CEB Minutes 01/28/2010 R
January 28, 2010
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD
Naples, Florida
January 28, 2010
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 Rooms
609-610,2800 N Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida, with the following
members present:
CHAIRMAN: Gerald Lefebvre
Larry Dean
Robert Kaufman
Lionel L'Esperance
James Lavinski
Tony Marino
Hermano Ortega
ALSO PRESENT:
Jean Rawson, Attorney for the Board
Diane Flagg, Code Enforcement Director
Jennifer Waldron, Enforcement Supervisor
Page 1
CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY. FLORIDA
AGENDA
Date: January 28, 2010, at 9:00 a.m.
Location: 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr. Naples, FL 34104 Rooms 609-610
NOTICE: THE RESPONDENT MAY BE LIMITED TO TWENTY (20) MINUTES FOR CASE
PRESENTATION UNLESS ADDITIONAL TIME IS GRANTED BY THE BOARD. PERSONS WISillNG
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 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 TillS 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, WillCH RECORD INCLUDES THE
TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. NEITHER COLLIER
COUNTY NOR THE CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD SHALL BE RESPONSffiLE FOR PROVIDING
TillS RECORD.
1. ROLL CALL
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES-
A. November 19, 2009 Hearing
4. PUBLIC HEARINGSIMOTIONS
A. MOTIONS
Motion for Extension of Time
1. J. Peaceful, LC.
CELU20090010758
2. Catalina Calderon Est., Ofelia Dimas & Jorge Calderon
2007110455
3. Israel & Delma Gallegos
2007060101
B. STIPULATIONS
C. HEARINGS
1.
CASE NO:
OWNER:
OFFICER:
VIOLATIONS:
FOLIO NO:
VIOLATION
ADDRESS:
2.
CASE NO:
OWNER:
OFFICER:
VIOLATIONS:
FOLIO NO:
VIOLATION
ADDRESS:
3.
CASE NO:
OWNER:
OFFICER:
VIOLATIONS:
FOLIO NO:
VIOLATION
ADDRESS:
4.
CASE NO:
OWNER:
OFFICER:
VIOLATIONS:
FOLIO NO.:
VIOLATION
ADDRESS:
CESD20090015238
ZONIA. LAMBERT TR., ZONJA Z. LAMBERT REC. TRUST
INVESTIGATOR JAMES KINCAID
COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES, CHAPTER 22 BUILDINGS AND
BUILDINGS REGULATIONS, ARTICLE II, FLORIDA BUILDING CODE, SECTION 22-26(b)
(104.5.1.4.4) PERMIT # 90000826 FOR A 12FT X 16FT WOODEN SHED EXPIRED WITHOUT
FIRST OBTAINING A CER TIFICA TE OF COMPLETION
74413960006
3450 CHEROKEE ST. NAPLES, FL
CESD20090015245
ZONJA. LAMBERT TR., ZONIA Z. LAMBERT REC. TRUST
lNVESTIGA TOR JAMES KINCAID
COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES, CHAPTER 22 BUILDINGS AND
BUILDINGS REGULATIONS, ARTICLE II, FLORIDA BUILDING CODE, SECTION 22-26(b)
(104.5.1.4.4) PERMIT # 930000827 EXPIRED WITHOUT OBTAINING A CERTIFICATE OF
COMPLETION
74413960006
3450 CHEROKEE ST. NAPLES, FL
CESD20090015248
ZONJA. LAMBERT TR., ZONIA Z. LAMBERT REC. TRUST
INVESTIGATOR JAMES KJNCAID
COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES, CHAPTER 22 BUILDINGS
AND BUILDINGS REGULATIONS, ARTICLE II, FLORIDA BUILDING CODE, SECTION
22-26(b)(l04.5.1.4.4) PERMIT # 930015737 FOR A FRAME DETACHED GARAGE- NO
ELECTRIC EXPIRED 6/14/94 WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING A CERTIFICATE OF
COMPLETION
74413960006
3450 CHEROKEE ST. NAPLES, FL
CESD20090007837
DAYSI FALCON, CARIDAD JIMENEZ & BARBARA JIMENEZ
INVESTIGATOR MARIA RODRIGUEZ
FLORIDA BUILDING CODE, 2004 EDITION, CHAPTER 1 PERMITS, SECTION 105.1,
COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE 04-41, AS AMENDED, SECTION
10.02.06(B)(I)(a), COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS, CHAPTER 22 BUILDING AND
BUILDINGS REGULATIONS, ARTICLE II, FLORIDA BUILDING CODE, ADOPTION
& AMENDMENT OF THE FLORIDA BUILDING CODE, SECTION 22-26(b)(106.1.2)
COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE 04-41, AS AMENDED, SECTION
1O.02.06(B)(I)(e). MULTIPLE ADDITION ADDED TO PRIMARY STRUCTURE.
ACCESSORY STRUCTURE/SHED CONVERTED INTO LIVING QUARTERS WITHOUT
PROPER PERMITS
30680960006
1414 APPLE ST. IMMOKALEE, FL
5.
CASE NO:
OWNER:
OFFICER:
VIOLATIONS:
FOLIO:
VIOLATION
ADDRESS:
6.
CASE NO:
OWNER:
OFFICER:
VIOLATIONS:
FOLIO:
VIOLATION
ADDRESS:
7.
CASE NO:
OWNER:
OFFICER:
VIOLATIONS:
FOLIO:
VIOLATION
ADDRESS:
5. OLD BUSINESS
CESD20090012965
TREASURE B & JEFF AHLBRANDT
INVESTIGATOR RENALD PAUL
COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, 04-41, AS AMENDED, SECTION
10.02.06(B)(I)(a). OWNER ENCLOSED THE PORCH AND ADDED A WOODEN SHED WITH
NO PERMITS
38163480005
6090 PAINTED LEAF LANE NAPLES, FL
CESD20090013027
CHARLES D. BROWN
INVESTIGATOR ED MORAD
COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, 04-41, AS AMENDED, SECTION
1O.02.06(B)(I)(a) FAILURE TO OBTAIN BUILDING & LAND ALTERATION PERMITS,
INSPECTIONS, AND CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY AS REQUIRED.
74031280003
414 3RD ST. IMMOKALEE, FL
2003031014
GEORGE B. & KAREN L. DELPORTO
INVESTIGATOR JAMES SEABASTY
91-102, AS AMENDED, SECTION(S) 1.5.6, 1.8.7, 1.9.2,2.1.11,2.1..15 PAR. 1,2.2.10.2.2
2.6.21.2.3,2.7.6 PAR'S 1,2,3 & 5 & SECTION 3.3.11. DID OBSERVE A WOODEN DECK!
DOCK COMBINATION APPROXIMATELY 16 FT. BY 20 FT. WITH ELECTRIC EXTENDING
FROM THE BACK OF THE MOBILE HOME, PARTIALLY INTO THE CANAL
01208000005
102 EGRET LANE PLANTATION ISLAND, FL
A. Motion for Imposition of Fines /Liens
1.
CASE NO:
OWNER:
OFFICER:
VIOLATIONS:
FOLIO NO:
VIOLATION
ADDRESS:
CEVR20090004297
MEGHAN H. SOLOFF
INVESTIGATOR SUSAN 0' FARRELL
COLLIER COUNRT LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE 04-41, AS AMENDED, SECTION
3.05.08(C). OBSERVED EXOTIC VEGETATION ON DEVELOPED PROPERTY BUILT AFTER
1992
49460006100
2328 BROADWING CT. NAPLES, FL
2.
CASE NO:
OWNER:
OFFICER:
VIOLATIONS:
FOLIO:
VIOLATION
ADDRESS:
3.
CASE NO:
OWNER:
OFFICER:
VIOLATIONS:
FOLIO:
VIOLATION
ADDRESS:
4.
CASE NO.
OWNER:
OFFICER:
VIOLATIONS:
FOLIO:
VIOLATION
ADDRESS:
5.
CASE NO.
OWNER:
OFFICER:
VIOLATIONS:
FOLIO:
VIOLATION
ADDRESS:
CELU20090007827
HERIBERTO PEREZ
INVESTIGATOR RENALD PAUL
COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE 04-41, AS AMENDED, SECTION 2.02.03
SINGLE FAMILY HOME WAS CONVERTED TO MUL TI-F AMIL Y IN AN AREA DESIGNED
FOR SINGLE FAMILY USE
36120200000
2081 50TH ST. S.W. NAPLES, FL
CESD20090007768
ALBA R. LICCI
INVESTIGATOR RALPH BOSA
COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, 04-41, AS AMENDED, SECTION
10.02.06(B)(1)(e). A GARAGE CONVERTED INTO LIVING SPACE WITHOUT PERMITS
39890600005
2395 39TH AVE. NE. NAPLES, FL
CESD20080008804
JAMES P. & LAURA S. GUERRERO
INVESTIGATOR RALPH BOSA
COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, 04-41, AS AMENDED, SECTIONS
1O.02.06(B)(l)( a) AND 10.02.06 B (1)( e )(i). MOBILE HOME/ MODULAR HOME PLACED AT
LOCATION IN QUESTION WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE REQUIRED BUILDING
PERMIT
00104520004
1965 PLATT RD. NAPLES, FL
2007080603
REY & EDITH MARTINEZ
INVESTIGATOR MARIA RODRIGUEZ
COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, 04-41, AS AMENDED, SECTION
1O.02.06(B)(1)(a), 10.02.06(B)(I)(e) & 1O.02.06.B(1)(e)(i) MULTIPLE ADDITIONS BUILT ONTO
STRUCTURE WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING PROPER PERMITS.
30680880005
1410 APPLE ST. IMMOKALEE, FL
B. Motion for Reduction of FineslLiens
6. NEW BUSINESS
7. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Motion for Imposition of FineslLiens
B. Request to Forward Cases to County Attorney's Office as Referenced in Submitted Executive
Summary.
8. REPORTS
9. COMMENTS
10. NEXT MEETING DATE - February 25, 2010
11. ADJOURN
January 28, 2010
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All set?
I would like to call the code enforcement board of Collier County
meeting to order.
And before we start, actually, a couple announcements.
First of all, Ed Larson has resigned as of Friday. He took a
position as a magistrate for Glades and Hendry County and it would
be a conflict if he was on the board, so he has resigned.
And we also have a new member. If you would like to introduce
yourself.
MR. MARINO: Tony Marino.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Go ahead.
MS. WALDRON: Mr. Gerald Lefebvre?
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Here.
MS. WALDRON: Mr. Larry Dean?
MR. DEAN: Here.
MS. WALDRON: Mr. Robert Kaufman?
MR. KAUFMAN: Here.
MS. WALDRON: Mr. Manny Ortega is not present.
Mr. Tony Marino?
MR. MARINO: Here.
MS. WALDRON: Mr. Lionel L'Esperance?
MR. LESPERANCE: Here.
MS. WALDRON: Mr. James Lavinski?
MR. LA VINSKI: Here.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Thank you very much.
And there are some changes to the agenda.
MS. WALDRON: Under number four, public hearings, motions,
letter A, motion for extension of time, we have three additions.
Number four will be Petitoles St. Jean, case CESD-20090010557.
Number five will be Agathonicos Pamboukis, case
CESD-20090011000.
Number six is Emmanuel and Anna Moran, case
Page 2
January 28, 2010
CESD-200800007126.
Under stipulations, we do have one stipulation. This will be item
number four from hearings, Daysi Falcon, Caridad Jimenez and
Barbara Jimenez, case CESD-20090007837.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: And that will be heard, the
stipulation will be heard at 11 :00 a.m.?
MS. WALDRON: Correct.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Thank you.
MS. WALDRON: Under letter C, hearings, number seven, case
number 2003031014, George B. and Karen L. Delporto has been
withdrawn.
Under old business, number five, letter A, motion for imposition
of fines/liens, number four, case number CESD-20080008804, James
P. and Laura S. Guerrero has been withdrawn.
And we do have another addition that we would like to add under
-- I guess it would be additional letter, we'll call it letter C under
motion for reduction of fines/liens, emergency case. This will be
Petitoles St. Jean, case CEPM-20090018927.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any further changes?
MS. WALDRON: No.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a motion to approve?
MR. DEAN: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a second?
MR. KAUFMAN: Second.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. DEAN: Aye.
MR. MARINO: Aye.
MR. LA VINSKI: Aye.
Page 3
January 28,2010
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye.
Any nays?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes.
And if I am not mistaken, the alternate will be voting also; is that
correct, Jean?
MS. RAWSON: Yes, that would be correct.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Thank you very much.
So you will be a voting member today.
And approval of, I guess it's November 19th, 2009 hearing. It
seems so long ago.
MS. WALDRON: No. No changes to the minutes.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a motion?
MR. KAUFMAN: Motion to approve.
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. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. DEAN: Aye.
MR. MARINO: Aye.
MR. LA VINSKI: Aye.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye.
Any nays?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes.
And we're going to start off with the public hearings, motion for
extension of time, J. Peaceful, L.C., case number
CELU-20090010758.
MR. PEACEFUL: Good morning.
Page 4
January 28, 2010
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Good morning.
MS. WALDRON: Mr. Chairman and the Board, the county is
requesting that we give J. Peaceful an extension of a 120 days. They
have been working with the commissioners to try and come up with a
solution for their issues on the property, and we would like to give
them the time to do so.
MR. KAUFMAN: I'll make a motion to approve 120 days.
MR. DEAN: Second.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any further discussion? Okay.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. DEAN: Aye.
MR. MARINO: Aye.
MR. LA VINSKI: Aye.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye.
Any nays?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes.
MR. UNIDENTIFIED:
MR. PEACEFUL: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: And if you could note for the record
that Hermano Ortega has arrived.
(Mr. Ortega is present.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: We're under motions. Catalina
Calderon and Ofelia Dimas and Jorge Calderon, case number
2007110455.
You really haven't missed much yet.
Yes, we have seven full members, regular members, and he will
be the seventh.
If I can have the parties sworn in, please.
Page 5
January 28, 2010
(Speakers duly sworn.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: If you can state your name for the
record, please?
MR. DIMAS: My name is Raul Dimas, Jr.
MR. SNOW: My name is Kitchell Snow for code enforcement.
That's spelled K-I-T-C-H-E-L-L, and Snow, S-N-O-W.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do you need a spelling on any
names?
Okay, very good.
You are looking for an extension of time; is that correct, sir?
MR. DIMAS: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All right.
And how much of an extension are you looking, again?
MR. DIMAS: We had filed a letter just saying that we wanted an
extension hopefully for another month, by the end of January. But the
way things worked out it's going to be a little bit further than that.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay.
MR. DIMAS: We were able to obtain a letter from the chief
saying that hopefully --
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Can you speak up or bring the mic
closer to you?
MR. DIMAS: I'm sorry.
We had obtained a letter from the chief saying that hopefully by
the fourth and fifth that we would be able to go ahead and take care of
the structure on the address that we were doing. The only thing is,
weather permitting.
So I mean, say another 30 days or 60 days to ensure that that's
complete.
MR. SNOW: Just one thought for the board. This is an
unoccupied structure. It is not occupied at this particular time. Hasn't
been occupied for quite some time.
They've been working with the fire department to do a burn of
Page 6
January 28,2010
the structure and they had to remove some asbestos and do some other
things.
The only thing I would like the consideration of the board is give
them due time. And also once it's burned they are still going to have
to remove some things from the property. So please take that in
consideration when you are extending time.
MR. DEAN: Do you have a recommendation?
MR. SNOW: I would go for another 30 days after the time. It's
supposed to go February 4th, I believe, that's what the date is on here.
So another 30 days after that to allow time for removal of any debris
that is left by the fire.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Would 60 be sufficient?
MR. DIMAS: Yes, sir.
MR. KAUFMAN: I would like to make a motion we extend the
time 60 days.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear --
MR. DEAN: I'll second the motion.
MS. RAWSON: That would be the March 25th code
enforcement, you want to set it on that date? March 25th would be the
following meeting after the 60 days.
MR. KAUFMAN: Yes.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: So you want to set it until March
twenty -- instead of 60 days --
MR. KAUFMAN: I don't exactly know how many days that is.
MS. RAWSON: It's more than 60 but it would be the next time it
could be on the agenda.
MR. KAUFMAN: Sounds reasonable.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay, so if you can write up the
order that it would be on the agenda for our next -- our March --
MS. RAWSON: Twenty-fifth.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: March 25th meeting.
And would you like to amend your second, Mr. Dean?
Page 7
January 28,2010
MR. DEAN: Yes.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. DEAN: Aye.
MR. MARINO: Aye.
MR. ORTEGA: Aye.
MR. LA VINSKI: Aye.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye.
Any nays?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes.
MR. SNOW: We thank the Board.
MR. DIMAS: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Next one, next motion for extension
of time, Israel and Delma Gallegos. I know I'm not saying that right.
But 2007060101.
And if you can swear in both parties -- or swear in the
investigator.
(Speakers duly sworn.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Hermano, you are a voting member
today, too.
Go ahead.
Has he communicated with you that he would like an extension
of time?
MS. RODRIGUEZ: He was supposed to be here but he was
running late, the truck wouldn't start. I guess he's not going to make it.
But he did request with the letter stating that he needed an
extension of time due to the fact that he doesn't have the $7,000 that
Page 8
January 28, 2010
they are asking for the permit.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay.
MR. KAUFMAN: I have a question on the letter that I have in
my packet. It doesn't seem to be dated or signed. And when was it
received?
MS. RODRIGUEZ: Maria Rodriguez, Collier County Code
Enforcement.
It was mailed in. I -- that was not one that I faxed in so I don't
know when they mailed it.
MS. WALDRON: It was received before the time frame allowed
for us to put it on the agenda.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Has the board read the letter?
MR. DEAN: Yes, I have.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any thoughts of the board?
MR. ORTEGA: I have a thought. They're requesting an
extension of time. I believe RQ Design may no longer be in business,
so how is that going to work?
MR. KAUFMAN: We don't know that.
MR. ORTEGA: The board doesn't.
MR. KAUFMAN: I don't see anything that tells me that things
are going to change between now and 30, 60, 90 days down the road
as far as acquiring additional dollars to take care of the situation.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: The other option the board has is to
leave the order as it stands and then when he does in fact get the
permit, get a C.O. if that's what's needed, or certificate of completion,
whichever is needed, he can come back to us and show that he was
diligent in doing the work, and at that point we can reevaluate the
fines.
MR. KAUFMAN: When I look at the order I see it was extended
six months prior to this meeting. This seems to be just getting
extended and extended.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any other thoughts of the board?
Page 9
January 28, 2010
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a motion?
MR. KAUFMAN: I make a motion to deny.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a second?
MR. L'ESPERANCE: I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. DEAN: Aye.
MR. MARINO: Aye.
MR. ORTEGA: Aye.
MR. LA VINSKI: Aye.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye.
Any nays?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion is denied.
Next one will be Mr. St. Jean.
(Speakers were duly sworn.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: There is two cases. One is an
extension of time and the other one we will be hearing as an
emergency case.
I'm looking for the packet myself. I remember seeing that -- let
me just see where it is. Here we go.
MR. DEAN: I don't know why it was at the end.
MS. WALDRON: It looks like this.
MR. LA VINSKI: It was in the loose--
MR. DEAN: It's not loose, with holes in it.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Can you explain why you would
like an -- first state your name, please.
MS. ST. JEAN: My name is Marie St. Jean.
Page 10
January 28,2010
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. And if you can state why you
would like an extension of time, please.
MS. ST. JEAN: Yes, I have a six months deferral to do it, the
permit, because the financial don't let me do it in the six months.
That's why I write a letter if! can have three months to do it.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: The original order which was a
stipulated agreement --
MS. ST. JEAN: Uh-huh.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: -- was back from June.
MS. ST. JEAN: Yes.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Correct?
MS. ST. JEAN: Yes.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: And we gave you 120 days.
MS. ST. JEAN: Yes.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: And then are you telling me you
came in front of us one other time to extend that?
MS. ST. JEAN: Yes.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Is that correct?
MS. ST. JEAN: Yes.
MS. SYKORA: Excuse me -- for the record, my name is Carol
Sykora, S-Y-K-O-R-A, Collier County Code Enforcement
Investigator.
No, she did not come before you to ask for an extension before.
She was given the 120 days, which was up January 25th, and that's
when I spoke to her and she said, please, could she have an extension.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: The stipulated agreement was dated
the 16th of June but then didn't come in front of us until September; is
that correct?
MS. SYKORA: I believe September was the date.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: I'm looking at the stipulated
agreement right now. Okay.
MR. KAUFMAN: What's the county's position on this?
Page 11
January 28,2010
MS. SYKORA: Excuse me, I have a copy of the stipulation
agreement. Mine has September on it.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: We have one too.
MS. SYKORA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: I was looking at the date at the very
top. It's dated June 16, 2009 --
MS. SYKORA: Okay, all right --
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: -- and then I looked down and saw
that it was actually ---
MS. SYKORA: I wanted to make sure you knew that --
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: -- sign date ofthe 24th of
September.
MS. SYKORA: The county has no objection to her extension.
She's been through some rough times here, and it's going to cost a
little bit of money because she has to re-app the permit for the screen
enclosure. And so hopefully she gets it done in the three months.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: But there has been no application for
the permit, correct?
MS. SYKORA: No.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: How long does it usually take --
MS. SYKORA: She has to actually hire a contractor to do this.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: How long does it usually take to get
the permit once they apply for it?
MS. SYKORA: It shouldn't be too long because it's going to be a
re-app of the permit.
On the old permit the notice of commencement was filed, so I'm
not quite sure how that would be on a new permit if she would have to
go through that again. And she has to have a spot survey, which is
more money.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Has that been done originally or no?
MS. SYKORA: No, that was not done. And it did fail one of the
permit's inspections before due to lack of putting the permit out for the
Page 12
January 28,2010
inspector to sign, so --
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Very good.
MS. SYKORA: -- and there is a $75 fee due to that too.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. You're requesting 120 days--
or, no, 90 days.
MS. ST. JEAN: Twenty, 120.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: A hundred-twenty?
MS. ST. JEAN: Uh-huh.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. Yeah, because the letter says
three months.
MS. ST. JEAN: Okay. I'm going to do it on time, because that's
a financial trouble but I'm going to make myself be ready for it, to do
it.
MR. KAUFMAN: So you think--
MS. ST. JEAN: Because I'm supposed to -- I know the pool cage
to do it for me because the pool cage was already done. But they don't
give me any permit for that. I don't know about it, that's why I don't
have it.
MR. KAUFMAN: You think 90 days is sufficient time to get
that done --
MS. ST. JEAN: Yeah, I'm going to do it. Uh-huh.
MR. KAUFMAN: I would like to make a motion we extend the
time 90 days then.
MR. ORTEGA: I have a question though. Is there a permit on
the screen enclosure?
MS. SYKORA: There was a permit pulled when it was put up.
However, the inspections in the final certificate of completion was not
accomplished and then therefore it expired. So she has to get that
reapplied for through a contractor and then get the inspection and a
10-day spot -- the spot survey to show setbacks and pay the $75 fee.
MR. ORTEGA: If the permit is expired was it a contractor that
pulled the permit originally?
Page 13
January 28, 2010
MS. SYKORA: Yes.
MR. ORTEGA: He can re-app it but she can also pull the permit
under her name if she's the homeowner.
MS. SYKORA: She's not listed as the homeowner, it's her
brother.
MR. ORTEGA: I see. And I'm also a little bit confused with
regards to the violation. One says electrical system, the other says no
water to the house.
MS. SYKORA: That's another case that is going to be heard.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: That's going to be the emergency
case heard at the back of our cases.
MR. ORTEGA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: The other question I have is, since
you are not the owner of this property do you have the authority to
speak and accept --
MS. ST. JEAN: Yes, he was with me first time. I have it--
MS. SYKORA: He was present --
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do we have anything in writing in
that regard?
MS. SYKORA: I have nothing in writing but he was at the
hearing, the original hearing. I'm not sure if he signed this or not. He
was present when the stipulation was signed also --
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: I don't want to really hear the case,
and there is a motion and a second, but basically there is not much
work that has to be done, it's just someone has to come out and do the
survey and apply for the permit and a couple of other items.
MS. SYKORA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay, very good.
MS. SYKORA: It's not much work but it is expensive. And I'm
assuming that she's -- the economy. The house is actually in lis
pendens also.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All right. We have a motion and if
Page 14
January 28, 2010
I'm not mistaken we have a second.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. DEAN: Aye.
MR. MARINO: Aye.
MR. ORTEGA: Aye.
MR. LA VINSKI: Aye.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye.
Any nays?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes. You have 90 more
days.
MS. ST. JEAN: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: You're welcome.
MS. SYKORA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: The next one will be Pamboukis.
Try the last name.
The respondent is not in?
(Speaker duly sworn.)
MR. SMITH: For the record, Reggie Smith, Code Enforcement
investigator. That's pronounced Pamboukis, I believe.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Pamboukis, thank you.
MR. SMITH: Mr. Pamboukis is still out of state at this time. He
has requested an extension from his January 19th due date for -- by
letter to Ms. Jennifer Waldron to the end of March.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: This was the condo that was literally
gutted out in Santa Barbara Landing, I think it's called or was that
called that?
MR. SMITH: Correct, yes, sir.
Page 15
January 28,2010
I understand that our next CEB is on the 25th; is that correct?
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: That's correct.
MR. SMITH: So I'll leave it up to the board to grant the
extension until that time. The county has no objections.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Have permits and work commenced
on the --
MR. SMITH: Mr. Pamboukis has hired a licensed contractor in
the name of Cuba Construction.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay.
MR. SMITH: I have received an E-mail from their bookkeeper
stating that they have been hired.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay, that's good.
MR. SMITH: A permit has been applied for, permit number
2010010710. It is still in apply status at this point. It was applied for
on the 19th of January.
The E-mail I received from Cuba Construction was dated the
12th of January, so he was hired or they were hired before the due date
and they just, maybe they had to pull records or something like that.
MR. KAUFMAN: Make a motion that we extend the time to the
next scheduled --
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: It would be two --
MR. KAUFMAN: Was it March twenty--
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Twenty-fifth.
MR. KAUFMAN: Twenty-fifth, til the March 25th meeting.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a second?
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Second.
MS. WALDRON: Can I interject? I just want to point out that
in this letter they are asking until the end of March to finish the
remodel. If you look at the bottom.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Yes.
MR. SMITH: Again, I'll leave that up to the board whatever you
recommend.
Page 16
January 28, 2010
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Can we -- okay. Any further
discussion of the Board?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor of the March 25th
date say aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. DEAN: Aye.
MR. MARINO: Aye.
MR. ORTEGA: Aye.
MR. LA VINSKI: Aye.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye.
Any nays?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes.
MR. SMITH: Thank you.
MR. KAUFMAN: Could you mention to the respondent that
should he have a problem making the last two weeks, to show up at
the meeting and I'm sure that the board would like to hear from him.
MR. SMITH: Very good, sir, thank you.
MR. DEAN: That would only be five days or something.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: We're going to skip over to
stipulated agreement.
MS. WALDRON: Hold on, we have got one more extension.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Oh, you're always pulling a fast one.
Go ahead.
MS. WALDRON: It's Manuel and Anna Moran.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Oh, that was there, okay. I missed it.
(Speakers sworn.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Looking for an extension of time,
sir?
MR. MORAN: Yes, sir.
Page 17
January 28, 2010
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Looking for 90 days?
MR. MORAN: Uh-huh.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Just, can you briefly -- I know you
have a letter that you wrote, but can you just briefly explain why you
need 90 extra days?
MR. MORAN: Yes, sir. Sorry.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: First of all, can you state your name
for the record?
MR. MORAN: I don't understand what you mean.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Can you please say your name?
MR. MORAN: Manuel Moran.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Thank you. Okay. Can you explain
why you are looking for an extension of time?
MR. MORAN: Yes, sir. I spent so much time to find out the
original permit for the building and after that the survey, I trespassing.
The permit in my name already. And now the survey has a problem,
the building is point one inch less than 75, it's 74.99. And I had to
redo the new survey now. Yes, sir. And waiting for a little more time
to redo the survey and finish.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Can you bring the microphone
closer to you, please? Thank you.
MR. KAUFMAN: Is that an administrative piece of paper that
needs to be filed with the county to grant that 1/1 Oth of an inch?
MR. ORTEGA: Have you applied for a variance, did the
building department request that you need a variance or suggest that
you need a variance due to the encroachment?
MR. MORAN: I don't understand but a word what you said.
MR. ORTEGA: Because the building is encroaching into the
setback area.
MR. MORAN: Yeah, the building is behind the house in the
backyard. But when I find out the original survey when I buy the
house, and the lady on the front counter saw the survey, it's 74.99.
Page 18
January 28,2010
And now I had to redo the survey. She say maybe the survey
company make a mistake on the distance between the building and the
limit. And right now I have to redo a new survey but the company
doesn't have a record for the survey and they cannot use the survey
that I have.
MR. ORTEGA: Chairman, is this an existing residence they
added an addition or --
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: I'm looking through the stipulated
agreement right now.
Maybe the investigator can shed light on it.
MS. PEREZ: Yes, if I may add, for the record Cristina Perez,
Collier County Code Enforcement Supervisor.
From the notes of the case that I'm reading here it appears that it
was a metal steel building, a shed-type, you know, a metal steel
garage that was built on the property prior to this homeowner
purchasing the property. So when he purchased the property and the
violation was found, a permit had been obtained but it was never
C.O.'d, so that's why he says that he had to go through the process of
getting the permit under his name.
So the permit has been reviewed and it is in a ready status
pending the survey that he's talking about to see ifhe meets the proper
setbacks.
MR. KAUFMAN: So if the survey comes back and verifies that
the building is encroaching by an inch or whatever, then an
administrative variance needs to be provided to the county to waive
that one inch.
MS. PEREZ: I believe so. That would have to be the next step if
there is not an error found in the original survey he had.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: And how long does that usually
take?
MS. PEREZ: I could not answer that question.
MR. KAUFMAN: From personal experience it could take a
Page 19
January 28,2010
month to three months.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: I guess, if that's the case, Mr.
Moran, when do you think you will have the money to have the
survey done?
MR. MORAN: I think this month.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: This month. Okay.
So if we were to give a 120-day extension that would give him
plenty of time to have the survey done, and then if there is any issues
to take care of them within the 90 days.
MR. KAUFMAN: You think that would be sufficient time, 120
days to get everything resolved? Either it's encroaching or it's not --
MR. MORAN : Yes, I just need to redo. I just need to redo the
survey and call the inspector to do the survey.
MR. KAUFMAN: Or squeeze the building an inch in, whatever.
MR. MORAN: I'm thinking about it.
MR. KAUFMAN: I would like to make a motion to extend the
time 120 days.
MR. DEAN: I'll second that motion.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. DEAN: Aye.
MR. MARINO: Aye.
MR. ORTEGA: Aye.
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye.
Any nays?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes.
MR. MORAN: Thank you very much.
Page 20
January 28, 2010
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: You have 120 days from today.
MS. PEREZ: Thank you, gentlemen.
MS. WALDRON: Mr. Chair, we do have another stipulation that
has come in. This will be number six from hearings, Charles D.
Brown, case CESD-20090013027.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I have a motion to amend the
agenda?
MR. KAUFMAN: Motion to amend the agenda.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a second?
MR. DEAN: Second.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. DEAN: Aye.
MR. MARINO: Aye.
MR. ORTEGA: Aye.
MR. LA VINSKI: Aye.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye.
Thank you.
(Speakers duly sworn.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Has everyone read it? If you could
state your names for the record, please.
MR. BROWN: Charles D. Brown.
MR. MORAD: Ed Morad.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Thank you very much.
And you have agreed to this stipulated agreement?
MR. BROWN: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Very good.
Any questions of the Board?
MR. BROWN: No, sir.
Page 21
January 28, 2010
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: No. Does the board have any
questions?
MR. KAUFMAN: Make a motion we accept the stipulation as
written.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a second?
MR. DEAN: I'll second that motion.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. DEAN: Aye.
MR. MARINO: Aye.
MR. ORTEGA: Aye.
MR. LA VINSKI: Aye.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye.
Any nays?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes.
MR. BROWN: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Thank you very much.
Jennifer, can we move on to hearings now?
This next hearing will be Zona (sic) Lambert. And it's case
number CESD-200900115238. And we have three cases.
Can we put these all together or should we keep them separate,
Jean?
MS. RAWSON: You can put them together but we need three
separate orders, so we need three separate motions.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. Very good.
(Speakers duly sworn.)
MS. WALDRON: Mr. Chair, would you like me to read each
statement of violation then, now?
Page 22
January 28, 2010
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: I think that's what --
MS. WALDRON: For each case?
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: What with your voice, is that --
MS. WALDRON: I'll struggle through.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. As long as you are alright.
MS. WALDRON: This is in reference to case
CESD-200900 15238, violation of ordinance, Collier County Code of
Laws and Ordinances, Chapter 22, Buildings and Building
Regulations, Article 2, Florida Building Code, Section 22 to 26.B
104.5.1.4.4.
Description of violation: Permit number 930000826 for a 12-foot
by 16-foot wooden shed expired without first obtaining a Certificate
of Completion.
Location address where violation exists: 3450 Cherokee Street,
Naples Florida 34112.
Folio number 74413960006.
Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation
location: Zonia Z. Lambert Trust, Zonia Z. Lambert Revocable
Living Trust, 655 Camelia, Vero Beach, Florida 32963.
Date violation first observed: September 22nd, 2009.
Date owner/person in charge given notice of violation: Notice of
violation mailed first class and certified mail return receipt requested
on September 22nd, 2009. Notice was posted on property and
courthouse on September 23rd, 2009.
Date on which violation to be corrected: November 3rd, 2009.
Date of reinspect ion: November 5th, 2009.
Results of reinspection: The violation remains.
In reference to case CESD-200900 15245, violation of ordinance,
Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, Chapter 22, Buildings
and Building Regulations, Article 2, Florida Building Code, Section
22 to 26.B 104.5.1.4.4.
Description of violation: Permit 9340000827 expired without
Page 23
January 28, 2010
obtaining a Certificate of Completion.
Location address where violation exists: 3450 Cherokee Street,
Naples, Florida, 34112.
Folio number 74413960006.
Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation
location: Zonia Z. Lambert Trust, Zonia Z. Lambert Revocable
Living Trust, 655 Camelia Lane, Vero Beach, Florida 32963.
Date violation first observed: September 22nd, 2009.
Date owner/person in charge given notice of violation: Notice of
violation was mailed first class and certified mail return receipt
requested on September 22nd, 2009 and notice was posted at property
and courthouse on September 23rd, 2009.
Date on which violation to be corrected: November 3rd, 2009.
Date of reinspect ion: November 5th, 2009. Results of
reinspection: The violation remains.
And in reference to case CESD-20090015248, violation of
ordinance, Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, Chapter 22,
Buildings and Building Regulations, Article 2, Florida Building Code,
Section 22 to 26.B 104.5.1.4.4.
Description of violation: Permit number 930015737 for a framed
detached garage, no electric, expired on 6/14/94 without first
obtaining Certificate of Completion.
Location address where violation exists: 3450 Cherokee Street
Naples, Florida 34112.
Folio number 74413960006.
Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation
location: Zonia Z. Lambert Trust, Zonia Z. Lambert Revocable
Living Trust, 655 Camelia Lane Vero Beach, Florida 32963.
Date violation first observed: December 22nd, 2009.
Date owner/person in charge given notice of violation: Notice of
violation was failed first class and certified mail return receipt
requested on September 22nd, 2009 and notice was posted at property
Page 24
January 28,2010
and courthouse on September 23rd, 2009.
Day on by which violation to be corrected: November 3rd, 2009.
Date of reinspect ion: November 5th, 2009.
Results of reinspection: Violation remains.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. Like to go ahead?
MR. KEEGAN: Good morning. For the record, Thomas Keegan
Collier County Code Enforcement Investigator.
These came in, the three cases came in as complaints on
September 21 st, 2009 from another department. I researched the
property card, the permits. I found out all three permits were issued.
They never received inspections, therefore they expired.
I made numerous site visits to this property, left cards. I actually
called the owners' daughter, left her numerous messages. I actually
received a call back from her on January 13th. I advised her of the
situation, what was going on. It's her brother that actually lives at the
house.
She stated that she wants nothing do with her brother and that he
should just lose the house.
I advised her of the violation and the possible fines and she went
on to say, good, that he has been nothing but trouble.
I should say I've dealt with this property numerous times, it's -- it
is what it is, and that's the three cases we have for the expired permits.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Have you dealt with this property
prior to this case or --
MR. KEEGAN: Oh, yes.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: But we haven't had any hearings --
MR. KEEGAN: Not CEB.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Very good.
MR. KEEGAN: Code enforcement board.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Right.
MR. KAUFMAN: When you look at the permit that was pulled
in 1993 were there any inspections done or anything --
Page 25
January 28, 2010
MR. MORAD: No, sir, none of them.
MR. KAUFMAN: So they pulled the permit to build it and that
was the end?
MR. KEEGAN : Yes, sir.
MR. KAUFMAN: Is this property in lis pendens by any chance?
MR. MORAD: No.
MR. KAUFMAN: Foreclosed?
MR. KEEGAN: No, it is not.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any other questions of the Board?
MR. KAUFMAN: Well, I would like to make a motion that we
find this, on case ending in 5238, a violation.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Now, are all the other cases very
similar to this?
MR. KEEGAN: Same dates, same steps, everything.
MR. KAUFMAN: We have to pick each one individually to vote
on.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay, so let's -- we have a motion, if
we can have a second.
MR. DEAN: I'll second that motion.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor of finding
violation say aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. DEAN: Aye.
MR. MARINO: Aye.
MR. ORTEGA: Aye.
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye.
Any nays?
(No response.)
Page 26
January 28,2010
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes.
MR. KAUFMAN: I would like to make a motion on the
CESD-20090015245 --
MR. DEAN: I'll second that motion.
MR. KAUFMAN: -- that we find them in violation.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. DEAN: Aye.
MR. MARINO: Aye.
MR. ORTEGA: Aye.
MR. LA VINSKI: Aye.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye.
Any nays?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes.
And on the third case.
MR. KAUFMAN: On the third case -- I just got new lenses in
my eyes so this is kind of an eye test for me -- ending in 15248, I
would like to make a motion that we find that also in violation.
MR. DEAN: I'll second that motion.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. DEAN: Aye.
MR. MARINO: Aye.
MR. ORTEGA: Aye.
MR. LA VINSKI: Aye.
Page 27
January 28,2010
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye.
Any nays?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes.
MR. KAUFMAN: Do you have a recommendation, officer?
MR. KEEGAN: Yes, sir. The county recommends that the Code
Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs
in the amount of $81.72 incurred in the prosecution of this case within
30 days, and abate all violations by obtaining a valid permit and
request all required inspections through to Certificate of Completion,
or obtain a valid demolition, requests all required inspections through
to Certificate of Completion and remove all unpermitted
improvements within blank amount of days of this hearing or a fine of
blank amount a day will be imposed until the violation is abated.
The respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator
when the violation has been abated in order to conduct the final
inspection to confirm abatement.
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 this order.
And all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property
owner.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: If I could --
MR. KAUFMAN: Is that 81.72 on the first case?
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: If I can interrupt. It was brought to
my attention that the respondent is here now; is that correct?
Are you Mr. Lambert?
MR. LAMBERT: Yes, sir, I'm Julio Lambert.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Jean, now that he's here, we already
made a motion against him, should we move forward or could we
back up, what?
MS. RAWSON: Well--
Page 28
January 28, 2010
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Before you -- hold on a second. If!
can have you sit down.
MR. LAMBERT: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: And you can take the mic if it's -- is
it moveable? Can you move it off the stand?
MS. RA WSON: You might do this. After he says what his
name is and he gets worn in, you might ask him if he admits to the
violations, and then you can move on to hear what he has to say about,
you know, whether or not you should fine him.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. I apologize for interrupting
you.
If you can bring the mic to you please. And if you can swear him
in?
(Speaker duly sworn.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: And if you can state your name,
please?
MR. LAMBERT: My name is Julio Lambert, sir.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Question, who is Zonia Lambert?
MR. LAMBERT: Zonia is my mom.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Zonia, okay.
I guess, do you have the authority to speak on your mother's
behalf?
MR. LAMBERT: I've got rights to the house also.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Is she deceased?
MR. LAMBERT: No, sir, she had a stroke and she's in a nursing
home.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All right. So at this point we should
-- do you admit to a violation at this property?
MR. LAMBERT: Which violation are we talking about?
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: There are three separate violations.
One violation for case number, I'll just say the last, like, five numbers:
15238 is abandoned or suspended permit Number 22-26.B
Page 29
January 28, 2010
104.5.1.4.4. And we're actually talking about each of the cases.
The next case is 15245. And that violation is abandoned or
suspended permit 22-26.B 104.5.1.4.4.
And then the third and last one is case number 15248, abandoned
or suspended permit. And is it the same permit number? Looks like
it's the same permit number.
No?
MR. KEEGAN: No. You were reading the ordinance.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: I'm sorry. Violation, okay.
MR. KAUFMAN: Basically there were permits pulled in 1993,
they were never finished, there was no C.O. issued on--
MR. LAMBERT: Yes, sir.
MR. KAUFMAN: That's the nature of the three violations.
MR. LAMBERT: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do you admit to that, I guess --
MR. LAMBERT: I'll admit that the structures haven't been
finished yet.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay.
MR. LAMBERT: This happened after hurricane Andrew and
then my Dad died and then my mom had a stroke and money has been
very, very, very tight just getting by. So they are not abandoned but
they are suspended.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: We don't want to -- we already
heard the case because you weren't here. We already heard the case.
We don't want to hear the case again. All I'm asking is do you admit
to the violation, that they are, in fact -- the house has not been
properly C.O.'d, Certificate of Occupancy has not been received, all
the inspections have not been completed --
MR. KEEGAN: If! may, it's not for the house--
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay.
MR. KEEGAN: It's for a garage, a carport and a shed.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: I apologize.
Page 30
January 28, 2010
Do you admit to those violations?
MR. LAMBERT: Well, I'll admit, yes, sir, that there is work that
hasn't been completed at the house yet.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay.
MS. RAWSON: Now, in an abundance of caution, since he's
admitted that, and you've already found violations in all three, before
you decide what the order of the Board is going to be, I think I would
probably let him testifY.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: So we should reopen the hearing is
what you're saying --
MS. RAWSON: I would.
MR. DEAN: I'll make that motion to reopen the hearing.
MR. KAUFMAN: Second.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do we need to rescind the previous
motions?
MS. RAWSON: No. I mean, I think you've already found
violations and he's already admitted to them, so now I would let him --
I would open the hearing and let him testifY before you make your
order of the Board as to what to do about the fact that there are
violations.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay.
I have a motion and a second. Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. DEAN: Aye.
MR. MARINO: Aye.
MR. ORTEGA: Aye.
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye.
Any nays?
Page 31
January 28,2010
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes.
Just to let you know what we did, is in your absence we heard the
cases. We found that there was a violation.
MR. LAMBERT: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: And as you walked in we were at the
step where we were going to order you to do something.
MR. LAMBERT: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: And that's where we suspended that
process, and what we're going to do is let you -- you admitted that
there are violations, in fact --
MR. LAMBERT: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: -- so at this stage we're going to ask
you to, I guess, basically explain why you haven't finished your
permits. And then at that point we are going to make a
recommendation -- not recommendation, and order is going to be
made that you have a certain time frame to do -- to finish the work,
basically.
MR. LAMBERT: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: And then -- and then at that point, if
you do not finish the work based on that time period, at that point
fines will start per day.
Go ahead.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: You covered my point, thank you.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay, very good. Any other board
members?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay, go ahead. If you can explain,
I guess, why the permits have not been received.
MR. LAMBERT: Yes, sir. Well, my father died in '94. To
make it simple he died without a will so the government ended up
with most of his money. It took many, many years to get the money.
Page 32
January 28, 2010
Then we continued to work on the house. We started working on
it again and then my mom had a stroke. That's all verifiable --
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: And what year was that?
MR. LAMBERT: And that pretty much shut us down.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: What year was that, that your
mother had a stroke?
MR. LAMBERT: Three, four years ago.
And just been trying to hang on. In the last five years we paid
more taxes than we've paid on the house in the last 30 years, and the
house is not worth a fifth of what it's taxed at.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: That's something this board can't
review. But--
MR. LAMBERT: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: What would be your time frame to
correcting the issues?
MR. LAMBERT: Sir. Excuse me. I've hired an insurance
adjustor, a private adjustor to try and -- because I've got a claim still
outstanding with First Protective for damages to the house from
Hurricane Wilma and Hurricane Daniel. And we're in the process of
trying to settle this. And if you could give me until the end of this
year I would have -- I give you my word everything will be complete.
And right after that I'll move out of this town and you'll never see me
agam.
MS. WALDRON: Mr. Chairman, I'm not sure that we swore Mr.
Lambert in. Did we?
MR. LAMBERT: Yes, ma'am.
MS. WALDRON: Okay. Just wanted to make sure.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: No problem. Okay.
Any comments from the board?
MR. ORTEGA: I have a comment. In your opinion is there a
life safety issue here?
MR. KEEGAN: My opinion is you've got unpermitted structures
Page 33
January 28, 2010
on a property. So I would consider that, yes.
MR. ORTEGA: I understand, but--
MR. L'ESPERANCE: But these structures aren't being dwelled
in, are they?
MR. KEEGAN: No.
MR. LAMBERT: No.
MR. KEEGAN: That have never been inspected.
MR. LAMBERT: Can I comment on that?
MR. ORTEGA: Sure.
MR. LAMBERT: Yes, sir, they have been inspected. The
carport, the contractor we hired didn't pull the final on the carport.
The detached garage, it has everything, it has framing inspection,
everything has been inspected, everything was done legally. The only
thing, the carport didn't have a final inspection and there is a fence
permit that we didn't finish because when somebody has a stroke and
you don't have access to money any more that destroys your -- it
destroys everything, your will to go on, too.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Investigator?
MR. KEEGAN: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: If in fact the final permits are the
only items that need to be done --
MR. LAMBERT: Yes, sir. I apologize for interrupting. The
carport just needs a final.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Right.
MR. LAMBERT: But the detached garage still need two
permits. Well, it needs a -- it needs --
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Two inspections.
MR. LAMBERT: It needs a final framing and it needs, it needs
to be stuccoed. And I don't know if you would C.O. a garage.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Well, this may be an option. Is
taking care of the -- to show goodwill, taking care of the least
expensive items like the carport, if it needs just a final inspection -- the
Page 34
January 28,2010
final inspection, would it be based on 20 I 0 or the LDC that is
currently in place or would it be based on when the permit was
originally pulled? Would it be an after the fact inspection, what -- I
mean --
MR. KEEGAN: I believe it would be an after the fact because he
would have to re-app -- the permit is done, the permit is expired. He
would have to re-app it. And I'm sure if would be after the fact.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Because what I'm thinking is if the
carport is -- break this down into three increments -- and the garage
needs to be restuccoed and the final needs more work, labor to finish
it. If there is a way that we can maybe separate getting the work done,
a certain time frame, a shorter time frame for the carport, a little bit
longer, let's say, if the shed needs to be done and then the garage.
MR. KEEGAN: How about -- and I'm just throwing this out at
you, giving a time frame to have the permits issued. Once the permits
are issued we'll give a time frame for them to be C.O.'d on each
permit.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: But the buildings are in different
stages of completion, is what I'm trying to get at --
MR. KEEGAN : Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Ifhe shows there is goodwill being
done on his part for -- I mean --
MR. ORTEGA: I don't think -- this permit, if it's a '93 permit,
right?
MR. KEEGAN: Yes, sir.
MR. ORTEGA: It's not going to be re-apped. He's going to have
to do it again. It's up to the building official, obviously, which might
incur, obviously you're going to have the new expenses. It might even
impact impact fees. So you have all these things to consider.
The code that was used in '93 obviously it's, you know --
MR. KEEGAN: Different.
MR. ORTEGA: So plans would probably be redone. But again I
Page 35
January 28, 2010
think what needs to happen is probably for him to go to the building
department and have a sit down and see what his options are. I think
that would be step one before he does anything --
MR. KEEGAN: Absolutely.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Mr. Lambert, I have a question of you. Is
it your intent to do any of these potential items we've been discussing
here or is it your intent to sell the property?
MR. LAMBERT: Sir, I plan on fixing the property as soon as I
get my insurance settlement from First Protective. I plan on fixing it
proper and then selling it and moving out of Naples is what I want to
do.
But I'm going to fix the house before I do anything because I'm
not going to give it away.
MR. MARINO: What is the time frame on this insurance
adjustment?
MR. LAMBERT: Ninety days.
MR. KAUFMAN: I have a suggestion, just to see if we get any
nods on the board, that we take what you said, go to the building
department, give you X amount of time to go to the building
department, talk with them. That will also give you a certain amount
of time to resolve your issues with the insurance company. And if
nothing is resolved at that time come back to the board and we can see
where we go from there. If that's agreeable to the board.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Ultimately we want to see an
abatement. So in that order we need to have something that
definitively states that it's going to be abated, either the structure is
demolished or the permits have been applied and received and a C.O.
IS gIven.
But if you want to break it down, then that's fine.
MR. DEAN: Can I ask one question?
MR. LAMBERT: Yes, sir.
MR. DEAN: The insurance that you are talking about, when was
Page 36
January 28,2010
that claim filed?
MR. LAMBERT: That claim was filed in '95, sir.
MR. DEAN: So 1995. And here we are saying we're going to
get done in 90 days?
MR. LAMBERT: Sir, in 1995 I made a claim. It took a year to
get the first check from the insurance company. They give us a good
faith check. They gave us a $30,000 deposit, which we started
working on the house at the time.
And then they told us to please be patient, we will get back with
you. I have filed eight claims. You can verify with Tallahassee where
I've made formal complaints for the company not coming back to
make the estimates. Because they made an estimate on the house in
January of2000, right after Charlie and Wilma. They make an
estimate in January, and from the January until we got the check in
July, the house had been rained on 50 times. So the estimate they
made there was invalid.
So they said they were going to send somebody in there to
reestimate the house. Plus when they did that they didn't do the
estimate on the carport or the laundry room. And, I mean -- and they
were supposed to come back and do that. And I filed formal
complaints with Tallahassee, and you can -- I will verify -- I will bring
you the paperwork where I have sent -- I have filed formal complaints
and filed formal complaints.
And then they were supposed to go to mediation the beginning of
last year. And then there was a problem. They didn't ever -- they
never sent me the paperwork to go to mediation like they were
supposed to.
And then I spoke to a gentleman who knows this public adjustor
where you pay him 10 percent of whatever that he gets you, and then
he tells me, well, get me the estimates for the house and I will get you
your money minus 10 percent.
MR. DEAN: Okay.
Page 37
January 28, 2010
MR. LAMBERT: And that -- the part that I have been having
problems with is getting the estimates because after four and a half
years nobody wants to go and give you an estimate. And I've offered
the gentlemen to pay for the estimates and they still don't want to give
me the estimate. So that's what took me -- but he told me within 90
days after I get the estimates, he told me that he would give me the
money, because he's getting 10 percent of everything that I get so he's
after that money.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay.
MR. MARINO: Is there enough money in this whole claim that
it's going to take care of all these problems that he has with this whole
case?
MR. LAMBERT: Sir, there is $130,000 what we can get still.
We never got any interior damage or nothing. I got $1,400 worth of
damages. The couches in the house alone were worth 9,000.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: I think that's enough --
MR. LAMBERT: And I can verify everything that I'm telling
you gentlemen right now. There is no lies or nothing coming out of
my backside.
MR. KAUFMAN: Investigator, have you had communication
with Mr. Lambert in the past?
MR. KEEGAN: In the past, yes. Not on these cases.
MR. KAUFMAN: Is there -- Mr. Lambert, is there any reason
why you haven't had a dialogue with the county to tell them what's
going on and --
MR. LAMBERT: Sir, the only -- I've just been trying -- not to
make no excuses but I have just been trying to get by.
I mean, the taxes on the house are five times what the house is
worth. And I haven't had the funds to fix the house, because you have
to pay $5,000 for a three bedroom, one bath house that's been
destroyed six years ago, it's a slap in the face.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: That wasn't the question he --
Page 38
January 28, 2010
MR. LAMBERT: No, sir, I haven't spoke to the gentlemen
because nobody's ever said anything about the permits. But I was
intending to take care of that when I got the money from the insurance
company because I wasn't going to leave my house a wreck.
MR. KAUFMAN: Are you aware that he had tried to contact
you or your family or the trust?
MR. LAMBERT: Sir, the only time we spoke to any of these
gentlemen is when we seen them like two weeks ago when they spoke
to my son when we were throwing a bunch of stuff away. We were
clearing it, we were just tossing all old equipment and stuff for
construction, and everything that we had, we were just cleaning house
with it.
And they came by and he gave this paperwork to my boy knotted
up like this and he told me, here. He gave the paperwork to my boy
and --
MR. KEEGAN: That wasn't me.
MR. LAMBERT: That was two weeks ago, which told me to
come to Court today. And I apologize for being late. I have not been
feeling good and I really didn't want to --
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: I think we heard enough. I would
like to close the public hearing unless the board has any other
questions.
MR. ORTEGA: I still have one question. I don't think it was
answered. Does this -- do these structures pose a life safety situation?
MR. KEEGAN: In my opinion, yes.
MR. ORTEGA: You've seen them physically?
MR. KEEGAN: No.
MR. ORTEGA: You have not seen the structures yourself?
MR. KEEGAN: I have photos from the other departments, from
the aerials. They do exist. But no, I have not physically seen them,
.
no, SIr.
The carport I have seen from the outside. The two structures in
Page 39
January 28,2010
the rear of the property I have not seen.
MR. ORTEGA: Okay.
MR. KAUFMAN: One final comment I would like to make.
These structures can also be removed. We have a wooden shed, is one
of these cases.
MR. LAMBERT: No, these are not -- these are -- these
structures were built to code. You would need a bulldozer to remove
them and thousands of dollars to remove them, where it wouldn't cost
that much to fix them.
And there is no damage, there is nothing that can be damaged
when the only thing that is wrong with the carport is it need a fascia
finished on it, it needs a final inspection. And everything, and
everything -- there is nothing hanging, there is no damage, there is
nothing that you can get cut or nailed on, everything is solid built to
code.
And there is nothing hanging that is going to fall and injure
anybody.
MR. KAUFMAN: We're here to try to work out something that
would be amenable to --
MR. LAMBERT: Yes, sir, and I appreciate that.
MR. KAUFMAN: -- everybody involved. So my question to
you is, how much time, knowing that you have an insurance claim
going on, how much time would you need to where you could actually
show that some progress is being made on this, these three violations?
MR. LAMBERT: Sir, you said to start with the carport first.
You give me 45 days, I will have it permitted and finished, the first
carport.
And when I get my insurance money I give you my word I'll
jump on everything and it will be finished right away, just as fast as I
can get it finished because I want to sell that house and be out of
Naples, or at least sell it -- I'm going to fix it and rent it out where I
can get out of Naples.
Page 40
January 28, 2010
MS. WALDRON: Mr. Chairman?
MR. KAUFMAN: That's the carport.
MR. LAMBERT: Yes.
MS. WALDRON: We do have a few photos if the board would
like to see them.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Well, we already heard the case and
everything, so that, I think we would be rehearing the case if we were
to look at the photos. Is that your -- okay, thank you.
MR. KAUFMAN: Now, the carport is --let me ask which--
MS. RAWSON: The 245.
MR. KAUFMAN: 245?
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: It's the second one.
MR. KAUFMAN: I guess this hinges on you receiving money
from the insurance company. If you don't receive money from the
insurance company, all bets are off.
Am I correct in that assumption?
MR. LAMBERT: Sir, if! -- I know I said 45 days. But if you'll
give me 60 days. If I got to go dig ditches for nickels I will finish that
carport to make -- to, I don't know how to say this, to show you my
good faith that I am doing what I told you that I would do.
MR. KAUFMAN: Mr. Chairman, what I would like to propose
that we do is take it case by case and go from there.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: That's what -- yes, that's--
MR. KAUFMAN: So, on the 245 case, this is the carport.
MR. LAMBERT: Yes, sir.
MR. KAUFMAN: I would like to make a motion, using your
language, I'll fill in the blanks. We give you 60 days, that's what you
asked for.
MR. LAMBERT: Yes, sir.
MR. KAUFMAN: And should you not finish it in 60 days a fine
of $200 per day be assessed.
MR. LAMBERT: Yes, sir, I'll agree to that.
Page 41
January 28, 2010
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: And part of that was demolition if
. ,
It s not --
MR. KAUFMAN: Yes, he has the option--
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay.
MR. KAUFMAN: -- through to Certificate of Completion on
either one.
This is just the 5245 case. Okay. That's my motion.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a second?
MR. DEAN: I'll second that motion.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. DEAN: Aye.
MR. MARINO: Aye.
MR. ORTEGA: Aye.
MR. LA VINSKI: Aye.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye.
Any nays?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes.
So you have 60 days for that --
MR. LAMBERT: Yes, sir, I give you my word it will be done
by then --
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: -- for 15245.
MR. LAMBERT: Carport.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: The -- is it the carport?
MR. KAUFMAN: Carport.
MR. DEAN: Carport.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay, good. Carport.
And if within the 60 days it's not completed, Certificate of
Page 42
January 28, 2010
Completion, or demolished, there will be a $200-a-day fine assessed.
MR. LAMBERT: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay.
MR. LAMBERT: All it needs is just a final inspection, is all it
needs.
MR. KAUFMAN: The second case -- the second easiest for you
to resolve, which would be what, the shed?
MR. LAMBERT: Yes, sir.
MR. KAUFMAN: The shed. And the shed is the 5238?
MR. KEEGAN: Yes, sir.
MR. KAUFMAN: Now, let's -- how much time would you need
to resolve the situation with the shed?
MR. LAMBERT: I would like to get 45 days for that, sir.
MR. KAUFMAN: Now, do you want 45 days after the 60 days
MR. LAMBERT: Yes, sir.
MR. KAUFMAN: -- is what you are asking for?
MR. LAMBERT: Yes, please.
MR. KAUFMAN: So from now that would be in essence 120
days.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Roughly 120.
MR. KAUFMAN: Okay. And that--
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: What would be the reasoning for
120 days?
MR. DEAN: Doing the carport first and then he's doing the shed.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Oh, I see what you're saying. Okay.
MR. KAUFMAN: Sixty days for the first one to be done. That
would show us good faith et cetera, et cetera. If that's not resolved in
60 days --
MR. LAMBERT: Two hundred dollars-a-day fine, yes, sir, or
tear it down.
MR. KAUFMAN: That's correct.
Page 43
January 28,2010
On this one -- let me go to the last one --
MR. LAMBERT: Yes, sir.
MR. KAUFMAN: -- just for -- the last one, give me a time
frame on that.
MR. LAMBERT: Sir, that is going to cost me $5,000 to finish
that. I'm hoping to get the insurance money before I start working on
that.
MR. KAUFMAN: So that's the longest lead time item on that
one.
MR. LAMBERT: Yes, sir.
MR. KAUFMAN: But if you don't get the insurance money in
the first 60 days we kind of know what the answer is going to be going
forward.
MR. LAMBERT: Yes, sir. As far as the carport, I give you my
word that it will be finished. And I give you my word on the 45 after
the 60.
And if I tell you -- if that house is not complete before the end of
this year I will sign that house to you and I will move dirt-ass broke
out of Naples, excuse my language.
MR. KAUFMAN: I don't know what the -- I omitted the Court
costs. The only ones I had was the $81. Are they the same on all
three cases?
MR. KEEGAN : Yes, sir.
MR. KAUFMAN: The 81.72? Okay.
So I would like to make a recommendation -- or a motion that we
extend 120 days on 15238 with a $200-a-day fine after the 120 days.
MR. DEAN: That's the shed?
MR. KAUFMAN: That's the shed, yes.
MR. DEAN: I'll second that motion.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor.
Page 44
January 28, 2010
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. DEAN: Aye.
MR. MARINO: Aye.
MR. ORTEGA: Aye.
MR. LA VINSKI: Aye.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye.
Any nays?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes.
MR. KAUFMAN: Now the tough one, garage.
It seems to me that in 120 days, you probably will have a pretty
good idea whether you're going to get the insurance money or not.
And what I would like to figure a way of doing is, to come back
here, we just want the violations abated.
MR. LAMBERT: Yes, sir, absolutely.
MR. KAUFMAN: To come back here during that 120 day
period to see if that's going to be resolved or not. And I'm not quite
sure how we can structure that.
MS. FLAGG: If! could suggest to the board, you can set a date
for him to come back, give him a completion date in the order, and
then he can come back under motion for extension of time and give
you an update of how it's going.
MR. KAUFMAN: I think that's an excellent idea. And I think
120 days, since it coincides with one of the other orders, might be the
sufficient time.
What I'm saying is after 120 days you come back here--
MR. LAMBERT: And show you that everything is--
MR. KAUFMAN: -- we probably have the first two abated,
hopefully.
MR. LAMBERT: Yes, sir.
MR. KAUFMAN: And at that time if you need an extension to
Page 45
January 28, 2010
complete the final piece you can ask for the extension at that time.
The board seeing the due diligence that you have done on the
first two I'm sure would be sympathetic to extending you sufficient
time to finish the project.
MR. LAMBERT: I give you my word it will be done within that
time limit.
MR. KAUFMAN: So that's the motion I would like to make on
case 5248, last four digits, that we extend the time on that to 120 days,
whatever meeting date that falls in at.
MS. RAWSON: That would be in May.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Not to abate it but to come back and
MS. FLAGG: No, what your order would state is that he needs
to abate by 120 days and set the fine. And then ifhe is unable to do
that he could request an extension of time at that point.
MR. KAUFMAN: So we'll set that at 120 days, which will be
the May meeting, with a fine of$200 a day, and the costs are 81.72.
MS. RAWSON: Well, ifhe doesn't complete it within 120 days
then he can come back in the May meeting. But if he completes it
within 120 days then we're done.
MR. KAUFMAN: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: And the other thing is, the
suggestion is to keep the investigator abreast of what you are doing.
Do you have all his contact information?
You do, okay.
So when he does call maybe a month or two to check-up and see
how things are progressing, you keep an open dialogue, because that
would really alleviate a lot of the issues and problems.
MR. LAMBERT: Yes, sir. Sir, all I got is one phone number
that I've had for five years and they've got it.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. Ijust want to make just a
suggestion, okay.
Page 46
January 28,2010
Now we've made a motion.
MR. DEAN: I'll second the motion.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. DEAN: Aye.
MR. MARINO: Aye.
MR. ORTEGA: Aye.
MR. LA VINSKI: Aye.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye.
Any nays?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes.
Thank you very much for your time.
MR. LAMBERT: Thank you, sir. Gentlemen, thank you very
much.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: If we could take a -- come back
about quarter after.
(A recess was taken.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: I would like to call the code
enforcement board back to order.
The next case will be Treasure B. and Jeff Ahlbrandt,
CESD-20090012965.
And I would like to swear in the investigator.
(Speaker duly sworn.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: The respondent is not present; is that
correct?
MR. PAUL: No, they are not.
MS. WALDRON: This is in reference to violation of ordinance,
Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section
Page 47
January 28, 2010
10.02.06.B.IA.
Description of violation: Owner enclosed porch and added a
wooden shed with no permits.
Location address where violation exists: 6090 Painted Leaf
Lane, Naples, Florida, 34116. Folio 38163480005.
Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation
location: Treasure B. and Jeff Ahlbrandt, 6090 Painted Leaf Lane,
Naples Florida 34116.
Date violation first observed: August 12th, 2009.
Date owner/person in charge given notice ofviolation:
September 28th, 2009.
Date on which violation to be corrected: October 28th, 2009.
Date of reinspect ion: November 9th, 2009.
Results of reinspection: The violation remains.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Go ahead, inspector.
MR. PAUL: For the record, Renald Paul, Collier County Code
Enforcement.
This is in reference to case number CESD-20090012965 dealing
with violations of: owner has enclosed a porch and has a wooden shed
in the rear yard of the property, and neither one has a permit.
Service was given on 9/28 of'09.
I would like to present case evidence and the following exhibits,
B-1 through three and C-l.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a motion to accept --
MR. KAUFMAN: Motion to accept.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: -- the pictures. Do I hear a second?
MR. DEAN: I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: And if you can just raise your hand
please.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor.
Page 48
January 28,2010
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. DEAN: Aye.
MR. MARINO: Aye.
MR. ORTEGA: Aye.
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye.
Any nays?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes.
MR. PAUL: And as you get the pictures, you'll see Exhibit B-1,
it's from the neighboring property. It shows the back end ofthis
home.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: And the part that has been enclosed,
is that --
MR. PAUL: It's the back part, which you'll see on B-2, it's a
much closer photo.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Behind that tree --
MR. PAUL: Correct. It's behind the tree as you can see. That's
supposed to be an open porch or a screened-in porch but they have
enclosed it and placed windows.
MR. KAUFMAN: I would like to commend the county on
printing on both sides of the paper.
MR. PAUL: I had some printer problems this morning.
And on Exhibit B-3 you'll see the wooden shed that they had
built in the rear of the property.
Exhibit C-l, that is the original building application that they had
applied for and they had gotten for the home. As you'll see towards
the middle of the page it will say there is supposed to be a porch and
then it shows the square footage of the porch.
MR. KAUFMAN: Have you been in contact with the residents?
MR. PAUL: No. Every time I've gone to this residence you can
Page 49
January 28, 2010
hear the dogs inside. No one has ever come to the door. I've been
there when there was even a car in the driveway but no one comes to
the door.
I've posted the property. I've left business cards. The business
cards have been removed by someone but they never, ever called me.
So I'm unfortunately not in contact with the owners.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any further questions?
MR. KAUFMAN: I would like to make a motion the violation
exists.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a second?
MR. ORTEGA: I'll second.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. DEAN: Aye.
MR. MARINO: Aye.
MR. ORTEGA: Aye.
MR. LA VINSKI: Aye.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye.
Any nays?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes.
And your recommendation?
MR. PAUL: We ask that the owners pay the operational costs in
the amount of $81.15 incurred in the prosecution ofthis case within 30
days of this hearing, abate all violations by respondents required to
obtain any and all permits as required by Collier County for any and
all improvements and additions to this residence, or obtain permits for
removal of all unpermitted improvements and additions to this
residence, and obtain all required inspections and Certificate of
Page 50
January 28,2010
Completion within X amount of days of this hearing or be fined X
amount of dollars for each day the violation remains unabated.
The respondent must notify code enforcement within 24 hours of
abatement. If the respondents fail 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 this agreement,
and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner.
MR. KAUFMAN: Are there any safety violations, electrical in
the porch, for instance?
MR. PAUL: I've never been inside of the porch 'cause I can't
seem to get ahold of these folks. So I've never actually been inside the
home.
MR. KAUFMAN: And the shed, same thing?
MR. LAMBERT: Same thing.
MR. KAUFMAN: Did you see any evidence of wires being
strung?
MR. PAUL: No, I don't, not from what I can see at least.
MR. KAUFMAN: Let me take a stab at it, then. I would like to
make a motion that we provide 90 days for all permits to be pulled to
completion, and a $200 a day fine subsequent to the 90 days.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: And if the permits are not pulled for
demolition, because that was part of the order, correct?
MR. PAUL: Yes, it was.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. How many days to
demolish?
MR. KAUFMAN: Should be in the same--
MR. PAUL: Same thing --
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Time period? Very good.
MR. KAUFMAN: Ninety days.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a second?
MR. DEAN: I'll second the motion.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any further discussion?
Page 51
January 28,2010
MR. DEAN: Question. The 90 days, is that too long or do you
think it's correct?
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: You seconded, it --
MR. DEAN: Well, I'll second it now. That's why I seconded it,
so I could open it up for discussion.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do you think 90 days would be
sufficient to --
MR. PAUL: I would think it would be sufficient. It gives him
plenty of time and --
MR. DEAN: I think it gives them too much time.
MR. MARINO: He's had too much time.
MR. DEAN: You go there and there is no response. And the
enclosure could be, for all we know, living quarters. And we're
allowing 90 days again. I always think that's too long. To me, 30
days gets a response.
MR. PAUL: I'll go with any recommendation you give me.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: But part of it is you have to give
time for them to actually go ahead and get the permits and --
MR. DEAN: I think if you gave him five days he could walk in
the door and get a permit, you know. Why give him all this time?
I just think 90 days, and he has an enclosed that you can't see.
And if it's living quarters and if there is electrical problems or
whatever and there is a fire, I mean, to me I'd call it -- that would
make him come in here sooner, I would think, if he had 30 days. He
has to respond to 30 days or we move on it. But I just think you give
him 90 days that's a long time. That's my opinion.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Would you like to withdraw your second
and request that the original motion --
MR. DEAN: No, no, I would like to amend the second.
MR. KAUFMAN: How about if! amend the motion.
MR. DEAN: No, I can amend the second. That's okay. We can
vote on both. Either way you want to go.
Page 52
January 28, 2010
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: If I'm not mistaken the first has to
agree to any amendment.
MR. DEAN: You can amend the motion then vote on it whether
he does or not.
But anyway, I'll refer back to the motion, that's fine. I seconded
it to open it up for discussion because I think when you enclose a
building and you give 90 days that's a long time. That's a long time.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Mr. Kaufman, would you like to
amend your motion?
MR. KAUFMAN: I'll amend my motion.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: To?
MR. KAUFMAN: Thirty days.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a second?
MR. DEAN: I'll second that motion.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. DEAN: Aye.
MR. MARINO: Aye.
MR. ORTEGA: Aye.
MR. LA VINSKI: Aye.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye.
Any nays?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes.
MR. PAUL: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: IfI'm not mistaken, next case would
be Petitoles St. Jean; is that correct?
MS. WALDRON: We actually are on to old business and that
would be after that.
Page 53
January 28, 2010
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: What's that, that's going to be under
old business?
MS. WALDRON: It's after the old business.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. All right. My mistake. So
we're going to old business now?
MS. WALDRON: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Very good. Meghan Soloff. Case
number CEVR-20090004297.
The respondent is not here, I take it?
(Speakers duly sworn.)
MS. WALDRON: That is in reference to violation of Collier
County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section
3.05.08.C.
Location of violation: 2328 Broadwing Court, Naples, Florida.
Folio number 49460006100.
Description of violation: Observed exotic vegetation on
developed property built after 1992.
On September 24th, 2009 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-4499, Page
2129 for more information.
The respondent has not complied with the code enforcement
board orders as of January 28th, 2010.
The fines and costs to date are described as the following. Fines
at a rate of $50 per day for the period between December 25th, 2009
to January 28th, 2010, 35 days, for the total of$1,750. Fines continue
to accrue.
Operational costs of$86.14 have not been paid. The total
amount to date is $1,836.14.
MS. O'FARRELL: For the record, Susan O'Farrell, Collier
County Code Enforcement Environmental Investigator.
Page 54
January 28, 2010
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Thank you.
When was the last time that you visited the property?
MS. O'FARRELL: Yesterday.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Yesterday. And it has not been
corrected.
MS. O'FARRELL: Violation still exists.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Very good.
MR. KAUFMAN: Have you had any contact with the owner?
MS. O'FARRELL: No. She won't answer the phone, she won't
answer the door. I've checked. I know the house is in foreclosure but
she's still living in the house. The trash was put out yesterday so I
know that they are still there.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. Do I hear a motion to impose
the fines?
MR. KAUFMAN: So moved.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a second?
MR. LA VINSKI: Second.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. DEAN: Aye.
MR. MARINO: Aye.
MR. ORTEGA: Aye.
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye.
Any nays?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes.
MS. O'FARRELL: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Thank you very much.
Page 55
January 28, 2010
Next case will be Heriberto Perez, CELU-20090007827.
(Speaker duly sworn.)
MS. WALDRON: In reference to violations of Collier County
Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 2.02.03.
Location of violation: 2081 50th Street Southwest, Naples,
Florida. Folio 36120200000.
Description of violation: Single family home converted to
multi-family in an area designed for single family use.
On October 22nd, 2009 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-4506, Page
2544 for more information.
The respondent has not complied with the code enforcement
board orders as of January 28th, 2010.
The fines and costs to date are described as the following. Fines
at a rate of $250 per day for the period between November 22nd, 2009
to January 28th, 2010, 68 days, for the total of$17,000. Fines
continue to accrue.
Operational costs of $86.71 have not been paid. Total amount to
date, $17,086.71.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. The last time you visited the
property?
MR. PAUL: Yesterday.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: And none of the work has been
completed or they haven't converted it back to a single family home?
MR. PAUL: No, they haven't.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any questions from the board?
MR. KAUFMAN: Contact with the owners?
MR. PAUL: None at all. When I went to the property the other
day no one was home, unfortunately, so -- they haven't called me or
anything, so -- there has been no change, no permits applied for.
Page 56
January 28, 2010
MR. KAUFMAN: Make a motion we impose the fines.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a second?
MR. LA VINSKI: Second.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. DEAN: Aye.
MR. MARINO: Aye.
MR. ORTEGA: Aye.
MR. LA VINSKI: Aye.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye.
Any nays?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes.
Next case will be Alba Licci, CESD-20090007768.
(Speaker duly sworn.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: And the respondent is not present; is
that correct?
MR. PAUL: Correct.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Thank you.
MS. WALDRON: In reference to violation Collier County Land
Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 1O.02.06.B.1E.
Location: 2395 39th Avenue Northeast, Naples, Florida. Folio
39890600005.
Description of violation: Garage converted into living space
without permits.
On November 19th, 2009 the Code Enforcement Board issued a
finding of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was
found in violation of referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the
violation. See the attached order of the Board, OR-4516, Page 10 for
Page 57
January 28, 2010
more information.
The respondent has not complied with the code enforcement
board orders as of January 28th, 2010.
The fines and costs to date are described as the following. Fines
at a rate of$250 per day for the period between November 22nd 2009
to January 28th, 2010, 68 days, for the total of$13,600. Fines
continue to accrue.
Fines at the rate of $200 per day for the period between
December 20th of2009 to January 28th, 2010, 48 days, for the total of
$8,000. Fines continue to accrue.
Operational costs of $81.72 have not been paid. Total amount to
date $21,681.72.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: I think the dollar amounts may be
incorrect. Order number one and three in the -- what you just read
says that it's $250 a day, but number three, if they do not comply with
paragraph one of the order within 48 hours then the fine shall be $200
per day. So we may have overcharged $50 per day.
And is that -- do you want to look at it, make sure that I'm --
MS. WALDRON: It's actually the right total amount but the
wrong amount per day. It should be $200 a day.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay, so it is the right amount.
Any questions?
MR. KAUFMAN: Any contact with the owner?
MR. BOSA: For the record, Ralph Bosa, Collier County Code
Enforcement.
I did make contact with Mr. Brian Spaulding, who is the -- has
power of attorney for the owner. And he did say the violations still
remained, both violations.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: And when was that contact made?
MR. BOSA: Yesterday. Yesterday morning, sir.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any discussion on when it may be
abated?
Page 58
January 28, 2010
MR. BOSA: No, sir, none at all.
MR. KAUFMAN: Is there somebody living in the house?
MR. BOSA: Yes, there is, sir.
MR. ORTEGA: I think it's important to better understand each
of these cases, where you have situations like this, is whether the
home is under lis pendens or under foreclosure also.
Is this home under foreclosure?
MR. BOSA: It is under lis pendens, sir.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a motion?
MR. KAUFMAN: Make the motion that we impose the fines.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a second?
MR. ORTEGA: Second.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. DEAN: Aye.
MR. MARINO: Aye.
MR. ORTEGA: Aye.
MR. LA VINSKI: Aye.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye.
Any nays?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes.
MR. KAUFMAN: This would be one of those that comes under
the edict of contacting the bank and not selling a house when there are
violations on it that code enforcement has been working on to resolve.
MS. FLAGG: Correct. The challenge the bank has is that if
there is someone living in the home they can't address the violation for
us. But once the bank takes Certificate of Title then the bank will
address it before they sell the home.
Page 59
January 28, 2010
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: The next case will be Rey and Edith
Martinez, case number 2007080603.
(Speakers duly sworn.)
MS. WALDRON: This is in reference to violation of Collier
County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section
10.02.06.B.1A, 10.02.06.B.1E and 1O.02.06.B.1E.i.
Location of violation: 1410 Apple Street, Immokalee, Florida.
Folio 30680880005.
Description of violation: Multiple additions built onto structure
without first obtaining proper permits.
On April 23rd, 2009 the code enforcement board issued a finding
of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in
violation of referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation.
See the attached order of the Board OR-4449, Page 2444 for more
information.
The respondent has complied with the code enforcement board
orders as of December 23rd, 2009.
The fines and costs to date are described as the following. Fines
at the rate of $200 per day for the period between July 25th of2009 to
September 29th of2009, 67 days, for the total of$13,400.
Operational costs of $87 have been paid. The total amount to
date is $13,400.
MR. KAUFMAN: I would like to make a motion we abate the
fine.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Before that, I have a question. The
respondent has complied with the CEB order as of December 23rd,
2009 but the fine is only from July 25th through September 29th.
Why is there such a discrepancy there?
MS. RODRIGUEZ: It was done in two parts. He had to obtain
the permit within so many days and then he had to C.O. it within a
year. So that's why there are two different--
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay.
Page 60
January 28, 2010
We have a motion?
MR. KAUFMAN: A motion to abate the fines.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Second.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All of those in favor.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. DEAN: Aye.
MR. MARINO: Aye.
MR. ORTEGA: Aye.
MR. LA VINSKI: Aye.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye.
Any nays?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. Do you understand what we
just did?
You had fines of$13,400 and we erased them, basically, so you
do not have to pay any fine. And you have already paid the
operational costs, so you do not owe the county anything.
All right?
MS. MARTINEZ: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: You are welcome. Have a good
day.
I'm trying to kill a little bit of time because we have a case at
11 :00 but we're going right through these.
MS. WALDRON: We have the emergency case left.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Right, I know.
Petitoles St. Jean.
And once again, if you can swear the parties in?
(Speakers duly sworn.)
MS. WALDRON: This is in reference to case
Page 61
January 28, 2010
CEPM-20090018927, violation of Collier County Code of Laws and
Ordinances, Chapter 22, Article 6, Section 22 through 231,
Subsections 1 and 2.
Description of violation: Single family home that is being
occupied without water.
Location address where violation exists: 105 Doral Circle Naples,
Florida 34113. Folio 54901800009.
Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation
location: Petitoles St. Jean, 2740 Linwood Avenue, Naples, Florida
34112.
Date violation first observed: December 17th, 2009.
Date owner/person in charge given notice of violation: Notice of
violation posted at the property and the courthouse on December 28th,
2009.
Date on by which violation to be corrected: Immediately.
Date of reinspect ion: January 4th, 2010.
Results of reinspection: Violation remains.
MR. MUCHA: For the record, Joe Mucha, M-U-C-H-A,
Property Maintenance Specialist, Collier County Code Enforcement.
This case initiated back in December of 2009. My department
received a complaint from neighbors in regards to people living in this
houses with no electricity or running water or sewer. And part of the
complaint was also that they were dumping waste and washing clothes
in the canal that's behind the property and -- all right, I'll go from
there.
So on December 17th, 2009 I made a site visit to the property and
met with the property owner Mr. St. Jean and his sister, who was there
at the time as well. I advised them of the complaint that was received.
They did confirm to me that there is currently no water, electric
to the property. They state that no one actually lives at the house but
it is more used for storage. They also admitted at that time that
sometimes during the day people are at the property. And I observed
Page 62
January 28,2010
furniture inside the home and there were several cars parked in the
driveway.
Property owner at the time stated that he would be able to get the
power restored to the property shortly but because so much money
was owed for the water that the water could not be turned back on at
this time.
And I advised that I would be back to issue a notice of violation
for no water and electricity.
And at that time I did confirm with public utilities that there was
an outstanding water bill for approximately $1,600.
December 28th, 2009, attempted to serve notice of violation with
personal service to property owner at his address of record, which is
2740 Linwood Avenue, Naples.
And this property is currently vacant. I talked to neighbors and
they said the property had been vacant for a few months. So at that
time I elected to post the notice of violation at the subject property and
the courthouse and also send the notice of violation regular mail.
January 4th, 2010, I made a site visit to the property and
observed a vehicle in the driveway. I knocked on the door and no one
answered. I checked around the side of the house and observed that
the electrical meter was not moving.
I talked to a neighbor at 103 Doral Circle, which is directly right
next door to this property. He states that the vehicle in the driveway is
associated with someone that is staying at the house.
I contacted Ms. St. Jean and she states that the water and electric
is still shut off. I asked her if anyone was living in the house and she
said no, no one lives there but her uncle sleeps there during the day
sometimes.
At that point I advised her that no one could be staying at the
house without utilities.
She states that she can get the power turned back on but would
have a hard time getting the water turned on because so much money
Page 63
January 28, 2010
is owed.
I advised her at that time even if the power is restored we still
couldn't have anyone staying there without water.
And at that point I decided to prepare this case to send to a
hearing.
On January 8th, 2010 I contacted Florida Power and Light and
they confirmed that the power had been restored to the property. I
contacted public utilities and they confirmed that the water remains
shut off due to an outstanding water bill still not being paid.
January 26th, 2010 I posted a notice of hearing at the property
and the courthouse.
And January 28th, I met with -- went to the property and Ms. St.
Jean was there, and I again advised her that nobody could be staying
there without water.
She states they were only there for a couple of hours.
I asked her ifher uncle was still sleeping at the property and she
said that he was not, and she said that she would be here for the
hearing today.
So that's where we are. The water is still shut off and it's my
contention, and also to the neighbors in the area, is that there are
people staying in this house, whether they might not be staying there
all the time, they sometimes come and stay during the day for a few
hours, sometimes maybe somebody comes there and sleeps, so -- that's
where it's at.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Anything you would like to add?
MS. ST. JEAN: Well, since my brother buy this house and he
has a trouble with the neighbor, they always complain for every little
thing.
They said we are jugging some water, washing clothes there.
He's lying, they are not doing that.
And then I don't know, what can I say.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Is the water turned off?
Page 64
January 28, 2010
MS. ST. JEAN: No, I'm going to the water now if they are going
to make a payment plan for us. But it too high for us to pay one time.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Is the water currently turned off?
MS. ST. JEAN: Yes, turned off. But I'm going to the water
today if they going to make plan for us, payment plan, turn back on.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: And the power has been turned back
on?
MS. ST. JEAN: Uh-huh.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: I have a question. Is the sewer a public
sewer or is it a septic tank?
MS. ST. JEAN: I don't know, maybe he have a tank outside in
the front yard.
MR. MUCHA: I think they are on public --
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Public?
MS. ST. JEAN: Probably.
MR. MUCHA: And that was one of the questions I came up
with, is like, when you are staying there, even if you're there for a few
hours, I mean, how do you use, like, those kind of facilities, if
somebody has to use the bathroom or --
MS. ST. JEAN: I always go -- I work at night. I'm the only one
live there now. I always went home every day, make some cleaning,
get my dress because I work at night. Always home for a couple of
hours.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Is anyone staying there currently?
Is anyone living there?
MS. ST. JEAN: No.
MR. KAUFMAN: You just mentioned that you are the only one
that lives there.
MS. ST. JEAN: I'm only one now always go home during the
day for couple hours, make some cleaning, fix some things.
MR. KAUFMAN: So you have a residence someplace else?
MS. ST. JEAN: Yes, I have my brother. But I was working at
Page 65
January 28, 2010
night six night, because when I was out during the day I just stopped
by for a couple hours, that's it.
MR. KAUFMAN: If the water is shut off! think a violation
exists. And I would like to make a motion that a violation does exist.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a second?
MR. DEAN: I would like to second that motion.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. DEAN: Aye.
MR. MARINO: Aye.
MR. ORTEGA: Aye.
MR. LA VINSKI: Aye.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye.
Any nays?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes. What is your
recommendation?
MR. MUCHA: My recommendation is that the code
enforcement board orders the respondent to pay all operational casts in
the amount of$81.15 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30
days and abate all violations by.
Respondent must restore the water to the property with an active
valid account with Collier County Public Utilities or vacate the
premises of all occupants until such time that water is restored to the
property with an active valid account with Collier County Public
Utilities within blank days of this hearing or a fine of blank until
violation is abated.
Respondent must notify the Code Enforcement Investigator when
the violation has been abated in order to conduct the final inspectioni
Page 66
January 28, 2010
to confirm abatement.
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 this order and all costs of
abatement shall be assessed to the property owner.
MR. KAUFMAN: So this would fall under the safety and health
MR. MUCHA: Yes, sir.
MR. KAUFMAN: -- as far as immediate is concerned.
And you say that you are going to be --
MS. ST. JEAN: I'm going now if they are going to make
payment plan for us. Because $1,600 too high to pay at one time.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a recommendation?
MR. KAUFMAN: I would like to make a motion, fill in the
blanks. The 81.15 is the cost. Water needs to be restored within
seven days or a $250 a day fine will be imposed. And during the next
six days, or until the water is restored, that nobody is to inhabit that
dwelling.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a second?
MR. MARINO: I have a question. Once the water is turned on,
the electricity is on, it's habitable to be lived in?
MR. MUCHA: Yes, sir.
MR. DEAN: I'll second the motion.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any further discussion?
MR. ORTEGA: I do have another question for clarity purposes.
Once you go today and you make the payment, they will restore
the water?
MS. ST. JEAN: I'm going to go to there, talk to them what they
going to do with me for payment plan. I don't know what gonna this, I
don't know what they going to tell me to do.
MR. ORTEGA: Okay, that's why I asked the question. So in
other words, you had no discussion with them so far with regards to a
Page 67
January 28, 2010
payment plan?
MS. ST. JEAN: I went there before, couple of times. They
refused to do it. I'm going to try again.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. Well, if the water is not
turned on and no one is living in the place then there is no violation;
correct?
MR. MUCHA: That's correct.
MR. DEAN: No, wait a minute, I misunderstand then. All
dwellings in compliance with housing standards, all dwelling units,
whether occupied or unoccupied, shall comply with the requirements
of this section as here set forth. And that's water, right? Am I wrong?
MR. MUCHA: Well, as long as it's vacated, as long as it's
unoccupied.
MR. DEAN: But it says whether occupied or unoccupied, so
that means somebody there or not, I guess. It still says it has to have
water.
MR. ORTEGA: Right. It's not an abandoned home.
MR. DEAN: Right.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: It sounds like the home is occupied.
I think we have a motion and a second, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: We do. I'm just reading the Section
22231 that's in our package and I'm just trying to see if it says that
actually the water has to be on.
The first section, sanitary facilities required, it just says that it
shall have a kitchen sink with a counter work space, a lavatory basin,
all in working good order -- and connected to an approved and
sanitary sewer system as approved.
I mean, it's connected but it's just not working.
MR. DEAN: Jean, how do you read that?
MS. RAWSON: It sounds to me like if you are going to occupy
it you are going to have to have the water on, and you could keep
people from occupying it until the water is turned on. But you have
Page 68
January 28,2010
an empty house that nobody occupies that doesn't have water. I don't
know that that's a violation.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: She stipulated to the fact that the home is
periodically occupied.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: But what I'm trying to get at is if she
can't set a payment plan and they're not willing to turn the water back
on, and the house isn't occupied, then I don't want to see it be a
violation.
Because we've had cases that houses are unoccupied and we
make sure that, you know, on different cases, not this particular issue
with connections or water working or electricity, but other issues that
we say you cannot have your house occupied, and --
MR. KAUFMAN: I don't think the motion addresses that
portion, it just says that they shall not occupy the house if there is no
water there. I think that's what's in my motion.
MS. FLAGG: Mr. Chair, if I could offer, public utilities does set
up payment plans for people in this type of situation. It does require
her to go and meet with them to talk about what she can pay in terms
of a payment plan. And there are also multiple opportunities for
assistance with the various community resources, which the
investigator can get her the community resource brochure.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do you understand that there may
be assistance that you could get, and you would talk to the investigator
to connect you with those.
MS. ST. JEAN: Okay.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: So the motion is that either the water
is turned on in seven days and you then can occupy the house or if the
house is not occupied the water does not have to be turned on.
Is that the motion?
MR. KAUFMAN: Yes, that is the motion.
MR. DEAN: I second that.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All right. Any further discussion?
Page 69
January 28,2010
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. DEAN: Aye.
MR. MARINO: Aye.
MR. ORTEGA: Aye.
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye.
Any nays?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes.
MS. ST. JEAN: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: You do understand that the house
cannot be occupied --
MS. ST. JEAN: Uh-huh.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: -- without water.
MS. ST. JEAN: Uh-huh.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Thank you. And you have seven
days to get the water turned on if you expect to have it occupied.
MS. ST. JEAN: Okay, okay.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Thank you very much.
MS. WALDRON: Mr. Chair, I have called the interpreter's
office and they are on their way.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: They are on their way, huh.
We have Jim Hermanez.
We'll take a recess until they come.
(Recess was taken.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Let's reconvene. I would like to call
the code enforcement board back to order once again.
MS. FLAGG: The report for this month is, I wanted to let you
know that the department --
Page 70
January 28, 2010
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Could you just state your name? I
know we all know you but if you can --
MS. FLAGG: Diane Flagg, Director of Collier County Code
Enforcement.
This past month in December the department accepted a national
achievement award for the blight prevention program at the Board of
County Commissioners meeting.
In addition, recently you probably saw one of the community
task forces recognized, I believe it was on Wink TV. They did a
vacant home sweep in conjunction with the sheriffs office, utilities.
We had a lot of people participate.
And one other component of the blight prevention program is
having the bank abate code violations so that we don't have to utilize
taxpayers' money to abate these violations. At this point, the banks
have expended $1.2 million in Collier County to abate 894 code
violations.
The other thing we do is we monitor the department's
performance every week and there's established performance measures
for that. This past week the banks expended $13,140 to abate code
violations and they abated 17 cases.
There were 156 new cases opened this past week. There were 57
cases closed with voluntary compliance.
There's a service that we now provide which is called a lien
search and also a property code inspection. And we did 55 lien
searches this past week.
What the lien search is, is that we provide a service that the buyer
of a home can contact code enforcement either by website or by phone
and request whether there is any code violations on the property,
whether there is any liens on the property, past code cases on the
property, any fines owed on the property. And for $25 we give them a
complete history of what has happened on that property.
In addition we also provide property inspections, which I see Mr.
Page 71
January 28, 2010
Dean there is holding up the new brochure that has actually gone out.
Naples area Board of Realtors has been very helpful in providing that
information to the realtors. And basically it outlines both the lien
search process and encouraging folks to get a property inspection
before they buy a home so that they are not surprised by code cases.
And just as a reminder, what transpires, what we're seeing
happen is that when a homeowner is foreclosed on, and there may not
be any code cases on that property but that homeowner knew that they
turned a screened patio into a family room without a permit, what they
are doing is they are waiting until the bank sells the property to
somebody else and then they're calling in a code case on it.
So to make sure that folks that are buying homes in Collier
County, whether as investment or as Homesteaded property, we're
providing the service to them. This information is on the code
enforcement website at Colliergov.net. It outlines -- you can actually
print the brochure right off the website. It outlines all the services that
are being provided and what it takes to obtain the service.
And every week we also look at the number of cases, the average
number of cases that each investigator in the department is carrying.
And last week each investigator is carrying an average of 41 cases.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Thank you very much for that
report.
MR. DEAN: Can I add one little thing? You said something
about in July of this year there would be a license, you would have to
be licensed for inspections?
MS. FLAGG: In July 2010 home inspectors will be required to
be licensed. So when these property inspections are done, what we
have placed in the brochure, we encourage folks to use private
inspectors. Code enforcement also provides those inspections but
we're trying to encourage folks to use the private market.
And home inspectors, people have to be very specific on the type
of inspection they want, not only to check whether the water faucets
Page 72
January 28, 2010
work and the toilet works but also to have them check to see if there is
code violations.
We did provide a training for a large group of home inspectors
and told them what to look for and how to obtain the information.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: That training was provided through
MS. FLAGG: Code enforcement provided the training to the
home inspectors at no charge --
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Right, that NAB OR -- probably four
or five months ago, maybe?
MS. FLAGG: Yes.
MR. ORTEGA: Is that archived? Is that archived?
MS. FLAGG: What, the training?
MR. ORTEGA: Uh-huh.
MS. FLAGG: No, the training was conducted at NAB OR.
We've offered to continue to provide that training to home inspectors.
We're working very closely with NAB OR, National-- or sorry, Naples
Area Board of Realtors is NABOR, the acronym, and they have been
extremely helpful in getting this information out to home inspectors,
contractors, realtors, about these services that are being provided.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any other questions?
MR. DEAN: Very good.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Has there been a Name change for
code enforcement? I heard there was a going to be a name change to
code compliance.
MS. FLAGG: No. There was -- I guess it's been about six or
eight months ago one of the commissioners, because of the new
direction of the department, was interested in changing it to code
compliance. That was -- the decision of the board was to keep it code
enforcement because that's where all the licenses that the investigators
hold, everything is referred to as code enforcement.
And as was explained, the mission statement is really what
Page 73
January 28, 2010
determines the leadership and the direction that the department goes.
And the mission statement of the department was revised to reflect
working with the community on achieving compliance.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: And --let me see. The other request
to forward cases that -- are you done with your report?
MS. FLAGG: I am, thank you.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any other questions? We don't have
to go over request to forward cases because that's on the consent
agenda.
Any other -- do we have the translator here yet?
MS. WALDRON: Yes, we do.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Very good.
We're ready.
This case is Falcon and Jimenez, number CESD-20090007837.
(Speakers duly sworn.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Thank you very much. If you can
state your names for the record, please.
MS. FALCON: Daysi Falcon.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Thank you.
MS. RODRIGUEZ: Maria Rodriguez, Collier County Code
Enforcement.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Thank you very much.
All right, could you just -- want to -- oh, you have to read in the
case.
MS. RODRIGUEZ: She's reading the stipulations.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Thank you.
MS. RODRIGUEZ: Daysi Falcon on behalf of herself and
Caridad Jimenez and Barbara Jimenez.
It's agreed between the parties that the respondent shall pay
operational costs in the amount of$80.86 incurred in the prosecution
of this case within 30 days of this hearing, abate all violations by,
must apply for and obtain a Collier County building permit or
Page 74
January 28, 2010
demolition permit and request required inspections to be performed
and passed through a Certificate of Completion/Occupancy within 180
days of this hearing or a fine of $200 per day will be imposed until the
violation has been abated.
Respondent must notify code enforcement within 24 hours of
abatement of the violation and request the investigator perform a site
inspection to confirm compliance.
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 this agreement and all
costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner.
THE INTERPRETER: Yes, I did. More or less.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Yes, I do?
THE INTERPRETER: Yes.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Very good. Any comments from the
board?
MR. ORTEGA: Have there been--
MR. KAUFMAN: Go ahead.
MR. ORTEGA: Have there been permits applied for?
MS. RODRIGUEZ: Not yet.
MR. KAUFMAN: Is it unusual or is it just me that it's 180 days,
six months?
MS. RODRIGUEZ: She owned two properties side to side. She
had issues on the first property and she abated them. And this is why
it's -- because we opened up both at the same time so it's taken her
quite a bit to finish the first property. She's starting to work on the
second one.
But she hadn't done any permitting or anything. She does want
to leave some of the stuff that is there and wants to demo some
because it's quite a bit.
MR. ORTEGA: Does it pose a life safety hazard?
MS. RODRIGUEZ: What's there now, they are pretty much like
Page 75
January 28, 2010
sheds, so -- one of it is attached to the house but no one is living in it.
She says she's going to turn them into storage rooms. So I don't see
that there is a safety issue.
MR. ORTEGA: Unless there is a hurricane.
MS. RODRIGUEZ: Unless there is a hurricane.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any other questions of the Board?
MR. KAUFMAN: I would like to make the motion that we
accept the stipulation as written.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a second?
MR. DEAN: I'll second that motion.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. DEAN: Aye.
MR. MARINO: Aye.
MR. ORTEGA: Aye.
MR. LA VINSKI: Aye.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye.
Any nays?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes. Okay.
If you can explain to her -- just quickly, if you can explain to her
that she will have 180 days to correct the violation or a $200 per day
fine will be imposed.
Thank you very much.
MS. FALCON: Oh, thank you.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: You're all set.
Any other comments?
The next meeting is February 25th, 2010.
MR. KAUFMAN: I'll make a motion to adjourn.
Page 76
January 28, 2010
MR. LA VINSKI: Second.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any further discussion? Probably
not.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
MR. KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. DEAN: Aye.
MR. MARINO: Aye.
MR. ORTEGA: Aye.
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye.
Any nays?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes.
Thank you very much, folks.
*****
Page 77
January 28, 2010
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 11:27 a.m.
COLLIER COUNTY 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 Elizabeth Brooks.
Page 78