Loading...
CLB Minutes 01/21/2009 R January 21,2009 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE CONTRACTORS' LICENSING BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY Naples, Florida January 21, 2009 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Contractor Licensing Board, in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m. in REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: Les Dickson Richard Joslin Eric Guite' Lee Horn (Absent) Terry J erulle Thomas Lykos (Absent) Michael Boyd Glenn Herriman (Absent) ALSO PRESENT: Patrick Neale, Attorney for the Board Robert Zachary, Assistant County Attorney Michael Ossorio, Contractor Licensing Supervisor Page 1 AGENDA COLLIER COUNTY CONTRACTORS' LICENSING BOARD DATE: WEDNESDAY - JANUARY 21,2009 TIME: 9:00 A.M. W. HARMON TURNER BUILDING (ADMINISTRATION BUILDING) COURTHOUSE COMPLEX ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO, AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THAT TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. I. ROLL CALL II. ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS: III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: DATE: DECEMBER 17, 2008 V. DISCUSSION: Tom Warren - Prometric Agreement VI. NEW BUSINESS: Charles R. Mc Dermott - Contesting Citation Shelli A. Mehri - Review of Credit Report John Tangorra - Request to Qualify 2nd Entity Olga Kolesnikova - Review of Construction Experience Affidavits VII. OLD BUSINESS: Calvert N. Courtney II - End of Year Profit Loss Statement VIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS: Case #2009-01 James Schuck D/B/A: Marco Marine Construction, Inc. (Cert. #26439) Case #2009-02 Donald Ricci Sr. D/B/A: Marco Marine Construction, Inc. (Cert. #13520) Case #2009-03 Todd Grup D/B/A: TAG. Professional Carpentry, LLC. (Cert. #26457) IX. REPORTS: X. NEXT MEETING DATE: WEDNESDAY FEBRUARY 18, 2009 W. HARMON TURNER BUILDING, 3RD FLOOR (COMMISSIONERS MEETING ROOM) 3301 E. TAMIAMI TRAIL NAPLES, FL. 34112 (COURTHOUSE COMPLEX) January 21, 2009 CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I'd like to call to order the Contractor-- Collier County Contractor Licensing Board meeting on January 21 st, 2009. Any persons who decides to appeal a decision of this board will need a record of the proceedings pertaining thereto and therefore may need to ensure that a verbatim record of this proceedings is made, which record includes that testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. I'd like to open the meeting by starting with roll call starting to my right. MR. JERULLE: Terry Jerulle. MR. DICKSON: Les Dickson. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Richard Joslin. MR. BOYD: Mike Boyd. MR. GUITE': Eric Guite'. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Staff have any additions or deletions to the agenda? MR. JACKSON: Good morning. For the record, Ian Jackson, License Compliance Officer for Collier County. Under discussion, there will be a deletion of Tom Warren from -- regarding the Prometric agreement. And under new business, an addition of Carlos Meran for a review of experience affidavits, of which I've passed out the I application to you. If the board is so inclined to make the change. And that's all staff has. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: What was Prometric for? For what agreement? MR. JACKSON: They're the testing company. And the name -- I believe they were to be here because the name of the company had changed. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I see. Okay. MR. OSSORIO: Mr. Chairman, for the record, Mike Ossorio, Page 2 January 21,2009 Contractor Licensing Supervisor. Years ago it used to be Experior Testing, Block and Associate, and then it became Thompson Prometric. And then Thompson, they split. Now it's called Prometric. And I got to talking to the managing individual down there -- up there in Baltimore. And he wanted to address the board and tell where licensing is and how it's working and sign an agreement to extend-- keep doing the Prometric testing. Because they have actually sold. But I'll keep you informed with that. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay. Could you do one other item for me and find out what type of languages that he gives his testing in? MR. OSSORIO: Prometric is a nationwide company. It's only in English. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Only in English. MR. OSSORIO: Only in English. There is a company called Gainesville Independent, which we use. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Right. MR. OSSORIO: It's a State of Florida company. And they are -- they have multiple ones: English, Spanish, German. They have a variety of different ones. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay. With that said, I need approval for the changes to the agenda. MR. DICKSON: Dickson, so moved. MR. GUITE': Guite', second. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Moved and seconded. All in favor? MR. BOYD: Aye. MR. GUITE': Aye. MR. JERULLE: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Aye. MR. DICKSON: Aye. Page 3 January 21,2009 CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay, I need an approval of the minutes for the December 17th, '08 meeting of last year. Just one cha~ge that I see before we make an approval here is that on the front page, cover page, it's got Michael Ossorio listed as the zoning and land development review, which I think that might be a good place to put him to, but we'll keep him in licensing for a while. MR. DICKSON: Dickson, I'll move to approve them as amended. MR. JERULLE: Jerulle, second. MR. BOYD: Second, Boyd. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Moved and seconded. All in favor, signify by saying aye. MR. BOYD: Aye. MR. GUITE': Aye. MR. JERULLE: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Aye. MR. DICKSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: So moved. Okay, first order of business. Is there a Charles R. McDermott here? (No response.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: No. MR. DICKSON: That was easy. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay, we'll put him on the bottom of the page for the moment, see if he comes in late. Maybe the parking -- by the way, one quick little comment here. This morning -- we've always -- the board members have always had a place to park basically in the advisory committee sections. This morning when I got here there was cones in front of all of the parking places, which I didn't want to park in somewhere I wasn't supposed to, so I didn't move the cones. According to security, that's what they're doing now. The Page 4 January 21,2009 advisory members are allowed to move those cones and park into a spot and put the cone back when you're done. Because they are finding people are parking in the wrong places and wrong cars are parking there, and then consequently they don't have enough parking for everyone. Just so that we're aware. Okay, is there a Shelli A. Mehri available? Would you please come to the podium, please, and be sworn in. MS. MEHRI: Good morning. (Speaker was duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Is that how you say your name, Mehri? MS. MEHRI: Uh-huh. Thank you. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Ms. Mehri, it appears that you've applied for a license here? MS. MEHRI: I've had my license from earlier and I was wanting to reinstate my license. Due to the horrific credit report I have, I'm requesting that I am permitted some time to -- I'm working with Trinity Credit to bring that into a better light. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: You say you've been in business here before? MS. MEHRI: Yes. MR. OSSORIO: Mr. Chairman, just to give you a quick background. Under of the renewal process, you have -- we renew everyone's license September. From September, October, November, December you're considered delinquent. January through January of the next year you are suspended. Come January 1st the following year you're null and void. Unfortunately her case is that she did not renew when she was delinquent. She went suspended. And when you get suspended, the code explicitly says you have to fill out the application again. And you're going to have to take some testing if you require testing. And also if -- you need a credit report. Page 5 January 21, 2009 And unfortunately within her past year, this lady's had some issues with some credit, and I forwarded it to the licensing board. I have no objection of her getting her license back, and with some monitoring, if that's the desire of the licensing board. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Could you just maybe expand a little bit what happened? MS. MEHRI: I wrote you this nice little letter. It's rather embarrassing. I had left -- not left. I'm a faux finisher is pretty much -- I need my painting contractor's license for my base coats only. I do want to do that the legal way. I don't want to sneak behind anybody's back. During the past two last years my husband got in some trouble. We have six children. He was taken from me for several months. My mother died and I ran the family. I made choices. We had several people that almost died. My children were very ill. And my credit reflects choices -- it doesn't show what I paid. And I'm sorry, my girlfriend's having surgery right now and I need to get to the hospital. But the thing is that it's just my clients never had an issue with me. I'm very good at what I do. I'm an artist. But I do want to be legal. I want to be legal. And so over the next six months I'm sure that I can pay these phone bills. And I did lose my house and I did get my house back. I did turn my car in and got something cheaper. But it's just life. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay, that's enough. MS. MEHRI: Thank you. MR. OSSORIO: The sad thing about it is, Mr. Joslin, if she did renew in the suspension period -- I mean in the delinquent period, we wouldn't have had to pull her credit and there wouldn't have been an issue. So -- and that's what happened. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Yeah. Pleasure of the board? MR. OSSORIO: We have no complaints on her in the past history . Page 6 January 21, 2009 MR. DICKSON: What type of painting is she doing? MR. NEALE: Faux finishing. MR. OSSORIO: Well, she has a painting license. But when you're a faux finisher, typically you have a business tax license and it's no construction required or no certificate. But to be a faux finisher, sometimes they go in and they contract for the whole job, to do the base coat, to use a roller. And if you're going to use a roller, if you're going to be doing a base coat, then you have to be a licensed painter. Some faux finishers don't even want to deal with that. Some faux finishers like to do the base coat. This lady likes to do the base coat, so she needs to be a painter. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I wouldn't probably have a problem with allowing this lady to have a license back. I think probably it would be -- and since you've done it before, maybe to put her on six months probation, or six months review of the credit just to make sure that she is trying to pay these off. MS. MEHRI: Definitely. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Would there be a question about that? I understand that you're going through some hardships, so -- MS. MEHRI: Just today's a rough day, so today I really need to CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Sounds like it's been quite a rough year. MS. MEHRI: Yeah. But I appreciate the fact that I got to come first so I can make it to the hospital. So thank you. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I'll put that into the form of a motion, that we approve the ability for her to have a license. And she is to report to staff in a six-month period with her credit report, showing that she's paying off some of these debts that she has now. MR. DICKSON: Dickson, I'll second. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: We got a motion and a second. All in favor, signify by saying aye. Page 7 January 21,2009 MR. BOYD: Aye. MR. GUITE': Aye. MR. JERULLE: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Aye. MR. DICKSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: All. MS. MEHRI: Thank you. May I leave? CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: You can go, yes. Next we have a Mr. John Tangorra. Are you present, please? MR. TANGORRA: Yes. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Would you come to the podium, be sworn in, please. (Speaker was duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Mr. Tangorra, you are here today to qualify a second entity. MR. TANGORRA: Yes. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Would you mind reflecting on that and tell us what you're trying to qualify? MR. TANGORRA: The person that I'm qualifying is recently divorced, and his wife was a qualifier for his company. And he's also an installer for my company. And while being very good at what he does, he doesn't seem to think he can -- he's going to be able to pass the test on his own. He's an Italian immigrant. Been in this country a long time, but he just needs a little help. He's very responsible. Insurances and everything he needs is always current. He also does work for Home Depot Expo. And as far as the settlement, he has to qualify his own company. He has a period of time in order to get that done, and so I offered to do it for him. Very good man, good friend. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: This is a license for wood flooring, is that the case? Page 8 January 21,2009 MR. TANGORRA: Yes. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: He installs wood flooring in homes and MR. TANGORRA: Uh-huh. MR. DICKSON: You mentioned as part of a settlement. What settlement? MR. TANGORRA: Or not a settlement. Their divorce agreement. She -- his ex-wife is the qualifier of his company. MR. DICKSON: Of the divorce, okay, I'm with you. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: In your packet you've also listed here that this gentleman that you -- Claudio is his name, I guess? MR. TANGORRA: Claudio, yes. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: He's an Italian immigrant, I guess doesn't speak a lot of English. MR. TANGORRA: He speaks pretty good. Spanglish. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Then what is the reason why he can't take the test himself? MR. T ANGORRA: He has a problem processing English to Italian if he's trying to read something and figure it out. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: How long have you been in business? MR. TANGORRA: About 10, 11 years. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Any other comments from the board? MR. DICKSON: Everything's in order. I move to approve. MR. JERULLE: Jerulle, second. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Motion and second to approve. All in favor, say aye. MR. GUITE': Aye. MR. BOYD: Aye. MR. JERULLE: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Aye. MR. DICKSON: Aye. Page 9 January 21, 2009 CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: It's approved. MR. TANGORRA: Thank you. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: You're welcome. MR. NEALE: Mr. Joslin? CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Yes, sir. MR. NEALE: When you call the question, if you could, even though it is a unanimous vote, say all in favor, and then also any opposed or -- I think just so we get it both on the record. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I'm sorry. Okay. Moving right along. This is a good one. Olga Kolesnikova. MR. DICKSON: That was pretty good. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Is that close? (Speaker was duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Did I kill your name too bad, Ms. Olga? MS. KOLESNIKOV A: Well, you just -- it's all right. So short story -- THE COURT REPORTER: Excuse me, I need you on the microphone. MS. KOLESNIKOVA: So short story-- CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Ms. Olga, we're going to have to take this and put it into evidence I think -- MS. KOLESNIKOV A: Okay. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: -- before it's submitted. MS. KOLESNIKOV A: Short story. I'm Russian. A long time our company was working without any advertising -- CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: One second. If you could get just a little closer to the microphone so we can understand you, and speak a little slower. MS. KOLESNIKOV A: Okay. Long time I used to work without paying advertising, referrals only. And we ran out of work quick a year ago. So it was time to get license. The same situation like previous person. I didn't go to school to Page 10 January 21,2009 study English. So basically most difficult part for me, to pass the exam. When I finally pass exam for painting, I thought that's it, no more. Contractors come for me. So when I apply for license, there is still lines, what did you do last 10 years. I didn't throw (sic) what I did all those 10 years. So I got the license with -- start advertising. Nothing happened. No business. Nobody calls. Calls just from unemployed painters mostly, or something small like 300. Baseboard painting, something. You know, we have to make a living. So next idea was to get to -- to get on Home Depot, least for tile setting. Okay, so I got to get back to books, take another exam. And when I apply for tiling license, Michael just check painting application and tiling application. And on painting I didn't just explain what did I do, just 10 years. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay, so what license are you really trying to get? MS. KOLESNIKOV A: Now I want floor covering and tile/marble. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay. MR. OSSORIO: What license does she already have? You have a painting, am I correct? MS. KOLESNIKOV A: Painting. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: She has a painting license now? MR. OSSORIO: She has a painting license. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Active? MR. OSSORIO: Yes. MR. JERULLE: Can you explain why she's here? MR. OSSORIO: Unfortunately we're seeing a lot of people that already have a license in painting, tile and marble. Now they're coming in for more licensing. And one of the things, when you already have a license, we Page 11 January 21,2009 consider you a painter, we're assuming that you're painting. She's come in for a tile -- she's taken the tile and marble exam and she applied for a tile and marble exam. Unfortunately when I checked her references, I checked one. The gentleman said basically that no, she didn't do tile work for her (sic) and that's why we're here today. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: So she doesn't have the credentials or the affidavits to -- MS. KOLESNIKOV A: I can explain the situation. All this time I was self-employed. All this time. You can't spell my name, nobody can. Trust me. I was self-employed. I did work for other contractors and was paid from company to company. I now was employed to anyone. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: So you've been a self-employed person for quite some time. MS. KOLESNIKOV A: Well, since '92. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Well, do you realize that here in Collier County that for every trade that you do that does require a license, that you have to have a license to qualify you to do that trade? And the problem that you have here that I see is that you're asking us to give you a license in which you have no real affidavits of experience to do because you're telling us here under oath that you have been doing this with -- not working for a company but working for yourself. And apparently unlicensed. MS. KOLESNIKOV A: But I did work for contractors. I did work for contractors. First three years it was like we got here without any money, without English, without anything. We start working like crazy. You know, we used to work 70,80 hours per week. Just day off we have --like we get here in January. First day off we had like in June. We start working Sundays in 2002. We had our first vacation 2004. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Have you ever worked for a company Page 12 January 21, 2009 per se, like for another flooring company or somewhere where you want to do the trade in? MS. KOLESNIKOV A: You can do work or you can't do work. If you can do work, people know you can do work, people call you, you do the work. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Gentlemen? MR. OSSORIO: You've never taken the tile and marble exam, have you, just the floor covering? MS. KOLESNIKOV A: I pass tile and marble. MR. OSSORIO: You have to make sure we clarify. Every single certificate has to take the business procedure test. And some trades require you to take the trades exam. Unfortunately there are some multiple licenses that just require the business procedure test. And we weigh heavily on the applicant's experience. And she's going for not tile and marble, but she's going for floor covering, which is carpet and vinyl. MS. KOLESNIKOV A: Well, actually, I want both. MR. OSSORIO: Have you taken the tile exam? THE COURT REPORTER: Please get on the microphone. MS. KOLESNIKOV A: Yes, I did. I got 82. MR. OSSORIO: Okay, so you've taken the tile and marble exam. MS. KOLESNIKOV A: Yes. MR. OSSORIO: I recommend that we -- she'll go back and try to get more affidavits of companies who she worked for, and then we'll see if she can reapply again to show experience. And we can work on that. MS. KOLESNIKOV A: Okay. MR. NEALE: I would -- what I would recommend the board do is just table it for a period and let her come back, rather than deny it. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Table it till next month? MR. DICKSON: Dickson, so moved. Page 13 January 21,2009 CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Joslin, second. I have a motion and a second. All in favor, signify by saying aye. MR. BOYD: Aye. MR. GUITE': Aye. MR. JERULLE: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Aye. MR. DICKSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Motion carries. What we're going to do is we're going to put you on a -- basically a hold for a little while, maybe 30 days or till the next meeting -- MS. KOLESNIKOV A: Okay. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: -- and see if you can come up with more affidavits of experience that you can get from your people that you work for, and then possibly get them to Mr. Ossorio or to staff. And if those are in line and probably in good order, then you probably wouldn't even have to come back before the board. He can make the decision on his own if you have the experience. If not, then yes, you will be back here again. MS. KOLESNIKOV A: Okay. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay? MS. KOLESNIKOV A: Okay. MR. OSSORIO: Mr. Chairman, one of the things that we're seeing, an influx of someone being a licensed painter or someone being floor covering, now they're trying to get back into licensing and getting more licensing. And we're assuming since you're a tile and marble company and you're your own business, we're assuming you're doing tile and marble. Now you're coming in with a painting -- nothing particular of Page 14 January 21,2009 this lady, but now we're seeing people come in and say well, I want to be a painter. And we're assuming that you're tile and marble, where do you get the experience in painting. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Exactly. MR. OSSORIO: So that's the things we're -- going across my desk. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I understand what you're saying for sure. This is a prime case for it. MS. KOLESNIKOV A: Can I say something? Back in Russia we used to do -- it calls -- profession calls finisher. You come to somebody's home and do everything, from ceiling to floor. Doesn't matter. Painting, tile, wood. We can -- we could replace windows, doors, put baseboards, crown moldings, it's finisher. You don't have -- CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I can understand what you're saying as far as being in Russia. But as of now, you are in the United States, and you do live in Collier County, and we have a few other rules -- MS. KOLESNIKOV A: And I can do -- CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: -- that you must follow. MS. KOLESNIKOV A: -- anything. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay. Maybe the general contractors test is maybe what you need to take. MS. KOLESNIKOV A: Well, actually, I was trying. I got all the books. I have original application from 2003. I just couldn't pass the exam. I didn't have enough English. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay. Well, keep trying. MS. KOLESNIKOV A: Okay. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: All right. Well, we've got a new one here that was presented. A Carlos Meran, is it? Are you present? MR. OSSORIO: Mr. Chairman, while we're waiting on Mr. Meran, I reviewed his application, and one of his experience letters -- CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: You want to give this to the County Attorney (sic), please, and then he can -- or to the court reporter. She Page 15 January 21, 2009 can enter it in. MR. NEALE: She gets one. (Speaker was duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Mr. Meran, I'm not really sure why you're here. Would you explain the reason why you're in front of us. MR. MERAN: I was an employee ofB&W Paving Contractors, Southwest Florida. I worked for the guy for over three years. I run the company, the estimate, the paving, the trucking, all the equipment was parked at my house. On April 19th of '08, he decide not to be with me anymore. On that day I say fine, no problem. You go your way, I go my way. I was trying to get into a different field. I didn't want any conflict with the guy. I was exporting equipment to the Dominican Republic, that's where I'm from. And things slow down a little bit. I contact Jose Moya, Asphalt Paving. He's right here. And we went into business together. Thing got slow, like, you know, the economy is really bad. So I decide -- we decide to break up. No problem, no anything like that. And then I decide to get my license, because I have all the equipment. When I was working for B&W Paving, I was half owner, half, owning all piece of equipment that was there. Everything was under my name. Everything was at my house. And he was paying me with checks, that I got proof of. I had a house under my name that was his. He was living at the house. He was paying for the house. I had nothing to do with the house. The house was not mine. I could have kept the house if I wanted to. What I don't own, I don't want it. So I gave the house back to him. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay, I don't want to interrupt you, but let's get to the point of why you're here. Page 16 January 21, 2009 MR. MERAN: One condition was I need a letter from you saying that I work for you for the time that I work. He refused to give me that letter. And I say, so if you don't give me that letter, you're not going to get the house. I spoke to Mike about it. He called to verify my credential on my application. I guess Michael told me that Charles Willey told him that I didn't work for him. So that's what I'm here for. And I got plenty of proof that I worked for the guy. And Equipment Source, the only owner of B& W that they knew until the time that we broke up, it was Carlos Meran. Jose Moya, the only guy that they knew in Golden Gate Estates running B&W Paving was Carlos Meran. So I don't know what's the problem here. Maybe he doesn't want no competition, he doesn't want no other people licensed out in the Estates. Competition is good for the people. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: How did B&W pay you? MR. MERAN: They pay me by check. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: By check? MR. MERAN: Self-employed. Never pay no taxes. I was out on the W-2. Never gave me a 1099, here's what you make last year. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Mr. Ossorio, any input from you as far as what's going on here? I'm not liking what I hear, for sure. MR. OSSORIO: One of the things that the licensing office, we do, is check references and check experience and check affidavits. Mr. .Moya (sic) has two affidavits: One for three months and one from B&W Paving. Unfortunately B&W Paving has sent me a letter rescinding his affidavits and basically saying that the only thing Mr. Meran ever did for me was drive the vehicle. Much as I'd like to go ahead and issue him a license, unfortunately I'm bound by the code. If he withdraws his application and Mr. Meran doesn't show me more experience or another letter of affidavit, I have to forward it to the licensing board. Page 17 January 21, 2009 He did prove -- he did present evidence to you today with some information that's intriguing, and I'll leave it at that. And Robert Zachary can talk to you a little bit more about it, ifhe needs to. MR. MERAN: You guys haven't seen the proof that I got that I work for the guy. That's in the other package. Not as a truck driver, running the company, running estimate, paving, sealing. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I understand what you're saying. But the problem is is that Mr. Willey is not willing to fill out an affidavit that says you did this. And unfortunately we have to go by what's in front of us. We can't go by testimony or -- unless you had some other type of proof that you could give to us. MR. MERAN: I got plenty of proof that I work-- MR. NEALE: If I may just refer the board to Section 22-184(B) and (C) of the code. And particularly section C. It's when an applicant is referred -- application is referred to the contractors licensing board, the board shall take testimony from the applicant and shall consider other relevant evidence regarding whether the application meets the requirements of this division, meaning that section of the code. Upon the evidence presented by the applicant and the contractor licensing supervisor, the board shall determine whether the applicant is qualified or unqualified for the trade in which the application has been made. So the board can consider all relevant evidence outside of the affidavits. The affidavits are one form of proof, but they certainly are not the only form, nor are they necessarily conclusive. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Well, in the package that I have, I am not finding anything else that's conclusive, unless I'm missing something here. MR. MERAN: I got one more letter. MR. NEALE: What I would -- if I may, Mr. Meran. MR. MERAN: Sure. MR. NEALE: What I would suggest to the board is that you ask Page 18 January 21,2009 Mr. Meran -- because he brought along a fairly substantial packet of information, it appears -- if possibly the board would have him walk through that with you. It might be more revealing than simple testimony. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: All right. MR. NEALE: I think he's got it. Did the board -- it should be entered as evidence, yeah. You've got a copy of it? THE COURT REPORTER: Yes. MR. NEALE: He's going to hand out to the board copies of a packet that he's brought. MR. ZACHARY: If you give a copy to the court reporter, we could -- MR. NEALE: The court reporter has one. MR. MERAN: She got one. MR. ZACHARY: We could have that marked as an exhibit. MR. NEALE: And if the board could move this into evidence as an exhibit for this hearing. MR. DICKSON: Dickson, so moved. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I need a second. MR. GUITE': Guite', second. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I have a motion and a second on the table. All in favor of bringing this into evidence, signify by saying aye. MR. GUITE': Aye. MR. JERULLE: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Aye. MR. DICKSON: Aye. MR. BOYD: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: So moved. Page 19 January 21,2009 MR. ZACHARY: And Mr. Meran, if you could go through this packet with the board and explain to them what it is. If you could explain to the board what this is. MR. MERAN: Page number one, this is a letter from Dark Peak LLC, dated January 3rd, 2005, 7:00 a.m. Presented by Marcia Tinberg and Charles Willey. On that day, they was talking about going to a partnership with me. Marcia Tinberg, Carlos J. Meran, to buy property. The second page -- the third page dated March 15th, 2005. The bottom paragraph, Marcia Tinberg and Carlos Meran informed Fred L. Baietto, partner in B& W Paving and Asphalt, on March 15th, 2005 that Carlos Meran and Marcia Tinberg will be doing paving in Collier County under Charles Willey license. February 20, 2005, Marcia -- fourth page. On February 20, 2005, Marcia Tinberg agreed to buy equipment with Carlos 1. Meran for paving business, Southwest Florida, as well as equipment for clothing business in Florida. This are -- the fourth page. This is check proving -- dated March 13, '08, made out to Carlos Meran that was on job that was done. Four (sic) page, also checks prove that it was paid for paving. And if you go down the list, those are the proof that I have that I work for the guy paving. Not only driving, but paving. MR. GUITE': And this man says that you were only a truck driver for him? MR. MERAN: Yeah. MR. GUITE': And you got checks for $11,000? For a truck driver, he makes pretty good money. MR. MERAN: I got a check -- CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I need to get ajob like that. MR. MERAN: -- on the very last page of those Colonial Bank letterhead dated March 28, '08, made out to Carlos Meran for $38,770. That was the final payment. If you read on the bottom, it say Page 20 January 21,2009 equipment. That was the day that he paid me for the half of the ownership that I have with him. That was the last check made out to me. And then on the following page, I got plenty of checks made out to Charles Willey. 2,525, 2,200, $2,000. Keep down the line, I got checks from Carlos J. Meran made out to B&W Paving Contractors, Southwest Florida. 1,490, 12,500 made out to Charles Willey. 6,160,4,500. B&W Paving Contractor paying Carlos Meran, 1,560, 1,560. And if you keep on flipping the pages, you will see that I was not a truck driver, like he say. I got the experience when I got together with Jose Moya. He could tell you more about my knowledge of paVIng. I got one more proof that I was not only driving for him, but we bought a LeeBoy 7000 Paver. We pay $70,225 for that paver. Half of that, it was my money. All the equipment insurance was under my name, Carlos J. Meran, B&W Paving Contractor. My address was there. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay, that's enough for the moment. MR. JERULLE: I have a question about your letter of April 3rd, 2008 in here. MR. MERAN: April3rd? MR. JERULLE: B&W Paving Contractors. From the law offices of Glantz and Glantz. MR. MERAN: What was that? MR. JERULLE: From the law offices of Glantz and Glantz. MR. MERAN: Okay. That letter went to my house, made out to B&W Paving Contractor, attention Charles Willey. A problem with a driveway. Proof that he used my address. That's what I'm trying to show here. MR. JERULLE: Okay, but there was a problem with this lady's driveway. Page 21 January 21,2009 MR. MERAN: Yeah. I don't know if they solved the problem, because he never -- we never talked to each other after we broke up. I didn't do anything to the -- MR. JERULLE: But you were half owner in the company. MR. MERAN: Yes. MR. JERULLE: And you don't know if you resolved this lady's problem. MR. MERAN: At this time on April 3rd, we received the letter like two weeks after we broke up. We broke up on March 19th. MR. JERULLE: January of2009 and you don't know if this lady's driveway has been repaired? MR. MERAN: Oh, no, I don't know. Because I was not -- we were together up to April 19th, 2008. And-- MR. JERULLE: But the date -- MR. MERAN: -- this was after the fact. MR. JERULLE: -- of the letter is April 3rd. MR. MERAN: Yeah. And this -- MR. JERULLE: Prior to you breaking up, you received the letter. MR. MERAN: No, no, no, that was after. The last date that we worked together was March 19th. This letter is dated -- MR. JERULLE: You said April, I'm sorry. MR. MERAN: -- April, 2008. I don't know if this was resolved. And the proof of the checks, the last check for $38,000 -- MR. JERULLE: When you said you broke up, how did you break up? MR. MERAN: He just told me one day we don't want to be in business together, something that we -- MR. JERULLE: Did you own shares in that corporation? MR. MERAN: I was not on any way, shape or form on any piece of paper ofB&W Paving Company, even though that I own half of the equipment. Page 22 January 21,2009 MR. JERULLE: So you owned half of the equipment, not half of the company. MR. MERAN: Right. MR. JERULLE: And you don't know if this lady's driveway has been repaired to date. MR. MERAN: Not to my knowledge. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I've got one other question. On the next page, it doesn't have a page number, but there is another promissory note that was made out to you? MR. MERAN: Yeah. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: It appears it must have been from B&W that owes you or -- did they sign a promissory note to you for $75,000; is that correct? MR. MERAN: I never lent any money to Charles Willey. This was made up. Why? Through the divorce. MR. DICKSON: Mr. Neale, let me speak to you for a minute. Where I sit right now is yeah, he pretty well showed that he's got experience. But when these things come to light, everything gets opened up. And I see possibility, strong possibility of workers' compo fraud, I see strong possibility of tax evasion. I see all sorts of issues that are now more pressing than an issue of whether he has expenence. So I'm looking legally from you. He came in here to verify experience, but I got other issues now. MR. NEALE: Well, the section that I read to the board clearly sets out that the board is reviewing the application for his competency under this section of the code, whether he is qualified to be a contractor. Therefore, the board can look at the other aspects. I think as far as the tax issues and such, the tax issue is probably one that is not within the purview of the board. But certainly workers' comp issues are directly related to the board's review of an application. Page 23 January 21, 2009 What I would suggest to the board is if they do have concerns in those areas, since he only had the opportunity to prepare for an experience affidavit, is that you could -- if the board so decides, have him come back with a response to the other issues the board sees, or the board is certainly within its power and ability to approve or deny this application, based on the evidence presented today. Because the board really is only considering the evidence as presented today and in the packet. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Would that be a better way to do it at this moment, just deny the motion at the moment and then let him come back with more information and maybe come before us again with affidavits that he can get? I understand where you're going. MR. DICKSON: At the same time, he's not a member of the corporation. MR. NEALE: No. And that -- you know, even though he asserts under oath that he was a partner, but not on the documents, officially and legally he was not a partner, so therefore, unless he was the qualifier, which he was obviously not-- MR. MERAN: No. MR. NEALE: -- Mr. Willey was the qualifier, he doesn't have responsibility under the code for workers' compo issues, for tax issues or anything like that, because it's the qualifier that this board would look to if there were any such violations. What the board is looking to in this instance is solely his qualifications to obtain this license, not what may have happened with another qualifier in a prior business. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Just like Mr. Jerulle said regarding the affidavit -- or the information that he had no knowledge of taking care of this woman's problem with the driveway. He would have no knowledge of doing that. MR. NEALE: Well, whether he had knowledge or not-- CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Not knowledge, but-- Page 24 January 21,2009 MR. NEALE: -- it was not his responsibility, because he wasn't the qualifier. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Right, exactly. So it doesn't matter to him if it was taken care of or not in reality. MR. MERAN: That letter was not directed to me. Did I open the letter? Yes, it went to my address and I opened the -- MR. DICKSON: Mr. Meran, we're not even talking about that, so don't interj ect, okay? CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Yeah, this is not something-- MR. DICKSON: What I'm talking about, and I'm madder than hell about, is contractors that operate like this. When all five of us are contractors up here and we try to play by the rules and play by the book and do our taxes and do our insurance, but we've got people out here operating like this that undercut us every day and put us out of business because of dishonesty. That makes me mad. MR. MERAN: I have knowledge of that. I didn't have a phone number for me to call. I call a few people. He was the only guy getting the job, getting the job, doing all the paperwork. My involvement with the company, B&W Paving, it was to go out there and do the job. Call me every morning, where we going? Go do this, do that. MR. DICKSON: That's what I was resolving with him. My anger is not directed at you right now. MR. MERAN: Okay. MR. DICKSON: But I do have quite a bit of anger when I see checks like this. MR. MERAN: There's plenty more. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: And a sizeable amount of money. MR. JERULLE: Mr. Ossorio, has he passed a business-- MR. OSSORIO: Yes, he's met all the requirements to pass the trades exam and the business procedure test. MR. DICKSON: Is there a license -- is there a -- oh, he did his Page 25 January 21,2009 trade also? MR. OSSORIO: He did his trade. He's filed for worker's compo exemption, he has liability insurance and has a corporation. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: A workers' compo exemption. And he's going to go do an asphalt driveway. By himself? MR. OSSORIO: Well, you can have either workers' compo exemption or you can have staff leasing or you're going to have employees through a payroll service. MR. MERAN: I got my certificate of liability for Workmen's Compo Which that letter was faxed to the board, and it was never put in my application. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: So you have insurance and Workmen's Compo now? MR. MERAN: Yes. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay, that's enough. MR. DICKSON: I move that we approve his experience. Grant the license. MR. GUITE': I'll second, Guite'. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: We've got a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. GUITE': Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Aye. MR. DICKSON: Aye. MR. BOYD: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Any opposed? MR. JERULLE: Nay. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Motion carries 4-1. MR. DICKSON: Do we have the right, Mr. Ossorio, to forward these documents to workers' compo division and the state for any action they feel -- deem necessary? MR. NEALE: Yeah, I think the -- frankly since they are now public record, since they've been placed on the public record here, that Page 26 January 21, 2009 becomes sort of almost irrelevant. Since they are public record, they can be forwarded anywhere, because anybody can access them. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Do we need a motion to do this, or can this be done -- MR. NEALE: I would suggest leaving that in Mr. Ossorio's purvIew. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay. MR. MERAN: I got one more thing to say. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: No. MR. NEALE: Please don't. MR. OSSORIO: Mr. Chairman, one of the things that we do in our office is that under the contractor licensing, if Mr. Meran wishes to fill out a formal complaint, we would do the investigation ourself on a misconduct. So if Mr. Meran wishes to do so, he could do so. But he would have to testify to the board of the extent of his businesses with B& W Paving. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Let's just say he chose not to. Would it make a difference? MR. OSSORIO: Well, then it would be hearsay, and it wouldn't be -- we need direct testimony for that particular charge. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Is this packet not now into public records and information, or no? MR. OSSORIO: I think this hearing is closed. But the -- to open up an administrative complaint, we would need more. MR. NEALE: Yeah, the hearing is -- yeah, all of the information in the packet is public record. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Public record, correct? Right, so that could be used in Michael's continuance of what's going on. MR. NEALE: The county can -- you know, I mean, within the purview of the code, the county can initiate an investigation on its own. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay. That would be my Page 27 January 21, 2009 recommendation to Mr. Ossorio then. You're done. MR. MERAN: One more thing to say. The owner ofB&W Paving is here today. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: We really don't want to hear that right now. You're done and your license has been okayed. MR. MERAN: Thank you. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Good luck to you and make sure you keep your nose clean. MR. MERAN: I will. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay, we'll reverse one time. I'm still looking for a Charles R. McDermott. Are you present? MR. McDERMOTT: Yes. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Mr. McDermott, would you please be sworn In. (Speaker was duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Before me it looks to me like I have a request for a hearing on citations you received. Two citations, apparently. MR. McDERMOTT: Just one, sir. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: One citation. I'm showing two. MR. OSSORIO: Mr. Chairman, just to clarify, the one he's contesting, the 4281, the 2149 was 2005. I don't think Mr. McDermott is contesting that. Obviously you can't, it's over 10 days. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I got you, okay. This is a citation for power washing a roof. Do you want to explain what happened? MR. McDERMOTT: Yeah, I contracted with the homeowner to do a power wash of the pool area and driveway, and I was approached by a painter. And he said, if you want that roof done, I can do it for you, I've got a painting license, blah, blah, blah. Handed me a card. Told the homeowner. Homeowner said, yeah, might as well get Page 28 January 21,2009 it done, too. So the kid was on the roof and he was doing the work. And I was approached by the -- a code enforcement guy, and I was ticketed for it. He originally wanted to ticket the fellow who was on the roof, but the fellow said he didn't have a license, he wouldn't give his license. And he said, well, I've got to see a license from somebody real fast or else they're going to call the police and -- CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: So the ticket was issued to you then. MR. McDERMOTT: Right. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Did the man work for you? MR. McDERMOTT: No. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Not at all. MR. McDERMOTT: I met him just about a day before that, and he gave me a card. MR. JERULLE: Who paid him? MR. McDERMOTT: Well, I gave him the portion of the money from the homeowner. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: So in reality you did pay him. You did have him work for you. MR. McDERMOTT: Well, you know what I mean? I wasn't going to get two different checks from the homeowner. I just -- CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay. MR. McDERMOTT: The fellow was -- you know, he took off and, you know, it was over. MR. JERULLE: The homeowner paid you -- MR. McDERMOTT: Well, yeah, I mean, I had to finish my portion. MR. JERULLE: Excuse me, I'm asking a question. The homeowner paid you to power wash the pool area and the roof -- MR. McDERMOTT: And driveway. MR. JERULLE: And the driveway. And the roof -- Page 29 January 21,2009 MR. McDERMOTT: And his money for the roof. MR. JERULLE: And you hired this other gentleman to do the roof. MR. McDERMOTT: Okay. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay. MR. JERULLE: No, I'm asking the question. MR. McDERMOTT: Well, you know what I mean? It was there and he came up to me and he presented a card. I thought he was a legitimate painter. Seemed to have all the look and the credentials and the -- said, you know, we can get this done for you and we can take care of your homeowner and -- MR. JERULLE: Is that a yes? MR. McDERMOTT: I guess it's a yes. MR. DICKSON: He's not even a legitimate employee or a legitimate subcontractor. MR. McDERMOTT: I guess not. MR. JOSLIN: He might have got the card down at Circle K off the bulletin board. MR. McDERMOTT: No, I didn't get this. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: No, not you. I'm saying your friend that you met, however you met him. MR. McDERMOTT: Well, yeah, he approached me. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Well, I guess that will be a lesson to you then. You better watch who you have come and do work for you when you've already contracted to do the job, if you're getting paid. Because once you pay that person -- now, if the homeowner would have paid him, it would have been a different story, see, it wouldn't have been on you. It may not have been correct or the right way to do a process, but nevertheless you wouldn't be here today facing this fine. MR. DICKSON: I move that the citations stand. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I second the motion. Motion and a second. All those in favor? Page 30 January 21,2009 MR. JERULLE: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Aye. MR. DICKSON: Aye. MR. BOYD: Aye. MR. GUITE': Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Motion carries. You have to pay the fine, sir. Sorry. MR. McDERMOTT: All right.. Okay, that ends all the new business items. We've got one item on old business. Mr. Calvin Courtney, are you present? I don't see him. MR. OSSORIO: Mr. Chairman, Calvin Courtney left me a message yesterday basically saying that he had some sort of emergency. And I would like to go ahead and postpone this till the next meeting. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay. So moved, we'll do it. All right, we've got a bit of a -- cases with public hearings. People need a break at all? No? You good? Okay. All right, let me give you a quick insight of what goes on here. This is public hearings. First of all, is James Schuck from Marco Marine Construction here? MR. SCHUCK: (Indicating.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: You are here. Would you please come to the podium on this side. What's going to happen here, we're going to have some basic opening statements from both parties. Then after each party gives those opening statements, we'll have each side present their case to us. We'll hear testimony from those two parties, in which case you'll be able to ask questions of the witnesses, if there are any witnesses Page 31 January 21, 2009 available or any witnesses going to testify. In which case then we're going to have a quick closing short statement, closing statements. And then we'll close the public hearing and then the board will deliberate here on the conclusions of law and the final penalty phases, if there is any. MR. OSSORIO: Mr. Chairman, just before we get started with this particular public item, I believe what the county wishes to do, and maybe Robert Zachary can help us out, is that this gentleman will stipulate to the charges, of all charges that were cited under the Administrative Code, under the misconduct. I would like to have Ian have an opening statement, walk you through what happened, and Mr. Schuck will go ahead and contest (sic) to what he did. And on the back of your exhibit, you'll see a stipulation charge, and that will be something you can deliberate on after. So we'll try to expediate (sic) this, ifhe wishes to plead this case. That's something Pat Neale will talk to you about. MR. NEALE: Yeah. And this -- it's not unprecedented for this board to obtain and receive a stipulation, an agreed -- where essentially this is a simpler way to resolve the case, if the board so agrees to the terms of the stipulation. For lack of a better term, it's similar to a plea bargain in a criminal court, whereby the party agrees to plead to a certain charge, based upon an agreed upon set of penalties. And so what the board can do is obviously the board has the power to approve or deny the stipulation, but it can certainly expedite this hearing in that if the board hears the opening statement, then hears the stipulation to the charges, reviews the penalties and feels that that's appropriate, then the board can just adopt the stipulation and agreement as being the findings of this board, and that can be converted into a normal order. And the penalties and everything would go forth as if a regular hearing had been held and an order was issued. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: One question. How does the stipulation Page 32 January 21, 2009 evolve? How did this come up? Or who put together the items of penalty phase that he agreed to? How did this come about? MR. OSSORIO: Mr. Chairman, one of the things we looked at this year is -- one of the things that I looked at was we've noticed that there's maybe more cases this year than we had in the previous years in the past. And to come to better resolution and to expediate (sic) the licensing board and the hearings, we try to follow suit with code enforcement, the board does. Their staff usually comes with a recommendation or stipulation. And either the board agrees to it or they don't agree to it, whatever you prefer. But that's something that we would like to get forward into. I mean, with the board's pleasure, of course. MR. DICKSON: May I discuss something? CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Yes, you sure may. MR. DICKSON: Before we get into this, this goes back before your time, Michael. I think Michael-- or Mr. Joslin and Mr. Neale and I, I think were the only three that know it. But this nasty word longshoreman insurance. This county has been through this years and years and years ago. One contractor could afford it, none of the others could. We fought it. We had cases. We reversed cases. We changed it. And the county finally came down with a rule that it's a federal act, it's not a county act or a state act. We finally came down with a rule that longshoreman insurance would not apply in Collier County because these canals were not considered navigable waterways. Do you remember this, Mr. Neale? MR. NEALE: Yep. MR. DICKSON: So is longshoreman insurance an issue in this case? MR. NEALE: I don't know. Is longshoreman's on this or just regular insurance? CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Longshoreman. And I think Workmen's Page 33 January 21, 2009 Compo was also listed on here, no? MR. DICKSON: It's listed in the summary. MR. NEALE: Yeah, what did finally resolve, though, is that -- and my understanding, and of course as you correctly point out, it's been a number of years ago. But my understanding is that at the end of the day it came out that yes, longshoreman insurance was going to be required and there was nothing we could do about it. MR. OSSORIO: Mr. Dickson, just to -- maybe I can clarify. I was here when we had all those meetings. And if that was what we talked about to strike it from the code, we would surely have done so. Clearly it's in the code. We do have a building block that clearly states that you need longshoreman insurance. And longshoreman insurance has changed over the years, referencing payment and different class codes. The federal government's finally realized that, you know, they're not building this bridge or this barge or this whatever, this widget they're doing on these huge bays. And it has been more affordable. I've been to many marine associations, and the marine industry has really got involved in Tallahassee and really pushed for a new class code. And maybe Marco Marine can talk to you about that. But there's more that meets the eye here. And we understand longshoreman insurance is expensive, but it is in the code, and we do have a building block and we do have a letter from the state and also from the federal government that it is mandated, that longshoreman is needed on navigable waterways. So I was in those meetings many years ago. MR. DICKSON: But does it apply to all the contractors that work on these docks? MR. OSSORIO: Oh, yes. MR. NEALE: Yeah, electrical contractors and everything. MR. DICKSON: See, that applies to me. I was told by the county when all this was going on and they made this final rule Page 34 January 21, 2009 because some of these docks have roofs on them. MR. OSSORIO: There's no doubt about it. There is a policy. Like I said, there is a building block. And we take -- and we look at if you're working -- if you're working from the shoreline and it's incidental to what you're there for, electrical or if you're doing some plumbing work or something out there to the dock, longshoreman is not needed. But if you're building this huge levy or this dock or this something with a big barge, it's called a floating device. So if you're on a floating device or near a floating device, you would need to have longshoreman insurance. And we take that into consideration. MR. DICKSON: You're not talking a dock in the backyard? MR. OSSORIO: Well, we're talking a dock. We're talking if they -- if a barge pulls up and it's on a floating device, unfortunately we have to abide by the code and the building block and what the code tells us. If you're on a floating device and you are incorporated, you need to have longshoreman insurance. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: But that's not the question. Mr. Dickson is asking about a -- a lot of these docks have basically maybe undercover docks where a boat can drive in -- MR. OSSORIO: If you are a navigable-- CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: -- that needs a roof. Now, ifhe has a roof on it -- MR. OSSORIO: If you're working-- CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: -- that's not floating. But would he need longshoreman insurance? MR. OSSORIO: No, he would not. Like -- I'll go ahead and specify it again for you. If you're using a floating device. If you're on a barge, a boat. If your feet are not on the property or on land, you need longshoreman insurance. So in other words, if I'm a roofing company and I'm replacing a little piece of shingle on a dock, no, we're not going to make you get longshoreman insurance. But if you were Page 35 January 21, 2009 telling me that you're a marine contractor and you come into the City of Marco Island or City of Naples or Collier County requires to do this $50,000 dock extension with this barge, you're going to need longshoreman insurance. If you don't have it, you're not going to get a building permit. MR. DICKSON: Okay. I thought it was resolved another way. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay. So then you don't need the insurance is what we're saying. MR. DICKSON: As long as Mike's there. MR. NEALE: As long as you're not operating off a barge. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Or off a barge. Okay. All right, let's begin, I guess with all that said. Maybe we'll get some answers from these two gentlemen here. Ian, you want to begin with the opening statements -- or be sworn in, I'm sorry. And also, before we start that, we'll need to have a motion to place this packet into evidence. MR. DICKSON: So moved, Dickson. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Second? MR. BOYD: Second, Boyd. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: All in favor? MR. BOYD: Aye. MR. GUITE': Aye. MR. JERULLE: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Aye. MR. DICKSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Motion carries. MR. OSSORIO: Mr. Chairman, just to clarify, can we combine Case No. 2009-2 and 2009-1, or is that possible? MR. NEALE: I would suggest to the board to do that. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I think we could do that. Page 36 January 21,2009 MR. NEALE: There's precedent to do that where we combine-- CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay. Then we need to have Mr. Ricci come up and be sworn in also. (All speakers were duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: And also, would you make the motion amended to bring in Case No. 2009-1 and 2009-2. MR. DICKSON: I'll so amend my motion. MR. GUITE': I'll second it. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Motion and second. All in favor? MR. BOYD: Aye. MR. GUITE': Aye. MR. JERULLE: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Aye. MR. DICKSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Motion carries. Mr. Ian, go ahead. MR. JACKSON: Thank you. These cases obviously involve insurances. Not only is the longshoreman's one facet of the issue here, but the Workers' Compo is another facet. There was a lapse of coverage in which the company was knowingly performing work for a substantial period of time. I've heard dates from the insurance company up to 10 months. And I have documentation from these gentlemen that show it might not have been 10 months. But the bottom line is that there was a lapse of coverage, and the qualifiers that are here before you acknowledge the lapse of coverage and acknowledge the fact that they were working without the coverage, Workers' Compo and longshoreman's. That sums up Count I. Page 37 January 21, 2009 And Count II, there was one case that I know of them performing work without an issued building permit by Collier County. Due to the fact they couldn't have the building permit issued because of the lack of coverage and the status of their license. And I know as we've touched on, we have the stipulated agreement. If it would please the board, I'll read that so it's entered into the record. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: At this moment, maybe we don't have to do that right now. Let's wait for just a moment and let's hear the statements of their side. And then we'll get down, maybe we can skip a lot of these episodes and go right to that -- MR. JACKSON: Certainly. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: -- particular section. MR. OSSORIO: Just want to make sure, Michael Ossorio, Contractor Licensing Supervisor. This was a call-in complaint with the cooperation with the City of Marco Island and the City of Marco Island building official. I guess what transpired between the longshoreman and the Workers' Compo issues -- and every contractor knows that once you have a policy, you need to pay your premium. If you don't pay your premium, they cancel you. And unfortunately knowingly, not these qualifiers, but the owner of Marco Marine Construction knew about there was no coverage and they continued to work. But we did get an investigation and we did get a complaint referencing them working in Marco Island or close to Marco Island without any building permit. And that the reason why, like Ian Jackson said, was they could not get a building permit because their certificate was inactive because of the insurance. But they had been working for many months with the insurance company to come into compliance. And that's the issue. The issue is that they knowingly did not pull a building permit Page 38 January 21,2009 on this exhibit. You can look at the exhibits, if you'd like, the photographs. Clearly depicts that you need Workers' Compo and you also need the building permit to do this work without it (sic). So this is a willful code violation on their part. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: One quick question. Does workmen's compensation and longshoreman's insurance, are they insured by the same company? I mean, is it workmen's compo and longshore combined together when they get insurance of this nature for a marine contractor, or is it two different companies? MR. JERULLE: It could be both. MR. OSSORIO: It could be both. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Either way? MR. JERULLE: Yeah. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay. MR. OSSORIO: On this particular case, I think Marco Marine was dealing with one insurance carrier, and they had longshoreman insurance and they had Workers' Compo coverage. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: So they could have had workmen's compo through one company and longshoreman's through another company, if they chose to. MR. OSSORIO: Yes. And that does happen. And we get -- we are the certificate holder and we put that in the database. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay. Okay, let's hear the opening statement from -- which one's going to speak first? MR. NEALE: What I would suggest to the board is based upon the way this case has been presented is that you have the two respondents testify that they agree to and accept the terms of the stipulation agreements as set out. That can be a basis. If the board then subsequent to that decides that they want to go further and pursue the case in full, then they could go from there. But I think for purposes of this, I would suggest that you have them testify that they accept the terms of the stipulation agreement as set out. Page 39 January 21,2009 CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I just wanted to hear the reasons why, but that's okay. Okay? Then Mr. Ricci and Mr. Schuck, you are present, right? MR. RICCI: That's correct. MR. SCHUCK: That's correct. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Have you read the stipulation and agree to the stipulation that was given to you regarding this case? MR. RICCI: Yes, we have. MR. SCHUCK: Yes, I have. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: And do you agree to the penalty phases that were given to you or promoted (sic) to you at the moment? MR. RICCI: Yes, we have. MR. SCHUCK: Yes, I have. MR. NEALE: And what I would just suggest is that you also get them to testify on the record that they are agreeing to the stipulation agreement based upon their own free will and that they are not being coerced in any way, shape or form to sign this stipulation agreement. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: During the stipulation agreement you were in no way coerced into signing it, you did it on your own free will ? MR. SCHUCK: That's correct. MR. RICCI: Yes, we did. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: And this is all for the record, okay? MR. RICCI: Yes. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I would still like to hear just one quick scenario, just one quick synopsis from you of the reason of why you didn't have insurance. Was what the reasons of why you let this insurance lapse so long. Maybe a week or two or 10 days or 20 days, okay, but for 10 months? MR. SCHUCK: We're a family owned and operated business and we had a family member that was handling this. And apparently she did not pay, I think that Ian says from December of 2007. But we Page 40 January 21, 2009 got a certificate of completion from a Collier County job dated May 22nd. So we don't know when it was abandoned. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: When it lapsed. MR. SCHUCK: Not paid or what. We found out August 27th when we tried to apply for a seawall permit that we had no insurance. At that time we had a change of ownership. The lady that was handling this is no longer with us. And at that time we tried to get the insurance. Well, because it had lapsed, we had an audit. They wanted $34,000 up front. So to come up with $34,000 -- we're a ma and pa organization. We don't have backers, so we had to continue on. And we had to get contracts. And most of the people we've had contracts with, we told them our predicament. We didn't try to dupe anybody. All our employees knew about it. It was because of one person's negligence that we're in this situation. And it took us until January 2nd, I think, to come up with the insurance. Because they asked for $34,000. We gave them $34,000, and then they asked -- they came back and asked for another $20,000. And so in the meantime, you know, we thought we had it. And then they said we sit on you for 30 to 45 days before we issue your Insurance. So it took a long time to get the insurance. Yes, we worked without it. We take full responsibility of it. And as far as working without the permit, I mean, we had deadlines to keep, these people knew it. I mean, if we would have stopped work, I mean, we had open permits, you would have had a bigger mess than what you have now. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: You would have had a bigger mess if someone would have got hurt on that job. MR. SCHUCK: We would have took care of them. MR. JERULLE: Are we allowed to ask questions? CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Sure. Page 41 January 21, 2009 MR. JERULLE: Who writes checks for your corporation? MR. SCHUCK: At that time Patti Price. And now it's D.J. Ricci, Jr. and myself. MR. JERULLE: So Patti Price wrote the checks? MR. SCHUCK: She was the one that up until September was handling the affairs. MR. JERULLE: Was she the owner? MR. SCHUCK: That's correct. She was the president. MR. JERULLE: She was the president and she wrote checks. Did you review the checks? MR. SCHUCK: Sometimes, yeah. Not all of them. Believe me, we were -- asked these questions of her, and she said she had it all in her head. Didn't want any of our help. MR. JERULLE: But you're the owners of the company. MR. SCHUCK: Qualifiers, yes. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Is there a different owner of the company versus the qualifier? MR. SCHUCK: She's still the owner. It's in to get taken out. It's in the lawyers hands. So she's removed from it. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: So technically she is the owner. MR. SCHUCK: Yeah, she's the president -- CHAIRMAN JOSLIN : You're just qualified, so you're taking -- MR. SCHUCK: No, no, she's not the qualifier-- CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: No. You both are the qualifier. MR. SCHUCK: -- Mr. Ricci is. Yes, that's correct. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Is there any other qualifiers in Marco Marine besides yourselves? MR. SCHUCK: Donald P. Ricci, Jr. He has a state license. MR. RICCI: If I may add, Don Ricci, Sr., we've been in business since 1980. Been a long time. Probably the longest longevity of any marine contractor in Collier County. We've got a good reputation. Page 42 January 21,2009 Probably 15,000 customer base. We made a decision as a family. We had 15 employees that we would have put out of work in making this decision. We were told every day that tomorrow, tomorrow, tomorrow we'd get it. They put it into an audit situation. They said they could take up to nine months to do this, you know, which was ridiculous. We spoke to some legal counsel on it. They said, you know, you're at their mercy. And so we applied for that permit in Goodland. It was ready. They called and told us to come and pick it up. So we knew that with the work that we had proposed to do was in approval of Collier County. And Mr. Schuck and I and my son, we made a decision that just bad times, that we would, you know, try to get this job completed so we could afford to pay the workmen's compo And as we all know, to come up with, you know, 60 some thousand dollars overnight is a tough deal. We even went to the banks to try to get loans and bridge loans, and we were turned down in every case. We never had this problem at all in the company. MR. JERULLE: The audit is based upon work performed in the past. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Right. MR. RICCI: That's correct. MR. JERULLE: So you didn't pay the insurance in the past. MR. RICCI: No, actually, we had -- MR. JERULLE: This is for -- when you're doing an audit, you're doing an audit on the last year's income, and you're audited on the value of the work and then you're paying the insurance on the value of the work. So you've already been paid this money. MR. RICCI: Yes. In some respects, yeah. MR. JERULLE: Mr. Ossorio, does he have any past fines? MR. OSSORIO: Not that I know of. Not Mr. Schuck or Sr. Junior there might be some issues that we handled internally, but Page 43 January 21,2009 nothing out of the ordinary, no. MR. NEALE: And I would note to the board that we probably should have the terms of the -- I'm sure the board's reviewed the stipulation agreement, but I would suggest that the terms of that agreement be read into the record, just so that the board can have them in front of them to hear them. Because I think once the board sees those, that will allay some of your concerns about where we're going here. So maybe you could have county staff to read the stipulation. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Well, okay, if there's no further-- MR. RICCI: On those items, if it's possible to grant us some more leniency in time. Because the business atmosphere obviously is not any better than it was, you know, six months ago. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Thank you, we'll take that into consideration. MR. RICCI: Appreciate it. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: At this time then we'll close the public hearing, if there are no further comments from either side. We've heard the case, we've heard testimony, and the respondents have pretty much admitted the guilt, so we can go right into reading the stipulation and going into the final phases. MR. NEALE: I would suggest that prior to closing the public hearing, that the board have the stipulation read into the record and then subsequently after that close the public hearing -- CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay. MR. NEALE: -- just so that it's on the record as part of the hearing. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay. Mr. Ossorio, would you like to read the stipulation that you have entered into with these people? MR. OSSORIO: I'll let Ian Jackson do it, since he's the narrater of it. . CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Mr. Jackson? Page 44 January 21, 2009 MR. JACKSON: This is Case 2009-1, Board of County Commissioners, Petitioner, versus James G. Schuck, d/b/a Marco Marine Construction, Incorporated, Respondent. Comes now the undersigned, James Schuck, on behalf of himself or as representative for respondent; enters into this stipulation and agreement with Collier County. As to the resolution of notice of hearing and reference, Case No. 2009-1, dated for the 21st of January, 2009. In consideration of the disposition and resolution of the matters outlined in said Case No. 2009-1, for which a hearing is currently scheduled for January 21 st, 2009, to promote efficiency in the administrative complaint process, the parties hereto agree as follows: One: The violations noted in the referenced administrative complaint are accurate, and I stipulate to their existence. Therefore, it is agreed between the parties that the respondents shall : One: Pay operational costs in the amount of $500 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 60 days of this hearing. Two: Pay civil penalty in the amount of $5,000 within 60 days for Count I, 4.1.11, failure to maintain at all times with an insurance company authorized to do business in the State of Florida; the limits of liability and other categories of insurance as required by this ordinance. Three: Pay civil penalty in the amount of $1,500, within 60 days for Count II, 4.1.18, proceeding on any job without obtaining applicable permits or inspections from the city building and zoning division or the county building review and permitting department. Four: Serve a probationary period of 12 months in which any violation of Ordinance 2002-21, as amended, would result in the immediate suspension of Collier County Certificate 26439, and a hearing of the violation at the next scheduled Contractor Licensing Board. Page 45 January 21, 2009 Five: Successfully complete an approved business and law test within the 12-month probationary period. MR. OSSORIO: Mr. Chairman, just for clarity purposes, it's going to be suspension of Collier County Certificate 13520 as well. And Donald P. Ricci, Sr. is before you today in Case No. 2009-2 and 2009-1, since we combined them both. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay. Isn't there two licenses involved, though? MR. OSSORIO: They are. And I thought there'd be the two certificates. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay. MR. OSSORIO: Unless you want to read both stipulations in the record. MR. NEALE: No, just read the one. And since the terms are identical just have them apply to both. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay. So the terms and conditions of the stipulation will apply to License No. 13520 and also 26439. MR. JACKSON: Correct. MR. DICKSON: You said suspended. I thought it was probation. MR. NEALE: Yeah, it's probation, not suspension. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Probation, right. MR. DICKSON: Correction. Okay. MR. OSSORIO: Well, under section four, immediate suspension of Collier County Certificate if he violates within the next scheduled Contractor Licensing Board. So there is a suspension if he violates anything under 2006-21, as amended, within a 12-month period. MR. DICKSON: Okay. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay, one other item. In the meantime, by the stipulation of the 60-day period is to pay the amounts of -- the fines that are due. What about applying for new permits or gaining new permits or getting inspections on jobs that may be undergoing right now. Is this going to be something that we're going to allow to Page 46 January 21,2009 keep going? MR. OSSORIO: Well, one of the things under the -- obviously every single contractor has to get a building permit, and that's expected. So if he violates something that's grievous or something we feel he violated at the code under to -- then we will bring it forward to the licensing board for further action. But every single contractor knows that before they start work, especially the Florida Building Code says you have to apply for a building permit and be issued one by the building official, so -- and get all inspections and pass all inspections. So that's a given. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay, one question for Mr. Ricci and Mr. Schuck. Have you obtained workmen's compo insurance and the longshoreman's insurance you need now? MR. SCHUCK: Yes, we have. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: You have gotten it? MR. SCHUCK: That's correct. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay. And that's on file with staff? MR. SCHUCK: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay, great. Okay, this stipulation being read into the record. Then as of now, we can close the public hearing. And you both gentlemen can have just a seat right in the front just for a moment. Right now we're going to go into deliberation with the board members to review the stipulation, if any changes or additions need to be done or added. What's your thoughts, gentlemen? MR. DICKSON: I move that we follow the county's recommendation. They know more about it than we do. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: We've got a motion to accept the county's stipulation agreement. MR. BOYD: Second, Boyd. Page 47 January 21, 2009 CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: And I have a second. Is there any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: No discussion, I'll call for the vote. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. MR. BOYD: Aye. MR. GUITE': Aye. MR. JERULLE: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Aye. MR. DICKSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Motion carries 5-0. MR. DICKSON: Now you need your short form. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Yeah, where is it? MR. NEALE: Because this was a stipulation, I think that in this particular case just the reading of the stipulation and the fact that the board voted on it is adequate and I don't think the board has to go through the full reading and findings of fact, conclusions of law. Because the board has accepted a stipulated agreement. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: We can just enter this-- MR. NEALE: So we'll enter the stipulated agreement. And I'll draft an order showing that the board has adopted the stipulated agreement as entered into between the county and the respondents. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Great, okay. Good luck to you. MR. DICKSON: I remember those two gentlemen. They've been around a long time. They're good people. And they were part of that longshoreman thing when we had all those marine contractors in here. Yeah, they're just -- there's not many marine contractors left in this county . We're -- I think you can count them on one hand. MR. OSSORIO: Well, if you remember, Mr. Dickson, that Page 48 January 21,2009 Marco Marine Construction was very focal point about amending our Collier County ordinance too as well. They wanted it. So it wasn't like they didn't want it. MR. DICKSON: Yeah. Well, they're -- I remember those two. They are good people. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: And they do good work. They've been around a long time. MR. DICKSON: Yeah. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: All right, we have another case before us. It's Case No. 2009-03. Todd Grup, d/b/a T.A.G. Professional Carpentry, LLC. Are you present? MR. GRUP: Yes. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Would you come to the podium and be sworn In. (Speakers were duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Also, I will need a motion to enter the Case No. 2009-3 into evidence. MR. DICKSON: Okay, Dickson, so moved. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Second? MR. GUITE': Guite', second. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Motion and a second. All in favor? MR. BOYD: Aye. MR. GUITE': Aye. MR. JERULLE: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Aye. MR. DICKSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Motion carries. Once again, we're going to go through the routine with the Page 49 January 21, 2009 opening statements. The county can present its side first and then we'll go to your side, Mr. Grup. MR. GRUP: Okay. MR. GANGULI: Good morning. Investigator Rob Ganguli. G-A-N-G-U-L-I. Collier County Contractor Licensing. The summary of this case is as follows: On December 19th, 2008, I, Rob Ganguli, Collier County License Compliance Officer, made a field observation at a job site at 6080 Dogwood Way in Golden Gate of carpentry work consisting of installation of roof trusses on an addition to a single-family home being built under owner/builder permit 2008062042. The three workers on-site stated they were employed by T.A.G. Professional Carpentry and provided a business card for Todd A. Grup. My on-site research revealed a delinquent Certificate No. 26457 issued for cabinet installation contractor. Further research revealed that Mr. Grup had scheduled the examinations for roof contractor and carpentry contractor several times, but had been unsuccessful in passing either test. This activity construes a violation of Collier County Ordinance 2006-46, Section 4.1.2, which regulations contracting to do any work outside the scope of his or her competency. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Mr. Tug (sic), would you like to comment or give your opening statements as to what happened? MR. GRUP: Yes, I would. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Just a short synopsis now. We're not going to get into the case just yet. Just a short overall picture of what went on. MR. GRUP: Well, I was -- on the day in question I was contacted by Mr. Ganguli. He called my cell phone and had asked me if I was working at 6090 Dogwood Way. And I had explained to Ron that -- or to Rob that I had supplied Page 50 January 21, 2009 the guys for the owner, but they don't work for me. And I wasn't acting as the contractor on that job by any means. The next door neighbor's a friend of mine, Tim Hayes. So the way I ended up over there finding out about the project was I was over there speaking with Tim Hayes. The owner next door was doing the addition. He came out. We met. He was a veteran, I'm a veteran. He was looking for some carpenters to do the job. I said sure, I'll help a battle buddy out, and I'll find you some carpenters. But they don't work for me. I didn't pay them. And I explained this to Rob. But I couldn't -- there was no communication. There was a big communication gap between he and I. So that's why we're here today. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay, we'll go back to Mr. Jackson (sic). Any evidence or any other witnesses or any other testimony you want to give that's going to correlate what you're saying? MR. GANGULI: Mr. Joslin, Mr. Ganguli. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Mr. Ganguli, I'm sorry. MR. GANGULI: I'd like to present my case, if I may. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: You may. MR. GANGULI: Okay, Board of County Commissioners, Collier County, versus Todd A. Grup, Case No. 2009-3. Mr. Grup's charged with contracting to do any work outside the scope of his or her competency as listed on his or her competency card as defined in this ordinance or as restricted by the Contractors Licensing Board. On Friday, December 19th, 2008, I made a field observation at the previously mentioned address of three workers, Federico Cruz, Ishmael Mendoza and Jorges Mendoza installing trusses on an addition to the rear of a dwelling under owner/builder permit 2008062042, issued to a Craig A. Layton, who was not working on the job site at the time of my visit. When I asked the workers about their employer, they stated they Page 51 January 21, 2009 worked for T.A.G. Professional Carpentry, and Mr. Cruz provided a business card for Todd A. Grup. My investigation revealed a delinquent Certificate No. 26457 for cabinet installation contractor issued to Mr. Grup. My continuing research resulted in no licensing information being discovered for carpentry. A phone call was made to Mr. Grup, at which time I stated my concerns about framework being out of the scope of his license. During our conversation, Mr. Grup repeatedly inquired about what I was doing on his job site, insinuating I had no authority to be conducting an inspection there. Mr. Grup then responded that he was a business partner of the Certified Building Contractor Jack D. MeN air of McNair Construction LLC, CBC-059162, and that the three workers performing the carpentry there were employed by McNair Construction. In a phone call to verify this, Mr. McNair stated that he was a corporate officer of Mr. Grup's company but was unaware of this particular job, was not in contract with the homeowner, and had not provided any employees to do any work at this location. A notarized affidavit, included in your evidence packets, was later obtained from Mr. McNair attesting to the same. In a phone call to the homeowner, Mr. Layton, he stated that although no written contract existed, a verbal agreement had been made with Mr. Grup to perform work on his project for, quote, a few thousand dollars. Mr. Layton further stated that he had never been in contract with McNair Construction, LLC. A notarized affidavit obtained from Mr. Layton attesting to the same is also included in your evidence packets. Prior to the end of the business day on December 19th, 2008, Mr. Grup appeared at the contractor licensing office and reactivated his delinquent cabinet installation certificate. Page 52 January 21, 2009 After doing so, Mr. Grup requested a meeting, which was also attended by Investigator Ian Jackson. In this meeting Mr. Grup insisted that his business arrangement with Mr. Jack McNair allowed him to operate in this manner, but he would change any contracts over to McNair Construction, if it would satisfy the concerns of this office. On Tuesday, December 23rd, 2008, Mr. Grup again attended a meeting at the contractor licensing office and was personally served with a notice of this hearing, which he refused to accept. Service of this notice was also sent to him via certified mail, which he also refused. Mr. Ossorio, if I recall correctly, refusing a certified notice of hearing is a violation in and of itself. Mr. Grup isn't being charged with that, I just want it to be on file. Gentlemen, a similar stipulation as Mr. Jackson presented in the first case was offered to Mr. Grup prior to this hearing being initiated. Some of the terms of it, other than the usual operational costs and fines that are normally imposed, were a six-month suspension of the certificate and a probationary period after its reinstation. And Mr. Grup was not interested in any of these terms. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: This was a stipulation you tried to make before he got here? MR. GANGULI: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: What was that offer again? MR. GANGULI: The specifics involving his certificate were a six-month suspension and after reinstatement of the certificate a probationary period of 12 months. MR. GUITE': Was there any fines involved? MR. GANGULI: Yes, sir, the standard fines, $5,000 and $500 in operational costs were also included in the stipulation. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay. Mr. Grup, let's turn it over to you for a moment, and let's hear the presenting of your case. MR. GRUP: Well, I would just like to say again that I didn't Page 53 January 21,2009 contract to do this work. I found him some carpenters. These people don't work for me. We didn't make a contract. When the owner was approached, Craig Layton, he was approached by Michael Ossorio in the tone of, well, if you sign the affidavit and say that you hired these people, then I'm going to revoke your license -- or I'm going to revoke your building permit. So of course he's not going to say that he hired these people. He paid them. I mean, we have no contract. He's got an $11,000 impact fee on his permit. So he threw me under the bus. MR. NEALE: If I may note that what Mr. Grup has just offered is purely at best secondary hearsay. He's testifying to something that he was told that Mr. Ossorio told to someone else. MR. GRUP: Well, Mr. Oss -- excuse me, but Mr. Ossorio said that that's the way he was going to explain it to Mr. Layton. He goes, well, if Craig comes into this office and signs this affidavit, I'm going to tell him that we're going to revoke his building permit. MR. NEALE: Nonetheless, that is hearsay. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Hearsay. Did you indeed -- Mr. Grup, did you indeed send these people over to this house to do the work? MR. GRUP: I found him the carpenters, and they arranged to do the work. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Did you physically know the person that they were going to do the work for? MR. GRUP: No. No, I don't. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: So it could be taken -- if that was the case, it could have been taken, correct me if I'm wrong, but that gentleman could have been in a sense misled thinking that you were a contractor that could contract this, and you sent him three or four people to go and do the work for him. MR. GRUP: No, I don't believe so. He could not have been misled. Page 54 January 21,2009 You know, I explained to him, I said sure, it'd probably cost you a couple thousand dollars in labor. And this is a 1,500 square foot addition, so -- CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: So what's to tell this gentleman that these are my guys, they work for me every day -- MR. GRUP: I didn't say that. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: -- and I'll send them over there on a Saturday and Sunday and do the work, and it may cost you a couple thousand dollars but that's okay. MR. GRUP: Sir, I wasn't even on the job. I didn't -- they don't work for me, I merely was helping a battle buddy out. He's a veteran, I'm a veteran. I thought I would try to help him out. That's the only reason the occurrence happened. MR. JERULLE: Rob, the cards that you show in the packet here, where did you get those cards? MR. GANGULI: Mr. Jerulle, this particular card was -- or the photocopy of this card is was what was handed to me when I inquired of the workers of who they were employed by. MR. JERULLE: So those workers knew you and probably worked for you in the past hanging cabinets? MR. GRUP: No. No, they did not. Those cards were on the job site on a little ledge in the owner's backyard, and that's where Rob found them. These guys don't know me; these guys don't work for me. MR. JERULLE: Why were your cards on the job site? MR. GRUP: Because I put them there. They were in my pocket, so I put them on the job site in the owner's backyard. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: But just a moment ago you testified that you sent these men there -- MR. GRUP: I did. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: -- but they don't know you? So you just picked up two strangers off the street -- Page 55 January 21,2009 MR. GRUP: Listen -- CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: -- and sent them to the job? MR. GRUP: -- I said they don't work for me. And these guys were found at Able Body, okay? They're carpenters. People stand outside of Able Body every day looking for work. All I did was find these guys for him, give them the address. I didn't transport them, I didn't pay them. The owner paid them. I did not pay them. The owner paid them. Actually, the owner had the neighbor pay them. I have nothing to do with this other than finding him carpenters that can do the job. And that's the honest to God's truth. MR. OSSORIO: Mr. Grup, you did testify that you never visited that site, and then you just said that you were there on the site dropping off business cards. MR. GRUP: I was there on the site -- well, I did testify that I was there. I was there at the neighbor's house, Tim Hayes, speaking to Tim Hayes. That's how I was approached by Craig Layton. And that's how I had discovered that there was an addition being built in the backyard. The yards are connecting. I mean, they live on big lots that are connecting. MR. JERULLE: And Tim Hayes paid Able Body? Is that what you said? MR. GRUP: Tim Hayes paid the carpenters for Craig Layton. MR. DICKSON: This is the identical story, the one you told us before. You remember the last time you were here? MR. GRUP: I remember the last time I was here for the roofing work that I did in '04. MR. DICKSON: Following Hurricane Wilma. MR. GRUP: It's not the exact story. How is it the exact story? MR. DICKSON: Well, you didn't know the guys that did the repair that you repaired on Neapolitan Way, that little old lady who came in with her granddaughter, until the little old lady testified that you're the one that did the proposal and you were the one that was Page 56 January 21,2009 strong arming her to -- MR. GRUP: That's absolutely inaccurate. And you can go back into the records and look, but you're absolutely inaccurate, Mr~ Dickson. MR. DICKSON: I know, everything you do is absolutely perfect and you have an excuse for it. And quite honestly, I'm -- MR. GRUP: I don't feel comfortable being ridiculed by you, sir. I don't think that it's respectful, and I'd like respect here. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay, let's stop that comment right now. MR. DICKSON: I'm not trying to be respectful. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I'm just telling you the facts. You have been before us, correct? MR. GRUP: I have one time, yes. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Thank you, that's enough. Let's talk about this case now. How about a closing statement, Mr. Jackson -- Mr. Ganguli, I'm sorry . MR. GANGULI: No worries. MR. NEALE: By the way, they still get the opportunity to cross-examine each other. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Oh, I'm sorry. Yes, you are right. Is there any questions that you have to ask of Mr. -- MR. GANGULI: No, sir. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Any questions you'd like to ask the county, Mr. Ganguli? MR. GRUP: I have no questions. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: No more questions? MR. GRUP: No. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Once again then, we'll go to closing statements. MR. GANGULI: Mr. Joslin, my closing is as follows: This is the second time that Mr. Grup has appeared before the Contractor Page 57 January 21, 2009 Licensing Board for a similar violation. On May 29th, 2008, Mr. Grup also received a $500 citation from Field Supervisor Allen Kennette after he was again discovered contracting outside the scope of his license. In the event that the board concludes that a violation exists, it will construe the third time that this type of activity has come to the attention of our office. I'd like to add to the record that when tested for a certificate of competency, Mr. Grup received a passing grade of84.5 on the business and law examination. This should be eonsidered reflective of a clear understanding of the privileges and restrictions of the licensing that he currently holds. If it is decided that a third violation exists, it presents a complicated set of circumstances for the county to consider in order to make a recommendation, and I will abstain from doing so. MR. NEALE: I would also like to just make a point to the board at this point in that Mr. Grup, as part of the -- actually, let me wait until later when the board's considering this matter. Please go ahead. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: All right. Closing statement from you, Mr. Grup? Just to wrap up what's going on. MR. GRUP: I would just like to again say that I did not contract the work. There's no contract. I didn't get paid. The owner paid the men that were working on the job. And this is completely unfair, in my opinion. And that's about all I can say. So I'm at your mercy. But that's it. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: That's it? Okay. Nothing else, board members? No other questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay, at this time then I will go ahead and close the public hearing. I need a motion to do so. MR. GUITE': I'll make a motion. MR. DICKSON: So moved. Page 58 January 21,2009 CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: So moved and seconded. All those in favor? MR. JERULLE: Second. Did somebody second? CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Yes. MR. JERULLE: All right, sorry. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: We got a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. BOYD: Aye. MR. GUITE': Aye. MR. JERULLE: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Aye. MR. DICKSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Motion carries. Public hearing is closed. You can have a seat, if you'd like. Mr. Ganguli, you can have a seat. Just so you know, this is a section where the board now will deliberate on what's going on in the testimony we've heard. MR. NEALE: If I may, I'll do my-- CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Yes, Mr. Neale. MR. NEALE: -- whole thing with the board here. In these cases, as is the norm, I try and give the board a little bit of guidance on how to review the case and the method -- the applicable way -- methodology to cover the case. And in this case, the board shall ascertain in its deliberations that fundamental fairness and due process were afforded to the respondent. However, pursuant to Section 22-202.G.5 of the Collier County ordinance, the formal Rules of Evidence as set out in Florida Statutes shall not apply. The board shall consider solely evidence presented at this hearing in the consideration of this matter. It shall exclude from its Page 59 January 21,2009 deliberations irrelevant, immaterial and cumulative testimony. It shall admit and consider all other evidence of a type commonly relied upon by a reasonably prudent person in the conduct of their affairs. This is whether or not the evidence so admitted would be admissible in a court of law or in equity. As noted, the hearsay may be used to explain or supplement any other evidence in this type of case, but by itself it is not sufficient to support a finding in this or any other case unless it would be admissible, over objection, in a civil court. The standard of proof in this type of case where the respondent may lose his privileges to practice his profession is that the evidence presented by the complainant must prove the complainant's case in a clear and convincing manner. This is a burden of proof on the complainant that's a larger burden than the preponderance of evidence case that would be in a civil case or would be in a matter where he does not risk losing his ability to practice his profession. The standard in evidence are to be weighed solely as to the charges set out in the complaint as Ordinance 90-105, Section 4.1.2, which is contracting to do any work outside the scope of his or her competency, as listed on his or her competency card and as defined in this ordinance or as restricted by the Contractors Licensing Board. In order to show a -- support a finding that the respondent is actually in violation of the ordinance, the board must find facts that show the violations were'actually committed by the respondent. The facts must show to a clear and convincing standard the legal conclusion that the respondent was in violation of the relevant sections of the ordinance as amended. These charges are the only ones that the board may decide upon, as those are the only ones to which the respondent has had the opportunity to prepare a defense. Any damages awarded, should the respondent be found in Page 60 January 21,2009 violation, must also be directly related to the charges. They may not be for matters unrelated. The decision made by this board today shall be stated orally at this hearing and is effective upon being read by the board. The respondent, if found in violation, has certain appeal rights to this board, the courts and the State Construction Industry Licensing Board, as set out in the Collier County ordinance and the Florida Statutes and Rules. If the board is unable to issue a decision immediately upon the conclusion of this hearing, because of questions of law or other matters of such a nature that the decision may not be made at this hearing, the board may withhold a decision until a subsequent meeting. The board shall vote based upon the evidence presented on all areas, and if it finds the respondent in violation, adopt the administrative complaint. The board shall also make findings of fact and conclusions of law in support of the charges set out in the administrative complaint. And now the board should go to deliberation, please. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay. What is the pleasure of the board? Any comments, discussions? MR. JERULLE: Well, in light of what Mr. Neale just said, I think the county put together a very good case interviewing the owner, and we have testimony in here from the owner that he's hired Mr. Grup. I see no evidence from Mr. Grup that he wasn't the contractor. His friend could have come in and testified. Did not. Or provided evidence as to who paid Able Body, ifin fact Able Body was the contractor or the workers, and I see no evidence of that. So I think it's a pretty clear case. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Just so the board members know that now we are deciding on the Count I of the charge that he be either guilty or not guilty of the charge first.t Page 61 January 21,2009 Any other discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: You don't have to be so silent. I agree with Mr. Jerulle 100 percent. There's no doubt. This is the second time this man's been before us. And I'm sure that this probably did go on. I'm pretty much to the assumption now where I believe that the man is lying to us, telling us he had no knowledge of what went on on this job. So my standing is that I agree with Mr. Jerulle 100 percent, that it's pretty much cut and dried. No other discussion, I'll call for a motion. MR. GUITE': I'll make a motion that we find Mr. Todd (sic) guilty on Count I, Case No. 2009-3. MR. BOYD: Second, Boyd. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Motion and a second on the floor. All those in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye. MR. BOYD: Aye. MR. GUITE': Aye. MR. JERULLE: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Aye. MR. DICKSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: No opposed. Motion carries 5-0. All right. Now that he's been found guilty, the penalties. The county itself has -- I'm sorry, Mr. Neale, go ahead. MR. NEALE: As the respondent was found in violation of the ordinance, the board shall consider and order sanctions under the following parameters as set out in Collier County Ordinance and in Florida Statutes, Chapter 489. The sanctions which may be imposed are: The suspension of the Collier County or city Certificate of Competency. Suspension of a -- Page 62 January 21,2009 revocation of a Collier County or city Certificate of Competency. Denial of the issuance or renewal of the Certificate of Competency. A period of probation of reasonable length, not to exceed two years, during which the contractor's contracting activities shall be under the supervision of the Contractors Licensing Board and! or participation in a duly accredited program of continuing education directly related to the contractor's contracting activities. Any period of probation or continuing education program ordered by the Contractors Licensing Board may be revoked for cause by said board at a hearing noticed to consider said purpose. The contents of said notice shall be substantially as provided for in the Collier County ordinance, and the service of said notice shall be as provided in the Collier County Ordinance. Evidence that either of these methods of service had been utilized shall be sufficient to show that the notice of hearing requirements of the section have been met. Restitution may be ordered; a fine not to exceed $10,000 per violation; a public reprimand; a reexamination requirement; denial of the issuance of Collier County or city building permits or requiring issuance of permits with specific conditions; and reasonable investigative and legal costs for the prosecution. In imposing these sanctions upon someone who's found to have violated the Contractors Licensing Board shall consider all the evidence presented at the hearing, as well as, number one, the gravity of the violation; number two, the impact of the violation on the public health, welfare or safety; number three, any actions taken by the violator to correct the action; number four, any previous violations committed by the violator; and number five, any other evidence at the hearing by the parties relevant as to the sanction which is appropriate for the case, given the nature of the violation and the violator. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: With that said -- MR. NEALE: I have one further thing. Page 63 January 21,2009 The board shall also issue a recommended penalty for the State Construction Industry Licensing Board. And that includes a recommendation for no further action, suspension, revocation or restriction of the registration, or a fine to be levied by the state. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Again, with that said, what's the pleasure of the board? Any ideas, suggestions or discussions on this -- on a motion? Bear in mind that the gentleman has been found guilty of Count I. MR. JERULLE: I have a question to some of the members of the board that have been here longer than I have. He was offered something by the county and refused. What has the board done in the past? MR. DICKSON: We haven't had these offers in the past. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: No. This is probably one of the first ones I think we've ever had where the county's -- MR. GUITE': This is the first I remember. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: -- made an offer. MR. DICKSON: I like it and they're doing it because they're so busy. MR. NEALE: There's a couple of points on that. Number one, I think the board should treat any offer of settlement as being something to not be considered in this. It wouldn't be considered in a normal legal case, and so it shouldn't be considered here. The fact that someone accepted or rej ected an offer of settlement has nothing to do with the outcome of this case. Because anyone is free to reject any offer of settlement in any kind of case in order to exercise their due process rights for a hearing. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I understand. I think the penalties should be something that is going to be an eye opener, there's no doubt. Only because this is the second time. MR. JERULLE: Can we ask Mr. Ossorio what his Page 64 January 21, 2009 recommendation is? CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: You sure can. Mr. Ossorio, do you have any comments or any recommendations? I believe there were some that were given by Mr. Ganguli. MR. OSSORIO: Well, there's the first recommendation not to proceed with the state, due to the fact that Mr. Grup is a locally licensed cabinet installer that the state doesn't regulate, so there would be nothing forwarded to the State of Florida. Our recommendation is that he serves a six-month suspension, a $5,000 fine, paid within two months. $500 investigation cost. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay. There's some ideas, gentlemen. Still open for discussion. MR. JERULLE: I agree with Mr. Ossorio. I would add a probationary period, though, to what he just suggested. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: At least a year. MR. NEALE: As the board can consider past violations and past penalties, Mr. Grup, in his previous case, which was Case 2006-04, which was decided on February 15th of2006, the board at that point imposed a two-year period of probation upon him. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: And when was this again, 200 -- MR. NEALE: This was his 2006 case. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: So he's just barely off probation from the last case. MR. GRUP: Can I make a comment about that 2006 -- CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: No, I don't need to hear from you anymore, thank you. MR. GRUP: You're welcome. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Mr. Dickson, you're awful quiet. MR. DICKSON: You don't want to hear what I want to say. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Sure I do. MR. JERULLE: This was filed in 2008. So this happened during Page 65 January 21,2009 his probationary period. MR. NEALE: No, the probationary period expired February 15th, 2008. MR. JERULLE: Oh, February. Excuse me. I stand corrected. MR. DICKSON: County's being very lenient. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Uh-huh. That's why I wanted to hear your comments. MR. BOYD: Well, the troubling part is that after we fined him in 2006, if you read the back of his business card, it says complete renovation specialist, commercial, residential, new construction, remodeling, additions, which doesn't fall under his license. MR. GUITE': I'm surprised it doesn't say highrises on there. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: The other thing that really upsets me is that -- MR. JERULLE: That's a very good point. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: -- if you really stopped and looked at the pictures inside of this pamphlet -- inside of our packet, there's some pretty serious trusses going on here. MR. GUITE': Yeah, it's not just a couple trusses -- CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I mean, we're not talking about a couple pieces of lumber being put up. We're talking about two guys he picked up off the street that went and did this? I don't think so. I mean, Mr. Dickson, you do this all the time, you know? It probably takes you a lot longer to train somebody just to hammer nails rather than do all this. MR. JERULLE: There's not a lot of bracing on those trusses either, from what I can tell. MR. DICKSON: Did you pull the permit? Just curious. MR. OSSORIO: On this particular job? MR. DICKSON: Yeah. MR. OSSORIO: There was a building permit for an addition by an owner/builder, yes. Page 66 January 21,2009 MR. DICKSON: Did you pull it? I mean, did you -- MR. OSSORIO: Oh, no, we did not pull the building -- no, we did not. I believe -- MR. GUITE': Has it been inspected? MR. OSSORIO: I believe the homeowner came in -- I'm speculating, but I believe Rob Ganguli had the conversation with the homeowner that they hired, he actually hired a carpentry company to go in there and do the work. But I'm not sure. But I think that's exactly what happened. He eventually hired a licensed company to complete the work. MR. DICKSON: Okay. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Completion of the work. But was that-- were these pictures derivative of the pictures that were taken after the work that -- MR. OSSORIO: No, the pictures were taken on the day of the investigation by Rob Ganguli. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay. Any other thoughts? I'm still waiting. Just say it out. Let's hear it. MR. DICKSON: I'm not chairman. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I understand that. MR. DICKSON: This is my day to be quiet. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I know, but I'm not supposed to make motions, you are. MR. DICKSON: Well, you've got three other-- CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Anyone else here -- MR. DICKSON: -- people that can make motions. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: -- thinking the same way? This penalty we're talking about now with the recommendations from the county, is this something that is it -- is it going to be enough? MR. GUITE': No. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: No? What can be added to it, gentlemen? Page 67 January 21,2009 MR. GUITE': I would almost say double it and I'd be happy. I mean, it's just again and again and again, it's the same people coming back up here doing the same thing. And this one's -- we had the shutter company that was doing the work and they weren't pulling the permits. Well, at least they were doing the work that was in their scope of business. This guy's doing work that's not even in his scope. And it's just not right. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: And he's advertising it. MR. GUITE': Exactly. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Majorly. MR. GUITE': And he's inactive, with no workmen's compo MR. GRUP: If I might interject, I'm partners with a state certified building contractor. T.A.G. Professional Construction, Jack McNair and I are partners. And Jack is a state certified building contractor. I don't know if you guys are aware of that. MR. JERULLE: It doesn't say that on this card, though. MR. GRUP: Doesn't say what, sir? THE COURT REPORTER: I can't hear this conversation -- MR. NEALE: Yeah, ifhe's going to give testimony, which he is doing, he has to be on the mic. and has to be on the record. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Exactly. And we don't need to hear this, do we? MR. GUITE': The testimony's closed. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: The business card pretty much speaks for itself. And the Todd A. Grup is your name, I'm sure, so that's enough for me. You want to make a motion to that? MR. GUITE': Yeah, I'll make a motion. MR. GRUP: The business is qualified by-- CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Excuse me, sir -- MR. GRUP: -- a state certified building contractor. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: -- we've heard enough. Thank you. Page 68 January 21,2009 MR. GUITE': I'll make a motion that we fine Mr. Grup $10,000, with a $500 fee for the county for the investigative purposes. And I'm going to say just revoke the license. Because he's just coming off probation less than a year ago. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Got a motion on the floor for a $10,000 fine, $500 in operational costs, and his license is revoked. Do I hear a second? MR. JERULLE: What does that mean? May I ask a question of the motion? CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: That means that his license as of today is revoked. MR. JERULLE: Does that mean, Mr. Ossorio, he can never be licensed in anything, or just his cabinet license is revoked? MR. OSSORIO: Well, when you revoke his certificate, that means his cabinet license is going to be null and void. Mr. Grup can apply for a license -- a different license, carpentry or reapply for a cabinet, but he would have to go in front of the licensing board for approval. We have -- we've had in the past revoked somebody's license and within a year they've come back to the licensing board and we have granted them the certificate. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: In the same trade? MR. OSSORIO: Yes, I believe so. MR. NEALE: Yeah. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: So that means his license would be revoked, he pays a $10,000 fine. We'll give it a time period, probably, within a certain period of time. And a $500 operational cost to hear this case and do what we have to do. MR. JERULLE: Could we -- are we saying that we're going to amend the motion that he cannot come back and apply for a new license within -- MR. GUITE': No, he can come back and apply. Page 69 January 21, 2009 MR. JERULLE: -- within a certain time period. MR. NEALE: Yeah, you can't -- CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Right, we can't restrict, I don't believe. MR. JERULLE: You cannot do that. MR. NEALE: You can't say that he cannot come back and apply. He essentially automatically has leave to apply. But as Mr. Ossorio correctly points out, any future applications, because of the revocation, would certainly be referred to this board. MR. JERULLE: To this board. MR. DICKSON: I like your motion, because he's tried numerous times to get a roofing license, he's tried numerous times to get a carpentry license. He just doesn't pass the test. The cabinet license he has he doesn't use, because he's doing this other stuff. So by revoking the cabinet license, you're basically doing him a favor, because you're going to put him into a study mode, and he can take that test at Gainesville any time he wants to and get one of those other licenses. And then at least we've got him legal. So I second. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Got a motion on the floor and a second. Any discussion further? MR. GUITE': Do we need to put a time on the 10,000? CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Want to put a time on it? It's your motion. MR. GUITE' : Well, I'll be lenient there and give him six months. And not -- I'd like to see some within --like every 30 days some paid on it. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay, so we could break the 10,000 down into a six -month period is what you're saying? MR. GUITE': Right. Six equal monthly payments. MR. JERULLE: Do we have a second, or do I need to -- MR. DICKSON: I seconded it. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Yeah, it's already been seconded. Page 70 January 21, 2009 I'm just trying to figure out equal increments. Maybe Pat Neale can determine what the equal payments will be. Of equal payments for six-month period-- MR. GUITE': Just six equal monthly payments. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: -- to equal $10,000. MR. GUITE': Yes, that will do it. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I've got a motion and a second. All those -- I'll call for the vote, if there's any (sic) more further discussion. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. MR. BOYD: Aye. MR. GUITE': Aye. MR. JERULLE: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Aye. MR. DICKSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: None opposed. Motion carries five to nothing. Okay. Now, Mr. Neale, I'm going to need the -- I suppose the final order of the board. Did you print it out for me yet? MR. NEALE: I'll e-mail it to you again. We'll get this printed up. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: In the case of Board of Commissioners versus Todd A. Grup, d/b/a T.A.G. Professional Carpentry, LLC, Case No. 2009-3, License No. 26457. This cause came on or before public hearing before the Contractors Licensing Board on January 21st, 2009 for consideration of the administrative complaint filed against Todd A. Grup, d/b/a T.A.G. Professional Carpentry, LLC. And the service of complaint was made in accordance with Collier County Ordinance 90-105 as amended. The board, having heard this hearing under testimony, under Page 71 January 21, 2009 oath, received evidence and heard arguments respective to all appropriate matters. Thereupon issues its finding of fact and conclusions of law and order of the board as follows: That Todd A. Grup, d/b/a T.A.G. Professional Carpentry, LLC is the holder of record of License No. 26457, and that the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida is the complainant in this matter. That the board has jurisdiction of the person of the respondent and that Todd A. Grup was present at the public hearing and was not represented by counsel at the hearing on today's date. All notices required by Collier County Ordinance No. 90-105, as amended, have been properly issued and were personally delivered. Respondent acted in a manner that is in violation of Collier County ordinances and is the one who committed the act. That the allegations of fact as set forth in the Administrative Complaint as to Count I, 4.1.2, contracting to do any work outside the scope of his or her competency as listed on his or her competency card, as defined in this ordinance or as restricted by the Contractors Licensing Board, are found to be supported by the evidence presented at the hearing. The conclusions of law alleged and set forth in the Administrative Complaint as to the Count I are approved and adopted and incorporation (sic) herewith: To wit, the respondent violated Section 4.1.2 of Collier County Ordinance 90-105, as amended, in the performance of his contracting business in Collier County by acting in violation of the sections set out in the administrative complaint with particularity . Order of the board: Based on the -- excuse me. Based upon the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law and pursuant to the authority granted in Chapter 489, Florida Statutes, and Collier County Ordinance No. 90-105, as amended, by a vote of five in favor and zero opposed, a majority vote of the board members presents, respondent has been found in violation and (sic) set out above. Further, it is ordered by a vote of five in favor and zero opposed, Page 72 January 21, 2009 a majority vote of the board members present, that the following disciplinary sanction and related order are hereby imposed upon the holder of contractor's certificate of competency License No. 26457. And that is -- as of to day's date, Todd A. Grup ofT.A.G. Professional Carpentry, LLC is ordered to pay a $10,000 restitution fine -- MR. NEALE: Not restitution, it's a fine. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I'm sorry, $10,000 fine to be paid in a period of six months in equal increments for the next six months until -- every 30 days until the entire balance is paid off. Along with $500 in operational costs, which will be paid within the next 30 days. And that also that License No. 26457, belonging to Todd A. Grup, d/b/a T.A.G. Professional Carpentry, LLC, that license is hereby revoked. And that's the order of the board. And that ends Case No. 2009-003. Okay, anything else going on, gentlemen? Any reports or anything? Anybody has anything to say? I only have one small item just to mention, okay? Through my diligent efforts of I guess trying to find out things that go on in Collier County and through conversation I've heard in the field, I know that there was some conversation here a while back about the county closing down certain portions of the county. That -- and closing down to a 32-hour workweek. Which I believe that in some cases I think it's -- in some ways it's good, in some ways it's not. I think in the case of licensing, I think the licensing department really needs to be out in the field now 10/7 -- 24/7. And thank the commissioners for allowing one of the new investigators to be on board now, which gives us just a little more power while we're out there in the field. I did hear this past week, though, that that thought, that terminology as far as going to that 32-hour work week has been tabled for the moment. I just want to make it a record that it is out there in the open, and if anyone has any discussions or thoughts on it, I'd like to Page 73 January 21,2009 hear about them. And the next meeting date I guess will be February 18th, right here in the same building, 2009. And I just need one more motion to adjourn. MR. GUITE': Make a motion to adjourn. MR. BOYD: Second. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: All in favor? MR. BOYD: Aye. MR. GUITE': Aye. MR. JERULLE: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Aye. MR. DICKSON: Aye. ***** There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 11:10 a.m. COLLIER COUNTY CONTRACTOR LICENSING BOARD RICHARD JOSLIN, Chairman These minutes approved by the board on as presented or as corrected Transcript prepared on behalf of Gregory Reporting Service, Inc., by Cherie' R. Nottingham. Page 74