Good Morning Everyone,
I appreciate the recent exchanges following our communications last week.
Attached as a PDF and below for easy access is my formal recap, settlement proposal, and request for clarification regarding jurisdictional scope, statutory obligations, and public safety concerns arising from the issues previously documented.
Given the serious implications for regulatory integrity and citizen protection, I trust that this matter will receive the appropriate level of review and response.
I remain available for any clarifications or further discussions deemed necessary.
Thanks,
Robert J. Pillow
2 Squares Solutions
121 S Orange Ave
Suite 1500
Orlando, FL 32801
rob@2sqsol.com
office: 407-536-WEB3
mobile: 407-340-6100
To Whom It May Concern:
Recap and Reset
One of the biggest issues leading up to Monday afternoon, combined with an unprecedented chain of events that came at me in rapid succession, was a matter of expectations.
When I finally reached the Director of Real Estate level at the FLDBPR, I believed this was the person who would say, "Enough," and help move things toward a proactive solution. That did not happen.
I had the same high expectations when my concerns reached the General Counsel, Robert Earhardt, and even more so when they reached the Office of Inspector General and the Inspector General himself. Instead, I encountered the exact same playbook I had already experienced with Orange County — deflection, minimization, and a lack of true engagement.
Subsequently, Monday was necessary.
Everything that has happened since Wednesday is more in line with what I originally expected to happen — not necessarily a full resolution, but at least a shift toward effective communication.
With even the slightest movement toward engagement, my initial instinct was to continue pressing aggressively. However, I made a conscious decision to focus on constructive resolution rather than immediate disruption. I recognized that actions such as alerting the media in Tallahassee, while available, would likely have been more disruptive than productive at this stage.
I appreciate that, in the aftermath, there has been some acknowledgment that this situation — stretching almost sixteen months — has not been easy for anyone involved.
I respectfully request that your office refrain from applying an artificially narrow scope of review that would inadvertently exclude misconduct or regulatory gaps that Florida law was specifically designed to address.
Clarification Regarding Early Information
I also recognize that much of the difficulty early on arose from the fact that critical information was either withheld or misrepresented by Orange County officials and their affiliated property management companies.
Throughout much of this process, the Chief Building Inspector (CBI) appeared to control the flow of information, presenting a narrative that minimized regulatory violations. At the same time, I was relentlessly pursuing every thread of information available, even though many leads were tainted by incomplete or inaccurate disclosures.
It was not until very recently — less than two weeks ago — that I uncovered the legally defective Notice of Commencement (NOC) tied to the project. This discovery materially changed the factual and legal landscape, revealing clear statutory violations that had previously been obscured.
I also recognize that the Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation (DBPR) operates under a strict set of statutory and regulatory constraints. Even when agency staff may have recognized potential issues, they are understandably limited in their ability to provide legal advice, interpret statutes for private individuals, or direct citizens toward specific evidentiary findings.
While I believe some at the DBPR suspected the underlying issues — particularly concerning the NOC — I understand that they could not simply tell me to "look here" or "investigate this."
Accordingly, I want to make clear that I do not fault the DBPR for early limitations. Instead, I appreciate the professional boundaries within which the agency must operate. Now that the statutory violations and underlying factual record are fully visible, I trust that your offices will take appropriate action consistent with your mission and statutory duties.
Settlement Proposal
Following this reset, I am prepared to resolve this matter amicably under the following conditions:
Immediate initiation of a formal investigation and temporary suspension by the DBPR and OIG into the following licensed individuals and entities:
- The Orange County Chief Building Inspector (CBI) – Thomas Hetherman
- The Licensed Real Estate Brokerage – Olde Town Brokers
- The Licensed Real Estate Agent/Property Manager
- Christina Gabrielle
- Maria Blanchard
- Derek Premo
- The Licensed Architect Contractor/Property Owner – Ryan Young Interstruct Design + Build Orlando
Immediate suspension of the licenses involved pending the outcome of the investigation to ensure public protection during the review process.
As part of the investigation, I will be permitted to submit up to 25 specific questions regarding regulatory compliance, licensure conduct, and procedural failures, with responses provided under the investigation record.
Compensation to be provided at my established Federal Court expert witness rate for the time and contributions necessary to assist in identifying regulatory gaps, procedural failures, and public safety risks.
No further public exposure or escalation will occur regarding the FLDBPR and OIG while the investigation is conducted in good faith and with full cooperation.
An agreement by the DBPR and OIG to publicly support or assist in promoting a Change.org petition proposing reforms to Florida property management laws, particularly related to rental housing compliance, licensing oversight, and tenant protections. https://chng.it/c7YFr62Vhw
These terms are narrowly tailored to ensure public safety, restore confidence in regulatory oversight, and avoid unnecessary further action.
Scenarios for Consideration
Scenario 1: Constitutional Equal Protection and Broad Interpretation
If the Equal Protection Clause is to mean anything in the modern regulatory environment, then citizens — including the thousands of families living in rental housing — deserve equal and broad application of laws and regulations designed to protect them.
If the broadest, citizen-centered interpretation of the applicable laws, administrative codes, and building standards authorizes oversight, then your office clearly has jurisdiction to investigate systemic issues impacting public safety.
The Equal Protection Clause cannot be applied selectively, and where vulnerable populations — including tens of thousands of infants and young families — are exposed to regulatory gaps, the law demands a response.
Scenario 2: Systemic Public Safety Failures Despite Legal Compliance
Even if all prior determinations are legally correct, then we have uncovered a massive loophole that currently affects tens of thousands of Floridians.
If everything was done perfectly legally, and no agency or official can be faulted under current laws, then how do we explain the following well-documented facts:
- No valid postal address issued for 14 weeks after occupancy.
- No E911 registration for emergency services for 14 weeks after occupancy.
- No trash service or cart delivery due to the lack of a valid Certificate of Occupancy for over 6 weeks.
- Repeatedly ignored inquiries to the individuals and departments responsible, even as listed on official Orange County Fast Track websites.
- If no wrongdoing occurred, then clearly the law is inadequate to prevent real-world harm. And that, by itself, demands action.
Scenario 3: Purpose of the FLDBPR and OIG
Even if no "blame" can be assigned to any individual today, the clear purpose of the Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation and the Office of Inspector General is:
To identify gaps,
Investigate failures, and
Prevent future harm — not to shield systemic flaws by narrow technical readings.
Florida's property and building laws, many dating back to the 1990s, were written for a predominantly hard copy industry. Today, modern technological advancements in building, licensing, and occupancy tracking have exposed vulnerabilities that the existing regulatory framework has not kept up with.
Through my extensive documentation and persistence over 16 months, these issues have now been brought to light.
The real test is not whether existing laws can technically excuse these failures — but whether your offices are committed to investigating and correcting them to protect the citizens of Florida.
Public Commitments and Mission Obligations
Further, I note that Inspector General Rodney MacKinnon has publicly stated:
"It is good to see that our state will be continuing to invest in Florida’s youngest citizens and their families."
Additionally, your agencies' official missions reinforce the expectation of action:
Florida DBPR Mission: "License efficiently and regulate fairly."
DBPR Office of Inspector General Mission: "Promote accountability, integrity, and efficiency within the Department of Business and Professional Regulation." (Florida Statutes Section 20.055)
Florida Real Estate Commission Mission: "Protect the public by regulating real estate practitioners in a fair and unbiased manner."
The issues I have raised — particularly those affecting rental properties housing tens of thousands of Florida’s infants and young families — squarely implicate these public commitments and legal obligations.
For context, I started the public petition on March 4, 2023(https://chng.it/c7YFr62Vhw because I recognized broader systemic problems beyond my own situation.
My perspective was shaped by my professional experience working with over 25 VA hospitals nationwide, as well as my volunteer service with Meals on Wheels and my position on the Board of Directors for the Central Florida Disability Chamber of Commerce.
These experiences gave me valuable insight into the challenges faced by elderly individuals, veterans, and persons living with disabilities — many of whom are among Florida’s most vulnerable renters.
As the missions of the DBPR and OIG emphasize public protection and regulatory integrity, I trust that your office will review these concerns consistent with both the letter and the spirit of Florida Statutes §§ 455.225, 468.604, and 20.055.
Failure to act would represent a departure from both statutory responsibilities and public trust.
Closing
I remain willing to resolve this matter efficiently and amicably in the interest of public trust and citizen protection.
During my research over the weekend, I was able to make a new connection that had not been apparent previously. Specifically, on March 6, 2023, after submitting two technical questions to the Chief Building Inspector regarding the Notice of Commencement, an eviction notice was placed on my door only a few hours later. I trust that any review of this matter will consider the totality of the circumstances presented.
I respectfully note that any decision to narrow the scope beyond the clear obligations imposed by Florida law may become a matter of interest to external oversight authorities.
Sincerely,
Robert J. Pillow – Former and First Resident at 2228 Vine Street Orlando, Fl 32806
rob@2sqsol.com or 407-340-6100
From: rob 2sqsol.com
Sent: Friday, April 4, 2025 10:02 AM
To: MacKinnon, Rodney <Rodney.MacKinnon@myfloridalicense.com>
Cc: Noble, Katie <Katie.Noble@myfloridalicense.com>; Ehrhardt, Robert <Robert.Ehrhardt@myfloridalicense.com>; McGinnis, Katy <Katy.McGinnis@myfloridalicense.com>; Bailey, Maggie <Maggie.Bailey@myfloridalicense.com>
Subject: RE: OIG CASE #2025290-REF - Urgent Request For Immediate Phone Call For Clarification!
Mr. MacKinnon,
Thank you for formally confirming the closure of your office’s review. I appreciate your time and responses throughout this matter.
I respectfully note that while the case may be closed for investigative purposes, the pending public records request remains legally active. Closure of a complaint does not terminate the statutory obligation under Florida’s public records laws, and I appreciate the inclusion of the Custodian of Records to ensure compliance.
If preferred, I am happy to submit a new, fully documented public records request for clarity. However, for me to simply accept the facts as stated, I do need to see the records supporting those conclusions as quickly as possible.
Can you please advise when I can expect to receive the public records?
Additionally, since you have referred the matter back to the Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation (FLDBPR), when should I anticipate a formal response or next communication from their office?
Finally, I would note for the record:
If, through this process, a gap, loophole, or procedural failure in the permitting, inspection, or licensing system has been uncovered, it would seem that addressing it — rather than declining review — would fall squarely within the public interest and the ethical obligations of licensed legal professionals in the State of Florida. I am not suggesting malicious intent by your office, but respectfully, systemic issues deserve attention, not dismissal.
One final question:
Who is the General Counsel for the Office of Inspector General (OIG)?
If they have been included in the communications, I am unaware of their identity and would appreciate clarification for my records.
Full transparency remains the best path forward to ensure that any statutory, regulatory, or procedural failures can be properly addressed before they harm anyone else.
Thank you again for your time, consideration, and attention to these important matters.
Thanks,
Robert J. Pillow
2 Squares Solutions
121 S Orange Ave
Suite 1500
Orlando, FL 32801
rob@2sqsol.com
office: 407-536-WEB3
mobile: 407-340-6100
From: MacKinnon, Rodney <Rodney.MacKinnon@myfloridalicense.com>
Sent: Friday, April 4, 2025 9:46 AM
To: rob 2sqsol.com <rob@2sqsol.com>
Cc: Noble, Katie <Katie.Noble@myfloridalicense.com>
Subject: FW: OIG CASE #2025290-REF - Urgent Request For Immediate Phone Call For Clarification!
Good morning Mr. Pillow,
You can consider my office’s position formally closed now. I’m sorry we couldn’t resolve this issue for you. For your public records request, I’m looping in our Custodian of Public Records and Public Records Coordinator.
RJM
Rodney J. MacKinnon
Inspector General
Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation
2601 S. Blair Stone Road
Tallahassee, FL 32399
(850)-414-6700
Please Note: Florida has a very broad public records law. Most written communications to or from state employees regarding state business are public records available to the public and media upon request. Your email communications may therefore be subject to public disclosure.
From: rob 2sqsol.com <rob@2sqsol.com>
Sent: Friday, April 4, 2025 9:31 AM
To: MacKinnon, Rodney <Rodney.MacKinnon@myfloridalicense.com>; Ehrhardt, Robert <Robert.Ehrhardt@myfloridalicense.com>; McGinnis, Katy <Katy.McGinnis@myfloridalicense.com>; Bailey, Maggie <Maggie.Bailey@myfloridalicense.com>
Cc: Collier, Matthew <Matthew.Collier@myfloridalicense.com>
Subject: RE: OIG CASE #2025290-REF - Urgent Request For Immediate Phone Call For Clarification!
[NOTICE] This message comes from a system outside of DBPR. Please exercise caution when clicking on links and/or providing sensitive information. If you have concerns, please contact your Knowledge Champion or the DBPR Helpdesk.
Good Morning Mr. MacKinnon,
Thank you again for your reply and for the time you have dedicated to this matter. I do genuinely appreciate it.
That said, we have no choice other than to break free of the loop we are currently in — where I raise legitimate questions, receive a denial, and then have my subsequent requests for clarification and documentation effectively ignored.
If your office truly wishes to bring this to a close, it is very simple:
I respectfully need the requested documents, case files, and legal basis for your determinations, so that I can properly assess my next steps without repeating the same flawed assumptions to another agency.
I want to be clear:
My legal basis is sound.
I have responded quickly, consistently, and with a willingness to cooperate.
I have not wavered, and I am not seeking arguments — only the transparency I am entitled to as a citizen of Florida.
If all the experts involved expect me to simply accept their opinions as final, then it is only fair that I be provided the information and internal communications that formed the foundation for those opinions. Otherwise, I am being asked to trust conclusions without the evidence that supports them.
Accordingly, I am setting a final deadline:
If the requested public records, legal clarifications, and documents are not provided by Monday at 5:00 PM Eastern Time, I will consider your office’s position formally closed, and I will escalate this matter through the appropriate legal and regulatory channels without further notice.
I am not looking for a battle — only for closure through full transparency.
Thank you again for your time and consideration.
Thanks,
Robert J. Pillow
2 Squares Solutions
121 S Orange Ave
Suite 1500
Orlando, FL 32801
rob@2sqsol.com
office: 407-536-WEB3
mobile: 407-340-6100
From: MacKinnon, Rodney <Rodney.MacKinnon@myfloridalicense.com>
Sent: Friday, April 4, 2025 9:15 AM
To: rob 2sqsol.com <rob@2sqsol.com>; Ehrhardt, Robert <Robert.Ehrhardt@myfloridalicense.com>; McGinnis, Katy <Katy.McGinnis@myfloridalicense.com>; Bailey, Maggie <Maggie.Bailey@myfloridalicense.com>
Cc: Collier, Matthew <Matthew.Collier@myfloridalicense.com>
Subject: RE: OIG CASE #2025290-REF - Urgent Request For Immediate Phone Call For Clarification!
Good morning Mr. Pillow,
Once again, my office has no authority over any of the violations you’re citing or any Orange County building inspectors. I must defer to the Department as to whether or not they do, but their legal reasoning appears to be sound.
Your complaint with my office is closed and I am not investigating this issue further.
RJM
Rodney J. MacKinnon
Inspector General
Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation
2601 S. Blair Stone Road
Tallahassee, FL 32399
(850)-414-6700
Please Note: Florida has a very broad public records law. Most written communications to or from state employees regarding state business are public records available to the public and media upon request. Your email communications may therefore be subject to public disclosure.
From: rob 2sqsol.com <rob@2sqsol.com>
Sent: Friday, April 4, 2025 9:00 AM
To: Ehrhardt, Robert <Robert.Ehrhardt@myfloridalicense.com>; MacKinnon, Rodney <Rodney.MacKinnon@myfloridalicense.com>; McGinnis, Katy <Katy.McGinnis@myfloridalicense.com>; Bailey, Maggie <Maggie.Bailey@myfloridalicense.com>
Cc: Collier, Matthew <Matthew.Collier@myfloridalicense.com>
Subject: RE: OIG CASE #2025290-REF - Urgent Request For Immediate Phone Call For Clarification!
Importance: High
[NOTICE] This message comes from a system outside of DBPR. Please exercise caution when clicking on links and/or providing sensitive information. If you have concerns, please contact your Knowledge Champion or the DBPR Helpdesk.
Good Morning,
Thank you again for your recent responses, but I must be very clear — this situation is far from resolved, and it is reaching the point of no return.
Over the past 16 months, I have tried every administrative, regulatory, and legal channel available to resolve a situation that no citizen should ever have been forced into. Instead of corrective action, I have been met with ambiguous statements, jurisdictional deflections, and vague references to "procedural gaps."
Your most recent communications indicate that despite overwhelming evidence of statutory and regulatory failures, the FLDBPR and OIG are declining to act. I respectfully demand final clarification before proceeding with formal complaints to the Florida Commission on Ethics, escalation to elected officials, bar complaints, and public exposure.
Clarification Demanded:
Are you formally acknowledging that there were regulatory failures — but declining to take action because a local government passed a Final Inspection?
Are you officially stating that the following do not warrant further review, investigation, or referral by the OIG or FLDBPR?
A legally invalid Notice of Commencement (NOC)
No Certificate of Occupancy (CO) at lease signing
No trash service for 6+ weeks
No valid postal address or e911 registration for 14 weeks
No Change of Use Permit for a storage shed converted into residential use
A Failed Eviction Attempt for “Making Too Much Noice Trying To Get Answers” after raising concerns to Orange County, Olde Town Brokers and Ryan Young the owner and also licensed by the FLDBPR.
Violations of:
Florida Statute §713.13 (NOC requirements)
Florida Statute §83.51 (Landlord compliance)
Florida Statute §468.604 (Public Officer Misconduct)
Florida Building Code §111.1 (CO requirement)
Are you stating that even if a Final Inspection is passed under questionable or illegal circumstances, the FLDBPR and OIG have no power to act against licensed individuals or officials involved?
Critical New Information:
I must also formally point out that there is an active lawsuit pending in Orange County naming both the Chief Building Inspector and the Division of Building Safety — the very individuals and agency responsible for approving the unlawful final inspection tied to this matter.
Your office is now stating that even if government officials pass Final Inspections improperly, the FLDBPR — the very agency created to regulate them — cannot or will not act.
If this is truly your position, it is a catastrophic failure of the regulatory system, leaving every citizen of Florida vulnerable to misconduct by local building officials.
If you are correct, then you are publicly admitting that licensed government officials can commit regulatory misconduct without fear of accountability — if they approve their own work.
Your Own Procedural Gaps:
In March 2024, I contacted the U.S. Postal Service Office of Inspector General about the address and mail delivery issues. The USPS forwarded the matter to their internal Consumer Affairs Office — because they too recognized procedural failures.
When my local State Representative's office (Rep. Anna Eskamani) contacted Orange County, the response was:
"There were errors, that were not errors, but procedural gaps and no one in the County has ever seen anything like this before and we are all learning a lot."
That statement is now part of the public record and will be included in all forthcoming litigation and ethics complaints.
My Position:
The rage I felt earlier this week after 16 months of abuse was released, and I am now more focused than ever, your plan to deflect and destroy my momentum has backfired spectacularly!
In the last 9 days, I have closed two major business deals, including equity stakes in CaddyTime (a Greg Norman-backed venture) and a 10% Ownership of Jesse James Golf’s e-commerce platform. I am stabilizing financially and fully prepared for a sustained legal battle.
The window to resolve this amicably is rapidly closing.
Last Offer Before Escalation:
I am still willing to offer a path forward:
A mutually binding NDA to allow confidential discussion.
An agreement to resolve the matter without further public exposure or litigation.
If you wish to discuss this, you must respond in writing by Monday at 5:00 PM Eastern.
Otherwise, I will proceed with:
Filing a formal ethics complaint with the Florida Commission on Ethics
Filing bar complaints against all licensed attorneys involved
Including the FLDBPR and OIG as primary defendants in the pending lawsuit
Full public exposure via dedicated media channels
If everything you have stated so far is 100% lawful and true, then it appears I have uncovered a major loophole in your enforcement systems, the Florida Building Code, and state regulatory oversight — one that places every citizen at risk.
If that is the case, your duty should be to fix the loophole, not ignore it.
Final Request:
Please confirm in writing by Monday at 5:00 PM Eastern:
Whether you are officially closing DBPR/OIG Case #2025290-REF
Whether you are declining all further review and enforcement
Whether you acknowledge the active litigation and its implications
Whether you intend to take any corrective action at all
Thank you for your time and attention.
Thanks,
Robert J. Pillow
2 Squares Solutions
121 S Orange Ave
Suite 1500
Orlando, FL 32801
rob@2sqsol.com
office: 407-536-WEB3
mobile: 407-340-6100
From: rob 2sqsol.com
Sent: Thursday, April 3, 2025 11:57 AM
To: Ehrhardt, Robert <Robert.Ehrhardt@myfloridalicense.com>; MacKinnon, Rodney <Rodney.MacKinnon@myfloridalicense.com>; McGinnis, Katy <Katy.McGinnis@myfloridalicense.com>; Bailey, Maggie <Maggie.Bailey@myfloridalicense.com>
Cc: Collier, Matthew <Matthew.Collier@myfloridalicense.com>
Subject: RE: OIG CASE #2025290-REF - Urgent Request For Immediate Phone Call For Clarification!
Importance: High
Good Morning,
Thank you for your response and acknowledgment of prior communications. I will extend a sincere apology for my tone on Monday — this has now stretched into 16 months of circular reasoning and agency deflection, despite what is clearly a systemic regulatory failure with severe consequences for a Florida resident.
However, your current response raises even more legal and procedural concerns, particularly around the lack of transparency and the absence of a detailed statutory explanation for your findings. To be clear, I have submitted multiple public records requests related to this investigation and have yet to receive the documents or analysis that allegedly support the determination of “legal insufficiency.”
I am respectfully requesting:
A specific legal basis for why each component of my complaint was deemed outside the Department’s jurisdiction;
A formal explanation of why the statutory violations outlined below are considered non-actionable;
Immediate delivery of any records or internal communications used to justify the decision referenced in your response.
Key Violations – Not Subject to Local Discretion:
No Certificate of Occupancy at Lease Signing
Lease executed: December 20, 2023
CO issued: January 25, 2024
Conclusion: Residential lease executed and occupied without legally required CO – in clear violation of Florida Building Code §111.1 and F.S. §83.51
No Mail Service for Over 6 Weeks
No USPS-recognized address or postal delivery
Congressman Frost’s office had to intervene
Conclusion: Denial of basic utilities essential to habitability, supported by relevant case law
No Trash Service for 6+ Weeks
Orange County Solid Waste cited the lack of a CO
Conclusion: Public health and habitability failure, directly tied to unlicensed occupancy
No Change of Use Permit Filed
A detached shed converted into a residential unit
No documentation of the legally required change of use filing
Conclusion: Unlawful occupancy and potential code evasion
Statutorily Defective Notice of Commencement (NOC)
Filed by former contractor/property owner
New contractor listed but not signed; never corrected
Conclusion: Clear violation of F.S. §713.13 — a state-level statute, not a local procedural matter
You are the licensing authority.
If you are stating that this situation — including licensed real estate professionals leasing an uninhabitable and unpermitted property — is outside your enforcement purview, then please provide:
A detailed legal explanation of how a department charged with licensing and regulating real estate, construction, and permitting professionals can ignore this level of failure;
Confirmation that, per FLDBPR and OIG, there will be no investigation, no enforcement, and no referral based on the information I’ve submitted;
An acknowledgment that I may cite this determination as final in future court proceedings and public records.
This is not a matter of blame or bad luck — this is the system breaking down at every level, and no citizen should be forced into court simply to understand who is responsible.
You’ve stated that my recourse is judicial. That’s now in progress. However, your agency’s refusal to take any ownership or offer transparency in the face of documented violations — some of which you license directly — is now part of the story too.
I will be adding this exchange to my ongoing case in Orange County and will be issuing subpoenas to all relevant individuals. If your office refuses to cooperate now, I will simply move the inquiry to the courtroom and to the court of public opinion — both of which are growing more interested by the day.
Please consider this a final opportunity to provide clarity and demonstrate the integrity your agency claims to uphold.
Thanks,
Robert J. Pillow
2 Squares Solutions
121 S Orange Ave
Suite 1500
Orlando, FL 32801
rob@2sqsol.com
office: 407-536-WEB3
mobile: 407-340-6100
From: Ehrhardt, Robert <Robert.Ehrhardt@myfloridalicense.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 3, 2025 11:17 AM
To: rob 2sqsol.com <rob@2sqsol.com>; MacKinnon, Rodney <Rodney.MacKinnon@myfloridalicense.com>; McGinnis, Katy <Katy.McGinnis@myfloridalicense.com>; Bailey, Maggie <Maggie.Bailey@myfloridalicense.com>
Cc: Collier, Matthew <Matthew.Collier@myfloridalicense.com>
Subject: RE: OIG CASE #2025290-REF - Urgent Request For Immediate Phone Call For Clarification!
Mr. Pillow,
I addressed most of these issues over the phone on 3/21. I attempted to address them further during our follow up phone call on 3/31.
I understand that this situation has been extremely difficult for you and truly wish I could help you find a desirable resolution. However, each of your complaints were found legally insufficient. The complaints against the real estate agents were found legally insufficient because the Department of Real Estate has no jurisdiction over landlord tenant disputes. Your complaint against Mr. Hetherman was found legally insufficient because the Board of Building Code Administrators does not have the power to impose its judgment on County officials if the county in question maintains that the county inspection process was followed because there is not a statewide standard for the process of approving building inspections.
If you have any additional, fresh evidence, the department will reconsider your complaints.
Robert L. Ehrhardt
Deputy General Counsel for Professions
Office of General Counsel
Florida Department of Business and
Professional Regulation
Phone: 850.717.1789
From: rob 2sqsol.com <rob@2sqsol.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 3, 2025 8:32 AM
To: MacKinnon, Rodney <Rodney.MacKinnon@myfloridalicense.com>; Ehrhardt, Robert <Robert.Ehrhardt@myfloridalicense.com>; McGinnis, Katy <Katy.McGinnis@myfloridalicense.com>; Bailey, Maggie <Maggie.Bailey@myfloridalicense.com>
Cc: Collier, Matthew <Matthew.Collier@myfloridalicense.com>
Subject: RE: OIG CASE #2025290-REF - Urgent Request For Immediate Phone Call For Clarification!
Importance: High
[NOTICE] This message comes from a system outside of DBPR. Please exercise caution when clicking on links and/or providing sensitive information. If you have concerns, please contact your Knowledge Champion or the DBPR Helpdesk.
Mr. MacKinnon and FLDBPR Counsel,
This is the most direct path to resolving this issue and, frankly, the fastest way to end my continued involvement — provide your legal and statutory justification for refusing to investigate this matter, despite the detailed evidence submitted. As a resident of the State of Florida and a pro se litigant in an active case in Orange County, I am entitled to direct answers and transparency from your office.
Thank you for your recent response but let me be clear — this matter is not resolved. After more than 15 months of silence, deflection, and passing of responsibility between agencies, I cannot accept ambiguity from those tasked with protecting the public. What I’ve encountered is not just bureaucratic inefficiency — it amounts to systemic gaslighting.
The DBPR and OIG are responsible for ensuring the professionals you license comply with state law. Instead, your responses have amounted to: “Yes, something went wrong — but it’s not our problem.” That is not acceptable.
I am asking for a clear and documented response to the following:
Are you acknowledging that regulatory or procedural failures occurred but still declining to take investigative or enforcement action?
Is it the official position of DBPR and OIG that, despite the documented issues below, no further review, action, or referral is warranted?
Summary of Documented Violations:
Notice of Commencement (NOC):
Filed by a contractor no longer associated with the project
New contractor listed, but not signed or legally executed
No correction filed, despite permitting documents stating: “New contractor must file NOC”
Habitability and occupancy violations:
No Certificate of Occupancy (CO) at time of lease signing (CO issued Jan 25, 2025 — lease began Dec 20, 2023)
No trash service for over 6 weeks
No valid address or e911 registration for 14 weeks
Final Issuance Review Completed 14 weeks after moving into 2218 Vine Street
No record of a required Change of Use permit for converting a detached storage unit into a residential dwelling
FLDBPR-licensed property manager and broker failed to ensure habitability or compliance with CO requirements
Failed Eviction proceedings initiated shortly after I raised these issues in writing
Internal meeting held by Orange County Legal titled “2218 Vine St” in July 2024, proving awareness with no corrective action
These issues violate:
Florida Statute §713.13 (NOC requirements)
Florida Statute §83.51 (Landlord compliance)
Florida Statute §468.604 (Public officer conduct)
Florida Building Code §111.1 (CO requirement)
You cannot maintain that this is:
A serious regulatory breach,
Outside your jurisdiction, and
Unworthy of further action.
This contradiction is now part of the public and legal record. If your formal position is that this case is closed and no further action will be taken, please confirm that in writing so I may proceed with court filings, bar complaints, and escalation to elected officials and media channels.
If, however, your offices are still reviewing this matter, please confirm that as well.
Final Request:
I respectfully request confirmation on the following:
Is this matter considered outside your jurisdiction?
Do you find that no regulatory or statutory violations exist requiring review, enforcement, or referral?
If yes, please confirm that DBPR/OIG Case #2025290-REF is now officially closed.
If I have misunderstood your current position or if this remains under review, please respond immediately.
I have exhausted all administrative and oversight channels in good faith. My only remaining options are legal escalation and public exposure — but my preference remains a cooperative, transparent resolution.
Thank you for your time and attention.
Thanks,
Robert J. Pillow
2 Squares Solutions
121 S Orange Ave
Suite 1500
Orlando, FL 32801
rob@2sqsol.com
office: 407-536-WEB3
mobile: 407-340-6100
From: MacKinnon, Rodney <Rodney.MacKinnon@myfloridalicense.com>
Sent: Tuesday, April 1, 2025 7:50 AM
To: rob 2sqsol.com <rob@2sqsol.com>
Cc: Collier, Matthew <Matthew.Collier@myfloridalicense.com>
Subject: RE: OIG CASE #2025290-REF - Urgent Request For Immediate Phone Call For Clarification!
Good morning Mr. Pillow,
I’m not sure if this is a veiled threat or a sincere desire to communicate, but we are not legally required to meet with you, and given your behavior this past afternoon, we will not be meeting with you.
Again, we have no jurisdiction over this matter. We cannot overturn the decision of the Department not to investigate. We are not some sort of appellate court. You expressed in your other emails a desire to litigate the issue, and that is your recourse at this point.
RJM
Rodney J. MacKinnon
Inspector General
Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation
2601 S. Blair Stone Road
Tallahassee, FL 32399
(850)-414-6700
Please Note: Florida has a very broad public records law. Most written communications to or from state employees regarding state business are public records available to the public and media upon request. Your email communications may therefore be subject to public disclosure.
From: rob 2sqsol.com <rob@2sqsol.com>
Sent: Monday, March 31, 2025 4:45 PM
To: MacKinnon, Rodney <Rodney.MacKinnon@myfloridalicense.com>
Cc: Collier, Matthew <Matthew.Collier@myfloridalicense.com>
Subject: RE: OIG CASE #2025290-REF - Urgent Request For Immediate Phone Call For Clarification!
[NOTICE] This message comes from a system outside of DBPR. Please exercise caution when clicking on links and/or providing sensitive information. If you have concerns, please contact your Knowledge Champion or the DBPR Helpdesk.
I will be in your office for a face to face before the end of the week:
2601 Blair Stone Road
Tallahassee, FL 32399-1018
Thanks,
Robert J. Pillow
2 Squares Solutions
121 S Orange Ave
Suite 1500
Orlando, FL 32801
rob@2sqsol.com
office: 407-536-WEB3
mobile: 407-340-6100
From: MacKinnon, Rodney <Rodney.MacKinnon@myfloridalicense.com>
Sent: Monday, March 31, 2025 4:31 PM
To: rob 2sqsol.com <rob@2sqsol.com>
Cc: Collier, Matthew <Matthew.Collier@myfloridalicense.com>
Subject: RE: OIG CASE #2025290-REF - Urgent Request For Immediate Phone Call For Clarification!
Good afternoon Mr. Pillow,
You spoke with both the General Counsel and the Deputy General Counsel. We have no authority over this matter. Your recourse at this point is through the judicial system.
RJM
Rodney J. MacKinnon
Inspector General
Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation
2601 S. Blair Stone Road
Tallahassee, FL 32399
(850)-414-6700
Please Note: Florida has a very broad public records law. Most written communications to or from state employees regarding state business are public records available to the public and media upon request. Your email communications may therefore be subject to public disclosure.
From: rob 2sqsol.com <rob@2sqsol.com>
Sent: Monday, March 31, 2025 4:27 PM
To: Collier, Matthew <Matthew.Collier@myfloridalicense.com>
Cc: MacKinnon, Rodney <Rodney.MacKinnon@myfloridalicense.com>; OIGReportFraud@fdle.state.fl.us
Subject: RE: OIG CASE #2025290-REF - Urgent Request For Immediate Phone Call For Clarification!
Importance: High
[NOTICE] This message comes from a system outside of DBPR. Please exercise caution when clicking on links and/or providing sensitive information. If you have concerns, please contact your Knowledge Champion or the DBPR Helpdesk.
I need a direct phone number as soon as possible to discuss this matter, especially after the response from the Deputy General Counsel for the FLDBPR who I need to mention didn’t mention deputy at all, I just found that out from his outgoing voicemail message.
This is an urgent request!
Thanks,
Robert J. Pillow
2 Squares Solutions
121 S Orange Ave
Suite 1500
Orlando, FL 32801
rob@2sqsol.com
office: 407-536-WEB3
mobile: 407-340-6100
From: Collier, Matthew <Matthew.Collier@myfloridalicense.com>
Sent: Friday, March 28, 2025 3:42 PM
To: rob 2sqsol.com <rob@2sqsol.com>
Subject: OIG CASE #2025290-REF
Dear Mr. Pillow:
The Office of Inspector General would like to acknowledge its receipt and review of your correspondence received on 03/28/2025. Your complaint has been forwarded to the Director of the Office of General Counsel for review and handling as deemed appropriate and also has been sent to DBPR’s Office of Open Government regarding the public record request contained in your complaint.
In the event you have any further questions or would like to provide any additional information pertinent to your complaint, please contact the Office of General Counsel at (850) 488-0063.
Sincerely,
“/s/” Matthew Collier, CFE, CIGI
Director of Investigations
Office of Inspector General
Department of Business and Professional Regulation
2601 Blair Stone Road
Tallahassee, FL 32399-1018
The information contained in this transmission is intended
Solely for the use of the person(s) named herein. If you
are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified
that any review, dissemination, distribution or duplication
of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you are not
the intended recipient, please contact me by reply e-mail
and destroy all copies of the original message.
The State of Florida has a very broad public records law
pursuant to Chapter 119, Florida Statutes. Most written
communications to and from state officials regarding state
business are public records, available to the public and media
upon request. Therefore, your e-mail communications may be
subject to public disclosure.