Loading...
CLB Minutes 04/18/2012RECEIVE MAY 16 2012 April 18, 2012 board of County C MINUTES OF THE COLLIER COUNTY CONTRACTORS' LICENSING BOARD MEETING April 18, 2012 Naples, Florida LET IT BE REMEMBERED that the Collier County Contractors' Licensing Board, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 AM in REGULAR SESSION in in Administrative Building "F," 3rd floor, Collier County Government Complex, Naples, Florida, with the following Members present: Fiala Hiller — Henning Coyle .,e _ -- Coletta ;Sc-- ALSO PRESENT: CHAIRMAN: Vice Chair: Excused: Lee Horn Richard Joslin Terry Jerulle Kyle Lantz Thomas Lykos Michael Boyd Robert Meister Jon Walker Patrick White Michael Ossorio — Supervisor, Contractors' Licensing Office James F. Morey, Esq., Attorney for the Contractors' Licensing Board Steve Williams, Esq., Assistant County Attorne�sc- Corres: Ian Jackson, Licensing Compliance Officer Date:--I I -) "112 item *IuS2 -A°1 1 Copies to: April 18, 2012 Any person who decides to appeal a decision of this Board will need a record of the proceedings and may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the Appeal is to be based. I. ROLL CALL: Chairman Lee Horn called the meeting to order at 9:05 AM and read the procedures to be followed to appeal a decision. Roll call was taken and a quorum was established. Five members were present. II. ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS: Changes: • Under Item VII- (A), "Public Hearings" — Case #2012 -05, "Christopher McHugh," has been continued to May 10, 2012. III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Thomas Lykos moved to approve the Agenda as amended Second by Kyle Lantz. Carried unanimously, S — 0. IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES— March 21,2012: Corrections: • Page 7, "Motion" — o Vice Chairman Joslin stated he did not oppose the motion — he merely coughed/cleared his throat when Chairman Horn called the vote — the Hearing Reporter misinterpreted his response. The language was revised as follows: "Kyle Lantz moved to approve accepting the Stipulation. Second by Vice Chairman Joslin. Motion carried, 7— "Yes " /1— "Abstention." Patrick White abstained from voting. " Kyle Lantz moved to approve the Minutes of the March 21, 2012 meeting as amended. Second by Vice Chairman Joslin. Carried unanimously, S — 0. V. DISCUSSION: None. VI. NEw BUsmEss: None. 2 April 18, 2012 VII. OLD BUSINESS: A. Orders of the Board Vice Chairman Joslin moved to approve authorizing the Chairman to sign the Orders of the Board. Second by Kyle Lantz. Carried unanimously, S — 0. (Note: In the following case and the case heard under Section VIII, "Public Hearings," the individuals who testified were sworn in by the Attorney for the Board.) B. Bob's Air Conditioning and Refrigeration, Inc. It was noted that Bobby James Phillips, II, was present and was not represented by Counsel. Bobby James Phillips stated he applied to request restoration of his permit pulling privileges. Michael Ossorio provided the following information: • On May 20, 2009, the Contractors' Licensing Board continued Case No: 2009 -06 (Code violation) to the June meeting, allowing Mr. Phillips an opportunity to correct the violation and make restitution to the consumer. • Mr. Phillips left the area in June, 2009. • In June, the Board permanently revoked Mr. Phillips' permit pulling privileges • Mr. Phillips is a State - certified Contractor, and the Florida Construction Industry Licensing Board was notified on May 21, 2009 of the Board's decision. The recommendation was that "no action" should be taken. • Mr. Phillips has requested a modification of his suspension. Chairman Horn noted the homeowner had been reimbursed by Mr. Phillips on March 7, 2012. Mr. Phillips stated he did not agree with the Board's decision. He stated he had been doing "service work" for the past two years. Mr. Ossorio contacted the homeowner who stated he was pleased that he had been reimbursed, and had no objections to Mr. Phillips' request to be reinstated. Chairman Horn asked Mr. Ossorio if there had been any other complaints made against Bobby Phillips and the response was, "no." Mr. Ossorio noted the Board has to option to uphold the suspension, or revoke it, or to modify it. He suggested if the Board choses to modify the suspension that Mr. Phillips remain under the jurisdiction of the Licensing Board and to restrict his permit pulling privileges, i.e., only Mr. Phillips can sign for a permit, in person. If the Board's Order is violated within a two -year period, the suspension will be reinstated. April 18, 2012 It was noted the new Florida Building Code went into effect on March 15th and the provisions affect Air - Conditioning Contractors. Michael Ossorio stated Mr. Phillips is a State - certified Contractor and will renew his license with the State in September, 2012. "CityView" [County's computer system] tracks Workers' Comp insurance and Mr. Phillips can only pull permits if his certification is active and current in the system. Thomas Lykos moved to approve reinstating the permit pulling privileges of Bobby James Phillips with the following stipulations: • Mr. Phillips will be required to personally pull all permits for his work; • Mr. Phillips will be placed on probation for a period of two years; • During the probationary period, any violation will result in an immediate revocation of his permit pulling privileges and would require him to appear before the Contractors Licensing Board. Second by Vice Chairman Joslin. Discussion: Vice Chairman Joslin remembered the case and was pleased Mr. Phillips was able to make restitution to the homeowner. He advised Mr. Phillips to be conscientious in the future because any appearance before the Board would result in his license being revoked. Kyle Lantz objected to the use of the word, "probation." He stated the Board was overstepping because Mr. Phillips was State - certified. Thomas Lykos explained the reason for imposing a probationary period was if Mr. Phillips were to accept a project and not pull a permit, without probation, the only recourse would be to cite him for not having a permit. He would not necessarily be required to appear before the Board. Vice Chairman Joslin agreed with Mr. Lykos, stating the probation was a deterrent. Michael Ossorio clarified Bobby Phillips, as a State license holder, is not on probation, but his Certificate of Competency with Collier County is on probation. Attorney James Morey stated when imposing any sanction on a State - certified contractor, the Board has the ability to impose specific conditions in terms of the permit- pulling privileges. Mr. Lantz countered there were two different issues: being required to pull permits in person, and being on probation. Thomas Lykos amended his motion as follows: To approve reinstating the permit pulling privileges of Bobby James Phillips with two stipulations: I. He must personally pull all permits for all future work; and 2. For a period of two years, if he is found to be guilty of any violation, his permit pulling privileges will automatically be revoked. Second by Vice Chairman Joslin. Mr. Phillips stated he did not have a problem with the conditions. April 18, 2012 Chairman Horn called for a vote. Motion carried unanimously, S — 0. VIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Case #2012 -05: Christopher McHugh, d/b /a PMC Enterprises Division, Inc. has been continued to May 16, 2012 (per amended Agenda). B. Case #2012 -06: Walter Paesano, d/b /a Paesano's Painting, LLC Chairman Horn outlined the general process of the Public Hearing: • The County will present an Opening Statement to set forth the charges and, in general terms, how it intends to prove the charges. • The Respondent will present his/her Opening Statement setting forth, in genera.] terms, defemes to the charges. • The County will present its Case in Chief by calling witnesses and presenting evidence. • The Respondent may cross - examine the witnesses. • After the County has closed its Case in Chief, the Respondent may present his/her defense, i.e., to call and examine witnesses, introduce Exhibits, cross - examine witnesses, impeach any witness regardless of which party called the witness to testify, and rebut any evidence presented against the party. • After the Respondent has presented his/her case, the County will present a Rebuttal to the Respondent's presentation. • When the Rebuttal is concluded, each party is permitted to present a Closing Statement. • The County is allowed a second opportunity to rebut the Respondent's Closing Statement. • The Board will close the Public Hearing and begin deliberations. • Prior to beginning deliberations, the Board's Attorney will give a "charge" to the Board, similar to the charge given to a jury, setting out the parameters on which the decision will be based. • During deliberations, the Board can request additional information and clarification from the parties. • The Board will decide two different issues: • Whether the Respondent was guilty of the offense(s) charged in the Administrative Complaint, and a vote will be taken on the matter. • If the Respondent was found guilty, the Board must decide the sanctions to be imposed. • The Board's Attorney will advise the Board concerning the sanctions and the factors to be considered. • The Board will discuss the sanctions and vote. April 18, 2012 Ian Jackson, Licensing Compliance Officer, presented the County's Opening Statement: • The County will show through sworn testimony and documented facts that Walter Paesano, the Respondent, violated Florida Statutes 440.10(1)(a) by failing to provide and maintain Workers' Compensation coverage for his two employees. • Said violation of Florida Statutes constitutes a violation of Collier County Ordinance 90 -105, as amended, Section 22- 201(6). Vice Chairman Joslin moved to approve entering Case No. 2012 -06, Board of County Commissioners vs. Walter Paesano, d1b /a Paesano's Painting, LLC, Collier County License #27889, into evidence. Second by Kyle LantL Carried unanimously, S — 0. • Chairman Horn entered the information packet into evidence, marked as County's Exhibit "A. " Chairman Horn asked Mr. Paesano if he wished to present an Opening Statement and the response was, "no." He also stated he was "ashamed." Concerns were raised about the Respondent's ability to understand the charges. • Thomas Lykos asked Mr. Paesano if he required the services of a translator. While the Respondent again replied, "no," Mr. Lykos stated he was not comfortable with the Respondent's fluency in English as a second language. • Vice Chairman Joslin agreed. • Attorney Morey noted Mr. Joslin's concern about whether or not the Respondent understood the gravity of the situation, and also noted the issue of due process. He suggested taking a brief recess to explore options. RECESS: 9:28 AM RECONVENED: 9:38 AM Chairman Horn reconvened the Public Hearing at 9:38 AM. Attorney Morey stated Martha Vergara, who is employed in the Minutes and Records Department of the Collier County's Office of the Clerk of Courts, was present to assist the Respondent by serving as a translator (English to Spanish). Mr. Morey was noted Ms. Vergara would not give testimony but will translate fairly, honestly, and accurately from English to Spanish (for the Respondent) and from Spanish to English (Respondent's responses to the Board's questions). He thanked Ms. Vergara for graciously volunteering to help Mr. Paesano. [There was a brief pause in the proceedings: Martha Vergara read the Administrative Complaint and Case Summary, and then translated the document for the Respondent.] Col April 18, 2012 Vice Chairman Joslin requested the translator advise Mr. Paesano he has the right to be represented by a Spanish- speaking attorney. Walter Paesano declined to be represented by Counsel. Chairman Horn asked the Respondent if he wished to present an Opening Statement which was his overview of the case. Walter Paesano stated the case was opened because he did not have Workers' Compensation coverage for his two workers. Terry Jerulle asked the Respondent if he had read and understood the Complaint and Mr. Paesano replied, "yes." Ian Jackson presented the County's Case in Chief • On March 1, 2012, the Contractors' Licensing Office received a complaint concerning possible unpermitted remodel work at 1204 Hernando Street. • He performed a site inspection and met with the Respondent who was in the process of either painting a small portion of the exterior of the home or cleaning some materials. • Mr. Paesano escorted Mr. Jackson through the home where he observed two individuals painting the interior. • Mr. Paesano explained he had been subcontracted by Elaine Higgins, B.K. Services of Naples, LLC, for the painting work. • Mr. Jackson asked the Respondent if he provided Workers' Compensation coverage for the two employees, his response was "yes." • Mr. Jackson researched the County's data base and found that Mr. Paesano had a Workers' Compensation exemption for himself. • The Respondent acknowledged he did not provide the required coverage. • Mr. Jackson instructed Mr. Paesano to stop his employees (Omar Osorio and Jose Mercario) from continuing to work. • Mr. Paesano was advised that only he could complete the painting because he was an exempt officer of the corporation, Paesano's Painting, LLC. • The Notice of Hearing was issued to Mr. Paesano, via hand delivery, on March 8, 2012. Chairman Horn inquired about a previous violation. Mr. Jackson replied the Respondent had been cited on November 17, 2009 for a similar violation. At that there, only one employee was not covered by Workers' Compensation insurance and the fine was $300. He noted, for the record, the fine had been paid. Thomas Lykos asked if other work was being done at the house in addition to the painting and Mr. Jackson responded "no." Mr. Lykos stated the complaint referenced possible unpermitted work and asked Mr. Jackson if he noted any violations, and the reply was "no." Ian Jackson stated a "Stop Work" Order was not issued because there were no permitting issues. 7 April 18, 2012 Mr. Jackson noted the Respondent stated he had been hired as a painting sub- contractor by Elaine Higgins, the qualifier of B.K. Services of Naples, LLC. Chairman Horn asked the Respondent to identify who had hired him, i.e., the homeowner or another Contractor. Walter Paesano explained: • Elaine Higgins called him and asked him to paint the laundry area, a closet area, and two doors. • He was not hired to paint the entire house. • Ms. Higgins was painting the interior of the house — he had been subcontracted to paint the areas that were difficult for her. o Ms. Higgins was also present at the proceedings. Vice Chairman Joslin asked the Respondent why he hired helpers when the job would have taken only 3 or 4 hours to complete. The Respondent replied to make sure the job was done in one afternoon. Kyle Lantz asked if the two gentlemen worked for the Respondent on a regular basis and Mr. Paesano responded when he had jobs, he always worked by himself. He stated the two men were at his house when he received Ms. Higgins' call and he asked them to come along with him. Mr. Lantz asked if Omar Osorio and Jose Mercario were his friends; Mr. Paesano said, "yes." Terry Jerulle directed his question to the Respondent, "When you were first asked by Mr. Jackson if you had Workers' Compensation for the two employees, you said `yes.7' Mr. Paesano stated he thought the Workers' Compensation "papers" said he had coverage for one to four employees — he remembered that — but he checked again and found it was different. Chairman Horn asked the Respondent when friends helped him on a job, how did he pay them, i.e., were they paid in cash, or by check, or did he use a payroll service — how did he compensate his employees. The Respondent stated Ms. Higgins would pay him, but because this job was not finished, he was not paid. Chairman Horn asked Elaine B. Higgins to come forward and be sworn in. Chairman Horn asked Ms. Higgins if she was a General Contractor. Elaine B. Higgins stated she was a Painting Contractor. Chairman Horn asked if she "subbed" the job out to Mr. Paesano. She responded she was behind on the job and asked the Respondent if he could help her with one of the rooms in the back. She stated she has worked with Walter for ten years. Vice Chairman Joslin asked Ms. Higgins if she was aware she was to obtain a April 18, 2012 copy of Mr. Paesano's Workers' Compensation Insurance as her subcontractor. Ms. Higgins responded she had his license, Workers' Compensation exemption, and his insurance. She stated she was not present at the job site during the time of Mr. Jackson's inspection. When she had seen Mr. Paesano, he was alone. Chairman Horn called for a brief recess. RECESS: 9:53 AM RECONVENED: 9:56 AM Chairman Horn reconvened the Public Hearing at 9:56 AM. Vice Chairman Joslin asked if there was a written contract between the Respondent and B. K. Services of Naples, LLC, or if it was verbal. The Respondent stated there was no written contract. Chairman Horn asked if everything was verbal — on the phone or in person. Mr. Paesano replied Ms. Higgins had called him. Kyle Lantz asked the Respondent if he brought in friends in the future to help him paint, how would he pay them and ensure they had Workers' Compensation coverage. Walter Paseano stated he has very few jobs and does not need people to help him. He further stated if he found a large job, he would call the "Small Business" people to help him with the right papers. At the moment, he doesn't have any jobs. Chairman Horn stated it is a good policy to ask for help when you are not sure and Mr. Paesano replied, "yes." He asked Mr. Paesano if he understood the reason why Workers' Compensation insurance is required — to protect him, the homeowner, and employees. Mr. Paesano stated he understood. Thomas Lykos asked the Respondent if he understood Workers' Compensation coverage is required by law when other people are working for him on a job site. Martha Vergara explained Mr. Paesano understood he needed his paperwork and now understands that the paperwork is to be completed in advance if anyone will be on a jobsite helping him. Mr. Lykos again asked the Respondent if he understood he was required to obtain Workers' Compensation coverage. Mr. Paesano replied, "yes." Mr. Lykos noted the Respondent admitted, on the record, that he did not obtain Workers' Compensation coverage for his workers. [There was a brief pause while Ms. Vergara translated for the Respondent.] Mr. Paesano replied, "yes." Terry Jerulle questioned Ian Jackson concerning the 2009 Workers' Compensation violation. Mr. Jackson explained a Citation had been issued and a fine of $300 had been G� April 18, 2012 imposed. He stated he had paperwork to distribute to the Board for consideration in the event Walter Paesano was found in violation. The documents were applicable to the penalty phase of the proceedings. Terry Jerulle questioned Elaine Higgins. She replied she is a licensed to work in Collier County and reiterate the name of her company, `B. K. Services of Naples, LLC." Chairman Horn asked Ian Jackson to present the County's Closing Statement Ian Jackson noted since Respondent acknowledged the violation, the County had nothing further to present. Chairman Horn asked Mr. Paesano if he wished to present a Closing Statement but the Respondent declined. Vice Chairman Jerulle moved to approve closing the Public Hearing. Second by Terry Jerulle. Carried unanimously, 5 — 0. Attorney Morey outlined the Charge to the Board: • The Board shall ascertain in its deliberations that fundamental fairness and due process were accorded to the Respondent • Pursuant to Section 22- 203(g) (5) of the Codified Ordinance, the formal Rules of Evidence set out in Florida Statutes do not apply. • The Board shall consider solely the evidence presented at the Hearing in its deliberation of this matter. • The Board shall exclude from its deliberations irrelevant, immaterial and cumulative testimony. • The Board shall admit and consider all other evidence of a type commonly relied upon by reasonably prudent persons in the conduct of their affairs, whether or not the evidence so admitted would be admissible in a Court of Law or Equity. • Hearsay evidence may be used to explain or supplement any other evidence but hearsay, in and of itself, is not be sufficient to support a Finding, unless such hearsay would be admissible over objection in a civil action in Court. • The Standard of Proof in actions where a Respondent may lose his privileges to practice his profession is that the evidence presented by the Complainant must prove the Complainant's case in a clear and convincing manner. • The Burden of Proof on the Complainant is a larger burden than the "Preponderance of Evidence" Standard set in civil cases. • The Standard of Evidence is to be weighed solely as to the charges set out in the Complaint. • The only charges the Board may decide upon are the ones to which the Respondent has had an opportunity to prepare a defense. • The damages awarded by the Board must be directly related to the charges. • The decision made by the Board shall be stated orally at the Hearing and is effective upon being read, unless the Board orders otherwise. 10 April 18, 2012 • The Respondent, if found guilty, has certain appeal rights to the Contractors' Licensing Board, the Courts, and the State Construction Industry Licensing Board, pursuant to Florida Statutes and the Florida Administrative Code. • The Board shall vote upon the evidence presented in all areas and if the Respondent is found in violation, shall adopt the Administrative Complaint. • The Board shall also make Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law in support of the charges set out in the Complaint. Chairman Horn reiteration there had been an admission of guilty. Thomas Lykos moved to approve finding the Respondent was "guilty" of the charges submitted by the County. Second by Vice Chairman Joslin. Carried unanimously, S — 0. Attorney Morey stated since the Board found there was misconduct by the Contractor under Section 22- 203(b) (1), the Board may, but is not required to, impose any of the following Disciplinary Sanctions individually, or in combination: (1) Revocation of the Collier County (or City) Certificate of Competency, (2) Suspension of the Collier County (or City) Certificate of Competency, (3) Denial of the issuance or renewal of the Collier County (or City) Certificate of Competency, (4) Imposition of a period of probation of reasonable length, not to exceed two years, during which the Contractor's contracting activities shall be under the supervision of the Contractor's Licensing Board, and/or participating in a duly- accredited program of continuing education directly related to the Contractor's contracting activity. Any period of probation or continuing education program ordered by the Contractors' Licensing Board may be revoked for cause by said Board at a Hearing noticed to consider said purpose. (5) Restitution; (6) A fine not to exceed five thousand dollars ($5,000); (7) A public reprimand; (8) Re- examination requirement; (9) Denial of the issuance of Collier County (or City) Building permits or requiring the issuance of permits with specific conditions; (10) Reasonable legal and investigative costs for the prosecution of the violation. Attorney Morey advised the Board that when imposing disciplinary sanctions on a Contractor holding a Certificate of Competency or a State - certified Contractor who has been found to have violated the Ordinance, the Contractors' Licensing Board shall consider the following: (1) The evidence presented at the Hearing; (2) The gravity of the violation; (3) The impact of the violation on public Health/Safety or Welfare; (4) Any actions taken by the violator to correct the violation; 11 April 18, 2012 (5) Any previous violations committed by the violator, and (6) Any other evidence presented at the Hearing by the parties relevant as to the sanction which is appropriate for the case given the nature of the violation or the violator. Ian Jackson requested to distribute documentation to the Board. Michael Ossorio stated it was marked as Exhibit `B." Vice Chairman Joslin moved to approve entering the documentation provided by Ian Jackson into evidence as County's Exhibit `B." Second by Kyle Lantz. Carried unanimously, 5 — 0. Ian Jackson stated the evidence was from 2009 case that was referenced during the Public Hearing which consisted of a copy of Citation No. 5098 which was issued for not providing Workers' Compensation coverage (one employee). The jobsite was located at 1130 San Marco Drive. There was a "Detail Report" from the Comity's data. base confirming the $300 fine had been paid. Vice Chairman Joslin noted the Respondent had been previously cited for violating the requirement to provide Workers' Compensation coverage. He asked Ian Jackson about the severity of the 2009 violation. Ian Jackson stated he did not recall any details about the case. Chairman Horn asked for a recommendation from the County. Michael Ossorio stated the County recommended: • The Respondent is to pay $350.00 for investigative costs; • Imposition of a fine of $1,000.00 to be paid within 60 days; • Placing the Respondent on probation for a period of two years during which time he is to report all jobs to the Contractors' Licensing Office on a weekly basis; • The Respondent will be required to take and pass the Business Procedures test within one year. It was noted the Business Procedures Test is given in Spanish on a daily basis in Gainesville and Ocala. The test is given on a monthly basis in English in Bonita Springs. Thomas Lykos stated the Respondent apparently did not learn the gravity of the violation since it occurred a second time. Vice Chairman Joslin stated he agreed with the imposition of a $1,000 fine as a deterrent but stated he did not want to drive the man out of business. Terry Jerulle stated the Business Procedures Test should be taken as soon as possible and suggested a deadline of three months. Michael Ossorio outlined the costs involved: $130.00 — sponsors; $ 80.00 for the exam plus the cost of one book. A preparatory class is also available for an additional fee. 12 April 18, 2012 Kyle Lantz suggested extending the time for the Respondent to pay the fine to 120 days while requiring him to take the exam sooner than one year. Discussion ensued concerning the amount of the fine; the risk of injury to the Public, i.e., homeowners, business owners, employees; the responsibility of the Contractor. Thomas Lykos recommended increasing the fine to $2,500 because it was a second offense. Vice Chairman Joslin moved to approve imposing the following sanctions on Walter Paesano, d/b /a Paesano's Painting, LLC, as a result of being found guilty: • Payment of investigative costs in the amount of $350 within seven (7) days; • Placing his Certificate of Competency on probation for a period of two (2) years; • During the probationary period, Mr. Paesano is to report all jobs to the Contractors' Licensing Office on a weekly basis; • Imposition of a fine in the amount of $1,500 to be paid within 120 days; • Mr. Paesano is to take1pass the Business Procedures test within 90 days; • Any violation will result in the immediate suspension of his Certificate and he would be required to appear before the Board. Second by Terry Jerulle. Discussion ensued concerning the amount of the fine and a case previously heard by the Board. It was noted the Business Procedures Test contained a Workers' Compensation component. Chairman Horn called for a vote. Motion carried, 4 — "Yes " /I — "No." Thomas Lykos was opposed. Chairman Horn stated: • This cause came on for public hearing before the Contractors' Licensing Board on April 18, 2012 for consideration of the Administrative Complaint in Case #2012 -06 filed against Walter Paesano, d/b /a " Paesano's Painting, LLC," the holder of record of Collier County Certificate #27889. • Service of the Complaint was made in accordance with Collier County Ordinance 90 -105, as amended. • The Board, at this Hearing, having heard testimony under oath, received evidence and heard arguments respective to all appropriate matters, therefore issued its Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law as follows. Findinzs of Fact: • Walter Paesano, d/b /a " Paesano's Painting, LLC," is the holder of record of Collier County Certificate #27889. 13 April 18, 2012 • The Board of County Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, Contractors' Licensing Board is the Petitioner (Complainant) in this matter. • The Board has jurisdiction of the person of the Respondent. • Respondent, Walter Paesano, was present at the Public Hearing held on April 18, 2012, and was not represented by Counsel at the Hearing. • All notices required by Collier County Ordinance 90 -105, as amended, have been properly issued and were personally delivered • The Respondent acted in a manner that is in violation of Collier County Ordinance and is the one who committed the act. • The allegations set forth in Administrative Complaint as Count I, under Section 22- 201(6), "Disregards or violates, in the practice of his contracting business in the County, any of the building, safety, health, insurance, or Workers' Compensation laws of the State, or Ordinance of this County, " have been found to be supported by the evidence presented at the Hearing Conclusions of Law: The Conclusions of Law alleged and set forth in the Administrative Complaint as Count I have been approved, adopted and incorporated herein, to wit: "The Respondent violated Section 22- 201(6) of Collier County Ordinance 90 -105, as amended, and Florida Statute 440- 10(1)(a) in the performance of his contracting business in Collier County by acting in violation of the Section set out in the Administrative Complaint with particularity. Order of the Board. • Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, and pursuant to the authority granted in Chapter 489, Florida Statutes, and in Collier County Ordinance 90 -105, as amended, by a vote of 4 in favor, and none in opposition, a majority vote of the Board members present, the Respondent has been found in violation as set out above. • Further, it is hereby ordered by a vote of 4 in favor, I in opposition, a majority vote of the Board members present, that the following disciplinary sanctions and related Order are hereby imposed upon the holder of Collier County Certificate of Competency #278895, to wit: • Payment of investigative costs in the amount of $350 within seven (7) days; • Placing his Certificate of Competency on probation for a • period of two (2) years; • During the probationary period, Mr. Paesano is to report all jobs to the Contractors' Licensing Office on a weekly basis; • Imposition of a fine in the amount of $1,500 to be paid within 120 days; • Mr. Paesano is to take /pass the Business Procedures test within 90 days; • Any violation will result in the immediate suspension of his Certificate and he would be required to appear before the Board. 14 April Chairman Horn noted the case was closed. Martha Vergara stated she translated the Order of the Board for the Responc and Mr. Paesano understood the Board's decision. IX. REPORTS: (None) X. MEMBER COMMENTS: (None) XI. NEXT MEETING DATE: Wednesday, May 16, 2012 Board of County Commissioners' Chambers, Administrative Building "F," 3rd Floor (Government Complex), 3301 E. Tamiami Trail, Naples, FL 34112 There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by the order of the Chairman at 10:32 AM. COLLIER COUNTY CONTRACTORS LICENSING BOARD Lee Horn, Clairman The Minutes were proved by the Board/Chairman on , 2012, "as submitted" [_] OR "as amended" 15