Litigants await rulings in civil rights case filed in opposition to metropolis | Information

A local man suing Muskogee City for alleged civil rights violations, suspected of “corruption and incompetence”, arranged for the meter to be removed after a woman tossed a Molotov cocktail into an apartment complex he owned.

Elias Quintana said the 2018 fire caused little damage, which was contained in a small area due to the cinder walls between units. He said pulling the meter was unnecessary and violated the International Property Maintenance Code.

Richard Flores, a mechanical engineer recruited by Quintana as an expert, said the city inspectors lacked the qualifications to determine if the meter needs to be drawn. Flores said city workers had also failed to abide by numerous IPMC regulations or to extend due process to Quintana.

“It’s ridiculous to have an electrical inspector who doesn’t know anything about electrical engineering and a construction manager who doesn’t know anything about dangers,” Flores said in a recent telephone interview. “If the utility felt there was a problem, they would pull the meter, but they didn’t – the power had been turned off before the fire department even got there.”

Attorneys representing the city argue in a motion for a preliminary ruling pending, denying Quintana’s efforts to have the court reconsider an earlier order and denying the extent of the June 28, 2018 fire Damage. They also argue that the city workers’ decision was an appropriate exercise of the city’s authority to remove “a potential threat to life and safety”.

“Anyone competent to inspect the electrical system and wiring saw that the wiring was damaged and posed a potential threat to life and safety,” said John J. Love, attorney at the law firm that represents the city . “Although the plaintiff denies this, he has no experience of electrical inspections,” and “the expert whom the plaintiff identified never looked at the wiring in the apartments after the fire.”

Love also argued in a motion for a summary judgment dismissing Quintana’s civil rights lawsuit that the decision to pull the meter on the apartment complex was not a constitutional decision. He agrees that the owner of property that has been taken from the government should be compensated, but this is not justified by Quintana’s claim.

“Courts have recognized that ‘government regulation – by definition – involves the adjustment of rights for the common good,” argues Love, citing a US Supreme Court case, “or” that the City caused him to sacrifice ‘all economically beneficial uses’ of his property. “

Quintana, waiting for a federal judge to decide on competing summary judgment motions and petition the court to reconsider dismissing lawsuits against city workers in their respective capacities, disagrees with the city’s assessment. He and Flores say IPMC’s selective enforcement against Quintana was part of a plan that “put 15 families on the streets”.

“One of the reasons I did this was to help these people – it was part of my ministry,” said Quintana of the low-rent apartments on South Cherokee Avenue. “I saw that I had people living on the streets, people in tents, and I bought this little piece of land, gave them a place to stay, and helped them find work.”

The city is citing a history of alleged violations of the law before the fire to support its position that its “actions were right and necessary”.