Tuesday April 10th, 2018
CE / Exams: Teleconference call
Wednesday April 11th, 2018
Additional Entity Division II –
Wednesday April 11th, 2018
Application Review Division II –
Thursday April 12th, 2018
Probation Division I & II
This was the 1st time that I attended this session. It was difficult to capture all the allegations and the reasons for the actions. Also, the sound system was not great and we could hardly hear all the words. However, there was one case where Mr. Atkins did his best for his client, however the board was not willing to give the continuation.
Thursday April 12th, 2018
Additional Business Entities Committee – Division I:
The list of small and hence the meeting was short too. Nothing Unusual but the usual: Proven experience, Supervision, control, W-2 or Ownership.
As with past observations, the Board consistently and uniformly applies the criteria established in 61G4-15.0024: The board continues their request for live CE for laws and rules for mistakes such as the ownership/ W-2 Employee or payment as commission.
Also to be noted: The non-rule of “qualifier must appear when applying to qualify a 3rd entity, regardless of ownership interest” is in full effect and being enforced.
- The qualifier owns 20% or more of the additional entity to be quailed
- The Qualifier is a W-2 Employee of the additional entity to be qualified.
- As the board continues issuing the license contingent upon showing the proof of W-2
- We believe that this issue will come up again and they might go back to asking for paystubs instead of just the W-4
- Or both (better yet).
- If the qualifier owns 50% or more of TWO entities, the application can be approved by DBPR staff and bypass the committee meeting altogether. BUT, If it is for a THIRD Entity, the applicant will have to appear before the committee regardless of any other factors.*
*The committee is still holding to their new policy regarding how 61G4-15.021 (5) is being interpreted. This rule is commonly called the 50/50 rule in which an applicant who owns more than 50% of both entities is allowed to bypass the requirement to appear before the board. That interpretation has changed so that this bypass only applies where the applicant is seeking to qualifying a 2nd entity. The board now requires that applicants must appear when seeking to qualify a 3rd, 4th or greater number of entities. This is regardless of how great of a percentage of ownership of any of the entities. This change was requested by board members at the end of the November General Session and evidently became effective with the January 2017 meeting.
- Whenever the qualifier, has applied for this additional entity with less than 20% stake, and don’t have an FRO, the board asks the qualifier to “voluntarily” accept taking 7 hours of live classroom CE on Construction Laws & Rules. This is especially true when the qualifier changes his stand during the session and hearing to the requirements and wants to amend the application.
- In most cases these license holders have either forgotten or someone else filled the application for them.
- They forgot about the requirements.
- They don’t have Financial control nor have thy appointed a FRO.
- Stock certificates & ownership can be given to the proposed qualifier at no cost. The important thing is that this stock has value. This means that if the qualifier leaves this additional company, the owner must purchase the stock back. There can be no stipulation that the stock must be given back to the owner at no charge.
Thursday April 12th, 2018
Application Review Committee – Division I:
- Nothing out of regular.
Past observations were:
- Endorsement applications from the State of California continue to be accepted; there was one case of a California Licensee seeking Florida Licensure by endorsement, there was no resistance. (Note: he had already passed the Florida B&F exam). This endorsement applies only to General, Building & Residential Contractor categories.
- In light of the new rule, the committee in general seems more open to consider a broader range of experience as acceptable for active & proven experience. “Habitable” and “New” construction does not seem to be as big of an issue as it was before
- Applicant has been W2 Employee of a licensed contractor – not a sub. * there has been a little movement on this requirement and starting with the July 2016 meeting the board will consider experience gained by a sub who was directly supervised by a GC who was controlling the means and methods of construction, such as a Shell Contractor with a GC who owns & qualifies the company.
- Control of means & methods of construction – hire fire authority or at least controlling subs
- Was involved in the construction of a building from ground up on new construction or MAJOR demo / remodels (but still has to meet at least 4 of the 7 structural experience categories listed in 61G4-15.001 (2)
- At least 1 year field experience: boots on the ground & hard hat on the head. Not all in the office. Not necessarily to construct with your own hands but out in the field controlling what is being done, checking measurements, progress checks, etc. Controlling the means & methods of construction.
Friday April 13th , 2018
CILB Rules Committee 8:30am
The meeting was called to order by The Chair, turned the meeting over to CILB Counsel, Rachel, the following rules being tracked:
61G4-12.008 – Time Compliance with Final Orders*. Is now Effective 04/8/18
61G4-15.032 -Certification of Swimming Pool Contractors –Rachel found some pre-existing language in the rule that still mentions the candidate providing proof of experience by affidavit. This amendment will strike that language as it has long ago been removed as a requirements. There was a motion to strike out the language, a second and it was approved by the board. Language approved on 02/16/18
61G4-18.001 Continuing Education Requirements – JAPC required that regarding the Specialized Wind Mitigation Training, the FBC be incorporated by reference.
This language was approved in November and is moving along in the adoption process. Notice Published in 02/27/18
New 61G4-12.007 Board Agenda Materials
The language was approved by the board 03/16/18
Applications will be forwarded to the Board office for placement on an electronic agenda for distribution to the Board members after the application is deemed complete or when the applicant informs the Department of their request to proceed “as is” without satisfying an application deficiency, in accordance with section 120.60 Florida Statutes. Materials amending a completed application or other proposed agenda materials submitted less than 21 days prior to a Board Meeting will not be included and will not be distributed to board members except as outlined below. The Board delegates authority to the Board Chair in consultation with Board Counsel to determine when an exception is warranted in order to comply with legal requirements, including fairness to all parties or to the public. The Chairperson presiding over each board meeting session will determine whether or not to accept materials offered during the respective session.
Rulemaking Authority 120.525, 120.57(2), F.S. Law Implemented 120.525, 120.57(2), F.S. History–New __________.
There was a brief discussion about violation of this rule, if it should be considered as “minor violation”. After some debate, and Ms. Rachel’s intervention, they all decided that there would be no violation if someone submitted the documents after the deadline. They would be tabled for review for the next meeting.
That concluded the Rules Committee agenda and meeting. Adjourned
Friday April 13th, 2018
CILB General Session Meeting – 9:00am all Board members: both divisions.
The meeting was called to order at 8:30am by chair, Richard Kane. Richard turned the meeting over to Dan Biggins for the Executive Director’s Report.
Executive Directors Report:
Dan welcomed the new board members.
He requested all the board members to take the FBI Course for checking and verifying the Backgrounds. And said that it is mandatory that all pass that test.
He informed the board that the Department of BET has agreed to keep the same time for trade portion of the General Contractors Computer Based exam @ Four Hours and Thirty Minutes
The NASCLA members would be coming to present themselves at the May Board Meeting. He also mentioned that NASCLA has already presented to the states bordering Florida to recognize the Florida State Exam as we would recognize theirs.
He recognized the services and dedicated work of Ms. Ramsey, the Deputy Attorney for the Prosecuting division.
That concluded the executive Directors Report
Chairman displayed the handbook that was provided to him few years back and that one of the portions that talked about being “…. Flexible and not creating unnecessary hardship ….”. He also mentioned of using rationality on the financial responsibility portions.
That concluded the Chairman’s Report
Prosecuting Attorney Report:
Ian Brown, was just thankful for the recognition of Ms. Ramsey and wishing her a great success. He admired her efforts, hard work and contribution towards the department.
That concluded the Prosecuting Attorney’s report.
Attorney General Report: The meeting was turned over to Rachel Clark the CILB Counsel:
There were 9 hearings. Most of them were usual, most were approved and few denied. Following are my personal thoughts
- While trying to follow the exact words, what is the exact definition of the lawfully gained experience?
- If one is working on a federal job, the federal contracts do not need a licensed contractor. Why is the experience gotten on federal jobs not be recognized?
- Can a licensed engineer or an architect, hired as independent consultant to act as a construction manager, giving them capability to recommend the termination of the subcontracts be considered as lawfully gained experience?
That concluded the Attorney General’s Report
- Education Committee: Nothing out of normal. 13 Courses Approved
- Rules/ Legislative All rules approved and/ moving through the process.
- Recovery Fund: 12 claims / 2 Continuation/ 2 Denied and 8 Approved/ $254,177
Old Business: None
- The board opened the rule 61G4 – 15-0021 for amendment and discussions. This is mainly to discuss the 50% rule that brings the requirement for the candidates to come in front of the board. This will be interesting conversation.