MINUTES NOT VERBATIM
SANTA ROSA COUNTY BUILDING CODE
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS MEETING
MINUTES
FEBRUARY 11, 2004
The regular meeting of the Santa Rosa County Building Code Board of Adjustments and Appeals was held February 11, 2004, at 3:00 p.m. in the Conference room of the Santa Rosa County Building Inspection Department located at 6051 Old Bagdad Highway, Room 202, Milton, FL 32583. Board members present were Mr. Larry Hall, Vice-Chairman; Mr. Frank Harold, Mr. Danny Holt and Mr. William J. Blackman.
Mr. Charles “Pete” Southerland, Chairman, was absent from the meeting
Building Inspection Department staff in attendance were Mr. Tim Tolbert, Building Official; Mr. Skip Tompkins, Compliance Division Superintendent; Mrs. Rhonda Royals, Building Department Coordinator; and Ms. Amy Allen, Permit Analyst.
Mr. Tom Dannheisser, County Attorney was also present for the meeting.
Mr. Hall, Vice-Chairman called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m.
Approval of Agenda:
There was an amendment to the agenda. Mrs. Rhonda Royals asked the Board to move item number seven in front of item number five on the agenda. Item number five would become item number six and so forth. Mr. Harold made a motion to accept the agenda. Mr. Holt seconded the motion. The motion carried with an unanimous vote.
Approval of Minutes:
Mr. Harold made a motion to approve the minutes from the December 10 , 2003 meeting. Mr. Holt seconded the motion. The motion carried with an unanimous vote.
Next Meeting:
The next regularly scheduled meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, March 10, 2004, at 3:00 p.m.
Robert Ival Miller d/b/a Miller Brothers
Mrs. Royals explained the case to the Board. Mr. Miller has asked the Board to reinstate his Santa Rosa County Competency card. Mr. Miller holds his current state registration as a General Contractor but has failed to renew his competency card. The last renewal Mr. Miller has conducted according to Santa Rosa County records was in 1995. The card would have expired in 1996. The card has been expired for 8 years.
He would like the Board to reinstate his license in lieu of taking the contractor’s examination. Mrs. Royals read section 14 of the county ordinance which specifies the requirements for reinstatement of license.
Mr. Miller has supplied to the Board a letter of good standing from Escambia County and also a list of the permits he has pulled in Escambia County.
The Board discussed with Mrs. Royals the type of permits Mr. Miller was issued in Escambia County.
Mr. Miller was present at the meeting to state his case. Mr. Miller moved residences in 1995. His address was not changed with Santa Rosa County Building Inspection Department which led to the failure of receipt of the renewal notification. Mr. Miller did not notice the absent of the notification and did not renew his license. He did renew his Santa Rosa County Occupational license and his Escambia County Competency card. Mr. Miller has contracted all over the state doing commercial work.
Mrs. Royals explained to the Board the address had not been updated at the time Mr. Miller made first contact with the Building Department. Mrs. Royals has updated the record since that time.
The Board discussed the type of license Mr. Miller holds and the type of permits and work Mr. Miller has conducted. Mr. Miller explained that the permits issued in Escambia County were mostly residential projects.
Mr. Miller supplied proof that his Santa Rosa County occupational license has been updated. Mr. Miller explained that he also constructed a new home in the City of Pensacola.
Mrs. Royals read the letter of good standing from Escambia County. Mrs. Royals also explained that Mr. Miller would be required to pay the double rate to reinstate his competency card.
Mr. Holt made a motion to reinstate Mr. Miller’s license. Mr. Harold seconded the motion.
Mr. Blackman asked the Board if his license could be limited to strictly residential license. Mrs. Royals explained that his State registration would not allow those requirements. He would have to resubmit to the State.
The motion carried with an unanimous vote with the stipulation that he would be required to pay the double fee on the competency card.
Old Business (Formal Hearing)
James R. Leland VS Vance Rockwell d/b/a Rockwell Construction
THESE MINUTES CAN BE OBTAINED VERBATIM DUE TO THE FACT THAT A COURT REPORTER WAS PRESENT AT THE MEETING
Mr. Hall asked Mrs. Royals if any new information had been submitted to the Building Department since the Probable Cause meeting. Mrs. Royals explained that Mr. Leland had submitted additional information at the present meeting. Mrs. Royals read the charges against Mr. Rockwell which involved the violation of Ordinance 2002-06, section 16, paragraph 1e and violation of Ordinance 2002-06, section 16, paragraph 1f.
Mr. Randy Jones, Compliance Investigator, was present at the meeting to state the findings from his investigation. Mr. Jones explained that Mr. Leland contracted first with Mr. Ken Lipsey. Mr. Lipsey did not have a license so could not pull the permit. Mr. Lipsey and Vance Rockwell, doing business as Rockwell Construction, worked together and Mr. Rockwell pulled the permit for the construction of Mr. Leland’s residence. All money was paid to Mr. Lipsey. Mr. Lipsey does not have a license and at the date of the meeting. The Building Department has not received any documentation showing that he was employed by Rockwell Construction.
Mr. Harold asked Mr. Jones if he knows of any other times Mr. Lipsey and Mr. Rockwell have contracted permits in this way. Mr. Jones knows nothing of that type of thing. Mr. Harold asked Mr. Jones if he knew of any problems with Mr. Rockwell. Mr. Jones explained that there is one house Mr. Rockwell is constructing in the Avalon area that has had some problems but have nothing to do with this situation.
Mr. Hall asked for the additional information that was submitted at the present meeting which was distributed to the Board members.
Mr. Leland was present at the meeting to state his case. Mr. Hall asked Mr. Leland to summarize the situation to the Board. Mr. Leland explained the contract with Mr. Lipsey and Mr. Rockwell to construct his house. Mr. Leland discussed that the permits were applied for by Mr. Lipsey for Rockwell Construction. Mr. Leland explained that all payments went through Mr. Lipsey. Mr. Leland stated the permitting and payment process for his residence. Mr. Leland discussed the items on the contract that were considered breached.
Mrs. Donna Leland was also present at the meeting to state her concerns. Mrs. Leland asked what would be done to Mr. Lipsey who was not in attendance at the meeting. Mr. Harold explained that the Board only had jurisdiction on the licensed contractor which would be Mr. Vance Rockwell. Mr. Dannheisser further explained the situation to the Board and Mr. and Mrs. Leland.
Mr. Vance Rockwell, doing business as Rockwell Construction, was present at the meeting to state his case. Mr. Rockwell explained his stand in the construction process.
Mr. Rockwell’s accountant, Mrs. Rockwell formally Ms. Davis, was present at the meeting to explain the role Mr. Lipsey had in Rockwell Construction. She stated that Mr. Lipsey was paid $200.00 a month because he was only a supervisor. Mrs. Rockwell explained that Mr. Lipsey has been paid $200.00 a month since 2000. Mr. Lipsey stopped working for Rockwell Construction in September of 2001.
Mr. Holt and Mrs. Rockwell discussed the permit application submitted by Mr. Lipsey for Rockwell Construction.
Mr. Rockwell discussed with the Board the documentation submitted to Santa Rosa County by Mr. Leland.
Mr. Leland explained why he had contacted Mr. Rockwell; this was due to the fact that problems were occurring with Mr. Lipsey. Mr. Leland asked about an authorization form which the Building Department keeps on file allowing the contractor to allow employees to pull permits under the contractor’s license. Mrs. Royals explained the form had been mistakenly filed with another project application that Rockwell Construction was completing. Mrs. Royals read the form to the Board.
Mr. Holt discussed the house and the construction with Mr. Leland. Mr. Leland explained that he had designed the house.
Mrs. Royals read from the ordinance the disciplines available for this type of violation.
Mr. Blackman asked the Board if Mr. Rockwell had signed the contract and if he had pulled all of the permits. Mr. Holt asked Mr. Dannheisser if it was acceptable for checks to be issued from Mr. Leland to Mr. Lipsey with Mr. Rockwell being the contractor. Mr. Lipsey paid some of the sub-contractors and suppliers.
Mr. Holt made a motion to clear Mr. Rockwell of any charges, that he would be not guilty. Motion dies for lack of a second.
Mr. Harold made a motion to find Mr. Rockwell guilty of charges. Mr. Blackman seconded the motion. The motion carried three to one.
Mr. Harold made a motion for a formal reprimand to be placed on Mr. Rockwell’s record. Mr. Blackman seconded the motion. The motion carried with an unanimous vote.
Mr. Hall asked Mrs. Royals if the Building Department has had any other contact with Mr. Lipsey. Mrs. Royals stated that Mr. Rockwell has rescinded his letter allowing Mr. Lipsey to pull permits under his license.
Mr. Blackman made a motion stating that Mr. Lipsey would not be allowed to pull permits in Santa Rosa County acting on behalf of a contractor. Mr. Harold seconded the motion. The motion carried with an unanimous vote.
New Business (Probable Cause)
Santa Rosa County VS James E. Harkins, Jr. d/b/a Stallion Steel, Inc
Mrs. Royals explained the case to the Board. This complaint was filed by Santa Rosa County against Mr. James E. Harkins, doing business as Stallion Steel, Inc, for failure to obtain necessary inspections on permits that were issued to him.
Mr. Randy Jones, Compliance Investigator, was present to state the findings from his investigation. This situation was brought to the Building Department’s attention by another sign contractor in the area and it is also a part of another situation dealing with Skyline Outdoor. Mr. Harkins was installing signs for Skyline Outdoor. Approximately twelve permits were issued to Mr. Harkins. Five of those permits have had inspections. Seven have not had any inspections at all. There are setback problems with some of them; this problem is in the process of being solved. The situation for this meeting is the failure to obtain the inspections. Citations have been issued for some of these permits by a Code Enforcement Officer. A court case is scheduled on these citations. Mark Locklin is the owner of Skyline Outdoor.
Mr. Skip Tompkins, Compliance Division Superintendent, and the Board discussed the role of Mr. Locklin and Skyline Outdoor with Mr. Harkins. The Board asked Mr. Jones about the permitting process.
Mr. James E. Harkins was present at the meeting to state his case. Mr. Harkins explained that he is the manufacturer of the signs. Mr. Harkins sold Mr. Locklin five signs. Mr. Harkins allowed Mr. Locklin to permit those signs. Mr. Locklin was to notify Mr. Harkins when he was ready for them to be installed. At that time, Mr. Harkins would install the signs. Mr. Harkins has not heard from Mr. Locklin since then. Mr. Harkins did not know that Mr. Locklin had already installed the signs. Mr. Locklin owns the signs but Mr. Harkins manufactures the signs and installs the signs.
Mr. Hall explained that the contractor who pulls the permits is responsible for the signs. Mr. Locklin is not a licensed contractor and is being dealt with in a civil action within the court system. Mr. Harkins was under the assumption that the only signs Mr. Locklin had were manufactured by Stallion Steel. Mr. Harkins did not know of the other signs. Mr. Harkins has since mailed a letter revoking his previous authorization for Mr. Locklin to pull permits for Mr. Harkins.
Mr. Hall asked the Building Department if any other problems have occurred with Mr. Harkins. The Building Department was not aware of any other problems.
Mr. Blackman made a motion to table the case until the civil court case had been satisfied.
The Board and Mr. Tolbert discussed the process of pulling permits and calling for inspections in Santa Rosa County. Mr. Hall asked Mr. Harkins if he would call the Building Department for any inspections or permits until the case had been resolved.
Mr. Blackman asked the following to be added to his motion: Mr. Harkins would need to pull his own permits and call for his own permits until the case was resolved. Mr. Holt seconded the motion. The motion carried with an unanimous vote.
Mr. Hall called for a five minute break at 4:25 p.m.
Mr. Hall called the meeting back to order at 4:30 p.m.
Update on Swimming Pool Contractors
Ms. Amy Allen, Permit Analyst, gave the Board a brief update on the swimming pool contractors and the status of inspection requests by those contractors. It was determined that there are still problems with some of the contractors requesting the necessary inspections.
Discussion ensued among the Board to determine ways the problem with the contractors’ failure to obtain inspections could be resolved.
The Board asked the Building Department if they could mail out letters to all the pool contractors advising them of the inspections that had not been requested. The Board also asked that the letter state that disciplinary action would be taken if the permits were not inspected.
Election of Chairman and Vice Chairman
Mr. Holt made a motion for Mr. Larry Hall to become Chairman and Mr. Frank Harold to become Vice Chairman. Mr. Blackman seconded the motion. The motion carried with an unanimous vote.
Mr. Holt made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Mr. Blackman seconded the motion. The motion carried with an unanimous vote.
Mr. Hall adjourned the meeting at 4:55 p.m.
Approved this ______ day of __________________ 2004.
_______________________________________________
Charles “Pete” Southerland
Chairman
Prepared by Amy Allen, Permit Analyst I
Santa Rosa County Building Inspection Department