[00:00:01]
GOOD MORNING, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.
[Permit and License Appeal Board on February 5, 2026.]
WELCOME TO THIS MEETING OF THE PERMIT AND LICENSE APPEAL BOARD FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS.I'M HONORED TO BE THE CHAIRMAN OF, UH, THIS BOARD.
UH, IT IS FEBRUARY 5TH, 2026 AT 8:37 AM WE HAVE TWO HEARINGS ON TODAY'S AGENDA BEING 65 38 TIOGA CIRCLE, APPEALING AND DENIAL OF A BOARDING HOME LICENSE.
UH, I'M GONNA GO WITH BAGUETTE HOLDINGS, BUT I WOULD PREFER TO BE ABLE TO SAY IT CORRECTLY.
UH, UH, IF, IF YOU WOULD CORRECT ME, UH, APPEALING THE NOTICE OF THE FINAL DESIGNATION AS A HABITUAL CRIMINAL PROPERTY, UH, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD ARE APPOINTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE MAYOR.
WE GIVE OUR TIME FREELY AND RECEIVE NO FINANCIAL COMPENSATION FOR THAT TIME.
UH, AT THIS POINT, I'D LIKE TO DO A ROLL CALL.
PLEASE SAY HERE IF YOU'RE HERE.
I KNOW YOU'RE HERE, BUT I HAVE TO HEAR IT.
BUT WE WON'T BE ABLE TO HEAR YOU LATER.
SO, MR. JEFFERSON, JUST KNOW THAT WE CAN'T ALL HEAR YOU RIGHT NOW, SO MAKE SURE YOU USE THAT HAND RAISE.
UM, BUT MR. JEFFERSON IS HERE.
UH, WE HAVE A NEW MEMBER FROM DISTRICT 11.
UH, I'D LIKE TO TAKE A MINUTE AND WELCOME, UH, MR. CRON.
UH, HE IS FULFILLING HIS EDUCATION OBLIGATION BY, UH, OBSERVING TODAY'S HEARING.
I LOOK FORWARD TO, TO MEETING YOU.
AND THANK YOU FOR ALLOCATING THE TIME TO BE ON THIS BOARD.
LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH YOU.
AND APOLOGIES FOR THE TECHNICAL DIFFICULTY.
NONE OF US CAN HEAR YOU, BUT WE'RE GONNA ASSUME YOU SAID SOMETHING ERUDITE AND NICE.
UH, SO IN THIS CASE, IS THIS, IS HE A HERE FOR THE PURPOSES OF QUORUM, JUST FORMALLY, OR DO, DO I MARK HIM? YES, I MARK HIM HERE.
WE ARE FULL MINUS ONE, SO THEY CAN DO, I MEAN, UH, AB ABSENT IS MESSALA.
UH, MR. CRON IS A FULL MEMBER OF OUR BOARD, ALTHOUGH HE IS NOT ALLOWED TO VOTE OR DELIBERATE, UH, HE IS OBSERVING.
AS I MENTIONED, WE HAVE A QUORUM.
THERESA CARLISLE, CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE.
MAYOR SAVA MARTINEZ, NANCY SANCHEZ, UH, THE APPELLANT.
DO YOU HAVE YOUR MIC ON? IS ANOTHER LIGHT? YEAH.
DO YOU HAVE A WITNESS TODAY? YEAH.
UH, MY WITNESS HERE IS MY WIFE.
UM, CITY ATTORNEYS, UH, SETH YOST FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS.
AND CHANEL FISHER WITH THE CITY.
REMEMBER THAT, UH, IF YOUR VIDEO, FOR EXAMPLE, LIKE MR. JEFFERSON, UH, GOES OFF, YOU ARE NO LONGER PRESENT, SAME AS MR. CILLA, UH, MR. CILLA ISS BACK.
I SUPPOSE THE ULTIMATE KEEPER IS MARY.
ARE WE IN THE SAME SITUATION WE WERE BEFORE? DO YOU SEE MR. JEFFERSON? OKAY, SO, MR. JEFFERSON.
[00:05:01]
GOT IT.SO, TECHNICALLY AT, UH, 8 42, MR. JEFFERSON IS ABSENT.
THE PERMIT LICENSE APPEAL BOARD IS A QUASI-JUDICIAL BOARD.
WE ARE HERE TO RECEIVE EVIDENCE AND ARGUMENT AND TO APPLY THE GOVERNING CITY ORDINANCE AND TO SIDE THE APPEAL BASED ON A PREPONDERANCE OF THE EVIDENCE PRESENTED AT THIS HEARING.
AS SUCH, MEMBERS MAY NOT COMMUNICATE WITH MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC ABOUT AN ACTIVE CASE OUTSIDE OF THIS HEARING.
IF YOU NEED ASSISTANCE DURING THE HEARING, PLEASE SPEAK TO MS. SANCHEZ.
MS. SANCHEZ, DO YOU HAVE SPEAKER CARDS AND EVERYTHING YOU NEED FOR EVERYONE WHO IS, DO WE DO THAT AND NO.
SO IF YOU NEED ANYTHING, PLEASE GET MS. SANCHEZ'S ATTENTION.
UH, THAT IS PROCEDURAL NOT TO THE ALL COMMENTS WILL BE DIRECTED TO THE CHAIRMAN.
I WILL MAKE PROCEDURAL RULINGS WHERE REQUIRED.
PLEASE WAIT TO BE RECOGNIZED, UH, AS WE GO FORWARD.
UH, THE BOARD'S DECISION IS CONTROLLED BY THE CRITERIA AND THE APPLICABLE ORDINANCE.
ARGUMENTS ABOUT BROAD POLICY, FAIRNESS OR CONSTITUTIONALITY MAY BE MADE TO PRESERVE ISSUES FOR LATER REVIEW, BUT THEY TYPICALLY DO NOT CONTROL WHAT THE BOARD IS AUTHORIZED TO DECIDE.
I MAY REMIND YOU, BUT I, I WON'T LECTURE YOU ABOUT THAT GOING FORWARD.
UM, PLEASE STAY ON THE RELEVANT FACTS AND RELEVANT TO THE TIME PERIOD AND TO OUR STANDARDS.
UH, SOME ORDINANCE ARE BACKWARD LOOKING PROMISES OF FUTURE ACTION OR POST-EVENT REMEDIATION.
MAY OR MAY NOT BE RELEVANT DEPENDING ON THE ORDINANCE.
TIE YOUR EVIDENCE TO THE ELEMENTS OF THE ORDINANCE, UH, THAT THE ORDINANCE ACTUALLY REQUIRES.
AND IN THIS CASE, UH, WE'VE SPOKEN, UH, E EACH SIDE WILL HAVE A FIVE MINUTE OPENING, A FIVE MINUTE, UH, CLOSING, AND, UH, 15 MINUTES TO, UH, TO MAKE YOUR CASE.
THAT TIME INCLUDES ANY CROSS-EXAMINATION, UH, YOU, YOU CHOOSE TO MAKE OF WITNESSES.
UM, UH, AT THE END, WE WILL HAVE BOARD QUESTIONS, WHICH WILL NOT COUNT AGAINST YOUR TIME, AND THEN WE WILL VOTE.
UM, DO WE HAVE ANY, ANY PUBLIC SPEAKERS? OKAY.
SO THE, THE NEXT ORDER OF BUSINESS IS TO APPROVE OUR MEETINGS OF OUR JANUARY 8TH, 2020 SIXTH MEETING.
DO I HAVE A MOTION? I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE.
DO I HAVE A SECOND? SECOND, SECOND.
SO WE HAVE A MOTION, UH, MR. GONZALEZ, SECONDED BY DR. JACKSON.
IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, UH, THOSE IN FAVORS, PLEASE SAY AYE.
ANYONE OPPOSED? PLEASE SAY MAY.
SO WE NOW HEAR OUR FIRST CASE, UH, WHICH IS WEBINAR.
THE NEXT ITEM IN BUSINESS IS TO HEAR THE APPEAL REQUEST OF 6 5 3 8 TIOGA CIRCLE APPEALING THE DENIAL OF A BOARDING HOME LICENSE UNDER CHAPTER EIGHT, SECTION NINE B TWO OF, OF THE DALLAS CITY CODE.
UM, MS. CARLISLE, WOULD YOU READ THE APPLICABLE CODE TODAY? YOU HAVE BE TODAY.
YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU AN APPEAL, THE DENIAL OF A BOARDING HOME FACILITY LICENSE SECTION EIGHT A DASH NINE STATES THAT THE DIRECTOR SHALL DENY THE LICENSE THAT THE DIRECTOR DETERMINES THAT THE REQUIREMENTS OF SUBSECTION A HAVE NOT BEEN MET, OR THE BOARDING HOME FACILITY IS LOCATED WITHIN 2000 FEET OF ANOTHER BOARDING HOME FACILITY OR GROUP BUILDING FACILITY.
THEREFORE, IT IS THE DUTY OF THIS BOARD TO EVALUATE THE EVIDENCE AND TESTIMONY PRESENTED FOR YOU TODAY TO DETERMINE WHETHER THE BOARDING HOME FACILITY IS OR IS NOT LOCATED WITHIN 2000 FEET OF ANOTHER BOARD OF ANOTHER BOARDING HOME FACILITY OR GROUP DWELLING FACILITY.
IF YOU DETERMINE THAT THE FACILITY IS LOCATED WITHIN 2000 FEET OF ANOTHER FACILITY, THEN THIS BOARD MAY AFFIRM THE DECISION OF THE DIRECTOR OF CODE COMPLIANCE.
IF YOU DETERMINE THAT THE FACILITY IS NOT LOCATED WITHIN 2000 FEET OF ANOTHER FACILITY, THEN THIS BOARD MAY REVERSE THE DECISION OF THE DIRECTOR OF CODE COMPLIANCE.
[00:10:01]
ONLY CONSIDER THE FACTS AS THEY EXISTED AT THE TIME OF THE LICENSE DENIAL IN MAKING ITS DECISION.UH, LET ME INTRODUCE RIGHT NOW BECAUSE WE HAVE LOST OUR QUORUM IN.
SHALL WE? CAN WE USE THAT AS THE OFFICIAL? OKAY.
MR. JEFFERSON, YOU HAD RAISED YOUR HAND, SO WE CAN'T HEAR YOU.
I SAW IT ON THE, ON THE, UH, DIGITAL, BUT, OKAY.
UM, YOU HAVE FINISHED READING IT.
UH, I'D LIKE TO SWEAR IF YOU, UH, ARE GOING TO SPEAK ON THIS CASE ON EITHER SIDE.
WOULD YOU PLEASE STAND AND BE SWORN? YES, MS. SAN SANCHEZ.
WILL, WILL YOU SWEAR TO WITNESSES EITHER SIDE? IF, IF YOU'RE GONNA SPEAK, PLEASE BE SWORE.
SO TURN YOUR MICS ON, ON MS. PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.
DO YOU SOLEMNLY SWEAR THAT TO THE BEST OF YOUR KNOWLEDGE, THE TESTIMONY YOU'LL GIVE BEFORE THIS BOARD TODAY WILL BE THE TRUTH? YES, I DO.
UH, WHEN YOU SPEAK, PLEASE, UH, STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS BEFORE, MAKE SURE THE MICROPHONE IS ON.
UM, THE APPELLANT HAS AN OPEN SET.
UH, SO AGAIN, MY NAME IS, UH, SAMUEL ZUKE.
AND, UH, THE REASON WHY WE'RE HERE TODAY, BECAUSE WE HAD, UH, UM, A DENIAL OF OUR BODY HOME LICENSE ON THE 65 38 PER CYCLE.
NOW, ACCORDING TO THE NOTICE, UH, SENT TO US BY THE, BY THE CITY THAT, UH, THE, THE FEE OF 890 $89 WAS NOT PAID ON TIME.
SO, WE'RE TWO WAYS BEHIND ON THAT DUE TO CIRCUMSTANCES, BECAUSE IN OUR BOARDING HOME SINCE, UH, APRIL LAST YEAR TO END OF NOVEMBER, WE DO NOT HAVE ANY RESIDENT IN THERE.
BUT WE CONTINUOUSLY, YOU KNOW, PAYING, UH, THE PROPERTY HOUSE.
AND THE, BRENT, I NEED TO INTERRUPT YOU BECAUSE I HAVE, UH, GIVE IT THAT THE BOARD HAS ACCEPTED EVIDENCE FROM BOTH PARTIES, UH, UH, INTO OUR RECORD.
THAT, THAT EACH OF YOU PROVIDED, UH, UH, WE'LL CALL REQUEST AND APPELLANT'S EXHIBIT ONE AND CITY'S EXHIBIT ONE.
UM, THE, THE EXPIRATION DATE WAS ON THE 12TH OF NOVEMBER.
THEN MY WIFE TOLD THE INSPECTOR WHEN THEY WERE THERE IN, UM, A FEW WEEKS AGO IN THE DIFFERENT BOARDING HOME THAT, UH, THAT PERMIT WILL BE MADE ON THE FOURTH OF, UH, DECEMBER, SINCE WE HAVE, WE DON'T HAVE ANYBODY SINCE APRIL, THE END OF NOVEMBER.
SO, UM, THE INSPECTOR THAT COMES TO OUR HOUSE ALL THE TIME, HER NAME IS, UH, I CAN'T REMEMBER HER NAME.
SO SHE TOLD HER VERBALLY THAT THIS PERMIT IS GOING TO BE MADE FIRST WEEK OF DECEMBER.
ON THAT FIRST DAY OF, FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER, WAS PREPARED, COMING TO THE OFFICE TO MAKE A PERMIT.
THEN AROUND NINE O'CLOCK, THE HOUSE MANAGER CALLED US WHILE WE ARE ON THE WAY, GOING TO MAKE THE PAYMENT THAT THE CITY HAS ALREADY COME HERE AND PLACED A NOTICE OF VIOLATION THAT, UH, UM, WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE OPERATING ON THIS BURNING GOVERNMENT NO LONGER.
THEN, UM, MY QUESTION WAS, BUT WE TOLD, UH, THAT WE'RE COMING ON THE FORCE.
THEN THEY WENT EARLIER BEFORE THE TIME.
THEY NORMALLY COME TO THE HOUSE AND PLACE A NOTICE OF VIOLATION, YOU KNOW? THEN, UM, WE DECIDED TO GO BACK THE FOLLOWING DAY.
I WROTE, UH, FOLLOWING DIRECT AN APPEAL, WHICH WAS SUBMITTED TO YOU GUYS, YOU KNOW, LETTING THEM UNDERSTAND THE, YOU KNOW, THE PROBLEM WE HAD, WHY WE COULD NOT MAKE THIS ON TIME,
[00:15:01]
ON APPEAL, YOU KNOW, UH, YOU KNOW, WITH ALL MY HEART, ACTUALLY, TO LET THEM UNDERSTAND THAT IT WASN'T INTENTIONAL AND THAT WE ARE READY TO MAKE THIS PAYMENT.NOW, WHEN, WHEN I GOT THERE, I MET THE SUPERVISOR WHO WAS SITTING RIGHT BEHIND ME.
YOU KNOW, I TOLD HER THAT WE'RE GOING TO PAY, BUT SHE DISCOURAGED ME TO MAKE THAT PAYMENT, THAT THERE'S NO POINT PAY YOU, THAT IF YOU ACTUALLY PAY RIGHT NOW, THAT YOUR MONEY'S GOING TO BE WASTED FOR NOTHING, SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO PAY.
SO SHE DID NOT GIMME THAT ENCOURAGEMENT AT ALL TO MAKE ANY PAYMENT.
SO WE LEFT, YOU KNOW, WITH UNCERTAINTY THAT I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO RIGHT NOW.
THEN I CAME DOWN TO THIS BUILDING TO MAKE INQUIRY.
THEY ASKED ME TO GO BACK TO THE CITY, UH, TO THEIR MANAGER, THAT WHEN I WENT BACK THERE, THE MANAGER AND EVERY ONE OF THEM, THE DOOR WAS SHOT.
THEY WERE ON 20 FOR ABOUT THREE DAYS.
THEN THE FOURTH DAY, WHICH WAS ON A FRIDAY, I CAME BACK THERE.
THEN I DID NOT MEET HIM, DID NOT CALL HIM OVER THE PHONE.
AND I TOLD HIM MY PREDICAMENTS, YOU KNOW, YOU SEE WHO ADVISE ME TO MAKE THAT PAYMENT, THAT MOST LIKELY IF THEY ACCEPT THE PAYMENT, THEY MAY APPROVE IT OR THEY MAY NOT.
BUT IF THEY DID NOT, THEY'RE GOING TO GIVE ME 10 DAYS TO COME TO THE, UH, TO APPEAL THIS CASE TO THE CITY BOARD.
I SAID, OKAY, THAT IS MUCH BETTER THAN WHAT I EXPERIENCED FROM THE SUPERVISOR.
WOULD NEVER WANTED ME TO MAKE ANY PAYMENT.
SO, ON THAT CASE, I WENT BACK AND I TOLD HIM I WAS MAKING A PAYMENT.
YOU KNOW, I CAME BACK TO THE OFFICE, I MAKE THAT PAYMENT.
AFTER MAKING THAT PAYMENT, WE LEFT, ACCORDING TO THE NOTE, THEY SAID WITHIN 10 DAYS, WE HEAR FROM THEM IF IT'S APPROVED OR DENIED.
AND IF IT'S DENIED, THEN WE HAVE TO, YOU KNOW, UH, SEND OUR CASE TO THE, UH, TO THE BOARD, WHICH WAS ACTUALLY WHAT IS HAPPENING TODAY.
WITHIN 10 DAYS, WITHIN THE 10 DAYS PERIOD, AT THE, UH, ONE OF THE INSPECTORS, YOU KNOW, WENT BACK TO THE BODY HOME AND, UH, TOLD THE HOUSE MANAGER THERE THAT WE HAVE TO INVITE, AND THAT, UH, WE DO NOT HAVE ANY RIGHT TO OPERATE ANY LONGER.
SO THAT IS NOT RIGHT BECAUSE WE'RE DEALING ON PAPERWORK RIGHT NOW.
THE MANAGER HAVE TOLD ME WHAT TO DO EXACTLY, AND THAT IS WHAT I'M GOING BY.
THE TIME HAS NOT ELAPSED, AND I'VE ALREADY SENT OUT THE INFORMATION THEY NEEDED FROM ME TO THE CITY BOARD.
NOW, THE, UH, OOPS, HOLD, UH, UH, TAMARA ACTUALLY WENT BACK TO THE HOUSE MANAGER AGAIN, INFORMED HER THAT THEY TOLD US TO VIC AND CALLED THE PROPERTY MANAGEMENT OF OUR, OF OUR MEETING.
SORRY, YOU, YOUR OPENING TIME HAS EXPIRED.
YOU WILL, THIS IS NOT YOUR TIME TO PRESENT YOUR CASE.
THIS WAS JUST AN OPENING SO THAT THE, UH, UH, CITY HAS A FIVE MINUTE OPENING.
LIKE, GIVE US A ROADMAP ABOUT PROVIDING EVIDENCE.
OH, UH, SETH YOST, UH, CITY ATTORNEY, UH, ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS HOUSE.
IF YOU, I DON'T NEED YOUR HOME ADDRESS, WOULD YOU? OH, OKAY.
NO, NO, I DON'T NEED YOUR HOME.
IN THAT CASE, MY ADDRESS IS 1500 WEST STREET, SORRY,
UH, GOOD MORNING, HONORABLE CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE PERMANENT LICENSE APPEAL BOARD.
THE CITY IS HERE TODAY TO DEFEND OUR DECISION TO DENY THE BOARDING HOME LICENSE AT 65 38 TGA CIRCLE.
THROUGH TODAY'S TESTIMONY AND OTHER EVIDENCE, THE CITY WILL ESTABLISH THAT DALLAS CITY CODE CHANGED IN 2023, WHICH PREVENTS ANY NEW APPLICANT FOR A BOARDING HOME LICENSE FROM MAINTAINING A BOARDING HOME WITHIN 2000 FEET OF ANOTHER BOARDING HOME, ALL BOARDING HOMES WITH VALID LICENSES PRIOR TO FEBRUARY 22ND, 2023, OR GRANDFATHERED IN UNDER THE OLD CODE.
THE CITY WILL ALSO ESTABLISH THAT THE BOARDING HOME LICENSE FOR 65 38 TIOGA CIRCLE EXPIRED IN NOVEMBER OF 2025, AND THAT BECAUSE THE PROPERTY IS WITHIN 2000 FEET OF TWO OTHER BOARDING HOMES, THE BOARDING HOME LICENSE CAN NOW NOT BE ISSUED UNDER THE NEW CITY CODE.
THE CITY WILL ALSO SHOW THAT PRIOR TO THE BOARDING HOME LICENSE EXPIRING AT 65 38 TIOGA, UM, THE OPERATOR WAS WARNED NUMEROUS TIMES THAT THE LICENSE NEEDED TO BE RENEWED WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIMEFRAME TO AVOID LOSING THE LICENSE ALTOGETHER.
BUT DESPITE THESE WARNINGS, THE RENEWABLE APPLICATION WAS NOT SUBMITTED WITH THE REQUIRED FEE UNTIL OVER A MONTH AFTER THE LICENSE ACTUALLY EXPIRED.
AND IT WAS NOT UNTIL ALMOST TWO WEEKS UNTIL AFTER CODE COMPLIANCE ISSUED A NOTICE OF VIOLATION FOR OPERATING WITHOUT A VALID BOARDING LICENSE THAT THE APPLICATION WAS FINALLY SUBMITTED WITH THE ACCOMPANYING FEE.
HAD THE LICENSE BEEN RENEWED ON TIME, THE PROPERTY WOULD STILL BE GRANDFATHERED IN UNDER THE OLD DALLAS CODE THAT DID NOT HAVE THE 2000 FEE RESTRICTION.
HOWEVER, SINCE THE LICENSE EXPIRED AND IT WAS NOT RENEWED BEFORE ITS EXPIRATION,
[00:20:02]
UM, THE PROPERTY LOST ITS GRANDFATHERED STATUS UNDER THE OLD DALLAS CITY CODE AND COMPLIANCE COULD NOT LEGALLY ISSUE A NEW LICENSE.UM, ADDITIONALLY, UH, MS. TILLEY WAS WARNED IN WRITING BY THE CITY PRIOR TO PAYING THE $889 FEE, THAT HER APPLICATION WOULD BE DENIED DUE TO THE LICENSE BEING EXPIRED AND THE NEW 2000 FEET RESTRICTION AND DALLAS CODE CLEARLY STATES THAT THIS APPLICATION FEE IS NON-REFUNDABLE.
SO, PURSUANT TO SECTION EIGHT, A NINE OF THE DALLAS CITY CODE, UH, THE BOARDING HOME LICENSE FOR 65 38 TIOGA CIRCLE APP APPLICATION WAS PROPERLY DENIED, AND THE $889 FEE SHOULD NOT BE RETURNED.
UH, THE APPELLANT, YOU HAVE, UH, 15 MINUTES.
UH, YOU MAY CALL A WITNESS IF YOU SO CHOOSE.
UM, THIS IS ALSO TIME IF YOU, IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO CROSS EXAMINE ANOTHER WITNESS, YOU SHOULD HOLD SOME.
UM, MY FIRST ONE IS, UH, HE SAID THE, UH, IN 2023, UH, UH, 2023, UH, THE, THE LAW CHANGED ABOUT THE 2000 FEET, UH, YOU KNOW, SPACE FOR ONE BOARD TO THE OTHER.
BUT MY QUESTION IS SAID, WHERE WAS THE CITY WHEN SOMEBODY HAVE TWO BODY HOMES IN THE SAME STREET? THIS IS TGA CIRCLE.
SOMEBODY HAVE A BODY HOME ON A TIOGA STREET AND ANOTHER ONE ON TGA STREET, WHICH IS LESS THAN TWO BLOCKS.
SO THE LAW, WHERE WAS THE LAW THERE, YOU KNOW, WAS THE LAW NOT GUARDING THAT FELLOW, THAT HE CANNOT HAVE TWO BODY HOMES VERY CLOSE TO EACH OTHER.
YOU KNOW, LESS THAN 2000 FEET.
I'M NOT IN THE SAME STREET WITH THIS FELLOW.
I MEAN, A DIFFERENT STREET TOGETHER.
AND IF YOU CHECK IT, I'M MORE THAN ALMOST 2000 FEET AWAY FROM THIS.
SECONDLY, UH, I THINK THAT THIS IS DON ACT ALL BIAS BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, THE, THE CITY INSPECTORS GOES OVER THERE, UP HERE.
I DO NOT KNOW THE REASON WHY OURS SHOULD BE A TARGET.
OUR BODY HOME WAS ESTABLISHED IN 2016, OKAY? AND SINCE 2016, I HAVE NOT SEEN ANY OTHER BODY HOME AROUND THERE UNTIL THIS TIME.
WE HAVE THIS PROBLEM THAT I'M SEEING TWO BODY HOMES ON THE SAME STREET, LESS THAN 2000 FEET, AND IT IS PERMITTED BY THE STATE OR BY THE CITY THAT THIS BODY HOME SHOULD BE EXISTING ALL BY ONE SINGLE PERSON.
AND TO I ALERT YOU AGAIN, YOU KNOW WHAT HAPPENED.
WHY WOULD THE, UH, CITY INSPECTOR CALLED MY, UH, MORTGAGE, UH, THIS, UH, UH, MANAGEMENT TO EVICT US? SHE WENT DOWN TO THE HOUSE AND TOLD THE HOUSE MANAGER THAT WE ARE BEING EVICTED.
THIS NOTICE WAS PLACED ON MY DOOR.
WHY DID YOU PUT IN EVICTION? THEY SAID, WE THOUGHT YOU'RE OWE, BUT THE CITY TOLD US THAT YOU ARE NO LONGER IN OPPRESSION.
YOU KNOW, THAT IS NOT THE JOB OF THE CITY TO TELL SOMEBODY ELSE TO EVICT ME FOR NO JUST REASON.
SO THIS IS BINTA, YOU KNOW, THAT IS WHAT I CALL IT.
THEY SHOULDN'T HAVE DONE THAT AT ALL, YOU KNOW, AND THE, THE ONE, SHE MADE A STATEMENT IN HER LETTER THAT MY WIFE'S, UH,
BUT THIS IS THE COPY OF THE BACKGROUND THAT IS EXPIRING TODAY, TODAY.
SO I WAS WONDERING, WHAT, WHAT WERE THEY LOOKING AT WHEN THEY COME FOR EXPIRATION? HER BACKGROUND CHECK IS STILL IN, UH, IS IS STILL AUTHENTIC, HAS NOT EXPIRED AT ALL.
AND THE NEW ONE WAS, YOU KNOW, WHEN THE EXPIRATION OF THIS, SHE HAD A NEW ONE.
SO WE ARE NOT EVEN, YOU KNOW, UH, LOCK IN ANY EVIDENCE THAT THEY MAY LOOK FOR THAT WE DON'T HAVE.
WE HAVE A THEN NOT ASK THE CITY AGAIN, IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SUBMIT EVIDENCE, YOU SHOULD, UH, IT'S NEW.
YOU SHOULD SUBMIT A COPY TO THE OTHER COUNCIL AND TO THE BOARD IF YOU DON'T HAVE COPIES, UH, UNLESS ANYONE, WELL, WE, WE NEED A COPY FOR THE PEOPLE ONLINE.
UH, THE OTHER ONE IS SIR, SO NO, THE OTHER ONE IS THIS.
YOU KNOW, THEY WERE IN THAT HOUSE IN AUGUST, UH, AUGUST, AUGUST 29TH.
THEY WERE THERE FOR INSPECTION.
SO IF THEY WERE THERE FOR INSPECTION AND INSPECTION, SAYS NO VALIDATION AT ALL, YOU KNOW? SO HOW COME WHEN PREPARING LETTER OF EVICTION OR SO FROM OPERATING
[00:25:01]
INDICATING THAT, UH, I COULD NOT RECORD, HAVE EXPIRED? WAS THE CITY INSPECTOR NOT LOOKING AT THE RECORDS THAT WAS PRESENTED TO HER? OR WAS SHE WORKING OFF HEAD? NOT THIS UNDERSTANDING THAT EVERY RECORD YOU HAVE SEEN IS RIGHT AND CORRECT.THAT'S WHAT THEY SAID, NO VIOLATION, YOU KNOW, BUT ACCORDING TO THE RECORD I HAVE HERE, THAT INDICATES THAT THERE WAS A VALIDATION BECAUSE HER DID NOT RECORD HAS EXPIRED, WHICH IS NOT TRUE.
OKAY? SO I WANT, YOU KNOW, THE BOARD TO LOOK INTO THE ACTIONS OF THE CITY INSPECTORS.
YOU KNOW, ONE, THEY WANTED TO EVICT US BY GOING BACK TO OUR PROPERTY MANAGEMENT VICTIMS THEMSELVES.
AND THEY TOLD US WHAT HAPPENED.
THE CITY CALLED THEM, OKAY? WHICH THE CITY HAS NO RIGHT TO DO THIS VIOLATION OF, OKAY, THEY'RE NOT MY RENT, AND WE NOT INSTRUC SOMEBODY ELSE WHEN I'M NOT OWE THEM AT ALL.
UH, THE STANDARDS AT AT HAND ARE WHETHER THEY LEGALLY, UH, SHOULD HAVE, UH, DENIED YOUR PERMIT OR IF YOU FOCUS ON THE REASONS THEY GIVE.
UH, I'M PUT ON THE, THE ISSUE OF, UH, YOU KNOW, DENYING MY PERMIT.
BUT WHAT I'M TRYING TO EXPLAIN HERE THAT THEY DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO TEST SOMEONE AS TO ME FROM THE HOUSE.
OKAY? THIS IS JUST LIKE COMPOUNDING THE PROBLEM, MAKING IT VERY DIFFICULT FOR US TO DEAL WITH.
YOU KNOW, THIS IS OUR FIRST TIME WE HAVE EVER HAD THIS PROBLEM SINCE 2016.
IT'S JUST TWO WEEKS LATER THAT WE MADE THIS PAYMENT.
AND I BELIEVE IN THIS STATE AND IN THIS COUNTRY, IF YOU OWE AND TELL THEM, I'M READY TO PAY, THEY GIVE YOU THAT OPPORTUNITY TO PAY.
IF I OWE ELECTRIC BILL, WE WHAT THE, UH, THE TSU WILL DO.
THEY CALL ME OFF IF I DID NOT CALL THEM.
AND WHEN I MAKE MY PAYMENT, THEY STATEMENT, RIGHT? IF I OWE A MORTGAGE, I DID NOT PAY IN TWO MONTHS OR THREE MONTHS, THEY WRITE ME TO PAY.
IF I PAY, I REMAIN IN THE HOUSE.
BUT I, I'M WONDERING WHY THE CITY WILL TAKE THIS VERY DIFFERENTLY, THAT THE PERMIT WAS MADE TWO WEEKS LATER, AND THEN IT RESORT TO ABOLISHING OUR AB BODY, HER THAT THIS IS NOT RIGHT.
WE ARE HUMAN BEINGS LIKE EVERY OTHER FELLOW WE'RE TRYING TO SURVIVE.
AND THAT I DON'T THINK THAT THE CITY WILL LIKE US TO BE DESTITUTE, TO STAY ON THE STREET, NOT WORKING, NOT HAVING A JOB OR SOMETHING TO FEED THEM.
BECAUSE OUR BILL HAS BEEN PAID.
WE PAID THE MONEY OF THE 819 $89 WAS PAID.
AND I WANT THE CITY TO FOCUS ON THIS AND THEN ACCEPT THIS PAYMENT AS A REGULAR PERMIT.
IT IS LATE IF YOU CHARGE US FOR LATE PAYMENT OR GIVE US A, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, UH, A CITATION FOR THAT PAYMENT.
I BELIEVE THAT YOU WERE POINTING TO AN EXHIBIT THAT IS IN EVIDENCE.
BUT IF, IF YOU DON'T MIND POINTING TO IT IN YOUR, UH, I BELIEVE I'VE SEEN IT.
SO IF YOU DON'T, JUST MIND ACKNOW JUST POINTING US TO IT, AS YOU SAID.
I BELIEVE IT IS PRESENTED THAT DAY.
WHAT PAGES IS IT? OKAY, GO AHEAD.
APPELLANT'S EXHIBIT PAGE EIGHT.
CAN I, CAN I SAY SOMETHING? UM, IF YOU ARE SWORN IN AND HE CALLS YOU AS A WITNESS ABSOLUTELY, YES.
I'M SORRY, YOU WERE SWORN IN THAT MM-HMM
IF YOU'D LIKE TO CALL A WITNESS, JUST, UH, GIVE YOUR, UH, ADDRESS AND, UH, OKAY.
MY ADDRESS, UM, THE TOYOTA ADDRESS, 6 5 3 8 CIRCLE DALLAS ZIP CODE IS 7 5 2 1 4.
UM, I DON'T KNOW THAT WE FORMALLY NEED TO HAVE QUESTIONS, UH, AND ANSWERS IN THIS CASE.
WELL, WHAT I WANTED TO, YOU KNOW, APPEAL FOR IS, UM, YOU KNOW, I KNOW WE'RE LATE IN MAKING OUR PAYMENT, AND THE REASON BEING THAT WE DID NOT HAVE ANYBODY AT THE BODY HOME, THE RENT, THE, THE RENT WAS PAID FROM OUR SALARY FOR THAT, HOW MANY MONTHS WE WERE WORKING TO PAY THE, UH, PAY THE RENT, UM, ON THE BUILDING THAT WE WERE NOT USING BECAUSE WE WERE NOT USING IT BECAUSE THERE WAS NO, NOBODY THERE.
SO THAT MONEY WAS COMING OUT OF OUR POCKET.
SO I'M BEGGING IF, YOU KNOW, IF Y'ALL WILL ALLOW US TO CONTINUE, YOU KNOW, RUNNING VOTING FROM THERE, BECAUSE I MEAN, EVEN IF THE BODY HOME IS DENIED, WE WILL STILL CONTINUE TO PAY THAT RENT UNTIL THE, UM, UNTIL THE, UM,
[00:30:02]
THE, THE HOUSE EXPIRED.YOU KNOW? SO, I MEAN, IF THAT WOULD BE IMPORTANT TO US, PLEASE, YOU, YOU KNOW, IF YOU DON'T MIND, YOU KNOW, LOOK INTO OUR, OUR SITUATION, PLEASE.
I WILL DO SOMETHING A LITTLE BIT UNCONVENTIONAL AND ASK, ASK COUNSEL WHETHER THE CODE HAS ANY PROVISION FOR HARDSHIPS IN THIS CASE.
WE USE YOUR TIME TO RESPOND TO WITNESSES TO, SO, UH, THE OTHER THING I'M TALKING ABOUT IS, UH, ALL THE INFORMATIONS, EVERY ALLEGATION, YOU KNOW, UH, LAID AGAINST US IS NOT TRUE.
ONLY MISTAKE MADE
AND, UH, I STAND BY APPEALING TO THE MEMBERS OF THIS BOARD TO PUT IT INTO ATION, BUT SOMEBODY IS JUST TRYING TO HURT US FOR NOT JUST OKAY, IF NOT FOR THE MANAGER, I, I WOULDN'T HAVE PAID THAT MONEY BECAUSE THE SUPERVISOR CATEGORICALLY TOLD ME THAT IF YOU PAY YOUR MONEY, BE LOST AND THEN IMAGINE HOW I'M GOING TO LOSE 808, $9 FOR THE MONEY, YOU KNOW, GAVE ME SOME KIND OF, THAT WAS THE REASON WHY I PAID UP.
SO I DO NOT SEE WHY I NOT SHOULD BE DENIED WHEN SOMEBODY IS HAVING TWO BODY HOMES ON THE SAME STREET AND THERE'S NO LAW AGAINST HIM.
AND IF I SHOULD VACATE, TECHNICALLY IS COMING TO BREAK MY HOUSE AND PUT ANOTHER BODY HOME BY THERE.
SO THIS WALL SHOULD GO TO EVERYBODY, NOT TO SOME PARTICULAR PERSON, OKAY? BECAUSE THEN VERY AWARE THAT YOU CANNOT BE 2000, 2000 FEET, YOU KNOW, FOR EACH OTHER.
AND THEY ARE LONG SOMEBODY TO HAVE TWO BODY HOMES IN THE SAME STREET, AND THERE WAS NO COMPLAINT.
SO THIS IS WHERE MY QUESTION LIES.
IF THE CITY OVERLOOKED THAT, AND IF THEY DO NOT, THEY SHOULD PLEASE CONSIDER A SITUATION AND ALLOW US
WOULD YOU LIKE TO CALL ANY OTHER WITNESSES OR, OKAY, THANK YOU.
YOU CAN, UH, STOP HIS TIME JUST, UH, BOARD QUESTIONS.
UM, IF YOU'D LIKE TO ASK A QUESTION IN YOUR ONLINE, PLEASE, UH, DO YOUR ONLINE HAND RAISE, AND, UH, OTHERWISE I WILL WALK THROUGH IT.
SHE ASKED WHETHER WE WANNA CROSS EXAMINE, UH, WE HAD A WITNESS, BUT YOU DIDN'T DO IT.
I YOU TYPICALLY CONSIDER THE SPEAKER AS A WITNESS IS THAT WE HAD ONE YES, BUT I, UH, MADE THE ASSUMPTION THAT YOU DIDN'T WANT TO BY VIRTUE OF NOT SAYING, SO, I'M, I APOLOGIZE IF, IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO CROSS EXAMINE IT IS, UH, YOUR TIME.
I'M SORRY, I, I MAY, I TOOK SILENCE.
UM, VICE CHAIR FOR THANK YOU CHAIR.
I HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS FOR YOU.
UH, YOU SAID THIS ING HOME WAS ESTABLISHED IN 2016, CORRECT? YES, MA'AM.
BUT YOU CURRENTLY HAVE NO ONE THERE AT THIS MOMENT? RIGHT NOW WE JUST HAVE ABOUT, UH, FOUR PEOPLE.
BUT WAS THE HUSBAND RESPONDED AND THEY FATHER OH, FOUR PEOPLE.
SO YOU DO HAVE SOME YEAH, WE RESIDENTS THERE.
AND THEN WERE YOU EVER TOLD BY THE CITY THAT YOU WOULD LOSE GRANDFATHER STATUS? DO YOU REMEMBER EVER HEARING THAT WORD, GRANDFATHER STATUS?
[00:35:01]
NO, MA'AM.I'M HAVING THE GRANDFATHER ISSUE FOR THE FIRST TIME WHEN I RECEIVED, UH, UH, THIS LETTER.
SO I DO NOT KNOW WHAT THE GRANDFATHER, YOU KNOW, STANDS FOR.
SO NOBODY TOLD US ANYTHING ABOUT IT.
AND THEN WE WERE THE FIRST IN TGA STREET, YOU KNOW, TGA CYCLE.
THERE WAS NOBODY WHO
THERE WAS NOBODY RIGHT THERE THEN WE WERE THE FIRST IN THAT AREA BEFORE THIS OTHER GUY ESTABLISHED TWO BODY GO ON THE SAME STREET, ON THE DIFFERENT STREET.
IT SOUNDS LIKE THE LAW, THE THE LAW CHANGED IN 2023.
MY QUESTION IS, WERE YOU AWARE OF THIS? NO.
IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU WEREN'T, UM, NEVER HEARD THAT TERM BEFORE NOW, BUT YOU DO AGREE TO THE FACT THAT YOU SUBMITTED PAYMENT LATE? YES, MA'AM.
YOU KNOW, THAT, UH, PAYMENT WAS LATE.
THAT, THAT'S THE REASON WHY I WROTE AN APPEAL, LETTING THEM KNOW THE CIRCUMSTANCES THAT SINCE APRIL LAST YEAR, THE END OF NOVEMBER, WE HAVE NO RESIDENT THERE.
BUT WE KEEP MAINTAINING THE BUILDING HOPING THAT WE'RE GOING TO GET PRESIDENTS FUNDING.
WE DON'T APPROVE A BUSINESS AND WE EXPECT PEOPLE TO FLOW INDIA BACK AND FORTH.
WE SAY GRADUAL PROCESS THAT PEOPLE COMES SEE AND THEY INSPECT THE PLACE.
IF THEY LIKE IT, THEY'LL TELL YOU THEM WHAT TO STAY.
AND IF THEY DON'T, ALL WE DO IS SAY JUST MARKETING EVERYWHERE WE GO TO THE HOSPITAL, GO EVERYWHERE TO LET THEM KNOW WE HAVE A PLACE FOR PEOPLE WHO DON'T HAVE A PLACE STAY.
AND THE GRACE OF GOD, THAT HAPPENED IN, UH, EARLY END OF NOVEMBER 20 WHEN WE STARTED HAVING PEOPLE COMING IN ONE AFTER THE ORDER.
SO YOU'VE HAD PEOPLE THERE COME IN A, AFTER YOU SUBMITTED THE APPLICATION IN NOVEMBER, YOU MENTIONED, SO AGAIN, PLEASE, I GUESS I'M JUST CONFUSED, UM, ABOUT YOUR BUSINESS AND HOW MANY PEOPLE HAVE BEEN THERE.
HAVE THEY BEEN THERE LIKE ALL YEAR? UM, THIS, UH, THESE FIVE PEOPLE, IT'S A REVOLVING DOOR, PEOPLE COMING,
YES, THANK FOUR PEOPLE CAME IN THE SAME DAY.
WE WERE VERY, VERY, WE WERE VERY FORTUNATE, YOU KNOW, SO, BECAUSE WE ALSO HAD TO LAY THE, THE HOUSE MANAGER GO, BECAUSE WE, WE WERE PAYING, PAYING HER WHILE SHE WAS THERE FROM THE TIME WE DIDN'T HAVE NOBODY TILL NOVEMBER.
SO AFTER WE PAID HER, YOU KNOW, PAID HER NOVEMBER, YOU KNOW, 3RD OF NOVEMBER, NOVEMBER, WE ASKED HER TO LEAVE BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE ANYBODY THAT'S NOT ANY PAYING HER.
SO TOWARDS THE END OF NOVEMBER, UM, I MEAN, GOD ANSWERED HER PRAYERS.
ARE THERE O OTHER QUESTIONS? CHAIR? I'LL QUESTION.
I WAS LOOKING, DID YOU HAVE A, UH, RESIDENCE IN JULY? NO, 2025? NO.
AND ALSO, UM, WERE, UH, SINCE YOU STATING ABOUT THE 2000 DISTRICT, DISTRICT, ARE YOU AWARE, UH, CURRENTLY THAT THAT NO LONGER WOULD STAND BECAUSE OF THE NEW POLICY THAT'S IN, IN STORE AND THAT, UM, BECAUSE IF YOU HAD TO PAID YOUR, UH, DUES BEFORE YOU WOULD'VE BEEN GRANDFATHERED IN, AND THAT'S THE BIG ISSUE WHERE YOU UNDERSTANDING NOW THAT IF THE DUES WAS PAID PREVIOUSLY, THAT YOU WOULD'VE BEEN GRANDFATHERED WITH THE NEW PREVIOUSLY? WELL, JUST UNDERSTANDING THAT RIGHT NOW, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, ONE THING IS I TOLD THE, OUR INSPECTOR, I SAID, THIS IS, THESE ARE OUR PRE COMMENTS.
WE DON'T HAVE ANYBODY AT BOARDING HOME, YOU KNOW, SO COULD YOU GIVE ME, BECAUSE WHY I TOLD HER THAT I WAS COMING TO PAY ON THE 1ST OF DECEMBER WAS TO USE MY SALARY WHEN I GET PAID TO COME AND PAY, YOU KNOW, SO BY THE TIME, YOU KNOW, WE GET TO THE OFFICE, THEN THE STICKER WAS ALREADY ON THE DOOR AT THE PARTY HOME.
SO IT'S LIKE, I MEAN, WE WERE, WE WERE REALLY STRUGGLING.
WE, THE, THERE WAS NO MONEY ANYWHERE.
WE, WE WORK AND USUALLY TO PAY THE RENT, WE'LL WORK AND USE IT TO PAY THE RENT.
SO THAT WAS WHAT WE WERE GOING THROUGH.
AND UH, SECONDLY, UH, IN REGARDS TO THE PEOPLE IN THE BODY ROOM IS JUST LIKE, UH, A TEMPORARY STATE FOR EVERYONE OF THEM DUE TO THEIR CONDITIONS, YOU KNOW, AND NOT HAVING RELATIVES WERE TO STAY THE CITY ACTUALLY, UH, PROVIDE OR, YOU KNOW, UH, ADVERTISE BODY HOMES WHERE PEOPLE OR HOSPITALS WHO BE ABLE TO, YOU KNOW,
[00:40:01]
SAY, TRY THESE PEOPLE OR TRY THOSE PEOPLE.OUR BODY HOME HAVE BEEN ONE OF THE BEST, YOU KNOW, COMPARED TO OTHER BODY HOMES AROUND GIVE, THE CITY COULD GO AROUND AND CHECK FOR FIVE OR 10 BOARDING HOMES AND COMPARE TO TIGER CYCLE.
YOU FIND OUT THAT TIGER CYCLE IS GOING TO BE BETWEEN THE FOURTH AND THE FIFTH PEOPLE ARE BEING BODY HOMES CAN BE ABLE TO FIND, OKAY, UNDER WE, WE ARE PEOPLE WITHOUT HAVING MONEY TO PAY.
SOME OF THEM HAVE STAYED FOR THREE MONTHS, ONE YEAR WITHOUT PAYING US A LEAVE.
I DID NOT GO TO THE COURT AND SAY THAT, THAT THIS GUY STAY THERE FOR ONE YEAR OR SIX MONTH, NOT PAY AND KNOW THEIR CONDITIONS.
OKAY? SO THIS IS JUST A TEMPORARY PLACE FOR THEM TO STAY.
SO WE'LL TELL YOU THEIR SOCIAL SECURITY MONEY WE TAKEN IN THE MONTH OR TWO MONTHS TIME, WE THINK BEFORE THAT TIME THEY'LL ABSTAIN.
YOU KNOW, THEY WOULDN'T EVEN TELL YOU WHERE THEY'RE GOING.
YOU JUST TAKE THEIR HANDBAG AS USUAL, WALK AROUND AND THAT'S THE END OF IT.
SO I'VE LOST A LOT OF MONEY, TRY TO HELP OTHER HUMAN BEINGS.
I DUNNO, BECAUSE I DO THAT BECAUSE THEY'RE HUMAN BEINGS LIKE ME.
AND THE CITY SHOULD NOT PUNISH UP BECAUSE WE'RE ONLY THERE FOR TWO WEEKS.
LATE PAYMENT, I CAN PAY THE, YOU KNOW, THE TAXES, YOU KNOW, ON THAT, ON THE DIFFERENCES THAT SHUTTING DOWN BY BODY HOME.
WE HAVE SUFFERED SO MUCH SINCE 2016 TO BUILD ALL OF A SUDDEN JOB BECAUSE OF TWO WEEKS LATE PAYMENT.
AND WE'RE SHUTTING DOWN COMPLETELY.
THE SIMPLY SHOULD LOOK INTO THAT LAW AGAIN, THAT THIS IS NOT RIGHT FOR SOME PEOPLE WHERE EVERYBODY STRUGGLING, WE DON'T HAVE THAT MONEY BANK SOMEWHERE.
THE STATE DON'T PAY US, OR THE SOCIAL SECURITY DON'T PAY US UNTIL AFTER 13 DAYS OF THEIR STAY.
LIKE I SAID, AGAIN, YOU KNOW, SOME DO AWAY WITH THAT MONEY.
I'VE NEVER REPORTED ANYBODY OR GO ANYWHERE TO SAY THAT I'M LOSING $5 OR $20 OR 1000 BUCKS.
YOU KNOW, WE JUST ABSORBED IT AS A LOSS.
THIS WAS, WE'RE STILL ON ON GOOD TIME.
UH, I JUST HAVE TWO, UH, QUESTIONS.
ONE IS, I NOTICED ON ONE OF THESE FORMS IT SAYS, UH, KYLE'S HOME TWO, HOW MANY BOARDING FACILITIES DO YOU OPERATE? TWO.
WE HAVE TWO, ONE, UH, O ORDERS AND THE TITLE CYCLE.
WHICH IS ABOUT THE FIVE TO SEVEN MINUTES DRIVE FROM ITALY.
AND THEN MY SECOND QUESTION IS, YOU SAID YOU'VE BEEN OPERATING SINCE 2016.
UH, IS THIS THE FIRST TIME THAT, UM, YOU HAVE BEEN LATE ON A PAYMENT FOR YOUR YES, JUST FOR.
AND IS THAT FOR BOTH FACILITIES? NO.
DOES THIS ONE? IT DOES THIS ONE.
ARE THERE, UH, AS DO YOU HAVE FURTHER QUESTIONS? I, UH, I SEE MR. QUINN.
UM, AND, AND AFTER THAT, UH, MR. BUQUET OUTTA CURIOSITY, YOU RECEIVED NOTICE ON 10 28 TO RENEW YOUR LICENSE.
DID YOU RESPOND TO THAT NOTICE? IT'S NOT CLEAR, MR. QUEEN, YOU, ARE YOU POINTING TO AN EXHIBIT? UM, UH, YES.
UM, I'M THERE, HANG ON IN, IN, IN THE CITIES.
UH, A IT'S, IT'S, IT'S ONE OF THE CITIES.
THAT WOULD PROBABLY BE EXACTLY IT.
SO, SO DID YOU RESPOND TO THAT EMAIL THAT WAS SENT ON 10 28 EMAIL? 10 28 FOR WHAT THE CITY NOTIFIED YOU THAT YOUR LICENSE WAS GOING TO EXPIRE, UM, AND YOU BASICALLY HAD TWO WEEKS TO GET IT DONE, GET RENEWED AND PAID.
DID YOU RESPOND IN KIND TO THAT EMAIL? WELL, I DID NOT RECEIVE THAT EMAIL OF 10 28, YOU KNOW, BUT IT WAS A VERBAL COMMUNICATION WHEN TAMALA CAME TO THE, UH, SECOND BOARDING ROOM TO REMIND US THAT, UH, OUR, UM, OUR PAYMENT IS GOING TO BE DUE ON THE, UH, 12TH OF, UH, UH, NOVEMBER.
AND THAT'S WHERE MY WIFE, I, I, I DON'T MEAN I'VE GOTTA STOP YET.
DID YOU SAY YOU DID NOT RESPOND TO THE EMAIL? I DID NOT RECEIVE THAT EMAIL.
[00:45:01]
UM, DID YOU KNOW THAT YOUR LICENSE WAS EXPIRING ON THE 12TH? YES.SO YOU KNEW, SO DID YOU REACH OUT TO THE CITY BEFORE THE 12TH? YES, WE SPOKE WITH, UH, WE SPOKE WITH, UH, MS. UH, MS. MARSHALL.
WHEN DID YOU SPEAK WITH HER? THAT WAS, UM, THAT WAS NOVEMBER, BUT NOT, YOU KNOW, THAT WAS, UH, FIRST WEEK OF NOVEMBER WHEN SHE CAME FOR INSPECTION AT THE OTHER HOUSE.
SO YOU SPOKE TO THE CODE COMPLIANCE OFFICER? YES.
YOU DIDN'T SPEAK TO THE CITY ITSELF? I DIDN'T, NO, WE DIDN'T KNOW THAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO SPEAK WITH THE CITY BECAUSE MY, MY THING WAS THAT IF I, I, IF I SPEAK WITH THE, UH, WITH THE CODE COMPLIANCE THAT, YOU KNOW, SHE WILL BE ABLE TO, YOU KNOW, GIVE US THE GRACE.
WE DID NOT SPEAK, HANG ON A MINUTE.
SO THE CODE COMPLIANCE OFFICER, ALL THEY DO IS THEY COME OUT AND THEY CHECK THAT YOUR ABIDING BY THE LAW, THEY DO NOT HAVE THE WHEREWITHAL TO GRANT.
AND SO I I, YES, I I'M A LITTLE MYTH THAT YOU DIDN'T GO TO THE CITY AND ASK FOR SOME KIND OF FORBEARANCE.
DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION? WE'RE WRONG, WE'RE WRONG ON THAT.
SO MY QUESTION IS, SO MY QUESTION IS, SO YOU DID OR DID NOT REACH OUT TO THE CITY ITSELF? NO.
UH, THE FACT IS, UH, WE DID NOT REACH TO THE CITY, SIR, BECAUSE WE'RE NOT AWARE THAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO REACH TO THE CITY.
WE ONLY GO TO THE COMPLIANCE OFFICE RIGHT THERE IN DALLAS.
THOSE ARE THE PEOPLE WE DEAL WITH.
I'VE NEVER BEEN HERE, YOU KNOW, ABOUT ANYTHING OF THIS NATURE.
AND AFTER, AFTER SPEAKING TO TAMARA, SHE SAID, OKAY, OKAY.
AND WE TOLD HER THAT THIS PERMIT WILL BE MADE, MADE ON THE 4TH OF DECEMBER.
SHE WENT AHEAD AND PUT THIS VIOLATION NOTICE OF, UH, YOU KNOW, STOP OPPRESSION OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
AND SHE KNEW ALREADY THAT WE'RE COMING TO PLAY ON THE FORCE, BUT SHE WENT TO THE HOSPITAL COURT MUCH EARLIER TO DROP THIS NOTICE.
ALL, ALL RIGHT, AT THE END OF THE DAY, YOU ANSWER MY QUESTION THAT YOU DID NOT REACH OUT TO THE CITY ITSELF, SO YOU ALLOWED IT TO EXPIRE.
THAT'S THE END OF MY QUESTIONS.
UH, MR. CILLA, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
UM, JUST HAVE A FEW SET OF QUESTIONS HERE.
AND I GUESS I WANTED TO ASK AND GO BACK, UH, TO WHAT WAS JUST ASKED OF YOU REGARDING THE EMAIL THAT WAS SENT ON OCTOBER 28TH.
IT IS ADDRESSED TO ENZI TILLY.
AND SO IS THAT, UH, ANGIE TILLEY? IS THAT THE SAME? THAT'S CORRECT.
SO THAT EMAIL WAS ACTUALLY SENT TO YOU.
HOW DID YOU RECEIVE THE EMAIL THAT WAS SENT TO YOU? YES, I DID RECEIVE THAT EMAIL.
MY, YOU KNOW, I WAS REALLY THINKING THAT I WILL GET MONEY TO GO AND PAY BEFORE THE, UH, BEFORE THE EXPIRATION OF THE LICENSE.
SO I, SO I CAN APPRECIATE THAT AND I'M EMPATHETIC TO THAT.
BUT MY QUESTION, MY ADDITIONAL QUESTION TO THAT IS, DID YOU REACH OUT TO PRASHANT URA WHO SENT THAT, THIS ADMINISTRATION SPECIALIST ONE? NO, I DID NOT.
MY REASON THAT I SAID, MY REASON BEING THAT WHEN I, YOU KNOW, WHEN I SPOKE WITH THE CO COMPLIANCE, I THOUGHT, YOU KNOW, THAT WAS MY OWN THINKING.
I DID NOT KNOW THAT I WAS SUPPOSED TO, YOU KNOW, GO TO THE, UM, GO TO THE OFFICE AND SPEAK WITH THE PERSON OR SPEAK WITH THE MANAGER.
DID YOU AND I, AND I'M SORRY I MISSED THE RELATIONSHIP WITH THE GENTLEMAN WITH YOU TODAY.
IS THAT YOUR HUSBAND? THAT'S MY HUSBAND, YES.
DID YOU INFORM YOUR HUSBAND WHEN YOU RECEIVED THIS EMAIL ON OCTOBER 28TH THAT YOU HAD RECEIVED AN, THAT YOU GUYS HAD RECEIVED AN EMAIL THAT SAID YOU NEED TO BE APPLYING YOUR LICENSES, COMING RENEWED? NO, I DID NOT INVOLVE HIM.
DOES HE HAVE ACCESS TO YOUR EMAILS? NO.
AND HOW DO YOU, SINCE 2016, EXPLAIN TO ME ABOUT THE BOARDING HOUSES.
DO YOU HAVE TO RE-REGISTER EVERY YEAR OR EVERY TWO YEARS, OR EVERY CERTAIN AMOUNT OF TIME? EVERY YEAR.
SO IS IT THE SAME DEADLINE EVERY YEAR? UM, NO, I DON'T THINK SO.
[00:50:01]
WOULD'VE BEEN YOUR DEADLINE? WAS IT IN NOVEMBER OR WAS IT A DIFFERENT MONTH? UM, UNFORTUNATELY, I CAN'T REMEMBER, BUT I DON'T THINK IT'S EVERY MONTH.IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT THE SAME MONTH.
IT'S, IT'S NOT THE SAME MONTH.
BUT HOW DID YOU KNOW TO PAY FOR THAT? FOR 20 TWENTY'S LICENSE FEE? 'CAUSE THEY'LL SEND THE EMAIL.
THEY'LL SEND EMAIL, THEN, YOU KNOW, WE'LL GO AND PICK JUST LIKE THE EMAIL THAT YOU GOT IN OCTOBER 28TH, 2025? THAT IS CORRECT.
SO YOU TYPICALLY GET IN, DID IN 2023.
DO YOU THINK YOU GOT THE SAME TYPE OF COMMUNICATION ABOUT THE EXPIRATION OF YOUR LICENSE? YES.
AND YOU WERE ABLE TO PAY IN 2023, WAS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S RIGHT.
AND IN 2020, IN 2024, YOU WERE ABLE TO, IN 2024, YOU WERE ABLE TO PAY AS WELL, CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT.
AND THE REASON FOR NOT BEING ABLE, BEING ABLE TO PAY FOR THE LA YOU KNOW, FOR THIS LAST ONE WAS THAT I, THERE WAS NO MONEY.
WE DIDN'T HAVE ANY MONEY WITH IT.
UNDERSTAND? I, I, I'M NOT, I'M NOT, I'M NOT DISPUTING YOUR REASON.
UM, I WANT TO KNOW, IN REGARD TO THE BUSINESS THAT YOU'RE IN OF BOARDING HOUSES, HOW DO YOU OR YOUR HUSBAND KEEP INFORMED ABOUT THE LAWS THAT AFFECT YOUR BUSINESS? BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WE GO TO THE CLASSES EITHER ONLINE OR IN PERSON.
SO DO YOU, HOW OFTEN DO YOU ATTEND A CLASS? WHAT ABOUT POST SOMETHING TO HAVE, I'M SORRY, I CAN'T HEAR THE RESPONSE.
YEAH, WHENEVER THEY SAY SOMETHING TO EMAIL, I SHOULD INFORM ME AND THEN, UH, EITHER I GO TO THE CLASS OR SHE'LL, OR IF THEY'RE DOING IT ONLINE, YOU KNOW, BOTH OF US WILL ATTEND OR I'LL ATTEND MYSELF.
YOU KNOW, THE, IS THE EMAIL COMING IS, AND I'M SORRY TO INTERRUPT, IS THE EMAIL COMING FROM THE CITY SAYING, HEY, THERE'S A NEW LAW OR NEW INFORMATION? NO, WE DID NOT.
I DID NOT SEE THAT, AND I DON'T THINK SHE HAVE ANYTHING WITH, WITH REGARDS TO THIS NEW LAW OF 2023 OF CHANGE OF, UH, 2000 FEET FROM HONORABLE HOME.
WHEN IS THE LAST TIME THAT EITHER WHEN IS, I'M SORRY, I HAVE LIMITED TIME.
WHEN IS THE LAST TIME EITHER ONE OF YOU ATTENDED A CLASS? WHAT YEAR THAT WAS? THAT WAS AROUND, UH, I BELIEVE MAY OR JUNE.
MR. JEFFERSON HAS BEEN, OH, YOU'RE BACK.
MR. JEFFERSON, DO YOU HAVE QUESTIONS? NO QUESTION.
YOU MAY HAVE TO SHAPE YOUR HEAD.
I DON'T THINK WE'VE EVER GOTTEN YOUR MIC TO WOOD.
UM, I HAVE COUPLE, UM, DID, IT'S A LITTLE BIT UNCLEAR TO ME AS TO WHETHER THE, UH, WHETHER YOU FAILED A CRIMINAL BACKGROUND CHECK OR DIDN'T TAKE IT IN TIME.
YOU KNOW, I JUST HAVE MY BACKGROUND CHECK AND THIS, A COPY OF IT THAT EXPIRES.
THIS, UH, THIS ONE SHOULD EXPIRE, UH, TODAY ON THE 4TH OF FEBRUARY THIS EXPIRE, AND ONE THAT THAT'S APPROVED.
BUT, UH, ACCORDING TO THE NOTICE THAT, UH, THE BACKGROUND CHECK EXPIRED 2024, WHICH IS NOT TRUE, SIR.
AND THIS IS A COPY OF THE CORRECT, THE BACKGROUND CHECK, AND THEN THE NEW ONE WAS TAKEN.
UH, I'VE ALREADY GIVEN, UH, THE NEW, UH, BACKGROUND CHECK, YOU KNOW, TO TAKE PLACE OF THIS ONE.
THIS IS, WE HAVE THE NEW BACKGROUND CHECK.
THE RECEIPT IS THAT, THAT'S, I'M SORRY.
NINE? NO, THAT, THAT ONCE FEBRUARY OF 25.
YEAH, NO, THIS IS THE OLD ONE THAT SPARK YESTERDAY.
ANY CHANCE IT WAS A LEAD YEAR LAST YEAR? NO.
SO WHAT THAT MEANS AT A MINIMUM IS AT THE TIME THIS WAS, THIS WAS VALID.
I WANT CONTINUE TO USE MY THOUGHT.
HAVE YOU VERIFIED THAT YOU ARE INSIDE 2000 FEET OF, UH, A DIFFERENT BOARDING HOUSE? YES.
[00:55:04]
QUESTION.I, I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION.
YOU DIDN'T HAVE, HAVE YOU VERIFIED THAT YOU ARE IN FACT WITHIN 2000 FEET OF ANOTHER BOARDING HOUSE? DO YOU AGREE WITH THAT ASSESSMENT? I DO NOT AGREE WITH THAT BECAUSE RIGHT HERE, THIS IS, UH, I'M NOT SURE I KNOW EXACTLY HOW TO, HOW TO DEAL WITH THAT, EVAN, BUT IF I, IF I ASKED YOU FROM A STRAIGHT LINE, I'M NOT SURE, NO MATTER WHERE THE STREETS ARE OR WHATEVER, AS AS A BIRD FLIES, ARE YOU WITHIN 2000 FEET OF ANOTHER BOARDING HOUSE? I'M NOT SURE.
I'M NOT VERY SURE ABOUT, THEY'RE TALKING THIS AND THIS, SO WE ALL, AND THEY HAVE TWO ON THIS STREET.
THE, THEY BROUGHT A CHECK SO FAR, CAN LOOK AT, UH, SO MY CLIENT IS, IS COMING TO A CLOSE.
SO I, WHAT I HEAR IS, IS THAT AT, AT LEAST AT A MINIMUM, YOU'RE NOT SURE, UM, IS JUANA, IS THE NEAREST HOUSE ALSO YOURS? NO.
SO AT A MINIMUM, YOU DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE WITHIN 2000 FEET.
AND, AND YOU DON'T SIMPLY STIPULATE THAT, THAT, YEAH, WHAT I, WHAT I DID WAS TO USE MY GPS UHHUH
YOU KNOW, OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, YOU KNOW? OKAY.
AND THEN DOING THAT, YOU KNOW, I'M ABOVE 2000 FEET FROM ALL OF THIS BODY ROOMS. I AM, UH, ABOUT TO BE OUT OF TOWN.
UM, I ASK YOU, WELL, WE'LL DO THAT LATER.
MY QUESTIONS ARE, ARE COMPLETE.
SO WE HAVE A SECOND ROUND TECHNICALLY.
DOES ANYBODY HAVE A SECOND ROUND QUESTION? VICE TORES.
UH, MR. QUE, UH, WOULD YOU CONSIDER THIS CODE COMPLIANCE OFFICER AN AGENT OF THE CITY? LIKE, DID YOU CONSIDER IT BEING ENOUGH TO TALK TO THEM AS YOU SPEAKING TO THE CITY? WOULD YOU AGREE WITH THAT STATEMENT? YES.
UH, IF YOU CAN REPHRASE THAT STATEMENT AGAIN, IF YOU DON'T MIND.
DID YOU THINK THAT ASKING THIS CODE COMPLIANCE OFFICER FOR MORE TIME WOULD MEAN THE CITY WOULD AGREE TO IT, THAT THAT WAS THE CORRECT WAY TO DO IT? TO ASK FOR, YOU KNOW, TO MORE TIME TO PAY? WELL, UM, OR, BECAUSE YOU SAID THAT YOU SPOKE WITH MS. MARSHALL MM-HMM
AND, BUT YOU DIDN'T REALLY SPEAK DIRECTLY TO ANYONE IN THE CITY, IS THAT CORRECT? NO.
WOULD YOU SPEAK TO ANY OTHER FELLOW THAN, UH, MARSHALL HERSELF AND, UH, OUR THOUGHT WAS, YOU KNOW, SHE CAN, YOU KNOW, SINCE YOU KNOW, SHE COMES TO THAT HOUSE REGULARLY, SHE CAN CONVEY A MESSAGE TO WHOEVER IS CONCERNED OR YOU KNOW, OF, OF PAYMENT.
BUT MY ASTONISHMENT WAS, UM, UH, TELLING HER THAT WE ARE MAKING PAYMENT ON THE FORCE AND THEY CAME THAT SAME FORCE TO PLACE THIS NOTICE IS WHERE I'M WORRIED, YOU KNOW, BUT SHE KNEW ACTUALLY THAT WE ARE COMING OUT THERE ON THE FORCE TO MAKE PAYMENT THAT THE ONLY FELLOW WE COMMUNICATED TO ABOUT OUR PAYMENT.
IF I HAD KNOWN THAT I HAVE TO GO TO SOMEONE ELSE, I WISH I HAVE DONE THAT.
YOU KNOW, 'CAUSE NOTICE, STOP ME FROM MOVING AROUND TO GO TO ANYWHERE AT ALL.
THAT WILL, YOU KNOW, HELP ME OUT FROM THE SITUATION WHERE THAT PARTICULAR TIME.
QUESTION, HAS MS. MARSHALL COME OUT TO YOUR HOME AS CODE COMPLIANCE OFFICER FOR A COUPLE OF YEARS? DO YOU HAVE A RELATIONSHIP WITH HER? LIKE, UH, YOU'VE KNOWN HER FOR A WHILE? YES.
UM, I WOULD NOT SAY WE, WE HAVE A RELATIONSHIP WITH HER.
JUST A PROFESSIONAL RELATIONSHIP, RIGHT? RELATIONSHIP, YES.
YEAH, WE, WE COMMUNICATE
YOU TRUSTED HER? YEAH, I TRUSTED HER, YES.
AND THEN, UM, IS IT YOUR STANCE THAT IN NONE OF THE CLASSES THAT YOU'VE BEEN TO, WHICH YOU HAVE TO GO TO ON A YEARLY BASIS, YOU WERE EVER TOLD THE LAW HAS CHANGED? UM,
[01:00:01]
YOU, YOU KNOW, THE 2000 FEET RULE, AND IF YOU DON'T PAY FEES ON TIME, YOU MAY LOSE YOUR STATUS BEING GRANDFATHERED IN IN ANY OF THE CLASSES.THIS WAS NEVER ADDRESSED? NO, NOT THE, THE FACT IS, UH, I DID NOT ATTEND ANY OF THOSE CLASSES THAT MENTIONED ABOUT, UH, UM, ABOUT, UH, THE 2000 FEET.
IF YOU DON'T PAY ON TIME, YOU LOSE YOUR STATUS, YOU KNOW, NO.
AND, AND IF IT IS, MAYBE THEY DID NOT INFORM US ON THAT.
AND, UH, UH, SINCE 2023 THEY SAID THAT.
I SEE MR. CILLA WITH THEIR HAND.
IS THERE ANY, UH, ANYONE PRESENT WHO'S BEEN THE ONE? OKAY, I SEE MR. CILLA, YOU GOT THREE MINUTES HEARD.
UM, SO I ASK BOTH OF YOU, UM, DO BOTH OF YOU ATTEND CLASSES ON AN ANNUAL BASIS OR DO ONE OF YOU ATTEND CLASSES ON AN ANNUAL BASIS AND THEN YOU REPORT BACK TO THE OTHER PERSON? BOTH OF THOSE ATTEND CLASSES AT THE SAME TIME.
SO ONE OF YOU, OR SOMETIMES YOU SAID BOTH OF YOU.
I, I'M SORRY, I DIDN'T HEAR YOUR ANSWER.
AND THEN IF NOT, IF I GO, I'LL LET HER KNOW.
BUT IN MOST CASES WE'LL BE TO THE CLASS ABOUT THREE OR FOUR TIMES TOGETHER.
EITHER ME OR SHE WILL ATTEND THAT CLASS ONLINE.
AND WHERE DO YOU ATTEND THE CLASSES? HUH? WHERE IN THE CITY? IS IT THE CITY BUILDINGS OR IS IT SOME YEAH.
AND DO YOU GET A BOOK OR PAMPHLET OR POWERPOINT OR SOME TYPE OF PAPER THAT YOU WALK AWAY WITH? PAMPHLETS.
PAMPHLETS, PAMPHLET, SOMETIMES PAMPHLETS.
YEAH, SHEETS YOU PICK UP, YOU KNOW, ENTERING THE HALL, YOU KNOW, NOT THAT THEY PASS ANYTHING IN PARTICULAR.
THIS IS WHAT YOU SHOULD BE LOOKING AT, YOU KNOW, NOW.
AND ARE THESE PUT ON BY CITY EMPLOYEES? THESE, THESE, UH, CLASSES? REPEAT? DO CITY EMPLOYEES TEACH THESE CLASSES? YES.
IN REGARD TO THE BACKGROUND CHECK, I WAS MISSED.
WHEN DID YOU GET THE RENEWED BACKGROUND CHECK, UM, THAT THE CHAIR WAS SPEAKING OF BEFORE IT EXPIRES? I KNOW IT EXPIRES, BUT WHEN DID IT ACTUALLY BEGIN, SIR, IF I MAY UNDERSTAND IF I MAY REPLIED TO THAT? HABA CHECK WAS SUPPOSED TO EXPIRE YESTERDAY AND THE EXPIRED YESTERDAY ACTUALLY.
AND THE NEW ONE WAS DONE ON THE THIRD OF THIS MONTH TO REPLACE.
WHEN DID THAT, WHEN DID THE BACKGROUND CHECK START THAT EXPIRED YESTERDAY? IT'S, UH, FEBRUARY TO FEBRUARY 25, 24 TO FEBRUARY, YOU KNOW, 25.
SO AS, AT THE TIME THIS LETTER WAS WRITTEN, THIS BACKGROUND CHECK IS STILL CURRENT.
WE KNEW WHAT WAS DONE ON THE THIRD.
UM, I THINK THAT I'M CONCLUDING, LEMME SEE IF I HAD ANY MORE QUESTIONS.
HAVE Y'ALL EVER BEEN LATE BEFORE ON YOUR, ON PAYING YOUR PERMIT OR LICENSE? NO.
AND THE HOUSES THAT ARE THERE THAT YOU TALK ABOUT, HAVE THEY BEEN THERE BEFORE? 2023 THAT ARE TOGETHER? CAN YOU SAY THAT AGAIN? THE TWO HOUSES THAT ARE TOGETHER, HAVE THEY BEEN THERE BEFORE 2023? YES.
BEFORE I ASK ANYBODY, OKAY, UH, QUICKLY, UH, THOSE CLASSES YOU TOOK ARE, WERE THOSE CONTINUING EDUCATION CLASSES THAT ARE REQUIRED FOR YOUR LICENSE? UM, IT'S KIND OF LIKE, YOU KNOW, THERE'S SOMETHING NEW, YOU KNOW, THERE'S ANYTHING, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING NEW, THEN THEY WILL, YOU KNOW, SCHEDULE THE CLASS FOR US TO COME.
AND IT'S EDUCATIONAL TOO? YES.
LIKE HOW DO YOU KNOW ABOUT THOSE CLASSES? EMAIL FROM, FROM THE CITY.
FROM CODE COMPLIANCE OR CODE COMPLIANCE.
THAT SAY WHAT YOU, YOU NEED TO BE AT THIS MEETING.
OR THERE'S A TRAINING OR THERE'S A MEETING.
AND I DIDN'T HEAR YOU, ARE ARE GOING TO THOSE MEETINGS REQUIRED TO KEEP ANY LICENSE? NO, IT'S JUST, SO IT'S NOT TECHNICALLY A-A-C-O-E.
UM, AND I BELIEVE YOU SAID THAT THE CODE COMPLIANCE TEACHES THE CLASS, RIGHT? YEAH, THE PERSON, UM, THE COMPLIANCE SOMETIMES, YOU KNOW, FIRE DEPARTMENT WILL COME, YOU KNOW, DIFFERENT, UH, SECTION.
[01:05:01]
TELL YOU THAT THE LAW HAD CHANGED? NO, SIR.TO BE, TO BE KIND WITH YOU? I'VE NEVER HEARD ABOUT THAT.
DID THEY GIVE YOU BY WRITING OR
AND, AND TO BE CLEAR, THE, UM, THE CRIMINAL BACKGROUND AT THE TIME OF THE REVOCATION WAS ENFORCED AND UP TO DATE MM-HMM
DID YOU FAIL ANY OF THE OTHER INSPECTION? THE CITY IN INSPECTS MANY THINGS.
UH, DID YOU FAIL A HEALTH INSPECTION OF THE FIRE INSPECTION? NO.
AND, UH, THIS IS EXAMPLE MM-HMM
OF THE, UH, INSPECTION OF AUGUST, 2025.
AND, UH, IF THE ALLEG THAT, UH, THIS CRIMINAL BACKGROUND EXPIRED, UH, UH, 2024, THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE TO FIND IT OUT ON THIS, UH, INSPECTION WHEN THEY WERE THERE.
AND IT STATED HERE, THERE WAS NO, NO VALIDATION FOUND.
AND ACTUALLY THERE'S, THERE SHOULD BE NO ONE BECAUSE THE, UH, PEN BACKGROUND IS UP TO DATE.
NO, I, I WAS, UH, WONDERING IF THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE.
FINALLY, UM, HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN OPERATING? CONTINUOUSLY? SINCE 2026.
SO YOU STARTED IN 15? YES, BECAUSE ALL US WAS, UH, 2015.
UH, THAT IS THE EXTENT OF MY QUESTIONS.
UM, DOES ANYBODY FEEL THE NEED FOR A QUICK FIVE MINUTES OR CAN WE KEEP GOING? OKAY.
UM, AT THIS POINT, THE, UH, CITY'S CASE, UM, YOU HAVE, UH, I SUPPOSE YOU, YOU HAVE TO, WE HAVE YOUR ADDRESS.
UM, UM, YOU, YOU HAVE 15 MINUTES TO, UH, CALL WITNESSES, MAKE A STATEMENT.
AND I BELIEVE THE APPELLANT MEMORY SERVES ABOUT NINE MINUTES.
IF, IF, IF THE APPELLANT WANTS TO CROSS EXAMINEE, THE APPELLANT DOES HAVE TIME.
I JUST DON'T REMEMBER EXACTLY HOW MUCH, BUT WE'LL GET TO THAT.
CALL WITNESSES TO THE MEETING.
BEN CHANEL FISHER FOR THE CITY, THE CITY CALLS JOSE RU.
I AM THE MANAGER OF THE BOARDING HOMES UNIT LOCATED AT 40 20 WEST ILLINOIS.
MR. RUIZ, HOW LONG HAVE YOU SERVED AS A BOARDING HOME MANAGER? I'VE SERVED A LITTLE BIT OVER TWO YEARS, APPROXIMATELY TWO YEARS AND TWO MONTHS.
AND IN THAT ROLE, WHAT ARE YOUR PRIMARY RESPONSIBILITIES? ONE OF MY PRIMARY RESPONSIBILITY, OF COURSE, IS TO OVERSEE THE ENTIRE UNIT, THE CASEWORKER, THE INSPECTORS, BUT ALSO MAKE THE FINAL DECISIONS ON ALL APPLICATIONS THAT ARE SUBMITTED TO THE CITY.
ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH THE CITY'S BOARDING HOME LICENSE ORDINANCE? YES.
I'M, CAN YOU BRIEFLY EXPLAIN HOW LONG A BOARDING HOME LICENSE IS VALID? THE BOARDING HOME LICENSE IS VALID FOR ONE YEAR AFTER ISSUANCE.
WHAT IS REQUIRED FOR AN OPERATOR TO RENEW A BOARDING HOME LICENSE? UM, PER CHAPTER EIGHT A, THE OPERATOR HAS TO, WELL SUBMIT A COMPLETED APPLICATION, WHICH INCLUDES A LOT OF DOCUMENTS, A LOT OF INFORMATION ALSO INCLUDES THE BACKGROUND CHECK, THE FIRE REPORT, GAS TEST EVERY FEW YEARS ALONG WITH, UM, PAYMENT OF THE APPLICATION TO BE CONSIDERED COMPLETE.
WHAT HAPPENS UNDER THE ORDINANCE IF A RENEWAL IS NOT SUBMITTED BY THE DEADLINE? IF A RENEWAL IS NOT SUBMITTED BY THE DEADLINE, THEN THAT LOCATION HAS NO LICENSE AND WE HAVE TO REVERT BACK TO DALLAS CITY CODE AS IT RELATES TO ADDRESSING THE VIOLATIONS OF OPERATING LI UH, A BOARDING HOME WITHOUT A LICENSE.
ONCE A LICENSE EXPIRES, DOES THE ORDINANCE ALLOW IT TO BE RETROACTIVELY RENEWED? IT DOES NOT ALLOW RETROACTIVE RENEW.
IT HAS TO BE LOOKED AT THE NEW APPLICATION FOR A NEW BOARDING HOME.
DOES THE CITY PROVIDE NOTICE TO BOARDING HOME OPERATORS WHEN A RENEWAL DEADLINE IS APPROACHED YOU AS, AS A COURTESY, WE USUALLY SEND AN EMAIL, UM, WITHIN 30 DAYS OF THE, UM, RENEWAL PERIOD.
[01:10:03]
RETURNING TO THIS CASE, ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH THE BOARDING HOME LOCATED AT 65 38 IGA CIRCLE? YES, I'M, DO YOU KNOW WHO THE OPERATORS ARE? UM, MS. TILLY IS THE OPERATOR.DO YOU KNOW WHEN THE LICENSE EXPIRED FOR THE BOARDING HOME AT 65 38 IOLA CIRCLE? YES.
IT EXPIRED NOVEMBER 12TH, 2025.
LET ME BRING YOUR ATTENTION TO THE PRESENTATION.
WE ARE SHOWING THE LICENSE FOR THE BOARDING HOME AT 65 38
DOES THIS FORM ACCURATELY REFLECT YES, IT DOES.
THE, THE LICENSE? YES, IT DOES.
AND CAN YOU TELL US, DO YOU SEE ON THE LICENSE WHEN THE EXPIRATION DATE IS? YES, THE DATE IS 11 12 20 25.
MOVING TO THE NEXT SLIDE, DID THE CITY PROVIDE NOTICE TO THE OPERATOR THAT THE RENEWAL DEADLINE WAS APPROACHING? YES.
WHILE IT'S NOT REQUIRED, WE DID SEND AN EMAIL NOTIFYING THEM THAT THE LICENSE WOULD BE EXPIRED ON OCTOBER 28TH.
AND CAN YOU SEE THE PRE PRESENTATION, MR. SLIDE SIX.
WAS THIS AN EMAIL SENT TO MS. TILLEY? YES.
AND WHEN IS IT DATED? UH, OCTOBER 28TH, 2025.
CAN YOU READ THE STATEMENT IN THE BOX AT THE BOTTOM OF THAT EMAIL? YES.
IT STATES IF YOUR LOCATION IS WITHIN 2000 FEET OF ANOTHER REGISTERED LIGHTS AND LOCATION, YOUR LOCATION WILL NOT BE ABLE TO OPERATE.
IF IT DOES NOT CONTINUOUSLY MAINTAIN ITS REGISTERED.
AND LICENSE STATUS, FIRST SECTIONS EIGHT A DASH SIX 16 AND EIGHT A DASH NINE B TWO A.
DID THE CITY RECEIVE THE RENEWAL FEE AND APPLICATION BEFORE OR ON OR BEFORE NOVEMBER 12TH, 2025? THE DEADLINE? NO, IT DID NOT.
WHAT HAPPENED TO THE LICENSE FOR THE BOARDING HOME AT 65 38 TIOGA CIRCLE? ONCE THE RENEWAL DEADLINE PASSED, IT BECAME EXPIRED.
AND AFTER THE LICENSE EXPIRED, DID THE OPERATOR CONTINUE OPERATING THE BOARDING HOME? YES, IT DID.
WHICH WAS THE OPERATOR LEGALLY AUTHORIZED TO OPERATE A BOARDING HOME AFTER THE LICENSE EXPIRED? NO, THEY WERE NOT.
DID THE CITY BECOME AWARE THAT THE BOARDING HOME WAS STILL OPERATING WITHOUT A LICENSE? YES, IT DID.
WHAT ACTION DID THE CITY TAKE ONCE IT DETERMINED THE BOARDING HOME WAS OPERATING WITHOUT A VALID LICENSE? IT CONDUCTED A SITE VISIT AT THE LOCATION AND ISSUED A NOTICE OF VIOLATION.
SO I'M GONNA BRING YOUR ATTENTION TO SLIDE SEVEN.
DOES THIS SLIDE ACCURATELY REFLECT THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION THAT WAS ISSUED TO MS. TILLEY? YES, IT IS A NOTICE, A VIOLATION LETTER.
HAS THE SLIDE BEEN PROVIDED TO THE, UH, APPELLANT? THIS PART OF YOUR, UH, THE EXHIBITS? THE, THESE ARE ALL IN OUR EXHIBITS.
THEY ARE, THAT WERE SUBMITTED TO AFTER THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION WAS ISSUED, DID YOU INFORM THE BOARDING HOME OPERATOR? WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF A NEW APPLICATION WAS SUBMITTED? YES.
AND THIS IS AN EMAIL THAT YOU SENT? UH, SLIDE EIGHT.
IS THIS AN EMAIL THAT YOU SENT? YES.
AFTER A PHONE CONVERSATION, AN EXPLANATION OF CITY ORDINANCE AND REGULATIONS.
UH, I DID GIVE THEM THE OPPORTUNITY TO APPLY, UM, BUT I DID ADVISE 'EM THAT THEY DID.
THE LIKELIHOOD OF THEM OBTAINING THE LICENSE WAS NOT GONNA HAPPEN BECAUSE, UM, BY CODE I HAD TO DENY IT.
AND I DID ADVISE 'EM THAT IF THEY SUBMITTED IT, THAT WOULD HAPPEN AND THEIR FEE WOULD BE NON-REFUNDABLE.
AND DID YOU INFORM THE OPERATOR OF THE 2000 FEE ORDINANCE IN THAT EMAIL? YES, I DID.
DID THE OPERATOR SUBMIT AN APPLICATION AND FEE AFTER THAT CONVERSATION? YES, THEY DID.
AND WHAT DATE WAS THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED FOR? 65 38 TIOGA CIRCLE.
IT WAS RECEIVED ON IN DECEMBER 13TH.
ONCE THE APPLICATION WAS RECEIVED ON DECEMBER 13TH, HOW WAS IT CLASSIFIED? UNDER THE ORDINANCE? UNDER THE ORDINANCE.
IT'S NOW A NEW APPLICATION FOR A NEW BOARDING HOME
[01:15:01]
FACILITY.SINCE THE PREVIOUS HAD EXPIRED, WAS THE NEW APPLICATION DENIED? YES, IT WAS.
AND THIS IS SITES 11, IS THE DENIAL LETTER, IS THIS A DENIAL LETTER THAT WAS SENT TO MS. TILLEY? YES, IT IS.
WHEN REVIEWING A NEW APPLICATION, WHAT ORDINANCE REQUIREMENT MUST BE APPLIED? THE ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS IN CHAPTER EIGHT A.
DOES THE CURRENT ORDINANCE INCLUDE A SPACING REQUIREMENT FOR THE BOARDING HOMES? YES, IT DOES.
WHAT DOES THAT SPACING REQUIREMENT? CURRENTLY IT'S 2000 FEET.
IS A PROPERTY AT 65 38 TIOGA CIRCLE LOCATED WITHIN 2000 FEET OF ANOTHER BOARDING HOME? YES, IT IS UNDER THE ORDINANCE.
CAN A NEW BOARDING HOME LICENSE BE APPROVED AT THAT AT THE LOCATION OF 65 38 TOYOTA SURFACE? NOT E LICENSE.
WHY NOT? UH, BECAUSE IT WOULD BE IN VIOLATION OF DALLAS CITY CODE.
WHY WAS THE OPERATOR PREVIOUSLY ALLOWED TO OPERATE WITHIN THE 2000 FEET OF ANOTHER BOARDING HOME? BECAUSE THEY HELD A CONTINUOUS LICENSE AFTER THE ORDINANCE WAS AMENDMENT AMENDED BY DALLAS CITY COUNCIL IN 2023.
DOES THE GRANDFATHER STATUS DEPEND ON MAINTAINING A CONTINUOUSLY ACTIVE LICENSE? YES, IT DOES.
WHAT HAPPENS TO GRANDFATHER STATUS IF THE, THE LICENSE EXPIRES? IF THEY TERMINATE? ONCE THE APPLICATION WAS CLASSIFIED AS A NEW APPLICATION, DID THE CITY HAVE DISCRETION TO APPROVE IT DESPITE THE SPACING REQUIREMENT? NO, IT DOES NOT.
THE CODE DOESN'T PROVIDE FOR DISCRETION BASED ON THE ORDINANCE.
WAS THE CITY REQUIRED TO DENY THE APPLICATION? YES, IT WAS.
WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THE ORDINANCE THAT LIMITS BOARDING HOMES WITHIN 2000 FEET OF EACH OTHER? UH, THE PURPOSE, THE PRIMARY OVERALL PURPOSE IS TO MAINTAIN THE WELFARE, SAFETY CONCERNS OF THE RESIDENTS OF THE BOARDING HOME, BUT ALSO TO, UM, MAY NOT HAVE IFICATION OF BOARDING HOME IN A CERTAIN AREA BECAUSE THE LICENSE IS WHAT ALLOWS THEM TO LEGALLY OPERATE AS PART OF A SINGLE FAMILY SO THAT IT CAUSE MINOR, UM, DISTURBANCE IN THE QUALITY OF LIFE OF THE RESIDENT, OF THE NEARBY RESIDENT.
AND SO IN SIMPLE TERMS, WHY WAS THE CITY UNABLE TO APPROVE THE APPLICATION? BECAUSE DALLAS CITY CODE STATES THAT IT'S WITHIN 2000 FEET OF ANOTHER.
WOULD THE OUTCOME HAVE BEEN DIFFERENT IF THE OPERATOR HAD RENEWED ON TIME? YES.
HAD AN APPLICATION BEEN SUBMITTED ON OR BEFORE THE EXPIRATION DATE? UM, THE PRO, UH, THE LOCATION WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN DENIED FOR THE TWO THOUSANDS
AS THE WITNESS, UH, DOES THE APPELLANT HAVE QUESTIONS FOR THE WITNESS? YES, MS. YEAH.
UM, SO YOU SAID, UM, WHAT I WANT TO KNOW FROM YOU, WHAT IS THE PROPOSAL OF THE, THE 2000 FEET AWAY FROM? WHAT PROPOSAL DOES THIS SERVE? YOU KNOW, WHY YOU PUT THAT THERE? BUT, UH, IT SHOULD NOT BE 2000 FEET FROM WHAT IS THE PURPOSE FOR, I I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT THE PURPOSE OF THE CITY COUNCIL AT THAT TIME.
I JUST KNOW THAT THAT IS THE REQUIREMENT OUR COUNCIL VOTED ON, UM, TO MAKE IT WITHIN 2000 FEET.
FOR THE, FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE RECORD, THE, UM, UH, POLICY, UH, IS, IS WELL OUTSIDE THE DISCRETION OF THIS BOARD.
WE EXIST, UH, ONLY TO APPLY THE LAW REGARDLESS OF WHAT WE THINK, THE LAW ABOUT THE LAW TO THE FACTS TO THE LAW.
UM, WHAT I WANTED TO KNOW IS THAT IF THE MONEY THAT DOESN'T KNOW THE PURPOSE OF THE 2000 FEET, AND THEN WHY ARE THEY APPLYING IT TO THIS PARTICULAR INCIDENT WE'RE HAVING RIGHT NOW, YOU APPLY SOMETHING THAT YOU'RE NOT AWARE OF AND WE'RE MAKING IT A LAW AGAINST US.
AND MOREOVER, MOVING THERE SINCE 2016.
I DON'T KNOW WHEN THE OTHER FELLOW IS.
IS THIS QUESTION FOR THE FOR THE WITNESS? YEAH, FOR THE WITNESS.
AND THEN I DON'T KNOW WHERE THE OTHER FELLOW WHO HAS TWO BODY HOMES IN THE SAME STREET AND THEN THIS LAW WAS NOT THEN KNEW THAT IT WAS SISTANT OR THE CITY.
CAN THEY JUST OVERLOOK IT? IS THAT CORRECT? AND THAT IS INCORRECT, SIR.
THE PREVIOUS PROPERTIES WERE REGISTERED WITH THE CITY PRIOR TO 2023 BEFORE THE REQUIREMENT WAS CHANGED.
THEREFORE, THEY HAD THE NON-CONFORMING GRANDFATHER ABILITY TO CONTINUE TO OPERATE, UM, EVEN IF THEY WERE NEXT DOOR TO EACH OTHER.
UH, WHY DID YOU, UH, SEND US A COPY OF, UH, THE 2000 FEET
[01:20:01]
AWAY FROM OTHER BODIES THAT THIS LAW HAVE CHANGED? BECAUSE THIS IS MY FIRST TIME HEARING IT.WE DON'T HAVE ANY INFORMATION REGARDING, YOU KNOW, TO THE, UH, TO THE CHANGE OF A 2000 FEET FROM ONE TO THE OTHER.
THE SECOND QUESTION TO THAT, WHY WILL SHE PLACE 2000 FEET WHEN THERE ARE WOMAN LIKE YOU OR NOT? SO ARE THE ALLY NEED DAMAGE IN THE STREETS, OR EXCUSE ME, SIR.
UH, OVER HERE, CAN YOU PLEASE SPEAK INTO MR. SAMUEL? YEAH.
CAN YOU PLEASE SPEAK INTO THE MICROPHONE? WE'RE NOT CAPTURING YOUR COMMENTS ON THE RECORD.
MY QUESTION IS, SIR, THE 2000 FEET, THE PURPOSE ITSELF, YOU DO NOT KNOW, AND LET'S ASSUME, YOU KNOW, WHY WOULD THE CITY PUT THAT 2000 FEET AWAY FROM THIS BODY HOME TO ANOTHER BODY HOME? ARE THEY PREVENTING CION OR ANY KIND OF HAZARD FROM THE PEOPLE LIVING INDIA? BECAUSE I PRESUME THAT THE PEOPLE LIVING IN THOSE HOUSES ARE WHO BAD.
SO WHY SHOULD THAT LAW BE AND BE IN THE EFFECT TO PREVENT SOMEBODY WHO HAS BEEN THERE FOR 2016 LOSING HIS LICENSE AS SOMEBODY WHO HAVE, YOU KNOW, WHO HAS TWO BODY HOMES? WE HAVE TO STAY, AND I BET IF I LOSE MY LICENSE, THAT GUY IS GOING TO OCCUPY MY HOUSE.
SORRY, YOU, YOU'D BE ASKING A QUESTION AND SO FORTH.
LET, LET ME, MS. MURPHY, HOW MUCH TIME DO DOES HE HAVE? OKAY.
AND WE'RE GONNA JUST SAY MAYBE IN THE FUTURE.
UH, YEAH, I THINK WE, WE'VE DONE, LET'S TAKE ABOUT FOUR MORE MINUTES IF, IF YOU WANT.
BUT PLEASE MAKE SURE YOU'RE ASKING HIM QUESTIONS AS OPPOSED TO, I I, I WOULD ASK THIS.
AND FOR THE FIRST QUESTION REGARDING NOTIFICATION, UM, TO THE APPLICANT OF THE 2000 FOOT REQUIREMENT.
WHEN I BECAME THE MANAGER IN 2023, WE ACTUALLY, THAT'S WHEN THE ORDINANCE WAS PASSED.
WE HELD, UM, TWO MEETINGS THAT AT THE ONE AT THE END OF THE YEAR AND ONE THE FOLLOWING YEAR, AND THE 24TH, WHICH WE MADE REQUIRED ATTENDANCE AT ECHO PARK FACILITY.
UM, ONE OF THE MAIN PURPOSES OF THAT MEETING WAS TO DISCUSS THE CHANGE TO THE DALLAS CITY CODE, WHICH INCLUDED THE 2000 SQUARE FOOT REQUIREMENT, AS WELL AS THE RAISING OF THE FEE.
UM, AFTER THAT, WE, UM, WE START A PROCESS WHERE WE HOLD MONTHLY MEETINGS WHERE WE OPEN THEM UP FOR DISCUSSIONS SO THEY CAN COME AND ASK ANY QUESTIONS, ANY OPERATOR.
AND WE ALSO PROVIDE BRIEF TRAINING ON ANY THINGS THAT WE SEE OUT OF THE ORDINARY, UM, THIS YEAR, UM, WORK SCHEDULE TO HAVE ONE IN JUNE, LAST OCTOBER.
UM, I BEGIN THE MEETINGS, AND THROUGH THE MEETINGS, I EMPHASIZE THE NEED TO PLEASE SUBMIT YOUR APPLICATION TO A TIMELY MANNER SO THAT YOU DON'T, UM, AVOID THIS CONFLICT OF HAVING YOUR NON-CONFORMING RIGHTS TERMINATED.
AND ADVISE HIM THAT ALL APPLICATIONS SUBMISSIONS REGARDING RENEWAL HAVE TO GO THROUGH OUR ADMINISTRATIVE SPECIALIST BECAUSE HE'S THE ONE WHO RECEIVES AND ACCEPTS THE APPLICATIONS AND COMES TO US FOR APPROVAL.
AS IT RELATES TO THE SECOND QUESTION, UM, REGARDING THE PURPOSE, UH, AGAIN, I, I THINK THE CHAIR, I MADE IT CLEAR IT'S, IT'S NOT MY DECISION TO DETERMINE THE PURPOSE OF WHY THE CITY COUNCIL PASSED THE ORDINANCE.
UM, BUT THAT IS THE, THE REGULATIONS THAT I HAVE TO ENFORCE AT THIS TIME.
DO YOU HAVE FURTHER QUESTIONS? YEAH.
UH, I'LL, YOU KNOW, BUT PLEASE,
UM, DO YOU HAVE, SO ARE, ARE, DO YOU HAVE ANY FURTHER STATEMENTS WITH MR. WITNESS? NO.
UH, DO YOU HAVE FURTHER WITNESSES? NO.
UM, AT THIS POINT, UH, WE'LL OPEN QUESTIONS TO THE BOARD.
I SEE MR. CIA, WHO'S LOCAL, WANTS TO SPEAK I TWO, SO I MISSED, OKAY.
UH, START WITH VICE CHAIR TORRES.
SO I HAVE A, DO YOU HAVE ANY EVIDENCE, UM, INSPECTOR, SORRY.
INSPECTOR REESE, DO YOU HAVE ANY EVIDENCE THAT, UM, THEY WERE AT THOSE TWO MEETINGS THAT YOU MENTIONED? WHERE, LIKE, DO YOU HAVE A SIGN IN SHEET AT THESE MEETINGS? UM,
[01:25:01]
I, I DON'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION WITH ME TODAY.UM, IN ADDITION, IF IS THE REQUIREMENT OF THE MEETINGS, THEY'RE NOT REQUIRED TECHNICALLY TO ATTEND, WE ASK 'EM TO BE MANDATORY BECAUSE WE WANNA RELAY INFORMATION, WANNA BE PROACTIVE IN GETTING THEM THE INFORMATION THAT THEY NEED.
SO YOU DON'T HAVE ANY SIGN IN SHEETS AT THE MEETINGS, CORRECT? MM-HMM.
NOT AT THIS TIME TO ENTER INTO RECORDS.
THAT WOULD, I MEAN, I THINK THAT THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING YOU COULD INCLUDE IN THE MEETINGS, JUST IN CASE THIS COMES UP AT A, IN A DIFFERENT CASE.
YOU MENTIONED YOU HAD A CONVERSATION.
DID YOU SAY YOU, YOU TALKED TO THEM OVER THE PHONE? YES.
MR. SAMUEL? UM, PRIOR TO THAT EMAIL, UM, WHEN I GAVE 'EM THE OPPORTUNITY, I THINK, UH, MENTIONED EARLIER WE HAD A CONVERSATION, AND IN THAT CONVERSATION, UM, I DISCUSSED THE ISSUE.
SO MR. SAMUEL CONTENDS THAT TODAY IS THE FIRST THAT HE'S HEARD OF THIS CHANGE IN LAW.
AND YOU SAID IN, IN A CONVERSATION OVER THE PHONE, DID YOU EXPLICITLY TELL HIM, HEY, LIKE THE GRAVITY OF THE SITUATION, IF YOU DO NOT GIVE ME AN, A FULL APPLICATION? RIGHT.
'CAUSE IT NEEDS TO HAVE AN APPLICATION IN ADDITION TO A FEE, YOU WILL LOSE YOUR LICENSE.
I SAW IT IN THE EMAIL, BUT YOU VERBALLY TOLD THEM, UM, OVER THE PHONE? YES.
HOWEVER THAT CONVERSATION OCCURRED.
UM, I, UM, I BELIEVE IT WAS EITHER THAT MORNING BEFORE THE EMAIL WAS SENT OUT OR LATE THAT AFTERNOON.
SO I DON'T RECALL IF IT WAS THE, THE E UH, EVENING PRIOR OR THAT MORNING OF THAT EMAIL BEING SENT OUT ON IN DECEMBER.
SO YOU, YOU DID HAVE A CONVERSATION.
SO, AND WE DO THIS SOMETIMES TOO, TO, UM, JUST IN GENERAL, BUT OUTSIDE OF THIS CITY ORDINANCE, WOULD YOU HAVE DENIED THIS LICENSE APPLICATION? I GUESS THE QUESTION I'M NOT UNDERSTANDING IS, THE QUESTION IS, UM, IF IT WASN'T FOR THE CITY ORDINANCE, WOULD I HAVE DENIED THE APPLICATION? YES, THAT'S EXACTLY CORRECT.
UM, I DON'T THINK THE LAW ALLOWS ME TO APPROVE OR DENY AN APPLICATION WITHOUT GUIDANCE FROM CITY ORDINANCE.
I GUESS WHAT I'M GETTING AT IS, UM, WERE THERE OTHER ISSUES WITH THE BUSINESS? UM, IF, IF YOU'RE RELATING TO THE, UM, CRIMINAL BACKGROUND, WHEN THEY SUBMIT THE APPLICATION, YOU HAVE TO SUBMIT THE CURRENT DOCUMENTS.
SO WE DON'T DISPUTE THE FACT THAT THEY DID HAVE A CURRENT CRIMINAL BACKGROUND, HOWEVER, IN THE ACTUAL APPLICATION SUBMITTED MIGHT HAVE BEEN A CLERICAL ERROR.
THEY INCLUDED THE OLD COPY, NOT THE UPDATED COPY.
THAT'S WHY IT WAS INCLUDED IN THAT NOTICE OF VIOLATION THAT THE CRIMINAL BACKGROUND WAS INCORRECT.
I GUESS WHAT I'M TRYING TO GET AT, UM, IS YOU'RE THE MANAGER OF BOARDING HOMES FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS, CORRECT? YEAH.
SO YOU HAVE SOME REGULATIONS THAT ARE BASICALLY VERY BLACK AND WHITE, RIGHT? IF YOU HAVE A HOME 2000 FEET, IF YOU DON'T DO YOUR APPLICATION, DOES THE CITY LOOK AT FURTHER CODE COMPLIANCE OR ANYTHING ELSE SUBSTANTIVELY DIFFERENT OUTSIDE OF THAT TO MAKE A DESIGNATION? UM, THIS IS A, THIS IS A GOOD BUSINESS THAT THE CITY NEEDS.
THIS, THIS IS GOOD FOR DALLAS.
UM, THE ORDINANCE ACTUALLY DOES THAT BECAUSE THE LICENSES WOULD, ALLOWS THEM TO EXIST OTHERWISE WITHOUT A LICENSE.
IT WOULD BE A SONY VIOLATION OR BOARDING HOME FOR CITY TO EXIST IN THE CITY.
SO OVERALL, THAT LAW, UM, THE FACT THAT YOU HAVE A LICENSE, IT'S ALLOWING YOU TO OPERATE.
SO THAT IN ITSELF, IN THE BIG PICTURE, IS WHAT GIVES THAT DISCRE DISCREPANCY TO THEM TO BE ABLE TO OPERATE.
SO THIS IS REALLY VERY MUCH A TECHNICAL DEFICIENCY IN THE WAY THAT THIS LICENSE WAS SUBMITTED, RIGHT.
TECHNICAL AS IT RELATES THAT THEY SUBMITTED IT, UM, AFTER THE EXPIRATION DATE? YES.
THAT'S THE ONLY THING THAT THEY DID INCORRECTLY AND PROVIDED THE INCORRECT INFORMATION AT THAT TIME? YES.
I MEAN, THE REPERCUSSIONS ARE HUGE, RIGHT? BECAUSE THE, THEY DIDN'T REALIZE THAT THEY WERE GONNA LOSE GRANDFATHER STATUS, BUT THAT IS THE ONLY THING THAT THEY DID INCORRECTLY WAS JUST NOT GIVE, UH, THE FEES ON TIME, CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.
IS THERE ANYBODY REPRESENTING A DISTRICT LESS THAN NINE? LET'S SEE.
JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT THIS NEW, NEW METHOD OF, UH, US DOING THE ROUND ROBIN QUESTIONS.
UM, SO
MR. RUIZ, MY QUESTION FOR YOU IS, LET'S TALK ABOUT THE HYPOTHETICAL, UH, 'CAUSE I NEED TO KNOW WHETHER THERE
[01:30:01]
WOULD'VE BEEN ANYTHING TO HAVE BEEN DONE IN THAT EMAIL THAT MAYBE TRY CLOSER TO YOUR MIC.HEY, IN THAT EMAIL, CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES.
IN THE EMAIL THAT WAS SENT BY, I GUESS, UH, ONE OF THE INDIVIDUALS THAT YOUR SUBORDINATE SAID IN ON OCTOBER 28TH TO MS. TILLEY, IT STATED THAT, AND I KNOW THAT'S A NOTIFICATION THAT YOU'RE NOT REQUIRED TO SEND, IF ANY, IF EITHER ONE OF THE INDIVIDUALS HERE TODAY WOULD'VE CONTACTED YOU OR YOUR STAFF BEFORE THE EXPIRATION NOVEMBER 12TH, WAS THERE ANYTHING THAT THE CITY COULD DO IF THEY SAID, HEY, FOR FINANCIAL REASONS, HARDSHIP, WE NEED A LITTLE MORE TIME.
IS THERE ANYTHING THAT ALLOWS YOU TO DO SOMETHING IF YOU'RE CONTACTED BEFORE THE EXPIRATION, UH, PAYMENT PLAN OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT? UM, THE CODE ACTUALLY JUST STATES THAT THE APPLICATION NEEDS TO BE SUBMITTED IN A TIMELY MANNER.
SO AS LONG AS THEY SUBMIT THE APPLICATION, UM, WE DO HAVE A TIMEFRAME WHERE I CAN REQUEST ADDITIONAL INFORMATION PER THE LAW.
SO HAD THEY MADE THE PAYMENT, I'M, I'M SORRY.
HAD THEY SUBMITTED AN APPLICATION? I DO, ACCORDING TO CITY ORDINANCE, HAVE UP TO 30 DAYS TO MAKE THAT DECISION.
THEY HAVE TO 30 DAYS TO COMPLETE EVERYTHING, BUT I NEED TO HAVE THE PAPER APPLICATION SUBMITTED.
SO, JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, I'M SORRY, ARE YOU STILL TALKING? I APOLOGIZE.
SO JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, THE, IF THEY WOULD'VE SUBMITTED THE APPLICATION BEFORE NOVEMBER 12TH, YOU WOULD'VE BEEN ABLE, YOU HAVE SOME WIGGLE ROOM OF BASICALLY SAYING, I NEED 30 DAYS FOR YOU TO COMPLETE THIS APPLICATION, AND THEY MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE BEEN ABLE TO KEEP THIS GRANDFATHER CLAUSE WITHIN THIS HYPOTHETICAL.
IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT.
THEY COULD, AS LONG AS WE HAVE RECEIVED THE APPLICATION ITSELF ON THE EXPIRATION DATE OR PRIOR TO THAT, UM, THE ORDINANCE DOES ALLOW SOME LEEWAY.
AND JUST TO BE CLEAR, UM, THERE WAS A, AND, AND ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT YOU RECEIVED IT, YOU WENT THROUGH WHAT THE REQUIREMENTS ARE OF A BOARDING HOUSE.
IF THOSE REQUIREMENTS DID NOT EXIST, ESSENTIALLY THE CITY OF DALLAS WOULD NOT ALLOW FOR, UM, OR THERE WOULD BE NOTHING THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR BOARDING HOUSES, IS THAT CORRECT? EXCEPT FOR THESE CITY CODES? THAT IS CORRECT.
SO IN ESSENCE, THIS IS A PRIVILEGE OR A CARVE OUT THAT THE CITY HAS PUT IN PLACE IN ORDER TO ALLOW FOR BOARDING HOUSES.
IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT.
AND SO WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF A BOARDING HOUSE? I'M, I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH THEM BESIDES WHAT I'VE READ AND WHAT I UNDERSTAND, BUT WHY IS THE CITY, WHY DOES THE CITY ALLOW FOR BOARDING HOUSES? UM, SO BASED ON THE CODE, THE, UH, BOARDING HOUSE FACILITY, UM, IT GETS CONFUSED WITH BOARDING.
UH, A BOARDING HOME FACILITY IS SEPARATE THAN A BOARDING HOUSE, WHICH IS GOVERNED BY ZONING A
SO A BOARDING HOME FACILITY, WHICH IS LICENSED IS MEANT FOR A, A SINGLE FAMILY OR IN THE CORRECT ZONING CAN BE IN COMMERCIAL, BUT IT ALLOWS SPECIFICALLY FOR SINGLE FAMILY.
IF YOU HOUSE THREE OR MORE INDIVIDUALS AND YOU PROVIDE THEM A SERVICE, UM, SERVICE ARE LISTED, UM, I'LL JUST NAME A FEW LIGHT HOUSEKEEPING MEDICATION, UM, EVEN INCLUDES, UM, CARE FROM OUTSIDE AGENCIES AT THE HOME, MONEY MANAGEMENT FOR PEOPLE THAT MAY NEED THAT ASSISTANCE.
IN REGARD TO THE 2000 FEET, HOW DID YOU KNOW THAT THERE THEY WERE LESS THAN 2000 FEET FROM ANOTHER HOME? UM, WE ACTUALLY HAVE, I I THINK YOU HAVE AN EXHIBIT ON PAGE 13.
I SKIPPED THAT EXHIBIT SOMEHOW.
OR, IT'S ON PAGE 13, UM, WHERE IT SHOWS TWO LOCATIONS OF JUDGE DECREE.
THE CODE REQUIRES TO TAKE A LINEAR MEASUREMENT, NOT DRIVING DOWN THE STREETS, OR GPS HAS TO BE A LINEAR MEASUREMENT.
SO THERE YOU CAN SEE THAT THERE'S TWO, UM, WITHIN, UH, 2000 FEET.
AND I APOLOGIZE THAT THE CITY COULD SHOW PAGE 13.
'CAUSE MY PAGE 13 IS A CODE NOR NOR DOES IN YOUR EXHIBITS, UH, NOR MINE DOESN'T EITHER.
BOARDING HOME IS THIS, WHAT, WHAT PAGE IS THIS IN OUR EXHIBIT? MR. ILLA, YOU WERE, TIME IS UP.
FINISH THIS LINE OF QUESTION REAL QUICK.
HE, HE ASKED WHERE YOU POSTED, UH,
[01:35:02]
THE, UH, 2000 FOOT MAP, OR, OR I DON'T BELIEVE IT'S IN OUR BINDER.IT IS PART OF OUR PRESENTATION.
WELL, WHERE, WHERE'S THAT? UH, THAT'S THIS WE'RE, IT'S JUST A PART OF OUR PRESENTATION OF, OF OUR EVIDENCE.
YEAH, I MEAN, IT, IT'S VERY HARD TO RE HAVE YOU PROVIDED EVERYTHING IN YOUR PRESENTATION HERE TO THE APPELLANT? SURE.
YOU, YOU HAVE SH SHOWN MR. CCHU, UH, WHAT HE ASKED FOR AT LEAST.
WE'LL PROBABLY CONTINUE DOWN THAT ROAD.
UH, I ACTUALLY SKIPPED DR. JACKSON.
UM, MEMBER, UH,
SO AFTER WE ISSUED THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION IN ON DECEMBER 1ST.
AND THEN, UH, ANOTHER QUESTION THAT YOU ANSWERED PREVIOUSLY THAT IF THEY HAD TO RESPOND, UH, TO YOU, AND AS FOR YOUR TIME, THE, UH, EXPIRATION NOVEMBER THE 12TH, THAT WOULD NOT INCLUDE THE GRANDFATHER, IS THAT CORRECT? UM, SO LET ME CLARIFY.
SO IF THEY SUBMIT THE, THE APPLICATION WAS DUE ON THE 11TH.
SO HAD THEY REACHED OUT TO US, WHEN I SAY US IS OUR LICENSING TEAM, WHICH IS ME, THE SUPERVISOR, AND PRASHAN WHO'S, WHO'S OUR, UH, ADMINISTRATOR, RECEIVES THE APPLICATION IF THEY GO AHEAD AND IF YOU NOTICE ON THAT EMAIL TELLS 'EM WHAT THEY HAVE TO DO.
IF THEY GO IN, THERE'RE ON THEIR OWN AND SUBMIT THE APPLICATION WITHOUT PAYMENT, THEN THE CLOCK STOPS BECAUSE WE HAVE THE APPLICATION, WE HAVE TO REVIEW IT DURING OUR REVIEW PROCESS.
IF THERE ARE DEFICIENCIES, THEN WE HAVE TO REACH OUT TO YOU AND GIVE YOU TIME TO CORRECT THOSE DEFICIENCIES BECAUSE ALL THOSE DEFICIENCIES HAVE TO BE CORRECTED SO WE CAN MAKE THE FINAL DECISION, UM, BECAUSE THE CODE ALLOWS FOR US TO GIVE YOU THAT TIMEFRAME, BUT WE HAVE TO RECEIVE THE ACTUAL APPLICATION PORTION, THE PAPERWORK PORTION, UM, THROUGH OUR ONLINE SYSTEM.
UH, IF, UM, THE BOARD DECIDE TO REVERSE, DO THAT MEAN THAT THEY WOULD NOT BE INCLUDED AS A GRANDFATHER? THEY WOULD HAVE TO MOVE FORWARD ON A MOVE PROCESS? UM, SO IF YOU, IF YOU VOTE THAT THEY DO NOT GET THE LICENSE TODAY, UM, THEN THEY WILL NOT BE ABLE TO OPERATE A BOARDING HOME.
THERE, THERE ARE, THEY ARE FREE TO LOOK FOR ANOTHER LOCATION IN THE CITY OF DALLAS THAT'S NOT WITHIN 2000 FEET OF ANOTHER.
AND THEY COULD SUBMIT AN APPLICATION OR AN APPLICATION.
WHAT IF THAT, IF THE BOARD DECIDE TO REVOKE YOUR DECISION, AND WILL THEY BE ABLE TO OPERATE AND NOT BE INCLUDED IN THE GRANDFATHER OR WILL THEY BE INCLUDED IN THE NEW REGULATION? NO, UH, THEY WOULD BE INCLUDED ON BOTH NEW REGULATIONS.
SO IF YOU DECIDED TO GIVE 'EM THE LICENSE, THEY WOULD GET THEIR LICENSE.
UM, AND THEY STILL HAVE TO ABIDE BY CITY CODE IF THEY LET IT EXPIRE AGAIN, UM, AND WE GO THROUGH THE PROCESS, THEN WE MIGHT FIND OURSELVES HERE AGAIN IF THEY DECIDE TO APPEAL FOR THE SAME ISSUE.
SO, UH, I THINK MR. CLINT QUALIFIES NEXT.
UM, MS. MR. RUIZ, UM, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE LICENSE FOR A BOARDING HOUSE IS FOR ONE YEAR, CORRECT? CORRECT.
AND WOULD THE ANNIVERSARY OF THAT LICENSE BE, GIVE OR TAKE A DAY THE SAME EVERY YEAR? UM, GIVE OR TAKE IS GONNA BE WITHIN A WEEK, ALMOST EVERY YEAR.
UM, BECAUSE IT'S FROM THE DATE OF ISSUANCE, IT REALLY DEPENDS.
DO THEY APPLY EARLY ENOUGH WHEN WE GET THE INSPECTION DONE? IT'LL BE CLOSER TO THE DATE, BUT AGAIN, IT, IT RELY US ON WHEN WE GET ALL THE INFORMATION.
[01:40:01]
UH, YES.'CAUSE, UM, THE APPELLANT HAD SPOKEN EARLIER SAYING, WELL, THEY DIDN'T KNOW WHEN THEIR LICENSE HAD EXPIRED, SO THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION.
UM, YOU STATED THAT Y'ALL HAD MEETINGS IN 23 AND 24 TO GO OVER, UM, UH, NEW REGULATIONS, AND YOU HAD STATED THAT THE 2000 FEET WAS DISCUSSED IN THE MEETINGS.
AND DID I HEAR YOU CORRECTLY THAT THESE MEETINGS ARE MANDATORY? WE DO SEND AN EMAIL AND WE SAY IT'S MANDATORY TO TRY TO GET 'EM IN TO COME SEE IT, BUT IT'S NOT REQUIRED BY CITY CODE.
WE AS A DEPARTMENT MAKE IT MANDATORY RELAY THE INFORMATION.
AND SO I WANNA MAKE SURE I HEARD THIS CORRECTLY.
YOU SPOKE WITH THEM BEFORE 10 28 THAT THEIR LICENSE WAS UP FOR RENEWAL, CORRECT? UM, I DIDN'T SPEAK WITH THEM.
UM, WE HAD A, A MEETING, YOU KNOW, AT THE MEETINGS, BUT NOT DIRECTLY WITH THEM PRIOR TO OCTOBER 28TH.
THEN I'M, I'M SORRY, I MISHEARD.
BUT ON 10 28, THE EMAIL DID STATE SPECIFICALLY THEIR LICENSE WAS GONNA EXPIRE AND THE GRANDFATHER WOULD GO AWAY, CORRECT? CORRECT.
SO, UM, BECAUSE EARLIER IN THE MEETING, MR. UM, THE APPELLANT SAID, WELL, THIS IS THE FIRST HE WAS HEARING ABOUT THE 2000.
SO IN YOUR OPINION, DID HE KNOW WELL IN ADVANCE THAT THE 2000 WAS GONNA GO AWAY? IN MY PROFESSIONAL OPINION, IF HE DID ATTEND THOSE MEETINGS, LIKE HE TESTIFIED EARLIER, THEN I WOULD SAY YES.
HE SHOULD HAVE BEEN MADE AWARE.
HE SHOULD HAVE BEEN AWARE OF IT.
SO SO YOU'RE SAYING HE W HE WAS AWARE OF IT? YES.
UM, MS. HIN HAS SAID THAT HER QUESTIONS HAVE ALREADY BEEN ANSWERED, UH, MEANING MR. GONZALEZ NOT LAST OR NOT LEAST.
I KNOW IT SEEM THE BEST FOR LAST
UM, SO IF I'M UNDERSTANDING CORRECTLY, UM, IF THEY SUBMITTED THEIR APPLICATION, UH, PRIOR TO THAT LAST DATE, THEY WOULD'VE HAD SOME TYPE OF LEEWAY FOR, UH, MAKING THE PAYMENT A LITTLE BIT LATER.
THEY DIDN'T NECESSARILY NEED THE PAYMENT ON THE DATE THAT THE APPLICATION WAS DUE, IS THAT CORRECT? RIGHT.
AS LONG AS WE GET IT WITHIN THE TIMEFRAME INDICATED IN DALLAS CITY CODE, THEY WOULD'VE BEEN FINE.
AND WAS THAT COMMUNICATED TOWARDS THEM? UM, DID NOT HAVE COMMUNICATIONS WITH THEM BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T RESPOND TO THE OCTOBER 28 EMAIL TILL THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION OF DECEMBER 1ST, BUT BY THAT TIME IT'S TOO LATE.
SO IT'S SAFE TO SAY THAT THEY MAY NOT HAVE BEEN AWARE THAT THEY COULD SUBMIT THE APPLICATION AND MAKE PAYMENT AFTERWARDS? THEY, THAT IS CORRECT.
UM, THE LETTER THAT YOU SENT, YOU SAID YOU SENT A LETTER, I THINK IT WAS OCTOBER 28TH.
DO YOU HAVE ANY CONFIRMATION THAT THAT LETTER WAS RECEIVED BY THEM? UM, OCTOBER 28TH WAS AN EMAIL.
WHAT WAS THE DATE OF THE LETTER? THE LETTER WAS DATED, I BELIEVE DECEMBER 1ST.
SO THERE WAS NO LETTER SENT OUT IN, UH, BEFORE THE EXPIRATION? THAT IS CORRECT.
GOTTA LOOK BACK AT MY NOTES HERE REAL QUICK.
SO, AND THIS IS GOING OFF OF, UH, VICE CHAIR TORRES'S QUESTION.
I JUST WANTED TO REPHRASE IT BECAUSE I DIDN'T GET A CLEAR UNDERSTANDING.
I THINK I KNOW WHAT SHE WAS TRYING TO ASK.
IF THE PAYMENT HAD BEEN RECEIVED BY THE DEADLINE AND THE APPLICATION, WOULD YOU HAVE APPROVED THIS PERMIT BASED ON THE INFORMATION AND REVIEWED WHAT WE REVIEWED? YES.
UM, AND THEN, AND, AND, AND LET ME ADD THIS, UM, SURE.
BECAUSE TO PROVIDE CLARITY, I WOULD HAVE, TECHNICALLY, I CANNOT APPROVE IT UNTIL THEY CONDUCT AN INSPECTION BECAUSE I CAN DENY IT FOR TWO REASONS FOR FAILING THE ADMINISTRATIVE PORTION OF IT, OR FOR FAILING THE INSPECTION.
SO I CANNOT SAY 100% THAT I WOULD'VE BECAUSE THE INSPECTION AFTER THE FACT NEVER OCCURRED.
IT WOULD'VE BEEN PENDING THE INSPECTION.
UM, SO, UH, WITH THAT CLEAR TO PROVIDE CLARITY, UM, EVEN IF THE BOARD SAYS IT, UM, YOU CANNOT DENY IT, THEY STILL HAVE TO PASS THE INSPECTION SO THEY CAN RECEIVE THE LICENSE.
AND MY LAST QUESTION IS ACTUALLY, IN REGARDS TO THIS, I GUESS, EVIDENCE THAT'S ON THE SCREEN.
UM, I GUESS WHY WERE WE NOT PROVIDED THIS EVIDENCE IN ADVANCE? I HONESTLY, I CAN'T SEE THAT, SO I DON'T, I, SHE SAID IT SAYS 1500 FEET, BUT I, I DON'T KNOW, IT SAYS THAT 'CAUSE I CAN'T READ THAT.
SO IS THERE ANY WAY THAT WE CAN GET A COPY OF THIS EVIDENCE AND OKAY, PERFECT.
WE CAN SUBMIT THE, THE WHOLE PRESENTATION.
MY ONLY CONCERN IS, IS IS THAT THE APPELLANT, UH, HAVE SEEN THIS,
[01:45:01]
UH, THE ENTIRETY OF THE, ANYTHING THAT WASN'T IN THE PACKET, UH, INITIALLY, UH, AHEAD OF TIME.THIS GRAPHIC IS, THIS GRAPHIC ITSELF WAS PART OF THE PRESENTATIONS SHOULD BE THE ONLY THING THAT THEY DON'T HAVE.
AND CHAIR, IF, IF I MAY ADD, I I BELIEVE IT.
WAS THERE EVIDENCE THAT THEY PROVIDED TO YOU? WE DON'T SEE IT IN THAT THEY, THEY HAD A LIST OF ALL THE LOCATIONS.
SO THERE IS A LIST THAT SHOWS ALL OF THE BOARDING HOMES WITHIN 2000 FEET.
THIS WAS JUST FOR DEMONSTRATIVE PURPOSES TO SHOW WHERE THEIR HOME IS.
AND THERE ARE ACTUALLY FIVE BOARDING HOMES WITHIN 2000 FEET.
WE JUST PUT TWO JUST FOR DEMONSTR DEMONSTRATIVE PURPOSES, ACTUALLY.
SO WITH THAT, I HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION.
NO, I, I THINK YOU'VE GOT, OH, OKAY.
SO YOU, YOU JUST MENTIONED THERE'S FIVE BOARDING HOMES WITHIN 2000 FEET.
I'M ASSUMING SOME OF THOSE ARE WITHIN 2000 FEET OF EACH OTHER.
DO YOU KNOW HOW MANY OF THOSE BOARDING HOMES ARE GRANDFATHERED IN? I ASSUME ALL OF THEM.
UM, I'LL BE, I'LL BE, UH, FAMOUS LAST WORDS.
UM, JUST TO BE CLEAR, WHEN DID YOU RECEIVE THE APPLICATION? WE RECEIVED THE APPLICATION AFTER DECEMBER, DECEMBER 11TH, DECEMBER 13TH.
OUR RECORDS SHOW DECEMBER 13TH, DECEMBER 13TH, AND THE FINAL DAY TO HAVE RECEIVED IT ON TIME WOULD'VE BEEN WHAT? THE 11TH OF NOVEMBER.
AND I BELIEVE YOU SAID, BUT I JUST WANNA CLARIFY THAT YOU COULD RECEIVE AN APPLICATION WITHOUT PAYMENT AND STILL BEGIN TO PROCESS IT.
UM, DO YOU TYPICALLY PROVIDE, UH, UH, CARE PERIODS FOR, UH, UH, FOR PROPERTIES AND OWNERS THAT ARE, THAT ARE OUT OF COMPLIANCE? WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY CARE PERIOD, SIR? WELL, LET'S SAY, LET'S SAY YOU DID AN INSPECTION MIDYEAR.
UH, WOULD YOU IMMEDIATELY REVOKE THEIR PERMIT OR WOULD YOU NOTIFY THEM AND SAY, HEY, YOU GOTTA FIX THIS, THIS FIRE SOMETHING, OR, UH, THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION IS YES OR NO.
IT DEPENDS ON THE ISSUE AND THE SEVERITY OF THE ISSUE AND THE HISTORY OF THAT BOARDING HOME WHEN IT RELATES TO OTHER ISSUES.
POSSIBILITY THAT, UM, I KNOW IN, IN YOUR, UH, LINE OF WORK, YOU SEE ALL RANGES OF, OF, OF, THERE'S NOT A TECHNICAL TERM FOR GOOD AND BAD ACTORS, BUT WOULD YOU CONSIDER, UH, THE APPELLANT TO BE A GOOD ACTOR, UH, UP TO THIS POINT? YES.
I WANNA FOCUS ON, ON THE, UH, THE, THE DISTANCE.
WHAT IS YOUR PROCEDURE? I, I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
I I DO WHAT, WHAT IS YOUR TYPICAL PROCEDURE THAT WHAT YOU PUT UP LOOKS TO BE? MAYBE A GOOGLE MAPS WITH A DRAWING.
W WAS THAT, UH, A LINE THAT WAS, UH, MADE TO MEASURE? UH, SO OUR, OUR NORMAL PROCEDURE TO WALK YOU THROUGH, IF ANYBODY WANTS TO APPLY FOR A BOARDING HOME, WE GET A PHONE CALL.
WE ASK 'EM TO SUBMIT AN EMAIL REQUEST.
IN THAT EMAIL REQUEST, WE ASK 'EM TO PROVIDE THE ADDRESS TO THE LOCATION.
THEY WANT TO ESTABLISH A BOARDING HOME.
THEN WE HAVE A, A, A SOFTWARE SYSTEM, UM, CALLED TMY, UM, THAT'S BEEN PRE-PROGRAMMED WITH ALL OUR EXISTING BOARDING HOMES.
AND WHAT WE DO IS WE ENTER THAT ADDRESS INTO TMY TO SEE IF THE PROPERTIES ARE, IF THERE'S ANY OTHER PROPERTIES ALREADY LICENSED WITHIN THAT 2000 SQUARE FOOT AREA.
UM, IF THEY ARE, THEN WE NOTIFY, UM, THE APPLICANT OR THE INQUIRY THAT CURRENTLY WE HAVE ONE, OR CURRENTLY WE HAVE TWO WITHIN 2000.
I'M, I'M, I'M RUNNING OUTTA TIME.
TELL ME ABOUT, UH, IS THIS, IS THIS SYSTEM BASED ON GPS COORDINATES? LINEAR, HOW PRECISE IS IT? IT, IT'S LINEAR.
IT'S WITHIN A, A FOOT OR SO, FROM WHAT I'VE BEEN TOLD.
IF IT WAS VERY CLOSE, LIKE WITHIN 25 FEET AT SOME POINT, DO YOU HAVE A WAY OF SURVEYING? IF, IF WE DID, UM, IF IT CAME DOWN TO IT, UH, THEN I WOULD DISCUSS IT WITH MY COLLEAGUES, BUT MORE THAN LIKELY WE'RE TALKING A FOOT OR TWO AND IT'S DISCREPANCIES.
YOU KNOW, 25 FOOT IS MORE OBVIOUS.
[01:50:01]
IF IT'S SMALLER FOOT, THEY WOULD, WE PROBABLY ARE ON THE SIDE OF CAUTION AND ISSUE A LICENSE.THE, THIS BOARD HAS SEEN LESS THAN 25 FEET.
I DON'T, NO, THERE, THERE'S NOT, UH, I'M NOT THE MISS OF CO WHAT YOU SAID.
YOU'RE, YOU'RE OUT OF ORDER IN LOVE.
UM, OH, MR. SO WE HAVE, SO ROUND TWO, WE, WE HAVE ILLA AT NINE.
THREE MINUTE, ACTUALLY, JUST WANTED TO CLEAN UP A LITTLE BIT, MR. RUIZ.
UM, IN REGARD TO THESE FIVE LOCATIONS THAT ARE WITHIN THE 2000 FEET THAT ARE A PART OF THE PRESENTATION, I GUESS I DIRECT THIS TO YOU OR DIRECT THIS TO YOUR ATTORNEY.
IS IT PAGE 68, IS WHAT YOU'RE REFERENCING MR. RUIZ OF YOUR, OF THE, OF THE EVIDENCE WE RECEIVED, OR IF THE CITY ATTORNEY COULD CHECK THAT AND SEE IF THAT'S THE PAGE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT? YES, THAT'S THE LINK.
AND SO THE CIRCLE IS THE KYLE'S HOUSE, WHICH IS MS. TILLEY'S IS THE OPERATOR, AND THEN YOU HAVE NUMBER 36.
NOW, I DON'T SEE ANY DISTANCE FROM THERE, BUT YOU'RE INDICATING, I GUESS EVERYTHING THAT'S IN BOLD, IS THAT 36, 13, 6 AND FIVE, ARE THOSE THE ONES THAT ARE WITHIN 2000 FEET OF THE KYLE'S HOUSE? OUR HOME? I DON'T HAVE, I DON'T HAVE THE LIST IN FROM ME, BUT BASED ON MEMORY, I DO BELIEVE THAT IS CORRECT.
I'M JUST, SO I'LL ASK THE ATTORNEY, CITY ATTORNEY, IS THAT THE REASON FOR BOLDING THOSE PARTICULAR ADDRESSES? AND THIS IS THE SAME, UM, THAT'S INCLUDED IN THE APPELLANT'S EXHIBITS AS WELL.
SO THE APPELLANT HAD IT, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE IT'S, THAT'S WHAT IT'S INDICATING NOW THAT YOU MENTIONED THE APPELLATE, SIR, I DO RECALL IT IS ACCURATE.
SO PAGE 14 IN THE APPELLANT'S EXHIBIT, THEY HAVE IT, THEY PRESENTED IT TO US.
AND THEN ALSO IN PAGE 68 OF THE, THE CITIES, IT'S THE SAME LIST, OR AT LEAST IT APPEARS TO BE, I JUST WANTED TO KNOW WHAT THE HIGHLIGHTED OR THE BOLDED ADDRESSES ARE FOR.
UH, THAT MEANS, OKAY, NO MORE.
YOU MENTIONED A PROGRAM THAT YOU SOMETIMES HAVE, THAT YOU HAVE DISCRETION OAK.
UH, I BELIEVE YOU SAID THAT IN ORDER TO DO THAT YOU HAVE TO HAVE AN ON-TIME APPLICATION.
THE DISCRETION IS PROVIDED TO ME BY THE DALLAS CITY CODE.
AND HOW MUCH DISCRETION DO YOU HAVE? OKAY, SO PER DALLAS CITY CODE, WHEN WE GET A, AN INCOMPLETE APPLICATION, UM, I HAVE TO SEND YOU A CERTIFIED LETTER ADVISING YOU DO HAVE 30 DAYS TO CORRECT THAT ISSUE, OR THE APPLICATION WILL AUTOMATICALLY EXPIRE.
BY THAT, DO YOU MEAN AN INCOMPLETE ON TIME APPLICATION? YES.
AN INCOMPLETE AGAINST INCLUDES PAPERWORK PAYMENT FOR ANY REASON.
THE APPLICATION WILL AUTOMATICALLY EXPIRE IN 30 DAYS.
SO THAT CASE WOULD'VE BEEN 1211 OR 1212, CORRECT.
UM, ARE THERE FURTHER WITNESSES? NO, WE WENT THROUGH THAT.
THAT SAID, WE'LL CLOSE THE EVIDENCE PART OF THE HEARING AND HERE A FIVE MINUTE CLOSE FROM THE APPELLANT AND THEN FROM THE CITY.
UM, I WANT, PLEASE MAKE SURE YOUR MIC IS ON.
I WANT INFORM THE BOARD THAT, UM, WE DO NOT HAVE ANY VIOLATION PRIOR, BEFORE THE, UH, UH, THE LETTER WAS SENT TO US.
THE, THE, THE BACKGROUND CHECK WAS CORRECT AND WAS AUTHENTIC, BUT TELLING YOU THAT, UH, WE SUBMITTED THE OLD ONE.
[01:55:01]
CURRENT, YOU KNOW, UM, BACKGROUND CHECK WAS SUBMITTED TO THEM, AND THAT'S WHAT WE SUBMITTED TO THE CITY.WHAT I GAVE THEM WAS 2005, UH, BACKGROUND CHECK, WHICH WAS CORRECT AND EXPIRED YESTERDAY, AND THE NEW ONE WAS TAKEN.
SECONDLY, UH, THE, THE PAGE 13 LINEAR MEASUREMENT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT, WE DON'T HAVE ANY KNOWLEDGE OF IT AT ALL.
AND IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT THAT DIAGRAM, UH, WE WANT THEM TO POINT THAT TO BE EXACTLY WHERE WE ARE, 2000 FEET CLOSE TO ANY ROOM.
WE ARE NOT, THEY DID NOT SEND US ANY EVIDENCE OF THIS, WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TODAY.
THEY'LL NOT SEND ANYTHING TO US.
THIRDLY, WE WE'LL BLOCK OUT OF THEIR SYSTEM BEFORE THE FORCE OF, UH, DECEMBER BECAUSE HE WAS THE ONE THAT TOLD ME THAT HE WILL HAVE TO GIVE THEM PERMISSION TO ALLOW US TO MAKE OUR APPLICATION.
SO THERE'S NO WAY WE CAN MAKE ANY APPLICATION PENDING WHEN THE MONEY WAS PAID.
WE'RE NOT GIVEN THAT OPPORTUNITY TO DO ANYTHING AT ALL.
OKAY? WE WOULD'VE DONE THAT, BUT WE'LL BLOCK AT YOU.
THERE'S NO WAY WE CAN DO ANYTHING.
HE WAS THE ONE THAT TOLD ME, I'M GOING TO CALL THE GUY OVER THERE TO ALLOW YOU TO MAKE YOU APPLICATION.
SO THAT WAS EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED.
WE SHOULD HAVE DONE THIS BEFORE THIS TIME, BUT WE HAVE BLOCKED OUT.
AND IF THEY WERE GIVEN, THE OPPORTUNITY WAS THEN WE MAKE A PAYMENT BECAUSE ONE, THE SUPERVISOR NEVER WANTED US TO MAKE ANY PAYMENT AT ALL.
HE WAS THE ONLY ONE THAT GAVE ME THE INFORMATION THAT I COULD MAKE A PAYMENT.
AND WHEN HE MEET WITH HIS FELLOW, UH, TEAM WORKERS, THEN THEY WILL DECIDE IF THEY'LL GIVE US THE OPPORTUNITY TO CONTINUE OR NOT.
BUT I KNEW THAT THEY WERE NOT GOING TO GIVE US THAT OPPORTUNITY ALREADY BECAUSE OF WHAT I'VE BEEN LOOKING AT AS AT THAT TIME, YOU KNOW? OKAY.
SO, UH, I WANT THE BOARD AS WELL TO UNDERSTAND THAT THE CITY OR THE, UH, THE CO COMPLIANCE, UH, INSPECTORS HAVE MADE A LOT OF MISTAKES, YOU KNOW, IN THEIR INSPECTIONS AND WHAT THEY'RE CHARGING US, THEY CAN JUST BRING US HERE BECAUSE THEY WORK WITH THE CITY.
YOU KNOW, THEN WE SHOULD JUST GO, YOU KNOW, TO YOU, UH, YOU KNOW, GO ANYWHERE WE WANT.
WHY WOULD THEY GIVE, UH, YOU KNOW, CALL OUR BUT, UH, BUILDING MANAGEMENT TO, YOU KNOW, TO EVICT US? WHAT DID THEY GO THAT FAR? ARE THEY TRYING TO HURT OUR FEELINGS OR TRY TO SHOW US THAT COMPLETELY? WHY SHOULD THEY GO THAT FAR BY GETTING THIS INVASION? NOTICE THAT THE STATE OR THE CITY IS NOT PAYING FOR OUR RENT.
WHY WOULD THEY DO THIS? THIS IS TO TELL YOU THAT SOMETHING IS GOING ON WITHIN THE STATE WAS COMING TO OUR HOUSE.
THEY REALLY WANT MAKE SURE WE CLOSE DOWN.
YOU KNOW, THEY DID EVERYTHING POSSIBLE.
THEY SHOWED US DOWN COMPLETELY.
WE CANNOT MAKE ANY CONNECTION WITH THEM.
WHEN YOU CALL THE PHONE CALL, THEN SHELL TELL ME IF SHE THERE THAT IS NOT AVAILABLE, YOU'LL BE HERE AFTER ONE WEEK OR THERE ABOUT, YOU KNOW, I FIND, WHERE ELSE DO I HAVE TO GO? THIS IS THE ONLY PLACE I KNOW I SHOULD COME AND LAY MY COMPLAINTS, YOU KNOW? BUT HE'S NOT AVAILABLE ACCORDING TO THE SUPERVISOR, RIGHT? THE MEETING IS VERY DIFFICULT FOR US.
AND THEY, THEY DETERMINED TO SHOW US THAT, YOU KNOW, SO I WANT THEM TO POINT TO ME, YOU KNOW, LINE BY LINE, THE, THE, UH, THE, UH, THE BUILDINGS THAT ARE CLOSE TO TGA CIRCLE, WOULD THEY, THEY'RE WRONG, BUT THEY DON'T WANT TO SAY IT HERE.
SO WITH THIS, I'M ASKING THE CITY AND THE BOARD MEMBERS HERE, YOU KNOW, TO RECONSIDER OUR APPLICATION, BECAUSE THIS IS PURE WICKEDNESS, INTENTIONALLY WANT TO DO THIS TO US FOR NOT JUST REASON.
AND THIS IS VERY DISHEARTENING FOR YOU.
WHO BEING LIKE YOU, WE KEEP PEOPLE IN THAT HOUSE, THAT STAY IN MY HOUSE FOR FREE, DON'T PAY ME A RUNAWAY.
THEN I'M GOING TO CITY JUST FOR TWO WEEKS.
YOU WANT TO SHUT ME DOWN FOR 2016, I STARTED MY BUSINESS.
YOU TELL ME HOW YOU'LL FEEL IF YOU HAD TO BE IN MY SHOES.
SO WE SHOULD THEN GO TO THE STREET.
AND I'VE DECIDED TO ESTABLISH A BUSINESS AND EMPLOY PEOPLE TO WORK THERE.
I'M HELPING THE CITY AS WELL BY PAYING SOME PEOPLE WHO ARE WORKING FOR ME AND HELPING THE CITY, HOUSING THOSE PEOPLE.
I KEEP THEM IN MY HOUSE, THEY STAY THERE, EAT MY FOOD, DO EVERYTHING, CONSUME MY BILLS, AND AT THE END OF THE DAY, THEY'RE GONE.
NO PERMIT DID I COME TO THE CITY AND ASK CITY TO DON'T KNOW THE RELATIVE.
OKAY, SO THE CITY SHOULD PLEASE THINK ABOUT THIS.
I'M DOING MY OWN JOB TO HELP THE CITY.
AND THEN THE CITY SHOULD NOT SAY, PLEASE FINISH UP AND THEN DO SOMETHING VERY HARMFUL TO US LIKE THIS.
[02:00:01]
THIS CASE TURNS ON CLEAR UNCLEAR REQUIREMENTS AND UNDISPUTED FACTS.THE OPERATORS WERE SENT ADVANCED NOTICE THAT THEIR LICENSE RENEWAL DEADLINE WAS APPROACHING.
THEY DID NOT SUBMIT A RENEWAL APPLICATION OR FEE BY THAT DEADLINE.
AFTER THE LICENSE EXPIRED, THEY CONTINUED TO OPERATE THE BOARDING HOME WITHOUT A VALID LICENSE AND DID NOT APPLY UNTIL AFTER THE CITY ISSUED A NOTICE OF VIOLATION UNDER THE ORDINANCE.
ONCE THE RENEWAL DEADLINE PASSED, THE PRIOR LICENSE EXPIRED.
AT THAT POINT, THERE WAS NO LICENSE TO RENEW, AND THE CITY WAS LEGALLY REQUIRED TO TREAT THE SUBMISSION AS A NEW APPLICATION.
UNDER THE CURRENT ORDINANCE, THE OPERATOR'S GRANDFATHER'S STATUS EXISTED ONLY BECAUSE THEIR LICENSE HAD REMAINED CONTINUOUSLY ACTIVE.
THAT STATUS DOES NOT SURVIVE AN EXPIRED LICENSE, PARTICULARLY WHEN THE OPERATOR CONTINUED OPERATING IN VIOLATION OF THE ORDINANCE.
BECAUSE THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN 2000 FEET OF OTHER BOARDING HOMES, THE ORDINANCE PROHIBITS APPROVAL OF A NEW APPLICATION.
THE CITY APPLIED THE ORDINANCE EXACTLY AS IT WAS WRITTEN AND INTENDED AND ENFORCED IT CONSISTENTLY.
FOR THOSE REASONS, THE DENIAL OF THE LICENSE WAS LAWFUL AND APPROPRIATE, AND THE CITY RESPECTFULLY REQUESTS THE BOARD AFFIRM THAT DECISION.
AT THIS POINT, I'LL TAKE A MOTION, UH, JUST CLARIFICATION.
ARE WE DOING A MOTION AND THEN WE'RE ABLE TO GIVE REASONING OR ORATE, BUT WE, WE HAVE TO HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE IN ORDER TO DISCUSS.
UM, SO MR. CHAIR, I MOVE THAT THE PERMIT AND LICENSING APPEAL BOARD IN APPEAL IN APPEAL OF THE DENIAL OF THE BOARDING HOME OR, YEAH.
BOARDING HOME FACILITY LICENSE OF NEGOTI TILLY LOCATED AT 65 38 TIOGA CIRCLE, FIND THAT THE A FIND FOR THE APPLICANT AND REVERSE THE DECISION OF THE DIRECTOR OF CODE COMPLIANCE IN ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER EIGHT OF THE DALLAS CITY CODE.
IS THERE A SECOND TO THIS MOTION? I SECOND THE MOTION.
MR. GONZALEZ WITH A MOTION? MS. SHIN SECOND.
MR. GONZALEZ, YOUR MOTION? YES.
SO I THINK EVIDENCE AND THE, THE RECORD HERE THAT WE'VE SEEN, TO ME IT DOES ESTABLISH THAT THE, UH, APPELLANT DID FAIL TO MAINTAIN THOSE COMPLIANCE, UM, FOR THE LICENSE, ESPECIALLY IN REGARDS TO RENEWING ON TIME, PAYING THAT, UM, FEE AND THE APPLICATION.
BUT I THINK THAT THERE'S A COUPLE QUESTIONS BEFORE THE BOARD.
UH, ONE OF THOSE IS DID THEY COMPLY WITH ALL THE TECHNICALITIES OF IT, BUT ALSO WHETHER, UM, STRICT ENFORCEMENT OF THAT AMENDED 2023 ORDINANCE, UM, IS BASICALLY SERVES THE INTENT, UM, UNDER THESE SPECIFIC CIRCUMSTANCES.
UM, WE KNOW THAT THE APPELLANT OPERATED UNDER THIS, THEIR LICENSE FOR THE PAST 10 YEARS OR MORE WITH NO ISSUE.
SO THEY CLEARLY DO NOT POSE A, UH, SAFETY HAZARD TO THE PUBLIC OR TO THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD.
MR. GONZALEZ, I NEED TO DO THIS FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE RECORD.
NONE OF OUR STANDARDS, I BELIEVE IN, UH, INCLUDE THE INTENT OF, OF THE LAW.
THAT'S FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE RECORD.
UH, SO, YOU KNOW, IGNORANCE OF LAW DOES NOT EXCUSE NON-COMPLIANCE.
UM, BUT I THINK THE ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS, UM, THAT IMPOSE A PERMANENT DISQUALIFICATION, WHICH WOULD BE IN THIS INSTANCE DUE TO TEMPORARY, UM, I GUESS FINANCIAL HARDSHIP, UH, DO NOT SERVE THE, THE PURPOSE OF THAT CITY ORDINANCE.
I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT'S WHAT IT IS.
SO, UM, I GUESS THAT'S MY, MY REASONING FOR WHY I BELIEVE THAT WE SHOULD OVERTURN THIS DECISION.
UM, THAT IN ALSO REGARDS TO THE COMMUNICATION, I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT THE COMMUNICATIONS, WHETHER THEY ACTUALLY RECEIVED THOSE COMMUNICATIONS, UM, WHETHER IT WAS CONVEYED TO THEM THAT THEY COULD FILE THE APPLICATION AND THEN STILL MAKE A PAYMENT.
I KNOW FOR MYSELF, UH, YOU KNOW, MY ELECTRIC BILL, I'M LIKE, OH, I DON'T KNOW, MAYBE IF I DON'T HAVE THE MONEY RIGHT THEN, YOU KNOW, AM I GONNA GET MY ELECTRIC TURNED OFF? WELL, NO, YOU CALL THEM AND, BUT NOT, THAT'S NOT CLEAR TO EVERYONE.
SO I JUST BELIEVE THAT WITHIN THESE VERY SPECIFIC CIRCUMSTANCES, WE AS A BOARD DO HAVE LEEWAY TO MAKE THIS DECISION AND DECIDE IF THIS IS, UH, REALLY FOLLOWING THE, UM, INTENT OF THAT ORDINANCE.
UM, I DO AGREE THAT AS THE CODE IS WRITTEN, UH, THE CITY DID FOLLOW IT.
UM, I DO BELIEVE THAT THERE IS LEEWAY IN THE COMMUNICATION OF THE CODE, THAT IT, IT'S NOT VERY CLEAR THAT, UM, A COMPLETE APPLICATION ISN'T THE PAYMENT OR FEE IS NOT CONSIDERED PART OF A COMPLETE APPLICATION.
I THINK THE CODE CAN BE CLEAR ABOUT THAT,
[02:05:01]
THAT THE APPLICATION IS SEPARATE FROM THE FEE.AND, UH, THAT IS THE SIMPLE REASON WHY I, UM, I SECONDED TO REVERSE THE DECISION.
WOULD ANYBODY ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION VICE CHAIR TO THANK YOU? UM, I AGREE WITH MS. SHIN.
I THINK THIS CASE TURNS ON AN ISSUE REGARDING THE GRAY AREA OF NOTICE.
I THINK THAT THERE WAS, THERE COULD HAVE BEEN SOME LENIENCY PROVIDED.
AND HAD THE APPLICANTS RECOGNIZE THAT AS LONG AS THEY SUBMITTED AN APPLICATION, THEY WOULD'VE BEEN GOOD, RIGHT? I, I THINK THEY WERE UNDER THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THEY HAD TO DO BOTH THINGS, APPLICATION AND MONEY.
THEY DID NOT HAVE ONE OF THOSE TWO THINGS, AND SO THEY DID NOT MOVE FORWARD WITH THE APPLICATION.
AND SO HAD THEY KNOWN THEY WERE SEPARATE AND APART, I DO BELIEVE THAT THEY WOULD'VE ACTED IMMEDIATELY WITHIN THE DEADLINE AND SUBMITTED THE APPLICATION IN ORDER TO NOT LOSE THEIR BOARDING THEIR BUSINESS.
BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY THE, THE CONSEQUENCES, LIFE CHANGING.
I NO LONGER HAVE A BUSINESS, UH, ANYONE THAT RECOGNIZES I WILL NO LONGER HAVE A BUSINESS IF I DON'T DO THAT, WOULD'VE ACTED DIFFERENTLY IN MY OPINION.
I ALSO THINK THE CITY COULD HAVE PROVIDED US ALL A VERY CLEAR, UH, RECORD OF THE 2000 FEET.
UM, I WOULD'VE ALSO LIKED SOME MORE INFORMATION REGARDING, UM, OUTSIDE OF THE CODE OF THIS, YOU KNOW, GRAY AREA, WHAT WAS GOOD OF THIS BOARDING HOME, LIKE WHAT, WHAT WE COULD HAVE, WHAT ELSE WE SHOULD HAVE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION.
BECAUSE AS A BOARD, WHEN IT COMES TO BLACK AND WHITE, SOMETIMES WE DO HAVE THE ABILITY TO KIND OF GET IN THAT GRAY AREA, AND I THINK THAT'S WHERE IT FALLS HERE.
BUT BECAUSE THE CONSEQUENCE DOESN'T MEET, UM, YOU KNOW, THE DECISION, I WOULD AGREE WITH THE REVERSAL AT THIS MOMENT.
UM, ARE THERE OTHER SPEAKERS? ARE THERE SPEAKERS IN AGAINST, ARE THERE SPEAKERS IN GENERAL? UM, I'D LIKE TO BRING UP SOME, GO AHEAD.
WHO, WHO IS THAT? I'D LIKE, MR. I THANK YOU, SIR.
UM, I IS, I CAN APPRECIATE THE, THE COMMENTS OF, OF MY, WE GOTTA FIGURE OUT A WAY TO HEAR YOU.
UH, YOU CAN'T HEAR ME NOW? WE CAN, CAN YOU HEAR ME? YEAH.
SO I CAN APPRECIATE ALL THE COMMENTS OF, OF MY FELLOW BOARD MEMBERS.
UM, THE APPELLATE WAS NOTIFIED IN WRITING, AND THE EMAIL EXPLICITLY STATED, YOU NEED TO RENEW THAT.
THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT THE PROCEDURE IS.
UM, THEY, THEY CLAIMED, UM, IN THEIR CLOSING THAT THEY COULD NOT MAKE CONNECTION WITH THE CITY.
WELL, IN THE EMAIL, NOT ONLY WAS THERE A NAME, BUT THERE WAS A PHONE NUMBER THAT COULD HAVE PICKED UP A PHONE AND CALLED AND SAID, PLEASE CLARIFY FOR ME WHAT MY STEPS ARE SO I DON'T LOSE MY LICENSE.
THE 2000 FOOT BARRIER WAS IN THAT EMAIL.
SO TO CLAIM THAT TODAY'S THE FIRST DAY THEY KNEW ABOUT IT, UM, IT IS BLATANTLY FALSE AT THE END OF THE DAY.
UM, YOU KNOW, I HATE TO BE SO BLACK AND WHITE, BUT THEY WERE NOTIFIED IN WRITING.
UM, THEY HAD NOT, THEY, THEY HAD TWO WEEKS TO RENEW, BUT THEY TOOK AN EXTRA MONTH ON TOP OF THAT TO RENEW.
SO THERE WAS NO URGENCY ON THEIR PART TO PROTECT THEIR BUSINESS.
AND AS A BUSINESS OWNER, IF I GET AN EMAIL SAYING, I'VE GOTTA DO A, B, AND C, I'M DOING A, B, AND C AND ASKING, DO I NEED TO DO DE AND F? UM, I, I FEEL BAD.
BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, THEY SAW IT COMING AND DID ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.
UH, I WILL GO, I, I HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF CONCERN ABOUT IF WE WERE TO, UH, MR. CCHI, I SEE YOU, UH, IF WE WERE TO APPROVE THIS, WHETHER THIS IS WITHIN OUR DISCRETION, SIMPLY BECAUSE I'M NOT REALLY SURE WHAT HAPPENS.
DO THEY GET THEIR GRANDFATHER BACK? I DON'T, WELL, I DON'T KNOW.
I MEAN, IF SO, IS THAT WITHIN THIS BOARD'S AUTHORITY TO, TO DO THAT? OKAY.
YOU'RE, YOU'RE ON, ON THE LIST, BUT, UH, THIS IS MAYBE A, A LEGAL QUE.
I, I JUST, I WANNA RAISE IT ON THE RECORD BECAUSE I, I DON'T, IN, IN, IN OUR MOTION WHEN IT SAID IF WE DO THIS, I THINK WE OUGHT TO ADDRESS THAT.
UM, IF BY VIRTUE OF, I SUPPOSE IT IS TRUE, IF BY VIRTUE OF OVERRULING THE OFFICIAL, WE ESSENTIALLY GO BACK AND TREAT IT AS IF THEY DID IT CORRECTLY, THEN THEY
[02:10:01]
WOULD GET THEIR GRANDFATHER, I THINK IS THE CORRECT ANSWER.UM, UM, I HATE TO ADMIT, I KNOW I'M THE CHAIR, BUT, BUT, UH, I DO HAVE, YOU CAN RUN MY TIME
LET'S ASSUME I GOT THREE MINUTES LEFT.
UM, UH, THE, THE TRICK HERE, THE THING I STRUGGLE WITH, THE CITY'S BASICALLY, RIGHT, UM, THEY FOLLOWED THEIR OWN RULES.
UM, SO I LOOK AT IT AND SAY, OKAY, IN, IN A NORMAL CASE, THERE'S ENOUGH HERE WHERE, WHERE I COULD, I THINK, DECIDE IT'S WITHIN OUR, OUR DISCRETION, UH, UH, TO OVERTURN, UH, THE OFFICIAL.
I HAVE SOME CONCERN ABOUT WHAT HAPPENS, UH, WHEN THE, THE NEXT DOMINO COMES IN, BECAUSE SOME DEGREE WE, WE'VE GOT A PRISONER'S DILEMMA IN THIS SITUATION.
UM, THE GAME THEORY, UM, AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE TELL THE NEXT PEOPLE.
WE'RE GONNA SAY, UH, UH, THIS GROUP OF WERE WONDERFULLY GOOD ACTORS, AND MAYBE YOU'RE LESS GOOD.
AND THAT'S, SO THAT, THAT'S A TRICKY, THAT'S A TRICKY THING.
WE, WE WALKED DOWN, SO I'M NOT EXACTLY SURE YET.
HOW ABOUT, BUT, UM, UH, OPEN TO PERSUASION.
UM, I, MS. MR. SAXON, OH, OKAY.
MR. CILLA, YOU'RE, AM I RECOGNIZED CHAIR? IT'S HARD TO, I DIDN'T GET THE LAST PART.
AM I RECOGNIZED AS SPEAK? YES, YOU'RE UP.
UM, I HAVE THE SAME QUESTION, UM, IN REGARD TO IF THIS DOES GET OVERTURNED.
UM, THAT THE CONCERN IS, THERE'S TWO SEC, THERE'S TWO THINGS GOING ON HERE.
ONE IS THAT THEY WERE LATE, SO THEREFORE THEY FALL INTO ANOTHER CATEGORY.
SO WHAT THEY, WHAT WE'RE HERE TODAY TO HEAR ABOUT IS THE FACT THAT THEY AS THE APPELLANT FOR A NEW LICENSE, 'CAUSE THAT'S THE, THAT'S THE STATUS.
THEY FALL IN THAT, THAT STATUS, IF WE OVERTURN IT, THEY BASICALLY GO INTO THIS LOOP BECAUSE RIGHT NOW THEY DON'T HAVE A LICENSE.
AND TWO, THEY ARE GOING TO FALL INTO NEW APPLICANT EACH TIME.
I DON'T THINK THAT THIS BOARD HAS THAT TYPE OF, I DON'T THINK THAT THIS BOARD HAS THIS TYPE OF LENIENCY OR ABILITY OR AUTHORITY TO GO TO THE SECOND STEP, WHICH WAS, HEY, LET'S ASSUME THAT THEY FILED ON TIME AND JUST DIDN'T PAY ON TIME.
I, I GET THAT ASSUMPTION, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT THAT'S IN OUR PURVIEW.
SO IN REGARD TO THIS, IN REGARD TO THE, THE, THE CURRENT, UH, MOTION, I WOULD DISAGREE.
THE STATE THAT BASICALLY THE CITY HAD DONE ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT THEY NEEDED TO DO, MS. TILLEY DID RECOGNIZE THAT SHE GOT THE EMAIL BASICALLY, AND UNFORTUNATELY DID NOT ASK ANYBODY, DID NOT CALL THE CITY, DID NOT CALL THE NUMBER THAT WAS ON THE EMAIL.
IT, BESIDES MR. SAMUEL SAYING HE DIDN'T SEE IT, HE'S NOT THE OPERATOR.
AND IN REGARD TO A BUSINESS, THIS IS IMPORTANT EVEN TO ASK THE QUESTION IMMEDIATELY, EVEN IF THEY THINK THEY KNOW THE ANSWER OR THEY'RE SCARED OF THE ANSWER.
TO ME, TO IMMEDIATELY CALL AND SAY, HEY, WE DON'T HAVE THE MONEY.
WE DON'T HAVE ANY BORDERS RIGHT NOW, BUT IF, WHAT CAN WE DO TO POSSIBLY KEEP OUR LICENSE? AND CLEARLY THERE ARE OTHER, AT MINIMUM, FOUR BOARD HOMES, BOARDING HOMES THAT DID GO AHEAD AND ENTER THEIR APPLICATION.
WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THEIR SITUATION WAS, BUT THEY CLEARLY ENTERED THEIR APPLICATION ON TIME AND WERE ABLE TO GET THEIR LICENSE RENEWED.
AND THEY WERE GRANDFATHERED IN BECAUSE THEY'RE ALL IN A CLUSTER THAT AS APPEARS TO BE WITHIN 2000 FEET OF EACH OTHER.
AND SO IF THE ONLY ONE THAT DID NOT, UH, ADHERE TO THAT REQUIREMENT, UNFORTUNATELY, WAS THIS PARTICULAR HOME HERE THAT'S IN FRONT OF US, I DON'T, I DON'T FEEL GOOD ABOUT THE DECISION, BUT I ALSO FEEL LIKE OUR, THIS BOARD DOES NOT, DOES NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO BASICALLY GO TWO STEPS BACK AND ASSUME THAT THEY HAVE, THEY, THEY, UH, SUBMITTED THEIR APPLICATION ON TIME AND IT WAS ONLY A PAYMENT DEAL.
I DO UNDERSTAND THE FACTS OF THE, OF THE MATTER HERE AND WHY THEY'RE HERE.
I JUST, I DON'T THINK THAT THAT'S IN OUR AUTHORITY.
MR. SACKS, YOU WANTED CLARIFICATION, THEN? UH, THE FLOOR IS YOURS.
UH, UH, MR. CILLA, UH, WAS THE EXACT SAME POINT THAT I HAD.
UM, IT LOOKS LIKE WE HAD THE LATE APPLICATION OCCUR AND THEN AN EMAIL SENT TO THE APPELLANT SAYING, YOU CAN APPLY AGAIN, BUT
[02:15:01]
THIS IS WHAT'S GONNA HAPPEN.THEY DID, AND THEN WHEN THEY APPLIED, THEY WERE TOLD THEY WERE DENIED.
AND IN THAT DENIAL LETTER, IT SAYS, YOU CAN REACH OUT TO PLA.
AND THEY REACHED OUT TO PLA UH, SORRY FOR APPEAL.
I DON'T THINK WHY WE'RE HERE TODAY IS TO REVERSE THE LOOP APPLICATIONS TO CONFIRM, OR, I'M SORRY, AFFIRM OR REVERSE THAT IN UP OF 2000, SORRY, 12, 17 25.
AND IF I COULD JUST GET CLARIFICATION FROM THAT AND IF THAT'S THE CASE, I'M STILL WITH MR. CHI ON THIS.
I BELIEVE THAT CITY ATTORNEY HAS PROVIDED ENOUGH EVIDENCE AND THE APPELLANTS WERE GIVEN ABOVE AND BEYOND, UH, HELPFUL INFORMATION FROM COURSEWORK TO MANDATORY COURSEWORK, UM, TO RESOURCES ONLINE, TO EMAIL ADDRESSES, TO PHONE NUMBERS, AND TO OTHER, UH, COUNCIL MEMBER, SORRY, NO COMMISSIONERS POINTS ON LENIENCY.
IF, IF MY LIVELIHOOD WAS ON THIS, I WOULD ABSOLUTELY TAKE THE STEPS WEEKS IN ADVANCE IF I RECEIVED TO CALL, IF I WASN'T ABLE TO.
E ELECTRICAL BILL IS DIFFERENT THAN PAYING FOR MY FAMILY.
LIKE I CAN, I CAN LIGHT A FIRE IN THE BACK TO KEEP THEM WARM, BUT I CAN'T PAY FOR THEIR BILLS PLAN ANYMORE.
SO, YEAH,
AND TO, UH, SECOND, MR. FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE RECORD CODE COMPLIANCE SERVICE, AXER HAS NO INTENTION OR ABILITY TO, TO SET A FIRE IN HIS BACKYARD.
UH, AM AM I ABLE TO MAKE AN ADDITIONAL COMMENT ON MY MOTION? UH, LET ME MAKE SURE.
I BELIEVE THEY HAVE, MR. CILLA WANTS TO GO.
LET'S GO BACK AND SAY THAT, UH, WELL, ONE, FROM MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT WE WOULD BE ACCEPTING OR REVERSING DECISION ON A NEW APPLICATION.
UH, IS THAT CORRECT? THERE IS NO NEW, NEW.
WE ARE, WE ARE SITTING IN, WE WE'RE SITTING IN JUDGMENT OF THE DECISION TO DENY THE NEW APPLICATION.
THE, TO DENY THE, IF YOU MEAN NEW, YOU MEAN THE, THE 2025 APPLICATION? YES.
AND SO IN THAT CASE, IF WE WERE TO, IF WE TO ANSWER THE QUESTION OF WHETHER THEY WOULD BE GRANDFATHERED IN, THEY WOULD NOT BE A NEW APPLICANT NEXT YEAR, THEY WOULD BE RENEWING THEIR LICENSE NEXT YEAR, WHICH WOULD MEAN THAT, IN MY UNDERSTANDING, THAT THEY WOULDN'T HAVE TO GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS OF A NEW APPLICATION AGAIN.
'CAUSE THEY WOULD HAVE AN EXISTING LICENSE THAT WE HAVE AUTHORIZED TODAY.
I, I DON'T THINK WE OUGHT TO MAKE THAT PART OF OUR MOTION.
WELL, IT'S NOT PART OF THE MOTION.
THIS IS JUST DEBATING AND DISCUSSING THE MOTION.
AND THEN MY SECOND POINT IS, YOU KNOW, WE CAN SIT HERE AND MAYBE HAVE A DISAGREEMENT ON WHETHER WE CAN DISCUSS INTENT OR WHAT, BUT WHAT WE CAN LOOK AT IS EVIDENCE.
AND, UM, IF FOR ME, THE EVIDENCE OF HOW FAR THE OTHERS ARE AWAY IS STILL IN QUESTION.
THEY WERE NOT SUBMITTED THE EVIDENCE BEFOREHAND.
I STILL TO THIS MOMENT HAVE NOT SEEN THE MAP UPHAND OF HOW FAR THE DISTANCE IS.
UM, SO, YOU KNOW, THERE'S MULTIPLE REASONS WHY WE CAN, UM, MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS REVERSAL.
AND FOR ME, IF WE WANNA BE REAL SUPER TECHNICAL, THAT'S A REAL TECHNICAL THING THAT I WOULD BASE MY, UH, JUDGMENT OFF OF THIS.
SO THAT'S MY, MY COMMENT ON THAT.
UH, MR. CCI? YEAH, JUST TO, I GUESS MORE OF A REBUTTAL TO THAT ONE.
IT WAS SUBMITTED AS FAR AS I CAN TELL ON PAGE 14 OF THE APPELLANT, THEY HAD THE LIST OF ALL THE BOARDING HOMES TO, UM, IT WAS SUBMITTED THROUGH THE CITY'S EXHIBITS THROUGH PAGE 68.
IN REGARD TO DISTANCE, OR NO DISTANCE, I, MY QUESTION WAS SPECIFICALLY TO THE OFFICER OF THE COURT AND WHICH IS THE CITY ATTORNEY.
THEY ARE UNDER, UM, AN OBLIGATION OBVIOUSLY TO, TO TELL US WHAT THEY KNOW OR DON'T KNOW.
AND THEN MR. RUIZ ALSO CONFIRMED THAT THAT LIST OF THE FIVE, WHICH INCLUDED, UM, OUR APP OR OUR APPELLANT TODAY INCLUDED ALL FIVE OF THEM STAYING THERE WITHIN THE 2000 FEET.
SO WHETHER THERE WAS ACTUAL DISTANCE, I DON'T THINK THAT THE IDEA OF WHETHER WE HAD, WHETHER THEY WERE A THOUSAND FEET AWAY OR 900 FEET AWAY OR 1800 FEET AWAY, UM, IS, IS NOT THE, THE CRUX OF THE ISSUE HERE.
UH, ON REGARD TO THE SECOND ISSUE OR SECOND POINT THAT WAS BEING MADE, I DO THINK WE DO HAVE AN ISSUE.
UM, IF WE DO REVERSE, WE ARE REVERSING A NEW APPLICATION.
IF WE'RE REVERSING A NEW APPLICATION, I'M, I'M NOT, I DON'T KNOW THAT I UNDERSTAND HOW THAT WE JUMP OVER THE HURDLE OF A NEW APPLICATION.
'CAUSE THAT'S WHAT WAS DENIED.
[02:20:01]
AND SO IF WE'RE JUMPING HOW WE JUMP OVER THE HURDLE OF SAYING THAT NEW APPLICATION, WE REVERSE IT, ALLOW IT TO GO THROUGH, WE DON'T THAT, THAT WE'RE, ARE WE SAYING NOW THAT YOU CAN HAVE WITHIN THIS 2023 RULE THAT DOES NOT APPLY TO THIS NEW APPLICATION? I'M A AND I, I GUESS I DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE THAT THAT'S WHAT THE BOARD HAS THE AUTHORITY TO DO.THAT IF, IF THE CITY, YOU KNOW, NOT THE CITY ATTORNEY THAT'S PRESENTING TODAY, BUT IF OUR, YOU KNOW, I GUESS A POINT OF ORDER, IF WE HAVE SOME TYPE OF CLARIFICATION ON THAT, THEN THAT MAY SWAY ME SOME DIFFERENT WAY.
BUT I DON'T THINK WE HAVE THAT AUTHORITY.
AND SO THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO, I GUESS THAT WAS MY REBUTTAL TO THAT.
MR. CCHI, I HAVE ASKED, UH, OUR BOARD ATTORNEY, BUT I WILL DO IT ON THE RECORD, UH, WHETHER YOU, WHETHER YOU HAVE AN OPINION OR RULING AND OR NOT, IN READING THE CODE IN SECTION EIGHT A DASH NINE, IT SAYS THIS PARAGRAPH DOES NOT APPLY TO A BOARDING HOME FACILITY LICENSE BEFORE FEBRUARY 22ND, 2023.
AND THAT CONTINUOUSLY MAINTAINS A BOARDING HOME LICENSE.
SO IF THIS IS A NEW APPLICATION, THEY WERE NOT LICENSED BEFORE FEBRUARY 22ND, 2023.
SO I DON'T THINK THAT THEY WOULD BE GRANDFATHERED, BUT I DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE IN RES WITH THAT RESPONSE.
AND I WOULD DEFER TO, TO MR. RUIZ BECAUSE THIS IS HIS AREA OF EXPERTISE.
IF, UM, CLARIFYING AND EXPLAINING THIS PROVISION OF THE CODE, UH, I THINK, I THINK THEY HAVE STATED THEIR, THEIR POSITION.
UM, SO OUR WHAT YOU OUR, YEAH.
OUR POSITION IS THAT IF IT'S CONTINUOUSLY MAINTAINED, THEN THEY CONTINUE TO BE GRANDFATHERED IN.
BUT IF IT'S NOT CONTINUOUSLY MAINTAINED, THEN THEY'RE A NEW APPLICANT.
UM, ALSO, I, I BELIEVE WHAT MR. REEVES HAS SAID IS A DISTINCTION WITH, I DISLIKE MY VOTE, UH, BECAUSE I HAVE EMOTION AND SYMPATHY, BUT I, I, UH, I, I DON'T HAVE THAT BENEFIT HERE.
UM, I JUST CAN'T FIGURE OUT WHAT I WOULD DO, UH, THE NEXT TIME TO THE NEXT APPLICANT AND HOW I WOULD BE CONSISTENT.
SO, UH, I'M GONNA VOTE AGAINST, UH, THE MOTION, BUT I'M NOT SAYING I WOULDN'T FEEL GREAT IF YOU GUYS, UH, OVERRULED ME, BUT I, BUT I THINK, I DON'T THINK WE HAVE THE DISCRETION TO, TO, UH, TO, TO DO WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT DOING.
BUT, UM, THAT IS, UH, THAT IS FOR THE BOARD.
UM, MR. QUINT? YEAH, I JUST WANTED A TAIL HOOK ON, UH, MR. CILLA, YOU KNOW, EMPATHY AND, AND ALL THAT GOOD STUFF IS IMPORTANT, BUT WE ARE CHARGED WITH UPHOLDING THE LAW.
WE'RE UP CHARGED WITH ADMINISTERING THE LAW AND NOT PUTTING OUR PERSONAL FEELINGS IN IT FOR SOMEONE'S BUSINESS.
I, I DON'T WANNA SOUND CALLOUS, BUT WE HAVE A JOB TO DO, AND THAT'S TO ADMINISTER THE LAW AS IT'S WRITTEN.
UH, DO WE HAVE THAT IN BY RE I THINK MOST EVERYONE ELSE HAS SPOKEN BEFORE.
UM, VICE RE YEAH, I THINK THIS, UH, I THINK THIS GOES BEYOND EMPATHY.
UM, AND I SPOKE TO THAT EARLIER, HOW I WOULD'VE LIKED MORE GOOD THINGS AND OF, YOU KNOW, LIKE, I, I SHOULD KEEP THIS LICENSE BECAUSE OF A, B, C, LOOK AT ALL THE GOOD THINGS I'M DOING.
WE'VE HAD OTHER APPLICANTS DO THAT.
SO, UM, I STILL THINK IT'S BASED ON THAT GRAY AREA OF, OF NOTICE.
I THINK THAT THE WAY THAT WE CAN BE CONSISTENT TO FUTURE APPLICANTS IS TELL THE CITY, HEY, KEEP A, KEEP A LOG OF THESE, UM, MANDATORY MEETINGS.
BRING THAT LOG WITH YOU, HAVE A CLEAR MAP.
UM, IN ADDITION, JUST, UH, MAKE IT VERY CLEAR THAT THEY NEED THAT.
ONE OF THE TWO THINGS HAVE TO BE SUBMITTED, EITHER THE APPLICATION OR THE MONEY IN ORDER FOR YOU TO BE LIKE, CONSIDERED, UH, JUST DOING MORE ON THE CITY'S PART IN ORDER TO LET, UM, CONSTITUENTS RECOGNIZE THE SEVERITY OF THE SITUATION.
IN MY OPINION, THAT'S WHERE I'M AT, UH, THIS GRAY AREA OF LIKE, DID HE KNOW? DID HE NOT KNOW? DID HE UNDERSTAND ANY, DID HE NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT, UM, DID THEY AS A ORGANIZATION, AS A BUSINESS UNDERSTAND THE GRAVITY OF THE SITUATION? I DON'T THINK THEY DID.
UM, AND SO IT'S, IT'S, I'M NOT EVEN, YOU KNOW, LIKE TALKING ABOUT LIKE WHAT'S GOOD ABOUT KEEPING THE BUSINESS OR NOT, BECAUSE WE WEREN'T GIVEN, UH, MUCH ON IN THAT REGARD.
WE WEREN'T GIVEN THE PROS, THE CONS.
UM, I ASKED FOR SOME OF THAT, BUT THAT REALLY WASN'T PROVIDED BECAUSE YOU WANNA KEEP THIS A BLACK AND WHITE
[02:25:01]
ISSUE, WHICH IS FINE, IN MY OPINION.UH, SO IN, IN THE FUTURE FOR APPLICANTS NOT TO HAVE THIS GRAY AREA, UH, TIGHTEN UP THE CITY, UH, IN THE WAY THAT THEY WORK, UM, AS FAR AS WITH THEIR CONSTITUENTS, IS MY OPINION.
SO I STAY, I STAND WITH THE, WITH MY DECISION TO REVERSE THE DECISION.
I THINK EVERYONE HAS SPOKEN TWICE.
MS. FLYNN, LOOK, UH, DOES ANYONE WHO HAS NOT SPOKEN TWICE WANT TO SPEAK MS. HIN? UM, I THINK MY FELLOW BOARD MEMBERS WERE GOOD.
UM, I, I THINK DURING THAT DEBATE, I'VE CHANGED MY OPINION.
UM, I DO THINK THE CITY, AGAIN, PRESENTED A GOOD CASE.
UM, MY FELLOW BOARD MEMBERS HAVE REMINDED ME OF THE TASK AT HAND, AND IT'S SPECIFIC TO THIS NEW APPLICATION.
I AGREE THAT, UM, THERE'S A LOT OF EMOTIONS IN THIS DECISION BECAUSE IT IS SOMEONE'S BUSINESS.
UM, SO WHILE I DO THINK THE CITY FOLLOWED THE CODE TO THE T, I DO THINK THERE'S ROOM FOR IMPROVEMENT.
UM, UM, BY THE, UM, SORRY, MR. THE BOARDING HOME UNIT OR BOARDING HOME FACILITY UNIT, UM, TO TIGHTEN UP AND HAVE CLEAR CADE, UH, COMMUNICATION WITH THEIR, UM, LICENSEES WITH THEIR PEOPLE UNDER YOUR PURVIEW.
UM, I, I DO THINK, UM, THE APPELLANTS DID NOT UNDERSTAND THE APPLICATION PROCESS.
UM, AND YES, THEY DID NOT ASK THE RIGHT QUESTIONS.
THEY DIDN'T SEEK, THEY DIDN'T HAVE URGENCY IN ASKING QUESTIONS OF YOUR DEPARTMENT.
BUT, UM, I THINK ALSO THE COMMUNICATION COULD HAVE BEEN MORE CLEAR FROM YOUR END AND FROM YOUR, YOUR EMPLOYEES.
AND THAT, UM, THE SEVERITY OF IT, WHAT WAS REALLY AT STAKE IF THEY DIDN'T MEET THESE DEADLINES.
AND ALSO, UM, WHAT CON COMPILES A COMPLETE APPLICATION AND THAT MAYBE MONEY ISN'T DUE WHEN YOU SUBMIT THE PAPER APPLICATION.
UM, SO I THINK BOTH SIDES HAVE ROOM FOR IMPROVEMENT.
AND SO THAT'S WHAT I'LL SAY ON THAT.
WHAT, UH, STATE YOUR POINT, UH, MS. SHIN WAS THE SECOND ON THIS, SO I'M NOT SURE THAT WE NECESSARILY NEED TO VOTE UNLESS THERE'S GOING TO BE ANOTHER SECOND ON THIS MOTION.
WE THANK YOU IN JUST A MINUTE.
UH, YOUR POINT WELL, WELL TAKEN.
MR. CILLA, DO YOU HAVE A POINT? WELL, IT'S RULED, SO IT RULED ON HIS, HE, HE IS CORRECT.
WE'RE GONNA SOLVE THAT IN JUST A SECOND.
SO THE QUESTION HERE BECOMES, UH, MS. SHIN CAN WITHDRAW HER SECOND.
I'M JUST TELLING YOU WHAT HER OPTIONS ARE.
SHE CAN, UH, SHE DOESN'T HAVE TO, UM, AND SHE CAN VOTE AGAINST HER SECOND.
THERE'S NOTHING THAT STOPS US IN OUR RULES.
UH, BUT THAT'S, THAT'S A QUESTION FOR MS. MS. HIN ONLY? NO, I STILL SECOND THE MOTION.
SO THE, THE MOTION IS TO OVERTURN, UH, UH, AT THIS POINT, I'LL CALL THE ROLE, UH, DISTRICT ONE, MR. SAXON? I DO NOT.
SO MAY, MAY, MS. A IS NOT HERE.
MS. THOMAS, SHE'S SPEAKING, BUT WE CAN'T HEAR ANY CHANCE YOU CAN UNMUTE YOUR COMPUTER.
I'M SORRY, SHE'S UNMUTED HERE, BUT SHE MAY BE ON HER COMPUTER.
OH, CHAIRMAN, YOU'RE SPEAKING TO HER.
IS THAT CHAIRMAN? CAN, CAN SHE WRITE THERE, YOU KNOW, ON A PIECE OF PAPER, MS. THOMAS, WAS THAT YOU, I I KNOW YOU'RE TRYING TO TELL ME SOMETHING I'M NOT PROCESSING.
HOW DO WE HANDLE THAT? BECAUSE, BECAUSE YOU USED CHAD CHAIR.
CAN SHE WRITE YES OR NO? YEAH.
[02:30:01]
UH, NO, I, I I DON'T BELIEVE WE CAN, I THINK WE HAVE TO HAVE A VOICE FOR THE RECORD.CAN, CAN THE CHAIR, MR. CHAIR, CAN SHE, CAN SHE CALL INTO A NUMBER AND PUT ON SPEAKER IN ORDER TO HAVE THAT RECORDED? SHE CAN.
AND, UH, WE'LL, SO FOR THE, FOR FOR THE TIME BEING, WE'RE GONNA SKIP YOU, BUT WE WILL NOT FINISH WITHOUT YOUR VOTE.
UM, DR. JACKSON? OH, UM, THE MOTION IS TO OVERTURN, UM, REVERSE, UM, NO, NAY, NAY.
UM, VICE CHAIR TORRES FOR THE MOTION FAVOR.
UM, MR. JEFFERSON NAY, NAY, MR. JEFFERSON IS A NAY.
MR. CILLA NAY, MR. JEFFS NAY, MR. QUINT, NAY, MS. SHIN NAY.
UH, NONETHELESS, WE, WE, UH, WE DO WANT MS. THOMAS'S VOTE.
THAT'S NOT HOW TO DO, OH, BUT WE, YEAH, THERE WE GO.
WE, WE STILL HAVE TO HAVE THE SCREEN.
I'M GUESSING IF YOU ARE USING THE APP ON YOUR PHONE, IT OVERRIDES YOUR COMPUTER.
WE'RE GONNA NEED YOU TO VOTE AGAIN, JUST SO YOU KNOW.
MOTION FAILS, UH, WITH, UH, VICE CHAIR TORRES AND MR. GONZALEZ IN OPPOSITION.
UH, DO I HAVE A SECOND MOTION? I MOVE THAT WE UPHOLD THE CITY'S DECISION TO DENY THE BOARDING HOUSE PERMIT FOR 65 38 TIOGA CIRCLE, DALLAS, TEXAS 7 5 2 4 1.
UH, GIVE ME ONE SEC TO ASK A QUESTION OF OUR, UH, ATTORNEY, MS. CARLISLE.
DO I NEED TO HAVE THIS ON THE RECORD IN THE MOTION? UH, MR. QUENTIN, YOUR MOTION, WOULD YOU STATE THE REASON, UH, FOR, UH, THE, THE, YOU MAY SEE A, UM, MOTION THAT WAS EMAILED TO YOU, UM, BY NANCY WITH, UH, THAT EITHER WAY, IF YOU, UH, STATE, UH, STATE, FOR EXAMPLE, WHICH, WHICH PLANK, UH, THE, UH, UH, THE APPELLANT FAILED, FOR EXAMPLE, 2000 FEET OR, OR WHATNOT.
UH, SO CAN I JUST MAKE AN AMENDMENT TO IT? HOW BE YOU? JUST START OVER.
SO,
IS THERE A SECOND, MR. GUT? SECOND THEN.
DO WE HAVE FURTHER DISCUSSIONS? UH, ONLY THING I WOULD SAY IS THAT I DON'T BELIEVE ANYWHERE IN HERE IS A NOTICE REQUIREMENT, UH, FROM THE CITY STANDPOINT, UH, IN, IN TERMS OF, UH, LEGALLY BEING REQUIRED TO PROVIDE NOTICE BEFORE, UH, TURN, UH, DENIED.
UH, I DO THINK IT'S KIND OF, WE'RE DEALING WITH A MATTER OF DAYS, BUT THAT'S, THAT'S DIFFERENT THAN, UH, OR, OR ANY OTHER COMMENT, OR SHALL WE, SHALL WE PROCEED TO A VOTE? OKAY, MR. SACHS? YEAH, I,
[02:35:01]
UM, UM, MS. THOMAS.WE'RE GONNA SKIP MS. THOMAS FOR, FOR A SEC.
FOR, WELL, I, THOUGHTS OF DR. JACKSON? WELL, DOES MARY HAVE HER ON THE PHONE? I'M SORRY, MR. MARY? UH, OKAY, WE'LL, WE'LL COME BACK.
UM, DR. JACKSON, WHICH AUTO MOTION MOTION TO AFFIRM THE, UH, OKAY.
I DON'T, I, I, I'M NOT DOING ANYTHING BUT LOOKING AT, AT WHAT WE TALK ABOUT.
OKAY, MS. THOMAS, THE MOTION IS TO AFFIRM, I'M SORRY, SAY THAT AGAIN.
THE MOTION IS, IS TO, UH, AFFIRM THE BUILDING OFFICIAL AFFIRM THE, AFFIRM, THE, THE, I'M SORRY.
THE, THE MOTION IS TO DENY THE APPELLANT'S APPEAL.
YOU, YOU VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE TO DENY THE APPEAL.
WELL, WE JUST DID, I CLOSED IT, BUT, OKAY.
NOW LET, DR. JACKSON, JUST, LET'S JUST DO IT FOR THE RECORD.
MAY, MAY, UM, MR. CCHI, UH, MR. JEFFERSON? YES.
SO THAT MEANS IT PASSES DESCENT.
IS MS. TORRES JACKSON AND GONZALEZ, UH, THOSE, UH, UH, ON THE, UH, UH, DOWNSIDE, WOULD, UH, WOULD YOU LIKE TO MAKE A STATEMENT THAT DISSENT NO ABILITY THAT WOULD HAVE DISSENT FOR, FOR BENEFIT OF THAT? I, I DON'T THINK IT'S NOT COME.
THE, THE MOTION PASSES EIGHT TO THREE.
IS THAT TRUE? WITH VICE TORRES, MR. GONZALEZ AND, UH, DR. JACKSON IN OPPOSITION.
THE NEXT THING IS A 10 MINUTE BREAK, AND, UH, WE ARE GONNA CALL THE NEXT CASE AND MOVE MUCH FASTER.
UH, SO WE WILL RECONVENE AT, UH, LET'S JUST SAY AT NOON.
PERMANENT LICENSING APPEAL BOARD IS CALLED BACK TO ORDER AT 11:41 PM ON FEBRUARY 5TH, 2026.
UH, WE ARE, WE DO HAVE A QUORUM.
WE'RE MISSING, MISSING MR. JEFFERSON AND MR. THOMAS.
SO WE'RE, UH, ANYONE ELSE GOES ANYWHERE, UH, WE LOSE OUR QUORUM.
UM, UH, UH, SO THE NEXT CASE IS THERE IS A FORMALITY OF IT.
UH, THE NEXT CASE IS APPEAL HEARING FOR BIDOT HOLDINGS LIMITED, UH, WHICH IS A, UH, REQUEST TO, UH, OVERTURN THE HABITUAL CRIMINAL PROPERTY DESIGNATION UNDER SECTION 28 DASH FOUR EIGHT OF THE, UH, DALLAS CITY CODE.
UH, THIS IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT IN THAT WE HAVE, UH, A, A RETROSPECTIVE CODE THAT HAS TWO DISTINCT, UH, BURDENS.
THE, UH, CITY MUST IMMEDIATE INITIALLY PROVE, UH, THE EXISTENCE OF, OF ITS, UH, PREDICATES, WHICH
[02:40:01]
REQUIRES FIVE DEBATABLE, UH, EVENTS WITHIN 365 DAYS AS DEFINED.MS. CARLISLE WILL WILL READ THAT, AND IF, AND ONLY IF THAT, UH, SUCCEEDS, THE, UH, THE APPELLANT WILL HAVE THE CHANCE TO THE BUT, UH, PRESUMPTION, UH, I WILL LET MS. UH, CARLISLE READ THE FORMAL TODAY YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU AN APPEAL OF A DESIGNATION AS A HABITUAL CRIMINAL PROPERTY.
IT IS A DUTY OF THIS BOARD TO EVALUATE THE EVIDENCE AND TESTIMONY PRESENTED BEFORE YOU TODAY AND DETERMINE WHETHER THE PRESUMPTIONS IN SECTION 27 DASH 48 OF THE DALLAS CITY CODE ARE OR ARE NOT SATISFIED.
THE PRESUMPTIONS ARE AS FOLLOWS.
NUMBER ONE, WHETHER THE PROPERTY IS OR IS NOT THE SITE OF FIVE OR MORE AVAILABLE CRIMINAL ACTIVITIES WITHIN 365 DAYS IN EITHER A REPORT OF A LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY DOCUMENTING AN INVESTIGATION OF AN AVAILABLE CRIMINAL ACTIVITY ON THE PROPERTY OR ENFORCEMENT ACTION AGAINST ANY PERSON ASSOCIATED WITH THE AAT CRIMINAL ACTIVITY ON THE PROPERTY.
AND TWO, WHETHER THE PROPERTY IS OR IS NOT, BESIDE AT WHICH PERSONS HAVE HISTORICALLY COMMITTED AVAILABLE CRIMINAL ACTIVITIES.
ACCORDING TO RECENT CRIME DATA, M THREE, AN OWNER OF A HABITUAL CRIMINAL PROPERTY IS PRESUMED TO HAVE KNOWINGLY TOLERATED THE AAT CRIMINAL ACTIVITY AT THE OWNER'S PROPERTY BY FAILING TO TAKE REASONABLE STEPS, INCLUDING THOSE OUTLINED IN SECTION 27 DASH 49, SUBSECTION B, PARAGRAPH ONE OF THIS CHAPTER AS AMENDED TO ABATE THE AVAILABLE CRIMINAL ACTIVITY.
AVAILABLE CRIMINAL ACTIVITY MEANS THOSE ACTIVITIES LISTED IN CHAPTER 125, THE TEXAS CIVIL PRACTICE AND REMEDIES CODE AS AMENDED.
IT INCLUDES DISORDERLY CONDUCT, RS AND DISCHARGE OF A FIREARM AND A PUBLIC PLACE, GAMBLING, PROSTITUTION, AGGRAVATED ASSAULT, ROBBERY, UM, DELIVERY POSSESSION MANUFACTURER, OR USE OF AN ILLEGAL SUBSTANCE.
THIS TERM DOES NOT INCLUDE CRIMES OF FAMILY VIOLENCE.
IF YOU DETERMINE THAT, IF YOU DETERMINE THAT THESE PRESUMPTIONS ARE SATISFIED, YOU MUST AFFIRM THE DECISION OF THE CHIEF POLICE.
IF YOU DETERMINE THAT THE PRESUMPTIONS WERE NOT SATISFIED, YOU MAY REVERSE THE DECISION OF THE CHIEF REPORTS.
UM, A NOTE HERE ABOUT EVIDENCE, YOU HAVE COLLECTIVELY SUBMITTED OVER 1800 PAGES.
UM, 900 OF THEM ARE EXACT DUPLICATES, MOSTLY POLICE REPORTS.
UM, THIS BOARD, UH, IS NOT SUBJECT TO THE FORMAL RULES OF EVIDENCE.
AND, UH, THEREFORE, I, I'VE CHOSEN TO, TO ALLOW, UH, ALL OF IT.
HOWEVER, UM, THE BOARD MAY, UH, APPLY WHATEVER WEIGHT TO THE EVIDENCE, UH, THEY SAY FIT.
SO I, IF YOU HAVE EVIDENCE THAT IS MATERIAL, UH, YOU SHOULD TELL US AND FOCUS ON IT, AND YOU SHOULD TIE IT TO THE PLANKS IN THE CASE.
UM, UH, YOU ARE ALL, UH, PROFESSIONAL ADVOCATES.
UH, SO, UH, I BELIEVE YOU, YOU'LL HOLD TO THE STANDARDS.
UH, YOU ARE WELCOME TO MAKE CONSTITUTIONAL ARGUMENTS.
UH, THIS BOARD DOESN'T HAVE AUTHORITY OVER THAT, BUT IF YOU, IF YOU WANT TO MAKE THEM IN ORDER TO PRESERVE, UH, THE RECORD FOR, UH, JUDICIAL REVIEW, I, I UNDERSTAND IT'S YOUR TIME.
UM, UM, THAT SAID, UH, THE WAY WE HAVE AGREED, UH, TO DO IT IS THAT EACH SIDE WE WILL INTRODUCE IN A MINUTE, UH, HAS A FIVE MINUTE OPEN AND CLOSE, UH, AND HAS 25 MINUTES TOTAL TO PRESENT THEIR CASE AND CROSS EXAMINE, UM, YOUR, WHEN YOUR WITNESS IS BEING CROSS EXAMINED, YOUR TIME WILL STOP.
UM, UH, ANY WITNESS CALLED, MAY BE CROSS EXAMINED, UM, APPEARING FOR THE APPELLANT.
SHADAY LEWIS ON BEHALF OF GIBSON, HER AT LAW.
MS. LEWIS, DO, DO YOU HAVE WITNESSES? NO, NO WITNESS.
AND FOR THE CITY, UH, THIS MATTHEW STRINGER, THIS IS CI, ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY JULIUS SHAKES.
AND WE DO HAVE ONE WITNESS, DETECTIVE ANTONIO GOMEZ.
UH, EVIDENCE WILL BE, UH, UH, REFERRED TO AS, UH, APPELLANT'S REQUEST, APPELLANT'S EXHIBIT CITY'S EXHIBIT.
AND THEY'RE NUMBERED BY THE, UH, CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE.
[02:45:05]
YOUR, UM, LET, LET ME MAKE SURE WE HAVE A QUORUM.YOUR, YOUR OPENING STATEMENTS, MS. LEWIS.
UM, I'M CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.
UM, WE'RE HERE TO APPEAL THE FINAL DETERMINATION DESIGNATING PROPERTY AT 2014.
MS. LEWIS, I, UH, I MADE A MISTAKE, UH, I'M SORRY, I NEED TO SWEAR IN, UM, ALL OF THE WITNESSES JUST TO BE SURE.
IF YOU'RE HERE TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS CASE.
WOULD YOU PLEASE STAND AND BE SWORN? MS. SANJE, DO YOU SOLEMNLY SWEAR THAT TO THE BEST OF YOUR KNOWLEDGE, THE TESTIMONY YOU WILL GIVE BEFORE THIS BOARD TODAY WILL BE THE TRUTH? THANK YOU.
UH, AND IF YOU CAN PUT HER 25 MINUTES.
UM, COUNSEL, UH, WE'RE HERE TO APPEAL THE FINAL DETERMINATION, UM, DESIGNATING MY CLIENT'S PROPERTY AT 24 15, UM, 24 35 AT 24 45 WEST NORTHWEST HIGHWAY, UM, AS A HABITUAL PINE PROPERTY.
UM, THE CITY'S CASE REST ON A PRESUMPTION THAT WITHOUT HOLDING LIMITED, MY CLIENT AND THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, UM, KNOWINGLY TOLERATED CRIMINAL ACTIVITY.
HOWEVER, UNDER DALLAS CITY CODE SECTION 27 48 C, UH, THIS PRESUMPTION IS PROVIDED IF THE OWNER HAS TAKEN REASONABLE STEPS TO ABATE SUCH ACTIVITIES.
UM, THE EVIDENCE TODAY WILL SHOW THAT OUR CLIENT DID NOT SIMPLY MEET THE STANDARD OF REASONABLE STEPS AS THE OWNER AND AS A COMMERCIAL LANDLORD.
UM, THEY EXCEEDED IT, UM, LONG BEFORE RECEIVING THE FORMAL NOTICE AND IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING, UM, THE FORMAL NOTICES AS WELL.
THE APPELLANT IMPLEMENTED A ROBUST, UM, SECURITY INFRASTRUCTURE AND TOOK AGGRESSIVE LEGAL ACTION AGAINST NONCOMPLIANT TENANTS.
UH, WILL FURTHER DEMONSTRATE, UM, THAT SOME OF THE NUMERICAL COUNTS AS FAR AS INCIDENTS, UM, THAT WERE CAPTURED IN THE 365 DAY LOOK BACK PERIOD, UM, WERE INCORRECTLY INCLUDED, UM, AND RELIED ON CRIMES THAT EITHER OCCURRED OFFSITE OR ON PUBLIC LAND, UM, WHERE THE OWNER HAS NO JURISDICTION.
UH, CITY, YOU HAVE, UH, FIVE MINUTES, MS. LEWIS, YOU, YOU WERE DONE, CORRECT? YES.
YOU, YOU WERE DONE, CORRECT? YES, SIR.
UM, MAKE SURE WE MAINTAIN OUR QUORUM.
UM, CITY, GOOD MORNING, HONORABLE CHAIR AND BOARD, UH, FOR YOU TODAY.
UH, AS AN APPEAL OF HABITUAL CRIMINAL PROPERTY DESIGNATION FOR THE PROPERTY AT 24 15 AND 2035 AND 24 45 WEST NORTHWEST HIGHWAY, UH, THIS MORNING, YOU'LL HEAR TESTIMONY AND REVIEW EVIDENCE SHOWING THAT THE PROPERTY WAS DECIDED ON FIVE DEBATABLE OFFENSES DEFENDANT DURING FIVE DAY PERIOD, THAT THE OWNER FAILED TO TAKE REASONABLE STEPS TO ABATE CRIMINAL ACTIVITY HAS HISTORICALLY OCCURRED.
ON, AS SUCH, THE HCP DESIGNATION SHOULD BE UPHELD.
UM, PLEASE, FROM MS.
UH, DURING THIS PERIOD, HE, HE ALSO EXECUTED TWO WARRANTS PROPERTY, UH, ONE FOR A
AND I APOLOGIZE, I I SAID 15 AVAILABLE, BUT I, I
UM, LIKE 15 ON JULY 10TH, 25, CITY SENT A LETTER TO THE PROPERTY OWNER NOTIFYING THEM OF THE HCB
[02:50:01]
PRESUMPTION.UH, AND THEN IN AUGUST, THE PROPERTY OWNER, UH, RECEIVED, UH, A LETTER FROM BP VICE UNIT TELLING THEM THAT THERE'S GAMBLING A ILLEGAL GAMBLING OPERATION OCCURRING ON THEIR PROPERTY, AND TO TAKE, UH, STEPS TO ABATE THAT ACTIVITY.
AND SIR, IF YOU, IF YOU WANNA, UH, PRESENT EVIDENCE THAT'S, THAT'S IN YOUR, YOUR, YOUR TIME, WE DO THAT GENERAL WALKTHROUGH, WHAT YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT.
UM, IF YOU COULD TO, UH, SLIDE, UH, PROPERTY IS PRESUMED AT TO CRIMINAL PROPERTY OF FIVE OR MORE AVAILABLES CURRENT IN THREE FIVE DAYS.
UM, THE PRESUMPTION CAN BE REBUTTED AT THE PROPERTY THAT REASONABLE CRIME WERE IN PLACE AT THE PROPERTY PRIOR TO THE DATE OF THE PRESUMPTION LETTER.
UM, SO TO BE CLEAR, ATION OF CRIME PREVENTION MEASURE AFTER JULY 10TH, 2025, UH, SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION.
I MEAN, WHETHER THE, UH, HABITUAL CRIMINAL PROPERTY PRESUMPTION WAS REBUTTED.
UM, AT THE COURT MEETING ON AUGUST 11TH, UM, THE PROPERTY OWNER HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT EVIDENCE TO REBUT THE PRESUMPTION, UH, EVIDENCE WAS PROVIDED.
AND DID, UH, LIEUTENANT LISA'S INFORMATION, UM, UH, JURY LOGS, UH, VIEW OF THAT EVIDENCE, UH, DID YOU DETERMINED THAT THE, UH, IT WAS NOT SUFFICIENT TO REBUT THE PRESUMPTION? UM, NOTABLY ABSENT WAS EVIDENCE THAT THE OWNER HAD TAKEN, UH, REASONABLE STEPS TO ENFORCE, UH, LEASE, UH, VIOLATION TO DETERMINATE LEASES.
DEFENDANTS FOUND TO BE CONDUCTING CRIMINAL ACTIVITY ON A PROPERTY, UM, THAT YOU'LL LIKELY HEAR, UM, ME APPELLANT THAT THE HP DESIGNATION SHOULD BE REVERSED DUE THE RECENT IMPLEMENTATION OF CRIME PREVENTION MEASURES, UM, AND OBVIOUSLY APPRECIATES THE INFORMATION OF THESE MEASURES.
UH, UNFORTUNATELY, IT'S TOO LITTLE, TOO LATE TO REBUT THE, THE PRESUMPTION.
UM, AND JUST TO SUMMARIZE TO TODAY, SHOW THAT THE OWNERS FAILED TO COMMIT REASONABLE CRIME PREVENTION MEASURES PRIOR TO JULY 10TH, 2025.
THEREFORE, THE HCB DESIGNATION SHOULD BE UPHELD.
OKAY, MS. LEWIS, YOU HAVE 25 MINUTES.
UM, AND IN THE SPIRIT OF, YOU KNOW, THE LENGTH OF THE, UM, BINDER, I, I DO NOT INTEND TO GO THROUGH ALL OF THESE.
IT'S JUST FOR THE RECORD, AND I'LL HIGHLIGHT THE, THE SPECIALIST THAT I'D LIKE TO FOCUS ON.
I DON'T KNOW WHETHER YOU'RE HEARING WHAT WE'RE HEARING.
IT'S, I'M NOT PUTTING MY HAND UP TO YOU.
CAN EVERYONE HEAR ME OKAY, MR. QUIN? YOU DO, DO WE HAVE A POINT OF ORDER? EXCUSE ME, CHAIR.
THIS IS, UH, MS. UH, LEWIS'S OPENING, UH, SHE SHOULD HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
ANOTHER 4 25? NO, NO, SHE, SHE OPENED.
UM, AND, UH, MS. LEWIS, I'M BEING ASKED TO ASK YOU TO SPEAK CLOSER TO THE MICROPHONE, MEANS WE'LL GET TO, IS THAT BETTER, MS? GOOD.
SO, AS SET FORTH IN, UM, THE MEMORANDUM IN APPELLANT'S, UH, SUPPORTING EVIDENCE BINDER THAT WAS SUBMITTED, UM, MY CLIENT PROACTIVELY IMPLEMENTED SEVERAL CRIME PREVENTION THROUGH ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN PRINCIPLES, UM, LONG BEFORE ANY FORMAL NOTICE WAS ISSUED ON JULY 9TH.
AND AS WELL AS AFTERWARDS, UM, MY CLIENT MAINTAINS A ROBUST NETWORK OF 30 TO 45 ACTIVE EXTERIOR SECURITY CAMERAS, WHICH THE CITY HAD REQUESTED HE INSTALLED SEVERAL YEARS AGO.
SO THEY HAVE BEEN INSTALLED AND IN PLACE FOR A, A LONG TIME.
UM, THAT'S ALSO CONFIRMED IN CPDS.
UM, ON INCIDENT REPORT, UM, THERE'S AN INCIDENT REPORT NUMBER 0 1 5 4 3 6 DASH 2025.
UM, IT'S INCLUDED AS, LET'S SEE, ALL OF THESE INCLUDED IN BOTH OF THE, UM, SORRY, EXHIBIT H AND APPELLANT'S, UM, EVIDENCE BINDER, UM,
[02:55:01]
FOR THE FULL DETAIL OF IT.UM, BUT BASICALLY THERE'S STATEMENTS THERE WITHIN THAT REPORT.
ALSO ACKNOWLEDGING, QUOTE, THAT THERE'S CAMERAS AT THE LOCATION THAT FACED THE PARKING LOT.
UM, ANOTHER, SORRY, I WAS HAVING A LITTLE ISSUE.
UM, ANOTHER THING THAT MY CLIENT DOES HAVE IS PROFESSIONAL SECURITY.
UM, THAT HAS BEEN IN PLACE FOR QUITE SOME TIME, UM, BEFORE THE INITIAL DESIGNATION WAS GIVEN NOTICE AS WELL.
UM, OUR CLIENT
UM, AT THE TIME OF OUR COURT MEETING, THAT REPRESENTATIVE ALSO ATTENDED, WE PROVIDED ALL PAGES FOR THE DAILY PATROL LOGS FOR ALL OF THE INCIDENTS THAT WERE CITED IN THE INITIAL NOTICE, UM, THAT WERE CONSISTENT WITH SECURITY PRESENCE.
UM, THOSE LOGS ARE ALSO GENERATED DAILY, NOT JUST ON THE DATE FOR THE INCIDENTS THAT ARE LISTED, BUT EVERY SINGLE DAY.
AND THEY'LL ALSO SHARE WITH THE CLIENT AS WELL.
AND AS FAR AS THE SIGNAGE THROUGHOUT THE PROPERTY, UM, FOR TERRITORIAL REINFORCEMENT, UM, THERE'S EXTENSIVE SIGNAGE FOR NO TRESPASSING, NO LOITERING, UM, AND TOWING NOTICES POSTED THROUGHOUT THE COMMON AREAS, UM, ALL OF WHICH WERE PERSONALLY DOCUMENTED BY OFFICERS AND THE CITY DURING THE INSPECTION.
AND YOU'LL ALSO SEE INDICATIONS OF THEM IN THE, IN THE CITY'S EVIDENCE BINDER.
UM, I WOULD LIKE TO NOTE THAT THE, IF WE CAN GO TO, LET'S SEE, I THINK IT'S AN, IF YOU REFER TO CITY'S EVIDENCE FINDER NINE, WHICH LISTS, UM, YEAH, THE CITY'S TAB NINE, UM, WHICH IS SOME OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS THAT WE'RE TAKING DURING OUR ONSITE INSPECTION.
IS THERE A PAGE NUMBER YOU CAN HEAD US TO? PAGE 1 66.
WHICH SHOULD BE, I THINK THE FILE NUMBER, UM, ENDS IN 1 4 5 4 0 8, THE LARGE FILES.
SO THAT SHOWS THE EXTERIOR OF ONE OF THE TENANTS, UM, WHICH HAD SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE ISSUES WITH THE RELEASE.
UM, BUT JUST FOR DEMONSTRATIVE PURPOSES, THIS IS THE EXTERIOR OF ONE OF THE BUILDINGS.
UM, IF YOU ZOOM OUT ON THAT PICTURE, YOU CAN SEE THAT THERE'S CLEAR SIGNAGE SHOWING ITS PRIVATE PROPERTY WARNING FOR
YOU CAN SEE THE EXTERNAL LIGHTS THAT ARE ATTACHED TO THE BUILDING, UM, BOTH KIND OF AT THE LOWER LEVEL, AND THERE'S SOME LARGER ONES HIGHER UP AS WELL.
UM, AND YOU CAN SEE ALSO SOME OF THE EXTERIOR CAMERAS.
THE OTHER THING I WANTED TO POINT TO, UM, AND THERE'S OTHER PHOTOS, UM, AS WELL, LIKE, THAT IS JUST A, AN EXAMPLE.
UM, THE OTHER THING I WANTED TO KIND OF HIGHLIGHT, TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF WHAT TYPE OF PROPERTY THIS IS, IF YOU CAN REFER TO APPELLANT'S EVIDENCE BINDER EXHIBIT A, WHICH SHOWS THE PROPERTY MAP AND THE APPELLANT'S PROPERTY IS THE SECTION THAT'S HIGHLIGHTED IN GREEN.
UM, GREEN, THIS PHOTO WAS TAKEN FROM THE DALLAS CENTRAL APPRAISAL DISTRICT, UM, PROPERTY MODEL.
SO THE, IF YOU LOOK WITHIN THAT GREEN SQUARE THAT'S HIGHLIGHTED, THE PROPERTY CONSISTS OF THREE SEPARATE BUILDINGS.
UM, IT'S BASICALLY AN OUTDOOR SHOPPING PLAZA.
SO EACH ONE OF THOSE BUILDINGS HAS A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT TENANTS COMPOSING OF RESTAURANTS, BARS, UM, SOME, THERE'S AN AUTO REPAIR SHOP, A CONVENIENCE STORE, A LIQUOR STORE, JUST VARIOUS TYPES OF COMMERCIAL TENANTS.
KIND OF ENCOMPASS ALL OF THESE BATTERIES.
BUT THE ONE THAT WE JUST SHOWED A PICTURE OF WAS JUST IN LIKE, THE CORNER OF ONE OF THOSE BUILDINGS.
I WANNA STRESS THAT THOSE, THE SIGNAGES, THE CAMERAS, THE LIGHTING IS SOMETHING THAT IS ENCOMPASSING THAT ENTIRE AREA.
UM, THIS IS A, INTERRUPT YOUR TIME FOR A MINUTE AND STOP IT.
I'M, I'M LOOKING AT BOARD MEMBERS AND THEY'RE HAVING TROUBLE KEEPING UP WITH YOUR, UM, I WANNA
[03:00:01]
MAKE SURE WE FOLLOW YOU.SO THIS IS A COMMERCIAL PROPERTY, UM, PROPERTY.
THE APPELLANT OWNS THIS COMMERCIAL LAND.
UM, AND THEN ALL OF THESE TENANTS HAVE LEASES, LEASE AGREEMENTS FOR THAT.
UM, AND I WANNA HIGHLIGHT THIS 'CAUSE I'LL BRING IT UP LATER AS WELL.
UM, SO JUST TO KIND OF FLAG IT FOR THE WESTERN PART OF THIS PROPERTY, WHERE YOU CAN SEE THE KIND OF CONCRETE ENDS, THAT'S GRASS AREA.
AND THEN THERE'S ALSO A CREEK THAT RUNS RIGHT THERE.
SO MY CLIENT'S PROPERTY ENDS AT THE END OF THAT CEMENT
UM, THERE'S A CREEK AND THEN YOU SEE A SEPARATE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY, UM, ON THE WESTERN SIDE OF THE CREEK AREA AS WELL.
YEAH, I WANTED TO REFER TO THE CHART AND THE CITY'S EVIDENCE BINDER LISTED AT THE VERY BEGINNING.
I'LL GET YOU THE PAGE NUMBER AS WELL.
UM, IT BEGINS ON PAGE FOUR OF THE CITY'S BINDER.
THERE'S A CHART WITH, UM, DIFFERENT AREAS OF ISSUES THAT WERE POINTED OUT OR RAISED DURING THE INSPECTION AND SOME RECOMMENDED MEASURES THE CITY PROPOSED, UM, AND WHETHER OR NOT THE EVIDENCE, UM, WAS PRESENTED.
UM, AT THE TIME, AND I THINK THIS IS AT THE COURT MEETING, SO SOME OF THIS WAS PRESENTED AT THE COURT MEETING AND SOME WAS SUBMITTED, UM, AT LEAST UP INTO OUR INSPECTION BEFORE THE FINAL DETERMINATION WAS MADE.
UM, BUT I JUST WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT THAT AS FAR AS THE LIST OF ITEMS THAT WERE BEING FLAGGED TO BE ADDRESSED.
SO IN REGARDS TO THE VIDEO SURVEILLANCE, UM, THOSE REMARK, NO, BUT AGAIN, THERE'S 30 TO 45 CAM EXTERIOR CAMERAS ACROSS THAT ENTIRE PROPERTY.
UM, I ALSO WANTED TO STRESS THAT MY CLIENT, UM, THE APPELLANT OWNS THE PROPERTY AS A COMMERCIAL LANDLORD, SO HE MANAGES THE EXTERIOR OF THE PROPERTY, THE COMMON AREAS LIKE THE PARKING LOTS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
UM, AND THEN THE INDIVIDUAL TENANT HAVE RESPONSIBILITY TO MAINTAIN THE INTERIOR OF THE COMMERCIAL SUITES.
UM, THEY HAVE AN OPTION TO USE VIDEO CAMERAS.
A LOT OF THEM DID IN FACT HAVE INTERNAL VIDEO.
UM, BUT HE'S RESPONSIBLE ONLY FOR THE EXTERIOR SIDE OF THINGS.
UM, ACTIVE MONITORING, UM, THERE IS SEEING, LET'S SEE, UM, THE VISIBLE SIGNAGE, I BELIEVE YOU'VE ALREADY ADDRESSED.
THERE'S CAMERAS, UM, CAMERAS AND SIGNAGE THROUGHOUT ALL OF THE EXTERIOR PROPERTY ADDRESSING THOSE ISSUES.
SECURITY PATROLS, UM, HE WAS ALREADY UNDER CONTRACT WITH A SECURITY COMPANY AT THE TIME OF THE REPORT MEETING.
THAT REPRESENTATIVE ALSO ATTENDED THE REPORT MEETING AND GAVE TESTIMONY TO THE CITY.
UM, WE PROVIDED THEM WITH THE RECORDS FOR THE INCIDENTS LISTED IN THE INITIAL NOTICE.
UM, AND WE HAVE DAILY PATROL LOGS FOR ALL DATES, WHICH WERE EASY TO GET JUST FOR THOSE DAYS.
SO THERE'S A DAILY CORRESPONDENCE FOR ALL OF THE THREE TO FIVE VISITS THAT EACH PATROL DOES EACH DAY.
THERE'S A SUMMARY THAT'S SUBMITTED TO MY APPELLANT AND THAT OFFICER THAT DOES THE PATROL ALSO COORDINATES WITH DPD IF THERE'S AN ISSUE THAT HE WITNESSES OUTSIDE OF HIS PURVIEW, AND HE COORDINATES TO GET AN OFFICER THERE AS WELL.
UM, THE CITY ALSO RAISED THE IMPORTANCE OF CRIMINAL TRESPASS AFFIDAVIT, WHICH I DO AGREE WAS VERY IMPORTANT.
UM, WE DID PROVIDE THAT TO THEM ON OCTOBER 27TH.
UM, THIS WAS AFTER THE FINAL DETERMINATION, BUT I HAVE BEEN COORDINATING AND WITH MY CLIENT IN THE CITY TO GET THAT DONE AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
UM, DUE TO THE SIZE OF THE PROPERTY AND THE WAY THAT THE AFFIDAVIT FORM WAS FORMATTED, WE JUST NEEDED TO MAKE SURE EACH INDIVIDUAL TENANT WAS LISTED, BECAUSE EACH ONE HAS A SEPARATE ADDRESS.
AND THEN THEY ALSO HAVE DIFFERENT INDIVIDUALS THAT WE HAVE TO LIST AS AUTHORIZED PERSONNEL FOR ALL OF THEM AS WELL.
SO WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE ALL OF THEM ARE INCLUDED SO THAT IF THERE'S ANY ISSUES IN THE FUTURE GOING FORWARD, IT'LL BE MUCH EASIER FOR THE APPELLANT, THE TENANTS, AND THE CITY TO TRESPASS INDIVIDUALS TO MAKE IT EASIER.
UM, PARKING CONTROLS, UM, THE CITY RACE ISSUES ABOUT ACTIVELY MONITORING PARKING.
UM, ONE OF THE ISSUES, UM, NOTED WAS THERE WAS A LARGE U-HAUL KIND OF PARKED AND A DOCK, UM, AND IT LOOKED VERY SPECIFIC IN PLACEMENT.
UM, THE APPELLANT REACHED DIRECTLY OUT TO THE TENANT TO ASCERTAIN IF IT WAS HIS AND TO HAVE HIM REMOVE IT.
UM, THE TENANT CLAIMED THAT IT WASN'T HIS
[03:05:01]
FUND, REGARDLESS, IT WAS STILL MOVED, UM, I BELIEVE WITHIN THE WEEK, UM, FROM OUR LAST INSPECTION.UM, SO HE DOES RESPOND TO THOSE PRETTY ACTIVELY.
UM, AND LEASE ENFORCEMENT, WE CONDUCTED A, UM, PROPERTY WIDE AUDIT, UM, AND TERMINATED NONCOMPLIANT LEASES AS WELL.
SO I WANT TO REFER YOU TO, UM, APPELLANT'S EVIDENCE BINDER EXHIBIT D, UM, WHICH RANGES FROM D ONE TO D FIVE.
UM, I BELIEVE THAT, AS I MENTIONED, THE CRIMINAL TRESPASS AFFIDAVIT WAS NOT SUBMITTED WITH THE REBUTTAL INFORMATION THAT WAS SUBMITTED AFTERWARDS.
SO I JUST WANNA POINT THAT OUT.
UM, DO WE HAVE IT AND HAVE YOU SUBMITTED IT TO OPPOSING COUNSEL? YES, YES.
UM, IT WAS FILED WITH THE CITY IN OCTOBER, AND I SUBMITTED A COPY TO A OPPOSING COUNSEL AS WELL.
AND IT'S INCLUDED IN THE BINDER AS, OH, I THOUGHT YOU SAID IT WAS, I'M SORRY.
I JUST WANTED TO, UM, NOTE THAT THE DATE I, I HAVE IT LISTED AS IT BEING SUBMITTED WITH OUR REBUTTAL.
IT WAS NOT SUBMITTED WITH THOSE DOCUMENTS.
IT WAS AFTERWARDS, BUT IT WAS SUBMITTED.
SO I JUST WANTED TO, WHAT I'VE MOSTLY COVERED IS JUST A SUMMARY OF EVERYTHING HERE.
UM, I DON'T INTEND FOR YOU ALL TO GO THROUGH ALL OF THESE, THIS QUITE LENGTHY.
UM, THIS WAS JUST TO DEMONSTRATE THE BREADTH OF DOCUMENTS THAT WERE SHARED WITH THE CITY, UM, AFTER THE INSPECTION AND BEFORE THE FINAL DETERMINATION WAS MADE.
UM, SO ALL OF THESE DOCUMENTS ARE WHAT WE PROVIDED, UM, TO REBUT THE PRESUMPTION BEFORE THAT DETERMINATION WAS MADE.
I HAVE A SUMMARY HERE, UM, AND I DO WANNA HIGHLIGHT EXHIBIT D TWO.
UM, BUT YOU CAN GO TO ANY ONE OF THOSE PAGES.
THESE ARE LETTERS THAT WERE SENT TO ALL OF THE TENANTS, UM, FOR A COMPLIANCE AUDIT.
UM, THESE WERE HAND DELIVERED TO EACH ONE OF THE TENANTS.
UM, YOU CAN SEE ON THE BOTTOM OF SOME OF 'EM, WHICH TENANT IS ACKNOWLEDGING IT, SEND IT BACK.
SOME OF THOSE WERE ACTUALLY CONFIRMED WITH THE, UM, WITH THE LANDLORD DIRECTLY AS WELL, UM, BECAUSE THEY WERE ON SITE AND HE VISITS SOME OF THE PROPERTIES, LIKE RESTAURANTS AND EVERYTHING.
SO HE HAD SOME OF THOSE ALREADY.
BUT THIS IS JUST TO DEMONSTRATE THE TYPE OF COMPLIANCE, THE BREADTH OF IT THAT WAS CONDUCTED.
ONCE ISSUES WERE MADE AWARE, UM, THE CITY RAISED SOME ISSUES THAT WERE DISCOVERED IN THE INSPECTION REGARDING TO SOME BUSINESSES NOT HAVING, UM, MAY HAVE EXPIRED CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY, MAY HAVE HAD LIKE AN OLDER TENANT'S NAME ON IT.
AND, AND SOME OF THE OTHER ISSUES WERE LIKE WHETHER OR NOT THE, THE TENANTS THERE WERE THE RIGHT PEOPLE ON THE LEASE TO CONFIRM, UM, BECAUSE SOME OF THEM HAD BEEN OPERATING UNDER THEIR INDIVIDUAL NAME, THE BUSINESS NAME, AND TO KIND OF CONSOLIDATE THOSE DIFFERENCES THAT WERE BROUGHT UP IN THE LEASE.
SO ALL OF THOSE THINGS WERE COVERED.
UM, WE HAD EVERYONE COMPLIANT WITH THE EXCEPTION OF ONE TENANT, UM, WHICH IS HIGHLIGHTED IN A LOT OF THE CITY'S, UM, EVIDENCE BINDER AND PHOTOS.
UM, THERE WAS ONE TENANT I WANNA RAISE THAT WAS DURING THE INSPECTION REPRESENTED, UM, AND ON THE LEASE REPRESENTING HIMSELF AS BEING AN ELECTRONIC REPAIR COMMERCIAL SPACE.
WHEN WE VISITED IT, IT WAS VERY CLEAR THAT THAT WAS NOT THE CASE.
THERE WAS NO INDICATION OF ANY ELECT ANY LEGITIMATE ELECTRONIC REPAIR BUSINESS BEING HELD THERE.
UM, THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT YOU CAN SEE FROM THE OUTSIDE, BUT WE DID NOTICE IT DURING THE INSPECTION.
UM, AFTERWARDS, MY, UM, CLIENT IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWED UP WITH THE TENANT.
UM, THE ANSWERS THAT WERE GIVEN WERE NOT SATISFACTORY AND HIS LEASE WAS IN FACT TERMINATED.
UM, THERE WERE ALSO ISSUES THAT WERE RAISED IN SOME OF THE INCIDENT REPORTS.
I'LL FLAG SOME OF THE LARGER, MORE CONCERNING PROPERTIES.
UM, ONE WAS CALLED WOW SPA, WHICH WAS A MASSAGE TYPE SPACE.
UM, AND THE DPD VICE UNIT, UM, CONDUCTED AN INVESTIGATION AND FOUND THERE WAS, UM, PROSTITUTION HAPPENING IN THAT LOCATION.
SO BEFORE THE INSPECTION, THAT LOCATION WAS RATED AND SHUT DOWN.
UM, BOTH I AND MY CLIENT LEARNED OF THE RATE DURING THE REPORT MEETING, UM, AT THAT TIME, THE INITIAL NOTICE WITH ALL OF THE INCIDENT REPORTS LISTED, BUT WE HAD NOT YET RECEIVED THE ACTUAL REPORTS BACK FROM THE CITY OF DALLAS YET.
SO WE DIDN'T HAVE THE ACTUAL REPORTS, BUT WE DID LEARN ABOUT IT IN THE REPORT MEETING.
UM, SINCE THE DPD RATED AND SHUT THAT BUSINESS DOWN, THAT SPOT HAS ALSO BEEN VACANT FENCE.
THERE'S NOTHING ELSE OPERATING THERE.
UM, THERE WAS ANOTHER BUSINESS THAT
[03:10:01]
LOOKED TO BE SOME TYPE OF GAMBLING TYPE PLACE THAT WASN'T ALSO IN VIOLATION OF THE LEASE.THAT ONE'S ALSO BEEN SHUT DOWN, NOT OPERATING.
THAT LEASE HAS ALSO BEEN TERMINATED.
UM, IT WAS A SMALL MATTER I WANTED TO RAISE.
UM, AND I LISTED THEM IN MY MEMORANDUM, BUT THERE WERE, UM, I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY ISSUE WITH THE, THE NUMBER THRESHOLD AND MEETING, UM, THE STATUTORY REQUIREMENT FOR IT.
UM, I THINK THERE WERE THREE THAT WERE WRONGFULLY INCLUDED.
UM, ONE INCIDENT INCIDENT REPORT NUMBER 0 1 5 4 3 6 DASH 2 0 2 5 LISTED ON THE MEMORANDUM AND INCLUDED IN THE EXHIBIT BINDER, UM, WAS ACTUALLY A HOTEL OR MOTEL SPACE DESCRIBED IN THE POLICE REPORT, UM, ON WALNUT HILL, WHICH WAS NOT A PROPERTY INCLUDED IN THIS PROPERTY.
AND IT'S NOT OWNED BY, UM, THE APPELLANT.
UM, INCIDENT NUMBER 1 6 4 0 8 8 DASH 2 0 2 4.
UM, THAT ONE ALSO ORIGINATED ON A PUBLIC STREET NEAR SEVEN 11, ALSO NOT A PART OF THIS PROPERTY, AND IT'S NOT OWNED BY THE APPELLANT.
UM, AND THEN INCIDENT NUMBER 0 8 9 1 1 2 DASH 0 2 5, UM, WHICH WAS A RANDOM ACT OF MISCHIEF, UM, BY AN UNKNOWN SUSPECT THAT DAMAGED THE CAR MIRROR.
UM, I I BELIEVE CATEGORIZING THAT RANDOM ACTIVE VANDALIZATION BY AN UNIDENTIFIED PARTY AS AN DEBATABLE CRIMINAL ACTIVITY, UM, IS A BIT OF A EVIDENTIARY STRETCH THAT IGNORES THE REASONABLE STEPS.
SO PRIMARILY OUR ARGUMENT IS THAT IN REGARDS TO THE ORDINANCE ITSELF, UM, SECTION 27 DASH 48 FOR THE PRESUMPTIONS, UM, THE FOCUS FOR OUR ARGUMENT IS MOSTLY UNDER SUBSECTION C, THAT THE OWNER OF A HABITUAL CRIMINAL OR NUISANCE PROPERTIES PRESUMED TO HAVE KNOWINGLY TOLERATED DEBATABLE CRIME ACTIVITY OR CODE VIOLATION, UM, AT THE OWNER'S PROPERTY BY FAILING TO TAKE REASONABLE STEPS TO ABATE THAT CRIMINAL ACTIVITY.
UM, THERE'S NO, UM, CONTENTION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THERE'S FIVE OR MORE OFFENSES IN THE 365 DAYS, I BELIEVE THAT'S GIVEN.
UM, BUT THE, OUR ISSUE IS THAT THESE STEPS AND THE AMOUNT OF, UM, PROTOCOLS THAT WERE ENTITLED TO AVOID THIS TYPE OF ACTIVITY WERE ALREADY IN PLACE AND WERE IN FACT ENHANCED, UM, DURING THE INSPECTIONS AND AFTERWARDS AS WELL.
UM, I'LL TO FINISH UP WITH MY ARGUMENT, I DO WANT TO RAISE SOME OF THE KIND OF UNREASONABLE STANDARDS, UM, THAT CAN SHOW WHETHER OR NOT THERE ARE REASONABLE STEPS OR NOT.
UM, IN THE CITY'S FINAL DETERMINATION LETTER, WHICH IS APPELLANT'S EVIDENCE, EXHIBIT G SHOWS THE FINAL DESIGNATION LETTER.
UM, AND THAT'S PAGE STARTING AT PAGE, UM, 6 68 OF THE PDF 6 67 ON, STARTING ON THE SECOND PAGE OF THE FINAL DETERMINATION.
IT LISTS SEVERAL DIFFERENT, UM, PREVENTATIVE MEASURES TO BE IMPLEMENTED TO THAT WERE SUGGESTED.
UM, A LOT OF THESE, IT'S BEEN PASSED THE REASONABLE STANDARD THAT'S GIVEN IN THE STATUTE.
UM, THE FIRST ONE BEING TO INSTALL A METAL ST FENCE ON THE WESTERN PART OF THE PROPERTY.
UM, AS I FLAGGED EARLIER ON THE PROPERTY MAP, THAT LAND IS NOT OWNED BY THE APPELLANT.
IT'S ACTUALLY OWNED BY THE CITY.
SO NOT ONLY WOULD HE BE HAVING TO TAKE ON THE CITY RESPONSIBILITY, BUT IT WOULD ALSO BE ENCROACHING ON MUNICIPAL PROPERTY.
UM, REGARDING THE COMMERCIAL LEASES, THOSE ARE ALL LISTED, UM, IN EXHIBIT D FIVE.
UM, A LOT OF THEM ARE VERY SIMILAR IN NATURE, JUST WITH DIFFERENT TENANTS NAMES.
UM, BUT ALL OF THESE WERE ALSO PROVIDED TO THE CITY, UM, BEFORE THE FINAL DETERMINATION WAS MADE AS WELL.
UM, WE INCLUDED ALL OF THE ITEMS IN E AND EXHIBIT D.
THE CITY WAS PROVIDED THE COMPLIANCE LETTER THAT WE DISCUSSED EARLIER.
UM, DOCUMENTS SHOWING BUSINESS OWNERSHIP AND INSURANCE.
SO THE CERTIFICATES OF, UM, FORMATION FOR ALL OF THE BUSINESS ENTITIES, IDS FOR THE INDIVIDUALS THAT OWNED THEM.
UM, COPIES OF THE INSURANCE POLICIES FOR ALL THE TENANTS.
ALL OF THAT WAS SUBMITTED AS WELL.
UM, LET'S SEE, CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY PERMITS,
[03:15:01]
LICENSES.ALL OF THOSE WERE SUBMITTED THAT HAD ANY ISSUES.
A LOT OF THEM WERE ALREADY WITNESS AND THE CITY TOOK PHOTOS OF DURING THE INSPECTION.
SO SOME, THEY HAD SOME, UM, I HAD TO PROVIDE AFTERWARDS.
UM, AND THEN THE CRIMINAL TRESPASS AFFIDAVIT WAS ALSO PROVIDED AS WELL.
UM, LET'S SEE, GOING DOWN THIS LIST FROM THE FINAL DESIGNATION, THERE'S RECOMMENDED FOR PARKING, UM, DIFFERENT THINGS TO PUT IN PLACE IN REGARDS FOR THE PARKING MONITORING, AS I STATED EARLIER, AND HAS SHOWN IN A LOT OF THE PHOTOS, THERE'S ALREADY PARKING NOTICES THROUGHOUT THE EXTERNAL PARTS OF THE PROPERTY FOR TOWING ENFORCEMENT, UM, THAT IS PRIVATE PROPERTY AND FOR NO ORDERING SIGNAGES AS WELL.
SO ALL OF THAT WAS ALREADY IN PLACE AT THE TIME, UM, AND WAS AVAILABLE BEFORE THE FINAL DETERMINATION.
THE CAMERAS ALSO MENTIONED THEIR EXTERNAL CAMERAS THROUGHOUT THE PROPERTY.
UH, 30 TO 45 OF THEM, UM, INTERNAL CAMERAS, UM, WERE MONITORED BY THE TENANTS, THE EXTERNAL CAMERAS.
UM, THE APPELLANT ALSO OFFERED TO COORDINATE WITH THE, IF THERE WAS ANY FOOTAGE OR ANYTHING THAT WAS NEEDED, THEN HE WAS OPENLY READY TO COOPERATE AND SHARE THAT, UM, WITH HIM AS WELL.
UM, THERE IS A RECOMMENDATION THAT FLOCK CAMERAS BE INSTALLED, UM, WHICH WOULD BE, I, I BELIEVE THAT A FLOCK CAMERA WOULD BE KIND OF EXCESSIVE OR OUTSIDE OF THE REASONABLE STANDARD.
UM, THAT'S NOTICED BY THE STATUTE ITSELF.
UM, IF THERE WAS ONE IN PLACE, THAT WOULD BE ONE THING JUST TO MAINTAIN IT, BUT IT'S INCREDIBLY HARD TO GET THAT INSTALLED AND MAINTAINED, AND IT'S NOT, IT'S ABOVE THE REASONABLE STANDARD.
UM, EXTERNAL LIGHTINGS WERE ALREADY IN PLACE.
UM, AND MIND YOU, OUR INSPECTION WAS DURING THE DAY, SO I DIDN'T NOTICE.
I I'M NOT AWARE OF ANY LIGHTING ISSUES THAT ARE HAPPENING AT NIGHT.
UM, BUT IF SO, THEN THE TENANTS TYPICALLY REPORT THEM AND THEY GET REPLACED WITH ISSUE WITH ANY EXTERNAL LIGHTING.
UM, I BELIEVE SECURITY WAS ALREADY ADDRESSED.
UM, SECURITY WAS ALREADY, THERE WAS ALREADY SECURITY CONTRACT, UM, IN PLACE, UM, BEFORE THE COURT MEETING.
UM, AND PRIOR TO THE FINAL DETERMINATION AS WELL.
UM, THAT REPRESENTATIVE ATTENDED TO THE COURT MEETING AND TESTIFIED AS WELL, UM, OR GAVE HIS ACCOUNT OF EVERYTHING.
UM, A COPY OF THAT SECURITY AGREEMENT IS ALSO INCLUDED AS EXHIBIT J, APPELLANTS BINDER.
UM, AND THAT IS BY, UM, ARMED FORCE PATROL AS WELL.
WHERE AM I AT? I'LL WRAP HERE IN JUST A FEW SECONDS.
UM, COURSE MOST OF IT, I, YEAH, ACTUALLY THAT'S, THAT'S MOST OF MY ARGUMENT.
I THINK I'LL, I'LL RESERVE THE REST OF THE TIME.
I, I APPRECIATE THAT YOU'VE, UH, YOU'VE, UH, STUCK TO THE NEWS AT HAND.
UH, UNLESS ANYONE OBJECTS HERE, I, I WOULD LIKE TO ALLOW MS. LEWIS, UH, FIVE MINUTES, MEANING THE CITY WOULD, WOULD HAVE A TOTAL OF 30 IN CASE SHE'D LIKE TO CROSS-EXAMINE A WITNESS.
UNLESS ANYONE HAS A PROBLEM WITH THAT, IT SEEMS APPROPRIATE.
SHE'S, SHE'S STAYED ON TARGET, SO THE CITY WILL ALSO HAVE A TOTAL OF 30 MINUTES.
SO, SO YOU NOW HAVE FIVE MINUTES AND SEVEN SECONDS TO CROSS EXAMINE MR. MR. CHAIR.
IF, IF YOU'RE ASKING QUESTIONS NOT YET.
UM, WELL, NO, I KNOW YOU'RE NOT, I GUESS IF YOU'RE ASKING THE BOARD QUESTIONS, IF ANYBODY OBJECTS, I GUESS I, I WOULD OBJECT FORMALLY BECAUSE CAN WE SEE IF THE QUESTIONS THAT ARE ASKED BY THE BOARD WOULD COVER WHAT MR. MS. LEWIS WOULD COVER OR THE CROSS? I'M NOT SURE WHO'S TALKING.
IT'S CAN YOU NOT SEE ME? NO, MR. CILLA? NO.
UH, ANYWAY, I MEAN, IT REQUIRES UNANIMOUS CONSENT, SO YOU CAN OBJECT AND, AND THIS WON'T HAPPEN.
WELL, I, I, SO HERE, HERE'S MY POINT.
MY POINT IS I WOULD THINK THAT WE COULD GIVE AN EXTRA FIVE MINUTES IF NECESSARY.
UH, IF MS. LEWIS FEELS LIKE SHE HASN'T BEEN ASKED THE RIGHT QUESTION OR INQUIRY, UM, THAT'S ALL I WOULD, THAT'S THE ONLY THING I'VE YOU, YOU'D PREFER WE MAKE THIS DECISION IN A LITTLE BIT.
THAT'S ALL JUST TO LET YOU HAVE, YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO OBJECT FOR ANY REASON YOU WANT.
SO I THINK MS. LEWIS, MR. CCHI IS EMINENTLY REASONABLE, BUT, UM, SO I THINK IF YOU NEED TIME, YOU'LL, YOU'LL PROBABLY GET IT.
UM, TIME BEING, UH, UM, DO WE HAVE QUESTIONS? OH, YEAH, THAT'S TRUE.
DID, WOULD YOU LIKE TO CROSS EXAMINE? JUST NOT, IF SHE DIDN'T CALL A WITNESS, WOULD YOU LIKE TO CROSS EXAMINE MS. WE, UH, NO.
[03:20:01]
THE BOARD, MAY I ASK QUESTIONS? I SEE A HAND FOR MR. CILLA.DO I SEE ONE ALSO FOR MR. QUINT SOMEWHERE? SO EVEN UP THERE? NO.
SO IT'S MR. CILLA AND NO CHAIR? I DO, I DO HAVE HANDOUT AND ANYBODY LOCALLY.
SO WE'LL START WITH, WITH MR. CILLA, 'CAUSE HE WAS FIRST, UH, THEN WE'LL GO TO MR. CLINT AND THEN WE'LL BECOME LOCAL.
SO MS. LEWIS, MAY I START? MS. YOU MAY CHAIR.
UM, MS. LEWIS, I WANTED TO UNDERSTAND, ARE YOU SUGGESTING THAT THE AVAILABLE, UH, CRIMES THAT WERE LISTED IN THE CITIES AND WHAT WAS GIVEN TO THE APPELLANT WERE, WOULD, I GUESS, WOULD YOU AGREE THAT THEY WERE ALL BETWEEN THIS JULY, 2024 AND JULY, 2025 TIME PERIOD? YES.
I, I DO CO SEE THAT THE ONES LISTED WERE WITHIN THE 365 LOOK BACK PERIOD, AND THAT INCLUDES THAT LIST IN THEIR INITIAL.
AND THEN, SO IN REGARD TO THE LANDLORD, YOU SAID THAT WHENEVER TENANTS GAVE YOU INSIGHT OR GAVE THE LANDLORD INFORMATION THAT LIGHTS WERE OUT OR SOMETHING WAS IN, YOU KNOW, A PROBLEM, THE LANDLORD DO SOMETHING, DID THE LANDLORD EVER DO A REGULAR AUDIT OF, OR, UH, AN ONSITE REVIEW OF THE, OF THE PROPERTY ON SOME TYPE OF REGULAR BASIS? FOR THE EXTERNAL PART, YES.
UM, AND THAT'S WHERE THE LEASES KIND OF COME IN.
IT OUTLINES THE DIFFERENT RESPONSIBILITIES BETWEEN THE LANDLORD VERSUS THE RESPONSIBILITIES THAT LIE WITH THE TENANTS.
SO HE'S RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL OF THE EXTERIOR MAINTENANCE.
UM, AND THEN THE TENANTS ARE RESPONSIBLE.
SO I, IF I MAY STOP YOU, 'CAUSE WE ONLY HAVE A LIMITED AMOUNT OF TIME, MS. LEWIS, I HAVE A SPECIFIC QUESTION.
WAS THERE AN ACTUAL ACTIVITY, PHYSICAL ACTIVITY WHERE THE LANDLORD OR SOMEBODY REPRESENTING THE LANDLORD WOULD DO A PHYSICAL WALK OF THE PROPERTY ON A REGULAR BASIS? AND IF SO, HOW OFTEN? AND IF SO, WHEN DID IT START THE YES, THE ANSWER IS YES.
UM, THE SECURITY PATROL, UM, THAT'S WITHIN THEIR SCOPE OF THEIR AGREEMENT AS WELL.
UM, THOSE ARE, THEY HAPPEN THREE TO FIVE DAYS EVERY SINGLE DAY.
UM, AS FAR AS HOW LONG, THREE TO FIVE DAYS EVERY SINGLE DAY? YES.
AND THAT THEY'VE BEEN UNDER AGREEMENT SINCE OCTOBER.
THREE TO THREE TO FIVE TIMES A DAY, OR THREE TO FIVE DAYS A WEEK.
THREE TO FIVE TIMES A DAY EVERY DAY.
AND THEN IN REGARD TO WHEN DID THE SECURITY START? UM, THAT AGREEMENT WAS BACK IN OCTOBER 23RD, IS THE CURRENT ACTIVE AGREEMENT.
WHEN, HOW LONG AGO, HA HOW LONG HAS THE PROPERTY OWNER HAD SECURITY ON THIS PROPERTY? UM, I'VE ONLY LOOKED BACK FOR THIS CURRENT ONE, UM, SINCE AT LEAST 2023.
UM, I KNOW HE DID HAVE SOME IN RELATION TO SEPARATELY, BUT TOWING SOME KIND OF INFORMAL AGREEMENTS.
BUT THE WRITTEN ONES THAT I'VE GOTTEN HAVE BEEN FROM OCTOBER OF 23.
WHO WOULD'VE KNOWN? WHO KNOWS THAT DEFINITE OF HOW, HOW LONG AGO THEY'VE HAD SECURITY.
WOULD THAT BE THE PROPERTY OWNER? UH, WELL, YEAH, HE'S THE PROPERTY OWNER.
SO WHEN I ASKED, YEAH, WOULD HE KNOW IF IT WAS BEFORE 2023? AND HOW OFTEN? UM, I THINK I'M HAVING TROUBLE UNDERSTANDING.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU MAY HEAR MY QUESTION.
LET ME, LET ME PHRASE, UH, LET ME GIVE YOU ANOTHER QUESTION.
I'M NOT SURE IF YOU'RE HEARING ME AND I HAVE LIMITED TIME.
THE, WHAT I'M CURIOUS ABOUT THE THREE TO FIVE TIMES A DAY, WHEN ARE THOSE WALKS AROUND THE PROPERTY OCCURRING? ARE THEY OCCURRING 24 7? ARE THEY OCCURRING BETWEEN A CERTAIN TIME PERIOD, 8:00 AM TO 8:00 PM WHEN ARE THOSE OCCURRING? UH, YEAH, 24 7 BECAUSE SOME OF THE BUSINESS ARE MORE LIKE DAYTIME FOCUSED BUSINESSES, LIKE THE RESTAURANTS, CONVENIENCE STORE AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.
AND THEN SOME OF THE BUSINESS OPERATE AT NIGHT MOSTLY, UM, LIKE SOME OF THE OTHER RESTAURANTS AND BARS AND LOUNGES.
SO THE, AS FAR AS THE TIMEFRAME IS THROUGHOUT A 24 7 PERIOD, WOULD THE SECURITY, WOULD THE SECURITY PERSON BE REQUIRED PER THEIR CONTRACT TO WALK INSIDE THE TENANTS UNITS? NO.
UM, AND BY THE LEASE, THEY WOULD NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO DO EITHER.
UM, THE TENANT HAVE PRIVATE SECURITY, UM, THEY HIRE THEIR OWN INTERNAL SECURITY TO HANDLE EVERYTHING BASICALLY FROM THE DOOR INWARDS.
SO WOULD, BUT THE LANDLORD WOULD'VE HAD THAT OPPORTUNITY TO WALK IN DURING REASONABLE TIME PERIOD, LIKE FROM AN EIGHT TO FIVE GO WALK INTO THE LEASE UNIT? CORRECT.
[03:25:01]
LANDLORD DOES HAVE, UM, UM, INSPECTION AUTHORITY UNDER THE LEASE TO DO REGULAR INSPECTIONS.UM, THAT WOULD NOT FALL WITHIN THE GUISE OF LIKE AN UNDERCOVER HIDDEN PRO THAT YOU WOULDN'T YEAH, NO, I'M, I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT UNDERCOVER.
BUT THEY WOULD'VE SEEN, THEY WOULD'VE SEEN THE, THE ELECTRIC ELECTRICAL COMPANY THAT THEY WOULD'VE SEEN THE GAMBLING, UH, UNITS, CORRECT? CORRECT.
AND SO MY QUESTION IS, HOW LONG AGO DID THE GAMBLING UNITS APPEAR, OR HOW LONG HAD THEY BEEN THERE? ADVICE OR SHARE THAT? UM, NO, I, I'M NOT SURE.
I KNOW THAT AT THE TIME OF OUR INSPECTION, UM, THEY WERE, THE, THE UNITS WERE STILL THERE.
UM, AND THE CLIENT DID SHARE, THERE WAS, WHEN IT WAS BROUGHT UP DURING THE COURT MEETING AND WE GOT THE REPORTS THAT THERE WAS AN INSTANCE OF IT, HIS IMMEDIATE REACTION WAS, WHAT DO YOU MEAN THEY'VE BEEN GONE ALREADY? HE'D ALREADY KICKED THEM OUT.
SO THERE WAS ANOTHER ISSUE, UM, WHERE THE SECOND HE BECAME AWARE OF IT THAT WAS NOT RELATED TO THIS, UM, DESIGNATION ISSUE AT ALL.
UH, ONCE IT BECAME AWARE OF IT, HE ACTUALLY TERMINATED THAT LEASE AND GOT THEM REMOVED AS WELL.
SO THIS WAS A COM COMPLETELY DIFFERENT ENTITY WHERE IT HAPPENED.
AND I DON'T KNOW IF I HAVE TIME.
SO, UM, MS. LEWIS, YOU, YOU STATED THAT THERE'S 30 TO 45 CAMERAS.
WELL, IS IT 30 OR 45? I CAN GET THE EXACT NUMBER.
'CAUSE THAT'S A, THAT'S A REALLY BIG GAP FOR SUCH A LARGE PRO, UH, PROPERTY.
UM, ARE THOSE CAMERAS MONITORED 24 7? UM, THEY ARE MONITORED.
UM, THEY'RE RECORDED AND THEN HIS MANAGEMENT TEAM REVIEWS THEM DURING LIKE DAYTIME HOURS.
SO THEY ARE, THEY ARE MONITORED 24 7 OR THEY'RE NOT, NOT 24 7, I BELIEVE THEY'RE MONITORED DURING NORMAL BUSINESS OPERATING HOURS.
AND IF MY MEMORY SERVES ME CORRECT, THE VAST MAJORITY OF THESE CRIMES HAPPENED AT NIGHT.
UH, JUST IN THE POLICE REPORTS, UM, ONE OF THE BIGGEST ISSUES I'VE GOT IS, UM, THE, THE, THE AVAILABLE CRIMES.
UM, I, I CAN APPRECIATE THAT YOU SAID THREE OF THEM WERE NOT ON YOUR PROPERTY.
I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND AND I GET IT, BUT THAT STILL LEAVES 11, WHICH IS CONSIDERABLY MORE THAN THE THRESHOLD OF FIVE.
BUT WHAT, WHAT'S REALLY TROUBLING IS THE NATURE OF THESE CRIMES.
UM, YOU'VE GOT DEADLY CONDUCT, AGGRAVATED ASSAULT, AGGRAVATED ASSAULT, AGGRAVATED ROBBERY.
THESE ARE REALLY SERIOUS CRIMES.
THESE ARE, THESE ARE NOT MISDEMEANOR, SO TO SPEAK.
UM, HOW OFTEN, YOU SAID YOU HAVE THE SECURITY, UH, SEVEN DAYS A WEEK.
UM, AND DID I HEAR YOU HAVE THREE TO FIVE PATROLS A DAY? YES.
AND WHAT TIMES ARE THOSE? UM, AS I MENTIONED, THEY'RE DURING DIFFERENT TIMES OF THE DAY BECAUSE THE PATROL IS RESPONSIBLE FOR, TO ENCOMPASS ALL OF THE AREAS, SUMMER, DAYTIME, SUMMER NIGHT.
SO THEY STAGGER THEM DURING DIFFERENT TIMES OF DAY SO THAT THEY CAN BE THERE DURING THE DIFFERENT OPERATING HOURS OF THE DIFFERENT BUSINESSES.
SO I, I WOULD LOVE TO HAVE MORE INFORMATION OF, WELL, ARE THEY THE VAST MAJORITY AT NIGHT VERSUS DAYTIME? UH, BECAUSE AT THE END OF THE DAY, MOST OF THESE CRIMES ARE HAPPENING IN THE EVENING TO LATE HOURS VERSUS DURING THE DAY.
SO AN EXAMPLE OF SOME WOULD BE UNDER APPELLANT'S EXHIBIT D ONE, UM, STARTING ON PAGE 31, UM, IS AN EXAMPLE OF SOME OF THE SECURITY LOGS.
SO THESE WERE THE ONES THAT WERE SUBMITTED FOR THE SPECIFIC DATES OF THE POLICE REPORTS LISTED.
UM, AND IT GIVES AN IDEA OF WHAT'S ALL INCLUDED AND THE TIMESTAMPS FOR WHEN THEY'RE SUBMITTED AS WELL.
SO THEY'LL GIVE A DETAIL OF WHAT THE PATROL OFFICER WITNESS TAKES ANY PHOTOS OR VIDEO THAT MAY BE RELEVANT.
UM, IF THERE'S ANY INDICATION WHERE THEY HAD TO INCLUDE POLICE DIRECTLY, THOSE ARE NOTED AS WELL.
BUT THEY'RE DURING DIFFERENT TIMES OF DAY, THEY'RE NOT AT THE EXACT SAME TIME EVERY DAY.
SO I, I'LL HAVE TO GO BACK AND LOOK IN MAYBE SECOND ROUND, WE'LL DISCUSS IT AGAIN.
UH, YOU HAD MENTIONED ABOUT FENCING AND THAT THE PROPERTY BUTTED UP TO CITY PROPERTY.
UM, WAS THERE NO PART OF THE BACK PART OF THE PROPERTY OR THE PROPERTY THAT A FENCE COULD HAVE BEEN INSTALLED? NOT THEN I TO IT, NO.
THERE WAS ON A BUTT CEMENT EDGE, AND THEN AT THE GRASS LEVEL, WHICH IS RIGHT UP TO THE EDGE WITHIN THE CITY PROPERTY.
SO UNLESS AN EASEMENT, SOMETHING IS OBTAINED, THAT'S THE ONLY THING I CAN THINK OF THAT COULD ALLOW IT.
SO WHEN YOU SAY A BUTT CEMENT EDGE, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT LIKE A CURB? MM-HMM
SO FENCING COULD BE INSTALLED IN THAT CURB BECAUSE THAT'S STILL THE PROPERTY OWNER'S PROPERTY.
SO THEY, THEY CHOSE NOT TO PUT A FENCE UP? NO,
[03:30:01]
THERE'S BEEN NO FENCE UP THAT PROPERTY.WHAT I'M SAYING IS, IS THE CITY HAD SUGGESTED THAT YOU PUT ONE UP AND THE PROPERTY OWNER CHOSE NOT TO PUT IT OUT.
NO, IT WAS IN THEIR FINAL DETERMINATION, AND THAT'S WHEN WE FILED THE APPEAL.
SO THEY'VE NOT DECIDED TO TAKE ANY ACTION UNTIL A DETERMINATION IS MADE, BUT ALSO BECAUSE THE, THE STANDARD IS FOR, LEMME STOP.
YOU LEMME, MY QUESTION WAS THAT THEY GOT THE, FROM THE CITY, IT SAID, LET'S PUT A FENCE UP.
AND THEY CHOSE NOT TO PUT IT UP, EVEN THOUGH THE CITY SAID, PLEASE DO.
AGAIN, THAT WAS LISTED IN THE FINAL DETERMINATION LETTER, WHICH DO WE FILE THE APPEAL IMMEDIATELY AFTER.
SO NO ACTIONS WERE FURTHER TAKEN UNTIL A DECISION WAS FINALLY MADE HERE.
I YOU'RE, YOU'RE NOT ANSWERING MY QUESTION AND I'M JUST GONNA WITHDRAW THE QUESTION.
LOCALLY, RIGHT TO LEFT, I KNOW WE HAVE DR. JACKSON, WE HAVE
WE WOULD LIKE TO JUST CONFIRM THAT, UM, YOU STATE THAT YOUR CLIENT HAS EXCEEDED THE STEPS REQUIRED TO KEEP THIS PROPERTY SAFE.
IS THAT CORRECT, MS. LEWIS? FROM THE REASONABLE STANDARD AND DEFINED BY THE STATUTE? YES.
FROM THE REASONABLE, REASONABLE STANDARD.
IS IT REASONABLE TO BELIEVE THAT A LANDLORD WOULD WALK THE PREMISES OF HIS TENANTS YES.
TO DO ROUTINE AUDITS? YEAH, THAT'S REASONABLE.
SO YOU MENTIONED EARLIER THAT THAT WOULD BE EXCESSIVE, OR MAYBE I'M WRONG, UM, THAT IT WOULD BE EXCESSIVE TO DO SOMETHING OF THE SORT.
SO DOES THE LANDLORD, UH, HOW OFTEN DOES THE LANDLORD SEND SOMEONE TO ACTIVELY LOOK INTO THE BUSINESSES THAT ARE LEASING HIS PROPERTY? UH, NO, I, I WANTED TO POINT OUT IT'S NOT THAT THAT'S SUCCESSIVE WHAT I WAS HIGHLIGHTING IS THAT THE DIFFERENT RESPONSIBILITIES IN THE LEASE AND THE RESTRICTIONS THAT THE, UM, OWNER AS THE LANDLORD HAS IN ORDER TO GO IN, UM, THEY HAVE AN ABILITY TO INSPECT A PREMISES WITH NOTICE.
UM, BUT NOT TO ROUTINELY JUST KIND OF SHOW UP FOR THE BUSINESS TO SEE.
SO HOW MUCH NOTICE DO YOU AS A LANDLORD HAVE TO GIVE YOUR TENANTS BEFORE YOU CAN COME IN AND IT NOT BE SEEN AS A KIND OF ROUTINE, LIKE A GOTCHA KIND OF A INSPECTION? IT IS JUST REASONABLE NOTICE.
UM, HELEY DOESN'T, SOME LEASES WILL HAVE A CERTAIN DAY LIMIT.
UM, AND EVEN THEN, AS LONG AS THE TENANT IS IN AGREEMENT, REASONABLE IS NORMALLY CONSIDERED DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS.
UM, IT USUALLY AT LEAST A COUPLE DAYS NOTICE SO THAT THEY CAN MAKE SURE.
SO IS THAT EXPLICIT IN YOUR LEASE THAT THE LANDLORD CAN COME IN AT ANY TIME? THAT'S REASONABLE.
DO YOU USE THE WORD REASONABLE IN YOUR LEASE? UM, I CAN FIND IT.
OR, UH, THE LEASE ARE ON EXHIBIT D FIVE.
OKAY, SO QUESTION THE OFF THERE, THERE'S A SECURITY OFFICER, THERE'S ONLY ONE SECURITY OFFICER DOING THREE TO FIVE ROUNDS, A, A DAY, FIVE DAYS A OR SEVEN DAYS A WEEK, RIGHT? THERE'S ONLY ONE OFFICER? NO, NOT ONE OFFICER.
UM, SO THE COMPANY WILL SEND DIFFERENT OFFICERS TO DO THE PATROLS.
SO, BUT LOOKING AT YOUR EXHIBIT, I'M LOOKING AT THE CONTRACT YOU HAVE WITH THE SECURITY, UH, AND YOU'RE, YOU'RE BEING CHARGED 550.
CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHAT IS THAT FOR? BECAUSE IT SHOWS ONE OFFICER, BUT, UH, RIGHT, SO IT'S NOT JUST ONE, IT'S NOT THE SAME OFFICER IS WHAT I'M SAYING.
SO THERE'S ONLY ONE OFFICER CONDUCTING THE INSPECTIONS AT A TIME.
SO YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I WAS WANTING TO CONFIRM.
THERE'S ONE PERSON ON SITE DURING FIVE DAYS WEEK, UH, DURING FIVE ROUNDS.
AND THEN YOU'RE NOT CONTENDING THAT THESE, UH, CRIMES ARE HAPPENING.
WHAT YOU'RE CONTENDING IS THAT YOUR LANDLORD HAS DONE ENOUGH.
UH, IS THERE A REASON THAT HE DID NOT PRESENT HIMSELF TO THE HEARING TODAY? JUST FOR AVAILABILITY.
UM, AND HE WAS AVAILABLE DURING THE COURT MEETING.
UM, I INCLUDED A SENSITIVE AT COUNT AS WELL IN THE EXHIBIT.
UM, THERE WASN'T ANYTHING ELSE TO ADD.
AND THEN DO YOU FEEL, WOULD, HAVE YOU GONE TO THE, UH, LOCATION THAT YOU REPRESENT, UM, THE LOCATION AT HAND AT ISSUE HERE? HAVE YOU BEEN TO THE PREMISES YOURSELF? YEAH, I ATTENDED BOTH OF THE INSPECTIONS ALONG WITH THE CITY OFFICIALS.
WOULD YOU FEEL SAFE, UM, BEING, UH, SOMEONE
[03:35:01]
THAT GOES THERE? YES.I MEAN, I DUNNO, I THINK THERE'S A RESTAURANT.
WOULD YOU FEEL SAFE GOING TO THE RESTAURANT? YEAH, I, I ACTUALLY HAVE ATTENDED THE RESTAURANTS THERE.
UM, A LOT OF THE ISSUES THAT ARE RAISED ARE MORE CONCERNING OFFENSIVE, UM, HAPPEN, HAPPENED ASIDE FROM THE, UM, THE MASSAGE PARLOR INCIDENTS AND PROSTITUTION, WHICH I BELIEVE THAT ONE WAS NOR NORMAL DAYS.
A LOT OF THE INCIDENTS THAT OCCUR AT NIGHT, I PERSONALLY HAVEN'T ATTENDED AT NIGHT.
UM, BUT A LOT OF THE INCIDENTS REPORTED WERE SHOOTINGS OR, UM, ASSAULTS AT NIGHT.
UM, THERE ARE ALSO INCIDENTS WITHIN THOSE WHERE THERE'S, IN THE POLICE REPORT, THE TENANT SECURITY HAS STEPPED IN TO HAVE THOSE INDIVIDUALS REMOVED.
AND I WANNA AT LEAST WANNA KEEP THEM.
IT'S NOTED THAT THEY WERE REMOVED FROM THE PROPERTY AND THE PERSON CAME BACK TO COMMIT THE CRIME.
UM, MS. LEWIS, I, COUPLE QUESTIONS TO ASK.
UM, CAN YOU TELL ME, UM, DO WHEN THE PROPERTY OWNER PROVIDE, UM, GIVEN THE APPLICATION, DO THEY FOLLOW UP ON THE TYPE OF BUSINESS THAT THEY'RE GONNA LET, UM, UM, PROVIDE A LEASE FOR THAT BUILDING? YES.
UM, THERE ARE SOME IMMEDIATE FOLLOW UPS WITH IT AS WELL.
UM, SO IF THEY SIGN A LEASE, UM, SOME OF THEM WILL, YOU KNOW, DEPENDING ON THE STATUS OF WHERE THEY'RE, OF THE BUILDING, IF THEY'RE FORMING A NEW BUSINESS, THEY'LL PROBABLY ASK FOR A COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF FORMATION.
SOME OF THAT STUFF MAY BE PENDING AT THE TIME.
UM, AND THEY MAY HAVE JUST LISTED THEMSELVES INDIVIDUALLY OR ONCE THEY SIGN, THEY'LL GET A COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY AS WELL.
UM, WHICH CAN HAPPEN WITHIN, YOU KNOW, THE DAYS OF THE LEASE.
SO, AND ANY, ANY THAT ARE, UM, SELLING ANY ALCOHOL PURCHASES, THEY'LL GET A COPY OF LIKE TABC