[00:00:01]
EVERYONE.[CALL TO ORDER]
I CALLED THE BUILDING AND STANDARDS COMMISSION A MEETING IN ORDER, I MEAN, TO ORDER FOR JANUARY 25TH, 2023.LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT THE TIME IS 6:40 PM MY NAME IS SHAGUN.
I'M CHAIR OF THE BUILDING AND STANDARDS COMMISSION.
AT THIS TIME, I WILL CALL, ROLL, AND ASK FOR THE COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT, UM, TONIGHT TO PLEASE I, UM, SIGNIFY THAT YOU'RE HERE.
A QUICK REMINDER TO THE COMMISSIONERS THAT ARE REMOVING IN, PLEASE TURN ON YOUR CAMERA AT ALL TIMES AND KEEP IT ON SO THAT WE CAN MAINTAIN QUORUM.
REMEMBER TO TURN YOUR MICS ON AS WELL, PLEASE PRESENT.
AND COMMISSIONER FRANCIS HERE.
AND WE ALSO HAVE, UH, CHIEF TOM BAKI HERE.
UM, AND BEFORE THE CASES ARE CALLED, THE COMMISSION WILL ENTERTAIN PUBLIC COMMUNICATION.
FOR ITEMS THAT ARE NOT ON TONIGHT'S AGENDA, EACH SPEAKER WILL BE ALLOWED FIVE MINUTES, UM, I'M SORRY, THREE MINUTES OR SIX MINUTES.
FOR ANYONE THAT REQUIRES INTERPRETATION SERVICES, THERE'S NOBODY HERE.
TONIGHT, THE COMMISSION WILL CONSIDER, UH, WILL CONDUCT A HEARING FOR FOUR OF SIX CASES ON THE POSTED AGENDA.
THE COMMISSION WILL CONSIDER SEVEN CASES, FOUR, FIVE PROPERTIES.
THE CASES WILL BE CONSIDERED IN THE ORDER IN WHICH THEY APPEAR ON THE AGENDA.
HOWEVER, THE COMMISSION MAY TAKE A CASE OUT OF ORDER IF IT DIMS, UH, IT APPROPRIATE.
ALL ATTENDEES AT THE HEARING ARE REQUIRED TO OBSERVE APPROPRIATE DECORUM AND STABILITY SO AS NOT TO IMPAIR THE COMMISSION'S ABILITY TO CONDUCT BUSINESS.
THE COMMISSION'S COORDINATOR, MELANIE ALI, WILL CALL EACH CASE ON THE AGENDA, FOLLOWED BY TESTIMONY.
AUSTIN CODE STAFF WILL ALSO BE AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS WHEN YOUR CASE IS CALLED.
THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE PROPERTY MUST COME FORWARD AND TAKE A SEAT NEAR THE PODIUM, OR IF YOU'RE PARTICIPATING REMOTELY, MAKE SURE TO UNMUTE YOUR PHONE.
THE CITY WILL PRESENT ITS EVIDENCE AND WITNESSES.
FIRST, YOU AND YOUR REPRESENTATIVE MAY THEN ASK THE WITNESS, UH, OR THE WITNESSES QUESTIONS ABOUT THEIR TESTIMONY.
AFTER THE CITY HAS PRESENTED ITS EVIDENCE AND WITNESSES, YOU'LL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT YOUR OWN WITNESS AND EVIDENCE AS WELL.
YOU'LL HAVE A TOTAL OF FIVE MINUTES TO PRESENT YOUR CASE.
WHEN THE TIMER INDICATES THAT YOUR TIME HAS EXPIRED, YOU MUST FINISH YOUR SENTENCE AND CONCLUDE YOUR PRESENTATION.
DO WE HAVE A DESIGNATED TIME KEEPER TONIGHT? YES.
UH, JAMES, US FOR AUSTIN COHEN, I'LL BE YOUR DESIGNATED TIME KEEPER.
AFTER YOU AND THE CITY HAVE PRESENTED EVIDENCE AND WITNESSES, THE COMMISSION MAY ASK QUESTIONS OF EITHER SIDE.
AFTER THE COMMISSION MEMBERS ASK QUESTIONS, I WILL ALLOW OTHER INTERESTED PERSONS WHO ARE PRESENT TO OFFER RELEVANT TESTIMONY ABOUT THE CASE.
BOTH SIDES AND THE COMMISSION MAY ASK QUESTIONS OF ANY ADDITIONAL WITNESSES.
AFTER ALL THE EVIDENCE AND TESTIMONY IS CONCLUDED, THE COMMISSION WILL DISCUSS THE CASE AND VOTE ON A DECISION.
THE COMMISSION'S DECISION WILL BE ANNOUNCED TONIGHT, AND A COPY OF THE DECISION WILL BE MAILED TO YOU.
A DECISION OF THE COMMISSION IS FINAL AND BINDING, UNLESS APPEAL TO DISTRICT COURT WITHIN 30 DAYS AS PROVIDED IN THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE.
IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS PROCEDURE, PLEASE ASK YOUR QUESTIONS WHEN YOUR CASE IS CALLED.
NOW, I WILL, UH, LIKE TO SWEAR IN THE WITNESSES, UM, THAT ARE WANTING TO TESTIFY UNDER OATH.
ANY PERSON THAT WANTS TO PRESENT TESTIMONY BEFORE THE COMMISSION, IN ANY CASE, INCLUDING THOSE REMOVING IN, PLEASE STAND UP AND RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND SO THAT YOU MAY BE SWORN IN.
DO EACH OF YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE TESTIMONY YOU'LL PROVIDE THIS EVENING IS THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH?
[00:05:01]
IF SO, PLEASE SAY, I DO DO.IF THERE'S NOTHING FURTHER, WE'LL, OH, ACTUALLY, WE'LL, UM, GO AHEAD AND CONSIDER THE AGENDA ITEMS, UH, THAT ARE BEFORE THE COMMISSION TONIGHT, AND THE
[1. Approve the minutes of the Building and Standards Commission regular meeting on December 7, 2022.]
FIRST ITEM IS GOING TO BE THE MINUTES FROM THE DECEMBER HEARING CHAIR.OH, DID YOU HAVE A MEETING? YES.
I WAS JUST GOING TO MOVE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES.
WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM DECEMBER 2ND.
WE HAVE A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER MUELLER.
I'VE BEEN FROM COMMISSIONER FREIBERGER.
HAVE WE ALL HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW THE MINUTES? YES.
SO WE'LL GO AHEAD AND, UM, JUST ASK IF ANYBODY HAS ANY OBJECTION TO APPROVING THE MINUTES.
UM, DO WE NEED TO ACTUALLY TAKE A VOTE? CAN HEAR? UM, I, I GUESS WE COULD, YES.
WE'LL GO REALLY QUICKLY AND TAKE A VOTE.
THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER FREIBERGER.
UM, AND I'M ALSO IN FAVOR, COMMISSIONER FERRE.
UH, COMMISSIONER THOMPSON AYE.
COMMISSIONER STS, I THINK YOU ARE MUTED.
YOU COULD JUST SIGNIFY BY RAISING YOUR HAND.
UM, I'LL MOVE ON TO COMMISSION.
I WAS, I HAD AN AUDIO ISSUE AND I WATCHED Y'ALL FOR ABOUT TWO MINUTES THERE.
UH, I DIDN'T HEAR THE LAST ORDER OF BUSINESS, PLEASE.
WELL, THE, WE'RE, WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM DECEMBER, 2022.
ARE YOU INFORMED? CAN I BE SHOWN AS AN, I'D LIKE TO BE SHOWN AS AN I ON THAT.
I THINK WE HAVE, SORRY ABOUT THAT.
WE HAVE, UM, THE MINUTES APPROVED FROM DECEMBER, 2022.
MAY I BEGIN CALLING THE CASES? YES, WE CAN BEGIN CALLING THE CASES.
[2. Case Numbers: CL 2019-182477; CL 2019-182566; and CL 2019-183170]
ITEM NUMBER TWO.THE FIRST THREE CASES ON THE AGENDA ARE REGARDING A MULTI-FAMILY PROPERTY IN THE REPEAT OFFENDER PROGRAM LOCATED AT 79 29 GA STREET, ALSO KNOWN AS PLAZA DEL NORTE.
ORDERS WERE ISSUED IN NINE CASES FOR THIS PROPERTY IN SEPTEMBER, 2019, ALL OF WHICH HAVE SINCE COME INTO COMPLIANCE.
THE CASES ARE RETURNING TONIGHT AT THE REQUEST OF THE NEW OWNERS REGARDING RELIEF FOR PENALTIES ACCRUED IN THREE OF THE NINE CASES.
THE CASE NUMBERS ARE AS FOLLOWED, CL 20 19, 1 8 2 4 77 IS REGARDING THE BUILDING'S EXTERIOR CL 2019.
1 8 2 5 66 IS REGARDING THE BUILDING'S HAND HANDRAILS AND GUARDRAILS AND CL 2019.
180 3 1 70 IS REGARDING THE INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR OF UNIT 1 0 9.
EXHIBITS CAN BE FOUND IN THE GOLD BOOKS IN YOUR READERS OR GOOGLE DRIVE FOLDER.
HERE'S SOME FACTS ABOUT THE CASE.
THIS CASE IS ABOUT A COMMERCIAL MULTI-FAMILY PROPERLY PROPERTY CURRENTLY IN THE REPEAT OFFENDER PROGRAM CONSISTING OF ONE BUILDING WITH 24 UNITS.
ORDERS WERE ISSUED IN THE, EACH OF THE THREE CASES HERE TONIGHT FOR REPAIR WITHIN 45 DAYS, WITH A PENALTY OF $1,000 PER WEEK.
ON THE 46TH DAY OF COMPLIANCE WAS NOT ACHIEVED.
THE COMBINED TOTAL PENALTY AS OF TODAY'S DATE IS $382,695 AND 51 CENTS, WHICH INCLUDES INTEREST ACCRUED SINCE COMPLIANCE WAS ACHIEVED.
AND YOUR READER OR GOOGLE DRIVE FOLDER, YOU'LL FIND THE FOLLOWING EXHIBITS ONE AND TWO A THROUGH TWO N EXHIBITS THREE AND FOUR A THROUGH FOUR H.
AND EXHIBIT 17 AND 18 A THROUGH 18 L, WHICH WERE PREVIOUSLY ADMITTED, EXHIBIT 19, WHICH CONTAINS UPDATED COMPLAINTS AND CASE HISTORIES FOR THE THREE CASES.
THE REQUIRED NOTICES FOR TONIGHT'S HEARING AND POSTINGS, COPIES OF THE BSC ORDERS ISSUED SEPTEMBER 30TH, 2019, AND CURRENT PENALTY STATEMENTS FOR EACH OF THE THREE CASES.
[00:10:01]
20, WHICH CONSISTS OF PRE AND POST COMPLIANCE PHOTOS AND CODES RECOMMENDATION.AND LASTLY, PROPERTY OWNER DOCUMENTS TO BE MARKED AS EXHIBITS.
AUSTIN CODE DIVISION MANAGER, MATTHEW NORIEGA, IS HERE TONIGHT TO DISCUSS THE EVENTS THAT LED TOWARDS COMPLIANCE AND TO SHOW YOU SOME PRE AND POST COMPLIANCE PHOTOS OF THE PROPERTY.
DIVISION MANAGER, NORIEGA, PLEASE BEGIN YOUR TESTIMONY.
WELL, GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS.
I'M THE DIVISION MANAGER FOR THE REPEAT OFFENDER PROGRAM.
AND AS MENTIONED, THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 79 29 GAULD IS, UH, REGISTERED WITH A REPEAT OFFENDER PROGRAM SINCE SEPTEMBER OF 2018.
AND, UH, THE PROPERTY HAS RECEIVED NUMEROUS VIOLATIONS.
IT HAS BEEN CITED THROUGH ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING PROCESS, THE BUILDING OF SANDERS COMMISSION, AND, UH, JUST, UH, JUST TO, JUST TO GIVE YOU AN INFORMATION, THIS PROPERTY WAS THE FIRST PROPERTY THAT WE'VE EVER SUSPENDED UNDER THE SUSPENSION REVOCATION PROCESS UNDER THE ORDINANCE.
SO BACK IN JULY OF 2020, THIS PROPERTY WAS SUSPENDED.
UM, THE PROPERTY HAS MADE DRASTIC CHANGES AND, UH, THE EFFORTS OF THE NEW OWNER HAS BEEN, UH, NOTICED.
AND JUST SOME OF THE PICTURES, YOU'LL SEE HOW THE CONDITIONS HAVE CHANGED QUITE A BIT.
UH, THIS PROPERTY HAS BEEN REMOVED RECENTLY FROM THE SUSPENSION, UH, BEGINNING OF THIS MONTH OF 2023.
SO LET'S TAKE A LOOK AT SOME PICTURES.
THIS WILL BE THE PICTURES WHEN WE FIRST WENT OUT TO THE PROPERTY.
SO THE FIRST PICTURE'S GONNA SHOW THE WELL PRE-COMPLIANCE PHOTOS.
SO THIS IS BLADA NORTE, 79 29 GAT.
NEXT PHOTO, CONTEXTUAL FIT, PICTURES OF JUST THE CONDITIONS AT THAT TIME.
UH, THIS WAS AN ISSUE WHEN WE FIRST WENT OUT THERE BECAUSE THERE WAS QUITE A BIT OF, UH, UH, UH, PLANTS.
AND THERE WAS QUITE A BIT OF, UH, UH, ITEMS ON, IN THE, THE WALKWAYS OF THE, UH, THE CORRIDORS OF THE, UH, THE APARTMENT COMPLEX.
SO THAT CAUSED AN EGRESS ISSUE.
WE BROUGHT IT TO THEIR ATTENTION DUE TO THE NUMEROUS ITEMS THAT WERE ON THE, IN THE CORRIDORS, IN THE AREAS FOR, FOR, TO BE ABLE TO EXIT THE PROPERTY OR FOR EGRESS.
UH, NEXT PHOTO, JUST SHOWING THE, THE PASSAGEWAYS, HOW THEY WERE NOT UP TO CODE, AND JUST A REQUIREMENT TO, TO REMOVE THOSE ITEMS. NEXT PHOTO, UH, ISSUES WITH THE, THE LIGHTS.
THERE WERE NUMEROUS LIGHTS OUT ON THE PROPERTY.
AND, UH, THIS, THIS PHOTO JUST SHOWS ONE OF THE LIGHTS OUT.
NEXT PHOTO, UH, ALSO CONDITIONS ARE JUST THE LIGHTS NOT NOT FUNCTIONING PROPERLY.
UH, THIS ONE JUST SHOWS THE LIGHTS ONCE AGAIN, BUT ALL, THERE WAS NUMEROUS WIRING, UH, EXTENSION CORDS THAT WERE JUST RUNNING THROUGH THE, THROUGH THE APARTMENTS, AND, UH, THEY WERE OUTSIDE.
EXTERIOR, UH, EXTENSION CORDS.
WE'RE GONNA SEE THE INTERIOR OF IT.
UH, WHAT SHOWS JUST THE BROKEN WINDOWS.
UH, WHAT HAPPENED ON THIS PROPERTY IS THAT THE BROKEN WINDOWS, IT WAS NUMEROUS BROKEN WINDOWS, BUT THEY WERE USING PLEXIGLASS.
AND, UH, PLEXIGLASS IS NOT UP TO CODE OR IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE GLAZED PROPERLY.
SO THIS WAS ONE OF THE ISSUES, UH, THAT WAS, UH, THAT WAS IN VIOLATION.
SO YOU CAN SEE THE PHO, UH, JUST BROKEN GLASS, JUST A PLEXIGLASS THAT THEY WERE USING.
NEXT PHOTO HERE, YOU SEE THE DETERIORATION, THE ROOFING, UH, THE, THE SOFFIT, THE, THE FASCIA IS JUST DETERIORATING DUE TO THE, JUST THE NOT MAINTEN, NO MAINTENANCE ON THE PROPERTY.
NEXT PHOTO, ONCE AGAIN, JUST FAIA, JUST DETERIORATION.
UH, JUST, UH, THE CONDITION THAT WE FOUND WHEN WE WERE THERE.
NEXT PHOTO, JUST AGAIN, ONCE AGAIN, JUST, UH, THE CONDITIONS WE FOUND NEXT.
WELL, THIS WAS AN ISSUE WHEN WE FIRST WENT OUT THERE.
WHEN WE, WHEN WE WENT OUT THERE, THE, THE, THE HANDRAILS, THE, THE GUARDRAILS WERE ALL LOOSE.
THEY WERE NOT PROPERLY SECURED.
UH, THEY WERE WOBBLING, AND THEY WERE IN A, IN A DANGEROUS CONDITION, UH, FOR THE TENANTS IN THOSE UNITS.
HERE'S, UH, JUST SOME OF THE LANDINGS, UH, THE CONDITIONS THAT WE FOUND AND HOW, UH, THE, THE TENANTS WERE DEALING WITH SOME OF THE, UH, OF THESE HANDRAILS AND GUARDRAILS AND SOME OF THE LANDINGS.
NEXT PHOTO HERE, YOU SEE THAT, UH, THEY WERE NOT PROPERLY SECURED.
THERE WAS NO, THERE WAS NO, UH, UH, SECURE OR ANCHORING OF THE, OF THE HANDRAILS.
UH, THEY WERE ROB WOBBLY, AND THEY WERE, NO, THEY WERE DANGEROUS.
NEXT PHOTO, THEY WERE USING NAILS TO, TO HOLD THE HANDRAILS.
AND, UH, IT WAS A CONDITION THAT WE HAD TO, IT WAS IN VIOLATION.
THIS IS SOME OF THE REPAIRS THAT THEY DID, UH, WAS NOT UP TO CODE, BUT THEY MADE SOME REPAIRS, BUT, UH, STILL THEY WERE, IT WAS IN VIOLATION.
THIS IS UNIT 1 0 9, I BELIEVE.
[00:15:01]
UH, LET'S GO INSIDE AND TAKE A LOOK AT WHAT'S INSIDE.NEXT PHOTO HERE, WE, THE STOVE WASN'T FUNCTIONING PROPERLY, AND IT WAS DUE TO A FIRE THAT OCCURRED.
UH, IF YOU TAKE A LOOK AT THE NEXT PHOTO, YOU CAN SEE WHERE THE, THE DAMAGE WAS DONE TO THE VENT HOOD.
IT WAS A FIRE THAT OCCURRED, SO THERE WAS THE STOVE AND THE VENT HOOD WAS DAMAGED.
NEXT PHOTO, WATER WASN'T DRAINING IN THE SINK.
UH, JUST STAGNANT WATER THAT WAS JUST, UH, NOT DRAINING PROPERLY.
NEXT PHOTO, UH, COUNTERTOPS WERE NOT, UH, UH, HAD HOLES.
THEY WERE PUTTING, UH, PAPER OVER IT, PUTTING ALUMINUM FOIL OVER IT, JUST TO COVER THE, THE HOSE OVER ON THE, ON THE COUNTERTOPS.
NEXT PHOTO, HAVING ISSUES WITH THE A AC.
UH, THE REGISTERS, UH, THERE WAS, THEY WERE TRYING TO MAKE THE REPAIRS.
THERE WERE HOLES IN THE CEILING.
NEXT PHOTO JUST SHOWS THE, THE DAMAGE THAT WAS OCCURRING IN THE UNITS, THE HOLES, AND, AND HOW THEY'RE, THEY WERE JUST NOT MAINTAINING THE PROPERTY OF TO CODE.
AND THESE TENANTS WERE LIVING IN THESE CONDITIONS.
NEXT, PHOTO TILE, MISSING THE BASEBOARDS NOT PROPERLY SECURED.
LET'S TAKE A LOOK AT THE WAY THE PROPERTY IS NOW.
AND, UH, WE'LL SEE THE DRASTIC CHANGES THEY'VE MADE.
HERE'S A, UM, CONTEXTUAL PICTURE.
THE PAINTING THEY PAINTED, THE, THE EXTERIOR MADE MANY IMPROVEMENTS.
LET'S TAKE A LOOK AT THE NEXT PHOTO.
IT'S NOW CALLED THE CRESS HOUSE.
UM, MADE SOME, UH, REPAIRS TO THE OUTSIDE PAINTING, AND THEN ALSO JUST A DECORATIVE FEATURE OUTSIDE.
NEXT PHOTO, JUST THE, UH, CORRIDORS.
NOW THE LANDSCAPING OUTSIDE THE COMMON AREAS.
NEXT PHOTO, JUST THE CHANGES THAT HAVE BEEN MADE.
THE WINDOWS ARE REPLACED AND PROPER GLAZING, AND JUST THE PASSAGEWAYS ARE E ARE, ARE, ARE PASSABLE, AND, AND UP TO CAR.
JUST ONCE AGAIN, JUST JUST THE CONDITIONS THAT THEY'RE LIVING IN NOW.
LIGHTS WERE REPAIRED, SOFFITS WERE REPLACED.
THE CONDITIONS THAT THEY NOW ARE, ARE, UH, HOW THEY'RE UP TO CODE.
JUST THE REPAIRS TO THE, TO THE ROOF, TO THE, TO THE FASCIA, THE, THE SOFFIT.
UM, MANY, MANY REPAIRS BEEN BEEN CONDUCTED AT THIS PROPERTY.
NEXT PHOTO, JUST THE LIGHTS HAVE BEEN REPAIRED AND FUNCTIONING COR CORRECTLY.
WE'RE GONNA GO BACK INTO THE PROPERTY.
NEXT PHOTO, NEXT PHOTO, STOVE WORKING.
NEXT PHOTO, DRAINING PROPERLY, THE SINK.
JUST SEE THE REPAIRS THAT WERE DONE.
NEXT PHOTO LIGHTS REPAIRED WORKING.
NEXT PHOTO, TILE REPAIRED, BASEBOARD REPLACED.
NEXT PHOTO, TRIM, TRIM, UH, REPLACED ON THE DOOR.
JUST, UH, MORE, MORE, UH, JUST THE REPAIRS THAT THEY CONDUCTED.
NEXT PHOTO, THE REGISTERED REPLACED, AND NEXT PHOTO GLAZING.
THE WINDOWS HAVE BEEN REPLACED WITH PROPER, UH, GLAZING.
AND I BELIEVE THAT'S THE LAST PHOTO.
JUST TO, JUST TO GIVE YOU SOME, AN UPDATE.
AND THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT RECENTLY OCCURRED.
WE, WE WENT OUT TO THE PROPERTY AND WE WENT OUT TO THE PROPERTY TO TAKE A LOOK AT, UH, WHAT OTHER REPAIRS THEY WERE DOING.
UH, MANY OF THE UNITS ARE VACANT.
THEY'RE, THEY'RE MAKING THE REPAIRS INSIDE.
UH, THEY'RE, THEY'RE VERY, UH, VERY UP TO DATE.
THEY'RE, THEY'RE VERY, VERY GOOD CONDITION.
THESE UNITS PERMITS HAVE BEEN PULLED.
UH, MANY OF THE PERMITS HAVE BEEN FINALED ALREADY.
BUT ONE THING THAT WE DID NOTICE GOING INTO THE UNITS, THEY'RE STARTING TO TRENCH OUT SOME OF THE UNITS.
THEY'RE TRYING, THEY'RE GOING INTO THE UNITS AND, AND THEY'RE BRINGING UP THE, THE CONCRETE TO GET TO THE SEWER LINES AND GETTING TO THE SEWER LINES.
THEY'RE REPLACING THOSE SEWER LINES,
[00:20:01]
MAKING THE REPAIRS TO THE CLEAN OUTS, UH, AND, AND MAKING ALL THESE REPAIRS, WHICH IS GREAT, BUT PERMITS HAVE NOT BEEN PULLED, AND WE BROUGHT THAT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE NEW OWNER.SO THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE JUST RECENTLY FOUND.
WE SENT OUT NOTICE OF VIOLATION, AND THIS PROPERTY, UH, IS NOW NOTIFIED THAT THE PERMITS ARE REQUIRED TO, TO REPLACE THOSE SEWER LINES AND, AND TO MAKE THOSE REPAIRS.
SO THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE RECENTLY INSPECTED, AND THAT'S, UH, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT, UM, WE WANTED TO BRING TO YOUR ATTENTION.
THAT ENDS MY, THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
STAFF ASKED, THE STAFF ASKED THE COMMISSION TO ADMIT EXHIBIT 19, WHICH INCLUDES STAFF PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, AND OTHER RELEVANT DOCUMENTS.
AND EXHIBIT 20, WHICH CONSISTS, WHICH CONSISTS OF PRE AND POST COMPLIANCE PHOTOS.
STAFF ALSO REQUESTS THAT THE COMMISSION ADOPT THE PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS LAW AND ORDER THE FOLLOWING.
ONE AFFIRMED THE CIVIL PENALTIES PREVIOUSLY ASSESSED IN THE SEPTEMBER 30TH, 2019, ORDERS, 2 0 1 916, 3 3 2 4 2 0 1 9 1 6 3 3 2 5, AND 2 0 1 9 1 6 3 3 3 2, WHICH AS OF TODAY'S DATE, TOTAL 155,000 760 19, 1 8 2 4 7 7, REGARDING THE BUILDING'S EXTERIOR, $150,781 AND 6 CENTS FOR CL 20 19, 180 2 5 66, REGARDING THE HANDRAILS AND GUARDRAILS, AND $76,149 AND 28 CENTS FOR CL 20 19, 183, 1 70 REGARDING UNIT 1 0 9, INTERIOR, EXTERIOR, INCLUDING INTEREST FOR COMBINED TOTAL OF $382,695 AND 51 CENTS.
UM, I'LL GO AHEAD AND ADMIT STAFF'S EXHIBIT, UH, 19 AND 20.
AND I'LL ALSO, IN THE INTEREST OF TIME, GO AHEAD AND ADMIT THE OWNER'S EXHIBITS AS WELL.
UM, AND I BELIEVE WE HAVE MR. WOLF HERE.
UM, YOU MAY GO AHEAD AND, UH, PROCEED WITH YOUR PRESENTATION AND YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
JUST TO BE CLEAR, THIS IS THE FIRST TIME I'VE EVER BEEN A REPEAT OFFENDER OF ANYTHING OR ANY KIND OF LIST.
SO, UM, ALSO THE FIRST TIME I VOTED $382,000, UH, TO ANYBODY.
BUT, UH, I, I PUT TOGETHER A PACKET, WHICH I DON'T KNOW IF YOU GUYS HAVE BEEN ABLE TO SEE IT, BUT JUST KIND OF TELLING THE STORY OF THIS PROPERTY.
WHEN WE TOOK IT OVER, YOU SAW THE BEFORE PHOTOS.
A LOT OF THE REPAIRS THAT THE GENTLEMAN HAD POINTED OUT TO, TO THE INTERIORS, UH, WERE REPAIRS MADE, UM, LIKE IN 2020 BEFORE WE, THE PROPERTY, JUST TO KIND OF BARELY MAKE IT LIVABLE.
SO THE UNITS INSIDE ARE MUCH, MUCH NICER.
AND I HAVE SOME PHOTOS I CAN SHOW YOU ON THAT.
UM, JUST TO GO INTO IT, NOT, NOT ONLY WAS THE PROPERTY IN IN HIGH, UH, HIGH LEVEL OF DISREPAIR, I I PUT IT IN MY PACKET, A COUPLE OF ARTICLES.
UM, THERE WAS A SWAT INCIDENT ON GULF STREET IN NORTH AUSTIN THAT WAS BACK IN 2019.
UM, THE CITY AUSTIN MONITOR HAD PUT IN, UH, HAD LABELED THIS PROPERTY AS A REPEAT OFFENDING PROPERTY SAYING IT WAS UNSAFE.
SO IT HAD A LOT OF BAD, BAD PUBLICITY.
THERE WAS EVEN A, UH, A RAP VIDEO, WHICH I SCREENSHOTTED ON YOUTUBE, UH, THAT WAS FILMED AT THE PROPERTY IN 2019.
AND I WON'T READ THE LYRICS THAT ARE BELOW.
BUT, UM, HAD A PRETTY BAD REPUTATION.
SO ME AND MY, UH, TWO PARTNERS IN THIS, WE PURCHASED THE PROPERTY.
I SPOKE WITH STAFF, UH, MELANIE OVER AT THE BSC COMMISSION, TRYING TO FIND OUT MORE INFORMATION ON THESE, UH, BSC ORDERS.
UM, AND, YOU KNOW, WE WERE TOLD AS LONG AS WE WERE ABLE TO PURCHASE THE PROPERTY AND MAKE THE REPAIRS NECESSARY AND PROVE TO THE COUNCIL THAT, YOU KNOW, WE WERE DEFINITELY WILLING TO DO THE RIGHT THING, THAT HOPEFULLY WE CAN GET SOME LEEWAY ON SOME OF THESE FINES.
CUZ OBVIOUSLY THESE ARE ALL RELATED TO PREVIOUS OWNERSHIP OF SOMEBODY WHO JUST DIDN'T CARE ABOUT THE PROPERTY AND EVENTUALLY LOST IT.
UM, SO WE'VE DONE A PRETTY SUBSTANTIAL INVESTMENT IN THE PROPERTY.
UM, I CAN SHOW YOU, I'LL HOLD IT UP JUST SO YOU CAN SEE IT, BUT IF YOU CAN JUST LOOK AT ONE OF THE INTERIORS.
SO IT'S, IT'S ALL NICE STAINLESS STEEL.
IT'S NOT LIKE BARELY WORKING AND FUNCTIONING OVENS WITH FOIL ON 'EM.
AND WE'VE PUT A LOT OF MONEY INTO THESE INTERIORS.
UM, WE'VE GONE THROUGH THE WORST ONES.
UH, WHEN WE INHERITED THE PROPERTY, THERE WERE FIVE TENANTS THAT HADN'T PAID RENT FOR OVER A YEAR.
HAD TO GO THROUGH THE EVICTIONS THAT TOOK SEVERAL MONTHS, UM, BUT EVENTUALLY ABLE TO GET CONTROL OF THE PROPERTY AND MAKE SUBSTANTIAL IMPROVEMENTS.
AND NOW IT'S A VERY SAFE, SAFE AND GREAT ENVIRONMENT.
AND ONE, THE HOLDUP IS, UH, ADDRESSING THESE, UH, ORDERS FROM THE BSC BECAUSE OUR CONSTRUCTION LOAN WILL NOT FUND US TO CONTINUE ANY LONGER UNTIL WE CLEAR THESE UP.
UM, OBVIOUSLY WE DON'T HAVE THIS KIND OF MONEY TO JUST PAY THIS, AND WE'RE JUST HOPING THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU GUYS CAN LOOK AT THE PRO PROGRESS
[00:25:01]
WE'VE DONE AND, UH, THE VISION WE HAVE FOR THE PROPERTY, AND JUST PROVIDE A LITTLE BIT OF LEEWAY, UM, HARRISON BEFORE PHOTOS THAT THEY'RE PUTTING UP A COUPLE OF THINGS AS WELL.UM, I DID GET, ONE OF THE TENANTS HAD WRITTEN A LETTER, UM, TO YOU.
I WANTED TO READ, UM, TO WHOM IT MADE CONCERN.
I'VE BEEN LIVING IN THE GULF STREET APARTMENT SINCE 2014.
THE PREVIOUS OWNERS NEGLECTED THE PROPERTY AND NEVER FIXED ANY NECESSARY MAINTENANCE ITEMS. MANY OF THE UNITS WERE BROKEN INTO PEOPLE CONSTANTLY DUMPING THEIR TRASH EVERYWHERE, CARS GETTING VANDALIZED, ALL OF OUR UNITS IN POOR CONDITION.
MY FAMILY WAS NOT SAFE HERE SINCE THE NEW OWNER TOOK OVER AND REVAMPED THE ENTIRE PROPERTY WITH NEW LANDSCAPING, LIGHTING AND PAINT.
I HAVE SEEN THE WORKERS REGULARLY CHECKING ON THE PROPERTY AND CLEANING UP.
PROPERTY MANAGEMENT HAS BEEN AVAILABLE TO ME, AND I WAS EVEN ABLE TO QUALIFY FOR ONE OF THE NEWLY RENOVATED UNITS BEFORE THEY LISTED IT FOR LEASE.
OUR FAMILY IS MUCH HAPPIER HERE NOW, AND WE HOPE IT'S STAY FOR A LONG TIME.
I URGE YOU TO HELP THEM FINISH THEIR PROJECT SO THAT OUR PROPERTY HAS NEW RESIDENTS AND STAYS IN THE GOOD MAINTAINED CONDITION.
THEY'VE WORKED HARD TO GET IT TO ESTEBAN SOTO, UM, UNIT TWO OH THREE WITH THIS PHONE NUMBER.
UM, AS FAR AS A TIMEFRAME, JUST SO YOU CAN KIND OF GET AN IDEA OF HOW QUICKLY WE REALLY HAVE MOVED ON THIS.
UM, WE PURCHASED THE PROPERTY AUGUST 4TH, 2022.
UM, AUGUST 10TH, I MET WITH, UH, REO.
UH, THE CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER ASSIGNED TO THIS AT THE ADDRESS, UM, ADDRESSED HIS CONCERNS.
WE PUT TOGETHER A PLAN FOR RECTIFYING ALL THE ISSUES IN A TIMELY MANNER.
THERE WAS A EIGHT PAGE LIST OF THINGS THAT HAD TO BE CORRECTED.
UM, AND THEN HERE WE ARE, FIVE AND A HALF MONTHS LATER, UM, CODE VIOLATIONS ARE CLEARED.
ONE, UH, QUICK THING THE GENTLEMAN SAID ABOUT THE PLUMBING PERMITS.
WE HAD AN EMERGENCY SEWER BREAK IN ONE OF THE UNITS.
AND WE HAD TO BASICALLY PULL OPEN THE FLOOR, MAKE THAT REPAIR.
IT JUST HAD TO BE DONE FOR LIKE, THE SAFETY OF THE TENANTS.
I HAVE THE PERMIT NUMBER, UM, AND WE DO HAVE A PERMIT ON THAT.
SO WE'RE WORKING ON FINALIZING THAT SO THAT THAT PERMIT IS TAKEN CARE OF.
UM, WE'VE RENOVATED THE EXTERIOR.
WE HAVE NEW SIGNAGE, COMMON AREA LIGHTING, NEW, NEW DOORS, NEW WINDOWS.
UM, ALL THE VACANT UNITS HAVE BEEN REPAIRED.
THE SURROUNDING AREA IS MAINTAINED AND CLEAN.
WE HAVE TRASH, UH, MONITORING WEEKLY PEOPLE DUMP TRASH ON THAT PROPERTY CONSTANTLY.
WE HAVE SOMEBODY THERE WEEKLY THAT COMES BY AND PICKS UP COUCHES.
I'M SELLING, I'VE GOT ABOUT 20 COUCHES IF ANYONE'S LOOKING FOR SOMETHING.
UM, OUR BANK LOAN IS SECURED TO FINISH THE PROPERTY.
UH, WE CAN CLOSE AS SOON AS THIS IS KIND OF RESOLVED.
AND 10 OF THE UNITS ARE GONNA BE REMAINING AFFORDABLE HOUSING WITH EXISTING TENANTS IN PLACE.
WE HAVEN'T RAISED THEIR RENT, WE HAVEN'T GIVEN, UM, ANY KIND OF NOTICE TO VACATE.
THEY'RE ALL GOOD TENANTS WHO'VE BEEN THERE FOR FIVE PLUS YEARS.
UM, AUSTIN NEIGHBORS, RESIDENTS, POLICE CODE ENFORCEMENT ARE HAPPY.
SO, UM, YEAH, SO THAT'S, THAT'S THE CASE.
HOPEFULLY YOU GUYS CAN, UM, FIND IT IN YOU TO REALIZE THAT WE ARE REALLY DOING THE RIGHT THING.
ANY MONEY THAT WE PAY FOR THESE FINES, UH, IS JUST MONEY THAT'S NOT GOING TO THE PROPERTY.
WE'RE NOT SELLING THIS PROPERTY, WE'RE NOT MAKING A PROFIT.
UM, WE'RE JUST GENUINELY TRYING TO BRING IT UP TO A GREAT STANDARD, HAVE IT IMPROVE THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND, AND DO.
UM, AND, UH, I'LL TURN IT OVER TO THE COMMISSIONERS RIGHT NOW.
IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS FOR DIVISION MANAGER NORIEGA OR FOR THE OWNER.
I'LL TAKE COMMISSIONER THOMPSON FIRST.
YES, I'VE, UM, I SUPPOSE WHEN YOU BOUGHT THIS, YOU BOUGHT IT AS A, UH, DEPRECIATED PROJECT, RIGHT? YOU DID NOT PAY FOR ANY OF THESE, UH, ANY OF THESE IMPROVEMENTS WHEN YOU BOUGHT THE HOME, I MEAN, BOUGHT THE CORRECT.
AND SO YOU GOT A GOOD BARGAIN ON IT.
AND SO WHEN YOU PAY, WHEN YOU GET IT FIXED AND PUT MONEY IN THERE TO GETTING IT FIXED MM-HMM.
AND IT SEEMS TO ME LIKE THE CITIZENS OF AUSTIN BY NOT TAKING THE FINES ARE DEPRECIATING, THE FINES THAT ARE ON IT ARE ACTUALLY PAYING FOR THE VALUE.
THEY'RE, THEY'RE, THEY'RE HELPING HAND YOU A NICER PROJECT TO NOT GET TOO INTO THE WEEDS OF THE NUMBERS.
AND NOT THAT YOU'RE CONCERNED IF WE'RE MAKING MILLIONS OF DOLLARS ON THIS OR MAKING NOTHING.
I KNOW THAT'S LIKE REALLY NOT THE OBJECTIVE OF YOUR QUESTION OR, BUT WE BOUGHT THE PROPERTY AT WHAT WAS GOING TO BE A GOOD DEAL.
NOT A GREAT DEAL, BUT A GOOD DEAL, YOU KNOW, A GOOD LONG-TERM INVESTMENT FOR US.
WE'VE HAD A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF ISSUES THAT HAVE ARISE DURING THE REMODELING
[00:30:01]
OF THIS.UM, LIKE I SAID, WE HAD A SEWER LINE BUST UNDER THIS GIANT BUILDING AND, YOU KNOW, IT'S BECOME A, A, A THING.
UM, ALSO THE, BECAUSE OF THE LENGTH OF TIME INTEREST RATES HAVE RISEN BY 30, 40%.
SO, LIKE WHAT OUR PAYMENT WAS GONNA BE WHEN WE STARTED ON THIS VENTURE IS VERY DIFFERENT THAN WHAT IT IS NOW.
AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE'RE GONNA, ON A MONTHLY BASIS, WE'RE NOT ACTUALLY NOT GONNA MAKE ANY MONEY.
WE'RE NOT GONNA MAKE ANY CASH FLOW ON THIS PROPERTY.
WE'RE HOPING THAT LONG TERM IT IS A GOOD ASSET FOR US.
I MEAN, THAT'S WHY WE'RE DOING IT.
UM, BUT BACK TO YOUR QUESTION ABOUT, OR YOUR STATEMENT ABOUT THE CITIZENS HANDING US, UM, UH, AN, AN IMPROVEMENT.
WE'RE, WE'RE CONCURRENTLY OR, UM, WE'RE IMPROVING THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS WELL? VERY MUCH SO.
AND, AND IT'S JUST MAKING EVERYBODY'S VALUE AROUND US GO UP.
LIKE IT WASN'T JUST A BAD DISREPAIR PROPERTY, LIKE IT WAS ACTUALLY A, A HAVEN FOR CRIME AND CAUSING ISSUES FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND SO YES, LIKE OUR DOLLARS HAVE TO MAKE SOME RETURN, WHICH ISN'T GREAT IN THIS CASE, IT REALLY ISN'T.
BUT WE'RE ALSO PROVIDING SOMETHING TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS WELL.
AND I BELIEVE YOU COMMENTED THAT THE INTEREST RATE WAS SOMETHING LIKE 30 TO 40%? NO, THE, THE, THE PAYMENT, UH, IS GONNA BE BETWEEN 30 AND 40% HIGHER THAN WHAT IT WAS WHEN WE STARTED, BECAUSE OUR, OUR INTEREST RATE WAS GONNA BE LIKE 4% WHEN WE STARTED, AND NOW IT'S SEVEN AND A HALF.
SO NOT THAT THAT MATTERS TO YOU, BUT IT MATTERS TO US.
WE'RE NOT MAKING MONEY OFF OF THIS.
WE'LL BE NEG AND HONESTLY, WE'LL, WE'LL, WE'LL BE NEGATIVE IF WE ADD ANOTHER 400 K TO OUR BALANCE.
IF, UM, IT HAD BEEN MADE CLEAR, UM, OH, I'M SORRY.
UM, I THINK VICE CHAIR FERRERA HAD A QUESTION WE'LL COME TO YOU NEXT.
I, UM, DO YOU, I, I WISH YOU HAD PROVIDED SOME, UM, YOU'VE OBVIOUSLY SPENT A LOT OF MONEY ON THESE REPAIRS, BUT I NOTICED IN YOUR EXHIBITS YOU DIDN'T PROVIDE, UM, INVOICES OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, WHICH WAS STATED IN THE LETTERS, THAT THAT'S KIND OF THE TYPICAL EVIDENCE THAT WE TAKE INTO ACCOUNT.
BUT NEVERTHELESS, UM, HOW MUCH HAVE YOU SPENT ON THESE REPAIRS? UH, APPROXIMATELY AS OF RIGHT NOW, ABOUT APPROXIMATELY 600,000.
AND IT'S GONNA BE ANOTHER 400,000 TO FINISH, SO ABOUT A MILLION DOLLARS IS WHAT WE'RE PUTTING INTO IT.
WHEN YOU SAY FOUR, 400,000, THAT'S NOT DEFINED REFERRING TO NO, THAT'S JUST TO FINISH THIS PROJECT.
SO OUR TOTAL INVESTMENT INTO THIS WILL BE A MILLION DOLLARS OF RENOVATIONS.
UM, SO REGARDING THE EXISTENT FINES, WHEN YOU TOOK THE PRO WHEN YOU PURCHASED THE PROPERTY, WOULD YOU HAVE HESITATED TO PAY THE PRICE THAT YOU PAID? HAD YOU KNOWN THAT, OR HAD YOU THOUGHT THAT MAYBE THE FINES WOULD NOT BE RELIEVED? A HUNDRED PERCENT, RIGHT.
AND, AND SOME OF THEM MAY BE LIKE ABLE TO BE, WE, WE'VE MIGHT HAVE BEEN ABLE TO MAKE SOME OF IT WORK, SOME OF IT WORK, BUT THEN JUST WITH THE REAL ESTATE ENVIRONMENT, WHICH HAS DRASTICALLY CHANGED IN THE LAST SIX MONTHS, AS I'M PRETTY SURE EVERYONE'S AWARE, LIKE, IT, IT HAS CHANGED THE PICTURE FOR US.
SO, NO, WE WOULD NOT HAVE BOUGHT IT TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION.
AND IF YOU HAD NOT BOUGHT IT, DO YOU SUSPECT THAT IT WOULD STILL BE IN THE CONDITION THAT IT'S IN AND THE TENANTS WOULD STILL BE LIVING IN THE CONDITION THEY WERE LIVING IN, AND IT WOULD STILL BE A HAVEN FOR CRIME? I MEAN, IT'S BEEN LIKE THAT FOR SO LONG.
I BELIEVE THE CITY'S BEEN ON THIS FOR YEARS.
I MEAN, I DON'T THINK THE, YEAH, I WOULD'VE HAD SECOND, I'VE LEARNED A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE HISTORY OF IT, AND HE HAD A GAMBLING ISSUE, AND THE COURT HAD TO INTERVENE TO ACTUALLY COLLECT THE RENTS.
I MEAN, IT, IT, IT'S A WHOLE MESS.
SO, NO, I DON'T THINK IT WOULD'VE BEEN TURNED AROUND, MAYBE EVENTUALLY, I'M SURE.
DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM COMMISSIONERS? COMMISSIONER STEAD? NO.
I BELIEVE COMMISSIONER GREEN WAS WAITING LONGER THAN I WAS.
I, I'LL YIELD HIM IF, IF I'M CORRECT ABOUT THAT.
CAN YOU REPEAT THAT? I'M SORRY.
I'M HAVING AUDIO ISSUES TODAY.
I WAS JUST SAYING, I THOUGHT COMMISSIONER GREEN HAD HIS HAND UP BEFORE I OH, SO I, I DIDN'T WANNA CUT THE LINE IF, UH, HE WAS WAIVING.
COMMISSIONER GREEN, DID YOU HAVE SOME COMMENTS? YEAH, I DO.
UH, THIS, UM, PARTICULAR PROPERTY IS IN DISTRICT FLORIDA.
THE, UM, MY, UH, COUNCILMAN REPRESENTS, AND I'M, I'M VERY, UH, FAMILIAR WITH THIS PROPERTY, HAS BEEN, UH, UH, AN EYESORE, UH, AND A, UM, UM, MY MAGNET FOR CRIME AND, UH, UH, BROKEN WINDOWS SYNDROME FOR, UH, YEARS.
UM, NOW THAT BEING SAID, UH, UH, THE, THE, UH, THE, UH, PURCHASES WERE, UM, WHERE I WAS AWARE OF THE, UH, THE CONS, UH, PROBLEMS WITH, WITH CODE.
BUT, UM, GOING BACK TO THE REPEAT OFFENDER PROGRAM WHEN IT FIRST
[00:35:01]
STARTED, THIS IS EXACTLY THE OUTCOME YOU WOULD, YOU WOULD WANT, UH, IN MY OPINION.AND, UH, YOU KNOW, KIND OF WHERE WE WERE AT IN 2013 AND 14, THE REPEAT OFFENDER PROGRAM GOT KICKED OFF.
UM, SO I, MY POINT, MY PERSPECTIVE AND MY POINT IS, IS THAT, UH, THIS IS, UH, A REHABILITATED PROPERTY AND A, AND A PLACE THAT, UH, UH, NEEDS, UM, AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
UH, AND, UH, UH, IT'S THE KIND OF ACTION THAT WAS, UH, UP FOR, UH, DURING THE, UH, DISCUSSIONS FOR THE, UH, FEDERAL REGISTRATION PROGRAM BACK SEVERAL YEARS AGO.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR INPUT AND INSIGHT.
WE'LL, WE'LL CONSIDER THOSE ONCE WE START DISCUSSING MORE.
UM, FIRST I HAVE WHAT I THINK WOULD, UH, BE CHARACTERIZED AS A POINT OF ORDER.
UM, AND THEN I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE.
I'LL, I'LL MAKE MY POINT OF ORDER FIRST.
UM, AND THEN, UH, BASICALLY DURING, UH, THE OWNER REPRESENTATIVE'S TE MR. WOLF'S TESTIMONY, AND THEN AGAIN, HIS, UH, COLLOQUY WITH COMMISSIONER BENIGNO, THERE WERE, UH, REFERENCES TO, UH, UH, STATEMENTS, UH, MADE OUTSIDE OF THE, UM, OUTSIDE OF THE HEARING TONIGHT.
UH, PARTICULARLY, UH, UH, THE OWNERS SEEMED TO REPRESENT THAT HE RECEIVED SOME SORT OF ASSURANCE IN CONVERSATION WITH MS. ALI THAT THERE WOULD BE AN OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE THESE, UH, ASSESSED PENALTIES, UH, REDUCED, UH, OR MODIFIED.
AND THEN IN THE COL, WE KNOW THAT COMMISSIONER BENIGNO RE REVISITED THAT, SUGGESTING THAT IT WOULDN'T HAVE UNDERTAKEN THIS INVESTMENT HAD IT NOT BEEN FOR THAT CONVERSATION.
I THINK OUR BYLAWS SPECIFY THAT WE ARE NOT ALLOWED TO CONSIDER E EVIDENCE THAT WOULD NOT BE ADMISSIBLE, UH, UNDER THE TEXAS RULES OF EVIDENCE.
AND I, AND, AND THE REFERENCE TO THE, TO THE ALLEGED CONVERSATION WITH MS. ALI, UH, WOULD BE CONSIDERED INADMISSIBLE HEARSAY AS A, AN OUT OF, UH, NORMALLY WOULD SAY OUT OF COURT STATEMENT A HERE, I WOULD JUST SAY OUT OF VENUE STATEMENT, UM, UH, OFFERED FOR THE PROOF OF ITS CONTENT.
SO I WOULD JUST RAISE THAT AS A POINT OF ORDER.
AND I, I GUESS IF I COULD MOVE, UH, THAT THE, UH, MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS BE DIRECTED TO DISREGARD, UH, THE ALLEGED EXCHANGE BETWEEN MR. WOLF AND MS. UM, AND I, I'LL, I'LL, I GUESS I CAN LET THE CHAIR RULE ON THAT, AND THEN I'D LIKE TO BE RECOGNIZED FOR, UM, QUESTION, QUESTIONS OF THE OWNER.
UH, MAY I MAKE A POINT OF ORDER? SURE, GO AHEAD.
I, I BELIEVE THAT THE DEFINITION THAT YOU QUOTED IS HEARSAY, IS IT'S AN OUT OF COURT STATEMENT OFFERED FOR THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER IS ASSERTED.
I WAS NOT ASKING HIM ABOUT THE TRUTHFULNESS OF THOSE STATEMENTS, BUT RATHER HIS PRESENCE SENSE IMPRESSION, WHICH IS AN EXCEPTION FOR HEARSAY.
SO IT WAS NOT ABOUT WHETHER THE TRUTHFULNESS OF IF HE COULD SEEK THEM, BUT HIS IMPRESSION FOR THOSE STATEMENTS AT THE TIME, AND I, I'M NOT AN EXPERT ON HEARSAY, BUT IT'S A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SAYING, DID THOSE STATEMENTS HAPPEN AND WHAT WAS YOUR IMPRESSION FROM THEM AT THE TIME THAT HE IS ABLE TO TESTIFY TO.
SO I'M NOT AN EXPERT, BUT I ALSO THINK IT IS RELEVANT WHAT HIS IMPRESSION WAS.
UM, AND THOSE, THAT'S A DIFFERENCE IN HEARSAY.
HE'S NOT SAYING WE'RE NOT LITIGATING OR, OR TESTIFYING TO THE STATEMENTS THAT WERE MADE, BUT THE PRESENT SENSE IMPRESSION THAT HE HAD FROM THEM.
AND WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE, THE MATTER ASSERTED IN THESE STATEMENTS, WHETHER IT WAS TRUTHFUL THAT HE COULD SEEK THE RELIEF OR NOT, BUT WHETHER THAT WAS HIS IMPRESSION FROM THAT CONVERSATION, HE CAN TESTIFY TO.
SO THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING OF IT, AND THAT'S WHY I FOUND IT APPROPRIATE TO ASK QUESTIONS ABOUT IT.
I WILL ACKNOWLEDGE, UM, BOTH OF YOUR POINTS.
AND I WOULD RULE TO SAY WE WILL GO AHEAD AND NARROW THE FOCUS OF TONIGHT'S HEARING TO FOCUS ONLY ON THE TESTIMONY THAT WE ARE GIVEN TONIGHT.
SO, UM, AS FAR AS WHO SAID WHAT OUTSIDE OF THE CONTEXT OF THE EVIDENCE AND MR. WOLF'S, UM, STATEMENTS TONIGHT, WE WILL NOT CONSIDER THAT WHEN HAVING OUR DISCUSSIONS.
UM, BUT WHAT WE WILL BE ABLE TO CONSIDER WOULD BE MR. WOLF'S, UM, GENERAL UNDERSTANDING OR MAYBE HIS EXPECTATIONS WHEN HE WENT INTO THIS TRANSACTION.
UM, WE WILL SPECIFICALLY DISREGARD ANY REFERENCES TO, UM, HIS RELIANCE ON STAFF, UH, MAKING ANY COMMENTS REGARDING THE ABILITY TO GET THIS FINES DISCOUNTED OR WAIVED IN ANY WAY.
AND BE RECOGNIZED FOR, FOR QUESTIONS.
UH, MR. WOLF, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TESTIMONY TONIGHT.
UH, THE NAME OF THE PROPERTY BEFORE YOU TOOK POSSESSION WAS PLACE DEL NORTE? YES, CORRECT.
THAT'S SORT OF A, THAT'S A SPAN, LIKE A SPANISH NAME.
SO I DID ASK MY FRIEND WHAT IT MEANT.
HOW, HOW, UH, NORTH HOUSE, I BELIEVE.
UM, AND I GUESS CREST HOUSE, UM, THAT IS THE CREST PORTION OF THAT I GATHER, IS PROBABLY AN ILLUSION THAT IT'S ADJACENT TO CRESTVIEW.
[00:40:01]
YES.TYING IT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THE CRESTVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD, AND THEN H A U S, THAT'S JUST, UH, THE GERMAN SPELLING OF HOUSE, JUST TRYING TO MAKE IT SOUND NICER AND FANCIER.
AND I, I, WE, BECAUSE OF THESE FINES, I HAD TO SAVE AN EXTRA LETTER, SO I DIDN'T WANT THE E
IS GERMAN FANCIER THAN SPANISH? NOT THAT I, NOT THAT I'M AWARE OF.
I, I, ONE MORE QUESTION, ACTUALLY I DO HAVE ONE MORE.
UM, HOW MANY OF THE SAME TENANTS THAT WERE IN THE, UH, PROPERTY BEFORE ARE STILL THERE? UH, AT LEAST 10.
UM, I DON'T, I DON'T HAVE AN EXACT NUMBER.
I WANT TO SAY 15 TO 15 OR 1610 I KNOW ARE STAYING THOUGH.
IF I COULD JUST MAKE ONE QUICK COMMENT ON THAT.
UM, THE REASON FOR CHANGING THE NAME IS BECAUSE IF YOU LOOK UP PLAZA DEL NORTE, YOU LOOK UP THE ADDRESS, YOU GET THINGS LIKE THE SWAT, TEAM INVASION ARTICLE, THE RAP VIDEO, THE TERRIBLE REVIEWS THAT IT'S FULL OF BEDBUGS AND WE JUST WANTED TO REBRAND IT.
SO THAT'S THE, THE NOTHING INTENDED MORE THAN THAT.
UM, I DO HAVE ONE QUICK QUESTION, AND THEN IF ANYBODY WANTS TO MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC PART OF THE HEARING, UM, MR. WOLF, SHE HAD ONE TOO.
OH, I HAVE ONE QUESTION FOR THE, UM, OWNER
YOU CAME TONIGHT WITH SOME, UH, EXHIBITS AND A SUMMARY.
SO I APPRECIATE THAT PREPARATION AND I DEFINITELY APPRECIATE ALL THE WORK YOU PUT IN OVER THE LAST, THE FIVE MONTHS THAT YOU DID HAVE TO DO THE REPAIRS.
UH, MY QUESTION TO YOU IS, UM, WHEN STAFF MADE, UH, WHEN THE CITY MADE THE PRESENTATION AND GAVE US A TOTAL AMOUNT, IT WAS ABOUT, IT WAS $382,695 AND 57 CENTS, I BELIEVE.
IS THERE A SPECIFIC AMOUNT THAT YOU ARE LOOKING FOR TONIGHT? CUZ I DON'T BELIEVE THAT WAS IN ANY OF YOUR DOCUMENTS AND I DIDN'T HEAR THAT IN YOUR TESTIMONY AS FAR AS THAT YOU WANT, WHAT, UM, AMOUNT OF DISCOUNT WOULD YOU WANT TO SEE, OR WHAT SPECIFIC AMOUNT WOULD YOU LIKE FOR THE COMMISSIONERS TO CONSIDER? EV AGAIN, WE'RE NOT SELLING THIS PRO PROPERTY.
EVERY DOLLAR THAT WE PAY IS GOING IS JUST ANOTHER DOLLAR THAT'S NOT GOING INTO THE PROPERTY.
OUR BU OUR ORIGINAL BUDGET WAS ABOUT $800,000.
WE'RE GONNA BE AT A, AT A MILLION.
WE CAN'T GET ANY ADDITIONAL FINANCING.
YOU KNOW, I'M NOT, I'M A NORMAL, NORMAL GUY, DIDN'T GRADUATE COLLEGE, WORKED, YOU KNOW, MY WHOLE LIFE.
I MEAN, I'M NOT LIKE SOME ENDLESS CORPORATION THAT HAS MONEY.
SO IN AN IDEAL SENSE, MR. GREEN HAD MENTIONED THIS IS THE RIGHT OUTCOME.
THIS IS WHAT YOU GUYS ARE SEEKING.
WE'RE FIXING THE PROPERTY, WE'RE NOT MAKING SHORTCUTS.
I'D LOVE TO HAVE IT ALL WAIVED.
I MEAN, IT, IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH US.
AND WE'RE, WE'RE DOING THE RIGHT THING.
AND AS FAR AS, UH, MS. ALI THAT CONFERENCE, THAT CONVERSATION, I JUST DID WANNA REFERENCE THAT.
SHE'S BEEN SUPER HELPFUL CAUSE I'VE TALKED TO HER THIS WHOLE PROCESS EVEN BEFORE WE BOUGHT THE PROPERTY.
BUT MY, I DID HAVE CONVERSATIONS WITH THREE DIFFERENT STAFF MEMBERS AND IT WAS MY IMPRESSION, POSSIBLY FALSELY THAT, HEY, IF YOU DO THE RIGHT THING, THE COUNCIL SEES THAT, YOU KNOW, THESE ARE ALL RELATED TO THE OLD OWNER.
LIKE IT SHOULDN'T BE AN ISSUE AND THAT COULD BE A COMPLETELY FALSE THING AND YOU DON'T HAVE TO USE THAT.
BUT RATHER THAN GO BACK AND FORTH, I JUST WANTED TO LIKE, LET'S GET THIS THING DONE, LET'S MAKE IT LOOK GREAT, DO THE RIGHT THING, AND THEN HOPEFULLY YOU GUYS SEE THAT.
AND, YOU KNOW, IF THERE WAS A $382,000 YOU GUYS HAD TO PAY BECAUSE OF THIS, I MEAN, THAT WOULD BE ONE THING.
BUT I DON'T KNOW IF THERE WAS ACTUALLY ANY LIKE, COST.
IT WAS JUST MORE PENALTIES BECAUSE OF NEGLIGENCE FROM THE PREVIOUS OWNER WHO'S NOT IN THE PICTURE.
UM, COMMISSIONER MUELLER? YES, THANK YOU.
UM, SO I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE ATTORNEY, I THINK, AND THEN A QUESTION FOR THE OWNER.
SO MY QUESTION FOR THE ATTORNEY IS, LIENS ARE PLACED, PLACED ON THE PROPERTY WHEN THESE FINES ARE ASSESSED? CORRECT.
SO WHEN A PROPERTY IS SOLD, WOULDN'T THOSE LIENS BE THEN CALLED IN BY THE CITY AND RESOLVED THEN? AND IF NOT, WHY NOT? UM, SO COMMISSIONER MUELLER, UM, IN THIS, IN THIS INSTANCE, THOSE LIENS WILL FOLLOW THE PROPERTY.
UM, THEY ARE NOT CALLED IN IMMEDIATELY.
THEY'RE STILL ACTIVE ON THE PROPERTY.
UM, I, I CAN'T REALLY SPEAK TO PROPERTY LAW AND WHY WE DID OR DID NOT CALL IN A LIE.
UM, BUT I CAN SAY I BELIEVE THIS WAS A FORECLOSURE SALE.
UM, AND SO NONE OF THE LIENS WERE EXTINGUISHED.
UH, THE CITY STILL HAS THE AUTHORITY TO
[00:45:01]
COLLECT ON THE LIENS.UM, AND, UM, UM, I BELIEVE, UH, UH, DIVISION MANAGER MOORE MIGHT HAVE A BETTER QUESTION, ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION.
YES, ROBERT MOORE, UH, AUSTIN CODE DIVISION MANAGER, UH, THEY'RE NOT, THERE'S A BUNCH OF DIFFERENT LA LANGUAGE INVOLVED IN THIS.
THERE'S LIENS, FINES, PENALTIES, THERE'S ALL THAT, RIGHT? THIS IS KIND OF A PENALTY.
IT'S NOT REALLY TECHNICALLY A LIEN.
THERE IS AN ORDER THAT'S ON THE, THAT SHOWS THESE PENALTIES, BUT IT'S NOT AN ACTUAL LIEN FOR THE CITY.
THE ONLY TIME THE CITY ACTUALLY PUTS A LIEN ON SOMETHING IS IF WE'VE SPENT MONEY, LIKE WHEN WE MOW LAWNS OR REMOVE TRASH AND RUBBISH OR, YOU KNOW, FENCE A PROPERTY OR SOMETHING LIKE WHEN WE'VE ACTUALLY SPENT MONEY, THAT'S WHEN WE START FILING LIENS.
NOW, IF WE WANTED TO MAKE THIS THING A PERMANENT THING, WE COULD FILE FOR A SUMMARY JUDGMENT, YOU KNOW, WE COULD SUE FOR THAT.
AND, AND THEN THAT BECOMES A LIEN OF SORTS.
IT'S KIND OF JUST A, A FLOATING PENALTY UNTIL IT'S, SOMETHING'S DONE WITH IT UNTIL WE DECIDE TO SUE FOR IT OR, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S, UM, RECTIFIED HERE OR, OR WHATNOT.
AND NOW I WILL SAY, JUST WHILE I HAVE THE MIC,
SO, UH, WE DEFINITELY HAVE SOME COST IN IT.
YEAH, I'M, I GUESS, I MEAN, I'M PARTLY ASKING THIS BECAUSE THIS IS NOT THE FIRST TIME SOMETHING LIKE THIS HAS COME UP WHERE A PREVIOUS OWNER LET IT GO FOR YEARS AND THEN FINALLY IT'S SOLD TO SOMEONE ELSE.
AND IT JUST SEEMS FROM, UM, THE CITY'S POINT OF VIEW WOULD BE SMARTER TO HAVE A LEANN ON IT AND FORCE THAT OWNER TO TAKE THAT OUT OF THE PROCEEDS FROM THE SALE AND PAY FOR IT.
AND IT WOULD ALSO BE DISCLOSED IF IT WAS A LIEN TO THE BUYER THROUGH A TITLE SEARCH.
I MEAN, I WAS ASSUMING THAT THAT WAS THE CASE, BUT I APPARENTLY THAT WAS A WRONG ASSUMPTION.
UM, AND IT'S INTERESTING THOUGH THAT IT WAS A FORECLOSURE SALE, SO IT WAS CLEARLY, IT WAS A, YOU KNOW, VERY LOW PRICE, UM, FOR THESE UNITS.
UM, AND YOU KNOW, I APPRECIATE THE, THE SPEED WITH WHICH YOU MADE ALL THOSE REPAIRS.
IT'S CERTAINLY MUCH NICER PROPERTY.
I IMAGINE THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE GONNA RECOUP THAT, THAT THROUGH HIGHER RENTS ALSO OVER TIME.
UM, BUT I HAD A QUESTION FOR YOU CUZ YOU MENTIONED THAT 10 OF THE UNITS WOULD, UH, REMAIN, WOULD REMAIN AFFORDABLE AND THAT THOSE 10 TENANTS WERE STAYING AND YOU DIDN'T WANT, YOU KNOW, TO LOSE THEM BECAUSE THEY WERE GOOD TENANTS.
I WANTED TO KNOW, IS THAT A FORMAL ARRANGEMENT THAT YOU'VE AGREED THAT THE RENTS WILL BE SET AT A CERTAIN LEVEL WITH THE CITY? OR IS THERE ANY, UM, GUARANTEE THAT THOSE WILL REMAIN AFFORDABLE? WE, MY PROPERTY MANAGERS REDOING LEASES WITH ALL OF THE, THE INDIVIDUALS THAT WE'RE KEEP BASICALLY KEEPING THERE.
AND, AND AS FAR AS THE INDIVIDUALS WE'RE PICKING TO KEEP, THERE ARE JUST ONES THAT AREN'T DESTROYING THEIR UNITS AND LEAVING TRASH EVERYWHERE, YOU KNOW, SO WE HAVE LIKE, WE HAVE 10 GOOD PEOPLE THAT HAVE BEEN THERE FOR FIVE PLUS YEARS AND WE'RE NOT RAISING THEIR RENTS AND YEAH.
SO THIS IS, THIS IS YOUR OWN ARRANGEMENT.
IT'S NOT BECAUSE YOU'RE OFFICIALLY YEAH, IT, IT IS.
I MEAN, AND I DON'T WANT IT TO MAKE IT SOUND LIKE A NON-PROFIT THING.
WE JUST HAVE 10 STABLE UNITS AND THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, I THINK THEY'RE ALL UNDER A THOUSAND DOLLARS A MONTH IN RENT AND WE'RE KEEPING IT AND THEY GET A MUCH BETTER PLACE TO LIVE.
SO, BUT NEW BUT NEW UNITS, WE'VE HAD TO, LIKE I SAID, WE HAD TO EVICT SIX OF 'EM THAT COST, YOU KNOW, THAT COST A LOT OF MONEY.
I MEAN, THOSE ONES, UH, WE RENOVATED THE UNITS AND WE'RE CHARGING MARKET RENTS FOR WHAT AND WHAT ARE MARKET RENTS FOR THOSE UNITS? UH, THE TWO BEDROOMS ARE 1495, BUT WE'RE NOT GETTING THAT.
SO IT'LL PROBABLY BE LIKE 1400.
AND THEN THE ONE BEDROOM'S, UH, 1200 APPROXIMATELY.
I THINK, UM, COMMISSIONER FRANCIS AND THEN VICE CHAIR FERRERA AND THEN COMMISSION THOMPSON.
WELL, I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER GREEN.
THIS IS THE GOAL, RIGHT? LET'S GET UNITS THAT ARE SUBSTANDARD AND GET 'EM BROUGHT TO A STANDARD THAT'S ACCEPTABLE FOR, FOR RESIDENTS TO, TO OCCUPY.
SO IN, IN THAT REGARD, WE'RE MOVING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION AS FAR AS COSTS THAT ARE RELATED TO THAT.
YOU KNOW, IF YOU'RE GONNA BUY AN INVESTOR AND YOU'RE GONNA BUY PROPERTY, WELCOME ABOARD AND IT JUST, WHATEVER COMES, COMES YOUR WAY, THAT'S JUST PART OF WHAT YOU GET WHEN YOU BUY A RENTAL PROPERTY.
SO I DON'T HAVE A WHOLE LOT OF SYMPATHY THERE, BUT I WANT TO HAVE CLARITY ON AN ISSUE THAT COMMISSIONER MUELLER BROUGHT UP.
UM, AND MY QUESTION IS TO YOU, SIR, YOU WERE UNAWARE OF THESE FINES WHEN YOU PURCHASED THE PROPERTY? IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE TELLING US? WE WERE AWARE THAT THERE WERE PENALTIES ASSESSED.
LIKE THEY WEREN'T, THEY WEREN'T ACTUAL RECORDED LIENS, BUT THAT'S WHY WE HAD TALKED TO THE BSC COMMISSION AT LENGTH PRIOR TO BUYING IT.
AND AS FAR AS BUYING IT AT FORECLOSURE, GETTING THIS GREAT DEAL, LIKE THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN.
WE DIDN'T GET SOME STEAL ON THIS FOR PENNIES ON THE DOLLAR
[00:50:01]
THAT WE, WE ACTUALLY BOUGHT IT SIX MONTHS AGO, WHICH WAS THE, THE, YOU KNOW, YOU SEE THOSE CHARTS WHERE YOU SHOULDN'T BUY REAL ESTATE.SO I THINK IT'S A SAFE ASSUMPTION.
THE TITLE COMPANY DID THEIR WORK.
SO TO SAY THAT WE RUN UNAWARE IS REALLY NOT QUITE ACCURATE.
SO GIVEN THAT AND YOUR STATEMENT THAT, YOU KNOW, THE CITY HAS INCURRED COST STAFFING, YOU KNOW, TRIPS AND, AND THERE HAVE BEEN SOME COST RELATED TO BRINGING THAT INTO COMPLIANCE, THAT REALLY THE TAXPAYERS SHOULDN'T BE FITTING THAT BILL AND IT SHOULD BE SOMETHING, IN MY OPINION TO, TO COMPENSATE FOR THAT, WHETHER IT'S 350, SO THOUSAND DOLLARS, I'M NOT SURE COMPLETE WAIVING AWAY MY OPINION DOESN'T SEEM TO BE A GOOD PERSPECTIVE, BUT THAT THERE'S MAYBE SOME ROOM FOR COMPROMISE IN THERE.
DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? UM, AND THAT'S ALL I HAVE.
OH, WOULD YOU LIKE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE HEARING, UM,
I'LL MOVE TO CLOSE THE HEARING.
UM, AND DO WE HAVE ANYBODY OBJECTING TO CLOSING THE PUBLIC PART OF THE HEARING? NO.
SO NOW WE CAN HAVE OUR DISCUSSIONS.
I THINK COMMISSIONER THOMPSON HAD SOMETHING ELSE.
AND THEN VICE CHAIR, I WAS, UH, GOING TO MAKE A PARALLEL COMMENT, UH, TO THE LAST ONE.
AND THAT IS WHEN WERE YOU SURPRISED AND FOUND OUT THESE, UH, ATTACHMENTS WERE ON THERE? WE WON'T CALL 'EM LIENS.
WE, WE WERE AWARE OF THEM BEFORE WE PURCHASED THE PROPERTY.
AND SO YOU, YOU CAN'T SAY YOU WERE SURPRISED AND DUMBFOUNDED AND ALL THAT SORT OF THING.
I'M SUR I WOULD BE SURPRISED BASED ON PRE BASED ON MANY, MANY CONVERSATIONS I'VE HAD, IF THERE WASN'T SOME RELIEF HERE, I WOULD.
OKAY, VICE ORDER, MADAM CHAIR.
OH, MOVE TO STRIKE THE REFERENCE TO THE CONVERSATIONS AGAIN.
I MEAN, IT, IT, I UNDERSTAND YOUR RULING TO BE THAT WE CAN TAKE ACCOUNT OF THE THE PRESENT SENSE IMPRESSION, BUT, BUT IT SEEMS TO BE ATTRIBUTING TO PAST CONVERSATIONS HIS UNDERSTANDING.
I I THOUGHT THAT WAS RULED ON.
UM, COMMISSION HAS STILL SAID A REMINDER TO THE COMMISSIONERS THAT ALL THE STATEMENTS REGARDING WHAT STAFF MIGHT HAVE SAID OR DIDN'T SAY PRIOR TO, UH, TODAY REGARDING THE FINES.
WE ARE GOING TO DISREGARD THAT, THOSE, UH, STATEMENTS OR COMMENTS.
UM, AND I THINK VICE CHE, I HAD SOMETHING TO ADD.
UH, YES, I WANTED TO MAKE A COUPLE OF COMMENTS.
UM, SO FIRST I THINK FELLOW COMMISSIONER GREEN, UH, STATED IT WELL EARLIER, UH, WHEN HE SAID THAT THIS CASE, YOU KNOW, UM, PROVIDES EXACTLY THE SORT OF OUTCOME WE WANT FROM THIS REPEAT OFFENDER PROGRAM.
AND, UM, I THINK IT BEARS KEEPING IN MIND KIND OF THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF OUR COMMISSION, AND I DON'T HAVE IT IN FRONT OF ME.
AND AT THE RISK OF MISSTATING SOMETHING EXACTLY, I KNOW WE HAVE A LOT OF ATTORNEYS
BASICALLY WE'RE HERE TO ENFORCE THE CITY'S PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE, RIGHT? AND MAKE SURE THAT THE CITIZENS OF AUSTIN HAVE, UM, PLACES TO LIVE THAT MEET THE MINIMUM STANDARDS OF THE CODE OR PLACES TO WORK THAT MEET THE MINIMUM STANDARDS OF THE CODE.
I DON'T BELIEVE WHETHER THE PROPERTY OWNER, UH, MAKES MONEY, MAKES A KILLING AT THIS LOSES MONEY.
UM, WHAT HIS STATE OF MIND WAS WHEN HE BROUGHT THE PROPERTY, IF HE THOUGHT HE WAS, I DON'T THINK ANY OF THAT REALLY SHOULD COME INTO PLAY, IN MY OPINION, IN OUR DECISION MAKING.
UH, WE'RE NOT JUST HERE, WE'RE NOT HERE TO PUNISH PEOPLE BECAUSE THEY MAKE MONEY.
AND THE PURPOSE OF THIS COMMISSION IS ALSO NOT TO CREATE WEALTH FOR THE CITY.
WE'RE NOT A REVENUE GENERATING ORGANIZATION.
BECAUSE WE WANT PEOPLE TO FIX THEIR PROPERTIES AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE TO BRING THEM INTO COMPLIANCE SO THAT THE CITIZENS OF THE CITY HAVE A PLACE TO, IN THIS CASE, TO LIVE TO MEET THOSE STANDARDS.
I WISH, UH, MR. WOLF HAD BROUGHT THE INVOICES, RIGHT.
UM, SO WE COULD SEE THE TALLY.
UM, UH, BUT IT'S CLEAR THAT A LOT OF WORK AND A LOT OF MONEY HAS BEEN SPENT ON THE PROPERTY.
I THINK WE CAN SEE THAT FROM THE PHOTOS.
I THINK ALSO ISSUES OF WHETHER HE'S VOLUNTARILY, UH,
[00:55:01]
PROVIDING RENT CONTROLS OR NOT PROBABLY AREN'T REALLY CENTRAL TO OUR DECISION.UM, $382,000 IS A LOT OF MONEY.
UH, I THINK IN MY OPINION, FOR A, FOR A BUSINESS OWNER, UH, I BELIEVE IN THE PAST WE'VE PROVIDED RELIEF SOMETIMES ON THE ORDER OF 90% AND CHARGE PEOPLE 10%, WHICH IN THIS CASE WOULD BE 38,000 BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE ANY BACKUP.
PERSONALLY, I WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF 80% RELIEF, 20% OF THE FINE, WHICH IS $76,000 APPROXIMATELY.
UM, I'D LIKE TO BUILD ON WHAT, UM, EDWARD WAS JUST TALKING ABOUT.
AND I FEEL LIKE THESE FINES, $382,000 ARE PUNITIVE AND THAT THESE FINES ORIGINALLY SET OUT WERE TO INCENTIVIZE THE PREVIOUS OWNER TO REMEDIATE THE PROPERTY AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE.
THE CURRENT OWNER HAS MERELY INHERITANT WHAT THE OTHER PERSON DIDN'T DO.
AND I THINK WE NEED TO GIVE THIS CURRENT OWNER THE BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT FOR WHAT HE HAS DONE IN SUCH A SHORT AMOUNT OF TIME.
AND THE FACT THAT $382,000 IS SITTING OVER HIM LIKE AN ANVIL, I THINK IS DISCOURAGING FOR HIM TO DO ANYTHING ELSE TO THE PROPERTY.
I THINK THAT 90% IS MORE APPROPRIATE THAN 80%.
UM, SO I THINK THAT WE NEED TO ENCOURAGE OTHER PROPERTY OWNERS TO DO THE SAME THING, WHAT YOU DID IN TERMS OF REMEDIATING THE PROPERTY TO MAKE SO THAT WE HAVE AFFORDABLE HOUSING HERE IN THE STATE OFFICE.
AND I, JUST TO CLARIFY, I DIDN'T CATCH THE PERCENTAGE THAT YOU WOULD RECOMMEND 90.
I WOULD RE I WOULD RECOMMEND, UH, I WOULD RECOMMEND A REDUCTION OF 90%.
UM, COMMISSIONER VINNO AND THEN COMMISSIONER THOMPSON AGAIN, I BELIEVE, UH, THOMPSON HAD HIS HAND.
COMMISSIONER THOMPSON WAS FIRST.
IT SEEMS TO ME THE, UM, FACT THAT IT WAS NOT A SURPRISE AND YOU KNEW IT WAS THERE AND IF YOU ARE IN THIS BUSINESS, YOU KNOW WHAT IT'S GOING TO COST TO FIX UP AND YOU CAN'T JUST HOPE YOU'RE GONNA GET SOMETHING FREE.
SO I WOULD RECOMMEND SOMETHING IN THE 20% RANGE.
UH, COMMISSIONER BENIGNO, I, I WOULD SAY THAT WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY AS A COMMISSION THIS EVENING TO, UM, REWARD OR PUNISH.
AND, UM, I CAN'T THINK OF WHAT HE SHOULD BE PUNISHED FOR.
I DON'T SEE A SINGLE COST THAT HE HAS INCURRED THE CITY.
I DON'T SEE A SINGLE FINANCIAL, UM, THING THAT HAS BEEN, HE HAS BURDENED ANYONE WITH.
UM, AND IT DOES NOT MAKE SENSE TO ME WHY WE WOULD PUNISH SOMEONE WHO HAS DONE WHAT SUPPOSEDLY THIS PROGRAM, UM, SEEKS TO INCENTIVIZE.
AND I THINK THAT WHAT WE WOULD DO NOW IS SEND A MESSAGE NOT TO HIM, JUST TO HIM AND HIS BUSINESS, BUT TO MANY OTHER PEOPLE LIKE HIM AROUND THE CITY THAT MIGHT BE INTERESTED IN REPAIRING DISREPUTABLE PROPERTIES, THAT THEY WILL TAKE A TREMENDOUS RISK FINANCIALLY TO DO THE WORK ITSELF AND THEN THE CITY ARBITRARILY WILL BURDEN THEM WITH A GREATER RISK, UM, THAN THEY MAY BE ABLE BE ABLE OR WILLING TO BEAR.
UM, AND WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IS A CITY THAT INCENTIVIZES PEOPLE WHO ARE WILLING TO RISK BANKRUPTCY AND PUT LONG HOURS INTO IMPROVING A PROPERTY THAT THEY HOPE ONE DAY MIGHT TURN A PROFIT.
SO WITH WHAT I THINK SEEMS TO BE INTEGRITY, WHERE THERE HAS BEEN QUICK ACTION, THERE ARE NOW TENANTS WHOSE LIVES HAVE BEEN IMPROVED.
THERE ARE AUSTINITES WHO CAN LIVE SAFELY IN A HOME THAT THEY PREVIOUSLY WERE NOT SAFE IN.
UM, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE, BE MULTIPLIED AROUND THE CITY THAT WE SHOULD BE INCENTIVIZING.
I SEE NO REASON WHY THERE SHOULD BE NOT 90 OR 99% RELIEF, UM, BECAUSE I DON'T SEE A SINGLE THING THAT HE HAS DONE THAT WE SHOULD PUNISH.
I DON'T SEE IT AS WE'RE CHOOSING RELIEF.
WE'RE CHOOSING PUNISHMENT AND I DON'T SEE WHAT HE SHOULD BE PUNISHED FOR.
I SAY 99%, NOT A HUNDRED PERCENT.
AND I HAVE A, I HAVE, UM, MR. MOORE, YOU HAVE YOUR HAND UP, RIGHT? YES.
UH, ROBERT MOORE, DIVISION MANAGER.
[01:00:01]
TO RESPOND TO THAT A LITTLE BIT.THE CITY ISN'T BURDENING ANYBODY WITH ANYTHING.
I MEAN, THE, THE NUMBER CAME FROM THIS COMMISSION AND WE CAN'T TOUCH IT.
SO Y'ALL CAN, AND THAT'S FINE.
UH, BUT THAT'S NOT, WE DIDN'T BURDEN ANYBODY.
UM, AND WE WERE OPEN TO NEGOTIATIONS, BUT WE AGAIN, DIDN'T SEE ANY RECEIPTS OR ANYTHING.
I MEAN, WE, WE, WE AGREED THAT 382 IS A BIT, UH, EXCESSIVE.
UM, WE'RE JUST TRYING TO PRESERVE THE INTEGRITY OF OUR ORDERS ONE AND TWO, JUST KIND OF COVER SOME OF THE COSTS.
AGAIN, WE DON'T TRY TO MAKE MONEY.
SO THAT'S, THAT'S OUR POSITION.
THEN COMMISSIONER THOMPSON, AND THEN COMMISSIONER MUELLER, AND COMMISSIONER TOAD AS WELL.
I THINK WHEN A PERSON KNOWS WHAT THEY'RE GETTING WHEN THEY BUY, THEY DON'T NEED TO ASK THE CITY TO HELP 'EM PAY FOR, IT DOESN'T MATTER WHETHER YOU'RE BUYING A HORSE OR A CAR OR WHATEVER IT IS, IF YOU KNOW WHAT YOU'RE GETTING, YOU KNOW WHAT YOU'RE GETTING AND YOU KNOW WHAT YOU'RE PAYING FOR IT, AND YOU KNOW WHAT LIABILITY IS OUT THERE, YOU NEED TO DO IT.
AND MAYBE THAT'S WHY THE TAXES IN AUSTIN ARE SO HIGH.
UM, WE HAVE COMMISSIONER MUELLER, YOU HAD A COMMENT? YES.
UM, YEAH, I MEAN, I, I I, I'VE STILL KIND OF STUCK ON THIS.
I THINK WE NEED TO CHANGE THE WAY THAT, THAT, THAT THESE SHOULD BE LEANED SO WE'RE NOT PUT IN THIS POSITION AGAIN AND AGAIN, I DO THINK RIGHT NOW THE MESSAGE IS TO CURRENT BAT OWNERS, YOU KNOW, YOU DON'T REALLY HAVE TO BE IN A HURRY TO DO THIS.
THE PENALTIES, YOU KNOW, WILL JUST NOT BE COLLECTED ON YOU, AND YOU CAN SELL IT.
IT DOESN'T SEEM TO PENALIZE YOUR SALE IF PEOPLE HAVE BELIEFS ABOUT NOT PAYING THEM.
BUT I THINK THE, THE FACT HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED THAT THE, THAT YOU DID KNOW THAT THERE WERE THESE PENALTIES.
SO, UM, I, I WOULD PROPOSE A COMPROMISE POSITION THAT WE REDUCE THEM BY HALF.
UM, SO, UM, I GUESS I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE REDUCE THE PENALTIES BY HALF.
WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR, UM, COMMISSIONERS.
IS THAT IT? ARE YOU OKAY, THANK YOU.
UM, SO WE HAVE A MOTION ALREADY, BUT COMMISSIONER SOAD, YOU HAD A COMMENT OR A QUESTION? THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.
I HAD A, I, I JUST HAD SOME COMMENTS.
I WANTED TO CONTRIBUTE TO THE, THE DISCUSSION.
I, I, I GUESS I'VE BEEN ON THIS COMMISSION ABOUT FOUR YEARS.
UH, I HAVE SEEN THIS ISSUE COME UP, UH, MULTIPLE TIMES, AND I, I, I HAVE DISCERNED THAT THEY'RE, WELL, FIRST OFF, I, I THINK, I THINK COMMISSIONER MILLER IS RIGHT.
IT WOULD BE DESIRABLE FOR THESE FINES TO TAKE THE FORM OF LIENS SO THAT THIS DISCUSSION DIDN'T COME UP AS OFTEN AS IT DOES.
UM, I, I THINK THERE ARE TWO SCHOOLS OF THOUGHT.
I THINK WE'RE SEEING THEM BOTH IN EVIDENCE HERE TONIGHT.
ONE SCHOOL OF THOUGHT IS THAT IF A NEW OWNER PURCHASES A PROPERTY SUBJECT TO ACCRUED PENALTIES AND TURNS AROUND AND FIXES IT UP, WE SHOULD FORGIVE THE PENALTIES.
AND, AND THAT WAS, THAT WAS MY OWN VIEW FOR A LONG TIME WHEN I WAS ON THIS COMMISSION.
AND I, I, I, I THINK, UH, UH, MY VIEW WAS THAT THE PURPOSE OF THE PENALTY IS NEITHER TO COLLECT REVENUE FOR THE CITY IN NOR TO, YOU KNOW, RETRIBUTIVE PUNISH BAD ACTORS, BUT RATHER JUST TO INCENTIVIZE COMPLIANCE.
AND ONE WAY TO BRING ABOUT COMPLIANCE IS FOR AN OWNER WHO MAY LACK THE WHEREWITHAL THAT PICKS UP THE PROPERTY HIMSELF TO TURN AROUND AND SELL IT TO, UH, AN OWNER WITH THE, THE CAPITAL TO CAPACITY TO DO SO.
AND, AND, AND THAT ACHIEVES THE DESIRE RESULT.
AND, AND WE DON'T NEED TO GO AFTER THE MONEY AFTER THAT.
UM, I THINK THE SECOND SCHOOL OF THOUGHT, AND THIS IS I THINK WELL ARTICULATED BY, BY, UH, YOU KNOW, COMMISSIONER THOMPSON.
UM, AND THAT IS THE IDEA THAT IF YOU ARE, IF YOU'RE TAKING THE PROPERTY SUBJECT TO $382,000 IN ACCRUED PENALTIES, AND YOU KNOW THAT THERE IS NO LEGAL OBLIGATION ON THE PART OF THE CITY TO FORGIVE THOSE PENALTIES, THEN THAT SHOULD BE BAKED INTO THE PURCHASE PRICE.
SHAME ON YOU IF YOU PURCHASE IT FOR ANYTHING LESS THAN A $382,000 DISCOUNT FROM WHAT YOU WOULD OTHERWISE PAY FOR THAT INVESTMENT IN.
SO DOING YOUR ROLLING THE DICE ON, ON THIS, ON THIS COMMISSION'S, UH, UH, BENEFICENCE.
RIGHT? AND, AND ONE OF THE REASONS THAT OVER MY, THE LENGTH OF MY SERVICE HERE I'VE GRAVITATED TOWARD THE SECOND SCHOOL OF THOUGHT IS, IS THAT IF, IF WE'RE CONSIDERING THESE CASES ALL THE TIME, WE'RE TEEING UP THIS TERRIBLE SITUATION WHERE IF WE DO THIS ERRATICALLY, UH, THEN WE STAND THE RISK OF CREATING A ARTIFICIAL WINDFALL FOR THE BUYER SINCE THEY TOOK THE SUBJECT TO THE PENALTY.
AND WE'RE BASICALLY GIVING THEM A, A GIANT GIFT IN THE FORM OF FOREGONE CITY REVENUE FROM THE, FROM THE PENALTY WE'RE NOT COLLECTING.
OR, UH, IF WE START DOING THIS ALL THE TIME, WE START DOING THIS CONSISTENTLY.
UH, THEN, UH, WE'RE TEEING UP THE SITUATION THAT I THINK COMMISSIONER MILLER RAISED, WHICH IS, UH, WE'RE INCENTIVIZING BAD PROPERTY OWNERS TO JUST CARRY THE CLIENT KNOWING THAT THEY CAN PASS OFF THE, THE, THE PROPERTY WITHOUT
[01:05:01]
NECESSARILY HAVING TO TAKE A HUGE DISCOUNT FROM ITS MARKET VALUE.SO I, I GUESS I, IN MY, IN MY SERVICE HERE, I'VE KIND OF, I'VE KIND OF DRIFTED OVER FROM, I THINK THE, YOU KNOW, WHAT, WHAT COMMISSIONER BENIGNO IS ARTICULATING TOMORROW, COMMISSIONER THOMPSON'S POSITION, AND, AND THAT'S REALLY WHERE I STAND ON THIS ONE.
I'M NOT PREPARED TO MOVE OR SECOND A MOTION FOR ANY, UH, DISCOUNT IN THIS CASE BECAUSE I, I, I, I DON'T KNOW HOW GOOD A DEAL, UH, MR. WOLF GOT.
AND IT, AND IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN A PHENOMENAL ONE.
AND YEAH, HE SAYS HE'S NOT GONNA FLIP IT, BUT HE'S, HE'S, HE'S GONNA RECOUP THAT MONEY AND, AND I DON'T SEE WHY WE NEED TO HELP HIM.
UM, HE KNEW WHAT HE WAS GETTING INTO.
UH, SO THAT'S ALL I HAVE, BY THE WAY OF COMMENT.
UM, YEAH, THAT'S VERY HELPFUL.
AND COMMISSIONER FREIBERGER, AND THEN COMMISSIONER BENIGNO.
I'VE BEEN TORN ON THIS ONE AS I LISTENED TO EVERYONE'S THOUGHTS ON THIS.
UM, THIS CITY DESPERATELY NEEDS AFFORDABLE HOUSING, AND I, I AGREE WE SHOULD BE INCENTIVIZING IT.
AND IN FACT, THE CITY DOES PAY A LOT OF MONEY TO INCENTIVIZE IT.
WHAT IS MISSING IN THIS CASE IS THAT THERE ARE NO, THERE'S NO OVERSIGHT, THERE'S NO PROGRAM, THERE'S NO, IT'S NOT LOW INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDITS.
WE HAVE THE WORD OF THE OWNER.
WE HAVE THE RESULTS OF THE WORK, WHICH IS VERY IMPRESSIVE.
BUT THERE'S NOTHING PREVENTING THE OWNER FROM, YOU KNOW, NEXT FALL OR WHENEVER THE LEASES END TURNING AROUND AND RACKING UP THE RENTS TO THE MARKET RATE.
WE HOPE THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN TO THE 10 GOOD RESIDENTS THAT YOU WANT TO KEEP.
UM, SO I, I THINK WITH THAT IN MIND, I WOULD BE MORE INCLINED TO LEAN TOWARDS PROBABLY THE 80% FORGIVENESS AS A WAY OF RECOUPING SOME OF THE CITY'S COSTS, REWARDING THE OWNER AND HOPING THAT WE SEE MORE GOOD PLAYERS IN THE FUTURE.
I WOULD SAY THAT, UM, THOSE POINTS ARE WELL TAKEN.
UH, I AGREE THAT IT'S RISKY TO BUY AN ASSET WITHOUT KNOWLEDGE OF RELIEF.
I THINK THOUGH, IN, LET'S THINK ABOUT THIS.
SO WE BOTH HAVE POINTS THAT IN BROAD TERMS, TAKEN TO EXTREMES COULD SUPPORT OUR OWN VIEWPOINT.
SO IN AN EXTREME BROAD VIEWPOINT, IF THE SYSTEM WORKS THE WAY THAT I WAS SAYING, THERE WOULD BE PEOPLE INCENTIVIZED TO FLIP THESE PROPERTIES.
AND I UNDERSTAND COMMISSIONERS JUST HAD, AND OTHERS WERE COMMISSIONER MUELLER, WHERE YOU'RE SAYING THAT ALSO THEN ADDS RELIEF TO THE PEOPLE THAT ARE COMMITTING THESE VIOLATIONS, THAT THE PURCHASE PRICE WOULD BE IMPROVED.
SO I SEE, I, I THINK THAT MAYBE THAT'S AN IMPASSE, THAT THERE'S A POINT TO EITHER SIDE.
UM, CAUSE I THINK, I THINK THAT'S A FAIR POINT, BUT I ALSO, I THINK I'M STILL CORRECT THAT, UH, WE WANT, I WANT AN, UH, COM AN ENVIRONMENT THAT INCENTIVIZES THESE KIND OF REPAIRS AND FOR THEM TO BE DONE QUICKLY.
UM, LET'S, I THINK IN THIS SPECIFIC CASE, LET'S NOT GET LOST IN THE WEEDS AND THINK, OKAY, SO IF WE INCUR AN EXTRA $370,000 OF EXPENSE TO THIS OWNERSHIP, THEY, THEY'RE STILL A BUSINESS.
AND SO THAT MONEY INSTEAD OF BEING TAKEN AWAY, AWAY IN A MON IN THE SENSE THAT IT'S LIKE IT'S NOT EXISTENT YET, AND SO THAT IT'S EITHER REVENUE TO THE, THE CITY THAT THEY WOULD BE PAID IN THE FORM OF A FINE, OR, UM, OR I'M SORRY, IT'S TAKEN AWAY FROM THEIR EXPECTANT FINE PIECE.
OR WE HAVE TO SAY, YES, WE WANT YOU TO PAY THIS US THIS MONEY, SO IT'S GONNA GO TO THE CITY.
UM, IN THE SENSE IF WE DON'T REFER OR, UM, OFFER RELIEF, WELL, HE THEN NOW HAS AN EXTRA $370,000 THAT HE HAS TO GET THROUGH RENT.
AND SO THAT'S, I I, I KNOW WE'VE GOT, WE'VE TOUCHED ON THIS SUBJECT BEFORE, BUT LET'S THINK SPECIFICALLY IN TERMS OF THERE'S HOWEVER MANY UNITS IN THE BUILDING, THEY HAVE TO, THEY HAVE TO GET THAT MONEY BACK THROUGH RENT.
WE'RE GONNA JUST, WE'RE, WE'RE CHOOSING NOW TO JUST RAISE RENT ON THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE THERE.
UM, AND I, AND I KNOW THAT IT, HE PROBABLY WOULDN'T SAY THAT THAT'S HOW IT WORKS, CUZ IT'S, IT FEELS DRACONIAN A LITTLE BIT, BUT THERE'S A BUDGET, THE BOTTOM LINE, AND WHEN THE REVENUES DON'T MATCH THE EXPENSES, IT HAS TO COME IN THROUGH RENT INCREASES.
AND SO THIS IS HOW WE GET AN ENVIRONMENT WHERE RENTS JUST KEEP GOING UP AND UP AND UP IN THE CITY WHERE THE, THE MORE THE EXPENSES ADD UP ON THE BALANCE SHEET, THE MORE THAT THE REVENUE HAS TO GO UP TO, TO BALANCE THE BALANCE SHEET.
AND SO THEY'RE GONNA GO UP AND THEN SPECIFICALLY THINKING ABOUT THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN THESE APARTMENTS, I DON'T WANT THEM TO HAVE TO PAY THAT MONEY.
I WOULD RATHER IT BE TAKEN AWAY THROUGH A FORM OF FORGIVENESS, UH, FROM THE CITY THAN FROM THE POCKETS OF THE PEOPLE THAT ARE LIVING IN THIS APARTMENT COMPLEX.
SO THAT'S WHEN I THINK OF IT SPECIFICALLY OF WHO DO I WANT THAT $370,000 TO COME FROM? I'D RATHER IT BE FORGIVEN AND OUT OF THE CODE DEPARTMENT BECAUSE
[01:10:01]
IT'S, IT'S NOT, UH, SOMETHING THAT PEOPLE'S LIVES ARE DEPENDING ON, IN, IN THE WAY THAT IT WOULD BE FOR RENT.SO I, I KNOW IT, YOU KNOW, I DON'T WANNA GET TOO VIEWPOINT SPECIFIC ON IT, BUT I, I FEEL STRONGLY ABOUT IT WITH THIS CASE CUZ IT'S LIKE, THIS IS LOW INCOME HOUSING AND IT'S A, IT'S A CASE WHERE A REALLY BAD, DANGEROUS PROPERTY GOT FLIPPED.
AND, UM, THAT'S, THAT'S HOW I SEE IT.
SO I, I RECOGNIZED THOSE POINTS, BUT I, I, I WON'T BUDGE ON MY PERSPECTIVE ON FORGIVENESS.
WE ALREADY HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR.
UM, OF COURSE, UM, IF ANYBODY WANTS TO MAKE A COUNTER MOTION OR FRIENDLY MODIFICATION, NO, I'M JUST GOING TO CLEAR UP SOME OF THE CONFUSION, THE POINTS GENERATED OVER THERE.
HOPEFULLY NEXT TIME YOU AND OTHER PEOPLE WILL TAKE A GOOD LOOK AT IT BEFORE YOU BUY, AND I CAN'T SEE THAT NOT HAPPENING.
THE OTHER THING IS WE KEEP TALKING, THIS IS LOW RENT PROPERTY.
IT'S NOT AS LOW AS WE'RE MAKING OUT BECAUSE YOU HAVE NOTED THAT NOT THROUGH OUR PROGRAM OR ANYTHING, BUT YOU'VE GOT 10 PEOPLE, 10 UNITS THAT ARE, YOU'RE LOW RENT.
AND I THINK THAT IS VERY ADMIRABLE OF YOU.
SO HOW MANY UNITS DO YOU HAVE? IT'S 24 UNITS TOTAL.
SO 10 OF THE 24 UNITS ARE LOW RENT AND THE REST ARE NOT, ARE COMPETITIVE RENT.
THEY'RE COMPETITIVE, BUT THEY'RE STILL 12 TO $1,400.
THEY'RE NOT, YOU KNOW, $3,000 CONDOS AND WELL, IT'S PROBABLY NOT IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD, ARE THEY? NO, IT'S NOT.
SO YOU WOULD HAVE A HARD
UM, SO I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND OH, OH, THE CITY HAS A REBUTTAL.
I'M JUST, WHILE Y'ALL ARE CONSIDERING THE MOTION.
TYP, TYPICALLY IN THE PAST WHEN WE DO DO REDUCTIONS, WHATEVER THAT IS, UNLESS IT'S ZERO, UM, YOU KNOW, YOU PUT A 30 DAY WINDOW TO PAY THAT OR IT GOES BACK UP TO THE ORIGINAL AMOUNT AND THAT'S HELPFUL.
THAT'S JUST A REQUEST FROM THE CITY.
JUST SOMETHING FOR US TO KEEP IN MIND.
UM, SO WE'RE, CAN I, CAN I SAY, AM I ALLOWED TO SAY SOMETHING BEFORE WE CLOSE IT UP OR WHO, WHO, I CAN'T HEAR ME RIGHT HERE.
OH, AM I ALLOWED TO SAY SOMETHING? WE ALREADY CLOSED YOUR PARTNER.
WE'RE NOW ABOUT TO CLOSE ALL OF IT.
UM, MS. ALI, UM, CAN I ASK WHO SECOND THAT MO MOTION? UH, WE DON'T HAVE A SECOND YET.
WE WERE JUST GOING AROUND, UM, COLLECTING OUR THOUGHTS.
UM, SO WE ARE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND VOTE.
UM, MY, I'LL SECOND THE MOTION FROM COMMISSIONER MUELLER JUST SO THAT WE CAN PROCESS THAT.
UM, YEAH, THIS IS A DIFFICULT ONE, RIGHT? UH, I'M SITTING HERE AND, UH, I, I KNOW THE NEW OWNERS.
I KNOW THEY, THEY TOOK SUBJECT TO EVERYTHING ELSE THAT WAS HAPPENING AND, UH, YOU ARE IN A VERY DIFFICULT SITUATION, SORT OF, AND HERE I AM TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT CAN WE DO.
UM, AND AS VICE CHAIR FERRERA POINTED OUT, WE JUST SIMPLY DON'T HAVE NUMBERS IN FRONT OF US TONIGHT FROM YOUR SIDE OF THINGS, UM, YOU CAME WELL PREPARED, SO I'M SURPRISED THAT WE DON'T HAVE INVOICES OR SOME SORT OF, UM, PROOF OF PAYMENTS FOR ALL THESE THINGS.
SO WE'VE ALREADY ADMITTED THE EVIDENCE BEFORE US, SO WE'LL GO AHEAD AND, UH, PROBABLY HAVE TO CONSIDER YOUR VERBAL TESTIMONY.
I THINK YOU HAD A COUPLE OF OPPORTUNITIES TO TELL US EXACTLY HOW MUCH WAS SPENT ON, UM, YOU DID TELL US SIX, $600,000, BUT, UM, EXACTLY HOW MUCH WAS SPENT ON THE SPECIFIC REPAIRS THAT BROUGHT EVERY, BROUGHT ALL THE UNITS INTO COMPLIANCE.
SO, UM, WITHOUT KNOWING ANYTHING ELSE, UH, WE'LL, GO AHEAD.
I WOULD SAY WE HAVE, UH,
AND WE HAVE A SECOND, SO I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND VOTE ANYWAY.
I'M NOT SURE WE'LL HAVE A DECISION ON THAT, BUT, OKAY.
AND COMMISSIONER FRANCIS, UM, HOW DO YOU VOTE ON A RELIEF OF 50%?
[01:15:03]
WELL, I WISH THE CHAIR WOULD'VE ALLOWED A LITTLE MORE CONVERSATION CUZ THIS IS DIFFICULT.WE DON'T KNOW WHAT WE'VE DONE IN THE PAST.
THERE SEEMS TO BE INCONSISTENCIES IN HOW THIS IS DONE AND FLOWS.
AND I'M REALLY UNCOMFORTABLE WITH THE PROCESS, BUT ALL WE KNOW IS WHAT WE KNOW RIGHT NOW.
AND SO WE'RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT, WHAT THAT IS.
GOOD POINTS BY THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS.
I'LL, I'LL SUPPORT THE MOTION.
WELL, I WAS GOING TO SUGGEST THAT WE COULD TABLE THIS AND GO ON TO THE OTHER CASES TONIGHT, ESPECIALLY SINCE THERE ARE PEOPLE WAITING, UM, FOR THOSE OTHER CASES AS WELL.
I, I DON'T KNOW WHO'S SPEAKING.
SO I THINK WE SHOULD CONTINUE WITH THE VOTE.
WE'VE ALREADY STARTED THE VOTING PROCESS.
SO, COMMISSION ELLI, HOW DO YOU VOTE? I VOTE ON WHAT MY COMMENTS WERE ABOUT REDUCING IT TO 90% BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT TO BE PUNITIVE.
WE WANT TO INCENTIVIZE THE OWNER FOR THE WORK HE'S DONE.
SO I'M GONNA VOTE AGAINST THIS MOTION OF 50% BECAUSE I THINK THAT 90% IS A MORE VALID NUMBER.
AND COMMISSIONER GREEN, HOW DO YOU VOTE ON THE 50% RELIEF? UM, MY, MY THINKING'S VERY SIMILAR.
UM, COMMISSION MINE'S MORE ALONG, UM, 80%, SO I DON'T WANNA VOTE AGAINST IT.
UH, ALONG COMMISSIONER TLE AND COMMISSIONER GREEN.
AND COMMISSIONER FRYBERGER? NO.
AND I WOULD VOTE AGAINST AS WELL.
UM, COMMISSIONER FERRE I VOTE AGAINST FOR THE SAME REASONS THAT HAVE BEEN STATED.
SO, UM, THAT MOTION DOES NOT CARRY, UH, DO WE HAVE, OH, COMMISSIONER GREEN? YES.
I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION WITH THE, UH, THE SAME EFFECTIVE, UH, WORDING EXCEPT, UH, SUBSTITUTE 50% FOR 80% REDUCTION.
CAN YOU REPEAT THAT PERCENTAGE PLEASE? 80% EIGHT ZERO REDUCTION.
SO WE HAVE A MOTION FROM COMMISSIONER GREEN FOR 80% REDUCTION.
WE HAVE A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER FREIBERGER AND I'LL GO AHEAD AND JUST CALL THE VOTES.
UM, SO COMMISSIONER GREEN, UH, AYE.
AYE UM, COMMISSIONER BENIGNO, CAN I VOTE AT THE END AGAINST, AT THE END? OH, YES, YOU CAN VOTE AT THE END.
UH, COMMISSIONER THOMPSON? UH, NO.
AND COMMISSIONER FERRERA? I VOTE YES.
IT SEEMS LIKE THAT'S THE BEST REDUCTION THAT WE CAN GET, SO I VOTE.
UM, I BELIEVE WE HAVE EVERYONE.
SO WE HAD, UH, TWO NOS, THREE NOS.
UM, SO MR. WOLF, THANK YOU FOR COMING TONIGHT AND STAFF, THANK YOU FOR YOUR PRESENTATION AS WELL.
SO YOU WILL GET A COPY OF TONIGHT'S ORDER IN THE MAIL.
UM, I THINK, UH, WE TRIED HARD TO REACH A FAIR, UM, YOU KNOW, RESULT.
AND THANK YOU FOR ALL THE REPAIRS THAT YOU'VE DONE AS WELL.
THANK YOU GUYS FOR HEARING ME OUT.
COMMISSIONERS A REMINDER PLEASE TO, UH, MUTE YOUR MICS WHEN YOU'RE DONE SPEAKING.
I WANTED TO ALSO MAKE A NOTE THAT, UM, MS. ALI, THE FIRST CASE ON TONIGHT'S AGENDA HAS
[01:20:01]
BEEN REMOVED, CORRECT? THE FIRST CASE? YEAH.UM, I WAS GOING TO ASK IF WE COULD MOVE, UH, MANSELL AVENUE TO THE, WE'VE GOT QUITE A FEW PEOPLE HERE FOR THAT.
PROPERTY, IF WE COULD HEAR THAT ONE.
AND THEN WE'LL GO BACK TO NUMBER THREE.
AND CAN I ASK, JUST FOR MY RECORD KEEPING, UM, HOW DID MR. SOAD AND MS. MUELLER VOTE ON THAT LAST, UM, COMMISSIONER MUELLER SAID YES AND COMMISSIONER SOAD SAID NO.
I JUST WANTED TO GET MY NUMBERS CORRECT.
[5. Case Number: CL 2023-001069]
NUMBER FIVE ON THE AGENDA IS CASE NUMBER CL 20 23 0 0 169 AND IS REGARDING THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1 1 39 MANSELL AVENUE.EXHIBITS CAN BE FOUND IN THE TEAL BOOKS IN YOUR READERS OR GOOGLE DRIVE FOLDER.
THIS CASE WAS OPENED IN JANUARY, 2022 AS A RESULT OF A FIRE.
THIS CASE IS REGARDING AN UNOCCUPIED SINGLE STORY RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE, WHICH IS HOMESTEADED THE NEGLECTED STRUCTURE SUFFERED SEVERE FIRE, DAMAGE IS UNSAFE, UNSTABLE AND UNINHABITABLE.
THERE IS NO RECORD OF A PERMIT APPLICATION IN OUR DATABASE TO DATE FOR REPAIR OR DEMOLITION.
THIS STRUCTURE IS CONSIDERED DANGEROUS WITH UNSAFE AND HAZARDOUS CONDITIONS AND REQUIRES DEMOLITION IN YOUR READERS.
IN GOOGLE DRIVE FOLDER, YOU'LL FIND THE FOLLOWING EXHIBIT ONE, WHICH CONTAINS THE COMPLAINANT CASE HISTORY.
A COPY OF THE TRAVIS CENTRAL APPRAISAL DISTRICT RECORD THAT VERIFIES OWNERSHIP, THE REQUIRED NOTICES OF VIOLATION, NOTICES OF HEARING AND POSTINGS, AS WELL AS A FIRE INCIDENT REPORT, EXHIBIT TWO, WHICH CONSISTS OF PHOTOGRAPHS MARKED AS TWO A THROUGH TWO J AND CO.
LASTLY, CODES RECOMMENDED ORDER.
AUSTIN CODE INSPECTOR AARON HAEL IS CURRENTLY ASSIGNED TO THIS CASE AND IS HERE TO PRESENT THE PHOTOGRAPHS AND DISCUSS THE VIOLATIONS AS DEPICTED.
INSPECTOR HAGLE, PLEASE BEGIN YOUR TESTIMONY.
I'M AN INSPECTOR WITH AUSTIN CODE ALL PRESENTING A CASE THIS EVENING, UH, REGARDING PROPERTY AT 1139 MANSELL AVENUE.
THIS IS A 513 SQUARE FOOT SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL HOME CONSTRUCTED IN 1953 AND SITS ON A 13 OF AN ACRE PARCEL.
UH, FOR REFERENCE, THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED EAST OF WESTERVILLE ROAD IN SOUTH OF AUSTIN, FIRE STATION FIVE, UH, AT 12TH AND WEBER ZONING IS SF THREE.
TRAVIS CENTRAL APPRAISAL DISTRICTS IDENTIFIED THE OWNER AS MR. LEMI REN.
JOINT OWNERSHIP APPEARS TO HAVE SEVERED IN 1988 WITH AN EX-SPOUSE, AND THIS HOME WAS INITIALLY PURCHASED BY THE RENZ IN 1981.
I WAS ASSIGNED AS THE INITIAL INVESTIGATOR FOR THIS CASE AND REMAIN SO.
APPROXIMATELY 14 INSPECTIONS HAVE BEEN CONDUCTED ON THE PROPERTY, INCLUDING THE DAY OF THE FIRE.
THIS PROPERTY HAS BEEN THE SUBJECT OF TWO PRIOR PRESENTATIONS AND ORDERS FROM THE BUILDING AND STANDARDS COMMISSION.
THE GENESIS OF THIS CASE IS A STRUCTURE FIRE, WHICH OCCURRED AT APPROXIMATELY 10:00 AM ON JANUARY 7TH, 2022.
I WAS NOTIFIED BY THREE 11 IN THE AUSTIN FIRE DEPARTMENT AT A FIRE THAT OCCURRED, WHICH RESULTED IN NO INJURIES BUT CAUSED HEAVY DAMAGE TO THE UNOCCUPIED STRUCTURE.
I WENT TO THE SCENE AND MET WITH THE HOMEOWNER, MR. REN AND HIS SON.
I SPOKE WITH HIM BRIEFLY AND CONDUCTED AN INSPECTION OF THE PREMISES.
AT THAT TIME, I NOTED THE FRONT OF THE HOME, THE NORTH EXPOSURE AND THE REAR OF THE HOME WERE DAMAGED BY FIRE AND THE FIREFIGHTING EFFORTS, THE ENTIRE NORTH WALL OF THE HOME IS DESTROYED AND MISSING.
UM, THE REMAINING STUDS AND AND STRUCTURE ARE UN SALVAGEABLE FROM FOUNDATION TO ROOF.
AN EXAMINATION OF THE REAR OF THE HOME SHOWS FIRE AND WATER DAMAGE TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER.
THE CEDAR PICKET FENCE BETWEEN 1139 AND 41 HAS BEEN DESTROYED.
THE FRONT DOOR OF THE HOME WAS OPEN.
I WENT INSIDE TO ASSESS THE CONDITIONS THERE.
I NOTED A HEAVY ACCUMULATION OF BOXES AND DEBRIS, CEILING AND JOISTS, WHICH WERE FAILING, UH, BOWED AND AS WELL AS GENERAL DISREPAIR AND UNINHABITABLE OF THE INTERIOR.
MOST NOTABLY, THE CEILING DAMAGE WAS NOT CAUSED AS A RESULT OF FIREFIGHTING EFFORTS.
UH, I ESTABLISHED THE HOMEOWNER DOES NOT RESIDE IN INSTRUCT INSIDE THE STRUCTURE, BUT OUTSIDE IN A TOWED RV, I INQUIRED WHERE THE WASTE CREATING, UH, CREATED BY THE RV WAS DISPOSED WHERE THE WATER SUPPLY ORIGINATED AND WHERE THE POWER WAS COMING FROM.
I'VE RECEIVED COMPLAINTS, UH, FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD PRIOR REGARDING THIS PROPERTY REGARDING HUMAN WASTE BEING DUMPED ON THE GROUND AT THE PROPERTY.
MR. REN ADVISED ME THAT HE EITHER USES THE RESTROOM AT A NEARBY CONVENIENCE STORE OR HAS OTHER PLACES HE CAN GO.
HE FURTHER STATED HE HAS A GENERATOR PROVIDING ELECTRICITY, ALTHOUGH IT WORKS, UH, INCONSISTENTLY, I WAS UNABLE TO ESTABLISH HIS WATER SUPPLY SOURCE.
AN EXTENSION CORD WAS OBSERVED FROM THE RV ACROSS THE YARD INTO THE NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY.
HOWEVER, IT WAS DESTROYED DURING THE FIRE.
[01:25:01]
BOTH THE FIRE REPORT AND MY INTERVIEW WITH MR. REN INDICATED THAT THE FIRE ORIGINATED AS A RESULT OF AN INDIVIDUAL.HE ALLOWS TO SLEEP ON THE SIDE OF THE HOUSE, CREATING A FIRE WHICH WAS ULTIMATELY LEFT UNATTENDED AND WHICH SUBSEQUENTLY IGNITED HER TENT AND THE STRUCTURE.
THROUGHOUT THE LIFE OF THIS CASE, I HAVE OBSERVED, OBSERVED A NUMBER OF PERSONS WANDERING NEAR, UH, AND ON THE PROPERTY.
I WAS MOST RECENTLY CONFRONTED AT THE PROPERTY ON JANUARY 18TH.
THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION WAS POSTED THE FRONT DOOR OF THE RV AS WELL AS A YELLOW PLACARD, UH, ATTACHED TO THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE.
I WAS ABLE TO MAKE CONTACT WITH ONE OF MR. RE'S DAUGHTERS AND INTERVIEWS, UH, WITH BOTH OVER THE TIME.
UH, WERE ABLE TO ESTABLISH THE FOLLOWING AS FAR BACK AS 2020 AT LEAST IT APPEARS THERE HAVE BEEN, UH, VAGRANCY CONCERNS, UH, CONCERNING INDIVIDUALS LIVING ON A TRANSIENT BASIS ON THE PROPERTY.
ALL SERVICE UTILITIES HAVE BEEN DISCONNECTED TO THE PROPERTY FOR SOME TIME.
MR. REN INDICATED THAT THE PREVIOUSLY DETERIORATED PIPES FROZE INSIDE THE STRUCTURE AND WHEN THEY FINALLY GAVE OUT, HE PURCHASED THE RV AND RESIDES OUTSIDE.
THE FIRE OF 2022 WAS LI LIKELY THE LAST STRAW TO THE HOME, BUT IT WAS UNINHABITABLE PRIOR TO THE FIRE BY THE OWNER'S ADMISSION.
UH, I ADVISED MR. RENN IT WAS CONTRARY TO MUNICIPAL CODE TO OCCUPY THE RV AS A RESIDENCE AS WELL AS THE ADDITIONAL CODES OF VIOLATIONS PREEXISTING AND BROUGHT ABOUT BY THE FIRE.
THESE INCLUDE MAINTAINING OR CREATING, UH, A DANGEROUS STRUCTURE OF PREMISES, FOUNDATION WALLS OPEN AND ACCESSIBLE SUCH THAT RODENTS AND PESTS CAN ENTER EXTERIOR WALLS AND SIMILAR CONDITION, WINDOWS, SKYLIGHTS AND DOOR FRAMES.
UNSOUND AND POOR REPAIR, NOT WEATHERTIGHT, INTERIOR SURFACES NOT MAINTAINED IN SANITARY CONDITION.
ACCUMULATION OF GARBAGE INSIDE AND OUTSIDE ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS HAZARDS AS A RESULT OF DETERIORATION OR DAMAGE.
ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT EXPOSED TO WATER, ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT EXPOSED TO FIRE AND INADEQUATE OR UNINSTALLED FIRE SAFETY REQUIREMENTS.
THE ADDITIONAL DEFICIENCY I LISTED WAS THE UNLAWFUL OCCUPATION OF THE RV AS A HABITATION IN THE SF THREE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THERE WAS AND REMAINS ACCUMULATED, TRASH, RUBBISH AND DEBRIS ON THE PROPERTY.
I EXPLAINED TO MR. RENN AND HIS SON THAT HE WOULD NEED TO RELOCATE ELSEWHERE EITHER WITH OR WITHOUT THE RV.
I SUGGESTED MOVING TO AN RV PARK WITH APPROPRIATE HOOKUPS AS DISPOSITION OF THE PROPERTY WAS DECIDED.
BOTH INDICATED THE UNDERSTOOD MR. REN HAS SUBSEQUENTLY REFUSED TO LEAVE THE PROPERTY.
UH, HIS DAUGHTER AND FAMILY HAVE ATTEMPTED TO MOVE HIM WITH NO SUCCESS.
COLLECTIVELY, AUSTIN CODE HAS MADE EVERY EFFORT TO ASSIST THE PROPERTY OWNER INTO SUITABLE ACCOMMODATION AND TO BRING A RESOLUTION TO THE PROPERTY.
WE'VE HAD MEETINGS WITH UH, AUSTIN ENERGY, HANDS ON HOUSING AUSTIN WATER, AUSTIN PUBLIC HEALTH, AND I PERSONALLY INITIATED A COMPLAINT WITH ADULT ADULT PROTECTIVE SERVICES.
I FILED THIS COMPLAINT TO ITS END AND LEARNED THE PROPERTY OWNER WAS ABLE TO ARTICULATE.
HE DID NOT WANT OR NEED ASSISTANCE.
THERE WERE ABANDONED VEHICLES ON THE PROPERTY WHICH HAD BEEN REMOVED, SOME OF THE ACCUMULATED TRASH AND RUBBISH THAT'S BEEN COLLECTED BY A R.
HOWEVER, THE PROPERTY TO DATE REMAINS BOARDED UP, UNINHABITABLE, UNREPAIRED, AND UNTOUCHED.
SINCE THE FIRE, A LARGE PIT BULL DOG IS TIED TO THE TRAILER, WHICH MAKES THE INSPECTION PROCESS RISKY.
UM, OUR TEAMMATES IN RELEVANT CITY AGENCIES HAVE ATTEMPTED, ATTEMPTED TO FACILITATE A RESOLUTION WITH NO SUCCESS.
SEVERAL ASSESSMENTS, UH, BOTH INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL TO THE CITY HAVE SUGGESTED IT'S NOW NOT VIABLE FOR REHABILITATION.
THE SANITATION BLIGHTING AND, UH, HOMELESSNESS ISSUES RAISED AND PERPETUATED BY THE PROPERTY ARE TROUBLING AND CREATE CONCERNS AMONG THE NEIGHBORHOOD WHICH THEY'VE IDENTIFIED WITH AUSTIN CODE.
I WILL NOW PRESENT PHOTOGRAPHS WHICH DEMONSTRATE THE PROGRESSION OF THE CASE AND WILL BE HAPPY TO ENTERTAIN ANY QUESTIONS.
UM, I'LL MS. ALI, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE? NO.
I'LL GO AHEAD AND ADMIT, UM, STAFF'S EXHIBIT ONE AND EXHIBIT TWO A THROUGH TWO J AND WE ALSO HAVE THE OWNERS HERE, I BELIEVE.
I DON'T BELIEVE, UH, MR. HAEL SHOWN HIS PHOTOGRAPHS YET.
EXHIBIT TWO A IS THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY.
THIS IS THREE DAYS AFTER THE FIRE.
THIS WAS AFTER THE PROPERTY HAD BEEN BOARDED UP.
[01:30:01]
TOWED RV THAT MR. REN OCCUPIES ON THE DOOR.THIS IS TAKEN FROM MANSELL AVENUE, UH, LOOKING EAST INTO THE PROPERTY.
UH, TO THE LEFT IS WHERE THE FIRE ORIGINATED.
UH, BEHIND THE TREE ON THE RIGHT IS THE TOWED RV.
UM, THE PROPERTY HAS BEEN BOARDED UP HERE.
I BELIEVE THIS IS, UH, THIS 7TH OF JANUARY, 2022.
EXHIBIT TWO D IS THE, UH, FRONT OF THE HOUSE.
THIS IS PRIOR TO STEAM TEAM BOARDING UP THE PROPERTY.
THIS IS THE, UH, UH, THE FRONT DAMAGED PORTION OF THE HOUSE.
AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE'S HEAVY FIRE DAMAGE FROM, UH, FLOOR TO CEILING.
UH, IF YOU LOOK ON THE LEFT EDGE OF THE PHOTO, YOU CAN SEE THE CROWN OF THE ROOF.
THERE IS FIRE DAMAGED ALL THE WAY TO THE TOP.
TWO E IS A PHOTO TAKEN THE SAME DAY.
UH, THIS IS THE DAY OF THE FIRE.
AS YOU CAN SEE, THE UH, STEAM TEAM, UH, IS THERE ON THE RIGHT, JUST BEGINNING THE BOARD AND SECURE PROCESS.
UH, THERE'S A DOG KENNEL THERE ON THE LEFT.
THE FIRE ORIGINATED THERE ON THE LEFT BETWEEN THE HOUSE AND THE FENCE, YOU CAN SEE THE HE FENCE HAS BEEN DESTROYED, UH, AS HAS THE ENTIRE, THAT WOULD BE THE NORTH EXPOSURE OF THE HOUSE.
THIS IS TAKEN STANDING INSIDE THE FRONT DOOR.
UH, NONE OF THIS, UH, DAMAGE AND CEILING, EXCUSE ME, ISSUES WERE CAUSED BY THE FIRE DEPARTMENT.
THERE'S NO WATER, UH, DAMAGE INSIDE THE HOUSE HERE.
THIS IS ALL PREEXISTING DETERIORATION AND DAMAGE TO THE CEILING.
THE FLOORS UNSTABLE AND UNSOUND, AND YOU CAN SEE THE CEILING JOISTS ARE BEGINNING TO BOW AND FAIL AT THE, THE TOP OF THE PHOTO.
THIS IS WHERE THE FIRE, UH, ORIGINATED.
THIS IS THE NORTH FACE OF THE HOUSE.
AS YOU CAN TURN FROM GROUND ALL THE WAY TO THE ROOF, THE ROOF STRUCTURE ALONG THE ENTIRE NORTH EXPOSURE HAS BEEN DESTROYED.
UH, THE FENCE IS DESTROYED AND THE ENTIRE, UH, DEPTH OF THE HOUSE HAS BEEN BURNED AS WELL.
THIS IS THE REAR OF THE HOUSE.
THIS IS LOOKING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE HOUSE.
UM, THERE IS DAMAGE, UH, ON THE CORNER THERE WHERE THE FIRE DEPARTMENT DID, UH, BREAK OUT THE WINDOWS.
AND THERE IS FIRE DAMAGE AT THE BASE, UH, OF THE HOME THERE.
THE BACK DOOR, I DON'T BELIEVE, UH, WAS PRESENT AND THAT WAS BOARDED UP AS WELL.
UH, THIS IS A PHOTO TAKEN ALSO IN MANSELL AVENUE.
UM, THIS IS FACING THE PROPERTY JUST A LITTLE BIT FURTHER SOUTH.
YOU CAN SEE THE RV, YOU CAN SEE THE DOG.
UM, AND THE PROPERTY HAS BEEN BOARDED UP AND REMAINS BOARDED UP.
UH, AT THIS TIME YOU CAN SEE THERE'S SOME ACCUMULATED TRASH AND RUBBISH, UH, DURING THE INSPECTIONS THIS WEEK THAT HAS BECOME WORSE.
UH, THERE REMAINS ACCUMULATED TRASH AND DEBRIS ON THE PROPERTY.
THIS IS THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE HOUSE ON THE BACKYARD.
AS YOU CAN SEE, THE ADJOINING FENCE BETWEEN 1139 AND 1141 HAS BEEN DESTROYED.
UH, THE INTERIOR THROUGH THE WINDOW THERE HAS BEEN CHARRED AND DAMAGED BY FIRE.
AS HAS THE FOUNDATION OR THE BEAMS APPEAR IN BEAM HOUSE, UH, HAS BEEN DAMAGED BY FIRE THERE AT THE BASE.
I BELIEVE THAT'S MY LAST PHOTO.
I ALREADY ADMITTED THOSE EXHIBITS, BUT FOR THE RECORD, I'LL ADMIT EXHIBIT ONE AND TWO A THROUGH, UM, TWO J.
BECAUSE OF THE EXISTING CONDITIONS SHOWN IN THESE PHOTOGRAPHS AND THOSE DESCRIBED IN THE FINDINGS OF FACT, THE CODE OFFICIAL FOUND THAT THIS STRUCTURE IS A PUBLIC AND AN ATTRACTIVE NUISANCE AND IS CONSIDERED SUBSTANDARD WITH HAZARDOUS CONDITIONS.
STAFF ASKS THE COMMISSION TO ADMIT EXHIBIT ONE, WHICH INCLUDES STAFF PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND OTHER RELEVANT DOCUMENTS AND PHOTOGRAPHS MARKED AS EXHIBITS TWO A THROUGH TWO.
A, OBTAIN AND FINALIZE ALL NECESSARY PERMITS.
B DEMOLISH ALL PORTIONS OF THE FIRE DAMAGE RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE AS AND REMOVE HIS DEBRIS LEAVING THE LOT CLEAN AND RAKED.
AND C REQUEST INSPECTIONS FROM AUSTIN.
CODE TO VERIFY COMPLIANCE TWO ON THE 46 DAY OF COMPLIANCE HAS NOT BEEN ACHIEVED.
A AUTHORIZE THE CODE OFFICIAL TO PROCEED WITH DEMOLITION AND TO CONSIDER ALL PORTIONS OF THE FIRE DAMAGE RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE, INCLUDING ANY ITEMS IN AND AROUND THE STRUCTURE
[01:35:01]
AS DEBRIS AND DISPOSE OF AS SUCH.B PROPERTY OWNER SHALL BE ON NOTICE THAT THE CODE OFFICIAL IS AUTHORIZED TO ASSESS ALL EXPENSES INCURRED AGAINST THE PROPERTY UNLESS EXEMPTED BY THE TEXAS CONSTITUTION.
A LIEN FOR THOSE EXPENSES MAY BE FILED BY THE CITY OF AUSTIN AND RECORDED WITH THE TRAVIS COUNTY DEED RECORDS SHALL ACCRUE AT A RATE OF 10% PER YEAR FROM THE DATE OF THE ASSESSMENT UNTIL PAID IN FULL.
UM, WE HAVE THE OWNER HERE AND WE UM, WE HAVE TWO ADDITIONAL, I BELIEVE FAMILY MEMBERS.
SO MR. DAVID REN, IS THAT RIGHT? UH, MR. LEMI REN SINNER.
AND MR. EDWARD DOWNING? THAT'S CORRECT.
SO ARE YOU ALL, UM, GOING TO BE PRESENTING TONIGHT? YES, WE WILL.
SO YOU CAN GO AHEAD AND PROCEED CHAIR.
WE HAVE SOME EXHIBITS ALSO THAT, I'M SORRY.
WE ALSO HAVE SOME EXHIBITS THAT REG REGINA WENT, REN SENT.
SHE'S SUPPOSED TO BE ONLINE AS WELL.
AND, UH, DO WE HAVE THE EXHIBITS IN OUR WE DO.
UM, THEY WERE EMAILED TO ME JUST BEFORE THE MEETING.
SO, UM, THEY'RE GONNA BE, THEY CAN BE PUT UP ON THE SCREEN IF YOU, IF THAT'LL WORK.
UM, SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND PROCEED WITH THE OWNERS THAT ARE IN FRONT OF US AND THEN IF MS. REN CALLS IN, WE CAN ALSO HEAR FROM HER.
YOU DO HAVE FIVE MINUTES, UM, TO MAKE YOUR PRESENTATION AND THEN THE COMMISSIONERS MIGHT HAVE QUESTIONS FOR YOU.
UH, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, MY NAME IS EDWARD DOWNING.
I'VE BEEN ASKED BY MR. REN TO HELP HIM IN THIS.
I'VE BEEN ASKED BY MR. RAN TO HELP HIM IN THE THIS PROCEDURE.
UH, HE'S AWARE OF THESE, UH, VIOLATIONS AND WHAT HE'S BEEN DOING IS IN THE PROCESS OF TRYING TO, HE'S APPLIED FOR THE HOME REPAIR PROGRAM APPLICATION AND I BELIEVE APPROXIMATELY A YEAR AGO HE MADE ANOTHER APPLICATION, BUT IT'S FALLEN THROUGH.
HE'LL BE ABLE TO EXPLAIN THAT.
AND WHAT OUR MAIN GOAL IS, WE PLAN ON DEMOLISHING THIS HOUSE AND WE'D REQUEST AT LEAST 90 DAYS TO GET THIS CUZ WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON, UH, A SUITABLE PERSON THAT'S GONNA PAY FOR THE DEMO DEMOLITION OF THIS HOUSE.
AND LET MR. REN EXPLAIN TO YOU WHAT HE HAS DONE ON HIS, UH, APPLICATIONS.
TELL HIM ABOUT THE APPLICATIONS.
WAS, UH, HAND ON HOUSING TOLD ME THAT THEY COULD TAKE CARE OF IT ON GOLD BOND.
SO THEY'RE COMING OUT HERE TO FIX MY HOUSE.
THEY COME OUT THREE TIMES AND THEN THE CITY ALSO COME OUT AND SAID THEY WERE GOING TO GIVE ME A NEW HOUSE SO THAT THEY KEPT ON DOING THAT OVER AND OVER.
BUT THE HANDS ON HOUSING ALSO, UH, WERE WORKING ON IT.
THEN I WENT OVER THERE TO TALK TO HIM AND, UH, HE HAD A, A CONTRACT OVER THERE, BUT HE HAD, UH, LEFT.
HE DON'T WORKING NO LONGER WORK FOR THE CITY, SO HE WASN'T WORKING ON MY CASE ANYMORE.
DID YOU APPLY FOR THIS HOME REPAIR PROGRAM? APPLICATION? YES.
AND I THINK WE SENT THIS IN TO THE, THE BOARD TODAY.
AND I THINK, DAVID, YOU CAN TELL US ABOUT THE DEMOLITION YOU PLANNED ON DOING IN THIS HOUSE.
UH, REGINA, ARE YOU ON? IF YOU WANT TO CHIME IN, YOU CAN CHIME.
WHICH REGINA'S MY SISTER, OLDER SISTER.
IS MS. RENN ONLINE WITH US? UH, MS. REGINA RENN? NO.
CAN YOU TELL US, UM, YOUR FATHER WANTED YOU TO TELL US ABOUT THE, UH, PROGRESS YOU'VE MADE REGARDING THE PLANNED DEMOLITION? SO, IT'S VERY DIFFICULT FOR ME TO SPEAK TO YOU TONIGHT AND TO SAY ANYTHING TONIGHT.
UM, I HAVE CORRESPONDED WITH ERIN AND THE OTHER PEOPLE, AND I AM FULLY AWARE OF WHAT HAS BEEN GOING ON AND WHAT HAS BEEN NEEDED TO BE DONE.
[01:40:01]
THE THING IS, MY FATHER LACKS INSIGHT AND HE DOES NOT HAVE A NATURAL ABILITY TO HOLD HIMSELF ACCOUNTABLE.AND BECAUSE OF HIS MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES, I HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO ACCOMPLISH WHAT THE GOAL WAS GOING FORWARD.
IF YOU WOULD ALLOW US THE 90 DAYS, WE WILL, BECAUSE NOW HE UNDERSTANDS THE SEVERITY AND THAT IT HAS TO COME DOWN THAT, THAT WHETHER HE GETS HELP WITH HELPING HANDS OR HANDS ON HOUSING OR WHATEVER IT'S CALLED, HE UNDERSTANDS NOW THAT IT MUST BE DEMOLISHED AND THAT THE LOT MUST BE CLEARED.
SO I, I AM ASKING FOR MERCY THAT YOU DO NOT, UH, GIVE US ANY PENALTIES OR FEES AND ALLOW US TIME TO DEMOLISH THE HOUSE.
I STARTED A PROCESS, BUT BECAUSE MY MOTHER'S NAME WAS NOT ON THE PROCESS, AND I DON'T KNOW HOW IT GOT OFF, UM, BUT I HAVE GONE DOWN TO TRAVIS COUNTY TO TRY TO GET IT DONE, TO PUT BACK ON.
BUT WITH ALL OF THE DIFFERENT, UM, ISSUES THAT, THAT, YOU KNOW, HAS BROUGHT FORWARD, THE ONLY THING THAT I CAN SAY IS THAT MY BROTHERS AND I WANT TO HELP MY FATHER RESOLVE THESE ISSUES.
BUT IT IS SO COMPLICATED BECAUSE OF THE FEDERAL RIGHTS THAT HE HAS, EVEN WITH THE MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES.
AND EVEN THOUGH APS CAME OUT, I HAVE MYSELF CALLED APS.
UM, BUT EVEN BECAUSE OF THAT, BECAUSE HE ANSWERS THOSE CERTAIN QUESTIONS APPROPRIATELY IS NOTHING IS DONE.
SO I, I AM HIS MEDICAL POWER OF ATTORNEY.
I DO, I DO HAVE HIS, UM, DURABLE POWER OF ATTORNEY, BUT BECAUSE MY FAMILY DOES NOT WANT TO PUT THOSE TYPE OF LABELS ON MY FATHER, I HAVE BEEN HINDERED EVERYONE IS ON THE SAME PAGE TODAY.
EVERYONE KNOWS THAT THIS HOUSE HAS TO COME DOWN AND DOES A LOT, MUST BE CLEARED.
GIVE US A LITTLE TIME TO MOVE FORWARD AND DO WHAT I STARTED SO THAT WE CAN MEET THE STANDARD AND COME WITHIN THE COCO COMPLIANCE.
MY FATHER HAS, HE LACKS INSIGHT AND SOME MIGHT SAY HE HAS, HE HAS NOT GROUNDED THE WAY WE WANT HIM TO BE GROUNDED OUT OF RESPECT.
WE CONTINUE TO, MY FATHER IS NOT THE SAME MAN THAT RAISED US RIGHT NOW, BUT HE IS OUR FATHER.
AND HE, WE GIVE HIM THAT RESPECT.
AND HE DOES HAVE, BY LAW, THE RIGHT TO SELF-DETERMINATION CONSIDERING THAT THAT IS THE REASON WE PUT THE, THE LITTLE CAMPER OUT THERE FOR HIM.
BUT NOW THAT WE UNDERSTAND THAT, THAT IS NOT ALLOWABLE, WE WANT TO, TO MOVE EVERYTHING FORWARD, WE WILL PLACE HIM ON A DIFFERENT PROPERTY.
I JUST NEED YOU ALL TO BE MERCIFUL AT THIS POINT FOR ME AND MY, MY FAMILY, AND SO THAT WE CAN ACCOMPLISH WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE.
THANK YOU MS. REN, UM, FOR THE VERY CLEAR AND, UH, YEAH, THAT, THAT HELPS US A LOT.
UM, I THINK OUR YOUR TIME IS UP, BUT IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE THAT YOU WANTED TO ADD? UH, IN CONCLUSION, MR. REN? UH, MY EX MY DAUGHTER IS TALKING AND, UH, I DON'T GRIEVE EVERYTHING SHE SAYS.
SO, YOU KNOW, I WAS JUST, UH, THIS HAPPENED BEFORE MY DAUGHTER CAME IN, ME GETTING THE HOUSE FIXED.
SHE DIDN'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THIS.
SO I WENT UP ON MY OWN AND DONE THIS HERE AT HANDS ON HOUSING AND GOT THIS HIM, UH, QUALIFIED.
AND NOW, YOU KNOW, THEY SEEN THE, THE BACKFIRE ON ME THAT KNOWING IT, THAT THEIR HAND ON HOUSING WAS GOING TO FIX THE HOUSE, THEY CAME OUT AND THEN SHOWED ME THAT THE HOUSE WILL BE FIXED.
AND HE MADE A DEAL WITH THE CO ENFORCEMENT WHEN THE COURT ENFORCEMENT WAS THERE, HE CO ENFORCEMENT
[01:45:01]
HIM, MADE A DEAL THAT THEY WASN'T BOTHERING ME YET UNTIL THE HOUSE GET FIXED, AND THEN I COULD MOVE BACK IN THE HOUSE AND PUSH THE TRAILER BACK UPSIDE THE HOUSE.THE HOUSE WAS IN A MESS LIKE THAT.
A MAN OVER THERE SAID, BUT WE CLEAN THAT WHOLE THING UP.
SO, YOU KNOW, AND, UH, THE WAY HE'S SHOWING IT UP THERE, THAT THAT WAS THE BEGINNING.
SO ALL, IT'S NOT THAT IT'S NOT THERE LIKE THAT, HE'S GOT SOME LATE PICTURES THERE.
THEY KIND OF SHOWING UP REAL BAD.
THAT'S WHEN THEM THINGS WAS REALLY MESSED UP.
BUT NOW IT'S A, IT IS A, IT'S A TRAILER IN FRONT OF MY HOUSE THAT I DON'T HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH.
AND, UH, IT IS GOT, UH, PORCH WASHING MACHINE, ALL DIFFERENT KIND OF STUFF.
AND SOME PEOPLES DOWN THE STREET, THEY, THEY'LL BRING STUFF AND PARK CARS ALL IN FRONT OF MY HOUSE.
I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THAT.
SO THAT, THAT OUGHT BE HIS JOB TO SEE WHO'S PARKING ALL THEM CARS UP AND DOWN THE STREET BECAUSE IT MAKES MY HOUSE LOOK BAD.
SEE, I HAVE A DOG FOR A WASHOUT.
THE PEOPLES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THEY, THEY WILL RIP YOU OFF.
AND I GOT MY DOG THERE ALL TO PROTECT ME ALSO.
AND I, THE, THE OWNER IN THAT HOUSE IS NOT FIXED BECAUSE HOMEOWNER HOUSING, THEY DIDN'T GIMME THE RIGHT INFORMATION.
THEY LET ME GO OUT AND SAID, I NEED A SOCIAL SECURITY CARD.
THAT'S WHAT THEY NEED TO PREPARE THE HOUSE.
I HAD A SOCIAL SECURITY CARD, BUT THEY WANT TO SEE, SEE THE PAPER TYPE.
THEN THEY TURN AROUND AND PUT A LABEL ON ME AND SAYS I WAS A FRAUD, THAT THIS WASN'T NONE ME.
AND THEN THE, THE CITY AND THE SOCIAL SECURITY GOT TOGETHER AND I DIDN'T GET A SOCIAL SECURITY CARD AND SAID TWO YEARS, TWO YEARS GETTING A SOCIAL SECURITY CARD BECAUSE THIS, WHAT PUT ON ME IS I, I'M A FRAUD AND I NEVER BEEN A FRAUD IN MY LIFE.
AND SO THE HOUSE DIDN'T GET FIXED ON THE KIND A SOCIAL SECURITY CARD.
NOW THEY SAID, GO AHEAD AND GET A WARRANT LETTER, TOLD ME TO GO GET A WARRANT LETTER THAT THEY WERE WAITING FOR ME TO GET A WATER LETTER.
SO I WENT AND GOT THE WATER LETTER WHEN I GOT THE WATER LETTER.
AND I GOT THE SOCIAL SECURITY CARD.
WELL, WAS IT NOW WE DON'T HAVE NO MONEY IN THE BUDGET.
UM, YEAH, THAT'S, THAT'S ALSO HELPFUL TO US.
I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU UNDERSTOOD THAT TONIGHT THE CITY'S ASKING TO DEMOLISH.
UM, AND IT SOUNDS LIKE THAT'S ALSO YOUR PLAN, RIGHT? YES, THE PLAN WAS, IS DO THAT.
UM, I'LL GO BACK TO, UM, INSPECTOR HAGLE.
JUST TO BE CLEAR, UH, IT IT'S NOT WITHIN OUR, CERTAINLY NOT WITHIN MY ABILITY TO, TO BROKER ANY KIND OF AGREEMENT WITH ANY OUTSIDE AGENCY WITHOUT THE OVERSIGHT OF THE, OF THE CODE DEPARTMENT.
SO, UM, WE DID HAVE DISCUSSIONS WITH HANDS-ON HOUSING AS WELL AS A BUNCH OF OTHER CITY AGENCIES, BUT THERE WAS NEVER A, A FORMAL OR INFORMAL AGREEMENT MADE OF ANY KIND, UH, WITH THOSE AGENCIES.
SECOND, UM, I I'M DELIGHTED TO HEAR THAT, THAT THEIR PLAN IS, IS IN LINE WITH OURS.
HOWEVER, UH, WE ARE AT NOW ABOUT 380 DAYS IN, UH, WHERE IT WAS EXPLAINED TO EVERYONE INVOLVED THAT RESIDING WITHOUT SANITATION, WITHOUT UTILITIES ON THE PROPERTY IN AN RV IS UNLAWFUL.
AND, AND I WOULD JUST LIKE TO REITERATE THAT.
UM, INSPECTOR, UM, NOW I'LL GO TO THE COMMISSION.
IS SOMEONE SPEAKING OR TRYING TO SPEAK? IT'S REGINA, THE, HIS DAUGHTER.
MR. AARON IS, I'LL GIVE YOU ONE MINUTE BECAUSE YOUR TIME'S ACTUALLY UP AND THEN WE HAVE TO GO TO THE COMMISSIONERS.
UM, MR. AARON IS, UH, HA IS ABSOLUTELY CORRECT.
IT HAS BEEN DIFFICULT AT THIS TO THIS POINT, BUT THE DIFFERENCE IS I NOW HAVE MY FAMILY SUPPORT.
MY BROTHERS ARE IN AGREEMENT AND WILL NOT BE, UH, UH, OPPOSING ME IN USING THE DUPA POWER OF ATTORNEY.
[01:50:01]
THANK YOU.UM, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND SEE IF ANY OF THE COMMISSIONERS HAVE A QUESTION OR COMMENT, UH, EITHER FOR STAFF OR FOR THE OWNER'S.
I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION FOR INSPECTOR HAEL AND THEN A QUICK QUESTION FOR, UH, MR. DOWNEY, IF THAT'S OKAY.
UM, INSPECTOR HAEL, THIS IS JUST KIND OF A, A GENERAL QUESTION, BUT, UM, I BELIEVE THAT WHEN A DEMOLITION ORDER GOES THROUGH, LIKE IN THIS CASE 45 DAYS, IF IT WERE TO GO THROUGH, THAT DOESN'T MEAN THE CITY IS GOING TO BE THERE IN 45 DAYS WITH A BULLDOZER, RIGHT? THAT TYPICALLY THERE'S, THERE'S QUITE A LAPSE BEFORE THAT ACTUALLY GETS EXECUTED, WHICH STILL ALLOWS TIME FOR A HOMEOWNER TO DEMOLISH THEIR HOME.
CAN YOU KIND OF WALK ME THROUGH THAT QUICKLY? I WOULD REFER THAT TO DIVISION MANAGER MOORE.
UH, I'M OVER THE CRED DIVISION CASE REVIEW AND ESCALATION DIVISION.
IT, THAT PROGRAM IS WITHIN OUR DIVISION.
UH, I SIGN OFF ON ALL THOSE PAPERS AND YES, IT'S A LENGTHY PROCESS.
WHETHER WE WANTED TO DO IT TOMORROW OR NOT, WE COULDN'T, IT WOULD TAKE US AT LEAST FIVE TO SIX MONTHS.
AND I, I JUST WANT TO ADD, YOU KNOW, IF WE SEE SOMEONE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE DEMOLISHING OR UM, 25% DONE DEMO, LIKE WE'RE NOT GONNA STEP, LIKE WE'RE GONNA LET IT, YOU KNOW, TAKE ITS COURSE.
I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY IF WE'RE SEEING A YEAR'S GONE BY AND IT'S NOT DONE ANYTHING, THEN, THEN WE WOULD, WE WOULD HAVE TO MOVE FORWARD.
BUT, YOU KNOW, WE, WE TRY TO ALLOW IT TO, WE DON'T WANT TO DEMOLISH IT.
UM, AND MR. DOWNEY, ARE YOU, ARE YOU THE, UH, FRIEND OF THE FAMILY OR AN ATTORNEY FOR THE, WELL, I AM AN ATTORNEY AND UH, THE REASON I GOT INVOLVED IN THIS ONE OF, UH, MR. RENT'S NEIGHBORS AND I ATTEND THE SAME CHURCH AND SHE ASKED ME TO LOOK OVER SOME OF THESE DOCUMENTS AND TRY TO ASSIST HIM IN GETTING SOME OF THESE THINGS TAKEN CARE OF.
AND SO, OH YEAH, I'M DOING ALL THIS PRO BONO.
UM, SO YOU'RE, IF I UNDERSTAND YOUR REQUEST IS TO CHANGE THE CITY'S ORDERS FROM 45 DAYS TO 90 DAYS, CUZ YOUR INTENT IS STILL TO DEMOLISH.
AND, UM, UM, BUT WERE YOU AWARE OF WHAT WAS JUST ARTICULATED THAT, THAT EVEN IF THIS ORDER GOES THROUGH AS WRITTEN 45 DAYS, YOU, YOU WILL STILL HAVE THAT PERIOD OF TIME YOU WERE ASKING FOR TO, TO NO, NO, SIR.
AND OUR REASON FOR THE 90 DAYS WAS TO REQUEST IT SO WE COULD GET THE BUILDING DEMOLISHED AND WE WOULD NOT HAVE A LIEN PLACED ON THE PROPERTY.
THANK THE DISCUSSION WAS MADE THAT WE COULD PROBABLY HAVE IT DEMOLISHED CHEAPER, BUT THAT'S STILL IN DISCUSSION.
UM, DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE COMMISSIONERS? NO.
I I DO HAVE A QUESTION, UH, FOR THE OWNERS.
UM, SO I KNOW MS. REN IS THE ONE THAT HAS THE POWER OF ATTORNEY.
IS THAT, HAS THAT BEEN CONFIRMED? DOES YOUR DAUGHTER HAVE THE POWER OF ATTORNEY? POWER OF ATTORNEY? YES.
SHE'S, I GOT SICK AND I HAD TO GO STAY WITH HER, SO RIGHT THEN THERE I NEEDED HELP.
THAT'S, AND THAT'S WHAT THAT'S ALL ABOUT.
UM, SO THE OTHER QUESTION I HAD, UM, WAS THAT SHE HAD MENTIONED THAT YOU WOULD BE MOVING TO A DIFFERENT PROPERTY.
THE RV, UM, IS SIMS THAT STAFF'S CONCERN IS THAT THE RV'S GOING TO REMAIN ON THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY UNTIL YOU GET THE DEMOLITION DONE.
UM, BUT HOW QUICKLY, IDEALLY COULD YOU MOVE THAT RV, UM, TO THE DIFFERENT LOCATION THAT YOU PLAN RIGHT NOW? I DON'T HAVE A LOCATION TO MOVE IT.
I KNOW IT HAVE TO BE MOVED AND I HAVE TO NOW LOOK FOR A LOCATION.
WE, WE HAVE SEVERAL LOCATIONS.
WE HAVE A BROTHER THAT STAYS OUT IN THE COUNTRY.
HE HAS PLENTY OF PROPERTY LAND ON HIS PROPERTY.
UM, MY MOM, WE CAN PUT IT IN HER BACKYARD JUST FOR NOW.
UM, SO WE HAVE LOCATIONS HE CAN MOVE TO.
OH, COMMISSION ULTA, GO AHEAD.
AT THIS TIME I'D LIKE TO MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, UM, AND FURTHER TO ADOPT STATUS FINDING OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, UH, WITH THE FOLLOWING AND RECOMMENDED ORDER WITH THE FOLLOWING MODIFICATIONS THAT IN PART ONE OF THE ORDER, UH, THE REQUIREMENT OF DEMOLITION TAKE PLACE WITHIN 45 DAYS, BE STRICKEN AND, AND, AND, UH, SUBSTITUTE 90 DAYS PART TWO OF THE ORDER THAT ON THE 91ST DAY OF COMPLIANCE HAS NOT BEEN ACHIEVED, ET CETERA.
UM, AND THAT WITHIN 45 DAYS, THE TOWED
[01:55:01]
RV BE, UH, REMOVED FROM THE PROPERTY.OH, WHICH ONE TO CLOSE THE HEARING AND ALSO THE MAIN MOTION.
ALL RIGHT, WE HAVE A MOTION AND IF THERE ARE NO FURTHER COMMENTS, WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC PART OF THE HEARING.
UM, SO THANK YOU FOR EVERYBODY THAT PRESENTED AND, UM, I'LL LIKE TO, TO CALL, UM, TO QUESTION THE MOTION THAT WE HAVE UNLESS SOMEBODY ELSE HAS A MODIFICATION OR A DIFFERENT MOTION.
CAN WE CHAIR GO PAST THE 45 DAYS? I THOUGHT WE KINDA LOCKED INTO THAT.
45 DAYS AND THEN THERE'S SOMETHING PIVOTAL ABOUT THAT.
BUT AM I GETTING SOMETHING CONFUSED? UM, I THINK THE MOTION WAS FOR 90 DAYS, THE MOTION IS THE RECOMMENDED ORDER, MODIFIED TO SAY 90 DAYS.
AND FROM AFTER THE NINE 90TH DAY, SO THE 91ST DAY, THAT'S WHEN THE PENALTIES WILL START.
THAT'S WHEN THERE WILL BE A DEMOLITION.
AND, UM, ALSO THERE WAS A MODIFICATION TO THE RECOMMENDED ORDER THAT, THAT RV MUST BE MOVED WITHIN THE 90 DAY PERIOD.
WAS THAT 45 DAYS? COMMISSIONER SOAD? I I SAID 45 DAYS FOR REMOVAL OF THE, UM, RV OF THE R P RV.
UM, SO I MOVE THAT THE ADOPTS STAFF FINDING OF BACK CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER THE FOLLOWING REQUIRED THAT THE OWNER COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING WITHIN, WITHIN 45 DAYS FROM THE DATE THE ORDER IS MAILED.
REMOVE THE PHOTO RV, UH, FROM THE PREMISES TO REQUIRE THAT THE OWNER WITHIN 90 DAYS FROM THE DATE THE ORDER IS MAILED, OBTAINED AND FINALIZED ALL NECESSARY PERMITS TO PORTIONS, ET CETERA, REQUEST INSPECTIONS.
AND THEN WHAT, WHAT HAPPENED IN PARAGRAPH TWO? NOW PARAGRAPH THREE ON THE 91ST DAY, THE COMPLIANCE IS NOT ACHIEVED.
AUTHORIZED THE CODE OFFICIAL TO PROCEED WITH DEMO DEMOLITION, ET CETERA.
FIRST INCIDENT LANGUAGE THAT APPEARS IN THE PROPOSED ORDER.
I, I HOPE THAT'S A SUFFICIENT RESTATEMENT.
I, I, UH, I WOULD WEAR OUT MY THROAT IF I HAD TO READ IT ALL.
BUT I THINK THAT MEMORIALIZES IT FOR PURPOSES OF OUR, UM, UM, OF OUR ORDER.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR CLARIFYING A WRENCH IN THAT.
THE, THE THANK YOU COMMISSION ELLI.
UM, YES, THE REMOVAL OF THE RV IS NOT IN, IN THIS ORDER.
IT'S, THAT'S A WHOLE DIFFERENT VIOLATION.
THIS WE DO STRUCTURAL MAINTENANCE STUFF HERE THAT'S LIKE A LAND USE VIOLATION.
SO THAT WOULD BE A DIFFERENT PROCESS.
SO IF Y'ALL COULD COME UP WITH A MOTION WITHOUT THAT, THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WE, WE MAD CHAIR.
I CAN, I I CAN FEEL THAT I, I I WAS GONNA JUST MAKE IT A TOOTHLESS, SORT OF A ORATORY, YOU KNOW, I DIDN'T EXPECT THAT THE FAILURE TO REMOVE THE RV WOULD TRIGGER THE DEMOLITION.
UM, BUT IF IT'S, IF IT'S, IF IT DOES MORE HARM THAN GOOD TO HAVE THAT LANGUAGE IN THERE, JUST BECAUSE IT'S SORT OF ULTRA VARIES WITH RESPECT TO WHAT THIS COMMISSION IS AUTHORIZED TO ORDER, THEN, THEN I'M, I'M COMFORTABLE JUST STRIKING THAT, THAT PORTION AND MODIFYING MY MOTION TO BE CHANGING 45 TO 90 AND 46 TO 91.
AND I CAN MAKE THAT MY MOTION AND UH, AND HOPE THAT I CAN, UH, PREVAIL UPON, UH, COMMISSIONER SELLING TO SECOND, A THIRD TIME
OH, SECOND DISCIPL ONE THE THIRD TIME AROUND
OKAY, SO WE HAVE A MOTION THAT WE ARE VOTING ON, WHICH IS ESSENTIALLY THE RECOMMENDED ORDER WITH THE CHANGE TO 90 DAYS, UM, IN PARAGRAPH ONE AND TO THE 91ST DAY IN PARAGRAPH TWO.
I'LL GO AHEAD AND CALL THE VOTE.
AND I'M ALSO IN FAVOR OF THAT AND COMMISSION.
AND COMMISSIONER, UH, MUELLER.
SO THAT SEEMS LIKE EVERYBODY'S ON THE SAME PAGE.
AND YOU'LL BE GETTING A COPY OF THE ORDER.
[02:00:01]
I MEAN, WE ALL AGREED WITH YOUR, UM, REQUEST AND HOPEFULLY YOU CAN GET EVERYTHING DONE.[3. Case Number: CL 2022-182920]
WE'LL GO RIGHT ON TO, UM, NUMBER THREE ON THE AGENDA.OKAY, NEXT ON THE AGENDA FOR THE COMMISSION'S CONSIDERATION IS CASE NUMBER CL 20 22 1 8 2 9 20 AND IS REGARDING A PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8,005 MARBLE RIDGE DRIVE.
STAFF EXHIBITS CAN BE FOUND IN THE GRAY BOOKS IN YOUR READERS AND GOOGLE DRIVE FOLDER.
HERE'S SOME FACTS ABOUT THE CASE.
THIS CASE IS ABOUT A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE.
THE CASE WAS OPENED IN NOVEMBER, 2020 DUE TO A COMPLAINT.
THE HOME IS CURRENTLY OCCUPIED AND IS HOMESTEADED.
THERE HAS BEEN NO CONTACT WITH THE OWNER DESPITE NUMEROUS ATTEMPTS BY AUSTIN CODE.
THERE ARE CURRENTLY NO ACTIVE PERMITS FOR THIS.
PROPERTY CONDITIONS ARE CONSIDERED SUBSTANDARD AND REQUIRE REPAIR.
IN YOUR GOOGLE DRIVE FOLDER OF READERS, YOU'LL FIND THE FOLLOWING EXHIBIT ONE, WHICH CONTAINS THE COMPLAINING CASE HISTORY.
A COPY OF THE TRAVIS CENTRAL APPRAISAL DISTRICT RECORD THAT VERIFIES OWNERSHIP, THE REQUIRED NOTICES OF VIOLATION, NOTICES OF HEARING AND POSTINGS, AND EXHIBIT TWO WHICH CONSISTS OF CODES, PHOTOGRAPHS MARKED AS EXHIBITS TWO A THROUGH TWO J.
AND LASTLY, CODES RECOMMENDED ORDER.
AUSTIN CODE INSPECTOR SANDY VAN CLEVE IS HERE TONIGHT TO PRESENT THE PHOTOS AND DISCUSS THE VIOLATIONS AS DEPICTED.
INSPECTOR VAN CLEVE, PLEASE BEGIN YOUR TESTIMONY.
GOOD EVENING, MADAM CHAIR AND COMMISSIONERS.
I AM THE ASSIGNED CODE OFFICER FOR THIS CASE.
THE COMPLAINT ORIGINATED ON NOVEMBER THE 19TH OF 2020 THROUGH A THREE 11 CALL CONCERNING SUBSTANDARD ISSUES WITH THE ROOF AT A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY AT 8,005 MARBLE RIDGE DRIVE.
I FIRST INSPECTED THE PROPERTY ON NOVEMBER 19TH, 2020 AND OBSERVED THE SHINGLES ON THE ROOF WERE IN POOR CONDITION AND WERE SHOWING SIGNS OF EROSION AND SIGNIFICANT GRANULE LOSS ON THE SHINGLES.
ADJACENT TO THE FRONT ENTRANCE WAS PARTIALLY DETERIORATED AND SHOWING SIGNS OF ROTTED WOOD AND THERE WERE AREAS OF MOLD LIKE SUBSTANCE GROWING ON THE WOOD ALONG THE EAST SIDE OF THE STRUCTURE.
THERE WERE HOLES IN THE SOFFIT AND THE FASCIA BOARD AND, UH, IT WAS DETERIORATING ALONG THE EAST SIDE OF THE STRUCTURE.
THE GUTTERS ON THE STRUCTURE WERE BECOMING DETACHED, UH, FROM THE SIDE OF THE ROOF.
NOTICES OF VIOLATION WERE SENT TO THE PROPERTY OWNER ON NOVEMBER THE 19TH, 2020, NOVEMBER THE EIGHTH, 2021, AND OCTOBER THE 27TH OF 2022.
THE MOST RECENT NOTICE OF VIOLATION WAS POSTED ON THE PROPERTY ON NOVEMBER 9TH, 2022.
AN ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING WAS HELD FOR THE STRUCTURAL VIOLATIONS RELATING TO THE ROOF THAT WAS HELD ON FEBRUARY THE 16TH OF 2020.
THE OWNER OR ANYONE ON BEHALF OF THE OWNER DID NOT SHOW UP FOR THAT HEARING.
THEREFORE, THE OWNER WAS FOUND LIABLE FOR THE STRUCTURAL VIOLATIONS PRESENTED AT THE HEARING.
BASED ON DEFAULT, I HAVE MADE NUMEROUS GOOD FAITH EFFORTS TO TRY TO CONTACT THE PROPERTY OWNER BY LEAVING NUMEROUS DOOR TAGS AFTER INSPECTIONS, TALKING TO NEIGHBORS NEXT TO THE HOMEOWNER, AND LEAVING MESSAGES ON WHAT I BELIEVE TO BE A MOBILE PHONE NUMBER THAT I FOUND THROUGH AN INTERNET SEARCH, UH, TO NO AVAIL.
NO ONE EVER CONTACTED ME OR RETURNED ANY MESSAGES.
SO, THE FOLLOWING PHOTOGRAPHS OR REPRESENTATION OF THE DEFICIENCIES I OBSERVED AT THE PROPERTY DURING MY MOST RECENT INSPECTION ON JANUARY THE 11TH OF 2023.
AND IF YOU CAN GO TO THOSE PHOTOS, UH, EXHIBIT TWO A IS A PHOTO, CONTEXTUAL PHOTO OF THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY AS YOU SEE IT.
EXHIBIT TWO B IS A PHOTO OF THE CLOSEUP OF THE ADDRESS ON THE STRUCTURE SHOWING THAT IT'S IDENTIFIED AS 8,005.
NEXT PHOTO, PLEASE, IS EXHIBIT TWO C IS A PHOTO SHOWING THE RAIN GUTTER.
AS YOU CAN SEE, IT'S BECOME DETACHED, AND THIS WAS TAKEN, UH, AT
[02:05:01]
THE WEST SIDE OF THE STRUCTURE.THIS FELLOW SHOWS THE RAIN GUTTER ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE HOUSE ON THE EAST SIDE.
AND AS YOU CAN SEE, IT IS ALSO PARTIALLY DETACHED, UH, FROM THE END THERE.
AND ADDITIONALLY, THERE'S A LARGE HOE, AS YOU CAN SEE UNDER THE SOFFIT.
THIS PHOTO SHOWS YOU CAN SEE THE DETERIORATION OF THE SOFFIT AND THE FASCIA THAT'S BASICALLY BECOME DETACHED FROM THE ROOF IN THE, IN THE STRUCTURE, IT'S DE AND IT'S SHOWING, UH, ROTTED WOOD.
AND YOU CAN SEE SOME MOLD, LIGHT GROWTH SUBSTANCES SHOWING OR GROWING ONTO THE WOOD.
AND BECAUSE THE CONDITION HAS BECOME SO BAD, AS YOU CAN SEE THROUGH THE, UH, UH, BRICK WALL THERE, THAT'S A HOLE GOING INTO THIS ACTUAL STRUCTURE.
THIS IS EXHIBIT TWO F AND THIS SHUTTLE PHOTO SHOWS, UH, A MORE CLOSE UP VIEW OF THE HOLE IN THIS SOFFIT ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE STRUCTURE.
AND YOU CAN ALSO SEE THE DETERIORATION ABOVE THAT ON THE FASCIA BOARDS.
THIS IS EXHIBIT TWO G, AND THIS IS JUST ANOTHER PHOTO THAT WE JUST, UH, SAW IN THE PREVIOUS PHOTO OF THE, UH, DETERIORATION OF THE SOFFIT.
THE FACIA COMING DETACHED FROM THE STRUCTURE.
AND IF YOU LOOK UP AT THE RIGHT HAND CORNER, YOU CAN SEE A HOLE IN THE ROOF.
AND THEN ALSO YOU CAN SEE THE CONDITIONS OF THOSE SHINGLES THAT ARE COMING APART.
THIS IS EXHIBIT TWO H AND THIS CAN SHOWS A CLOSEUP OF THE DETERIORATION OF THE SHINGLES AT THE FRONT OF THE STRUCTURE.
UH, YOU CAN SEE HOW WORN DOWN THEY ARE.
UH, THIS WAS TAKEN ON A CLEAR DAY, SO THAT'S NOT SNOW ON THE SHINGLES.
THAT'S ACTUALLY, UH, THE LOSS OF THE GRANULES ON THE SH ON THE SHINGLES.
UH, THIS IS EXHIBIT TWO I AND THIS SHOWS, UH, THE DETERIORATION, THE SHINGLES AND GRANULAR LOSS, UH, ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE STRUCTURE.
AND ADDITIONALLY, IF YOU LOOK UP AT TOWARDS THE CHIMNEY AREA, YOU CAN SEE IT'S MISSING, MISSING THE FLASHING AROUND THERE.
AND ALSO, YOU PROBABLY CAN'T REALLY TELL THAT WELL, BUT THE FLASHING AROUND THE VENT PIPES ARE ALSO BECOMING DETERIORATED AS A RESULT OF THE SHINGLES BEING DETERIORATED.
THIS IS JUST TAKEN TOWARD THE FRONT, KIND OF FROM THE FRONT TO THE BACK OF THE EAST SIDE OF THE ROOF, JUST TO SHOW YOU THE OVERALL VIEW OF THE ONE SIDE OF THAT, UH, ROOF, JUST TO SHOW THE DETERIORATION OF THOSE SHINGLES.
THE ROOF IN GENERAL, THE, THE GUTTERS AND THE FLASHING UP AROUND THE CHIMNEY AND THE VENT PIPES.
AND THAT CONCLUDES, UH, THE PHOTOS IN MY PRESENTATION.
AND I'M AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE BECAUSE OF, BECAUSE OF THE EXISTING CONDITIONS SHOWN IN THESE PHOTOGRAPHS.
AND THOSE DESCRIBED IN THE FINDINGS OF FACT, THE CODE OFFICIAL FOUND THAT THIS STRUCTURE IS A PUBLIC AND AN ATTRACTIVE NUISANCE WITH SUBSTANDARD CONDITIONS.
STAFF ASKED THE COMMISSION TO ADMIT EXHIBIT ONE, WHICH INCLUDES STAFF PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, AND OTHER RELEVANT DOCUMENTS AND PHOTOGRAPHS MARKED AS EXHIBITS TWO, EIGHTH OR TWO
ONE, OBTAIN AND FINALIZE ALL NECESSARY PERMITS.
TWO, REPAIR ALL CITED VIOLATIONS TO THE RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE WITHIN 45 DAYS FROM THE DATE THE ORDER IS MAILED.
THREE REQUEST INSPECTIONS FROM AUSTIN CODE TO VERIFY COMPLIANCE AND FOUR ON THE 46 DAY OF COMPLIANCE HAS NOT BEEN ACHIEVED.
ASSESS A CIVIL PENALTY OF $210 PER WEEK THAT WILL CONTINUE TO ACCRUE UNTIL THE CODE OFFICIAL DETERMINES THAT THE REPAIRS REQUIRED BY THIS ORDER ARE COMPLETE INTEREST SHALL ACCRUE AT A RATE OF 10% PER YEAR FROM THE DATE OF THE ASSESSMENT UNTIL PAID IN FULL.
UM, I'LL GO AHEAD AND ADMIT EXHIBIT ONE AS WELL AS EXHIBIT TWO, WHICH CONTAINS THE PHOTOGRAPHS MARKED AS TWO A THROUGH TWO J.
UM, IS THERE ANY, THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY? UM, I DON'T THINK SO.
IS MR. PENNINGTON HERE OR ANYONE FOR MR. PENNINGTON? NO.
WELL, UM, COMMISSIONERS, DO WE WANT TO ASK ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF OR DO WE HAVE A MOTION COMMISSION? A MUELLER?
[02:10:01]
UM, YES.SO THIS IS A CASE WHERE IT'S A HOMESTEADED SINGLE FAMILY PROPERTY, THE OWNER'S NOT RESPONDING.
UM, AND I WONDER IF I, I KNOW THAT IN THE PREVIOUS CONVERSATION, UM, SOMEONE MENTIONED THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN'T REALLY WORK WITH THIRD PARTIES WHO MIGHT PROVIDE THESE SERVICES, AND I SUSPECT THEY HAVE LONG WAITING LISTS, BUT I WONDER IF IT MIGHT BE POSSIBLE TO REFER SUCH CASES TO THE HOUSING AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT BECAUSE THEY DO HAVE CONTRACTS AND RELATIONSHIPS WITH THOSE ENTITIES AND, YOU KNOW, MIGHT HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO SOME OUTREACH TO THE OWNERS.
UM, IT, IT JUST ALWAYS GIVES ME HEARTBURN WHEN THERE'S BEEN NO RESPONSE FROM THE OWNER AND WE JUST DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON.
BUT, YOU KNOW, UM, IT'S A HOMESTEAD OF PROPERTY THAT'S OCCUPIED.
I SUSPECT THE OWNER DOESN'T HAVE, DOESN'T KNOW WHAT TO DO, YOU KNOW, DOESN'T HAVE THE WHEREWITHAL TO DO ANYTHING.
UM, SO I, I GUESS I'M WONDERING IF YOU ALL EVER HAVE THOSE CONVERSATIONS WITH HOUSING AND PLANNING, UM, IF THAT MIGHT BE SOMETHING THAT COULD BE ADDED TO, UH, WHAT THE CODE OFFICER DOES IN SUCH SITUATIONS, BECAUSE MAYBE THEY HAVE THE ABILITY TO BE MORE PROACTIVE ON TRYING TO LINK THEM UP WITH THE HOME REPAIR PROGRAMS. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER MUELLER, MS. ALI, UM, I'M NOT SURE ABOUT CONTACTING, UH, THAT ORGANIZATION, BUT WE DO PROVIDE A LIST OF, UH, RESOURCES ON THE BACK OF EACH NOTICE THAT WE SEND OUT, UM, WITH, WE DO HAVE RESOURCES THAT WE PROVIDE TO THE OWNER WITH DIFFERENT AGENCIES THAT CAN ASSIST IN THOSE KINDS OF THINGS.
NOW, I, I UNDERSTAND THAT I'M SUGGESTING ANOTHER CITY DEPARTMENT THAT ACTUALLY HAS THE CONTRACTS WITH THOSE AGENCIES AND HAS, YOU KNOW, ON ITS MISSION, ANTI DISPLACEMENT.
YOU KNOW, THEY, THEY MIGHT HAVE THE CAPACITY TO, UM, DO OUTREACH IN THESE KIND OF CASES.
OH, I THINK THAT'S, UM, THANK YOU.
I THINK THAT'S A GOOD, UM, CONSIDERATION MAYBE OUTSIDE THE SCOPE OF TONIGHT'S HEARING.
UM, I DO SEE THAT ON ALL THE VIOLATION, UH, NOTICES.
IT'S QUITE A, A LONG LIST OF RESOURCES IF THE OWNERS ACTUALLY OPEN, YOU KNOW, THE LETTER, SO, OH, WELL, THAT, I DON'T KNOW, BUT I, I THINK THAT, UH, THE RESOURCES ARE MADE AVAILABLE TO THEM IN THAT SENSE.
SO WE CAN PROBABLY DISCUSS OUTSIDE OF THIS MEETING, UM, OTHER WAYS MAYBE TO REACH OUT TO THE OWNERS.
UM, DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? OH, COMMISSIONER FREIBERGER.
UM, YES, ONE OTHER COMMENT TOO IS JUST NOTING THAT BECAUSE THIS IS HOMESTEADED, IF THE OWNER DOES MAKE THESE REPAIRS AND COMES BACK TO TALK WITH CITY STAFF, AND HE FINDS THAT WE MAY ASSESS, COULD BE OFFSET BY THE COST OF THOSE REPAIRS AS LONG AS THEY HAVE DOCUMENTATION.
SO WITH THAT IN MIND, I'M READY TO MAKE A MOTION.
I MOVE TO, UH, CLOSE THE HEARING AND ADOPT STAFF'S PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDED ORDER.
UM, WHO WAS THAT? I DIDN'T, OH, COMMISSIONER GREEN.
IT'S SO DIFFICULT FOR ME TO RECOGNIZE VOICES OVER THE INTERNET, BUT THANK YOU.
WE HAVE A SECOND TO THAT MOTION.
UM, SO WE'LL GO AHEAD AND VOTE.
AND COMMISSIONER STAN? UM, THAT WAS AYE.
UM, AND COMMISSIONER THOMPSON.
AND I ALSO AM IN FAVOR AND COMMISSIONER, I'M A VICE CHAIR.
SO WE HAVE A VOTE, UM, SO THE ORDER WILL GO OUT AND HOPEFULLY THEY DO RESPOND TO THE ORDER.
[4. Case Number: CL 2023-001501]
THE AGENDA FOR THE COMMISSION'S CONSIDERATION IS CASE NUMBER CL 20 23 0 0 1 5 0 1.THE ADDRESS FOR THIS CASE IS SEVEN 15 RED RIVER STREET.
THE EXHIBITS CAN BE FOUND IN THE RED ORANGE BOOKS IN YOUR READER'S OR GOOGLE DRIVE FOLDER.
[02:15:01]
HERE ARE A FEW FACTS ABOUT THE CASE.THIS CASE IS ABOUT AN UNPERMITTED ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IN THE FORM OF A DECK LOCATED AT THE REAR OF A COMMERCIAL PROPERTY.
THE CASE WAS INITIALLY OPENED IN OCTOBER, 2021, AND HAS REMAINED IN VIOLATION SINCE THAT TIME.
THE STRUCTURE IS UNLAWFUL AND UNPERMITTED, THIS ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IS CONSIDERED DANGEROUS WITH UNSAFE CONDITIONS AND REQUIRES STIMULATION IN YOUR READERS OR GOOGLE DRIVE FOLDER, YOU'LL FIND THE FOLLOWING EXHIBIT ONE, WHICH CONTAINS THE COMPLAINING CASE HISTORY.
A COPY OF THE TRAVIS CENTRAL APPRAISAL DISTRICT RECORD THAT VERIFIES OWNERSHIP, THE REQUIRED NOTICES OF VIOLATION, NOTICES OF HEARING AND POSTINGS, A PRINTOUT OF THE PERMIT HISTORY, AND AN IN ENGINEER'S REPORTS FROM 2020 AND 2021 AND EXHIBIT TWO, WHICH CONSISTS OF CODES, PHOTOGRAPHS MARKED AS EXHIBITS TWO A THROUGH TWO N.
AND LASTLY, CODES RECOMMENDED ORDER.
ADDITIONALLY, WE HAVE PROPERTY OWNER DOCUMENTS THAT TO BE MARKED AS EXHIBITS.
AUSTIN CODE INVESTIGATOR WILLIS ADAMS IS HERE TONIGHT TO PRESENT THE EXHIBIT PHOTOS AND DISCUSS THE VIOLATIONS AS DEPICTED.
INVESTIGATOR ADAMS, PLEASE BEGIN YOUR TESTIMONY.
UH, GOOD EVENING, MADAM CHAIR AND COMMISSIONERS.
MY NAME IS WILLIS ADAMS. UH, I AM THE CODE INVESTIGATOR ASSIGNED TO THIS CASE.
UH, THIS CASE WAS ACTUALLY CALLED IN BY THE AUSTIN FIRE DEPARTMENT ON OCTOBER 20, UH, 22ND OF, UH, 2021, UH, FOR, UM, UH, WORK WITHOUT PERMIT, UH, ISSUE OF POSSIBLY NOT HAVING A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY AND FOR, UH, UM, SAFETY CONCERNS.
UM, THE INITIAL INSPECTION OCCURRED ON THE 22ND BY ONE OF, UH, ONE OF OUR TEAM MEMBERS OF A DIFFERENT, UH, TEAM, THE EXTENDED HOURS TEAM, A LATE 19.
UH, I TOOK UP THE INVESTIGATION ON THE 26TH OF OCTOBER OF 2021.
AND, UH, MY FINDINGS ON THAT DATE WAS I FOUND THIS, UH, UH, SMALL CLUB WE USED.
IT WAS CALLED THE SIDE WINDER.
UM, I WENT TO THE LOCATION, UH, THE PROPERTY WAS LOCKED UP, THE FRONT DOOR WAS LOCKED.
I COULD NOT OBSERVE THE, UH, SOUTH SIDE OF THE STRUCTURE, BUT I COULD OBSERVE THE NORTH SIDE, WHICH IS A PARKING LOT ADJACENT TO IT RIGHT OFF EIGHTH STREET.
I COULD SEE A STRUCTURE, UH, OVER THE FENCE.
SO I CONTINUED TO WALK EAST ON EIGHTH STREET AND ACTUALLY WALKED ALL THE WAY TO THE, UH, POLICE MAIN AND WENT DOWN TOWARD THE, UH, RIVERWALK AREA, WALLER CREEK AREA.
AND HE WAS ABLE TO OBSERVE THE, THE PART OF THE BACK OF THE STRUCTURE FROM THE, UH, FROM THE SIDE THERE, FROM THE, FROM THE, UH, PATHWAY DOWN TO THE WALLER CREEK.
AFTER FOLLOW UP INSPECTIONS, UH, I DECIDED TO CHECK THE HISTORY OF THIS PROPERTY, AND I FOUND SOME UNIQUE HISTORY THAT THE OWNER HAD APPLIED FOR A SITE EXEMPTION BACK IN AUGUST OF 2019, UH, FOR FOOTINGS, UH, FOR THAT REAR DECKING.
I ALSO FOUND THAT, FOUND THAT THEY HAD SUBMITTED A SITE PLAN, UH, IN FEBRUARY OF 2020 TO REPAIR THOSE CONCRETE FOOTINGS.
THE, UH, PLAN REVIEW WAS SUBMITTED, I'M SORRY, IN 2020, AND IT WAS NOT APPROVED.
IT WAS, UH, IT ACTUALLY EXPIRED.
UM, THE SITE PLAN WAS APPROVED.
UH, I CHECKED THE TCAD RECORDS, UH, FOR THE OWNER.
THIS PROPERTY, IT SHOWED THE OWNER PURCHASED THIS PROPERTY IN 1998 AFTER, UH, NUMEROUS INSPECTIONS, UH, THIS PAST YEAR.
UH, AND AFTER THREE DIFFERENT TIMES, I'VE SENT, NO, THIS IS A VIOLATION.
THE PAST YEAR, I MET WITH A TENANT WHO NOW OCCUPIES, IS TRYING TO OCCUPY THAT PROPERTY AND BRING IT BACK INTO CODE.
UH, I WAS ALLOWED INSIDE THE, UH, BUILDING WITH, UH, A FIRE MARSHAL, MR. AJ PADILLA.
UH, THE TENANT WANTED TO, UH, TRY TO HAVE THE VIOLATIONS REMOVED FOR THE WORK WITHOUT PERMITS SINCE THAT DECK HAD NOT BEEN APPROVED, UH, HAD NOT BEEN PERMITTED WHEN IT WAS BUILT, UM, BACK.
AND THE CONDITION OF THE DECK, UH, WAS NOT IN VERY GOOD CONDITION, NOT CERTAINLY A DECKING YOU WOULD WANT TO, UH, HAVE A BAND PERFORM ON OR ANYONE TO SIT ON.
UM, I WOULD LIKE TO SHOW YOU THE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THAT, UH, PARTICULAR PROPERTY RIGHT NOW, WHICH WILL ILLUSTRATE SOME OF THE CONDITIONS THAT I PUT OUT IN THE, THAT I, THAT I SENT OUT IN THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION, UH, FOR WORK WITHOUT PERMIT, AS WELL AS, UH, SAFETY CONCERNS OF THE FOOTINGS, THE DECKING ITSELF, UH, THE GRADING AND DRAINAGE OF THE, THE PROPERTY, UH, UNDERNEATH THAT DECKING.
UH, THIS IS A PICTURE OF THE PROPERTY,
[02:20:01]
UH, FROM A GOOGLE SHOT.UM, I BELIEVE IT'S 2014, UH, THAT IS AT THAT TIME WAS CALLED THE RED EYE FLY LOUNGE.
UH, THIS IS ACTUALLY A GOOGLE SHOT FROM EIGHTH STREET.
UH, UH, THIS ALSO IS, UH, BACK, I BELIEVE IN 2014.
AND THIS IS THE VIEW JUST BEFORE YOU GO DOWN INTO THE WALLER CREEK AREA, THAT IS ACTUALLY THE BACK OF THAT, UH, DECKING AND THE CANOPY OVER THE DECKING.
UH, YOU CAN SEE THE EROSION FROM THE HILLSIDE, UH, JUST BELOW THAT DECKING, SO IT'S RIGHT ON THE EDGE OF THE HILL.
UH, YOU SEE ONE OF THE FOOTINGS, UH, THAT, UH, WAS PLATE WAS PART OF THAT, UH, PLAN REVIEW.
UH, RIGHT THERE IN THE CENTER, THERE IS A FOOTING THAT'S ON THE RIGHT THAT IS NOT VISIBLE BECAUSE OF THE FOLIAGE.
AND THERE'S ALSO ONE ON THE LEFT, UH, EXHIBIT TWO C PLEASE.
AND THIS IS ACTUALLY, UH, UH, ACTUALLY HOW THE F THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY LOOKS NOW.
UH, IT EVENTUALLY BECAME THE SIDE WINDER BAR, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN.
AND, UM, THIS IS ACTUAL THE ADDRESS THERE.
SEVEN 15 RED RIVER EXHIBIT TWO D.
THIS IS A SLIDE, UH, FROM THE, UH, INSPECTION I PERFORMED IN OCTOBER OF 2022, ALONG WITH THE FIRE MARSHAL THAT IS A DOOR ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY.
AT ONE TIME, THE OWNER OR THE OWNER'S, UH, REPRESENTATIVE OR EVEN THE TENANT HAD PLACED A STAIRWELL IN THEIR OR STAIRWAY, A STAIRWAY, A STAIRWELL IN THAT, A STAIRWAY IN THAT, UH, ALLEY ON THE, UH, SOUTH SIDE TO ACCESS THE PROPERTY OR THE INSIDE OF THAT, PROBABLY FROM THE ALLEY THEY HAD TO REMOVE THAT.
UH, AS A RESULT OF THAT ALLEY DOES NOT BELONG TO THEM ACTUALLY AS A PUBLIC WORKS ALLEY, UM, RIGHT AWAY.
SO THEY HAD TO REMOVE THAT STAIRWAY.
AND THAT ALSO WAS, WAS THE LANDING.
AND THE STAIRS WERE BUILT WITHOUT A PERMIT AS WELL.
EXHIBIT TWO E UH, THIS IS THE, THIS IS A DECK THAT'S IN QUESTION.
AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE IS A FENCE THAT GOES AROUND, UH, EACH SIDE OF THAT, UH, PARTICULAR DECK.
UH, YOU CAN SEE IT'S, UH, THERE'S NO RAILING FOR THE STAIRS LEADING UP TO THE DECK.
UM, UH, THE DECK IS NOT, UH, VERY WELL CONSTRUCTED.
THIS DECK WAS CONSTRUCTED AS WELL WITHOUT A PERMIT.
UH, EXHIBIT TWO F AND THAT'S A, A MUCH, UH, CLOSER PHOTOGRAPH OF THE STAIRS.
UH, THE UNDERNEATH PART OF THE DECK, UH, THERE'S A LOT OF TRASH AND DEBRIS AROUND THE DECK, ALSO ON TOP OF THE DECK.
UH, SLIDE TWO G, THAT IS THE SPEAKERS AND THE CEILING ABOVE THE DECK.
AS YOU CAN SEE, THE CANOPY HAS SOME HOLES IN IT.
UH, THOSE SPEAKERS WERE WIRED WITHOUT THE, UH, UH, THE ELECTRICAL PERMIT BEING PROVIDED OR BEING APPROVED, UH, BY THE CITY OF AUSTIN.
THAT IS THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE DECKING LOOKING, UH, UH, AND THERE'S A, AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE'S A, UM, A TREE THAT'S ACTUALLY, UH, GOING THROUGH THAT CANOPY THAT'S A, HERE, THIS TREE THAT IS A, UH, PECAN TREE.
SO, UH, THERE IS, UH, THE BASE OF THAT TREE IS ACTUALLY, UH, CONCRETE.
SO, UH, I'M NOT SURE WHEN THAT, THAT MIGHT HAVE, THAT COULD HAVE BEEN THERE FOR YEARS.
UH, THAT PARTICULAR, UH, CRITICAL ROOT ZONE OF THAT TREE OBVIOUSLY HAS BEEN COMPROMISED BY THAT.
UH, BUT YOU CAN SEE THE, UH, CONDITION OF THE DECK IS NOT VERY, IT'S NOT VERY WELL CONSTRUCTED.
UH, TWO, I PLEASE EXHIBIT TWO.
I, UH, THIS IS A, UH, SHOT, UH, CURRENT SHOT, UH, THIS YEAR OF, UH, THE STRUCTURE, THE REAR OF THE STRUCTURE, AGAIN, FROM A STREET, JUST, UH, BEFORE YOU LEAD DOWN INTO THE WALLER CREEK AREA.
NEXT, UH, EXHIBIT PLEASE, TWO J.
AND THAT'S JUST LIKE A CLOSE UP SHOT OF THAT SAME, UH, VIEWPOINT FROM THE, UH, A STREET.
UH, THE EXIT EXIT, THE ENTRANCE TO THE WALLER CREEK AREA TWO K.
UH, THIS IS A SHOT FROM THE, UH, PARKING LOT THAT'S ADJACENT, UH, RIGHT OFF EIGHTH AND, UH, RED RIVER AND TWO L.
THIS IS ACTUALLY INSIDE MY INSPECTION WITH, UH, THE, UH, AFD FIRE MARSHAL.
UH, ONE OF THE REQUIREMENTS, UH, THAT, UH, THE FIRE MARSHAL, UH, SUGGESTED TO THE TENANT IN ORDER TO OCCUPY
[02:25:01]
THE FRONT STRUCTURE.ONE WAS TO HAVE A PUSH BAR ON THAT PARTICULAR DOOR LEADING OUT TO THE NORTH SIDE.
UH, THE OTHER SUGGESTION WAS TO PUT UP A FENCE TO SEPARATE THE DECKING FROM, UH, THE REAR EXIT OF THE, UH, STRUCTURE AS WELL.
UH, THE FIRE MARSHAL FELT THAT DECKING WOULD NOT BE SAFE FOR, UH, PERSONS, UH, TO OCCUPY, WHETHER THEY WERE IN A VAN OR EVEN WHETHER THEY WERE SITTING ON IT OR WALKING ON IT.
UM, AND I CONCUR WITH THAT, UH, WITH HIS OPINION ON THAT.
UM, ALSO HE REQUIRED, UH, EXIT SIGNS FOR THE REAR DOOR.
AND ON THE SOUTH SIDE WHERE THAT ENTRY WAS, THAT ENTRY HAD TO BE CLOSED IN.
UM, THE EGRESS ON THE SOUTH SIDE DOES NOT EXIST ONLY ON THE NORTH SIDE, AND THAT DOOR HAD TO HAVE A PUSH BAR, AND IT HAS A, UH, FIRE EXIT SIGN THAT WAS, UH, PUT IN BY THE TENANT.
UH, THE REASON THAT, UH, THIS PROPERTY IS REALLY A CONCERN, UH, FOR ME.
I'VE HANDLED A LOT OF PROPERTIES IN THE CBD, AND WE HAVE SOUTH BY COMING UP.
UH, THE TENANT OF THIS PROPERTY WANTS TO PREPARE THIS PROPERTY TO OPEN UP A CLUB.
UH, SO MY CONCERN IS THE SAFETY OF BOTH THE, THE PATRONS AS WELL AS THE EMPLOYEES, UH, OF THIS, UH, LIEUTENANT.
AND, UH, USUALLY WHEN I BRING A PROPERTY TO THIS COMMISSION, IT'S ALL ABOUT THE SAFETY OF THE PEOPLE INVOLVED IN IT.
AND I'D LIKE TO POINT THAT OUT.
THE OTHER THING, AND, UH, IS THERE ANOTHER, UH, EXHIBIT AFTER THIS ANOTHER? IT'S OKAY.
THIS IS THE, UH, SECOND TO THE LAST EXHIBIT, TWO M.
AND THAT'S ACTUALLY, IF YOU LOOK AT THE CANOPY, THERE'S A BEAM, A SUPPORT BEAM TO THE RIGHT, ALMOST TO THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE PHOTOGRAPH, WHERE THERE'S SUPPOSED TO BE A SUPPORT BEAM ON THE LEFT.
AND THAT'S SUPPOSED TO HOLD UP THAT FLAT PIECE AND GO DOWN TO A PIER THAT WAS ADDED AS PART OF THAT PLAN REVIEW, UH, THAT WAS SUBMITTED TO THE CITY IN 2020.
UH, PART OF THE PLAN REVIEW ALSO REQUIRED THAT THE OWNER WOULD HAVE TO GET A GEOTECHNICAL REPORT, UH, ALSO GET A, UH, ENGINEER'S REPORT.
BOTH OF THOSE REPORTS WERE BASED OFF OF THE 2015 INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE.
WE ARE NOW UTILIZING THE 2021 INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE.
SO, UM, THIS IS SOMETHING STAFF MAY HAVE TO REVIEW THAT IT'S POSSIBLE THE DEVELOPMENTAL SERVICES MAY REQUEST, UH, A NEW GEO TECHNICAL REPORT AS WELL AS A NEW ENGINEER'S REPORT BASED ON THE 2021 INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE.
A FINAL SLIDE IS, UH, TWO L TWO N AND THAT'S, UH, YOU, YOU MIGHT NOT BE ABLE TO SEE IT THERE, BUT THERE'S A CONCRETE PIER THAT'S RIGHT, UH, RIGHT IN THE CENTER THERE.
IT'S, IT'S KIND OF BLOCKED BY FOLIAGE, BUT THERE IS NO BEAN THAT GOES UP TO SUPPORT THAT, UH, CANOPY.
AND THAT IS THE, UH, CONCLUSION OF THE, UH, PHOTOGRAPHS.
I DO HAVE, UH, ONE OTHER STATEMENT.
UH, THIS IS A COPY OF THE PLAN REVIEW.
IT IS, I BELIEVE, IN THE PACKET THAT MELANIE MENTIONED THAT EARLIER.
AND I JUST WANNA READ THE, ONE OF THE PARAGRAPHS THAT WAS, UH, ADDED TO THIS REPORT BY DEVELOPMENTAL SERVICES.
AND IT SAYS THAT SINCE THE OUTDOOR PATIO SPACE WILL HAVE TO BE RE RECONFIGURED TO MEET THE GEOTECHICAL RECOMMENDATIONS, THERE ARE NO RECORDS OF PREVIOUS BUILDING PERMITS, AND THERE ARE MULTIPLE LIFE SAFETY CONCERNS THAT HAVE NOT BEEN ADDRESSED BY THE SUBMITTED STRUCTURAL PLANS.
THE APPLICANT IS TO SUBMIT A COMPLETE SET OF CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS THAT SHOW THE IN PLACE CONSTRUCTION, AND AT A MINIMUM, AT ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION SHALL INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING, A LIFE, A LIFE SAFETY PLAN AND KEY PLAN ARCHITECTURAL PLANS, A STRUCTURAL PLANS AND M E P PLANS, WHICH ARE BASICALLY MECHANICAL, ELECTRICAL, AND PLUMBING PLANS.
UM, AGAIN, THIS IS, WAS THIS, UH, PLAN REVIEW, UH, AS I, IN MY CONCLUSION WAS BASED ON THE 2015 INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE.
NOW THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'M OPEN TO ANSWERING THEM.
BECAUSE OF THE EXISTING CONDITIONS SHOWN IN THESE PHOTOGRAPHS AND THOSE DESCRIBED IN THE FINDINGS OF FACT, THE CODE OFFICIAL FOUND THAT THESE STRUCTURES ARE A PUBLIC AND AN ATTRACTIVE NUISANCE AND ARE CONSIDERED DANGEROUS WITH UNSAFE CONDITIONS.
STAFF ASKS THE COMMISSION TO ADMIT EXHIBIT ONE, WHICH INCLUDES STAFF PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, AND OTHER RELEVANT DOCUMENTS, PHOTOGRAPHS MARKED AS EXHIBITS TWO A THROUGH TWO N.
STAFF ALSO REQUESTS THAT THE COMMISSION ADOPT THE PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT AND
[02:30:01]
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER THE FOLLOWING.ONE, REQUIRE THAT THE OWNER COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING WITHIN 45 DAYS FROM THE DATE THE ORDER IS MAILED.
A, OBTAIN AND FINALIZE ALL NECESSARY PERMITS, B DEMOLISH ALL PORTIONS OF THE COMMERCIAL ACCESSORY DECK STRUCTURE AND REMOVE HIS DEBRIS, LEAVING THE LOT CLEAN AND RIGGED.
C REQUEST INSPECTIONS FROM AUSTIN CODE TO VERIFY COMPLIANCE TWO ON THE 46TH DAY, IF COMPLIANCE HAS NOT BEEN ACHIEVED, A AUTHORIZE THE CODE OFFICIAL TO PROCEED WITH DEMOLITION AND CON TO CONSIDER ALL PORTIONS OF THE COMMERCIAL ACCESSORY DECK STRUCTURE, INCLUDING ITEMS IN AND AROUND THE STRUCTURE AS DEBRIS AND DISPOSE OF AS SUCH.
AND B, THE PROPERTY OWNER SHALL BE ON NOTICE THAT THE CODE OFFICIAL IS AUTHORIZED TO ASSESS ALL EXPENSES INCURRED AGAINST THE PROPERTY UNLESS EXEMPTED BY THE TEXAS CONSTITUTION.
A LIEN FOR THOSE EXPENSES MAY BE FILED BY THE CITY OF AUSTIN AND RECORDED WITH THE TRAVIS COUNTY DEED RECORDS, INTEREST SHALL ACCRUE AT A RATE OF 10% PER YEAR FROM THE DATE OF THE ASSESSMENT UNTIL PAID IN FULL.
I'LL GO AHEAD AND ADMIT EXHIBIT ONE, UM, AS WELL AS EXHIBIT TWO, WHICH CONTAINS PHOTOGRAPHS MARKED TWO A THROUGH TWO N.
UM, I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ANYBODY HERE FOR THE OWNERS TONIGHT.
WE SHOULD HAVE SOMEBODY OR, OR ACTUALLY ON THE PHONE.
WHO DO WE HAVE ONLINE? WE SHOULD HAVE, UH, ONE OF THE, THE OWNER JIMMY
UM, YEAH, WERE YOU HERE EARLIER WHEN I WAS SWEARING IN, UM, THE PEOPLE THAT WERE GOING TO SPEAK TONIGHT? I WAS, I, I'VE BEEN HERE SINCE SIX 15.
I STOOD UP, I RAISED MY HAND AND, AND I SWORE IN, AND I'LL BE HAPPY TO DO IT AGAIN.
YOU DON'T HAVE TO DO IT AGAIN.
UM, SO YOU MAY PROCEED WITH YOUR PRESENTATION.
UH, LET ME, UM, I'LL, I'LL TRY AND SQUEEZE, UH, YOU KNOW, THREE YEARS INTO, INTO THREE MINUTES, UH, BASICALLY THIS, THIS PROPERTY, UH, WAS TENANTED OCCUPIED.
UH, AND WE HAD A TENANT THAT VACATED, A NEW TENANT WENT IN, WE WENT TO GET IN A PERMIT, AND THEN IT TRIGGERED A CODE COMPLIANCE BECAUSE OF A LOAD ISSUE.
SO THAT BEGAN A PROCESS THAT HAD BEEN ONGOING NOW FOR ALMOST THREE YEARS.
UH, WE'VE SPENT OVER $82,000 IN ENGINEERS REPORTS, GEOTECHNICAL PLANS, EVERYTHING.
UH, BUT EVERY TIME WE WOULD PRESENT SOMETHING TO THE CITY, IT WAS SOMETHING DIFFERENT, UH, THAT THEY WANTED.
AND IT GOT, UH, SO MUCH TO THE POINT THAT WE ENDED UP ABANDONING, UH, THE PLAN.
UH, AND, UH, EVEN THOUGH WE'VE GOT, YOU KNOW, GEOTECHNICAL, ALL THESE THINGS ARE IN PLACE AND THEY'RE IN THE FILES.
THEY'VE BEEN IN THERE FOR THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS, THE FACT THAT IT'S BEING ASKED, YOU KNOW, WHERE THAT THIS NEEDS TO BE DONE, IT'S, IT'S THERE, IT'S IN YOUR FILE.
UH, BUT IN ANY EVENT, UM, THE, UH, SO WHAT WE ENDED UP DOING, UH, IS ABANDONING THE PLAN, UH, AND, AND, AND, AND MEETING WITH THE FIRE, THE FIRE DEPARTMENT ASKED US TO DO SOME THINGS, WHICH WE DID.
UH, AND A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO, WE ENDED UP, UH, SEPARATING, UH, THE DECK, UH, AND, UM, REDUCING THE LOAD THAT WE'RE ALLOWED, UH, IN THE, UH, IN THE PROPERTY.
WE'VE GOT, OUR CO FIRE DEPARTMENT IS, IS BLESSED THE DEAL.
AND I SENT THOSE, UH, UM, THOSE APPROVALS, UH, YOU KNOW, TO YOU.
UH, BUT ALL OF THIS STUFF, I, I MEAN, I, I DIDN'T EVEN KNOW WHY THIS WAS UP HERE BEFORE, BEFORE YOU, MAYBE THERE WAS SOME KIND OF AN OPEN PERMIT.
WE DIDN'T CLOSE IT, RIGHT, BECAUSE THE, THE PERMIT THAT WE HAD, UH, WENT IN FOR, UM, EVEN THOUGH WE PROVIDED ENGINEERED PLANS AND SO FORTH, THEY, THEY KEPT CHANGING THE SCOPE OF WHAT, WHAT THE ASK WAS.
AND WE JUST FIGURED IT WAS JUST, JUST CHEAPER JUST TO JUST END IT, DO A SMALLER, UH, UH, SPACE.
WE'VE GOT OUR CO IN, IN COMPLIANCE WITH FIRE DEPARTMENT SPACE IS PERMITTED.
THAT DECK, BY THE WAY, YOU'RE SHOWING MY OWNERSHIP SINCE 1998.
I PUT IT IN A, A DIFFERENT ENTITY.
THAT DECK HAS BEEN THERE FOR OVER 30 YEARS.
WHEN WE WENT IN FOR THIS, UH, OR PERMANENT, INITIALLY, THEY WERE ASKING, UH, WE GAVE THEM A FULL SET OF PLANS WHEN THIS BUILDING WAS, WAS, WAS REMODELED AND SO FORTH.
BUT IT JUST, WE KEPT GETTING DIFFERENT REVIEWERS, DIFFERENT ASKS, AND IT JUST GOT, GOT, GOT TO A POINT THAT WE JUST WANTED TO, TO DO AN ABBREVIATED
[02:35:01]
THING.SO EVERYTHING IS IN, UH, WE'VE GOT FIRE DEPARTMENT AND COMP, UH, SATISFIED.
THE PICTURES THAT, UH, THAT THE GENTLEMAN JUST SHOWED YOU DON'T SHOW, UH, THE NEW SEPARATION OF THE DECK.
I DON'T KNOW IF HE, IF HE HAS SEEN IT, UH, IN THE LAST COUPLE OF MONTHS, BUT IT WAS, THIS WAS ALL DONE OR COMPLETED ABOUT RON SHARED WHAT, ABOUT TWO MONTHS AGO? ABOUT TWO MONTHS, YEAH, ABOUT TWO MONTHS AGO.
UM, THANK YOU FOR YOUR BREVITY AS WELL.
UM, YEAH, I, I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND ADMIT YOUR EXHIBIT THAT YOU SENT, YOU SENT IN.
SO WE'LL HAVE THAT IN FRONT OF THE COMMISSIONERS AS WELL.
UM, I DO NOT SEE PHOTOGRAPHS IN HERE.
DID YOU INTEND TO SUBMIT ANY PHOTOGRAPHS? WELL, I HAD A LITTLE PROBLEM HERE, UH, TODAY IN SENDING THE PHOTOGRAPHS, UH, BECAUSE MY, MY, MY STAFF PERSON WASN'T HERE.
EVERY TIME I TRIED TO SEND THEM, I WAS JUST SENDING A PIECE OF IT.
SO I DON'T KNOW IF YOU GOT 'EM OR NOT.
UM, I DID NOT RECEIVE ANY PHOTOGRAPHS.
UH, I WILL, UM, I ACTUALLY DO SUPPORT WITH, UH, WITH MR. AND MR. SAID, I ACTUALLY DID OBSERVE THE FENCING.
IT'S A SIX FOOT, UH, PRIVACY FENCE, UH, WOOD THAT'S BUILT ACROSS, UH, THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY, ABOUT 10 FEET, I BELIEVE, FROM THE REAR DOOR, AND MAYBE ABOUT 15, UH, 15 TO 20 FEET FROM THE ACTUAL DECK.
UH, MY CONCERN, UH, AS, AS WELL AS THE FIRE MARSHAL CONCERN, WE ACTUALLY MET WITH THE TENANT.
ON NUMEROUS OCCASIONS, I'VE SPOKE WITH HIM OVER THE PHONE, UH, ON MANY OCCASIONS.
UH, HIS CONCERN WAS TRYING TO, UH, MAKE SURE HE COULD GET THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY OPENED UP.
SO THAT'S WHY HE ADDED THE, UH, FIRE, UH, EXIT SIGNS, THE PUSH BAR ON THE DOOR.
AND, UH, HE'S BEEN, UH, I, I'M NOT SURE HOW LONG HE'S BEEN ATTENDED THERE, I WOULD SAY AT LEAST FOR, UH, SEVEN, EIGHT MONTHS.
AND THE PLACE HASN'T OPENED UP.
AND ONE OF HIS CONCERNS WAS THAT THE COAL VIOLATIONS THAT WE HAD THERE WERE PREVENTING HIM FROM OPENING UP, OPENING UP THE CLUB.
UH, AGAIN, OUR, MY CONCERN WAS THE FACT THAT, UH, PATRONS WOULD HAVE, UH, ACCESS TO THAT REAR DECKING.
UH, SO THAT'S WHY HE WAS, UH, GIVEN INFORMATION BY THE FIRE MARSHAL THAT IF HE COULD SOMEHOW KEEP THAT FROM HAPPENING, THEN THERE'S A POSSIBILITY THAT HE WOULD BE ABLE TO OPEN UP THAT FRONT SPACE, UH, AT, FOR HIS BUSINESS.
UH, SO THAT'S WHY THAT PRIVACY FENCE WAS BUILT.
AND I ACTUALLY DID SEE THAT PRIVACY FENCE, UH, IN, IN DECEMBER OF LAST YEAR, ALONG WITH THE, UH, FARM.
YEAH, THE, THE TENANT NOW HAS A CO.
THANK YOU, MADAME CHAIR OF A QUESTIONS, UH, FOR THE OWNER AND FOR STAFF.
SO FIRST THE OWNER, I THINK, IS IT MR. LISTER? AM I, IS THAT CORRECT? THE NAME? UM, LAURE.
UM, SO THE QUESTION IS, UM, I MEAN, YOU'VE MENTIONED THERE'S A CEO, UM, BUT THAT, BUT THAT'S NOT CLEAR TO ME WHETHER IT'S FOR THE ENTIRE PROPERTY, WHETHER THE DECK'S INCLUDED.
SO YOU SAID THAT YOU HAVE ALL THE, ARE, ARE YOU SAYING THAT THE DECK IS NOW, HAS GONE THROUGH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, UH, HAS BEEN IN, ALL THE PLANS HAVE BEEN APPROVED, THE IT'S BEEN INSPECTED.
IT, IT'S, THERE'S NO ISSUE ANYMORE WITH THE DECK AS WE SEE IN THE EXHIBITS, IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? NO, THAT'S NOT AT ALL.
I'M, I'M SAYING THAT PLAN HAS BEEN ABANDONED.
UH, AND, AND WE WERE DOING, AND A SMALLER, UH, WE DID A SMALLER, UH, ASK, UH, FOR APPROVAL.
AND THAT'S WHAT, WHAT WE ENDED UP, UH, OBTAINING.
SO YOU, YOU, THAT AREA IS FENCED OFF.
UH, AND, UH, UH, AND NO LONGER PART OF OUR ASK.
SO THAT, THAT, SO, SO YOU, YOU OBTAINED AND FINALIZED ALL THE NECESSARY PERMITS FOR WHAT YOU DID DO, IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? THAT'S CORRECT.
SO, UH, THE, UM, SO WHAT IS YOUR OBJECTION TO THE RECOMMENDED ORDER, IF YOU ALREADY HAVE, IF IT'S TELLING YOU GET YOUR PERMITS AND YOU HAVE THEM, WHAT'S THE OBJECTION? WELL, THE ONE, ONE OBJECTION WOULD BE THEY'RE ASKING FOR DEMOLITION OF THE DECK.
FIRST OF ALL, WE HAVE AN ENGINEER'S REPORT TO SHOW, UH, WHAT'S THERE IS SAFE.
UH, WE'VE GOT, UH, UH, AND THEN THAT, THAT AREA HAS ALREADY BEEN FENCED OFF.
I DON'T WANT TO DO ANYTHING THAT'LL COMPROMISE, UH, WHAT, UH,
[02:40:01]
YOU KNOW, THE BALANCE OF THE DECK.SO I, I DON'T WANT ANYTHING DEMOLISHED BACK THERE.
IT'S, UH, IT'S NOT ACCESSIBLE AND IT'S FENCED OFF.
SO IF I UNDERSTAND, CUZ AGAIN, I DON'T HAVE PHOTOS OR PLANS HERE.
YOU'RE SAYING THERE'S A PORTION SMALLER THAT WAS BUILT THAT'S PERMITTED, AND THEN THIS ONE PORTION THAT, UH, WHOSE SAFETY IS KIND OF CALLED INTO QUESTION, IT'S FENCED OFF, SO IT'S NOT ACCESSIBLE, IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? THE, THE DECK, I'M, I'M GONNA LET RON SPEAK TO THAT ONE SECOND HERE.
LET ME MAKE SURE WE'RE CLEAR ON KIND OF WHAT THE SITUATION IS.
THE DECK AREA IS A SEPARATE PART OF WHAT WE HAVE A CO TO OCCUPY AT THIS POINT IN TIME.
RIGHT NOW, OUR, OUR CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY IS FOR THE BUILDING STRUCTURE, NOT THE DECK AREA.
THEREFORE, WE SEPARATED THE DECK AREA OFF SO THAT WE WOULDN'T HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE, THE, THE CONSTRUCTION DIS ISSUES RELATING TO THE CREEK.
AND, UM, SO, SO NOW WHAT WE'VE GOT IS JUST A CO ON AN EXITING FROM THE BACK OF THE BUILDING AND, UH, AND AN ENTRANCE ON THE FRONT.
SO IT'S JUST A BUILDING STRUCTURE THAT IS APPROVED AND COED AND FIRE MARSHAL APPROVED AND READY TO GO AND NOW OCCUPIED BY A TENANT WHO IS IN OPERATION.
BUT THE, THE ORDER DOESN'T REALLY TALK ABOUT THE BUILDING.
IT ONLY REALLY TALKS ABOUT THE, THE ACCESSORY DECK.
SO, UM, YOU HAVE A PERMIT FOR THAT.
YOU JUST ABANDONED THIS KIND OF UNSAFE ONE IN PLACE AND FENCED IT OFF, I'M NOT CLEAR.
THAT'S WHAT, THAT'S WHAT WAS DONE.
THAT DECK, BY THE WAY, IS, IS, IS OVER 35 YEARS OLD BECAUSE THAT'S HOW LONG I'VE HAD THE PROPERTY AND IT WAS THERE.
UH, BUT, UH, BUT IN ANY EVENT, UH, BY OUR ENGINEERING PLANS SHOWING WHAT WE WERE GOING TO DO, UH, WAS, UH, WAS APPROVED, JUST THE PROCESS GOT TO BE SO LENGTHY AND CUMBERSOME.
WE JUST OPTED JUST TO FENCE IT OFF AND JUST DEAL WITH IT LATER.
SO YOU DON'T WANNA DEMOLISH IT, YOU JUST WANNA KEEP IT FENCED OFF.
I'D RATHER THE ORDER SAY THAT WE WOULD SECURE IT, MAKE SURE IT'S NOT ACCESSIBLE.
UH, BUT, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T WANT TO, UM, TO DEMOLISH ANYTHING.
AND THEN A QUESTION FOR, UM, INSPECTOR ADAMS REGARDING THE ORDER ITSELF.
UM, JUST WONDERING IF THERE'S LIKE A, A LOGIC ERROR.
SO IF, AND I KNOW WE JUST HEARD THE OWNER SAY THEY DON'T WANNA BUILD THIS DECK, BUT IF THEY DID ONE A, WHICH IS THEY OBTAINED AND FINALIZED THE NECESSARY PERMITS FOR THAT DECK, UM, THEN WOULDN'T THAT IMPLY THAT THEY DON'T HAVE TO DEMOLISH IT? I MEAN, IF IT, IF IT'S PERMITTED, SO SHOULDN'T IT SAY, OR LIKE, YOU'RE, YOU'RE CORRECT ON THAT, BUT LET'S GO BACK A LITTLE BIT.
I'M, I'M JUST, I KNOW I'M KIND OF, KIND OF GOING DOWN A, A PATH WITH THE OWNER.
WELL, I, I JUST WANT A A POINT OF CLARIFICATION.
THEY DIDN'T NEVER HAVE A PERMIT FOR THAT DAY.
SO THEY SUBMITTED A PLAN REVIEW IN THE PLAN REVIEW.
DEVELOPMENTAL SERVICES REQUESTED A ENGINEER'S REPORT BECAUSE THEY NEEDED SUPPORTING FOR THE DECK.
THEY NEEDED TO PUT IN PEERS OR ANCHORS TO SUPPORT THAT DECK.
NO, I, I SAW IT AND THAT'S WHY THEY DIDN'T GET THE PERMIT.
BUT I'M JUST SAYING, JUST KIND OF THE, AND MAYBE I'M NITPICKING, BUT THE LOGIC OF THE ORDER ITSELF, IF THEY SOMEHOW MANAGED IN 45 DAYS TO OBTAIN AND FINALIZE PERMITS, THEN IT SEEMS THAT THE SECOND PART WOULD BE UNNECESSARY.
THAT THEY WOULD NOT NEED TO DEMOLISH IT.
IT SEEMS LIKE THERE SHOULD BE AN OR AFTER THE WORD OF PERMITS, LIKE THEY EITHER GET THE, ALL THE NECESSARY PERMITS, PERMITS, OR THEY GOTTA TEAR THIS THING DOWN BECAUSE IF THEY GET THE PERMITS, THEN THAT, WHY WOULD THEY NEED TO TURN IT DOWN? IT GOT PERMITTED UNLESS THE PERMITS FOR DEMOLITION.
ISN'T THAT THE LANGUAGE IN THE DEMOLITION ORDERS USUALLY THAT IT'S, THE PERMITS ARE REFERRING TO DEMOLITION PERMITS? IS THAT, WELL, IT DOESN'T SAY PERMITS, DEMOLITION PERMIT, BUT PERMITS ALSO IMPLY THAT IT'S BEEN FINALIZED.
AND SO SINCE IT HAS NO PERMITS, BUT IT, BUT THE ORDER SAYS IF THEY, THEY, THEY HAVE TO OBTAIN AND FINALIZE THEM, WHICH WOULD IMPLY ALL THAT GETS DONE.
SO IF ALL THAT GOT DONE, WHY WOULD THEY NEED TO DEMOLISH? IT JUST SEEMS LIKE THERE SHOULD BE AN OR BECAUSE IT'S BASICALLY, EVEN THOUGH THE OWNER HAS INDICATED THEY HAVE NO INTENT OF DOING THIS WELL, WELL, I AGREE WITH YOU THAT MAYBE AN OR AND OR SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN THERE, BUT, YOU KNOW, BUT IAND, WE SPLIT HERE IS HERE.
I MEAN, I KNOW, BUT JUST BECAUSE TO ME, THE FENCE THAT THEY PUT UP AGAIN, IS A PRIVACY FENCE.
IN THE PREVIOUS CASE, UH, TWO PREVIOUS CASES, A PRIVACY FENCE.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE PICKETS YOU BUY AT HOME DEPOT.
NOW WE'RE LOOKING AT POSSIBILITY HAVING THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE IN DOWNTOWN AUSTIN DURING SOUTH BY NOW, MY CONCERN IS THAT A PRIVACY FENCE SEPARATING A DECK THAT IS QUESTIONABLE FROM
[02:45:01]
A GROUP OF PEOPLE THAT MAY HAVE ALCOHOL IN THEIR SYSTEM.AND YOU'RE ASKING ME TO, YOU KNOW, AS A PERSON DEALING WITH SAFETY, THAT I'M GONNA ASSUME THAT THAT FENCE IS GONNA BE A BARRIER TO AN UNSAFE DECK, WHICH DOESN'T HA HAS A CLIFF OF 30 TO 40 FEET BELOW IT.
WELL, IF, IF I COULD SAY SOMETHING, THERE'S NOT, THERE'S NOT A FENCE ON ANY OF THOSE.
WE'RE THE ONLY PROPERTY THAT'S GOT A FENCE BACK THERE.
I MEAN, YOU KNOW, WE CAN PUT A, A DIFFERENT TYPE OF FENCE IF THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE CONCERNED WITH, BUT THERE'S ONLY A HUNDRED PERSON OCCUPANCY ON THIS WHOLE BUILDING.
IT'S JUST THE BUILDING IN THE FRONT.
YEAH, BUT SO I MEAN, THE CONCERN ISN'T ABOUT YOUR BUILDING.
UNDERSTAND, AND, AND, AND THE ISSUE ABOUT THE DECK NOT BEING PERMITTED IS REALLY UNFAIR.
THAT DECK IS, WAS THERE FOR OVER 35 YEARS AGO MAYBE.
I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW WHAT PERMIT MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE BEEN OBTAINED BACK WHEN, BUT, UM, UH, IT, UH, IT WAS THERE WHEN I BOUGHT IT, UH, OVER 30 YEARS AGO.
UH, AND IT'S THE ONLY REASON WHY IT WAS AN ISSUE WAS THAT WE HAD A REVIEWER THAT WANTED US TO DO SOMETHING BEYOND THAT AND JUST KEPT SPIRALING DOWNWARD.
AND WE JUST SAID, YOU KNOW, WE JUST CAN'T JUST KEEP SPENDING MONEY.
IT TOOK US TWO YEARS AND WE STILL DIDN'T HAVE A PERMIT.
WE SURELY CANNOT GET A PERMIT IN 45 DAYS.
SO, I MEAN, THAT'S WHY WE JUST SAID, YOU KNOW WHAT, LET'S FENCE IT OFF.
LET'S JUST GET THE OCCUPANCY FOR THE FRONT BUILDING AND LEAVE IT AT THAT.
UH, CAN I ADD SOMETHING ELSE TO RESPOND TO THAT? SURE, SURE.
MR. UH, IN 2008, UH, I'M NOT SURE IF IT WAS, UH, MR. NAURA, HE OWNED IT IN 2008.
SO A REPRESENTATIVE OF HIS SUBMITTED A SITE PLAN TO THE CITY OF AUSTIN.
UH, I HAVE THE SITE PLAN NUMBER, 2008 DASH 0 1 0 3 A.
THAT SITE PLAN WAS FOR THE FINISHING AND COMPLETION OF THAT DECK.
WELL, THAT, THAT, THAT, UH, I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT, WHAT, HOW IT STYLED WHAT THEY WANTED.
WHAT WE HAD, WE HAD AN ENGINEER COME IN, AND RON, YOU CAN ADDRESS IT CONCERNING THE PEERS, BUT IT WAS NOT TO FINISH THE DECK.
IT WAS TO STABILIZE, UH, A PORTION OF THE DECK THAT THEY FELT WAS UNSTABLE.
AND, AND THAT ENGINEER, AND IF YOU, IF YOU LOOK IN YOUR FILE ALONG WITH THAT PERMIT WILL BE THE ENGINEER'S REPORT, HOW THE STABILIZATION WAS SUPPOSED TO BE DONE.
AND SO FOR ALL OF THAT IS THERE IN THE FILE.
IT WASN'T TO, TO GET A DECK PERMITTED, IT WAS TO GET THAT DECK STABILIZED.
UM, YES, VICE CHAIR, I MOVE, WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THIS HEARING AND ADOPT THE CITY RECOMMENDATION AS WRITTEN.
UM, VICE CHAIR MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
SO I THINK WE CAN CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
AND VICE CHAIR ALSO HAS A MOTION TO ADOPT THE RECOMMENDED ORDER OF STAFF.
CAN I ASK A QUESTION ABOUT THE MOTION? UH, SURE, GO AHEAD.
THE WAY I INTERPRET THIS BASED ON THE OTHER DEMOLITION ORDERS THAT WE'VE SEEN, IS THAT THIS IS SAYING OBTAIN AND FINALIZE THE PERMITS NEEDED TO DEMOLISH THAT THIS WHOLE ORDER IS ABOUT DEMOLITION.
IT'S BASICALLY SAYING THEY NEED TO DEMOLISH THAT DECK.
IS THAT WHAT YOUR UNDERSTANDING IS IN MAKING YOUR MOTION? NO, BECAUSE THE EXHIBITS CLEARLY HAVE REPORTS FROM THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT WHERE THERE'S STILL OUTSTANDING QUESTIONS FOR, FOR A PERMIT.
NOW, NOW THAT MIGHT BE MOOT BECAUSE THE CODE HAS, HAS CHANGED.
MAYBE WE TO ASK THE, UM, STAFF WHO WROTE THE ORDER YEAH.
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE WE'RE WE UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE VOTING ON.
I THINK THEY ALREADY ANSWERED THAT, BUT I'LL LET STAFF ANSWER AGAIN.
ROBERT MOORE, DIVISION MANAGER.
THIS IS WRITTEN FOR DEMOLITION PERMIT.
THIS IS JUST A RECOMMENDED ORDER.
Y'ALL CAN CHANGE IT AND, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, Y'ALL CAN CHANGE IT.
UM, IF YOU CHANGED IT TO LIKE A REPAIR ORDER, THE PERMITS WOULD READ THE SAME.
SO RIGHT NOW, AS IT SITS, IT IS DEMO AND DEMO PERMITS.
UM, DOES THAT HELP? AND VICE CHAIR, WOULD YOU LIKE TO RESTATE YOUR MOTION? CLARIFY YOUR MOTION OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT? UM, NO, BECAUSE WITHOUT KNOWING THE, THE STATUS OF THE, UH, OF THE PERMIT, WHETHER IT'S STILL OPEN OR WHETHER IT'S EXPIRED OR WHETHER ALL OF THAT, I MEAN, I THINK EVERYTHING ELSE IS JUST CONJECTURE.
UM, WE CAN JUST LEAVE IT AS WRITTEN.
IF I MAY ADD, I, IF THE PERMIT IS OPEN AND WE'RE GOOD WITH REPAIR TO FIRE DEPARTMENT
[02:50:01]
RECOMMENDATION, THAT WOULD BE FINE.WELL, YOU KEEP MENTIONING FIRE DEPARTMENT, BUT YOU KNOW, THERE'S LIKE 10 DEPARTMENTS THAT LOOK AT IT.
IN DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, YOU'D HAVE, SORRY, THE PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED.
SO I WANTED TO, MAYBE IT WASN'T CLEAR.
UM, THE PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED, SO THE OWNERS, YOUR TIME IS UP AS FAR AS PRESENTATIONS, BUT YOU MAY RESPOND WHENEVER YOU ARE ASKED A QUESTION DIRECTLY.
UM, I, I DON'T REMEMBER IF IT WAS, SO IS YOUR MOTION ABOUT DEMOLITION, ABOUT THE INTERPRETATION THAT WAS JUST CONFIRMED THAT THIS IS A, THIS IS AN ORDER TO GET THE PERMITS TO DEMOLISH? WELL, I DON'T KNOW THAT, THAT MY, THAT'S INTERPRETATION.
IT'S, YOU KNOW, THE ORDER IS WRITTEN.
AND I'VE MOVE THAT WE ADOPT THE ORDER AS WRITTEN.
UM, I JUST ASKED HIM TO CLARIFY THAT WHAT WE WERE, WHAT THIS WAS WRITTEN TO BE ABOUT WAS GETTING PERMITS TO DEMOLISH AND HE SAID YES.
SO THAT'S WHAT I THINK WE'RE VOTING ON, BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT IT SAYS.
IT'S THE WRITTEN THE SAME WAY AS ALL THE OTHER DEMOLITION ORDERS.
SO WE COULD ADD, WE COULD ADD THE WORD DEMOLITION TO PERMITS, PERMITS FOR DEMOLITION IF YOU WANT.
BUT I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE WE ALL KNOW WHAT WE'RE VOTING ON.
COMMISSIONER MUELLER, I, I APPRECIATE AND ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I THINK COUNSEL WANTS TO HELP US OUT HERE.
UM, UH, THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR.
UM, I'D JUST LIKE TO CLARIFY, THE RECORD WILL BE VERY CLEAR THAT THAT ONLY, UM, DEMOLITION PERMITS WILL SATISFY THE TERMS OF THE ORDER.
UM, AND TO COMMISSIONER MUELLER'S POINT, THIS IS TEMPLATE LANGUAGE.
UM, FEEL FREE TO ADD IN, UH, TO, UH, ONE A OBTAIN AND FINALIZE ALL NECESSARY DEMOLITION PERMITS.
UM, OR IF STAFF HAVE ANOTHER SUGGESTION.
UM, THE, THE LANGUAGE IS VERY, UH, OPEN TO CHANGE.
I MEAN, I, I KNOW IT'S A MOOD POINT BECAUSE IT'S, THEY, THEY CAN'T PROBABLY GET A PER, YOU KNOW, MEET THE, THE, UH, DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT'S REQUIREMENTS IN 45 DAYS.
BUT TECHNICALLY, IF THEY HAVE AN OPEN BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION, I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY.
IF THEY MET IT AND THEY SATISFIED ALL THE DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT QUESTIONS ABOUT THE DESIGN OF THAT DECK, WHY THIS HAS TO BE A DEMOLITION ORDER.
UM, I DON'T THINK, UM, AGAIN, YEAH, JUST ONE MOMENT.
UH, COMMISSIONER STILL COURSE.
UM, I DON'T THINK THAT THE QUESTION BEFORE US IS, UM, IT'S NOT CONCRETE, RIGHT? IT'S JUST A QUESTION.
IT'S FOR US TO DECIDE, SO WE DON'T HAVE TO AGREE WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS.
WE DON'T HAVE TO EVEN ADOPT ANY OF IT.
YOU COULD COMPLETELY MAKE ONE UP IF YOU WISHED.
UM, BUT COMMISSIONER SOAD, PLEASE.
ACTUALLY ECHOING WHAT YOU WERE JUST SAYING, I I WAS JUST GOING TO OFFER TO MR. UH, THE VICE CHAIR THAT, UM, PARAGRAPH ONE SUBS A, B, AND C, THOSE ARE, THOSE ARE CONJUNCTS, RIGHT? SO AMONG THE ORDERS WE WOULD BE GIVING, IF WE ADOPTED THE ORDER AS WRITTEN WOULD BE ONE B DEMOLISH ALL PORTIONS OF THE COMMERCIAL ACCESSORY DECK.
AND SO THERE'S NOTHING IN THE OTHER SORT OF SURROUNDING MATERIAL THAT PROVIDES AN EXCEPTION TO THAT, TO THAT ORDER.
SO I, I'M NOT SAYING WE NEED TO ADOPT IT, BUT I'M SAYING THAT IF WE DO ADOPT THE ORDER AS WRITTEN, I, I, I THINK THAT IT JUST FULL STOP CONTEMPLATES THE DEMOLITION OF THE D I JUST JUST WANTED TO OFFER THAT.
THANK YOU, UH, MR. VICE CHAIR.
THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING, UM, ALL THE POINTS THAT, UH, I THINK A COUPLE OF US ALREADY MADE.
SO HAVING SAID THAT, VICE CHAIR, WOULD YOU LIKE TO STILL TRY THE SAME MOTION OR WOULD YOU LIKE TO MODIFY, UM, YOUR MOTION IN ANY WAY?
I I KNOW IT'S JUST A BIT OF A, UH, DID SOMEBODY HAVE THEIR HANDS ON? OH, YES.
I JUST WANNA PUT HIS MIND TO EASE.
I MEAN, IT'S THE SAME THING IF WITH OUR, WHAT I SAID EARLIER, LIKE IF THEY GET A PERMIT, I MEAN, IT'S BEEN THERE FOR 35 YEARS.
THEY SAY THEY HAVE A STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING REPORT SAYING IT'S, IT'S ALL GOOD.
UH, I DON'T KNOW WHY YOU COULDN'T PERMIT IT.
SO IF THEY DO THAT, WE'RE NOT GONNA DEMOLISH THIS THING.
AND INSPECTOR ADAMS, YOU HAD SOMETHING ELSE TO ADD? YEAH, I, I, I KEEP, I HEARD THAT, UH, THAT A PERMIT, THERE WAS AN OPEN PERMIT.
THERE IS NO OPEN PERMIT FOR THIS PROPERTY.
THE PERMIT THAT THEY OPENED UP WAS A PERMIT, I BELIEVE, FROM 2014 TO ACTUALLY, UH, GET THE LOAD CARD AND ALSO ADD A, UH, OUTDOOR BAR AREA.
IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THAT DECKING.
AND AGAIN, AS FAR AS THE ENGINEER'S REPORT, AGAIN, IT WAS BASED OFF OF A 2015
[02:55:01]
INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE, WHICH MEANS IF THEY HAD TO PRESENT THAT TODAY, IT WOULD HAVE TO BE BASED OFF THE 2021 INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE.SO THERE'S NO OPEN PERMIT ON THIS DECK.
THERE'S NO WAY THAT, THAT ANY OF THIS CAN BE SATISFIED.
NO, THEN THE ORDER, UH, THE MOTION STAYS AS IS THE CITY ORDER CAN STAY AS IS.
SO YOU HAVE, UH, WE HAVE A MOTION FROM VICE CHAIR TO OKAY.
TO ADOPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDED ORDER.
AND WE HAVE A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER FRYBERGER.
UM, IF THERE ARE NO OTHER COMMENTS, I'LL GO AHEAD AND CALL THE VOTE ON THAT.
UM, I THINK MY ONLY CONCERN, I APPRECIATE THE OWNER'S, UM, PRESENTATION TONIGHT.
MY ONLY CONCERN IS IF WE FESS THIS OFF AND JUST LEAVE IT, UM, ALONE WITHOUT ANY FURTHER PLANS, UM, WE ARE NOT ACHIEVING ANYTHING, UM, AT ALL IN TERMS OF PUBLIC SAFETY.
SO, HAVING SAID THAT, I'LL GO AHEAD AND CALL THE VOTES.
UM, SO COMMISSION
MADAM CHAIR, THAT WAS, I VOTE NO.
UM, COMMISSIONER FRANCIS THAT VOTE? YES.
AND COMMISSION SAG? I VOTE YES.
AND COMMISSIONER BENIGNO? UM, ABSTAIN.
AND COMMISSIONER FREIBERGER? I'M A YES.
AND COMMISSIONER, UH, MUELLER? YES.
SO, UM, THE VOTE CARRIES, AND WE'LL GO AHEAD AND, UM, THE STAFF WILL HAVE THAT REDUCED INTO AN ORDER, AND IT'LL BE MAILED TO, TO YOU, THE OWNERS, BUT THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE TONIGHT.
WELL, THANK YOU FOR JOINING US, UH, REMOTELY TONIGHT.
I, I JUST, JUST A BRIEF COMMENT.
I DISAGREE WITH THE RESULT, BUT IN ANY EVENT, I JUST WANTED TO SAY THIS.
UH, I REALLY WANT TO, UH, THANK YOU GUYS FOR YOUR PUBLIC SERVICE.
I'VE, I'VE BEEN LISTENING TO THIS THING SINCE SIX 15.
I THINK IT'S THE FIRST TIME I'VE, I'VE TUNED IN WITH THIS TYPE OF A, A HEARING, BUT, BUT YOUR DISCUSSIONS ARE INTELLIGENT, ARTICULATE.
I'M NOT GONNA SAY I'M GONNA BE TUNING INTO THIS CHANNEL INSTEAD OF YELLOWSTONE FROM NOW ON, BUT I DO, DO WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE, UH, AND, UH, YOUR PUBLIC SERVICE AND APPRECIATE WHAT YOU DO.
THANK YOU, UM, FOR THE CLOSING COMMENTS AND GOOD LUCK.
[6. Case Number: CL 2023-001176]
ITEM NUMBER SIX, THE LAST CASE ON THE AGENDA IS CASE NUMBER C L 20 23 0 0 1 1 76.THE ADDRESS FOR THIS CASE IS 6,907 WENTWORTH DRIVE.
THE EXHIBITS FOR THIS CASE CAN BE FOUND IN THE OLIVE GREEN BOOKS IN YOUR READERS OR GOOGLE DRIVE FOLDER.
THIS CASE OPENED IN OCTOBER, 2021 IS ABOUT A COMMERCIAL FOURPLEX, WHICH IS SUFFERED FROM EXTENSIVE FIRE DAMAGE DUE TO A FIRE NEXT DOOR.
THE STRUCTURE IS VACANT AND CONSIDERED UNSAFE FOR HUMAN OCCUPANCY.
THERE ARE NO PERMIT APPLICATIONS ON FILE.
THE STRUCTURE IS CONSIDERED DANGEROUS, DANGEROUS WITH UN UNSAFE, AND UNSANITARY CONDITIONS IS A BLIGHT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND REQUIRES DEMOLITION AND YOUR READERS OR GOOGLE DRIVE FOLDER, YOU'LL FIND THE FOLLOWING EXHIBIT ONE, WHICH CONTAINS THE COMPLAINANT CASE HISTORY.
A COPY OF THE TRAVIS CENTRAL APPRAISAL DISTRICT RECORD THAT VERIFIES OWNERSHIP, THE REQUIRED NOTICES OF VIOLATION, NOTICES OF HEARING AND POSTINGS, AS WELL AS A FIRE INCIDENT REPORT, EXHIBIT TWO, WHICH CONSISTS OF CODES, PHOTOGRAPHS MARKED AS TWO A THROUGH TWO H.
AND LASTLY, CODES RECOMMENDED ORDER.
AUSTIN CODE INSPECTOR AARON HALE IS ASSIGNED TO THIS CASE AND HE IS HERE TO PRESENT THE EXHIBIT PHOTOS AND DISCUSS THE VIOLATIONS AS DEPICTED.
THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR AND COMMISSIONERS.
UM, I WILL BE BRIEF WITH THIS.
I'M AN INSPECTOR WITH AUSTIN CODE, AND I'LL PRESENT A PROPERTY AT 69 0 7 WENTWORTH DRIVE.
THIS IS A 3,968 SQUARE FOOT RESIDENTIAL FOURPLEX, CONSTRUCTED IN 1984 ON A TWO ACRE PARCEL.
THERE ARE FOUR INDEPENDENT UNITS IN THIS BUILDING.
[03:00:01]
IS ZONED MF TWO FOR REFERENCE.THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED OFF OF LOYOLA LANE, WEST OF DECKER.
AFD STATION 26 IS APPROXIMATELY TWO BLOCKS SOUTH OF THIS, UH, ADDRESS.
UPON BEING ASSIGNED TO COLONY PARK, UH, I INHERITED THIS CASE.
APPROXIMATELY 30 INSPECTIONS HAVE BEEN CONDUCTED AT THIS PROPERTY, AND I'VE ESTABLISHED THE FOLLOWING ON SEPTEMBER 30TH, 2021 AT APPROXIMATELY FOUR STRUCTURE FIRE WAS REPORTED AT 69 0 9 WENTWORTH, WHICH IS THE ADJACENT NORTHERN PROPERTY 2 69 0 7.
IT'S A SIMILAR, OR IT WAS A SIMILAR FOURPLEX, UH, AGAIN, DU LOCATED DUE NORTH OF 69 0 7.
ACCORDING TO THE FIRE REPORT, 69 0 9, WENTWORTH BECAME A TWO ALARM BLAZE THAT ULTIMATELY DESTROYED THAT STRUCTURE.
UH, THE FIRE WAS NOT CONTAINED WHOLLY TO THAT PROPERLY AND DIG IGNITE.
THE NORTH EXPOSURE OF 69 0 7, UH, BURNED THE ENTIRE LENGTH OF THE BUILDING, AND HEELY DAMAGED THE ENTIRE STRUCTURE ON BOTH LEVELS.
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES FAILS TO SHOW, UH, AN APP APPEAL APPROVED BUILDING PERMIT, ALLOWING FOR THE DEMOLITION OF 69 0 9.
UH, IT HAS BEEN DEMOLISHED AND IS A SLAB AT THIS POINT.
THE FIRE REPORT SHOWS THAT 69 0 9 WAS UNOCCUPIED.
69 0 7 WAS, UH, IT'S RELEVANT TO NOTE THAT THE TIME OF THE FIRE, 69 0 9 WENTWORTH WAS OWNED BY A PROPERTY MANAGEMENT FIRM.
69 0 7 WAS OWNED BY INDIVIDUALS WITHIN 60 DAYS OF THE FIRE.
BOTH PROPERTIES HAD BEEN SOLD TO ALFONSO AND ADELA HERNANDEZ, AND THEIR OWNERSHIP OF BOTH PROPERTIES CONTINUES TODAY.
NOTICES OF VIOLATION WERE GENERATED AND SENT TO THE OWNERS OF 69 0 7 FOR THE MAINTENANCE OF AN UNSAFE BURN STRUCTURE OR PREMISES, AND FOR LARGE ACCUMULATIONS OF TRASH AND DEBRIS.
IN JULY OF 2022, UH, IT WAS, UH, IDENTIFIED THAT ILLEGAL DUMPING WAS SPIRALING OUTTA CONTROL ON THE PROPERTIES.
AN EMERGENCY BOARD AND SECURE FOR PERIMETER FENCING WAS CONDUCTED.
AN APPROPRIATE E B S NOTICE WAS SENT REGARDING THAT MULTIPLE YELLOW PLACARDS HAVE BEEN POSTED TO THIS PROPERTY.
UH, AS IT WAS LEARNED THAT THE OWNERSHIP CHANGED, THE NEW NOTICES OF VIOLATION WERE GENERATED AND SENT IN JUNE OF 2022.
THOSE NOTICES REFLECT THE CURRENT OWNERSHIP.
NO PERMITS OR APPLICATIONS HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED, WHICH WOULD ALLOW FOR THE DEMOLITION OF REPAIR OR REPAIR OF 69 0 7 REMAINS PROFOUNDLY HAZARDOUS, COMPLETELY BURNED ON ONE SIDE WITH CHARRED TIMBERS FROM GROUND TO ROOF LINE.
THE INTERIORS OF THOSE TWO EXPOSED UNITS ARE VISIBLY COMPLETELY DESTROYED.
TRANSIENT AND HOMELESS ACTIVITY IS UNCHECKED ON THE PROPERTY.
THE PERIMETER FENCING HAS BEEN BREACHED, REMOVED, AND DESTROYED.
UH, I CONDUCTED AN INSPECTION THIS WEEK.
I CONDUCTED AN INSPECTION TODAY, UM, AS WELL AS MY SUPERVISOR AND TEAM INVESTIGATOR.
EARLIER IN THE WEEK, UH, INSPECTOR ADAMS, UM, ENCOUNTERED A NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS WANDERING ON AND NEAR THE PROPERTY.
UH, SUBSEQUENTLY WE OBSERVED SMOKE COMING FROM THE PROPERTY.
UH, ONE OF THE CHIMNEYS AT THIS ABANDONED PROPERTY, UH, NOTIFIED AFD AFD STATION 26, RESPONDED AND DID LOCATE A SQUATTER INSIDE THE PROPERTY WHO HAD SET UP A FAIRLY ELABORATE HOUSEKEEPING IN THERE.
UM, THEY DID EXTINGUISH THE FIRE.
THEY PULLED THE GARBAGE OUT AND PUT THAT OUT ON THE SIDE.
UM, DUE TO THE EXTENSIVE DAMAGE CAUSED BY THE SEPTEMBER FIRE, THE PROPERTY CAN'T BE BOARDED UP.
THERE WOULD BE NOTHING TO ATTACH THE OSB TWO ON THE NORTH EXPOSURE OF THE PROPERTY.
UM, THE ONLY VIABLE OPTION IS DEMOLITION, MAYBE FENCING, UH, TO MAKE SOME MEASURE OF SECURITY TO THE, TO THE COMMUNITY.
THIS PROPERTY SITS ADJACENT TO A CAP METRO TRANSIT LINE.
CAP METRO BUSES MOVE UP AND DOWN WENTWORTH ONTO COLONY LOOP AND OFF OF LOYOLA.
UM, THERE ARE CHILDREN IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA.
THE ENTIRE NEIGHBORHOOD IS FULL OF FOUR PLEXES.
UH, THIS PROPERTY BACKS TO RIVERSTONE DRIVE AND IS ACCESSIBLE FROM THE BACKYARDS OF THOSE PROPERTIES.
UH, I OBSERVED TODAY THAT PEOPLE TRANSIT ACROSS THE ACCUMULATED TRASH AND RUBBISH AT WHAT USED TO BE 69 0 9 TO GET TO RIVERSTONE.
UH, FINALLY, THE SCOPE AND EXTENT OF THE ILLEGAL DUMPING ON THE BOTH 69 0 7 AND OH NINE PROPERTIES, UH, IS ON A SCALE WHICH IS UNUSUAL EVEN FOR AUSTIN COAT OFFICIALS.
UH, LITERALLY MOUNTAINS OF DISCARDED FURNITURE, MATTRESSES, BAGGED AND UNBAGGED GARBAGE CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS, CAR PARTS, UH, AND UNDER THEIR IDE UNIDENTIFIABLE WASTE ARE ON BOTH PROPERTIES.
DURING MY INSPECTION THIS WEEK AND TODAY, UH, I OBSERVED FERAL KATZ BUZZARDS EVIDENCE OF RAT AND RODIN INFESTATION AND ITINERANT INDIVIDUALS MILLING THROUGH THE WASTE.
I WILL NOW PROVIDE PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE OF THE ISSUES REGARDING THIS PROPERTY, AND I'D BE HAPPY TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE.
PHOTOGRAPH TWO A IS, UH, TAKEN FROM WENTWORTH AVENUE.
I'M STANDING DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF 69 0 7.
I'M LOOKING AT THE EDGE OF 69 0 7, UH, INTO
[03:05:01]
AND ACROSS THE PROPERTY OF 69 0 9.THIS IS, AGAIN, TAKEN FROM DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF 69 0 7.
THIS WAS TAKEN THIS WEEK ACCOMPANIED BY, UH, THE CODE SUPERVISOR AND CODE INVESTIGATOR.
YOU CAN SEE THE FIRE, UH, THE ITEM OF SMOKING THERE, THAT THE FIREMEN ARE INSIDE THE STRUCTURE THERE.
THEY'VE PULLED OUT THE BURNING GARBAGE, UM, THAT SUBSEQUENTLY REIGNITED ITSELF WHEN THEY HAD TO PUT THAT OUT AGAIN.
UM, YOU CAN SEE THE, UH, FENCING THERE IN FRONT.
PHOTO TWO C IS A CLOSEUP OF MY MOST RECENT YELLOW PLACARD, WHICH I AFFIXED TO THE FENCE.
THERE WAS A PREVIOUS YELLOW PLACARD THAT HAS DISAPPEARED THAT WAS POSTED, UH, AT THE ONSET OF THE ORIGINAL CALL LAST YEAR OR TWO YEARS AGO IN 2021.
UH, THIS IS, UH, PHOTO TWO D IS A PHOTO THAT WAS TAKEN THIS WEEK.
UH, THIS IS WHAT PROMPTED THE CALL TO AFD.
UH, THE THREE OF US OBSERVED THE SMOKE COMING OUT OF THE CHIMNEY THERE SHOULD BE NO ONE IN THAT BUILDING.
THERE'S NO TRESPASSING AND PRIVATE PROPERTY SIGNS POSTED TO THE BUILDING AS WELL AS THE EXTERIOR FENCING.
UM, AND AGAIN, THAT WAS THE BURNING GARBAGE INSIDE THAT BOTTOM UNIT.
TWO E IS, THIS IS THE BURNED EXPOSURE, THE NORTHERN EXPOSURE OF 69 0 7 WENTWORTH.
YOU CAN SEE THE ACCUMULATED TRASH AND DEBRIS.
THIS PILE CONTINUOUSLY GETS BIGGER.
UM, IT'S FULL OF WET GARBAGE AS WELL.
UH, PEOPLE ROOT THROUGH IT, ANIMALS.
THIS WAS TAKEN FROM THE STREET.
I'M STANDING DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF 69 0 9.
UH, THIS IS JUST AN OVERALL VIEW OF THE NORTH EXPOSURE OF 69 0 7, SHOWING THE BURNED UH, DAMAGE EXTENDS FROM ROOF TO FLOOR AND FROM FRONT TO BACK.
UH, THE ENTIRE PROPERTY ON, ON THAT EXPOSURE IS DESTROYED.
IT'S A CLOSE UP OF, UH, SIMILAR PHOTOS, TWO G AGAIN, SHOWING THE EXTENSIVE FIRE DAMAGE, UM, THROUGH THE ENTIRE LENGTH AND HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING THERE.
NEXT PHOTO TWO H CLOSE UP, TAKEN FROM, UH, THE MIDDLE OF WENTWORTH DRIVE, SHOWING THE CHARRING AND DETERIORATION OF THE ROOF, OVERHANGS AND STAIRWAY STRUCTURE, UH, THAT SERVICED THE UPPER AND LOWER FLOORS OF, UH, 69 0 7.
BECAUSE OF THE EXISTING CONDITIONS SHOWN IN THESE PHOTOGRAPHS AND THOSE DESCRIBED IN THE FINDINGS OF FACT, THE CODE OFFICIAL FOUND THAT THIS STRUCTURE IS A PUBLIC AND AN ATTRACTIVE NUISANCE AND IS CONSIDERED DANGEROUS WITH UNSAFE AND UNSANITARY CONDITIONS.
STAFF ASKED THE COMMISSION TO ADMIT EXHIBIT ONE, WHICH INCLUDES STAFF PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT IN CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND OTHER RELEVANT DOCUMENTS IN PHOTOGRAPHS MARKED AS EXHIBITS TWO A THROUGH TWO H.
STAFF ALSO REQUESTS THAT THE COMMISSION ADOPT THE PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER THE FOLLOWING.
ONE, REQUIRE THAT THE OWNER COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING WITHIN 45 DAYS FROM THE DATE THE ORDER IS MAILED.
A, OBTAIN AND FINALIZE ALL NECESSARY PERMITS.
B, DEMOLISH ALL PORTIONS OF THE FIRE DAMAGE COMMERCIAL FOURPLEX STRUCTURE AND REMOVE ITS DEBRIS, LEAVING THE LOT CLEAN AND RAKED, AND C REQUEST INSPECTIONS FROM AUSTIN CODE TO VERIFY COMPLIANCE TWO ON THE 46TH DAY, IF COMPLIANCE HAS NOT BEEN ACHIEVED, AUTHORIZED THE CODE OFFICIAL TO PROCEED WITH DEMOLITION AND TO CONSIDER ALL PORTIONS OF THE FIRE DAMAGE COMMERCIAL FOURPLEX STRUCTURE, INCLUDING ITEMS IN AND AROUND THE STRUCTURE AS DEBRIS AND DISPOSE OF AS SUCH.
AND B, THE PROPERTY OWNER SHALL BE ON NOTICE THAT THE CODE OFFICIAL IS AUTHORIZED TO ASSESS ALL EXPENSES INCURRED AGAINST THE PROPERTY UNLESS EXEMPTED BY THE TEXAS CONSTITUTION.
A LIEN FOR THOSE EXPENSES MAY BE FILED BY THE CITY OF AUSTIN AND RECORDED WITH THE TRAVIS COUNTY DEED RECORDS.
INTEREST SHALL ACCRUE AT A RATE OF 10% PER YEAR FROM THE DATE OF THE ASSESSMENT UNTIL PAID IN FULL.
AND THEN IT'S ALSO TEN NINE FIFTY, SO I JUST WANTED TO LET YOU KNOW.
UM, BUT LET ME GO AHEAD AND ADMIT THE EXHIBITS AND MAYBE WE CAN SEE IF WE CAN GET IT DONE.
I'LL ADMIT EXHIBIT ONE AS WELL AS EXHIBIT TWO, WHICH CONTAINS PHOTOGRAPHS TWO A THROUGH TWO H.
AND, UM, THANK YOU INSPECTOR HAGGLE.
DO WE HAVE ANYBODY HERE FOR THE OWNERS? I DON'T BELIEVE I HAVE ANY NOTE ON THAT.
I MOVE THAT WE ADOPT THE ORDER AS.
CAN I ASK A QUESTION BEFORE WE DO THAT?
[03:10:01]
UH, SURE.UM, SO MY QUESTION IS, IF, IF WE ADOPT THIS, WE KNOW IT'S ACTUALLY GONNA TAKE A REALLY LONG TIME FOR THE DEMOLITION TO OCCUR, AND I'M JUST WONDERING HOW DO WE, UM, HOW DO WE MAKE SURE IT'S ADEQUATE THAT IT'S FENCED OFF RIGHT AWAY? IS THAT SOMETHING THAT CODE WILL, WILL DO? OR IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD PUT IN THE ORDER SAYING LIKE, WITHIN A WEEK THERE SHOULD BE SECURE FENCING OR WHAT IS, WHAT IS THE BEST WAY TO HANDLE THAT? I THINK THAT WAS COVERED, BUT LET ME LET, UH, INSPECTOR HAGO GO OVER THAT AGAIN.
I FORGOT TO ADDRESS THAT WITH YOU.
UH, WE HAVE, UH, IN FACT HAD DISCUSSIONS THIS WEEK.
WE ARE RECALIBRATING THE FENCING FOR THAT.
UH, THE EXTERIOR REAR FENCE WAS NOT PUT UP BY ALLIED FENCING.
UH, WE ARE GONNA HAVE THE REAR AND THE SIDES FACED, UH, FENCED.
UH, AND THEN WE HAVE COMMUNITY COURT AB EVADING THE PUBLIC SPACES, AND WE'RE GONNA WORK ON AN ABATEMENT FOR THE PRIVATE SPACES.
SO THE FENCING WILL BE, UH, CONTINUOUS AROUND BOTH PROPERTIES.
IN THAT CASE, I SECOND THE MOTION.
SO WE HAVE A MOTION TO ADOPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS, UM, UM, THAT WAS MADE BY COMMISSION ELLI, AND WE HAVE A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MUELLER.
UH, UNLESS WE HAVE ANYTHING ELSE, I WOULD LIKE TO CALL THE VOTE ON THAT.
SO COMMISSION ELLI, HOW DO YOU VOTE? AYE, I VOTE.
COMMISSIONER, UH, FRYBERGER AYE.
AND COMMISSIONER THOMPSON? AYE.
AND I ALSO WOULD BE IN FAVOR AND VICE CHAIR FOR AYE.
SO THE VOTE CARRIES AND, UM, PLEASE SEND THE ORDER OUT AND HOPEFULLY THEY DO RESPOND TO THAT.
THANK YOU EVERYONE FOR GETTING THIS DONE TONIGHT.
UH, WE DO HAVE A COUPLE OF OTHER THINGS, SO I THINK WE DO HAVE TO EXTEND THE TIME.
WE'RE AT 9:53 PM SO WOULD ANYBODY LIKE TO MAKE UP MOTION TO EXTEND THE MEETING? AND WE, I BELIEVE WE CAN EXTEND IT TILL 10 10.
I'D MOVE TO EXTEND THE MEETING TO 10 10 AND HOPEFULLY THAT WILL BE ENOUGH FOR THE PRESENTATION.
UM, WHO SECONDED IT? OH, ALL RIGHT.
SO THANK YOU COMMISSIONER FRYBERGER AND COMMISSIONER FRANCIS.
AND IS EVERYBODY IN FAVOR OR IS THERE ANYBODY THAT OBJECTS TO EXTENDING THE MEETING TILL 10:10 PM NO OBJECT.
WE DON'T HAVE TO VOTE ON THAT ONE, DO WE? WE DO NEED TO VOTE.
COMMISSION VOTE? YES, MS. MAD CHAIR, YOU DON'T NEED A VOICE VOTE.
UH, YOU DON'T NEED TO NAME EACH COMMISSIONER.
UM, YOU CAN JUST DO IT UP, DOWN, VOTE, AND THEN JUST CALL THE REMOTE COMMISSIONERS BY NAME.
ALL IN FAVOR OF EXTENDING THE MEETING FOR 10 MINUTES.
COMMISSIONER SEIG AND COMMISSIONER GREEN? YES.
OH, AND NO, ANYBODY OBJECTS? OKAY.
WE'RE GONNA GO AHEAD AND EXTEND IT FOR, UH, TILL 10, 10:00 PM AND
[7. Staff briefing on the Repeat Offender Program]
THE NEXT THING ON THE AGENDA WILL BE THE STAFF BRIEFING.ITEM ITEM NUMBER SEVEN IS A STAFF BRIEFING AND DIVISION MANAGER, MATTHEW NORIEGA IS HERE TONIGHT WITH A PRESENTATION REGARDING THE REPEAT OFFENDER PROGRAM AND MORE SPECIFICALLY HOW A PROGRAM GETS SUSPENDED, HOW PROPERTY GETS SUSPENDED.
I PROMISE I'LL BE QUICK AS POSSIBLE, BUT THIS IS A PRESENTATION JUST TALKING ABOUT THE SUSPENSION REVOCATION PROCESS.
AND I KNOW THAT GOES BEFORE THE BO UH, THE COMMISSIONERS WHEN THERE'S AN APPEAL.
AND, AND I JUST WANT TO, UH, GO OVER THE HISTORY JUST REAL QUICK AND, AND, AND THE, THE IMPORTANCE OF THIS, UH, SUSPENSION REVOCATION PROCESS.
UH, JUST IN 2013, AUSTIN CITY CODE, UH, WE APPROVE THE, THE, UH, THE ORDINANCE, AND THIS HELPS US TO ASSURE PROPERTIES ARE MAINTAINED IN ACCORDANCE WITH PUBLIC HEALTH SAFETY AND PROPERTY MAINTENANCE
[03:15:01]
STANDARDS OUTLINED IN THE CITY CODE.UH, THE ORDINANCE PROVIDES ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES TO ENSURE THE PROPERTY IS COMPLIANCE WITH THE REQUIRED MAINTENANCE.
SO WHAT WE USE IS WE USE CITATIONS, ADMINISTRATIVE CITATIONS, MUNICIPAL COURT BUILDING, A STANDARDS COMMISSION, AND THIS ENFORCEMENT, UH, TOOL, WHICH IS A SUSPENSION REVOCATION.
IN 2013, WHEN WE STARTED THE PRO, THE, THE PROGRAM OR THE, THE ORDINANCE, THE, UH, WE WEREN'T USING THE SUSPENSION REVOCATION RIGHT AWAY.
WE STARTED REGISTERING PROPERTIES, STARTED TAKING THEM TO COURT, TAKING, UH, GOING TO BUILDING A STANDARDS COMMISSION.
BUT IN 20 20TH OF JUNE OF 2020, WE STARTED USING THE SUSPENSION REVOCATION.
AND IT HAS BEEN VERY SUCCESSFUL FOR US.
IT'S, WE USE IT, IT'S A TOOL THAT HAS BEEN, UH, USED AND IT, WHAT IT DOES, IT PROHIBITS A REGISTRANT FROM RENTING VACANT PROPERTIES TO NEW TENANTS.
UM, IT, UH, HELPS US TO BE ABLE TO GAIN COMPLIANCE.
AND, AND, AND A PERFECT EXAMPLE IS TODAY 79 29 GAUNT.
THAT WAS OUR FIRST PROPERTY WE EVER, UH, SUSPENDED.
AND WHEN WE SUSPENDED THAT PROPERTY, WE, WE WENT THROUGH ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING, WE WENT TO BUILDING A STANDARDS COMMISSION, WENT THROUGH MR. COURT, AND NOW SUSPENSION.
AND NOW LOOK WHERE THE PROPERTY'S AT.
LOOK WHERE THIS, THE, THE, THE, THE WAY IT, THE WAY IT HAS RESULTED.
UM, GOING TO THE NEXT, UH, SLIDE, I, I'M NOT GONNA GO THROUGH THIS.
IT JUST TALKS ABOUT THE FIVE DIFFERENT, UH, REASONS WHY WE CAN SUSPEND A PROPERTY.
UH, THERE THERE ARE DIFFERENT REASONS.
UH, AS MANY, MANY OF THE REASONS WE USE IS FOR THE BUILDING OF STANDARDS COMMISSION, BECAUSE THOSE ARE OUR ORDERS THAT ARE GONE TO THE BUILDING OF STANDARDS COMMISSION.
UM, THIS, THIS, UH, SUSPENSION REVOCATION, WE JUST DON'T SPRING IT ON THEM.
ALL OF A SUDDEN, UH, WE, WE USE THE, UH, THE BUILDING OF STANDARDS COMMISSION, THE ADMINISTRATIVE CITATIONS AND, AND THE NOTICES OF VIOLATION.
SO AT TIMES, THESE NOTICE OF VIOLATIONS HAVE BEEN SENT OUT MAYBE ABOUT A YEAR OR OR TWO YEARS BEFORE WE START GOING INTO THIS PROCESS.
UH, WE USE EVERY TYPE OF ENFORCEMENT TOOL.
THEN WE COME INTO SUSPENSION, AND BEFORE WE EVEN SUSPEND, WE SEND OUT AN INTENT TO SUSPEND LETTER, AND WE LET THEM KNOW THAT THEY, THEIR PROPERTY WILL BE SUSPENDED IN 30 DAYS, AND THEY HAVE TO COMPLY WITH THE VIOLATIONS THAT ARE CITED ON THAT LETTER.
SO THEY, THEY KNOW EXACTLY WHAT NEEDS TO BE CORRECTED.
SO KNOWING THAT THEY, UH, HAVE TO CORRECT THAT, IF THEY DO NOT, THEN WE SEND OUT THAT SUSPENSION LETTER AND THEN IT GIVES 'EM ANOTHER 10 DAYS TO APPEAL.
AND AS YOU'VE, YOU'VE HEARD, UH, ONE CASE BEFORE THE BUILDING STANDARDS COMMISSION, WE SEE WHAT, WHAT COULD RESULT THE RESULT? UM, THERE ARE 90 PROPERTIES RIGHT NOW ON THE, ON THE PROGRAM.
WE CURRENTLY HAVE SIX PROPERTIES.
AND, AND JUST TO, UH, EMPHASIZE ONE OTHER POINT TOO IS THAT THE, THE PROGRAM IS VERY EFFECTIVE ON LARGE COMPLEXES, MULTI-FAMILY PROPERTIES.
IT'S NOT AS EFFECTIVE AND DUPLEXES AND, AND FOURPLEXES.
SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT, UH, WE DO SEE THAT'S EFFECTIVE FOR THE LARGER COMPLEXES WHEN YOU'RE GOING INTO 200, 400 UNITS, THAT THAT DOES AFFECT THE OWNERS BECAUSE THAT DOES AFFECT THEIR REVENUE.
UM, THE NEXT SLIDE JUST SHOWS YOU HOW THE, UH, THE ROW, HOW IT GOES TO THE, UH, GOES BETWEEN THE, BEFORE THE BOARD, I MEAN THE BUILDING STANDARDS COMMISSION.
AND YOU HAVE THAT, YOU HAVE THAT, UH, TO GRANT TO OR DENY THE APPEAL.
JUST REAL QUICK, THE NEXT SLIDE, IT JUST SHOWS HOW THE, UH, HOW WE PROHIBIT THE REGISTRANT FROM RENTING VACANT UNITS AND NEW TENANTS.
AND THE WAY WE VERIFY THAT THE UNITS ARE VACANT, WE GO THROUGH AUSTIN ENERGY UTILITIES, AND WHAT THEY DO IS THEY SEND US A REPORT ON ALL UNITS THAT ARE REFLECTING OR THAT ARE UNDER THE MANAGEMENT COMPANY OR THE OWNER'S NAME.
SO IT INDICATES IF THE UNIT IS VACANT.
SO KNOWING THAT WE, WE KNOW EXACTLY HOW MANY UNITS ARE VACANT.
NOW WHAT WE DO IS 30 DAYS, APPROXIMATELY 30 DAYS LATER, WE'LL GO AND TAKE A LOOK.
AND IF THOSE UNITS HAVE NOW GONE INTO A, A, UH, TENANT NAME, WE KNOW THAT THEY'RE STARTING TO RENT THESE UNITS.
WE HAVE FILED ONE MUNICIPAL COURT CHARGE RECENTLY BECAUSE TENANTS HAVE BEEN RENTING OUT THE UNIT OR THE, THE OWNERS HAVE RENTED OUT UNITS.
SO WE, WE ARE TRYING TO SEE HOW THAT PROCESS WORKS IN MUNICIPAL COURT.
SO JUST, UH, JUST A BRIEF WITH AS QUICK AS POSSIBLE.
BUT, UH, WELCOME TO ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.
UM, THAT WE DO HAVE THE PRESENTATION IN OUR FOLDERS AS WELL, IN OUR READERS AS WELL.
[8. Discussion and possible action to form a working group on Repeat Offender Program Offender Program rental registration suspension appeals.]
HAVE QUESTIONS? UM, ONLINE.UH, JUST REAL, REAL QUICK, I WANT TO POINT OUT THAT OVER THE LAST SIX YEARS, THE EFFECTIVENESS OF CODE LEVERAGING, UH, THIS, UH, PARTICULAR ORDINANCE HAS BEEN OUTSTANDING.
UH, UH, THEY HAD A SIGNIFICANT LEADERSHIP CHANGE ABOUT SIX YEARS AGO THAT PROVED, UH, THEM TO BE MORE EFFECTIVE AND, UH, UH, USE THEIR INITIATIVES AND, UH, REALLY BRING THE OPPORTUNITIES, UH, TO, UH, HELP CLEAN UP SOME OF THE PROBLEMS WE HAD, UH, UH, TO BEAR.
AND I JUST WANTED TO SAY THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
[03:20:02]
THANK YOU.UM, YEAH, I THINK THAT WAS A GREAT SUMMARY OF
AND I'M SURE IT'S NOT AS SIMPLE AS YOU MAKE IT SOUND, BUT I DO LIKE THAT THE SUSPENSION SEEMS TO BE GETTING MORE, UH, COMPLIANCE OUT OF THIS, UM, LANDLORDS OR OWNERS, AS YOU SAID.
SO IT WAS HELPFUL TO KNOW THAT, AND OUR ROLE, UM, SEEMS VERY CLEAR TO ME.
THE ONE QUICK QUESTION I HAD WAS, WHENEVER YOU SEND THAT NOTICE OF INTENT TO SUSPEND, UM, YOU'VE DONE ONLY A HANDFUL OF THEM, BUT HAVE PEOPLE ACTUALLY COME FORWARD TO TRY TO, UM, APPEAL, UH, CAN THEY DO ANYTHING AT THAT POINT OR DO THEY ACTUALLY JUST GO INTO COMPLIANCE IF YOU, WE, WE SEE MORE, UH, COMPLIANCE WHEN THEY RECEIVED THAT LETTER.
THEY, THEY TAKE ACTION AND, AND WE'VE SEEN THE ACTION.
WE HAD ONE CLOSE TO APPEAL, BUT THEY CORRECTED THE VIOLATIONS BEFORE THE, THE, UH, THE BEFORE THE HEARING OCCURRED.
SO IT, IT'S A VERY EFFECTIVE TOOL.
UM, AND THE, THE ONE CASE THAT'S IN FRONT OF THE MUNICIPAL COURT, THAT'S THE VERY FIRST TIME YOU'RE TRYING THIS? THAT IS CORRECT.
WE'RE TRYING TO SEE IF, UH, HOW MUNICIPAL COURT, UH, WHAT, UH, WHAT THE CHARGES AND SEE IF THE, WHAT JUDGMENT WE GET FROM THAT, UH, THAT COURT, THAT, UH, AFFIDAVIT.
COMMISSIONER MUELLER? YES, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THAT.
VERY CONCISE BUT VERY HELPFUL BRIEFING.
UM, I ASKED FOR THAT BECAUSE I WANTED TO PROPOSE THAT WE SET SOME STANDARDS FOR WHEN PEOPLE BRING, FOR WHEN PEOPLE BRING APPEALS.
AND THAT'S LIKE, ORIGINALLY I HAD SUGGESTED DOING A WORKING GROUP, WHICH I WAS KIND OF DISCOURAGED FROM DOING BECAUSE APPARENTLY THOSE CAN KIND OF STRING ON AND ON.
SO I WANTED TO JUST PROPOSE FOR US MAYBE TO TAKE ACTION ON AT OUR NEXT MEETING IF, IF THE COUNCIL CAN TELL ME IF THIS IS NOT SOMETHING WE CAN DO, BUT I WANTED TO PROPOSE THAT WE ADOPT THE SAME, UH, REQUIREMENTS THAT WE USE WHEN SOMEONE COMES AND ASKS US FOR MORE THAN 90 DAYS TO DO THE WORK.
THE SAME KIND OF EVIDENCE BE BROUGHT TO US THAT THEY HAVE PERMITS, THAT THEY HAVE FINANCING, THAT THEY HAVE A PLAN FOR DOING THE WORK, THAT THEY, THEY HAVE TO BRING THAT INFORMATION TO US IF THEY WANNA ASK FOR AN APPEAL.
SO, UM, I, YOU KNOW, SO LAUREN CAN TELL US IF THAT'S SOMETHING WE'RE ALLOWED TO DO OR NOT, BUT UM, OBVIOUSLY WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO MAKE IT.
AND THAT RUNS INTO DISCUSSION ITEM NUMBER IN THERE.
UM, THAT WOULD ACTUALLY BE A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM RATHER THAN A WORKING GROUP, BUT THAT IS SOMETHING YOU COULD PUT ON A, ON A FUTURE AGENDA.
THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT I WAS PROPOSING.
BUT IS THAT SOMETHING LIKE, IS THAT A RULE CHANGE THAT WE HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO MAKE? YES.
THAT I'D LIKE TO PROPOSE IT FOR THE AGENDA NEXT TIME THEN.
UM, IS ANYBODY OPPOSED TO ADDING TO THE AGENDA? YOU KNOW, EITHER THE NEXT, I WOULD JUST ASK STAFF TO GIVE US BANDWIDTH.
WELL, WE'RE HAVING TO EXTEND THE MEETING AT 10 O'CLOCK TO GO INTO A WORKING GROUP, RIGHT.
SO IF WE'RE GONNA SPEND TIME AS A GROUP ON A PROJECT THAT WE MIGHT, AND I KNOW SOME OF THAT HAS TO DO WITH YOU PROCESSING CASES AND, BUT DOES THAT MAKE SENSE THAT WE'RE NOT PUSHING UP AGAINST 9 45 TO TRY AND TURN INTO A NEW ITEM AS A GROUP AND HAVE FRESH DISCUSSION? IT'S, I DON'T KNOW ABOUT YOU, BUT IT GETS TOUGH TO DO THAT AFTER A LONG DAY.
SO MAYBE THAT, I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU MANAGE THAT INTERNALLY, BECAUSE PEOPLE HAVE THE RIGHT TO COME BEFORE IT, RIGHT.
I'M JUST SAYING OTHERWISE WE'LL NEVER GET IT DONE.
WE'LL, WE'LL ALWAYS RUN OUT OF TIME OR SO ANYWAY, IF YOU WOULD JUST TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION WHEN YOU'RE DOING THE AGENDAS THAT OH, OKAY.
SO WE ARE DISCUSSING SOMETHING ELSE, BUT ALL RIGHT.
NO, NO, WE'RE DISCUSSING THE SAME THING.
I'M JUST SAYING WE'RE, HE'S JUST CONCERNED THAT IT'LL BE 10 O'CLOCK AND THEN WE GET TO THIS ITEM.
[FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS]
CHAIR POINT.CAN WE OFFICIALLY MOVE INTO FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS? UM, YES.
FOR THIS DISCUSSION, I WANT TO SAY YES.
UM, MR. NOGA, SO, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE, YOU'RE FREE TO GO, I GUESS IF, AS FAR AS THE BRIEFING GOES, SO WE'LL GO INTO FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS, BUT WE ONLY HAVE FOUR MINUTES AND 30 SECONDS.
AND I ACKNOWLEDGE WHAT, UH, COMMISSIONER FRANCIS IS SAYING, UH, REGARDING SETTING AGENDAS IN GENERAL, CORRECT? YES.
SO FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS. UM, WE ARE DISCUSSING HAVING ON THE FUTURE AGENDA, WHETHER IT'S THE NEXT MEETING OR THE ONE AFTER THAT, UM,
[03:25:01]
COMMISSIONER MUELLER'S PROPOSAL TO DISCUSS MAKING A SLIGHT CHANGE TO THE NOTICES THAT GO OUT TO THE REPEAT OFFENDER PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS.SO DO, DO WE HAVE ANYBODY THAT'S, UM, AGAINST PUTTING THAT ON THE AGENDA OR WILL THAT BE A PROBLEM? UM, IT SOUNDS LIKE IT, IT'S NOT GOING TO BE A PROBLEM AS LONG AS WE ARE NOT PUSHING UP AGAINST 10:00 PM IS THAT RIGHT? CORRECT.
SO, UH, COMMISSIONER MUELLER WOULD, WOULD YOU BE OKAY WITH IT BEING ON ANOTHER, UH, MEETINGS AGENDA IF NEXT MONTH'S AGENDA IS ALREADY FULL? I'M JUST NOT SURE WHEN MY TERM ENDS, SO I'D PREFER IT TO BE NEXT MONTH, BUT IT DOESN'T, YOU KNOW, I DON'T HAVE TO BE HERE, I GUESS.
ALL RIGHT, MS. ALI? UM, WE COULD MOVE IT UP ON THE AGENDA POSSIBLY.
THAT WOULD BE UP TO MY CHAIN OF COMMAND, WHETHER HE'S A GROUP TO THAT OR NOT.
UM, WE COULD ALSO DO A SPECIAL CALL MEETING, UM, SPECIFICALLY FOR THIS, YOU KNOW, WE WERE ALLOWED ONE, ONE PER QUARTER.
UM, BUT YEAH, THE AGENDA'S A TRICKY THING.
I MEAN, WE, WE TRY TO BALANCE IT AS BEST WE CAN.
I MEAN, WE SOMETIMES, UH, THE, THE PENALTY FORGIVENESS THING TAKES 20 MINUTES AND SOMETIMES, LIKE TONIGHT IT TAKES AN HOUR AND A HALF.
SO, BUT WE TRIED TO GET AS MANY CASES ALSO HEARD AS POSSIBLE.
SO WE, IT'S, I MEAN, THAT'S UP, THAT'S WHAT WE TRY TO DO, BUT THAT'S WHERE WE'RE AT.
BUT I GET, I MEAN, WE, WE'LL TRY TO ALLOW IF, IF WE DON'T DO A SPECIAL CALL MEETING OR AM I TALKING ABOUT STUFF I'M NOT SUPPOSED TO.
UH, ANYWAY, IF WE DO DO A SPECIAL CALL MEETING, I MEAN, IF WE DON'T DO, WE WILL MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S TIME.
UM, SO YES, UM, WE'LL TRY TO COMMISSIONER MUELLER ACCOMMODATE, YOU KNOW, YOUR CONCERNS ABOUT TIMING AND MAKE SURE IT'S SOONER THAN LATER IS WHAT IT SOUNDS LIKE.
AND I THINK THAT, UM, IF YOU WANTED TO PUT TOGETHER SOME LANGUAGE AHEAD OF TIME OR, UM, YOU KNOW, THAT MIGHT EXPEDITE THINGS AT THE NEXT MEETING.
SO IF THERE'S NOTHING ELSE ON FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS, NOTHING ELSE.
THANK YOU FOR A GREAT MEETING.
I WISH I COULD GO LOOKING BACK.
I KNOW ALL AND ALL TO THAT LITTLE, MY BIG SISTER.
OH, IT WAS A LITTLE, THAT'S WHERE I SOUL MUSIC, THAT'S WHERE I, RHYTHM AND BLUES, THAT'S WHERE I.