PCCLB Special Magistrate Hearing March 16, 2026 9:00AM - Mar 16, 2026

Good morning. My name is Jeff Fuller. I'm the special magistrate who's been assigned to the March 16, 2026 Pinellas County Code Enforcement Special Magistrate Agenda. Welcome to Pinellas County Code Enforcement Special Magistrate Hearings. The special magistrate is charged with conducting hearings to determine whether an alleged violation of the county code has occurred. In order to meet that obligation, all parties or their representatives will be allowed an opportunity to be heard on matters relevant to the alleged violations. All witnesses offering testimony or presenting evidence will be required to swear or affirm that the testimony they provide is the truth. The order of presentation will begin with the county presenting their evidence of the alleged violations and then the respondent shall present his or her case. Both parties shall have an opportunity to cross-examine all witnesses. The special magistrate may question any witness. The clerk will announce the names of the cases from the agenda. When you hear your case called, please respond by coming to the podium with your representative and or any witnesses to be sworn in. When addressing the special magistrate, please speak clearly into the microphone. The clerk does not always call the cases in the number in order that's on the agenda, so listen and when you hear your case called, please come to the podium. Any person who decides to appeal the decision of the code enforcement special magistrate with respect to any matter considered at this hearing will need a record of the proceedings and for such purposes may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is based. Record is not provided by Pinellas County. Caroline, would you call case number one? Yes. Item one continued from January 12, 2026. Department PCCLB. Matter advertising code violation holding out code violation. Case number CLB MG25-00955, CLB-MG25-00956, CLB-MG25-00957, CLB-MG25-00958, investigator Jay Padgett. Citation number CLB-CT25-00590, CLB-CT25-00572, CLB-CT25-00573, CLB-CT25-00573, CLB-CT25-00573, CLB-CT25-00552, CLB-CT25- throttle aggregation. Jay Patterson, Esquire, 3110 Palm Harbor Boulevard, Palm Harbor, Florida, 34683, Robert at RobertEckardLaw.com, Drew at RobertEckardLaw.com, Juanita at RobertEckardLaw.com, Service at RobertEckardLaw.com, and PCCLB Investigator Jay Padgett, Plains as Witness, Pinellas County Code Enforcement, 631 Chestnut Street, Clearwater, Florida, 33756, Jay Padgett at Pinellas.gov, and Yardley Collette, Esquire, Assistant County Attorney for PCCLB, in care of Thandaway 10, Legal Secretary, Pinellas County Attorney's Office, 315 Court Street, 6th floor, Clearwater, Florida, 33756, Y. Collette at Pinellas.gov, T. Thandaway at Pinellas.gov, violation address, SMDoorAutomatic.com, Yelp, Google Nextdoor, Tarpon Springs, Florida, 34689, OxyBrightServices.com, Google Yelp, Craigslist, OxyBrightServices.com. Thank you. Who is appearing for the county? Good morning, Magistrate. Yardley Collette and Investigator Pageant for the county. And who's appearing for the respondent? Good morning. Robert Eckard, on behalf of the respondent, Mr. Corey. Are you offering any evidence or are you lawyering? Am I lawyering? Yeah. Or are you offering evidence? No, we're going to resolve these. Oh, okay. However, we've missed one today. I want to make sure it makes the record. From what Ms. Yardley and I discussed, there was one that was apparently left off that was not paid, CLBCT2400411. The one I had was CLBCT2500591 was the uncontested citation. Oh, the uncontested. Okay. Thank you for that question. It was uncontested. In time, I guess. To my knowledge. Before I got retained. So I just want to make sure that gets included, if necessary, so it's not hanging out there. All right. March 12th, I issued an order denying the motion to dismiss. Did you all get that? I did. Yes, Magistrate. I wasn't sure it would get to everybody. All right. County may proceed. Yes, so, Magistrate, before we begin and get into the record and the evidence, Mr. Eckert and I have discussed. So regarding three of the citations, and this is something that's new coming in front of you, so I'm deferring to you in this process. Regarding three of the citations for Oxybride, it's the 572, 573, and 574. It's the county's understanding that Mr. Eckert's client, Mr. Corey, has come, I would argue, into compliance by becoming, his business has become qualified by a licensed contractor. And so the county would be happier, would reduce those, because the company has come into compliance, would reduce those fines by half. So there were, it was a 1,000, 1,500, if my records are, if my notes are accurate. My notes have 1,500, and 500. So according to the citations, CT2500572 was for 2214.6, unlicensed contractor, advertising garage door services via flyer in Pinellas County, Florida. That was for 1,000. Right, I've got that one at 1,000. Okay. The CT2500573, under 2214.6, unlicensed contractor, advertising garage door services via website Google CrateList and Yelp in Pinellas County, Florida, for 1,000. Okay, that's the one I've got wrong. And then the last one, CT2500574, excuse me, for 2214.4, unlicensed contractor, holding himself out to the public while advertising garage door services via webpage in Pinellas County, Florida, for 500. With that understanding, Mr. Magistrate, the agreement was, as Ms. Collette identified, that they would admit the violations to the extent to resolve them, give them 30 days to pay on those citations. And then regarding the other two citations, these were for the SM door automatic. At this point in time, excuse me, at this point in time, it's the county's understanding that Mr. Corey or Mr. Corey's company has not come into compliance, but the county is willing to give, and Mr. Eckert and I discussed, 30 days for that company to come into compliance. And if they would not come into compliance, then the county would be seeking full fees. That's the understanding. These are advertising violations. No consumer harm, no proof of actual work done under the statute or the ordinance. But to the extent that clients want to resolve them, they're wanting to resolve them today without prejudice, obviously, for future challenge, I guess, if they decide to do so. But that's maybe a county commission issue that they can pursue. But the statutes are the statutes. I understand the code enforcement enforced them the way they believed they needed to be enforced. Of course, you've read the motion in terms of the challenges and the concerns from the respondent's perspective of enforcing advertising with words without actual work and some ambiguities. But to the extent we want to get them resolved, they want to resolve them today with that understanding from Ms. Colette. All right. And so county does defer to you, magistrate, on whether or not to accept the agreement. I am going to accept the agreement. As far as the Oxybrite on CLB-CT25-00572, I'm going to find a violation of Code Section 22-14, subsection 6, and issue a fine in the amount of $500. As to CLB-CT25-00573, I'm going to find that there's a violation of Code Section 22-14, subsection 8, and we'll issue a fine of $500. As far as CLB-CT25-00574, I'm going to find a violation of Code Section 22-14, subsection 4, and issue a fine of $250. And, magistrate, sorry, I apologize to interrupt. Just to clarify, on the 573, that was a violation of 22-14-6, or 8? I believe it was cited as 22-14-6. I just want to make sure the record's clear. Okay. Let me check that. Thank you. That is correct. It's 22-14, subsection 6. Thank you, magistrate. As far as SM-DOOR automatic, I will find that as the CLB-CT25-00590, a violation of Code Section 22-14, subsection 8, give the respondent 30 days to become compliant and issue a fine of $500. Failing to come into compliance, the county may petition to inform the magistrate that compliance was not achieved, and I will then entertain a different fine. As far as CLB-CT25-00591, we'll find a violation of Code Section 22-14, subsection 4, issue a fine of $250, subject to becoming compliant within 30 days. Failing to do so, upon notification from the county, we will reopen and have a new hearing on those two cases. When is 30 days? 30 days. Wednesday, April 15, 2026. That'll be April 15, 2026, by 5 p.m. Now, what was the one that there's a dispute over that wasn't in my... I think you got them. Yeah, the 991, but you addressed it. Oh, okay. But you addressed 590 as subsection 8, and I believe the county charges as subsection 6. Yes. I've managed to... I think I need new glasses. I can't see the 6 and the 8 when I'm... You're not alone. I'm having the same issues, too, so... How much time spent behind computer screens and reading fine print? I guess. Anything further on these two? All right, so then I'm clear, those are the two Oxybrite, the fines levied 500 and 250, respectively, on 590 and 591. Those are the fines. Should he get compliant? Should the company get... Those are the fines imposed now, and if he's compliant, they become half. I thought Oxybrite was the one that you guys said was already in compliance. Oxybrite is in compliance. Right. It's SM-door. I'm talking SM-door. Okay, the SM-door, I've issued the fine, and if the county informs me that you haven't got any compliance, then they will come back before the magistrate and we'll take it from there. Got it. All right. Is that paperwork for me? No, the county has barred us from having a printer today. Yes. It will be mailed to you and emailed to you. As you've been receiving those emails, you're going to get it as well. Okay. When do you think that will be? Within 10 days. Okay. All right. No further business. Are we excused? You are. Thank you, magistrate. All right, Caroline, would you read item number 5? Yes. Item 5, Department PCCLB. Matter, no permit code violation, unlicensing contracting code violation. Case number CLB-MG25-01118. CLB-MG25-01119. Investigator C. Furland, citation number CLB-CT25-00920, CLB-CT25-00921. Defendant Andy Garcia-Gonzalez, notice address Andy Garcia-Gonzalez, 8627 Layden Drive, Tampa, Florida, 33614. Andy Garcia-2793 at gmail.com. And Sarah Mungavero, plaintiff's witness, 2176 Chaparral Way, Dunedin, Florida, 34698. And PCCLB investigator C. Furland, plaintiff's witness. Pinellas County Code Enforcement, 631 Chestnut Street, Clearwater, Florida, 33756. C. Furland at pinellas.gov. And Yardley Collette, Esquire, Assistant County Attorney for PCCLB. In care of Natasha Creighton, Legal Secretary, Pinellas County Attorney's Office, 315 Court Street, 6th floor, Clearwater, Florida, 33756. Y. Collette at pinellas.gov. N. A. Creighton at pinellas.gov. Violation address, 2176 Chaparral Way, Dunedin, Florida, 34698. Ready, who is here for that case? Yardley Collette and Investigator Furland for the county. Is Investigator Furland the only one that's going to offer testimony? Yes, Magistrate. And Mr. Gionis and I have also had a conversation prior to the hearing. All right. So regarding Mr. Gionis' client, Mr. Gonzalez, there's two citations. The CLBCT2500920 for work without the required permit for electrical work within Pinellas County, Florida, and CLBCT2500921 on licensed contracting to perform electrical services within Pinellas County, Florida. In our conversations, Mr. Gionis says that his client is working or will become either licensed or qualified or in some manner able to legally do the services that his client has been performing in the next 60 days is what has been agreed upon. Understand that this is a little different from the last case, but again, if his client would come into compliance, the county is willing to reduce the fines in half if compliance is achieved within those 60 days. The agreement? That's accurate. My client is currently working for a licensed contract, and he should have his qualified. When is 60 days? 60 days. Friday, May 15, 2026. May 15? May 15. All right. As to CLB-CT25-00920, I will find a violation of Code Section 22-15, Subsection 5. We'll give the respondent 60 days, which is May 15, 2026, at 5 p.m., to become in compliance. And assuming that occurs, the fine will be $250. As far as CLB-CT25-00921, I will find a violation of Code Section 22-14, Subsection 1. Give the respondent 60 days to come into compliance, which is May 15, 2026, at 5 p.m. And we'll issue a fine in the amount of $1,000. If the county determines that compliance has not been achieved, they are to bring the cases back before the magistrate, and we'll proceed from there. Thank you, magistrate. Thank you. All right. My only question is, so is payment of the, at least, the reduced required within 30 days, or are we waiting until 60 days just so he's doing what he needs to be doing? It's up to you, magistrate. Oh, what's the order normally say? The order normally says within 30 days. Let's make it 60, rather than have two deadlines to have to be calendared by everybody. And I would just provide the proof of law by permit or employment to Ms. Klett. Okay. All right. Perfect. Thank you very much. Thank you, magistrate. Thank you. And the last is, I can't go anywhere. I was like this a year ago. I turned 50. Thank you all very much. Bye. Have a good day. All right. We're going to get into recess for five minutes. Communications, please stop recording. Caroline, will you please call item number two? Yes. Item two, department PCCLB. Matter, advertising code violation. Case number CLB-MG25-01010, CLB-MG25-01011. Investigator Jay Padgett. Citation number CLB-CT25-00710, CLB-CT25-00711. Defendant Patrick Flannery. Notice address, Patrick Flannery. Defendant 1323 Sands Terrace East, number 103, Clearwater, Florida 33764. P. Flannery at gmail.com and PCCLB Investigator Jay Padgett. Plaintiff's Witness, Pinellas County Code Enforcement. 631 Chestnut Street, Clearwater, Florida 33756. J. Padgett. J. Padgett. J. Padgett at pinellas.gov. And Yardley Collette, Esquire, Assistant to County Attorney for PCCLB. Case number Thandaway, I'm sorry, case number in care of. Thandaway 10, Legal Secretary, Pinellas County Attorney's Office 315 Court Street, 6th floor, Clearwater, Florida 33756. Y. Colette at pinellas.gov. T. Thandaway at pinellas.gov. Violation address, 630 Chestnut Street, Clearwater, Florida 33756. And Patrick's handymanservice.com, Yelp. Who is here for that case? Yardley Collette and Investigator Padgett for the county. My name's Patrick Flannery. All right. Mr. Flannery and Investigator Padgett, would you please raise your right hand? Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Yes, sir. All right. Mr. Flannery, you may have a seat right there. The county may proceed. Thank you, Magistrate. Good morning, Investigator Padgett. Good morning. Could you please summarize the facts and circumstances, including any supporting documentation regarding the citations that we are here for today? Sure. So, on September 17th, 2025, while in the field traveling in Clearwater, I observed a vehicle advertising drywall carpentry work with the company Patrick's handyman and remodeling services displayed on the vehicle. I tied the company vehicle to a Patrick Flannery of Clearwater, who is also advertising online in Pinellas County. Mr. Flannery previously held a finished carpentry license with the PCCLB, which has since been eliminated, Mr. Flannery does not hold a license to perform drywall or carpentry work in Pinellas County. On September 18th of 2025, upon further investigation, I discovered that Mr. Flannery is advertising electrical, carpentry, and drywall services online in Pinellas County. On September 30th, 2025, issued citations to Patrick Flannery for unlicensed advertising, which was his third offense. Exhibit 1, these are the photos I obtained the day that I observed Mr. Flannery's vehicle on Gulf of the Bay Boulevard in Clearwater. The top caption displays his company, Patrick Handyman Remodeling Services, LLC, with services displayed on the right side of the vehicle, such as carpentry and drywall and texture repair. Second caption of the rear of the vehicle with Mr. Flannery's license plate displayed in that photo, also with the same services displayed on the rear of the vehicle. Photo 2, two captions of the rear of the vehicle. Closer caption of the services displayed with Mr. Flannery's company and his tag number in each of these captions. And closer caption of the vehicle on the right side with Mr. Flannery's company, Patrick Handyman Remodeling Services. County moves for the photos in as county is Exhibit 1. Any objection to Exhibit 1? I have Exhibit 1 also. Mr. Flannery, if you need to speak, you need to come up to a mic because it's recorded. Thank you. It's just in the wording, how he said the things that are labeled on Exhibit 1. If you would like to take a look, I can show you Exhibit 1. And the way it says it isn't the way he said it. It says carpentry, doors and cabinets, laminate and tile flooring, drywall and texture repair. Gazebo assembly. All right. I understand your objection. I'm going to overrule the objection because the photographs speak for themselves and you'll have an opportunity to testify concerning them. Of course. Do you have the photograph? Would you like to see it? I do have it. Okay, great. Can you hand mark it? Composite Exhibit 2. During my investigation, it led me to the online advertising for Mr. Flannery's company. These are captions from his website, patrickshandymanservice.com, dated September 18th, 2025. Our services, remodeling services, installation services. Another caption, installing ceiling fans, stairs installation, drywall repair, replacing exterior doors. Another caption, again, listing drywall repair, exterior door repair. The caption, advertising replacement of exterior doors. Photo of Mr. Flannery performing drywall work. This is a caption showing what appears to be siding work of a home with the new siding installed on the property. Areas we serve, St. Pete, Largo, Dunedin, Palm Harbor, Clearwater, which are within Pinellas County. Another caption, listing the services again, Mr. Flannery's email and contact for his company. This is from yelp.com, Patrick's handyman and remodeling services, listing drywall installation and repair. Services offered, continued on that page, drywall installation or replacement, drywall repair service area listed as serving Clearwater, which is in Pinellas County. County moves for the composite printouts of the website and Yelp in his county's composite exhibit two. Any objection to exhibit two? The two things that are listed on Yelp. I don't subscribe to Yelp. I have in the past. Never once have I claimed to do electrical, not plumbing either. He didn't say plumbing. But also, anyone in this room could open a Yelp account for me. And that's, I think, what originally happened on Yelp. Customers can start Yelp pages for you. I did not start this Yelp page, and I don't subscribe. I have zero responsibility for the things that are listed online through Yelp. I'm going to admit the Yelp into evidence, and you'll have an opportunity to testify as you just did. I'm sorry. So exhibit two will be admitted into evidence. You may. Inspector Pageant stated the photos of myself doing drywall. The photo of me doing drywall is clearly a drywall repair, just for the record. All right, you'll have an opportunity to testify concerning that. Okay. I just wanted to clear up some of the things the way he stated it. Yeah, you'll have an opportunity to ask him questions when he's done. Okay. And you'll also have an opportunity to present your case and your arguments. Thank you. Exhibit three. This is the Sunbiz account for the company Patrick's Handyman and Remodeling Services, LLC, listing Mr. Flannery as the owner of the company and the sole person on that. County moves for the Sunbiz printout in his county's Exhibit three. Any objection to Exhibit three? Exhibit three will be admitted into evidence. All right, Exhibit four. It's the affidavit of nonlicensure for Mr. Flannery, stating that I did a thorough search, did not find any county or state license for Mr. Flannery. County moves for the affidavit of nonlicensure in his county's Exhibit four. Any objection to Exhibit four? Exhibit four will be admitted into evidence. Exhibit five, part of my research into Mr. Flannery was to see if he had held any state license as well. Currently, Mr. Flannery is eligible for exam with the state for a general contractor's license. However, it does not currently hold that license. County would move for the DBPR printout in his county's Exhibit five. Any objection to Exhibit five? I have been accepted to do the exams for the state and have passed all three exams for the state. Here is my Exhibit four or five are the past exams that I've done. I am in the application process to complete the general contractor's license in Florida. All right, you have an opportunity to present your witnesses and your testimony and put those exhibits into evidence during your case. So I will admit Exhibit five. Composite Exhibit six is the violation history for Mr. Flannery. These are the previous citations issued to Mr. Flannery from 2021 and 2022. This was for unlicensed contractor advertising on social media issued July 1st of 2021. That fine was paid and was for $500. See another caption of the citation from 2021 citation 21-2042. A violation of code section 20-214 subsection 6, unlicensed contractor advertising on social media without holding a contractor's license. This was another citation that was issued to Mr. Flannery 2021 issued June 8th of 2021. Also for unlicensed advertising, this fine was paid as well. This citation issued March 14th of 2022, 22-2040. Also unlicensed advertising via Google. This was paid and that was for $8,000 as well. Correction. This citation actually went unpaid. 22-2040 was submitted for non-payment reviewed by the magistrate June 7th, 2022. The final order for the citation for unlicensed advertising, which was ordered November 17th of 2022. This was the lien that was filed on Patrick Flannery for non-payment for citations 22-2039, 22-2040. The county moves for the, I guess, packet of information regarding prior citations or prior violations in his county's composite exhibit 6. Any objection to exhibit 6? I'm not sure I received the ones that remain unpaid. Thank you. I will admit exhibit 6 into evidence. It's got limited evidentiary value and we'll give it the weight it deserves. So exhibit 7, this was the license for Mr. Flannery, the finished carpentry license, which was eliminated July 1st of 2024. Date issued for that license was October 21st of 2022. The correspondence sent to Mr. Flannery regarding licensing and upgrading to the carpentry license and informing him this group of work for carpentry does not include drywall replacement. That was sent to Mr. Flannery, November 4th of 2024. The county moves information regarding the previous county license in his county's composite exhibit 7. Any objection to exhibit 7? Exhibit 7 will be admitted into evidence. Nothing further for investigator pageant. All right. Mr. Flannery, this is your opportunity to ask questions or cross-examine investigator pageant. Mr. Flannery, any documents you want to show to the magistrate, you can place it on the seal and it's going to be reflected on our computer screens as well as the TVs here. So the seal is right there in front of you? Right there, yeah. Great. Thank you. Thank you very much. This is a copy of my previous license for Pinoas County. This is one. And it was discontinued by the county. Ever since it had been discontinued, I did pursue the upgraded license for the state by way of general contractors and have completed those. Okay, we will admit that into evidence as respondents exhibit number one. Is that a copy we can have or do we need to make a copy? You can have any of these? And I don't, because we don't have a scanner either, do we? No. You can have all of these copies I brought today for you. Okay. So you had, in addition to Exhibit A, so this picture he was referring to is a drywall repair. It was wood rot only, just a repair. It does show the picture of it being finished, just a repair. I have checked with the county on multiple occasions. Since I did get the first tickets for advertising or non-licensure, I did pursue the license. I did correct, I thought I corrected all of the advertising problems I had at the time. Once I got the license, I did do some extra advertising on social media and with my website. I subscribed to Yelp briefly, canceled it. I'm not a fan of Yelp. I did not say anything directly. I don't do electrical work, period. If you called me today and said, could you do my ceiling fan? I wasn't aware that ceiling fans were still on my webpage, but I also wasn't aware that ceiling fans alone are illegal. I prefer not to do ceiling fans, honestly, or anything electrical or plumbing. It's not in my scope. I don't pursue it. This picture of my drywall repair is clearly just a repair. It was water damage or something I repaired. And as far as I knew, there was nothing illegal about doing a drywall repair. That's what I state that I do. I think on my website, it does state there is installation. It should probably be changed now that I'm without license. So I would agree that that's stated. It says also stair installation is this one. And I find that referring to stair treads, which are not illegal. Drywall repair. This one on my website. Drywall repair. As far as I know, drywall repair is not illegal. That was directly from my website, not Yelp. It does have the territories that I serve. That's correct. Here are the images of my van you have already. And it specifically states anywhere on the print, it is drywall repair. And like I said, as far as I'm concerned, there's nothing illegal about drywall repair. This says remodeling services and drywall. No, it doesn't even say drywall on that. It says installation services, which install could be your sofa. I didn't think there's anything illegal about this highlighted option, installation services. I mean, unless the inspector directly holds the patent to some of these terms that are highlighted, replace exterior door. That may have only been intended when I actually did have the license, because I understand that you're supposed to be licensed for exterior doors. Even though if the homeowner pulls their own permit and has the door, I'm not sure if it's still illegal then. As long as the whole size doesn't change, I think is what the law really says. So if the whole size doesn't change, I think I'm still allowed to do exterior doors in that case. This one just says exterior door repair. As far as I know, I'm able to do repairs with no license. That's an advertisement that will probably remain with your approval of magistrate. Drywall repair, exterior door repair, drywall repair, exterior door repair. Those things are legal. Replace exterior door. I said that one, it's got some gray area for me, but I think it was intended when I did have the license to do that. I did already show you the exhibit A on this license. So when I did have the license, I advertised for exterior doors. These are Yelp from Exhibit A. I stated before that I have no responsibility or affiliation with Yelp. Didn't create this Yelp page, and I didn't edit it. These are from Yelp. This one's from Yelp. Highlighted my address and Clearwater being a service area. That's okay. I've been in Pinellas County pursuing the legal above-board route for anything that I do to avoid being fined or being in further trouble for seven years. This is one of my exams with Pearson VUE that is still within the legal timeline to pursue my general contractor's license. I have hired a third party to do the application processing for me so that I can't mess it up. That's one. That's one. So these are three passing, the three that are required for the Florida exam, or the general contractor. I have passed all three. So those are the three exams. I'm not particularly relevant. This is from the Carpenters Pension Trust Fund of Kansas City. I'm a retired, 28-year union carpenter. Just reference to previous. And that's all I have in regards to that. I beg the pardon of the magistrate, and we'll take it from there, I guess. I think I'm not guilty. If it comes down to asking me if I'm guilty or not guilty, I think I'm not guilty, especially as far as electrical contracting goes, that Yelp page is not mine. I didn't create it. The remaining documents that weren't put in as Respondent's Exhibit 1 will be put in as Respondent's Composite Exhibit 2. It doesn't sound like you have any questions, actually, for Judge Padgett. I actually know a Judge Padgett. That's why I said that. There's a lot. Ms. Colette, this is your opportunity to cross-examine or ask questions of Mr. Flannery. Regarding the Yelp page, I believe, correct me if I'm wrong, I believe you had previously stated that you had subscribed to Yelp previously. I did subscribe to Yelp, I guess. Thank you, magistrate. All right. But I should also add that I currently do not. I haven't for years. That was back maybe when I had a license or something. I never did state that I did electrical. All right. I would like brief closing arguments. We'll let the county go first with a closing argument. Closing arguments are where you tell me what you think the evidence showed and tell me what you want me to do. And I'm particularly interested in hearing about the vehicle and what's on there and what requires a license that's on there. I'm going to grab our Exhibit 1, which includes the photos. Thank you, magistrate. Today we're here for two citations, CLBCT2500710, unlicensed contractor advertising drywall and carpentry services to the public via vehicle in Pinellas County, Florida, and CLBCT2500711, unlicensed contractor advertising electrical, drywall, and carpentry services via website Yelp in Pinellas County, Florida. Regarding the advertising of drywall and carpentry services on the vehicle, as you're aware it states, carpentry, doors and cabinets, laminate and tile flooring, drywall and texture repair, gazebo assembly, and handyman and remodeling services with links to the website and phone and then Google, Facebook, and I think I'm getting older and don't know what the other symbol is for your magistrate. As you're aware, a license for drywall installation is required under, I'll state both the county rules and also the state specialty license contract category. So for the state, they have a gypsum drywall specialty contractor is a specialty contractor whose scope of work is limited to the installation of all necessary and install metal accessories, including non-load bearing metal studs, runners, hangers, channels, drywall metal suspension accessories, prefabricated and prefabricated sealing materials, and the preparation of the service over which drywall product is to be applied. This includes the application of base and finish coats specifically designed for the gypsum drywall products of their own erection. This category shall not include plastering block or wood partitions. That's the state's specialty contractor definition found within the Florida Administrative Code. Pinellas County, as you're aware, magistrate has a special act from the legislature that was reenacted in 2024, where it repealed the previous special act. Now, for clarification purposes, the drywall specialty contractor classification under the Pinellas County Construction Licensing Board, that rule or that contractor category was established under the old act, but that in and of itself also states that the drywall specialty contractor is a specialty contractor whose services are limited to the execution of contracts, requiring the experience, knowledge, and skill necessary to install, repair, maintain, and replace drywall. The scope shall include the installation of all necessary and incidental metal accessories, including metal studs, runners, hanger channels, drywall metal suspension accessories, sealing materials, insulation, and the preparation of the surface over which drywall or other cementious board product is to be applied. This work also includes the application of base and finish codes specifically designed for the drywall products. The scope of such work shall comply with all plans, specifications, and applicable codes, laws, and regulations. The drywall contractor shall not contract for any other work of another trade that is included within the scope of any other license category. Nothing in this definition shall be construed to limit or infringe upon the scope of work or any other specialty contractor licensed by the Pinellas County Construction Licensing Board. So just wanted to get those definitions regarding drywall out from the outset. As you're also aware, under the special act from the legislature, although this was not brought up, I find it could be relevant that there is an exemption under 2024-294 laws of Florida where the exemption states it's the $500 exemption. So if arguing that, you know, a repair would be under a certain amount of $500, there is an exception to that exemption, which, and I'll just read fully, so it says any work or operation of a casual minor inconsequential nature in which the aggregate contract price for labor materials and all other items is less than $500, but this exemption does not apply to, and pertinent to this discussion, I believe is B, to a person who advertises as a contractor or otherwise represents or exhibits by any manner or device that he or she is qualified to engage in contracting. So under this, obviously, advertising, there's no services that were, there's no evidence we're not charging any services that were actually done, but it was rather advertising, a purpose is obviously protecting, or protection of the public, and so when looking at the advertising on the vehicle, you're then directed to the website wherein there are pictures of drywall installation being done. I'm trying to find the exact, I think you understand the photo that I'm referencing to, it does also say drywall repair, but again, that exemption only applies for work that's $500 or less, so inclusion of the vehicle and then also the website, and then with Yelp, it lists drywall installation or replacement and drywall repair. To address the Yelp situation, and then I'll go back to the electrical and carpentry services, as you've seen in the Yelp page, under the services offered, it does state that it's verified, by business, and testimony was provided today by Mr. Flannery that he has, in the past, at least subscribed to Yelp. On here, it also lists the same website and same phone number that's also listed on the vehicle for that Yelp page, so I wanted to clarify that, and then looking at the carpentry services, and then the electrical, as you're aware, any electrical services, and I think Mr. Flannery no longer plans to do ceiling fan installs, but that's where the electrical citation is coming from, and then the carpentry, the stair installation, and then there are also photos on the website. And again, linking from carpentry on the van, then links to the website. Let me find the appropriate photo. There's photos of outside wall being completely repaired or restored, with additional siding or hardy board installed, as well as the replace of exterior door, and then, as we noted, the stair installation. And I apologize, these are all getting just for all inclusion, nothing from that page. But under the state specialty contractor licenses, one of the contractor licenses that they have is a window and door installation specialty contractor, and so the state defines that as a person, or the contractor, quote, is qualified and certified by the board to install, replace, adjust, repair, and service when not prohibited by law in accordance with accepted engineering data and or according to manufacturer's specification of exterior windows and doors. And then it goes on to hurricane protection devices, shutters, and hardware in connection therewith. A moment here. And so that would look to the exterior door installation that falls under, and then as far as the carpentry, under the state rules that DBPR has defined, there is a structural carpentry, especially contractors qualified or certified by the board to install any wood products or metal framing in a structure of a building, including rough framing door window, including metal and structural trusses. So the county would argue that stair installation is something that looks to potentially structural issues. There's the hardy board or the two-by-fours that were the exterior framing. There's potentially exterior framing. It's unclear from the photos, but you can tell that there was removal of materials and installation. And so the county would argue that there's evidence on the website of the electrical from the installation of the ceiling fan. I apologize. You have the stair installation on the website, the drywall repair that was done, the interior exterior door replacement by showing either it was stated on the website or there's photos of the work that was done on drywall. I know that it's disputed as to whether or not Mr. Flannery still has access or still updates that page, but it does state, the Yelp page does state that it was verified by business, and he's testified today to subscribing to Yelp, which also includes the same website and phone number. And then as far as on the vehicle, it lists carpentry, drywall, and texture repair, which then would refer you to the website. And again, looking at advertising and whole, it would be unclear, but it could very well be seen by the public that carpentry can include many different things, maybe some things that necessarily if it's cabinets, you know, that specialty contractor license category was eliminated, but carpentry can include many different things, drywall and texture repair. It can include, it can include, it's unclear, but when you look to the website, there's additional evidence of what has been done. With that, county would ask for a violation to be found for both of the citations. All right, thank you. Mr. Flannery, this is your opportunity to do a closing statement where you tell me what you think the evidence showed and tell me what you want me to do. Thank you, Magistrate. She quoted the statute from Pinellas County, and I feel like that was previously to them expelling that line of licensing because I do remember that's what it said before and during while I had the license. Pinellas County now doesn't carry a license or scope of work for that territory, not cabinets, not interior doors, not flooring, not stairs, especially stair treads, laminate flooring. That stuff is absolutely legal. The pictures that they show was laminated floors, stair treads, legal. So, like she said, I checked it myself with the state. If it's under a $500 job, which clearly that one drywall repair, they have a picture on my website of me doing a repair, and that's what I claim to do is repair. Most patches are $200. So, yeah, that's within the law to do repairs. Carpentry, she even said that the scope for carpentry is pretty vast. It could be if someone damages a beautiful piece of this trim, I can repair it. Does that mean that I need a license to repair a piece of trim? I don't think so. It's probably going to be under $500. So, and with respect to the public, protecting the public, there are hundreds of other candidates to go witch hunting after than myself. I legitimately try to stay above the board. This is my life. This is what I want to do. I want to be more above the board every day. And I think that me presenting myself as a professional, as I do, really gets under their skin. This was the reason why pageants stopped me. Hates my rap. Everything that's on there is legal. It's absolutely legal. None of that stuff that's stated on there that I do, including Patrick's Handeman Remodeling Services. That's a trademarked logo that I trademarked myself. And every bit of that stuff is legal. So, with respect to your magistrate, I would like that to be dismissed. And as far as the Yelp thing goes, anyone of this panel could go on there right now and edit that Yelp page to make it say that I do electrical work. It doesn't mean that I put that on there. So, with respect again to the magistrate, I would like that to be dismissed. First, a ceiling fan that I, it states on my website that I could install a ceiling fan. Seems like a handyman job. A lot of people ask for, do I do it? I don't like to do ceiling fans. You could have a problem with a dimmer or something that's not really within my realm. So, I prefer not to do ceiling fans. If it was up to me, that would be removed from my website. I'll go and talk to the administrator about that today. But, excuse me, as far as I'm concerned, I am innocent in respecting the public. The public in our community is fortunate to have people like me that can come and be of value, especially with the time of need, the hurricanes. And people need us. And it just so happened that 2024 was the year the county terminated my line of licensing. So, nothing I did wrong. I pursued it legally. I earned it. I took my 14 hours of improved education in September, like you're supposed to, to renew. The county just stopped carrying those licenses. Immediately, if not before that, I already was pursuing my general contractor's license. So, I do have evidence that that will be completely valid soon as well, and then I can legally contract other people. It's my whole goal for that. Be of more service to our community. I think it's a waste of our dollars chasing honest people like me when there's so many other people you could be chasing with respect to you. All right. Thank you. As to citation CLB-CT25-00710, which involves the advertising on the vehicle, I don't think the evidence sustains that a violation of 22-14 sub-6 occurred, and I will dismiss that citation. As to citation CLB-CT25-00711, code section 22-14 sub-6, I am going to find there is a violation of code section 22-14 sub-6, and I'm basing this solely on the website. I am not considering the Yelp page, and I will issue a fine of $2,000. All right. We'll be in recess for five minutes. Continue. Hmm? We could continue if you'd like. I haven't had a chance to look at the files. Communications, please stop recording. You're going to get a copy of the order through certified mail. Caroline, would you please read item number four from the agenda? Item four. Department, PCCLB, matter unlicensed contracting code violation, case number CLB-MG25-01107, investigator N. Nichols, citation number CLB-CT25-00839, defendant Jeremy Andrew, notice address Jeremy Andrew, 940 Watson Drive, Lakeland, Florida, 33811, Andrew, C-O-N-S-T-88 at yahoo.com, and PCCLB investigator N. Nichols, plaintiff's witness, Pinellas County Code Enforcement, 631 Chestnut Street, Clearwater, Florida, 33756, N. Nichols at pinellas.gov, N. Yardley Collette, Esquire, assistant county attorney for PCCLB, in care of Thandaway 10, legal secretary, Pinellas County Attorney's Office, 315, Court Street, 6th floor, Clearwater, Florida, 33756, Y. Collette at pinellas.gov, T. Thandaway at pinellas.gov, violation address 20064, Goff Boulevard, Indian Shores, Florida, 33785. Who is here for that case? Yardley Collette and investigator N. Nichols for the county. Sir, your name? Jeremy. Last name, Andrew? Yes, sir. All right, just need to identify that for the record. Yes, sir. Mr. Andrew and investigator N. Nichols, would you please raise your right hand? Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Yes, sir. I do. All right. You may have a seat right there. Can I leave my stuff here? No, take it with you if you could, because we may need to use that screen and stuff. Okay, no problem. The county may proceed. Thank you, magistrate. You can sit here, right? You can sit on the table. Not on the table, but right here. Thanks. No, I don't do that. Good morning, investigator Nichols. Good morning. Could you please summarize the facts and circumstances, including any supporting documentation regarding the citation that we are here for today? Of course. Good morning, your magistrate. Good morning, magistrate team, courts. I'd like to talk about unlicensed contracting. As an investigator, part of our job is to basically, throughout the county, to identify unlicensed contracting and other things. On a specific day, when I get it right, November 4th, 2025, I was driving northbound on Gulf Boulevard. Part of my job is to identify certain job sites. We check commercial job sites, residential, industrial job sites. While I was driving southbound, I did notice a vehicle parked at a construction site. What I do is use my computer to identify the contractors to see who are licensed, permits, and to make sure that everyone is in compliance. At the time, I did notice Mr. Jeremy Andrews' vehicle parked. I used a database to check to see if this particular business was licensed. Did not see a license. I made contact with the project manager of Rovaza Construction Group. I was able to talk to him so that he can identify all the parties, subcontractors that are working on this particular project, which is a, they were renovating a condominium. He pointed out all the contractors, provided license number, and at the time, they believed that J. Andrews were licensed. I informed him that he was not licensed due to the fact that I could not locate it in any of our databases. We tried to locate Mr. J. Andrews, Andrew, I apologize, was not able to find him because this particular residential condominium had several floors, and there were many contractors working there. So, at the time, Mr., the Rovaza Construction Company said that once he located him, he would ask him to leave until he is able to get licensed. For my first exhibit, I would like to enter into exhibit one, the, am I, this is the property appraiser showing the area where the construction was taking place. It is owned by a Lamoet condominiums. They were basically working on framing, suffix, and siding. This is where Mr. Jeremy Andrews were located at the time when I saw his vehicle parked in the parking lot doing construction work. So, I'd like to enter this into evidence as the location property appraiser showing where he was working. Any objection to exhibit one? Probably there working. Exhibit one will be admitted into evidence. During that time, I went back to the office, did a little poking around, used the database to see what I can find out about J. Andrews Framing, LLC. I was able to locate Mr. J. Andrews Framing, LLC. It's a business he registered with SunBiz, which basically, in layman's term, the definition for SunBiz is a platform for business registration, filing, and public records where they can receive documents, subpoenas, emails. So, he is registered with SunBiz, and clearly, its status says that he's active. So, I'd like to enter this into evidence as Exhibit 2 that J. Andrews Framing is an actual business located in Polk County, and he was in Pinellas County working. Any objection to Exhibit 2? Exhibit 2 will be admitted into evidence. I'll give you an opportunity to present your case, and you'll have an opportunity to cross-examine and Investigator Nichols as well. During that time, as an investigator, what we do is we normally check all databases. We normally use social media intelligence. We have a county computer or a county database to check to see if Mr. J. Andrews Framing is licensed, or he's basically registered in Pinellas County. We also use DBPR, where we check to see if he's a state-licensed contractor. During those times, I was not able to locate any licensing for Mr. Jeremy Andrews as for framing. I'd like to enter the affidavit of non-licenser into Exhibit 3 into these dockets due to the fact that there was no evidence showing that he is licensed at all in the county or in the state. Any objection to Exhibit 3? Yes, sir. Come on up here, and we don't have microphones back there, so we do it the old-fashioned way, make people walk. All I want to say is I'll get to the end, but I'll have all my documents saying that I don't have to be a licensed contractor in the state of Florida. Okay. And I have a thing here. I have all the, what it says, I'm a non-construction. I fall underneath the GC. He pulls the permits. This is a letter from him. He wasn't there at the time. He pulled the permits. Everything's legal. I have everything here. I'll show you that. All right. Thank you, sir. Exhibit 3 will be admitted into evidence. Thank you, sir. Another thing we also checked. Obviously, this was in the town of Indian Shores. We have an interlocal agreement, so what I do is I would contact the local, I would contact the city of Indian Shores to ask for a copy of the permit and all the contractors. I received a copy of the permit and inspection card from the city, which shows the contractor, Ravaza Construction Group, is the one who pulled the permit and is licensed to be on that site working. Also, the inspection card also lists Ravaza Construction Group as the general contractor. At no time in any of this paperwork does it show Mr. J. Andrew Framing, LSE, is subcontracted. I'd like to enter this into the court. So it's Exhibit 4. Any objection to Exhibit 4? Yes, sir, because we're not aware of the... Mr. Andrew, if you can come into the microphone. Thank you. The contractor, Don, was not aware nobody has to be listed on the permit because I'm not a contractor. He's the contractor. So I'll follow it as a subcontractor. All right. I'll admit Exhibit 4 evidence, but you'll have an opportunity to pursue that. During that time, I had the pleasure of speaking to Mr. Jeremy numerous times on the phone. We basically went back and forth about what is considered licensed contract on licensed contract. He did inform me he was licensed. I asked him to provide any documentation that would be helpful for my investigation. He was very helpful. He did send a copy of an alleged document he claimed is a license. Once I received it, it basically shows that this is a Polk County local business tax receipt. And for the definition for the Polk County local business tax is it grants the holder to conduct business in Polk County, not Penalas, Polk County. It does not certify him as a professional competency in any trade or occupation. Basically, it does just give him the legal status to work in Polk County for a business. And I'd like to enter this into the course as Exhibit 5. Investigator, before we move to that portion, can you please read under the activity type of the code what it states so that it's clear for the record? Okay, sorry. So under the code 23-0000, limited non-licensed construction only. Thank you, Investigator. County moves this in as County's Exhibit 5. Any objection to Exhibit 5? No, sir. Exhibit 5 will be admitted into evidence. After speaking to Mr. J. Andrews several times, again, I speak to the business, which I've spoken to Mr. Don Campbell. He's the construction consultant working for Ravaza. He did provide an email because I wanted to ask about his working on the job site. He did provide me an email that I would like to read to the courts. It says, good morning, Investigator Nichols. I have had some screenshots that Jeremy sent over to me. Some of the screenshots, obviously, seen as Exhibit 4 or 5. We spoke about this early on the phone today, and I just wanted to make sure that you have it for your records. As I mentioned, thank you for your grace in this matter. I assure you that we will make the necessary adjustment to put Jeremy and his team on our payroll moving forward when he is working in Pinellas County. So basically, Ravaza realized that Mr. Andrews is not licensed. He's an unlicensed contractor. He immediately removed him from the site. He offered the business, J. Andrews, to be on his payroll where they can deduct FICA taxes and he will be covered under their workman's comp policy. But Mr. Andrews denies it and said he does not want to be on their W-2. If he was W-2, he would very well be in compliance, but he did not want to. So I'd like to enter this into evidence as Exhibit 6 that the business, Ravaza Construction Group, knew that Mr. J. Andrews was not a licensed contractor, however, did offer him to put him on the payroll so that they could be in compliance. Investor Nichols, I see additional documentation under that e-mail. Is that a new exhibit or are those the screenshots tied to? Okay, can you please walk, just so they're clear for the record of what was included in that e-mail? So one of the screenshots here that Mr. Jeremy Andrews provided, Ravaza, was a copy of his Certificate of Liability of Insurance that he has for his business and worksmen's comp. The other one is just an e-mail saying that insurance, Certificate of Insurance, and basically what you just saw, the business tax license, which, again, I would like to reiterate to the court, is not a license, it's just a tax. Thank you, Investor Nichols. County moves that in as County's Exhibit 6. Any objection to Exhibit 6? I know, okay, Exhibit 6 will be admitted in evidence. Right. Anything you're going to say has to come to them. Mr. Andrews, you have to speak through the microphone. Thanks. Your Magistrate, as you heard, he just said he's a 1099. Obviously, you cannot be a 1099 to work in this country. Please continue with what your evidence is. Last but not least, Your Honor, Exhibit 7, which is the citation that it's basically for a licensed contractor working at Lamoet Condo without being in compliance of the property in Pinellas County. Here's a couple of photos showing his vehicle at the property site. Obviously, Mr. J. Andrews Framing has his truck at the site where he was working. I was unable to locate him when I was trying to find him. However, I was met with the project manager for Revazor that said he is on this property working. And again, closer of his license number for the vehicle and shows J. Andrews Framing LLC, 863 is a Polk County area code. I'd like to enter this into evidence that... Can you move for the photos to be moved in as Exhibit 7? The citation should already be in the record. Yeah, the citation is in the record, which is why we're here. And any objection to the photographs? Sorry, not at all. Photographs in Exhibit 7 will be admitted into evidence. And just to sum up my investigation, again, I spoke to Mr. Andrews several times on the phone. We had a good communication going back and forth about what's licensing and what's not licensing. The one thing he ran across to me, which I researched and I tried to explain to him, that he is going off the Jim Walters rule, which says that a subcontractor can work under a licensed contract if they're doing the same scope of work. However, I tried to explain to Mr. J. Andrews that I cannot speak for any of the counties, but Pondellas County is our own district where we have a special act. And within that special act, it shows that in our, and this is not something I'm entering into evidence, under the Pondellas County Construction Licensing Board, reference in Chapter 489-105, it says the work he was doing requires a carpentry specialty contractor. That's the license that was required. I spoke to him. The scope of such work shall include rough framing, structural, non-structural trusses, cheating, and siding. Those were the two things he was doing, was the rough framing and the siding. According to the Ravaza Construction, that's what they hired him to do. And again, they knew he wasn't licensed, and they released him and tried to put him under W-2, and he rejected. That's it, Your Honor. I'm sorry, your magistrate. Anything, any further questions of this witness? No further questions of Investigator Nicholas. All right. You have the opportunity now, Mr. Andrew, to ask the investigator questions or cross-examine. Well, I don't have none for him. Okay. May I be excused? Yeah. Any other evidence from the county? Not at this time, Your Honor. Oh, he was late. I just want to make a clarification with Investigator Nichols' testimony regarding the contractor classifications under the new special act. As I know you're aware, the PCCLB was, I guess, reenacted or re-established by the legislature in 2024 under Chapter 2024-294, Florida, or Laws of Florida. The prior classifications or definitions of the PCCLB were enacted under the previous special act. I'm just putting that out as clarification as that special act was repealed just so there's clarification across the board. But I'm, if needed, can reference the state licensure categories on closing if necessary. Okay, you'll have to do that at closing. Yes. You may present your case. Thank you. Okay, I got several things. Yes, there's an activity type on there that shows right here. It's a non-constructional license. Here's what it says. It's a limited instruction. I can work under the local. Can you move that over to the seal? So where you have the yellow paper, just move that document. Yeah, so it could be seen. And then you just. Here's another one, too. That's for this. And then this is what I got from the state website. Mr. Andrew, I'm so sorry to interrupt. I've just only put one page on the seal because it can't see both. So as you're showing it, just put one and one. You've already seen all this, right, in this. Magistrate, you've seen the other documents? Yeah, this is. Okay. This says that they not have to have a state license because I fall under, you know, working under GC or anybody that pulls a permit. I have all this here. That's for this. This is coming from the state of Florida. Here's another one. I think I printed it out twice. And for the record, I was doing wall sheeting. His guys were doing the siding. It says right here, number two, rough. It's somebody who's not licensed as a contractor. And this one here says it's not mandatory. And then this is a letter from Don Bravasso. And here's, when I do work, that's a tax. That's how I get paid, $10.99. Like these people over here, they get a check from Pinellas County. And I bid on jobs for contractors. And then they tax me because I have a federal tax ID number. And that's how I get paid. So Don didn't want to put me on the W-2 because then I'd be an employee, which I'm a sub because I have my own, carry my own general liability and my workman's comp. And stuff that they told me I have to have required by the state of Florida. And that's why I'm a sub. That's why I didn't want to get on the W-2 with him because I've already got tax forms that I get every year. So I'm an independent sub of what you call it. And that's about it. And as far as my van, I have logos on there, but it's no more than putting a bumper sticker on your trays for advertisement. I'm a second-generation framer. And when the illegals came here, it put us all out. So that's the only way for me to advertise. And it's in the shop right now, but that's the only advertisement I do. And I'm totally legal from the state of Florida to be a sub underneath the contractor. It says it right here. You need to get copies of all of those things. And I just feel like this should be dismissed. Oh, it is on the record, so it's good enough. On the record as well, yes. Yes, sir. Okay, could I see those documents again real quick? Yes, sir. You can review first. Oh, she wants to start. Yeah, there's no state stuff in there. I'll just stand here and then. Thank you, Magistrate. Oh, for the, what is that, definitions? 105? Yes, ma'am. Thank you. Not needing that contractor. As long as I work underneath a contractor's permit, a state license. And I'm just organizing these to try to be in order. I went through text messages, so I'm sorry they're all kind of cut off. No, it's understandable. They clarified it. What I'm reviewing, it's an attorney general opinion magistrate that I'm trying to get in order here. Is that yours or part of the stuff that he had? It's what the respondent has provided. I think I've got a complete packet here. Why don't you wait just a minute so I can finish reading this? Yes, sir. Okay. All right, sir. Go ahead with your question or statement that you were fixing to make. Just for the record, when he was looking for me, I was at lunch. I wasn't hiding. These will be admitted into evidence as a respondent's exhibit one. Anything else? No, sir. All right. We'll go ahead and do closing statements. Closing statements are where the parties tell me what they think the evidence showed and tell me what they want me to do. County may proceed with their closing statement. And magistrate, would you entertain a question or two of the respondent? Oh, yeah. I'm sorry. That's fine. We got disjointed there. Yeah. Yes. She's good. Yes. Come on up and she's going to ask questions or cross-exam and I skipped a step. Oftentimes, I don't have too many questions. Sure. No problem. That's what I'm here for. I just wanted, if you could just clarify the work that was being done on the project. What I was doing or the whole project? The work that you were doing. It was my understanding that it was framing, but I believe that you testified differently. Sighting. I mean, not sighting, the sheeting, wall sheeting. His guys was doing the hardy board sighting. Okay. Yes, sir. And you were, sorry. We were replacing. I have put a hardy board or concrete sighting on a second story of a house before. Yes. That's what Don's guys were doing. I was pulling off the old wall sheeting and they were taking pictures of it. And the inspector was coming and inspecting it and we covered it up with the force field new wall sheeting. Yes, sir. Wall sheeting. Like Tyvek or? It's plywood. It's a structural problem. Okay. Thank you. So it all had to be inspected and pictures taken and all that stuff. Okay. And then them guys came behind with the sighting. Okay. Yes, ma'am. Thank you. It was wall sheeting. Okay. I just wanted to get that clarification. No problem. And thank you for dumbing it down for me. I appreciate it. That was my only question that I had. All right. All right. Thank you. Thank you. So you may have a seat and the county may proceed with the closing statement. Magistrate, based on that answer, may I have just one minute before I begin with my closing? Yes. Thank you. We'll adjourn for five minutes. Okay. Thank you, Magistrate. Please. You're done? Oh, you said, no, you said we would adjourn for five minutes? Yes. Yes, that would be. Okay. Thank you. We will adjourn for five minutes. Communications, please stop recording. I'm not sure that the time stamp will ever become important on the records in these cases, but I do note that it has now been corrected. Yes. And gone forward the hour that it's supposed to be. County may proceed with their closing statement. Thank you, Magistrate. The citation that we're here for today is CLBCT25-00839, unlicensed contractor working at La Mouette Condo without being in compliance at a property in Pinellas County, Florida. As you heard today, the defendant or the respondent admitted that he was on-site at lunch. Well, the investigator wasn't doing his investigation, but was working on-site doing sheathing and working essentially under a general contractor's license and under the GC who had pulled the permit. Under Chapter 489, I'll start as the respondent had placed into evidence, I believe, some information regarding 489-113, and it's referencing sub-portion 2. That portion of 489-113-2 states that a person must be certified or registered in order to engage in the business of contracting in this state. However, for purposes of complying with the provisions of this chapter, a subcontractor who is not certified or registered may perform construction work under the supervision of a person who is certified or registered, provided that the work is within the scope of the supervising contractor's license. The supervising contractor is responsible for the work and the subcontractor being supervised is not engaged in construction work that would require a license as a contractor under any of the categories listed in 489-105-3-D through O. This subsection does not affect the application of any local construction licensing ordinances. So, there's two different pathways that can be taken from that portion of statute. The first is under 489-103 lists the exemptions that where Chapter 489, dealing with contracting, would not apply to. Under 489-103-2 talks about and what was referenced by the investigator as regarding somebody who's listed as a W-2 versus a 1099. So, under 489-103-2, it states that for exemptions, this part does not apply to any employee of a certificate holder or registrant who is acting within the scope of the license held by that certificate holder or registrant and with the knowledge and permission of the license holder. However, A, if the employer is not a certificate holder or registrant in that type of contracting and the employee performing any of the following or performs any of the following, the employee is not exempt. One, holds himself or herself or his or her employer out to be licensed or qualified by a licensee. Two, leads the consumer to believe the employee has an ownership or management interest in the company. Or three, performs any of the acts which constitute contracting. Two, B, goes further and states the legislative intent of the subsection is to place equal responsibility on the unlicensed business and its employees for the protection of the consumers in contracting transactions. Key to that portion of 489-103-2 is what follows, and it says, For the purpose of this part, quote-unquote employee is defined as a person who receives compensation from and is under the supervision and control of an employer who regularly deducts the FICA and withholding tax and provides workers compensation. As was testified today, Mr. Andrew would not meet the definition of employee because the general contractor on the site is not who is deducting the FICA and withholding tax and providing workers compensation. Mr. Andrew testified that he's providing that or deducting that on himself as a 1099 employee. That exemption is also listed under the special act that controls the Pinellas County Construction Licensing Board, which states that, again, it's one of the exemptions is any employee of a certificate holder who is a subordinate of such certificate holder, or the act does not apply to, apologies, any employee of a certificate holder who is a subordinate of such certificate holder, or if the employee does not hold himself or herself out for hire or engage in contracting except as an employee. So, arguably, if, well, not even arguably, if Mr. Andrew was, in fact, an employee of the general contractor, then he would not have to be licensed if the work that was being done met or was done under the contractor's license and the work that was being performed needed the requisite license. Additionally, when going back to 489.113, it does say that the subsection does not affect the application of any local construction licensing ordinances. So, as you're aware, and I've stated previously, the county or PCCLB is controlled by a special act, Chapter 2024-294, Laws of Florida. Under that special act, it repealed the previous act and reinstated or reinstated and repealed the previous act that was enacted back in 1975, if memory serves me correct. Under that, there are definitions under the previous special act that were enacted as contractor classifications. One of those, I'm trying to find the exact definition, which was a carpentry specialty contractor, which the definition was amended or established July 9, 1991, amended January 21, 2003. A carpentry contractor is a specialty contractor whose services are limited to the execution and performance of contracts requiring the experience, knowledge, and skill necessary for the on-site fabrication, assembling, handling, erection, installation, dismantling, adjustments, alteration, repair, and servicing involving wood, light gauge steel, and allied construction materials. The scope of such work shall include rough framing, structural and non-structural members, trusses, sheathing, siding, soffit, fascia, floors, interior and exterior, windows, and doors. The scope of such work shall comply with all plans, specifications, codes, laws, and regulations applicable. The scope would include finished carpentry and cabinet contractor, which was, as you're aware, has been eliminated as a specialty licensed contractor. So, first off, if Mr. Andrew was, in fact, an employee of the general contractor, then we would not be here today regarding that issue under, and that speaks to the 489-113-2. In my read of it, it appears that the language there is very similar to the exemption portion of 489 of being able to perform construction work under the supervision of a person who is certified or registered, provided that the work is within the scope of the supervising contractor's license and that they're responsible for the work and not engaged in work that would require a license as a contractor under any of the categories listed in 489-105-3D-O, which, of importance, that does not include the specialty license contract, specialty license classifications that the Department of Business and Professional Regulation have enacted pursuant to under statute or pursuant to other additional statute. And for additional clarification, I know that during testimony, Investigator Nichols mentioned the Jim Walters or Jim Walter exemption. From my research, that would fall under 489-113-4D, which states any person who is not required to obtain registration or certification pursuant to 489-105-3D-O, again, which would not include the specialty contractor licenses, may perform contracting services for the construction, remodeling, repair, or improvement of single-family residences, including a townhouse as defined in the Florida Building Code, without obtaining a local license if such person is under the supervision of a certified or registered general building or residential contractor. As used in this paragraph, supervision shall not be deemed to require the existence of a direct contract between the certified or registered general building or residential contractor and the person performing specialty contracting services of note and of importance. The work that was being done was not on a single-family residence or a townhome. It was on a condo building or a condominium. And so, ultimately, it is up to the magistrate to determine the legal arguments that are being made and whether or not sheathing and that would be a requirement and whether or not or would require licensure under county definitions that were previously enacted. It does include that. However, as I've stated, there is a new special act, and those rules were enacted during the time of the old special act. And so, just providing that for clarity and context for the magistrate and his decision. All right. Thank you. Mr. Andrew, this is your opportunity to do a closing statement where you tell me what you think the evidence showed and tell me what you want me to do. For clarity, Ravasa, I gave you all a written... All of that is there, yeah. And there's this. Okay, I've got to find it again. Here it is. Would you like to read it, sir? I've read it. Oh, about me doing work for him? Yes. Okay. Yeah, to clarify, I did work for him before, and I produced... Before I do work for any contractor, state-licensed contractor, I have to provide my general liability, million-dollar coverage, plus my workman's comp before I can start any work. I did a job for him before this job here. That's why he called me back, and that's why I ended up working over here. I just wanted to show you that, you know, but as far as the citation, I just feel like I haven't broken the law. I did everything that the state of Florida told me that I have to do, required to do, and, you know, I researched it, and they said this, as long as I'm under, it tells you right here, he's, at the end of the day, he's the contractor. You know what I mean? You can't have two contractors doing one job. You can't have two state... Unless they're an electrical contractor with their state-licensed, just like he is. I'm just a trade, and I work... We've been doing this our whole entire life. We work underneath contractors. At the end of the day, the contractor is liable for it. That's why he has a state license. And the inspectors come and inspect our work. And I'm a second-generation framer, so, you know, we know how to do our work. You know what I mean? So I just want to just say that I felt like I'm not breaking the law, and I haven't done anything wrong at work and help somebody out. And I just would like this to go away, just finally to go away. And that's why I requested a hearing, so, you know, I can take care of this. Thank you, sir. Thank you. Okay. As to citation number CLB-CT25-00839, I'm going to find that the evidence supports that there is a violation of Code Section 22-14, subsection 1. The authorizations that are being offered are for employees, which are W-2 employees. Yes, sir. 1099 employees have to have their own license to do any trade that needs to have a license. So I will issue a fine in the amount of $500, and the parties will receive a copy of the written order shortly. Okay, we'll take a five-minute recess. Communications, please stop recording. Caroline, would you read item number six for me from the agenda? Yes. Item six, Department PCCLB, Matter Advertising Contracting Code Violation. Case number CLB-MG25-00013. Investigator C. Furlan, citation number CLB-CT25-00940. Defendant Michelle Matthews, notice address Michelle Matthews, 2348 Willow Tree Trail, Clearwater, Florida 33763. Michelle at ICI-contracting.com. And PCCLB investigator C. Furlan, plaintiff's witness, Pinellas County Code Enforcement, 631 Chestnut Street, Clearwater, Florida 33756. C. Furlan at Pinellas.gov. And Yardley Collette, Esquire, Assistant County Attorney for PCCLB. In care of Natasha Creeden, Legal Secretary. Pinellas County Attorney's Office, 315 Court Street, 6th floor, Clearwater, Florida 33756. Y. Collette at Pinellas.gov. NACREDEN at Pinellas.gov via HTTP, oh, I'm sorry, violation address via HTTPS, semicolon, slash, slash, network.procore.com, slash, p, slash, ICI, dash, contracting, dash, inc, dash, Oldsmar, and HTTPS, dash, dash, ICI, dash, contracting, dot com, dash, or slash. I was here for item 6. Yardley Collette and Investigator Furlan for the county. And who's here for the respondent? I'm Michelle Matthews with ICI. Would Investigator Furlan and Ms. Matthews please raise your right hand? Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do. All right. The county may proceed. You may have a seat. Thank you, Magistrate. Good morning, Investigator Furlan. Good morning. Can you please summarize the facts and circumstances, including any supporting documentation regarding the citation that we are here for today? Yes. On December 18th, I got a complaint that ICI contracting was advertising on a website, and they are unlicensed to do so. Citation's already in record. It is the unlicensed advertising for demolition services. We're not certified. This is a composite of the website. I ran this on December 22nd. ICI contracting, Procore Network. The website will bring you to the ICI contracting, Inc. Services areas for ICI, and it lists several places within Pinellas County. It's just this is a screenshot to show that basically the same thing. And then the rest of this is going to be pictures, but I wanted to make sure that you had a full understanding of the website. So this is all what's on the website. Services. This is a total commercial, residential, and industrial demo. Contact for information. Send your resume to Michelle. Located in Oldsmar. And these are just pictures of demos they have on their website. That's the last page. County moves for the website. Printouts in as county's composite exhibit one. Any objection to exhibit one? Exhibit one will be admitted into evidence. The Sunbiz for ICI contracting does list a Michelle Matthews as a title director, as well as a Scott Andrew. Ms. Matthews is the one who had signed on the Sunbiz, the annual report. County moves for the Sunbiz. Printouts in as county's exhibit two. Any objection to exhibit two? Exhibit two will be admitted into evidence. When researching DBPR, I did not find anything for Michelle Matthews. I did find something for a Scott Andrew, Scott Wayne Andrew, with the same address. He is eligible for exam. I had noted after I had written the citation that Mr. Andrew has been cited before. I did not cite him. I cited Ms. Matthews as the other director of the business. So this is DBPR. County moves for the DBPR. Printout in as county's exhibit three. Any objection to exhibit three? Exhibit three will be admitted into evidence. And the affidavit of non-licensure. Ms. Matthews does not hold the license for ICI contracting. There is no license for ICI contracting for demolition. County moves the affidavit of non-licensure in as county's exhibit four. Any objection to exhibit four? Exhibit four will be admitted into evidence. I have nothing further for Investigator Furland. Do you have any questions of Investigator Furland? Anything else from the county? You may come up and present your case. Afternoon, Madam Street. The issue here is the Procore and the advertising on Procore. Procore actually is a site that we're a demolition subcontractor. So we work for general contractors that have us use Procore to get our plans, to do our billing. We go back and forth. So they pay for our Procore access. What had happened is usually it's just a subcontractor option to where you're not on any kind of board or you're only the people that the general contractors that we bid to that invited us on this Procore could see what we were doing, what we are and who we are on there. And it's mainly just for billing. We don't advertise. We don't pay to advertise on Procore. Just recently, Procore came out with this thing where you can change your subcontractor to be eligible for others to see you that maybe hadn't invited you as a subcontractor. I have three Procores because we do billing and we need to access plans. So we have an estimating one where they send if they want us to bid something. These are general contractors that we've worked with before. Then I have my Michelle at ICI, which is my billing where I approve and submit our invoices and things like that to the subcontractors. And then I also have one for Scott Andrew as he needs to access plans and things like that. I have where originally, I don't know if you can see this. This is what originally our Procore is. And if you see here, they just came up with this new option to do where you can upgrade your account. But this one is for Scott. On some button pushing or going through, because I only use mine for billing, somehow that is the one that they are saying is advertising this, that we've done anything. This I wanted to show, this is from my Michelle at ICI Procore, and it says visible on the construction network, and it's crossed out as no. So I had no idea that I was even on any kind of network with Procore. That's not what we use Procore for. Also on their evidence, they're showing the, this is their evidence of my Procore page, and it actually says join Procore in March of 2023. 2023 was before we had our, we were, came in and to end of 2003, 23, 2024, for a different citation where they said we were advertising as a general contractor. And so after, after that meeting and everything, we had to change what we were doing. And obviously, I guess I didn't change my Procore because I didn't know it was public. And then when I accidentally published this page somehow with their new system that Procore has is the only reason, way I could think of that, why that would be there. We do not advertise on Procore. We do not advertise for Pinellas County anymore. In 2024, we went where we have a actual general contractor that's actually on our payroll. And we went and, because we were going to go forward with the recommendations when we were here in 2023-24 with the last citation, and they explained what to do to, we have a general contractor on payroll that filed paperwork with a CELA for us to work, but it's only in unincorporated Pinellas County. That was in 2024. We haven't been doing any work, so we haven't updated anything or anything. But from what my understanding was, we registered there and unincorporated. And then if we get a project in, say, Bel Air or Tarpon Springs or Newport Ritchie, some of them have their own building offices where we would have to file that paperwork with that agreement with the general contractor at each area. So in order for us to be able to work under the general contractor, we have to file this paperwork in each area that we would want to work demolition in under that contract. But we did do that, but we don't work in Pinellas County, and I did not advertise. It's actually just a mistake. It is. I guess that would be it. All right. Do you have any questions? Let's see what time it was to. Good afternoon. Okay, so when you're – so is it still to this day, I guess, that you still have a GC on your payroll? We do. Not mainly – not for Pinellas, but for – because we do Florida, Tampa Bay. And if – because we're not a general contractor, we can do demolition under – as a subcontractor, which is what we do. We don't – but if, say, they want us to do extra pull permit or stuff, we have a general contractor. Okay. So in your general contractor, is it correct that they've not qualified your company through DBPR? I would say no. And when – I know that you said with Procore, that was a system that you mainly used for payroll, and now it seems to have maybe been broadened out for – For billing. For billing. Okay. So when you're working as a subcontractor with these other companies, is it more on, like, an independent contractor basis? Or are you – is ICI then – I don't even know if this would legally be possible, but is ICI, quote-unquote, a W-2 employee for the other contractors that they're – that are subbing out the work? No. The general contractor hires us to do the demolition. Okay. And it's correct that you all do not have, like, a specialty demolition license, either through the state or through the county? We do not do for Pinellas County. We don't work in Pinellas County. Okay. But you also do not have one through, like, the state of Florida, DBPR? That you use the – you use your GC instead? The state of Florida does not require demolition to have a specialty license. It's only Pinellas County. But we only work under general contractors just to avoid all this situation. We're – we're – under the state of Florida, we're allowed to work as a demolition subcontractor without a demolition license. They don't have one for Florida, just Pinellas County. If that's your testimony, I have no further questions. All right. We'll go ahead and have closing statements. Those closing statements are where the parties tell me what they think the evidence showed and tell me what they want me to do. The county may proceed. Thank you, Magistrate. We are here for CLB CT25-00940, unlicensed advertising for demolition services when not so certified within Pinellas County, Florida. To start with the websites that were placed into evidence, the Procore website lists the demolition service – let me – just so I have it directly in front of me. Demolition and concrete cutting services and links to the ICI Contracting, Inc. website, which is where the numerous photos that investigator Furland placed into evidence are from. On the Procore website, it does state that the service areas for ICI Contracting, Inc. include Clearwater, Dunedin, Indian Rocks Beach, Oldsmar, Pinellas Park, Safety Harbor, St. Petersburg, Tarpon Springs as service areas for ICI Contracting, Inc. As I said, the ICI Contracting, Inc. website then shows the photos of the demolition services that are available by ICI. So, under Florida statutes, under Chapter 489-1053, I pulled the exact definition up so I have it for you. I had a portion of it but not the entirety, which lists out the definition of contractors. 49-1053 lists what a contractor is and it says, For the purposes of regulation under this part, the term demolish applies only to demolition of steel tanks more than 50 feet in height, towers more than 50 feet in height, other structures more than 50 feet in height, and all other buildings or residences. And then it goes on to discuss the Division I versus Division II contractor categories. Additionally, after the legislature or legislative updates in 2025 and prior to that, DBPR, or Department of Business and Professional Regulation, defined certain specially contractor classifications. And it defines, so it's 61G4-15.100 of Florida Administrative Code, states that the purpose of this rule is to provide for the certification of the following specialty contractor license types. Let me go down to O. O includes an industrial facility specialty contractor is one who's qualified or certified by the board to perform any work involving the construction, repair, demolition, modification, alteration of uninhabitable, industrial structures, industrial structures, housing, manufactured, industrial equipment being installed therein by the contractor of specialized equipment used to produce or move goods or materials, including but not limited to energy production, gas production, chemical production, installation of fixed equipment above ground storage tanks and related accessory piping and construction of habitable or uninhabitable attached accessory structures not exceeding 1,500 square feet used solely to house related operating and controlling equipment. They shall be limited. They shall be limited. They shall be limited to enter contracts for the scope of work described herein and who may perform such work permitted under this rule, except as otherwise expressly provided in Section 489.113 Florida Statutes. An industrial facility specialty contractor shall be required to subcontract all work above that falls within the scopes of work set forth in Section 489.1053 B through P or 489.505 Florida Statutes, or for fire protection systems under 633.318 Florida Statutes to a licensee who holds a state certification or registration in their respective category of work. In that same rule, P lists the definition for a building demolition specialty contractor. is a contractor whose contracting business consists of the execution of contracts requiring the experience, financial means, knowledge, and skill to demolish, if not prohibited by law, steel tanks 50 feet or less in height, towers 50 feet or less in height, other structures 50 feet or less in height, other than buildings or residences over three stories tall, and buildings or residences three stories or less in height. So it seems clear under the rules that have been promulgated by the Department of Business and Professional Regulation regarding an industrial facility specialty contractor as well as a building demolition specialty contractor, and then the definition under 489.1053 of contractor, which states that the term demolish, and if you skip ahead, includes or applies to all buildings or residences. The fact that ICI does not itself have a license or is not qualified by an individual or business that has a license, it would be the county's argument that they're engaging in advertising as an unlicensed contractor, and for that we move forward, and for that we move forward a violation to be found of 22-14.6. Thank you. This is your opportunity to do a closing statement, Ms. Matthews. Thank you. I believe the main issue here is the advertising, which we do not advertise on Procore, and that email, the Michelle at ICI on Procore, was not supposed to be public. It was something that was entered long ago, and because Procore was not an advertising or a site where everybody could see it or send us bid requests for, I did not know it was even. I didn't know that when those buttons were pushed that it published it. Our other two Procore accounts are not published, and with that new thing that Procore did, we try to follow the rules of Pinellas County, and we do not wish to work in Pinellas County until Scott, my partner, gets his GC license, as it is more difficult to work here, so it's not somewhere where I would have advertised to work in. After we were in 2023, I didn't advertise that Procore was not an advertisement. We did not pay to advertise, and that account is not where we get our invitations to bid. They go through Procore through an estimating at ICI-contracting email. The Michelle is just my personal one, so they give me invoices. The contractors that have invited us on Procore invoice us, and that's where we get our plans and information about certain projects that we are working on with them. It's not something I use for advertising or getting new customers from, and thank you. All right. This is extremely confusing. The complaint that initiated this is against Scott Andrews. Scott Andrew, ICI contracting. Doesn't mention Ms. Matthews at all. James Buchanan, who I'm assuming is not President Buchanan, but a different James Buchanan. And then the DPR printout says that Andrew, Scott Andrew, does have a general contracting license. It's current to 831 of 2026 with an address in Pompano Beach. And then there's another entry on the DPR, and you can see why I'm getting confused here, that says that his certified general contractor is an application in progress. Even though the entry right above it says that it's current and active. Yeah, somebody can, please. And if I'm incorrect, I'll have Investigator Furland assist. But my understanding is, are you looking at the, as far as on the DPR printout, are you looking at the Scott Charles Andrew? I am. For Pompano Beach? So my understanding is that is not the same individual as Scott, Wayne, Andrew, that are the following two for certified building and certified general contractor. Those both listing as eligible for exam and that main address of 2348 Willow Tree Trail. I believe that's the address on the Sunbiz for ICI. And my additional understanding is why the citation was issued not to Mr. Andrews because they had been previously cited in terms of an equitable determination to cite, rather than cite Mr. Andrews. I don't want to reference you by your first name, so I apologize. Ms. Matthews. So then the citation was for 500 versus an elevated citation if issued to Mr. Andrews. And I believe Ms. Matthews may have something that she would like to state as well. The one thing that I didn't understand is that, like you pointed out there, whoever made this anonymous thing pointed out that Scott Andrew was advertising on Procore. But under Scott's ICI contracting Procore email and cite, his is not, it's what the paperwork I showed you where it's not visible to anything. It's only a subcontractor account with Procore. So they wouldn't have been able to see it under Scott Andrew. The only reason they put it in my name is because of that, my Michelle at ICI contracting in Procore, that just recently, when I clicked that button, must have made it possible for other people to see besides the Procore. All right. As to citation CLB-CT25-00940, I am going to find that there is a violation of 22-14, subsection 6. I understand that it was a mistake, but I don't think that the ordinance in law really give me the power to forgive it because it was a mistake if that's what actually happened, which apparently it did. And I will assess a fine in the amount of $500. Okay. We'll be in recess for five minutes. Communications, please stop recording. How long would you read item number three? Yes. Item three, Department PCCLB Matter Advertising Code Violation Case Number CLB-MG25-01087 Investigator Jay Padgett Citation Number CLB-CT25-00803 Defendant Anthony Scott Phillips Notice Address Anthony Scott Phillips 5034 Isla Vista Court Newport, Ritchie, Florida 34655 Anthony at Tony's Handyman SVCS.com And PCCLB Investigator Jay Padgett Plaintiff's Witness, Pinellas County Code Enforcement 631 Chestnut Street, Clearwater, Florida 33756 Jay Padgett at Pinellas.gov And Yardley Collette Esquire, Assistant County Attorney for PCCLB In care of Thandaway 10, Legal Secretary, Pinellas County Attorney's Office 315 Court Street 6th Floor, Clearwater, Florida 33756 Y. Collette at Pinellas.gov T. Thandaway at Pinellas.gov Violation address Facebook.com Who's here for this case? Yardley Collette for the county along with Investigator Pageant Don't see anyone here Caroline and Nicole Have you all heard anything from voicemail or email or anything about this? No, Magistrate Okay, it is now 1234 This was scheduled for 9 o'clock There's no one here So we will proceed As soon as I put Investigator under oath You swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? I do All right, the county may proceed Thank you, Magistrate Good afternoon, Investigator Pageant Good afternoon Would you please summarize the facts and circumstances Including any supporting documentation regarding the citation we are here for today? Sure So on November 4th of 2025 I observed an advertisement on Facebook for a Tony's Handyman Services The ad displayed such services as water heater replacement, ceiling fans, and screen room enclosures Upon further investigation, I tied the advertisement page to an Anthony Phillips of Newport Ritchie I determined that Mr. Phillips does not hold any license with the state or the county and I issued one citation to Mr. Phillips for a licensed advertising One These are the captions from Mr. Phillips Facebook page, Tony's Handyman Services Serving Pasco County, excuse me, Pasco and Pinellas County There were 40 years in the construction trades, there's nothing I can't fix, and he advertised himself as a construction company Further captions of Mr. Phillips page So ceiling fan with Mr. Phillips contact information, caption of services offered by Tony's Handyman Services General home maintenance, general home maintenance, carpentry, ceiling fans, water heaters, water softeners, complete bathroom and kitchen remodels Service areas Service area is also listed again as Penalas County With Mr. Phillips contact information Another caption of the page showing what appears to be a water heater replacement Caption him saying this is a rebuilt screen porch Last caption of the page with Mr. Phillips contact information with his phone number and email address on that page County moves for the Facebook print-offs in his county's Exhibit 1 Hearing no objection, Exhibit 1 will be admitted into evidence Exhibit 2 is the affidavit of non-licensure for Anthony Phillips Stating that a thorough search Did not find any contractor's license for him with the county or the state County moves for the affidavit of non-licensure in his county's Exhibit 2 Hearing no objection, Exhibit 2 will be admitted into evidence Three, to my research into Mr. Phillips I did see that he is eligible for exam with DBPR However, he does not hold a license through DBPR County moves for the DBPR printout in his county's Exhibit 3 Hearing no objection, Exhibit 3 will be admitted into evidence And I have no further questions for investigator pageant Since we got started, I haven't noticed anyone come into the hearing room Has anyone come into the hearing room that Caroline or Nicole have noticed? No magistrate And haven't received any type of email or anything? No magistrate All right All right As to citation CCB-CT25-00803 I'm going to find a violation of Code Section 22-14, Subsection 6 And assess a fine in the amount of $500 That concludes the items on the agenda Next order of business Are there any county attorney matters? The hearing will be adjourned Communications, please stop recording Communications, please stop recording Communications, please stop recording