# Calif homeowners battle building code enforcement



## mark handler (Aug 22, 2011)

Calif homeowners battle building code enforcement

The Associated Press

Posted: 08/22/2011 05:15:21 AM PDT

Updated: 08/22/2011 05:15:21 AM PDT

SAN FRANCISCO—Homeowners in Northern California are battling what they call bullying by Contra Costa County building inspectors.

A Superior Court judge recently ruled the county overstepped its authority with baseless building code violations and fines against Clark and Karla Fratus, who were ordered to tear down two vacation homes.

The Contra Costa Times http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_18728961

says the Livermore couple is now suing in San Francisco federal court over the building codes enforcement.

The couple was fined nearly $13,000 in 2005 because downstairs living quarters in the two homes are below the flood plain. The couple says the county told them it had lost the original permits for the two homes and would not accept their copies.

East Contra Costa homeowners score court victory against county code enforcement

By Roman Gokhman

Contra Costa Times

© Copyright 2011, Bay Area News Group

Posted: 08/22/2011 12:00:00 AM PDT

For several years, homeowners on and near this small Delta community have argued loudly that Contra Costa County was overstepping its authority and bullying them with baseless building code violations and fines.

The county has repeatedly dismissed their complaints, but it may find that harder to do after a recent court victory by two homeowners that has prompted the husband and wife to seek "millions" in a federal lawsuit.

Contra Costa County Superior Court Judge Laurel Brady ruled in June that the county incorrectly ordered Clark and Karla Fratus to tear down parts of two vacation homes they own, and she wiped out thousands of dollars in fines against the Livermore couple.

Bolstered by that victory, the two are suing again, saying that they are fighting for all property owners in Contra Costa County. The federal suit, filed in July in U.S. District Court in San Francisco, names county supervisors and several building department officials as defendants. The suit asks for unspecified damages; Karla Fratus says they want the county to pay them millions of dollars.

"The county was demanding we tear down half of our properties," Karla Fratus said. "The fines were bogus."

County building officials fined the couple $12,900 in 2005 for violations with their two homes, across Dutch Slough from Bethel Island. The homes have downstairs living quarters that are below the flood plain, and the building department wanted them removed.

The Fratuses said the county told them it had lost the original permits for the two homes and would not accept their copies.

The fines were attached to their property taxes, Karla Fratus said, and the total has since ballooned to about $21,500 because of additional fines for not paying those taxes.

In her ruling, Brady said documents provided by the Fratuses provided strong evidence that at least one of the homes was built in 1964 -- long before a 1987 law that requires all new residential construction be above the flood plain and that new additions to older structures have prior approval. She said their evidence strongly suggests the same for the second house.

The county failed to provide any proof that the homes were built, or that additions were made to them, after the law took effect, Brady said. She ordered the county to lift the fines against the couple.

"I think we could stand to learn from what the court ruling is; it will be very valuable to us," county building inspections Director Jason Crapo said. "We will try to learn from that and improve our code enforcement practices in the county."

Contra Costa County building department head Catherine Kutsuris said county attorneys are studying Brady's decision and will soon decide whether to appeal it. Attorneys at the Contra Costa County Counsel's Office did not return phone calls seeking comment.

Karla Fratus said she and her husband had no chance of winning an initial appeal with the county because it was heard by the same building inspector who cited them for the violation and his supervisor.

"If you got a speeding ticket and appealed, you would not see the same officer who wrote you up ruling on the appeal," she said. "We should have had an independent adjudicator."

Fratus said she and her husband sued the county last year. The couple went through five attorneys and paid $50,000 in attorney fees before deciding to represent themselves.

County Supervisor Federal Glover, of Pittsburg, said he and his colleagues have been pushing for more stringent code enforcement in East Contra Costa for years.

But a handful of Bethel Island residents have complained that building inspectors have treated them unfairly. Bill Gearhart said some have left town rather than go along with the county's demands.

He said the building department has made decisions arbitrarily.

"The thing that's annoyed people is that sometimes it's backed by reasonable thinking, and sometimes it isn't," Gearhart said.

Last year, the county asked San Jose resident Dan Majhor to remove some farm equipment, a boat and some storage trailers from his property on the island. Majhor appealed a $4,300 fine on grounds that the property could not be seen from the road and lost.

Since then, building inspectors have made more than 10 trips to his property and charged him another $700 for inspections, he said.

"They're bullying me," he said. "They said they could put this (fine) against my property tax."

After hearing about the Fratuses' court victory, Majhor said he has begun to consider his own lawsuit.

Glover, whose district will no longer include Bethel Island after new supervisorial boundaries take effect, said he does not believe the Fratus case will convince others to sue the county.

"If they think something is unfounded, they can (sue)," he said. "I don't think there will be many cases where we are wrong about these things."

m


----------



## Keystone (Aug 22, 2011)

Ouch, if its as it reads, it sounds like a hel_ish three ring circus starting with the building inspectors to the department manager, hearing board, local court & last but certainly not least possibly the local attorney's.


----------



## Mark K (Aug 23, 2011)

The problem with a lack of an independent appeal process is very similar to one of the problems reported in the City of Oakland.  Sounds as if this is not a unique situation.


----------



## Frank (Aug 23, 2011)

The lack of proof that the buildings were constructed after the rules took effect and the refusal to look at the hownowner's copy of the plans that is evidence that they were built before starts pushing it towards Malfeasance.  Getting the order overturned and the fines lifted is the easier part-- It will still be an uphill battle to collect damages.


----------



## incognito (Aug 24, 2011)

Best of luck to the homeowners. What the he-- is wrong with the government entities in California??


----------



## Mark K (Aug 24, 2011)

The government entities in California are subject to sunshine and an active press.  It would surprise me if there were not similar problems in other states.


----------



## rktect 1 (Aug 24, 2011)

I like how they are now fighting for all homeowners..... for millions of dollars.


----------

