03-134����� e�
t�lj�(`.� c�-3 c�-�'C73
RESOLUTION
CITY OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA
Presented By
Referred To
Committee: Date
33
WHEREAS, Citizen Service Office, Division of Code Enforcement has requested the City Council
to hold public hearings to consider the advisability and necessity of ordering the repair ar wrecking and
removal of a two-story, wood frame, duplex with a detached, two-stall garage located on property
hereinafter referred to as the "Subj ect Property" and commonly known as 733 Charles Avenue. This
property is legally described as follows, to wit:
Lots 16 and 17, Block 2, Syndicate No. 2 Addition.
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
WHEREAS, based upon the records in the Ramsey County Recorder's Office and information
obtained by Division of Code Enforcement on or before June 13, 2002, the following are the now lrnown
interested or responsible parties for the Subject Property: Joseph H. Odens & Margie V. Odens, 733
Charles Avenue, St. Paul, MN 55104; Indymac Bank FSB, 155 North Lake Avenue, Pasadena, CA 91101;
Associates Industrial Loan Company, 1868 Beam Avenue, Maplewood, MN 55109
WHEREAS, Division of Code Enforcement has served in accordance with the provisions of
Chapter 45 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code an order identified as an"Order to Abate Nuisance
Building(s)" dated October 8, 2002; and
WHEREAS, this order informed the then lmown interested or responsible parties that the structure
located on the Subject Property is a nuisance building(s) pursuant to Chapter 45; and
WHEREAS, this order informed the interested or responsible parties that they must repair or
demolish the structure located on the Subject Property by November 7, 2002; and
WHEREAS, the enforcement officer has posted a placard on the Subject Property declaring this
building(s) to constitute a nuisance condition; subject to demolition; and
WHEREAS, this nuisance condition has not been corrected and Division of Code Enforcement
requested that the City Clerk schedule public hearings before the Legislative Hearing Officer of the City
Council and the Saint Paul City Council; and
VJHEREAS, the interested and responsible parties have been served notice in accordance with the
provisions of Chapter 45 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code, of the time, date, place and purpose of the
public hearings; and
Council Fi1e # �3+ � J�
Green Sheet � � o aN ay
AA-ADA-EEO Employer
1 WHEREAS, a hearing was held before the Legislative Hearing Officer of the Saint Paul City Oi a3�
2 Council on Tuesday, January 28, 2003 to hear testimony and evidence, and after receiving testimony and
3 evidence, made the recommendation to approve the request to order the interested or responsible parties to
4 make the Subject Properry safe and not detrimental to the public peace, health, safety and welfare and
5 remove its blighting influence on the community by rehabilitating this shucture in accordance with all
6 applicable codes and ordinances, or in the alternative by demolishing and removing the structure in
7 accordance with all applicable codes and ordinances. The rehabilitation or demolition of the stnxcture to be
8 completed within fifteen (15) days a£ter the date of the Council Hearing; and
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
WHEREAS, a hearing was held before the Saint Paul City Council on Wednesday, February O5,
2003 and the testimony and evidence including the action taken by the Legislative Hearing Officer was
considered by the Council; now therefore
BE IT RESOLVED, that based upon the testimony and evidence presented at the above referenced
public hearings, the Saint Paul City Council hereby adopts the following Findings and Order concerning the
Subject Property at 733 Charles Avenue:
That the Subject Property comprises a nuisance condition as defined in Saint Paul
Legislative Code, Chapter 45.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
That the costs of demolition and removal of this building(s) is estimated to exceed three
thousand dollars ($3,000.00).
That there now exists and has existed multiple Housing or Building code violations at the
Subject Property.
That an Order to Abate Nuisance Building(s) was sent to the then laiown responsible parties
to correct the deficiencies or to demolish and remove the building(s).
That the deficiencies causing this nuisance condition have not been conected.
That Division of Code Enforcement has posted a placazd on the Subject Property which
declares it to be a nuisance condition subject to demolition.
That this building has been routinely monitored by the Citizen Service Offices, Division of
Code Enforcement, Vacant/Nuisance Buildings.
8. That the lrnown interested parties and owners are as previously stated in this resolution and
that the notification requirements of Chapter 45 have been fulfilled.
ORDER
The Saint Paul City Council hereby makes the following order:
L The above referenced interested or responsible parties shall make the Subject Property safe and not
detrimental to the public peace, health, safety and welfare and remove its blighting influence on the
community by rehabilitating this structure and correcting all deficiencies as prescribed in the above
referenced Order to Abate Nuisance Building(s) in accordance with all applicable codes and
ordinances, or in the alternative by demolishing and removing the structure in accordance with all
applicable codes and ordinances. The rehabilitation ar demolition and removal of the structure
must be completed within frfteerr�i'S�days after the date of the Council Hearing.
� r �`� `�°�
- E hmployer
�� -l'I�1
2. ff the above correcrive action is not completed within this period of time the Citizen Service Office,
2 Division of Code Enforcement is hereby authorized to take whatever steps are necessary to
3 demolish and remove this structure, fill the site and chazge the costs incurred against the Subject
4 Property pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 45 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code.
5
6 3. In the event the building is to be demolished and removed by the City of Saint Paul, all personal
7 property or fixtures of any kind which interfere with the demolition and removal shall be removed
8 from the property by the responsible parties by the end of this time period. If all personal properry
9 is not removed, it shall be considered to be abandoned and the City of Saint Paul shall remove and
10
11
12 4.
dispose of such property as provided by law.
It is fiuther ordered, that a copy of this resolution be mailed to the owners and interested parties in
accordance with Chapter 45 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code.
Requested by Department of:
BENANA
BLAKEY
BOSTROM
COLEMAN
Yeas Navs Absent
✓
�
✓
Citizen ervice Office� Code Enforcement
Bv: ��U�
Form Approved by City Attorney
HARR/S �/ ,.? t
LANTRY ✓ G 1'// \
By:
RE/TER �/�
Adopted by Council: Date � 3 �
Adoption Certified by Council Secretary
Approve ayor for Sub � sion to
Council -
Rv� ��� .
AA-ADA-EEQ Employer
of Code
Andy Dawkins 266-8427
TOTAL # OF SIGNATURE PAGES
GREEN SHEET
� _ . !i� � /1�� ��
'�� - ._ _� , �'
V
o2-1�a
No 102424
��
� wvo�l�wserwnl , ❑
(CLJP ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGNATUR�
ry Council to pass this resolurion which will order the owner(s) to remove or repair the referenced building(s). If
; owner fails to comply with the resolution, the Citizen Service Office, Division of Code Enforcement is ordered
remove the building. The subject property is located at 733 Charles Avenue.
PLANNING COMMISSION
CIB CAMMITTEE
CML SERVICE COMMISSION
Fies tlus a�saMrm e.er walaetl un0er a mnGa� r« Nis decaMienl4
VES NO
Fias tlis P��rm e�ef bcen e Cily empbyee7
YES No
Oaes thie Y&�rm D� a slaN not nannal�YO� bY anY curteM city emPbyee?
YES NO
Is tli�s peisaJfi�m a terpeled oeiWo(t ,
VES NO
dain all vec ariswe�s m seoerate sheM antl aVach m a� sheM
INI7IATING PROBLEM ISS1E, OPPOR7UNITV (Who. WhaL When. Whe�e, Why)
This building(s) is a nuisance building(s) as defined in Chapter 45 and a vacant building as defined in Chapter 43 of
the Saint Paul Legislative Code. The owners, interested parties and responsible parties lrnown to the Enforcement
Officer were given an order to repair or remove the building at 733 Charles Avenue by November 7, 2002, and
have failed to co,mply with those orders.
...:.. ,�.�
^, � The City will eliminate a nuisance.
4��eiffN�runas to wrecx ana remove tms nuuau�
collected as a special assessment against the property tases.
� �� ������ d � ^
L. 11 '
���� �'� �r ��
DISADVANTAGES IF NOT APPRO�
A nuisance condition will remain unabated in the City. This building(s) will continue to blight the community.
AOUMOFTRANSACTONS �B4OOO - �9,000 COST/REVENUEBUD6EfED(dRCLEONE�
souRCe Nuisance Housing Abatement �.rnm,NU�e�n 3326
INFORMATION (IXPWN) ,
AA-ADA-EEO Employer �
NO
ROUTING, ORDER:
BeIow ace comect roufmgw fce the.siz most frequent types oEdocimments:'
CONTRACTS (assumes authorized bndget esists) ' COIINCII.RESOLUTION (ameod liudg'ets/accept gants)
1. Outside Agenc.y 1: Depaitmenf Diiect� ,' ,,,
2.,Depac{mentDirectot 2.OffceofFinancialServicesD'aector '
3: CityAttotnep. � 3� 'Crt};�cen�y � � �
a: lviayor�Assistant (f� oontracts ova $z$;000) a,- %fayor/nssisEanc '; ,
5. H�en RighYs (for oontrads over $50,000) 5. , C'dq Conncil
6. Offrce of Fina�isl Services - Accoimting 6. Office ofFinanciaCServices - Ac�ting,
nv�tsrxnx�v� oRn�as (B»aget��> courica,iiESOr.irr�orr <au mt�s ffia o�am�c�>
t. a�avityhr�agerornep�menta�o,m�nc 1, nep"azlmencv;Fecror'
2. DepartmentDi�ecton ' � � 2. CitqAitomey� ',, � � � � �
3. �ce ofFinancial Services D'uector ,, 3. lvfayor/Assistant ',
4: City Clerk , 4. City, Cwmcil'
5. O�ce ofFinenciai Services - Acconnting
ADMINfSTRATTVE ORDII2S (all others)
2. City'Attomey
3: Office ofFina�ial ServicesD"uector
4. ' Ciry Clerk
2. City'Attomey
3. Mayor/a��Anr '
a'. cuy ci�x' .
TOTAL NUMBER OF SIGNATURE PAGES
Indicate the # of pages on wluch si�ahaes are required a� papenlip or,flag each'of these pages.,, ,
� � � � , � , . , � , , , i� „ , ,. � , ' � , , ,
AC'FIONREQLJESTED .
Descn`be what the,project/request seetcs to accomplish m either duonoIogical oida or order of importance, wluefiever is
most appropriate for the issue. Do not write complete sentiEnces., Be�n each item m yrns lis[ with avedi. '„ .
.,, ' , ' . , '
RECOM1vfENDATIONS
Complete iflhe issoe in qnestion hss been presented before.anS'�?�Y Public or private.
PERSONAL SERVICE COI3TRACTS: '
1Lis rofamalion will be nsed to deteimi� the ci}y's liability for workeis ,compensetion claims, taxes and proper civil ,
service 5irmgrules
INITIATINGPROBLEtr�IS$UE,OPPpRTUN1TY' '
Explein the situati� or condiaons ThaE created a need for yo� project � requesC ' „
ADVANTAGES IF AFPROVED
Indicate whether tbis is simP$' an a�nual,bud8et Procedme re4uired bY law/chazYer or whethe¢ there are specific ways in
wliidt the Cily of Saint Paul and its citizens wi}1 benefit &omthisprojcct/actiam.
DLSADVANfA(�S,SFAPPROVID � � � � � � � � �
What negafive effecfs or majar chmges to e�ristiug'o; past �ro� might tlus P%1�4� P�ce �fit is pacsed ,
(e.g.; haffic delays, �ise, tax'increases or assessments)?, To, wliom7 Wfien? Farhow longR
DISADVANTAGES SR NOT APPROVID
What will be tiienegatiqe consequences �tlie pmmised action is not approved? Inabilityto delivu sernceT Co�miie
� higtitce�c,noise,eccidentrate?�I.osso£revenue? � � .� ' � ,
FINANCIAL IlvIPACT
AlfhouSh9on mi�st tail� the informationyou pmvide here ta the issue yon are addzessing in general gom m�st answes
rivo,questions: How much is it goiog to cosl2 Who is S�mS� PaY?
.. ., ...., . �.', , .. �.�. ,.
. �� vnF i
� � � �
.
„
,� �� , i �n1 „�, . , , - ,
�
�
REPORT b 3 ��3 �
Date: April 8, 2003
Time: 10:00 a.m.
(130 p.m. for 929 Albemazle)
Place: Room 330 City Hall
15 West Kellogg Boulevazd
LEGISLATIVE HEARING FOR ORDERS TO REMOVE/REPAIR, CONDEMI`TATIONS,
SUMMARY ABATEMENT ORDERS, ABATEMENT ASSESSMENTS
Mazcia Moermond
Legislative Hearing Officer
1.
2.
3.
Appeal of Vehicle Abatement Order at 976 Minnehaha Avenue East.
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends changing the compliance date to Apri129, 2003, on
the March 20 Vehicle Abatement Order.
Laid over summary abatement from February 11, 2003:
J0207AA 1125 Beech Street °
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends reducing the assessment from $326 to $181 plus the
$45 administrative fees for a total assessment of $226.
Laid over summary abatements from March 25, 2003:
J0207AAAA Cleanup of property at 837 Fourth Street East
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
4. Laid over summary abatements:
J0206W Towing of abandoned vehicles from 1130 Abell Street;
J0207A2AA Property cleanup at 657 Lawson Avenue East.
657 Lawson Avenue East
Legisiative Hearing Officer recommends spreading the assessment over a five year period.
1130 Abell Street
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 733 Charles Avenue.
If the owner fails to comply with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove
the building. (Laid over from 3-25-03)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends laying over to the April 22, 2003, Legisiative Hearing.
a� -►a�
LEGISLATIVE HEARING REPORT OF APRiL 8, 2003
Page 2
6. Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 718 Sherburne
Avenue. If the owner fails to comply with the resolurion, Code Enforcement is ordered to
remo��e the building. (Laid over from 3-25-03)
L,egislative Hearing Officer recommends granting the owner 180 days to complete the
rehabilitation of the property provided the following is done by noon of Aprii 23, 2003:
i) Provide evidence of a cleaz title for the properry, 2) Provide purchase agreement with a
developer, 3) Post a$2,000 bond with the Office of License, Inspections, Environxnental
Protection; 4) Pay the current vacant building fees and real estate taxes, 5) Provide a plan
indicating how all the items on the Code Compliance Inspection report will be completed,
6) Show evidence of financial ability to complete the repairs on the plan.
7. Summary Abatement
J0301B Boarding-up of vacant building for part of December 2002 and all of
January 2003;
J0301C Demolitions of buildings from January 2003 to February 2003;
J0301A Property cleanup for part of December 2002 to part of January 2003.
(Note: 929 Albemarle Street will be heard at the 1:30 meeting.)
509 Glendale Street (J0301A)
Legislative Heazing Officer recommends laying over to the Apri122, 2003, Legislative Heazing.
773 Frank Street (J0301A)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends laying over to the April 22, 2003, Legislative Hearing.
701 Bun Street (also known as 699 Burr Street) (J0301A)
Legisiative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
707 Maryland Avenue East (J0301A)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
369 Fuller Avenue (J0301A)
Legisiative Heazing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
1130 A�Iinnehaha Avenue West (J0301A)
Legislative Heazing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
899 Palace Avenue (J0301A)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
922 Woodbridge Street (J0301A)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
LEGISLATIVE HEARING REPORT OF APRIL 8, 2003
Page 3
929 Albemarle Street (J0301A) 05 _ � 3�
Legislative Heazing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
8. Appeal of Summary Abatement Order at 690 Charles Avenue.
Legislarive Heazing Officer recommends changing the compliance date to May 8, 2003, of the
Mazch 20 Summary Abatement Order.
9. Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 1269 Coach Road. If
the owner fails to comply with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the
building.
Legislative Heazing Officer recommends approval of the resolution.
10. Appeal of Summary Abatement Order at 582 Charles Avenue.
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends changing the compliance date to May 8, 2003, on the
Mazch 20 Summary Abatement Order.
rrn
d3 -► y
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINLJTES OF APRII, 8, 2003
Page 5
W Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 733 Charles Avenue. If
�� the owner fails to comply with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the
building. (Laid over from 3-25-03)
Bob Volden, 1817 Van Buren Street, appeared and stated he is here to answer questions.
Marcia Moermond stated this will go to the City Council on April 23. She has given the owner a
few months to deal wiih this issue. She understands that two weeks ago, the owner (Joseph
Odens) was two �hir�s of the way through the repair list that he worked out with Andy Dawkins,
Director of Code Enforcement. Mr. Dawkins told Ms. Moermond yesterday that he walked
through the building, and there was a little work that needed to be done before the owner could
occupy the first floor. Ms. Moermond would like to see a lot of progress before the City
Council's Public Hearing on April 23. The owner needs to talk. to Andy Dawkins about how to
get done with this. In order to pull permits, a$2,000 bond will need to be posted. The City
Council could opt to waive that requirement. Mr. Volden responded the minor items are almost
all finished.
Ms. Moermond recommends laying over to the April 22, 2003, Legislative Heuing to finalize
recommendations. This matter will be on the City Council Public Hearing agenda for Apri123.
Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 718 Sherburne Avenue.
If the o�vner fails to comply with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove
the building. (Laid over from 3-25-03)
Justine Maine, 28231 Johnson Lane, Chisago, Minnesota, appeazed and stated he has the deed
and vendor's interest transferred into his name. He has copies of those. He can get certified
copies later. He also has a notice of cancellation of the contract-for-deed. The dissolution of
contract is about the same thing.
Colleen Wilkes, 5383 Stacy Trail Lot #122, Stacy, Minnesota appeared and stated she has not
been served with any papers and has talked to an attorney. Mr. Maine responded this is not the
time and place to contest that.
(Steve Magner viewed the paperwork.)
Mr. Maine stated his investor has a letter of intent and financing in order to repair and bring the
property up to living standards.
Marcia Moermond asked does he have a purchase agreement. Mr. Maine responded he does.
He can get a letter from his closing company that this is clear. Ms. Wilkes responded it cannot
be cleaz if she was not served.
Mr. Magner asked is there a letter from his title company that he has free and clear title to this
property. Mr. Maine responded no, but he can get one.
MINUTES OF THE LEGISLATIVE HEARING � ,� J
FOR ORDERS TO REMOVE/REPAIR, CONDEMNATIONS, SUMMARY
ABATEMENT ORDERS, ABATEMENT ASSESSMENTS
Tuesday, April 8, 2003
Room 330 City Hall, 15 West Keliogg Boulevazd
Marcia Moermond, Legislative Hearing Officer
STAFF PRESENT: John Betz, Code Enforcement; Roxanne Flink, Real Estate; Fallon Kelly,
Code Enforcement; Steve Magner, Code Enforcement; Haroid Robinson, Code Enforcement;
Tchu Yajh, Planning and Economic Development
Appeal of Vehicle Abatement Order at 976 Minnehaha Avenue East.
Ivlarcia Moermond stated the City wrote a vehicle abatement order to remove the vehicle from
the properiy because it did not have current tabs. She asked does it have current tabs now.
Elvis Abanonu, owner, appeared and stated it does not have current tabs. The problem is that it
belongs to his younger brother who is away in medical school. Mr. Abanonu does not have the
insurance papers to change the tabs. Also, it would be a financial bwden on Mr. Abanonu
because he is a full-time law student and cannot afford the tabs. He does not have the insurance
information yet to the car, although his brother said he would faac it. He will be back this
summer and wi11 take caze of the task.
Ms. Moermond stated there aze two expenses: the cost of the tabs and the cost of towing it off the
property which would be much greater. It seems to be on an approved surface. She asked about
how mueh tabs are. Mr. Robinson responded it would be under $100.
Ms. Moermond recommends changing the compliance date to Apri129, 2003, on the Vehicle
Abatement Order dated March 20. This will give Mr. Abanonu three more weeks to get current
tabs on the car. All he needs is the insurance numbers to update the tabs. Mr. Abanonu
responded he will call his brother and get the numbers by the new compliance date.
Laid over summary abatement from February 11, 2003:
J0207AA 1125 Beech Street
Keith Pederson, o�vner, 882 Payne Avenue, appeared and stated he is not sure what is going on,
and he is here to find out.
Haroid Robinson reported an order was issued on July 18, 2002, a work order was sent on
August 8, and the property was cleaned up on August 16. Orders were mailed to Mr. Pederson at
882 Payne and Occupant at 1125 Beech.
Mr. Pederson stated he received no notice. He has been at that address for 20 years. His trash
hauler noticed someone dumped trash there and called in to get authorization to pick up the
extras. 1125 Beech was vacant. The longest the trash was there was a week. There was trash
o� -��y
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF APRIL 8, 2003 Page 2
there from the move out. After that was picked up, someone else dumped on the properry, and
the hauler picked it up again. He goes there every week to pick up. He was not even awaze there
was any trash out there until he got the heazing notice for the assessment.
Ms. Moermond asked was there a correcrion order. Mr. Robinson responded a summary
abatement was sent on July 18 and a reinspection was done on July 30. They have a photograph
of the refuse and a videotape of the cleanup. No mail was retumed.
Ms. Moermond stated it is the City's responsibility to mail things to the address listed. Staff is
telling her tt�at they did and it did not come back in the mail. Their obligation is fulfilled.
Regardless, it is the owner's responsibility to keep the property cleaned up. Mr. Pederson
responded he does. It had to be different trash that was picked up than what was on the notice.
� (A videotape was shown.)
Mr. Pederson stated his records show his hauler went back two days later on July 22 bzcause
there was so much trash he could not do it on his regulaz route. It would have been a week and
two days from them noticing the trash. If sor.ieone came along on July 23 or thereafter, that is a
new incident. It could have been dumped there on the 6`
Ms. Moermond asked were there specifications on the work order about what needed to be
picked up. Mr. Robinson responded items and debris from the backyazd azea. On the original
summary abatement order issued on July 17, the debris and refuse was still there. He laid it over
because it looked like it was set out for pick up. He gave an extension of a week. He went back
on August 8 and it was still there. Mr. Pederson responded it was not trash. He has a bill
showing that it was picked up on July 22.
(Ms. Moermond looked at the paperwork.)
Ms. Moermoud asked was furniture mentioned in the original abatement. Mr. Robinson
responded the order has "discarded furniture" or it.
Mr. Pederson stated most of the inspectors call him on the telephone. If he had received a notice,
he would have taken care of it within 24 hours or he would have called the inspector. There are
two separate incidents here: they issued an order which he never received and he picked it up
anyway, subsequent to that pickup, they got anoYher deposit by another neighbor.
Ms. Moermond recommends reducing the assessment from $326 to $181 plus the $45
Administrative fees for a total assessment of $226. There is enough information here for a
decrease, but not more than that. Clearly the hauler picked up the furniture, but the City is seeing
other types of garbage and refuse in that area. The inspector says these are the same materials.
She is glad that he has a good relationship with the inspectors and they call him, even though
they are not abligated to do that.
0� -��y
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF APRIL 8, 2003
Laid over summary abatements from March 25, 2003:
J0207AAAA Cleanup of property at 837 Fourth Street East
(No one appeared.)
Page 3
Mazcia Moerxnond recommends approval of the assessment. This has been rescheduled three
times; therefore, it has been scheduled for fow hearings.
Laid over summary abatements:
J0206W Towing of ab2ndoned ��e'�ic1_es from private pra�ertp at 113� Abe11 S<reet
J'J207A2AA Properfy ciea :u� for property Iacated at 657 La�r�son Acenue East.
657 Lawson Avenue East
(Tchu Yajh provided a interpreting service for this property.)
The following appeared: Mai Thao and Chao Xiong, owners.
Nlazcia Moermond stated the City removed a refrigerator from the backyard of this property. Ms.
Thao responded that is conect.
n4s. Moermond stated the total assessment is $300. Ms. Thao asked could it be reduced.
Ms. Moermond asked would it help to have payments made over time. Ms. Thao responded she
would like to ask some quesYions. Also, she and her husband were separated at this time.
Ms. Moermond asked did she receive an order from the City to take caze of the refrigerator. Ms.
Thao responded no. Harold Robinson responded the notice was mailed to Mai Thao and Chao
Xiong at 657 Lawson. No mail was returned. Refrigerators are touchy items. Code
Enforcement does not give a long time to comply.
Ms. Moermond asked was the door attached. Mr. Robinson responded he is not sure. The notice
was mailed on October 22, 2002, with a compliance date of October 28.
Ms. Thao stated she was there was when the City was videotaping.
(A videotape was shown.)
Ms. Moermond asked does she understand the public safety risk of a refrigerator with the door
attached. Ms. Thao responded she understands it is a danger. She could not cazry it herself, so
she was waiting for the weekend when her brother could come and help her carry it. Before she
could do it, the City picked it up. '
o� -��y
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF APRIL 8, 2003 Page 4
Ms. Moermond stated the assessment needs to be paid. The City did the work. Kids do
suffocate in refrigerators with doors attached. Had the refrigerator had a chain around it or if the
door had been removed, it would be a different situation. Staff acted conecfly in moving quickly
to take caze of this situation. Someone from Real Estate can help her with payment
arrangements.
Ms. Thao stated the door was on the bottom. Mr. Robinson responded it looked like the door
was on the right side. Ms. Moermond concurred with Mr. Robinson.
Mr. Robinson stated it doesn't matter anyway. There was refuse and debris and notice was
given. Everything was done properly.
Ms. Thao stated she does not understand why it was so much to.remove the refrigerator. Mr.
Robinson responded there is a one-hour minimum of $225, plus the hauling, disposal of the
appliance, and the administrative fees.
Roxanna Fiink explained the payment options, interest, and billing procedures.
Ms. Moermond recommends spreading the assessment over a five-yeaz period.
1130 Abell Street
James Swartwood, 5537 Dupont Avenue South, and P.O. Box 17255, Minneapolis, appeazed and
stated he corrected the situation and took appropriate action at the time. This was rental
property, and he reminded the renter this was a violation of his lease. When the rer.ter failed to
remove the vehicle, Mr. Swartwood gave him a notice and evicted him.
Marcia Moermond stated there was a citation to Mr. Swartwood issued for having an unlicensed
vehicle on the property and he was found guilty. The citation was because the property owner
had it stored on the property. When she looks at these things, she considers if it is the
responsibility of the taxpayers or the owner of the property. If he had called a private tow
company to have it removed, it would have been a lot cheaper.
Mr. Swartwood stated the building did not do anything wrong. The car was the renter's property.
Ms. Moermond responded 1130 Abell is Mr. Swariwood's property.
Mr. Swartwood stated the property is 1130 Abell, but the car was Mr. Chavez's car. If it was left
in the pazk or on the street, Mr. Chavez would get a tag for it. If he does it on the property, Mr.
Swartwood gets a tag for it. Mr. Moermond responded that is true, but Mr. Swartwood had the
violation of having the car there, he knew it was there, he received the correction order way
ahead of time. He was responsible and could have made anangements to have it towed, he
didn't, and he waited for the City to do it. '
Ms. Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
01-11 y
LEGISLATIVE HEARING NIINIJTES OF APRIL 8, 2003
Page 6
Mr. Magner suggested a recess so that his office can contact the title company and review these
documents before proceeding.
(This issue was discussed again about 30 minutes later.)
Ms. Ma�ner stated that based on the information that Fallon Kelly received from Mr. Maine's
title company, it appears there is still not cleaz ownership on this property. It is Mr. Maa er's
recommendation that this go to the City Council public hearing on April 23. If a bond was
posted and a clear title produced, it would be re-evaluated by the City Council.
Mr. Maine asked how long it would take to get a certified copy �vhen it is done with at the court
system. Fallon Keliy responded the closing company has not received anything.
Mr. Magner stated that Mr. Maine is seeking legal advice, and the City cannot give that to him.
Ms. Wilkes stated she has not had an opportunity to take care of the properiy, and she did not
know he had taken over the contract. Mr. Maine responded he is not legally obliged to notify
her.
Ms. Moermond stated Ms. Wilkes will continue to get notices as an interested party.
Ms. Wilkes stated she would like to speak with Ms. Moermond privately. Information is not
being sent to her correct address. Ms. Moermond responded she �vill not speak privately on
matters in Legislative Heazings. (Note: Ms. Wilkes left her address on the sign-in sheet.)
Ms. Moermond recommends granting the owner 180 days to complete the rehabilitation of the
property provided the following is done by noon of April 23, 2003: 1) Provide evidence of a
cleaz title for the property, 2) Provide purchase agreement with a developer, 3) Post a$2,000
bond with the Office of License, Inspections, Environmental Protection; 4) Pay the current vacant
building fees and real estate taxes, 5) Provide a plan indicating how all the items on the code
compliance inspection report will be completed, 6) Show evidence of financial ability to
complete the repairs on the plan.
Summary Abatement
J0301B Boarding-up of vacant buildings for part of December 2002 and all of
January 2003;
J0301C Demolitions of buildings from January 2003 to February 2003;
J0301A Property cleanup for part of December 2002 to part of January 2003.
(Note: 929 Albemarle Street will be heard at the 1:30 meeting.)
509 Glendale Street (J0301A)
Paul and Kathy West, owners, appeared. Ms. West stated she returned the green card.
o� -�sy
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINiJTES OF APRIL 8, 2003
Page 7
Mazcia Moermond recommends laying over to the Apri122, 2003, I,egislative Hearing as Code
Enforcement does not have the files available on this properiy, even though the owners say they
returned the green cazd.
773 Frank Street (J0301A)
Tong Pao Vang, owner, appeazed.
Mazcia Moermond recommends laying over to the Apri122, 2003, Legislative Hearing as Code
Enforcement does not have the files available on this property.
701 Burr Street (also known as 699 Burr Street (70301A)
(No one appeared.)
Mazcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
707 Marvland 9venue East {J0301A)
(No one appeared.)
Marcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
369 Fuller Avenue (J0301A)
(No one appeared.)
Marcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
1130 Minnehaha Avenue West (J0301A)
(No one appeared.)
Marcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
899 Palace Avenue (J0301A)
(No one appeared.)
Marcia Moerrnond recommends approval of the assessment.
o�-�3y
LEGISLATNE HEARING NIINLJTES OF APRIL 8, 2003
922 Woodbridee Street (J0301A)
�..- :
Mazcia Moermond stated there was an accuxnulation of refuse on the property. The City cleaned
it up for $288.
Donna Kapaun, 258 Mayfair Road, appeared and stated she has no problem with what the City
did. She is trying to stay on top of the tenants. She would like to see the videotape. Her main
concem is when she received the sununary abatement order on a Saturday, she called Lisa Martin
(Code Enforcement) on Monday and Tuesday, and Ms. Martin never retumed the phone calls.
Ms. Kapaun called the main number and finally got Ms. Martin's mailbox. It was gettin� close
to the inspection date and the voice mzil said she would be out of the office. ?��s. Kapaua called
the main number again and spoke to 7ohn Betz. She told him that she got the noYice on the tenth
and the cleanup was suppose to be done on Januazy 13, she could get the garbage done, but there
was no way she would get the repairs made. Finally, Ms. Martin called the day they were
cleaning up the property and said she was returning the calls from the previous week.
Ms. Moermond asked did she leave a message. Ms. Kapaun responded she left several messages
on Ms. Martin's voice mail and never got through. Then, she called the main number. That
person put her through to John Betz who did not understand why she was put through to him
because he was not her supervisor.
Ms. Kapaun stated the roof is deteriorated, but it is not leaking. The inspector says the interior
walls are defective. On the garage, there aze two areas that need repair. The roof has already
been replaced. She is reading from the correction notice that is associated with this cleanup.
(Ms. Moermond looked at the correction notice.)
Ms. Moermond stated these are two different things. The correction notice speaks to structural
issues. The abatement is just about the garage and refuse.
NIr. Betz stated that Ms. Martin indicated she received phone calls and attempted to return the
phone call on January 15 and there was no answer and no voice mail. Ms. Kapaun responded
that was after the inspection date of the January 14. She had left several messages that she
needed to speak with Ms. Martin before the 14"'.
Mr. Betz stated the property was cleaned on the 21 �` by the City.
Ms. Kapaun stated she has a letter from the tenant saying that she picked it up.
(A videotape was shown.)
Ms. Kapaun stated she did not see any refuse other than some paper laying around that the wind
could have brought in.
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF APRIL 8, 2003
os -���}
Page 9
Ms. Moermond asked does she have regular gazbaae collection service. Ms. Kapaun responded
yes. Gazbage was scheduled to be picked up the day after the City picked it up. She has had
problems with a neighbor who is dumping on her property. She does plan to put up a wall to
prevent his overlay from comin� onto her property.
Ms. Moermond stated the summary abatement notices were mailed on January 9. There was still
a seven day lag time. Ms. Kapaun responded she called her everyday. She did not call her after
Ms. Martin called her which was the day they were picking up the garbage.
Ms. Moermond stated it indicated in the files that the owner tried calling on January 15, but the
City did the cleanup on the 21s`. The owner could have appealed the abatement order. (Mr. Betz
showed Ms. Kapaun where it is on the bottom of the order where she could appeal.)
b4s. Kapaun stated she does not have a problem with what the CiYy does, but she does have a
problem when the City does not return calls. Ms. Kapaun said Mr. Betz told her not to worry
about it because nothing would be done until Ms. Martin got back. Mr. Betz responded that he
does not have a recollection of saying nothing would happen until Ms. Martin got back. He
would leave a message with the inspector to contact the owner prior to doing anything. He
would not put his office in a position of saying nothing would happen until the inspector can
contact you. That puts the office in limbo.
Ms. Kapaun stated there is no point in arguing about this. She is in favor of property being
picked up, but it would have been prevented if Ms. Martin returned her call in a timely fashion.
Ms. Moermond recommends approval of the assessment. She cannot deal with complaints about
staf£ Ms. Kapaun needs to contact Andy Dawkins, the Supervisor. She can also write the
Mayor or Deputy Mayor.
929 Albemarle Street (J0301A)
(This address was heard at the afternoon meeting.)
Appeal of Summary Abatement Order at 690 Charles Avenue.
Marcia Moermond stated there is scrap waod in a pile, but probably not a nice, neat pile.
Joseph Larson, owner, appeared and stated that is the case.
Ms. Moermond asked has he made an attempt to put this in a neat pile. Mr. Larson responded he
tried to get ahold of Jim Prill (Code Enforcement) who did not give him an answer and told him
to call Mr. Robinson.
03-i�'�
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF APRIL 8, 2003 Page 10
Ms. Moermond stated the City of Saint Paul book "Neighborhood Nuisances" has information
about wood piles. Mr. Larson responded that book talks about firewood, but his pile is more than
that. There is some scrap lumber that he will use to rebuild a fence.
(Mr. Larson showed Ms. Moermond photographs.)
Ms. Moermond stated there seems to be a way to arrange the pile so it is not a fire hazard or a
harborage for vermin.
Mr. Larson asked can he put it in a pile or does he need to purchase a shed. Harold Robinson
responded exterior storage of �vood is not accepted. If there is a time:ine or plan, then it can be
worked out. If it is piled against his gazage, it needs to be neater and the different woods
separated. Working something out with the inspector is the cheapest way to go.
Ms. Moermond recommends bringing the property into compliance by May 8, 2003.
ResoluYion ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 1269 Coach Road. If
the owner fails to comply with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the
building.
Terry Waldorf, Wellington Management, 1625 Energy Pazk Drive #100, appeazed and stated this
is an old rail:oad building.
(Steve Magner submitted photographs.)
Steve Magner reported this is a two story brick building on a lot of 58,890 square feet. The
Building was condemned December 30, 2002, and has been vacant since August 1991. The
current owner is Atrium North LLC. There have been 18 summary abatement notices issued to
secure the building 14 times, cut grass, and remove refuse. The Port Authority was owner of the
property until Wellington Management took it over in a sale. The Port Authority took possession
from Burlington Northern.
Marcia Moermond asked have there been any summary abatement notices since Wellington took
over the property. Mr. Magner responded he does not think so. There has been a good working
relationship. He continued with his report: On February 5, 2003, an inspection of the building
was conducted, a list of deficiencies which constitute a nuisance condition was developed, and
photographs were taken. An order to abate a nuisance building was issued on February 20, 2003,
with a compliance date of March 7, 2003. As of this date, this property remains in a condition
which comprises a nuisance as defined by the legislative code. The vacant building fees have
been paid. Real estate taxes are paid. Taxation has placed an estimated market value of $53,000
on the land and $29,100 on the building. As of Apri18, a Code Compliance Inspection has not
been applied for nor a$2,000 bond posted. Wellington is in agreement that t'he building is a
nuisance and they aze seeking a demolition. They had to go before the HPC (Historic
Preservation Commission) to acquire the demolition permit, but most of that has been resolved.
o� -» y
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF APRIL 8, 2003
Page 11
An Envuonmental Assessment Worksheet (EAV� needs to be completed. Wellington has
contracted with a consulting company to start this process.
Mr. Waldorf stated 8 goal is to remove the building. Thirry percent sits on railroad land 37
feet from the iracks. It is not practical to redevelop the building. They applied for a demolition
permit about a month ago, went to the HPC hearing, got approval to do it with restrictions to
photograph the building for the historic record. Then, they popped in with the EAW, which is
completed and has gone over to PED (Planning and Economic Development). Now, they have a
30 day period for public comment. The only additional thing is an artist to do a pencil drawing
of the building.
Mr. Magne; stated t;�e HFC has given ?he okay for the demolition permit �vith requirements. The
Fire Department has gone there repeatedly to put out fires.
Ms. Waldorf asked about expediting the resolution.
Ms. Moermond asked about the 30 day waiting period. Mr. Magner responded it is the comment
time far the EAW and a state requirement.
Mr. Waldorf stated it wiil be published on April 14. They have 30 days from then. Mr. Magner
added that it will be at least May 15 before they can get the permit.
Mr. Waldorf stated the Fire Department has told him they will no longer enter the building to
fight a fire.
Ms. Moermond recommends approval of the resolution to remove or repair.
Appe�l of Summary Abatement Order at 582 Charles Avenue.
Marcia Moermond stated the owner is doing work on the property and was asked to cleanup
refuse. Ms. Moermond asked what kind of work is being done. One of the permits the owner
pulled is for repair work.
Patricia Lundgren, owner, appeared and stated she has lifted the whole house and is installing a
basement. It started October 4. The house is closed up. Most of the dirt is in back. She is not
done by any means with this project. She still has a lot of work to do on it.
Harold Robinson stated he does not have a problem with the project. Usually they give leeway
for construction debris when there is a project going on, but it is scattered through the yard. He
would recommend a dumpster or containing it in a smaller area.
Ms. Lundgren stated this is an ongoing project. She was told there aze "impr6perly stored or
accumulated refuse," but she does not know what that means. She is bringing more things on
that site. Some things could go and some are going. For example, the footings under the porch
o� -i�y
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINLJTES OF APRiL 8, 2003
Page 12
have been put in a pile. She cannot lift them. The excavator will use a front end loader to pick
them up. She has not contacted them yet because it is srill snowing. Also, she has no grass nor
sidewalk, and it is too muddy right now. She has to use the boazds as a sidewalk to get around.
There was a playhouse that a plumber broke. He did it in the middle of December when it was
frozen to the ground.
Ms. Moermond stated one thina is to keep things as tidy as possible throughout the process. The
City get calls from r.eighbors. She suggested the inspector and her meet w�thin tw�o �veeks.
Mr. Robinson stated this was a sweep, but they do get lots of reports. They do get calls from
neighbors that say Code Enforcement is picking on them, but not picking on the neighbor down
the street. He would meet the owner at the property.
Ms. Moermond recommends changina the compliance date to May 8, 2003, on the March 20
Summary Abatement Order.
The meetin� was adjourned at 11:56 a.m.
�
o� -��y
REPORT
Date: Mazch 11, 2003
Time: 10:00 a.m.
130 p.m. (2168 Minnehaha only)
Place: Room 330 City Hall
15 West Kellogg Boulevard
LEGISLATIVE HEARING FOR ORDERS TO REMOVE/REPAIR,
CONDEMNATIONS, Si JMMARY ABATEMENT ORDERS, AND ABATEMENT
ASSESSMENTS
Marcia Moermond
Legislative Hearing Officer
1. Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 733 Charles
� Avenue. If the owner fails to comply with the resolution, Code Enforcement is
ordered to remove the building.
(Laid over from 2-11-03)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends laying this over to the March 25, 2003,
Legislative Hearing per a request from staff.
2. J0207A1A Laid over summary abatements from February 25, 2003, for property
cleanup at 712 Hawthorne Avenue and 627 Palace Avenue.
627 Palace Avenue
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
712 Hawthorne Avenue East
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends laying over to the May 13, 2003, Legislative
Hearing.
3. Laid over summary abatements from February 25, 2003:
J0207A1AA 2021 California Avenue East
J0205WV Towing of abandoned vehicles from private properties at 115
Sycamore Street East and 123 Geranium Avenue East.
J0205VVVV Towing of abandoned vehicles at 2168 Minnehaha Avenue East.
2021 California Avenue East
Legislative Heazing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
2168 Minnehaha Avenue East
(Also see Item 4.)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
123 Geranium Avenue East
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
o� -�3y
LEGISLATIVE HEARING REPORT OF MARCH 11, 2003
115 Svcaxnore Street East
Legisiative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
Page 2
4. J0207AAAAA Property Cleanup from February 25, 2003 at 2168 Minnehaha
Avenue East
(Laid over from 2-25-03)
(Also see Item 3.)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
5. J0204CC Laid over summary abatement from February 25, 2003 at 1000 Reanev
Avenue
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
6. Summary Abatements:
J0207A2 Property clean-up for part of July 2002 to part of December 2002;
J0206V Towing of abandoned vehicles from private property for part of July
2002 and all of September 2002.
728 White Bear Avenue North (J0207A2)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends deleting the assessment.
790 Selbv Avenue (J0207A2)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends deleting the assessment.
1076 Maenolia Avenue East (J0207A2)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends laying over to the March 25, 2003, Legislative
Hearing
665 Magnolia Avenue East (J0206V)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends deleting the assessment.
657 Lawson Avenue East (J0207A2)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends laying this over to the April 8, 2003, Legislative
Hearing.
1111 Bush Avenue (J0207A2)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
1039 Earl Street (J0207A2)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
1075 Front Avenue (J0207A2)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
pa -134
LEGISLATIVE HEARING REPORT OF MARCH 11, 2003
489 Hatch Avenue (J0207A2)
Legislative Hearing Officer recoaunends approval of the assessment.
0 Liehmer Place (J0207A2)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
Page 3
598 Maryland Avenue East (J0207A2)
Legislarive Hearing Officer recommends the assessment be reduced from $195.00 to
$75.00 plus the $45 administrative fees for a total assessment of $120.
1066 Reanev Avenue (J0207A2)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
925 Woodbridge Street (J0207A2, two assessments)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of both assessments.
939 Woodbridee Street (J0207A2)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
1130 Abell Street (J0206V)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
775 Ashland Avenue (J0206V)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
946 Carroll Avenue (70206V)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends deleting the assessment.
77 Front Avenue (J0206V)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
1587 Hudson Road (J0206�
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
791 York Avenue (J0206V)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
819 Johnson Parkwau (J0207A2)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends laying over to the March 25, 2003, Legislative
Heazing.
482 Lawson Avenue West (J0207A2)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends deleting the assessment.
o� -��y
LEGISLATIVE HEARING REPORT OF MARCH 11, 2003 Page 4
7. Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repau- the property at 20 Sycamore
Street East. If the owner fails to comply with the resolution, Code Enforcement is
ordered to remove the building.
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends granring the owner 180 days to complete the
rehabilitation of the properry.
rrn
o� -1�y
MINUTES OF THE LEGISLATIVE HEARING
ORDERS TO REMOVE/REPAIR, CONDEMNATIONS,
SiJMMARY ABATElVIENT ORDERS, AND ABATEMENT ASSESSMENTS
Tuesday, March 11, 2003
Room 330 City Hall, 15 West Kellogg Boulevazd
Mazcia Moermond, Legislative Hearing Officer
STAFF PRESENT: John Betz, Code Enforcement; Michael Driscoll, City Attorney's Office;
Steve Magner, Code Enforcement; Racquel Naylor, City Council O�ces; Harold Robinson,
Code Enforcement; Tchu Yajh, Plamiing and Economic Development
The meeting was calied to order at 10:01 a.m.
Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 733 Charles Avenue. If
the owner fails to comply with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the
building.
(Laid over from 2-ll-03)
Marcia Moermond recommends laying this over to the March 25, 2003, Legislarive Hearing per a
request from staff.
J0207A1A Laid over summary abatements for property cleanup at 712 Hawthorne
Avenue and 627 Palace Avenue. (Laid over from 2-25-03�
627 Palace Avenue
Arno A. Karner, 627 Palace Avenue, appeared and stated it is not safe for him to work in his yazd
because of Gopher State Ethanol. He has symptoms from the plant, such as ringing in his ears.
For the most part, he does not see how the City can force him to comply and not force Gopher
State to comply. The City has not gone into Gopher State and shut them down to make them
comply with City noise ordinances.
Mazcia Moermond asked what notices were issued for this property. John Betz responded orders
were issued on August 7, 2002, to remove discazded appliances and cut tall grass by August 12.
At that time, the owner appealed the orders and that appeal was denied by the City Council. The
City proceeded to remove the appliances and cut the ta11 grass. Now, we aze here on the cost of
that removal.
Mr. Kamer stated he went to court on a ricket and that was dismissed.
Ms. Moermond stated he is not allowed to subsequently appeal the assessment after the appeal of
the order was denied; however, this appeal was processed. Mr. Karner responded if he is denied
here and gets railroaded at the City Council, he will appeal on the grounds of civil rights because
he is not getting equal justice under the law as Gopher State Ethanol. The City has taken away
his one auenue of civil disobedience and freedom of speech because he can't use a megaphone or
walk with a protest sign because of health problems he attributes to Gopher State Ethanol. The
o� -�ay
LEGISLATIVE HEARING NIINLJTES OF MARCH 11, 2003 Page 2
appiiances were stored safely. There was no safety concem for the tall grass and weeds. He
should not have to pay for any of this.
Ms. Moermond requested the videotape.
(A videotape was shown.)
Mr. Karner stated he stipulates that the City did the work. He does not need to see the videotape.
The only reason he did this was because this is his only way to voice his opposition. His
azgument is not that he is wrong. His azgument is Gopher State Ethanol is more wrong than he
is. This is the first problem he has had with the City. It is his only way to voice his opposition to
the CiTy's negligence in enforcing nuisance ordinances against Gopher State Ethanol.
Ms. Moermond stated what is in front of her is the condition of his yazd. It has nothing to do
with Gopher State Ethanol. He received proper notice. Mr. Kamer responded he was not given a
chance to voice his opposition when he appealed the original correction order. He was told it
was irrelevant. If he is prosecuted and fined, the City is treating him under the law differently
than Gopher State Ethanol.
Ms. Moermond asked the cost of the assessment. Mr. Betz responded $729.
Ms. Moermond stated the $729 is the actual cost to the City doing this cleanup. This is not a
fine, but a biil that the City can force payment on by assessing it on the taxes. The City cannot
charge more than what it costs to perform these services. Mr. Karner responded he does not have
to be charged. The City did not have to do the work. There is no real safety violation. He is
getting sick in his own home and his hearing is permanently damaged by this plant. He used to
do the yard work before Gopher State Ethanol moved in.
Ms. Moermond stated she has no control over the Gopher State Ethanol issues. She understands
he is having difficulty maintaining his yard because of health problems he amibutes to ethanol.
That would be a private issue between him and the ethanol plant. That may be something he can
pursue elsewhere. He sfill has to maintain his own yazd. If he cannot do it himself, he should see
that it is done. Mr. Karner responded that she is suggesting that he should pay someone to hurt
themselves in his yard while they breath the garbage from the plant. He asked who will cover his
liability insurance or should he hire a different person each time so they are not exposed to too
much. No one has answers to those types of questions. As long as Gopher State Ethanol is
exceeding the City and State noise ordinances, he is not going to go to his yard except to get to
his car or to his bus stop.
Ms. Moermond recommends approval of the assessment. She understands that Mr. Karner feels
this is civil disobedience; however, Code Enforcement officials do have to go out and enforce the
minimum property maintenance standazds. If he does do not maintain his yazd, he can look
forward to additional sumrnary abatement orders and assessments onto his tases. She suggests
he write all seven City Councilmembers a letter explaining his position. This will be on for a
public hearing so he will be heazd at that time. Looking at what she has in front of her, she has
o� �3y
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINi7TES OF MARCH 11, 2003 Page 3
no reason to justify recommending a partial assessment or delering it entirely. Mr. Karner
responded he expected the appeal to be denied. He did not get a chance to be heazd last time in
front of the City Council.
712 Hawthorne Avenue East
Jolui Betz stated that the property owner is requesting to be heard along with another issue that is
before the Legislative Hearing Officer on May 13.
Marcia Moermond recommends laying over to the May 13, 2003, Legislative Hearing.
Laid over summary abatements from February 25, 2003:
J0207A1AA 2021 California Avenue East
J0205VVV Towing of abandoned vehicles from private properties at 115 Sycamore
Street East and 123 Geranium Avenue East
J0205VVW Towing of abandoned vehicles at 2168 Minnehaha Avenue East.
2021 California Avenue East
(No one appeared)
Marcia Moermond stated it is her understanding that the owner could not be here. He indicated
that he had a short time to comply, and he did not think the conditions justified the abatement.
Also, these were his home business landscaping supplies and not gazbage items.
(A videotape was shown.)
Harold Robinson reported the assessment was for $298. The owner called him and said the
Parks crew picked up a new tire. Mr. Robinson picked up the tire from Parks and brought it to
the owner's house. At the time, the owner did not seem upset about the assessment. As seen
from the videotape, it was clearly not all landscaping items.
Ms. Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
2168 Minnehaha Avenue East
(Note: this appeal will be heard at the 130 meering.)
123 Geranium Avenue East
(No one appeared)
Harold Robinson reported this is about an abandoned vehicle.
0-,_�3y
LEGISLATIVE HEAIZING MINLJTES OF NIARCH 11, 2003 Page 4
Mazcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment. She received a letter from Fred
Hoelzel, Properry Manager, who indicates that the caz may or may not have belonged to a tenant
who was evicted in 2002. It would still be Mr. HoelzePs responsibility to ensure that the vehicle
is removed from the properry.
115 Svcamore Street East
Trina Smith, owner, appeazed and stated the vehicle was not abandoned. She wanted to Irnow
why she was getting chazged $800 for this.
Harold Robinson stated orders were issued on Apri122, 2002, with a compliance date of May 20.
Ms. Smith responded she never received a letter telling her to remove the car or it would be
towed. She only received a letter that if she wanted the items out of the caz, she should pick
them up or the parts would be sold to pay for the towing.
Mr. Robinson stated it was a white Ford with expired tabs. It was towed on June 24. Notices
were sent to Trina Smith and [someone else] at 115 Sycamore Street East. The mail was not
returned. If mail is returned, they make another effort to notify.
Ms. Moermond asked was something put under the windshield wiper indicating there is an
abatement order on the vehicle. Mr. Robinson responded not always.
Ms. Moermond asked if there were any abatement orders or tickets outstanding. Mr. Robinson
responded an abatement order went out on the recheck. A work order was sent on May 20 and
the vehicle was towed on June 24 by the police. There was a two month period there.
Steve Magner stated if the vehicle was claimed at the Impound Lot there would not be an
assessment because the owner pays the towing and impound fees to claim the vehicle. She
would have had an opportunity to claim the vehicle based on the letter from the Impound Lot.
Ms. Smith asked why it is $800.
(Ms. Moermond looked at a Police Tow Work Order on this property.)
Ms. Moermond stated the police costs were $775.60.
Ms. Smith stated that she was not going to get the vehicle after they towed it because there was
nothing wrong. She didn't get a ticket or something telling her that she needed to show her
records. She only received a letter telling her that she towed the car.
Ms. Moermond recommends approval of the assessment. Records show that the property owner
received notice.
o� -�3y
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINIJTES OF MARCH 11, 2003 Page 5
J0207AAAAA Laid over summary abatement from February 25, 2003:
2168 Minnehaha Avenue East
(Note: this appeal will be heazd at the 130 meeting.)
J0204CC Laid over summary abatement from February 25, 2003:
1000 Reanev Avenue
(No one appeazed.)
Steve Magner reported this assessment is for $56,411.01. On February 26, his office mailed a
complete statement breaking down all the costs. Included was a letter to call Mr. Magner if he
had any questions. Mr. Magner has not heard from Mr. Vallaincourt.
Marcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment. Code Enforcement has provided the
owner with the itemized bill he requested and he is not here.
Summary Abatements:
J0207A2 Property clean-up for part of July 2002 to part of December 2002;
J0206V Towing of abandoned vehicles from private properly for part of July 2002
and all of September 2002.
728 White Bear Avenue North (J0207A2)
(On February 25, John Betz requested that this issue be deleted due to improper notification.)
Marcia Moermond recommends deleting the assessment.
790 Selbv Avenue (J0207A2)
Steve Magner requested this be deleted.
Marcia Moermond recommends deleting the assessment because the notice was sent to the wrong
property.
1076 Maryland Avenue East (J0207A2)
Steve Magner requested that this be laid over to March 25.
Mazcia Moermond recommends laying over to the Mazch 25, 2003, Legislative Hearing
o� -�� y
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINLJTES OF MARCH 11, 2003 Page 6
665 Magnolia Avenue East (J0206V)
Steve Magner requested that this be deleted.
Marcia Moermond recommends deleting the assessment because the owner was incorrectly
assessed.
657 Lawson Avenue East (J0207A2)
(Tchu Yajh provided interpreting services at this property.)
The following owners appeared: Chao Xiong, 967 Galtier Street, and Mai Thao, 657 Lawson
Avenue East. Mr. Xiong stated he did not send in a green card and cannot attend a hearing on
March 25.
Marcia Moerxnond recommends laying this over to the April 8, 2003, Legislative Hearing.
1111 Bush Avenue (J0207A2)
(No one appeared.)
Marcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
1039 Ear] Street (J0207A2)
(No one appeared.)
Marcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
1075 Front Avenue (J0207A2)
(No one appeared.)
Marcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
489 Hatch Avenue (J0207A2)
(No one appeared.)
Marcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
O� -13 �
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINi.JTES OF MARCH 11, 2003 Page 7
0 Liehmer Place (J0207A2)
(No one appeared.)
Mazcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
598 Marvland Avenue East (J0207A2)
Stacy Davis, owner, appeared and stated he does not recall the City doing any work. She never
received a letter, but she and a neighbor got a letter at the same time to cut weeds. Her, her son,
and a neighbor boy did that.
Harold Robinson reported on October 10, a suminary abatement was issued with a pre-authorized
vehicle order, which means it goes right to Parks and Recreation to do the work after a certain
date. Parks and Recreation cut the grass on October 15, 2002. Orders were sent to Stacy Davis
at 598 Maryland Avenue East.
Ms. Dauis stated she would like to see the video. She never received a letter.
(A videotape was shown.)
Ms. Moermond recommends the assessment be reduced from $195.00 to $75.00 plus the $45
administrative fees for a total assessment of $120. The work done seems minor from the
videotape.
1076 Maryland Avenue East (J0207A2)
(No one appeared.)
Marcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
1066 Reanev Avenue (70207A2)
Marcia Moermond stated her paperwork shows that the City cleanup up refuse, mamess, tires,
papers, and branches for $316.
Jearline Galloway, owner, appeared and stated she purchased the house in July. The previous
owner was suppose to take care of this. She never received a notice.
(A videotape was shown.)
Ms. Moermond stated they did leave a lot of work on the properry. She asked was the agreement
that they would clean it up. Ms. Galloway responded it was suppose to be removed per the
D�-��Y
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINIJTES OF MARCH 11, 2003 Page 8
paperwork. She thought the previous owner came back and did the work. The City did not do a
goodjob.
Hazold Robinson stated that if the items aze not identified on the original summary abatement,
they are cazeful about not taking those things. The City has lost appeals by taking too much. If
items look like they may be useful or still in good condition, they try not to take them. Usually
when the City cleans up, they clean up well.
Ms. Moermond asked when Ms. Galloway received the bill. Roxanne Flink responded the owner
has 30 days to pay without interest.
Ms. Moermond stated it seems like there were materials to be cleaned up on the properiy. She
would like the owner to have something in writing to take to the former owner to encourage them
to fulfill their obligations. Ms. Galloway was responsible for the property when the abatement
occurred. The assessment far that will stand. If there is something the City can do to provide
documentafion to secure money from the people who really did this, the City can help with that.
Ms. Galloway asked can she make payments in installments. Ms. Moermond responded that
Real Estate staff can help her with that.
Ms. Moermond recommends approval of the assessment. Ms. Flink added that she should check
with her title inswance to cover the cost.
925 Woodbridge Street (J0207A2, two assessments)
(No one appeared.)
Marcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessments.
939 Woodbrid�e Street (J0207A2)
(No one appeared.)
Mucia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
1130 Abell Street (J0206V)
(No one appeared.)
Marcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
03 —lsy
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINLJTES OF MARCH 11, 2003 Page 9
775 Ashland Avenue (J0206�
(No one appeazed.)
Marcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
946 Carroll Avenue (J0206V)
The following appeazed: Lynn Connolly, 554 Central Avenue West, Housing Manager for the
Public Housing Agency (PHA); and Micl�aei Driscoll, City Attomey's Office, PHA's attorney.
Mr. Driscoll stated PHA never received notice prior to receiving the assessment notice. There
may have been a notice sent to the owner of the vehicle or to the tenant, but there was no notice
sent to the PHA. They are usually sent to the same address as the assessment notice.
Lynn Connolly talked to a representative of PHA to see if she received a complaint. This person
would receive the original complaint and forward it to Ms. Connolly. This person said she did
not receive a complaint in May. Maureen, Citizen Service Office, said she had no record of a
complaint at the PHA. Mr. Betz responded the Citizen Service Office would not get notice.
Notices were issued to Martin Smith at 955 McKnight Road South and the occnpant at 946
Carroll. The ownership printout does not have PHA on it. Mr. Driscoll responded he does not
understand what printout Mr. Betz is looking at.
Steve Magner asked was there recent acquisition of this property. Since there was not proper
notification, he suggests deleting this assessment. He will give information to the AMANDA
Computer System to make sure they check these records.
Ms. Moermond recommends deleting the assessment.
77 Front Avenue (J0206V)
(No one appeared.)
Mazcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
1587 Hudson Road (J0206V)
The following appeared: Tue Vang, owner, and Cheeney Xiong, brother-in-law.
Ms. Vang stated it is her properiy, but the vehicle belongs to Mr. Xiong. He does not have a
place to put his car. A police officer told them on September 12 to move the vehicle or it would
be towed. He moved the vehicle before September 12. He moved it to a different spot.
Mr. Xiong stated the complaint letter said to not pazk on the grass. He moved it from there.
a3-\1`1
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINiJTES OF MARCH 11, 2003 Page 10
Harold Robinson reported the orders were issued on August 28, 2002. The vehicle needed
current licensed tabs and it was pazked on the grass. On the September 12 recheck, the vehicle
was off the grass, but still in violation. On September 24, it still had expired tabs, so it was
towed.
Ms. Moermond asked is that how they remember it. Ms. Vang responded yes.
Ms. Moermond stated a vehicle has to have current tabs, even on private property. The
assessment will have to stand at $347.05. The owner can make payxnent arrangements so it can
be done over time. This is the cheapest she has seen for a vehicle tow and storage.
Mr. Xiong stated that someone at the Impound Lot said there would be no charge.
(Mr. Xiong showed Ms. Moermond a title.)
Mr. Robinson stated once it is offered as scrap, there are no fm chazges.
Ms. Moermond asked is there any indication how he would have come to this impression. Mr.
Betz responded there would not be any charges if the vehicle was sold for enough money to
cover all the costs.
Ms. Flink suggested holding off on the determination on this one to do further checking.
Mr. Robinson stated if the owner said he was leaving the caz there, then he wouldn't pay
anything. It would be assessed.
Ms. Moermond stated she will look into this and find out what the procedure is. Her inclination
is that staff is correct: the vehicle owner wouldn't pay then and the property owner would pay
when it is assessed. She would like to find out if he was given the wrong information. She will
send him a letter and let him know what she finds out. Ms. Vang asked about interest. Ms. Flink
explained the process to her.
(Ms. Moermond's recommendation is approvai of the assessment. Because the title was turned
over to the City, the City would not charge the vehicle owner for the tow; however, there are still
charges for storage up to the point when the tiUe was turned over to the City.)
791 York Avenue
Marcia Moermond stated these aze abandoned vehicles. There is a green Cadillac and a blue one.
Bill Cunnien, owner, appeared and responded they are not his cars and they were in the alley.
Steve Magner stated the inspector indicated that on September 3, 2002, an inspection was
conducted and an a vehicle abatement notice was issued and mailed on September 4 to the
� � -��y
LEGISLATIVE HEARING NNUNNtJTES OF MARCH 11, 2003 Page ll
Cunniens at 2529 Cottage Grove Drive in Woodbury. There were two vehicles with no plates.
The inspector went back out on September 16. The vehicles were parked on the north side of the
gazage neat to the alley and they were removed. Mr. Cunnien responded the north side of the
garage would be in the alley. There is a no pazking sign there.
Ms. Moermond asked were these vehicles dumped on his property or near his properry. Mr.
Cunnien responded they aze not his vehicles.
Ms. Moermond asked is the property vacant, rented out, etc. Mr. Cunnien responded it was
rented out. It had a fire and burned.
Mr. Magner stated the inspector indicates that when he was there on the 16"', the vehicles were
moved to the north side of the gazage next to the alley. When the original sununary abatement
was issued, the vehicles were on his property. Mr. Cunnien responded that when the City towed
them, they were not on the properiy. They were towed from the alley.
Ms. Moermond asked were the police present for the tow. Mr. Magner responded they were.
Ms. Moermond asked are they tenant vehicles. Mr. Cunnien responded he had tenants, but he is
not sure they belonged even to the tenants. He told the tenants to remove the vehicles.
Ms. Moermond stated he is still responsible if it is on his property. Mr. Cunnien responded it
was not on his property; it was in the alley. Mr. Magner added that this is a dead end alley.
Ms. Moermond stated she will follow up with the Police Department and the City Attorney's
Office to see who is in charge of what space and what to do in this situation. She will send him a
letter. Her guess is that the car started out on his property. Mr. Cunnien responded if he does not
have a title card, he cannot get rid of the vehicles. Mr. Magner responded the owner of the
property can ca11 the police department and ask for a manager's tow. They tag the vehicle and
then the owner can call a towing company. He might be charged a cost for the tow.
(Ms. Moermond recommends approval of the assessment of $440.60 for the green Cadillaa The
property owner should be charged for the tow and storage of the green Cadillac as it was towed
from the unimproved area in the rear of that address. The gray Cadillac should not be charged to
the property owner as it was towed from the improved area in the rear of that address; however,
there was no abatement tow sheet created for the gray Cadillac anyway.)
819 Johnson Pazkwav (J0207A2)
Racquel Naylor stated she received a call shortly before the meeting from an owner who said that
the green card was not rehuned.
Marcia Moermond recommends laying over to the March 25, 2003, Legislative Hearing.
o� -" y
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINLJTES OF MARCH 11, 2003 Page 12
482 Lawson Avenue West (J0207A2)
Marcia Moermond stated tkis assessment is for refuse, debris, tall grass in the yard. The work
was done on September 5, 2002.
Rod Klindworth, owner, appeazed and stated this is rental property. He would like to see the
videotape.
(A videotape was shown.)
Mr. Klindworth stated it was September 7 that it was suppose to be reinspected. He called Lisa
Martin (Code Enforcement) and got an extension to comply. They did get the boat out, which
must have been after this videotape. He probably should have been over there more often. It was
completed on September 13.
John Betz reported the work order was sent August 27. The inspectar indicates the property
owner called on September 6 who explained it was rental properiy, he would be returning on
Monday, and he would take care of it by September 13. Mr. Betz presumes he meant the boat.
The work had been done on September 5. Mr. Klindworth responded the officer was supposed to
reinspect on September 7. He got it done on September 13. The boat was gone when he got
there. He had that removed.
(Ms. Moermond looked at the letter Mr. Klindworth is referring to.)
Ms. Moermond stated this is a correction norice dated August 27. That would be different than
the summary abatement order that would have precipitated this assessment. There should be
another letter dated the same time.
Steve Magner stated the summary abatement inspection was conducted on August 9, 2002, with
a compliance date of August 15. This is for a boat and trailer. These were mailed to Saint Paul
Postal Employee Credit, 2401 McKnight Road North and to the occupant at 482 Lawson Avenue
West. The boat one was also sent to Roderick Klindworth, 482 Lawson. Mr. Klindworth
responded he does not live there. It was homesteaded when he got it.
Mr. Magner asked when he purchased the property. Mr. Klindworth responded he thinks he has
had it at least six years.
Mr. Magner stated the correction notice was sent to Robert Klindworth, P.O. Box 452, South
Saint Paul, but the sununary abatement was sent to Lawson. Mr. Magner suggests deleting the
assessment because Code Enforcement did not mail the summary abatement to him and for some
reason the correction notice was mailed on the same or similar date.
Mr. Klindworth stated he has quite a few buildings and he does take caze of them.
oz ��4
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINLJTES OF MARCH 11, 2003 Page 13
Ms. Moermond recommends deleting the assessment. She suggested he clean up the address
problems so it is not shown up inadvertently as being homesteaded. Roxanna Flink stated that
unless he goes in and makes it nonhomesteaded, then it will stay that way until something
happens.
Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 20 Svcamore Street
East. If the owner fails to comply with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordered to
remove the building.
Steve Magner reported this is a two story, wood frame, single family dwelling. It was
condemned on Mazch 25, 2002, and vacant since then. There have been six suuunary abatement
notices issued to secure doors and windows, remove refuse, and cut tall grass. On January 7,
2002, an inspection of the building was conducted, a list of deficiencies which constitute a
nuisance condition was developed, and photographs were taken. An order to abate a nuisance
building was issued on January 13, 2003, with a compliance date of January 29. As of this date,
the properry remains in a condition which comprises a nuisance as defined by the legislative
code. The vacant building fees were paid. A citation was issued on August 20, 2002, charging
the previous owner with failure to pay the annual vacant building fee. Real estate taxes aze paid.
Taxation has placed an estimated market value of $4,800 on the land and $20,200 on the
building. On March 4, 2003, a code compliance inspection fee was paid. A$2,000 bond was
posted on March 10. Code Enforcement estimates the cost to repair is $80,000 to $100,000;
estimated cost to demolish is $7,000 to $8,000.
Mr. Magner went on to say that the properiy is in a state of neglect and disxepair. A number of
people have illegally occupied the building. Measures have been taken to enforce the
condemnation on this dwelling. The previous owners just transferred ownership. His office
would not be opposed to the new owner having time to rehabilitate the property as long as he
completes the project within 180 days, brings the building into code compliance certificate
requirement, and maintains the yard and the walks.
Marcia Moermond asked about the time period far the summary abatements. Mr. Magner
responded the rash of them happened over the last three months as they were coming to a resolve
with the previous owner.
Bee Vue, 1292 Donegal Drive, Woodbury, appeared and stated his plans are to fix up the
property.
Ms. Moermond asked has he had a code compliance inspection conducted. Mr. Vue responded
he has. The inspection has been done, but he only has a draft of it.
Ms. Moermond asked is it a dangerous structure. Mr. Magner responded yes, based on the
condition of the property.
o� -t�y
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MIIViJTES OF MARCH 11, 2003 Page 14
Ms. Moermond asked has he pulled a building permit. Mr. Vue responded he tried to do that
yesterday. The code compliance inspection was not ready, so he was not able to get the pernut
yesterday. He should be able to pull the pemrit today.
Ms. Moermond asked has he done other kinds of rehabilitation projects like this. Mr. Vue
responded he has. Mr. Magner responded he has done some before, but Mr. Magner would like
to emphasize that the project has to be completed within the tune frame of the bond and the yard
has to be maintained. Also, he cannot have occupancy until the code compliance has been signed
off.
Ms. Moermond stated he should work closely with the inspectors. This is a dangerous slructure,
and the City Council is not likely to give any leeway. Mr. Vue responded the property is not in
danger structurally. The first week, he cleaned out the whole house except for the basement.
Mr. Magner responded it might not be in an immediate peril of collapsing, but a police officer
partially fell through the front porch. The rear edition has rotted through to the point that a finger
could be pushed through the siding.
Ms. Moermond recommends granting the owner 180 days to complete the rehabilitation of the
property.
The properties listed below have already been rafi�ed by the City Council.
367 Bates Avenue (J0207A)
(No one appeared.)
Racquel Naylor said the owner called and was not able to attend this heazing for health reasons
but would like to appeal this.
(A videotape was shown.)
Ms. Moermond stated she would like to follow up with the owner. That can be done via
telephone or scheduling an April hearing. So far the finding is that there was junk that needed to
be removed. She needs to hear why this was not taken care of in a timely manner and if she
received notice.
713 Bedford Street (J0207A, J0207B, J0205V)
(No one appeared.)
Marcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessments.
The meeting was adjourned at 11:53 am.
rrn
D3-l3y
REPORT
Date: Febniary 11, 2003
Time: 10:00 a.m.
Place: Room 330 City Hail
15 West Kellogg Boulevazd
LEGISLATIVE HEARIlVG FOR ORDERS TO REMOVE/REPAIR, CONDEMNATIONS,
AND ABATEMENT ASSESSMENTS
Marcia Mcermond
Legislative Hearing Officer
Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 1198 Sherburne
Avenue. If the owner fails to comply with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordered to
remove the building.
(Laid over from 12-10-02)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the resolution.
2. Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 2285 Benson Avenue.
If the owner fails to comply with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove
the building.
(Laid over from 1-28-03)
Legislative Heazing Officer recommends laying over to the February 25, 2003,
Legislative Hearing.
� 3. Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 733 Charles Avenue. If
the owner fails to comply with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the
building.
(Laid over from 1-28-03)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends laying over to the March 11, 2003, Legislative
Hearing.
4. Summary Abatements:
J02TRASH3 Q Provide weekly garbage hauling service for the third quarter of 2002.
J0204C Demolitions of buildings from part of July 2002 to part of November
2002.
J0207A Property clean-up for part of July 2002 to part of December 2002.
J0207B Boarding-up of vacant buildings from August 2002 to November 2002.
J0203G Grass cutting for part of August 2002 to October 2002.
774 Central Avenue West (J0207A) .
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends laying over to the February 25, 2003,
Legislative Hearing.
o3—�3y
LEGISLATIVE HEARING REPORT FOR FEBRUARY 11, 2003 Page 2
1000 Reanev Avenue (J0204C)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends laying over to the February 25, 2003,
Legislative Hearing.
567 Strvker Avenue (J0207B)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends laying over to the February 25, 2003,
Legislative Hearing.
1125 Beech Street (J0207A)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends laying over to the Apri18, 2003, Legislative
Hearing.
(Note: At the meeting, the Legislative Hearing Officer's recommendation was approval as
the owner did not appear; however, the owner called later and requested to be heard on
Apri18.)
1143 Central Avenue West (J0207A)
Legislative Heazing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
270 Charles Avenue (J0207A)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
670 Cha;les Avenue (J0207A)
Legisiative Hearing Off cer recommends approval of the assessment.
430 Edmund Avenue (J0207A)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends laying over to the February 25, 2003,
Legislative Hearing.
(Note: At the meeting, the Legislative Hearing Officer's recommendation was approval as
the owner did not appear; however, the owner called later and requested to be heard.)
603 Edmund Avenue (J0207A)
Legislative Heazing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
837 Fourth Street East (J0207A)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends laying over to the February 25, 2003,
Legislative Hearing.
55 Front Avenue (J0207A)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessmedt.
76 Geranium Avenue West (J0207A)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends reducing the assessment from• $306 to $186 plus
the $45 administrative fee for a total assessment of $231.
0�-1�4
LEGISLATIVE HEARING REPORT FOR FEBRUARY 11, 2003 Page 3
489 Haeue Avenue (J02TRASH3Q)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
1093 Hudson Road (J0207A)
L,egislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
714 Ielehart Avenue (J0207A)
Legisiative Hearing Officer recommends reducing the assessment from $195 to $100 plus
the $45 administrative fee for a total assessment of $145.
501 Kent Street North (J02TRASH3Q)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
0 Liahtner Place. Vacant Lots (J0207A)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
271 Maria Avenue (J0207A)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends laying over this matter to the February 25, 2003,
Legislative Hearing.
(iVote: At the meeting, the Legislative Hearing Officer's recommendation was approval as
the owner did not appear; however, the owner called later and requested to be heard.)
1459 Matilda Street (J03TRASH3Q)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
1346 Minnehaha Avenue West (J0207A)
Legislative Heazing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
814 Sherburne Avenue (J0207A}
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
1459 Sherburne Avenue (J02TRASH3Q)
Legislative Heazing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
7�4 Sixth Street East (J0207A)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
650 Central Avenue West (J0207A)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
1214 Minnehaha Avenue East (J0207A)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment. •
2168 Minnehaha Avenue East (J0207A)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
a � -���{
LEGISLATIVE HEARING REPORT FOR FEBRUARY 11, 2003 Page 4
791 York Avenue (J0207B)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
594 Lawson Avenue West (J0207B)
I,egislative Hearing Officer recommends deleting the assessment.
2193 Bush Avenue (J0203G)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
42 Dale Street Street (J0207B)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
1552 Sims Avenue (J0203G)
Legislative Heazing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
534 St. Peter Street (J0207B)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
550 Edmund Avenue (J0207A)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends laying over to the February 25, 2003,
Legislative Hearing.
(Note: the owner did not appear; but called later and requested to be heard on February
25.)
5. Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 893 Desoto Street. If
the owner fails to comply with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the
building.
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends that the following is done by noon of February
26, 2003: 1) Pay the vacant building fee, 2) Pay the real estaYe tases, 3) Provide a work
plan indicating how all the items on the code compliance report will be completed and
include evidence of financial a'oi�ity to complete them.
�
s�-taw
REPORT
Date: January 28, 2003
Time: 10:00 a.m.
Place: Room 330 City Hall
15 Kellogg Boulevazd West
LEGISLATIVE HEARING FOR ORDERS TO REMOVE/REPAIR,
CONDEMNATIONS, AND ABATEMENT ASSBSSMENTS
Marcia Moermond
Legislative Hearing Officer
Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 2285 Benson Avenue.
If the owner fails to comply with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove
the building.
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends laying over to the February 11, 2003,
Legislative Hearing.
� 2. Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 733 Chazles Avenue. If
the owner fails to comply with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ardered to remove the
building.
Legislarive Hearing Officer recommends laying over to the February 11, 2003,
Legislative Hearing.
�
MINUTES OF THE LEGISLATIVE HEARING
ORDERS TO REMOVE/REPAIR,
CONDEMNATIONS, AND ABATEMENT ASSESSMENTS
Tuesday, January 28, 2003
Room 330 City Hall
Mazcia Moermond, Legislative Hearing Officer
The meeting was called to order at 10:00 a.m.
STAFF PRESENT: Fallon Kelly, Code Enforcement
�� `��
��.
Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 2285 Benson Avenue. If
the owner fails to comply with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the
building.
(Fa11on Kelly submitted photographs.)
Fallon Kelly reported that the building was condemned on July 26, 2002, and has been vacant
since August 8, 2002. The current owner is Robert W. Hartnett. The owner has not discussed
his intentions with Code Enforcement. On November 20, 2002, an inspection of the building
was conducted, a list of deficiencies which constitute a nuisance condition was developed, and
photographs were taken. An order to abate a nuisance buiiding was issued on December 5, 2002,
with a compliance date of January 6. As of this date, this properiy remains in a condition which
comprises a nuisance as defined by the legislative code. The vacant buiiding fee, real estate
taxes, and code compliance inspection fee have been paid. The $2,000 bond has-not been posted.
Code Enforcement estimates the cost to repair is $80,000 to $90,000. The estimated cost to
demolish is $6,000 to $7,000.
Mazcia Moermond asked is this property Category 2 or 3. Mr. Kelly responded Category 3.
Esther McGinnis, of Peterson, Fram and Bergman, 50 Fifth Street East, Suite 300, representing
Guazanty Residential, appeared.
Ms. Moermond stated that Guazanty is not the only mortgage lender on this property; St.
Anthony Park State Bank and Minnesota Housing Finance Agency aze two others. Ms.
McGuuus responded she was only awaze of Minnesota Housing Finance. Guaranty has the
mortgage on the property and they would like to rehab it. The owner is not in default of his
mortgage payment nor taxes. They cannot do a mortgage foreclosure by advertisement which is
the quickest way of doing it. They aze about to commence a mortgage foreclosure by judicial
action. In such a proceeding they wiil base it on the fact that there has been waste and he has not
maintained this property. They would like to get approval from the court to go on the property,
make repairs, and commence the foreclosure. Compelling the foreclosure will cause one of three
options: 1) compel the owner to begin rehabilitation; 2) compel the owner to sell the property
immediately; or 3) Guaranty will step in and do it. At this time, Ms. McGinnis wouid request an
extension of time to begin the process and post the bond.
o� �-��.
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUT'ES OF JANUARY 28, 2003 Page 2
Ms. Moermond stated this building has not been maintained. There were seven summary
abatement notices issued. She asked are these mostly from a particulaz time period. Mr. Kelly
responded it does not appear that there is any concentrated time period that the siunmary
abatement notices were issued.
Ms. Moermond asked has the mortgage company attempted to negotiate with the owner. Ms.
McGinnis responded the problem is that they do not have the owner's current address. One of
her purposes of coming here today is to obtain that address. Ms. Moermond responded the
address listed with Ramsey County is 2285 Benson Avenue.
Ms. Moermond stated this situation is tricky. There is no bond, the fees have been paid, the code
compliance inspection has not been conducted, and the mortgage company does not have the
legal interest in the property yet. Ms. McGinnis responded it is her understanding that she can
pay the bond. Guazanty intends to rehabilitate the property and return it to the tax rolls. That
would be in the best interest of everyone concerned and maintain her client's interest in the
property.
(Ms. McGinnis looked at the photographs provided by Mr. Keily.)
Ms. Moermond stated that she has an order to abate a nuisance dated December 5. She has seen
that, responded Ms. McGinnis.
Ms. Moermond asked how long it would take the courts to act on her request to do a mortgage
foreclosure by judicial action. Ms. McGinnis responded it would take ciose to two months
because they have to publish this matter.
Ms. Moermond stated the photographs of the house do not look good. The preliminary
inspection items look bad. There aze holes in the house allowing rain to enter. It is a Category 3
buiiding meaning it is a dangerous structure. There are support joists in the photographs. Ms.
Moermond asked does Code Enforcement have a recommendation. Mr. Kelly responded that his
immediate supervisor takes into account when a mortgagee comes in and discusses their intent to
remedy the problem. Understanding that this a dangerous structure, he recommends going
forwazd with the order to remove or repair the property.
Ms. Moermond recommends laying over to the February 11, 2003, Legisiafive Heazing. By that
day, the bond should be posted, the proceedings started with the District Court System, and a
code compliance inspection completed. There may be measures that they can take in terms of
stabilizing that building. The code compliance inspection fee was paid in September. The first
order of business is to get the code compliance inspection done. Ms. Moermond asked who
should be contacted regazding the inspection. Mr. Keliy responded Jim Seeger, LIEP (License,
Inspections, Environmental Protection).
0�3-�3�}
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINiJTES OF JANUARY 28, 2003 Page 3
Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 733 Charles Avenue. If
the owner fails to comply with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the
building.
(Fallon Kelly submitted photographs.)
Fallon Kelly reported this is a two story wood frazne brick duplex. It was condemned on July 27,
2001, and has been vacant since August i, 200L The current owner is Joseph H. Odens and
Mazgie V. Odens from Ramsey County. The owners have not discussed their intentions with
Code Enforcement. Seven smmnary abatement notices were issued to remove refuse, remove
shed, cut tall grass, and secure the basement window. On October 1, 2002, an inspection of the
building was conducted, a list of deficiencies which constitute a nuisance conditions was
developed, and photographs were taken. An order to abate a nuisance building was issued on
October 8, 2002, with a compliance date of November 7. As of this date, the property remains in
a condition which comprises a nuisance as defined by the legislative code. The vacant building
fees are due and owing of $400. Real estate taxes aze paid. Tasation has placed an estimated
mazket value of $9,400 on the land and $77,200 on the building. On October 8, 2002, a code
compliance inspection was done. A$2,000 bond has not been posted. Code Enforcement
officers estimate the cost to repair is $40,000 to $50,000; estimated cost to demolish, $8,000 to
$9,000.
The following appeared: Joseph H. Odens, 733 Charles Avenue, owner; Bob Volden, 1817 Van
Buren Avenue, friend.
(Marcia Moermond gave Mr. Volden a copy of the Summary that Mr. Kelly just read.)
Mr. Volden stated that Mr. Odens is 72 years old and still healthy far that age. He is physically
capable of doing everything he did in his eazlier years. He is retired and on social security with a
fixed income. Since August 1, 2001, he had a difficult time getting the house refinanced, but
was abie to do it. The payoff on the house was $22,000 and he was able to pay that and bring the
taxes up to date.
Mr. Volden stated the property of 733 Chazles is at the epicenter of a containment area with high
drug tr�c. The current situation with the inspection department began when Mr. Odens
became awaze of this constant drug traffic. He went to District 7 to seek help, and they talked to
the police. The police sent four people from the FORCE Unit to the property, and they asked
could they come in. When they came in, a fifth man came around the corner. Mr. Odens was
tense at this situation because he recognized an individual from the inspections department. Mr.
Odens was taken to Ramsey Hospital for psychiatric evaluation. One FORCE officer showed up
at Ramsey Hospital, and Mr. Odens was released. He walked up to Rice Street to catch a bus
home. When he got home, there was something posted on the door.
Mr. Volden went on to say that Mr. Odens lived alone on the first floor of the property. �3is wife
lives in Nashvilie, Tennessee. The second floor was occupied by his son and his friends. There
was some income there. There was a chain link fence azound the property and high shrubs. He
O�- �3y
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF JANLJARY 28, 2003 Page 4
had continuing drug traff c and prostiturion out there. He cut the hedges down, removed two
interior fences, and got rid of a lazge pile of firewood. The yazd is swept clean. Mr. Odens has
former City Councilmember David Thune as an advocate for him.
One of the things on the list was replacement of the fiunace, said Mr. Volden. Mr. Odens was
able to secure through RAP (Ramsey Action Program) a new furnace. He was told he is allowed
to do anyfliing without permit under $300. He has run out of time, but he is not out of money.
He has worked for several tree trimming services and can cl'unb up and down trees, so he has the
physical capabilities to do several projects. He is bringing items into compliance one at a time.
In smmnary, stated Mr. Volden, more time is needed. The containment situation on Grotto and
Chazles has gone away. Joe's eldest son was occupying the upstairs of this duplex. His son Bill
spent three years helping with a home improvement show called Hometime. He was there to
help with the properry, but he has not been around lately.
Mr. Odens stated that on October 1, the inspector gave him 190 days, which is not over until
April 10. He told Andy Dawkins (Code Enforcement) that the inspector gave him 190 days, and
Mr. Dawkins asked did he have that in writing. All that says to Mr. Odens is that what they say
does not mean anything. Outside painting cannot be done until warmer weather. There may be
one house on the entire block that would pass new house codes. In his house, every piece of
plumbing works. There are no leaks nor drips. Every piece of electrical equipment works. He
lived in the building 2 to 3 other winters with no heat upstairs, but it is not a problem because the
downstairs heat will keep all the plumbing upstairs from freezing.
Mr. Volden stated that Mr. Odens needs more time to get into warmer weather. It is not anything
that would threaten the status of the property. Many things are completely done. He would
welcome a current status evaluation to see how things are coming along. It is a beautiful old
house.
Mr. Odens stated he lived across the street from an eyesore for about seven years, but it was
known as a piece of art and called the "shoe house."
Ms. Moermond stated she has a letter dated October 8, 2002, which stipulates what work is
needed. She needs to talk to the inspector Jim Seeger, LIEP (License, Inspections,
Environmental Protection) who wrote the report. Mr. Seeger says in his letter that not everything
needs to be done to make the house code compliant. Mr. Odens responded the items that read
"recommended" do not need to be done.
Ms. Moermond stated she would like an indication of what has been done, what has had
progress, and what still needs to be done. Also, the vacant building fees have not been paid. The
City does require a$2,000 bond to be posted to do work on a vacant property. She asked where
he is at in taking care of those items. Mr. Odens responded he had to tell the permit office who is
going to do the work in order to get a permit. He has had several bids, but he does not have
anyone committed to do the work. They either give a price he cannot live with or they do not
return his calls. He asked can he post the bond and leave it until he uses it. Ms. Moermond
responded the point of the bond is to show financial ability to conclude the repairs.
d����'
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF JANLJARY 28, 2003 Page 5
If the painting does not get done, stated Mr. Odens, they will take his bond_ Mr. Kelly responded
that if he posted the bond and paid the vacant building fee, he would t�ave 180 days from the
posting of the bond to complete the nuisance violations. Mr. Volden responded that is doable.
Mr. Odens stated a kid could break a window and he would not have the work completed and
forfeit his bond. Mr. Kelly responded if the inspector fmds that at least 50% of the violations
have been fixed, then there is an extension given. Mr. Volden responded it sounds workable.
Mr. Volden stated Mr. Odens does not cook on the premises because he eats out. He just needs
his bed and his bathroom. It would greatly simplify his life if he could live there. Ms.
Moermond responded she cannot grant that he can live there legally.
Ms. Moermond recommends laying over to the February 11, 2003, Legisiative Hearing. At that
time, they will talk about the bond process and what he has finished on his list.
The meeting was adjourned at 10:50 a.m.
�
MiNUTES OF THE LEGISLATIVE HEARING
ORDERS TO REMOVE/REPAIR,
CONDEMNATIONS, AND ABATEMENT ASSESSMENTS
Tuesday, February 11, 2003
Room 3�0 City Ha1UCourthouse
Marcia Moermond, Legislative Hearing Officer
The meeting was called to order at 10:00 a.m.
�� \��
�b`-� .
STAFF PRESENT: John Betz, Code Enforcement; Louise Langberg, Real Estate; Steve
Magner, Code Enforcement; Racquel Naylor, City Council Offices
Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 1198 Sherburne
Avenue. If the owner fails to comply iviYh the resolution, Code Enfarceraent is ordered to
remove the building.
(Laid over from 12-10-02)
(No one appeazed to represent the property.)
Marcia Moermond rec�mmends approval of the resolution.
Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 2285 Benson Avenue. If
the owner fails to comply with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the
buiiding.
(Laid over from 1-28-03)
Ms. Moermond stated she understands there has been a code compliance inspection since the
previous Legislative Hearing.
Esther E. McGinnis, of Peterson, Fram & Bergman Professional Association, 50 Fifth Street
East, Suite 300, appeazed and stated they have also posted the bond.
Ms. Moermond asked if have they begun the proceedings in District Court to seek a mortgage
foreclosure by judicial action. Ms. McGinnis responded they began by sending out the 30 days
notice. She was misinformed as to the steps for judicial foreclosure since she does not normally
do them. The first step is sending out the 30 days notice, but this is not going to impede anything
because they have taken possession of the property. Under the mortgage, they do have the right
to make repairs. Also, they are in the process of soliciting bids to make the repairs pursuant to
the code compliance inspection. They are also solicitix�g bids to secure the property.
Ms. Moermond asked what was indicated on the code compliance inspection. Mr. Magner
responded he was not present for the previous legislative heazing on this matter. Since that
hearing, a code compliance inspecrion has been completed. One issue was that the foundation
had a failure. The Office of LIEP (License, Inspection, Environmental Protection) is going to
require a structural engineer report on the foundation for its repair. The front exterior wall is
deteriorated to the point of collapse. They are requiring that plans be submitted for this. Other
��
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 11, 2003 Page 2
items have come up on the inspection, such as electrical and plumbing. It is still lus office's
recommendation that this property be demolished.
Ms. Moermond asked does he categorize this building as dangerous based on the code
compliance inspection. Mr. Magner responded it is possibly dangerous for anyone inside the
building. They would have to properly shore up the roof to make the repairs needed. They also
have to replace the roof covering, rafters, boards, and vents to bring it into compliance.
Ms. Moermond stated this is a dire situation. Ms. McGinnis responded they have put out bids
and are serious about rehabilitating this property. Her question is what they need to do to prevent
this property from being demolished and to satisfy the City's safety concerns.
Ms. Moermond stated she is not confident that this building is safe to work on and worth trying
to rehabilitate based on the code compliance inspection with an unstable foundation and entire
front wall of the building. She will give Ms. McGinnis a chance to get the bids back and put
together a work program to include a work plan and a budget to indicate how the work plan
would be financed to complete the items on the code compliance inspection. If that meets with
the approval of staff and herself, Ms. McGinnis can go forward with rehabilitating the building.
They are on a quick time line. Ms. Moermond is concerned about this structure continuing to
sYand. If that work program does not meet staff concerns, then slie wiil go ahead with the order
to remove or repair. She asked how long Code Enforcement needed to look at the work program.
Mr. Magner responded they can review it and meet with a LIEP inspector to review any issues of
safety in four business days.
Ms. Moermond stated by noon of Wednesday, Febnaary 19, Ms. McGinnis should send to Steve
Magner the following: 1) work program, 2) a financial report. On February 19, Ms. Moermond
will make a decision whether or not to move fonvard with the resolution to remove or repair.
This matter will be laid over to the February 25, 2003, Legislative Hearing.
`,/ Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 733 Charles Avenue. If
�; � the owner fails to comply with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the
building.
(Laid over from 1-28-03)
The following appeared: Joseph H. Odens, owner; and Bob Volden, 1817 Van Buren Avenue,
friend.
(Mr. Odens gave Ms. Moermond paperwork. Mr. Magner looked at it also.)
Ms. Moermond stated the paperwork includes a list of all the items on the code compliance
inspection and where Mr. Odens is in terms of completing them. The next step is figuring out
what it costs to get this work done and then put together a work program to complete all of these
items. It is the City's I.aw that he will need to post a$2,000 bond to work on this property, which
is a vacant building. Mr. Dawkins (Code Enforcement) is available to meet with him on this
�� `��
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 11, 2003 Page 3
matter and it will be laid over for four to six weeks for him to think about his options. Ms.
Moermond would like a specific work program. There aze a lot of different ways to approach
this: he can undertake this work himself, he can go through a contractor, or go through a
nonprofit agency. There are also City loans that may be appropriate. He does not have to make a
decision today, but jusY hear what Mr. Dawkins has to say. Also, Mr Odens shouid continue with
the list of things to do.
Mr. Volden stated there was a rundown of all the items. There is also a set of photographs of the
exterior. Many of the interior items have been done. There has been a great deal of progress.
They got a copy of the report regarding the abandonment. There is a�eat deal of toxic material
they take issue with. The important thing is that Mr. Odens gets back into the property. There
are a few items that exist in almost all older properties, such as toxic materials on basement
pipes. As he understands it, this property is put in a category of "new house code compliance."
Mr. Magner responded that is not the case. The code compliance inspection would be standard
for any property in that azea based on those same requirements.
Mr. Moermond recommends laying over to the March 1 I, 2003, Legislative Heazing. At that
ineeting, she would like to see a budget for completing the items on the list, some notion of how
it would be financed, and a notion of how the $2,000 bond will be financed. City staff are
confident that he is earnest and completed a fair bit already. The City is willing to give him more
time. The house is worth saving.
Summary Abatements:
J02TRASH3Q Provide weekly garbage hauling service for the third quarter of 2002.
J0204C Demolitions of buildings from part of July 2002 to part of November
2002.
J0207A Property clean-up for part of July 2002 to part of December 2002.
J0207B Boarding-up of vacant buildings from August 2002 to November 2002.
J0203G Grass cutting for part of August 2002 to October 2002.
774 Central Avenue West (J0207A)
(John Faulkner appeared. The green card was not rehzrned; therefore, the records were not
available for this property.)
Marcia Moermond recommends laying over to the February 25, 2003, Legistative Hearing.
1000 Reaney Avenue (J0204C)
(Louie Vaillancourt, 1033 Selby Avenue, St. Paul Park, appeared. The green card was not
returned; therefore, the records were not available for this property.)
Mazcia Moermond recommends laying over to the February 25, 2003, Legislative Hearing.
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 11, 2003
567 Strvker Avenue (J0207B)
v� «�
Page 4
(Tanimi Lang, 485 Winona Avenue East, appeazed. The green cazd was not returned; therefore,
the records were not available for this property.)
Marcia Moermond recommends laying over to the February 25, 2003, Legislative Hearing.
1125 Beech Street (J0207A)
(1Vo one appeazed to represent the property.)
Marcia Moermond recommends laying over to the April 8, 2003, Legislative Hearing.
(At this hearing, Ms. Moermond's recommendation was approval as the owner did not appear;
however, the owner cailed later and requested to be heard on Apri18.)
1143 Central Avenue West (J0207A)
(No one appeared to represent the property.)
Marcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
270 Charles Avenue (J0207A)
(No one appeared to represent the property.)
Marcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
670 Charles Avenue (J0207A)
(No one appeazed to represent the property.)
Mazcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
430 Edmund Avenue (J0207A)
(No one appeared to represent the property.)
Marcia Moermond recommends laying to the February 25, 2003 Legislative Hearing.
603 Edmund Avenue (J0207A)
(No one appeared to represent the property.)
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY I 1, 2003
Marcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
��-\��
Page 5
(At this hearing, Ms. Moermond's recommendation was approval as the owner did not appear;
however, the ow�ner cailed later and requested to be heard.)
837 Fourth Street East (J0207A)
Racquel Naylor stated that the Dorothy Lyons called and would like this issue laid over to the
next hearing.
Marcia Moermond recommends laying over to the February 25, 2003, Legislative Hearing.
55 Front Avenue (J0207A)
John Betz stated his department conducted a sweep in this area. On September 11, 2002, orders
were issued to the property owner about discarded vehicle parts, scrap lumber, and debris in yard
with a compliance date of September 15. The property was reinspected on September 16, and it
was still in violation. An order was sent to the Pazks Department who cleaned the property on
September 18.
Paul Breckman, owner, appeared and stated he never received notice. He is 75 years old and has
been in and out of the hospital. They were doing some construction. There was a waterfall
garden in the back of that lot. It was next door to the house he lived in for many years. They
were removing the rock garden and the contractor left some things.
Ms. Moermond requested to see the videotape.
(A videotape was shown.)
Mr. Breckman stated there were several tons of rock. The contractor piled the debris against the
garage. Mr. Breckman feels this is a financial burden on him.
Ms. Moermond asked what there is in terms of a notice. Mr. Betz responded he has a copy of the
notice sent to Mr. Breckman at 55 Front Avenue. It was mailed on September 11. There is
nothing in the file to indicate it was returned. A violation tag was also issued.
Ms. Moermond asked is this the address used by Ramsey County for tax purposes. Mr. Betz
responded yes.
Ms. Moermond asked is that the address where he receives his tax information. Mr. Breckman
responded yes. Also, he brought a letter from his doctor verifying he was ill at the time. Because
he was in and out of the hospital, he did not get a notice.
�� ���
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 11, 2003 Page 6
Ms. Moermond asked was he in the hospital in September. Mr. Breckman responded yes, he was
back and forth. The items were piled against the gazage. The gate was left open. It was not
visible from the sidewalk and the street.
Ms. Moermond asked was the disassembled waterfall on his properry. Mr. Breckman responded
yes.
Ms. Moermond recommends approval of the assessment. The owner is responsible and the
notice was legally sent to his residence.
76 Geranium Avenue West (J0207A)
John Betz reported his office issued orders to the property owner on September 11, 2002, to
remove a pile of brush and branches in the yazd area with a compliance date of September 15.
The recheck was on October 3 and it was not in compiiance. The Park Department cleaned the
property on October 7.
Gail Kober stated she bought the house and double lot in the winter. There are about 15 trees on
the lot. The lot was very overgrown on the back fence and alley, and she is cleaning it up. When
she got the list, she called and spoke to Paula Seeley (Code Enforcement) on September 13 and
expiained what she was doing. Ms. Kober started a small fire pit in the backyard because of the
volume of brush she was trying to get rid o£ She was trying to burn it bit by bit. Last summer it
was rainy and she couldn't burn it. The original pile was burned down. A friend came over with
a power saw to cut down a crab apple tree. She had a hand saw she was using also. That was the
new pile the City took away. Ms. Seeley said she tried to call her. She was using an old phone
number. Ms. Seeley told her to wait until she received her notice to do something about this.
Ms. Kober stated it is going to take her some time to take care of all the brush. It is a good sized
pile and she is working on it.
Mr. Betz stated this was conducted as part of a sweep. Ms. Seeley is not the area inspector but
issued the original notice. She indicates that she called the owner on September 16, and the
owner said she would burn it ar bring it up north on September 16. This file went back to the
area inspector who went to the property on October 3. He indicated he didn't think the situation
was going fast enough. He tried to call the owner to discuss this, but the phone number was
disconnected. Ms. Kober responded she is sure what they took was the second pile. The number
he called was her old number at 989 Armstrong. Her new number is listed.
Mr. Betz stated they try to make a courtesy call to discuss the situation.
Ms. Kober stated she would like to cleaz it out and make it a nice yard. She does not know how
to do it except little by little. It is just she and her 15 year old son.
Ms. Moermond recommends reducing the assessment by $75 from $306 to $186 plus the $45
administxative fee for a total assessment of $231. It appears Ms. Kober did contact the inspector
��-\��
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 1 I, 2003 Page 7
and try to make arrangements. Her official address listed c��ith the County was notified that this
would be happening. (Louise Langberg explained to the owner the process for paying the
assessment.)
489 Ha¢ue Avenue (702TRASH3Q)
(No one appeazed.)
Mazcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
1093 Hudson Road (J020�A)
John Betz reported the inspector was at the property on November 19, 2002, and the yard and
boulevard had an accumulation of refuse and debris. The owner was hand delivered an order to
remove it by the next day. It was not cleaned up. A work order was issued to the Parks
Department on November 20 and it was cieaned up that day.
Steve Magner suggested looking at the videotape in this case.
(A videotape was shown.)
Hosie L. Gant, owner, appeared and stated his mail goes to the post office. He can't have mail
delivered to his house. When he got there to load the truck, the City was picking it up already.
He was told to take up the matter with the City Council.
Ms. Moermond stated he was hand delivered a letter. Also, she noted that there have been
excessive violations over the past two yeazs. Mr. Gant responded this is a condemned and
vacant building. He did put all that out there to move it. He had a friend heip him because he
had two strokes, an operation, and a fractured collarbone. He is doing all he can. People dump
things in his driveway. There were two cars back there, and he pushed them into the alley.
Ms. Moermond recommends approval of the assessment. He was hand delivered the notice to
clean it up within 24 hours.
714 Ielehart Avenue (J0207A)
Bob Regan, owner, appeared and stated he received an order indicating he had weeds to clean up.
He received one previously about the back fence. He and his wife thought they meant the weeds
along the property line. They are in the process of landscaping the yard. He killed off the front
yard. It is basicaily dirt and landscape borders there. They were going to finish it this year. The
back fence is done. On the work order they thought the completion date was the 17` but it was
actually the 14`". If they were given until the 17` it would have been done. There weren't that
many weeds in the front. A five man crew moved in. There were two pickup trucks, a dump
truck, and a flat bed with a fork lift. They showed the work order. He told them he thought it
���\3�
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 11, 2003 Page 8
was the 17"'. He indicated that he did not �vant them to do anything on the property. He and wife
started to puil the weeds, and they had to call in a police officer. He apologizes for that, but he
was perturbed. In 15 minutes, the City was done with the work. He got an assessment for $195.
He got a copy of the work report, which indicated one hour of work for $150. He did not have
any information on how they account for what they took and charged him. He had about 100
square yards of cutting.
John Betz reported that even if there were two people and a pickup h it would have been
$150. There is a minimum charge if they have to do the work. They have to get the equipment
there and to get it place to place. If the grass was cut when they arrived, there wouldn't have
been any charge. He can call the Parks Department to justify the hourly charge and a break down
of the chazge.
Ms. Moermond asked for a copy of the abatement order.
(Ms. Moermond looked at the order.)
Ms. Moermond recommends reducing the assessment from $195 to $100 plus the $45
administrative fee for a total assessment of $145. From looking at the order, she would have read
it as a 14, but it is not as clear as it could be. However, she is dismayed that the situation rose to
the level which required a police officer to come out. It costs the City $150 to send out a squad
caz. Mr. Regan responded he understands.
501 Kent Street North (J02TRASH3Q)
John Betz reported there was a complaint issued about trash in the yard. On August 22, 2002, an
inspector notified the property owner to remove trash and provide trash service by August 28.
On September 17, there was still no proof that there was trash service. An order was issued to
the Parks Departrnent to provide a container and weekly trash service. This charge is for $50 to
deliver the container and $50 a week to empty the container until the owner provides proof that
he hired a licensed refuse hauler. That has happened. The City's service discontinued on
October 2.
Josh Trent, owner, appeared and stated this is his grandmother's place that he bought to keep her
in her house. His aunt takes caze of her. He told them it was their responsibility to get a garbage
hauler. They said they would and they never did. They had three gazbage bags ried in a knot.
When they have four bags, they haul them away to the City dump. He never received a notice
that he had to get a garbage hauler. He was told by Paula Seeley (Code Enforcement) that he had
to have the yard clean. He cleaned the yard. All of a sudden, a garbage truck dropped the
dumpster off. He had no prewarning of that. The garbage crew wanted $50 per week. Waste
Management gave him two 60 gallon ban picked up 4 times a month for $25 a month. No
garbage was ever put in the City's dumpster. As faz as this issue goes, he is being charged $50
for gazbage hauling, $20 for recheck commercial service, and $20 for a service charge. No
a� �-��
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 1 l, 2003 Page 9
garbage was hauled out of his yard. Mr. Betz responded that the $50 was actually for dropping
off the container.
Ms. Moennond recommends approval of the assessment. It is expensive for the City to provide
garbage service for a house here and there.
0 Liehtner Place. Vacant Lots
(No one appeared.)
Marcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
271 Maria Avenue (J0207A)
(No one appeared.)
Marcia Moermond recommends laying over this matter to the February 25, 2003, Legislative
Hearing.
(Note: At the meeting, Ms. Moermond's recommendation was to approve the assessment;
however, the owner called later to request that it be heard on February 25 as he will be out of
town for a while.)
1459 Matilda Street (J03TRASH3Q)
(No one appeared.)
Marcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
1346 Minnehaha Avenue West (J0207A)
(No one appeared.)
Marcia Moermond recommends approvai of the assessment.
814 Sherburne Avenue (J0207A)
(No one appeared.)
Marcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
1459 Sherburne Avenue (J02TRASH3Q)
(No one appeared.)
�� ���
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 11, 2003 Page 10
Marcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
754 Sixth Street East (J0207A)
7ohn Betz reported this is actually two separate charges. On the first, orders were issued on
September 18, 2002, to clean up refuse, tall grass, debris, garbage in the yard with a compliance
date of September 26. The work was not done by the owner, and the Parks Department cleaned it
October i.
The second set of abatement orders was issued on October 2, 2002, to clean the yard, and cut
grass by October 14. A reinspection was done on October 15. A work order was issued to the
Parks Department, who cleaned it on November 12.
Lucille Widing, 1349 Winchell Street, owner, appeazed and stated she rented the property. The
new owner infonned her diat a renter said the City cut the grass. Ms. Widing moved, and her
change of address should have followed her. She has always complied with the City's notice.
The City is not hard to deal with. If she needs more time, they give it to her.
Ms. Moermond asked when she sold the property. Ms. Widing responded April or May 2002.
Ms. Moermond asked was her name still the owner of record with Ramsey County. Mr. Betz
responded the orders were issued to Lucille Widing at 1362 Birmingham Street. Ms. Widing
responded she does not live there anymore.
Mr. Betz stated the orders were also sent to the occupant at 754 Sixth. The ones sent to Widing
were sent back to Code Enforcement undeliverable because the forwarding had expired.
Ms. Moermond asked is the new owner an occupant. Ms. Widing responded she is not sure.
Mr. Betz asked when the sale occurred. Ms. Widing responded it was empty on February 1. She
evicted the renters and she put it up for sale. It was empty for a few months. She is not sure
when she closed on the property.
Mr. Betz asked did she own the property when the City cleaned it. Ms. Widing responded she
thinks she did.
Mr. Betz stated if she did own it, she should have maintained it. The grass was not being cut, the
yazd was fuil of trash. Ms. Widing responded she did clean the yard. There were two dumpsters
there.
Ms. Moermond stated if Ms. Widing can bring to her evidence that she sold the property prior to
the abatement orders being issued, then she will recommend removing the assessment. If she
cannot, the assessment will stick.
o� ���
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MII�TUTES OF FEBRUARY 11, 2003 Page i l
(Ms. Widing faxed her purchase agreement to Ms. Moermond. It appeazs she owned the property
when both notices were sent; therefore, Ms. Moermond's recommendation is for approval of the
assessment.)
650 Central Avenue West (J0207A)
Steve Magner reported this is a property cleanup for scrap wood, metal, plastics, junk, and tall
grass in the boulevazd and alley. A summary abatement order was mailed on June 31, 2002, with
a compiiance date of July 30. It was rechecked on August 13 and the Pazks Department was sent
a work order on that date.
Lori Athias, 4520 Orchazd Avenue, Robbinsdale, appeared and stated they purchased the
property on August 26 as a rehab property. There was no notice and they cleaned up everything.
The title company checked the properiy and there was nothing there.
Mazcia Moermond stated this is one of those unfortunate situations in that the title company
would have discovered it, but the timing is close. This is not a problem between the new owners
and the City, but between the new owners and the previous owner. Mr. Magner responded Code
Enforcement took a summazy abatement action prior to the closing. They notified the owners of
record at the time, which are the taxpayers at the address provided to them. Ms. Athias
responded the sellers are deceased. Mr. Magner responded Willie Traxler was the fee owner, but
Phyllis Trasler, one of the siblings, was one of the parties in charge of the property at the time.
This issue revolves around them contacting the title company to cover this which should have
picked up at the time of closing.
Ms. Moermond asked is there any information to provide to them. When she hears appeals, it is
about whether the work occurred, whether it should have occurred. She is just heazing that this
information was not disciosed to the new owners. When they buy it, they assume these
assessments.
Ms. Moermond recommends approval of the assessment (Mr. Magner gave them information
on this assessment.)
1214 Minnehaha Avenue East (J0207A)
(No one appeared.)
Mazcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
2168 Minnehaha Avenue East (J0207A)
(No one appeazed.)
Marcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
o� `��
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY i I, 2003 Page 12
791 York Avenue (J0207B)
Steve Magner reported this was a boarding up of an unsecure building due to a fire. This was
ordered by the fire department. As standazd procedure, when the fire department is at the scene
and no one is able to take immediate action to secure the properry, they will contact the boarding
contractor to secure the location so there is no vandalism or damage to the structure. It
immediately becomes a nuisance as defined by the administrative code.
Bill Cunnien, owner, 2529 Cottage Grove Drive, Woodbury, appeazed and stated he arrived
home that afternoon, and there was a message from the Fire Department that the house had
burned. When he got there at 5:00, the Fire Department was still there, and they were boarding
up the property.
Marcia Moermond stated the Fire Department is completely right to take care of the situation for
safety issues. Steve Magner responded that they usually recommend that these costs are turned
over to the insurance company as it is generally covered as part of the loss. Mr. Cunnien
responded they will not cover it.
Ms. Moermond recommends approval of the assessment, but she suggested that the owner write
the Counciimember and explain this. The Councilmember for this area is Council President
Bostrom.
594 Lawson Avenue West (J0207B)
Steve Magner reported he received a call from the board up contractor. The police department
requested this property be boarded up due to an ongoing investigation of the scene. There had
been a homicide at this unit, and the detectives did not want anyone to enter this property, even
though they had put on their standard lock. $ecause there was some notoriety to the case, they
were concerned that there was a possibility of unlawful entry. Mr. Magner went to the scene
with the Police Department and the boazding contractor. He notified the on-site caretaker who
was an offspring of the owner. He made a phone call to the owner to indicate the action he was
taking. Mr. Magner also indicated to the owner that he may want to appear at this forum.
Mazcia Moermond asked did the owner had an opportunity to take care of this. Mr. Magner
responded he had no chance to board this because the Police Department was trying to stop any
entry into this unit. They were barring the owner from entry.
The following appeared; Kendall Crosby, 259 11` Avenue North, South Saint Paul, owner; and
Joe Keller, caretaker. Mr. Crosby's son was living at the property. They own a hardware store a
haif a block away. This was the second floor. They have not had any problems at this property.
It is a secure building and has a front door secure lock. They lost six months of rent on this
because they were locked out of their building. The police were funny on this. They boarded it
up without letting him know�. The notice was never sent to him. It was sent to the prior owner.
b �-�3�
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 11, 2003 Page 13
They have owned it far almost two years. They lost $3,600 of rent. They are today just starting
to remodei this apartment from the police moving everything out, even the carpeting.
Ms. Moermond asked how long it had been since the unit was remodeled. Mr. Crosby responded
it had not been remodeled for eight years. They aze in the hardware business, and they have all
the boarding materials. Their insurance company will not cover it. They might drop them
because rental insurance is hard to come by, so he does not want to claim it on the insurance.
There was never any problems at this property. There was almost four weeks after the police
were done. They released the apartment four weeks prior, and never notified him. He had to
remove the boards himself.
Ms. Moermond recommends deleting the assessment. The unit was boarded because it was a
crime scene and the police thought that needed to happen. Also, she wonders about victim
protection programs, although she does not know if it applies to an owner of a building.
2193 Bush Avenue (J0203G)
(No one appeared.)
Marcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
42 Dale Street North (J0207B)
(No one appeared.)
Marcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
1552 Sims Avenue (J0203G)
Steve Magner reported this is about tall grass and weeds on the boulevard and yard. On August
2, 2002, an order was issued to the owner on record, Guaranty Residential Lending, Austin
Texas, and Shoua Lor and Daosavanh Mua, 3273 Cottage Grove Drive, Woodbury. The
compliance date was August 8. The work was done by a contractor on August 16. There have
been four previous summary abatement orders.
Daosavanh Mua, owner, appeared and stated her house caught on fire on September 2001. They
never received notice to mow the lawn. They did receive a letter to pick up the trash and remove
the caz. They were no longer at 3273 Cottage Grove Drive in August 2002. They were at 726
Desoto. Mr. Magner responded his office would be unaware of that unless the properiy records
are changed or his office is notified.
Marcia Moermond recommends denying the appeal. Previous orders have been issued in the
past. The owner has a history and should know what it takes to maintain the property. She
should have been checking the property and notifying the County about her change in address.
o� ���
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 11, 2003 Page 14
(Ms. Mua gave her new address to Mr. Magner.)
534 St. Peter Street (J0207B)
(No one appeazed.)
Mazcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 893 Desoto Street. If
the owner fails to comply with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the
building.
(Steve Magner submitted photographs.)
Steve Magner reported this is a two story wood frame duplex. The building has been vacant
since February 26, 2002. The current owner is Daniel De La Cruz. Seven summary abatement
notices have been issued to remove refuse, cut grass, remove staircase, secure south entry door
and garage wall. On December 18, 2002, an inspection of the building was conducted, a list of
deficiencies which constitute a nuisance condition was developed, and photographs were taken.
An order to abate a nuisance building was issued on December 23, 2002, with a compliance date
of January 22. As of this date, this property remains in a condition which comprises a nuisance
as defined by the legislative code. The vacant building fees are due and owing. Real estate taxes
are unpaid of $1,970.24. Taxation has placed an estimated market value of $69,000 on the
building and $9,900 on the land. On July 22, 2002, a code compliance inspection was obtained.
On January 21, 2003, the $2,000 bond was posted. Code Enforcement estimates the cost to
repair is $60,000 to $70,000; estimated cost to demolish, $8,000 to $9,000.
The foilowing appeared: Ricardo Solomon, previous owner, 5228 Brookdale Court, Brooklyn
Park; Yolanda Medellin, 1523 Magnolia Avenue East #2; Don Speese, loan officer, 9201 41 �`
Avenue North, New Hope.
Marcia Moermond asked what category this is. Mr. Magner responded it is a Category 2, which
is classified as a nuisance by the legislative code and would require a bond.
Mr. Solomon stated he bought the building in 1994 and started to rent it. He sold it to Daniel De
La Cruz, son-in-law of Ms. Madellin. Mr. Solomon still has a second mortgage on the place. He
found out in June about the fire in February 2002 and it has been vacant since this. He didn't
know anything about the other conditions listed. The fire seems to be a lot more than that. It has
not been occupied.
Ms. Moermond asked if he purchased it from him. Mr. Solomon responded Daniel De La Cruz
has a mortgage. He put $10,000 and Mr. Solomon had to carry about $18,000. Other than that,
Juan came to him and said he needed him to help. They were put out of the place based on the
fire. He started to contact his insurance company so he couid get some help. They said they
�� `��
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 11, 2003 . Page 15
would not cover it and they did not have insurance. When he sold the place in 2001, he had a
yeaz's worth of insurance that didn't expire until April 2002. He was not aware of the other
conditions.
Ms. Medellin stated she was sent a notice that she had to talk to the inspectors. They told her to
pay the bond. That's what she did. She thinks the inspector saw the mattresses and told her she
couid not go back into the buildings. They first told her she couid go back in within three days.
Then they put up a paper saying she could not go in. She does know what happened then. They
told her now to pay the $2,000 fine so she can start working on the house.
Mr. Magner stated the City does not have a defined person who has physical control of the
property. The inspectors have had conversation with Juan (Ms. Medellin's husband) and Mr.
Magner has had conversations with some contractors. Daniel De La Cruz purchased the property
from Mr. Solomon and the properiy was sold in two fashions. Mr. De La Cruz pulled a mortgage
and he has a recorded contract for the rest of the monies with Mr. Solomon. He asked where Mr.
De La Cruz is. Ms. Medellin responded he is her son-in-law and he is letting Ms. Medellin
occupy the building. He just started working.
Mr. Magner went on to say that Mr. De La Cruz is the one that technically has the ownership of
the property. If he was to register the building with Code Enforcement, pay the vacant building
fees, and hire a licensed contractors, they could commence action and complete this project if
Ms. Moermond and the Council are wiliing to let them do that. If Mr. De La Cruz does not come
forwazd, Mr. Solomon's course of action as an interested party is to file with Ramsey County
action to cancel the contract to take over possession to control the asset. He can come to Code
Enforcement to register the vacant building, and then request Mr. Moermond give them 180 days
to complete the repairs. If they do not complete the project, the City can step in and remove the
structure.
Mr. Solomon stated when he first found out about the fire, he paid a fee, which he thought was
the vacant building fee. It was approximately $125. Mr. Magner responded that would have
covered the code compliance inspection report.
Mr. Solomon stated the bottom line is Daniel De La Cruz has to come down, register the
building, and then get the contractors working on it. Mr. Magner responded yes and he has to
ask the Ms. Moermond to give him 180 days to fix up 50% of the items on the code compliance
inspection report.
Mr. Speese stated he did not know al] this has to be done.
Mr. Solomon stated it was unpaid taxes, but he thought it was escrowed. Mr. Magner responded
this is information his office received from Ramsey County. Without having Mr. De La Cruz
here, it is hard to discuss this matter. Mr. Magner's recommendation is that someone stop in the
office at 1600 White Bear to register the building and pay the fee.
�� ���
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 11, 2003 Page 16
Mr. Solomon stated the building is structurally sound.
Ms. Moermond stated by noon of February 26, the vacant building fee should be posted. She
would aiso like to see those real estate tases paid. That should be taken caze of by noon of the
26"' as well as a sign of their seriousness to undertake and complete this rehabilitation. Also, a
plan to accomplish all the things on the code compliance inspection, who will do what, how
much it will cost, and how to accomplish this financialiy.
Mr. Solomon asked for a copy of the code compliance inspection. Mr. Magner responded by
recommending they go to LIEP.
Mr. Speese asked does Daniel have to be present. Mr. Magner responded not as long as he
foilows all the criteria: registered the building, paying the vacant building fee, and paying the
taxes by noon of February 26.
Ms. Moermond recommends granting the owner 180 days to complete the rehabilitation of the
property on condition that the following is done by noon of February 26, 2003:
1) Pay the vacant building fee;
2) Real estate taxes paid; and
3) A work program indicating how all the items on the code compliance report will be
completed and include evidence of financial ability to complete them.
The meeting was adjourned at 12:01 p.m.
rrn