SOUTH LAKE TAHOE, Calif. – What was the first home of Lake Tahoe Community College, and before that the Gerken Motel, the property at 2659 Lake Tahoe Boulevard is now being torn down after years of litigation. Crews were on site starting Monday, May 5, 2025, to start the process of removing the buildings, capping the well that was on site, and remediating the soil and space.

As the Sunray Motel, the property fell into disarray and substandard living conditions for those living there. The property was abandoned without fixing numerous safety and other code issues in October 2022. The City of South Lake Tahoe had stepped in and added fees and fines for failure to address the issues found at the motel and violation of the code. At the time, the fines went unpaid by the property owner, Yan Jiang, and his company Fragranice, Inc. CA Corporation, forcing the city into a lawsuit.

Since that time, the parties have been in court to work out the appointment of a receiver and an abatement order. The City has received all payments due on the fines, according to the City’s Director of Development Services, Zach Thomas.

Mr. Jiang told South Tahoe Now that they were issued the demolition permits, but no plans for the property have been released. The City has no plans in process. The owner wanted to get the property cleared and remediated at this time. Fragranice, Inc. and the City of South Lake Tahoe have another hearing in court scheduled for May 23, 2025.

Status People of the State of California and the City of South Lake Tahoe v. Fragranice, inc. (Case no. 24CV2330)

Counsel for the City, Eli Flushman, appeared at the hearing on April 11, 2024, which was a continued hearing on the City’s Petition for the Appointment of a Receiver. The Court had continued the previous hearing to give the owner of the Sunray Hotel (Fragranice Inc.) additional time to demonstrate that they would abate the substandard conditions alleged by the City. Prior to the hearing, the Sunray submitted a status report to the Court detailing their efforts to commence demolition – with the goal being completing demolition in May 2025.  Leading up to the hearing, the Sunray reported to the Court that it was working to complete the approval of their demolition permit. The Sunray requested the Court deny the City’s petition, or to continue the matter until the demolition was complete. The City provided its own status report, which confirmed that the demolition permit had been issued following some required corrections to their permit. The City objected to any outright denial of the Petition to Appoint a Receiver, as no actual abatement had yet to take place.

At the hearing, the Court asserted that it was satisfied with the progress made by the operators of the Sunray given that a permit was issued, and that they appeared ready to proceed. However, the Court agreed it was premature to dismiss/deny the City’s Petition. The Court decided to continue the hearing to May 23, 2025, at 1:30 pm. The Court indicated that it would take oral briefings at that time regarding the completion of any abatement.