00-002694 Department Of Business And Professional Regulation, Division Of Hotels And Restaurants vs. Ruth E. Angelo, D/B/A Speedy Two Shop Status: Closed Recommended Order on Wednesday, October 25, 2000.

Summary: Revocation of restaurant license for repeated violations of requirements to obtain license, education certification, and numerous citations.

STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND )

PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, )

DIVISION OF HOTELS AND )

RESTAURANTS, )

)

Petitioner, ) Case Nos. 00-2694

) 00-2695

vs. ) 00-2696

) 00-2697

ANGELO E. RUTH, d/b/a )

SPEEDY TWO SHOP, )

)

Respondent. )

______________________________)

RECOMMENDED ORDER

Robert E. Meale, Administrative Law Judge of the Division of

Administrative Hearings, conducted the final hearing in

Fort Myers, Florida, on September 20, 2000.

APPEARANCES

For Petitioner: Gail Hoge, Senior Attorney

Department of Business and

Professional Regulation

1940 North Monroe Street

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0792

For Respondent: Angelo E. R uth, pro se

2774 Blake Street

Fort Myers, Florida 33916

STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE

The issue is whether Respondent is guilty of various

violations of Florida statutes and rules in the operation of his

restaurant and, if so, what penalty should be imposed.

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

The four consolidated cases raise a number of alleged

violations, as identified in four sets of inspections taking

place between January 1998 and May 1999. The specific

allegations incorporate the violations cited in the inspection

reports, which are detailed in the Findings of Fact below.

At the hearing, Petitioner called three witnesses and

offered into evidence 14 exhibits. Respondent called no

witnesses and offered into evidence no exhibits. The

Administrative Law Judge has admitted, post-hearing, as

Administrative Law Judge Exhibit 1, the licensing certificate for

the licensing year ending December 1, 1999. All exhibits were

admitted.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. Respondent holds license control number 46-04280R, which

is in effect from December 1, 1999, through December 1, 2000.

The license authorizes Respondent to operate a restaurant known

as Speedy Two Shop at 2957 Martin L. King Boulevard in

Fort Myers.

2. Petitioner has previously disciplined Respondent. By

Stipulation and Consent Order filed May 22, 1997, the parties

agreed that Respondent would pay an administrative fine of $1100

and correct all violations by April 30, 1997. The Stipulation

and Consent Order incorporates the findings of inspections on

February 25 and March 7, 1997. These inspections uncovered seven

violations, including missing hood filters over the cooking

surface, heavy grease accumulations on the inside and outside of

the hood, a fire extinguisher bearing an expired tag (May 1995),

and operation without a license.

3. In Petitioner's District 7, which includes Fort Myers,

the licensing year for restaurants runs from December 1 to

December 1. Respondent's relevant licensing history includes

annual licenses for the periods ending December 1, 1997; December

1, 1998; and December 1, 1999.

4. However, Respondent has operated his restaurant for

substantial periods without a license. Respondent renewed his

license ending in 1997 after four months of operating without a

license, his license ending in 1998 after 17 months of operating

without a license, his license ending in 1999 after six and one-

half months of operating without a license, and his license

ending in 2000 after one and one-half months of operating without

a license. For each of these late renewals, Respondent paid a

$100 delinquent fee.

5. Petitioner conducts periodic inspections of restaurants.

These inspections cover a broad range of health and safety

conditions. Certain violations, as marked on the inspection

forms, "are of critical concern and must be corrected

immediately." This recommended order refers to such violations

as "Critical Violations."

6. On January 22, 1998, Petitioner's inspector conducted an

inspection of Respondent's restaurant. The inspection uncovered

seven Critical Violations.

7. Two Critical Violations involved Respondent's compliance

with licensing and training requirements. Respondent was

operating the restaurant without a license, and no employee had a

food manager's card, which evidences the successful completion of

coursework and a test in managing a restaurant. The report warns

that if Respondent did not renew his license before February 1,

1998, Petitioner would impose a fine and possibly revoke his

license. The report requires Respondent to ensure that an

employee obtains a food manager's card by March 3, 1998.

8. Two Critical Violations involved Respondent's

noncompliance with fire safety requirements. The fire

extinguisher and built-in fire suppression system both bore

outdated tags. The former tag expired in April 1997, and the

latter tag expired in May 1997.

9. The remaining three Critical Violations were that the

restaurant lacked a filter in his hood over the stove, ceramic

tiles over the three-compartment sink, and sanitizing solution in

the bucket that was supposed to contain sanitizing solution.

Respondent's employee explained that the hood filters were being

cleaned, but apparently offered no explanation for the other two

Critical Violations.

10. Despite the specific warnings concerning the licensing

and training violations, the January 1998 inspection report

requires only that Respondent correct the violations by the next

routine inspection.

11. On March 26, 1998, Petitioner's inspector conducted an

reinspection of Respondent's restaurant. The inspection

uncovered the same Critical Violations, except for the sanitizing

solution. The report states that Respondent must come to

Petitioner's office in the next seven days to renew his license.

12. On April 2, 1998, Petitioner served upon Respondent an

Administrative Complaint alleging that, on January 1, 1998,

Respondent was operating without a license. Neither this nor any

subsequent charging document cites any of the other six Critical

Violations found in the January 22, 1998, inspection as bases for

discipline, so this recommended order treats these other

violations as background, rather than as independent grounds for

discipline. On June 30, 2000--over two years after issuing the

Administrative Complaint--Petitioner transmitted the

Administrative Complaint to the Division of Administrative

Hearings (DOAH) for the purpose of conducting a formal hearing,

and DOAH assigned this case DOAH Case number 00-2694.

13. On April 29, 1998, Petitioner's inspector conducted

another reinspection. Upon identifying himself to Respondent's

employee, the employee denied the inspector access to the

premises and told him to return at 2:00 PM. The inspector

replied that the reinspection would take only five minutes and

that he could not return at 2:00 PM, but the employee continued

to deny the inspector entry.

14. On May 12, 1998, Petitioner's inspector conducted

another reinspection and found the same seven Critical Violations

present during the January 1998 inspection. New Critical

Violations were the presence of one "small mouse and roaches"

under the three-compartment sink and the presence of cooked

sausage patties and links with an internal temperature too low to

prevent the proliferation of bacteria. As for the food manager's

card, Respondent told the inspector that he had left it at home.

The report warns that Respondent must correct the violations by

May 18, 2000, 8:00 AM.

15. On September 29, 1998, Petitioner served upon

Respondent a Notice to Show Cause alleging the violations found

during the inspections of March 26, April 29, and May 12, 1998.

On June 30, 2000--one year and nine months after issuing the

Administrative Complaint--Petitioner transmitted the

Administrative Complaint to DOAH for the purpose of conducting a

formal hearing, and DOAH assigned this case DOAH Case number

00 -2697.

16. On July 31, 1998, Petitioner's inspector conducted

another reinspection and found five of the same Critical

Violations: operating without a license, no employee with a food

manager's card, fire suppression system bearing an outdated tag,

ceramic tile missing over the three-compartment sink, and heavy

grease accumulation on the hood filters, which had been

reinstalled.

17. Petitioner never cited these five Critical Violations

in any charging document, so this recommended order treats these

other violations as background, rather than as independent

grounds for discipline.

18. On October 2, 1998, Petitioner's inspector conducted an

inspection and found four of the original Critical Violations:

no license, no employee with a food manager's card, no current

tag on the fire suppression system, and no ceramic tile over the

sink. Although the fire extinguisher was presumably current, it

was improperly placed on the floor. Other Critical Violations

included the storage of sausage at the improperly warm

temperature of 51 degrees, the absence of a thermometer in the

home-style refrigerator, the presence of rodent feces on the

floor, the absence of working emergency lights, the absence of a

catch pan in the hood system, a broken self-closer on the side

door, a clogged hand sink, an extension cord serving a toaster,

and the evident expansion of the restaurant without an approved

plan. The report gives Respondent until October 9, 1998, at

11:00 AM to correct the violations.

19. On October 12, 1998, Petitioner's inspector conducted a

reinspection and found all of the Critical Violations cited in

the preceding paragraph still uncorrected.

20. On October 20, 1998, Petitioner served upon Respondent

an Administrative Complaint alleging the violations found during

the inspections of October 2 and 12, 1998. On June 30, 2000--one

year and eight months after issuing the Administrative

Complaint - -Petitioner transmitted the Administrative Complaint to

DOAH for the purpose of conducting a formal hearing, and DOAH

assigned this case DOAH Case number 00 -2695.

21. For some reason, Petitioner neither prosecuted the

pending charges nor conducted repeated inspections for several

months after October 1998 inspections and Administrative

Complaint.

22. The next inspection of Respondent's restaurant took

place on April 30, 1999. Despite the six and one-half months

that Petitioner effectively gave Respondent to correct the

numerous Critical Violations cited in the October 12, 1998,

inspection, Respondent continued to violate many of the same

provisions for which he had been cited throughout nearly all of

1998.

23. The inspection report discloses that, again, Respondent

was operating without a license. The report notes that he lacked

a license for the licensing years ending in 1998 and 1999. One

of Petitioner's inspectors testified that Respondent had been

making progress on the licensing issue. However, the implication

that Respondent was unable to pay the $190 licensing fee (usually

accompanied by a $100 delinquent fee) is quietly rebutted by the

notation, also in the April 30, 1999, report, that Respondent had

completed the expansion project--still, without the required plan

review.

24. Again, no employee at the restaurant had a food

manager's card. Again, the fire suppression system was in

violation--this time because the indicator revealed that it

needed to be recharged. Again, the hood filters were missing

above the cooking surface. Again, the hand sink was inoperative-

-this time, it was not only clogged, but it also lacked hot

water. Again, emergency lighting was inoperative. Again, the

ceramic tile was missing over the three-compartment sink. Again,

food was maintained too warm in the refrigerator--this time,

chicken was at 69 degrees. A new Critical Violation was the

exposure of live electrical lines and insulation. The April 1999

inspection report gives Respondent until May 14, 1999, at 11:00

AM to correct the violations.

25. On May 14, 1999, Petitioner's inspector conducted a

reinspection and found that Respondent still had not obtained a

license for the licensing year ending in 1999, still lacked an

employee with a food manager's card, still had not obtained

approval of its expansion plan, still lacked ceramic tile over

the three-compartment sink, still had a clogged hand sink without

hot water, still lacked working emergency lights, still tolerated

exposed electrical line and insulation, and still lacked hood

filters above the cooking surface.

26. On June 2, 1999, Petitioner served upon Respondent an

Administrative Complaint alleging the violations found during the

inspections of April 20 and May 14, 1999. On June 30, 2000--one

year and one month after issuing the Administrative Complaint--

Petitioner transmitted the Administrative Complaint to DOAH for

the purpose of conducting a formal hearing, and DOAH assigned

this case DOAH Case number 00 -2696.

27. Over a period of 16 months, Petitioner conducted eight

inspections of Respondent's restaurant. On what would have been

a ninth inspection, one of Respondent's employees denied access

to the inspector.

28. On each of these eight inspections, Respondent was

operating without a license, lacked an employee with a food

manager's card, and lacked ceramic tile over the three-

compartment sink. On seven of these eight inspections, the fire

suppression system was expired or discharged, and the hood filter

was missing or excessive grease had accumulated on the filter or

the liner.

29. On three of these eight inspections, the fire

extinguisher was outdated, and, on a fourth inspection, it was

improperly stored on the floor. On three of these eight

inspections, sausage or chicken was at improper temperatures--the

86 degrees at which sausage was served on one occasion was only

17 degrees warmer than the 69 degrees at which chicken was stored

on another occasion. On three of these eight inspections, the

hand sink was unusable because it was clogged or lacked hot

water, the emergency lights did not work, and restaurant

expansion was taking place or had taken place without review or

approval of the plans.

30. On two of these eight inspections, the inspector saw

signs of rodents in the kitchen--one time actually seeing a small

mouse. On two of these eight inspections, exposed electrical

lines and insulation were present in the kitchen.

31. Petitioner has proved by clear and convincing evidence

that Respondent committed all of the cited violations.

Uncorrected violations over 16 months amount to more than a

failure to take advantage of the numerous opportunities that

Petitioner gave Respondent to bring his restaurant into

compliance. These uncorrected violations constitute a refusal to

comply with the basic requirements ensuring the health and safety

of the public. The penalty must weigh, among other things,

Respondent's blatant disregard of fundamental requirements in

licensing, training, and fire and food safety; Petitioner's

demonstrated lack of diligence in enforcing Respondent's

compliance with these requirements; and the peril posed by these

failures upon the public health and safety.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

32. The Division of Administrative Hearings has

jurisdiction over the subject matter. Section 120.57(1), Florida

Statutes. (All references to "Sections" are to the Florida

Statutes, all references to "Rules" are to the Florida

Administrative Code, all references to "FC" are to the 1997 Food

Code, and all reference to "NFPA" are to the 1998 National Fire

Protection Association Safety Code.)

33. Section 509.032 provides in part:

(1) General.--The [Division of Hotels and

Restaurants; "division"] shall carry out all

of the provisions of this chapter and all

other applicable laws and rules relating to

the inspection or regulation of public

lodging establishments and public food

service establishments for the purpose of

safeguarding the public health, safety, and

welfare. . . .

(2) Inspection of premises.--

(a) The division has responsibility and

jurisdiction for all inspections required by

this chapter. The division has

responsibility for quality assurance. Each

licensed establishment shall be inspected at

least biannually and at such other times as

the division determines is necessary to

ensure the public's health, safety, and

welfare. . . .

(b) For purposes of performing required

inspections and the enforcement of this

chapter, the division has the right of entry

and access to public lodging establishments

and public food service establishments at any

reasonable time.

(c) Public food service establishment

inspections shall be conducted to enforce

provisions of this part and to educate,

inform, and promote cooperation between the

division and the establishment.

* * *

(6) Rulemaking authority.--The division

shall adopt such rules as are necessary to

carry out the provisions of this chapter.

(7) Preemption authority.--The regulation

and inspection of public lodging

establishments and public food service

establishments and the regulation of food

safety protection standards for required

training and testing of food service

establishment personnel are preempted to the

state.

34. Section 509.261 provides:

(1) Any public lodging establishment or

public food service establishment that has

operated or is operating in violation of this

chapter or the rules of the division,

operating without a license, or operating

with a suspended or revoked license may be

subject by the division to:

(a) Fines not to exceed $1,000 per

offense;

(b) Mandatory attendance, at personal

expense, at an educational program sponsored

by the Hospitality Education Program; and

(c) The suspension, revocation, or refusal

of a license issued pursuant to this chapter.

(2) For the purposes of this section, the

division may regard as a separate offense

each day or portion of a day on which an

establishment is operated in violation of a

"critical law or rule," as that term is

defined by rule.

* * *

(5)(a) A license may not be suspended under

this section for a period of more than 12

months. At the end of such period of

suspension, the establishment may apply for

reinstatement or renewal of the license. A

public lodging establishment or public food

service establishment, the license of which

is revoked, may not apply for another license

for that location prior to the date on which

the revoked license would have expired.

* * *

(7) A person is not entitled to the

issuance of a license for any public lodging

establishment or public food service

establishment except in the discretion of the

director when the division has notified the

current licenseholder for such premises that

administrative proceedings have been or will

be brought against such current licensee for

violation of any provision of this chapter or

rule of the division.

35. Petitioner must prove the material allegations by clear

and convincing evidence. Department of Banking and Finance v.

Osborne Stern and Company, Inc. , 670 So. 2d 932 (Fla. 1996) and

Ferris v. Turlington , 510 So. 2d 292 (Fla. 1987).

36. Section 509.241(1) provides:

(1) Licenses; annual renewals.--Each public

lodging establishment and public food service

establishment shall obtain a license from the

division. . . . It shall be a misdemeanor of

the second degree, punishable as provided in

s. 775.082 or s. 775.083, for such an

establishment to operate without a license.

Local law enforcement shall provide immediate

assistance in pursuing an illegally operating

establishment. The division may refuse a

license, or a renewal thereof, to any

establishment that is not constructed and

maintained in accordance with law and with

the rules of the division. The division may

refuse to issue a license, or a renewal

thereof, to any establishment an operator of

which, within the preceding 5 years, has been

adjudicated guilty of, or has forfeited a

bond when charged with, any crime reflecting

on professional character, including

soliciting for prostitution, pandering,

letting premises for prostitution, keeping a

disorderly place, or illegally dealing in

controlled substances as defined in chapter

893, whether in this state or in any other

jurisdiction within the United States, or has

had a license denied, revoked, or suspended

pursuant to s. 400.414. Licenses shall be

renewed annually, and the division shall

adopt a rule establishing a staggered

schedule for license renewals. If any

license expires while administrative charges

are pending against the license, the

proceedings against the license shall

continue to conclusion as if the license were

still in effect.

37. Rule 61C-1.002 (5) and (6) states in part:

(5)(c) Plan Reviews and Variances.

1. The operator of each public food

service establishment to be newly

constructed, remodeled, converted, or

reopened shall submit properly prepared

facility plans and specifications to the

division for review and approval in

accordance with the provisions of Chapter

509, FS, and rule chapters 61C-1 and 61C-4,

FAC. Such plans must be approved by the

division prior to construction, remodeling,

conversion, scheduling of an opening

inspection and licensing. . . .

* * *

(6) Renewal -- It is the responsibility of

the licensee to renew the license prior to

the expiration date. . . . Any public

lodging or food service establishment

operating on an expired license is deemed to

be operating without a license, and subject

to the penalties provided for this offense in

law and rule.

38. Section 509.039 provides in part:

It is the duty of the division to adopt, by

rule, food safety protection standards for

the training and certification of all food

service managers who are responsible for the

storage, preparation, display, or serving of

foods to the public in establishments

regulated under this chapter. These

standards are to be adopted by the division

to ensure that, upon successfully passing a

test, a manager of a food service

establishment shall have demonstrated a

knowledge of basic food protection practices.

These standards shall also provide for a

certification program which authorizes

private or public agencies to conduct an

approved test and certify the results of

those tests to the division. The fee

for the test shall not exceed $50. All

managers employed by a food service

establishment must have passed this test and

received a certificate attesting thereto.

Managers have a period of 90 days after

employment to pass the required test. The

ranking of food service establishments is

also preempted to the state; provided,

however, that any local ordinances

establishing a ranking system in existence

prior to October 1, 1988, may remain in

effect.

39. Rule 61C-4.023(1) and (2) provides:

(1) All managers who are responsible for the

storage, preparation, display, and serving of

foods to the public shall have passed a

written certification test approved by the

division demonstrating a basic knowledge of

food protection practices regulated and

administered by the division or an agency of

state government outside Florida which has

been approved by the division. Those

managers who successfully pass the

certification examination shall be issued a

certificate which is valid for a period of

five years from the date of issuance. All

establishments shall designate in writing the

food service manager or managers for each

location. Establishments that have four or

more employees at one time engaged in the

storage, preparation or serving of food

shall have at least one certified manager

present at all times when said activities are

taking place. All other establishments shall

have a certified manager or managers

responsible for all periods of operation but

said manager or managers need not be present

at all times. It shall be the responsibility

of the certified manager or managers to

inform all employees under their supervision

and control who engage in the storage,

preparation, or serving of food, to do so in

accordance with acceptable sanitary practices

as described in this chapter.

(2) The test shall be designed to assess the

manager's knowledge of basic public health

food protection practices which includes:

(a) Receiving and storage of food

supplies, including dry, refrigerated and

freezer storage;

(b) Food protection and preparation

practices, including:

1. Thawing of potentially hazardous

food;

2. Techniques to minimize handling; and

3. Recognition of critical temperatures

during storage, preparation, cooking,

serving, displaying and reheating;

(c) Personal hygienic practices of

employees during all phases of preparation

and serving of food;

(d) Equipment and utensil design and

fabrication, installation and location as

well as cleaning, sanitizing and storage;

(e) Water supplies;

(f) Sewage disposal;

(g) Plumbing;

(h) Bathroom and handwashing facilities;

(i) Garbage and trash storage and

disposal;

(j) Insect and rodent control;

(k) General housekeeping including

cleaning, maintenance, lighting and

ventilation;

(l) Control of toxic materials; and

(m) Premises sanitation and other

miscellaneous activities which the manager

needs to ensure are accomplished to prevent

the occurrence of foodborne illness.

40. Rule 61C-1.004(3), (5), (6) and provides:

(1) Water, plumbing and waste. Except as

specifically provided by these rules,

standards for water, plumbing and waste shall

be governed by Chapter 5, Food Code, herein

adopted by reference. For the purpose of

this section, the term "food establishment"

as referenced in the Food Code shall apply to

all public lodging and public food

establishments as defined in Chapter 509,

F.S.

* * *

(3) Vermin control--Effective control

measures shall be taken to protect against

the entrance into the establishment, and the

breeding or presence on the premises of

rodents, flies, roaches and other vermin.

All buildings shall be effectively rodent-

proofed, free of rodents and maintained in a

rodent-proof and rodent-free condition.

. . .

* * *

(5) All fire safety, protection and

prevention equipment must be installed,

approved, maintained and used in accordance

with Chapter 509, FS, and the National Fire

Protection Association Life Safety Code

Chapter 101, as adopted by the Division of

State Fire Marshal in Chapter 4A-3, FAC.

(6) All building structural components,

attachments and fixtures shall be kept in

good repair, clean and free of obstructions.

* * *

(9) Fire safety equipment.

(a) Fire Extinguisher Installation--Fire

extinguishers shall be installed in

accordance with NFPA 10, Standard for

Portable Fire Extinguishers, herein adopted

by reference.

(b) A standard state approved service tag

shall be attached to each extinguisher and a

person holding a valid state permit issued by

the State Fire Marshal shall recharge or

inspect the extinguisher and shall prepare

the tag to include the information required

by rule 4A-21.041, FAC.

* * *

(10) Means of access must permit

unobstructed travel at all times and be

maintained free of obstructions and fire

hazards. Halls, entrances and stairways

shall be clean, ventilated and well-lighted

day and night. Hall and stair runners shall

be kept in good condition. Handrails shall

be installed on all stairways and guard rails

around all porches and steps. Adequate means

of exit shall be provided pursuant to NFPA

101. Exits shall be clearly marked with

approved illuminated exit signs.

(11) Electrical wiring--To prevent fire or

injury, defective electrical wiring shall be

replaced and wiring shall be kept in good

repair. No extension cords shall be used

except during cleaning, maintenance and other

temporary activities. . . .

41. Food Code Section 4-204.112(B) provides in part:

. . . cold or hot holding equipment used for

potentially hazardous food shall be designed

to include and shall be equipped with at

least one integral or permanently affixed

temperature measuring device that is located

to allow easy viewing of the device's

temperature display.

42. Fo od Code 5-202.12(A) provides:

A handwashing lavatory shall be equipped to

provide water at a temperature of at least

43°C (110°F) through a mixing valve or

combination faucet.

43. Food Code Section 5-205.15 provides:

A plumbing system shall be:

(A) Repaired according to law; and

(B) Maintained in good repair.

44. Food Code Section 6-201.11 provides in part:

. . . floor coverings, walls, wall coverings,

and ceilings shall be designed, constructed,

and installed so they are smooth and easily

cleanable, except that antislip floor

coverings or applications may be used for

safety reasons .

45. Food Section 6-202.15(A) provides in part:

outer openings of a food establishment shall

be protected against the entry of insects and

rodents by:

(3) Solid self-closing, tight-fitting doors.

46. NFPA 96, 3-2.6 requires in part: "Filters shall be

equipped with a drip tray beneath their lower edge. . . ."

47. NFPA 96, 8-1.2 provides: "Filter-equipped exhaust

systems shall not be operated with filters removed."

48. NFPA 96, 8-2.1 requires in part: "All actuation

components [of fire-extinguishing systems] . . . shall be checked

for proper operation during the inspection . . .."

49. Petitioner has proved by clear and convincing evidence

all of the violations discussed above.

50. In its proposed recommended order, Petitioner requests

a one-year suspension or, in the alternative, completion of

relevant coursework, payment of a $3000 administrative fine (over

12 months), and correction of all still-uncorrected violations.

These penalties do not seem proportionate to the repeated

disregard of numerous, crucial licensing requirements.

RECOMMENDATION

It is

RECOMMENDED that the Division of Hotels and Restaurants

enter a final order revoking Respondent's license.

DONE AND ENTERED this 25th day of October, 2000, in

Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida.

___________________________________

ROBERT E. MEALE

Administrative Law Judge

Division of Administrative Hearings

The DeSoto Building

1230 Apalachee Parkway

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060

[phone] SUNCOM 278-9675

Fax Filing [phone]

www.doah.state.fl.us

Filed with the Clerk of the

Division of Administrative Hearings

this 25th day of October, 2000.

COPIES FURNISHED:

Susan R. McKinley, Director

Division of Hotels and Restaurant

Department of Business and

Professional Regulation

Northwood Centre

1940 North Monroe Street

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0792

Barbara D. Auger, General Counsel

Department Business and

Professional Regulation

Northwood Centre

1940 North Monroe Street

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0792

Gail Hoge, Senior Attorney

Department of Business and

Professional Regulation

1940 North Monroe Street

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0792

Angelo E. Ruth

2774 Blake Street

Fort Myers, Florida 33916

NOTICE OF RIGHT TO SUBMIT EXCEPTIONS

All parties have the right to submit written exceptions within 15

days from the date of this recommended order. Any exceptions to

this recommended order must be filed with the agency that will

issue the final order in this case.