Loading...
CEB Minutes 09/28/1989 1989 Code Enforcement Board September 28, 1989 ~ \ .: CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY DATE: September 28, 1989 TIME: 9:00 A.M. PLACE: 3rd Floor Boardroom, Building "F", Collier County Government Center, Naples, Florida CEB STAFF PRESENT ANDREWS CONNELLY CONSTANTINE LAMOUREUX PEDONE STRAIN WILLIAMS X X X X X X X CLARK MANALICH SMITH WILSON x X X X MINUTES BY: Ellie Hoffman and Annaliese Kraft, Deputy Clerks CALLED TO ORDER AT: 9:00 A.M. ADJOURNED: 11:50 A.M. PRESIDING: Darlene Connelly, Chairman ADDENDA TO THE AGENDA: Workshop to be held immediately following the regular meeting. Page 1 CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY SEPTEMBER 28, 1989 *** ITEM: AddendUDl to the Agenda C~rS: Mr. Strain called attention to the fact that Chairman Connelly will be resigning from the Board, and suggested that a workshop be held, immediately following today's meeting to discuss future meetings. MOTION: Made by Mr. Strain that a workshop be held, imme- diatelv followina today's meetina. Seconded by Mr. Laaoureux. Carried unanimously. *** ITEM: Approval of Minutes of July 13, 1989 MOTIOII: Made by Mr. Andrews that the ainutes of July 13, 1989, be approved as suai tted. Seconded by Mr. Strain. Carried unanimously. *** CASE 110: 89-008 RESPOBDDT : Lewis Collins LOCATION OF VIOLATION: 127 North 1st Street, Fred Whidden Subdivision, Lots 1 & 2, Block 4, Immokalee, Florida VIOLATION: Section 5, Subsections 1, 7, 11, 121, i, p, q, and 16a, c, of the Collier County Housing Code, Ordinance 89-06 COIelEhTS: Mr. Williams advised that due to a conflict, he will abstain from voting on this case. He indi- cated that he has known Mr. Collins for many years, and has also worked for him in the past. Mr. Strain stated that he has known Mr. Collins from past associations in attempting to do some work for him. He noted that he is involved occasionally with Mr. Collins through Rotary. He indicated that he does not have a problem with voting on this case, as long as Mr. Collins does not object. Page 2 CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY SEPTEMBER 28, 1989 Mr. Collins indicated that he does not object to Mr. Strain participating in the voting. Code Compliance Investigator Smith presented Composite Exhibit "A" to become a part of the record relating to Case No. 89-008, Lewis Collins, respondent. Chairman Connelly stated that Composite Exhibit "A" has been accepted as evidence to be entered into the record, and questioned whether Mr. Collins had any discrepancies with regard to any of the material, to which Mr. Collins replied negatively. Mr. Smith advised that Mr. Lewis Collins is owner of record of 127 North 1st Street, Fred Whidden Subdivision, Lots 1 & 2, Block 4, Immokalee, Florida, and is being charged with violation of Collier County Housing Code Ordinance 89-06, Section 5, Subsections 1, 7, 11, 12a, 12i, 12p, 12q, 16a, and 16c. Mr. Smith reported that on May 8, 1989, Housing Code Investigator Maria Valcarcel conducted an inspection at the above property, and several Housing Code violations were noted. Mr. Smith explained that at the time of the inspection, Ms. Valcarcel went over the violations with Maria Gonzalez, Agent for Mr. Collins, and on-site tenant. He indicated that on May 22, 1989, Investigator Valcarcel reinspected the premises for compliance, but found that no corrections had been made. He noted that on July 13, 1989, Investigator Valcarcel mailed a certified violation letter to Mr. Lewis Collins, outlining the violations and time of corrections; also, an identical certified package was sent to Mrs. Gonzalez. He stated that on August 15, 1989, Investigator Valcarcel reinspected the premises, and found that no compliance had been made. He affirmed that on August 24, 1989, he rechecked the property for compliance, and found that all violations still existed, and therefore, prepared the subject case. Upon being sworn in by Code Compliance Investigator Smith, Mr. Lewis Collins stated that he does not contest the testimony as given by Mr. Smith. He acknowledged that he is owner of record of the sub- ject property. Page 3 CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY SEPTEMBER 28, 1989 Mr. Collins stated that he rented the property to Mrs. Gonzalez some years ago, and his initial agreement with her was that if in the event the Health Department should cite him for unkempt pro- perty, he would tear down the house. He advised that in the meantime, Mrs. Gonzalez moved three trailers onto the property, and the house that she was renting from him began to deteriorate. He indicated that Code Enforcement Officials advised that the trailers would have to be removed, and Mrs. Gonzalez has complied with same, other than one remaining trailer, which is allowed. Mr. Collins explained that because of the deterioration of the house, he told Mrs. Gonzalez that he was ready to tear it down, but she expressed a desire to buy the house (not the pro- perty) from him. He noted that because she had lived in the house for a long period of time, he decided to deed the house over to her. He advised that Mrs. Gonzalez is attempting to bring the structure up to Code Enforcement: she has painted the house, and is attempting to rework the inside. Code Enforcement Supervisor Clark stated that his understanding is that as long as Mr. Collins is the property owner of record, and has been properly notified of the violations, the issue should be resolved by the County Attorney's Office as to whether or not a deed for physical property on the property itself, can eliminate a regular violation that has been noted and acknowledged by the owner of the property. Assistant County Attorney Wilson indicated that she is not an expert in real property law, but what she recalls is that a real property improvement cannot be severed from the real property itself unless it can be easily moved. She stated that from this Board's perspective, it is the property owner that must be looked to for any violations that occur on that property. Mr. Clark reported that Mrs. Gonzalez and Mr. Collins both were notified of the violations in May, and Staff felt that corrections could be made to the house by October, but these corrections have not been made. Page 4 CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY SEPTEMBER 28, 1989 Attorney Wilson introduced Assistant County Attorney Maftalich to the Board. She advised that he speaks Spanish, and will interpret for Mrs. Gonzalez. Upon being sworn in by Mr. Smith, Mrs. Gonzalez stated that she believes that she is the owner of the house, and in her opinion, Mr. Collins owns the property, itself. She indicated that she is aware of the need for the repairs that are to be made, but there was a delay during the time that the paperwork went back and forth, and in the meantime, she could not effectuate any repairs. She further noted that she believed that she had several days for the repairs to be completed, but she was unable to obtain a licensed contractor, due to the short notice, so she and some friends engaged in the repairs themselves. She advised that almost everything with the exception of the electrical violations have been corrected: a new floor in the bathroom; the house has been painted; windows and doors have been changed; the kitchen floor has been changed; repairs have been made to the foundation; and, there are new walls in the rooms. Mr. Smith advised that a Code Compliance Investigator inspected the subject residence as late as yesterday, and found that corrections have been made in bits and pieces of each violation, but corrections have not been completely made to one item. Attorney Maftalich indicated that Mrs. Gonzalez's position is that the only remaining violations that need to be corrected are the kitchen wall and the electrical problems, noting that Tommy Lynn, Electrical Contractor has been contacted, and she believes that the problems can be corrected within 30 days. Mr. Smith stated that if the Board sees fit, he has no objection, to granting Mrs. Gonzalez an addi- tional 30 days for the remaining corrections to be made. He recommended that if compliance is not met within the 30 day period, that a fine be assessed, as opposed to bringing this case back and starting over again. Page 5 CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY MOTION: SEPTEMBER 28, 1989 Assistant County Attorney Maftalich translated this to Mrs. Gonzalez, and advised that she understands Mr. Smith's recommendation. Mr. Constantine questioned whether there are still 9 remaining violations that need to be corrected? Mr. Smith replied affirmatively, noting that no one section of the violations has been completely brought into compliance. Mr. Lamoureux asked whether the Board has any recourse against Mrs. Gonzalez since Mr. Collins is the owner of the property? Attorney Wilson advised that the fines are imposed for the violations if they are not corrected, and if the fines thereafter are not paid, there becomes a lien on the real pro- perty which can ultimately be foreclosed upon. She indicated that the burden is still on Mr. Collins, as the record owner of the real property, to encourage Mrs. Gonzalez to make sure that those corrections are done. Attorney Wilson, requested that Attorney Maftalich explain to Mrs. Gonzalez that his interpretations in both English and Spanish have been paraphrasing testimony, and that she does acknowledge and accept this manner of interpretation. Attorney Mafialich stated that Mrs. Gonzalez acknowledges that she understands what he has told her in Spanish, and specifically, that she has 30 days to complete the repairs. Made by Mr. Andrews that the violations as stated, are still in existence; that the Findings of Fact are that Lewis Collins is the owner of record of the subject property; that the Code Enforcftlent Board has jur isdict ion of the person of the ReSl)Ondent and that Lewis Collins was present at the pUblic hearinQ; all notices required by Collier County Ordinance 88-89 have been properly issued. The property located at 127 North 1st Street, I-.o&81ee, Florida is in violation of Ordinance 89-06, Section Five, Subsections 1, 7, 11, 12a., i., p., q., and 16 a., and c. of the Collier County Rousing Code: unsafe foundation; windows do not fit; walls and ceilings have cracks and holes; bathroom cabinet is unsanitary; bathrooa floor is Page 6 CODE DPORCBMEIfT BOARD OF COLLIER COUJITY SEPTEMBER 28, 1989 not secure, and is infested; electrical fixtures have exposed wirinQ; bedroom doors do not contain proper locks, and they do not fit. Seconded by Mr. Strain. Carried 6/0 (Mr. Williams abstained.) Chairman Connelly stated that Conclusions of Law that Mr. Lewis Collins is in violation of Section 5, Subsections 1, 7, 11, 12 a., i., p., q., and 16 a., c. of the Collier County Housing Code Ordinance No. 89-06. Mr. Clark advised that Compliance Services is recommending that at the end of the 30 day period in which corrections are to be made, that a fine of $25/day per violation be imposed. Attorney Mafialich translated Mr. Clark's recommen- dation to Mrs. Gonzalez. He reported that Mrs. Gonzalez understands the recommendation. MOrIOII : Made by Mr. Andrews that based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and pur_ suant to the authority granted in Chapter 162, Florida Statutes, and Collier County Ordinance 88-89, it is hereby ordered that the Respondent correct the violations of Section Five, Collier County Ordinance 89-06, Subsections 1, 7, 11, 12 a., i., p., q., and 16 a., and c., and that said corrections be c~leted on or before October 28, 1989, and if Respondent does not cOllDlv with this order on or before that date, then and in that event Re8Dondent is hereby order to pay a fine of $25.00 per day per violation for each and every day any violation herein continues past said date, for a total of $225.00 per day. Failure to co~lv with the Order within the specified ti.. will resul t in the recordat ion of alien pursuant to Chapter 162, F.S., which..v be foreclosed, and Respondent's property sold to enforce the lien. Seconded by Mr. Constantine. Carried 6/0 (Mr. Williams abstained). *** *** Recess 10:20 A.M. - Reconvened: 10:35 A.M. *** *****Deputy Clerk Kraft replaced Deputy Clerk Roffaan at this time***** Page 7 CODE DPOKCDmlIT BOARD OF COLLIER COUJITY CASE NO. USP01fDIatT: SEPTEMBER 28, 1989 89-009 Jack W. Barrs LOCATIO. OF VIOLATION: Collier County Parcel 8.1 and Parcel 78, Section 9, Township 50, Range 26 VIOLATIOIl: COMMENTS: CASE NO. DSPOlIDD"r : Section 5, 6, & 7 of Ord. 88-45 Assistant County Attorney Wilson stated that notice was sent to the Respondent by certified mail and the letter was returned "Unclaimed". She suggested that this case be continued until the end of the meeting to see if he appears. 89-010 Code Enforcement Coordinator Smith stated that Composite Exhibit "A" is being submitted into evi- dence in Code Enforcement Board Case 89-010 Willi.. D. Lanier LOCATIO. OF VIOLATION: Rear of 1278 Trail Terrace Drive Lot 8, Block F, Trail Terrace Naples, Florida VIOLATIOII : COIIImn'rS: Section 8, Subsection 8 of Ordinance 82-2 Mr. Smith indicated that Mr. Lanier is not here, but Mr. Walker is representing him. In response to Ms. Connelly, Mr. Walker responded that the viola- tions were corrected on the day he was apprised of them. Mr. Smith reported that Mr. Walker has corrected the violations and noted that Mr. Lanier is the owner of record, represented by Mr. Walker, his brother-in-law. Mr. Smith explained that Mr. Walker has a deed showing he owns the property, and an agreement between Mr. Lanier and Mr. Walker, but it has not been recorded. Mr. Smith stated that Mr. Walker, after being contacted, did correct the violations, but if the violation should occur again, a penalty may be imposed. He indicated that Mr. Walker has complied with the Ordinance. In response to Ms. Connelly, Mr. Smith reported that there was a tenant on the property; there were automobiles that were untagged, and the violations could re-occur. Page 8 CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY MOTI01I: co. I JIJITS : SEPTEMBER 28, 1989 Mr. Clark stated that these cases are brought before the CEB because commercial property has a higher propensity for violations. He indicated that it is the property owner's responsibility to make sure that the property is in compliance with the County's Ordinances. He suggested that the Board impose a fine of $25.00 per day if the viola- tion re-occurs. Mr. Walker reported that the first notice was sent by registered mail, and he received and signed for it. He noted that the notice was addressed to Mr. William D. Lanier, and he forwarded it to Mr. Lanier in Pompano Beach where he resided. He explained that by the time he received the notice, the time to correct the violations had passed. Mr. Walker stated that if he is aware of the viola- tions, they will be corrected. Mr. Smith indicated that he had a conversation with Mr. Walker, who stated that he was the owner of the property, and he corrected the violations that day. Ms. Connelly commented that Mr. Clark's comments were a reminder that it is the property owner's responsibility to also act as an enforcer in making sure that the County's Ordinances are complied with. Mr. Walker emphasized that if he is aware of any violations, they will be taken care of. Made by Mr. Strain that the findings of fact are that Willi_ D. Lanier is the owner of record of the subject property, that the Code Enforcellent Board has jurisdiction over the person who responded, that J_ Walker was presen~ at the pUblic hearina, that all notices required by Collier County Ordinance 110. 88-89 have been pro- perlv issued, and the property located at 1278 Trail Terrace Drive, Lot 8, Block F, Trail Terrace, Naples, Florida, is in violation of the following Ordinance 82-2, Section 8, SUbsection 8. Ms. Connelly questioned whether the CEB can find someone at the findings of fact in violation when the record shows that the violation has been removed. Attorney Wilson suggested that the Order and Motion be tailored to reflect that they were in violation at the time notification was sent to them, the violation was not corrected within the Page 9 CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY AJlIa....,.a> 1101"10.: COl~..TS: SEPTEMBER 28, 1989 time period requested by the Code Enforcement Official, and the violations have been complied with prior to the hearing, but not prior to the date set for compliance. Made by Mr. Strain to aaend his action by changing the word HisH to "wasH. Seconded by Mr. Pedone. Upon call tor the question, the action carried una- niaouslv. Ms. Connelly stated that if this specific violation re-occurs, a fine of $25.00 per day will be imposed. Mr. Clark reported that any automobile of similar nature would be the same violation. Mr. Walker questioned if he will be notified of the violation? Mr. Smith stated that Mr. Walker should get the deed recorded because the owner of record will be notified. Mr. Walker questioned what would happen if he did not inspect the property daily and a car was parked there without a tag? Mr. Clark responded that in enforcement there is always an effort to notify the owner. In response to Ms. Connelly, Attorney Wilson indicated that the aim of the County is compliance, not punitive. A lengthy discussion followed about administrative policy and proper notice. Ms. Connelly explained that Mr. Walker had a valid question in asking whether or not the Order of the CEB would become effective without his knowledge, or notice being given to him to remove a vehicle, etc., and technically when evidence is presented there is a violation and the Order kicks in. Ms. Connelly reported that administration policy is that notice would be given before the citation is issued. She emphasized that Mr. Walker is not the owner of record, and the notice would go to Mr. Lanier. Mr. Walker stated that the property will be in his name as of this date. Ms. Connelly reported that in response to the question can a Code Enforcement Board Order reflect there will not be a violation until notice and an opportunity to cure the violation has been given, County Attorney Wilson replied in the affirmative. In response to Mr. Walker's question about renters, Mr. Clark emphasized that any violation is against the property, not the owner. Page 10 CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY SEPTEMBER 28, 1989 MOTIOII: Made by Mr. Strain that under the conclusions of law, William D. Lanier is in violation ot Section 8, Subsection 8 of Collier County Ordinance 110. 82-2 Collier County Zoning Ordinance. Based upon the toregoing findings ot fact and conclusions o"f law and pursuant to the authority aranted in Chapter 162 PIa. Statutes in Collier County Ordinance 110. 88-:~9,t it is hereby ordered that the respondent correct the violation of Section 8, subsection 8, Collier County Ordinance 110. 82-2 by ~ing the licensed vehicles and not allowing the licensed vehicles to re-occur. As said corrections are cOllDleted, and if Respondent does not reply in the future with this Order or before that date, then, and in any event Respondent is hereby ordered to pay a tine of $25.00 per day for each and every day that any violation described herein occurs in the future after written notification pUrsuant to this Ordinance. Failure to co~lv with the Order within the specified time will result in recor- dation of a lien pUrsuant to Chapter 162 Fla. Statutes, which .av be foreclosed and Respondent's property sold to enforce the lien. Seconded by Mr. Pedone. Carried unanimously. Mr. Constantine questioned if this Order is against the current owner of record, William D. Lanier, will that be altered when owner of record is changed? Attorney Wilson stated that it goes with the property. *** CASE 110. 89-011 Code Enforcement Coordinator Smith stated that Composite Exhibit "A" is being submitted as evi- dence in Code Enforcement Case 89-011 RESPOIIDDT : Floyd & Carol Ann Green LOCATIOII OF VIOLATION: 58 Dolphin Circle, Isle of Capri, Florida 33934 VIOLATIO.: Section 8.46, Subsection b., and Section 10.7 of Ordinance No. 82-2 COIBlEhrS: Mr. William Smith, Code Enforcement Coordinator, stated that a receipt for certified mail mailed to Page 11 CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY MOTIOIl: CASE 110. lUISPOIIHIft : SEPTEMBER 28, 1989 Floyd and Carol Green at 309 Ohlones Street, Freemont, California 94539 September 7, 1989 has not been received. He indicated that he had a telephone conversation with them at their residence in California and advised them of the hearing. He reported that Mr. Green told him they applied for a permit and are caught up in the system, but the system needs more information before the permit can be issued. In response to Ms. Wilson, Mr. Smith stated that no one was residing or temporarily staying at the property. Attorney Wilson suggested continuing the matter until the next Code Enforcement Board meeting. Made by Mr. Constantine to continue Case No. 89-011 to the next regularly scheduled meetina of the Code EnforceJlet1t Board. Seconded by Mr. Andrews. Carried unanimously. *** 89-012 Mr. William Smith, Code Enforcement Coordinator stated that Composite Exhibit "A" is being sub- mitted as evidence in Code Enforcement Case 89-012. Jess & Evelyn Mootispaw LOCarIo. 0. VIOLATIOIl: Section 24, Township 495, Range 26 E, Tract 39, N. 82.5 ft. of 557.5 W. 1/2 5 acres, Naples Farm Site, Inc. VIOLATI01I : COl. an...S: Section 5, 6 and 7 of Ordinance 88-45, the Collier County Litter Control Ordinance and Section 5, 6 and 7 of Ordinance 85-33, the Collier County Nuisance Abatement Ordinance Mr. Smith, Code Enforcement Coordinator, stated that there were junk vehicles and trash including a burned mobile home on the property. He noted that after notice was sent, some debris and trash was removed, but 3 junk vehicles are still on the pro- perty. He explained that the violations still existed on September 5, 1989 and all notices were served. He reported that Mr. Mootispaw had stated that he has a land lease agreement and an agreement to deed with another party that is in litigation. Page 12 CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY SEPTEMBER 28, 1989 He indicated that Mr. Mootispaw is seeking a 30 day extension from the Code Enforcement Board to either change the owner of record, or bring the property into compliance. Mr. Smith stated that Staff has no problem with granting the continuance. Mr. Mootispaw explained that he owns 3 lots, one of which was sold in 1985 on an agreement to deed. He stated that the other violations have been taken care of, but he has been advised by the Sheriff that he cannot move the car off the lot legally, as the property is in a litigation dispute. MOTIOIl: Made by Mr. AndreWs that Case No. 89-012 be continued until the next Code EnforceJBeDt Board aeet inQ' . Seconded by Mr. Constant ine . Carr ied 6/1. (Mr. Lamoureux opposed). *****Recess: 11:10 A.M. Reconvened 11:15 A.M.***** CASE 110. 89-013 USPOIIDDT : Jane R. Alander LOCATIO. OF VIOLATION: Lot west of 1550 Airport Road Naples, Florida 33962 VIOLATIOII: Ordinance No. 82-2, Section 7.11, Subsections b. 4 of the Collier County Zoning Ordinance CfIII 1 ..~S: Ms. Connelly stated that because of a conflict of interest, she will abstain from voting and file a B-8 form. Attorney Donald Pickworth, representing Jane and Fred Alander, requested a continuance because a petition for a change in zoning of the parcel at issue scheduled for October 24, 1989 is pending. He explained that at issue is a change from current residential to commercial zoning that has been pending before the Board of County Commissioners for a period of approximately 2 years. Mr. Clark indicated that he had no objec- tion to the continuance, with one proviso; that the alleged violation of parking on the subject lot be ceased until the Board of County Commissioners rules. Attorney Pickworth responded that this matter was in County Court in 1986 and a Court Page 13 CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY SEPTEMBER 28, 1989 Order was issued requiring concrete abutments be placed between the commercial and the residential lots. He stated that the Alanders told him that they complied with the Court Order, but the bumpers are no longer there, and the situation will be brought into compliance with that Order. Mr. Lamoureux questioned why a rezoning petition is relevant to this case, and Attorney Pickworth responded that if the rezoning Petition is granted, this would become a moot issue. In response to Mr. Lamoureux's question as to why the case has not been heard by the Board of County Commissioners, Attorney Pickworth explained that a year and one half has been spent trying to resolve the situation with the Water Management District. He reported that Respondent leased land between the top of the canal bank, and Petitioner's property line. He stated that the land was leased for additional parking, and it was later discovered that an unre- corded agreement exists between the County and the Water Management District. He indicated that because there is an easement located in there, no use can be made of that property. He explained that after leasing the land, Petitioner found that the land could not be used for parking and a permit was needed from the Water Management District. He stated that the permit was denied the first time, but granted the second time. In response to Mr. Lamoureux, Attorney Pickworth explained that the Board of County Commissioners is aware of the viola- tion as it is part of the official record. Attorney Wilson questioned if there is any reason that this matter would not be addressed on October 26, 1989? Attorney Pickworth indicated that Petitioner will not request a continuance. Mr. Clark requested that Attorney Pickworth's clients police the lot so that no parking takes place; not just place concrete bumpers in the lot. Attorney Pickworth indicated that "No Parking" signs will be put where the berm is to keep people from parking there. MOrIOII: Made by Mr. Strain that Case 89-013 be continued until the Code Enforce-.nt Board aeeting o~ October 26, 1989 with the stipUlation that the alleged violation cease and desist until it can be Page 1. CODE ~Dm1IT BOARD 01' COLLIER COUJITY cOIn .~~5: MO'l"IOIl: ITDI: COl. "-~5: ITDI: ~~5: SEPTEMBER 28, 1989 addressed at that time. Seconded by Mr. Willi_. Carried 5/1. (Mr. Lamoureux opposed, Ms. Connelly abstained) . *** A discussion was held regarding Case No. 89-009 vs. Jack W. Barrs heard earlier in the meeting. Mr. Smith indicated that Compliance Services contends proper notification under the Ordinance has been made and would like to proceed. He pointed out that he would like Composite Exhibit "A" entered into evidence. In response to Ms. Connelly, Attorney Wilson indicated that technically the County is in compliance, but her position is to be conservative and avoid a possible appeal. She suggested posting notice on the property itself. Mr. Clark concurred. A discussion followed about certified mail and return receipts. Ms. Connelly indicated that Composite Exhibit "A" would be entered into evidence. Made by Mr. Strain that Case Mo. 89-009 be con- tinued until the Code Enforcement Board aeetina October 26, 1989. Seconded by Mr. Constantine. Carried 6/1. (Mr. Lamoureux opposed). *** OLD BUSInSS Attorney Wilson stated that Mr. Mafialich is pre- sent, and he has prepared a detailed memorandum comparing the County's Ordinance with the revisions to the State Statute and recommended revised language. She explained that a draft will be made available to the members of the Code Enforcement Board before the next meeting. REPORTS Mr. Clark reported concern from Staff that the Code Enforcement Board had no authority to retroactively impose fines in relation to the Evangelisto case on Marco Island was alleviated by Mr. Evangelisto pleading no contest in misdemeanor court and paying the $150 fine in addition to the retroactive fines. Page 15 CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY SEPTEMBER 28, 1989 He explained that the issue of double jeopardy brought up by Mr. Evangelisto's attorney was defeated. He emphasized that the news media has made the community aware of the action of the Code Enforcement Board. He stated that 4 cases resulted in guilty pleas and routinely there are 2 or 3 cases a week, and none have been lost. He reported that enforcement issues are growth related, and with more population, more violations exist. He noted that the hiring of the second housing code investigator has been postponed until June. He stated that there was a 28% increase in complaints in the past 5 months. He indicated that Collier County's program and the Code Enforcement Board was the subject of a discussion at a seminar on enfor- cement, and other counties and municipalities asked for information. He thanked the Code Enforcement Board and the Board of County Commissioners for their progressive approach and support. In response to Mr. Andrews, Attorney Wilson explained that in misdemeanor court the fines are not given to Compliance Services. Mr. Clark stated that the fines go to the General Fund. *** WEED ORDIIIARCE Attorney Wilson reported that there were a number of complaints from Immokalee and Naples Manor areas regarding overgrown lots and crimes committed by people hiding in the lots. She noted that the Ordinance only addressed lots in recorded sub- divisions and would have limited the authority of the Code Enforcement Board. She explained that the Ordinance was amended to extend it to unrecorded subdivisions, and allow clearing of a portion of properties that are not lots or in any type of sub- division, 20 feet into the property from a public right-of-way. Attorney Wilson explained that Golden Gate Estates is a special case and not covered by the new Ordinance. She also mentioned that the fees were increased. Mr. Clark commented that the fee increase from $25.00 to $100.00 and the increase in administrative fees will have a positive impact. Page 16 CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY SEPTEMBER 28, 1989 He stated that the higher fees will encourage people to hire their own contractor and clear their lots. Ms. Connelly stated that she disliked good-byes, and will think of everyone with fond memories. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned by Order of the Chair. COLLIER COUNTY CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD Darlene Connelly, Chairman Page 17 /' CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY. FLORIDA AGE N D A DATE: September 28, 1989, at 9:00 A.M. NOTE: ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING; THERETO, AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE',. WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. NEITHER COLLIER COUNTY NOR THE CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING THIS RECORD. 1. ROLL CALL 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES July 13, 1989 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Board of County Commissionersvs. Lewis Collins; Case No. CEB 89-008 B. Board of County Commissioners vs." Jack W. Barrs; Case No. CEB 89-009 C. Board of County Commissioners vs. William D. Lanier; Case No. CEB 89-010 D. Board of County Commissioners vs. Floyd & Carol Ann Green; Case No. CEB 89-011 E. Board of County Commissioners vs. Jess & Evelyn Mootispaw; Case No. CEB 89-012 F. Board of County Commissioners vs. Jane H. Alander; Case No. CEB 89-013 5. OLD BUSINESS 6. NEW BUSINESS /' /1 / 7 . REPORTS 8. NEXT MEETING DATE Scheduled for October 26, 1989, at 9:00 A.M. 9 . ADJOURN - 2 -