Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Dumping Contested Case topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Hearing officer finds property owner responsible for dumping at 2335 NW 29th; $525 fine
Summary
After inspection photos and testimony, Hearing Officer Darcy Siegel found the property owners responsible for dumping at 2335 Northwest 29th Street and entered a $525 fine, waiving the administrative cost. The tenant and translator disputed the evidence, saying others frequently dump or sort trash in that location.
Get email alerts on the Dumping Contested Case topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
At a contested hearing over a dumping citation for property at 2335 Northwest 29th Street, the inspector introduced a packet of photographs and the citation forms into evidence and testified the items in the pile included mail with the owner's name and address. The tenant, Felix Gutierrez, appearing with a translator, disputed that his father or the owner had dumped the material and said homeless individuals and passersby regularly go through and add to piles.
Inspector testimony described photographs taken on 05/23/2025; the inspector said he had to search through the pile and located a piece of mail with the owner's name. Responding to a question from the hearing officer about whether there was a photo showing the owner dumping the material, the inspector said there was no such image. Gutierrez and his translator argued that third parties may have placed the mail and that footage from a Ring camera could show other people dumping. The hearing officer stated the evidence in the packet and the identification of owner‑linked mail supported a finding that the citation was properly issued.
"I'm gonna find that this citation was properly issued... And the fine for this violation is $525," Hearing Officer Darcy Siegel said, adding she would "waive the administrative cost." The order named Maria and Rafael Septapien Jr. as the property owners and recorded the $525 penalty.
Why it matters: The case illustrates the evidentiary standard at administrative enforcement hearings — a mailed item with an owner's name in a debris pile can be determinative even when respondents assert intervening actors may have contributed to the pile. Parties wishing to contest such findings should preserve video evidence and contemporaneous documentation that shows chain of custody for discarded items.
