Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-12-2025 - HEX Recon Decision with Appendix A - Carner Code Enforcement Decision - 1 BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER OF RENTON DECISION UPON RECONSIDERATION FILE NUMBER: CODE23-000293 ADDRESS: 11135 SE 164th St Renton WA 98058 PROPERTY OWNER: Kelly Carner 11135 SE 164th St. Renton, WA 98058. REVIEW AUTHORITY: City of Renton TYPE OF CASE: Finding of Violation DISPOSITION: Two of the four alleged violations sustained (one just in part) and $200 of the $300 fine sustained. The fines shall be waived if required corrective actions are completed by the deadlines set by this decision. Mr. Carner has until April 15, 2027 to abate Violation No. 4 and until April 11, 2025 to abate Violation No. 3. Overview Mr. Carner’s request for reconsideration is granted in part. Violation No. 1 of the Notice of Violation (NOV)(parking unlicensed vehicles) under appeal is reversed. The term “vehicle” in RMC 4-4-085(D)(2) is found to be ambiguous. It’s unclear whether the referenced “vehicle” must be motorized. Since zoning ordinances must be strictly construed in favor of the property owner, the ambiguity of the “vehicle” term is resolved in Mr. Carner’s favor and RMC 4-4-085(D)(2) is not found to apply to nonmotorized vehicles. Violation No. 4, unauthorized habitation, is sustained. However, Mr. Carner’s abatement period is extended to two years given that he established that he used a travel trailer in good faith as his residence since 2008. Unfortunately, Mr. Carner was not able to prove that his trailer use was lawfully established. To establish lawful creation of the use he would have had to start inhabiting the trailer prior to March 1, 2008 when his property was annexed into the City. Mr. Carner established that the use was created in 2008 but not prior to March 1, 2008. Further, Mr. Carner was also not able to produce any compelling legal authority that supported his position that the trailer could be shielded from new regulations as a legal nonconforming use. As ruled in prior Code Enforcement Decision - 2 Carner decisions1, nonconforming use rights only attach to the primary single-family use of the property and do not extend to the trailer use. This hearing was re-opened an unprecedented number of times to give Mr. Carner every reasonable opportunity to defend his nonconforming use rights. At the original hearing Mr. Carner took a position against overwhelming case law that he did not have the burden of proof to establish his nonconforming use rights. Consistent with that position he didn’t present any evidence on that issue, thereby depriving himself of the ability to fully defend himself. Despite no obligation to do so, the Examiner subsequently re-opened the hearing to enable Mr. Carner to provide evidence on his nonconforming use rights. Mr. Carner provided some additional evidence but none on the Violation No. 4 habitation issue. The Examiner issued a final decision sustaining Violation No. 4. Mr. Carner requested reconsideration. In his reconsideration reply briefing Mr. Carner submitted a significant amount of new evidence that finally addressed his nonconforming use rights on Violation No. 4. New evidence is usually not authorized in reconsideration. Mr. Carner was given a third opportunity to present new evidence nonetheless to address this important issue. Bearing the burden of proof, it was Mr. Carner’s responsibility to find out what county and city ordinances addressed his habitation issues. City ordinances are available both on-line and at City Hall. County ordinances are also available for public inspection. The multiple re-openings of this hearing for Mr. Carner’s benefit exemplify the difficulties pro se litigants face in addressing complicated legal issues without the benefit of a law degree and the resources of a law office. Presumably the City is more interested in having an accurate factual record as opposed to prevailing in an appeal hearing because a pro se litigant doesn’t have the resources to hire a lawyer. That is the reason for the multiple re-openings of this appeal proceeding. Unfortunately, City staff didn’t reveal until their closing brief that the habitation prohibition underlying Violation No. 4 had been in effect since 2002. In his closing Mr. Carner asserts that he should have been notified earlier about the 2002 adoption date. City staff have no obligation to make Mr. Carner’s case for him at every step of this appeal proceeding. As earlier identified, Mr. Carner was the one responsible for researching the ordinances necessary to support his nonconforming use defense. Ideally the City would have identified the 2002 ordinance earlier in the review process anyway. However, it’s also understandable that City staff didn’t catch on to the relevance of that ordinance until they put their closing together. Given the circumstances it’s tempting to re-open the hearing for a remarkable fourth time to address the 2002 ordinance. However, little would be accomplished with this added delay. As noted in Footnote 1 of the November 1 2024 Carner decision, to prevail on his nonconforming use claim Mr. Carner would have to overcome the case law against his position in addition to establishing prior lawful use. Specifically, Mr. Carner had to establish that under cases such as the FN 1 referenced Icicle decision he would have to establish that the use protected as a nonconforming use was his travel trailer in addition to his single-family home. Mr. Carner did not identify any court opinion or argument that could lead to such a conclusion. Even if Mr. Carner 1 There are two prior Carner hearing examiner decisions referenced in this Decision Upon Reconsideration. One is the decision subject to Mr. Carner’s reconsideration request. That final decision was issued on November 1, 2024 for CODE23-000293 and is referenced as the “November 1, 2024 Decision.” The second decision was a final decision issued for other code violations on February 21, 2019 for CODE17-000628 and is referenced as the “2019 Carner Decision.” Code Enforcement Decision - 3 did establish lawful habitation prior to annexation, he still would not have created a protected nonconforming use under the Icicle decision and others like it. Given this consideration and the multiple re-opened hearings already granted to Mr. Carner, there is insufficient grounds for yet a fourth re-opening of the hearing. If Mr. Carner has a bill of sale, bank record or other document clearly showing that he purchased the trailer prior to March 1, 2008 that may be considered for re- opening the hearing an extraordinary fourth time, but otherwise the record is closed to any further requests for reconsideration. Mr. Carner still benefitted from establishing a factual record for his nonconforming use claim in the re-opened hearing. Should Mr. Carner succeed in overcoming the weight of legal authority against him on judicial appeal, he will have a factual record at his disposal to establish the facts of his nonconforming use defense. Absent the reopened hearing Mr. Carner could still win on the law but then lose on the facts because he failed to establish prior use. Mr. Carner’s efforts at establishing good faith long-term use also established good cause for an extended abatement period from one year to two years. HEARING and REHEARING The hearing on the appeal was held virtually on August 27, 2024 at 10:00 am via the Zoom application. Mr. Carner was given until September 3, 2024 to provide written argument in his defense and the City until September 10, 2024 to provide a written response. In review of the hearing transcript the Examiner found that Mr. Carner may not have understood that he had the burden of proof in asserting affirmative defenses to the alleged FOV violations. To give Mr. Carner a fair opportunity to assert his affirmative defenses, the Examiner re-opened the hearing for that purpose by email dated September 11, 2024. Mr. Carner was given until September 20, 2024 to present additional argument and evidence on this affirmative defenses, the City until September 27, 2024 to respond and Mr. Carner until October 2, 2024 to reply. The briefing on affirmative defenses was subsequently extended to October 18, 2024. The record was closed on October 18, 2024. A final decision on the Carner appeal was issued on November 1, 2024. Mr. Carner filed the subject request for reconsideration on or before November 8, 2024. By email dated November 12, 2024 the Examiner gave the City until November 22, 2024 to respond to the reconsideration request and Mr. Carner until November 26, 2024 to reply. The City responded on November 22, 2024 by email. Mr. Carner replied on November 25, 2024 with several declarations and a photograph presented to show that the travel trailer subject to Violation No. 4 had been used for habitation since before the adoption of RMC 4-4-030I. The City moved to strike the new evidence by email dated December 4, 2024. The examiner authorized the new evidence so long as Mr. Carner made himself and the authors of the declarations available for cross-examination. The hearing was re-opened on February 11, 2025 for purposes of conducting the cross-examination. Written closing briefs were authorized through February 25, 2025. The City and Ms. Carner both submitted written closings within that time period. The record was closed as of February 25, 2025. Code Enforcement Decision - 4 TESTIMONY A computer-generated transcript of the re-opened February 11, 2025 hearing has been prepared to provide an overview of the hearing testimony. The transcript is provided for informational purposes only as Appendix A. EXHIBITS All email communications involving the hearing examiner, City and Appellant together were entered into the record as reflected in the City Clerk’s website on the day of hearing2. The written closing briefs of the Appellant and City are also admitted into the record and considered for this final decision. Mr. Carner’s written closing includes both his February 19, 2025 email and the attachment to that email. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Findings of Fact of the November 1, 2024 Decision are adopted to the extent consistent with this Decision Upon Reconsideration. 2. Habitation of Trailer. Mr. Carner resided continuously in a trailer on the violation site since 2008 to present. Mr. Carner presented compelling testimony from Kris and Katie Amos, Caleb Carner, Morgan Ryberg and Tim and Stephanie Carner to support this position. Morgan Ryberg and Tim Carner were Mr. Carner’s children who lived in the trailer for several years with Mr. Carner. Tim Carner is Mr. Carner’s brother and has resided in Mr. Carner’s “stick built” home on the violation site since Mr. Carner moved into the trailer in 2008. Although almost all of the witnesses testifying on the trailer issue are close relatives of Mr. Carner, it is unlikely they exaggerated or manufactured any of their testimony. They signed declarations and testified under oath. They plausibly demonstrated that Mr. Carner moved into the trailer so that his brother and brother’s wife could move into the residence of the violation site. This was a logical and highly plausible means of dealing with the high housing costs of the Puget Sound area. Although Mr. Carner established that he established his trailer habitation in 2008, he did not establish that he did so prior to March 1, 2008. March 1, 2008 as identified in Mr. Carner’s 2019 Decision, is the date his property was annexed into the City of Renton. Given that March 1 is very early in the year, in the absence of any other evidence it would have to be concluded that more likely than not the habitation commenced after March 1, 2008. 2 The City Clerk distributed a screen shot of the indexed emails during the February 11, 2025 appeal hearing. The parties were also given the opportunity to verify the accuracy of the index over the next couple days after the hearing. No missing emails were identified in that time period. Code Enforcement Decision - 5 CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. Authority of Examiner: The Conclusions of Law (COL) of the November 1, 2024 Decision are adopted to the extent consistent with this Decision Upon Reconsideration. 2. Burden of Proof. The City’s waiver of burden of proof for affirmative defenses as referenced in COL No. 2 of the November 1, 2024 Decision is only found to apply to the first hearing and not the habitation nonconforming use issues raised in the February 11, 2025 reopened hearing. As identified in the November 1 Decision, the case law placing the burden of proof on the one claiming a nonconforming use (in this case Mr. Carner) is extensive and irrefutable . In his reconsideration request Mr. Carner cites to Anderson v. Island County, 81 Wn. 2d 312 (Wash. 1972) for the assertion that “for a nonconforming use to be deemed unlawful, the government must prove that it was illegal when it began.” The Anderson decision nowhere imposes such a ruling. Anderson dealt with a rezone adopted by Island County that the County justified in part on facilitating the operations of a nonconforming use. The validity of the rezone was in question. The Anderson court placed the burden of proof on invalidating the rezone on rezone opponents, holding that “one who asserts that a public authority has abused its discretion and is guilty of arbitrary, capricious, and unreasoning conduct has the burden of proof.” Id. at 317. Beyond the foregoing quotation, there was no discussion in the Anderson court about who had to prove that a nonconforming use did or did not exist. Rezone opponents in Anderson apparently had to prove that the County erroneously classified the use as nonconforming, but that was only because they were disputing the validity of the rezone. The circumstances of the case were a little unique because the burden of proof was arguably reversed when the validity of the rezone was put into play as opposed to the nonconforming use determination itself. Nonetheless, all of the case law dealing with the direct validity of a nonconforming use determination places the burden on the person claiming nonconforming use rights as detailed in the case law cited in the November 1, 2024 Decision. Reconsideration Issues Mr. Carner’s reconsideration issues are quoted below in italics and addressed in associated conclusions of law: Carner Allegation No. 1: Grandfather Rights Were Overlooked in Assessing Violation No. 1 3. Upon reconsideration, Mr. Carner is not found to have violated RMC 4-4-085(D)(2) as alleged in Violation No. 1 of the Notice of Violation (NOV) issued for CODE23-000293. This determination is not based upon nonconforming use rights as alleged in Mr. Carner’s topic header quoted above, but rather the ambiguity of the “vehicle” term in RMC 4-4-085(D)(2). In his reconsideration request, Mr. Carner correctly relies upon the fact that the term “vehicle” in RMC 4-4-085(D)(2) is ambiguous as to whether the vehicle must be motorized. As identified in the decision under reconsideration, the common meaning of the term as defined in an English Code Enforcement Decision - 6 dictionary doesn’t dictate that a vehicle be motorized. However, the zoning code definition of “large” and “small” vehicles identifies that the vehicle is motorized. To add a little further weight to Mr. Carner’s position, RMC 4-4-085(D)(2) identifies that vehicles in the open should be “operational,” which arguably suggests that they can be self-propelled. As identified in the November 1, 2024 Decision, construing unmotorized vehicles as “vehicles” is likely consistent with legislative intent since that intent is likely aimed at preserving and enhancing residential character of Renton neighborhoods. Enforcing RMC 4-4-085(D)(2) against nonmotorized vehicles is consistent with this intent. However, case law provides that zoning ordinances must be strictly construed in favor of the property owner. See, Milestone Homes v. City of Bonney Lake, 145 Wn. App. 118, 127 (Wash. Ct. App. 2008). Under this standard it must be recognized that the term “vehicle” in RMC 4-4-085(D)(2) can be reasonably construed as limited to motorized vehicles given the zoning code definitions for large and small vehicles. As to legislative intent, it is conceivable that the Council was thinking of lots with multiple rusting junk motor vehicles, a fairly common problem in some jurisdictions where some property owners like to accumulate these vehicles for parts and restoration. Strictly construing RMC 4-4-085(D)(2) in favor of Mr. Carner, there is some latitude to construe “vehicles” in RMC 4-4-085(D)(2) as limited to motor vehicles Mr. Carner is advised that the City Council may respond to this decision by amending RMC 4-4- 085(D)(2) to clarify that “vehicle” includes nonmotorized vehicles. Historically the City Council has quickly addressed these types of ambiguities in its codes by amendments that make clear its on-going objective to maintain and enhance residential character. If City staff present such an amendment to the City Council, they should also have the amendment clearly address nonconforming use rights. A case from the Chelan County referenced in the decision under reconsideration identifies how Chelan County made it clear how newly adopted short term rental restrictions were to be applied to existing uses. See Icicle/Bunk, LLC v. Chelan Cnty., 537 P.3d 321 (2023). That type of clarity would be highly beneficial in providing guidance on how to apply the City’s residential performance standards to established uses such as those of Mr. Carner. The only vehicle identified as subject to Violation No. 1 was a travel trailer. It is uncontested that the travel trailer is not motorized. Violation No. 1 is therefore dismissed. Carner Allegation No. 2: Inconsistencies in the Code Language Compounded by Failure to Apply Grandfather Rights 4. Issue 2 as quoted above serves as no basis for changing the original decision because Mr. Carner has no “grandfather” rights that shield him from changes in the law as applied in the NOV under appeal. As detailed in the CODE17-000628 decision, Mr. Caner’s nonconforming use (grandfather) rights are limited to single family use. Those protections don’t extend to how that use is exercised. The violations alleged in the NOV don’t preclude Mr. Carner from using his property for the zoning code use of single-family residential use. Those violations only regulate how storage and parking is to be conducted in that single-family use. As such, the regulations cited in the NOV qualify as performance standards that local governments are authorized to apply to existing uses as authorized by Rhod-A-Zalea & 35th, Inc. v. Snohomish County, 136 Wn.2d 1, 10 (1998). Code Enforcement Decision - 7 The concept of performance standards applied to existing uses was most recently exemplified in Icicle/Bunk, LLC v. Chelan Cnty., 537 P.3d 321 (2023). In the Icicle case Chelan County adopted an ordinance prohibiting more than one short term rental per lot. A property owner who had been renting out two short term rentals on a single lot challenged the application of the ordinance to him on the basis that the two rental units qualified as nonconforming uses. The Icicle court found that the two units were not protected as nonconforming uses. It specifically held that the “use” to which the property owner was vested was short term rental use generally and not to two short term rentals specifically. In the same vein, the “use” to which Mr. Carner has vested is generally single-family residential use, not how he parks and stores vehicles on his property. Clearly if the Icicle court found it valid to shut down the use of an entire dwelling unit, that same court will have no problem in finding parking and storage restrictions as valid performance standards as well. Carner Allegation No. 3. Precedent for Recognizing Grandfather Rights in RMC 4-4-085(D)(3) (Violation No. 3) 5. Examiner CODE23-000293 decision did not set any precedent on protecting grandfathered (nonconforming) uses from newly adopted performance standards. Mr. Carner’s established parking was partially protected from RMC 4-4-085(D)(3) because that provision expressly granted nonconforming use rights to pre-existing driveways. The City Council is free to grant nonconforming use rights in the RMC beyond constitutional requirements to any extent it finds appropriate. The City Council has not deemed it necessary to add such rights to any other code sections cited in the NOV. The RMC doesn’t grant Mr. Carner any nonconforming use rights beyond those identified in RMC 4-4-085(D)(3) for the violations of this appeal. Carner Allegation No. 4: Importance of Grandfather Rights for Preventing Future Harassment and Ensuring Consistency 6. The hearing examiner has no authority to extend nonconforming use rights beyond that required by the constitution or authorized by the RMC. If Mr. Carner would like to have additional grandfather rights incorporated into the RMC he will have to persuade the City Council to adopt such added protections. 2019 CODE17-000628 Decision 7. Mr. Carner disputes that he received proper service of the 2019 CODE17-000628 examiner decision. That issue is beyond the scope of this appeal. The issuance of the 2019 Decision has no bearing on the results of this decision. The fines assessed in the NOV and adopted in the decision under appeal were not based upon any violations found in the 2019 Decision. Some of the reasoning of the 2019 Decision is referenced to save time on duplication, but the 2019 does not serve as any precedent for this decision. Nonconforming Use Rights for Violation No. 4 8. Mr. Carner does not directly challenge the COL on Violation No. 4 in his reconsideration request. However the issue is covered by his general contention that the November 1, 2024 Decision should have found that this trailer habitation met the criteria for “grandfathering.” Code Enforcement Decision - 8 As outlined in the City’s closing brief, habitation has been prohibited in travel trailers and recreational vehicles since the adoption of Ordinance 4963 in 2002. As outlined in the November 1, 2024 Decision, to prevail on a claim of nonconforming use the claimant must prove that use was lawfully established. As outlined in a recent nonconforming use judicial decision involving a property owner named Seven Hills: Seven Hills bears the initial burden of proof to establish the existence of a nonconforming use. Seven Hills must show (1) that the use existed before the County enacted the zoning ordinance, (2) that the use was lawful at the time, and (3) that it did not abandon or discontinue the use. Once Seven Hills has established the nonconforming use, then the burden shifts to the County to prove Seven Hills had abandoned or discontinued the nonconforming use. Seven Hills, LLC v. Chelan Cnty., 495 P.3d 778, 791 (Wash. 2021) (citations omitted). As outlined in the 2019 Carner decision and later affirmed in Icicle/Bunk, LLC v. Chelan Cnty., 537 P.3d 321 (2023), the “use” that is nonconforming is not every accessory use associated with the primary use of the violation site, but rather just the primary single-family home use itself. Mr. Carner’s nonconforming use defense doesn’t conform to the criteria above for two reasons, First, as a matter of law the only “use” protected as nonconforming is his residence. The associated travel trailer is not the primary use of the property and can be regulated or prohibited as necessary to implement the City’s police powers to protect public health, safety and welfare. Second, as determined in FOF No. 2 above, Mr. Carner has not met his burden of proof in establishing that the travel trailer use was established prior to his annexation into the City in 2008. If that use had been established while still in unincorporated King County and if that use was lawful under King County regulations at the time, then Mr. Carner would have met the requirements for establishing a legal nonconforming use if the use was a protected use (which it is not). Constitutional/Federal Civil Rights Mr. Carney raises several constitutional and federal civil rights claims. The Examiner has authority to address those types of claims. Administrative tribunals, including hearing examiners, are creatures of the legislative body that creates them. Lejeune v. Clallam Cty., 64 Wn. App. 257, 270– 71, 823 P.2d 1144 (1992); State v. Munson, 23 Wn. App. 522, 524, 597 P.2d 440 (1979); Chaussee v. Snohomish County Council, 38 Wn. App. 630, 636, 689 P.2d 1084 (1984). Their power is limited to that which the creating body grants. Lejeune, 64 Wn. App. at 270-71. Th e Renton City Council has not granted the hearing examiner any authority to adjudicate constitutional and civil rights claims. Code Enforcement Decision - 9 DECISION Violation No. 3 and 4 are sustained. Violation 1 is dismissed for the reasons identified in this reconsideration decision. Violation No. 2 is dismissed for the reasons identified in the November 1, 2024 Decision. The corrective action required by the FOV for Violation No. 3 shall be completed by April 11, 2025; provided that the driveway as identified in the November 1, 2024 Decision shall be considered an approved surface and vehicles may be parked on that surface. The corrective action required for Violation No. 4 shall be completed by April 30, 2027. During the abatement period only one travel trailer may be used for habitation. Habitation of any other travel trailer shall immediately cease upon issuance of this decision. $200 of the $300 fines imposed by the FOV are also sustained. The $200 fine shall be waived if all corrective actions are timely completed. DATED this 11th day of March, 2025. City of Renton Hearing Examiner NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL AND RECONSIDERATION Appeal to Superior Court. An appeal of the decision of the Hearing Examiner must be filed with Superior Court within twenty-one calendar days, as required by the Land Use Petition Act, Chapter 36.70C RCW. Requests for reconsideration shall be entertained if filed with the City Clerk prior to 5:00 pm, November 20, 2024. . Appendix A Carner Reopened (Completed 03/10/25) Transcript by Rev.com Page 1 of 51 Appendix A February 11, 2025 Hearing Transcript Carner Code Enforcement -- CODE23-000293 Note: This is a computer-generated transcript provided for informational purposes only. The reader should not take this document as 100% accurate or take offense at errors created by the limitations of the programming in transcribing speech. A recording of the hearing is available at the City Clerk’s Office should anyone need an accurate rendition of the hearing testimony. This transcript is only provided as a convenience to the parties for easy and approximate access to the testimony provided during the hearing. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:00:32): There it goes. Okay, great. Alright, for the record, it's February 11th, 2025, 1:30 PM I'm hearing examiner for the City of Renton presiding over a reopened, excuse me, code enforcement appeal from Kelly Carner. This has been kind of an unusual case where in my 30 years of doing code enforcement, I don't think I've ever reopened a hearing and we're at the second time on Mr. Garner's. Both times were for the purpose of ensuring that he had full opportunity to address his non-conforming use rights. Those are called grandfathered rights for those of you who aren't familiar with it. The first time, I believe before I even issued the final decision on the reconsideration was to address some nonconforming use rights that were expressly stated in the rent and municipal code. It basically provided if your use was in existence prior to the adoption of this ordinance, you could continue it and gave Mr. Carter an opportunity to address that. (00:01:30): The second time after the final decision was issued, that is under reconsideration, was over the travel trailer habitation alleged violation. And in that one, the code written municipal code doesn't expressly state that you can be grandfathered in. And so we're kind of have a mixed issue of law and fact here. One, whether the trailer habitation had occurred prior to the adoption of the ordinance that made that a violation. And two, whether there are grandfathered rights to that kind of use. So I mean, during the hearing today, I think we're primarily going to be focused on any evidence pertaining to when the travel trailer was use was first established. And I know that the city at least wanted time to prepare a brief and kind of address the legal part of it. And of course Mr. Carner will have opportunity to address that as well. So we had, Mr. (00:02:24): Carner had sent an email with a bunch of declarations identifying well from persons who basically testified that they had lived in the trailer or knew that had been there since around 2009. The city wanted an opportunity to cross examine those witnesses. That is a legal right under case law of the state. So that's the purpose of what we're doing here today. And as I ruled earlier, the city can of course respond in kind with new evidence since Mr. Carner was given the opportunity to provide new evidence. But Mr. Carner will have final say in this and the final opportunity to provide that evidence because on grandfather rights, at least my interpretation is he has the burden of proof. So a little complicated in this case is what are the exhibits of the case, because we've had a lot of email back and forth since the decision was issued. I think the easiest way to handle what documentation is going to be considered as part of reconsideration would be just all the email exchanges that involve Mr. Carner, the city and Appendix A Carner Reopened (Completed 03/10/25) Transcript by Rev.com Page 2 of 51 myself. And of course I have had no correspondence with the city or Mr. Carner without the other party present. So you all know exactly what communications we're talking about, all that. Ms. Moya, you placed all those emails at the city website, correct? At the hearing examiner site? Ms. Moya (00:03:45): Yes. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:03:46): Okay. (00:03:47): Yeah, unless there are any objections, I'm going to enter all those email exchanges. I will allow the parties a couple of days from the conclusion of today's hearing to go and look at the website and make sure that all the emails are there. And if you identify an email that wasn't in there, we'll put it in there. But I think just so we have a same understanding of what documents we're considering, it would be all the email exchanges since the decision under reconsideration was issued. And that would include that decision as well, as well as all the exhibits and testimony that are a part of that decision. And the date of that decision. Just to be clear for the record, it was issued on November 1st, 2024. So, okay. So hearing no objections, I'll enter the email correspondence in all attachments. I think that makes it pretty easy, straightforward. Lemme ask Ms. Mattson, you had submitted an exhibit list. Were there any exhibits on top of that that are in your list? You wanted to be put in the record or We can wait until your response. Okay. Alright. Mr. Carter, are there any other documents beyond what you've already submitted through the email correspondence? Speaker 1 (00:04:56): No. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:04:56): Okay. Alright. So Mr. Carter, I don't know how you want to proceed if, I mean, like I said, the city wants to cross examine the authors of the declarations you provided. You can have your witnesses testify or the city can go directly to questioning if you want. Mr. Carner: (00:05:12): I thought that that's what they were going to do is just go directly to it. So if Sheila wants to start, my daughter's here with me, so when you're ready to ask her how she knows me and my habitation in the trailer and stuff, basically you can start with whoever you want. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:05:32): Okay. Alright. Ms. Matson, why don't you call up the persons you wanted to question. And I will say after, Speaker 1 (00:05:40): Thank you so much. Good afternoon. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:05:40): Appendix A Carner Reopened (Completed 03/10/25) Transcript by Rev.com Page 3 of 51 Oh, just to clarify too, after every time after Ms. Mattson has done questioning Mr. Carter, you can then of course engage in redirect examination of your witnesses and ask additional questions. It's alright. Go ahead Ms. Nason. Ms. Madsen: (00:05:56): Thank you. Quick question, are the witnesses going to be you sworn in? Examiner Olbrechts: (00:06:01): Yes. Yeah. Ms. Madsen: (00:06:04): Okay, great. We would like to call Kelly Carner as the Examiner Olbrechts: (00:06:10): First witness. Okay. Mr. Carter, raise your right hand. Do you swear affirm, tell the truth, nothing about the truth in this proceeding? Ms. Madsen: (00:06:16): Yes. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:06:16): Okay, great. Okay, go ahead Ms. Batson. Ms. Madsen: (00:06:21): So good afternoon. Thanks for coming. I wanted to discuss the picture that you provided of JCO fifth wheel. It says up in the top right hand corner. Do you know which picture I'm talking about? Mr. Carner: (00:06:38): Not unless you show it. I wouldn't know the picture. Ms. Madsen: (00:06:43): Sheila, did you want to show 'em? I can give you co-host. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:06:47): I see that on my screen. Okay. Yeah, Speaker 1 (00:06:52): There you go. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:07:03): Not seeing anything yet. Speaker 1 (00:07:11): Appendix A Carner Reopened (Completed 03/10/25) Transcript by Rev.com Page 4 of 51 Did Katie and Mr. Carner: (00:07:11): Chris? This could drop. There Speaker 1 (00:07:15): We go. Mr. Carner: (00:07:15): Oh, they're there. Sheila. We might want to go with Katie and Chris sooner than later since they're in Mexico. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:07:27): Okay. Mr. Carner: (00:07:27): Okay. Yeah, I see that. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:07:28): Alright, Ms. Mattson, do you want to try to question the Amoss first since apparently they, Mr. Carner: (00:07:34): I can't hear you. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:07:35): Oh, you can't hear me? Let's see. Is my audio coming in badly? What's Speaker 1 (00:07:40): The question there? You're Examiner Olbrechts: (00:07:42): Okay? No, I was just saying that Ms. Matson, Mr. Carner requested you question the amoss first because they're in Mexico. Mr. Carner: (00:07:49): Yeah, they're down in the BA, California area, so Sure. Ms. Madsen: (00:07:55): Yeah, they're right Mr. Carner: (00:07:56): After Mr. Just in case they get cut off or something. Appendix A Carner Reopened (Completed 03/10/25) Transcript by Rev.com Page 5 of 51 Examiner Olbrechts: (00:07:59): Yeah, why don't we question them. I'll swear them in. Yeah, Mr. Carner: (00:08:01): Absolutely. Speaker 1 (00:08:02): Mr. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:08:02): And Mr. Amos is, so we'll start off with the Amos then. Mr. And Mrs. Amos, can you raise your right hand, be sworn in. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth? Nothing but the truth in this proceeding? Mr. Amos: (00:08:15): Yeah. I'm sorry. Did you say Ms. Amos or Mr. Amos? Examiner Olbrechts: (00:08:18): I said Mr. And Mrs. Amos. Actually Mr. Amos: (00:08:20): Both Examiner Olbrechts: (00:08:20): Of Mr. Amos: (00:08:20): You? Examiner Olbrechts: (00:08:21): Yeah. Okay. Alright. They do. Okay. Alright, go ahead Ms. Mattson. Ms. Madsen: (00:08:28): Okay, so we're switching to Mr. Amos. Mr. Amos: (00:08:31): Yeah. Ms. Madsen: (00:08:32): Chris? Mr. Amos: (00:08:33): Yes. Appendix A Carner Reopened (Completed 03/10/25) Transcript by Rev.com Page 6 of 51 Ms. Madsen: (00:08:33): Do you prefer to be called Chris? Mr. Amos: (00:08:35): Yeah, Ms. Madsen: (00:08:36): That's fine. Hi Chris. I'm going to talk with you a little bit about the statement that you provided. I have it here up on the screen. Can you see that statement? Speaker 1 (00:08:53): Yeah. Ms. Madsen: (00:08:55): Okay, perfect. Do you recognize the statement? Mr. Amos: (00:09:01): Yes. Ms. Madsen: (00:09:04): And then I see your signature here. Did you sign that? Mr. Amos: (00:09:08): Yes. Ms. Madsen: (00:09:13): Alright, thank you. Did you write this statement? Speaker 1 (00:09:19): No. Okay. Who wrote the statement Ms. Madsen: (00:09:32): And you, how do you know Mr. Conner? Mr. Amos: (00:09:39): He's the ex-husband of my wife. Ms. Madsen: (00:09:44): Got it. And how long would you say, Mr, I'm sorry, go ahead. Mr. Amos: (00:09:50): And the father of my two stepchildren, and I've known Kelly since, I want to say we first met in 2008. Appendix A Carner Reopened (Completed 03/10/25) Transcript by Rev.com Page 7 of 51 Ms. Madsen: (00:10:10): Great, thank you. How often have you been to the property over there at 1 1, 1, 3, 5 Southeast, one 64th Street. Mr. Amos: (00:10:19): A lot. Not only was it because the kids would go back and forth between him and us, but also we just go over there for various reasons. Speaker 1 (00:10:33): Sure. Ms. Madsen: (00:10:37): And then the statement says that the trailer was purchased in oh eight. How old were you at that time, approximately? Mr. Carner: (00:10:51): Hold on. I was born in 76. So can I object to this? Because what relevance is that how old he was? Examiner Olbrechts: (00:11:01): Yeah. What's the relevance of his age? Ms. Mattson? Ms. Madsen: (00:11:05): We are making sure that they were of legal age to make a decision about the status of trailer. Mr. Amos: (00:11:17): I say I was like 34. Oh, I'm sorry. Maybe I was supposed to wait until you guys Examiner Olbrechts: (00:11:22): No, that's fine. Yeah, go ahead. Yeah, a I'll allow the answer then. Alright, go ahead Ms. Matson. Ms. Madsen: (00:11:30): And then where have you lived while you've known Mr. Carter Mr. Amos: (00:11:37): Renton? When we first, sorry, I should, it was initially, we were living in Maple Valley, right on the Renton border. And then we bought a house in Renton and we were there for the other nine years or so. Ms. Madsen: (00:11:58): Perfect. Was that at the one 64th house? Mr. Amos: (00:12:03): No, it was, no. Appendix A Carner Reopened (Completed 03/10/25) Transcript by Rev.com Page 8 of 51 Ms. Madsen: (00:12:08): Alrighty. And then going back to your statement, to which travel trailer are you referring? Mr. Amos: (00:12:20): I am not a hundred percent sure on what brand it was, but I know exactly what trailer it is. It is the main trailer that Kelly resides in. What brand is it? Do you remember? Speaker 1 (00:12:40): I'm Ms. Madsen: (00:12:41): Just, Mr. Amos: (00:12:43): You can't Ms. Madsen: (00:12:43): Hear me? You can keep going. I'm just taking Mr. Amos: (00:12:45): Okay. Ms. Madsen: (00:12:47): No, no, I can hear fine, but if I take a minute to respond, I'm just writing notes. Mr. Amos: (00:12:52): Yeah, and I do apologize. I guess I should have looked at up, but I dunno the brand, but I know it was his primary residence since I met him. Mr. Carner: (00:13:01): Also, I have a question about what the relevance of what trailer it is. It's the use of the trailer since I started living it in 2008 is what we're talking about. Have I been living in a fifth wheel on this property? What brand is, that's what we're trying to bear. What brand the trailer is is still relevant. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:13:25): I mean it would have to be continuous use if there were different brands and there was a gap between one and the other. I mean, I don't see a problem with developing, Mr. Carner: (00:13:34): I understand what you're saying, but she's trying to lock it down to a specific brand and as long as I've been living in this trailer for the whole period of time, Speaker 1 (00:13:45): Appendix A Carner Reopened (Completed 03/10/25) Transcript by Rev.com Page 9 of 51 Which Mr. Carner: (00:13:45): I have just like I've explained to everyone, then the brand is irrelevant. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:13:51): Okay. Well and it also tests the memory of the witnesses, so I'll still allow it. Go ahead Ms. Matson. Ms. Madsen: (00:13:59): Thank you. How do you know when Mr. Carner purchased the travel trailer in your statement? You said 2008. How do you know that? Mr. Amos: (00:14:10): I just know that he had the trailer before I met him. So by the time I had met him, he was already living in it. Ms. Madsen: (00:14:26): So before you met him, he was living in it and you met him in oh eight and he was living in it? Mr. Amos: (00:14:33): It would've been, I met him in either, it was either late oh eight or early oh nine because that's when I moved into the area. Ms. Madsen: (00:14:39): Okay, got it. So that was 2008? Mr. Amos: (00:14:48): Yes. He was living in it. Yes. Ms. Madsen: (00:14:52): Okay. And then are you aware that the property was annexed in March of oh eight? Mr. Carner: (00:14:59): Okay. This needs to stop. She's going beyond what this hearing is for. This hearing is for the relevance of them knowing who I am, knowing that I lived in the trailer, nothing else. That's what this hearing is for. If you guys do not want to stick to what this hearing is for, I will just appeal this decision and I'll see this in the Superior Court. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:15:26): Alright, so Ms. Mattson, what's, okay, Mr. Carner: (00:15:27): We're just going with all this. Appendix A Carner Reopened (Completed 03/10/25) Transcript by Rev.com Page 10 of 51 Ms. Madsen: (00:15:30): That's it. We're just going over statements. Mr. Carner: (00:15:33): You need to go over the statement that they signed and how they know me. That's it. There is nothing else for you to be asking questions about. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:15:41): Okay. Alright, well let's not engage in argument between the attorneys here, or not attorney, sorry, the parties here, but Ms. Patson. Yeah, let's move on. Next question. Ms. Madsen: (00:15:54): Sure. Chris, are you, this language is used in your statement. I just need to know from you what you define a travel trailer as. Mr. Carner: (00:16:15): Objection. Same course. She's going down. Has nothing to do with anything. I can highlight it for you. You're wasting our time, Sheila. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:16:26): Okay. Alright. Well, I'm going to allow some leeway here, just like you'll have leeway to ask your questions. Mr. Carner, go ahead, Ms. Matson. Ms. Madsen: (00:16:41): Okay, Chris, can you go ahead and what you think a travel trailer is? Mr. Amos: (00:16:48): Well, my definition of a travel trailer is a mobile trailer that can move from location to location. Ms. Madsen: (00:16:55): And then along those same lines, a definition of a domicile Mr. Amos: (00:17:00): Residence Ms. Madsen: (00:17:04): And your definition of habitation. Mr. Amos: (00:17:07): Somebody that's residing in that residence. Ms. Madsen: (00:17:13): Appendix A Carner Reopened (Completed 03/10/25) Transcript by Rev.com Page 11 of 51 Sorry, these are a little repetitive, but I just want to make sure it's all on the record. No, that's totally fine. Your definition of a residence, Mr. Amos: (00:17:26): A home where people reside in, Ms. Madsen: (00:17:35): And then your definition of a living space. Mr. Amos: (00:17:42): The same thing as a home, wherever somebody might be living, whether it be a house, a trailer. Okay. Ms. Madsen: (00:17:53): And do the terms travel trailer and residents mean the same thing? Mr. Amos: (00:18:00): Yeah, to me they do. I mean, to me, me, it depends on the use of whatever the trailer. If somebody's deciding to live in it, then I would say yes, that's a residence. Ms. Madsen: (00:18:18): Okay. And then in your statement, when you say that the use has been consistent and uninterrupted since its establishment, what do you mean by consistent and uninterrupted? Mr. Amos: (00:18:32): Kelly has lived in that, ever since I met him, there's never been any point that I've known Kelly to ever live in anything else. And because of the fact that he is the father of the two step kids, the step kids or my step kids, I'm sorry, his children would bounce between us and him every week. And so because of that, he's always been there and we've had a lot of interaction with him ever since Katie and I got married. Ms. Madsen: (00:19:01): Okay. And then when you say since its establishment, since what has been established? Mr. Amos: (00:19:11): Did I say establishment? Oh, on the left. Oh, sorry. Ms. Madsen: (00:19:17): Yeah, let me highlight it for you. Mr. Amos: (00:19:20): I'm sorry. I thought you Ms. Madsen: (00:19:23): Right there. Appendix A Carner Reopened (Completed 03/10/25) Transcript by Rev.com Page 12 of 51 Mr. Amos: (00:19:25): I would say by its establishment is when the travel trailer was purchased, located, or moved into the current location and then he moved into it. Ms. Madsen: (00:19:41): And then this one gets a little bit more down into the statement. What specifically leads to your statement That the travel trailer appears to meet the necessary requirements for safe and responsible habitation. Mr. Carner: (00:20:02): So we're not following any of the guidelines for this proceeding. This wasn't a proceeding to go through word by word of the Let me go highlight Examiner Olbrechts: (00:20:17): Document. Yeah. Yes, it was. Okay. Ms. Matson, what was, yeah, that's fine. Within the scope she is trying Mr. Car trying Mr. Carner: (00:20:25): To nitpick. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:20:26): Yeah. Well that's all right. If it gets repetitive, we'll stop it. Mr. Carner: (00:20:29): That something's not true. That's all she's doing. Ms. Madsen: (00:20:32): So these statements are all identical and we need to make sure that what was said is the truth and finding out. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:20:47): That's fine. Overruled. Proceed. Please. Overruled. Proceed please. They Mr. Carner: (00:20:50): Signed the document and they've sworn that they've made a true statement. You don't need to go word for word through this document to try to catch something. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:20:59): Well, Ms. Carner, she has that right? I've overruled your objection. Go ahead, Ms. Matson. Mr. Carner: (00:21:04): You guys don't have to answer any of your questions either. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:21:07): Appendix A Carner Reopened (Completed 03/10/25) Transcript by Rev.com Page 13 of 51 Okay. Mr. Carter. Okay. But if they don't answer questions, their declarations don't come in. That's your choice. Mr. Carner: (00:21:14): Their declarations work for what the scope of this is. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:21:19): Are you devising your witnesses to not answer the questions? Mr. Carter? We'll be done right now if that's the case. And I'll issue a decision on the evidence up to this point. I'm Mr. Carner: (00:21:28): Saying this is how do they know me? Examiner Olbrechts: (00:21:29): Okay. Your objection is overruled. Alright. Okay, go ahead Ms. Matson. Mr. Carner: (00:21:33): We'll have fine with this down the road. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:21:35): Yeah. Okay. Go ahead Ms. Matson. Ms. Madsen: (00:21:39): Okay. What leads to your statement of the travel trailer that it appears to meet the necessary requirements for safe and responsible habitation? Mr. Amos: (00:21:51): To me, I mean, it has a kitchen. It's stable, it has restrooms, and at its time, the two children would bounce between our home and his. And the children were both comfortable and felt safe there and had access to all the necessary amenities that they would need to be able to function properly. Ms. Madsen: (00:22:17): Okay. And then do you have home inspection experience? Mr. Amos: (00:22:21): I do not. I don't. Ms. Madsen: (00:22:27): And so you've been there. Have you personally inspected the travel trailer? Mr. Amos: (00:22:32): I've been in that travel trailer a lot. Ms. Madsen: (00:22:34): Appendix A Carner Reopened (Completed 03/10/25) Transcript by Rev.com Page 14 of 51 You've been inside. Mr. Amos: (00:22:35): Okay. Ms. Madsen: (00:22:39): Alright. And is the travel trailer connected to any water or wastewater or Mr. Carner: (00:22:46): Power? Objection. Objection. Again. Out of the scope of what this is for? Examiner Olbrechts: (00:22:54): No, it's within the scope. It's a, she's determining whether it was really used for habitation, whether it had utilities is probative of that. So overruled. Go ahead, Ms. Matson, Ms. Madsen: (00:23:08): Just a question. If the travel trailer was connected to any water wastewater and or power? Mr. Amos: (00:23:14): Yes, I believe so. They had electricity, it had water, and it had operating sewage. Ms. Madsen: (00:23:21): Thank you. And then in your statement, when you say that the trailer is in good condition, what leads you to believe that it was in good condition? Mr. Amos: (00:23:33): I was in that trailer even this last summer, and the trailer is both comfortable to me. It doesn't have any signs of something that's in a dilapidated state. It keeps the water out, has a working kitchen, has working restaurants. Ms. Madsen: (00:23:55): Okay. And then using the language from your statement, do you believe that the travel trailer is intended for habitation? Mr. Amos: (00:24:05): Yeah, I mean, you're talking to the wrong people. We live in, well, we're down in Mexico for a good chunk of the year. And I'm sorry that I'm expounding on this, but we see people living in all sorts of things. And so to me, as long as it's a comfortable, safe living space, then absolutely, I feel like it is adequate resonance for somebody. Ms. Madsen: (00:24:26): Okay. And then my last one, thank you for being so patient with me after this conversation. Do you still agree with the statement that you provided? Appendix A Carner Reopened (Completed 03/10/25) Transcript by Rev.com Page 15 of 51 Mr. Amos: (00:24:36): I do. A hundred percent. Ms. Madsen: (00:24:37): Okay. Thank you so much for your time. Mr. Amos: (00:24:40): Yeah, yeah, absolutely. And did you want to go to Katie next? Ms. Madsen: (00:24:45): Yes. Speaker 1 (00:24:57): Hi, Ms. Madsen: (00:24:58): I'm Sheila. Can I call you Katie? Speaker 6 (00:25:00): Yes, that's good. Thank you. Ms. Madsen: (00:25:02): Thanks for meeting with me today. Let me go ahead and bring up your statement really quick. Speaker 1 (00:25:19): I can't Ms. Madsen: (00:25:20): See it. My screen is a little small. Okay, so I have the statement up on the screen. Can you see it okay? Speaker 6 (00:25:32): Yes I can. Ms. Madsen: (00:25:33): Okay. Do you recognize it? Speaker 6 (00:25:37): Yes, I do. Ms. Madsen: (00:25:38): Okay. Did you sign this? Speaker 6 (00:25:39): Appendix A Carner Reopened (Completed 03/10/25) Transcript by Rev.com Page 16 of 51 Yes, I did. Ms. Madsen: (00:25:41): Did you write this statement? Speaker 6 (00:25:43): No. Who wrote it? Kelly Carner did. Ms. Madsen: (00:25:51): And then how do you know Mr. Carner? Speaker 6 (00:25:54): He is my ex-husband. Ms. Madsen: (00:25:57): How long have you known him? Speaker 6 (00:26:01): Since 1998 ish, maybe before that. Ms. Madsen: (00:26:09): But Speaker 6 (00:26:09): Students are fine as well. Yeah. Ms. Madsen: (00:26:12): And then how often have you been at the property? At 1, 1, 1, 3, 5 Speaker 6 (00:26:17): Pretty often. Speaker 7 (00:26:25): Then Ms. Madsen: (00:26:29): Where have you lived while you've known Mr. Carner Speaker 6 (00:26:35): In Renton? A little bit in Maple Valley, mostly Renton. Ms. Madsen: (00:26:39): Appendix A Carner Reopened (Completed 03/10/25) Transcript by Rev.com Page 17 of 51 Got it. Do you currently live at the 1 1 1 3 5? No. And then going back to your statement on the screen right here, to which travel trailer are you referring when you say that Kelly Carner has maintained a travel trailer on this property? Speaker 6 (00:27:01): It's the one you showed in the picture that the jco, same one he is had since he purchased it. Okay. Ms. Madsen: (00:27:12): And then how do you know when he purchased that? Were you there? Speaker 6 (00:27:15): I wasn't there when he purchased it. We had just separated and he purchased it within a month of that. Got Ms. Madsen: (00:27:25): It. And then how do you know that the trailer was used as a residence before 2019? Speaker 6 (00:27:35): We've been there, like Chris said, having the kids divided between us. We were there quite a bit. And so I was eye witness to him living in it. Okay. And then, Ms. Madsen: (00:27:58): Sorry, since the language is used in your statement, what do you define a travel trailer as? Speaker 6 (00:28:06): It could be an RV motor home, anything mobile. It can also be a living space. Ms. Madsen: (00:28:17): And what do you define habitation as? Speaker 6 (00:28:21): Space that's lived in. Ms. Madsen: (00:28:27): And in your statement, do you say that travel trailer and residence mean the same thing? Speaker 6 (00:28:40): They can be, yeah, depending on the use. Ms. Madsen: (00:28:47): Okay. And then going to the consistent and uninterrupted use of it, what do you define that Speaker 6 (00:28:55): Appendix A Carner Reopened (Completed 03/10/25) Transcript by Rev.com Page 18 of 51 As? He is lived in it since he purchased it back in 2008 consistently. Ms. Madsen: (00:29:05): Okay. And then going to the statement where you say that it appears to meet the necessary requirements for a safe and responsible habitation, what is safe and responsible? Habitation? Speaker 6 (00:29:26): A space that keeps you warm when needed, that has as a bathroom to use kitchen. Just the basics to be able to be comfortable and safe. Ms. Madsen: (00:29:40): Okay. And then do you have any home inspection experience? Speaker 6 (00:29:44): No. No, I don't. Ms. Madsen: (00:29:47): Have you yourself been inside the trailer? Speaker 6 (00:29:50): Yes, I have. Ms. Madsen: (00:29:56): And then what observation did you believe? That it's in good condition. Speaker 6 (00:30:01): There's just nothing that stands out as though it's in disrepair in any way. The plumbing works, the power, everything seems to be in good shape. Ms. Madsen: (00:30:21): Okay. So using the language from your statement, do you believe that travel trailer is intended to be used for habitation? Speaker 6 (00:30:28): Yeah, definitely. Ms. Madsen: (00:30:30): And is it intended to be his residence? Speaker 6 (00:30:33): Yes. Ms. Madsen: (00:30:37): Appendix A Carner Reopened (Completed 03/10/25) Transcript by Rev.com Page 19 of 51 And then after this conversation, do you still agree with the statement that you provided? Yes, I do. Thank you so, so much. Yeah. Thank you for your help, Mr. Hearing Examiner, that was all for Examiner Olbrechts: (00:30:58): Chris Ms. Madsen: (00:30:59): And Keith. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:31:00): Thank you Mr. And Mrs. Amos. And unless Mr. Carner plans on calling you, you don't need to stay on, but that's up to Mr. Carner, I believe. Mr. Amos: (00:31:08): Okay, thank you. We'll go ahead and sign on then. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:31:10): Okay, Mr. Carner. Okay. Thank you Mr. Mr. Amos: (00:31:13): No, sorry. Did you say you wanted us to stay on? Oh, Examiner Olbrechts: (00:31:15): No, no. I was saying unless Mr. Carner needed you to stay, do you need them to stay Mr. Carner? Mr. Carner: (00:31:19): I don't need to put them through any more of this, so no. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:31:23): Okay. Thank you again, Mr. And Ms. Davis, appreciate your comments. Mr. Carner: (00:31:26): Okay, we're okay. Whatever you guys Examiner Olbrechts: (00:31:27): Need. Mr. Carner: (00:31:29): If the examiner says you can sign off, you guys sign off and I appreciate what you've done. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:31:33): Thank you. Yeah, thank you. Appendix A Carner Reopened (Completed 03/10/25) Transcript by Rev.com Page 20 of 51 Mr. Carner: (00:31:35): Alright. Thank you everybody. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:31:40): Okay, Ms. Matson, you want to do Mr. Carner now? Mr. Carner: (00:31:43): Yes, Examiner Olbrechts: (00:31:43): Back to him. Okay. And Mr. Carner, I believe I swore you in, so go ahead, Ms. Mr. Carner: (00:31:47): Whatever is next. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:31:48): Yeah. Ms. Madsen: (00:31:53): All Speaker 1 (00:31:53): Right. Mr. Carner: (00:31:56): We're not doing this because of me, Sheila. We're doing this because of you wanted to cross examine everyone. Ms. Madsen: (00:32:01): Yep. So Mr. Carner: (00:32:02): That's the one reason I'm here. Ms. Madsen: (00:32:04): Okay. We're moving on to your picture here. Mr. Carner: (00:32:07): Yep. Ms. Madsen: (00:32:08): That I have up on the screen and I see the date in the corner of 5 31 2009. Appendix A Carner Reopened (Completed 03/10/25) Transcript by Rev.com Page 21 of 51 Mr. Carner: (00:32:14): Yeah, that was the first picture I sent you that you said didn't have any relevance. Then I sent you the picture that had the timestamp from Google Maps that showed the date and it showed all the location numbers, the GSI numbers and stuff on it. So Ms. Madsen: (00:32:33): The 5 31, is that the date that the photo was taken? Mr. Carner: (00:32:36): Whatever the date was stamped on the photo itself down there in the bottom corner to this, that would be when Google Maps took that picture. They only take the picture once a year. Speaker 1 (00:32:49): Okay. Mr. Carner: (00:32:50): So the 2009 picture is the first picture I could get because the trailer wasn't in that position where it was in 2008. I had just purchased it. Ms. Madsen: (00:33:03): Okay. And then for this picture, can you explain how this picture shows that that white rectangle is a travel trailer? Mr. Carner: (00:33:20): Do you want to make the picture bigger so everyone can see it better? Speaker 1 (00:33:23): Of course. Mr. Carner: (00:33:24): Blow it up. Mainly for myself too. I don't have my bifocals on. Sure. So the white thing that's sticking out where the arrow is, the farthest, that's the awning for the trailer, the rear thing sticking out, protruding right below the arrow on the white. That's the slide out of the trailer. Then on the other side where it sticks out, you can see that little wider area. That's the other slide out for the trailer. And then you can kind of see it, but there's a shed real close to it up on the top, on the left hand side looking forward. And there's another slide out, which is what this trailer that I'm sitting in currently has is three slide outs. Ms. Madsen: (00:34:08): Okay. Is there another view in addition to your description? Mr. Carner: (00:34:14): Another view of the trailer? Ms. Madsen: (00:34:16): Appendix A Carner Reopened (Completed 03/10/25) Transcript by Rev.com Page 22 of 51 Yes. Mr. Carner: (00:34:18): No, there's not another I sent you what I could get, documentation that would be admissible to a court. Okay. Which wasn't a document that was produced by me, it was produced by Google Maps. Ms. Madsen: (00:34:32): Google Maps. Okay. Got it. And then can you explain how this picture shows that that white rectangle is being used for habitation? Mr. Carner: (00:34:42): I can't, are you questioning me now? Is that what's going on here? Speaker 1 (00:34:49): Yeah. Ms. Madsen: (00:34:49): Oh yes. Sorry, Mr. Carner: (00:34:51): I didn't know that you were moving on to me, and then I'll answer your questions and then you're moving on to everybody else. Ms. Madsen: (00:34:57): Yeah, yeah, yeah. We were going to do you first and then the other people had to go. Mr. Carner: (00:35:03): Did Sheila, did you ever swear in, Ms. Madsen: (00:35:07): I'm not being questioned right now, but Examiner Olbrechts: (00:35:11): Yeah, she will be sworn in when she provides testimony. Yeah. Yeah. Well I could do it now in case there's testimony included in her questioning. I mean, it's not just to be safe, Ms. Mr. Carner: (00:35:23): I can't hear you, sir, Examiner Olbrechts: (00:35:23): Sir. Oh, I don't know why that's not, can you hear me? Now's Mr. Carner: (00:35:27): Appendix A Carner Reopened (Completed 03/10/25) Transcript by Rev.com Page 23 of 51 Going out. I dunno if that's just me or you Examiner Olbrechts: (00:35:29): Guys can, I think it's maybe the connection. Yeah, my connection kind of goes in and out sometimes too. We Speaker 1 (00:35:35): Hear all the time. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:35:36): Okay. Well that's good to know. Okay, so Ms. Matson, let me swear you in just to, like I said, we don't really need to do it until you testify, but in case there's any testimony in your questions, do you swear affirm, tell the truth, nothing but the truth in this proceeding? Speaker 1 (00:35:49): Yes. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:35:49): Okay, great. Okay. Alright, go ahead. Ms. Madsen: (00:35:54): Okay. To the extent that this picture shows a travel trailer, what is the make and model of the travel trailer? Mr. Carner: (00:36:04): The JCO fifth wheel, just like the picture says. Ms. Madsen: (00:36:09): And what's the license plate number? Mr. Carner: (00:36:16): I don't have the license plate number. It's not on the picture, which I pretty sure is irrelevant to the question. We're talking about the trailer that I'm presiding. And Ms. Madsen: (00:36:29): So we're trying to make sure that this is in fact a JCO fifth wheel trailer. And in order to do that, we could use the plate to connect it Mr. Carner: (00:36:39): All. And I could walk back and get you the license plate, but it's not on there right now. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:36:48): Okay. And Mr. Carter, of course, if you don't know the answer, it's perfectly acceptable to say, I don't know. Yeah. So that's fine. Appendix A Carner Reopened (Completed 03/10/25) Transcript by Rev.com Page 24 of 51 Ms. Madsen: (00:36:56): Alright, I think we are done. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:37:00): Okay. That was easy. Alright, with Mr. Carner: (00:37:02): All your questioning for me. Ms. Madsen: (00:37:04): Yes. Question for Mr. Carner: (00:37:06): Mr. So do you don't have any questions about the other pictures I sent you? The more current ones? Just this one. Ms. Madsen: (00:37:14): As far as I know, the scope of this was just limited to the foundation of the picture that I'm bringing up on the screen right now. Mr. Carner: (00:37:24): Okay. So the evidence that I entered into that had all the pictures, that's fine still, Examiner Olbrechts: (00:37:33): You mean the ones already admitted for the prior hearing? Mr. Carner: (00:37:37): Excuse me sir. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:37:38): Are you talking about the pictures you admitted in the prior hearing? The last hearing we did, Mr. Carner: (00:37:44): The email I sent you asked if I had any evidence to submit into this hearing and I sent an email that had a bunch of all of our correspondence going back and forth that had the two newest pictures that I had taken off of Google Earth Speaker 1 (00:38:08): That Mr. Carner: (00:38:08): Showed the location data. Appendix A Carner Reopened (Completed 03/10/25) Transcript by Rev.com Page 25 of 51 Examiner Olbrechts: (00:38:11): Well, I mean, assuming that was in the email communications that I admitted into the record at the beginning of the hearing, it's been admitted. Speaker 1 (00:38:19): Okay. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:38:19): Yeah, and like I said, over the next couple days, what, and Ms. Moya, if you're listening, if you could do a screenshot of all the emails that are currently at the examiner website for this case and email it to everybody. That way we know exactly what we're talking about in terms of which are in the record at this point. Speaker 1 (00:38:37): Yeah. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:38:39): Did you hear that Ms. Speaker 8 (00:38:39): Moya a Ms. Madsen: (00:38:39): Screenshot of what we have? Examiner Olbrechts: (00:38:43): Yeah, of what you have you asked, sorry, of all the emails that Ms. Madsen: (00:38:46): I'll do that right Examiner Olbrechts: (00:38:46): Now and just email it to everybody and then that way there'll be no question in case people something that way there'll be no question about whether something was added or subtracted since today. Mr. Carner: (00:38:57): Yeah. Okay. Well I thought she would've had questions about those pictures. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:39:00): Yeah. Yeah. Well, it's up to her. Like I said, they're admitted, so Yeah, that's fine. Ms. Matson, you're done questioning. Okay. So who's your next witness, Ms. Matson? Ms. Madsen: (00:39:14): Appendix A Carner Reopened (Completed 03/10/25) Transcript by Rev.com Page 26 of 51 We have Caleb Carner. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:39:17): Okay. Alright. Mr. Carter, let me just raise your right hand. Do you swear affirm to tell the truth, nothing but the truth in this proceeding? Speaker 1 (00:39:25): Yes. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:39:26): Okay, great. Alright, go ahead Ms. Mattson. Ms. Madsen: (00:39:31): Hi there, I'm Sheila. Can I call you Caleb? Yeah, I'm just going to put statement up on the screen. Let me know if you can see it. Speaker 1 (00:39:44): Yep. Ms. Madsen: (00:39:46): Perfect. Do you recognize the statement? Speaker 9 (00:39:50): Yeah. Okay. Ms. Madsen: (00:39:53): Did you sign this statement? Speaker 9 (00:39:55): Yes. Ms. Madsen: (00:39:57): Did you write this statement? Speaker 9 (00:39:59): No. Ms. Madsen: (00:40:01): Who wrote this statement? Speaker 9 (00:40:03): My dad, Kelly. Appendix A Carner Reopened (Completed 03/10/25) Transcript by Rev.com Page 27 of 51 Speaker 1 (00:40:06): Okay. Ms. Madsen: (00:40:11): And then how often have you been to the property at one one? 1, 3, 5. Speaker 9 (00:40:19): Most of my life I grew up there. Speaker 1 (00:40:23): Okay. And then Ms. Madsen: (00:40:33): Lemme see here, have you lived in the trailer while you've, sorry? Have you ever lived inside the trailer? Speaker 9 (00:40:57): Yes. Ms. Madsen: (00:41:00): Do you currently live there? Speaker 9 (00:41:02): No. Ms. Madsen: (00:41:05): And then in your statement, you referred to a travel trailer, to which are you referring? Speaker 9 (00:41:12): The Jaco travel trailer that he's in. Ms. Madsen: (00:41:19): And how do you know when he bought the travel trailer? Speaker 9 (00:41:25): How do I know? Is that what you said? Yes. Speaker 1 (00:41:27): Yes, Speaker 9 (00:41:28): Because I was in it right after he bought it. Okay. Ms. Madsen: (00:41:36): Appendix A Carner Reopened (Completed 03/10/25) Transcript by Rev.com Page 28 of 51 And then to the best of your recollection, when was the travel trailer first used as a resident? Speaker 9 (00:41:45): From what I remember, as soon as he bought it. Ms. Madsen: (00:41:50): Okay. And oh eight? Speaker 1 (00:41:52): Yeah. Ms. Madsen: (00:41:54): Alrighty. And then the language in your statements, points to travel trailer, what do you define a travel trailer as? Speaker 9 (00:42:08): Something that you can move to an RV but also reside in or live in. Ms. Madsen: (00:42:16): Okay. And what do you define a residence as? Speaker 9 (00:42:22): Home? Something you can sleep in, be comfortable. Ms. Madsen: (00:42:29): And then do you equate travel, trailer and residence as meaning the same thing? Speaker 9 (00:42:35): Yes. Ms. Madsen: (00:42:40): In your statement, when you say that the use has been consistent and uninterrupted since its establishments, what do you mean by consistent and uninterrupted? Speaker 9 (00:42:52): He's only lived in that, Ms. Madsen: (00:42:58): Never lived in the 1, 1, 1, 3, 5. Speaker 9 (00:43:01): Well that's the address. Appendix A Carner Reopened (Completed 03/10/25) Transcript by Rev.com Page 29 of 51 Ms. Madsen: (00:43:04): Okay. And then in your statement you say that it appears to meet the necessary requirements for safe and reasonable habitation. What are the necessary requirements Speaker 9 (00:43:26): For it to be healthy and you're not getting sick in it? Everything's working properly. Ms. Madsen: (00:43:34): Okay. Do you have home inspection experience? Speaker 9 (00:43:38): No. Ms. Madsen: (00:43:42): You've been in the trailer before you said? Speaker 9 (00:43:44): Yes. Ms. Madsen: (00:43:47): Alrighty. And what leads you to believe that it's in good condition? Speaker 9 (00:43:52): I lived in there most of my life, so I know that it's all working good and nothing's wrong with it. Ms. Madsen: (00:43:58): Okay. And then do you believe that the travel trailer is intended to be used as a domicile? Speaker 9 (00:44:12): Sorry, you got to explain that word to me. Ms. Madsen: (00:44:17): No problem. I'm just using the language that's in your statement here. Mr. Carner: (00:44:21): Domicile is a residence. I didn't hear what she said. Ms. Madsen: (00:44:26): Oh sorry. Sorry about that. Sorry if I'm cutting out. Speaker 9 (00:44:30): Oh no, you're fine. I'm sorry. Appendix A Carner Reopened (Completed 03/10/25) Transcript by Rev.com Page 30 of 51 Ms. Madsen: (00:44:32): So using the language from your statements, do you believe that the travel trailer is intended to be used as a domicile? Speaker 9 (00:44:42): Yes. Ms. Madsen: (00:44:44): Yes. And do you believe that it's intended to be used as a living space? Speaker 9 (00:44:53): Yes. Ms. Madsen: (00:44:55): And then after this conversation, do you still agree with this statement that you provided? Speaker 9 (00:45:00): Yes, I do. Ms. Madsen: (00:45:03): Great. Thank you so much for your time. Yep. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:45:07): Okay. Ms. Madsen: (00:45:07): That's Speaker 1 (00:45:08): All. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:45:09): Alright. And Mr. Carter, like I said, if you want to ask questions of your own witnesses after they're done, you always have that opportunity so Mr. Carner: (00:45:18): You can if Yeah, no. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:45:18): Okay. Mr. Carner: (00:45:19): He was asking a question, that's why I explained it to him. Appendix A Carner Reopened (Completed 03/10/25) Transcript by Rev.com Page 31 of 51 Examiner Olbrechts: (00:45:23): Oh, sure. Yeah, that's fine. Okay. Mr. Carner: (00:45:25): I mean this is to gain evidence or information, right? That's what this whole thing's about. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:45:31): Yeah. Yeah, yeah. I just want to make sure that you recall that you could re-question your witnesses after they were done with their testimony. Yeah, Mr. Carner: (00:45:37): There's no reason for me to question my son. Like he said, he's lived in it since I bought it. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:45:42): I Mr. Carner: (00:45:42): Mean, he was six years old when I bought it and lived in it basically until he was 17. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:45:49): Yeah. Yeah. Alright. Compelling testimony. Mr. Carner: (00:45:51): Him and my daughter, they're the same as far as their knowledge about this. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:45:58): Understood. Mr. Carner: (00:45:59): You know how, I don't need to explain, but you know how I feel about all this. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:46:04): Oh yeah. Yeah. Okay. Mr. Carner: (00:46:06): I've been very clear about Examiner Olbrechts: (00:46:07): It. Question? Yes. Yes. Alright, well onto the next witness, Ms. Matson, thank you Caleb for your testimony. Mr. Carner: (00:46:14): Appendix A Carner Reopened (Completed 03/10/25) Transcript by Rev.com Page 32 of 51 And like I said, Morgan's here with me so I can give her my laptop if you want to question her if you want to do Tim and Stephanie next or whatever. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:46:23): Okay. Ms. Matson up to you. Ms. Madsen: (00:46:26): Yeah, we'd like to call Morgan Ryberg please. Speaker 7 (00:46:31): Hello? Examiner Olbrechts: (00:46:32): Okay. And I'm sorry I didn't catch your last name. Ms. Speaker 7 (00:46:36): Ryberg. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:46:37): Oh, okay. Alright. Ms. Ryberg. Swear in just you raise your right hand. Do you swear affirm to tell the truth, nothing but the truth in this proceeding? Ms. Madsen: (00:46:43): Yes. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:46:43): Okay, great. All right, go ahead Ms. Mattson. Ms. Madsen: (00:46:47): Hi, I'm Sheila. Can I call you Morgan? Yes. Hi Morgan. Thanks for coming today. Let me bring up, there we go. Can you see my screen okay? Speaker 1 (00:47:02): Yeah. Ms. Madsen: (00:47:04): Okay, perfect. Do you recognize the statement? Speaker 7 (00:47:09): Yes. Ms. Madsen: (00:47:11): And then I have your name here. Did you sign this? Appendix A Carner Reopened (Completed 03/10/25) Transcript by Rev.com Page 33 of 51 Speaker 7 (00:47:14): Yes. Ms. Madsen: (00:47:16): Did you write this Speaker 7 (00:47:17): Statement? No. Ms. Madsen: (00:47:20): Who wrote the statement? Speaker 7 (00:47:21): My dad, Kelly. Perfect. Ms. Madsen: (00:47:29): And then it says that the trailer was purchased in oh eight. How old were you at that time? I was eight years old. Where, sorry. Have you ever lived in the trailer? Speaker 7 (00:48:00): Yes. Ms. Madsen: (00:48:03): Do you currently live in the trailer? Speaker 7 (00:48:04): No. Ms. Madsen: (00:48:07): How long would you say you lived in the trailer for? Speaker 7 (00:48:11): From age eight to 17 maybe. Ms. Madsen: (00:48:19): Alrighty. And then in your statement here, to which travel trailer are you referring? The JCO that he lives in. Speaker 1 (00:48:38): Alrighty. Ms. Madsen: (00:48:43): This language is used in your statement. What do you define a travel trailer as? Appendix A Carner Reopened (Completed 03/10/25) Transcript by Rev.com Page 34 of 51 Speaker 7 (00:48:50): Something that can be lived in that is also mobile, can be moved to different places. Ms. Madsen: (00:49:00): And then what do you define a domicile as Speaker 7 (00:49:05): A home where someone lives. Ms. Madsen: (00:49:08): Okay. And then Speaker 7 (00:49:11): What do you define a residence as? Where someone resides permanently? Yes. Ms. Madsen: (00:49:27): And then what would you define a living space as? Where someone Speaker 7 (00:49:32): Lives has their home. Ms. Madsen: (00:49:35): Okay. And Speaker 7 (00:49:37): Then do a travel trailer and residence mean Ms. Madsen: (00:49:39): The same Speaker 7 (00:49:40): Thing? They can, Ms. Madsen: (00:49:41): Yeah. What do you mean by the statement that the use of the travel trailer has been consistent and uninterrupted since its establishment. Speaker 7 (00:49:55): He's been living in it ever since he bought it and moved it to the property. Ms. Madsen: (00:50:06): Okay. And then what leads to your statement that the travel trailer appears to meet the necessary requirements for safe and responsible habitation? Appendix A Carner Reopened (Completed 03/10/25) Transcript by Rev.com Page 35 of 51 Speaker 7 (00:50:17): It has everything that a normal home would have. A kitchen, bathroom, bedroom, washer, and dryer. Okay. Ms. Madsen: (00:50:27): Do you have home inspection experience? Speaker 7 (00:50:30): No. Ms. Madsen: (00:50:34): And you said you've lived in it, so you've been inside it and you've seen it? Yeah. Alright. And what observations lead you to believe that it's in good condition? Speaker 7 (00:50:48): It doesn't have any leaks or anything like that. Everything is in working order inside. Ms. Madsen: (00:50:55): Okay. And Speaker 7 (00:50:57): Then Ms. Madsen: (00:50:57): Do you believe that the travel trailer is intended to be used as a dump style? I believe that they can be used for one, yeah. And do you believe that the travel trailer is intended to be used as a permanent residence? Yes. And after this conversation, do you still agree with your statement that you provided? Speaker 1 (00:51:20): Yes, I do. Ms. Madsen: (00:51:23): Thank you very much, Morgan, for all your help. Yep. You're welcome. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:51:28): Thanks for your testimony. All right, next witness. Ms. Matson. Ms. Madsen: (00:51:34): Thank you. We would like to call Timothy Carner. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:51:43): Okay. Where's Timothy? Is that alright? Appendix A Carner Reopened (Completed 03/10/25) Transcript by Rev.com Page 36 of 51 Speaker 10 (00:51:48): True. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:51:48): Okay. Mr. Carter, I'll, let me swear you in. Just raise your right hand. Do you swear affirm to tell the truth, nothing but the truth in this proceeding? Speaker 10 (00:51:54): I do. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:51:55): Okay, great. Okay, go ahead Ms. Mattson, Speaker 1 (00:51:59): Why would you? I do, Ms. Madsen: (00:52:05): Hi Mr. Garner. Can I call you Tim or Tim? Yes ma'am. Speaker 10 (00:52:09): Tim. Ms. Madsen: (00:52:10): Hi Tim. I'm Sheila. Speaker 10 (00:52:12): How are you? Ms. Madsen: (00:52:14): Good, thanks. How are you? Speaker 10 (00:52:16): Good. Ms. Madsen: (00:52:17): Alrighty. So I have up on my screen a statement. Do you recognize this statement? I Speaker 10 (00:52:24): Do. Ms. Madsen: (00:52:26): Did you write this statement? I Appendix A Carner Reopened (Completed 03/10/25) Transcript by Rev.com Page 37 of 51 Speaker 10 (00:52:27): Did not. Ms. Madsen: (00:52:29): Who wrote this statement? Speaker 10 (00:52:30): Kelly Carner. Ms. Madsen: (00:52:35): How do you know Mr. Speaker 10 (00:52:37): Carner? Kelly is my brother. Ms. Madsen: (00:52:41): How often would you say you've been to the property at 1, 1, 1, 3, 5, Speaker 10 (00:52:46): Every day since 2008. Speaker 1 (00:52:51): Every day Speaker 10 (00:52:52): Actually, and on and off since 2000 when he bought it. Ms. Madsen: (00:52:58): Oh, about the home in 2000? Speaker 10 (00:53:01): I believe so. Ms. Madsen: (00:53:02): Okay, got it. Mr. Carner: (00:53:03): It was actually in 1999 when I bought the home. Ms. Madsen: (00:53:08): Okay. And then in 2008 when the travel trailer was purchased, were you living at residence? 1, 1, 1, 3 5? Speaker 10 (00:53:21): Appendix A Carner Reopened (Completed 03/10/25) Transcript by Rev.com Page 38 of 51 No, I was living in it in 2009. Ms. Madsen: (00:53:26): 2009, okay. And then you currently live at the 1 1 1 3 5? Speaker 10 (00:53:32): I do. Okay. Ms. Madsen: (00:53:35): And you said since 2009, Speaker 10 (00:53:38): May of 2009, Ms. Madsen: (00:53:40): May. And then in your statement, the travel trailer to which are you referring? Speaker 10 (00:53:47): The JCO travel trailer that Kelly lives in. Ms. Madsen: (00:54:00): All right. Since the language is used in your statement, what do you define a travel trailer as Speaker 10 (00:54:08): A trailer that can be moved for the purposes of living in. Ms. Madsen: (00:54:15): And what do you define a residence as Speaker 10 (00:54:18): Place where you live? Ms. Madsen: (00:54:24): Do the terms travel trailer and residence mean the same thing to you? Yes. And then what do you define as a permanent living space? Speaker 10 (00:54:51): Someplace where you live permanently. Ms. Madsen: (00:54:58): And when you say that it's been consistent and uninterrupted since its establishment, what do you mean by that? Appendix A Carner Reopened (Completed 03/10/25) Transcript by Rev.com Page 39 of 51 Speaker 10 (00:55:05): What's that Ms. Madsen: (00:55:07): In the statement when it says that the use of the travel trailer as a residence has been consistent and uninterrupted, Speaker 10 (00:55:19): What does that mean? Ms. Madsen: (00:55:20): Yes, Speaker 10 (00:55:21): Exactly what it says. Ms. Madsen: (00:55:27): And sorry, just to clarify, do you live in the trailer or do you live in the house? Speaker 10 (00:55:32): I live in the house. Oh, Ms. Madsen: (00:55:33): In the house. Okay, got it. Thank you. Sorry. Speaker 10 (00:55:37): We lost our house in 2009 and Kelly Lake allowed us to move into his house and he moved into the, he was living in the trailer. Ms. Madsen: (00:55:48): Wow. I'm sorry to hear about that. That's not good. Speaker 10 (00:55:53): Well, we weren't construction, so we were affected by the crash of 2007 and eight. Ms. Madsen: (00:56:00): I remember that, yeah. And then what leads to your statement that the travel trailer appears to meet the necessary requirements for responsible and safe habitation? What does it mean? Speaker 10 (00:56:16): What does it mean? It means that the travel trailer was purchased for the purpose of living in as a new unit. It has had no damage done to it in the time that Kelly's been living in it. It is fully functional as a house has all the amenities that a house has fixed, smaller. Appendix A Carner Reopened (Completed 03/10/25) Transcript by Rev.com Page 40 of 51 Ms. Madsen: (00:56:39): Got it. And you said you're in construction. Do you have home inspection experience? Speaker 10 (00:56:45): I do. Ms. Madsen: (00:56:49): Can you tell me what your home inspection experience entails? Speaker 10 (00:56:54): I have 40 years in residential construction and remodeling. And that involves inspecting homes for remodeling to make sure they meet code. Ms. Madsen: (00:57:05): Oh, Speaker 10 (00:57:06): Perfect. That's awesome. Ms. Madsen: (00:57:09): Have you yourself inspected the JCO travel trailer? Speaker 10 (00:57:12): I have no reason to. Ms. Madsen: (00:57:18): Have you been inside of the trailer? Speaker 10 (00:57:21): Many times. Ms. Madsen: (00:57:23): And what leads you to believe that it's in good condition? Speaker 10 (00:57:27): That it was purchased brand new and it's a higher end trailer and everything has been taken care of well, very well maintained. Ms. Madsen: (00:57:40): Very well maintained. Okay. And then do you believe that the travel trailer is intended to be a permanent residence? Speaker 10 (00:57:51): Appendix A Carner Reopened (Completed 03/10/25) Transcript by Rev.com Page 41 of 51 Absolutely. I know many people that live in them. Ms. Madsen: (00:57:57): And was it intended to be used as a permanent living space? Speaker 10 (00:58:02): Yes, I know people that live with them every day. Okay. And half the people that are on the street in Seattle live in there. Ms. Madsen: (00:58:12): Oh, in Seattle. And after this conversation, do you still agree with the statement that you provided? Speaker 10 (00:58:19): 100%. Ms. Madsen: (00:58:22): Thank you so much for your time. That would be all for Timothy. Mr. Carner: (00:58:41): Is Caleb needed still, Examiner Olbrechts: (00:58:45): Ms. Matson? No, we Mr. Carner: (00:58:46): Don't have any. Bubba, you can go if you need to. Thank you. Ms. Madsen: (00:58:54): Thank you. We'd like to move to Stephanie Carner, please. Speaker 1 (00:58:59): I'm here. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:59:00): Okay. Ms. Carner, let me swear you in. Just raise your right hand. Do you swear affirm to tell the truth, nothing but the truth in this proceeding? Speaker 1 (00:59:05): I do. Examiner Olbrechts: (00:59:06): Thank you. Okay, go ahead Ms. Mattson. Appendix A Carner Reopened (Completed 03/10/25) Transcript by Rev.com Page 42 of 51 Ms. Madsen: (00:59:12): Hi Ms. Carner. Can I call you Stephanie? Speaker 8 (00:59:13): You can. Ms. Madsen: (00:59:15): Hi Stephanie. I'm Sheila. Good to meet you. Speaker 8 (00:59:17): You too. Ms. Madsen: (00:59:19): Just a couple questions. None of these should be shocking to you. You see a statement up on the screen. Do you recognize that statement? Speaker 8 (00:59:30): I do. Ms. Madsen: (00:59:32): And then your signature here, did you sign that? Speaker 8 (00:59:35): I did. Ms. Madsen: (00:59:37): Great. And did you write the statement? Speaker 8 (00:59:40): I did not. Ms. Madsen: (00:59:42): Who wrote the statement? Speaker 8 (00:59:43): Kelly. Ms. Madsen: (00:59:46): Perfect. How do you know Mr. Kerner? He is my brother-in-law. How long have you known Mr. Kerner? Speaker 8 (00:59:57): About 32 to 33 years. Appendix A Carner Reopened (Completed 03/10/25) Transcript by Rev.com Page 43 of 51 Ms. Madsen: (01:00:03): Alrighty. Do you live at the property at 1 1 1 3 5? Speaker 8 (01:00:08): I do. Ms. Madsen: (01:00:10): In the house or in the trailer? Speaker 8 (01:00:11): In the house in Ms. Madsen: (01:00:18): And how long have you lived there? Speaker 8 (01:00:21): Since May of oh nine years. Is that It's a lot of years, sorry. Ms. Madsen: (01:00:31): And in your statement to which chapel trailer are you referring? Speaker 8 (01:00:36): Kelly's jco. Ms. Madsen: (01:00:43): Alright. How do you know when Mr. Kerner purchased the travel trailer? Speaker 8 (01:00:49): It was just before we moved in and he was separated, newly separated at the time. So it was a tough time in everybody's life, I think, then. Speaker 1 (01:01:04): Alrighty. Ms. Madsen: (01:01:09): Alright. Since this language is used in your statement, what do you define a travel trailer as? Speaker 8 (01:01:15): Something that's mobile. Ms. Madsen: (01:01:19): And what do you define a domicile as? Appendix A Carner Reopened (Completed 03/10/25) Transcript by Rev.com Page 44 of 51 Speaker 8 (01:01:23): The act of living in space. Ms. Madsen: (01:01:27): And what do you define a permanent resident? As Speaker 8 (01:01:30): A place where somebody lives. Ms. Madsen: (01:01:36): What do you define as a living space? Speaker 8 (01:01:41): Roof over your head place that's warm. Ms. Madsen: (01:01:47): And then do the terms travel, trailer and residence mean the same thing to you? Speaker 1 (01:01:51): Yep. Ms. Madsen: (01:02:00): What do you mean by this statement? That the use of a travel trailer as a residence has been consistent and uninterrupted since its establishment. Speaker 8 (01:02:10): He's been living in it since he bought it. Ms. Madsen: (01:02:16): Okay. And what specifically leads to your statement? That it appears to meet the necessary requirements for safe and responsible habitation? Speaker 8 (01:02:29): It has a roof over it. No leaks has heat. It has all the basic necessities that someone would need to live. Ms. Madsen: (01:02:40): Okay. Do you have home inspection experience? Speaker 8 (01:02:44): I do not. Ms. Madsen: (01:02:47): Have you ever been inside the trailer? Appendix A Carner Reopened (Completed 03/10/25) Transcript by Rev.com Page 45 of 51 Speaker 8 (01:02:49): I have. Ms. Madsen: (01:02:51): Have you ever inspected it? Speaker 1 (01:02:53): No. Ms. Madsen: (01:02:56): And then what observations lead you to believe that it's in good condition? Speaker 8 (01:03:00): When I've been in it, it's always been warm or cold. It has working bathroom, I've used kitchen, bed space, all that. Ms. Madsen: (01:03:15): Alrighty. Right. And then using the language from your statement, do you believe that the travel trailer was intended to be used as a permanent residence? Speaker 8 (01:03:26): Yes. Ms. Madsen: (01:03:30): Do you believe that the travel trailer is intended to be used as a domicile? Speaker 1 (01:03:35): Yes. Ms. Madsen: (01:03:40): And after this conversation, do you still agree with the statement that you provided? Speaker 8 (01:03:44): I do. Ms. Madsen: (01:03:47): Thank you so much for your time and patient. No problem. Thank Examiner Olbrechts: (01:03:51): You. Thank you. Is that everybody, Ms. Mattson? I think it is. Okay. Speaker 1 (01:03:59): Mr. Can I ask a couple of questions of Ms. Mattson? Appendix A Carner Reopened (Completed 03/10/25) Transcript by Rev.com Page 46 of 51 Examiner Olbrechts: (01:04:01): Of course. Oh yeah. Oh, but Ms. Mattson, yeah, I suppose. Yeah, go ahead. Mr. Carner: (01:04:06): Okay. Can I call you Sheila? Is that okay? Ms. Madsen: (01:04:10): Absolutely. Mr. Carner: (01:04:11): Okay. Did you have any legal assistance in preparing your questions today? Ms. Madsen: (01:04:23): I'm not sure what the relevance, yes, but why? Mr. Carner: (01:04:32): Well, I'm just saying if you have an attorney helping you, because I don't have an attorney helping me. So it goes to fairness when you're dealing in proceedings, if you're represented by an attorney and have one killing you and I don't, that shows that there's an unfair act going on. Ms. Madsen: (01:04:52): So we do have a city attorney that helps all city departments. And what's discussed with city attorney is protected under attorney client privilege. Mr. Carner: (01:05:01): Well that goes when it's just a person talking to the city, but anything you talk to the city about is actually a matter of public record because it's a city business operation. So I could request all information that has ever been sent between you and the attorney. Relevance for this. Okay. Examiner Olbrechts: (01:05:24): Yeah. Are you asking questions about that, Mr. Carner or what? Mr. Carner: (01:05:28): Down the road. Examiner Olbrechts: (01:05:28): Alright. Okay. That's Mr. Carner: (01:05:29): What I'm doing Examiner Olbrechts: (01:05:30): Right now. Appendix A Carner Reopened (Completed 03/10/25) Transcript by Rev.com Page 47 of 51 Ms. Madsen: (01:05:31): We can't hear you Mr. Hearing Mr. Carner: (01:05:32): Examine. Examiner Olbrechts: (01:05:32): Oh, I'm sorry. Okay. I was just asking Mr. Carner, are you asking her about the substance of her communications with the attorney? Mr. Carner: (01:05:39): I'm asking if she had an attorney help her. Examiner Olbrechts: (01:05:42): Okay. Yeah, that's been asked and answered. Did you have any other questions about that? Mr. Carner: (01:05:47): No, I just have a statement that you are trying to, not you during examiner, but Sheila, I can't pronounce your last name. What is it? Madson? No, not yours. Examiner Olbrechts: (01:05:59): Alre? Yeah. Mr. Carner: (01:06:01): Rex. Examiner Olbrechts: (01:06:01): Yeah. Alre. Yeah, Mr. Carner: (01:06:03): Alre. Okay. Sorry, I'm trying to word it out in my brain and I'm like, I don't know what this is. Okay. No, I'm just saying the city is trying to take my place of dwelling away from me that I've been living for some time in a world that we have thousands of people that are homeless, it seems like really not a smart thing for the city to be doing with everything that's going on. I'm not hurting anyone. Do you understand what I'm Examiner Olbrechts: (01:06:40): Saying? I'm not sure who you're asking the question to Mr. Carter, but yeah, I certainly do. And Mr. Carter, you will have final word here and that's going to be your most effective point for making your final argument. Okay? Yeah, yeah. Well Mr. Carner: (01:06:56): We're going to email that stuff, right? Appendix A Carner Reopened (Completed 03/10/25) Transcript by Rev.com Page 48 of 51 Examiner Olbrechts: (01:06:58): Yeah, well that too. Yeah, I think you're correct. Yeah, that the city wanted to do that in writing. But yeah, Mr. Carner: (01:07:05): I'm done. I just, I'm very agitated with all this as you can tell. Examiner Olbrechts: (01:07:15): Yeah, definitely understand that we still have, the city has an opportunity to respond to the declarations with their evidence. And Mr. Carter, then you have the final reply. Did Ms. Matson, were you going to be presenting anything in response to the declarations, any testimony you had other witnesses listed in your witness and exhibit list? That was it. That's it. The city's done for today. Okay. And Mr. Carner, you're finished. Alright, Mr. Carner: (01:07:40): The hearing's completed, Examiner Olbrechts: (01:07:42): I think it is just now setting deadlines for the written closings is, you may recall the city wanted to do a written closing. How much time does the city need? And Mr. Carter, you'll have a chance to respond to their written closing. So as usual, you get final word, or at least for the grandfather issues. So Ms. Matson, what does the city need? Like a week or how much time? Speaker 1 (01:08:05): We would prefer a week, please. Examiner Olbrechts: (01:08:06): Okay, so that'll be due February 18th and Mr. Carner make yours due February 25th. Is that fair? Speaker 1 (01:08:13): Sounds fair. Examiner Olbrechts: (01:08:14): Okay. Alright. Yeah, and a couple things because Mr. Garner's reconsideration request is more than just the habitation issue, it also included I think the definition of vehicle again. And that one is he actually has a good chance of winning on that one. And so I just want to point out to the parties some case law that is pertinent. There's case law, there's actually quite a bit that provides that zoning ordinances must be strictly construed in favor of the property owner. So in general, if there's any ambiguity, it's going to be interpreted against the city and in favor of the property owner for that. One case example is Milestone Homes versus City of Bonney Lake 1 45 Washington App one 18. So especially the city might want to respond to that one because I think that the vehicle definition is ambiguous in this particular case. So I think Mr. (01:09:11): Appendix A Carner Reopened (Completed 03/10/25) Transcript by Rev.com Page 49 of 51 Carner has actually a better argument than I initially appreciated and had a good chance I'll change my position based on that reconsideration request. And the other one, I think, like I said at the beginning of this proceeding, as far as the habitation issue goes, it's both factual and legal. The factual being whether it's been occupied so far, Mr. Carner has made a pretty good case that he has resided in that trailer since about 2008, 2009. Probably the bigger issue here is the legal one. And it's a tough one whether even though he has a grandfathered right to have a residence there, is it from the city perspective, is it enough that he's got his built stick home, the single family home there, and that the city therefore can, as a performance standard, make the habitation of trailers illegal even after he's established that vested? Right. (01:10:09): That's a tough one. And I think the icicle case that I cited to in my final decision, it's under reconsideration, gives some clarity on that issue. I think that the problem for the city in that particular case is that, I can't remember, I think it was Chelan County was the one that was the subject of that case. In the icicle case, they specifically said, you're just grandfathered to one residence essentially, and you can't have several short-term rentals because they moving short-term rentals at the time. And I don't think rent's code is that clear about what's grandfathered and what's not. And so that's kind of the issue to grapple with. On the city side. (01:10:53): I just say, I know this has gone on for a while. I probably didn't need to reopen the hearing twice. I think it was 20% just to make sure that there were no problems with the validity of the proceeding. And the other 80% is, I think the city is, even though it doesn't appear to be the case to Mr. Carner, just wants to ensure that we have an accurate rendition of facts. I wanted to just give Mr. Carner every opportunity to address whether or not he is in fact grandfathered or not. I mean, the city of Renton is, they're a bit tougher than a lot of jurisdictions out there in terms of what they expect of property owners. But that's also had a big effect on the city. I think over the last few decades. The quality of the built environment in here has improved substantially, and that's increased everyone's property values. (01:11:43): So I can see where the city of council is coming from. I mean, I could say that I've ruled against code enforcement several times over the last few decades based on the theory that if the code's ambiguous, I usually rule in favor of the property owner. And every time I've done that, the city council has almost immediately amended the code to make it clear that the property owner is violated their nuisance regulation. So at least historically, the council, their policy has been to be really tough about this. And I think Mr. Carter, you get this in court, you've got, it's a little bit of an uphill battle. But like I said, we're dealing with some, I think you kind of called them homecoming regulations, or excuse me, homeowner association type regulations. And that level of regulation hasn't been addressed under grandfather rights very much in the court. So who knows? I mean, you could prevail. Like I said, my job is just to apply the law as fairly as I can. That's all I'm doing here. And really, to be fair, that's code enforcement's job as well. You're really fighting the rent and policies here set by the city council. (01:12:58): And I'll just do what the council says and if the court says the tells the council they can't be this strict, then they'll change the regulations and I'll apply them accordingly. I'm sorry that you had to get the brunt of this. Like I said, your case has been the one that's gone on the longest of any I've done for rent or any jurisdiction for that matter in 30 years. But that's because this has a big impact on you. You're just in a bad spot there. Appendix A Carner Reopened (Completed 03/10/25) Transcript by Rev.com Page 50 of 51 Mr. Carner: (01:13:28): One of it was unnecessary. Examiner Olbrechts: (01:13:35): Okay. Well, like I said, I didn't have to reopen twice. I could have just based it on the evidence I had and most likely that would've held up. But I wanted to give you the chance to get your input there as much as you could. So anyway, yeah, so I'll look forward to the briefing and then my decision will be due roughly a couple of weeks after the final brief comes in. And finally, Mr. Carter, you'll have your day in court if that's what you need. So again, I just thank everyone for all the time they spent on this and it's a tough case for everybody and I appreciate that. Mr. Carner: (01:14:08): So to be clear, you're just making decisions about what the council has made into law as far as the city or the ordinances not Examiner Olbrechts: (01:14:21): Yeah, I can't change the ordinances or anything. No. Mr. Carner: (01:14:24): You're not going to get into the taking clause or anything about the Fifth Amendment? Examiner Olbrechts: (01:14:28): Yeah. I mean, other than when it helps me interpret the law, sometimes the takings clause can help you. You can make the conclusion that counsel didn't intend this ambiguous ordinance to be applied in a manner that takes property and violates the constitution. But beyond that, yeah, I don't resolve claims of damages, claims against the city, that kind of stuff. That's what you would do on your judicial appeal. Mr. Carner: (01:14:49): So that would be in court. Examiner Olbrechts: (01:14:50): Yeah. The same with the federal civil rights violations that you've alleged. I have no jurisdiction over that. Mr. Carner: (01:14:55): Okay. That's better clarity for me. I didn't truly know how far your authority went with any of this. Examiner Olbrechts: (01:15:05): Yeah, yeah. Just for me, it's just the code. That's it. I just apply the code and that's all that I do. But that's a lot of it, obviously. And there's enough to deal with just on those specific issues. Mr. Carner: (01:15:19): Appendix A Carner Reopened (Completed 03/10/25) Transcript by Rev.com Page 51 of 51 Well, to give Sheila an update, I do have my building permit finally, it took nine months, so we've already had two inspections. We're making some corrections for getting ready to pour concrete, and that will take care of all the other issues that were of issue once the garage is built. Examiner Olbrechts: (01:15:42): Okay. Well, I hope, yeah, obviously I hope you guys can resolve, just Mr. Carner: (01:15:45): Letting her know I am still working to do the best I can to comply, but like I said, I don't want to give up any rights that I have. Speaker 1 (01:15:54): That's all Mr. Carner: (01:15:55): This is about. This whole thing is my rights Speaker 1 (01:15:58): And Mr. Carner: (01:15:59): It's a big thing for you, for me to lose my place of residence. I did tell you that I travel a lot for the county and the work I do and stuff. So it really doesn't make any sense for me to try to get someplace else to live or to pay for it when I'm not even there. Examiner Olbrechts: (01:16:17): No, I understand. Yeah. That's why we spent so much time on this and just to get it right. Alright, thank you. All care Speaker 10 (01:16:23): Anymore. Examiner Olbrechts: (01:16:24): Okay. Alright, we're adjourned. Okay.