HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-06-2025 - Citys Email Reply
Cynthia Moya
From:Sheila Madsen
Sent:Friday, December 6, 2024 4:43 PM
To:Phil Olbrechts; Kelly Carner; Carner, Kelly
Cc:Cynthia Moya
Subject:REPLY TO RESPONSE TO MOTION TO STRIKE (Carner) CODE23-000293
Attachments:Carner Correspondence RE Habitation of Recreational Vehicle.pdf; Carner Email RE
Living in Trailer (04.2024).pdf
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Flagged
In reply to the response filed by Mr. Carner on December 5, 2024.
The City notes with interest that Mr. Carner did not address the City’s preliminary assertion that his Motion
for Reconsideration did not address the fundamental requirement that such a motion be based on
evidence which could not have been discovered and produced at the initial hearing as well as the
additional opportunities for submissions of evidence before the Decision was issued. Since Mr. Carner did
not challenge this assertion in his response, and since this is a threshold determination, the City
respectfully requests the Hearing Examiner strike evidence and deny his motion for reconsideration.
In the alternative, the City replies to Mr. Carner’s response as follows:
IIA: Evidence
II.A.1 Mr. Carner fails to provide a statement of the public source of the photograph. He only notes
that if it is from a publicly available source, it should be presumed accurate.
II.A.2 Mr. Carner fails to show, in the personal statements, how each have personal knowledge of
the length of time the existing trailer has been owned by Mr. Carner, nor how they know the trailer
has consistently been used as a living space. In fact, the statement that the use of “this trailer …
has been consistent and uninterrupted since its establishment” is in direct contradiction with Mr.
Carner’s own statements to the City (Statements highlighted in orange and blue in attached
files). There is also not foundation of the expertise or experience that leads each of the witnesses
to state that the recreational vehicle “appears to meet the necessary requirements for safe and
responsible habitation” when using a travel trailer, which is a violation of City Code.
While the statements assert facts that may be verified, those facts represent an affirmative
defense to violations noted by the City and the burden of proof thereby rests on Mr. Carner. Since
Mr. Carner has asserted those facts beyond what the City has claimed, he bears the burden of
proof of those facts.
Mr. Carner has not provided any contemporaneous evidence that clearly shows the recreational
vehicle at question has been on the site, such as a dated photograph of the trailer, including some
identifiable markings, nor a receipt for the vehicle, nor licensing or registration. Each of those
should be readily attainable by the owner of the vehicle and property, Mr. Carner.
II.B – Foundation –
II.B.1 The Witness statements do not, on their four corners, establish the length of time the
witnesses have known Mr. Carner nor the basis of their familiarity with Mr. Carner and/or his
property nor their expertise to describe how or whether a recreational vehicle is “safe and
responsible habitation” nor their expertise or experience to determine whether a recreational
vehicle is “in good condition, and it continues to serve its intended purpose” nor how their
expertise or experience helps substantiate the appropriateness of “use of the \[recreational vehicle\]
as a domicile on his property.”
1
II.B.2 There is no metadata provided with or on the aerial photo submitted. There is no header or
footer information or independent statement asserting the source of the aerial photo, not more
fully describing the images shown aside from the added verbiage ”Jayco fifth wheel” and a red
arrow pointing to an unclear white rectangular shape. Even if the aerial photo is generally
admissible, the added verbiage and arrow are not from that source, and there is no independent
verification of the contents of the aerial photo.
II.C,D, and E The City relies on its earlier motion related to relevance, hearsay, and rebuttal.
SHEILA MADSEN, Code Compliance Inspector
City of Renton // Development Services
Virtual Permit Center // Online Applications and Inspections
o?ice 425-430-7236
NOTICE OF PUBLIC DISCLOSURE: This message complies with Washington State’s Public Records Act – RCW 42.56
From: Kelly Carner <kelvisss@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, December 5, 2024 7:44 AM
To: Cynthia Moya <CMoya@Rentonwa.gov>; Phil Olbrechts <olbrechtslaw@gmail.com>; Kelly Carner
<kelvisss@gmail.com>; Sheila Madsen <SMadsen@Rentonwa.gov>
Subject: RESPONSE TO MOTION TO STRIKE EVIDENCE
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Renton. Do not click links, reply or open attachments unless
you know the content is safe.
Attached is the response to the previous Email from Sheila Madson, to strike relevant evidence.
2