Board of Zoning Adjustments - Regular Meeting

Why don't you repeat that, please?

Okay. A call to order the West County Board of Zoning Adjustments meeting for Wednesday, July 22nd, 2026. Can I have a roll call, please?

Yes. Member Vovitz? Here. Member Santos? Present. Member Lewis? Here. Vice Chair Spaulding? May be here in a bit. Chair Siebert? We have quorum.

Thank you. If you can, please stand for a pledge of allegiance. We're going to public comment. Does anybody have anything they want to talk about regarding items on the agenda? Anybody online, Rodrigo?

So far, nobody's online. If anybody is online and wishes to speak on an item not on today's agenda, you can press the raise hand button at the bottom center of your screen. If you're on a telephone, you can press star nine, and that will let us know you wish to speak. So far, nobody's online. Just for the record, Vice Chair Spaulding is coming to the room.

Thank you and apologies for my tardiness.

Okay, so we'll close public comment and open forum. Speak on any topic of the community concern.

Yes, so again, if you wish to speak on something that's not on today's agenda, you can press the raise hand button at the bottom of your screen. Otherwise, if you're on a telephone, you can press star nine and let us know if you wish to speak. So far, nobody's raised their hand on items not on today's agenda.

I'd like to speak. Why do we have public comment and open forum? Aren't they one and the same? And shouldn't that just be listed once?

We'll be addressing that on forthcoming agendas. We'll be addressing that on forthcoming agendas.

Okay, thank you. This discussion last week. I know. We discussed it at the last meeting. That's why I'm surprised to see it's still listed here.

Okay, I don't see anything on tobacco retailer regulations administrative hearings. We are going to move into the neighborhood preservation and zoning ordinance abatement hearings. These are the administrative hearings for the neighborhood preservation and Alameda County zoning ordinances. Items on today's agendas have been scheduled because the owner has not complied with a notice to abate a nuisance. As the enforcement body, we will hear and consider all relevant evidence, objections or protests and receive testimony as to the means of abating the alleged nuisance. For this board to find that a nuisance has been abated, the owner must show proof that the nuisance has been rehabilitated, repaired, removed or demolished. If you cannot show proof of abatement, then we may find that a public nuisance does exist on your property and that there is sufficient cause to abate the nuisance. This board will then issue an order specifying the nature of the nuisance and the method of abatement. The abatement work must be commenced and completed in not less than 10 or more than 60 calendar days. The board's order will reference your right to appeal our decision. You will have 10 days from the date of service of the order to appeal to the Alameda County Board of Supervisors. A copy of the findings and order will be served on all owners of the property in the same manner that notice of this hearing was given. In addition, a copy of the findings and order will be posted on or near the property. Any findings imposed by this board may be reduced or waived upon determination of hardship or special circumstances. The first item, please.

Alfonso Flores with Alameda County Code Enforcement. I'll be presenting the first item. So the first item is for 18245 Standish Avenue, Cherryland, California, 94541, with assessor parcel number 413-0047-039-00. This is with regards to violations of Alameda County Neighborhood Preservation Ordinance Section 6.65, A1 and 3 and B6. The violations are accumulation of trash, debris, and miscellaneous items throughout the front and side yards of the property, inoperable vehicles stored on the property. Pertinent facts are on August 6, 2025, a site visit confirmed a violation. August 6, 2026, Or excuse me, that should read August 6, 2025. I apologize. A declaration of public nuisance and notice to abate was mailed to the owner. And then on March 30th of 2026, a site visit confirmed that the violation remains. On March 30th, 2026, we sent a notice of failed inspection and final notice to abate along with a notice of administrative hearing, which was mailed certified and regular mail to the property owner. On April 13th, 2026, we received an appeal from the property owner. And on June 11th, we sent the appeal confirmation and hearing notice, which was mail certified and regular mail to the property owner. We visited the property again on July 13th, 2026, and we verified that the violation remains. So with regards to previous violations, none in recent years. CONTACT WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER. I HAVE HAD CONTACT WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER. THE PROPERTY IS NOT VACANT. OUR RECOMMENDATION IS THAT WE DECLARE THE PROPERTY IN VIOLATION OF ALAMEDA COUNTY NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION ORDINANCE AND THEREFORE PUBLIC NUISANCE, DENIED OF APPEAL, REQUIRE THE APPEALMENT OF THE PROPERTY OF THE VIOLATION TO BE COMPLETED WITHIN 10 DAYS. and order the property owner to pay outstanding fines and fees. With regards to the exhibits, the first one here on your screen shows what the property looked like on August 6, 2025 when we visited. As you can see, there are a couple of vehicles there parked in the driveway that appear to be inoperable, along with various items throughout the front yard of the property. Exhibit 3 and 4 as well from the same date, August 6th, which just show a slight different angles. This was the conditions on the property in March. And as you can see, where there wasn't previously items in the front, there were now items. Looks like they may have been trying to take some things out. But the property conditions are roughly more or less the same. 7 and 8, again, from our... Actually, this is from our visit from July 13th. So items from the front that were in the fence were removed. And it does look like there's the items that are out there do change. So, again, it does look like things are being brought out maybe from inside. I'm not sure. And then from earlier today, you could see there's a container now in the front. which looks like that's what they're using to remove the items. And there are other things there, but the vehicles are still there. If the vehicles are operable, we just ask that the owner demonstrate that they can run. Just for context, too, the appellant will go into further detail on this. The owner that we were citing was a husband and wife. At the time of our initial inspection, it was made clear to us that the property owner, the husband, had some medical issues and they wanted more time. So when we came back later in March, several months later and we cited it and one of the property owners passed away. And so here today we do have the wife. So that's going to conclude my presentation. And if you have any questions.

You'll wait, please. I'm gonna call for questions, please. I'd like to Remember Santos, do you have any questions for staff? No member Lewis. Do you have any questions for staff?

It looks like they're making some progress. Is that correct?

From March to today it looks like there are less items. Yeah, I

Complete though. Yeah.

Yeah.

Okay. Thank you. Do you have any questions for staff?

Yeah. Maybe you can clarify that seven month gap. I'm just first background information. That was due to the.

My intention was just to give them a few months, but just got backlogged and I wasn't able to get back to the property until then.

Okay. Do you know how long the dumpster's been there?

The property owner will probably clarify this, but it was not there on July 13th. So sometime between July 13th and today. So I'm assuming it was recent.

Okay. And this would not be one of those 12-month period subsequent fine situations? Yes. I know that that's part of the order, right? If you get future violations of this type within a 12-month period, you could have a subsequent fine. That's what I was wondering about the seven-month.

Still repeating it as from the original notice, so it's the same violation. If they were to, after this is resolved, if they were to get another violation within, I believe it's a 24-month period, it's a subsequent fine of $500. Yeah.

and just for a note i looked in that dumpster there's like nothing in it some um household garbage kind of stuff but no no big items or anything so that's all i have thanks you're spalding do you have any questions i do what are the fines are the fines and fees at issue

So we charge a $214 reinspection fee and a $289 administrative fee. Together that's, sorry, my math is a little off, a little over $500. Okay.

And so the, aren't we limited on what we can waive? Isn't it?

I think I'll defer to County Councilwoman Allen. All right.

You can you can waive fines but not fees for NPO violations.

Okay, so the administrative are what fines or fees? 289.

Both of those are fees. Those are a re inspection fee and an administrative fee.

So neither are waivable, are you saying? It is. Which is the fine? The 214 or the 289?

Neither of those are considered fines in our department.

Okay, so what are they?

Those are fees. Reinspection fee and an administrative fee.

Okay, so those fees are not waivable. Is that correct?

If I'm understanding correctly, a county council stated that only the fine.

We have no authority to waive those fees. Okay. Yeah.

I think if I'm understanding correctly, if you were to determine that this wasn't a violation, then we wouldn't apply those fees because you guys would be.

Right. Only if we determine it's not a violation. Right. Okay. If we continue the matter to provide the appellant more time, and she complies, then would it be dropped?

The fees are for a violation that occurred or that we fine them or feed them on March 30th. So that's what they're appealing. So if it's done after the fact... The case will be closed as abated, but that fee was from March 30th, so that would still apply. They wouldn't get any new fines or fees, I should say.

Okay, because the question is, right now, it appears that there's been no abate, if we find there's no abatement at this time. And there could be another set of fines or fees imposed. Is that correct?

To my understanding, so just a hypothetical, if you were to declare it in violation and give the person 30 days, at the end of 30 days that it was incompleted, we would issue another set of fees. Excuse me.

Okay. All right. So I'm just trying to understand what the scope of our authority is. Okay. Thank you.

I don't have any questions at this time. We should open the public comment at this time. I have a card. Yeah, Anderson, would you like to speak? Please state your name.

I can speak. Hold on. If you could speak right into the microphone, please. Right up against it.

My name is Lucila Anderson, and I am the owner of the property My husband just recently passed away and, you know, he was very ill. We usually didn't keep the house like that, but he always wanted to keep his track and all that. They are both. Functionable. You can start at any time, both cars, but they will be removed. I even hire somebody and I had, this is my second container that I have it to discard, but, um, the people that I hired didn't show up. So it was supposed to be done by this week. But yeah, things happen. And I am not able to do any of the hardly any of the work because I had just had surgery on my shoulder. So it's very hard for me to do it. But I am I can guarantee you that this is going to be taken care of. And just maybe just give me 30 days or 60 days, I will really appreciate that. And I can send you the pictures of what it's going to look like.

Anybody online that wishes to speak on this matter?

No, nobody online has raised their hand.

Anybody on the panel have questions for the

I have a question for staff though. So this is a situation. We have a couple of seniors living in a house. Husband's got health issues, wife, little soldier. Is there anything that the county can provide for folks that, is there anything that, is there any, what does the County do to help somebody in this situation? Because it appears we see these things constantly. And I don't know if it's accurate, but I say the majority of them are senior citizens, folks that can't necessarily take care of this on their own. Maybe they're on a fixed income and don't have the assets in order to pay somebody to come in and clean this up. What does the County offer if anything, or do we just sit here and find them 500 bucks?

So our department doesn't have any programs, but the county as a whole, I believe, has GART, which the memory of the acronym might be a little bit off. I think it's like geriatric geriatrics. It's for people who are elderly, basically. So we actually have attempted to call them, but we haven't really gotten a response. I could try following up with them again to see if they would do anything. From my understanding, it's Typically for folks with mental disabilities, like maybe they have dementia or they have difficulty remembering and things like that. So I'm not sure if they would help in this situation or not, but we can try to reach out to them again.

So did you just tell me that there's a county department, JART, whatever you want to call it, you've reached out to them and they have not called you back

Yeah, the flyer that I have is a pretty old flyer, so I'm not 100% sure if the program...

There's nobody in the county that can point you in the right direction. I'm just asking the question here because we're expecting these people to do something that maybe they're not physically capable or financially capable of doing, and our only remedy is to fine them until they do it. That just seems a little... you know, a little off. If we can't offer them some type of an assistance in certain situations, what are we doing here?

County's ultimate remedy is to abate it itself. So the county does provide the ability to abate the service, but that would be charged to the property owner.

Yeah, but that would go to the property tax, and if they own it, they're not going to pay that until they pass on or their heirs get the house. Or sell.

Or sell.

Yeah. So but I mean, are we communicating like have we communicated to Mrs. Anderson here? Hey, maybe you want to reach out to these JART folks and see if there's something that that is possible. Or Mrs. Anderson, we can abate this. We can do the work. It's going to go on your property tax. But as a senior citizen, you can delay that until a later date. Are we passing this information along or are we just dropping the hammer on them? this is a point of information guard is a behavioral health program so it wouldn't be the jurisdiction of guard to help them okay well my question was is there any any any part anything the county can do to help folks that may not be able to do this and that was what was mentioned so that that that's that's what i'm i'm wondering do we like i said it just doesn't seem to be um very fair treatment for these folks

Thank you, Member Santos. Member Spaulding?

Back up to the... Did you start the car or trucks in front of the inspector? Okay.

Okay, so the...

are because all right inoperable vehicle so it is opera you you said if it starts staff states if it starts it's operable she said she started them why are we citing for inoperable it hasn't been demonstrated to staff yet that it's operable so we would just need her to show us that it they run she just told us that she

No, she said she could start them in front of us.

So you never started it. I never, I never spoke. Uh, I spoke to him. I never saw him.

Oh, okay. So he didn't have, when anybody was there, you and whoever was there physically did not connect.

Okay. All right. So, um, Gemta has been extremely helpful. It's just that due to the circumstances, it's just everything came down on me, you know.

Yeah, it snowballs. Too much. Right.

But I can guarantee you that it is, I want to clean it up as much as you.

Well, I'm sure it's an eyesore that you don't like looking at.

So it's going to be taken care of. I just need some extra time.

Okay, so you have this dumpster. How long do you have the dumpster for?

Just had it. They didn't bring it until last week, I think.

Okay, and usually you get charged for however much you have it. Do you have a schedule on how long you're going to have this dumpster?

Oh, no. They give me so much. Yeah, it's true. They give me so much time.

But how much time have they given you or how much time is left?

Oh, it's two weeks.

Okay. So you just basically have two weeks for this dumpster. Okay. And have you contacted the waste management does two free pickups?

Are you aware of that?

Okay. All right. Yeah. Waste management does two free pickups. but it is limited to a certain amount. It has to be bundled, organized, and things like that.

The furniture that we had before out there, the waste management took it.

Okay, so you may have one more free pickup to go. Okay, all right. What about, have you heard, I don't know if you caught or understand exactly the discussion about if the county abates it, they will incur a certain amount of money to do it. And then that is placed on your taxes. So my only question is, does county council know, if we know this, is this result in an increase of the amount of taxes due annually or or a lien that just sits there for X number of years, because I know there's the article, just a recent article. If the lien has been there and there's been no payment of taxes for more than eight years, but you've been paying your taxes. Okay, good. And so as long as she's paying her taxes, my question is, is, are her taxes going to go up as a result of that? if the county abates it, or is that paid when the house is conveyed? Such as there's a sale.

Also remember that there was that proposition 13, my husband always used to talk about, I wouldn't want this to go in a different direction.

That's a tax basis. Yeah, that's your tax basis on how much you would pay for capital gains. Right. But what we're talking about is, do your annual taxes that you pay now, would, my question to county council is, do we know if those taxes would actually increase or does what she's paying now remain the same and then it just gets paid when the property is conveyed? If we know that, or do we? And if we don't, we don't.

I could tell you with about 99% certainty that it would not increase her property, ad valorem property taxes.

Her annual taxes.

That it's assessed on a property as a lien and it's recoverable by the county through an action, either to sell the property and pay the lien off or it's recoverable upon the sale of the property.

Okay. So there's that option too. So you're aware. So I'd like to know what your thoughts are.

I...

on are you interested in that option of just allowing the county to abate it and other than maybe the inoperable vehicle assuming that starts um but everything else on the accumulation because you have a lot of stuff there uh most of the stuff is going to be removed like i said it uh

I don't know if you can just give me at least 30 days or 60 days and you'll see that there's going to be a difference.

Okay.

Really? I had surgery, but I also take care of, I have a daughter who has stage four cancer. So I do have a lot of weight. Yeah. You have a lot of doctors, medical, you know, to bring all of this up. And it is true.

Right. Okay. So, um, All right. My thought is maybe just to continue this for a certain amount of time to allow her to take care of it. And then it can, if assuming it's not taken care of yet, or then it just comes back.

You can find me all you want if it's not done in 60 days.

Yeah. Well, the problem is it's $500 against you. Like this event is a $500 event.

Okay, do six. Fonzo, you had a question?

No, typically whenever we send an amount to finance, like to bill, the owner typically has a window where they would pay. And then if they don't pay, it typically goes to a lien hearing in front of the board of supervisors. So it doesn't just get added on to their property taxes like that. Process. Yeah, exactly.

They're invoiced for it. Right, yeah.

So maybe that's if we continue it, that would delay that invoicing until that next hearing date. Is that correct?

Would delay everything. The county wouldn't take action because they don't have the authority to.

Okay. All right. My other question to staff is if she sends you a video on your phone, you can do. showing you starting up the car.

Is that satisfactory to staff?

Typically, we'd like to be present. We'd be more than willing and happy to meet with her. But if she was to send me a video, I would just have to probably submit it to my boss to make sure.

The only thing is if you go out there, then that's another inspection fee. That's the problem.

No, that's not correct.

Oh, okay. All right, great. Then you could go and visit, watch her start it, and there's no extra charge. Okay, perfect.

Any other questions?

One more question for staff. So the young lady here says that she hired some folks to help clean it up and they didn't show up. Do we have a list of referrals of folks that you can give her that might be a little bit more responsive that would come out there and get the job done? Do we offer that service to anybody?

We do not have the accommodation.

It would be a conflict of interest to give folks information on how to clean up their yard? Wow.

Well, I think that perhaps Mrs. Anderson could contact some of the service organizations in the area, such as Lions Club, even the Boy Scouts. I know that my husband used to be in the Lions Club and they would get calls for help and they would actually go out and do the work for the people. So it's worth a phone call. All I can do is say no. They might say yes. Yeah.

There you go.

Try the service clubs. Other questions?

Can council explain to me why giving folks a list of referrals of folks who might be able to do the abatement is a conflict of interest?

Oh, it gives the impermature of the county's approval of those particular businesses. And how would you compile that list on what standards, on what basis? It opens the county up to challenge from other people who aren't listed on The county does keep a list of contractors that it uses for its jobs, and that's publicly available, but we would never recommend that to others.

I'm not saying recommend, just here's a list. I mean, I'm a subcontractor. If I want to do business with WebCorp or Swinerton, I have to get pre-called. You know, you would think that, hey, if you want to be on this list, send us your financials, send us some referrals, and then we could add you to this list. And we're not recommending them. We're just saying, hey, here's a list of folks that might be able to help you out. I just don't in this world of litigation. That's ridiculous that that's an issue.

The county does maintain a list much in the way as you've described for hiring for county jobs.

I understand.

And that's searchable on the web.

I'm a subcontractor. I understand what I need to do to work for the county.

Yeah. So that would be the only list that the county would have.

I just got a bug today that what we're doing here. is affecting seniors, folks with some health issues. And I just don't know that this is morally something that we should be a part of. That's all I'm saying. I think we're getting our verbs shared.

coming i think we are we're getting our verbs confused here between recommend and what's available could staff send mrs anderson the link to the county approved contractors that the county uses that is publicly available i just wouldn't recommend that it's publicly available and uh i probably can find it on her own okay all right but at least maybe they can tell her what words search terms she should be looking for. Not everybody is good on search terms. That's all on where that location is on the web, which is publicly available. That's all. It's not a recommendation. Um, okay. So if we continue this for 60 days, And that way there's no decision yet and everything is delayed. That gives you time to contact the county inspector, show them they can come out and you can show them the car starts. And that will also give you time to contact the service organizations to see if they could help fill that dumpster up for you. So I would gather you have no objections to that. Okay. Great. And then the only other issue is the $500. Then we'll have to address that later.

Okay. Not yet.

The public hearing is not closed. Thank you, Ms. Anderson. You can have a seat. Thank you. Just checking with the appellant. Are there any other questions before I close public comment?

Thank you. I'm sorry. Just for clarification, so just so the staff understands, if the board chooses to continue the matter, what does, so assuming they clean it up, you would still want to see it to determine whether the original appeal should be upheld or not? Correct? Okay. Whether it's clean or not. Okay, got you. Thank you.

Let's close public hearing.

There's no further. Not for this matter. Okay, so that would be my motion is to continue the phase to allow the appellant to contact the service organizations and let them know that you have a limited time on this dumpster and then take advantage of your leftover waste management pickup and also to arrange for the inspector to see the cars start.

Are we considering this based on hardship that we're?

It would be a motion to continue the matter for 60 days. So we're not making any determinations at this point in time.

I have a motion for Vice Chair Spaulding to continue this item for 60 days. Second. A motion by Member Spaulding and a second by Member Lewis. I have a vote, please.

Yes, the vote is as follows. Member Voves.

Aye.

Member Santos. Aye. Member Lewis.

Aye.

Member, or excuse me, Vice Chair Spaulding. Aye. Chair Siebert.

Aye.

Item passes.

Okay. You understand what's going on. Okay, great.

Okay. Can we have item two, please?

Good afternoon. Juan Carlos Martinez with Alameda County Code Enforcement. The next item before you is for 855 Via Bregani in San Lorenzo. APN number 411-0018-01700. Case number COD 2026-00316. for violations of Alameda County Neighborhood Preservation Ordinance Section 6.65.030 A1, 12, and B6 for overgrown weeds and vegetation in front of the property and allowing the growth of vegetation that obstructs the public sidewalk area. The pertinent facts are as follows. On April 1st, 2026, I conducted a site visit and confirmed the violations listed above. On April 2nd, a declaration of public nuisance notice to abate was mailed to the property owner by regular mail. So on April 2nd, I confirmed via email correspondence that the property is under a public guardianship through the County of Merced. On April 15th, I conducted another site visit. No progress was observed. On April 29th, um, I confirmed again with the, uh, the email correspondence, uh, that the owner, uh, unfortunately passed away. Uh, the County of Merced was petitioning at the time, uh, to move to a public administrator from a public guardianship on May 4th. Um, Alameda County council office was contacted by the County of Merced just to, uh, formally let us know that they were aware of the issue and, um, and through their process to take care of it. On June 16, I conducted a follow-up site visit and did not observe any progress. Same day, June 16, I emailed the county of Merced and did receive a response that the administrator had not been appointed yet, but they were hopeful for a late July appointment. And then on July 10, I re-inspected and conducted a site visit. No progress observed. And same day, July 10th, a notice of failed reinspection and notice to abate and notice of administrative hearing is certified in regular mail to the property owner. And I sent that correspondence to the County of Merced as well. Previous violations, yes. From August, 2023 to July, 2025, there were four overgrown vegetation cases on the property. Three of them were abated by the county. One was dismissed to an ownership change. And then prior to that, going back to 2008, there were three more overgrown vegetation cases, as well as one garbage can related case, all of which were owner abated. A contact with the property owner that really should say no. We've been in contact with the County of Merced, but as I mentioned, the property owner is deceased and the property is vacant at this time. Staff recommendation is to declare the property in violation of the Alameda County Neighborhood Preservation Ordinance, public nuisance, and require abatement within 10 days.

The owner is deceased on this one.

Yes.

I guess the county of Merced, do they have like a relative that lives in Merced?

I believe they're in attendance. They're actually online. So they can give you more context. But my understanding is that it was under a public guardianship, which is typically appointed when someone can no longer care for the property for various reasons. And then once they pass away, it moves into a public administrator. But they can clarify that better, I think. An aerial view of the property. And those from the April 1 inspection. And on April 15. This from June 16 inspection. From July 10. Lastly, this was from visiting the property yesterday. You can see it's still the same. And that concludes my presentation. Happy to answer any questions.

Chair Spalding?

Who is the present owner? Is it the estate of Barbara Barabara? last entry on the assessor's uh record that that we go off of is barbara barbara barrero okay so she she barbara barrero died and so what we don't know is apparently this property was not placed in a trust because it would show up in the county records in your correct And so therefore it's her estate. And so it's the public, the Merced County probate public administrator who is administering.

That's my understanding. But again, they may be able to speak to that better.

We have anybody on behalf of the property owner. Do we know?

There should be representatives from the county of Merced on the phone.

Okay. All right. That's helpful. Thank you.

I don't have any questions at the moment.

Any other questions? Do you have any questions? Open the public comment. I would have to open the public comment for that, wouldn't I?

Yes, we do. So if the public comment is open, we have Brianna McMahon of Merced Deputy Council. So Brianna, if you could please unmute yourself, go ahead.

Hello. Can you hear me?

Yes.

Okay. So Barbara was under a conservatorship here in Merced County, but unfortunately she passed away We are in the process of closing her conservatorship case so that we can then open the public administrator case. Our next hearing to close out the public conservators case isn't until August 14th. But due to this in-between of her passing, we have no authority to spend any of her funds to clean up this property. So we're basically in a legal limbo at this time.

All right, so respond, Vice Chair Spalding. So because the hearings not to August 14, and that's like three weeks, about from now. So it sounds like you would have just no objections, if we make the determination that there's a violation and require abatement in 10 days, and then that would just be added to the liabilities of her estate, right?

It does, correct.

Okay. All right. So I think that there was an article, a local article about housing availability, et cetera, and these exact types of circumstances. published in the East Bay local newspaper, and I'm sure that the public administrator's office, you guys hopefully will think about, consider some legislation to address some of these issues, I think. Would be helpful.

Questions, anybody else online?

There's no one else online with their hands raised.

This public comment.

I'd make a motion to adopt staff's recommendation in, um, to our abatement within 10 days because I have no authority. The property is going to get sold. Um, and, and go from there.

I'll second.

We have a motion by Vice Chair Spaulding and a second by Member Santos. Can we take the vote, please?

Yes, the vote is as follows. Member Voves? Aye. Member Santos? Aye. Member Lewis? Aye. Vice Chair Spaulding? Aye. Chair Siebert?

Aye.

Motion passes.

Move on to the next item, please.

Call you up, sir. We'll call you.

You're not there yet.

Almost, but not quite.

Members of the board, my name is John Kransky with Alameda County Code Enforcement, and this is regarding item 3-17028 Rolando Avenue, Castro Valley, California, 94552, APN number 080A-0225-005-00, case number 2026-00524. This is in regards to the Board of Zoning Adjustments Neighborhood Preservation Ordinance Abatement Hearing of July 22, 2026. Keller Donald E. In regards to 17028 Rolando Avenue, Castro Valley, California, 94546, APN 080A-0225-005-00. The violations are as follows. Alameda County Neighborhood Preservation Ordinance Section 6.65.030, A1, 3, 10, B6, and E2. One, overgrown vegetation throughout the property. Two, storing inoperable vehicles on the property. Three, vehicles parked on unapproved surfaces. The pertinent facts are as follows. On... On 5-21-2026, a site visit was performed and I confirmed the violation. On 5-27-2026, a declaration of public nuisance and a notice to abate was mailed to the property owner. On 6-9-2026, a site visit was performed and the violations remained. The property was not in compliance. On 6-24-2026, a notice of failed reinspection and final notice to abate and also a notice of administrative hearing was mailed certified and regular mail to the property owner. Previous violations, yes, there were. In 5-28-2024, it had to deal also with inoperable vehicles as well as overgrown vegetation and weeds. It was closed through admin action and then reopened also through the same. Have I had contact with the property owner? No. Is the property vacant? I don't believe so. Staff recommendation is to declare that the property is in violation of the Neighborhood County Preservation Ordinance. and therefore a public nuisance and require abatement to be completed within 10 days. So as you can see, here's an overhead view of the property. It's just a single-family dwelling. And in the front, on my initial inspection, I noted that there were three vehicles on the property. We'll get to the third one. But there was very much overgrown vegetation throughout the property, trash cans stored, vegetation on the roof line. And then there was another vehicle to the right hand side of everything that was pretty much almost invisible because it was just covered with so much vegetation and dry grass. Upon reinspection on the failed reinspection, June 9th, 2026, I noted the same things. Nothing had really changed on the property. Same vehicles that looked as if they were inoperable. The same vegetation was growing on the public right away on the roof line of the property. And then also the vehicle that's hidden under the brush or, you know, the tree. And then today, as of July 22nd, 2026, I did go there and note that the dry grass had been removed. So that's really awesome. Now I would just need the owner to prove that the vehicles do run and the vehicle that's stored on cinder blocks would need to be moved and relocated in order to be able to get that in compliance with the ordinances. And also a small amount of vegetation that's on the roofline would also need to be removed. So yeah, uh there's this this property could be fixed very quickly again staff recommendation is to declare that the property is in violation of the alameda county neighborhood preservation ordinance and therefore a public nuisance and require the abatement be completed within 10 days and that's that's my presentation thank you uh questions vice chair spalding um there are three cars at issue right Yes, there's three cars on the property that I noted. Two of them looked as if they were inoperable.

There's the two dark blue ones that's covered up.

So typically if a car is covered and it looks to be not wrecked, we won't require that to always be uncovered. and then proven to be running because it's covered up, it's in good condition, it's taken care of. We can't assume that it's inoperable.

So it's the two cars, the blue cars?

Yes. Yes, those are the ones at question.

That are at issue. Are you saying that the 722 picture is a satisfactory, and I guess, yeah, the picture is taken on July 22 of the weed whacking is satisfactory?

I would like to see the most of the vegetation that was cut removed. That is and then like I said, the vegetation that's in violation, it's on the roofline that would need to be removed. and there could be some other things that you know could be done but we're here to enforce the ordinance as as it reads and as it stands we we can only enforce it as much as we can't enforce beauty you know we can't enforce blight uh but we can't you know if if it's complies with the ordinance there's not much we can do to force somebody's hand well no i'm just questioning on you know how

Cause I see quite a few long straggles there. You're being very generous.

That's why I said there's still work that needs to be done. And if we, if and when we can talk to the owner, we could 100% come up with a plan that is acceptable for all parties.

So overgrown vegetation throughout the property is still applicable because you've got the vegetation growing on the roof.

That's on the roof. And also, you know, you keep,

On top of the car.

The cars, that's a blight. If there's a driveway, that should not be covered because you're blocking your access to your driveway, that kind of stuff.

Okay.

Member of OVIS?

Are you counting the motorcycle on the side of the house under the tarp as one of the inoperable vehicles?

As I said, if it's a tarped vehicle and we have no reason to suspect that it's inoperable and it's stored in a place that's acceptable and approved surface, typically we're not going to go after those because they're stored in a correct way.

Okay. I see there's some kind of pavers put down for the black car hiding in the bushes. Would you ask them to remove those pavers also?

By the ordinance, it has to be on an approved all-weather surface, such as masonry, concrete, asphalt, that type of stuff. Just laying down paving blocks wouldn't be acceptable in this case.

If it was operable and parked in the street.

But yeah, then that'd totally be fine.

Thank you. That's all I have. Amber Lewis, do you have any questions? I don't. Member Santos?

No.

Other questions? All right, open public comment. No. Let's open public comment. And do we have any speakers in the building or online? Anybody online, Rodrigo?

Nobody online has raised their hand?

The property owner, I think.

Donald?

My name is Donald Keller. I'm the owner of the house.

When you're done, can you please fill out a speaker card for us? When you're done, could you fill out one of these little cards? You can do that afterwards, sir.

They're in the back. That's fine. Go ahead.

Open public comment. I don't know if I said that or not.

After working several decades for a community hospital, I acquired an ear infection that makes it difficult for me to hear a woman's voices, particularly above 1,800 hertz. If you could speak slowly, I would appreciate that. And I'll be using the teleprompter, which is quite nice. Anyway, I'm a poor man. I was forced to retire at the age of 59. I'm 74 now. And because I worked in a community hospital civil service for several decades, and I got outsourced by a guy from Kuwait that got a free IT technical education on an H-101 visa. Since then, I'd had to use up all of my retirement savings to hold on to my house, and I almost lost it if it wasn't for TARP funds. Anyway, I don't drive. I can't afford to drive. My adjusted income is less than $31,000 a year, which does not allow enough money for car insurance and things like that. I generally don't go anywhere. I'm almost 74 years old. And, um, I, uh, all three of those cars were operable when, when they were parked there. Uh, I put, uh, pavers in it too, uh, because it's, uh, it's quite common on that side of the street. There's no parking and, uh, it's quite common for people to park their cars in front of their houses. Usually they can afford to, uh, to pave it over or something or other, but I can't. Um, anyway, um, one car, a, uh, exotic dream machines, California Countach is a exotic machine that looks like a very expensive Lamborghini Countach from 10 feet away. It's got a Cadillac 500 cubic inch motor and the Corvette and the suspension and a custom tube frame, which is quite expensive. It's probably worth about $40,000 to $100,000 when operable. It was operable when I parked it there, but the speedometer cable broke somehow, and I sort of started to take it apart and then realize that I needed a custom cable made in order to finish it. And it was kind of beyond my, my abilities to do so. The, um, the, uh, the blue car, the, uh, 2006, uh, civic, uh, has about 54,000 miles on it. And, um, one of the, uh, brake calipers came apart on it and I parked, parked it and I tried working on it, but, uh, I didn't have an impact wrench in order to fix it, so I kind of let it sit there. The 1999 Maxima was operable when I parked it there. It's got a manual transmission, and it's a hilly area, and the clutch is worn, and it has difficulty making the hills. Also, the alternator, I tried replacing the alternator on it, but there's not enough room for me to work around in it. And I never really got the belt tightened properly. So at the time I had another car, I didn't worry much about it. And I'm... I have a problem with keeping the property up because I have a lot of medical issues. Um, I, I've had three, uh, kidney surgeries and, um, my, uh, my, my blood is not really that good. It's, I get tired quite, quite easily when I do things, just taking out the garbage, uh, makes, makes me exhausted. And, uh, um, recently I got a, um, a hedge trimmer, electric hedge trimmer. And I replaced the spool for my weed whacker. And I intend to, before the trash man comes tomorrow, clear out some of the vegetation around the cars. And maybe if I can get a ladder, get up onto the roof and start clearing that out as well. When I purchased the Lamborghini, I put it on a credit card, and because I lost my job, I defaulted on the credit card. And I have paperwork here saying that they want $18,000 from me because of that. And since the tariffs went into effect last year, I started putting things on my credit card. because I'm interested in making videos for the public interest, and I needed to buy some Chinese and Indonesian photographic equipment, and so currently I owe about $22,000 in current credit card fees, which I'm paying about $300 a month in interest, and on my my meager salary that's going to take me a while before I can afford the $500 to $800 that it takes in order to get me new batteries for the cars and also to take care of the gas tank that the gas has turned to shellac in it. And I need to have some stay build being put in there and then sloshed down and cleaned up on it. Also, I need to take out the spark plugs for the Cadillac engine and put oil in it so that it doesn't wear out when I first started up. And also the other cars, I have to take out what goes for a spark plug now. It's really a coil on top of the cars and squirt oil into that too so it doesn't cause a lot of wear on the engine when I start it up. but I can get the cars running, but I have a problem with my credit card debt that I think I will be resolved by late winter and I'll be able to afford the batteries and other things in order to get those operable.

Another car that runs, Mr. Keller? Mr. Keller, do you have a car that runs now?

I have what?

A car, a vehicle that runs?

haven't driven in several years no i get around by walking and taking the bus okay i can't afford to operate a car questions of mr keller or vice chair spalding so the is the lamborghini the covered up one The covered up one is the Exotic Dreams Machines California Countach, which looks like a Lamborghini.

Okay, the Countach. Then you've got your 2006 Civic, and then you have a Maxima. Have you thought about selling these vehicles?

Yes, I would like to, but I'd like to get them running first so that I can get a lot more out of them. The Honda has only about 54,000 miles on it, and it should be worth something. The Maxima has about maybe 105,000 miles, but the engine is still solid.

So, the question is, is putting the money in, accumulating enough money to improve that, but you've also stated that you've got a very burdensome interest payment due under your credit card, and debt. So how do you propose to address this?

By paying them off. And I should have the extra money within a few months in order to afford to fix up the vehicles, which I intend to do. They are worth something. And since I've spent out all of my retirement money, these are the only things that I have left for my retirement that I can use to handle my health issues.

Because right now the staff is recommending that this be abated and maybe the question is how does staff address abatement of inoperable vehicles? Because this sounds like these vehicles can be operable but if they've been sitting there for a while as Mr. Keller says the gas in the tank becomes infected so to speak and needs to have work done. So how does staff address that?

So we typically go off of what's called the Abandoned Vehicle Act. It's 6.48, I believe. And what that does is it establishes us, it gives us the ability as a department to note that a vehicle does not run. It's considered inoperable, wrecked, or dismantled, any of those types of definitions. We can determine whether or not it seems like it's not running. Then we do what's called a three box letter, We notify all interested parties in the vehicle. So let's say we did go ahead and three-box letter the Countach, the California Dream Machine. We would then notify everybody that has a vested interest, the lien holder, the bank, the property owner, the owner, the registered owner of the vehicle, and we would give them a chance to say, okay, we would like to save this vehicle and either remove it, relocate it, or repo it. If nobody comes forward in order to be able to do that and the car cannot be proved to be running, we did then do what's called a green sticker. And that gives the owner five days in order to be able to either remove the vehicle, get it running, or relocate it to an approved space, such as a garage. What if they don't do that? If they don't do that and there's no appeal or anything like that that's filed, we then have the ability to go on the property and take that.

Okay, and then what do you do with the vehicle after that? It's dismantled. It's dismantled. It's no longer available to the owner. The owner doesn't have any recourse after that.

Oh, they cannot get the vehicle back.

Okay, because they've had the prior opportunities to cure. Okay. So it sounds like you've got timing issues here on how much time because this has been sitting here for a long time already. And you haven't been doing anything about it because you have, as you said, you've had your health issues to deal with. So is there anything that's changed that why you think you're going to be able to do it now versus having had the time to do it and not doing anything?

It could change my situation.

I mean, what's the difference between now and the past several years where these cars have been in this condition i i don't quite quite know okay so so i guess i'm just trying to understand is how much you are talking about time like out into the winter and we can't give you that much time we can't give you months we can't give you six months i think you've that none of them are operable at this time, correct?

These are my retirement savings.

I understand, which is why we're having this conversation is how to preserve these retirement savings. How do we do this? How do we preserve it so that the county does not take them away? See what I mean? So I'm trying to get you to help us to understand your circumstance so we can figure out how you can preserve these. So what's the timing? Because we can't give you like six months.

Okay. I can buy them by the, uh, the batteries, but I'd have to put it on credit cards for 30% interest. And I can, I can get, get things going. You know, of course my interest will, will, will, will accumulate more, but, uh, I can do that in a shorter amount of time and certainly get the contact running. Because it was running. It was just the speedometer cable is inoperable. And I can get that going in a short amount of time.

So like 60 days or something? What's our maximum time period? 60? I think we're 60. 60.

Yes, that's correct.

It does have a carburetor and I may have to rebuild the carburetor because the shellac that forms in the carburetor needs to be cleaned out. But it may operate even so.

You heard the other option of staff said if you move the cars, like if you have AAA you get triple at the AAA service, they will tow your cars for you. And then if you could tow it to another location, so it's not sitting on your front yard because you're not supposed to be paving over your front yard either.

And in the garage, it's a driveway.

Or if you put it in the garage, like if you got space in your garage, you could put it in your garage.

The car has no, the house has no garage. There's no garage on the property.

There's no garage.

John Kranske, Alameda County Code Enforcement. We definitely can work with the owner on either relocation to a different space, an approved area, such as somebody else's house that maybe has a garage or covered in the back. We want to work with the owner as much as possible. And as for the vegetation and all that, we can definitely give time where time is needed as long as certain milestones are met and like a compliance agreement where we could say, let's get these things done. We've done that in the past. We'll do it again. No problem. And we'll work with the owner as much as we possibly can in order to bring the property into compliance in the quickest and easiest fashion for the owner.

Okay. All right. And the only suggestion I would have is that don't be going up on a ladder by yourself.

I did look into renting a garage nearby, and there is one available within a mile, but it's like $500 a month, which I can't afford.

That sounds a bit pricey. Okay, all right. So the main thing is maybe if you... also get rid one car because you've got space for two cars on your driveway but not three because right now you have a third one parked in your yard underneath the bushes uh they have to be operable though i know and he needs the time to make them operable is the or he needs to relocate or move them sell or sell them that's right um So I don't know, maybe, is this another continuation?

I think 60 days would be fair for Mr. Keller to work with the county to try to get him out of the situation.

Since he has made progress, he has weed whacked the front yard, which is good. Although I'd say take another whack at it.

Do you have any other questions for Mr. Keller? Member Santos? No.

Elizabeth? Yes, so you've got three items on the on the list. And I want to know from him. Do you feel 60 days is adequate to take care of these three items on the list?

Three things I'll do the best I can, but it's going to be difficult for me.

So I can appreciate what you've told us. But We have to rule on what we have in front of us here. So it's the cut and remove any dead vegetation from the property. Trim all lawn areas to height of no more than six inches in height. It looks like you already got a good start on that. Relocate all vehicles to approved all weather parking surface. So not on the front lawn? Right. Okay. and remove inoperable vehicles or restore them to operable status. This really isn't too bad of a list. With 60 days, you think you could accomplish the three items?

I'd have a problem with the maxima, but the other ones- Just overall, just given what we know here.

Three things and can you do it in six months?

Unfortunately, I have health problems. And a year ago, the BlackRock that owned my health provider fired my primary care provider, and I haven't seen him in a year. And I found that I have an infection from my kidneys that was uncovered by my urologist two weeks ago.

You had dialysis?

No, it's not as bad as dialysis. I do have kidney stones that come up from time to time. But he wants me to do an ultrasound to see what's going on that caused the infection.

Okay. We just want to get back to the 60-day, if that's adequate for you to do these three things.

Or do we continue it for 60 days? And so then that...

The progress.

Yes. So to see the progress... that gives them time because what you need to do is either one at a time please you relocate you relocate your inoperable vehicles okay or you get one or more running and you can leave it at your house as long as they're running if it's not running then they need to be put someplace else That's the point. And then you'll have time to work on them. So if we continue this for 60 days and then you would come back and see where you're at on your vehicles and the lawn and the overgrown vegetation, then that would provide you the time to have a plan. You can work with staff on that. Would that be helpful for you? Because we appreciate you want to keep your assets since you need those for your retirement. Yes. So we're trying to come up with a proposal to accommodate your needs and the needs of the community of not having what appears to be a mess. Yes. on your house. See what I mean?

Yes.

All right. Thank you. Louis, do you have any questions? All right. Rodrigo, is there anybody online?

There is no one online who wishes to speak on this side.

Okay, we're gonna close public comment. Anybody have any questions before we make a motion? But you'd like to make the motion?

So I'll make a motion to continue it for 60 days to allow Mr. Keller to explore what to do with these cars so that he has the time to either get them moved or fixed or however he can do it. And then to finish cleaning up the vegetation and getting the vegetation off the roof. But don't get on a ladder by yourself. So that would be my motion.

A motion by Vice Chair Spaulding. Do I have a second? I'll second. We have a second by Member Bovis. Can we take the vote, please?

Sure. Member Bovis? Aye. Member Santos? Aye. Member Lewis? Aye. Vice Chair Spaulding? Aye. Chair Siebert? Aye. Motion passes.

At 60 days.

Work to do.

I hope that I can make this a success and no longer be a blight to the community.

Also for yourself, because that'll put your property in better shape.

Well, I'm certain that it would be nice to have some success. I don't have much successes these days, and it's something that I've been meant to do all this time. But it's just that when I start thinking about getting things done, my ADHD kicks in, and I get this fire going on in my brain, and it's difficult for me to get started. Now that I have some structure here, then I can look at it as like routine tasks that I can do and maybe I can succeed with this. Right.

Thank you, Mr. Keller. Can you please fill out a speaker card before you go? Fill out the speaker card.

Fill out the speaker card.

Yes. Thank you.

Thank you. Mr. Kransky has one for you.

You have the next item, please.

Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen of the board. It's Terrence Jackson, Alameda County Code Enforcement. We're here to talk about the property located at 16961 President Drive in Castro Valley, California, 94578, APN number 080, A as in Adam, dash 021-035-00. Case number COD 2026-00381. and the violation of the alameda county neighborhood preservation ordinance sections six point six five point zero three zero a as an atom section one and six and b uh b as in boy section two three and six violations are number one overgrown weeds and vegetation trash and debris on the property number two broken window unsafe entry stairs on the vacant fire damage property Pertinent facts, April 23rd, 2026 site visit confirmed violation, April 28th, 2026 declaration of public nuisance notice to abate mail to the property owner, June 2nd, 2026 site visit violation remains June 23rd, 2026 notice of violate notice of failed re-inspection and final notice. to abate and notice of administrative hearing mail certified in regular mail to the property owner. Previous violations. Yes. Starting with the past one from November 17th, 2025 fire damage, vacant house. And I saw no violation verified at that time. July 1st, 2024 fire damage house deteriorating and unsecured abated by owner March, 2022. Correction, March 2025 of 2021, unsecured building, trash, debris, overgrown weeds, and vegetation abated by owner. April 2025, correction, April 2025 of 2012, trash, debris, deteriorated deck walkways abated by owner. January 14, 2009, trash, debris, inoperable vehicles abated by owner. February 13th, 2004 trash and debris abated by owner contact with property owner. Yes. Property vacant. Yes. I have recommendation to clear the property is in violation of Alameda County neighborhood preservation ordinance and therefore a public nuisance and require abatement to be completed within 10 days. Review of the residence property. First exhibit photo one, and that's the 23rd of 2026. Bit three as well, and four. Exhibit five was taken on June 2nd, 2026 and exhibit six as well. Seven overgrown weeds and vegetation and eight as well. And the pre-hearing inspection, which was conducted this morning on July 22nd, 2026. Concludes my presentation.

Any questions of staff member Santos?

It says that you had contact with the owner?

Yeah, and that was kind of confusing. We got a hold of an elderly lady that used to be the owner of the property. She quit the property to her son, Gerald. So I've been talking to her, myself as Ed LaValle, talking to her to see if she can get her son to comply and help us out. We got no response on that as of yet.

We haven't gotten in touch with the son, who theoretically is the current property owner.

That's correct.

I mean, this thing looks like if we abated it, we'd never get our money back. It looks like it's worth less than the abatement costs.

Well, speaking to the previous owner, she said that they have no money at all. What? No money at all to get it abated.

How long has it been like this?

From my understanding, for a number of years.

Do you know when the fire was?

I sure don't.

I think it's 2020. Based on the previous violation. That's when it showed.

Amber Lewis, do you have any other questions? Yes. When was the fire?

It was. It was in 2025 or under previous violations. So November 17th, 2025. Fired. damaged vacant house and eyesore, but no violations were verified.

Yeah, I don't understand. I guess I just, I don't understand.

Yeah, I wasn't a case handler at that time.

I think just taking a look, they could be verified.

Yet there's no movement at that time on the house.

So just a quick Google street view between January 2024 and April 2017, there was a very big change in the view from the street of the property. Excuse me, January 2014, excuse me, to April 2017. And I can hopefully show that.

It's really precarious. I wouldn't want a feral cat to go in there. It looks like it's going to fall down that cliff. Yeah. Kind of scary.

Well, there's the abatement.

Sheriff Spalding, do you have any questions?

So you tried to get a hold of Gerald and no... A response.

Okay.

All right. Well, we'll see if maybe the property owner shows up at the hearing. Online.

Any other questions of staff? Okay. Now open the public comments. Do we have anybody online, Rodrigo?

Let me check here real quick. So nobody's raised their hand online.

We'll close the public comment. Okay. Does Gerald live locally? I'm curious why it's not fenced off.

That's what our intentions are in the abatement to get it fenced off. Yes. And that second question, uh, from my understanding, the mom says Gerald live in Southern California. Um, I tried to get ahold of him one time for the number he hung up the phone on.

So, right. So the, the, um, the abatement though says to bring in your compliance must be taken, secure the building to prevent unlawful. entry repair broken window but the county's not going to do that the county's just going to board it up isn't it correct yeah and fence it then and then the issue is any fencing gonna fence it off um

The previous owner, she was concerned about how it's going to look, the degradation or what's already in a state as it is now. But we explained to her that the stair casings, as well as the other railing on the other side of the driveway, we're going to have a fence on that portion and block off that so people can't access. The driveway will still remain clear, though.

Oh, OK. So it would not show up as far as the neighbors are concerned?

The stairs wouldn't be accessible. That's correct. Because they're really scary.

All right. So my thought is just let's adopt staff's recommendation and require abatement to be completed in 10 days.

Do you have a motion?

I have a motion.

Vice Chair Spaulding, do I have a second? We have a second by Member Lewis.

Can I take the vote, please?

I have a question.

Clear to me that the order provides authority to fence off the property. Steph, point out where that is.

Well, at of the conflict arises because your property into compliance, the following measures must be taken. And That does say repair, replace unsafe deck or install sufficient barricades to prevent attractive nuisance. So maybe that is the source of- I'm looking at the abatement order itself. Which is what, at the end? Resolution?

It currently reads the declaration of nuisances for allowing overgrown weeds, vegetation, trash, and debris. Okay. That's fine. Allowing along with a broken unsecured window and unsafe entry stairs. So there's no, and there's nothing in here that says what the, what the remedy is going to be.

It says, and along with a broken and unsafe entry stairs on the vacant fire. So So that's the nuisance. And then it says, be it further resolved, orders the owner to cut, trim, remove, trash, etc., and secure building premise to prevent unlawful entry onto the property.

Which I read to pertain to the broken window, which allows entry into the property, but it speaks nothing to the fencing of the stairs.

I would go to my grammar class, and it says secure building premise to prevent unlawful.

Maybe rather than trying to interpret the order, we can just be clear.

Okay, any suggested modification? Yes.

Secure building.

Fencing. Perimeter, would we say perimeter, secure perimeter?

Secure unsafe entry stairs from unlawful entry by fencing.

Okay, so the motion would be is to modify page two, be it further resolved to add remediation includes by fencing, secure building premises to prevent unlawful entry onto property by fencing. Okay.

We say fencing or barricade.

As I read it, preventing unlawful entry under the property, again, relates back to the broken window, which allows unlawful entry into the property. So that's in order to fix the window. It's not in order to fence the stairs, which the stairs themselves do not allow unlawful entry under the property. They're just an unsafe condition of the property. And so we want to secure the property from unlawful entry by fixing the window. And we want to prevent access to the unsafe stairway by fencing. If that's what staff is proposing.

But see, I look at page one on the letter, April 28, and it says the specific violations are damage and land use.

And that's fine, but this is the order that we're talking about, the actual legal order.

Yeah, I mean, just to clear it up by modifying it, that takes care of it.

We just add a clause to the end of the further resolved clause that says, secure the unsafe entry stairs to prevent access via fencing.

That's my modification. Is that the second?

Yes, absolutely. Okay.

And we have a motion of a motion by Vice Chair Spaulding and a second by Member Lewis. Can we take the please?

It's the voters as far as member of us I remember Santos I remember Lewis I vice chair Spalding I chair Siebert I motion passes.

That's it. Last one. We do not have anything on the alcohol beverage sale, regulation administrative hearings, or regular calendar. Let's go to approval of the minutes. Anybody see anything on there that needs to be fixed?

I don't know if anybody agrees with this one on page two. On page two, because that was quite a case there. Page two, second paragraph. It's just saying the property owner discussed efforts to obtain permits and complete required improvements while addressing ongoing tenant disputes. It mentions later that the tenants are only going to allow property owner in with proper noticing but i know that the property owner had stated that she had tried to notice the attendant the tenants in order to gain access for the repairs i remember her saying that so i don't know if that should be in there or not because later on it saying that they'll only allow her entry after proper legal notice had been provided but i thought she had

done that oh she kept she would she would say by text it'd be four o'clock in the afternoon and she'd say i want to be there at eight o'clock tomorrow morning and they were saying no you have to give us 24 hours notice so that that that's what that was talking oh okay okay

The other one was further down the paragraph that says motion to continue the case for 30 days to allow the landlord to install the heating system. I wondered if in there somewhere we should mention that there was an appellant letter of request to waive her fines and fees.

which is this is what the follow-up is going to be when we look at it in 30 days should would you agree with that well the motion is just to continue the hearing so that her i'll come up yeah her request to waive fines and fees come up anyway we wouldn't have to okay because that's part of the appeal okay all right then that's that's all i had so if it's it's fine like that

So I don't have any other changes. Anybody else? Well, was there anything in the paragraphs that you... Well, I think Member Santos cleared up that she didn't give them the proper notice to gain that access.

And they made that abundantly clear.

Over and over and over again.

The only other one would be whether you want to clarify that under the tenants paragraph was, you know, there's a discussion including occupancy history, repair requests, access for inspections, rental agreements, labor for rent, concerns regarding eviction, but we actually were talking about their eviction proceedings not just some rumor about eviction. Weren't they actually in it?

Yeah. The tenants, well, she had attempted multiple times to evict them and they had succeeded in preventing that or having those evictions dismissed. But those cases can be dismissed quite easily. Like your three day notice is not perfect. You've included, it's not part of the rent, blah, blah. So, um, My problem is the tenants maintained that access had not been refused but requested that entry occur only after proper legal notice had been or is provided rather than had been provided. We should probably go is. This we know is going to be a record which the tenants will be referring to no doubt some party will refer to these minutes i think it's worth the change that's a good one just make a difference right so is provided um would be my notification i don't have any others to paragraph three

Is that what it was? Yes.

Okay. In that motion to adopt the draft minutes for July 8th, 2026, with a modification, page two, paragraph three, last sentence, the tenants maintain that access had not been refused, but requested that entry occur only after proper legal notice is provided. And strike had been. In motion.

I'll second. I have a motion by member Bovis and a second by Vice Chair Spaulding. Can we take a vote, please?

The vote is as follows. Member Bovis? Aye. Member Santos? Aye. Member Lewis? Aye. Vice Chair Spaulding? Aye. Chair Siebert? Aye. Motion carries.

Thank you. And we're going to staff chair board announcements, comments and reports. Does anybody have anything?

Anything from staff?

We were going to hear about public comments.

You mean next meeting, not this meeting. Oh, I see.

Yeah, next time.

We're in there, board, staff. Anything else?

I just have one comment on, you know, we have the staff is kind of, we've got a stack of hardship cases here. that have been presented by the neighborhood preservation. And I don't know who can take the lead, trying to come up with some kind of list or something on resources for people to, but I think that would be helpful in general. As the hardship case goes.

We're going to see more of those.

We're going to see more of those. Yes, it's not going to get any easier. It's going to get worse.

I'm not going to be here. I'm going to be out of town August 26th.

Oh, that's Wednesday.

Fourth Wednesday.

Yeah, I am on the fence on that one. I think I'm okay.

Anything else? All right, we're meeting adjourned.

Yay. No, everybody says that.