CEB Minutes 05/26/2022May 26, 2022
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
COLLIER COUNTY CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD
Naples, Florida, May 26, 2022
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
Kathleen Elrod
Lee Rubenstein
Tarik N. Ayasun, Alternate
John Fuentes (Excused)
Danny Blanco (Excused)
Chloe Bowman (Absent)
Sue Curley (Excused)
ALSO PRESENT:
Helen Buchillon, Code Enforcement
Elena Gonzalez, Code Enforcement
Jeff Letourneau, Manager of Investigations
Patrick White, Attorney to the Board
Page 1
May 26, 2022
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning, everybody. I'd
like to call the Code Enforcement Board to order.
Notice: That the 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 the 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 board
shall be responsible for providing this record.
Okay. Things should go fast today because we have a lot of
empty seats up here. We're going to -- we're to start with the Pledge
of Allegiance. If you'll all stand for the Pledge.
(The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: If you'd remain standing, Tarik has
something he'd like to start with.
MR. AYASUN: Thank you. As you know, we had a tragedy
yesterday or the day before in Texas. It's very close to my heart for
two reasons. One, I was president of the board for Marco Island
Charter Middle School for 21 years; very close to kids. I know how
it is in the classroom.
Second, my son, Cornell Thompson, United States Marine Corp,
he's from Uvalde, and I've been there. I've been to the community.
Beautiful place. So, please, just for 30 seconds may I have silence to
remember the people and the parents for the kids.
(Moment of silence was observed.)
Page 2
May 26, 2022
MR. AYASUN: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Before we begin, I wanted to
acknowledge that one of our long-standing folks from the Code
family, Eric Short, has moved onto another job in the county. And I
thought Eric was terrific. It's going to be a big loss to Code
Enforcement. Not only was he a supervisor here, he also ran the
North Naples task force, which I'm a member of, and he was great.
We're going to miss Eric.
Okay. Having said that, let's start with the roll call.
MS. BUCHILLON: Good morning. For the record, Helen
Buchillon, Code Enforcement.
Mr. Robert Kaufman?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Here.
MS. BUCHILLON: Ms. Kathleen Elrod?
MS. ELROD: Here.
MS. BUCHILLON: Mr. Lee Rubenstein?
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Here.
MS. BUCHILLON: And, Tarik Ayasun?
MR. AYASUN: Here.
MS. BUCHILLON: Sue Curley is excused. Mr. John Fuentes
is also excused, and Danny Blanco is excused. Chloe Bowman's
supposed to be here.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. That brings us to the
agenda. We may have a change or two?
MS. BUCHILLON: Yes, sir, we have some changes.
We actually just received a stipulation. First stipulation under
hearings, No. 1, CESD20210001477, Four Amigos 3, LLC.
And then also we have a continuance that was added to the
agenda. Under public hearings, A, motion for continuance,
CELU20190011289, Pelican Lake Property Owners Association of
Collier County, Inc., which they're all scheduled for impositions.
Page 3
May 26, 2022
And then the next, adding to the agenda -- well, it's not adding.
We have a rehearing, which it was under the wrong section by my
mistake, which I apologize, and it should be under old business,
motion for rehearing, CESD20210002916, Carlisle Wilson Plaza,
LLC.
And now the withdraws.
Under public hearings, D, hearings, No. 3, CESD20220001443,
Michael C. Peck and Svetlana V. Peck, has been withdrawn due to
compliance efforts.
Number 4, CELU20210011019, Nelson Martinez Land Holding,
LLC, has been withdrawn. It came into compliance just recently.
Number 5, CESD2020000868 1 9 Ali Abouzari, has been
withdrawn due to compliance efforts.
Under old business, motion for imposition of fines, No. 5,
CEPM20210002299, Nina Diaz, Lucia Marrero, and Alfred Diaz, Jr.,
has been withdrawn due to compliance efforts.
And those are all the changes.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Get a motion from the
Board to accept the agenda as modified.
MS. ELROD: Motion to accept.
MR. AYASUN: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Motion and second. All those in
favor?
MS. ELROD: Aye.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: (No verbal response.)
MR. AYASUN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously.
Okay. Only one stip today.
NM
May 26, 2022
MS. BUCHILLON: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It's like a different universe, okay.
So the first stip is --
MS. BUCHILLON: Number 1.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- No. 1 from hearings.
MS. BUCHILLON: Yes, CESD20210001477, Four Amigos 3,
LLC.
THE COURT REPORTER: Do you swear or affirm the
testimony you will give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth?
MR. CATHEY: I do.
MR. ALISON: I do.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Could you state your name on the
microphone for us, please.
MR. ALISON: Jay Alison.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And would you like to
read the stip into the record for us?
MR. CATHEY: Yes. For the record, Investigator Ryan
Cathey, Collier County Code Enforcement.
Therefore, it is agreed between the parties that the respondent
shall:
One, pay operational costs in the amount of $59.28 incurred in
the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing;
Two, abate all violations by: Obtain all required Collier County
building permits or demolition permit, inspections, and certificate of
completion/occupancy for the unpermitted improvement/alterations
on the second floor within 120 days of this hearing, or a fine of $200
per day will be imposed until the violation is abated;
Three, respondent must notify Code Enforcement within 24
hours of abatement of the violation and request an investigator
perform a site inspection to confirm compliance; and,
May 26, 2022
Four, that if the respondent fails to abate the violation, the
county may abate the violation using any method to bring the
violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier
County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this agreement,
and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. No problems?
MR. ALISON: No problems.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Get a motion to accept the
stipulation as written.
MS. ELROD: Motion to accept the stipulation as written.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN:
Second. All those in favor?
MS. ELROD: Aye.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN:
(No verbal response.)
MR. AYASUN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN:
Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN:
It carries unanimously.
Thank you, Ryan.
MR. CATHEY: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN:
Thank you, sir.
MR. ALISON: Thank you.
MS. BUCHILLON: Next case would be the motion for
continuance, CELU20190011289, Pelican Lake Property Owners
Association of Collier County, Inc.
THE COURT REPORTER: Do you swear or affirm the
testimony you will give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth?
MR. MUCHA: I do.
MR. BOYD: I do.
May 26, 2022
MS. COWAN: I do.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. If you could state your
name on the microphone for us, please.
MR. BOYD: Thank you, Chairman Kaufman. This is
Attorney Don Boyd, and I'm with Attorney Brittany Cowan. Good
morning to you and the members of the Code Enforcement Board.
We are here on behalf of the respondent, Pelican Lake Property
Owners Association of Collier County.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a bunch of
speaker slips. Are they going to speak or not speak?
MR. BOYD: Chairman Kaufman, we don't have the answer to
that, but I can tell you that we have filed -- we're set for the
imposition of fine hearing today, but we also filed a motion for
continuance, as we're still working with the county on some aspects
of correcting the violation. So I don't know how you wanted to hear
that or deal with that issue.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, on the continuance, how
much time do you need?
MR. BOYD: We would request 90 days, we're requesting.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And 90 days -- you're in
the process of ameliorating the situation?
MR. BOYD: That's correct. We're working with the county to
deal with some landscaping issues that are in this drainage easement,
which is at issue in the Code Enforcement case. So we're still
working with county.
The last meeting we had with the county occurred on May 16th,
which is about 10 days ago. Just, again, we're trying to ensure that
the proper buffer requirements are in this drainage easement which,
again, from our standpoint, and it's confirmed in the engineering
report that we provided, this draining easement does not serve a
purpose. It's not functional, and that's, you know, confirmed in the
Page 7
May 26, 2022
report. And we did attach a copy of that report to our -- the motion
that we have filed today.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Joe?
MR. MUCHA: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any thoughts on this?
MR. MUCHA: Well, I mean, from my standpoint, they've been
very -- you know, I mean, for a couple -- a few years now I've been
working with them, and it's a long process. All these things, it's
steps. There's been many steps. And I think at first there was
a -- you tried to vacate the drainage easement. That didn't work.
MS. COWAN: Correct.
MR. MUCHA: And they had to go another route called -- it's
an easement use agreement.
MR. BOYD: Agreement, correct.
MR. MUCHA: And that's, like, very involved and takes a lot
of approvals. And I think it looks like it's towards the finish line
now, right?
MS. COWAN: Correct.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So you're not opposed to granting
a continuance?
MR. MUCHA: I'm not against it myself. I don't have a dog in
the fight, really. I know there's some folks here from Copper Cove
that would, you know, want to give you their opinion. But as far as I
can see, they are working diligently. It's just the county -- there's
many layers when it comes to these processes.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So this is between Copper
Cove and Pelican?
MR. BOYD: That's correct. Copper Cove's the neighboring
property or the neighboring community on the side of this, kind of,
drainage easement, if you will, wherever the code enforcement issue
is occurring, if you will.
May 26, 2022
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So let me just take a wild
guess that they're going to say the opposite of you.
MR. BOYD: That would probably be a fair conclusion,
Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I can see the heads bobbing. So
why don't we start by the folks who want to -- the public to speak. I
can call you by name.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Do we have a picture, Mr. Chairman?
Do we have a picture of the property in question?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Jeff.
MR. LETOURNEAU: For the record, Jeff Letourneau, Collier
County Code Enforcement.
I can dig one up. I wasn't prepared to show any pictures, but I
can get one -- just bear with me a little bit, and I'll have one up here.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: We have pictures. We have
multiple pictures.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you have them hard copy they
can put on the visualizer?
MR. WHITE: He's not on the record, sir.
MR. LETOURNEAU: I can dig one up here in about a minute.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. LETOURNEAU: In the meantime, we could probably,
you know, start with --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. William.
MR. BLOOMQUIST: Can we start with Ron, please.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Or we can start with Ron.
Since this is a continuance, we know nothing about what's going
on there as far as the writeup other than what it says on our
paperwork which says paving of asphalt in the drainage easement as
well as trailers, pavers, wood signs, poles, miscellaneous items being
stored in the -- it's probably an eyesore is probably --
May 26, 2022
MR. MUCHA: Well, I can tell you about all those other items
that have been stored. Those have been removed. At this point it's
just the trailers and the paving into the drainage easement.
THE COURT REPORTER: Do you want me to swear them all
in?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah, why don't you swear them
all in at the same time. She can swear you in in distance; you don't
have to come up. The word of God travels throughout the whole
room.
THE COURT REPORTER: Do you swear or affirm the
testimony you will give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth?
(The speakers indicated in the affirmative.)
MR. BLOOMQUIST: Can I just give them this? It's
something I prepared.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you have a copy of this you can
put on the visualizer? If not, I'll give it to you.
MR. BLOOMQUIST: I do.
MR. LETOURNEAU: Mr. Kaufman, I do have a picture if you
want to see it.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah. Why don't we see the
picture so we know what people are talking about.
MR. WHITE: Do you have another copy?
MR. BLOOMQUIST: I have several copies.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. If you would, maybe you
can describe what we're looking at.
MR. BLOOMQUIST: My name is John Bloomquist. I'm the
president of Copper Cove HOA.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. BLOOMQUIST: I think before I say anything, first of all,
I want to thank you for the opportunity to speak, number one, and,
Page 10
May 26, 2022
number two, I want to thank you for doing what you do, because it's
not an easy job. It's well paid, I'm sure, just like we are from the
HOA board. So this is important and thank you very much for
hearing us.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We get paid double what you get
paid.
MR. BLOOMQUIST: That's a lot, yeah.
Okay. So we found out that Pelican Lakes would come before
Collier County's Board of Code Enforcement with the attached
petition through Joe Mucha. Over the last two months, we've
learned that besides receiving changes to their drainage easements
and PUD for three lots, they are now asking for code fines to be
mitigated by this board. This should not happen unless Copper Cove
Preserve has some say.
We have incurred several considerable hardships over the last
four -plus years with legal fees impacted by slightly -- unsightly
conditions coming in and out of our community, delays and loss of
time to make decisions on a recreation parcel, and much more.
Between 2017 and 2020, Pelican Lakes tried to take our
property, our well, and sued us for their own benefit and to harm
Copper Cove Preserve. Now we come before you for help.
This is not only -- this is only to do with the eastern boundary
and the applicable easement and Code Enforcement for screening of
their 10- to 12-, 14-foot trailers that are two to four feet away from
our boundary line, which does greatly impact us. From what I
understand, it is zoned for three lots on their PUD today, not storage.
Again, this is the first thing we see, our community, when entering
and leaving the community.
We are 100 percent residential, a relatively new HOA,
only -- since 200 of the homes were built since two
thousand --between 2011 and ' 14.
Page 11
May 26, 2022
I understand -- understood from the open meeting at Rookery
Bay a new 8- to 10-foot wall would be put on their boundary and was
to be placed to screen these trailers from the residential -- but it was
placed in front of their trailers to screen it from their residential
properties and not Copper Cove's.
We have even discussed the drainage coming from the asphalt to
the property line, and -- we haven't seen this, and there's not a typical
15-foot buffer between property lines.
After not being able to speak to Pelican Lakes except through
attorneys between the years 2017 and '21,1 finally went to the
general manager, and we asked to open up communications with
Copper Cove Preserves and their board of directors. We've asked
for a wall on the south -- we've asked for the wall to the south be
built around the corner and 60 yards to the preserve without success.
They insist that a five-foot minimum for lots which has been, and as I
understand it, will continue to be storage.
We've also asked for drain tiles since the drainage easement has
been mitigated or it's being mitigated by South Florida Water
Management District, which runs directly off their asphalt to Copper
Cove property.
But, again, they would not hear of this. Today we only have a
buffer that is their northeast boundary, and it's a preserve. But that
does not cover the storage area, and that's what you're looking at right
up here.
Since February, I understand their general manager, their
president, their treasurer, and others have resigned from the board of
directors. I was able to reach out to the president, John Albert, and
we talked about the code for screening storage area. It was a cordial
call, but I reminded him that there's a significantly different screening
for lots, you know. And he said he would check the requirements
and get back to me, but it would have to go before the homeowners
Page 12
May 26, 2022
and be voted on. My question is, not Code Enforcement? I mean, I
would think they would have the say in this.
I reminded him that the last five -plus years we've had to live
with an eyesore, and when we asked if Copper Cove -- when they
asked if Copper Cove would be willing to help with the expense of
the wall, I also -- he asked if we would help pay for it. I reminded
him that the responsibility to screen their storage was not Copper
Cove's, and he would get back to me and research the code
enforcement. As of today, we have not heard back.
We cannot be silent anymore. We are asking for a minimum of
a wall like the south and -- west and south roadways be completed
around the corner to the preserve. Like down the -- like the wall
down the boulevard. As stated in Statutes 4.0.2.12, the design
standards for outdoor storage. Keep in mind, today on the books it
shows that it's three lots, but they're asking for special usage for
storage, and that pavement goes right within three feet of that fence
that they have, which is the boundary line. And you can't tell
me -- and on the other side of that -- of that concrete or that asphalt is
a wall that was put on the side. And I thought it was going to be in
our boundary line, but it was put to screen them and not screen us. It
didn't seem fair.
So they keep telling us, I believe we need more than a
non -permitted five-foot chain -link fence and a hedge, especially since
their toy haulers are between 10 and 14 feet tall [sic] and parked right
up against the fence.
They want to put up a hedge, which needs to be maintained.
Who's going to irrigate? Who's going to maintain the height
properly? These are all good questions. And I just don't think it's
enough.
And the asphalt, no drainage buffer. We had asked them at one
time, can they put a drain tile on there so it goes to the preserve or the
Page 13
May 26, 2022
other side, which goes to the roadway, which has got a natural swale,
and they wouldn't do that.
So they also have two ship containers. You know those
containers you see on ships? They have two of those they're using
as buildings in there. They have a maintenance building inside
there. They have equipment storage in that area. And I believe that
the ship container is actually in their preserve. And, if I'm not
mistaken, preserves do not allow ship containers or temporary
buildings to be put on a preserve.
So all we're asking for is that they follow Collier County codes
and that this is handled fairly, and that's really all we want. We
think we owe it -- 217 homes, all single-family, and we look at this
every day going in and out of the preserve.
Now, if you look at the one -- the picture that's up there, that's an
old picture, and that picture is when they had the fence on our
property. And what they did, they moved it up to the asphalt, three
feet from the asphalt. That is not today's picture, and it doesn't show
the wall. And that is a -- to my knowledge, we have not been able to
find a permit for that fence to begin with, and it was on Copper
Cove's property. Actually, it's on our buffer. So they moved it
back, but it is right up against --
UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: This is a better picture of
todays.
MR. WHITE: Sir, if you're not on the record, you can't speak.
Wait your turn, please.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: I just wanted to give him an
updated picture.
MR. WHITE: Sit down, please.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: I will.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Jeff, do we have a plat picture available
that shows Copper Cove --
Page 14
May 26, 2022
MR. LETOURNEAU: I personally don't have one available at
my fingertips here.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let me do one thing. They are
asking for a continuance. We're not hearing the case. So all of the
pictures and everything else will come to play when the case is either
heard or not heard. So that's one thing I wanted to say.
Jeff, you want to say something?
MR. LETOURNEAU: A couple things. The case has already
been heard. There's already been a violation confirmed. There's
daily fines running right now.
This is really not the venue to talk about what they can and
cannot have going forward in the future. Joe is the Code
Enforcement officer in charge of this case. His duty is to find -- you
know, find a violation and try to get them to comply with that
particular violation. Code has no say in what they're going to be
allowed to put in there as far as fencing, buffers, this and that. That's
something they have to do in conjunction with other entities of
Growth Management: Zoning, Building Department, Engineering
Department. Whatever they're allowed to do, that's going to have to
be decided by those entities at Growth Management, not Code
Enforcement, or this board has no say in that either.
But right now, they're getting fined daily. Even if they get a
continuance, those fines will still continue to run.
If they have to go above and beyond to get something like a
conditional use or, you know, a Site Improvement Plan or something
like that, the county will reach out to the other members of the
community to get their input on, you know, what they're going to
allow them to do there.
You know, I just don't think this is really the entity that can
satisfy your requirements of, you know, not being -- to be able to do
one thing or the other as far as that easement goes.
Page 15
May 26, 2022
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: When was this --
MR. BLOOMQUIST: With all due respect, we have never
been contacted about any changes with the exception of the one on
the PUD that was at Rookery Bay when they came and said they
were going to put a 10-foot wall in the end.
MR. LETOURNEAU: I mean, I don't know the whole
situation. I don't know the zoning. I don't know where they're at as
far as getting this thing permitted. I don't even know if they need
neighborhood input. They might have some approved -- something
already approved as an accessory or primary use on that particular
property.
MR. MUCHA: If I could just say one thing, too. This
particular case is just involving the paving into the drainage
easement. It has nothing to do with walls or buffering. And that's
something that's going to be addressed with their ongoing process
that they are going to put in a hedge, which code does allow you for a
storage yard to put a 7-foot hedge in or a wall. I mean, that's nothing
I have control over, and I don't even think Copper Cove can even
object to them putting in a hedge or a wall. But this particular case
is just about the paving into the drainage easement.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So what I'm trying to get
to the bottom of -- and we'll let everybody who has requested to
speak speak -- is if you object to the continuance -- let me explain.
The continuance means they want to come back here. They're not in
compliance right now. I don't know when it was heard or when the
fines started to accrue, how much the fines are, don't know any of
that.
MR. MUCHA: I can give you --
MR. LETOURNEAU: I believe it was October of 2020 when
the case first originated here.
MR. MUCHA: February of 2020, and the fines to date are over
Page 16
May 26, 2022
$127,000.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So -- which brings us back
to you object to their request for a continuance; is that what
we're -- about the paving. That's what we're talking about?
MR. MUCHA: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Jeff, you agree to that?
MR. LETOURNEAU: I do. I don't have the order in front of
me right now, but I'm taking Joe's, you know, expertise/opinion.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So it's the continuance. I
understand what you're saying. For some reason, I don't recall this
case when it was done, and I've been around here longer than the
podium's been here. So why don't we hear, if you're done --
MR. BLOOMQUIST: I can turn it over to a few of the other
people that wanted to talk.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you.
MR. BLOOMQUIST: And I think this has been -- this pot's
been stirred long enough, and a lot of people are really frustrated on
our end. And so if it shows that way, I apologize in advance. But,
you know, we've had to deal with this. It's always a continuance.
This is the way it's always been, and then they legal up, and then they
come before these things, and they get another continuance and
another continuance and another continuance. Meanwhile, there's
217 homes in Copper Cove that look at this on a daily basis. We'd
like to do something with our recreation parcel. We'd like to take
down that temporary thing that's sitting there because we had to hide
it as best, we can because it was -- it looked terrible. And I'd be
glad -- more than happy to offer a tour and show you exactly what
we're talking about any time, because we need some help on this.
It's been dragging on too long.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Why don't we have the --
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Mr. Chairman, do we have any more
Page 17
May 26, 2022
pictures that show the overall site as in comparison to --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Helen, you have --
MR. RUBENSTEIN: -- Copper Cove?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You have a picture that you can
show on the visualizer?
MR. RUBENSTEIN: For a plat map.
MR. WHITE: Mr. Chairman, if I may, as a point of order, the
matter before you is a motion for a continuance.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I understand.
MR. WHITE: You cannot, in a sense, rehear the case from
2020, nor can you at this point in time, with all the testimony you're
likely to hear and have heard, do anything other than decide on the
continuance or not. You cannot impose additional fines. You
cannot mandate that something happen. It's beyond your
jurisdiction.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I understand. What --
MR. WHITE: In the simplest terms, this testimony is not
relevant to the continuance request.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, I understand. What Lee is
asking for is he just wants to see what they're talking about.
MR. WHITE: I understand.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay?
MR. RUBENSTEIN: I want to see how Pelican Lakes'
property butts up to Copper Cove and where the infraction is. This
picture shows me it could be anywhere in the county. Where's
Copper Cove's property line -- how does this picture affect those?
MR. WHITE: How is knowing the answer to the information
you're seeking going to affect your determination of whether a
continuance should be granted or not or what the amount of time may
be? It may have something to do with how long you think it might
be that they need. They think they need 90 days.
May 26, 2022
MR. AYASUN: Mr. White, I have a question, too.
MR. WHITE: Yes, sir.
MR. AYASUN: What if we accept or what if we deny? What
is the consequence of each case?
MR. WHITE: As staff has told you, you have an imposition of
fine case, No. 10 on your agenda today. Let's assume for the sake of
discussion, a hypothetical, that you deny the continuance. Then my
belief is you will be under imposition of fine hearings No. 10 be
considering the case.
MR. AYASUN: Right.
MR. WHITE: But my point simply is, knowing some of these
things may be relevant to whether you impose the fines or not, but as
to whether you continue the case or not, I'm not sure it matters. I
understand due process, and everybody here wants to have an
opportunity to speak, but I don't believe this is the forum where you
have any authority to do anything other than grant the continuance or
not or impose the fine or not.
MR. AYASUN: So all we are tasked with here is decide
whether we're going to allow the continuance or not; is that correct?
MR. WHITE: That's correct. And if you're going to allow it,
how much time.
MR. AYASUN: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Next speaker. We have
John, Karen, William.
MS. FINN: I'm going to speak.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Are we going to see a picture or not?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: On the picture, just so we know
what we're looking at as far as the time is concerned, do you have a
problem with that?
MR. WHITE: It's at your discretion. I'm simply trying to keep
the Board within the parameters of what you have authority to do and
Page 19
May 26, 2022
decide today.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Well, I don't think showing
a picture is going to change that much of what we're doing. Do you
have a picture of the lay of the land, Helen?
MS. BUCHILLON: No, sir.
MR. WHITE: Mr. Chairman, there was no motion made by
Mr. Bloomquist with respect to the materials he's provided you as to
whether he wants them admitted into the record or not. I know
you've probably reviewed them. He's read it almost verbatim into
the record. But there was nothing that was stated as to whether he
wants it admitted as evidence or not.
MR. BLOOMQUIST: I brought them for that purpose so you
would have them. I'd be more than glad --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Why don't you go.
MS. FINN: Okay. My name is Karen Finn, and I'm a resident
of Copper Cove. Today we came here because there was a hearing
about Pelican Lakes having their fines mitigated. When we get here,
now we find that they, Pelican Lakes, wants a continuance. So
everything that we had prepared was based on coming here for this
hearing about levying fines -- or removing the fines from Pelican
Lake, but now we're told that we can't bring any of this here because
you, or we, are only supposed to be dealing with a continuance,
another 90 days, for something that has been going on for the last
four -and -a -half years. I think this is very unfair.
My point in coming here today about not allowing these fines to
be waived from Pelican Lake is that there are three residential lots
involved in this area that they are using for a commercial storage
facility. They have never been changed. There's never been a
rerecorded plat map. There has never been an amendment or a
zoning variance in this area to allow this storage to go on. This has
been a problem since 2018.
Page 20
May 26, 2022
So what are we supposed to do here today, wait, and now just
have you rule on some continuance and come back and be able to
present our reasons why we are upset with this whole situation that
has been going on since 2018?
When Pelican Lake submitted three parcels for permits for a
fence to be replaced after Irma, and one of those parcels is part of this
area that we are here today talking about, that they never continued
the fence in the permit they got. Why was the county signing off on
it? Why was it never completed correctly?
So here we are. So that's all, really, I have to say, because if
we're only here for a continuance, what I have to say means nothing.
And I want to know when we can come back when it does mean
something to this board and to the code.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, if a continuance is not
granted by the Board, then we're going to hear Item 10, which is the
imposition of the fine.
MS. FINN: Okay.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And if the fine is imposed, and it's
still not brought into compliance, the fines continue to accrue.
MS. FINN: All right.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So I hope that answers that portion
of your question.
MS. FINN: And if the continuance isn't issued and we hear this
about these fines, how much longer is this going to go on?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Until they run out of money.
MS. FINN: Just saying that the fines are going to be given to
these people does not bring this property into compliance in any way,
manner, or form.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, fines are generally the
method that is used to get compliance.
MS. FINN: But it hasn't happened since 2020.
Page 21
May 26, 2022
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And they have been accruing
since.
MS. FINN: And so?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And they're up to what, Joe,
100-and-some-odd thousand dollars?
MR. MUCHA: $127,000.
MS. FINN: They could have put a fence in by now.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MS. FINN: All right. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Thank you.
We have another speaker? John Lovera.
MR. LOVERA: Lovera.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And for vou. Patrick, it's
L-o-v-e-r-a.
MR. LETOURNEAU: Mr. Kaufman, I'd like to put up the
original order if you guys --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah.
MR. LOVERA: My name's John Lovera. I'm a resident of
Copper Cove.
Most of the points I had in my statement have been brought up,
especially all these properties are residential. They are running a
storage facility there. They collect rent from their HOA people for
that storage facility.
Why it's been allowed? You know, across the road on 951 we
have a storage center that pays property taxes and collects sales tax
and so forth. These properties, the assessment on them are only
$100. They are not being assessed for property tax, yet they are
producing income, number one.
The other, I have -- I gave a pit photograph of the storage
containers which were put on. I did make a complaint to the code
department about four years ago about these storage containers. I
Page 22
May 26, 2022
believe the county has a rule against storage containers on residential
properties.
The county's been granting continuous exemptions for these
containers because Pelican comes to them saying that they have
building permits, and they need these containers to hold material in.
Is the photograph of that -- can you show that?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, we need a motion from the
Board to accept that photo. Do you have a motion?
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. AYASUN: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
second. All those in favor?
MS. ELROD: Aye.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
Do we have a second?
We have a motion and
MR. AYASUN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So we can show that photo now.
MR. LOVERA: This photo is an example; it's right on the line
with our development. There's an orange trailer and a gray one that
have been there since 2017. You can see the growth growing on it.
Those containers are in a wildlife preserve. They are not in the rec
parcels that the shipping containers are on. So this is the example of
what Ron was talking about earlier. This is why we are frustrated.
So that's about all I really have to say. I think the other
owners --
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Sir.
MR. LOVERA: Yes.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Is the property on the right of the fence
Page 23
May 26, 2022
Copper Cove?
MR. LOVERA: Correct, sir. We have a 15-foot buffer as
required by our PUD. They have a 15-foot buffer as required by
their. They are not following that. They have -- I have one other
where their actual trailers are.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Our motion covers both pictures.
MR. LOVERA: They have -- that's the pavement. It's
three -and -a -half feet from our fence now. They moved the fence
back because they were 11 feet on our property. They sued us for
adverse possession. We won the case, and they moved the fence
back.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let me ask a question, just to
clarify my mind. On the other case, not hearing anything, were they
cited for these violations?
MR. MUCHA: For the storage containers?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah, I can't read what you put up,
Jeff.
MR. MUCHA: That was actually on a separate parcel than the
one we're dealing with today.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. But it was a case that was
heard, and they were cited?
MR. MUCHA: I don't think it ever came to a hearing, or it
might have. It's been a few years I've been dealing with this, so...
MR. LETOURNEAU: What we're here for right now is spelled
out in the bold letters right here. That's what we're imposing -- that's
what we're asking to impose on today.
Observe paving of asphalt into the drainage easement as well as
trailers, pavers, wood signs, signs poles, and other miscellaneous
items being stored in the drainage easement. That's what the county
brought for imposition today, and that's what they're asking for a
continuance on.
Page 24
May 26, 2022
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, gotcha.
MR. MUCHA: And so, basically, all those other items besides
the trailers have been removed from the easement.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. LOVERA: No.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do we have any other
speakers?
MR. LOVERA: Thank you for your time.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you. Do we have any other
speakers?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Hearing none, maybe the
respondent and --
MR. WHITE: Mr. Chairman, I mean, I'm trying to help stay
between the lines of procedural due process today.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. WHITE: I think you at least need to ask whether the
counsel for the respondent desire to cross-examine any of the
witnesses, at least put it on the record whether they chose to or not so
that we're kind of following our own rules.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So what he said, do you
want to cross-examine any of the witnesses? They've been sworn.
MR. BOYD: Chairman Kaufman, I don't think we're going to
exercise our right to cross-examine the witnesses. Again, I think I
would agree with counsel here, what they've essentially said is kind
of far afield from what we're asking for in connection with the
limited request of a continuance today.
MS. COWAN: But if I may, I would just like to briefly address
a couple things and clarify some issues related strictly just to the
continuance itself and that request.
So a couple things: It is actually zoned TTRV permitted use
Page 25
May 26, 2022
under the PUD. 3.3.B is trailer storage. The three lots in question
actually did receive site development approval back in the '90s for
trailer storage.
We do understand -- Pelican Lake completely understands the
concerns of Copper Cove. It's an eyesore. We get that. So part of
the process -- and Joe Mucha was just on the recent call with this.
We have already obtained district permits from South Florida Water
Management related to the drainage easement and the ditch, so that
was a process. We had to go through that process. Once we
obtained the district approval, which was October of last year, we had
to submit that, then, to county Stormwater Division. We obtained
Stormwater approval already for the encroachments, being the trailers
and the pavement. So we did obtain that in November of last year.
What's the remaining piece of this, to screen this properly, we
have to comply, as I think it was Mr. Lovera mentioned, with the
outdoor storage requirements for trailer storage. So we have to
comply with that as well as our Pelican Lake PUD.
So we have proposed, and we have presented both to Mark
Templeton at landscaping and to the newest Stormwater manager.
We've submitted the landscaping proposal, but because it is a
drainage easement and it's all overlapping on our PUD, we have to
get an additional approval from Stormwater before we can make any
planting and screening right now. Otherwise, it would be potentially
subject to another code violation.
So that's the last piece that we're waiting on. That's why we've
requested the continuance today.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And you believe that in 90
days you're going to have everything done?
MS. COWAN: Yes. So everything's been submitted. We
just had our -- as Mr. Mucha mentioned, we had our last meeting
with county Monday, May 16th. At that point we proposed all of the
Page 26
May 26, 2022
additional landscaping. We met with Mark Templeton. We've been
meeting with -- Stormwater actually just changed over this week, so
there's now a new person in Stormwater that's being brought up to
speed. But we've been actively pursuing this. We absolutely want
to screen the storage area. We have submitted proposals for that.
We'd be happy to share them with Copper Cove as well. But they
have been submitted to county.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Can we ask a question?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. The public hearing is
closed.
So everything is going to be done in 90 days, so you hope.
MS. COWAN: Yeah. So the remaining piece would be
Stormwater approval to now put the plants we already have for the
pavement, and the storage trailer, approval for that from Stormwater,
but to put the plantings there because there is 100 percent overlap
between the PUD and the landscaping requirements with the drainage
easement. So we want to get approval for that before we plant
anything, because we don't want to have another code issue on our
hands.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So in 90 days --
MS. COWAN: Correct.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- if everything is -- and I'm talking
to you folks to the left side of my head. If everything is done, the
respondent then has to come back, and we will either impose all or
part or none of the accrued fine.
There's a big difference between when we hear the imposition of
fines whether they have come into compliance or not. So I just
wanted to make that clear.
Jeff?
MR. LETOURNEAU: No, you said pretty much what I was
going to say.
Page 27
May 26, 2022
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN:
Board?
Oh, boy. So comments from the
MS. ELROD: Regardless as to whether we do a continuance or
not, it's still going to take them that long to get it done.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I believe you're correct.
MS. ELROD: So I'll make a motion to grant the continuance.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do we have a second?
MR. AYASUN: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. Okay.
MR. AYASUN: But remember the fines continue.
MS. COWAN: Absolutely.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: They continue to accrue.
Okay. I believe that this is going to be the end of the road for
your problems once this is resolved within the next three months. If
it's not, the fines will continue to accrue. And the last thing that can
be done when these are written up is that the county can abate the
situation and charge that back to the people who are violating the
law/ordinance.
Okay. Any other comments on the motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hearing none, all those in favor?
MS. ELROD: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. AYASUN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. It passes. Ninety days.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Nay.
MR. BOYD: Thank you, Chairman. Thank you, Board.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: One nay.
MR. WHITE: Relative to the imposition case, No. 10, my
understanding is -- and, Helen, I may be wrong.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Change the agenda.
I
May 26, 2022
MR. WHITE: While counsels here, they want to withdraw the
item, and that would require the Board to amend the agenda to allow
them to withdraw with it.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, I'm not sure. If we have
granted a continuance, doesn't that automatically -- we change the
agenda to just remove it?
MR. WHITE: It's still an item on the agenda. It's more a
formality of process.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So, Counselor, will you
withdraw Item 10?
MR. WHITE: It's the county's request to withdraw, sir.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. WHITE: I'm sorry. I'm trying to fill in for
Mr. Letourneau.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. LETOURNEAU: Thank you, Mr. White.
Yeah, due to the fact that the continuance was granted, the
county will withdraw the imposition at this point.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. WHITE: You need a motion to amend the agenda to
withdraw it.
MS. ELROD: I'll make a motion to withdraw it.
MR. AYASUN: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. All those in favor?
MS. ELROD: Aye.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: (No verbal response.)
MR. AYASUN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously.
Page 29
May 26, 2022
And I need a motion to amend the agenda.
MS. ELROD: Motion to amend the agenda.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And it's seconded. All those in
favor?
MS. ELROD: Aye.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: No.
MR. AYASUN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It passes unanimously.
MS. ELROD: In ninety days it should be taken care of.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I believe your problems are
actually going to be resolved, and I'll be here in three months.
Hopefully.
MR. BLOOMQUIST: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you.
Now we have a nice intimate meeting. We have all the
distractions removed, and Jeff has disappeared, but that's okay. We
can continue.
MS. BUCHILLON: Okay. Next case under public hearings,
motion for extension of time, No. 1, CESD20210000240, Parrots in
Paradise Trust, which they are also scheduled for imposition.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
THE COURT REPORTER: Do you swear or affirm the
testimony you will give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth?
MS. PATTERSON: I do.
MR. WETZEL: I do.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Sir, if you could put your name on
the mic for us, please. Put it up a little bit.
MR. WETZEL: I do.
Page 30
May 26, 2022
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Tell us your name.
MR. WETZEL: Kent Wetzel.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And you are --
MR. WETZEL: The owner of the trust.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Sherry?
MS. PATTERSON: Sherry Patterson, Collier County Code
Enforcement.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: This has to do with alteration
work, enclosed lanai without required permits, et cetera.
MS. PATTERSON: Yes.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN:
continuance on this case?
Okay. So you are requesting a
MR. WETZEL: Yes. The reason for that is that when I first
got the notice, I thought this was going to be something very easy. I
went to two builders that I know in Collier County, and they both
looked at this, and they said, oh, we can take care of this. We'll hire
an engineer, have them come out and look at it. And trying to find
an engineer in today's environment to do a project that's that small
when they've got requests to do projects that are that big is very
difficult.
So as time went by and I kept following up with them and
saying, are we going to get the engineer out there? Are we going to
get the engineer? And, finally, they sort of went, we can't find
anybody that wants to accept the small project.
So a friend of a friend recommended Russ, who has submitted
all the documents to date. What this started out as, I bought this
house 10 years ago, and a neighbor complained that said it's an illegal
structure. Well, the first thing I did was I went down to Collier
County and said, can I get a copy of the original building permit?
Well, it was built in the '70s, and nobody had a copy. They searched
their records; it wasn't available.
Page 31
May 26, 2022
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN:
It's on microfiche, but go ahead.
MR. WETZEL: Yeah, it wasn't. Yeah, microfiche, yeah.
And what this was was this was a true Florida room at the time it
was built, concrete slab, 3-foot wall around it, the jalousie crank -out
windows.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let me cut -- make this a little
shorter.
MR. WETZEL: Oh, okay. What I'm asking for is -- I know.
I got sidetracked.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN:
MR. WETZEL: Yes.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN:
the house?
MR. WETZEL: Correct.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN:
it CO'ed with a --
MR. WETZEL: Correct.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN:
into compliance?
Let me just ask one question.
Was this done before you bought
So that means you're trying to get
-- with an architect to bringing it
MR. WETZEL: And we're about that close to having it all
done now. And I think Sherry will agree we've submitted -- my
engineers -- the engineer I've finally got has submitted everything.
Code Enforcement's come back. We need one more document, and I
think he got that all in yesterday. And so I'm hoping that within the
next -- I think they have a meeting next Wednesday, and I'm hoping
that they're going to say "we're going to give you a permit on next
Wednesday."
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So it's permit by --
MR. WETZEL: Affidavit.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- affidavit.
And, Sherry, do you have any comments on this?
Page 32
May 26, 2022
MS. PATTERSON: I understand. I talked to Mr. Wetzel
earlier today about what was going on. I kind of filled him in on the
code side from what we see. And I know that he's diligently
working on it.
What county has to say is that he was granted 180 days back in
October 29th, 2021, and it's taken him six months to get to where he's
at right now. And so, you know, and he's looking for a 90-day
extension.
Right now the permit is in reject status. There are still some
things he needs to, you know, take care of, get that done, and I talked
to him about that, so I'm sure he'll be going back down there to talk to
the county and get it all finished out. But that's what the county has
to say about it.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So you think this could be done in
30 days?
MR. WETZEL: I'm very well -- I would say 99 percent sure it
will be done in 30 days.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. But you're requesting 90
days just in case?
MR. WETZEL: Just in case, yeah. I've never had to do this
before, and the engineer that I've got right now is very good. I'm
just, you know --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Okay.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Motion to accept.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Motion to accept --
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Continuance.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- for 90 days.
MS. ELROD: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second to
accept the continuance for 90 days. All those opposed?
(No response.)
Page 33
May 26, 2022
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. You have 90 days.
MR. WETZEL: One other thing is I know we have a --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: No more questions. I'm only
kidding you.
MR. WETZEL: I know there's supposed to be a fine that is
accruing, and I'm hoping that -- you know, that I really have been
working on this, that we can do something that we don't -- I've had to
hire -- the engineer cost me $3,000, and I'm hoping I don't --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The fines will continue to accrue
until you come into compliance.
MR. WETZEL: Okay.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: At that time we will hear for the
imposition or non -imposition or modification of the fine at that time.
MR. WETZEL: Okay.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So you can make your plea
now, but it's going on deaf ears until you come into compliance.
MR. WETZEL: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Jeff?
MR. LETOURNEAU: For the record, Jeff Letourneau, Collier
County Code Enforcement.
We would like to withdraw our imposition due to the fact that
you gave the 90-day continuance.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MS. ELROD: Motion to modify the agenda.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. AYASUN: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second.
All those in favor?
MS. ELROD: Aye.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
Page 34
May 26, 2022
MR. AYASUN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So, Helen, you can strike
that from the motion to impose.
MS. BUCHILLON: Got it.
MS. PATTERSON: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thanks, Sherry.
MR. WETZEL: Thank you.
MS. BUCHILLON: Next case under motions, motion for
extension of time, No. 2, CESD20210008551, Robert Vocisano and
Mario Vocisano.
THE COURT REPORTER: Do you swear or affirm the
testimony you will give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth?
MS. BAEZ: I do.
MR. GONZALEZ: I do.
MS. PEREZ: I do.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. You can bring the
microphone down. That's my level, okay.
MS. BAEZ: Maglie Baez.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And?
MR. GONZALEZ: Ariel Gonzalez.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Cristine.
MS. PEREZ: Good morning. Cristina Perez, Collier County
Code Enforcement.
This is a request from the respondent for an extension of time.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: How much time are you
requesting?
MS. BAEZ: I'm requesting at least 90 days.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And the reason for your
request?
MS. BAEZ: Is we have been putting in for the permit, but they
Page 35
May 26, 2022
keep rejecting it because they need more information from the
architect and the contractor. So that's what they're working on right
now.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And you think --
MS. BAEZ: We have put in for the permits, but they have been
rej ected.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Are you familiar with what
the rejection --
MS. PEREZ: It's an extensive list of structural rejections and
fire -- the fire review rejections. So my conversation with
Ms. Maglie this morning was that they're intending to convert -- the
two rooms that were in violation, just to revert them back to their
original state due to the extensive amount of work that they're being
requested to submit.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN:
back to what it was before?
MS. BAEZ: Uh-huh.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN:
Okay. So you're going to return it
And I know that every time you
get involved with the fire, that takes --
MS. BAEZ: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- more time than making a baby.
Okay. Anybody want to make a motion?
MS. ELROD: I'll make a motion.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Question.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes, Lee.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Are you working with the general
contractor?
MS. BAEZ: Yes. He's the general contractor.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Okay.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You're going to have it done in 60
days?
Page 36
May 26, 2022
MR. GONZALEZ: I hope.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: There's no hope here. You've got
to do it.
MS. ELROD: They were requesting 90.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Ninety, I mean.
MR. GONZALEZ: To bring it back to the original condition,
the Fire is still asking for the same thing, many things. But the
architect work on that right now.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. GONZALEZ: He said maybe he get done maybe one or
two weeks.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Does this have anything to
do with the size of the windows, that you can use them to get out
during a fire?
MS. BAEZ: No.
MR. GONZALEZ: No, it's not about that.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Good.
Anybody want to make a motion?
MS. ELROD: I'll make a motion to grant 90 days.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second.
Any discussion on the motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Hearing none, all those in favor?
MS. ELROD: Aye.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. AYASUN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously.
Page 37
May 26, 2022
MR. LETOURNEAU: Once again, sir, the county would like
to withdraw their imposition at this point.
MR. WHITE: From Agenda 8.
MS. ELROD: Make a motion to modify the agenda.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. AYASUN: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor?
MS. ELROD: Aye.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: (No verbal response.)
MR. AYASUN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously.
Helen is diligently writing.
MS. BUCHILLON: Next case, No. 3, CESD20210011051,
Polly Ave, LLC. They're also scheduled for imposition.
THE COURT REPORTER: Do you swear or affirm the
testimony you will give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth?
MR. MUCHA: I do.
MS. MEDINA: I do.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Joe, you want to give us a
quickie on this?
MR. MUCHA: Yes. So basically there was four permits that
had been expired, and they've reactivated those permits. And there
was some issues with cleanup at the site; they've taken care of those
issues. And I feel like since Julie has come on board with this,
things are moving in the right direction.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And you are requesting a
continuance of how much time?
May 26, 2022
THE COURT REPORTER: Your name?
MS. MEDINA: Oh, hi. I'm Julie Medina on behalf of Clear
Development. We're the general contractor on file.
And Polly Ave, LLC, the owners, have flown in from Argentina
to be part of this hearing.
We actually believe that we've complied with everything and do
not need to extend the time. We've -- the permits are active again.
We've cleaned up the site, and so we're requesting that the violation
be removed and the fee be abated.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Two different items.
MS. MEDINA: Yep. Yes, yes.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So the first thing is, are you
withdrawing your request for a continuation?
MS. MEDINA: Yes. Well, have we complied, Joe? I'm
sorry.
MR. MUCHA: No, because the order is that you have to get
the inspections and close out the permits. I think I explained that to
you before --
MS. MEDINA: Okay.
MR. MUCHA: -- that that was part of the --
MS. MEDINA: Okay. It's a 24-month project, so...
MR. MUCHA: This is a new development off of Santa Barbara
going --
MR. LETOURNEAU: So I have the order up right here,
Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes.
MR. LETOURNEAU: It does say that they have to get the
permits, get the inspections, and certificates of completion or
occupancy before this is settled.
MS. MEDINA: Okay. So --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So you are requesting a
Page 39
May 26, 2022
continuance. We're back to that.
MS. MEDINA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Of how much time?
MS. MEDINA: Right now our schedule shows -- and we could
give you a copy of the schedule -- shows that it will be certificate of
completion on April I st, 2024. That's why I'm a little confused,
because I thought that the violation was because the permits were
expired.
MR. LETOURNEAU: For the record, Jeff Letourneau, Collier
County Code Enforcement.
When we come across a code violation, a permitting violation,
when you have expired permits or the work has stopped and you're
not in compliance anymore, when we bring it before the Board, we
ask for the permits to be reissued, the inspections done, and the
certificate of completion to be done on all our permitting cases.
Just because, historically, if we just asked for the permits to be
reissued, once again, you guys could just let it expire, a new property
owner could buy the property and be stuck with this stuff. So we
make sure that the property owner follows through with what they
need to do.
MS. MEDINA: Okay. And there is a little bit of history,
which we've discussed with Joe and with Adam previously. Because
of COVID and the prior GC that was in charge of the project, let the
permits expire, and that's why ownership came in from Argentina to
kind of explain that we're in charge. Claro (phonetic) has a good
record with Collier County.
MR. LETOURNEAU: And what I'd like to say is this is not
your normal shed or something like that. This is a big project.
MS. MEDINA: Forty-eight units.
MR. LETOURNEAU: So, obviously, it's going to take a long
time to build. And the county wouldn't be objecting to maybe a
May 26, 2022
pretty decent first extension and maybe the report, they come back at
some point and give you the progress reports or --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: This is all -- how many buildings
are we talking about?
MS. MEDINA: It's 48 units.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Forty-eight units.
MS. MEDINA: Townhomes.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN:
one at a time or all at once?
Are you going to have them CO'ed
MS. MEDINA: No, all at once.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's the problem.
MR. LETOURNEAU: Well, I mean, we could -- I mean, the
continuance could go on, and maybe they come back in six months
and give you a progress report where they're at. You know, I mean,
we've done that before.
MR. MUCHA: I mean, we came for four permits, so we didn't
come for 48 permits.
MS. MEDINA: Correct, four permits.
MR. MUCHA: So however you want to do it. I mean --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I think six months is a reasonable
time to come back to make sure we're making progress on getting
everything done.
MS. MEDINA: Okay. We're in agreement to that. We're
happy to do that.
MR. WHITE: Point of order, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes.
MR. WHITE: This is an LLC. And, ma'am -- I didn't get your
last name, Julie.
MS. MEDINA: Medina.
MR. WHITE: Medina. Ms. Medina had indicated that the
owners are present, and my, you know, quick research shows that the
Page 41
May 26, 2022
manager of the LLC --
MS. MEDINA: Victor Bazzano.
MR. WHITE: Is he present?
MS. MEDINA: Yes.
MR. WHITE: Would he be able to come forward and at least
put on the record that you're authorized as their agent?
MS. MEDINA: Oh, sure. And he's mentioned it before to Joe,
but --
MR. WHITE: I understand, but we're talking about record.
(A conversation was had in Spanish.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: What she said.
MR. WHITE: Will he require a translator?
MS. MEDINA: I can't translate? No.
MR. WHITE: The answer is yes.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Only if you know both languages.
MR. WHITE: If you can translate, that's fine. Please -- he has
to be sworn. No, no, no. Come to the podium, please.
THE COURT REPORTER: Do you swear or affirm that you
will translate everything from English to Spanish and Spanish to
English to the best of your ability?
MS. MEDINA: I swear. I do.
THE COURT REPORTER: Do you swear or affirm the
testimony you will give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth?
MR. BAZZANO: Yes.
(A conversation was had in Spanish.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So you asked him if --
MS. MEDINA: If I'm authorized to speak on behalf of Polly
Ave, LLC.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And he said "si." Okay, just for
the record.
Page 42
May 26, 2022
MR. WHITE: Thank you very much.
MS. MEDINA: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So six months we're going
to see what kind of progress is going to be made, and at that time if
you want to request, based on all the things that have been done, an
additional amount of time, we certainly would hear that.
MS. MEDINA: Joe, yes?
MR. MUCHA: That's fair, yes.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We're done. Hold on.
MR. LETOURNEAU: I think Mr. White was just telling me
that the reason we got him on the record is that he doesn't have to fly
all the way back from Argentina next time. We already know she's a
representative of this company.
MS. MEDINA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. He's happy about that.
MR. WHITE: Unless you want to enjoy the Florida weather.
MR. BAZZANO: Beach.
MS. MEDINA: Okay, great. So we'll stay for hearing No. 12,
for Item No. 12? No?
MR. LETOURNEAU: At this point the county would like
to -- well, did you guys vote on the continuance yet?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes.
MR. LETOURNEAU: You did?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I thought you made the motion.
MS. ELROD: I made the motion to continue for six months.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: I second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor?
MS. ELROD: Aye.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: (No verbal response.)
MR. AYASUN: Aye.
Page 43
May 26, 2022
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously.
MR. LETOURNEAU: At this point, the county would like to
withdraw their imposition of fine request.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And then we modify the
agenda.
MS. ELROD: I make a motion to amend the agenda --
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Second.
MS. ELROD: -- again.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor?
MS. ELROD: Aye.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: (No verbal response.)
MR. AYASUN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously.
Okay.
MS. MEDINA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Adios. I just used my whole
Spanish repertoire.
MS. BUCHILLON: Okay. And the last motion for extension
of time, No. 4, CESD20210001565, Maria Velazquez, and she is also
scheduled for imposition of fines.
MR. LETOURNEAU: Okay. Mr. Chairman, I believe that the
respondent didn't bring an interpreter, so we ask the Board if it's okay
for Supervisor Perez to be the interpreter for her.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes.
MR. LETOURNEAU: Thank you.
THE COURT REPORTER: Do you swear or affirm that you
May 26, 2022
will translate everything from English to Spanish and Spanish to
English to the best of your ability?
MS. PEREZ: Yes.
THE COURT REPORTER: Do you swear or affirm the
testimony you will give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth?
MR. MARINOS: I do.
MS. VELAZQUEZ: (Through interpreter) Yes.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Here we are. You want to
give us a little --
MS. ELROD: History lesson.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah, a little backdrop on what
we're doing today.
MR. MARINOS: Absolutely. For the record, Investigator
Jordan Marinos, Collier County Code Enforcement, in reference to
Case CESD20210001565.
Ms. Maria Velazquez's case originated from a 2006 permit that
Ms. Velazquez was led to believe was completed. She found out
later on that was not the case. There were a few permits involved:
a CO for a pool and spa permit as well as a demolition permit for an
overhang that was built without a permit. She got those two taken
care of. The third one is still open due to some problems that have
come up. Essentially, there were some modifications made after the
permit was done, so that permit can no longer be used. She's having
to start from scratch.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And that's for what?
MR. MARINOS: The original 2006 permit modifications to
the home.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: To the home?
MR. MARINOS: Yes.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's to the overhang, whatever?
Page 45
May 26, 2022
MR. MARINOS: No, the overhang was taken care of as well
as the pool/spa permit.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Gotcha, okay. Okay. And the
respondent is being -- is asking for how much time?
MS. PEREZ: She says that she's asking for six months.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Are you familiar with what
needs to be done? I know you can't talk for the Building
Department, but is that a --
MR. MARINOS: That is a fairly reasonable time. There is a
lot of work left to be done kind of from start to finish, really. She's
made as much progress as you can, but engineering drawings have
been an issue along with new FEMA regulations that we are just kind
of navigating through as well.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Because ordinarily we
grant a continuance, the fines are going to continue to accrue. So it's
in her best interest to get everything done as quickly as possible.
Okay. Does she want to testify through you?
MS. VELAZQUEZ: No.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MS. ELROD: I'll make a motion to grant the six months.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a motion to grant
the six months, and seconded. All those in favor?
MS. ELROD: Aye.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: (No verbal response.)
MR. AYASUN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously.
MR. LETOURNEAU: Once again, we'd like to withdraw the
May 26, 2022
imposition of fines, please.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MS. ELROD: Make a motion to modify the agenda.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And, once again, we modified the
agenda. I can't read that far away.
MR. WHITE: You need a second and a vote.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor?
MS. ELROD: Aye.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: (No verbal response.)
MR. AYASUN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously.
Okay. Terri, you okay for eight more minutes?
THE COURT REPORTER: (Nods head.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And the international
symbol for break is (indicating). Okay. Which brings us to --
MS. BUCHILLON: Which brings us to --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- Case 2, I guess.
MS. BUCHILLON: -- D, hearings, No. 2, CESD20220001044,
Black River Rock, LLC.
MR. RODRIGUEZ: Good morning.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. Could you put
your name on the microphone for us.
MR. RODRIGUEZ: I'm Joel Rodriguez.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And I remember --
MR. GONZALEZ: Ariel Gonzalez.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And he's the contractor?
MR. RODRIGUEZ: Yes.
THE COURT REPORTER: Do you swear or affirm the
Page 47
May 26, 2022
testimony you will give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth?
MS. PEREZ: Yes, I do.
MR. RODRIGUEZ: Yes.
MR. GONZALEZ: I do.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. You want to read the --
MS. PEREZ: Yes, sir. Good morning. For the record,
Cristina Perez, Collier County Code Enforcement.
This is in reference to Case No. CESD20220001044 dealing
with violation of the Collier County Land Development Code 04-41,
as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a) and Section
10.02.06(B)(1)(e)(i) in reference to an unpermitted wall with door
installation in the rear of the unit located at 12285 Collier Boulevard,
Naples, Florida, 34116. Folio No. 35778480008.
Personal service was given on February 28, 2022.
This case was opened as a referral from the Collier County
Contractors Licensing Division at the end of January 2022.
Contact was first made with the tenant, Mr. Joel, but no contact
has been possible or received from the ownership, Black River Rock,
LLC. The notice of violation was issued on February 17th, 2022.
Mr. Joel has stated that he is working with his contractor to
obtain the permit for the uncompleted work, but to this date there's
been no application that's been submitted.
On May 23rd, 2022, the investigator, Bradley Holmes, spoke to
Mr. Joel and his contractor, Mr. Gonzalez, and they advised that they
were about 15 days away from submitting a permit application
packet, but as of today the violation remains.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. I'm surprised that this
didn't turn into a stipulation, but...
MS. PEREZ: Unfortunately, because there hasn't been contact
with the LLC or their representative to grant authorization to the
May 26, 2022
contractor or to the tenant, that's why we did not proceed forward to
sign a stipulated agreement.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Is this commercial or
residential?
MS. PEREZ: This is a commercial property.
So I'd like to present the case evidence in the following exhibits:
It is one photograph that was taken by Contractors Licensing Officer
Orlando Ramos, and then there's also the building determination from
Contractors Licensing and the Building Department.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Get a motion from the
Board to accept the exhibits?
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Motion to accept.
MR. AYASUN: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Second. All those in favor?
MS. ELROD: Aye.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: (No verbal response.)
MR. AYASUN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously.
MR. LETOURNEAU: Just for the record, have they seen these
pictures, Cristina, this picture?
MS. PEREZ: I don't --
MR. RODRIGUEZ: No.
MR. LETOURNEAU: Sir, I got it right here. Sir, can you
come over?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I told you it's "beneca."
MR. LETOURNEAU: This is the picture. So do you have any
objection?
MR. RODRIGUEZ: Those pictures were illegally taken.
May 26, 2022
MS. PEREZ: It was taken from the alleyway. It's a
photograph from the rear, a bay door from --
MR. RODRIGUEZ: Illegally taken.
MS. PEREZ: From the alleyway with an open door.
MR. RODRIGUEZ: No one had sent him to my property to
take those pictures. No one put a complaint against me. It was to
the other guy. It was to the other unit, Unit No. 2.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Are you objecting to those pictures
being --
MR. RODRIGUEZ: It's not that I'm objecting, but I'm just
saying what I know.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's the question, though.
That's -- generally the objection is you say, that's a picture but not of
my unit or whatever, but --
MR. RODRIGUEZ: It is my unit --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. RODRIGUEZ: -- but it is an illegal picture taken because
he was not sent there by his superior to investigate my unit. He went
to a different unit. So he started taking picture of my unit without no
one telling him to do that.
MS. PEREZ: I'm assuming when he says "he," he's referring to
Contractors Licensing --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Contractors Licensing.
MS. PEREZ: -- because the case was referred to Code from us
[sic].
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. RODRIGUEZ: Exactly.
MR. LETOURNEAU: At this point I would have question of
whether or not you have authorization to be here on the owners' -- to
represent the owner of the property.
MR. RODRIGUEZ: I'm not being here on the owner's
Page 50
May 26, 2022
representation. No one ever write to me or say to me that the owner
needed to give me anything. If you did, I need to see that document
because other than that I would have reached out to them and say you
need to give me an authorization. But at no point that was sent to
me on a written paper that say you need this and this. All they asked
me was to get a general contractor and bring this to code, which is
what I'm doing, because I'm renting over there.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Who was notified as to a violation?
Was it the LLC?
MS. PEREZ: The LLC is the owner of record.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So the LLC --
MR. RODRIGUEZ: But his violation is to me.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hold on, hold on. The LLC was
notified. They should be here, or they could authorize you or
somebody else to be here.
MR. RODRIGUEZ: Where is the notification?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It went to the LLC.
MR. RODRIGUEZ: Where is it at? Don't she have a copy?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Helen, do you have a copy of the
notification?
MS. BUCHILLON: I'd like to clarify the complaint from our
Contractors Licensing. The case did come in as a complaint
according to the record of the Contractors Licensing case.
Mr. Joel, is your unit Unit No. 6?
MR. RODRIGUEZ: Yes.
MS. PEREZ: Yeah. The code case came in as interior
remodeling without a permit. Address is 12285 Collier Boulevard,
Unit No. 6. So Contractors Licensing reacted to their case and, in
return, referred it over to us as no contractor involvement.
MR. RODRIGUEZ: Contractor Licensing went there for a
different unit, and the guy from that unit told him that I have done the
Page 51
May 26, 2022
same thing.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Contractors Licensing can drive by
my house and find me in violation. They don't have to have a
specific place to go. If they see a violation, they write it up.
MR. RODRIGUEZ: I respect that.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Cristine -- oh, you have that?
MS. BUCHILLON: The NOV, yes.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes.
MS. BUCHILLON: Yes.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MS. BUCHILLON: There's a copy of the NOV in here.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Could you give that to the
respondent, or a copy of it?
MR. WHITE: And point of order, for the record, Mr. Chairman
and board members.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah.
MR. WHITE: He's testified he's a tenant, and under the
definition, that makes him a violator. The distinction is that any
fines that might be imposed are imposed against the owning --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: LLC.
MR. WHITE: -- LLC.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I understand.
MR. WHITE: I'm just putting it on the record so it's clear.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: No, but the respondent said that he
hasn't seen anything, so we're just going to show him that the LLC
was notified of the violation.
MR. WHITE: My point is he is not the respondent. He is,
however, categorized as the violator.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. LETOURNEAU: And I would also like to point out that
the county would have a problem with him objecting to see this
Page 52
May 26, 2022
picture since he doesn't have the full authorization of the LLC.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yep. But just to be Johnny nice
guy, we will give him a copy.
MR. LETOURNEAU: Right. I'm readv to put it uD at this
point.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. RODRIGUEZ: The only thing I came was, I'm trying to
help out. I don't want to leave anybody in limbo. It was hard for
me to get -- I was referred to different engineers to help me out, and
like some other people say, it was hard to get that. I know him for a
while, and I ask him to help me. The first guy wanted $9,000. I
thought it was a lot of money for an engineer to ask me for those
drawings.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Now, Patrick --
MR. WHITE: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- if he's not authorized to make
decisions based on LLC giving permission, is he still authorized to
speak?
MR. WHITE: Absolutely. You can hear his testimony --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. WHITE: -- the same as you heard that of unrelated
individuals from Copper Cove.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. I just wanted that on the
record. Okay.
MR. RODRIGUEZ: I just want to help out. It's not a big deal.
It's just a wall with a door that I think it could be solved easily. If
you just allow him what he needs to do now that he got the engineer,
we'll get it taken care of.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. What we're going to do
first is the county has presented their case. Do you have anything
else to present? Were you --
Page 53
May 26, 2022
MR. LETOURNEAU: We just want to get our picture up, and
the determination. That's where we're at right now.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Right.
MR. LETOURNEAU: And you guys did vote on -- yes.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes.
MR. LETOURNEAU: Here we go.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I see the door.
MR. RODRIGUEZ: So this is a photograph taken from Salt
Alley, the bay door, and then, obviously, the wall -- the bay door
being up and the wall that --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That holds the door, okay. And
you're done?
MS. PEREZ: Correct.
MR. LETOURNEAU: No. Just the determination, correct?
That -- you did want that put in. So we're just going to go right here
real quick. And that the Building Department did say okay to Code.
And no licensed contractor involved. Additional research may be
required. Based upon information provided, a permit would be
needed for that particular door and wall.
MS. PEREZ: There is a building official signature on the
bottom of the document.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN:
has to be done by a contractor?
MS. PEREZ: Correct.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN:
your testimony.
MR. RODRIGUEZ: Yeah.
Since it's commercial property, it
Okay. Gotcha. We've heard
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Now it's our job on the Board to
find out whether a violation exists, which we will vote on, and then
we go from there, so...
MS. ELROD: I'll make a motion a violation exists.
Page 54
May 26, 2022
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion a violation
exists.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: I'll second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And we have a second. All those
in favor?
MS. ELROD: Aye.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. AYASUN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously.
Okay. Now, do you have a suggestion for us?
MS. PEREZ: Yes, sir, the county has a recommendation. The
county recommends 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 one, obtaining all required Collier County building
permits or demolition permit, inspection, and certificate of
completion or occupancy for the additional wall and door within
blank amount of days of this hearing or a fine amount of blank per
day will be imposed until the violation's abated;
Number 2, the respondent must notify the code enforcement
investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct
the 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 method the violation into compliance and may use
the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the
provisions of this order, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed
to the property owner.
Page 55
May 26, 2022
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN:
blanks?
Okay. Anybody want to fill out
MS. ELROD: Question.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Sure.
MS. ELROD: Is he authorized to even make this agreement?
MS. PEREZ: Well, it's the county's recommendation. I did
explain to the tenant and the contractor that whatever testimony or
time frame they would provide would be as just an opinion or, you
know, hearsay.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It doesn't matter whether he agrees
or not. We're imposing this.
MS. ELROD: Okay.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So anybody want to fill out
the blanks? Go ahead.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: I will but with a question. Black River
Rock, LLC, are they a Florida LLC?
MS. PEREZ: They're actually out of Missouri. One of the
managers does have a -- I was able to trace that there is connections
to other properties in Naples, and then there's also another manager
that has an address in North Carolina. So I have found two phone
numbers, and I've contacted two of them to see if I get a call back to
advise them of the hearings.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Were they aware of today's hearing?
MS. PEREZ: That I'm aware of, we sent the notice to address
of record in St. Charles, Missouri, but we did not receive a response
back, and I haven't received a phone call regarding the two messages
I left.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. WHITE: There are also -- the answer to your question is
yes, they are a Florida LLC, and the managers both have Plant City
mailing addresses, and same for the registered agent.
Page 56
May 26, 2022
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: I'll take a shot at the blanks.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Go ahead. I'll start you out:
59.28 paid within 30 days.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Right. Ninety days of this hearing, and
a fine of 150 per day.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thereafter.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: So...
MR. RODRIGUEZ: Can I mention something, please?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: One second. We have to vote on
this first. Okay. We have a motion. All those in favor? Is it
seconded?
MR. AYASUN: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Seconded. All those in favor?
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. AYASUN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
MS. ELROD: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. One opposed. Okay.
Now --
MR. RODRIGUEZ: I was going to say, due to the X amount of
work that he's up -- the contractors and everybody is why we haven't
been able to, you know, literally complying with everything on time,
because it hasn't been easy. Everybody's extremely busy. No one
has been wanting to really get involved with this.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's why we've given you 90
days to come into compliance.
MR. RODRIGUEZ: Okay.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Pull the permit. The work has
already been done. You have to do the inspections. And if you do
Page 57
May 26, 2022
it within the 90 days, there's no fine.
MR. RODRIGUEZ: No, no problem. I'll pay it.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The only thing is $59.28 needs to
be paid within 30 days.
MR. RODRIGUEZ: Fifty-nine.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: 59.28.
MR. AYASUN: $59.28.
MR. RODRIGUEZ: Times 30.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: No, no, no.
MR. RODRIGUEZ: No problem.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Won't the LLC be notified?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes, yes. I'm just explaining it,
yes. And this will all be sent to the LLC. Notice -- same notice
of -- NOV, notice of violation. Okay. That's it.
MR. RODRIGUEZ: Thank you.
MR. GONZALEZ: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We're going to take a
break for the court reporter. I was trying to come up -- at least 10
minutes. Okay.
(A brief recess was had from 10:36 a.m. to 10:54 a.m.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I'd like to call the Code
Enforcement Board back to order. And the next case I'll let you
announce.
MS. BUCHILLON: Next case would be under old business, B,
motion for rehearing, CESD20210002916, Carlisle Wilson Plaza,
LLC.
THE COURT REPORTER: Do you swear or affirm the
testimony you will give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth?
MS. SPECTOR: I do.
MR. AMBACH: I do.
May 26, 2022
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: This is Carlisle. I started reading
through it. We can do this the easy way, or we can do it the hard
way.
Okay. Could you state your name on the microphone for us.
MS. SPECTOR: I absolutely can. My name is Sarah Spector.
I'm an attorney with Roetzel & Andress. I'm here on behalf of
Nasman (phonetic) Enterprise, which is the tenant of the building.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MS. SPECTOR: And we are here on a request for rehearing. I
have -- since I've been here -- been speaking with Mr. White, with
Mr. Ossorio, and the gentleman right here to my left.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Uncle Jeff. Jeff.
MS. SPECTOR: Yes, Jeff Letourneau, sorry. I blanked for a
second, because this all happened in the past 10 minutes.
So we are here on a rehearing request. We understand that the
county believes that that is improper because we are not the violator.
The issue that we have had with this is that the landlord -- and I
understand with the testimony given at the last hearing, the landlord
has not been very responsive to the county, and he's not been
responsive at all to us.
All of the changes that were made to the building were made
before we came into the occupancy of the premises. All the issues
that are noted were already there. We've been in litigation with the
landlord, and that caused some going back and forth, and we
just -- we wanted to insert ourselves to make sure that you knew that
we are working on this. We did receive a permit, and all of the work
has been done. We are just waiting for the sub work to be brought
up. There's a sub that is not in the system, so we're not able to
request inspections at this moment.
But what we'd like to request and what I had talked with
Mr. White about, separate from the rehearing request, we would be
Page 59
May 26, 2022
happy if we could just amend the order to remove the running fine
and the order to stop work, because we have removed all of the
health -and -safety issues and, like I said, we've done everything per
the permit, and it just needs to be closed out.
So we hope that we will be able to do that before June 22nd so
that, if the order is amended, we wouldn't have to come back next
month because there would be nothing to impose.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. WHITE: If I may, Mr. Chairman, my recommendation to
Ms. Spector was based on a variety of, you know, legal issues, if you
will, and is more a question of, you know, procedural efficiency,
administrative efficiency on behalf of the Board's part. And my
belief is that if you were to construe the motion for rehearing instead
on the part of tenant, who is the actual violator, as a motion to amend
the order and to amend it to a time frame that would be appropriate, I
think that would simplify things and should allow for the case to
come into compliance as quickly as possible without any litigation.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. The fine currently is
accruing at what rate?
MR. WHITE: It, I believe, is --
MS. SPECTOR: Six hundred dollars a day starting with the
day after the last hearing.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Say it again.
MS. SPECTOR: Six hundred dollars a day.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Oh, I remember this case.
MR. WHITE: And the point, I think, there was --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: To get somebody's attention.
MR. WHITE: The Board's intention to have them expedite and
achieve the results as quickly as possible, and I believe that what you
have before you, if you are to consider it as a motion to amend the
prior order, you can choose what fine amount may be differently.
May 26, 2022
You can choose a different compliance date. In fact, you can even
choose different compliance terms consistent with the work that's
been done is being promised to be done by the tenant, and the time
frame within which they would get it done.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So, for instance, if
we -- and I'll run this by you. If this can be extended to, say, two
months, 60 days.
MR. WHITE: If you amended the order from what it said
previously to come into compliance within 60 days, and let's say you
have the amount of fine at $300 a day, so long as they came into
compliance with all of the things that they were asked to do, which at
this point one of the things that I think drove the request for rehearing
was the prior order stating that they had to cease operations and et
cetera, had conditions imposed where they had to turn off utilities.
We've done that in residential context, but here my understanding is
that in order to actually do the work, they need some of the utilities
on and that they have otherwise done all of the other things that the
prior -- the currently existing order's required.
So in administrative efficiency and to avoid litigation -- because
I don't believe a rehearing is the proper option. Instead, they'd be
compelled to try and file an appeal to the Circuit Court. We can
avoid all of that, I believe, if the county's agreeable and the Board is
agreeable to an order that would be amended to a time period
reasonable, a fine reasonable, and the actions remaining to be done
being the ones that need to be done.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let's say that we amend the order
and do 60 days.
MR. WHITE: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: At the end of 60 days, we would
consider abating any fine that had accrued.
MR. WHITE: If they actually were given 60 days at this point,
Page 61
May 26, 2022
okay.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: There would be no fine.
MR. WHITE: There would be no fine if they came into
compliance beforehand. You'd never see the case again.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MS. SPECTOR: Only if you remove the first fine, which is the
one that is running for operating; that would need to be removed.
MR. WHITE: The point of amending the order is that that
would not exist and, therefore, it would never have, in a sense, been
accruing.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So let me try this on. So if
somebody made a motion to amend the date to -- let's see. We're in
June -- our August meeting, that should give the respondent sufficient
time to come into compliance. The existing fines would disappear.
MR. WHITE: Well, no, because if you actually had the prior
order to review on the screen, you'd see that one of the prior order
requirements was to cease and desist within a time period that was
actually probably less than the time it took to have the order
rendered, and from your lawyer's --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, now that you've confused
us --
MR. WHITE: Well, from your lawyer's point of view, we don't
have -- I'm not going to say this on the record because it could come
back to bite the Board in the future.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let me try Jeff on this one.
MR. WHITE: Sure.
MR. LETOURNEAU: I'm as confused as you are at this point,
so let's go at it here.
MR. WHITE: Can you put the prior order up?
MS. SPECTOR: I have it.
MR. LETOURNEAU: I don't have it in my --
Page 62
May 26, 2022
MR. AMBACH: I could read it.
MR. LETOURNEAU: Helen, do you have it right there?
MR. WHITE: It's in the packet.
MS. BUCHILLON: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. WHITE: And by putting it on the visualizer, I think we
can all have a --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Follow through --
MR. LETOURNEAU: Yeah. Helen, the only thing I have is
the request for a hearing in the iDrive here.
MS. BUCHILLON: It's not on the --
MR. AMBACH: I can read it if you'd like me to.
MR. LETOURNEAU: Hold on. Is it in more than one spot?
MR. WHITE: Could we just put it on the visualizer?
MR. LETOURNEAU: Okay. Hold on. All right.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Your question.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Yes.
MR. LETOURNEAU: For some reason there was -- for some
reason there was two folders here, all right. I do have it. Hold on.
Let me put it up here.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: While Jeff s looking for that, I have a
question.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Point of information.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: These violations were written against the
LLC, not the tenant, correct?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah.
MR. WHITE: But, in fact, the location, the precise location on
the property and the nature of the violations themselves pertain to --
MR. RUBENSTEIN: To the tenant.
Page 63
May 26, 2022
MR. WHITE: -- the unit that the tenant occupies and leases,
and in that sense they are the, quote, violator.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: So who requested the motion for -- on
this? Who brought them here today?
MS. SPECTOR: The tenant.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: You did.
MR. WHITE: Yes, sir.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Where's the LLC involved?
MS. SPECTOR: Right here.
MR. WHITE: No, no.
MS. SPECTOR: The tenant LLC is here. I represent the
tenant.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: No, no.
MS. SPECTOR: He's not been responsive at all. He wasn't at
the last hearing either.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: No, Carlisle Wilson, LLC.
MS. SPECTOR: He hasn't been responsive at all.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: So isn't that who our argument is with?
MS. SPECTOR: He won't respond, so I don't -- meanwhile,
we're getting fined $600 a day.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: You are or Carlisle?
MS. SPECTOR: Well, Carlisle is but, per our lease, he
could -- I don't know what -- if he would be successful --
MR. LETOURNEAU: Mr. Carlisle is here right now.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: You're not getting fined; Carlisle is.
MS. SPECTOR: But we're the tenant, and eventually --
MR. RUBENSTEIN: But does it say in your lease that you pay
fines that they commit? I don't understand that.
MR. WHITE: I'd encourage Ms. Spector to not answer that,
because it may -- has it been testified to, Mr. Rubenstein?
MR. RUBENSTEIN: All right. Well, my -- I mean, my
May 26, 2022
question is, Jeff, is -- I mean, Carlisle Wilson Plaza, LLC, is
supposed to be here, correct?
MR. LETOURNEAU: He just walked in. Mr. Carlisle is
sitting right there.
MR. CARLISLE: I was never noticed on this. I'm here for
something else.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: All right. Well, that's who I think we
need to hear from, and your argument is with him.
MR. WHITE: Mr. Rubenstein?
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Yes, sir.
MR. WHITE: The Board has an item on its agenda for its
consideration. If you, as part of that, want to hear from Mr. Carlisle,
that would be entirely appropriate. But at this point I think you have
someone at the podium who's making a request, and that's the
pertinent matter to be discussed and decided.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let me see if I can help. Probably
not, but I'll try.
MR. WHITE: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Since you have shown up and you
are here, and we still have a hallway out there, how about we send
everybody out there and see if they can resolve the situation and
come back with a good suggestion for the Board to consider.
MS. SPECTOR: Yes.
MR. LETOURNEAU: I don't know if that's feasible at this
point.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Ask the guy sitting next to you.
Yes, sir. You have to be sworn before you talk, so raise your
hand.
Terri, you get an award for today.
THE COURT REPORTER: Do you swear or affirm the
testimony you will give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
Page 65
May 26, 2022
but the truth?
MR. CARLISLE:
separate issue.
Yes, ma'am. Unfortunately, I'm here on a
MR. WHITE: Sir, sir, you have to state your name on the
record.
MR. CARLISLE: Greg Carlisle.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Now, what were you saying?
MR. CARLISLE: I'm here on a separate issue, and I heard my
name -- heard Carlisle Wilson called. I've been circumvented on this
whole issue. Mike called me on it and made me aware that I was
incurring fines. And this tenant went in and did all of these
improvements without my knowledge, without my consent, and it's
just -- they're suing us for a separate incident, so we're in litigation
with them. I can't even talk to this tenant without my attorney.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MS. ELROD: I have a question. You said the improvements
were done prior to your tenancy?
MS. SPECTOR: Yes.
MS. ELROD: Okay.
MR. CARLISLE: That's not true.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's a different argument.
MS. SPECTOR: Yes. So can I just explain what we're
looking for here?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Sure.
MS. SPECTOR: Okay. So you'll see under B is the two fines
that were imposed. One is running now; 2 will not start running
until June 22nd. We would like 1 to be removed, because we've
brought -- the property's no longer a health hazard because we've
removed the issues that were identified that way, and then if you
would extend the date for No. 2, we won't even have to come back
before you because the only thing we need to do now is get
May 26, 2022
inspections. The work's already been done. So it will be abated
before your August meeting, and then there will be no fine to impose.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So let me -- let me --
MR. WHITE: If I may just -- in an effort to only clarify. My
point about Item B 1 in the order is that they were asked to do
something in a time frame that actually would have been prior to the
order being signed, and that's all I'm going to say about it. And I'm
going to let you think about that for a minute --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. WHITE: -- and hope it supports why it is I'm suggesting
we do -- thank you, sir.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I understand. Now, let me try this
out. I would like to make a motion to modify the order under
Paragraph B 1 by eliminating that paragraph and extending the -- on
Paragraph 2, the June 22nd time frame to August.
MR. WHITE: My belief, it would be on or around
August 23rd.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. August 23rd. Now, that's
my motion.
MS. ELROD: I will second the motion.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: But the fine's still accruing.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: No, the fines don't accrue until
after -- if they don't come into compliance after August 23rd.
MR. WHITE: That is correct.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. I have a motion.
MS. ELROD: I second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And I have a second. I would ask
for discussion on the motion, but you'll just confuse me.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: You know, I do have a question, I
mean --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Sure, go ahead.
Page 67
May 26, 2022
MR. RUBENSTEIN: -- and I hear you, Counselor.
MR. WHITE: Thank you.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: And I listened to you.
MR. WHITE: Very good, sir.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: And I do read what's given to us.
MR. WHITE: I understand that.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: And I'm thinking the county's fight is not
with her client but with this gentleman. He is Carlisle Wilson Plaza,
LLC, correct?
MR. CARLISLE: Yes, sir.
MR. WHITE: Yes, but --
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Okay. So if he is the person that
the -- that this is -- fine is against --
MR. WHITE: Yes.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: -- our argument is with him.
MR. WHITE: I don't think you have an argument at all. What
you have is a consideration on the part of the violator to approve a
means by which they would come into compliance.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: No, I understand.
MR. WHITE: If you understand that, then I don't understand
the point of your question. And I don't mean to be objectionable.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: I know. But does she have the right
to --
MR. WHITE: Yes.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: -- make these requests?
MR. WHITE: Yes. I would tell you that she didn't if she
didn't.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Do we deal with tenants, or do we deal
with owners?
MS. SPECTOR: The definition of violators --
MR. WHITE: Sir, sir, sir. In the last --
May 26, 2022
If I may, Ms. Spector.
In the very last case, that's exactly what we did.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. You have my motion. I
have a second.
MR. WHITE: I mean, the point of it, Mr. Rubenstein, is that
the order will still apply to the LLC.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Okay.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: That's what I didn't hear. Okay.
MR. WHITE: Oh.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay?
MR. WHITE: I'm sorry.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: That's all right.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Call the question. All
those in favor?
MS. ELROD: Aye.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. AYASUN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously.
MS. SPECTOR: Thank you very much.
MR. CARLISLE: Could I ask a question?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Sure.
MR. CARLISLE: This seems -- if -- if a --
MR. WHITE: Is this case closed, sir?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes, it is. He's just asking a
question.
MR. CARLISLE: Question for the Board, just a general
question. If I have property and a tenant comes into the property,
May 26, 2022
improves the property or does improvements without asking, without
pulling a permit, I understand I'm responsible, but then I didn't even
know about this until Mike called me last month.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's your fight with your tenant.
MR. CARLISLE: Yes, sir. I understand that. But I'm
ultimately the one responsible for it, right?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And that's what gives you
leverage. You can then --
MR. CARLISLE: But my attorney doesn't know what to do. I
mean, we're just -- we don't know what to do.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Maybe this attorney in the back
could represent you.
MR. CARLISLE: No, I've got a good attorney. It's okay. It's
frustrating. I don't mean to be a nuisance.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's no problem. I'm glad that
you showed up.
MR. CARLISLE: I was here for something else. I didn't even
know it.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. If we could help you with
something else, we'll be glad to.
MR. CARLISLE: I hope so.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thanks, Chris.
MR. AMBACH: You're welcome. Have a good day.
MR. WHITE: Great job.
MR. AMBACH: Thank you. Appreciate it.
MR. AYASUN: For those of you who have never been to
Siberia, this is what it feels like right now. This must be 70 degrees
or less in here.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's the other -- there's another a
committee that comes in after us that requires the room to be cooled
off.
Page 70
May 26, 2022
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Keeping the salads cold.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Helen, what's up?
MS. BUCHILLON: Okay. Next case, under old business, C,
motion for imposition of fines, No. 2, CESD20190003400, Carlos
and Veronica Arreaga.
MR. AYASUN: What was the number? Helen, what was the
number?
MS. BUCHILLON: Number 2 under imposition of fines.
THE COURT REPORTER: Do you swear or affirm the
testimony you will give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth?
MS. ARREAGA: Yes.
MR. ARREAGA: Yes.
MR. MUCHA: I do.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I'm trying to find the paperwork on
this. The last three digits of the case number?
MS. ELROD: 400.
MR. AYASUN: 3400; three four zero zero.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: It starts on the bottom of the motion.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I'll find it. We're not going
anywhere.
Okay. Joe, you want to read this into the record for us?
MR. MUCHA: Yes, sir. For the record, Joe Mucha,
supervisor, Collier County Code Enforcement.
Past orders: On March 25th, 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,
OR5933, Page 2479, for more information.
On September 23rd, 2021, the Board granted a continuance for
120 days. See Documents and Images for more information.
Page 71
May 26, 2022
On February 24th, 2022, the Board granted a continuance for
three months. See documents and information -- see Documents and
Images for more information.
Violation has been abated as of May 9th, 2022. Fines and
dates -- fines and costs to date are as follows: Fines have accrued at
a rate of $200 per day for the period from September 22nd, 2021, to
May 9th, 2022, for 230 days, for a total fine amount of $46,000.
Previously assessed operational costs of $59.28 have been paid.
Previously assessed operational costs of $59.63 have been paid.
Operational costs for today's hearing is $59.77, for a total fine
amount of $46,059.77.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. When I read through this, I
see that when it was first adjudicated we granted time, 120 days, four
months.
Then you came back, and the Board granted three more months.
So you were granted seven months, and it took you till May of 2022
to get this done. Is there a particular reason for this?
MR. ARREAGA: So primarily, we explained last time, that we
were working with a builder that just -- they were not giving us any
information of what they were doing with the house, and they were
supposed to demolish the whole thing. So we took it upon ourselves
to go ahead and demolish it.
Last time we showed up here, we all pitched in and we got it
demolished. And I believe the -- what do you call it? They already
came in and did inspection, and we passed it. So, I mean, that's
really the reason why it was all delayed.
And I think we did it within time -- within the last time you guys
gave us, the final extension, correct?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: February 24th you were granted
three months. February, March, April, May, yes, so you were in
compliance on that.
Page 72
May 26, 2022
Could I get your name?
MR. ARREAGA: Yes, Carlos Arreaga.
And your name?
MS. ARREAGA: Veronica Arreaga.
MS. ELROD: I'll make a motion to deny the county the
imposition of fines.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN:
we have a second?
Okay. We have a motion. Do
MR. AYASUN: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. All those in
favor?
MS. ELROD: Aye.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. AYASUN: Aye.
Okay. In the future.
THE COURT REPORTER: He didn't vote.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Nay.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: In the future I think these cases are
going to start fining -- for the people who are watching there on TV,
my first inclination is to fine $1,000 on this just because of the length
of time that it took to come into compliance, so consider yourself
lucky.
MR. ARREAGA: I understand. Thank you.
MR. WHITE: And I understand your point, Mr. Chairman.
One of the things that is a factor in your analysis of whether you deny
or impose some or all of the fines the county is seeking is the
economic hardship on the respondent.
And the past practice of the Board has not typically asked nor
have the respondents, as in this case, offered what the economic
hardship would be if the fine amount was imposed. But if that is
Page 73
May 26, 2022
going to be the practice going forward, I simply just want to kind of
put everybody, as you have, on notice that we ought be asking that
question. It isn't the county's responsibility to put it on their
recommendation, their executive summary what the economic
hardship would be; however, it is one of the factors you're asked to
weigh.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah. My point in all this is,
for -- and we hear a lot of these cases, and almost every time the fines
are abated. It becomes a -- the weapon that you have to get people
to come into compliance is, in essence, the fines. And if you don't
have that, why would anybody apply for a permit or come into
compliance or anything else? So that's my point.
MR. WHITE: I'm not offering an opinion.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I know. Okay.
MR. WHITE: I'm simply --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And I am as well. Okay.
MR. WHITE: I'm not offering an opinion. I'm simply saying,
these are the things you're supposed to consider.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. ARREAGA: Thank you.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Well, can I jump in and close this?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Sure.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: I hear what you're saying, but I also think
there's a responsibility of the Board to fine where it sees it needs to.
The county has expenses.
MR. WHITE: And certainly what typically happens is --
MR. RUBENSTEIN: I'm not done.
MR. WHITE: Oh, I'm sorry. I thought you were.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: The county has expenses. We have
code officers that are out there sweating getting this done, taking
pictures, filing reports, and if they see it's a road to walking out, as
Page 74
May 26, 2022
the Chairman said, with no fine whatsoever, I think the whole system
is wrong. And so this isn't a board of come on in, and we're going to
let you go. We're going to say come on in and let's listen and do
what's appropriate. And as far as our concern for respondents, that's
not our concern, in my opinion.
MR. WHITE: Well --
MR. RUBENSTEIN: And I'll leave it at that.
MR. WHITE: I'm not debating it with you.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Okay. Then that's the end of it. Okay.
Let's move on.
MR. WHITE: Okay, Lee.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: No.
MR. LETOURNEAU: Mr. Chairman, before we move on --
MR. RUBENSTEIN: We could debate it forever.
MR. WHITE: It's not a debate, sir.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes, Jeff.
MR. LETOURNEAU: I've gotten some updated information
regarding the Imposition of Fine No. I I from Carlisle, that he is, like,
right at the finish line at this point. So the county would like to
withdraw the imposition and bring it back next month. Hopefully he
should be in compliance at that point.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's fine.
MR. LETOURNEAU: So -- but I think you have to vote on
that at this point.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We'll vote to modify the agenda.
Your favorite motion.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: I make a motion to accept.
MR. AYASUN: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN:
MS. ELROD: Aye.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Aye.
Okay. All those in favor?
Page 75
May 26, 2022
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. AYASUN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously.
MR. LETOURNEAU: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So Carlisle is coming back.
MR. AYASUN: I know it's not for debate purposes, but for the
record, I'm with Mr. --
MR. WHITE: Rubenstein.
MR. AYASUN: -- Rubenstein and the Chairman.
MR. WHITE: And I'm simply saying, these are the rules of the
road, and you ought to at least ask --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. WHITE: -- if there's an economic hardship or not if they
don't tell you that that they have one. That's all I'm saying. And as
far as the point of the distinction between the fines and the costs,
that's fine. What I was going to say, Mr. Rubenstein, was simply
that you typically say you're going to waive the fines, and you never
mention the costs, but the orders always waive both and abate both.
So if you choose to impose and give the county its costs as part of it,
it doesn't matter to me. You pay me the same regardless, so I don't
have an opinion about it.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Stop beating the dead
horse.
MR. WHITE: All right.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: You do have an opinion; otherwise, you
wouldn't say what you said.
MR. WHITE: No.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: And, like, I have an opinion.
Page 76
May 26, 2022
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. LETOURNEAU: We have people waiting here. Can we
discuss it at some other point, please.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Discuss it over a drink.
Helen, what's the next case?
MS. BUCHILLON: Next case under imposition of fines,
Number 3, CEVR20210003024, Tuscany Pointe Community
Association, Inc.
THE COURT REPORTER: Do you swear or affirm the
testimony you will give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth?
MS. PEREZ: I do.
MR. ONUFRAK: Yes.
MS. NELSON: Yes.
THE COURT REPORTER: Can you state your name.
MR. ONUFRAK: John Onufrak, O-n-u-f-r-a-k.
MS. NELSON: Carolyn Nelson.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Can you state your name?
I didn't hear it on the microphone.
MR. ONUFRAK: Oh, it's John Onufrak.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And you are with the
Tuscany Pointe Community Association?
MR. ONUFRAK: Yes. I'm on the board, and I'm a director,
and I have Carolyn Nelson with me. She's secretary/treasurer on the
board also.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And you're from Boston. Okay.
MR. ONUFRAK: No.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You're not? It sounded like it.
MR. ONUFRAK: Close, though, close. New York.
MR. AYASUN: New York, Bronx.
MR. ONUFRAK: Pardon me?
Page 77
May 26, 2022
MR. AYASUN: Bronx, I said, but that was just a guess.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I don't think the Bronx is in New
York anymore. Okay.
Do you want to read this into the record for us, please.
MS. PEREZ: Yes, sir. Good morning. Cristina Perez,
Collier County Code Enforcement.
This is in reference to violation of Collier County Land
Development Code 04-41, as amended, Sections 4.06.05.H.6 and
Section 4.06.05.K.2. Location was a Folio No. 78536003066.
Description: Dead shrubbery buffer required vegetation on the
north perimeter of Tuscany Pointe Cove No. 2 Development.
Past orders: On September 23rd, 2021, the Code Enforcement
Board issued a findings of fact, conclusion of law and order. The
respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinance and
ordered to correct the violations. See the attached order of the Board
in Documents and Images for more information.
On January 27, 2022, the 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 April 14, 2022.
Fines have accrued at the rate of $150 per day for the period
from November 23rd, 2021, to April 14, 2022, a total of 143 days, for
a total fine amount of $21,450.
Previously assessed operational costs of $59.28 have been paid.
Operational costs for today's hearing is $59.49. Total amount is
$21,509.49.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I realize things grow at certain
times of the year. In January we gave you a continuance that, I
guess, took you to November, if I'm correct; is that correct?
MS. PEREZ: Well, the case came before you on
September 23rd, 2021, and the Board granted them 30 days to
I
May 26, 2022
comply, gave them a compliance date of November 22, 2021, at
which point Tuscany did submit for an insubstantial change to their
Site Development Plan, which was a lengthier process than just
replanting the vegetation. They went from one vegetation type to
another, so they had to go through that change in order for the county
to approve the change of Cocoplum to Clusia, I believe is what it
was.
So they submitted their application actually before they came to
you on November 1 st, 2021. It went under review, and then there
was a re -submittal at the end of September. It was finally approved
on December IOth, 2021, but it was completed and issued to them on
January 11 th, 2022, which was shortly before they came back to you
to ask for more time to be able to implement everything that was
required on their site -- on their insubstantial change.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Anybody have any
questions from the Board or motion?
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Yeah, I have a question. The area in
question that died, was it sprinklered?
MR. ONUFRAK: No. It was Clusias that had to be planted,
240, and the --
MR. RUBENSTEIN: No, the old plant that died.
MR. ONUFRAK: Oh, the old plant that died, that was actually
a wax myrtle.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Do you have sprinklers in the area?
MR. ONUFRAK: Oh, yes, there are. They put in a
new -- with this here IC plan, a new drip line was required, and that
was also put in.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: And you have -- your sprinklers are
working now?
MR. ONUFRAK: Yes. At the time that Code Enforcement
and Growth Management came out, we had the irrigation company
Page 79
May 26, 2022
out at the same time to turn on all the sprinklers to show them
all -- both, Code Enforcement and Growth Management, that the
sprinklers were working, and they were.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Clusia is a very good plant; hearty,
great barrier. I know. I've planted a lot of them myself.
MS. ELROD: I'd like to make a motion to deny the county the
imposition of fines.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a motion. Do
we have a second?
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. All those in
favor?
MS. ELROD: Aye.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: (No verbal response.)
MR. AYASUN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously.
Okay. Enjoy your new plants.
MR. ONUFRAK: Thank you.
MS. PEREZ: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: What else would you like?
MS. NELSON: So I've got a question. At this point here, do I
understand this correctly, that -- were the fines waived, or are the
fines enforced?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Waived.
MS. ELROD: They're waiving.
MS. NELSON: Waived. All right. I'm sorry. Thank you.
MR. WHITE: You don't want to snatch defeat from the jaws of
victory.
of .1
May 26, 2022
MS. NELSON: No, no. I'm very nervous.
MR. ONUFRAK: Thank you very much.
MS. BUCHILLON: Next case, No. 4, CESD20190004216,
Carlos and Dulce Valdes.
THE COURT REPORTER: Do you swear or affirm the
testimony you will give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth?
MR. MUCHA: I do.
MS. GIGUERE: I do, too.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I'm reading the letter that's
attached to the --
Okay. Joe, do you want to --
Could you state your name on the microphone for us.
MS. GIGUERE: Absolutely. It's Vicki, V-i-c-k-i. Last name
is Giguere, G-i-g-u-e-r-e.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You do look familiar.
MS. GIGUERE: I might.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
Okay, Joe. You know Vicki.
MR. MUCHA: Yes, I do.
For the record, Joe Mucha, supervisor, Collier County Code
Enforcement.
Past orders: On August 29th, 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,
OR5674, Page 3557, for more information.
On August 28th, 2020, the Code Enforcement Board granted a
continuance. See the attached order of the Board in Documents and
Images for more information.
Violation has been abated as of October 5th, 2020.
May 26, 2022
Fines and costs to date are as follows: Fines have accrued at a
rate of $100 per day for the period from February 26th, 2020, to
October 5th, 2020, for 223 days, for a total fine amount of $22,300.
Previously assessed operational costs of $59.63 and $59.35 have
been paid. Operational costs for today's hearing is $59.56, for a total
fine amount of $22,359.56.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: What's confusing to me on this is
the -- "it has been abated as of October 5th, 2020"?
MR. MUCHA: Yes, sir. This was during the COVID times,
and I think it kind of got lost in the shuffles. I know we had to
cancel a few hearings, and it just --
MR. LETOURNEAU: I think it got lost in our computer
program and recently just got discovered, and I put it on the
imposition of fines. I apologize that it's so late, but that's where
we're at at this point.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Any comment from the
respondent?
MS. GIGUERE: Yes. I'm here on behalf of the owners, and
they are requesting that the fines be waived. If you have any
questions, I'd be happy to answer.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And --
MR. RUBENSTEIN: I have a question.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: I notice there's two open code cases on
the bottom.
MS. GIGUERE: Yes.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Do they have anything directly or
indirectly to do with this case?
MS. GIGUERE: With this case specifically regarding to the
tiki huts, no; however, there are other, like you said, cases on the
property that are currently being worked on. Pre-app meetings have
May 26, 2022
already been held. Site improvement plans are being submitted.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Nothing to do with the chickee huts?
MS. GIGUERE: Correct.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Okay. That's all.
MS. ELROD: So I'll make a motion to deny the county the
imposition of fines.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. AYASUN: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second.
All those in favor?
MS. ELROD: Aye.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. AYASUN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously.
I think, you know, going forward, Kathy -- we changed the way
we deny fines. You're done, Vicki.
MS. GIGUERE: Free to go? Thank you, Mr. Kaufman.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We -- that language denying the
county's imposition of fines -- Patrick's gone. We used to say we
abated the fines. I think when you go through the other language, it
confuses, as it did the prior case. I think it might be easier to go
back to -- and we can discuss that at our rules meeting -- just abate
the fine. Or do you find a problem with that?
MR. LETOURNEAU: I would like to talk that over with
Mr. White at some point, yes.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It will be an hour discussion.
Okay.
MS. BUCHILLON: Next case, No. 6, CENA20210010285,
May 26, 2022
Naples ALF, Inc.
THE COURT REPORTER: Do you swear or affirm the
testimony you will give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth?
MS. HIGGINS: I do.
Good morning.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning.
MR. LETOURNEAU: Monique, before you get going here, I
like to embarrass her. This is our newest member of our
investigative team, Monique Higgins.
MS. HIGGINS: Thank you.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Welcome.
MS. HIGGINS: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Welcome. We won't annoy you
too much.
MR. LETOURNEAU: I'm sure she's nervous enough, and I
just made her more nervous.
MS. HIGGINS: For the record, Monique Higgins, Collier
County Code Enforcement investigator.
Past orders: On January 27, 2022, the Code Enforcement
Board issued a findings of fact, conclusion of law and order. The
respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and
ordered to correct the violation. See the attached order of the Board,
OR6110, Page 3945, for more information.
The violation has not been abated as of May 26th, 2022.
Fines and costs to date are as follows: Fines have accrued at
the rate of $200 per day for the period from March 29th, 2022, to
March [sic] 26, 2022, 59 days, for a total fine amount of $11,800.
Previously assessed operational costs of $59.28 have not been
paid. Operational costs for today's hearing, $59.35. Total amount,
$111918.63.
May 26, 2022
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. It's not in compliance, and
they haven't paid the operational costs. Would anybody like to make
a motion to impose?
MR. RUBENSTEIN: I do. I'll make a motion to impose the
fines as presented as -- on the current document.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a motion.
MS. ELROD: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And a second. All those in favor?
MS. ELROD: Aye.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN:
(No verbal response.)
MR. AYASUN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN:
Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN:
It carries unanimously.
Monique, perfect.
MS. HIGGINS: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN:
Okay.
Now, the next time you come before us, we're going to expect a
very experienced person.
MR. LETOURNEAU: Well, here you go.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. AYASUN: She's already back.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let Helen tell us which case it is.
MS. BUCHILLON: Next case, No. 7, CENA20210009772,
Naples ALF, Inc.
THE COURT REPORTER: Do you swear or affirm the
testimony you will give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth?
MS. HIGGINS: I do.
For the record, Monique Higgins, Collier County Code
I l •
May 26, 2022
Enforcement Board investigator.
Past orders: On January 27, 2022, the Code Enforcement
Board issued a findings of fact, conclusion of law and order. The
respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and
ordered to correct the violation. See the attached order of the Board
for more information.
The violation has been abated as of April 20th, 2022.
Fines and costs to date are as follows: Fines have accrued at a
rate of $200 per day for the period from March 14, 2022, to
April 20th, 2022, 38 days, for a total fine amount of $7,600. Vendor
Invoice 2683 on January 27, 2022, costs of $20,640 have not been
paid.
Previously assessed operational costs of $59.28 have not been
paid. Operational costs for today's hearing, $59.28. Total amount,
$28,358.56.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: When you look at this and you see
the violation has been abated, has been abated by the county, and the
county has never been paid back for that abatement. So having said
all that...
MS. ELROD: I'll make a motion to impose the fines.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have a
second?
MR. RUBENSTEIN: I'll second.
MR. AYASUN: Second.
MR. WHITE: Point of clarification. Would that include the
costs?
MS. ELROD: Yes.
MR. WHITE: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor?
MS. ELROD: Aye.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Aye.
May 26, 2022
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. AYASUN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously.
MS. HIGGINS: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, you're two for two.
MS. HIGGINS: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You get a percentage.
MR. AYASUN: Off the record.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: No Christmas cards for her.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah. Next case, Helen.
MS. BUCHILLON: Next case, No. 9, CEROW20210008921,
Dominic and Alicia Lento.
THE COURT REPORTER: Do you swear or affirm the
testimony you will give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth?
MR. AMBACH: I do.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Chris, you want to read it
into the record for us?
MR. AMBACH: Yes, sir. For the record, Chris Ambach,
Collier County supervisor for Code Enforcement.
Past orders: October 29, 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,
OR6054, Page 3480, for more information.
The violation has been abated as of March 2nd, 2022.
Fines and costs to date are as follows: Fines have accrued at a
rate of $200 per day for the period from November 14th, 2021, to
March 2nd, 2022, 108 days, for a total fine amount of $21,600.
May 26, 2022
Vendor Invoice 2664 on October 29th, 2021, cost of $210 have
not been paid. Previously assessed operational costs of $59.21 have
not been paid. Operational costs for today's hearing, $59.28. Total
amount, $21,928.49.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you know, it might be a little
suggestion, when you have the "violation has been abated," if they
could say on cases like this "by the county," it might make things
clearer.
MR. LETOURNEAU: That can be done. Helen, can you take
a note of that, please. Can you take a note of that, please, that when
we abate the violation, on the top line there "the violation has been
abated," you put in "the violation has been abated by the county."
MS. BUCHILLON: Okay, got it.
MR. LETOURNEAU: All right.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Anybody want --
MR. LETOURNEAU: I just -- I just want to kind of lead you
guys through this one. This was vegetation in the right-of-way,
obviously. It took the county, through our process, 108 days to get
our vendor out there, and the actual cost of the vendor was $210. I
just wanted to make note of that. Okay.
THE COURT REPORTER: You said $210?
MR. LETOURNEAU: $210, yes.
MR. WHITE: And to your point, Mr. Chairman, your order
will reflect, including today and the prior order, that it was abated by
the county.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good. Okay. Get a motion from
the Board to impose.
MS. ELROD: I'll make a motion to impose the fines.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: I'll second.
MR. WHITE: And costs?
MS. ELROD: Yes, sir.
May 26, 2022
MR. WHITE: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I didn't hear that. Was that --
MR. WHITE: I was simply clarifying that we would add the
costs as well as the fine amounts.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. It's on the bottom of the
page.
MS. ELROD: I'll impose the total amount, how's that?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah. Okay. All those in favor?
MS. ELROD: Aye.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: (No verbal response.)
MR. AYASUN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously.
Okay.
MR. WHITE: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Next, Helen?
MS. ELROD: I think we're done.
MS. BUCHILLON: That's it. We're done.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I figure we had 17 minutes left. I
said we'd be done at noon, so...
Okay. A couple of comments. We're going to have our
meeting to discuss the rules. Is that going to be our next meeting or
a subsequent meeting?
MR. WHITE: Well, Mr. Chairman, if you're asking my opinion
on it, I'd prefer it would be in July or August because I will be having
to -- as you previously approved -- dialing in for the June meeting.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I agree.
MR. WHITE: And I'd prefer to be present so we can have a
more robust discussion.
of w
May 26, 2022
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I love it. Okay.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Motion to adjourn.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Motion to adjourn.
MS. ELROD: Second.
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 11:43 a.m.
ROBERT KA
, CHAIRMAN
These minutes approved by the Board on-SwE. Vg42j, as
presented or as corrected
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF FORT MYERS
COURT REPORTING BY TERRI L. LEWIS, REGISTERED
PROFESSIONAL REPORTER, FPR-C, AND NOTARY PUBLIC.
Page 90