The URL can be used to link to this page

CEB Minutes 01/24/2013 CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD Minutes January 24 , 2013 January 24, 2013 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY CODE ENFORCEMENT B N Wa gvigj Naples, Florida, January 24, 2013 MAR 20 p �' l 1 2013 BY: 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: District 1 District 2 District 3 District a CHAIRMAN: Robert Kaufman District 6 Gerald Lefebvre James Lavinski Lionel L'Esperance misc. Corres: Tony Marino Date: Larry Mieszcak Item#: Chris Hudson (Excused) Copies to: ALSO PRESENT: Diane Flagg, Code Enforcement Director Jennifer Baker, Code Enforcement Jean Rawson, Attorney for the Board Page 1 CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AGENDA Date- January 24, 2013 Location: 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Naples, FL 34104 NOTICE: THE RESPONDENT MAY BE LIMITED TO TWENTY (20) MINUTES FOR CASE PRESENTATION UNLESS ADDITIONAL TIME IS GRANTED BY THE BOARD. PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK ON ANY AGENDA ITEM WILL RECEIVE UP TO FIVE (5) MINUTES UNLESS THE TIME IS ADJUSTED BY THE CHAIRMAN. ALL PARTIES PARTICIPATING IN THE PUBLIC HEARING ARE ASKED TO OBSERVE ROBERTS RULES OF ORDER AND SPEAK ONE AT A TIME SO THAT THE COURT REPORTER CAN RECORD ALL STATEMENTS BEING MADE. ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO, AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. NEITHER COLLIER COUNTY NOR THE CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING THIS RECORD. I. ROLL CALL Robert Kaufman, Chair Gerald Lefebvre, Vice Chair Kenneth Kelly Larry Mieszcak 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. November 29, 2012 4. PUBLIC HEARINGSIMOTIONS A. MOTIONS Motion for Extension of Time Lionel L'Esperance Tony Marino James Lavinski Chris Hudson, Alternate 1. Wilkert & Fidelene Eugene CESD20120003854 B. STIPULA,riONS C. HEARINGS 1, CASE NO: CESD20120004782 OWNER: JAVIER GONZALEZ OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR GATOR PATRICK BALDWIN VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, 04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTION 10,02.06(B)(1)(a) AND 10.02.06(B)(1)(e)(i) A CARPORT BUILT WITHOUT OBTAINING A COLLIER COUNTY BUILDING PERMIT FOLIO NO: 40932000002 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 560 EVERGLADES BLVD. S. NAPLES, Fl, 34117 2, CASE NO: CESD20120012029 OWNER: JACIN'rO A. VALENCIA OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR HEINZ BOX VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, 04 -41, AS AMENDED SECTION 10.02.06(B)(1)(a) LjNPERMIl-FED SHED FOLIO NO: 36430920009 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 5515 29 PLACE SW NAPLES, Ft., 34116 3. CASE NO: CESD20120006516 OWNER: CHRISTOPHER R. SAMPLE OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR DEE PULSE VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, 04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTION 10.02.06(B)(I)(a), (e) AND (i) ADDFJ) ENTRY DOOR AND UPSTAIRS FULL BATUROOM WITI-10tiTFIRST OBTAINING Rl"QUIRED COLLIER COUNTY PER.-MIT AND PERMIT 95-2051 IS EXPIRED AND NO "CO" OBTAINED. FOLIO NO: 62424200000 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 748 108"" AVE N. NAPLES, FL 34108 5, 6. CASFI NO: CELIJ20120013294 OWNER: CHRISTOPHER R. SAMPLE OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR DEE PULSE VJOI-ATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVEI-OPMENT CODE, 04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTION 1.04.01(A) SINGLE FAMILY STRUCTURE ALTERED AND USING UPSTAIRS AS SEPARATE ROOM RENTALS, FOLIO NO: 62424200000 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 748 108TH AVE N. NAPI-.E.S, 1, L 34108 CASE NO: CESD20120008370 OWNER: MARIA C. BENAVIDES OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR ERIC SHORT VIOLATIONS. COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, 04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTION 10,02.06(B)(1)(a) NO VALID COLLIER COUNTY PERMIT FOR AN ENCLOSED LANAI, DECK AND A GAZI`1BO WITI I ELECTRIC, FOLIO NO: 39837400006 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 2748 4 5TH AV[-"' NE NAPLE.S, Fl- 341210 CASE NO: CESD20120015193 OWNER: MARK & ANNE SHORES OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR CHRIS AMBACII VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT' COD F, 04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTION 10.02.06(B)(1)(a) INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR MODIFICATIONS T0THE HOME WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING ALL, REQU 'IRED COLLIER COUNTY BUILDING PERMITS, INSPECTIONS AND A CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION/OCCUPANCY FOLIO NO: 37544720000 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 431 12T" AVE NW NAPLES. FI., 34120 CASE NO: CESD20120015319 OWNER: SOUT"WESTIFLORIDA RENTALS, LLC. OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR MICHELLI. SCAVONE VIOLATIONS: COI-.J.;IER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, 04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTION 10,02.06(B)(1)(a) PERMIT NUMBER 20120203549 FOR INTERIOR REMODELING UNIT 13 EXPIRED WITHOUT COLLIER COUNTY PERMIT. ALSO INTERIOR REMODELING OF UNIT BEING CONDUCTED WITHOUT FIRST APPLYING FOR COLLIER COUNTY BUILDING PERMIT FOLIO NO: 48783840002 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 8085 BAYSHORE DR. NAPLES, FL 34112 10 CASE NO: CESD20120008264 OWNER: GUILLERMO ALONSO OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR ERIC SHORT VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAN]) DEVELOPMENT CODE, 04-41 AS AMENDED. SECTION 10,02,06(B)(1)(a) UNPERMITTED ALTERATIONS -1-0 THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE WITH PLUMBING AND ELECTRIC, AN UNPERMITTED ACCESSORY STRUCTURE WITI I PLUMBING AND ELECTRIC, AND A POOL WITI IOUT A CER.11FICATI.", OF COMPLETION/OCCUPANCY FOLIO NO: 39950080002 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 3210 EVERGLADES BLVD N. NAPLES, Fl, 34120 CASE NO: CESD20120004892 OWNER: JEFFREY M. STONE & MARDI S. MOORMAN OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR JONATHAN MUSSE VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVI*--'[..OPMI.,-,N'I'CODE, 04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTION 10.02.06(B)(1)(c) AND 10.02.06(B)(1)(a) MULTIPLE STRUCTURES CONSTRUCTED ON THE PROPERTY Wl"I'l TOUT FIRST OBTAINING VALID COLLIER COUNTY PI:RMITS. FOLIO NO: 38168960009 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 5741 PAINTED LEAF LANE NAPLES, FL 34116 CASE NO: CESD20120015571 OWNER: RENE WILLIAM SHARPE OFFICF"R: INVESTIGATOR ERIC SHORT VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENTCODE, 04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTION 10.02.06(B)(1)(a) A PAR`I'IALLY CONSTRUCTED HOME WITI JOUT COMPLETED COLLIER COUNTY BUILDING PERMITS, INSPECTIONS, AND CER'T'IFICATE OF COMPLETION/ OCCUPANCY FOLIO NO: 39020880006 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 5220 40"' ST. NE NAPLES, Ft., 34120 CASE NO: CEPM20120010100 OWNER: WELLS FARGO HOME MORTGAGE OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR JIM SEABASTY VIOLATIONS; COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES. CHAPTER 22 BUILDING AND BUILDING REGULATIONS, ARTICLE VI PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE, SECTION 22-231(12)(c), 22-231(12)(1) AND SECTION 22-242 PROPERTY MAINTENANCE - -- ISSI-14"S CONSISTING OF WINDOW WITH BROKEN CLASS, UNSECURED DOORS IN THE REAIZ OF THE DWELLING, UNSECURE WINDOWS, AND MISSING ROOF SHINGLES THROUGHOUTROOF FOLIO NO: 45847720003 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 1391 11 "' S'T'REET SW NAPLES. FL 34117 11 CASE NO: CESD20120010188 OWNER: WELLS FARGO HOME MORTGAGE OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR JIM SEABASTY VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND ]*)]:-,V],..].,.OPNIEN'I'COI)E, 04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTION 10.02.06(B)(1)(a) AND 10.02.06(B)(1)(e) NO COLLIER COUTN4*Y PERMITS FOR GARAGE ALTERATION, ADDITION A-17ACIIEDTO REAR OF RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE' AND STORAGE STRL ' ICTURE TO THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY. FOLIO NO: 45847720003 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 1391 1 ]'Ili s,rREET SW NAPLES, FI, 34117 5. OLD BUSINESS A. IN-lotion for Imposition of Fines/Liens CASE NO: CESD20120003258 OWNER: FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTGAGE CORPORATION OFFICF ' R: INVF ' STIATOR CHRIS AMBACH G VIOLATIONS: 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 EXPIRED POOL PERMIT AND NO PROTECTIVE BARRIER AROUND THE POOL FOLIO NO: 36912040009 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 2221 GOLDEN GATE BLVD W. NAPLES. FL 34117 CASE NO: CEPM20120003266 OWNER: FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTGAGE CORPORATION OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR CHRIS AMBACH VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES, CHAPTE,R 22, ARTICLE VI, SECTION 22 -231, SUBSECTION 9,11,12i, 12p, AND 20 EXPOSED WIRES, NO SMOKE DETECTORS, HOLES IN CEILING AND WALLS AND BROKEN WINDOWS. FOLIO NO: 36912040009 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 2221 GOLDEN GATE BLVD. W. NAPLES, FL, 34117 CASE NO: CES020120004794 OWNER: HERNANDEZ EQUITY INVEST, INC. OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR PATRICK BALDWIN VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, 04-41 AS AMENDED, SECI ION 10.02.06(13)(1)(a) EXPIRED PERMIT NUMBER 2006063986 "CBS HOME" FOLIO NO: 41105240009 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 1261 DESOTO BLVD. S. NAPLES, FL 34117 4. 6, CASE NO: CESD20120006219 OWNER: CRAIG M. MORRIS OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR JONATI [AN MUSSF -ION VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, 04-41 AS AMENDED, SECT 10,02.06(B)(1)(a), 10.0106(13)(])(e) AND FBC 1 10.1 CARPORT OR DETACI [ED GARAGE THAT WAS CONSTRUCTED BETWEEN 2002 AND 2003, NO VALID COLLIER COUNTY PERMIT WAS EVER ISSIJEID FOLIO NO: 38167240005 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 5845 PAINTED LEAF LANE NAPLES, FL 34116 CASE NO: CEPM20120004563 OWNER: CRAIG M. MORRIS OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR JONATHAN MU 'S S F, VIOLA'T'IONS: COLLIER. COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES, ARTICLE VI, PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE, SECTIONS 22-231(12)(c), 12(i), 12(b) AND 12(q) DWELLING WITH MISSING ROOF, WINDOWS AND DOORS DAMAGED INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR WALLS FOLIO NO: 38167240005 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 5845 PAINTED LEAF LANE NAPLES, FL 34116 CASE NO: CELU20120007339 OWNER: TIMOTHY TODD LAINHART, LORI RENEE LAINHART, ANTHONY IRA LAINHART & DEANA RENEE LAINHART OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR ERIC StiORT VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, 04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTIONS I .04.01(A), 2.0103 AND 10.02.06(B)(1)(a) A PERMITTED ACCESSORY STRUC]"URE. WITH UNPERMIT"I'ED ALTERATIONS AND WITH NO PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE ON THE SAME PARCEL. FOLIO NO: 37692280007 VIOLATION ADDRESS: NO SITE ADDRESS NAPLES, Ft, CASE NO: CESD20110005345 OWNER: GRAND CYPRESS COMMUNITIES, INC. OFFICER: INV[-',S'I'IGATOR JIM SEA13ASTY VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, 04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTION 10,02,06(B)(1)(a) AND 10.02,06(B)(1)(c) R.I-MODEL, INCLUDING THE REIMOVAL OF A FIRE WALL BETWEEN COMMERCIAL UNIT` 604 AND 605, PRIOR TOTI IE ISSUANCE OF COLLIER COUNTY BUILDING PERMIT FOLIO NO: 76885100984 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 3887 MANNIX DR. UNIT 605 NAPLES, FL 34114 um 12 CASE. NO: CELU2012008659 OWNER: JESUS JAIME & MARIA MARTINEZ OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR PATRICK BALDWIN VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, 04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTION 10,02.06(B)(1)(a), 10.02.06(B)(1)(c)(i) AND 2.02,03 EILFCTRICAL, IMPROVEMENTS MADE TOTHE PRINCIPAL. S'f'RUC'I URE AND THE UNDERGROUND STORAGE CONTAINF'R ON THE ESTATES ZONED PROPERTY F01-10 NO: 41346400006 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 3014 EVERGLADES BLVD, S. NAPLES, FL 34117 CASE NO: CESD20110006185 OWNER: JOSE F. CASAREZ OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR MARIA RODRIGUEZ VIOI..A'*f']ONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, 04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTION 10,02.06(B)(1)(a) A MOBILE HOME INS] ALA.ED WITHOUT FIRST OBT A COLLIER COUNTY BUILDING PERMIT F'01,10 NO: 63082502 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 4806 MIRAHAM DRIVE IMMOKA[-FE, FL 34142 CASE NO: 2007100236 OWNER: ANTHONY DINORCIA SR. LIA.". OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR HEINZ BOX VIOLATIONS; COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, 04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTION 10.02.06(B)(1)(a), 10.02,06(B)(1)(c) AND SECTION 10.02.06(B)(1)(c)(i) NUMEROUS UNPERMITTED STRUCTURES, INCLUDING 014FICE CANOPY STRUCTURES, SILOS, AND BUILDINGS FOLIO NO: 274560004 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 3963 DOMESTIC AVE. NAPLES, FL, 34104 CASE NO: CELU20100022151 OWNER: ANTHONY DINORCIA SR. LLC. OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR HEINZ BOX VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODI: - ', 04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTION 10.02.03(B)(5) SWALES ON SIDES AND REAR OF PROPERTY FILLED IN VIOLATING SDP 2004 AR5054. FOLIO NO: 274560004 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 3963 DOMESTIC AVE. NAPLES, Ft, 34104 CASE NO: CESD20120000069 OWNER: HENRY ROUZIER & JESSICA E. LOPEZ OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR MARIA RODRIGUEZ VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND I)EVEI.,OPMI'--,NT CODE, 04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTION 10.02,06(B)(1)(a) A MOBILE HOME INSTALLED WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING '1"I I E� AU'I'l IORIZATION OF THE REQUIRED PERMITS, INSPECTION AND CERTIFICATL". 01, OCCUPANCY AS REQUIRED BY THE CODE FOLIO NO: 54680007 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 4807 MYEIRS RD. IMMOKALEE, I'l, 34142 13 14 15 16, CASE NO: CESD20110011764 OWNER: PAUL A. & CATHLEENT. HURCKY OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR VICKI GIGUERE VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, 0441 AS AMENDED, SECTION 10.02.06(B)(1)(a)TW0 STORY CONCREI'E AND WOOD STRUCTURE LOCATED IN THE REAR PROPERTY AREA WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING COLLIER COUNTY BUILDING PERMIT FOLIO NO: 26480720007 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 4425 NORTH ROAD NAPLES, IL 34104 CASE NO: CESD20100009135 OWNER: OPERA NAPLES, INC. OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR MICHELLE SCAVONE VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS, CHAPTER 22. ARTICLE 11, SECTION 22-26(b)(104.5.1.4,4), FLORIDA BUILDING CODE, 2007 EDITION, CHAPTER 1, SECTION 105.1 AND ORDINANCE 04 -41 AS AMENDED, I'llE COLLIER COUNTY I...ANf) DEVELOPMENT CODE, SECTION 10.02.06(B)(1)(a) ALTERATIONS Of"BUILDING CONSISTING OF, BU'I NOT LIMITEDTO, ELECTRICAL, ADDING AND REMOVING OF INTERIOR WALLS, ADDING AND WIDENING OF DOORS/DOOR3AMS WITHOL''I FIRST OBTAINING REQUIRED COLLIER COUNTY BUILDING PERMITS FOLIO NO: 61631160002 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 2408 IINWOOI) AVE, NAPLES, FL 34112 CASE NO: _ I ESD20110009946 OWNER: CARLOS REGO RIVERS OFFICI.."R: INVESTIGATOR JOHN CONNE-17A VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, 04-41 AS AMENDED. SECTION 10.02.06(B)(1)(a) ADDITIONS MADE TO THE REAR OF HE STRUCTURE. WITIIOL.T. PERMITS FOLIO NO- 35743160007 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 2117 45"" TERRACE SW NAPLES, FL 34116 CASE NO: 2007090878 OWNER: JON R. & DENISE TC BRIMMER OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR CHRIS AMBACH VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. 04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTION 10.02.06(B)(1)(a), 10.02.06(B)(1)(e) AND I 0.02,06(13)(1)(c)(i) DF'TACHED GARAGE BUILT IN REAR YARD WITHOUT' I, IRSTOBl'AINING COLLIER COUNTY PERMITS FOLIO NO: 371110760009 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 561 7""" ST. NW NAPLES, FL 34120 IT CASE NO: CESD20110006404 OWNER: JOHNT, REYNOLDS & MICHELE A. REYNOLDS OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR CHRIS AMBACH VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, 04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTION 10.02.06(B)(1)(a) PERMIT FOR THE f IOME ON THE PROPERTY STALLED WITHOUT RECEIVING ALL INSPECTIONS AND A CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION/OCCLIPANCY FOLIO NO: 37169240004 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 160 GOLDEN GATE BLVD, W. NAPLES, FL. 34120 is. CASENO: CFSI)20120006821 OWNER: ROBERT D. CAMPBELL JR. & NINA M. CAMPBELL OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR PATRICK BALDWIN VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENTCODF, 04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTION 10.02.06(B)(1)(a) AND 10.02,06(13)(1)(c)(i) GARAGE ENCLOSED AND TURNED INTO LIVING SPACE WITH A BATHROOM AND A MOBILE I IOMF1 WITFIOUTCOLIAER COUNTY BUILDING PERMTS. FOLIO NO: 39393640009 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 2331 8"" AVE. SE. NAPLES, I'L 34117 19. CASE NO: CEAU20110013571 OWNER: JEFF J. & JOAN R. REEDER OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR PATRICK BALDWIN V1014ATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, 04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTION 10,02.06(B)(1)(a) AND 10,02.06(B)(1)(e)(i) AND FLORIDA BIALDING CODE, 2007 EDITION, CHAPTER I PERMITS, SECTION 105.1 MULTIPLE SHED TYPE STRt1CT1JRf,.S AND A FENCE CONSTRUCTED WITHOU I'COLLIER COUN'I Y BUILDING PERMITS FOLIO NO: 39393520006 VIOLATION! ADDRESS: 2321 10^'H AVE SE NAPLES. FL 34117 B. Motion for Reduction of Fines/Lien C. Motion to Rescind Previously Issued Order 1. Ahmet & Melissa Celik 6. NEW BUSINESS 2007110592 7. CONSENT AGENDA A. Request to Forward Cases to County Attorney's Office as Referenced in Submitted Executive Summary. 8. REPORTS 9. COMMENTS 10. NEXT MEETING DATE - February 28, 2013 11. ADJOURN January 24, 2013 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning, everybody. I'd like to call the Code Enforcement Board to order. 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 chairman. All parties participating in the public hearing are asked to observe Robert's 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 pertainings (sic) pertaining thereto and, therefore, may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. Neither Collier County nor the Code Enforcement Board shall be responsible for providing this record. So could we have the roll call. MS. BAKER: Mr. Robert Kaufman? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Present. MS. BAKER: Mr. Gerald Lefebvre? MR. LEFEBVRE: Here. MS. BAKER: Mr. James Lavinski? MR. LAVINSKI: Here. MS. BAKER: Mr. Tony Marino? MR. MARINO: Here. MS. BAKER: Mr. Lionel L'Esperance? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Here. MS. BAKER: And Mr. Larry Mieszcak? MR. MIESZCAK: Here. MS. BAKER: And Mr. Chris Hudson has an excused absence for today. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So all members will be voting today. Page 2 January 24, 2013 Okay. Do we happen to have any changes to the agenda today? MS. BAKER: Yes, we do. Under No. 4, public hearings/motions, Letter A, motions, we have an addition to motion for extension of time. This will be Martha Mendez Cruz, Case CESD20110014160. And then we have three additions for motion for continuance. The first will be No. 11 from hearings, Case CEPM20120010100, Wells Fargo Home Mortgage. The second will be No. 12 from hearings, Case CESD20120010188, Wells Fargo Home Mortgage. The third will be No. 13 from imposition of fines, Case CESD20110011764, Paul A. and Cathleen T. Burcky. Under Letter B, stipulations, we have three stipulations. The first will be No. 2 from hearings, Case CESD20120012029, Jacinto A. Valencia; the second will be No. 1 from hearings, Case CESD20120004782, Javier Gonzalez; the third will be No. 6 from hearings, Case CESD20120015193, Mark and Anne Shores. Under Letter C, hearings, No. 3, Case CESD20120006516, Christopher R. Sample, has been withdrawn. Number 4, Case CELU20120013294, Christopher R. Sample, has been withdrawn. Number 7, case CESD20120015319, Southwest Florida Rentals, LLC, has been withdrawn. Number 8, Case CESD20120008264, Guillermo Alonso, has been withdrawn. And we do have an addition to hearings. It's an emergency addition. It will be No. 13. It's Case CEPM20130000548, Brent R. Parker. Under No. 5, old business, Letter A, motion for imposition of fines/liens, we did have an addition to this as well. It will be No. 20. Case CESD20110017156, Ronnie and Beverly Bishop. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do we have a motion to Page 3 January 24, 2013 accept the agenda as modified? MR. LAVINSKI: Make a motion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have second? MR. MARINO: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And we have a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Passes unanimously. Okay. One question I have. On the Menendez Cruz, the motion for extension of time, is that in the additional package that was on the desk? MS. BAKER: It should be, yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. All righty. MS. BAKER: The first case will be motion for extension of time, Wilkert and Fidelene Eugene, Case CESD20120003854. Mr. Chair, did we do approval of the minutes from the last meeting? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I think I forgot. MR. MIESZCAK: I'll make a motion we approve the minutes. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Second your motion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second to approve the minutes from the last meeting. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. Page 4 January 24, 2013 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Okay. MS. BAKER: I think we also need to make a motion to approve the agenda as well. Did we do that? MR. L'ESPERANCE: So moved. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We did -- we did the agenda. MS. BAKER: You did -- you approved the agenda? MR. LEFEBVRE: I made a motion. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Oh, that's right. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We need a motion to clear our memories. Well, maybe not. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. You're asking for a continuance on this? MS. EUGENE: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Could you give us our (sic) names so -- for the record. MR. EUGENE: My name is Wilkert Eugene. My wife, Fidelene. MS. EUGENE: My name is Fidelene Eugene. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. You've written a letter requesting a 90-day extension on this? MR. EUGENE: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you want to give us a little background on the extension? MR. EUGENE: Yeah. So the first time we came, we asked for six-months because of financial hardship, so -- we couldn't be able to finish everything. So I've already done everything on the outside to Page 5 January 24, 2013 the addition, but we need a couple more months to get everything finished on the inside. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So you're requesting an additional 90 days now until April of 2013; is that correct? MR. EUGENE: Yes, sir. MS. EUGENE: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. County have any problem with that? MR. CONNETTA: No, sir, we don't. MR. MIESZCAK: I'll make the motion -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Motion -- MR. MIESZCAK: -- to approve -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- to approve. MR. MIESZCAK: -- 90-day extension. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: 90-day extension. Do we have a second? MR. LAVINSKI: Second. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Second? All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Okay. You have until April. If you can't meet that date, please come back before April and let us know. MR. EUGENE: Yes, thank you. Page 6 January 24, 2013 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you. MS. EUGENE: Thank you very much. MR. CONNETTA: Thank you. MS. BAKER: Next case under motion for extension of time is Martha Mendez Cruz, Case CESD20110014160. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. MS. FERNANDEZ: Good morning. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Could you give us a little background? MS. FERNANDEZ: Yes. My name is Veronica Fernandez, Martha Menendez Cruz's daughter. In August I came to ask for an extension to -- because we had to finish up the home. And the culvert -- my parents didn't have enough funds to get that all together because we had had some complications on the home. Of course, they don't live there because there's no CO. And you gave us an extension until, I think, a couple days ago, but they don't have all the funds yet. And I've been out of the country, so I came back last month, and I'm going to try to stay here to help them out to try to see if we can finish it. We've passed all the inspections. We just need the final and the culvert, that's it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. When you -- do you have any idea when you will be able to complete it? MS. FERNANDEZ: Well, the culvert's about $3,000. They have half of it already, so it will be a couple months, I guess, before we can -- I can get back to work and get everybody together and try to see if we can finish it. So -- I didn't know, so I asked for six months. I'm hoping it's going to be sooner than that so they can finally move in, but I really don't know exactly how many months it's going to take me to get the rest of the funds. Page 7 January 24, 2013 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Anything from the board? MR. LEFEBVRE: Have they been working to abate the issue here? MR. SHORT: They have. They have two inspections remaining, so they are making efforts. THE COURT REPORTER: Can I get your name? MR. SHORT: For the record, Investigator Eric Short. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Eric, do you have any problem with the six-month extension on this? MR. SHORT: I do not. MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion to extend for six months. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. MR. MARINO: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion, and we have a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Okay. Six months. If you can't meet that date, also, come back before that, as you have now. You're a couple days late, but come back before us so we can adjust accordingly. MS. FERNANDEZ: Thank you very much. Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you. MR. SHORT: Thank you. Page 8 January 24, 2013 MS. BAKER: The next case will be No. 1 under motion for continuance, which was No. 11 from hearings, Case CEPM20120010100, Wells Fargo Home Mortgage. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. MR. SEABASTY: Good morning. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I see this is a maintenance issue on the property? MS. KNIEP: Uh-huh. I'm Angela Kniep. I'm the realtor representing the bank. And there's some title issues right now that they're taking care of. And then they -- they're aware of the situation and they plan to -- you know, they're doing the title issues first. Right now we're requesting a 60-day extension. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you have the authorization from the bank to speak on their behalf? MS. KNIEP: I think -- I have all the -- you know, the listing representation papers. Would you like those? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: No. Generally, what's provided is a letter of authorization from the party who was due to be before us and naming you as the person. I have no problem with it if the county has no problem. MS. KNIEP: I think I have plenty of information I could give, you know, the county or the board here, and I've also been dealing with the code enforcement office. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Has Wells Fargo asked you to come here to the meeting this morning? MS. KNIEP: Yeah. They've asked me to handle with code enforcement. And I've emailed with Michelle (sic) Crowley and Jim Seabasty and some other members on the board. MR. SEABASTY: Good morning. For the record, Jim Seabasty, code enforcement investigator. We have no problem with the 60-day extension. They've been Page 9 January 24, 2013 working very hard to straighten out the deed, and they're working on the property in the meantime. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: On the property itself, what is it, some broken windows, missing roof shingles? MR. SEABASTY: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And there's another case after this we'll hear immediately following this. MR. SEABASTY: Correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So you need 60 days? MS. KNIEP: Yes, please. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And the county has no problem with the 60 days? MR. SEABASTY: That is correct. MR. L'ESPERANCE: So moved. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So we have a motion to grant 60 days. MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second the motion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And we have a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. MS. KNIEP: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. On this case, 60 days, which moves us to the next case. MS. BAKER: The next case is CESD20120010188, Wells Fargo Page 10 January 24, 2013 Home Mortgage. It was No. 12 from hearings. MS. KNIEP: It's the same situation. We've been doing both in conjunction, you know, with each other and working with code enforcement. MR. LEFEBVRE: I just have one question. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Before you do -- this one is a little different. This one is an addition that was done. So a permit for this addition would need to be applied for and received. Do you have that? MS. KNIEP: Yes. We have the application there. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Mr. Lefebvre? MS. KNIEP: We're figuring out the title problem first. MR. LEFEBVRE: It looks like this transferred to Wakovia, which now is Wells Fargo, back in July, July 7, 2011; is that correct? MS. KNIEP: Yes. MR. LEFEBVRE: That seems like a long time to get all of the issues resolved. MS. KNIEP: Well, they weren't aware of them until, I think, maybe six months ago. They weren't -- MR. LEFEBVRE: All right. MS. KNIEP: The first email I have was in September about it. But I didn't become the listing agent until September. MR. LEFEBVRE: Right. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: On this case, the county -- MS. KNIEP: It's a foreclosure. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The county had proceeded against the homeowner originally, and then it was foreclosed, I assume, and the bank wound up with it. MR. SEABASTY: That is correct. Again, for the record, Jim Seabasty, Collier County investigator. Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So that's why the delay is? MR. SEABASTY: Yes, sir. Page 11 January 24, 2013 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: But the bank did take it over in 2011? MR. SEABASTY: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: One would think that the bank would have known what is their responsibility at that time. They do this all the time. Okay. MR. LEFEBVRE: That's the point I'm trying to bring up is if the bank took it over in July 2011, they should have done a title search and found out that there was issues back then. What I don't want this to become is a -- more drawn out than it currently is due to the fact that it's a year and a half that they've held title to the property. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: How much time will Wells Fargo need to complete this? MS. KNIEP: Well, we've picked up the -- we've gotten the permit -- you know, the paperwork for the permit for -- by affidavit and spoken to some engineers and a builder, got a licensed contractor, and they've started the process with the contractor. We're asking for 60 days and hopefully get it -- get moving right away, you know, on it with -- I'll call the contractor when I leave here and tell him to get going on it. MR. MARINO: Have the permits actually been pulled? MS. KNIEP: No, no, no, no. We just picked up, you know, the paperwork and have contacted the licensed -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The contractor's going to be the one who pulls the building permit. I think 60 days is reasonable. I'm not happy with it as far as the 2011 is concerned, as Mr. Lefebvre pointed out. But I would accept a motion for 60 days if someone wants to make it. MR. LAVINSKI: Make a motion we approved a 60-day extension. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a motion. Do we have a second? Page 12 January 24, 2013 MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second the motion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And we have a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Hopefully this is done within 60 days, and if it isn't, I would expect somebody from Wells Fargo to be here. MS. KNIEP: Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Probably not the listing agent. MS. KNIEP: Okay. I'll let them know. Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Thank you. MS. KNIEP: Thank you. MS. BAKER: The next case under motion for continuance is from imposition of fines, No. 13, Case CESD20110011764, Paul A. and Cathleen T. Burcky. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. MR. SNOW: Good morning, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I see we're missing the respondent at this? MR. SNOW: Mr. Burcky works out of town. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. SNOW: He submitted his letter. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And you want to give us the background on this? Page 13 January 24, 2013 MR. SNOW: If you remember, this was the two-story structure that had been built around a tree in a pole barn. They had submitted a permit in March. It finally got issued in November. They've had no inspections. Nothing's been done as far as that's concerned. They need to get a demolition permit to remove the two-story structure around the tree, which they haven't done yet. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Initially, in reading this, I have my process, and I looked to see if the property is in compliance, which it's not. MR. SNOW: That's correct, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I also look to see if the operational costs have been paid, and they have not. MR. SNOW: That's correct, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And I would automatically just impose the fine. So to ask for an extension now seems out of line to me. MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion to deny. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. I have a motion to deny. Do we have a second? MR. MARINO: Second; second it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. We'll hear this during the imposition of fines. Page 14 January 24, 2013 MR. SNOW: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, thank you. MR. SNOW: Thank you. MS. BAKER: The next case will be under stipulations, which was No. 2 from hearings, Case CESD20120012029, Jacinto A. Valencia. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. MR. VALENCIA: Good morning. MR. BOX: Good morning. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You want to start with a little background or just read the stipulation on this particular case? MR. BOX: If I could read the stipulation, would be fine. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. BOX: My name is Investigator Heinz Box. I'm with code enforcement, Collier County. Therefore, it is agreed between the parties that the respondent shall pay operational costs in the amount of$80.57 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing and abate all violations by obtaining all Collier County building permits and demolition permit, inspections, and certificate of completion or occupancy within 120 days of this hearing, or a fine of$200 per day will be imposed until the violation is abated. The respondent must notify the code enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request 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 the abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do you understand the stipulation that you've signed? Page 15 January 24, 2013 MR. VALENCIA: Yes, I do. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: This is a shed that was put up without a permit; is that it? MR. VALENCIA: Yes. I bought the property seven months ago, and I didn't know about it. It's been there for many years. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. VALENCIA: But I will comply with whatever I have to do. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do we have a motion to accept the stipulation as written? MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to accept. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And we have a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Thank you very much. Hundred and twenty days. Hopefully we won't see you then. MR. VALENCIA: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. BAKER: The next stipulation is No. 1 from hearings, Case CESD20120004782, Javier Gonzalez. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. BALDWIN: For the record, Patrick Baldwin, Collier Page 16 January 24, 2013 County Code Enforcement 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, demolition permit, inspections, and certificate of completion/occupancy within 90 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 KAUFMAN: Okay. I have one question. On -- this was first observed in March, which is almost -- about 10 months ago. Is there any particular reason why it's taken so long to go through the process to get to here? MR. BALDWIN: In speaking to the owner, he's gone back and forth if he wanted to permit it or not, and then, ultimately, it does not meet setbacks, so he's decided to remove it. MR. GONZALEZ: Well, after going through the Collier County -- the code trying to get the permits, they gave me the runaround. I talked to one of your guys over there, and he told me just make a drawing, pretty much put it together. I come in with the drawing, I bring it there, and he's like, okay, no, that's not going to work. Go ahead and bring me this. And then after going at least maybe four or five times there, and they tell you to bring one thing and then they tell you to bring another, Page 17 January 24, 2013 and then they tell you to bring another, and you lose -- I mean, there's one thing that you should be able to do. And if they could tell you exactly what you need, you would actually come and have it all together. But from the beginning, if I would have known that the setbacks didn't meet, like I told him, I could have tore it -- when he first went out there, if it didn't meet compliance, I would have tore it down. You know, I would have took it off, because you can actually take it off. But that's the only reason why I tried to get a permit, and I was under the assumption -- I was told by the officer that it could probably be worked with if it didn't meet the setbacks. And then when I came to try to get a permit, it didn't. So I mean, I just lost, you know, trying to get a permit actually. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And you think you can make the time frame on this stipulation? MR. GONZALEZ: Yes, yes, definitely. I can definitely take it down without a problem. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. I have no problem with the stipulation. Do we have a motion to accept it? MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to accept. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion to accept the stipulation as written. MR. MARINO: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And a second by Mr. Marino. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? Page 18 January 24, 2013 (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Thank you. MR. GONZALEZ: Thank you. MR. BALDWIN: Thank you. MS. BAKER: The next stipulation is No. 6 from hearings, Case CESD20120015193, Mark and Anne Shores. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Which case was this, Jen, originally? MS. BAKER: This was No. 6 from hearings. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Good morning. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. AMBACH: For the record, Investigator Chris Ambach, Collier County Code Enforcement. Therefore, it is agreed between the parties that the respondent shall: Pay operational costs in the amount of$80.29 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing; Abate all violations by obtaining Collier County building permits or a demolition permit, inspections, a certificate of completion/occupancy within 120 days of this hearing, or a fine of $250 per day will be imposed until the violation is abated; Unpermitted living space must be unoccupied and utilities turned off within 24 hours of this hearing until the building permit or demolition permit has received a certificate of completion/occupancy, or a fine of$250 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 Page 19 January 24, 2013 abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. You understand the stipulation that you signed? MR. SHORES: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And background on this or -- MR. SHORES: Well, we got the house, and there was more that needed to be done than we thought, and I didn't realize there was the outstanding issues with the permitting. So now I've got an engineering firm I'm working with and just need to get more funds together to finish his process so I can get a permit for this. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You think 120 days will do it? MR. SHORES: Yeah. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do we have a motion to accept the stipulation? MR. L'ESPERANCE: So moved. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second the motion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Thank you. MR. SHORES: Thank you. MR. AMBACH: Thank you. MS. BAKER: Moving on to Letter C, hearings, No. 5, Case Page 20 January 24, 2013 CESD20120008370, Maria C. Benavides. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Eric? MR. SHORT: Good morning. MS. BAKER: Hold on. I've got to read the -- MS. BENAVIDES: Good morning. 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 valid Collier County permits for an enclosed lanai, deck, and gazebo with electric. Location/address where violation exists: 2748 45th Avenue, Northeast, Naples, Florida, 34120; Folio 39837400006. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Maria C. Benavides, 2880 45th Avenue, Northeast, Naples, Florida, 34120. Date violation first observed: July 3, 2012. Date owner/person in charge given notice of violation: October 3, 2012. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: November 2, 2012. Date of reinspection: November 7, 2012. Results of reinspection: The violation remains. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. SHORT: Good morning. For the record, Investigator Eric Short, Collier County Code Enforcement. I would now like to present case evidence in the following exhibits: One photo taken on July 18, 2012, by Investigator Patterson. The photo was stored and obtained from a database that I have authorized access to. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Has the respondent seen that photo? MR. SHORT: Actually, they have not. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Could you show that to her, please? Page 21 January 24, 2013 Take a look at the photo just to make sure that that's the right property. So it's three photos? MR. SHORT: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do we have motion to accept the photos? MR. L'ESPERANCE: So moved. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Thank you. MR. SHORT: This case originated with Investigator Patterson on May 31, 2012. Investigator Patterson and I made a site visit on July 18, 2012, and observed a lanai enclosure, an elevated deck, and a gazebo with electric. The property owner was directed to the building department and was advised to submit for permits. The gazebo has since been removed without a Collier County demolition permit. To date, no compliance efforts have been made. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That second picture is a picture of the missing lanai; is that it? MR. SHORT: That photo was taken on November 6th, a later date from the original photo, and you can see the gazebo has been Page 22 January 24, 2013 removed. MS. BENAVIDES: You wouldn't be able to see the gazebo from that side, because what you call a gazebo, which was a roof, was only on the right side. That previous picture was the left side. The whole deck didn't have a cover on top. It was only part of it, and we had that just to store our four-wheelers and stuff under it so they wouldn't get wet. It didn't have the whole thing covered, so that's only half. MR. LEFEBVRE: So the section to the right is uncovered? MS. BENAVIDES: Yes. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Ma'am, can you lower the microphone a little bit, please? Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. SHORT: Each photo taken on November 6th was of the right side of the house and of the left side of the house. This photo here was taken from the right. MS. BENAVIDES: Right, and that would show where the roof is missing now. MR. SHORT: Right. Correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. BENAVIDES: I had gone to the permitting department. When they first left -- I've never met with anybody, because I'm never home, but they did leave paperwork and a card. So I went down to the permitting department. I spoke to Mr. -- I think his name is Randall, because that's who they told me to talk to. I told him I originally wanted a demo permit. And he says, well, you know, it's a good-size deck. You might want to make it work. You know, bring us in a drawing, and we'll send you the structural and we'll see what they can do and help you out in doing it. So I did one -- you know, I drew one, I hand drew one. I went to structural. I spoke to a Tom -- I can't remember his last name. I spoke to him four times, actually. The first time he says, you know what, Page 23 January 24, 2013 that's not good enough. You'll need something different. So I went back. I created another one. It wasn't good enough. The third time he told me, go on to lowes.com and you can created a deck on their website. So I created that. I bring that back. That was in -- that was good, but then they needed the specifications on all of the wood. They wanted the numbers, the stamps, and all of this. This deck has been up -- I mean, I agree I did it without permitting, but it's been up for years. So I don't know the specifications of the wood. He said, you know, normally there's a stamp on there that you can, you know, look up. It's so old that there's no stamps; there's no nothing. And he wanted to know the size of the screws that I had used, the amount of screws, all of that. I didn't build the deck. My husband did. He no longer lives with me. I wouldn't know to begin to tell you how many screws are on there, what screws are on there, or how it was put together. So the other thing, too, was the enclosed lanai. The lanai -- when I originally bought the home -- because I bought it brand new. The only part that I put up is I took off the screen and put up a wall. The reason I did that was for two reasons. One, I don't have a garage, so I needed something to store stuff in, and another one, people were ripping my screen to come into my home. So to avoid that, I put up a wall, and the wall does have a window and a door. But the rest of the house -- I didn't modify any of the house. The house is still intact the way it is. If you open that door in the back, you'll be able to see my two glass doors and my windows. So all of that is still intact. I didn't fully enclose the lanai. It was just the one wall. And I know I didn't get permitting for it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The electric that was in the lanai is MS. BENAVIDES: The electric in the lanai, that -- the house. That's no -- those are just light sockets that you would have outside Page 24 January 24, 2013 your home. It's not something that I put in there. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Was it an extension cord, or it was permanently wired? MS. BENAVIDES: Oh, to the deck you mean, or to -- the lanai already has -- it came like that with the house. MR. LEFEBVRE: No, to the deck. MS. BENAVIDES: It has electrical sockets. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: To the deck. MS. BENAVIDES: Oh, to the deck, yeah, it was a line of-- live line that was going through the deck, because there was a light hanging from that roof. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Now that's all cleared out? MS. BENAVIDES: That's all gone. That was gone the first day when I heard about it, and then I went -- a couple of days later I went down to the permitting department, and I told them that all that was gone. So -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Well, the board is mostly interested in compliance, which this appears to now be in compliance, if you don't take into consideration that permits weren't pulled to put it in or to take it out. So -- Anything from the board? MR. LEFEBVRE: Well, it's not in compliance, because permits haven't been pulled for the deck or for the wall that was put up on the lanai. So she still would have to go and get after-the-fact permits for these items or demolish them. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I misunderstand. It was -- the structure that was removed is one of the items. The deck was never permitted as well? MS. BENAVIDES: No. MR. SHORT: Correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Oh, okay. I must have misunderstood. Page 25 January 24, 2013 MS. BENAVIDES: I'd like to get it -- that was my original thing, to get it demolished. Because, like I said, I would never be able to give you the specifications on any of that wood or anything that was, you know, put on there. So I think the easiest thing for me is to get a demolition permit and just have it removed. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: How long do you think that would take you? MS. BENAVIDES: I would say about 120 days, just because I need to find somebody to do it for me. The other question that I have is, if I remove the wall that I put up on my lanai, do I have to add a screen back up, or can I leave it open? Because the four walls -- the three walls that are inside that enclosed lanai are the home. It's the outside of my home. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That would be a question to the permitting department, not to the board. MS. BENAVIDES: Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The first thing we need to do is find out if a violation exists. So why don't we start with that and go forward from there. MR. LEFEBVRE: I find a violation due to the fact -- there was an admittal by the respondent. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do we have a second on that? MR. MARINO: I'll second it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a second. So all those in favor that a violation does exist, say aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. Page 26 January 24, 2013 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So a violation does exist. Now, how do we put the baby back together? You need 120 days, you said, to bring everything into compliance? MS. BENAVIDES: And have it removed. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. LEFEBVRE: How about a recommendation from -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do we have a recommendation from the county? MR. SHORT: Yes, sir. 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 KAUFMAN: Okay. Would anybody like to take a stab at it? If not, I will. $80.29 within 30 days, 120 days to complete the process, permits, demo, et cetera, or a $250-a-day fine thereafter. That's my motion. MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second your motion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. Page 27 January 24, 2013 All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So 120 days. If you can't get it done in 120 days, come back before the 120 days expires, because there's a $250-a-day fine thereafter. MS. BENAVIDES: Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. BENAVIDES: Okay. Thank you so much. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, thank you. Good luck. MR. SHORT: Thank you. MS. BAKER: And, Mr. Chair, we did have an additional stipulation that did come, if you want to go to that next. MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion to amend the agenda. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Modify the agenda. MR. LEFEBVRE: Modify the agenda. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. MARINO: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And we have a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. Page 28 January 24, 2013 MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The agenda is so modified. MS. BAKER: This will be No. 9 from hearings, Case CESD20120004892, Jeffrey M. Stone and Mardi S. Moorman. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: 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 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing; Abate all violations by obtaining a Collier County building permit or demolition permit, inspections, 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 to perform a site inspection to confirm compliance; That if the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any 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 KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Mr. Chairman, I have question. I notice the stipulation agreement's a little different from the one previous about occupied dwellings. Does this particular case need that former stipulation, or is this one adequate? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is the structure occupied or not? MR. MUSSE: The guesthouse. I just -- I just found out that it Page 29 January 24, 2013 was actually a guesthouse. The whole time I thought it was a storage building when I was speaking with Mr. Stone in the past. Never been inside it. You would have to ask Mr. Stone if someone's living in the guesthouse. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Mr. Stone? MR. STONE: Yes, somebody's staying there. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. L'ESPERANCE: So then my question remains, should we use the former stipulation agreement that we saw a couple cases ago? I notice that it's different from this one. MS. BAKER: Yeah. We could ask the investigator to modify that and bring it back. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Because I thought that was a very good inclusion on the former stipulation agreement about the occupied property, if it's occupied, et cetera, et cetera. I kind of like the wording that was in that one. MR. MUSSE: Okay. Will do. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Thank you. Is that okay, Mr. Chairman? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's absolutely correct. Mr. Stone? MR. STONE: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Could you give us a little background on the -- there was a guesthouse built, I guess, without a permit; is that it? MR. STONE: Actually, it was there when -- my sister bought the property, and that was there when we bought the property. And then I bought the property from her. So that's always been there since CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The beginning of time. MR. STONE: -- you know, we've had the property. Now, you know, that -- now, there's a couple of carports I built onto my garage that, you know, I didn't get a permit for. But that's always been there. Page 30 January 24, 2013 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: What do you intend on doing with the guesthouse? Are you going to leave it and get it permitted, or are you going to tear it down? MR. STONE: I don't know what to do. I mean, the bank's repo'ing my house now. It's already in repossession. So, you know, they're trying to short-sale it right now. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So -- MR. STONE: But I'm losing the house, period, so -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So you're not going to do anything? You're going to let the bank do it? MR. STONE: Not if I can help it. I mean -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The 120 -- do think that -- MR. STONE: You know, I've lost everything already, so -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you think the bank is going to do whatever they're going to do within 120 days? MR. STONE: I don't know. I'm hoping so. I'm hoping they sell it or do something in the next 120 days. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: What we don't want to happen is for the house to go short-sale or whatever and somebody else wind up with the same problems that you have, unsuspectedly; in other words, it needs to be part of the record that anybody who would purchase that would know what violations exist. MR. STONE: Well, I mean, you know, we purchased it, and it was there, so I mean -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Right. MR. STONE: It's been purchased twice, like I said. My sister purchased it; it was there. Now I purchased it from my sister; that building was there. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Mr. Chairman, do we have the ability to put a little bit of a flag on this particular -- MR. STONE: And as far as I know, I'm paying taxes on it. Page 31 January 24, 2013 MR. LEFEBVRE: Well, with a stipulated agreement, it would be recorded. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Right. MR. LEFEBVRE: But that still -- it's not -- he's not going to correct the problem, so five months from now, if it's bank owned, it's now the bank's issue. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's correct. MR. STONE: I don't have the money to do anything. I mean, you know -- MR. LEFEBVRE: Just for a matter of discussion, I don't know if it would be better to hear the case, find him in violation, and then put a time frame on it. I don't know if there's really much of a difference to do that. I mean -- MR. L'ESPERANCE: Jean, what do you think? MR. LEFEBVRE: It's going to be the same outcome. MS. RAWSON: Well, he's stipulated and agreed to a certain amount of time. If he loses the house, you know -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It's moot. MS. RAWSON: -- the bank's stuck with the order. If you accept a stipulation that's the same as if you heard the case, I don't think it makes any difference. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Well, I think that the -- this is nothing unusual to us. It happens all the time, and 120 days, if nothing is done and it's in violation and it's $200-a-day fine, which you're probably not going to pay either, that now will revert to the bank. So -- am I clear on that or -- MS. FLAGG: Just as clarification, if there's an order entered, the bank can still sell the property to somebody else. The buyer would only know about the order if they did a lien search. Hopefully they would get title insurance, and the title insurance company would pick up the order. Page 32 January 24, 2013 MR. STONE: Well, see, now -- now that goes back to my sister. We had title insurance and all that when she bought the house, so that should already have been found on that, originally. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The difference there is the title company would have seen -- had this come before the board as a violation, they would have seen that, but it didn't at that time. It slipped through the cracks or whatever. MR. STONE: Yeah. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: There was no violation, so the title company gave you title insurance not knowing that there was a structure there that was not permitted. MR. LEFEBVRE: What will happen is they'll -- this will be filed, so if the title company does do a title search at this point, they'll see that there's some kind of violation on the property. If it goes past five months, then they'll see that there's $200 -- or whatever we decide -- per day until it's corrected. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah. I have no problem with accepting the stipulation as written and let it play out the way it plays out. MR. LEFEBVRE: But we have to make those changes that -- MR. MUSSE: Excuse me. I did make corrections. I added about the unpermitted living space. I just need him to initial it. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Okay. Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Why don't you read that piece into the record. MR. MUSSE: You want me to start all over? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: No, no, no, just the modification. MR. MUSSE: The modification, the unpermitted living space must be unoccupied and utilities turned off within 24 hours of this hearing until the building permit or demolition permit has received a certificate of completion/occupancy, or a fine of$250 per day will be imposed until the violation has been abated. Page 33 January 24, 2013 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Mr. Stone, you understand that as well? MR. STONE: Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do we have a motion from the board? MR. L'ESPERANCE: So moved, to accept. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion to accept the stipulation as written. Do we have a second? MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And we have a second. Mr. Lefebvre, you have a question? MR. STONE: I have a problem here. MR. LEFEBVRE: Well, I have a problem too. It says within 24 hours the power has to be turned off. MR. STONE: Right. MR. LEFEBVRE: Hold on. I'm speaking. MR. STONE: Okay. MR. LEFEBVRE: Within 24 hours, but there's no -- does it say -- it doesn't say that you have to go back in to make sure that's turned off, and there's no fine attached to that. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That was part of the original stipulation of$200 a day, I'm assuming. MR. LEFEBVRE: Must be turned off within 24 hours, but how are we going to -- MR. L'ESPERANCE: Two fifty per day. MR. STONE: If I turn the power off to that, then all the power to my well and my pump and all that goes off. I have no water for my house. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: In other words, you're saying that the power for that guesthouse -- MR. STONE: Is all on the back of that shed, yes. It's all there. It's all connected. Page 34 January 24, 2013 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Part of your house, your main structure? MR. STONE: Right. If I shut the power off, then I have no water. MR. L'ESPERANCE: It says utilities must be -- MR. STONE: It does have a panel in it. I mean -- MR. L'ESPERANCE: Can you turn off the power at the panel? Sir, can you turn off the panel? MR. STONE: There's a breaker in the house that turns off that out there, and then there's a panel out there. Now, I can turn off most of the panel out there. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Will your well still work if you turn off your panel? MR. STONE: If I turn off the panel in the house, the well won't work. MR. L'ESPERANCE: If you turn off the panel in the guesthouse, will your well function? MR. STONE: I can leave -- well, if I leave the breaker on for it, it will function, and turn off all the other breakers off. MR. MARINO: Pull the breakers. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Is that okay with -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It's okay with -- in all likelihood -- I'm trying to be pragmatic -- any fine that you attach to this separately won't get paid. The only thing that would change this is if the sheriff were to enforce it. So that's the situation we're at right now. So why don't you agree to turn the power off to the guesthouse so it doesn't disrupt your well and -- et cetera. MR. STONE: Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. LEFEBVRE: But he also said it's being -- that guesthouse is currently occupied, correct? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah. How long -- well, how long Page 35 January 24, 2013 are the people going to be in the guesthouse? I could phrase it, how long are they going to be there without electricity, but -- MR. L'ESPERANCE: Well, they have to get out within 24 hours. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. According to the order, they should vacate the property within 24 hours. MR. STONE: Right. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I know that imposes a hardship. MR. MARINO: How many people are living in this guesthouse? MR. STONE: Just one. MR. MIESZCAK: Paying rent? MR. STONE: He's behind in the rent, but yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, then that shouldn't be too big a problem then. Okay. So he needs to vacate the property, and you can tell him that the Code Enforcement Board has -- and you'll get a copy of this -- requested that that be vacated, and as soon as that happens, then turn the panel off so it doesn't disrupt your water in your house. MR. MARINO: Well, he's got to do that within 24 hours. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Do we need a vote on this, Mr. Chairman, or are we -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes, we do. But I'm wondering if we could give him a little bit more -- since it's been there for years, a little bit more time to vacate the property than 24 hours. We have done that in the past. MR. L'ESPERANCE: What is your suggestion? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I would say a week. Would that be enough time to have him gather his things and get out of there? MR. STONE: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So my recommendation would be to change that 24 hours to seven days. Page 36 January 24, 2013 MR. MUSSE: Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: This isn't something -- that has been built and was there for how many years? MR. STONE: Well, I've lived there 10 years, so -- and it was there before I bought the house. And my sister was there. So I know it's been there at least 12 years. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Does anybody have a problem with seven days? MR. MARINO: No. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Could we get a motion, then, with the seven-day modification on the vacating of the property? MR. L'ESPERANCE: So moved. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. MARINO: Second it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. We wish you all the best of luck, Mr. Stone. I know it's a bad situation, but that's just the way it is. Thank you. MR. LEFEBVRE: Does he have to initial that signature? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Yes, he will. MS. BAKER: The next case will be No. 10, Case CESD20120015571, Rene William Sharpe. Page 37 January 24, 2013 (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: A partially constructed home without completed Collier County building permits, inspections, and certificate of completion/occupancy. Location/address where violation exists: 5220 40th Street, Northeast, Naples, Florida, 34120; Folio 39020880006. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Rene William Sharpe, 5220 40th Street, Northeast, Naples, Florida, 34120. Date violation first observed: October 15, 2012. Date owner/person in charge given notice of violation: October 15, 2012. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: November 14, 2012. Date of reinspection: November 15, 2012. Results of reinspection: The violation remains. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning, Eric. MR. SHORT: Good morning. For the record, Investigator Eric Short, Collier County Code Enforcement. I would like to present case evidence in the following exhibit: One photo taken on January 23, 2013, showing the unfinished structure. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Motion to accept the photo? MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to accept. MR. LEFEBVRE: Is that the complete package? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is that all the photos you have? MR. SHORT: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. Page 38 January 24, 2013 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Thank you. MR. SHORT: This case originated on October 15, 2012, from a prior case that was withdrawn due to a change in ownership. Research revealed that Permit No. 200602448 for a CBS home is expired. Attempts to contact the new owner has been unsuccessful. To date, the violation remains. MR. L'ESPERANCE: When was the last activity on this home for construction occurring, roughly? MR. MIESZCAK: A long time ago. MR. SHORT: In 2006. MR. L'ESPERANCE: 2006. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, it looks like it needs to be spruced up a little bit. You've had no ability to contact the owner? MR. SHORT: No. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you know whether there's a mortgage on this house? MR. SHORT: I don't have that information offhand. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I guess we could look that up in the Clerk of the Court. MR. LEFEBVRE: I make a motion a violation exists. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Second. Page 39 January 24, 2013 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second that a violation exists. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Okay. This looks like a structure that probably will need to be -- MR. MIESZCAK: Torn down. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah, taken down. Okay. Do you have a suggestion, Eric? MR. SHORT: 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: 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. Page 40 January 24, 2013 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is this a safety problem out there? MR. SHORT: You can tell that the roof is dilapidated. I mean, it's been sitting for a while. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: No. I mean, is this a place where kids may go to play or -- MR. SHORT: There is some graffiti on the inside that -- maybe some kids have been hanging out there. MR. L'ESPERANCE: No swimming pool? MR. SHORT: I'm sorry? MR. L'ESPERANCE: No swimming pool? MR. SHORT: No pool. MR. LEFEBVRE: Could we see the order, please? Would this maybe be one that might be best to break down? Can I see the order, please? MS. BAKER: The recommendation? MR. LEFEBVRE: Yeah, the recommendation. Yeah, sorry, the recommendation. Would this be better to break down where it says, maybe, get the building permits within a certain period of time, and then -- certificate of completion or demolition permit? MR. L'ESPERANCE: And if not, then to demolish the structure? MR. LEFEBVRE: Right. MR. L'ESPERANCE: It's an attractive nuisance, maybe. MR. LEFEBVRE: I mean -- because you have to give them ample time to responsibly finish this house, which probably would take six months or so. If we just put one time frame, it could take six months or more before they come back in front of us, but if we put a time frame of getting a building permit or a demo permit within a time frame and it's separated out, what's the board's thought? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, I think that I would agree with you except that there's been no contact with the owner. MR. LEFEBVRE: Right. Well, what I'm saying is, if we give Page 41 January 24, 2013 them a shorter period -- window to get the building permit and then fines start -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I'm in favor of giving him a short time to do everything. MR. LEFEBVRE: Well, that's -- I mean -- MR. MARINO: I agree. MR. LEFEBVRE: That's -- if their intentions are to finish the building then -- I mean, you're not, obviously, going to pull permits and finish the building in 30 days, let's say. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, I would give them 90 days, and that's it. If you can't get them in 90 days -- you haven't gotten them yet, and you've been trying for how long? MR. SHORT: Since October 15, 2012. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: If he hasn't gotten them since October, the likelihood of getting them going forward is probably unlikely. MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Unless you want to make it even shorter than 90 days, because it could be a safety violation with kids playing in there, et cetera. The county, in all probability, will be the ones who will demo this building and put a lean on it. MR. LEFEBVRE: There's been no submittal for any kind of permits or anything? MR. SHORT: No, there haven't. And just to clarify, there's no foreclosure proceedings or anything. MR. LEFEBVRE: It would be pretty hard to get financing. MR. L'ESPERANCE: So this structure may have been abandoned? You're not sure. MR. SHORT: It recently changed ownership. MR. LEFEBVRE: In September. In September it changed ownership. So the chances are, it probably is -- it's not -- more than likely it's not financeable, unless there's a construction mortgage on it, Page 42 January 24, 2013 but unlikely other than a construction mortgage. All right. I'll go with Mr. Kaufman's recommendation. We always can change our order, or if we see progress we can -- obviously, they can come back in front of us. So I'm going to make it even shorter. I'm going to make it -- I'm going to make it 60 days. So the time frame will be -- obviously, to pay operational costs in the amount of-- how much was -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: 80.57. MR. LEFEBVRE: Thank you -- 80.57; within 60 days of the hearing, must do the above, or a fine of$300 a day will be imposed. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. MARINO: I'll second that. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And we have a second from Mr. Marino. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Thank you, Eric. MR. SHORT: Thank you. MS. BAKER: The next case will be No. 13, which was the added emergency case, CE -- Case CEPM20130000548, Brent R. Parker. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. BAKER: This is in reference to violation of ordinance, Page 43 January 24, 2013 Collier County Code of laws and Ordinances, Chapter 22, Article VI, Section 22-231(1) and Section 22-231(2). Description of violation: No hot and cold water supply to occupied dwellings. Location/address where violation exists: 850 7th Street, Bonita Springs, Florida, 34134; Folio 24533040005. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Brent R. Parker, 11325 Sunray Drive, Bonita Springs, Florida, 34135. Date violation first observed: January 14, 2013. Date owner/person in charge given notice of violation: January 15, 2013. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: Immediately. Date of reinspection: January 22, 2013. Results of reinspection: The violation remains. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. MS. PULSE: Good morning. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I assume that no hot water is a byproduct of no water? MS. PULSE: Correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. PULSE: For the record, Investigator Dee Pulse, Collier County Code Enforcement. I have -- I would like to present case evidence in the following exhibits: A photograph taken by me on January 22, 2013. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Motion to accept the exhibit? MS. PULSE: I also have email notification from Utility Billing Investigator Michael Andreski advising me that the meter had been pulled and, therefore, no water going to occupants. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. PULSE: He believed there possibly could be occupants at that time. He wasn't sure. Page 44 January 24, 2013 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So we need a motion to accept the photo and a motion to accept the written documentation from the water company. MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion to accept. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And we have a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Thank you. MS. PULSE: I was notified by Investigator Andreski that water meter was pulled due to nonpayment of the bill. There were possibly occupants on site. The structure is a duplex. I was on site. I confirmed that the occupant -- there were occupants in the structure. I spoke to occupants in both units and confirmed they had no water. I was given several phone numbers to contact owner. I've called; left voice messages. I've not ever received any contact back from the owner. We created a notice of violation; courtesy copy was taken to the owner-of-record address. He was not available, so it was posted at his property. Notice of hearing was created; also courtesy copy taken to the owner of-- owner's address of record and was left with a female Page 45 January 24, 2013 occupant that was at the residence, and to date I have not heard from the owner. Utility billing verified this morning the outstanding amount due has not been paid. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And the owner lives locally? MS. PULSE: In Bonita Springs. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Is there a legal action against this rental property? MS. PULSE: Yesterday I was at the property. There is a notice posted, three-day notice to vacate. That portion of the duplex, I believe the occupants left. The other portion, there are still occupants I spoke to yesterday. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Do we know if there's any court action against? MS. PULSE: I don't know. MR. L'ESPERANCE: You don't know. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: What do the occupants that are still there say? Are they leaving? MS. PULSE: No. They don't intend to leave. They haven't been given any notice as well from the owner, they said. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's hard -- it's hard to stay in a place with no water, so -- MS. PULSE: Right. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: They may not intend to. But let's see if we find them in violation first. Anybody like to make a motion that a violation exists? MR. MARINO: I'll make a motion that the violation exists. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And we have a second. Page 46 January 24, 2013 All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. A violation exists. Do you have a recommendation? MS. PULSE: Yes, sir. 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: Number one, water supply must be restored to the property with an active valid account with Collier County Public Utilities or premises should be vacated until such time that the water supply is restored to the property with an active valid account with Collier County Public Utilities within blank days of this hearing, or a fine of blank per day will be imposed the until 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 bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provision of-- provisions of this order, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Mr. Chairman? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. Page 47 January 24, 2013 MR. L'ESPERANCE: I have a question to Jean about Paragraph 1. Second line down after the word "premises," we have the word "should." Should that, perhaps, be a little stronger? Perhaps the word "shall" or -- MS. RAWSON: Shall. MR. L'ESPERANCE: -- or "must"? Thank you. MR. LEFEBVRE: I would like to fill in the blanks. So with that change -- make that one change, "should" shall be -- shall be changed to "shall," and I'd like to make it within three days of this hearing, or a fine of$500 per day will be imposed, and all operational costs to be paid within 30 days. MR. MARINO: I'll second that. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Will someone notify the residents there that should the water not be restored by, I guess it's Monday, that they will have to vacate the premises? MS. PULSE: Okay. I will. MR. LEFEBVRE: And is there any way to -- I mean, I know you haven't had any contact with the owner, but is there any way to notice the owner also? MS. PULSE: We could leave this order at his residence. MR. LEFEBVRE: I know by the time Mr. Kaufman signs the Page 48 January 24, 2013 order, it's usually next week. Is there any way to notify him sooner? MS. BAKER: We could just try and make a site visit to the residence again and try and get ahold of him. MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I can sign it today if it was ready, but Jean has to put it together. MR. LEFEBVRE: Right. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: This was an emergency case. MR. LEFEBVRE: Right. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I can't believe that the folks are capable of living there with no water, and I wonder why there was a notification on one of the units to vacate and not the other. MR. LEFEBVRE: Maybe they're not paying rent. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And the other thing that I would probably check into is, again, on the Clerk of the Court, to see if there are any foreclosure proceedings, or maybe the foreclosure team could take a look at this. MS. PULSE: I don't believe that there's any foreclosure proceedings, but I don't know that there's any eviction ordered -- recorded eviction notices. MR. MARINO: You spoke to the people that are living there now? MS. PULSE: Yes, sir. MR. MARINO: And the water'd been turned off? MS. PULSE: Well, I'm not sure how -- I didn't ask them how long it had been off, but the utility billing department said that it had been off since July. MR. MIESZCAK: July? MR. MARINO: Could there be two separate meters there? MS. PULSE: No, there's only one meter. MR. MARINO: One meter? MS. PULSE: Uh-huh. Page 49 January 24, 2013 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Was there a well there possibly? MS. PULSE: I don't believe so. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. PULSE: The occupants advised me that they were bringing in water -- buckets of water, and they were bringing it from a business that they worked at, but now they're getting it from the neighbor. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Unfortunate. MS. PULSE: With their permission. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Thank you. MS. PULSE: Thank you. MS. BAKER: Moving on to No. 5, old business, Letter A, motion for imposition of fines/liens, No. 1, Case CESD20120003258, Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. AMBACH: Again, for the record, Investigator Chris Ambach, Collier County Code Enforcement. Violations of the Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a) in the 2007 Florida Building Code, Chapter 4, Section 424.2.17. Location: 2221 Golden Gate Boulevard West, Naples, Florida, 34117; Folio No. 36912040009. Description: Expired pool permit and no protective barrier around the pool. Past orders: On May 24, 2012, 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, OR4806, Page 3379, for more information. The property is in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board's orders as of October 9, 2012. The fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order Item No. 1 and 2, fines at a rate of$500 per day for the period Page 50 January 24, 2013 between June 9, 2012, and October 9, 2012, 123 days, for the total dollar amount of$61,500. Order Item No. 4, abatement costs of$4,180 have been paid. Order Item No. 5, operational costs of$81.15 have been paid. Total amount to date: $61,500. The county recommends full abatement of fines, as the violation is abated, and operational costs are paid. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So the county abated it and then was paid back by the respondent? MR. AMBACH: That's correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion to abate. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. MIESZCAK: Second the motion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. The fine is abated; the lien is abated. MS. BAKER: Next case is No. 2 under imposition of fines, Case CEPM20120003266, Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. AMBACH: Again, for the record, Investigator Chris Ambach, Collier County Code Enforcement. Page 51 January 24, 2013 Violations: Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, Chapter 22, Article VI, Section 22-231, subsections 9, 11, 12i, 12p, and 20. Location: 2221 Golden Gate Boulevard West, Naples, Florida, 34117; Folio No. 36912040009. Description: Exposed wires, no smoke detectors, holes in the ceiling and walls and broken windows. Past orders: On May 24, 2012, 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, OR4806, Page 3377, for more information. The property is in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of November 15, 2012. The fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order Item No. 1 and 2, fines at a rate of$500 per day for the period between July 24, 2012, and November 5th -- I'm sorry, November 15, 2012, 115 days, for the total dollar amount of$57,500. Order Item No. 5, operational costs of 81 .41 -- excuse me -- $81.43 have been paid. Total amount to date: $57,500. The county recommends full abatement of fines, as the violation is abated, and operational costs have been paid. MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion to abate. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second the motion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And we have a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. Page 52 January 24, 2013 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. One question I have on this. It seems the bank -- this is probably one that was in foreclosure, the bank took it over and then abated everything, and that's how it's come before us. That's why the days -- the fines are so high. MR. AMBACH: That's correct. This was a grow house case -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. AMBACH: -- at the time, and it was several issues. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Very good, thank you. MR. AMBACH: Okay. MS. BAKER: Next case is No. 3, CESD20120004794, Hernandez Equity Investment Incorporated. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. LETOURNEAU: For the record, Jeff Letourneau, Collier County Code Enforcement. Original violation of Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). The violation location is 1261 DeSoto Boulevard South, Naples, Florida, 34117; Folio No. 41105240009. Violation description is an expired permit, No. 20006063986, CBS home. Past order: On September 27, 2012, 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, OR4853, Page 1142, for more information. The property is not in compliance with the Code Enforcement Page 53 January 24, 2013 Board orders as of January 24, 2013. The fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order Items No. 1 and 2, fines at the rate of$200 per day for the period between December 27, 2012, to January 24, 2013, totaling 29 days, for the total amount of$5,800. The fines continue to accrue. Operational costs of$81.15 have not been paid. Total amount to date: $5,881.15. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, it looks like it fails the test of -- it's not in compliance; the operational costs have not been paid. MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to impose the fine. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion to impose. Do we have a second? MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Thanks, Jeff. MR. LETOURNEAU: Thank you. MS. BAKER: Next case, No. 4 under imposition, Case CESD20120006219, Craig M. Morris. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. MUSSE: Good morning. For the record, Investigator Jonathan Musse, code enforcement. Past orders: On September 27, 2012, the Code Enforcement Page 54 January 24, 2013 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, OR4844, Page 313, for more information. The property is not in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of January 24, 2013. 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 a period between December 27, 2012, and January 24, 2013, 29 days, for a total of$5,800. Fines continue to accrue. Order Item No. 5, operational costs of$80.86 have not been paid. Total amount to date: $5,880.86. MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion to impose. MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second the motion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. By the way, have you been in contact with these folks at all? MR. MUSSE: I've been trying to get in touch with Mr. Craig. I haven't been able to since the last hearing. Basically -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It's -- December 27th was the end of the year. It hasn't been a long time. MR. MUSSE: Right, right. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And it's -- they accrue very quickly. Page 55 January 24, 2013 MR. MUSSE: Yes, yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is it possible for you to try to get ahold -- MR. MUSSE: Well, I've been trying to call him. It's just -- I'm getting no response; leaving messages and not getting any response from him. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Does he have an address you can mail something to? MR. MUSSE: I believe it's addressed to this property. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Is that property occupied? MR. MUSSE: No. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Does he live in town? MR. MUSSE: Everything -- the past times that I called him, he was always up north. Whether or not he has another residence in Naples I'm not aware of. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, okay. Yeah, we're all about compliance, and we'd just as soon this come into compliance and not be fined, but -- MR. MUSSE: Right. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Would the public record show an alternate address up north? MR. MUSSE: Not -- I could -- MS. BAKER: The addresses that are on the public record are to that residence. That's the only residence we have for him. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Thank you so much. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you. MS. BAKER: The next case is No. 5, Case CEPM20120004563, Craig M. Morris. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. MUSSE: Investigator Jonathan Musse, code enforcement. Past orders: On September 27, 2012, the Code Enforcement Board issued the finding of fact, conclusion of law and order. The Page 56 January 24, 2013 respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached order of the board, OR4844, Page 311, for more information. The property is not in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of January 24, 2013. 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 a period between December 27, 2012, and January 24, 2012, for a total of $5,800. Fines continue to accrue. Order Item No. 5, operational costs of$80.86 have not been paid. Total amount to date: $5,880.86. MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion to impose. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. MIESZCAK: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Thank you. MR. MUSSE: Thank you. MS. BAKER: Next case is No. 6, Case CELU20120007339, Timothy Todd Lainhart, Lori Renee Lainhart, Anthony Ira Lainhart, and Deana Renee Lainhart. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. SHORT: Regarding violations of the Collier County Land Page 57 January 24, 2013 Development Code 04-41, as amended, Sections 1 .04.01(A), 2.02.03, and 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). Location: No site address; Folio No. 37692280007. Description: A permitted accessory structure with unpermitted alterations and with no principal structures on the same parcel. Past orders: On August 23, 2012, 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, OR4832, Page 1924, for more information. The property is not in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of January 24, 2013. The fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order Item No. 1 and 2, fines at a rate of$150 per day for the period between December 21, 2012, through January 24, 2013, 35 days, for the total of$5,250. Fines continue to accrue. Order Item No. 5, operational costs of$80.86 have not been paid. Total amount to date: $5,330.86. MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to impose the fines. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And we have a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) Page 58 January 24, 2013 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. I have one question. When you have no site address, where do you -- do you post it on the property? MR. SHORT: That is correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And at the courthouse? MR. SHORT: Correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Nothing is mailed to the respondent? MR. SHORT: The respondents actually have a separate address listed. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Oh, okay. All righty. Thank you. MR. SHORT: Thank you. MS. BAKER: Mr. Chair, the county is asking that No. 7 be withdrawn for Grand Cypress Communities, Inc. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Absolutely not. No. MR. MIESZCAK: Why? (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. LETOURNEAU: For the record, Jeff Letourneau, Collier County Code Enforcement. The gentleman was here this morning. He's that close to getting the -- he's got both permits pulled. He didn't realize that his contractor had not called in for the final inspection on the one permit. It's the wall permit. And it will be done today along with him paying the operational costs, which he claims he didn't know anything about at this point. MR. MIESZCAK: I'm surprised that he has not paid the operating costs. MR. LETOURNEAU: He, honestly, told me he did not know about the operational costs or thought he had already paid it, one of the two. MR. LEFEBVRE: Was he in front of us personally, or was his -- MR. MIESZCAK: Yes, he was here four months ago. MR. LEFEBVRE: All right. Page 59 January 24, 2013 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: When you say he's "this close," based on what? MR. LEFEBVRE: Final inspection, wall inspection. He was on his phone with his contractor as I was out there speaking with him telling him to come down and get that thing taken care of today. He was under the assumption that it was already done. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I'll tell you, I -- ordinarily, if he was here, I'd say you need to pay the $82.86 before we consider anything other than imposing it. MR. MIESZCAK: And he was here. He just walked out the door, so -- MR. LEFEBVRE: The other thing -- the other issue I have, he was noticed to come here. Why wasn't he on the phone with his contractor then? Why did it take here this morning? That's -- MR. LETOURNEAU: To be honest with you, he told -- I didn't have access to my computer. He told me his permit was done, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. I said, Jen, I really don't know at this point if it's taken care of. Went out there and just talked to him two seconds ago. Showed me that it was one step away, and that's where we're at. MR. LEFEBVRE: But what I'm trying to get at is when he was noticed for this meeting today, he should have been on the phone to his contractor, and it should have been taken care of, so -- MS. RAWSON: This is not something you vote on. If they want to withdraw it, they can withdraw it. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Exactly. MR. LEFEBVRE: Oh, okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Are you saying you want to withdraw it? MR. LETOURNEAU: I do want to withdraw it. I do believe that he will have it taken care of. And he's on his way right now to pay the operational costs. I just gave him the address. Page 60 January 24, 2013 MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay. MR. LETOURNEAU: Sorry for the confusion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: No problem. MS. BAKER: Next case is No. 8, CELU20120008659, Jesus Jaime and Maria Martinez. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do we want to -- how are your fingers? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Take a short break. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you want to take a short break? Okay. Let's take a short break. It's been an hour and a half. Okay. Be back at 10:40. (A brief recess was had.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Can we modify the agenda to move Jeffs last case up now? MR. LEFEBVRE: He has two cases. MS. BAKER: He's got two, actually, that he's taking care of. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Move both of them up. MS. BAKER: The next -- I'll just call them in order from which ones that he has, if that's fine. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. BAKER: The next one will be No. 8, CELU20120008659, Jesus Jaime and Maria Martinez. MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion -- do we have to amend? (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. This is in order, so we don't have to do the motion. MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay. MR. LETOURNEAU: For the record, Jeff Letourneau, Collier County Code Enforcement. Thank you, gentlemen. This is in violation of Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Sections 10.02.06(B)(1)(a), 10.02.06(B)(1)(e)(i), and 2.02.03. Page 61 January 24, 2013 Violation location is 3014 Everglades Boulevard South, Naples, Florida, 34117; Folio No. 41346400006. Violation description: Electrical improvements made to the principal structure and the underground storage container on the Estates zoned property. Past order: On October 25, 2012, 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, OR4853, Page 1140, for more information. The property is not in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of January 24, 2013. The fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order Items No. 1 and 2, fines at the rate of$500 per day for the period between November 30, 2012, to January 24, 2013, totaling 56 days, for the total amount of$28,000. Fines continue to accrue. Order Item No. 5, operational costs of$82 have not been paid. Total amount to date: $28,082. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: This was the grow house out there, as I recall. MR. LETOURNEAU: Yes, sir. Underground storage container that everybody was up in arms about. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion to impose. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second the motion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. Page 62 January 24, 2013 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Thank you. MS. BAKER: Okay. Then the next two cases will be taken out of order. They're No. 18 and No. 19 from imposition of fines. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Mr. Lefebvre has a motion to amend the -- MR. LEFEBVRE: I make a motion to amend the agenda. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Which case is this, again? MS. BAKER: Next case is No. 18, Case CES20120006821, Robert D. Campbell, Jr., and Nina M. Campbell. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. LEFEBVRE: Once again, for the record, Jeff Letourneau, Collier County Code Enforcement. 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). Violation location is 2331 8th Avenue Northeast, Naples, Florida, Page 63 January 24, 2013 34117; Folio No. 39393640009. Violation description: Garage enclosed and turned into living space with a bathroom and a mobile home without Collier County building permits. Past order: On September 27, 2012, the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinance and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached order of the board, OR4844, Page 319, for more information. The property is not in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of January 24, 2013. The fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order Item No. 1 and 2, fines at the rate of$500 per day for the period between November 27, 2012, to January 24, 2013, total of 59 days, for a total of$29,500. Fines continue to accrue. Order Item No. 5, operational costs of$80.57 have not been paid. Total amount to date: $29,580.57. MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to impose the fine. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Page 64 January 24, 2013 MS. BAKER: Next case is No. 19, Case CEAU20110013571, Jeff J. and Joan R. Reeder. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. LETOURNEAU: Once again, for the record, Jeff Letourneau, Collier County Code Enforcement. Original violations: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a) and 10.02.06(B)(1)(e)(i) and the Florida Building Code, 2007 Edition, Chapter 1, permits, Section 105.1. Violation location is 2321 10th Avenue Southeast, Naples, Florida, 34117; Folio No. 39393520006. Violation description: Multiple shed-type structures and a fence constructed without Collier County building permits. Past order: On February 23, 2012, 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, OR472, Page 1312, for more information. An extension of time was granted on June 28, 2012. See the attached order of the board, OR4819, Page 1418, for more information. The property is in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of January 11, 2013. Can we just go to the bottom? The county recommends full abatement of fines as the violation is abated and operational costs are paid. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do we have a motion to abate? MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to abate. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. MARINO: Second. Page 65 January 24, 2013 MR. MIESZCAK: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Thank you. MR. LETOURNEAU: Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Feel better, Jeff. MR. LETOURNEAU: Thank you. MS. BAKER: Okay. Next case, we're jumping back to No. 9, Case CESD20110006185, Jose F. Casarez. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. RODRIGUEZ: For the record, Maria Rodriguez, Collier County Code Enforcement. The property owner approached me today and is asking for an extension of time. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hold on one second. MR. KAUFMAN: Why don't you let us know what your story is. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. CASAREZ: Yes, sir. I had some complications in the construction that I'm doing. I've run into some big boulders while I was trying to bury the anchors. I had to dig a -- one of them was five foot in diameter. I had to dig a big hole, bury it. I've got four more that I've got to do, and I'm going to have to probably rent a chipping hammer to see if I can break them up because they're just too big. Page 66 January 24, 2013 And that's -- in between that and getting anchors and me, the only one working full time, has put a big problem in funds. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. An extension -- I'm looking back in the case. An extension was granted for 90 days in May. MR. CASAREZ: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So the original case goes back to February. MR. LEFEBVRE: That's not the original case. October 2011 . CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: October, I'm sorry, of'11. MR. LEFEBVRE: Right, October 2011 . Then there was an extension of time in February of last year, and then a subsequent extension of time on the 28th of June. MR. MARINO: June. MR. LEFEBVRE: I just feel this has been going on long enough. You know, he's already gotten two extensions, received two extensions from this board. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Is this mobile home occupied? MR. CASAREZ: Yes. We're living in it now. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Besides the anchors that you're installing, what else needs to be accomplished? MR. CASAREZ: Other than -- put disconnect on for the A/C and the water heater, and that's it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: How much was done prior to this? Was there a lot of work before this was done? MR. CASAREZ: I've done it all. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. RODRIGUEZ: He applied for a permit, a demolition, because, of course, he had two mobile homes on the piece of property. The demolition permit was issued, but he never called in the inspections and, of course, it expired. The building permit for the mobile home, the new mobile home, which he was already living in, he applied for it, but it couldn't be Page 67 January 24, 2013 issued until he CO'ed the demolition permit. Since it wasn't CO'ed, they didn't give him the permit for the mobile home. He's now applied for a demolition for the mobile home. It is in permitting right now, and it's ready to be issued, but he hasn't picked it up yet. So until he finalizes that demolition permit, he's not going to be able to do anything on the installation of the mobile home that he's in. MR. L'ESPERANCE: What will be the cost on the demolition permit, roughly? MS. RODRIGUEZ: He owes about $112 to pick up the demolition permit. Once that's issued, then he can pick up the permit for the mobile home. And I don't know how much -- probably $200 for the other permit. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, that's the permit for it, but the work that needs to be done is -- seems to be the stumbling block here with the boulders and the chipping hammer or whatever. How long do you think it would take to get this done? MR. CASAREZ: Because I'm by myself and doing it alone, it's probably going to take me three months, maybe two months, if I can. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It's unfortunate. We are about compliance and we like to see this to come into compliance. And Mr. Lefebvre is 100 percent correct, we've delayed this now for an awful long time. Do you have a comment? MS. FLAGG: I would just remind the board that if you choose not to provide the extension, there is still another opportunity for him that -- once he does come into compliance, we can go to the commissioners on his behalf and ask that the fines be waived, as long as he continues to make compliance efforts. So there is still an opportunity if he does pursue compliance if you choose not to grant the extension today. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And the extension that you're Page 68 January 24, 2013 requesting is what, 90 days? MR. CASAREZ: Yes, sir. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Mr. Chairman, I suggest that we do grant the extension for 90 days with the understanding by the owner that this probably, at the board's discretion, will be the last extension, and from there on you will be subject to possible fines. MR. CASAREZ: That's fine. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Do you understand? MR. CASAREZ: Yes. MR. L'ESPERANCE: And I don't know if I'll get a second or not on my motion, but we'll have to see. MR. MARINO: I'll second it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So we have a motion and we have a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Nay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. It passes. You have 90 days. MR. CASAREZ: Thank you, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And understand that this is probably going to be the last extension -- MR. CASAREZ: Right. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- that you'll have on this. MR. CASAREZ: Okay, thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Thank you. MS. BAKER: The next case will be No. 10, Case 2007100236, Anthony Dinorcia, Senior, LLC. And, Mr. Chair, I believe that the respondent is also asking for an Page 69 January 24, 2013 extension on this case, so we may want to let him go first. MR. DINORCIA: Good morning. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. DINORCIA: Gentlemen, what's happening here is we've done everything that we could. We got the architect's plans, we got the landscaping plans, we cleared the lot of all the exotics. And the engineer has been working with the county getting a deviation on parking, which we finally got a response a couple days ago, and it's going back and forth between the engineer and the county on getting a parking deviation. That's what's holding us up from getting us a permit. We're still back and forth, but we did everything that we could do so far. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: This is a case, also, that goes way back. Looks like it was signed on -- was it January? I see April of 2012. That was probably an extension. MR. LEFEBVRE: Stipulated agreement. January 18, 2012, a year ago. MR. DINORCIA: A substantial amount of work from the architects and engineers and landscape architect has been done. MR. LEFEBVRE: How much more time do you think you'll need? MR. DINORCIA: Well, the engineer's asking for indefinite; I'm sure that that's not possible. MR. LEFEBVRE: No. MR. DINORCIA: But I would say another 120 days, because it took them 120 days to get a response from the county. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: What does the county say? MR. BOX: We have no objection to it. The scope of this case -- it's actually two cases here. One involves numerous structures, probably in excess of 10 structures that are on his property that are unpermitted. Since that time, he's obtained permits for the -- one of Page 70 January 24, 2013 the structures, which was the main building and office building. And there was a secondary case that was involved with this also that had to do with a swale on the property, and he's coming into compliance on that also. He's trying to. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: How did all these -- MR. DINORCIA: Well, a lot of them were permitted but we didn't show the permit; right, Mr. Box? We dug up the -- MR. BOX: No. As far as our records reflect, there was never any permits that were applied for. The only one that was applied for was the office building, which had kind of fallen through the cracks. It was never CO'ed, and that's the one that has been CO'ed, so -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So 120 days, you think, would be sufficient time for you to -- MR. DINORCIA: Well, he just got a response, so they should be able to get it cleared up pretty quick. And as soon as we get that, then we can apply for the permits. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Once you get the permits, what actual work has to be done? This is just -- MR. DINORCIA: Basically the work is done. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Mr. Chairman, I move that we grant the extension of 120 days. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. Page 71 January 24, 2013 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. So you have a 120-day extension. If for some reason it's not done by then, come back in to us, and we'll cross that bridge when we come to it. MR. DINORCIA: Okay. Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you. MS. BAKER: Then the next case is No. 11, Case CELU20100022151, Anthony Dinorcia, Senior, LLC. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Go tackle him. It almost seems like we just saw you, but -- MR. DINORCIA: It seems that way. Sony. Can't get away. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Now, when I read this, it looks like, according to what you said, the swale is now in compliance? MR. BOX: No, it's not in compliance. He's moving towards compliance on that, once again, with his engineering company. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So you want a continuance on this as well? MR. DINORCIA: Yes, we will require because of the -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Same time frame? MR. DINORCIA: Yes, that will work. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Can we get a motion from the board? MR. MARINO: I'll make a motion we grant the extension. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hundred and twenty days? MR. MARINO: Hundred and twenty. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. Page 72 January 24, 2013 MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. MR. DINORCIA: Anymore? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I don't know. Don't walk too fast. MR. DINORCIA: Okay. Thank you. MS. BAKER: Next case is No. 12, Case CESD20120000069, Henry Rouzier and Jessica E. Lopez. And the operational costs have been paid on this case. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. RODRIGUEZ: For the record, Maria Rodriguez, Collier County Code Enforcement. The property owner is asking also for an extension of time. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Why don't you give us some background. MS. LOPEZ: I've actually contacted the tax collector in Immokalee trying to find what year it is. I've contacted the property appraisal (sic). They've told me that the person in charge of that section would contact me. I haven't heard from them yet. I don't seem to find any numbers on the trailer. I've actually contacted someone, though. They're going out there to check to see if they can see what year it is to pursue with it to see if the mobile home can actually be permitted. MR. LEFEBVRE: Have you asked for a continuance before? MS. LOPEZ: Yes, I was here -- MS. RODRIGUEZ: No, she hasn't. MR. LEFEBVRE: No, okay. Page 73 January 24, 2013 MR. L'ESPERANCE: What is the county's take on this? MS. RODRIGUEZ: We have no objection. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I see 120 -- 180 days. I guess that was the original order. MS. RODRIGUEZ: That was the original. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: What was done -- that was in November. When did you start working on getting this problem resolved? MS. LOPEZ: I've been working on it. It's been some months now, but I don't have any information on it. My husband is the one that did it all. So I don't know if there's a title or not because he's deceased, so it's, like, I'm left with myself to try to figure it out. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Has the county been able to help the respondent out in getting this resolved? MS. RODRIGUEZ: We suggested that she come in and talk to the permitting lady that comes to the office in Immokalee, and she did. And she kind of gave her an idea of where to look for the VIN number on the mobile home because, of course, she can't find any of the paperwork that her husband did. But she has not been able to locate it. But today, hopefully, she hired someone that will come out to look at the mobile home to see if he can figure it out for her. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: If there's no VIN number on it, is there another way of getting -- MS. RODRIGUEZ: Well, that's what he's -- I don't know. This gentleman is a mobile home installer, so he knows what he's doing. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. LEFEBVRE: Is there a company name on the trailer anywhere, like the manufacturer? MS. LOPEZ: No. I mean, I've looked around all in there. I haven't seen to find anything, so that's why I'm going to have someone go out there that knows more about it to see if they can actually find Page 74 January 24, 2013 some kind of information on it. MR. LEFEBVRE: I was just wondering if it was like a car where it has an emblem on, like, the front where you can maybe call up the manufacturer and describe what it looks like. MS. LOPEZ: No, I haven't. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Mobile homes don't. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: How much time do you think you'd need to get this resolved? MS. LOPEZ: Maybe another six months. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Six months is a long time. I think all -- this is just a -- paperwork. MS. RODRIGUEZ: Well, after she gets the title -- she'll have to request a title of the mobile home to see what year the mobile home was built. If the mobile home was built and it meets code, then she will be able to permit it. But at this point I have no idea whether it was built up to code or not, you know. It has to be wind zone too. MR. LEFEBVRE: If there's a title to it, would that be recorded? MS. RODRIGUEZ: Yes. It's just like a vehicle. It has to be recorded. But in order to get it, she'll need the VIN number, and I have no idea where the -- that's why the mobile home installer's going to come in and look for her. MR. LEFEBVRE: Isn't there any way to call -- if it's recorded with the state or whatever agency -- MS. RODRIGUEZ: She would need a name. She would need a VIN number, and she doesn't know who the owner was, because her husband did it all. MR. LEFEBVRE: Right. But if title was transferred into her husband's name, would it be under her -- MS. RODRIGUEZ: They have no title. MS. LOPEZ: I've contacted the DMV for it and given my husband's name, but they don't find it, so -- MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay. Page 75 January 24, 2013 MR. L'ESPERANCE: Mr. Chairman, I move that we grant the respondent 180 days extension. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second that motion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. You have 180 days. MS. LOPEZ: Okay. Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Which is six months. MS. BAKER: The next case is No. 14, Case CESD20100009135, Opera Naples, Inc. MR. MARINO: Gentlemen, I have to excuse myself from this one. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Mr. Marino needs to be excused for the remainder of the meeting. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Just this case. MR. LEFEBVRE: Just this case. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Just this case? MR. MARINO: Just this. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Oh, okay. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is this a case where -- this is one we denied the -- Page 76 January 24, 2013 MR. SNOW: No, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- continuance? MR. SNOW: That's going to be next. This is the next. This is the case below that, No. 14. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. What we have before us is a case that is, according to the write-up, not in compliance, and the operational costs have not been paid; is that correct? MS. BAKER: No. We're on No. 14, Opera Naples. I'm sorry. I skipped No. 13. We'll go back to that. MR. MIESZCAK: Oh, okay. MS. BAKER: I apologize. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Oh, okay. This one is easier. MR. SNOW: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. SNOW: Sir, this is violations of Collier County Code of Laws, Chapter 22, Article II, Section 22-26(b)(104.5.1 .4.4), Florida Building Code, 2007 Edition, Chapter 1, Section 105.1, and Ordinance 04-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). The location is 2408 Linwood Avenue, Naples, Florida, 34112; Folio number is 61631160002. And the description is alteration of the building consisting of, but not limited to, electrical, adding and removing interior walls, adding and widening the doors and door jams without first obtaining required Collier County building permits. Past orders: On August 25, 2011, the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact and a conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinance and ordered to correct the violations. See the attached order of the board, OR4718 and Page 2022, for more information. An extension of time was granted on May 24, 2012. See the attached order of the board, OR4832 and Page 1930, for more Page 77 January 24, 2013 information. An additional extension of time was granted on October 25, 2012. See the attached order of the board, OR4855 and Page 2484, for more information. The property is in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board order as of January 7, 2013. The fines and costs to date are described as follows: Order Item No. 1 and 2, fines at the rate of$200 per day for the period between November 30, 2012, and January 7, 2013, 39 days, for the total amount of$7,800. Order No. 5, operational costs of$80.86 have been paid. Total amount to date is $7,800. And the county recommends full abatement of fines, as the violation is abated and operational costs paid. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Could I get a motion from the board? MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to abate. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: (Abstains.) MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Thank you. MS. BAKER: And we'll be going back to No. 13, Case CESD20110011764, Paul A. and Cathleen T. Burcky. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) Page 78 January 24, 2013 MR. SNOW: Again, Kitchell Snow, Collier County Code Enforcement, K-I-T-C-H-E-L-L, S-N-O-W. This concerns violations of the Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). The location is 4425 North Road, Naples, Florida, 34104; the folio number is 26480720007. The description is a two-story concrete and wood structure located in the rear property area without first obtaining Collier County building permits. Past orders: On September 27, 2012, 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, OR4844 and Page 270, for more information. The property is not in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of January 24, 2013. 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 November 27, 2012, and January 24, 2013, 59 days, for a total of$8,850. Fines continue to accrue. Order No. 5, operational costs of$80.29 have not been paid. Total amount to date is $8,930.29. MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion to impose. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Page 79 January 24, 2013 MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. MR. SNOW: Thank you. MS. BAKER: Next case, No. 15, Case CESD20110009946, Carlos Rego Rivers. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Sir? MR. RIVERS: Hi. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Instead of having the county read it in, you're before us to request what? MR. RIVERS: I'm coming here for legalizing the lanai, but it's going to be hard -- every day going to be hard to put in code. Every day more expenses, more expenses with other expenses, you know, for my mortgage or something. And I decide, you know, to tear down the lanai because I no can afford no more. So that's it. I addressed the letter for you, you know. I am in the process, you know, to get the permit for demolition. I put tear down. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: This goes back to March of 2012. MR. RIVERS: Yes, long time. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And before that. These are the extensions I'm looking at. MR. RIVERS: Yeah. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All the way back to 2011; November 18, 2011 . MR. LEFEBVRE: Is the house in foreclosure? MR. RIVERS: No. I bought the house two years ago. I tried to put in code many things for the house and get inspection for this, inspection for that. And the lanai was legalized, but I tried to do it at the same time, but I no can afford everything. You know, it's hard for Page 80 January 24, 2013 me to get demolition, hard for me. I don't have no more money because insurance go up, everything. MR. LEFEBVRE: We've granted a couple extensions already. MR. RIVERS: Yes. You know, I tried to bring it down but, you know, everything is expensive. I have to pay engineer twice, you know. Everything I bring somebody, it's money, money, money. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So you've decided to do what then? MR. RIVERS: Bringing it down, demolition. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And when is it going to come down? MR. RIVERS: For sure, I risen -- THE COURT REPORTER: Say that again. I didn't understand you. MR. RIVERS: I already apply. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You applied for a demo? MR. RIVERS: Yeah. MR. LEFEBVRE: Is that correct? MR. BOSA: Yeah. For the record, Ralph Bosa, Collier County Code Enforcement. He did apply for the demo permit. It will be ready next week. He paid all the fees and everything associated with the demo permit. MR. LEFEBVRE: When did he apply for it? MR. BOSA: A demo permit. MR. LEFEBVRE: When? MR. BOSA: Yesterday, actually, so -- he says -- from what he was telling me, he tried to get it permitted as the way it was, and it was just too much money to get it upgraded to today's code, so he just said he's going to, you know, demo it and put it back to its originally permitted state. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Well, this is one where it's gone on probably way too long. And it may be, as Diane Flagg pointed out, a case where you may want to go back after the fact, after the board rules, should they rule to impose this. That would be a Page 81 January 24, 2013 shorter time frame, I'm sure, to remove the structure. So it's up to the board what they would like to do. MR. LEFEBVRE: I think with the fact that he did pull the permit, or did apply for the permit -- and you said the permit will be ready next week? MR. BOSA: Next week, on the 30th. MR. LEFEBVRE: Once you get the permit, how long do you think it will take from the time you get the permit to the time that you can remove the structures or return it to the original state? MR. RIVERS: You know, that won't be long. MR. LEFEBVRE: I'm looking for a time frame. How long? MR. RIVERS: Couple of days. That's it. MR. LEFEBVRE: I think in this particular case I would recommend or make a motion to grant a 30-day extension from today, or let's say till our next meeting. MR. L'ESPERANCE: I'll second your motion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. So you have one month. You've applied for the permit. MR. LEFEBVRE: Until our next meeting. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Until our next meeting. The building should be gone. If it's gone, that's fine. If not, we'll see you then. Page 82 January 24, 2013 MR. RIVERS: All right, okay. MR. BOSA: Thank you. MS. BAKER: Next case is No. 16, Case 2007090878, Jon R. and Denise T. Brimmer. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. AMBACH: For the record, Investigator Chris Ambach, Collier County Code Enforcement. I believe Ms. Brimmer's here to ask for an extension of time. MS. BRIMMER: Good morning, everyone. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. MS. BRIMMER: I'm Denise Brimmer, and I believe we thought we were done with this process. We applied -- we've had four engineers. Because Causeway Trusses went out of business, we had to have another engineer. We got all the permits approved, and then I found out how much they cost with impact fees, and I did not have the money. I have been emailing back and forth, and I found out this morning from Officer Ambach that they have expired. So I have to go apply for something else. We have 900 of the $1,500 needed for the permits to finish getting him to come in for the CO. This building was built before we bought the property. We've traced it back to 1986. We bought the property in 2000. And it's been an ongoing mess. We've had several different engineers and contractors and just -- we would like this process done. So we need to raise the funds to continue to pay for what needs to be done to be in compliance. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: How long do you think you'd need to raise the funds? MS. BRIMMER: I'm able, because I'm the only one working, to save about $100 a month, so I'm $600 short. Now, if I have other contracts come in -- it's the next thing on my Page 83 January 24, 2013 list. That's where money goes. It doesn't go into our savings or 401(k). This is the top priority next to necessary and essentials, such as insurance and mortgage and food. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. County, what say you? MR. AMBACH: The county would like to leave the decision up to the board. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. But the respondent has been working on -- diligently in getting this resolved? MR. AMBACH: Well, there was a few extensions granted by the board. Approximately three weeks after the last extension, the permit expired, and it's been in an expired state since May. MS. BRIMMER: That's when we got the permit. That's when our new general contractor and our new engineer went, because they said that what -- the original engineer and architecture were not the correct building. So they had to come out and redo it and check how keep the cement was. So that all happened in May, and we were told of the certificates being approved in July. So I don't -- maybe the original permit that I applied for in January expired? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: As long as you can show work, generally, on a permit, it automatically keeps going. MR. AMBACH: That's correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So -- MS. BRIMMER: It was just paying for the information since the building was -- what -- it was the after a fact permitting. MR. LEFEBVRE: After-the-fact permit. MS. BRIMMER: So all I was told in the last email -- and I've been emailing back and forth -- is they don't accept payments, that I need to come in with the $1,500. So I've been -- I'm at $800; I'm at $900. So I've been confirming back with them, but no one told me that they expired. MR. LEFEBVRE: It's been 19 months since you originally came Page 84 January 24, 2013 in front of us. I don't know how long it took for you to come in front of us, but somewhere around two years now that this issue's been going on. That's just an awful, awful long time. And you've had a couple extensions already. So I'm hardpressed to give another extension, unfortunately. It's been -- MR. L'ESPERANCE: This is not a dwelling, correct? MS. BRIMMER: No. It's an outbuilding. We don't use it. It's there. It's attached to our mortgage, so we can't demo it. We went back to our insurance, and they are -- our title insurance. That expired seven years after you bought the property. So I have no recourse within title insurance not finding that this wasn't CO'ed when they applied it to our mortgage, so I have to CO it. I don't have a choice. I can't change the structure that's listed on our mortgage. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Do you have electricity in the structure? MS. BRIMMER: There is electricity in there. That permit was already approved. MR. L'ESPERANCE: That part of the permit was approved for the inspection? MS. BRIMMER: All of the -- they're all after-the-fact. So we were told everything was good. All we had left is to pay and for Chris to come out and do a site visit. MR. AMBACH: I've not seen anything for electric. I've not seen anything for electric on that as far as permits are concerned. MR. L'ESPERANCE: I would be in favor of an extension if you agree to turn off the electrical power to that building until you have a granted extension or approved extension. MS. BRIMMER: Sure. It's -- all it is is the garage door opener. So there's a fuse box that's separate for that area. MR. L'ESPERANCE: How much time are you looking for? MS. BRIMMER: I'm able to raise about $100 a month. So $1,500, I'm looking at approximately five-and-a-half months, because I'm actually at $953.73 saved towards this. Page 85 January 24, 2013 MR. L'ESPERANCE: Would 180 days be close enough? MS. BRIMMER: That would be perfect. MR. MIESZCAK: I agree. MR. L'ESPERANCE: I'd like to move that the extension of time be granted for 180 days with the understanding to turn off the electrical until the electrical has been approved. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I will support that if you understand that this is the last -- MR. L'ESPERANCE: That's correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- extension that we will entertain. MR. L'ESPERANCE: That's correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. LEFEBVRE: I think I mentioned that last time. MR. AMBACH: If I could just ask the board, would you require me to go out and make an inspection to make sure that electric's off, or is that -- I'm not -- I just want to clarify. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Yes, please. MR. AMBACH: Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So we have a motion to grant 180 days. And we have a second; is that correct? MR. MIESZCAK: Yes. But let me ask just one question. That detached garage, you built it? MS. BRIMMER: No. It was -- MR. MIESZCAK: It was there when you bought it? MS. BRIMMER: Yes. MR. MIESZCAK: Which is the problem of Florida. It goes with the land. So it should have been in a title or some search that people like that don't get stuck with it. So when we're granting her that time, I see no problem with granting this time. MR. L'ESPERANCE: I agree. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. L'ESPERANCE: She didn't do it. Page 86 January 24, 2013 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? MR. LEFEBVRE: Nay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries, two, three, four, five, six -- five yeas, one nay. Okay. MR. BRIMMER: Thank you, gentlemen. Have a great day. MS. BAKER: Next case, No. 17, Case CESD20110006404, John T. Reynolds and Michele A. Reynolds. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. AMBACH: For the record, Investigator Chris Ambach, Collier County Code Enforcement. Violation: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). Location: 160 Golden Gate Boulevard West, Naples, Florida, 34120; Folio No. 37169240004. Description: Permit for the home on the property installed without receiving all inspections and a certificate of completion/occupancy. Past orders: On March 22, 2012, the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation in referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached order of the board, OR4784, Page 1792, for more information. The property is in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of January 7, 2013. The fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order Page 87 January 24, 2013 Item No. 1 and 2, fines at a rate of$250 per day for the period between July 21, 2012, and January 7, 2013, 171 days, for the total of $42,750. Order Item No. 5, operational costs of$81.15 have been paid. Total amount to date: $42,750. The county recommends full abatement of fines, as the violation is abated and operational costs are paid. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do we have a motion to abate? MR. MARINO: Make a motion to abate. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. MR. AMBACH: Thank you. MS. BAKER: Next case is No. 20, Case CESD2011001715, Ronnie and Beverly Bishop. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. BOSA: Good morning. For the record, Ralph Bosa, Collier County Code Enforcement. This is in reference to violations of Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). Page 88 January 24, 2013 Location is 1329 St. Clair Shores Road, Naples, Florida, 34104; Folio No. 294600009. Description: Turned permitted garage into a guesthouse. Past orders: On September 27, 2012, the Code Enforcement Board issued a findings of fact, conclusion of law and order. Respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached order of the board, OR4844, Page 315, for more information. The property is not in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of January 24, 2013. The fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order Item No. 1 and 2, fines at the rate of$250 per day for the period between November 7, 2012, to January 24, 2013, a total of 59 days, for the total of$14,750. Fines continue to accrue. Order Item No. 5, operational costs of$79.72 have not been paid. Total amount to date is $14,829.72. MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to impose the fine. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion to impose. MR. MARINO: Second it. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Thank you. MR. BOSA: Thank you. Page 89 January 24, 2013 MS. BAKER: And the next item is under Letter C, motion to rescind previously issued order for Ahmet and Melissa Celik, Case 2007110592. The county is requesting that the finding of fact order and the lien order be rescinded due to a land area calculation error on this case. MR. MIESZCAK: Whose calculation error? MS. BAKER: It was previous staff s error on the case. MR. MIESZCAK: Okay. MR. UESPERANCE: This is a recommendation from the county attorney or some other office? MS. FLAGG: We were doing QC checks on previous investigators' cases and identified this one, which is why we're requesting the order be amended. MR. UESPERANCE: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: This was where they cleared, according to the order, more than one acre so that when you went back it wasn't -- MS. FLAGG: It was just less than an acre; therefore, it would have been fine. MR. MIESZCAK: I'll make a motion to rescind. MR. LEFEBVRE: I'll second, but I have a question too. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second to rescind. Go ahead with your question. MR. LEFEBVRE: Were there any fines or anything that were paid by the respondents? MS. BAKER: No, sir. MR. LEFEBVRE: Nothing was ever paid? MS. BAKER: No. MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: This goes back to 2011. Gerald was the chairman at that time. Page 90 January 24, 2013 Okay. We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. UESPERANCE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. MR. UESPERANCE: That's a not -so- subtle dig. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: No, no. I was just showing how long ago it was. MR. MIESZCAK: That's a long time. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Because Gerald was chairman, and after Gerald was Kelly, and after Kelly, yours truly, so it was quite a while ago. MS. BAKER: The next item will be No. 8, reports. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Back to the beginning of the book. MS. FLAGG: Good morning. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. MS. FLAGG: For the -- since -- November of 2008 through January 13, 2013 -- hard to believe we're in 2013 -- the banks have expended $3.1 million to abate 2,754 code violations. And just as a reminder, these are funds that the banks have expended generally before they take title to the property. They're doing it based upon the mortgage note and a desire to keep the property into compliance so that they can then sell the property. Since July 2009 this board, the special magistrate, and the Board of County Commissioners have waived or abated $9.2 million in fines. Page 91 January 24, 2013 For the week of January 7 through January 13, 2013, 93 cases were opened. There have been 385 property inspections; 986 cases were closed with voluntary compliance; 47 abatements were completed by the county; 33 of our cases have been affected by bankruptcy. Again, the bankruptcy numbers continue to increase primarily due to what we're seeing with the foreclosure issues our community has faced. In the week also there were 208 lien - search requests completed, and three of the 208 had open cases. In addition, on December 12, 2012, the Board of County Commissioners voted to stop accepting anonymous complaints; however, they did offer to community members that if they were concerned about retaliation by trying to address an issue in their community, that they could work through their commissioner to have the issue addressed. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. MIESZCAK: Pretty nice. Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Anything from the board? MR. MARINO: I have a request. Is it possible to get the changes to the agenda, if we all got them? This way we weren't scrambling at the last minute to try to -- MS. BAKER: Unfortunately, we do not know the changes, usually, until the morning of the meeting. So there really isn't any way for us to get that prepared for you until -- because we have up -- until the last minute of when we start this, it's continually changing. MR. MIESZCAK: The slight challenge is how quickly we can put it together. MS. FLAGG: If -- we give community members the opportunity to pursue a stipulation as opposed to going through the hearing process, and so those, typically, are the changes that occur the day of the meeting. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It's not so much the stipulations, Page 92 January 24, 2013 because that's generally the same case. It's just rearranging in the agenda. But the other -- I think what Tony is referring to, that you walk in and you have a stack of papers that now you've got to see where you're going to put them in there. But I understand. That's just the way it is. MR. MARINO: I only have 31 tabs. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah. MR. MIESZCAK: I'll make a motion to adjourn. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion to adjourn and a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. UESPERANCE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We're adjourned. Page 93 January 24, 2013 There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 11:31 a.m. CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD Chairman These inutes approved by the Board o rv� ��as � presented or as corrected TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC., BY TERRI LEWIS, NOTARY PUBLIC /COURT REPORTER. FORM 8B MEMORANDUM OF VOTING CONFLICT FOR LASTCQOURNTY, MMUNICIPAL, AND OTHER LOCAL PUBLIC OFFICERS /tq M y� C/O O , COUNCIL, COMMIS ION, AUTHORITY, OR COMMITTEE MAILING ADDF�ES$/J� �` �O L �^ THE BOARD, COUNCIL, COMMISSION, AUTHORITY OR COMMITTEE ON (( / /ff/�/��JLL WHICH I SERVE IS A UNIT %OF- CITY COUNTY ❑ CITY BOUNTY ❑ OTHER LOCAL AGENCY A NAME OF POLITICAL SUBDIVISION: DATE ON WHICH VO'rE OCCURRED /— 2— C/— //"P MY POSITION IS: ••• ❑ ELECTIVE WHO MUST FILE FORM 813 This form is for use by any person serving at the county, city, or other local level of government on an appointed or elected board, council, commission, authority, or committee. It applies equally to members of advisory and non - advisory bodies who are presented with a voting conflict of interest under Section 112.3143, Florida Statutes. Your responsibilities under the law when faced with voting on a measure in which you have a conflict of interest will vary greatly depending on whether you hold an elective or appointive position. For this reason, please pay close attention to the instructions on this form before completing the reverse side and filing the form. INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 112.3143, FLORIDA STATUTES A person holding elective or appointive county, municipal, or other local public office MUST ABSTAIN from voting on a measure which inures to his or her special private gain or loss. Each elected or appointed local officer also is prohibited from knowingly voting on a mea- sure which inures to the special gain or loss of a principal (other than a government agency) by whom he or she is retained (including the parent organization or subsidiary of a corporate principal by which he or she is retained); to the special private gain or loss of a relative; or to the special private gain or loss of a business associate. Commissioners of community redevelopment agencies under Sec. 163.356 or 163.357, F.S., and officers of independent special tax districts elected on a one -acre, one -vote basis are not prohibited from voting in that capacity. For purposes of this law, a "relative" includes only the officer's father, mother, son, daughter, husband, wife, brother, sister, father -in -law, mother -in -law, son -in -law, and daughter -in -law. A "business associate" means any person or entity engaged in or carrying on a business enterprise with the officer as a partner, joint venturer, coowner of property, or corporate shareholder (where the shares of the corporation are not listed on any national or regional stock exchange). ELECTED OFFICERS: In addition to abstaining from voting in the situations described above, you must disclose the conflict: PRIOR TO THE VOTE BEING TAKEN by publicly stating to the assembly the nature of your interest in the measure on which you are abstaining from voting; and WITHIN 15 DAYS AFTER THE VOTE OCCURS by completing and filing this form with the person responsible for recording the min- utes of the meeting, who should incorporate the form in the minutes. APPOINTED OFFICERS: Although you must abstain from voting in the situations described above, you otherwise may participate in these matters. However, you must disclose the nature of the conflict before making any attempt to influence the decision, whether orally or in writing and whether made by you or at your direction. IF YOU INTEND TO MAKE ANY ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION PRIOR TO THE MEETING AT WHICH THE VOTE WILL BE TAKEN: • You must complete and file this form (before making any attempt to influence the decision) with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the meeting, who will incorporate the form in the minutes. (Continued on other side) CAF FnprA RR _ Gcc iionnn V v PAGE 1 APPOINTED OFFICERS (continued) • A copy of the form must be provided immediately to the other members of the agency. • The form must be read publicly at the next meeting after the form is filed. IF YOU MAKE NO ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION EXCEPT BY DISCUSSION AT THE MEETING: • You must disclose orally the nature of your conflict in the measure before participating.- • You must complete the form and file it within 15 days after the vote occurs with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the meeting, who must incorporate the form in the minutes. A copy of the form must be provided immediately to the other members of the agency, and the form must be read publicly at the next meeting after the form is filed. DISCLOSURE OF LOCAL OFFICER'S INTEREST I, 0� 1444 �J , hereby disclose that on 1^ Z L / 20 3 (a) A measure came or will come before my agency which (check one) inured to my special private gain or loss; inured to the special gain or loss of my business associate, inured to the special gain or loss of my relative, inured to the special gain or loss of by whom I am retained; or inured to the special gain or loss of which is the parent organization or subsidiary of a principal which has retained me. (b) The measure before my agency and the nature of my conflicting interest in the measure is as follows: Date Filed Signature NOTICE: UNDER PROVISIONS OF FLORIDA STATUTES §112.317, A FAILURE TO MAKE ANY REQUIRED DISCLOSURE CONSTITUTES GROUNDS FOR AND MAY BE PUNISHED BY ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING: IMPEACHMENT, REMOVAL OR SUSPENSION FROM OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT, DEMOTION, REDUCTION IN SALARY, REPRIMAND, OR A CIVIL PENALTY NOT TO EXCEED $10,000. CE FORM 8B - EFF. 112000 PAGE 2