the meeting of January 14 2026 of the Housing Code Advisory and Appeals Board

will now come to order the board consists of five members who are not employees of

the city the board is an impartial decision maker the board is appointed by

the mayor with approval of the City Council your board members are myself

Brandon Fisher the chair also we have tonight mr. and tab lien and miss Taylor

we also like to introduce Leah Billings secretary to the board Peter Lemos code

and housing enforcement chief and David Kim counsel to the board I will not ask

the secretary to call the roll sir yes and tab lien here Taylor here please

Please rise for the opening acknowledgments in honor of Sacramento's indigenous people

and tribal lands.

To the original people of this land, the Nisenan people, the Southern Maydo, Valley and Plains

Mywak, Patwin-Wintan peoples, and the people of the Wilton Rancheria, Sacramento's only

federally recognized tribe.

May we acknowledge and honor the native people who came before us and still walk beside us

today on these ancestral lands by choosing to gather together today in the act of practice

of acknowledgement and appreciation for Sacramento's indigenous people's history, contributions,

and lives.

Thank you.

Let's now have the Pledge of Allegiance.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for

which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and death, as well.

Thank you.

You may be seated.

I would now like to explain the reason for this hearing.

For items two through four, we are here to consider the expenses incurred by the city

in the notice and order and the repair, demolition, or securing of any building or structure done

in the housing and dangerous buildings cases before us,

together with any protests or objections.

The question here is, are the fees, costs,

or other amounts claimed by the city reasonable and justified?

This board may revise, correct, or modify the proposed charges

as we seem just.

Once this board is satisfied with the correctness of the charges,

we shall then make a decision confirming or rejecting the charges.

any written protest and related information received have been forwarded to us for consideration in our decision.

You will hear our decision today and receive formal notification of our decision in the mail.

Our decision will be forwarded to the City Council for determination whether this hearing was conducted in accordance with the City Code.

We're now moving to our agenda.

Item number one, approval of minutes for December 10th, 2025.

I pass motion.

I second.

Fisher?

Yes.

And Tablian?

Yes.

Taylor?

Yes.

Before we call item number two, I would like to explain the operation of the meeting tonight.

Each item will be called in order of those requesting to speak.

Unless staff or board members request otherwise, the owner, representatives should state their name and address and explain the nature of your appeal.

Please keep your appeals concise.

The staff will identify themselves and provide a summary of the case, including the recommendation, and then the owner can respond.

We will now call item number two.

3108 2nd Avenue, owner Parktown Holdings LP.

The secretary will swear you in.

I can have all parties for item number two for the property at 3108 2nd Avenue.

Please raise your right hand and answer the following question.

Do you solemnly swear under penalty of perjury that the testimony and evidence that you give at this hearing

should be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

Yes.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Please begin, Mr. Lovato.

This is agenda item number two.

The case number is 25-023473, property owner's Parktown Holdings LP.

The property address is 3108 2nd Avenue, Sacramento, California, 95817,

with a parcel number of 0100365-00300.

0.0. Today is January 14, 2026. My name is Paul Lovato. I'm building inspector with Housing

and Dangerous Buildings. This case opened on June 19, 2025, and the current case status is open.

On June 24, 2025, I arrived at 10 a.m. The property is a three-plex with one unit upstairs

and two units downstairs. The complaining party then let me know that there was a problem with

the deck of the second floor and the stairs and when the complaining party called the owner he

stated he would have a contractor come out to make repairs as for the repairs made he replaced some

of the deck with plywood and opened up at the bottom of the deck to replace some of the framing

as for the stairs he tore down the old stairs and replaced them with new when the complaining

party stated he was asking the contractor if they pulled any permits and had any inspections the

contractor then stated that he applied for the permits and was waiting on the

city to respond back. When the stairs were complete, the complaining party then

looked up to see if there was any permits and it showed they did submit,

which was SUB-2510592, but then never followed through with obtaining the

permit. Pictures were taken for the case documents. On July 24th, 2025 at 1031 a.m.

I arrived at the single-family residence to take photos and update the case files.

Due to lack of contact from the owner and failure to obtain the Housing and Dangerous Buildings permit,

I issued a notice and order.

I also ordered a cloud be placed on the title and a title report be done.

This is what's being appealed here today.

On August 4, 2025, I received a call from the property manager, Kyle,

who stated he received the notice and order and wanted to know how to submit drawings for the permit.

I emailed him a cheat sheet that showed how to start the process.

On September 11, 2025, the property shows it has submitted for the building permits.

And on October 15, 2025, permit COM-2518066 was issued

with a scope of work of new stairs at the front of the dwelling and repairs to the decking.

On December 9, 2025, I arrived on site for a building foundation forms inspections on permit CLM 251-8066, and I approved it.

The itemized in total cost of work is the notice and order is $1,500.

The termination fee is $190.

The title cost is $47.50, which brings a total of $1,737.50.

The notice of the Les Pendants cloud was properly recorded at the Sacramento County Assessor's Office on August 8, 2025.

The property owner was contacted prior to issuing a notice and order.

The preliminary letter was sent on June 24, 2025.

The notice and order was sent to the property owners address listed on the current title report of Park Town Holdings LP 1111 H Street, 3rd floor, Sacramento, California 95814.

It was effectively served on July 25th, 2025 by substitute service.

The notice and order was not appealed, and the appealing has received the information being presented this evening.

Staff recommends that the board adopts a decision confirming the total charges of $1,737.50 for the notice and order on the property known as 3108 2nd Avenue, Sacramento, California, 95817, parcel number 0100365003000.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Lovato.

Mr. Navarro, please begin.

Yes.

So what I'm appealing, the main reason for my appeal today is that from the point that I was made aware on August 4th from Mr. Lovato going forward,

I was actively trying to search for architects and engineers to take somewhat of a smaller job, and that was somewhat of a difficult process.

and then also the Park Town Holdings, the 1111 H Street, third floor, that's an old business address for this entity.

In the meantime, in December, this entity moved to 1615 S Street, and so that was not received,

and I was not made aware of it until August 4th, and like I said, I was actively searching for architects, engineers,

so that I could obtain a permit and move forward with getting this rectified with a proper contractor as well.

Once the plans were submitted, there were some comments going back and forth.

I was hand-in-hand in that process.

Once they were approved, I was actively engaging with contractors to try and get this done as soon as possible.

and that's really the main reason for my appeal today

in hopes that you guys would reconsider the $1,700

and change fines that were levied to the property owner

because at this point, I think he's paid $20,000 or so

for the new stairs and balcony to be brought up to code

and so he's made a significant investment in the property

in keeping his tenants and the public safe

and so that's my argument.

Thank you. Any questions or comments from the board?

Sure.

So in looking, it appears that on June 24th,

it appears that the work to the stairs were done prior to pulling the permit, though.

There was some work contracted by the owner.

He was under the impression that if it was like for like dry rod,

that he could just go ahead and have that done.

So I'm not contesting the fact that there was work done prior to pulling the person.

And then I'm looking at the pictures from the file.

You also mentioned so that it was sent to the wrong address,

but that means the owner didn't update the address.

Yes.

And then what about the copy?

And if I'm looking at the picture correct, Inspector Lovato, it's loading.

Give me one second.

Is that the picture of you posting it at the property?

Yeah, so at the 2nd Avenue property is where I posted it, just so any way we could try to get a hold of somebody.

So the 1111 address there on H Street, that's what's recorded with the county.

Yeah, no, I see that.

But the posting that you did, did you post it and did you mail it to the 3108 also?

Not 3108.

We mailed it to the 1111 H Street.

Oh, okay.

The address that's on file.

Yes.

Okay.

And I think when I posted it at the property, because it was after that when you got a hold of me,

so he probably, since it was mailed, you say they're no longer at that address.

The posting is probably how he got my number, and we talked after that.

How did you?

Yeah, the tenant went ahead and contacted me, and that's when I got in touch with Mr. Lovato.

Okay.

I mean, I definitely understand, and it was done quickly, but I will say just understanding that the costs,

as the chair had mentioned, our job is to make sure that the city didn't fine you unjustly,

and it appears, at least in the documentation, that they did reach out.

they did try to contact you

they made their best effort

to contact at the address that you had

it hadn't been updated

so I don't have any other questions

so

Peter Lee Moskowitz and Housing Enforcement Chief

just to be clear there was no penalties issued

this was a notice and order and it's just the

cost of the notice and order

which is a fee approved by the city council

so the case

didn't go to penalty

okay

Sir, do you understand what he was saying there?

So normally they charge $380 a month?

That's the monitoring fee.

Monitoring fee.

Right, but if a notice and order is issued, this is the fee for that notice and order to be issued.

That's just the fee for that notice.

A penalty would be anywhere between $1,000 and $25,000 on a housing case.

That would be an actual penalty plus the inspection fee, as you mentioned.

but those fees that was addressed in this is just simply the fee of the preparation and service of the notice and order.

That's not discretionary by the inspector or department or anything else.

It's a fee that's set for that notice by city council.

Okay. Thank you. I have no further questions.

Is there a motion from the board?

All right.

While I completely understand, it appears that the city, before I make my motion, I'll

just say, did at least not issue all of the fees that they could have.

It looks like they did about half.

So with that, I'll make a motion confirming the total charge of $1,734.50 for the notice

an order on the property known as 3108 2nd Avenue, Sacramento, California, 95817, APN

number 0100365003000.

Second.

Fisher?

Yes.

And Tablin?

Yes.

Taylor?

Yes.

Thank you.

Mr. Navarro, we did find in favor of the city that the fees were reasonable and justified.

you'll receive notice of this information, of this decision in the mail, and please make sure that the address is updated for the properties.

All right, thank you.

So I would also recommend, because they can find you, and I'm just giving this to you so you don't come back for another case,

but the rental housing inspection program also uses the same, I think, addresses.

So I would make sure that they update the address for the rental housing inspection program, too.

Okay.

All right.

Thanks.

Uh-huh.

Items 3 and 4 will be considered separately.

All right.

3112 Marysville Boulevard.

The secretary will swear you in.

Second.

I have all parties for the property located at 312 Marysville Boulevard.

Please raise your right hand and answer the following question.

Do you solemnly swear under penalty of perjury that the testimony and evidence that you give

at this hearing shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

Yes.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Mr. Lovato, you may begin.

Yes, this is agenda items number three and four for case number 25-033833.

Property owner Hart Family Trust, property address 3112 Marysville Boulevard, Sacramento, California 95815.

Parcel number is 265-005-203-4000.

Today is January 24th, or January 14th, 2026.

My name is Paul Lovato, building inspector with Housing and Dangerous Buildings.

This case opened on August 31st, 2025, and the current case status is closed.

On August 31st, 2025, I received a call from a 311 operator at 9.55 a.m.

stating a securement is required at 3112 Marysville Boulevard of a standard size entry door

in the Sacramento Police Department or on site.

I then contacted the officer on site who stated the property is now vacant and people in the dwelling have been removed.

I then called Gray Construction and had them dispatched to the site where securement was performed.

Securement entailed a new deadbolt installed at the entry door.

on september 2nd 2025 i arrived on site at 12 30 p.m and from the front of the property it looks

to be vacant and it was secured i took pictures of the front of the dwelling for the case documents

the itemized and total cost of the work the securement fee was 626 dollars and 33 cents

and a termination fee of $190.

Total cost comes to $816.33.

The notice of the less pendants cloud was properly recorded

at the Sacramento County Assessor's Office on October 10, 2025.

The appellant has received the information being presented this evening.

Staff recommendation that the board adopts a decision

confirming the total charge of $816.33

for the work performed by the city on the property known as 3-1-1-2 Marysville Boulevard, Sacramento, California, 95815,

parcel number 265-005-2034-0000.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Lovato.

Actually, just real quick, before we move on, can I just clarify?

We're hearing these as two separate cases, so we're hearing the 626.

They're the same.

yeah it's the same yeah i just we have to vote separately and so i'm trying to figure out what

we're voting on that's the only reason um so the vote you're voting ones on the securement for the

and then the termination separately okay that's all i was curious about first one was paid because

it was done through escrow i didn't have a choice um and uh the second one that bill came afterwards

otherwise it would have been the same way to escrow company escrow company called to see i

I don't know why, because that bill was earlier.

I don't know why it didn't show up originally.

But either way, one is paid and one is not.

Thank you, Mr. Hart.

Is there more to your appeal?

Is there more to your appeal that you would like to state for us?

Oh, yeah.

Do I need to do my name or an address?

If you could, you could name it.

Rick Hart.

My home address is 3260 French Avenue, West Sacramento, California.

Property address is 312 Marysville Boulevard.

and I'm not the owner, I wanted to make sure that you guys understand that you filed the

list pendants improperly because the property was sold to another person. So you filed it on

property I didn't own. So I think you might want to direct them to remove that because I think

that's a pretty big issue when you do that. And I would have them verify it, but the list pendants

is filed after the property was sold. So it's a mistake. I mean, it was pretty close, but

it is after. So that needs to be removed because that's not even legal.

And then I want to get into the, I don't even know where to start. I mean,

we have a person, he was living there and he gets arrested, right? The house looks vacant

because it's in escrow and he luckily will stay in there long enough for us to get it closed.

So it's in escrow. It's getting close. He's there towards the end.

The property looks vacant, but he's staying there.

He gets arrested. I don't know why. None of my business.

And then cops come up, I guess, take him away, decide that he needs securement.

Well, you know, all they needed to do was lock the front door and go out the back door and hit the lock button.

And none of us would be here today.

I'd be in a bar with my buddies getting ready for the Kings game.

And, well, you guys would still be here, but I wouldn't.

So, I mean, that's the honest truth.

I mean, that's all that had to happen that day.

But instead, they call Paul.

Paul comes out.

Apparently, they can't find my number.

I dare anybody in this room to type heart, West Sacramento, and see what you get, how hard my number is to find.

I'm going to fill up probably the first page.

That's how hard my number is to find.

My company is easy to find, heart management.

My address is in there.

They know the address.

They see that everything goes to West Sacramento on the title.

It would be record.

I don't know how they have it.

I've owned the house for almost 40 years.

How they don't have my information?

I've dealt with this office before.

So how they didn't call me is beyond me.

But they didn't.

So they didn't call.

They change the locks.

They think it's secure, but, you know, it's Marysville Boulevard.

So I get a call from a neighbor.

House is wide open.

So my property manager goes over, goes to lock it.

Key don't work.

So now we're like, who changed the locks?

You know, and so we're trying to figure out who changed locks.

We don't know.

So we changed the locks again because nobody told us that the locks were,

anybody changed the locks.

Nobody called.

Nobody looked out.

Nobody did anything, okay?

And so, and what they did is they changed the inside lock, right,

the regular wood door, which doesn't lock that great.

That's why it has a metal door in the front.

So there's a metal secure door in the front of the house,

and they didn't change that one.

No, they changed the one that's, they didn't need to change any of them,

but that's the one they changed.

okay and and then now I'm paying you know what 200 and some 300 300 some dollars for that I'm

paying 500 in fees for what for something that didn't even need to be done here I mean at some

point you have to hold the staff accountable I mean they they need to actually do their job

I mean you can't go out I mean he's securing the house right did he not look at the back door

and see this?

Did you not see this?

It's pretty obvious.

Hit the lock button.

It locks.

Trust me.

You know, that's all he had to do.

And this would not even be an issue.

Instead, they file liens.

They have all these fees.

And for what?

What kind of customer service are you delivering here?

They didn't ever even make an effort.

The only time I found out is when I got the bill.

I mean, I just don't think this is how you run anything.

You know, there has to be people, has to be some accountability to this.

You know, it's like, you know, I get it.

Everybody's busy.

They can't, but it's like a mistake is done and it should be rectified.

And that's the way I feel about it.

You know, and, you know, and I don't even know if this is a policy, but you filed this

list pendants on this house, not only when I didn't own it, but you filed six days before

the bill was even due.

Okay?

It was filed on the day I sold it, and it was sent, and it was paid through the escrow

company.

And so I'm like, and that's still six, it was six days they took the money from me,

and then they sent you guys checks.

I don't know what happens after that.

I mean, you guys have bought and sold.

You bought houses.

Title company looks it up.

You pay the bill.

That's it.

You know?

And then, oh, they're going to tell me it's not paid.

They still haven't acknowledged that it's paid.

I don't even know.

Ask them now.

Do they have a record of it?

I have a canceled check.

I put it in my packet for you guys.

I mean, at some point, you got to...

Look, this is what they're saying is like...

I mean, what part of this house looks like it's not, you know, in good shape?

You know what I mean?

It's not, it's like, I know you can't leave it empty or unlocked,

but it's like, at least look at the thing.

Somebody's got to actually think, you know?

It's just, what am I paying for?

I didn't even get, nobody even contacted me so I could get the keys,

find out that it was a lock.

I dare you.

Google my name.

Hart, West Sacramento.

See what comes up.

And it's like, you've got to hold these people accountable for this stuff.

They've got to do the job correctly, and that's why I'm here.

This is a waste of time.

I already paid the $600, you know?

So I'd like to at least address your question.

The city of Sacramento does require any time the property is not vacant,

but unsecured, there is an actual requirement that they come and secure the property.

So you had asked that, and so I wanted to address that.

No, no, I get that.

It does go off a bid system.

I read the policy, yes.

Yeah, okay, so just so you're aware.

But I'm saying that they just could have hit the button and locked the door.

Yeah, so I'll ask what was done for, was it you that arrived?

It was great construction.

Okay.

Oh, so was it like later at night or?

Middle of the afternoon.

Hold on one second.

Go ahead.

This was on a Sunday morning at 9.55 a.m.

Okay.

So then Great Construction was just asked to secure the property.

Yes, they were asked to secure the property.

When they showed up there, the police department showed them it was the front door that needed to be secured.

And it wasn't to where they had to put plywood over it or anything like that.

It was just a locking issue.

So they did put a deadbolt on it.

I don't think Gray Construction does the home inspection of other ways to secure the property.

They're called out by the police department.

The police department tells them we need this done.

That's what we do.

And then the property is secured.

And then do you know the phone number on file for the property owner?

Oh, so it was, did the police not try to contact?

Yeah, the police did.

They said that they couldn't contact.

They couldn't get a hold of him?

They had no contact number to call somebody.

There was no alarm on there.

Sometimes people have alarms.

Alarm companies will have phone numbers, but there was nothing there.

Okay.

I mean, so I definitely understand.

You do understand.

They're securing the building, right?

Their job.

You're telling me they're not looking at the back door then?

Is that what you're saying?

Correct.

They're securing the building, not just locking the front.

They're locking the back.

Well, they're...

Not to lock the back door to make the place secure.

Well, the way that the construction company works,

they're going to respond to what the police department is asking.

You got two city employees out.

You got the police department and you got Paul.

No, no.

Paul just said he wasn't there.

It's a Sunday, so they don't work on the weekends.

He told me he was there.

Okay, the case report...

I received the phone call and called Gray Construction.

Right.

They received a call from a 311 operator at 9.55 a.m. on a Sunday morning.

So Paul is not working at 9.55 a.m. on a Sunday morning.

So that means the police department called Gray Construction, which is a subcontractor.

Paul gets involved on Monday morning when he is on shift.

Is that correct, Peter?

So police department calls Paul.

Paul calls the contractor.

Tells him go out and meet at the police department there.

See what needs to be secured.

They're appointed what needs to be secured.

To answer a couple of your questions, Mr. Hart,

so one of the things was why don't we just call by looking up your name

because at the time the property wasn't in your name.

It was in Hart Family Trust.

As I said, you have the address.

Hold on.

When I just pulled up Hart Family Trust, it comes with a Fulton, California contact.

I'm just saying, as you said, it would be as easy.

I wanted to see if...

Hold on.

Sir.

You know it's in West Sac.

It says West Sac.

Right?

Do that.

Do Hart Family Trust West Sac.

I'm telling you, what you said is look up your name.

I wanted to see if there was...

West Sac.

You can't expect them to do research.

They go off...

Let's research.

Anyhow, sir.

What do you do?

I'm just responding.

What am I paying $500?

So let him finish.

So I am just responding to you.

You said look up your name.

I did.

I wanted to see if there was something we didn't do correctly.

I looked at what the title of the property was at that time, looked it up.

It did not come back to a West Sacramento phone number.

Second part, you said that there was no record of you making a payment.

It does show that the balance due right now is $190.

There was a $630 or $50 payment made.

So that's just answering your questions is all.

Thank you.

What is a termination fee?

and why is the termination fees before the actual admin fee,

and why wasn't it part of the original bill?

I'm just curious on that.

That just doesn't make any sense.

Termination fee is the fee that the county charges the city

when we record and release the lien or the cloud.

So there's a cloud placed immediately as disclosure to any title company

that there was action done on the property.

so we charge the release and the fee to record.

You actually put a list pendants on a house as soon as the bill is brought up.

You don't pass the due date.

You just put it on immediately.

That's a policy?

There's a cloud placed on the title as soon as there's any code enforcement actions on the property.

So if there's a notice of any action against the property, then there's a disclosure.

so that's a cloud put on title.

So the code...

The house has to be dilapidated.

What...

I don't understand the whole process.

It's just this...

So from my understanding,

and you can correct me if I'm wrong,

these are actually set by the city council.

It's not something that Peter and his shop

at code enforcement...

You don't see anything wrong with this.

Here's the problem.

We're appointed to uphold the laws

that the city council and the city.

Now, I will say...

I've been on these boards.

you're here to be able to make those type of adjustments that's why you can

know we can't we actually are not allowed to make this you're doing this we'd see

it's gonna rubber stamp whatever we check to make sure that the city did

their job according to the what the city council is a private basically they

don't have to call me they do they he explained I mean it isn't that hard but

why don't you have your number updated with the city I've owned it for 40 years

I've dealt with this office before I don't they have my number if they don't

I haven't changed my number since I've had it.

Mr. Lovato, is this property registered with the rental housing inspection program?

Well, right now, the property ownership has changed.

Right.

At the time, was it?

It had already switched hands.

Oh.

That's right.

So it was already in a different person's name.

No, I mean, when he went out there, it was still mine.

It was at that time.

It was switched on August, October 10th.

This happened in what?

September?

August?

August 31st.

So on August 31st, the property was still in the name of your family trust.

And when it happened.

And it was registered with the rental housing inspection program for the city of Sacramento?

I have no idea.

That's up to the property manager.

No, it was not registered.

It was filed as exempt.

Was it a rental property?

Yeah.

Oh, okay.

When it says exempt, that means he's stating the owner lives there.

Yeah, I didn't state it.

I don't even know what...

But you as the owner are ultimately responsible because you hired the property manager.

So they're saying that it's not a rental property, so they didn't contact.

There was no number registered because they were listed as not a rental property.

So they just couldn't hit this, and now I...

And if they couldn't reach the property manager...

I can see where it's headed, okay?

So let's get it straight.

The lien needs to come off because it was filed improperly.

I hope you guys at least look into that.

I'm going to turn it over to the title company because now there's a lien on the property.

They did insurance.

I'll let them deal with that.

I'll let their loyals deal with that.

You got your $600.

I take it you're not going to waive the $200.

One second.

Is there still a lien on the property from the city of Sacramento for this?

The cloud is still recorded, yes, with the property.

Because of the termination fee.

I got you.

So technically, how do we hear this case if the $190 is on the property but it's not under his name?

How do we even have the opportunity to rule on a case that's not his cloud?

Well, it's going to follow the parcel.

Which is not his.

So how does he even have the rights to appeal a $190 fee that's not his?

Correct.

I'm appealing the actual amount.

The 600.

I'm appealing the whole thing.

I get that.

But ultimately, he's not responsible for the 190.

It's not on his, or I guess he's not legally, or at least it's not on his property.

Correct.

You paid the 600.

You paid, yeah.

If you paid the 190, we can call it a day.

Otherwise, either way, you're going to have to take this lien.

I get that.

We can't take liens off that.

We'll have to let the city handle that.

All right.

So I'll tell you, for the 626, let's just get that one done with.

I'll make a motion for the 626 and then we can do the 196.

Do we, is the motion, it's already been paid.

626 has already been paid.

So do we move to uphold?

The title company took it even before you filed the lien.

No, we get that.

Hold on one second.

My question is, however we rule, the 626, if we uphold it, the city keeps it because they have it already.

It has already been paid through escrow.

So if we move to remove it, then they get a refund.

I got you.

So for the 626, do you have any other questions before I do the 626?

Did you have any?

Let's just get the 626 on here.

So confirming the total charge of 62633

for the work performed by the city on the property

known as 3112 Marysville Boulevard, Sacramento, California,

95815, APN number 26500520340000.

Second.

Fisher?

Yes.

And Tablian?

Yes.

Taylor?

Yes.

So we can move on to the next.

So my only concern is, and Peter, the 190 is not, it's going to follow the property right now.

So either way, this 190 fee, I mean, my concern is if I was the new owner, that would be something that would be fought by possibly the new owner.

Or through title and escrow since you got a title insurance.

most likely. So, I mean, honestly, what's the easiest thing here? Is this going to cost

the new owner? The new owner would have to go back to their title company because they

did have, you know, that's who discovered the last one. The previous owner is who the

fee was charged to. He filed an appeal in a timely manner, so he has the right to that

appeal. I get the rights. So ultimately, the prior owner is protecting his interest of

the title company not coming back after him

for funds that he's already received?

I mean,

it's

going to fall to the next person.

I think this is one of those things

that even if he let it go,

the next person's going to get it and then they're going to fight it

and it's going to be more administrative.

I'm

waving that one

because it's not his being anyway.

Are you?

That's fine.

All right.

I think it's going to cost the city a lot more money

to try and figure this out in the long run

than the $190 anyway.

So I'm going to confirm the total charge for the site.

We've moved on to the next one.

So I'm going to recommend that we waive

the $190 termination fee.

Let me find it again.

For the property as 3112 Marysville Boulevard,

Sacramento, California, 958158PN number 265004.

520340000.

Second.

Fisher.

Yes.

And Tablian.

Yes.

Taylor.

Yes.

So, Mr. Hart, we did find in favor of the city for item number three, upholding the charge

of 626-33.

However, we waived a termination fee of $190.

You will receive notice of our decisions in the mail.

You guys are writing a check.

Thank you.

I was going to donate it to charity.

I just think you guys got to look at these procedures.

If you call somebody out, let them give a service charge.

Let them do it the right way.

Trust me.

Listen.

And again, yeah.

No, I understand.

I don't know, man.

I mean, think about it if you were me.

I mean, you own a house, and all of a sudden you're getting bills for something that did nothing.

They didn't even secure the house.

They did the wrong door.

You know?

Have a good night.

Thank you.

You all right?

Item number five.

We'll ask the secretary to do this.

Thank you.

Okay.

Item number five, the following lines shall be heard as blanket items.

City staff recommends that the board adopt a decision confirming the total charge noted by each agenda line for the expenses

incurred by the city in the enforcement of the provisions of the Housing Code

and or Dangerous Buildings Code with respect to the property known by the

physical address and or parcel number APN as noted within each agenda line for

item number five lines one through 53 in lines 55 through 85. So move. Second.

Fisher?

Yes.

And Tablion?

Yes.

Taylor?

Yes.

Thank you.

Item number six, election of chair and vice chair for 2026.

What say the board?

A vote today or stay this until our next meeting?

I'm open either way.

Second next meeting.

all right what do we decide oh i think you're firsting it and then i'll second it how's that

all right so we're going to post he said next meeting he said this one or he's he's proposing

it to the board next meeting sounds great all right we'll push it to the next meeting when we

have i propose we discuss this in february all right second here we go yeah so next meet march

next meeting next meeting next meeting yes meeting yeah march so we'll have to do a vote all right

That sounds great.

And I second.

I said, yeah.

Oh, I don't know.

I said second.

All right, start again.

You first.

No.

Oh, you first.

Well, yeah.

I'll first it.

How about we're doing it right now.

I'm yes that we postpone it to the next meeting first.

I second.

Okay.

Yes.

Okay.

All right, Fisher.

Yes.

And Tablin.

Yes.

Taylor.

Yes.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Any board comments or public comments?

Yes, I just wanted to bring the board's attention that if you haven't been notified yet, we'll get a briefing out to you that you're going to see some new charge coming to some of these hearings.

There's a charge that's going to be coming forward for a tech fee.

So you'll see it just like we have the Liz pendants or the cloud and title and fees and such that there'll be a tech fee added on to.

So we'll be seeing it in the appeals.

But if staff hasn't got a brief out to you guys yet, we'll get it out to you of what it is, what it looks like, and what the reasoning for it is.

Thank you.

Thank you Mr. Lemos.

Any other comments?

Meeting adjourned.