The City of Ocala Contractors Board found multiple individuals violated city contracting rules and approved fines and prosecution-cost awards after hearings on Sept. 19, 2025.

Board members accepted staff findings that contractors or helpers performed work that required permits or a licensed contractor at several Ocala addresses, including 1528 Northeast 17th Avenue, 1828 East Silver Springs Boulevard and 1014 Northeast 12th Street. The board imposed monetary fines, split prosecution costs among co-defendants where cases were related, and set payment deadlines.

Chief code official Dale Hollingsworth presented the cases and explained the municipal code sections cited in the complaints, and Officer Ocis Ferreira and other code officers gave onsite testimony and photographic evidence. Hollingsworth told the board the violations cited included municipal code sections 22 1 51(b)(6) (acting in the capacity of a contractor without being duly licensed), 22 1 51(b)(8) (performing work that requires a building permit), and, in one case, 22 1 51(b)(10) (aiding or abetting an unlicensed person) and 22 1 51(b)(13) (acts that would constitute a violation by a licensed contractor).

In case CON25-0033 (Hillary Carter, 1528 Northeast 17th Avenue), Officer Ocis Ferreira testified the work observed was an interior bathroom demolition with no permits. Carter told the board she removed drywall after plumbing work and said she did not perform electrical work. Carter said, "I ain't doing none of that," when asked about electrical work. The board voted to accept staff recommendations: fines of $150 per violation (three violations totaling $450), prosecution costs of $152.47, with an initial staff-requested payment deadline of Nov. 6, 2025; the motion to accept staff recommendation passed (motion by Kevin Steiner; second by Mrs. Wright).

In case CON25-0036 (Juan Antonio Ortiz Garcia, 1828 East Silver Springs Boulevard, Long John Silver's location), officers observed two unlicensed individuals replacing exterior panels with no permits. Staff recommended $150 per violation (two violations, $300 total) and a split of prosecution costs ($62.11 for this defendant), with payment due Nov. 6, 2025. The board voted to accept staff recommendation (motion by board member Eddie; second by Kevin Steiner).

Case CON25-0037 (Jorge Luis Molina), involving the same restaurant job as CON25-0036, was presented as substantially the same scenario; the board accepted staff recommendation and imposed the recommended fines and cost split (motion carried; second by Mrs. Wright).

In case CON25-0034 (Jasper Fayol, 1014 Northeast Twelfth Street), inspectors found siding removed, a dump trailer on the lawn and workers on site. Although an owner-builder permit was in the file, officers said on-site evidence and testimony indicated Fayol was hired to perform the work and was not the homeowner or supervising homeowner as required. Fayol told the board, "I made a mistake. I didn't do enough research, paying a fine for it, man." Staff recommended a $150 fine; the board moved to accept staff recommendations and voted 3-1 to find the violations and impose the recommended penalty (three in favor, one opposed; the recorded opposing vote was by Mister Ferentino).

Case CON25-0035 (Abed Rabo Dauzayed) involved the same project connected to CON25-0034. Staff presented testimony that Dauzayed subcontracted work to unlicensed workers and that the homeowner provided messages showing payments of about $6,000 toward the work. Dauzayed told the board, "I was unaware what I was doing was wrong, and I didn't know that I needed a license to operate." After discussion about severity and advertising, the board approved a motion to increase the fine to $300 per violation (from staff's baseline amount), split half the prosecution cost with related defendants, and set payment per staff recommendation (motion carried; second recorded). The board also noted its unlicensed-contractor files are submitted to the Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation (DBPR) for reporting and potential further action.

Board members repeatedly distinguished owner-builder permits from situations where a homeowner hires an outside person or where a person hires subcontractors; the board recorded that owner-builder permits require the homeowner to be on site and to supervise work, and that hiring others to do the work can create violations of the owner-builder rules. Staff clarified that where two unlicensed individuals worked at the same job site, prosecution costs were split between the related cases.

The board directed staff to provide defendants with information on the fines and to coordinate payment arrangements and paperwork; staff also confirmed the city forwards unlicensed-contractor case files to DBPR in Tallahassee. Several defendants were advised to meet with staff for additional questions and to receive copies of evidence and notices.

The board's actions were limited to administrative findings and monetary penalties; no criminal sentencing or licensing revocations were decided at this hearing. Payment deadlines and specific amounts were recorded in staff recommendations and board motions for each case.