Loading...
CLB Minutes 04/21/2021 April 21, 2021 MINUTES OF THE COLLIER COUNTY CONTRACTORS'LICENSING BOARD MEETING April 21, 2021 Naples, Florida LET IT BE REMEMBERED that the Collier County Contractors'Licensing Board, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 AM in REGULAR SESSION in the Administrative Building "F", 3rd Floor, Collier County Government Complex, Naples, Florida, with the following Members present: Chairman: Matthew H. Nolton, Jr. Vice Chairman: Terry Jerulle Members: Richard E. Joslin, Jr. Patrick G. White Todd Allen Kyle E. Lantz Joseph M. Coleman (arrived at 9:30 am) Robert P. Meister III (fit) e1/4K,Tr-3ed ALSO PRESENT: Kevin Noe11, Esq. —Attorney for the Contractors'Licensing Board Timothy Crofts—Contracting License Supervisor Colleen Kerins—Assistant County Attorney Michelle Ramkissoon—Operations Supervisor, Contractors' Licensing Office Michael Bogert—Collier County License Compliance Officer James Reynolds—Collier County License Compliance Officer -1- April 21, 2021 Any person who decides to appeal a decision of this Board will need a record of the proceedings and may need to ensure that a verbatim record of said proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which any Appeal is to be made. 1. ROLL CALL: Matthew Nolton, Board Chair, opened the meeting at 9:00 AM. Roll Call was taken; six (6) members were present in the BCC Chambers. • Joseph M. Coleman—Late Arrival at 9:30 AM A quorum was established at Roll Call; six (6)voting members were present at start of meeting. 2. ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS: None. 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Mr. White moved to approve the agenda; Mr. Lantz offered a second in support of the motion. Carried unanimously 6-0. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: A. MARCH 17, 2021 Patrick White moved to approve the Minutes of the March 17, 2021 meeting. Richard Joslin offered a second in support of the motion with one exception of inserting Mr. Coleman correct first name in one area. Carried unanimously 5-0 (Chairman Nolton abstained). Minutes were approved as amended. 5. PUBLIC COMMENTS: A. (None) 6. DISCUSSION: A. TESTING AGENCIES— SPANISH REVIEW Timothy Crofts, Contractors Licensing Supervisor, brought up how the County's two (2) of the three (3) testing agencies are accommodating those Spanish speaking individuals taking the most requested licensing exams by offering them translated into both English and Spanish. They allow the use of a Spanish translation dictionary is additional translation is needed. Mr. Crotts further explained while some of the lesser requested licensing exams are yet to be translated, the testing agencies can provide a translated exam to the examinee with one (1)to two (2)weeks'notice. Mr. Crofts also addressed Mr. Joslin's prior query about the reference materials being available in Spanish. Mr. Crofts again explained how these two (2) agencies will provide and allow the use of a Spanish translation dictionary during testing and extend the exam time to accommodate its use. -2- April 21, 2021 Additionally, Mr. Crotts explained that these agencies will also review the exam with those Spanish and English speaking individuals to explain where they erred on the exam so they can study/prepare for the next exam. 7. REPORTS: A. CITATION REPORT Timothy Crofts reported the numbers of issued citations and unpaid percentages for 2019, 2020 and the first(1st) month of 2021. In 2019,there were 241 total citations issued with 41% unpaid; In 2020 (as affected by COVID-19) there were 149 total citations issued with 35.8% unpaid; and in January 2021, there were 52 citations issued with 30.4%unpaid. Prior to 2021, if an individual is issued a citation, they needed to come into the office and pay the citation in person. In 2021, if an individual is issued a citation and the County has that individual's email, the County will email the individual a payment slip so they can pay it on- line if they so wish. The County believes providing this option of payment explains the reduction in percentage of unpaid citations for this year. According to the County's current ordinance, an individual has 45 days to pay a citation; if they fail to do so,the County will place a lien on the individual which will stay until the fine gets paid. Matthew Nolton queried Mr. Crofts about placement of a lien preventing the pulling of a permit. Mr. Crofts explained most placed liens are on unlicensed individuals who would not be pulling permits. Terry Jerulle queried about notification of lien and Michelle Ramkissoon, Operations Supervisor, Contractors' Licensing Office, responded inaudibly off camera. Patrick G. White reiterated Ms. Ramkissoon`s inaudible response by stating notice of the lien is mailed out via postal service, fifty (50) days (Please note that it should be 15 days—per TC) is afforded for payment, and if not paid, is recorded by the Collier County Clerk's office. Mr. White further queried Mr. Crotts if there is any subsequent action, like foreclosure on the lien, if the lien remains unpaid for more than a year. Mr. Crofts responded that there is currently no subsequent action like foreclosure on the lien if unpaid for more than a year. Given Mr. Crofts response, Mr. White suggested tracking liens not paid post recording for possible foreclosure on those remaining unpaid after a year as this information would be of interest to the Board. Mr. Crofts replied in the last few months liens have been being paid due to the lienee wanting to either get licensed or sell tangible property. Mr. Jerulle then opined the goal was to get people in compliance and licensed, Mr. White concurred, and Mr. Crotts explained under current ordinance if a$1000 fine for being unlicensed is issued, one can come in -3- April 21, 2021 within forty-five (45) days to get the application and testing done and have the fine reduced to $300. Mr. Crofts further concurred with Mr. Jerulle regarding the goal is to get people in compliance, not just fining them. Mr. White further suggested publication of these fines be done by the County through the various available conveyances, i.e., recording, placement on and regular mention of these liens on County TV, as a means of diligent follow-up on the payment of this liens. Mr. Nolan further suggested a quarterly document listing outstanding liens for non-licensure be sent to various contracting organizations. 8. NEW BUSINESS: A. ORDERS OF THE BOARD Mr. Joslin offered a motion to have Board Chair sign Orders of the Board, Mr. Lantz offered a second in support of the motion. Carried unanimously 6-0. Note: The individuals who testified in the following cases under Item 8, "New Business,"were first sworn in by Meg Brown. B. MOSHE MIKE MOUSSERI—WAIVER OF EXAMS Mr. Nolton called Moshe Mike Mousseri to the podium and Mr. Mousseri did not comply. Mr. Crotts advised Mr. Mousseri was notified of the hearing. Mr.Nolton then put this particular matter on hold and moved on to the next hearing. Mr. Nolton again called Mr. Mousseri to the podium at 9:32 AM and Mr. Mousseri still not being present moved on to the next agenda item, #9 Old Business. Mr. Nolton again called Mr. Mousseri to the podium at 9:42 AM and Mr. Mousseri still not being present moved on to the next agenda item, #10 Public Hearings after a short 5-minute break. At approximately 10:30 AM, Mr. Nolton made mention to Mr. Crotts that Mr. Mousseri still had not appeared and queried Mr. Crotts what did he want to do about that. Mr. Crotts responded saying the matter would be carried over to the next meeting and he would contact Mr. Mousseri to determine why he did not show at this meeting. Mr. White made a motion to table 8.B. to the next meeting; Mr. Joslin offered a second in support of the motion. Carried unanimously 7-0. C. KENNETH W. VANDERPLOEG—WAIVER OF EXAMS Mr. Crotts stated Mr. Vanderploeg is asking for a waiver of exams for reinstatement of a swimming pool spa repair contracting license. Mr. Vanderploeg received his license from Collier County in September 2012 and was placed in cancellation/void status in 2013 due to non-renewal. -4- April 21, 2021 According to county ordinance, if an individual has taken an exam and his license has gone into void status, the exam for the license had to be taken within the three (3) previous years. Mr. Vanderploeg passed his licensing exam in 2002. A review of verification of experience submitted by Mr. Vanderploeg has shown that he has continued to work in the swimming pool/spa trade to this day by working with other licensed companies in this trade within Collier County. By doing this, it has allowed Mr. Vanderploeg to keep up with industry standards. Mr. Nolan queried Mr. Crofts if Mr. Vanderploeg was licensed in other counties. Mr. Crofts responded that Mr. Vanderploeg has been working with other licensed companies within Collier County, but he does have a license in another county. Mr. Vanderploeg explained to the Board that he went through a"tough time" due to a divorce, selling his house, and not having the money needed to renew his license. But things are "looking better"now and he is ready to clean pools on his own, so would need a license to do so. Mr. White queried Mr. Vanderploeg about what was entailed in the listing "Continuing Education Classes" on his application. Mr. Vanderploeg responded that he took on-line or in-person classes up to the time his license expired in order to keep his license renewable and has been working with other licensed contractors since then to maintain his knowledge of industry standards. Mr. White queried Mr. Vanderploeg if any of these employers required him to take continuing education classes and Mr. Vanderploeg responded they did not. Mr. Lantz queried Mr. Vanderploeg regarding keeping up with five (5) different employers' pool routes while running his own business and Mr. Vanderploeg responded that he worked part-time for these different employers. Mr. Lantz further queried Mr. Vanderploeg about his W-2 and"fill-in" status with these companies and Mr. Vanderploeg confirmed he was a W-2 employee of one company and part-time/fill-in with the others. Mr. Lantz further queried if Mr. Vanderploeg did "repair" or "service" for these companies and Mr. Vanderploeg explained he did both. Mr. Joslin recommended Mr. Vanderploeg start the fourteen(14)hours of continuing education classes required for his license and made a motion to give Mr. Vanderploeg a ninety (90) day probationary license after providing a successful completion of the necessary fourteen(14) hours of continuing education to Mr. Crofts. Failure to do so would result in a suspension of the license and the applicant coming back before the Board for a determination on total revocation of the license. However, if Mr. Vanderploeg successfully provides proof of continuing education, his license will be taken off probationary status and fully reinstated upon repayment of three (3)years of back fees. Mr. Jerulle offered a second in support of the motion. Carried unanimously 7-0. -5- April 21, 2021 9. OLD BUSINESS: A. MANUEL BLANCO DBA B & B INVESTMENT DEVELOPMENT CORP (CONTINUED FROM JANUARY CLB MEETING) Mr. Nolan stated Mr. Blanco was not present in the boardroom and explained this matter had come before the Board prior wherein it gave him a finding and t timeframe. Mr. Crofts concurred and expounded on Mr. Blanco's guilty finding saying he was given sixty (60) days to take care of the outstanding permit. The reason Mr. Blanco was brought before the Board this month was because of Mr. Blanco's failure to come forward despite having sixty (60)plus days to do so. The County has attempted to contact Mr. Blanco about status of the outstanding permit but has not been able to contact him. Michael Bogert, Collier County License Compliance Officer, further stated a simple review of the CityView database shows the permit status remains expired. The failed January 7, 2020 inspection has also not been resolved. Mr. Jerulle queried Mr. Bogert about contact with Mr. Blanco and Mr. Bogert responded he had contact with respondent on April 1st wherein the respondent stated the securing of an engineer, however the permit issue would not be resolved until after this meeting, more specifically the last week of April. Mr. Jerulle further queried Mr. Bogert if this was a county license and Mr. Bogert clarified that it was a state license. Mr. Crofts advised the Board of the County's Recommendation. The Recommendation is that Mr. Blanco's permit privileges in Collier County be suspended indefinitely; the Board issue a public reprimand to Mr. Blanco; and the County be ordered to submit the Finding of Facts to the CLB for action against Mr. Blanco's license as they see fit. Mr. Lantz queried Mr. Crofts about the roofing contractor on the job and Mr. Crofts responded the roofing contractor was out of business. Mr. Lantz further queried Mr. Crofts about any recourse Mr. Blanco had and Mr. Crofts explained he (Blanco) would have to come before the Board again to explain what he had done to clean up this item. Mr. White queried Mr. Crofts about having had some contact with the respondent if the revocation of the license was indefinite, what recourse would Mr. Blanco have for reinstatement. Mr. Crofts clarified Mr. Blanco's permitting privileges with the County were only suspended indefinitely, not revoked. Mr. Joslin then queried Mr. Bogert about the timing of the permit resolution being the last week in April and Mr. Bogert responded Mr. Blanco stated to him on April 1st about the securing of an undisclosed engineer at the end of March for an unspecified amount of compensation who said the documentation necessary to resolve the permit issue would not be available until the last week in April. -6- April21, 2021 Mr. Jerulle queried Mr. Crofts about the public reprimand including other counties and Mr. Crotts responded that it would not. Mr. Jerulle queried why didn't the County's reprimand include other counties and Mr. Crofts responded that the County could notify the surrounding counties if the Board wished it to do so. Mr. Bogert then advised the County's reprimand does go out via social media so there would be a larger audience that sees it as well. Mr. Coleman suggested adopting the notification of surrounded counties of the public reprimand as a universal disciplinary action be carried over to the next meeting and Mr. Nolan concurred. Mr. White queried Mr. Crofts about the timeframe in which to notify CLB and Mr. Crofts confirmed it as fifteen (15) days from the time of receipt of the Board's signed order. Mr. Lantz made a motion that the Board follow the County's recommendation of suspending permitting privileges, with the exception of the permit that gives rise to this violation, a public reprimand issued in Collier County with notification to Lee, Monroe, Charlotte, Henry, Miami-Dade and Broward Counties of the action, and a submittal to the State Contracting Licensing Board with recommendation for further action within 15 days of receipt of the signed order, and Mr. Joslin offered a second in support of the motion. Carried unanimously 7-0. BREAK FROM 9:45 AM- 9:50 AM 10. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. 2021-04—KENNETH DAVID CARTER DBA CARTER FENCE COMPANY, INC. Mr. Joslin stated his knowledge of and working with Kenneth Carter and expressed his recusal from this matter if necessary. Most of the Board also mentioned their personal knowledge of Kenneth Carter and/or past or present use of Carter Fence Company through professional associations. Kevin Noell, Esq., Contractors' Licensing Board Attorney, queried the Board in total if their decision here would inert any private gain or loss. The Board in total responded negatively, so Mr. Noell advised no recusals of any board member were required. Mr. Noell went on to mention the Chairman's Preamble and other documentation provided in the meeting packet were reviewed, agreed to, initialed and signed by the Respondent. James Reynolds, Collier County Licensing Investigator, issued his opening statement and submitted Preamble and packet as evidence. Mr. White moved that the Preamble and packet be accepted into evidence; Mr. Jerulle offered a second in support. Carried unanimously 7-0. -7- April 21, 2021 Mr. Carter on behalf of Carter Fence Company issued his opening statement apologizing for running this job without a permit. He stated it was not the company's intention to do so as they had applied for a permit prior to starting, but as the permitting process takes quite a while and the customer wanting to get his business secured, they did do some work prior to the permit being issued. Mr. Crofts pointed out to the Board that Mr. Reynolds did have the facts of the case if they would like to hear them. Mr. Nolton responded advising these statements were only opening and they would now move to the County to present their case. Mr. Reynolds established Mr. Carter as the owner of Carter Fence Company; alleged the company contracted for, received payment, and performed a scope of work for a fence installation at 3470 Bayshore Drive without a permit on March 3, 2021. Work commenced on March 4, 2021 and again on April 10, 2021 despite a Stop Work Order for commencing work where a permit is required. Permit was applied for on February 4, 2021 and has not been issued. Mr. Reynolds alleges Mr. Carter, on behalf of Carter Fence Company, is complicit of misconduct by a holder of a Collier County Certificate of Competency to proceed on any job without obtaining applicable permits or inspections from the City building and zoning division or the County building review and permitting department. Mr. White queried Mr. Carter about the permit status and what was going to happen to the customer; Mr. Carter responded that the permit has been rejected due to new codes in the Bayshore district requiring an aluminum fence instead of the chain link fence chosen by the customer. So, in order to secure the customer's property, the company put up another chain link fence (since the original fence was removed and no longer usable). Mr. Carter further explained not wanting to leave the property unsecured is the reason for the additional work being done. Mr. White then queried Mr. Carter about a resolution to the matter with the customer;to which Mr. Carter responded he had requested a meeting with the County and Code Enforcement to rectify the situation and come up with some sort of conclusion. Mr. White then clarified with Mr. Carter he is admitting guilt to the County's allegations and has no resolution with the customer at this time; to which Mr. Carter agreed. Mr. Jerulle queried Mr. Carter about removing the newly installed fence and Mr. Carter again responded they did not wish to leave the customer's property unsecured. Mr. Jerulle asserted that was not Mr. Carter's problem. Mr. White clarified with Mr. Carter that as he had removed the prior chain link fence in order to return the property to its original state, the company installed another chain link fence and will be giving the customer his money back; to which Mr. Carter agreed and re-asserted his company's intention to resolve the issues with the requested support from the County and Code Enforcement. Mr. Lantz queried Mr. Carter about the cost difference between an aluminum and -8- April 21, 2021 chain link fence to which Mr. Carter explained a job installing a chain link fence costs about $8,000 whereas installing an aluminum fence costs about $30,000. Mr. White motioned to close public hearing; Mr. Joslin offered a second in support of motion, and it was carried unanimously 7-0. Mr. White further motioned to find the respondent guilty of the charges alleged in the Administrative Company; Mr. Lantz offered a second in support of motion, and it was carried unanimously 7-0. Mr. Crofts offered in consideration of the company's numerous prior complaints of working without permits,the County's recommendation of a$2000 fine to be paid within ninety (90) days; if fine not paid within that timeframe, then license will be revoked. The County also recommends as a result of today's proceeding, the license be placed in probationary status for one (1) year; the permit regarding this incident be completed, with a Certificate of Completion issued, within ninety (90) days; if no Certificate of Completion issued within that timeframe, then the respondent will appear before the Board to explain why the job was not completed timely. The County will also work with the respondent to help him set up a meeting with the building official to help him understand what needs to be done as far as meeting the requirements of the permit currently in reject status. Mr. Joslin queried Mr. Crofts about how Mr. Carter was to close out the permit if the customer did not want the code required aluminum fence and Mr. Crotts responded Mr. Carter was to go to the chief building official to ask to be removed from the permit if that was the case. As far as the existing fence not meeting code, then Code Enforcement would get involved with the customer property owner. Mr. Jerulle queried Mr. Crofts about what would happen to the license probationary status after one (1)year and Mr. Crofts responded if there were no other issues involving commencing work without a permit or any other violations, then the probationary status would be removed. Mr. Jerulle clarified that if there were issues, then the respondent would come before the Board again and Mr. Crofts confirmed. Mr. Nolton asked Mr. Crofts what would happen in that instance and Mr. Crofts responded the County would investigate and if the complaint rose to the level of it being an alleged violation of an ordinance, then the respondent would appear before the Board on that alleged violation. Mr. Carter objected to the County's recommendations saying the fine was too high& the probationary period too long. Mr. White advised Mr. Carter that he could appeal the ruling should he choose to. Mr. White made the motion that the respondent be required to pay a $2,000 fine within ninety (90) days and if not paid within that timeframe, then the license would be revoked; probationary period of one (1) year and if no further violations brought to the -9- April 21, 2021 Board's attention during that timeframe, then the probation period would end; if there were any alleged violations,the Respondent would be brought back before the Board; as to permit currently in reject status, it is to resolved with a Certificate of Compliance or if the contractor removes himself from the permit within ninety (90) days, failure to do so will result in the respondent being brought back before the Board for further consideration. Mr. Lantz offered a second in support of the motion. Carried unanimously 7-0. Mr. Nolton proceeded to read the Findings of the Facts. Corn Mt55t Ofl c-5 11. NEXT MEETING DATE: WEDNESDAY, i�Y 19,2021 Commissioner's ' 'ambers, 3rd Floor-Administrative Building Government Center,3299 E. Tamiami Trail,Naples, FL Mr. White made a motion to adjourn; Mr. Lantz offered a second in support of the motion. Carried unanimously 7-0. There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned at 10:32 AM. COLLIER COUNTY CONTRACTORS'BOARD THEW NOLTON, Chairman The Minutes were approved by the Chairman or Vice Chairman of the Contractors'Licensing Board on MQAl , 2021, (check one) "as submitted" [ ] or "as amended" [ ✓ ]. -10-