The URL can be used to link to this page

CESM Minutes 10/17/2008 October 17, 2008 MINUTES OF THE HEARING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY SPECIAL MAGISTRATE Naples, Florida, October 17,2008 LET IT BE REMEMBERED that the Collier County Special Magistrate, in and for the County of Collier having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 AM in REGULAR SESSION in Conference Room #610 of the Collier County Community Development and Environmental Services Building, located at 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida, and the following persons were present: SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: Secretary to the Special Magistrate: Honorable Brenda Garretson Sue Chapin STAFF PRESENT: Marjorie Student-Stirling, Assistant County Attorney Kitchell Snow, Code Enforcement Investigative Supervisor Marlene Stewart, Code Enforcement Administrative Secretary HEARING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY SPECIAL MAGISTRATE AGENDA Date: October 17,2008 at 9:00 A.M. Location: Community Development and Environmental Services 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida, 34104 Conference Room 609-610 o NOTE: ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO, AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBA TIM 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 SPECIAL MAGISTRATE SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING THIS RECORD. I. CALL TO ORDER - Special Magistrate Brenda Garretson presiding A. Hearing rules and regulations II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - October 3, 2008 IV. MOTIONS V. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Stipulations B. Hearings 1. CASE NO: OWNER: OFFICER: VIOLA nONS: PU 4413 JON IRWIN INVESTIGA TOR GEORGE CASCIO ORD. 2005-54, SEC. 19.C.14 REFRIGERATOR) WHITE GOODS CURBSIDE WITH DOORS NOT REMOVED (HEALTH, SAFETY, WELFARE ISSUE) 51978010469 FOLIO NO: VIOLATION ADDRESS: 15000 SAVANNAH DR. NAPLES, 34119 2. CASE NO: OWNER: OFFICER: VIOLA nONS: PR 002854 MARK GILDEA PARK RANGER ROGER RIECK ORD. SEC. 130-66 FAILURE TO AFFIX BEACH PARKING PERMIT TO VEHICLE VIOLATION ADDRESS: MARCO SOUTH ACCESS 3. CASE NO: OWNER: OFFICER: VIOLA nONS: PR 003334 LUCILA INSAUSTI PARK RANKGER MAURICIO ARAQUIST AIN ORD. SEC. 130-66 FAILURE TO DISPLAY PAID PARKING RECEIPT VIOLA nON ADDRESS: MARCO SOUTH ACCESS 4. CASE NO: OWNER: OFFICER: VIOLA nONS: PR 040890 JULIUS TROIANI PARK RANGER CYNTHIA GAYNOR ORD. SEe. 130-66 FAILURE TO PAY METER VIOLA nON ADDRESS: V ANDERBIL T BEACH STREET 5. CASE NO: OWNER: OFFICER: VIOLATIONS: PR 040704 GLENN MADDOCK PARK RANGER CYNTHIA GAYNOR ORD. SEC. 130-66 FAILURE TO PAY METER VIOLA nON ADDRESS: NORTH GULF SHORE 6. CASE NO: OWNER: OFFICER: VIOLATIONS: PR 000391 ROBERSON ESCARMENT PARK RANGER KURT ARAQUISTAIN CODE OF LAWS AND ORD. CHAP. 246, ARTICLE II, SEC. 246-28 (B)(7) WALKING DOG IN PARK VIOLATION ADDRESS: GOLDEN GATE COMMUNITY PARK 7. CASE NO: OWNER: OFFICER: VIOLATIONS: FOLIO NO: VIOLATION ADDRESS: CEPM 20080011393 DIANE L MATHIEU, TR., JOHN R.MATHIEU, TR., & DIANE L. MATHIEU, REV. TR., UTD 7-12-02 INVESTIGATOR JOHN SANTAFEMIA ORD. 2004-58, SEC. 12 EXISTENCE OF A DANGEROUS BUILDING 27586840000 427 WILLET AVE., NAPLES, 34108 2 8. CASE NO: OWNER: OFFICER: VIOLATIONS: FOLIO NO: VIOLA nON ADDRESS: 9. CASE NO: OWNER: OFFICER: VIOLATIONS: FOLIO NO: VIOLATION ADDRESS: 10. CASE NO: OWNER: OFFICER: VIOLA TIONS: FOLIO NO: VIOLA nON ADDRESS: 11. CASE NO: OWNER: OFFICER: VIOLA nONS: FOLIO NO: VIOLATION ADDRESS: CENA20080011107 GRACIELA DELAGUlLLA INVESTIGATOR JONATHAN MUSSE COLLIER CO. LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE 04-41, AS AMENDED, SEC. 2.01.00(A) UNLICENSED/INOPERABLE VEHICLE(S) STORED ON RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY 62765280006 826 95TH AVE. N, NAPLES, 34108 CEAU20080001226 JOSE DE JESUS AND GLORIA GARCIA INVESTIGATOR RENALD PAUL FLORIDA BUILDING CODE, 2004 EDITION, SEC. 105.1 FAILURE TO OBTAIN CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION FOR FENCE PERMIT #2006020489 36126960001 1842 48TH ST. SW, NAPLES, 34116 CESD20080010509 CELIA ANDRADE AND JOSE ALFARO INVESTIGATOR RENALD PAUL COLLIER CO. LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE 04-41, AS AMENDED, SEC. 1 0.02.06(B)(1 )(A) ADDITION OF SHED WITH NO PERMITS 36122000004 2100 50TH ST. SW NAPLES, 34116 CEPM 20080009793 ALEGRO OWENS AND LILLIE BELL OWENS INVESnGA TOR JOE MUCHA CODE OF LAWS AND ORD., ARTICLE VI, SEC. 22-231, SUB(S), 1-5,9-11, 12B, 12C, 12I-12P & 20 ABANDONED AND UNSECURED MOBILE HOME MAINTAINED IN DETERIORA TED CONDITION. 56401280004 304 ROSE AVE., IMMOKALEE, 34142 3 12. CASE NO: OWNER: OFFICER: VIOLATIONS: CEPM20080010842 DOROTHY JOHNSON INVESTIGATOR JOE MUCHA CODE OF LAWS AND ORD., ARTICLE VI, SEC. 22-231, SUB(S).2-5, 8-11, 12B, 12C, 121-12M, 120, 12P, 12R, 19 & 20 RENTAL PROPERTY WITH SEVERAL MINIMUM HOUSING VIOLATIONS TO INCLUDE, BUT NOT LIMITED TO: NO HOT WATER SUPPLY, NO WATER HEA TING FACILITIES, NO HEATING EQUIPMENT, ELECTRICAL OUTLETS & LIGHTS NOT IN GOOD WORKING ORDER 61481640002 FOLIO NO: VIOLA nON ADDRESS: 1888 AIRPORT RD. S. NAPLES, 34112 C. Emergency Cases: VI. NEW BUSINESS A. Motion for Imposition of Fines: VII. OLD BUSINESS A. Request to forward cases for Foreclosure / Collections VIII. CONSENT AGENDA IX. REPORTS 1. CASE NO: 2007081165 CASE TYPE: Nuisance Abatement Assessment of Lien - August 1, 2008 Hearing OWNER: Teresa G. Oliver & Genevieve C. Zanetti Lien not recorded, property should not have had lien placed on it, invoice was paid prior to Aug. 1,2008 2. CASE NO: CENA20080001063 CASE TYPE: Nuisance Abatement Assessment of Lien - August 1, 2008 Hearing OWNER: Jorge & Ana Marie Serna Lien not recorded, owners not responsible for County Abatement invoice. County vendor abated wrong property X. NEXT MEETING DATE: November 7, 2008 at 9:00 A.M. located at the Community Development and Environmental Services, 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr., Conference Rooms 609 - 610. XI. ADJOURN 4 October 17,2008 I. CALL TO ORDER The Meeting was called to order by the Honorable Special Magistrate Brenda Garretson at 9:00 AM. All those testifying at the proceeding did so under oath. A. Hearing Rules and Regulations were given by Special Magistrate Garretson. Special Magistrate Garretson noted that, prior to conducting the Hearing, the Respondents were given an opportunity to speak with their Investigating Officer(s) for a Resolution by Stipulation; looking for compliance without being punitive. RECESS: 9:20 AM RECONVENED: 9:37 AM II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Marlene Stewart, Code Enforcement Administrative Secretary, proposed the following changes: (a) Under Item V(B), "Hearings," the following cases were WITHDRAWN by the County due to payment: . Agenda # 1, Case # PU 4413 - BCC vs. Jon Irwin . Agenda # 3, Case # PR 003334 - BCC vs. Lucila Insausti (b) Under Item V(B), "Hearings," in Agenda # 8, the Case Number prefix was changed to CEV 20080011107 - BCC vs. Graciela DelAguilla (c) Under Item V(C), "Emergency Cases," the following cases were ADDED to the Agenda: . Agenda # 1, Case # CO-00192 CEVFH 20080007320 - BCC vs. Clean Ride Limo, Inc. . Agenda # 2, Case # CO-00193 CEVFH 20080007285 - BCC vs. Clean Ride Limo, Inc. . Agenda # 3, Case # CO-00194 CEVFH 20080007574 - BCC vs. Clean Ride Limo, Inc. . Agenda # 4, Case # CO-00195 CEVFH 20080007692 - BCC vs. Bobby D. Calvert . Agenda # 5, Case # CO-00196 CEVFH 20080007684 - BCC vs. Neil Walmsley . Agenda # 6, Case # CO-00197 CEVFH 20080008631 - BCC vs. Clean Ride Limo, Inc. (d) Under Item IX, "Reports," the following case was added: . 3. Case # CENA 20080003578 - BCC vs. Chad Sulkes The Special Magistrate approved the Agenda as amended, subject to changes made during the course of the Hearing at the discretion of the Special Magistrate. 2 October 17, 2008 III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Sue Chapin, Secretary to the Special Magistrate, proposed the following changes: Agenda 16, Case # PU 4433 - BCC vs. Centex Homes Agenda 17, Case # PU 4434 - BCC vs. Centex Homes Agenda 18, Case # PU 4356 - BCC vs. Centex Homes The Investigators of record for the above-referenced cases, Michael Andresky (Agenda # 16 and #17) and Albert Sanchez (Agenda # 18), were not present and unable to present their cases according to the Agenda. Investigator George Cascio, as noted, represented them. The Minutes of the Special Magistrate Hearing held on October 3, 2008 were reviewed by the Special Magistrate and approved as amended. IV. MOTIONS A. Motion for Continuance: 4. Case # PR 040890 - BCC vs. Julius Troiani The Hearing was requested by the Respondent who was not present. Collier County Park Ranger Cynthia Gaynor was present. Violation(s): Ord. Sec. 130-66 Failure to pay meter Violation Address: Vanderbilt Beach Street The Respondent's Request for a Continuance was received by Marlene Stewart on October 16, 2008 at 5: 10 PM. It was not filed before the deadline. The Investigator stated the County objected to the granting of a Continuance. The Respondent's letter stated he would not be in the area on the Hearing date due to his current employment. He would be available on October 28th through October 31 st and from November 16th through November 18th. The Special Magistrate noted supporting documentation was not submitted with the written request as required. The Special Magistrate DENIED the Respondent's Request for a Continuance. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Stipulations: 3 October 17, 2008 8. Case # CENA 20080011107 - BCC vs. Graciela Del A2uilla (The Respondent's name was corrected to Del Aguila.) The Hearing was requested by Collier County Code Enforcement Investigator Jonathan Musse who was present. The Respondent was also present. (NOTE: The Case # was changed to CEV 20080011107 per amendment to the Agenda. ) Violation(s): Collier Co. Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Sec. 2.01.00(A) Unlicensed/inoperable vehic1e(s) stored on residential property Violation Address: 826 95th Ave. N, Naples, 34108 A Stipulation was entered into by the Respondent on October 17, 2008. The Investigator stated the violation had been abated on October 6, 2008. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, and finding the violations did exist but were CORRECTED prior to the Hearing, the Respondent was found GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to pay the Operational Costs incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of this case in the amount of$117.34 on or before November 17,2008. 10. Case # CESD 20080010509 - BCC vs. Celia Andrade and Jose Alfaro The Hearing was requested by Collier County Code Enforcement Investigator Renald Paul who was present. The Respondents were also present. Erica Alfaro-Andrade, daughter ofthe Respondents, served as translator. Violation(s): Collier Co. Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Sec. 1 0.02.06(B)(1 ) (A) Addition of shed with no permits Violation Address: 2100 50th St. SW, Naples, 34116 A Stipulation was entered into by the Respondents on October 17, 2008. The Investigator stated the Respondents agreed to pay the Operational Costs. Respondent, Jose Alfaro, stated the violation was caused by the previous owner. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondents were found GUILTY of the alleged violation(s) and were ordered to obtain the required Collier 4 October 17,2008 County permits for additions to a residence, inspections and a Certificate of Completion, OR remove the unpermitted addition by obtaining a Collier County Demolition Permit, with required inspections, and a Certificate of Completion, all on or before January 17,2009, or afine of $1 00. 00 per day will be imposedfor each day the violation remains thereafter, unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. If the Respondents have not complied by the deadline, the County is authorized to abate the violation by contractor bid-out and assess the costs to the Respondents. lfnecessary, assistance may be requestedfrom the Collier County Sheriff's Office. The Respondents were ordered to pay the Operational Costs incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of this case in the amount of $117. 69 on or before November 17, 2008. The Respondents are to notify the Investigator within 24 hours of a workday to concur the violation(s) had been abated. 7. Case # CEPM 20080011393 - BCC vs. Diane L Mathieu. Tr.. John R. Mathieu. Tr.. & Diane L. Mathieu. Rev. Tr.. UTD 7-12-02 The Hearing was requested by Collier County Code Property Maintenance Specialist John Santafemia who was present. Respondent, John Mathieu, was present and the Respondents were represented by Attorney Brad Kelsky. Violation(s): Ord. 2004-58, Sec. 12 Existence of a dangerous building Violation Address: 427 Willet Ave., Naples, 34108 A Stipulation was entered into by Respondent, John R. Mathieu, on behalf of his wife, Diane L. Mathieu, and himself on October 17, 2008. The Investigator stated the structure sustained severe water damage. The Notice of Violation was served on July 25,2008 to the Respondent, John Mathieu. Twelve (12) photographs, dated July 25,2008, were introduced, marked as County's Composite Exhibit "A" and admitted into evidence. Attorney Kelsky stated the Respondents have been involved in litigation for the past year, and eight parties are involved. The Special Magistrate and Attorney Kelsky discussed the re-hearing period and options available in the event demolition cannot occur by January 17,2009. The Special Magistrate explained the fine would accrue if the deadline was not met, but would not be assessed until the County filed a Motion for Imposition of Fines. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondents were found GUILTY of the alleged violation(s) and were ordered to obtain a Collier County 5 October 17, 2008 Demolition Permit, all required inspections, and a Certificate of Completion on or before January 17,2009 or afine of$250.00 per day will be imposedfor each day the violation remains thereafter, unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. If the Respondents have not complied by the deadline, the County is authorized to abate the violation by contractor bid-out and assess the costs to the Respondents. If necessary, assistance may be requested from the Collier County Sheriff's Office. The Respondents were ordered to pay the Operational Costs incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of this case in the amount of$117.52 on or before January 17, 2009. The Respondents are to notify the Investigator within 24 hours of a workday to concur the violation(s) had been abated. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS B. Hearings: 6. Case # PR 000391 - BCC vs. Roberson Escarment (The Respondent's first name was corrected to Robe!!:..son.) The Hearing was requested by the Respondent who was present. Collier County Park Ranger Kurt Araquistain was also present. Violation(s): Code of Laws and Ord., Chap. 246, Article II, Sec. 246-28 (B)(7) Walking dog in park Violation Address: Golden Gate Community Park The Respondent stated his religious beliefs did not allow him to "swear" and affirmed the truthfulness of his testimony. The Respondent stated he often walked his dog in the park without incident. He had been observed by Collier County Sheriffs and Park Rangers on other occasions and had not been issued a Citation. The Park Ranger stated a sign, posted at the entry to the Park, visually indicated dogs were not allowed within the Park and further stated the restriction is always enforced, not selectively. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUILTY of the alleged violation(s) and ordered to pay a civilfine in the amount of$30.00, together with an administrativefee of $5. 00, on or before January 17, 2009, unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. The Respondent was ordered to pay the Operational Costs incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of this case in the amount of $50. 00 on or before January 17, 2009. 6 October 17, 2008 Total amount due: $85.00 2. Case # PR 002854 - BCC vs. Mark Gildea The Hearing was requested by Collier County Park Ranger Roger Rieck who was present. The Respondent was not present. Violation(s): Ord. Sec. 130-66 Failure to affix beach parking permit to vehicle Violation Address: Marco South Access The Notice of Hearing was sent via Certified Mail on October 2,2008 and delivery was confirmed by the U.S. Postal Service. The Special Magistrate stated the Respondent sent an undated letter of explanation stating he resides in Massachusetts and would not return to the Naples area until the fall. The Respondent's letter was marked as Respondent's Exhibit "I" and admitted into evidence. The Park Ranger stated individuals buying beach parking permits are advised of proper placement on their vehicles at the time of purchase. The Respondent's vehicle did not display the permit in the proper location. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUILTY of the alleged violation(s) and ordered to pay a civil fine in the amount of $3 0.00, together with an administrative fee of $5.00, on or before November 17, 2008, unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. The Respondent was ordered to pay the Operational Costs incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of this case in the amount of $50. 00 on or before November 17, 2008. Total amount due: $85.00 4. Case # PR 040890 - BCC vs. Julius Troiani The Hearing was requested by Collier County Park Ranger Cynthia Gaynor who was present. The Respondent was not present. Violation(s): Ord. Sec. 130-66 Failure to pay meter Violation Address: Vanderbilt Beach Street The Special Magistrate noted the Respondent's previous Request for a Continuance had been denied. 7 October 17, 2008 The Notice of Hearing was sent via Certified Mail on October 2, 2008 and delivery was confirmed by the U.S. Postal Service. The Investigator stated the parking meter had expired and the owner was identified through the vehicle's license plate. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUILTY of the alleged violation(s) and ordered to pay a civilfine in the amount of $3 0.00, together with an administrative fee of $5.00, on or before November 17, 2008, unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. The Respondent was ordered to pay the Operational Costs incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of this case in the amount of $50. 00 on or before November 17, 2008. Total amount due: $85.00 5. Case # PR 040704 - BCC vs. Glenn Maddock The Hearing was requested by Collier County Park Ranger Cynthia Gaynor who was present. The Respondent was not present. Violation(s): Ord. Sec. 130-66 Failure to pay meter Violation Address: North Gulfshore The Notice of Hearing was sent via Certified Mail on October 2,2008 and delivery was confirmed by the U.S. Postal Service. The Investigator stated the street parking meter had expired and the owner was identified through the vehicle's license plate. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUILTY of the alleged violation(s) and ordered to pay a civilfine in the amount of$30.00, together with an administrativefee of $5. 00, on or before November 17, 2008, unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. The Respondent was ordered to pay the Operational Costs incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of this case in the amount of $50. 00 on or before November 17, 2008. Total amount due: $85.00 9. Case # CEAU 20080001226 - BCC vs. Jose de Jesus and Gloria Garcia The Hearing was requested by Collier County Code Enforcement Investigator Renald Paul who was present. The Respondents were not present. 8 October 17,2008 Violation(s): Florida Building Code, 2004 Edition, Sec. 105.1 Failure to obtain Certificate of completion for fence permit #2006020489 Violation Address: 1842 48th St. SW, Naples, 34116 A Stipulation was entered into on October 14, 2008 by the Respondents. The Investigator stated the violation had been abated and the Operational Costs of $117.52 were paid. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, and finding the violations did exist but were CORRECTED prior to the Hearing, the Respondents were found GUILTY of the alleged violation. Operational Costs of$117.52 had been paid. 11. Case # CEPM 20080009793 - BCC vs. Ale2ro Owens and Lillie Bell Owens The Hearing was requested by Collier County Property Maintenance Specialist Joe Mucha who was present. The Respondents were not present. Violation(s): Code of Laws and Ord., Article VI, Sec. 22-231, Sub(s), 1-5,9-11, 12B, 12C, 12I-12P & 20 Abandoned and unsecured mobile home maintained in deteriorated condition. Violation Address: 304 Rose Ave., Immokalee, 34142 (NOTE: The Investigator added Subsection 19 to the violations.) The Notice of Violation was posted at the property and the Courthouse on June 30, 2008. The Notice of Hearing was sent via Certified Mail on October 2, 2008. The Investigator introduced the following County Exhibits which were marked and admitted into evidence: · Composite "A" -7 photographs dated June 17,2008 · Composite "B" - 2 photographs of Notice of Violation posting dated June 30, 2008 · Composite "C" - 10 photographs dated October 15,2008 · Composite "D" - 2 photographs of Notice of Hearing posting, dated October 2, 2008 The Special Magistrate noted the Respondents had not responded to the Notice. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondents were found GUILTY of the alleged violation(s) and ordered to either repair the violations by hiring a fully licensed General Contractor to obtain all required permits, related inspections and afinal Certificate of Completion, OR completely demolish the structure by hiring a fully licensed General Contractor to obtain a Collier County 9 October 17, 2008 Demolition Permit, all required inspections and a Certificate of Completion, all on or before November 17,2008, or afine of$250.00 per day will be imposedfor each day the violation remains thereafter, unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. If the Respondents have not complied by the deadline, the County is authorized to abate the violation by contractor bid-out to demolish the structure, and assess the costs to the Respondents. If necessary, assistance may be requested from the Collier County Sheriffs Office. The Respondents were ordered to pay the Operational Costs incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of this case in the amount of$118.22 on or before November 17, 2008. The Respondents are to notify the Investigator within 24 hours of a workday to concur the violation(s) had been abated. 12. Case # CEPM 20080010842 - BCC vs. Dorothv Johnson The Hearing was requested by Collier County Property Maintenance Specialist Joe Mucha who was present. The Respondent was not present. Violation(s): Code of Laws and Ord., Article VI, Sec. 22-231, Sub(s).2-5, 8-11, 12B, 12C, 121-12M, 120, 12P, 12R, 19 & 20 Rental property with several Minimum Housing Violations to include, but not limited to: no hot water supply, no water heating facilities, no heating equipment, electrical outlets & lights not in good working order Violation Address: 1888 Airport Rd. S., Naples, 34112 The Investigator introduced the following photographs which were marked as County's Exhibits and admitted into evidence: · Composite "A" - 25 photographs, dated July 15,2008 · Composite "B" - [stated] 11 [actual count: 12] photographs, dated October 15, 2008 The Notice of Hearing was sent via Certified Mail on October 2,2008 and delivery confirmation was provided by the U.S. Postal Service. The Notice was also posted at the property and the Courthouse on October 3,2008. On July 17, 2008, the Investigator personally served the Notice of Violation and the Property Maintenance Report upon the Respondent's son. He further stated a Lis Pendens had been filed against the property by the previous owners. Cpl. Mike Nelson, Collier County Sheriff's Office, stated the property is near St. Matthew's House, a homeless shelter, and individuals who were not accepted at the shelter (due to possession of alcohol) stayed at the abandoned mobile home. 10 October 17, 2008 On October 16, 2008, the owner submitted a Boarding Permit Application to Code Enforcement. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUILTY of the alleged violation(s) and ordered to board the entire structure by obtaining a Collier County Boarding Permit on or before October 24, 2008 or a fine of $250. 00 per day will be imposedfor each day the violation remains thereafter. The Respondent was further ordered to either repair the items cited in the Property Maintenance Report dated July 15,2008 by hiring afully licensed General Contractor to obtain all required permits, related inspections and a final Certificate of Completion, OR completely demolish the structure by hiring afully licensed General Contractor to obtain a Collier County Demolition Permit with required inspections and a Certificate of Completion, all on or before December 17, 2008, or afine of $250. 00 per day will be imposedfor each day the violations remain thereafter, unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. If the Respondent has not complied by the deadline, the County is authorized to abate the violation by contractor bid-out to demolish the structure and remove the debris to an appropriate disposal facility. All costs for abatement will be assessed to the Respondent. If necessary, assistance may be requested from the Collier County Sheriff's Office. The Respondent was ordered to pay the Operational Costs incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of this case in the amount of$117.96 on or before November 17, 2008. The Respondent is to notify the Investigator within 24 hours of a workday to concur the violation(s) had been abated. RECESS: 11:20 AM RECONVENED: 11:44 AM V. PUBLIC HEARINGS C. Emergency Cases: 1. Case # CO-00192 CEVFH 20080007320 - BCC vs. Clean Ride Limo. Inc. The Hearing was requested by Collier County Code Enforcement Vehic1e-for-Hire Specialist Michaelle Crowley who was present. Assistant County Attorney Marjorie Student-Stirling was also present. The Respondent, Bobby Dwight Calvert, owner, was present and represented by his Attorney, Brandon Perkins. Violation(s): Code of Laws & Ord., Chap. 142, Sec.(s) 142-51(A), 142-58(F)(4) 11 October 17, 2008 Operated a vehicle for hire making passenger pickup in Collier Co. without a valid PV AC issued Certificate to Operate a passenger transport business Violation address: 851 Gulfshore Blvd. N. as destination The Special Magistrate noted the cases (CO 00192-00197) were initially heard on September 19,2008 and continued to October 3,2008. The Special Magistrate stated the issue raised by Respondents Clean Ride Limo, Inc., Bobby D. Calvert, and Neil Walmsley was whether or not the County's Ordinance applied to DOT-licensed commercial vehicles for hire. During the October 3rd Hearing, the Special Magistrate granted th~ County's "Request for Continuance" and ruled the Attorneys were to submit legal position papers [Memorandum of Law] via email by October 13,2008. The Attorneys were to decide and notify Code Enforcement on October 16, 2008 whether or not to add the cases to the October 17, 2008 Hearing Agenda. There was a discussion concerning the documents submitted by each Attorney. The Special Magistrate stated the parties could reference the submittals, if necessary, during the proceeding. The Respondent's position was heard first. Attorney Perkins stated Collier County's Vehicle-for-Hire Ordinance regulates certain vehicles for hire, but commercial motor vehicles are exempt from the Ordinance if a vehicle is operated by a driver holding a commercial driver's license with a passenger endorsement. The seating capacity of a vehicle determines its classification, e.g., if a vehicle seats 15 or less, it is not considered to be a "commercial" vehicle. Commercial vehicles are regulated by the U.S. Department of Transportation and Florida Department of Transportation ("DOT"). DOT issues a number to the company that must be displayed on each commercial vehicle. The number allows DOT to track compliance with its regulations including provisions for insurance coverage, routine scheduled inspection reports, and drivers' records. DOT conducts spot-checks of commercial vehicles to verify compliance for vehicles under its jurisdiction. Due to the extensive regulation by DOT, Collier County created an exception to the Vehicle for Hire Ordinance. The purpose of the Ordinance was to assure that vehicles for hire were safe for public use and carried proper insurance coverage. The Ordinance was drafted, in part, by Assistant County Attorney Tom Palmer. The transcripts referenced in the Respondents' Memorandum of Law were: · PV AC Meeting Transcript dated September 11,2001 (verbatim transcript) · PV AC Meeting Transcript dated April10, 2002 (verbatim transcript) 12 October 17,2008 The Special Magistrate stated she would take Judicial Notice of the documents. Attorney Perkins stated during the 2001 PV AC Meeting, the previously standing Ordinance was amended, i.e., definitions were changed and items added. During the 2002 Meeting, issues were reviewed and revised. He referred to the PV AC Meeting Minutes, dated April 1 0, 2002, at page 52 [See: Pages 5 and 6, the Respondents' Memorandum of Law] and quoted Ms. Pat Baisley concerning regulation of buses and Code Enforcement Director Michelle Arnold concerning exemptions to the Ordinance. On Page 7 [Memorandum], he quoted Assistant County Attorney Palmer regarding Federal authority. Mr. Palmer stated the County's primary concern was to determine if the vehicles were "good vehicles with proper insurance. He stated Collier County decided to regulate vehicles carrying 15 passengers or less, while allowing other governmental agencies and/or laws to regulate commercial vehicles carrying more than 15 passengers. Cited: Fla. Stat. ~ 322.41 - Local issuance of Drivers' Licenses prohibited: "Any person issued a driver's license by the department may exercise the privilege thereby granted upon all streets and highways in this state and shall not be required to by county, municipality, or other local board or body having authority to adopt local police regulations to obtain any other license to exercise such privilege." [See: Page 14 of the Respondents' Memorandum of Law] He stated commercial vehicles are regulated by the Department of Transportation and a driver must obtain a Commercial Driver's License ("CDL") in order to legally operate a commercial vehicle. Iftransportation of passengers is involved, the CDL must also contain a passenger endorsement. Code Enforcement's interpretation: To operate a commercial vehicle in Collier County, a driver must obtain a Collier County license in addition to a CDL. Attorney Perkins stated the intent to the Ordinance was to exclude commercial vehicles regulated by other governmental agencies from supplemental regulation by Collier County. He stated DOT issues a registration number that must be displayed on a commercial vehicle; DOT does not issue a license. The Special Magistrate asked if the Respondents' argument was that the registration process brings the drivers under the jurisdiction of DOT. Attorney Perkins stated the vehicle's seating capacity determines whether it falls under DOT's jurisdiction and compliance with its regulations. 13 October 17,2008 There was discussion concerning DOT's regulations: a new for-hire company is required to complete a Motor Carrier Application for DOT Number and supply information concerning the size and types of vehicles to be operated and the type of business to be conducted, e.g., passenger transportation versus transportation of agricultural materials or hazardous materials, etc. Clean Ride Limo, Inc. is authorized to carry passengers. Also discussed was whether DOT has the authority to conduct criminal background checks. DOT is concerned about crimes relating to the operation of a vehicle such as DUI/manslaughter. Attorney Perkins questioned whether Collier County has the authority to conduct a criminal background check. Cited: Fla. Stat. ~ 125.581 - Certain local employment registration prohibited: "(1) Except as authorized by law, no county or municipality shall enact or enforce any ordinance, resolution, rule, policy, or other action which requires the registration or background screening of any individual engaged in or applying for a specific type or category of employment in the county or municipality or requires the carrying of an identification card issued as a result of such registration or screening, whether or not such requirement is based upon the residency of the person. However, an ordinance that regulates any business, institution, association, profession, or occupation by requiring background screening, which may include proof of certain skills, knowledge, or moral character, is not prohibited by this section, provided that such regulation: (a) Is not preempted to the state or is not otherwise prohibited by law; (b) Is a valid exercise of the police power; (c) Is narrowly designed to offer the protection sought by the county or municipality, and (d) does not unfairly discriminate against any class of individuals. (2) This act shall not be construed to prohibit any employer, including a local government, from investigating the background of employees or prospective employees or from requiring employees to carry an identification card or registration card." Collier County issues special licenses in order to drive for-hire vehicles carrying passengers while Fla. Stat. ~ 322.41 states local government cannot issue drivers' licenses or impose other restrictions. He stated Collier County's argument contains statutory weaknesses. 14 October 17, 2008 He questioned Collier County's concern for the types of vehicles, SUVs, and not for other types of vehicles such as rectangular vehicles. A bus, which is a 38+ passenger vehicle, is not regulated by the Ordinance. He stated the County appears to be primarily concerned with SUV-shaped vehicles, i.e., the 26 passenger Hummer and the 28 passenger Escalade. The Special Magistrate reiterated vehicles with a carrying capacity of more than 15 passengers are regulated by DOT and the State of Florida. Attorney Perkins stated the County cited Fla. Stat. ~125.01(1)(n) for authority to regulate limousines for hire. [See: Page 13, Memorandum of Law]. He pointed out the vehicles listed were taxis, jitneys, limousines for hire, rental cars and other passenger vehicles for hire but the Statute did not refer to commercial vehicles. The Hillsborough County Public Transportation Commission was given authorization by the Florida Legislature, in 2001, to regulate certain vehicles for hire, and the passenger capacities for each category were clearly defined. [See: Page 12, Memorandum of Law]. Local jurisdiction applies to vehicles with capacity of 15 passengers or less. Attorney Perkins stated by removing the seating capacity limit from the definition of "limousine," Collier County confused the issue while trying to cover a perceived gap in the Ordinance. The intention of the drafters of the Ordinance was not to regulate vehicles already regulated by DOT. Assistant County Attorney Palmer stated: "... If we're - if there's this unregulated area here that nobody 's doing it and we kind of do it by default because we're interested in seeing to it that when people being carried around vehicles that their - that their - that vehicles are adequate and at least somebody 's looking the vehicles are adequate and the insurance is in place." [PV AC Minutes, April 1 0, 2002, at Page 56.] The exception in the Ordinance states if vehicles are regulated by another agency, they do not fall under the jurisdiction of Collier County. Vehicles operated by a childcare facility are regulated under the Childcare Laws, not by the County. He stated if the County intended to regulate large capacity vehicles, such as buses, the Ordinance should have been revised to eliminate exemption. The 2001 and 2002 PV AC Minutes stated the County does not regulate vehicles. He stated the County has changed its interpretation and cited the Respondents with approximately $4,500 in fines because DOT's registration numbers are not considered to be a license, as in a paper license. Black's Law Dictionary defines "license" as: "A right granted which gives one permission to do something which he 15 October 17, 2008 could not legally due absent such permission; leave to do a thing which the LICENSOR (the party granting the license) could prevent. Generally speaking, [it] means a grant of permission to do a particular thing, to exercise a certain privilege, or to carryon a particular business or to pursue a certain occupation." Attorney Perkins stated DOT's permission is revocable. If Clean Ride Limo, Inc. operates unsafe vehicles, DOT can revoke its registration number and close down the business. If certain driving-related crimes are committed, the Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles can revoke a driver's license. Clean Ride Limo was granted a revocable permission to operate. He stated Assistant County Attorney Palmer, PV AC Chairman Pease, Vice Chairman Pat Baisley, and Code Enforcement Director Michelle Arnold decided when the Ordinance was amended that if DOT covered commercial vehicles, Collier County did not need to do so. That particular provision of the Ordinance has not been amended in the past six years. He asked if the County was so concerned, why are rectangular-shaped vehicles not regulated? Why would the Ordinance cover a 26-passenger vehicle but not a 38- passenger since both are in the same class of vehicle? He noted the County is apparently not concerned with bus-shaped vehicles. He concluded by asking the Special Magistrate to find the Respondents not guilty of the violations. He further stated the severity of the violations for three Citations would forever bar Clean Ride Limo, Inc. from operating in Collier County. The penalty does not equate with Assistant County Attorney Palmer's statement that the County's goal was to ensure for-hire vehicles were good, clean, safe, properly insured vehicles. The Special Magistrate asked if all six cases emanated from one incident or if different dates were involved. Investigator Crowley stated five of the cases originated on May 9, 2008 and the sixth case originated on May 10, 2008. The County presented its position. Assistant County Attorney Marjorie Student-Stirling stated it was her understanding at the September meeting Clean Ride was supposed to bring its license and provide information regarding what it was authorized to do. Clean Ride provided only a copy ofthe renewal application for the Florida DOT registration number and a statement attested to by a Florida DOT representative. The Special Magistrate stated her intent was for Mr. Calvert to present whatever documentation was available to support the general representation made during the September 19th Hearing. 16 October 17, 2008 [Special Ma~.dstrate Minutes. September 19. 2008: "The Special Magistrate ruled the Case would be CONTINUED. The Respondent was ordered to produce documentation from the State of Florida identifying the activities authorized under the license by September 24, 2008, and provide it to Code Enforcement. Code Enforcement was required to provide its documentation to the Respondent by September 29, 2008. '1 Attorney Stirling stated the County's response confirmed the Ordinance does provide some exemptions if a license is produced. She contacted Lieutenant Jeff Frost, Public Information Officer, Motor Carrier Compliance Office, Florida DOT, who stated: "The Florida DOT number is a registration with the State, the purpose of which is to enable the State of Florida Department of Transportation to track compliance with the Code of Federal Regulation's requirements made applicable to intrastate commercial motor vehicles pursuant to ~ 316.302(1)(b) of Florida Statutes." The definition of a U.S. DOT number was obtained from the U.S. Department of Transportation's website: "A U.S. DOT number serves as a unique identifier when collecting and monitoring a company's safety information acquired during audits, compliance reviews, crash investigations, and inspections." Attorney Stirling stated the website did not refer to a DOT number as a "license." She further stated the County's regulation of public vehicles extends beyond Florida DOT's regulations: · Alcohol and drug testing · Certificate of Safety · Quality of drivers including physical condition and whether or not there is evidence of substance abuse · Hours drivers are permitted to operate - instances of driver fatigue · Equipment on the vehicle and emergency equipment carried She cited to the Code of Federal Regulations ("C.F.R.") 49 C.F. R.393: · Parts and accessories for safe vehicle operation 49 C.F.R. 395: · Hours of service for drivers 49 C.F.R. 396: · Inspections, repairs and maintenance ofthe vehicles 17 October 17, 2008 49 C.F.R. 397: · Transportation of hazardous materials (which is not applicable to the case being heard) Collier County's Ordinance also encompasses: · Esthetic requirements · Requirements for passenger comfort and safety (vehicle interior) · Requires drivers to obtain yearly-renewal LD. cards · Backgrounds checks are conducted including mental health history as well as a criminal background check (as described in the Ordinance) She stated the County-issued LD. is not a Drivers' License because only the State can issue a Drivers' License. She further stated Fla. Stat. ~322.57 requires drivers to pass an examination testing his/her actual knowledge ofthe safe operation of commercial vehicles as well as a road test of his /her driving skill. The County's PV AC Ordinance resulted from concern for the background of the driver in an effort to protect the individual passengers in such vehicles. The Special Magistrate noted Attorney Perkins had previously cited Fla. Stat. ~125.581 and asked Attorney Stirling if the County was arguing it came under one of the exceptions in the Statute regarding background screening. Assistant County Attorney Stirling cited from the Statute: " ... However, an ordinance that regulates any business, institution, association, profession, or occupation by requiring background screening, which may include proof of certain skills, knowledge, or moral character, is not prohibited by this section, provided that such regulation: (a) Is not preempted to the state or is not otherwise prohibited bylaw; (b) Is a valid exercise of the police power; (c) Is narrowly designed to offer the protection sought by the county or municipality, and (d) Does not unfairly discriminate against any class of individuals. Ms. Stirling stated: · moral character is an issue of concern, · the County's Ordinance is not preempted by the State, · the Ordinance is a valid exercise of the police power because the County has an interest in protecting passengers to avoid situations where exiting the vehicle would be difficult, making the passengers "prisoners in a moving vehicle," · the Ordinance is narrowly defined to offer the protections sought by the 18 October 17, 2008 County, specifically to examine the backgrounds of drivers of vehicles for hire, · the County's Ordinance does not unfairly discriminate against any class of individuals. The Special Magistrate requested the specific provision regarding Item (c). The types of crimes were outlined in Section 142-37(c) ofthe County's Ordinance: · moral turpitude types of crimes, · sexual/physical abuse of children, the elderly, and disabled individuals, · pornography, · sale and/or possession of controlled substances, · the Racketeering Act, · driving while intoxicated or under the influence of drugs/alcohol, · reckless driving, · indecent exposure of sexual organs, . murder, · manslaughter, and . kidnapping. Attorney Stirling noted there are some apparent limitations. She further stated: "The Special Magistrate is without jurisdiction to hear any statement, argument, or evidence alleging any revision of a County Ordinance as unenforceable due to conflicts with the United States Constitution or the Florida Constitution, Florida Statutes, administrative agency regulations, or other County Ordinances or Court decisions." The Special Magistrate stated she would not rule on whether or not a law was Constitutional. The reason for the Hearing was to determine whether or not the Respondents are under thejurisdiction of the County's Ordinance. Attorney Stirling pointed out the Respondent allowed thirty days to elapse after the Citation was issued. He did not serve notice that he was contesting the Citation and he did not pay the fines. She stated the purpose of the September 19th Hearing was to request the imposition of fines and liens against the company. Investigator Crowley stated a decision was made to place the matter on the Special Magistrate's Agenda for ajudgment in the amount of the face value of the Citations. The Special Magistrate noted Code Enforcement had the ability to assess the fines without the necessity of a hearing. By placing the matter on the Hearing Agenda, Code Enforcement opened up the matter for a ruling by the Special Magistrate. She stated the parties were entitled to appeal the decision and allowed thirty days after the Order was issued to begin the appeal process. 19 October 17,2008 Attorney Perkins stated Respondent Calvert faxed his written objections to the violations outlined in the Citations to Code Enforcement explaining he/his company was regulated by DOT and Investigator Crowley admitted receiving the document. He further stated the CDL with passenger endorsement allows Mr. Calvert to driver passengers on Florida's streets and highways. He cited Fla. Stat. ~ 322.41, stating no other governmental entity or local board can require him to obtain an additional license. He maintained the Collier County Driver's ill card was, in fact, a license because it was a "revocable permission," and the State/DOT -issued CDL preempts the need for any other license. A CDL allows a driver to transport passengers in a commercial motor vehicle and also to drive any car in a class below "commercia!." If Mr. Calvert is driving a commercial vehicle carrying more than 15 passengers, he is exempt from Collier County's Ordinance. Ifhe is driving a taxi, he is required to comply with the Ordinance. Ms. Stirling cautioned against a broad interpretation of the exceptions. The Special Magistrate asked Attorney Stirling if the County's argument was inconsistent with Assistant County Attorney Palmer's statements and, if so, how could they be reconciled. Attorney Stirling stated Assistant County Attorney Palmer wrote the Ordinance and was one ofthe last persons to revise it. In 2001, Attorney Palmer remarked it could "cut both ways." She further stated Florida requires the DOT number, even though it is a federal number, to perform certain intrastate tracking and auditing activities. The Special Magistrate asked Attorney Stirling if the County's position was that its argument was not inconsistent with Mr. Palmer's statements. Attorney Stirling noted his comments about "cutting both ways" and his references to Federal permits throughout the Minutes. She stated it was difficult to determine exactly what was meant from reading a transcript. The Special Magistrate stated the "cuts both ways" comment was unfortunate since it implied whomever was examining the Ordinance could make the decision as to which way it was cutting. She noted while Mr. Palmer may have drafted the new Ordinance, he did not write the original Ordinance. 20 October 17, 2008 Attorney Perkins stated Code Enforcement Director Michelle Arnold's comment summed up the Respondents' position, i.e., (paraphrasing) "if it's regulated by someone else, they don't have to be certified by us." [See: Page 6, Memorandum of Law] He referenced Assistant County Attorney. Palmer's statement, "What we're interested in to find if somebody is seeing to it that these are good vehicles with proper insurance." [See: Page 7, Memorandum of Law]. Attorney Perkins stated Mr. Palmer mentioned the phrase "federal permit" only one time. He further stated whichever terms were used, e.g., "license," "permit," or "registration," ifthere was regulation by another entity, then Collier County's Ordinance would not apply. He asked the Special Magistrate to review the definition of "license" as a revocable permISSIOn. He requested the Special Magistrate to consider, if she determined Clean Ride Limo did fall under the Ordinance, the statements of Assistant County Attorney Palmer, PV AC Chairman Pease, Vice Chairman Pat Bailsey, and Code Enforcement Director Michelle Arnold during the PV AC Meetings would mitigate any fines assessed to Clean Ride and Mr. Calvert because Clean Ride possessed a DOT number. The Special Magistrate stated she will write an opinion after she examined the various cites referenced during the Hearing. She further stated the thirty-day appeal period would not begin until after the Order was issued. She will consider all the information presented and notifY the parties by email when the Order is available. 2. Case # CO-00193 CEVFH 20080007285 - BCC vs. Clean Ride Limo. Inc. The Hearing was requested by Collier County Code Enforcement Vehicle-for-Hire Specialist Michaelle Crowley who was present. Assistant County Attorney Marjorie Student-Stirling was also present. The Respondent, Bobby Dwight Calvert, owner, was present and represented by his Attorney, Brandon Perkins. Violation(s): Code of Laws & Ord., Chap. 142, Sec.(s) 142-51(A), 142-58(F)(4) Operated a vehicle for hire making passenger pickup in Collier Co. without a valid PV AC issued Certificate to Operate a passenger transport business Violation address: 851 Gulfshore Blvd. N. as destination (Refer to: Agenda # 1, Case # CO-00192 CEVFH 20080007320 - BCC vs. Clean Ride Limo, Inc.) 21 October 17,2008 3. Case # CO-00194 CEVFH 20080007574 - BCC vs. Clean Ride Limo. Inc. The Hearing was requested by Collier County Code Enforcement Vehicle-for-Hire Specialist Michaelle Crowley who was present. Assistant County Attorney MaIjorie Student-Stirling was also present. The Respondent, Bobby Dwight Calvert, owner, was present and represented by his Attorney, Brandon Perkins. Violation(s): Code of Laws & Ord., Chap. 142, SEC.(S) 142-51(A), 142-58(F)(4) Operated a vehicle for hire making passenger pickup in Collier Co. without a valid PV AC issued Certificate to Operate a passenger transport business Violation address: 3950 Radio Rd. as destination (Refer to: Agenda # 1, Case # CO-00192 CEVFH 20080007320 - BCC vs. Clean Ride Limo, Inc.) 4. Case # CO-00195 CEVFH 20080007692 - BCC vs. Bobbv D. Calvert. The Hearing was requested by Collier County Code Enforcement Vehicle-for-Hire Specialist Michaelle Crowley who was present. Assistant County Attorney MaIjorie Student-Stirling was also present. The Respondent was present and represented by his Attorney, Brandon Perkins. Violation(s): Code of Laws & Ord., Chap. 142, Sec.(s) 142-33(J), 142-37(B), 142-58(F)(4) Operated a vehicle for hire making passenger pickup in Collier Co. without first obtaining a Driver ill issued by Collier Co. Code Enforcement Violation address: 851 Gulfshore Blvd. N. (Refer to: Agenda # 1, Case # CO-00192 CEVFH 20080007320 - BCC vs. Clean Ride Limo, Inc.) 5. Case # CO-00196 CEVFH 20080007684 - BCC vs. Neil Walmsley The Hearing was requested by Collier County Code Enforcement Vehicle-for-Hire Specialist Michaelle Crowley who was present. Assistant County Attorney MaIjorie Student-Stirling was also present. The Respondent, Bobby Dwight Calvert, owner, was present and represented by his Attorney, Brandon Perkins. Violation(s): Code of Laws & Ord., Chap. 142, Sec.(s) 142-33(J), 142-37(B), 142-58(F)(4) Operated a vehicle for hire making passenger pickup in Collier Co. without first obtaining a Driver ill issued by Collier Co. Code Enforcement 22 October 17, 2008 Violation address: 851 Gulfshore Blvd. N. as destination (Refer to: Agenda # 1, Case # CO-00192 CEVFH 20080007320 - BCC vs. Clean Ride Limo, Inc.) 6. Case # CO-00197 CEVFH 20080008631 - BCC vs. Clean Ride Limo. Inc. The Hearing was requested by Collier County Code Enforcement Vehicle-for-Hire Specialist Michaelle Crowley who was present. Assistant County Attorney Marjorie Student-Stirling was also present. The Respondent, Bobby Dwight Calvert, owner, was present and represented by his Attorney, Brandon Perkins. Violation(s): Code of Laws & Ord., Chap. 142, Sec.(s) 142-33 (J), 142-34, 142-37(B) Allowed/employed Neil Walmsley to operate a vehicle for hire making a passenger pick up in Collier Co. without first obtaining a Driver ill issued by Code Enforcement Violation address: 851 Gulfshore Blvd. (Refer to: Agenda # 1, Case # CO-00192 CEVFH 20080007320 - BCC vs. Clean Ride Limo, Inc.) VI. NEW BUSINESS: A. Motion for Imposition of Fines: NONE VII. OLD BUSINESS: A. Request to forward cases for Foreclosure / Collections: NONE VIII. CONSENT AGENDA: NONE IX. REPORTS: The following information was read into the record in order to obtain closure for the cases: 1. Case # 2007081165 Case Type: Nuisance Abatement Assessment of Lien - August 1, 2008 Hearing Owner: Teresa G. Oliver & Genevieve C. Zanetti Lien was not recorded, property should not have had lien placed on it, invoice paid prior to Aug. 1, 2008 2. Case # CENA 20080001063 23 October 17, 2008 Case Type: Nuisance Abatement Assessment of Lien - August 1,2008 Hearing Owner: Jorge & Ana Marie Serna Lien was not recorded, owners not responsible for County Abatement invoice. The County vendor abated wrong property. 3. Case # CENA 20080003578 Case Type: Nuisance Abatement Assessment of Lien - August I, 2008 Hearing Owner: Chad Sulkes Lien was not recorded; the case was incorrectly included on the Consent Agenda, invoice was paid prior to Aug. 1, 2008 The Special Magistrate confirmed no further action was required. X. NEXT HEARING DATE - November 7, 2008 at 9:00 AM The Hearing will be located at 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive in the Community Development and Environmental Services Building in Conference Room 609-610. There being no further business for the good of the County, the Hearing was adjourned by Order of the Special Magistrate at 12:50 PM. COLLIER COUNTY SPECIAL MAGISTRATE Brenda Garretson, Special Magistrate These Minutes were approved by the Special Magistrate on as presented _, or as amended _' 24