Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Government Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident alleges code‑enforcement hearings cost Cotati about $41,500 in past month
Summary
During public comment a resident alleged that recent code‑enforcement hearings and related legal and administrative costs totaled roughly $41,524 in the past month, exceeding the department’s FY 25/26 budget. Council did not respond with a cost confirmation during the meeting.
Cotati — A resident who identified herself during the Sept. 9 public comment period alleged that recent code‑enforcement hearings generated roughly $41,524 in recoverable costs to the city over the prior month, a figure she said exceeds the city’s current code‑enforcement budget.
Laurie Alderman presented a line‑by‑line breakdown she said reflected 28 hours of hearing time and related professional fees: an administrative law judge billed at $550 per hour; code‑enforcement staff time; outside counsel and paralegal fees; and city technical support for Zoom/ADA accommodations. Alderman said the estimated total was $41,524 and contrasted that with a code enforcement budget for 2025–26 of $38,000, stating, “The city is already over budget just by the hours spent on the hearings.”
Alderman also characterized the hearings as “the persecution of George Barrick” and framed her cost summary as recoverable legal costs, advising the council to review the financial impacts. The claim included several specific hourly‑rate assumptions for different roles, which Alderman read during her public comment.
City staff and council did not provide a substantive cost confirmation or a rebuttal during the meeting; the transcript shows the public comment was heard and the meeting proceeded to the next items. The claim was not resolved during the session and would require staff follow‑up and verification of billing, charging practices and budget accounting.
Next steps: The claim would need to be verified by city finance and legal staff; the council did not refer or direct a specific investigation during the meeting.
