Dear Santa Cruz County Building Official Chief Building Inspector Jennifer Hutchinson,

Just a few of the many questions for you, more to come....
How did you get your own home un-red tagged, on East Zayante, the one that the propane company called the County on you to complain about, the one that burnt down (after you sold it), the one you were doing work without a permit when you where a Building Inspector?

How did you get a job as a Building Inspector with absolutely ZERO Building Experience?
Did you ever have any interest or experience of any kind when you first became "interested" in being a building inspector- as job you "discovered" after a couple of years of driving the bus for the construction inspection classes to their field trips?

Have you ever had any building experience of any kind ever? As reported from many of your fellow students in the Construction Management Class at Cabrillo you were in, as you prepared for your new career in Construction Management for South County Housing (the very, very PROFITABLE NON-PROFIT) you reported that up that time you had completed a Concrete Counter Top for YOUR KITCHEN as your "Magnum Opus", your "first big project". Nice, but anything else before or since, ever?

Would we be better off if you would had stayed a bus driver, or were you UNntrained, UNsafe and UNcertified for that job too?

How Did You Come Back From Being Shown the Door by Planning Director Alvin James and the County of Santa Cruz Risk Management informing you that are being let go- for among other things, WRECKING (multiple) County Vehicles (and lying about it) and Hanging out at the Stables feeding your horse on County Time (and even being so brazen to bring along other Building Inspectors as part of their "training")? Any many, many, more......

SEIU 521 Union Shop Stewart, Jim Heaney (PAID 2008 $71,783.31) claims he really tried his best to keep your job- despite your performance- but he couldn't. He must of done something right though cause when you got to be Building Official you took care of him like family.... and you did take care of his family too right, his wife worked for you right, and isn't that his brother Marty Heaney (PAID 2008 $73,730.42) that you hired provisional to permanent when he didn't even have a valid certification? You are definitely one of Tom Burns',  you all know those silly Civil Service Rules are only for the bureaucrats who do not know how to get around them yet?

How did you get "Painted Golden and Shipped Off" (as reported by Building Official, John DeCourcey), and who arranged you a job at South County Housing?- A Job for which you have absolutely ZERO experience and no reason (other than political) to be hired for (nice string pull), and did they promise you could come back after Alvin James left.

How did you reappear Welcomed back by Tom Burns in a position that had to be adjusted to you, as you to try to embellish and stretch your "experience" and "training"?
Is that why you are so insecure, aloof, arrogant and passive aggressive?
Is it anything more than just self serving delusion -that gives you the ability to assume you may be in any way qualified for (not just entitled to)  such an important Public Safety Position?

Oh, just one quick more quick thing- why would you "accommodate" your friend Jim Heaney after his DRUNK DRIVING arrest while driving home from the Planning Department Christmas Party?
Was that just a thanks for him helping you from when you lost your job before, or did you really think that he was such an important employee to the daily functioning of your Section?

Do you think a Building Inspector is an important public and life safety  position requiring good decision making as well good judgment?

Are those characteristics reflected in an Building Inspector (now Plans Examiner PAID 2008 $71,783.31), Jim Heaney, who chose to first of all get drunk at a WORK Christmas Party, and then using his judgment decided to drive home intoxicated, endangering the public with his deadly dangerous, illegal and abhorrent behavior.
Wouldn't you expect a sense of propriety, good judgment, or at least guilt, to consume an average person AFTER the ARREST and eventual sobriety to dictate that one would report what happened to your employer immediately to help them plan for the future or would you just go about business as usual continuing to drive around a County Vehicle like nothing happened?
I am sure the SEIU Local 521 Management and Shop Stewart (or was Union Chapter Vice-President then?) Jim Heaney  appreciated the very good paying job (PAID 2008 $71,783.31) as a Plan Checker you created for him, again without the benefit of those pesky Civil Service Rules, and again all with the help of Tom Burns and the willing County Personnel Department.
It worked out great for Tom Burns, he was able to gain control the SEIU in Planning by having a meek, embarrassed, and beholding Jim Heaney control his Union "work" on behalf of the "regular" members, thus helping to further "control" and manipulate union members with no help available to them, but what was in it for you Jennifer Hutchinson? 

Just Curious, and can't wait to post your response! We will post it right here >>>>>>>                                 <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

COUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ

Planning Department

 

Date:  February 13, 2008

To:      Jennifer Hutchinson, Chief Building Inspector

From: Tom Burns, Planning Director

Jennifer- As you know, the County Code was recently amended to change the definition of “Building Official” in Chapter 12.10.150. “Building Official” is now defined as the Planning Director or his or her designee. The purpose of this change is to make it clear that final authority for all code administration and enforcement lies with the Planning Director as the head of the agency. This designation is consistent with other sections of the County Code, where the Planning Director, or his or her designee, is charged with the administration of the zoning ordinance, environmental regulations, the grading ordinance, Chapter 18.10, and the enforcement provisions in Chapter 19 of the County Code. 

Now that the Codes have been adopted, the purpose of this memo is to designate you to act on my behalf as the Building Official for day-to-day administration of the building codes. You can continue to use the title of Building Official in your communications with staff and the public.  In this capacity, you should continue to use your judgment in applying and interpreting the various provisions of the technical codes.

From time-to-time, situations will arise which involve unusual facts or special circumstances that are unique, which may set a precedent, and/or deserve further policy consideration before making a final determination. Please consult with me in these instances prior to “landing”. I have confidence that you will recognize the situations that deserve further discussion and deliberation, as you have brought these issues forward in the past.

Occasionally, these issues will come directly to my attention, or to the attention of the Assistant Planning Director. When this happens, you can expect the same from us- that we will not “land” before consulting with you, or in your absence, with one of your staff. I truly believe that the best public policy is made when various sides of an issue are explored, and differing viewpoints are considered. Our policy forum meetings are a working example of this philosophy.

On rare occasions, you and I may disagree in the end, and in these instances, this change in the code makes it clear that I have final decision-making authority. This change is consistent with the authority I have for all of the other codes administered by the Planning Department. The final authority rests with me as the Planning Director, even though a staff of 100 individuals carries out day-to-day administration of the codes.

Cc David Lee, Assistant Planning Director        

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________

...and What about lowly Assistant Planning Director Mark Deming?...and he is the only one of em' that is an Actual Planner...
why are Burns, Hutchinson, and Lee so
AFRAID of Planning, Building and Land Use Professionals?
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________

OUR Building official knows that Code backwards and forwards, oh wait, just backwards.....Or every thing you every wanted to know about the
"Board of Appeal"
...............but where afraid to ask Herr Burns about

By Jennifer Hutchinson
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________

The following was part of a transcribed email exchange between Tom Burns and Jennifer Hutchinson due to an illegible scan of the email, but it is sadly accurate

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________


Link to scan of  Building Official Hutchinson's original email CLICK here>>>


________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________


...That sure does not read like the works of The County of Santa Cruz Building Official, the Authority on the Building Codes for Santa Cruz County. Whoever wrote that appears uneducated, unsure, unclear, insecure, wrong and afraid of Tom Burns... Why was she hired? Why don't we deserve a qualified Building Official for Santa Cruz County?


The title or designation of Building Official is a serious position with a Public Safety component that has an affect on more citizens in their day to day life than any other component of Government.

In Santa Cruz County we have had the position of Building Official manipulated, and hijacked to serve politicians and insiders and to keep and expand the power of selfish, short-sighted bureaucrats such as Tom Burns, Susan Muariello, her Board of Supervisors.

They derive power by having a weak, malleable people, beholding to them for their job, then they can really do want to (and not do what they don't want to) and their friends and political allies get what they want and We The People again get to pay for it and live with the consequence of their political decisions, i.e. remember how much money South County Housing got for NOT Building in Felton? Oh ya - But that was just Redevelopment money, not REAL money. Taxpayers paying the bills and suffering the consequences.


________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________



"There is so much illegal building as there is, which doesn't help anybody and could kill people, but the illegal building is a direct result of an overbearing bureaucratic process."
                                                                      -Local Citizen http://www.topix.net/forum/source/santa-cruz-sentinel/TFD2R7L13SBJPPBPN


________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________

Jennifer Hutchinson's Corruption and Poor Judgment present your Plan Checker for the evening-
Jim Heaney, Cocktails anyone?


________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________

COUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ

Planning Department

 

Date:  December 6, 2005

To:      Personnel Director – Dania Torres-Wong

From: Planning Director – Tom Burns

The Chief Building Inspector manages the Inspection Services Section. The second in command is the Supervising Building Inspector position, which is presently vacant. We are in the process of trying to fill that position, but have encountered difficulties, as you are aware. Therefore, this position will likely remain vacant for another couple of months. The position of Senior Building Inspector is the next in line, and is the lead inspector in the field. The incumbent is retiring in Dec. It is critical for this position to be filled quickly, to ensure adequate ongoing oversight of our field inspection function.

 

In order to expedite this process, we are recommending a promotional only recruitment to fill this upcoming vacancy. In addition, the likely candidates for the position of Senior Building Inspector are currently employed with the County as Building Inspectors, and there are several who meet the minimum qualifications for the next level.

 

If a building inspector is selected off a promotional list for the position of Senior Building Inspector, that will create a vacancy at the Building Inspector I/II level. We have a need for a bilingual building Inspector in the field, and it is our intention to designate the next vacant building inspector as a bilingual position. This promotional recruitment will likely accelerate that process.

 

Please contact me if I can answer any questions. Thank you for your assistance.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________

"We are in the process of trying to fill that position, but have encountered difficulties,
as you are aware." Tom Burns
Burns to another well placed Democratic Party Corrupt bureaucrat, Personnel Director Dania Torres-Wong on how he considers promoting Building Inspector ll Scott Walker a "difficulty".

Scott Walker applied for the Supervising Building Inspector Job, was qualified by the County Personnel Department, interviewed by Jennifer Hutchinson, Tom Burns and Crew.
Jennifer Hutchinson then ANNOUNCED in a Building Department staff meeting that Scott Walker had interviewed for the position but " he did not have the skills or experience for the job"-
IN FRONT OF THE ENTIRE BUILDING DEPT STAFF!

GREAT for Management Control-
Horrible for Employee Morale
Thus Burns, Hutchinson were then able to HAND PICK yet another of their fellow travelers- hired of the transfer list from San Francisco, no compettion, no problem and again NO EXPERIENCE in Raphael Torres - Gil, just another bueracrat to mold and direct beholding to Tom Burns, David Lee and Jennifer Hutchinson. ....and Raphael Torres- Gil has about the same level of experience as Building Official Jennifer Hutchinson- NONE!

9/6/05

John and I interacted again on the subject of what an altered wall is.  The written doc is difficult to implement.  He stated that we should be in the business of not treating punitively and instead treat with leaniency when ever we have a nebulous policy.  Why cant it be clear enough to be able to draw a line on.  I had asked him to propose changes to it once before.  Propose solutions instead of complaining about it.  He said why not just email john d about what his intentions were when he wrote it.  I said no, why not propose some revisions to the document and we will talk about it.  I felt resistant to changing a thing about the doc.  Why?? Because it is fine, I think.  Perhaps his point that I don’t have to apply it in the field is true but he seems to be attacking me on this one.  He is going around the department asking other staff people how they would like it interpreted and it isn’t up to other staff.  The inspection division has been given the task to develop a policy and make the decisions. 

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________

...and for our next exercise... we will explore our feelings on Altered walls along with Jennifer Hutchinson...


________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________

Left-hand Column Case

Title (optional):

 

Case Writer:

 

Brief background leading up to the conversation: we have a document that defines what an altered wall is.  It is needed because some other departments make requirements of applicants if they exceed a threashold of reconstructing existing walls beyond that threashold.  For instance if you alter more than 75% of your existing walls the Fire department will consider your project a reconstructed house and not a remodel.  New houses have requirements that remodels don’t, like fire sprinklers.  The public wants every old shack to be reconstructed for the least amount of cost.  The policy is not clear and tough to implement.

 

 

What was thought and felt	What was said and done
John clearly does not want to make that call.  He wants to find fault with the policy instead.      (what felt to me like venting           I thought John lacked the ability to enforce the procedure as it is written because he feels like it punishes applicants that end up at the effect of it unknowingly or by accident.  He stated that lots of people are really honest and not trying to work the system and it isn’t fair.    I also felt like it was a repeat of prev. conv. Where I had asked him to draft some solutions to revise the procedure, which he never did.	John gets field problems that need resolution quickly.  This policy needs revising and he has been asked in the past to draft some solutions and meet with me.  Again today he needed to tell me of a field problem where if we call the walls altered the guy would have to be placed in the reconstruct category.   Fire dept. would then require a sprinkler system.   $$$.   He said he had asked zoning if they care.  Then I said it is not up to zoning to care, you are charged with making the decision and tell them the percentage.  It isn’t an inspectors job to be concerned with saving the applicants money or worry what the ramification of the decision is.  Those are zonings requirements and not ours.  They just need someone to make the decision and give them the percentage of altered walls.  , they are not capable of deciding what is struct. not.
9/7/05 I felt like this was an ethical dilemma.  I felt strident.  And I felt like he was being pushey.         I felt like he was asking for special treatment.  Again, ethical.     I felt confused about what he really wanted, and what to say.  He was pressuring me to remember some past conversation.  I concluded by saying I wanted to do some preperation and meet later in the day.	Eric wanted to talk about Wheelock project.  He wanted to know what the accessibility requmts would be to convert to R-6 and asked how to circumvent doing them.    He asked for an inspection outside of the current permit to identify any problem areas.  I said that was out of the ordinary.     I told him to get a special inspection permit for the conversion from the r-3 occ. To the r-6 occ.  He said “you said, if we do the work now we won’t have to meet all those accessibility reqmts later.”  I said it isn’t right to try to circumvent the code requirements.

Erik Shapiro VS. Jennifer Hutchinson- Who is lying MORE?

 See the Reference above to a Fellow County Manager
 asking for special treatment and trying to "circumvent" accessibility requirements
NICE PEOPLE!
That is Erik Shapiro(PAID 2008 $121,193.60)
Santa Cruz County's very own Redevelopment Housing Manager
 -Redevelopment Would Never do Anything Illegal to intentionally "circumvent" the ADA as well as other Federal  and  California Accessibility Requirements ...RIGHT??

He Claims:
“you said, if we do the work now we won’t have to meet all those accessibility reqmts later.”

She Claims:
"He was pressuring me to remember some past conversation."

She Claims:
"He wanted to know what the accessibility requmts would be to convert to R-6 and asked how to circumvent doing them."

He Asked :
"He asked for an inspection outside of the current permit to identify any problem areas."

She Feels:
"I felt like he was asking for special treatment."

Ah and So it goes, Jennifer Hutchinson and Erik Sharpiro the forces of corruption find them selves at odds and (Shapiro's corruption seems to even prompt Hutchinson to contemplate a moment of honesty WOW way to go Erik!)
......It is hard to get things worked out when they are both corrupt lying bureaucrats!


________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________

More Planning FUN! Lets all play-

Yes this next gem is County of Santa Cruz Planning Department's VERY OWN Jennifer Hutchinson at "work"... at least during this time she was not bothering anyone, giving misinformation to the trusting Members of the Public or slowing down the entire Departments Hanson Training Class- over and over and over and over- LOG IN ALREADY!! (Yah, go ahead put in WWW in front of your log in again Jennifer, and again,... We'll all just wait.... and again...)
...and yes this is THE Building Official until Tom Burns says different-Jennifer Hutchinson will
 "act on my behalf as the Building Official"
 Lucky Us, are those our only CHOICES?  Really, how sad.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________

If Horses Were in High School, What Cliques Would They Be In?

 

Quarter Horses: Definitely jocks. Strutting around
flexing those muscles, showing off their
butts...definitely jocks.

Thoroughbreds: Preppies. Sometimes athletes, never
'jocks'. Monogrammed blankets, leather halters, Nike eventer shoes, the latest custom trailer and tack. They are the "new money" rich.

Appaloosas: Could only be the stoners. They like to
trip acid so they can watch their spots move.

Arabians: RAH! RAH! SIS BOOM BAH! GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO TEAM!! (Need I say more?)

Shetland Ponies: Frightening, spiky hairdos, snotty
attitudes and any color of the rainbow .... gotta be
PUNKS. Some even sport tattoos.

Friesians: Big, buff, and always in black, they are
the biker clique. Cigs hanging out of the corner of
their mouths, dangerous glint in the eyes, daring
anyone to cross their path.

Morgans: They're the nerdy teacher's pets, running
around doing everything from yearbook to decorating
the gym and ratting out the bikers, stoners and jocks.
They have perpetual wedgies.

Drafts (all breeds): No real clique, they're just the
big guys who sit in the back of the room and fart a
lot (and then laugh). Who's going to STOP them?

Icelandics and Paso Finos: They're the little
squirrelly geeks who flit around a dance trying to fit
in and fail miserably. The kind who wear Toughskins
jeans from Sears (or would that be rip off
WeathaBeetas??).

Ahkle Tekl (Akle Takl? Ackle Tackle....!! Akhal
Teke!!): Foreign exchange student(s). And no one can
spell their names either.

Hackney Ponies: A breed this manic would have to be a
band geek. Marching along with their knees and heads
held high.....even going to the bathroom.

Warmbloods: Old Money Preppies, as opposed to the TBs who are new money preppies. All their tack is imported from Europe , they drink Perrier water and eat only organically grown feed. They look down on everyone and talk amongst themselves about summer in Paris and skiing in Gstad and wasn't it dreadful how provincial Spruce Meadows has become?

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________

Read yet another Architect's experience with
Hutchinson and Livingston's
incompetence and control

Cove Britton Wed, May 20, 2009 - 10:22 pm posted on SantaCruz.com comments

Hi all-

A number of you have expressed curiosity of what happened to my recent redtag and appeal regarding the red tag.
So here is the story (as I understand it).
A remodel addition (designed by my office) to an existing dwelling on Beach Drive was given a Notice of Violation and Intent to Record – the reasons stated on the Notice were vague, but we were verbally told it was due to a particular wall being removed. That wall, if it had actually been removed, could of triggered the home being demolished and brought up to current code (essentially a million dollar plus up tick on construction cost).
The original inspector had instructed the builder to remove dry rot, that instruction was given with out my, or the engineer’s consent. The inspector also gave a correction notice (not a notice of violation, that occurs later) assuming that the whole wall would be removed due to the dry rot. The builder then consulted with our office and the engineer (some what belatedly as dry rot had been removed) prior to removing all the structure at issue, at that time the engineer and our office promptly informed him not to remove any structure. I am familiar with the original inspector and do not believe there was any malicious intent but it was ill advised to instruct the builder to remove wall that our plans indicated to remain…no matter what reason.
As it turned out the wall still had enough sound wood to support the existing header- we did substitute a wood rim joist with a steel rim joist to minimize loads on the existing header below (an upgrade to our approved plans that already indicated replacement of the deck joists above the wall in question).
The original inspector happened to drive by prior to leaving on vacation and saw the steel deck joist and assumed we had replaced the header. He reported that to Jennifer Hutchinson, who sent out Sean Livingston to issue a stop work notice etc…
Once I was informed of the red tag, I contacted Mr. Deming (assistant planning director) via- email and explained that I did not believe that there was an issue, but was unsuccessful in having the red tag removed, at that point I appealed to the Local Appeals Board.
In the mean time I heard second hand that neither the original inspector nor Jennifer Hutchinson were necessarily in support of keeping the red tag in place (that they were aware it had been issued in error), but that “superiors” had decided to keep it in place.
At the same time the Local Appeals Board was trying to hear the appeal, quite properly, but were being blocked by county staff.


________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________