MINUTES FOR BOARD MEETING OF THE NEVADA STATE BOARD =
OF
ARCHITECTURE, INTERIOR DESIGN AND RESIDENTIAL DESIGN
Board Conference Room, 2080 E. Flamingo Rd., Su=
ite
120, Las Vegas, NV 89119
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
Chairman George Garl=
ock called
the meeting to order at 8:44 a.m.
Roll Call: Judith Fermoile, George Garlock, =
Larry
Henry, John Klai, JoAnn Oppenheimer Gore, Derrell Parker, Bill Snyder and =
Larry
Tindall. Greg Erny was excus=
ed.
Also in attendance:<=
span
style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> Gina Spaulding, Executive Directo=
r;
Betty Ruark, Chief Investigator; Dianna Hegeduis, Legal Counsel; Monica
Harrison, staff.
AGENDA ITEM 1<=
/u> &nbs=
p; Approval
of consent agenda
<=
/span>
Consent agenda inclu=
ded
the following:
Architects: Registration by reciprocity
|
6256 |
Gary
C. Roberts |
6269 |
Frank
W. Hailey |
6282 |
John
N. Thompsen |
|
6257 |
Crystal
Barriscale |
6270 |
Kim
Larsen |
6283 |
Lori
M. Treboldi |
|
6258 |
Grover
C. Bryan |
6271 |
Gregory
J. Lorusso |
6291 |
Olvia
D. Adamstein |
|
6259 |
Robert
L. Carli, Jr. |
6272 |
John
T. Campo, Jr. |
6292 |
Anthony
J. Atkin |
|
6260 |
David
J. Evans |
6273 |
Lloyd
Fruchtman |
6293 |
Thomas
E. Bowe |
|
6261 |
Steven
R. Graves |
6274 |
Dominique
Gobbell |
6294 |
Steven
C. Carver |
|
6262 |
Michael
R. Howard |
6275 |
Michael
J. Habel |
6295 |
Cornelius
R. DuBois |
|
6263 |
Michael
D. Jones |
6276 |
Richard
B. Hall |
6296 |
Christopher
Ganiere |
|
6264 |
Douglas
L. McCord |
6277 |
Ulysse
G. McCann |
6297 |
Mark
R. McKechnie |
|
6265 |
David
W. Ohlemeyer |
6278 |
James
E. Stone |
6298 |
Patrick
J. Morabito |
|
6266 |
David
S. Urffer |
6279 |
Henry
C. Onochie |
6299 |
Grant
A. Simpson |
|
6267 |
David
L. Wallace, Jr. |
6280 |
Gregory
J. Somjen |
6300 |
Charles
J. Wyse |
|
6268 |
Joseph
H. Donovan |
6281 |
James
D. Coles |
|
|
Residential
designers: Registration by
reciprocity
|
284-P |
David
L. Harris |
|
|
|
|
Spaulding said that =
items
1E-1, 1E-4, 1E-6 and 1F-3 should be pulled from the consent agenda and held
until after the new registrants are sworn-in. Board members requested agenda it=
ems 1B,
1E-10, 1F-1, 1F-2, 1F-4 and 1F-5 be pulled from the consent agenda.
Motion: Klai
moved to approve the consent agenda, items 1A, 1C, 1D, 1E-2, 1E-3, 1E-5, 1=
E-7,
1E-8, 1E-9 and 1F-6. Motion =
seconded
by Snyder.
Vote: =
All in
favor. Motion passes.
AGENDA
ITEM 1B Approval of minutes: August
13, 2008
Tindall said Page 7, Agenda Item 7, regarding the continuing education regulation, should reflect that it was not passed unanimously, as he voted against it.= Spaulding said she remembers that= Henry voted against it was well. S= he said the correction would be made.
Motion: Snyder
moved to approve the August 13, 2008 minutes with that correction. Motion seconded by Tindall.
Vote: =
All in
favor. Motion passes.
AGENDA
ITEM 1E-10 Firm na=
me
approval request: SGH Inc.
Motion: Klai
moved to approve the firm name “SGH Inc.” Motion seconded by Fermoile.
Spaulding said that the corporate list of officers does not list any Nevada registrants. She said that s= he has a call into the registrant for clarification, but she has not received a r= eturn call.
Henry said that was one of his concerns as well. Additionally he questioned its status as a foreign corporation. Spaulding explained when a foreign corporation registers with the Secretary of State, it must register using = the home company name. If that n= ame does not comply with this board’s regulations, the firm can then ame= nd the name, such as to use an acronym.
Garlock tabled the item for further clarification.
AGENDA
ITEM 1F-1 Firm registration approval request: WMB Architects Inc.=
Motion:
Garlock said that a
non-registrant holds the title of Associate Architect. Spaulding said the letter would c=
larify
he cannot use that title in Nevada.
Vote: =
All in
favor. Motion passes.
AGENDA
ITEM 1F-2 Firm registration approval request: Robert A.M. Stern Architects, LLP=
Motion:
Klai said there are a
number of individuals listed under this entity; he said Mr. Stern is not o=
n the
list. Spaulding said it is a=
list
of owners not registered in Nevada and Mr. Stern is a registrant.
Vote: =
All in
favor. Motion passes.
AGENDA
ITEM 1F-4 Firm registration approval request: TAG International LLP<=
b>
Motion:
Klai said it appears=
a
nonregistrant is the “go to guy.” Board members said it needs to be=
clear
who can perform professional services in Nevada. Spaulding said she would re=
mind
the registrant about Nevada law.
Vote: =
All in
favor. Motion passes.
AGENDA
ITEM 1F-5 Firm registration approval request: AMAA Nevada, Inc.
Motion:
Fermoile said the
ownership does not add up to 100 percent.=
Board members directed staff to call the registrant to see if he co=
uld
send correct information before the board meeting concludes.
Garlock tabled the i=
tem.
AGENDA
ITEM 2 Public
workshop for LCB R154-08, proposed adoption of regulations pertaining
=
&n=
bsp; &nbs=
p; to
Chapter 623 of the NAC regarding continuing education
A workshop was held =
to
solicit comments on the proposed adoption of regulations requiring continu=
ing
education. 23 people attende=
d the
workshop to listen to the board discussions.
Spaulding explained =
that the
purpose of today’s workshop is to receive comments from the public.<=
span
style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> Tomorrow a public hearing will be=
held,
during which the board may make amendments to the proposed regulation and
approve, or not approve, the regulation.&=
nbsp;
She said the Legislative Commission has final approval of the
regulation.
Spaulding said that =
she
wanted to clarify, as Erny did at the last board meeting, that the two hou=
rs of
building code related research and learning may be earned in a work settin=
g,
and may be structured or unstructured.
David Walliser, a re=
gistered
architect, registered his opposition to the proposed regulation. He said it is an economic issue f=
or
him. He added that he suppor=
ts
continuing education, but does not think the board should mandate it.
Spaulding said that =
the board
was very cognizant of the potential costs to registrants and will be makin=
g a
concerted effort to inform registrants of free and low-cost education
opportunities.
Tindall said that he=
would
vote against the proposed regulation.
There were no further
comments on the proposed regulation.
Garlock closed the workshop for LCB File No. R154-08.
AGENDA ITEM 11A-7=
C=
ase No.
04-004N – In the matter of Charles Gruwell
The respondent is all=
eged to
have violated NRS 623.360.1(a)(b)(c) by holding himself out as being quali=
fied
to provide architectural registered interior design services for multiple
projects, and by engaging in the practices of architecture and registered
interior design, without having a certificate of registration issued by the
board.
A settlement agreemen=
t was
negotiated incorporating a Guilt Clause, an administrative penalty of $330=
,000
and investigative costs in the amount of $6,200. All penalties and costs will be w=
aived
based upon respondent’s filing of Chapter 7 Bankruptcy and assurances
that he will not perform any of the services of a registered interior desi=
gner
or architect in the state of Nevada without first obtaining registration f=
rom
the board. Staff recommends =
approval
of the settlement agreement.
Motion: =
Tindall
moved to approve the settlement agreement.
Motion seconded by Snyder.
Beverly Salhanick, at=
torney
for Mr. Gruwell, was in attendance.
Hegeduis explained th=
at
since the time investigative staff filed a complaint, Mr. Gruwell has file=
d for
Chapter 7 Bankruptcy. She we=
nt on
to explain that Chapter 7 means a total liquidation of assets, with all de=
bts
discharged, so the board would not be able to collect on a judgment. Hegeduis said that in this situat=
ion,
the best way to protect the public was to add the “Additional
Terms” clause to the settlement agreement, which requires Mr. Gruwel=
l to
contact the board if he is considering any future projects in Nevada. Mr. Gruwell must advise the board=
of the
potential scope of a project and find out if it is within the scope of
regulated practice for an architect or registered interior designer.
Board members discuss=
ed
alternatives to the current settlement agreement.
Hegeduis noted that t=
he
settlement agreement was dated incorrectly; it should read October 9, 2008=
, not
October 10.
Vote: =
Garlock,
Oppenheimer Gore, Parker, Tindall and Snyder in favor. Fermoile and Henry
opposed. Klai recused himself.
Motion passes.
AGENDA ITEM 3 &nbs=
p; Formal
contested administrative hearing – In the matter of Charles Gruwell,=
Case No. 04-004N,
consideration and adjudication of the complaint alleging violations of NRS
623.0225, NRS 623.0123, NRS 623.026, NRS 623.360 and NRS 623.365
Garlock
said this item was no longer needed, as the case was settled under the pre=
vious
item.
AGENDA ITEM 4 &nbs=
p; Discussion
regarding status of board’s 2009 Legislative BDRs
Spaulding
reminded board members that the board submitted three bill draft requests
(BDRs). She said in August s=
he
heard from the governor’s office that the housekeeping and emeritus
status requests had been combined into one bill, while the BDR for written
contracts was denied. The
governor’s office stated that while written contracts were good busi=
ness
practice, they should not be mandatory.&n=
bsp;
Spaulding
said if the board wished to go forward with a bill requiring written contr=
acts,
it would have to find a legislator to introduce the bill. Board members said that was not
necessary at this time.
Spaulding said that the engineer’s board =
is
pursuing requiring written contracts.&nbs=
p;
Ruark said the requirement will be included in the engineers’=
code
of conduct.
AGENDA
ITEM 1F-5 Firm registration approval request: AMAA Nevada, Inc.
Garlock recalled the
item.
Garlock said staff
received a revised application with corrected ownership percentages.
Motion:
Vote: =
All in
favor. Motion passes.
AGENDA ITEM 11A-1=
C=
ase No.
07-108N – In the matter of Douglas Andresen
The respondent is all=
eged to
have violated NRS 623.360(1)(a)(b)(c) by holding himself out as being qual=
ified
to practice architecture, and by engaging in the practice of architecture,=
for
a commercial project in Las Vegas, without having a certificate of registr=
ation
issued by the board.
Staff received an ano=
nymous
complaint regarding a company that was calling around to find an architect=
to
seal drawings for a high-end car rental project called Voyager Classics.
The respondent was se=
nt a
Notice of Charges concerning this project and a letter of response was
received. The respondent's c=
ase was
discussed with Chief Investigator Ruark and the decision was made to offer=
the
respondent an opportunity to settle the issue informally rather than face a
disciplinary hearing before the board.&nb=
sp;
A settlement agreement was negotiated incorporating a Guilt Clause,=
an
administrative penalty of $5,000 and investigative costs in the amount of
$1,600. Staff recommends app=
roval
of the settlement agreement.
Motion: =
Parker
moved to approve the settlement agreement.
Motion seconded by Fermoile.
Vote: =
All in
favor. Motion passes.
AGENDA ITEM 11A-2=
C=
ase No.
08-032N – In the matter of Richard Telford
The respondent is all=
eged to
have violated NRS 623.360(1)(a)(b) by holding himself and his firm out as =
being
qualified to provide services that fall under the practice of architecture=
by
stating that he was licensed in Nevada and listing his expired certificate=
of
registration on his website.
The respondent was
previously interviewed in regards to a related case and it was noted at the
time that his website, located at bartosikandtelford.com, listed him as ho=
lding
Nevada certificate of registration #1841.=
A review of the database revealed that the respondent’s
certificate had expired on December 31, 1997. Subsequent investigation revealed=
that
the respondent had also been advertising in the Lake Tahoe and western Nev=
ada
area telephone directories.
The respondent was se=
nt a
Notice of Charges concerning this project and a letter of response was
received. The respondent's c=
ase was
discussed with Chief Investigator Ruark and the decision was made to offer=
the
respondent an opportunity to settle this issue informally rather than face=
a
disciplinary hearing before the board.&nb=
sp;
A settlement agreement was negotiated incorporating a Guilt Clause,=
an
administrative penalty of $1,500 and investigative costs in the amount of
$1,000. Staff recommends app=
roval
of the settlement agreement.
Motion:
Oppenheimer Gore moved to approve the settlement agreement. Motion seconded by Snyder.
Vote: =
All in
favor. Motion passes.
AGENDA ITEM 11A-3=
C=
ase No.
08-039R – In the matter of Sam Ng
The respondent is all=
eged to
have violated NRS 623.270(1)(f) and NRS 623.360(1)(a) by holding himself o=
ut as
being qualified to practice architecture for a 49-unit condominium project
prior to obtaining his certificate of registration issued by the board.
During the investigat=
ion of
a related case it was revealed that the respondent held himself out as bei=
ng
qualified to practice architecture by meeting with the client and discussi=
ng
the project, the 323 Residences in Lake Tahoe, Nevada, without having a
certificate of registration. Staff
received a copy of an email from the developer/client, addressed to the
consultants chosen to work on the project and the respondent, which showed=
the
respondent being involved in the project prior to him receiving his
registration.
The respondent was se=
nt a
Notice of Charges concerning this project and a letter of response was
received. The respondent's c=
ase was
discussed with Chief Investigator Ruark and the decision was made to offer=
the
respondent an opportunity to settle this issue informally rather than face=
a
disciplinary hearing before the board.&nb=
sp;
A settlement agreement was negotiated incorporating a Guilt Clause,=
an
administrative penalty of $2,500 and investigative costs in the amount of
$1,500. Staff recommends app=
roval
of the settlement agreement.
Motion: =
Klai
moved to approve the settlement agreement.
Motion seconded by Henry.
Vote: =
All in
favor. Motion passes.
AGENDA ITEM 11A-4=
C=
ase No.
08-044N – In the matter of Toni Loren
The respondent is all=
eged to
have violated NRS 623.360(1)(a)(b) by disseminating a proposal and by hold=
ing
herself out as being qualified to provide services that fall under the
practices of architecture and residential design, without having been issu=
ed a
certificate of registration by the board.
Staff received an ano=
nymous
complaint alleging that the respondent and her firm had disseminated a
proposal, dated December 17, 2007, to offer services for a two-phase home
remodel, which included the preparation of design drawings and plans ready=
for
engineering and permit submittal. <=
/span>
The respondent was se=
nt a
Notice of Charges concerning this project and a letter of response was
received. The respondent's c=
ase was
discussed with Chief Investigator Ruark and the decision was made to offer=
the
respondent an opportunity to settle this issue informally rather than face=
a
disciplinary hearing before the board.&nb=
sp;
A settlement agreement was negotiated incorporating a Guilt Clause,=
an
administrative penalty of $1,500 and investigative costs in the amount of =
$1000. Staff recommends approval of the
settlement agreement.
Motion: =
Parker
moved to approve the settlement agreement.
Motion seconded by Tindall. =
Vote: =
All in
favor. Motion passes.
AGENDA ITEM 11A-5=
C=
ase No.
09-012N – In the matter of Gene Fong
The respondent is all=
eged to
have violated NRS 623.360(1)(a)(b) by holding himself out as being qualifi=
ed to
provide services that fall under the practices of architecture, registered
interior design and residential design, without having a certificate of re=
gistration
issued by the board.
In preparation to con=
duct a
reciprocity interview with the respondent, board staff discovered that the
biography page on the respondent’s website, located at www.gf=
aarchitects.com, listed him as a reg=
istered
architect in Nevada. A revie=
w of
the board database revealed that the respondent had applied for a Nevada
certificate of registration in October 2001; however, he did not complete =
the
application process and his file was purged in May 2003. The respondent explained that in
anticipation of receiving his Nevada registration back in 2001, he had add=
ed
the information to his website, but never removed it.
The respondent was se=
nt a
Notice of Charges concerning this project and a letter of response was
received. The respondent's c=
ase was
discussed with Chief Investigator Ruark and the decision was made to offer=
the
respondent an opportunity to settle this issue informally rather than face=
a
disciplinary hearing before the board.&nb=
sp;
A settlement agreement was negotiated incorporating a Guilt Clause,=
an
administrative penalty of $3,000 and investigative costs in the amount of
$1,200. Staff recommends app=
roval
of the settlement agreement.
Motion: =
Klai
moved to approve the settlement agreement.
Motion seconded by Oppenheimer Gore.
Vote: =
All in
favor. Motion passes.
AGENDA ITEM 11A-6=
C=
ase No.
09-013N – In the matter of Matthew Molsberry
The respondents are a=
lleged
to have committed five violations of NRS 623.360(1)(a), five violations of=
NRS
623.360(1)(b) and two violations of NRS 623.360(1)(c) by holding themselve=
s out
as being qualified to practice architecture, and by engaging in the practi=
ce of
architecture, for multiple Nevada projects without having a certificate of
registration issued by the board.
During the background
investigation of reciprocity applicant Matthew Molsberry, five Nevada proj=
ects
were discovered on the firm’s website, Visioneering Studios, Inc.
The respondents were =
sent a
Notice of Charges concerning these projects and a letter of response was
received. The respondents=
217;
case was discussed with Chief Investigator Ruark and the decision was made=
to
offer the respondents an opportunity to settle this issue informally rather
than face a disciplinary hearing before the board. A settlement agreement was negoti=
ated
incorporating a Guilt Clause, an administrative penalty of $22,500 and
investigative costs in the amount of $2,000. Staff recommends approval of the
settlement agreement.
Motion: =
Klai
moved to approve the settlement agreement.
Motion seconded by Henry.
Vote: =
All in
favor. Motion passes.
AGENDA ITEM 11B &nb=
sp; Discussion
and possible decision regarding closure of enforcement cases
Ruark
recommended the following cases, which were investigated, for closure with=
out
disciplinary action:
|
04-025N |
08-001N |
08-052N |
08-071N |
|
07-045N |
08-018R |
08-066R |
08-072N |
|
07-068N |
08-022N |
08-067N |
08-090N |
|
07-071R |
08-027N |
08-068N |
09-015N |
Motion: =
Parker
moved to close the above-referenced cases.
Motion seconded by Henry.
AGENDA ITEM 11D-2 N=
orthern
Nevada building department trip report
Ruark
said the trip report was in the board members’ agenda books.
The board adjourned for lunch.
AGENDA ITEM 11D-1 L=
etter
from Joyen Vakil at MGM Design Group
Ruark
told board members that this letter stemmed from an enforcement case. Board members said they were conc=
erned
about the MGM properties that do not use MGM Design Group and are not unde=
r Mr.
Vakil’s control. They
directed staff to find out who is in charge of design at the other propert=
ies
and educate them about Nevada law.
AGENDA
ITEM 1E-10 Firm na=
me
approval request: SGH Inc.
Garlock recalled the item, tabled earlier in the meeting. Spaulding gave board members the = updated corporate paperwork.
Vote: =
Henry
opposed. All others in favor=
. Motion passes.
AGENDA ITEM 11C &nb=
sp; Discussion
and possible decision regarding board interpretation of NRS
&nb=
sp; =
; &=
nbsp; &nb=
sp; 623.330(1)(d)
and NAC 623.0195
Ruark
told the board that staff is starting to hear of many instances of contrac=
tors
going out of business and not completing construction of projects they have
also designed. Some building
departments have asked this board how to handle these scenarios since the
plans, which were prepared under the contractor’s exemption in NRS
623.330(1)(d), have already been approved and construction is underway.
Board
members said that the exemption (NRS 623.330(1)(d) and NAC 623.0195) is ve=
ry
restrictive and specific in its intent.&n=
bsp;
B=
oard
members went on to say that the phrase “for his own construction
activities” means the entire project, not only portions thereof. Board
members said that the exemption is strictly construed and is not transfera=
ble
to another contractor.
Board
members said that the client is taking a risk if he hires a contractor to
design and build his project. They
said if a client has a partially built project that was designed by a
contractor under the contractor’s exemption, regardless of the perce=
nt
completed, he has two options for proceeding. First, the client may hire an arc=
hitect
or residential designer to design the un-built portions of the project, and
then hire a new contractor to complete the construction. Second, the client can hire a new
contractor to redesign the entire project (built and un-built) and then bu=
ild
it, as allowed in NRS 623.330(1)(d).
Board member said that it is important to get t=
his
information out to the public, especially consumers who may be considering
design-build projects. They
suggested adding a question in the 2009 Blue Book.
Motion:
Motion seconded by
Fermoile
Vote: =
All in
favor. Motion passes.
AGENDA ITEM 13A &nb=
sp; FYI: NCARB press release regarding the
six-month rule for interns who begin
&nb=
sp; =
; &=
nbsp; &nb=
sp; an
NCARB Record on or after July 1, 2009
Spaulding said this item was provided for board
members’ information. =
AGENDA ITEM 13B &nb=
sp; FYI: NCARB Fast Facts October 2008
Spaulding said this item was provided for board
members’ information.
AGENDA ITEM 14A &nb=
sp; Discussion
and possible decision regarding board positions on the proposed
NCIDQ bylaw revisions= to be voted on at the 2008 Council of Delegates meeting on November 14-15, 2008<= o:p>
Spaulding said the two proposed bylaw revisions=
are
benign. The first revises the
definition of “provincial board.” The second makes changes to compl=
y with
other sections of the bylaws.
Board members had no comments on the proposed
revisions.
AGENDA ITEM 14B &nb=
sp; FYI: NCIDQ 2008 board nominees’ =
CVs for
November 2008 Council of
&nb=
sp; =
; &=
nbsp; &nb=
sp; Delegates
meeting in Kansas City
Spaulding said this item was provided for board
members’ information.
AGENDA ITEM 14C &nb=
sp; FYI: BOD meeting minutes for June 2008=
and
July 2008; Council of Delegates
&nb=
sp; =
; &=
nbsp; &nb=
sp; teleconference
meeting minutes for September 2008
Spaulding said this item was provided for board
members’ information.
AGENDA ITEM 14D &nb=
sp; FYI: NCIDQ Council of Delegates meetin=
g, November
14-15, 2008, Kansas City
Spaulding said this item was provided for board
members’ information.
AGENDA ITEM 15=
Spaulding said the
legislative town hall meeting scheduled for northern Nevada is October 29.=
Northern Nevada board members sho=
uld
plan to attend.
Spaulding said that t=
he
letter requesting reappointment of board members Erny, Garlock and Klai wa=
s in
the board agenda books. She =
said
she spoke to the governor’s staff member recently and he said the de=
cisions
for reappointments would be forthcoming.&=
nbsp;
Spaulding reported th= at staff is currently tracking 69 bill draft requests. The list is in the agenda books.<= o:p>
Spaulding said that a=
t the
last meeting, the board requested a letter be sent to churches regarding h=
iring
a licensed design professional. The
draft is now before the board for feedback. Board members offered suggestions=
and
edits. A revised draft will =
be
presented at the January board meeting.&n=
bsp;
Spaulding suggested a=
date
be set for a committee meeting regarding NAC 623.840. The committee members are Erny,
Fermoile, Garlock and Parker. A
tentative meeting was set for November 18.
AGENDA
ITEM 16 Public information re=
port
Spaulding
gave the report, as Hatfield was not in attendance. She said that the board agenda bo=
oks
include the latest copy of =
Focus newsletter, message tracking for the newslett=
er, a
copy of the Ohio board’s newsletter (with a reprint of the
“Don’t be a shill” article) and the latest column in Builder/Architect magazine.
AGENDA
ITEM 17 FYI: Thank you card from Yvonne Lewis =
to the
board
Spaulding said this item was provided for board
members’ information.
Motion: Henry moved to elect George Garlock=
to
be NSBAIDRD Chairman and Bill Snyder to be NSBAIDRD Secretary/Treasurer.
Vote: All in favor; motion passes.
Chairman
Garlock adjourned the meeting at 5:00 p.m.
* * * * * * * * * *
Wednesday, October 15=
, 2005
Chairman Garlock called the meeting to=
order
at 9:05 a.m.
Roll Call: Judith Fermoile, George Garlock, =
Larry
Henry, John Klai, JoAnn Oppenheimer Gore, Derrell Parker and Bill Snyder.<=
span
style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> Greg Erny and Larry Tindall were
excused.
Also in attendance:<=
span
style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> Gina Spaulding, Executive Directo=
r;
Betty Ruark, Chief Investigator; Dianna Hegeduis, Legal Counsel; Monica
Harrison, staff.
Garlock said that items 1E-1, 1E-4, 1E-6 and 1=
F-3
were carried over from yesterday.
He said those items would trail Agenda Item 7.
AGENDA
ITEM 7A Deliberations/Action =
on
applications for registration:
Architectural
Snyder swore in the
following individuals as architects:
1. Paul A. Cavin................................ 6=
284
2. Eduardo Cervanted..... 3. Craig H. Lucas............ <=
span
style=3D'mso-tab-count:1 dotted'>.................. 6286
4. Jagandeep Singh......... .................. 6287
5. Christopher A. Teachman
6. Duan H. M. Tran........ .................. 6289
7. Catherine Wines......... .................. 6290
Motion: =
Fermoile moved to approve the registration of the above
referenced individuals as architects.&nbs=
p;
Motion seconded by Oppenheimer Gore.
Vote: =
All in favor. Motion passes.
AGENDA
ITEM 7B Deliberations/Action =
on
applications for registration:
Registered interior design
Snyder swore in the
following individuals as registered interior designers:
1.
Ramona K. Burns.............=
............. 155-ID
2.
Kimberly A. Daoust..........=
............. 156-ID
3.
Ja E. Haddad................=
................. 157-ID
4.
Kara M. Lohrengel...........=
.............. 158-ID
5.
Joseph Sacco................=
................. 159-ID
6.
Andrea Vollf................=
................. 160-ID
7.
Christina C. dos Santos.....=
............. =
161-ID
8.
Sheila M. Glennie...........=
............... 162-ID
Motion: =
Parker moved to approve the registration of the above
referenced individuals as registered interior designers. Motion seconded by Henry Vote: =
All in
favor. Motion passes.
Garlock asked if the new registrants =
had any
comments about the registration process.&=
nbsp;
No comments were offered.
AGENDA
ITEM 1E-1 Firm name approval request:
Andrea Vollf Interiors
Motion: Henry
moved to approve the firm name “Andrea Vollf Interiors.”
Motion seconded by Sndyer.
Vote: =
All in
favor. Motion passes.
AGENDA
ITEM 1E-4 Firm name approval request:
Js Interiors Group
Motion: Klai
moved to approve the firm name “Js Interiors Group.” Motion secon=
ded by
Fermoile.
Vote: =
All in
favor. Motion passes.
AGENDA
ITEM 1E-6 Firm name approval request:
KML Designs
Motion: =
Parker
moved to approve the firm name “KML Designs.” Motion seconded by Fermoile.
Vote: =
All in
favor. Motion passes.
AGENDA
ITEM 1F-3 Firm registration approval request: TANDEM NEVADA INC.<=
span
style=3D'font-size:11.0pt'>
Motion:
Spaulding cautioned =
that
the registrant must be in responsible control of the regulated work.
Vote: =
All in
favor. Motion passes.
AGENDA ITEM 8<=
/u> Presentat=
ion
of audit results for Fiscal Year End 2008 – Christy Andersen,
=
; &=
nbsp; &nb=
sp; CPA,
Bradshaw, Smith & Co., LLP
Christy Andersen, accountant for Bradshaw, Smith
& Co., LLP, presented the FY 2007-08 audit results to the board.
Vote: All in favor; motion
passes.
AGENDA ITEM 5 &nbs=
p; Public
hearing regarding LCB file R154-08, possible adoption of regulations
&nb=
sp; =
; &=
nbsp; &nb=
sp; pertaining
to NAC 623 regarding continuing education requirements
A public hearing was=
held to
solicit comments on proposed adoption of regulations pertaining to NAC 623
regarding continuing education requirements. Spaulding said the workshop for t=
hese
proposed changes was held on October 14, 2008.
There was no public =
present
to offer comments, nor were any written comments received prior to the pub=
lic
hearing.
Motion: =
Klai
moved to approve LCB file R154-08.
Motion seconded by Oppenheimer Gore.
Vote: =
Fermoile,
Garlock, Klai, Oppenheimer Gore, Parker and Snyder. Henry opposed. Motion
passes.
AGENDA
ITEM 10 Discussion and possible decision regarding application of Robert B=
rown
for
=
; &=
nbsp; &nb=
sp; architectural
reciprocal registration
Spaulding said this i=
s a
case where there has been disciplinary action taken against the applicant,=
as
well as possible character issues.
Mr. Brown appeared before the board and answered questions about the
disciplinary and court actions.
Mr. Brown answered bo=
ard
member questions regarding his previous disciplinary and court actions.
Motion: =
Parker
moved to approve the reciprocal registration for Robert Brown. Motion seconded by Fermoile. <=
span
style=3D'font-size:11.5pt;mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt'>Vote: All in favor. Motion passes.
AGENDA ITEM 12=
Formal contested
administrative hearing – In the matter of Nolan Carl, Case
Nos.
06-028N and 07-046N, consideration and adjudication of the complaint alleg=
ing
violations of NRS 623.023, NRS 623.360 and NRS 623.365
A formal hearing was held in the matter of Nolan
Carl, Case Nos. 06-028N and 07-046N.
Mr. Carl does not have a certificate of registration issued by this
board. The respondent was al=
leged
to have violated NRS 623.360(1)(a) by holding himself out to the public or
soliciting business as an architect in Nevada, NRS 623.360(1)(b) by advert=
ising
or putting out a device to the public that he was an architect, or that he=
was
otherwise qualified to engage in the practice of architecture, and NRS
623.360(1)(c) by engaging in the practice of architecture. All violations are alleged on four
separate projects.
In attendance:
David Newton, Counsel to the Board
Dianna Hegeduis, Prosecuting Attorney
Witnesses for the prosecution:
Richard Threlfall
Valery Volostnykh
Laura Bach, NSBAIDRD Investigator
The counts brought against Nolan Carl are as
follows:
Dolphin Court Day Spa
By holding himself out to the general public as=
if
he is qualified to practice architecture, soliciting business as an archit=
ect,
and practicing architecture without a certificate of registration issued b=
y the
board, respondent has violated NRS 623.360(1)(a)(b) and (c).
Testimony was heard and evidence was introduced=
into
the record, which substantiated the allegations against Respondent Nolan C=
arl.
Motion: K=
lai
moved that the State had proven allegations 9 through 14 of the complaint.=
Motion seconded by Parker.
Vote: =
All in
favor. Motion passes.
Paseo Verde Project
By holding himself out to the general public as=
if
he is qualified to practice architecture, soliciting business as an archit=
ect,
and practicing architecture without a certificate of registration issued b=
y the
board, respondent has violated NRS 623.360(1)(a)(b) and (c).
Testimony was heard and evidence was introduced=
into
the record, which substantiated the allegations against Respondent Nolan C=
arl.
Motion: K=
lai
moved that the State had proven allegations 15 and 17 through 20 of the
complaint. Motion seconded by
Snyder.
Vote: =
All in
favor. Motion passes.
Stetson Ranch Project
By holding himself out to the general public as=
if
he is qualified to practice architecture, soliciting business as an archit=
ect,
and practicing architecture without a certificate of registration issued b=
y the
board, respondent has violated NRS 623.360(1)(a)(b) and (c).
Testimony was heard and evidence was introduced=
into
the record, which substantiated the allegations against Respondent Nolan C=
arl.
Motion: K=
lai
moved that the State had proven allegations 16 through 20 of the
complaint. Motion seconded by
Snyder.
Vote: =
All in
favor. Motion passes.
Maryland Parkway at Levi Project
By holding himself out to the general public as=
if
he is qualified to practice architecture, soliciting business as an archit=
ect,
and practicing architecture without a certificate of registration issued b=
y the
board, respondent has violated NRS 623.360(1)(a)(b) and (c).
Testimony was heard and evidence was introduced=
into
the record, which substantiated the allegations against Respondent Nolan C=
arl.
Motion: K=
lai
moved that the State had proven allegations 21 through 24 of the
complaint. Motion seconded by
Snyder.
Vote: =
All in
favor. Motion passes.
Motion: =
Klai
moved to impose an administrative fine of $40,000 ($10,000 per project).
Vote: =
All in
favor. Motion passes.
Motion: =
Klai
moved to refer the matter to the District Attorney’s Office for crim=
inal
prosecution. Motion seconded=
by
Parker.
Vote: =
All in
favor. Motion passes.
Motion: =
Klai
moved to refer the matter to the Attorney General’s Office for pursu=
it of
an injunction and to order Mr. Carl to pay all costs and fees associated w=
ith
the investigation and hearing.
Motion seconded by Oppenheimer Gore.
Vote: =
All in
favor. Motion passes.
AGENDA ITEM 19 Items for future agen=
da
·
Future
implementation of IDEP
·
Discussion on=
how
to best protect the public against unlicensed individuals doing residential
design and regulated areas of residential interior design
AGENDA ITEM 20 Public comment
There
was no public comment.
Chairman Garlock adjourned the meeting=
at 3:05
p.m.
|
______________________________ William Snyder, Secretary/Treasurer |
_________________________________ Gina Spaulding, Executive Director |