Eureka’s most notorious slumlord took the stand this morning to testify in his own defense while an attorney for the city of Eureka peppered him with questions about mold, cockroaches, faulty plumbing and overdue repairs at several of his properties. 

Alternately nervous, evasive and defiant, Squires claimed to have completed most of the repairs necessary to get back in compliance with building codes at the 26 properties at issue in the case. He pleaded ignorance and confusion about many of the city’s permitting requirements and repair requests.

At his own attorney’s advice, Squires last week refused to allow city inspectors on his properties to see whether or not the repairs had actually been completed. Squires said he refused access because he respects his tentants’ rights and privacy.

The city’s battles with Squires date back more than a decade. (See a selection of previous Journal coverage here, here, here and here.) Last January, the city, along with the county District Attorney’s office, sued Squires and his wife, alleging “ongoing and pervasive” code violations. The city is seeking permanent injunctions on properties owned by the couple.

Representing the city of Eureka was attorney Dean Pucci with the Roseville law offices of Jones & Mayer. He asked Squires to specify the repairs he’d completed — and the permits he’d requested — at one Eureka property after another: a Victorian at 119 West Sixth St., bungalow apartments at 2927 through 2941 California St., a subdivided house at 1637 Third St. and more.

Squires claimed the city initially denied him permits because six of his properties had been placed in receivership. The order placing those properties in the hands of a third party was stayed following an appeal. He also claimed to have completed many repairs without getting new permits or follow-up inspections.

Pucci challenged him. “You and your handymen are not certified building inspectors, right?” he asked. “You testified to remedying literally hundreds of violations since the beginning of this case, yes?” Squires confirmed that he had. “How can you say those [repairs] comply with state and local law?”

Squires replied, “I have years of experience and a little common sense.” If a faucet needed to be repaired because it didn’t have cold water, for example, he could simply turn it on and check it to see if it worked, he said.

In a surreal exchange, Pucci asked Squires to look at one of several binders filled with pictures taken at his properties. He directed Squires to look at pictures taken recently at the Blue Heron Lodge on Broadway, where the city had previously identified mold and water damage. He asked Squires to look at a picture of a wall and shower tiles and say whether or not he saw water damage.

“I don’t see water damage,” Squires replied. “I see filth.”

Pucci also asked Squires about evidence of cockroaches at the Blue Heron Lodge. Squires admitted that there have been cockroaches in some of the units, but he said the presence of the insects “depends on the cleanliness of the tenants.”

During a break in the proceedings, Squires told the Journal that some tenants make complaints as “an attention getter … to try to get free rent.” And he said that the city’s case against him is based on retaliation for his own suit against the city alleging harrassment. 

Back in court, Pucci suggested it’s the other way around. “Isn’t it true that every time the city initiates legal action against you, you turn around and file a complaint against the city?”

After some back and forth, Squires responded, “There were some legal proceedings, yes.”

Puccie also asked Squires why he hasn’t completed repairs he promised 19 months ago at a preliminary injunction hearing. Squires said they’re almost done.

Pucci completed his cross-examination of Squires before the hearing ended at noon.

Both Pucci and Squires’ attorney, Bradford Floyd, said they expect the trial to wrap up by Thursday.

Ryan Burns worked for the Journal from 2008 to 2013, covering a diverse mix of North Coast subjects,...

Join the Conversation

7 Comments

  1. City inspectors are not that “certified”!

    City inspectors pass “new construction” all-the-time where brand new lumber used to build with is “stricken with NASTY mold too”. Hmmm, but because the city is a cohort for the tax collector and property tax roll values, the city only wants the money and value added benefits – this is why new construction mold is allowed through “cover-up” by “certified inspectors” – higher tax bases and values that are trumped-up and false. Why? Tax revenue for a California state government and its city governments that are too big and too inefficient, so they must thieve and steal by making-up processes to lie, using tax dollars from everyone in order to use against only one person. Just think if any individual could dip into tax dollars to help fight their legal battles against any governing jurisdiction –>government would go under!

    Also, in Humboldt County, mold is everywhere!!!!!

    Now, cockroaches, that is funny. Do the tenants really expect to have their place bombed repreatedly? Afterall, most of Downtown Eureka is cockroach hotel where restaraunts serve food from kitchens that have been “cockroach” bombed; yet, the city only cares about money!

    Additionally, most rentals not “new costruction” are run down pieces of crap too, exactly WHY the tenants chose to live in that piece of crap (LOW RENT WHEN JOBS ARE ZILCH AND SOCIETAL COSTS ARE RISING! -So, tenants can play a ruse or guise game against the landlord after-the-fact for a decision to live that the tenant made in many instances (not all though, understandably). Of course, the city creates the game of no jobs, no money, use site conditions as the nexus to force value-added costs onto the asset that are not legally required (it is only the use of people as political tools regardless of the individual decision making by the tenant choosing prior-hand to live in the run-down rental! Government employees are slime when they play these games!

    This issue has more to do with “subsidized tax funds” not yielding results the city wanted because the city decides it is good busines to get into business with the private sector through quasi contractual relationships it pre-disguises as not the scam to steal wealth that it is. So many mandates for housing, no wonder the government resorts to low down dirty tricks! – HOJ

    Ps. The Squires messed-up taking the money and aligning their lifestyle with government! No wonder people avoid processes they can envision. No wonder people grow dope to avoid being “ripped-off” by local government employees and officials. Government employees would not have their jobs if they were not allowed to “mess with people”!

  2. @Ned…..you sound like a typical tenant in some of Floyd’s buildings. He may not be a perfect landlord, but he kept many of you in a house or an apartment, when no one else in their right mind would have rented to you.

  3. “COMMENT / BY VERBENA / NOV. 28, 9:51 P.M.
    Why was my comment taken down?”

    Why, because you are a troublemaker psycho btch from Hell, VERBENA RETARDO.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *