AKATALEPTOS FORENSICS "Eyes clenched tight, Truth sprawled out before him, He trips! — STUPID PLACE TO SIT!" Case Ref: OFH-2025-001 • forensics@akataleptos.com
Akataleptos Forensics — Computational Forensic Analysis

# Systematic Denial of Maintenance & Pre-Planned Closure of the Old Fire House Teen Center

A forensic analysis of 7,573 public records obtained via PRA (Washington Public Records Act, RCW 42.56), revealing a pattern of deliberate facility neglect, coordinated closure planning, and false public statements by City of Redmond officials.

Subject
City of Redmond, WA — Parks Dept.
Facility
Old Fire House Teen Center (est. ~1952)
Records Analyzed
7,573 documents (4 PRA installments)
Analysis Method
Computational forensics & data analysis
Prepared By
Akataleptos Forensics
Report Date
April 2026
Contact
forensics@akataleptos.com
Classification
Public
$94,370
Total Requested
$0
Total Approved
8
Years of Denials
6
Month Blackout
7
Days Before — Denied Closure
14 Contradictions: Actions vs. Stated Intent → Open Interactive Evidence Database → 📦 Download Complete Press Kit (ZIP)

Contains: Official report, timeline, legal violations analysis, source documents, and exhibits

♥
Prepared on behalf of
Sasha Glenn & the teens & families of the Old Fire House
This analysis was conducted as a duty to truth and coherence. When a community loses a 30-year institution and the public record doesn't add up, someone has to do the math.
Finding 1 — Capital Improvement Requests

## $94,370 in Capital Requests: 100% Denial Rate Over 8 Years

Every capital improvement request submitted for the Old Fire House between 2017 and 2025 was denied. The requests addressed documented safety hazards, federal ADA compliance violations, and critical equipment failures. Click any row for supporting detail.

Year | Request | Amount | Safety Issue | Result
--- | --- | --- | --- | ---
2017 | Stage Lighting Replacement ▶ | $22,000 | Electrical faults causing shorting | Denied
Request: Replace stage lighting system experiencing intermittent electrical faults and shorting — a documented fire and electrocution hazard in a building used by teenagers. Outcome: Capital request denied without documented alternative. The hazard was left unaddressed for 2 more years until the same request was resubmitted at a reduced amount. Significance: This is a safety issue in a building serving minors. Denial without remediation could constitute negligence. Capital Equipment Requests 2018-2025 (PDF) →
2019 | Stage Lighting (Re-requested) ▶ | $12,000 | Same electrical faults, 2 years unresolved | Denied
Request: Same stage lighting replacement, resubmitted at a 45% reduced cost ($12,000 vs. original $22,000) — staff had already self-compromised on scope. Outcome: Denied again. The electrical hazard documented since 2017 remained unrepaired. The building continued operating with known electrical faults for another 6 years. Significance: When staff cut the request nearly in half and it was still denied, the pattern of denial regardless of amount becomes apparent. Capital Equipment Requests 2018-2025 (PDF) →
2021 | ADA-Compliant Stage Replacement ▶ | $40,000 | Non-compliant since 1995 — federal violation | Denied
Request: Replace the stage to meet ADA accessibility requirements. The stage had been non-compliant since 1995 — 26 years of federal accessibility violation. Outcome: Denied. A public building serving minors — including disabled minors — was knowingly kept in violation of federal disability law for over a quarter century. Significance: ADA compliance is not discretionary. The city had a legal obligation to make this repair. Denying it while continuing to operate the building constitutes a federal violation. The city subsequently cited building condition as justification for closure — a condition they created by refusing to maintain it. Capital Equipment Requests 2018-2025 (PDF) →
2021 | Awning Frame Repair ▶ | $15,345 | Detaching from building — falling hazard | Denied
Request: Repair the awning frame, which was physically separating from the building structure — a falling debris hazard in an area where teens gather. Outcome: Denied. A structural element actively detaching from a public building over a pedestrian area was left as-is. Significance: A falling awning is a liability event waiting to happen. The city chose to accept that risk rather than spend $15K on repairs. Capital Equipment Requests 2018-2025 (PDF) →
2023 | Amplifier Replacement ▶ | $5,025 | 2 of 3 amplifiers dead | Denied
Request: Replace 2 of 3 non-functional amplifiers. The teen center's recording studio and performance space — its core program offerings — were becoming non-functional. Outcome: Denied. $5,025 — less than the monthly cost of the PR firm later hired to manage the closure narrative ($4,468.75/month). Significance: The city spent more per month on communications management than it would have cost to keep the teen center's core programs running. This represents the elimination of program capability through funding denial — deny the tools, then cite declining engagement as justification for closure. Capital Equipment Requests 2018-2025 (PDF) → S&A Contract — $4,469/mo comparison (PDF) →

$94,370
Total Requested
$0
Total Approved
5 of 5
Requests Denied
$4,469
Monthly PR Expenditure
Note: The PR firm hired to manage the closure announcement cost $4,468.75 per month — nearly as much as the $5,025 amplifier request that was denied. The total capital denied over 8 years ($94,370) represents less than 22 months of PR fees. The city allocated funds to narrative control while denying building maintenance.
Capital Equipment Requests 2018-2025 (PDF) → S&A Communications Contract (PDF) →
Finding 2 — Budget Analysis

## Systematic Underfunding Pattern in Building Maintenance Budget

Public records request data reveals planned maintenance was consistently underfunded while emergency repair costs escalated. Revenue targets were set at levels that guaranteed the appearance of program failure.

#### Building Maintenance

Planned maintenance funding 15–30% under budget
Outside repairs (emergency) 300–432% over budget
R&M supplies (2023 → 2025) ↓ 76% drop
Analysis: Deny planned maintenance → building deteriorates → emergency repairs escalate in cost → cite rising costs as evidence the building is a liability. A self-reinforcing failure loop.
PRR Budget vs. Actuals 2019-2025 (XLSX) → OFH Teen Center Budget vs. Actuals (XLSX) →

#### Revenue & Internet

Revenue target $106,271
Actual revenue collected $6,129 (5.8%)
Internet budget accuracy (4 years) 300–800% underbudgeted
Analysis: A revenue target set 17x higher than actual collections is not a projection error — it is an unreachable benchmark. The gap between target and actual was then cited as evidence the program was not financially viable.
PRR Budget vs. Actuals 2019-2025 (XLSX) →

### Finding: The Maintenance Cost Justification Is Circular

The city's stated reason for closure was building maintenance costs. The maintenance costs were high because the city denied planned maintenance for 8 years, forcing every repair into emergency status at 3–4x the planned cost.

The condition cited as the basis for closure was created by the decisions of the entity that ordered the closure.

Full Forensic Analysis → FCA Summary Report v4 (PDF) →
Finding 3 — Timeline Reconstruction

## 24 Months of Internal Planning, Zero Days of Public Input

Forensic email analysis of the PRA-produced documents reconstructs the closure planning timeline. The evidence indicates the decision was finalized at least two years before public disclosure. Filter by evidence type to trace the decision process.

January 2023

#### "Alternate Facilities Plan" appears on OFH Team Meeting agenda

Meeting

The phrase "Alternate Facilities Plan" begins appearing on every OFH Team Meeting agenda — and continues for 24 consecutive months.

Source: OFH Team Meeting agenda documents recovered via PRA

Significance: This is the earliest documented evidence that the city was actively planning to move programming out of the Old Fire House. The item appeared on every agenda for two full years before the public was informed. This was not a spontaneous decision driven by a facilities report — it was a sustained, internally coordinated process conducted without public notice.

OFH Team Meeting — Jan 2023 (PDF) → OFH Team Meeting — Nov 2023 (PDF) → OFH Team Meeting — Feb 2024 (PDF) → OFH Team Meeting — Aug 2024 (PDF) → Alternative Facilities Initial Plan (XLSX) → View in Evidence Database →
April 2024

#### Meng Analysis FCA presented to Council — retained in DRAFT status

Budget

The Facilities Condition Assessment by Meng Analysis was presented to City Council but deliberately retained in DRAFT status — preventing it from becoming an official public document.

Source: Council records, FCA report metadata

Significance: A draft document can be revised before finalization. Retaining it in draft for 10 months provided flexibility to adjust findings before they became the official basis for action. The DRAFT watermark was only removed on Feb 27, 2025 — 12 days before the public announcement.

FCA — Full Report (PDF, 18MB) → FCA — Summary Report v4 (PDF) → View in Evidence Database →
August 2024 — February 2025

#### 6-Month Gap in Email Production

Email Record

Near-zero emails appear in the PRA production for this entire 6-month period. This is the interval during which the closure decision was finalized — and the corresponding records are absent from the production.

Source: Forensic gap analysis of 7,573 PRA-produced documents

Significance: The city produced thousands of emails from before and after this period, but virtually nothing from the 6 months when the closure decision was being made. Three hypotheses: (1) city employees ceased using email for 6 months (implausible), (2) communications shifted to non-discoverable channels (consistent with 45 channel-switching events detected in the broader corpus), or (3) the emails were withheld from the PRA production (consistent with the 911+ withheld email finding).

This represents the most significant gap in the evidentiary record.

PRA Suppression Report → Full Forensic Analysis → View in Evidence Database →
December 2024

#### Stepherson & Associates PR firm contracted

PR / Narrative

The city contracted Stepherson & Associates at $4,468.75/month to manage closure communications — exceeding the monthly maintenance cost of the building (~$3,083).

Source: City contract records

Significance: A communications firm was contracted three months before the public announcement. The monthly communications expenditure exceeded monthly building maintenance. This is consistent with a pre-determined closure decision requiring managed public disclosure, not a facilities-based decision process.

S&A Communications Contract (PDF) → Consulting Services Agreement (PDF) → Project Charter — OFH Communications (PDF) →
January 21, 2025

#### S&A begins formal communications engagement

PR / Narrative

Stepherson & Associates begins formal engagement. The communications apparatus is operational 7 weeks before public disclosure.

Source: Engagement records, S&A billing

Significance: By this point, the decision is finalized, the narrative is being constructed, and the FCA report remains in draft. The remaining actions are staging and execution.

S&A Contract — Billing Records (PDF) →
February 6, 2025

#### FCA report pulled from network drive, forwarded internally

Email Record

Quinn Kuhnhausen retrieves "City of Redmond Final Report.pdf" from the N: drive and forwards to Cameron Zapata.

Source: Email: Quinn Kuhnhausen → Cameron Zapata, recovered via PRA

Significance: The FCA report is being circulated internally while still in DRAFT status. The file name reads "Final Report" but the document still carries a DRAFT watermark — it will not be officially finalized for another 3 weeks.

FCA — Full Report (PDF, 18MB) → View email thread in Evidence Database →
February 18, 2025

#### "OFH Engagement Plan and team check-in agenda"

Meeting

S&A and Parks staff hold engagement planning session. Orphan thread recovered: 20 associated emails.

Source: Orphan thread recovered via forensic analysis, 20 associated emails

Significance: The "engagement plan" was a communications rollout plan, not a public consultation process. Its purpose was managing the public reaction to a decision already made.

Project Charter — Communications OFH (PDF) → Community & Stakeholder Outreach Plan (PDF) → View orphan thread in Evidence Database →
February 19, 2025

#### "OFH 2/18 team check-in meeting notes" distributed

Email Record

Meeting notes distributed. Orphan thread: 110 emails. Stepherson Associates cc'd on all internal communications.

Source: Orphan thread, 110 emails recovered via forensic analysis

Significance: 110 emails on a single thread regarding a single meeting's notes indicates the full internal coordination apparatus: Parks, Facilities, Communications, and the external PR firm all synchronized on messaging. The PR firm was not advising from outside — they were embedded in internal city communications, co-authoring the public narrative.

Staff Talking Points (PDF) → City-Prepared FAQs (PDF) → View full thread in Evidence Database →
February 24–25, 2025

#### Sprinkler system testing & maintenance bid issued

Budget

IFB 10861-25: The city issues a bid for sprinkler system maintenance on the Old Fire House — 2 weeks before announcing the closure.

Source: Facilities emails, IFB 10861-25 bid documents

Significance: If the building was being closed for maintenance costs, why was the city actively soliciting maintenance bids two weeks before the announcement? Either internal coordination failed, or the "maintenance cost" justification was developed after the actual decision was already made.

View IFB emails in Evidence Database →
February 25, 2025

#### FCA report forwarded again internally

Email Record

Quinn Kuhnhausen forwards the FCA report to Glenn Coil. The still-DRAFT document continues circulating as the basis for an imminent announcement.

Source: Email: Quinn Kuhnhausen → Glenn Coil

Significance: The report that will justify the closure to the public is being distributed internally while still officially a draft. The public will be told the decision is based on "findings of the recent comprehensive condition assessment" — a document that was in draft status until 12 days before the announcement.

FCA — Full Report (PDF, 18MB) → View in Evidence Database →
February 27, 2025

#### DRAFT watermark removed from FCA report

Closure Action

"I just removed the DRAFT watermark off the document." — Sarah Partap (Meng Analysis), attaching "Redmond Summary Report v4.pdf". 12 days before public announcement.

Source: Email from Sarah Partap, Meng Analysis

Significance: The report was in DRAFT for 10 months (April 2024 – February 2025). It was finalized 12 days before the public announcement. This is consistent with the report being held in draft deliberately — available for internal use but not subject to public scrutiny — until the announcement apparatus was ready.

Redmond Summary Report v4 — Finalized (PDF) → View email in Evidence Database →
March 4, 2025

#### RYPAC member inquires about demolition plans

Email Record

Freya Reiger (RYPAC) emails Jeff Hagen: she has learned the OFH is being demolished. She requests building history for a historic landmark application.

Source: Email thread "OFH Demolition Questions" — Freya Reiger → Jeff Hagen

Significance: Word has reached community members a week before the official announcement. A community member is already attempting to initiate historic landmark protection. The city's response to this inquiry will become one of the most significant pieces of evidence in the record.

View thread in Evidence Database →
March 4, 2025 — Same Day

#### Inquiry escalated to Deputy City Administrator within 4 hours

Email Record

Jeff Hagen → Erica Chua → Zach Houvener → Loreen Hamilton. A routine community question reaches the Deputy City Administrator in under 4 hours.

Source: Email forwarding chain, timestamps recovered via PRA

Significance: A routine inquiry about building history does not require Deputy City Administrator involvement unless the answer is politically sensitive. The escalation speed indicates this was treated as a threat to the planned timeline, not a routine constituent request.

View forwarding chain in Evidence Database →
March 4, 2025 — 1:09 PM

#### Hamilton to Reiger: "No such decision has been made"

False Statement

Loreen Hamilton emails Freya Reiger directly: "there has been no such decision made about the Old Firehouse Teen Center." The closure is announced 7 days later.

Source: Direct email from Loreen Hamilton (Deputy City Administrator) to Freya Reiger, March 4, 2025, 1:09 PM

At the time of this statement:

• The PR firm had been working for 6 weeks

• The FCA DRAFT watermark had been removed 5 days earlier

• 110-email coordination threads were active between staff and S&A

• The engagement plan was already written

• The press release was 3 days from approval

This is a direct, documented false statement from a senior city official to a community member making a legitimate inquiry.

Full Forensic Analysis → View Hamilton email in Evidence Database →
March 7, 2025

#### Presentation, FAQ, web content, and staff communications finalized

PR / Narrative

"COR Community Center_Presentation_03.07.25.pdf" created. "For Review: Web Content, FAQ, Staff Communications" thread active (32 emails). Mayor Birney approves the news release.

Source: Internal attachments, orphan thread (32 emails), approval chain records

Significance: Three days after Hamilton told a community member "no decision has been made," the city is finalizing presentation decks, FAQs, web content, staff talking points, and the news release. The Mayor personally approves the release. The entire communications apparatus is staged.

Staff Talking Points (PDF) → City-Prepared FAQs (PDF) → News Release 3.11.25 (PDF) → OFH Facility Discussion Presentation (PDF) → View approval chain in Evidence Database →
March 10, 2025 — 4:30 PM

#### Mayor and Hamilton meet with RYPAC teens

Closure Action

Mayor Birney and Loreen Hamilton meet with the teens after hours to inform them the center is closing. The news release is distributed the following morning.

Source: Meeting records, RYPAC testimony

Significance: The primary stakeholders — the teens who used the center — were informed the evening before the press release, in person, with no time to organize a response. By the following morning, the narrative was set.

March 11, 2025 — 9:00 AM

#### Press Release: "City Transitions Teen Programs from Old Fire House"

Closure Action

784 emails on announcement day. Lisa Maher informs Council the closure is based on "findings of the recent comprehensive condition assessment." The assessment that was in draft for 10 months.

Source: Press release, email to Council from Lisa Maher (Deputy Executive Director)

Significance: The official narrative: this is a "facilities decision" based on a "recent" assessment. The evidence: the assessment was 10 months old, held in draft until 12 days prior, the PR firm had been working for 3 months, the closure had been planned for 2+ years, and a senior official had denied the decision existed 7 days earlier.

784 emails in a single day — the largest single-day volume in the entire PRA corpus — documents the scale of the coordinated communications push.

Official News Release — March 11, 2025 (PDF) → Staff Talking Points (PDF) → View announcement in Evidence Database →
November 2025

#### Council votes to demolish — no replacement plan presented

Closure Action

Council votes to demolish the Old Fire House. No concrete replacement plan has been presented. No public hearing was held on the closure decision itself.

Source: Council records, November 2025

Significance: The building is now slated for demolition. The lot — 0.64 acres of downtown Redmond, zoned for 144 feet at FAR 8.0, adjacent to the new light rail station — will be cleared without a publicly presented plan for its use.

Council Agenda Memo (PDF) → Financial Analysis → Mayor's Bond Letters of Intent (PDF) → View in Evidence Database →
Finding 4 — Statement vs. Evidence Comparison

## Official Statement vs. Contemporaneous Evidence

What a senior city official communicated to a community member on March 4, 2025, compared to the documented activities occurring simultaneously within City Hall.

Official Statement

> "There has been no such decision made about the Old Firehouse Teen Center."

— Loreen Hamilton, Deputy City Administrator
Email to Freya Reiger, March 4, 2025, 1:09 PM

View Original Email in Evidence Database →
Documented Activities at Time of Statement

- ✓ PR firm under contract and working for 6 weeks ($4,469/mo)
- ✓ FCA report DRAFT watermark removed 5 days earlier
- ✓ 110-email coordination thread active with S&A
- ✓ "Engagement Plan" already written and reviewed
- ✓ 20-email planning thread for rollout logistics
- ✓ Press release approved 3 days later
- ✓ Teens informed 6 days later
- ✓ Public announcement 7 days later

S&A Contract → FCA Report v4 → News Release → Engagement Plan → Evidence Database →
"A cleared lot with no plan is not a promise. It is an invitation." — Akataleptos Forensics, OFH-2025-001
Appendix A — Source Documents

## Primary Source Document Archive

All documents cited in this analysis are available for download. All were obtained through public records requests or recovered from public records.

#### Capital & Budget Records

Capital Equipment Requests 2018-2025 Budget vs. Actuals 2019-2025 OFH Teen Center Budget vs. Actuals Mayor's Bond Letters of Intent

#### Facility Condition Assessment

FCA — Full Report (18MB) FCA — Summary Report v4 (DRAFT removed Feb 27) OFH Facility Discussion Presentation

#### Communications Contracts

S&A Communications Contract Consulting Services Agreement Phase 2 Teen Services Engagement Project Charter — Communications OFH

#### Council & Public Communications

Council Agenda Memo News Release — March 11, 2025 Staff Talking Points City-Prepared FAQs Community & Stakeholder Outreach Plan

#### Meeting Agendas (24 Months)

Team Meeting — Jan 2023 (first appearance) Team Meeting — Nov 2023 Team Meeting — Feb 2024 Team Meeting — Aug 2024 Alternative Facilities Initial Plan

#### Forensic Analysis & Investigation

THE FULL PICTURE — Master Forensic Analysis PRA Suppression Report Financial Analysis Affidavit Exhibits Interactive Evidence Database (7,573 records)
Finding 6 — Service Monetization

## The "Replacement": $0 Became $458/Year Per Teen

The Old Firehouse was a free, open-access teen center for 30 years. Its replacement at the Redmond Community Center at Marymoor Village (RCCMV) now charges fees for nearly every program.

Before (OFH, 1994–2025): Walk in. No registration. No fees. No credit card. Music equipment, art supplies, live shows, mentorship, social space — all free, all the time, for everyone.
After (RCCMV, 2026): Online registration required. Credit card required. Per-activity fees. Limited spots. The following are actual prices from the City of Redmond’s official registration portal:

Program | Cost | Capacity | What It Replaced
--- | --- | --- | ---
DIY Recording | $110 | 6 teens | Free unlimited recording studio access at OFH
DIY Live Show | $88 | 6 teens | Free live performance venue at OFH for decades
Ice Cream Social | $40 | 12 teens | Free social hangout space at OFH every day
Teen Social Nights | $5/night | 40 teens | Free drop-in every day at OFH
YES Counseling | $0 | Drop-in | Also free at OFH (cannot charge for crisis services)
Themed Days | $0 | — | Not actual programs — placeholder labels

Annual cost per teen (RCCMV):
Weekly social nights: $5 × 52 = $260
One recording session: $110
One live show: $88
Total: $458/year For activities that were free for 30 years
Annual cost per teen (OFH, 1994–2025):
Walk in any day: $0
Use recording studio: $0
Play live shows: $0
Total: $0/year For 30 years. For everyone. No exceptions.

Source: All pricing verified from City of Redmond official registration system (Amilia portal) on April 4, 2026. Full analysis in Contradiction #14.

Appendix B — Methodology & Recommendations

## Analysis Methodology & Recommended Actions

This analysis was conducted using computational forensic methods applied to 7,573 public records obtained through four separate PRA requests filed with the City of Redmond, WA.

#### Interactive Evidence Database

3D forensic visualization of all 7,573 emails, entity network graphs, campaign finance data, and anomaly detection across the full PRA corpus.

Open Evidence Database

#### Contact Elected Officials

The findings of this analysis concern the conduct of City of Redmond officials. Public comment remains open at regular council sessions.

council@redmond.gov

#### Council Meeting Schedule

Redmond City Council meets twice monthly. Public comment periods accept testimony on agenda and non-agenda items.

Meeting Schedule

#### Community Campaign

SaveOFH is a community-led campaign organizing to preserve the Old Fire House and the programs it served.

SaveOFH.com

#### Press Kit

Downloadable press materials including executive summary, key findings, timeline, and source document archive for media use.

Download Press Kit

#### Share This Analysis

All findings are sourced from public records. This analysis is available for distribution, citation, and independent verification.

Copy Link
Methodology Note: This analysis was performed using computational forensic techniques including: automated email thread reconstruction, reply-chain orphan detection for withheld records, temporal gap analysis, network graph analysis of communication patterns, duplicate detection across 7,573 documents, and cross-referencing of public campaign finance records with email participants. All findings are derived from documents obtained through lawful public records requests. The interactive evidence database provides full traceability from each finding to its source document.
A commitment to public accountability

### Need Help With Something Like This?

Akataleptos Forensics conducted this analysis pro bono — because the evidence demanded it. If you’re a community member, journalist, or advocate facing a similar situation — public records that don’t add up, decisions made behind closed doors, institutions dismantled without explanation — and you don’t have the resources to fight back, reach out.

We offer what services we can, free of charge, to those who need it most.

forensics@akataleptos.com