Built from the City's minutes records — no AI-written textBriefing final
The City's record
What the City's record shows
Built only from the City's minutes (1186_CE_Reg_Minutes_04_21_2022.pdf). Page numbers are the minutes' own. Discussion is in the minutes' text; it is not summarised here.
Attendance (the roll call)
Listed present when the roll was taken: Jim Gifford, Edward Green, George Brown, Kimberly Curtis
Arrived after the roll: David Lightholder (the minutes note: “6:23 arrived”)
(Checked against the ballots and the printed roll lines; no independent membership list of this board is available to confirm that the roll is complete.)
Listed absent: Lloyd Roberts, Sharri Scott, Jocelyn Scott
Also listed as present (staff and other roles): Dennis Bunt (Code Enforcement Manager), Jason Collins (Police Officer), Augusto Gonzalez-Ruiz (Code Enforcement Officer), Michael Potts (Code Enforcement Officer), Debra Babb-Nutcher (Board Attorney), Darla Crowl (Recording Secretary)
Adopted actions (9)
to approve to the agenda of April 21, 2022 (moved by Green, seconded by Brown); CARRIED — the City's minutes, p. 1
to approve to the minutes of March 17, 2022 (moved by Brown, seconded by Green); CARRIED — the City's minutes, p. 2
to amend Staff's recommendation and a fine of twenty-five dollars ($25.00) and find the Property Owner in violation (moved by Green, seconded by Brown); CARRIED — the City's minutes, p. 3
to amend Staff's recommendation and give the property owner (90 days) until July 26, 2022 and find the Property Owner in violation (moved by Curtis, seconded by Lightholder); CARRIED — the City's minutes, p. 3
to amend Staffs recommendation and give the property owner (90 days) until July 26, 2022 and find the Property Owner in violation (moved by Lightholder, seconded by Green); CARRIED — the City's minutes, p. 4
to approve Staff's recommendation and find the Property Owner in violation (moved by Brown, seconded by Green); CARRIED — the City's minutes, p. 4
to amend Staff's recommendation and give the property owner (90 days) until July 26, 2022 a fine of twenty-five dollars ($25.00) and find the Property Owner in violation (moved by Brown, seconded by Green); CARRIED — the City's minutes, p. 5
to approve Staffs recommendation and find the Owner in Non-Compliance (moved by Lightholder, seconded by Green); CARRIED — the City's minutes, p. 5
to approve staff's recommendation to City Council the lien reduction be in the amount of One thousand nine dollars and eighty-four cents ($1009.84) (moved by Brown, seconded by Lightholder); CARRIED — the City's minutes, p. 6
Money named in the minutes' motions (what each motion did with the amount, in its own words)
$25.00 — Code Enforcement: decided in an adopted motion. “amend Staff's recommendation and a fine of twenty-five dollars ($25.00) and find the Property Owner in violation” (motion result: CARRIED; the City's minutes (1186_CE_Reg_Minutes_04_21_2022.pdf, p. 3); fiscal period not recorded)
$25.00 — Code Enforcement: decided in an adopted motion. “amend Staff's recommendation and give the property owner (90 days) until July 26, 2022 a fine of twenty-five dollars ($25.00) and find the Property Owner in violation” (motion result: CARRIED; the City's minutes (1186_CE_Reg_Minutes_04_21_2022.pdf, p. 5); fiscal period not recorded)
$1009.84 — Code Enforcement: recommended to another body (City Council decides; not a final approval). “approve staff's recommendation to City Council the lien reduction be in the amount of One thousand nine dollars and eighty-four cents ($1009.84)” (motion result: CARRIED; the City's minutes (1186_CE_Reg_Minutes_04_21_2022.pdf, p. 6); fiscal period not recorded)
Agenda (the City's wording)
The City's agenda for this meeting is on file (CE_Reg_Agenda_04_21_2022), but its item list has not been read reliably by machine yet, so no outline is shown.
Transcript Partial transcript
Machine transcription of the meeting recording. The words are the recognizer's, except where a passage is marked as corrected or machine re-recognized; most have
not been checked against the audio, so words, numbers and names can be misheard.
It describes what was said. It cannot establish who voted how, an amount or an outcome — the City's
minutes do that (above).
A time links to its passage, and “Copy link” copies that link. No recording can be started from here.
351 suspect passage(s) marked in place; 1 stretch(es) where a voice was detected and no words were recognized.
How this transcript was made. New machine transcription of the whole recording, with 16 voices separated from the audio.
26 short machine repair(s) (32 word(s)) are labelled in place, with the original words beside them: an ordinary word was replaced only where two further machine readings agreed on a different one.
Checks run on this transcript: the recognizer's own warning signs, whether a voice was detected where the words are and a language review for likely mishearings.
A second, independent machine reading was compared with it word by word: the same words for 94.1% of 15,629 content words.
Dotted words (452 places) are ordinary wording differences: hover or tap to see the other reading.
351 passages (21% of the words) are marked suspect: their words are not shown ("unclear audio") and support no statement: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ; the language review questioned them; or no voice was detected there.
Agreement between two machine readings is not verification.
Voice detected, no words recognized (1 stretch). Something may have been said here that the transcript does not have:
01:29:48 (9 s) — neither reading has words
Speakers were separated by voice. A plain name rests on evidence tied to that voice; “provisional” is a name from an earlier text-only pass and is not verified; “Speaker N” is an unidentified voice.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:00:07–00:00:14 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:01:41–00:01:42 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:02:28–00:02:29 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:02:48–00:02:52 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:03:21–00:03:25 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
who just joined us. My other officer is unfortunately out sick this week. So I can't introduce you to him at this meeting. It'll have to be the next meeting.
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:04:11–00:04:11 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:04:25–00:04:29 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:04:29–00:04:36 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:05:01–00:05:06 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
For the record, Augusto Gonzalez, Code Enforcement Officer, I am submitting a packet of documents and photos associated with this case. The photos accurately depict the property during my visits and show my finding, i'm sorry, accurately depict the property during my visits.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:05:37–00:05:41 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:05:47–00:05:49 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:06:11–00:06:16 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:06:24–00:06:26 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
the outcome and the inspections. At this point, the uh permit was expired. there was no active permit and there was no final inspection uh the permit had expired from 2019.
uh It was consistently popped out. um Notice was sent for the permit at this point, uh and monitored the RV. In November, for your photo five findings, that's when I educated the property owners of the RV pop outs and the ordinance that
my prior findings. I contacted the building department and relayed that information to the owners so they can correct it. Here in uh March, just last month, photo seven findings, the RV still maintained in a housekeeping manner. uh At some point, the antenna, I believe, or there was some kind of cord that was disconnected, which I had pointed out to them, was ‸ removed, but that was the only progress made at that point.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:07:54–00:07:56 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
state of the work that was done without a permit. There is an active permit on the property currently. uh The same thing. How the property is, the current condition of it, after the work was done. uh It's just finding here from today's date, the RV is still in the same housekeeping position. uh parked in store that hasn't moved.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:08:25–00:08:31 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
so if the trailer was just sitting there for storage, it would be closed up for storage. It's actually the pop outs are out, so if you entered that unit,
And aerials from the property appraiser also show the overhang extended out over the front as if you were going to sit there like it was set up at a campground.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:09:30–00:09:32 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
bring in the pop outs so it's more for traveling, and then it would just be there for storage. Okay. If they took a trip, and they came back, and they wanted to open it up to air it out and clean it, the code allows for that. But it doesn't allow to be in that state for use at all periods of time, like they couldn't go out there to have a party or watch TV or have somebody staying over.
Flag: a language review questioned the wording; numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:10:18–00:10:20 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: the machine readings disagree here; numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:10:24–00:10:24 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: the machine readings disagree here; numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:10:26–00:10:26 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:10:35–00:10:35 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Yes, the code. it's it The trailer is parked legally because of its size. It's parked on the side or rear of the yard. It just can't be extended out for for use. I
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:11:03–00:11:08 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:11:33–00:11:42 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:11:45–00:11:48 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Mr. Chair, if I can, just to clarify the motion. They currently have an active building permit, so that violation is technically in compliance, but due to the fact that we had issue a stop work order in the beginning to get them to get a permit, and that one permit has already expired,
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:12:08–00:12:11 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
permit expires, then they would just be a repeat violation from that point on. So that is not an active violation. We're asking that it be found to have been in violation of the permit section.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:12:43–00:12:46 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Well, they had no permit when they started the porch, then they obtained one that permit expired. We cited them again, and they have one, but we want to make sure that they follow through and get their final inspections on their porch and get the permit resolved. So they were in violation,
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:13:09–00:13:11 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
they got a permit, they weren't, then they went back in violation. So based on the pattern, we're just asking that they find that this property was to have been in violation for not getting the required permit and following through the process.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:13:27–00:13:31 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
would have been, I don't know the exact date, but I'm assuming August or September. They did pull a permit, but then they let it expire. So then we, then Augusto had to cite them again. So what we're attempting to do here is just show that they were in violation, have been in the past. That way, if they let it lapse again, it would be a repeat. We wouldn't have to do a whole new case to cite them for the same violation they've been cited for twice.
If I can just uh kind of relate this to the other work that we do here, uh every month when we meet, it's very typical that we have at least one case that's pulled from the agenda because it has been complied. And we've seen any number of those over the years. I don't think we have ever had somebody come in here and say, we cited somebody and before we could get them before the board, they complied. So that case is now moot. And then I've never heard somebody say, but they were out of compliance for a while. So we want to have a finding. I think that once it's complied, it's complied. And if they do happen to uh bring this up again, uh because they don't make their their deadlines this time, one of the things that you could present and argue in your uh presentation is, this is not the first time that they've been out of compliance. We have, we have history of that in the minutes or or whatever, but I don't know that. We've ever done this before where we say somebody who has complied, let's bring them in here anyhow and tell them they weren't in compliance, but now they are.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:15:41–00:15:43 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
make. So if they can't make that decision on this case, that's completely understandable. right But there has been precedent set what we have done to have been in violation and
It's called a no fine standing order. We have, I don't know that we've ever done that before, but that does exist as a possibility. But that's ‸ Only when they haven't, they complied before they came before you,
So if the notice of violation said you need to get your permit application done by January 10 and they don't get it done until ‸ April 10, then. Code staff can bring it before you and ask for a finding that they were in violation for, for a period of time, but they are now in compliance. ‸ And that does set them up for a repeat violation, but that is why
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:16:59–00:17:03 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
is, this is either it is or is not. In terms of making it, making it once we hear from the owners, once we make a motion, should we ignore the fact that the uh permit was required or should we
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:17:19–00:17:21 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:18:02–00:18:13 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
everybody for giving us this opportunity. There is some truth to what they say, but it's not the whole truth. um There's a lot of flaws in and what he's saying. And um first of all, this goes way back to like 2019. and um In 2019, we did receive a letter from the city saying, we have a permit. We have that letter with us. If you'd like to see it, it says that we have a permit. So we continued working on it. Then they came back and said, we don't have a permit and they put a stop work order on our house. So we stopped working on it. And the pictures, it looks bad because we didn't work on it for a long time because they said we can't work on it.
as ‸ time went on after 2019, we had COVID and all the things happened with COVID in the cities and whatever major issues. And then, um Carrie was the one that sent us the letter that saying Katie, whatever her name is. And then, uh she came by and we were working on the side of the yard where
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:19:40–00:19:43 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
removing dirt from the side of the house because we continually had water coming in the house. becausethere was a lot of dirt piled up on the side. So all we did is remove the dirt, put it in that dumpster that was there so that the water would have a place to run off.
at the time we hadn't been working on that. But as he said, the picture where the dumpster was, we were working on the side yard, but we had not been working on the awning due to the fact that we realized that we didn't have a permit at the time. So she did put the stop work order showing us that we did need a permit, um in order to be able to continue and finish.
‸ so the issue really at this point is, is the recreational equipment, uh and as, as we addressed a few moments ago, uh if it appears to be ‸ something that, that is a place to live, then that's not allowed. Okay.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:21:11–00:21:17 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
and gives us a violation for the awning goes around the side of the house and then gives us a violation on an illegal parking of a recreational vehicle uh section 14. it says it's not within the allotted setback on our property. I did my homework and it was within the allotted setback of the property. And i said‸ I said, I told him, I said, listen, I think you're wrong. I think this is within the allotted setback. He's like, no, no, no, this is not, you don't know what you're talking about. Then I said, okay, prove it. So he went back ‸ apparently his boss sent him straight because he came back to us and told us, my boss set me straight. It is within the allotted setback.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:22:07–00:22:13 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:22:56–00:22:56 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
If you can't have it plugged in and you can't have it popped out because you have to air it out. That's where the windows are. If you see on the pop-out you otherwise you can't air it out. And this is basically now becoming harassment because he removed it from the violation. Then he adds it back on for something different. Trying to trying to find us for some kind of a violation that isn't even in the law.
14d in front of us, which we were pulled in for um the housekeeping. We do have lights attached to the back porch. That is for the decoration of our backyard. um It is popped out. But the only thing that we don't see on here under section 14d was that
That's the only confusion that we we are not understanding because that is not clearly it. Well, it's not in here at all that says it can't be open and it can't be hooked up.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:24:09–00:24:10 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
I appreciate that. But uh the only way that those others will get addressed is if uh the officer cites them asas he did you, or you as a citizen make a complaint about them, in which case it comes again back to the code officers. But uh what we are, what we are citing is, is
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:24:32–00:24:38 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:24:48–00:24:54 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said) · 00:25:03–00:25:09 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
I mean, it is our RV, on our property, so we are in and out of it, but we're not, we're not, no, not living in it. Do we have it open? Yes. Does he sometimes go in to chill or to have like a meeting so it's quiet in there because of the dogs? Yes. But it's not used for housekeeping as they're assuming.
And it's just, do you understand how this is confusing because he did find us for where he said it's the location that's the problem. Then he took it off, said that's not a problem. So we had no fine. And then he comes back and finds us for something else. That's harassment. I mean, what you see why I lost
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:25:49–00:25:52 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
knew what he was doing to begin with. So i and I don't blame him. Maybe it's the law is not clear on that on that. And I, I kind of agree with him on that because it wasn't clear to me neither. I had to Google it and look it up. And that's how I knew it was within the allotted step back.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:26:14–00:26:23 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:26:50–00:26:56 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
uh Well, you were quick to quote to us what that particular section said. uh And as you point out, and I think I agree that just by virtue of having the slides out, that doesn't violate the rule. Having it plugged in doesn't violate the rule with somebody who has formerly had a unit like this. I know that it's important to be able to keep air flow in our humidity and keep the air conditioner going. So ‸ I i disagree and there's a lot of discussion that could be had. I disagree with Mr. Manager that just having the slides open constitutes a violation. I don't see that by the plain language, but housekeeping is a violation and you have just testified to the fact that you have
that I would periodically open it up, air it out, run the air conditioner check the systems, and close it up again. ‸ I didn't keep it open all the time.
they were holding meetings in it. iI think having the motor home open, keeping the air conditioning running, all that is just part of maintaining a unit. But when you say you have a meeting and
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:29:45–00:29:46 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:29:47–00:29:50 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:30:01–00:30:04 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
have condiments in your refrigerator or you're used enough for overflow because you're traveling with it. Because, I mean, that's one of the reasons I kept mine plugged in, because I'm not going to unload load
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:30:25–00:30:26 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
that is another thing. If you took a trip and you came home and you needed to air it out and stuff, that's all allowed. This RV has not moved in years. It's been in that same position. So that's what draws our attention to it is
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:30:44–00:30:51 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
It's used as an extension of the home. That is exactly what staff is saying. As far as setbacks, I'm not going to allow my officer to send out a notice that's not correct. We
so when Mr. Gonzalez sent a letter regarding setbacks of parking, I then informed him that under the code, because of the size of that trailer, it can't be parked in a driveway. It can be parked on the side of the house.
correct it. But yes, to answer his question, I'm not going to let Augusto send him a letter saying he's in violation of setbacks when he's not. And he wasn't. So all that is correct. And that notice was revised, re-sent to them and the case was started. So that's how we got to this section of the code.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:32:04–00:32:06 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:32:10–00:32:16 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
being used for anything other than taking a trip somewhere. When you come back from the trip, you air it out. You you may, you can leave it plugged in if that's just to run the ‸ refrigerator. But if you're going in there toto do anything else, um that's that's not within the code. Okay. So, uh so you do understand what you're going to need to do
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:32:48–00:32:48 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
‸ case ce 210080, uh based on the, uh packet submitted by the officers, the testimony by the office from the manager and the testimony of the property owners, uh
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:33:20–00:33:27 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
no finding with regard to the permit applied as it is currently in compliance, but I'll make a parenthetical note that it had not been in compliance in case this comes up in the future. And that
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:33:46–00:33:47 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:33:48–00:33:52 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
correct the problem, but you need to after it's corrected. Call the code officer and let him know. So you can come and take a look at it and close the case. Okay. As
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:34:20–00:34:21 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:34:36–00:34:39 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
office. okay You shouldn't be using it for. The only reason that the slide should be open is for maintenance because you're allowed to store and maintain the vehicle on your property. So if
doing things besides maintaining it. uh You should probably your default should be mostly closed and if you have to open it up to maintain it every now and then, so be it.
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said) · 00:35:01–00:35:06 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
The address is 1108 Kirkland Drive. i was submitting a packet of documents and photos associated with this case. The photos actually depict the property during my visits. I visited the site seven times. During my first inspection, I found the property in violation of accumulation
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:35:35–00:35:41 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:35:46–00:35:56 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
in photo one shows my initial inspection of my findings with the junk, scrap metal and an operable vehicle. My same findings are shown here in this photo.
Flag: a language review questioned the wording; numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:36:17–00:36:19 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
shows the accumulation of trash and litter. The scrap metal behind this accessory structure here and in front of the home. More scrap metal, cones, miscellaneous items. ‸ Same findings again here and also inoperable vehicles. same This here is
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:36:51–00:36:54 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
It's going to be the cones, the miscellaneous uh construction debris, uh scrap metals behind here. um You can see it part of it inside of the truck also and in operable
Behind here in this photo, you can actually see, uh i've been we the the owner has showed some progress. uh he He scraps metal and it's maintained there in that area, which has been part of the violation.
changed. Each inspection will show the the violation for vehicles. the Some of the vehicles will all will change as far as plates or the inoperable or operable status. uh That uh Silver Dodge Ram works
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:38:10–00:38:10 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
one month. When I follow up with the property owner and take new pictures, it may not work the next month. And I believe he changes his registration through his vehicles as they work.
So he's had two or three at one time and then they disappear and then, but there's always one vehicle with either no tag or doesn't run? Yes, sir. Thank you.
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:38:52–00:38:52 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:38:54–00:38:57 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
The violations have not been fully resolved. I sent the notice of hearing on April 1st, 2022, and it was ‸ certified and posted on the property in violation. Staff finds in case 21-0634 that the owner is in violation and recommends today to ‸ be given ‸ to come
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:39:16–00:39:19 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:39:48–00:39:56 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said); the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 00:40:24–00:40:30 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
over there because to try to clean, to clean those wire and thing to to get get some, couple money, you know. But he say it's okay. What he says it's true.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:41:05–00:41:08 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
blew the, blow. And, I wasn't able to get somebody to fix it. And I tried to, try to fix it. But, the vehicle is, is my name. It's registered. But, I, ‸ know, I know,
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:41:26–00:41:40 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:42:41–00:42:48 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:42:53–00:42:59 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:43:28–00:43:32 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:44:18–00:44:24 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:44:29–00:44:29 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
none. The motion passed. uh so you have the 90 days, sir. When you get the work done, uh call, ‸ call the code officer and tell him so he can come and look at it, check it out.
Mr. Chair. Before we proceed, I'd like to recognize that uh David lightholder did attend the meeting. He just came in a little late since he seconded the motion. We should put that on the record that he is present.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:45:23–00:45:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
of documents and photos associated with this case. The photos actually depict the property during my visits. I visited the site six times. During my first inspection, I found the property in violation of parking in the yard.
Flag: a language review questioned the wording; numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:45:46–00:45:53 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:45:54–00:46:01 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
so there is your vehicles inoperable and or unregistered. Storing outdoors, section 6-900 b 11, miscellaneous junk outdoors throughout the property and or improper confinement of storage. Trailers and yard, utility trailer parked within the front and or corner side yard area. and
we have the motor vehicles parts um throughout the front and side yard. The storing of junk and scrap metal, uh lumber, waste paper products, uh building materials along the carport and around the property. uh ‸ landscaping utilities, yes, there's the outdoor storage ‸ there. There ‸ also the orange van and a couple other vehicles there. um Overall are inoperable or unregistered.
No, there's no license plate on that orange van. uh Here we're gonna ‸ have more outdoor storage, parking in the yard, um miscellaneous items throughout each inspection here.
No. Yes, it does. I'm sorry, on the right side. Apologies. There we have more miscellaneous outdoor storage. um They actually dropped down uh millings there. I'm not sure why. uh
it was okay because it took away the front yard, I believe. um I educated him with the ordinance. Here again, we have numerous vehicles and outdoor storage.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:47:41–00:47:44 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:47:52–00:47:53 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:48:06–00:48:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Okay, well, I need to do a presentation where I show you all of our inspections so that we have it for the record. So I can't just speed up and then I need to make sure that the ordinances are read into the record so that everybody can make an accurate decision. So that's why it's taking so long.
motor vehicles again, this photo, uh some of Some items here are blocked because of the RV. um trailers parked out in the uh yard. This year is in February
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:49:05–00:49:10 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 00:49:20–00:49:23 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
This here from this morning, the violations are still current with the same vehicles. In some cases, uh inoperable and registered. No tags on them. Outdoor storage uh miscellaneous items also. And there's a trailer, utility trailer parked in the yard. You can actually see the outdoor storage you're Also behind the yellow van.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:49:52–00:49:53 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
days. The violations have not been fully resolved. I sent the notice of hearing on April 1st, 2022, and it was sent certified and posted to the property in violation. Staff finds in case 21-0654 that the owner is in violation and recommends that
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:50:39–00:50:42 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:51:42–00:51:43 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:51:51–00:51:52 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:51:55–00:51:56 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
with this property, and I tried to follow up with the officer to see what actually needed to be done. To my understanding, the mulch was laid down to try to clean up the property and beautify it. He did not know that he couldn't cover the entire yard in mulch. I don't know how much mulch needs to be removed. When I did go by there this morning, or this afternoon, right before I came here, there's a small area over to the right where you can see that it's been pulled back. And then the tenant has made progress. I mean, you can see from some of the photos massive progress has been made from the condition that it was in that
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:52:55–00:52:59 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Okay. And Mr. Chair, just for the record, the mulch was not cited that came in the process of doing this case. So the mulch is not an issue in this particular case.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:53:49–00:53:51 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
have a limitation on, you know, stone gravel, different things like that. So that's a planning and zoning issue, but it's not before this board here tonight.
Right. Okay. So, uh if you've given this to, uh the law firm already, have they given you any indication ‸ how long it's going to take to actually get the, end of the court and get this action to move forward?
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:54:20–00:54:24 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
they would be proceeding with the eviction. I don't know how long that would take. I'm more than happy to ask for an update on the time frame that she thinks it'll take to be able to have the tenant removed. um I believe she she said previously, um might have been 30 days. No,
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:54:44–00:54:47 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:54:48–00:54:48 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:54:53–00:55:02 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
21-0654, I'll make a motion. ‸ amend staff's recommendation to 90 days because there's an eviction on the table and if it goes past there's not resolved within 90 days they should contact code enforcement for an extension. um It could take six months. um and If it's
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:55:35–00:55:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:55:44–00:55:49 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
‸ and they want to have it resolved. Just because you want to evict the problem tenant doesn't mean that everybody has to wait for the eviction. Evictions can take months and months. That's it. uh
and they did not respond. So not only do we have and the attorney is not only aware of the rent, but also the code violations. So I made sure that she knows that it's not just a rent payment thing that needs to be done to come into compliance. It's continuous code violations, which we're not okay with. So we can't keep the tenant. ‸ And unfortunately, and I also explained to the officer, the prior property manager who was called the property manager was not allowed to engage with any attorneys and she was not allowed to do the eviction. She was under the assumption that she could and she was trying to. She is not well, which is where I came into play. And that's why I was hired because she couldn't proceed with this. And I did also make him aware of that. She didn't know that at first, but she had been the ‸ property manager for like five or six years. Then we got to this point. She couldn't evict. So,
motion, um say, of 30 or 60 days for them to file the eviction and then for us to hold the case until the conclusion of the eviction case, that might work in this scenario. um Because then she can get a court date, a court you know, file the court papers and we would hold the case because we have no idea what the docket on the
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:58:02–00:58:02 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:58:04–00:58:04 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
my promotion that we change that recommendation of 30 days to 90 days. ‸ it's not resolved in 90 days, a fine of 100 per day be imposed until compliance is achieved.
Just one. And that is that uh I'd like to attach to that motion that uh we're making this uh recommendation based on the photographic and test of photographic evidence and testimony as offered by the officers and the testimony offered by the property manager. And that uh it's because of the demonstrated violations of the codes that have been cited in the presentation.
Okay. Motion on forward a second. All in favor say ‸ aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? There are none. So the motion passed. and uh pass that along to the uh attorney. You'll get uh ‸ where will the official notice go to the owner?
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:59:38–00:59:39 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:59:51–00:59:58 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:00:08–01:00:18 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:00:22–01:00:28 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:00:32–01:00:32 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 01:00:41–01:01:00 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
the carport. And the lawn mower still in place. There's a cylinder block in this one from February. storm Again, storing junk, scrap metal, scrap lumber. um This photo taken this morning. The property still remains in violation with the same violations of accumulation, trash and litter, and storing outdoors. uh With a laundry basket tires, lawn mowers still out there, ‸ and other miscellaneous items. Is
inspection on April 21st, 2022, the property remains in violation. I have been working on this case for 182 days and the violations have not been fully resolved. I sent the notice of hearing on April 1st, 2022, and it was ‸ certified and posted on the property in violation. Staff finds in case 21-0689 that the owner
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:02:47–01:02:49 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:02:51–01:02:51 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Mr. Chair, they were scattered across the property and then after getting noticed, they placed them over the mailbox. I think to say that it was part of a decoration of some kind. However, um they breed mosquitoes and it's still a hazard.
have three or four other tires scattered around the property. right I have no idea why we did attempt to make contact with them during a chief's walk of the neighborhood. But as we approached their house, they went inside and did not come back out. So we did not get to talk to
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:03:39–01:03:39 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:03:48–01:03:50 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: a language review questioned the wording; numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:03:53–01:03:58 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
be found in violation. And, uh that the, uh violation will be corrected within 30 days or a fine of 50 a day will be imposed until compliance is achieved.
this is based on, uh photographic and verbal testimony from the code officer that it is uncontested by the property owner and that, uh the violations are as cited, uh accumulation of trash and litter and the appropriate sections and storing outdoors, the appropriate sections of
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:04:58–01:05:05 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
10 50 park drive, I'm submitting a packet of documents of photos and photos associated with this case. The photos actually depict the property during my visits. I visited the site six times. During my first inspection, I found the property in violation of temporary storage. Appendix A, Article 12, Section 30 a3 Temporary Storage Unit
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:05:25–01:05:28 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:05:36–01:05:36 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:05:45–01:05:46 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
left of the conics. We also have a vehicle there at the time that was in violation that's been cured since then. This is the temporary storage unit. um The storing junk, scrap metal, scrap lumber scrap lumber uh was present around the temporary unit. This also shows
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:06:16–01:06:16 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:06:23–01:06:23 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
23rd, uh depicts the storing of junk and scrap metal, as well as the temporary storage unit on the property. um Here's the uh protective treatment here. The exterior structure um needed to be painted at the time. uh
‸ temporary storage unit? If they get approval from planning and zoning, they can have it for 30 days. um They fill out an application ‸ and they can keep it for 30 days.
so The cured violations, restoring outdoors, Section 6-900 b 11 protective treatment, Section 6-1003 b uh The violation that's present today is the temporary uh storage, uh and they say
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:08:20–01:08:21 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:08:28–01:08:29 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:08:30–01:08:33 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:08:50–01:08:58 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:09:05–01:09:07 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
to try toto make all this ‸ compliance when the officers finally reached me instead of continuously sending it to my husband's name. um I've been working really hard to do it. uh I think I only need 90 more days to get that temporary storage off the property. um
So we're trying to take the stuff out of the house that needs to be out, put the stuff ‸ in the storage unit it needs to be put in to the home, and rearrange everything. I would like to try to get the zoning and planning permit to put it into the backyard, take the storage unit that's down in the back yard excuse me that is, the
down and busted and remove that from the property and then place this in the backyard. I am working to try to get all the proper stuff for the house to be put into my name. So until then, I'm really having trouble pulling permits or doing anything to help in this matter. I want like to be compliant. I've tried to do as much as I can without having to try to go and pull permits.
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:10:46–01:10:46 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
90 days? um Absolutely, especially if she's going to attempt to make it a shed and pull an actual building permit. She's probably going to need every bit of that because she'll need engineering and tie downs and
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:10:59–01:10:59 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:11:08–01:11:14 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
May I ask a question? Yes. How do I go about doing this without all the court documents to be able to go to planning and zoning to get the stuff that I need? If we're kind of still in a process here.
That's the other reason we were given 90 days because she would in order to pull an owner builder permit, she would have to have the ownership of the property
And since you're the spouse, um the building official can make a determination in that way. So I would go to building as quickly as possible and tell them what your plans are and then they can guide you through what you need to do. Yes,
89th day, a little sooner than that. let Let the code officer know that uh you're working on it and what progress you've made and uh then he can adjust it if needed.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:12:54–01:13:00 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:13:06–01:13:09 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Okay, I would uh second Mr. Brown's motion uh also stating that uh we are making this finding for violation of temporary storage based on testimony and photographic evidence
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:13:22–01:13:26 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:13:30–01:13:39 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:13:58–01:14:10 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
‸ I'm submitting photos that I took through my re-inspections of the property to actually depict the property during my visits. This case is brought to the Code Board on January 20, 2022, and was found in violation of
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:14:21–01:14:29 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:14:32–01:14:34 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:14:36–01:14:37 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Mr. Chairman, I'd like to just mention that there's a scrivener's error on the on the presentation. It should not be protective treatment. It should be
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:14:46–01:14:54 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
On the slide that I just had. oh I'm sorry. Yes. On this one. protected treatment was on the case before, but it didn't get deleted off this slide. So I just want to point that out for the record.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:15:36–01:15:42 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
explain one thing to you, sir, before you uh state anything. Under non-compliance according to uh state statute, we can only find you either in compliance or non-compliant That's the only thing the board can do at this point. So tell us what your intentions are
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:16:06–01:16:06 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
he said I had to move a car engine and fix my fences. and yeah, I got like two things to do. I had to rebuild that whole thing. I tried nailing it back together. It just fell apart on me. And uh so I i worked ‸ like 5 30 tonight putting that together. I
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:16:31–01:16:32 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
And all I got to do now is I got to go buy two more boards and connect the hinges. And then that's done. And then put a row of screws on the other one.
want to advise you, sir, to uh obviously get that work done as soon as you can and then call the code officer because uh he can advise you on the rest of the case.
Second. Okay, motion on forward a second. All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? There are none. So the motion is passed. uh You're non-compliant There will not be a excuse me. There will be a letter sent to you that states exactly what we've done. And you just need to get it fixed as quickly as you can to uh to stop whatever fine could could otherwise get registered.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:18:29–01:18:32 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
you know, quickly in the next week or so, we'll stop the fine and explain to him how he can apply for a reduction or amnesty. And we'll go through that with him.
Finish your fence and make sure that there's no items scattered around the property, outdoors, up by the garage. Everything needs to be in a fully enclosed building. If you're going to put the washing machine in your house, put it in your house or get your fence up. And
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:19:42–01:19:46 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:19:51–01:19:51 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:19:56–01:20:02 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:20:03–01:20:04 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
2020, at which time the Board found the owner, Korth, Brian C., in violation of the following. Temporary storage, Appendix A, Article 12, Section 38 3 Business tax receipt, Chapter 12,
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:20:16–01:20:20 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:20:20–01:20:29 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:20:30–01:20:31 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
‸ Code Enforcement Board provided the owner time to correct said violation, therefore consistent with the Code Enforcement Board's order. A lien was started against the property at a non-compliance hearing
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:20:40–01:20:44 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:20:44–01:20:48 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:20:48–01:20:53 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:21:02–01:21:05 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:21:09–01:21:11 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:21:16–01:21:17 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:21:20–01:21:21 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
The length of time the property was in violation before correction? Previous code violations? Yes. With the previous tenant? Property taxes?taxes Tax bills 2021 are current. Other liens? Records show no outstanding liens on the property. no water liens.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:21:49–01:21:59 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:22:00–01:22:10 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
you now, is the current property owner. He was not the property owner at the time of the violation. He sold the property to Mr. koth who started a roofing business um on the property without bringing it up to planning and zoning specifications or obtaining a business tax receipt. uh Mr. Brown had to take the property back. That's when the property came into compliance. So he is the current property owner now, and he's the one that corrected the violations, but he was not the owner of the property when this took place. He had actually sold it to Mr. koth And I'm sure he can elaborate on that.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:23:27–01:23:30 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
make the city ‸ whole. The city has spent a bit over $1,000 to inspect and re-inspect and do the paperwork and so forth. Given the fact that you were not the owner at the time and this all happened, ‸ the board may make some other move on that direction. Whatever we do, I want you to understand is a recommendation to city council. And you will get notice of when that city council hearing will be, you're of course welcome to attend that meeting and make your case there as well. So no matter what we do, city council gets the final word. And with that,
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:24:22–01:24:25 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:24:54–01:24:58 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:25:05–01:25:06 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Mr. Chair. I would just like to address the board. I know that our presentations are different and I know that we're reading a lot of violations into the record, but there's a reason for ‸ that. We need to be more specific. And we need to make sure that the board understands the violations presented in front of them. So I apologize that the presentations are a little longer than they used to be, but there's actually a reason for that. So if it's ever contested, we have everything on the record of what we cited and why we cited it. So that's the reason for the new presentations and the new PowerPoint presentation is to let the board know and I am also working on getting you guys.
so that the board can just be better informed all the way around. So we're still working on that part of it and we'll get that. Um, but there's a reason why we're doing this.
is this based on, uh, legal opinion that we need to have photographs that are months old? Well, because that to me, those are meaningless. They really don't tell us anything.
we've been working the case and the fact that the property has been in violation for that length of time. So that is the evidence that we are choosing to give to the board so that the board is fully informed that it just didn't happen today or it just didn't happen in March. We try to give you the full outlook of the case and have it be part of the record. Um, it helps in appeals and things like that. It shows status and timeline. So that's why we do that.
Well, it's, it's staff's presentation, so it's our evidence that we're producing to you. So we want to give you that ‸ there is case law. Things change over time. I just think it's more beneficial that you have all the facts and findings of a case before you make a motion on it and not make a motion just for a 30 or 45 day period.
maybe just a summary of what has happened prior to the, you know, the current violations that didn't comply yet. Um, might be better. Just a summary and then be more specific and detailed on.
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 01:28:57–01:29:27 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
which I think has been really good because in the past it's just been here's a picture, please find them in violation. But now we're getting much more explicit testimony here's a picture and let me tell you why this is a violation.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:29:44–01:29:45 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:29:57–01:30:09 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:30:17–01:30:23 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
used to give the board the actual summary that we were reading from and we were asked by the board to just give the cost sheet and limit it because we're already reading it but if you would like it
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:30:32–01:30:33 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
be more than happy to give you the presentation which has the actual fine property value and our cost sheet attached to it. We have no problem doing that.
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said); a language review questioned the wording · 01:30:42–01:30:52 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
20 page packet that was given on a couple months ago but we needed something between that and this that adds maybe why the owner ‸ might be asking for the reduction that information is helpful.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:31:09–01:31:14 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
the application. It would it would be extra work for staff to try to summarize the application and create another document to give to you but if that's what the board wants we'll do our best to supply that to the board.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:31:57–01:31:59 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:32:00–01:32:00 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Thank you. And I would just like to say with regard to the photographs and the photographic evidence and everything that sets the stage. My personal feeling and others may feel differently, but my personal feeling is the most important thing is the picture of what we started with what brought you out there in the first place. And pictures that show where we ended up ‸ and maybe not every picture of every inspection along the way, but a summary of during the course of time from where we are to where we ended.
Here's the work that's been done. Here's some improvement. Here's this. We don't necessarily have to see every picture of everything that's been complied, but a summary saying we started here. These were complied. Here's a picture of it midway. Here's where we ended up today. And this is what we're,
Flag: the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 01:32:38–01:32:56 · gap filled by a machine re-reading (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:32:55–01:33:01 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Again, we're presenting the case so that there's no in between. We don't want somebody come up and saying, well, we complied this in December. It just happened to reoccur then. So there's a reason for it. Because when the record goes to court, they can actually tell the judge. Yeah, we complied in this period. We don't know what they're showing. So I'll go with whatever legal tells me to do. And if they say we can do that, I have no problem with doing that. Because if you think I like writing out all these pictures, but we do want our cases to be solid. We don't want openings or loopholes for people to make challenges.
Any challenges before we won and it was done, but times change and people bring up other reasons and judges opinions change. And that's kind of where we are, but I'll try to accommodate the board.
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:35:07–01:35:07 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
and I ‸ block out the evening. ‸ I'm coming here for the, I come here at 6 o'clock and I'm here to what done. So if it takes a little bit longer, it takes a little bit longer.
lot more information beaming at you. You should just be a photograph. Now it's copies of the codes. If you notice, we gave you folders with a copy of all the codes. And that's so everybody understands what the code is.
based on some case law. She gave us some materials to read and wants us to be more specific in our motions and cite, uh, what it is that we're basing our motions on. For instance, the, uh, the photographic evidence and testimony and what it spoke to and how it actually applies. So she asked us to be a little more detailed and why not? I think
if you just put the violations and would be sufficient, wouldn't it? I have a hard time reading and remembering everything. I mean, it gets to the point like I'm a lawyer. Well, they,
Um, I am also trying to get some sample motions and stuff and again, give you guys booklets that give you a little more material of how we do things. So
month that we've done this. So it's still a work in progress. So all comments are welcome. And we, we tweak it. I've tweaked the presentation a lot since last month. It's completely changed with where the way I had ordinances put.
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:38:17–01:38:17 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
And I don't make these comments ‸ to think that we're spending too much time or to try to shorten the meeting because indeed, when I started on the board, we had meetings that went until one o'clock in the morning, you know, so that's really not the issue.
the beginning. This is what it looked like six months ago. Here's what it looks like this morning. Anything in between is really minutia. We really don't need it in my mind.
Well, then I would like to ask the city attorney and get their opinion on because I do think it leaves a area. So I would like to contact Kristen and speak to her regarding her thoughts on that.
I want to make sure your orders get upheld. So I think that a lot of it's going to depend on the particular facts, but there is some relevance to the staff letting you know whether the owners were cooperative, whether they got things done quickly.
don't think you do need to see every picture from every inspection in the average case, but maybe there's a particular case where that is very relevant and we need to let code staff kind of use their discretion in letting you know what is important with the in between if there's anything important. But I think it is important for them to at least let you know they've been very cooperative or they've not been cooperative at all because
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:40:23–01:40:24 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:40:27–01:40:31 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
And also just to let you know. The pictures you're seeing here tonight are only a fraction of the pictures that my officers end up taking. Um, so I usually select what we need to prove the violation over the course of time. I bet you on each one of these cases is probably another 20 pictures sitting because it's a redundant picture. It's showing the same thing.
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:41:12–01:41:13 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
remember having. Poster board with pictures taped on it on an easel in front of the board and I remember handing out all the pictures to the board and let it run down the thing.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:41:55–01:41:56 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said); the recognizer flagged its own output; the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 01:42:21–01:42:24 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording