Loading...
CLB Minutes 03/20/2024 March 20, 2024 1 MINUTES OF THE COLLIER COUNTY CONTRACTOR LICENSING BOARD MEETING March 20, 2024, Naples, Florida LET IT BE REMEMBERED that the Collier County Contractor Licensing Board, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m. in REGULAR SESSION in Administration Building F, 3rd Floor, Collier County Government Center, Naples, Florida. MEMBERS: Stephen Jaron, Chairman Terry Jerulle, Vice Chairman Matthew Nolton Kyle Lantz Richard Joslin Robert Meister (arrived 9:05 a.m) Todd Allen Elle Hunt (approved absence) ALSO PRESENT: Timothy Crotts, Code Enforcement Manager Ronald Tomasko, Esq., Assistant Collier County Attorney Patrick Neale, Contractor Licensing Board Attorney Ryan Cathey, Licensing Operations Supervisor Any person who decides to appeal this decision of the Board will need a record of the proceedings and may need to ensure that a verbatim record of said proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which any appeal is to be made. March 20, 2024 2 1. Roll Call: Quorum established. Chairman Jaron approved absence for Ms. Hunt. 2. Additions or Deletions: Add 6C under Discussion – Senate Bill 1142. 3. Approval of Agenda:  Kyle Lantz: Approved the agenda as amended.  Richard Joslin: Seconded the motion. All in favor – aye. (Carried unanimously, 6-0.) 4. Approval of Minutes:  Matthew Nolton: Motion to approve the minutes of February 17, 2024.  Kyle Lantz: Seconded the motion. All in favor – aye. (Carried unanimously, 6-0.) 5. Public Comments: None 6. Discussion: A. Timothy Crotts: Announcement of the reappointment of Robert Meister to the Contractor Licensing Board. His new term will be until 2027. 6. B. Timothy Crotts: Introduction of Ryan Cathey, new Supervisor of Operations for the Contractor Licensing Board. He will oversee the front of the house and take over Sandra Delgado’s position. 6.C. Timothy Crotts: Addition of Senate Bill 1142. We have been operating under House Bill 1833 which is currently supposed to take effect July 1 of this year. However, there has been some delay in getting that done, so the Senate has introduced Senate Bill 1142, which effectively is going to push everything back another year to July 1 of 2025. Every license that Collier County currently has will stay active through July 1 of 2025. The bill has gone through the Senate and passed unanimously; it is enrolled and is waiting for the signatures of the legislative officers and then for the Governor to sign it. 7. Reports: None 8. New Business: A. Orders of the Board (10 Items):  Richard Joslin: Motion that the Chairman signs the orders of the board.  Terry Jerulle: Seconded the motion. All in favor – aye. (Carried unanimously, 7-0.) B. PRESTON C. HORATH; REVIEW OF EXPERIENCE; EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR; TKC SITE DEVELOPMENT LLC  Preston Horath: Sworn testimony given. March 20, 2024 3  Terry Jerulle: Has had dealings with Mr. Horath and recuses himself from voting.  Timothy Crotts: Mr. Horath submitted an application for the issuance of a local license for excavation contractor, which requires 36 months experience. As part of the application process for the issuance of the excavation contractor license, Mr. Horath was required to submit documentation showing his experience. As part of the review process by Staff, Mr. Horath had submitted the following verification of experience documents. A review of these documents showed the following. The company SHJ Gas and Fire Feature Services, which is owned by Alex Heppner. Mr. Horath was employed from 2018 to 2024 and was a part-time 1099 employee who worked approximately 40 hours a month when needed. The 480 hours a year times the 5.3 years equals 2,520 hours over that five year period. Scope of work listed was underground excavation, and this information was confirmed by a phone call interview with the company owner. Ringers Metal Work, Luke Ringer President. Mr. Horath was employed from October 2023 to November 2023, was a part-time 1099 employee, and the president did not remember the number of hours worked for the one month period. Diorio Building LLC, which is a state certified building contractor, Nicholas Diorio was a managing member. Mr. Horath was employed from 2021 to current as a part time 1099 employee who worked approximately 40 hours per month when needed. The 480 hours per year times three years three months would be 1,560 hours. The scope of the work was excavation, drainage systems and grading. This information was confirmed by a phone call interview with the company managing member. There has always been a question as to what constitutes 36 months experience and is it based on full time employment. Based on research conducted under Florida Statute 49111, License Examination, Subsection One in part, one year of proven experience in the category for which the person seeks to qualify for the purpose of this part, a minimum of 2,000 hours shall be used for determining full-time equivalency for one year. Based on the information received, it is Staffs’ opinion that Mr. Horath does not meet the minimum requirements set forth in Ordinance 20646 as it relates to experience under Section 1.6.3.18 as an excavation contractor. Because Mr. Horath does not meet the qualifications needed for the issuance of the excavating contractor license, Mr. Horath has been referred to the Board under Section 2.5.2, refer the application to the Contractor Licensing Board for decision and Mr. Horath is here today to answer your questions.  Stephen Jaron: To review, he needs 6,000 hours?  Timothy Crotts: That is correct. Using what the state has under 4911, which we also operate under the guidance of 489, the state has said that 2,000 hours constitutes full time employment for one year. Currently, he is about two-thirds short of what he actually needs because a lot of the time that was worked was in conjunction with another employee.  Terry Jerulle: Mr. C hairman, point of order. Mr. Neale, I have recused myself. What are my limitations?  Patrick Neale: You can still participate in discussion; you cannot vote on the issue.  Terry Jerulle: Mr. Chairman, I have discussed working with Mr. Horath on a project on the condition that he gets his license. I want to make sure the Board and the public know that.  Stephen Jaron: Can you give us any more experience or background info to help you? We see you have quite a bit of experience, but you're coming up short.  Preston Horath: That's only the experience I can still prove. I have been doing this since I've been out of high school, roughly 20 years. I started out working for a company named Hydro Rock. We started on the quarry at 951 and Immokalee Road. I spent 3-4 years working for them. And then we moved to Madison Park, which is off of Davis Blvd. and Radio Road. I spent 2-3 years there as well. Then we moved to Ferraro, which was the old drive-in movie theater. We dug lakes, berms, all the excavation things that were needed. I cannot verify working for Hydro Rock because they have been out of business since 2007-2008. I worked full-time for them. March 20, 2024 4  Matthew Nolton: What exactly were you doing?  Preston Horath: I was running bulldozers, excavators by age 21. I had my own crew. I was a finishing operator. I wish I could prove that but nobody is still around.  Terry Jerulle: Your testimony is worth something.  Preston Horath: Then after 2007/2008, I moved to the landfill because there was no one else hiring. I spent a few years there working as their lead operator. Nobody still works there that knew me; I didn't know who to call. And then I started working for D and D Site Services for five or six years, which has recently become obsolete.  Kyle Lantz: What kind of excavation work did you do for the first three jobs when you were moving around?  Preston Horath: We du g lakes. That was our main thing. We dug all the lakes in the quarry, Ferraro and Madison Park.  Kyle Lantz: Do you have much trench work experience?  Preston Horath: Trench work, no; digging the lakes and building the golf courses, house pads and getting the rough sub-grades ready.  Robert Meister: You worked for D and D? I recognize you. I believe you have done some work on a couple of my job sites.  Matthew Nolton: You worked for the landfill, Waste Management? (Yes.) I would think a big corporation like that would be able to supply employment records.  Richard Joslin: Is there a way to get some information from Waste Management?  Timothy Crotts: If the applicant can supply me some information and contact names, we can certainly reach out to them  Kyle Lantz: What did you do for waste management?  Richard Horath: I was their lead operator, so I did everything there, running machines, at the landfill itself.  Stephen Jaron: Have you ever done single family home construction where you're working in a lot where you have homes on either side?  Preston Horath: Yes, for D and D Site Services.  Timothy Crotts: In speaking with the two major employees of Mr. Horath, both employers spoke of the quality of his work, mentioning that it was very good quality.  Todd Allen: Motion to approve his application.  Richard Joslin: Seconded the motion. All in favor – aye. (Carried unanimously, 6 -0; Mr. Jerulle did not vote.) C. GRANT M. WARK; REVIEW OF CREDIT (REINSTATEMENT); PAINTING CONTRACTOR; WARK ENTERPRISE LLC (DBA) WARK PAINTING  Grant Wark: Sworn testimony given.  Timothy Crotts: Mr. Wark has submitted an application for the reinstatement of his painting contractor license, which requires a minimum credit score of 660 and showing financial responsibility. As part of the application process under Collier County Ordinance 20646, Section 2.3.9, Mr. Wark was required to submit a personal and business credit report. Mr. Wark’s personal credit report was reviewed and appears not to meet the financial responsibility as set forth in Section 2.5.1, Subsection D, the applicant or qualifier meets the requirement for financial responsibility as set forth in Rule 61G4-15.006 of the State of Florida. A review of the personal credit report submitted by Mr. Wark shows the following areas of concern. Mr. Wark's current credit score is 492; also shows past due accounts in the amount of $436 by Capital One Auto dated December 31, 2023; $833 by Capital One, dated January 24, 2024; and $789 by First Premier dated January 7, 2024. The total amount of past March 20, 2024 5 due was $2,058. Based upon the information received, Mr. Wark does not meet the minimum requirements set forth in Ordinance 20646 as it relates to financial responsibility. Mr. Wark is being referred to the Board under Section 2.5.2 referral the application to the Contractor Licensing Board for decision and Mr. Wark is here today to answer your questions. His license went into suspended status for failure to renew, and this is a reinstatement application and a credit report is required for the reinstatement application. It would have gone into suspended status December 31, 2023. Recommendation: Staff would recommend that the license be reinstated and be placed on a 12 month probationary period. That within 60 days, Mr. Wark submit to Staff a payment plan approved by all past due creditors; that within six months Mr. Wark submit an updated credit report showing no other credit issues, and that all current payment plans are current with the required payments; that within 12 months, Mr. Wark shall submit an updated credit report showing no credit issues, that all payment plans have been satisfied and paid in full and an approved credit score of 660 has been attained. At any time during the 12 month probationary period, Mr. Wark can show Staff that all past due amounts have been satisfied in full and that his credit score is 660 the probationary period can be removed. Failure to comply with this order shall require Mr. Wark to appear back before the Board for further review and possibly disciplinary actions as deemed appropriate by the Board.  Stephen Jaron: Mr. Wark , do you have any other information you would like to add? It looks like you've got a car loan that's delinquent and credit cards as well.  Grant Wark: I have an opinion on the personal credit side of things in this business. But I play along to comply. As far as the business itself, I don't have any judgments or liens or collections. So I've been responsible in that financial aspect. But no, it's going to be a typical excuse or swing for me. And work, certainly I want to maintain good credit. I don't really have much to say. I have a good reputation. When it comes to painting, I haven't had any issues, violations, citations. I've been compliant. If I would have paid the reinstatement on time, I could probably have avoided the whole exposure of the personal credit thing. So that was my mistake. The invoice looks like the receipt when you receive it in the e-mail. I thought it was a receipt, but it was an invoice for the reinstatement fee. So that was my mistake. Regardless, though, it's good for me to have to deal with the credit anyway. So I think maybe by being in front of you that might light a fire that wasn't maybe as urgent before. I mean it's important to me.  Timothy Crotts: At the end of 12 months when he submits his credit report, if it's not at 660 but we see no other credit issues, we would just bring him back in front of the Board to extend the probationary period until such time he could get it to 660.  Stephen Jaron: Is there something that happened years ago that brought your credit score down ?  Grant Wark: Yes, I transitioned to roofing sales. As everybody is familiar with, it's like chasing gold when we have a hurricane. I did well with for over a year. I stepped away from painting and I just tried to maintain my general liability and comp status and the county tax and just maintained it if I was to use it later. I probably could have put my license in hold status. Transitioning into this, salespeople get paid when the jobs are installed. That’s where I took a hit financially waiting for the roof jobs to get installed. I did pretty well as far as sales for a roofing company, but when it got to the install side of things, it was more of a circus that was unexpected. So I'm back to painting.  Kyle Lantz: Do you think it's feasible that you'll be able to pay the $2,058 in the next year?  Grant Wark: Absolutely. Since I submitted that credit report to you, I think I'm at 575.  Matthew Nolton: I'll make a motion that we adopt the County's recommendation.  Todd Allen: Seconded the motion. March 20, 2024 6 All in favor – aye. (Carried unanimously, 7-0.) D. JUAN D. LOPEZ; SECOND ENTITY APPLICATION; PAINTING CONTRACTOR; SWFL PAINTING SERVICES LLC  Juan Lopez: Sworn testimony given.  Timothy Crotts: Mr. Lopez has submitted a second entity application for the trade of painting contractor. Mr. Lopez currently holds a valid painting contractor license from Collier County, which was issued in 2017 under the name of Professional Home Painting of Southwest Florida Incorporated. A review of the current license at City View shows that there have been no complaints against the company, and Mr. Lopez has had no issues with renewing his license. It should be noted that Mr. Lopez currently holds a workman's compensation meaning that he has no employees who work in the construction trade under this company name. Mr. Lopez also holds a Collier County roofing, roof coating, roof painting and roof cleaning license which was issued in 2011. Mr. Lopez is submitting a second entity application to qualify the company SWFL Painting Services LLC for the afore- mentioned trade. There is no license currently associated with this company and it should be noted that Mr. Lopez is not listed as an officer of this company according to the latest review of the Florida Division of Corporations website. One individual identified as Noslen A. Cruz is the only officer listed and is the only person to show a workman's compensation for this company. Mr. Lopez is here today to answer your questions regarding his second entity application.  Stephen Jaron: Mr. L opez, why do you want to qualify another business if you are not an owner or an officer?  Juan Lopez: It's for a friend of mine. I am trying to help him out because he can't pass the painting test because of his English. I came up with the idea of him being a handyman. If he gets any jobs that require painting he could perform those jobs under my license.  Terry Jerulle: Why can't he do that now with your license? You already have a painting company that is licensed by you. If he gets a job, why don't you work it through that existing company? Why do you need a second entity?  Juan Lopez: It would be his job, his contacts, and his referral. I wouldn't want to take anything from the income that he gets from the job.  Stephen Jaron: The friend that you're trying to help out is a handyman and has a license. But he can't pass the test to get a painting license. Is your friend here today?  Friend of Mr. Lopez: Sworn testimony given.  Juan Lopez: Sworn testimony given for true and accurate translation for Friend.  Richard Joslin: Could you tell him that the testing is also given in the Spanish language if he wanted to take the test or why hasn't he?  Friend/Juan Lopez: He wasn't able to find the books in Spanish. He has been having a hard time studying for that.  Kyle Lantz: How are you going to get paid from this? And what happens if something goes wrong?  Juan Lopez: We are thinking just a low commission monthly. We're not expecting a lot of work at first. If it happens then we can revisit this. We thought maybe have a trial period or maybe a year to see how things go. I'm not asking for much. I'm more like friends helping another. I am going to be supervising. I want to be added to the bank account for the company to see what income he's getting for those paying jobs and if it's true to what he's telling me that he's doing. He wants to get his own company. I do not want an employee.  Stephen Jaron: Mr. Crotts, do you have a recommendation? March 20, 2024 7  Timothy Crotts: I think based on current testimony, and let's go back to the testing for the license, two tests are required. One is the trade and the other is the business law. The business law is a universal test that is given for every trade. It doesn't matter what it is, and I'm pretty sure that they will have the testing materials in Spanish. The painting test is in Spanish. He may need to take some time to get the book, have somebody help him who can translate the English into Spanish. He needs to try to get the license. If you recall, we've had other people come in who have said they can't take the test. I think there are a lot of unknowns at this point. I agree with the Board's assertion with there is no reason why he cannot become an employee of Mr. Lopez in order to bring income in while he's attempting to get that license. At this point, the Staff would need to deny the second entity application.  Richard Joslin: I have a motion. I would just like to say, first of all, I think you're making a big mistake in doing what you're doing right now. Because at the moment, we have no idea of what this man can do in the painting industry. And secondly, you have no control over that company at all if you are not some type of an officer of the corporation – something that can dictate the fact that you are in charge of him in your second entity and right now I see nothing of that factor. So I'm going to make the motion to deny.  Terry Jerulle: Seconded the motion. All in favor – aye. (Carried unanimously, 7-0.) E. DAMIR CRUZ PERDOMO; SECOND ENTITY APPLICATION; TILE & MARBLE CONTRACTOR; ITAL TILE & MARBLE CORP.  Damir Cruz: Sworn testimony given.  Timothy Crotts: Mr. Cruz has submitted a second entity application for the trade of tile and marble contractor. Mr. Cruz currently holds a valid tile and marble contractor license from Collier County, which was issued in 2013 under the name of Nova Sign Works DBA of Nova Works. Mr. Cruz also holds a State of Florida certified electrical specialty license. A rev iew of the current license and City View shows there have been no complaints against the company. It should be noted that Mr. Cruz currently holds a workman's compensation, meaning that he has no employees who works in the construction trade under this company name. Mr. Cruz is submitting a second entity application to qualify the name of Tile and Marble Corporation for the aforementioned trade. There is a local license currently associated with this company with the license holder ’s name being shown as Beatriz Italo. It should be noted that she is listed as an officer of the company according to the latest review of the Division of Corporations website. Staff is unsure of what percentage of ownership Mr. Cruz and Ms. Italo, as we do not have any documentation showing the percentage of ownership other than what has been stated verbally by Mr. Cruz, which is 0%. Staff has been unable to contact Ms. Italo because the contact information on file with City View is not up to date. Staff does have a concern as to why Tile and Marble Corporation needs a second license holder for this company, and Mr. Cruz is here today to answer your questions regarding the second entity application.  Stephen Jaron: Can you convince us that this makes sense for us to approve?  Damir Cruz: I've had my tile contractor since 2013. Prior to that we have done work for ITAL Tile and Marble. He's actually one of the persons that did my experience when I applied. He has been working the tile trade since 2000 and according to what he told me verbally, he opened his company in 2005 and he's working there now. His ex-wife, which is Ms. Italo, she is the license holder. They recently divorced and she is no longer going to be in the corporation. Thus he asked me to sponsor his company for the time being until he gets his license, which I'm willing to do for a time period of 2-3 years. He's going to start studying for that. So I am here so that I can sponsorship his application/license. March 20, 2024 8  Terry Jerulle: Are you the financial officer of this new company? It would be the new company that you are going to be licensing. Per the Statute you are financially responsible for every company that you license. Are you aware of that? (No)  Matthew Nolton: And you are also responsible if they do any work outside of the license, then you're the one that's going to be here responding to that.  Damir Cruz: I will be supervising the jobs. We agreed to that. So I'll be there. But it's only going to be for two-three years. He's already getting his books.  Stephen Jaron: Is he here? Can he come up?  Italo Durant: Sworn testimony given. I started my business in 1998, and after this I buy it. In that time, I now have papers and I was illegal in that time. In 2005, I married a lady. She is American. She gave me the citizenship. She opened the license for me and I never had troubles, no problems. I try to get my license and she told me for what, you are my husband. Unfortunately, I have divorced with her and she called me two months ago and she told me, you know what? The license is gone. I don't need my name and your company. So what I try to do? I have a lot of experience. I want to do lessons to get a CG. I did not want the tile to continue with my tile contractor license. I already bought the books, a lot of books. He's my good friend. I have a lot of friends. I go with him (Mr. Cruz) here because he worked for me. I teach him a lot of things. He has experience now and we have each other, and he knows how I work. And I told him you can help me. He told me. Yes. Why not? I have my work compensation. A lot of people work for me. All the companies that were in here in Naples, they are happy. My customers are happy. The company I work with, Abbey Carpet, they require me because of my name.  Terry Jerulle: Who owns ITAL Tile and Marble?  Italo Durant: Me – 100% owner.  Terry Jerulle: I heard two different things. You said it's no longer licensed?  Italo Durant: No. My license has continued. She is still the qualifier and she told me to remove her name on the license when you get it approved; to not use her name.  Terry Jerulle: Do you have any documentation stating that?  Italo Durant: Yes, she texts me. No other documentation.  Terry Jerulle: From my standpoint, there's an entity and there's a qualifier. You are trying to add another qualifier. I just want to make sure that the first qualifier understands that or agrees that she's not going to be qualifying.  Terry Jerulle: Mr. Crotts, I have a question. Is someone allowed to qualify a company that already has a qualifier without that qualifier agreeing or disagreeing?  Timothy Crotts: That would be part of the issue between him and his ex-wife. You could have a second qualifier on a company. You are allowed to do that. I will say too that as of yesterday, Mr. Italo (Durant) is listed as an officer and so is his ex-wife. She is also still currently listed as an officer of the company, so she's still qualifying the company. She would have to submit in writing to Staff that she no longer wishes to qualify the license. An issue you would run into would be any disciplinary action on which license holder would be held responsible for the disciplinary action, either for working outside the scope or any workmanship. So that is the only caveat. So any contract would have to specify under which license number that contract is being performed under. Each qualifier would have a separate issuance number.  Patrick Neale: Typic ally the way it works is you have primary and secondary qualifier. You don't necessarily have both qualifier numbers on a contract. You have to have at least one. But in general, typically the state will, and I'm talking from what I have experienced with DBPR and the way they operate, it's typically the state would go after the primary qualifier. March 20, 2024 9 Secondary qualifiers can pull permits and things, but typically it's the primary that is the one that would be chased.  Discussion ensued with regard to: - Getting his tile license now and general contractor license later - Mr. Durant has passed the first test for his general contractor license; took the second test twice and failed. He needs more time. - The ex-wife is pushing for him to get her name off the current license - Does he even have the experience to qualify for the general contract license - Mr. Durant is a subcontractor in tile only for other general contractors  Timothy Crotts: Staff is still concerned about the operation of the company with a second qualifier. Based upon what Mr. Neale has said and maybe Mr. Neale can answer the question, is how do they determine who is the primary qualifier for the company?  Patrick Neale: The primary qualifier would be in all likelihood the current qualifier. Mr. Durant would be the secondary qualifier. Then when she resigned, removed her license, then he would become the primary. The issue that would be addressed is to show that he has financial control and responsibility for the entity. The way the State used that and typically viewed it in the past is that they have to be a W2 employee. Or they have to have significant shareholdings in the company and be an officer. They would have to work out between them those things and it would be part of the deal. I suggest from at least my legal point of view, I would be concerned about a commission arrangement with no ownership. I think that's an issue that would be cause for concern as far as financial responsibility.  Todd Allen: Is there any leeway for us to approve him if he's not quite getting the minimum score?  Timothy Crotts: We have done that before, but the standard that we used in the past was for a medical condition, that the individual was having trouble due to the medical condition, not just because they couldn't reach that area.  Kyle Lantz: I'm going to make a motion that we approve the second entity for a period of six months. And you have six months to get your license.  Todd Allen: Seconded the motion.  Matthew Nolton: The only thing I would put in some discussion and based on what Mr. Neale had said, that there are still concerns because there is no legal connection at all. I understand what we're trying to do here, but there's a big piece missing. And Mr. Cruz, you're going to be responsible. If I was going to be responsible, I would want to be an officer or have some control or say.  Damir Cruz: I am willing to if he allows me. I can be a member owning 10% of the company and that way I can sponsor him.  Patrick Neale: 49.1195 specifically states that the secondary qualifying agent is responsible only for the supervision of field work at sites where his or her license was used to obtain the building permit and (2) any other work for which he or she accepts responsibility. The secondary qualified is not responsible for supervision of financial matters. If the primary qualifier is gone then he becomes primary.  Terry Jerulle: Mr. Cruz, what happens if his ex-wife gets angry and doesn't want to come off ownership or remove the license, and there's a fight. You're going to be stuck in the middle.  Damir Cruz: He already mentioned that she wants off, so he's going to be going through the legal paperwork to remove her from his corporation. Thus I will be the primary qualifier. Now, I am willing to accept being a member of the corporation, having ownership, and that way I can supervise him during that time.  Terry Jerulle: Do you want to defer this until next month and provide all that paperwork?  Damir Cruz: Yes. And he would have to agree as well.  Matthew Nolton: Does your ex-wife currently have any ownership in the business? (Zero after the divorce.) March 20, 2024 10  Timothy Crotts: I think Staff would want to see documentation showing that she has no ownership in the company. We would like to see maybe through the divorce decree showing that she no longer has any ownership within the company. Originally with the ownership of the company with the documentation she was listed as the president. Mr. Durant was listed as a secretary and that changed a couple of years ago. She went from secretary and he went to President. However, we still don't have any documentation showing that she has no ownership.  Kyle Lantz: I would like to modify my motion to grant him a six month second entity license that does not take effect until the previous qualifier relinquishes her qualifying of the company. In addition, provide a copy of an agreement signed by Mr. Durant and Mr. Cruz stating Mr. Cruz has financial responsibility over the six month period.  Todd Allen: Seconded the motion. All in favor – aye. (Disunited vote 6-1: Stephen Jaron – nay) 9. Old Business: None Break from 10:12 to 10:24 a.m. 10. Public Hearings: A. 2024-03 – RICARDO VALDEZ DBA IMPERIAL MARINE CONSTRUCTION INC (CEMIS20240000238)  Ricardo Valdez: Sworn testimony given.  Timothy Broughton: Sworn testimony given.  Matthew Nolton: Makes a motion to open the public hearing.  Todd Allen: Seconded the motion. All in favor – aye.  Timothy Broughton: A c opy of the hearing preamble was given to and read by the respondent. He has signed and dated the copy. I would like to enter the preamble and packet for case #2024- 03 into evidence at this time.  Richard Joslin: Motion that we accept the packet into evidence.  Kyle Lantz: Seconded. All in favor – aye.  Timothy Broughton: Respondent, Mr. Ricardo Valdez, a Collier County licensed marine contractor, with issuance number 36468 is the qualifier for Imperial Marine Construction Inc. Imperial Marine Construction Inc. contracted for and received payment for the installation of two jet ski lifts at 428 Marquesas Court, Marco Island, FL. The installation of the two jet ski lifts commenced prior to an issue permit for which one was required. Mr. Ricardo Valdez is in violation of Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, Section 22-20118, which states in pertinent part that it is a misconduct for the holder of a Collier County certificate of competency to proceed on any job without obtaining applicable permits or inspections from the City Building and Zoning Division or the County Building Review and Permitting Department. The Marco Island chief building official, Mr. Raul Perez, and other members from the City of Marco Island Government are here to present the facts of the case if needed.  Ricardo Valdez: Actually I take full responsibility for what happened. It was a miscommunication within us and it was no intention at all of going around pulling permits or anything or records indicate all the contrary. You know, we're being pretty much up to what's March 20, 2024 11 required to comply with any jobs as far as building permits and everything. It was a rush time due to the hurricane and it was just a miscommunication within us. But you know, I take full responsibility for it. We thought the permit was submitted and released. I am referring to the company.  Todd Allen: I am confused. Mistakes happen but I am looking at six prior violations beginning in 2017, two as late as January 2024, where this has happened before.  Stephen Jaron: So did you have a permit to do other work like on the sea wall or the dock?  Ricardo Valdez: Everything has been corrected and everything has been passed – all inspections required by the County. For the jet ski lifts and the sea wall, everything is in order.  Terry Jerulle: I think the question was Mr. Bell is when you were working on that site to put in the jet ski lifts, were you doing any other work on that site?  Timothy Broughton: The sea wall installation would be the first violation, January 30 of 2024 on Kingston Court. Those two violations, the one we're currently discussing, and this administrative complaint and that one came in within three days of each other. So the sea wall permit is that case. We are in question here on the jet ski lift cases.  Matthew Nolton: With all these prior cases, Mr. Crotts, he has not been before the Board for any of those. Were there fines for all of those?  Timothy Crotts: No, there would be no fines. The only thing that would happen is, and the Chief Building Official can correct me on this, but they would be after the fact fees that would be added to the permit if in fact the work commenced before the permit was issued. We do the same thing at the County level. It may not rise to the point where it comes in front of the Contractor Licensing Board, but there is a penalty which is assessed in the building department of after-the- fact fees.  Matthew Nolton: Motion made to accept his plea of guilty.  Todd Allen: Seconded the motion. All in favor – aye. (Carried unanimously, 7-0.)  Patrick Neale: Prior to the penalty phase, if I may just address a few issues with the Board. You found him in violation, so you have to review what sanctions are going to be imposed. And I think the Board knows well what those sanctions are, but I just want to go over them. Since he is a County licensed contractor, you can revoke his certificate of competency, suspend his certificate, deny issuance or renewal of the certificate, assign probation of a reasonable length not to exceed 2 years, order restitution. Probably not relevant in this case. A fine not to exceed $5,000 or $10,000, a public reprimand, reexamination requirement, denial of the issuance of permits or requiring issue of future permits with conditions. And reasonable legal and investigative costs. In determining the sanctions the Board shall consider several factors. Number one is the gravity of the violation; number two is the impact of the violation; number three, any actions taken by the violator to correct said violation, any previous violations committed, and any other evidence that was presented at this hearing that was relevant to the sanction that's appropriate. You also shall issue a recommended penalty for the State Board, which is no further action, suspension, revocation or restriction of any registration he is registered, and a fine to be levied by the State Construction Industry Board.  Richard Joslin: Makes a motion to close the public hearing.  Todd Allen: Seconded the motion. All in favor – aye. (Carried unanimously, 7-0.)  Timothy Crotts: Even though Mr. Valdez is showing six prior incidents, seventh including today, Mr. Valdez has not been in front of the Contractor Licensing Board for any other disciplinary actions. Therefore, Staff is going to ask for a $1,000 fine to be paid March 20, 2024 12 within 60 days. Failure to pay the fine within 60 days will resort in the automatic revocation of the respondent’s license and that he is placed on 12 months probation.  Discussion follows: - One of the few times the County is not strict enough. - Correct the behavior – six prior violations for the same issue - Mr. Valdez is a qualifier; more than 10% but less than 50%; not a controlling owner of Imperial Marine; not involved in day-to-day operations  Raul Perez, Chief Building Official, City of Marco Island: Sworn testimony given.  Matthew Nolton: This is a large company? Do they pull a lot of permits? If we look from 2017 to current, and there have been six or seven violations, would that be over 1,000 permits? I am trying to understand from your perspective if this is a habitual situation or they pull so many permits and get ahead of themselves on a couple?  Raul Perez: I would say it would at least be in the hundreds at minimum. In regards to being relative to the volume that they do, it is a small number.  Richard Joslin: How many employees does the company employ?  Ricardo Valdez: Over 30. Bernice, in the office, is in charge of processing the paperwork. I am not her direct supervisor.  Carlos Montanez: Sworn testimony given.  Stephen Jaron: You have 45% ownership of the company? (Yes.) If you are supervising the field personnel and before you can start anything you need a permit. So who is the person that's going to tell the field to start and actually do the work?  Carlos Montanez: That would be me. We take full responsibility and for the sea wall as well.  Terry Jerulle: Mr. Montanez, the County has given us their recommendation and I for one, don't necessarily agree with it. So convince me going forward how you are going to deal with the situation so that Mr. Valdez does not have to come back in front of the Board again.  Carlos Montanez: We would check all the permits and make sure it's active before we start any work. Be more careful.  Richard Joslin: Maybe have the permit in hand on the job. You take care of the scheduling of the job also right? Then you're sending the crews to go to XY and Z. That has to be handled very carefully, correct?  Stephen Jaron: You have to put a permit board up. You've got to put something in the permit box.  Timothy Crotts: We had some of the testimony brought up that when the work is commenced without a permit, that the building department will assess after the fact fees and I think it would be good to hear from Mr. Perez on what those fees would be for permits that are pulled after the fact.  Raul Perez: The work without permit fee is three times the permit cost, and that's the fee that's been assessed to each incident. All violations have been paid. March 20, 2024 13  Further discussion: - Getting the cart before the horse approach - Scheduling issue - The company pays for the qualifier fee but that person is on 12 months probation - More comfortable with a $2,000 fine rather than $1,000 - The difference between $1,000 and $2,000 is not going to mean anything when most of the jobs are $40-$60,000 jobs.  Matthew Nolton: Moved to adopt the County’s recommendation as a motion.  Todd Allen: I'm going to go out on a limb and say that we need to suspend. If the only way to get their attention that this is important and they need to do this is to suspend them for a little while.  Kyle Lantz: I am going to second the motion, and I agree with the suspension but I think they have never been in this formal setting yet, and let's leave that for, okay here's your chance – get your act together and if not know very well where we are leaning if we see you back here.  Matthew Nolton: Suspending has a lot of ramifications. There are a lot of current projects out there and I think it puts them on notice that we are not going to be lenient next time if it happens again.  Timothy Crotts: One thing the Board could do is to consider putting the probationary period for 24 months. That certainly would lead a lot more credence to know that now you have two years which you need to make sure every permit is done as required.  Matthew Nolton: I would be willing to amend the motion to 24 months probation instead of 12 months.  Kyle Lantz: Seconds the amended motion. All in favor – aye. (Disunited vote 6-1: Todd Allen – nay)  Stephen Jaron: Upon consideration of all testimony received under oath, evidence received and arguments presented by the parties during the public hearing, the Board issues the following findings and conclusions. Service of the administrative complaint and notice was legal, sufficiently provided and in compliance with the applicable law. The respondent is the holder of the license as set forth in the Administrative Complaint Citation #2024-03. Respondent was present at the hearing and was not represented by counsel. The Board has jurisdiction over the respondent and subject matter raised in the administrative complaint. The respondent committed the violations as set forth in Count One of the administrative complaint, therefore, by a vote of seven in favor, the respondent is found guilty of the violations as set forth in Count One of the administrative complaint. By a vote of six in favor and one opposed, the Board imposes the following sanctions against the respondent: a $1,000 fine to be paid within 60 days, otherwise the license would be revoked; and 24 months of probation.  Matthew Nolton: Makes a motion to close the meeting. LAST NAIiIE_FIRST NAl!1E_T.4IDDLE NAME fe.P;rltr- Eeuv ? NAAIE OF BOARD. COUNCIL. COMMISSION, AUTHORIry OR COMMITTEE c c-c_ LTi IttAILING ADDRESS\tt -rtra^etr.< Rr'.:eg P THE 8OARD, COUNCIL. COMMISSION. AUTHORI]Y OR COMMrrIEE ON WHICH I SERVE ISAUNIT OF: u ctry !.cour.rrr U OTHER LOCALAGENCY"NI COUNTY (-*C=,-^-r=rZ NA E OF POLIIICAT SUBDIVISION DATE ON WHICH VOTE OCCURREO3.2D-2D24 |.ry PostTtoN ls O ELECTIVE j4 aceorrrrw WHO MUST FILE FORM 8B This form is for use by any person serving at the county, city, or other local level of govemment on an appointed or elected board, council, commission, authority, or committee. lt applies to members of advisory and non-advisory bodies who are presented with a voling conflict of interest under Section l'12.3'143, Florida Statutes. Your responsibilities under the law when faced with voting on a measure in which you have a conflict of interest will vary gr€atly depending on whether you hold an elective or appointive position. For this reason, please pay close atlention to the insfuctons on lhis form before completing and flling lhe form. INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 112.3143, FLORIDA STATUTES A person holding elective or appointive county, municipal, or other local public office MUST ABSTAIN from voting on a measure which would inure to his or her special privale gain or loss. Each elected or appointed local officer also MUST ABSTAIN from knowingly voting on a measure which would inure to the special gain or loss of a principal (other than a government agency) by whom he or she is reiained (including the parent, subsidiary, or sibling organization of a principal by which he or she is retained); to the special private gain or loss of a relative: or to the special priyate gain or loss ol a business associate. Commission€rs of community redevelopment agencies (CRAs) under Sec. 163.356 or 163.357, ES.. and omcers of independent special tax districts elected on a one-acre, one-vole basis are not prohibited from voting in that capacity. For purposes of this law, a "relative" includes only the offlcer's father, mother, son, daughte( husband, wife, brolher, sister, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-inJaw, and daughter.inJaw. A "business associate" means any person or entity engaged in or carrying on a business enterprise with the officer as a partner, joint venturer, coowner of property, or corporate shareholder (where the shares of the corporation are not lisled on any national or regional stock exchange). ELECTED OFFICERS: ln addition to abstaining from voting in ihe situations described above, you must disclose the conflict PRIOR TO THE VOTE BEING TAKEN by publicly stating to the assembly the nature ot your interesl in the measure on which you are abstaining from voting: and WITHIN 15 OAYS AFTER THE VOTE OCCURS by compleling and filing lhis form wlth the person responsible for recording the minutes ot the meeting, who should incorporate the form In the minutes. APPOINTED OFFICERS: Although you must abstain from voting in lhe situations described above, you are not prohibited by Section '112.3143 from otherwise participating in these matters. Howeve( you must disclose the nature ot lhe connict before making any attempt to influence the decision, whether orally or in writing and whether made by you or at your direction. IF YOU INTEND TO MAKE ANY ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE OECISION PRIOR TO THE MEETING AT WHICH THE VOTE WILL BE TAKEN: ' You must complete and llle this form (before making any attempt to innuence the decision) with the person responsible for recording the minutes of lhe meeting, who will incorporate the form in the minutes. (Continued on page 2) CE FORM 88. EFF. 11/2013 Adoptad by relerenc€ in Rule 34-7.010(1X0. F.A.C. PAGE 1 FORM 88 MEMORANDUM OF VOTING CONFLICT FOR couNTY MUN|CIPAL, AND OTHER LOCAL PUBLTC OFFTCERS APPOINTED OFFICERS (continued) . A copy ot the form must be provided immediately lo the other members of the agency. . The form must be read publicly at the next meeling alter the torm is filsd. IF YOU MAKE NO ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION EXCEPT BY DISCUSSION AT THE MEETING: . You must disclose orally the nature of your conflict in the measure before participating. . You must complete the form and file it within 15 days after the vote occurs with the person responsible tor recording the minutes of the meeting. who must incorporate the form in the minutes. A mpy of the form musl be provided immediately to the other members of the agency, and the iorm must be read publicly at the next meeting afler the form is filed. NOTICE: UNDER PROVISIONS OF FLORIDA STATUTES 5112.317, A FAILURE TO MAKE ANY REOUIREO OISCLOSURE CONSTITUTES GROUNDS FOR AND MAY BE PUNISHED BY ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING: IMPEACHMENT, REMOVAL OR SUSPENSION FROM OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT, DEMOTION, REDUCTION IN SALARY REPRIMAND, OR A CIVIL PENALry NOT TO EXCEED SlO.OOO. OISCLOSURE OF LOCAL OFFICER'S INTEREST , hereby disclose thal on (a) A measure came or will come before my agency which (check one or more) _ inured to my special private gain or loss; _ inured to the special gain or loss ol my business associate, inured to the special gain or loss of lvhom lam retained: or inured to the special gain or loss of is the parent subsidiary, or sibling organization or subsidiary of a principal which has retained me. (b) The measure before my agency and the nature of my conflicling interest in the measure is as fo ows th ,+ lnuredtothespecialgainorlossofmyrelative, by , which or: 3. zt>-L1z! i €tau-*i -trtscr-ose},-6 S* !*et'C, (3Ce (ir,ls.".l 5q.r-s-is, , -E-^ed o€ \\ Qs-*l-,,qc- Gs\-.c{ r,qr-(A ?wi-o"i C. +\Uu+\ ot f KL {:E Srier-aPMer.,.:i-, E\o\Qur,src.rsut AGzr'-ss€-s \s\trs eu6** C. \\t <f -dr,rrAf Gu.Pss-t. f-:trrrth-Ge*e*4'r.\ *\:tS *ftililstl-t \u+r t *&!*le*5JuH.xF,HffiHffi n" rffi.ql3s$ftB5;{5 C. \bu64 ^=crs =.zt- ={ 5.r-riaft$*slLo, sUs*,scS S*,-{ra.,r1 . lf disclosure of specific information would violate confidentiality or privilege pursuant to law or rules governing attomeys, a public oflicer, who is also an attomey, may comply with the disclosure requirements of this section by disclosing the nature of the interest in such a way as to provide the public with notice of the conflicl. g.70-24 sis tu cE FORM 8A - EFF. t1/2013 Adopled by rercrence in Rulc 34-7.010(1X0. F.A.C PAGE 2 Date Filed March 20.2024 11 Richard Joslin: Seconded. All in favor - aye. Next Meeting Date: Wednesday, April 17,2024 There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned at l0:50 AM. Licensing Board These minutes were approved by the Chairman of the Contractor Licensing Board ,, (fL4/ - oZ4 , @heck one) as submitted v/ or as amended t4