STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

DIVISION OF HOTELS AND )

RESTAURANTS, DEPARTMENT OF )

BUSINESS REGULATION, )

STATE OF FLORIDA, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

vs. ) CASE NO. 79-589

) 23-4600H ALFRED L. MERRITT t/a STEVENS )

HOTELS APARTMENTS ANNEX, )

)

Respondent. )

)

RECOMMENDED ORDER

A hearing was held in the above captioned matter, after due notice, at Miami, Florida, on June 7, 1979, before the undersigned Hearing Officer.

APPEARANCES

For the Petitioner: Francis Bayley

Staff Attorney

Department of Business Regulation 725 South Bronough Street Tallahassee, Florida 32301

For the Respondent: Alfred L. Merritt

142 Northeast 9th Street Miami, Florida

ISSUE PRESENTED

Whether Respondent violated Chapter 509, F.S. and Chapter 7C, F.A.C., as stated in the Notice to Show Cause dated January 4, 1979.

Respondent appeared at the hearing without counsel and was advised as to his rights in an administrative proceeding under Chapter 120, Florida Statutes. He elected to represent himself at the hearing.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. Respondent Alfred L. Merritt owns and operates the Stevens Hotel Apartments Annex located at 142 Northeast Ninth Street, Miami, Florida. This public lodging establishment has been issued license No. 23-4660H by Petitioner (Testimony of Brown, Merritt)

   
   

2. On December 5, 1978, Petitioner's inspector, Roger Brown, conducted a routine inspection of the licensed premises. During the course of the inspection, while accompanied by the manager of the apartment building, Brown

   noted a number of apparent violations of Chapter 509, Florida Statutes, and Chapter 7C, Florida Administrative Code. These were as follows:

   
   

   1. An electrical junction box located in the first floor hallway was not covered and electrical wiring was thereby exposed. (Rule 7C-1.04(4)) Reinspection on June 6, 1979, showed that this condition no longer existed.

      
      

   2. Cracked concrete wall on stairs leading from second to third floor on east side; ceiling ripped in apartments 29 and 31, exposing pipes; doors to apartments 29 and 30 kicked in and insecure; floor in apartment 31 in need of repair; window on first floor, north side, broken and required replacement. (Rule 7C-1.03(1)) Reinspection on June 6, 1979, showed that necessary repairs had been made for the foregoing deficiencies except that the ceilings in apartments 29 and 30 had not been completely repaired.

      
      

   3. No screens were present to cover crawl holes in the building foundation or for windows of apartments 29 and 31. (Section 509.221(8), F.S., Rule 7C-1.03(3), F.A.C.) Reinspection on June 6, 1979, showed that screens had been installed for the crawl spaces, but not for apartments 29 And 31.

      
      

   4. Roach and vermin dropings were present in cabinet drawers, closets, under cabinets and beds throughout the building. (Section 509.221(6), F.S., Rule 7C-1.03(3), F.A.C.) Reinspection on June 6, 1979, showed that the infestation problem had been reduced, but still existed.

      
      

   5. Weeds had not been cut on the east side of the premises, and trash and debris were present on the east side and rear of the building. (Rule 7C-1.03(7), F.A.C.) Reinspection on June 6, 1979, revealed that the weeds had been cut and the trash removed. Garbage cans had no lids and therefore were not waterproof, (Rule 7C-1.03(5), F.A.C.) Reinspection on June 6, 1979, showed that the cans had been sealed with plastic and were satisfactory. (Testimony of Brown)

      
      

3. Respondent testified that he is a county employee who operates the apartment building in question as a means of future retirement income. He rents to a working class group who throw items through the screens and otherwise abuse the premises. The apartments need continuous repair and Respondent claims that he is doing "everything humanly possible" to maintain the building in satisfactory condition. (Testimony of Merritt)

   
   

   CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

   
   

4. Petitioner seeks to assess a civil penalty against Respondent or to suspend or revoke his license for various violations of Chapter 509, Florida Statutes, and Chapter 7C, Florida Administrative Code.

   
   

5. Section 509.261, F.S. authorizes Petitioner to take disciplinary action against the license of any public lodging establishment that has operated or is operating in violation of provisions of Chapter 509 and Rules promulgated by Petitioner. In lieu of action against a license, Petitioner may impose fines for such violations not to exceed $500 for each offense.

   
   

6. The foregoing findings of fact establish that Respondent has violated Section 509.221(6), F.S. and Rule 7C-1.03(3), F.A.C., which require that vermin shall be kept exterminated. The evidence also shows numerous violations of Rule 7C-1.03(1) requiring walls, ceilings, floors, and windows to be kept in good

   repair. Although Respondent has made certain repairs, violations still exist as to ceilings in apartments 29 and 31.

   
   

7. In view of Respondent's good faith attempts to maintain the property in repair, suspension or revocation of his license to operate the establishment is not considered warranted. However, the violations established by Petitioner justify the imposition of a total fine of $250.

RECOMMENDATION

That a fine of $250 be imposed against Respondent Alfred L. Merritt t/a Stevens Hotel Apartments Annex pursuant to Section 509.261(2), Florida Statutes.

DONE and ENTERED this 22nd day of June, 1979, in Tallahassee, Florida.

THOMAS C. OLDHAM

Hearing Officer

Division of Administrative Hearings

101 Collins Building Tallahassee, Florida 32301

COPIES FURNISHED:

Francis Bayley Staff Attorney

Department of Business Regulation 725 South Bronough Street Tallahassee, Florida 32304

Alfred L. Merritt t/a

Stevens Hotel Apartments Annex

142 NE 9th Street Miami, Florida

Docket for Case No: 79-000589

Orders for Case No: 79-000589