Actions pertaining to Fresno Code Enforcement case number E22-08009, concerning 4594 E. Grant Ave., and the five (5) Administrative Citations issued November 5, 2025, December 15, 2025, January 22, 2026, June 17, 2026, and July 23, 2026: 1. HEARING on the five (5) Administrative Citations. 2. Take one of the following actions: 1) CONFIRM the Administrative Citations issued November 5, 2025, December 15, 2025, January 22, 2026, June 17, 2026, and July 23, 2026; and ORDER Appellant to repair/correct the confirmed violations within thirty days; OR 2) CONFIRM certain Administrative Citations but DISMISS others and ORDER Appellant to repair/correct the confirmed violations within thirty days; OR 3) DISMISS the Administrative Citations issued November 5, 2025, December 15, 2025, January 22, 2026, June 17, 2026 and July 23, 2026.

REPORT TO THE BUILDING STANDARDS APPEALS BOARD November 17, 2026 FROM: ANDREW JANZ, City Attorney Office of the City Attorney BY: CHRISTINA C. PIÑA, Deputy City Attorney Office of the City Attorney SUBJECT ..Title Actions pertaining to Fresno Code Enforcement case number E22-08009, concerning 4594 E. Grant Ave., and the five (5) Administrative Citations issued November 5, 2025, December 15, 2025, January 22, 2026, June 17, 2026, and July 23, 2026: HEARING on the five (5) Administrative Citations. Take one of the following actions: CONFIRM the Administrative Citations issued November 5, 2025, December 15, 2025, January 22, 2026, June 17, 2026, and July 23, 2026; and ORDER Appellant to repair/correct the confirmed violations within thirty days; OR CONFIRM certain Administrative Citations but DISMISS others and ORDER Appellant to repair/correct the confirmed violations within thirty days; OR DISMISS the Administrative Citations issued November 5, 2025, December 15, 2025, January 22, 2026, June 17, 2026 and July 23, 2026. ...Body RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends option (1): After holding the appeal hearing, the Building Standards Appeals Board (BSAB) CONFIRM the Administrative Citations issued November 5, 2025, December 15, 2025, January 22, 2026, June 17, 2026, and July 23, 2026, and ORDER Appellants to repair the remaining violations within thirty days, pursuant to FMC 1-409(f). EXECUTIVE SUMMARY On August 17, 2022, case E22-08009 was opened due to a complaint from the tenant there was structural damage to the foundation of the rental home. (Appeal Packet, pg. 3) An inspection was conducted the next day by Community Revitalization Specialist Carlos Rubio (Inspector Rubio) who confirmed cracks in the stucco and chimney showed cracks along the sides near the roof. (Appeal Packet, pg. 8) After numerous inspections, multiple Notice and Orders were issued but the damaged chimney was never repaired or removed. The property owner applied for a permit to remove the chimney on October 14, 2024. Additional information was requested by the Planning and Development Department which was never received. The permit expired on July 1, 2025. After three citations were issued, the chimney was removed without a permit. Two additional citations were issued for not correcting the violation of repairing or removing the chimney with a valid permit. BACKGROUND The BSAB was established by Resolution number 2025-149 passed May 22, 2025, in order to hear various appeals, including Code Enforcement appeals related to building standards under FMC Chapter 11, Articles 3 and 4. To perform this duty, the BSAB must review the Appeal Form received by the appellant, any other information provided by the appellant, the staff report, and all attachments. Pursuant to FMC section 1-408, the scope of the hearing “shall be limited to the order, citation, decision, or determination being appealed, the grounds for relief raised in the notice of appeal, and any specific requirements of this Code.” (FMC § 1-408(e).) The BSAB may admit any relevant evidence, “if it is the type of evidence on which responsible persons are accustomed to relay on in the conduct of serious affairs,” and “hearsay evidence may be used for the purpose of supplementing or explaining any direct evidence but shall not be sufficient in itself to support a finding unless it would be admissible over objection in civil actions.” (FMC § 1-408(d)(3).) The City has the burden of proof and production of evidence, and the burden of proof shall be preponderance of the evidence. (FMC § 1-408(f).) Preponderance of the evidence means the evidence shows a fact is more likely true than not true, or over a 50% probability. If the BSAB finds that any of the violations set forth in the appealed notice or citation is continuing and remains as of the time of the hearing, the determination must include an order for the Appellant to correct the violations within thirty days, and a progress hearing must be set to occur thirty to sixty days later. (FMC § 1-409(f).) Summary of Facts On August 17, 2022, case E22-08009 was opened due to a complaint from the tenant there was structural damage to the foundation of the rental home. (Appeal Packet, pg. 3) An inspection was conducted the next day by Community Revitalization Specialist Carlos Rubio (Inspector Rubio) who confirmed cracks in the stucco and chimney showed cracks along the sides near the roof. (Appeal Packet, pg. 8) On November 3, 2023, Inspector Rubio met with tenant who allowed inspection of the property. 7 housing violations were found. The fireplace chimney was leaning away from the dwelling, light can be seen through the space between the chimney and the dwelling. (Appeal Packet, pg. 9-10) A Notice of Violation was issued on December 4, 2023, including the chimney violation with notice to repair/remove the chimney and to obtain all required permits and inspections. (Appeal Packet, pg. 55) On January 17, 2024, Inspector Rubio met with tenant who allowed inspection of the property. Confirmed 3 of the 7 housing violations remained. The fireplace chimney remains leaning with gap between dwelling and chimney. (Appeal Packet, pg. 13) On September 13, 2024, the tenant allowed Inspector Patterson to conduct a re-inspection. Confirmed the chimney is still damaged (leaning), water heater not properly secured and detached garage converted to living space without plans/permits. A Notice and Order was issued on September 18, 2024. (Appeal Packet, pg. 15, 64) On October 16, 2024, the tenant allowed Inspector Patterson to conduct a follow up inspection. The garage was returned to garage usage but violations of damaged chimney and water heater remain. (Appeal Packet, pg. 18) On November 7, 2024, the tenant allowed Inspector Ruelas to conduct a follow up inspection. The chimney remains leaning and water heater support straps are still missing. (Appeal Packet, pg. 19) On December 17, 2024, Inspector Ruelas conducted a permit inquiry and found application B24-14169 was submitted on October 14, 2024, to “remove chimney”, additional information requested on October 16, 2024, “Comment: Please provide additional clarification regarding the removal of the chimney. Will this be complete removal of the chimney brick, with new framing and sheetrock or will the chimney remain and be filled in?” and on January 2, 2025 “A plan set for the framing and structural will be required for the alteration. Please upload a plan set to B24-14169 for review.” (Appeal Packet, pg. 22, 270) On June 3, 2025, Inspector Ruelas conducted a reinspection and found the damaged chimney is leaning away from the house and cracks in stucco on same side of the house. (Appeal Packet, pg. 27) On July 10, 2025, a Notice and Order was issued and posted by Inspector Ruelas listing the following violations: chimney/flue is damaged (leaning), exterior wall stucco is cracking damaged, water heater not properly secured, and permit expired. The deadline to correct violations was 07/28/25. (Appeal Packet, pg. 76) Inspections were conducted on July 29, 2025, August 14, 2025, September 15, 2025, October 1, 2025, and October 30, 2025. At each inspection, Inspector Ruelas found the chimney remained damaged/leaning and no active permit on file. (Appeal Packet, pg. 33, 34, 38, 40) On November 5, 2025, the First Administrative Citation was issued for failure to comply with the Notice and Order dated July 10, 2025. (Appeal Packet, pg. 88) On December 15, 2025, the Second Administrative Citation was issued for failure to comply with the Notice and Order dated July 10, 2025, after an inspection was conducted and the chimney remained damaged and leaning. There were no updates to the permit application after additional information was requested on January 2, 2025. (Appeal Packet, pg. 41, 106) On January 22, 2026, the Third Administrative Citation was issued for failure to comply with the Notice and Order dated July 10, 2025, after an inspection conducted on January 16, 2026, revealed the chimney was still damaged and there were no updates to the permit. (Appeal Packet, pg. 124) On February 5, 2026, Inspector Ruelas spoke with Gerald Chandler from the Building Department. He stated a miscellaneous damage inspection is needed to determine if a permit is required. Inspector Ruelas emailed the information to JD Home Rentals with the phone number for the Building Department. (Appeal Packet, pg. 45) On March 5, 2026, Jovanna from JD Homes emailed stating their consultation was completed and they were told to apply for a permit. Inspector Ruelas granted an additional extension to April 12, 2026 (Appeal Packet, pg. 46, 48) On April 14, 2026, Inspector Ruelas emailed Jovanna at JD Homes advising the permit application is now locked and requested an update. (Appeal Packet, pg. 49) On May 13, 2026, Inspector Ruelas conducted a follow up inspection and found the chimney removed without an active permit and workers actively working on the house. A Stop Work Notice was posted. (Appeal Packet, pg. 49) On June 17, 2026, the Fourth Administrative Citation was issued for failure to comply with the Notice and Order dated July 10, 2025. (Appeal Packet, pg. 142) On July 23, 2026, the Fifth Administrative Citation was issued for failure to comply with the Notice and Order dated July 10, 2025, after a reinspection revealed the property remained in violation and there were no active permits on file. (Appeal Packet, pg. 88) Scope of Hearing FMC section 1-408(e) establishes two pertinent limitations to the scope of a hearing: (1) the order, citation, decision, or determination that was appealed; and (2) the grounds for relief raised by the Appellant. The scope of the BSAB hearing is limited to the Administrative Citations issued November 5, 2025, December 15, 2025, January 22, 2026, June 17, 2026, and July 23, 2026, as that is what Appellant filed appeals for. The grounds for relief raised by Appellants are as follows: Appeal to First Citation dated November 12, 2025, “When we attempted to renew permit, the building department informed us that updated plans were required for reapplication, which has extended the process.” (Appeal Packet pg. 194) Appeal to Second Citation dated December 22, 2025, “Planning is asking for plans and we are going to request for a special inspection to be done.” (Appeal Packet pg. 198) Appeal to Third Citation dated January 26, 2026, “Relief should be granted because we have applied for the required permit and are actively complying. A special inspection has been requested and we are currently awaiting the City’s response to schedule it. The delay is due to the City’s review process and is beyond our control. We respectfully request additional time.” (Appeal Packet pg. 224) Appeal to Fourth Citation dated June 23, 2026, “The unexpected request for plans created a delay in the permitting process. We believe the chimney repair work does not require plans and we are requesting a review of that determination….” (Appeal Packet pg. 232) Appeal to Fifth Citation dated July 30, 2026, “We proceeded with the permit process as requested, however, additional delays occurred when plans were required. We requested a consultation and special inspection to resolve the issue but the special inspection was denied…” (Appeal Packet pg. 245) Staff Analysis In order to confirm the Notice and Order, the BSAB must be satisfied by a preponderance of the evidence that: (1) violations of the FMC existed on the Property; and (2) proper notice was served on the property owner. Standard of Proof – Preponderance of the Evidence FMC section 1-408(f) establishes that the burden of proof in administrative hearings is “preponderance of the evidence”. The Supreme Court of the United States has established that preponderance of the evidence is met when the trier of fact believes “the existence of a fact is more probable than its nonexistence.” (Concrete Pipe and Products of California, Inc. v. Construction Laborers Pension Trust for Southern California (1993) 508 U.S. 602, 622; citing In re Winship, (1970) 397 U.S. 358, 371–372, (Harlan, J., concurring) (brackets in original).) In quantifiable terms, if the BSAB is 51% sure that a fact is true, the City has met that burden and the BSAB should find in favor of the City for that fact. Violations of the FMC Existed on the Property On July 10, 2025, a Notice and Order was issued and posted by Inspector Ruelas listing the following violations: chimney/flue is damaged (leaning), exterior wall stucco is cracking damaged, water heater not properly secured, and permit expired. The deadline to correct violations was 07/28/25. (Appeal Packet, pg. 76) First Administrative Citation On November 5, 2025, the First Administrative Citation was issued for failure to comply with the Notice and Order dated July 10, 2025, after an inspection revealed the chimney was still damaged and Permit #B24-14169 that was acquired for the chimney removal application had expired. (Appeal Packet, pg. 88) Second Administrative Citation On December 15, 2025, the Second Administrative Citation was issued for failure to comply with the Notice and Order dated July 10, 2025, after an inspection revealed the chimney was still damaged and Permit #B24-14169 that was acquired for the chimney removal application had expired. (Appeal Packet, pg. 41, 106) Third Administrative Citation On January 22, 2026, the Third Administrative Citation was issued for failure to comply with the Notice and Order dated July 10, 2025, after an inspection revealed the chimney was still damaged and Permit #B24-14169 that was acquired for the chimney removal application had expired. (Appeal Packet, pg. 124) Fourth Administrative Citation On June 17, 2026, the Fourth Administrative Citation was issued for failure to comply with the Notice and Order dated July 10, 2025, after an inspection revealed the property remained in violation and Permit #B24-14169 that was acquired for the chimney removal application had expired. (Appeal Packet, pg. 142) Fifth Administrative Citation On July 23, 2026, the Fifth Administrative Citation was issued for failure to comply with the Notice and Order dated July 10, 2025, after a reinspection revealed the property remained in violation and Permit #B24-14169 that was acquired for the chimney removal application had expired. (Appeal Packet, pg. 160) “The chimney/flue is damaged/listing (leaning).” FMC §§ 11-324; Health and Safety Code §§ 17920.3(a)(14), 17920.3(b)(8)-(9) FMC 11-324 states that Health and Safety Code section 17920.3 "substandard building" is hereby adopted by the City of Fresno. Health and Safety Code section 17920.3 declares that any building or portion thereof, regardless of zoning designation, shall be deemed a substandard building if there is general dilapidation or improper maintenance (a)(14) or the fireplace or chimneys list, bulge or settle due to defective material or deterioration or if they are of insufficient size or strength to carry imposed loads with safety (b)(8)-(b)(9). The Inspectors observed on numerous occasions the chimney to be damaged and leaning away from the home. “Permit #B24-14169, acquired for (chimney removal) application has expired and/or has been cancelled. Per the Residential Code, every permit issued shall become invalid unless the work on the site authorized by such permit is commenced within 180 days after its issuance, or if the work authorized on the site by such permits is suspended or abandoned for a period of 180 days after the time the work is commenced. A final inspection and approval is required before the use or occupancy of the improvements covered by this permit is allowed.” FMC § 11-103, 11-307, 11-308, 11-310; Cal. Residential Code § R105.1, R106.1, R109.1) FMC section 11-101 adopts the California Building Code, and FMC sections 11-307 and 11-308 state that it is unlawful to erect or construct buildings or structures without first obtaining the required permits. FMC section 11-103 adopts the California Residential Code and the California Residential Code sections R105.1, R106.1 and R109.1 outlines the requirements for the permits, plans, and inspections that must be completed before a building or structure is intended to be constructed. The Inspector’s inspections revealed an application for a permit to remove the chimney was submitted on October 14, 2024, and the chimney was removed on or about May 13, 2026, without submitting the required plans, permits and inspections. Proper Notice was Served on the Property Owner On July 10, 2025, the Notice and Order was posted at the Property and mailed by both first class and certified mail. (Appeal Packet, pgs.86-87) The Notice and Order contained all information required by FMC section 11-327, including identification of the Property, clear descriptions of the violations and reference to all code sections violated, photographs, a statement of the required actions to correct the violations, and information concerning appellants’ right to appeal. On November 5, 2025, the First Administration Citation was mailed by both First Class and certified mail. (AP, pg. 104) On December 15, 2025, the Second Administration Citation was mailed by both First Class and certified mail. (AP, pg. 122) On January 22, 2026, the Third Administration Citation was mailed by both First Class and certified mail. (AP, pg. 140) On June 17, 2026, the Fourth Administration Citation was mailed by both First Class and certified mail. (AP, pg. 158) On July 23, 2026, the Fifth Administration Citation was mailed by both First Class and certified mail. (AP, pg. 176) CONCLUSION Staff has demonstrated that violations existed on the Property at the time of the properly issued Notice and Order and proper notice was served. The BSAB should CONFIRM the Administrative Citations issued November 5, 2025, December 15, 2025, January 22, 2026, June 17, 2026, and July 23, 2026 as the violations existed on the property at the time the Citations were issued and proper notices were served to the property owner, and ORDER Appellants to repair the remaining violations within thirty days. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS. Pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15378, the Commission’s consideration of the Application is not a CEQA “project”. LOCAL PREFERENCE Not applicable. FISCAL IMPACT Not applicable. Attachments: Exhibit A – Appeal Packet Exhibit B – Findings Matrix Exhibit C – Presentation