06-601Council File # �
Green Sheet # 3030937
RESOLUTION
CITY OF
Presented
Refened To
PAUL, MtNNESOTA
.I
Committee Date
WHEREAS, on April 19, 2006, the Council of the Ciry of Saint Paul adopted Council File #06-383, said
Resolution being the Ratification of Assessments of benefits, cost, and expenses for property cleanup during
December 2005 (File No. J0506A1, Assessment No. 8174); and
WHEREAS, the properry at 1772 Marshal] Avenue, being described as:
Skidmore & Cassedy's Pazk Addition, Lot 4, Block 2,
with the property identification number 04-28-23-12-0104 was assessed an amount of $337; and
WHEREAS, the Legislative Hearing Officer recommends reducing the assessment to a total of $200 because the
owner made a good faith effort to address the code violations at the property;
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the amount of the assessment for 1772 Marshall Avenue be reduced
from a total of $337 to a total of $200, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the reduction of $137 be funded by the Exempt Assessment Fund.
Yeas Nays Absent
Benanav �
Bostrom �
Harris `
Helgen `-
Lantry r /
Montgomery �
Thune �
U �
Requested by Department of:
�
Form Approved by CiTy Attomey
�
Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council
Adopted by Council: Date i�i9F /� �?O//!o
Adoption Certified by Council ecretary By '
By: .
Approved by May ate � `� / —�
By:
� Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet �
�'�O�
Departrnenf/office/wuncil: Date Initiated:
co -���il o,�,�N� Green Sheet NO: 3030937
Conpct Person 8 Phone: ���ent Sent 7o Gerson InitiaUDate
Racquel Naylor � 0 0 'I
Must Be on Council Agenda by (Date): Number 2
For
Routing 3
Ortler 4
5
Total # of Signature Pages _(Clip All Locations for Signature)
Reducing amount of the assessment for a properiy cleanup during December 2005 at 1772 Mazshall Avenue.
Recommendations: Approve (A) or Reject (R):
Planning Commission
CIB Committee
Civil Service Commtssion
Personal Service Contracts Must Answer the Following Questions:
1. Has this perso�rm ever worked under a contrect for this department?
Yes No
2. Has this personffirm ever been a city employee?
Yes No
3. Does this personffirm possess a skill not normally possessed by any
current city employee?
Yes No
Explain ali yes answers on separate sheet and attach [o green sheet
Initiating Problem, Issues, Opportunity (Who, What, When, Where, Why):
E
AdvanWges If Approved:
Council Res�arch Cerrter
20�8
DisadvantaStes If Approved:
— ...�...:..... .� �_.��:w_-". ' �! . ,�.., .
Disadvantages If Not Approved:
"otal Amount of
Transaction:
Funding Source:
CosURevenue Budgeted:
Activity Number:
Financial Infortnation:
� (Explain)
�
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF MARCH 28, 2006
Ms. Moermond asked did he own the building in 2005. Mr. Lor responded no.
Page 4
��. t. daqs adequate aznount
to clean it up. Mr. Lor did not foliow the law with vacant buildings; therefore, he did not get notice
from the City on the snow remodal situation. Mr. Magner added that his office got the new ownership
information on 3-16-06. His office has it now.
330 Marvland Avenue West (J0506A), $300
John Betz reported that a letter went out to the properiy owners on 12-12-OS from a complaint about
snow and ice on the sidewalk. This has a 72 hour compliance date. The reinspection was done and the
inspector reissued another Summary Abatement to the property owner on 12-20-OS with a compliance
date or 12-25-05. It was reinspection on 12-27-OS and the work was not done. The work was issued to
the Pazks DeparLment It is uiilniown why the inspector reissued them.
Patricia Schickling, 200 Winthrop Street South #308, appeared and stated the notice may have been
reissued because the she does not live there anymore. The house was surrendered on 3-14-OS when
baiilcruptcy was filed. The Sheriff's sale was 7-21-05. Net Bank is now the owner. She has a rent
lease.
Steve Magner explained that if Net Bank is now the owner, they are also responsible for the
assessment.
Marcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment It will not affect Ms. Schickling. I�et
Bank should have been maintaining the property.
� 1772 Mazshali Avenue (J0506A), $337
Jolui Betz reported that his office issued orders on 12-1-OS to remove garbage, rubbish, and a brush
pile to comply by 12-12-05. A reinspection was conducted. The conditions still existed, and the
inspector issued a Si.mlinary Abatement notice to the properiy owner to correct the violation by 12-19-
O5. A reinspection was conducted, and conditions had not been corrected. Parks did the work on 12-
27-05.
Gregory Breining, owner, appeared and stated he is looking for clarification because he is also being
billed by his private trash hauler. He is confused as to who hauled what. He asked when the trash was
hauled. Mr. Betz responded 12-27-05.
(A videotape was shown.)
Mr. Breining stated that he was saving the boards (mentioned on the videotape). What happened is
confusing. His tenant was moving out and had a big pile of gazbage by the gazbage area. It sounds as
though that is what the call was in response to and that was hauled by the private trash company. The
City crew got stuff that was put out later. Also, $337 seems much for the volume the City hauled. He
has papenvork from On�, and they hauled at least some of the stuff that generated the original
complaint. He would ask that the amount be reduced since he did respond to the initial complaint.
D���PD�
/
, �-�o�
�
" LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINtJT'ES OF MARCH 28, 2006 Page 5
Ms. Moermond recommends reducing the assessment from a total of $337 to a total of $200. There is
an houriy chazge of $260. Mr. Breining responded that is fair.
752 Carroll Avenue (70601A), $358
Ms. Moermond recommends approval of the assessment as no appellant appeared.
105 Manitoba Avenue (J0504E), $70 (laid over from 3-21-06)
John Betz reported that he inspected the properry on 6-15-OS and issued orders to remove mattresses,
shopping card, discazded swimming pool, and fencing from the yard by 6-20-05. The reinspection was
conducted on 8-15-OS and the items remained in the yazd. A$50 excessive consumption fee was
imposed. The items had been relocated to the backyazd; they were on the side of the house. Mr. Betz
does not show anything for five yeazs. Ms. Moermond responded that the owner may not have owned
it five yeazs ago.
Ms. Moermond recommends deleting this assessment.
Appeal of Summary Abatement Order at 1941 Nortonia Avenue; owner: Thomas Jirik, (NHPI)
Steve Magner reported that Rich Singerhouse (NHPI) went out to the property on 3-3-06 on a
complaint. He found the dwelling open at the northside rear door, the interior was trashed and abused,
animal feces throughout, basement full of gazbage, and a missing window. There were no animals at
that time. He sent a Vacant Building Registration Notice and issued a Summary Abatement to secure
the basement window. On March 15, the inspector went back out, the reaz door had been boazded, and
the east basement window was broken out. A Summary Abatement Order was issued for dog feces.
Ms. Moerxnond asked are the feces inside the house or outside. Mr. Magner responded both. As of
this date, the window was still broken, the dog feces was covered by snow so it is unknown if it had
been removed from the reaz yard. They have received another complaint in regazds to that window,
and they aze concerned that previously the building had a strong odor during the summer months. The
inspector's notes indicate that the building will smell with the gazbage and feces in it once the weather
gets warmer.
Ms. Moermond asked did he receive the order. Mr. Jirik responded, "Of course not."
(A copy of the order was made and Mr. Jirik was given a copy in a few minutes.)
Thomas Jirik, owner, stated he removed a lazge window air conditioner from the back yard. The dogs
were gone, and that had nothing to do with the March 15 order for dog feces.
Ms. Moermond asked is he saying that the dog feces aze not there. Mr. Jirik responded that if they aze,
they were not there after Mazch 3.
Ms. Moermond asked if he is saying that he cleaned the yard on Mazch 3. Mr. Jirik responded the yazd
is snowed in with three feet of snow. He is not even going in there. O`n February 26, he removed the