AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR TESTING AND MATERIALS et al v. PUBLIC.RESOURCE.ORG, INC.

Filing 204

LARGE ADDITIONAL ATTACHMENT(S) to Public Resource's Second Motion for Summary Judgment by PUBLIC.RESOURCE.ORG, INC. 202 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by PUBLIC.RESOURCE.ORG, INC., 203 SEALED MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE DOCUMENT UNDER SEAL filed by PUBLIC.RESOURCE.ORG, INC. (This document is SEALED and only available to authorized persons.) filed by PUBLIC.RESOURCE.ORG, INC.. (Attachments: # 1 Public Resources Statement of Disputed Facts, # 2 Public Resources Evidentiary Objections, # 3 Public Resources Request for Judicial Notice, # 4 Declaration Carl Malamud, # 5 Declaration Matthew Becker, # 6 Consolidated Index of Exhibits, # 7 Exhibit 1, # 8 Exhibit 2, # 9 Exhibit 3, # 10 Exhibit 4, # 11 Exhibit 5, # 12 Exhibit 6, # 13 Exhibit 7, # 14 Exhibit 8, # 15 Exhibit 9, # 16 Exhibit 10, # 17 Exhibit 11, # 18 Exhibit 12, # 19 Exhibit 13, # 20 Exhibit 14, # 21 Exhibit 15, # 22 Exhibit 16, # 23 Exhibit 17, # 24 Exhibit 18, # 25 Exhibit 19, # 26 Exhibit 20, # 27 Exhibit 21, # 28 Exhibit 22, # 29 Exhibit 23, # 30 Exhibit 24, # 31 Exhibit 25, # 32 Exhibit 26, # 33 Exhibit 27, # 34 Exhibit 28, # 35 Exhibit 29, # 36 Exhibit 30, # 37 Exhibit 31, # 38 Exhibit 32, # 39 Exhibit 33, # 40 Exhibit 34, # 41 Exhibit 35, # 42 Exhibit 36, # 43 Exhibit 37, # 44 Exhibit 38, # 45 Exhibit 39, # 46 Exhibit 40, # 47 Exhibit 41, # 48 Exhibit 42, # 49 Exhibit 43, # 50 Exhibit 44, # 51 Exhibit 45, # 52 Exhibit 46, # 53 Exhibit 47, # 54 Exhibit 48, # 55 Exhibit 49, # 56 Exhibit 50, # 57 Exhibit 51, # 58 Exhibit 52, # 59 Exhibit 53, # 60 Exhibit 54, # 61 Exhibit 55, # 62 Exhibit 56, # 63 Exhibit 57, # 64 Exhibit 58, # 65 Exhibit 59, # 66 Exhibit 60, # 67 Exhibit 61, # 68 Exhibit 62, # 69 Exhibit 63, # 70 Exhibit 64, # 71 Exhibit 65, # 72 Exhibit 66, # 73 Exhibit 67, # 74 Exhibit 68, # 75 Exhibit 69, # 76 Exhibit 70, # 77 Exhibit 71, # 78 Exhibit 72, # 79 Exhibit 73, # 80 Exhibit 74, # 81 Exhibit 75, # 82 Exhibit 76, # 83 Exhibit 77, # 84 Exhibit 78, # 85 Exhibit 79, # 86 Exhibit 80, # 87 Exhibit 81, # 88 Exhibit 82, # 89 Exhibit 83, # 90 Exhibit 84, # 91 Exhibit 85, # 92 Exhibit 86, # 93 Exhibit 87, # 94 Exhibit 88, # 95 Exhibit 89, # 96 Exhibit 90, # 97 Exhibit 91, # 98 Exhibit 92, # 99 Exhibit 93, # 100 Exhibit 94, # 101 Exhibit 95, # 102 Exhibit 96, # 103 Exhibit 97, # 104 Certificate of Service)(Bridges, Andrew)

EXHIBIT 93

Defendant's Name: Mi1X cardin Harr
PFN:DSM428

s:

CEN:78L9388
CEPD REPORT HlGFREOBll
DEClARATIDN IN SUPPORT OF PROBABLE CAUSE
fHE UNDE~GNED HEREBY DECLARES:

1.

That she Is an INSPECTOR with the Alameda County District A tomey's Office, Oa land, Cal rot ta

2.

That the contents of thls dedarat!on, provides probable cause ta berteve the above--

committed the following offenses:
b.) PC 192{b)
l.

I dedare under information and belief that the follcwine Is true and correct:

On December 2rrd 20 6, a fire [0ok place at a warehouse commonly known as the Gho'St Ship, I
t 1309 3 si Avenue. The warehouse was the venue for a music event tha nigh and approximately 100 peo

were in attendance. The fire started on the firS1 floor 1n the northwest co ner uf the arena se at
approximately 11:20 PM. As a result of the ire thrrty•s:ix (36) individuals died from smoke ·nt:,ala ,on
ca
1

the bu tiding was I rgely consumed in the flre, the exact cause is cl ss fied

as undetermined.

Derk 1011 Almena was the lease holder for the entir property at 1309 31 Avenue.
mena oo
possession in November 20 3. The term of the lease was from Nov mber 11, 2013 until ovember 30. 2018
The area where the warehouse was located was zoned for light industrial and its permitted use as as a
warehouse, according to Ci y of Oakland planning building and fire codes. Neither the erms of he lease nor
the local statutes permitted the warehouse to be used as a residence. After taking possession, Almena and ·s
family moved into the warehouse in viola ion of the lease; the Oakland Muniopal code and the Califomia Fr
Safety code. Almena began to suble space inside the warehouse, allowlng Individuals to live inside the
warehouse. Residents reported paying Almena anywhere from 350 to 1400 dollars a month for ltving space

inside the warehouse.

.

Almena allowed and encouraged tenants to use non-conventional bu ldirlg materials that he collea.ed
to create the! r living spaces. These non--conventional buildfns ~als md.ud4!d recycled dry wood~ such as
fence boards, shingles~ window frames, WOOden sculptures,·taiM$1•t,· J1~~,qpns, wooden RlffllUllre
·

tra lers, rugs, .and other ramshackte pieces-

IMng spaces that did not confom:to•
be removed. The manner
Oakland Munfdpal

Rail

In 2014, Alm na allowed Max Harri to live In ttie war house and mad him th,e "Creauve Directer."
Harris collected ren . mediated dlsputes between residents and acted as an intermediary between Almen and
the owner of the warehouse. Between 201 through December 20J 6, Almena and Harns allow d up to 2.5
people at on time to live .incl work In the warehouse. During his t1me, neither Almena no Harris. '5nugnt a
variance In the l • ning regulations or a permi to change the u.!>e of the building from light industrial o liv
work, In Viola lion of the Oakland Municipal code and the Callfornia Fire Safety code,
From November 2013 until December 1016, Almena advertised the upstairs spac.e Inside h warer ous ·
as a venu for music events and social ga herlngs 1 knowing lt was a violation of he City cf Oa land Mun·cipa
code. Often times Almena allowed as many as 100 people to gather inside this unsafe end unpermrtt d
warehouse. He advertised the venue for rant on social media and by word of a mouth.

During the course of Almena and Harris' tenancy, law enforcement officials responded to tt,e
warehouse for multlp!e c lls for service. ln many oft ese cases, officers were met outslde th!'.! warehousi!: by
the complaining p,an.v, When asked by law nforcement if people llved tn the space, Almena and Harris lied to
law enforcemenl officers by insisting that no one lived in the warehouse. Almena and l-larrls' actions of
al owing people to live In he building effectively changed the o cupanc:v of the building and triggered the need
for add1 lonal fire Siilfety requirements, s outlined by the Oakland Mu nicipal code and the California Sta e i:ire
1

code.
0 ic Alm- n di .rrg d the ocOJp ru:y f th bui!d lnG lt beram his r pon~ibility under the Ca1ifornia
fire Code to lnstarl fire suppressjon systen s such as automatic 11'e sprinklers, sma e alarms, exit signs, marked
locationi for fire extl11gul:.hers, and create an evaci.iation plan. Witness state they warned Afmen num rous
times about the obvious fire hazard in id the w rehou e Al en ' failur o c. is a violation cl the Oakl nd
Municipal code and th Cal1forn1a Fire S f ty cod .
During he cour e of the tenancy, Aln n , wlrh the h p of Harr

alt r d th int rior of he wareh us
by building a make.shift bathroom, cu trng a doorway into wall cut ing hole into the roof and opening a
previously sealed windo 'J m a wall o t e dJacen building.
s alter-otions w re all done without the permit
and inspection process hcit is design d to Jns re the sa, ty • p ople occupy n the building and re violations
of the Oakland Municipal cod and Californ a t te ire code
1

Almena was responslbl for the construcbon of an un fe
irca e from th first floor ta th .second
noor. A the top of the stairs was, what witnesses described as, a ramp or "gang plank" connecting the stalrs to
the !iecand floor Wltne:s~es describe these wooden stairs as dangerous and narrow, only allowing a group of
people to travel up or down the sta1rs ln a slngte flte. The construction of these stairs was uneven in width and
height accord ng to witnesses who travelJed them. The construction and the manner in which the stairs were

constructed was a violation of th!! Oakland Municipal code and the California Fire code.

Durlne; th cour e of their possession of the building, Almen ti and H;;irris acted k11owmgly and with dis egard
for the risk when they:
• Allowed individuals to liv In he warehouse and deceived the police, fire department and owners about

ttia fact;
•

Allowed large groups to a§semble in rhe warehouse for musical events in the spac and on December

t"d, 2016 they actually blocked one of two points of egress;
•

Conducted Lmpen 1itted and uninspected construction, including electrical work;

•

Allowed the floor to c:elllng storage of large Quantities of highlv flammable materials th t crea

d a

deadly and dangerous space;
Almena's and H rris' actions were reek.less, creati11g a high risk of death. A reasonable person would h e
~nown that acting fn that way would cr:eate :such risk. Their actions were so different from the way an ordinarily
careful person wo1ld act in the same S'ituation that their actions amounted to a disregard for human life. Their
u
reckle s actions were the proximate cause of the death of the 36 individuals trapp,ed lnsitie the warehouse
when the fire started.

I dl!cla e Lmder penaity of perJury under the laws of the Slate of California that the foregoing is correct.

Oat d: June 5, 2017 at Oa land 1 C lifornia

CERTIFICATE OF PROBABLE CAUSE
The Court, upon th~ review of this de la ration, hereby

Fmds

good cause to detain the above-named individual.
Date: _________
Time;

---------

_Does not Find