“I’m curious: do you actually have evidence that city officials ignored violations?”
It was a warehouse that had been illegally converted into apartments. It obviously had inadequate fire suppression sprinklers and it obviously had inadequate fire exits.
Did the building inspectors red tag the warehouse like they should have?
No.
There’s your evidence.
As I pointed out in an earlier post, property owners (and tenants) have rights - and one of those rights is the right to due process.
Please use your intellect to think about the issues surrounding this tragedy instead of simply relying on your initial knee-jerk emotional reaction.
In my opinion, the organizers of the illegal "rave" have a lot more culpability in this tragedy than either the owner of the building, or the city's building officials. The tenant is equally culpable for creating and maintaining a fire hazard, and also for allowing people to live there illegally (assuming that he actually did so). As po0litically incorrect as it may be, I also think those who attended, and stayed at, the "rave" (yes, the victims) also have some culpability for being too ignorant or stupid to watch out for their own best interests and personal safety.
Finally, building codes for "existing" (read: old) buildings are quite often different from those for new construction. They also differ from locale to locale. I have yet to see any evidence that the building code for Oakland even requires sprinklers for a warehouse the age of the building in question. As far as illegal uses and occupancy go, no city could afford to employ the number of code officials it would take to track down and eliminate every illegal or nonconforming use within their jurisdiction. And to ask them to do so would be to invite a heretofore unprecedented level of government interference in the lives of property owners.