Aug 19, 2024 Building Standards Commission Workshop

[Call to Order ]

[00:00:04]

I'LL CALL THIS BUILDING STANDARDS MEETING TO ORDER AT 3:53, TO GET STARTED.

[ITEM 1: Discuss and take appropriate action regarding June 17. 2024, Minutes. ]

THERE'S NOT A SECTION WHERE I NEED TO READ ANYTHING FOR THE VIDEO MEETING NOTES OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

OKAY. JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE FOR ITEM ONE DISCUSS AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION REGARDING JUNE 17TH 24 BSC MINUTES.

DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS ABOUT THE MEETING MINUTES.

IF NOT, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

MOTION BY DANNY.

I SECOND THE MOTION. SECOND BY SAMER.

I WILL ENTERTAIN A VOTE.

ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.

AYE. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.

[ITEM 2: The Commission to hold a public hearing, consider and take action to determine the condition of structures as prescribed by City of Decatur Code of Ordinances, Article IV Unsafe, Dangerous or Hazardous Buildings and Structures, Section 10-105 Proceedings of the Building Standards Commission, (b) Criteria for Determining Substandard Condition, of property owned by Mikel E Jackson and Kathy Daiker at 301 W Hallsell Street City of Decatur, Wise County, Texas also described as .2750 acres of Lot 2 and Part of Lot 3 Block 36 of the South Decatur addition. Determine action to be taken to demolish the structure determined substandard by the Building Standards Commission on July 15, 2024. No action has been taken to secure or demolish the structure. (BSC 23-00191) ]

PERMISSION TO HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AND TAKE ACTION TO DETERMINE THE CONDITION OF STRUCTURES AS PRESCRIBED BY CITY OF DECATUR.

CODE OF ORDINANCES, ARTICLE 4.

UNSAFE, DANGEROUS, HAZARDOUS BUILDING STRUCTURES.

SECTION 10-105.

PROCEEDINGS OF THE BUILDING STANDARDS COMMISSION.

WE GO ON. IT IS DESCRIBED AS LOT 0.275 ACRES OF LOT 2, PART 3 OF LOT 3, BLOCK 36 OF SOUTH DECATUR EDITION.

IF THE STRUCTURE DETERMINED TO BE SUBSTANDARD, THE COMMISSION SHALL TAKE ACTION ACCORDING TO THE CITY OF DECATUR CODE OF ORDINANCES.

OKAY. AGENDA ITEM 2 IS MOVED TO THE END OF THE AGENDA TO ACCOMMODATE ANY PERSONS THAT MAY WANT TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM.

SO I WILL GO AHEAD AND ALLOW OPEN A PUBLIC HEARING IF ANYONE HERE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS AGENDA ITEM.

I'M HAPPY TO COME UP.

IT IS 355 TO OPEN A PUBLIC HEARING.

GIVE IT A LITTLE BIT. SEEING NO ONE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK HERE.

WE'RE ONLINE, CHERYL.

WE SO STARTING WITH ITEM TWO IS WHERE WE ARE CURRENTLY. DETERMINED THE STRUCTURE TO BE SUBSTANDARD.

MADE ALL OF THE REQUIRED NOTIFICATIONS ON THIS.

WE'VE DONE SOME MORE RESEARCH, LOOKED INTO THE PROPERTY A LITTLE BIT MORE, TRYING TO FIND ANY WAY TO MOVE FORWARD ON THIS IN ANY OTHER WAY AND NOT FINDING ANY OUR RECOURSE IS TO GO THROUGH WHAT THE CODE OF ORDINANCE CALLS FOR ON THAT.

SO I'M GOING TO HAVE OUR CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER, RICK DENNEY, COME UP HERE AND TALK ABOUT THE OVERVIEW OF THE ACTIONS THAT WE TOOK AND WHERE WE'RE HEADED WITH THIS.

WE ARE LOOKING FOR AN ORDER OUT OF THE BUILDING STANDARDS COMMISSION TODAY TO COMPLETE THE ORDER TO DEMOLISH THIS BUT WITH THAT, I'LL BRING RICK DENNY UP HERE.

I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AS WELL.

IF WE CAN GO AHEAD AND MARK THAT IN AT 3:56.

DO WE NEED TO KEEP IT OPEN? [INAUDIBLE]. WELL, ARE THERE OTHER PEOPLE? I DON'T AS LONG AS WE BUILD THE RECORD, IT DOESN'T.

IT'S NOT A HARD AND FAST STRUCTURE OF WHEN YOU HAVE TO BUILD THE RECORD.

BUT I WONDER IF THERE'S ANYBODY ELSE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN THE PUBLIC HEARING.

OKAY. I'M HAPPY TO LEAVE IT OPEN THEN, AND WE'LL CLOSE IT.

WE'LL LOOP BACK TO IT. THANK YOU.

YES, SIR. OKAY.

OVERVIEW OF THE ACTIONS.

WE INITIALLY SENT THE FIRST LETTER ON AUGUST 29TH, 1923.

THE FINAL NOTICE PRIOR TO THE FILING, BUILDING STANDARDS COMMISSION WAS SENT ON DECEMBER 6TH, 1923, WITH NO RESULTS BETWEEN THAT TIME.

CONTACT THE WISE COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR AND GOT TAX TAX CERTIFICATE.

THE OWNERSHIP AND ENCUMBRANCE REPORT PROVIDED BY THE WISE COUNTY TITLE COMPANY NUMBER 4.

NOTICE OF PROPOSED ACTION BY THE BUILDING STANDARDS COMMISSION WAS MAILED BY CERTIFIED MAIL.

RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED TO KATHY DIKER ON JUNE 18TH, 2024.

NUMBER 5. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING PUBLISHED IN WISE COUNTY MESSENGER THAT WAS POSTED ON JULY THE 4TH, 2024.

A DETAILED TIMELINE FROM CASE NOTES AND WE ALSO HAVE PHOTOS OF THE PROPERTY.

I THINK I KNOW LAST TIME WE LOOKED AT THEM, WE'VE GOT CURRENT PICTURES THAT WE WE TOOK TODAY OF IT, BUT THERE'S BEEN NOTHING NO IMPROVEMENTS MADE ON THE PROPERTY AT ALL.

AS YOU CAN SEE, IT'S NOW IT'S BECOME A PRETTY GOOD FIRE HAZARD WITH THE GRASS GROWING UP AND IT'S JUST DRY AS IT CAN BE WITH THIS DROUGHT.

BUT BEEN NO ACTION WHATSOEVER OVER THERE.

THE BUILDING STANDARDS COMMISSION DECLARED SUBSTANDARD STRUCTURE ON JULY 15TH, 2024.

NUMBER NINE, NOTICE OF BUILDING STANDARDS COMMISSION ORDER MAILED POSTED ON THE PROPERTY AND PUBLISHED IN THE NEWSPAPER ON JULY 17TH.

[00:05:11]

AND THEN NUMBER 10, NOTICE OF BUILDING STANDARDS.

PUBLIC HEARING WAS FOR DEMOLISH, WAS MAILED ON AND POSTED ON THE PROPERTY AND PUBLISHED IN THE NEWSPAPER AUGUST 8TH, 2024.

THERE'S ONE THING THAT I KNOW LAST TIME THERE WERE SOME, I THINK THERE WAS A MOTION MADE THAT WE GIVE A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME FOR THE PERSON TO TRY TO GET THE PROPERTY PUT IN THEIR NAME.

AFTER WE DID SOME RESEARCH, NOT KNOWING MUCH ABOUT THE PROPERTY, OWNER MIKEL JACKSON IS DETERMINED THAT HE HAD PASSED AWAY IN IN 2004.

SO IT'S BEEN 20 YEARS THAT THAT PROPERTY HAS BEEN SITTING THERE WITH NOBODY MAKING ANY EFFORT TO GET IT PUT INTO THEIR NAME OR NOT UNABLE TO OR WHATEVER.

BUT THAT'S 20 YEARS AND IT'S JUST SIT THERE.

SO THIS WILL MAKE SURE YOU ALL WERE AWARE OF THE TIME FRAME, BECAUSE I WASN'T SURE OF IT EITHER LAST TIME, HOW LONG HE'D BEEN, BUT I DO HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THAT.

MY QUESTION IS, WHEN WAS THAT FIRE? I'M NOT SURE WHEN THE FIRE OCCURRED.

I THINK THEY SAID IT WAS 2018 OR 19, I BELIEVE, OR MAYBE PRIOR.

THAT IT WAS 21.

[INAUDIBLE]. IT WAS BEFORE 21.

OKAY. SO THAT PROPERTY SET THERE [INAUDIBLE].

YEAH. THANK YOU. CAN I ASK A QUESTION? THE GENTLEMAN THAT WAS HERE LAST MONTH, IN MY LAYMAN'S OPINION, DOESN'T HAVE ANY LEGAL RIGHT TO THE PROPERTY SO ASKING HIM TO DO ANYTHING I DON'T THINK IS REASONABLE OR FAIR.

AND IT SEEMS THAT MISS.

CATHY DYKER AND MR. MIKEL JACKSON ARE BOTH DECEASED.

YES, SIR. IS THERE ANY WAY TO SEE IF THERE'S ANY SIBLINGS OR OTHER FAMILY MEMBERS THAT SHOULD HAVE INHERITED THIS PROPERTY? WE'VE GONE THROUGH.

IS THAT BEYOND OUR OBLIGATION? I MEAN, WE'VE LOOKED AT EVERYTHING WE COULD TRY TO FIND, YOU KNOW, A LEGAL TO SEE IF ANYBODY ELSE WAS EVEN PART OWNERS IN IT OR ANYTHING AND THERE'S NOTHING ELSE.

MIKEL JACKSON WAS THE ONLY OWNER AND THEN KATHY DYKER, OF COURSE, HAS PASSED AWAY, BUT IT NEVER WAS IN HER NAME EVEN THAT WAS WHERE THE MAILING ADDRESS WHERE THE WE MAILED THE LETTERS TO.

I GUESS THAT THEY WERE LIVING AT THE SAME PLACE AT ONE TIME, BUT SHE NEVER WAS ANY OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY.

WE LOOKED INTO WHY HER NAME IS ASSOCIATED AT ALL WITH THE PROPERTY, AND WHAT RICK FOUND OUT WAS THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT THE CORRECT ME, IF I'M WRONG, THE ASSESSOR ADDED.

NO, THE NOT THE ASSESSOR AT THE APPRAISER.

NO, NOT THE APPRAISAL DISTRICT.

OKAY, YOU TELL IT.

YEAH. AT THE COUNTY APPRAISAL DISTRICT.

SAID THAT WAS ONLY JUST SIMPLY FOR MELON REASONS.

ONLY THAT SHE WASN'T EVER ANY OWNER OF THAT AND THERE'S NO RECORD IN THE COURT RECORD SHOWING THAT EITHER MIKEL JACKSON.

THE ONLY THING WE COULD FIND IN DOING ALL OF OUR RESEARCH, HAVING ANY OWNERSHIP OF IT.

BUT WHERE I WANTED TO GO WITH THAT IS THAT WHEN THIS SORT OF THING HAPPENS, WHEN AN OWNER CAN'T BE DETERMINED, THAT'S WHEN WE START UTILIZING PUBLICATION ALLOWANCES UNDER THE STATUTES.

SO WE PUBLISH TO MAKE ANYBODY THAT COULD POSSIBLY HAVE AN INTEREST, OWNERSHIP, INTEREST IN THE PROPERTY, TO MAKE THE PUBLIC AWARE OF THESE ACTIONS. THANK YOU.

WE HAVE PUBLISHED THIS AT LEAST THREE TIMES IN THE WISE COUNTY MESSENGER FOR DIFFERENT LEVELS OF THE PUBLIC HEARINGS THAT WERE TAKEN.

I WAS JUST CURIOUS AGAIN, MR. MIKEL JACKSON PASSES AWAY 20 SOME YEARS AGO.

WAS THERE EVER PROBATE? WAS THERE EVER, YOU KNOW, SOME OTHER TYPE OF FAMILIAL LEGAL HEARING WHERE THIS PROPERTY SHOULD HAVE PASSED ON TO SOMEONE ELSE? BUT IT SEEMS LIKE THERE ISN'T AND THAT'S WHY THERE WASN'T AN EVENT LIKE THAT AND THAT'S WHY WE HIRE THE TITLE COMPANY TO DO THE SEARCH ON THIS, TO SEE IF THERE'S ANY WAY THAT WE CAN LOCATE ANYONE THAT'S INVOLVED WITH THAT AND THE TITLE COMPANY DID NOT TURN UP ANYTHING THAT WE WERE ABLE TO FOLLOW THROUGH WITH.

WELL THANK YOU. ONE MORE QUESTION.

SO ASSUMING THE BOARD VOTES TO SUPPORT THE DEMOLITION OF THE PROPERTY, THE CITY TAKES CARE OF IT, MEANING THE CITY HIRES A THIRD PARTY. COMPANY?

[00:10:02]

I ASSUME WE'LL GIVE THEM 30 DAYS TO PAY.

IF SOMEBODY WANTED TO PAY THAT AFTER THE 30 DAYS, WE'D PLACE A LIEN ON IT ON THAT PROPERTY.

WHAT HAPPENS TO THE OWNERSHIP? WHERE DOES THE OWNERSHIP GO OF THE PROPERTY? WHO OWNS IT AFTER THE BUILDING IS DEMOLISHED? WHOEVER OWNS IT NOW, WHICH WE DON'T KNOW.

SO IT COULD POSSIBLY STAY IN LIMBO FOR AN UNKNOWN AMOUNT OF TIME.

THAT'S OUTSIDE OF WHAT WE WOULD DO.

WE DON'T AWARD OWNERSHIP OR DEFINE OWNERSHIP, BUT AT THIS POINT, THERE'S BEEN NO OWNER IDENTIFIED AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE UTILIZING THE PUBLICATION AVENUES TO ABATE THE DANGER THAT THIS STRUCTURE CAUSES IN THE COMMUNITY.

WOULD THERE BE A POSSIBILITY THAT OWNERSHIP WOULD GO TO THE CITY SOMETIME IN THE FUTURE? I THINK MORE LIKELY BECAUSE THERE'S A TAX LIEN ALREADY ON THE PROPERTY.

THAT'S NOT THE CITY'S TAX LIEN.

I THINK MORE LIKELY IT'S GOING TO GO TO I GUESS IT'S THE COUNTY THAT HAS THE LIEN.

OKAY. THAT'S MORE LIKE THEY'RE GOING TO THEIR LIEN IS GOING TO TAKE PRECEDENCE.

I SUPPOSE WE COULD END UP BEING A PARTIAL OWNER AND I BELIEVE IT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING AT THE LAST MEETING, ACCORDING TO THE GENTLEMAN THAT WAS HERE. NO WILL HAD BEEN PROBATED TO MY KNOWLEDGE.

YEAH, I DON'T BELIEVE SO.

WE'VE HADN'T FOUND ANYTHING TO SHOW THAT.

A FOLLOW UP QUESTION. SO ASSUMING THE BUILDING IS IS DEMOLISHED, THE PROPERTY IS CLEANED UP 2, 3, 4 MONTHS LATER, THE GRASS IS GOING TO GROW AGAIN.

SO DOES THAT NOW BECOME THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CITY? I'M SURE THAT UNLESS SOMEBODY DOES STEP UP AND TAKE CARE OF THAT THE CITY WILL PROBABLY BE DOING THAT AND HAVING TO PLACE LIENS ON IT? AND I WANT TO CLARIFY THAT THE OWNERSHIP, IT'S STILL THE OWNERSHIP OF THE PROPERTY TO MAINTAIN THAT PROPERTY.

YEAH. NOW WE HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO FIND ANY OWNERS FOR THAT.

SO WE WILL CONTINUE TO SEND NOTICES AS WE'RE SUPPOSED TO ON THAT.

WE WILL FILE A LIEN AGAINST THAT WHENEVER WE MOW IT.

BUT OUR MAIN CONCERN HERE IS TO ABATE THE PUBLIC NUISANCE AND THE DANGER THAT'S IN PLACE.

THAT'S THERE AND NOW, BY DOING THAT, WE WILL END UP WITH THAT PROPERTY IN A BETTER WAY TO FOR IT TO BE MAINTAINED BY MOWING.

WE WANT TO MAKE SURE IN THIS PARTICULAR INSTANCE AND SOME OF THE ONES IN THE PAST, WE'VE ALLOWED THEM TO LEAVE THE FOUNDATION IN PLACE THERE.

THIS ONE, BECAUSE THEIR STEM WALLS WERE GOING TO TRY TO REMOVE EVERYTHING THAT'S ON THE PROPERTY SO THAT THE PROPERTY CAN BE MAINTAINED AND HOPEFULLY AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE WHETHER IT IS A ACTUAL OWNER THAT IS DISCOVERED AND THEY ARE ABLE TO TAKE CARE OF ALL OF THE LIENS THAT ARE TAKEN THAT ARE PLACED AGAINST IT AND MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT PROPERTY.

OR IF THE COUNTY AT SOME POINT TAKES THAT PROPERTY FOR BACK TAXES AND IT IS IT'S RESOLD TO BE REDEVELOPED, HOPEFULLY WE END UP WITH A BLANK SLATE FOR EITHER ONE OF THOSE CONDITIONS.

EVEN IF, LIKE I SAID, IF AN OWNER COMES FORWARD AND IS ABLE TO TAKE CARE OF THE LIENS THAT ARE AGAINST IT, WE HOPE THAT THEY IMPROVE ON THAT PROPERTY.

THANK YOU.

MR. CHAIRMAN, I WANT TO ANSWER THE QUESTION ON WHEN THE FIRE WAS.

ACCORDING TO FIRE DEPARTMENT RECORDS, THE FIRE CAME IN AT 11:40 P.M.

ON WEDNESDAY, MAY 29TH, 2019.

SO WEDNESDAY, MAY 29TH, 2019 AT APPROXIMATELY 11:40 P.M.

[INAUDIBLE]. DOES ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION UP HERE? I PERSONALLY THINK THIS PROPERTY DOES NEED TO GO, BUT I'M AFRAID THAT IT WILL SIT WITH THE LIEN ON IT FOR QUITE SOME TIME AND AGAIN, OUR MAIN CONCERN IN THIS IS TO ABATE THE HAZARD THAT'S IN PLACE NOW BEFORE SOMEBODY GETS IN THERE AND BECOMES INJURED OR WORSE.

SEEING AS THE PUBLIC HEARING, I THINK IS STILL OPEN, I THINK WE'RE IN A GOOD SPOT TO CLOSE THAT, AS LONG AS THERE'S NO ONE ELSE HERE THAT NEEDS TO DISCUSS FURTHER IT, THEN WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 4:08 AND I WOULD LIKE TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE VOTE ON SECTION.

[00:15:06]

THERE IT IS. OPTION ONE.

ON THIS.

I DO NEED YOU TO STATE THE MOTION.

THE ADDRESS.

NO, SIR. I MOVE THAT THE.

I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE VOTE ON OPTION ONE.

THE MOTION IS MOVED THAT WE ORDERED TO DEMOLISH THE STRUCTURE AT 301 WEST HALLSELL AND THAT WAS APPROVED BY THE BUILDING STANDARDS COMMISSION ON JULY 15TH, 2024. TO BE CARRIED OUT UNDER ARTICLE FOUR UNSAFE, DANGEROUS OR HAZARDOUS BUILDING STRUCTURES AND SECTION 10-107 FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSION.

I SECOND THAT MOTION.

SECOND. MOTION FROM JOE.

SECOND FROM SAM. ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.

PASSES UNANIMOUSLY ALL RIGHT.

[ITEM 3: New and/or future business items. ]

WE DO HAVE A ANOTHER MEETING SCHEDULED FOR AUGUST 19TH, 2024.

ACTUALLY THAT'S A THAT'S A TYPO ON MY PART.

I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT.

IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE SEPTEMBER NEXT MONTH AND SEPTEMBER 16TH AND IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE? ANY OTHER BUSINESS? NOT AT THIS TIME.

IF WE HAVE OTHER ACTIONS THAT THAT COME FORWARD DURING THAT TIME, WE'LL BRING WE'LL PUBLISH THAT AND MAKE SURE THAT WE BRING A CLEAR SET OF FACTS TO YOU.

BUT WE'D LIKE TO BRING BACK BEFORE YOU IN SEPTEMBER WHERE WE'RE AT WITH THIS PROPERTY AND THAT WAY WE AT LEAST FOLLOW IT OUT ALL THE WAY TO ITS CONCLUSION. VERY GOOD.

I THINK THAT CONCLUDES OUR MEETING FOR THE DAY AT 4:10.

I WILL ADJOURN US.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, THAT WAS EASIER THAN ADOPTING CODES, WASN'T IT?

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.