Planning and Zoning Board - Regular Meeting

Good morning. I'd like to call to order the 01/08/2026 Construction Board of Appeals meeting to order. Can we have the roll call, please?

Chair Larson?

Here.

Vice Chair Silvestri? Here. Mr. Mahood?

Here.

Mr. Williams?

Here.

Mr. Martinez?

Here.

Mr. Ilk?

Here.

And we have the swearing in of staff, please.

Do you swear or affirm that the statements made today will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? Thank you.

Item number four, the verification of a quorum, which there is. Moving on to item five, Pledge of Allegiance. Can we please stand? Moving on, item number six, approval of, last meeting's minutes. I need a motion or motion for discussion or is there any corrections?

I motion to approve the October.

All approve? Aye. All opposed? Aye. There any additions or deletions to today's agenda?

We do have a few. We are going to be postponing item number eight c to the next hearing, April 9. And we will also be postponing item number 10 a to the next meeting. Just to note, we would like to begin with nine new business and have our staff present the information there before we get into the rest of the consent agenda.

So we're moving item number nine, new business.

To the front.

Okay. I mean, do we have so we have to elect a new chairperson?

Eight c for the next meeting.

To the next meeting. Correct. Eight c. Eight c and

10 a.

10.

So

it's that time to have an election again?

Yeah. We'll move on to oath of office now first, and then we're gonna get to the elections and then the sunshine laws. So I will let clerk's office take over.

K. So if mister Mahood, miss Silvestri, and mister Ilkin please raise their right hands, I will give you the oath of office. I do solemnly swear that I will support, protect, and defend the constitution and government of The United States and the state of Florida and that I will bear true faith, loyalty and allegiance to the same and that I am entitled to hold office under the constitution and laws of the state of Florida and that I will faithfully perform all of the duties of a member of these Contractors Board of Appeals.

I do.

Thank you.

Item 9B, election. How does there are one year terms for all?

Yes, so it will be one year terms.

This is something new, that's I mean.

Correct. The chair is only allowed to serve a one one year term as chair. That's one of the new items this year.

And then how about vice?

No set limit for vice chair or pro tem.

Is that in effect retroactively or no? Okay. Meaning you're eligible to stay as chair. Meaning you're eligible to stay as chair.

I'm eligible for?

To stay as chair. No. It's

So not this sorry to interrupt, Carly Fabian, Deputy City Attorney. So the one chair has been in place since 2023 or 2024, I believe. It's one consecutive year. So that just means that if whoever's been serving as chair cannot be chair again for this election, but could be chair again in the following election. This is just to make sure that people get a chance, but we understand that you might be limited in the amount of people. Yeah.

Yeah, that's not new, got it. I retract that.

Okay, so everybody is going to do this paper ballot.

So, first, there has to be, I guess, the chair, we can do it multiple ways. We can just go straight into voting. You can open up the floor to nominations. However the Board wishes to proceed. I believe last time we opened the floor to nominations, and then you can discuss it if you wish and then you can go into voting. So however the board wishes to proceed on that matter is up to the board.

I think we should nominate who we think. And since they can serve more than one term, just not consecutive, correct? So in other words, Ted would be eligible to serve as chair again. He was chair back in

dark ages. '23. Yeah.

Correct. If if I and I apologize because I don't normally come. But if the only person who would not be eligible to serve as chair would be Mr. Larson, right? Because you've been chair for the last year.

Sorry to interrupt. So, Mr. Ilg was chair at the last hearing in October. He had stepped down as chair and at that point, Larson was nominated and voted in as chair.

But that wasn't last year.

The year before.

The year be Wayne has been It's been a whole year. This whole year.

Okay.

Yeah. Okay.

Yeah. '24. '20. '4. '24? '24. '24. '4. Yeah.

Yeah. It's been a whole year. So My apologies. I

so I would like to I would like to nominate Ted for chair again if he's willing. What was that?

Doesn't want to.

Thank you, but no.

Okay. Then I'd like to nominate Adam Williams for chair.

No. It's your turn. No. Why

don't Linda and then Adam be a bite. Mike, you want pro temp?

I'll do pro temp.

So first we will just nominate the chair because I guess depending on the outcome of the vote, and you can still vote for whomever you wish, and just as an example, if a majority voted for Mr. Ilg, he would have the ability to decline at that moment. That's just an example.

That's what we just did.

Well, that

was for nominations.

I rescind my no. Can still nominate.

I was kidding.

You can nominate whomever you wish. They could say right here, if you nominate me and vote for me, I will turn it down. When it comes to voting, you can then vote for whomever, and if that person declines the nomination after voting, it would go to another ballot.

Okay. So,

would like to nominate Ted.

Can the chair be vice chair?

Yes. Existing? Yes. Yes.

And okay, so we're just doing chair now because then I would nominate Wayne for vice chair.

So we're just doing chair.

We're just doing chair.

Okay, I nominate and the reason is I nominate mister Williams because I think he would be the best at it. That's why I'm nominating him.

I can't promise I won't.

Okay. So we should vote now.

Unless there's any further

I do wanna ask one point of clarification. Is you did note that if we vote and a majority selects somebody and they decline it, it goes to another ballot. Correct? Correct. It is not who is second on the ballot because it requires a majority. Correct.

So you need four votes.

And that's the case for all three positions. That's not just Correct. Yes.

Okay. Can we make more copies?

It's not gonna be scribbled on the back.

We just cross out

the Okay. Name of the person to

So when you make your vote, the clerk will pick your ballot up.

Put like one, two, three.

Alright. Okay. So

first is chair. Yeah.

Okay. The tally for the votes are Mr. Williams with three votes, Ms. Silvestri with one vote and Mr. Ilk with two votes.

What was that?

Does that count as a majority?

What was that again?

It is Mr. Williams with three votes, Ms. Silvestri with one vote, Mr. Ilk with two votes. So by majority, it is Mr. Williams.

Okay, yay. I'm not going to make you all revote, that's fine. Okay.

Thank you.

So at this point, Mr. Williams would take the chair and then proceed to voting for vice chair.

I would like to nominate Wayne for Vice Chair, Wayne Larson.

Wayne, you were nominated. I don't know if you want to say anything. No. Are there any other nominations?

I'd like to nominate Mr. Mahood.

We're talking about the, vice chair?

Vice chair.

Vice chair.

I nominate Wayne Larson. Are

there any new nominations? Is Wayne nominated or If not, go ahead and proceed to vote.

Okay. The tally is five for Mr. Larsen and one for Mr. Mahood. Mr. Larson takes majority vote.

Okay. Proceeding to pro tem. Do we have any nominations for that? Any others? No. All right. Proceed to vote.

Okay. The tally is Mr. Mahood with five and Ms. Silveshry with one. Mr. Mahood has the majority vote.

Thank you. Okay, proceeding to item 9C Sunshine Law Roberts Rules of Order. I assume this is the city attorney office presentation.

If we could just do a motion to approve all three, we can do it as one.

Alright, Motion to approve the election of the new chairperson, myself, Vice Chair, Wayne Larson and Pro Tem, Michael. Second. All those in favor? Aye.

Okay. Good morning. So as I mentioned earlier, my name is Carly Fabian. I'm a deputy city attorney, and I'm here to go over sunshine law, public records law, ethics laws, Robert's Rules of Order, and just some additional rules that we have in our city resolution that governs boards and committees. I'm gonna go through this pretty fast.

I think a lot of you have been on either this board or another board and know a lot of this, but I do talk very fast, so interrupt me at any point if you have any questions. So we're gonna start with Sunshine Law. Sunshine Law is both a codified statutory and constitutional right that people have, which is to both know about when meetings are happening, so be notified of the date and time of a public meeting, as well as being able to attend and access records of those meetings. So what is a public meeting? It is a gathering of two or more members of the city council, city board, or any city committee to discuss a matter which foreseeably will come before them.

So this could be something like an upcoming ordinance or resolution. It could be terms of an agreement, but it could be any item that could foreseeably be placed on an agenda. This must be in the sunshine. So what does that mean? So if two members of any board are meeting about anything that could foreseeably be on an agenda, that meeting needs to be the date and time needs to be published so that anyone can attend.

There needs to be a record, and people need to be able to attend. So some examples that are typically not, and I say typically with the caveat that anything could have to be in the sunshine depending on the intent and purpose of the discussion taking place. But typically, staff meetings aren't don't fall under the sunshine. Council members attending meetings of another public board, council members attending a privately sponsored forum, or any members of a board or the council attending a social event. Now that's the biggest caveat.

Right? So the example I gave previously was two of you are going and you're playing pickleball together. Right? That's not necessarily violating Sunshine Law. During one of the water breaks, you start talking about something that has to do with construction board of appeals. You may have just inadvertently violated Sunshine Law. So my recommendation is, you know, even though Port St. Lucie's not small, right, it's a small community, and a lot of people might see each other at different events. So if there's two people from a board at a social event, don't discuss the board in which you're on in any capacity just to ensure that you're not accidentally violating Sunshine Law. So here's just an example of what our notices look like here at the city.

You don't have to worry about this. Our clerk's office handles this. But typically, a good rule of thumb is seven days notice. We sometimes even give more than that because a lot of these are posted months in advance. Again, isn't statutory, this is just a good practice.

The notice must statutorily detail the time and place of the meeting and an agenda is preferred. Again, not statutorily required, we want to make sure that the public knows why they may want to attend a meeting. The meeting site must be sufficient in size and accessible locations so that the public may attend. So one good example that has come out in case law is there was a board, I think it was a planning and zoning board in another city where all of the members of the Planning and Zoning Board happened to be members of a country club, an exclusive country club. They decided to meet at the country club.

The court found that they are in violation because the members of the public couldn't attend, right? So that's kind of a sillier example. Sometimes for City Council, for some of our big items like budget hearings, right, when we are the budget is coming before our City Council, sometimes we will have to create additional room here at City Hall to make sure everyone can attend because sometimes the chambers fills up. We cannot turn people away because there's no more room. And then there's a record.

And again, this isn't something you have to worry about. Our clerk's office handles this. But the the minutes of a public meeting have to be taken promptly and have to be available for inspection. The way we do this at the city is we post these online on our registrar calendar. These minutes can be a brief summary, so it can be a quick action agenda or it can be verbatim. And videotaping does not substitute for a written record. So even though some of our meetings are streamed, right, and people can watch them in real time, we still have to have a written record provided afterwards. So why is this important? There are both criminal and non criminal consequences for violation of the Sunshine Law. So the most common example would be not knowing.

Right? So that example I just gave, two members of a board are at a social event, they're not even thinking about it. Right? They're just talking. You have a common experience being on the same board. You start just discussing something that could forcibly come before it. Somebody overhears you. Somebody reports it. Now you're in hot water even though you didn't necessarily mean to do it. Right?

That still has punishable by fines and you can be removed from your position. It could also affect that decision. So if that decision later comes before the board, it's voted on and then somebody comes forth and says, I heard them talking about this at a, you know, at a at a restaurant or somewhere, that would void the decision and they would have to come back in front of the board. So it costs the city time and money. The other side of this would be a knowing violation.

So this means there's an item, you wanna find out how another person on the board feels about it, so you plan to meet up to discuss this item, right, away from the rest of the board. You're knowing what you're doing is in violation of the Sunshine Law. That is of second degree misdemeanor and can have up to jail time. So again, this leaves the city vulnerable to attorneys' fees and just, again, a waste of time because you might have to then people might be removed from their positions, there might have to be elections, there might have to be we might get attorneys' fees for any sort of challenges. Any questions about Sunshine Law?

Rule of thumb, if you're seeing each other outside of here and that also includes written communication. So texting, emailing, talking on the phone, just don't do it. Don't talk about anything with this board. Yep.

If we talk about something that we've already done afterwards, like while we're walking out here, all the decisions have been is that okay?

So I would still refrain from talking about anything that has to do with this board unless it's during a public meeting. The reason why I say that is, and your example is kind of good, right? Because you're just you're leaving, you just it just happened, you're walking out, you're talking about it. The issue that could come up is let's say that there's another item that's related to that that comes then in front and somebody says, I heard them talking about it when they were walking out. Would it rise to a violation? I don't know. Right? It depends on what was discussed. It still leaves you vulnerable to a potential challenge. So rule of thumb, don't talk about anything with the board, but of course there are gonna be examples. That's a that's a great example. You you most likely wouldn't be violating, but I still wouldn't do it.

Well

So the problem is that when we it could foreseeably come before the Board, I can't say with 100% certainty that something has that has come before the Board will never come before the Board again. That's really what it comes down to, right? So you sometimes deal with the same type of the same people, you deal with the same types of matters. And so that's where to give a blanket statement that something that has already been voted on would never come before the board again is just too vague of a statement. It could. So it could foreseeably.

Okay. So my thing was about we've decided already and we're talking about it. But that person could also appeal that decision. Right.

That's correct.

We shouldn't talk about it.

Correct. That's that's a great example. Yep. And that's where I'm saying you foreseeably just don't know. Did you have another That was my Yes. My comment. Yep. And one of the examples like something being appealed. Right? Or even something that has to do with maybe similar projects or similar. It it could it just could foreseeably come before the board. That's a great question. Any other questions about Sunshine? And if you ever have a question about anything, the best rule of thumb is to go to staff. And if staff finds that the question that's or or the city attorney's office.

And if the question is something that, okay. You know what? I bet you everyone is gonna have this question, then it's something that could either be brought up during the meeting, right, or it could be communicated to everyone on the board. But that's your safest bet because you are allowed one of you can obviously talk to staff without violating Sunshine. So now we're going to move into public records laws. Public records laws are very similar to Sunshine in that they're very broad. It's both a statutory and a constitutional right, and anyone can make a public records request for any reason. So public records are materials made or received by the city in connection with official business to perpetuate, communicate, or formalize knowledge of some type. Now the communication part of this is the simplest. Right?

People are emailing back and forth. People are texting back and forth. People are sending some sort of written communication back and forth. I think everyone knows that that's public record. Where this becomes a little trickier, and it's a little bit gray area, is that perpetuate or formalize knowledge. So the example I like to give is there has been examples of a board. Right? And somebody is taking notes during a presentation on something they're going to take they're gonna vote on, and they're writing down their notes. And someone in the audience sees it and says, I want a copy of those notes. And of course, the person's challenge is gonna be, well, it wasn't communication.

Right? But their argument could be, it was used to formalize knowledge that you use then to vote. So public records is expansive and it's very hard to make a blanket statement of what isn't a public record and what is. And so the rule of thumb is you just want to treat everything like a public record. So materials, this is of course papers, document, letters, maps, faxes, books, etcetera.

Any electronic files, so your emails, your text messages, your calendar invites between two people, Internet posts or social media. The city of Port St. Lucie's Facebook page, they cannot delete any comments on that page because that is the public communicating with the city. Right? So if somebody that's one of the vulnerabilities of having social media because if somebody goes on and says something and maybe it's not very kind or it's it's it's critical, there's nothing that the city can do.

The city has to leave it because that's a form of public records. Photographs, videos, audio recordings. A lot of these things are items that the clerk's office here takes care of. Like, for example, this meeting being recorded, they keep a copy of it. I believe that everyone here has a city of Port St. Lucie email address by correct? Is it the no? No. No. No. I would definitely look into that. I don't see you do. Okay. I would look into making sure that everyone has a City of Port St. Lucie email address.

And the reason why I say this is our IT department has access to all the emails within our own cityofpsl.com email address. That means that if there's a public records request for any of you with your communications with staff or anything to do with your official business here, our IT department can pool it. Where it gets tricky is if you're using, like, your Gmail or a personal account, which you might have to be if you don't have the City of Port St. Lucie email, is now the onus is on you if there's a public records request for you to pull everything. And it's just a little bit easier if you're using the cities.

So I will get with staff to see to make sure that everyone has one if that's a possibility. And so again, official city business, so materials sent and received by employees in connection with their job, materials sent and received by the council or board members in connection with their official capacity, and those of a personal nature are not city business. Now again, like with Sunshine Law, there's caveats to this. So this is where using discretion in the way that you're communicating with your role here on the board is important. So if you're texting someone, right, about something to do with this, hopefully it's not another board member because that would be violating sunshine, but if you're having communication and intermittently you're also having personal communication, just know that if there's ever a public records request and it's challenged of what has been turned over, your communications might need to be inspected to make sure that all of the official capacity communications have been provided.

And so I tell people to try to keep it as separate as possible. It's a little bit more difficult for Board members because you don't have city phones and city computers and things where you can keep everything on one. But just, again, use discretion and be smart about it when you're using your personal devices. So these are just some examples. So emails sent and received by council members to constituents, draft documents shown to others for review, notes used to create documents for distribution, and it comes down to the intent and purpose.

So again, if you're up here and you're writing down a note to your neighbor on a napkin, that napkin is a public record, right? It doesn't have to necessarily be a document, but if it falls into that perpetuate, communicate or formalize knowledge, it could be a public record. And so who must comply with public records? Members of the city council, city officials, all city employees, city boards, and including city volunteers. So you are the we don't ask here at the city to turn over any physical papers.

So if you are taking notes or you're communicating back and forth or you're texting, right, those are things we don't ask you to turn them over at the end of each day or each month. So if there is a public record, you are the custodian of those records for purposes of turning over anything that might fall under that public records request. And only the city clerk's office is permitted to destroy records in accordance with the retention schedule. So even though some items have a very short retention schedule of only maybe thirty days or a year, that doesn't mean anyone can destroy a record. In order for that to be destroyed, it has to go through the city clerk's office so that they can let the state know that items are being destroyed because they are no longer need to be retained legally. Yes.

I have a question. Could you give us an example of what would be public records that anybody on the board could have?

So for the purposes of what you all do, that would be emails. Right? Especially if you're not emailing using your Citi email because maybe you don't have one. So maybe you have a Gmail account that you use to email and maybe it's communications between you and staff about whatever you might do on the board. That would be the main thing because there really shouldn't be communications between you all because that would be violating Sunshine.

The example I gave of maybe you're passing notes up here. Right? Maybe you're writing something down, you're showing it to your neighbor. That could be an example of a public record. Maybe you're writing something for some reason, some sort of draft, and you're showing the draft to somebody else because you wanna send it to staff to provide to the whole board or whatever it may be, and it's a draft and you're showing it some those are examples.

It would be the prop proper disposal or something like that? But some of the documents that we get here, I run it through a shredder. Is that adequate? Is that what what it

So so that's a good question. So it depends on the content. So everything with public records depends on what it is. I would imagine a lot of what you're shredding are things that have their own home already. So agenda items, if you're just printing out the backup documents for like, let's say, today's meeting, as long as you're not taking notes on them, right, and changing them too much, there's already those documents already have a home because they're already posted on the city's website.

So somebody made a public records request and said, would like all of the agenda backup items from the January 8 meeting. They could go and get that from Legislature. They wouldn't need it from you, if that makes sense. Where it becomes tricky is again is that note taking where if you're using it to write down or you're using it to pass back and forth and someone says, want the communications between you and another member of the board, then it could be a public record. But if they're asking for documents that the clerk's office or staff has, we can get that from staff or the clerk.

So in other words, if we make notes on the agenda, that becomes public record.

I would keep it. I would just have a folder of all of those things.

On it.

And if you ever then step away from the board, my suggestion is just to turn those over and say, hey, I've been keeping these. Again, what are the chances that there's a public records request? Probably pretty slim, but it's the safest, right? So that's what I do. If I have an agenda and I'm taking notes on it, I like to just keep a folder of everything that I've been taking notes on. I keep it to the side. And then for me, I work here, so I just have my own collection. But for those of you, if your time here is done, you can just let the clerk know, hey, I've been keeping these. You can keep them and then the clerk's office can decide whether or not they need to be retained. That would be the best practice.

And so with public records request, a any person can contact any city person to make a public records request, and that can be done in any way. So we have GovQA, which is our public records request software where anybody can go in. They can make a request. They can do so anonymously, and we could post the the those records to that website. However, the law is very clear that we cannot direct people to go directly to that website to make a request.

So what does that mean? I'm wearing this sweater. Right? So let's say after this meeting, I go across the street to Dunkin' Donuts, and I'm standing in line, and it's work hours especially, and someone comes up to me at Dunkin' Donuts and says, oh great, you work for the city, I'd like to make a public records request. I would have to take that request because I'm a public servant and I'm out in the community and someone can tell where I work so they're they're asking me. People can make public records requests through phone calls. They can make it through email. They can make it in person. So even though we have this this system that makes it easier, my response can't be, oh, no. No.

Go on GovQA, and you can make it that way. You can leave people there because it's easier, but you have to take the request. And again, people don't need to explain why they want the the request. They don't even need to give a name. People can get public records requests in a variety of ways. So it could be on posted on GovQA. It could somebody could come and they could say, I'd like a public records request. I'm not telling you my name, where I live, anything about me. And we could figure out a way to just leave the documents with the the up people up front, and they would pick them up that way. We cannot create any barriers to getting those requests.

And then a person may also take photographs of the records while they're in the possession. So if there's a public records request for some sort of documents that maybe are too big to scan into a smaller format, if we're talking about maybe like plats or plans or something like that, they could always come and take pictures. So again, it's a governmental service. There isn't a time frame in which public records requests need to be fulfilled, but we need to acknowledge them within forty eight hours. And so we work with staff to compile any requests.

And then our office is the one that reviews them to ensure that there's nothing that needs to be redacted. So there's two categories for redaction. There's confidentiality, which is very narrow. So that's talking about maybe it's ongoing litigation. So it's attorney client, which is very, very narrow in a time frame.

Some security risks. So some of the plans from, like, our utilities department might fall under confidentiality because it could create a security risk. But the biggest one is exemptions. And so what's interesting about exemptions in the state of Florida is we as a city are allowed to honor them. So that's the biggest ones are the personnel, police officers, judges, people who work for DCAF, state attorneys, public defenders, any of these people in really vulnerable positions where they want to protect their address, the names of their spouses and their children.

And while we do have this exemption, we don't actually have to honor it as a city. So what does that mean? Someone comes, they say, hey. I would like to redact my address and my information because I'm a police officer, and we say, And then there's a public records request, and it has that information on it, and we accidentally provide it to that person, there's no liability to the city. So it's more of a privilege than it is a right.

And then failures to comply. So again, with Sunshine Law, there's two main example or there's two categories. There's a knowing violation. That's, of course, you're destroying public records on purpose. For some reason, there's a record, you don't want it to get into the hands of people, so you're destroying it.

You're knowingly violating the law. That is a first degree misdemeanor and can have jail time. The more common example of this, those unknowing violations. So if we have a public records request and you just inadvertently don't turn something over, the biggest challenge that a requester has is to come back and say, I don't think you gave us everything, and we could look to see and then turn over everything else. That does leave us open to attorney's fees and having to pay court costs, but that would be their biggest recourse is just to say, give me everything I ask for.

If something has been destroyed, then of course that was something that could potentially be litigated and it just leaves the city open to additional costs. Any questions about public records? Now we have ethics. I'm going go through this very quickly as well. So there are several legal restrictions and reporting requirements in their four main categories.

So we have laws pertaining to prohibited and restricted conduct, so misuse of public positions, conflict of interest, nepotism, voting conflicts, laws pertaining to bribes, so gifts, honoraria, expenditures, and then government transparency laws involving financial disclosure and then laws pertaining to lobbying activity. So what is a public officer? Under section 112 of Florida statutes, it's any person elected or appointed told office in any agency, including any person serving on an advisory board. So for the purposes of 112 and ethics laws, your board is considered you are public officers. So what does that mean you can't do?

So you can't solicit or accept anything of value, including gifts, loans, rewards, promises of future employment, favors, services based off the understanding of a vote, official action or judgment being influenced. A lot of this should be kind of common sense. Right? You can't take gifts in order to vote a certain way on an item. Acting in official capacity, directly or indirectly purchase, rent, or lease any goods or services for your own agency from any business entity of which the officer or director, spouse, or child is a director or has a material interest.

So again, that comes into the conflict. If there's an item that's coming before you all and it's directly related, there's a material interest in your own business outside of what you do on the board, that's where you might have a voting conflict and may want to abstain. Accept any compensation or payment that should know or with the exercise of reasonable care should know that was given to influence a vote or action. This last bullet point is the one that most people find themselves in trouble for. It's not the first the first bullet point of, hey, I'm gonna give you, you know, $10,000 if you vote yes.

Right? Most people we know that's wrong. Most people aren't doing that. What is this last one where people don't realize the optics of what they're doing? So maybe someone has an item that's coming before this board. Right? And you happen to know that person outside of of of being on this board, which is allowed. Right? Again, you can know people. And they say, hey, you know, I was out somewhere and I saw this golf set and I thought thought you would really like it.

Here you go. I'm gonna give it to you. And then you look, the next agenda, that person has an item that's coming before you. You may have truly not thought at that second that what they were doing was trying to influence your vote, but that's where it takes being a public servant to have a little extra discretion to say, you know what? This person, I know what they do in the community. I know what their business is. They could have interactions with me on my board. I'm going say to them, can't take this. As long as I'm on the board, I can't take this gift. Right? Even though and you might know that you're not going to influence your vote. You're just going to take the gift and think it was nice. You wanna think about how that looks. Yes.

I got another question. If you have a neighbor, for example, that you don't interact with

Okay.

And he comes in front of the board, and I know who the guy lives next door to me or down the block. How how would you consider that? Would you remove yourself from that case? Or

Just be you just know them because they're a neighbor? Pardon? You just know them because they're they just happen to live in your community?

I mean, because they live there. Period.

No. You don't have to abstain from that. No. The only time you would really have to abstain is if it's a family member or if it's directly related to like a a business decision. So I'll I'll give planning and zoning as a example because I work work closely with that board. But if there's a zoning item that's coming before or a variance and it's directly related with a business they have outside of their board, they would have to abstain from voting because there's a conflict. You're gonna know people. Right? So if you would just happen to know someone and they're not a direct family member, so they're not a spouse or child or sibling or parent, then no. You don't need to abstain.

And it's gonna happen. You're gonna know people. It's just part of the business. And again, you shouldn't be corruptly using or attempting to use your position as secure a special privilege, benefit, or exemption or hold any employment or contractual relationship that will create a continuing or reoccurring conflict. I think this is a little bit different for your board. I don't think this will come up as much. But for sub boards, for example, public art advisory board. There are some artists who would probably do great on that board, but they want to keep submitting applications to submit their art to the city, and they would have to continuously keep abstaining for voting. Right? If they're they're the ones that are submitting, so that probably just wouldn't be the board for them.

Hold any employment or contractual relationship with any business entity or agency, which is subject of the regulation or is doing business with the agency of which he or she is an officer employee or use information not disclosed to the public for personal gain. And so again, if you do have a voting conflict, which will happen from time to time, what you would need to do is you would need to publicly state to the assembly the nature of it. So if the item comes before you, you know that there's a voting conflict because you happen to have a business and your business is doing business or your business, like, directly or indirectly have a material interest, you would explain why there is a conflict and that you're abstaining from voting. I do recommend that if you think that there's going to be a conflict before coming into a meeting to get with the clerk's office. And the reason for that is we do expect everyone to vote on every item.

And so we want to ensure that what you're thinking is a conflict is actually a conflict before you abstain. This does happen where people are overly cautious, which is great, right, and want to disclose. But with the help of our office, we might say that's not actually a conflict and you're okay to vote. And then again, within fifteen days after the vote, you would get with the clerk's office for any filing of any memorandums of why there was why you abstained from that vote. So any questions about ethics?

The biggest thing that comes up is conflict of interest when it comes to voting. I don't know how often it comes up with what your board deals with, but if you do have one, again, I would just say get with the clerk's office. And if the clerk has a question about it, they can get with our office to see if it actually is a voting conflict and have you prepared before you head in if you have to abstain or not. And then Robert's rules of order. So this is just how we function here at the city, how we run a board.

These are making the motions and how we vote. So role of the chairperson is calling the meeting to order, announcing the purpose and topic of items to be discussed, recognizing members on the floor who are going to speak, protecting the quorum from digressing too much, and protects the integrity of the meetings from disruption or distraction. Chairpersons cannot make motions, cannot close a debate before every member has had the opportunity to speak. So decorum, the speaker must be recognized before the chairperson before speaking, Should limit speech to ten minutes. This is not a steadfast rule.

This is just a guideline. Same with the three we allow the public to speak for three minutes. That's a guideline. Right? So a board can either make that shorter or longer depending on that meeting. Right? As long as it's being applied to the whole meeting and not just one person. And a a speaker should try not to speak more than twice on a motion. So and that's just to make sure everybody gets an opportunity to speak and to keep the meeting moving. Decorative should be kept at all times, including confining statements to merits of pending questions, not attacking a person's motives, not speaking adversely on an item that is not pending or hasn't has already been finalized.

So you voted on an item. It's done. You don't wanna keep talking about why you voted the opposite direction. And a member may not interrupt except for urgent situations. And again, this is just to keep the meetings flowing and to make sure that all people get an opportunity to speak, even those with a minority opinion of the rest of the Board. And so these are just some examples of making a motion. You can use it to amend a motion. You can use it to limit discussion. We see that more with really contentious items. We don't normally do it too much with our own city council, but you'll see at some other cities, they might have an item they know is going to be super contentious, and so they want to limit everyone from speaking more than two to three minutes to keep the meeting going.

So some additional considerations. So quorum is the minimum number of voting members who must be present in order to conduct business. You can have a meeting if there's no quorum, you just can't vote. Motions cannot be made by the chair, and motions must be seconded by someone other than the chair and the person who made the motion. And only one motion can be discussed at a time.

And this is really where the chair the role of the chair comes up to make sure that if there is more than one thing being discussed and it happens sometimes because items might intersect, but you want to make sure that you're being very clear for the record about what is being discussed. Any questions about Robert's rules? Okay. And then this is just so we have a resolution here at the city, Resolution 24R59, which has been changed a couple of times over the last few years. It will probably be changed again in the future.

And this is how we establish additional rules and procedures for our Boards and committees here at the city. And so there's just a couple of things of those that I wanted to touch upon because I think they're important. So quorum is a majority of the Board size regardless of vacant seats. So if a Board has seven members, the majority would be four members, and that's what you would need for quorum. Alternate members shall be contacted and substitute for absent members on a rotating basis. Every Board does this differently, and that's okay. Some Boards, as soon as one member is absent, they have an alternate step in. Other Boards like to wait to see if quorum is going to be affected. So you're going to have less than four people. You're going to ask an alternate to step in, so you make sure you have quorum.

I really do defer to staff, the staff for your board and the attorney who's working to see how that works for you all. Sometimes, like I said, other boards like to just they have seven members, they want to make sure there's always seven members present if they can. And then alternate members shall have the rights afforded to voting members except for making motions, engaging in discussion debates once a motion is on the table and voting. So that means that if an alternate member is here and they're sitting which they would an alternate member who is not acting as a voting member would sit out in the chambers. They would not sit on the dais.

But if they're here, they have an opinion, they are act they're allowed to speak unless it's a quasi judicial item or if a motion has been made and now you're debating before voting. And one of the reasons we we changed this within the last year or so is because alternate members, we want them to be knowledgeable about the Board when it's time for them to sit in as a voting member. So if you have a Board where everybody attends almost every single meeting, and there's one time that an alternate member is needed and they've never even attended, they may not be knowledgeable enough or have been attending to enough to really provide meaningful feedback. And so we we do suggest that alternate members attend all the meetings, watch the meetings. And because they're taking the time out of their schedule to be here, even though they're not necessarily voting, we want to at least make sure that their opinions are valued.

Quick question, when you're that, it sounds like you're speaking of the alternate members as a member of the audience. So acting almost as a member of the public. Is that accurate?

And you could treat it that way. So that's how I would treat it. Yes. Okay. Yep.

And then any board member who wishes to resign has to submit a written notice in the city clerk and shall not be eligible for reappointment for a period of one year unless there's good cause shown. If there is a vacant seat, alternate members may be elevated or new applications may be reviewed, and then it has to be appointed by the mayor. So it really does come down to the mayor's decision. And as we had discussed earlier, a member may only serve as chair for one consecutive year. So that means you do one year, you have to take a break.

We did this because we wanted to make sure that everyone who is consistently serving on a board gets the opportunity to be a chair. But we also recognize that sometimes you might have the same two, three members who are consistent, You might have a few other members who are constantly new. And so that's why we only do it for one consecutive year because if it happens to be a board is switching between the Vice Chair, the Pro Temp and the Chair because that just happens to be their seasoned members, then that's just how it has to be. Okay. And I think that is it.

So are there any questions? I know that was a lot of information in a very small amount of time. If you ever have any questions about any of this, please feel free to reach out to our office. We can't obviously give personalized legal advice. So if it's a question about ethics, we might direct you to the Commission on Ethics, and they can answer any questions. But if you have a question that could easily apply to the entire board, right? So it's a question that might come up a lot. I'll go back to that public art advisory board of can an artist apply for a call for artists for the city if they serve on the board. That's a question that has come up. That's not individualized to one person, right?

That would be a type of question that someone could e mail me and then I would come to the Board and I would say, hey, we got this question. I want all of you to hear this answer because all of you might have this question. If the question that you're asking is very individualized to you and your situation, like I said, then we may point you to the Commission on Ethics, and they can help you if you have a conflict of interest or a voting issue. All right. Great. Any questions? Thank you so much. Thank

you. Moving back to Item eight on the agenda.

So, Port, first off, can you turn your microphone?

Sorry, I didn't know it was off.

I will defer to the Board since we did move to new business for 9A, B and C. The Board can remain in new business to discuss or the Board at its choosing can move back to eight.

Does that require any kind of vote or can we just stay in new business since we're in there?

I will leave it up to the Chair to make his, it does not require a vote.

Okay, then we'll just state, yes. So the chairperson recognizes Mr. Larson on a new item in new business.

Yes. I receive a letter from the state from the Department of Business and Professional Regulation and it talks about having unlicensed contractors in the state and how the department is dedicated to protecting the public by combating unlicensed activity and enforcing action will be brought against those who violate the law under jurisdiction CILB pursuant to Chapter 489FS. Now this is the state we're talking about. They also say that you can file a complaint with the department against a licensee or individual you suspect of performing unlicensed activity here. Such complaints may be anonymous.

Why does the city of Port St. Lucie not make it anonymous? And because they do, can we make a motion to change that?

So I'm not sure. I have not seen that letter and I have not

The state allows anonymous phone calls to call against unlicensed individuals, but the city does not. Is that just an internal thing or did they pass a resolution or something?

So there is a state statute out there that does for code enforcement.

This is unlicensed activity, not code enforcement.

So, right. So I have not looked into what you're referring to. I've not seen that letter. I've not looked at that state statute.

I'm

fact, not it's true. Can we get the city to change their policy?

That is something that the city can discuss and bring back to the board. But we cannot overrule state law.

Do we need to have a discussion about that? I think it's possible that if the state is letting people call anonymously, why do people in the city feel like

That's not city ordinance, correct, that that's required. That's just a government or a building department decision or is it

That's what I'm asking. If it's just a building department decision and who made the decision because years ago you were able to do that. So And all of a sudden, a year or two ago, all of a sudden you couldn't be anonymous anymore. Correct. Which made, well, who

changed it?

The state. So, seeing the letter you're referring to, without looking into the statute that you're referring to in the letter. Okay. The state enacted a statute within the last year or two that says for code enforcement, building enforcement, can make an anonymous complaint, but we cannot investigate that complaint unless there is information. Now, it's very possible that the state has exempted themselves, I'm not sure.

I would need to look into it, so I cannot make a definitive statement without doing further research into the issue.

When you say information, what does that mean? You got to detail what the reason is and it still remain anonymous?

So for instance, I can make a phone call and I can say, Andy Martinez has an unlicensed business out of his house. And then the city can say, okay, great, I need your name, I need your contact information. Nope, I'm not going to provide it. Okay, thank you, we cannot investigate this.

Our investigators also have a right to determine whether or not it's, a life safety issue to pursue that anonymous, complaint.

What is that Wayne? Is that a state law what you presented?

I don't know. I mean, was just surprised receiving that a month ago saying, the state we're supporting, you know, well, we're going after unlicensed activity and by the way, you can be anonymous if you call in.

Is there a state statute that is on that letter?

I'll give you the letter.

Would it be prudent to request that the city attorney's office prepare a response and potentially either email or present at the next meeting findings relative to this potential statutory change if there was one?

Yes, you can make that request. It would definitely be at the next meeting. I would not do it over email for the reasons that Ms. Fabian just presented. But we can take a look at the letter. We'll make a copy of it and look into it.

Okay, I don't think that requires a vote or anything, but I do think that would be a request. Yes. Mr. Larson, anything else on that item or no? No. Okay. Are there any other items in new business before we work backwards to item eight in the agenda? No. Seeing none. Moving on to item eight, approval of consent agenda, beginning with item 8A. I believe item 8A has a special clause that needs to be attended to relative to the consent agenda.

Please note that Citation thirty two thousand two and ninety two is a third offense, which does not indicate a monetary fine. The third offense is pursuant to Florida Statute four eighty nine-one 120 seven(two) which states any unlicensed person who commits a violation of subsection one after having been previously found guilty of such violation commits a felony of the third degree punishable as provided in statute 775.082 or 775.083. No monetary penalty is imposed. A civil penalty or monetary penalty of $2,000 has been imposed for willfully and deliberately disregarding the ordinance for citation three three three two two nine five, which is the same violator. The violator has entered into a payment plan for $3.02 $2.09 5 and has paid off half of the total amount due.

Citation three two two nine two is the one that we have on our agenda today. It is a third offense. Two previous cases have been listed. I provided information for the board. Would you like me to read that off?

Yes, please.

05/02/2007, case number 6717 was a was a first offense and acting in the capacity of a contractor without being duly registered or certified. And citation number 27404 was a second offense from 02/24/2020 of acting in the capacity of a contractor without being duly registered or certified. And we have the citation 32292 would be the third offense of that case. Citation 32295 is not being presented before the board, but I still did provide information on it. From 02/24/2020, case number 27406 is a citation first offense was issued for willful or deliberate disregard or violated any municipal ordinance and citation three through two ninety five is the second time that they're violating that.

Thank you. With that, I would ask if the Board has any recommendations on this as this is a consent agenda item, but does not have a monetary fine imposed. I guess first I would ask the city attorney what is the options available to the board in terms of penalty that could be recommended. I believe this is at this point rising to the level of felony according to that, which would mean we would recommend it to the state, if I recall correctly, but if we could have clarification.

That's correct.

Yeah. So we will be sending this to the police department, as well as the state of Florida.

Okay.

I'm not sure if a motion needs to be made to for the board to find them in violation or

Yes. There still need to be a motion to find them in violation.

Would that be all inclusive under the consent agenda for everything

this specific? We have to read them out one at a time anyway on the consent agenda. So we would need to motion for this one first, correct?

No, so for the consent agenda items, you can someone can make a motion to approve the consent agenda and then everything on the consent agenda would be approved. If someone would like to pull one of the items to discuss individually, a motion can be made. So, for instance, someone can, I move to approve the consent agenda? Or it can be, I move to approve the consent agenda 8A, B, D, and E, and pull out F to discuss separately. So if there's one in particular that people want to discuss, we can pull that and then approve the rest of the consent agenda, go back to that item, and then discuss it and vote on that afterwards.

I make a motion to approve the consent agenda.

Do I have a second?

I second that.

Any discussion? Nope. All in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed? Consent agenda is approved. Proceeding to item 11, as item 10 has been moved to our next meeting. Citation hearings. Will we be hearing all of these at the same time or are these all individually separated items as it's the same?

They'll be separate. Yeah, we'll be hearing them separate. Okay. So with that, we'll move to item 11A, citation hearing with Art LEGO LLC, mister Fabian Medina, citation number 32259. Investigator, Darren Serbian.

We already had the swearing in of staff. Do we need to swear in Mr. Padina?

So Mr. Subrian will make his presentation. When his presentation is complete, then Mr. Chair, you will direct the clerk to swear in the respondent, at which point the respondent can make a statement, ask questions of the city or the Board, then we proceed to, back and forth, and then it goes to the vote.

Alright. Mr. Sobrian, if you have your presentation.

Good morning. I am licensed investigator Darren Sobrian. I am bringing Citation 32,259 to the Board against Fabian Perdoza Medina. The Florida Statute sections were 489.1271F, engaging in business or acting in capacity of a contractor or advertising self or herself as a business organization as available to engage in business or acting capacity of a contractor without being registered or certified or a holder of a certificate of competency. Scope of work was structural, windows and doors.

The date this citation was issued was 08/27/2025. The method of service with citation was regular mail and certified mail return receipt requested. The violator did require request for a hearing. On 08/28/2025, I was assigned a case, Service Request 20, for unlicensed activity. A contractor included evidence of reviewing and contracting notice that the contractor included replacing windows, doors.

I am citing Fabian Pedroza Madonna for acting in capacity of a general contractor without a license. On the same day, I generated the citation and it was mailed. The same day, Mr Medina received a call from myself and I stated to him that he is working without a license, he should cease from doing so and should not continue as an unlicensed contractor in the future. On 09/18/2025, our office received a call from Mr. Medina.

He came into the office, sorry. He said he should not be at fault because the homeowner refused permitting. He stated that he has proof and the refusals and refusals. Fabian says the owner has many houses all over the city of PSO and is hoping to sell many of them. So no permits are being pulled at any time for them.

He also stated that the GC that he works under has signed citations to be added to the CBA. Okay. Here you can see because he replaced the when I went there, there was a case originally opened for me to go on view and it was to do with windows and doors. So, when I proceeded there, I noticed the windows and the doors, they looked new, everything they looked new, replaced. Now, the complainant forwarded other information to do with interior work, which I couldn't see at the time, okay?

But these are some this is his contract that he has here. It goes here. On his top line, it goes replace windows, doors or windows around the house. And then there's there's actually it looks like a front door. It looks like it's been replaced as well when I went there. Okay. I think it was it was quite a window because I could only see around the front of the property. I couldn't get to the back of the property. Okay. This was at the front of the property. There's new windows at the front and the door looks new as well.

Okay. It's

the same one. Yeah. There we go. This property looks like it's been getting ready to be rented out or sold, but it seems like there's been quite a bit of work done on it. There you can see again and there the front with the door.

Everything looks new at the front. Obviously, couldn't go around the back because it's not in my thing, but I left the door hanger. And there is an open case on the property owner themselves to do with this issue as well, okay? So that's what we're looking into at the moment.

Are we permitted to ask clarification questions before having Mr. Medina speak?

Yes, you may ask the city any questions

This you is why I asked initially if we were hearing this case as one or as separate, our documentation in our reports is all the same documentation for all three. Therefore, if we are hearing them separate, I would request that the city identify which particular element they are asking to be heard for each case. So for citation thirty two thousand two and fifty nine, which specific thing are we looking at? Because all three citations cite the same statute or ordinance rather as, so if this is windows and doors, can we clarify what the next two are just so we know how to separate those when we're reviewing them, unless the board, rest of the board has any other thoughts on that?

This particular citation was for windows and doors by acting as a GC. There was another one where he was just acting as a plumber.

Okay. Are coming up. Are coming up.

Electrical. That's why they're separate.

Good. All right. All right. We're clear. This is just on the windows and doors. Alright.

Yeah.

Thank you. Any other questions?

I think that, you asked the question that I had in reference to the different citations. It was repeated for windows and doors and then for electrical, I believe.

Plumbing. Yeah.

And several citations with the same, actually several detail with the same citation. What does that mean? That mean, when you say citation number, for example, the plumbing water heater replacement, that's 32258. And then on 32259, There are two violations, I presume, structural windows and doors.

That's all. That is That would be the same. Structural is windows and doors. That's it's like windows there's windows, but it's

Because it was It's that there are two windows and doors. Just one.

Yeah. It's structural. It's a structural issue. It's the windows. Basically, it's the windows.

Why was it repeated so many times? Sorry? Twice. It was repeated twice.

Each is a different license. A different one? A different violin I mean, it's a different category of license acting in the capacity

They referred to us windows and doors.

Contractor acting in the capacity of a plumber acting in the capacity of an electrician. There are three different violations.

Yeah. He's had free basically, that's why there's three different cases.

I see.

He's acting in capacity as a plumber, as a GC, and as an electrician.

Okay.

Three totally different issues here. I'm reading them in individual.

Yeah. So for this one, we are focused on the the GC, which is just on the windows and doors. So with that, I will call Mr. Medina now to the stand and ask if he can be sworn in to provide his statement.

Is that all? I'm sorry for my English because I was born here. I want to try to talk to you.

First, you have to be sworn in.

Raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm that the statements made today will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? And please state your name for the record. Thank you.

All right. If you'd like to speak now.

Okay. I'm not going to lie. We got a contract. The customer got a contract to me because he used to live close to my house. He said the house was removed for the old owner because it was a drop deal or something like that. What I told the house was a total mess. He say, as the emails can show you, I want a doll house, beautiful house. Okay? We're gonna start with the permit. I don't want a permit. Why not? Because my business is just flipping. Are you sure? Sure. You're going to take the responsibility for that?

Okay. I got my allowance, general contractors. I can provide the names. I've been on the business for seven years. As you can see, the zombies register is the first time that I've been here. I don't have any complaint from my customers. I don't have any yes, I'm guilty. You can see the pictures. I did the job. I'm not going to say I didn't do it because I do it. If I had to pay the penalty or something like that, I'm to do it because I'm guilty.

I have a question. Are you claiming to be a licensed general contractor?

Never. It's not like I got a my specialty is plumber and I got all my studies. I got

Are you licensed as

anything? Not yet because I am processed to my residence. I can be licensed for now.

So you have no licenses in the state in the city of Port St. Lucie?

No. Okay.

No. But did you get to replace the windows and doors?

Yes.

Mr.

Were you working directly for the owner of the building or were you working for a contractor?

There is actually two owners, but they already sell the house. It's a

Running Good LLC.

Brandon Brand, yes. And the other one is Susan or Sara something.

Rosavi.

So you're working directly for them. They're paying you or is a contractor in between you two?

Yes. He pay me. The owner pay me.

Okay. Mr. Larson.

Yes. Mr. Medina, you said you advertise that you are licensed.

Because I got my general contractor.

You have a general contracting license. We just asked you that and you said no.

I'm not a general contractor, but I own the business and I get my contracts with a general contractor.

I'm sorry.

I'm not a general contractor. This real.

I'm having a hard time. Either you are or you're not. I

support my company with general contractors outside. They make my the permits for me. You just

Do you know that's illegal in the state of Florida? You cannot do that. That's illegal against the law.

If I hire the the

general You can't hire anybody as a business owner because you're not a general contractor. You have to be a general contractor to hire other contractors. You can't. So you do not have a license. This is not a license. This is just a business number that you have when you file with the state

Yeah.

To be a limited liability corporation. They assign you a number. Why do they assign this number? So you can pay taxes. That's all. Not this is not a license.

This is clear to me.

Then why are you why are you working as a licensed contractor?

Many people outside on the street do the same thing. You got a general contractor.

So everybody else does it, so you do it.

What if you put the permit with the general contractor? I mean, I'm not gonna lie. This is the this is the market outside.

Well, I mean that that's why we're here because the reason is you're acting in the capacity of a contractor when you are not a contractor. You may know how to do the work, but you have to get a license. So that's why you're before us and we strongly recommend you go and take your license and get licensed, right, and do that. But for now you're in violation and you acted.

Please forgive me because I didn't know it's over the law.

Okay. You've been here. You've been working you said for ten years doing this and and you're telling me you have no idea you need a license. I don't believe it.

But I didn't know that is a violation, hire a general contractor.

That's impossible to be in the state of Florida working in this business. I'm a general contractor. Yes. The first thing I learned coming from another place here is what do I need to do to be a licensed contractor in Florida? You have to take a test. You gotta you you have to, you know, take a course and pass the test and then you have to prove that you're financially stable and you have to give credit references and then it's a big and then you get your license. But in the meantime, I could only work for somebody who's has a license.

Is what I do?

No. Mister Young. Oh.

Hey. My my I don't think he understands. I I find a customer.

You cannot find a customer. That's against the law. You cannot find a customer. It's against.

Mister Hill. Wayne

is a general contractor. You cannot ask him to pull a permit for somebody that you contacted. You contact me about a job. I ask you, can you do this? You cannot ask him to pull a permit for you unless you work for him. And he contacts me and he pulls a permit and it doesn't make a difference if the homeowner doesn't want to pull permits, you cannot work for them. Okay. So having somebody pull permits for you, a general contractor is illegal. It's illegal for them to do it. You may not have known that, but they have to know that.

A contract unless you are paid by him. Okay. So if that works and he does the work and he makes the contract with the customer, that's perfectly fine. And because other people are doing it does not make it any less of an offense. A lot of people do that and if we catch them, they will be up here before. And a lot of people have come in here and we've had to cite them for this same kind of job. So you cannot do that. Either you work for the contractor or you get your own license.

Miss Silvestri.

Also, you stated that the house has been sold, correct? Yeah. Okay. Sorry.

There is a funny part. The actual owner is calling me and he say, I wanna fix some things that is

Okay, but the house if the house has been sold, there is a lot of unpermitted work done on this house and I don't know how that would actually go through closing.

Well, at the moment, we have an open case on it and it's actually scheduled for notice So, of hearing as you know, we will address that.

But that guy is actually four houses around the Right.

But it will create a problem with unpermitted work.

They hire people without documents, and then in the middle of the contract, they steal the money. You know? That that guy is Graham.

Graham. Graham.

This is kidding. At the at the middle of the process, they just stop the process and steal the money from the people who's who's doing the job. Just because they are citizens and the other people is not documents, they try to how can I say? I don't know. To me, it's something like

Mr. Vadina, I would say this for this board, that is outside of our scope. I know. We just understand our focus is solely on whether or not you're accepting or rejecting the citation that you did violate the city ordinance. It sounds like you're saying you did, which I'm not going to speak on behalf of the rest of the board, but I do believe if you're admitting to that, that is all we can hear. I would advise you to speak with other personnel relative to the other issues that you are bringing up as there may be additional cases within the building department and other departments that may become relevant

at

that point.

I'm going to interrupt

anyways. So, just for the Board's reminder, this is a violation hearing.

Yes.

Right, so as the chair has alluded to, you just determine whether or not the respondent is in violation. If the board determines that he is in violation, the board can then determine how long to, it can be the next meeting, which is in April, it could be the meeting after that in September. Sorry, hold on one second please. The board just determines if the respondent is guilty of the citation.

Yes.

And then chooses to impose a penalty.

That is correct. With

that, I would ask, is there any additional discussion or anything additional relative to the violation that either the city or Mr. Medina would like to speak on behalf of? Just related to the violation?

Yes. What's I got there is one violation about the electricity.

That's not this one. This is just the windows and doors Do right I hear a motion? And if you have the motion, please make sure to read it. Two parts.

I have one question to clarify.

Mr. Martinez.

You admit that you did the work without a license, is that correct?

That's all. Okay.

Whoever

would like to read the motion and then subsequently what they're proposing relative to the second motion. So remember, have the findings of fact and then we have the imposition of a penalty.

Mr. Chairman, based on the testimony heard today and the evidence produced by the parties of this case, I move to submit the following motion to establish the findings of fact. On the date of 08/27/2025, Citation 32,259 was issued by City of Port St. Lucie Licensing Investigator Darren Subbarin to Fabian Medina. A copy of the citation was properly served. The allegations of fact, as set forth in the citation with any attachments thereto are true and adopted and incorporated herein by this reference.

Second. All in favor?

Aye. I

move that the Construction Board of Appeals based on the findings of fact concludes that the respondent did violate Port St. Lucie City Code section 150.53 a six, and I move to order the following action: place a civil penalty in the amount of $1,000

Second.

All in favor.

Aye.

Any opposed? Alright, moving on to item 11B, citation number 32258. Investigator, Darren Sobrian, also related to Mr. Fabian Medina and Art Lego LLC. Mr. Sobrian, if you would like to present your case for this citation.

Sure. I am licensed investigator Darren Sobrian. I bring in Citation 32258 to the Board against Fabian Pedroza Medina. The Florida statutes violated were: 489.1271, engage in the business or the active capacity of a contractor who advertise himself or herself as a business organization as to available to engage in business or act in the capacity of a contractor without being duly registered or certified or a holder of a certificate of competency. The scope of work is plumbing, water heater replacement.

The date of the citation is 08/27/2025. Method of service for citation was regular mail, certified mail return receipt requested. The violator did request the hearing. Once again, like the other case, I was signed a case, Service Request 20, in regards to water heat replacement by unlicensed contractor. The citation was posted out on the same day, August 28, and I called mister Medina.

It's the same conversation and explained to him that he's unlicensed. He should be doing unlicensed work and he's replaced water heater. And basically he hasn't got a license to do any kind of plumbing work whatsoever. As I said, once again, September, when he came into the office, he spoke to our office staff and he explained to them that it shouldn't be at fault because the homeowner was refused permitting and stated that the proof and refusal of Fabian, the owner, said many houses all over they have many houses over the City Of Port St. Lucie and hoping to sell many of them.

So the permits are not being pulled. I mean, this is what, you know, and it this is what it says here. In the laundry room, you see this section here, goes fixed new water heater. You have a photograph of that? I I I have no photos because I was only from the outside of the property. This was the this information came from the complainant. This is what we received. This all this this documentation.

The complainant was the owner?

No. I believe she possibly worked for them. Her name was, as you mentioned her name, Sarah Rosavi. This was the person that forwarded all this information to us. So we had this information and that's where the initial complaint came from. We opened a case on that. I went around there, but I could only from the outside get the photos from the outside. But then we looked into it and then we could see the water heater replacement. And obviously, he's he had a contract with them to do this work. So, that's all we have to really go on with that. But he says it in there that he's replaced the water heater and plumbing. Okay.

To clarify, I believe the complainant worked for the property owner at some point in time, not the violator.

Okay. So, I presume no permits were obtained by any

No permits at all. No permits. And the complainant actually said they did have more properties as well, which we're kind of looking into that.

Mr. Madina, did you install a water heater?

Yes, I have.

Okay.

Question

for the department. Being that the property owner is the owner of multiple houses, that puts it in a commercial perspective now. No, it wouldn't that he's working for a company that flips houses versus a home. He's not a homeowner, a homeowner.

Yes, it's still a residential.

It's still a residential home.

But I think he's working for for another company. He's not working for I think the contract was to an LLC. Running LLC. Yeah. He has a company. Yeah.

You're referring to the property owner?

He? Mister Medina contracted with an LLC.

With mister Medina, and that's the company we're working on right now. Yeah. What the owner has nothing to do with his this violation.

Commercial or residential, not to interrupt, I'm sorry, Ted. Commercial or residential, we're here because he was acting in the capacity of a contractor and that it's regardless as to whether or not it's

Right, right. But to make the distinction of, oh, I'm just doing work for Mrs. Jones, homeowner, he's actually doing it commercially for a commercial

capacity is of a contract and it's regardless of who he's doing the work for that's the violation. Yeah, just to be clear and commercial or residential, it would be the same.

Same thing.

I want

to give Mr. Medina an opportunity. Is there anything else you want to say, because you didn't technically have your opportunity to present for this particular case with respect to the water heater in the plumbing?

I can lay, I mean, I do the job. Okay. I never heard that. He say it's Will Sarah who's complaining about report to me about the city. And it's just because I talked to her and say, if you don't pay me, I'm gonna leave the house. Believe me. I can do it. She's supposed to fill me $10,000 at the end of the job when everything was done. I got all the emails all the emails. After I say, hey.

If you're gonna you're gonna pay me, I'm gonna leave the house. The next day, my check was in my mailbox. But she takes one month after, and this is after maybe four or six months after I leave the house. Everything was working good and everything is good enough.

But to the point of the case, you're admitting that you installed the water heater and conducted the plan? Okay.

Is

there any further discussion on this particular citation from the board? Anybody want to read the motion?

Sure. I'll go. Mr. Chairman, based on the testimony heard today and the evidence produced by the parties this case, I move to submit the following motion to establish finding of fact. On the date of 08/27/2025, Citation 32,258 was issued by the City of Port St. Lucie licensing investigator Darren Sobrian to Fabian Pedraza Medina. A copy of this citation was properly served. The allegations of fact is set forth in the citation with any attachments thereto are true and adopted and incorporated herein by this reference.

I second it.

All in favor?

Aye.

Opposed? Nope. All right. Continue.

Yeah. I move that the Construction Board of Appeals based on the finding of a fact include that the respondent did violate Port St. Lucie Code Section one fifty dot five three zero a six, and I move to order the following action, places civil penalty in the amount of $1,000.

I second it.

All in favor. Aye. Any opposed? The ayes have it. All right. And for the final citation in this case, we will move to item 11C. Investigator Darren Sobrian, with Mr. Fabian Pedraza Medina, Art LEGO LLC, citation number 32255. Mr. Sobrian?

Yes, sure. I am licensed investigator Darren Sobrian. I am bringing citation 32255 to the Board against Fabio Pedrosa Medina. The Florida statute violated were 489.531A, practice contracting unless the person is certified or registered electrical scope of work electrical. The date of the citation was issued was 08/27/2025.

Method of service for citation, regular mail and certified mail, return receipt of receipt requested. The violator did request the hearing. For this case, it's similar to the same, all the same information, request service request 20 regarding unlicensed contracting, which I investigated, and we found that Mr. Medina had worked doing electrical work as an unlicensed contractor. He sent out in the citation which was this 132255 on August 28.

On August 28, I called Mr. Medina and explained to him that he should not be doing any electrical work if he's not licensed period. And he said he would actually stop when I spoke to him. So at that point there, I thought that was it. But he came into the office once again, as I stated, in September to say the people he's working for didn't need to pull permits, all relevant stuff really.

So at that point there, we're here now. You requested a hearing to come today, and that's where we are. You can see from the contract he has his it's for installing lights. Yeah? New fixtures, 12 reset recessed lights, new switches, outlets in all the house, fans. I mean, this is I mean, I never went inside the property, so I can't say. I can only go from what he says on his contract. Yeah. And it says, we've put in new fixtures. He's put in new fans, switches. He's put in recessed lights. I mean, that's that's all we've we've we've got gone on. On.

You are you completed? Okay. Any clarification for the city, miss Silvestri?

Mr. Medina, did you do this electrical work? Did you install the reset lights and the new switches and outlets all through the house?

I just replaced the lights. I don't know if I need a license for that. I just replace the lights. I don't run wires. I don't touch nothing. And the Audi's, of course, I replace the old ones for the new ones. I don't know if I need a license for that. But when we talk with him when I talk to him, and he said something, they replaced the panel too, all the brakes panel.

Did you replace the panel?

I don't know.

Did you replace the ceiling fans?

Yeah. Okay.

Yeah. But the old ones for the new ones.

Yeah.

Who installed the hot water heater? You did?

The hot water heater.

The hot water heater? The electric? That was last

This is just relative to the the lighting and electrical. She

hired she hired an electrician, and I heard the email. There is an email. I don't know if you wanna see it.

But you did install the ceiling fans?

Yes. I replaced the old ones for the new ones.

Okay.

I need a license for that.

Yes. Excuse

me. If I could just interject. To replace the ceiling fans, to replace lighting, there's no new wires around, no permits required and that we wouldn't necessarily require an electrical license, but if it's replacement. If it was a replacement, we would not.

It's very vague. You're not sure when it says new fixtures. You don't know if it's actually installed new fixtures or it's just replaced like for like.

Can we see that

in fixtures?

Mr. Medina, how

much were you paid to do the electrical work?

Like 2,500.

And that included the ceiling fans, the appliances also, the ceiling fan, the materials?

You supplied the material?

No, material because material is under my contract. I just hired the electrician.

You hired the electrician?

I have someone to do the electricity.

But you Okay. You hired the electrician. Okay.

But after that, as you can see, she doesn't like my work. She hired a new electrician to do everything again.

Point of clarification on that. Are you saying you hired an electrician to touch the paneling and deal with the wires or? No, no. So what did you hire a person doing electrical work to do?

Replace the fence and change the outlets. That's it. I didn't touch the panel because I don't do that. It's too much.

But you hired the electrician to do that?

Yeah. Okay. No. That's well, that's what I just asked. So that that's why I'm

Just for

one I'm

Brazilian

fan. I didn't touch the panel. If you wanna build pictures for the house, I got the pictures inside, everything inside because it's it's one of my projects before and after.

Correct. Yeah, I'll ask it one more time just to see to make sure we're crystal clear. So the person you hired, not that they hired, what was the whole scope of their work that you hired, not that the owner hired after the phase?

We changed the outlets, the switches and replaced the fan. That's it.

So they did not pull wire, nothing was new, they did not touch the panel?

No. Okay. We didn't touch the panel because when I talked to her about the price, she said it's too much. A regular electrician shares around $5,000 for change the panel. The panel was too old, too old. She said, okay, I got someone to do for 2,000. Go ahead. It's your business. It's not mine.

Now in your contract, you state that you have 12 reset lights. Installed 12 recess lights?

We changed the lights. What?

Mr. Larson?

Yeah. No. It says you install new recessed sliding. Older houses does not have recessed sliding. Which means So you had to run wires to get recessed wire.

They just don't have something like that. That is very easy to change just the just the I don't know.

Are you

talking about the bulb?

Do you

change the bulb or did you change the whole device?

No. You replace the the thing the thing I mean, this thing.

Were they LEDs? LED fixtures?

Yeah. Their holes was there. Their wires was there. I mean, this is the truth. I don't wanna lie. I you know?

So you connected the wires to the fixture.

Yeah. And it's very simple. Today, it's very simple.

But you're not allowed

to do it.

Well, what did the electrician do? Excuse me? You say you had an electrician. Right?

Yeah.

What did he do?

Change the outlets, change the switches

Yeah.

And change the lights.

Physically didn't do it. Alright. Okay.

I think we're getting there, but mister Olga, thank you.

So you yourself personally, you did not climb on the ladder and change fixtures in the ceiling. The electrician did.

No. Yeah. He

does. Electrician did it. You did not do it.

No. I can't. I mean, I know how can I

Okay? But I'm saying what I'm saying is

things to

you didn't climb up on the ladder and do the wiring for the fixtures in the ladder. No, sir. Okay. Electrician did that.

Okay.

And who was the electrician?

He's got the thing there.

I don't think that

Who was the electrician?

His name is Freddie. He's from Guatemala. Actually, he's on the jail because the documents. I'm sorry. That's what it is.

Yeah. So he's very To the people

of the board, you're acting in the capacity of electrician if you hire an Yes. I mean, no matter what, it's in the contract. You cannot do that.

Yeah. That's that's I think the point that we're trying to make is that you you hired somebody else to do that.

That's acting in the capacity of a general contractor which we all already covered and fined him for. He's not acting as an electrician if he hires an electrician. He's acting as a general contractor which we already fined him for. So what we are dealing with here is did he actually do the electrical work and can be fined because he acted as an electrician.

In my opinion, five times he says, yes, did And at the end, no. So I I I

I think I think that he's acting in the capacity of a general contractor.

Mister Larson, whatever, I always have to say yes because I'm the contractor. If you ask me, if you did it, I did it because I have someone else with the ability to do it. Of course, say yes, I did it because it's my contract. I responsible for everything.

Yes. And just a point of clarification on the citation, it's not that he's acting as the actual electrician, it's he's engaging in the capacity of a contractor for the work, which if he is hiring somebody Yes. That would be the admission of that.

But is that covered under the under the first thing?

Yes. That is that's what this is about here. Yes. Exactly. Yeah.

So we've already we've already Right.

But but it's a different work, though. It's a different scope of work. So it's a different

Second time around.

Yes. If I'm understanding that correct, because this is a different scope of work. Actually, all three items are technically a similar violation, but they're different scopes of work in different locations. And this one also has, correct me if I'm wrong, investigator Sir Brian, you also marked practice contracting unless the person is certified or registered electrical, which is a specific subcategory or difference from the rest. Is that right? Okay.

So just to clarify, essentially he contracted for the entire project and he subbed work out to other people?

Yes.

He acted in the capacity of a general contractor, but any work that he did under that contract, if he did the electrical work, plumbing work, then he acted in the capacity of an electrician or

a plumber.

But he acted in the capacity of a general contractor contracting for the entire project.

Right, which is what each of the citations is for with the different elements of the scope. Do any members of the Board have further questions? All right. Would somebody like to, make a motion?

Sure. Mr. Chairman, based on the testimony heard today and the evidence produced by the parties of this case, I move to submit the following motion to establish the finding of fact. On the date of 08/27/2025, citation number 32255 was issued by City of Port St. Lucie licensing investigator Darren Sobrian to Fabian Petrazza Medina. A copy of the citation was properly served. The allegations of fact are set forth in the citation with any attachments thereto are true and adopted and incorporated herein by this reference.

Do I have a second?

I second it.

All in favor?

Aye. Aye.

Any opposed? Nope.

I move that the construction board of appeals based on the finding of fact includes that the respondent did violate Florida statute four eight nine point five three one one a and I moved to order following action place a civil penalty in the amount of $1,000

Second. All in favor. Aye. Any opposed. I guess I'll say the same thing that I often hear Wayne and Ted speak to and if you guys want to add something to this.

Mr. Medina, just understand that the actions that you have taken, whether you understood them or not are still in violation of the statute. Hopefully, this serves as a solid reminder of what you do need to do as you mentioned you're working towards plumbing, right, I believe is what you said towards getting all the things for that. Take this as a good lesson and make sure that everything you're doing is kosher in the future. Obviously don't continue to hire contractors even with their licenses underneath you because as Mr.