patterson and
Investigator K. Snow.
The Respondent was not present.
Investigator Patterson stated for the record that although she is the issuing officer, the case
was transferred to Investigator Snow who is presenting the Request for an Imposition of
Fines. Investigator Snow stated that this case was opened in 2004. A site visit was made and
an Affidavit of Non-Compliance was filed on May 18, 2006 by Investigator Patterson. On
January 3,2007, Investigator Snow conducted a site visit and determined that the property
was still not in compliance.
The property was posted by Investigator Snow and he was contacted by telephone by a
representative from the Advanced Merchandising Company's corporate office. He advised
the representative of the Hearing date and, in view of the large amount of the fine, the need
for a company representative to attend the Hearing. No one had attended the initial Hearing
on behalf of the Respondent.
The Investigator requested an Imposition of Fines in the amount of$53,900 (from July 15,
2005 through January 5, 2007, for a total of 539 days at $100 per day) in addition to
Operational Costs in the amount of$264.29, for a total fine of$54,164.29.
13
January 5, 2007
The Special Master GRANTED the County's request and imposed afine of $53, 900
together with Operational Costs of $264.29 for a total fine of $54,164.29. The County was
instructed to proceed with lien enforcement.
VI. OLD BUSINESS
A. Request to forward Case for Collections/Foreclosure: NONE
VII. REPORTS - Executive Summary for recommendation to approve the Imposition of
Liens for owners of record who have failed to pay invoices resulting from Nuisance
Abatement Code violation enforcement actions.
The Special Master reviewed the Executive Summary.
The Special Master approved the Imposition of Liens for owners of record who have failed to
pay their invoices that resulted from Nuisance Abatement Code violations enforcement
actions subject to the Special Master's review of the actual Orders imposing the liens and
subject to correction at a future Hearing.
VIII. ANNOUNCEMENTS - NONE
IX. NEXT MEETING DATE - January 19,2007.
There being no further business for the good of the County, the Hearing was adjourned by
order of the Special Master at 1 :51 PM.
FOR THE COLLIER COUNTY SPECIAL MASTER HEARING
Special Master, Brenda Garretson
14