The URL can be used to link to this page

03-589�� ` ��IJe�V1�''lL Presented By Refened To Committee: Date 2 WHEREAS, on November 8, 2002, the Truth-in-Sale-of-Housing Board (hereinafter, the 3 `Board'�, acting pursuant to Leg. Code § 189.10(8), sent a letter to tnxth-in-sale-of-housing 4 evaluator Ron Staehli indicating its intent to take an adverse action against the license held by; 5 and 7 WHEREAS, the Board alleged that Staehli had violated various provisions of the huth-in-sale- 8 of-housing ordinance and its adopted guidelines under the provisions of Leg. Code §189.15(a)(1) 9 requiring compliance with the Board's code of ethics and Leg. Code § 189.15(a)(2) requiring 10 complete disclosure reports in accardance with the Board's standards as well as fiirther alleging 11 that Staehli had exhibited a pattern and practice of taking actions detrimental to the truth-in-sale- 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 of-housing program; and WHEREAS, in its November 8, 2002, letter, the Board advised Staeheli that a public hearing on these allegations would be held before the Board on November 20, 2002; and WHEREAS, on November 20, 2002, the Boazd duly conducted a public hearing where Board staff presented findings of violations and recommended that Staeheli's license be suspended for a period of six months with an additional one-year's probation thereafter; and LVHEREAS Mr. Staeheli, as well as other interested persons, were also given an opportunity to be heard;and, WHEREAS, at the close of the public hearing, the Board found that the allegations that Mr. Staeheli had violated the standards for huth-in-sale-of-housing evaluators set forth in Leg. Code § 189 had been substanriated; and WHEREAS, Board staff recommended that Staehli's truth-in-sale-of-housing inspection license be suspended for a period of six months with an additional probationary period of one year; and WHEREAS, the Boaxd elected to suspend Staeheli's truth-in-sale-of-housing evaluator license by suspending the license for a period of one month and to impose an additional probationary period of one year sub}ect to the condition that Mr. Staehli's inspecrion reports wouid be sub}ect to random review and violations of city ordinances could result in a permanent revocation of the truth-in-sale-of-housing evaluator license; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Leg. Code § 1&911, Mr. Staeheli duly filed an appeal of the Board's decision in this matter requesting a hearing before the Saint Paul City Council for the puxpose of reviewing the Boazd's findings; and RESOLUTION CITY OF SAINT PAUL, NIINNESOTA �� Council File # 03_ � i^. �' Greensheet# '.�O�l��'O (�s i, 2 WHEREAS th �Saint FaG7 City Councii duly conducted a public hearing on Mr. Staeheli's �? ' Sr�f 3 appeal on January 8, 2003 where all persons interested were given an opporhmity to be heard 4 and, at the conclusion of the hearing based upon the record of the Board and all the testunony 5 and records of the public hearing, the City Council moved to deny the appeai and to uphold the 6 detennivations of the Board; and 8 WF�REAS, Mr. Staeheli thereupon filed an action in Ramsey County District Court, Diskict 9 Court F91e No.C2-03-340 to ck�allenge the underlying detemrination of the Board and the Saint 10 Paul City Council's decision upholding the Board's deternunation in this matter; and 11 WHEREAS, by an Order of the Court dated January 17, 2003, Mr. Staeheli's cause of action was 12 duly dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdicrion; and 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 WHEREAS, Mr. Staeheli had previously initiated a cause of action in Ramsey County District Court, District Court against the Board and its staff alleging violations of the Minn. Stat. § 13.41, Subd. 2 and which was pending at the time of the City Council's January 8, 2003 determinations; and WHEREAS, Mr. Staeheli, contacted the City Attorney's Office to discuss possible settlement of the pending lawsuit as weil as the matter of the Board's determinations upheld by the City Council; and WHEREAS, settlement terms were presented to and considered by the Board on January 29, 2003 which the Board agreed to accept for the purpose of settling in fuli the pending lawsuit as well as any additional action Mr. Staeheli might take regarding the matter of the Boards's November 20, 2002 determinations upheld by the City Council; and Wf3EREAS, the Board, having agreed upon settlement terms, recommends that the City Council approve the said terms as settlement in fuil of any and all claims against the City by Mr. Staeheli; Now, therefore be it resolved, that the CoLmcil of the City of Saint Paul hereby confirms the decision of the Board regarding its determination to suspend Mr. Staeheli's truth-In-sale-of- housing evaluator license and to impose a period of probation on that ]icense based upon Mr. Staeheli's violations of the standazds for truth-in-sale-of-housing evaluators set forth in Leg. Code § 189 and, accordingly, denies Mr. Staeheli's appeal from those determinations; and, be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that Council of the City of Saint, exercising its discretion to reverse, confirm or modify a$oard decision as provided in Leg. Code § 189.11 (c), and recognizing that Mr. Staeheli has pending a cause of action against the Board and its staff, hereby approves as a full and final settlement of that matter and any other matter whatsoever that may arise from the Council's confirmation of the Board's November 20, 2002 actions based upon Mr. Staeheli's violations of the standards for huth-in-sale-of-housing evalnators, the following terms: 1. Mr. Staeheli's license would be suspended for 30 days, beginning on July 1, 2003 and ending July 30, 2003; and 2. Mr. Staeheli would be placed on probation for 30 days, beginning August 1, 2003 and ending August 30, 2003, in which any reports prepared by Ronald Staeheli would be subject to random review and he wouid be subject to progressive discipline for any violations found; and Page 2 of 3 � 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 0�)��JaL 3. The Boazd will not discipline Mr. Staeheli for complaints filed between November 2002 and February 15, 2003; and 4. The Boazd retains the right to impose progressive discipline against Mr. Staeheli for any future violations of truth-in-sale-of-housing standards or other claims filed with the Board after February 15, 2003; and 5. Mr. Staeheli will dismiss with prejudice, and without call for any costs, all pending claims against Connie Sandberg, the Boazd and the City of St. Paul, and release any and all claims which he has or may have, whether presently known or unknown, arising in law or in equity, which were made, or which could have been made against Connie Sandberg, the Board, the City of Saint Paul and all of their past and present agents, officers, and employees, predecessors, and successors, and successors in interest. oz -�s�j AND, BE TT FURTHER RESOLVED that the appropriate city officials are directed to enter into a stipulation of settlement consistent with terms conditions set forth herein; and BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, that a copy of ttvs resolution shall be mailed to the appellant and to the Board. Requested by Department of: By: BY. _� � i Approved by Date " � BY — (f�� Form proved by Ci y Attomey &y: �` Approved by Ma�yor for Submission to Council BY.�1/ Adopted by Council: Date ��g _�,Op3 C � ' Adoption Certified by Counci�115ecretary � Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet � e� - SP� DeparUneM/offiedcouncil: Date Initiated: — - — ca -�=Ty�� ,��N� Green Sheet NO: 3001280 ContaCt Person & Phone: � ��^e�rt SaM To Person InitiallDate Peter Wamer p - Aaorn 266-8710 Assign 1 ' Attorn De rtment Direc[or Must Be on Council AgerMa by (Date): Number 2 ' Aaorn 18,1UN-03 F� Routing 3 rS 06ice Ma or/A.ssisfavt Order 4 onnpl 5 � C1e*1c ' Cferk Total # of Signature Pages _(Clip All Loeations for SignaW re) Aation Raquested: Memorializing City Council Action taken January 8, 2003, denying the appeal of Ron Staeheli regarding the ruling of the Saint Paul Truth in Sale of Housing Boazd Recommendations: Approve (A) or Reject (R): Personal Service CoMracts Must M�swer the Folbwing questions: Planning Commission 1. Has this personlfirtn ever worked untler a coMract for this departmeM? CIB Committee Yes No Civii Service Commission 2. Has this personfirtn ever been a cily empbyee? Yes No ' 3. �ces this persontFrm possess a skill not normaNy possessed by any . . curreM city employee? Yes No Ezplain all yw a�v�rers on separate sheet a�W attach to green sheet Initiating Problem, Issues, Opportunity (Who, What, When, Where, Why): Adva�tages If Approved: DisadvaMages M Approved: DisadvanWges M Not Approved: Total AmouM of CosURevenue Budgeted: Transaction: fumling Soutee: Activity Number: Financial Information: (F�cplain) OFFICE OF TIIE CITSt ATTORNEY Manuel Z Cervarttes, City Attomey w � � V•i CITY OF SAINT PAUL Randy G Kelly, Mayor Civil Division 400 Ciry Hall 15 West Kellogg Blvd. Saint PauZ, Minnesota SSIO2 Teleplwne: 651266-87I0 Focsimile: 65] 298-5619 June 9, 2003 Nancy Anderson Council Secretary 310 City Hall 15 West Kellogg Blvd. St. Paul, MN 55102 Hand Delivered �,� ¢� CB;t#efi ��`� � � 2643 Re: Appeal by Ron Staehli from a decision of the Truth in Sale of Housing Board on November20,2002 Deaz Nancy: Would you please place the attached resolution memorializing the City Council's decision uphoiding a decision of the Truth-in-Sale-of-Aousing-Board. The Council action date was January 8, 2003. This matter nnight be confusing because between the time that Staehli filed his appeal of the TISH Board's decision and before the Council heard the appeal, he also filed two separate actions in state district court stemming from the TTSH Board's decision. One of the actions was dismissed but the other action was still pending at the time the Council heazd the appeal. Staehli and our civil litigation division were actively involved in negotiating a settlement to the district court action. The resolution does two things: it upholds the TISH Boazd's decision and also incorporates the settlement agreement negotiated by Portia Hampton-Flowers of our civil litigation division. The settlement, to some extent, modifies the TISH Board's decision upheld by the Council. For that reason, Pm asking that you just set this matter on the consent agenda as would be the normal course of action in such maters so, in the event there are questions about the settlement, those questions can be answered by Portia Hampton-Flowers as I was not involved in that process. This seems to be a way to address both issues in one document. It is unusual but it seems like an efficient way to handle the matter. If any of this doesn't make sense, please call me and I can help straighten it out. Finally, as things usualiy happen, I got a call from Andy Dawkins asking the status of this resolution and the need to get it onto the agenda as soon as possible. If you could get it on next weeks consent � y � agenda, I would appreciate it. Thanks. �� Very truly yours, !?L✓. v�_ Peter W. VJarner Assistant City Attomey PW W/rmb Enclosure : �. December 9, 2002 Mr. Ron Staeheli 4300 Blackhawk Road Eagan, MN 55122 Dear Mr. Staeheli: � � s�a'�"'� • � 9` � C�3 • 5E+�, 4 � In response to your letter dated November 29, 2002, appealing the ruling of the Saint Paul Truth In Sale of Housing Board, I have scheduled a public hearing before the City Council. Since you indicated that you were not available on December 18`�, I have scheduled your hearing for the next public hearing date, which is the following time: Date: Wednesday, January 8, 2003 Time: 5:30 pm. (Starting time of City Council public hearings) Location: Saint Paul City Hall - 3r Floor - City Council Chambers 15 W. Keliogg Blvd. Saint Paul, MN Also, I have requested a copy of the Saint Paul Truth in Sale of Housing Board Minures, and will forward you a copy under separate cover. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (651) 266-8564. Sincerely, �,,, �, . ��_�---�_-„��,.�„ Nancy L. And on Assistant Secretary to the City Council Office ofthe City Council 310 City Hall Saint Paul, MN 55102 CZTY OF SAINT PAUL OFFICE OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY HALL THIRD FLOOR SAINT PAUL, MYNNESOTA 55102-1615 sgas � Printed ov RerycleC Paper Chapter 189. Truth-in-Sale of Housing* See. 189.11. Appeals. Page 1 of 1 O.� �s� (a) Filing. An evaluator may obtain a hearing before the city council to appeal any board order by filing a written request with the city clerk. The deadline for filing an appeal shall be within ten (10) calendaz days after the date when the order is sent to the evaluator. (b) Setting hearing date. In the event that an appeal is filed with the city clerk, the city council shall, within two (2) weeks, fix a date for a public hearing. The city clerk shall mail a notice of the date, time, place and subj ect of the hearing to the person requesring the appeal and to the board. (c) Hearzng. At the time of the city council hearing, the city council shall hear from the person requesting the appeal, any board member or their designee, and any other parry who wishes to be heard regarding the appeal. After the hearing, the city council may reverse, confinu or modify the board's order. The city clerk shall mail a copy of the city council's decision of the appeal to the person requesting the appeal and the board chairperson. (Ord. No. 17732, § 2, 5-3-90; C.F. No. 01-1189, § 1, 12-5-01) http://www.cistpaul.mn.us/code/lc 189.html 12/2/2002 G �,�.,:�. 6 � �� s..ae•`� November 29, 2002 Donald Luna, City Clerk City of St. Paul 1700 City Hall 15 W Kellogg Blvd. St. Paul, MN 55102 Mr. Luna I was the subject of a Hearing before the St. Paul Truth in Sale of Housing Board on November 20, 2002. I am making an official request to appeal the ruling of the Board to the City Council as is my right under Chapter 189. Piease contact me as to the date that the Council can hear the appeal. I am making an additional request to you and the Council that the hearing be scheduled far enough out that I have the opporiunity to review the minutes of the November 20, 2002 Board hearing so that I can properly refer to them with the Council. I feel 10 days after the minutes are available should be sufficient time to review them before a hearing date. I am also unavailable on December 18, 2002 so please do not schedule for that day. I am not sure how long staff will need to prepare those minutes but they are essential to my appeal. The ordinance requires that the appeat date be set within 2 weeks of the notice of appeal request but not that the actual appeal be heard in that time. Thank you and please contact me about a date either to Ron Staeheli, 4300 Blackhawk Rd. Eagan MN 55122 Or by calling 651-293-0100 Sincerely Ronald Staeheli REGEI�lEB NOV 2 7 2002 C1TY CLERMC a� - s t�1 Meeting Truth-in-Sale ofHousing Meeting Disciplinary Hearing, Evaluator Ron Staeheli Wednesday, November 20, 2002 4:00 P.M. 722 Payne Avenue I. Roll Call - Jerry Beedle, called the meeting to order at 4:05 p.m. Board Members Present: Jerry Beedle, Tom Burt, Paul Finsness, Clay Larson, Toumoua Lee, Shem Mortensen-Brown, Robert Nardi and Connie Sandberg Absent: Sunil Bawa Neighborhood Housing and Property Improvement Employees Present: Joel Essling, Maynard Vinge and Patricia McGinn Public Attendees: Evalnators Present: Roger Bovee, Mike Moser, Barry Eliason, Ron Staehli, Bruce Bluxnenthal Others Present: Brice Staeheli, Dionne Holley, Brian Parla, Justyna Johnson, Chris Netteberg, Cindy Lauge, Jan Weber, Steven Rosnow, Donauan Cummins, Diane Clark, Geoyian DeRasia, Lorno M Arvig Clark, Rae Jean Malone, Jeffery Orchid, David Hill, Robert Staeheli, Janet Staheli II. Complaint and Investigation Materials A packet of materials was presented to the board which included recent correspondence between Ron Staeheli and Connie Sandberg, a brief chronological history, guideline information for disciplinary action, individual complaints, original truth-in-sale-of-housing disclosure, composite table of disclosure report omissions and/or deviations from evaluator guidelines and staff summary report and recommendation. Mr. Staeheli presented materials preceded by an aral statement "The first things I would like you to lrnow." His packet of materials included: a time line of events, statements regarding board policy regarding complaints from one evaluator to another, Passing scores for the Test and the Practical Test House established by the Board, history of board discipline in regard to complaints, statement from former Director of the Code Compliance Office, materials regarding Test Houses and Seminar, a list ofdeficiencies his son Brice found at Open Houses which if evaluators are to be disciplined will tum into complaints, letters of recommendations for Ron Staeheli, and a letter from Mr. Staeheli expressing his objections to some procedural errors. b � -$8' III. Hearing: Discussion and Evidence There was a lengthy discussion concerning the four properties involved in which the complaint, evaluator response and staff investigation comments were presented. Mr. Staeheli gaue comments and explanations on each item presented. After the discussion of these items, several attendees spoke on Mr. Staeheli's behalf. Representatives from Delisle Realty, Hall Realty and Edina Realty spoke in regards to the satisfaction they have received from Mr. Staeheli. IV. Board Action A motion was made and seconded that Mr. Staeheli's license be suspended for 6 months per staffrecommendations. In addition, for one (1) year after reinstatement, randomly selected reports prepared by Mr. Staeheli will be reviewed for compliance with program guidelines. Any founded complaints and/or violations consistent with those presented in this report, prepared during this monitoring period, whether found by staff review or from an outside source, will result in an immediate and permanent revocation of Mr. Staeheli's license. After lengthy discussion, the motion was withdrawn and the second was also withdrawn. A new motion was made and seconded that Mr. Staeheli's license be suspended for 30 days. In addition, for one (1) year after reinstatement, randomly selected reports prepared by Mr. Staeheli willbereviewedforcompliancewithprogramguidelines. Anyfoundedcomplaintand/orviolations consistentwiththose presented in this report, prepared during this monitoringperiod, whether found by staff review or from an outside source, will result in an immediate and permanent revocation of Mr. Staeheli's license. Motion passed. V. Adjournment The meeting was adjoumed at b:40 p.m. Truth-in-Sale of Housing Complaint Investigation 1428 N. Snelling Ave, dated 10/23/Ol Complaint, Evaluator Response and Staff Investigation comment d �.SY 1 The following is a compilation of the original complaint as sent to the evaluator, the corresponding response from the evaluator, and a staff comment upon the evaluator's response. Copies of original report and photos from complaint are available. Evaluator general comment: "All of these responses aze gleaned from re-inspection of the exterior of this property and from memory. When I get a complaint about a properiy I always start out feelin� that maybe I really screwed up. Then I go and look at the properties and realize that there are just some inspectors that do not know that the Guidelines aze not meant to be a list of ho�v a property is not new but a list of what is illegal and deficient in the eyes of the city. Save one item none of these conditions rise to the level of illegal and Below Minimum Standazds." Staff comment: The Truth-in-Sale of Housing disclosure report is, primarily, an observation of condition and the range of observations includes those things that do not meet a certain standard. The standard is not always "legal" or "deficient". Since no code enforcement action is ever take from the reports, a"legal" standard has no real meaning. The standard most often is a comparison to cunent code as well as an evaluation of function and condition. Generally speaking, a completed Truth-in-Sale of Housing report will indicate the approximate age of a home, because the items marked as "below standazd" did meet standards at the time of original construction. Therefore the evaluator's comment that "the Guidelines are not meant to be a list of how a property is not new.." is incorrect; most often, that is exactiv what the report does list. Item/ TISH GL ref rati� 1. 12 A M Investieator Descri�tion of imoroperlv marked or omitted comment for this rating item B Omitted: Improperly supported plastic water pipes Evaluator: The real estate a�ent reports that the plastic plumbing was installed after the 23rd of October. Staff comment: Staff has not spoken to the agent. Staff observed the water pipes are not properly supported. 2. 12 D M B(or H) Omitted: Lacks water flow to kitchen and bathroom when basement taps aze open at same time Evatuator: The flow was adequate at the time of inspection. Installation of additional plumbing could have loosened rust that further restricted flow. I have no doubt that the flo«� would be worth a comment on a Buyer's inspection but the Guidelines and Chapter 34 do not have very high standards for water flow. Staff comment: Staff did not check. (Person with key was in a hurry.) page 2 of4 Item.� TISH GL ref ratin 3. 13 A H 4. 13 C H Investieator ratine H H Description of improperlv marked or omitted comment for this item Omitted: Improperly supported gas line to dryer Omitted: Flexible brass gas connector at dryer 3. & Evaluator: The gas line was capped at time of TISH at the ceilin�, any loose or improper piping would 4. have to have been installed after that time Staff comment: Staff found complaints valid. Installation did not appear to be new; installation did not appearto be professional. 5. 16 B M B Omitted: Corrosion of galvanized water pipes Evatuator: The guidelines do not require mention of corrosion of water pipes unless they aze leaking. staff comment: Unable to check in limited time available. The Guidelines do not specifically ask evaluators to look for corrosion. The Guidelines continually emphasize looking for professional installation and evidence of maintenance in a"workmanlike" state of repair. Visible corrosion should be mentioned. 6. 17 c B M H Omitted: Vent connector improperly repaired with aluminum foil Evaluator: Without the aluminum foil the vent connector would have met code. Because a home owner adds a modification that he thinks might help it is not up to us to be so ano�ant as to think it may hurt. If someone told hnn to wrap the flue in foil and it did not hurt anythin� it does not violate any code. Staff comment: Vent connector covered with foil. Truth-in-Sale of Housing evaluators aze not required to disassemble anything to investigate what is behind a modification. However, the use of foil at a connection point is unusual enough to suggest the use of the foil as a repair method and that it was not placed there for cosmetic reasons. If the connection to the flue is improper the foil conceals the condition. If it is not improper, the presence of the foil is misleadin�. A comment, at least, would be appropriate, e.g., "Connection covered with foil. Unable to view to evaluate the connection to the chimney." 7. 44 A 3 B B Omitted: Submerged ballcock in basement toilet, lacks 1" air gap Evaluator: The basement was full of stora�e at time of inspection. The existence of a toilet was not appazent. Staff comment: Unable to check in limited time available. page 3 of4 Item/ TISH GL ref ratine Investi ator Descrintion of improperlv marked or omit`ed comment for this ratine item s � 01' 8. 58 C M B Omitted: Roof vents plugged by bird nest or 61 N N Evatuator: First of all, a bird's nest does not always block ventilation, second the Guidelines do not require a thorough inspection of each and every roof vent. Thirdly my copy of the TISH states there was not ventilation, the guidelines at the time only ask for Y or N, not an explanation. Staff comment: Staff did not have a step ladder at the time of inspection, ho�vever with a step ladder attic access would have been easy. Picture submitted with complaint sho�vs a completely blocked vent. The report indicates the attic was accessed, there are ratings in items 58 through 61. If the attic was accessed, the bird's nest would have been cleazly visibie and shouid have been noted as a reason for the "N" ratin� for 61. Ventilation. 9. 67 B M B Omitted: Lacks deadbolt locks at entry door Evatuator: The Guidelines at the time of inspection specifically allowed the short throw deadbolts that this home was supplied with. Staff comment: Complaint is specific to the front entry door. There is no deadbolt at all on the front entry door. 10. 73 E M B Omitted: Chixnney lacks a visible metal liner Evaluator: There was ample evidence that the gas fired appliances where (sic) into proper venting, and if you look close you can see the metal liner just above the clay liner. It is why they require binoculazs on inspections. Staff comment: With binoculars, from the alley, no metal iiner was visible. In the basement, the vent connections for the water heater and furnace to the chimney aze covered with foil. 11. 76 A M B Omitted: Decayed studs and sill plate Evaivator: The Guidelines require signs of rot or decay not simply water staining. Although the garage did contain stora�e at the time of inspection and there may have been some decay in areas not visible at time of inspection. Staff Comment: Staff found severe staining. Did not use an awl, but sill plate and studs are blackened in areas. The Guidelines say, "Any sign of rot or decay, lack of a proper finish, weathered/peelin� paint or loose/missing glazin� shall be marked as "Below minimum requirements." Water stainin� would be a si� of possible rot or decay. page 4 of 4 Item/ TISH GL ref ratin7 12. 77 A M Investi a tOT Description of improperlv marked or omitted comment for this ratin? item B Omitted: Gara�e floor cracked and broken up. The Guidelines require "Excessive cracking" not any crackin� to call as below minimum. Staff Comment: The slab in the corner of the gazage is broken and cracked. The Guidelines say, "The Evaluator shall determine if the slab and/or foundation is sound, and has no structural failure. Damaged areas, excessive cracks etc. shall be marked as "Below minimum requirements." There is cracking, which even if not excessive would be classified as a damaged azea, and should have been noted. 13. 78 A M B Omitted: Vehicle door lower panel deteriorated Evatuator: While the gaza�e door is not new it is not illegal in its decay or deterioration, it has smali check mazks along the bottom but has been refinished and is a professional state of repair. S tafF C omment: Investigation found small check marks alon� the bottom of the door. 14. 80 A M H Omitted: Gazage door opener wired via extension cord Evatuator: This may be true I have no memory of it and may have missed this item. StafF Comment: Extension cord is clearly visible. 15. 80 A M H Omitted: Gazage GFCI outlet failed to trip when tested with hand tester Evatuator: The garage GFCI outlet was tested and tested fine at the time of inspection. They are required ta be tested weekly because over 4 or 5 months they may go bad! Staff Comment: No tester available at the time of inspection. 16. 80 A M B Omitted: Automatic garage door opener control button not mounted within sight of door (unapproved manner) Evaluator: The Guidelines have no requirement for reporting on a garage door opener save that it exists! This garage door opener is a much older model and therefore is grandfathered and you can see the door from the location of the button throu�h a large window. And just as an additional point the GDO controller can be operated from anywhere in the neighborhood so a code requiring a specific placement of the button is silly. Staff Comment: The button to control the gara�e opener is outside the garage on the north side, by a window. The azea is enclosed by a privacy fence. The installation is unusual and probably �s�orth notin�. Staff additionally notes the button is placed less than 5' hi�h. 39.Smokc detector Tnformation ��} I� 5 l� f S� Smokcdcicctor(s) Y Disclosure Report ��' Properi�� loc�ztcd Y Saint Paul Truth-in-Sale of Housing �' l L1 (� a Hard-«imd H (Carefully rzad this rntire rzport) � � = d ti THIS REPORT LS NOT A WARRANTY, BY THE CITY OF ST. PAUL OR EVALUATOR OF THE FUTURE " USEFUL LIFE, OR THE FUTURE CONDTTION OF ANY BUILDPi IG CONIPONENT OR FI%TURE. Notice: A copy of this Report must be pubGcly displayed at the premises whrn thz house is sho«n to prospective buyers, and a copy of tlus RzpoR must be provided to the bu}'er prior to ihe time of si� ing a Purchase A�eement. Address of Evaluated Dwelling: 1428 Snelling Ave. . Owner's Name: �Vendell Worley Owner's Address: 1-128 Snelling Ave. Listing Asent and Asency: Team Netteberg include Ciry, State and Zip codz Type of Dwellins: Single Family XX Duplex Townhouse Condo* ' For condominium uni[s, this evaluation includzs only [hosz items locatzd �1ithin [he residential units and dozs not include thz use azeas, or other nonrzsidential azeas of the stnicn�re. Comments: HERITAGE PRESERVATION INFORi�IATION According to informaflon proeided to Truth in Sale of Housing Ecaluators by the Cih of S[. Paul Office of License, Inspections and Environmental Protection this property: � � IS located «ithin a St. Paul Heri[agz Przservation District or it is individi�ally desi�nated as a St. Paul Heritage Preservation Site. (Re�iew and approval of Estecior work (evcluding painting), modifications, Additions and demolition in required by the Hzritage Preservation Commission and city staff.) 0 Is NOT locatzd within a St. Paul Heritase Przsercation Distric[ nor it is individuall}' dzsionated as a St. Paul Heritage Preservation Sitz. 'Ihis infoRnation is not �uaranteed by the ecaluator nor by the City of St. Paul. Questions rzsazd'mg Heritage Preservafion tnformation Can bz referred to khe Office of Licznse, Inspection and Envuonmental Protzction at (651) 266-9090 This Report: 1. is intzndtd [o pro�idz basic infonnation to the home bu}�er and szlizr prior to tht time of sala. Ttus report R'ILL NOT be uszd to enforc< the xquirrmznts U32 LR,�fliSlIIlt�'2 COa2: }IOtVL�Yf� Utis evaluation Focm «ill be used by'the Fve Dzpartmrnt to dzte�mine if there is compliance ��i4i the requiremmts for a ha �rir�d smoke dztzctor in sin�lt faznily asidencu. 2. is baszd on Chap[er 34 ofdie SC Paul Le3islaticz Codz and the cuaen[ Tmth in Sak of Housing Evaluaror Guidalinzs 3. is norivarranted, bq the CiTy� of St Paul, or by the zcaluator of thz condition of tkie building component, nor of the accuracy of this report 4. co��ers only the itzms listed on thz fom� and only ihosz items �isible at thz timz of evaluation. Ihz E�'aluaror is noi r<quved to i�mu[e lhe heating plant ust a laddzr to obsme Eae mndition of Ihz roofm�, at53552fIlIJI21S2RLS OC f4�ILLdit NdCCtS5IbI2 ffi285. 5. may� bz buzd upon diffzrent s[andatds [han the lender, Federal Housing Adttdnis[ration (FfI.S) or Veterans Adminislration (\ :�). 6. is valid for onz year from tliz date of issuz and only� for the owner namzd on this reporc - Quesrions regarding this report should 6e directed to the evaluator. Complaints reearding this report should be directed to Citizen Senice O�ce, Code Enforcement Di��sion Truth-in Sale of Housing, 15 W�. Kelloge Blcd, Room 190 St. Paul, NIN. 55102, Phone No. (651) 266-8-{�{0. � , EVALUATOR: American Central Inspections, Ron Stazheli PHONE: (651) 293-0100 DATE: 10-23-2001 R:c ll2001 Propem�address: 1423 Snelling Ave. ` i�I" = Meets minimum requirements- the item complies with the minimum Housing Code requuements. "B" = Belo«� muumum requirements - thz i[em is bzlow minimum Housing Code requirements. "C"= Comments - the item cannot be adeqvately evahtated or it has some deficiency, but the deficiency is insufficient to make the item bzlow minimum requirements - "FT' = Hazardous - the item in its present condition may endan�er the health and safety of [he occupant. "Y" = Yes "N'= No Any item mazked "B", "C" or "H" must hace a ��ritten commznt about thz item. Additional commrnt shezG may bz attachzd if needed. Item # Comments BASEMENTlCELLAR 1. Stairs and Handrails ..................... 2. BasemenUce112r floor ..................... 3. Foundation ................................... -�. Evidence of dampness or stainin�...... �. First floor, floor system .................... 6. Beams and columns ........................ B I M M Y. 4 M M No handrail, open side Old ��atzr stains o ernces ..............1 7. Service sizz: Amps : 200 Volts : lli/230 8. Electrical senicz installation /gounding M 9. Electrical �riring, ou[lets and fi.�-[ures... M PLUbIBING SYSTEM 10. Ftoor drain(s) ............................ 11. Wastz and vent piping ...................... 12. Watzr piping ............................. ... 13. Gas pipin� (all floors) ............... 14. Water heater(s) installation............ 1�. Water hea[er(s) ventina ..................... 16. Plumbin� fishirzs ..................... M M M H 13 M M M HEATING SYSTEM(S) � af ............... 1 I7. Heating plant(s): Fuel: GAS Typz: FA a. Installation and visible condition M b. Vie«'ed in operation .................. Y c. Combustion ��entino ................... M The Evaluator is eot required to ignite the heatinb plant(s). 18. /Additional heatins unit(s) Fuel: Elzctric T}pz: Baseboazd a. Installation and �isiblz condition M b. Viz« in opzration .............. ... N c. Combasuon vzntin�... _ ................ N/A 19. ADDIiIO\AL Co�IEri'2'5............ Uncapped gas line in kitchen E VALUATOR: American Central Inspections, Ron Staeheli DATE: 10-23-2001 Pa�e 2 of 3 � R:v 1i2001 Propem address: 1428 Snelling Ace. "�I^ =1lttLS minimum requirzmenis "B° = Below muumivn requ'uzmrnts "C' = Commrnts "FI" =H�zardous°Y"=Yes "ti^=\o Item k Comments HITCHEN 20. V: a11s and ceilin� ............................. M 21. Floor condition and ceiling height......... M 22. Ecidence of dampness or staining.......... N 23. Electrical outlets and fiti ................ M 2-}. Plumbin� systzms ............................. M 2�. W'atzrflo�v ...................................... b1 26. Windoa- size and openablz azea ............. M 27. Windou� and door condition .................. B 27,33,38,47,53 Missing some hold opzn hard«�are LIVIi\G AND DINING ROOM(S) 28. Walls and ceiling ............................... M 29. Floor condition and ceiling hziLlt[.......... l�f 3Q E�idencz of dampnzss or s[ainu��........... N 31. Elzctrical outlets and fixtures ................ B 31 Too fe�v outlets 32. 6tiindo�c size and openablz azza............ M 33. Windo« and door condition ................ B IIALLWAYS, STAIRS AND ENTRIES 3-4. Walls, ceilines and floors .................... T.f 3�. Evidznce of dampnzss or stainin_.......... N 36. Stairs and handrails to uppzr floors........ M 37. Electricai outlzts and fistures ............... M 38. Piindo«� and door condition. _ ................ B 39. Smoke de[zctor(s) ........................... Y � Properlt� locaied ........................... Y Hard-��ired ................................ _ H 39 No hard«ired smoke detec[or BATHROOYIS(S) # of. Full 1 Partial -10. Walls and ceilins .............................. M 41. Floor condition. � ............................. M 42. Evidence of dampnzss or staining.......... N 43. Electrical outlets and fi�turzs ................ M 4�. Plumbuis fi�tures ............................. B 44 Faucet below drip line of tub, tub drain flat cented -4�. �TiaterFlo«� ................................... M �6. Ri indow size and openable azea or mechanical exhaust .......................... M 4Z Condi[ion of «�indo�rs or mechanical � E�haust and doors ......................... ... E SLEEPING ROO�I(S) No. of: 3 48. Walls and ceilins .............................. M 49. Floor condition, arza, and ceiling hzi�ht.. M J0. Evidznce of dampness or staaun�.......... N � 1. Elzctrical outlzts and fiztures ............... M 52. Window size and openable uea............ M 53. Windo«� and door condition ................... B ENCLOSED PORCHES AND OTHER ROOMS (Evalnator shall iden[ifi� zach additional room separatzlv and Commen[ «'hen neceSSan'.) ��4. �Valls and floor condition .................... M ». Evidznce of dampnzss or stauilng.......... N �6. Electrical outlets and fixtures ..........:.... M - �7. W'indotc and door condition ..................... M ATTIC SPACE (Visible Areas) �3. Roo£boazdsandraftzrs ..................... M �9. E�idence of danipness or siaining....... _ N 60. Elzcu «irinJoutlet;/TLt'tui'es......... Ivf 61. Ventilation ................................ . F 62. ADDITIONAL COH�NTS......... �� S�' EVALUATOR: American Central Inspections, Ron S[aeheli DATE: 10-23-2001 Page 3 of 4 xz� tzooi Property Address: 1428 Snelling A� e. EXTEffiOR (Visiblz P.reas) 63. Foundation ...................................... 6�. BasemenVicellazwindows ..................... 6�. Drainage (srade) .............................. 66. ErFerior walis ................................... M M B 65 M "�I^ = V[eMS minimum rzquiremrnts `B° = Balow minimum requirements "C"' = Commrnts "fI" = Hazardous °]" _ �"es "\" = No Item # Comments Pitched to house 67. Daors (frames/stoan�screens) ................ M 63. Windo«s (frames�stovns/screens)..... ...... M 69. Ope� porches, stainvays and decks... ....... B 69 Missin� handcaii 70. Comice and trim ......................... ...... M 71. Roofcoc�erins and flashins,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,, [vt 72. Gutters and do��nspouts ...................... M 73 . Chimnevs .............. ........................ bt 7-4. Outlets, 5sh�res and service entwnce. ...... M G.ARAGE 7�. Roof struc[ure and cocerins .................. M 76. Wall siructure and coverins .................. M 77. Slab condition .................................. M 78. Gara�e doors .................................._ M , 79. Garaoe opener- (see impor[ant notice :6) . Y - -- An FiP��ric:ii�ing �utlet° afid �i - nses ➢� 81. Additional Comments ....................... I hereby certity that the above report is made in compliance with the SC PaW Legislative Code, Clupter 3;, and that I h��-e utilized the care and diligence, reasonable and ord'u�an�, for mee[ing the cer[i£cation standards prescribed 6y the Truth-In- Sale of Housing Ordinance, Chapter 189. I ha� e found no inst:u�ce of non-complunce nith the items listed a6oce as of tlie date oFthis report, ezcept those desienated herein. �.- ,�/lOy._; � �j�� 65 I -2 93-0100 10-2;-2001 Evala3tor Sig�ature Phone Number Datz ITE}IS 82 THROtiGH 89 ARE \OT ADDRESSED I\ CH.4PTER 3J. THEIR I\CLUSIO\ O\ TAIS FOR�I IS I\7E\DEDTO PRO�ZDE StiPPLE�IE\'LaL I\FOR\LaTIOY TO THE BL']'ER fi0 DETER�fI\ATIOS IS bI.4DE RHETAER TAE 1TE�IS \IEET bIL\"I�IIIDI REQL`IRE\fENTS. ALL ITEbIS bI.4Y BE R�.TED, SF.APPROPRL�.T& ENERGY INFORMATION INSULATION 82. Attic insulation ..................... 83. Foimda[ion insulation ............. 8-l. Knee«�a1llnsulation .............. 8�. Rim Jois[ Insulation ............... 86. Storm Doors ....................... ........... 87. Storm Windo«s ................... .......... WEATfIERSTRIPPING 88 . Doors ............................................. ....... 89 . Windows .................................................... FII2EPLACE/WOODSTOVES � OF 90. Dampers installed in fueplaces ........................... 91. Installation ............... ................................... 92 . Condition .................................................... Approz. 1W Inches ��A td�l None NA Nonz Y Y NV = Not cisiblz NA =Not applicablz Y Y Pase 4 of 4 Rec I �2001 lli IPORTANT NOTICES 1. .1n�� sin�lz famil}� residrnez in St Paul must hace a: Izas[ onz smokz detector connated to thz elzcuical s}steesv The dzt°c[or must bz locat� near slzepin� roonu. For more infoana[ion call Fire Rectntioa 2Z3-6230. 2 Rainieadm connzctzd ro the sanitan� seuzr s�star, mus[ bz disconnected. For morz infomiation calt Public �t'orks Se�c:r Di�isioa (65I) 266-623�. 3. ?m' house built btFecz 19�0 may hnvz Itad paint on'in i[. If childrzn zat lead paint �hev can be poaoned For mor: inEe,r.iatiat call Saint Paul Raasszy Counn' Public Fizalth (651) 292-65�s. J. Thz City of St Paul or thr E��aluator arz not resporsible for mz dettmunation ofthe przszncz of airbome pactictes su:n u asezstos no�ious gues, such as radon or otha conditions of air quality ilut may be pres:nt nor thz conditions ut�ich ma}' caus: the abo�e. 5. If tlus building is used for any purpose other that a sin�le family dwelling, it may 6e illegallr zoned. To help }�ou detennine legal uses under the zoning ordinance, mntact the Zonine Adnw�istrator at (651) 266-9005. 6 Automatic garrge doors should reverse upon strildng an object If it does not reverse, it poses a serious haz�rd and should be repaired or repLxed �, unntediateiv. � T}pe of Insulation \� y t � / � • • l ...... .� . �. . ._ ... � �: �!� C ^ � ' ..ir� �'. . .. kc. iKM �'�V� � � . �'/ \ ,, P �' �:��..'�T ' � e � :iR' _ ' '� . ' _ ..- I . .. +� 1' . � . '..,; : .f/Y/ G //L G Lacks Deadboli locks at entry door. sy -Sf"� �� r� �' ` �ent connector improperly � __'• � repaired with aluminum foil. ,, , �..-----, �..�.`� �i;i��;�i�� / \ .. . . /\. / rl n_ _ I ' �•��(yw. !y �� . ••Y\ , ~ � p � �� f �� : � „;;��° _,- . �-=� �_ � � , ,: _ , . .. _ - .. -. , _ ,. . .� .._, , - .� .; �.�.�--- — __.�,;.��---.-�_-- �--- - -- _ =,.._,_ �---- -- — ---_ __--- ----_-- - - —"- � . _ ` �------ ,. _-.__ u , Improperly supported plastic water pipes. (Not pictured) Corrosion of galvanized water pipes. Lacks water fiow to kitchen and ; - -- - ._ ,�::� bathroom when basements taps are open at same time. Roof vents plugged by bird nests %%< _ %l� 7 l rV ° . Flexible brass gas connector at dryer. p�.Sdr� 1:`�r. -- �fJ _. � � --- y - /: �. �y :. ��> � "----- Improperly supported gas line to - dryer. -� --�--�-- �- _ .. Automatic garage door opener control button not mounted within sight of door. (exterior side wall of garage) Submerged ballcock in basement toilet. � Chimney lacks a visible metal liner��_�q ��3 �� 5�_ � ,.�� E .;.� N� ;�� ;' `-: �i jV . ��1 I�� L � ( � �� t Garage door opener wired via �;` �� extension cord � � � �- Garage floor cracked and broken 7�/� `'�Z up. Deca studs and sill plate. �� <<r, �Not pictured) Vehicle door lower -�g�� panel deteriorated. `� Garage GFCI outlet failed to trip ` �o �- when tested with hand tester. (H) � /iiC/ �v r � � � s.: � :,-3 Z . " �: �� _:i . � _ '�e � �� ' �.l .�,. .. _. y - l %jil JY �i.-�o� ,,,... Flexible brass gas connector at dryer. ' � �c : �3 � .SY9 ' �, -_ �. .- � :, �;�: c� � i ';x � � `\� � �� . '-:� � �� _ �. .. �� Improperly supported gas line to dryer. (3 � �- � � _�_�� Automatic garage door opener control button not mounted within sight of door. (exterior side wa(I of garage) �� 7 ,? � ` � ��` ��n�l.`� � Submerged balfcock in basement toil�t. " �A.�. � n.� � ``�-�` `�P Truth-in-Sale of Housing Complaint Investigation 105 Lexington Ave S, dated 9i17/Ol Complaint, Evaluator Response and Staff Investigation comment �� S ry The following is a compilation of the original complaint as sent to the evaluator, the corresponding response from the evaluator, and a staff comment upon the evaluator's response. Copies of ori�inal report and photos from complaint are available. Evaluator general comment: "All of these responses are gleaned from re-inspection of the exterior of this property and from memory. When I get a complaint about a property I always start out feeling that maybe I really screwed up. Then I go and look at the properties and realize that there are just some inspectors that do not know that the Guidelines are not meant to be a list of how a property is not new but a list of what is illegal and deficient in the eyes of the city. None of these conditions rise to the level of illegal and Below Minimum Standazds" Item/ GL ref 1. 12 D TISH Investieator Descriotion of improoerlv marked or omitted comment for this item ratine ratin2 M B or H Omitted: lack of flow to kitchen and/or bath fixtures when basement faucets are open at the same time Evaivator: The flow was adequaYe at the time of inspection. I have no doubt that the flow would be worth a comment on a Buyer's inspection but the Guidelines and Chapter 34 do not have very high standards for water flow. Staff comment:: Basement laundry tub, kitchen sink on first floor and bathroom hand sink used to check flow. Toilet was not flushed. Flow in the hand sink was slow, but still ran to the pencil-width specified in the Guidelines. 2. 17a B B H Omitted: Vent connector lacks proper clearance to combustibles. Evatuator. The fumace at the property is a design that does not require a clearance to wood framing members only flammable wall coverings. The fumace met the code and guidelines at the time of the inspection. Staff comment: Tin has been used to cover wood framing next to the exhaust ventin� of water heater and fumace. 3. 3� N Y Omitted: Excessive stainin�, water dama�e on front entry ceiling Eva�uacor. There was fresh paint at the time of my inspection, while there may be �vater staining at the time of the Buyer's inspection there was none at the time of the Truth-in-Sale of Housing Inspection 5 months ago! Staff comment: The front entry ceiling is not painted, nor has it ever been painted. �Vood is stained and rotted. page 2 0£2 Item/ GL ref 4. 65 A TISH Investigator Description of impronerly marked or omitted comment for this ratin ratine item M B Omitted: Areas of grading lack proper slope for draina�e Evaluator: The house has a pitch away from all areas of the property. The Guidelines only require a 3% pitch. How the other inspector interprets "proper drainage" is up for debate but the property meets the Guidelines. Staff comment: Snow cover present at time of staff inspection. The Guidelines do not specify any particular pitch, they say, "Determine if The grade allows waYer migration away from the dwelling." 5. 68 B M B Omitted: Some basement screens or storm windows not in place Evatuator: This is the stupidest one. If �u don't have self-storin� windows at some noint there will either not be screens or storms on a window. The Guidelines do not require us to audit the existence of screens in the winter or storms in the summer. Staff comment: Storms missing in hvo places. Air flow noted around basement windows in northwest room. The Guidelines ask the evaluator to check for screens, including storm windows, particularly as a protection against the entrance of rodents. 6. 73 M B or H Omitted: Cracked, deteriorated chimney crown and clay liner Evaluator. The chimney crown is not visible from the ground and the clay liner has small chips out of the back side. The chimney is lined with metal liner and has no fiznction in venting any fixture or appliance. Staff comment: Work appeazs to have been done to close off azound metal liner. Missing mortaz from azound bricks on chimney, plainly missing when viewed with binoculazs. 7. 76 A M B Omitted: Garage siding in contact with gound, decayed Evatuator: The garage is desi�ned for the cedar siding to be in ground contact. There is no deterioration evident on the three sides that I was able to see this week. The Guidelines do not mention �ound contact and the property would be grandfathered because the garage is 100 years oid! starf coa�menc: Snow cover present at time of staff inspection. "Grandfatherin�" is not relevant. If wood is in contact with the soil it deteriorates, a fact which may incur repair costs for an owner, and a Fact which should be pointed out to potential buyers so they are able to evaluate the risk they �eould assume if they �vere to purchase the property. 39.Smol;c detector Information O1. S=' Smokc dctcctor(s) Y Disclosure Report �- Z5' Q � Properly locatcd 1' Saint Paul Truth-in-Sale of Housing HBLd-tciLCd Y (Carefullyreadthisrntirzreport) � �' � 2.., THIS REPORT IS NOT A WARRA:tiTY, BY THE CITY OF ST. PAUL OR EVALUATOR OF T73E FUTLRE USEFUL LIFE, OR THE FUTURE CONDITIOti OF ANY BUILDING COMPONENT OR FIXTURE. Notice: A cop�� of this Report must Ix pubiicly displayed a[ thz premises wfien the house is sho��,a to prospzctive buyers, and a copy of this Report must be pro�zded to the buyer prior to the time of si�in� a Purchase Agreement Address of Evaluated Dwelling: 105 i.esington Aee South Owner's Name: Lemas Enterprises Owner's Address: do Boris Tscetovany, Edina Realt�� Grand Ac�e Office Listing Agent and Agency: Boris Tsyetovat}}•, Edina Realty� include Cin�, Sta[e and Zip code Type of Dwellina: Sinale Family XX Duplex Townhouse Condo* ' For condominium units, this ecaluation includzs only tliose itzms located «ithin the residential units and dezs not includz [he use areas, or other nonresidential azeas of thz structure. Comments: HERITAGE PRESERVATION INFOI2NIATION According to information pro�ided ro Truth in Sale of Housing Evaluators b}� the City of St. Paul Office of License, Inspections and Emironmental Protection this propem�: � � I$ located ��i[hin a St. Paul Herita�e Presen�ation District or it is nidividually desi�ated as a St. Paul Heritage Presen�ation Site. (Re�zew and approval of Etterior �vork (excludin= paintin�), modifications, Additions and demolition in rzquired by the Herita�e Preszrcation Commission and city staff.) � IS N�T locatzd «ithin a St. Paul Herita�e Preservation District nor it is individuall}� desi�ated as a St. Paul Herita�e Przservation Sitz. "11iis information is not guaran[zzd by the ecaluator nor by the City of St. Paul. Questions rzgarding Hzrita�z Preservation Information Can be refesred to the OBice of License, Inspzction and Environmental Protection at (651) 266-9090 This Report: I. IS LIti2R(SL(I [O p[OV1L2 FI2SIC ][1FOtR13S10I1 l0 iI1L I10R12 SUY¢f 9Rd 52II2C PRO{ (O U12 SIIIlt OE53IL. T�115 CLPOR �� 'ILL NOT be uszd to rnforce ihe requirements of SLIt I.f�15�351\'L COdt: t10«'2VCC� []LS C4'a�LL3ilOR fOli[S Nll� b2 LLSLd b4 ult F�t2 D2P921RI2I1I TO aLICRfOIIt 1{1112C21S COtI]pli2Ri2 \lli}i SI12I2q111[L[ri2RLS fOT 3}13[d� wved smokz detec[or in singlz family residznczs. 2. is baa�d on Chapter 34 of ihe St Pau! iz�s'�slative Codz and tha curtrnt Truth in Salz of Housing Evaluator Guidzlines 3_ is not �s�artanted, by tha City o£St Paul, or by tke evaluator of the condition ofthe building componrnt, nor of the accurati� of this rzport. 4. cove�s only thz items liried on the foan and onl}� lhose itzms visib(z at thz time of evaluation. Thz Evaluator is not requ¢zd to i�rute the heating planS use a laddzr ta obsrn'e thz condition of thz roofmg, dI5�St2IRbi2 I12t115 Ot 2�'�U1IL ItL1CC25SIbIL 91Y`15. 5. may bz based upon diffarnt siandards thu� the ]rnder, Fedzral Housing Administration (FHA) or Vxtzrans Administrarion (� 6. is calid for one y'zar &om the date of issue and onl}� for the o«ner namzd on this report. - Questions reo�rdinn this report should 6e d'uected to the e��aluator. Complaints regardinn this report should be directed to Citizen Ser�ice Office, Code Enforcement Di}ision Truth-ia Sale of Aousina, 15 �V. Kelloeg Bt��d., Room 190 St. Paul, bL\. 55102, Phone ho. (651) 266-8-IA0. C � �i � �L, i� I.. '� , EVALUATOR: AmedcanCenualInspzcuons,RonStaeheli PHONE: (6�1)293-0100 DaTE:09-17-200( Rev 1/2001 Propert} address: 105 Lesington Ac�e South "bT' = M�zts minimum requirements- the item complies with the minimum Housing Code requirements. "B" = Belo«• nunimum requircments - the item is below minunum fIousing Code requirements. "C"= Commznts - the item cannot be adequately evaluated or it fias some deficiency, but the deficirnc}� is insufticien[ to make the item below minuuum requirements � "H" = Ha�ardous - the item in its presrnt condition may endanger the health and safety of the occupant. "Y = Yzs "N" = No An}' item markzd "B", "C" or "H" must have a�oritten comment about the i[em. Additional commrnt shezts may bz attachzd if needed. Item � Comments BASE�IEnT/CELLAR 1. Stairs and Handrails ..................... 2. Ba,emenUcellar floor ..................... 3. Foundation ................................... -�. Evidznce of dunpness or stainin�_.... 5. First floor, floor systzm .................... 6. Beams and columns............--.......-- Old ��ater stains in unfinishzd azea, M M M Y. 4 M M ELECTRICAL SERVICES(S) # of Senices ..............2 7. Sen�ice sizz: Amps : 100 Volis : I1�/230 8. Electrical service installation /gou¢dins. M 9. Elzctrical ��irin¢, oullets and fihtures.. � B 9 Light Fi�-hue in closet not florescent only sTy•le I i1Cp3131�[el.y'(.� Y�lu I 10. Ftoor drain(s) ............................ 11. Wastz and ven[ piping ................... 12. Water pipina ............................... 13. Gas pipina (all floors) ............... 14. �Nater heater(s) installation............ 1 �. W'atzr hea[er(s) venting .................. 16. Plumbin� fi�ctures ..................... M M M M M M M HEATI�i TG SYSTENI(S) �` of ............... 1 17. Heacuy plant(s): Fuel: GAS Type: FA a. InsYaIlation and visible conditioa B 17a No mdia[or in one sleepinL room b. Viz�czd in opzrnfion .................. N c. Combustion venting ................... M The Evaluator is not mquired to ignite the heating plant(s). 13. /Addi[ional heating unit(s) Fuel: GAS. Typz: 3. Installation and cisible condition b. Vie«�ed in opzration .................. c. Combuslion ��entine ..................... 19. ADDITIO`i.�.L COMI4IEIvTS...... EVALUATOR: American Cen4al InspecGons, Ron Staeheli DAIE: 09-17-2001 Page 2 of 3 Rm' 1l2001 Properh� address: 105 Leungton Ave South "�I^ = bt_c's .-.ti^i: :um requirrnirnss u B � = BzIUIY ll�1.yl{�L : (LC�U1(2[YIL[ILS � C" = Comments "H =Hv�rdous"Y"=Yes "�i =I�o - �N Item # Comments �� HITCHEN 20. W"alls and ceiling ............................. M 21. Floor condition and ceilino height......... M _ 22. Ecidzncz of dampness or staining.......... N 23. Etectrical ouflets and fixtures ................ M 2-1. Plumbing s}stzms ............................. M 2�. txiater flo« ....................................... M 26. Windo�c size and openable azea ............. M 27. 44indow and door condition .................. B 27,47 Missino locks LIVI�IG AND DItii'LYG ROONI(S) 23. �Valls and cziline ............................... M 29. Floor condition and ceilin� height.......... M � 30. Evidznce of dampnzss or stauun�........... N 31. Electrical outlzts and fittures ................ M 32. Windo�c size and openable uea............ M 33. �iindo�c and door condition ................ M HALLWAYS, STAIItS AND ENTRIES 3-{. Wall�, ceilings and floors .................... M 3�. Ecidence of dampnzss or staining.......... N 36. Stass and handrails [o upper floors........ M 37. Electrical outiets and fia�tures ............... M 33. Windo�c and door condition ................... M 3J. Smokede[ector(s) ............................ Y � Properly locatzd ............................ Y Hazd,wirzd .................................. Y BATHROOi�IS(S) k o£ Full 1 Par[ial 40. W'alls and czilin� .............................. M 41. Floor condition ................................ M =}2. Ec�idence of dampness or staining.......... N 43. Electrical outlzts and fi�tures ................ M 44. Pliunbin� fiatiues ............................. M �t�. 6Vater Flow ................................ ... M , 46. Window size and openable azea or mechanical eshaust .......................... M -17. Condition of windows or mechanical Eshaust and doors ......................... ... B SLEEPING ROOM(S) No. of: 4 48. Walls and ceilin� .............................. M �49. Fioor condition, area, and ceiling height.. M �0. Evidence of dampness or stauung.......... N � 1. Electrical outlets and Fvtwes ............... M �2. Windo«� size and openable azea............ B 52 No one ��indo�v opens to 24" in hzight in NW sleepins room �3. Windo�v and door wndition ............... _.. M ENCLOSED PORCHES AND OTHER ROOMS (Ecaluator shall identifi' zach addilional room upalatzly and CAmmeRt �vhen neCe5sa7}'.) �-4. Walls and tloor conditron .................... M ». Evidznce of dampness or stainin�.......... N �6. Elzctrical outlets and £�tures ............... M - �7. �Gindow and door condition ..................... M � ATTIC SPACE (Visible Areas) �8. Roof boards and raftus ................._.. No access/sma11 scuttle, could not fullv ecaluate. �9. E�idence of damnness or staurins......... 60. Elzctnca! «irinJoutleu/tistures�........ 61. Ventilation ................................ . 62. ADDITIONAL CO�iENTS......... EVALUATOR: American Central Inspections, Ron Staeheli DATE: 09-17-2001 Page 3 of 4 xz� inooi Properiy� Address: l0i Lesinb on Ace South "\P'=Mzetsminvuumrequiremrnts "B =Commrnis"A^=Hazardous`Y"=Yes "N^=\o - EXTERIOR (Visible Areas) 63. Foundarion ...................................... 6-3. BasemenUcellar windows ...................... 6�. Draina�e(grade) ............................... 66. Eaterior �oafls ................................... 67. Doors (fzames�stonns/screens) ............._. 68. Windows (frames/storms/screens)..... ...... 69. Open porches, stairnays and decks... ....... 70. Cornice and trim ......................... ...... 71. Roofcoceringandtlasfiing ................... 72. Gutters and doanspouts ................ ...... 73. Chimneys ....................................... 7-}. Outlets, fis[ures and service enVance....... GARAGE M M M M B 67 M B 69 M M M M M Type of Insulation Item # Doubfe cylinder dead6olt No handraiis in esterior stairn�a}s 7�. Roof strvc[ure and covering .................. M 76. Wall stmcture and coverine .................. M 77. Slab condition .............. .................. Locked 78. Garage doors .................................... 79. Garage opener (see importan[ notice �6) . . ec[ne mnn„ ou ets an x[ures......... S 1. Additional Comments ....................... I here6y certiFy that the above report is made in compliance with the SL Paul Lee slatice Code, Chapter 34, and [hat I have utBized the care and dili�ence, re:tsonable and ordinary, for meeting the certification st�tdards prescribed by the Truth-In- Sale of Aousing Ordinance, C7tapter 189. I Aave found no instartce of non-complunce with the items ]isted ahave as of the dute otthis report, except those desimated herein. c=1� ��- 651-293-0100 09-17-2001 Evaluator Sigiature Phone Numbzr Datz ITE�IS 82 THROtiGH S9 ARE \OT 1DDRESSED IV CH.aM'ER3�. THEIR LtiCLtiSIO\ OY THIS FOR\7IS I\TE\DEDTO PROVIDE StiPPLE�IE\T.aI. I�iFOR�LaTiO\ TO THE BLY'ER FO DETER�IIYATIO\ IS DL�DE RHETHER THE ITE�IS DIEET DII]�Ii7h[ REQtiIRE�SESTS. ALL TTE�IS Df aY BE R4TED, IF APPROPR7aTE. ENERGY INFORMATION LvSULATION 82. Attic insulation......... 83. Foundation insulation. 8-4. Knze��allInsulation... 8�. Rim Joist Insulation .............. 86 . Storm Doots ....................... ......................... 87. Stoixn Windo�as ................... ......................... �YEATHERS1RIppING 88 . Doors ....................................................... S9 . Windows .................................................... FIREPLACEJWOODSTOVES # OF 90. Dampers installed in fireplaczs ........................... 91. Installation ... ............ ................................... 92 . Condition .................................................... Y Y Y Y Comments Approc. NV Inthes - 1�iA IIV Nonz NA Nonz NV = Not Yisiblz NA =Not applicable Y M Pa�e 4 of 4 M � xz� inooi L�IPORTANT NOTICES i. :1ny� sin�lz famil}'raidrncz in St Paut mus[ 6a��e at Irast onz smokz detec[or con¢ectzd [o tht zlectrical systzm "@e Z:e kor must be (ocatzd nzar slzzpiny rooms. For more infocmation call Firz Precrntion 225-6230. 2. Rainlzadza connreted to the sanitare se�Fa sysv°m must be disconnMed For morz infom�ation call Public 54�orks, Se•ser Di�isioq (651) 266-6234. 3 �m� housz bnil[ beFore 1950 ma�� ha�x Irad paiot on m iL If childrrn eat kad paint the}' can bz poisonzd For morz infomiation call Saint Paul Ramse}' Counn� Rblic Hea:� (651) 292fii2=. �. The Ciry of Sc Paut or the Ecalua:or aze not rzsponsihle for �a dttmtunation of Ihz przsrnee of air6omz p�ctieies s¢c6 as as6es[os, noiiors �zs, s:ch as radon or otha conditions of air qualin'that ma} przsrn4 nor thz conditioas which ma�� causz the abovz. 5. If this 6uildine is used for any purpose other that a sinple family dweiling, it may 6e illegally zoned. To help }�ou determine legal uses under ihe zoning ocdinance, contact the Zoning Admi¢istrator at (651) 266-9008. 6. automaftc gazage doors should recerse upon rtrll.ing an object IFit does not reverse, it poses a serious huard and should be reptimd or replaced immediatelv. � s GN� � � � ,:,:. � ,. i_•, y' � ' . � . 1 ). � ' �1� ; ; b G .<��r�� T ��'� Lacks flow to kitchen and bath �- S�1 fixtures when basement faucets are open at same time. o- _�� ,� .� ��' �- �ty y� , t � Vent connector lacks proper clearance to combustibles. � { � c� � � , � � Ev� ��' � G � Not pictured. Excessive staining, water damage on front entry �, ceiling �� ,� �� , � C �1'Vi �✓_�� -EJY '�LLJ�.i�i �� il � 01-St1 � �� i � �� `� 3� �� ' � � 1 `_ Li ?r� � t 6 / , � f � e�� -n, _ :_ . -_ , .._.,._._.. '. r ,4 �`�� _ �.. �»., , - . - ' 1 .� �',! 1 , ' 1 i,_�� `� �i � � � �� a i u� �,.. . ' f,>:. I.... 1f: � / $ s �_- " , t ° �t . � t _ � i : " �' � . / �' � ,: � ' " "-o .; � , . . -. y . . . . . . . . t � 1 R . � r Truth-in-Sale of Housing Complaint Investigation 1815 Sims Ave E, dated November 16, 2001 Complaint, Evaluator Response and Staff Investigation comment O� -s�"1 The following is a compilation of the original complaint as sent to the evaluator, the cosesponding response from the evaluator, and a staff comment upon the evaluator's response. Copies of original report and photos from complaint are available. Item/ TISH Prooer Description of improperlv marked or omitted comment for this item GL ref ra_ t� rating 1 B B Omitted: headroom 5' 9" Evaluator: I commented that the item was below minimum standards. 2. 3. 4. 5. scaff Com�aent: Staff confirmed headroom measures 5'9". Evaluation does comment, "uneven". Report does not mention low headroom, then listed as 6'6" minimum, accordin� to Chapter 34. GL request specific comments for why an item is below minimum standards. B B Omitted: stainvay 23" wide Evaluator: The guidelines in force at the time had no mention of stainvay width. Staff Comment: Staff confirmed stairway width measures 23". Guidelines did not specifically mention stairway width requirements. Chapter 34 mentions only that stairs be maintained in accordance with the Building Code under which they were originally constructed. This element was changed in the new GL, so that stairway width is specifically mentioned. B H Omitted: metai pull-chain on laundry light Call made on missing plates should have been "H" instead of "B" Evaluator: The old guidelines only called outlet covers as below "B" 5taff Comment: Staff confirmed presence of inetai pull-chain. Evaluator's comment is incorrect. The former GL specified, "If conditions are viewed such as, missin� cover plates, open junction boxes, missing knockouts, and/or exposed wires, this item will be marked as "Hazardous"." Also relevant, "The evaluator shall determine if there are any ungrounded metallic light fixtures and/or electrical outlets located within 8 feet vertically or 5 feet horizontally of ground or grounded metal objects or plumbing/sinks or water supply, such ungounded fixtures or outlets will be marked as "Hazardous"." 9 B H Omitted: missing ceramic ring on ceiling light Evatuator: Cannot confirm all ceramic rings were on 4 months a�o. Staff Comment: Staff confirmed missin� ceramic ring. This condition may or may not have existed at the time of the ori�inal evaluation. However, the presence/alisence of ceramic rin�s is not the type of item that normally would be expected to chan�e in a short amount of time (4 months). 13 B B/H Omitted: no shut-off on stove eas line, "H", improper flex line, "B" Evaluator: Could not see stove service, the no shut off is not an "H" but a"B" Staff Comment: Former GL did call the no shut off as a"B". Staff was unable to verify; owner on-site using appliance. A more proper reference to this item would be, "can't view to evaluate". page 1 of 5 Item/ TISH GL ref ratin� 6. 13 B Proper ratine fe3 Description of impro�erlv marked or omitted comment for this item Omitted: unsupported dryer gas line Evaluator: Gas dryer line was secured at the time of my inspection Staff Comment: Staff observed unsupported dryer gas line. There was no hanger or holes from a removed hanger; it appears the gas line was not supported at any time, but was installed incorrectly. 15 M H Omitted: water heater flue is not sealed to chimney, nor in metal liner. Missing screws. Evaluator: There is no way to tell if the vent &om the water heater is in a metal liner, there was a metal liner in the flue and the water heater flue went in to the chimney. Staff Comment: Staff obserYed �vater heater flue is not sealed to chimne� m raP 1 tinPr ia mi¢sin� screws. Missing screws is a"B" call, with explanaYion required. If the flue is not sealed to the chimney, it is an"H" call. If it is in a liner, then the connection is visible before going into the chimney. S. 17c M B Omitted: missing screws in fumace flue pipe Evaluator: There were screws, there may not have been 3 on each and every joint. Staff Comment: Staff investigation co�rmed lack of screws in furnace attachment to chimney. Missing screws is a"B" call, with explanation required. 9. 19 H Omitted: exposed foam insulation on whole basement wall and over window Evaluator: Insulation must have been added. Statf Comment: Staff confirmed there is exposed foam insulation on basement all and over one window. According to the seliers the insulation was present at the time of the Truth-in-Sale of Housing evaluation. 10. 38 M B Omitted: kitchen door from rear entry, restricted access; can't readily reach lmob, narrow doonvay Evaluator: I have no idea what code this is in violation of. Staff Comment: Chapter 34 adopts the UBC for doors/exits. 1003.233 requires the exit width be maintained. Door width is regulated by the UBC, and required by Chapter 34 to be maintained, in a worlananlike state of repair. 'The door handle is not reachable without unusual effort. The latch and door aze not properly installed accordin� to any prior or existing code. E�ess is restricted as a result of this improoer installation. page 2 of 5 o�-s�1 Item/ TISH GL ref ratine 11. 38 M Proner ratin� f:3 Description of improperlv marked or omitted comment for this item Omitted: rear entry window: broken sash cords, painted shut, not operational Evaluator: There was no requirement the window be operational, it �vas properly chan�ed to a stationary window in violation of no codes. staff Comment: Staff observed rear entry window has broken sash cords and is painted shut. Picture indicates window to be double-hun� style. Staff has been unable to determine what is meant by "properly converted to stationary window". The windows in this house were installed as double-hun; and if they do not function properiy as double-hung, then the GL require the inspector to say so, and to say why, e.g. "Window non-functional; painted shuY'. 12. 44 M H Omitted: tub faucet below spill line Evaluator: Memory fails Staff Comment: Staff confirmed valid complaint IYs not clear if the evaluator's comment is meant to say he doesn't remember the guidelines, or if he doesn't remember the installation. If it is the guidelines, then'a copy should be carried while performing an evaluation. 13. 47 B B Omitted: weathered window, sashes painted shut, not operational Evatuator: Code requires excessive weathering, the window was not excessively weathered. Staff Comment: Evaluator comment included missing trim and hold open hazdware. GL state "all components must be present and in a workable order". Evaluator comments correspond to this "components" requirement. However GL also state "determine if the windows have been kept in a workman like state of repair", and "Mark as "B" any window that does not operate properl}�' Staff confirmed window is not operational. 14. 53 N Y Omitted: sashes painted shut, not operational Evaluator: Windo�v was properly converted to a sin�le hung windo�v. Staff Comment: Staff confirmed window is not operational. Picture indicates window to be double-hung f_6�! 57 B B Omitted: windows painted shut, not operational Evatuator: Window was properly converted to a sin�le hung �indow. Staff Comment: Staff confirmed window is not operational. Picture indicates �vindow to be double-hung style. See comment above in number 11. for item 38. page 3 of 5 Item/ TISH GL ref ratine 16. 58 None Proner ratin W Descrintion of imDrooerly marked or omitted comment for this item Omitted: exposed foam insulation on all kneewall areas Evaluator: Can not have exposed foam insulation in a non-habitable room only if the insulation was "exposed" to a habitable area. Staff Comment: Attic azea has been converted to habitable room use. Evaluator evaluated it as a bedroom, a habitable room, therefore the exposed foam insulation should have 6een noted. The evaluator stated "None" next to attic rating elements (58 - 61). Item 82., "Attic insulation", while not a required element, does have the notation, "NV" - Not visible, in the report. The exposed foam insulation is present, confirmed by staff. The only sepazation between the foam insulation and fhe living space was a sheeUcurtain, no door or acceptable covering. This should have been noted somewhere, either in 58. (attic) or possibly 48. (bedroom) as a hazardous condition. 17. 59 None Y Omitted: stains b chimney in attic/u�per hedroom Evaluacor: No staining at time of inspection Staff Comment: Staff confirmed the presence of minor staining on the chimney. This is in the attic area, which is converted to habitable usage (bedroom/sitting area). The evaluator stated "None" next to all attic rating elements and did not address the chimney in the report. Sellers report the stains were there for as long as they lived there. The staining should have been reported in either the attic section or the bedroom section of the report. 18. 66 M B Omitted: missing siding corners Evaluator: All sidin� corners on at time of inspection Staff Comment: Staff observed missing siding comers on two comers. Cannot tell for how long. 19. 67 B B Omitted: rear storm door is deteriorated Evaluator: It met the Minimum Standards at the time of inspection. Staff Comment: Staff concurs with Evaluator's assessment; staff did not observe a deteriorated threshold. However, complainant states the storm door is dented and deteriorated and has been for some time. The threshold under the doorway is deteriorated because the walk and foundation have settled and water enters under the door. 20. 68 M B Omitted: east storm window (frame) is broken in areas Evaluator: Window was fine at time of inspection. Staff Comment: Staff observed plastic window frame, east side, has some broken azeas. 21. 73 M B Omitted: gara�e chimney has dama�ed/missin� brick and mortar E� aluator. Gara�e chimney was not in service at time of inspection so its condition was not a concem. Staff Comment: Staff observed �arage chimney has damagedlmissing brick and mortar. Regardless of present usage, it is present and it's condition should be rated for the benefit of those who might think to use it. page 4 of 5 Item/ TISH Proner GL ref ratin ratina o� - 58�g Descriotion of improoerlv marked or omitted comment for this item 22. 76 B B Omitted: peelin� paint, lazge foundation cracks, weathered windows Evaluator: It would have become off square due to foundation cracks. The weathered windows would have been the ones with the deteriorated trim. Staft Comment: Staff observed peeling paint, foundation cracks, broken windo�v panes. Evaluator's terminology differs, but appazently addresses the same issue. However, it would also seem reasonable to attribute the source of the off-squue walls - again for the benefit of someone reading the report, to the cracks in the foundation/walls. The evaluator did not mention the peeling paint nor the deteriorated 23. 49 B B "Low headroom upstairs" - no comment regarding the relationship of the use of this space as a bedroom to all the other elements required by Chapter 34 for habitable space. Evaluator: I have no idea what this is about, I commented that there was low head room, it is not my responsibility to explain tot he lowest common denominator the entire impact of the fact on Western Civilization. The upstairs bedroom has low headroom. It is a very simple statement and idea. StafiComment: The upstairs bedroom is in space that was originally an attic. The space (probably) does not meet Chapter 34 minimum standards for habitable space (sq footage with a minium ceiling requirement, e�ess windows, light and ventilation requirements). A potential purchaser should be informed that the usage is not consistent with minimum requirements. This is one of the reasons the new GL and report form omit a count of bedrooms; to try to remove the evaluator from the situation of calling a space a bedroom where there is a difference between "usa�e" and "legal" bedrooms. 24. 58., 62. "None" Y, H Omitted any reference to visible attic elements (chimney and kneewall - see #16. & 17. above) in attic azea, area which is used as a bedroom. GL require detailing of why the area was not rated. Evaluator: There is no such thin� as attic components. There is either an attic area that is not finished or there is an area with low headroom that people aze using to live in. Staff Comment: The evaluator omitted attic ratings by entering "none" for Attic (hence omitted the chimney and foam insulation observations) in favor of the bedroom elements according to the use of the space. This left a hazardous situation unnoted. An evaluator is expected to comment when an area is not viewed, i.e. it would be acceptable to see,"used as a bedroom/habitable space" and then note the chimney and insulation conditions present in that area, regardless of the use. Additional comment from the Evaluator: "Thank you and please follow up with me on these so that I can learn something of what the Board expects of ine. This process seems excessively adversarial and much too confrontational. It's not about doing every inspection perfectly or catching our competition with their pants do�cn, it is about learnin� what the Board and the City expect from us." Staff Comment: Staff espects the evaluators to foilow the Guidelines, all thz time, and not selectively nor only when the evaluator a�ees �vith the Guidelines. This evaluator states in the Comments section on the front page of everv disclosure report prepared and filed under the February 2002 Guidelines, "This report must contain items that can not be repaired and that are grand-fathered by the codes, tAere(sicJ inclusion in this report is forced by the Evaluafor guidelines. My apologies, Ron" page 5 of 5 39.SmokedetectorInformation � I_"ZI _� i O'' �5�� Smoke detcctor(s) Y Disclosure Report Properl}� locatcd Y Saint Paul Truth-in-Sale of Flousing ��-} 3C� g �, � FIard-ticired Y (Carzfully read ti�is mtire rzpoct) � v THIS REPORT IS NOT A WARRA��ITY, BY THE CIT3' OF ST. PAUL OR EVALUATOR OF THE FUTURE `� USEFUL LIE'E, OR THE FUTURE CONDITIOti OF ANY BUII.DPi iG COl1PONEYT OR FIXTIIRE. � roticr. A copy of this Report must be publicly displa}�ed at the premises «�hen the ho� is'sho«n to proyective bu}'ers, and a copp of this Report must bz procided to the buyer prior to the time of si� ing a Purchase Agrzement. � Address of Evaluated Dweiling: 1815 Sims Owner's Name: Lori & Pat Riley Owner's Address: 1815 Sims Listina Agent and Agency: Bridget Schmidt ReMax indudz Cin, State and Zip code Type of Dwellina: Sing]e Family XX Duplex Townhouse Condo* • For mttdominittm ututs, tltis zvaluation includes onl}' those itents located «ithin thz residzntial uniG and doe; not includz the usz �reas, or othzr nonresidrntial areas of the struchuz. Comments: HERITAGE PRESERVATIO\` INFORMATION According ro infonna[ion pco�ided to Trufli in Sale of Housing E� aluarors bc flie Cin• of St. Paul Office of License, Inspections and Emzronmental Protection this property: � � IS loca[ed nithin a St. Paul Heritage Presercation Disuict or it is indicidually designated as a St. Paul Heritase Presmation Site. (Reciew and approval of Exterior �cork (escludin� pain[ing), moditications, Additions and dzmolition in required by� thz Hzritage Przsen�ation Commission and ciry staff ) ❑R Is NOT loca[zd ��ithin a St. Paul Azrita�z Preservation Dish nor it is indi�idi�ally desi�ated as a St. Paul Hzrita�e Preszn Site. This information is not guarantezd by thz evaluator nor b}� the City of St. Paul. Quzstions re�azdino Hzritagz Presen'ation Information Can be refzaed to thz Ot�ice of Liccnse, Inspzction and Environmzntal Protection at (651) 266-9090 Tius Report: 1. 351I112RdLd 20 P(0�'IdL (41SIC IS!{�01M.1230t1 LO 1}IL hORlz bLL4Y! 311d 52112C PitO! IO S}l2IIRl2 Of 5��2. �}IIS i2POt[ ��t1.1. ��T }.`2 USLd i0 2[3fO2C21}lf (L(�UIt2R1LI1LS O� i}12 L2��SI:R��Y COa2: IIDWL�'CZ� this ecahm[ion fortn �cill be used by the F'vz Departmrnt to detemtinz if thzre is cemplisnce wi8i the requirzmrnts For a hard wired smoke detector in singlz family residrnces. 2. is baszd on Chapta 34 of thz St. Pauf Leaslatice Codz and tha cu¢znt Tmih in Sale oFHousing Ecatuaror Guidetines 3. is not �vartantzd, by ihe CiTy of St. Paul, or by tl�z eca(uator of thz condition of tlx building mmponznt r.or of tl�e accurs�ti� of tltis report. 4. covers only the itams ]isted on thz fonn and onl�• 4iose items �isible at thz timz of zvatuatioa 7'hz Evaluator is not rzquired to i�itz the hzating ptant, use a ladder to obszn�z the condition of thz rooFm„ disassembiz itrnu or e�aluate inaccessible areas. 5. may bz based upon differrnt sLUiduds than thz lender, Fedzral Housin� Administration (FHA) or �'eterans �dministration (�:�1). 6. is valid for one }ear from tt,a date of issue and only� for the onnu named on this report. Quesfions reg�rding this report should be directed to the e��a]uator. Complain[s regarding this report should be directed to Citizeu Sen Office, Code Enfarcemen[ Didsion Truth-ia Sale of Housine, 15 R'. Kelloag Blvd., Room 190 St. Paul, hL�. j5102, Phone No. (651) 266-8��0. � � \ I� � EVALUATOR: AmericanCentralInspzctions,RonStaehzli PHONE� (6�1)233-0100 DA"IE:tl-16-2001 R2V ]i2��J1 Property address: 1815 Sims "bI" = Meets minunum requirements- the item wmplies �rith the muumum Housing Code requirements. ' "B" = Betow minimum requireatents - the item is below minimum Housing Code requirements. °C"= Commznts - the item cannot be adequatzl}• ecaluated or it�as some deficiency, but the deFiciency is insufl"icient to make the item below minimum requirements "Ei" = Hazardous - the item in its presen[ condition may endan�zr the health and safeTy of the occnpan[. "Y° = Yes `N" = No Any itnn marked "B", "C" or "H" must havz a�rritten commznt about the itzm. Additional comment shzzts may be attachzd if ne�d. Item � Comments BASEMENT/CELI.AR 1. Stairs and Handrails ..................... 2. BasemenVicellar floor ..................... 3. Foundation ................................... 4. Evidence of daznpnzss or stainin�...... �. First floor, floor s}stem .................... 6. Bzaznsandcolumns......._......_....... B M M Y. M B 1 Uneven 6 Temporary' columns � awxw �:�iw_�w:� a:�i ieaawisxawza.tic.c:c�wwwww�ww 7. Service sizz: Amps : 100 Volu : Ili/230 8. Elzctrical sznice installation /�ounding. M 9. Elechical ��iring, outizts and fistures... B 9 Missin� outlet cocers PLUMBING SYSTEM 10. Floor drain(s) ............................ M 1 l. W"as[e and vent pipin� ...................... M 12. Water pipina ................................. M 13. Gas pipina (all floors) ............... B 13 1-!. Watzr heater(s) installation............ B 14 1�. Waterheatzr(s)venting ..................... M 16. Plumbins fiarturzs ..................... M HEATING SYSTEM(5) # of ............... 1 17. Heating plant(s): Fuzl: GAS T}pe: FA a. Installation and �isible condition M b. Vie��ed in operation .................. Y c. Combustion venting ................... M The Evalua[or is not required to ignite the heating plant(s). 18. /Additional hzating unit(s) Fuel: GAS , Trpz: 8. Installation and cisible condition b. Vie�red in operation .................. c Combustion eentine ..................... 19. ADDITION.�.L CO�S1�fENTS............ No dirt tez on dryer or «�ater hzater szn Short T/P calve piping, threads on end ot piping EVALUATOR: American CenTral Inspections, Ron Staeheli DATE: 11-16-2001 Page 2 of 3 xz�inaoi Propertc address: 1815 Sims "�I^ = Meets minimum requirzmrnts "B" = Below minimum requiremmts "C"' = Comments "H" =Hazardous"Y"=Yzs "h =1�o Cp.� Item # Comments � 1 '� � HITCHEN 20. W"alisandceilins-.-.--_ ..................... M 21. Floor condition and ceiling hzi�h[......... M � 22. Evidence of dampness or stauung.......... N 23. Electrical outlzts and fi.eturzs ................ M , 2�. Plumbin� sy�stnns ............................. M 2�. 6�"ater flow_- .................................. M 26. ��'indo« size and opznable azea ............. M 2 Z R%indo�� and door condition .................. M LIVL\'G AND DI'�i'11i TG ROOM(S) 28. �4a11s and czilin� ............................... Ivf 29. Floor condition and ceilin� heighi.......... M 30. E��idznce of dampnzss or stauting........... N 31. Electcical outlets and fi�tures ................ M ,, 32. �t`indo�v sizz and openable area............ M - 33. W"indo�c and door condition ................ M H�LL�VAYS, STAII2S AND ENTRIES i�. Walis, ceiLngs and floors .................... M 3�. Ecidznce ot dampnzss or stauun�.......... N 36. Stairs and handrails io nppzr floors........ B 36 Steep and improper handrail 37. Electrical outlzts and fixtiuzs ............... M 3S. bVindo�v and door condition_ ................. M 39. Smoke dztzc[or(s) ............................ Y Propedy located ............................ Y Hard-�vired .................................. Y BATHROO�IS(S) � of. Full 1 Partial -40. Walls and ceilins .............................. B 40 Dz[eriorated wa11 board -1 l. Floor condition ................................ M �2. Ecidence of dampness or staining.......... N d3. Electrical ouflets and fi�ri�res ................ M , � �-!. Phmibuig fittures ............................. M -l�. WaterFlow ................................... M -16. Wu�dow sizz and openable azea or � mzchurical exhaust .......................... M �17. Condition of ��'indo�cs or mechanica] E�haust and doors ...................._... ... B 47 Missing trim and hold open hazd«�arz SLEEPING ROONI(S) No. of: 3 -13. Walls and czilhi� .............................. B 48 Water damasz under «indo�v =}9. Floor condition, area, and ceilin� height.. B 49 Lo�c head room upsta'us �0. Evidence o£dampness or stauting.......... Y 51. Electrical outlets and fistures ............... M �2. Window sizz and openable azea............ B 52 Small egess windows �3. Wntdow and door condition ................... B 53,57 Broken sash cords, loose glazing. crackzd panes ENCLOSED PORCHES AND OTHER ROOMS (Ecaluator shalt idrntify each additionai room szparatzty and comment when necessaz}'.) �-l. Wa11s and floor condition .................... M ». E}idznce of dampnzss or stauun�.......... N >6. Electrical ouUets and fishues........... _.. M >7. Windo«� and door condition ..................... B ATTIC SPACE (Visible Areas) �3. Roof boards znd raftas ..................... None_ �9. Evidznce of dampnzss or stauun_......... 60. Elzcu �ririnJoutlets/ILttures......... 61. Ver.tilation ................................ . 62. ADDITIONAI,CO�L'�iENTS...._... E VALUATOR: American Central Inspections, Ron Staeheli DATE: 11-16-2001 Page 3 of 4 Rev 1/2001 Prupem� Address: 1815 Sims "�I" = bitets rttinimum ttquazmrnis "B" = Baloa requirzmrnts `C" =CommecAS"FP'=Hazudous"Y °\ =.�o Item # Comments EXTERIOR (Visible Areas) � 63. Foundation ...................................... B 63 Some cracking 6-1. BssemenVicellar windows ...................... B 64 " Storms missing, some deterioration 65. Draina¢e (grnde) ............................... M 66. Eaterior walls ................................... M 67. Doors (frames/s[ortns/screens) ................ B 67 No working deadbolts, front deadboL[ double rylinder 63. Windows (frames/sto[ms/screens)..... ...... M 69. Open porches, stainvays and decks... ....... B 69 Missing handreil to deck 70. Comice and trint .............................. M 71. Roof cocerine and flashin¢ ............. ...... M 72. Gutters and doumspouts ................ ...... M � T. Chimneys ....................................... M 7-�. Ou[lets, fistures and service rntrance. ...... B 74 No GFCI ouflet GARAGE 7�. Roof smtch�re and cocering .................. Ivt 76. Wall struclure and coverin� .................. B 76 Some off square, Vim deterioraied 77. Slab condition .................................. Ivt 73. Gara�e doors .................................... M 7). Garnoe openerv (see important notice R'6) . Y 89 Ekzetrie t�irins, en�Fe�s en� 6 rtvres � �4 G�{�ea-t�ax. 81. Addiaonal Comments ....................... I hereby certify that the ahove mport is made in compliance eith the St Paul Legislafive Code, Clupter 3�{, and that I Lace utilized the cace and diligence, reasonabie and ordinan; for meeting the certificaflon standazds prescribed hy the Truth-In- Saie of Housine Ordinance, Chapter 189. I have found no instance of noncompliance e�th the items listed a6ove as of the date af this report, escept those designated herein �� 65 I-2 93-0 I 00 11-16-2001 Erahiator Signature Phone Number Date ITEJIS 82 THROtiGH 89 ARE \OT ADDRESSED I\ CH.aM'ER 3�. THEIR I\CI,L'SIOS OS THIS FOR�I IS I]'TEYDEDTO PRO�'IDE SCPPLE\fE\T.4I, I�FORbL1TI0� TO THE BLl'ER A'O DETERyII\ATIOY IS nI.4DE ��HETHER THE I'IE�IS �IEET \II\I3ItibL REQL7RE�fE\TS. ALL TTE6IS hLaY BE R4TED, IF 3PPROPRL4TE. ENERGY INFORNIATTON INSULATION 82. Attic insulation ..................... 83. Foundation insulation ............. 8�. Knee«�allInsulation .............. 3�. Rim Joist Insulation ............... 86. S[orm Doors ....................... ......................... 87. Storm Windo��s ................... ......................... �VEATHERSTRIPPING 83 . Doors ....................................................... 89 . Windows .................................................... FII2EPLACE/�VOODSTOVES # OF 90. Dampers installed in fireplaces ........................... 91. Installation .................................................. 92 . Condition .................................................... Type of Insulation Y Y Y Y 0 Approi. i�'V Inches - NA I�TV Nonz NA None NV = Not �isiblz NA =Not applicable Pa�e 4 of 4 Rev 12001 �IPORTANT NOTICES 1 :1n}� sin�lz facnil}� ruidznez in St Paul must hace az tzast ouz snoke dztzetor cormzetzd to tk�z eta.-tcical systrnv The dztz�ter musc be loca[ed nzar sizrpin� rooms. For morz infotmation call Fire PreventioR ZZS-6Z30. Z Rainleadzzs connzc[ed to tha sanitv}• snrzr s}stzm must be disconvectzd. For morz infoanation calt Public R'orks, Sz�ca Di�isieq (651) 266b23-5. 3. .?n}� house buil[ bzfore 1950 map have ]zad pain[ onin ¢. If ckuldrrn eat Izad paint, th�' can bz poisoned. For more inForm�tion call Saint Paul Runs�y' Counn� P36tic Hzalth (651) 292-6525. -i. Tne City of St Paul oz the E�aluator aze not rzsponsible forthe dztamivation oFthe przsence oFz�ome part�cla sucn az asbzs[es, no:¢ous gaszs, such as radon or otha mnditions oFair quatiTy� that ma}' be preunt, nor the mnditioas �vhich may causz t6e abocz. 5. If this building is used for any purpose other that a single Camily dn�ellina, it muy be illegalip zoned. To help you determuie legal oses nnder the zonine ordinance, contact [he Zoning Adrttinistntor at (651) 266-9008. 6. Automatic garase doois should revene upon stri6ing an objecG If it does not reverse, it poses a serious huard and should be mpaired or replaced immediatelv. O O � � N m m � N W f d m m C 0 0 � cn S m �' � � N � W � � i L1 JC � j � W m O v � � 5 a 0 O � � � � m m � � 3 � m N �. O A a � n N N N � � .�i O m � � � 3 m I m � ° _ � _ 0 a � m � 0 f � � W O f m m � � � f � a O � 6 O x m 7 N � N S � L�. y � m � N a y � .C.. � O m O a m c� 0 � � .y�� _ _ .: ..5 _ 9 .v '-��°--�`L=.=_T.,i �. s 9' T� 3 o� -s� � � � � w � � � O f � m � m � -Str� m � m N c � c v a 0 m a Q 0 � m H 7 � X � 0 m a 0 m � � C m O � O � 3 O W N � � d s� 0 m � � d � Gl � � S � m G N � � W 0 � m n m � S � N m m 3 a ° 3 N C 7 Ll. � � � � m m N O � m C � N N � � 'D m � N N N m � O � � 2 � a t £ i � m � ( -�i _:. .._ . .=-:,5^-^�•-z 91 m � :: • '. � � � � O. g � � y C � m � N .a, � � C 0 v N _.. m � fft �^."�v=.?� . � - ','l`y�' e a ° (�`�_�_ �y O ( � T �-�µ� 3 '' ,�- w,�g � a � � F ^ %.�$ � 1�:.� _�fY.� � � _= r� �` o - , .. . � �f �' �{� � - .�, =�'�- �' � �~. : m �i f . m . . _ - �. �_ t m _ _ st N O �___ m O � , �',._a.v.x � � 0 N b m � m w 3 � m � � m 3 0 � � m 0 3 � 7 m � 7 a 0 0 7 y � � � n 0 � < � � a � � 0 3 Q N � m S � ; a � A � � O C G _ 0 m m � N � C 0 � 0 � f m m � m Sb N -� � N � m n A � 7 c � m � � c m � -a m , w W m 0 � i V Q � A O c C n� -Str1 �� t v.r� � ; . . . .. � . . . ;; �� ,�;=. z - ; �„;�'' ?�: _� '= �� ti � G ..' t `.. ..... $- � , � „,�'� w.• ' i �g i:; i3� � t `. ' � c �A �i; �Y ” F'• '�"'' .. `i & � , �:� �� ,�"; 3° ;� �r � ' . >� � :r �: � �w _ .. N-,u__�_�m�"'n`.'��i��e� y � �� q -- 6 l+,.�d2J� k' .�c-.,,,�_"��n� � " . p s4. i-,Q y 5 �j `� , 3 . i . � 3 ,+,�r r ,, �,�'�� y �„?;. �' -r-- > r.`n � �.#s��, �� '�,'�F�� u a� �„y .� '-< s v 3 i t� � 4 �w a $., � x r , } �. � � ,�- � r ,�. r s : ' 7 3/ Y c f`' '' � c �� s '� � �`U �:�"'3 L '{- � t'��Y'� � � � �� ^ 3'1 }�t � �L>2� V4 « _ ��,�a` y "- �� e-,.. . �..�tr��+.Nlv�24;��. e � y =; ':;, : �� - 4:. ;;';M ". . ? ��. _; .. . i � r< � fi� � ' Y - 1 � �� "E � � � . rr *s,�,-,S `7' �� j � � . . � �aY. �-E -:L'a� t'•-1� 4 F �� + `., y : � lr t l � - `.: _ _ -._ -x��,�.� : _ .. . .CSk""'^. � �—. ,"+...�.. � .::: �� 2 f � f '�• �� .. . � .�.� F' z pn +' e y � : ,� sw �� .. ¢� . ,� ,"v+��."x.�Y_.' Y � � �" � Y . S � f r. � �� ' � �va - > t �.� � ,' _ _ � €+" .. i �� .-�� ¢ r. �A< W'i' �� S ` � a � � : y , �- n ' ' �e'1 \ ',?'. �j .. p�" . � /� � Y , vv:� �. � r �� -{�� x , $ �+.-c »� i'� � � f z � °� � � � y .+7 `� �� '�� v � ' � >�. ;-: �r �� i _ ��`�� s..,. =x a x � N � `tr i=` j±, ( f—� y z3Y , i .� � �f —r �;>;r' . � �� °-- � � .� , �., _ ? : r � +"- �y s*— , �,.F �< < { � i ' � y { � ' r r , � : � ` i 1 �tr_ , �.''� _ I i�, . a K E �1. � �. t i :y;� �' i .. . �. �_�..� r ` €- � L r � -- ,. _ � ,. . . � L. Y I j . i �-� 6� f' � < � ' . i �� .�i Y / 'h�� n t � � - "� �< .. f L �:. � N � +� � � ++ ,�, t • �� • �- _•_ . ~ �� - � Y �� .. .� v�'- . . � -� ,. , � � . . '. � ' ' � \ __' � - "' ' ' _"__""' ' ":: .� _ . � 3 r :. :. - j . • � ��' __ . __ _ _ � � ] - �� F� .• � -�_ . . ! ! _ i , '�' 4 . `� s � R1 . ' t . .�r�._ / Xj � 1 ! ��' � y.� f . ' � • . .. " . " ♦ar ,�`541 . , .i :_ � .^ �. � , '� . . ` . .. ' * . . ' .�". i f .: y ; �.. � �`- I ` �`� �-�_ � .� , .., , �: _. � �' ' �.r� .:� - ��'• - , �3x.� j , . : � , .. � � . � � ,, q �. i,l.w �� y �34�+i K:.�`� �54 _ -„m � �r n �$ : Y �e �.�{ � � +e�.,�, � `4 � s : , � ��=� - _ . � :_ ;-::=: :: ,. _ � ;� '� � .` '�. ,. • • �� ` Y'�'� C 'Y"�i �..`� V } :. __ . . e�` 4 �v"� #i.F.^S� Y �:��--� '. . . ht F { } �! `vK� `.r`..rc.. ,. - �e �� 3 �? �` { 3 _ .. � � . .._.. ^ ., . �_ _�.�.-..: �.._.__ _.-_..,:... � . I i l � I �� ( � x' _ � ~ �. f S r. _ � � �:�.�, ' _ ., . . ' ' . i •' � i .� "R�+ :. x �;�..�.3�. t r'rr,�?'. �.t:.x�.r .� , � . } f } R g � � �34� .=n � f. "j a � ' .. ._ . Y , F ' �t; .� I �� j ' ,� i �, { ; „_ u ;3 +�� , ♦ � ` C y,yt t . , .. . - � p '�'v a � }. ; y 'a� y' riiu� . _ . }�� > �� F" ,� � � j x:�lit �,�``'�_ � ti ' � .' E : , �`-�� . ��-. � M �� , � . r ` �;' � s . ' . . . , � ��.� �3s ��j ' T ` ' :�� . �,` ._ . , � � � F �# T �' 41 p� �:t�}h.. �, `Ia s �.;� � . t n � � 4�5� .1� et �il3 '� �,� � F '� � � � � :��, i <� v� �i�� Y s.'�' 7 5 � �� .-r. c w � r;,,,. '� � � 'i ' w < m � "+' �+� '�-�:% ^n ' :1 � _ � . 1'"�^ 1"�'. r�..: � F � . . k €L . . �.�. w y� j�� ""'`resx.r.i'` �' �'r*..w..ri t: . �� "t.d. � 1 � r ' w Y �-A4 ` -`t,,�aa e' -: � . .. � � � . ' � � s .. ! �q a '� `� F � ;. _ -x *��. _ �'✓ . `�� . � ��'�� - _��t _ � � � : _ �� . �� . ;�, _ , � ..� - � .� _�� `L .< . _ t : �j ��: .] _ ' �r ...,.,z - .' J: t f { y t� ` � __ z Y . . . �.f� �'W'P. ) _ f _ .l A � M� 'v+w+�.. y 1 / .. � ' l 6 � " � v LYl < .. �. . . '�4¢..+.. ._ . � ' . . . � ...�...f. ._,.i.':_.��. � . s...;r3 "-- - _ � «;+� F�" � .. ,�. 2i -�� >� ��rS. ti. '�� .�. �n� �.�,� _ �` r � , . , 5:��. -: '�±I � r� fi — � "» t ` , � „ -t. `:f . ' . . i J,7%' , ��'7i.� ` .:. _.: ..'�a� .� .�v . FX� �... ^� �� d �� [ . � �' t s � x ' � r'� - e�.y ;�.';, . , i"' / _ '�°. �'' :�a f S Truth-in-Sale of Housing Complaint Investigation 998 Jameson St, report dated Apri16, 2002 ,. Complaint, Evaluator Response and Staff Investigation comment �� S� The followin� is a compilation of the original complaint as sent to the evaluator, the conesponding response from the evaluator, and a staff comment upon the evaluator's response. Copies of original report, complaint, photo� evaluator's response and staff investigation aze available. During the investigation prior to sending the complaint to the evaluator staff was unable to access the interior of the property. The evaluator stated in his response that he was unable to access the interior of the property. Therefore, staff comments relatin� to the interior comments are limited to interpretations of the Guidelines IF the condition were to exist, and do not address whether or not the condition alleged in the complaint actually does exist. The exterior complaints were evaluated by staff and be�in with item 13. Item/ TISH Investi�ator Description of improDerlv marked or omitted comment for this GL ref ratin� ratin� item B B Said: Uneven rise and run, low handrail, low headroom, off square Omitted: rail is loose, held by wire; stairs improperly supported Evaluator: I called the rail as being improper, I also listed several other probiems with the stairway. ... The Guidelines have never in my experience required that every single problem with every sin�le component be listed on the report. ... I do not know how loose (the rail) it actually was, I may have been required to list it.... I call the item and then comment on the most important of the deficiencies. The Guidelines say that the basement stairs be "safe to use and capable of supporting the normal load that normal use be place on them." The complaint does not allege that the stairway did not meet the guidelines in this re�azd. If my interpretation of the Guidelines requirement is in error I apolo� ze and look to learn from this experience. Staf£comment: The comments the evaluator included on his report indicate to the reader that the stairs have minor problems, while the comments omitted indicate more structural or safety problems. The reader of the report is not informed of the potential for safety hazards. While the stairway may function to "support the normal load", if it is apparent the stairway is not properly supported, the notation should be made that there is a deficiency. A railing, held by wire, would not be expected to function properly and should be noted. 2. 3 M B Omitted: foundation damaged in many areas, especially by water meter; crumbled concrete Evaluator: My teport above #1 on page 2 says that the house is full of debris and storage and that all areas could not be evaluated. This was suggested at the last test house when you «�ere faced with a property that mi�ht have problems that you would not be able to indicidually evaluate. The foundation problems must have been blocked by that storage at the time of my inspection. Scaff eommeut: It is entirely possible that the foundation arza �cas covered/concealed by stored items. If that is the case, in any report for any item, that item should not be rated and the item should individualiy state the reason. A blanket statement at the top of a report is not specific enough. When an item is rated the implication is that the item was seen. paje 2 of 7 Item/ TISH GL ref ratin� 3. 10 B Investi¢ator Descrintion of imnroveriy marked or omitted comment for this rati� item B Said: Missin� cover Omitted: missing cleanout Evaluator: I am not sure if the complaint meant that there was no cleanout or there was no cleanout plug. The Guidelines do not call for a cleanout to be present only that a cleanout ping be tight fittin� and secure. Staff comment: The reference in the Guidelines to the cleanout plug is the same as the complaint designation of "cleanouY'. If a cleanout plug is not present it cannot be tight-fitting and secure. If one is not present, the Guidelines require an"H" rating. 4. 12 B B Said: No vacuum protection on threaded faucets, leaks, lacks support Omitted: Saddle-type faucefs on laundry tub Evaluator: Saddle type faucets are specifically allowed under the guidelines, see appendix #1. Staff commenr. Threaded faucets, alone, are not a deficiency. If theie is a hose attached to a threaded faucet there is the potential for contamination of potable water and that is a deficiency to be noted. The comment should not have been included if there was no hose attached (no indication either way). Saddle-clamps aze not acceptab]e. The saddle-clamps present do noY meet the required specification allowed, according to the complaint. 5. 15 M B Omitted: Missing screws on both water heaters; corrosion on water pipes,leaks Evaluator: I disclosed that the home was full of storage at time of inspection. It is possible that ther are screws missing that I was unable to evaluate due to that storage and I properly disclosed that on page 2 of my disclosure. The water leaks were comin� from the corroded pipes that were disclosed on my comment for item #12 where I used the word "Leaks" because item #12 is for water pipes and the thing that was leaking was water out of the corroded water pipes. StafF comment: If it cannot be viewed, it must be so stated. If it cannot be viewed, it must not be rated. 6. 17a M B Omitted: rusted, scorched areas; rusted areas on bumer assembly of fizmace Evaluator: I was unable to access the fumace due to excessice storage and I disclosed that on pa�e 2 of my evaluation. Staff comment: If it cannot be vieived, iY musY be so stated. If it cannot be vien it must not be rated. page 3 of 7 � Item/ TISH Investisator Desc GL ref ratin� ratin item 17c M B Omitted: missir.g screws on fumace flue; rust on flue pipes .St� Evaluator: I was unable to access the furnace due to excessive storage and I disclosed that on pa�e 2 of my evaluation. Staff comment: If it cannot be viewed, it must be so stated. If it cannot be viewed, it must not be rated. 8. 27, 33, B (a11 38, 47, items) S3, 57 B Said: Some frame deterioration missin� sash cords, sashes don't line up, missing locks Omitted: almost every upper sash does not operate and is painted shut Evaluator: I assumed that anyone would realize that the reason that the sashes don't line up is because they are stuck in the position of not lining up. Otherwise my comment of "sashes don't line up" could have' meant that they were open. When you make a comment that calls a component "B" and that they do not line up and they are supposed to be movable the fact that they will not move would seem obvious to me. There aze other problems with windows that don't line up that would not have been as well disclosed if I just said that they were painted shut. They may also be nailed or screwed in that position so the comment that they do not line up discloses more information. Staff comment: If a window is stuck and immovable, the comment should state so. "Sashes don't line up" sounds cosmetic and does not seem to impiy the windows are inoperable. � 31 M B Omitted: missin� fixture components in 1 floor livih� room Evatuator: I am not sure what components that the fixture is missing. If the fixture is missing things like globes I do not usually call that because it is an acceptable modification of a light fixture. If I buy a chandelier and remove every other crystal it certainly is not below any code. Under a strict reading of the Guidelines this may be something that should be mentioned. I would be interested in an interpretation of this from the Board. Staff comment: The Guidelines state, "... determine if all visible outlets and fixtures and wirin� have any missing and/or dama�ed components..." A missin� globe (an unprotected bulb in a fixture desi�ed to have a globe) is a missing component and should be noted. 10. 43 H B Said: No GFCI protected outlet Omitted: missin� fixture components page4of7 Item/ TISH Investi�ator Description of im�rooerlv mazked or omitted comment for this GL ref ratin� ratine iTem Evaluator: I am not sure what components that the fixture is missin�. If the fixture is missin� things like globes I do not usually call that because it is an acceptable modification of a light fixture. If I buy a chandelier and remove every other crystal it certainly is not below any code. Under a strict reading of the Guidelines this may be something that should be mentioned. I would be interested in an inTerpreYation of This from the Board. Staff Comment: The Guidelines state, "... determine if all visible outlets and fixtures and wirin� have any missing and/or dama�ed components.." A missin� globe (an unprotected bulb in a fixture designed to have a globe) is a missing component and should be noted. 11. 44 M H Omitted: improper air gap on 1� oor an oor oi e s; faucet below spill line Evatuator: I could not access the back of the toilets at time of inspection, a fact that was disclosed on pa�e 2 of the report. I had always interpreted the Faucet below spill line as bein� the same as the fixture discharge opening. It was brought up at the Apri19�' test house and debated and determined that if the faucet with goose neck is below the drip line than that is considered below the spill line and I have adjusted my calls since. This report was issued 3 days before that test house seminaz and the tubs have goose neck faucets. Staff Comment: Toilet air gap: If it cannot be viewed, it must be so stated. If it cannot be viewed, it must not be rated. 12. 56 B B Said: Older fixture wired with lrnob & tube wiring Omitted: Missing fixture components Evaivator: I am not sure what components that the fixture is missing. If the fixture is missing things like globes I do not usually calI that because it is an acceptable modification of a light fixture. If I buy a chandelier and remove every other crystal it certainly is not below any code. Under a strict reading of the Guidelines this may be something that should be mentioned. I would be interested in an interpretation of this from the Board. Staff Comment: Note: Knob and rixbe wiring, alone, is not a deficiency. It becomes a deficiency only in certain circumstances such as when it is covered by insulation. The Guidelines state, "... deternune if all visible outlets and fixtures and wirin� have any missin� and/or dama�ed components..: ' A missing olobe (an unprotected bulb in a fixture desi�ed to have a globe) is a missing component and should be noted. Rate a"B" if missin„ Rate an"H" if it's a shock hazazd. page 5 of � Itemi TTSH Investieator Description of imnrooerlv marked or omitted comment for this GL ref ratine ratin item �7 �� 13. 63 M B Omitted: trees growing next to foundation Evaluator: The trees were cut down, trimmed and looked to me to have been killed. Since the growin� season began I see that the effort to kill them was unsuccessful. The Guidelines do use the adjective "Growing". Staff Comment: If the trees were visible they must have been "growin�" at some time. If there ve�etation should be noted and not i�nored. The evaluator is supposed to record observations and not make assumptions. 14. 64 B B& H Said (64, 68): Screens and storms missin; Omitted: Deteriorated/weathered basement windows, boarded ' windows; broken jajged glass Evaluator: The Guidelines do not require that the windows not be boarded up. I called all trim as deteriorated under item #70 and the window was not broken in Apri1. Staff Commenr. Standard throughout the Guidelines is the phrase, "professional (or, �vorkmanlike) state of repair". Boazding should be noted as an indication of a less-than professional state of repair. T'he "screens and storms missing" comment, alone, does not indicate deterioration, nor would the reader be likely to relate a comment at #70 (cornice and trim) to item #64, basementicellaz windows. The date of the report is 4/6/02. The date of the complaint is 4(16(02. The pictures submitted with the complaint and staff investigation appear not to support the evaluator's contention that the window was not broken at the time of the original evaluation. 15. 65 M B Omitted: Grade slopes to house, poor draina�e; missing downspout extension under deck; water trapped beriveen garage siding & falling retaining wall (E side). Evaluator: Grade does not slope to house, the neighbors house slopes to this house but the grade reverses just before the house. Also the lot is sloped to the rear so that it does "allow water migration a�vay from the dwelling". The garage is not a dwelling and should not be commented about as if refers to drainage. The grade by the downspout is straight down a hill and an extension there would be unnecessary. Stafi Comment: Staff confirmed the grade slopes to the house. There is no downspout extension (under the deck) #65 also states, "...If drainage is not away from structures, mark as "Below Minimum Standards"". Note the plural use of structures. This section also directs the evaluator to consider "sidewalks, gutters and downspout extensions, basement windows, stainvays, stoops, retaining walls and plantin� areas". It is not unreasonable to expect the evaluator to fit this �ection to other conditions found, such as poor draina�e around a gazage. page 6 of 7 Item/ TISH GL ref ratine 16. 67 B 0 Said: Hazdware Ioose Omitted: deteriorated threshholds, decay present; door is separating and deterioraTing; rear door has missing wood Yrim; window is loose and weathered Evatuator: I disclosed all ofthe frim problems under Item #70. The doors were not excessively deteriorated Staff Comment: Severe deterioration noted by staff. A reader would not be likely to relate a comment at #70 (comice and trim), "Paint peeling, weathered, holes in trim and comice" to item #67, Doors. Comments need to be specific to the items rated in order to be understood to relate to those items. 17 Investieator Description of im rp ooerlv marked or omitted comment for this ratin¢ item 68 B B Said (64, 6$): Screens and storms missing Omitted: Windows & frames weathered; loose paint and putty; damaged, decayed; loose wood components Evaluator: I disclosed all of the him problems under Item �70. starf Commeat: A reader would not be likely to relate a comment at #70 (comice and trim), "Paint peeling, weathered, holes in trim and comice" to item #68, Windows. Comments need to be specific to the items rated in order to be understood to relate to those items. 18. 70 B B Said: Paint peeling, weathered, holes in trim and comice Omitted: trim components by front door rotted Evatuator: I disclosed al] of the him problems under Item #70. Staff Comment: #70 is Cornice and Trim. The item relates to the comice work and trim at the eaves. Trim at the front door would need to be separateiy identified. 19. B Said: Holes in asphalt vaileys � Omitted: Deteriorated roo£ moss & mold, loose flashing, buckled shin�les, upper S/W shingles missing, broken & weathered-lifted 71 B Evaluator: I did not see any azeas �vhere shingles aze missing, there was an azea that had some shin�les that could be referred to as wom but they met the spirit of the guidelines. They did not require sepazate comment as I already called the roof as belo�v minimum. Staff Comment: The comment, "Holes in asphalt valleys" is very specifia lf further deterioration is present, beyond this comment, then it needs to be noted, either with a general sYatement or further details, so that there is a sense of the overall condition of the roof from the comments made. page 7 of 7 Item/ TISH Investi2ator Description of improperiy marked or omitted comment for this GL ref ratinQ ratin item v ,, S� 20. 74 M H Omitted: exposed wire connections to rear light Evaluator: The wiring comes out of an approved weather mast head and is wired directly to the light fixture more than 15 feet above gade. I did not notice the wire nut at the time of the original inspection but would not have called it a hazard because at is so high off of the grade and some wire nuts are approved for exterior use and I can not say that that one is not approved. Staff Comment: Verified by staff. Item 74 states, "..properly installed and maintained .... Any exposed wires... shall be mazked as "Hazardous"." Fireprotectionlnformation �ICf�U� / Smokedetecror(s) x Disclosure Report � �� Property �«ated N Saint Paul Truth-in-Sale of Housing �/�'S / > Haid-v.'ired N (Carefully rzad this rntire report) O� �s� - 0 v. THIS REPORT IS NOT A WARRAPiTY, BY THE CITY OF ST. PAUL OR EVALUATOR OF THE FUTURE " USEFUL LIFE, OR THE FUTURE CONDITION OF e+u�1Y BUILDPi i G COViPONENT OR FIXTURE. � Notice: A co y of this R R miut be ublicly dia la �ed at the remises when thz house is shown to m � p � p 'p } p p spzctive buyen, and a copy of llus Repon must ix provided to thz buyer prior to the time of si�in� a Purchase A�zzmeni. I� Address of Evaluated Dweltirtg: 998 Jamison Owner's Name: Gail Ross Owner's Address: 1329 Case Ave. E. 55119 indude Cin•, State ifNOT St. Paul and ALL Zip code, ECE\ IS St. Paul Type of Dwelling: Single Family Duptex XX Townhouse Condo* ' For coado�ninium uaits, this evaluation incladzs only those items loca[ed uithin thz residential uni[s and dozs not includz the common ure azeas, or other nonresidrntial azeas of the structurz. Comments: This report must contain ifems thaf can not be repaired and fhat are grand-fafhered by fhe codes, fhere inciusion in fhis report is forced by the Evaluator guidelines. HERITAGE PRESERVATION INFORMATION Acwrding to informaaon pro�ided to Truth in Sale of Housing Ecaluators by the Ciry of St. Paul �ce of License, Inspections and Enrlronmental Protection this property: ❑ 1$ lo,:atzd widtin a St. Paul Hzrttage freurvation Disvi K or it is � Is NOT located witlun a St Paul Heritage Preservation individua((y dnignated as a SL Paul Herita�a Pruerva[ion Sita. (Raviaw Distiic[ nor it is individually duigiatzd az a St Paul and approval of Exterior work (esdudin� pa'vrting), mod�cations, Hzritage Resm�tion Sitz. additions and dzmolition is requ'ued by Iha Hzritagz Przurvation Commission and citv staff.l This information is not guaranteed by the evaluator nor by the City of S[. Paul. Questions regarding Heritage Preservation Eafocmation are to be referred to the O�ce of License, Inspection and Environmental Protection at f651) 266-9090 "ht^ _!�fezts minimum standard-$a item confomis to minimum standards of maintrnance "B• = Below minimum standards- the item is betow nunimum standards RA TING "C" = Commenis- tha item cannot bz adequatzly �iewed or has somz dzficirncy, but the deficirnn is insufficirnt to makz thz �,Y itzmbe7oa�muumumstmdards "H^ = Hazardous -tha item in iu pruznt condition may rndanger the heaih and safety of the occupant My itan mukzd "B", "C" OR "H" must have a weittrn commrnt about the itrnv Additional coaunrnt shzzts may be attached if nezded °Y^ =Yr '•B" = No °NV^ =Not�isibie/ Viewed "�/.�^ = Yotapplica6le This Report: I. is intended to provide basic information to the home buyxr and seller prior to the time of sale. This repoR SVILL NOT be used ro enforce the requirements of the Legislarive Code: hmvever, this eva(ua[ion form will be used by the Fire Department [o de[ermine if there is compliance with the requiremenis for a hard-wired smoke detector in single family residences. 2. is based on the waent Truth in Sale of Aousing Evaluator Guidelines 3. is not w�arranred, by the City of St Paul, or by the ecaluator of the condition of the buildine component, nor o£the accuracy of this report. 4 covers only the items listed on the form and only those Ue»cs visible a11ke time ot evaGaation. The E�aluator is not required to igaite the heatin2 plant (except during the heatina season), use a ladder to obsen�e the condition of the roo6ne, disassemb(e items or evaluate inaccessible areas. 5. may be based upon different standards [han Ihe lender, Federal Housing Administration (FHA) or Veterans Admiaistration (VA). 6 is talid for one yeaz &om the date of issue and onh' for [he o��ner named on this report. Questions re�ardin� this report should be directed to the evaluator. Compl:tints regardine [his report shoWd be directed to CStizen Service Office, Code Enforcement Di�ision Truth-in Sale ot fiousing,l5 W. ICellogg Bkd., Room 190 S4 Pau1, \I\. 55102, Phone So. (651) 266-Sa-}0. EVALUATOR: American Central Inspections, Ron Staeheli PHONE: (651) 293-0100 DATE: 0-{-06-02 Rzc L2001 0 � n �. . O A O i� i IN 1 � 0 O Propem� address: 998 7aznison BASEMENT/CELLAR 1. Stairs and Handrails ..................... 2. BasemenUcellar tloor ..................... 3. Foundation ................................... J. Evidence of dampness or staining...... �. First floor, tloor systzm .................... 6. Beams and columns ........................ Szepagelforatingkzy Item# Comments 1-81 Ezcessive storage throughout limits �isibility af all B 1 Unevrn rise and nui, low handrail, low headroom, off sqvare B 2 Uneven M Y. 4 Old water stains M M ELECTRICAL SERVICES(S) # of Senices .............2 7. Service sizz: . Amps : 30_60_100 _X_I50 other_ VolU : lli 11�/230 BASEMENT ONLY 8. Elzctrical szrvice insiallation lgoundin�. M 9_ Elzetrical �ivinn, ouflets and fnctures... M PLUMBING SYSTEM 10. F1oor drain(s) (basement) ...................... B 11. Waste �nd vent pipino (all floozs} ................ M 12. Water piping (all floo�) ........................... B 13. Cms piping (all floon) ............... H 14. Water heater(s) installation............ B 1�. Water hzate:(s) venting ..................... M 16. Plumbin� fictures (basement) .................. B HEATING SYSTENI(S) � of ............... 2 17. Hzatino plant(s): Fuel: GAS Typz: FA a. Installation and visibie condition M b. Viewedinoperation(a��dmnen�e��on)Y c. Combustion ven[uy ................... M 10 Missing cover 12 13 14 � No vacuum protection on threaded faucets, leaks, lacks support UncaPped gas line, Improper gas suPP P�P�� %:" water pipes, no gas shut off Fixhues lack air gap to pro[ec[ potable water, faucet teaks The Ecaluator is not requimd to igni[e the heatine plant(s) escept durine the heating season, between October 15 and April 15., 18. /Additional heating unit(s) Fuel: GAS Type: Space a. Installation and visible condition B 18a No duect heat soutce in some uppzr zooms b. Vie«�ed in operation .................. Y c. Combusrion ventin� ..................... B 18c Exposed flue could be burn hazard 19. ADDITIONAL CO�IlVIENTS (1 THROUGH 18)... B 19 No Dryer venting, plas[ic on «all flamxnabiz EVALUATOR: American Central Inspcxtions, Ron Staeheli DATE: 04-06-02 Page 2 of 4 Rev 1l2001 Propem address: 998 Jamison s=, p�;z 1 for rnin� kn Item # Comments W'hcrz thzre are multiple rooms under same category, tha evaluator mus[ specify thz room to wiuch ihe commrnt is related KITCHEN L U 20. �:iallsandceiling ............................. M M 21. floor condition and ceiling height......... M M � 22. Evidence of dampness or siainin�.......... N N 23. Elzctrical outlzts and fix[ures ................ M M " 2-4. Plumbin� systems ............................. B M 24 Faucet drips, rubber connector in drain linz 2�. Water flo�c ...................................... M M 26. Windo�c sizz and openable azea ............. M M O� �� 27. W'indo�v and door condition .................. B B 27,33,38,47,53,�7 Somz fmmz dztzriomtion, missin� sash cords LIVL�tG A!�ID DL�IING ROObi(S) 23. Rialls and ceilins ............................... M 29. Floor condition and ceIling height.......... M 30. Evidzncz of dampness or stainuig........... N 31. Electncal oudzts and fi:ctures ................ M 3 2. W'indo�c size and opznable azea............ M 33. Windo�c and door condition ................ B HALLWAYS, STAIRS AND ENTRIES 3-t. Walls, ceilin�s and floon .................... M 3�. Evidznce of dampness or staining.......... N 36. Stairs and handrails to uppzr floors........ B 37. Elzctrical outlets and fixtures ............... B 38. Window and door condition ................... B 39. Smokedztzctor(s) ............................ N Properly locatzd ............................ N Hazd-wired .................................. N BATHROOMS(S) -FO. Wa11s and cziling .............................. M 41. F1oor condition ................................ M 42. Evidence of dampness or staining.......... N 43. Elzctrical outlets and fistures ................ H ��. Plumbine fit ............................. M 4�. WaterFlow ................................... M 46. Window size /openable azea or mectianical e:chaustM 47. Condition of windo�rs/mechanical e�ausUdoors ... B SLEEPING ROOM(S) �3. Wails and ceiling .............................. M 49. Floor condition, azea, and ceIling hei�ht.. M �0. Evidence of dampness or stainin�.......... N � 1. Electrical outle[s and fistures ............... M 52. Windo�v size and openable azea............ B �3. Window and door condition ................... B EtiCLOSED PORCHES AND OTHER ROOMS 5-t. Walls and floor condition .................... M ». Evidencz oFdampness or stauung.......... N �6. Electrical outlets and fixtures ............... B �7. W indo«� and door condition ..................... B ATTIC SPACE (Visible Areas) . sashes don't line up, missing locks M M N M M B Trzads broken, nosing brokrn off, uneven Li�ht firture inop 36 37 Both units do not k�ave proper smoke detectors B 40 Cracks in wails B 41 Low ceiling N H 43 No GFCI protected ouUet M M M B Small e�ess windo��s M M N M B 52 B ' Older fixture wired with lmob & tube wirui� 56 � 8. Roof boazds and rafters ..................... Access not possible scut[le over kitchen tabie could no[ fuliy evaluatz 59. E�idzncz of dampness or staining......... 60. Elzcuical «iuinJoutleCS/fitrtures......... 61. Vzntilation ................................ . 62. ADDII"IO?iAI. CONL�IENTS (20 thmugh 61) M , E� :AL.liATOR: American Central Inspecuons, Ron Staeheli DATE: 0�4-06-02 Pa�e 3 of 4 xz�• vt:zooz Propem Address: 998 Jamison EXTERIOR (Visible Areas) 63. Foundation ...................................... 6-{. BasemenUcellar windows ...................... 6�. Drainage (¢rade) ............................... 66. Extertor walls ................................... 67. Doors (frames/stonns/screens) ................ 63. Windows(&ames/stonns/screens)........... 69. Open porches, stairways and decks... ....... 70. Comice and 4im ......................... ...... 71. Roof cov�ering and flashing ............. ...... 72. Gutters and downspouu ................ ...... 73. Chimne�'s ....................................... 7�F. Outlets, fixiures and secvice entrance. ...... M B M B B B B B B M B M GARAGE (S)/ ACCESSORY STRUCTURE (S) Item # Comments 61,68 Screens and stortrts missing 66 l Cracked and missing stucco 67 Hardwaze loose 69 70 71 73 Rear deck deteriorated, unecen steps, low guardrai] Pain[ peeling weathered, holes in trim and cornice Holes in asphalt valleys Moctar and bricks loose and missing 7�. Roof structure and covering .................. B 75-80 Dilapidated 76. Wall s[ructure and covering .................. B 77. Slab condiiion .................................. B 78. Garaae dooa ..................... ...... ...... B 79. Crarege opener- (see impoitant aotice kb) . N 80. EIecR-ic wirin¢, outle[s and fis[ures......... B 80 No GFCI protection 81. .lddiaonal Comments(63 throu� 80j FIItEPLACF,7WOODSTOVES#OF 0 82. Dampers installed in fueplaces ........................... 83. Installation ... ......... ...................................... 84 . Condition .................................................... ... .................. ................. .... SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION-No deteaninations made whether item meet murimum standards (Y/N, N/A, NV, oelv Y/N Type Inches/depth INSUI,ATION 82. Attic insulation............ 83. Foundation insulation.... 8-F. Knee«all insulation...... Rl Rim TnictTnciilatinn DIV N 2�J N I hereby certify that thfs report rnmplies with the Saint Pau1 Evaluator Guidetines, and tlut I have uh7ized reasona6le and ordinary care and diligence and that I have noted all conditiore that do not conform to the minimum sfandards of mauitenence. /� 651-293-0100 '04-06-02 page4of4 Evalvator Sigia[ure Prin[ed nazne Ron Staehe(i PhoneNumber Date Re� t/il2ooz IlYIPORTANT NOTICES l. Any singlz family residence in St Pau! must have a[ least one smoke de[zctor couaecYZd to the eltetrical systan'[t�e detMOr must bt located neaz slceping rooms. For more infortnalion call Fire Prevwtioq 228-6230. 2. Rainleadns connected to the sanitary uwer systzm must be discomlectzd. For more infotmation cail Public W'orks, Sewez Division, (651) 266-6234. 3. Any houu built bzfore L950 may have Irad p9int on�in it If childrrn eai Izad pain; they can 6e poisoned Formom infoemation call Sain[ Paul Racasey County Public Hutth, (651) 292-6525. 4. 'Ihz CiN of St Paul or thz Evaluator are not respovsible for the dmm�ination of the presence of avbanz particla such az asbu[os, novoiu gases, such az mdon or otha mvditiorss ofair e3uality that may Ix presrne, northe covd¢ions which may cause the above. 5. If this bidlding is ased tor any p�vpose other that a 9nele family dwelling, it may be �legalty zoned. To hefp you determme legal nses under the zoning ordinartce, contact the Zoning Ad�.:o.�t.a�o at (651) 2669008. 6. .automatic garage doon shodd rer'erse upon stxi6ing an o6ject If it does no[ revene, it pases a seriom harard and shouid be repaired or replaced ienmediateh'. '_'� ,. � �1 � " � r � - � _ f . �_� ��. 1 �. �� , �:.$�� _;�:��.W«. � o� -�''► � m � @ a `� � � . � N ' R _ � � 3 0 d m r � � a� � m 3 m ui 3 0 v c �3 E � c 0 N m o> a � � m c m � 0 a _ c d N N Q. T � U N � a O t y � � � � O .� d � m` 0 c R 3 O m m W ca 3 0 m m n a � a � c .� a a� � 0 0 � m � d � m m 3 m � E m � 3 0 a C �3 � d a m d s m N 3 � G N Y O � m C �N N .� N � � C � N � � � n n � 0 0 0 � �,��, ;,� , .. � �:,� � o� sf9 � ._ '-_ O , N - m ,. o� : `-i:, `: � �: =� -^�'�;, L N ,� C �- �t L N i O _� � ;: c � '� N � h N N _ � ra �N � � 0 a n r _;, 3 - N T a`� a 0 o_ _;: E z�- '�-��'i �'��`"s � ' ° o �� r -�'�'° � �" � l �t � � �� + _ ,� �-��" � c G �v.��' � .... � i�l � µ K .- ' R� � � � �a� � � i � � z� % sT�y� T ,� '.�. �.ri_� � 4 _`� � r '��'�` '`'-�''>'�_�� }�; �' ' o �, __ �n�:�� - � <� ` � W -�_-. - - .,:: -�-_� ,;f _ _ .�;� � pe _ _ O — _ U O". � � . s.s'�e'_ .-.,^"'�- " '- - E ;F�°`:-= - - - _- . . . . . - — N - _ '-...�g' - _ . - v � ��.: .-.,< ._ O ...._.' __. . , . _, _, . ._. x . �.. � O N m � � 3 O m � tD 0 � a N � � � c 0 R 3 m c . .� d � � C � '� � w y 06 y � � C � � � 'N N � � m � m 3 R o � m N � 3 �.' � � a a �o c Q O o. N cL � +. y' � m � � m 3 oi � m m c ,� a L a� a c � 3 0 � m N C O . C � X � 0 � C O a � C N � � m � m R 0 O N O � . ( �Fgr. �_ _..-. _ � �£ -`9 '� i...:.,_ .- . S ,Pi y t�� 1-` .� t '� .. • � .� � � �.. . ��*�� . ,. �:_ � _ . . . > . _ . y�� "��.��`� o�-s� � m � � a � ��Z _�� 3 O d m U r � 3 O N m � � � � Q . � � � 0 N 3 L � 0 C � 3 � U � L V. � � 3 d U N m c . y .� N N � N L � m 3 0 n 0 n 3 � U N � c . .� 0 N m � n � 3 O N m � � N � � � � � U U v> � «� N � d E 0 m ni N d . L � � 3 c 0 c 0 . 0 o` U N O C O N N N � N L d L N � 3 a� 0 c N 3 � N U -L' N � c� — c _ N � E v�, 0 0 � 0 r . .iv Cv� � , � r .�... .... �� - .c �.4�v �. _ �Y' .k',f 5. ' u ; - �' -, : r. � . _ �;F:: .- r. ' - <� � . . A�`- t , .. 0 w� . , .��- • • y �v��snv wt -t-nµ�c� �wrva�'�^ �+M1a^r��..a.� . . . . . . . . � .-'. �m+..s5 i�' __ � h : �� ` ��wz � ,�.« � �-i ;. � .� _.. ,��;. `� r �� ,�.. r �' � � .�,-_�..-s,...,.""'v:'-�'� a� -S�9 � m � � a 3 O d m � 'p � ;.: � .:a O :i p Nj � � C N C O d N � � .� N Q O a � N O � O N � c'9� �ir� � .� , ,_,� .. �. . �.�, �.. F + jjj � py < i � � 5 : ��v �.Ll \.i= _" _ _ � _ � _ � _ _ � =; 't f�� ,� , � , ��f / ,I - �� '; . .. ' � l y . � �� . � fp i�,L f .: � _. � ♦ K Jy � � ♦ '� � .«..+� r s.h f . �°,i �%�5" � . ,� '. � � v � n > � r �, s. -. . �� r t„�y�: ri i 4 � " � ��3 r ! .�,1�2'r" '. . � ��p ��i�. �� d �fJ l ., . . �I s Y . r: i x .i:�J�,y,�,�� ,,� R . �. � L .y �-A'� � ] �=��/ Y y� � a�` � � _ ..�' -: r �Y�, �s .�.f !�� '' :� �" . t , i F` ��' �'jr, k xy�;�n'�� F r.ss-�, �Ct ' ;� �i� s_ -� ¢:}`` � ; �. . .�,+4�� ' � r �.c's: �' � ;a�,•. . �� .�,�3� � r,�,�_, fy� �� .\� _ .♦ .w'�. ' , 4 t ,_ j .'r..1Z.i�.T, F i- "' \ _ �; � � � _, { i J •. ,t.L. .ye .I� � ... ' � .. u/•�� /•, i • � . 1, : Ie,�,,, "t.- �+ t.F.� ~,` •i�. � . ' '�. � ".M'i � " i �. `'r.. . J� i� t 2, w _ ' ,�` "y"^ � �,�. .r. -' f � 1i ^" ' �' `..' ..'.: , S_"I . /ti ^' J - �. �� 5�:;-� ,��ti'.��} / �r. .�.t S.-if7`.�,' �:t`� }� - �,� ' - ;� � { � r � „ J ' siC�- ~> �� ` � ! - i .'�''�"' , r � y '= -��-�.� �.�-� — �8' ,' ; - j= y' ' ��`�.�_'..�-t . - . .� -_�'•a -...'' r.'ti '�{�' '.: �� ?_` '.-^ "- � ti ./.; %!.�r-'� �� t�r_ ` j'. "�'a��, _•`"�'�-sf`.'r''rl��. �j�r. -y �,�.�..- � «a h.:4 ��'Y �,�'",.�,` '� '_ .� .` i : 'i. "--.! ` �{��.� ,,, ;,i ""��,_ `- -`�: = �s �/�^ �� v i�i ' � `� ��/ .i � �� i "_Jl��d��• ^�r.��r��'� J..i :? .l;,�.5 '{ �, , l �' �S.J �� 'i ��i �J�.£ '� ''k o'� -s�9 � ' '__ _ - ' :ii_ - _ _ _-' - - -- - _ _ - _ � _ -. � . __ , ' ' - - ' `� y < ->�- � - _ �� -_ - - : �;: - - _. - ' _" - . -- �L% _ ' ' ,' - . _ : _ � _;; _. .. _ - _ . - _ - _ � -_ _ . " " - �� _ " _ . 0 �(: � .�� f, d g � . .:: ,i fi:�t �-,.. s . , c -�-S:li l �. -. F: ; " !? . � � _ ', � � ;�. �:_� . l' - C ��. a >. tFl i ��, .�% __ ._ . . I � � ~. � " � � . � . :.. i.��: l��' .. . .... ; 3i.�` � ; � r 'e.+�Gi � )��!° S � i �' A f,� 'e 4� )''" .�w' - \ S9 a '� Y i . � 'fr � � ,y M +G ,�5�: a`� � .. F' � +,-., . -�t�..r�'�`:�:' r s — - �. .� � .._, ,..' . Agenda Truth-in-Sale of Housing Boazd Meetin� Disciplinary Hearin�, Evaluator Ron Staeheli `Vednesdav. November 20. 2002 4:00 - 6:00 p.m. I. � Roll Call 722 Payne Avenue Complaint and Investi�ation Materials A. Recentcorrespondence B. $rief chronolo�ical history C. Staff summary report and recommendation' D. Individual complaints 1. Addresses: �� 'S� ��,� - � � �� b��5�� (a) 1428 N. Snelling Ave (b) 105 Lexington Ave (c) 1815 Sims Ave (d) 998 Jameson St Itt . 2. Composite report: Complaint/Evaluator Response/Staff Comment 3. Copy of original disclosure Report Hearing: Discussion and Evidence IV. Boazd Action V. Adjoumment ��j� 1�� c� C � � � ° j l,� C�-e � �,�� ,��eh —I�� 1� �. �'(�- f aS G� C�Z?� �� m c�s�r,�, b�� `� c��f �� c��°�' �`� ��G/ �, nCVCI V CU DEC 18 2002 CITY ATTORNEY C['[TZEN SERVICE OFFICE Donald J Lunn, Ciry Clerk CITY OF SAINT PAUL Rarsdy C. Kelly, Nfayor November 8, 2002 Ron Staeheli American Central Tnspections, Inc. 3S8 Arbor St St Paul, MN 55102 DN[SION OF PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT Andy Dawkixs, Program Direclor Truth-in-Sale afHausing Pragram _ ISKellaggB[vd. Nest, n190 Tel: 65/-266-8440 SaintPaul,MN5510? Fax:651-166-8426 Re: Disciplinary Hearing before the Truth-in-Sale of Housing Board Wednesday, November 20, 2002 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. 722 Payne Ave, Community Meeting Room Dear Mr. Staeheli, 03 •St�� Pursuant to Board Resolution 02-02, Disciplinary Procedure for Truth-in-Sale of Housing Evaluators, this letter is your formal notification that the Truth-in-Sale of Housing Boazd may consider disciplinary action against your license at a special meeting on Wednesday, November 20, 2002. The issues Io be discussed wi11 inclnde those issues raised from the complaints f led for reports done at the following addresses: . l. 105 Lexington Ave S 2. 1815 Sims Ave 3. 1428 Snelling Ave N 4. 998 Jameson St The adverse action which may be taken against your license is based upon the improper reporting and rating of conditions present in the dwellings evaluated. These actions violate the Evaluator Code of Ethics, item 7., preparation of evaluations which contain false or misleading statements. As specified in Board Resolution 02-03, Guidelines for Disciplinary Action, an indication for adverse action exists for an intentional or established pattem of violation of Chapter 189 or any duties specifically required by Section 189.15. Chapter189.15 (1), and (2) require compliance with the code of ethics, and completion of the disclosure report in accordance with the standards in the Evaluator Guidelines. In addition, the Guidelines for Disciplinary Action allows the Board to consider adverse action for "Pattem and Practice" violations, defined as behavior wherein the evaluator shows a pattem and practice of actions detrimental to the pro�am or contrary to professional conduct. One example of a pattem and practice violation is an excessice number of founded complaints which sho« a lack of care in completin� reports according to the Evaluator Guidelines or in conformance with Chapter 189 which indicate incompetence. Incompetence �vithin the framework of this Resolution is defined as, "The quality or state of being incompetent; want of physical, intellectual, or moral ability; insufficiency; inadequacy." You have the right to be present at this meeting, and you have the right to be represented, and to present evidence, testimony, and azguments in defense or rebuttal. Please remember that the boazd members are not permitted to discuss a license matter scheduled for an adverse hearing with one another nor with any interested parties, unless such discussion occurs on the record durin� the hearing. No interested person shali convey or attempt to convey, orally or in writing, any azgument or opinion about the matter or any issue in the matter, to a boazd member until the boazd has taken final action on the matter. If you have any questions, please contact me at 651-266-1935. CONNIE SANDBERG � Truth-in-Sale of Housing Pro.gr Admini FROM : FRX N0. . Ncv. 05 e�22 02:42PM P1 Ron Staeheli, owner American Central Inspections 1�'ovember 9, 2002 Connie Sandberg Administrator, St. Paul Truth in Sale of Housing Program 1600 White Bear Ave. St. Paul, M�i SS106 Ms. Sandberg Voice (651) 293-0100 03�,,s� CeIl (612j 865-2004 Seeing that I have not received notification about any special hearing T am writing you to thank you for yovr decision not to go forward. I had anayed a considerable number of witnesses on my behalf who I have contacted and released from coming on November 20, 2002. Severa] witnesses changed business and travel plans and they where happy to get the news that they coutd go forward witfi their prior plans. Again, thank you and Z hope that we can address any future concerns as a 2eam, cooperatively and educationally with the common goal of quality and consisYency. Respectfully, c'G'i`i-'� Ron Stae eli 651-293-0100 CCfIZEN SERVICE OFFICE Donald l Lurta, Ciry Clerk 0 � �S� DfViSIOY OF PROPERiY CODE EVFORCESIEV'C _ AndyDrtwkins Divisioablann¢er CITY OF SAINT PAUL RandyC.Kelly, bfayor November 13, 2002 Ron Staeheli American Central Inspections 3�8 Arbor St St Paul MN 55102 Dear Mr. Staeheli, Truth-in-Sale of Hausing Prograni 1600 White BearAve K Te[: 65/-266-l900 SaintPaul,.4f.VS.i/06-1608 F¢x:6.iJ-266-l944 This letter is to confirm to you that I received your fax letter of Saturday, November 9, 2002, time stamped 2:42 p.m., on Tuesday momin„ November 12, 2002. I received this moming your phone messa�e time/date noted Tuesday, November 12, 2002, 3:30 p.m. Under the NOTICE section, 3., the Board Bylaws state, "The notice shall be served or mailed a reasonable time before the hearing date, generally considered to be at least ten (10) days prior to the date of the hearing." The notice was mailed to you thirteen (13) days prior to the meetin� date, postmarked Friday, November 8, 2002. The meetin� date and time was set by the Boud at the last regularly scheduled meeting which was attended by your son, Brice Staeheli. Your son often contacts this office on your behalf and it is my understanding from conversations with your son that he works with you in your business. It is reasonable to conclude that your son informed you of the Board's action setting the date of the special meeting. That information was available to you on September 9, 2002. Your fax letter of November 9, 2002 indicates you, indeed, were aware of the meetin� date. As you noted in that same letter you had not received any communication from this office. I did not notify you that the meetin� was cancelled. The meeting will occur, as scheduled, on November 20, 2002, be�inning at 4:00 p.m., in the Community meetin� room at 722 Payne Ave. While you are not required to do so, I sincerely hope you will attend. C _-C.1'�"-ti-e ��'�' --•t�r'� Connie SandberQ � Truth-in-Sale ofHousin� Pro�azn Administrator AA-ADA-EEO Emptayer Memorandum City of Saint Paul November 15, 2002 HISTORY: COMPLAINT INVESTIGATION Address Date of Evaluation 1428 N. Snelling Ave 10/23/01 105 Lexington Ave 9/17/01 1815 Sims Ave 11/16/01 998 Jameson St 4/6/02 Evaluator: Ron Staeheli Date of Complaint: 1 /15/02 1 /15/02 3/8/02 4/16/02 1428 N. Snelling Ave - September 17, 2001 (copy of disclosure report attached) Complaint received on January 12, 2002, accompained by digital photos (availabie) Original complaint, forwarded to Maynard Vinge, Code Enforcement Supervisor, on January 18, 2002, for evaluation of the complaint. inspection performed by Maynard Vinge, on or about January 22, 2002, to determine the validity of the compiaint as related to the evaluator's response � Letter sent fo Mr. Staeheli on January 24, 2002, by regular U.S. mail. (copy attached) Response received from Mr. Staeheli on February 2, 2002. (copy attached) April 17, 2002, Board meeting, Board deferred review of complaint to next regularly scheduled meeting in order to have more time to review the complaint. July 10, 2002, Board meeting. Board laid over complaint to next quarteriy meeting in order to give proper notice to subject evaluator. September 11, 2002, Board meeting. Evaluator requested and was granted a continuance of the hearing, to November 20, 2002. - 105 Lexington Ave S- September 17, 2001 (copy of disclosure report attached) Complaint received on January 12, 2002, accompained by digital photos (available) 63 �� Original compiaint, forwarded to Maynard Vinge, Code Enforcement Supervisor, on January 18, 2002, for evaluation of the complaint. Complaint History: 1428 N Snelling, 105 Lexington Ave, 1815 Sims Ave, 998 Jameson St page 2 of 3 Inspection perFormed by Maynard Vinge, on or about January 18, 2002, for the exterior and January 24, 2002 to view the interior, to determine the validity of the complaint as related to the evaluator's response. Staff polaroid photos available. Letter senito Mr. Staeheli on January 24, 2002, by regufar lt.S. mail. (copy attached) Response received from Mr. Staeheli on February 4, 2002 (via fax, time date stamped 2/3/02, 12:42:08 am) (copy attached). April 17, 2002, Board meeting, Board deferred review of complaint to next regularly scheduled meeting in order to have more time to review the complaint. July 10, 2002, Board meeting. Board laid over complaint to next quarteriy meeting in order to give proper notice to subject evaluator. September 11, 2002, Board meeting. Evaluator requested and was granted a continuance of the hearing, to November 20, 2002. 1815 Sims Ave - November 16, 2001 (copy of disclosure report attached) Complaint received on March 8, 2002, accompained by digital photos (available) Original complaint, forwarded to Maynard Vinge, Code Enforcement Supervisor, for evaluation of the complaint. Inspection performed by Maynard Vinge, on or about March 13, 2002, to determine the validity of the complaint as related to the evaluator's response. Staff photos available. Letter sent to Mr. Staeheli on March 19, 2002, by regular U.S. mail. (copy attached) Response received from Mr. Staeheli on March 20, 2002. (copy attached) Apri1 17, 2002, Board meeting, Board deferred review of complaint to next regularly scheduled meeting in order to have more time to review the complaint. July 10, 2002, Board meeting. Board laid over complaint to next quarteriy meeting in order to give proper notice to subject evaluator. September 11, 2002, Board meeting. Evaluator requested and was granted a continuance of the hearing, to November 20, 2002. 998 Jameson St - Aprif 6, 2002 (copy of disclosure report attached) Compiaint received on April 16, 2002, accompained by digital photos (available) Original complaint, forwarded to Maynard Vinge, Code Enforcement Supervisor, for evaluation of the complaint. Complaint History: 1428 N Snelling, 105 Lexington Ave, 1815 Sims Ave, 998 Jameson St page 3 of 3 Inspection perFormed by Maynard Vinge, on or about May 4, 2002, to determine the 07'S validity of the complaint as related to the evaluator's response. Staff was able to reveiw and evaluate only the exterior of the subject dweiling. Staff photos available. Letter sent to Mr. Staeheli on May 16, 2002, by regular U.S. mail. (copy attached) Response received from Mr. Staeheli on, via fax time/date stamped May 27, 2002, 9:34:12 p.m. (copy attached) July 10, 2002, Board meeting. Board laid over complaint to next quarterly meeting in order to give proper notice to subject evaluator. September 11, 2002, Board meeting. Evaluator requested and was granted a continuance of the hearing, to November 20, 2002. Memorandum City of Saint Paul November 8, 2002 To: All Truth-in-Sale of Housing Board Members, and The Complaint Files for: 1428 Snelling Ave 105 Lexington Ave N 1815 Sims Ave 998 Jameson St The Evaluators file for: RON STAEHELI Evaluator: Ron Staeheli From: Connie Sandberg, Truth-in-Sale of Housing Program Administrator Re: Inspection findings and recommendation 07� �rl On 7anuary 1S, 2002 (2), Mazch 7, 2002 (1), and April 17, 2002 (1), a total of 4 complaints were received by the Truth-in-Sale of Housing Program concerning evaluations performed by Mr. Ron Staeheli. The following is a summary of the complaints and the inspection findings. A separate report for each address with the original complaint to the evaluator and the evaluator's individual response to each item is attached. Inspection Findings: The following items were found through investigation, and after considering the evaluator's response, to be valid: (Numbering in the "Item" column corresponds to the numbering on the letter to the evaluator.) See also the attached composite table comparing the complaint items among these addresses, and the ones earlier reported to the Board. Refer to Board Resolution 02- 03, Guidelines for Disciplinary Action for explanation of the "Class" column. 1428 Snelling Ave Class Item Description 1, 4 2, 4 3 3 2 � � � � � Omitted: Improperly supported gas line to dryer Omitted: Flexible brass gas c onnector a drye Omitted: Vent connector improperly repaired with aluminum foil Omitted: Roof vents plugged by bird nest Omitted: Lacks deadbolt at entry door Omitted: Chimney lacks a visible metal liner 3, 4 11. Omitted: Decayed studs and sill plate 3 12. Omitted: Garage floor cracked and broken 01-sC� Complaint Report - Ron Staeheli Disciplinary Hearing, November 20, 2002 105 Lexington Ave Class 3, 4 3 2 Description Omitted: Excessive staining, water damage on front enhy ceiling Omitted: Some basement screens or storm windows not in place Omitted: Cracked, deteriorated chimney crown and clay liner Item 3. 5. 6. page 2 of 4 1815 Sims Ave Class 3 2 2 4. 1 6. 1 7. 2 8. 2 9. �� 3 11. 2 12. 3 13. 14. 15. 2 16. 3 17. Description Omitted: headroom 5' 9" Omitted: metal pull-chain on laundry light; erroneous call on missing cover pla Omitted: missing ceramic ring on ceiling light Omitted: unsupported dryer gas line Omitted: water heater flue is not sealed to chimney, nor in metal liner. Missing screws Omitted: missing screws in fumace flue pipe Omitted: exposed foam insulation on whole basement wall and over window Omitted: kitchen door from rear entry, restricted access; can't readily reach lrnow, nanow doorway Omitted: rear entry window: broken sash cords, painted shut, not operational Omitted: tub faucet below spill line Omitted: sashes painted shut, not operational Item 1. 3. Omitted: exposed foam insulation on all kneewall areas Omitted: stains by chimney in attic/upper bedroom o3-S�`7 Complaint Report - Ron Staeheli Disciplinary Hearing, November 20, 2002 3 21. 2 22. 3 23. 3 24. 998 Jameson St Omitted: garage chimney has damaged/missing brick and mortar Omitted: laz foun cracks Failure to note habitable space requirements Failure to rate attic items page 3 of 4 Interior access was not permitted by owner for the investigation of this complaint. Interior conditions in the complaint could not be independently verified, and have therefore been excluded from this report. 3 13. 2 14. 3 15. 3, 4 16. 3, 4 17. 3, 4 18. 3, 4 19. Omitted: trees growing next to foundation Omitted: deteriorated/weathered basement windows, boarded windows; broken jagged glass Omitted: grade slopes to house, missing downspout extension under deck, water trapped between garage siding and falling retaining wall (E side) Omitted: deteriarated threshold, decay present, missing trim Omitted: windows and frames weathered, loose paint and putty, peeling paint, decayed wood, loose w ood c omp o nents Omitted: trim components by front door rotted Omitted: deteriorated roof: moss and mold, loose flashing, buckled shingles, upper S/W shingles missing, broken and weathered-lifted 2 � 20. � Omitted: exposed wire connections to reaz light Recommendation: The Truth-in-Sale of Housing Ordinance, Chapter 189 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code, was enacted for consumer protection. The program relies upon independently employed evaluatar inspectors who pass a licensing exam to perform the evaluations required by the ordinance. The value to the consumer lies in the consistency of evaluation among houses and among evaluators. The Board adopts guidelines for evaluators to follow. The Guidelines are central to program consistency. Staff believes Mr. Staeheli knowingly fails to follow the Evaluator Guidelines. He has proven to staff he lrnows what the Guidelines require by filing complaints against other evaluators wherein he cites many of the same guideline items as the ones he himself has omitted in his reports. Even if the failure to follow the Guidelines is not willful, the failure is at least a demonstration oFincompetence. Failure to follow the Evaluator Guidelines is a violation of Chapter 189.15 (2), which requires evaluators to, OS-S�� Complaint Report - Ron Staeheli Disciplinary Hearin�, November 20, 2002 page 4 of 4 "Complete the disclosure report in accordance with the standards in the Evaluator Guidelines." Failure to follow the Guidelines also is a violation of the Evaluator Code of Ethics, item 4, which states, "The evaluator will be responsible at all times to execute his/her duties with due caze and in good faith, in compliance with the laws and regulations of the City of Saint Paul, in compliance with the Saint Paul Evaluator Guidelines, as adopted by the Board, and with the evaluator's Code of Ethics. Failure of the evaluator to comply with the law and Boazd direction through the Evaluator Guidelines shall constitute an infraction of the Code of Ethics." Chapter 189.15 (6) states, "Failure to comply with any one or more of these duties shall be sufficient cause for the board to take adverse action against the license or licensee." In January, 2002, the Board reviewed complaints against Mr. Staeheli for evaluations done at ll04 Duluth Street and 752 Bradley Street. Staff recommendation was to take no disciplinary action, at that time. The Boazd chose to follow the staff recommendation, and notified Mr. Staeheli that no action would be taken but that all information regarding these two complaints would be placed in his file (standard procedure). These four additional complaints received after the 7anuary meeting bring the total of fully investigated and founded complaints to six within the eight month period from September, 2001 through April, 2002. The Guidelines for Discipiinary Action, adopted by Resolution 02-03 on April 17, 2002, lists among the indications for Adverse Action. These four are relevant to the complaints against this evaluator, at this time. Item 2: Has intentionally or by established pattern violated any of the provisions of Chapter 189 or any duties specifically required by Sec. 189.15. Item 8: Has been the subject of substantiated complaints for his/her evaluations services. Item 9: Has demonstrated a pattem of incompetency in conducting evaluations Item 10: For just cause Staff believes there is sufficient cause to initiate adverse action against Mr. Staeheli's license. Staff recommends a minimum 6 month suspension of his license. In addition, staff recommends that for one (1) year after reinstatement, randomly selected reports prepared by Mr. Staeheli will be reviewed for compliance with program guidelines. Any founded complaint and/or violations consistent with those presented in this report, prepared during this monitoring period, whether found by staffreview or from an outside source, will result in an immediate and permanent revocation of Mr. Staeheli's license. After the one year probationary period, staff believes the board may consider prior history when evaluating complaints against an evaluator and may continue to increase time and/or severity of boazd actions within the meaning of progressive discipline. A suspension of Mr. Staeheli's license at this time and the imposition of a"probationar}�' period upon his reinstatement is consistent with the Disciplinary Guidelines and with the practice of pro�essive discipline. c,� W N o � w � c�o r :-� � _ � o C� N N W N W N N N N W W ° w - � v�i A �A � o � rn ,.. O _ T ` ?� C -`' � �1 � a � '� r(_"-" � O o CJ (�'� 0 � �' �, -c o. � � � o ° � � f � o r� � � _ �O 0. ..�^. � f= " � ._. �- u •y (j ."-i � �p C� � � G c� f� ti � bq �j tl: O <p �j OQ V•:` G � ,... .� , 7 p O p, N -, " ° o o' = a. °� � • o �i R c�o � c� ° � m � �� o � � �� " �' "• a � _ x � a � m a a �' � � o �' ,a ^ � ° c o' � o � n. � � � � � c� o � � � ° � o `� � oo ° a .*, '�r o � w a�c � � n. � = o� ' n p � w� n � c .�. V] '^' �G !D •"+ � �� o � N � � m c� G� � � � �p o •�- n „'7 � .-. (� C a � �+'� "^�' ° m a�c � c� a. �. ' o � c G i G' Q � ~ �' ' a `- � v� O G: � ,..�� .A�-. A> > '-' � �-' � vi � VO � tn r^ � �� N `t � - a' w aa � a.� o• � �, o rn o k ','S ti W ti n .. � ti � � o ai � v a' n C O o � � a a o � . � � � a � " � % " - o � ' „ rn F a 0 ' o � r- � \, x ° 5 vi 3 � 00 O � � n � � � � G � .� x x x x x x x - � �'^ 0 6 S n � � a O 7 A to N X �! • w = �° -' ' z a � o � G A P�j � P � X X X X X X X ° C t�'J � N � N O � V^ (7 �- x X x _ 3 a o O G A C� �T . < w W � �' N � iC X x . � N "' a . N o = co „ . �"' ��. N 0 0 < � C h N O O N O � � O H f3 H � a � 0 M d y P� O � G � � O "S � � ... y � � � A� � -t1�. O �'Y d < A'i e O � � ^�t � � l'J < � w � ^ ^ r� � n'= � C �. � ."'.r � � C :r G � � O � � � � `�" � .-'�. o , _s�rt 0o I`" I I I` I I� I I ( lo I� I� I I� wlWiwIAIAI.�IAI�IwINI�IN�N�W �N�N � � X � � � � � k o c � c o ` �C �G .�-•• � ni � N y � r�'�i � T N Ul �t � � � y n. a _ n. a a ' � o co m ^, ''� "� � � �' � � n. � � QO � � ."'+ �' O r�i� N � � X p C�i O n C n n � '�•. � � � y � � ^ y �, C n n' CD � �" . R O � (D � fJ 'O a � ..�' r�i� � � � '-^�' � a �� °' � o ° �• N �' N �, n. � � � n .• �' rn � O C . � ,.�.� � � R � � � � 23 � C. .�-. O � w N . O O � �. � R VJ �J n % �J V1 o n N � N C O n � O „' � � C � y � � UO � � �� O � � 0 � � � 0 � �• QQ K � , C o „� o � � � F� N '+ !D �."i X � X � X � X � k � � m �o � � y �. � � r� � w � c � o � � �. � � £i J �• � d Q G v �c' N =': o 'c �• o � r C� n � �. � x x x x H X X X X � 0 � 0 O c L N � a � � G d � � Q h �"� � � Q � � J O � 0 0 N w 0 A � 0 N �9 � O � N N O � �r n � ;-'� �j � O (� �N y �. O � '"� � � O o cu r' !� O p, .' 's O ' S � � .� � L�. � ° � O � � � � � C� � �o- � � � N `< � QQ o ., rn o n. � X n pO � � Q � � Q � � n O % lA � y Pi � � � � � � tn — � A � � w' z G �. � w 0 0 � 0 � C � G A S � U a N � `t � � �:. � o �l c.� W v A A W � � W W W W W W W W W W W W w N .. .. .. .. .. .. .. W W .. .. .. A A A A A A ? .p A A ? � o X � � � � G� �G � � y w � �C, � - o �a �' �' �' S �• c� c a -� a ti' � .. �, ^-� o a �' a Q. c a. a. o � � a. n. ,� ° a. F F � � F F F � �° c� F F ('. �. y '"� � � '�'� ,.� �n m v� rn "+ (D •�-� �„� „� � 0 � R X N � � R3 � � O X C � �' � • � �. T � ,.. � � � �. � Q�a � G 'CS � R. '�c.f' .^+ �i '�ci' 'G 'a � �' P. fi C) m `� G G ."'+ � .�. �' s�'.�� c� a p� � � N '�' � .�.. � �' p .�+ p' � � � • p � '6 �.�i . � O �, � � O � � � '� O � � � O. � ^ � ^ a' � �' '' y y � 6" in � � � v�i ..3. � ?? O O "t O � � ~ R ".3 F�.� .^f. "CS y � � � ti � ti � � � � � G w w 5 .^'+ `� � (D �- (� !� (� '�+ 0. G o � y � a' N �' O O O rn � � Y �, � N N fJ a �a a. x x x x x x x x x x x x x • x x x x x x x x x x x x x x c A N � a�.�� r (J �--� :^� n n .^> ti � p"J °-' ^ O � n - o �o = � o o. � �• o � � � v � � O M � O '�i � � � � � '`�-. i� y i r � C `G � � O .. � !�o O �, � R. � X n � m a. " ^; o � � o ¢, �n �-s O 'O � O � � r � x o o � �' 0 � tn — � 3 = � y � 0 cn — O � A N t� N �, _ � o =`z � A •- �: C� � �' � � o n N Q � G `� O -' ' � c _ � o O C A G � f�5 W � �] M y N . . O�S N (Y ca O d W � M � �IWI--I�I I�I I I�I�I I�I I IAIW N I� IW IW IA IW IA IW I.� IW IW I.� IN I� IW IW X � d � � o � ; d �' � a � � � � o a. � � �� a c� ° g cc � ` " N `; �� N � a r�. a. �, = � o �' ac �" o 0 0 0. � W � ai w � � � m Q, � � r� y � � pi (p 'c3 � � ..� d !� � O ns C 0. O � � � � � a c�o a o °' aa � a. o �° �� '+ c� _ � c^o � p� � N p � n � c'J ` � n. � � m � p. p � M in p' n �. �. y " p � � � C' .�x. o c�o c�`c " � �' � ^ c `w' w R ^ � cu °' � o �� co x ao ¢, o =. p, � v�i p• a y �' � '� � � � � O � O � ✓ �n N � G cp ¢ O .-� pi O � � � � � N N � T y 0. � � O � � �. � p�' � R. N � ( "� J M G p�j W � p., O G G � � �' P� � d y 0. � � � � � � � � R � � Q � � � y F � � V n (1. � n � d � � � CD .�q � N � � x x X X X X x • x x x x x x x x X x I x I x I x I x I x a 3 � V A 0 � J N � a . m � 0 h � � v 0 � � � 0 c� �r �, .. :-, � � O Cl � � � y y �'. o 5 � ^o � � � m o n, �t �. Q 'U T � 0 � �� M � c� ` o � � � � `.. P—� M r �' x O � �. '�' K � � � �� K O � � H 0 � a. 0 � � o x �n � N w � � -- \ � w � y � 0 Vi — O 3 A �j � N w � w o �; z A n � � 3 " m o � N � 3 V^ � � � C `� p C A �' � , ' N ' n N N O [p __ � � ` 0�-S�1 � � � � 0 00 � c� w w N N W w w W A A ` V] '�7 R =' �- � ` n; = d 7 n tra Pa c�� tro o aj A. �G 0 . .n C3. '"a ti C�'u' `+ �+, � O � O O � � n � � � � ^o co ° c o � � � � ti' � �' -�i (� v'�'i ',� n '�-. n N � d UG � � �p a a v� . . � � � � a a `� °' � '° a' � c� � � � o n. c� �'� ` � x - y k 'C� �• � � � � � p� 'O ^' � y � �' O o' � a °Q m � � �� y a a � n M ` Y � O x x x x x x x _ x X e N N � n C� w 'o. 0 a T 0 � 3 c m 3 £ s ' 0 � � �G ti [i A 6 R n O a 3 �' 0 � u � � N O M �t N `CS O � � � O � 0 O N w 0 A � C N �^ � 0 � N O � �r � � :-� ci � � � `G O O � '6 O � .-. 0 co � O �' � � N ' O ' .+ .y � � o � M ,�. O O �i � � � � � � o N M �a ° c P� N � �. o °� c�u o N� � � � x n � ti O � a O '.�. � o x � � � O � N � � � � � A = � � z � � � �: .. pp � O 3 d C C c A S � J C. N �- n > � O ti O U a�-�1 �' � � a�. s ry � � O. R�&LT��S� 1146 Rice Street • St. Pau1,l�IinnesoLa 551_I7 651-488-0561 • Fax 651-488-0565 delislecompanyin@ qwest.net To Whom It May Concern November 18,2002 To Whom It May Concern, I have been a licensed Realtor with The DeLisle Company for 20 years. Our office has handled numerous older homes and many distressed properties. We .have never had any complaints or lawsuits because of Ron Staehli's Truth In Housing reports. We call on Ron because he is always very prompt and is also efficient. Yours truly, -.,/�" ��///i�2�/ �/ �(.� Kurt Henriksson KH/ls Real Estate • MorPgages • Appraisals �i � z ML`S� ,...�a.; !�M�. Sofd D� DeLisle Company Personal Real Estate Service Buy • Sell •Trade Terry Stomski Since 1983 Business: 651-488-0561 � 146 Rice Street Fvc: 651-488-0565 St. Paul, Minnesota 55717 Voice Mail: 952-882-2080 E-Maii:delislecompan}4n@qwestnet Ce11:651-485-3246 November 18, 2002 RE: Ron Staeheli, American Central Inspection Service To Whom It May Concern: I, Terry Stomski, a licensed Real Estate agent with DeLisle Company, Inc., have been associated with Ron Staeheli regarding Truth In Housing inspections for some time now. I highly recommend his service to my clients. Both my clients and myself find Mr. Staeheli to be fast, efficient, honest and professional. 0� -S�'1 I am a retired Fugitive Unit Captain for the State of Minnesota. I can only judge Ron by my experience with him, which I have found to be above board. Sincerely, �.�I �, , RECEIVED �J ,�1 pr�; • � '[002 Terry Stomski CITY AT`�'URNEII � � � �-�� c �� r � �� S� .-� , �� (��,��- � u ' J `. 5 C`R ��`��-� `� �,�c��-� C „ r -- � �\��- c��'.��`� � ��, 0� -�'7 DeLls6e C�. REALTORS� 1146 Rice Street • St. Paul, Minnesota 55?? 7 651-488-0561 • Fax 651-488-0565 delislecompanyin @ qwes4.net November 19, 2002 RE: Ron Staeheli, American Central Inspection Service To Whom It May Concern: Mr. Staeheli has been doing the Truth In Housing Inspections for our office for the past several yeazs. We have always found him to be very professional, quick and thorough in performing these inspections. Our company often deals with clients in the lower income brackets, or those in foreclosure. Mr. Staeheli is willing to wait for the sale of the properiy to close before collecting his seroice fee. We find this to be a rare qualit}� in inspectors. Yours truly, �� Jeffrey T. DeLisle Real Estate Broker DeLisle Co., Inc. JTD/vlg Real Estate • Mortgages • Appraisals , i' � e►ts.' �� .Sfi1 � The first things I would like you to know. You may have heard some things about me and my "attitude" or my agenda as it regards this program. I have obtained letters of complaint sent to the Board that are completely inaccurate as to my performance and attitude. I am asking you to please to put all that aside. I need you to hear me, it is all generally false and is an attempt to show me in a particularly bad light. I have worked very hard building a business that is now in peril because of a calculated smear campaign and all I am asking you to do is keep an open mind. As I have stated in all of my responses to the city, I would have liked this process to have been an educational one, not an adversarial one. If I had been allowed to see the components and conditions I would have been able to learn . o� -S�-g much more about how the city and the Board would like these evaluations done. If this body requires that purple houses are to be called a hazard then I will call them a hazard. I have no argument with any of your guidelines and will do what you require. The problem becomes when someone says that it is purple and I see it more as Blue-green, or worse when someone paints it purple after I leave. In my conversations with you this evening I may question interpretations of the guidelines. It is very important to me that you understand this is not questioning your ability to set and interpret the guidelines with absolute authority. When I question a point it is from the point of view of an experienced TISH evaluator who's prior interpretation was never questioned and who has never had the opportunity to have the Board's version. p� -S Y9 TIME LINE September 1992-October 31, 2002 Spotless record of 3500 evaluations/inspections without complaint, law suit or correction. August 22, 2001 September 9, 2001 Performed TISH for 752 Bradley Perfonned TISH for 1104 Duluth September 17, 2001 Performed TISH for 105 Lexington October 23, 2001 October 31, 2001 November 16, 2001 December 9, 2001 January 4, 2002 January 9, 2002 Performed TISH for 1428 N Snelling Received notification that complaints where filed against me for 752 Bradley and 1104 Duluth. Performed TISH for 1815 Sims Ave. I attended required meeting about the new guidelines. Received results from Cities report about complaints for 752 Bradley and 1104 Duluth Board took no action against me for the Bradley and Duluth complaints. January 12, 2002 City received complaints against me for 1428 N Snelling and 105 Le�ngton. Please note that as soon as it became apparent that I would not lose my business over the first two complaints two more were filed by weeks end. January 15, 2002 I talked to investigator Harold Robinson who told me that the complaints against me for Bradley and Duluth were picky and unimportant, he upheld only 11 items of almost 60 complained about and he did not consider severity of condition just that it exists. No consideration given about TISH guidelines. January 16, 2002 January 25, 2002 Wrote letter to Board asking that the record be expunged of complaints due to my interview with Harold Robinson. Received notification of complaints against me for 1428 Snelling Ave and 105 Lexington Ave. 01-S�'9 March 21, 2002 Apri16, 2002 April 17, 2002 April 19, 2002 Received notification of complaints a�ainst me for 1815 Sims Ave. Performed TISH on 998 Jamison Attended Sprin� test house seminar Received notification of the cities report for 105 Le�ngton, 1428 N Snelling and 1815 Sims Ave. April 2002 Discussed case with inspector Joel Estling who said that they did not interpret the guidelines that they just reported on the condition. They left that interpretation to the Board. May 2002 Received notification of complaint for 998 Jamison. November 11, 2002 Received notification of cities report for 998 Jamison. As you can see all but one of the reports complained about was performed at a time that there was not anv question about my performance in this profession for 9 years. Please note that as soon as the competition that complained about me found out that nothing would happen to me on the first 2 complaints they immediately created 2 more complaints and then a third and fourth to seal the deal. This is a bald attempt to loose the lowest price evaluator, me, for their own enrichment. Not only will my clients be for the taking but the price can rise to Minneapolis levels. o�-s�1 It is the current policy of this Board to not investigate complaints from one evaluator to another. On the occasion of the first Board meeting following October 27, 1993 the Board was asked how a complaint from one evaluator to another should be handled. The situation was exactly as it is today. The Complaint was in writing. It was brought up by another evaluator. It followed a Buyers inspection. The decision of the Board was to wait until "we receive a formal complaint from the buyer" before starting an investigation. In studying the minutes from the Board meetings since that no other like case has come before the Board. If you discipline on these complaints you are changing a 9 year policy. (Please see a copy from the minutes of the meeting quoted attached) . �� -Stty Page 3 dominant, and if uanlatian to these languages should aIso be included in this brachure. Kim suggested that aiter the text is pulled together,it could be sent to the Board members for comments and then they couId fax iz back tn Public Healih. This issue will ag�in be reviewed at tha April Board mee�ng. F. 7oe Scheunemaasa iipdate - In reference to the last Baard Meeting of October 27, 1993 regarding the complainis issueti againsc 3ce Scheunemann, the Board had recommended that no formal action be taken at that time, but wan[ed to be kept informed of any fuhue camplaints or concems regarding Mr. Scheunemann. RecentIy, we have received anothet complaint, but Mr. Scheunemann has not been able ta respond ta this complaint or have the city staff invesflgate this matter as yet. The complaint was brought up by anather evaivator which involved a buysr inspecdon; both parties wcre upseY; and the evaluator sutsmitted a lecter to ciry staff. Jim's recommendation to hiaynard w�s not to start a formal investigation until we received a formal complsint from the buyer. When that should take place, Mr. Scheunemann will be properly notified and he will ba asked to respond to us. Maynard will then take Yhe infor�ation given to him, go out to the dwelling for an investigadon and write up a findings letter. Jim asked the Board whether or not they want to receive all copies of correspondance regazding complaints. Presenfly, only Jerty Beedie as Chairperson, is receiving this infonnafion. Kirn Foster read from the By-Laws that this was the correct way to handle ttus procedure. The Board seemed to be comfortabie with this decision. 7im stated that Mr. Seheunemann's complaint may be due to the volume of evalisations that he performs. Clay Larson s#ated that due ta his volume, that he felt comfortable with the number af complaints against Mr. Scheunemann; the Board generally agreed. Jerry Beedle told 7im that he wanted to be kept informec! of the fandings as they came up regarding Mr. Scheunemann. He stated that if complaints weze to become serious, then he would want to set up a special Board meeting to deal with the zssues at that time. Ms. Clendening,{complainant from 1997 Grand Avenue), appeared at the Boazd meeting requesting to speak against Mr. Scheunemann's evalaation of that groperty. She was not happy wikh the evaivation in regazd to her roof and the fact that she has not been compensated for replacing this roof. 7erry Beedte taid her that the Board were really not prepared to hear her statements and that this complaint had been resolved at the last Board meeking. Ms. Ciendening did proceed with some brief statements. Jim stated that tha Board had decidet! it was not an issue to revoke Mr. Scheunemann's ticense, but ralher just monifor him closely in the furitre. Ms. Clendening stated that Mr. Scheunemann told her that he had no insurance; what sn fact happened, the company insuring him at that ame went defauit, another company took a similar policy and began insering him. However, the insarance 03 �S � Passing scores for the Test and the Practical Test House are established by the Board at 75%. Using the same scoring method used by the Administrator of the Program and assuming that there is no argument about the accuracy of the items or debate about when the conditions changed, and the prevailing interpretation of the guidelines the following scores where achieved. 752 Bradley 1104 Duluth 105 Lexington 1428 N Snelling 1815 Sims 998 Jameson 81 items / 4 incorrect 81 items / 6 incorrect 81 items / 3 incorrect 81 items / 8 incorrect 81 items / 17 incorrect 81 items / � incorrect 95% 92 % 96% 90% 79% 90% Average score 90.33 % As many of the conditions changed between my TISH and the date of the complaint (average intervening time is 4 months), the guidelines changed during this time and that a11 of the complaints came from a motivated competitor I know that after I make my case you will see these scores go even higher. As it is my goal to do every inspection entirely within the guidelines I am not satisfied with these scores but I am not unhappy with them. There are things I could have called that I just missed and I have redoubled my efforts to not miss them in the future. An example of a call I missed, assuming the picture is correct, I should have called "Faucet below drip line" on Sims. 03•St'1 The punishment asked for is three times more severe than if I had tried to steal $4,000.00 In 1990 the Board suspended Gary Hartman for 60 days for attempting to steal $4,000.00 in fees from the city by not filing reports. The discipline asked for in this case (180 days) is much more severe and will destroy the business that I have worked very hard to build. It is based on disciplinary guidelines written after the reports where done and on complaints called "subjective and nit pickmg" by Commander Morehead o�-S� In the entire history of the Board an evaluator has never been disciplined in anyway for homeowner complaints. After careful review of the Boards minutes for the entire time they have been kept there is no record of an evaluator being in anyway materially disciplined for a complaint. That includes complaints dealing with collapsed roofs and condemned buildings by homeowners that have been severely damaged by evaluators miscues. Those situations have never resulted in a suspension of any kind. Any discipline at this time would be a departure from that policy. I realize that you have a new policy as evidenced by the Disciplinary Guidelines passed April 18, 2002 but I would again point out that all of the complained about properties where inspected by me using the prior Guidelines well before that policy took effect. o� •Sg� The former Director of the Code Compliance Office called these complaints "subjective nitpicking." I have mentioned this before but I believe it bears repeating. Commander Morehead wrote to you and repeated it last month at the regular meeting that this type of complaining and investigation only overwhelms the staff and creates the "personality conflicts" that you are seeing here. It also bears repeating that in his memo to you (copy attached} that they were "not seeing any constant and glaring examples of ...white paper" This seams to contradict the staff report that subtly accuses me of missing items on p�rpose. If there is going to be a"staff recommendation" wouldn't it be more fair to have all of the staff ha�e input into it, including the Director of Code Compliance. This memo was written at a time (July) when all of these reports and findings where at the city. Page 2 a � -Tr1 Recently TISH staff working for me have received a sia ificant number of complaints allegin� sloppy work by one or more evaluators. Procedures were followed and notice of the complaint(s} were sent to the effected evaluator(s). One or more evaluators were unhappy about the complaints and decided they were being picked on by other evaluators. They in turn went out and conducted informal and unrequested TISH re-inspections of properties inspected by whoever they thou�ht was lodging the complaints. These re-inspections were conducted during open houses, oftentimes without the owners permission. This led to at least one very stron� complaint from a homeowner/seller who objected to having his house used as a testing grounds for a war between opposing evaluators. My staff also complained they could not handle the volume of complaints coming into the office. This entire process also has conflict of interes[ issues. Note that since all house sales require TISH inspections, and since only a limited number of people hold TISH evalua[or licenses, any loss of licenses for one or more evaluators pushes the work, and the profits, to the remaining limited number of evaluators. At this time it appeazs there is a small TISH war going on out there with inspectors filing complaints against each other. To date we are not seeing any consisten[ and �laring examples of blatant out and out white papers. What we are seeing is a lot of subjective ni[pickino and growing personality conflicts. My advice to everyone is to slow down and take it easy. No one has been deputized to be a TISH quality control inspector. I have two neutral inspectors who perform that function. As you read on you will see a proposal for an institutional approach to quality control. In the mean[ime settle down. In addition to evaluating the above subjective problems we have come across more objective issues. We aze cunently looking at reports of sales or purchases of houses involving TISH licensed evaluators as either buyers or sellers where no TISH report was made. We are also lookin� at allegations of TISH inspections being performed but no fee being paid or report made. These types of complaints aze far easier to evaluate and have far greater consequences. The TISH program is entirely funded by the relatively minor fee required for each inspection. Any significant diversion of fees hurts the entire program. I believe the fee is the property of the City of St. Paul. I consider any diversion of a TISH fee as a theft of city funds, which could result in crimina? chazges �p to fe!ony levels. TISH staff have made some proposals to help fix some of the above problems. In addition, they have developed proposed guidelines for sanctions. Please carefully review these proposals, weigh their value, and be prepared to make suggestions either in person or via letter or e-mail to the TISH Boazd which meets again on July lOth. PROPOSALS 1. All TISH evaluators shall retain a physical copy of each TISH inspection performed, at their principal place of business. Copies shall be filed in alphabetical/numerical order by street name in a professional manner to allow for easy inspection and retained for three years. The physical copy shall note the date the report was submitted to the program and the means for payment, i.e. check number. TISH staff, upon giving reasonable notice to the evaluator of no more than 5 business days, shall have the right to inspect these files. AA-ADA-EEO Employer 03 -SS�1 Even the evaluators that prepared the Spring Test House got things wrong. In reviewing the Spring Test House Master with some of our own reports we found that 18 items that we found at the property did not appear on the Test House Master or where miss rated. This is not a condemnation of the people who prepared the report just an example of how even when there are two or three qualified evaluators standing around a house for two hours they can still miss things. This includes missing one of the most dangerous electrical/fire safety problem there can exist, a pirated line from the service drop that runs into the building energized and is not in conduit or ever fused. Is this because they are incompetent or just and example of seeing instead some of the 8,000 items we are expected to know and call? � ��_38'1 % 7c^^5 Item # rating proper rating omitted comment 3 B B 5 B B 10 M B 13 M B 16 17c 23 23 23 40 43 44 46 I: . : : : u H B H H H B H H C 58 C B 69 B B 74 H H metered in any way 78 C B 81 C B Evidence of settling Main beam cut Missing cover Cras lines improperly supported with shoe string and under supported Water offto fiacture is an H not a B Rusted flue Open grounds on 3 prong outlets Metal pulls on light fixture near sink Improper repairs to waste line require H not B Deterioration should be rated a C rather than B Rated B not H for lack of GFCI outlet Rated B not H for water off Fan inoperative might be required for sq footage to properly ventilate Deteriorated roof boards and decking Uneven deteriorated steps Wired enter building from service drop not metered or fused or Deterioration at doors should be rated B not C Plastic over insulation flammable o �-s rr� The Inspector who ran the Test House Seminar says that the guidelines are too subjective. In a letter (attached) Rich Miller who ran the fall test house required by this Board for continuing education tells this Board that ...."I have been inspecting homes for five plus years and am member of both ASHI and NAHI. Seldom, if ever, have I inspected a home with a Truth in Sale of Housing, from any city that requires them, that could not have resulted in a complaint against the evaluator." "Home inspections are a very subjective business and the city guidelines are often not interpreted the same way by everyone. As I found in the seminar, there was much discussion on many items that were reported different by inspectors. This lack of specificity of guidelines contributes to the situation you face." My possible miss-steps with interpreting the guidelines are a result of the problems listed above. As was stated by Mr. Miller any evaluator can create a complaint against any other evaluator and make it stick just using different interpretations of the guidelines. 11'19i2002 li:3U FA3 . i I � i • -� �"d121� �OIIIe Nov. 14, 20Q2 �1S'�CtIflYlS Z,�� St Paul Tnuh in �aIe of Housing Boar� Ladies and Geafleman, 2246 srewsterSt �� St Paui, MN 55108 b12 23Q-9Z31 (d1-64��0294 faz i As the peis� who conductrd th� Fxll Test House Seminar I have be� asked to attend the hearing on Wednesday Nov. 20, 2002. My schedule does nai ailow my attendauce_ I wou131ike to make a few poimzs tbat I£eeD mas� a#'Tect your deliber�+tions. I have beeu inspectisig houses for five pius yeais and am member of both ASHI and 1VAHI. Seldozn, if ever, Have I inspected a ha:ve with a Truth in Sale af Aausinn, &om any ciry thut rec�uims Yfietn, that could noi have r�suited in a complaiat against the evalvator. FTome inspactions are a very subjecfive business ane tise city guidelines are often not interpreted the seine wa�� by Qveryone. As I found in the se�zunaz, there was muckx dascussion on m�.wy items 4hat x reported diffeTently by ixaspectors. This lack of speciScity of guidelines contribufa ta t1�1 xitvarion you face. Unfortun:}tely, thc^�e do�:s nnt seem fo be a mandate Fry the cides to do aa:urate precise testir.g ofthe evaluators_ A soluaon to insue cousistency would be: every evtiluator passes an ofk"icial test hous� ox ¢ computer geneaat� test every two yeazs. This would need to be administereti by an a�pattial gioup with time restraisus puc on the evalaatc�r. With out thi� it is'�ery i�ad for an evaluator �r ihe epty to know if an individual is doing tt�e j ob corsectly. The �aining tir�e hace is hit and miss, we are #tot all reg�ued to atiaad the sa� seminar and tkxiz�gs aze disaussed in x differeut way and new infdmiation present at vaxiovs s�+na*r, There is no magic solution for this p*obian. Being a member of NAHI Stx�dards and Prucaces CoaEmittee, there are peer ieviews of inspector perforu�anee. Z2tis iaight be a wa7 m daal with Yhe situation you presently facc. Therc could then be rccommendations to ihe Cities if ffie ccmaplaints iiave nierit. Tbis and �aining t6e eva[�aiais berier �ssis�# fhe iu better job pr;rfotmance and uphold tlie s�ndards and practices ti�at r,}�e gub&c deserves. � I aci anal�t� to spzak direcLiy to the situation befora you wittwut evatuating a hisroricai represecztative sa�pie of repoY Theu content or lack of wntznt would shed fight on tlus situafi�n. If you would like �e to do this do aot hesitatz to call. Sincerely, i Rich hii$er I'srmer r Home Ie.r�ectors Flelp�ng witls Colutions � � i � VV1lVU1 ........................... ��_s�1 It is easy to find things to complain about when you are a well trained evaluator. My son Brice who many of you met last month was training to become a Truth in Sale of Housing evaluator. As part of his training on Sunday he went into open houses and examined the houses against the current TISH report. As he will testify to he often found more than 10 things "wrong" with the report, some picky, some serious. On the next several pages you will find the lists of deficiencies that he found. Of course if the Board requires evaluators to be disciplined these will have to be turned in as complaints. My point is that if you decide to change and go the direction of discipline then the Board will be very busy eliminating competition from the program, raising prices, creating animosity and discontent in the evaluator pool consequently creating the war that Commander Morehead warned about in his July memo to you. ,� .S 8'1 OS-17-2002 Truth in Sale in Housing Program Administrator I have inspected the property at 852 Cottage and have also examined the Truth in Sale of Housing report. I find that the following things where either missed by the inspector or marked improperly or ignored all together l. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Item # 1 3 9 9 15,17c 12 67 69 current call B N M M M B B B proper call B Y B B B B C B omitted comment Improper handrail Several water stains throughout Meta] pulls in closet light fixture. No globe on light fiacture in closet. Improper tape cover on unused flue line. Threaded faucets lack backflow protection Double cylinder deadbolt "C" Low guardrail around upper deck. I will be following up as to the city inspectors findings that I may more closely follow the guidelines in the future. Please send me a copy of the findings when they are available. If anyone has any questions please ca11651-293-0100 Sincerely Brice Staeheli o �_S�� September 16, 2002 South St. Paul Truth in Sale in Housing Program Administrator I have inspected the properfy at 834 2^d Ave S. and have also examined the Truth in Sale of Housing reporf. I find that the following notations where not on the Truth in Housing provided by the inspectori�i� Item # 1 1 1 1 4 7 8 8 9 11 �} 13 17 17 19 21 26 26 35 35 38 current call M M M M M M M B M M M H H B H B B B B M proposed call B B B B B B H B H B B B H H B H B B B B B comment No guardrail in area near bottom of stairs Low headroom Low hana�r�ail" � Notched stair stringer Temporary column in use Undersized water piping No water to basement shower No cold water to basement sink Open sewer line, old waier soften cycle Plastic T/P valve piping No water shut off for water heater Teflon tape used at plugged gas lines Bare bulb fixture in closet Lamp cord wiring to smoke detector Bath sink drain missing components Bare bulb fixture near sheif in bedroom No hold open hardware in bedroom Cracked pane in bathroom Uneven rise and run on exterior stairs Excessive rise on exterior steps Missing strike piate rear deadbolt I insist that this be invenstigated Q� .S'�R 06-02-2002 Truth in Sale in Housing Program Administrator I have inspected the property at 405 Rose Ave. E. and have also examined the Truth in Sale of Housing report. I find that the following things where.eit]ier missed by the inspector or marked improperly or ignored all together Item # 8 8 8 9 12 12 14 14 14 15 19 22 27 43 44 current call M M M M M M B B B B . proper tall H H H B B B B B H H B Y B H H omitted comment Open holes Plug fixses No jumper over water meter Washer improperly wired Tape repair to water line '/z" water pipes at meter '/z" water lines Improper T/P valve piping Scorching requires "H" Not sealed requires "H" Plastic dryer venting Small water stain Top Sashes painted shut No GFCI requires "H" Below spill line requires "H" I will be following up as to the city inspectors findings that I may more closely fo:low the guidelines in the future. Please send me a copy of the findings when they are available. If anyone has any questions please ca11651-293-0100 Sincerely Brice Staeheli 07' S1'1 April 20, 2002 Truth in Sale in $ousin� Program Administrator I have inspected the property at 1448 Bayard and have also examined the Truth in Sale of Housin� report. I find that the following things where either missed by the inspector�� marked improperly or ignored all together Item # 1. 1 2. 12 3. 12 or 14 4. 17a 5. 17c 6. 17c 7. 36 8. 36 9. 43 10. 47 11.47 12. 58-61 13. 60 14. 60 current call B M M M M M M M B none proper call B B B B B B B B H B B I : omitted comment Low headroom on stairs No vacuum protection on threaded faucets '/z" water lines (new copper) at water heater Vent lines not secured and loose Aluminum foil on joints of flue Rubber connector not approved Handrail not safety returned First stair to run for upstairs has a short run GFCI protected outlet missin� Sash paittted shut Broken sash cords Attic area easily accessible though back of closet Missing box covers Unsupported wiring I will be following up as to the city inspectors findings that I may more closely follow the guidelines in the future. Please send me a copy of the findings when they are available. If anyone has any questions please call 651-293-0100 Sincerely Brice Staeheli o3•r�1 os-l�-aoo2 Truth in Sale in Housing Program Administrator I have inspected the property at li78 Ashland Ave. and have also examined the Truth in Sale of Housing report. I find that the following things where either missed by the inspector�� or marked improperly or ignored all together Item # current call 12 B 15 M 17c M 17c M 19 H 19 H 36 M 36 M 36 M 44 M 27,33,38,47,53,57 M 55 N 57 M 59 Y 64 B 81 - proper call omitted comment B '/z" water couplers at meter limits home to '/z" service g Missing screws on joint ofwater heater B Flue reduces B Improper plug in chimney H Plastic dryer vent H Framing in basement not on treated wood B No handrail to attic B Handrail not safety returned B Improper guardrail in attic H No air gap in toilet suppiy B Missing sash cords throughout y Water stainin� on front porch B Cracked window y No comment for "Y" B Weathered, paint peeling B Louvers missing from bath vent damper. I will be following up as to the city inspectors findings that I may more closely follow the guidelines in the future. Please send me a copy of the findings when they are available. If anyone has any questions please call 651-293-0100 Sincerely Brice Staeheli 0 p� -Sf�1 os-l�-ZOOz Truth in Sale in Housing Program Administrator I have inspected the property at 1303 McLean Ave. and have also examined the Truth in Sale of Housing report. I find that the following things where either missed by the inspector��y or marked improperly or ignored all together Item # 8 8 8 9 9 12 13 15 19 19 43 44 52 71 current call M M M M M B M B N N M M M M proper call H H B H B B B H B C H H B B omitted comment No jumper over water meter Open holes on fuse box Plug fusesin use Extension cord wiring to dryer Bare bulb in closet Outside threaded faucet lacks backflow No gas shut off for gas dryer IVot sealed at chimney, not in metal liner Dryer vent longer that 14' Plastic ceiling cover flammable GFCI outlet will not test Toilet lacks backflow protection Small eeress window Some curling shingles I will be following up as to the city inspectors findings that I may more closely follow the guidelines in the future. Please send me a copy of the findings when they are available. If anyone has any questions please call 651-293-0100 Sincerely Brice Staeheli as .sr� .ruly is, aooz Truth in Sale in Housing Program Administrator I have inspected the property at 1731 Ivy Ave. E. and have also examined the Truth in Sale of Housing report. In my opurion the following things where either missed by the inspector�er or marked improperly or ignored all together Item # 1 9 12 14 15 19 19 23 51 51 67 67 74 current call B H M M B M H H M M M proper call B H B B B B B B H H B B B omitted comment Stringer starting to separate from joist Ceramic part missing, exposed conductor Outside threaded faucets not backflow protected '/z" water lines Flue line improperly supported Deteriorated wall framing Cleanout door on chimney not sealed Outlets aze not 20 amp rated One outlet each bedroom Switch cover missing No proper deadbolt front door Deadbolt built in to door knob double cylinder Service drop too close to deck. I will follow up to be sure that this complaint is investigated properly. Sincerely, Brice Staeheli o� � 06-02-2002 Truth in Sale in Housing Program Administrator I have inspected the property at 1116 Duluth and have also examined the Truth in Sale of Housing report. In my opinion the following things where either missed by the inspector G�}�� or marked improperly or ignored all together Item # 1 9 12 12 I3 17 current call B M M M H M proper call B B B B H B omitted comment No open side protection Routing of wires under joists Outside threaded faucets lack bacl�low protection Plastic supply piping No gas shut offto dryer Flue reduces I will follow up to be sure that this is investigated properly. Sincerely, Brice Staeheli 67 � o�-is-ZOO2 Tnxth in Sa1e in Housing Program Administrator I have inspected the property at 290 Johnson Parkway and have also examined the Truth in Sale of Housing report. In my opinion the following things where either missed by the inspector �isr�Gr�i or marked improperly or ignored all together Item # 1 1 1 9 12 12 13 13 14 14 43 64 73 74 76 current call B B B M B B B B M M B B B M M proper call B B B H B B B B B B H H B H B omitted comment Low handrail Handrail not safety returned Steep stairway Metal,pulls on light fixtures, some near grounded Water leak at meter Outside threaded faucet lacks backflow protection Unapproved shutoffs Unsupported gas lines '/�" water pipes serving more that three fixtures T/P valve piping closer that 6" from floor (Lack of GFCI requires H) (Jagged glass requires H) No metal liner visible Loose light fixture front door, han�ing conductors Trim around overhead door deteriorated I will follow up to be sure that this is investigated properly. Sincerely, Brice Staeheli o�-S�' 07-25-2002 Truth in Sa1e in Housing Program Administrator I have inspected the property at 980 Vir�inia and have also examined the Truth in Sale of Housing report. In my opinion the following things where either missed by the inspector� or marked improperly or ignored all together Item # 1 1 5 8 9 9 9 11 11 11 12 13 13 li 17c 23 27 27 33 36 36 36 36 39 53 53 63 69 69 72 current call M M M M M M M M M M B B B B M M M M M M M M M M M N M B B M proper call omitted comment B Bottom step off run B 4" unprotected area under stair B Joist notched at beam, separating H Knockout missin� on main box H Knockout missing on junction box B Metal pulls on light fixtures B Unprotected bulb near shelf B Vent ells in drain line for bath tub B Vent ell on drain line for laundry tub B Laundry tub wet vented B Shut off on water heater not gate vaive B Shut offto dryer not within 3' B Shut offto dryer not access able B Gas piping unsecured for dryer service B Negative pitch flue line B Reversed polarity on plug to right of sink B Screen door does not fit ti�ht B Casement window does not operate B Top sashes painted shut B Low headroom at bottom of stairs B Handrail not continuous B Handrail not safety returned B Low guardrail Y (should be rated Y-N) B Top sashes painted shut B Cracked panes B Finish and paint peelin� B Deck has openings of greater than 4" B Rear steps steep, no graspable handrail B Missing components and leaders. 6�'�� Comment on #52 should be "within 44" of floor" I will be following up as to the city inspectors findings. If anyone has any questions please call 651- 293-0100 Sincerely Brice Staeheli o� -sr� OS-13-2002 Truth in Sale in Housing Program Administrator I have inspected the property at 925 Snelling Ave. and have also examined the Truth in Sale of Housing report. I find that the following things where either missed by the inspector 3ie`r��E or marked improperly or ignored all together Item # 1. 1 2. 12 3. 23 4. 43 5. 53 current call B M H B B proper call omitted comment B Handrail not safety returned B Threaded faucet lacks backflow protection H Outlet covers missing H (Lack of GFCI outlet requires "F3") B Closet doors missing I will be followin� up as to the city inspectors' findin�s that I may more closely follow the guidelines in the future. Please send me a copy of the findings when they are available. If anyone has any questions please ca11 65 1-293-01 00 Sincerely Ron Staeheli 0� •S �9 OS-13-2002 Tnxth in Sale in Housing Program Administrator I have inspected the property at 877 Flandrau and have also examined the Truth in Sale of Housing report. I find that the following things where either missed by the inspector�� or marked improperly or ignored all together Item # 1. 1 2. 1 3. 11 4. 12 5. 12 6. 14 7. 19 8. 19 9. 19 10. 31 11. 31 1Z. 33 13. 44 14. 47 15. 52 16. 67 17. 67 18. 74 current call B B B M M M N �r N H H B M M M M M M proper call H B B B B B H H H H H B B B B B B B omitted comment Loose carpet, trip hazard Handrail not safety returned Rubber connector in use Unsupported water pipes No vacuum breaker on threaded faucets T/ P vale piping short Foam insulation on walls Plastic on walls not flame retardant Plates on framing not treated wood Reversed polarity on outlet Too few outlets in dining room Top sashes painted shut Rubber repair to supply pipes Door hangs up on floor Small egress window No deadbolt front door No strike plate rear door Service drop within 10' of deck. I will be following up as to the city inspectors' findings that I may more closely follow the guidelines in The future. Please send me a copy of the &ndings when they are available. If anyone has any questions please call 651-293-0100 Sincerely Ron Staeheli 03.�SYy Apri121, 2002 Truth in Sale in Housing Program Administrator I have inspected the property at 308 Clazence and have also examined the Truth in Sale ofHousing report. I find that the following things where either missed by the inspector marked improperly or ignored all together 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Item # 1 1 8 12 14 12-14 64 69 72 current call B B H M B B M n� M proper call B B H B B B B B B omitted comment Steep stairs Handrail not safety retumed Improper routing of wires Threads on faucets lack vacuum breaker Plastic piping from T/ P valve '/z" water pipes serve more that 3 fixtures Broken glass biocks Low handrail to sidewalk Missing leaders to direct away rain water. I will be following up as to the city inspectors findings that I may more closely follow the guidelines in the future. Please send me a copy of the findings when they are available. If anyone has any questions please ca11651-293-0100 Sincerely Ron Staeheli 6�-s�1 April 19, 2002 Truth in Sale in Housing Program Administrator I have inspected the property at 167 W Winfred and have also examined the Truth in Sale of Housing report. I find that the following things where either missed by the inspector ��illi� or mazked improperly or ignored all together Item # 1. 5 2. 5 3. 6 4. 11 5. 11 6. 11 7. 11 8. 11 9. I 1 10. 12 11. 12 12. 13 13. 21 14. 24 15. 24 16. 27 17. 27 18. 27 19. 29 20. 33 21.33 22. 41 23. 49 24.52 25. 52 current call M M B H H H H H H M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M proper call B B B H H H H H H B B B C B B B B B C B B C C B B omitted comment Excessive notching Lacks clearance to dirt Improper beam Mixed plastics Rubberconnectorimproper. Improper vent elbows on drain line of tub. Bath tub drain line improperly vented Clean out capped with "test plug" No 3" clean out on drain line. No vacuum breaker on threaded faucets Water shut offs not gate valves at main No dirt tee on water heater service Off level S trap on sink drain No clamp on dishwasher drain connection Missing sash cord. Broken pane Sash painted shut. Off level Missing hold open hardware Deteriorated frame Off level Off Level Smail egress windows Deteriorated frame and missing hazdware 6 � -�'�r� 26. 63 27. 63 28. 69 29. 69 30. 71 31. 73 M M M M M M : : . : : . Loose and missing mortaz. House off square due to foundation failure No handrail to sidewalk No landing, door opens over steps. Duct tape repair to chimney flashing Missin� mortar. I will be following up as to the city inspectors findings that I may more closely follow the guidelines in the future. Please send me a copy of the findin�s when they are available. Ifanyone has any questions please call 651-293-0100 Sincerely Ron Staeheli 358 Arbor Street � o�-s�r I respectfully suggest that these proceedings will not get you what you are looking for. If you believe that evaluations in St. Paul need to be much more in-depth and consistent then this route must be the slowest and most grueling. As a result of competitor complaints staff must have ho�rs and hours into these reports, meetings etc. All for the same result as calling me up and saying, "Ron we think you may be missing some things, lets talk about them" days of work have been lost. I never have been offered a face to face meeting about these complaints except once with Commander Morehead where he agreed to drop these subjective complaints. Unfortunately for a11 of us he was transferred and here we are. And now you have the question of disciplining the evaluator who has spent the most amount of time thinking about his business practices to teach other evaluators a lesson that they won't know what is. For 1/10� the effort you could require a quarterly meeting where a staff inember reviews the program and its complaints/comments with the evaluators. At this rate it will take 20 years to get through us all. 03 -S� Other evaluators are scared to come forward I talked to several of my fellow evaluators about coming here tonight in my defense. For the most part they are afraid that coming to my aid will shine a light on them and get the attention of the same person who has me in his sights. In other words the perception out there is that if certain evaluators want you out of the business then they will get you out. I did promise not to use their names in public but my wife also talked to many of them and will testify to these same type of conversations. Lncy 1\'elson, IBR Jnknson High ScRool Academy ofFiaa�nce S`t. Paarl, MN 55105 � �� Ron StaeLeli Aa'1eri.er�tral;tisp St Paui, MN � . •. I a•anted to drop }rou e:sete to lei y�u know how �uch I¢ppre�iated ail of fhc su�wrt gven to 'tae St Paul Communi.y. Last ni�ht (11-18-02) I taught a oammunity Bd Class at Gcntral Higlt School tided ".F�AiF' 2YI SELZ FOaR HONCE F{'�T'EOUTA .R��LTO.R" . I talked tn tiie class about L �th �nd housiag and tl�y were vety eXai�aci about it and asked Par a zeferrel. Ic was my p]easurc ro�ve your name to men of my class as a refciraL I have bcer. refemng your name over thm many years I have reughc Uus ¢7ess• Therc has r�evc. bcen a r,oznplaint tawazds you ar yaia competene;e, You are always FtmeSual and cornplctelytnorough, I have been dexling with business carccrs at Johuson Fligh School for mazay yeazs, S invite biuine3s people as guest speakecs for my siudez�ts. I insist on the speakes to be ethioai respoas{ble and trustwnrti�y. :t^nese chazacteristics aze daiitiitely ypur nstu�. I lenmacl tt�is by tfie feodback T gct from my clienu. �o one ever su�asted that you wece anyehi�g less tha,� efficien*.. ,�s a matzer af fact, srnne suggested that you werc too efficzcnt Agaia, thanlc }rou Par all yaur suppozt, .:.�pecially to thc St. PauI families, SSIIt:E1L>7.Y � LucyNe]son, Johnson Hi�. c ooi Ar�demy oPFinance, i / ../ / Tndepende� Sroker Realty o�-s � , Ron Staeheli, owner American Central Inspections September 22, 2002 Connie Sandber� Administrator of the St. Paui Truth in Sale of Housing program St. Paul, MN 55102 Connie, Voice (651) 293-0100 Cell (612) 865-2004 I find myself in an interesting situation and feel that it would be best to inform you and your office about it. Enclosed is a report that I prepared and faxed to the owner agent for 786 Ma�nolia Ave. E. in St. Paul. After preparing the report I received a call from the owner agent complaining about the number of comments that I had made and the excessive number of "B's" on the report He asked me to "bum" this report and that he was getting a different evaluator to do his report. I explained that we all had the same guidelines but he insisted that I not file this report and that he would get another one. It might interest you and your office how the new report compares to this one. It is reasonable to assume that who ever does the nea�t report has a reputation for doing "easy" reports. I assure you that this report accurately reflects the property today. p3-S�'1 In looking at the guidelines and Code of Ethics I do not see that I have to file this report if I am asked not to and that a new one will be done. I was told that the house is not currentiy listed for sale. I was assured that the agent has destroyed the copy that I faxed to his and I have not mailed him the hard copy. Please let me know if I missed anything that would require me to pay a filing fee in association with this report. Sincerely, C� �� leu. Ron Staeheli ll:/S.LJ.LI'JUL U^G'it'I'I RCI'IFVi RC�U�ID I.KVU.Fa � IYU,G47 '.C'C � p � -S�9 11-14•02 To whom i: mey coacem: �Y Aame i� Jay A. Soe&lcer � I a,m a licensed zeal esrate agent wocking Qvith :he bmkerage firm Rt�ax Resulta 1no. in gt, Paui, :vIIV, I have bean licenstd aiace 1993. I havt referrad c3i�ts m the city oP St. Paut to Mr. Rou 8taeheli uuracrous timaa throughout my tenwe ia the real estate busiaess. If ineaaory serves me conectly T believe these referrats stark.d at leest in 1994 & have continued since. These refezralc were to sellers whom Mt, SteeheEi paformcd the St. Paul'lYuth- Ta•Sale of Houslag tliacIosure repnrt whica is requi?ed by tE�e city of St. Psu? in resideuti�l rasi astate sales wifh in tt�e ciry of St Paui. Furtheanare, I Iu►ve refeaod. meny buyoxs to Mr. 9taekeli for whom he hes perinrmed buyer's �apx�°ns as we21. These ixisPections Lave takea piaee not oaly ib 3t. Paul but thtomugHout thn Twin Ci�es & subuz}�an marketp�ee, T hava p��3y �� oPPortuaity ta attend:narsy in.apxdoas gerformed hy Mr. Staoheli, I have fovnd Mr. 3taehcli tn perforra his jab whh compoteppe & professiouulism. JayA. Soef�cer RF.ALTf3k, CfRI lie/max Reaui�s Tnc, 107! Graad Avenue #IO2 St. �au},1�iN SSI05 651-2S1-4B06 t1.�V-1`J-'.'_Nk7� b(.17F' FRO('I� �: �oses?=E r:: i Z IOO WCSt AiOiiCZWIIy AVCR3IC � Miancagoiis, MN i�411 O� j S� PhonC:763-588-2523 Fax:612-�57-04 Nuviceibrr 19..Q02 Re: Ron St3eh'i American Central Tnsrcctious `I'n Whnm it May Concern: T have kuc�wt� Mr. Siuhli thruugh an a�ent at my nffice in Minn�apniis Since then I hav; b�;a�n ueiu;;:e3r. SWrtili to pertbrm St. Pnul Tnrth in Sc�e a£ Housing fur mc a:�d �Ay r�1CllLS. Mr. Stai:hfi alwuy� �xhihiieci the u4r,�ost integrity an,d a sinecm dcsirc to porfurm gr�at r��luslion report in meeiing a1] laousing nceds. Hc is s�xcaT �waluaiur. [ wnuld �irr Mr Ron S Wrhli s�+zitt without hcsitAtion. ,\,` Yours miiy, � �� .,�� "l t �� hah L. Van� !Z'ralto: "We Love lielpin� 8vcryanc Tiny an�] Sc11 Reai Estate" The part my lawyer wants me to be sure to include. D �� s � The following pages are for the record to express my objections to some procedural errors. They are not things on which I am basing the bulk of my defense on but they may come up at a latter date so I must include them here. d �.SY1 Ron Staeheli, owner American Central Inspections Voice (651) 293-0100 Cell (612) 865-2004 October 8, 2002 Connie Sandberg Pro�am Admuustrator Truth in Sale of Housings St. Paul, MN Connie Sandberg, First I would like to thank you and Chairperson Beedle for �anting the continuance I asked for. It was very decent of you and I do appreciate it. I azn a�riting this to make part of the record my objections to any hearinc as it regards my license to perfonn Truth in Sale of Housin� Inspections and the complaints you listed in your Notice of Disciplinary Action. With ali due respect there where several eirors that poison ureconcilably the entire proczdure and any result. The}• aze the following: 1) THE BOARD HAS HAD THE CASE AGAINST ME FOR 6 MONTHS. The entire case a�ainst me was given to the board before I was infonned that there �vas the possibiliTy that discipiinacy action might be taken a�ainst me. It is puttinL the prosecutions case aLainst a dzfendant to the }urv beTore the defendant even knows he is chazged. The Beard members have had inaccurate and misleadin� informaUOn about me for 6 months and could not have helped fotming opnuons about me and my business practices. Opinions that I will have an unreasonable burden to over come. Staffhad the results of their investigation for as many as 2 months before the April 17, 2002 meeting when they �ave the case to the Board. Staff withheld their conclusions &om me precluding me from presenting a defense on April 17�'. 2) ONLY Tf� BOARD CHAII2IS TO SEE Tf-IE COMPLAIISi'/RESPONSE BEFORE THE OFFICIAL HEARING Under the Guidelines adopted by resolution H02-02 on page 2 paragraph 5 it says specifically that only the Chanperson should be given a copy of the complaint and response. The entire Board was given the complaint violatin� this article of the Guidelines. Staff mailed additional copies to absent Board members. 3) TFIE SAME GiTIDELINES THAT WHERE VIOLATED IN GIVING Tf-IE BOARD Tf-IE COMPLAINTS APRIL 17`� PRECLUDED ME FROM CONTACTII�TG TI-IE BOARD AND ADDRESSING Tf� INACCURACTES The Guidelines do not allow ex-parte communication. In giving the complain[s to the Board the staff violated that azticle of the Guidelines. The sazne artic]e of the Guidelines kept me &om defending myself to the Boazd members. Sending the complaints to the Board members that �vhere not present directiy violated that same article. 4) Tf� HEARING IS BASED ON DISCTPLINARY GUIDELINES NOT ADOPTED WHEN TI-� TRANSGRESSIONS ALLEGEDLY OCCURRED. The Guidelines for Disciplinary Action resolutlons number 02-02 and 02-03 where passed by the board on April 17�' 2002. All of the complaints against me where based on evaluations perfomied before November 20�', 2001. You can not establish rules that you then appiy to transgressions occurrin� before the mles were adopted. 5) Tf� GIJIDELINES REQUII2E THAT Tf� FII2ST STEP IN 1NVESTIGATING A COMI'LANT IS THAT THE E VALUATOR BE INFORMED. 6� -Si�1 The Guidelines for Disciplinary Actions Adopted April 17, 2002 by iesolution #02-02 (Page I"Complaint investi�ation" item # I) specifically set out a procedwe for investigation complaints a�autst evaluators. That procedure requires that the very first act of staff after receiving a complaint is to inform the e� In all of the properties/reports that where investigated I was not infoimed until up to 2 weeks afra the complaint nas received and not until after the complaint was investigated. The Guidelines aze cerv clear on the proper order of actions by staff; according to the record that order «as violated. 6) STAFF RECOIvIMENDAITONS CONTAINED IN Tf� APRII, 17`" REPORT ARE BASED ON OPII�IONS DERIVED FROM FREE SPEECH THAT WHERE IRRELEVANT AND PRE7IJDICIAL AND NOT NOTICED TO ME AS Tf� SUBJECT EVALUATOR. StafT stated in the final report that at least pazt of the recommendation of discipline was based on a tiue statement that �4as «ritten in a comment section of a document that I had the right to make. A statement that none of the compiaints mentioned. As a govemment department it is incumbent upon you to be very careTul �vhen deciding disciplinary actions based on free and appropriate speech. The Board has had that opuuon before them for 6 months }vithout benefit of m}' e�planation and it should have never been inciuded in the staft recommzndations or the staT�'report about these complaints. It was prejudicial and urelevant to the underlying issues of the complaints. There was no compiauit prceess followed about the comment and as a result should not ha�e been included in the complaint inc report. 7) STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS CONTAINED IN THE APRII, 17 REPORT WHERE INCOMPLETE IN THAT THEY DID NOT CONTAIII THE RECONIIvIENDATIONS OF ALL OF Tt-TE STAFF MEMBERS. The Cmndr. Mike Morehead and at least one of the investigatin� inspectors recommended no disciplinarv� action be taken. As an impaftial report the staff report should have contained that infom�ation. 8) STAFF FiNAL REPORT CON'TAINS INFORMATiON THAT I MADE COMPLAATLS AGAINST 01T�R EVALUATORS. UNDER Tf� DATA PRNACY ACT I AM ENTiTLED TO ANONYNII'IY IN MAKTNG COMPLAINTS. I never gave my pemnssion to release my name as having complained against an}� evaluator and the report containing this information can hurt me with my business and future dealings with the Board These and other possible esors will foim any necessary appeal to both the Ciry Council and DistriM Courts. I read the letter that is part of the record of the 7uly meetin�, from the St. Paul CiN Attomey. It was her opution that any mention of ine or my case before the Boazd without me present violated the ex-parte portion of the Guidelmes and would taint the case a�ainst me. I am sure that giving the entire case to thz Board before I Ime�v its conclusions and ��ith no notice or oppor[unity to attend would fall under her definition of "[ainted". With all due respect I am sure you can see that any disciplinary action taken a�ainst me as it regazds these complalnts could never survive an appeai. Please consider this when schedulin� any meetings about this matter. Sincerzly, �� Ron Staeheli Cc: Ma}'or Randy Kelly St. Paul Ciri� Counci] et al.