Loading...
CEB Minutes 02/25/2021February 25, 2021 Page 1 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD Naples, Florida, February 25, 2021 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Code Enforcement Board, in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m., in REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: Robert Kaufman Gerald J. Lefebvre, Vice-Chair Sue Curley Kathleen Elrod Danny Blanco Chloe Bowman (Excused) Herminio Ortega (Excused) Barbara Ann Davis, Alternate (Excused) ALSO PRESENT: Helen Buchillon, Code Enforcement Jeff Letourneau, Manager of Investigations Patrick White, Attorney to the Board Code Enforcement Board Nuisance Abatement Board AGENDA Board of County Commission Chambers Collier County Government Center 3299 Tamiami Trail East, 3rd Floor Naples, FL 34112 February 25, 2021 9:00 AM Robert Kaufman, Chair Gerald Lefebvre, Vice-Chair Kathleen Elrod, Member Danny Blanco, Member Chloe Bowman, Member Sue Curley, Member Herminio Ortega, Member Barbara Ann Davis, Alternate Notice: Respondents may be limited to twenty (20) minutes for case presentation unless additional time is granted by the Board. Persons wishing to speak on any agenda item will receive up to five (5) minutes unless the time is adjusted by the Chairman. All parties participating in the public hearing are asked to observe Roberts Rules of Order and speak one at a time so that the court reporter can record all statements being made. Any person who decides to appeal a decision of this Board will need a record of the proceedings pertaining thereto, and therefore may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proce edings 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. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE II. ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA V. PUBLIC HEARINGS/MOTIONS A. MOTIONS MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME 1. CASE NO: CESD20190009564 OWNER: Syed M Madni OFFICER: Paula Guy VIOLATIONS: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). Observed accessory barn structure with interior alterations made for residence living space. FOLIO NO: 00215560005 PROPERTY 1858 Richards St, Naples, FL ADDRESS: B. STIPULATIONS (NON-CONTESTED CASES AND PRESENT AT THE HEARING) C. EMERGENCY CASES D. HEARINGS 1. CASE NO: CESD20200000596 OWNER: MAROON INVESTMENTS LLC OFFICER: Paula Guy VIOLATIONS: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). Alterations and renovations to garage structure with no permits. FOLIO NO: 37068440002 PROPERTY 260 9th Street NW, Naples, FL ADDRESS: 2. CASE NO: CESD20190012078 OWNER: Scott E Stewart and Mary E Stewart OFFICER: Arthur Ford VIOLATIONS: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Sections 10.02.06(B)(1)(a) and 10.02.06(B)(e)(i). Lanai enclosed without required permits, inspections, and certificate of completion/occupancy. FOLIO NO: 72400000285 PROPERTY 6855 San Marino Dr, Unit 204C, Naples, FL ADDRESS: 3. CASE NO: CESD20190002541 OWNER: Orlando Galindo and Maria Galindo OFFICER: Bradley Holmes VIOLATIONS: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). A large shed structure on the property under construction without an active permit. FOLIO NO: 37340800001 PROPERTY 1035 31st St SW, Naples, FL ADDRESS: 4. CASE NO: CESD20190010323 OWNER: Fred P Grunst and Joanne R Grunst OFFICER: Sherry Patterson VIOLATIONS: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, As amended, Sections 10.02.06(B)(1)(a) and 10.02.06(B)(1)(e)(i). Dock installed without required permits, inspections, and certificate of completion. FOLIO NO: 65471080005 PROPERTY 308 Sharwood Dr, Naples, FL ADDRESS: 5. CASE NO: CEPM20200009545 OWNER: NOVAD MGMT CONSULTING LLC OFFICER: Ryan Cathey VIOLATIONS: Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, Chapter 22, Article VI, Section 22-231(12)(n). Observed lanai screen mesh in need of repairs. FOLIO NO: 67940520007 PROPERTY 2323 Pinewoods Cir, Naples, FL ADDRESS: 6. CASE NO: CELU20200011975 OWNER: David N Ahmad OFFICER: Paula Guy VIOLATIONS: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Sections 1.04.01(A) and 2.02.03. Observed unauthorized storage of containers placed on improved Estates zoned parcel. FOLIO NO: 36962200006 PROPERTY 769 21st St SW, Naples, FL ADDRESS: 7. CASE NO: CEPM20200011328 OWNER: Sylvie E Nutten OFFICER: Arthur Ford VIOLATIONS: Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, Chapter 22, Article VI, Section 22-231(12)(n). A damaged dock in the rear of the property, on the canal. FOLIO NO: 27586280000 PROPERTY 496 Willet Ave N, Naples, FL ADDRESS: 8. CASE NO: CESD20200005241 OWNER: FEDERAL HOME LOAN MRTG CORP OFFICER: Bradley Holmes VIOLATIONS: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Sections 10.02.06(B)(1)(a) and 10.02.06(B)(1)(e)(i). An unpermitted barn-type structure, an unpermitted guest house structure and an unpermitted re-roof of the main house. FOLIO NO: 38336880005 PROPERTY 5975 Green Blvd, Naples, FL ADDRESS: 9. CASE NO: CEVR20200000062 OWNER: William E Christ and Roseanne R Christ OFFICER: Ryan Cathey VIOLATIONS: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Sections 3.05.01(B), 10.02.06(B)(1)(a) and 10.02.06(B)(1)(e). Site work, improvement of property, grading, and/or removal of protected/native vegetation without a valid building permit. FOLIO NO: 00741080402 PROPERTY 10827 Greenway Rd, Naples, FL ADDRESS: 10. CASE NO: CESD20200010274 OWNER: JOHN BLUM LIVING TRUST OFFICER: William Marchand VIOLATIONS: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). A sliding glass door was removed from the living room to the porch without a Collier County building permit. FOLIO NO: 25132160000 PROPERTY 3088 Kings Lake Blvd #7576, Naples, FL ADDRESS: 11. CASE NO: CENA20200013489 OWNER: Wilson Touchet and Dawn Hebert OFFICER: Paula Guy VIOLATIONS: Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, Chapter 54, Article VI, Section 54-181 and Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 2.02.03. Observed accumulation of litter on estates zoned unimproved parcel to include but not limited large piles of vegetation debris, landscape materials and commercial vehicles and trailers. FOLIO NO: 37165120005 PROPERTY NO SITE ADDRESS ADDRESS: 12. CASE NO: CELU20200013135 OWNER: Wilson Touchet and Dawn Hebert OFFICER: Paula Guy VIOLATIONS: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Sections 1.04.01(A) and 2.02.03. Operations of Landscape Maintenance company on an Estates unimproved zoned property. FOLIO NO: 37165120005 PROPERTY NO SITE ADDRESS ADDRESS: 13. CASE NO: CESD20200005267 OWNER: Monica Zamorano Trujillo, Victor A Valdes Miranda and Camila Borja OFFICER: William Shanahan VIOLATIONS: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). Converted garage without a permit. FOLIO NO: 36447880006 PROPERTY 2833 49th Ln SW, Naples, FL ADDRESS: VI. OLD BUSINESS A. MOTION FOR REDUCTION/ABATEMENT OF FINES/LIENS B. MOTION FOR RE-HEARING C. MOTION FOR IMPOSITION OF FINES/LIENS 1. CASE NO: CEPM20190008606 OWNER: Arthur S Nichols and Stella M Nichols OFFICER: Virginie Giguere VIOLATIONS: Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, Chapter 22, Article VI, Section 22-231(15) and Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). Unmaintained pool. FOLIO NO: 26830520006 PROPERTY 3112 Gordon St, Naples, FL ADDRESS: 2. CASE NO: CESD20190008083 OWNER: Jantina Jo Hanna OFFICER: John Johnson VIOLATIONS: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). A mobile home that has had extensive interior modifications, a separate garage building structure, and an accessory structure on the rear of this property do not have the required permitting, inspections, and approval from the County. FOLIO NO: 53352760003 PROPERTY 3061 Lunar St, Naples, FL ADDRESS: 3. CASE NO: CESD20190008029 OWNER: Claudel Victor and Altagrace Talleybrand OFFICER: Jonathan Musse VIOLATIONS: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). Rear exterior door sealed without a valid Collier County permit. FOLIO NO: 62103040002 PROPERTY 5430 Hardee St, Naples, FL ADDRESS: 4. CASE NO: CESD20180014394 OWNER: Daniel R Blake and Sally Sue Blake OFFICER: Joseph Mucha VIOLATIONS: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). Occupying the mobile home without first completing all inspections and receiving the certificate of completion/occupancy. FOLIO NO: 81626360004 PROPERTY 271 Sugar Loaf Ln, Naples, FL ADDRESS: 5. CASE NO: CEAU20170016724 OWNER: Tam Thanh Nguyen and Tammy Nguyen OFFICER: Delicia Pulse VIOLATIONS: Florida Building Code 6th Edition (2017), Chapter 1 Section 105.1 and Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 5.03.02(F)(3). Chain link and wood fence on property and no Collier County Building permit, fencing is dilapidated and not maintained. FOLIO NO: 38396160008 PROPERTY 5175 Green Blvd, Naples, FL ADDRESS: 6. CASE NO: CESD20190009564 OWNER: Syed M Madni OFFICER: Paula Guy VIOLATIONS: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). Observed accessory barn structure with interior alterations made for residence living space FOLIO NO: 00215560005 PROPERTY 1858 Richards St, Naples, FL ADDRESS: 7. CASE NO: CELU20180013990 OWNER: Vladimir Portal and Caridad Paz OFFICER: Bradley Holmes VIOLATIONS: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). Unpermitted improvements/structures: a converted garage, an aluminum porch, an entry addition, a large warehouse, a swimming pool, and ground level addition to the permitted pigeon coop. FOLIO NO: 36914160000 PROPERTY 2035 Golden Gate Blvd W, Naples, FL ADDRESS: 8. CASE NO: CESD20190010316 OWNER: Albert F Lepree and Lorraine M Fotiou OFFICER: Sherry Patterson VIOLATIONS: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Sections 10.02.06(B)(1)(a) and 10.02.06(B)(1)(e)(i). Dock installed without required permits, inspections, and certificate of completion. FOLIO NO: 65470760009 PROPERTY 244 Sharwood Dr, Naples, FL ADDRESS: 9. CASE NO: CESD20190004631 OWNER: Luis Rios Centeno OFFICER: Eric Short VIOLATIONS: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Sections 10.02.06(B)(1)(a), 10.02.06(B)(1)(e) and 10.02.06(B)(1)(e)(i). Additions/alteration to mobile home and added shed without obtaining required Collier County permits. FOLIO NO: 293400006 PROPERTY 301 Fillmore St, Naples, FL ADDRESS: 10. CASE NO: CESD20190009150 OWNER: Catherine Vidal OFFICER: Paula Guy VIOLATIONS: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). Above ground pool and accessory structure erected with no permits. FOLIO NO: 40985560007 PROPERTY 2880 10th Ave SE, Naples, FL ADDRESS: 11. CASE NO: CESD20190014518 OWNER: HENOCK CHERRELUS LLC OFFICER: Jonathan Musse VIOLATIONS: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). Lanai enclosed without first obtaining a valid Collier County permit. FOLIO NO: 62047080005 PROPERTY 5306 McCarty St, Naples, FL ADDRESS: 12. CASE NO: CESD20190009049 OWNER: Jose S Olivares-Gonzalez and Ana J Trejo De Olivares OFFICER: Joseph Mucha VIOLATIONS: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Sections 10.02.06(B)(1)(a), 10.02.06(B)(1)(e) and 10.02.06(B)(1)(e)(i). Addition/alteration/porch overhang and shed on the Property without permits. FOLIO NO: 25967802724 PROPERTY 14701 Apalachee St, Naples, FL ADDRESS: 13. CASE NO: CESD20190010279 OWNER: David M Turley and Kathryn A Turley OFFICER: Sherry Patterson VIOLATIONS: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Sections 10.02.06(B)(1)(a) and 10.02.06(B)(1)(e)(i). Boat dock and lift installed without required permits, inspections, and certificate of completion. FOLIO NO: 65475720002 PROPERTY 166 Oakwood Ct, Naples, FL ADDRESS: 14. CASE NO: CESD20190009030 OWNER: KATHERINE M JOHNSON TRUST EST OFFICER: Ryan Cathey VIOLATIONS: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Sections 10.02.06(B)(1)(a) and 10.02.06(B)(1)(e). Rear of porch/lanai enclosed with windows and or sliding window doors without the required Collier County permits and inspections. FOLIO NO: 61131640006 PROPERTY 1718 Bald Eagle Dr, Unit 513-C, Naples, FL ADDRESS: 15. CASE NO: CESD20200002795 OWNER: ROBERT J FIORILLO LIV TRUST OFFICER: Thomas Pitura VIOLATIONS: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Sections 10.02.06(B)(1)(a) and 10.02.06(B)(1)(e)(i). Exterior screen porch removed without demolition permit. FOLIO NO: 725200004 PROPERTY 1392 Henderson Creek Dr, Naples, FL ADDRESS: 16. CASE NO: CEROW20150023031 OWNER: Veronica Tressler, Barbara Dethloff and Elizabeth Lucky OFFICER: Sherry Patterson VIOLATIONS: Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, Chapter 110, Article II, Section 110-31(a). A culvert drainage pipe in need of repair or replacement. FOLIO NO: 161080008 PROPERTY 231 Willoughby Dr, Naples, FL ADDRESS: 17. CASE NO: CESD20170016916 OWNER: Neysis Rodriguez OFFICER: Michele Mcgonagle VIOLATIONS: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Sections 10.02.06(B)(1)(a), 10.02.06(B)(1)(e) and 10.02.06(B)(1)(e)(i). Unpermitted structures on the property and expired pool permit number 930007170. FOLIO NO: 37861480007 PROPERTY 1680 Randall Blvd, Naples, FL ADDRESS: 18. CASE NO: CESD20190006958 OWNER: Tara Crete OFFICER: Eric Short VIOLATIONS: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Sections 10.02.06(B)(1)(a), 10.02.06(B)(1)(e) and 10.02.06(B)(1)(e)(i). Altered lower level by adding cabinets and kitchen sink and converted laundry room to bathroom. FOLIO NO: 69600080005 PROPERTY 2531 Estey Ave, Unit #A2, Naples, FL ADDRESS: D. MOTION TO RESCIND PREVIOUSLY ISSUED ORDER E. MOTION TO AMEND PREVIOUSLY ISSUED ORDER VII. NEW BUSINESS VIII. CONSENT AGENDA A. REQUEST TO FORWARD CASES TO COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE 1. CASE NO: OWNER: OFFICER: VIOLATIONS: FOLIO NO: PROPERTY ADDRESS: IX. REPORTS X. COMMENTS XI. ADJOURN XII. NUISANCE ABATEMENT BOARD A. HEARINGS XIII. NEXT HEARING DATE-THURSDAY MARCH 25, 2021 AT 9:00AM XIV.ADJOURN February 25, 2021 Page 2 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. I'd like to call the Code Enforcement Board to order. Notice: That the respondents may be limited to 20 minutes case presentation unless additional time is granted by the Board. Persons wishing to speak on any agenda item will receive up to five minutes unless the time is adjusted by the Chairman. All parties participating in the public hearing are asked to observe Robert's Rules of Order and speak one at a time so that the court reporter can record all statements being made. Any person who decides to appeal a decision of the Board will need a record of the proceeding pertaining thereto and, therefore, may need to ensure that a verbatim 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. Okay. We do have an option next time not to read this but to just throw it on the board and let everybody take their time to read it; however... I'd like everybody to rise for the pledge. (The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I may be the only person here who has both COVID shots, because I'm old. Is there anybody else here that has both COVID shots? MS. BUCHILLON: Not even one. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, I'm not afraid of -- oh, there we go; one. So good luck in getting your shots. Everybody I know that's gotten the shot has gone out of the county to get it. I had to go to Miami. People have gone up to Cape Coral, et cetera. So it's not easy. So with that, why don't we take attendance. MS. BUCHILLON: Good morning. For the record, Helen February 25, 2021 Page 3 Buchillon, Code Enforcement. Robert Kaufman? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Here. MS. BUCHILLON: Mr. Gerald Lefebvre. MR. LEFEBVRE: Here. MS. BUCHILLON: Ms. Kathleen Elrod? MS. ELROD: Here. MS. BUCHILLON: Mr. Danny Blanco? MR. BLANCO: Here. MS. BUCHILLON: Ms. Sue Curley? MS. CURLEY: Here. MS. BUCHILLON: And Chloe Bowman and Barbara Ann Davis and Ortega are excused. Also, I want to put on the record two of the board members, Mr. Kaufman and Mr. Lefebvre, have renewed their term, and Danny has become a full-time member. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. BUCHILLON: And we also have one vacancy for an alternate, but we're going to fill it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Well, I'm glad we have five members here so there will be no ties. So I should take mine off of or no? Pardon the pun. Okay. Anybody have any comments on the minutes? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hearing none, we'll accept those as being approved. And we go now to the agenda. Any changes? MS. BUCHILLON: Yes, sir. First changes, we have five stipulations. First stipulation, No. 6 under Hearings, CELU20200011975, David N. Ahmad. Second stipulation, No. 4, CESD20190010323, Fred P. Grunst February 25, 2021 Page 4 and Joanne R Grunst. Number 3, CESD20190002541, Orlando Galindo and Maria Galindo. Number 11, CENA20200013489, Wilson Touchet and Dawn Hebert. Number 9, CEVR20200000062, William Christ and Roseanne R. Christ. Those are the stipulations. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And do we have any cancellations? MS. BUCHILLON: Yes, sir. Under Public Hearings, D, Hearings, No. 5, CEPM20200009545, NOVAD Management Consulting, LLC, has been withdrawn. Ownership in probate proceedings. Number 8, CESD20200005241, Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp, has been withdrawn due to compliance efforts. Number 10, CESD20200010274, John Bloom Living Trust, has been withdrawn due to compliance efforts. Number 12, CELU20200013135, Wilson Touchet and Dawn Hebert, has been withdrawn due to compliance efforts. Number 13, CESD20200005267, Monica Zamorano Trujillo, Victor A. Valdes Miranda, and Camila Borja, has been withdrawn. Permit has been issued. Under Motion for Imposition of Fines, No. 1, CEPM20190008606, Arthur S. Nichols and Stella M. Nichols, has been withdrawn due to compliance efforts. Number 3, CESD20190008029, Claudel Victor and Altagrace Talleybrand, has been withdrawn due to compliance efforts. Number 5, CEAU20170016724, Tam Thanh Nguyen and Tammy Nguyen has been withdrawn, due to medical issues. Number 8, CESD20190010316, Albert F. Lepree and Lorraine February 25, 2021 Page 5 M. Fotiou, has been withdrawn due to compliance efforts. Number 12, CESD20190009049, Jose S. Olivares-Gonzalez and Ana J. Trejo de Olivares, has been withdrawn due to compliance efforts. Number 16, CEROW20150023031, Veronica Tressler, Barbara Dethloff, and Elizabeth Lucky, has been withdrawn and will be rescheduled for next month. And those are all the changes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Can we get a motion from the Board to accept the agenda as modified. MS. CURLEY: Motion to accept. MS. ELROD: Motion to accept. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And a second. MS. CURLEY: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor? MS. ELROD: Aye. MS. CURLEY: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: (No verbal response.) MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. BLANCO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Which brings us to, I guess, the stipulations, unless there's something that needs to be heard first. MS. BUCHILLON: The extension of time. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. BUCHILLON: There's another change to the agenda. MR. LEFEBVRE: It never fails. MS. BUCHILLON: Under Hearings, No. 2, CESD20190012078, Scott E. Stewart and Mary E. Stewart, has been February 25, 2021 Page 6 withdrawn due to compliance efforts. MR. LEFEBVRE: Motion to modify the agenda. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Any other changes you have? MS. BUCHILLON: No, that's it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Get a motion from the Board to adjust the agenda again. MS. ELROD: I make a motion to adjust. MS. CURLEY: I'll second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor? MS. ELROD: Aye. MS. CURLEY: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: (No verbal response.) MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. BLANCO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Okay. MS. BUCHILLON: Okay. First case, Motion for Extension of Time, No. 1, CESD20190009564, Syed M. Madni. They're also scheduled for imposition of fines. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is it the same case? MS. BUCHILLON: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So what we have here is asking for an extension of time on a case that's already been heard? MS. BUCHILLON: Yes, sir. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. GUY: Yes. MS. MADNI: I do. MR. MADNI: Yes. February 25, 2021 Page 7 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. You're requesting an extension of time? MS. MADNI: We are, sir. MR. MADNI: Good morning. THE COURT REPORTER: I need your name. MS. MADNI: Robin Madni. MR. MADNI: And Syed Madni. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. MADNI: Good morning. We're seeking an extension of 180 days to complete the work on this existing permit that we have open. The space is more than livable. There's no health or safety issues whatsoever within the space. We have tried to comply as much as possible. We have gone and gotten our surveys, our ground elevations, new septic system, new drainfield. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let me stop you. We're not hearing the case now. We're just hearing to see if this is a case that needs to be extended and the circumstances surrounding extending the case. MS. MADNI: Exactly. I understand. So the reason that we're asking for the extension is we have put forth good effort to try to comply with you. We've hired a contractor that was supposed to help us through this process and, unfortunately, he did not fulfill his responsibilities in a timely fashion, which has set us behind. So we have tried multiple times reaching out trying to have him just submit the paperwork. It's there. Everything is ready to go; it just hasn't been put in. So we're asking for the extension of time to just be able to get the paperwork presented to you, if -- even if we have to do it ourselves, and go forward with whatever else has to be finished. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. I go to the county. MS. GUY: The county doesn't object to the motion for February 25, 2021 Page 8 extension of time due to the extenuating circumstances that took place with the contractor that was hired. And the owner has been in constant communication in regards to trying to adhere to the stipulation agreement that was signed when the case was heard. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let me see if I can do a quick summary on this. This is a case where there is a structure that has been transformed into living space; is that correct? MS. GUY: Yes, that is correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And this began when? MS. GUY: The case is extremely old. I inherited it from a previous investigator. So it's been an ongoing case. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is there a permit on this? MS. GUY: The permit has been -- it's under review. They've still been held up for the submittal. The permit was very complex. I know that there was meetings with the building official and the contractor to make sure that when they did apply for it that it would go through. So the permit has not been issued; it's still in the process of being -- of the submittals, and there was a lot of delays by the contractor that was hired. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So there's no permit. MS. GUY: Absolutely -- no, that is correct, there is no permit at this time. MS. CURLEY: The stipulation was July of last year and given 180 days, which is just recently. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Gerald. MR. LEFEBVRE: And just for your information, Mr. Chair, the notice of violation was given November 13th, 2019. MS. GUY: Correct. MR. LEFEBVRE: So, I mean, there's a lot of time that work could have been done on this. This seems like it's taken a really, really long time from the original notice of violation. February 25, 2021 Page 9 MS. CURLEY: Am I allowed to ask, like, what did you guys do when you got your first violation till when you ended up here last summer? What did you do in that eight -month period? MS. MADNI: So what we've done is we tried to follow the process. We sought out who was going to be the best contractor to help us through. You know, we know what we did wasn't right. We should have permitted it. We accept that. We just want to fix it from this point forward. So we hired a contractor. He was walking us through the process. You need to do A, B, C, D. Everything he asked us to do, we did; put in a new drainfield, putting in septic, all those things. MS. CURLEY: Okay. MS. MADNI: But my problem is reaching out to my contractor that I've paid to do the service and him not responding and not responding in a timely fashion or telling me that he has submitted things to county when he hasn't. MS. CURLEY: So are you asking for an extension because you've hired a new contractor? MS. MADNI: I've interviewed three contractors. Our contractor is not wanting to stop, and I've already paid him I'm trying to give him the benefit but -- at the end of the day, I have gone to the county myself. I have spoken with Renald Paul. I've walked through the steps with him. I have a checklist of everything to do, and even if my contractor isn't doing it, I've started my own checklist of just getting my stuff done so I can walk it in. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Was there electrical done on this? STPHAO: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Plumbing? MS. MADNI: Yes, sir. MR. MADNI: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So if you have electrical and February 25, 2021 Page 10 plumbing and you have no permit, this is a safety-and-health case. MS. MADNI: May I speak, sir? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah. Let me ask the county on that. Do you find that this is safety and health? MS. GUY: There's -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Go ahead. MS. ELROD: Is anyone living in the space? MR. MADNI: Yes. MR. LETOURNEAU: That's what I was going to ask. For the record, Jeff Letourneau, Collier County Code Enforcement Board. Paula, you've never really been inside? MS. GUY: I physically have never been inside. I inherited this case, like I said, in late 2020. But the -- they are occupied and, yes, it's -- it has plumbing, it has electrical that has never been inspected by Collier County. I can't testify to the fact that there's health and safety but, technically, if it hasn't been inspected, it would fall under that category. MR. LETOURNEAU: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So the answer is, it is safety and health? MR. LETOURNEAU: I would say that without knowing exactly what the plumbing and electric situations are in there, if they have been modified, then I would feel better if we consider that a health-and-safety issue, especially with people living inside of it at this time. MS. CURLEY: Are you using this as a rental? MR. MADNI: No, ma'am, we live there. MS. MADNI: So when we were hit by Irma, we lost everything. This is the land I had my horses living in the stable, okay. We took a section -- it already had on the original permit February 25, 2021 Page 11 which was still open for this structure, for this barn, which did have plumbing and did have electrical in it, and that was part of the original permitting. So what we did was we lost our home. We said, okay, we have one space to stay. Let's take this space, and let's go and build us a small apartment to live in while we recoup our finances and we build our home back out front. There was existing bathroom, which was in the original plans. There was existing electrical. Yes, we did modify it -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. CURLEY: What's the status -- MS. MADNI: -- by licensed contractors. MS. CURLEY: Oh. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: My concern on this more than anything, you're asking for 180 -- you're asking for six months -- MS. MADNI: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- to get a permit? MS. MADNI: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Most of the work has been done already? You just need a permit to get it inspected, et cetera? MR. MADNI: Yes. MS. MADNI: Exactly. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Then, to me, six months is way too much time. As one of the board members likes to say, Gerald, he could build a high-rise on the beach in six months. MR. LEFEBVRE: Not in six months. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Go ahead. Your comment. MR. LEFEBVRE: You could build a high-rise in the time it would take to get this completed. MS. CURLEY: So I have a problem that you're asking for us to help your current contractor to be unresponsive. I'm not in agreeance with letting that continue if that's going to be the person they're going February 25, 2021 Page 12 to rely on for their inefficiencies here, because I don't -- well, what's the status of your house in the front? MS. MADNI: I have not begun the house in the front because I need to finish what's happening in the back. I can't get a permit for something else when I haven't finished this. I'm trying to comply with what this is. I have interviewed three other contractors. I do have one of them. She has all my other paperwork. You know, I'm ready to go with her, should I need to do that. I'm also ready to walk into county myself and start doing these things myself. I met with Renald Paul. We went through a whole checklist, and he said, everything is here. We don't understand why this wasn't issued. It just wasn't turned in. I have multiple emails back and forth proving how I have tried to reach out to this contractor. MS. CURLEY: That's okay. That's okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I don't want to go out of order, but I look ahead to the case we have, No. 6, under imposition of fines, and I'm wondering how these two tie together, okay, the imposition of fines and a granting of an extension of time. Does the county believe that extending the time will affect the other case that's coming before us later today? MR. LETOURNEAU: Is it two separate cases? MS. GUY: No. It's only one case. The case was heard back in, I believe it was, July of 2020, and a stipulation agreement was signed. So this imposition of fines is because the fines have been running. They did not comply within the date that was agreed upon in the stipulation agreement. So it's one single case. MR. LETOURNEAU: Yeah, I scheduled it for imposition, and I'm just -- MS. GUY: And then she had met the owner -- MR. LETOURNEAU: She wanted to get -- she wanted to get February 25, 2021 Page 13 an extension at that time -- MS. GUY: Correct. MR. LETOURNEAU: -- so then it was scheduled for both on the same agenda. MS. CURLEY: So December 16th of 2020 the fines started -- I mean, the stipulation expired. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah, that means -- they're both the same case number. MR. LETOURNEAU: Yeah. And when I look at the CityView -- that's our computer program. And when I see that there's not a permit that has been issued for this particular violation, you know, in my mind I don't really dig real deep. I don't know their situation. I set up for imposition at that time because I can't see any progress at that point. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. LETOURNEAU: I believe it was set up for the -- for the imposition. They probably found about it, and then they wanted to ask for an extension at that point. CHARMAN KAUFMAN: I don't see any progress at all now. The initial was for no permit, and we have no permit from 2019 to now. MS. CURLEY: I'm going to make a motion to deny the request for extension of time. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a motion. Do we have a second? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I'll second it. Okay. Any discussion on this motion? MS. ELROD: They have done a lot. New drainfield and all of this other stuff take time and take money, and the permit -- they were relying on a contractor. February 25, 2021 Page 14 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I understand, but I'm just going based on what the initial -- MS. CURLEY: Wait. So you say that they've done a new drainfield? I thought you'd need a permit for that. MS. MADNI: We did acquire a permit from a Health Department. We did put new drainfield and septic, which is more than needed for the capacity for what it's supposed to be. We did do a new boundary survey. We did the new elevation and count-of-road survey for FEMA regulations. We've done all this on our own. We have made progress. I know it may not feel like it to you because you're looking at you want the permit, but for me to acquire the permit, I have to go through all these steps. MR. MADNI: And the second thing is, is we give everything to our contractor. He is negligent to fulfill his responsibility. MS. CURLEY: So that's something that you can take up with the Contractor Licensing and the state and do all your com plaints and follow that somewhere else, but I don't have confidence in the go-forward if you're going to continue to be committed to them, and that's why I just wanted -- that's why -- MS. MADNI: I made that perfectly clear in my emails to him, which I have brought you copies of today, that I have zero confidence in him. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's between you -- (Simultaneous crosstalk.) MS. MADNI: -- that I'm going to go whatever route -- MS. CURLEY: If you came in here with a permit that showed -- with your permit that showed that you had changed contractors and that you had your -- let's say your new contractor with you or a whole lot of other things that would support your words, then I would be thinking differently, but I'm not seeing that. MR. LEFEBVRE: It's very difficult. I mean, I know what it's February 25, 2021 Page 15 like to go through permitting. I've done it multiple times myself. But, again, as my fellow board member stated, working with the same contractor you're going to get the same results. So that's w here I'm in a difficult position to -- MS. CURLEY: And we have an example of that house in the front that's been -- Irma's been three-and-a-half years, and there's no work on that house. MR. MADNI: No, there's no house. There's no house. MR. LEFEBVRE: It was knocked down or -- but we're just looking at this case. The same contractor. It's just -- MS. ELROD: But she's claiming right now that she's going to hire another one. MS. MADNI: I have another contractor. MR. LEFEBVRE: I understand. MS. MADNI: We've interviewed -- MR. LEFEBVRE: Maybe we should hear this. I think we should push this to where we can actually hear the evidence. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The case was heard. MR. LEFEBVRE: Right. But I mean hear more so what's been done. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So the extension of time -- we have two items here. One is the extension of time, and then later in the agenda is whether the fines are going to be enforced, or there are other options at that time. MR. LEFEBVRE: I think that would be the time to dive in and find out what -- what has been done. Maybe look at the emails. It would have been nice to have the -- a contractor here, either your contractor you're working with now or the new contractor. MS. CURLEY: So she doesn't have a new contractor. We could extend it 30 days and make her bring a signed contract with proof that she's hired somebody new and fired the other person, and February 25, 2021 Page 16 then we would maybe consider her request for today. But for today, there's really no evidence other than doing all these things that she said she's done herself, which we should do, because they actually didn't get permits for all these things. It's not like they bought it this way, and they're living somewhere that -- I mean, they said they had licensed contractors help them do this, which is even more bad. MR. LEFEBVRE: Let me ask you a question. MR. LETOURNEAU: Well, the county wouldn't be adverse to that idea right there; a month to get -- let this -- let these people get their act together and get their -- a new contractor and come back in. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let me make a suggestion. MR. LETOURNEAU: Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, that -- we have a motion on the table to deny this. Later we have the implementation of the fine. At that time we can do what I think Sue is recommending, 30-day extension, blah, blah, blah. MR. LEFEBVRE: Why don't we do that now. Why don't we rescind -- MS. CURLEY: I don't understand why we're having two hearings on one case anyways. MR. LEFEBVRE: Why don't we rescind the motion to deny, and go to 30 days -- have them come back in 30 days and provide -- MS. ELROD: We don't have to hear the case either. MR. LEFEBVRE: Right. That would take care of the case. MS. CURLEY: Well, because if we vote right now, it's not going to be -- MR. LEFEBVRE: A motion to continue for 30 days. Pull this off, rescind it, and then -- MS. CURLEY: Let's check. Will you have a new contractor and paperwork in place in 30 days; is that something that you're financially able to accomplish? February 25, 2021 Page 17 MS. MADNI: Yes, ma'am. MS. CURLEY: I don't want to make them commit to something that isn't in their wheelhouse. MR. LEFEBVRE: So would you -- MS. CURLEY: Yes, I'll -- MR. LEFEBVRE: Would the person who seconded rescind the denial? MS. CURLEY: I'll rescind my motion, and someone else can make the other one. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I'll go along with rescinding it as the second. And you want to make a motion? MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion for a 30-day continuance, or until our next hearing, and you come back in front of us with a contract, a new contract, showing that you hired a new contractor. MS. MADNI: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Let me clarify one thing going forward. MR. LEFEBVRE: Yes. MS. ELROD: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The fines that are on Case 6, which is the implementing the fine, will continue based on a continuance -- MR. LEFEBVRE: Correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- for 30 days. MR. LEFEBVRE: And are all their fees paid up? Operational costs, have they been paid? MS. GUY: Yes, that's correct. MS. CURLEY: We don't need to hear the second one. MR. LEFEBVRE: We will not, correct. MS. CURLEY: So they can go home. MR. LEFEBVRE: Right. Correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So you have a motion. I February 25, 2021 Page 18 think I understand it. MS. ELROD: Second. MR. LEFEBVRE: That they come back in front of us in 30 days -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Right. MR. LEFEBVRE: -- to provide -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The next meeting, whether it's 30 days or 29, whatever it is. MS. BUCHILLON: March 25th. MR. LEFEBVRE: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. CURLEY: With all the things we talked about that are missing. MR. LEFEBVRE: To be clear, a new contractor. MR. MADNI: Okay. MS. MADNI: Yes, sir. MR. LEFEBVRE: Showing that you have -- and maybe even bring that new contractor in so he can explain the scope of the work and how long it's going to take to finish. MS. CURLEY: And one other question to the county. Have you -- has anyone from the county been let inside the barn? MS. GUY: Yes. The initial inspector that was assigned to the case did an interior inspection, and that was all presented when the case -- with the photos and -- MS. CURLEY: I just wanted to see if they were letting you do that. MS. GUY: Oh, yes. There's been full communication with the owners, you know, checking in and -- for progress and whatnot and meetings with Renald Paul for guidance and assistance. MS. CURLEY: So then if there -- when this does get done, is this going to be an accessory structure on a lot with no prior February 25, 2021 Page 19 structure? Are we going to -- are we just -- MS. GUY: It would be the -- that is -- that would be the primary structure. There's only one structure on the parcel. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let me bring this to an end. We have a motion. Do we have a second? MS. ELROD: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. And all of these things that you're asking now will be discussed in 30 days. MS. CURLEY: Amen. MR. WHITE: Mr. Chairman, point of order. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. WHITE: Is the intent of the Board here to effectively have the No. 6 case for imposition of fines not heard? Is that going to be considered withdrawn or -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It's extended -- it is a continuance on that case. This extension just shines the light on the other case. So that case is being continued for 30 days, and all the questions that are coming back and forth now will be resolved in 30 days -- MS. CURLEY: Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- with somebody who probably will be in a much better position to answer those questions, okay. So we have a motion and a second. Any more discussion on the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hearing none, all those in favor? MS. ELROD: Aye. MS. CURLEY: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: (No verbal response.) MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. BLANCO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? February 25, 2021 Page 20 (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Thank you. We wish you the best of luck in 30 days. If you need, I think they sell whips. MS. MADNI: I'm a horse owner. I have whips. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Contractor whips. Okay. MS. MADNI: Thank you. I appreciate your time. MR. MADNI: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Which brings us to stipulations, 6. MS. BUCHILLON: Yes, sir. Number 6, CELU20200011975, David N. Ahmad. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is David here? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you want to read the stipulation -- (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. GUY: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Would you read the stipulation into the record for us, please. MS. GUY: Okay. Therefore, it is agreed between the parties that the respondent shall pay operational costs in the amount of 59.28 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing. Abate all violations by removing all unauthorized storage containers from the Estates-zoned property to a site designated for such use within 60 days of this hearing or a fine of $100 a day will be imposed for each day the violation remains. Respondent must notify Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance; that if the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the February 25, 2021 Page 21 Collier County Sheriff's Office to enforce the provisions of this agreement, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Let the record show the respondent is not present. Anybody want to make a motion on this? MS. ELROD: Motion to accept as written. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and second. All those in favor? MS. ELROD: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: (No verbal response.) MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. BLANCO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let me ask Sue. Sue? MS. CURLEY: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We got an aye from the bathroom. Okay. MS. GUY: Thank you. MS. BUCHILLON: Next stipulation, No. 4, CESD20190010323, Fred P. Grunst and Joanne R. Grunst. MS. CURLEY: What number? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Number 4. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. PATTERSON: I do. Good morning. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. MS. PATTERSON: For the record, Sherry Patterson, Collier County Code Enforcement. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: If you would read the case into the record, the stipulation into the record. MS. PATTERSON: Yes. February 25, 2021 Page 22 Therefore, it is agreed between the parties that the respondent shall: One, pay operational costs in the amount of $59.28 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing; Number 2, abate all violations by obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition permit, inspections, and certificate of completion/occupancy for dock installed without required permits, inspections, and certificate of completion within 90 days of this hearing, or a fine of $100 per day will be imposed until the violation is abated; Three, the respondent must notify Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request that the investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance; Four, that if the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriff's Office to enforce the provisions of this agreement, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Let the record show that the respondent is not present. Yes, Gerald. MR. LEFEBVRE: This is part of the Palm River, all those docks? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. MR. LEFEBVRE: We've had multiple owners come in, respondents come in. Is 90 days enough? I mean, I know -- MS. CURLEY: Wait, wait. It's not 90 days. The citation was issued in 2019. MR. LEFEBVRE: I understand. But this case is a little bit unique because testimony from previous respondents stated that there's only two companies that have a small enough barge, I think they used -- February 25, 2021 Page 23 MS. PATTERSON: Yes. MR. LEFEBVRE: -- to get up there. MS. PATTERSON: Uh-huh. MR. LEFEBVRE: And we've had other respondents come in asking for more time. So is 90 days enough? MS. PATTERSON: I can't say that because, you know, I am aware that they only have a couple contractors that have a barge small enough to be able to get into the river back there. I do understand that. We have had a lot of people come in. We're getting to the end of this where most of them have came into compliance. And I do understand that others have came in and asked for more time. What I can tell you about this particular case right here is that the owner does have a permit, is currently in reject, but the case is that he's understanding of what needs to be done and when, and he's on top of it, because they get a corrections letter from the Building Department to tell them what has to be done and what's still left. He's fully aware of that, so... MR. LEFEBVRE: How long ago did that rejection letter -- MS. PATTERSON: The rejection letter was sent out December 8, 2020. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, if this is not done in 90 days, they'll come back here. They'll request more time, and we'll take it at that time. MR. LEFEBVRE: He's not here so, unfortunately, we can't change it without hearing the case. MS. PATTERSON: That's correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Right. So anybody want to make a motion on this? MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion to approve. MS. CURLEY: Second. February 25, 2021 Page 24 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and second. All those in favor? MS. ELROD: Aye. MS. CURLEY: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: (No verbal response.) MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. BLANCO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. MS. PATTERSON: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you, Sherry. MS. BUCHILLON: Next stipulation, No. 3, CESD20190002541, Orlando Galindo and Maria Galindo. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. HOLMES: I do. Good morning. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. Let the record show respondent is not present. Just have to put my two cents in there. MR. HOLMES: Yes, sir. Ready? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. You want to read the stipulation into the record for us? MR. HOLMES: Yes, sir. For the record, Bradley Holmes, Collier County Code Enforcement. Therefore, it is agreed between the parties that the respondent shall: One, pay operational costs in the amount of $59.28 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing; Two, abate all violations by obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition permit, inspections, certificate February 25, 2021 Page 25 of completion/occupancy for the unpermitted storage structure within 60 days of this hearing, or a fine of $100 per day will be imposed until the violation is abated; Three, the respondent must notify Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance; Four, that if the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriff's Office to enforce the provisions of this agreement, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. You know, based on just discussions this morning, I wonder how this respondent is able to get this done in 60 days here when we have other cases that take much more time. Is this -- MR. HOLMES: So he -- to my understanding, he's either a general contractor or a contractor of sorts. He's got a permit that was submitted. It's under review right now. And the structure was -- this was a preexisting structure, so we're permitting after the fact. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Affidavit. MR. HOLMES: Yeah. He had to go through a variance process to get up to now. So he's confident in it. We discussed the timeline, and he feels that everything should go smoothly. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. ELROD: Make a motion to accept. MS. CURLEY: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MS. ELROD: Aye. MS. CURLEY: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: (No verbal response.) February 25, 2021 Page 26 MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. BLANCO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Thank you, Bradley. MS. BUCHILLON: Next stipulation, No. 11, CENA20200013489, Wilson Touchet and Dawn Hebert. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. GUY: I do. For the record, Paula Guy, Collier County Code Enforcement. Therefore, it is agreed between the parties that the respondent shall: Pay operational costs in the amount of 59.28 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing; Abate all violations by removing all unauthorized accumulation of litter and stored items from the vacant, unimproved property to a site intended for such use within 120 days of this hearing, or a fine of $100 per day will be imposed until violation is abated. Respondent must notify Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance; that if the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation by using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriff's Office to enforce the provisions of this agreement, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHARMAN KAUFMAN: Is there any reason -- this is litter on a lot. MS. GUY: There's a lot of storage on this lot. The vacant lot was -- had landscaping materials, and vehicles and trailers that they're February 25, 2021 Page 27 working on getting off, and then there's an excessive large amount of vegetation debris that was taken down from -- never removed from Irma. And the owners are actually working with the Forestry Department. They tried removing it and taking it to the dump, but the financial realm was out of their -- out of their picture. So they're working with the Forestry Department and have planned burns set up, and they had a ranger come out and assess and determine how much time they would need to get it done. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. CURLEY: I make a motion to accept the stipulation as written. MS. ELROD: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MS. ELROD: Aye. MS. CURLEY: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: (No verbal response.) MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. BLANCO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. MS. GUY: Thank you. MS. BUCHILLON: The last stipulation, No. 9, CEVR20200000062, William E. Christ and Roseanne R. Christ. You don't have this one because we just got it here. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. MUCHA: I do. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Joe, are you going to have a hard time reading it since you don't have it? February 25, 2021 Page 28 MR. MUCHA: I have it. Good morning. For the record, Joe Mucha, Collier County Code Enforcement. Therefore, it is agreed between the parties that the respondent shall: One, pay operational costs in the amount of $59.28 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing; Two, abate all violations by obtaining all required Collier County approved mitigation plans, building perm its, inspections, and certificates of completion and/or occupancy to either keep the unpermitted improvement of the property as is or to restore the property to its original permitted condition within 180 days of this hearing, or a fine of $200 per day wil l be imposed until the violation is abated; Three, respondent must notify Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance; Four, that if the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriff's Office to enforce the provisions of this agreement, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHARMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Have they applied for a building permit? MR. MUCHA: No, but he -- the gentleman was here this morning, and he had his plans, and he's, like, ready to go and move forward. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. MUCHA: So just to give you a little background. The property was cleared. They were going to build a house at one point. They didn't build the house. Permit expired. So that basically voided February 25, 2021 Page 29 their approval of having the property cleared before. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So now they have plans to build? MR. MUCHA: Yes, sir. Yes, sir. MS. CURLEY: Do they have plans to build a house or -- MR. MUCHA: They're going to build a house. MS. ELROD: Motion to accept. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have a second? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I'll second it. MR. LEFEBVRE: I guess a question I have is, why wasn't there an option there to do a mitigation plan an d bring it back into -- MR. MUCHA: There is one, sir. MR. LEFEBVRE: Oh, there is? Okay. MR. MUCHA: Yeah, a Collier County approved mitigation plan, yes, sir. MR. LEFEBVRE: I'm sorry. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. CURLEY: Thanks, Joe. I'll second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I seconded it. All those in favor? MS. ELROD: Aye. MS. CURLEY: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: (No verbal response.) MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. BLANCO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Thank you, Joe. MR. MUCHA: Thank you. MS. BUCHILLON: Okay. February 25, 2021 Page 30 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So we are done with the stips? MS. BUCHILLON: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So it looks like the next case would be Case 1? MS. BUCHILLON: Well, we have, under imposition of fines, No. 1 is present -- I mean, No. 2 is present. I'm sorry. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. BUCHILLON: CESD20190008083, Jantina Jo Hanna. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. HANNA: I do. MR. JOHNSON: I do. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. Could you state your name on the microphone for us, please. MS. HANNA: Jantina Jo Hanna. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. You probably have a request before the county reads their case into the record? I'm looking a t this, and it says that the violation has not been abated; do you understand that? MS. HANNA: I'm not sure why they're saying that. I have been working on the agreement since we got up here last time; I think it was September or October. I have applied for a demolition permit, and I have removed a big structure on the property, and I had an electrician go through the building and check if there's any dangerous situations. As the survey -- as the violation states, there's part of the building that are too close to the property line. I had a survey done by Charles Strolston -- Tolton (phonetic), and I'm waiting for the results of that survey. And I understand you might be able to build a high-rise on the beach in six months -- MR. LEFEBVRE: I didn't say six months. MS. HANNA: -- but it's five months now, and I still don't have February 25, 2021 Page 31 the results for the survey, so... As soon as I have the results of the survey, that can determine what buildings need to be taken down. I will do that. I took a big structure down with my own hands with one man, because we couldn't get any machinery up there. Two of the tenants have already left our house. There's still six to be rehoused. I can do that, and I told Code Enforcement, and I want to emphasize on this: I can re-house every person that's still left there early May, which is two months, but I can't put them on the street. This is a sober living house. People are struggling with addiction. I can't put on them that they won't have a home because there's code violations. I can re-house them early May to another property of mine, but I can't do it until early May. So I'm asking you just to give me these two months and not having to put people on the street. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Let me go to the county. This thing is still not in compliance; is that correct? MR. JOHNSON: That is correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: What is -- go ahead. MS. CURLEY: Do you have -- have you provided the information on the survey to him? MS. HANNA: Yes. I wrote a letter to Michael -- MS. CURLEY: Okay. That's all I needed to know. MS. HANNA: -- in January. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Everybody's been sworn, right? THE COURT REPORTER: (Nods head.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: John, your comments on this case. MR. JOHNSON: For the record, John Johnson, Collier County Code Enforcement. It's the county's position that this is an egregious health/safety issue. You have previously ruled that way, and the efforts towards February 25, 2021 Page 32 compliance are not at a level where we could say continue on. It's health/safety. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. HANNA: I had an electrician go through the building. There is no health/safety for the tenants electricity-wise, plumbing-wise. The main problem with code violations -- whatever, code violation, is that the buildings are too close to the property lines. And that's why I need that survey, because I need to know what the survey says where the buildings are. MS. CURLEY: Do you have -- do you have evidence of paying for that survey and you've been waiting for it for five months? MS. HANNA: You can call Charles Tolton. MS. CURLEY: No, no. That's not -- I mean, I'm asking you for the evidence to back up what you're saying. So you're saying -- excuse me. MS. HANNA: They don't ask for money until the survey's done. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let me ask a question. Did John Walsh review this? MS. CURLEY: That's not true. MR. JOHNSON: Yes. And, Mr. Kaufman, if I may, the violation here is unpermitted modification to structures. The fact that they are, you know, near a property line is not the main issue. The main issue is these are unpermitted modifications that were made to a living structure. There's multiple people living in there. We went through this. And those still exist. And, yes, Jonathan Walsh ruled that this was a violation. MS. CURLEY: Yeah, I guess my point for asking about the survey was just to see the validity behind the testimony, because you would normally pay for a survey in advance of receiving it, and it certainly wouldn't take from October 22nd to now to get it. So I was February 25, 2021 Page 33 just, you know, inquiring about the wholeness of what we're hearing. MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion to deny. MS. CURLEY: Second. MS. HANNA: The survey stakes are in place. I just don't have the report yet. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The county is saying it's not the survey that's the problem. MS. HANNA: I understand. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The problem, according to the county, is that the Chief Building Department Head, Jonathan Walsh, finds that this structure is a safety-and-health problem. MS. HANNA: I understand, but now I have to go back. In 2016 when I started renovating the building, I went to Growth Management and I asked, do I need a permit? And I was told, because it is a mobile home, you do not need permits. In December 2017, after Hurricane Irma -- (Simultaneous crosstalk.) MR. LETOURNEAU: I'm going to object to this. I mean, we're not here to rehear the case. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's correct. We're not here -- all we're here to do is to impose the fine or not impose the fine. MS. HANNA: I understand. There's -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let me finish. MS. HANNA: Yes, please. CHARMAN KAUFMAN: And we have a motion from the Board to deny this request; in other words, to impose the fine. Now, if the Board passes this, then your next step would probably be to appeal it to the County Commission or whatever you nee d to do. MS. HANNA: Well, then I need to go to court, because Code Enforcement -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Whatever you need to do -- February 25, 2021 Page 34 MS. HANNA: Yeah. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- you need to do. Let me vote on this. MS. HANNA: No, but I have -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Not no. MS. CURLEY: One person has to talk at a time. MS. HANNA: Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So all those in favor? MR. WHITE: Mr. Chairman? MS. HANNA: I have a right to defend myself. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: What? MS. CURLEY: I just have one question before we take a vote. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. CURLEY: So you're saying it's a life/safety, and she's claiming there's still tenants in there. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Six tenants, yeah, correct. MS. CURLEY: We are going to impose the fine, but it doesn't protect the people that are living there. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That is not for us. That's up to Code Enforcement what they can do. They have, from the original order, to use the police if they need to, the Sheriff's Department, to enforce it. So that's beside the point. Right now -- MR. LETOURNEAU: I mean, I would like to clarify, though. You said her first step might be to go before the Board. I would say that her first step would be to get into compliance first, and then -- and then there's other options at that point. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: She's saying it's going to be -- May, everything is going to be -- all the tenants will be out, et cetera. And by the time she could go to court, it would probably be more than May. MR. LETOURNEAU: Well -- and at that time, you know, you February 25, 2021 Page 35 get tenants out, you get the thing into compliance. There is a method to submit a hardship and go -- and, you know, have it presented before the Collier County Commissioners, and they can vote on whether or not the fines are -- you know, could be waived or partially waived or whatever at that point. MS. CURLEY: So the point is there's other places in this county where people in the position that she stated can go, but they're just not going to be going to her rental properties. So I find that her revenue -- it sounds like she wants to move them to a place where they can continue to pay their rent underneath her landlord -- (Simultaneous crosstalk.) MS. CURLEY: -- instead of moving them out and dealing with her code issue right now. I don't like that, and I think it's unfair for other people. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. MR. WHITE: Mr. Chairman? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: What? MR. WHITE: I think there's a question as to what the amount of the fine would be. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: On this one here? MR. WHITE: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I haven't heard that raised yet. MR. WHITE: I'm raising it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. What's the problem with the fine? MR. WHITE: The date that's being used to calculate the start of the fine. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: August 23rd? MR. WHITE: Yes. That's a problem. If you look -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: What should it be? MR. WHITE: I don't know the factual answer to that without February 25, 2021 Page 36 the respondent telling us the date that she received t he order for the rehearing. MR. LETOURNEAU: No. I believe the date would be the date after the order was to be in compliance. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's correct. MR. LETOURNEAU: Not when she received any paperwork, and we're prepared to read this. MR. WHITE: If you read Page 99 of the packet, the order that was submitted following the motion for rehearing being granted, it's very specific as to when compliance was to occur -- MR. LETOURNEAU: This is not a rehearing. This is a county's request for imposition of fines. MR. WHITE: I understand, and in the record, sir, is an order on the motion for rehearing, and it specifies very clearly -- as I said, Page 99 of your agenda packet -- what it is that is the time frame for which compliance was to take plac e. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: If I'm not mistaken, from memory, this came before us as a rehearing. MR. WHITE: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We denied it. MR. WHITE: That is correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: If we denied it, it didn't happen. MR. WHITE: Not -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So that date doesn't count. MS. CURLEY: So why don't -- would you just do us a favor and read what you're speaking about, because I've read it, but nobody's -- it's a complex sentence. It goes 30 days, but if it's not in compliance, then you retrofit 20 days back. So would you just be mindful and tell us what you're interpreting that as. MR. WHITE: I'm interpreting the regulation and rule that the county itself, this board, has adopted. And we had a discussion about February 25, 2021 Page 37 this under, I believe, Article IV, and it's Subsection Q. And the order that's been referred to and the sentence I'm going to read to you says: The order of the board, meaning the original August order -- I'm sorry, July, July order -- shall be stayed and the time for taking an appeal tolled until the rehearing is disposed of and the decision i s received by the parties. So that's why I'm inquiring as to the date that the respondent received the rehearing order. The order itself is very clear in saying that -- and this is the order that was signed and is in the official record -- within 30 days of the order being received by the respondent but in no event for a period of 30 days longer than 20 days from the date of mailing of this rehearing order to respondent, whichever is shorter, a fine of 350 days [sic] will be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter. I understand that there may have been a prior practice, a prior interpretation that the effect of denying a motion for rehearing would be to go back to the original order's direction for compliance, but the sentence I read to you from your rules, in my interpretation, my opinion is that the order of the Board has been stayed as was the time for taking the toll -- tolling the time for taking an appeal, and it says that that take place until it's been deposed of, which means you heard it in September -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let me stop you a second. MR. WHITE: I have one more sentence, one more phrase. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Go ahead. Do your one more sentence. MR. WHITE: And the decision is received by the respondent. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Based on your interpretation, any case coming before this board could be appealed and then appealed and then appealed and never get resolution. Once we deny the ability to rehear the case, that case is done. February 25, 2021 Page 38 MR. WHITE: I don't -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And you disagree with it? MR. WHITE: I don't disagree with it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. WHITE: Except as to the part about the appeal. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: What is the difference in dollars? MR. WHITE: I believe the difference is somewhere around $30,000. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. WHITE: I don't know, again, the date that she may have received the order. But no matter what, the legally defensible date that she had to come into compliance would be November 19th of '20, and that on the 20th of November the fines would begin to accrue. There's no defense to that. MS. CURLEY: Well, isn't it assumed delivery? MR. WHITE: That's the 20-day period that I'm saying is November 19 and, therefore, the fines would start on November 20. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, I understand your argument. I disagree with it based on what I said before, that you can just continue to appeal and appeal, and no fines will be -- MR. WHITE: That's not accurate in the sense that the appeal does not stay the running of fines nor the order. The appeal does not do that. The appeal to court doesn't change that. The only thing that your rules say is stayed is your original order if a rehearing is filed for and until it is heard and disposed of. And in this order, that is the one she's subject to, it gave 30 days from the date that it was received but no more than 20 days from the date of mailing. The date of mailing was September 30th. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I understand. The Board chose not to rehear the case, so the rehearing shouldn't have anything to do with the disposal of this case. February 25, 2021 Page 39 MS. HANNA: May I please say something? MS. CURLEY: He's saying on September 24th, the Code Enforcement Board denied the request for a rehearing, so we didn't have a rehearing. MR. WHITE: Correct. MS. CURLEY: You're claiming that -- you're interpreting that because we had a rehearing, the fines shouldn't accrue till November whatever. We didn't have a rehearing. We denied it. MR. WHITE: You -- MS. CURLEY: So let's move it -- MR. WHITE: Your rules are clear. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let's vote on the motion. MS. HANNA: Can I please say something -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: No, no, no, you're done. MR. LEFEBVRE: We have to clarify what the fines are going to be before we can -- MS. CURLEY: That's not our job. MR. WHITE: Correct. It's my job, and I'm asking you to tell me what the date is so I can write the order so Mr. Kaufman can sign it. MR. LEFEBVRE: Let me ask a question. If -- you're saying that upon notification or receiving of mail is when the fines can start, correct? MR. WHITE: Correct. MS. CURLEY: No, he's saying -- MR. LEFEBVRE: Hold on. I'm asking him. MR. WHITE: It is the date that would be used based on what your rules say, because it's not only the date the order was issued, but it's the date it's received. MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay. So do we have -- does Code Enforcement have something signed saying that she received that February 25, 2021 Page 40 order? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Helen, do you have anything on that? MS. BUCHILLON: No. MS. CURLEY: Gerald, what you're missing in that is there's a law in the state that says that assumed delivery, so when something goes in regular mail, the law protects that U.S. mail that it's assumed delivered. He's using that date. But what Mr. Kaufman is saying is that he's claiming because we had a rehearing that the fines shouldn't start till November. We denied the rehearing, if you look at this. We denied it on September, so -- MR. LEFEBVRE: I think what our attorney is saying is it doesn't matter what the outcome of that hearing; it still stops. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: There was none. MR. LEFEBVRE: There was an outcome that it was denied. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: There was no -- you said there was -- the outcome of the rehearing. MR. LEFEBVRE: Please. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: There was none. MR. LEFEBVRE: The fines are going to accrue anyways. So what I would recommend is a motion that we would start, if it states 20 days after the rehearing denial, we start the fines 20 days after. MR. WHITE: That would be November 20th. MR. LEFEBVRE: Well, the rehearing was in September. MR. WHITE: Yes, but the order is very clear in effectively giving the time frame to come into compliance. MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay. MS. CURLEY: The order -- MR. WHITE: And it applies -- and it applies the 20 days that the rule indicates. If the respondent isn't going to tell us the date she received it, there's no defense to the fact of the 20 days which our February 25, 2021 Page 41 rule, Ms. Curley, kind of imposes as that tim e period for the mail to have been received, a legally sufficient period of time. And so it's 97 days that I'm calculating would be the amount of time that the fine would run. That's a $33,950 day [sic] fine total. The prior op costs were paid. That leaves the costs for today's hearing of $59.49, for a total amount of fines and op costs of $34,009.49, I believe, is the legally defensible accurate amount of fines and costs that, if she is going to appeal it to court, I would be prepared to defend your orders. MR. LEFEBVRE: What I don't want is -- is if this is going to be litigated that because the fine amounts are incorrect -- MR. WHITE: Correct. MR. LEFEBVRE: -- that there's no fine whatsoever. MS. CURLEY: We never get in trouble for undercharging. MR. LEFEBVRE: Exactly. So that's why -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So do you want to withdraw your motion to deny? MR. WHITE: I think what we're doing is a motion to grant the county's imposition of fines. MR. LEFEBVRE: Right -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. WHITE: -- and that the dollar amounts and days would be 97, and the grand total, as I stated on the record, is $34,009.49. MR. LEFEBVRE: Yes, that's correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do you want to -- MS. CURLEY: Do that. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- rescind your prior order, and the second rescind it? MS. CURLEY: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And now you want to make a new one. February 25, 2021 Page 42 MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a new motion; that we impose the fines, and it would be a correction to what is stated here. So it would be 97 days at $350 a day for an amount of $33,950. The operational costs for today would be added at 59.49 for a total of $34,009.49. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. LEFEBVRE: Is that correct? MR. WHITE: That is absolutely correct. MS. HANNA: May I please say something? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do we have a second? Not yet. Second? Do we have a second on that? MS. CURLEY: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. Okay. Now, all those in favor? MS. ELROD: I have a question. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Go ahead. MS. ELROD: They continue to accrue? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. MR. WHITE: Yes. MS. ELROD: So we're hitting this dollar amount, and then what happens? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It continues to accrue at $350 a day. MR. WHITE: Until it's abated. MS. ELROD: Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay? All those in favor opposed? MS. ELROD: Aye. MS. CURLEY: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: (No verbal response.) MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. BLANCO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? February 25, 2021 Page 43 (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Now, what did you have to say? MS. HANNA: Okay. MR. LEFEBVRE: It's over. MS. HANNA: I strongly object to the way employees of Code Enforcement Board have deliberately misled me about these board commission meetings. In the first half of 2020, I was invited three times. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: This was all heard -- MS. HANNA: I'm sorry. I need to state this, okay? I was invited three times to these meetings, three times. I wrote a letter to Code Enforcement saying because of COVID-19, the pandemic, I would not be able to attend a public meeting. Churches, shops, businesses, everything was closed. Public meetings were highly discouraged. It was a difficult time, and I am taking care of a group of very vulnerable people. It was my duty to make sure that I could not put myself in harm's way. I personally delivered these letters of objection to Code Enforcement, and they were received by one of their employees. All three times this member of Code Enforcement communicated to me that the set meetings were postponed anyway. Through this, the meetings were not postponed and were held without me being there. Even our last meeting of September of last year I attended, Code Enforcement, again, intentionally lied to me telling me there wa s -- MR. LETOURNEAU: I object -- I object to this whole thing right here. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. HANNA: I have the right to make this statement. I'm sorry. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. According to our rules, you February 25, 2021 Page 44 have five minutes, and you have had your five minutes, and the Chair has determined that they are not granting additional time. MS. HANNA: Then I have to go to a court of law, because I have been -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That -- you have to do what you have to do -- MS. HANNA: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- and we have to do what we have to do. MS. CURLEY: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So thank you very much. MS. HANNA: I hope you understand that you are putting -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I am what? MS. HANNA: This is a non-profit organization, and you are putting people that are fighting for their lives on the street. MR. LETOURNEAU: I would say that was done by you when you illegally built those structures in the first place, to be honest with you, and this is the consequences, rather than blaming it on the county. I'm sorry. MS. HANNA: I did not illegally build the structures. I was told I didn't need a permit. I didn't build the structure. MR. LETOURNEAU: That's hearsay. MS. HANNA: I had to make some changes to the structure. MS. CURLEY: Ma'am, we have other people waiting, and we would like if you would -- MS. HANNA: I understand, but this is now noted, and if I go to a court of law, it's noted. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. HANNA: So thank you very much. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you. MR. JOHNSON: Thank you. February 25, 2021 Page 45 MS. BUCHILLON: Next item on the agenda, under imposition of fines, No. 7, CELU20180013990, Vladimir Portal and Caridad Paz. (Ariel Gonzalez, the interpreter, was sworn to truly and correctly interpret English into Spanish and Spanish into English.) MR. GONZALEZ: I do. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. HOLMES: I do. MR. PORTAL: I do. MR. WHITE: The interpreter's name on the record? MR. GONZALEZ: Ariel Gonzalez. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. This is the case that ends in 3990; is that correct? MR. WHITE: Yes, sir. MR. HOLMES: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Why don't you give us just a quick summary, and then I'll go to the respondents to see what they have to say. MR. HOLMES: Okay. So from conversations this morning, I believe that the respondent has a request for the Board that he wants to start with -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. HOLMES: -- based on circumstances they've been dealing with that may be pertinent to how you direct the -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Basically, this was unimproved -- MR. HOLMES: Yeah. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- structures on -- a converted garage, as we commonly call a converted garage. MS. CURLEY: I'd like to hear from the county first, because it is from 2018. MR. HOLMES: Okay. Yes, just as he's describing, it's for February 25, 2021 Page 46 accessory structures, swimming pool, converted garage. This involved a variance process that is still underway at this time, and no permits have been pulled. From our understanding, though, there's been some extensive issues with the contractor that was originally going to be squaring everything away which is why, like I said, they have comments that they'd like to make. I think it would probably answer some of the questions that you may have from us. MR. LETOURNEAU: Sue, do you want to just read this in first and then go? Yeah, just read -- just do your normal spiel. MR. HOLMES: No problem. All right. For the record, Bradley Holmes, Collier County, Code Enforcement Board. In reference to Case No. CELU20180013990. Violation of the Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a) located at 2035 Golden Gate Boulevard West, Naples, Florida; Folio No. 36914160000 regarding unpermitted improvements/structures, a converted garage, aluminum porch, an entry addition, a large warehouse, a swimming pool, and a ground level addition to a permitted pigeon coop. Past order: On February 27th, 2020, the Code Enforcement Board issued a findings of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was in violation of -- excuse me -- of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violations. See the attached order of the Board, OR5742, Page 241, for more information. The violation has not been abated as of February 25th, 2021. Fines and costs to date as follows: Fines have accrued at a rate of $150 per day from the period of August 26th, 2020, to February 25th, 2021, 184 days, for a total fine amount of $27,600. Fines continue to accrue. Previously assessed operational costs of $59.28 have been paid. Operational costs for today's hearing: $59.35. February 25, 2021 Page 47 Total amount: $27,659.35. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Thank you. Good morning. MR. GONZALEZ: Good morning, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Just so we understand each other, this is a hearing to determine whether or not these fines should be implemented, okay. And you have something that you want to -- MR. GONZALEZ: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. GONZALEZ: Okay. I met him, like, a month ago. I'm a general contractor. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You're the general contractor? MR. GONZALEZ: Yes, but not to this job. I meet him, but I read those papers just this morning. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. GONZALEZ: I don't know nothing about this before. I just coming to help, to try to help him. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. GONZALEZ: Okay. That explained to me is that the other general contractor he had before, he got sick with COVID and ne ver come back again. He paid some money to him, and he never come back again to finish this job with the variance. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. GONZALEZ: Okay. What I'm trying to do is just to get an appointment with the variance and try to help him to finish with these papers. Also he take surgery, and he don't work. He don't got money to pay anything right now. So I tried to find a way to help him now? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. You're trying to find a way to help him now. MR. GONZALEZ: Yeah. February 25, 2021 Page 48 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So this is the first you've heard of this case? MR. GONZALEZ: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: He has no money? MR. GONZALEZ: No, because he's on (indiscernible) right now. He only get -- the only money he get only for Worker's Comp. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Now, we're here to determine whether this should be implemented, the fine. I haven't heard anything yet about trying to delay this -- or what is he asking for? MR. GONZALEZ: Okay. The delays is because he hired the other general contractor to what was the variance, but that general contractor got sick with COVID, and he never can meet him again. He never come back again. So he's alone was this. So he explained to me what happened, and then I just tried to work with that right now, so -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You're trying to act as a general contractor and as an interpreter? MR. GONZALEZ: I don't speak English good, but -- MS. CURLEY: Did he turn a chicken coop into a house and add a pool, too? MR. HOLMES: No, no, no. As far as the pigeon coop goes, there was additional modifications done to it that -- not a dwelling, no. MS. CURLEY: All right. So -- I don't remember this case. Were all those things, a pool, the aluminum things, the house is all one -- all these things done without a permit by this gentleman? MR. HOLMES: Not completely, to our understanding, by the gentleman. He did purchase the property. MS. CURLEY: When? MR. HOLMES: I don't have the exact date on hand, but a lot of February 25, 2021 Page 49 that was done by the previous owner to him. I can look up the date if you'd like it exactly. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So if it was done by the previous owner, if he was to get a -- he could do an after-the-fact contract. MR. LETOURNEAU: Permit by affidavit. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah. MS. CURLEY: It just would be nice to know when he bought it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: However, we're not at that stage now. We are at a stage where there's a violation that has not been abated, and we're waiting to hear something that would make the Board feel -- MS. CURLEY: There's nothing. There's no permits. It's similar to the case we've already heard. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Right. Go ahead, Gerald. MR. LEFEBVRE: Has a variance been applied for? MR. HOLMES: Yes. MR. LEFEBVRE: Yeah, okay. MR. HOLMES: The last to date activity on it was October 27th, 2020, when, essentially, a corrections letter was sent out. It's in resubmit status right now. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: What was the variance for? MR. HOLMES: The variance had to do with the pool and the large warehouse. They were both having encroachment issues. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: When I hear pool, I always am concerned with health and safety. Is this a pool that was put in? MR. HOLMES: Yes. It was an installed pool. Now, they did also have an issue with it being unprotected, but that has been rectified. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So you have a pool that's been -- that is protected? February 25, 2021 Page 50 MR. HOLMES: Correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. That has no permit on it? MR. HOLMES: There's a permit, but it's incomplete. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: On the pool? MR. HOLMES: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And there are other permits that have not been completed? MR. HOLMES: Not for the other items, no permit. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: No permits. MS. CURLEY: The large structure, is it -- MR. HOLMES: Things were, essentially -- from what I was informed by the respondent, they were doing the variance first, and then they were going to proceed with other things irregardless of whether they were -- the variance was necessary for everything. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So am I -- let me come back to the respondent. Are you asking for time that you'll have the money to complete everything? What are you asking for? MR. GONZALEZ: Okay. What I know now after conversation with him is that the swimming pool is -- the problem with the swimming pool, I think, it's outside of -- it's inside the setback, like five feet. That's what I read on the papers. CHARMAN KAUFMAN: The pool is inside -- in other words, it doesn't meet setbacks. MR. GONZALEZ: The setbacks. I think that's the problem with the swimming pool. The same problem with the shed behind, it's around 57 from the property line. It has to be 75. That's what the variance is. I think the variance is for that. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. GONZALEZ: The other problems, I don't read about that yet, about the construction of the -- in the warehouse or something. I don't read nothing about that yet. I don't know. February 25, 2021 Page 51 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. You're a general contractor. MR. GONZALEZ: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: What would be a reason for the county to grab -- to grant a variance on a building that's in the wrong place or a pool that's in the wrong place? MR. GONZALEZ: I think that the variance award is t hat they stay -- I think the permit to keep it ther e -- no, to leave the place where [sic], because you can't do the swimming pool again. That's what the variance is for. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. But if you have a building that's -- that is on the -- or across the property line, there's only one remedy that I can think of, and that's to take the building down. MR. GONZALEZ: No, it's not across the property line. It's in the setback. The setback has to be -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It's in the setback, okay. MR. GONZALEZ: Yeah. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So they're asking to reduce -- (Simultaneous crosstalk.) MR. GONZALEZ: -- the setbacks. It has to be 30, and it's 27 or -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So they're asking to reduce the setbacks. That's -- MR. GONZALEZ: Exactly. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- what the variance is. Is it both for the pool and the building? MR. GONZALEZ: Yeah, the building -- the properties -- the buildings, when he buy the house, there was another shed, but the Hurricane Wilma 2005 take out the building, and he buy another one and put it in the same place. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Oh, okay. So it was a shed that you buy. They deliver it. February 25, 2021 Page 52 MR. GONZALEZ: Exactly. That's how it's explained to me. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So it can be moved? MR. GONZALEZ: Yeah. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. HOLMES: It exist -- MR. GONZALEZ: That was explained to me, I believe. MR. HOLMES: Yeah. The structure -- that storage structure is a warehouse. That's a fixed very large building. That is not a moveable plastic shed from Home Depot. MS. CURLEY: I need a point of clarity, please. MR. HOLMES: Sure. MS. CURLEY: I'm confused with some of the dimensions and things that I heard. MR. HOLMES: I can explain what the variance is for, the variance for the pool and the warehouse. MS. CURLEY: No. I just want to know the warehouse, not the shed, the warehouse -- MR. HOLMES: Sure. MS. CURLEY: It's supposed to be 50 feet -- 75 feet off, or what was the numbers? And what is the change that it is encroaching into the -- I'm thinking about the neighbor. That's why I want to know. Why should this neighbor be exposed to these items closer to them when everyone else that follows the rules has their distance? I don't want to be this person's neighbor and have to afford this building encroaching on the green space that is put there on purpose. MR. LEFEBVRE: We're not here to hear the case. MS. ELROD: I believe that he said it was 30-foot setback, and building is 27-foot setback. MS. CURLEY: I didn't understand. He said a couple different dimensions, so I just wondered. MR. LETOURNEAU: I do believe the rear setback in the February 25, 2021 Page 53 Estates in that area is 30, off the top of my head. MS. CURLEY: So as a contractor you think that the county should reward this property for not being in the right place and putting something there without a permit by issuing them the variance? MR. GONZALEZ: I really -- I don't know exactly how the variance work, but I think he can explain that, but it's try to permit -- leave the construction [sic] of the places are right now. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's up to the county whether they grant the variance or they don't grant the variance. For our purposes here, if this is in violation and the violation has not been abated, our job as a board is to find out whether the fines should be imposed or not. MS. CURLEY: So the question that Mr. Kaufman asked you was would you please ask your friend or customer how much time he needs, and you didn't ask him that. MR. GONZALEZ: I don't know about the variance work, how long time they give it to us to fix this. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. GONZALEZ: But for me, because he would hire me to finish with this job, it's about two, three months. But I don't know how the variance work. He has to ask them -- they let us to keep the building in place. MS. CURLEY: Can you tell us what he said? When you asked him that, what did he say? MR. GONZALEZ: He said two months, three months, but he don't know. Really, he don't know; that's the truth. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And he has no money? MR. GONZALEZ: I'm sorry? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is that correct; he has no money? MR. GONZALEZ: No. He said he would pay time to time, you February 25, 2021 Page 54 know. As soon as he get it, he will pay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, it's hard to get a contractor, you or anybody else. MR. GONZALEZ: I don't charge nothing to him. I would do it for free. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. GONZALEZ: My job, not materials or anything. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Free is a good price. Okay. Go ahead, Gerald. MS. CURLEY: I'm not opposed to extending it 90 days. All it's going to do is cost him more money, and if he fixes it in 90 days, then, you know, it's a whole 'nother conversation. MR. LETOURNEAU: The county would not be, you know, adverse to an extension, but I would like to see that there was a lot of progress done on the stuff that wasn't tied in with the variance, you know, within that amount of time, obviously. MR. LEFEBVRE: Right. MS. CURLEY: Yeah. We're not really interested in the variance. We don't really care. We want everything else fixed that you were actually charged, you know -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I understand the variance. No sense trying to move something if you've got a variance. If you don't have a variance, it kind of ties your hands on what you have to do. What the county is saying, if we grant a period of time, an extension, if you will, without imposing the fines, that we would expect in 90 days somebody would come back here and say, it's all done, everything is fine, or this is what we have done, can you give us more time if that's required. MR. GONZALEZ: I agree with that. Perfect to me. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You understand that? MR. GONZALEZ: Yes. February 25, 2021 Page 55 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Now, do you want to make a motion? MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion for a continuance to 90 days. MS. CURLEY: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a motion and a second. Any discussion on the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hearing none, all those in favor? MS. ELROD: Aye. MS. CURLEY: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. BLANCO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Okay. You have 90 days to do what you need to do. MR. GONZALEZ: Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And remember, 90 days, you're going to be coming back here, and if we don't see any progress, then we're going to impose the fines most likely. Okay? MR. GONZALEZ: I understand that. Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Terri, we're going to take a 10 -- 12-minute break. (A brief recess was had from 10:26 a.m. to 10:43 a.m.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I'd like to call the Code Enforcement Board back to order. Okay. Helen, where we going? MS. BUCHILLON: Next case, we're going to call a case before two, because they have to leave to pick up their gran dson. So I'm going to call them first and then the other two that are her e. February 25, 2021 Page 56 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. BUCHILLON: Under imposition of fines, No. 13, CESD20190010279, David M. Turley and Kathryn A. Turley. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. TURLEY: Yes. MS. TURLEY: Yes. MS. PATTERSON: I do. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Could you state your name on the microphone for us. MR. TURLEY: My name's David Turley. MS. TURLEY: Kathy Turley. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And I know who you are. MS. PATTERSON: I'll tell you anyway. Sherry Patterson with Collier County Code Enforcement Board. So we're dealing with the violations of the Code Enforcement Board Land Development Code, 04-41, as amended, Sections 10.02.06(B)(1)(a) and 10.02.06 (B)(e)(i). The location is at 166 Oakwood Court, Naples, Florida. Folio 65475720002. Description is the boat dock and a lift install without required permits and inspections and certificate of completion. The past orders were on September 24th, 2020, the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violations. See the attached order of the Board, OR5831, Page 3989, for more information. The violation has been abated as of January 4th, 2021. The fines and costs to date are as follows: Fines have accrued at a rate of $100 a day from the period of December 24th, 2020, to January 4th, 2021, which is 12 days, for a total fine amo unt of $1,200. February 25, 2021 Page 57 Previously assessed operational costs of 59.28 have been paid. Operational costs for today's hearing is 59.35. And the total amount is $1,259.35. MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion to deny the county's request for imposition of fines. MS. CURLEY: Second. MS. ELROD: Second. MR. WHITE: And costs? MR. LEFEBVRE: And costs. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. I was going to -- I was going to -- they waited this amount of time to come before us, to let them speak, but since you did it -- MR. LEFEBVRE: They don't need to. MS. TURLEY: Thank you. MR. LEFEBVRE: You're part of that Palm River? MS. TURLEY: Yes, we're part of that. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. All those in favor? MS. ELROD: Aye. MS. CURLEY: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: (No verbal response.) MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. BLANCO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. MR. LEFEBVRE: Have a good day. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So the wait was -- was it worth the wait? MS. TURLEY: It was worth it. MR. TURLEY: Thank you very much. And also the wait on the bridge up there in Palm River. February 25, 2021 Page 58 MS. TURLEY: The bridge is open. MR. LEFEBVRE: It is. Great. Great. MS. CURLEY: Enjoy. Plus, we could be related. Turley, curley. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Smith, Brown. No. MS. BUCHILLON: Next case, No. 10, CESD20190009150, Catherine Vidal. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Also in the implementation. MR. LEFEBVRE: What case is this? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: No. 10 under imposition. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. GREINER: Yes. MS. GREINER: Yes. MS. GUY: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Let me just take a quick look. THE COURT REPORTER: Can I get your names. MS. GREINER: Catherine Greiner and Brandon Greiner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. You want to read this into the record for us? MS. GUY: Yes. For the record, Paula Guy, Collier County Code Enforcement Board. This is for a violation of the Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). Location is 2880 10th Avenue Southeast, Naples, Florida; Folio 40985560007. The description of the violation is an aboveground pool and accessory structure erected with no permits. Past order: On January 24th, 2020, the Code Enforcement Board issued a findings of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and February 25, 2021 Page 59 ordered to correct the violation. The attached order of the Board, OR5749, Page 3385, for more information. The violation has been abated as of January 27th, 2021. Fines and costs to date are as follows: The fines have accrued at a rate of $150 per day for the period from March 25th, 2020, to January 27th, 2021, a total of 309 days, a total fine amount of $46,350. The previously assessed operational costs of 59.28 have been paid, and the operational costs for today's hearing are 59.42; a total amount due of $46.409.42. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And you're here to request, give us a break, of reducing or abating the fine. MS. GREINER: Yes. MR. GREINER: Yes. We would -- we're asking you guys to abate the fees. If you guys look at the records, like, I think you'll see that every step along the way we were moving forward. There were a bunch of roadblocks, but the whole process, like, we were trying to get it completed. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. LEFEBVRE: This amount would get them an in-ground pool. MS. CURLEY: I can see that we gave you a year, so it obviously was a messy situation you were backing into. So I make a motion to deny the county's fines of $46,409.42, including the operational costs of 59.42 for today's hearing. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a motion. Do we have a second? MS. ELROD: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And we have a second. All those in favor? MS. ELROD: Aye. February 25, 2021 Page 60 MS. CURLEY: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: (No verbal response.) MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. BLANCO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. MR. GREINER: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You could go out to dinner now. MS. CURLEY: Have a pool party. MS. GUY: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Probably even Capital Grille. Okay, Helen. MS. BUCHILLON: Next case, No. 11, CESD20190014518, Henock Cherrelus, LLC. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. MUCHA: I do. MR. CHERRELUS: I do. THE COURT REPORTER: Your name? MR. CHERRELUS: Henock, H-e-n-o-c-k, C-h-e-r-r-e-l-u-s. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. This was a lanai that was enclosed without obtaining permits. Joe, you want to read this into the record for us? MR. MUCHA: Yes, sir. For the record, Joe Mucha, Collier County Code Enforcement. This is dealing with a violation of the Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). The violation location is 5306 McCarty Street, Naples; Folio No. 62047080005. Description of the violation is a lanai enclosed without first obtaining a valid Collier County permit. February 25, 2021 Page 61 Past order: On August 28th, 2020, the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinance and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached order of the Board, OR5187, Page 3104, for more information. The violation has not been abated as of February 25th, 2021. Fines and costs to date are as follows: Fines have accrued at a rate of $100 per day from the period from November 27th, 2020, to February 25th, 2021, 91 days, for a total fine amount of $9,100. Fines continue to accrue. Previously assessed operational costs of $59.21 have not been paid, operational costs for today's hearing is $59.35, for a total fine amount of $9,218.56. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Sir? MR. CHERRELUS: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You're before -- we're here to impose the fine or not. Ordinarily, when a violation has not been abated, that's a problem going forward. So we can't abate a fine when the violation still exists. So you're before us to request something or tell us whatever. MR. CHERRELUS: When I purchased property, the lanai was already closed. It's not like we converted it into a -- I convert it into a room. It was a half wall and a screen on the top. So the previous owner, that's I think, just stuccoed the whole -- the whole lanai. There was no code violation when I purchased it. It is an investment property. So now when I got that, I have to -- because it's under an LLC, I could not pull an owner -- an owner permit. So I have to hire a contractor. So I went and I got an architect, but just like for anything, small jobs becomes a little bit more -- more difficult now because you don't have that many people who have the appetite to do those February 25, 2021 Page 62 small jobs. So I hired an architect to -- I did not want to go ahead and destroy the whole thing. I said maybe I'll do -- not an affidavit, but I'll just do a -- turn it into a room since the house is a small home, house, about 800 square foot. I said, it's two-bedroom, one-bath; I'm just going to add an additional bedroom into it. So I hired the architect to do the draft. So I got that already. And I hired a contractor, general contractor to do the job. I paid, and I submit the -- he submitted the permit, the -- he submit it to the county for the permits. It was rejected because the house was built. There are quite a few things that they want the architect to fix, but also it was rejected in October. They wanted to -- what was more difficult was the fact that the -- since the house was built in 1981 -- 1968, the county said that any improved value, if you going to spend more than $20,000, so you will need to have a FEMA -- to complete a FEMA 50 percent building above flood zone elevation. And it was so difficult to find an appraiser that will give me a FEMA appraisal that will satisfy the county. I finally found one. I paid over -- almost close to $1,000. And the -- I finally got that, and I give it to my contractor, but he was sick for the past two months. So finally this week or next he said that he will submit everything back to -- all the corrections to the county so for approval, that way we can correct -- fix everything that needed to be fixed. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So what you're asking for is more time to get -- MR. CHERRELUS: More time, yeah. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And how much time do you think it will take to get this resolved? MR. CHERRELUS: Ninety days; 90 days should be sufficient. MR. LEFEBVRE: Have operational costs been paid? MR. CHERRELUS: Not yet. I have my check. I will pay February 25, 2021 Page 63 those. What -- the $59? I have a checkbook. I will pay it today. MS. CURLEY: So I think in light of the changes from when we gave him the original 90 days to what he's discovered, his money is better invested in -- I mean, I think he's done a lot of work in 90 days and learned a lot, and I think that giving him 90 more days is probably not going to be enough. So I'd be okay with six months to get this all squared away, and once he submits that FEMA certificate, he's either going to be denied, and then he's going to just bring the patio back to the way it's supposed to be -- you bought it that way, unfortunately. The violations run with the land. It doesn't run with who owns it. MR. CHERRELUS: Right. MS. CURLEY: So that will give him enough time to either move on with his project and go back and demo what was illegally done before he owned it. MR. LEFEBVRE: Is that a motion? MS. CURLEY: My motion is to give him -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Before you do a motion, I want the respondent to understand that if the operational costs of 59.21 are not paid today -- MR. CHERRELUS: Yes. CHARMAN KAUFMAN: -- whatever we grant you is not going to hold water. You understand? MR. CHERRELUS: Yeah, sure. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. That's number one. MS. CURLEY: And to his point, the next time you come just make sure your fines are paid before you see us. MR. CHERRELUS: Okay. MS. CURLEY: I make a motion to continue -- MR. LEFEBVRE: Continue. MS. CURLEY: -- continue the case for 90 days. February 25, 2021 Page 64 MR. LEFEBVRE: Ninety days or 180? MR. MUCHA: You said 180. MS. CURLEY: I beg your pardon; six months. MR. CHERRELUS: Six months, 180. MS. CURLEY: Sorry. I had notes down here. MR. LEFEBVRE: It sounds like he seconded it. MS. ELROD: I'll second it at the 180. MS. CURLEY: One eighty. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. All those in favor? MS. ELROD: Aye. MS. CURLEY: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: (No verbal response.) MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. BLANCO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. MR. CHERRELUS: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. MUCHA: Thank you. MS. CURLEY: That's a lot of work. MS. BUCHILLON: And we're back to hearings. Case No. 1, CESD20200000596, Maroon Investments, LLC. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. GUY: Yes, I do. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let the record show the respondent is not present. MS. BUCHILLON: Respondents were notified certified mail and regular mail on February 4th, 2021. It was also posted at the property and courthouse on February 3rd, 2021. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Paula, have you been able to February 25, 2021 Page 65 contact the respondent at all? MS. GUY: For the record, Paula Guy, Collier County Code Enforcement. Yes, I've been in communication with the owner. He lives in Connecticut. He's the representative of Maroon Investments. His name is Charles Flanagan. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Did you tell him that this was scheduled for a hearing today? MS. GUY: Yes, I did. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And he said? MS. GUY: He said that he would not be coming from out of state. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And? MS. GUY: And -- MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay. MS. GUY: He is still actively working on the case, but I could go ahead and present to you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. MS. GUY: Okay. This is in reference to Case No. CESD20200000596 dealing with violation of the Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a), alterations and renovations to a detached garage structure with no permits. The location is 260 9th Street Northwest, Naples, Florida; Folio 37068440002. Service was given on February 13th, 2020. On January 16th, 2020, an on-site visit with the occupant Christa Cole, and a licensing compliance officer, Ruben Martinez, to the detached structure location at 260 9th Street. The occupant provided me an entry consent form to enter the home into the property to view the alleged violation on the dwelling February 25, 2021 Page 66 on the rear parcel. Observed workers on site that were working without permits by Officer Martinez, and citations were issued with a Stop Work Order in place to cease all work being done without permits and the unlicensed contractor on site. Observed from exterior inspection a chain-link fencing with an in-ground pool and a screen lanai attached to the rear structure, which I'll refer to as Building 2. Interior inspections revealed a two-story residence to include a living area, two bedrooms, one bath, and a kitchen and a carport on the main floor. The second floor contained a living area, a bath, and one bedroom. Observed extensive repairs for upstairs bath to include removal of all fixtures, electrical fixtures, floor removal, drywall, and framework. Permits located for this parcel are 82-1371 and -1372. On January 17th, 2020, I was able to establish contact with the property owner of Maroon Investments, Charles Flanagan. I advised him of the complaint and building official review for violation to be determined. The property owner advised he is trying to get repairs done but is having delays due to the occupant not cooperating. On January 31st, 2020, the building official of Collier County reviewed the plans and case and determined a violation exists for Building 2 not being permitted for alterations. Violation was issued and posted, and service to owner received on February 13th, 2020. On April 14th, 2020, verified that the occupant has left the residence, and the owner, Mr. Flanagan, advised he has contractors working on the main residence and upon completion he will then start the permitting process for Building 2. On July 22nd, 2020, owner Mr. Flanagan advised the main residence repairs and permitting is completed, and this was verified February 25, 2021 Page 67 by myself, and he is preparing to start the permits for Building 2. August 20, 2020, I verified there was a permit issued, PRPL20200308887, and I received an update from a building -- the building official that the permit pulled by the owner has a hold and cannot be completed until the permit for the alterations is obtained and completed. On September 21st, 2020, Mr. Flanagan advised he has hired a permitting company to prepare submittal for the building alterations. On October 14th, 2020, I verified no permit has been applied for at that date and prepared case for hearing review. On February 5th, 2021, Mr. Flanagan advised he has Elite Permitting of Naples working on submittals for the permitting alterations needed for Building 2. On February 16th, 2021, a permit application received, was verified, PRBD20210205627, for interior repair, remodel, and plumbing. As of today's date, no permit has been issued for Collier County for the alterations made to Building 2. On February 24th, I met with Renald Paul, project coordinator of Collier County, and he reviewed permit application and the building plans that were submitted for the new permit. He advise d the scope of the permit applied for will not correct the violation. And as of today's date, I checked, and the permit that he's applied for is still pending. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Go ahead. MS. GUY: Okay. So I'd now like to present case evidence in the following exhibits. We have 17 photos taken by myself on January 16th, 2020, the Collier County property appraisal aerial view of 2020, and the Collier County Property Appraiser building sketch. No photos. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Could we get a motion from the February 25, 2021 Page 68 Board to accept the photos. MS. ELROD: Motion to accept. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And a second. All those in favor? MS. ELROD: Aye. MS. CURLEY: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: (No verbal response.) MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. BLANCO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Jeff, if you will. MS. GUY: There's additional document exhibits, too, if you need more clarification. There's a GIS zoning map. T he original building permits of the structure, Building 2, is that permit, 831371 and -1372, and an email correspondence from Building Official Jonathan Walsh in regards to the permit not being acceptable. This is the rear building. That's the exterior, the face of entry. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Go back up. That's an open door. A little higher. Right there. MS. GUY: Yeah, that's one of the main entries on the lower level. MR. LETOURNEAU: That's the second structure that's still in violation, correct? MS. GUY: Correct. MS. CURLEY: Is this, like, a guesthouse behind the house? MS. GUY: It is. It's not permitted for a residence. It's supposed to be a garage with, like, a small apartment, and it's been converted into a two-bedroom, two-bath home. February 25, 2021 Page 69 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It's converted without a permit? MS. GUY: That is correct. MS. CURLEY: Does the owner say it was done without his knowledge? MS. GUY: I believe these things were done prior to his purchase of the property. This is an investment proper ty. He rents it out, which at that time -- MS. CURLEY: Well, that's -- that countertop's not from 2009. MS. GUY: No, exactly. But he claims that all was done prior to his purchase. MS. CURLEY: So he bought it in 2009. So that claim doesn't seem to be substantiated by the pictures. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: He needs to invest -- MS. GUY: Correct. That door goes out to the carport. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. CURLEY: I've seen enough. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Continue. MS. GUY: Oh, wait till you see the work that was being done. There's a lot of extensive removal of flooring and ceilings. CHARMAN KAUFMAN: That's a peek-a-boo picture. MS. GUY: Yeah. That's the one bathroom downstairs. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Exposed wires. Go back up a hair. MS. CURLEY: So is somebody renting the front house also? MS. GUY: At the time of my initial inspection, the front house was vacant, but he had been actively leasing both -- you know, renting both of those properties out, which we shared with him that the ordinance won't allow him to do that, to rent it out to multiple families. So at this time it's empty now as of April from last year, but now he has the front residence -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. It doesn't matter whether -- February 25, 2021 Page 70 MS. GUY: -- occupant. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- there's nobody there? There's nobody there? MS. GUY: Not now, no. MR. LEFEBVRE: Subfloor. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Subfloor, okay. Is that it? MR. LETOURNEAU: Do you want to go through some other stuff, Paula? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Go where? MS. GUY: Yeah. There's -- I don't know if you needed for a more clear clarification, I have -- you know, the photos, but there's supporting documents. Like the aerial sketch, you can see the placement of where it's at in the -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I don't really think we need to go any farther than we are. You were buildings -- in summary, you have buildings that there's extensive work going on, plumbing and electrical, and there are no permits. MS. GUY: Correct. The violation is -- to clarify, it's for the changes and the alterations that were made. He's trying to get permits to correct the plumbing and the electrical, but the building official will not approve that permit -- it will not get a CO until he gets a permit for the actual alterations made to Building 2. MS. CURLEY: Is there a pool there? MS. GUY: Yes, there is, an in-ground pool. MS. CURLEY: At the guesthouse? MS. GUY: There's a pool at both residences. There's one at -- MS. CURLEY: Would you put a pool behind a garage? MS. GUY: Exactly. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It's a place to store your rubber duckies, I don't know. MS. GUY: Yeah. February 25, 2021 Page 71 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. CURLEY: This is shady. MS. ELROD: Well, you said the original permit for the garage had a bedroom and a bath in it. MS. GUY: It was for a -- yeah, a garage apartment, but it did not include in -- the plans were all reviewed by the building official from the original permits, the only permits that were on file for that detached structure, Building 2, and there was clearly revisions made. I also just uploaded -- because the new permit they applied for has the new building plans from an engineer. And I have that in the case file, and you can clearly see where they've labeled all the new changes. But they're not applying for that. They're just applying to do the repairs again. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And the Building Department said that's not going to work? MS. GUY: Well, it's under review. You know, I'm not at liberty to say that it's not going to work, but I feel 99.9 percent it's going to be the same issue that he had before. He applied for plumbing and electrical, not for alterations made to the building. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Was there a Stop Work Order issued on this? MS. GUY: Absolutely, yeah. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is it in effect right now? MS. GUY: Yes, there's no work to be done. Yeah, he stopped all work back there. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So our job, to begin with, is to find out whether a violation exists. MS. CURLEY: I make a motion a violation exists. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second that a violation exists. All those in favor? February 25, 2021 Page 72 MS. ELROD: Aye. MS. CURLEY: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: (No verbal response.) MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. BLANCO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Okay. Next. Do you have a suggestion for us, Paula? MS. GUY: I do. So the recommendation is that the Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of 59.28 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by obtaining all required county building permits or demolition permit, inspections, and certificate of completion/occupancy to either keep the unpermitted alteration/renovations to a detached garage structure or restore to the permitted state within blank days of this hearing, or a fine of blank per day will be imposed until the violation is abated. The respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriff's Office to enforce the provisions of this order, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is the building secure? MS. GUY: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Anybody want to try to fill in the blanks? MR. LEFEBVRE: I make a motion that the operational costs in February 25, 2021 Page 73 the amount of 59.28 be paid within 30 days and they have 90 days to abate the issue, or a $200-a-day fine will be imposed. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. BLANCO: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. Any discussion on the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hearing none, all those in favor? MS. ELROD: Aye. MS. CURLEY: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. BLANCO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Thank you, Paula. MS. GUY: Thank you for your time. MS. BUCHILLON: Next case, under hearings, No. 7, CEPM20200011328, Sylvia E Newton. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. FORD: Yes, I do. Good morning. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning, Art. MR. FORD: For the record, Arthur Ford, Collier County Code Enforcement. This is in reference to Case No. CEPM20200011328 dealing with the violations of Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, Chapter 22, building and building regulations, Article VI, property maintenance code, Section 22-231(12)(n) as in November. February 25, 2021 Page 74 The damaged dock in the rear of the property on the canal located at 496 Willet Avenue, Naples, Florida, 34108; Folio 27586280000. Service was given on December 10th, 2020. On October 10th, 2020, Code Enforcement received a complaint of a damaged dock behind 496 Willet Avenue. I made a site inspection. I photographed the damaged dock from behind the property along Vanderbilt Drive. On December 10th, Building Official Jay Walsh reviewed the case and photos and determined that a violation exists and permits are required to repair, replace, or remove the dock. I attempted to contact the respondent. She returned my initial call leaving a message for me to contact her. I left two messages on her voicemail to contact me, and no response to either. To date, the violation remains. There are no permits on file to repair, replace, or remove the dock, and the dock is in its current state as it was when I took the photos. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. A couple of quickies. Let the record show the respondent is not present. Helen, you want to let us know the notification. MS. BUCHILLON: Respondent was notified regular mail and certified on February 4th, 2021. It was also posted at the property and courthouse February 5th, 2021. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Art, do you have some photos for us? MR. FORD: Yes. I'd like to -- I took one photo December 10th, 2020, and I have the violation determination from J. Walsh. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Could we get a motion from the Board to accept the evidence. MS. ELROD: Motion to accept the evidence. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. February 25, 2021 Page 75 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and second. All those in favor? MS. ELROD: Aye. MS. CURLEY: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: (No verbal response.) MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. BLANCO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Throw them up. That does look like that dock is not very sturdy unless you're a duck. MR. FORD: Not even if you're a duck. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You have the determination from -- this is all over from the Palm River area? No, this is off of Vanderbilt. MR. FORD: Correct. Naples Park area. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So anybody like to make a motion that a violation exists? MS. ELROD: I'll make a motion the violation exists. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second a violation exists. All those in favor? MS. ELROD: Aye. MS. CURLEY: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: (No verbal response.) MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. BLANCO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. February 25, 2021 Page 76 You have a suggestion for us, Art? MR. FORD: Yes, I do. The Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of $59.28 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by: Number 1, must obtain/acquire Collier County permits through inspection and certificate of completion/occupancy to repair, replace, or remove the damaged dock within blank days of this hearing, or a fine of blank dollars will be imposed for each day that the violation continues. The respondent must notify a code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistanc e of the Collier County Sheriff's Office to enforce the provisions of this order. All costs of the abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Anybody want to try filling in the blanks? MR. LEFEBVRE: I will. Operational costs in the amount of 59.28 to be paid within 30 days. We'll have 120 days to abate the issue, or $150-a-day fine will be imposed. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a motion. Do we have a second? MS. ELROD: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor? MS. ELROD: Aye. MS. CURLEY: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: (No verbal response.) MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. BLANCO: Aye. February 25, 2021 Page 77 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Thank you, Art. MS. BUCHILLON: Next case, under motion for imposition of fines, No. 4, CESD20180014394, Daniel R. Blake and Sally Sue Blake. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. MUCHA: I do. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let the record show the respondents are not present. MS. BUCHILLON: Respondent was notified certified mail and regular mail on February 4th, 2021. It was also posted at the property and courthouse on February 4th, 2021. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Joe, take it away. MR. MUCHA: For the record, Joe Mucha, Supervisor, Collier County Code Enforcement. This is dealing with a violation of Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). Violation location was 271 Sugarloaf Lane, Naples; Folio No. 81626360004. Description of the violation was occupying a mobile home without first completing all inspections and receiving the certificate of completion and/or occupancy. Past orders: On February 28th, 2019, the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached order of the Board, OR5607, Page 534, for more information. Violation has been abated as of January 7th, 2021. Fines and costs to date are as follows: Fines have accrued at a February 25, 2021 Page 78 rate of $50 per day from the period of June 29th, 2019, to January 7th, 2021, for 559 days, for a total fine amount of $27,950. Previously assessed operational costs of $59.49 have been paid, operational costs for today's hearing is $59.42, for a total fine amount of $28,009.42. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is there any reason why this thing -- MR. MUCHA: I don't know if you remember, this is a gentleman they were having a real difficult time with the elevation certificate. I mean, the permit itself was inspected and passed all the inspections. It was just that one condition, and they just had a very difficult time. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I do remember the elevation certificate. MS. CURLEY: Yeah. When was everything done outside of the elevation certificate? MR. MUCHA: The mobile home itself was done pretty much immediately. It was just waiting for the elevation certificate. And I don't know all the factors of why it was difficult, but they finally got it done. I think the gentleman submitted an email, too. MS. CURLEY: Did he? Did he say something that we might want to see to -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I know he was very unhappy when he was here. I'll be -- MR. MUCHA: He's an unhappy -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Camper. MS. CURLEY: Well, just because people are unhappy doesn't mean that, you know -- MR. MUCHA: No, no. I know. MS. CURLEY: I do see that we set his fine at $50, so I feel like there was a more compelling reason to help him along with some of the hardships that maybe occurred, and this date sounds like maybe February 25, 2021 Page 79 this was post Irma, and he was living in it but hadn't finished fixing it or something like that. And we just want to be mindful of that one. I'd just like to sort of know, like, when he had actually had it done, and then what -- I don't care what took so long with the survey, but I'd like to be a little bit more mindful on the fine. MS. ELROD: I'll make a motion to deny the county the imposition of fines. MR. BLANCO: I'll second that. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MS. ELROD: Aye. MS. CURLEY: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: (No verbal response.) MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. BLANCO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. MUCHA: Thank you. MS. BUCHILLON: Next case, No. 9, CESD20190004631, Louise Rios Centeno. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. DELIA: I do. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Another oldie but goodie back from November 27 -- 22nd, 2019. Okay. Let the record show the respondent is not present and, Helen, do your thing. MS. BUCHILLON: Respondent was notified regular mail and certified on February 5th, 2021. It was also posted at the property and courthouse February 4th, 2021. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. You want to read us -- February 25, 2021 Page 80 MR. DELIA: Sure. My name is Jack Delia, Collier County Code Enforcement. As of -- here is the violations: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a) and 10.02.06(B)(1)(e) and 10.02.06(B)(1)(e)(i). Location's 301 Fillmore Street, Naples, Florida; Folio 2934000006. Description: Additions/alterations to mobile home and added shed without obtaining required Collier County permits. Past orders: On November 22nd, 2019, the Code Enforcement Board issued a findings of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violations of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violations. See the attached orders of the Board, OR5703, Page 3303, for more information. On September 24th, 2020, the Code Enforcement Board granted a continuance. See the attached order of the Board, OR5874, Page 209, for more information. This violation has not been abated as of February 25th, 2021. Fines and costs to date are as follows: Fines have occurred [sic] at a rate of $200 per day for the period from March 22nd, 2020, to February 25th, 2021, 341 days, for a total fine amount, 68,200. Fines continue to occur [sic]. Previously assessed operational costs of 59.28 and 59.42 have been paid. Operational costs for today's hearing is 59.70. Total amount is $68,259.70. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Jack, have you been in contact with the respondent? MR. DELIA: I did drive past and tried to make an attempt, but nobody answered the door. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any other attempts to reach them? February 25, 2021 Page 81 MR. DELIA: There's been -- from the case there's been many attempts to reach this person, the individual. I did check CityView to see how the permit status was, and it was still in rejected status. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And this goes back to 2019? MR. DELIA: Correct. MS. CURLEY: His stipulation was signed on 11/22 of '19 for 120 days. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, it hasn't been abated, so... MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion to impose the fine. MS. CURLEY: I second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MS. ELROD: Aye. MS. CURLEY: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: (No verbal response.) MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. BLANCO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Jack, are you new? MR. DELIA: I am new, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I never would have guessed that. MR. DELIA: Yep. I'm stumbling in here. Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You did fine. MR. DELIA: Thank you. MS. BUCHILLON: Next case, No. 14, CESD20190009030, Katherine M. Johnson Trust. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. SHORT: I do. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Eric, this looks familiar. February 25, 2021 Page 82 MR. SHORT: It sure does. For the record, Supervisor Eric Short with Collier County Code Enforcement. Can we just put the notice on the record? And I'll read it in for you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. BUCHILLON: I'm sorry. Respondent was notified regular mail and certified February 5th, 2021. It was also posted at the property and courthouse February 4th, 2021. MR. SHORT: Okay. This is in regards to your past orders. On August 28th, 2020, the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violations. See the attached order of the Board in OR Book 5817, Page 3102, for more information. The violation has not been abated as of February 25th, 2021. Fines and costs to date are as follows: Fines have accrued at a rate of $150 per day for the period from December 27th, 2020, to February 25th, 2021, 61 days, for a total fine amount of $9,150. Those fines continue to accrue. Previously assessed operational costs of $59.28 have not been paid, and operational costs for today's hearing of $59.28, for a total amount of $9,268.56. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Is Katherine Johnson still with us? MR. SHORT: I don't believe so. The individual we've been dealing with is a Leslie Sabo. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: She represents the trust. MS. CURLEY: Remember, she was her -- like, a friend and healthcare nurse worker that was trying to work on the place because she was buying it. February 25, 2021 Page 83 MR. SHORT: This individual was not at a hearing previously. MS. CURLEY: Oh, wrong Bald Eagle Drive. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That was another one. MR. SHORT: Yeah. We have a few cases in that area. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I know. They went through there, and they checked all the windows and whatever. MR. SHORT: Right. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So you have contact with the person who's representing the trust lately? MR. SHORT: I have been in contact with the contractor. I was in contact with the individual until -- and, Jeff, I don't know if you can pull it up. There's a requirement that fire requires. It's basically a disclaimer saying that, hey, we'll approve your permit as long as you understand that we're not held responsible for -- MR. LETOURNEAU: Which one is it? MR. SHORT: In that email there is a -- MR. LETOURNEAU: The email. MR. SHORT: Yes, there's a template that -- basically, she's just got to sign this template. MR. LEFEBVRE: I can't open the template. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. CURLEY: She's not available to sign. MR. SHORT: That's not it there, Jeff. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I realize it's a trust. MR. LETOURNEAU: It won't let me -- MS. CURLEY: But it's not been abated, so we have an issue here. MR. SHORT: Anyway, she refuses to sign this. She's afraid if she sells the condo later on, she'll be liable. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, this is worse, though. MR. SHORT: Right. It's a fire district requirement to -- February 25, 2021 Page 84 basically saying there's no liability. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I think our hands -- MR. SHORT: We know you're above the 20-foot height, something along those lines. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Our hands are tied on this. Not only has the violation not been abated, none of the previously assessed operational costs have been paid, so I think -- MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion to impose. MS. CURLEY: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MS. ELROD: Aye. MS. CURLEY: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: (No verbal response.) MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. BLANCO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Thank you, Eric. MR. SHORT: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We're locked in? MR. BLANCO: Sorry, guys. MS. CURLEY: Danny hit the panic button. MR. BLANCO: The lockdown one. MR. LETOURNEAU: We've got to be out of here before 1:00. MR. BLANCO: I know, right. MR. LEFEBVRE: It's all friendly here. MS. CURLEY: Uber Eats can, like -- can drone our lunch in maybe. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: What's that button? I want to know February 25, 2021 Page 85 where it is. MR. BLANCO: The one right here. MS. ELROD: You're back in alternate. Sit in that chair. MR. LEFEBVRE: You're demoted. MR. BLANCO: They're really serious with lockdown. Like, actual lockdown. MS. CURLEY: Danny. Is this on TV? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And they gave the button -- I think McDaniel sits over there, doesn't he? MR. BLANCO: Yes. MR. WHITE: You all have one. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: What? MR. WHITE: You all have one. MS. CURLEY: I know. It's right here. MR. WHITE: No, no, no. MR. LEFEBVRE: He has two. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is it the green button? MS. CURLEY: The panic button. Right here. MR. LEFEBVRE: He has a lockdown and a panic button. MS. CURLEY: What, did your chair hit it? MR. BLANCO: My knee. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Oh, it's not neasles (phonetic). Okay. Old joke. MR. LEFEBVRE: Let's move on. MS. BUCHILLON: Next case, No. 15, CESD20200002795, Robert J. Fiorillo Living Trust. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. MUCHA: I do. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let the record show the respondent is not present. Helen. MS. BUCHILLON: Respondent was notified certified and February 25, 2021 Page 86 regular mail February 5th, 2021. It was also posted at the property and courthouse February 4th, 2021. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Joe. MR. MUCHA: For the record, Joe Mucha, Supervisor, Collier County Code Enforcement. This is dealing with a violation -- violations of the Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Sections 10.02.06(B)(1)(a) and 10.02.06(B)(1)(e)(i). Violation location is 1392 Henderson Creek Drive, Naples; Folio 725200004. Description of the violation is an exterior screen porch removed without a demolition permit. Past orders: On September 24th, 2020, the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact, conclusion of law and order. Respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached order of the Board, OR5854, Page 411, for more information. Violation has been abated as of December 10th, 2020. Fines and costs to date are as follows: Fines have accrued at a rate of $100 per day from the period November 24th, 2020, to December 10th, 2020, for 17 days, for a total fine amount of $1,700. Previously assessed operational costs of $59.28 have been paid, operational costs for today's hearing is $59.42, for a total fine amount of $1,759.42. And I believe the owner submitted a request via email. MS. CURLEY: Could we see that? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. ELROD: I'll make a motion to deny the county the imposition of fine. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have a second? February 25, 2021 Page 87 MS. CURLEY: I'll second. Could we also include the hearing costs for today -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. CURLEY: -- to be not included? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and second. All those in favor? MS. ELROD: Aye. MS. CURLEY: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: (No verbal response.) MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. BLANCO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. MR. MUCHA: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I have a question on demolition permits. If they tore it down and you want to come into compliance, what do you do; build it back? MS. CURLEY: It's a revenue source. MR. LETOURNEAU: No. You pull the permit and have an inspector come out there to verify that it's not there. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. LETOURNEAU: Even though we knew it wasn't there in the beginning, but... CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. I just -- for future reference. MR. MUCHA: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, Helen. MS. BUCHILLON: Next case, No. 17, CESD20170016916, Neysis Rodriguez. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. McGONAGLE: I do. February 25, 2021 Page 88 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let the record show the respondent is not present. MS. BUCHILLON: Respondent was notified certified and regular mail February 4th, 2021. It was also posted at the property and courthouse February 4th, 2021. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Michele. MS. McGONAGLE: For the record, Investigator Michele McGonagle, Collier County Code Enforcement. This is in regards to violation of Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Sections 10.02.06(B)(1)(a), 10.06 -- I'm sorry -- 10.02.06(B)(1)(e), 10.02.06(B)(1)(e)(i), and 1.04.01(a). Location: 1680 Randall Boulevard, Naples, Florida; Folio 37861480007. Description: Unpermitted structures on the property and expired Pool Permit No. 930007170. Past orders: On May 24th, 2018, the Code Enforcement Board issued a findings of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached order of the Board, OR5519, Page 3608, for more information. On August 23rd, 2018, Code Enforcement Board granted a continuance. See the attached order of the Board, OR5549, Page 952, for more information. On March 28th, 2019, the Code Enforcement Board granted a continuance. See the attached order of the Board, OR5618, Page 1664, for more information. The violation has not been abated as of February 25th, 2021 -- yeah, 2021. Fines and costs to date are as follows: Fines have accrued at a rate of $250 per day for the period from August 23rd, 2018, to February 25, 2021 Page 89 February 25th, 2021, 918 days, for a total fine amount of $229,500. Fines continue to accrue. Previously assessed operational costs of $59.70 have been paid. Operational costs for today's hearing: $59.63. Total amount: $229,559.63. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Michele, have you been in contact with the respondent at all? MS. McGONAGLE: No. I have left notes at their door. I have attempted contact with phone, and I've gotten no response from them. MS. CURLEY: Do you think it's in foreclosure? MS. McGONAGLE: No. MR. LEFEBVRE: Question. The last time -- MS. CURLEY: I know. MR. LEFEBVRE: -- they were in front of us was March 28th, we gave a 30-day continuance. If there's been no contact in that period, or since then, but did the case -- why did it take now to have this case come in front of us? MS. McGONAGLE: There had been some contact with them right after that hearing, and there were a number of times where the case was initially scheduled for hearings through Code Enforcement but then because they were making efforts toward compliance, those cases were withdrawn before they ever came in front of the Board. MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay. MS. McGONAGLE: The last one was August 29th of 2019, and there's not been any contact from there. In that time frame, there were a couple of changes with area investigators, so this is one of those that just kind of got -- I was doing some research and realized that the case had never been imposed, so that's why we're here. MS. CURLEY: How about, anyone living there? MS. McGONAGLE: Yes. MS. CURLEY: And is the pool safe, fenced or whatever it need February 25, 2021 Page 90 be? MS. McGONAGLE: There is no screen enclosure for the pool now. There was a screen enclosure permit that had also expired, but there is a fence around the property. It's a white vinyl fence. It goes around the entire property. MR. LEFEBVRE: So that acts as a pool barrier? MS. McGONAGLE: Yes. MS. CURLEY: Even though it's not permitted. MS. McGONAGLE: The pool's not. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The unpermitted structures are? MS. McGONAGLE: There's numerous structures on the property. I have not been on the property because I inherited this case. From pictures of the property, there was a shed that they did get permitted but -- and all inspections have been completed, but it will not receive its CO until the other structures on the property that are unpermitted have been permitted. There's -- there are numerous outbuildings on the property, and they've not been addressed. MS. CURLEY: Was this, like, a neighbor complaint back in 2017? MS. McGONAGLE: Honestly, I can't tell you. MS. CURLEY: This seems like -- what do you do with this, Jeff? I mean, we can impose the fines, but what does the county do with this thing? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That becomes a county -- until you get elected, we'll let them decide. MS. CURLEY: But if it's in disrepair -- MR. LETOURNEAU: At this point, the county's not going to do anything. We're just going to, you know, hopefully get the imposition and lien the property and, you know, keep trying to contact this person and letting them know what the situation is, and hopefully they'll do something. February 25, 2021 Page 91 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Anybody want to make a motion as to -- MS. CURLEY: Motion to impose the fines. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a motion. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And A second. All those in favor? MS. ELROD: Aye. MS. CURLEY: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: (No verbal response.) MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. BLANCO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Thank you, Paula -- thank you, Michele. MS. McGONAGLE: You're welcome. MS. BUCHILLON: And the last case, No. 18, CESD20190006958, Tara Crete. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. SHORT: I do. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, Eric. Give us a shout. Let the respondent -- let the record show respondent is not present. And, Helen? MS. BUCHILLON: Respondent was notified certified and regular mail February 4th, 2021, and it was also posted at the property and courthouse February 4th, 2021. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. SHORT: For the record, Supervisor Eric Short with Collier County Code Enforcement. This is in regards to your past orders on November 22nd, 2019. The Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact, conclusion of February 25, 2021 Page 92 law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violations. See the attached order of the Board, OR Book 5703, Page 3281, for more information. The violation has been abated as of February 11th, 2021. Fines and costs to date are as follows: Fines have accrued at a rate of $200 per day for the period from February 21st, 2020, to February 11th, 2021, 357 days, for a total fine amount of $71,400. Previously assessed operational costs of $59.42 have been paid, operational costs for today's hearing is $59.35, for a total amount of $71,459.35. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. SHORT: Mr. Chair, I have been in contact with the contractor that was working on this case. I attempted several times to meet -- or to get in contact with Ms. Crete. I know her voicemail is full, and she's a realtor with Premier Realty but, unfortunately, I haven't been able to get in touch with her. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You know how those realtors are. MR. LEFEBVRE: Yeah, no kidding. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Well, I mean, all this some cabinets, basically. MS. CURLEY: In a condominium. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah. So -- MS. ELROD: I'll make a motion to deny the county the imposition of fines. MS. CURLEY: No. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Don't say no. That's -- that's the motion. Do we have a second on that motion? MR. LEFEBVRE: She's not asking for any reduction or anything? MR. SHORT: Unfortunately, I haven't been able to get in touch February 25, 2021 Page 93 with her. MR. BLANCO: I'll second that motion. MS. CURLEY: So I'd like to have discussion, because we sort of do have, like, a thing just for somebody to ask for it. I mean, the county's imposing the fines. She's been notified of this. She put this toilet in. She did all these things. We shouldn't relieve her of -- MR. LEFEBVRE: I can't read someone's mind. I don't know what they want. MS. CURLEY: Yeah, I can't either. MS. ELROD: They paid a contractor, and they remediated it, so they have financial investment in fixing it. MS. CURLEY: She signed an agreement on November 20th, 2019, that she would have it done and then she would notify us, and that was a year and three months ago. MR. LEFEBVRE: Let's vote. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let me just -- let me just remind the Board that fines are not imposed and not imposed [sic]. They can be a particular number that's picked out. MS. CURLEY: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So I just wanted to remind the Board that. But in the meantime, we have a motion, and we have a second. MS. ELROD: And I'd like to remind the Board that we are a compliance board and not a revenue stream. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah. Well, okay. All those in favor? MS. ELROD: Aye. MR. BLANCO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? MS. CURLEY: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. February 25, 2021 Page 94 MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MS. CURLEY: Would you be up for amending your motion? MS. ELROD: Nope. MS. CURLEY: I'll make a motion to impose $1,000 -- to reduce the county's costs -- requests for fine to $1,000 adding the $59.35 as operational costs. So the total fine is $1,059.35. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. SHORT: Mr. Chair, before you vote, may I -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. MR. SHORT: This respondent was not -- did not make the alterations. There was a good effort there, a good-faith effort. The county would have no objection to the first motion, but I just want to put that -- MR. LETOURNEAU: No, we have no objection to the second motion either. Sorry. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I just wanted to hear what you had to say. MR. SHORT: All right. That's it. MS. CURLEY: A well-informed owner knows. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. CURLEY: We have a motion and a second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MS. CURLEY: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So it's three ayes. Nays? MS. ELROD: Aye. February 25, 2021 Page 95 MR. BLANCO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And two nos. So it passes. MR. SHORT: Thank you. MS. CURLEY: And that's the end of that. MR. LEFEBVRE: Just a couple questions regarding these -- the foreclosure form that's here. There's several that are not homesteaded that have not been paid. Any idea of, I mean, what the next step is? Do these just sit out there, or they're going to start -- MS. CURLEY: Well, it says foreclosure or collection agency, so they can send it to collections. MR. LEFEBVRE: Is that what they're -- okay. MS. CURLEY: The last sentence says, forward them to the attorney's office for a foreclosure or collection. MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay. MR. LETOURNEAU: Yeah. I honestly can't speak for what the County Attorney is actually going to do with this at this point. MR. LEFEBVRE: All right. Because some of them are big -- you know, large numbers. One's -- we -- no fines were imposed for one, and there's a $59.21 operational costs that was not paid, so... MS. CURLEY: We don't have any say over this; this is just FYI, right? MR. LEFEBVRE: That's all it is. MR. LETOURNEAU: Yeah, exactly. And it's something that code can't -- we have to forward it on to the powers that be. MR. LEFEBVRE: Yeah. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Well, having no more business, we are -- MS. CURLEY: We don't need to make a motion on this? MR. LEFEBVRE: That was the consent agenda. MS. CURLEY: Okay. I beg your pardon. MS. ELROD: See, the 59.21 was the guy had died, and we February 25, 2021 didn't remove the operational costs. MS. CURLEY: Yeah, that's what made me think -- ******* There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 11 :48 a.m. C ENFORCEMENT BOARD R ERT K AN, CHAIRMAN These minutes approved by the Board on , as presented or as corrected TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF FORT MYERS COURT REPORTING BY TERRI LEWIS, FPR, COURT REPORTER AND NOTARY PUBLIC. Page 96