Loading...
CEB Minutes 07/31/2023 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD Naples, Florida July 31, 2023 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 Lee Rubenstein Tarik N. Ayasun Manmohan "Bart" N. Bhatla Kevin Johnson, Alternate James York, Alternate ABSENT: John Fuentes, Vice Chair Sue Curley Kathleen Elrod ALSO PRESENT: Tom Iandimarino, Code Enforcement Director Helen Buchillon, Code Enforcement Jeff Letourneau, Manager of Investigations Kevin Noell, Attorney to the Board CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning, everybody. I'd like to call the Code Enforcement Board to order. Notice: That respondents may be limited to 20 minutes for case presentation unless additional time is granted by the Board. Persons wishing to speak on any agenda item will receive up to five minutes unless the time is adjusted by the Chairman. All parties participating in the public hearing are asked to observe Robert's Rules of Order and speak one at a time so that the court reporter can record all statements being made. Any person who decides to appeal a decision of this board will need a record of the proceedings pertaining thereto and, therefore, may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. Neither Collier County nor the Code Enforcement Board shall be responsible for providing this record. And with that, why don't we all stand for the Pledge of Allegiance. (The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning, Helen. MS. BUCHILLON: Good morning, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you want to call the roll, please? MS. BUCHILLON: Yes. Good morning. For the record, Helen Buchillon, Code Enforcement. Mr. Robert Kaufman? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Here. MS. BUCHILLON: Mr. Lee Rubenstein? BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Here. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Mr. Tarik Ayasun? BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Here. MS. BUCHILLON: Mr. Bart Bhatla? BOARD MEMBER BHATLA: Here. MS. BUCHILLON: Mr. James York? BOARD MEMBER YORK: Here. MS. BUCHILLON: And, Mr. Kevin Johnson? BOARD MEMBER JOHNSON: Here. MS. BUCHILLON: Ms. Sue Curley has been excused, Mr. John Fuentes has been excused, and we're still waiting on Kathleen Elrod. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. I should -- at this point we welcome our new attorney. Kevin Noell, welcome. MR. NOELL: Thank you. Kevin Noell. I work for -- I look forward to working with the Board. I came over from Contractor Licensing Board advising them, and I look forward to working with you folks. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The Contractor Licensing sends us a lot of business. We also have two new members, James and Bart. MS. BUCHILLON: No. Kevin. His name is Kevin. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Kevin. Didn't I say Kevin? MS. BUCHILLON: No. You said James. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I said what? MS. BUCHILLON: James. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Oh, James is over here. I've got to get all the names squared away. By the way, when you speak into the mic, you have to be fairly close. So why don't we start with the modifications of the agenda. MS. BUCHILLON: Yes, sir. We have two stipulations. Under public hearings, motions, No. 15, CESD20220010598, HGG Management, LLC. Next stipulation, No. 14, CESD20230003117, Ahmad Ahmad. Those are the two stipulations, and we also have some withdrawns. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. BUCHILLON: Under public hearings. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. MS. BUCHILLON: D, hearings, No. 1, CESD20220011340, William J. Bayes Estate, care of Weston J. Bayes, PR, has been withdrawn. It will be rescheduled for the August hearing. Number 2, CESD20230001967, Robert U. Thompson Estate, has been withdrawn due to change of ownership. Number 3, CESD20230002406, Robert U. Thomas Estate, has been withdrawn due to change of ownership. Number 5, CESD20220007688, Erick Innis and Alyssa Innis, has been withdrawn due to an in-house continuance. Number 6, CESD20220003348, Harry A. Romano and Liza Jeanne Romano, has been withdrawn due to medical issues. And under old business, motion for imposition of fines and liens, No. 9, CESD20220001438, South Wind Village, MHC, LLC, has been withdrawn and will be rescheduled for the August hearing. And we're also going to be under D, motion to amend previously issued order, we're going to withdraw both No. 1 CERO20210008921 [sic]. We're going to re-notice the respondents due to a scrivener's error. Number 2, CESD20180004425, Maria C. Ramirez, has also been withdrawn. We're also going to be re-noticing the respondent due to a scrivener's error. And those are all the changes for now. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All righty. Can we get a motion from the Board to accept the agenda as modified. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: So moved. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And seconded. All those in favor? BOARD MEMBER YORK: (No verbal response.) BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: (No verbal response.) BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Aye. BOARD MEMBER BHATLA: Aye. BOARD MEMBER JOHNSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Okay. Which brings us to 15? MS. BUCHILLON: Yes, sir. No. 15, CESD20220010598, HGG Management, 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. JOHNSON: I do. Good morning. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. BOARD MEMBER JOHNSON: Good morning. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You're getting better with the mouse? MR. JOHNSON: Well, as long as Helen does it, I'm getting really good. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: AI. MR. JOHNSON: I can start. Do you want me to start? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Sure. MR. JOHNSON: Is that okay? Okay. For the record, John Johnson, 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; Abate all violations by -- I'm sorry -- No. 2, abate all violations by obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition permit, inspections, and certificate of completion/occupancy for the unpermitted renovations to multiple commercial units within 180 days of this hearing, or a fine of $200 per day will be imposed until the violation is abated; Number 3, respondent must notify Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance; and, Number 4, that if the respondent fails to abate the violation, the County may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use assistance of the Collier County Sheriff's Office to enforce the provisions of this agreement, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Let the record show that the respondent is not present. Any motions from the Board? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I'll make a motion that we accept the stipulation as written. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor? BOARD MEMBER YORK: Aye. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: (No verbal response.) BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Aye. BOARD MEMBER BHATLA: Aye. BOARD MEMBER JOHNSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Thanks, John. MR. JOHNSON: Thank you. MS. BUCHILLON: Next stipulation, No. 14, CESD20230003117, Ahmad Ahmad. MR. AHMAD: Good morning. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. 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. PACKARD: I do. MR. AHMAD: I do. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Jason, do you want to read this into the record for us? MR. PACKARD: Yes, sir. Good morning. For the record, Jason Packard, Collier County Code Enforcement. Therefore, it is agreed between the parties that the respondent shall: Number 1, pay operational costs in the amount of $59.28 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing; Number 2, abate all violations by obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition permit, inspections, and certificate of completion/occupancy for the unpermitted remodel work within 120 days of this hearing, or a fine of $200 per day will be imposed until the violation is abated; Number 3, respondent must notify Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance; Number 4, that if the respondent fails to abate the violation, the County may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriff's Office to enforce the provisions of this agreement, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. How many days did you have on your -- MR. PACKARD: One twenty. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And the fine after that is? MR. PACKARD: Two hundred per day. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, sir. MR. AHMAD: Hi. Good morning. How are you? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any problem with the -- I'm fine. Any problem with the time frame on this? MR. AHMAD: No, sir. We should have it done beforehand. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You have somebody there with a whole bunch of papers. MR. AHMAD: He's the one working on the project. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So rather than read through all of those, why don't we just -- County have any objection to the -- MR. PACKARD: No. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So I'd like to make a motion that we accept the stipulation as written. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And we have a second. All those in favor? BOARD MEMBER YORK: Aye. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: (No verbal response.) BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Aye. BOARD MEMBER BHATLA: Aye. BOARD MEMBER JOHNSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It passes unanimously. Thank you, Jason. MR. PACKARD: Thank you. MR. AHMAD: Thank you. You guys have a good day. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Painless, and you didn't even have to open up the papers. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Good show. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, we're two for two on the stipulations. Okay, Helen, where do we go from here? MS. BUCHILLON: Next case, under public hearings, motion for extension of time, No. 1, CESD20220003245, Naples-Davis Boulevard, LLC, care of Benson Development Co, 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. DANIEL: I do. MR. MARINOS: I do. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning, everybody. MS. DANIEL: Good morning. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Could you state your name on the microphone for us? MS. DANIEL: Sure. My name is Julie Daniel. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And you? MS. DANIEL: I'm the parallel for Benderson Development, and Benderson Development is the owner of Naples-Davis Boulevard, and we're the developer. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And you have their permission to testify -- MS. DANIEL: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- in their behalf? Okay. Charles. MR. MARINOS: Good morning. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. Do you want to give us a little summary of what we have in front of us? MR. MARINOS: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We do have a sheet on this from Julie. MR. MARINOS: If I can get you here. I apologize. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's okay. Just skimming this right now. As we discussed last night, we had a neighborhood information meeting. We have it tentatively scheduled for July 13th, blah, blah, blah. MR. MARINOS: Yes, sir. So there's a previous finding of fact. There's a sign in violation they need to get permits for. They are working through it currently. Waiting on a public hearing. This is the new Amazon warehouse building right off Collier Boulevard. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It must be a substantial sign. MR. MARINOS: It's a decent size sign. It's nothing too crazy. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. MARINOS: They're just looking for a little more time. They had some delays in their hearing process pushed back. I know they were supposed to have been through a hearing recently, public hearing. It got pushed back, no fault of their own, so they're kind of just on the backside of that now. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And we are -- you are asking for how much time? MS. DANIEL: Ninety days. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. DANIEL: So, basically, the hearing is on August 10th, and it was extended through no fault of our own. The Hearing Examiner requested an extension of time for the -- till August 10th. So John Kelly, who's the planner, he advised that it could take up to 30 days for the Hearing Examiner to make a decision, and then with getting all the permits and -- you know, we just feel like we need 90 days in order to be in compliance. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. County have any problem with the 90 days? MR. MARINOS: No. They've been very communicative. They've been up front and working with us the entire time, so they're well on their way. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Any comments or questions from the Board? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hearing none, anybody want to make a motion? BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Go ahead. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I make a motion that we extend 90 days. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Motion and a second. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hearing none, all those in favor? BOARD MEMBER YORK: Aye. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Aye. BOARD MEMBER BHATLA: Aye. BOARD MEMBER JOHNSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Thank you. MS. DANIEL: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you. Julie, you get extra credit. You were here early. You were here before me. MS. DANIEL: I came from Sarasota, too. Early morning drive. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Wow. Terri said bigger or louder. Okay. Okay, Helen. MS. BUCHILLON: We need to modify the agenda. We have another stipulation. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. BUCHILLON: Under hearings, No. 13, CELU20220011318, Yohenis Martinez. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Could we get a motion from the Board to modify the agenda? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I'll make that motion to modify the agenda. All those in favor? BOARD MEMBER YORK: (No verbal response.) BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: (No verbal response.) BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Aye. BOARD MEMBER BHATLA: Aye. BOARD MEMBER JOHNSON: Aye. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Well, second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Second. Passes unanimously. Charles, you're late. MR. MARINOS: Excuse me. 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. Hello again. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Let the record show that the respondent is not present. Okay. But you did meet with them this morning? MR. MARINOS: Yes, sir. We just -- we met just a few minutes ago. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. This has to do with boats on Estate-zoned property? MR. MARINOS: Yes, sir, inoperable boats on sands. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. It's hard to get a boat from the Estates to the gulf. There's no water. MR. MARINOS: Bit of a drive. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Why don't you read this into the record for us. MR. MARINOS: Yes, sir. 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 repairing and obtaining valid registration to a legal occupant of this property for all boats in violation, including affixing registration numbers to each hull, or store the boats in a completely enclosed structure or upon a licensed and operable trailer registered to a legal occupant of this property or remove the boats to a site intended for such use within 30 days of this hearing, or a fine of $50 per day will be imposed until the violation is abated; Three, respondent must notify Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement and the violation -- of the violation and request the investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance; Four, that if the respondent fails to abate the violation, the County may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriff's Office to enforce the provisions of this agreement, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. How many days did you have? MR. MARINOS: Thirty. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thirty. No, to get the registrations. MR. MARINOS: Complete compliance was 30 days. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do you think that's enough time for them to go through the bureaucracy of registering them? MR. MARINOS: Or put them in the building on site or remove them from the site. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Any questions or comments from the Board? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hearing none, someone want to make a motion? Make a motion. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Okay. I make a motion that we accept the findings. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: I'll second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And we have a second. All those in favor? BOARD MEMBER YORK: Aye. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Aye. BOARD MEMBER BHATLA: Aye. BOARD MEMBER JOHNSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Thanks, Charles. MR. MARINOS: Thank you, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, Helen. That takes care of the stipulations once again. MS. BUCHILLON: Yes. Next up we're going to go back to old business. B, motion for imposition of fines and liens, and we're going to do No. 4, CESD20210011573, Bayshore Suites, LLC. We have the attorney here. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Give us a minute or two to... 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. ALLEN: I do. MR. JOHNSON: I do. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. MR. ALLEN: Good morning. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Could you state your name on the microphone for us, please. MR. ALLEN: Certainly. Todd Allen. I'm the attorney for Bayshore Suites, LLC. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Good morning again. MR. JOHNSON: Good morning again. For the record, John Johnson, Collier County Code Enforcement. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. You want to read this into the record for us? MR. JOHNSON: Yes, sir. Past orders: On March 24th, 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, PG3953, for more information. On September 22nd, 2022, the Code Enforcement Board granted a continuance. See the attached order of the Board in documents and images for more information. On January 26th, 2023, the Code Enforcement Board granted a continuance. See the attached order of the Board in documents and images for more information. The violation has not been abated as of July 31st, 2023. Fines and costs to date are as follows: Fines have accrued at a rate of $200 per day for the period from July 23rd, 2022, to July 31st, 2023, 374 days, for a total fine amount of a $74,800. Fines continue to accrue. Previously assessed operational costs of $59.21 have been paid; operational costs for today's hearing are $59.42; for a total amount of $74,859.42. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you. Sir. MR. ALLEN: Yes. So the property owners had an incredible time finding a contractor to pull these permits and, unfortunately, one of those permits has now been -- is now being addressed. What had happened is she had retained somebody to come in and replace the water heater. That person had done work way outside the scope, including drywall, plumbing, and electrical, and had removed some things. The hot water permit has been inspected and is being addressed now. It's pretty close to being wrapped up. The confusion came on my client's part and her contractor's part on what permits were necessary to restore plumbing, electrical, and drywall. And it's my understanding that those things are being addressed now with the County. The contractor went in, had a conversation prior, and misunderstood what the County's requirements were, but those are now being addressed. So I would just ask for a little bit more time for us to wrap up these new permits and close them out. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I've had water heaters replaced in my house. They do them in a day. MR. ALLEN: Oh, I understand. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And this is over a year. MR. ALLEN: The problem is is this -- that whoever was retained to replace the water heater went way beyond the scope and demoed walls, demoed drywall, pulled electrical and plumbing out. It's more than a typical hot water heater replacement, and that's why it's -- the hot water heater replacement has been fixed and addressed, because that's the easiest. The problem now is the confusion on the other trades that were necessary. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is this a referral from Contractor Licensing? MR. JOHNSON: I'd have to look back, but -- MR. ALLEN: I'm on Contractor Licensing Board, and it was not a referral from us. MR. JOHNSON: I just looked back, and it was not. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Have you got any pictures? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: No. We heard the case already, so it doesn't matter. They're in violation, and they're still in violation because it hasn't been abated. Any comments or questions from the Board? BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: I'd like to make a motion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: I'd like to make motion that the fines of 74,859.42 be imposed. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a motion. Do we have a second? BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: No, not yet. It's too much. It's continuing now, right? MR. JOHNSON: Yes, the fines continue to accrue until the violation is abated. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: I'll second that. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a motion and a second. My comments on this is -- I mean, this goes back to March of 2022. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: For a water heater. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, for whatever the scope was that was done. It seems to be way past reasonable, so... MR. ALLEN: Yeah. I would just add, with the storm and finding contractors to do the work, there was a lot of things that were placed before the owner that she wasn't able to get contractors lined up. So, I mean, a chunk of that time were for reasons outside her control. There certainly -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Bayshore Suites has how many units there? MR. ALLEN: I believe it's just one. MR. JOHNSON: There's -- this particular case has one unit there, and next door is another unit that she did some outside work on. So we -- because it was the same owner, we combined it under one case just so there wouldn't be multiple cases. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Okay. We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? BOARD MEMBER YORK: Aye. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Aye. BOARD MEMBER BHATLA: Aye. BOARD MEMBER JOHNSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries. MR. ALLEN: Thank you. MR. JOHNSON: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Helen, this leads us to? MS. BUCHILLON: Another stipulation for the agenda. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Another stipulation. MS. BUCHILLON: Under hearings, No. 4, CEPM20230002800, Alejandra Lynch. 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. MUSSE: I do. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning, Jonathan. MR. MUSSE: Good morning. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you want to read this -- Let the record show that the respondent is not present. I guess they were here earlier? MR. MUSSE: She was. I thought she was here but, no, she snuck out. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Unless she smeared herself with vanishing cream, she's not there. Okay. Do you want to read this into the record for us? MR. MUSSE: Yes, sir. For the record, Investigator Jonathan Musse, Collier County Code Enforcement. It is agreed between the parties that the respondent shall pay operational costs in the amount of $59.21 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing; Abate all violations by obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition permit, inspection, and certificate of completion/occupancy for the repairs needed to bring the property into compliance with the required -- oh, okay. I'm sorry -- bring the property into compliance with the requirements of the Collier County Property Maintenance Code within 30 days of this hearing, or a fine of $250 per day will be imposed until the violation's abated. The respondent must notify Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the investigator to perform a site inspection to confirm compliance; that if the respondent fails to abate the violation, the County may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriff's Office to enforce the provisions of this agreement, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. It looks like the vanishing cream has worn off, and the -- Alexandra [sic], is that correct -- MS. LYNCH: Yes. Good morning, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay -- is now present. 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. LYNCH: I do. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. This is case No. 4. Okay. The stipulation is how many days and how many dollars? MR. MUSSE: Thirty days, $250 per day. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. MUSSE: And the operational cost is 59.21. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Ma'am, you have decided to demolish this building; is that it? MS. LYNCH: We -- I'm fixing everything up, and I got the plans going through the engineer to fix everything up, and we're going to demolish the roof and redo everything -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. LYNCH: -- according to the -- you know, to County codes, yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And the amount of days we have on this is 30 days? MR. MUSSE: Correct. I did advise Mrs. Lynch, like, if she would at least get a permit on file and be under review status. I know the Building Department's a little back up right now, but if at least it's under review status at that time, she would request an extension of time. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So 30 days is not improbable; it's impossible. MR. MUSSE: It's impossible, yeah. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah. Okay. So why not do a -- 60 or 90 days where she wouldn't have to be burdened in coming back here so often? MR. MUSSE: That's completely up to you, yeah. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, it's a stipulation, so I can't change -- MR. MUSSE: Understood. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- the stipulation. Only you guys can. Do you think you can get this done in 30 days? MS. LYNCH: I think it will be a little more, because I've got -- the engineer is working on the plans, and I've got to go through all the permits. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. LYNCH: So like you said, like, 60, 90 days, that would be more understandable and more appropriate, please. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Why don't we try this. Why don't you guys -- MR. MUSSE: Before you make that decision, the reason why we put 30 days, this is a 10-year-old case. It started off with a damaged roof back in 2013, and through the time, the building got worse because nothing was done. We're only requesting 30 days just to put her feet to the fire, so to say, just to make sure that she's going through steps. And as long as she has a permit on file, that's why we encouraged her to make an extension of time. So that's why the 30 days. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Of course, you can have a permit and not do anything. MR. MUSSE: Correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And that permit will get you up to a year. MR. MUSSE: True. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So it doesn't make things any better. If you do a stipulation that maybe is 60 or 90 days, we'll know in two or three months whether something is being done or not, including the permit. MR. MUSSE: Understood. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's why I'm suggesting that you go out in the hall and renegotiate the stipulation. MR. LETOURNEAU: For the record, Jeff Letourneau, Collier County Code Enforcement. I think at this point, due to the fact that the building official has declared a dangerous structure, that the County would be more willing to hear the case than to extend more than 30 days on the stipulation because, as Investigator Musse has stated, we're talking about 10 years where the building was brought before either the Special Magistrate or the Code Enforcement Board, I'm not really sure, for having the roof damage and over the last decade it's deteriorated so much that it's turned itself into a dangerous structure. And per the ordinance, 30 days is what we're allowed to give them, and that's why we're going for this stip right here. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Well, we can accept the stipulation, and then we will see the respondent back here probably in a month. MR. LETOURNEAU: And, like John said, we would hope that at least an application was in that you guys could say, okay, you're making progress at this point and, you know, we can extend her some more time because, obviously, the track record is 10 years old right now from the original violation. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. BOARD MEMBER YORK: Do you have any pictures of it? MR. MUSSE: I do, but I thought -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We've heard this case in the past. I remember the pictures. And we're not hearing the case now, so they don't really come to play, but -- MR. LETOURNEAU: I would just say that it's some major roof damage caused probably -- you know, time and a couple of hurricanes in between the original violation. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Well, 30 days is 30 days. Somebody want to make a motion to accept the stipulation as written? BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: I'll do that. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: I'll second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? BOARD MEMBER YORK: Aye. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Aye. BOARD MEMBER BHATLA: Aye. BOARD MEMBER JOHNSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Okay. MR. MUSSE: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We'll see you next month probably. MS. LYNCH: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good luck. MS. LYNCH: God bless. MS. BUCHILLON: Okay. Next up, we'll be back to old business, B, motion for imposition of fines and liens, No. 3, CELU20210009717, Azteca Supermarket 2000, Inc. We have the fire department here. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do we have any fires? No. Okay. CHIEF COXWELL: No fires. 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. RODRIGUEZ: I do. MS. LUNA: I do. CHIEF COXWELL: I do. LIEUTENANT FEY: I do. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Could you state your name on the microphone for us, please. MS. LUNA: Lydia Luna. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. It's a good thing you could raise your hand. MS. LUNA: I know. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Why don't we start -- MS. RODRIGUEZ: For the record, Maria Rodriguez, Collier County Code Enforcement. On February 23rd, 2023, the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of facts, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinance and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached order of the Board, OR6225, Page 1820, for more information. The violation has not been abated as of July 31st, 2023. Fines and costs to date are as follows: Fines have accrued at the rate of 250 per day for the period of June 24th, 2023, to July 31st, 2023, 30 days, of a total fine amount of 9,500. Fines continue to accrue. Previously assessed operational costs of $59.28 have been paid. Operational costs for today's hearing is $59.42. Total amount is $9,559.42. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Maria, you have here it hasn't been abated. MS. RODRIGUEZ: It has not been abated. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Does that mean it's still being used as the violation states? MS. RODRIGUEZ: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. RODRIGUEZ: Now, they did do a letter, which I'll go ahead and put it up, because they are asking for an extension of time. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is this the letter? MS. RODRIGUEZ: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Give us a minute on the Board to read through it. Okay. Do you want to introduce the witnesses? MS. RODRIGUEZ: This is -- CHIEF COXWELL: Assistant Chief Coxwell, Michael Coxwell with North Collier Fire. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. LIEUTENANT FEY: Lieutenant Dale Fey, North Collier Fire District. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. CHIEF COXWELL: Our -- really, our only input is the continued use, as you had asked from the beginning, as far as being open as a nightclub. We have no issue with the granting the extension. It's the continued use with the violations that are still in place, the safety violations. We have concerns to be continued to be open as a nightclub until the issues are resolved. We've been attempting to take care of these safety violations for going on two years. There's -- a lot of them are very basic and could be handled within a week's time span, somebody that knows how to change out batteries for emergency lighting. There's panic hardware on the doors. Just basic clearing of entryways so that there's, you know, access -- basic access. So there's some very basic items that, if it were to be open and approved for the use that they're asking, those items need to be taken care of. So to have them operating as a nightclub between now until they get all the, you know, change of use and everything taken care of, it's -- our safety concerns would be and our recommendation would be that they're not operating as a nightclub until these issues are resolved. That's really our only input for today. Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. In your estimation -- I mean, you do this stuff every day. CHIEF COXWELL: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: To come into safety on this particular property would take? CHIEF COXWELL: So aside from the change of use and going through the permitting issues and those types of things, the emergency lighting, the panic hardware, getting the things cleared, as far as access, there's a couple other issues. They have -- their sprinkler system and alarm system. I believe the alarm system is up to date. The sprinkler system just needs to have a licensed contractor come in and do their annual inspection. So they're out of date on their annual currently. So with coordinating a few things with different contractors and getting them -- they're not major items -- within a month for sure they could get all that -- I would think that would be a understandable time period for that. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So if they did that -- CHIEF COXWELL: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- and they were granted four months, let's say that we give them 30 days to get the first part done and to get all the permitting done that goes to four months, that would eliminate the safety hazard? CHIEF COXWELL: I would think that would be ample time, yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: But the fire chief, I think, is saying that they should not be operating. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. No, I understand. So you've heard what they've said. And I understand that you have some illness with your father, is it? MS. LUNA: Yeah, my father-in-law. My husband, that's why he's not here. He had to leave because -- they told him that he got kind of sick yesterday, so he left. I couldn't leave because I had surgery on Friday -- trying to be an electrician. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Who's running the business now? MS. LUNA: My daughter is running it right now. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And you've heard what they've said about the -- MS. LUNA: Yes. The emergency lights, the exit lights things, they're getting them right now at Home Depot. We're ordering the panic bars. On Friday -- Cintas is the one that does our sprinkler annual inspections, which I talked to them last week. It was supposed to have been done last year. Because of the hurricane -- it was around those days -- because we're due in September. So that's why we got kind of put back. And when I called her, they realized they hadn't done it. So it's scheduled for this coming Friday. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So let me just see if I -- in summary, if the business were to close -- this is hypothetical -- MS. LUNA: Right. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- for 30 days or until you get all of those safety items done, and then you would need probably, to get your permits in line, a total of four months, which includes that 30 days -- MS. LUNA: Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- that would be agreeable to you? MS. LUNA: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. The County have any problem with that? MS. RODRIGUEZ: We have no objection. MR. LETOURNEAU: Just to clarify, so they do have a business tax receipt for a restaurant, is that correct, to operate during the day, or no? MS. LUNA: It is for a movie theater. MR. LETOURNEAU: A what? MS. RODRIGUEZ: Theater. MR. LETOURNEAU: A theater, okay. MS. RODRIGUEZ: But from the theater it became more of a bar/club. MR. LETOURNEAU: So what they're using it for right now has no bearing on what they got as far as a business tax receipt? MS. RODRIGUEZ: Correct. MR. LETOURNEAU: Okay. Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So instead of popcorn and soda, it's popcorn and beer? MS. LUNA: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do they have a liquor license? MS. LUNA: It's just a beer license. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So that was a pretty good guess I had. Okay. Comments or suggestions from the Board? BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Well, I think it's very concerning that it's a health hazard. It's a danger, and I don't think they should be operating until at least the basics are done, such as the batteries and the buttons and the inspection. I think, you know, you've heard cases where these type of places went up in flames and a lot of people died. It's in front of us. We know that. So maybe whatever we decide to do, that should be the first part. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: I have a question. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Question. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Welcome, Kevin. I have a question. If the County and the Board allow an extension and some type of accident happens during that extension period, does the liability then fall back on the County for allowing the extension and allowing this business to operate knowing there's numerous violations out there? And, like Tarik said, one spark, and there's loss of life. Does that put the County at risk? MR. NOELL: That's a great initial question for me, sir. I would -- I would say that just -- if an extension's granted, that's still not this board authorizing the use of that facility in that manner. And so if -- you know, if that use -- at this point, as I understand, if that use is not authorized, the Board giving an extension of time to make corrections and things like that is not the same as the Board stamping that use and saying, yes, that's a permitted or allowable use, because at this point it still is not. If the Board is in the position of wanting to extend it for her to make the safety -- address the safe concerns, things like that, that's not the same thing as the Board saying continue operating this. That's the Board saying make these corrections before you operate in this manner. And if she, you know, continues to do that, then that will be something that Code Enforcement and things -- you know, different cases and stuff like that. But, no, I don't have a concern that the Board's exposing themselves to liability because, like I said, you're not authorizing that use. You're actually doing the opposite. You're keeping it on a, you know, kind of tight leash, so to speak, to get it moving. So does that answer your question? BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: For the most part. MR. NOELL: Okay. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Is 30 days realistic, Chief? CHIEF COXWELL: For the items mentioned, and it sounds like they have a head start on what they'll need, I would say yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Let me see if I can come up with the wording that Kevin will probably rewrite for me. That we grant 30 days to come into all the safety items that have been mentioned by the fire department. At that time the fire department -- and they cease operation for the next 30 days, No. 1. The fire folks can do the inspection after 30 days to make sure those safety features have been established. And as far as the permitting is concerned, that we give them the four months that they've asked for, which includes the 30 days. So it's -- from the time the safety program is instituted, it will be three months after that that everything should be done. Does that make any sense, Jeff? MR. LETOURNEAU: For the record, Jeff Letourneau, Collier County Code Enforcement. The reason that we brought this case to a hearing in the first part was for a business tax receipt. They don't have a business tax receipt to operate the business that they're operating. In order to get that business tax receipt, the fire department has to sign off on it. So I'd like to add also they need to get the business tax receipt issued before they start operation of the business. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And then the fire department, as part of the suggestion I made, would inspect after 30 days to make sure that those items have been done. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Until which time there will be no operation. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Right. CHIEF COXWELL: They can call us at any time during that time period for us to come out and do our inspection. Even if we came out after two, three weeks and they wanted us to inspect, they weren't up to par, they could call us out in another week or two. But the gentleman's exactly correct that to get this change of use and to get their business tax license, we're a vital component of that. They have to pass our inspection before the County issues that. So it's kind of a catch-all where they're not going to get that tax license until we've approved the safety violations have been cleared. MR. LETOURNEAU: One more point of clarification. They do have a business tax receipt for a theater right now. MS. RODRIGUEZ: Correct. MR. LETOURNEAU: They could operate that no problem; however, above and beyond with the nightclub would have to close down until they attain the new business tax receipt for that particular part of the business. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Now -- BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: I have a question. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Lee. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: What kind of liquor license are you operating under? Are you under a state SRX? You're selling liquor. MS. LUNA: We're just selling the beer. It's -- what is it? A 2COP series. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Just a beer license. MS. LUNA: It's just consumption of beer and -- inside the premises. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: So you have a beer and wine license? MS. LUNA: Just beer. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Just beer. On premise or off premise? MS. LUNA: In and off. That you could -- they could buy it and take it home or consume it inside the building. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Has anybody looked at this license? MS. RODRIGUEZ: We did. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Okay. MS. RODRIGUEZ: And it is an active one, although that bar is next to their -- it's, like, a grocery store, like, a convenience store. So they sell food, they sell household products. On the other end they have the move theater, which is now a bar/club. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do you understand what we're trying to do to work to your schedule? MS. LUNA: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So you can close that business down until you get that license? MS. LUNA: Uh-huh. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And do the -- if you have the safety stuff done by tomorrow, the fire department said they'll come out there and inspect it, and then you can get your license, the business license. MS. RODRIGUEZ: If they close the bar down -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. MS. RODRIGUEZ: -- convert it back to a movie theater, it would pretty much resolve our issue, and then she could work on trying to get all the permits for whatever she's trying to do for that section of it. And then once it's approved, then she can reopen it back up, because then she'll have her occupational license for it. But at this point, it will be about four months, the engineer said, before they go through all the paperwork and then the engineering and changing the occupancy and all that. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I understand. You understand? MS. LUNA: Yeah, I understand what she's saying. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So -- BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Are these three points your motion? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes, they are. So I have a motion that you stop doing business right now until you get your license. You can continue doing what the County has said as far as under your existing license, but you won't be using it as a, quote, nightclub until you get the safety features done, and then we're giving you a total of four months to get everything done, okay. Maria? MS. RODRIGUEZ: (Witness nods head.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Jeff? MR. LETOURNEAU: Just a clarification, I'm sorry. So I got the original -- a snippet of the original order up here. This is an imposition of fines. I don't know if you guys can impose any new rules or order at this point. It's just -- and I do believe that, if you look at this, they were to cease and desist the business operation on June 23rd. Has it stopped? MS. RODRIGUEZ: No. MR. LETOURNEAU: Okay. So you are going to stop it at this time until you -- MS. LUNA: Yes. MR. LETOURNEAU: -- get the correct -- all right. Just clarifying that. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So you've heard my motion. Kevin, good luck in writing it. And we have a second. All those in favor? BOARD MEMBER YORK: Aye. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. BOARD MEMBER BHATLA: Aye. BOARD MEMBER JOHNSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Nay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. One nay, and one, two, three -- five yays. It passes. THE COURT REPORTER: Who was the second? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Who was the second? BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: (Raises hand.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Well, thank you, gentlemen, for clearing us up and being so accommodating as far as getting out there as soon as possible to do the inspection. CHIEF COXWELL: Any time. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you. MS. LUNA: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you. And the respondent will be back here -- Maria, before you go away, let the respondent know that they will be back here for the imposition. This is only part one. MS. RODRIGUEZ: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Okay. Helen, this brings to us? MS. BUCHILLON: Hearings, No. 4 -- no, I'm sorry. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: How about No. 1? MS. BUCHILLON: No, it's No. 7. Number 7, CEPM20230002425, Robert P. Yardley and Louise L. Yardley. 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. MUSSE: I do. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let the record show the respondent is not present. Have you been in touch with them, Jonathan? MR. MUSSE: Yes, I did -- I was just talking with the daughter-in-law. She didn't have power of attorney. That's why she didn't stay. But I did inform her of the case. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So do you want to present your case? MR. MUSSE: Yes, sir. Good morning. For the record, Investigator Jonathan Musse, Collier County Code Enforcement. This is in reference to Case No. CEPM20230002425 in dealing with the violations of Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances Chapter 22, Article VI, Section 22-228(1), 22-231(12)(c), 22-231(12)(r), and 22-231(19), damaged soffits, missing sections of the downspout, and microbial growth on the exterior walls, located at 5340 Myrtle Lane, Naples, Florida, 34113; Folio No. 60780600003. Service was given on April 13th, 2023. Conducted an initial inspection on March 23rd where I observed the violations mentioned earlier. Spoke with the resident, Anthony, who informed me that the owners, Mrs. Yardley, does not currently reside at this property, and I -- and he suggested that I get in contact with her son, Tim Yardley. I was able to speak with Mr. Yardley on March 29th, who informed me that he has power of attorney. I explained the violation to include the possible unpermitted additions to the dwelling that will be dealt with in a separate case. Conducted a follow-up inspection on April 13th and spoke to a different resident who informed me that Mr. Yardley is not home at the time. I explained the violation and what would be needed to come into compliance. He stated that he'll forward the message to Mr. Yardley. Checked online and observed that the property is currently being sold. I contacted the listed realtor, Kendra Hoff, of MVP Realty Associates. She informed me that there's no potential buyers at the time and also noting the sale of the house may be difficult. Made several attempts to contact Mr. Yardley and never received a return call. At that time I prepared the case for hearing. A pre-hearing inspection was conducted on Friday, July 28th. Violation remains. At this time I'd like to present the case evidence in the following exhibits: Six photos I took is March 23rd, 2023, and four photos I took on July 28th, 2023. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Get a motion from the Board to accept the photos. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: So moved. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. All those in favor? BOARD MEMBER YORK: Aye. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: (No verbal response.) BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Aye. BOARD MEMBER BHATLA: Aye. BOARD MEMBER JOHNSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Okay. Picture show. No popcorn. MR. MUSSE: Here are the first four -- first six photos taken from the initial inspection. You can see the soffits. There's probably a closer photo right here. Some microbial growth on the property, a closer photo of the microbial growth. Here is the missing section of the downspout, closer angle of that, and the damaged soffits. That was taken on July 28th. Still no change in the violation on my last inspection. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is there somebody living there, Jonathan? MR. MUSSE: There are some residents that live there. According to the daughter-in-law that I spoke with, she said she's trying to get them evicted. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Are they squatters or they're renters? MR. MUSSE: I don't think they're renters. They probably, like, used to be friends and are not leaving. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So they're not friends now. MR. MUSSE: They're not friends. Squatting, basically. And, yeah, just a closer photo, and that's all I have for photo evidence. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. The structure has lots of violations, but we're only dealing here with the soffit violation. MR. MUSSE: Correct. This used to be a stilt home, and there's unpermitted additions in the bottom which was being handled by the area investigator. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Okay. Let the record reflect that the respondent is not present. And I make a motion that a violation exists. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And it's seconded. All those in favor? BOARD MEMBER YORK: Aye. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Aye. BOARD MEMBER BHATLA: Aye. BOARD MEMBER JOHNSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. And you have a suggestion for us? MR. MUSSE: Yes, sir. The County recommends that the Code Enforcement Board order the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of $58.28 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate violations by obtaining all -- oh -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I can't read that anyhow, so... MS. BUCHILLON: You have a copy up there. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah, I know. MR. MUSSE: Obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition permit, inspections, and certificate of completion/occupancy for all the repairs to bring the property into compliance with the requirements of the Collier County Property Maintenance Code within X amount of days of this hearing, or a fine of X amount of dollars per day will be imposed until the violation's abated. The respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the County may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriff's Office to enforce the provisions of this order, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Well, as far as the safety, it's probably not a safety hazard, downspouts, as a problem. MR. MUSSE: Correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. It's not safety and health. Were you surprised that somebody showed up today -- MR. MUSSE: Yes, yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- since you've been unable to contact them? MR. MUSSE: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And the conversation that you had with the daughter-in-law -- MR. MUSSE: Uh-huh. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- did she indicate that you'll be able to communicate on a regular basis? MR. MUSSE: Yes, I did get her contact information, and I also supplied her with the contact information of the area investigator, and I told her -- she made it seem like she can get this done in a decent amount of time. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Is there another case that's pending before us now on the rest of the structure? MR. MUSSE: I don't think the permitting case is on this agenda. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We're just talking about the gutters. Okay. So we need to fill out blanks. How many days? How many dollars? Had you not been contacted by the daughter-in-law, we would have made this a real short time frame -- MR. MUSSE: Correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- because that's how you get somebody's attention. Anybody here want to try to fill out the blanks? How many days? How many dollars? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I'll do it. It should be -- to put downspouts on is no big deal. That can be done in a day or two. I'm going to do 30 days and $50 a day fine thereafter. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And we have a second. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: I'll second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And we have another second. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Third. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: He's a third. Okay. You look like five-eighths to me. Okay. All those in favor? BOARD MEMBER YORK: Aye. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Aye. BOARD MEMBER BHATLA: Aye. BOARD MEMBER JOHNSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Thank you, Jonathan. MR. MUSSE: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, Helen. MS. BUCHILLON: Next case -- next case, No. 8, CEVR20210010022, Jason Brady and Nicole Brady. 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. MR. BRADY: I do. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Could you state your name on the microphone for us, please. MR. BRADY: Yes, Mr. Jason Brady. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Charles? MR. MARINOS: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you want to present your case? MR. MARINOS: I am getting it open. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Take your time. We're not going anywhere. MR. MARINOS: I apologize. A different order than I thought it was going to be in. Okay. Here we go. Good morning. For the record, Investigator Chuck Marinos, Collier County Code Enforcement. This is in reference to Case No. CEVR20210010022 dealing with violation of Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 3.05.01(B) for the unpermitted clearing of an unimproved lot, located at property -- no address; Folio No. 36665120108. Service was given on September 27th, 2021. This case originated as a reissuance of an NOV due to new ownership from previous Case CEVR20210005352, which had originated as a complaint on May 24th, 2021. This case was being handled by Investigator Saylys Coutin at the time who, on May 25th, 2021, observed an unimproved Estates-zoned property that had extensive clearing done with no vegetation removal permit or building permits on file. On June 4th, 2021, an environmental determination was conducted by Ms. Michaelle Crowley that found the property in violation. It was noted at that time that no wetlands were present on the parcel. On September 24th, 2021, it was observed that the property had changed ownership due to the current owner -- had changed ownership to the current owner, Mr. and Ms. Brady. Investigator Coutin closed the previous case and opened this new case. On September 27th, 2021, a notice of violation was posted on the property. Since the start of that case, as well as the -- sorry. Since the start of the previous case as well as this case, Tropical Environmental has been the main contact for abatement proceedings and has been responsive. Tropical Environmental has communicated their attempts to obtain the required Florida DEP permitting and wetlands determination since the time which we're -- since the time which was required for the issuance of Collier County permits. As of this hearing -- no, sorry. As of the pre-hearing on 7/28/2023, no permits have been issued by the County, and no permit applications are on file currently with the County. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. MARINOS: I would now like to present case evidence in the following exhibits: Five pictures taken by Investigator Coutin on May 25th, 2021, showing initial conditions, as well as two pictures taken by myself on July 28th, 2023, showing current conditions. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Has the respondent seen the photos? MR. MARINOS: He has. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you have any objection to those photos being entered? MR. BRADY: Not at all. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Get a motion from the Board to accept the photos. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: So moved. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And seconded. All those in favor? BOARD MEMBER YORK: (No verbal response.) BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: (No verbal response.) BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Aye. BOARD MEMBER BHATLA: Aye. BOARD MEMBER JOHNSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. MR. MARINOS: All right. These are the older photos. Excuse the resolution. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. MARINOS: This is the cleared property. It is a parcel behind an improved Estates-zoned property. It is a split parcel, taken on May 25th. You can see it was a lot of underbrush clearing underneath the drip line of trees along with a strip to get to the back. It was cleared with machinery. This is the view from the actual roadway going -- in the front left here is the actual improved property. There's a house on that further off to the side you can't see. And then, since then, this is the photos I took on Friday. A lot of vegetation growing back in but, of course, not abated yet. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: This is way out in the Estate? MR. MARINOS: Not way out in the Estates, but it's out there. You know, not out to DeSoto or anything, but also not on Collier Boulevard. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Let me ask, on the -- the first time in May of '21, it was first cited -- MR. MARINOS: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- for clearing without a -- using mechanicals. The resolution of that, this property was sold, and there was no fines levied, no liens? MR. MARINOS: No. The case had just -- had opened pretty recently. Mr. Brady and Ms. Brady basically spoke with them, agreed to take on the property in its condition with the violation still going. So the NOV was reissued at that time. They've been working with Tropical Environmental. I know they've got -- they're pretty far forward on their DEP. I believe that they've just got a few more plans but, obviously, they can discuss what they intend to do to fully abate. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. I probably didn't make myself clear. MR. MARINOS: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The property was sold after it was violated more than once; is that correct? MR. MARINOS: No, no. There is the one violation. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And that was September of '21? MR. MARINOS: That was September -- that was May of '21. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Initially. MR. MARINOS: Initially. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Then there was September of 21? MR. MARINOS: Which was the new NOV because of the new property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Now, the first property owner didn't pay any fine? MR. MARINOS: They paid no fines. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And fines were not accruing? MR. MARINOS: No, fines were not accruing. MR. LETOURNEAU: It never went to a hearing. MR. MARINOS: Yeah, it had never gone to a hearing. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. I understand better. All right. Sir, why don't you take us from there. MR. BRADY: Sure. The timeline is as Charles has pointed out. So we took ownership of the property on September '21. The -- we had gone into a contract six months prior with the previous owners, and the agreement of the sale was that they were going to make good on the violations. They reneged on that and didn't make good on the violations, and we decided to just go ahead and purchase the property and, obviously, taking on that headache as well; however, we were told that the onus would fall on the previous owners for the violation that they committed, and that's how it was positioned to us. Regardless -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let me stop you there one sec. So somebody told you that the fines or the violation would be the responsibility the past owner? MR. BRADY: Sure. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: They lied to you. Okay go ahead. MR. BRADY: Sure. So here we are today. We have worked with Tropical Environmental to diligently and patiently go through the process to get the wetlands permit and the vegetation removal permit. We've been continuously -- we, as in myself and Tropical Environmental, with the County, and we're being -- basically saying that once we get the FDEP permit, the wetlands permit, the 404, we could then -- and the building permit, we could address the vegetation removal permit. Obviously, a lot of time has expired since then because of all sorts of circumstances but none really within my control. And here we are today. We're about to get the FDEP permit issued, I think, in about eight days' time. And we now have a house plan, and we are about to sort of go into contract and start getting truss permits and building permits, et cetera, once that's -- I have all the documentation to... CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So once you have a permit for a structure -- MR. BRADY: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- that will erase the -- correct me if I'm wrong, Jeff. Will that correct the other portion? MR. LETOURNEAU: It will. For the record, Jeff Letourneau, Collier County Code Enforcement. In the past on these cases, we've recommended that we go all the way to CO; however, I think going forward we're going to just recommend the permit being issued at that point, because once it's issued, it would allow them to clear the property at that point. So, obviously, if they didn't follow through with the house permit and didn't get the CO down the road, we'd have to open a new case for that particular item. But, yeah, we're just looking for a house permit to be issued. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah, we've been here before. Okay. When do you think you'll be able to get a permit? MR. BRADY: Great question, because up until this point we've been really waiting on jumping through the -- you know, over the hurdles to get to a point where we can actually apply for a permit. But as we sit here today, I think we're very excited about potentially moving forward. But with the changing tides of the interest rates and everything else, we are also strongly considering, well, we've waited this long. Should we just wait another three to six months to see, you know, where we are financially, where the market is financially, where the interest rates are financially. The cost of building a place is coming down. So there's a few things in flux. So in an ideal world, we could be, in 30 days or three months, saying, it's -- you know, we would -- our intention is to build the house next year. We break ground in '24, and we finish the house in '24, and we move in, but there are a few factors where we're feeling a little bit uncomfortable. And so we're still going to build the house, but it's just a case of when. From your perspective, I'm just happy to make whole on the permit, whether that's before the fact or after the fact, however it is. I would like to do it as efficiently as possible, but I don't know whether that's going to be doing it in the next three months when we apply for our building permit or whether we do it at a later date. I don't know. I need to be sort of advised. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, if I were in your shoes, my first thought would be to get a building permit as quickly as possible, because once we impose an order, they generally accrue fines on a daily basis. MR. BRADY: Right. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: If you had a building permit -- I'll pick a number out of the sky. Let's say we gave you six months to get a building permit, and after six months, you start accruing fines of $100 a day, or whatever it is, which is -- that certainly adds to your financial thoughts on what you're doing. MR. BRADY: Of course. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Our thought is to get you into compliance as quickly and painlessly as possible. MR. BRADY: Sure. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So I would consider that as part of your financial discussions as far as where you go from here. How big a piece of property is this? MR. BRADY: Two-and-a-half acres. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Excuse me? MR. BRADY: Two-and-a-half acres. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Two and a half? Okay. Those are my questions for the day. Anybody have any questions here? BOARD MEMBER BHATLA: I have a question. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Sure. BOARD MEMBER BHATLA: What is the -- what's the impact of the violation? I mean, is there impact of the violation immediately? Is there any kind of hazard in the world -- MR. BRADY: No. BOARD MEMBER BHATLA: -- if you don't clear? MR. BRADY: The property was cleared. It's pretty much almost all grown back and, yeah, it's not affecting anyone else nearby at all. There's no hazards. BOARD MEMBER BHATLA: So you don't have any kind of hazard at all? MR. BRADY: No. There's no work being done. There's no -- nothing's being stored there. It's just a piece of land. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Typically -- and Bart is new. Typically, it doesn't matter whether there's a hazard or not. Half the cases -- half -- 80 percent of the cases that we handle have no hazard. BOARD MEMBER BHATLA: Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: They're just violations of code. For instance, if you build a house without a permit, there's -- you're not affecting anybody except all the taxpayers of Collier County who are now making up for the dollars that you're not spending on your building permit, and you're not being taxed. So that's where code comes to play. So just a thought. BOARD MEMBER BHATLA: I was interested in the timing element. How much amount of time should be allowed or should be considered to be given, you know, before the violation can be corrected. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We kind of -- well, to begin with, we have to find out if a violation exists. BOARD MEMBER BHATLA: Right. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Now, a violation would exist if the property was cleared using mechanical equipment without a permit either to build a structure or to clear the property. If that exists, then a violation exists. So at this point, I'm going to make a motion that a violation does exist. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: And I'll second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And we have a second. Any discussion on that? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hearing none, all those in favor? BOARD MEMBER YORK: Aye. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Aye. BOARD MEMBER BHATLA: Aye. BOARD MEMBER JOHNSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Okay. So a violation exists. And Chuck has graciously put together a thought on what resolution can be; am I right? MR. MARINOS: I certainly have. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. MARINOS: Recommendation: That the Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount $59.28 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by: One, obtaining and executing all required approved mitigation plans and/or Collier County building and vegetation removal permits, inspections, and certificate of completion/occupancy to either keep the unpermitted vegetative clearing of the property as-is or to restore the property to its originally permitted condition within blank days of this hearing, or a fine of blank per day will be imposed until the violation is abated, and the respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the County may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriff's Office to enforce the provisions of this order, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Jeff, you don't -- we're not going to do this until the CO is issued; this is just permit basis? MR. LETOURNEAU: For the record, Jeff Letourneau, Collier County Code Enforcement. I'm pretty comfortable with this verbiage at this point because of the word "required." Now, if he does the house permit, I think that he got his required permit issued at that time, and I'm going to advise Chuck to do an affidavit of compliance at that point; however, if he was going to go the mitigation route, he would have to get inspections and the sign-off from the -- from the Environmental Department in order to come into compliance. So I would like to leave that part in there just for the mitigation plans; however, I can assure you that we will be closing this case out once he gets that building permit issued. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Any comments or questions from the Board, or somebody like to fill in the blanks? BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: I have a question. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Shoot. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: The violation happened prior to any type of building permit? MR. LETOURNEAU: The violation occurred. That's why we're here is -- BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Right. MR. LETOURNEAU: -- because they removed vegetation on an unapproved piece of property without authorization. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Once the building permit is issued, he has the right to clear -- MR. LETOURNEAU: Exactly. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: -- going forward. MR. LETOURNEAU: So the clearing would be -- BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: The violation happened prior to? MR. LETOURNEAU: Right. So once that permit's issued, the violation goes away because he could bring the bulldozers in there on that day and clear it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Is 30 days enough, do you think? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, I'm guessing that the most likely scenario is that the respondent is going to pull a building permit on the property. To restore the property would cost a fortune. And then, when he decides to build on it, he's going to have to take all of his improvements out. So the logical solution would be to build a -- get a building permit. Once you have a building permit, you can drag that out for a long time before you actually build, and that would answer his comments about finance, the mortgage rates, and all the rest of that. MR. BRADY: Right. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So I'm going to suggest that we give him 180 days, six months, or a fine of $50 a day thereafter. BOARD MEMBER YORK: I second it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And we have a second. Any discussion on that? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hearing none, all those in favor? BOARD MEMBER YORK: (No verbal response.) BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Aye. BOARD MEMBER BHATLA: Aye. BOARD MEMBER JOHNSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. MR. BRADY: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Good luck on building. MR. BRADY: Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Don't get bitten by the mosquitoes out there. We're going to take a break for the court reporter now. We'll be back in 15 minutes. (A brief recess was had from 10:26 a.m. to 10:44 a.m.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I'd like to call the Code Enforcement Board back to order. Which brings us to? MS. BUCHILLON: We're still under hearings. Number 9, CEAU20220010097, Best Homes Builder at Golden Gate, 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. MARINO: I do. MR. GARCIA: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: If you could, state your name on the microphone for us, please. MR. GARCIA: Michael Garcia. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, Michael. MR. MARINO: Joseph Marino, Collier County Code Enforcement. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, Joseph. Your case. You start. MR. MARINO: All right. Good morning. This is in reference to Case No. CEAU20220010097 dealing with violations of Florida Building Code, 7th Edition (2020) Building, Chapter 1, scope and administration; Part 2, administration and enforcement, Section 105 permits, 105.1 required, regarding the fence built without permits, located at 1190 Ivy Way, Naples, 34117; Folio No. 00302800005. Service was given on April 19th, 2023, with a notice of violation posted at the property and courthouse. In addition, notice of violation was mailed regular and certified mail to the respondent. On November 9th, 2022, I arrived at 1190 Ivy Way and witnessed a fence being constructed by workers. No permits were on file at the time of initial inspection, and a stop order -- work order was placed on site. The determination was received November 10th, 2022, from Building Official Fred Klum. Determination stated permit required for fencing. A permit for a fence was applied for on November 19th, 2022. Fence permit remains in rejected status and expired on April 17th, 2023. Construction on fence and gate has continued with permit in rejected status. I would now like to present case evidence in the following exhibits: I have seven photos taken by me, zoning maps and aerials, and a correction letter. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Has the respondent seen the photos? MR. MARINO: Yes. We just went over them outside. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do you have any objection to the photos? MR. GARCIA: No. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. MARINO: So I would like to state that the respondent is the son of the registered agent for the property for property, for Best Homebuilders. She -- we did verify over the phone verbally -- because she is ill. They're coming from out of county, so he's in place of her today. We verified her name, address, everything on the phone with the supervisor just before this, so he's here to speak on her behalf. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. MARINO: They just weren't aware of the written due to the time frame, and we haven't had contact in a little bit. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Can we get a motion from the Board to accept the photos? BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: So moved. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Seconded. All those in favor? BOARD MEMBER YORK: Aye. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: (No verbal response.) BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Aye. BOARD MEMBER BHATLA: Aye. BOARD MEMBER JOHNSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. MR. MARINO: All right. Here's a picture when the fence was being constructed. Another picture from November 9th. This is our stop work order that we placed on property for November 9th, 2022. This was back in January. They had started completing the front of the property. This is so you can see now that they have the wooden gate with the columns and the notice posted. This is as of July 26th. The fence has been completed all the way across, all down the sides. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Are you saying that they were working on the fence even though a stop -- MR. MARINO: Even after a stop work order was done, yep. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. MARINO: So here we have -- let's see. How do we get -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is that two-and-a-half acres? MR. MARINO: The total property size, I believe, is about five and changes. Give me one second. I can tell you. MR. GARCIA: 5.15. MR. MARINO: 5.15? MR. GARCIA: Yeah. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. MARINO: How do you get this to go bigger on here? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is that out in the Estates? MR. MARINO: Yes, this is an Estates-zoned property. And they have a zoning overlay for -- oh, geez. They have the Rural Fringe Mixed-Use District overlay and NBMO neutral. This is the zoning overlay and zoning map right here. On the next pages -- oh, geez. Here's aerials from 2020, 2021. And then in 2023, you can see they've cleared a majority of -- about half the property right here. The fence is going from the front of the property all down the side here. 4.9 acres is the total. It's ag. MR. LETOURNEAU: It's agricultural. MR. MARINO: It's agricultural. Yeah, agricultural. Sorry about that. So it's agricultural. These are aerials, again, from 2020, 2021. The next case that's coming over that we're going to see next is the same property, so they go hand in hand. But as it stands right now, we have no -- the permit stays in rejected status. Here is a fence permit correction letter that was sent out back in December. The corrections require a wetland determination, which he has from the house. The house permit -- he has a house permit on the property right now. If he was to get the fence permit back in order, it would clear up the vegetation requirements, too, as well. So he's got a couple different things going on. These are the things that we've already discussed with him. He is aware, his mother is aware what they need to do to get the thing in order to get this fence permit back in proper status. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. MARINO: We had gone over a -- due to the fact, like I said, that his mother isn't here because she is ill and she's a registered agent, we were going to do a stipulation in an attempt to do that, and we had come up with a -- 60 days and then a fine, but because she's not here, he can't sign it. So that was to go with what the next part would be, the recommendation from us. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You don't have to get into the recommendation yet. We have to find out whether a violation exists first. Okay. Okay, sir. MR. GARCIA: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Was there was a problem getting -- his ability to be authorized to sign on this? Is that a problem? MR. MARINO: Well, he can't sign the stipulation because his mother is the registered agent for the LLC that owns the property. That's why we were only able to verbally confirm that she is allowing him to speak on her behalf and to be her, but we would need to have her writing or have her physically sign it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. I'll ask my question of our attorney. Would her verbally doing that satisfy the requirement? MR. NOELL: Well -- and I think since he is here and he's been kind of designated by the registered agent to speak, sir, are you in agreement with -- are you asking about the recommendation? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, no. He said they couldn't sign it because -- MR. NOELL: Right. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. NOELL: Yeah. I just didn't know if -- because I think the Board can just ask him the question, are you in agreement with the 60-day, you know, continuance to get the permit. Basically, the same thing that the stipulation set forth. If he agrees to that, there's no -- there's no issue. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Are you in a position to do that? MR. GARCIA: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. MARINO: We have verified on the phone just before this with her that she's okay with that. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Why don't we do this -- and Jeff is going to hate me. MR. LETOURNEAU: Well, we're already here. Why not just do the recommendation, and you guys figure out what you want to give him? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. I was going to say you can go out and do a stipulation, but that's okay. MR. LETOURNEAU: Yeah. We can just present our recommendation. You guys can hammer it out. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. NOELL: And a stipulation can be verbal as well, right, if there's an agreement, so... CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. Okay. So we'll go back to you -- you have a fence, and the work was done during rejected time frame. You consent that you're in violation? MR. GARCIA: Yes, yes. I will do -- I will fix the comments to get the permit approved for the fence. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So I'll make a motion that the respondent is in violation, a violation exists. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: I'll second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I've got a second. All those in favor? BOARD MEMBER YORK: (No verbal response.) BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: (No verbal response.) BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Aye. BOARD MEMBER BHATLA: Aye. BOARD MEMBER JOHNSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. We have to do everything in the right order. MR. GARCIA: Okay, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Otherwise they take away my birthday, you know. We can't have that. MR. GARCIA: Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So do you think you can get everything done in -- MR. GARCIA: Sixty days? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- in a month or two months, whatever? MR. GARCIA: Yeah. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: He said 60 days. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Sixty days. MR. GARCIA: The fence, I can close the permit in 60 days. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. GARCIA: That also has a permit, once they approve it, to build a house from the ground. That permit's already issued. If you go to the Permitting Department, you can see the permit situated to build the house. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So I'm going to go back to Joe. Do you have a suggestion for us? MR. MARINO: Yeah, we do. We were suggesting 60 days with $150 per day. I can read the full recommendation to you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Please. MR. MARINO: Okay. Description of violation was a fence built without required permits. The recommendation is that the Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of $59.28 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition permit, inspections, and certificate of completion/occupancy for the fence within 60 days of this hearing, or a fine of $150 per day will be imposed until the violation is abated. The respondents must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the County may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriff's Office to enforce the provisions of this order, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed by the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Sixty days is no problem. MR. MARINO: No. MR. GARCIA: Yes, sir. MR. MARINO: Oh, sorry. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you want to say some -- do you have more? MR. MARINO: No. He was telling me to scroll. I'm just not used to using the mouse yet. This is the first time. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We'll get you a mouse. Okay. Sixty days or $150 a day after that. Okay. MR. GARCIA: Okay, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's my motion. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: I'll second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All in favor? BOARD MEMBER YORK: Aye. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: (No verbal response.) BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Aye. BOARD MEMBER BHATLA: Aye. BOARD MEMBER JOHNSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Okay. MR. GARCIA: Thank you, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good luck. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: You've got another one. Yeah, don't go too far. MR. MARINO: We've got to do the other one for the vegetation removal. MS. BUCHILLON: The next case is No. 11 -- I mean, I'm sorry, No. 10, CEVR20220010205, Best Homebuilders at Golden Gate, LLC. MR. MARINO: Have we got to swear in again, or... CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah. It wears off very quickly. 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. MARINO: I do. MR. GARCIA: I do. MR. MARINO: For the record, Investigator Joseph Marino, Collier County Code Enforcement. This is in reference to Case No. CEVR20220010205 dealing with violation of Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 3.05.01(B) for clearing of property without valid permits and exceeding the allowable amount of clearing, located at 1190 Ivy Way, Naples, 34117; Folio No. 00302800005. Service was given on February 21st, 2023, with a notice of violation posted at the property and courthouse. In addition, the notice of violation was mailed regular and certified mail to the respondent. On November 9th, 2022, I arrived at 1190 Ivy Way and witnessed a large area of the property, including two entryways from Ivy Way, have been cleared of vegetation with use of heavy machinery. No permits were on file at the time of initial inspection. I prepared a determination request and received one back on December 28th, 2022, from Jaime Cook, environmental director. The determination stated the land is RFMU, rural fringe mixed use neutral, so preservation requirement is 60 percent of native vegetation, not to exceed 45 percent of the site. At most, 2.2 acres can be cleared if property owner will have accessory uses in addition to the one acre allowed with the approved building permit. Building permit for the house must be approved to clear one acre. Any clearing beyond the one acre will require vegetation removal permit of VRP, including a reason, but may not exceed the 2.2 acres of total clearing. The permit for the house was applied for on December 27th, 2022, and issued on February 21st, 2023. A permit for a fence was applied for on November 19th, 2022. Fence permit remains in rejected status and expired April 17th, 2023. Area that has been cleared exceeds the allowable amount without proper permits on file. I would now like to present the case evidence with the following exhibits: Determination by Jaime Cook, the environmental director; six photos taken by me; the zoning maps and aerials; and a vegetation removal permit affidavit -- permit activities. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Has the respondent seen the photos? MR. MARINO: Yes, we've gone over all of these as well outside. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you have any objection to the photos? MR. GARCIA: No, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Get a motion from the Board to accept the photos. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: So moved. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor? BOARD MEMBER YORK: Aye. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: (No verbal response.) BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Aye. BOARD MEMBER BHATLA: Aye. BOARD MEMBER JOHNSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. You did say that there was a permit issued for the house. MR. MARINO: Correct. They have the permit for the house. The only one that's in rejected status is the fence, which is why they kind of play hand in hand together. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We did the case on the fence. MR. MARINO: Uh-huh. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So my question to Jeff is, why are we hearing this at all? MR. LETOURNEAU: Because the house permit only allows for an acre, and it would not cover the total volume of the clearing. So he'd have to get the house -- MR. MARINO: Fence permit. MR. LETOURNEAU: -- and then maybe something else. MR. MARINO: He needs a vegetation removal permit for the fence. The house gets him to clear one acre. He needs a vegetation removal permit for the fence. So because the fence is in rejected status, he needs a vegetation removal permit now for everything, because if he's just gets the fence, it would fix up this one for the most part. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. LETOURNEAU: So the fence and the house permit would cover the total amount of clearing that's done so far? MR. MARINO: Estimated. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Catch 22. Okay. Gotcha. So you agree that you are in violation? MR. GARCIA: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. I make a motion that a violation exists. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. All those in favor? BOARD MEMBER YORK: Aye. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: (No verbal response.) BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Aye. BOARD MEMBER BHATLA: Aye. BOARD MEMBER JOHNSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. And if we do the same -- MR. MARINO: Yeah. We came up with 180 days for the hearing -- to give him the time to do that, and $150 per day after. Would you like me to just go right into the recommendation? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. MR. LETOURNEAU: Before you get going, though, I think that we'd like to kind of model it after the last clearing one. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Right. MR. LETOURNEAU: Once that fence permit is issued -- so he'd have both the fence permit and the house permit issued. At that point he's in compliance because he would have been allowed to clear that particular part of the property. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I agree. MR. MARINO: All right. All right. So this is -- description of the violation is overclearing of property without valid permits and exceeding allowable amount of clearing. The recommendation is that the Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of $59.28 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days, and abate all violations by obtaining all required Collier County approved mitigation plans, building permits, inspections, and certificates of completion/occupancy to either keep the unpermitted improvement of the property as-is or to restore the property to its original permitted condition within 180 days of this hearing, or a fine of $150 per day will -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let me stop you there for one second. The previous one was 60 days. MR. MARINO: This one's for the vegetation removal of the whole entire property. So if he -- it would take longer for the vegetation removal to build the whole house, because that's what we're looking for. MR. LETOURNEAU: Okay. Let me back up a little bit. I'm sorry. He's going by our traditional way of doing this. I want to change this at this point, though. So once he gets the fence permit issued, he'd have the house and the fence permit issued. He would be allowed to do that clearing at that point. That's when they're going to clear it once it's issued. MR. MARINO: Uh-huh. MR. LETOURNEAU: The violation is abated at that point. MR. MARINO: I was under the impression that we are supposed to wait till the whole house permit is completed. MR. LETOURNEAU: And we were -- and I didn't pull this change on him. So we're going to leave it as-is, because if they went the mitigation route, they'd still have to go through the inspections and the approval. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So you want to leave the 180 days? MR. LETOURNEAU: No. I'd rather leave the 60 days along to coincidence with him getting that fence permanent issued. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. LETOURNEAU: Sorry, Joe. MR. MARINO: Sixty. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So you were at the how many days. You said 60, right? MR. MARINO: Sixty for the fence, yeah. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And then $150 fine thereafter. MR. MARINO: Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You continue your -- MR. MARINO: Okay. So we're going to change it to the condition within 60 days of this hearing, or a fine of $150 per day will be imposed until the violation is abated. The respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the County may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriff's Office to enforce the provisions of this order, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So I make a motion the 59.28 be paid within 30 days, 60 days to complete the permitting process, and $150 thereafter. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Second. BOARD MEMBER YORK: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor? BOARD MEMBER YORK: Aye. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Aye. BOARD MEMBER BHATLA: Aye. BOARD MEMBER JOHNSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Thank you, Joe. MR. MARINO: Thank you. MR. GARCIA: Sir, after I get the permit for the fence -- I already got the permit for the house. After I get the permit for the fence, so the vegetation removal is going to be abated, the violation? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Right. MR. GARCIA: Okay. Thank you, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. You can discuss it out in the hall if you want, but you're correct. MR. GARCIA: Thank you, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Which brings us to? MS. BUCHILLON: Next case, we're still under hearings, No. 12, CEVR20220005103, Ana Iris Hernandez and Saul Garcia Torres. 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. MARINO: I do. MR. GARCIA: (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Sir, could you give us your name on the microphone? MR. GARCIA: No, no speak English. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I didn't hear that. THE COURT REPORTER: He doesn't speak English. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: He didn't say "yes" to the swearing. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Well -- MR. MARINO: He doesn't have a translator. We've discussed this out in the hallway. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do you speak Spanish? MR. MARINO: I do not speak Spanish. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Would you like to learn? MR. MARINO: I would be doing him a disservice if I tried. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Helen, ask him if he swears the information he gives is going to be the truth. MR. GARCIA: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We got past that hurdle. Okay. Same street. Seems to be a lot of activity on the street. MR. MARINO: There is. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Joe, it's your case. MR. MARINO: All right. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hold on one second. Jeff, the respondent doesn't speak English; has no translator. MR. LETOURNEAU: Okay. Hold on one second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. You're going to translate for him? MR. LETOURNEAU: No. THE COURT REPORTER: And can I ask you to read slower? MR. MARINO: Yes. THE COURT REPORTER: Thank you. MR. MARINO: Sorry. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Joe's too fast. That's what your girlfriend said. Slow down. Taking you out to dinner, you know. MR. LETOURNEAU: Mr. Kaufman? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. MR. LETOURNEAU: We've been, in the past, advised by our County Attorney that it's a conflict of interest for a member of Code Enforcement to translate for a respondent. If there's any Spanish-speaking people in the audience, you could ask them to translate for him. But he was advised before this hearing that he needed to bring a translator, and he failed to do so. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. This young lady coming up is going to help you out, I think. You have to raise your hand again. 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. LUNA: Yes, 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. GARCIA: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do you want to move to microphone over, or you guys get closer together. Okay. Joe? MR. MARINO: All right. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: He's going to present his case. You can tell the respondent what he's saying. And we're all good. Okay, Joe. MR. MARINO: All right. Good afternoon. For the record, Investigator Joseph Marino, Collier County Code Enforcement. This is in reference to Case No. CEVR20220005103 dealing with violation of ordinance -- Collier County code -- or Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 3.05.01(B) regarding trees overcleared/removed in the front yard without first obtaining vegetation removal permit, VRP, located at 1560 Ivy Way, Naples, 34117; Folio No. 00305880006. Service was given on January 25th, 2023, with a notice of violation posted at the property and courthouse. In addition, notice of violation was mailed regular and certified mail to the respondent. Initial inspection was performed on March 26th, 2022, by previous investigator. Aerials showed vegetation present in 2017 on the front half of the property and no longer present in 2023. Determination was received from Jaime Cook, environmental official, stating vegetation has gradually disappeared from the front half of the property over the last several years. NBMO sending designation requires 80 percent native vegetation preservation unless justified by a bona fide ag operations. Based on the information provided, it does not appear this is a bona fide ag operation. No uses that would qualify for a VRP; however, fire may qualify for a VRP if photographs would corroborate fire damage. Vegetation removal permit, VPR, required. I would now like to present case evidence in the following exhibits: Three photos taken by me, zoning maps and aerials, determination, historical maps, incomplete vegetation removal permit, application. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Has the respondent seen the photos? MR. MARINO: Yes. We went over this in the hallway. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Could you ask him if he objects to those photos being put on the record? MR. GARCIA: No. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Can I get a motion from the Board to accept the photos? BOARD MEMBER YORK: Motion to accept the photos. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Second. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And a second. All those in favor? BOARD MEMBER YORK: (No verbal response.) BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: (No verbal response.) BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Aye. BOARD MEMBER BHATLA: Aye. BOARD MEMBER JOHNSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Okay. MR. MARINO: All right. So this is going to be a historical maps for -- we're going to go back in time real quick. So this is the 2022. We're going now to 2021. As you can see, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016, 2015. So if we go from 2016 up now -- the land in the back here, just so everyone's aware, this has all been permitted from previous owners. It was excavated as an aqua farm. So the clearing back here is not in question. The clearing is going to be from this half of the property here. As we move up, you see this is all cleared. You start to see buildings coming into play. A lot of the trees are starting to go away. As we keep going, more and more of the front and the middle of the property has been cleared. There are no permits on file for any of the buildings, any of the operations going on here, and these are the only trees that remain. Everything that was in the front has been cleared. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: There were no building permits for the buildings on that portion of the property? MR. MARINO: No permits other than the aquaculture farms for -- these were lakes that they used before, prior to -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is there another case pending about the buildings? MR. MARINO: Not today, not at this time. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I ask -- okay. Could you ask the respondent how long he's owned this property. MR. GARCIA: Eight years. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Eight years. Were the buildings on the property when he bought it? MR. GARCIA: No, that's a trailer. (In English) A trailer, an office -- office trailer. (Through interpreter) It's a trailer with an office. (In English) Yeah, for food, animal. For animal. (Through interpreter) He has a permit for animals. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Are you familiar with any permits that he has out there, Joe? MR. MARINO: So I will pull up something for you for the permits and everything we have. So right here, at the top, this is the only permits that we have on file right now for this property. This is for the vegetation removal permit that he applied for regarding this case. Other than that, I have not found any other permits on the property. I can make this bigger. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let me ask a question. Is this property being taxed as vacant land? MR. MARINO: I do not know of that one. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Would you know, Jeff? MR. LETOURNEAU: I would not know. I think that the gentleman stated that -- that the trailer was there for -- THE INTERPRETER: Office purpose. MR. LETOURNEAU: I thought he mentioned food for animals or something also? Yeah. MR. GARCIA: "Si," (in English) that's for animal. MR. LETOURNEAU: So being an agricultural piece of property -- and we don't have a case on any of the structures at this time. But he would -- he would be allowed to have animals on the property and unpermitted structures that supported the feeding of the animals. He would need to get an agricultural exemption permit for that. But we're just here right now to discuss the clearing. We're not -- we're not here to talk about the structures on the property at this point, but we will be looking into it. I don't know if we can see them from a legal vantage point other than the aerials, though, at this time, so... MR. MARINO: Yeah. Everything that I've gotten for that property has just been from the right-of-way. It's fenced in and gated. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, let me ask another silly question. If -- let me ask the respondent. Did you clear that property? THE INTERPRETER: He said he cleared the front part because that's when the Hurricane Irma passed by, so it knocked out trees and all that. So he did clear that and it also damaged one of his equipments that he had there. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I didn't hear the last part. THE INTERPRETER: It damaged one of his equipments that he had there on the front, but he said he did clear the trees that had fallen when Irma passed by. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Was there any exemption, Jeff, for -- of clearing the downed stuff from the hurricane? MR. LETOURNEAU: If trees were actually knocked down and damaged beyond regrowing, no, you could get rid of that. It would just be, you know, hurricane damage, and he could just -- however, he would need to go before the environmental specialist and explain and hopefully have some evidence of that, that the hurricane caused the damage for the tree removal. He'd still need to get a vegetation removal permit for the trees that weren't damaged and remained up front there, though. I mean, it's going to be hard to prove that the hurricane destroyed every tree in the front up there. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And it's hard to prove that he destroyed the trees himself. MR. LETOURNEAU: It is, but here we are and the -- I would say that the hurricane we're talking about is probably Irma, because I don't think that Ian affected a lot of vegetation out there. It's going to be -- go ahead, Joe. MR. MARINO: If I may, I just direct you to the dates. I prepared the dates. This is first time I've heard about the trees being cleared from Irma, back on January 27th of 2023, the -- Saul came in to Growth Management Division stating he lost the vegetation due to the fires and that he would apply for the permits. Hence the reason why during the determination from Jaime Cook we stated that he's stating that he lost them due to fires, not Irma, and he was going to provide pictures. Pictures had never been received for the fire damage to allow him for the vegetation removal permit. And that was back in January. And then we got a call on February 2nd, received a call from his son that provided -- and I provided him with Renald Paul's number to start the vegetation removal process, all right. Then on February 24th, the permit application was submitted, and then March 30th it was incomplete. Permit application waiting on corrections. By April 25th, the corrections were not received, and then by May 31st we were starting to do -- redoing -- for hearing, and I notified his son on June 26th of this year, notified him that the case was being prepped for hearing. And if we take a look at -- sorry -- wrong folder. This is the incomplete submittal for the vegetation removal permit here. So they needed to show a site plan, the miscellaneous items in the application form. They didn't provide anything, and nothing's been moved forward on the vegetation removal permit. And this has all been based on fire up until just now with the Irma. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Can you ask -- he applied for a permit based on a fire. THE INTERPRETER: He said that was the prior owner. He said that the prior owner applied because there was a trailer -- a small trailer that got burnt there. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: He's owned the property for eight years. THE INTERPRETER: That's what he said. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And the fire was before that? THE INTERPRETER: He said that the prior owner told him that there was a trailer that got burnt there, and that when he bought, there was still, like, residue of the trailer that actually got burnt there. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So do you have the name of the person who applied for this permit because of the fire that was on the screen before us? MR. MARINO: This is the correction letter to Hernandez, Ana Iris. This is his wife, and it's Saul Garcia who's our respondent today. This is their permit that they applied for. This is the corrections letter for him. That's him. MR. LETOURNEAU: Three months ago. MR. MARINO: Three months ago on March 1st. He applied for it, and he came in to Growth Management himself on January 17th to get this stuff stated and said he's lost vegetation due to fire, and he will apply for a permit. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. This is not easy. So -- go back to the previous one. MR. MARINO: This one? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. Is that the permit that you applied for? THE INTERPRETER: That he was -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So my question was, did he apply for this permit, would be yes or no, was a -- yes or no got really -- THE INTERPRETER: Yes, he did apply for it because he was told to apply for it to help resolve -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The situation. THE INTERPRETER: -- the situation. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And he was told that by Renald Paul probably? THE INTERPRETER: Yeah. He went to the Horseshoe Drive to apply for the permit. The name he has here is Mariam Lorenzo. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you know who that is? MS. BUCHILLON: It's Mariam. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Mariam. THE INTERPRETER: Mariam. MS. BUCHILLON: No, it can't be. She doesn't do permits. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: No. Okay. He must have had a question. I'm trying to be Perry Mason here. He had a question, and he went to somebody who could give him an answer, who happened to be Mariam. It has nothing to do with the permit. So you applied for a permit. It's there, but it wasn't good. I'm trying to cut back on words. What will it take to get this permit approved? My question. Anybody can answer. Do you have any idea? MR. MARINO: Well, he's got to just do the corrections and get his permit back in proper order. The thing is, what he originally applied for was because of the fires. Then if we go back -- MR. LETOURNEAU: Joe, can you put up the determination? MR. MARINO: Determination. MR. LETOURNEAU: Yeah. Let's read that. That's going to straighten out everything. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. LETOURNEAU: I hope. Go down to the comments, please. And I'm going to read. And this is from Jaime Cook, the director of Environmental Services. MR. MARINO: Yes. MR. LETOURNEAU: Okay. Comments: Vegetation has gradually disappeared from the front half of the property over the last several years. NBMO sending designation requires 80 percent native vegetation preservation unless justified by a bona fide ag operation. Based on the information provided, it does not appear that this is a bona fide ag operation. No uses that would qualify for a VRP; however, fire may qualify for a VRP if photographs would corroborate fire damage. So they're saying if he's got pictures of fire damage -- obviously, somebody brought up fire damage at some time, or they wouldn't have referenced it in the determination. Would recommend code enforcement investigator include Environmental staff in conversations with property owner for remediation, VRP, and/or restoration. Down here at the bottom it says, if the owner has photographs or records of fire damage noted in code case details, would qualify for a VRP; however, vegetation may not be removed without a permit. Restoration may be required. So either/or, fire damage or what, it still needed a vegetation removal permit according to Environmental Services. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So the point we're at right now is he needs the VRP? MR. LETOURNEAU: He does, yes. No matter what caused the damage of the trees, he needs a VRP. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Whether it was a flood out there or -- MR. LETOURNEAU: I don't care. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. LETOURNEAU: They need evidence of what happened out there. That's what they're asking for. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Can you somehow explain that he needs that VRP, which is the vegetation removal permit, in order to satisfy this problem? You understand. MR. GARCIA: (In English) Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Can you work to get that done? THE INTERPRETER: Does he need to go to Horseshoe? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. MR. LETOURNEAU: He does. After this is done, we're going to give him some direction on who to go talk to. MR. GARCIA: (In English) Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Now, we understand what needs to be done. We found that the violation exists. MR. LETOURNEAU: I don't think you have yet. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have? Terri? Okay. I make a motion that a violation exists. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. All those in favor? BOARD MEMBER YORK: Aye. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: (No verbal response.) BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Aye. BOARD MEMBER BHATLA: Aye. BOARD MEMBER JOHNSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Okay. Now, you have a suggestion for us which basically probably says something about getting a VRP. MR. MARINO: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. What don't you read your suggestion, we'll fill out the days, and hopefully we can get this resolved. MR. MARINO: All right. Description of violation: Trees overcleared/removed from the front yard without first obtaining vegetation removal permit, VRP. Recommendation: 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: One, obtaining all required Collier County approved mitigation plans, building/vegetation removal permits, inspections, and certificates of completion/occupancy to either keep the unpermitted improvement of the property as-is or to restore the property to its originally permitted condition within blank days of this hearing, or a fine of blank per day will be imposed until the violation is abated. Number 2, the respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the County may abate all -- abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriff's Office to enforce the provisions of this order, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So we need days and dollars. Any idea, Jeff, how long it would take to get a VRP? MR. LETOURNEAU: Honestly, not really. I'm not really sure how busy they are as far as that particular permit is -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Give me a range. MR. LETOURNEAU: -- but I would say at this point 60 days would probably be a fair amount of time. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Make it 90 just in case. MR. LETOURNEAU: Yep. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Okay. I'll make a motion that we grant 90 days or a $50-a-day-fine thereafter, pay $59.28 within 30 days. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: I'll second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And we have a second. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: With a comment. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Give me a -- BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: If you could add to your motion that the respondent be given a copy of the recommendation in Spanish. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah, okay. They're going to meet with the respondent out in the hallway. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Yeah, but this lady's not going to be with him. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I understand that. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: That he understands about the approved mitigation plan. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I'll leave that up to the County to make sure that he understands what he needs to do -- BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- whatever language it is. Okay. There's my motion. We have a second. All those in favor? BOARD MEMBER YORK: Aye. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Aye. BOARD MEMBER BHATLA: Aye. BOARD MEMBER JOHNSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Okay. If you would tell him you're going to go out in the hallway, and they're going to be beat him up -- no. MS. LUNA: They're going to beat him up. MR. GARCIA: (In English) Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you. Thank you very much for your translations. I appreciate it. MS. LUNA: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: There goes Jeff. MR. LETOURNEAU: I'll be right back. MR. MARINO: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, Joe, thank you. How we doing, Helen? MS. BUCHILLON: We're good. Ready? We're back to old business, under motion for imposition of fines and liens, No. 1, CESD20210013157, Alfonso Perez Basilio and Carina E. Martinez Figueroa. THE COURT REPORTER: Do you swear or affirm you will translate everything from English into Spanish and Spanish into English to the best of your ability? MS. LUNA: 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? MS. RODRIGUEZ: I do. MS. MARTINEZ: Yes. MR. PEREZ: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Can everybody give me your name on the microphone. MR. PEREZ: Alfonso Perez Basillo. MS. MARTINEZ: Carina Martinez Figueroa. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. You can move the microphone down. Good. I know who you are. MS. RODRIGUEZ: For the record, Maria Rodriguez, Collier County Code Enforcement. Past orders: On June 23rd, 2022, the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinance and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached order of the Board, OR6155, Page 1567, for more information. The violation has been abated. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So that the sheet that we have in front of us is not up to date; is that correct, Helen? MS. RODRIGUEZ: It is. MS. BUCHILLON: Yes, sir. MS. RODRIGUEZ: It has been abated, it's correct, as of July 31st, 2023. The sheet -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let me stop you one second. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: It says has not been. MS. RODRIGUEZ: This is the corrected one, because they just did it. MS. BUCHILLON: They just did it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That was my question. Okay. It has been abated. Terrific. MS. RODRIGUEZ: It has been abated as of July 31st, 2023. Fines have accrued at a rate of $200 per day for the period of October 22nd, 2022, to July 31st, 2023. Total amount of days is 283. Total amount of fines, 56,600. Previously assessed operational costs of the amount of $59.28 have been paid. Operational costs for today's hearing is $59.35. Total amount: Fifty-six dollars 659 and 35 cents [sic]. The gravity of the violation, it's not a health and safety. Any actions taken by violator to correct Permit PRFH20221049129 was issued and finaled on July 31st, 2023, to correct violation. Any previous violations committed by the respondent violator: No. Any other relevant factors: None. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Thank you, Maria. Okay. They are here -- ask them, you are here to request the fines be reduced or eliminated; is that correct? MR. PEREZ: If they could remove them. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Comments from the Board? BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: I have a question. How long have they owned this property? MR. PEREZ: Seven years. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Did they put the addition on the mobile home? MR. PEREZ: Yes. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: When? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Any other comments from the Board? BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Yeah. When was it -- when was the addition put on? MR. PEREZ: About a year ago. A year. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Anybody want to make a motion? BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Go ahead. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: I'd like to make a motion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: To reduce the current fine of 56,659.35 to $1,000 plus the 59.35. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So it would be 1,059.35. I second that. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: That's correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Any discussion on that? BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: No. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hearing none, all those in favor? BOARD MEMBER YORK: Aye. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. BOARD MEMBER BHATLA: Aye. BOARD MEMBER JOHNSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Aye. I'm an aye, not a nay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The fine has been reduced over $50,000. MR. PEREZ: Okay. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: That will be registered as ordinary income and will be taxed. No, just kidding. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, thank you. MR. PEREZ: (In English) Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you, again. THE INTERPRETER: Thanks. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Just stay up there. MS. BUCHILLON: Next case, No. 5, CENA20220005940, Steven M. Thomas and also No. 6 is CELU20220002018, Steven M. Thomas. MS. THOMAS: Hello. 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. THOMAS: Yes, I do. MR. MARINOS: I do. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Why don't we -- we'll hear both cases at the same time, but we will vote on them individually. Does that sound good, Jeff? MR. LETOURNEAU: If Chuck's okay with it. MR. MARINOS: Won't hurt my feelings. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Don't tell me you don't speak English. MS. THOMAS: No, I speak English very well. My voice is a little raspy, but I do speak English. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. This one -- we'll hear the -- which one do you want to do first, Chuck, the 40 or 18, the last? MR. MARINOS: 5940. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We'll hear that one first. I think the ones -- most of us who were here at the time remember this case. Okay. This is whether somebody that was living in there was a relative or they weren't a relative. That goes back a ways. MS. THOMAS: Is that the specific violation is the relative one? MR. MARINOS: This is the nuisance abatement case. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Right. MS. THOMAS: Nuisance abatement. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do you want to read this into the record for us, Chuck? MR. MARINOS: Absolutely. Past orders: On July 28th, 2022, 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, OR6188, Page 500, for more information. On November 18th, 2022, the Code Enforcement Board granted a continuance. See attached order of the Board in documents and images for more information. On June 22nd, 2023, the Code Enforcement Board granted a continuance. See the attached order of the Board in documents and images for more information. The violation has not been abated as of July 31st, 2023. Fines and costs to date are as follows: Fines have accrued at the rate of $100 per day for the period from August 28th, 2022, to July 31st, 2023, 338 days, for a total fine amount of $33,800. Fines continue to accrue. Previously assessed operational costs of $59.21 have been paid, operational costs for today's hearing is $59.42, for a total amount of $33,859.42. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. THOMAS: Again, can you please clarify the -- what the actual violation is regarding on this one, please? MR. MARINOS: The 5940 is -- MR. LETOURNEAU: It's for litter. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Accumulation of litter including but not included [sic] to vehicle and ATV parts, trash, remnants, and dismantled RV parts. MS. THOMAS: Okay. Well, obviously, I mean, I've done a lot of work, and we have done this to the best of my ability. And last time I was here, 30 days ago, we showed you some pictures where, I mean, it's done a whole 360. I mean, it's not perfect, but it's definitely not what it was. And I don't know -- I mean, honestly, what more would it take for us to get that closed out and to, you know, take care of it? Because, I mean, it's done a whole 360. I mean, we've gone a long way, so I don't know -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Have you -- have you -- you cleaned up the property? MS. THOMAS: Oh, yeah. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: After you cleaned up the property, did you notify of Code Enforcement that you cleaned up the property? MS. THOMAS: Like I said, he came out, like, 30 days ago and took pictures, and we presented them here. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And did he point out other things that needed to be removed? MS. THOMAS: It was just the -- I believe the vehicles, the unlicensed and unoperable vehicles, which I was able to get two of them off, but my parents had been there since 1979, okay. They both just recently passed. And the VIN numbers on these vehicles -- it's a Nova, an International, a Chevette. Like, they're staples of my parents', you know, like, you know -- I don't know -- legacy, I guess. Staples of my parents' legacy. So the VIN numbers are rusted off. You can't get the VIN numbers. Nobody's going to take them, you know, without the VIN numbers. So, I mean, really, now I've got to go down to DMV and, like, make a list of every vehicle they've ever had so that way maybe they'll be on that list to try to -- it's just -- it's such -- like, if that's all that it is is just those vehicles, I mean, by all means, to -- I will -- MR. MARINOS: So the vehicle case is the next one. This one's for the litter violation. There has been steady improvement on the property for quite some time. It is not completely done yet. We still have piles of trash. Again, at this point much more organized than they were before but still being removed piece by piece. We still have -- we do have a pretty good amount still on site. Particularly, we have some -- particularly it's a little less organized around the home where the gentleman had been living. The rest of it's been more improved than that. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. On this case -- MR. MARINOS: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- would it be possible if the Board were to grant another 30 days, that you would go out there and point that this needs to be removed, that needs to be removed, to clear this case up? MR. MARINOS: I can do that as early as tomorrow. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Would that help? MS. THOMAS: Yes. No, absolutely, yes. That would be great. That way we could at least close this out and get us -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That would close this case out. MS. THOMAS: -- and get us, you know -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, it wouldn't close it out. There's still -- MS. THOMAS: I mean, I'm sure you guys love seeing me every 30 days, but, I mean -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: No, we enjoy seeing you, but we don't enjoy administering fines. MS. THOMAS: Right. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So one way or the other, we'll probably see you on this case to resolve it. MS. THOMAS: Right. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: But it would be so much nicer if the sheet that was in front of us says the violation has been resolved. MS. THOMAS: Right, correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And the way to do that is the person who's typing those words is the one who points to, you need to get rid of this or that or whatever it is, okay. So if you would work with the respondent. I don't think the Board would have any problem in granting a continuance of 30 days. MS. THOMAS: Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We need a motion from the Board for that. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: I'll make that motion of a 30-day continuance. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Right. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: The fines will continue to accrue. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Yeah. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's why it's a continuance. Okay. All those in favor? BOARD MEMBER YORK: Aye. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: (No verbal response.) BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Aye. BOARD MEMBER BHATLA: Aye. BOARD MEMBER JOHNSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. So he's going to come out there and work with you and -- MS. THOMAS: Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- help you pick up all the stuff. No, I know you're not going to do that. But we mean well. Okay. Which brings us to the vehicles. So why don't we read this one into record and we'll -- Helen? MS. BUCHILLON: Next case, No. 6, CELU20220002018, Steven M. Thomas. (The witnesses were previously duly sworn.) MS. THOMAS: I would also like to add that I recently just completed the probate process. That just went through about a week ago. So the home is now in my name through -- legally through probate and everything. So it's -- that's one of the biggest steps that was in the way. This -- with this particular case, I know you guys granted me, like, 360 days, or something along those lines -- 300 days or something like that to complete this one due to the probate process and everything. So would just -- to update on that, I just recently got the documentation stating that everything's been transferred into my name legally through probate, so... CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I don't recall the 365 days. Am I wrong, Jeff? MS. THOMAS: On this one, or -- I think it was this one with the vehicles. MR. LETOURNEAU: I'm sorry. I was talking to Kevin at that time. What did she reference for 365 days? BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: The first time we gave her, she says 365. MS. THOMAS: Maybe it was 300. MR. LETOURNEAU: Well, I mean, it's been a total of 365 days with the whole -- the first order and the first continuance, I believe. That's where we're sitting at right now. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Well, this case is ATV parts, un -- probably the big thing are the unlicensed vehicles; is that correct? MR. MARINOS: Yes, that is correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. I'm sure there's somebody out there in business that collects junk. MS. THOMAS: No, and I have had him come out and collect all the junk ones that he can identify the VIN on. Like I said, there are several vehicles of my parents' that do not have that VIN anymore. They've rusted out, and we can't get a good VIN on them, so... MR. LETOURNEAU: Most -- yeah, most people that do come take junk vehicles require some form of identification before they'll grab it. MS. THOMAS: Yes. So -- and I can't find any of the old titles or anything like that. I have nothing. So the only thing I can think of is to go down to the DMV and maybe have them print out a list of every vehicle my parents have ever owned in their lifetime and hope that it's on there. I don't know if that's -- if I can do that or not. But being that I was the -- you know, with probate with both of my parents and they both just passed, I mean, I was the, you know, secretary of the -- not estate, but I had the letters of administration and all that. So I could do those types of things. I just -- I don't know. I'm saying that there are vehicles that are unable to be identified. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: How many vehicles are left on the property? MS. THOMAS: There are four. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Four. I mean, you could get a dumpster and put the vehicles in a dumpster and have it hauled away. MS. THOMAS: You've got to be pretty strong to lift a car into a dumpster. MR. LETOURNEAU: Obviously, you have to get them cut up. MS. THOMAS: That's a lot. MR. MARINOS: Typically, one of the other solutions we have looked at is a licensed trailer. What is on the trailer is not considered necessarily part of the violation at that point. If it's been stored on a licensed trailer, that would be another option. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I didn't understand. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: One more time. MR. MARINOS: So if you have a junk vehicle and it's on a licensed, operable trailer, it's no longer under the vehicle ordinance for that property. It would be in compliance at that time as well. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. There are people who do that? MR. MARINOS: There are. It's been a solution that has been used before to come into compliance. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Are you familiar with that? MS. THOMAS: No, that's good to know. I did not know that. I guess we do need to talk a little more, huh? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Maybe, given sufficient time, maybe another month, you could meet with the respondent again and point out these things, and then you could take care of that, and we'll all be in compliance? MS. THOMAS: Yes. MR. LETOURNEAU: I think if you're going to give an extension on these vehicles, it's probably going to be a little bit more difficult than the litter, I would think. Maybe more than a month. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Sixty days? MR. LETOURNEAU: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: I have a question. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Go ahead, Lee. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Ma'am? MS. THOMAS: Yes. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: I remember when the case came up here back in May, and the cochair asked you if you were going to be able to be in compliance and get rid of all this junk, and you said yes. And then he made a motion to raise the daily fine from $100 per day to $500 per day. MS. THOMAS: Oh, wow. No. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: It's right here. MS. THOMAS: I definitely didn't remember that part. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: And I remember the one part of the question was, do you feel you'll have the right time and resources, meaning money, to clean this up, and -- MS. THOMAS: Well, I mean, obviously, with all -- BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: And you said yes. MS. THOMAS: -- due good intention, I mean, yes, I would love to see that -- BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Okay. MS. THOMAS: -- as a hopeful outcome. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: And as of today, nothing's been cleaned up. So here's my question -- MS. THOMAS: That's not -- BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: -- when you felt that you weren't going to be in compliance coming into today's hearing, did you think of calling this gentleman and saying, I'm not going to be in compliance? MS. THOMAS: Obviously not. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Okay. Thank you. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Yeah. Well, the issue -- okay. Continue. MS. THOMAS: Continue, please. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Why don't we -- I'll make a motion that we grant a 60-day continuance on this. Hopefully, you'll have the trash on the other case cleaned up, and you'll follow some advice from the code enforcement officer and get the vehicles removed, and we'll be all done, and we only have to see you one more time. Then we can go over the fines of what would be imposed and what wouldn't be imposed. Does that sound logical? BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: It does, but one suggestion is, seriously, as of today, you're looking at $68,000. MS. THOMAS: Which I can't forward either, so it's -- BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: That's besides the fact. But if you show good will and somehow get this all done in the dates, the Board may look at it in a different way. It may reduce it. It may do away with it. But if you come back here and nothing is done, you owe $68,000. Okay. MS. BUCHILLON: Mr. Kaufman, if I may, I also want to point out the previous ops costs has not been paid on this one. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. You're going to have to do that, the operational costs, okay? MS. THOMAS: I'm doing the best I can. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And those should be paid ASAP. Okay. So I have a motion. It was seconded. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: I did. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor? BOARD MEMBER YORK: Aye. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. BOARD MEMBER BHATLA: Aye. BOARD MEMBER JOHNSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Nay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. One nay. Five yay. It's approved. So hopefully we'll get this done. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: So you've got one at 30 and one at 60. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Right. Okay. I wish you good luck. I'd go out there and help you, but I can't bend over because my back bothers me, but... It will get worked out. It will all get worked out. Thank you very much. MS. THOMAS: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Have a good day. Okay, Helen. MS. BUCHILLON: Next case, No. 7, CESD20220001740, Vanessa Alvarado. 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. ALVARADO: I do. MR. OWEN: I do. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Brian? MR. OWEN: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Would you like to read this into the record for us? MR. OWEN: I would love to. Past orders: On August 25th, 2022, the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of facts, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was the found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached order of the Board, OR6175, Page 2673, for more information. On February 23rd, 2023, 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 June 1st, 2023. Fines and costs to date are as follows: Fines have accrued at a rate of $200 per day for the period of December 24th, 2022, to June 1st, 2023, 160 days, for more -- for a total fine amount of $32,000. Previous assessed operational costs of 59.28 have been paid. Operational costs for today are $59.56. Total amount due: $32,059.56. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Could I ask, ma'am, did you get rid of the sheds? MS. ALVARADO: No. I actually did the permit for them and moved them to their correct setback measurements. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. That was the problem with the sheds, that they were in the setback? MS. ALVARADO: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And the lanai, you got a permit for that? MS. ALVARADO: I reverted it back to the way it was. Right now I'm in the process of getting it normally process, like -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Any questions from the Board? BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: No questions. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: No questions. Anyone want to make a motion? MR. IANDIMARINO: For the record, Tom Iandimarino, Code Enforcement director. If you could, please read the -- scroll down, Brian, and read the bottom half of your summary, please. Thank you. MR. OWEN: Under conditions, the gravity of violation is not health or safety. Actions taken by violator to correct: There's Permit PRCP20221254356. Shed and carport were CO'ed on June 1st of 2023; and Permit PRFH2023 of -- 0207736. The lanai was CO'ed of May 26th of '23. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Tom, that's on our sheet, actually. MR. IANDIMARINO: Understood. I just wanted to have it read into the record. Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Great. All right. Anybody want to make a motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I'll make a motion we deny the County's ability to impose the tax. No penalty. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Okay. BOARD MEMBER YORK: I second it. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: We have a second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a second. All those in favor? BOARD MEMBER YORK: Aye. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Aye. BOARD MEMBER BHATLA: Aye. BOARD MEMBER JOHNSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. MR. LETOURNEAU: Can I point out the operational costs for today? Are you waiving those also? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. MR. LETOURNEAU: Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And the reason for that, I'll tell you -- not that you've asked, but I will anyhow -- is that it was first done in, I think, December 24th of -- when we started to impose fines and you -- we've seen cases drag on and on and on, and this one, you did address it, and we appreciate it. Thank you. MS. ALVARADO: I appreciate it. Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We're getting close to the end, Helen. MS. BUCHILLON: Yes, sir. Next case, No. 8, CENA20230000262, Gloria May. 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. MAY: I do. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Could you pull the microphone down for you. Thank you. MS. MAY: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Chuck, do you want to read this into the record for us? MR. MARINOS: Absolutely. Past orders: On May 25th, 2023, the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached order of the Board in documents and images for more information. The violation has not been abated as of July 31st, 2023. Fines and costs to date are as follows: Fines have accrued at a rate of $150 per day for the period from June 10th, 2023, to July 31st, 2023, 52 days, for a total amount of $7,800. Fines continue to accrue. Previously assessed operational costs of $59.28 have been paid, operational costs for today's hearing is $59.42, for a total amount of $7,859.42. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Our sheet says it was not paid. MR. MARINOS: It was paid earlier today, and that sheet is no longer valid. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Ma'am? MS. MAY: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It's -- according to our sheets, that the violation has not been abated. MS. MAY: Well, I did go down -- God, I'm so scared and nervous here. I wrote things down; let me refer to my notes. But I did pay the 58.90 today, and I have been cleaning up around the yard. All the vehicles are gone. There were four abandoned vehicles. My husband of 48 years passed away eight months ago, and he kind of left everything. It was an unexpected -- he was not ill. He died on November 29th right after Thanksgiving. And I've just been left alone to clean up and just -- because he had a garage. He had a construction business, and there are, you know, material -- building materials and stuff like that, but I've managed to barter and take care of whatever is listed on here. I did ask Mr. Moreno to come out and take a look so that he could see the progress that I've made. So I don't know if he wants to comment on that. MR. MARINOS: Sure. I can -- the property has made a pretty steady improvement for a while. There was a multitude of issues speaking directly to this case in particular. Obviously, litter being one of them. There's been some major improvement. Obviously, reinspection on Friday showed where we're sitting currently. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: What's left on the property to be removed; do you know? MR. MARINOS: There's a few organized piles of concrete blocks stacked in the rear. Looks like it was for a construction project, probably never commenced. She's spoken to having -- being able to give those away to somebody. There is a rear area that had previously been occupied by some legal tenants. Those are gone. They left a bunch stuff behind. Most of the loose litter is gone. There's some scaffolding materials that are kind of stacked in a corner, again, ready to be given away. Go-cart trailer -- I'm sorry -- not trailer, but frame empty that's still there, a few kind of assorted piles of stuff. I'd say we're down to far less than a dumpster left. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do you think you can get that remaining stuff -- MS. MAY: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- done in a month? MS. MAY: Yes. A lot of the things that are left have designated places to go. There is, like, a Ted shed structure, which a neighbor is going to take and make it into a chicken coop. There is -- the trailers are gone. And I've talked to John who was -- owns a paving company, and he wants the cinder block, and he said that he would come with his backhoe and his dump truck and help me get things straightened out and organized. And I think 30 days would be doable, but I would like to speak with him one more time. Maybe, perhaps, if you could give me 60 days. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. MAY: Or I don't know. I think I could do it in 30. I mean, I steady -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: How about this? MS. MAY: What? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You start doing whatever you can do, and in 30 days you'll go out there to do an inspection and see what's left, and we'll give you 60 days to resolve this. MS. MAY: Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You're still going to have to come back because we have to address the fine. We can't address the fine when it still has not been abated, okay. MS. MAY: Okay. I hope there isn't a fine. I mean, already I've been out there steady at it doing what I can do physically by myself. I'm 67 years old. I'm an old -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You're a child. MS. MAY: I don't feel that way. I really don't. It's been a tough year for me. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Well, I make a motion that we grant a 60-day continuous. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: So moved. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And we have a second. All those in favor? BOARD MEMBER YORK: Aye. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Aye. BOARD MEMBER BHATLA: Aye. BOARD MEMBER JOHNSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Okay. MS. MAY: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You have 60 days. Good luck. MR. MARINOS: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, Helen. MS. BUCHILLON: We have two more cases. One is an imposition, since we're still here. It will be No. 2, CESD20200007975, Jessica Doyle and Marc C. Berry. 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. For the record, Chris Ambach, Collier County Code Enforcement. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Chris, do you want to read this into the record for us? MR. AMBACH: I do, sir. Past orders: On August 27th, 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, OR6017, Page 211, for more information. On March 24th, 2022, the Code Enforcement Board granted a continuance. See the attached order of the Board in documents and images for more information. On June 23rd, 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 May 5th, 2023. Fines and costs to date are as follows: Fines have accrued at a rate of $150 per day for the period from December 26th, 2021, to May 5th, 2023, 496 days, for a total fine amount of 74,000 -- yeah, thank you -- $74,000. Previously assessed operational costs of $59.28 have been paid, and $59.42 have been paid. Operational costs for today's hearing, $59.70. Total amount: $74,459.70 [sic]. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Question: Has this pool been demolished and the site cleaned up? MR. AMBACH: It is. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Okay. And that was done when? MR. AMBACH: May 5th. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: May? That May date? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: May 5th. MR. AMBACH: That's correct, yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Was this done by the respondent and not by the County? MR. AMBACH: By the respondent. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Because quite often we have cases that come out and it's been abated, but it's been abated by the County. MR. AMBACH: Right. Yeah, he went through the -- attempted the permitting process several times over the course of two years. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: He had been here many times. MR. AMBACH: Many times, yes. Decided to go with the demo permit instead. I told him there was a hearing today. My staff reiterated to him last week to be here today for the imposition, and he said he would be, so... MR. LETOURNEAU: Chris, just to go over any mitigating factors, it wasn't a health and safety issue or -- MR. AMBACH: No. MR. LETOURNEAU: Was there any other violations on the property? MR. AMBACH: No other violations on that property. MR. LETOURNEAU: Okay. MR. AMBACH: Owner worked on obtaining permits; however, decided to go with the demolition route instead. MR. LETOURNEAU: Okay. And the final date there was the date of the certificate of completion for the demolition permit? MR. AMBACH: That's correct. MR. LETOURNEAU: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I thought that originally we had a problem with the fence around it. MR. AMBACH: There was a problem with the fence also. He had an issue with that. I don't even know where to begin. I could tell you -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's okay. I remember it. MR. AMBACH: Yeah, that's the case. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Is that the right slide, Helen, that's up there? BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: No. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: No. MS. BUCHILLON: It's not. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: I make a motion -- MS. BUCHILLON: You do have the correct one in your hands. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: I make a motion that we do away with the fine but charge him for 59.74 [sic] today. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. I'll second that. All those in favor? BOARD MEMBER YORK: Aye. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. BOARD MEMBER BHATLA: Aye. BOARD MEMBER JOHNSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Nay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So 59.70 will be imposed. Deny the County's ability to collect the other balance. You do the arithmetic. Chris, thank you. MR. AMBACH: Thank you, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Ordinarily, it's in the best interest of the respondent to show up, especially in a case like this. We have one more case. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: We had that lady on the imposition of the fine. She had two cases. We only dealt with one. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We dealt with the other. MS. BUCHILLON: Next case, under hearings, No. 11, CEPM20220009799, Massimo Maffei. 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. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Eleven. Okay, Chuck. Let the record reflect that the respondent is not present. Have you been in touch with the respondent? MR. MARINOS: I have tried to be in touch with the respondent. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. MARINOS: Good afternoon. For the record, Investigator Chuck Marinos, Collier County Code Enforcement. This is in reference to Case No. CEPM20220009799 dealing with a violation of Florida Building Code 7th Edition (2020), Chapter 4, Section 454.2.20, and Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Sections 10.02.06(B)(1)(a) and 10.02.06(B)(1)(e), addressing an Estates-zoned property with a permitted residential pool without a permitted permanent pool barrier, located at 5960 Green Boulevard, Naples, Florida, 34116; Folio No. 38336640009. Service was given on November 4th, 2022. This case originated as a complaint on October 26th, 2022. On November 3rd, 2022, after permitting research and property history was reviewed, it was determined that the previously installed pool barrier had been removed from the site with no demo permit on file and no current protection in place. A notice of violation was served on November 4th, 2022. Permit PRFW20230414135, for a new pool barrier, was applied for on April 5th, 2023. That permit was rejected and remains rejected at this time, as an after-the-fact vegetation removal permit was required to explain the clearing beyond the allowable amount. Vegetation Removal Permit PL20230008480 was applied for on May 4th, 2023, and is currently in incomplete status at this time. Corrections letter was generated on May 5th, 2023. No further permitting activities have been noted, and pool remains unprotected. I would now like to present case evidence in the following exhibits: One picture taken by myself on July 28th, 2023, showing current conditions; a picture taken by Supervisor Bradley Holmes on December 5th, 2022, showing conditions at that time; as well as two aerials. One from 2017 showing the in-place permitted protective barrier and one from 2022 showing the removed barrier over the pool. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Get a motion from the Board to accept the photos and documentation. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: So moved. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. All those in favor? BOARD MEMBER YORK: Aye. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: (No verbal response.) BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Aye. BOARD MEMBER BHATLA: Aye. BOARD MEMBER JOHNSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. MS. BUCHILLON: If I may, I want to put on the record, respondents were notified regular and certified mail July 10th, 2023. It was also posted at the property and courthouse July 3rd, 2023. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I don't know if I said that the -- let the record reflect the respondents are not present. MR. MARINOS: Yes. 5960 Green Boulevard from 2017. I'll zoom in here and show you. There's the protective pool barrier as permitted originally in place, and sometime between then and 2022 that pool barrier was completely removed from the property. There is currently nothing there, as we'll see in the next photos. On December 5th, 2022, Investigator Holmes got this picture from the side from legal vantage. It's kind of right behind here. It's kind of hard to see. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I see the railing going in. MR. MARINOS: Yep. But then we will see here -- this was taken on Friday from the neighbor's property, legal vantage, and there is nothing there. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. I don't think there are any cases that are more severe than the one we've got in front of us now. I make a motion that a violation exists. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Second. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: I'll second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor? BOARD MEMBER YORK: Aye. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: (No verbal response.) BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Aye. BOARD MEMBER BHATLA: Aye. BOARD MEMBER JOHNSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. You have had no luck in getting ahold of these people? MR. MARINOS: We've had previous communication via phone on this case and another case that is currently ongoing. Recent phone calls and visits to the site have proved fruitless at this time. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I mean, this is a case where I think the County may have to step in and put something up there, because the amount of time that we generally give on a pool without protection around it is, like, three days. Do you have a suggestion for us, Chuck? MR. MARINOS: We have a recommendation. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. MARINOS: That the Code Enforcement Board order the respondents 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: Erect a -- sorry. Must erect a temporary protective barrier around the pool within blank days of this hearing, or a fine of blank will be -- per day will be imposed until the violation is abated. In addition, must obtain all required Collier County building permits, pass all required inspections, and be issued a certificate of completion/occupancy for the installation of an approved permanent pool barrier within blank days of this hearing, or a fine of blank per day will be imposed until the violation is abated. And, three, that the respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the County may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriff's Office to enforce the provisions of this order, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: I'd like to make a motion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Go ahead. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Direct me, Counselor, if I get this one out of order. I want to -- my motion is to request the County to put up a temporary safety fence around the pool area with the proper signage of "no use" till corrected and to fine that homeowner $1,000 per day till the fines [sic] abated. MR. LETOURNEAU: For the record, Jeff Letourneau, Collier County Code Enforcement. We do put Part 3 in the orders in order for us to have the ability to abate the violation if we feel that they're taking too long to abate it. And I can assure you that we will put up a temporary fence. I'd have to discuss the ramifications of using taxpayer money on a permanent barrier at this time. But I don't think having that in an order helps anything in the situation. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Is the home occupied? MR. MARINOS: The home is occupied. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Say again. MR. MARINOS: The home is occupied. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Okay. MR. NOELL: If I could, Kevin Noell, attorney for the Code Enforcement Board. I would advise to not direct staff as far as a time frame in the work that they do. That's more of staff's discretion on things. Certainly, it's within this board's purview, you know, to find a violation exists, and the mechanism would be the enforcement against that homeowner as far as the deadlines to have it in compliance and things like that. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: What about if I revise to as soon as possible? MR. NOELL: Yeah. I would -- my recommendation would be -- you know, it sounds like the Board's already finding the violation exists and the fine imposed. I think Code Enforcement has their own mechanisms for issues like this where they have their internal processes. And I would not advise the Board to -- just because you kind of have the check and balances as well. So I would advise the Board not to get into directing staff as far as means, methods, things like that. And we have a violation before the Board, and fining them, and then giving them, you know, however much time the Board wants to give in the compliance, and then staff would do staff's side of things, you know, as under their policies and procedures. That's kind of separate from the Code Enforcement Board purview. But I understand the desire behind it and -- BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: So the motion will generate the action? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah. Let me see if I can make this easier. Terri, did we find them in violation? BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Yeah. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. I had written down on my sheet, day/days. The first thing is the temporary fence. How many days? BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Three. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Three days. Okay, good. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Three. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Now, as far as the permanent fence, pick the days. How many days for that? BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Ninety. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, 90 is fine. And $1,000 a day? BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Plus the 59.20. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Plus the court costs. Yeah, 59.20 paid within 30 days. MS. BUCHILLON: It's the thousand for both -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is everything clear? BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: I second that. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Your motion, his second, my help. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Okay. MS. BUCHILLON: Is the $1,000 for both, Part 1 and Part 2? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. I can't believe that somebody left the pool in that position. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Well, only -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I would only -- I don't know if this was reported by the neighbors. MR. MARINOS: This was, yeah, generated as a complaint. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And there's water in the pool? MR. MARINOS: There is water in the pool. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Yeah. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It doesn't matter. A pool is just as dangerous without water as it is with water. Okay. Okay. All those in favor? BOARD MEMBER YORK: Aye. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Aye. BOARD MEMBER BHATLA: Aye. BOARD MEMBER JOHNSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Question for Jeff. How long does it take your department to react to this motion that was approved? MR. LETOURNEAU: Well, you gave them three days on a temporary barrier. I definitely would have a discussion with my director the day after that three days is over with, and we could act that day if we needed to do. There's no -- there's no problem of running down to Home Depot and getting a temporary barrier. We have to coordinate with the Sheriff's Office also. And we definitely like to, you know, be in touch with the property owners before we go on their property and do something like that. But with this order we do have the ability to move quickly. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: There's no trespassing issue? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You use the Sheriff. MR. LETOURNEAU: Yeah. I think that in the past we've shown the Sheriff an order from the Board or from the Special Magistrate, and they've helped us comply with getting something abated at that point. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: When will they be notified? Right away, today? MR. LETOURNEAU: Well, Chuck's probably going to try to get in touch with them, you know, by any means necessary. MR. MARINOS: I'll be calling them as I get in the elevator, essentially. MR. LETOURNEAU: So hopefully they come to their senses and at least get that temporary barrier up quickly. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. I think we're out of orders. The next meeting is August 24th. MS. BUCHILLON: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is that on a Thursday? MS. BUCHILLON: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. BOARD MEMBER AYASUN: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It's unusual for our meetings to be held on other days. Okay. Any questions or comments from the Board? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Again, welcome to the new people. BOARD MEMBER BHATLA: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And we'll see you -- there was one thing I wanted to mention. I don't know when the Board's going to be full, but I might as well say it on the record. When you have a full board, it's seven members, and we have two alternates. Now, our previous attorney said that the alternates, if you have seven members here, would sit out there until some member is not here. And the reason for that, he said -- and I don't disagree with it -- it becomes difficult for our court reporter to understand when we say "all approved," someone approve, someone doesn't. Are they a member? They're not a member. So it makes it cleaner. So it's been my thought that this will work out fine. And it's good to have a full board once again, and I look forward to working with all the people, and we can go from there. So, again, welcome to Glen -- MS. BUCHILLON: Kevin. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Kevin. Kevin and Kevin, two -- MR. NOELL: I've been called worse, so we're fine. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Two Kevins and a Bart. And we'll see you guys next month. I think we're still going to be down at least one person next month. I may be wrong. Colleen would know the answer to that. BOARD MEMBER BHATLA: I'm not going to be able to attend -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Excuse me? BOARD MEMBER BHATLA: I'm not going to be able to attend it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: On the 24th? Okay. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Tell her. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: She will send -- Helen sends out a notice before the meetings to see who's going to be here and who's not. Okay. We are adjourned. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: On the 24th? Okay. BOARD MEMBER RUBENSTEIN: Tell her. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: She will send -- Helen sends out a notice before the meetings to see who's going to be here and who's not. Okay. We are adjourned. ******* There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 12:27 p.m. CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD Ai&" ROD ice FMAN, CHAIRMAN ATTEST CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT & COMPTROLLER These minutes approved by the Board on056k Zq(,2(23, 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.