The site meeting is cancelled, and “No work is currently scheduled”

October 23, 2026

VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL ONLY

Dear Director Hoevertsz and Supervisor Hermosillo:

This is the fifteenth written notice concerning the Subdivision Roadways and my third letter today. It responds to Director Hoevertsz’s second email of October 23, 2026, sent at 6:04 p.m. (the “Second October 23 Response”), attached as Exhibit A. That email was sent after my fourteenth notice. This letter incorporates the prior notices and uses the terms defined in them.

The residents currently participating are listed in the fourteenth notice: seven households on Glenwood, Oakwood, and Maplewood Drives.

I. WHAT THE SECOND OCTOBER 23 RESPONSE ESTABLISHES

II. CANCELLATION OF THE OCTOBER 30 SITE MEETING

Residents first learned of the October 30 site meeting on October 21. On October 23, by email sent after business hours on a Friday, it was cancelled. The stated reason is that an unidentified Deputy Director had already evaluated the site, at an undisclosed time, without notice to residents and without their participation.

THE RESULTThe County’s only site evaluation of four roadways serving approximately 300 residents was conducted without a single resident present, by an official the County has declined to name, with findings the County has not shared. The meeting at which residents could have shown the County the conditions they live with has been cancelled.

If the Deputy Director’s evaluation was sufficient to make the meeting unnecessary, its findings exist now. Residents request:

1. Reinstatement of the October 30 site meeting with residents present, or a site walk with residents on a date before November 13, 2026, on the terms in Section IV of the October 22 Letter.
2. The name and title of the Deputy Director, and the date, time, duration, and streets of the evaluation.
3. A written summary of the evaluation’s findings, including any observations on drainage, curb ramps, and pedestrian access.

These are operational questions, not records requests. Residents’ Public Records Act requests for the underlying records remain separate and pending.

III. “SCHEDULING” AND “NO WORK IS CURRENTLY SCHEDULED”

On October 22 at 4:36 p.m., the County notified residents that “The County is scheduling your request.” On October 23, the Director wrote that “No work is currently scheduled.” Both statements cannot describe the same Request. Please explain the October 22 notification, confirm the current status of Request No. 7181, and confirm that it will not be closed without written notice to all recipients.

NOTICE OF CONDITIONSThe County has written notice of a roadway it rates “Very Poor,” of hazards to children and to residents with limited mobility, of curb ramps rendered unusable by drainage failure, and of the approaching wet season. The County has now confirmed in writing that no work is scheduled.

The Second October 23 Response gives no date for answers on treatment and funding. The October 28, 2026 date for a substantive response to the October 18 Notice remains in effect. If the evaluation will not be complete by then, please state the date by which it will be.

IV. REQUEST TO SUPERVISOR HERMOSILLO

Supervisor Hermosillo, your office has not written to residents since October 21. Since then, the department has cancelled the only resident site meeting, stated that no work is scheduled, and given no date for answers.

Residents of the Subdivision Roadways are your constituents. They request that you:

1. Meet with residents on site on Glenwood, Oakwood, Brookview, and Maplewood Drives, on a date before November 13, 2026.
2. State whether you will ask that the condition and funding of the Subdivision Roadways be placed on a Board of Supervisors agenda, and if so, when.
3. Respond in writing to all recipients by 5:00 p.m. on Monday, October 26, 2026.

V. DISTRIBUTION OF CORRESPONDENCE

For the third time, a response from Director Hoevertsz was not sent to all recipients. It was copied to SPI Road Maintenance and three residents only. It omitted Supervisor Hermosillo, the First District office, the Clerk of the Board, The Press Democrat, and the four residents added to the distribution today: Ben Putterman, Tom Proctor, Quetzal Fasel, and Simon Blanchette. The Second October 23 Response is attached as Exhibit A and is now before all recipients. Please use “Reply All” for every future response.

VI. SUMMARY OF REQUESTED ACTIONS

All responses should be directed to every recipient of this letter. Any date not met will be noted in the record.

VII. REVIEW BY COUNSEL AND RESERVATION OF RIGHTS

This matter will now be reviewed by counsel, including the County’s handling of the Request and its treatment of the children, elderly residents, and taxpaying property owners who depend on the Subdivision Roadways. Correspondence should continue to be directed to the undersigned and to every recipient of this letter until further notice.

This letter is not intended as a complete statement of the relevant facts or of the rights and remedies of the undersigned or of other residents of the subdivision, all of which are expressly reserved. Nothing in this letter constitutes a claim under Government Code section 910 et seq. or a waiver of the right to present any such claim.

I look forward to your timely response.

Very truly yours,

Cessna Champion Barrett
Property Owner, 970 Glenwood Drive
Rancho Madrone Neighborhood Coalition Coordinator
Licensed California Real Estate Broker (DRE #01281555)

EXHIBIT A

Second email from Director Johannes Hoevertsz dated October 23, 2026, 6:04 p.m. PDT

Reproduced as received; emphasis added. Not addressed to Supervisor Hermosillo, the District 1 office, the Board, SPI’s general address, The Press Democrat, or residents Putterman, Proctor, Fasel, and Blanchette.