03-696�/yl��£D — �����-id�� -�� e?�D.3
Presented By
Referred To
RESOLUTION
CITY OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA
Council File # ��` ���
Green Sheet # ..,�pD�
2q
Committee: Date
WHEREAS, Citizen Service Office, Division of Code
Enforcement has requested the City Council to hold public hearings
to consider the advisability and necessity of ordering the repair or
wrecking and removal of a two story, wood frame, single family
dwelling and the detached, one stall, wood frame garage located on
properLy hereinafter referred to as the "Subject Property" and
commonly known as 837 4th Street East_ This property is legally
described as follows, to wit:
Lot 7, Block 2, Auditar's Subdivision No. 69, St. Paul,
Minn_
WIIEREAS, based upon the records in the Ramsey County
Recorder's Office and information obtained by Division of Code
Enfarcement on or before January 8, 2003, the following are the now
known interested or responsible parties for the Subject Property:
Estate of Rachel A. Lyons, c/o Dorothy Lyons, 10072 North 1 Oth
Street, Lake Elmo, MN 55042; Dorothy Lyons/William Lyons,
10072 North lOth Street, Lake Elmo, MN 55042.
WHEREAS, Division of Code Enforcement has served in
accordance with the provisions of Chapter 45 of the Saint Paul
Legislative Code an order identified as an "Order to Abate Nuisance
Building(s)" dated May 8, 2003; and
V�I-IEREAS, this order infarmed the then known interested or
responsible parties that the structure located on the Subject Property
is a nuisance building(s) pursuant to Chapter 45; and
WHEREAS, this order informed the interested or responsible
parties that they must repair or demolish the structure located on the
Subject Properiy by; June 9, 2003 and
WHEREAS, the enforcement officer has posted a placard on the
Subject Property declaring this building�s� to constitute a nuisance
condition; subject to demolition; and
WI-IEREAS, this nuisance condition has not been conected and
Division of Code Enforcement requested that the City Clerk schedule
public hearings before the Legislative Hearing Officer of the City
Council and the Saint Paul City Council; and
WI3EREAS, the interested and responsible parties have been
served notice in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 45 of the
Saint Paul Legislative Code, of the time, date, place and purpose of
the public hearings; and
�3 - �o9l
WHEREAS, a hearing was held before the Legislative Hearing
Officer of the Saint Paul City Council on Tuesday, July 8, 2003 to
hear testimony and evidence, and after receiving testimony and
evidence, made the recorn.n7endation to approve the request to order
the interested or responsible parties to make the Subject Property safe
and not detrimental to the public peace, health, safety and welfare and
remove its blighting influence on the community by rehabilitating
this structure in accardance with a11 applicable codes and ordinances,
or in the alternative by demolishing and removing the structure in
accordance with all applicable codes and ordinances. The
rehabilitation or demolition of the structure to be completed within
�' s�� days after the date of the Council Hearing; and
�9DI f?�ne�
WI-��REAS, a hearing was held before the Saint Paul City
Council on Wednesday, July 23, 2003 and the testinnony and
evidence including the action taken by the Legislative Hearing
Officer was considered by the Council; now therefore
BE IT RESOLVED, that based upon the testimony and evidence
presented at the above referenced public hearings, the Saint Paul City
Council hereby adopts the following Findings and Order concerning
the Subject Property at 837 4th Street East:
1. That the Subject Property comprises a nuisance condition
as defined in Saint Paul Legislative Code, Chapter 45.
2. That the costs of demolition and removal of this building(s)
is estimated to exceed three thousand dollars ($3,000.00�.
3. That there now exists and has existed multiple Housing or
Building code violations at the Subject Property.
4. That an Order to Abate Nuisance Building(s) was sent to
the then known responsible parties to correct the
deficiencies or to demolish and remove the building(s).
5. That the deficiencies causing this nuisance condition have
not been corrected.
6. That Division of Code Enforcement has posted a piacard on
the Subject Property which declares it to be a nuisance
condition subject to demolition.
7. That this building has been routinely monitored by the
Citizen Service Offices, Division of Code Enforcement,
Vacant/Nuisance Buildings.
8. That the known interested parties and owners are as
previously stated in this resolution and that the notification
requirements of Chapter 45 have been fulfilled.
ORDER
The Saint Paul City Council hereby makes the following order:
��
03 - �9l�
necessary to demolish and remove this structure, fill the site and
charge the costs incurred against the Subject Property pursuant
to the provisions of Chapter 45 of the Saint Paul Legislative
Code.
�9D) I✓'�✓�y
2. If the above co�ctive action is not completed within this period
of time the Citizen Service Office, Division of Code
Enforcement is hereby authorized to take whatever steps are
The above referenced interested or responsible parties shall
make the Subject Property safe and not detrimental to the public
peace, health, safety and welfare and remove its blighting
influence on the coininunity by rehabilitating this structure and
correcting all deficiencies as prescribed in the above referenced
Order to Abate Nuisance Building(s) in accordance with all
applicable codes and ordinances, or in the alternative by
demolishing and removing the stxucture in accordance wrth all
applicable codes and ordinances. The rehabilitation or
demolition and removal of the structure must be completed
within " G`��days after the date of the Council Hearing.
3. In the event the building is to be demolished and removed by the
City of Saint Paul, all personal property ar fixtures of any kind
which interfere with the demolition and removal shall be
removed from the properly by the responsible parties by the end
of this time period. If all personal properly is not removed, it
shall be considered to be abandoned and the City of Saint Paul
shall remove and dispose of such property as provided by law.
4. It is fiLrther ordered, that a copy of this resolution be mailed to
the owners and interested parties in accordance with Chapter 45
of the Saint Paul Legislative Code.
1
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
28
29
30
Yeas Na s Absent
Benanav �/
Blakey �
Bosirom �
Coleman �/
Requested by Department of:
Code forcement Division
BY: � �</Nf
Form Approved by City Attorney
03 �9l�
� Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet �
Departmentlofficelcouncil: Date Initiated:
cs -���s�� 13-JUN-03 Green Sheet NO: 3001481
Contact Person & Phone• Deoartment Sent To Person InRiaVDate
Andy Dawkins � 0 ' n Services
266-�9Z� ASSig� 1 itizen Semces De artment Director �'G
Must Be on Council Agenda by (Date): Number Z ; Attornev
23JUL-03 For
Routing 3 or's Office Ma or/Assistant
Order 4
5 i Clerk Ciri Clerk
Total # of Signature Pages _(Clip All Locations for Signature)
Action Requested:
City Council to pass flus resolurion which cvill order the owner(s) to remove or repair the referenced building(s). If the owner fails to
comply with the resolu6on, the Citizen Service Office, Division of Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. The subject
property is located at 837 4th Street East.
Recommendations: Approve (A) or Reject (R): Personal Service Contrects Must Mswer the Following Questions:
Planning Commission 1. Has this person/firm ever worked under a contract for this department?
CIB Committee Yes No
Civil Service Commission 2. Has this person/firm ever been a city employee?
Yes No
3. Does this personffirtn passess a skill not normally possessed by any
current city employee?
Yes No
Explain all yes answers on separete sheet and attach to green sheet
Initiating Problem, Issues, Opportunity (Who, What, When, Where, Why):
This building(s) is a nuisance building(s) as defined in Chapter 45 and a vacant building as defined in Chapter 43 of the Saint Paul
Legislative Code. T7�e owners, interested parties and responsible parties known to the Enforcernent Officer were given aa order to
repair or remove the building at 837 4th Street East by June 9, 2003, and bave failed to comply with those orders.
Advantages If Approved:
The City will eliminaxe a nuisance. ,! �'� j j �oQ�
�P i i � i ��,dF�F�� p
DisadvantageslfApproved:
The City will spend funds to wreck and remove flus building(s). These costs will be assessed to the property, collected as a special
assessment against the properry taaces.
DisadvanWges If Not Approved: �
A nuisance condirion will remain unabated in the City. This building(s) will continue to blight the community.
P,��t'�'h v�n�9°
Tohal Amount of �j
Transaction: $000 Cost/Revenue Budgeted: y n� i, ;; w� L�L�
Funding source: 001-00258 activiryNumter: Summary Nuisance Abatement
Fi nancial Information:
(6cplain) .
�J�-���
REPORT
Date: August 12, 2003
Tmme: 10:00 am.
Place: Room 330 City Hall
15 West Kellogg Boulevard
LEGISLATIVE HEARING FOR ORDERS TO REMOVE/REPAIIi, CONDEMNATIONS,
SUMMARY ABATEMENT ORDERS, ABATEMENT ASSESSMENTS
Marcia Moermond
Legislative Hearing Officer
�.1. Resolution ordering the owaer to remove or repair the building(s) located at 837
Fourth Street East. ff the owner faiLs to comply with the resolution, Code
Enforcement is ordered to remove the building(s). (Laid over from 7-22-03)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends granting the owner sis months to complete the
rehabilitation of the property on condition that a work plan, indicating how all of the items
on the Code Compliance inspection report will be addressed, is provided by noon of
August 27, 2003.
2. Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the building(s) located at 495
Curtice Street East. If the owner faiLs to comply with the resolution, Code
Enforcement is ordered to remove the building(sj. (Laid over from 7-22-03)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends granting the owner si.z months to complete the
rehabilitation of the property on condition that the following is done by noon of August
27, 2003: 1) a work plan has been provided and approved; 2) a$2,000 bond has been
posted; and 3) evidence has been provided of financial ability to complete the items on the
Code Compliance inspection report.
3. Appeal of Noflce of Condemuation and Order to Vacate at 936 White Bear Avenue
North.
Legislative Hearing Officer recomxnends lifting the condemnation if all of the corrections
have been made at the time of the re-mspection on August 16, 2003.
4. Appeal of Correction Nofice at 936 White Bear Avenue North.
Legislarive Hearing Officer recommends denial.
5. Appeal of Notice of Condemnation and Order to Vacate at 285 Topping Street.
(Legislative Hearing Officer's recommendation is forthcoming.)
6. Appeal of Summary Abatement Order dated July 14 at 285 Toouine Street.
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends denial.
03-4°t (,
LEGISLATIVE HEARING, AUGUST 12, 2003
PAGE 15
� Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the building(s) located at 837 Fourth
Street East. If the owner fails to comply with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordered
to remove the building(s). (Laid over from 7-22-03)
Ms. Lyons and Mr. Hammes appeazed.
Ms. Moermond asked for a progress report.
Ms. Lyons stated that regazding probate, she has initiated the papers which will be filed in
Probate Court. She has a receipt for the performance bond, a receipt for the vacant building fee,
and a letter from her brother showing that he is fmancially capable of addressing the
rehabilitation.
Ms. Moermond asked if Ms. Lyons had developed a work plan. Ms. Lyons responded that she
has the Code Compliance report and will be developing a work plan next.
Mr. Magner suggested that they give each contractor a copy of the Code Compliance report to
work from.
Ms. Moermond recommends granting Ms. Lyons six (6) months to rehabilitate the property
with the condition that an acceptable work pIan, which addresses ali of fhe ifems on the
Code Compliance report, be submitted by noon on August 27, 2003.
jab
(� 3 '�'�
MINIJT'ES OF THE LEGISLA'TIVE HEARING OF 7IJLY 22, 2003 Page 5
9. The windows and/or storm windows are in a state of disrepair. Replace all missing or
broken window glass. Make all necessary repairs to frames, sashes, hardwaze, and
associated trim in a professional manner. Pemut may be required.
10. The windows and/or door screens aze missing, defective or in a state of disrepair. Provide
proper window and door screens for all openable windows and doors. Screens must be
tight-fitting and securely fastened to the frames.
12. Sanitation: Immediately remove improperly stored or accumulated refuse including;
garbage, rubbish, junk, vehicle parts, wood, metal recycling materials, household items,
building materiais, aubbles, tires, esc. from yard. The Saint Paul L.egislative Code required
alI exterior �arnperty areas ta be maintaia�� m a clean and sanitary condition Usable
materials must be stored in an approved manner, so as not to consUtute a nuisance.
� Resolu6on ordering the owner to remove or repair the building(s) at 837 Fourth Street
Eas4 If the ovPner fails ta comply with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordered to
remove ihe bailding(s). {Laifl over from 7-8-03)
The following appeared: Dorothy Lyons, 10072 Tenth Street North, Lake Elmo; Williams
Lyons, Ms. Lyons' son, 10105 Tenth Street North, Lake Elmo; and William Hammes, Ms.
Lyons' brother, 10105 Tenth Street North, Lake Elmo.
At the previous hearing, Marcia Moermond stated, there were a lot of things that needed to be
done. Racquel Naylor r�s�ndecd a code compliance inspecrion completed, a work plan, a
finaraciai plan, real esi�e ta�es �aid, and a$2,000 bond posted. Ms. Moermond added that they
were suppose to clear ihe riile also.
Ms. Lyons stated she got the Code Compliance Inspection done and the report was received on
Friday. The taaces are paid as of yesterday (7uly 21). She has a check with her today for the
$2,000 �rt'ormance bond. She has hsr brother William Hammes with her; he will help her
finance i� project, cnordinate it, and assume responsibiliTy far getting the job done.
Mr. Hammes stated he contacted a licensed piumber yesterday. As soon as they get the permits,
they will go to work on the plumbing.
Ms. Moermond asked about the citaiion that is ouTstanding for failure to reg'�ster the vacant
building. Ms. Lyons responded she did aoT get out to tbe Code Enforcement office to pay the
$200 fec �esteadxy_ Toaay �ova'� added i�at if the f�s have nc�t been paid, then the citation is
still outst�ding.
Ms. R�oermonc� asked wha� has �� don� fo get the property in Ms. Lyons' name. Ms. Lyons
answered she contacted an attorney who does probate issues, but she wanted to get the code
compliance inspection list first.
Ms. Moermond asked about the financial capacity to complete the repairs on the Code
Compliance Inspection Report. With Mr. Hammes help, responded Ms. Lyons, it will be done.
a3 r� �
MINiITES OF THE LEGISLATIVE HEARING OF NLY 22, 2003 Page 6
Because of the unclear ownership issue, Mr. Magner requested the foilowing from any parties
providing monies to rehabilitate the property: proof that they have the money to rehabilitation
this property, and willingness to put that money into the project. Mr. Hammes is opening himself
up to liability because he does not own the property and Ms. Lyons cannot get a mortgage
because she does not own the property, stated Mr. Ma�er. A simple affidavit is all that it
needetl.
Ms. Lyons stated her attorney saw no problems in clearing the utle.
Ms. lv��aermond stated the public heazing is tomorrow (July 23) at the City Conncil meeting. She
does noi have all �e Tlungs needed to giv� the Council a clean recommendatioa of 280 days to
rehabilitate the propeny. She wonid like to see the citation settied, and the vacant building fees
paid. It would be helpful to have the ritle in Ms. Lyons' name. If not, then the City woutd need
from the financier some kind of siaYement or affidavit that he understands the tiTie situation.
Also, the $2,000 bond should be posted
Mr. Magner stated generally LIEP does not allow someone that is not on tide or has ownership to
post the bond. Ms. Lyons may need a document from her ]awyer that she has started probate and
has IQgal control of the property. His office would still like to see this issue laid over for two
weeks ta get more of the issues taken care of before this proceeds any further. The ownership
issue n�ais to be soived. 3'hey have oniy had the code cflmpliance inspection for a few days so
they need another week to get bids from contractors.
Ms. Mo�rmond recommends laying over to the August 12 Legislative Hearing and the August 27
City Councii Public Hearing. They have made good progress. At the August 12 hearing, Ms.
Moermond would like to see the following progress: 1) the probates initiated, 2) the vacant
bnilding fee paid, 3) evidence of financial capacity to complete the items on the code compliance
inspection reporY, 4) the $2;000 bond posted, 5) the cita6on cleared, and 6) the vacant buiiding
fee paid. As saon as the probates are siarted, A�fs. Lyons' aitamey could wriie a letter to the
building t of the Office c�f LIEP (3.i�:ense, Inspecrions, Environmental Protection)
saying that Ms. Lyons is in possession of this building, probate has been initiated, and she would
like the City to accept the bond. If that does not work, Ms. Moermond wili try to work with
I1EP. In the meanUme, the property should be maintained so that the City does not have to mow
the lawn and do other things. Ms. Lyons responded she would like another letter sent ta her.
The heae�ag was adja� at a�pan��mately 10_5� a.m.
rrn
��-�� C�
. ., :
Date: July 8, 2003
Time: 10:00 a.m.
Place: Room 330 City Hall
15 West Kellogg Boulevard
LEGISLATIVE HEARING FOR ORDERS TO REMOVE/REPAIR, CONDENINATIONS,
SIJNIMARY ABATEMENT ORDERS, ABATEMENT ASSESSMENTS
Marcia Moermond
Legislative Hearing Officer
1.
2.
� 3.
Laid over summary abatements
J4303A1 Property L7eanup during Mar� ZOA3 at 595 Fdma�ad Aveane;
Jfl3fl3A3 Properfy Clean�p duri�►g March 2003 at 422 Jessamine Avenue East.
595 F'dmund AvEnue
Legislative Heazing (1f'ficer reco�mends reducing the assessment from $297 to $152 plus the $45
administrative fees for a total assessment of $197.
422 Jessamine Avenue East
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
J03TI2A'��I1Q �'a�a�wide we�3 garbage hau�ing service for the first quarter of 2003;
J0304A Property clean-u� for part of April 2003.
483 Ariington Avenue East (J0304A)
Legislative Heazing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
104 Larpenteur Avenue West (J03TRASHIQ)
Legislative Hearing O�cer recommends reducing the assessment from $120 to $50 plus the $20
service fee for a tatal assessmen# of $70.
i0b le�Iani#flba Avenue (7a3d4A)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
876 Rice Street (J0304A)
Legislafive Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
1094 Ross Avenae (Jfl304A)
Legisiative Hearing Officer recossame�ads appraval of tixe assessmern.
Resolu�4n ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 837 Fourth Street East.
If the owner fails to comply with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the
building. �
(Recommendation is forthcoming.)
03 - �9(0
LEGISLATIVE HEARING REPORT OF JIJLY 8, 2003
Page 2
4, Resolufion ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 1819 Sheridan Avenue.
If the owner fails to comply with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the
building.
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the resolution.
5, Laid over summary abatement:
J0302AA Property cleanup during February 2003 at 1004 Bush Avenue.
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
rrn
03- 69G
CITIZE�i SERVICE OFFICE
Daaald J Lw.a, Ciry Clerk
DNISION OF PROPERTY CODE E�IFORCE�biENT
.4r.dyDmvkirzs Propram3fannQer
CIT'I' OF SAINT' PAUL Nuisartte Buildin� Code Enforcement
Rcxdy C. Ke[[y, Hfayor 1600 White Bear Avenue Nortk Tel: 6�l-266l900
Sain[Pau1,�5�106 F¢t:6il-266-1926
i
June 13, 2003
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS
Council President and
Members of the City Council
Citizen Service Office, VacanUlQuisance Buildin�s Enforcement Division has requested the City Council
schedule public hearin�s to consider a resolution ordering the repair or removal of the nuisance building(s)
located at:
837 4th Street East
The City Council has scheduled the date of these hearings as follows:
Legislative Hearing - Tuesday, July 8, 2003
City Council Hearing - Wednesday, July 23, 2003
The owners and responsible parties of record are:
Name and Last Known Address
Estate of Rachel A. Lyons
c/o Dorothy Lyons
1OQ72 North lOth Stceet
Lake Elmo. � ��0"?
Dorothv L��ons:tii'illiam Lvo�
10072 \ortu lOth Strvt
Lake Elmo, ivI\` »Oz2
Interest
Fee Owner
PossessionrClaims occnersni�
AA-ADA-EEO Employu
737 4th Street East
June 13, 2003
Page 2
The legal description of this proper[y is:
Lot 7, Block 2, Auditor's Subdivision No. 69, St. Paul, I�finn.
03- �9�
Division of Code Enforcement has declared this buildin�(s) to constitute a"nuisance" as defined b;
Le�islative Code, Chapter 4�. Division of Code Enforcement has issued an order to the then kno�vn
responsiole pasties to eliminate this nuisance condition by correcting the deficiencies or by razin� and
removin� this buildin�(s).
Inasmuch as this Order to Abate has not been complied with the nuisance condition remains unabated, th�
community continues to suffer the blightin� influence of this property. It is the recommendation of the
Division of Code Enforcement that the City Council pass a resolution orderin� the responsible parties to
either repair, or demolish and remove this building in a timely manner, and failin� that, authorize the
Division ofCode Enforcement to proceed to demolition and removal, and to assess the costs incurred a�ainst
the real estate as a special assessment to be collected in the same manner as ta�es.
Sincerely,
1>
ii �
i
Steve Ma�er
Vacant Buildings Supervisor
Division of Code Enforcement
Citizen Service Office
SM:pm
ec: Frank Berg, Buildin� Inspection and Desi�
Meghan Riley, City Attomeys Office
Nancy Anderson, Assistant Secretary to the Council
Laurie Kaplan, PED-Housin� Division
ccnph
9
AA-ADA-EEO Employer
Z2 .
MINUTES OF THE LEGISLATIVE HEARING ��— `� •'°
ORDERS TO REMOVE/REPAIR, CONDEMNATIONS
SIJMMARY ABATEMENT ORDERS, ABATEMENT ASSESSMENTS
Tuesday, July 8, 2003
Room 330 City Hall, 15 West Kellogg Boulevard
Marcia Moermond, Legislative Hearing Officer
The hearing was called to order at 10:03 a.m.
STAFF Pl�SENT: Steve lvfagner, Tony Novak, and Hazold Robinson, Code Enforcement
Marcia Moermond sYated she will work on recommendations for the CiTy Council on how to
handie all of ttte matiers on ttxe agenda today. All of these issues will have a pubiic hearing in
front of the City Council because they all involve money or properry rights.
Laid over summary abatement:
J0302AA ProperYy cleanup at 1D04 Bush Avenue
(No one appeazed. This issue was discussed at the end of the hearing after the owner arrived.)
Laid over summary abatements
J03D3Ai Property Cleanup at 595 Edmund Avenue
J03(13A3 Property cleanup at 422 Jessamine Avenue East (City Council referred this
matter back to the Legislative Hearing Officer)
422 Jessamine Avenue East
(No one appeared. This issL�e was discussed at the end of the hearing after the owner arrived.)
595 Edmund Avenue (Laid over from 6-10-03)
Mazcia Moermond stated the City did a property cleanup at this address for bags of yard waste
and dehris in the yard. The owner wrote a letter to Andy Dawkins (Code EnforcemenT) on June
1D. The assessicaent is $252 glus $45 administrative costs.
(A videotape was shown.)
Ms. M�rmand sLate� ar�exs we� �saaleci on A�arch 21 with a campliance date of March 26.
The following appeared: Karla Johnson, owner, and Mr. Reynolds, friend. Ms. Johnson stated
she received a letter on Mazch 22. She called Lisa Martin (Code Enforcement) on Mazch 24.
Ms. Johnson works three jobs and is a great grandmother. Mr. Reynoids, who is staying at her
house, is a recovered heart surgery parient. He cut the grass and trimmed the hedges. That is
why the bags were by the sides of the gazage. He did everything he could physically do. She
asked for an extension from Ms. Martin. Ms. Johnson thought it was very short notice from
Saturday morning to Wednesday to do the cleanup.
o����
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINLTTES OF NLY 8, 2003 Page 2
Ms. Moermond asked about any indication of a phone cali. Hazold Robinson responded it was
after the work was done. Ms. Johnson responded she called the inspector from work on Monday
morning.
Mr. Robinson stated that on Apri12, there was a voice mail and the inspector spoke to the
property owner regarding the work order. The owner was not sure what day her yazd was cleaned
up, but she thought it was Saturday. The owner felt that the City was targeting her, and the work
was done.
Ms. Johnson stated s�z ia9ke.d to ihe inspector Monday moming. She also talked to Mr. Dawkins
because the snspector said she had to have screens on tfie windows. There was snow on the
ground, so she did not need screens on the windows. Ms. Moermond responded the City Code is
not season-specific. The City Code requires the screens regardless.
Ms. Johnson stated she called the inspector on Monday, Mazch 31, because the bags were gone
on Friday. The inspector said that she had no knowledge of any of this. If the City picked up the
bags, it is unclear how the inspector did not know about it. Mr. Robinson responded the work
order was sent on March 27. Parks cleaned the yazd on Mazch 28. The summary abatement was
mailed on the 21�`. This was compiaint-based, and the inspection was done on March 20.
Ms. Moermond asked about a history of this property. Mr. Robinson responded there was an
order issued on May 1, 2000, for exterior maintenance. There were no orders for refuse or
debris.
Ms. Moermond stated she is heazing Ms. Johnson say that she had asked for an extension. Ms.
Johnson's letter says that she talked to Ms. Martin, who said she would go to the property on
March 26 to see how it was going. She did that, did not see enough progress, and had the work
order issued. It is a matter of miscommunicafion. Ms. Johnson responded the work was done. It
just needed to be hauled away. She works two jobs. She physically caiuiot do it, and Mr.
Reynolds did the best he couid. He trimmed the bushes and the hedge on the property line and
cut the grass, but she told him the notice said nothing abouf that.
Ms. Moermond asked what is on the sumulary abatement order and what needed to be cleaned
up. Mr_ Robinson r�onded the simunary abatement order says to "Remove impraperly stored
or accumnlat�d a�fizse incl�ding: garbage, �ubbish, discarded fur�aiture, appliances, vehicle parts,
scrap wood a�d metai, recycling materials, househald items, building materials or rubble, tires,
brush, e1[e. fram yacd areas '>
Mr. Reynolds stated the City picked up the bags that he placed by the gazage to be hauled off the
next day.
Ms. Johnson stated she got the letter on a Saturday, she called the inspector on a Monday. She
assumed everything was understood. The following Saturday, they planned to dispose of
everything. Everyday there was more progress. The hedges were trimmed, the yazd was cut.
She cannot do it with the hours that she works. Ms. Moermond responded the line of argument
O� (
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF NLY 8, 2003
Page 3
that "she cannot do iP' says that she is not responsible for maintaining the property. What Ms.
Moermond is willing to do is take $100 offthe assessment. It is reasonable that Ms. Johnson
was confused about what was agreed upon and may have been vague when she called on
Monday. There is no record of that call, but there are records of other calls that she made.
Ms. Johnson asked about the her rocks. Ms. Moermond responded she can go to Risk
Management for help with that.
Ms. Moermond recommends reducing ihe assessment from $297 to $152 plus the $45
administrarive fces for a tatal assessment of $197_
J03TRASHIQ Provide weekly garbage hauling service for the first quarter of 2003;
J0304A Property clean-up for part of April 2003.
483 ArlinQton Avenue East (J0304A)
(No one appeared.)
Marcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
104 Larpenteur Avenue West (J03TRASHIQ)
Paui Testor, owner, appeared and stated he ordered trash pickup service the first of the year. He
was using his barrel and not using the City barrei anymore. They City picked up their banel on
January 10 or 15. He was charged for two extra weeks. He called the City once or twice.
Marcia Moermond responded that the City turns off their service once they have a record of the
owner calling and proving there is private garbage service at the property.
Hazold Robinson reported they started gazbage service about September 27, 2002. BFI was
called on January 10, 2003, and the City container was removed on January 10.
Ms. Moermond asked whether he used the gazbage container those last two weeks. Mr. Testor
responded that he did.
Steve Magner reported the Suminary Abatement Order says the City requires a written notice
mailed io their office inciicafing the carrier. Tfiere has Yo be confirmation to stop the service.
They do not drive by on a weekly basis.
Ms. Moermond sTated that when l�tr. Testor's sister was here at a previous legislative heazing,
they falked about the assessment for the other garbage service for the third quarter of 2002. The
City incurred the cost of providing the gazbage service. Ms. Moermond could do one of two
things: 1) divide the assessment over five years; 2) push back the payment of the assessment
until he sells the property because of his disability. He would not have to pay it all until the
property is sold. The interest charged is 4.75%.
o�-���
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF NLY 8, 2003
Page 4
Mr. Testor stated his sister was holding his paycheck. She would not make payment when he
wanted her to, and it took ten weeks for him to talk her into getting trash service. She was aiso
mismanaging his checkbook, so he took the checkbook back. He is going to pay his assessment
in full today or next week. He just does not want to pay for that last week.
Ms. Robinson stated the inspector said to give notice to Parks on January 10 to cease pickup.
The notice does take sometime to get through. They e-mail and send regulaz mail to Pazks.
Ms. Moermond stat�d her notice says the charge is $120. She asked how many pickups that
would entail. Ms. Robinson respt>nded iwo_
Ms. Moerinond stated she will reduce the assessment from $120 ta $50 plus the $2Q service fee
for a iatal assessment of $70. The owner should not be chazged for the last week of gazbage
service.
106 Manitoba Avenue {J0304A)
Marcia Moermond stated her notice says that there aze discarded furniture, appliances, vehicles
parts, household items, refuse, and debris on the properiy. She asked if this property has been at
a legislative hearing previously. Steve Maguer responded it was torn down by the City a long
time ago.
Nura Hassan, owner, appeared and stated she has garbage service with BFI. They told her to get
everytliing oui, and said ihey would haul the next day, but it was a week before they came out.
They charged her $400 for hauling things.
(A videotape was shown.)
Ms. Moermond stated those items were not picked up by her gazbage service. She asked if those
items were left by the gazbage service. Ms. Hassan responded she dces not know. This was
regulaz garbage tt3ai overflowed S�e asked if the car is considered garbage. IvIr.l2obinson
responded that it was not; the caz was not abated.
Ms. Moermond asked whether she called the City to let them know she had garbage service and
she wauid like them to pick up these items� dvls. Hassan responded the gazbage was picked up
prior to the d�dllinE_ ��e did not think it was necessary to call the City.
NIs. Moermond stated there were items she picked up after the deadline. It looks like the City
did the work. She can offer spreading the assessment over five years so it is more affordable.
Ms. Hassan responded she did not understand what the City picked up.
Ms. Moermond asked if she would like Yo see the videotape again. Ms. Hassan responded yes.
(The videotape was shown again.)
0�3-1fl�l�
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF NLY 8, 2003 Page 5
Mr. Robinson stated the inspector did note that some of the items were removed and some
remained. She should go after the BFI hauler for a rebate. Ms. Hassan responded she is
disappointed because BFI shouldn't have left anything behind. She will pay the assessment all at
once. She requested a note saying that the City picked up things after BFI came out. Mr.
Robinson responded they can work something out.
Ms. Moermond recommends approvai of the assessment.
876 Rice Street (J0304A)
(No one appeared.)
Marcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
1094 Ross Avenue (J0304A)
Marcia Moermond stated this case is about "rubbish, oii/fuel tank, discarded furniture, grill,
mattress, wood, etc." and the owner was notified March 27. The City asked that it be taken caze
of within a week, but the work was not done until Apri125.
Hazold Robinson reported they spoke to the property owner on Apri13, who requested an
extension, which was granted. 3'fie recheck was done April 17. Some of the items were gone;
others were still there.
Iviaselino L. Tavale, owner, appeared and stated he talked to Mr. Vang. Mr. Tavale ordered a
dumpster to pick up everything. He moved the aluminum cans in back to recycle them. He was
going to use the shingies for the porch. Everything eise was cleaned up. The City picked up the
aluminum cans which he was going to take to the recycling on Friday. He needs the money. He
cannoi do a11 it�e work at onr,e, and he cai�not afford a contractor, so he does a little bit at a time.
It was stacked neafly.
(A videotape was shown.)
Ms. Moermond stated it looked like he did some cleanup. Mr. Tavale responded the only thing
the cr�w piciced up was the re�ycling. The Ciiy le#i the shingtes covered with boazds. Ms.
Moermond r�spondeci it l�ked iike t3� �ity picked up more than recycling. Mr. Robinson
responded the City left the new shingl�s.
Ms_ A�ioe�mosed zegoated the City did the work a month later. The owner should have known it
needed Yo be done. It looked like he had plenty of opportunity to compiete the cleanup. He can
file with Risk Management to claim money for the shingles and the recycling. She can
recommend that the assessment be paid over five yeazs. Mr. Tavale responded the recycling was
going to be taken during that day, and the City came in the morning to pick it up. Ms.
Moermond responded it had been a month since he was told to pick it up and a week after he had
negotiated an extension. Also, Mr. Tavale could have let the City know he needed another
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF JULY 8, 2003
�� �o� b
ZZ..
Page 6
extension. Mr. Robinson added that the recycling materials are clearly stated on the sumuzary
abatement order.
�
Mr. Tavale stated it does not cost $250 to remove recycling and materials. He paid $250 for the
dumpster. Ms. Moermond responded it is a lot cheaper for an owner to remove it. The owner
did not keep up his end by having these things taken caze of by the new deadline. Also, he did
not call the City to let them know he could not finish in time.
Mr. TavaTe statad thaY the igsp�ector did not send a letter saying the deadline was a certain date.
Ms. Moermond respamded lae did not n�e3 La do that It was cleaz Mr. Tavale had called and
arranged that la#er date.
Mr. Tavale stated it was not fair that he paid for a dumpster, and then the City charged him $250
to take away the recycling and the shingles. He put in a new gazage for $12,000 last yeaz. There
aze other neighbors that have worse yards.
Ms. Moermond asked if this was a complaint-based inspection or part of a sweep. Mr. Robinson
responded it was complaint-based.
Mr. Tavale stated he did his part. Ms. Moermond responded the City does not Yhink he did his
part. He has same options: 1) he can have the assessment spread over five yeazs, 2) he can file a
form vuith the City and explain his disability, which will postpone the payment of this until he
seils the property, or 3) he can go to the City Council on July 23 and ask them to decrease or
eliminate the assessmen#. Mr. Tavale responded he will appeal on July 23.
Ms. Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 83'7 Fourth Street East.
If the owner fails to comply with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove
the bailding.
(Steve Magner submitted photographs.)
Steve Magner reported the building was condemned July 2002 and it has bee�n vacant since then.
The current owner is Rachel A. Lyons, �,fio has been d�ceased since April 16, 1991. There have
been siac �'vnman> abatement noiices issued to secure tfie garage vehicle door, remove abandoned
vehicle, re�ave s4Qw andlor ir.e fram the public sidewalk, and cut tall grass. On April 30, 2003,
an inspectncrn mfthe buitding was conducted, a list of deficiencies which constitute a nuisance
condition was developed, and photographs were taken. An order to abate a nuisance building
was issued on May 8, 2003, with a compliance date of June 9. As of this date, this properry
remains in a condition which comprises a nuisance as defined by the Legislative Code. The
vacant building fees are due. A citation was issued chazging the owner with failure to pay the
annual vacant building fee. Real estate ta�es aze unpaid in the amount of $1,198 total for the
years 2002 and 2003. Taxation has placed an estimated mazket value of $12,300 on the land and
$54,300 on the building. A Code Compliance Inspectior� was applied for on June 16, 2003. A
o3-c�� �
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF NLY 8, 2003
Page 7
bond has not been posted as of today. Code Enforcement estimates the repairs to be $80,000 to
$90,000. The estimated cost to demolish is $7,000 to $8,000. This is a resolution for a 15 day
order to repair or remove this structure.
The following appeazed Dorothy Lyons and William Lyons, Ms. Lyons' son. Ms. Lyons
responded she wants to repair it because it is repairable.
Ms. Mcermond stated she sees a lot of problems with the history of this house. The Ciry had to
boazd this building, the vaeant building fees have not been paid, a citation has been written for
that, and real estaxe taYes ars owed of �I,fl98 for#he years 2(!02 and 2003. All these things tell
Ms. Mcermond that the owners will have �oubie completing the repair pla� She will want to
see these issues addressed before she widl consider a recommendation to the City Council for
more time.
Ms. Lyons stated there was an inspection in 1992 and i994. Everything was done except the
electrical. They put on a new roof, painted the house, and put in new storm windows and screens
in 1992 and 1994. Ms. Lyons stated she has been keeping the t�es up-to-date. She intends to
get a code compiiance inspection. All that she is asking today is to table it untii another reading
uniil she gets the code compliance report from Jim Seeger (License, Inspections, Environmental
Protectnon [LIEP]).
Ms. Moermond siated this issue is set to go to pubiic hearing before the City Council on July 23.
She would li3ce to Iay tlus over to the July 22 Legislative Heazing. Within two weeks, there
should be a r,ode compliance anspecTion report. Also, she would like to see the taxes paid by
then, and a$2,000 bond posted.
Ms. Lyons stated someone told her it had been vacant for a while, but that is enoneous. Her
furniture is still in there. Ms. Moermond responded what is in front of her now is the order to
rsmove or repair. Staff has said 'at was condemned in July 2002. It does not matter whether it
was occupied when it was condexnned. It is ihe condition of t1�e building itiat merited the
condemnation. The condemnation is not in front of her right now. They did not appeal the
condemnation or the appeal was not successful. This is the way it has come to her right now.
Ms. Lyons stated she was upset when she saw a sign posted that it was vacated, It has always
been occupied. She is taking caze of the property. It is in the histoncai area. She could not get
the electrical done plus sfie meede�i money to regair itne house.
Ms. Moermond stated if ii is not possibHe do have everything done, she will try to work with Ms.
Lyons, but she woutd like to see a good faith effort put forth to get things done. The public
hearing before the City Council will be the following day.
Ms. Moermond asked whether they have enough help in terms of programs and assistance. Mr.
Lyons responded they will look into it. Ms. Moermond stated they will talk about this in two
weeks if they cannot find the assistance they need.
03 �� �
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF NLY 8, 2003
�j
Ms. Lyons stated the property is in probate and that puts a blockage on the issue to a certain
extent. If the property was in her name, it would be a different story.
Ms. Moermond recommends laying over to the July 22, 2003, Legislative Hearing for the
following to be done: 1) a Code Compliance Inspection completed, 2) a work plan indicating
how all the items on the Code Compiiance Inspection Report will be completed, 3) a financial
plan showing evidence of financial abiliry to complete the items on the Code Compliance
Inspection Report, 4) real estate taxes paid, 5) a$2,000 performance bond posted, 6) vacant
building fees paid, and 6) the citation for failure to pay the vacant building fees should be taken
caze of.
Resoiuiion ordering t6e ownea #o remove or repaic the property at 1&19 Sheridan Avenue.
If the owner fails to comply with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordesed to remove
the buiiding.
(Steve Magner subxnitted photographs.)
The foliowing appeazed: Diane and Bob Trudrowski, 9052 Bush Lake Road, Bloomington. Ms.
Trudrowski stated she is the stepdaughter of Florence E. Walz, and has power-of-attorney over
Ms. Walz's personal matters; however, she does not have power-of-attorney over the house. Ms.
Walz is intiigent. She was placed in a nursing home in about 1997. The property was signed
over by a quick claim deed to her grandson Scott Walz in 1989. He resided at that properiy from
1987 to present Ms. Trudrowski found out Mr. Walz had not paid the ta7fes. She paid the t�es
and the assessment, even #hough Ms. Walz had vaca#ed the building. Ms. Trudrowski ceased
paying in 2001. At ttiis point, she does not know what her options are. There is a remote chance
Ms. Walz will go back to the house. It is Ms. Trudrowski's understanding that if the property
were sold, 51 % would go to the State and 49% would go to Scott Walz.
Mr. Trudrowski stated they have the means to fix up the property.
Ms. Moermond asked who is Scott Walz. Ms. Trudrowski responded he is gainfully employed.
Mr. Magner responded they have a mailing address for him.
Ms. Trudrowski stated she saw Mr. Ma�er when she �as tfiere getting same personat things
inside Yhe buiiding far Florence Vdaiz. She wauld like to k�ow her opT�ons. She cannot rent it
out beca�lse it has been grandfathered iu.
Steve Magner reported the building was condemned Apri12003 and has been vacant since May
1, 2003. The current property owner is Scott A. Walz. There have been six summary abatement
notices issued to remove gazbage, cut tall gxass, remove roofing material, and repair or remove
the gutter that is partialiy blocking public sidewalk. On Apri121_, 2003, an inspection of the
building was conducted, a list of deficiencies which constitute a nuisance condition was
developed, and photographs were taken. An order to abate a nuisance building was issued on
Apri124, 2003, with a compliance date of May 27, 2003. The property remains in a condition
which comprises a nuisance as defined by the legislative code. Vacant building fees are due for
d�`� t �o
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF JULY 8, 2003
Page 9
2002 and 2003. Reai estate taYes of $3,070 for the years 2001, 2002,and 2003 aze unpaid.
TaYation has placed an estimated mazket value of $11,700 on the land and $54,100 on the
building. Neither a Code Compliance Inspection nor bond have been obtained or applied for as
of today. Code Enforcement is seeking a resolution to repair or remove this structure.
Mr. Magner stated he met �Is_ Trudrowski at the property. The building has suffered from
severe lack of maintenance. The major problem is #he roof has failed and is allowing moisture to
enter. He advised Ms. Trudrowski that it is not a good idea to be in the building because of the
extensive mold growth and the hazardous conditions of the floors rotted out in some areas. This
building would have to be gutted down to the bare walls and studs to be rehabilitated. If the
building was razed, she does not know whether the building department would allow a building
on Yhat site because it is a small lot.
Ms. Trudrowski asked does the building have to meet the 30 foot criteria. Mr. Magner responded
there is a frontage criteria and a square footage criteria, and there are some paraineters to the
adjacent buildings. The problem they see there is that the adjoining homes aze at a higher
elevation and this lot drops off down towazd the street and the northwest corner of the lot. The
City would probably require full plans for rebuilding on it. If someone was to come in today and
apply for code compliance inspection, and the City Council decided to give the owner 180 days,
the properry couid be saved. If that does not happen and the house is torn down, it would be up
to the building deparhnenl and the zoning department of LIEP to allow rebuilding on that site.
Mr. Trudrowski asked does he have the right to ask LIEP if they would they allow rebuilding on
the lot. Mr. Magner responded that is general public information. That office would need to
know the address and check the site.
Ms. Moermond stated they are grandfathered in for the setbacks. Mr. Magner added that as long
as the house is existing.
Ms. Moermond asked if there �=zs a provision about the house being sehabilitated at more than
50% of the value, the new zoning criteria would come in#o pla3�_ Ivlr. Ma�er responded they
need to inquire about that with LIEP.
Ms. Tra�drowski asked aboaat a quic� claim deed. Mr. Magner responded there is an issue with
the ownership. LIEP will not accepl a bond from s�ffieone who is not the owner unless the
owner sYates in u�si'ang the other person can post a 3�nud. Ms_ I�ioermond responded that if they
had pawer�f-attoruey over the house, they could apply for all of this on behalf of Florence Walz
if she 3�as 51% ownership; however, Ms. Moermond cannot provide legal advice. Ms.
Moermond suggested they contact an attorney who specializes in real estate. If Florence Walz is
indigent, she may be able to be represented by Southern Minnesota Regionai Legal Services.
Mr. Magner stated if no action was taken and the Council approves the resolution to repair or
remove, the City would raze the buiiding and assess those costs on the taaces. At that point, the
lot could be sold. The adjoining properiy owner may be interested in the lot.
�� l�
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF NLY 8, 2003
Page 10
Mr. Trudrowski asked whether $3,070 was the total tax bill. Tony Novak responded there aze
also penalties. Mr. Magner added that there may be assessments, too.
Mr. Trudrowski stated they are going to be gone July 23. He asked whether this issue could be
delayed for that meeting in order for them to talk to an attomey. They would like to raze the
property and put up a new structure. Mr. Magner responded if they aze considering anything
other than rehabilitation, they shouid check with LIEP about rebuilding on it because it is an
extremely small lot.
Ms. Moermond stated she is not inclined to ask the Council to delay this. This is a dangerous
situarion. There aze mold and struchuai problems. Children could get inside.
Ms. Trutlrowski concurred with Ms. Moermond and asked when would be the next meeting. Ms.
Moermond responded there is a legislative hearing on July 22. Ms. Trudrowski responded she
cannot make that meeYing.
Mr. Magner stated that there should be enough time in the next two weeks to answer the
questions about the legal opportunity to wark on the property. Then, Ms. Moermond can make
more of an educated decision on the properiy on July 23. Ms. Trudrowski responded that is fair.
Ms. Moermond stated that once the ownership issue is cieaz, then she will be looking for a Code
Compliance Inspection. When talking to the building official about whether this is a rebuildable
site, they shouid ask if it is a site that can be rehabilitated. Her concern is there is so much of an
investmen#, it may be ireated as a new building. Mr. Trudrowski responded it may need to be
torn down and started over.
Ms. Moermond suggested the Trudrowskis call her before they go on vacation.
Jacob Bellinsky, 1813 Sheridan Avenue, appeared and stated he is the adjoining property owner.
The property at 1819 Sheridan is such a small lot, and a rodent trap right now. Neighbors
complain ihat rabbits are breeding there. Ae would like to acquire the land once it is vacant.
(Mr. Bellinsky submitted a photograph.)
Mr. Trudrowski asked whether the City sells the property. Mr. Magner explained that his office
would hire a contra�tor to re�ove Lt`e dwe�ling 15 days after the Council approves the order. Ms.
Moermond addrd that if nothing else t�e prc�paty wiil forfeit to #he State.
(There was finther discussion about the property.)
Ms. Moermond recommends approval of the resolution.
1004 Bush Avenue
(Note: this address was called at the beginning of the meeting, but the owner was not present.)
d�j' I�p
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF JULY 8, 2003
(A videotape was shown.)
Page 11
Daniel Yesnes, P.O. Box 5032, Hopkins, appeazed and stated he received a letter from the
inspector regarding the debris. He calied the inspector to tell him the tenant was moving out.
The inspector said his concern was the box spring and the dresser. Ms. Yesnes went there and
took away those things. As faz as he knew, the garbage service would take the rest and the carts.
That was the last he heazd of it until he received a letter about the chazges from the CiTy. He does
not know if there is a step missing. Mr. Yesnes compiied with what the inspector told him
verbally. Either the garbage people did not pick it up or the City did it beforehand.
Ms. Moermond askad whaY wa� in the s�n�ary abatement order. Mr. Magner responded the top
box is checked: "garbage, rubbish, discazded fizrniture, appliances, vehicle parts, scrap wood and
metal, recycling materials, househoid items, building materials or rubble, tires, brush, etc. from
yard areas." Written below is "furuiture and a mamess."
Ms. Moermond asked whether he received a copy of the order. Mr. Yesnes responded he did.
The box spring and a clothing dresser were the big things the inspector asked him to take care of.
He saw things by the ailey ready to go. The inspector told him to take care of something and he
did. As could be seen from the videotape, 90% of the items were in gazbage carts.
Ms. Moermond asked if there was a record of the phone conversation. Mr. Robinson responded
that there tivas not The summary abatement was mailed on February 4, 2003, with a compliance
date of February 10. The work was done by the Pazks Department on February 18. There were
14 days betcveen the time the summary abatement was maiied and the time Parks did the work.
There was plenty of time for the garbage company to pick it up. Mr. Yesnes responded the
tenant gave him a story. The big stuff was taken care of by Mr. Yesnes and the rest was in carts.
Ms. Moermond asked about the recheck and the cleanup. Mr. Robinson responded the recheck
was Febraary 10 and ttte cteanup was February 18.
Ms. Moermond asked if there was a problem with the garbage service. Mr. Yesnes responded
the tenants may have cancelled the garbage service. Mr. Yesnes is not certain. He is oniy saying
the big items were taken. The amount of $3Q6 seems high for items that aze in a cart and ready
for a huck to dump.
Ms. Mo�rmond �i�ed about tl� hour�y �harge. �ir_ Rabinson respnnded $225.
Mr. Yesnes stated ih�re ac��se fve or � carts full ofthis stui�. Ms. Moermond responded the
City ns nfli ira tke garbage business. They only send people out on certain calls. The tenants are
responsible in the Iease, but ultimately it is the owner's responsibility. It was not taken care of.
The recourse is not with the City. She cannot make an azgument to the City Council that the
citizens of Saint Paui are responsible for his tenants cancelling the garbage service a week eazly.
He should seek the money from the tenants for the cost incurred.
o3-e� �
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF NLY 8, 2003
Page 12
Mr. Yesnes asked if the inspector followed standazd procedures. Absolutely, responded Ms.
Moermond.
Ms. Moermond rewmmends approval of the assessment.
422 Jessamine Avenue East
(Note: this address was called at the beginning of the meeting, but the owner was not present.)
The following appeazed: IZobert H. DeFlorin, owner, and Kathy Schmig, fiiend. Ms. Schmig
stated that Rosemary I3efIorin (one of the listed owners) is deceased, and Robert is her son.
Mazcia Moermond stated the assessment is for $1,150.
Ms. Schmig asked for a breakdown of the costs. 5teve Magner responded the workers were there
for three hours for $675, there were 25 tires, and ten yards of refuse. Mr. Deflorin responded he
watched them pick it up. The workers were there for one hour. His yard is fenced. One guy
went out of the yazd and picked up gazbage from the church property. Ms. Schmig stated there
was a dumpster on Mazch 20 and they paid $2�0 for it. All the refuse was in that dumpster.
Mr. Deflorin stated the City ripped down security cameras and cut the cables.
Ms. Scl�mid stated there were tires in ihe tree, and they cut that down. They were in the house
and watched the workers do the enrire thing. They were having some problems so they could not
come out of the house. The City did not have to tear down the treehouse. They did not have to
take the empty trash barreis. That does not make any sense. There were 11 cars there. By the
time they came, there was one caz left. There was a flatbed tow truck that the workers pushed,
and they opened its hood. They took one car out and left the flatbed there. They gave a ticket for
pazking on the lawn. He has been doing iY for 4D years. There was a dog catcher there, who left
a note that the dog were abandoned there. Then, they came and put a vacant building sign on the
house on Apri17. By Apri14, they sent ihe check back on an appeal of the first work order. Ms.
Moermond responded she would like to see the paperwork on that.
(Ms. Schmig showed Ms. Moerxnond a document.)
Ms. Schmig stated she got a call on the day of the appeal for the vacant building saying that Code
Enforcement was going to drflp it because it is nat vacant any longer. After that, they got another
notice that scr�n;� �ere anissiag velricles must be operating, fascia, eta It was fixed. They feel
they are being �sed. Ti1e house was condemned in 2000. Now, the house is in good shape.
Ms. Sc�mig daes not feel the City should come in every time they want to look at the house.
There were trash and cazs there, but they took caze of it except for one automobile. She would
like to see the videotape.
(A videotape was shown.)
o�- c���
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF NLY 8, 2003
Page 13
Ms. Schmig stated she does not think it took three hours to do that little bit of work. Also, the
yard was ripped up.
Ms. Schmig stated the City gave them three days to do the first order. She appealed and got more
time. They got it all done before the hearing. She thought the wood would be okay. As for the
tires, Mr. Deflorin is a mechania That is her fault; she thought the tires wouid be okay if they
were stacked neatly.
Ms. Schmig staled they have trash pickeci up every week.
Ms. Moermond asked for an itemized list of the charges. 'I'hree hours at $575, 25 tires at $250,
ten cubic yards at $180, plus the $45 administrative fees comes to a total assessment of $1,150,
responded Mr. Magner.
As for the tires in the tree, Ms. Schmig asked if the City had determines the hees to be rotted.
Ms. Moermond responded there is a charge per tire.
(Ms. Schmig showed two out of the four cables that she says were ripped or torn by the City.)
Mr. Deflorin stated the City shorted out some ofthe channels on the monitor. He feels there is a
personai vendetta against him. Mr. Schxnig stated Mr. Deflorin got in trouble a few yeazs ago,
but he should not have to pay for the rest of his life. Also, when he went to the building code
place to deal with the vacant building, ten cops arrested them because Mr. Deflorin had a
warran#.
3t seems there were things damaged or taken that had useful value, stated Ms. Moermond. They
can file a claim with the City. She asked did they want the assessment spread over five years.
Ms. Schmig responded yes.
Ms. lvioermond recommends spreading the assessment over a five-year period.
The heazing was adjourned at 12:11 p.m.
rm