08/06/2018 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

COM1VIUNICATIONS Kim Rock; 5938 Mackenzie Road Representative: Wendy Rosett, attorney Mr. O'Malley stated that the communication from Wendy Rosett raises a question of jurisdiction and whether the board can hear the appeal. The appeal is to a notice of probation review for case 2016CRB2047 in the Rocky River Municipal Court. An appeal was filed to the BZBA based on language from a notice letter received by Ms. Rock. However, there was no new citation given by the Building Department and therefore no right to appeal. Mr. O'Malley did not believe the board has the jurisdiction to hear an appeal for a case that is in Rocky River Municipal Court. He believed the inspector made a mistake and used a form letter that had appeal language since he was asked to monitor the property for the Rocky River Courts. Wendy Rosett, counsel for Kim Rock, said Ms. Rock is asking the board to determine if what was cited by the building inspector were truly housing code violations. She was not asking the court to interfere with the Rocky River Court's probation case. Ms. Rosett stated that the letter received by Ms. Rock said the decision could be appealed. Mr. Gareau believed there is no jurisdiction for the board because no new order was issued by the building commissioner. Mr. O'Malley pointed out that the titles of the documents are Probation Review Notice and the case has gone through several rounds of monthly probation reviews. He said the court has appointed the inspector to be a probation inspector to ensure that the owner is in compliance with the code. He believed counsel was trying to get the board to intervene with the court's case. Ms. Rosett believed the board should decide whether the building citations are truly violations of the code and then it should go to the court once the items listed are decided on. Mr. Mackey asked Ms. Rosett what the body of competent jurisdiction at this time is. Ms. Rosett believed that the BZBA should determine violations of the code and believed that once the violations are decided on, then the case should go back to the court. Discussion regarding probation terms, Ms. Rosett said the probation period is for five years with monthly inspections, the judge said after six months she would review to determine if monthly reviews need to continue. The second notice is the only one that included the appeal language and that is why it was not brought up before this. Mr. Gareau believed the jurisdiction belongs with the court since the board does not provide guidance to the court. Mr. Raig believed that the case should not be reviewed by BZBA since the appeal language should not have been in the letter. Mr. Gareau stated that the board should not take any action since the matter was not officially on the docket. Mr. O'Malley believed the issue of indigency that was raised in the letter was a moot point since there was no jurisdiction. ADJOURNIVIENT With no further usiness, the meeting adjourned at 8:02 p.m. v Mike Raig, Chair Nicole R m o-Ackerman, Administrative Assistant Approved: Obhy-