CESM Minutes 03/16/2007
March 16, 2007
MINUTES OF THE HEARING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY
SPECIAL MASTER
Naples, Florida, March 16,2007
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: Jeff Wright - Assistant County Attorney
Dennis Mitchell - Code Enforcement Supervisor
HEARING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY SPECIAL MASTER
AGENDA
Date: March 16,2007 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 SPECIAL
MASTER SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING THIS RECORD.
I. CALL TO ORDER - Special Master Brenda Garretson presiding
II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
A. Hearing rules and regulations
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - March 2, 2007
IV. MOTIONS FOR CONTINUANCE
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Stipulations
B. Hearings
I.
CASE NO:
OWNER:
OFFICER:
VIOLA TlONS:
DAS 11234 THRU 11238
GREGORY COCHRAN
DAS OFC. PETER HINKLEY
CODE NO. 14-36, SEC. (A)(2)
INJURED DOG RUNNING AT LARGE AND MULTIPLE DOGS RUNNING AT
LARGE
VIOLA TlON
ADDRESS: PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY IN FRONT OF 624 10TH ST. & NORTH 10TH ST,
IMMOKALEE
2.
CASE NO:
OWNER:
OFFICER:
VIOLA TlONS:
DAS 1/239 THRU 1/243
GREGORY COCHRAN
DAS OFe. PETER HINKLEY
CODE NO. 14-34, SEe. (A)(I)
FAILURE TO VACCINATE MULTIPLE DOGS
VIOLA TlON
ADDRESS: PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY ON NORTH 10TH ST, IMMOKALEE
3.
CASE NO:
OWNER:
OFFICER:
VIOLA TIONS:
DAS 1/244 THRU 11246
GREGORY COCHRAN
DAS OFe. PETER HINKLEY
CODE NO. 14-41, SEe. (A)(5)
TORMENT ANY ANIMAL
VIOLATION
ADDRESS: PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY IN FRONT OF 624 NORTH 10TH ST, IMMOKALEE
4.
CASE NO:
OWNER:
OFFICER:
VIOLATIONS:
DAS 11278 THRU 1/281
RAUL DIAZ
DAS OFe. PETER HINKLEY
CODE NO. 14-36 SEC. (A)(2) & CODE NO. 14-36, SEC. (A)(7)
DOGS RUNNING AT LARGE; SNAP, GROWL AND SNARL TO THREATEN
PERSON
VIOLATION
ADDRESS: 505 HOPE CIRCLE, IMMOKALEE
5.
CASE NO:
OWNER:
OFFICER:
VIOLA TlONS:
DAS 1/285 & DAS 1/286
MATTHEW HUBBARD
DAS OFe. PETER HINKLEY
CODE NO. 14-36 SEe. (A)(2) & CODE NO. ]4-34, SEe. (A)(4)
DOG RUNNING AT LARGE; FAILURE TO AFFIX LICENSE
VIOLATION
ADDRESS: BA YSIDE STREET
6.
CASE NO:
OWNER:
OFFICER:
VIOLA TlONS:
DAS 1/287 THRU 1/290
NATALIE MYERS
DAS OFC. PETER HINKLEY
CODE NO. 14-36 SEC. (A)(2) & CODE NO. 14-36, SEC. (A)(5)
DOGS RUNNING AT LARGE; DEFECATION CREATING PUBLIC NUISANCE
VIOLATION
ADDRESS: COMMON GROUND ON BLAUVELT COURT
7.
CASE NO:
OWNER:
OFFICER:
VIOLATIONS:
DAS 11298 & DAS 11299
CHRISTINE JODOIN
DAS OFC. PETER HINKLEY
CODE NO. 14-41, SEe. (A)(9)
LEA VING DOG IN VEHICLE IN A CRUEL OR INHUMANE MANNER THAT
THREATENS THE HEALTH OF ANIMAL, NO WATER
VIOLATION
ADDRESS: 345] TAMIAMI TRAIL E.
8.
CASE NO:
OWNER:
OFFICER:
VIOLATIONS:
VIOLA TlON
ADDRESS:
9.
CASE NO:
OWNER:
OFFICER:
VIOLATIONS:
2007010511
CRAIG & GLORIA PERLOWIN
CED INV. RENALD PAUL
ORD. 04-4], SEe. 4.05.03(A)
RECURING VIOLATION - VEHICLE ON PARK ON THE GRASS
1900 46TH TERRACE SW
2006040727
ROBERT A. MITCHELL
CED INV. MARIO BONO
ORD. 04-41, SEC. 4.05.03(A)
PARKING ON UNPAVED! UNSTABLIZED SURFACE
VIOLA TlON
ADDRESS: 3465 DORADO WAY
10.
CASE NO:
OWNER:
OFFICER:
VIOLA TlONS:
2006060712 TIME CERTAIN! 12:00P.M.
JAMES & CATHY DONOVAN
CED INV. JOE MUCHA
ORD. 04-41. SEe. 1O.02.06(B)(J)(A) & 1O.02.06(B)(I)(D); CODE OF LAWS SEe.
22, ARTICLE II, PAR. 104.1.3.5
CONSTRUCTION WITHOUT PERMIT
VIOLA TION
ADDRESS: 200 TAHITI CIR.
VI. NEW BUSINESS
I.
A. Motion for Imposition of Fines:
CASE NO:
OWNER:
OFFICER:
VIOLATIONS:
VIOLA TION
ADDRESS:
B. Motion for Reduction of Fines:
I.
CASE NO:
OWNER:
OFFICER:
VIOLATIONS:
VIOLATION
ADDRESS:
2.
CASE NO:
OWNER:
OFFICER:
VIOLATIONS:
VIOLA TION
ADDRESS:
VII. OLD BUSINESS
DAS 11130 THRU 11150, DAS 11251 THRU 11267
KATHY LAVERY
DAS OFC. DAVID LEVITT
CODE NO. ]4-4], SEe. A(6) AND SEe. A(5)
ANIMAL WITHOUT WHOLESOME CIIANGE OF AIR & CAUSING TORMENT
TO ANIMAL
348] ] ITH A VENUE SW
2006040788
PEDRO M. HERRERA ESTATE C/O ADAM HERRERA
THOMAS KEEGAN
ORD. 05-44, SEC, 6, 7, & 8
ACCUMULATION OF LITTER
1122 IMMOKALEE DRIVE, IMMOKALEE
2005120270
JALP, LLC C/O LAIMIS PAISELlUNAN
CED INV. JOE MUCHA
ORD. 05-44, SEC. 6, 7, 8
TRASH & LInER REMOVAL - COUNTY ABA TED
5234 MARTIN STREET
A. Request to forward case for Collections / Foreclosure:
VJII. CONSENT AGENDA -
A. Recommendation to approve the Imposition of Lien for owners of record who have failed to pay invoices
resulting from nuisance abatement violation enforcement actions.
IX, REPORTS
X, NEXT MEETING DATE: April 6, 2007
XI. ADJOURN
March 16, 2007
I. CALL TO ORDER
The Meeting was called to order by the Honorable Special Master Brenda Garretson at
9:00 AM. All those testifying at this proceeding today did so under oath.
A. Hearing Rules and Regulations were given by Special Master Garretson. Special
Master Garretson noted that, prior to conducting the Hearing, the Respondents
were given an opportunity to speak with their Investigating Officer for a
Resolution by Stipulation; looking for compliance without being punitive.
RECESS: 9:10 AM
RECONVENED: 9:25 AM
II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Sue Chapin, Secretary to the Special Master, proposed the following changes:
· New Business: Item #2, Case No. 2005120270, was withdrawn by the County
. Next Meetin!! Date: April 6, 2007
The Special Master approved the agenda as amended, subject to any changes made during
the course of the Hearing at the discretion of the Special Master.
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - March 2, 2007
The Minutes of the Hearing held on March 2, 2007 were reviewed by the Special Master and
approved as submitted.
IV. MOTION(S) FOR CONTINUANCE - None
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. StiDulations:
8. Case # 2007010511 - BCC vs. Crai!! and Gloria Perlow in
The Hearing was requested by Code Enforcernent Investigator RenaId Paul who was present.
The Respondents were not present.
Violation(s): Ordinance 04-4i, Section 4,05.03(A)
Vehicle parked on the grass - Recurring violation
Address of violation: 1900 46'h Terrace SW, Naples, Florida
A Stipulation was agreed to the Respondents on February 27, 2007.
2
March 16, 2007
The Investigator stated the violation, which had been a recurring issue, was abated.
Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, and finding the violation(s) did exist
but were CORRECTED prior to today's hearing, the Respondents were found GUILTY
of the violation(s) alleged and were ordered to pay a civil penalty of $200. 00 on or before
April 16, 2007.
The Respondents have paid Operational Costs in the amount of $126.28 incurred
during the prosecution of this case.
The Special Master noted the fines in this case had been paid by the Respondents.
The Special Master stated if this violation were to occur again, the civil penalty assessed
would be greater. She suggested the Respondents should not be allowed to enter into
additional Stipulation(s), but should appear before her in the event of repeat violations.
B. Hearinl!s:
1. Case # DAS 11234 throul!h 11238 - BCC vs. Grel!orv Cochran
The Hearing was requested by the Respondent was present.
Department of Animal Services Officer Peter Hinkley was also present.
Violation(s): Ordinance 14-46, Sec. A(2)
Injured dog running at large/multiple dogs running at large
Address of violation: 624 N. 10th Street, Immokalee, Florida
The Respondent stated the dogs would dig under the fence which surrounds his house.
He indicated the dogs were kept outside to protect his house; they were not pets,
although he did feed them and provide water.
The Officer stated most of the citations were issued on June 16,2006. The citation
which referenced allowing an injured dog to run at large was issued on March 8, 2006.
He introduced several photographs which, after examination by the Respondent, were
marked as the County's Composite Exhibit "A" and entered into evidence, Officer
Hinkley confirmed that he had personally taken the photographs.
2. Case # DAS 11239 throul!h 11243 - BCC vs. Grel!orv Cochran
Violation(s): Ordinance 14-34, Sec. A(1)
Failure to vaccinate multiple dogs
Address of violation: 624 N. 10th Street, Immokalee, Florida
The Special Master stated the Citations were issued on March 8, 2006 and June 16, 2006,
The matters were initially set to be heard in November, 2006, but a Continuance was
granted at that time due.
3
March 16, 2007
The Respondent stated the puppies were too young to be vaccinated. The large black
dog, which belonged to his daughter, had been vaccinated.
Officer Hinkley stated that vaccinations could be started on a puppy at four months old
and the Respondent's puppies were approximately six months old.
3. Case # DAS 11244 throul!h 11246 - BCC vs. Grel!orv Cochran
Violation(s): Ordinance 14-41, Sec. A(5)
Torment any animal
Address of violation: 624 N. 10th Street, Immokalee, Florida
Officer Hinkley stated the dogs were infested with ticks and were later humanely
euthanized due to the disease known as "tick paralysis." He stated the Respondent did
not seek medical treatment for the dog whose leg was injured.
The Respondent stated the dog was injured in a fight with a pit bull, and that all dogs
were able to heal their own wounds by licking them.
County Attorney Jeff Wright stated the County's Code defines torture as "Any act,
omission or negligence causing, or allowing to continue, unnecessary or unjustifiable
pain or suffering when there is remedy and relief reasonably available."
The Special Master ruled on the Citations as follows:
(a) Finding the Notices of Hearing were properly served, the Respondent was found
GUILTY of the violation(s) alleged in Citations #11234, #11236, #I1237, #I1238,
and was ordered pay a civil penalty of $1 00. 00 together with a $7.00 DASfeefor
each of the four Citations on or before May 16, 2007, unless altered by a
subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Master.
The Respondent was ordered to pay Operational Costs in the amount of $50. 00
incurred during the prosecution of this case on or before May 16, 2007.
Subtotal Fine: $478.00
(b) Finding that the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was
found NOT GUILTY of the violation(s) alleged in Citation #11235.
(c) Finding the Notices of Hearing were properly served, the Respondent was found
GUILTY of the violation(s) alleged in Citations #I1239, #I1241, #I1242, #]]243,
and was ordered pay a civil penalty of $1 00. 00 together with a $7.00 DASfeefor
each ofthefour Citations on or before May 16, 2007, unless altered by a
subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Master.
The Respondent was further ordered to pay afine of$200.00 together with a $7.00
DAS fee for the violation(s) alleged in Citation #1 I 240, but the Respondent was
allowed until April 2, 2007 to provide proof of the dog's vaccination and license,
4
March 16,2007
and to bring this proof to the Department of Animal Services. If the Respondent
complied, the fine of $207 would be waived.
The Respondent was ordered to pay Operational Costs in the amount of $50.00
incurred during the prosecution of this case on or before May 16, 2007.
Subtotal Fine: $685.00
(d) Finding the Notices of Hearing were properly served, the Respondent was found
GUILTY of the violation(s) alleged in Citations #11244, #11245, #11246, and was
ordered pay a civil penalty of $250.00 for each of the three Citations together with
a $7.00 DASfeefor each of the Citations on or before May 16, 2007, unless altered
by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Master.
The Respondent was ordered to pay Operational Costs in the amount of $50.00
incurred during the prosecution of this case on or before May 16, 2007.
Subtotal Fine: $821.00
TOTAL FINE: $1,984.00
RECESS: 11:10 AM
RECONVENED: 11:30 AM
4. Case # DAS 11278 -11281- BCC vs. Raul Diaz
The Hearing was requested by the Respondent who was present.
Respondent's wife, Alicia Diaz, was also present.
Department of Animal Services Officer Peter Hinkley was also present.
Violation(s): Ordinances 14-36, Sec. A(2) and 14-34, Sec. A(4)
Dogs running at large; snap, growl and snarl to threaten a person
Address of violation: 505 Hope Circle, Immokalee, Florida
The Respondent's wife stated both dogs belonged to their son. One of the animals has
since died. She stated her husband had tried to pay the fine, but the money order was
returned.
Finding the Notices of Hearing were properly served, the Respondent was found
GUILTY of the violation(s) alleged in Citations #11278, #11279, #11280, #11281, and
was ordered to pay a civil penalty of $1 00. 00 together with a DASfee of$7.00 for each
of the four Citations on or before April 16, 2007, unless altered by a subsequent
Stipulation or Order of the Special Master.
The Respondent was ordered to pay Operational Costs in the amount of $50.00 incurred
during the prosecution of this case on or before April 16, 2007.
Total Fine: $478.00
5
March 16,2007
9. Case # 2006040727 - BCC vs. Robert A. Mitchell
The Hearing was requested by Code Enforcement Investigator Mario Bono was present.
The Respondent was also present.
Violation(s): Ordinance 04-41, Sec. 4.05,03(A)
Parking on unpavedlunstablized surface
Address of violation: 3465 Dorado Way, Naples, Florida
The Investigator stated the Notice of Violation had been served via certified maiL The
USPS proof of delivery had been received. The property was also posted,
The Investigator introduced photographs of the vans which, after examination by the
Respondent, were marked as the County's Composite Exhibit "A" and entered into
evidence.
The Respondent stated the parking restrictions are not uni formly applied, and that
parking in Golden Gate Estates, which is not an agricultural area, is not as restricted. He
reiterated the application of these restrictions to him is simply discriminatory. He cannot
afford to black-top his entire property in order to satisfy the County.
The Special Master suggested the Respondent contact the Planning/Permitting
Department in order to determine an alternative to expanding his parking area without
pavmg.
Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUILTY
of the violations alleged and was ordered to remove the vehicles to a paved surface on
or before March 21, 2007 or afine of $ 75. 00 per day would be imposed for each day the
violation remained thereafter, unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the
Special Master.
The Respondent was also ordered to pay a civil penalty of in the amount of $200. 00 on
or before April 16, 2007.
The Respondent was ordered to pay Operational Costs in the amount of $128.46
incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of this case on or before April 16,
2007.
The Respondent is to notifY the Investigator within 24 hours of a workday to concur the
violation has been abated.
10. Case # 2006060712 - BCC vs. James and Cathv Donovan
This is a continuation of the case heard by the Special Master on February 2,2007.
County Attorney Jeff Wright stated the focus of this case is a permitting issue.
The Hearing was initially requested by Code Enforcement Investigator Joe Mucha was
present.
6
March 16, 2007
Rocky Schofield, Ross Gochenaur, Craig Woodward, Esq., and Theodore and Karen
Wasserman were present as witnesses,
The Respondents were also present.
John Rogers was present. He disclosed that, while he is a licensed attorney in another
state, he was not acting in the capacity of an attorney for this Hearing, but as an Agent
for the Respondent. He also stated he is the former owner of the property who sold it to
the Respondents.
Violation(s): Ordinance 04-41, Sec. 1O.02.06(B)(1)(a) and (d), and
Code of Laws Sec, 22, Article II, 103.1.3.5
Construction with permit
Address of violation: 200 Tahiti Circle, Naples, Florida
The Investigator stated the violation was of a legal non-conforming boathouse that was
tom down and rebuilt without permits. The Investigator further stated the rebuilt
boathouse was expanded in size and the roof was higher than the previous boathouse.
Rocky Schofield stated that a legal, non-conforming structure may be rebuilt in the exact
footprint of the previous structure.
Mr. Scholfield introduced the following items on behalf of the County which were
marked and accepted into evidence as follows:
. Exhibit "A" - copy of old the survey
. Exhibit "B" - copy ofthe new survey
. Exhibit "C" - copy of the dock plan, previously submitted to and approved
by the DEP
. Exhibit "D" ~ certified survey of Wasserman property (08/09/2001) which
shows neighboring docks (the Respondents ' property)
. Exhibit "E" ~ certified survey of the new dock
Ross Gochenaur, Planning Manager of Department of Zoning and Land Development
Review, stated that he was not prepared to address the subject of permitting since all
building permits are issued by Building Department.
John Rogers requested a standing objection to Mr. Gochenaur's entire testimony
contending Ross Schofield had previously testified that this issue was simply a
permitting matter.
Craig Wasserman, Esq., representing the Wassermans, stated the zoning on set-backs and
how the permit was obtained are pertinent to the discussion. He referred to the Findings
of Fact entered following the February 2, 2007 Hearing in which the "County advised
the Special Master that any and all Code violations related to the boathouse may be
7
March 16, 2007
present when the subject property is addressed at the Hearing." He stated that a
Continuance was granted because the Respondent said he was not prepared to discuss
those issues at that time. Mr. Wasserman continued the Respondent had ample time to
prepare to discuss all of the issues at the present Hearing, including the zoning issue.
Mr. Gochenaur read a portion of the Land Development Code, Section 9.03.03(B)(2),
concerning non-conforming structures into the record. He emphasized the final sentence
in that Section which reads, "Any expansion of the facility no matter how insignificant
will void legal non-conforming status and will require strict compliance to the Code."
Mr. Gochenaur also referred to Section I 0.02.06(B)(l)( c )(2) which stated, "A building
or land alteration permit issued in error shall not confer any rights or privileges to the
applicant to proceed or continue with construction, and the County shall have the
power to revoke such permit until said error is corrected. "
Mr. Rogers again objected to Mr. Gochenaur's testimony. He stated a permit had been
applied for, and issued, to rebuild the dock slip and the lift and had received a Final
Inspection. He further stated this particular Code Section had not been previously
checked as a violation.
Theodore Wasserman stated when he and his wife purchased the property in 2001 the
view 0 the Mangroves was unobstructed. Construction of the new roof would not only
impair his view but also diminish the water access on one side of his dock, thus
negatively affecting the value of his property.
Karen Wasserman presented several photof,'faphs on behalf of the County which were
marked and accepted into evidence as follows:
. Composite Exhibit "F" - before and after of the roof
. Composite Exhibit "G" - views of the Mangroves
. Composite Exhibit "H" - dock slip and pilings
. Composite Exhibit "I" - dock slip, boat and davits
. Composite Exhibit "J" - close-up of the roof
Investigator Mucha stated the application for the permit cited "dock and lift," but did not
mention the need to demolish the old boathouse to rebuild it. He introduced a copy of
the permit application which was marked as Composite County Exhibit "K" and
accepted into evidence.
Mr. Rogers questioned the Investigator regarding the citation issued. The Investigator
reiterated the citation has been issued for starting the roof without a permit, charging
"Work done on roof of boathouse prior to issuance of permit; permit is still in apply
status pending review and may not be approved. If permit is not approved, must remove
irnprovements made, including materials, from property and to restore to a permitted
state."
8
March 16, 2007
Investigator Mucha stated he had inspected the property on January 10, 2007 to verify
that the roof trusses had been removed.
RECESS: 1:50 PM
RECONVENED: 2:02 PM
10. Case # 2006060712 - BCC vs. James and Cathv Donovan (Continued)
Mr. Rogers stated that Bullard Construction Co. applied for the permit to build the
boathouse roof on April 18th and the permit number was 2006042435. When he checked
the County website in July and realized the permit had not been issued, he contacted
Bullard Construction to immediately stop all work on the site, The violation was
corrected the day the County allowed Bullard Construction to remove it.
He stated the Respondents agreed the work on the boathouse roof was started without a
permit and pitch of the new roof was too high. They only wish to rebuild the new roof
with a lower pitch to comply with County Code. He reiterated the permitted work
completed for the dock slip was done within County guidelines, the application had been
approved and issued, and a Final Inspection had been completed.
Mr. Rogers submitted several documents on behalf of the Respondents which were
marked and accepted into evidence as follows:
. Exhibit" I " - photograph of dock slip and boat
. Exhibit "2" - photograph of unfinished roof
. Exhibit "3" - permit tracking and inspection schedule
. Exhibit "4" - status of permit and inspection schedule
Mr. Rogers stated two permits were applied for concerning this property. The first
permit was to rebuild the dock slip and install the lift. That permit was issued, the work
was completed, and the County approved it via the Final Inspection. He stated the
second permit should be the only issue considered by the Special Master since the Notice
of Violation cited starting work without an issued permit, and there was never any other
Citation issued.
The Special Master asked if the Respondents should have been served a Notice of
Violation after the February 2, 2007 Hearing if the County had determined the permit
issued to rebuild the dock slip was issued in error.
The Special Master stated that the intention of her Order was for all of the issues raised
at the last Hearing to be brought to this Hearing. The Order stated, "This matter was
continued until further notice. Written notice was to be given to the Office of the Special
Master when the parties were ready to proceed." The Special Master stated the parties
were given as much time as they needed to compile their documentation and obtain their
experts.
9
March 16, 2007
The Special Master stated that she would not rule on this issue today, but would obtain a
verbatim transcript of this Hearing before making her determination. She stated the fee
to obtain the transcript would be assessed as part of the Operational Costs. The Special
Master asked the participants for their final summaries.
County Attorney Jeff Wright summarized:
I. A roof was built and removed from the structure without a permit;
2, The footprint of the dock, or size of the slip, has changed;
3. The structure was modified and a Stop Work Order was issued regarding the
modification.
4. The "before" and "after" surveys indicate that the new boathouse was not a
change of the existing structure, but a full replacement;
5. The permit was processed based on incomplete information which may have
suggested "change" instead of "replacement";
6. The County's views the prior legal, non-conforming status as void, and
7. The Respondents were in violation of Codes with respect to the building of the
roof and the demolition of the roof without proper permits.
Mr. Woodward summarized:
1. The set-back from the Respondents' old dock to the Wasserman's dock was
four feet;
2. To retain the legal, non-conforming use status, the new dock slip and
boathouse roof had to retain the exact dimensions of the prior structure;
3. The new structure now allows for a wider boathouse, with higher pilings,
a larger slip and new lift, to allow for the storage of a larger boat;
4. The Code has been violated because the Respondents have built a totally new
structure while still trying to maintain the old set-back, thus achieving the
added benefit of "grand fathering" the new structure.
Mr. Rogers summarized:
I. The issue was still a permitting issue;
2. The only Citation that was issued noticed the violation of constructing the roof
without a permit;
3. No County employees from the Permitting Department have stated the permit
was received in error, or that the permit was based on fraud, or that the
issuance of the permit was a mistake;
4. the Respondents will re-apply for a permit to construct a new roof that will not
impede the view of the Wassermans.
Code Enforcement Supervisor Dennis Mitchell summarized:
I. The County cited the Respondents for constructing the roof without a permit;
2. The roof does not exist now;
3. As the investigation proceeded, other violations were discovered, i.e., the roof
was removed without a permit;
4. There are issues beyond the roof to be addressed;
10
March 16, 2007
5. The County determined that the original violation cited has been abated;
6. The County Attorney stated at the beginning of this hearing that the subject of
the hearing was simply a permit issue, and
7. It is within the jurisdiction ofthe Special Master to deny the issuance of other
permits until all of the other matters are investigated.
The Special Master concluded the Hearing.
RECESS: 3:40 PM
RECONVENED: 4:00 PM
5. Case # DAS 11285 throul!h 11286 - BCC vs. Matthew Hubbard
The Hearing was requested by the Respondent who was not present.
Department of Animal Services Officer Peter Hinkley was present.
Violation(s): Ordinances 14-36, Sec. A(2) and 14-34, Sec. A(4)
Dog running at large; failure to affix license
The Officer stated this was a repeat offense and the Notice had been served via certified
maiL
Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUlL TY
of the violations alleged in Citations #11285 and #11286, and was ordered to pay a civil
fine of $200. 00 together with a $7.00 DASfeefor Citation #11285 since it is a repeat
violation and to pay a civil fine of $100.00 together with a $7.00 DASfeefor Citation
#11286 on or before April 16, 2007, unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order
of the Special Master.
The Respondent was ordered to pay Operational Costs in the amount of $50. 00 incurred
by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of this case on or before April 16, 2007.
Total Fine: $364.00
6. Case # DAS 11287 throul!h 11290 - BCC vs. Natalie Mvers
The Hearing was requested by the Respondent who was not present.
Department of Animal Services Officer Peter Hinkley was present.
Violation(s): OrdinanceI4-36, Sec. A(2) and Sec. A(4)
Dog running at large; defecation creating a public nuisance
The Officer stated the Notice had been served via certified mail.
Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUlL TY
of the violations alleged in Citations #11287, #11288, #11289 and #11290, and was
ordered to pay a civil fine of $1 00. 00 together with a $7.00 DASfeefor each of the four
Citations on or before April 16, 2007, unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or
Order of the Special Master.
]1
March 16, 2007
The Respondent was ordered to pay Operational Costs in the amount of $50.00 incurred
by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of this case on or before April 16, 2007.
Total Fine: $478.00
7. Case # DAS 11298 and 11299 - BCC vs. Christine Jodoin
The Hearing was requested by the Respondent who was not present.
Department of Animal Services Officer Peter Hinkley was present.
Violation(s): Ordinance 1 14-41, Sec. A(9)
Leaving dog in vehicle in a cruel or inhumane manner that threatens the health of animal;
no water
Address of violation: 3451 Tamiami Trail East, Naples, Florida
The Officer stated the Notice had been served via certified mail.
Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUILTY
of the violations alleged in Citations #11298 and # 11299, and was ordered to pay a civil
fine of $250. 00 together with a $7.00 DASfeefor each Citation on or before April 16,
2007, unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Master.
The Respondent was ordered to pay Operational Costs in the amount of $50. 00 incurred
by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of this case on or before April 16, 2007.
Total Fine: $564.00
VI. NEW BUSINESS
A. Motion for Imposition of Fines:
1. Case # DAS 11130 throu!!h 11150 and DAS 11251 throu!!h 11267 - BCC vs.
Kathv Laverv
The County was represented by Code Enforcement Supervisor Jeff Letourneau.
The Respondent was present.
Mr. Letourneau stated the County requested payment of Operational Costs in the amount
of$50.00, together with fines of$9,766 (for 38 DAS Citations at $257 each), for a total
of$9,816.00.
The Respondent stated she had been unemployed for the last three months of 2006 and
was just able to start working in January, 2007; she could only make installment
payments due to her limited finances.
County Attorney Jeff Wright stated the lien was the County's assurance that payment
would be made.
12
March 16,2007
The Special Master GRANTED the County's request and imposed a lien of $9,766 (for
38 DAS Citations at $257 each), together with Operational Costs of $50. 00, for a total
fine of $9, 816. 00. The Respondent was ordered to pay this fine on or before June 16,
2007, or the County would proceed with enforcement of the lien.
B. Motion for Reduction of Fines:
1. Case # 2006040788 - Estate of Pedro M. Herrera c/o Adam Herrera
The County was represented by Code Enforcement Supervisor Jeff Letourneau who
stated Mrs. Adam Herrera met with Code Enforcement Supervisor Mitchell, She entered
into a Stipulation on behalf of the Estate to pay a fine of$5,000.
County Attorney Jeff Wright stated the lien has been recorded on February 27,2007;
the Special Master no longer retained jurisdiction.
The Special Master DISMISSED the Motion for Reduction of Fines as moot.
VII. OLD BUSINESS
A. Request to forward Case for Collections/Foreclosure: NONE
VIII. CONSENT AGENDA - None
IX. REPORTS - None
X. COMMENTS - NONE
XI. NEXT MEETING DATE - April 6, 2007.
There being no further business for the good of the County, the Hearing was adjourned by order
of the Special Master at 4:40 PM.
FOR THE COLLIER COUNTY SPECIAL MASTER HEARING
Special Master, Brenda Garretson
These Minutes were approved by the Special Master on
as presented , or as amended
,2007,
13