It is now.

Sorry, y'all.

Let's do a little do over.

Uh the time is now 9 03.

We're gonna call this meeting to order.

This is July the 9th, and we'll begin with a roll call for members present.

Kayla Miranda, Joel Solis.

George Grimes Jr.

Present.

Dr.

Linda Lopez Rodriguez.

Yvonne Addison.

David Valtieta.

Jamie Little here.

Fred Andes.

Also present in the meeting from the City of San Antonio or Savina Ray from the City Attorney's Office and from Development Services.

Kathy Rodriguez, Development Services Administrator.

Jenny Ramidez, Code Enforcement Manager, Estorti's Development Services Specialist 1.

Melissa Maldonado, Administrative Assistant Two, and myself, Judy Kroom, Development Services Specialist Supervisor.

Chair Aquorum is present.

Thank you very much for that.

Alright, can we go ahead and move on to item number three, the Spanish translator?

Thank you for approaching the podium.

Good morning, everybody.

Thank you very much.

All right.

So we're gonna move on to the chair's statement.

We do have a quorum.

It's present.

We're gonna ask you to silence your cell phone or any device that may disrupt the public hearing.

Uh no person shall delay or disrupt the proceedings or disobey the order of the chair.

If you wish to speak on a case, you will be allowed three minutes.

However, an owner or owner's representative will have unlimited time.

Please keep all information relevant to the property in question and the code violation.

As advised prior to the public hearing, the city will provide translation services for anyone needing assistance.

It is our understanding that you have made such arrangements as advised in your notice of hearing.

Our expectations is that you submit the required documents prior to this public hearing.

Your responsibility as a property owner or lien holder of a dilapidated structure case is to demonstrate the following.

One, provide the required documents.

Discuss your detailed scope of work with a cost for each item.

Outline in the order to bring the property into compliance to the satisfaction of the code officer.

Number two, submit the required proof of financial ability to pay for the proposed work and discuss feasibility of repairs dependent upon monies at hand.

Number three, request the amount of time needed to complete the work.

All abatement orders by the board shall be enforced.

All work proposed must be done within the code regulations and required permits prior to commencement of the work.

You may attain all permits from the Department of Development Services located here at 1901, South Alamo Street, San Antonio, Texas, 78204.

If in doubt as to the process during this time, please contact the code enforcement officer.

Any owner or laneholder dissatisfied with an order of the board may appeal in civil district court within 30 days after the date that the order is mailed.

If you have any questions regarding the orders, please contact the code enforcement officer or development service staff members by phone at Area Code 210 207 5422.

Please note that it is unlawful for any persons present to solicit or pedal services regarding any property under consideration by the board during the course of this public hearing as per City Code Section 16-236.

Thank you very much.

All right, that concludes the chair statement, and we're gonna move on into approval of the minutes.

Number five.

Everyone had received the minutes.

Good.

Can I have a motion to approve the minutes?

Mr.

Chair, this is Fred Andes.

I would like to motion that we approve the minutes for January for June 11, 2026, and leave them as is.

I am so used to just pushing the button.

Thank you for that.

What should we have a second?

Uh this is George Grimes.

I second the motion.

George, thank you.

All right.

This is the moment to have any discussion.

Any discussion regarding the moment the minutes?

All right uh hearing none can we do a roll call to approve Joe Solis yes George Grimes Jr.

Yes Jamie Little yes Fred Andes motion is approved four to zero.

Thank you very much for that that takes your approval of the minutes and that moves us on to item number six staff reports.

We do have reports good thank you Chair Solis and good morning and good morning to members of the board I am Kathy Rodriguez Development Services Administrator giving you a quick briefing on emergency demolitions that have transpired uh we have one this morning that was in city council district two on 5407 Gwenda Lee that was an accessory structure only it was vacant at that time the demolition was uh determined based on a sudden act that occurred on June 19th of 2026 and that was fire uh the structure was demolished and removed on June 25th of 2026 that's the only item I have to report on any questions or comments from the board.

Very none thank you for that report thank you thank you excuse me board um Jenny Ramirez good morning uh interim uh coded enforcement administrator we uh we do have a slight delay with our city attorney she was delayed due to uh um district court action uh if we could take maybe a five minute coffee break hopefully um I'll check in with her we did we didn't want to start any case presentations until she does arrive all right so the time is now 9 10 we'll take a five minute break and then reconvene back in this room thank you all very much okay the the time is now 9 18 we took a little bit longer than we anticipated and we'll start going an additional time so at this moment at 9 18 we're going to take a 30 minute recess we'll be back at 9 47 all right everyone we're gonna conclude the recess at time is now 9 28 and we'll get started with our first case and that will be 829 West Hutchins we have anyone to speak to that morning board good morning for the record my name is Crystal Town Dangerous premise officer for the city of San Antonio Development Services Department the structure being presented today is located at 829 West Hutchins Place with a recommendation for demolition in accordance with city code article 8 chapter 6 this is the third time 829 West Hutchins place is being presented before the board March 13th 2025 is the first date the property was presented presented before the board a 90 day repair order was given for the main structure and the accessory structure.

On September 11th 2025, the second date, that was the second date the property was presented before the board, and a 30-day demolition order was given for the accessory structure.

Please note on August 13th, 2024, a dangerous assessment response team inspection was conducted.

The inspection is a collaborated inspection with a variety of city departments that included the San Antonio police department.

The legal description is NCB 9425 block 150 lot 7, located in City Council District 3.

The owner on record is Tankerously Tammy Ray and Fisher Michelle Lee and Fisher Justin Bradley with a mailing address of 829 West Hutchins Place, San Antonio, Texas, 78221.

The property owners are not present today.

Does the board wish to continue?

See no objection, please proceed.

San Antonio Police Officer Torres is here to speak.

Thank you.

The Office of Historic Preservation has confirmed on September 16, 2024, the property is not eligible for historic designation.

The first inspection regarding 829 West Hutchins Place was conducted on August 13th, 2024.

The original notice was mailed on August 22nd of 2024, and the certified receipt was not returned.

On August 19, 2024, a meeting was held at the City Attorney's Office to discuss violations found on the property.

Michelle Fisher and Tammy Tinkerously attended the meeting.

The code violations were explained to the individuals.

On June 25th, 2026, the notice for the BSB hearing was posted at 829 West Hutchins Place.

On June 25, 2026, the notice for the BSB hearing was mailed to Tammy Ray Tankerously and Michelle Lee Fisher and Justin Bradley Fisher, and the certified receipt has not been returned.

On June 4th, 2026, an administrative warrant was conducted to obtain photographs.

No scope of work or financial proof or letter of credit or engineers report has been provided.

No permits have been obtained for the property.

A notice to vacate was posted on the property on December 5th of 2024, and this property is located within 1,000 feet of McCollum High School.

This is the front elevation of the structure.

The decking for the front porch is warped and rotted in multiple areas.

The steps going up to the front porch are unlevel.

The fascia board is missing in multiple areas, and the remaining fascia board lacks weather protection.

This is going to be the right elevation of the structure, and that top left corner of the front end right elevation, the fascia board is cracked and detaching from the structure.

This is looking at the foundation underneath the structure.

The cement posts have been added.

No permits have been obtained for the property, and the cement posts are not supporting the structure.

This is the rear elevation of the structure.

Again, the facial boards are lacking weather protection.

And here is a photo of the foundation of the rear elevation.

The structure is now sitting on a cinder block.

This is going to be the front portion of the left elevation.

The decking is rotted and has lacks weather protection.

This is going to be the rear elevation of that left elevation and the fascia board lacks weather protection as well.

This is going into the back attached porch.

The floor system is soft when walking in, and the ceiling does have water damage.

Here's a closer view of that water damage, and they also used materials to cover holes in the ceiling.

This is walking into the kitchen and living room area, large amount of trash and debris throughout the entire structure.

Going into the living room area, there is a large, there is a hole in the roof system and water is coming through.

It was raining the day of this warrant, so water was actually, leaking into the structure itself.

So here's a different angle of that living room.

The floor is saturated with water, and there's water coming into the roof system.

The ceiling fan panels are warped due to the water damage.

The tiles towards the right portion of that photo also are detaching from the ceiling and have significant water damage.

So here's a closer view.

There's actual water dripping into the structure, and the decking has significant water damage as well.

The floor is starting to buckle and that is saturated with water from the rain.

This is the kitchen area, large amount of trash and debris throughout the structure.

Again, and the windows were uh unsecure at the time, and we boarded them up at the time of the warrant.

This is going to be the bathroom area.

The floor covering is unlevel, and again, large amount of trash and debris.

There is no water for the property or electricity.

Um however the toilet is still being used by unhoused that break into the property.

In that top left corner of the photo, the ceiling tiles are detaching from the structure, and it does have water damage as well.

This is going into one of the bedrooms.

Again, the ceiling has collapsed, or the sheet rock from the ceiling has collapsed, exposing the decking and ceiling joists, and the decking has significant water damage.

Here's a closer view of the water damage to the ceiling.

This is another bedroom.

It does look like new sheetrock has been placed on the ceiling and walls.

Again, there's no permits obtained for the property.

The structure located at 829 West Hutchins Place is in violation of City Code Article 8, Chapter 6, 156, subsections 1, 2, 8, 11, 12, 15, 17, and 18, which any building or structure which has any or all of the conditions or defects here and after described shall be deemed to be a dangerous building and a hazard to public health, safety, and welfare, provided that such conditions of defects of dilapidation, substatternness, or unfitness for human habitation pose a threat or potential threat to life, health, property, or human safety.

Staff recommends demolition.

That concludes my presentation of 829 West West Hutchins Place.

Thank you very much, Ms.

Tanner.

Is there any questions for her?

This is George Crimes.

This board ordered demolition of this property on September 18th of 2025.

The board ordered demolition for the accessory only.

Thank you.

Your second order is the repair order that was for the main.

So on September 11th of 2025, the only structure presented in front of the board was the accessory structure.

On March 13th, 2025, a 90-day repair order had been given for both the main structure and the accessory structure.

So now you're asking us to demolish the main structure because it was not repaired.

Correct.

But prior to that, we were only asked to demolish the accessory structure.

Why won't we ask then to demolish the main with it?

At that time, the property was still being occupied by the property owner.

The property is now vacant and abandoned.

So we did abate the property on September 26th of 2024, and then I also abated the property on June 4th, 2026.

Do we have a cost?

The cost of September 26th of 2024 is 1,195.

The cost for the abatement on June 4th of 2026 is 497.

Did you is there any abatement like boarding up or anything like that scheduled?

The property is remained cleaned at this time.

However, the grass will grow and we will have to cut again if the owner does not.

But you don't have anything in right now.

No.

Like for boarding the windows or secure department.

No, all the windows were secure at my last inspection at this time.

So at this point, we're just going to monitor the property, and once the grass is high, then we'll we'll put a work order in for it.

But our as of right now, we don't have anything pending since we did just debate it.

So right now you're just anticipating grass.

Correct.

That's the last debate.

Correct.

Hopefully.

Yes.

Power and electric water?

There is no active electricity or water.

And no contact.

I have not had contact with any property owner.

Is this near school?

Yes, it's within 1,000 feet of McCollum High School.

High heavy traffic?

Yes, it's uh right off of commercial avenue.

Alright, I'll ask more to the safe officer.

Alright, thank you.

Any additional questions?

Seeing none.

We do have one.

Witness that's gonna testify today, and that is Officer Torres.

Can you please approach the podium?

And state your name.

I guess in this case, the the district you residing in are conducting business in for the record.

Yes, sir.

Good morning, board.

I'm also a tourist with the San Antonio Police Department South Safe Unit.

I oversee uh the location of 829 West Hutchins Place, which is gonna be the 6150s district's area, um, which is what I oversee so far from being in the district and dealing with this house uh with the patrol bars and with the carload from patrol, it seemed like there's just a lot of suspicious activity going on here, a lot of suspicious princements coming in and out throughout the night and throughout the day.

Uh when I've gone by, I have been able to take some of the homeless people that were in the house to the ditch that is on the east side of the home, and that ditch is that ditch is well known for drug activity, criminal activity.

So it seems like once they do the drug activity there, they go to the home, sleep it off, and then go.

Um, which is I feel it's really unsecure due to the fact that since the school is nearby, seems like with the cause when kids walk going back and forth, uh the people or the drug users or uh homeless people there can be interacting with them throughout the day.

This is Joel Slay.

So did the owner file anything with you regarding the house is vacant?

Not since I've been there, no sir.

Not since you've been there, okay.

Any additional questions from the board?

This is Fred Andis.

Um, if people from a school, are you aware of the traffic in that area?

So in personnel, I mean like kids and stuff walking to school.

Yes, it seems like it's medium, it's not light or heavy.

Uh usually it goes, it disperses throughout, but there is a good medium traffic going uh on the westbound of commercial towards this house.

How close do they come?

So from so far from it seems from the cause is I couldn't give you specific can be specific, probably.

From the home within a couple of houses, yes, sir.

All right, next one.

Um criminal traffic.

We we understand what Dart's there for.

So criminal traffic, are you running into the same personnel at this property or others?

So uh in some aspects you've seen them uh where it's the same personnel from the ditch and then different ones, and when I speak to them on the ditch, I always ask them, hey, where do y'all go?

Because I know y'all don't stay here all the time.

And they're like, Oh, we go to a home.

Okay, what's the home?

And then they don't they just say oh it's on Hutchins, in which we already know which house it is, and that's basically what they tell me or advise me.

All right, thank you.

Yes, sir.

Any additional questions?

Hearing none?

Thank you, Officer Torres.

Appreciate it.

Okay.

So can I have a motion regarding 829 West Hutchins Place, please?

I'd like to motion.

All right, Mr.

Hans, please go.

I moved at the property located at the 829 West Hutchins Place.

Is a public nuisance by City Code Chapter 6, Article 8, Section 6, 157, which is not feasible to be repaired.

At this time, and it's in violation of city code chapter 6, article 8, section 156, Subsections 128, 11, 12, 15, 17, and 18.

And its violations pose a threat or potential threat to life health safety or property.

And it should be demolished within 30 days, maintained vacate, all utilities to be cut and all abatements in the past and previous or current abatements to be collected.

And have the property free of all debris, Mr.

Anders, this is uh Joel Salis.

I'm just gonna ask you to just clarify what do you mean by the past and present abatements to be collected?

We can now collect by court order or by the board's order.

Any past abatement.

They don't have to necessarily now go on the um property tax pickup stuff.

Yeah, the liens, okay.

You can now have them collected, and let's count can council put that in a more legal term for them.

Well, let me let me just take care of the motion first.

I just want to do clarification on that.

Well, that's what it is.

Is you can uh have them collected now instead of waiting for that.

And council can give you more guidance on that.

Oh wait for the discussion on that.

Okay.

So we have a motion regarding the property located at 829 West Hutchins Place, that it is a public nuisance per city code chapter six, article eight, section six-157, which is not feasible, be repaired at this time and is in violation of city code chapter six, article eight, section six-156, specifically sections one, two, eight, eleven, twelve, fifteen, seventeen, and eighteen.

Move that the property be demolished within 30 days from the issuance of this order, that it be vacant, vacate remain, that the utilities be cut, the collection of past and present abatements, and that the property remain free of debris.

Do we have a second?

Uh this is George Grimes, our second.

Thank you, George Grimes.

All right, now we'll open up for any discussion.

Mr.

Chair, this is Savita Ryewood, uh City Attorney's Office, uh, to explain uh the portion of the order as to collection of abatement costs, the abatements that uh code is required to conduct to uh make sure it is secured, uh cut clean, etc.

Uh they are charged to the owner, however, um this board has the authority to uh order the owner to pay those abatement costs, and with this uh court order, uh, it carries more weight for enforcement of that collection at this point.

Thank you for that clarification.

All right, so we have a motion, we have a second.

Any further discussion?

Seeing none, can we go to a roll call?

Joe Solist.

Yes.

George Brimes Jr.?

Yes, Jamie Little, yes, Fred Andes.

Motion passes with a vote of 420.

Thank you all very much for that one.

That takes care of West Hutchins Place.

And we're going to move on to 826 Peggy Drive.

Do we have someone present to discuss Peggy Drive?

Good morning, board.

Good morning.

For the record, my name is Cynthia Santana, Dangerous Premise Officer for the City of San Antonio Development Services Department.

The structure being presented today is located at 826 Peggy Drive with a recommendation for demolition in accordance with City Code Article 8, Chapter 6.

This case is the first time being heard before this board.

The legal description is NCB 13905, block 4, lot 24S, 25 feet of 23, located in City Council District 2.

The owner on record is Bila John A.

with a mailing address of 1418 Greer Street, San Antonio, Texas, 78210-5538.

All notices of hearing were properly issued as required.

The following individual is present on behalf of the case, John Bila the second.

The owner on record is not present today.

Does the board wish to continue?

Any concerns?

See none, yes.

Please proceed.

A phone number was not found for the owner, but I have spoken with the son of the owner, John A.

Bila the second.

The Office of Historic Preservation has confirmed on December 9th, 2025, that the property is not eligible for historic designation.

The following is a timeline of events regarding the notification process.

The first inspection regarding 826 Peggy Drive was conducted on July 25th, 2025.

Original notice was mailed on July 30th, 2025, and the certified receipt was delivered to the mailbox on August 1st, 2025.

A conference meeting was held on September 22nd, 2025.

John A.

Bila II, a representative for the owner appeared at the meeting.

On June 25th, 2026, the notice for the BSP hearing was posted at 826 Peggy Drive.

On June 24, 2025, the notice for the BSB hearing was mailed to the owner, and the certified receipt has not been returned.

No scope of work or financial proof or letter of credit or engineers' report has been provided.

As of July 8th, 2026, there are no permits on file for 826 Peggy Drive.

An administrative warrant was obtained and executed on June 3rd, 2026 for the photos that are being presented today.

This first photo is of the front elevation as it faces the street, showing a single story structure in a residential zone built in 1940 and is 1302 square feet.

The structure has wood siding, a gable roof with shingles, and a pier and beam foundation with a stem wall.

This structure is not located within a thousand feet of a school.

The shingles on the roof are worn and missing granules.

The decking is wavy.

The wood siding on the front lacks weather protection.

It's damaged and detaching in locations.

The brick facade under the windows is cracked, detaching and collapsing on the right side.

The front window is broken and boarded up, and the garage door is also broken.

This is a photo of the left elevation.

The siding lacks weather protection, is missing and detaching.

The window is broken and boarded up, and that fascia on the left side has collapsed from deterioration.

This is the rear elevation.

The roof above that little enclave is sagging.

The siding is detaching and deteriorated at the bottom on the left side.

The windows were broken and boarded up by the city.

This is the right elevation from the rear of the structure.

The siding is detaching, and the broken windows were boarded up.

This is a close-up of the deteriorated siding at the garage door.

The garage door is broken on the left bottom side.

This is a close-up of the brick facade on the front elevation that is pulling away from the structure.

On the right corner of the front elevation, you can see the exposed sill beams that are weathered from the exposure and deteriorated.

The brick is collapsed here on the front.

This is a closer photo of the left elevation where that fascia has detached.

This is looking up at the rear elevation.

The broken rafters under here are the reason for the sagging.

As you go in the rear entrance, you enter the kitchen.

As you go through the kitchen, this is the front room.

You can see the front entrance door there.

Again, the ceiling drywall is collapsed from water damage.

This is more of a contextual photo of that room.

You can see that there's more ceiling damage by the front door.

The frames around the front entrance door and that window on the right side are damaged.

The room is full of debris.

As you walk through that front room, and you start to head towards the hallway.

This is the one of two bedrooms on the front on the right elevation.

Here you can see that the drywall is damaged and collapsed.

Natural light is visible through those exterior boards.

Both the elements and vegetation are growing through, allowing pests to enter the structure.

This is the bathroom where the tiles have collapsed around the plumbing for the tub.

The window is broken and boarded up above the bathtub.

This is going from the hallway.

So you have the one bedroom that we looked at previously across the hallway was that bathtub, bathroom.

And then if you continue down the hallway, you go to the second bedroom in the structure.

This is a six-inch gap in the floor, uh, between the hallway and the last bedroom on the rear right side.

If you walk into that room and just turn around, you can see the degree of separation between the the flooring there.

Um this wood siding is water damage.

This siding actually is part of that little enclave at the rear.

We have large gaps where natural light is coming through.

So if you turn around and look into the bedroom, um, you can see the extent of water damage from the failing roof.

The decking is water damage, the drywall is collapsed, windows are broken, the drywall at the bottom under the window is also deteriorated from the amount of water damage coming through the frames.

This is just a close-up of the wall that's cracked from that water damage and all the debris at the bottom from the water coming through the structure.

This is on the right elevation of that room.

More natural light is present and the wood again is water damaged.

I apologize for the blurry photo.

I had to put my camera into a window to take a photo of this.

The garage was not accessible.

We could not get in there, but I wanted to at least demonstrate to you the amount of natural light coming in through the bottom around the garage door and where that siding was missing on the front elevation.

The decking uh at the top above the garage door shows water damaged and more natural light.

There's a hole at the top in the roof over the yellow cabinet.

This is looking to the rear of the garage, uh, to the rear elevation as well.

You can see the amount of damage to the roof and to the rear wall there from where the siding is missing.

Satellite images show the holes in the roof have existed for at least seven years.

The water has been off since 1997.

Since the conference meeting with the representative, the owner's son, 10 months ago.

No action has been taken to repair it, and it remains a dangerous structure.

To recap the structure located at 826 Peggy Drive is a violation of City Code Article 8, chapter 6-156.

Subsections one, two, five, seven, eight, eleven, twelve, fifteen, seventeen, and eighteen, in which any building or structure which has any or all of the conditions or defects herein, after described, shall be deemed to be a dangerous building and a hazard to public health, safety, welfare, provided that such conditions of defects of dilapidation, substandardness or unfitness for human habitation, pose a threat or potential threat to life, health, property, or human safety.

Staff recommends one question I have before we open it up to other questions in that regards the concrete stem walls.

Thank you very much for that they are broken or deteriorating.

Sorry, the information on that?

In your presentation?

The one photo on the foundation where the sill beams were deteriorated.

You can see the concrete is deteriorated there also.

Uh the concrete in between, it looks like uh that rear room uh might have been put on after the fact, so there's a concrete in between that hallway and the rear bedroom, and there's that six-inch gap.

That's all concrete in there, and it is deteriorated.

Thank you for that additional information.

Is there any questions from the Mr.

Chairman?

Officer Santana, describe again your interaction with the somebody who represented the owner.

Yes.

Mr.

Bila, the second came for the conference meeting.

Um we talked about what needed to be done.

Um at that time, he didn't give me any plans for what he wanted to do, whether to fix it, only that we were not.

Okay, and the notes uh mention your attempt to contact an executor of the estate of a deceased owner, is that right?

That is the son.

Okay, and and do you know if uh the estate of that owner has been administered so that the son has title to the property?

I do not.

Uh BCAD continues to have the property underneath his father, and um I show no action as far as being listed in the estate of.

Um so not at this time.

Thank you.

Any further questions?

Go ahead, Mr.

Hans.

Um, you have abatement in here.

We have um the property does get mowed, um, I'm guessing by the son uh or whomever he hires.

Uh however, about once a year we have had to go in and still cut it.

More recently it was over two feet high.

Um we had to cut it on June 2nd.

So we've cut it in June of 2023, May of 2024, August of 2025, and again, like I said, June 2nd of 2026.

Well, I'm interested because it says here you had an abatement clean and secure by the city.

Yes, we received a complaint from uh neighbors that the structure was broken into, uh placard was placed on the front of the structure and the notice of violation was sent.

No action was taken to secure the property, so uh we came in and we mowed and we boarded up all the broken windows in the rear and on the uh right elevation, and that was 25.

That was 2025.

It was, yeah.

Well, I'm sorry, 2026.

Well, no, what?

Yes, 2025.

August of 2025, yes.

So that was done and then it was boarded up uh property was secured, but I didn't see anything in here that says when it was clean, but either or so it was secured on the 26th by the boards.

The neighbor called you and it uh property was secured via city, so that tells me they just boarded it up.

Correct.

So they haven't got to the MO part yet.

So you said 2023 was the first abatement?

Yes.

Uh, we we frequently get calls that the structure is overgrown.

Uh we post notice, um, occasionally occasionally it's taken care of by whoever is in charge of the property, but um we have currently four liens on the structure for abatements.

Do you have a cost of each, and that includes the one on the twenty twenty-five, right?

Yep.

Uh 2023.

Um well the liens I had the liens are different because they add the administrative fees.

Um, but the cost they're already in a lien process.

There are four liens on the property.

And you have any more since?

Uh I don't know if the last one was placed as a lien June 2nd.

That was an additional 268 dollars.

That would be the 26th, right?

Correct.

2026.

2026.

So 2025 back have already been leaned.

Correct.

So 2026 is only one, and you're not sure if it's been leaned on yet, right?

Yeah, and I don't see where they've been um collect paid.

Right.

Well, normally liens they wait.

All right.

So do we have an amount on the total on all of the abatements?

Uh in 2023, it was ninety-three dollars.

2024 it was 209.

In 2025, it was 325.

And in June of 2026, 268 dollars.

And that's for cutting.

That's for cutting and cleaning and securing.

Okay.

Is there anybody that you've seen on the property other than the owner?

I have never seen anyone at the property.

So you don't even know if the owner's cutting the grass, just somebody is.

Yeah.

We send notice and then it gets cut.

Okay.

Thank you.

Any further questions for the officer?

All right, hearing none.

Thank you very much for your testimony today.

All right.

Uh John Biel, will you approach the podium?

All right, let me just start with uh if you can give us your name, uh, your address or will you resign in the current district?

My name is John A.

Bella the second.

I am the interest owner of 826 Peggy Drive through the estate of John A.

Biella.

I'm the executor of his estate and will.

I reside at 1418 Greer Street, San Antonio, Texas.

All right.

So I believe.

Just hold on for the moment.

I'm just gonna ask legal counsel.

For the purpose of this hearing, we can consider him as the representative of the open of the owner.

Correct, because he is listed as the executor.

Super.

All right, Mr.

Um, you know, you have unlimited time.

Please go ahead and start with your presentation.

Uh the week of June 22nd, 2026, we received a notice for this hearing today.

I believe on 627 certified letter was received via mail.

Uh that checks the dates of Officer Santana from the first notice of the 25th, I believe.

Um, June 28th, we visited the property, received the notices that were posted on 629.

We reached out to our real estate broker and our attorneys for counsel um due to scheduling.

Um we have a follow-up with our attorneys today, Friday, July 9th.

Um, we also had a hearing this hearing this morning for 7.9.

Um at this point, uh, we've created a timeline or a response.

Um with our follow-up today with our attorneys.

Uh we are planning on by July 14th to have contractors and to walk the property to provide bids and to prepare a scope of work.

On July 28th, we're hoping to start demo and prep for the property.

And then with August the 4th, uh or August the 11th, we're hoping to start work based off those bids and scope of work.

I am requesting a rear hearing due to the time frame that we initially faced with this notice of the week of June 22nd.

Uh planning to meet and provide an update or our scope of work at the at one of the board meetings of August of this board.

I am asking that my attendance here today shows my ability to work with this board and the city of San Antonio.

And Mr.

Millet, you didn't say what it is you intend to do with the property.

You know what it is you're planning on doing with this?

Based off the work, um, it could potentially be a hold, a sell, or one of those options.

So you plan to restore the home?

Yes, sir, based off the bids we received from the contractors.

Thank you very much.

We'll open this up for any questions or comments, Mr.

Biela.

Um this is Fred Ennis.

This has been going on.

Well the property's been in disarray since 2019.

Okay.

Okay.

Is that when you became the executor?

And I'll say that because that's pretty much when was that?

Um John A.

Biella uh passed in the year of 2012, and through his estate, um, I want to say I was the executor of his will either 2013 or 2014.

So nothing's happened since then.

I'm assuming there's some legal time in there to get everything done.

So 2019, everything should have been legally done for the title train and all that, right?

So from 2019 to today.

When did you guys start working on the process?

Did you got the clearance to work so that you could actually physically do something on there on the property?

What do you mean by the clearance to work?

Because if you're in probate, you really can't do much to the property as far as construction wise, you can clean up and do minor stuff, repairs, but you can't do major stuff.

When did you get the authorization to do the major stuff?

I don't know if I'm capable to answer that question.

I don't know the legal response to that.

Well, you're here as an owner.

Correct?

Yes.

So when did you get the blessing of owner instead of executor?

I would have to check those dates.

Well, I don't I don't know that answer.

I ballpark it.

Was it last year within six months or the question I'm trying to find out is why all of a sudden now you got if you've been executor, you could make repairs and no repairs were ever made.

Now you're wanting to make major changes, so you have the authority to now.

When did that change from executor to owner?

Based off my role.

Yeah.

That I don't know.

I would have to look at paperwork and stuff like that regarding his estate.

But you're the owner now.

You're not an executor, right?

I'm the executive of his will, that property has never been transferred over from John A.

Biella to John A.

Bella the second.

Legally, I guess this would have to go to you then.

Because is he entitled to make major changes if he's not the true owner?

He's only the executor of the property.

He's only allowed to make minor repairs, etc., correct?

I'm the executor with the only interest of the property.

Yeah, as uh executor, uh I believe what the board is trying to ascertain, has the will been filed for probate?

Yes, ma'am.

And have you had the hearing uh for the probate judge to confirm you as executor and issue uh letters testimony?

Yes, ma'am.

And so I believe for where uh the board is heading as you mentioned uh that was uh around 2013-2014.

Yes, ma'am.

So, why has nothing been done to the property up to uh today's hearing?

Uh respectfully, because today's the first time we're doing this, but it's not the first time you've had contact with issues of the property, correct?

Correct.

So you were aware there were issues for this board to allow major construction to the property, you have to have title in hand.

Yes, sir.

But you don't, right?

You have executor of the will, an executive of the property, but you don't have title of the property, correct?

Mr.

Chair, if I made a clarify, he is the executor of the state.

The will has been submitted for probate, and the court has issued letters testamentary.

So at that point, uh, the executive now has uh full authority over the property, but when okay.

When did all of that take place?

If I recall 2013-2014, so from that time to now you're still not in Bearcat as property owner, right?

Correct.

It's under John A.

Biella.

And you haven't done anything since then, not repairs or nothing.

No, sir.

So from at least 2013 from testimony from staff that you've had abatements done to the property.

You were notified of those abatements, correct?

Yes, sir.

And you are taking care of the property?

Yes, sir.

But you're not working on the property to bring it to code.

Correct.

Okay.

Now you want to all of a sudden jump in and say, yeah, we're doing something about it.

Yes, sir.

Does that make sense now?

What I'm trying to do.

My question is, is why you want to do it all now?

And you were given a packet when you had a the meeting with staff?

Yes, they give you a packet.

And it told you what to bring?

Yes, sir.

Did you bring the statements that re-require?

Proof of uh finance uh scope of work, scope of work, engineers report.

What's the other one?

There's three of them.

Scope of work, engineers report, and financial proof.

Well, there's another one too.

Uh read read your sheet.

It's the first three on your sheet.

Uh it is scope of work, uh proof of financial means to uh complete the repairs, and uh an engineer's uh letter in support of those repairs.

And that was given to in a packet, and you're saying now you're my understanding in a few days they're gonna go out and walk the property?

Yes, sir.

We're waiting to hear from our attorney.

We consulted them on the 29th and due to scheduling for July that break.

We have not had that appointment.

We have that appointment this afternoon.

Well, I'm I I'm trying to understand why you didn't do this back when you got control of the property, because we did not have this meeting.

You don't need this meeting correct to do all that, but yet you're here 2013?

Yes, sir.

So now you had all that time to do all this.

I did.

So I'm trying to understand why you didn't do all of this stuff before you had to come here back then.

There was no reason to do it.

As a property owner, I don't have to repair the property at that time.

As soon as the city started giving you notices, you do, Mr.

Anders, I believe you have your answer to your question.

I'm just saying that that's you have to take care of what's been given to you, correct?

The abatements we received for for boarding up the property, securing it, and cutting the grass.

Uh no more questions.

All right.

Anyone else have questions?

No.

Okay.

Well, Mr.

Real, thank you very much for your testimony today.

You may sit down.

Mr.

Chair, this is Judy.

Just for the record, just wanted to mention that Mr.

David Rattieta is now in attendance.

Thank you.

Thank you, Junior.

Appreciate that.

All right.

So we have the property at 826 Peggy Drive.

Do we have a motion regarding the property?

Mr.

Chairman, this is George Grimes.

I have a motion.

Go ahead and please proceed, Mr.

Grimes.

Yeah, I'm a we reset uh this uh property for future hearing.

All right.

So we have the property located at 826 Peggy Drive.

We have a motion to reset.

Do we have a second?

This is this is Jamie Little and I second the motion.

Thank you, Jamie.

So we have a motion and a second.

Do we have any discussion?

Our wishes to amend the motion.

Alright, hearing none, then we'll go ahead and move on to a roll call vote, please.

Joel Solis?

Yes.

Before before the vote, uh the reset.

The board will need to specify next available hearing.

In August, or uh the default would be reset in 30 days.

So the board could provide some guidance.

Certainly.

Do we wish to make an amend the motion?

Uh this is George Grimes.

It was my motion.

Uh I would like the motion to re reset uh within 30 days.

Thank you, Mr.

Grimes.

And the second, Jamie, do you agree with that?

If this is Jamie, I agree.

Yes.

Thank you.

All right.

So the motion is to reset property located at 826 Peggy Drive for 30 days.

Do we have any further discussion?

All right, hearing none, let's go ahead and proceed with the roll call.

Joel Solis?

Yes.

George Grimes Jr.

Yes.

Jamie Little?

Yes.

Fred Andes.

Uh yes.

And one abstention for Mr.

David Valtieta.

The vote will be 42021.

Thank you very much.

And the code officer will meet you outside if you like.

Yes.

All right.

The next case we're looking at is at 511 Yellowwood Drive.

We have someone here to talk to it.

Ah.

For the record, my name is Cynthia Santana, dangerous premise officer for the City of San Antonio.

Development Services Department.

The structure being presented today is located at 511 Yellowwood Drive with a recommendation for demolition in accordance with City Code Article 8, Chapter 6.

This case is the first time being heard before this board.

The legal description is NCB 12240, block 14, lot 3, Skyline Park, Unit 2C.

Located in City Council District 2.

The owner on record is Moore Anna E with a mailing address of hearing were properly issued as required.

The owner on record is not present today.

Does the board wish to continue?

Any concerns regarding proceeding with this case?

See none.

Please proceed.

A phone number was not found for the owner, nor have I spoken with them.

The Office of Historic Preservation has confirmed on March 24th, 2026.

The property is not eligible for historic designation.

The following is a timeline of events regarding the notification process.

The first inspection regarding 511 Yellowwood Drive was conducted on August 14th, 2025.

Original notice was mailed on September 30th, 2025, and the certified receipt was returned to unclaimed on October 6th, 2025.

A conference meeting was held on October 23rd, 2025.

Neither the owner nor a representative appeared for the meeting.

On June 25, 2026, the notice for the BSB hearing was posted at 511 Yellowwood Drive.

On June 24, 2026, the notice for the BSB hearing was mailed to owner, and the certified receipt has not been returned.

No scope of work or financial proof or letter of credit or engineers report has been provided.

And there are no permits on file for 511 Yellowwood Drive as of July 8, 2026.

An administrative warrant was obtained and executed on June 3rd, 2026 for the photos that are being provided for today's presentation.

This first photo is of the front elevation as it faces the street, showing a single story main structure in a residential zone built in 1960 and is 1,578 square feet.

The structure has a brick and transit siding, a gable roof with a metal covering, and a slab on grade foundation.

The structure is not located within a thousand feet of a school.

The metal roof is separating from the decking on the right side and is resting on the right side of the main gable.

Windows are broken and boarded up by the city.

This is the right elevation where the brick siding is collapsing towards the top of the wall.

The wood that is exposed is rotted and deteriorated.

The fascia and metal eave strip are missing, and the supporting wood there is weathered from exposure to the elements.

The metal roof is detaching from the right side.

The siding is missing, exposing the wall studs and the bathroom shower tub inset.

I'll show you a closer up photo to where you can see that.

The rear sliding glass door is missing, allowing rodents, weather elements, and individuals to enter the structure.

This is the left elevation.

The fascia lacks weather protection.

The window glazing is broken, and the siding is damaged.

This photo is of the missing soffit at the front elevation.

You can see the bricks at the top are also missing, both of which allow rodents to enter the structure and cause damage.

You can see the center, the photo of the metal roofing covering is detaching.

The rafters are exposed to the elements, their water damage, deteriorated and broken.

This close-up shows the degree to which the original wood siding is deteriorated.

The rafters are rotted from the exposure to the elements.

This is a close-up of that rear elevation where the interior is open to the elements.

You can walk through the studs into the kitchen on the left side of the photo.

The tub is at the bottom.

There, where that white, where you see the white area, that's a shower inset.

The tub is underneath it and visible from the exterior.

Here you can see the detached metal roof cover from the rear elevation on the right side.

The room that is underneath this area has significant damage, and I'll show you an interior photo here shortly.

This is the side of the structure where that metal roof cover was adhered in properly.

If you look up underneath that metal covering, the metal roofing, you'll see that there's no decking there at all.

It was just set on top of the fascia boards.

The soffit is also missing from this side and rotted.

This is the first room as you walk in from that missing sliding glass door at the rear entrance.

The wall covering is missing on all sides of this room.

The wood members are listing to the interior on that center left wall.

You can see up close to the top plate, those uh wood members are leaning in.

Natural light is present at the top center of that wall as well.

The slab is exposed with no covering.

The debris is scattered across the floor, creating an egress violation.

This photo is a close-up of the missing wall covering, exposed electrical wires, and that hole in the wall on that side.

You can see mold at the bottom, halfway between the studs from the water exposure, the joist at the center, right at the top there, where it connects to the stud at the top peak is uh rotted and deteriorated from water damage.

On that same wall, you can see the exterior brick wall through the studs.

If you look to the right, this is uh what appeared to be a kitchen area.

Um visible through the studs on the right side of the room.

It backs up to the bathroom where you can see that shower inset.

Here there's no exterior wall.

Like I said, you can walk through the studs to the exterior of the property.

Ceiling drywall is collapsed, there's no wall covering, and again the slab is exposed with no floor covering.

This is the front room to the left of that kitchen area.

It has the same deficiencies with collapsed drywall, missing wall covering, and no floor covering.

Someone staying at the structure.

They've never been present when we've arrived to take inspections or do abatements.

This is the rear bedroom that is on the right side of the structure, and this is the area where that roofing, the metal roofing was pulled up from the decking.

You can see the extent of damage, water damage, the drywall is collapsed, the wall covering is missing, wiring is exposed, and natural light is present at the top, allowing the elements to further penetrate the structure.

As you were on the way to this is uh the front bedroom on the right side as well.

Again, the windows are broken, wall coverings missing, and there's a large amount of debris uh in the room.

This is the ceiling area looking over to some of the windows that the city is boarded up again with collapsed drywall and boarded up windows.

This is as you walk down the hallway.

Uh this is that act that bathroom that you can see from both the kitchen and the exterior wall, the amount of natural light coming in around the fixture, and then the ceiling there at the top, the wall is separating from the roof, uh, due to the extensive water damage.

This property uh this structure has sat neglected um for at least two years, according to satellite imagery.

That roof has been damaged since that time since 2024.

Uh the water has been off since 2023.

To recap the structure located at 511 Yellowwood Drive is in violation of City Code Article 8, Chapter 6-156, subsections 1, 2, 5, 7, 8, 11, 12, 15, 17, and 18, which any building or structure which has had any or all of the conditions or defects here and after described shall be deemed to be a dangerous building and a hazard to public health, safety, welfare, provided that such conditions of defects, dilapidation, substandardness, or unfitness for human habitation, pose a threat or potential threat to life, health, property, or human safety.

Staff recommends demolition.

That concludes my presentation of 511 Yellowwood Drive.

Thank you, Officer Satan.

We'll open it up for any questions.

I got a few here.

Um it seems like there were there were two ways being worked here.

The VP VBP program was working one, and you were working with to try to resolve this issue, correct?

Correct.

Now VBP had their hands in since 2025.

Under that program, the building is supposed to be boarded up.

Did they do it or no?

The city did it.

Right.

So the city code.

Okay.

Because it seems because there's two occupants or two city ordinances are groups working it.

Yeah.

So all of the abatements are done by code.

Correct.

So when you received it in 2026, because they finally released it to code.

Um any abatements since we've we've been abating the property since 2022, both in vegetation and broken windows.

Um our last abatement was just on June 3rd.

Um, and you can see from the July 6th photo that it's ready to be abated again.

The vegetation grows faster in that yard than any I've seen.

So we have uh four abatements on record since 2022.

But this property, the first notes in us is 814 2025.

That is when I took it as a dangerous premise.

That's when I've been having PM.

From way back from 2022.

Those are all code cases.

Correct.

And it still has issues.

So I read in here that the owner apparently in a nursing home as of the 20 as of 2025.

The owner's still there.

Uh I don't know.

Uh, that was contact that was made through the vacant building program.

I didn't have, uh, and if I remember correctly, Miss Williams with the vacant building program had stated that uh she spoke with a caretaker that had stated that she was in a nursing home.

Um I don't know if she's since passed away.

Uh I don't have any contact with that person.

You haven't had any contact with anybody.

No, it's only been through Miss Williams with the vacant building program.

And the only signs that you know somebody's there is because there's a bed there.

Correct.

But you've never made contact with them.

How about neighbors?

Uh no, I haven't spoken with the neighbors.

How many abatements have been done since 2022?

Four.

Four.

And they're all for property.

They're for windows and for overground vegetation.

And the current one was in July.

It was in June on June 3rd.

And its cost?

That one was 447 dollars.

Excuse me.

Thank you.

Um 47.

And it's you you already got another work order in for your project?

No, I need to create another one.

I just took a photo on July 6th, and I see that in a month's time the grass is.

Just for the grass.

Clean it.

So far the secure is still holding.

Secure in the way that the doors and windows are secure, but that whole wall is missing.

Uh that whole section between the kitchen and the bathroom.

Well, they've done those walls before.

We've seen that one where the city has put so I guess that'll be another work order.

Are you going to try to do the same?

It would.

You'd have to create two work orders.

Correct.

One for the building and one for the yard.

Well, there I can do it in the same work order.

I can do it in the same work order.

Okay.

So there's still at least two work orders that one more work order, yes.

And then if they don't continue, so we have nobody to code.

Okay.

And powers off, waters off.

Uh it is.

Yep.

Okay.

Thank you.

Are there any other questions for the code officer?

All right, seeing none.

Can we uh get a motion regarding 511 Yellowwood Drive?

Uh Mr.

Chairman, I have a motion.

Please proceed with the emotion.

Uh this is George Grimes.

I move that the property located at 511 Yellowwood Drive.

Is a public nuisance per City Code Chapter 6, Article 8, Section 6-157, which is not feasible to be repaired at this time and is in violation of City Code Chapter 6, Article 8, Section 156, subsections 1, 2, 5, 7, 8, 11, 12, 15, 17, and 18.

I move the property be uh demolished within 30 days from the issuance of an order that it be secured free of trash and debris, and that costs of abatements be uh collected from the owner.

Point of order.

When you say cost of abatements, can you be more specific with that in the order?

The cost of all prior abatements, and how about current?

All prior and current abatements.

Thank you.

Okay.

Thank you for that motion.

Uh we have a motion regarding 511 Yellowwood Drive, that it is a public nuisance for City Code Chapter 6, Article 8, Section 6-157, which is not feasible to be repaired at this time and is in violation of City Code Chapter 6, Article 8, Section 6-156, specifically 1, 2, 5, 7, 8, 11, 12, 15, 17, and 18.

We move that the property be demolished within 30 days from the issuance of this order, that it be um secured and free from trash and debris, that the owner be required to cover the cost of prior and current abatements, and do we have a second for that?

This is Jamie Little, and I second the motion.

Thank you, Miss Little.

Any discussion regarding the motion?

Alright, not seeing none.

Can we move to a roll call, please?

Joe Solis?

Yes.

George Grimes Jr.

Yes.

Jamie Little?

Yes.

Fred Andes?

Yes.

David Maltieta?

Yes.

Motion passes with the vote of 520.

Thank you very much.

We're gonna move on to our next property.

We still have two more to go.

So this is going to be 1918 McCullough Avenue.

Do we have anyone to provide testimony?

Good morning board.

Good morning.

For the record, my name is Hassan Razawi.

I'm a dangerous premises officer with City of San Antonio Development Services Department.

The structures being presented today is located at 1918 McCullough Avenue, San Antonio, Texas, with a recommendation for repair in accordance with City Code Article 8, Chapter 6.

This is the second time this case is being heard before this board.

Just want to advise the board that this case was presented before this board back in April 9th of 2026.

The legal description is NCB 2999 block 1, lot 7, located in City Council District 1.

The owner on record is Poland Polonard Herbert Lawrence with a mailing address of 5107 Village Way San Antonio, Texas, 78218.

All notices of hearing were properly issued as required.

Please proceed.

A contact was made with the property owner, Mr.

Lawrence via phone calls and text messages.

The Office of Historic Preservation has confirmed on January 15, 2026, the property is not eligible for historic designation.

The following timeline of events regarding the notification process.

The first inspection regarding 1918 McCullough Avenue was conducted on March 11, 2025.

The original notice of violation was mailed on March 12, 2025, and the notice of violation was returned unclaimed on April 4th, 2025.

The conference meeting letter was mailed to the property owner on November 26, 2025.

On December 19, 2025, the pre-conference meeting held at DSD with no attendance on the property owner.

And as per property owner request, on January 9th, 2026, a second uh pre-conference hearing was held at DSD with no attendance of the property owner.

On June 25th, 2026, the notice for the BSP hearing was posted at 1918 McCullough Avenue.

On June 25, 2026, the notice for BSP hearing was mailed to the property owner.

No scope of work or financial proof or letter of credit.

An engineer's report has been provided on April 9th, 2026.

No permit on file as of today, July 9th, 2026.

This is the uh contextual photo of the structure located at 1918 McCullough Avenue.

It is a single-story commercial structure with slap on grade foundation, brick siding, and flat roof system.

The next photo showing the front left elevation of the structure.

The left brick siding is detaching with a gap.

This is a closer view of the front left elevation of the structure.

As you can see, the gap uh on the brick siding on the left uh elevation of the structure.

Um as you can see uh towards the ceiling, that separation of the brick siding expose the interior to the elements.

This is just a closer view to show the separation and the gap on the left portion of the structure.

The next photo is a front right elevation of the structure.

The next photo is the right elevation of the structure.

I try to do my best to get a good angle, but as you can see, there is a lot of vehicles, and there is a privacy fence.

Excuse me, on the right portion of the structure.

The next photo showing the rear portion of the structure.

As you can see, there are multiple cracks and the brick siding.

It goes it goes horizontally from the left rear all the way to the right rear portion of the structure.

This is a contextual photo because of the sunlights and the vegetation.

There are multiple cracks, major cracks in the brick siding at the rear portion of the structure, but there are other photos which shows these cracks.

This is a contextual photo is showing the rear portion towards the left rear portion of the structure.

As you can see, there is a major crack between the windows and the roof system.

This is a contextual photo, shows the rear portion of the structure.

Again, there are multiple cracks between the window framing all the way to the roof system.

There are also cracks by the window framing.

The next photo, I was trying to get the best angle I can.

As you can see, the vegetation is preventing me of getting a closer view of the front, I mean, from the rear left elevation of the structure.

Again, there is a major crack going horizontally from the right portion, the right portion all the way to the front.

On the next photo, I was trying to zoom in.

As you can see, the crack in the brick siding, it goes all the way.

There is a couple of stepping cracks all the way to the front.

I'll just interrupt you for a moment.

Is that tree looking next to that corner of the building actually contacting the building?

No, it's closer to the building.

Okay.

Yeah, but it's not impacting the structure.

Thank you.

Yes, sir.

This is just a contextual photo.

I know the sunlight is kind of like prevent the cameras from getting a like a better angle because the sunlights and the vegetation.

The next photo is upon entering the main entrance of the structure.

As you can see, the roof, the roof ceiling, the ceiling covering, excuse me, the ceiling covering is collapsing in some areas, and towards the back of the structure, as you can see, there were there are a couple of holes in the brick siding exposing the interior to the elements.

Yes, sir.

This is towards the center of the structure.

As you can see, the ceiling covering is damaged, collapsed, and missing in some areas.

As you can see, there is a major crack at the back.

It's a stepping crack in the brick siding, and there are a couple of holes exposing the interior to the elements.

The next photo is towards the uh left, as upon your you entering the main uh entrance.

Uh again, the the ceiling covering is missing and damaged.

Uh the ceiling tile, the ceiling joys are extremely rotted with a couple of holes and the and the brick siding exposing the interior to the elements, and also, as you can see, there are uh multiple use of the extension cord, which is posing electric hazard.

The next photo is I will call it um uh upon you upon entering the structure, you're gonna go to your left.

Uh as you can see, the the ceiling cover is the ceiling covering is extremely damaged and rotted and deteriorated.

And this is a contextual photo uh towards the left portion of the structure interior.

Um the ceiling covering is is significant significantly damaged and rotted.

Uh the ceiling uh rafters and doors are extremely rotted, and as per uh structured tenants, it's they stated that every time it rains the the roofs start leaking.

This is towards uh the back of the structure, towards the emergency exit.

As you can see, there are uh multiple cracks in the brick siding over the emergency exit over the windows.

There are a couple of holes in the brick siding exposing the interior to the elements.

The ceiling covering is missing and damage in some areas, the ceiling rafters and ceiling doors are extremely rotted and deteriorated.

This is just a closer view to show the numbers of stepping cracks in the brick siding and to show the holes and the brick siding.

This is a contextual photo.

Again, there's a uh multiple use of extension cord, which is posing uh electric hazard.

This is a single story commercial structure built in 1942, zone C2.

The left brick siding is detaching with multiple cracks, and the left and rear brick siding, electric with electric hazard with holes in the siding exposing the interior to the elements.

The siding is lacking weather protection.

To recap, the structures located at 1918 McCullough Avenue is in violation of City Code Article 8, Chapter 6-156, subsections one, two, five, seven, eight, twelve, and fifteen, in which any building or structure which has any or all the conditions or defects here and after described shall be deemed to be dangerous building and hazard to public health, safety, and welfare, provided that such conditions of defects of dilapidation, substance, substandardness, or unfitness for human habitation, pose a threat or potential threat to life, health, property, or human safety.

Staff recommend repairs.

That concludes my presentation of 1918 McCullough Avenue.

Thank you very much for that presentation.

I just wanted just two observations.

The center post on the interior, was that an actual support beam that's starting to lean?

Yes, sir.

And so it was that leaning is it because the base is rotted out, or is it that the building is pushing it to the side, or is it run into it's it's probably they have some foundation issues, and also the ground, it's actually not uh straight.

It's kind of like uh crowded out, yeah.

It's a little round towards the center, even like when I parked on the main driveway, it's kind of like it's going up to the hill.

So and the the cracks in the rear that very evident in the rear walls.

Were you able to actually see the the cracks from the interior as well?

Able to locate those, or those additional cracks that you saw?

These are additional cracks, and as you can see on the contextual photo, the structure interior, there are a lot of tires that prevent me to get a closer view uh of the cracks.

Very well.

Okay.

I'm gonna open this up for questioning.

Anyone have any questions for the officer?

Uh yeah, this is George Crimes.

Um, is that property currently currently occupied by the tenant?

And and is so is that an operating business?

Yes, sir.

It is uh an active business, it is a tire shop.

And uh since the order resetting the hearing, have you uh had any contact with the owner or the owner's representative?

No, sir.

Thank you.

Mr.

David waltier, I've got a couple of questions for you.

You keep referring to the to the brick as siding, but it appears that the brick is the entire wall composition or it's a double white structural element to the structure.

Yes, sir.

Uh so to me it looks like you know with the conditions that it's it's pretty well you know I mean the cracks go through on both sides it's the same crack on front and back inside and outside yes sir uh do you know if and when and whether or not they have a current occupancy certificate for that tenant I did not check that all right thank you for the questions uh I got one for legal I had a question for legal sorry we'd interrupt you there no no it's busy uh on the um designated term demolition when an order goes out uh is that considered an abatement or no yes uh in the context of uh what this board's jurisdiction is uh demolition is uh abatement of a public nuisance all right so when we order that term in an abatement it could also cover the demolition cost as well correct yes all abatements uh all actions that have been taken by the city to address any health safety welfare violations on a property are abatements all right I just wanted to clarify instead of having to write a specific piece for that piece all right so anything embatement wise now on this property did since March I mean I'm sorry May 5th I think is what the court order read since then have you had any contact no sir and the only thing you said you got yeah from anybody and the only thing you said it was received was a uh uh engineers report yes sir he provided the engineers report on April 9th when we had the BSP hearing and he tried to request more time um this is what happened but nothing happened since then according to the tenants um they stated that maybe like about a month ago uh there are a couple of contractors they can buy a look at the structure but as of today there's no permit there's no contact was made with the property owner or the uh contractor as they claimed that they were on site so your last conversation was April 9th that is correct and uh we had a conversation down the hallway the the thing is I try to explain what needs to be done the property owner raises his hand he was like I got this and he walked away then that's the last that is the last time we make contact and you've reached out since then that's the problem he provided a phone number uh we talked before I sent a text messages but now he claimed that this is an office number and he does not uh receive any text messages and the old numbers that you used are not it's not working did you go by the address and he's not there that's that's another problem he claimed that the property at the the owner address on record it's not his address so he's claimed that we've been sending notices to the wrong address okay but he ends up with it and comes the ninth for the meeting excuse me sir he ended up with information and came to the ninth he claimed that uh as you can see I made contact with him multiple times and that's the only property that he requested to reset the pre-conference meeting on both times he did not show up we we've been in contact over the phone via text messages but when we had our last BSB hearing he claimed that he never talked to me and he don't he doesn't know what I'm talking about so he denied any contact that was made with him.

Mr.

Chair, may I ask a question?

Yes, please proceed.

Uh Hassan, uh when he claimed uh the notices were being sent to the wrong address, did he provide an alternate address?

No, ma'am.

And he didn't provide an alternate phone number?

No, sir.

And I'm I'm gonna read here because the court order says one nine one eight McCullough Avenue.

It's business.

Yes, it is an active business photoshop.

This would also go to the business, correct?

When it's mailed out, counsel this would actually go to the business too, or uh generally yes.

The notices would go um to any entity associated with that address also copies of uh the hearing notices would be posted on the premises itself.

And this is uh Hassan again.

I did post a notice of the hearing on the actual business.

The tenants are aware they stated they they will uh send that to the property owner.

Well, and that's another one I'm ready because if you went to the business, then those tenants wouldn't be holding his mail, they would be given his mail.

Yes, sir.

Because this affects them.

So you've made every opportunity since the ninth to see if they were going to come to the meeting and they didn't show.

No, sir.

All right, thank you.

Thank you.

Uh Mr.

Chairman, uh another question for legal.

Does the tenant of this property have standing to challenge the demolition order?

Uh excuse me.

Uh the tenant does not uh only persons with a recorded legal interest as owner lien holder or mortgagey.

Thank you.

And officer Hassan, you mentioned the the engineers report a couple of times.

Can you summarize what was in that engineer's report?

I think the Ms.

uh our admin provided the engineers report to the board.

Yes, we see it on the display now.

Thank you.

A question for legal?

To clarify basically.

In the order it says that they are to prove uh financial means, scope of work, and timeline, since they did not provide that that would constitute a failure to comply with the order, correct?

Correct.

So basically the engineers report is moot.

Uh the engineers report uh as submitted, uh can be taken uh the board can decide the worth of that report if it's sufficient to uh the document itself since it was uh submitted as and is part of the official record, uh the board can take a look at it, it doesn't necessarily render a moot, however, the board can also take into consideration the failure to follow through with the previous orders and or have the engineer available to respond to questions, did you reinspect this building after the ninth of April?

Yes, sir.

Uh it would you did you compare the photos from prior to and to see if there was any it's is the same exact nothing has been changed, no repairs have been done.

No, no, I mean to see if there's any like from a visual that break is a little more out than what it was before or uh it looks the same.

You're talking about the separation at the front well not just that any other issues that like uh you saw the separation to split the cracks yeah it it looks the same so the cracks look like they've changed bigger or smaller or it and and it looked the same okay thank you.

Mr.

Chairman may I ask yes please do another question and I apologize I missed the answer to uh board member Valteri's question is there a certificate of occupancy an existing valid see of um I did not check that information but I think um we can uh we can have that information on the on the laptop we can check right now is the business uh or the tenant operating the business currently yes ma'am I believe that was one of the main concerns because the property came to my attention from the zoning team um I cannot speak on their behalf but it seems that they were having issues as far as issuing a certificate of occupancy or other uh permits so that's why they it was brought to my attention because they think it is not safe the structure is not safe.

Okay and um as the dangerous premises investigator uh would you provide uh information as to your belief as to whether or not it is safe for the tenant to be operating a business in the conditions the structure presents based on the current uh uh condition of the structure it is not safe for the tenants to operate the business that's why I asked you before if you noticed a difference in the previous photos to the current photos has there been any structural change and you testified to that already that's what I was getting to is is it would normally show a sign did you uh at any time go to a supervisor uh what is he the the chief inspector did he review this at any time no sir sorry about that um I did just want to clarify one point I do oversee the zoning team and I did confirm on the um in our system um the property does have a certificate of occupancy it is current it is for uh tire repair service what initiated the original complaint or the investigation is for for for businesses that do sell um scrap tire or use tires and take in scrap tires there is an annual permit that must be obtained so upon before we approve that for um a license an annual license for that scrap tire license our staff will do a um uh an inspection of the of the of the business of the building and that's what would have precipitated um officer Hassan uh being called out there okay and it did um you probably don't but I'm just gonna ask it were there any footnotes attached to the recommendation did you probably don't have access to that from your computer the recommendation from the building certificate no sir they just you just see that they have a certificate right correct so I'm just wondering if they made a concern of footnote so next time if it pops up they know what to does that make sense that somebody would put a footnote in there saying hey look we have an issue but we're gonna issue the permit, but in the footnotes, this is why, and it was kind of a.

Actually, we wouldn't issue the permit until this situation is is this is actually holding up the issuance of the annual license because we want confirmation that the building is safe to continue operation.

So it's kind of a it's a twofold piece, they're kind of a circular issue.

We did not issue uh a scrap tire license because this process is still continuing on and that's what I wanted to know if they have a license now.

They don't so they do not they do have a certificate occupancy.

Currently, there is a current certificate of occupancy.

We have not pursued that action uh to potentially reevaluate that piece, but we have not issued the scrap tire license at this point.

Okay, so now the certificate occupancy comes from you guys or somebody else.

It comes from development services, okay.

It is issued, and once it's issued, it continues on unless it is revoked.

We will typically not revoke it until we have a finalization of standing of as an order or as the you know a declaration or something significant.

Our investigation is typically not just enough.

We want the escalation piece with court cases and the findings in some type of order to help um execute that um reevaluation.

So everything right now was just it's pending on this hearing today.

Yes, sir.

All right, thank you.

That clears the light up right there.

Let me ask another question.

The uh engineering report that was submitted by the owner says the roof started leaking after tenant moved in and ceiling sheet rock and drop ceiling tiles for water damage.

Since the roof was replaced 10 years ago, there have been no more leaks.

Is that your opinion that the roof still leaks?

As per tenants, that was back in uh April of this year.

Uh they stated that when it starts uh start right raining like heavily, the roof start leaking.

Thank you.

All right, any more questions for the code officer?

All right, hearing none.

Thank you very much for your testimony today.

Chair, this is Judy.

Yes, Judy.

We do have one public comment to read into the record.

Please proceed.

This email was received from Frederica Kushner on Wednesday, July 8th, 2026 at 312 p.m.

concerning item number six, parcel address 1918 McCullough Avenue, main structure.

Legal description NCB 2999 block one lot seven.

The main structure at 1918 McCullough Avenue was built in 1949 and has been an active part of the neighborhood for over 75 years, notwithstanding the Office of Historic Preservation's review of demolition application.

We believe the original building can and should remain as part of Tobin Hills McCullough Avenue Streetscape as it has been for three quarters of a century.

The original 1949 structure should remain, but the trailer, etc.

add-on, should be declared a hazard and demolished.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Frederick Kushner, Council District 1.

Thank you.

Thank you for reading that into the record.

Quick question back to uh code inspector, our code officer.

Yes, sir.

In your testimony, you this is not a designated historical building, correct?

Uh, this does not fall into designated historical building.

The Office of Historic Preservation has confirmed on uh January 15, 2026, the property is not eligible for any historic designation.

Okay, so this guy's arguing for some type of historical, which it year doesn't make it, it's criteria.

All right, so with that said, that's all that I wanted to clarify that it was not clarified as a historical.

Thank you.

All right, thank you very much.

Regarding the property in 1918 McCullough Avenue.

Do we have a motion?

Mr.

Chair, this is redandus.

I'll make a motion.

Please proceed with your motion.

I move that the property located at 1918 McCullough Avenue.

Is a public nuisance for Chapter Code City 6, Article 8, Section 6 157, which is not feasible to be repaired at this time, and is in violation of city code chapter 6, Article 8, Section 6 156, subsections 125, 7, 8, 12, and 15, and is its violations pose a threat, potential threat to life, health, safety, and property.

I ordered that the property that this building be demoed within 30 days.

It is to be vacated.

Utilities are to be cut.

It is to be secured.

It is to be free of all debris.

And the owner must pay for all abatements.

That's the end of my motion.

Alright.

Let me read that motion back.

Make sure that I've got that correct.

We're moving that the property located at 1918 McCullough Avenue is a public nuisance for City Code Chapter 6, Article 8, Section 6-157, which is not feasible to be repaired at this time.

Specifically sections 1, 2, 5, 7, 8, 12, and 15.

We move that the property be demolished within 30 days from the issuance of this order, that it be vacated, the utilities cut, that the property be free of trash and debris, and for the owner to cover past and present abatement cost.

Did I get that right?

Yes.

Do we have a second regarding the motion?

Second.

This is George Grimes.

Thank you, Mr.

Grimes.

Do we have any discussion?

I did want to this is David Valtier.

I did want to amend that with uh just a revocation of any certificate of occupancies that are active.

Revoke.

All right, we have a request to include in the motion to revoke the cert of occupancy.

Uh let me uh staff on the uh the amendment was revoked certificate of occupation that automatically comes once this order is granted, correct or no?

Would that be an automatic or would it have to be in the court order?

It is not necessarily automatic, so uh, but I uh I do want to remind the board uh all the other terms um are orders, the revocation of the certificate of occupancy, the by statute, uh that authority is solely vested in the building official, so uh that can be part of the order, but to let you uh the board know it'll be uh more as a recommendation to the building official and then director Tomance will make the final decision to revoke.

Thank you for that clarification.

Thank you.

Then I would revise that to say as a recommendation we recommend that the certificate of occupancy any current ones be revoked, I'm gonna go ahead and yeah, I'll take the amendment.

The second agrees to the amendment, okay.

So we're gonna add to recommend to revoke the sort of occupancy.

All right, so we have a motion, we have a second.

Any further discussion regarding 1918 McCullough Avenue?

Wait, it is in the discussion phase still.

Did you have this is Officer Hassan again.

Just uh for the record, the staff came with a recommendation of repair, but the board disagree and they recommend demolition.

Thank you.

Yes, that was in written in our last order.

Anybody?

Um that should be all right.

So can we proceed with a roll call vote, please?

Joe Zelise?

Yes, George Grimes Jr.

Yes.

Jamie Little?

Yes.

Fred Andis.

Yes.

David Balquiera.

Yes.

Motion passes with a vote of 520.

All right.

That concludes test my 1918.

West McCullough.

And we're on to our last property of the day.

This is 212 Go Forth Drive.

This is another reset.

And we do have someone.

The talk to this one.

Thank you.

Good morning.

For the record, my name is Stephanie Sanchez, dangerous premises officer for the City of San Antonio Development Services Department.

The structure being presented today is located at 212 Go 4th Drive with a recommendation for demo for repair in accordance with City Code Article 8, Chapter 6.

This case is a reset and is the second time being heard before this board.

The legal description is NCB 14948, block 2, lot 16, located in City Council District 10.

The owner on record is Bustos Lorenzo, care of Aselmo Bustos with a mailing address of all notices of hearing with a mailing address of 212 go forth drive.

All notices of hearing were properly issued as required.

The owner on record is not present today.

Does the board wish to proceed?

Yes, I believe we are.

Thank you.

Contact has been made with the daughter and granddaughter Lisa Bustos by phone, and she was present at the last hearing.

The Office of Historic Preservation has confirmed on October 14th, 2025, that the property is not legible for historic designation.

The first inspection regarding 212 go for drive was conducted on November 6th, 2024.

The original notice was mailed on November 13th, 2024, and the certified receipt was returned unclaimed on November 25th, 2024.

On March 12, 2026, the building standards board hearing was held with a reset order for the main and a 30-day demolition for the accessory.

On June 4, 2026, a warrant was executed to obtain photos that are being presented today.

On June 25, 2026, the notice for this BSB hearing was posted at 212 go forth.

On June 24, 2026, the notice for the BSB hearing was mailed to the owner, and the certified receipt is pending.

At this time, no scope of work, financial proof, letter of credit, or engineers report has been provided.

As of July 8th of 2026, there are no permits on file for 212 go forth.

The photos that are being presented for today's presentation were taken on July 2nd, 2026 and June 4th, 2026.

So here we do have the front elevation of the structure.

We do have a pending case to address the issue.

So here we are going towards the rear of the right elevation.

You do see above the carport that the overhang is uh rotting and it is starting to sag and is deteriorating along the metal iron door gate that is there, the brick siding is cracking all the way down and starting to separate.

Here we go to the rear elevation.

Um there is a large, several large holes due to the deteriorated um decking and shingle covering that is present.

Um it is rotting.

Um, little room towards the right was a small little addition that is starting to lean.

Here we do just have a close-up just to show that it is starting to lean and as well as um affecting the foundation that is present.

Here we do have um a photo for the right.

I'm sorry, the left elevation of what I could get the most because it is pretty close to the fence line.

You do just see some deterioration to the overhang as well as some you can see how much that little room is leaning also.

This will be the front view of the left elevation.

Um you can't see over the arch.

There is separation in the brick as well as the damage to the overhang.

There's a hole in the soffit as well.

This is the view from the front patio section where you do see the damage to the siding of the brick.

Here we are entering the structure.

There is some trash and debris.

Um this will be the front door entryway, which would be the living room.

This will be the bedroom to the left of Sedway.

There is um items and debris throughout, making it difficult if anybody were to be present for ingress or egress.

Here we are towards the center of the structure, which would be the kitchen area.

Um there is a hole in the ceiling with the drywall that has collapsed as well as some debris on the ground.

This will be the rear right bedroom.

Um, you do see some items throughout as well as some of the drywall that has fallen from the ceiling.

And here is the ceiling, showing that there is um no drywall.

Here we are going into the garage.

Um, there is three, it's a three-car garage.

We're entering where it is two, and there is a separate garage that is standing alone that I was not able to enter, but coming in, you do see some items as well as the steps that were a little wonky walking past.

So here we do have you can see the severe deterioration or lack of roof system that is currently present.

Um, it is severely w weathered and water damaged, and this will be that separate garage that was an addition.

Um again, large hole lack of a roof system.

There is items and debris throughout the deterioration and water damage that is present.

This is a main structure.

Um, excuse me.

This is a main single story residential wood frame structure with brick and stuckle siding and a hipped roof system with asphalt shingle covering on a concrete slab foundation.

The rear roof is has large holes with missing and rotting sheathing and covering.

Raftors are rotting and weathered, allowing for the elements and wildlife to enter.

The overhang is rotting and sagging with soffits detaching.

The brick siding masonry has cracks and separation.

To recap, the structure located at 212 go forth is in violation of city code article 8, chapter 6-156 subsection.

One, two, four, five, seven, eight, eleven, twelve, fifteen, seventeen, and eighteen, in which any building or structure which has any or all of the conditions or defects herein after described shall be a deemed to be a dangerous building and a hazard to public health, safety, and welfare, provided that such conditions of defects of dilapidation, some standardness or unfitness for human habitation, pose a threat or potential threat to life, health, property, or human safety.

Staff recommends repair.

That concludes my presentation of 212 go forth drive.

Thank you for that presentation.

I noted that the officer on the report is not used.

Was there a change in this one?

Currently, yes, I have assisting to complete this case.

So you're assisting John Garza on this one.

Okay.

And the other I was going to mention was in the repair order, we had requested the owner provide the following documents for review, written scope of work with dates certain for completion repair, proof of financial means to complete the repairs.

Has that been provided to you as well?

No, sir.

So that has not been provided.

No.

Okay.

Thank you for that clarification.

And we'll open it up for discussion.

Uh Mr.

Chairman, uh, has the accessory structure been demolished?

No, it is currently still standing.

So, but the order required it to be demolished.

Correct.

So we they allow for the 30-day order for the demo for the accessory.

We allow the owners to make an attempt to do so.

If not, they still have the appeal process as well.

Once that fails, we'll send out a letter to let them know hey, the orders have expired.

What are you gonna do about this?

Um at that point, then we start our process to create the work order, get our contractors, apply for permits, and so we are currently in that process.

Thank you.

Okay, and and you have not had not had contact with the owner since the order was issued.

So to my understanding, I did review the last uh original hearing for here.

The listed owner, Mr.

Lorenzo Bustos is the grandfather of Lisa, who is the person who had came last time.

Um the care of for Al Salmo Bustos is her father, and they are both deceased.

Um currently would have to go through probate.

Um, she I believe she said there's nine grandchildren that would have to come together and some don't want to do anything with the property.

Um she's the one that has taken the initiative to try to do something with the property, um, but currently could not make it today because she is out of state working.

Okay, any further questions for the code officer?

Uh not at the code officer, I do have one of counsel uh on the bottom line of the the last line.

Hang on a minute.

It's uh it gives failure to comply part of the order.

Do you have the order at your beck and call?

On that last line.

No, it's actually last sentence.

Is that gonna interfere with the the way that's written?

When we order for a um abatement, does that line interfere with the abatement when we order an abatement, or is that in lieu of possible?

It could be done.

Okay, uh let me get to the order.

Uh oh, here it is.

Uh hold on.

Yeah, yeah, because that that may the way it's written may alter the way even the last one was done, but because they didn't show up, this would be null and void anyway.

But the way that's written, I interpret it as interfering or could interfere with an abatement process when we order for an abatement.

Are you referring to uh the last standard paragraph failure to comply?

Yeah, and the last line, the last sentence specifically, a lien shall be.

Uh no, it uh it will not.

Uh any order issued by this board today will not interfere with that clause.

But if that wasn't in there, then that line would still if we didn't order the abatement the way we ordered it before, that line would would play.

But if we order the abatement process, then that line is basically null and void, right?

No, that uh that is what will uh that's uh what provides the basis for the city to take action due to failure to comply, and any time the city uses public funds to abate a public nuisance, uh that is just notice that the city is required uh assess a lien for those costs.

So when I order like the last and when I ordered that, that still does not affect that line.

No, okay.

It's just a an additional tool.

All right, I just wanted to clarify that in my mind.

Thank you.

George, you have a question?

Yeah, um, is there any evidence of anybody occupying this property?

Since we have been since uh city has been in this process?

Since I've been assisting with this, I have not noticed any unsecurings or anything that indicates otherwise.

Okay, and uh does our utilities serving this property?

Water and gas uh water and no, all utilities have been disconnected for several years.

Thank you.

I got another one for you.

Your previous uh code officer reminded us that you were asking for a repair.

Are you still asking for the repair?

Are you gonna rely on the board's decision?

Currently, my recommendation is still for repair, yes, sir.

Even though nobody showed up from the time, what was this order given?

It was given uh back from March, March 12th.

23rd is when they signed it.

So whenever so from March 23rd on, you have no contact with anybody.

I actually spoke with uh Miss Lisa Bustos yesterday.

Um, it wouldn't be in the notes because uh we gave you the information prior to um, and she said she would not be able to make it, but that she did send in an email that um will be read into the record.

So you've had contact with her since the 23rd of March?

Yes, once as of yesterday.

Did you have any meetings between the 23rd of March and yesterday?

I have not.

Were there any scheduled with them?

Do we know that?

From I believe um through the email that I did I I read also, um, she tried to get in contact with John but wasn't aware um he was unavailable.

Oh, okay.

So we may have some extenuating circumstances.

All right, thank you.

I've got a question.

Go ahead.

Um just looking at, and I know you don't have this image here, but I looked at Google Maps, looking at the image there, and it looks like that whole back of a house roof has holes in it.

It is.

Would you, in your opinion, think that or assess that that roof is one entire structure or an add-on?

I believe that the third garage that's standing alone in its own room wasn't eventually an addition at one point or another.

Um the siding is different in Stuckle siding compared to the rest of the structure that's all brick.

Okay, and so looking at the historical and BCAD, it doesn't look like there were any improvements made after 56.

Okay, so it may have been an illegal structure at some point.

Um possibly.

Okay.

Thank you very much.

Alright, thank you also for your testimony.

Can we proceed to public comments?

Yes, on Wednesday, July 8, 2026, at 4 23 p.m.

Lisa Bustos wrote, Stephanie, thanks for the call.

I'm sending the email to Judy Croom as you suggested in order to get a reset and for Judy to be aware of the latest updates on the 212 Go4 Drive San Antonio, Texas property.

I currently reside outside of Texas due to a temporary work assignment required by my employer.

While I travel to Texas periodically, my next available to appear in person is August 26th through September 1st.

If those dates are not feasible, I am also available during October.

The property remains in probate and progress is continuing.

A landscaping company has been hired to remove the overgrown vegetation and debris from the property.

The demo of the structure in the backyard has fell through because of no shows on responsiveness.

However, I did secure a bonded company that is able to complete the job within 30 days.

They visited the site last week and will send the 7500 quote to my email by the end of the week.

This quote has been approved already.

Repairs to the main structure will require additional time, but I have already begun discussions with a realtor regarding the property's eventual sell once the state matters are resolved.

In addition, I am actively completing the airship and ownership transfer process.

The grandchildren of the heirs are transferring their ownership interest to me, and four of the eight required priorities have completed the sign and necessary paperwork, which will be filed.

The remaining transfers are in progress, although I am not personally responsible for the property and live outside of the state.

I'm the only one interested party that's making the effort to get the property in a proper condition.

I respectfully request additional time so these probates, ownership, and property matters can continue moving forward.

Thank you for your consideration, and I appreciate your willingness to reschedule the court date to a time when I can be present.

Thank you, and I'm happy to have a conversation any time.

I also I want to also add that I found out today, Officer Garza has been out on a leave, and I have reached out to him about this situation, and he didn't respond.

I learned that from Stephanie Sanchez that she took over for him today.

Thank you.

Alright, thank you for reading that public comment.

If there are no other questions, can we move to a motion regarding 212 go forth drive?

Uh Mr.

Chairman, I have a motion.

Please proceed with your motion.

I move that the property located at 212 go forth drive.

Isn't in violation of City Code Chapter 6, Article 8, Section 6-156, subsections 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 11, 12, 15, 17, and 18.

I move that the property be repaired within 30 days from the issuance of this order, that it be secured free of trash and debris.

Let me just read that motion back again.

We're gonna move in that the property located at 212 go forth drive is a public nuisance for city code chapter 6, article 8, section 6-157, which is feasible to be repaired at this time and is in violation of City Code Chapter 6, Article 8, Section 6-156.

Specifically for the main, we're only talking about the main, it's sections one, two, four, five, seven, eight, eleven, twelve, fifteen, seventeen, and eighteen.

We move that the property be repaired within 30 days from the issuance of this order, that the property be secured and be free of trash and debris.

Do we have a second?

Uh I'll second it within a uh and add a uh ask for a friendly amendment.

You said the property is to be free of debris, secure.

Did you say vacate?

I did not say vacate.

And utilities were off, correct?

It might okay.

So I'd add in there to maintain vacate.

No problem.

Yes, I agree.

And uh a follow-up every 15 days.

I know it's 30 days, but would uh to code.

And to also give code the documents that were required on the first order.

Would that be acceptable?

Yes.

Agreed.

And that's the I agree.

All right, let me just read that back again.

All right, so the motion now before us is that we move the property located 212 go forth drive.

Uh is a public nuisance for City Code Chapter 6, Article 8, Section 6, 157, which is feasible to repair it at this time and is in violation of City Code Chapter 6, Article 8, Section 6-156.

Specifically sections for the main one, two, four, five, seven, eight, eleven, twelve, fifteen, seventeen, and eighteen.

That the property, oops, I move that the proper we move that the property be repaired within 30 days from the issuance of this order, that it be secured, free of trash and debris, that a follow-up be conducted every 15 days, and that the documents ordered in the prior order, which was to provide a written scope of work with dates certain for completion of repairs, to that the proof of financial means to complete the repairs, that those be provided.

And must pull all permits.

Any discussion regarding the motion?

Mr.

Chairman, since we've got a couple of new people on the on the board, I'm sure they've been through the training, but I'm wondering if it uh would be appropriate to ask legal to describe the process, assuming that this uh motion passes, and and given the difficulty that this owner will have moving forward, what what is the process if they fail to begin repairs?

So uh just to clarify the order was to begin repairs in 30 days.

The motion is to repair within 30 days, uh, two ways, the two routes, uh being uh very uh technical with the order, if uh there's a failure uh to have made substantial progress to repair within the 30 days, uh two routes could be taken.

Uh the the first one I mentioned the technical route would be okay.

They failed uh comply with the letter of the order, and it will uh most likely be brought back to the board for uh with the recommendation for demolition.

Uh the second route uh which is uh typically the uh more realistic approach would be that uh the code officer would continue to work with uh Lisa Bustos, and as long as uh effort is uh continuing to be made by her, and she uh does provide documentation to show uh the remaining four heirs are transferring their interest in the property to her, and she's made uh some type of progress, the code officer has the discretion to continue working with the property owner to uh get to the point where the structure uh no longer presents a nuisance.

I am for uh board member Terry and board member little the uh bottom line in reality is that if a property owner does show uh uh progress towards repairing a structure, uh it's in the best interest of the city, and uh it's uh what this board ultimately would like to see is to if it is feasible to be repaired, and the board uh provides the repair order.

Uh the code officers uh will definitely endeavor to get to a point where it can be repaired, okay.

Thank you for that clarification.

So we have a motion, it's been seconded.

Any further discussion?

Not seeing none, can we proceed to a roll call?

Joe Solis?

Yes.

George Grimes Jr.

Yes, Jamie Little, yes.

Fred Andes, David Maltieta, yes.

Motion passes with a vote of five two zero.

All right, thank you all.

I think that takes care of all the properties that we were looking at for today.

And then we're moving on to the BSB guidelines policies and procedures, administrative items.

We have anyone talking to that today.

Nothing from uh my end, good.

Well, that completes our agenda for the day.

Then that means that we are in adjournment.

Thank you all very much.

Thank you, staff.

Thank you.