Laserfiche WebLink
w <br /> i <br /> Through their two meetings ago and comments from attorney Dalton for <br /> Mr, Richard!. He researched those comments and found that he did <br /> concur with those comments regarding carbo's not considered an <br /> operator. There was a fine line because they do so-called operate a food <br /> establishment, which was serviced by an on-site septic. But, they are not <br /> considered an operator because they do not have direct and full charge <br /> of the operation of the septic system even though they do contribute to <br /> it. They were a percentage of the owner because they were pert of a <br /> commercial condominium association Tine V does defer to the master <br /> deeds of the condominium associations. The association itself would be <br /> the owner. But, they did not individually pick out nor do they set the <br /> percentages of ownership, which were set by the master deed. Title V <br /> did defer to that within the regulation. It was his recommendation that <br /> the board vote to rescind the order letter against Mr. Richardi and <br /> carbo's because they were not an owner or an operator of the entire <br /> septic system unto itself. That was hover their regulation was worded. <br /> Mr. Ball stated that they would start from there. <br /> Mr. Santos made a motion to rescind the order letter against Mr. Richard! <br /> and carbols because they were not an owner or an operator of the entire <br /> septic system unto itself. That was how their regulation was worded. Mr. <br /> Ball seconded the motion. Motion passed. <br /> Mr. Harrington continued that the other part of his comments were that <br /> he felt that the BOH does issue carbo's a food establishment permit and <br /> license as a facility. Therefore, they have the ability under the board's <br /> jurisdiction if they were to change their seating. If they were to increase <br /> their seating without the permission of the board then they could cite <br /> there. Part of the federal food code that was adopted-by the state says <br /> that because they do operate at a facility that is serviced by an-on-site <br /> septic, They had to operate that septic within the law. That law was still <br /> Title V. They could not add seats because it did affect the septic and <br /> they did have direct jurisdiction over them through the federal food code. <br /> On two occasions they had documented that they had expanded their <br /> seating beyond the approved seating. He felt that the board had direct <br /> jurisdiction over the condominium association because the condominium <br /> association in itself is an owner of the septic system, They could cite the <br /> association that carbols was a part of so he thought that there was some <br /> F direct jurisdiction also. He didn't think that the 600 GPD applied to them <br /> s an individual owner because they were part of the association. <br /> Mr. Ball asked.if someone was present from Deer crossings <br /> Mr. Michael McGrath was civil engineer and land surveyor who worked <br /> 2 <br /> i <br />