Fresno Building Standards Appeals Board Meeting - April 9, 2026 (Note: Minutes Show April 7, 2026) - Summary
Fresno Building Standards Appeals Board Meeting - April 9, 2026 (Note: Minutes Show April 7, 2026) - Summary
The Building Standards Appeals Board of the City of Fresno convened at 1:00 PM on April 9, 2026, according to the prompt, though the minutes indicate the meeting occurred on Tuesday, April 7, 2026 at 1:00 PM. The board considered three new matters: a late appeal filing, an appeal of a first administrative citation, and a workshop on burden of proof. All five board members were present: Chair Imelda Golik, Vice Chair Scott Vincent, Board Member Daniel Field, Board Member Scott Mears, and Board Member Rick Ransom. The agenda was approved unanimously at 1:01 PM.
Consent Calendar
- Approval of February 3, 2026 Meeting Minutes (ID 26-416) – Approved unanimously.
- Approval of February 17, 2026 Meeting Minutes (ID 26-263) – Approved unanimously.
Public Comments & Testimony
- No members of the public spoke during the public comment period.
Discussion Items
- VIII-A: Late Appeal Filing for 1347 E Shields Avenue – Appellant Marichele Porter, a registered nurse residing in Fresno and working in San Francisco, testified that her appeal was filed late due to circumstances beyond her control. She explained that the original notice was mailed to an incorrect address, requiring rerouting, and that she was out of town for work in early January 2026, returning on January 28, 2026. She submitted the appeal immediately upon her return but it fell outside the 15-day filing window. The Board discussed the justification and agreed that good cause existed to accept the late appeal. The motion to approve passed 5-0. Porter was advised to continue working with city staff to clarify the issues in her appeal.
- VIII-B: Appeal of First Administrative Citation for 4816 E Fillmore Ave (E23-01585) – The citation, issued December 17, 2025, alleged five violations: HVAC replacements without permits on three separate buildings, and two abandoned permits for carport and HVAC work. Senior Deputy City Attorney Sarah Papazian presented the city’s case, stating that despite extensions granted through early December 2025, reinspections showed no corrective action other than one incomplete permit application. She recommended confirming the citation in full under the preponderance-of-evidence standard. Attorney Michael Titus, representing the property owners, argued for dismissal or continuance, citing delays beyond the owners’ control: required HERS inspections by third parties, disputes over whether plans were needed for electrical removal, and the owners’ belief that ongoing progress would prevent a citation. He also raised concerns about inspections conducted without required consent under Fresno Municipal Code Section 1-303. The Board questioned staff about consent, permit history, and HERS inspection timelines. Board members expressed skepticism about the owners’ diligence, noting that only one HVAC permit had been pulled in 2023, and that recent permit applications appeared last-minute. They found consent issues irrelevant because the HVAC units were visible from the public right-of-way. The Board voted 5-0 to confirm the citation in full, triggering a progress hearing set for 30–60 days to allow the owners to complete repairs.
- VIII-C: Workshop on Burden of Proof and Preponderance of Evidence – Assistant City Attorney Daniel Casas presented a workshop to clarify the preponderance-of-evidence standard, the lowest legal burden of proof, requiring a fact to be more likely true than not (i.e., >50% probability). He contrasted it with clear and convincing evidence and beyond a reasonable doubt, and explained that the city bears the initial burden in administrative appeals. He used scale illustrations to show that even a slight tipping of the scale in favor of the city satisfies the standard. Casas also addressed consent and Fourth Amendment protections: consent is needed to enter private areas like units or locked spaces, but not when conditions are visible from a public right-of-way. He confirmed that the board must apply the municipal code as written and cannot waive requirements. Board members asked clarifying questions about burden shifting for affirmative defenses and the application of consent in the earlier case.
Key Outcomes
- VIII-A: Approved acceptance of the late appeal for 1347 E Shields Avenue (5-0).
- VIII-B: Confirmed the first administrative citation for 4816 E Fillmore Ave in its entirety (5-0), ordering the appellant to repair all violations within 30 days and scheduling a progress hearing.
- VIII-C: Workshop provided; no formal action taken.
- The April 21, 2026 regular meeting was canceled due to no pending items.
Meeting Transcript
Yes, just a reminder to everyone to please speak as close to the mic as you can, otherwise they can't hear you in the audience. Thank you. I now call this meeting a building standards appeal board to order. City staff, please call the role. Board member ransom. Here. Board member Mears. Here. Board member Field. Here. Vice Chair Vincent. Here. Chair Golek. Here. Okay, the procedure. For each matter considered by the board, there will be a staff presentation followed by a presentation from the project applicant. Then discussion by the board. Both staff and the applicants will have the right for a rebuttal presentation prior to closing the public hearing. Public comments on all matters on the agenda shall be taken during agenda item six. All public testimony will be limited to three minutes per person. All public testimony must be presented to the board at the podium. The three lights on the podium next to the microphone will indicate the amount of time remaining for the speaker. In making this determinations. please I think Madam Chair I'd move to approve the agenda procedurally first let's confirm there are no changes to the agenda this is Ashley Atkinson Assistant Director for Planning and Development sitting in for Eric Frampton as building official since he is out today uh there are no uh changes proposed to the agenda by staff okay and board members are there any changes on your part of the agenda is there a motion to approve as amended I have a motion to approve second all in favor aye aye aye okay so let's see here so let's move on um the the agenda is approved we will now move on to the consent calendar on the consent calendars we have for a uh approval of the February third building standards um meeting minutes and approval of February 17 building standard regular meeting is there a motion to approve the consent calendar move to approve the both minutes as uh presented second second all in favor aye aye opposed the consent calendar is approved then we will move on to the reports by the board members um board members do you wish to make any reports no nothing none okay we will move on to public comment are there uh we are now going to take public comments on all matters with any member of the public would you like to speak on items on continued or new matters if so each speaker has three minutes please identify the item that you will comment and begin your comments no okay none so we'll move on to continued matters there are no items in continued matters so we will now move on to new matters okay let's go on to new matters so uh i will let um the hearing will be held as follows so we have staff presenting um this is uh the hearings to determine whether good cause exists to accept the late appeal filing for one three four seven East Shields Avenue anybody wants to do a presentation good afternoon um so my name is Marie Chalet Porter um and I live here in Fresno um and I work in San Francisco uh as a registered nurse um I am appealing um for a good cause um on the fact that um initially the letter uh was sent to an incorrect address and had to be rerouted to me um which took an additional amount of time to get to my home um aside from that when I did receive the letter it was after um I was in San Francisco um working and also I traveled for business in January in the beginning of January so I was not in town until uh January 2 8th of this year 2026 um which is when I received um and submitted the appeal but unfortunately it was after the 15 days um that was allotted for me to be able to submit the appeal um for that reason I am asking for um good cause to be able to submit my appeal and get my case heard okay so you're asking for an extended time yes okay uh board members do you have any questions not of the appellant at this appellant at this time I do have some questions about this for staff thank you okay so no questions yeah okay thank you okay so can can we get a clarification from staff um the way that the actions are listed on the agenda for us to do um I was taking this as just making a judgment on the appeal or the the late filing of the appeal notice or request and not into the violations that are included because for example item two three um says dismiss the first administrative citation so that that kind of confused me and I'd like clarification Um I was taking this as just making a judgment on the appeal or the late filing of the appeal notice or request and not into the violations that are included, because for example, item two three um says dismiss the first administrative citation. So that kind of confused me, and I'd like clarification on that. I think I can speak briefly on that. Christina Roberson, assistant city attorney. Good afternoon. Um I think that that is for the second hearing. There is a hearing today regarding the property on Fillmore, which is an actual hearing for um uh the appeal. Um, this this first hearing is just to determine whether good cause exists to accept the late appeal. Okay, you're you're correct. I mistook that. No problem, no problem. Um, thank you. Thank you. Okay, shall I uh I will close it now and then we'll have the board members um we'll have a discussion. This is closed right now for discussion amongst uh the board members. I think the extensions should be granted, just because she's given proof of that she wasn't here when the citation came and it was sent to the wrong address. So I don't have a problem giving the extension. I agree, you know, the compounding things. The the anybody has any other ideas. No, she has some excellent points. Traveling nurse number one and uh being delivered to the wrong address initially. I I agree. I tend to agree. So let's uh begin a motion to deny or accept the late appeal. So who would like to make a motion to accept the appeal? Uh motion to accept second.
openpublica.com