The Unselected Level C Predicate

Case 23-009185 | Card 15 | 4880 T Street, Sacramento CA 95819

The dollar arithmetic of the penalty run is carried by Card 11; this card addresses the predicate recited on the order pages themselves. The City's produced Orders Imposing Administrative Penalty recite the two-prong Level C definition of SCC 1.28.010(D)(3)(c) — harm to public or private property, or repeated/continuous noncompliance with a hearing examiner's order or notices of violation — without identifying which prong the penalty rests on. The representative order pages at M146, M585, and M615 quote that definition, and all 28 order-header pages produced in the M146-M615 range — covering 23 penalty dates, five of them appearing on two pages each — carry the same recitation. None selects the harm path or the noncompliance path, identifies the underlying order or notice, or states the property facts that make either path true.

The recitation was not a one-time event. The City's activity log numbers administrative penalties through the 24th cycle and directs a 25th M010; the first produced order is $1,000.00 M146, and the 23rd and 24th cycles rise to $2,000.00 M585 M615 Card 14 Card 11. Prong (2), repeated or continuous noncompliance, presupposes an identified order or notice and its requirements. The original Notice and Order supplied only the Chapter 8.96/8.100 recital and the generic B31/B59 list before the 08/29/2025 violation-list expansion M124 M125 M012-013 Card 10.

Representative signing pages carry the "Bo Cosley / Principal Building Inspector" block M147 M307 M615. SCC.15.04.100 lists Principal Building Inspector as one of the chief building official's assistants, and Card 52 reads the recurring "Bo Cosley" cursive as a repeated templated digital signature image. Each signed order in the produced run thus carries that supervisor's block over a Level C recitation that names no prong.

IN PLAIN TERMS

The rule the City used for these penalties has two different paths: the property is causing harm, or the owner is repeatedly failing to comply with a particular order or notice. Each penalty order quotes both paths and does not say which one applies here. The orders carry a supervisor's signature block and continue cycle after cycle. The file does not show the choice, or the facts, that connect these penalties to one Level C basis.

RECORD CHAIN

  1. The original predicate was generic. The Notice and Order face recites that the property is in "sub-standard and/or dangerous condition under … Chapter 8.96 and/or Chapter 8.100" M124 and is signed for Cosley on its face M124; the attached Correction List lists only B31 "Other" and B59 "Permits Required" with incomplete/partial-list language and no structure, work item, location, or selected Level-C prong M125. The Violation Index later adds itemized entries opened 08/29/2025 M012-013. The pre-access billing question belongs to Card 10.
  2. A monthly penalty run issued on that predicate. Administrative penalties ran from 06/29/2023 through the 11/18/2025 cycle, itemized in the master ledger Card 11.
  3. The order run is in the May production, numbered by the City's own log. The May file holds the Order Imposing Administrative Penalty pages of the run M146 M585 M615, each headed "ORDER IMPOSING ADMINISTRATIVE PENALTY (Sacramento City Code 1.28.010)" M146; the City's activity log numbers the administrative penalties through the 24th (11/18/2025) and directs a 25th (11/25/2025) M010.
  4. Each header recites the same two-prong Level C definition without selecting a prong. The order headers recite SCC 1.28.010(D)(3)(c) in full — Level C violations are those that "either: (1) are likely to cause … harm to public or private property; or (2) show repeated or continuous noncompliance with … a hearing examiner's order … or notices of violation" M146-615. The headers state no facts showing harm to property under prong (1) and identify no order or notice that the noncompliance under prong (2) runs against.
  5. The signature is a repeated image. The mailed-corpus review Card 52 reads the same stroke pattern, slant, and trailing flourish recurring across the orders.
  6. The rate doubled inside the run. The last two orders impose $2,000.00 rather than $1,000.00 M585 M615; the rate-change authority question is Card 14.

FULL CIRCLE

The penalty orders assign Penalty Category C but quote both alternatives in SCC 1.28.010(D)(3)(c), stating no harm finding, no noncompliance finding, and no identified underlying order M146 M585 M615. The run began on the original order's generic B31/B59 predicate, before the later violation-list expansion M124 M125 M012-013 Card 10.

The expected response is that prong (2) supplies the basis: continuing noncompliance with an unappealed Notice and Order. That reading still depends on a specified order or notice with specified requirements. The file the City closed as complete supplies neither property-specific findings behind the recurring penalty run nor native approval records showing how the "Bo Cosley / Principal Building Inspector" block was applied R.26-1965.1 M147 M307 M615 Card 4 Card 52.

Cosley's title does not close the gap. Principal Building Inspector is an enumerated assistant position under SCC.15.04.100, but the orders bearing that block are the same orders that recite both prongs without selecting one. The separate question of Paul signing the Notice and Order is carried by Card 5.

The produced record therefore shows generic B31/B59 order content, penalty-order headers that recite both Level C prongs without choosing one, and no produced approval or generation record supplying the missing selection or findings.

APPLICABLE LAW

SOURCE CITATIONS USED BY THIS CARD

CARD REFERENCES