HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/4/2025 Item 6a, Loew
Colunga-Lopez, Andrea
Michael Loew <mloew15007@gmail.com>
Sent:Sunday, November
To:E-mail Council Website
Subject:Public Comment on Item 6a
Dear Mayor Stewart and City Council Members,
My name is Michael Loew, I am a resident and homeowner in the city. I served as the City’s Chief
Building Official from June 2023 through June 2025. I am writing to provide supplemental context
regarding Building & Safety operations during that period and to support the Council’s review of
resource allocation, service delivery capacity, and policy impacts on public safety.
Policy of Revenue Generation Over Service Delivery
The Building and Safety division's core challenge is a structural paradox embedded in the city's fiscal
policy. This was brought into sharp focus during the 2024 fee study. The City’s contracted
consultant's analysis, based on past years of the city's own spending data, concluded that the division
was under-resourced relative to the fees it collected. This resulted in a calculation that proposed to
reduce fee rates by 35%.
To avert a significant revenue loss, I was directed to develop an entirely new methodology, one
based on the time and resources it should take to properly administer and enforce the building code.
My analysis successfully justified maintaining the existing revenues, an action that preserved
approximately $1 million in annual revenue for the department. The logical and ethical next step was
to fund the division to the level its own fee-justification model proved was necessary. I submitted
corresponding significant operating budget requests of over $500,000 (half of the calculation) to begin
to align our resources with our mandated responsibilities during the 24-25 fiscal year. Those requests
were largely denied.
My efforts to align resources with responsibilities extended beyond those budget requests. I identified
a significant public safety risk and revenue opportunity in the City’s unaddressed backlog of more
than 2,000 expired permits since 2020. As part of the fee study, I developed and proposed new fees
specifically to address this backlog, which the Council subsequently adopted. This initiative was not
merely punitive; it was a strategic plan to generate an estimated $1.2 million in revenue, designed
explicitly to help the department weather the exact kind of economic uncertainty in development that
later prompted budget cuts. However, despite Council approval, I was denied the resources and
operational discretion to implement this revenue-positive, public-safety initiative.
The Operational Consequences
As the report correctly notes, the City saw a "decline compared to previous years" in new
development, which was "reflected in permitting and inspection volumes." However, this slowdown in
revenue-generating activity was met with a historic surge in our non-revenue-generating public-safety
duties. The report confirms that "The Code Enforcement team processed a record number of
investigation requests."
1
Instead of shifting resources to meet this record-breaking demand for code enforcement, the
administration used the decline in permit revenue to justify system-wide austerity measures that
crippled our ability to function. At the same time, according to the report, the Planning Division
"achieved greater stability through the hiring of three interns and permanent staff," while the Building
and Safety division was directed to "complete more work in-house to reduce costs." This directive
was coupled with a significant expansion of my own duties. I was tasked with rebuilding another team
by assuming the responsibilities of the vacant Supervising Civil Engineer, overseeing the day-to-day
operations and recruitment for the Engineering Development Review Team, including the new
Supervising Civil Engineer.
The strain on the building division was further compounded by the director's determination to divert
code enforcement resources away from core public-safety risks, such as dangerous buildings and
expired permit enforcement, and towards a new fraternity and sorority party enforcement initiative. I
was explicitly excluded from these efforts by the director and never consulted or asked to speak to
the grand jury on the matter. I was denied the staff required to address the thousands of pending
permit violations affecting the broader community's safety.
Public Hazard at 1150 Laurel Lane
1150 Laurel Lane represents a systemic failure by the City's handling of the "dangerous building," a
major public safety enforcement case.
My initial attempt at enforcement against the project began in June 2024, but was halted by
Director Tway who instructed me to extend the property's Temporary Certificates of
Occupancy.
For the next five months, I was consistently pressured to extend occupancy authorizations,
and Director Tway prevented me from issuing a Notice of Violation.
It was only when I refused to sign another TCO extension in November 2024 that the
administration was forced to confront the issue, and I was again directed not to send the
Notice of Violation until I met with the City Manager.
City Manager MacDonald met with me on December 18, 2024. The Fire Chief declared the
building too hazardous for his crews to enter in the event of an emergency, and I presented
detailed inspector reports confirming the building’s rapid decay.
The response from leadership was not immediate action, but an instruction to delay
enforcement until after Christmas because issuing a notice before would be “immoral.”
It took an additional three months of internal pressure before I was finally able to issue a formal
Notice of Violation in March 2025, condemning parts of the structure.
Just days before the formal appeal hearing, on May 1, 2024, the City itself undermined the
condemnation by participating in the "Bike Month" event on the hazardous property.
This case presents a serious and unmitigated public safety risk given its proximity to a public
elementary school and public parks. The 17 acre property was supposed to provide hundreds of
housing units in a core location for the city. However, any future prospect of housing or development
at this location will now be impeded by the millions of dollars worth of substandard conditions of the
70-year-old building, and the over $50 million dollars of debt that has been reported on the property.
2
Community-Wide Consequences
The culmination of a record-breaking enforcement workload, constrained resources, and active
administrative obstacles created an unsustainable work environment, leading to my constructive
discharge in June of this year. It is critical for the Council to know that I am the eighth Building
Official hired by the City in the last 12 years. This is not a series of isolated departures; it is a clear
pattern of institutional instability driven by flawed fiscal policy.
For over a decade, the City has collected an estimated $10 million more in fees for review and
inspection services than it has spent providing them. This is not a budget surplus, but represents a
decade of public funds collected for services that were not fully rendered. The consequences are now
etched into our community's landscape in the derelict and uninhabitable properties like "The Sub," in
the unresolved safety risks posed by thousands of expired permits, in the dangerous conditions at
1150 Laurel Lane, and in the frequent reports of substandard living conditions from local tenants. All
the while, the City Council continues to adopt new policies for the Building & Safety division to
enforce, such as single-use plastics and polystyrene restrictions, shopping cart management, and
energy efficiency ordinances.
The City collects fees based on a promise of safety and service. It is imperative that the Building &
Safety division be fully equipped to deliver on that promise. I urge the Council to interrogate the
allocations of resources for the Community Development Department, and to begin providing
adequate funding for a public safety program that meets the needs and demands of our community.
Sincerely,
Michael Loew, MPA, CBO
3