Loading...
CEB Minutes 11/18/2011 R November 18, 2011 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD Naples, Florida, November 18, 2011 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Code Enforcement Board, in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m., in REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present: ? NCR" CHAIRMAN: Kenneth Kelly Robert Kaufman BY: .. Gerald Lefebvre ..... James Lavinski Larry Mieszcak Chris Hudson Lionel L' Esperance (Absent) Tony Marino (Excused) Ronald Doino (Excused) Fiala Hiller ALSO PRESENT: Henning -K}, Coyle ,r Diane Flagg, Code Enforcement Director Colette Vt. Jennifer Baker, Code Enforcement Jean Rawson, Attorney Misc. Comes: Date: h Item#: '( -K1(.0 Page 1 Copies to: November 18, 2011 CHAIRMAN KELLY: Good morning. I'd like to call the Code Enforcement Board of Collier County to order for November 18, 2011. Notice: The respondent may be limited to 20 minutes for case presentation unless additional time is granted by the board. Persons wishing to speak on any agenda item will receive up to five minutes unless the time is adjusted by the chair. All parties participating in the public hearing are asked to observe Robert 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 the 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 records include the testimony and the evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. Neither Collier County nor the Code Enforcement Board shall be responsible for providing this record. May I have roll call. MS. BAKER: Mr. Ken Kelly? CHAIRMAN KELLY: Here. MS. BAKER: Mr. Robert Kaufman? MR. KAUFMAN: Here. MS. BAKER: Mr. Gerald Lefebvre? MR. LEFEBVRE: Here. MS. BAKER: Mr. James Lavinski? MR. LAVINSKI: Here. MS. BAKER: Mr. Larry Mieszcak? MR. MIESZCAK: Here. MS. BAKER: Chris Hudson? MR. HUDSON: Here. MS. BAKER: Mr. Lionel L'Esperance is absent, and Mr. Tony Marino and Mr. Ronald Doino have excused absences. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Any changes to the agenda? Page 2 November 18, 2011 MS. BAKER: Yes, we do. Under No. 4, public hearings, motions, Letter A motions, motion for extension of time, we have two additions. Number 3 will be Steven T. Hovland and Melanie Ann Hovland, Case CESD20100019758. Number 4 will be Michael and Amy Facundo, Case CESD20100006940. Under stipulations, Letter B, we have four stipulations. The first will be Silver Lakes Property Owners Association of Collier County, Case CELU20100004523; Number 2, Steven and Kelly Johnson, Case CESD20090011861; Number 3, Carlos Rivers, Case CESD20110009946; and Number 4, Elias Nicot, CESD20100003911. Under Letter C, hearings, No. 1, Case CESD20110008948, Philippe Quentel has been withdrawn; Number 8, Case CESD20110001100, Steven J. Sokol has been withdrawn; Number 19, Case CELU20100021890, Douglas B. and Diane M. Faas has been withdrawn. And that is all the changes I have. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. MR. KAUFMAN: Motion to accept the changes in the agenda. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Motion and a second. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? Page 3 November 18, 2011 (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Motion carries. Moving on to the approval of the minutes from October 27, 2011. MR. KAUFMAN: Motion to approve. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Motion and second. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: And one abstention, due to an absence. It does carry. Moving on to public hearings. Motions, motion for continuance, motion for extension of time. First case, Waste Services of Florida, Incorporated. Are the representatives here? Come on up and we'll swear you in. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Good. Sir, could you state the name for the record. MR. HAGAN: Sure. My name is Chris Hagan from Hagan Engineering. I'm here representing Waste Services of Florida, Inc. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Just for the record, could you state publicly that they have given you authorization to speak on their behalf. MR. HAGAN: Yes, they have, and I have a representative here with me also. Page 4 November 18, 2011 CHAIRMAN KELLY: Will the representative be testifying or anything today? MR. HAGAN: Only if needed. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. All right. Just let us know, and we'll get him sworn in as well. MR. HAGAN: Very good. CHAIRMAN KELLY: You're the one that's requesting the extension. Do you want to give us a brief overview as to what's going on and what the need is? MR. HAGAN: Sure. We came before you-all back in August, and we had just pulled our building permit for the required construction the day before. Came in, we got 120-day time limit. We found out very shortly thereafter that there was a problem with the approved plans. Our contractor found some inconsistencies, so we had to go for a building revision. We submitted very promptly. Back by 9/23 we were back into the county for building permit review, and that permit was issued on November 10th. So we've lost about -- almost 90 of our 120 days, and what we'd like to do is get a 60-day extension to make up for the difference. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Now, you said that it was issued back on the 10th of November. Does that mean you actually picked it up as well and you're actually ready to go and -- MR. HAGAN: Correct. They're mobilizing as we speak and getting all the -- all the things that they can do off site have been started. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any questions from the board? MR. KAUFMAN: Has the 82.86 been paid? MR. HAGAN: Yes, sir. We made our payment the day of the hearing. MR. KAUFMAN: Do you think 60 days should do it as far as the timing? MR. HAGAN: We believe so. Page 5 November 18, 2011 CHAIRMAN KELLY: Investigator, do you have any -- does the county have any objections with the extension? MR. BOX: No. MR. KAUFMAN: I make a motion that we extend it 60 days. MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second that motion. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Motion and second. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Great. Good luck. Thank you. MR. HAGAN: Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN KELLY: The next case is going to be Marvin and Donna Schroeder. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Good morning. Mr. Schroeder, I presume? MR. SCHROEDER: Yeah. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Since you're the one that's requesting the extension of time, would you like to briefly describe what's going on so that we can kind of get a feel for the situation? MR. SCHROEDER: Well, we've been trying to get things together. My wife had a very bad situation with her heart. She had a heart attack, and it's been a very -- hardship on us. And we need money to get this thing rolling. And I also lost my job. Page 6 November 18, 2011 And I'm asking for an extension. And I'd like to get at least six months to a year, and -- because I've tried to go ahead and contact people to get the surveying done and -- on this building and everything. And they want money up front now, and things are very rough. And that's about all I've got to say. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. I know this is a rather personal question, but is the property in any type of foreclosure proceedings? MR. SCHROEDER: No. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Thank you. Any questions from the board? MR. KAUFMAN: This case had a 270-day extension the last time it was heard, if I'm not mistaken. MR. SCHROEDER: Right, right. MR. KAUFMAN: Okay. And my second question is, has the $80.29 been paid? MR. CONDOMINA: For the record, Investigator Danny Condomina, Collier County Code Enforcement. The operation costs have not been paid. MR. SCHROEDER: I could pay it. It's not a problem. MR. KAUFMAN: Excuse me? MR. SCHROEDER: I can pay that. That's not a problem. MR. KAUFMAN: Yeah. That was due to be paid 30 days after the last hearing. MR. SCHROEDER: Okay. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any other questions from the board? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: How about from the county, any objection to the extension of-- 9 to 12 months is what's asked for in the letter. The respondent said 6 to 12 months. MR. CONDOMINA: We do not oppose as long as he pays the operational costs. I don't want to set another date for that, for him to Page 7 November 18, 2011 pay the operational costs. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Well, the respondent just admitted that wouldn't be a problem, so I'm sure we can make that part of this. MR. KAUFMAN: My concern on cases that go on and on like this is that -- the possibility that the property is sold to somebody else with these black marks, if you will, on them, and then the next person winds up before the board. So 270 days was a long time in the past, and to extend it another year seems a little unreasonable, personally. MR. LEFEBVRE: Correct me if I'm not -- correct me if I'm wrong. But it still shows that there is an order on public records. So if there's a titles search done, a new owner would be aware that there is a violation and that something has to be corrected on the property. MR. SCHROEDER: Right. MR. LEFEBVRE: So if he were to sell it, it would be under this particular cloud. CHAIRMAN KELLY: I'm not a realtor, but is it in public record, or is it only under a property search through the new code inspections? MR. LEFEBVRE: It would be -- MS. BAKER: The order is filed in the Clerk of Court's public record. MR. LEFEBVRE: So when they did -- if they were to do a title search, it would show up. So it would be a public record. MR. KAUFMAN: That is if somebody purchases the property without a mortgage. If they -- excuse me. If they purchase the property without a mortgage, they don't necessarily need title insurance, and we're back in the same ball game again. That's only -- a title search is only done at the request of the person purchasing the property, or most banks would require it as part of obtaining a mortgage. So the situation still exists. MR. MIESCZAK: Are you telling me if somebody paid cash Page 8 November 18, 2011 they wouldn't get a title? MR. KAUFMAN: They may not. That's up to them. MR. MIESZCAK: That doesn't really sound -- MR. KAUFMAN: Not title. MR. MIESCZAK: That doesn't -- title insurance. MR. KAUFMAN: That's correct. MR. MIESCZAK: But that doesn't even make sense. MR. LEFEBVRE: Jean, is that -- MR. MIESCZAK: It could be a lien. MS. RAWSON: You know, whether people get title insurance or not, you know, I don't know. But the point is that every time these orders are entered, they are immediately recorded. So if someone's foolish enough to pay cash for a property and not get the title insurance or not at least do a lien search, I can't imagine it. But they're recorded. That's all I can say. MR. LEFEBVRE: I would -- I would think that a search would be done because they have to find out if there's a mortgage on the property to see what they have to pay off. So it would show up. But I'm in agreement with Mr. Kaufman. I think a year would be an excessive amount of time to give since this case has already had an extension. I make a motion that we grant an extension for 150 days. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. MR. LEFEBVRE: Five months. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Gerald, did you want to do something about op costs? MR. LEFEBVRE: And op costs be paid -- well, he agreed to pay them. Do you have a check now? MR. SCHROEDER: No, I don't have one with me. I got to -- MR. LEFEBVRE: Within 15 days. MR. SCHROEDER: Where do I pay that to, right -- MR. KAUFMAN: I'll second that motion. Page 9 November 18, 2011 CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. We have a motion on the table to extend for 150 days and to pay the operational costs in 15 days. Do we have any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: And the motion carries unanimously. And you can talk to the investigator, and he'll help you with how to pay those operational costs. MR. SCHROEDER: Okay. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Thank you very much, sir. MR. CONDOMINA: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Next case for extension of time is Hovland. Are the respondents here? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: To the board, we have -- do we have anything in writing on this one? MR. LEFEBVRE: Yes, we do. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Which one is it? Okay, got it. MR. KAUFMAN: Are there any cases that we were given in the distribution on this case? CHAIRMAN KELLY: Yeah. It's in the imposition of fines. Page 10 November 18, 2011 MR. KAUFMAN: Oh, okay. CHAIRMAN KELLY: It is -- for the record, let me read this one in. It's an extension of time for Board of County Commissioners versus Steven T. Hovland and Melanie Ann Hovland, respondents, and that is Case No. CESD20100019758. Investigator, you want to state your name for the record. MR. ASARO: Yeah. Tony Asaro with the Collier County Code Enforcement Board Department. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Do you have any objections with the extension of time asked for? MR. ASARO: I don't. MR. KAUFMAN: I do. Nothing's been paid and they're not in compliance, and, ordinarily, that's three strikes and you're out. CHAIRMAN KELLY: It would be a different situation, I believe, if there was actual compliance here. MR. ASARO: Yeah. I think Mr. Hovland's having some financial problems right now. Last time I talked to him he was in -- having some pretty extreme financial hardships with this property and some other properties. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any other questions for the investigator? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion amongst the board about this case? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: How about a motion? MR. KAUFMAN: I'll make a motion that we deny the extension of time. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Do we have a second? MR. LEFEBVRE: I'll second that motion. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Seconded. Any discussion? (No response.) Page 11 November 18, 2011 CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: And this will go back to its original spot on our docket today. Thank you, Tony. MR. ASARO: Okay. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Next case is going to be Facundo. Are the respondents here? Sorry if I butched your name. MR. FACUNDO: You did good. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Good morning, sir. MR. FACUNDO: Oh, good morning. Sorry. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Would you state your name for the record, please. MR. FACUNDO: Michael Facundo. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. And since you're the one that's asking for the extension of time, would you like to explain the circumstances? MR. FACUNDO: Yeah. It's just -- it's been a journey for my wife and I. I guess in a nutshell what had occurred was I'd hired a contractor, Tyler Construction. He was here prior to this meeting roughly about 120 days, and he had asked for an extension and -- in good will, thinking that he was going to be able to complete my house. And what sort of put everything -- halted everything, I guess, is that he had built the house within the setbacks, 3 feet. Page 12 November 18, 2011 Since then, out of my own pocket I have, you know, rectified the situation, and we're in compliance now. But, unfortunately, the time sort of expired, and he's not able to make good on what he had told this board he was going to do. And so I -- my wife and I had decided to go elsewhere, and we've hired another contractor. He's not, sort of, signed up yet, and so I'm asking right now if we could -- for a 180-day extension upon issuance of a permit. And I believe I sent this letter, and hopefully it's in part of your enclosure that, you know, explains to you what has gone on. So I guess in a nutshell I'm sort of at your mercy to make this -- you know, to make this happen. So, that's -- that's it. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Could you clarify again just a little bit of the circumstances? We're pretty good about working with people. MR. FACUNDO: Right. CHAIRMAN KELLY: So, you know, you're not under the gun here. But just as far as where you are as far as permitting, actual work being done, that kind of stuff. MR. FACUNDO: Okay. The -- that was not -- the demolition of the wall, which is facing the north side, has been demo'ed, and so we have already made it into compliance. It's in the setbacks now. Right now I have put a phone call H.L. Bennett, which is a surveyor out of LaBelle, that's going to come in and do a tie-down survey, basically, and showing that it's in compliance. And right now I have the drafter that's wrapping everything up hopefully by, I want to say, the end of this month, according to this letter. And then my intent is to submit it the first week of December. And I know that, you know, hopefully the turnaround process for review would be, hopefully, you know, with no rejections, obviously, by the end of December, and hopefully the contractor can go ahead and commence and get started on -- in January. And so he had told me tentatively that he would need about Page 13 November 18, 2011 approximately six months to finish, and so that's where we're at now. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. MR. SNOW: If I could offer some clarity to the board for you. Remember, originally this case had to do with a foundation that was encroaching on setbacks. It was across the line. He couldn't do anything with the permits until he got that permit done and that CO'ed. In the meantime, his contractor lost his licensing that he had hired, and all the funds that he had invested and previously gone, Mr. Facundo has lost. So he's done what he needed to do other than to build the house, and he's had to get a new contractor. He has to get new plans, he has to get them approved, and he couldn't do anything until that one permit was finished, so -- CHAIRMAN KELLY: So in other words, the county has no objection for -- with the extension? MR. SNOW: And he has paid operational costs. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. MR. KAUFMAN: That was my question. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any questions from the board? MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion to grant six months, and not six months from the time of issuance of the permit, but six months from today. MR. KAUFMAN: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. We have a motion and a second. Let's just clarify that real quick, because you did say -- you're right, Gerald. He did say from issuance. We don't like to leave that window, just because it could be out in never neverland. MR. FACUNDO: Right. CHAIRMAN KELLY: So basically what you're asking for is six months from the end of December when you believe your permit's going to be approved, or is it six months from today? MR. FACUNDO: Well, to be quite frank, it would be six months Page 14 November 18, 2011 from the end of December would be when I'm asking for, because I want to give 30 days for -- in case there's rejections or comments that they -- the guy that has to respond to. MR. LEFEBVRE: I'll amend my motion to make it seven months. MR. KAUFMAN: I'll amend my second. MR. MIESZCAK: Also, can I add that we pay operating costs? CHAIRMAN KELLY: Done. MR. MIESCZAK: That's in? CHAIRMAN KELLY: And Supervisor Snow said it was done. MR. MIESZCAK: Oh, he did? Okay. I have "not," okay. CHAIRMAN KELLY: All right. So we have a motion and a second. Any other discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: And the motion carries. Great. Thank you. Good luck. All right. MR. SNOW: Thank you, board. MR. FACUNDO: Thanks. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. I believe that completes our extensions of time? MS. BAKER: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Are there any changes -- any new Page 15 November 18, 2011 stipulations? MS. BAKER: We do have one new stipulation. It will be Charles R. and Laurie L. Flaum, Case CESD20110002004. CHAIRMAN KELLY: And in our hearings, what number is that? MR. KAUFMAN: Twelve. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay, thanks. MR. MIESZCAK: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KELLY: That will be Stipulation No. 5. Okay. We need to amend the agenda. MR. KAUFMAN: Motion to amend the agenda. MR. MIESZCAK: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Second. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Agenda is amended. So moving on to stipulations. The first case is going to be Silver Lakes Properties with the owners' association of Collier County. Is there a representative here from Silver Lakes? (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: For the record, would you state your name and position. MR. BENNETT: I'm Conway Bennett. I'm the park manager. Page 16 November 18, 2011 I'm -- also represent the management company that's the agent for the association. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Good morning. MR. BENNETT: Good morning. CHAIRMAN KELLY: This is a stipulated agreement, which means that most of the work's been done out in the hall already. We'll just have the investigator read in the stipulation to the record, and then we can talk about it afterwards. MR. BENNETT: Okay. MS. McGONAGLE: Good morning. For the record, Investigator Michelle McGonagle, code enforcement. This is in regards to Case No. CELU2010004523, Silver Lakes Property Owners Association of Collier County, Incorporated. Come now, the undersigned, Conway Bennett, on behalf of himself and Silver Lakes Property Owners Association as representative for the respondent and -- enters into the stipulation and agreement with Collier County as to the resolution of notices of violation in reference to Case No. CELU20100004523 (sic), dated the 8th day of October 2010. In consideration of the disposition and resolution of the matters outlined in said notice of violation for which a hearing is currently scheduled for November 18, 2011, to promote efficiency in the administration of the code-enforcement process and to obtain a quick and expeditious resolution of the matters outlined therein, the parties hereby agree to the following: The violations noted in the referenced notice of violation are accurate, and I stipulate to their existence: An open storage area being utilized at Silver Lake RV Resort without first obtaining a Site Development Plan for this use. Therefore, it is agreed between the parties that the respondent shall pay operational costs in the amount of$81.43 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing; Page 17 November 18, 2011 Number 2, abate all violations by: Cease using the area for open storage or obtain a Site Development Plan amendment allowing the use of open storage in this area within 270 days of this hearing or a fine of$200 per day will be imposed until the violation is abated. The 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 of the county, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance 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. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Thank you. Sir, do you understand and agree to everything that was just read and you signed? MR. BENNETT: Yes, we do. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Are there any questions from the board? MR. KAUFMAN: Make a motion we accept the stipulation as written. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: We have a motion and a second. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: And it carries. Page 18 November 18, 2011 MR. LAVINSKI: I'd like to not vote on this issue. Their respondent's agent is in the same business as I am, and I just will abstain from this vote. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. We have one abstention. Jean, do we have one of those handy-dandy forms? MS. RAWSON: We do. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Very good, thank you. MR. BENNETT: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Good luck. MS. McGONAGLE: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Next case is going to be Steven and Kelly Johnson. Are the respondents here today? MR. BALDWIN: No, they're not. CHAIRMAN KELLY: That is Hearing No. 23. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Patrick, do you want to state your name and read it. MR. BALDWIN: For the record, Patrick Baldwin, Collier County Code Enforcement investigator. Therefore, it is agreed between the parties that the respondent shall: One, pay operational costs in the amount of$81.43 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing; Two, abate all violations by obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition permit, inspections, and certificate of completion/occupancy within 60 days of this hearing or a fine of$150 per day will be imposed until the violation is abated; Three, respondent must notify code enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance; Four, that if the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county Page 19 November 18, 2011 may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance 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. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Thank you. Are there any questions from the board? MR. KAUFMAN: Motion to accept the stipulations as written. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: And the stipulation carries. Thank you, Patrick. The next stipulation is going to be Rivers, Carlos Rivers, and that is CESD20110009946, Case No. 2 under hearings. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Good morning. MR. MUCHA: Good morning. For the record, Joe Mucha, Collier County Code Enforcement. I met with the property owner Carlos Rivers this morning. He has agreed to pay operational costs in the amount of$79.72 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing and to abate all violations by obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition permits, inspections, and certificates of Page 20 November 18, 2011 completion/occupancy within 120 days of this hearing or a fine of $100 per day will be imposed until the violation is abated. The respondent must notify code enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance; that if the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance 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. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Good morning, sir. MR. RIVERS: Good morning. CHAIRMAN KELLY: For the record, could you state your name, please. MR. RIVERS: My name is Carlos Rivers. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. And do you understand and agree to everything that was just read? MR. RIVERS: Yes. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Do we have any questions from the board? MR. KAUFMAN: Motion to accept the stipulation as written. MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second the motion. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Motion and a second. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All those in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. Page 21 November 18, 2011 CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: And the motion carries. Thank you, sir. Sir, if you have any problems getting this done within the time frame, please come and see us before the time expires. MR. RIVERS: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Next case is going to be Elias Nicot, and that is Hearing Case No. 7, CESD20100003911. MR. NICOT: Good morning. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. BALDWIN: For the record, Patrick Baldwin, Collier County Code Enforcement Board investigator. Therefore, it is agreed between the parties that the respondent shall: One, pay operational costs in the amount of$80.86 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing; Two, abate all violations by obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition permit, inspection, and certificate of completion/occupancy within 180 days of this hearing or a fine of $150 per day will be imposed until the violation is abated; Three, respondent must notify code enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance; Four, that if the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance 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. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Sir, good morning. MR. NICOT: Good morning. CHAIRMAN KELLY: For the record, can you state your name, please. Page 22 November 18, 2011 MR. NICOT: My name is Elias Nicot. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. And do you understand and agree to everything that was just read? MR. NICOT: Yes, I do. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Any questions from the board? MR. KAUFMAN: Motion to accept the stipulation as written. MR. MIESZCAK: Second that motion. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: The motion carries. Again, if you run into any issues, please come see us before the time expires. MR. NICOT: Thank you very much. MR. BALDWIN: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KELLY: And the last stipulation -- no? Second to last? No -- is going to be Flaum, that's Case No. 12 under hearings, Charles and Laurie, Case No. CESD20110002004. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Good morning. MR. MUSSE: Good morning. For the record, Investigator Jonathan Musse, code enforcement. It is agreed between the parties that the respondent shall pay operational costs in the amount of$80.57 incurred in the prosecution Page 23 November 18, 2011 of this case within 30 days of this hearing and abate all violations by obtaining a Collier County building permit or demolition permit and obtain all inspections and certificate of completion within 120 days of this hearing, or a fine of$200 per day will be imposed until violation is abated. Respondent must notify code enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the investigator to perform a site inspection to confirm compliance; that if the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using the methods to bring the violation into compliance 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. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Good morning, ma'am. MS. FLAUM: Good morning. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Can you state your name for the record, please. MS. FLAUM: Laurie Flaum. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. And do you understand and agree to everything that was just read? MS. FLAUM: Yes. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Great. Does the board have any questions? MR. KAUFMAN: Is 120 days sufficient time to get everything done? MS. FLAUM: I think so. I hope so. MR. KAUFMAN: Okay. I make a motion to accept the stipulation as written. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Do we have a second? MR. HUDSON: I second it. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Seconded. Any further discussion? Page 24 November 18, 2011 (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All those in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: And the motion carries. Great. Thank you, both. If you have any issues, ma'am -- Laurie, I'm sorry -- before the time expires, please come back and see us. Okay. What's next? MS. BAKER: We do have four more stipulation agreements. Number 6 will be Eric T. Rodriguez, Case CESD20110005820. That was be No. 16 from the agenda; Number 7 will be Marc L. Shapiro, Case CESD20110007725, Number 6 from the agenda; Number 8 will be Kirstin C. Martucci, Case CESD20110008406, Number 9 from the agenda; and Number 9 will be Kirstin C. Martucci, Case CELU20110006574, and that's Number 10 from the agenda. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Entertain a motion to amend the agenda. MR. KAUFMAN: Motion to amend. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Seconded. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. Page 25 November 18, 2011 MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: And it carries. MR. KAUFMAN: I have one question. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Yes. MR. KAUFMAN: On the last one we just did, there were two cases. Is this both of them or just one of them? CHAIRMAN KELLY: Both. Number 8 under stipulations will be Case Hearing No. 9, and then 9 under stipulations will be case No. 10. MS. BAKER: There are two cases for Martucci. MR. KAUFMAN: Right. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Both of them stipulated. Okay. So, Mr. Rodriguez. MR. RODRIGUEZ: Yes. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Good morning. MR. PAUL: For the record, Renald Paul, Collier County Code Enforcement investigator. The owner has agreed to the stipulation. He has agreed to pay operational costs in the amount of$81.43 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing. Abate all violations by obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition permit, inspection and certificate of completion/occupancy within 120 days of this hearing, or a fine of $200 per day will be imposed until the violation's abated. The respondent must notify code enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the investigator perform a site Page 26 November 18, 2011 inspection to confirm compliance. If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance 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. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay, thank you. MR. PAUL: And I have explained this to him. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Good morning, sir. MR. RODRIGUEZ: Good morning. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Do you agree and understand everything that was just read? MR. RODRIGUEZ: Yes. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any questions from the board? MR. KAUFMAN: Motion to accept the stipulation as written. MR. MIESCZAK: Second that motion. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Pick one. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: And it carries. MR. PAUL: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KELLY: If you run into problems, let us know Page 27 November 18, 2011 before it expires. MR. RODRIGUEZ: Okay. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Thanks. Next case is going to be Marc Shapiro. Is the respondent here? MR. BLUESTEIN: Good morning. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Good morning. Are you representing or are you Marc? MR. BLUESTEIN: I'm counsel. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. You don't need to be sworn in then. Just get the investigator. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Investigator, would you like to read into record and state your name, please. MS. POTTER: Okay. Good morning. For the record, Janis Potter, Collier County Code Enforcement investigator. It is agreed between the parties that the respondent shall pay operational costs in the amount of$81.15 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing and abate all violations by obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition permit, inspections and certificate of occupancy/completion within 120 days of this hearing or a fine of$150 per day will be imposed until the violation is abated. Respondent must -- No. 3, respondent must notify code enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance; and No. 4, that if the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance 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. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Good morning. Would you like to state your name for the record. Page 28 November 18, 2011 MR. BLUESTEIN: Attorney Jeff Bluestein for Marc L. Shapiro. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Is that your signature on the -- MR. BLUESTEIN: That is my signature, and that's my bar number. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay, cool. MR. BLUESTEIN: And I've circled as representative. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Great. Any questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Is that the house in foreclosure or lis pendens? MR. BLUESTEIN: It may have gone to a lis pendens. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any other questions from the board? MR. KAUFMAN: A hundred and twenty days sufficient time to MR. BLUESTEIN: That's a good question. It's a little bit tight, but I think it's feasible. We have to go through a permit-by-affidavit process, which obviously we have very little control over. MR. KAUFMAN: Okay. I'd like to make a motion we accept the stipulation as written. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Do we have a second? MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Seconded by Mr. Lavinski. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? Page 29 November 18, 2011 (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Motion carries. MR. BLUESTEIN: Thank you for your time. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Thank you, sir. Okay. Now we have Kirstin Martucci, Case No. -- because there's two of them -- CESD20110008406, which is Hearing No. 9. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. POTTER: Good morning. For the record, Janis Potter, Collier County Code Enforcement investigator. It is agreed between the parties that the respondent shall pay all operational costs in the amount of$81.15 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing and abate all violations by, Number 2, obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition permit, inspections and certificate of completion/occupancy within 120 days of this hearing, or a fine of $150 per day will be imposed until the violation is abated. Number 3, respondent must notify code enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance. Number 4, that if the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance 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. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Great. Can you state your name for the record, please. MS. MARTUCCI: Kirstin Martucci. CHAIRMAN KELLY: And do you understand and agree to everything that was just read? MS. MARTUCCI: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Does anyone from the board have a question? Page 30 November 18, 2011 (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Entertain a motion. MR. KAUFMAN: Motion to accept the stipulation as written. MS. MARTUCCI: Thank you. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. That one carries. And it is a new case, so I think we should probably re-swear you in. Sorry. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: And then, Janis, could you read the case number for the record. MS. POTTER: This is Case No. CELU20110006574. It is agreed between the parties that the respondent shall pay all operational costs in the amount of$81.43 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing, and abate all violations by: Apply for and obtain any and all occupational licenses from the tax collector to include but not limited to a zoning certificate from Growth Management Division within 45 days of this hearing, or a fine of$100 per day will be imposed until the violation is abated; Number 3, must cease all traffic not associated with the allowable residential use to include travel of employees to and from the property within 180 days of this hearing, or a fine of$250 per day will be Page 31 November 18, 2011 imposed until the violation is abated; Number 4, must cease all parking/storage of company and employee vehicles on property within 180 days of this hearing, or a fine of$250 per day will be imposed until the violation is abated; Number 5, respondent must notify code enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance; And, Number 6, that if the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance 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. CHAIRMAN KELLY: I have an issue with No. 4. If I'm reading this correct, does it say that somebody in the Estates cannot have a company vehicle at their house, parking it there? Must cease all parking/storage, so that's parking or storage, of company and employee vehicles. Employee vehicles I understand, but company vehicles? MS. POTTER: The employees are coming to the property and taking the company vehicles off the property. CHAIRMAN KELLY: I understand, and that's against zoning regs, of course, that -- even if she did get the occupational license, still couldn't have that, but she could still have her own company vehicle with a sign on the side and park it at her own residence. MS. POTTER: Uh-huh. CHAIRMAN KELLY: If I read this literally, it would disallow that as well, and she'd be susceptible to a fine of$250 per day. Maybe it's just me. MR. LEFEBVRE: I think No. 3 and 4 are very similar. To me, it seems like it would be fining her for -- to maybe taking out No. 4 or rewording it a little bit. MR. HUDSON: I agree with that. I think you caught that, Chair. Page 32 November 18, 2011 I think it basically says the same thing as Mr. Lefebvre said, and I think that -- I mean, a lot of folks in the Estates park a company on their property, a company vehicle on their property. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Yeah, that's not prohibited if I'm correct, or else I'd be in trouble. But I understand the zoning regulations about increased traffic. That's not allowed. Deliveries, personal -- or employee picking up company vehicles and leaving their own, that's not allowed. But No. 4 I have an issue with still, so I was wondering if we could reword that in some way. MS. FLAGG: You can take it out. It's up to you. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Is that okay? MS. FLAGG: Uh-huh. MS. PEREZ: Good morning. For the record, code enforcement supervisor, Cristina Perez. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. PEREZ: Without elaborating much on the case itself, because you're hearing the stipulation, the No. 4 of this section would be for the illegal storage and parking of all of the company vehicles. The property is being used as storage of these commercial vehicles. So in -- I can't tell you an exact number but, for example, say they have five employees, they have four employees that come and go every working day to pick up these vehicles and then come back in the afternoon and put them on the property. In the zoning aspect, that would be something allowed in an industrial area versus an Estates zoned property. But in seeing what you're saying, if the vehicle that Mr. Martucci were to use would be in violation of that section, of that quote because it says "all." So we could reword it to say besides vehicle that is operated by the property owner or property occupant. CHAIRMAN KELLY: How about, since there's such a great section already in the zoning regulations that clarifies exactly what can and can't, how about we just refer to the zoning, just come in Page 33 November 18, 2011 compliance with zoning regulations. MS. PEREZ: Okay. That would be fine. So we could step out and reword that section, or we could do it on the record, and then have them -- CHAIRMAN KELLY: We're here now. Might as well. MR. LEFEBVRE: I think we maybe should -- just so they can look at the Land Development Code and kind of tailor it towards that, and come back with a No. 4 that's closer to the -- CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. MR. LEFEBVRE: -- Land Development Code so we can bring this case back later. I mean, if it's -- CHAIRMAN KELLY: Yeah. I have no problem amending the agenda again if you want to go see if we can't get better language. MS. PEREZ: Okay. Thank you. MR. LEFEBVRE: Would the respondent agree to that? CHAIRMAN KELLY: Yeah. We're trying to make it better for you. MS. MARTUCCI: Okay. CHAIRMAN KELLY: It's just a little constrictive right now. MS. MARTUCCI: Okay. CHAIRMAN KELLY: And if we'll go out, we'll see if we can't change that writing just a little bit, and come back. MS. MARTUCCI: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Thank you. In that case, can we move on to our hearings and then we'll come back to that? MR. KAUFMAN: Do we have to modify the agenda? MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to modify agenda to come back. MR. KAUFMAN: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. Page 34 November 18, 2011 MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Now we're moving on to hearings. We're going directly to Case No. 4, which is going to be Melba Garcia. Is the respondent here? MR. BALDWIN: Yes. MR. GARCIA: Good morning. I'm here on behalf of my wife, Melba Garcia. She's out of the country with her sick mom in Honduras. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Sorry about that. I just wanted -- sir, I apologize, I didn't mean to be so rude, but I just wanted to make sure everybody was sworn in and that the county was going to allow you to speak on behalf of your wife, so -- MR. GARCIA: Yes. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay, great. We're going to read the case into record first, and then we'll talk about it. MR. GARCIA: Okay. MS. BAKER: This is in reference to violation of Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a), and 10.02.06(B)(1)(e)(i). Description of violation: Enclosed the garage and added full bathroom without Collier County building permits. Location/address where violation exists: 4280 6th Avenue Northeast, Naples, Florida, 34120; Folio 40745440008. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Melba Garcia, 4280 6th Avenue Northeast, Naples, Florida, 34120. Page 35 November 18, 2011 Date violation first observed: September 10, 2009; Date owner/person in charge given notice of violation: December 30, 2010. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: January 26, 2011. Date of reinspection: October 27, 2011. Results of reinspection: The violation remains. MS. FLAGG: Mr. Chair, just a clarification. You may get on the record that he has the property owner's permission to speak. CHAIRMAN KELLY: We'll do that right now. Sir? MR. GARCIA: Yes. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Could I get you just to say into the record that you have permission to speak on behalf of the property owner? MR. GARCIA: Yes, I have permission to speak on behalf of the property owner. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Thank you. Investigator. MR. BALDWIN: Good morning. For the record, Patrick Baldwin, Collier County Code Enforcement. This is in reference to Case No. CESD20090014480 dealing with the violation of: Enclosed the garage and added a full bathroom without Collier County building permits located at 4280 6th Ave Northeast Naples, Florida, 34120; Folio No. 40745440008. Service was given on December 30, 2010, via posting. I would now like to present case evidence in the following exhibits: Four pictures taken September 11, 2009, and one photograph taken yesterday, November 17, 2011. MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to accept. MR. KAUFMAN: Has he seen the pictures first? MR. BALDWIN: He has not. I was unaware that he was here for Melba. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Let's get some approval first, and then Page 36 November 18, 2011 we'll go from there. If you can show the pictures to him so he doesn't have any objections. We have a first. Do we have a second? MR. KAUFMAN: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: We have a second. Okay, sir? MR. GARCIA: I have no problem with that. CHAIRMAN KELLY: All right. Any other discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) MR. GARCIA: I have something to say. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Sir, go ahead. You have an objection with the photos? MR. GARCIA: We tried to keep up with the permits, but we ran out of money. It's so much money to modify the drainfield and the septic tank and all that. And the house now, we tried to make an agreement with Bank of America to keep the house from going in short sale, and they didn't want to come to any kind of agreement, so the house is on short sale, so -- it's $3,800 more they want for the septic tank. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Can I get you to hang on one second -- MR. GARCIA: We ran out of money. CHAIRMAN KELLY: -- because we're going to hear all of that as soon as the county presents. MR. GARCIA: Oh. Page 37 November 18, 2011 CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay? Let them kind of run through and do their thing so we can kind of get a sense for what's going on, and then you'll have ample time to tell us what's going on and your side of the whole thing. MR. GARCIA: Okay. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay, cool. All right. You're approved. MR. BALDWIN: I'd like to present the details of the case. Code Enforcement Investigator Michelle Scavone responded to a complaint that someone was renting -- THE COURT REPORTER: Can I get you to slow down, please. MR. BALDWIN: Oh, all right. Code Enforcement Investigator Michelle Scavone responded to a complaint that someone was renting a garage that was converted into living space. The investigator met with the owner, and they applied for a permit. The permit number was 2009101187 and was to convert the garage to a bedroom and a bathroom. The case was then transferred to me, and the owner has applied for a new permit because the other permit was expiring. The new permit number, 2011030435, is for a game room with a bathroom. That permit was applied for March 7, 2011, and the permit still has not been issued or CO'ed. The last rejection was by the Environmental Health Department on August 10, 2011. I've spoken with the contractor, Octavio, who's pulled the permit for the owner, and I've spoken with the owner, Melba Garcia, on several occasions, and they appear to want to obtain the CO, but it just doesn't happen, due to financial hardships, as I think he's going to state. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Do you want to show us the photos? This is inside the garage? MR. BALDWIN: This is inside the garage, yes. You can see the Page 38 November 18, 2011 bathroom there. That's just a picture of the outside of the garage here, and the last one will be a picture of the outside of the house taken yesterday. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. MR. KAUFMAN: Is the floor level in the garage the same level as the house, or is it lower? MS. BAKER: It's the same level, I believe. I was only in the property one time, so I believe it's the same level. MR. GARCIA: Yes, sir, same level. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. All right. Then -- finished? MR. BALDWIN: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Sir, all yours. MR. GARCIA: Okay. I just wanted to say we were trying to get the permits done. My wife had this thing done to the garage because her dying mom was sick, and she wanted to get her out of the rent trap from the apartments. And she's very sick now in Honduras. And now, when all this commotion happened, we rented it out to another person after her mom left to Honduras. And this all occurred because we rented it out to the tenant that wasn't happy that -- in the second month she did this. But we tried to get the permits, everything together legal so we can be in compliance, but it's just too much money. They want $3,800 for -- to modify the drainfield and -- so that I'll have 100 gallons more in drainage per day of sewage water, and it's just too much money. The house is in short sale with Bank of America. Bank of America doesn't want to come to agreement with us to -- you know, to -- with the value of the house so we can keep on paying the mortgage and stuff. So it's in their hands. Bank of America wants it on short sale. So that's the bottom line. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any chance of turning the garage back Page 39 November 18, 2011 into a garage? MR. GARCIA: It would be -- it would be a big problem because we sealed the door with Sheetrock in the back, and it would just be a total mess. MR. KAUFMAN: Is it occupied now? MR. GARCIA: Because we're using it as storage. It's just used for storage. We don't have it rented out to nobody. It's just storage. A small bathroom. Like I said, we spent, like, over $2,000 getting all the permits, and it's -- now they want another 3,800 more to modify the drainfield, and it's not going to happen. So we're trying to come to an agreement with Bank of America so we could keep the house, and they don't want to come to bring the price down, because the house has lost a lot of value because it's out there in the boonies. And it's just -- it's in short sale. They want us to just stay there watching the house so the house won't be vandalized, but they want to put it on short sale. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Any questions from the board? MR. BALDWIN: Sir, could I state one thing? As of yesterday, I was checking the Clerk of Courts, and I could not find a recording of the lis pendens on the property. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Thanks. Any other questions? MR. KAUFMAN: Well, I'd like to follow up what the investigator said. You said it's -- there's no lis pendens on the house? MR. GARCIA: No lis what? Excuse me? MR. KAUFMAN: Lis pendens is the first notification that they intend to foreclose the property. They generally do that, and then you get into the -- MR. GARCIA: Yeah, that's because my wife has been calling trying to -- trying to agree -- you know, come to an agreement where we can keep the house, but the house has dropped in value so much Page 40 November 18, 2011 for being so far out there that it's not worth what we agreed to pay for it on the 200,000. Now the house is, like, worth a hundred and six or hundred and seven thousand, and we've done a lot of work to it. So it's a matter of them coming to an agreement with us so we can keep up the mortgage payments, and they don't want to. They just want to throw it over their shoulder and say -- and the reason we haven't done that is because my wife's been calling them every two or three months to try to come to an agreement with them. That's why they haven't put it up on foreclosure yet. MR. LEFEBVRE: Are you current on your payments? MR. GARCIA: No, no. MR. LEFEBVRE: No? MR. GARCIA: No. Six months. MR. KAUFMAN: I'd like to make a motion we find the respondent in violation. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Do we have a second? MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: We have a second. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. There is a violation. It just means that what the investigator said is true, and now does the investigator have a recommendation? Page 41 November 18, 2011 MR. BALDWIN: I do. That the Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of $81.43 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by, one, obtaining Collier County building permits or demolition permit, inspections, and certificate of completion within blank days of this hearing or a fine of blank dollars per pay will be imposed until the violation is abated; Two, utilities are to be turned off to the addition of the principal structure within blank days of this hearing until permit has obtained a certificate of completion/occupancy, or a fine of blank per day will be imposed until the violation is abated; Three, the respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance 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 KELLY: Okay. Does anyone on the board have a discussion or would like to -- MR. KAUFMAN: I have a quick point to make. It seems that money is short and you're unable to get this permitted. MR. GARCIA: Yes. I brought the letter here to show you that they want $3,800 for the modification -- MR. KAUFMAN: I understand that. But as far as the board and the violation is concerned, the details of how much it costs, et cetera, is not the concern as much as the violation itself. So if your intention is to never -- because that's what you said -- have it permitted, we're kind of limited on what we can do to help you out. The first number that was discussed, the 81.43, that's the amount of money, court costs, if you will. But as far as getting the place Page 42 November 18, 2011 permitted, I'm certainly willing to make a motion to give you six months to see what can be done, but if you come back after six months and nothing has been done, that generally causes more problems. So do you think maybe in some given period of time you might be able to come into compliance as far as getting it permitted? MR. GARCIA: In six months? I think we can work with that. Does the bathroom, the restroom area, need to be knocked down or just open the garage door back up again? MR. KAUFMAN: The concern that the board always has it electrical, that the electricity to that area be turned off, because nobody's inspected it. They don't know whether it's a possible fire hazard. MR. GARCIA: That wouldn't be a problem. MR. KAUFMAN: Okay. So I'm going to go back -- if you want to -- give you my recommendation, and that was that the costs of 81.43 be paid within 30 days, and 180 days -- six months' time be given or $150 a day fine after six months to come into compliance, and the utilities, the electricity, to be shut off to that space within 30 days or $100 fine on that. Did I miss anything? MR. LEFEBVRE: Will the respondent be responsible to call the investigator to come out and make sure the power's been turned off? MR. KAUFMAN: Yes. Once you throw the circuit breaker to turn the electricity off into that space, you should notify code enforcement so they can come out there to verify that. MR. GARCIA: Okay. MR. KAUFMAN: And then you have six months to, hopefully, come into compliance as far as permitting, et cetera, either that or it gets reverted back to -- it gets reverted to what it was originally, a garage or storage space without electricity and water. MR. GARCIA: Right. Let's say the house goes into what Bank of America wants, short sale, what do we do then? Page 43 November 18, 2011 MR. KAUFMAN: Well, the short sale shouldn't have anything to do with this. All the short sale is, that your mortgage is bigger that you can sell the house for. MR. GARCIA: No, we won't be there, then we won't be there. MR. KAUFMAN: That's if-- MR. GARCIA: That we are totally going to abandon the house in the next couple of months, let's say. MR. KAUFMAN: Well, that's between you and the bank. MR. GARCIA: That's going to be the bank's problem now. MR. KAUFMAN: Well, you own the house, and you have to agree to a short sale should a short sale occur. MR. GARCIA: That's what's likely to happen, before we tear the thing down, you know, to make it back to garage, because we spent over $10,000 doing that for her mom that was very, very sick. MR. KAUFMAN: I understand. MR. GARCIA: And she's dying now overseas. MR. LEFEBVRE: It would be your responsibility to notify any owner or any potential buyer of the issue with your property prior to it being sold, but this also -- MR. GARCIA: No problem. MR. LEFEBVRE: This order will also be recorded in public records. So as you probably heard in one of the previous cases, if there is a search done to find out if there's any liens, mortgages, so forth, this will show up. MR. GARCIA: That's no problem. MR. LEFEBVRE: So what I'm saying is -- MR. GARCIA: Well, we think we're going to let the bank -- the house go to the bank, you know. MR. LEFEBVRE: So you're telling me basically this isn't going to be fixed and in six months we'll probably have to impose the fines. MR. GARCIA: Well, we'll have to discuss it with my wife when she comes back in a couple of months, but that's when I think it's Page 44 November 18, 2011 going to happen, because the house is so far out there, the end of the Golden Gate Boulevard, the last boulevard, it's called DeSoto. MR. LEFEBVRE: I know where it is. MR. GARCIA: That's where it's at. MR. LEFEBVRE: Thank you. MR. MIESZCAK: I'd like to add one thing. We're talking about turning off the electric. What about the plumbing to the garage? Would that area still be used or what, you know? MR. KAUFMAN: I'll -- MR. BALDWIN: The recommendation, No. 2, says utilities, so MR. MIESZCAK: So that covers electric and toilet? MR. BALDWIN: And plumbing, I would -- and the water. MR. MIESZCAK: Water? MR. BALDWIN: Yes. MR. MIESCZAK: Okay. MR. LEFEBVRE: Is air conditioning being kept on in there? Because if not, then there's going to be a mold issue. MR. BALDWIN: It's supposed to be a garage, so -- MR. LEFEBVRE: Right. MR. BALDWIN: -- sometimes garages don't have A/C. I don't know, sir. I don't know if there would be a mold issue. MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Well, to make things even more interesting, I don't think we should give six months to a home that is going to be let go anyways. MR. MIESZCAK: I agree. CHAIRMAN KELLY: I think we should get a lien filed on it immediately so that some unsuspecting buyer doesn't get stuck with this bag. MR. LEFEBVRE: But this order will be recorded, correct? MS. RAWSON: Yes. Page 45 November 18, 2011 CHAIRMAN KELLY: But that might -- I agree, I agree, so it will be known. But the buyer might not know to the extent of financial repercussions that this may have on them, where if you had a lien, you would know exactly what it would cost. This is a fine plus what it would take to get it into compliance. MR. LEFEBVRE: Well, the only difference is, let's say hypothetically -- and I know Bank of America doesn't move fast, but let's hypothetically say it goes under contract, it closes within 120 days. They'll know that they have 60 days to get this into compliance or a fine will start to be -- MR. KAUFMAN: Let me ask one question. Are you going to pay the $81.43 within 30 days? MR. GARCIA: Yes, I think that would be the best thing and wait the six months. And my wife will be happy with the six months period that you guys set it, that we could work with, and we would turn it back to the garage, or just we'll leave the house. MR. KAUFMAN: If somebody wants to modify the dates, I'm all ears. MR. LEFEBVRE: Is it currently up for sale? MR. GARCIA: She's calling every two months Bank of America. MR. LEFEBVRE: That wasn't the question. MR. GARCIA: For sale, for sale? MR. LEFEBVRE: The question, is it currently for sale on the market? MR. GARCIA: No. MR. LEFEBVRE: Is it currently listed with a real-estate agent? MR. GARCIA: No. MR. LEFEBVRE: No. So no offer's been submitted to Bank of America at this point. I think we're going to be back here in six months imposing fines. So no matter what date we give them to get this into compliance, it's really a nonfactor. Page 46 November 18, 2011 So, Mr. Kelly, if you want to -- CHAIRMAN KELLY: It's just a, you know, concern that I have. I just want to throw it out there. MR. LEFEBVRE: What would be a time frame that you would be -- CHAIRMAN KELLY: I'm with you. I don't think it matters what time we put out there. I think we're just going to be back. So the sooner the better, in my eyes, so that we can make sure that everything's out in the open. MR. KAUFMAN: I think that you had a comment that we kind of cut you off on regarding the time frames on this, if you had any comments on that. MS. FLAGG: What I believe you're dealing with is that Bank of America has not even responded to these folks. So there are many times that banks successfully pass properties on because there's not a lien filed against the property, because many times they don't look for the specific orders. They're looking for the liens. And if there's not a lien, then they pass the property on. The order is recorded. So -- we're going to provide this gentleman some resources in regard to working with the banks, which we'll do after this. So I think you're at the very beginning of negotiating with the bank in this case. MR. KAUFMAN: And it wouldn't get posted as far as a lien is concerned until after whatever the time frame is on this order? MS. FLAGG: Correct. This is a finding of fact. So once -- whatever time frame you set for coming into compliance, the day after that it would be re- -- it would be scheduled again for a lien hearing. MR. KAUFMAN: Maybe it would be proper to cut the baby in half and -- in other words, instead of being 180 days -- I'm just talking to the board now -- 180 days, if we made it 90 days and -- with the instruction to the respondent that should he have any problems within the 90 days to come back to us if he needed additional time. MR. LEFEBVRE: When is our next hearing? Page 47 November 18, 2011 CHAIRMAN KELLY: January. MR. MIESCZAK: January 19th. MS. BAKER: January -- MR. LAVINSKI: 19th. MR. MIESCZAK: Somewhere. MS. BAKER: 19th. MR. LEFEBVRE: So, realistically, if we cut it down to 45 days, you can bring it back to imposition of fines. That way if, for some reason, it does go to short sale or foreclosure, there will be a lien at that point, potentially. MR. KAUFMAN: Then I will modify my motion to show 45 days. And the second on the motion? MR. LEFEBVRE: I don't know. Did I second the motion? MR. KAUFMAN: I think you did. MR. LEFEBVRE: I can't remember. MR. MIESCZAK: Are you staying at 150? MR. LEFEBVRE: Did I second the motion? THE COURT REPORTER: I can go back and look. MR. MIESCZAK: You said 45 days, $150 a day; that's what you're saying. MR. LEFEBVRE: If I was the one that seconded it, then I'll amend my motion. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Why don't we go ahead and withdraw the original; start over. This way we won't have to worry about who seconded it. So go ahead and withdraw your first one and try a new one. MR. KAUFMAN: Okay. I withdraw the motion. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. MR. KAUFMAN: And I'll start with the new motion: 81.43 paid within 30 days; within 45 days, at $150 a day, is the second one; and the utilities, that's 30 days, and $100. Does that fit in your -- MR. LEFEBVRE: I second that motion. Page 48 November 18, 2011 CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Motion carries. Okay. So now what we've done is given you 45 days or a fine of $150 for day. Now, keep in mind, if you successfully work something out and are able to keep the home and you want to go through, finish the permitting, and get everything taken care of so that you can stay in the home and enjoy the garage conversion with the new addition, you can do that. If you run into problems with timing, come back to us before it expires and ask for an extension. We're pretty good about those things. As long as we see activity, we're pretty lenient. MR. GARCIA: Right. CHAIRMAN KELLY: But if it goes past the time frame and there's no extensions, we could then get to a point where we actually file a lien against the property, and those fines would continue to accrue until the property was sold, because the person selling it would have to pay those off before they could sell it. So that's where we stand. Don't forget to turn off the utilities within the next 30 days. So turn the plumbing off on the toilets and the sinks and everything, and then also the electricity to the garage. MR. GARCIA: Okay. MR. LEFEBVRE: And he'll have to notify? Page 49 November 18, 2011 CHAIRMAN KELLY: Correct. You'll have to notify Investigator Baldwin when you do that so that he can come and inspect to make sure that it's done. MR. GARCIA: The lights and the plumbing? CHAIRMAN KELLY: Yes, sir, that's correct. MR. KAUFMAN: They'll come out and flush the toilet and turn the light on. MR. BALDWIN: I'll meet with him outside, and we'll just -- CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay, very good. And in the audience, I don't have a speaker form for you on this case, but did you want to publicly comment on this case? MR. HESTER: Yes, I would. CHAIRMAN KELLY: I'm going to have to have you come up and swear yourself in as soon as we're done with this one. Okay. Any other questions, Mr. Garcia? MR. GARCIA: No. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. MR. HESTER: This man here. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Wait. Let's have you come up to the microphone, we'll have you swear yourself in -- or get you sworn in, and then you can state your name, and you have three minutes to tell us everything you'd like to say. MR. HESTER: My name is Erik Hester. I -- CHAIRMAN KELLY: Wait, wait. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. MR. HESTER: For that man -- CHAIRMAN KELLY: You want to state your name real quick. MR. HESTER: Erik. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Erik, okay. MR. HESTER: For that man -- CHAIRMAN KELLY: Yes. Page 50 November 18, 2011 MR. HESTER: -- if his toilet was removed, would he still be in a problem? CHAIRMAN KELLY: Yes. MR. HESTER: And if his garage door was to open and he could drive his car in there, would he still have a problem? CHAIRMAN KELLY: As long as there was additional electrical that was done and it had not been inspected, yes, he would. He's -- he would need an inspector from the county building department to go in and make sure that everything conforms to code before he could use that and be in compliance. So, yes, he still would be in trouble. MR. LEFEBVRE: Also, he would have to get a demo permit to remove any walls that were built illegally, so then he would have to have it inspected. MR. HESTER: Do you have a wall built? MR. LEFEBVRE: The bathroom. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Yeah. MR. LEFEBVRE: So, yes. MR. HESTER: All right. Thank you. CHAIRMAN KELLY: You're welcome. Okay. So do you need a break? THE COURT REPORTER: (Shakes head.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Go a couple more, okay. The next case is going to be Valori Coe-Fitzgerald. Are the respondents here? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. BAKER: This is in reference to violation of Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). Description of violation: No Collier County permit for garage door converted into exterior wall which is in need of repair, and no Page 51 November 18, 2011 permit for storage structure near the rear of the dwelling. Location/address where violation exists: 1081 21st Street Southwest, Naples, Florida, 34117; Folio 45903640001. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Valori Coe-Fitgerald, 1081 21st Street Southwest, Naples, Florida, 34117. Date violation first observed: July 8, 2011. Date owner/person in charge given notice of violation: July 26, 2011. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: August 25, 2011. Date of reinspection: October 25, 2011. Results of reinspection: The violation remains. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. MR. CONDOMINA: For the record, Investigator Danny Condomina, Collier County Code Enforcement. This is in reference to Case No. CESD20110009349 dealing with the violation of no Collier County permit for garage door converted into exterior wall, which is in need of repair, and no permit for storage structure near the rear of dwelling located at 1081 21st Street Southwest, Naples, Florida, 34117; Folio No. 45903640001. Service was given on July 26, 2011. I would now like to present case evidence in the following exhibits: Two photographs taken by me on September 8, 2011, a floor plan found under Permit 86915, elevation plan found under Permit 86915. MR. KAUFMAN: Motion to accept the exhibits. MR. MIESZCAK: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. Page 52 November 18, 2011 MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Go ahead. And also, slow down just a little bit for the court reporter. MR. CONDOMINA: Sorry. CHAIRMAN KELLY: That's all right. MR. CONDOMINA: Details of case: This violation first observed on July 8, 2011. I checked property card and several databases for permits. I could not find a permit for this conversion or storage structure. Permit 86915 shows a garage where now exists a window and exterior wall. That's the storage and that's the garage or where the garage was converted. Now the next floor plan, please. Thank you. MR. KAUFMAN: Is this property occupied, by the way? MR. CONDOMINA: No, sir, it's vacant. CHAIRMAN KELLY: And is it also bank owned? MR. CONDOMINA: There is a notice of lis pendens. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Okay. So it's supposed to be a garage, and they've definitely converted it and enclosed it. MR. CONDOMINA: The exterior wall now with the window is, it's in disrepair so -- also, just a note. MR. KAUFMAN: Make a motion we find them in violation. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. Page 53 November 18, 2011 CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: That was pretty easy. Okay. Do you have a recommendation? MR. CONDOMINA: Yes, sir. That the Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of$81.15 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition permits, inspections, and certificate of completion/occupancy within X days of this hearing or a fine of X per day will be imposed until the violation is abated; Two, the respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance 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 KELLY: Okay. MR. LEFEBVRE: I make a motion that the Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of 81.15 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by -- and give 45 days from this hearing or a fine of$150 per day will be imposed. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. MS. RAWSON: Hundred and fifty? MR. LEFEBVRE: Hundred and fifty, yes; one fifty. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Do we have a second? MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second that motion. Page 54 November 18, 2011 CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: And the motion carries. Okay. Thank you, Investigator. MR. CONDOMINA: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Now moving back to our stipulation, which just happened to fall right in line as far as cases. Are we good to go, Kirstin? MS. BAKER: Can you wait? CHAIRMAN KELLY: Yeah, let's take a ten-minute break. We'll recess for ten minutes and be right back. (A brief recess was had.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. I'd like to call the Code Enforcement Board back to order. We're going to go to Hearing Case No. 11, Frank Paz. Are you in the room? (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. BAKER: This is in reference to violation of Florida Building Code, 2007 Edition, Chapter 1, permits, Section 105.1. Description of violation: Fence without Collier County building permits in disrepair. Location/address where violation exists: 125 2nd Street Northeast, Naples, Florida, 34120; Folio 37282480000. Page 55 November 18, 2011 Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Frank Paz, 2864 10th Avenue Southeast, Naples, Florida, 34117. Date violation first observed: May 4, 2011. Date owner/person in charge given notice of violation: May 13, 2011. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: June 12, 2011. Date of reinspection: September 29, 2011. Results of reinspection: The violation remains. MR. BALDWIN: Good morning. For the record, Patrick Baldwin, Collier County Code Enforcement. This is in reference to Case No. CEAU20110005919 dealing with the violation, fence without Collier County building permit in disrepair located at 125 2nd Street Northeast, Naples, Florida, 34120; Folio No. 37282480000. Service was given on Monday, May 13, 2011, via posting. I would now like to present case evidence in the following exhibits: Two photographs, the first one dated May 4, 2011, and the second taken yesterday, November 17, 2011. MR. KAUFMAN: Motion to -- MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to accept. MR. KAUFMAN: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Page 56 November 18, 2011 MR. BALDWIN: I'd like to present the details of the case now. This case was opened by Investigator Janis Potter May 4, 2011. I posted the property on May 13, 2011. Last month I left a door hanger and a business card at the owner's other address in the Golden Gate Estates, but I still have not heard from the owner to this date. All of my attempts have gone to nothing, and we're here today. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Two quick questions. One is, is there anyone occupying the home, or is it in some kind of foreclosure procedures? MR. BALDWIN: Yes, the home is vacant, and there's a lis pendens -- well, there was a lis pendens, but it was dismissed in 2009. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. And second, do you have a permit in reference to this fence showing that -- MR. BALDWIN: There is not a permit. CHAIRMAN KELLY: How do we know it's this property and not the neighbor's? MR. BALDWIN: Well, typically -- that's a good question. Typically, when you build a fence in the Estates, the slats that you see, the upright -- CHAIRMAN KELLY: Yeah. MR. BALDWIN: -- beams or whatever. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Posts. MR. BALDWIN: They're on the inside of the property. The other property does have a fence, but it's a chain-link fence. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay, thank you. MR. KAUFMAN: It was probably reported by them. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any other questions? MR. KAUFMAN: Is that fence laying down there with the weeds growing through it? Is that -- is that what I'm seeing in this picture? MR. BALDWIN: Yes. That was the original picture taken May Page 57 November 18, 2011 4th. The picture taken yesterday, they have repaired the fence, and the property is being maintained, although vacant. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. So there is no permit, and it was not part of the original site plan to have a fence? MR. BALDWIN: Correct. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. MR. KAUFMAN: Did you happen to ask the neighbor whose fence that is, or -- MR. BALDWIN: No, I did not. MR. KAUFMAN: Because I know that when you put a fence up, the ugly side goes to the people who put the fence up, and the nice-looking side goes the other way. But if they didn't get a permit, that might have fallen out of the window. This was an anonymous report? MR. BALDWIN: This was opened by another investigator out on patrol. MR. KAUFMAN: Okay. Make a motion we find them in violation. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: The motion carries. Do you have a recommendation? Page 58 November 18, 2011 MR. BALDWIN: Yes, I do. That the Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of $80.29 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by: One, obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition permit, inspections, and certificate of completion/occupancy within blank days of this hearing or a fine of blank dollars per day will be imposed until the violation is abated; Two, the respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance 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 KELLY: Okay. Any questions from the board? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Anyone like to accept the recommendation? MR. KAUFMAN: I'd like to fill in the blanks; 80.29 paid within 30 days, $100-a-day fine after 60 days. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: We have a motion and second. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. Page 59 November 18, 2011 CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: And it carries unanimously. MR. BALDWIN: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Great. Thank you, Patrick. Since our motion prior to amend the agenda allowed us to bring the stipulation back at any time, let's go ahead and bring the stipulation for Case CELU20110006574, Kirstin Martucci, back at this time. This would be Case No. 10 on your hearing docket. Consider yourselves still sworn in from prior. MS. POTTER: Okay. MS. MARTUCCI: Okay. CHAIRMAN KELLY: All right. Do we have -- let's see what this looks like. Do you -- do we need to reread this in? MR. MIESCZAK: We just changed the wording on No. 4, I think, didn't we? MS. RAWSON: I think that you probably -- I'm trying to remember the discussion. I think you probably went through all of it, and then you suggested that we reword No. 4. So I think -- MR. MIESZCAK: Right. MS. RAWSON: -- that we all just have to read No. 4. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Cristina, is No. 3 also amended? Let's get her sworn in, and -- oh, you're already sworn in from before, sorry. MS. PEREZ: In hearing the discussion of the board, in Finding 3 and 4 being similar, we went ahead and took 3 and 4 and summarized it into the new Number 3. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Janis, you want to just read No. 3 into the record then for us, please. MS. POTTER: Sure. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Thank you. MS. POTTER: Number 3, must use property as intended in Page 60 November 18, 2011 Estates-zoned property by complying with the Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Sections 2.02.03 and 2.03.01, Subsection B, within 180 days of this hearing or a fine of$250 per day will be imposed until the violation is abated. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Very good. Thank you. Everything sound good to you? You agree to everything that was written? MS. MARTUCCI: Yes. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Any questions from the board? MR. KAUFMAN: Motion to accept the stipulation as written. MR. MIESZCAK: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: And the motion carries. This is a -- I think, a lot better. It's not as restrictive. MS. MARTUCCI: Okay. Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Thank you. MS. POTTER: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Now moving back to regular hearings, Case No. 12. MS. BAKER: Thirteen. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Thirteen. It is Janet Sneeden. Is the respondent here? Page 61 November 18, 2011 CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. BAKER: This is in reference to violation of Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). Description of violation: Utilizing Collier County property appraiser's aerials, modifications to the main structure without first obtaining Collier County building permits. Location/address where violation exists: 540 Platt Road, Naples, Florida, 34120; Folio 00111280007. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Janet Sneeden, 540 Platt Road, Naples, Florida, 34120. Date violation first observed: July 12, 2011. Date owner/person in charge given notice of violation: July 19, 2011. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: August 19, 2011. Date of reinspection, October 5, 2011. Results of reinspection: The violation remains. MR. ASARO: For the record, Tony Asaro with Collier County Code Enforcement. This is in reference to Case No. CESD20110009351, pertaining to a violation of the Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a), exterior modifications to a mobile home without obtaining Collier County building permits. The property is located at 540 Platt Road Naples, Florida, 34120; Folio No. 0011280007. Service was given on July 19, 2011. At this time I would like to present case evidence. I have two aerial photos dated from 2004 to 2011 -- and 2011, and six current photos that were taken November 15, 2011. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any objections from the respondent? Do you have any problems with us seeing these photos? Have you seen Page 62 November 18, 2011 them? MR. HESTER: I don't care about the photos. I have a question. MS. BAKER: Can you talk in the mike, please. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Yeah. You'll have to speak in the mike so that the court reporter can hear you. MR. HESTER: Hi, there. 1999 -- CHAIRMAN KELLY: No, it's just about the photos. We're going to let county do their part first, and then you'll get plenty of time to tell us your side. Any problem with the photos themselves? MR. HESTER: (Shakes head.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. MR. KAUFMAN: Motion to accept the photos. MS. BAKER: Hold on. The respondents haven't seen the photos, so we're going to show them the photos first. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Make your motion. MR. KAUFMAN: Motion to accept the exhibits. MR. MIESCZAK: I'll second that. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Go ahead, Tony. MR. ASARO: On July 12, 2011, utilizing the Collier County Property Appraiser's GIS mapping system, I observed aerial photos Page 63 November 18, 2011 from 2004 to 2011 of a mobile home on the property with increased living space without first obtaining Collier County building permits. Also on November 15, 2011, I was granted access to the property by the property owner, Janet Sneeden, to take updated photos of the property. On that same day I did meet with Janet, the property owner. She advised me at this time she's experiencing financial hardship right now and is not in the position to complete the permitting process. Violation still remains. CHAIRMAN KELLY: You want to describe the photos for us? MR. ASARO: That's the main structure. That's the mobile home. Or they -- well, it's been enlarged. That's another shot of the front of the mobile home, and soon you'll be seeing a side shot of the original mobile home. CHAIRMAN KELLY: So just for clarification, mobile home's on the left, addition on the right? MR. ASARO: Yeah, and then actually addition -- the mobile home's on the left. You can see where the main structure is, the original structure, and then there's some additions to it around the entire property. MR. KAUFMAN: The roofline? MR. ASARO: This is the original roofline, and then some of this is the additions. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Can you restate that, please, so that the court reporter can pick it up. MR. ASARO: Okay. The original mobile home is -- that's the original, and then in the front is the additions, and there's some additions in the rear. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. MR. KAUFMAN: The roofline that's going across there straight, is it at the end of the one roof, is that where the -- it has been added to, or is it just in front of that other roofline? Page 64 November 18, 2011 MR. ASARO: I think that's -- I'll have to let Erik tell you about that. He'll be able to explain that to you. MR. HESTER: See this spot right there -- CHAIRMAN KELLY: Hey, Erik? MR. HESTER: -- that is your trailer, and this is what the man built. MR. KAUFMAN: Okay. Thank you. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay, got it. All right. And the aerials? MR. ASARO: The aerial photos show in 2004 what the -- what it looked like then, and then the 2011 photos show -- aerial photos show how it's been enlarged. CHAIRMAN KELLY: 2004 is on the right? Okay. MR. HESTER: No -- yeah. MR. KAUFMAN: That's what it says. MS. BAKER: 2004. MR. KAUFMAN: Collier County Property Appraiser. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay, okay. Do you have anything else? MR. ASARO: No, that's it. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Is there -- as far as a permit search, have there been any permits at all? MR. ASARO: A permit for the original structure, the original mobile home. CHAIRMAN KELLY: So there was a permit to place a mobile home on the property? MR. ASARO: Right, but there wasn't any permits to do any modifications to the original mobile home. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Would -- what we're seeing even in 2004 still looks like there's some sort of an addition to the original mobile home. MR. ASARO: It appears that way, yeah. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. MR. ASARO: But I don't have any aerial photos of what it Page 65 November 18, 2011 looked like originally. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. And in what year was the mobile home placed on site; do you know? MR. HESTER: Ninety-three. MR. ASARO: Yeah, it was in 1993. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay, great. Okay. If you can, both of you state your name for the record, and then tell us what's going on and how can we help. So if you want to start, Janet, I presume? MS. SNEEDEN: Yeah. I'm Janet Sneeden. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Can you pull the mike down to you? It actually -- yeah, you'll have to speak up a little bit so that the court reporter can hear it. MS. SNEEDEN: I'm Janet Sneeden. Yeah, the place not that great. We bought it as -- the way it is, with a guy named James Cane. James Cane died a couple days ago, because we went to look for him about what's going on. But he built the place, and he killed himself a couple days ago. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Wow. MR. HESTER: I'll explain that one. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Erik, what was your last name again? MR. HESTER: Hester. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay, Erik Hester. Go ahead, please. MR. HESTER: All right. In 1999 I went out and looked at this place. What I liked was that there was lots of land and nobody around me. I did not enlarge that house. I did, though, after a tree fell into the house under the hurricane, I had to put metal roofing on. Another tree fell on the other side. I've called FEMA. They do not agree with me. They say it didn't happen. Now, this man sold me this property. He did this work. We went through title search. County flew over and took pictures. At this point in time somebody should have came to us and said, this has been modified. This is illegal, but no one did. But there was Page 66 November 18, 2011 pictures taken from above. I seen them. I can't download the computer, but it does it. I don't think anybody here is willing to pay for someone else's sins or crimes. I will not lie to you and say I didn't fix things, because this was a total disaster. If someone walked into that meeting and said, it's going to cost you this and this to fix it, I would have taken my 10,000 down and sued the guy for it, and we wouldn't have gone any further. This was not the only piece of land I own. I did want to build another house on 32nd Avenue, but this was done. This saved time. So I go to this man who built this, because he's put me in a very b position at this moment, and I said, you are going to court on Friday. I will be here to pick you up. The following morning my friend tells me that James Cane put a gun to his head and eliminated the chance of him being here. So next thing, how do you correct the problem? I have two solutions, bulldozer or fire. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Let me explain from the county's standpoint why we're here today. The county has a responsibility to ensure that its residents are safe. So in that they have a building department that overlooks any type of additions or changes to a building to make sure that they follow certain codes. Whenever those are not followed, there is a corrective action and oversight hearing. This happens to be one of those avenues, and we're public just like you, and we come and we try to help out the public but also enforce some of the ordinances and the Land Development Code. Unfortunately -- and this is going to hurt -- unfortunately, all violations in this county go with the property, not with who caused the problems on the property. Now, you may have a civil path to go back after the person. But as far as who's responsible today, unfortunately, it goes with the Page 67 November 18, 2011 property and whoever owns it today. Now, a couple of years ago when we started having a lot of foreclosures and a number of homes that were being passed through banks on rapid deals, we started noticing more and more of these type situations where a previous owner committed these violations and then passed them on to new unsuspecting owners. During that time there were some very sad cases of people who were losing basically their life savings because they didn't realize what they were getting into. And because of that, our own director, Diane Flagg, along with her team, lobbied a number of people in the community to create a new process to where in these cases, in these foreclosure and these pass-on cases, there's an additional search that's done, not just on the title, but through Code Enforcement to make sure there's no violations against it that were in violation of the Land Development Code or any ordinances relating thereto. Unfortunately, that's just taken place in the last couple of years and that was not in place back when you purchased it. So the good news is, moving forward, we're seeing less and less of this situation. The bad news is, unfortunately, the law is still the way it is, and the violation goes with the property. And, therefore, since you're the owner of it, you're responsible for that. I would strongly discourage you from taking any harsh action like, for instance, a fire or a bulldozer. We'll see if there's maybe a way to work with the existing structure or maybe even get some of those that were added on permitted so that you can continue to enjoy them the way you do now. There are avenues. So due to the testimony that you had, I -- MR. HESTER: I just want you to understand, you don't tear off one section and try to save this place. It won't happen. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. All right. Well, unfortunately, that might be the case then. But at least there's no denial there are some additions that were put on, there's no records of permits, so we Page 68 November 18, 2011 do have -- we do, in fact, have a violation. So the first thing we need to do is rule as to whether or not there's a violation, and I believe, due to your own testimony, we do have a violation. So give us a moment, we'll go ahead and rule on that part, and then we'll talk about how we fix this problem. Okay. MR. KAUFMAN: Motion that a violation exists. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: And all in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. It passes. Tony, would you like to read the recommendation, and we'll go from there. MR. ASARO: Recommendation is that the Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of$80.86 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition permits -- permit, inspections and certificate of completion or occupancy within blank days of this hearing, or a fine of blank dollars per 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 a final inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to Page 69 November 18, 2011 bring the violation into compliance 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 KELLY: Okay. MR. KAUFMAN: I have a couple of questions. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Go ahead. MR. KAUFMAN: Have you had an opportunity to do some investigating as to how much it would cost to bring this property into compliance? MR. HESTER: Say that again. MR. KAUFMAN: Okay. There was an addition that was put on. MR. HESTER: Several. MR. KAUFMAN: Several additions that were put on, and they have probably electrical and plumbing in those additions? MR. HESTER: See, plumbing. That's a really good one there. After buying the place, I flushed the toilet and it didn't go down, and then I took a shower, and the water stayed in the tub, and then I brushed my teeth and the water went out of the sink but a few minutes later it came through the wall. MR. KAUFMAN: So it was in real bad shape when you bought it? MR. HESTER: One bathroom. He drilled a hole into the frame of the trailer, the wood frame, and sank the pipe into it, and that was for the tub. It went nowhere. MR. KAUFMAN: When did you purchase this property? MR. HESTER: I started buying it in '99. MR. KAUFMAN: Okay. And since 1999, have you fixed lots of things that are on it? MR. HESTER: Oh, yeah. MR. KAUFMAN: So is it in a condition that it's possible that it would pass an inspection from the county? MR. HESTER: Negative. Page 70 November 18, 2011 MR. KAUFMAN: You say that -- do you have any reason why? MR. HESTER: How old is the trailer? MR. ASARO: It was built in 1993. MR. HESTER: No. MR. ASARO: Or placed on the property in 1993. MR. HESTER: Maybe a '50s model. He tore the sides off the trailer, the outside of it. He put drywall there. It started off as a porch. It became the kitchen, living room, and a bedroom. It was a flat roof. The first hurricane/storm that came through, I'm standing on the roof trying to stop a leak, and I went through the roof. I have put four layers of plywood on this roof trying to stop it. The problem is, it's a flat roof. The county would not approve of a flat roof, would they? Also, you had a tree growing through the kitchen. Every time the wind blew, it separated the two parts of the buildings. I had to remove a tree. The bathroom that we use now, it -- the sink ran with hot water going to the toilet. To do this, he drilled a hole through the wall, which put it into the plumbing, the plumbing that was now going to the septic. The septic tank is unable to be found and located anywhere in the yard. It is because someone allowed him to set the trailer directly on top of the septic tank. A tree grew, and it stopped the septic tank from being able to use anything. I had to climb inside this septic tank under the house and remove thousands and thousands of roots that filled it. We're talking the most disgusting thing I've ever had to do except for picking up a dead person. It took me three days to dig all these roots out. The septic tank was ruined. I had to drain it and reconcrete it. It's still under the house. Page 71 November 18, 2011 MR. KAUFMAN: Okay. Well, I'd like to go through the -- unless there are any other comments from the board. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Are there any other questions? MR. MIESZCAK: No. MR. KAUFMAN: I'll fill in the blanks. The 80.86 to be paid within 30 days, ninety days, $200-a-day fine to come into compliance. MR. HESTER: Really? MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: We have a motion and a second. Do we have any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All those in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. That gives you 90 days to either get the permits to be able to leave the structures as they are or to modify them in a way to where they go back to the original state so that you can continue to live in the main portion of the home. The choice is up to you. I know that the county is willing to help by getting the investigators -- I'm sorry -- the inspectors from the building department out to at least tell you what you need to do and so forth, if you want to set up a meeting with them. That won't cost you anything, but at least you can get an idea of where you stand. MR. HESTER: There is no money. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. MR. HESTER: I do not have a job. I'm fixing to sell my truck Page 72 November 18, 2011 so I can pay the land tax. It's going to be scrapped. I'm going to get maybe $400 for something I've got 32,000 into. And you're going to give me fines? CHAIRMAN KELLY: Well, what will happen is, we're going to go 90 days until you have -- give you the opportunity to at least see where you stand. If it's not then completed or found out of the violation by those 90 days, then another hearing will happen. It will come back to us again for what we call imposition of fines; that means from that point forward there will be a fine that will happen daily until it is taken care of. And we feel horrible that you're in this situation, but I can tell you you're not alone. There are a number of people -- MR. HESTER: Sir, I have a question. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Yes, sir. MR. HESTER: I'm going to call the fire department. I'm going to have them burn my house down. I will no longer be in your -- what is it? CHAIRMAN KELLY: Actually, that's a good thing. We've done that before with foreclosed homes that people didn't want to, you know, spend the time to fix up, and the fire department has used them for test homes and burn homes to practice on. So if that's something you want to do, I'm sure -- MR. HESTER: No, it's not something I want to do. I am not going to pay fines. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. MR. HESTER: I do not have money. I struggle with trying to eat. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Well, this -- if you did that, though, if you donated it to the fire department -- MR. HESTER: I get no home now. CHAIRMAN KELLY: True, true, but it would give you an opportunity to start over, perhaps. Page 73 November 18, 2011 MR. HESTER: Not here. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Okay. MR. HESTER: You know, we came to this country because of the taxation, the government controlling everything. We went to war with that country. I stood for our country. CHAIRMAN KELLY: And everyone appreciates what you've done and the sacrifices you've made. MR. HESTER: I got spit on, called a baby killer. CHAIRMAN KELLY: I understand. Without turning it into a political statement we're, again, sorry. MR. HESTER: This house hurts no one. CHAIRMAN KELLY: I understand, I understand. MR. HESTER: You can't even see it from the road. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Again, I can appreciate where you're coming from and your right to own land and to do with it what you like, believe me, but there are certain ordinances that are not there just for the other public. They're there for your safety as well. So I apologize. Okay. All right. MR. HESTER: Very well then. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Thank you, sir. Thank you. All right. Moving on to the next case. Joselino and Yolando Sanchez, Sandy Sanchez. Are the respondents here? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. BAKER: This is in reference to violation of Florida Building Code, 2007 Edition, Chapter 1, permit, Section 105.1. Description of violation: Fence constructed without Collier County building permits. Location/address where violation exists: 2530 4th Avenue Southeast, Naples, Florida, 34117; Folio No. 40920360000. Page 74 November 18, 2011 Name and address of owner; person in charge of violation location: Joselino and Yolando Sanchez and Sandy Sanchez, 2530 4th Avenue Southeast, Naples, Florida, 34117. Date violation first observed: June 3, 2011. Date owner/person in charge given notice of violation: June 6, 2011. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: July 6, 2011. Date of reinspection: September 29, 2011. Results of reinspection: The violation remains. MR. BALDWIN: Good morning. For the record, Patrick Baldwin, Collier County Code Enforcement. This is in reference to Case No. CEAU20110007445 dealing with the violation of a fence constructed without Collier County building permits located at 2530 4th Ave Southeast, Naples, Florida, 34117; Folio No. 40920360000. Service was given on June 6, 2011, via posting. I would now like to present case evidence in the following exhibits: Two photographs, the first one taken June 3, 2011, and the other one taken yesterday, November 17, 2011. MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to accept the photos. MR. KAUFMAN: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) Page 75 November 18, 2011 CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. MR. BALDWIN: I'd like to present the details of this case. I first observed this violation on June 3, 2011. I posted the property on June 6, 2011. The property has been vacant and a final judgment was recorded in 2009. I have not had any contact with the owners of this property. The bank has been maintaining the property once we identified it as a vacant, foreclosed home, but the fence violation still remains. CHAIRMAN KELLY: The bank's not interested in helping with that violation? MR. BALDWIN: It doesn't appear so, sir. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Questions from the board? MR. LEFEBVRE: Yeah, one big question is if this -- this is a foreclosed property owned by the bank? MR. BALDWIN: A final judgment was awarded in 2009, but they have yet to get a certificate of title. MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay. Should the bank have been noticed also? MR. BALDWIN: As of right now they're not the titleholder of the property. It's still under the -- Sanchez. MR. LEFEBVRE: Sanchez. CHAIRMAN KELLY: It one of the bank's, though, that you're able to communicate with and they know about it? MR. BALDWIN: They're aware of it. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. MS. FLAGG: Just for the record, the bank has been noticed, which is why they're maintaining the property. They've just elected not to address the fence issue. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. MR. KAUFMAN: The fence could just be removed, and that would be the end of the -- which doesn't seem to be a real big deal. MR. MIESZCAK: Nice fence; they just get a permit. Page 76 November 18, 2011 CHAIRMAN KELLY: There's no permits for the fence at all, correct? MR. BALDWIN: No, sir. MR. KAUFMAN: Motion we find them in violation. MR. MIESZCAK: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Do you have a recommendation? MR. BALDWIN: Yes. That the Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of $80.57 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by: One, obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition permit, inspections, and inspection of completion/occupy within blank days of this hearing or a fine of blank dollars per day will be imposed until the violation is abated; Two, the respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance 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 property owner. Page 77 November 18, 2011 CHAIRMAN KELLY: Somebody like to create a motion? MR. LEFEBVRE: I'd like to make a motion that $80.57, incurred in the prosecution of this case, be paid within 30 days, and abate all violations within 30 days or a $100 fine. MR. KAUFMAN: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. We have a first and a second. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: And it carries unanimously. Thanks, Patrick. Okay. Case No. 15, Maykol Calderon. Is the respondent here? Investigator, we'll swear you in. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. BAKER: This is in reference to violation of Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). Description of violation: No Collier County permit for a wooden structure with electric in the front of the residential structure. Location/address where violation exists: 1281 27th Street Southwest, Naples, Florida, 34117; Folio 37344880001. Name and address of owner; person in charge of violation location: Maykol Calderon, 4461 Pine Ridge Road, Naples, Florida, 34119. Page 78 November 18, 2011 Date violation first observed: June 27, 2011. Date owner/person in charge given notice of violation: September 14, 2011. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: October 5, 2011. Date of reinspection: October 25, 2011. Results of reinspection: The violation remains. MR. CONDOMINA: For the record, Investigator Danny Condomina, Collier County Code Enforcement. This is in reference to Case No. CESD20110009230 dealing with the violation no Collier County permit for wooden structure with electric in the front of residential structure located at 1281 27th Street Southwest, Naples, Florida, 34117; Folio No. 37344880001. Service was given on September 14, 2011. I would now like to present case evidence in the following exhibits: Two photographs taken by me June 27, 2011. MR. KAUFMAN: Motion to accept the exhibits. MR. MIESZCAK: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: It carries. MR. CONDOMINA: Details of case: This violation first observed on June 27, 2011. I checked the property card and several databases for permits. I could not find a permit for this chickee Page 79 November 18, 2011 structure with electric that is in bad condition. The permit for the home was pulled sometime in 2005. There was a final judgment for foreclosure recorded in April 2010, and then later on the order was vacated -- vacating judgment was recorded July 2011. As of today, there's no active foreclosure information recorded. I have not been in contact with the owner, and the property is vacant. And there's no permit as of today. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Is there any type of leniency as far as codes and ordinances goes for Native Americans and their type of structures? MR. CONDOMINA: There is in the Florida Building Code, but the chickee -- when it has electric, it still needs a permit. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. MR. KAUFMAN: Has anybody checked to see if that electric is hot? MR. CONDOMINA: No, sir. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Hot is a -- MR. CONDOMINA: Obviously. CHAIRMAN KELLY: It's just a term. MR. CONDOMINA: I haven't checked, no. MR. KAUFMAN: Make a motion we find it in violation. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? Page 80 November 18, 2011 (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Do you have a recommendation? MR. CONDOMINA: That the Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of$80.57 incurred in the prosecution of this case and abate all violations within 30 days and abate all violations by: Obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition permits, inspections, and certificate of completion/occupancy within X days of this hearing or a fine of X per day will be imposed until the violation is abated. Two, the respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance 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: My concern on this is a possible safety violation with EL (sic) out there. It probably would be prudent to check with FPL or whoever the electric company is out there to see if the electric to the house and to that box in front is turned off, which I would make as part of the recommendation. MR. LEFEBVRE: I don't know if you can force FPL to -- they don't have the ability to go and just turn off power to this tiki hut, or whatever it's called, and I don't think they can just turn off power if someone's paying -- MR. KAUFMAN: Well, that would be the question. This is in foreclosure and they vacated it? There's nobody living there? MR. CONDOMINA: It's vacant, and when I checked recently, it -- I mean, there's no active foreclosure. The last one was dismissed. In July -- I just had it. MR. LEFEBVRE: July 1 lth, I think you said. Page 81 November 18, 2011 MR. CONDOMINA: July 2011 it was vacated, so -- CHAIRMAN KELLY: Another issue with doing that is, if the pipes go directly to the main panel, you'd have to gain access to the inside of the home in order to shut that off. MR. KAUFMAN: Well, they would shut that off at the pole before it goes to the home if that's the case because -- the reason I bring this up is whether to give them 30 days to comply or longer or shorter. If it's a safety violation -- I don't know whether it is or it isn't, you know, by looking at pictures of the box, that concerns me that -- and it's right at the edge of the street. And children, being what they are, might become curious, so that's why I'm concerned about the electric there. MR. SMITH: Excuse me, Commissioners. On the power, FP&L does not turn off all the power to the foreclosed homes. You have to turn all your breakers off inside of your house. CHAIRMAN KELLY: If-- hang on. MR. SMITH: And at that time -- CHAIRMAN KELLY: Hang on. We're going to have to have you resay all of that -- MR. LEFEBVRE: Sworn in. CHAIRMAN KELLY: -- after we get you sworn in. MR. SMITH: Okay. CHAIRMAN KELLY: You're allowed to speak to the case. MR. SMITH: Oh, I've got a house out there, too. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Go ahead. We'll get you sworn in. MR. SMITH: Yeah. Thomas Smith. Hi. Everything I say is true. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. SMITH: Regarding the power. FP&L does not turn none of the power off to none of the foreclosed homes. What they require from you is that you turn off all your circuit breakers and leave Page 82 November 18, 2011 everything off. They don't want nothing on. Now, regarding your power to the outside, you will have to have access to inside of the house to cut the power to whatever is outside of the house. But they do not turn off the power. Because my house is in foreclosure right now, and the power is still on, has been on for the last two years. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. MR. SMITH: All the breakers off are (sic) in my house, but you can get into my house. If you got into my house, you could turn everything right back on, and that is their standard policy, because I asked them about that. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. MR. KAUFMAN: Thank you for the advice. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Thanks, Tom. Cool. All right. So does that help? I don't think we have the jurisdiction in order to do that. MR. KAUFMAN: I don't know. Does anybody besides me think this is a possible safety problem? MR. LEFEBVRE: Go ahead. MR. CONDOMINA: We can attempt to call FP&L and see what they can do about it. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Our deal is still with the owners, the respondents. We could still put that into the motion, and that would just be part of the violation. MR. CONDOMINA: I agree. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Because they are the ones that are going to get served this, correct? MR. CONDOMINA: Yes, sir. MR. LEFEBVRE: Have you been in contact with them? MR. CONDOMINA: No, sir. We did have the foreclosure team dealing with the bank that did the dismissal, but obviously we haven't received cooperation as of yet. Page 83 November 18, 2011 CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. MR. KAUFMAN: Okay. I'll try to fill in the blanks: 80.57 within 30 days, $200-a-day fine after that, and that the county will attempt to ascertain the safety of the outside electric that's located at the tiki hut. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. MR. MIESZCAK: Did you say days? I didn't hear days. MR. KAUFMAN: Thirty days. MR. MIESCZAK: Okay. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Seconded by Gerald? MR. LEFEBVRE: Yes. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All those in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: It carries unanimously. MS. RAWSON: Do you want to put in the order that you're telling the county to check on the safety? I mean, don't you think they'll just do that? CHAIRMAN KELLY: Go ahead. You can explain your intention behind that. MR. KAUFMAN: It would be much easier, obviously, if we were in contact with the owner of the property. We're not. I don't know who else to go to when you're dealing with the electric to see -- since it's right at the road on a pole, I am uncomfortable with that. I'm Page 84 November 18, 2011 sure there are children in the area. FP&L, community minded as they are, I'm sure would have no problem in letting us know that the box -- maybe they -- all you need to do is put a little lock on those boxes, and that would probably be enough to keep it safe. Those boxes do have a provision for a lock. MS. RAWSON: My problem is that you're ordering the county. You know, every time we say, if they don't do what they're supposed to do, then the county may abate the violation; so maybe you want to say, the county may contact FP&L. MR. KAUFMAN: Okay. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Well, I think that's what it was. The county was going to ascertain whether or not it was even feasible or possible. I think that's -- right? MR. KAUFMAN: Yes. MR. CONDOMINA: I was going to say, we do have where, like she said, from any method to bring the violation into -- maybe that can -- that will be part of our -- us abating it would maybe just -- MR. KAUFMAN: Great. MR. CONDOMINA: For the safety. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Got it, Jean? MS. RAWSON: Got it. CHAIRMAN KELLY: All right. Moving on to the next case, it's going to be -- is it Delzotto? Is that the next one? Because Rodriguez was the stip, correct? MS. BAKER: Just for clarification, did you vote on that motion. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Yeah. MS. BAKER: Okay. MR. MIESCZAK: That was fast. I didn't hear it either. MR. KAUFMAN: Lightning. CHAIRMAN KELLY: I voted on it, right? THE COURT REPORTER: Yes. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Yeah. It was so fast I don't remember. Page 85 November 18, 2011 (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. BAKER: This is in reference to violation of Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10 02.06(B)(1)(a), Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(e)(i), and Florida Building Code, 2007 edition, Chapter 1 permits, Section 105.1. Description of violation: Metal shed, garage conversion, and fence all built without Collier County building permits. Location/address where violation exists: 2921 2nd Avenue Southeast, Naples, Florida, 34117; Folio 40927600006. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Alejandro Cesar Delzotto, 7685 Tara Circle, Apartment 201, Naples, Florida, 34104. Date violation first observed: June 3, 2011. Date owner/person in charge given notice of violation: June 6, 2011. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: July 6, 2011. Date of reinspection: September 29, 2011. Results of reinspection: The violation remains. MR. BALDWIN: Good morning. For the record, Patrick Baldwin, Collier County Code Enforcement. This is in reference to Case No. CEAU20110007440 dealing with the violation: Metal shed, garage conversion, and a fence all built without Collier County building permits located at 2921 2nd Ave Southeast, Naples, Florida, 34117; Folio No. 40927600006. Service was given on June 6, 2011, via posting. I would like to present case evidence in the following exhibits: Two photographs taken June 3, 2011, and three photographs taken yesterday, November 17, 2011. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Motion? MR. KAUFMAN: Motion to accept the exhibits. MR. MIESCZAK: I'll second. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. Page 86 November 18, 2011 CHAIRMAN KELLY: Seconded. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Carries unanimously. MR. BALDWIN: The first photo is how we recognized the property as a vacant fore- -- well, possible foreclosure home. Picture of the fence. MR. KAUFMAN: Could you go back to the first picture again, just real quickly. All right. MR. BALDWIN: That's a picture of the garage. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Is that a permit or your posting? MR. BALDWIN: That was a notice that someone had left on the property that had nothing to do with us. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. MR. BALDWIN: That's the shed out back. And the last picture will be a picture of the fence. I'd like to present the following details of the case: Violation was first observed by Investigator Janis Potter on June 3, 2011. I then confirmed the violation on June 6, and I posted the property and sent a notice of violation regular and certified mail. I had made several attempts to contact the owner, but as of this date we have had no correspondence. There is not a lis pendens on this property, and -- or one has been -- I have not been able to find a Page 87 November 18, 2011 lis pendens that has been recorded on this property. The home is vacant. And that's all. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any questions for the county? MR. KAUFMAN: Motion to find them in violation. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Seconded. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Do you have a recommendation? MR. BALDWIN: I do. That the Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of $81.43 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by: One, obtain all required Collier County building permits or demolition permit, inspections and certificate of completion/occupancy within blank days of this hearing, or a fine of blank dollars per day will be imposed until the violations are abated; Two, the respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violations into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this order, Page 88 November 18, 2011 and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Would somebody like to create a motion? MR. MIESZCAK: I'll make a motion that the respondent pay all operating costs of$81.43 within 30 days, and $150-a-day fine in 30 days of this hearing. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. We have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. KAUFMAN: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: The motion carries. MR. BALDWIN: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Thank you, Patrick. The next case is going to be Thomas Smith. Is the respondent here? MR. SMITH: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KELLY: There he is. Welcome back, sir. MR. SMITH: Not really, but -- MR. KAUFMAN: We have to swear you in again because it wears off. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. BAKER: This is in reference to violation of Collier County Page 89 November 18, 2011 Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a), and Florida Building Code, 2007 edition, Chapter 1, permits, Section 105.1. Description of violation: Garage conversion, large structure, and fence on the property with no valid Collier County building permits. Location/address where violation exists: 2461 4th Avenue Northeast, Naples, Florida, 34120; Folio 40622180009. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Thomas P. Smith, 2461 4th Avenue Northeast, Naples, Florida, 34120. Date violation first observed: March 9, 2011. Date owner/person in charge given notice of violation: September 14, 2011. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: September 28, 2011. Date of reinspection: September 30, 2011. Results of reinspection: The violation remains. MS. POTTER: Good morning. For the record, Janis Potter, investigator, Collier County Code Enforcement. This is in reference to Case CESD20110003049, violations of Collier County Land Development Code, 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a), and Florida Building Code, 2007 edition, Chapter 1, permits, Section 105.1. The violations are located at 2461 4th Avenue Northeast, Naples, Florida, 34120; Folio ID 40622180009. Service was given on September 14, 2011. And I'd like to present three photographs to be entered in as evidence. The first is a photograph of the garage conversion. MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to accept the photographs. MS. POTTER: The second is a photograph of the shed, and the third photograph is a photograph taken of the fence at the front of the property. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. Page 90 November 18, 2011 MR. MIESCZAK: Has Mr. Smith seen these? You've seen the photos? MR. SMITH: They're okay. I'm not going to have a problem with the photos. MR. MIESZCAK: Okay. Motion to accept the second. MR. KAUFMAN: Second. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. We can see them. MS. POTTER: While doing research on another case on the property on March 9, 2011, I found a -- that there was a permit obtained in 1996 for a garage conversion that did not receive a certificate of completion as is missing several final inspections. There is also a shed on the property as well as a fence with no Collier County building permits. On May 3, 2011, I received a telephone call from the property owner. He told me that he no longer lives on the property, as he was served an eviction notice by the bank in 2009. He acknowledged that the garage conversion was not complete and he also stated there were no permits for the shed or the fence. Again, he was not living at the property, but he would stop by the property periodically to make sure that the structures were secure and Page 91 November 18, 2011 that the grass and the lawn were maintained. He also stated at the time that the property was for sale and there was a short sale pending to close in June; however, the sale did not take place, so the property is still vacant. The foreclosure team, who's been monitoring this case with me, has not received any response from the lender, and as such, the case was prepared for hearing. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Is that it for the county? MS. POTTER: Yes. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Mr. Smith, do you have anything to add? MR. SMITH: No. The only thing, the final on the garage is just an electrical. The bathroom needed the division between the panel and the sink. That has been done. That was done right after the county informed the contractor of the situation. The county failed to follow through, and then I didn't realize that they had failed to follow through with the final. All that needs is just someone to come out and make sure that the electric falls within the wall -- divider falls within the county permission, and that should be no big deal there. The fence, I didn't know I needed a permit for the fence, and I didn't know I needed a permit for the Ted shed on the back of the property. The bank does -- they foreclosed me in January of 2009. We went for a modification at the time, stayed in the house because I got a lawyer to do the modification, a realtor lawyer, and I paid him 15-, 1800 bucks to do that. Took about six months to get back, and the bank basically told me to forget it, they weren't going to remodify the house. So at that time -- because we were under a lot of stress waiting to be thrown out of the house basically -- so we went ahead and moved out of the house. At that time, I continued to go over and monitor the Page 92 November 18, 2011 house and maintain the house and the property and everything. But we've been out of the house now two-and-a-half years. The bank, I talked to them just a couple days ago. The bank told me to call their property management -- the people that monitor the property and will take care of it. I tried to do that a couple times. It's very hard to get ahold of these people. I am going to try again. But they did tell me that once they take and take control of the property, I will no longer be allowed on the property. In other words, they're going to gate lock the property, because there is a gate on the front. They will lock the property. They will have their maintenance people come in and take care of the property, but after that I'm not allowed on the property no more. So basically that's where it stands. The permitting for the fence, I don't have the money right now. I'm partially part-time working. I got a part-time job, but I don't have a job, so -- and that's where we're at. Me and my wife are in some pretty bad times right now. We are renting from some other people that are very, very nice. And we're still having money trouble and everything. And then we've got our grandkids dumped on us. They were abandoned by their mom. So we've got all these things going on right now. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Well, it's very admirable that you would still keep up somewhat with the property that, you know, has been foreclosed. And we appreciate the insight to it. We'll go ahead and see if there's a violation or not and go from there. MR. SMITH: Okay. MR. KAUFMAN: Has this been through the -- our foreclosure group? MS. FLAGG: Just as clarification, he's the owner of record. The bank has not taken title to this property, and it may be -- because we're seeing more and more that the banks are giving the property back to Page 93 November 18, 2011 the property owner. So we'll help him check to see the legal status of this property. MR. KAUFMAN: We have some contacts at the -- MS. FLAGG: We do. MR. KAUFMAN: That's good news. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Yeah. MR. KAUFMAN: Be happy to make a motion that we find it in violation. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. MR. MIESZCAK: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Pick one. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All right. And do you have a recommendation, Janis? MS. POTTER: I do. Recommendation is that the Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of$81.15 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days, and abate all violations by: Number 1, obtaining all required Collier County building permit or demolition permit, inspections, and certificate of completion/occupancy within blank number of days of this hearing, or a fine of blank dollars per day will be imposed until the violation is Page 94 November 18, 2011 abated; Number 2, the respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance 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: I have a question for the county. On this case -- I know we've had similar cases before -- is it best to encourage the bank to do something to have a shorter date or a longer date on the recommendation? MS. FLAGG: Well, in regard to permits, unless the bank wants to go to court and get the Court's authority to obtain a permit to do the internal work, they generally aren't -- they can get a permit with a court order if they're not the owner of record. What we need to do is find out what the bank's plans are, because I believe what I'm hearing is that they didn't actually foreclose in January '09. They may have filed the lis pendens on January '09, and those lis pendens may go on for years with (sic) the bank ever taking any action. MR. SMITH: Okay, question. The final for the house, will I have to pay for your inspector to come back out and finally sign off on the garage mod? CHAIRMAN KELLY: Somebody will. You know, we're not going to give you advice either way. We've seen people in the past that if they're already moving towards foreclosures, they just kind of walk away and let the bank take care of it. MR. SMITH: Well -- CHAIRMAN KELLY: But if you feel as though -- that this may come back into your lap and you want to move forward, you know, you or somebody is going to have to pay for a reapplication of the Page 95 November 18, 2011 original permit for the conversion, and then whatever inspections are remaining will be part of that, and they can just have an investigator come in and take care of it. The shed in the back would also need a permit, which is part of this violation. That should be pretty simple, I would assume. MR. SMITH: So once I apply for the permit, pay the fee for the permit, then you'll abate the -- whatever is left over? CHAIRMAN KELLY: Well, one more step. We do need that final inspection -- MR. SMITH: Oh, yeah. CHAIRMAN KELLY: -- certificate. MR. SMITH: Well, you'll have to have that inspector come out, right? CHAIRMAN KELLY: Right. Once that's done, then, yes, you would be in compliance, correct. MR. SMITH: All right. Because the fence is 90 percent gone. I basically gave a lot of the fence away to other people that wanted it. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. MR. SMITH: So it's basically -- the only pieces left is just in the front. But I'd still have to pull a permit for the remaining part of the fence. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Sure. MR. SMITH: Okay. MR. KAUFMAN: The boats that are there, are those your boats or -- MR. SMITH: No. They were customers' boats at the time. They refused to pay or didn't have the money to pay for the boats that are on the property. I have tried to -- I've removed two of the boats. I'm going to try to remove two more when finances are available. But the county has basically taken the boats that used to be able to be taken out there and disposed of for just the weight and the crushing up of them; they've changed that now. Now it's $70 to get rid of a vessel Page 96 November 18, 2011 from zero to 20 feet, and you have to remove the engine and the gas tanks from the vessels. Also, if you take a boat that's bigger than 20 feet, the fee to dispose of it is $370. So that kind of makes it hard for me to -- I can physically get the motors out, the gas tanks out. That's not an issue. The issue is the money to do it. The only thing I can think of for right now, with the vessels on the property, is to basically move them to another lot where I'm living at, which still puts me in violation of your code. But I don't know what else to do, because I haven't got the money to move those vessels; otherwise, they'd have been gone, because I don't want no issues with the bank, and I don't want no issues with the county. CHAIRMAN KELLY: I appreciate that. If somebody would like to make a motion? MR. KAUFMAN: I'll make a motion: The 81.15 to be paid within 30 days. MR. SMITH: That I could probably do, no problem. MR. KAUFMAN: A hundred and twenty days, that should give you some time to speak to the bank and to the county for the -- to see what can be done, and $100-a-day fine after the 120 days. Of course, if you have anything that you want to tell us prior to the expiration of the 120 days, I certainly recommend you come back to the board. MR. SMITH: Okay. MR. MIESCZAK: I make a motion -- I mean second the motion. CHAIRMAN KELLY: We have a motion and second. Any discussion? MR. LEFEBVRE: Just quickly. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Go ahead. MR. LEFEBVRE: Really, please get with the county. They have resources that they can get in touch with bank. Maybe there may be a way for you to work out an agreement where you can get your Page 97 November 18, 2011 house back. MR. SMITH: Well, I'm not interested in the house no more, no. MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay. Well, you've been very diligent in keeping -- going there and looking over the house, and when you -- it's kind of a gray area between the foreclosure and taking title, the bank taking title of the property, but I commend you for going over there, keeping an eye on it and everything. MR. SMITH: Well, I maintained the house across the street from me that's been vacant and is still vacant and is overgrown, as mine is right now. I used to go over there and cut the yard over there because I got tired of looking at it. MR. LEFEBVRE: Right. I give you a lot of credit for doing that. CHAIRMAN KELLY: So any more discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: We have a motion and a second. All in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: And the motion carries unanimously. Thanks for being here today, and thanks for helping out. MR. SMITH: All right. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Next case is going to be Jeffrey Lee Smith. Is the respondent here? (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. BAKER: This is in reference to violation of Collier County Page 98 Ili November 18, 2011 Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a), and Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(e)(i). Description of violation: Two chickee huts with electricity, shed, and a swimming pool with a spa at -- with expired Permit No. 2006080726. Location/address where violation exists: 240 8th Street Northeast, Naples, Florida, 34120; Folio 39260240008. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Jeffrey Lee Smith, Jr., 240 8th Street Northeast, Naples, Florida, 34120. Date violation first observed: July 21, 2011. Date owner/person in charge given notice of violation: July 21, 2011. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: August 20, 2011. Date of reinspection: September 23, 2011. Results of reinspection: The violation remains. MR. BALDWIN: Thank you. Good morning. For the record, Patrick Baldwin, Collier County Code Enforcement. This is in reference to Case No. CESD20110010017 dealing with the violation: Two chickee huts with electricity, shed, and a swimming pool with spa with an expired Permit No. 2006080726 located at 240 8th Street Northeast, Naples, Florida, 34120; Folio No. 39260240008. Service was given on July 21, 2011, via posting. I would like to present case evidence in the following exhibits: Three photographs taken July 21, 2011, one aerial photo of the property from 2011, and three photographs taken yesterday, November 17, 2011. MR. KAUFMAN: Motion to accept the exhibits. MR. MIESZCAK: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? (No response.) Page 99 November 18, 2011 CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. MR. BALDWIN: The first picture is a picture from -- what you see from the road of the property -- can hardly see it. But the first picture -- from the road, sorry. That's a picture of the north side of the property. That is the chickee hut to the north side. And that's a picture of the front of the house. MR. KAUFMAN: Is the house occupied? MR. BALDWIN: No, it's vacant. This is an aerial photo. On the top of the aerial photo, I have circled -- I have one of the chickee huts, and then in the middle there what appears to be two separate pools or one connecting pool or a pool and a spa. And then at the bottom there is another chickee hut that is circled. And in the back of the photograph here there was a shed. But as of yesterday, that shed was removed. I don't know when it was removed, but when I got access to the property yesterday from the neighbor to get a better picture of the location behind the house, I noticed that the shed was removed. This is -- I gained access from the neighbor. This is -- this is the chickee hut to the south side of the property. It's actually a beautiful pool and setup they have going there. MR. MIESCZAK: Party town. MR. LEFEBVRE: There might be a buyer. Page 100 November 18, 2011 MR. BALDWIN: That is, again, trying to get a good picture of something that's going on back there with the chickee huts. And they have almost like a grotto, like rock thing setup there. It's pretty cool. MR. MIESCZAK: Let's go. MR. BALDWIN: And that is another picture of the chickee hut from the north side. You can see the electricity, because the satellite dish is there. And that's all. I'd like to present the details of the case now. In July of this year I responded to a complaint about a vacant and foreclosed home. While on the property, and during the research phase of my investigation, I observed that there were two chickee huts with electricity, a shed, and a swimming pool with spa all built without Collier County building permits. The swimming pool did have a permit but the permit was never CO'ed. I've tried to make several attempts to contact to speak with the owner, but to this date it still not has happened (sic). The home is vacant as of right now, and there is a lis pendens that was recorded on November 7, 2009. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. MR. KAUFMAN: Is the pool green or -- MR. BALDWIN: Foreclosure team was working with the bank. It's CitiMortgage, and they passed it back to me. It was -- we noted that it was possibly green. I could not determine if the pool water was green or not. Just yesterday was the first time that I actually could see, and I couldn't tell if the pool was boarded. I couldn't tell if there was water there or if it was just black water. The aerial photo does show that it's black. I couldn't determine. But the bank is aware that there -- that there could possibly be an unmaintained pool. MR. KAUFMAN: And as far as the address, I did notice that the location of the violation is 240 8th Street, and the respondent shows Page 101 November 18, 2011 that as his address as well. MR. BALDWIN: Yes. MR. KAUFMAN: But there's nobody there? MR. BALDWIN: Correct. MR. KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. LEFEBVRE: Make the motion that a violation does exist. MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second the motion. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Do you have a recommendation? MR. BALDWIN: Yes. That the Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of $81.15 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by: One, obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition permit, inspections, and certificate of completion/occupancy, within blank days of this hearing or a fine of blank dollars per day will be imposed until the violation is abated; Two, the respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Page 102 November 18, 2011 Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this order, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Somebody like to make a motion? MR. LEFEBVRE: I'd like to make a motion that the $81.15 incurred in the prosecution of this case be paid within 30 days, and within 45 days the fine be abated or $150-a-day fine will be imposed. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Do we have a second? MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second that motion. MR. KAUFMAN: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Seconded. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All those in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: And it carries unanimously. MR. BALDWIN: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Thank you. Next case, Hearing No. 21, John C. Boyer, Betty Jane Savard-Boyer. Are the respondents here? MR. KAUFMAN: Yes. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Would you like to come on up. MS. SAVARD-BOYER: From sitting so long. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. BAKER: This is in reference to violation of ordinance Page 103 November 18, 2011 Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a), and Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(e). Description of violation: Observed structure in the rear of the yard behind main structure which was permitted for a den/storage now converted to a living space with plumbing and air conditioning, and no permits were obtained. Location/address where violation exists: 514 105th Avenue North, Unit A, Naples, Florida, 34108; Folio 62841960004. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: John C. Boyer and Betty Jane Savard-Boyer, 479 Palm Court, Naples, Florida, 34108. Date violation first observed: April 15, 2011. Date owner/person in charge given notice of violation: May 3, 2011. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: June 1, 2011. Date of reinspection: September 7, 2011. Results of reinspection: The violation remains. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Hang on a second, Investigator, before you get started. Number 2 in the statement of violation, description of violation, it's talking about a structure that was permitted but then at the end of the line it says, no permits obtained. MS. BAKER: No permits for the conversion. It was converted into living space. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. So they were obtained for the shed? MS. BAKER: It was permitted as a den/storage, and the supervisor can probably -- CHAIRMAN KELLY: I gotcha. But never obtained to live in it? Got it. All right. MR. LEFEBVRE: Isn't a den for living? Okay. CHAIRMAN KELLY: It should be fine. MR. BOSA: For the record, Ralph Bosa, Collier County Code Page 104 November 18, 2011 Enforcement. This is in reference to Case No. CESD20110002585 dealing with the violation of a structure at the rear of the property originally permitted for a den or storage. It had improvements done for living space with plumbing and air conditioning, and no permits were obtained. It's located at 514 105th Avenue North, Naples, Florida, 34108; Folio No. 62841960004. Service was given on May 3, 2011. I'd like to present case evidence in the following exhibits: Four photos taken on April 5th by Investigator Pulse. MR. KAUFMAN: Has the respondent seen them? MS. SAVARD-BOYER: Yes, I've seen them. CHAIRMAN KELLY: And you're okay with them? MS. SAVARD-BOYER: Yes. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. MR. KAUFMAN: Motion to accept the exhibits. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Do we have a second? MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second the motion. CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. MR. BOSA: That is the front of the structure. That's the driveway driving back into the structure, just behind the main structure. Page 105 November 18, 2011 MR. KAUFMAN: It's a detached structure, is that -- MR. BOSA: It is -- yes, it is detached, detached structure. That is inside of the structure; kitchen, full appliances, and a small bathroom with toilet and running water to the shower. I'll present the details of the case. Received a complaint that the rear structure originally permitted as a den/storage was now being rented out. On April 5th, Investigator Pulse conducted a site visit with permission of the owner, took pictures of the exterior and interior of the structure. Further research shows that the structure itself is permitted but not to be included plumbing or air conditioning. On April 28, Investigator Pulse spoke with the owner in regards to the violation via phone. We have been in constant communication with the owner and the engineer she hired to help her with this conversion, to obtain the proper permits for the improvements. As of today -- today's date, the permits have not been applied for. And she does have somebody living there currently. She did assure me that the person is moving out and should be completely moved out by the end of next weekend. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Anything else from the county? MR. BOSA: No, that's it. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Do we have any questions for the county? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All right. Your turn. You can speak as plainly as you'd like. Just kind of give us an idea of what's going on. MS. SAVARD-BOYER: Okay. Unfortunately, I am a -- well, not unfortunately. I'm a realtor. Unfortunately, we purchased this property for sale by owner in 2005. The owner had -- the back unit was rented. I have a copy of what was in that back unit along with the fact that it was a gentleman with a child that lived back there. Page 106 November 18, 2011 So we naturally thought that it could be rented. I mean, it has electricity, it had washer/dryer. You know, everything was there. Driveway was there. It's a concrete driveway. It was there. We would certainly like to have it permitted. The electricity, I understand, was permitted. We will -- we will get new air conditioning, because we've had -- and I have -- as you can see, I have lots of paperwork here that I was going to give you. We've had an A/C inspector out there or an A/C appliance person. That was put in in 1987. So -- probably with or without a permit, there is nothing we can find. As far as the plumbing goes, we had a licensed plumber. I have all of the -- a copy of all their cards with me. And the electrician was also out there. We also had a structural engineer out there. The gentleman that we've been working with has copies -- all these copies were sent back to him. The owner of this property also owned -- and I have a copy here. The lot is two lots less three feet. But in the -- on the corner, Lots 26 and 27 were owned by his wife. Okay. Twenty-six and twenty-seven -- well, there's a large building, and then there's a garage that they built there. The garage -- we had to give three feet -- we didn't have to. Three feet were taken away from one of our lots so that the garage did not have to be torn down. I had no -- we had no idea that this was not -- that it was in violation. We had no idea of that, and I didn't know that until just this spring. We had all the proper paperwork done. I mean, we had -- being a realtor, we had everything taken care of, but there was no thought of checking with the county to see if permits were done back in the '70s or '80s whenever this structure -- well, obviously it was built in the back part in '87 when the A/C was put in. We have removed -- there was a shed that was within 15 feet of the back cyclone fence. We did remove the shed. The man that's Page 107 November 18, 2011 living in there is going to be moving out. We -- I mean, it's a perfectly good residence. It's not hazardous. If the -- if the people that live in the front want to use it for -- if family is coming to visit them, we'd like that to be used. But we do want to correct this problem. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Is the county's position that this cannot have a rental on it, or is it just that we need to get the permits? MR. BOSA: That's correct. It's not supposed to have a rental back there, especially if it's not permitted for the plumbing and the A/C, because I don't know what -- it was permitted for electricity, but I don't know what alterations were done. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Of course. If we did get the permits, though, and everything was CO'ed, could they use that as living quarters for a family member from the main home? MR. BOSA: As far as I know -- I'm not 100 percent sure, but I think she would have to get a variance if she wanted somebody to rent to be there permanently. MR. MIESZCAK: Can I ask one question? Is there -- when you said that there were an extra lot or two, do you get one tax bill or do you get two tax bills? MS. SAVARD-BOYER: No. We only get one tax bill. MR. MIESCZAK: So it's -- basically then it's one piece of property? MS. SAVARD-BOYER: It's a double lot less three feet on the west side. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. So there's a good chance she might be able to get that variance, if needed? MR. BOSA: There could be a chance, yes. I can help her with that. MR. LEFEBVRE: The thing is, she stated that she'd want to use -- or have the tenant that's in the front building use the secondary -- this building as, like, a guest residence, which would be allowed, correct? Page 108 November 18, 2011 MR. BOSA: That's -- as far as I know, it is, but we can confirm that with the building official. MR. LEFEBVRE: But it cannot be rented out as -- MR. BOSA: No. MR. LEFEBVRE: It would be -- it cannot be rented out. It's single-family use there. MR. BOSA: Yes. MR. LEFEBVRE: One residence. MR. BOSA: Actually, it's a duplex. Her main home is a duplex. She has two renters, if I'm correct. MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay. MR. KAUFMAN: This is in Naples Park. MR. BOSA: Yes. Yes, sir. MR. KAUFMAN: They have sewer there? MR. BOSA: As far as I know, yes. MR. KAUFMAN: So as far as the permitting and that detached building, what is it lacking as far as permitting? MR. BOSA: The -- all the plumbing permitting. She has to get a plumbing inspection. The application itself back in 1987, when the building was permitted for -- the building electricity says -- right there it says, no HVAC, no plumbing at all. So she would have to get a permit for just the HVAC, because there is ductwork in there and everything. MS. SAVARD-BOYER: We did have a plumber look at it, and he didn't see any problem. And I don't have his report. It's with someone else. CHAIRMAN KELLY: That's okay. We believe you. The structure looks very nice. We're just trying to kind of get a feel for how long we think that it's going to take you so we're as fair as possible. MR. LEFEBVRE: There would be an after-the-fact permit, is what it would have to be. Page 109 November 18, 2011 CHAIRMAN KELLY: Correct. MR. LEFEBVRE: So an engineer would have to go in there and MS. SAVARD-BOYER: I don't care. Anybody can go in and check it out. The man that's there is a salesman. He's only there on the weekends. He travels Florida selling cigars, and he's been no problem. And we've had no problem with anybody back there. MR. KAUFMAN: What I think Mr. Kelly was talking about is a permit by affidavit so that the work is there, it meets code, and an engineer or -- MS. SAVARD-BOYER: Exactly. MR. KAUFMAN: -- signs off on it, and that will take care of that. And if a husband and wife lived in the first building and they had a fight, he could go sleep in the back building. MS. SAVARD-BOYER: You're funny. MR. MIESZCAK: He is funny. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Well, do we want to determine if there's a violation? MR. LEFEBVRE: I make a motion that there is a violation. MR. MIESCZAK: I'll second that motion. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Doesn't mean you're a bad Page 110 November 18, 2011 person. MS. SAVARD-BOYER: Oh, thank you. CHAIRMAN KELLY: It just -- it is what it is. MS. SAVARD-BOYER: Well, I was one of those people that bought a house and there were violations on it. Who would think that you needed a permit for a fence? I mean, I've been selling real estate for 30 years, most of the time in Minnesota. You don't need a permit for a fence. But anyhow, it's just different here, and you don't realize it. And a lot of these people that buy down here are from other states, and they don't understand. CHAIRMAN KELLY: I'm really glad you said that, because as you probably know, this is televised, and -- MS. SAVARD-BOYER: Oh, Lord. CHAIRMAN KELLY: And most of our -- most of our respondents are in the same position you are, and it's so glad to hear someone who's in the industry to realize that, you know, it's just unfair, but that's the way it happens. So please get not only a title search, but also a property search done. MS. SAVARD-BOYER: Well, I had all that. We had a title search done. We have title insurance. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Right. MS. SAVARD-BOYER: We had all of that. CHAIRMAN KELLY: But there's a new -- a new property search done in addition to -- MS. SAVARD-BOYER: This is just -- I know. CHAIRMAN KELLY: -- the title search. MS. SAVARD-BOYER: This is just recent. CHAIRMAN KELLY: It is very recent. MS. SAVARD-BOYER: But it wasn't in 2005 or when people came to paradise. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Correct. It's still paradise. Supervisor, do you have a recommendation? Page 111 November 18, 2011 MR. BOSA: Yes, I do. That the Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of $81.15 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by: Obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition permit, inspections and certificate of completion/occupancy within X amount of days of this hearing, or a fine of X amount per day will be imposed until the violation is abated. Number 2, any renters in structure must vacate property within X amount of days or X amount of days -- X amount per day will be imposed. The respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to contact a final -- conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance 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: I have a question of the respondent. I know you're going through this process to get all the I's dotted and the T's crossed. How long do you think that's going to take you to get it all done? MS. SAVARD-BOYER: Well, I was just going to say, certainly not as long as it takes the bank to take over a property, but anyhow. We would try to get it done as soon as possible, but if we can't correct it, I mean, if-- we can correct the A/C. I mean, that isn't a problem. But the plumbing certainly seems to be working. There's a cleanout right there on the concrete and everything. Everything's been done right. In answer to your question how long will it take to be done, well, it's season now, and people are down and people are very busy. And it's taken us months to get these other four people to come out and just Page 112 November 18, 2011 check it, and I even offered -- we even offered to pay them. They don't want anything. They just need the time to get there and look at it. So in answer to your question, if we could have, you know, three months, we should be able to get it done. MR. KAUFMAN: Let me try filling in the blanks, if I can. You want to put that back up on the screen. MS. BAKER: No -- MR. KAUFMAN: It was. I got the 81.15 from it. It was there and gone, I thought. MS. BAKER: We modified a copy. It's not a very clean copy. MR. KAUFMAN: Oh, okay. Operational costs in the amount of 81.15 to be paid within 30 days, and 180 days, six months, to get everything done that you need to get done, and $100-a-day fine after the six months. Hopefully that should -- MS. SAVARD-BOYER: Yeah. Can I ask a question? MR. KAUFMAN: Sure. MS. SAVARD-BOYER: Suppose we decide that we don't want to use it as that and we just use it as storage for stuff-- you know, down here you have a lot of stuff-- what do I have to do to remove the -- you know, remove the kitchen or -- CHAIRMAN KELLY: Let me help you with that. Let him finish his motion -- MS. SAVARD-BOYER: I'm sorry. CHAIRMAN KELLY: That's okay -- and then we'll get back to that, because that's absolutely an option. MR. KAUFMAN: Okay. So that's 81.15 within 30 days, 180 days to get it permitted or whatever you need to do to come into compliance, or $100-a-day fine thereafter. And as far as vacating the property, you said that the gentleman was moving out in 30 -- in a week? MS. SAVARD-BOYER: He's gone by the -- he said he'd be out Page 113 November 18, 2011 by the end of November, but he told me that he'd be out -- he's going to be out, like, right after Thanksgiving. MR. KAUFMAN: Okay. Thirty days would be sufficient to vacate -- MS. SAVARD-BOYER: Oh. MR. KAUFMAN: -- vacate the property or $100 a day after that. MR. MIESCZAK: I'll second the motion. CHAIRMAN KELLY: A motion and a second. Now discussion. To answer your questions, all you would need to do is turn it back into the original storage area that it was from the original permit, which means remove the plumbing and the air conditioning, I believe. I think that's pretty much all that you said was put in there. So take out the toilet, you know, take out the sink, cap them off. MS. SAVARD-BOYER: Can I ask you a question? CHAIRMAN KELLY: Yeah. MS. SAVARD-BOYER: If it was permitted with electric for a den, why -- I don't understand how it was permitted as a den with electric and no A/C. We're in Florida. CHAIRMAN KELLY: They may mean central A/C, whereas, you might just put one in the window. Like we call them a window banger. You might still be able to use something like that. MS. SAVARD-BOYER: Oh, okay. CHAIRMAN KELLY: But there's two different types of units. So maybe they're referring to the larger units. And but it -- whatever it specifically said was excluded from the original permit you wouldn't be able to have. And the investigators can get you in touch with the building department who will go item by item and let you know what is and isn't acceptable. But, quite honestly, the pictures showed something that looked in very good condition. MS. SAVARD-BOYER: Oh, it's nice. Page 114 November 18, 2011 CHAIRMAN KELLY: You may be able to just get an engineer to sign off on that for a few hundred dollars. MS. SAVARD-BOYER: Okay, thank you. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. So we do have a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: And the motion carries unanimously. MS. SAVARD-BOYER: Thank you so much. CHAIRMAN KELLY: So basically you've got six months. If you run into problems or, you know, there's a snag or something, come back before the time expires; we'll see if we can't get you an extension so that you're, you know, staying in the good graces. MS. SAVARD-BOYER: Very good. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Thank you. MS. SAVARD-BOYER: Thank you. MR. BOSA: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Next is going to be Paul and Jacqueline Richards. Are the respondents here? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: No. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) Page 115 November 18, 2011 MS. BAKER: This is in reference to violation of Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a), and 2007 Florida Building Code, Chapter 4, Section 424.2.17. Description of violation: Permit No. 2010040206 expired on October 2, 2010. No certificate of completion obtained. Temporary safety barrier has fallen down and is not secure. 580 -- I'm sorry. Location address where violation exists: 580 24th Avenue Northeast, Naples, Florida, 34120; Folio 37748320002. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Paul Richards and Jacqueline Richards, 580 24th Avenue Northeast, Naples, Florida, 34120. Date violation first observed: October 22, 2010. Date owner/person in charge given notice of violation: August 30, 2011. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: September 14, 2011. Date of reinspection: September 20, 2011. Results of reinspection: Violation remains. MS. POTTER: Good afternoon. For the record, Janis Potter, Collier County Code Enforcement investigator. This is in reference to Case CESD20100020099, violation of Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a), and Florida Building Code, Chapter 4, Section 424.2.17. Violation located at 580 24th Avenue Northeast, Naples, Florida, 34120; Folio ID 37748320002. The property and courthouse were posted on August 30, 2011. I'd like to present case evidence: A photograph taken by myself yesterday, November 17, 2011, showing a pool and no barrier. MR. KAUFMAN: Motion to accept the photos. MR. MIESZCAK: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? Page 116 November 18, 2011 MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. MS. POTTER: Okay. This case is for an unsecured pool with no protective barrier. The original swimming pool permit was obtained in 2007. That permit was reapplied for twice, once in 2009 and again in 2010. Fence permit was obtained in 2009. That permit was reapplied for in 2010. At one point temporary orange fencing was installed; however, that fencing was not sturdy and over time fell down and has been removed. No final inspections were performed on that fence, and the permit expired in October of 2010. While serving the notice of violation to the property owner on November 7, 2011, he indicated to me that he was not able to reapply for either permits on account of financial reasons. And, for the record, Mr. Richards was here earlier this morning but had to leave due to employment reasons. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Is that it for the county? MS. POTTER: Yes. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Do we have any questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Is there -- MR. KAUFMAN: Motion to find them in violation. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Do we have any discussion? Page 117 November 18, 2011 (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Do you have a recommendation? MS. POTTER: Okay. County's recommendation is that the Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of$82.29 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by: Number 1, obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition permit, inspections, and certificate of completion/occupancy within blank number of days of this hearing or a fine of blank number of dollars per day will be imposed until the violation is abated; Number 2, must erect an approved, protected -- protective pool barrier to avoid safety concerns, and/or must apply for and obtain Collier County building permits for a permanent pool enclosure and protective barrier and follow through to certificate of completion within blank number of days of this hearing or a fine of blank number of dollars per day will be imposed until the violation is abated; and, Number 3, the respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this order, Page 118 November 18, 2011 and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. MR. KAUFMAN: I have one question. Is the pool empty? MS. POTTER: I asked that question to the property owner, and he said it was empty; there was no water in it. MR. KAUFMAN: Okay. So you won't drown, but you'll have a concussion from the fall. Okay. I'd like to take a shot at this. Eight-two ninety-nine. MS. POTTER: Eight-two twenty-nine. MR. KAUFMAN: Eighty-two twenty-nine paid within 30 days, and the violation should be abated in seven days or a $250-a-day fine. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Is that for Part 1 or Part 2? Because Part 1 is to -- MR. KAUFMAN: Part 1. Part 2 is we need something done to ensure nobody falls in the pool, and that should be done -- well, seven days is about as short a time as you can go. Am I right, Jean? MS. RAWSON: (Nods head.) MR. KAUFMAN: So I don't even know if we should address that if we address the first one. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Do we have a second? MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second the motion. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. We have a motion and a second. Discussion? MR. KAUFMAN: I see a quizzical look on Jen's face. MS. BAKER: Go ahead. CHAIRMAN KELLY: It's going to be difficult for them to get any permits in seven days. And I can see why the recommendation was split into two parts. I agree with the seven days and $250-per-day fine for Part 2. For Part 1, I'm thinking 30 days maybe would be more appropriate. MR. LEFEBVRE: I think 30 days is a long time. CHAIRMAN KELLY: For. Part 1, just to get the CO? I mean, Page 119 November 18, 2011 Part 2 is to put the temporary -- MR. LEFEBVRE: I see what you're saying. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Yeah. I think it is a health and safety, which is why we need the barrier within seven days. Am I reading this correct? MS. BAKER: Uh-huh. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Yeah, so -- MR. KAUFMAN: So the barrier is Part 2, is what you're talking about. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Correct. Barrier is Part 2. Part 1 would be the actual permit and COs. MR. KAUFMAN: I'll modify my motion, if that's what the board is for. We've got nods. Okay. MR. MIESCZAK: You're saying that No. 1 is 30 days and No. 2 is 7 days? CHAIRMAN KELLY: Correct. MR. KAUFMAN: Correct. MR. MIESZCAK: I'll modify my second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. MR. LEFEBVRE: Same fine amount for both? MR. KAUFMAN: Yes. MS. BAKER: Can you state that again, what the fine amount was. MR. KAUFMAN: The fine is $250 a day for Part 1, and $250 a day for Part 2. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Jean, you've got both of those? MS. RAWSON: I do. Thank you. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. So we have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? Page 120 November 18, 2011 MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: And it carries. Great. Thanks, Jean. MS. RAWSON: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. That concludes all of our hearings. Now we're going on to No. 5, old business, skipping No. 1 because it was extended for time, to No. 2, Steven T. Hovland and Melanie Ann Hovland, and the respondents are not here. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: This is in reference to case CESD20100019758. Cristina, would you like to read it in? MS. PEREZ: Yes. For the record, code enforcement supervisor Cristina Perez. Violations: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). Location: 7850 Friendship Lane, Naples, Florida; Folio No. 00103840400. Description: Shed, wood decking, and garage converted to an apartment without first obtaining Collier County building permits. Past orders: On June 23, 2011, 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, OR4698, Page 121 November 18, 2011 Page 1335, for more information. The property is not in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of November 18, 2011. The fines and costs to date are described as follows: Order Item No. 1 and 2, fines at the rate of$150 per day for the period between October 22, 2011, through November 18, 2011, 28 days, for the total of$4,200. Fines continue to accrue. Order Item No. 5, operational costs of$81.15 have not been paid. Total amount to date, $4,281.15. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Do we have a motion? MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to approve as presented. MR. KAUFMAN: Seconded. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: And it carries. Next case is Jennifer Carolyn Samules. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. ASARO: For the record, Tony Asaro, Collier County Code Enforcement Department. Board of County Commissioners versus Jennifer Carolyn Sames. Violations: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). Location: 4320 14th Street Northeast, Naples Florida; Folio No. Page 122 November 18, 2011 39602680006. Description: Canceled Permit No. 2008040049 for a single-family home with carport/shutters and permit. Permit No. 2008040055 for a guesthouse. Past orders: On August 25, 2011, 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, OR4718, Page 2032, for more information. The property is not in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders, and -- as of November 18, 2011. The fines and costs to date are described as follows -- as the following: Order Item No. 1 and 2, fines at a rate of$200 per day for the period between October 25, 2011, November 18, 2011, 25 days, for the total of$5,000. Fines continue to accrue. Order No. 5, operational costs of$81.15 have not been paid. Total amount to date is $5,081.15. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Thank you. MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to impose the fine. MR. KAUFMAN: Second. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All those favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: And the motion carries. Page 123 November 18, 2011 Thank you, Tony. MR. ASARO: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Rodriguez is already taken care of, so moving to -- MS. BAKER: No. MS. PEREZ: This is a different Rodriguez. MS. BAKER: This is a different Rodriguez. MR. MIESCZAK: Different Rodriguez? CHAIRMAN KELLY: See, I thought so. All right. Dig it back out. Go ahead. Sorry. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. PEREZ: This is in reference to CEB Case No. CESD20110006525. Violations: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a), and the Florida Building Code, 2007 edition, Chapter 1, permits, Section 105.1. Location: 2620 22nd Avenue Northeast, Naples, Florida; Folio No. 40295960009. Description: The following permits are expired: No. 2003061529 for a pool; No. 200302602 (sic) for a pool cage; and No. 2003020399, screen enclosure with pan roof; fence on the property with no valid Collier County permits. Past orders: On September 22, 2011, the Code Enforcement Board issued a findings 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, OR4728, Page 857, for more information. The property is not in compliance with the -- with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of November 18, 2011. The orders and costs to date are described as the following: Order Item No. 1 and 2, fines at the rate of$200 per day for the period between October 23, 2011, through November 18, 2011, 27 days, for Page 124 November 18, 2011 the total of$5,400. Fines continue to accrue. Order Item No. 5, operational costs of$81.43 have not been paid. Total amount to date, $5,481.43. MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to impose the fine. MR. KAUFMAN: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: And it carries. Moving on to Ofelina and Dean Patten. Are the respondent here? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. PEREZ: This is in reference to CEB Case No. CESD2011007245. Violations: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). Location: 4530 22nd Street (sic) Northeast, Naples, Florida; Folio No. 39659120001. Description: Swimming Pool Permit No. 2004031700, expired on September 12, 2004, missing a 10-day spot survey and fees outstanding; Screen Cage Permit 2004042999, expired on November 17, 2004. Missing 10-day spot survey; shed on property, no valid Page 125 November 18, 2011 Collier County permit obtained. Past orders: On September 22, 2011, the Code Enforcement Board issued a findings 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, OR4728, Page 873, for more information. The property is not in compliance with the Collier County -- with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of November 18, 2011. The fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order No. 1 and 2, fines at the rate of$250 per day for the period between October 14, 2011, through November 18, 2011, 36 days, for the total of$9,000. Fines continue to accrue. Order Item No. 5, operational costs of$80.86 have not been paid. Total amount to date, $9,080.86. MR. MIESCZAK: Motion to impose the fines. MR. KAUFMAN: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: The motion carries unanimously. Now to Valerie Lojewski and Carol Nelson. Are the respondents here? MS. PEREZ: (Shakes head.) (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) Page 126 November 18, 2011 MS. PEREZ: This is in reference to CEB No. CESD20080159 -- 15799 (sic). Violations: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.01(B)(1)(a). Violation location: 330 Wilson Boulevard South, Naples, Florida. Folio No. 3722080008 (sic). Past orders: On September 22, 2011, the Code Enforcement Board issued a findings 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, OR4728, Page 859, for more information. The property is not in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of November 18, 2011. The fines and costs to date described as following: Order Item No. 1 and 3, fines at the rate of$200 per day for the period between October 23, 2011, through November 18, 2011, 27 days, for the total of$5,400. Fines continue to accrue. Order Item No. 2 and 4, fines at the rate of$200 per day for the period between September 30, 2011, through November 18, 2011, 50 days, for the total of$10,000. Fines continue to accrue. Order Item No. 7, operational costs of$81.15 have not been paid. The total amount to date, $15,481.15. MR. MIESCZAK: Motion to approve the imposition of fines. MR. KAUFMAN: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. Page 127 November 18, 2011 MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: And the motion carries. Moving on to Sandra Sage. No respondent. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. PEREZ: For the record, code enforcement, Cristina Perez. This is in reference to CEB Case No. CELU20100019962. Violations: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 2.02.03. Location: 3135 Ravenna Way, Naples, Florida; Folio No. 00209120008. Description: The storage of several boats and unlicensed trailers on the property not identified as the property owner's and not allowed -- and not allowable use for the agricultural zoning district where this property is located. Past orders: On September 22, 2011, the Code Enforcement Board issued a findings 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, OR4728, Page 889, for more information. The property is not in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of November 18, 2011. The fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order Item No. 1 and 2, fines at the rate of$150 per day for the period between September 28, 2011, through November 18, 2011, 52 days, for the total of$7,800. Fines continue to accrue. Order Item No. 5, operational costs of$80.57 have not been paid. Total amount to date is $7,880.57. MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to approve imposition of fines. MR. KAUFMAN: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? Page 128 November 18, 2011 (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Motion carries unanimously. Next one is Krista Irizarry -- MS. PEREZ: Irizarry. CHAIRMAN KELLY: -- and John Irizarry. Apologies. Didn't mean to beat up your name like that. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. PEREZ: For the record, code enforcement supervisor Cristina Perez. This is in reference to Case No -- CEB Case No. CEV20100018622. Violations: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 2.01.00(A), now found in Code of Laws and Ordinances Article III, Chapter 130-95. Location: 105 16th Street Southeast, Naples, Florida; Folio No. 39210380002. Descriptions: Many unlicensed and inoperable vehicles and trailers on the Estates-zoned property, two Volks beetles, vans, commercial trailers, and more. Past orders: On May 22, 2011, the Code Enforcement Board issued a findings of fact and conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached order of the board, Page 129 November 18, 2011 OR4690, Page 273, for more information. The property is not in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of November 18, 2011 . The fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order Item No. 1 and 2, fines at the rate of$100 per day for the period between October 24, 2011, through November 18, 2011, 26 days, for the total of$2,600. Fines continue to accrue. Order Item No. 5, operational costs of$80 have not been paid. Total amount to date, $2,680. County would like to recommend that the respondent be granted a six-month extension to allow the respondent to work with the Golden Gate Estates Civic Association, who are currently working -- are working in the process of revising the vehicle ordinance for a possible alternative solution. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Do we have a motion? MR. KAUFMAN: Do we have a respondent? CHAIRMAN KELLY: Well, sir, if you want to chat. MR. IRIZARRY: Well, I mean, I just can't -- you know, like I said, just like last time, I can't understand why I can't keep my own personal bug on my property without having to -- I don't have the money to get it fixed. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Sure. MR. IRIZARRY: I mean, you move out there to -- you know, it's not in anybody's way, and I have pictures of-- CHAIRMAN KELLY: That's all right. I just assumed that, you know, because the county was recommending a six-month extension, we would -- MR. IRIZARRY: And last time we were here you said there weren't going to be any fines imposed until, you know, we came this time. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Right. MR. IRIZARRY: And they say I've got $2,000 in fines. You Page 130 November 18, 2011 said, you know, that there weren't going to be any fines imposed until we have this meeting, if it comes to that. CHAIRMAN KELLY: And as of right now there still aren't. It would be after today that they would actually impose them. So since the county's recommending a six-month extension due to an ordinance change, I'm in support of it. Let's see what the rest of the board said says. MR. MIESZCAK: When was the ordinance change? When was the ordinance change? MS. FLAGG: The ordinance has not been changed. The Golden Gate Estates folks that work with Cristina's team is interested in revising the ordinance, and she feels that the group would have to present the ordinance to the Board of County Commissioners; get their approval to change the ordinance, but they're working on the ordinance right now. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay, great. MR. MIESZCAK: So that time frame is realistic? MS. PEREZ: It's something that we've been working on already. And in talking to Mr. Irizarry this morning, I advised that maybe this would be something that he would like to go, you know, and talk to this group and see if his situation could somehow be -- you know, there could be something -- they've talked about hobby vehicles and whatnot out in the Estates, so this might be, you know, another solution for him. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. If the county's recommendation is to give an extension for six months, why didn't we just wait six months and then see the imposition later? Do you want me to actually extend -- do you want us to actually extend the original order? MS. PEREZ: Right. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Good. MR. LEFEBVRE: So there's no fines. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay, good. Page 131 November 18, 2011 MR. LEFEBVRE: I make a motion that we give an extension of six months. CHAIRMAN KELLY: From today, correct? MR. LEFEBVRE: Let's take it till our May meeting. Would that be six months? CHAIRMAN KELLY: Well, it's just that he's -- you know, he's already passed since October. So do you want to do it six months from now, or do you want to go back to when the original order expired? MR. LEFEBVRE: Six months from now. CHAIRMAN KELLY: From now, okay. MR. LEFEBVRE: From today. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Cool. So we have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second that motion. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Seconded. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All right. Well, let's hope the ordinance passes. MR. IRIZARRY: All right. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Cool thanks, man. Sorry about that one. If I had known that's what the situation Page 132 November 18, 2011 was, I would have pulled that up to the very beginning. MR. IRIZARRY: I wish -- my whole day's shot now. I saw you sitting back there. I apologize. MR. IRIZARRY: Yeah. All right. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Thank you. Next one's going to be AAAA Homes, Incorporated. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. PEREZ: For the record, Cristina Perez, Collier County Code Enforcement. This is in reference to CEB Case No. 2007090283. Violations: Florida Building Code, 2007 Edition, Chapter 1, Section 105.4.1. Location: 581 7th Street Northwest, Naples, Florida; Folio No. 37110800008. Description: Expired Permit Nos. 2001110145 for a fence; 2008050699 for a Ted shed type structure; 2008050702 for a pole barn/storage shed; 2008050704 for a pump shed. Past orders: On July 28, 2011, the Code Enforcement Board issued a findings 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, OR4708, Page 1559, for more information. The property is not in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of November 18, 2011. The fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order Item No. 1 and 2, fines at the rate of$200 per day for the period between October 27, 2011, through November 18, 2011, 23 days, for the total of$4,600. Fines continue to accrue. Order Item No. 5, operational costs of$80.57 have not been paid. Total amount to date $4,680.57. MR. MIESZCAK: Motion, imposition of fines. MR. KAUFMAN: Second. Page 133 November 18, 2011 CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Motion carries. And the last case is going to be Hilda Beo- -- MS. PEREZ: Beovides. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Beovides. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. PEREZ: Collier County Code Enforcement, Cristina Perez. This is in reference to CEB Case No. CEAU20100022285. Violations: Florida Building Code, 2007 Edition, Chapter 1, Section 105.1. Location: 1321 Everglades Boulevard South, Naples, Florida; Folio No. 40988080005. Description: Fence with a gate constructed without Collier County building permits. Past orders: On September 22, 2011, the Code Enforcement Board issued a findings 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, OR4728, Page 881, for more information. The property is not in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of November 18, 2011. The fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order Page 134 November 18, 2011 Item No. 1 and 2, fines at the rate of$100 per day for the period between October 23, 2011, through November 18, 2011, 27 days, for the total of$2,700. Fines continue to accrue. Order Item No. 5, operational costs of$80.57 have not been paid. Total amount to date, $2,780.57. MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to approve imposition of fine. MR. KAUFMAN: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: And it carries. MS. PEREZ: Thank you, gentlemen. CHAIRMAN KELLY: That's the end of all of our hearings and old business. On to new business. How about -- there's nothing being forwarded to the County Attorney's Office under the consent agenda, so reports. MS. FLAGG: Just a quick update. For the week beginning November 3rd ending November 9th, the banks have expended $2,531,000 to abate 2,048 violations. Just in that week's time frame, the banks expended $33,700 on code violations. For that week also there were 219 new code cases opened, just in that week; 646 property inspections conducted during that week; 115 lien searches, which are, when the potential buyer of a property is Page 135 November 18, 2011 getting ready to buy a property, they contact our office to say, are there any code cases on this property. Of those 115 requested during that week, 12 had open code cases. So those are 12 prevention cases that would not have showed up at your hearing with folks saying that they didn't know there was a code case on the property. And the investigators this week are carrying an average of 57 code cases each, which is significant. In addition, what you saw a lot today were vacant homes, and the -- each of the five code district teams continue to conduct the vacant home sweeps, and by doing this, they're identifying vacant homes. They're following up with the owner and the banks, because you're seeing quite a few times the situation where the owner vacated the home and thought the bank had foreclosed and, in fact, the bank had not foreclosed. They may have filed a lis pendens, and that may be a long time, from filing the lis pendens, that the bank takes any further action. In some cases they were receiving letters, thought that the bank had started the foreclosure process, but we're even finding homes that the owners vacated, and there wasn't even lis pendens filed on the home. So we're contacting -- as we come across these vacant homes through the sweeps, we're contacting the property owners, and it's coming as a surprise to them that they actually are the owner of the home. And we're also contacting the bank if there is a lis pendens filed because, as you know, we work with the banks to abate these violations long before they take title to the property. We're contacting the banks to maintain these properties, and we're also monitoring the vacant properties in conjunction with the Sheriffs Office because we want to make sure that there's no nefarious activity occurring in these vacant homes. Page 136 November 18, 2011 Additionally, the five co-district teams work with the Sheriffs Office and their other partner agencies to conduct meet and greats and community cleanups. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Excellent work, Diane. Thank you. MS. FLAGG: Good team. CHAIRMAN KELLY: And comments? MR. LAVINSKI: Yeah. Mr. Chairman, I have a comment. On our internal process, what seems to have happened today, as our packages have gone from two pounds to four pounds, the first thing you read in, and I think Jen did once, if the first person to read the case in could give the agenda line item number, would -- I find it extremely helpful. Because when we get here with 20 or 30 cases and we shuffle them between stipulations and back and forth to motions, you kind of lose track, and to try to track this nine-digit case number is a little bit bewildering for me. MS. BAKER: We can do that. That's no problem. MR. LAVINSKI: So if you could just read in that line item, that gets me set right to the case we're discussing and the issue. MS. BAKER: I will work with the chair that we get that straightened out. MR. LAVINSKI: And the investigators. You know, sometimes they read in a case first. Whoever reads it first. MR. MIESZCAK: I was talking to the chairman about the same thing. CHAIRMAN KELLY: It's either that or tablets. And then you can stop killing all these trees. I'm just saying. MS. BAKER: We'll talk about that later. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any comments? Any other comments? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: In that case, we'll see you at our next meeting, which isn't until January 19, 2012. Have a wonderful holiday, and we'll see you next year. Page 137 November 18, 2011 MR. MIESZCAK: I'll make a motion to adjourn. MR. KAUFMAN: Second. MR. MIESCZAK: Happy Thanksgiving, Merry Christmas. See you next year. CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. ***** There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 12:45 p.m. CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD - , nnet , Chairman These minutes ap roved by the Board on q,,,, L. 12. as presented or as correc TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC., BY TERRI LEWIS, NOTARY PUBLIC/COURT REPORTER. Page 138