From: Laurie alderman <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 5, 2025 11:37 AM
To: Kevin Patterson <[email protected]>
Cc: George Barich ; Susan Harvey <[email protected]>; Laura Sparks <[email protected]>; Sylvia Lemus <[email protected]>; Ben Ford <[email protected]>; John Savage <[email protected]>; Carleton L. Briggs Attorney at Law ; Michael Ceremello Ceremello
Subject: Citizens business comment for August 12th meeting, re: repealing the 2019 code enforcement administrative code changes.
CAUTION:EXTERNAL SENDER
If suspicious, do not click on links, open attachments, or provide credentials and report it by using the "Phish Alert Report" button.
I would like to propose that the city council members insist that on a future agenda item, that the repeal of the Administrative codes implemented in 2019 be repealed (see attached from June, 2019 agenda packet). The current administrative codes implemented in 2019 have in practice been unconstitutional in that it is against the 4th Amendment, in that they are against search and seizure protections.
The "tool" that was implemented in 2019, was that code violations would be treated like traffic tickets. If a code violation is suspected, then the person would be cited. They then could pay the fine or appeal it...but first depositing the fine amount. The relevant code sections are:
1.28.040 Contents of citation.
Each.administrative.citation.shall.contain.the.following.information¿ A¡.Date?.approximate.time?.and.address.or.definite.description.of.the.location.of.the. violation(s)·
B¡.The.code.sections.or.conditions.violated.and.a.description.of.the.violation(s)·
PUBLIC COMMENT
C¡.The.amount.of.the.fine.for.the.violation(s)·
D¡.An.explanation.of.how.the.fine.shall.be.paid.and.the.time.period.by.which.it.shall.be.paid· E¡.Explanation.of.rights.of.appeal?.including.the.time.within.which.such.claimed.violation. may.be.contested.and.the.procedure.for.requesting.a.hearing.to.contest.the.violation· F¡.The.name.and.signature.of.the.enforcement.officer.issuing.the.citation·.and G¡.If.the.violation.is.one.which.is.continuing?.an.order.to.correct.the.violation.and.prohibiting. the.continuation.or.repeated.occurrence.of.the.violation?.including.an.explanation.of.the. consequences.for.failing.to.correct.the.violation.as.ordered¡.The.explanation.of.the. consequences.should.state.that.a.separate.violation.exists.for.each.and.every.calendar.day. any.violation.of.any.provision.of.this.code.is.committed?.continued?.or.permitted¡.(Ord¡.❹❹❷. ° .8.Exh¡.A.(part)?.867❺)¡
1.28.070 Appeal of the administrative citation.
A¡.Time.to.File.an.Appeal¡.Any.recipient.of.an.administrative.citation.may.contest.that.there. was.a.violation.of.this.code.or.that.it.continues.to.exist?.or.that.he.or.she.is.the.responsible. person?.by.completing.a.»request.for.hearing‹ .form.and.returning.it.to.the.city.in. accordance.with.the.instructions.on.the.form.within.fifteen.calendar.days.from.the.date.the. administrative.citation.is.served.or.deemed.to.have.been.served?.together.with.an. advanced.deposit.of.the.total.fines.due¡.Such.»request.for.hearing‹ .forms.shall.be.made. available.at.no.charge.at.City.Hall?.the.city.website?.and―or.through.the.city"s.designated. agent¡.A.failure.to.file.a.timely.»request.for.hearing‹ .form.shall.be.deemed.a.waiver.of.the. right.to.appeal.the.citation.and.to.seek.judicial.review¡.The.requirement.that.the.fine.be. deposited.in.advance.may.be.waived.if.an.advanced.deposit.hardship.waiver.form.has.been. filed.and.approved.in.accordance.with.procedures.adopted.by.the.city.manager¡ B¡.Return.of.Deposit¡.Any.administrative.citation.fine.which.has.been.deposited.shall.be. refunded?.in.whole.or.in.part?.to.the.extent.it.is.determined?.after.a.hearing?.that.the.person. charged.in.the.administrative.citation.was.not.responsible.for.the.violation.or.that.there.was. no.violation.as.charged.in.the.administrative.citation¡ C¡.Hearing.Officer¡.The.city.manager.shall.be.authorized.to.assign.a.hearing.officer.to.any. person.or.persons?.qualified.by.training.or.experience?.whom.the.city.manager.may.appoint. or.who.are.retained.by.contract.to.conduct.such.hearings¡.The.hearing.officer.shall.not.be.a. city.employee.or.an.appointed.city.official¡.(Ord¡.❹❹❷.° .8.Exh¡.A.(part)?.867❺)¡
1.28.080 Hearing procedure.
A¡.No.hearing.to.contest.an.administrative.citation.before.a.hearing.officer.shall.be.held. unless.and.until.a.timely.»request.for.hearing‹ .form.has.been.completed.and.submitted. and.the.fine.has.been.deposited.in.advance.or.waived.as.provided.under.Section.7¡8❹¡6❸6¡ B¡.After.receipt.of.the.»request.for.hearing‹ .and.fine.deposit?.a.hearing.before.the.hearing. officer.shall.be.set.for.a.date.that.is.not.less.than.fifteen.and.not.more.than.ninety.calendar. days.from.the.date.that.such.request.is.filed.in.accordance.with.the.provisions.of.this. section¡.The.person.requesting.the.hearing.and.the.city.may.agree.to.a.hearing.date.that.is. either.sooner.or.later.than.the.time.periods.required.herein.for.a.hearing¡.Unless.advanced. notice.is.otherwise.waived.by.the.requesting.party?.the.person.requesting.the.hearing.shall. be.notified.of.the.time.and.place.set.for.the.hearing.at.least.ten.calendar.days.prior.to.the. date.of.the.hearing¡.The.failure.of.any.recipient.of.an.administrative.citation.to.appear.at.the. scheduled.hearing.shall.constitute.a.forfeiture.of.the.fine.and.be.a.bar.to.judicial.review.of. the.hearing.officer.decision.based.upon.a.failure.to.exhaust.administrative.remedies¡ C¡.The.hearing.officer.shall.only.consider.evidence.that.is.relevant.to.whether.the.violation. occurred?.and.whether.the.responsible.person.has.caused.or.maintained.the.violation.of. this.code.on.the.date(s).specified.in.the.administrative.citation¡.Such.relevant.evidence. includes?.without.limitation?.staff.reports.or.presentations?.oral?.physical?.and.documentary. evidence.regarding.the.alleged.violation(s)?.and.proposed.method.of.abatement?.if.any¡ D¡.The.hearing.is.intended.to.be.informal.in.nature¡.Formal.rules.of.evidence.and.discovery. do.not.apply¡.The.city.manager.may?.from.time.to.time?.adopt.procedures.for.the.format.and. proceedings.of.the.administrative.hearing¡.The.person.contesting.the.administrative. citation.shall.be.given.the.opportunity.to.testify.and.present.witnesses.and.evidence. concerning.the.administrative.citation¡.The.city.shall.have.the.burden.of.proof.by. preponderance.of.the.evidence.to.establish.that.the.responsible.person.committed.the. violation.specified.in.the.administrative.citation¡
E¡.Each.witness?.prior.to.providing.oral.testimony?.shall.be.sworn.by.the.hearing.officer.or. his.or.her.designee¡.Each.party.shall.have.the.opportunity.to.cross‗examine.witnesses.and. present.evidence.in.support.of.the.party"s.cause¡
F¡.The.administrative.citation.and.any.additional.document.submitted.by.the.issuing. officer―employee.shall.constitute.prima.facie.evidence.of.the.respective.facts.contained.in. those.documents¡.Formal.rules.of.evidence.shall.not.apply¡ This code is unconstitutional in that it is seizure of assets without due process. A person is guilty of a violation first if it is suspected by the code officer or any employee of the City. The person then has two routes to go, both of which seizes the person's property (money). They can pay the fine and be done with it. Or they can appeal the "ticket"... but they still have to deposit the full amount of the fine to appeal what could be a months long appeal. Either way, the person has to pay out. Most people are not going to appeal but rather just pay the "ticket". This makes a person guilty of the violation, no matter what....issues such as human habitation of a vehicle are subjective in nature, and would need an appeal to prove that for instance, it was a dog in an RV when the code officer insists it was a person habituating a vehicle.
Repealing the 2019 Administrative code changes would return the hearings back to in front of the city council. Before 2019, there was only one code enforcement case in 2015 that made it before the council in a decade to my knowledge. The rest were handled by city staff and open communication with the Community Development department.
I am writing this as a citizen, not as the paralegal of Mr. Briggs. It is my idea and research, with no urging by Mr. Briggs to do so. It has been claimed by Mr. Smith that I am under orders from Attorney Briggs to disrupt or be the spokesperson for him according to Mr.
Smith. Here is when Mr. Smith accused me of such at the May 28th Zoom hearing... smith goes after carleton .mp4
smith goes after carleton .mp4
Mr. Smith was then quickly replaced by Mr. Ngo of Redwood Public Law. I speak to the city council as a 53 year resident and citizen of Cotati, nothing else.
Sincerely, Laurie Alderman