05-301�,vt �N � �
�-�-DS
RESOLU710N
Presented By
Referred To
Council File # �S �l
Green Sheet # 3025204
1 WHEREAS, Neighborhood Housing & Property Improvement has requested the City Council to
2 hold public hearings to consider the advisability and necessity of ordering the repair or wrecking and
3 removal of a one-story, single family dwelling with a detached, two-stall, wood frame garage located on
4 property hereinafter referred to as the "Subject Property" and commonly lrnown as 800 Iglehart Avenue.
5 This property is legally described as follows, to wit:
6
7
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
I.ot 5, Block 5, Edwin Dean's Subdivision of Part of Smith and I.otYs Out lots to the City
of St. Paul, Ramsey County, Minnesota, except alley L,ot 16, Block 3, Butterfield
Syndicate Addition No. 1.
WHEREAS, based upon the records in the Ramsey County Recorder's Office and information
obtained by Neighborhood Housing & Property Improvement on ar before November 28, 2004, the
following are the now known interested or responsible parties for the Subject Property: CDC Investment
Crroup, Inc., P.O. Box 93, Cottage Grove, MN 55016-0093; Rebecca L. Williams, 800 Iglehart Avenue,
St. Paul, MN 55104-5541; Maisie (Massy) Ballard, 1225 Westminster Street, St. Paul, NIN 55101; JP
Morgan Chase Bank, 2255 North Ontario, Suite 400, Burbank, CA 91504-3190; Minnesota Medical
Assistance Program, Minnesota Department of Human Services, 444 Lafayette Road, St. Paul, MN
55155-3850; Shapiro & Nordmeyer, L.L.P., 7300 Metro Blvd, Suite 390, Edina, MN 55439-2306
WHEREAS, Neighborhood Housing & Property Improvement has served in accordance with the
provisions of Chapter 45 of the Saint Paul L.egislative Code an order idenfified as an "Order to Abate
Nuisance Building(s)" dated January 18, 2005; and
WHEREAS, this order informed 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 Property by February 2, 2005; and
WHEREAS, the enforcement officer has posted a placard on the Subject Property declaring this
building(s) to constitute a nuisance condition; subject to demolirion; and
WHEREAS, this nuisance condition has not been corrected and Neighborhood Housing &
Property Improvement requested that the City Clerk schedule public hearings before the Legislative
Hearing Officer of the City Council and the Saint Paul City Council; and
AA-ADA-EEO Employer
GlTY OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA GZ
1 WHEREAS, the interested and responsible parties have been served notice in accordance with
2 the provisions of Chapter 45 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code, of the time, date, place and purpose of
3 the public hearings; and (�
4 V�� ��
5 WHEREAS, a hearing was held before the Legislative Hearing Officer of the Samt Paui City
6 Council on Tuesday, March 8, 2005 to hear tesTimony and evidence, and after receiving testimony and
7
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
evidence, made the recommendation 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 welfaze and
remove its blighting influence on the community by rehabilitating this structure in accordance with all
applicable codes and ordinances, or in the alternative by demolishing and removing the structure in
accordance with all applicable codes and ordinances. The rehabilitation or demolition of the structure to
be completed within �� days after the date of the Council Hearing; and
tSO
WHEREAS, a hearing was held before the Saint Paul City Council on Wednesday, April 6, 2005
and the testimony and evidence including the acUon taken by the I.egislative Hearing Officer was
considered by the Council; now therefore
BE TT 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 800 Iglehart Avenue:
That the Subject Property comprises a nuisance condition as defined in Saint Paul
Legislative Code, Chapter 45.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
That the costs of demolition and removal of this building(s) is estimated to exceed three
thousand dollars ($3,000.00).
That there now exists and has existed mulUple Housing or Building code violations at the
Subject Property.
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).
That the deficiencies causing this nuisance condition have not been corrected.
That Neighborhood Housing & Property Improvement has posted a placard on the
Subject Property which declazes it to be a nuisance condition subject to demolition.
That this buiiding has been routinely monitored by Neighborhood Housing & Property
Improvement, Vacant/Nuisance Buildings.
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:
1. The above referenced interested or responsible parties shall make the Subject Property safe and
not detrimental to the public peace, health, safety and welfare and remove its blighting influence
on the community by rehabilitating this structure and correcting all deficiencies as prescribed in
the above referenced Order to Abate Nuisance Building(s) in accordance with all applicable
AA-ADA-EEO Employer
1 codes and ordinances, or in the alternative by demolishing and removing the siructure in �' �`
2 accordance with all applicable codes and ordinances. The rehabilitation or demolition and
3 removal of the structure must be compieted within ��€tee�r� days after the date of the Council
4 Hearing. l �
5
6 2. If the above conective action is not compieted within this period of time Neighborhood Housing
7 & Property Improvement is hereby authorized to take whatever steps are necessary to demolish
8 and remove this structure, fill the site and charge the costs incurred against the Subject Property
9 pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 45 of the Saint Paul Izgislative Code.
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
3. In the event the building is to be demolished and removed by the City of Saint Paul, all personal
property or fixtures of any kind which interfere with the demolition and removai shall be
removed from the property by the responsible parties by the end of this time period. If all
personal property 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 further ordered, that a copy of this resolution be mailed to the owners and interested parties
in accordance with Chapter 45 of the Saint Paul L.egislaUve Code.
Requested by Department of:
Benanav
Montaomerv
Bostrom
ThL
Haz
Lai
Hel
Ado�
Adox
By:
Appz
By:
Yeas Navs
✓
✓
J
Absent Neichbor od Housin Pro ert Im rovement
B �, 1 N1' -.-
AA-ADA-EEO Employer
� Green Sheet Green Sheet Green $heet Green Sheet Gresn Sheet Green Sheet �
_. � _ �
: �,��"e��o����n�„ ������a�� Green Sheet NO• 302520� ��
' rf �-{ �Ieig6bwLOOd Housing/Pioperiy � 7-FEB-05 .
� Contact Person & Phone;
Deoarhment SentTOPerson InitiaUDate
Andy Dawkins � 0 Ho ' o
26E7927 puign 1 hoodHo ' De armieut ' ector ���
Musf Be on Council Agenda by (Date): Num6er 2 � A rne ,?sJ�f — b„ j
�� OEAPR-05 For
Routing 3 vor's OfGce — �r/Assistant T __
. . Order 4 o cil
5 i CI k i Clerk
� Total # of Signature Pages _(Clip All Locations for SignaWre)
Action Requested: -
�: City Councfl to pass this resolution which will order the owner(s) to remove or repair the referenced building(s). If the owner fails to
- comply with the resolution, Neighborhood Housing & Property Improvement is ordered to remove the building. The subject property
' is located at 800 Iglehart Avenue.
e�, �
, Recommendations: Approve (A) or Reject (R): Personal Service ConVacts Musi 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/firtn ever been a city employee?
" Yes No
3. Does this person/firm possess a skill not normally possessed by any
� ° cuvent ciry employee?
;n , 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 Saim Paul
' Legislative Code. The owners, interested parties and responsible pazfies known to th8 Enforcement Officer were given an order fo
' repair or remove the building at 800 Iglehart Avenue by February Z, 2005, and have failed to comply with those orders.
; --_ AdvanWges if Approved:
The City will eliminate a nuisance.
Disadvantages ii Approved:
, The City will spend funds to wreck and remove this building(s). These costs will be assessed to the property, collected as a special
assessment against the property taxes.
�� Disativantages If Not Approved:
A nuisance condition will remain unabated in the Ciry. This building(s) will continae to blight the communiry.
�„ ;
;� , . Total Amount of
"�' 8000 CosURevenue Budgeted: y
Trensaction:
;' FundinySource: NUiSanceHouSing ActivilyNumber:3p2�j� �+�' s{�QSP,2tf�F(;e+nfRy
Financiallnfortnation: Abatement
� � (Explain) ��� � $
NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSLVG & PROPERTY �7PROVEMEhT
Andy Dawkins, Progr¢m,N¢rt¢ger /�tG � �.(\,
l » J�J
C �Y �r" Ja�r PA V L Nuisartce Building Code Enforcement
Randy C. Ke!(y, Mayor l600 Nonh Wkite Bear dvenue Te[: 65l-266-I900
SairstPanl,M1LY5�106 F¢cb�l466-1926
��
February 11, 200�
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS
Council President and
Members of the City Council
Neighborhood Housing & Property Improvement , Vacant/Nuisance Buildings Enforcement
Division has requested the City Council schedule public hearings to consider a resolution
ordering the repair or removal of the nuisance building(s) located at:
800 Iglehart Avenue
The City Council has scheduled the date of these hearings as follows:
Legislative Hearing - Tuesday, March 8, 2005
City Council Hearing - Wed�esday, April 6, 2005
The owners and responsible parties of record are:
Name and Last Known Address
CDC Investment Group, Inc.
P.O. Box 93
Cotta�e Grove, M1V 55016-0093
Rebecca L. Williams
800 Iglehart Ave
St. Paul, MN 55104-5541
Maisie (Nfassy) Ballard
1225 Westminster Street
St. Paul, MN 55101
JP Morgan Chase Bank
2255 North Ontario
Suite 400
Burbank, CA 91504-3190
Interest
Fee Owner
Homesteader
Power of Atty. For Homesteader
�.��..� ��;���u�1 ���
Mortga;e Holder
��� .� �
�v�
AA-ADA-EEO loyer
�����
a � ;.
H�`
�'�t
800 Iglehart Avenue
February 11, 200�
Pa�e 2
Name and Last Known Address
Minnesota Medical Assis[ance Program
Minnesota Department of Human Services
444 L.afayette Road
Shapiro & Nordmeyer, L.L.P.
7300 Metro Blvd
Suite 390
Edina, NIN 55439-2306
The legat description of this property is:
Interest
Lien Holder
Atty. For Mort�aje Holder
Lot 5, Block 5, Edwin Dean's Subdivision of Part of Smith and L.ott's Out lots to
the City of St. Paul, Ramsey County, Minnesota, except alley.
Neighborhood Housing & Property Improvement has declared this building(s) to constitute a
"nuisance" as defined by I.egisiative Code, Chapter 45. Neighborhood Housing & Property
Improvement has issued an order to the then known responsible parties to eliminate this nuisance
condition by correcting the deficiencies or by razing and removing this building(s).
Inasmuch as this Order to Abate has not been complied with the nuisance condition remains
unabated, [he community continues to suffer the blighting influence of this property. It is the
recommendation of the Neighborhood Housing & Property Improvement that the City Council
pass a resolution ordering the responsible parties to either repair, or demolish and remove this
building in a timely manner, and failing that, authorize the Neiahborhood Housing & Property
Improvement to proceed to demolicion and removal, and to assess the costs incurred against the
real estate as a special assessment to be collected in the same manner as taxes.
Sincerely,
1�
. , i i �
Steve Mab er
Vacant Buiidings Supervisor
Neighborhood Housing & Property Improvement
SM:mi
cc: Frank Berg, Building Inspection and Design
Judy Hanson, City Attorneys Office
MaryErickson, Assistant Secretary to the Council
I.aurie Kaplan, PED-Housing Division
AA-ADA-EEO Empioyer
_: ���.
..t.LA,Fg'�_
�� � '
:',as.'x."�'.?s-�-�-
C� 30 �
MINiJTES OF THE LEGISLATIVE HEARING ���C'�Z
ORDERS TO REMOVE/REPAIIZ, CONDENINATIONS, ABATEMENT ASSESSMENTS,
ABATEMENI' ORDERS, RENTAL REVOCATION CERTIFICATES
Tuesday, Mazch 8, 2005
Room 330 City Hall, 15 Kellogg Boulevard West
Marcia Moermond, L,egislative Hearing Officer
The hearing was called to order at 10:02 a.m.
STAFF PRESENT: Steve Magner, Neighborhood Housing and Property Improvement (NHPn
Laid over Summary Abatements from 3-1-OS (scheduled to go to City Council on Mazch 16):
996 Charles Avenue (J0406A)
Mike Lyon, owner, 4181 99'�' Avenue NE, Blaine, appeared and asked if the dollar figure could be
reduced. He is guilty: he travels and the lawn got too tall. He has since hired a neighborhood boy
to do the lawn. Ms. Moermond responded that this is not a fine; it is a charge for service. There is
no criminal chazge associated with any of tkus. It is simply that the City mowed the lawn for him
and charged a flat hourly rate. Most of it is a trip chazge.
Steve Magner reported this was a sununary abatement for tall grass and weeds in the front and
back yards. There was a Correction Notice issued at the same time for a garage. There was a
longer tune to comply on the gazage; and it was in compliance at the last inspection. Mr. Lyon
responded that he put siding on the gazage.
Prior to that, said Mr. Magner, there was a summary abatement issued to another person in 2003.
Mr. Lyon responded he didn't own it then.
Ms. Moermond stated she would like to ask if the owner would promise not to do this again. Mr.
Lyon responded yes and said that he is taking Ms. Moermond's time for something that should not
haue happened.
Ms. Moermond recommends reducing the assessment by half from a totai of $220 to a total of
$110. It did cost the CiTy that much money to do a cleanup. She will iook to the owner to take
care of this properiy from now on.
793 Howell Street North (J0406A)
(Note: Ms. Moermond received a letter dated Febniary 27, 2005, from Frances Olson, owner.)
Mazcia Moermond explained that the owner appears to be disabled and homebound. Her finances
aze a problem. A follow up phone call was made to see if she would be interested in qualifying for
a deferment or dividing payments over time. (Note: no one answered the owner's phone and
there was no machine for taking messages.) Ms. Moermond would like to review the file on this
property.
Steve Magner reported his office received a complaint on July 12, 2004; there was illegal dumping
in the alley of 16 foot garage doors and large garbage bags. The complainant thought the gazage
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF MARCH 8, 2005
U� �c��
�te � 2 ��
doors were from down the alley. The inspector found a blue Plymouth open to enhy plus brush
and scrap wood on the west end of the property. A Swnmary Abatement was issued and sent to
Frances Olson. There is no information that maii was retumed. A Vehicle Abatement was issued
on the blue Plymouth, lacking tabs, and open to entry. On 7uty 20, the properiy owner called and
asked for an extension on the car and said the brush was cleaned up. On August 27, the brush and
wood were still there. There was no answer when calling the owner. There was an extension on
the car and a work order was sent on the brush and wood.
(A videotape was shown.)
Ms. Moermond stated it did not look like dumped items. She asked was a vehicle abatement done
on the Plymouth. Mr. Magner responded the caz was gone on September 15. The inspector
cleazly indicated on the order to remove brush and scrap wood $om the west side of the yazd.
Ms. Moermond recommends reducing the assessment by half from a total of $323 to as total of
$161.50. It was a small brush pile and a small amount of lumber.
�i� Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the building(s) at 800 Iglehart Avenue.
If the owner fails to comply with the order, Neighborhood Housing and Property
Improvement is ordered to remove the building(s).
The following appeared: Lawrence P. Zielke, Attorney with Shapiro and Nordmeyer, 7300 Metro
Boulevard #390, Edina, 55439; Lori Athias, 4521 Orchard Avenue North, Robbinsdale, 55422;
and David Youmans.
(Photographs were submitted.)
Steve Magner reported this is a one story dwelling. The building has been vacant since Aprii 9,
2004. The cunent owner is CDC Inveshnent Group per Ramsey County Properiy Records and
Revenue. There have been siu smiunary abatement notices issued for several violations. On
January 5, 2005, 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 with a compliance date of Febil3ary 2, 2005. As of this date, this
properry remains in a condition which comprises a nuisance as defined by the legislative code.
The City has had to board this building to secure it against trespass. The vacant building
regisiration fees aze due. Tasation has placed an estimated market value of $34,700 on the land
and $112,300 on the building. On Febniary 14, a Code Compliance Inspection was done and is
aitached. A bond has not been posted. The cost to repair is $70,000 to $80,000; cost to demolish,
$7,000 to $8,000.
Marcia Moermond stated it looks like a condemnation. She asked was there a fire. Mr. Magner
responded there was an extensive fire that resulted in the opening of a vacant building file.
G�-3C� �
LEGISLATIVE HEARING NIINLTTES OF MARCH 8, 2005
Page 3
Ms. Moermond asked about the summary abatement norices. Mr. Magner responded most of
them were issued between Apri12004 and January 2005. A number of those resulted in work
orders being issued.
Mr. Ziellce reported that he is the attomey for the foreclosure that took place on July 9, 2004. The
six month redempfion has expired. The only notice he got was a letter dated February 11, 2005.
Mr. Zielke contacted his client via e-mail on Febniary 21 with a letter saying attached is a copy of
a notice of public hearing. His client is J.P. Morgan Chase Bank. Homecomings is the servicer of
this loan and JP Morgan Chase Bank is the enrity that owned the mortgage that was foreclosed.
Mr. Zielke is the attomey for both. He never got a response as to whether they wanted hixn here
this morning, but Mr. Zielke was coming this morning on 763 Fu11er anyway. There is a purchase
agreement. JP Morgan Chase Bank is trying to sell it to Lori Athias. The foreclosure is done. It's
a good thing that someone is here to rehab the properry and meet the code compliance issues. Mr.
Zielke was contacted by one other investor during this redemption period; therefore, there must be
some redeeming quality to this property.
Ms. Moermond asked can he identify some of the players in her paperwork. Mr. Magner stated
CDC Invesiment Group comes up for Ramsey County and he is mailing to them. Minnesota
Medical Assistance Program was recorded as a lien holder on August 7, 2003. Mr. Zielke stated
they foreclosed on Rebecca Williams.
Lori Athias stated she has a purchase agreement. The mortgage company hired real estate agents
to sell the property once the foreclosure process was completed. That was done. It was put on the
market. David Youmans contacted the real estate agent. The inspection was done. They put
together the rehab plan. They aze purchasing the properiy from the mortgage company and
working through their real estate agent.
Ms. Moermond stated the homesteader could apply for an abatement for the properiy taaces. Mr.
Magner responded that the taxes for 2003 and 2004 haue been paid. CDC is listed because there
was a court claim filed on August 22, 2004, for Massie Ballard, power of attorney for Rebecca
Williams. Mr. Zielke stated they were foreclosed out and have no interest in the property at this
point.
Ms. Moermond stated the main problem aze the significant items on the Code Compliance
Inspection. This is not the typical rehabilitation project. Dauid Youmans responded it looks
scarier on paper. He has been through the house a couple of times. They haue done a lot of
rehabs and a lot of new conshuction. This is just one of the many he has done.
(Ms. Athias submitted before and after photographs of a fire-damaged house in Minneapolis.)
Ms. Moermond stated they are scheduled to close on Mazch 28, so the Apri16 public hearing
would be after that, and all this should be in good shape at that point. She would like to look
through these materials. She might ask for more details. The fire damage looks profound to this
building, so she might apply more scrutiny because of that. She would like to be coxnfartable in
answering questions if the Council wonders how this can be done.
��-�o �
LEGISLAT'IVE HEARING MINIJTES OF MARCH 8, 2005 Page 4
Ms. Athias stated she would also like to send other photographs of fire damaged homes that they
have rehabilitated. There are about three other ones that are faz worse than this one.
Ms. Moermond stated there is no bond posted yet, the vacant building fees aze due. She would be
looking for that to be taken care of by noon of Apri16. The $2,000 bond will be sufficient. She
asked about the financial information. Ms. Athias responded she has a pre-approval letter. She
can send further information about that with the photographs.
Ms. Moermond stated it looks like things aze in order. There will not be another legislative
hearing on this. She will recommend the Council give 180 days to do the rehabilitation.
Ms. Moermond recommends the following: granting the owner 180 days to complete the
rehabilitation of the properiy on condition that the following is done by noon of April 6, 2005:
1) post the $2,000 bond, 2) pay the vacant building fees, 3) submit a work plan indicating how and
when the property will be rehabilitated, and 4) submit evidence of financial capacity to execute the
rehabilitation.
Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the build'utg(s) at 763 Fuller Avenue. Tf
the owner fails to comply with the order, Neighborhood Honsing and Property
Improvement is ordered to remove the building(s).
Lawrence P. Zielke, Attorney with Shapiro and Nordmeyer, 7300 Metro Boulevazd #390, Edina,
55439, appeazed.
(Photographs were submitted.)
Steve Magner reported that this is a two story dwelling with a detached two stall garage. It has
been vacant since July 7, 2004. The current owner is Deusche Bank Trust Company, per Ramsey
County Property Records and Revenue through foreclosure. The previous owner attempted to
rehabilitate this property prior to losing it. The Coda Compliance Inspection is attached. There
have been ten summary abatement no6ces issued for several code violations. This address was
picked up during a sweep of the azea. A file has never been closed. On January 12, 2005, 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 nuisance building was
issued on January 24, 2005, with a compliance date of Febniary 8. This property remains in a
condition which comprises a nuisance as defined by the legislative code. The City has had to
board this building to secure it against trespass. The vacant building registration fees of $250 are
due. Tasation has placed and estimated mazket value of $36,200 on tUe land and $115,800 on the
building. On January 10, 2005, a Code Compliance Inspection was done and is attached. A bond
has not been posted. Code Enforcement Officers estunate the cost to repair this strucrixre is
$80,000; estimated cost to demolish, $8,000 to $9,000. This property is in foreclosure. Mr.
Magner was contacted by a real estate agent who is trying to mazket the building.
Mr. Zielke stated he was contacted tkus morning by Mr. Clark of Brighton Real Estate for
purposes of representing their interests at this hearing. Brighton has assumed servicing
C5� �i
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTE5 OF MARCH 8, 2005 Page 5
responsibilities for this foreclosed mortgage from Homecomings. Mr. Zielke attempted to contact
Homecomings asking for instructions. It was not until this morning that he found out that
Homecomings had transferred servieing on this, wluch explains why he didn't heaz from them. As
far as foreclosure goes, a foreclosure sale was held on December 3, 2004, subject to a six month
redemption. Unfortunately, they did not receive instrucrions from Homecomings to a shortened
redemption proceedings. The property is now three months into the redemption. They aze
reaching the point where it is almost moot. Mr. Okanla is still the owner ofthe properLy subject to
his redemption rights. The properiy has been vacant for some time. The February l l letter was
the first notice Mr. Zielke got regazding some of the issues involved with the property. What she
would like to do is buy some time so the new service company can get somebody out to the
property. If Mr. Zielke could get copies of some of the abatement orders and the Code
Compliance Report, he can get that to his client. Somebody needs to take caze of the property, and
he will advise the new client to do so. If there is not a health or safety issue, maybe it cotxld be
tabled to the next hearing. Then, they can start securing and cleaning up the property. They aze
not the owner of the property until the redemption expires. In all, it has been foreclosed, they are
halfway through the redemption, and there is a new servicer that may be more in touch thau
Homecomings as far as their inspections and properry maintenance.
Ms. Moermond asked did Mr. Okanla live here. Mr. Magner responded that Mr. Okazila and his
sister have owned a number of properties in Saint Paul. They aze investors that purchase a
properiy and then sell it back and forth between each other, each fime refinancing the property for
higher amounts. For examp1e,1080 Pazk is one of them.
Ms. Moermond asked how Mr. Okanla is listed as a homesteader if he is an investor. Mr. Magner
responded that is a quesfion for Ramsey County because it is their documentation. They are
giving someone a break on their taxes provided the properiy is homesteaded.
Ms. Moermond asked is Oluyemisi the sister or brother. Mr. Magner responded that is the sister
far Bobatunde. He believes that Ms. Okanla is a resident of Florida. Her mailing address is 2750
18`�' Avenue South, Minneapolis and IVHPI does not get materials back.
He has had three parties in the last two weeks inquiring about this property. All these parties have
been individuals who rehabilitate properties in the City. Mr. Magner has directed them to Jim
Angle, Realty House, 5120 Edina Industrial Boulevard, Minneapolis, who requested to be put on
the mailing record for this property. Mr. Zielke responded that he ]rnows Mr. Angie and deals
with hisn on a lot of properties. He cannot speed up the redempfion period. He can unpress on his
client to watch the properiy and make sure it gets cleaned up if there is junk in the yard.
Mr. Magner stated his office would be looking for a mortgage company that will take possession
of the properry through foreclosure; redempfion period is up June 3. It wouid show good faith on
their part to expedite this for a five week redemption period. They could start the process by next
week provided the City were to lay over this matter. ff they were to go to a five week redemption
and put it at eight weeks, they would be 30 days out from the established Council date versus 60
days. Ms. Moermond asked lus experience with the certificate holder maintaining property. Mr.
Magner responded an REO specialist comes in, secures the property, winterizes it, and does active
C� �� �
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF MARCH 8, 2005 Page 6
management. Most of these mortgages are written and most policies state they can come in and
stop any further loss to the asset. They can winterize the property.
Ms. Moermond asked about work orders. Mr. Magner responded that every summary abatement
has gone to a work order.
Mr. Zielke stated that having Mr. Angle on board gives another set of eyes because he will look at
the property as well: Also, if there is that much investor interest, it is a possibility they will
purchase a sheriff's certificate. Mortgage companies aze not equipped to rehabilitate properties,
but they can inspect properties and they are equipped to do routine maintenance. The suggestion of
five weeks is good. He could go to his client and say that is a condition for getting a break.
Mr. Magner stated it would be beneficial for the mortgage company to do a shorter redemption
period because that would give them a clear title to anyone else who comes in. He finds it
unlikely that Mr. Okanla would be able to redeem it out because he does not have a good track
record with pmperty ownership and maintenance in the City. He has created a lot of work for
NI�'I. Mr. Zielke responded the owner would have to come up with over $100,000 to redeem this
property. It seems that is unlikely.
Mr. Magner added that it is important that the mortgage company do the redemption period and
register the vacant building. Mr. Zielke responded that should not be a probiem.
Ms. Moermond stated the owner wouid have to make it through the April 6 City Council Meeting.
For a two week layover, she will be looking for the vacant building fees to be paid and for the
property to be maintained. She would be looking for something indicating they will ta1:e
responsibility for tUis properiy. Her deadiine would be noon April 6 and no fixrther violations
between now and then. If that can be done—vacant building fee paid, a letter saying someone will
be taking responsibility to manage the properiy, it is maintained in an otherwise code compliant
fashioYr —she will give two weeks. If he gets the two weeks, in the subsequent two weeks she will
be looking for the $2,000 bond to be posted, a purchase agreement, and a financial plan on how
the house will be rehabbed. This is a11 predicated on him seeking a shortened redemption time
period. If they go back to hearing, it wouid be April 19.
Mr. Zielke responded evetything sounds reasonable except for the purchase agreement and
finaucial plan. Ms. Moermond responded a purchase agreement could be concluded. Mr Zeilke
responded subject to the redemption rights, he supposes.
Ms. Moermond recommends laying over to the April 19 Legislafive Hearing on condition that the
following is done by noon of Apri16: 1) vacant building fees paid, 2) no fi�rther property
maintenance violations between Mazch 9 and April 6, and 3) a letter indicating someone will be
takiug maintenance responsibility for the property.
The hearing was adjourned at 11:13 a.m.
rtn