CEB Minutes 06/23/2021June 23, 2021
Page 1
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
COLLIER COUNTY CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD
Naples, Florida
June 23, 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
Danny Blanco
Sue Curley
Kathleen Elrod
Lee Rubenstein
Chloe Bowman (Excused)
ALSO PRESENT:
Helen Buchillon, Code Enforcement
Elena Gonzalez, Code Enforcement Specialist
Cristina Perez, Code Enforcement
Patrick White, Attorney to the Board (attending remotely)
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
June 23, 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
Lee Rubenstein, Alternate
George Andreozzi, 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 Ord er 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 proceedings is
made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based.
Neither Collier County nor the Code Enforcement Board shall be responsible for providing this
record.
I. 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: CESD20180011460
OWNER: Carlos Valdes and Dulce Valdes
OFFICER: Joseph Mucha
VIOLATIONS: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended,
Sections 10.02.06(B)(1)(a) and 10.02.06(B)(1)(e). Addition of a
tiki hut without obtaining a Collier County building permit.
FOLIO NO: 26081640007
PROPERTY 191 Smallwood Dr, Chokoloskee, FL
ADDRESS:
B. STIPULATIONS (NON-CONTESTED CASES AND PRESENT AT THE HEARING)
C. EMERGENCY CASES
D. HEARINGS
1. CASE NO: CELU20190003159
OWNER: Roylan Reyes and Yaima Reyes
OFFICER: Delicia Pulse
VIOLATIONS: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended,
Sections 2.02.03 and 1.04.01(A). Vehicles parking on an
unimproved lot.
FOLIO NO: 3631976005
PROPERTY 5275 Golden Gate Pkwy, Naples, FL
ADDRESS:
2. CASE NO: CEVR20200005901
OWNER: FIELDS OF GREEN LAWN CARE INC
OFFICER: Bradley Holmes
VIOLATIONS: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended,
Section 3.05.01(B). An unimproved, estates zoned property
where more than 2 acres were cleared without any vegetation
removal permit or issued Collier County building permit.
FOLIO NO: 37923960009
PROPERTY 4792 11th Ave SW, Naples, FL
ADDRESS:
3. CASE NO: CESD20190014019
OWNER: Yunior Lopez Morell
OFFICER: Paula Guy
VIOLATIONS: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended,
Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). Observed alterations made with no
permits to rear of main residence and detached structure garage
in rear yard.
FOLIO NO: 37168800005
PROPERTY 275 1st St SW, Naples, FL
ADDRESS:
4. CASE NO: CESD20200010077
OWNER: Gisella C Burgos
OFFICER: William Shanahan
VIOLATIONS: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended,
Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). Garage finished without a permit.
FOLIO NO: 36370720000
PROPERTY 5425 26th Ave SW, Naples FL
ADDRESS:
5. CASE NO: CESD20200013730
OWNER: Peggy L Mills
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). Master
bath remodeled without the required permits.
FOLIO NO: 33400000363
PROPERTY 431 La Peninsula Blvd, Naples, FL
ADDRESS:
6. CASE NO: CESD20200012476
OWNER: FRENCH FAMILY TRUST
OFFICER: Luis Macedo
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 second story addition.
FOLIO NO: 436000001
PROPERTY 258 Rose Apple Ln, Naples, FL
ADDRESS:
7. CASE NO: CESD20210005432
OWNER: HIGHLAND PROP OF LEE AND COLLIER
OFFICER: Delicia Pulse
VIOLATIONS: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended,
Section 6.01.05. Soil Erosion and Sediment Control system (silt
fencing) has not been completely installed as required by the
approved site development plan, silt fencing installed is not
being used properly.
FOLIO NO: 407360000
PROPERTY 4886 Santa Barbara Blvd, 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: CESD20180006559
OWNER: Anthony J Baldoni and Dana S Baldoni
OFFICER: Delicia Pulse
VIOLATIONS: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended,
Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). Alterations/improvements made on
property and no Collier County building permits obtained.
FOLIO NO: 51978012988
PROPERTY 14483 Jekyll Island Ct, Naples, FL
ADDRESS:
2. CASE NO: CELU20180010455
OWNER: Michael J Tirpak and Patricia A Tirpak Living Trust
OFFICER: Eric Short
VIOLATIONS: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended,
Sections 1.04.01(A) and 2.02.03 and Collier County Code of
Laws and Ordinances, Chapter 110, Article II, Section 110-
31(a). Outdoor parking/storage of vehicles on unimproved
property without an approved site plan and parking vehicles in
the county right of way.
FOLIO NO: 70721280003
PROPERTY 3047 Terrace Ave, Naples, FL
ADDRESS:
3. 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:
4. 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:
5. CASE NO: CESD20200000511
OWNER: Guillermo Garcia and Sara Rojas De Garcia
OFFICER: William Marchand
VIOLATIONS: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended,
Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). A shed was observed on property
without Collier County Permit.
FOLIO NO: 25967801204
PROPERTY 14592 Apalachee St, Naples, FL
ADDRESS:
6. CASE NO: CESD20200000495
OWNER: Julio Aleman and Milagros Aleman
OFFICER: Joseph Mucha
VIOLATIONS: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended,
Sections 10.02.06(B)(1)(a) and 10.02.06(B)(1)(e). 1)
Improvement(s) including, but not limited to, aluminum
overhang and 2) Voided permit 2009040657.
FOLIO NO: 25967801385
PROPERTY 14607 Chickee Dr, Naples, FL
ADDRESS:
7. CASE NO: CESD20200006945
OWNER: Martha Cisneros
OFFICER: Thomas Pitura
VIOLATIONS: Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, Chapter 110
Article II, Section 110-31(a) and Collier County Land
Development Code 04-41, as amended, Sections
10.02.06(B)(1)(a) and 10.02.06(B)(1)(e)(i). 1) Mobile home,
shed, and storage container placed on the property without
permits, and 2) Unpermitted driveway access to the property
from Auto Ranch Road.
FOLIO NO: 769240004
PROPERTY 980 Auto Ranch Rd, Naples, FL
ADDRESS:
8. 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). An unpermitted storage structure,
under construction without a Collier County Building Permit.
FOLIO NO: 37340800001
PROPERTY 1035 31st St SW, Naples, FL
ADDRESS:
9. CASE NO: CELU20200010724
OWNER: Greg Carlisle c/o E James Kurnik
OFFICER: Ryan Cathey
VIOLATIONS: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended,
Section 2.02.03 and Collier County Code of Laws and
Ordinances, Chapter 54, Article VI, Section 54-181. Observed
a vacant residential lot being used to store litter/outside storage
consisting of but not limited to boats, trailers, RV’s, storage
containers, metals and plastics.
FOLIO NO: 38103000005
PROPERTY NO SITE ADDRESS
ADDRESS:
10. CASE NO: CESD20190005289
OWNER: RAAKEL BRAUN REVOCABLE 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). Interior
remodeling without required permits.
FOLIO NO: 48480640000
PROPERTY 1000 Manatee Rd Unit A304, 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
IX. REPORTS
X. COMMENTS
XI. ADJOURN
XII. NUISANCE ABATEMENT BOARD
A. HEARINGS
XIII. NEXT HEARING DATE - JULY 22, 2021 AT 9:00AM
XIV.ADJOURN
June 23, 2021
Page 2
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning, everybody. I'd like
to call the Code Enforcement Board to order.
Notice: Respondents may be limited to 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 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 this board will
need a record of the proceedings 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.
And with that, I'd like everybody to stand for the pledge.
(The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: This morning just -- we have our
alternate sitting in. He'll be a full voting member. I wanted to put
that on the record.
Lee, welcome to the Board.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Anything you say can and will be
used against you. No? Only kidding. So let's start out with the
minutes.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Roll call.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you want to do the roll call or
the minutes first? Either way?
MS. BUCHILLON: Roll call.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Go ahead.
MS. BUCHILLON: Good morning. For the record, Helen
June 23, 2021
Page 3
Buchillon, Code Enforcement.
Mr. Robert Kaufman?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Here.
MS. BUCHILLON: Mr. Lefebvre?
MR. LEFEBVRE: Here.
MS. BUCHILLON: Ms. Kathleen Elrod?
MS. ELROD: Here.
MS. BUCHILLON: Mr. Danny Blanco?
MR. BLANCO: Here.
MS. BUCHILLON: Chloe Bowman is excused.
Ms. Sue Curley?
MS. CURLEY: Here.
MS. BUCHILLON: Mr. Lee Rubenstein?
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Here.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MS. BUCHILLON: And we also have -- now we have a
vacancy for a full member, and it will be advertised.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And we want to thank
Herminio for the time he spent on the Board over the last, I don't
know how many years, six or seven years. We wish him well.
Okay. Anybody have any comments on the minutes from last
meeting?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hearing none, I'll take a motion
from the Board to accept the minutes.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion.
MS. ELROD: Second.
MR. BLANCO: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Motion, second. All those in favor?
MS. ELROD: Aye.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Aye.
June 23, 2021
Page 4
MS. CURLEY: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: (No verbal response.)
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
MR. BLANCO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously.
I'm guessing that we probably have some changes to the agenda.
MS. BUCHILLON: Yes, we do.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: What a guess.
MS. BUCHILLON: Okay. We have two stipulations. First
stipulation, under Hearings, No. 4, CESD20200010077, Gisella
Burgos.
Next stipulation, No. 7, CESD20210005432, Highlands
Properties of Lee and Collier County, Limited.
And we also have withdrawns.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MS. BUCHILLON: Under Public Hearings, D, Hearings, No. 2,
CEVR20200005901, Fields of Green Lawn Care, Inc., has been
withdrawn per Code Enforcement.
Number 5, CESD20200013730, Peggy L. Mills, has been
withdrawn due to compliance efforts.
Number 6, CESD20200012476, French Family Trust, has been
withdrawn due to compliance efforts.
Under Old Business, Motion for Imposition of Fines, No. 1,
CESD20180006559, Anthony J. Baldoni and Dana S. Baldoni, has
been withdrawn and will be rescheduled for next hearing.
And those are all the changes.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Could we get a motion from
the Board to --
MS. CURLEY: I have a -- I have a question about a change.
June 23, 2021
Page 5
May I ask now?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah. You can talk into the mic
so --
MS. CURLEY: Yeah. So No. 2 under hearings, you said it was
withdrawn because of Code Enforcement. What does that mean?
This was withdrawn last month, too. Last month you withdrew it
because it wanted to go to the County Attorney's Office and then it
would be back on for this month.
MS. PEREZ: Correct. For the record, Collier County Code
Enforcement Supervisor, Cristina Perez.
Last month it was withdrawn because they obtained legal
counsel. And we did have a meeting with staff this week, and there's
additional information that we need to research before being able to
bring that case forward.
MS. CURLEY: Okay. Well, it's been a year.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah, that is a problem.
MS. CURLEY: If there's additional information the county
needed to research, they should have done it a year ago.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I agree with you.
MS. CURLEY: Yeah. I mean, just because they -- just because
the property owner lawyered up, then we decided to get our ducks in
a row?
MS. PEREZ: Well, there's a site visit that's scheduled for next
Tuesday with the staff -- code staff, environmental staff, and the
property owner so that we can complete the information that's needed
to bring it forward.
MS. CURLEY: But last July in 2010 [sic] the property owner
couldn't -- you know, yeah.
MR. LEFEBVRE: I agree with you, Sue, but it's their
prerogative to withdraw it. So, unfortunately, there's not much we
can do.
June 23, 2021
Page 6
MS. CURLEY: No, I understand. I don't like it, but I
understand.
MS. ELROD: Motion to accept the changes.
MR. BLANCO: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and second. All
those in favor?
MS. ELROD: Aye.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: 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.
Going back to the previous case, Cristine, do you know who reported
that as a code violation?
MS. PEREZ: The No. 2 that we're discussing?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah.
MS. PEREZ: Yeah. There was a specific complaint on the
property, but this particular case was opened by staff.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So it might have been a
neighbor or somebody that reported it.
MS. PEREZ: Yeah. The original complaint was addressed, and
then this particular case was opened as a field observation by the
investigator.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Gerald.
MR. LEFEBVRE: I don't think that's relevant, but we'll hear the
case.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Whenever things happen, I'm
looking out for the public. So if somebody reports something, not
June 23, 2021
Page 7
this particular case, anything, and it just goes on and on and on, I can
understand the frustrations for the public, and that's my primary
concern, the public.
MS. CURLEY: That's what I was thinking. What if four of
those people came all the way from wherever this is located to, you
know, make a statement about it, if they were the complainant, and
then they find out that it's not here, that we've given this person the
luxury of another month?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: For those of us who watch all of the
meetings on TV, it just happened with the planning board this week,
as our eminent Terri could verify, okay.
Which brings us going forward to probably the first stipulation,
which would be No. 4.
MS. BUCHILLON: Actually the Motion for Extension of Time.
Okay. Number 1, CESD20180011460, Carlos Valdes and Dulce
Valdes.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Did they send a letter in that we
have in our package or not?
MR. LOMBARDO: Good morning, Mr. Chairman. We're here
on their behalf. My name is Zach Lombardo. This is Cameron
Woodward. And we have a presentation on this motion, and we've
conferred with staff in advance of this meeting.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
(The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
MR. MUCHA: I do.
MR. LOMBARDO: I do.
MR. WOODWARD: I do.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah. We now swear in attorneys
because -- you know...
MR. LOMBARDO: And I think it's a good call.
Okay. So we were before you some months ago and had just filed
June 23, 2021
Page 8
our right-of-way vacation application, which is something that
directly addresses this issue, and today we are coming before you
because we are still in negotiations with the county on that
application.
The way right-of-way applications work is that the
Transportation Department has to specifically agree to the proposal.
So we've made a proposal. Mr. Matt McLean in the Transportation
Department is the reviewing staff member, and we are awaiting the
county's decision -- the county staff's decision as to whether the
proposal will be sufficient.
Cameron, if you could show the aerial really quickly.
I can show you what's on the table at the moment and explain why
that would resolve the outstanding code enforcement issue.
This is the aerial of the north part of the property on Chokoloskee.
And what is interesting here is that the yellow triangle is the property
at issue for your violation. To the left of it you'll notice this skinny
strip. That's a county right-of-way. It's actually a two-lane road. It's
dirt at that point. And about a half a dozen houses, that's the only
way to get to those houses.
Now, it does connect on a road south and west of there, but
because -- between the triangle -- and then that's a cemetery right
there north of it-- that's only seven feet.
And so the county at the current moment has no ability to
connect South Lopez Lane to Smallwood Drive because they can't
put a roadway within seven feet. And so what's currently being
proposed is that our clients will transfer the north piece of that
triangle to the county in exchange for pieces of the parking lot which
is what's causing the code enforcement issue, because the chickee
hut, two of the poles are sitting in the county right-of-way.
And so -- and I know timing is a concern on this board.
So if you could show the next aerial.
June 23, 2021
Page 9
I wanted to bring this to put some context in all this. This is
1973 at that exact same spot. And this county right-of-way has been
used as a parking lot at this property since at least the '70s. And so
this is a long-standing issue that we are now very close to resolving
through negotiations with county staff.
And so my hope is that if we could have an additional three to
six months to come in and check in with our negotiations on county
staff to you-all, we can resolve not just this issue of are there two
poles in the county right-of-way, but is there a parking lot, and how
can we make sure that the only -- this is essentially the only piece of
commercial real estate on the entire island -- is able to be redeveloped
and hardened for storms because, more critically than this chickee
hut, if they were to pull a building permit to remodel this building
substantially, they wouldn't be able to build anything there because
the setbacks of this space are quite large and the building is zero
setback all the way across and has been since at least 1973. This is a
DOT aerial.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So your negotiations are going to
take how long?
MR. LOMBARDO: I don't know how long they're going to take
specifically. We have made the offer. We're waiting for county staff
to do a visit and confirm that all the measurements are there. As I
indicated to you-all last time, more concerning about Chokoloskee is
that a lot of the things aren't where the property lines say they are,
and so they're going to send surveyors down to make sure that, is it,
in fact, seven foot wide? What happens right there? Which, as I
discussed last time, is an incident of Chokoloskee, you know, being a
county hopper. This is the third county Chokoloskee has been a
member of.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So let me just -- quick reference.
So it's either going to be okayed by the county, in which case this
June 23, 2021
Page 10
case disappears --
MR. LOMBARDO: Well, I guess what I would say is, if it's
okayed by the county, it would be possible for them to come into
compliance with no adjustments to the property itself.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So that's A.
MR. LOMBARDO: A.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Or, B, you can't negotiate because
somebody doesn't agree.
MR. LOMBARDO: And then they need to come into
compliance.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And then we would hear this case at
that time.
MR. LOMBARDO: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So you're looking for some
additional time on this?
MR. LOMBARDO: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Three to six months, is that what
you said?
MR. LOMBARDO: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Gerald?
MR. LEFEBVRE: We've already heard the case.
MR. LOMBARDO: Well, then we're looking for additional
time for the -- I guess, the fee mitigation.
MS. CURLEY: I remember this, and we went right --
MR. LEFEBVRE: It was a restaurant.
MS. CURLEY: We went to the historical part of it, and because
it's Chokoloskee, and who knows what surveys -- you know,
techniques they were using when this was originally platted, if it was
platted --
MR. LOMBARDO: It was platted in the 1950s, but this wasn't
part of the plat.
June 23, 2021
Page 11
MS. CURLEY: I mean, this is --
MR. LEFEBVRE: This is a tiki hut at a restaurant, right?
MR. LOMBARDO: So what it is --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes.
MR. LOMBARDO: It's, unfortunately, not on the Google map
aerial that I show you. But they put a chickee hut next to a restaurant
so they could have more outdoor seating during all of the madness,
and -- but the front two poles are sitting, basically -- we're talking
about, like, a six-inch right into the right-of-way which would have
been -- to the extent it's a reasonable misunderstanding, they've been
using that parking lot forever, like centuries -- not centuries, decades.
MR. LEFEBVRE: I make a motion to continue this case for 180
days.
MS. CURLEY: I would even be okay with just giving them
enough time so they can sort it out, and the county's not --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well --
MS. CURLEY: I mean, I know it's been since February '19, but
the ladies came here, and they've just purchased the property, and we
get it. We don't want -- we want --
MR. LEFEBVRE: How much time were you thinking?
MR. LOMBARDO: One way to key it is we could key it to the
right-of-way. So there's an active right-of-way application which
is --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: If we do six months, as the motion
on the floor says, and after six months it's not resolved, we can do
this all again; part two.
MR. LOMBARDO: Okay. Sounds good to me.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. I second your motion.
Okay.
MS. CURLEY: Does the county agree with this?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you have anything to say,
June 23, 2021
Page 12
Cristine?
No. Joe?
MR. MUCHA: For the record, Joe Mucha, Collier County Code
Enforcement Supervisor. I know they've been actively working with
the county, and we have no objection.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Just for my own curiosity,
who filed the complaint on this?
MR. MUCHA: There's a long-standing feud between this
property and a neighboring property.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MS. CURLEY: Do you want to share the date of what you were
referencing, your paperwork that you said you'd filed for the zoning?
MR. LOMBARDO: Oh, just for the record. For the
right-of-way application, if you wanted to go look at what's been
filed, is PL20200001674, and I believe that property owner -- by the
way, Cameron, if you could flip back to the aerial, the current
aerial -- is a property on South Lopez Lane who would be massively
benefited by being able to connect South Lopez Lane to Smallwood
Drive. So we're trying to come up with a more global way to fix the
weirdness of this problem.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a motion and a
second. Any other discussion on the motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hearing none, all those in favor?
MS. ELROD: Aye.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Aye.
MS. CURLEY: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
MR. BLANCO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
June 23, 2021
Page 13
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously.
MR. LOMBARDO: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: See you in six months, or maybe
not.
MS. ELROD: Hopefully not.
MR. LOMBARDO: Maybe not.
MR. LEFEBVRE: There's fines accruing on this, correct?
MR. MUCHA: Yes, sir.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay. So we will see him again.
MS. BUCHILLON: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Unless they just want to pay fines
and, you know --
MS. BUCHILLON: Next item on the agenda, Stipulation,
No. 4, CESD20200010077, Gisella Burgos.
MR. SHANAHAN: Good morning.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning.
(The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
MR. SHANAHAN: I will.
For the record, Bill Shanahan, Collier County Code
Enforcement.
The stipulation reads: Therefore, it's 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 the
hearing;
Two, abate all violations by obtaining all required Collier
County building permits or demolition permit for the structure,
inspections, and certificate of completion or occupancy to permit the
garage conversion into a living space, or return the original -- to the
original permitted condition within 120 days of this hearing, or a fine
of $150 per day will be imposed until the violation is abated;
June 23, 2021
Page 14
Three, cease and desist use of the unpermitted garage conversion
and disconnect all unpermitted utilities until a valid permit,
inspections, and certificate of completion or occupancy has been
issued within three days of this hearing, or a fine of $150 will be
imposed until the violation is abated;
Four, respondent must notify Code Enforcement within 24 hours
of abatement of the violation and request the investigator perform a
site inspection to confirm compliance;
Five, that if the respondent fails to abate all the violations, 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: Take a breath.
MR. SHANAHAN: Yes, sir. It was a long one, yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So the respondent turned the garage
into living spacing?
MR. SHANAHAN: No, sir. Actually, it was -- the previous
owner did it without a permit and, unfortunately, buyer's remorse, the
current owner now has to get the permit for the garage conversion.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So since this was done by a prior
owner --
MR. SHANAHAN: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- they can do this by an affidavit,
correct?
MR. SHANAHAN: It depends on what the Building
Department says. I believe they can. But she's currently trying to get
the permit now. It hasn't been issued yet, though.
MS. CURLEY: Is anyone living in the garage?
MR. SHANAHAN: No, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And you're going to inspect
June 23, 2021
Page 15
that at some point in the future to make sure that the breakers have
been turned off, et cetera?
MR. SHANAHAN: Actually on Monday, yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MS. ELROD: Make a motion to accept the stipulation as
written.
MR. BLANCO: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second.
Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hearing none, all those in -- yes.
MS. CURLEY: No, I just couldn't read No. 2, but that's okay.
Don't worry about it.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor?
MS. ELROD: Aye.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: 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.
MR. SHANAHAN: Thank you.
MS. BUCHILLON: Next Stipulation, No. 7,
CESD20210005432, Highlands Properties of Lee and Collier County,
Limited.
(The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
MS. PULSE: I do.
MR. CADENHEAD: I do.
June 23, 2021
Page 16
THE COURT REPORTER: Your name?
MR. CADENHEAD: Bobby Cadenhead.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do you want to read the
stipulation into the record for us.
MS. PULSE: Yes, sir. Good morning. For the record, Dee
Pulse, Collier County Code Enforcement.
Therefore, it is agreed between the parties that the respondent
shall: No. 1, pay all operational costs in the amount of $59.35
incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing;
Number 2, abate all violations by installing the required silt
fence along the property lines as depicted on the approved Site
Development Plan, and obtaining Collier County engineer approval
within 30 days of this hearing, or a fine of $150 per day will be
imposed until the violation is abated;
Number 3, 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;
Number 4, 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. First question, is this
property -- you own this property?
MR. CADENHEAD: No. The Highlands Property of Lee and
Collier owns the property.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I don't -- and you signed the
stipulation?
MR. CADENHEAD: I have an affidavit from the general
partner of Highlands Lee to deal with the Board.
MS. CURLEY: Who's the owner; James Siesky, the registered
June 23, 2021
Page 17
agent?
MR. LEFEBVRE: No.
MS. PULSE: He's a register agent, but he's not the owner.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Mr. Cadenhead has been here before
regarding this property on other cases.
MS. CURLEY: He's signing a stipulation. A little different
than --
MS. PULSE: Do you have the affidavit? Can you put it on the
screen.
MR. LEFEBVRE: He's represented this group multiple times
on other properties, including this one.
MS. PULSE: This is a notarized affidavit.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: My eyes, actually, are not that
good.
MS. CURLEY: It's specific to this case.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MS. PULSE: Do you want me to read it?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: No.
MS. CURLEY: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: As long as Terri can read it, we're
okay.
MS. ELROD: I make a motion to accept the stipulation as
written.
MR. BLANCO: Second.
MS. CURLEY: So I just had a --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Go ahead.
MS. CURLEY: I had a question about -- this is a pretty quick --
we're seeing this case pretty quick. So I notice it's on a preservation
land. Is it a silt fence that's creating a pollution issue for this preserve
property?
MS. PULSE: No, it's not creating a pollution issue. There is an
June 23, 2021
Page 18
active site development permit, and it's just not installed correctly.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: This is the --
MS. CURLEY: Silt fence.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The silt fence. It has to be under
the ground that --
MS. PULSE: Correct, buried six inches.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And it's not?
MS. PULSE: It's not.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So you're going to --
MR. CADENHEAD: We're going to take care of everything.
MS. CURLEY: Thirty days is a long time in rainy season.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Well --
MS. CURLEY: It's meant to prevent erosion and runoff to --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Lee, do you have something you'd
like to say?
MR. RUBENSTEIN: There was a motion made, but there
wasn't a second.
MS. CURLEY: There was a second.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Oh, I'm sorry.
MS. CURLEY: And then we're having a discussion between us
on the motion.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Any other questions?
Comments?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hearing none, all those in favor?
MS. ELROD: Aye.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: (No verbal response.)
MS. CURLEY: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: (No verbal response.)
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
MR. BLANCO: Aye.
June 23, 2021
Page 19
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously.
MR. CADENHEAD: Thank you, sir.
MS. PULSE: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Helen, who's the next person
who is here?
MS. BUCHILLON: Under Hearings, No. 1,
CELU20190003159, Roylan Reyes and Yaima Reyes.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Which one?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Number 1 under hearings.
You look familiar. Weren't you just here?
MS. PULSE: Yeah.
MR. EVANS: May I start? Not yet.
THE COURT REPORTER: I need to swear you in.
(The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
MS. PULSE: I do.
MR. EVANS: I do.
MS. REYES: I do.
MR. REYES: I do.
MR. VANASSE: I do.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Can everybody state their name on
the microphone for us.
MR. EVANS: Josh Evans, J.R. Evans Engineering.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MS. REYES: Yaima Reyes, property owner.
MR. REYES: Roylan Reyes, property owner.
MR. VANASSE: Patrick Vanasse with RWA, land-use planner.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So you're up.
MS. PULSE: Okay. For the record, Dee Pulse, Collier County
Code Enforcement Investigator.
June 23, 2021
Page 20
This is in reference to Case No. CELU20190003159 dealing
with the code -- or with violation of the Collier County Land
Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 2.02.03 and Section
1.04.01.A. It's for vehicles parking on an unimproved lot.
It's located at 5275 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34116.
Folio is 36319760005.
Service was given on April 2nd, 2019.
So this case was opened for vehicles parking on unimproved lot.
Owners of the lot own the daycare located adjacent -- on the adjacent
property. The parking situation on unimproved lot is due to lack of
space for customer parking also.
Owners have begun the processes of improving the lot for
additional space for daycare operations. Many steps are needed for
this improvement. Owners have been working diligently with county
personnel as well as their personal engineering company.
As of June 22nd, 2021, the violation remains.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Was this violation reported by a
neighbor?
MS. PULSE: It was a field observation.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MS. CURLEY: Is this in the city, Golden Gate City?
MS. PULSE: Yes, right on Golden Gate Parkway.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you have any pictures for us?
MS. PULSE: Yes. I would like to now present case evidence in
the following exhibits: One photo taken by myself on August 27th,
2019, one photo taken on June 22nd, 2021, and the property appraiser
aerial for 2021 and the zoning map image of the property.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Have the respondents seen the
photos?
MS. PULSE: They've seen the photos, but they haven't seen the
aerial map or the zoning map.
June 23, 2021
Page 21
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do you want to show that to
them?
MS. PULSE: Sure.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. For the respondents, do you
have any objection to this being entered into evidence?
MR. EVANS: No, sir.
MR. REYES: No.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Can I get a motion from the
Board to accept the photos.
MS. ELROD: Motion to accept the photos.
MR. BLANCO: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor?
MS. ELROD: Aye.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: 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. Could you tell us the property -- that's -- they're all parked on
that parcel?
MS. PULSE: Yes, sir. When you see the aerial from the
Property Appraiser, you'll be able to see more clearly the boundary
lines.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Now, the violation is
parking on a property they don't own, A; B, they're parking on
property that's not proper, doesn't have rock or pavement, et cetera?
MS. PULSE: They --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So is that two violations or just
June 23, 2021
Page 22
one?
MS. PULSE: They own the property.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Right.
MS. PULSE: But it is a violation of land-use for parking on a --
or an unimproved lot.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MS. PULSE: You can't really do anything on an unimproved
lot.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And I understand from what
you said that this goes back to 2019?
MS. PULSE: Yes.
MS. CURLEY: Now, can they join the two lots and make it one
contiguous lot that the zoning would be appropriate for contiguous --
MS. PULSE: Well, they have been going through all the
planning that they have to accomplish. COVID slowed things down
as well, and there, was issues with the actual zoning of the property
and use as a daycare, actually, also, which the daycare's been there
for years. But the zoning had to update or get --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It's not zoned commercial?
MS. CURLEY: That zoning all along that street's weird. Each
lot is weird.
MS. PULSE: Yeah. And they also just completed a zoning
change, actually, and an overlay for the property. So they have had
to go through a lot of processes. They're very diligent to do
whatever. They wish they could just do it tomorrow and be done, but
they have to follow processes.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Sir?
MR. EVANS: Good morning.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Your turn.
MR. EVANS: Josh Evans, for the record. We were -- my firm,
J.R. Evans Engineering was immediately hired after they obtained the
June 23, 2021
Page 23
violation. And we had a pre-application meeting with the county.
That pre-application meeting determined that they needed to rezone
the property via a conditional use and then do a Site Development
Plan, because they've been in business since 1985. The building was
built back in the '70s, and it was really prior to a lot of Site
Development Plan standards that exist today.
So, unfortunately -- and I'm sure you guys have heard in other
hearings, when you do a Site Development Plan, you've got to, to the
extent possible, bring that entire site up to code, and that's an
extremely expensive process and infrastructure improvement project.
So that's led to things like needing to upgrade the pump station,
repaving the entire parking lot, adding buffers. You know, it's like
when I have clients come in and have this conversation, it hurts me to
tell them all the things they're going to have to do and spend money
on to get themselves just back into the same business they were in the
day before.
But with that being said, via the pre-application meeting, we'd
found out that there's a Golden Gate Overlay District that was being
modified, and that might fix the zoning for us, and a year-and-a-half,
two years went by because of COVID. We were waiting on that to
submit the Site Development Plan for the parking.
In order to move things along, we wanted to even advance our
schedule further while waiting on that and submitted a site
improvement plan for the pump station which led to us getting the
structure of the Site Development Plan put together.
Those dates were -- we submitted that in February 2017 -- I'm
sorry -- February 17th, 2020; second submittal on April 15th, 2020.
And then we got that approved. The pump station's being
constructed.
And then for -- now that the overlay has been approved -- it got
delayed almost a year because of COVID -- we immediately
June 23, 2021
Page 24
submitted the Site Development Plan for the parking, which includes
the whole property and brings it all together like you were
suggesting. It's one defined development with buffers and ADA
parking and all those things in this new Site Development Plan.
That was submitted earlier this year. We resubmitted last week.
We anticipate getting approval on that, you know, in the next 60 to
90 days. But there are some deviations that we needed to get into the
zoning because it didn't carry over from the overlay district, which is
going to require a hearing examiner, which is why Patrick Vanasse is
here. He's a planner. That process is going through currently, and
they anticipate a HEX with the Hearing Examiner in about four to
five months.
So everything's moving along fine. The Code Enforcement
group offered us a stipulation of six months, which would have been
great. I mean, we appreciated it. We're gracious of it. But we're
really going to need more than that, because it's going to take us six
months just to finish up all the entitlement and design work and
permitting, and then a small business trying to get a contractor to do
an asphalt parking lot for 10 parking spots is going to be a pretty
tedious task, and it's going to take some time.
So what I'm asking is -- the stipulation's great, but we would
request a year in order to get that done.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Can't you do some of the things in
parallel? If you -- if you're going to get someone to pave it, can't you
look for someone to pave it now so that when the time comes you
can --
MR. EVANS: We can, but no one's giving pricing for 60 days,
90 days out right now is part of the problem, because prices are
escalating so quickly. We can get a contractor lined up and probably
identify one, and I think we would definitely do that. Once we
submit -- once we get approval, and while we're waiting on the
June 23, 2021
Page 25
Hearing Examiner, I'm confident that we would be bidding the
project out.
MS. CURLEY: So the five-month hearing zoning meeting that
this gentleman's going to have is the county's calendar that you're
following?
MR. EVANS: Can you speak to the process with the Hearing
Examiner.
MS. CURLEY: I mean, it shouldn't take five months.
MR. VANASSE: Good morning. For the record, Patrick
Vanasse, RWA Engineering.
So right now we're going through the sufficiency review
component of the application. So the Golden Gate Overlay --
MS. CURLEY: I'm sorry. I just wanted to know is it your five
months that you need, or is it the county that can't schedule to see you
for five months?
MR. VANASSE: We're going to need five months. That's our
estimated time frame to get sufficiency and then to get scheduled and
heard in front of the Hearing Examiner. So hopefully it's a little
sooner, but four to five months is very likely.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Will this have to go in front of the BCC?
MR. VANASSE: No. It's just the HEX.
MS. CURLEY: Well, I'm for whatever you need to do to
accommodate a daycare center in Golden Gate City. And I know the
history of the zoning there from the late '70s. So I understand this is
not easy at all. So I would grant them whatever they want.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Well, we have to find a violation.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah. Anybody else want to speak
or -- do you want to speak?
MR. REYES: Yes.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. REYES: Okay. When you start talking about the case, you
June 23, 2021
Page 26
say if it's possible as far -- the property or put some gavel or
something. When the case was presented by the Code Enforcement,
we go to the office, and we talk to everybody there. And one of the
guys, one of the -- Renald Paul, we talked to him, and he say -- we
give him that option, you know. Asphalt a little bit or something or
put gravel or something. He said, it's no way we can give you a
permit to do that.
MS. CURLEY: He can't do it.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: No, I understand.
MR. REYES: All right. And we told him, okay. If we need to
do the Site Development Plan and do the permit, that's in the plan,
because we buy the building in 2017. Right away IRMA pass and
disappear everything. When that -- when that complaint coming, we
in the process of figuring out how to building everybody back from
Irma.
And we said, okay, we need to do that, we do it. And we hiring
Evans Engineering. But the process is too long.
After that, we figured it out, and we have that problem with zoning. I
don't know why, but these two lots is the only two lots all Golden
Gate is not commercial. I don't know what happened there, how they
figured it out, because that building is building for a daycare for
Roland Landy (phonetic). I don't know if you guys are familiar. He's
a guy here, one of the first in Collier County.
Was building commercial for a daycare from 1985. It's working
to daycare from 1985. I don't know why the property is still
residential. And we buy the next lot because we figured it out, we
have that problem with the parking lot. We have only nine parking
lot [sic]. And me and my wife decide, okay, we better buy that
property, and in the future we building the parking lot.
But, you know, it's coming, the complaint. Everything pushing
hard. And I said, okay, maybe that's the push we need to build the
June 23, 2021
Page 27
parking lot. And we start right away the process. But it's coming --
that happened in 2019.
We go to the meetings for the overlay on Golden Gate Parkway.
They said that take maybe one year, two years. We never know. I
said -- and if you do something now, the Site Development Plan, it's
coming, the overlay, we approve the overlay, everything need to be
on that new code. You better wait. That's what they told us. It's
coming the pandemia.
Supposed to be approved on March 19 -- last year, 2020, and
they cancel everything. And they approve in March this year. And
this right-of-way went partially -- it start working on the overlay, on
the deviation.
Yesterday we talked to Dee and Cristina, and we sign that
six-month agreement. But honest, everybody know six months is not
enough. They agree that. We agree that. That's why we come in
here and we decide to present the case because at least we need one
year.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MS. CURLEY: You could have built a new daycare in less
time.
MR. LEFEBVRE: I have a question.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Go ahead, Gerald.
MR. LEFEBVRE: If -- it appears that they're working
extremely diligently on this, and with the overlay and everything
issue -- approval of the overlay, why was this brought in front of us?
Why wasn't this --
MR. REYES: That's my question, too, sir.
MR. LEFEBVRE: I'm going to ask -- I just asked it, so...
MS. PULSE: Well, when we have a case that's that -- been
taking that much time, we do just want to bring it before you to
continue processes.
June 23, 2021
Page 28
MR. LEFEBVRE: But it's not any fault of this respondent
whatsoever.
MS. PULSE: Right.
MR. LEFEBVRE: So I just --
MS. CURLEY: Well, some of the companies that they hire take
five or six months to prep for a HEX meeting, and then they have the
engineer with many clients. So it's not any fault of the owner's, but
it's the dragnet of the vendors they hire.
MR. LEFEBVRE: The respondent stated that the overlay --
they're waiting for the overlay to be approved.
MS. CURLEY: Oh, yeah.
MR. LEFEBVRE: It was supposed to be approved March of
last year, and it was approved this year. So that is, in fact, the county.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's a year.
MR. LEFEBVRE: The engineering firm couldn't do anything
until they knew what the overlay's going to state. Why do a bunch of
work that is going to have to be redone? So it wasn't, I don't think, a
fault of any of the owners' vendors. It was a holdup over a year. So I
honestly feel this case should have been held off for a bit more,
because they've been extremely diligent, but --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We can resolve that problem.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay. Very good.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: One quick question. That's a
daycare.
MR. EVANS: Yes.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is that for children or adults?
MR. EVANS: Children.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So the cars that are parked there are
the little kids driving there?
MR. LEFEBVRE: I was thinking the same thing.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I just had to.
June 23, 2021
Page 29
MR. LEFEBVRE: I thought about the same thing.
MR. EVANS: The parking is predominately just employee
parking and quick drop-offs, but they do a rotation of drop-offs and
pickups.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So you don't have the five-
and six-year-olds parking there?
MR. EVANS: I hope not, sir.
MR. LEFEBVRE: They could fix a couple of their Power
Wheels in one parking space.
MS. CURLEY: And I don't mean to be -- but is there some sort
of carpooling that's occurring so you don't have this overflow so
you're not offending the county rules until this is resolved, or are you
guys just parking there?
MR. EVANS: I don't know the answer.
Are you-all parking there now?
MS. REYES: I'm sorry.
MR. EVANS: Are you parking there now, your employees?
MS. REYES: Yes. The thing is, we -- the building has only
nine parking spaces, and there's a total of us, there are 12 employees.
And our license capacity is for 90. So only nine parking spaces, 12
employees, and 90 kids. It just -- so the employees, we park in this
area, the empty lot, and we leave those nine parking spaces to the
parents because it's the safest area to -- they can, you know, park and
drop off the kids. We don't want to use those nine parking spaces and
parents have to go to the next lot to park and bring the kids. You
know, we're right at Golden Gate Parkway.
So we know that it's something that we have to fix right away
but, like I said, it's not in our hands. But we try to use a little bit of,
you know, common sense, leave those spaces just for the parents and
the kids, because it's the safe place for them to get in and out of the
building.
June 23, 2021
Page 30
MS. CURLEY: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Did you want to make a
motion earlier?
MS. CURLEY: I sort of did. I wanted to make a motion to
grant the -- to grant an extension of a year for this case. But you said
we had to vote -- we're hearing the case, so do you want to make a
motion that they're -- a violation exists?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah. First, does a violation exist?
Do you want to make that, Gerald?
MS. CURLEY: I make a motion a violation exists.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and second. All
those in favor?
MS. ELROD: Aye.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: 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.
Now, your motion, to grant a year?
MS. CURLEY: Yeah. I understand there's a stipulation that
was provided for them, and a stipulation was given, six months, and
nobody felt like that was enough, so --
MR. LEFEBVRE: Can we do just -- can we do this: Have them
sign a stipulated agreement today that would be one year and just --
we just approve the agreement?
MS. PEREZ: Good morning.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have to have -- we have to
June 23, 2021
Page 31
change the stipulation to show a year.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Right. We have all the parties here, so they
can just sign -- change it to a year.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Cristine, do you want to change it
to a year?
MS. PEREZ: Terri.
(The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
MS. PEREZ: Yes, I do.
For the record, Cristina Perez, Collier County Code
Enforcement.
So the issue, obviously, is a vacant parcel, vacant lot, illegal
land use to use it of any form. The two options from the beginning
was to get the approvals to allow them to use it as the parking lot for
the adjacent daycare or remove the vehicles from the vacant lot.
Having different options, I know we've talked about the property
owner -- or the business owners doing a drive-by for the parents to
where the parents aren't actually parking. They're driving by,
dropping off the children. I've suggested a carpooling system or,
from the beginning in March of 2019 when this case started, they did
have the option to come in through a conditional-use process.
Even though the overlay was in discussion at that time, the option on
the table, because it is residential/multifamily zoned, was for them to
go through a conditional-use process. Obviously, that is a more
costly procedure for them to follow through on that. So, financially,
it would have been more of a burden for them, which is why they
came in and discussed this overlay that was in place.
But throughout the course of this time, the option has always
been for them to just simply remove the vehicles, park them on the
daycare property, carpool, or of any sense.
So the county has no objection discussing the time frame if the
Board still feels that, you know, six months -- I had the discussion
June 23, 2021
Page 32
with their contractors and themselves with that stipulation, that if
they did not feel those six months were going to be enough not to
sign it. So they signed it and I didn't this morning, having that
discussion -- of discussing that with you because, you know, I felt
that it would only be fair.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is that six months?
MS. PEREZ: That was for -- that stipulation was for six
months.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Can that stipulation be modified to
show one year?
MS. CURLEY: Well, of course it probably can, but we still
have an issue of them violating -- they're still parking there. So it
seems like we're giving them a year, but they're not able to relocate
their cars to run their business. And so we're going to let them park
their cars illegally for three years.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, as long as the fines don't start
now and accrue, when we come up with our date, let's say we come
up with the date that's next year --
MS. CURLEY: Right, but the situation is that the cars are still
parked --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I understand that.
MS. CURLEY: -- in the wrong place. So are we going to let
them do that for a year?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, if you grant them one year to
come back, there are no fines that would accrue until after the year.
MS. CURLEY: Yes, I understand that.
MS. PEREZ: The county's recommendation, you know, without
putting it on the Board, was for them to cease and desist the
unauthorized parking or seek county approvals through, you know,
permits and whatnot.
And what I explained to him this morning, I said, if in four
June 23, 2021
Page 33
months your project is approved and your contractor starts the project
and your contractor says all the cars have got to be off the parking --
you know, the parking space so we could go in and do whatever work
needs to be done, then at that point the case was resolved because the
vehicles have been removed, you know, from that area.
So, you know, I'm not sure how this contractor would -- you
know, would -- their theory was, well, perhaps we'll park in one
section of the property while the contractor works on the other
section and then vice versa. Once that side's flipped, then we'll -- you
know, we'll park on the other way. But my suggestion was, you
know, the stipulation reads you cease and desist the parking. If that
happens in four months and your stip is for six, then your case would
be resolved and you continue to, you know, do the Site Development
Plan until it's finalized.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Is there any neighboring business that they
could potentially park some cars at, work out an agreement?
MR. EVANS: Unfortunately not. The business next to us has
limited parking also and hasn't been super helpful with -- we had an
opportunity to run a force main slightly through their property. It
would have saved a substantial amount of money, and that was not
considered. So, no, they don't really have a cooperative neighbor.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, they've been parking the cars
there since 2019?
MR. EVANS: Yes.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Probably since 1985?
MR. EVANS: No, they purchased the side lot -- when did you
buy the next lot?
MS. PEREZ: 2015.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So another year isn't going to do
anything one way or the other.
MR. EVANS: It would be pretty catastrophic to have to change
June 23, 2021
Page 34
the way they do their business at this point when we're so close. I
really don't think it will take a year, but I know it's more than six
months.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Mr. Chairman, just a couple points. I
think a year is way too long, and another concern that I would have is
I heard that the owners are concerned about the cost of the paving.
And what if everything falls into place and all of a sudden they don't
like the price to pay for 10 or 12 spots; are we back in here again
starting all over?
I think there should be some time restraints in regards to having
some type of paving bid submitted that you're [sic] acceptable; that
this whole process doesn't continue for another six months or a year.
I think that the -- your due diligence on your paving contract should
be done now and not later.
MR. EVANS: Okay. I think that's a reasonable expectation. So
we can have -- how about that we commit to having our bidding
completed by the time the Hearing Examiner occurs so that
immediately after the approval of that we could initiate the
contractor?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I have a suggestion.
MR. EVANS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Why don't you all get up and go out
in the hall and see what you can agree to, because it should be done
today, to modify the original stipulation so that it meets everybody's
expectations.
MS. CURLEY: Especially the county's.
MR. EVANS: I mean, I don't know if we need to -- we can pop
out if you want, but if we agree to -- by the time of Hearing Examiner
having a contractor under a contract to do those improvements -- the
Hearing Examiner is the only part that's not part of our -- we're not in
control of that schedule, so --
June 23, 2021
Page 35
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You can always come back before
the Board, given the particular time frame, to ask for additional time
showing that we've made progress, we've done this, this, and this, and
we need another month, or whatever it is at that time, but -- go ahead.
MR. EVANS: Well, that was -- we had that six-month
stipulation this morning, and we were going to sign it, but I maybe
wrongfully recommended to my client and said, you know, if we
know it's going to take more than six months, let's not bother them to
come back in six months when we know it's going to take longer.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It's no bother.
MS. CURLEY: And we -- your advice for them to have a
hearing was good. This is really complicated, and it's good that we
know this because now we have the history of it. But when you hear
the county's side of it, it is a little -- it is a little different. And I'm
one of the proponents that says, I don't want see you back in three
months. Let's give you nine or whatever the case it.
MR. LEFEBVRE: We're not here to micromanage how you get
to the end result, to the end zone. We don't care, but we just want it
to be resolved.
So we have a motion; we have a second. We should probably
vote on that or -- and then we can structure -- if we're going to go that
route instead of a stipulated agreement, let's structure a --
MS. CURLEY: Who's made the motion?
MR. LEFEBVRE: We had a --
MS. CURLEY: I just didn't hear -- I didn't see the rest of the
stip. The stip's got a lot of other language in it that would be helpful
for us to see.
MS. PULSE: Yeah, I haven't read the recommendation.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Yeah. You need to read the
recommendation. So we have a first, and we have a second. We
need to --
June 23, 2021
Page 36
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Can you repeat the motion, please.
MS. CURLEY: We don't have one.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: He just said we had a first and second.
MS. CURLEY: That a violation exists.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Right. It's a two-step process.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Let me go back to before.
Now that we've heard everything, if you were to go back in the
hallway and say, listen, why don't we just take what the county was
offering, and if there's a problem when you're getting near the end of
that time frame, that you come back and request some additional
time. I think that would make everybody happy.
MR. REYES: But I think if you guys give us a year, we don't
need to come back here.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Right, but that's -- this is a stopgap
measure. It looks like there are people on the Board who don't want
to go out one year at this point. They may go out six months six
months from now seeing all the progress that's been made. Okay. So
this goes on all the time.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Mr. Chairman, we have a first, and we have
a second. I call --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Hold on. Terri, do you have
the motion?
THE COURT REPORTER: I don't think you made a motion. I
think you just did the --
MS. CURLEY: I made a motion a violation exists.
THE COURT REPORTER: Right, you did that. So there's no
second motion.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So a violation exists. One of the
things that we could do is to come up with our ruling on what it's
going to be.
MS. CURLEY: Let's take the --
June 23, 2021
Page 37
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's what I'm looking for, and I
don't think we had a real motion. Terri doesn't have it, and I don't
have it in my head so -- okay?
MS. CURLEY: We were going to let --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Unless you'd like to make that
motion.
MS. CURLEY: We're going to let Dee read her suggestion in,
and then we're going to fill in the blanks for her.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Let's do that.
MS. PULSE: Okay. It is recommended 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: Number 1, discontinuing
the unauthorized parking on the vacant unimproved parcel or obtain
all required Collier County approvals, permits, inspections, and
certificate of completion/occupancy for such use within blank days of
this hearing, or a fine of blank per day will be imposed until the
violation is abated;
Number 2, 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: Okay. The only problem I have
with the suggestion is under No. 1, discontinue the parking
immediately. And we can change that "discontinue the parking" in
six months.
MS. CURLEY: Well, it should be 1 and 2, because I wouldn't
mind giving them a year but making the parking stop in six months. I
June 23, 2021
Page 38
mean, the -- discontinue the parking is the motivator. If we say we
want the parking gone in 30 days, I bet that guy's hearing won't be
five months.
MR. EVANS: What about just meeting in the middle -- and I
don't know if this is my place to do this, so I apologize if I'm being
offensive. But what about just make it nine months? And I think we
can get it done.
MS. CURLEY: I can see why they didn't accept this, because 1
is two things; 1 is two topics.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Right.
MS. PEREZ: Well, the stipulation is written to be one or the
other within the six months. You know, you either stop parking or
you get all the approvals within that six-month period.
So there's no immediate parking. It was going to be consistent.
That's why I had mentioned if your project starts in four months and
you have to get rid of the cars anyway, that brings the case into
compliance as well.
MS. CURLEY: So then what businesspeople think is, well,
after six months and fines start accruing, and then they go in for their
CEV loan, you know, or their small business loan and they have fines
on the property, then that gets in the way of their financing, and it
becomes a real mess for them.
MR. LEFEBVRE: This is no different than in a converted
garage where we tell them to turn off the power.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Right.
MR. LEFEBVRE: This No. 1 is combining the two, the
parking -- current parking and getting approvals. That should be
separated. We should have a time frame for when the parking has to
stop, and then the approvals.
MS. CURLEY: Let's just deal with what we've got. Let's just
say we'll give them -- instead of days, we'll give them nine months,
June 23, 2021
Page 39
and then after that it's $50 a day until they can complete their project
for the cars parking in the spot. We give them nine months. The
county offered six. He asked for 12. We meet in the middle with
nine, and after nine months, they're going to be charged $50 a day for
every day that they have cars parked there.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Lee, do you have a comment?
MR. RUBENSTEIN: No.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So what we're trying to do is
combine what you have in Item No. 1 with the parking and the days
and the fine. All three of those are in Item No. 1. So let me see if I
understand you. So you're saying nine months --
MS. CURLEY: To get a permit.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- does all three?
MS. CURLEY: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The amount is $50.
MS. CURLEY: After nine months.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: After nine months.
MS. CURLEY: And it's not a life-safety issue. If you
considered [sic] this to, you know, a garage conversion, it would be
different. This is cars parked there. We would ask them to do their
best to minimize the overflow parking and do what they can. But
you've got nine months to get those cars off the property. We don't
really care what you do with the property after that.
MR. LEFEBVRE: I wasn't trying to compare between life and
safety. I was trying to compare separating out the sections, which
we're not doing here, so that's --
MS. CURLEY: I wish that the county would make this a fast
track. I don't know if there's a process for that. But when the owner
discusses a safety of taking the kids in and out of the daycare and
getting them in their cars and out of their cars, like you said, there is a
variety of ways to do it. It needs to be done. It needs to be done
June 23, 2021
Page 40
faster.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah. Well, it's not easy to move
heaven and earth. So that's not part of this meeting.
Okay. So yours is 90 days [sic]. Days, parking, and the fine is $50.
MS. CURLEY: Nine months.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Nine months, excuse me. Yeah,
nine days would probably be out of line.
MR. EVANS: Nine days, yeah.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's your motion.
MS. CURLEY: Fifty bucks.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do we have a second?
MR. BLANCO: I'll second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a second. Any
comments 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. BLANCO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
MR. LEFEBVRE: Nay.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. It passes --
THE COURT REPORTER: I'm sorry. Mr. Rubenstein, I didn't
see you answer.
MS. CURLEY: Did you vote? She's asking for your vote.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: I oppose.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have two nos and one,
two, three, four yeses, so it passes.
Now, if it's not done in eight months, I would suggest that you
June 23, 2021
Page 41
be on the phone trying to get yourself back in here to see what we can
do to resolve the situation.
MR. EVANS: Thank you. Understood.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. EVANS: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you. Tell those kids they
can't drive until they're 15 years old or so.
MS. BUCHILLON: Next item on the agenda under Hearings,
No. 3, CESD20190014019, Junior Lopez Morell.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Terri, you're good till 10:30.
THE COURT REPORTER: Yes.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you want a hand mic where you
can sit down?
THE INTERPRETER: Me? No, I'm fine, thank you.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So that we can hear you. Helen
will give you a microphone. You can either sing or interpret,
whatever you want.
(Raakel Braun, the interpreter, was sworn to truly and correctly
interpret English into Spanish and Spanish into English.)
TNE INTERPRETER: I do.
(The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
MR. LOPEZ: I do.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Can you state your name on the
microphone at the podium for us.
MR. LOPEZ: My name's Junior Lopez.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Paula, you're all sworn.
MS. GUY: No.
(The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
MS. GUY: I do.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MS. GUY: Good morning.
June 23, 2021
Page 42
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning, Paula. You're up.
MS. GUY: For the record, Paula Guy, Collier County Code
Enforcement. This is in reference to Case No. CESD20190014019.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let me stop you one second. Is
that -- do we have to stop periodically so that you can translate this?
THE INTERPRETER: He understands.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
THE INTERPRETER: But, you know, something he doesn't
understand, then I can ask him.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Unless he doesn't
understand, he'll tell you, and we'll go from there.
MS. GUY: Okay. This is dealing with a violation of Collier
County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section
10.02.06(B)(1)(a).
There's alterations made with no permits to the rear of the main
residence and a detached structure/garage in the rear yard. The
location is 275 1st Street Southwest, Naples, Florida, 34117; Folio
37168800005.
Service was given on December 12th, 2019.
On November 20th, 2019, a citizen complaint was received from
alleged occupants of detached structure for alterations made to the
residence without permits from the Collier County building permit
[sic] and unsuitable living conditions.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Could I stop you one second? I'm
not -- the complaint was made by the people who were in this
structure that was not permitted?
MS. GUY: Yes, that's what -- the complaint was received.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MS. GUY: And upon verification of the complaint, they were
no longer residents there.
So on November 22nd, I was able to make contact with the
June 23, 2021
Page 43
owner. Due to a language barrier and translator needed, I -- to obtain
access permission to view the alleged violation [sic].
On November 26th, access was granted by the owner to Code
Enforcement and the Department of Health for complaints.
Observations of the detached structure confirmed there's no
occupancy by any persons for the detached structure. I verified that
the plumbing and electrical are in place.
Also observed a main residence to have an addition on the rear
home to include possible enclosures of the open porch. No permits
could be located for revisions to structures.
Original house plans were ordered, and meeting set with the
building official for review for violations.
On December 11th, the building official had determined that the
violations exist for the property to include revisions made to the
detached structure and revisions made to the main residence. Those
were all made by previous owner of the property.
On December 12th, the violation was issued and served to
owner, and a translator provided to owner upon service.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let me stop you again. Since this
started in 2019, the December that you're mentioning, is that 2020?
MS. GUY: No, we're in December 2019.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Still there, okay.
MS. GUY: Yes. So in December of 2019, the owner was able
to make a meeting and scheduled with Renald Paul which
subsequently was two separate meetings, and the last one was on
January 27th, 2020.
So from March of 2020 to March of 2021, the owner has hired
three different permitting companies to apply for these permits.
Successful permit submittal was in March of 2021.
On April 29th, 2021, the permit has been rejected. Correction
letters have been sent to Maria Cruz, the current permitting service
June 23, 2021
Page 44
provider for property owner.
In summary the owner has been in constant communication
during this process. He has encumbered several delays based on the
hired services and financial hardships incurred with the COVID,
because it started right in March of 2020. And then as of today's
date, he has two permits to obtain compliance. They are still in
rejected status and are pending for the corrections to be returned.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: When were they rejected?
MS. GUY: On April -- well, the letter was sent on April 29th.
The building permit, I don't know why it took so long for the letter to
go out, because the rejection in the permit stated it was on 3/19. And
the letter wasn't even provided to the owner. It was sent to the
permitting company.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So the letter saying you're
building permit was rejected was sent to the respondent or the
respondent's --
MS. GUY: Service provider, not to the respondent.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: In April?
MS. GUY: In April.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MS. GUY: April 29th. But on the permit activity, on both of
the permit activities it states that it was rejected. The last entry was
March 19th.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you know what the rejection
was for?
MS. GUY: I have the -- I did upload the correction letters, if
you'd like to see the details of them.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It will give us a better idea of what
actually has to be done to come into compliance --
MS. GUY: Correct.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- at that time. Okay. You
June 23, 2021
Page 45
probably have other testimony and photos, et cetera?
MS. GUY: That's correct. I'd like to present into evidence -- I
do have the original house plans if need to be reviewed, I have the
determination from the building official with supporting documents
to clarify the areas that were changed, and I have eight photos taken
by myself on November 26th, 2019, and I would also like to add in
the correction letters to be reviewed upon, if needed.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Has the respondent seen the photos,
et cetera?
MS. GUY: Yes, that's correct. We reviewed them this morning.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And are you -- are we able
to show those? Do you have any objection to those photos being
presented as evidence?
MR. LOPEZ: Yes [sic].
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Get a motion from the
Board to accept the --
MS. ELROD: Motion to accept.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second.
All those in favor?
MS. ELROD: Aye.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: 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, Paula. Oh, another eye test.
MS. CURLEY: Paula, I have a -- just a couple questions to fill
June 23, 2021
Page 46
in the blanks. I just went through everything you said. And in
December of '19, did this -- did Junior own this property at that time,
or was this original violation for the previous owners and they sold it
in between this?
MS. GUY: No, this -- Junior, he bought the home in 2016.
MS. CURLEY: Okay.
MS. GUY: But all of these alterations had took place by the
previous owner.
MS. CURLEY: I just wanted to know if this was one of these
cases that the violation was sold.
MS. GUY: No.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So this can be brought into
compliance via affidavits if the respondent --
MS. GUY: That is the venue that's in place, yes.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. I understand.
MS. CURLEY: Okay.
MS. GUY: So the house plans are -- yeah, they're pretty
intricate. If you go over to the actual photos, that's the left side of the
home. That actually should be a lanai that was enclosed on the back
of the residence. It only -- they only enclosed half of it. The other
portion was left. That's the interior on the detached garage structure.
It has plumbing and electric. It's not occupied. It's used for storage.
There was -- and there's plumbing on the outside, north side of the
building there.
MS. CURLEY: Is that a sink?
MS. GUY: It is.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do we have any zoning issues
here?
MS. GUY: Well, the zoning is one of the rejected. I noticed
this morning it did pass environmental, but -- when I was looking at it
again this morning. And these are the correction -- outstanding
June 23, 2021
Page 47
corrections needed. And, of course, there's two of them. There's a
separate permit for the detached structure and then one other permit
for the revisions to the main residence.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Can you read that, Gerald?
MR. LEFEBVRE: No.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And you have glasses on, so you
imagine how I feel.
MS. CURLEY: We can't see this one because of the lighting.
The lights glare.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Can you glow it up, Cristine? In
other words, make it bigger.
MS. CURLEY: Maybe you can just tell us what the -- in
summary, what the outstanding --
MS. GUY: Yeah. It's right here. I'm looking at it. It's for the
Health Department review corrections in regards to septic, and this is
for the permit --
MS. CURLEY: Did you say septic?
MS. GUY: Uh-huh. That's what it says, yeah. They need a site
plan to provide for the septic system in relation to the proposed
addition or change.
MS. PEREZ: This correctional letter that we're looking at is for
the shed. So as Paula said, the first rejection from the Health
Department is saying they want to provide the site plan and locate on
the site plan where the septic system is -- you know, identify it on
there.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And the other?
MS. PEREZ: And then there's another one for a residential
rejection, and that one appears to say that they need to provide the
affidavit of engineering documentation for the shed being applied for.
As it's being applied for as a permit by affidavit, they need a list of
the inspections.
June 23, 2021
Page 48
And there's also a site plan that they want to see the shed, the
finished floor elevation, the dimensions. So that's all in relation to
the survey to show all the setbacks as the structure is related to the
property line and the other -- the home. So it will list here in zoning
as well what they need to identify on that site plan such as, you
know -- well, it says all existing and proposed structures, showing
where the property lines are, the setbacks, separations, any
easements, bodies of water, crown-of-road elevation, and then the
flood elevation levels for FEMA.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Let me -- one quickie. You
keep on saying "shed."
MS. PEREZ: Yeah. This particular permit is for the detached
shed structure.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I understand. And that -- the use on
that is a shed?
MS. PEREZ: Correct, and that's --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Not living.
MS. PEREZ: Not living, not the shed; yeah, correct.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do you have any photos of
the inside of the shed?
MS. GUY: No, I wasn't -- well, yes. Those were the two where
you just saw the one room with the --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The toys?
MS. GUY: Yes. And then to the right of that on the north side
of the building is where the plumbing is where there is the sink, and
there's a sink on the interior. All that plumbing is on that wall.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: No commode?
MS. GUY: No. I could not locate any of that in there. It's a
very small structure. And I did not get -- I was not able to get access
into the addition that is enclosed, but from the exterior, the building
official said that I could go ahead and issue the notice with that.
June 23, 2021
Page 49
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. It appears that there are
many, many items that would need to be --
MS. GUY: Yes.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- taken care of at this point, okay.
MS. GUY: Correct.
MS. CURLEY: I'll make a motion that a --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Whoa, whoa, whoa. We haven't
found anybody in violation, and we haven't heard from the
respondent yet.
MS. CURLEY: All right.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Are you done, Paula?
MS. GUY: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
THE INTERPRETER: Junior said -- excuse me. He bought this
house five years ago, and all these repairs and additions were already
there. He had nothing to do with them.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Let me just -- so we can stop
at each point so you understand. It doesn't matter -- what you bought,
you own. So if you bought it and it was in violation before you
bought it and now you own it, you actually own the violations as
well.
THE INTERPRETER: Okay. He understands. He's doing that.
And he -- for the last permit they requested that he had the elevations
of the shed and the house, and so he's waiting on that. He called the
engineering company, and they told him it will take 21 days for him
to get these certificates or these elevations before he can take them
back to the permitting.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. When did you get the list of
what needed to be done?
THE INTERPRETER: Okay. He did not get a list of
everything. He got one item at a time. Maybe the inspectors came
June 23, 2021
Page 50
and looked at the shed, and so he got a violation for that, and then
eventually they came to the house, and they found the other
violations. So he didn't get, you know, a whole -- what he's supposed
all at once. It's been one thing at a time. And he's trying to do it all,
and so here he is.
MS. PEREZ: Mr. Chairman, I can help answer that question.
Earlier Paula -- for the record, Cristina Perez.
Paula testified earlier that the correction letters went to the
permitting technician that had been hired, and that's typically the
process. The owner signed an affidavit giving her the authorization,
you know, to apply for the permits, so the rejections went to her.
I contacted Mr. Lopez on June 3rd and advised him the case was
coming to a hearing and advised him of the rejections, which he was
unaware. His response is, I'm waiting for the county to come do the
inspections, thinking that his permit tech had submitted everything,
and they're just waiting on the county. So he became aware of it
June 3rd.
Yesterday, I believe it was, when I physically e-mailed him -- or
Monday. I e-mailed him the corrections letters, because after he
spoke to his engineer and the permit tech, he was under the
understanding he needed this elevation. And as I read, you know,
some of that stuff requires setbacks and all these other measurements
to be identified. So I e-mailed that over to his wife so he had a copy
himself of those corrections.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. For whatever reason, you
know, he is responsible, not the permitting company.
MS. PEREZ: Ultimately, he's the property owner applying for
this permit. He's just hiring their services to help him through the
permitting process.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And have you spoken with the
permitting company at all?
June 23, 2021
Page 51
MS. PEREZ: I have e-mailed the permitting tech multiple
times, including when these permits were rejected. I think it was in
the month of May that I had sent her an e-mail advising her of these
rejections and that the case would, you know, be moved to a hearing
if they were not submitted promptly.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And did you hear back?
MS. PEREZ: I have not heard back from her. I believe
Mr. Junior has -- or Lopez has made contact with her after he and I
have spoken.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Why don't you describe
where you are on getting everything fixed and inspected at this point
in time.
MR. LOPEZ: Now elevation, the house is good. Monday they
call for the guy for elevation for the calle --
MS. PEREZ: The road.
MR. LOPEZ: The road, the storage. This guy said 21 dia for
me looking for only storage, the calle.
MS. PEREZ: Road.
MR. LOPEZ: Only 21 dia for elevation.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Twenty-one days for the elevation.
THE COURT REPORTER: I need him to go through the
interpreter.
THE INTERPRETER: Okay. He's trying to do it. He has no
idea when he'll finish. He's waiting on the last permit, I think, and
the money he received from the government he paid towards repairs
that were needed, and so he doesn't really know how soon he would
finish doing all repairs he needs to do.
MS. CURLEY: I have a question.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Go ahead.
MS. CURLEY: So could you ask your son -- is this your son?
THE INTERPRETER: No, I just met him here.
June 23, 2021
Page 52
MS. PEREZ: She's generous.
MS. CURLEY: Oh, oh. Yeah, thank you.
Has he considered removing the contents inside the shed and just
bringing everything into the compliance instead of --
THE INTERPRETER: To leave it like original?
MS. CURLEY: No. To take it like it should have been
originally, yeah. Has he thought about that for --
MR. LOPEZ: The shed, no water, nothing. It's clean. Only the
storage? The storage?
MS. CURLEY: My question was, has he considered removing
all the illegal fixtures and just living in the house like it should be?
THE INTERPRETER: Yes. He says yes.
MS. CURLEY: That's the cheaper way, and faster.
THE INTERPRETER: Okay. He says yes.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Let's not confuse the house
with the shed.
MS. CURLEY: I'm talking about all of the infractions.
THE INTERPRETER: Infractions from the house also?
MS. CURLEY: Yes.
THE INTERPRETER: Okay.
MS. CURLEY: What is his answer? He's considered removing
all of those?
THE INTERPRETER: Yes. He says yes.
MS. CURLEY: It's the fastest way. It's going to be determined
on how much time we give him.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Before we get into that -- that's
after we find whether it's in violation.
Lee?
MS. PEREZ: The lanai and the shed will still have to be
permitted regardless of the alterations that were removed, yeah. But
you're right, that would help him.
June 23, 2021
Page 53
MS. CURLEY: Yeah. I don't know if -- the reason I ask that is
because there's been a lot of talk about it. But I don't know if
anyone's said to him the easiest route is to demolish all these illegal
items, and then he wouldn't, you know, be having all these surveys
and spending his money on things that he probably might not need
down the line.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We're not going to engineer
this whole situation.
Lee, you have a --
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Yeah, a question for Code. It states on
the violation it's -- you've got it written as a detached
structure/garage. Is it a garage, or is it a shed?
MS. GUY: It's referred to -- it's referred to as a garage. It's a
detached structure, which means that it's not part of the main
residence. It's considered an accessory structure.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: I understand. Was that structure part of
the construction when they built the house?
MS. GUY: Yes. It's permitted --
MR. RUBENSTEIN: I couldn't see on the drawing. Was it part
of the original construction?
MS. GUY: It's in the original plans, but it is not permitted for
plumbing and electric.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: And is there plumbing and electric
currently in there?
MS. GUY: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: There's a sink, not a commode, and
it has electric.
MS. GUY: Correct.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Is somebody living in that building?
MS. GUY: I verified upon my inspection that it is not occupied.
June 23, 2021
Page 54
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Can you ask him; does anybody sleep
there?
MR. LOPEZ: No. Nothing. No.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: So why do you have water and electric if
nobody's there?
MS. GUY: That was done by a previous owner, the alterations.
MR. LOPEZ: When I buy my house, everything is the same.
The water --
MR. BLANCO: The alterations were done --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: He bought it like that. Okay. So
what we have here, if I can summarize, is -- what we have here is a
failure to communicated. It's Cool Hand Luke. It's an old movie.
Anyhow, we have violations in the house, and we have violations in
reference to the shed. Am I correct?
MS. PULSE: Yes.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So I ask the Board, does a
violation exist?
MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion a violation exists.
MS. CURLEY: I'll second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a motion and a
second. All those in favor?
MS. ELROD: Aye.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: 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.
So a violation exists. Where do we go from here? I know you
June 23, 2021
Page 55
have a suggestion. Now, you had some questions or --
MS. CURLEY: No.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- concerns you want to talk before?
MS. CURLEY: No more.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Why don't you let us know
what your recommendation is.
MS. GUY: 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 or
occupancy to keep or remove the unpermitted alterations of the main
house and detached garage 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 Board
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 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
order, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property
owner.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So before we fill in the
blanks, I have some specific questions that may help us determine
what we want to do as far as time is concerned.
Does the respondent, whoever wants to -- unless he understands.
Do you have a complete list of what needs to be done to bring
everything into compliance?
MR. LOPEZ: Yes.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes, you have that list?
MR. LOPEZ: Yes.
June 23, 2021
Page 56
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And based on that list of things that
need to be done, how long do you think it's going to take you to do it?
MR. LOPEZ: Maybe, you know, six months.
THE INTERPRETER: Six months.
MR. LOPEZ: Six months.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Make sure you get that down, Terri.
THE INTERPRETER: Six months.
MS. CURLEY: Six months to repair it or remove it.
THE INTERPRETER: Right, to be in compliance with --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: To be in compliance, to have
everything -- the affidavit filled out, everything completed so he gets
a certificate of occupancy.
MS. CURLEY: Let's give him seven. Let's give him seven.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I understand the "street," but the
other words --
MS. PEREZ: Yeah. He just says that it all depends on how
quickly people want to work. You know, they're telling him 21 days
just to come and do the elevation. So that's his concern of, you know,
him trying to get people to -- he had to go and look for his engineer at
his house because he wouldn't answer his phone. When I called him,
he had to go and look for him at his home.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah. Everybody now is very, very
busy and very, very expensive, I might add. But there are certain
things you can do at the same time. He has to understand, is it
possible to get everything into compliance? I would think one of the
biggest concerns I have with his situation is the zoning. Is there any
building that's encroaching or -- nothing there for that?
MR. BLANCO: This is Estates-zoned property, right?
MS. GUY: Yes, it's Estates-zoned. And I don't foresee any of
that being an issue.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, great. That's terrific.
June 23, 2021
Page 57
MS. CURLEY: I mean, I'll fill in the blanks.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Go ahead.
MS. CURLEY: I'll give him seven months and $50 a day after
that.
MR. BLANCO: I'll second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Operational costs of 59.28
paid within 30 days?
MS. CURLEY: Yes. We need to have her explain that to him.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So -- well, we have to vote
on it.
MS. CURLEY: That was my motion.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. That's your motion.
MS. CURLEY: Seconded by Danny.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And it was seconded by Danny.
Okay. It's like pulling teeth here today. Okay. All those in favor?
MS. ELROD: Aye.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Aye.
MS. CURLEY: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
MR. BLANCO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously.
You have seven months, not six that you asked for, seven --
MR. LOPEZ: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- to get everything done, okay?
MR. LOPEZ: Okay.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I suggest that you do more than one
thing at a time. Get the elevation certificate and fix whatever needs
to be fixed or whatever. And if you can't meet that seven months --
June 23, 2021
Page 58
you may want to -- that you come back to us. You tell Paula that it
won't take me seven months; it may take me eight months. Come
back here so that you don't accumulate too much in the way of fines,
okay?
So right now you get this fixed, everything okayed in six
months, you're done.
MS. CURLEY: Could we make sure we explain the $58 fees
that needs to be paid within 30 days just so he knows that.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Do we have a --
MS. CURLEY: You can see him outside.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We're all set.
MS. PEREZ: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Thank you. Good luck.
MR. LOPEZ: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MS. GUY: I appreciate your consideration.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You need to take your translator out
for dinner.
MS. BUCHILLON: Ms. Braun, you can stay there. I'm going
to -- she has a case under imposition of fines, and since she helped --
she offered to help the gentleman, if we can just do her case right
now.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Who is this?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The translator has a case. And her
name, again, for the record is?
MS. BUCHILLON: Case No. 10 under imposition of fines,
CESD20190005289, Raakel Braun Revocable Trust.
(The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
MR. MUCHA: I do.
MS. BRAUN: I do.
June 23, 2021
Page 59
MS. CURLEY: Remind me what number.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Ten.
MS. BUCHILLON: Ten.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: In the package that you have.
MS. CURLEY: Tirpak Living Trust?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It's the last one in there.
Good morning, Joe.
MR. MUCHA: Good morning.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So how do you want -- do
you want the respondent to go first or --
MR. MUCHA: Yeah. They're going to have a request for you,
and they can explain it a little bit.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I have a letter here that you sent.
MS. BRAUN: Yes, I did.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MS. CURLEY: That was fast.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: What was fast?
MS. CURLEY: Her action on this based on COVID.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Over a year, okay.
Okay. Why don't you tell us what you're asking for, and then we can
have the county read this into the record for us.
MS. BRAUN: Well, I completed everything that I needed to do,
and the inspectors came and signed off on it, so I couldn't understand
why I was here.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MS. BRAUN: See, we did -- after the hurricane, I was going to
change the cabinets in my kitchen, which is a small, tiny, little
kitchen, and my daughter started -- we had no idea we needed
permits for that, because I did that, like, 20 years ago. And I just put
new cabinets in, but we needed the permit because of the sink and a
toilet. So that's when they stopped us from doing anything.
June 23, 2021
Page 60
Eventually we got a permit, and we got a contractor to come and do
it, and he did it all. And so, you know, I've complied now with
everything.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Joe, do you want to read this
into the record for us?
MR. MUCHA: Yes, sir, I will. For the record, Joe Mucha,
Collier County Code Enforcement supervisor.
Past order: On February 27th, 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 violation. See the attached order of the Board,
OR5742, Page 244, for more information.
The violation has been abated as of May 13th, 2021.
Fines and costs to date are as follows: Fines have accrued at a rate of
$200 per day for the period from June 27th, 2020, to May 13th, 2021,
for 321 days, for a total fine amount of $64,200.
Previously assessed operational costs of $59.28 have been paid,
operational costs for today's hearing $59.35, for a total fine amount of
$64,259.35.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. MUCHA: And I just wanted to say that I worked
exclusively with the daughter, and I know there was an issue at one
point that she had one contractor, and I think it was beyond what
maybe he could do, and that caused some delays. But, I mean, she
was great about keeping in touch with me, and we would have no
objection to waiving the fines.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MS. CURLEY: I'll make a motion to deny the county's
imposition of fines, including the 59.35 of today.
MR. BLANCO: I'll second that.
MS. ELROD: Second.
June 23, 2021
Page 61
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: 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.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: 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. BRAUN: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good luck to you.
Those could have been very expensive cabinets.
MS. BRAUN: Yes.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. It is breaktime. Ten of,
we'll be back.
(A brief recess was had from 10:37 a.m. to 10:52 a.m.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I'd like to call the Code
Enforcement back to order. Our next order -- our next case is? Fill
in the blanks.
MS. BUCHILLON: Under Old Business, C, Motion for
Imposition of fines, No. 2, CELU20180010455, Michael J. Tirpak
and Patricia A. Tirpak Living Trust.
(The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
MR. TIRPAK: I do.
MR. SHORT: I do.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning, Eric.
MR. SHORT: Good morning.
June 23, 2021
Page 62
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Would you like to read this into the
record for us, and then we'll go to the respondent.
MR. SHORT: For the record, Supervisor Eric Short with Collier
County.
This is in regards to your 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 violation. See attached
order of the Board in OR Book 5607, Page 536, for more
information.
The violation has been abated as of May 12th, 2021.
Fines and costs to date are as follows: Fines have accrued at a rate of
$100 per day from the period from August 28th, 2019, to May 12th,
2021, 624 days, for a total fine amount of $62,400.
Previously assessed operational costs of $59.91 have been paid,
operational costs for today's hearing is $59.42, for a total of
$62,459.42.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Sir, could you state your
name on the microphone for us.
MR. TIRPAK: Michael J. Tirpak.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And you have something to
say?
MR. TIRPAK: Yes, sir. We're working on it. I hated this to be
kicked down the road so long because of COVID and other things.
But we are finally, right now -- in fact, it might even be approved
today. We're waiting for one last little glitch with the fire
department. And I was told that it was going to be worked out here
this week. It's something to do with turnarounds. And they said it
wouldn't be a big problem. That's the only -- that's the only obstacle.
We're waiting to get our permit to do the actual changing in
construction.
June 23, 2021
Page 63
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let me see if -- I don't quite
understand this. It says outdoor parking. Storage of vehicles on
unimproved property.
MR. TIRPAK: Yeah. We're doing a Site Improvement Plan.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Why couldn't you just remove the
vehicles? It's taken two years to do this?
MR. TIRPAK: Well, I've -- there were -- I had several motor
homes and boats and storage and everything. And I notified the
people when I got -- when I got the notification that, you know, there
was a problem; we had to get out of there. Most everybody got out
except I had a problem with three people. One fellow had passed
away and left just his wife, and she was in a nursing home. He was
up in Canada. That took 18 months to get his motor home out of
there. And another one was the same. Not quite as bad, but he had
had a hip replacement and all that stuff, and it took 10 or 12 months
to get his out of there. And just getting things gathered and getting
drawings, getting engineering. I've hired an engineer.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I don't understand. Is this a --
MR. SHORT: Mr. Chair, if I may.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Go ahead.
MR. SHORT: Very similar to your earlier daycare case where
you had some parking occurring on a vacant unimproved property.
He resolved this violation by no longer parking on that property and
parking in the right-of-way. In the background, now that we're off
his back, he can focus on his site plan and things like that. But at this
point the violation has been abated.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: But the -- there was a piece of
property. There were vehicles of one sort or another parked on the
property. This was cited in February of 2019 to February of '20 to
February of '21 to now. That's, like, two and a half years.
MS. CURLEY: Six hundred twenty-four days.
June 23, 2021
Page 64
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, that's when the fines started
to accrue. The notification, I'm sure, was even before that.
MR. SHORT: Right. And I can give you some background if
you'd like. One of the lots is zoned residential. There was -- the
Tirpaks went in front of the Board of County Commissioners. I have
some minutes in the IDrive if you'd like to review those --
MR. TIRPAK: Oh, yes.
MR. SHORT: -- where the Board of County Commissioners
gave him some options on how to come into compliance and utilize
this property.
MR. TIRPAK: I'm sorry. Mr. Kaufman, may I? Yeah, that
long time span, I did go to two Board of County Commissioners'
meetings to try to have them help me with this problem, and they did.
They directed the people at Horseshoe Drive to help me out and do
whatever they could to get me out of the situation. But it took two
meetings with the Board of County Commissioners over a period of,
God, I don't know, it was eight or 10 months. Just nothing -- you
know, the wheels of government don't work very fast.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I'm familiar.
MR. TIRPAK: I mean, I was wanting to get this done, but I just
couldn't get it done.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You had a vehicle, and the owner
of the vehicle died.
MR. TIRPAK: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: How did you move that vehicle
after he died?
MR. TIRPAK: Well, finally, a nephew came down from
Canada and got the vehicle.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So they towed it -- they towed it
away?
MR. TIRPAK: Well, they drove it away, yeah.
June 23, 2021
Page 65
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MS. CURLEY: So I have a question. I know we haven't
heard -- this isn't a time to hear the case and everything, but I don't
mind the questions. But I guess, did they own this? Was this a
business? Were they renting things? I mean, is this person making
money with all these RVs on the property? I mean -- I'm speaking to
the county.
MR. TIRPAK: May I explain?
MS. CURLEY: I'm speaking to the county right now. In just
some summary like that, because I do agree that it's been a long time.
MR. SHORT: It was an outdoor storage lot, and whether or not
he was being compensated for vehicles being stored there, I don't
know.
MR. TIRPAK: When I bought it, it was. It was an outdoor
storage lot. The man that had it before me, Jim Morandy, Morandy
Kia, he had a Kia dealership here for a while, and he got ran out of
town, but he bought it, and he had me fence it.
There were two pieces of property there, 40-foot lots. He told
me, Mike, fence this property. I bought it. It's commercial. It's right
next door to yours, and I'm going to store cars there.
I said, okay, Jim, because I had a fence company next door. I
owned the property next door. And I fenced the property for him. I
got a commercial permit, because I went on the county site. It said it
was a commercial property, so I went and got a commercial permit to
put a commercial fence up, and I did, and everything got approved
fine. He parked cars there off and on for a year and a half or so until
he got ran out of town.
He got ran out of town. He lost the property. Went back to
the -- to the guy that he had a land contract with. The guy that had
the land contract came to me, he says, Mike, it's on the market. Do
you want to buy it?
June 23, 2021
Page 66
And I looked, and I said, ah, sure. Why not? I could use it to,
you know, expand my property.
MS. CURLEY: What year is that?
MR. TIRPAK: It was commercial.
MS. CURLEY: What year?
MR. TIRPAK: Two thousand --
MS. TIRPAK: It had to be --
MR. TIRPAK: -- six.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: A long time ago.
MS. CURLEY: Okay. That's fine.
MS. TIRPAK: 2006.
MR. TIRPAK: So, anyhow, it was 13 years -- 13 years I ran this
storage place there because I thought -- he was parking cars. I just --
you know, call me stupid. I think I said these same words into this
microphone a couple times, but I didn't know I had to go redo
something that he had already done.
But nobody bothered me for 13 years, and then I got a violation
for parking in the right-of-way and parking, you know, without a
permit in this lot. And I said, okay, fine. I'll get it done, you know.
Then I find out that one of the properties isn't even commercial.
The last one is zoned RFM-6 [sic], which I bought it as commercial
C-5, as the other one is C-5. Then I -- that was my trap. Again,
another thing I did stupidly. I didn't do due diligence when I bought
the property.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So to answer Ms. Curley's question,
the answer is, yes, the short answer?
MR. TIRPAK: What's the --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Were you being compensated for
the vehicles that were --
MS. CURLEY: It's a business.
MR. TIRPAK: Yes, yes.
June 23, 2021
Page 67
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. That was the question.
MR. TIRPAK: Yes.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: This is, what time is it, and you're
going to tell me how the watch works.
MR. TIRPAK: I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's okay.
MS. CURLEY: What's the property being used for now?
MR. SHORT: The property is not being used.
MR. TIRPAK: Not being used at all.
MR. BLANCO: Make a motion to deny the county's petition for
imposition of fines.
MS. ELROD: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second.
Any discussion on the motion?
MS. CURLEY: Gerald?
MR. LEFEBVRE: I haven't said anything.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Well --
MS. CURLEY: Let's reward him for taking two years to do
something.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, you can vote yes, and you can
vote no. So let me call the question.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Can you repeat the motion, please.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The motion is to deny the county's
ability to collect the 62,000 -- $62,400.
MS. CURLEY: We let him operate his business for two years,
and now we're relieving him of his debt.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. All those in favor?
MS. ELROD: Aye.
MR. BLANCO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
MS. CURLEY: Aye.
June 23, 2021
Page 68
MR. LEFEBVRE: Opposed.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Me.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You're opposed?
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Opposed.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Sue's opposed. You're opposed. So
we're denying your motion, Kathy and Danny. Am I correct?
MR. LEFEBVRE: You opposed it, too?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay.
MS. CURLEY: Let's start over.
MS. ELROD: Just for fun, I will remind us, we are compliance,
not a revenue stream.
MS. CURLEY: That's so stupid, Kathleen. That's the dumbest
thing to say.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Where are we at here?
MS. CURLEY: We're a quasi-judicial board.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So what we have now is the
motion failed to abate the fine. Can somebody --
MR. TIRPAK: Can I -- may I speak?
MS. CURLEY: No.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You don't get to vote.
MR. TIRPAK: No, I don't want to vote, but I just want to
reiterate what the Board of County Commissioners asked Horseshoe
Drive to do two years, two-and-a-half years ago. They asked them to
work with me as best as they possibly could to make this the least
amount of money to waive the fees, and that's what I thought, you
know, I was up with. And, you know, it wasn't my fault that it took it
this long. I wasn't -- I was in the hospital three times. But still, you
know, my engineer was bowled over with work. She couldn't get
anything done. I haven't been -- you know, I haven't been
stonewalling this. I wanted to get this done.
June 23, 2021
Page 69
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You already spoke. Now its up to
the Board to determine what to do. For the life of me, I don't know
what you need an engineer for. When you have vehicles parked on a
piece of property that shouldn't be there, what do you need an
engineer for, unless there's a crane --
MR. SHORT: Mr. Chair, if I may.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Go ahead.
MR. SHORT: If it will please the Board, I do have minutes that
express the Board of County Commissioners' direction. They're
highlighted. It may be a very simple read.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Read it.
MR. BLANCO: Mr. Chairman, additional comments on just
kind of supporting Kathleen's comments. The respondent had no
previous violations. This was not a health and safety issue either.
You know, we had COVID. The respondent went in front of the
BCC twice. Being a previous county employee a couple years ago, I
can tell you that it takes a while to schedule something in front of the
BCC. So just for the Board to keep that in mind.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Eric, do you want to read
the --
MR. SHORT: Okay. So, basically, they broke it down, and
they gave five different options for Mr. Tirpak. This is the first
option you see here, and that would cost around $46,000. If you look
at Option 2, and we scroll down -- I mean, we can go into detail of
what they say, that option there. We ended up deciding and agreeing
to go with Option 5, and we'll scroll down. And this is all relative to
the use of the property, and it's simultaneous with what the code
enforcement case was about.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I can't read the words from here.
Cristina, if you could make it bigger.
So where it says "utilize," is that in addition to -- you could
June 23, 2021
Page 70
develop the lot as residential; is that what I'm reading?
MR. SHORT: Yeah. So Lot 11 is zoned residential. The rest of
the properties are commercial. Lot 11, the intention is to use that as
additional buffering between -- because right next door is residential,
and then go through the process of getting your Site Development
Plan and using the lot as he was using it.
Now, just like the case you heard earlier with the daycare, the
childcare facility where, hey, they're parking on a lot, this was a little
different. It was an established use. He bought right into it, started --
or maintained the storage of vehicles on the property, ran it as a
business. We heard that.
And he had two options. Hey, work on -- get a site plan. You
have so much time, get the site plan approved, or remove the vehicles
all within that same amount of time frame.
Right away he started doing both. He hired an engineer. I have
a planning application that's been rejected a few times. He
resubmitted on the 21st of this month; has some minor corrections.
Regardless, we finally had a conversation. Hard to get ahold of. He's
had some health issues. And I said, hey, get Code off your back.
Remove the vehicles; stop parking in the right-of-way. We'll leave
you alone. Work on your site plan in the meantime, and that's where
we are.
MS. CURLEY: That was the original violation.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a new
motion.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. I'd like to drop all existing
charges and instill a flat $1,500 fee.
MS. CURLEY: I'll second that.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a motion, and we
have a second. Any discussion on the motion?
June 23, 2021
Page 71
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hearing none, all those in favor?
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Aye.
MS. CURLEY: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
MS. ELROD: Aye.
MR. BLANCO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That passes. Okay. Fifteen
hundred is not 62,000.
MR. TIRPAK: Well, yes, sir. I realize that.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. TIRPAK: Thank you.
MS. BUCHILLON: Next case, No. 3, CEROW20150023031,
Veronica Tressler, Barbara Dethloff, and Elizabeth Lucky.
(The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
MS. TRESSLER: Yes, I do.
MS. PATTERSON: Yes.
THE COURT REPORTER: What is your name?
MS. TRESSLER: Veronica. Tressler.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Could you say it on the
microphone.
MS. CURLEY: Pull it down.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Bring it down, yeah.
MS. TRESSLER: Veronica Tressler.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Mr. Chairman?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes.
MR. LEFEBVRE: I'm going to recuse myself on this case.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes.
June 23, 2021
Page 72
MR. LEFEBVRE: I had had discussions with Veronica
regarding selling her property.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Mr. White, are you listening
to us?
MR. WHITE: Yes, Mr. Chairman. I don't believe, unless
there's a pecuniary interest that your board member has, that there's
the need to recuse.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. In other words --
MR. WHITE: In other words, unless there was money received
or something else of value, the discussion beforehand is cured simply
by making the disclosure.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So you don't have to recuse
yourself.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. You can go back to sleep,
Mr. White.
MR. WHITE: Thank you.
MR. LEFEBVRE: He's our board attorney, by the way, that's
remote.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. Okay. Do you want to read
this into the record for us?
MS. PATTERSON: Sure. So for the record, Sherry Patterson,
Collier County Code Enforcement Senior Investigator.
Past orders of the Board: On May 26th, 2016, the Code
Enforcement Board issued a fining 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, OR5278, Page 2569, for more information.
On January 26th, 2018, the Code Enforcement Board granted a
continuance. See the attached order of the Board, OR5477,
Page 2468, for more information.
June 23, 2021
Page 73
The violation has not been abated by May 27th, 2021.
The fines and costs to date are as follows: Fines have accrued at a
rate of $150 per day for the period from September 24th, 2016, to
May 27th, 2021, for a total of 1,707 days for a total fine amount of
$256,250. The fines continue to accrue.
Previous assessed operational costs of $65.85 and $59.28 have
been paid, and operational costs for today's hearing is $59.42.
Total amount: $256,109.42.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. I remember this case from
years gone by. Can you update us on what -- I mean, it hasn't been
abated.
MS. TRESSLER: The reason I haven't gotten work done,
finances. Last time I was here, my sister was very ill, Barbara. Now
she's deceased. So I had to keep going back, you know, to try to take
care of her, and come back, and funeral arrangements. Her husband
was in the hospital at the same time.
My other sister, Elizabeth, is going through cancer surgery. And
so I just had -- this house was left to us by my father, and it's just
been a, you know, nightmare, but it's the only place I have to live. I
can't afford to go anywhere else.
Between the hurricane, COVID, all the illnesses in my family. I
came back, the permit had expired. I applied for a new permit. That
took a while. I tried to cancel this date, this hearing, you know, to
give me more time.
The inspector just came yesterday, and I had replaced all the
pipes last time I was here. The only thing I needed was the cement
over the pipe. And the inspector came yesterday. He was supposed
to call us and let us know. I stayed home all day. My son came over
and was with me all day.
I don't know when he came, but yesterday we found out that it
didn't pass. He found something wrong with one of the pipes, which
June 23, 2021
Page 74
I went out to look at. He called after 5:00, and I couldn't find the
problem with a pipes at all. And --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So the pipe --
MS. TRESSLER: -- he said he would come back, and, you
know, show me or let me know what needed to be done. So that's the
reason, you know, I haven't been able to do it. Finances, medical
things with my family, and lack of being here to take care of, you
know --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So the culvert pipe was replaced?
MS. TRESSLER: Both of them, two, because I have two
entrances.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Two of them.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Two pipes.
MS. TRESSLER: I mean -- and when we took the last pipes
out, there was absolutely nothing wrong with the pipes. Nothing.
There was a tree trunk, I guess, that had washed in with the hurricane
onto it. And had I known more about how these things work or they
operate, I would have just had somebody come and remove that and
had an inspector come, instead of removing all those pipes. Then I
had to remove a tree, which cost me $1,000, so they could do that
swale that they do. And that's been a nightmare, because now there's
mosquitoes all over the property, you know. So it's just been a
nightmare from the beginning to end.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Are you still waiting to hear back
from the inspector to find out exactly what needs to be --
MS. TRESSLER: Right, right. He just came, and he --
yesterday is when he came. When, I don't know, because, like I said,
I had my son come over to be there to hopefully understand better
than I would of what needed to be done yet, and I don't know when
he came, but he didn't come to the door. He didn't let us know he
June 23, 2021
Page 75
was there or nothing. So now I'm still waiting to see what needs to
be done and hopefully get this taken care of. I can't --
MR. LEFEBVRE: Let me ask a question.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Go ahead.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Can we pull up in CityView what the
inspector from yesterday -- would it be recorded by today?
MS. PATTERSON: Yes. If I may, in the IDrive, there's
actually the pictures of the culvert, what it looked like before and
what it looks like now. There's also the inspection report from the
inspector. It's also in the IDrive, if we could pull that up.
MR. LEFEBVRE: From yesterday?
MS. PATTERSON: From yesterday, yeah. Now, she will be
sent a corrections letter from the department. It's basically going to
say exactly what's on here. But since it just happened yesterday, it's
not going to be out today. She does have another inspection that's
going to happen today, because it was already prescheduled. I would
imagine the results of that are going to be that it's going to be rejected
as well because she didn't pass this one, which was a courtesy
inspection.
MS. TRESSLER: I mean, that's three days -- two days apart;
Monday and Wednesday. I mean --
MS. CURLEY: I have a question. So the contractor that you
hired, has he been paid to do this? And wouldn't this -- part of your
bill with this gentleman is to be -- let me finish, please -- was for you
to finish it and have this approved by the county? Wouldn't his job
have been that?
MS. TRESSLER: Well, the first contractor we got never
showed up.
MS. CURLEY: I'm talking about the one that's done the work.
MS. TRESSLER: That -- no, no. I had the work done
independently by somebody. Somebody came in, and I paid them
June 23, 2021
Page 76
$2,000 to take the pipes out, replace the pipes, and fill it. And that
was another nightmare, because when they filled it, whatever was left
in that dirt they put onto the grass, and it took months of rain and
everything else. It finally settled in the thing. So, no. So I feel like
I'm starting all over again with this.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let's take one nightmare at a time.
MS. TRESSLER: Okay.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: What needs to be done? I can't
really read that. It says -- Cristine, if you can.
MS. CURLEY: Left side pipe is drained, and must be replaced.
Slopes are incorrect, and meter -- at metered ends. Driveway have
not been finished with asphalt. Driveway not correct dimensions at
street edge. Needs to be 30 feet. Right side pipe is too low and must
be replaced.
MS. TRESSLER: And when I had it inspected before, the
inspector -- he's retired now. He said it was a couple centimeters and
it would be okay, you know, once they put the cement over it. So I
don't understand how a pipe is damaged when they're new pipes.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Well, driving over, without it being concrete
or asphalt, probably crushed the pipe.
MS. CURLEY: It could have been delivered broken.
MR. LEFEBVRE: That's probably what happened is vehicles
being driven over it. That's why you put down an apron, the concrete
or asphalt, so it takes the weight of the vehicles, unfortunately.
MS. CURLEY: That's why you hire a person that does this for a
living.
MR. LEFEBVRE: But there was other inspections --
MS. TRESSLER: I can't forward to hire -- you know, if I could
have afforded to hire somebody, I would have done it a long -- when
the county decided to do this. You know, when the -- this is
something that happened, that the county decided they were going to,
June 23, 2021
Page 77
you know, make pipes put in there. I mean, that neighborhood's been
there forever.
MS. CURLEY: So we're very aware of the drainage
improvements that are happening there, and it's for the benefit of all
of the northern part of the county. It's not for you.
MS. TRESSLER: Right.
MS. CURLEY: It's for drainage --
MS. TRESSLER: I understand that. If you don't have the
money, what do you --
MS. CURLEY: Are you asking me that question?
MS. TRESSLER: Well, I'm asking everybody that question.
MS. CURLEY: I'd move.
MS. TRESSLER: I'm just stating the fact.
MS. PATTERSON: Mr. Chair, if I could just say something
that might bring us up to speed, too, to help us a little bit.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Sure.
MS. PATTERSON: When Ms. Tressler was found in violation
of the right-of-way, a permit was issued back on April 25th, 2018.
Multiple inspection were performed, and they passed, but the permit
was canceled on 4/22/21 due to inactivity on the permit. So she had
to get a new permit. That brings us up to today. That's what she has
today. There were -- and I believe you pulled the permit
owner/builder; is that correct?
MS. TRESSLER: Uh-huh.
MS. PATTERSON: And so pulling the permit owner/builder
she acts as the contractor. So she can hire, you know, somebody to
come out and do it, and then they can call in the -- or she can call in
the inspections, like you called in the inspections. And there's kind
of a disconnect there.
So what I did was try to lead her to -- I asked her -- I told her
this morning I was going to give her a copy of this prior to her getting
June 23, 2021
Page 78
the corrections letter so that she'll know, and also I'm going to give
her Renald Paul's name and contact information so that she can go to
the county, meet with him, meet with the inspector, and find out
exactly what needs to be done. He can actually show her the
drawing. There's a drawing that the inspector did that shows exactly
what's going on right here.
So -- and I'll help her as much as I can through that process and
be there if I need to. But this is kind of where we're at right now.
And like I said, I believe that -- the permit's issued, and it will be -- it
will be expired on 11/1, so she still does have time.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I don't quite understand. It says,
the left side pipe is damaged and must be replaced. It can't be fixed.
MS. PATTERSON: I don't know because I'm not an inspector,
but what I know is that generally -- and now I see this right here
where it talks about -- let's see. Where it says, the driveway
dimensions are not correct. There's no approach on either one of
these. So she put in the culvert and, like Mr. Lefebvre was saying,
you continue to drive over it like that with no concrete there, it's
going to crush the pipe.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Lee? Lee?
MR. RUBENSTEIN: A couple questions. From looking at the
inspector's report, and since this has been going on for five years, to
me it looks like you need a brand-new driveway, not a pipe here or a
pipe there, because there is no material on the surface.
So to me it looks like you need a new driveway, and I'm not sure
what the costs are of it, but it's got to be cheaper to get that done than
deal with what you've got sitting here.
Have you had any quotes on a new driveway?
MS. CURLEY: This is not about a driveway.
MS. TRESSLER: Sir, I can't afford a new driveway. I'm -- I
went from living at my parents' house and my father taking care of all
June 23, 2021
Page 79
the bills to inheriting this -- you know, this home. That's the only
place I have to live in, you know.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: I understand.
MS. TRESSLER: I'm trying to do the best I can. Like I said,
I've been away from the house for so long because I've had to go
back and forth to Texas, you know, to deal with other things.
I'm trying to do the best I can and, like I said, I went out there
yesterday and looked at the pipe. I'm not an inspector, but I couldn't
see any damage in the pipe. He said, well, get down on your knees,
which I did, with a flashlight, and I couldn't see what he found wrong
with the pipe.
You could be correct, sir, saying that, but it's just one car, you
know. It isn't like it's, you know, a mobile truck or something going
through this. So I don't understand what -- where the damage is.
Like I said, I've replaced pipes in two entrances that didn't need
replacing, like I said, right from the beginning. If I had known
better -- and, also, the state came in and did the -- whatever you call
it.
MS. PATTERSON: Swale.
MS. TRESSLER: The ditch they put in there after the pipes
were replaced, you know, so that could have done it, too. I don't
know.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MS. CURLEY: So you know that you're here because you've
been accruing fines for a very long time, and the fine total amount is
$260,159.49?
MS. TRESSLER: Well, I'm here hopefully to correct --
MS. CURLEY: We can never remove fines if you've not
corrected the violation, and it's not corrected.
MS. TRESSLER: But, ma'am --
MS. CURLEY: I'm just telling you that this is all we're looking
June 23, 2021
Page 80
at is this one page. We've seen and heard of this case since 2015 or
2018. We've talked to them. You've stated your situation about the
financial burdens and it's the only place you have to live. And you
asked me what I would do. I recommended I would probably move
somewhere where I could manage the maintenance better.
But those problems are yours, and what we're faced as a board --
we're your neighbors. We follow all the rules as well. And we're
your neighbors -- is to deal with this fine now because you've not
corrected your situation.
MS. TRESSLER: But I tried correcting the situation. I got the
pipes replaced, you know, both. Legally somebody said to me -- and
I don't know if this is true or not, that by law you only have to do one.
MS. CURLEY: So, excuse me. When you put in your permit as
an owner/builder you assumed the responsibility that you are a
contractor. So by doing so, you have to learn the rules and laws set
forth for this project. And with the five items that were thumbs down
yesterday it doesn't seem like you've been able to understand and be
able to follow through with your permit as you stated you would
when you put in for your permit as an owner/builder. Again, that's
your task to manage, not ours.
MS. TRESSLER: I understand.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I have one question for the county.
Is this property homesteaded?
MS. TRESSLER: Yes, it is.
MS. PATTERSON: Yes, I believe it is now.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's all I need to know.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Ms. Tressler, you're here.
MS. TRESSLER: Yes, sir.
MR. LEFEBVRE: How much time do you need to get this
resolved?
MS. TRESSLER: Well, I was hoping -- it took so long since I
June 23, 2021
Page 81
applied for the permit to get the permit and then to get somebody to
come out and see it, I was hoping -- I had called to see if we could
avoid this thing so I could get it done and come back when it was
totally done so we wouldn't be going through this all over again.
MR. LEFEBVRE: If I'm --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Come up with a number; a month,
two months, three months.
MS. TRESSLER: Well, I'm hoping -- you said I still have how
long on the permit I have now?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Till November.
MS. PATTERSON: November 1st. But here's the thing is that
right now on the permit you only had two inspections that were left.
The inspection that they're doing today would be the final
right-of-way inspection. It's going to fail most likely, and the reason
why is because you still have these outstanding corrections to do.
That being said, when you talked about a whole new driveway, I
mean, you don't have the approach there, the concrete there or
anything. If you do have to do something to the pipe, there's
something with the pipe that is not -- it's too low. So I can't -- I can't
really say, but it's not going to be overnight, that's for sure.
MR. LEFEBVRE: There were inspections prior where it failed,
if I'm not mistaken, for a pipe being too low, if I remember. I'm
pretty sure. I'm pretty sure.
MS. PATTERSON: If that was -- you know, I'd have to look
back on it and see.
MR. LEFEBVRE: I'm pretty sure it was.
Again, back to my question. How much time do you think you need?
MS. TRESSLER: Six months.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. That will bring you to the
November time frame.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Roughly. Roughly. Okay.
June 23, 2021
Page 82
MR. BLANCO: I'll make a motion to continue the case for six
months till our November hearing.
MR. LEFEBVRE: I was going to say that, too.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MS. ELROD: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second.
All those in favor?
MS. ELROD: Aye.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: (No verbal response.)
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
MR. BLANCO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
MS. CURLEY: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. It passes. So you have until
six months from now. Let's see, this is June, July, August,
September, October -- November is probably the real date that you
have, but this case is put off until December.
MR. LEFEBVRE: November hearing.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: November hearing. Okay. So you
have -- you should have plenty of time to address what it is and go
from there.
MS. TRESSLER: Okay. Mrs. Patterson's been really helpful,
you know, with -- but, like I said, I had an inspection Monday and
another one. What could I get done in that time?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Well --
MS. TRESSLER: Okay.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- now you have a lot more time.
MS. TRESSLER: Okay. Thank you very much. I appreciate it.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MS. TRESSLER: Thank you.
June 23, 2021
Page 83
MS. PATTERSON: Thank you very much.
MS. TRESSLER: And I'll, you know, try to see what you said.
I mean, it's easier to say move somewhere else, but when you're 72
years old and you have no resources.
MS. CURLEY: Good luck.
MS. TRESSLER: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good luck.
MS. BUCHILLON: Next item on the agenda, No. 5,
CESD2020000511, Guillermo Garcia and Sara Rojas De Garcia.
(Melissa Rodriguez, the interpreter, was sworn to truly and correctly
interpret English into Spanish and Spanish into English.)
TNE INTERPRETER: I do.
(The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
MR. MUCHA: I do.
MS. DE GARCIA: Yes.
MR. GARCIA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Can everybody state their name on
the microphone so we can hear.
MS. DE GARCIA: My name is Sara Rojas De Garcia.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. GARCIA: My name, Guillermo Garcia.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MS. RODRIGUEZ: Melissa Rodriguez.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So you're the interpreter. Okay. I
don't know if you need the masks on or not, but that's up to you.
Okay, Joe.
MR. MUCHA: Good morning. For the record, Joe Mucha,
Supervisor, Collier County Code Enforcement.
Past order: On November 20th, 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
June 23, 2021
Page 84
ordered to correct the violation. See the attached order of the Board,
OR5883, Page 780, for more information.
The violation has been abated as of April 28th, 2021.
Fines and costs to date are as follows: Fines have accrued at a rate of
$100 per day for the period from January 20th, 2021, to April 28th,
2021, 99 days, for a total fine amount of $9,900.
Previously assessed operational costs of $59.28 have been paid,
operational costs for today's hearing is $59.49, for a total fine amount
of $9,959.49.
And just from information that I got about this, I think there was
a little bit of a language barrier, and I think once they had the permit
issued, they kind of believed that they were done, and it was maybe a
little miscommunication that they also had to get the inspections
done. So I think that's maybe a cause for a little bit of a delay.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do the respondents want to
say anything or --
THE INTERPRETER: She said all the inspections that have
been required are finished, and they have their permits for the shed.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah, it was done in April. So it
was done two months ago. Any questions or motions from the
Board?
MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion to deny the county's request
to impose fines.
MS. CURLEY: I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second.
All those in favor?
MS. ELROD: Aye.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Aye.
MS. CURLEY: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
June 23, 2021
Page 85
MR. BLANCO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously.
All done.
THE INTERPRETER: Thank you.
MS. DE GARCIA: Thank you.
MS. BUCHILLON: Next case, No. 9, CELU20200010724,
Greg Carlisle, care of E. James Kurnik.
(The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
MR. CARLISLE: Yes, ma'am.
MR. MUCHA: I do.
THE COURT REPORTER: What is your name?
MR. CARLISLE: Greg Carlisle.
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 January 28th, 2021, 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 in the OR Book 5896, Page 3111, for more
information.
The violation has not been abated as of June 23rd, 2021.
Fines have accrued at rate of $150 per day from the period of
April 29th, 2021, to June 23rd, 2021, 56 days, for a total fine amount
of $8,400. Previously assessed operational costs of $59.28 have been
paid, operational costs for today's hearing is $59.35, for a total of
$8,459.35.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Could you read that total again.
MR. SHORT: $8,459.35.
June 23, 2021
Page 86
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah. Our sheets have a different
number on it.
MR. SHORT: Yeah. The reason for that, the operational costs
were paid today.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Oh, they were paid.
MS. CURLEY: Okay.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Sir?
MR. CARLISLE: Guilty.
MS. CURLEY: Take him to jail.
MR. LEFEBVRE: In 20 years on this board almost, I've not
heard that yet.
MS. CURLEY: What's going on?
MR. CARLISLE: I'm embarrassed to be here because when he
asked how long I'd need, he offered six months. I said I'll have it
done in three, and it didn't happen.
And what I'm here for is there's containers parked behind a
vacant parcel that have been there for 20 years. We -- I developed
the property at 6800 Golden Gate Parkway, which was run by myself
for years and then sold to LA Fitness, and it was full of gym
equipment. And it was really -- the only person that knew the
containers were there and it affected was the neighbor next door,
because you really couldn't see it unless you looked at an aerial.
However, I was in Puerto Rico, and while I was in Puerto Rico, I
let -- a friend of mine asked if he could park some boats back there. I
said he could, and when I came back, he had boats parked along the
side of the road, and that obviously drew attention to the property,
and that's why a neighbor complained.
I understand the violation. And it was my intent -- now they're
full of construction equipment -- was to build a home there, but it's --
when I said three months, I thought I could get a permit by then, but I
can't get anybody to commit to the cost for a home.
June 23, 2021
Page 87
So it's -- I don't know what to do other than -- yeah, I'm going to
remove the containers. I was hoping to build a home. We're looking
at -- we do have a house that was engineered for the -- or
engineered -- developed for the property. The trusses came in at
15,000. Now they're at 60,000.
We're looking at redesigning it so it has a concrete roof instead
of a truss system, which, believe it or not, is actually cheaper, and
that -- with the architectural now being -- what am I trying to say? --
modern instead of the Mediterranean style, it won't look out of place,
but it still has to be redesigned. So I don't even know if it will come
in cost effective then.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let me help you out.
MR. CARLISLE: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Since this has not been abated, we
can't do anything with the fines.
MR. CARLISLE: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: What we can do is we can give you
some more time to figure out what you're doing.
MS. CURLEY: I just have a question. The only thing left there
is the containers?
MR. CARLISLE: No, ma'am.
MS. CURLEY: The boats are still there?
MR. CARLISLE: No, no. The boats -- one boat was there. I
had the boats removed.
MS. CURLEY: The containers are still on site?
MR. CARLISLE: Yes, ma'am.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Let me ask you a question. If he gets a
permit, construction materials are allowed on the site?
MR. SHORT: Yes, and historically a shipping container would
be allowed to house that construction material.
MR. LEFEBVRE: So now --
June 23, 2021
Page 88
MR. CARLISLE: That's what I was hoping for when I said
three months. I thought I could get the permit process done.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Get the permit, and that would --
MR. CARLISLE: It didn't happen.
MR. LEFEBVRE: So now that you're getting everything
reengineered, what stage are you at in that process?
MR. CARLISLE: I talked to my architect, who you might
know, JD Allen. He said, Greg, don't do anything for two years.
MS. CURLEY: Oh, man.
MR. LEFEBVRE: The fines --
MR. CARLISLE: No. I didn't even know I was getting fines
until I looked at this, but I understand fines are there.
MS. CURLEY: How about if you move those containers
somewhere, and we all live happily ever after?
MR. CARLISLE: I'm going to have to do that. I agree.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, how much time do you
need -- do you think you need to decide what you're going to do?
MS. CURLEY: I'd take your architect's advice.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: A month? Two months? If you
don't know, we don't know.
MR. CARLISLE: It could take three months.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. That's a number.
MR. LEFEBVRE: So the question I have, if you go ahead and
you're going to reengineer the building to do -- you're not going to do
a truss system, so it's not going to take probably three months for the
trusses to come back, so you have a -- so you can pull a permit and
do the architecture. So if you do decide to go that route, how long do
you think it will take before you submit a permit? And then you've
got to have review by the county, which is probably going to take 30
to 45 days.
MR. CARLISLE: To go into permitting -- we did get the price
June 23, 2021
Page 89
for the poured roof, which was within budget. I need to price back
out what the other trades are going to do, the HVAC, the electric, et
cetera, but --
MR. LEFEBVRE: Do you have prints now?
MR. CARLISLE: I do.
MS. CURLEY: Are you building this yourself?
MR. CARLISLE: I was, yes, ma'am.
MS. CURLEY: Well, that's going to take twice as long.
MR. LEFEBVRE: So you have prints now. So you're in the
bidding process. Once you figure, okay, the bidding, it's within the
realm of me building what I want to build within the budget I want to
build, so you're pretty far along in that process. The process that
takes a while is getting the engineering done and getting architecture
work done. That's done. So it's going to take probably a
month-and-a-half, two months once you're in permitting. So how
long do you think it's going to take to get the bids?
MR. CARLISLE: Well, I think once we're in permitting, the
containers could remain, right?
MR. LEFEBVRE: You have to have a permit.
MR. CARLISLE: Oh, true, true. Excuse me.
MR. LEFEBVRE: You have to have a permit.
MR. CARLISLE: You're right.
MR. SHORT: I would like to answer that question, though.
Can you just clarify, just so they understand, how many containers
are on site?
MR. CARLISLE: Do I have to say that? Eleven.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Eleven.
MR. CARLISLE: Of which not all of them are being used. I
can get rid of five of them right now. I had my son on site unloading
them, and he got mad at me and quit.
MS. CURLEY: That's funny.
June 23, 2021
Page 90
MR. LEFEBVRE: So what I'm trying to get at is, I'm trying to
come up with a time frame that can work to where we can come up
with an amount of days.
MR. CARLISLE: The problem with the house plans I have now
is the -- I don't know if they're going to -- we just got that bid in this
week. I didn't even think it was going to work, but I think I would
be -- rather commit to getting the containers out of there would be
better.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let me try this.
MS. CURLEY: Then you're done with it.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Time out. We give you, for
instance, a continuation of three months, and in two-and-a-half
months you did this, that, and the other thing, you still not there, and
you need more time, it's not cast in stone. You can come back and
ask for more time.
MR. CARLISLE: I appreciate that.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So it's a case of we can't put every
brick in place for -- you know, to come up with a time frame, so...
MR. LEFEBVRE: I make a motion to grant him four months.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MS. ELROD: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Continuance for four months.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Continuance, okay.
MS. ELROD: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And we have a second.
MS. CURLEY: And there's -- the conversation is the one I
always bring up --
MR. CARLISLE: Yes, ma'am.
MS. CURLEY: -- is that now you have fines on this property.
June 23, 2021
Page 91
If you go to a lender, they're going to see this lien, and you have
to explain it.
MR. CARLISLE: That's not an issue, but thank you for
explaining that.
MS. CURLEY: And $150 every day until --
MR. CARLISLE: That's going to hurt.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So the sooner you get it done, the
smaller the fines.
MR. CARLISLE: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And the possibility of the fines
being --
MR. CARLISLE: Abated.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- ameliorated, for lack of a cool
word. So we have a motion. We have a second.
MS. CURLEY: What is the extension, for how long?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Four months.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Not extension; continuance.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Continuance for four months.
MR. CARLISLE: That means I'll need to come back before the
Board, right, four months from now?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Unless you get everything done in
four months.
MR. CARLISLE: But I'll still need to come back to --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You still probably want to tackle
the fine.
MR. CARLISLE: Right.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. CARLISLE: Thanks for the note.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor?
MS. ELROD: Aye.
MS. CURLEY: Aye.
June 23, 2021
Page 92
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: (No verbal response.)
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
MR. BLANCO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Nay.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously -- oh.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Against.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It passes.
MR. CARLISLE: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So we'll see you soon.
MS. CURLEY: Good luck.
MS. BUCHILLON: Next case, No. 4, CESD20190009049, Jose
S. Olivares-Gonzalez and Ana J. Trejo De Olivares.
Respondent was notified certified and regular mail June 4th,
2021, and it was posted at the property and courthouse June 7th,
2021.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a letter attached to this?
(The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
MR. MUCHA: I do.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I have a handwritten note. Is that
the note that goes with this?
MR. MUCHA: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So Gerald is trying to talk
me into a different note.
MR. LEFEBVRE: It didn't work.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: No. Okay. “We initially tried to
get permit, but we found out it was going to cost a lot of money, and
we couldn't afford. That's when we decided to removed the addition.
We are asking that you would please remove the fines,” so...
MS. CURLEY: I love that. It's perfect.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you want to read this into the
June 23, 2021
Page 93
record for us, Joe? And let the record show that the respondent is not
present.
MR. MUCHA: Yes. For the record, Joe Mucha, supervisor,
Collier County development.
Past order: On November 22nd, 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,
OR5703, Page 3297, for more information.
On November 30th, 2020, to Code Enforcement Board granted a
continuance. See the attached order of the Board in documents and
images for more information.
The violation has been abated as of June 22nd, 2021.
Fines and costs to date are as follows: Fines have accrued at a rate of
$200 per day for the period from March 22nd, 2020, to June 2nd,
2021, for 438 days, for a total fine amount of $87,600. Previously
assessed operational costs of $59.28 and $59.35 have been paid,
operational costs for today's hearing is $59.56, for a total fine amount
of $87,659.56.
So if I could just give you a little bit of background on this. This
is a Habitat community. Habitat was the one that actually turned the
violations over to us, so it's not like it was from a neighbor or
anything. And initially the family did want to permit the additions.
They started to, and then I think the costs, you know, with
engineering, drawings, and everything, it just was overwhelming for
them. They are, obviously, on a limited income. So they elected to
remove everything. It just took a little bit of time, but they got it
done.
MS. CURLEY: I remember this.
MR. MUCHA: And they couldn't be here today. Their son, he's
an adult son, but he actually has cancer, and they had to take him to
June 23, 2021
Page 94
Miami for his chemotherapy treatments.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion to deny the county's request
to impose the fines.
MR. BLANCO: Second.
MS. ELROD: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second.
All those in favor?
MS. ELROD: Aye.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Aye.
MS. CURLEY: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: (No verbal response.)
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
MR. BLANCO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. It carries unanimously.
MR. MUCHA: Thank you.
MS. BUCHILLON: ***Next case, No. 6, CESD20200000495,
Julio Aleman and Milagros Aleman.
Respondent was notified regular and certified mail June 4th, 2021,
and it was also posted at the property and courthouse June 7th, 2021.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Gerald, this is the writeup on this
one. I had to rub it in.
MR. LEFEBVRE: I knew. I've got the right one now. Thank
you.
(The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
MR. MUCHA: I do.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Before you begin, let me read the
letter.
Okay. Joe, you have a little story on this?
MR. MUCHA: Yes, sir. I'll start with reading this in. For the
June 23, 2021
Page 95
record, Joe Mucha, supervisor, Collier County Code Enforcement.
Past order: On November 22nd, 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 --
ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached
order of the Board, OR5874, Page 376, for more information.
Violation has been abated as of April 27th, 2021.
Fines and costs to date are as follows: Fines have accrued at a
rate of $200 per day for the period from February 19th, 2021, to
April 27th, 2021, for 68 days, for a total fine amount of $13,600.
Previously assessed operational costs of $59.28 have been paid,
operational costs for today's hearing is $59.49, for a total fine amount
of $13,659.49.
So this is similar to the last one. It's a Habitat community. The
violation was turned in by Habitat to us. And I think one of the
issues that caused the delay here was -- after everything is inspected
and permitted, they have to submit a 10-day spot survey, and I think
that was something that they were unaware of, so it took a little bit
longer. They got it done. It's really only a couple months beyond the
time that was ordered. And this is for a lanai.
MR. BLANCO: Make a motion to deny the county's petition for
imposition of fines.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Second.
MS. ELROD: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second.
All those in favor?
MS. ELROD: Aye.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Aye.
MS. CURLEY: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: (No verbal response.)
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
June 23, 2021
Page 96
MR. BLANCO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously.
Thanks, Joe.
MR. MUCHA: Yes, sir.
MS. CURLEY: I mean, this might be a good opportunity for the
county to work with the Habitat communities to educate a little bit
further on what the homeownership of these new buyers -- some of
the things they have to do when they move in, and they want to make
alterations. It would stop this, and are we just going to assume that
they're first-time homebuyers in this community?
MR. MUCHA: I think a lot of these were people that have been
there for a while and they just didn't realize, or maybe Habitat wasn't
good about telling them. I mean, we've been doing reach-out -- we
go to their meetings, and we try to explain all of this now to try to
catch this stuff ahead of time now. But this was stuff that's been
existing for a while.
MS. CURLEY: Got it.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. It looks like you're in charge
of the next two.
MS. BUCHILLON: Yep.
MR. MUCHA: Next one.
MS. BUCHILLON: Next one, yeah.
Next case, No. 7, CESD20200006945, Martha Cisneros.
Respondent was notified certified and regular mail June 4th,
2021, and it was also posted at the property and courthouse June 8th,
2021.
(The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
MR. MUCHA: I do.
For the record, Joe Mucha, Supervisor, Collier County Code
June 23, 2021
Page 97
Enforcement.
Past order: On January 28th, 2021, 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,
OR5896, Page 3109, for more information.
The violation has not been abated as of June 23rd, 2021.
Fines and costs to date are as follows: Fines have accrued at a rate of
$150 per day for the period from April 29th, 2021, to June 23rd,
2021, for 56 days, for a total fine amount of $8,400. Fines continue
to accrue.
Previously assessed operational costs of 59.28 have not been
paid, operational costs for today's hearing is $59.28, for a total fine
amount of $8,518.56.
Now, the story on this one -- this is non-Habitat, and there's a
litany of it items that were cited, and nothing has been done, and the
homeowner is not in touch with us. Everything remains.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The homeowner lives --
MR. MUCHA: I don't even know if the homeowner's there. I
mean, we've spoken to family members, and nothing.
MS. CURLEY: Oh. You don't think they're dead?
MR. MUCHA: No, not dead. Just not --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Mobile home, shed, storage
containers, et cetera, on the property.
Let the record show that the respondent is not present. Nobody
has been able to reach the respondent directly?
MR. MUCHA: Not directly, no, sir.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Anybody want to make a
motion?
MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion to impose the fines.
MS. CURLEY: Second.
June 23, 2021
Page 98
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and second to
impose. All those in favor?
MS. ELROD: Aye.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: 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: Thanks, Joe.
Which brings us to the last case.
MS. BUCHILLON: Yes, sir.
Number 8, CESD20190002541, Orlando Galindo and Maria
Galindo.
Respondent was notified regular and certified mail June 4th,
2021, and it was also posted at the property and courthouse June 7th,
2021.
(The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
MR. HOLMES: I do.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let the record reflect the
respondent is not present.
MR. HOLMES: For the record, Bradley Holmes, Collier
County Code Enforcement.
Past order: On February 25th, 2021, the Code Enforcement
Board issued a findings of fact, conclusion of law and order that the
respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and
ordered to correct the violations. See attached order of the Board,
OR5944, Page 926, for more information.
June 23, 2021
Page 99
The violation has been abated as of May 7th, 2021.
Fines and costs to date are as follows: Fines have accrued at a
rate of $100 per day for the period from April 27th, 2021, to May 7th,
2021, 11 days, for a total fine amount of $1,100.00. Previous
assessed operational costs of $59.28 have been paid. Operational
costs for today's hearing, $59.42. Total fine amount of $1,159.42.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Has the respondent sent a letter in?
MR. HOLMES: Yes. It's attached in the IDrive. If you don't
have a copy, we can bring that up.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I can't see that. You're getting
warmer. Because of the reflection, I can't see it.
MS. CURLEY: Yeah, the light's --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Why don't you just read it to us.
MS. PEREZ: Yes. To whom this may concern. We have many
delays from various areas in order to finalize the permit in the 60-day
time frame that we hoped to finalize said permanent.
There was shortage of material and the delivery of same material
was delayed by a few weeks. Getting roof tile delivered was delayed
for two weeks as well after being ordered and, finally, there was a
delay with Collier County Building Department and application
process and issuance.
We applied in February 15, 2021, and finally received the
issuance of our permit on April 5th, 2021. There was delays in
getting responses from building reviewers regarding the approval of
our elevation certificates and additional documentation in order to get
our permit finalized. As soon as we got the last condition and
inspection finalized, we obtained the certificate of completion.
At this time we request that our fines be waived as we are fully
compliant at this time. We thank you for your time in advance.
Best regards, Orlando Galindo.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Seeing cases that are a year
June 23, 2021
Page 100
and two years old, this one's only 11 days.
MS. CURLEY: I make a motion to deny the county's
imposition of fines including today's costs of $59.42.
MR. BLANCO: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second.
All those in favor?
MS. ELROD: Aye.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: 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.
Gerald, do you want to do the honors, make a motion we adjourn?
MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion we adjourn.
MS. CURLEY: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We are adjourned.
*****
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 11:59 a.m.
June 23, 2021
COD FORCEMENT BOARD
' B ' T Kff ► = N, CHAIRMAN
These minutes approved by the Board onSk 24,X,U, as
presented X or as corrected
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF FORT MYERS
COURT REPORTING BY TERRI LEWIS, FPR, COURT
REPORTER AND NOTARY PUBLIC.
Page 101