The URL can be used to link to this page

CEB Minutes 02/26/2009 R February 26, 2009 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD NAPLES, FLORIDA February 26, 2009 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Code Enforcement Board, in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m., in REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: VICE CHAIRMAN: Gerald J. Lefebvre Kenneth Kelly Jim Lavinsky Robert Kaufman Edward Larsen Lionel L'Esperance Larry Dean ALSO PRESENT: Jean Rawson, Counsel for the Board Diane Flagg, Code Enforcement Director Jen Waldron, Code Enforcement Supervisor Page 1 CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AGENDA Date: February 26, 2009, at 9:00 a.m. Location: Collier County Government Center, Third Floor, 3301 East Tamiami Trail, Building F, Naples, FI 34112. NOTICE: THE RESPONDENT MAYBE LIMITIED TO TWENTY (20) MINUTES FOR CASE PRESENTATION UNLESS ADDITIONAL TIME IS GRANTED BY THE BOARD. PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK ON ANY AGENDA ITEM WILL RECEIVE UP TO FIVE (5) MINUTES UNLESS THE TIME IS ADJUSTED BY THE CHAIRMAN. ALL PARTIES PARTICIPATING IN THE PUBLIC HEARING ARE ASKED TO OBSERVE ROBERTS RULES OF ODER AND SPEAK ONE AT A TIME SO THAT THE COURT REPORTER CAN RECORD ALL STATEMENTS BEING MADE. ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO, AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. NEITHER COLLIER COUNTY NOR THE CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING THIS RECORD. 1. ROLL CALL 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - January 22, 2009 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS/MOTIONS A. MOTIONS Motion for Extension of Time 1. BCC vs. Marek & Lenka Okenkova 2. BCC vs. Jaime & Damarys Oliva 3. BCC vs. Jaime & Damarys Oliva CEB NO. CEVR20080003423 CEB NO. 2006090513 eEB NO. 2007080436 B. STIPULATIONS C. HEARINGS 1. BCC vs. Brian and Dara Gorman 2. BCC vs. Raymonde & Bolomin Charles 3. BCC vs. Lloyd Bowein 4. BCC vs. Pedro eruz 5. BCC vs. Kenneth e. Hill & Elizabeth J. Lefebvre-Hill 6. BCC vs. Roger Carter 7. BeC vs. Baby Boy Gallegos 8. BeC vs. Sara Barrera 9. BCC vs. Reinhard Marton 10. BCC vs. Mark A. Goodman CEB NO. CESD20080008567 CEB NO. 2007110124 CEB NO. CESD20080007737 CEB NO. CESD20080007554 CEB NO. 2007100809 CEB NO. CESD20080002827 eEB NO. CEPM20080016779 CEB NO. CESD20080005775 CEB NO. CESD20080010163 CEB NO. eESD20080006858 5. OLD BUSINESS A. Motion for Imposition of Fines/Liens 1. BCC vs. Reinaldo & Zoraida Jardines & Sylvia Jimenez 2. BCC vs. Pry of Naples, LLe. 3. BCC vs. Marvin Ralph Hoeman 4. BCe vs. Susan B. Williams 5. BCC vs. Adalberto & Martha Garcia 6. BCC vs. Roberto Reyes CEB NO. 2007030794 CEB NO. CES20080002782 CEB NO. CESD20080005124 CEB NO. 2007060820 CEB NO. 2007100929 CEB NO. 2007090686 B. Motion for Reduction/Abatement of Fines/Liens 6. NEW BUSINESS 7. CONSENT AGENDA A. Motion for Imposition of Fines/Liens B. Request to Forward Cases to County Attorney's Office 8. REPORTS 9. COMMENTS 10. NEXT MEETING DATE - March 26,2009 It. ADJOURN February 26, 2009 CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: I'd like to call the Code Enforcement Board of Collier County. It is February 26,2009. Notice: The respondent may be limited to 20 minutes for case presentation unless additional time is granted by the board. Person -- persons wishing to speak on the agenda item will receive up to five minutes unless time is adjusted by the chairman. All parties participating in a public hearing are asked to observe Roberts Rules of Order and speak one at a time so that the court reporter can record all statements being made. Any person who decides to appeal a decision of this board will need a record of the proceedings pertaining thereto and, therefore, may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made which record include the testimony evidence upon which the appeals is to be based. Neither Collier County nor the Code Enforcement Board shall be responsible for providing this record. May I have the roll call. MS. WALDRON: Good morning. Mr. Gerald Lefebvre. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Here. MS. WALDRON: Mr. Edward Larsen. MR. LARSEN: Present. MS. WALDRON: Mr. Kenneth Kelly. MR. KELLY: Here. MS. WALDRON: Mr. Larry Dean. MR. DEAN: Here. MS. WALDRON: Mr. Lionel L'Esperance. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Present. MS. WALDRON: Mr. Robert Kaufman. MR. KAUFMAN: Here. MS. WALDRON: And Mr. James Lavinsky. MR. LA VINSKY: Here. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: And, just for the record, all members will be full voting members. Page 2 February 26, 2009 Approval of the agenda. May I have a motion? MR. DEAN: I'll make a motion to approve the agenda. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a second? MR. LA VINSKY: Second. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any comments, discussion? MR. KELL Y: Do we have any changes that need to be entered into the public record? CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Yes, we do. MS. WALDRON: Immediately after the approval of the agenda, we'd like to add an item for appointment of the vice chair. Under motions Item 4-A, request for continuance, we would like to move C-5 under hearings, BCC vs. Kenneth C. Hill and Elizabeth J. Lefebvre-Hill, Case No. 2007100809. Also, under continuances we would like to move No. C-6, BCC vs. Roger Carter, CESD20080002827. Under stipulations, which is 4-B, we would like to move items under hearings No. C-1, BCC vs. Brian and Dara Gorman, Case No. CESD20080008567; No. C-3, BCC vs. Lloyd Bowein, Case CESD20080007737; C-8, BCC vs. Sarah Barrera, Case CESD20080005775; and C-9, BCC vs. Reinhard Marton, Case CESD 20080010163. And, additionally, we have C-4 will also be moved under stipulations, BCC vs. Pedro Cruz, Case CESD20080007554. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a motion now? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Move to accept the changes. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a second? MR. DEAN: I'll second that. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any discussion? Go ahead. Anything? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor? MR. LAVINSKY: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. Page 3 February 26, 2009 MR. LARSEN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. KELL Y: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes. And, just for the record, Richard Kraenbring, who was a full member, decided to resign between last meeting and this meeting and he was the vice chair. So we will have to appoint a vice chair today. I'd like to nominate Ken Kelly for vice chair. MR. L'ESPERANCE: I'd like to second that. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor? MR. LAVINSKY: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSEN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVER: Any nays? MR. DEAN: I was going to ask for discussion, but I'll pass on that. That's fine. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Would you -- okay. Motion passes. MR. KELLY: Thank you. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: And we're going to move on to public hearings. And the first one will be a continuance for Kenneth C. Hill and Elizabeth 1. Lefebvre-Hill, CEB No. 2007100809. And, just for the record, Elizabeth Lefebvre even though the spelling's the same and there's not many of us, there is no relation to myself and her. MR. DEAN: How do we know there's -- CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Trust me. MR. DEAN: Okay. Page 4 February 26, 2009 CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: If I can have the parties sworn in, please. (The oath was administered.) MR. MOYER: Yes, I do. MS. SORRELS: Yes, I do. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Go ahead, sir. If you can state your name, please. MR. MOYER: My name Jim Moyer. I'm a general contractor hired by these people, and I'm here to just give you what -- what you need. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Sir, who hired you, the names? MR. MOYER: Betty -- Betty Hill is -- Betty Hill is the wife of Ken. I do have a letter with a notarized statement authorizing me to come to the board today. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Is Betty short for Elizabeth? MR. MOYER: Yes, it is. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Would you like to enter that into the record, that letter? MR. MOYER: Yes. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. MR. KELL Y: I make a motion to accept the letter. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a second? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Second. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor? MR. LA VINSKY: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSEN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Go ahead. Page 5 February 26, 2009 MR. MOYER: How do I do that? Thank you. MS. WALDRON: Uh-huh. MR. KELL Y: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Moyer, how long do you think it's going to take to complete all of the work in order to come into compliance? MR. MOYER: What -- what I thought I'd do is give you a little background of where we are today. MR. KELL Y: That would be great. Thank you. MR. MOYER: Where we are today is that she is expressing an interest to hire me over a year ago and she didn't have the funds available to do that. She has contacted me about three or four weeks ago again indicating that she wanted to proceed with the process to bring the property up to code. So since then we have come to an agreement on what my fees would be and how I'd proceed to do this. I have initiated a land surveyor to go out and survey it. We have a copy of that now. I have hired a structural engineer also to make sure that the structures meet wind code. We have a couple situations on the property that are -- I don't think they're unique to this area, but I know that she has made some steps in helping clean up the area. I think that there were some trailers on the property, some fences that wanted -- as there wanted to be removed. She has done that. And now this is, in my opinion, the final step to do that. To answer your question how long will it take, I believe I think that there was a 60-day continuance. We'll be finished before that time. MR. KELLY: Okay. Thank you. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any other questions from the board? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a motion for continuance? MR. KAUFMAN: I'll make a motion that we continue it. Page 6 February 26, 2009 CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: For how long? MR. KAUFMAN: Sixty days. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a second? MR. DEAN: I'll second that motion. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: And a vote -- and a vote, please. All those in favor? MR. LA VINSKY: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSEN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any nays? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes. MS. SORRELS: Thank you, gentlemen. MR. MOYER: Thank you. MS. WALDRON: Mr. Chair, can we go back for one second. I think we skipped the approval of the minutes. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a motion to approve the minutes? MR. KELLY: Motion to accept the minutes. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a second? MR. KAUFMAN: Second. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor? MR. LAVINSKY: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. Page 7 February 26, 2009 MR. LARSEN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any nays? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes. The next motion of continuance will be Roger Carter, Case No. CESD200080002827. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Will you please swear in the parties. THE COURT REPORTER: Raise your right hands. (The oath was administered.) MR. CARTER: Yes. MR. GOMEZ: I do. THE COURT REPORTER: Please identify yourselves. MR. GOMEZ: Carmello Gomez, Collier Code Enforcement. MR. CARTER: Roger Carter. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Go ahead, sir. Usually we require a letter ahead of time stating that you would like a continuance, but I understand that you spoke to the investigator and -- MR. CARTER: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: -- would like to continue. Go ahead if you can explain. MR. CARTER: We're at the last stages. We actually have -- the fence have been taken care of, the sheds been taken care of, and the structure that had been there since an addition to the house was done in the '70s, I've owned the residence since '89 -- '89. So Mr. -- I've acquired the services of now it's Disney, Disney Associates, and we've submitted all of our documentations, the plans. We have a permit application and I would think it would be completed in the next 60 days or so should have all -- it's already been through Page 8 February 26, 2009 review at the, you know, the building inspectors and so we should be ready to go. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Is that correct? MR. GOMEZ: Yes, it is, sir. MR. DEAN: Question. Is anybody living in the space that you've improved? MR. CARTER: Not at this time, sir. MR. DEAN: Thank you. MR. CARTER: Well, and I would like to say for the record, I didn't improve it so... MR. DEAN: I just asked if anybody's living in the space -- MR. CARTER: Okay. MR. DEAN: -- that was improved. MR. CARTER: Okay. I thought you said-- MR. DEAN: And you said no? MR. CARTER: No, sir. MR. DEAN: Thank you. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any other questions of the board? MR. KELL Y: Just real quick. Sir, you said that it would take you about 60 days to get the permit and so forth. Will that also be enough time to complete any work that needs to be done without seeing this. MR. CARTER: There -- it's -- it's my understanding I received an e-mail from Mr. Disney that there will be no further work required, that the structure as built -- when it was built in the '70s meets all the code that it was required. I had certified letters from an electrician, a plumber, a structural engineer. Plans have all been submitted and the actual-- the room with a bath is actually livable space. It met fire code. It's been signed and sealed and certified. MR. KELLY: Okay. MR. CARTER: All that document's been turned in. So it's actually -- it meets the code at the time that it was constructed and Page 9 February 26, 2009 actually is in, you know, really good shape. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: So all it would require to be pulled is the after-the-fact permits -- MR. CARTER: That's -- that's exactly what-- CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: -- and inspections an so forth? MR. CARTER: The inspections have been done. We did it all by builder affidavit. So I'm waiting for -- and I actually got an e-mail or a confirmation from Mr. Disney from the county that the permit -- I know Mr. Gomez says it's in process because I think there's a -- whatever the impact fees are going to be, but the actual permit itself has been approved because all the inspections because we did it through contractors are complete. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. MR. GOMEZ: The permit for the chain link fence has been issued, not CO'd yet. And the permit for the enclosed screen porch with the bath area is in the apply status. MR. KELL Y: In that case, I'll make a motion to grant a 60-day continuance. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a second? MR. KAUFMAN: Second. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor? MR. LAVINSKY: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSEN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any nays? (No response.) Page 10 February 26, 2009 CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes. That'll be 60 days. MR. CARTER: Thank you, gentlemen. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Thank you. We're going to move on to motion for extension of time. BCC vs. Marek and Lenka Okenkova. I had problems with that last time. CEB No. CEVR20080003423. THE COURT REPORTER: Raise your right hands. (The oath was administered.) MS. PEREZ: Yes, I do. MR. OKENKOV A: Yes, I do. THE COURT REPORTER: Please identify yourselves. MS. PEREZ: Code Enforcement Supervisor Christina Perez. MR. OKENKOV A: Marek Okenkova, the owner. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All right. You're looking for extension of time, sir? MR. OKENKOV A: Yes, I do. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. Can you explain the reason for your extension -- for your extension. MR. OKENKOV A: The reason for my extension of the time is I am applying for the agriculture exempt for my property. So I'd like to have notice of reaffirmed use of my land. And -- and as far as mitigation plan which I was asked -- which I was asked to do, that kind of falling to -- to -- to approval for that agriculture exempt. So that's why I'm asking for-- CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: When did you apply for the agricultural exemption? MR. OKENKOV A: It was January. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: And how long did it take? MR. OKENKOV A: The first inspection is going to be beginning of March. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: How long does it take, the process, overall? Page 11 February 26, 2009 MR. OKENKOV A: That is up to the Collier County appraisal office. So I believe what I would like to ask for 90 days. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. We gave you 90 days back in, was it October meeting, October 31 st; correct? We gave you 90 days at that point. The question I have for you, Why did you let roughly 45 days or so, or actually more than that, 60 days before you decided to do your agricultural exemption or apply for it knowing that you had a time frame here? MR. OKENKOV A: I was going to go ahead and do a mitigation plan. I had difficulties with -- with the officer coming on to my site to look at the -- the -- the -- the inspections which have been done. And then also I had very much of difficulties to get anyone to do a mitigation plan for me. I was asked to go to Yellow Pages. There is ten different companies who are environmental services. Calling several of them, five of them are not in the business anymore. And I have been to find only the one which -- which is -- which is for me a little unfair because I have no one else to go to. So I guess they can do whatever they want me to with the fines -- with the fees. So the -- the problem was it was short period of time to get that, but then also if I knew I'm going to have a farm exempt, then that -- that's why I asked for that period of time. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any questions of the board? MR. KELLY: Sir, did -- did you make any effort to remove the berm? MR. OKENKOV A: Yes, they've been done right away. Yes, they are done. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any other questions? MR. LARSEN: What's the county's position? MS. PEREZ: The county has no position. MR. LARSEN: What kind of work has been done out at the site? MS. PEREZ: He did remove the berms. The berms were Page 12 February 26, 2009 removed back in December. So that was done a few days short of the deadline, but he did complete the -- the removal of those berms. MR. LARSEN: Has he been cooperative? MS. PEREZ: Yes, he has. MR. LARSEN: All right. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a motion? MR. LARSEN: I make a motion to extend the time for 90 days. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a second? MR. DEAN: I'll second the motion. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor? MR. LA VINSKY: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSEN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any nays? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes. MS. PEREZ: Thank you. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: You've got 90 more days. MR. OKENKOV A: Okay. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: The next case will be BCC vs. Jamie and Demarys Oliva, CEB No. 2006090513. And do we want to put these together? MS. RAWSON: Yes, but we have to do two orders so... CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. THE COURT REPORTER: If you'll raise your right hand. (The oath was administered.) Page 13 February 26, 2009 MS. O'FARRELL: Yes. MS. OLIVA: Yes. THE COURT REPORTER: Please identify yourselves. MS. O'FARRELL: Susan O'Farrell, Collier County Environmental Specialist. MS. OLIVA: I'm Demarys Oliva. MR. OLIVA: Jaime Oliva. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: You're looking for an extension of time? MS . OLIVA: Yeah. Well, I'm here today because we need an extension of time. I'm asking for 90 days to plant some trees that we plant a couple of months behind and were killed by the cool weather and I need to replant the trees again. I think 90 days going to be fine when the rainy season come in. So if I plant on that time, I think they're going to surviving because are small plants, like, three gallons. MR. KELLY: I have a question. Do you have any irrigation or sprinkler system to these plants? MS. OLIVA: Well, we got -- we don't have those, but we got a big -- we got a truck with a -- with a big tank. Then we water every week, once a week, because we plant, like, 58 slash pines. Those are big, like, I will say those are really high and those survive, but the small plants that were, like, (inaudible), they were, like, really small like three gallons and then we planted on time, but the cold weather kills them. MR. KELL Y: The reason why I'm asking you is because you had just said that you were hoping that rainy season would come to help the survivability, but 90 days only takes you to the start of June. And, typically, the rainy season doesn't start until mid-June, late June. I'm just suggesting to the board maybe just -- maybe another month if that's the case. If that's -- MR. LARSEN: I concur because basically, you know, this whole, you know, exercise about survivability and that, you're right. Page 14 February 26, 2009 We're not going to get any significant rains until the end of June at least. So even though they're only requesting 90 days, I think they should reconsider and ask for a bit more time. MR. KELLY: I'd also like to hear from Susan. MS. O'FARRELL: We have no objection to any extension that they ask for. I would suggest 120 days. MS. OLIVA: One hundred and twenty days, well, I think it's better, yeah. MR. KELLY: Okay. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any other questions from the board? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a motion? MR. LARSEN: I move to grant an extension of time of 120 days. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a second? MR. DEAN: I second the motion. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor? MR. LA VINSKY: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSEN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes. MS. OLIVA: Thank you. MS. RAWSON: Is that on both cases? CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Just on the first one. MS. RAWSON: Okay. Because we probably need to have a separate vote on the second one. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Right. You're right. And the next case will be BCC vs. Jaime and Demarys Oliva. Page 15 February 26, 2009 MS. OLIVA: Well, yeah. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: CEB -- let me do so again. CEB No. 2007080436. And is it -- MS. OLIVA: It's going to be the same. They are four properties and two property were where we're cleaning and those properties are together. So if we got the same time, it's going to be fine, I think so. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. MS. OLIVA: We will have -- MR. LARSEN: I make a motion we grant an extension of time of 120 days. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a second? MR. DEAN: I'll second that motion. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All right. Can I have a vote. All those in favor? MR. LAVIN SKY: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSEN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. KELL Y: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any nays? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes. MS. OLIVA: Thank you. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Thank you very much. MS. WALDRON: Mr. Chair, we also received another stipulation agreement. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. And which case is that? MS. WALDRON: That will be C-2 under hearings, BCC vs. Page 16 _._..._-"-_._.._._---_.---....-...,._..._--,-,,-~-----,_._.~_...._"'^-,~--""._........_~-^..._-=".--.__.._~.~..__.,'-"~~,._~~.-...- February 26, 2009 Raymonde and Bolomin Charles. MR. KELL Y: I make a motion that we amend the agenda to allow the stipulation. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a second? MR. KAUFMAN: Second. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor? MR. LAVINSKY: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSEN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any nays? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes. We're going to move on to stipulations. And the first stipulation is for Brian and Dara Gorman, C -- CESD20080008567 case number. THE COURT REPORTER: If you'll raise your right hands. (The oath was administered.) MR. MUSSE: Yes. MR. GORMAN: Yes. THE COURT REPORTER: Please identify yourselves. MR. MUSSE: Jonathan Musse, Collier County Code Enforcement. Last name is M-u-s-s-e. MR. GORMAN: Brian Gorman. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: And just give us a minute or two to read the stipulation. MR. KELL Y: Mr. Gorman -- MR. GORMAN: Yes. Page 17 ,.___..__ ,,_,__~"_~_"_'~~'~~'~___""~"_'_'_'___"'__.~~'-__'-""-'-'_".,._........._..,__~'"<~.,..,_~,.....-_.~~___._..""._.._"____.".___.___._,_._M_.._~~___...'._.__~. February 26, 2009 MR. KELL Y: Mr. Gorman, I have a real quick question. It says here that your dock has electrical power to it. MR. GORMAN: Yes. MR. KELLY: And my concern is that, obviously, with electric that has not been inspected there's a risk of hazard. How long has the dock been there with electric service and is there any way that temporarily, at least, until you do get your inspections approved there's a way to maybe flip the breakers so that the electricity doesn't flow to those outlets. MR. GORMAN: I've owned the house since 2003. The dock been there since 1995. I've made no changes to it since. MR. KELLY: Okay. It was just a suggestion maybe, but if that's -- if it's been there that long, I don't think it's going to be an issue. Thank you. MR. LARSEN: I have a question. It's signed by a Patrick White MR. GORMAN: Yes. MR. LARSEN: -- is that correct? MR. GORMAN: Patrick got called away on family emergency. I -- I wasn't even supposed to attend today. Jonathan had called me, asked me to attend just to appear. I've been -- I've been trying to deal with this situation for five years, four years. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Patrick White is your -- MR. GORMAN: My attorney. MR. LARSEN: Oh, okay. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: And are you just waiting to get inspections? Is that pretty much -- or permits? MR. GORMAN: Waiting for permits. We had -- no. There was an easement that had to be -- the dock that was in existence come to find out, Jonathan pointed out that there was an easement and so the dock couldn't be permitted. So the whole process of moving that easement is where we're at now. The easement's been moved. It's n Page 18 -"""-,,..~.,,"..._--_..~..,,.,,~-~-_._,-_._._--_... ..,.-.-,."........,.....--.-.-,,-----. February 26, 2009 and now it's just a matter of getting the permit. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: You applied for the permit? MR. GORMAN: Patrick has all the paperwork. I don't know anything about applying for permits so Patrick has all of that. He's got the information. He says about 80 percent done. He's got a couple minor issues to straighten out with the permits and go forward from there. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Typically how long does it take once a permit is applied for in a case like this? MR. MUSSE: I cannot say because this is -- this is a special -- cause usually, I mean, from what Patrick White says, you can apply for the permit and pretty much it's a Permitting and Building Department as far as when he can get the inspections. The dock is completed. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Right. MR. MUSSE: So all it has to be is inspected. So, as he said, Patrick White is about 80 percent done to apply for the permit. So it shouldn't be long, but they requested 120 days just to be safe. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. Mr. Kelly. MR. KELLY: Investigator, do you know ifthere was any environmental part of that permit application? MR. MUSSE: I believe there was some issues with the mangroves and I think that was resolved already. MR. GORMAN: The issue -- the issue with the mangroves from my understanding is that the easement is an environmental easement. The easement was on the -- on the -- is actually out in the water. It doesn't belong there. It belongs at the riprap where the mangroves grow. That's where we had to move it to. Now the dock is out in-- the dock is where it belongs. The easement's where it belongs. And hopefully environmental sees that. That's -- five years ago, four years ago I applied for a permit through three different contractors and none of them could get the permit. Page 19 February 26, 2009 So I wanted to rebuild the dock and put a new dock up. I had -- I stopped working on it because I had no success. Didn't -- nobody knew why we weren't getting the permit, but now since I've hired Patrick, the attorney, we found out -- we found out why I wasn't able to get a permit passed to redo the dock. I didn't know. I wasn't aware that the dock was never permitted until Jonathan came along. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. Jennifer, can you see ifhis mic is on. I'm not sure if it is or not. MR. GORMAN: Hello. MR. KELLY: Okay. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All right. MR. KELL Y: In that case, I'll make a motion to accept the stipulated agreement. MR. LARSEN: I second that motion. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor? MR. LAVINSKY: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSEN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any nays? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes. The next case will be -- will be Bowein, Lloyd Bowein, CES number -- CESD20080007737. THE COURT REPORTER: Raise your right hand. (The oath was administered.) MR. BUSSE: Yes. Page 20 _ m.__~_._."__ _ ______,__~_____,.~<_,__"'_, _,._.,,_~.._,,____._,_________'_+~~~'_~_~___>._"_"""____"" ...--.-.-,-"....""-..--,..,..-. - .'..- ..----........-,--.--~~,---_.~ February 26, 2009 MR. BOWEIN: Yes. THE COURT REPORTER: Please identify yourselves. CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER: Jonathan Busse, Collier County Code Enforcement. MR. BOWEIN: Lloyd Bowein. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: We're just going to take a minute or two to read the stipulated agreement. Has everyone -- everyone read it? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any questions from the board? MR. L'ESPERANCE: What's the county's recommendation? MR. BUSSE: Excuse me? MR. L'ESPERANCE: The county has no objection to this? MR. BUSSE: Not at all. MR. LARSEN: Let me ask a question. This is a rather large structure. Is this for personal use or for commercial purposes? MR. BOWEIN: It's a hydroponic setup and it's sort of experimental. It's really neither one. We do sell. We do sell some of the tomatoes, but it's basically an experiment to -- you know, it's not a commercially viable entity. You know, it's just we're experimenting with hydroponic gardening. Probably -- and if it works out good, move it to a farming location, but the growing is not the issue. It's the 4-by-4s with the shade clothe stretched over it is the only thing that's the subject of the permitting. And they weren't even sure how to permit it. That's why it took me awhile to finally apply. Actually, the pertinent application is under pole barn. That's the only application they had that came close. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: And this is in Naples Park; correct? MR. BOWEIN: Correct. And the permit has been applied for. I checked on-line. And because I had talked with them about how to apply for it and it passed one part. It was rejected on technical something. So it probably means I need to resubmit a drawing which Page 21 -"---,.,.~",.-.. .. -. -"'-'-'"'-' ~'-'-" ". ..-~-"--_._,--'-~-~ February 26, 2009 will be done. I should have the letter today. They say it takes two days and then I'll correct whatever they need to correct. So the permitting should be completed hopefully -- I don't know. They're not as busy as they used to be so they'll probably get it done a little bit quicker. So hopefully I'll have the permit and then all it needs is inspections. And I think that can easily be done within the 60 days. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do you see that this structure will get permitted and CO'd? MR. BUSSE: This one I've never seen -- CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. MR. BUSSE: -- a structure like this get permitted. I was really shocked that he actually was able to get a permit for it, but from -- I was speaking to Cara Stature (phonetic) from building and permitting and, yeah, they say it's permissible. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. Any others? MR. KAUFMAN: I just want to make a motion that we accept the stipulation. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a second? MR. KELLY: Second. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any discussion? MR. KELLY: Just that, you know, ifthere is any issues of the permit, maybe the respondent can come back and let us know ahead of time before the 60 days expires. This is a precarious situation. I'm with the inspector. We've never seen this before and I'm just thinking there may be some kind of issue that comes up in the learning process. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Right. And being that it's in Naples Park too. MR. KELL Y: If you do run into a situation -- MR. BOWEIN: Right. I'll let John know immediately if! run into any problems, but I think it's a -- probably a minor technical thing. Because I just had hand-up drawings. They told me I didn't need engineering drawings because there's no structure. Page 22 ,__y___,___,__"._,.~..'m__ '~'__"_'_'___'_'______ February 26, 2009 MR. KELLY: That's the only comment I had. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. All those in favor? MR. LA VINSKY: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSEN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any nays? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes. MR. BOWEIN: Okay. Thank you. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: The next stipulation will be Barrera, Sara Barrera, CEB No. CESD20080005775. THE COURT REPORTER: If you'll raise your right hand. (The oath was administered.) MS. RODRIGUEZ: I do. MS. BARRERA: I do. THE COURT REPORTER: If you'll please state your name and spell your last name. MS. RODRIGUEZ: Maria Rodriguez, R-o-d-r-i-g-u-e-z. THE COURT REPORTER: Please state and spell your last name. MS. BARRERA: Spell the last name? B-a-r-r-e-r-a, Sara, S-a-r-a. MS. VALLADARES: Alma Valladares. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: You might want to pull the mics closer to you when you're talking. We're j list going to take a minute or two to read the stipulated agreement. Has everyone read the stipulated agreement? (No response.) Page 23 ,____...~.".,,~_""'_._...'''_~'^~_._'_'~^_____.~. ',m. ..',. __..... ,_"",~_,_,'_~'__.'.~_._~'" February 26, 2009 CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any questions from the board? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: And you agreed to the stipulated agreement here? MS. VALLADARES: Yes. MR. KELL Y: If maybe it pleases the board to see if maybe this is being occupied now and if it is -- CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: That would be a question. MR. KELL Y: Is the area that was converted is somebody living in that now? MS. VALLADARES: Yes. MR. KELL Y: The concern of the board typically or at least my personal concern would be if you didn't get the inspections, would safety hazards exist? And granting this extension of time to get these things fixed up, we wouldn't want anything to happen, you know, in that time frame. Is there any way that you could not live in or occupy that room until all the inspections were passed? MS. VALLADARES: Yes. Yes. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: What needs to be done to get a CO at this point? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Maybe from the county. MS. RODRIGUEZ: They applied for a variance. I don't know if they're going to grant it because they're encroaching, but I believe they're supposed to go -- I think, do you have an appointment, right, for the county commissioner? Because they're asking for $5,000 for the variance and they can't afford it. So I think she said next week they have an appointment to go with them to see if they would drop the fees. After the variance goes in, I don't know if they're going to approve it because they're encroaching quite a bit. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Right. And even if they do get a variance, there are still going to be impact fees; correct? MS. RODRIGUEZ: Yes. Page 24 .,',- ._-,...,_...,---_._,._..~-,.,,'~. ".._-~._-",.._,-_.--...._".,..,,-""~~.,~.>-,--->.,-_._-_.._-_.,~_...><._~._---.__.._._.~.~-,,- February 26, 2009 CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Even though now it's going to be living space? MS. RODRIGUEZ: Yes. MR. KELLY: My concern here is it was once an open carport; correct? So now they've built walls, added electric. MS. RODRIGUEZ: There was a wall on one side of it. MR. KELLY: Right. MS. RODRIGUEZ: And they enclosed the other two sides. MR. KELL Y: And electric? MS. RODRIGUEZ: And electric. MR. KELL Y: Any plumbing? MS. RODRIGUEZ: No, no plumbing. MR. KELLY: I'm just concerned about the electric. MR. LARSEN: If! may, which one is Sara? MS. BARRERA: (Indicating.) MR. LARSEN: All right. Sara, you own the house? MS. BARRERA: Yes. MR. LARSEN: Okay. And did you buy it this way or did you make the carport into a bedroom? MS. BARRERA: No. I -- we made it. MR. LARSEN: Okay. Understand that basically if you enter into this agreement and you don't do what they say, there are fines associated with your noncompliance; do you understand? MS. BARRERA: Yes. MR. LARSEN: Okay. And the discussion here is whether or not you're going to be able to get it permitted, which means make it legal, or if you can't, then basically you've got to restore it to the way it was; do you understand that? MS. BARERRA: Yes. MR. LARSEN: Okay. All right. And you're comfortable entering into this agreement? You fully understood everything that was contained in here? And you know that basically you've got 120 Page 25 <,"_._",~,_..__._,_.__....._,_,_,_..___~~.._m.~'__'_',_....____fr~.__ February 26, 2009 days and, if not, it's $200 per day? MS. BARRERA: Okay. MR. LARSEN: All right? MS. BARRERA: Yes. MR. LARSEN: So do you have a timetable? Are you working with somebody to help you work your way through the system? MS. BARRERA: Yes. MR. LARSEN: All right. And you're pretty comfortable that you're going to be able to accomplish this within the 120 days one way or the other? MS. BARRERA: Yes. MR. LARSEN: All right. MR. KAUFMAN: When did you say the meeting was with the county? MS. RODRIGUEZ: I think she said next week was -- MS. BARRERA: Wednesday. MR. LARSEN: Okay. Well, I make the motion to approve the stipulation as presented by the county and by the respondent. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a second? MR. DEAN: Second. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any discussion? MR. DEAN: I just have one problem with occupying the master bedroom with electrical so -- so I would be against that. So some way or another she cannot live in that space. That's my opinion. MR. L'ESPERANCE: We need to modify the stipulation agreement. Jean? MS. RAWSON: You can ask her if she will agree with that and, then, maybe they can go out in the hall and redo the stipulated agreement. MR. L'ESPERANCE: She's verbally agreed to that already. MS. RAWSON: Then we would have to modify it, yes. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: And would we have to modify our Page 26 --- - --"--,-,~._._._~.,,. ,,------_.......,...,~.... February 26, 2009 motion to include that? MS. RAWSON: Yes. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. The -- first, if you could modify your -- MR. LARSEN: Sure. I'll modify the motion to prohibit occupancy of that -- of that converted carport, you know, until it's permitted. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Until it's CO'd? MR. LARSEN: Until it's CO'd. To be occupied as a master bedroom until it's CO'd. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: And the second, do you amend your second? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Y es. Yes. I agree to that. Second. MR. LARSEN: Do you understand that your stipulation has now been changed so that basically you can't sleep in that -- in that converted carport until you get a certificate of occupancy to use it for a bedroom? MS. BARRERA: Okay. MR. LARSEN: Do you understand that? MS. BARRERA: Yes, sir. MR. LARSEN: And you agree to that? MS. BARRERA: Yes. MR. LARSEN: Okay. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: What we're going to do prior to your leaving, you're going to -- they're going to change it and you're going to have to sign the amended one. Okay? MS. BARRERA: Okay. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All right. With a motion, a second, and no more further discussion, do I hear a vote. All those in favor? MR. LA VINSKY: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSEN: Aye. Page 27 ,---,-'~-"'"'-~~~-'~'-----~"'-"-----~-----"---- February 26, 2009 MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any nays? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes. MS. BARRERA: Okay. Thank you. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: The next case will be Reinhard Marton. And the CEB number is CESD20080010163. THE COURT REPORTER: Raise your right hand. (The oath was administered.) MR. KEGAN: I do. MR. MARTON: I do. THE COURT REPORTER: State your names and spell your last name. MR. KEEGAN: Thomas Keegan, K-e-e-g-a-n. MR. MARTON: Reinhard Marton, R-e-i-n-h-a-r-d, M-a-r-t-o-n. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: We'll take a minute or two to read the stipulated agreement. Has everyone read the stipulated agreement? (Board indicating.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Good. And you have agreed to this stipulated agreement. MR. MARTON: Yes, I have. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Very good. Any questions of the board? MR. DEAN: What's the use of the 15-by-1O? MR. MARTON: It's on one side are the electrical and there's plumbing. That was never touched, that one wall. And it's storage is really all the rest of it is. It's just an entryway from the back of the house. There had been a room there from the previous owner, and the Page 28 '_""a~N",,,___""_~_"N,,_,~____,_,"_"'M"_""_____ February 26, 2009 termites had pretty much taken care of most of it. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Have you inspected a new or have you been inside the new structure? MR. KEEGAN: My initial site visit, that's as far as we went in this case. I cited him for the un-permitted removal and then I cited him also for the structure rebuilt. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Uh-huh. But what I'm saying, have you been inside that new structure? Is it being used as storage or -- MR. KEEGAN: I haven't been in there lately, no. We've had-- CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Have you been in there at all is what I'm -- MR. KEEGAN: Yes. Yes. Yes. That's what it was being used for. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: So it is being used as storage and electrical panel like he described? MR. KEEGAN: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. MR. LARSEN: The concern is there -- it's not living quarters, is it? MR. MARTON: No. MR. LARSEN: And it's just off the back of the house? MR. MARTON: It's at the back of the house, an entranceway where there's also a washer and dryer in there and the electrical box, the hot water heater. That's all. MR. LARSEN: What's -- what's the structure consist of? Is it wood 2-by-4s? MR. MARTON: The replacement walls are -- my nephew and a roommate of his had put -- put it together. According to them it was very -- it was -- they feel it was code. I -- I -- I don't know for sure, unfortunately. I've had a tenant in there and I'm in the process of an eviction process with them. It had gone -- gone to the court today and we should have a writ of possession today. The sheriff will let us in Page 29 -,~,---'-----""--~~._~"~"- ..,.,. .--...-...... -.....-....-, February 26, 2009 there next week is what I'm told. MR. KEEGAN: I have a photo if you guys would like to see it. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: We're not here I don't think to hear testimony. MR. KEEGAN: That's fine. MR. LARSEN: And you're pretty comfortable with being able to obtain the necessary permits and certificate of completion within 60 days? MR. MARTON: Absolutely. MR. LARSEN: All right. Because you know the penalty is $200 per day should you be unable to achieve some kind of, you know, permits and inspection and certificate of completion by then? MR. MARTON: I've hired a local contractor, general contractor. MR. LARSEN: All right. MR. MARTON: He seems to feel 60 days will work. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Is there anything in here that if the structure isn't -- cannot be permitted, that it be removed? I don't see that. MR. KEEGAN: Well, it's obtain all necessary permits. He has the option. If it's not permittable, he could obtain a demolition permit. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: I mean, what it was is it was an existing structure before that was much larger that had termite damage and he replaced the structure but made it smaller? MR. KEEGAN: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: And just kept within the same footprint? MR. KEEGAN: Uh-huh. Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. Any other discussion or questions of the board? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a motion? MR. LARSEN: I move to approve the stipulation as presented. Page 30 February 26, 2009 CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a second? MR. LA VINSKY: Second. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor? MR. LA VINSKY: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSEN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any nays? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes. MR. MARTON: Thank you, gentlemen. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: The next stipulation will be Pedro Cruz, CEB No. CESD20080007554. THE COURT REPORTER: If you'll raise your right hand. (The oath was administered.) MR. PAUL: Yes. MR. CRUZ: Yes. THE COURT REPORTER: If you'll please state your name and spell your last name. MR. PAUL: Renald Paul, Collier County Code Enforcement, P-a-u-l. THE COURT REPORTER: And state your name and spell your last name. MR. CRUZ: Pedro Cruz, C-r-u-z, the last name. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: We're going to take a minute or two to read the stipulated agreement. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Jean, I notice that some of these Page 3 1 ~,--"_."--_...._--"""".._"-~"-,,._---"-~--_.._----"-,.-"~,.-.~._,--~----- February 26, 2009 stipulation agreements mention more detail about the violation. Some reference the initial -- are you comfortable with both ways of presenting the stipulation agreement? MS. RAWSON: I think are you talking about the violations? I don't have a problem with that because in the order it's going to spell it out as it did in the charging document which was, you know, the statement of violation. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Okay. MS. RAWSON: It's fine. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Okay. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Has everyone had an opportunity to read the stipulated agreement? (Board indicated.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. Very good. Mr. Cruz, you agreed to this stipulated agreement? MR. CONSTANTINE: Yes. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Is he -- MR. CONSTANTINE: Yes. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: -- you're translating for him? MR. CONSTANTINE: Yes. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Can you swear him in as a translator? THE COURT REPORTER: I can. Can you raise your right hand, please. Do you swear to accurately translate from English to Spanish and Spanish to English? Is it Spanish? MR. CONSTANTINE: Yes. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Thank you very much. MR. CONSTANTINE: You're welcome. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any questions of the board? MR. LARSEN: I have a question. The same issue arises here that my learned colleague pointed out on the case before the last. It seems to be an nonpermitted extension to the existing home. And the Page 32 -_.....----""---- ... February 26, 2009 question is, is anybody occupying that portion of the house? MR. CONSTANTINE: Yes. MR. LARSEN: Okay. What -- what is the nonpermitted extension? Is it a bedroom? A living room? MR. CONSTANTINE: It's a porch. It's a porch. Just a little room with a computer room and a TV where the kids play Xbox and PlayStation. MR. LARSEN: And -- and what is your inspection reveal in regard to the nonpermitted extension? MR. PAUL: It was a porch or lanai that was turned into a living space. There was electrical added, possibly plumbing. Obviously, they are occupying. They had furniture in there. If you'd like to we possibly or you could amend this stipulation to say no usage of this area. MR. LARSEN: I have no further questions. MR. KELL Y: I have a question. Investigator, you stated that there was also a pool? MR. PAUL: There's several different structures. We have a pool that's un-permitted. A shed had that's un-permitted. A Tiki hut that's un-permitted. You have this extension while this alteration that they've done to the lanai so we're talking all these things. MR. KELL Y: And they're all under this order; correct? MR. PAUL: Correct. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Is the pool an in-ground or above? MR. PAUL: Above ground. MR. KAUFMAN: Electrical like the pumps and stuff by the pool? MR. PAUL: Correct. MR. KAUFMAN: You said there's a possibility of plumbing in the extension as well? MR. PAUL: Correct. MR. KAUFMAN: Have you been in the-- Page 33 - _..._-------~--~----_._. ----,~_.-,.- "-....-.... ."..".~.. ....~.,~._--,_.,_-......- , February 26, 2009 MR. PAUL: Yes, I have. MR. KAUFMAN: Was there a bathroom or-- CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER: I'd have to check that. There may have been. MR. CONSTANTINE: No. There's no plumbing on that porch. There's no plumbing, only electrical. He can go and check whatever he want. MR. KELLY: My only concern is that with all of the structures and the additional work inside, 120 days may not be enough time. And I figured if we just grant it now -- MR. CONSTANTINE: I agree with that. We might need an extension. He understand that too, sir. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: But what I'm worried about, if there's electrical inspections that haven't been done -- MR. LA VINSKY: Yeah. That would be my concern too with the pool, you know, without any kind of inspection on the electrical, it just sounds like a disaster waiting to happen. MR. KELL Y: Sometimes when -- when they build these extensions and especially like a pool, they'll tap into one breaker or maybe two. And if you can just trip those, now you don't have anything feeding those lines until it's inspected. MR. CONSTANTINE: You're right. That's how it is. They have little break there where we can break and then we can take the cables out. MR. LARSEN: Right, but then what happens to the water in the pool? MR. KELL Y: Yeah. That's true. You'd have to shock it every month. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Have -- have you applied for any permits? MR. CONSTANTINE: Not yet. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Not yet. Page 34 -,------~_...~~._~~""..-"..__..~~..-......._.~-_._- -.- -..--.--..,.. February 26,2009 MR. CONSTANTINE: What we're going to do is destroy everything. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: You're going to remove everything, the Tiki hut, the pool -- MR. CONSTANTINE: Yes. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: -- and un-permitted addition? MR. CONSTANTINE: We might get -- he say he might get permission for the porch. We got to get -- you know, what we're going to do first, we're going to remove everybody and then we're going to go next to get the permit for the porch. What we did on the porch when we get close and everything we might get the permits for that. MR. KELL Y: Investigator Paul, does he need a demo permit for an above-ground pool and that little Tiki hut? MR. PAUL: He would need it for the Tiki hut. I don't know about the pool. MR. CONSTANTINE: That pool-- that pool is not grounded. I mean, it's not -- it's above ground and it's not plumbing running underground. Nothing. Everything is -- when -- when we got the pool there's a company went to start it and they say we don't need a permit. We -- I got all those papers that say we don't need a permit. They started they charge -- they charge him $2,000 to install it. And we paid the full $7,000. They said that we don't need a permit. We say, Are you sure? They said, Yes. You don't need a permit. We got all the papers and everything. There's no plumbing running underground. Nothing. MR. PAUL: It's because of the size of the pool that he's required to have a permit. Anything over 24 inches deep is required to have a permit. It's considered a pool just like any normal pool. MR. KELL Y: But what I heard you say, correct me if I'm wrong, you said that you were just going to remove the structure. And what I asked the investigator was, do you need a permit in order to Page 35 -, --,~"-,-,-,"._~~,_...~.._",~,_..~,"".,----~_.-.,,,~~..,.-'"~.'~'._'_"".'..,," _.~",._-_...~--_.~.-_.~." ,- --,--~--- February 26, 2009 remove those structures and he said yes. MR. CONSTANTINE: Yes. MR. KELLY: So just make sure you get that. MR. CONSTANTINE: I know. He told me where to go to get it. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: So you are going to remove the pool MR. CONSTANTINE: Yes. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: -- everything? MR. CONSTANTINE: If we have to, yes. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Well, I'm a little confused. You said, If we have to. Before you said we were moving it. MR. CONSTANTINE: Yeah, we are. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Now you're saying, If we have to. MR. CONSTANTINE: Yeah. Because we don't know -- we don't know about the pool if we, like, he asked. They don't know if the pool need a permit or not. So it was that's what I was talking about. We're going to remove the Tiki hut and everything. We was talking about the pool. And then, yes, we do. We're going to remove it. MR. PAUL: He needs a permit to keep that pool there. MR. LARSEN: Either way he's got to either get the permits or he's got to remove it and he's got 120 days. If you fail to do it within 120 days, you know it's $200 a day? MR. CONSTANTINE: I know. Ifwe can -- he's saying ifhe can -- if we can get more days to -- MR. LARSEN: One hundred and twenty days is a long time. Because what the board is saying is that basically you've got electrical out there which seems to be un-permitted. That means that, you know, it wasn't inspected and you didn't get a permit to do it. And people are concerned that if somebody gets injured out there because of faulty wiring, you know, that's not a good situation to have on a property. Page 36 February 26, 2009 So what we're trying to address is whether or not you'll be able to accomplish this within 120 days or should we even approve for 120 days in light of the fact you've got electricity running to several components out there including the pool and the porch. MR. CONSTANINE: Okay. MR. LARSEN: The question is whether or not we should require him to disconnect the electricity to the pool and the porch pending the application for the permits or the removal of the offending objects. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: I mean, you run into other issues by removing electricity to an enclosed area and also to a pool so... MR. LARSEN: Well, you know, that's -- I mean, how -- how is the pool hooked up? Is it just an extension cord out to the pump? MR. CONSTANTINE: No. It's a cable on the -- it's a cable coming from the Tiki hut with a little switch. So everything is grounding. Everything is on the pipe, the plumbing pipe, everything is inside there. We can remove it. It's not a big deal. I can call and come and remove everything. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a motion? MR. KAUFMAN: I have a question. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Go ahead. MR. KAUFMAN: Are you using the pool now at all? MR. CONSTANTINE: No. MR. KAUFMAN: There's no pool heater so -- MR. CONSTANTINE: No. There is no pool heater. MR. KAUFMAN: So it wouldn't be a problem to-- MR. CONSTANTINE: To remove it. MR. KAUFMAN: What about to remove the electrical as part of our motion? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Go ahead and include it in your motion. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: This is a suggestion that for the pool seeing that that might be easy to permit, separate that and get a permit within a shorter period of time so we can get the inspection out for the Page 37 February 26, 2009 pool at a -- in a -- I mean, just a suggestion. MR. L'ESPERANCE: I think they intend to remove it. Do you intend to remove the pool or -- MR. CONSTANTINE: We don't want to. We don't want to. If we can get the permit, like he say, if it's easy to get it, we can -- we can -- I can -- you know, I can pay and get it. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Okay. MR. CONSTANTINE: He understand English so. MR. CRUZ: That part. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: I don't know if -- how long do you think it would take to apply for a permit and if -- if they go out and inspect it, how long does that -- that take? MR. PAUL: In regards to the pool? CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: In regards to the pool. MR. PAUL: I can only guess depending on when they actually go and get the permit and whatnot, say, 30 to 60 -- 30 to 45 days possibly. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Because what I was thinking is maybe separate the pool, give them 30 days to get the pool done, and at least get that permitted. And then we have to worry about the structure. They'd probably have to have an engineer come in and certify or have a contractor come in and certify the -- the other structure which is going to take more time. Have you talked to a contractor at all? MR. CONSTANTINE: Not yet. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Not yet. When was this case brought? When was this case started? MR. KELLY: May. As the -- as the owner he doesn't necessarily need a contractor. It's only for a commercial building. He could do it by owner and just have a contractor or engineer take care of the inspections by affidavit. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Right. Exactly. That's what I'm Page 38 February 26, 2009 talking about. But what I'm saying is since May they've been aware of this situation and haven't done anything about it in that period of time. MR. KAUFMAN: Have you been in contact with the company that put the pool in? MR. CONSTANTINE: Yes. MR. KAUFMAN: And does it -- I guess they're a licensed pool company? MR. CONSTANTINE: Yes. Yes. We've got all the paper. We give them the check and everything. They -- they give me -- they give Pedro a big paper signed saying they start the pool earlier. MR. KAUFMAN: If that's the case, then, this is something that that company, if they're a licensed contractor in Collier County, would know the ropes as far as getting something permitted that the 30 days probably would be sufficient time to get that done by going back to the pool company. MR. LARSEN: May I ask a question? CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Yes, sir. MR. LARSEN: Would you be agreeable to unplug the pool or just, you know, turn off the electricity to the pool pending either a permit or removal of the pool? MR. CONSTANTINE: Yes, sir. We'll do it at once we get home. MR. LARSEN: And the Tiki bar, what -- what is that? Is that a big Tiki bar or is it small? MR. CONSTANTINE: It's kind of like --like this (indicating); right? MR. LARSEN: All right. Could you disconnect the electricity or turn off the electricity to the Tiki bar until you resolve this as well? MR. CONSTANTINE: When we disconnect the electricity from the pool, the Tiki bar will be out of electricity too. MR. LARSEN: Okay. And there's a -- a shed. Is there any electricity to that shed? Page 39 ,"'------,-,-,---',-,,"-_.~~..".,.'...,-_.__..- -,.~---_._--~-,- February 26, 2009 MR. CONSTANTINE: No. MR. LARSEN: Okay. And the only other thing is the porch. And basically are there doors from the house to the porch that you can close or what is the setup on that? MR. CONSTANTINE: Just a window. MR. LARSEN: Okay. All right. So is it acceptable to the county to -- to amend the stipulation to include that disconnection of the or to turnoff the electricity to the Tiki bar and pool? MR. PAUL: Yes. MR. LARSEN: All right. Nothing else. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a motion? MR. LARSEN: I move we accept the stipulation with the amendments that they'll turnoff the electricity pending approval or permits of certificate of occupancy to the Tiki bar and a pool. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Second. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor say aye. MR. LA VINSKY: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSEN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. KELL Y: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any nays? Nay. And before you leave, you're going to have to sign the changes on the stipulated agreement. MR. CONSTANTINE: Thank you. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Thank you. Okay. The next case will be BCC vs. Raymonde and Bolomin Charles or Charles Bolomin, CEB No. 2007110124. Page 40 February 26, 2009 THE COURT REPORTER: If you'll raise your right hand. (The oath was administered.) MR. WALKER: I do. MR. CHARLES: Yes, I do. THE COURT REPORTER: Can you please state your name and spell your last name. MR. WALKER: My name is Weldon Walker, W-a-I-k-e-r. THE COURT REPORTER: Your name, sir? MR. CHARLES: My name is Bolomin Charles. THE COURT REPORTER: Thank you. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: We're just going to take a minute or two to read through this. MR. KELL Y: Excuse me. Investigator, does that say 45 days and $200 per day or 100 per day? MR. WALKER: Two hundred dollars per day. MR. KELLY: Thank you. MR. WALKER: I'm sorry. MR. KELLY: No. No. That's all right. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Has everyone read the stipulated agreement? (Board indicated.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: And you agreed to the stipulated agreement? MR. CHARLES: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any questions of the board? MR. KELL Y: Just a quick question. Investigator, could you describe what it is? Is it just an overhang? MR. WALKER: Yes. What it is, is an overhang that comes off the front porch of the front of the house. It's not an enclosed overhang. It's a -- it's an overhang that actually had -- exists right over the front portion of the entrance of the house. It's not really a complicated Page 41 February 26, 2009 overhang, but it was one that they -- they did without getting a permit. MR. KELLY: Thanks. MR. LA VINSKY: So it's just like a rain shelter type of overhang? MR. WALKER: Exactly. If you were outside on the -- in the front of your house, there's, like, maybe a 3-by-4 section of the house where you can stand underneath that under-hang and where people don't get wet. MR. LA VINSKY: Okay. Thank you. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: And have you applied yet or done anything to get the CO or certificate of completion? MR. CHARLES: We -- we have applied, but we don't get the permit yet. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. MR. LA VINSKY: You said you have applied? Okay. It's in the process. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Is it ready to be picked up, the permit? MR. WALKER: Actually, if I could clarify. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Sure. MR. WALKER: They did apply and the permit was issued. The permit was issued in March of2008. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. MR. WALKER: The permit expired, actually, eight of 2000 -- eight of 2008 or 9, excuse me, of 2008. And I explained to Mr. Charles, he would need to go down and again re-app for that. And once he does that based on his past application and/or acceptance, they would determine whether or not they would again re-issue it, but he would need to go ahead and re-app. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. MR. LA VINSKY: So it's already been applied for and issued once and -- Page 42 ~_".....~___."._..._"~_____,,____.,.,__,__,,-_..,.~o,.~..._.,......__._.__.__.._.....__._"._ -_..~_.._..'._._,----- February 26, 2009 MR. WALKER: That's correct. MR. LA VINSKY: -- and expired? Okay. MR. KELL Y: I was just going to make a motion to accept the stipulated agreement as written. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a second? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Second. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor? MR. LAVINSKY: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSEN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. KELL Y: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: You're all set. Thank you. MR. WALKER: Thank you very much. MR. CHARLES: Thank you all. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: That will take care of stipulated agreements and I think that leaves us with two hearings, if I'm not mistaken. And let's before we go into hearings, let's take a break for about ten minutes. (Short recess was taken.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: I'd like to call the Code Enforcement Board meeting back to order and we're going to be moving to hearings. And the first hearing of two is BCC vs Baby Boy Gallegos, CEB No. CEPM20080016779. THE COURT REPORTER: If you'll raise your right hand. (The oath was administered.) MR. SNOW: I do. I so swear. THE COURT REPORTER: Please state your name. Page 43 ~~,~-~--~"~,~".",.",,,~-,'-"-~"""------"'-"'_._'...-.,- .""~,.-.'-"- February 26, 2009 MR. SNOW: For the record Supervisor Kitchell, K-i-t-c-h-e-l-l, last name Snow, S-n-o-w. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Is the respondent present? MR. SNOW: Uh-uh. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: He is not present. MS. WALDRON: For the record, the respondent and the board was sent a packet of evidence and we would like to enter the packet of evidence as Exhibit A. MR. KELL Y: I make a motion to accept the packet. MR. DEAN: Second. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor? MR. LA VINSKY: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSEN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. KELL Y: Aye. MS. WALDRON: This is in reference to violations of ordinance Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances 2004-58, Section 12. Description of violation: A derelict home declared to be a hazardous and dangerous building through property inspection by a certified official. Location address for violation exists 2401 Eden Avenue, Immokalee, Florida 34142, Folio No. 30731920005. Name and address of owner, person in charge of violation location, Baby Boy Gallegos a/kla Israel Gallegos, 1318 Pear Street, Immokalee, Florida, 34143. Date violation first observed, December 5th, 2008. Date owner/person in charge given notice of violation, December 16th, 2008. Date on by which violation to be corrected, January 11th, 2009. Date of reinspect ion, January 13th, 2009. Results ofreinspection, the Page 44 February 26, 2009 violation remains. At this time I would like to present Supervisor Kitchell Snow. MR. SNOW: Good morning for the board. I found the board's concern this morning when we're talking about illegal structures and additions rather prophetic. Before I go into the case, I had a conversation on this very property yesterday with the fire marshall in Immokalee. There has been illegal additions done on the interior of the structure. I asked, and as you can see by the photographs that I will submit, there was a small fire on the interior of this property. The fire was caused by a nail going through electrical inside of this property and it continued to heat the nail until it dried out the wood which eventually cost the property. So the concerns for the health, safety, and welfare of this board are n are very pertinent to all our cases. I would like to submit in evidence Photographs B-1 through 11. I would like to submit a report from the Building Review Department for the Permitting Department C-l and a notice from the county, a notice of dangerous structure, D-1. MR. KELLY: I make a motion to accept all of the exhibits in evidence. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a second? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Second. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a vote in favor. All in favor? MR. LAVINSKY: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSEN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. Page 45 February 26,2009 MR. KELLY: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any nays? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes. MR. SNOW: As you can see from the first photograph, this is the exterior of the home and this is not occupied at this particular time. I asked the fire marshal had the structure been occupied at the time of the fire and he was not aware that it was, but it is a rental property. The next photograph is -- MR. L'ESPERANCE: Is there -- is there hot electrical service to the structure? MR. SNOW: No, sir. I've looked on the outside. It doesn't appear that it's on but, again, I couldn't -- I had access to the interior one time with the sheriffs department and -- but we haven't had one since -- been inside since then. So I don't believe so. I can't testify definitively, but I don't believe so. As you can see, this is another shot of the exterior. One of the things that drew our attention is, this is not a very good photograph of it, but the roof, as Mr. Kelly can attest to this, has a big sway in it. That is what initially brought us to the concern. All the windows have been removed or broken. This next photograph is where the fire took place. And it's -- it's predominantly in this section it looks like it went up to the roof and that's where the sway came in. It has severe structural damage to that. And when they made the additions, again, they had pierced one of the major electrical wires from the other room and that's what caused the fire. This is the top going into the roof, the top section that I just wanted to let the board know this is going up into the attic of this structure. This is on the exterior of -- of this structure. And you see deterioration throughout the property similar to this. It's a dry rot in Page 46 ._-----_._,~,_.._-,-,._--""_._~.,. _...~,._-----_."---- February 26, 2009 the wood and certainly not in any condition for anybody to live in. This is -- again, this has been open. It looks like there's been some vandals and vandalism involved here. Most of the -- or I would say all of them, the appliances have been removed. And this was -- apparently was some type of sink or maybe in the kitchen. I really couldn't tell. Again, it looks like it's been -- the fire when it took place it probably burnt through the floor in the structure so it's permeated throughout the structure. It's only in a very small area. This is some of the additions and this is normally what you would see on the exterior of a home. I just wanted to let you know that's part of where it was. As you can see the fire was there, but that was part of the additions that they did in segregating the rooms. Again, just another photograph of the fire. This is another section of -- of -- that they've added. It looks like they added a little mezzanine on the top in one of the little rooms. One more example of fire coming through the other side on the backside of the house. When -- when this type of thing happens we can declare a structure unsafe, but we have through experience thought about structures that can be unsafe and we did submit for the building department to have one of the structural guys to go out and take a look and it was declared unsafe, inhabitable. We then noticed the respondent a notice of dangerous structure and they have 30 days. As you can probably see they have 30 days to -- to contact us and make repairs and that which they have not done. MR. L'ESPERANCE: They have not responded to your correspondence so far? MR. SNOW: They -- they -- one of my investigators had been out on that property in that area and they are aware of this. They've been -- they've been posted. I've been to the property -- their property to talk to them on several occasions. I've left door hang -- door Page 47 February 26, 2009 hangers in cars. And the investigators that I worked with, I did have a conversation with them. And, apparently, they were waiting for insurance. But I would only surmise, and this is just my opinion, not anything definitive, I would think the insurance company would probably have some concerns about how the fire started and the liability therein. That's -- I don't really know, but that's what I'm thinking. So, and, again, this poses health, safety, and welfare for this community. The door is locked but all the windows are broken and out. I went by yesterday and there were beer cans all in the interior of it. So I would imagine probably some homeless have moved in and just are occupying this. MR. KAUFMAN: I have a question. Being that this is possibly an insurance claim, can this structure be removed without any liability as far as the county is concerned? MR. SNOW: I don't know about what liability the -- the county has as far as if it's an insurance claim. We're not really sure, only what Mr. Gallegos has -- has said. This has been going on for quite sometime. And, again, because Mr. Gallegos hasn't been very cooperative in trying to contact us, we've made many attempts to try to get him to come in and find out what the property is. The fire marshall was not aware of any claims. He was not aware of any cases up along the property. Traditionally, the fire marshall keeps the claims open until litigation has been completed. There is no investigation currently on this property. MR. LARSEN: Supervisor Snow, in your professional opinion, is this a hazard to the safety and well-being of the citizens of Collier County? MR. SNOW: Absolutely, sir. MR. LARSEN: And in your professional opinion, does a violation on this property exist under the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances? Page 48 February 26, 2009 MR. SNOW: Absolutely, sir. MR. LARSEN: Okay. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any other questions from the board? MR. LARSEN: I make a motion and find that the violation does exist. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a second? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Second. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor? MR. LAVINSKY: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSEN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any nays? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes. Do you have a recommendation? MR. SNOW: Yes, sir, we do. And, again, we left the appropriate spaces for the board to decide what they feel is appropriate in this situation. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: So in your opinion you don't think the structure could be repaired? MR. SNOW: No, sir, I do not. And the building -- and, again, that's the purpose of having a structural inspector go out to make -- they're the professionals. They make the determination. They deemed it's an unsafe structure. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any questions? MR. LARSEN: I haven't finished reading it yet. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Could we focus this a little bit more or is Page 49 February 26, 2009 it just my bifocals? MS. WALDRON: It doesn't focus anymore. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Thank you for trying. MR. KELL Y: I have a procedural question. Jean, what is the maximum fine amount per day in a safety issue case; do you know? MS. RAWSON: Well, the-- MR. KELL Y: That's recommendation. MS. RAWSON: -- I think it's 250. MR. LARSEN: See, here's my concern, Supervisor Snow. You give them 30 days but, you know, what's going to be the status of this property for the next 30 days? MR. SNOW: Well, sir, it's going to remain as it is. And we can either -- you can either request for them to violate themselves and the county's going to go in and do it. That's the ultimate goal here is abate this violation. It -- it's going to cost too much to repair this structure to have it habitable. So their options are to -- they remove it or the county removes it and that's what we're asking. MR. LARSEN: Well, I understand to do it within the next 30 days before you're able to take action. But, you know, is there any way that this place could be secured to prevent that kind of activity that you kind of witnessed in there in regard to homeless possibly moving in or somebody else being injured on this property during that 30 days? MR. SNOW: You could request to have the structure boarded, sir. The board could request to have this boarded. But, again, the 30 days is being given so we -- the board could limit the time that is given to allow for this to be demo'd and we then we can go ahead and take care of that. The county does have funds to take care of this type of thing, but we would prefer the respondent do it. MR. LARSEN: Well, I don't have a problem giving the respondent 30 days to do it or imposing a fine. I'm just concerned that Page 50 February 26, 2009 -- you know, it's -- it's now open. It's now notorious. People know that it's abandoned and they know that basically they can get an easy access. And what's the turnaround time for having it boarded up by the county? MR. SNOW: It normally doesn't take long. We have to go -- we have to get a bid for that and they'll go out and take care of that. I think we could probably accomplish that in about ten days. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: But we'd have to give a time frame for the respondent to board it himself. So if we give ten days for the respondent to board it -- MR. SNOW: Well, you could give n excuse me for the interruption, Mr. Chair. You could give the respondent until early next week to do it. And then if it's not boarded, then the county will board it -- CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Right, but -- MR. SNOW: -- appropriate action. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: -- but to be fair to him, it takes me a couple days to sign the order. It takes a couple days for them to receive the order. So if we say ten days out from the meeting from today, today's date, it doesn't give him much time. MR. SNOW: I'll hand deliver the order, sir. MS. WALDRON: To answer Mr. Larsen's question, you -- you are able to fine up to $1,000 per violation. MR. LARSEN: A thousand dollars per diem? MS. WALDRON: One thousand dollars per day per violation. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Is there some way that we could put some type of plastic stay-away-type tape around the structure for this next ten days, stay-out tape or something like this? MR. SNOW: I don't believe that we can do that, sir. Again, the property owner has to have responsibility of that. We could probably talk to the sheriffs office in Immokalee, continue to do policing and probably do something with that. Page 51 February 26, 2009 CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: One thing we could do is -- is he readily available? I mean, do you -- have you met with him? MR. SNOW: I've tried to talk to Mr. Gallegos and the Gallegos family on several occasions. The investigator I work with, Maria Rodriguez, has talked to him on several occasions and encouraged him to come to the office, but he goes home and says he's going to come back, but I will talk to Mr. Gallegos personally. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: What I was thinking is if we give him five days from when he's delivered notice to, let's say, board up the property, he has five days, but what I'm worried about if that occurs, he's going to start -- MR. SNOW: No, sir. You give that order, sir, I will talk to him personally again to make sure that he understands what the order is and make sure that it gets accomplished. MR. KELLY: I also have a question for Jean. Ifwe give him five days, it's not practicable for any action to occur, does he have any way to tie this up in some kind of suit because the order was not compliable with, if you will? MS. RAWSON: I've given more than five days because in all fairness, if it's Monday when Gerald signs the orders, Tuesday when I get them to Jennifer, even if the inspector is kind enough to hand deliver it, it might be Wednesday of next week. So now we're already past the five days. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: No. No. Five days from when he receives the notice. MS. RAWSON: You could do that. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Or seven days, whatever the time frame. What I'm trying to get at is if we do issue an order that says he has 30 days to remove the building and -- but he has to board it up within ten days, I mean, it's going to be boarded for -- someone's going to have to go through that expense for ten-day's worth of between the demolition and the boarding. So I'm trying to avoid that. Page 52 February 26, 2009 MR. LARSEN: Right. In order to do the demolition, he's got to get the permits. And order to get the permits, he's got to make an application, pay the fees. It's going to take time. The question is, is there some authority that we have to -- to secure these premises pending application or receipt or nonreceipt of the permits? And, you know, what I'm concerned about is that some-- some teenager out in Immokalee is going to be in there and he's going to get hurt during this period of time. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Certainly. MR. LARSEN: And, you know, you're right. I think that he's got to give X number of days from when he actually receives the order in hand to take some action, you know, but how much time is -- is an open question. As for the fine I think a $250 a day fine is probably within reason. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: So, I mean, what we can do is separate out the -- the must be boarded within seven days of notification or ten days, whatever is agreeable. If not, then the county can go in and board it and then give us a period of time before the removal. MR. SNOW: If! may, the board can -- because of the health, safety, and welfare of this to the community under Chapter 162 you can impose a lesser time frame. You have the option to do that. It doesn't have to be the 30-day time frame because it is a health, safety, and welfare and it's imminent peril to this community. You can impose whatever you deem possible. I don't think boarding is really an option. I think you give him ten days to get it done. And if he doesn't do it, then the county does it. I think that's an option. MR. KELL Y: Is there any such provision similar to the 162 that allows the sheriffs department just to go in, mark off the area as a dangerous place using, like, the caution tape or the crime scene tape? MR. SNOW: I really can't testify to that without talking to them first. Page 53 February 26, 2009 MR. KAUFMAN: To speed things up, and I think that's what everybody's looking for, when you speak to him, can you find out from him if he intends to tear the property down and apply for the necessary permits, et cetera? And, if not, then maybe we can speed the process up by having the county do it immediately. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Well, I think his time to explain what he was going to do was here and now and he's not here. So we are going to make that decision for him. I feel that we should make him aware and make that decision for him. He was -- had the opportunity to come here and -- MR. LARSEN: Let me ask, Supervisor Snow, if the county undertook the demolition, does the county have to go through any kind of permitting process or is that something that the county is excused from doing? MR. SNOW: No. Our contractor will have to pull a demo permit. And they follow the same rules and regulations as anybody else that would apply. We just have to contact -- we do have contractors that we deal with on -- I wouldn't say on a daily basis, but we do deal with that know the ins and outs of the permitting process and we can get it done. Again, this is an imminent health and safety issue for this community and it needs to be taken care of. MR. LARSEN: All right. Now, Jean, does this board have authority to issue an order saying that a demolition permit should be issued on an expedited basis if requested by a contractor for the county? MS. RAWSON: Well, yes, but I don't think you would need to say that. You give -- it's my understanding it doesn't take very long to get a demolition permit; is that right? MR. SNOW: That is correct, ma'am. MS. RAWSON: So I would give the respondent, you know, a short period of time to get a demolition permit and demolish it. Ifhe doesn't, I would then have the county go in immediately and do it for Page 54 February 26, 2009 him. MR. LARSEN: Now, in regard to the applicable period of time, the problem I've seen over the last 20 years is if you give people seven or ten days, it's not sufficient. If you give them 15 or 20 days, usually it's deemed a bit more reasonable. So my suggestion to the board is that we basically give 15 days. And that basically if they can't get the permit or do not get the permit to demolish this premises, then the county does it within 15 days. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Would you like to fashion that into a motion? MR. LARSEN: Well, it's for discussion now. MR. KELL Y: I do have in addition to that discussion and I'll agree going with that. When do the fines stop if that was the case? Let's say we give him 20 days. Ten days after that the county steps in with their own permit and their own contractor to do the work. The work doesn't get finished for another 20 days. At what point do the fines stop and the cost to demolish accrue? MS. WALDRON: The fines would stop when the county abates, the date that the county abates the violation. MR. KELLY: So if the county's contractor took six months, it would be all that as well? MS. WALDRON: Correct. MR. LARSEN: I'm sorry. Is that in a part pulling the permit? Is that when the abatement process starts? MS. WALDRON: The abate -- well, the -- as far as the fines are concerned, the fines stop when that structure is demolished. MR. LARSEN: Upon the completion. MS. WALDRON: Upon the completion which is what your order usually states. MR. SNOW: And, just for the record, they're usually done in two days usually. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: And what would be the fine? Page 55 February 26, 2009 MR. LARSEN: I think a fine of$250 a day. MR. KELLY: Personally, I think it should be twice that. I mean, we do $200 a day for somebody putting a Tiki hut in the backyard. This is a structure that collapsed at a moment's notice. MR. LARSEN: Well, you know, I think -- I think -- I think your point is well taken. And the reason why I think your point is well taken is because of the testimony of the supervisor who said basically there's been a lack of cooperation. All right. So this is what I'd like to do, Mr. Chairman. I'd like to make a motion. I'd like to make a motion that paragraph 1 of the recommendation states, (as read): Obtain a demolition permit and remove the derelict home with all inspection through certificate of completion within fifteen days from the date of this hearing of a fine of -- or a fine -- it should be or a fine of $500 per day will be imposed. And then the remain -- the rest or the balance of the recommendation will stay as stated. MR. KELL Y: I will second that motion. MS. RAWSON: Why -- why don't you state on the record what the balance of the recommendation is as part of your order. MR. LARSEN: Well, all right. Well, then that particular case I shall read the recommendation. That the Code Enforcement Board shall order the respondent to pay all operational costs incurred in the prosecution of this case in the amount of$8,700.57 within 30 days of the date of this hearing and abate all violations by (1) obtain a demolition permit and remove derelict home with all inspections through certificate of completion within fifteen days of the date of this hearing or a fine of $500 per day will be imposed; (2) remove all refuse from said property to a site suitable for such disposal; (3) if the violation is not corrected by the time frame given herein, Collier County Code Enforcement may hire a licensed contractor to obtain compliance with the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the order. All costs for such abatement will be assessed and Page 56 February 26, 2009 become a lien against said property; (4) the respondent must notify the Code Enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement. Could you move up the -- all right. That -- that is the recommendation. MR. KELLY: And I, again, second that motion. MR. LARSEN: All right. So motion is to accept that recommendation as amended. And, Supervisor Snow, you'll complete the appropriate paperwork? MR. SNOW: Absolutely, sir. MR. LARSEN: Okay. So-- CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor? MR. LA VINSKY: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSEN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any nays? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes. MR. SNOW: I thank the board for its time. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Thank you. The next case will be BCC vs. Mark A. Goodman, CEB No. CESD20080006858. THE COURT REPORTER: If you'll raise your right hand. (The oath was administered.) MR. MARTINDALE: I do. MR. GOODMAN: I do. Page 57 February 26, 2009 THE COURT REPORTER: If you would state your name, please, for the record. MR. MARTINDALE: Ronald Martindale, Collier County Code Enforcement. MR. GOODMAN: Mark Goodman. MS. WALDRON: For the record, the respondent and the board was sent a packet of evidence and we'd like to enter the packet of evidence as Exhibit A. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a motion. MR. KELL Y: I make a motion to accept the packet. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a second? MR. DEAN: Second. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor? MR. LA VINSKY: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSEN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any nays? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes. MS. WALDRON: Some violation of ordinance Collier County Code of Law Chapter 22, buildings and building regulations, Article II, Florida Building Code, adoption and amendment of the Florida Building Code Section 22 through 26(b)(1 04.1.3 .5). Description of violation: Prohibited activities prior to permit issuance, permit application when required, improvement of property prior to issuance of building permit. Location address where violation Page 58 February 26, 2009 exists, 1348 Highlands Drive, Naples, Florida. Name and address of owner or person in charge of violation location, Mark A. Goodman, 1324 Highlands Drive, Naples, Florida. Date violation first observed, June 17th, 2008. Date owner/person in charge given notice of violation by certified mail, June 17th, 2008. Date on which violation to be corrected, August 7th, 2008. Date of reinspection, February 3rd, 2009. The results of reinspect ion, the violation remains. At this time I would like to present Investigator Ron Martindale. MR. MARTINDALE: Good morning. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Good morning. MR. MARTINDALE: I would like to present in evidence Exhibit B, Photographs I through 4, and Exhibit C-l which is a very basic floor plan of the structure in question. MR. KELLY: Make a motion to accept the evidence. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a second? MR. LA VINSKY: Second. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: No discussion. All those in favor. MR. LAVIN SKY: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSEN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any nays? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes. MR. MARTINDALE: On May the 22nd I received a property maintenance complaint on this property. After research determined the Page 59 February 26, 2009 issue was actually a permitted garage that had been converted into a living area without obtaining Collier County permits. I made numerous attempts to contact Mr. Goodman. And when that failed, I mailed a notice of violation certified mail on the 17th and it was received -- registered receipt was accepted, I'm sorry, on the 23rd as Ms. Waldron said. On the 14th I received a call from Mr. Goodman of July. He stated he'd just made aware of the issue. I believe he was out -- out of state or out of the country and asked for additional time to abate the violation. On the 8th I received -- 8th of August I received from Shearer Company that they had began to draw up contracts for plans for building for this improvement. On September the 2nd I received a second call from Frank Shearer stating he was meeting with respondent on-site to verify what would be needed to get the permit. On September -- September 30th, 2008, I received some additional information from Mr. Shearer what appeared -- they appeared to be making forward movement toward compliance so I granted some additional time. On the 6th of October a permit was issued, No. 2008110256 for the improvement, but was rejected during plan review for setback and septic issues. On the 17th the permitting department sent Mr. Goodman a plan review rejection letter and as of today no further actions have been taken for this permit. On the 8th I prepared the case for Code Enforcement Board and as of today the permit is still in applied status. The photos are -- were taken yesterday. This was basically a garage in front of the structure. As you can see on B-1 the -- where the one window you see, that used to be the entry to the garage. This photo indicates from the street where the garage door was Page 60 February 26, 2009 formerly. This is viewed from the other side ofthe structure. You'll note the door there on the left-hand side and the next photo is a close-up of the same. This is an exterior door that was also added. And it's, in fact, just one small room inside that door that is a laundry facility -- communal laundry facility. I did have -- Mr. Goodman did meet me on-site, gave me a tour through the interior of the property; however, the photos didn't turnout. I went back yesterday to try to get some interior photos but, unfortunately, nobody was home to allow me entry. MR. L'ESPERANCE: You said the changes and addition do include plumbing or they do not? MR. MARTINDALE: That I can't advise, sir. It was a garage what was permitted prior to that in the garage area. MR. KELL Y: And, Investigator, you said you had a site plan or some kind of layout? MR. MARTINDALE: Yes. I'm sorry, sir. It's No. C here. It will be the lower left-hand colored portion that is green in color. That is the appraiser's site plan. And that shows it's very basic, very rudimentary, but it shows that that is a garage and that's the location that was actually converted. MR. KELL Y: Were you able to find the original permits that showed that it was originally constructed and inspected as a garage? MR. MARTINDALE: Yes, sir. Yes, sir. I have all permits on file. And as Mr. Goodman he has many, many records there. He's been -- Mr. Goodman might advise -- the respondent has been very forthcoming in this. It's -- we've had some lack of communication at times, but he's been very, very understanding and cooperative. MR. KELLY: Okay. Great. Thank you. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Go ahead, Mr. Goodman. MR. GOODMAN: I don't know what to say. MR. LARSEN : Well, good morning, Mr. Goodman. How are you today? Page 61 February 26,2009 MR. GOODMAN: Very well. MR. LARSEN: What's the -- what's the status with your garage? Did you convert it over to -- is it part of the living area? MR. GOODMAN: Yes. It's a living area. I enclosed the garage and added the door on the side knowing better. I should have not done it without the permit. MR. LARSEN: So how do you want to resolve this? MR. GOODMAN: I'm going to resolve it by -- financial problems, of course, is part of it. I have the drawings from Shearer that we agreed on because of what it's kicked out for. I still haven't had a call back. I'm very bad about -- okay. I waited a little bit long here. When I got this letter, I started pursuing it faster again. Of course, the same thing with my architect-engineer. I had to call him. Where's the paperwork. He came and went through the whole house with me. We've got a complete floor plan of the existing house because there is no floor plan of except the additions. There's been four owner/builder additions. As you heard, my address, it's two doors down. It's actually not there yet either. I'm living in another place. But this was my home, the first home I ever bought. I've been in it many years. All this work was done while I was there and I done it. I got the new drawings. I just received them, dated and stamped by him. He had let it fallen back. I forgot about it. When I found out about this hearing, I'm calling, Hey, where's those drawings. I got to pursue it again, you know, 50 percent. MR. LARSEN: What do you want us to do for you, Mr. Goodman? MR. GOODMAN: Well, the only thing I'm concerned about-- okay. I don't like -- he -- Mr. Martindale, I guess, I was here at 8:30, didn't get to talk to him. Everything was starting to come to deal so he handed this to me a little bit later. Here, look at this. And, you know, more time is what I need. Page 62 February 26, 2009 MR. LARSEN: How much time? MR. GOODMAN: Because of financial part of it, I'm going to have to bring this stuff up to today's codes. When this was built, it was not done -- the window's not going to be -- it will meet the code. I'll take it back because I got hurricane shutters. One of the doors opens in instead of out. Today an exterior door cannot open that way. MR. LARSEN: Besides the electric that was originally in the garage, did you add any additional electric in there? MR. GOODMAN: Yes, I did, a little bit. MR. LARSEN: What, are they outlets? MR. GOODMAN: There was no outlets changed. I tied in one outlet to put the light to the laundry room which is owner/builder. All the electric in it was owner/builder before. I'm a licensed certified general contractor. I'm very knowledgeable of knowing what will meet code. It's all built to code. What I done was that was not done to code was pull the permit. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Well, being that you're a general contractor then -- MR. GOODMAN: I did it under owner/builder though. I was living in it. Yes. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: The point I wanted to make, before you interrupted me, was being a general contractor in Collier County, you should know that a permit had to be pulled. MR. GOODMAN: Absolutely I did. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: And so forth so that actually puts an added responsibility on yourself knowing -- MR. GOODMAN: I understand that. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. So, in fact, you do agree that there is a violation there? MR. GOODMAN: Yes. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. Very good. MR. KELLY: In light of that testimony, I'll make a motion that a Page 63 February 26, 2009 violation does exist so we can talk about recommendations. MR. KAUFMAN: I'll second. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor? MR. LA VINSKY: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSEN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any nays? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do you have a recommendation? MR. MARTINDALE: The county recommends that the Code Enforcement Board order the respondent to pay operational costs incurred in this matter which would be $88.14; to obtain the required Collier County Building or demolition permits; all required inspections up through and through issuance of certificate of completion -- (Microphone static.) THE COURT REPORTER: I'm sorry. Would you repeat that last part? MR. MARTINDALE: Sure. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Does anyone have their phones near a mic that's going off? MR. KELLY: Okay. Thank you, sir. MR. GOODMAN: I don't know if that's it or not. MR. KELLY: That's usually it. The cell phones -- CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Don't forget. Why don't you turn it off and put it back in your pocket. That way you don't forget it Page 64 February 26, 2009 because you might. MR. GOODMAN: It's in vibrate. I turned so it wouldn't do that. I apologize. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: No problem. But, yeah, that way you don't forget it and have to come back. MR. GOODMAN: Very well. Thank you. MR. MARTINDALE: Would you like me to start over? MR. KELL Y: Please. MR. MARTINDALE: The county recommends that the operational costs total of$88.14 -- $88.14 occurred be paid; and that the subject obtain Collier County building or demolition permits, all required inspections and a certificate of completion or occupancy within X amount of days or a fine of X amount of dollars per day will be imposed for each and any violation that remains. The respondent must notify the Collier County Code inspector when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement. And if the problem -- this problem fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Department to enforce the provisions of this order. MR. KELLY: A question to the respondent. Sir, basically this is a standard order. MR. GOODMAN: Yes. MR. KELL Y: And we have to fill in the blanks. MR. GOODMAN: Yes. MR. KELLY: How much time do you think you're going to need to help us fill in the blanks? MR. LARSEN: Can you get it done in 60 days? MR. GOODMAN: Financially, no. MR. LARSEN: How about 90 days? MR. GOODMAN: Financially, no. MR. LARSEN: What about 120 days? Page 65 February 26, 2009 MR. GOODMAN: Financially, no. MR. LARSEN: When do you think you could get it done? MR. GOODMAN: I can't answer that question. My financial situation is in very bad shape. I don't even know that I'll own this property in the amount of time that you're saying in any of those amounts of time. I am not able to make the mortgage payments. I have the paperwork together. I want to pursue it and I will pursue the permitting so that I can get the permit like I had. In fact, there was two violations written and one of them was permitted and tooken (sic) care of with a little bit of fault to me of ever getting it inspected. I did get the permit and demolished the property that was built on easement -- setback easement. The 180 days I think I can -- either I'll have it done or I won't own it. And then once I don't own it, I don't want to sign that I'm liable personally for the 200. I'd rather realistically -- my understanding I'd rather have a fine imposed now that goes against the property because it goes to the backside on a lien and then I'm not personally liable where the police department's going to come after me. I'm not understanding that. I'm scared of signing that part of it and signing it like I'm personally liable. Because my understanding right now would be the fines are assessed against the property. And if I'm -- you know, I don't want it assessed to me where it comes to me at my home that I do live at. MR. KELL Y: You're -- you're correct. The fines do go against the property, but typically what's happened in the past is the board does not like to take the responsibility that now lies on you as the current property owner and pass that on even if it's to the bank. Eventually the bank's going to liquidate that and it's going to go to some private homeowner. And you want to buy a home and have a lien on it. MR. GOODMAN: No, I wouldn't. No, I wouldn't. MR. KELL Y: So, if anything, that usually pushes the board to Page 66 February 26, 2009 try to get you to take care of it even quicker. And as a contractor it's great to know you can fix some of these things yourself. MR. GOODMAN: Yes. MR. KELL Y: Like turn the door around or something. MR. GOODMAN: And that's all in the drawings. I just have to get it -- again, you can see that it's dated. I just got it the last couple of days. And next week -- by next week I will be back down at the county and reapply. I've got questions yet for the septic tank people. The Health Department came with this one. We want that whole floor plan for no reason why. I mean, in any of this addition there's no plumbing. It's strictly electrical. Why the Health Department's come into it and stepped in, I don't know. I think it's because the original, what do you call it, complaint -- not the complaint, what you had written up at first? MR. KELLY: Violation. MR. GOODMAN: It talked about maybe plumbing and everything. The only plumbing is in the garage -- here is the actual permit plans, job site. It shows the washer and dryer. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Mr. Goodman, we're trying to fill in the blanks right now. MR. GOODMAN: I'm -- okay. So I'm not sure how long it's going to take either because I don't know what all I've got to come up with now so... CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: I don't know if this is relevant or not. Are you currently in foreclosure with this property? MR. GOODMAN: No. MR. LARSEN: I'd like to make a motion, Mr. Chairman. I'd like to move that we -- we give the respondent 120 days in order to obtain the required permits and inspection and certificate of completion or demolition and, otherwise, impose a fine of $1 00 per day. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a second? Page 67 February 26, 2009 MR. L'ESPERANCE: Second. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any discussion? MR. KELLY: I like the order. I'm sorry. I like the motion. My only hesitation is with consistency. I mean, when you have case after case where we've been doing 200 a day, I feel that the time frame is very fair. I was going to say 90 days. I feel the time frame is very fair, but I don't think the fine amount is consistent with -- MR. LARSEN: All right. If! amended my motion to $200 per day -- MR. KELL Y: I would go along with that. MR. L'ESPERANCE: I will amend my second if you amend your motion. MR. LARSEN: So this is going to be the motion. To obtain a county building or demolition permit or required inspections and a certificate of completion or occupancy within 120 days the amount of days or a fine of $200 per day will be imposed for each day any violation remains. Now, do I have to read, Jean, the entire recommendation again? MS. RAWSON: I would -- yes. I would read the last two parts including the cost. MR. LARSEN: Yes, ma'am. All right. And I believe those operational costs were -- MR. DEAN: Eighty-eight fourteen. MR. LARSEN: Eighty-eight fourteen. All right. All right. That the Code Enforcement Board will order the respondent to pay operational costs in the amount of $88.14 incurred in the prosecution of this date -- case within 30 days and abate all violations by (1) obtaining a county building or demolition permit, all required inspections, and a certificate of completion, slash, occupancy within 120 days or a fine of $200 per day will be imposed for each day any violation remains; (2) the respondent must notify the Code Enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order Page 68 February 26, 2009 to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement; (3) if the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of the order. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a second? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Second. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor? MR. LAVIN SKY: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSEN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any nays? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes. Okay, Mr. Goodman. You're all set. MR. MARTINDALE: Thank you very much. MR. GOODMAN: Thank you. MS. FLAGG: Mr. Chair, just as a point of clarification, the violations do run with the property. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Right. MS. FLAGG: And through the blight prevention program that we've set up in the Code Enforcement Department, what we're doing as the cases are open and the bank files a lis pendens with the Clerk of Courts or notifying the bank that there's a code violation on it in requiring the banks to repair the code violation, the banks are not going to be able to pass on that property to a buyer as long as that buyer needs a loan to buy the property. Because we're now registering Page 69 February 26, 2009 those code violations when the title companies are calling to see if there's a lien or a code violation on the property. The people buying the property are not able to get a loan until the bank abates the violation. So we're assuring in our program of Stop the Bleed we're assuring that these properties are not getting passed on to an unsuspecting buyer. And I -- I do have to say at this point the Code Enforcement team has achieved 100 percent compliance in having the banks abate code violations. MR. KELL Y: It may be out of order, but that's a huge congratulations to the Code Enforcement Department. That's a win-win for everyone involved. That's great work. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Thank you. Okay. Any old business? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: We're going to move on to imposition of fines. The first one is BCC vs. Reinaldo and Zoraida Jardines and Sylvia Jimenez. THE COURT REPORTER: If you'll raise your right hand. (The oath was administered.) MR. AMBACH: Yes. MR. JIMENEZ: I do. THE COURT REPORTER: Will you state your name and spell your last name. MR. AMBACH: First name Christopher. Last name Ambach, A-m-b-a-c-h, Investigator of Code Enforcement. MR. JIMENEZ: Juan Jimenez. Last name J-i-m-e-n-e-z. MS. WALDRON: This is in reference to Case 2007030794. On January 24th, 2008, the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact and conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached order of the board, OR 4325, page 3005, Page 70 February 26, 2009 for more information. The respondent has complied with the CEB orders as of February 24th, 2009. The county's recommendation is to issue an order imposing a lien in the amount of $5, 114.90. The fine's at a rate of $50 per day for the period between October 25th, 2008, to February 26th, 2009,96 days for the total of $4,800. Operational costs of $314.90 have not been paid. MR. KELLY: I have a question real quick. You said that originally came into compliance February 24th? MS. WALDRON: Yes. MR. KELLY: And the fines are incurring until February 26th? MS. WALDRON: Yes. The -- the executive summary was changed as per how I read it. MR. LARSEN: All right. So it's $100 less than what we have? MS. WALDRON: It's 100 less. It's two days less. MR. LARSEN: So it's $5,114.90 instead of 5,214.90? MS. WALDRON: Correct. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: And what relationship are you? Are you -- MR. JIMENEZ: I am Sylvia's husband and Reinaldo and Zoraida's son-in-law. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. And you have the authority to be here and represent -- MR. JIMENEZ: I do. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: -- the parties involved? MR. JIMENEZ: I do. MR. KELL Y: Sir, could you just give us a brief description on why it took longer to comply? MR. JIMENEZ: Sure. As when I -- last I came here was last January. We had R-Cube Design (phonetic). It's an architectural firm. They -- they did do the plans. They were not able to comply with once we got involved with DEP and Civil Corps of Engineers. They Page 71 February 26, 2009 were not able to comply with -- or this was beyond their expertise. So then we had to retain a Gina Green Engineering Firm in order to follow through with DEP. DEP finally, you know, back and forth we finally got a -- we finally got their approval September 30th. It was mailed out September 30th. We actually got it, I think, on the 6th or something. And then the permits were issued by the county on October 21 st. The wall was then constructed in November. The complete wall was done. The only thing that was missing we had to put in riprap and we also had to put in -- backfill the wall. We went back and forth with -- because DEP had requested one to two on the size of riprap which is, like, one to two feet on the size of the stone. And nobody around here has that. That doesn't exist. The one that exists is six to twelve. They finally agreed that, you know, six to twelve would be fine. So then we got the riprap. The entire wall, backfill, grading, everything was done by, I would say, the end of December the beginning of January. On the county permits it states a engineer certification letter needs to be provided. I contacted the engineer, said everything was done. She had already done all her inspections and so she just wanted to go see the backfill and the rocks. Once she went to see, she contact DEP to make sure, you know, to follow up with them to see what paperwork they needed to -- to finalize the permit. And it's taken -- it took her until I think the letter's dated the 17th we actually got the certification letter. I then called the county and asked for the final inspection. And -- and then I -- I didn't even know about this hearing until Monday. MR. KELL Y: Investigator, would you say that the respondent worked diligently to get this taken care of? It just took longer than what the board may have originally assumed it would? MR. AMBACH: I believe there's -- there's some truth to that, yes. I think he has -- I know he ran into some issues with a couple of Page 72 February 26, 2009 the different firms he was working with. I think he was trying, made a good-faith effort. Definitely. MR. KELLY: And, sir, there's operational costs of $314.90. Those -- we have no ability to waive. How soon could you have those paid? MR. JIMENEZ: I could pay it right now. As I stated to Investigator Ambach, I would have paid -- I would have paid. The last time I was here, I said, can I pay it here? They said, No. You will receive something in writing over the mail. I never got that. And then I said -- I even said to them this morning, Can I give you a check now for that? And that -- that's not an issue. MR. KELLY: Okay. In light of the testimony from the respondent and the county stating that the respondent did work diligently, I make a motion that we waive the fines and that the operational costs would be the only thing that would actually be liened unless something happens real quick here. You don't have to put that m. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a second? MR. KAUFMAN: Second it. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor? MR. LA VINSKY: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSEN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any nays? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes. Page 73 February 26, 2009 MR. JIMENEZ: Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Thank you. The next case will be Pry of Naples, LLC, Case No. CES20080002782. (The oath was administered.) MR. SNOW: I do so swear. THE COURT REPORTER: Thank you. State your name. MR. SNOW: For the record Supervisor Kitchell, K-i-t-c-h-e-l-l. Last name Snow, S-n-o-w. MS. WALDRON: This is in reference to Case No. CES20080002782. On July 31st, 2008, the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached order of the board OR 4385, page 0692, for more information. At this time the respondent has complied with the CEB orders as of December 18th, 2008. The county's recommendation is to impose a fine, lien at fines at the rate of $1 00 per day for the period between November 25th, 2008, to December 15th, 2008, for the total of $2,000. The operational costs of $89.42 have been paid. The total recommended lien amount is $2,000. MR. SNOW: Sir, I have talked to the respondents. Unfortunately, they were not able to be here today. They did give due diligence to try to get this CO'd when it was supposed to be CO'd. They ran into some -- some problems with inspections and had to come back. So they did give due diligence to try to alleviate this matter. If the board remembers, they did come back and request more time. So they have done everything they needed to do on their part. MR. KAUFMAN: Do you recommend that this fine be abated? MR. SNOW: I would -- I would agree with anything the board would recommend. MR. LARSEN: Supervisor Snow, did the respondents ask you to Page 74 February 26, 2009 make their request known to the board that they're seeking an abatement? MR. SNOW: Yes, sir, they did. MR. LARSEN: So it's just by circumstance or happenstance that they weren't able to make it here today? MR. SNOW: To be very honest with you, sir, until this was done, I talked to Mr. Cook, who was the representative, three or four times a week. And they had been very, very diligent on doing what they were trying to do. And they just ran into some inspection issues that -- that they couldn't handle and it got taken care of as soon as possible. MR. LARSEN: Based upon the respondents request for an abatement of fine, I would suggest that basically we abate the fine, but impose the operational costs that have already been paid from what I understand. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a second? MR. KAUFMAN: Second. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: And do I hear a vote? MR. LARSEN: All in favor. MR. LA VINSKY: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSEN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any nays? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes. MR. SNOW: I thank the board for its time. Page 75 February 26, 2009 CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: The next case will be Marvin Ralph Hoeman, and CB -- CEB No. CESD20080005124. THE COURT REPORTER: If you'll raise your right hand. (The oath was administered.) MR. PAUL: Yes. THE COURT REPORTER: State your name, please. MR. PAUL: Renald Paul, Collier County Code Enforcement investigator. MS. WALDRON: On October 31st, 2008, the Code -- the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinance -- ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached order of the board OR 4407, page 1781, for more information. At this time the respondent has not complied with the CEB orders as of February 26th, 2009. The county's recommendation is to impose a fine, lien at the fines at the rate of $50 per day for the period between January 30th, 2009, to February 26th, 2009, 28 days for the totalof$1,400. Fines will continue to accrue on this case. Operational costs of $87.57 have not been paid. The total recommended lien amount is $1,487.57. MR. LARSEN: And that's correct? That has not been complied with? MR. PAUL: Correct. This property's been foreclosed on by a bank. MR. LARSEN: So they don't have a certificate of completion for the house itself? MR. PAUL: No, they don't. MR. LARSEN: And the house has now been foreclosed upon? MR. PAUL: Correct. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: And now it's owned by the bank? MR. PAUL: Correct. Page 76 February 26, 2009 CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Jean, do we have to notice the bank instead of to impose this or -- or not? MS. RAWSON: Well, I think it would probably help Ms. Flagg and her staff out if we sent a copy of this order to the bank. I don't know which bank. MR. LARSEN: Well, I -- you know, we're -- we're here to impose a lien. And although, you know, the -- the officer was good enough to inform us there was some kind of foreclosure proceeding, I don't think that has any impact on our determination of whether or not to impose a lien today or not. I mean, basically what's before us is whether or not we should impose a lien of 1,487.57 and operational costs. And there is no opposition. So I would -- I would say that we accept the recommendation, we impose the lien, and that no further notice is required. MR. KELL Y: I agree, sir, but one thing and I'm sure I'm not seeing it right. It says that the liens that are being imposed are for order Item No. I and No.3. One is the permits and certificate of completion within 90 days. And No.3 is that the respondent if they don't comply with paragraph 1, it would be a fine of$200 per day. Now, on the order it says $50 per day. Am I -- are they the wrong -- the wrong order? MS. WALDRON: No, you are correct. MR. KELLY: So the fine amount would be -- MS. WALDRON: It would be $5,600. MR. LARSEN: All right. Let's -- let's just take a close look at this because basically it's No.3 that everybody is concerned about. And it's by order of the board January 29, 2009, there should be a fine of $200 per day. So the county's recommendation needs to be amended; is that correct? MS. WALDRON: Correct. MR. LARSEN: Okay. The amendment proposed by the county IS -- Page 77 February 26, 2009 MS. WALDRON: It would be fines at the rate of $200 a day for the period between January 30th, 2009, to February 26th, 2009, 28 days for a total of $5,600. The total recommended lien amount would be 5,687.57. MR. LARSEN: All right. So -- so the county's recommendation now is to impose or issue an order imposing a lien in the amount of $5,687.57; correct? MS. WALDRON: Correct. MR. LARSEN: And kudos to Mr. Kelly for finding this. MS. WALDRON: Kudos to Mr. Kelly. MR. KAUFMAN: I think we ought to follow what Jean had mentioned. Basically we're putting a lien on a piece of property that the owner doesn't own anymore. The lien goes with the property. The owner of the property now is the bank. And I think we should for no other reason because of that let the bank know. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Yes. MS. RAWSON: Well, if! know which bank it is. Because what the order also says is that the fines will continue to accrue until it's abated. So if I were the bank, I'd be happy to know that. MR. DEAN: Jean, can I ask a question. Ifwe -- when we do the lien, don't we still have to do the owner of the property? I mean, even though you're in foreclosure -- CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: It's foreclosed upon; right? The bank owns the property? MR. DEAN: I don't know that. I didn't hear it that way. MR. PAUL: They foreclose. They don't have title. MR. DEAN: They don't have the title? MS. FLAGG: Just a point of clarification. What that means is that the bank has filed a lis pendens which means that they have an intent to foreclose -- MR. DEAN: Oh, okay. MS. FLAGG: -- but they have not received the certificate of title Page 78 February 26, 2009 to the property. If the property is unoccupied, the banks have in their mortgage documents the ability to go in and abate violations before they have certificate of title. So if this property is not occupied, what we're finding is the banks, in order to stop the fines, are going in before they have certificate of title and abate the violations. MR. KELL Y: Well, in that case, I'll make a motion that we accept and impose the -- accept the order and impose the fines of $5,687.57. Fines will continue to accrue until the violation is abated. MR. LARSEN: And operational costs are included in that 5,687.57? MR. KELL Y: Correct. MR. LARSEN: Okay. I second that motion. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any further discussion? MR. KAUFMAN: Before we do, are we going to notify the bank? MS. FLAGG: I assure you, the bank will be notified. MS. RAWSON: This order is going to get recorded. And so, you know, they're going to know. It's also going to be sent to Mr. Hoeman by the way. MR. DEAN: Okay. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: With that no further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor? MR. LA VINSKY: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSEN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any nays? Page 79 February 26, 2009 (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes. MR. PAUL: Thank you. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: The next one will be Susan B. Williams, Code Enforcement No. 2007060820. (The oath was administered.) MR. BALDWIN: I do. THE COURT REPORTER: Would you state your full name, please. MR. BALDWIN: Patrick Baldwin, Collier County Code Enforcement Investigator. MS. WALDRON: On September 25th, 2008, the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinance -- ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached order of the board OR 4398, page 3870, for more information. At this time the respondent has not complied with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of February 26th, 2009. The county's recommendation is to impose a lien as follows: Fines at a rate of $50 per day for the period between January 4th, 2009, to February 26th, 2009,33 days, for a total of$1,650. Fines continue to accrue. Operational costs of $87.44 have not been paid. The total recommended lien amount is $1,737.44. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: I actually remember this where the builder made the changes, but without the permits, I guess? MR. BALDWIN: Yes. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Without changing the original floor plan around? MR. BALDWIN: Yes. MR. KAUFMAN: Have you had any contact with the respondent? Page 80 February 26, 2009 MR. BALDWIN: No, not in about five months. I have made numerous phone calls, but the phone just keeps ringing. No answering machine. MR. LARSEN: I make a motion that we impose the lien in the amount of $1,737.44 cents which includes a -- the fine for a period of 33 days for a total of 1,650 plus the operational costs of $87.44 which have not been paid. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a second? MR. DEAN: Second that motion. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor? MR. LA VINSKY: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSEN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any nays? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes. The next case will be BCC vs. Adalberto and Martha Garcia, CEB No. 2007100929. THE COURT REPORTER: If you'll raise your right hand. (The oath was administered.) MR. SANT AFEMIA: Yes, I do. MR. GARCIA: Yes. THE COURT REPORTER: And, again, if you will state your name. CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER: For the record John Santafemia, S-a-n-t-a-f-e-m-i-a, Property Maintenance Specialist Page 81 February 26, 2009 Collier County. THE COURT REPORTER: And your name is -- MR. GARCIA: And my name is Adalberto Garcia. THE COURT REPORTER: Thank you. MS. WALDRON: On April 24th, 2008, the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached order of the board OR 4356, page 1847, for more information. The respondent has complied with the CEB orders as of August 26th, 2008. The county's recommendation is as follows: To impose fines at a rate of $200 per day for the period between August 23rd, 2008, to August 26th, 2008, four days, for the total of $800. Operational costs of$416.05 have not been paid. The total recommended lien amount is $1,216.05. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: You were -- it took you four days longer? MR. GARCIA: Yes, four days. But all the inspections was finished on August 22 and -- but I was waiting the four extra days for -- take the CO. And the CO on August 26th. But all the -- all the inspections was finished in August 22. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Is that correct? MR. SANT AFEMIA: That would be correct. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. Has he been diligent in-- MR. SANTAFEMIA: Absolutely. Mr. Garcia has been nothing but cooperative and has been due diligence. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. MR. KELLY: I have a question. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Sure. MR. KELLY: Investigator, is it the normal process on permit cards that there's an actual call-in procedure to request the certificate of occupancy or is that something that's automatically generated after Page 82 February 26, 2009 all the inspections have been passed? MR. SANT AFEMIA: After the final inspection is complete and the inspector turns that in, it is entered into the computer and he's issued the certificate of completion. MR. KELLY: So the four days is really just a procedural waiting time on the county's side? MR. SANT AFEMIA: I'm not -- to be honest with you I'm not sure what happened there as far as why there was that delay in that getting inputted into the computer. That is the only information I have to rely on. And my affidavit of compliance is what's entered into the computer, the dates they put in. So that's why I had to go with that. Why that happened, I couldn't even explain. MR. KAUFMAN: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion that we abate the fine. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a second? MR. DEAN: I'll second that motion. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any discussion? MR. KELLY: Quick discussion is the operating costs. MR. DEAN: Yeah. What about the operational costs? CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: We can't do anything with operational costs. MR. KELL Y: Yeah. I just -- if we could let the respondent respond. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: The operational costs you will have to pay 416.05 -- $416.05. MR. GARCIA: Okay. And -- and how much is total? CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: That is the total. MR. DEAN: Total. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Four hundred and sixteen dollars and five cents. MR. GARCIA: Okay. And one question. I receive this bill by mail or -- Page 83 February 26, 2009 MR. LARSEN: No. No. MS. WALDRON: You can pay it here. I would suggest -- well, this is up to the chair, but we either need to impose that operational costs or he needs to pay it now to avoid that. MR. GARCIA: How much money? MR. LARSEN: One way or the another we have to impose it in order for it to be due and owing; right? MS. WALDRON: Well, you're going to place a lien on the property for the operational costs if you impose that today. Ifhe pays it right now, he won't have a lien on his property. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. Do you have the ability to pay $416 -- MR. GARCIA: I can pay that now. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: You can pay that now? MR. GARCIA: Yes, I can pay now. MR. LARSEN: Okay. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Then we won't impose the fines or the operational costs. MR. KELLY: So we have a motion and second? CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Yes. Well, we'll remove that motion. MR. KELLY: Okay. Yeah. You might want to withdraw it then. MR. KAUFMAN: Withdrawn. MS. RAWSON: This is interesting. If! don't put this in the order and if I put in the order that the operational costs, like I did in the last case, have been paid, you have to let me know if they don't pay. MR. KAUFMAN: Why don't you walk over and pay it and then we'll make the motion. MR. KELLY: There's a little bit of trust. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Is that okay? Page 84 February 26, 2009 MR. SANT AFEMIA: Sure. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Sir, if you can go ahead and write a check. MR. GARCIA: Okay. MR. LARSEN: All right. We're going to -- all right. So the motion now is basically -- well, we're going to abate the fine. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Right, abate the fine, yeah. MR. LARSEN: And then operational costs have been paid. MR. KAUFMAN: Have been paid. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Have been paid, yes. MR. LARSEN: Okay. So the motion is to -- MR. KAUFMAN: Abate the fine. MR. LARSEN: -- abate the fine. I second the motion. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: And all those in favor? MR. LAVINSKY: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSEN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. KELL Y: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any nays? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes. MR. SANT AFEMIA: Thank you. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: The next case is Roberto Reyes vs. CEB and the number is 2007090686. THE COURT REPORTER: If you'll raise your hand. (The oath was administered.) MS. PEREZ: Yes, I do. Page 85 February 26, 2009 THE COURT REPORTER: Would you state your name. MS. PEREZ: For the record Code Enforcement Supervisor Christina Perez. MS. REYES: I do. THE COURT REPORTER: And your name? MS. REYES: Marina Reyes. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Are you going to be translating for him? (The oath was administered for an interpreter.) MS. REYES: I do. THE COURT REPORTER: Thank you. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: And you have complied. You were three days -- it took an extra three days? MS. REYES: Yeah. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: And the reason why it took three extra days to comply with our order? MS. REYES: We requested on the 22nd, but it take it a few days CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: To come out? MS. REYES: Yeah. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: The inspector to come out and everything? MS. REYES: Uh-huh. MR. LARSEN: Three days or four days? CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: I'm sorry. Four days. Have they been forthcoming and trying to correct the issue? MS. PEREZ: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do we have any other questions from the board? MR. L'ESPERANCE: What's the county's recommendation? MS. WALDRON: Do you want me to read or are you asking for a recommendation? Page 86 February 26, 2009 MR. LARSEN: No. I want to make a motion to abate the fine. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a second? MR. DEAN: I'll second the motion. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor? MR. LAVIN SKY: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSEN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any nays? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes. MS. PEREZ: Thank you, board members. MR. LARSEN: You don't have to pay. MS. REYES: No? Okay. Thank you. MR. LARSEN: The fine's been abated. MS. REYES: Thank you. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Thank Ed for that. All right. Any new -- new business? MR. DEAN: I have something under new business. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Go ahead, sir. MR. DEAN: In light ofMr. Richard Kraenbring resigning, I'd like to make a motion to appoint Ken Kelly as vice chair. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: I think we did that already at the beginning. MR. DEAN: I don't remember. MR. KELL Y: Thank you, though. MR. L'ESPERANCE: That's another vote for you. Page 87 February 26, 2009 MR. DEAN: Are you telling me that was at the beginning of the meeting? MR. KAUFMAN: Senior moment. MR. DEAN: I left the room. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Approval of vice chair. MR. DEAN: Boy, you guys are quick. MR. LARSEN: You asked for a discussion on it. MR. DEAN: That's why I did it. Okay. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: You want to discuss it now? MR. DEAN: You know, I think I just did. Thank you. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Thank you, Larry. Request to forward cases to County Attorney's Office, do we have any cases? MS. WALDRON: There are not at this time. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. Any reports? MS. WALDRON: There are none at this time. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any comments? MS. WALDRON: I have no comments. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. No comments from the board. The next meeting will be March 26th, 2009. MR. KELL Y: One comment. Just to recap again. I mean, you know, the fact that these fines and liens accrue and continue to mount and go with the property is one thing that we've always struggled with. And with all the foreclosures and banks taking on these loans, for the county to kind of be able to put a stop to that and not have unsuspecting new buyers inherit these fines and these problems, I think that's terrific. Absolutely outstanding. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: And do I have a motion to adjourn? MR. DEAN: Motion to adjourn. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a second? MR. LA VINSKY: Second. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Is there any discussion? Page 88 February 26, 2009 (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: I didn't think so. MR. DEAN: Can't discuss. Roberts rules of order. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All right. Motion in favor? Go ahead. MR. DEAN: Go ahead. Are we adjourned? CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All in favor? MR. LA VINSKY: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSEN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. (Whereupon, meeting concluded at 11 :35 a.m.) ***** There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chairman at 11:35 a.m. CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD GERALD LEFEBVRE, CHAIRMAN These minutes approved by the board on presented or as corrected as TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC., BY CAROLYN 1. FORD, RPR, FPR Page 89