William Tezak complained to the Susanville Planning Commission that he's the victim of a "municipal racketeering scheme by elected and appointed officials." Photo by Sam Williams

Tezak turns up the heat on Susanville Planning Commission

Local property owner William Tezak continued his campaign against the city of Susanville’s code enforcement practices that he alleges are unconstitutional and — in fact, just plain illegal — at Tuesday night’s Susanville Planning Commission meeting.

Tezak threatened legal action in federal court and called for a FBI investigation into corruption by the city of Susanville alleging “policing for profit,” civil rights violations, municipal employee fraud/malfeasance in public office, crimes of extortion and slander to title regarding the city’s code enforcement practices.

Tezak’s latest letter, on the Executive Office of Caribbean Investments, Inc. letterhead, was stamped received by the city Tuesday — addressed to Mayor Quincy McCourt, Mayor pro tem Thomas Herrera, Councilmembers Mendy Schuster, Kevin Stafford and Russ Brown, City Administrative Officer Dan Newton, Code Enforcement Officer Cody Loflin, Building Official Dow Davis, Planning Commissioners Melanie Westbrook, James Merchant, Rod DeBoer, Wayne Jambois, Tony Ardito and Kelly Mumper. Additional copies were sent to the California Department of Justice and the FBI criminal division.

In his letter, Tezak alleges he is the victim of a “municipal racketeering scheme by elected and appointed officials” … “This scheme is being used against private property owners in an attempt to criminally extort and actually extort private property owners of money through unfounded/excessive fines, exempt permit fees, special assessments and even $500 per day penalties without any substantial legitimate governmental purpose or interest in properties concerning any legitimate health and/or safety impacts to a substantial number of people or the community at large.”

Three properties allegedly owned by Tezak were under consideration for the approval of an assessment of administrative penalties for noncompliance with a nuisance abatement order during the planning commission meeting — 105 Russell Avenue, 713 Cottage St., and 811 Cottage St.

During the meeting, Tezak alleged errors in the city’s APN identification of some of the properties that had been cited, and he said he had never received notification of some of the alleged violations because the city had mailed them to an address with which he was not associated. When asked, Loflin said he’d have to check his file to see if had a returned certified letter notice from a letter sent to Tezak’s address in Reno, Nevada. Tezak also said Loflin knew the location of his office on Main Street in Susanville.

Family members represented by the Marino Family Trust appeared and said they also had an ownership interest in some of these properties.

Susanville attorney Peter Talia appeared before the commission and said he currently is in Lassen Superior Court trying to clean up the ownership issue of some the properties, and he expects those issues to be completely resolved next month. He asked the commission for more time to resolve the issue before the commission made a decision.

A woman claiming to be one to Tezak’s tenants also appeared before the commission complaining about the conditions at her residence.

Several commissioners expressed concerns and their desire to ensure everything was done correctly, so the commission tabled the matter of the properties at 105 Russell Avenue, 713 Cottage St. until its Tuesday, Nov. 14 meeting — to be considered after the ownership issues had been resolved.

But the commission unanimously approved Resolution No. 23-1166 regarding the noncompliance with a nuisance abatement order for the property at 811 Cottage St.

According to the planning commission documents, “If the Susanville Planning Commission orders the assessment of administrative civil penalties in the amount of $500 per day effective from June 26, 2023, the 93 days of noncompliance with the nuisance abatement order will exceed the $10,000 maximum as authorized by § 8.32.290 SMC. The fiscal impact would be an increase in revenues in the amount of $10,000 to the general fund.”

The commission also approved Resolution No. 23-1167 ordering the property owner at 335 Grand Avenue to abate an “administrative nuisance.”

And the commission announced it will consider a new low-income apartment complex on Skyline Drive at its Nov. 14 meeting.