Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Evidence Admissibility And Compliance topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

City attorney flags inadmissible third‑party photos as Pinnacle Investments case moves to compliance window

Code Enforcement Special Magistrate · May 21, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

In Case CE-2025-00125 (940 S. Lake Shore Way), the magistrate allowed a 30-day compliance period; City Attorney Claytor advised an unsworn signed statement from a former tenant does not qualify as an affidavit and third-party photos are inadmissible evidence.

City Attorney Seth Claytor told the Special Magistrate that a signed document provided by staff from a former tenant “does not meet the legal requirements/criteria in order to qualify as an affidavit,” and therefore must be treated as an unsworn signed statement. The Code Enforcement Officer presented photographs but Claytor advised that the “third-party photos were inadmissible in the case” and that only photographs taken by the Code Enforcement Officer should be considered in the record.

Staff recommended finding that violations exist at 940 S. Lake Shore Way (Pinnacle Investments & Development Inc.), granting 30 days to bring the property into compliance after which fines would begin to accrue at $250 per day, and assessing administrative costs of $107.89, payable within thirty days. Owner and CEO/President Paul Campbell was present and was asked to explain any special considerations; the record does not reflect that the magistrate altered the staff recommendation at the hearing.

The hearing cited multiple code provisions concerning dangerous structures, roofs and drainage, stairways and porches, infestation, electrical hazards, and correction of violations of other codes. The magistrate’s order and the hearing record emphasize the admissibility of officer‑documented evidence for enforcement actions.