STN
STRAIGHT TALK NEWS

         





News and Legal Resources for Property Owners
News Alert! Thanks to Carrick lawsuit, red tags expunged. Learn how to get YOUR red tag expunged. For more info: email

News Alert! Aptos family wins lawsuit against County of Santa Cruz.

Site is under construction

Property Rights in Santa Cruz County

Experiencing property rights issues with the County of Santa Cruz? You are not alone. Recent court victories have vindicated property owners abused by County officials in the Planning Department and on the Board of Supervisors.

Read current and pending court cases in the County of Santa Cruz. Read about lawsuits against Supervisors Ellen Pirie, Neil Coonerty, Jan Beautz, Tony Campos, Mark Stone, John Leopold and now ex-Planning Director, Tom Burn, et al. 

Read ad placed by Alliance for Change, a property rights advocacy group. 

Resources: No Trespassing Signs      CA Building Codes      Uniform Housing Codes      Exemptions from Permits      Excessive Fees Relief  

News

January 23, 2011 

County Codes Not Legal, Notices of Violations Illegal and Invalid

Tamara Rice, County Counsel, confessed to Judge John Jeffrey Almquist, and the State of California has confirmed, that county codes are not legal. Building codes have not been certified by the State Building Standards Commission and none have been published as required by law. The County does not have the authority to restrict or put conditions or notices of violations on your property. Ordinances cannot be made up on a whim and applied selectively as has been done for years. 

Code enforcement is not certified or trained and neglects to bring licensed building officials or engineers from Public Works to properties under investigation. Thus, their notice documentations are null, void and invalid. 

Since 1950, Santa Cruz County has denied due process for its citizens, property and land owners. Current "process" involves what is commonly known the Kangaroo Kourt, a capricious Planning Department construct manned by County staff, directors, managers, supervisors, and code compliance employees. In other words, the same body of officials in charge of accusing is in charge of mediating. Foxes guarding the henhouse. 

One remedy is to request in writing a "legal due process hearing by a non-governmental person experienced and licensed in the area at issue". Unfortunately, at this time, your request will be ignored. The County of Santa Cruz lacks a Building or Housing Board of Appeals. The State of California requires licensed non-governmental citizens acting without a fee income bias, to handle appeals. 

Local architect, Cove Britton, filed a lawsuit in an effort to compel the county to "compel the Respondents (County of Santa Cruz) to reconstitute the County's Building and Fire Code Appeals Board with persons having the requisite qualifications mandated by California statutory law and allow such reconstituted Board to do its State mandated job without inappropriate interference".

November 12, 2010

County Staff Unqualified, Uncertified

California Civil Code Section 43.99 requires planning and code enforcement representatives to be state certified and trained. State law requires knowledge. Current electeds continue to International Council of Building Officials (ICBO) and International Code Council (ICC) state certification mandates since the 1970s. Current staff who do not meet requirements should be removed from their current positions to avoid illegal interaction with the public. 

Present and past Planning Directors have not met minimum standards for their positions. It should come as no surprise then that thousands of Santa Cruz County residents have endured false violations on their properties due to mishandling by unqualified County staff. 

November 12, 2010

Federal Court Approves In Limine Motion 

Plaintiff's In Limine motion approved. against County of Santa Cruz Board of Supervisors and Tom Burns, ex-Planning Director. Complaint details arbitrary, capricious, malicious acts in scheme to extort and intimidate property owners.  Read the order. 

October 7, 2010

County's False Fee System

Santa Cruz County frequently uses "internal memorandum" and "internal penalty fee charts" devised by planning staff without public input or legal approval. They then use these internal documents against selected property owners.

A lawsuit is about to be filed against County officials by an Aptos couple. Read the order

September 15, 2010

Aptos Couple's Lawsuit

Progress is being made in the Aptos couple case against defendants Ellen Pirie, Tom Burns, et al. This case has exposed a multi-department malfeasance in denying proscribed property rights protections to Santa Cruz County citizens. The latest filing further exposes untruths and downright malicious acts by County officials. Defendants have stolen or slandered title and rights through intimidation and unlawful red tags nearing tens of millions of dollars from property owners. Read case documents. 

An official's failure to act was deliberately indifferent causing injury and damages "when supervisors knew about subordinate's retaliatory conduct and did little to stop it" - see Blair v City of Pomona and Kennedy v City of Ridgefield. From CF Norton v Town of Islip - "failure to prevent subordinate from inappropriately pursuing zoning violations can be deliberate indifference". 

August 9, 2010

Court Filing Outlines Arbitrary and Capricious Practices

A reconsideration filing has been made which outlines malicious behavior on the part of County of Santa Cruz staff, appointees in the Planning Department. Tom Burns and Mark Deming have taken "early retirement". Could their jumping ship have something to do with pending lawsuits? 

Read court document. 

June 28, 2010

Paul Carrick and Cove Britton 

New court filings by Paul Carrick and Cove Britton. These citizens are standing up for property owners in Santa Cruz County. Loss of property rights affects everyone whether home owner or renter. Our Board or Supervisors, their County Administrative Officer Susan Mauriello and County Counsel have failed to uphold State and Federal law.

May 19, 2010

California Pension Fund Asks State for Additional $600 Million

It has long been held that the Planning Department views itself as a revenue generating machine. Read about pension woes. 

April 29, 2010

Cove Britton v County of Santa Cruz - Rescheduled

Cove's lawsuit relates to the concealment, by elected and appointed County officials, of an independent board for citizens to gain relief from wrongful decisions and excessive fees by the County. 

April 2, 2010

New Court Action Against Ellen Pirie, Neil Coonerty, Tony Campos, Mark Stone, John Leopold, Jan Beautz, Board of Supervisors, Ex-Planning Director Tom Burns

Scheme to defraud and extort from one class of citizens - property and land owners. Federal Court indicates it will issue an order before May 14, 2010 denying County of Santa Cruz and County Counsel, motion to dismiss September trial. The Court heard arguments today and will uphold constitutional deprivations case and right to a trial in September. County of Santa Cruz Board of Supervisors lack of mandatory duties to extort from property owners and 48-year concealment of an independent appeals board as required by State law. 

Read the newly filed Opposition Motion

Aptos couple previous filings and won motions. 

November 13, 2009

Cove Britton v County of Santa Cruz

A new lawsuit has been filed by architect Cove Britton against the County for concealing State appeal board rights and gatekeeping appeals. Cove has spoken at Board of Supervisor meetings and written numerous letters in an effort to restructure bad planning policy and to protect citizens from illegal ordinances and code compliance abuses. 

November 16, 2009

Tom Burns Quits

Tom Burns, uncertified Planning Director, leaves a department with a 56% budget shortfall. Taxpayers to pick up $4,513,797.00? Planning Department Budget. 

September 15, 2009

Lawsuits Against County 

Multiple lawsuits about to hit the County of Santa Cruz, Planning Director Tom Burns, Planning staff and Board of Supervisors. 

September 3, 2009

Building, Accessibility and Fire Code Appeals Board

County calls for elimination of Appeals Board

County shuts down Appeals Board

Cove Britton takes County to court

Board of Appeals California Code

"Under the police power granted by the Constitution, counties and cities have plenary authority to govern, subject only to the limitation that they exercise this power within their territorial limits and subordinate to state law." - Judge D. F., Superior Court, Appellate Opinion, denies cities and counties from making local ordinances not in compliance with State, Federal or Constitutional law. 

See precedent setting Monell case, Briseno Case and Leslie case - none of which can be overturned by County of Santa Cruz. An appellate court case ruled, "Local governments must adopt the statewide Uniform Building Code (UBC) adopted by the California Building Standards Commission (CBSC) pursuant to State law. They do not enact building codes pursuant to the constitutional grant of police powers."

In Supreme Court case Big Creek Lumber v Santa Cruz County, the Supreme Court finds that local ordinances are preempted by higher State laws occupying the field and with express intent. The County of Santa Cruz Board of Supervisors cannot ignore State mandated independent appeals boards for citizens and keep invalid ordinances restricting the powers of the appeals boards. See CBSC B101 and CBC 108.8

According to Government Code 1099 and precedent on conflict of interest California case law prohibits any person from holding two or more incompatible offices simultaneously. The law provides that a person holding incompatible offices is deemed to have vacated the first office at the moment she accepts the second office.  People ex rel Chapman v. Rapsey, 16 Cal. 2d 636, 644 (1940) (Holding that the offices of City Judge of the City of San Bruno and City Attorney of San Bruno are incompatible).

Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors Ellen Pirie, Neil Coonerty, Tony Campos, Mark Stone and John Leopold defied State and Local ordinances by appointing themselves as Appeal Board commissioners. The Supervisors illegal administrative construct was set up to obstruct and deny citizens rights. Lawsuits pending.

The State of California does not allow Planning Departments to hold administrative contained hearings if the citizens' appeals regard any of the State Building Standards Codes and Evidence Code 669.5  which states that "the county bears the burden of proof that an ordinance is necessary. The majority of county ordinances are either not necessary or are invalid and preempted by State and Federal laws or higher court opinions and rulings. A Building and Fire Code Appeals Board is required by State mandate to follow the California Building Standards Codes. The Count set up an appeals board for just three months this year then unlawfully disbanded it. The City of Santa Cruz, on the other hand, understands State laws for independent due process as they constituted a legally functioning Building Appeals Board when required by State. 

California Health and Safety Code Section 17960: "The building department of every city or county shall enforce within its jurisdicion all the provisions published int he State Building Standards Code".

County of Santa Cruz monthly administrative hearing calendars continue to deny due process and adherence to State codes. 99% of appeals requested regard the California Building Standards Code

The County setup an appeals board for three months this year (not according to CBSCrules that are mandatory per the State and Housing and Community Development Board) and then unlawfully disbanded it. The City of Santa Cruz understands the State laws for independent due process as they constituted a legally functioning Building Appeals Board when required by the State. Also pertinent is the City of Santa Cruz certification and ongoing credits budgeting document.

June 27, 2009

KSBW Channel 8 News on "Appealgate" and Trabing Fire

See Red Tape Stands in Way of Rebuilding for Trabing Fire Victims.

Tom Burns untruthful - states that there have been no valid appeals in 8 years. Not so. Numerous citizens have applied for appeals but were either ignored or led through the Planning Department's malicious Kangaroo Court. Property owners in all 5 districts have encountered denials, obstruction, errors and omissions. Citizen's right to due process have been denied for years. See Ellen Pirie appointee document. Court opinions are routinely ignored. 

Building Appeals Board establishment documents and signatures from 1976.

Building Appeals Board Information

Building Appeals Board Overview

California Health & Safety Code Section 17920.5 Enacted in 1961

Board of Supervisors, Tony Campos 2001 False Building Appeals Board Report

2002 Ellen Pirie Building Appeals Board "Appointment" 

Building Appeals Board and Trabing Fire Victims Problems with Planning Department

KSBW Video on Building Appeals Board and Trabing Fire Victims

Santa Cruz County Land Grab - Building Appeals Board Appointee Speaks

False Building Appeals Board "Reports" for years 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004 report not created, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, signed by County of Santa Cruz Board of Supervisors - Tony Campos, Ellen Pirie, Mardi Wormhoudt, Mark Stone, Jan Beautz and Neil Coonerty. 

Board of Supervisors Commission Vacancy Lists Missing Building Appeals Board in 2004 and 2007.

Dan Bronson's letter to Board of Supervisors

County Counsel's Response

June 21, 2009

In 2008 local government watchdogs alerted readers to outdated and missing ordinances on the County website. Not surprisingly one of the sections missing was local ordinance 12.10.070 which relates to permit exemptions. 

Failure of Mandatory Duties

Government Code 815.6 (formerly 815.4) holds County of Santa Cruz Board of Supervisors liable for failure of mandatory duties. 

Aptos Family Lawsuit names Board of Supervisors, County Planning Department and County of Santa Cruz as defendants. 

November 20, 2007 Board of Supervisors agenda item 54 completely deletes California Building Code 108.8 verbiage relating to Appeals Board in effort to conceal citizen rights to an independent housing or local board of appeals. County action conflicts with State of California Building Standards Commission code B101-B101.4.2

Citizen protest in 2008 (see November 25, 2008 Board of Supervisors meeting) lead to Board of Supervisor deletion of CBC 108.8 a second time. See November 25, 2008 Board of Supervisors meeting agenda item 39.1. Why the double deletion? Resulting action became county ordinance #5024 still awaiting codification. Interesting wording: 

(b) Administrative Amendment - Appeals Board. Section 108.8 of the 2007 California Building Code.....all relating to the "Appeals Board" are deleted.

Synopsis of codes violated 

June 16, 2009

Trabing Fire Victim, Travis Smith, spoke to the Board of Supervisors this morning about California Code 1099. The board ignored him. 

June 13, 2009

On June 9 County of Santa Cruz Board of Supervisors adopted ordinance amendments to agenda item 12 electing themselves commissioners of the local appeals board against advice of County Counsel Dana McRae. McRae advises even though the appeals board had been deleted by the Board of Supervisors on November 20, 2007 see ordinances 4894, 4893 to Title 12

Monte Sereno Family Prevails

Padgett Lawsuit - Darla and Joe Padgett and the City of Monte Sereno have been engaged in various lawsuits stemming from incidents relating to the Padgett's building their home in 1999. The city began with allegations of code violations and a too tall 6' wooden fence and the Padgett's claim, later proved, that a city employee had written them a threatening letter along with numerous other attempts by city officials to intimidate the family. September 2007, Monte Sereno's City Manager, Brian Loventhal, was found to have destroyed evidence and in June 2009 a jury found Mayor Curtis Wright violated the couple's civil rights and awarded the Padgetts $1 in compensatory damages, $200,000 in punitive damages and more than $4 million in attorney's fees - more than the City's entire annual budget. 

As more Santa Cruz County residents file suit against the County, Board of Supervisors and Planning Department, the county is going to find its coffers similarly affected. 

County Violates Permit Streamlining Act. June 24, 2008 Agenda Item 44






WATCH THE COUNTY AX AND ENTRAP THE BUILDING AND FIRE CODE BOARD OF APPEALS ON DVD COPIES. The legal basis claimed is flawed. The Supervisors established the appeals board, after concealing it for 48 years (since 1961), and established it under Health & Safety Code 17920.5 on November 25, 2008 - Agenda Item 39.1 in a 5:0 vote.  They appointed members to the appeals board on January 27, 2009 and then disbanded them using the same code 17920.5 on June 9, 2009.  You cannot disband an existing board correctly following State codes for their authority amongst major illegal interference from the County, especially Supervisors Ellen Pirie, Neil Coonerty, Director -Tom Burns, Ass't Director - David Lee, Chris Cheledon, Dana McRae and Rahn Garcia, County Counsel.  Absurd and unlawful.  Supervisor meetings and the Board of Appeals Commission DVD copies can be purchased for $20 at Community TV. They are located at 816 Pacific Ave., Santa Cruz, CA 95060, 831.425 .8848.

June 2nd the Supervisors Pirie and Leopold in a 5:0 vote axed the appeals board and on June 9th will do the final passage to deny due process to the citizens of Santa Cruz County.  Read more.

SUSAN MAURIELLO AND DANA McRAE AXE APPEALS BOARD WITH ELLEN PIRIE SECONDING THE MOTION BY LEOPOLD 
AND COUNTY COUNSEL
 RAHN GARCIA CITING MISINTERPRETATION OF LAW AND IGNORING INTENT. 
June 2, 2009 -  With complete disregard for higher California Building Code statute 108.8 the County unlawfully disbanded the new born Building and Fire Code Board of Appeals Commission misusing Health & Safety Code 17920.5 per agenda item 73.1. The County cannot disband a standing appeals board commission using this general statute.  CBC 108.8 has the force of law and is state mandated to be uniformly used by each county. Read Dan Bronson, Chair of BAFCAB, speech transcript of the true events that were orchestrated against BAFCAB. Read more.

TOM BURNS, DIRECTOR, ALLEGEDLY ASSAULTS DISABLE VINCE LO FRANCO AFTER PROTEST SPEECH AT PUBLIC BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MEETING TODAY.  SHERIFF CALLED AND CHARGES PRESSED. Sheriffs claim camera in hallway when there is no such surveillance camera in existance.  
July 1, 2009- No surveillance cameras confirmed in MidCounty Post article by Linda Friday. Perhaps LoFranco is correct about who assaulted who?  Read article.
June 27, 2009 - Update:  On
 KSCO interview today a party was told that another person stated Tom Burns allegedly assaulted him at a redevelopment agency meeting.
June 2, 2009 -  Does Tom Burns, uncertified, incompetent and known hot headed director of the Planning Dept., use physical abuse not just due process and
 redtag abuse on citizens?  Is the rumor true that Tom Burns and Jennifer Hutchinson are having an affair? Read more.


COUNTY CAO, SUPERVISORS COONERTY AND PIRIE ATTEMPTING TO GUT BUILDING APPEALS BOARD. COUNTY COUNSEL INCREASING THEIR LIABILITIES.  SUPERVISORS NOT QUALIFID.  SEE NEW AGENDA ITEM 73 AND 73.1 for public Board of Supervisor meeting on Tuesday, June 2, 2009, 9AM
May 29, 2009 - Read agenda #73.1 that places blame on the Building and Fire Code Board of Appeals Commission for the county's own errors and omissions and interference at the Commission meetings. Read more.

NEW YOUTUBE: SANTA CRUZ COUNTY CORRUPTION  
"
Appealgate" knowledge is spreading throughout the State.

May 26, 2009 - The youtube exposes 33 years of hiding the citizen appeals board by the Board of Supervisors, Tom Burns' Planning Dept. and County Counsel led by CAO, Susan Mauriello.  Watch this important interview of the new Chair of the Building and Fire Code Board of Appeals Commission, Dan Bronson.  Read more.


COUNTY SUPERVISORS BREACH STATE REQUIREMENTS OF COUNTY STRUCTURE AND MANDATES TO FOLLOW STATE LAWS AND STATE CONSTITUTION Read the State structure and authority over Santa Cruz County.

California Government Code Establishes the Board of Supervisors. It is mandatory for BOS to respect State higher laws. Read Government Codes that hold Supervisors for neglect to perform duties or if they violate any law or fraudulently or corruptly perform any duty. 

Bureaucrats Scraping for Power -new website reveals inside communications exposing alleged fraud practices, unlawful red tape and redtags by uncertified and untrained County officials and staff.

May 19, 2009 - 
The Mulcahy appeal filed by prominent architect, Cove Britton, has been removed due to its written vagueness and invalid claims made by Jennifer Hutchinson and Sean Livingston, building inspectors. HCDand ICC have oversight for wrongful use of inspector licenses.  Read more.  

END THE ALLEGED ABUSIVE WHIMS AND DENIAL OF DUE PROCESS RIGHTS BY UNCERTIFIED COUNTY PERSONNEL 
The uncertified county staff are: Tom Burns, David Lee, Mark Deming, Dave Laughlin, Ken Hart, Don Bussey, Kevin Fitzpatrick, Jacob Rodriquez, Laura Madrigal, Kathleen Salazar, Paia Levine, Alice Daly, Dave Keyon, Victorial Rodriquez, Robin Bolster, Jessica DeGrassi,Antoinella Gentele, Matt Johnston, Glenda Hill, George Gigarjian,Stephania Francone and other code compliance personnel, and staff permit planners. Jennifer Hutchinson was the uncertified building official until certified October 11, 2008, after five months of citizen protests. The City of Santa Cruz understands staff must be certified and trained. Read more.
   
Read the Aptos Times potent article about this second meeting.

Important court cases upholding Supervisors and County cannot inflict unlawful ordinances on citizens as they breach higher laws:
Briseno v. City of Santa Ana
Leslie v Superior Court

Being charged excessive fees? 
Request an appeal.  See court cases against excessive fees. 
 
Also,
 see Court Cases tab.

Planning Dept. Organizational Chart is dysfunctional and 2009 Budget 60% Loss (see page three for $5 million  -  a 60% loss!)

STOP COUNTY PURSUIT OF COLLECTIVISM 

SEE CITIZEN COURT CASES v COUNTY of SANTA CRUZ

PRECEDENT COURT CASES PROTECT DUE PROCESS RIGHTS FOR PROPERTY OWNERS. 
COUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ SUPERVISORS, CAO, PLANNING DEPT. AND COUNTY COUNSEL OPERATE WITH ARBITRARY AND CAPRICIOUS UNLAWFUL TREATMENT.  Ignore Supreme Court case law, Constitutions, Federal and State higher laws, California Building Codes and personnel uncertified and untrained in their plan to coerce Collectivism.  Read the Attorney General's Opinions of other local governments caught for violating the law and read a precedent setting case, Leslie v. Superior Court , finding a  county was not following State law.  Santa Cruz County is doing the same.  Also, read this Grand Jury report showing county Supervisors and others hand dipping control into the planning department.  Notice that this June 28, 2007, Tom Burns document agenda item #28 that the Board of Supervisors went along with does not even mention an independent due process appeals board as per CBC 108.8 that is required by State codes that supercede local ordinances and the Health & Safety Codes. Read the document that link has been shut off by the county on their website.  We ran copies of all pertinent documents over a year ago, to protect them for all citizens, as the county begins to shred evidence as the uncovering of the web tightens about their "alleged" corrupt schemes.

CITIZENS STRIKE BACK.
April 25, 2009 - The Board of Supervisors, CAO, County Counsel, and Planning Dept. mismanaged by  uncertified director, Tom Burns, are unlawfully continuing to deny property owners due process and continuing again to ignore higher laws.  Here is the Administrative Hearing Calendar for Code Compliance for April 2009.  Why are these property owners still being herded through an internal planning department personnel hearing rather than the Building and Fire Code Board of Appeals Commission?  See Hot News - 2009 for Administrative Hearing Calendars for November 2007 to July 2009.  All of these citizens were deprived their State and Federal Constitutional rights to due process with an independent appeals board that is required by State laws. Tom Burns business model does not work. Look at his actual and proposed budgets.  He costs the county multi-millions of dollars each year being in the red.  See page 28-1 (3 of 33) for 2005- 2008 chart.


FIRST BUILDING APPEALS BOARD MEETING STUNS COUNTY.
March 16, 2009 - Citizens prevail over County's corrupt practices. Tom Burns reigned in as unqualified and unlawful. See the bylaws Burns tried to push onto the appeals board but were rejected as they do not reflect State mandated laws. 
Read more.

COUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ VIOLATES CITIZENS' RIGHTS FOR 
33 YEARS CONCEALING APPEALS BOARDS.

On March 16, 2009, at 7PM, 5th Floor of County Building, will
be the first ever legally held
 Building and Fire Code Appeals Board meeting open to the public.  Please attend and record the meeting.Read more. 

INVESTIGATION REVEALS HUGE SCANDALS: 

ELLEN
 PIRIE AND TERRY HANCOCK NEPOTISM AND "APPEALGATE" SERIOUSLY VIOLATE STATE, FEDERAL CODES/ETHICS and CONSTITUTIONS.   

Appealgate - the County has hidden the appeals boards obstructing property owners due process civil rights for 33 years - yes - since 1976 - see establishment documents.  Read more.

County Snitch System is Discriminatory. China and the KGB operate with snitches.
Have they also violated Government
 Code  1027 for their unlawful red tag "snitch" complaint system?  Government Code 1027 was effective until March 24, 2008, repealed by SB 1322.  This code is usable for county mistreatment of citizens up until this date due to the "snitch system" Tom Burns, Ellen Pirie, Ken Hart impose.

THE STATE INTERNATIONAL CODE COUNCIL (ICC) REQUIRES CERTIFICATION OF BUILDING OFFICIALS, BUILDING INSPECTORS AND PLAN EXAMINERS.  TRAINING, EXAMS AND CERTIFICATION EXIST FOR CODE ENFORCEMENT INSPECTORS/OFFICERS.   SANTA CRUZ PERSONNEL ARE NOT CERTIFIED BY ICC OR CACEO AS OFFERED.  NEGLIGENT HIRING AND TRAINING ADDS TO CITIZENS CONSTITUTIONAL DEPRIVATIONS.

January 13, 2009

January 13, 2009 - Mike McDougall, Personnel Manager and Laurie Hill, Commission Staff,  mislead and pulled a fast one on the Civil Service Commission with nameless certification titles of expired or transferred personnel as current certified building inspector employees.  Jack Gordon, Chair of the Commission, Judy Jones, Robert Taren, Olivia Madrigal did not thoroughly review.  The public requested at the last and current meeting that all planning dept. staff be audited for state mandated certification.  McDougall and Hill contained their information to nameless individuals for only inspectors, disregarding a request for the entire dept. The department staff names are known and researched with the ICC in charge of licensing - they are not certified except for two people kept under Tom Burns'micro-management, Jennifer Hutchinson certified October 11, 2008 and Sean Livingston, Building Inspector.  Tom Burns remains uncertified which is required prior to hiring per Health & Safety code 18949.25 and 19870 for code enforcement and construction/building inspectors/officials.   City of Santa Cruz understands staff need to be certified and trained.  Read City of Santa Cruz budget meeting for certification and training per State law.

READ REST OF HOME PAGE:
 INVESTIGATION REVEALS HUGE SCANDALS, VIOLATION OF STATE, FEDERAL AND CONSTITUTIONAL LAWS, COVERUP AND NONCERTIFICATION OF PERSONNEL REQUIRED BY LAW.
Documents by county not binding or valid by uncertified and untrained staff ignoring State, Federal, Constitutional law and State mandated building standards and codes.
TO READ MORE OF HOME PAGE CLICK BELOW:
 CLICK HERE.


Disclaimer:   StraightTalkNews.org, in its entirety, is a news, information and legal reference site to educate, inform and offer opinion based upon experience, interpretation, and others experiences or comments or audio speeches, and is not meant to contain any libelous or defamatory statements.  The content is based on truth and fact, as of their writing or receipt, which is an absolute defense to defamation.  Long v. Vertical Tech., Inc., 113 n. C. App. 598, 603, 439 S.E. 2d 797, 801 (N.C. App. 1994); N.C. Gen. Stat. S15-168 (2007).  

Editorial, articles, letters, graphs, charts, links, stories, pdf files, court documents, emails and any other message, documents or content are included in this disclaimer. 

If corrections need to be made, please submit in writing retraction supportive facts and a retraction will be made within a reasonable time, if determined to be necessary.  Note that there is a three week statute of limitations time limit to request retractions.  After three weeks there is no legal standing for change requests for newspapers.



Straight Talk News is an independent news and information site which receives editorial and commentary contributions and case filings from citizens and parties concerned about property and privacy rights.  
Disclaimer.

Web Hosting Companies