07-625Council File # D 7_6�
Green Sheet # 3041652
RESOLUTION
.'
Presented by
OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA
��
1 BE IT RESOLVED, that the Council of the City of Saint Paul hereby certifies and approves the June 27,
2 2007, decision of the Legislative Heazing Officer for the following address:
3
4 ADDRESS
APELLANT
6 985 Rice Street Cheryl Mikel, owner
7 Decision: Appeal denied on the following: 1) Vacant Building registration requirement, 2) Vacant
8 Building Registration Fee of $250 dated April 13, 2007; 3) Code Compliance Inspection Report dated
9 April 12, 2007; and 4) Code Compliance Inspection Report fee.
Benanav
Bostrom
Harris
Helgen
Thune
Adopted by Council: Date
Adoption Certified by Cou ciI Secre[ary
By: � - l
Approve b; M . Date
By:
Requested by Department of:
�
Form Approved by City Attomey
By:
Form Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council
By:
� Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet �
� 7 �a �.5�
C� - Council
Contact Persoo & phone:
Marcia Moertnond
266-8560 -
Must Be on Council Aaen
Doc.Type: RESOLUTION
E-DOCUment Required: Y
Document Contact: Rarquel Naylor
Contact Phone: 2668573
7'I-JULA7
�
Assign
Numbef
�o[
Rou[ing
Order
Total # of Signature Pages �(Clip All Locations for Signature)
1. Has this persoNfirm ever worked under a contract for this department?
Yes No
2. Has this person/firm ever been a city employee?
Yes No
3. Does this person/firm possess a skill not normally possessetl by any
current city employee?
Yes No
Explain all yes answers on separate sheet antl attach to green sheet
Approving the decision of the Legislative Hearing Officer on appeals at 985 Rice $treet.
ioanons: Npprove �N� or n
Planning Commission
CIB Commiriee
Civil Service Commission
Initiating Problem, Issues. Opportunity (Who, What, When, Where, Why):
AdvanWges If Approved:
Disadvantages If Approved:
Disadvantages If Not Approved:
CosVRevenue Budgeted:
Transaction:
Funding Source:
Financial 1 nfortnation:
(Explain)
Green Sheet NO: 3041652
0 ouncil
1 ouncil De arhnentDirector
2 ' Clerk Ci Cle�k
3
4
5
Activity Number: , �k;?�+.+�'.: �`� �`�
��s� �.12�07
July 11, 2007 12:53 PM . Page 1
OFFICE OF LICENSE, INSPECTIONS AND
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
Bo6 Kessier, Director
CITY OF SAINT PAUL
Chri.rEapherB. Coleman, Mayor
Apri7 12, 2007
CHERYL NIIKEL
4550 HELMO PL .
QAKDALE MN 55128
Re: 985 Rice St
Fi1e#: 07 045002 VB2
Dear,Property Owner:
COMI✓lERCEBUILDING Telephonz� 651-266-909C
8Fo¢rthStreetEasl,Suite200 Facsim.ile: 65I-266-9099
St Ptae1, Minnesota 55707-7024 Web: wvrvr [iep.ur
Pursuant ta your request the above-referenced property was inspected and the following report is
submitted:
BUILDING
1. Repair top of chimney (brick loose} and replace flashing.
2. Properly install step flashing on rear roof of house on first floor.
3. Install window wells on basement windows as needed.
4. Rebuild front porch floor and framing as needed with franung inspecfion before
5.
6.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
I5.
16.
17.
18.
19
20.
21.
covering.
Install guardrails on front parch to meet code.
Installlanding at north side entry.
Install guardrail and handrail on basement stairs.
Install tempered glass in attic stair window.
Install insulation in attic floor.
Repair garage, leans to west.
Replace front porch roo£
Install ceiling joist as needed in garage.
InstalUProvide hand and guardrails on all stairways and steps as per attachment.
Tvck Point interiorlexteriar foundation.
Install tempered glass in window on stair landing.
Install tempered glass in window over bathtub.
Provide thumb type dead bolts for all entry doors. ]2emove any surface bolts.
Repair or replace any deteriorated window sash, broken glass, sash holders, re-putty
etc. as necessary.
Provide storms and screens complete and in good repair for a11 door and window
openings.
Repair walls and ceiIings throup�out, as necessary.
Where wa11 and ceiling covering is removed, attic, replace doors and windows,
(insulation, glass, weather stripping, etc.) shall meet new energy code standards.
AA-ADA-EEO Employer
�
b �-�� 6
Cheryl Mikel
Re: 98� Rice St
Page Two
� 11�1 1�►ZQ!
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
Prepare and paint interior and exterior as necessary (take the necessary precautions if
lead base paint is present).
Frovide general clean-up ofpremise.
Provide smoke detectors as per the Mi�uesota State Building Code.
Repair soffit, fascia tri, etc. as necessary.
Provide proper drainage around house to direct water away from foundation.
Install downspouts and a complete gutter system.
Provide general rehabilitation of garage.
ELECTRICAL
1. Ground the elecirical service to the water service within 5' of the entrance point of
the water service.
2. Bond around water meter with a copper wire sized for the elecfrical service per
Article 250 of the NEC.
3. Provide a completed circuit directory at service panel.
4. Close open laiockouts in junction hoxes with knockout seals.
5. Install GFCI receptacle in first bathroom adj acent to the sink.
6. Czround bathroom light in first bathroom and disconnect receptacle on fixture.
7. Remove any 3-wire ungrounded outlets and repiace with 2-wire or ground 3— wire to
code.
8. Check all 3-wire onflets for proper polarity and verify ground.
9. Install hard-wired, battery backup smoke detector as specified in Bulletin 80-1 and
other smoke detectors as required by the IRC.
10. Install e�erior lights at back entry doors.
All elecfrical work must be done by a licensed electrical conh under an electrical
permit.
Any open walls or walls that aze opened as part of this proj ect must be wired to he standards
o the 2005 NEC.
�
t� 7-h ��
Cheryl Mikel
Re: 98� Rice St
Page Three
PLUN�ING
All plumbing work requires permit(s) and must be done by a plumbing contractor licensed in
Saint Paul.
Temperature and pressure valve discharge piping incorrect on water heater.
2.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
I1.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
I:I�Y1►� 3!
2.
3.
4.
5.
�
Gas venting incorrect on water heater.
Water piping inconect on water heater.
Water heater not fired ar in service.
Water meter is removed; not in service.
Repair or replace all corroded, broken, missing or leaking water piping.
boiler fi11 water line requires backflow assembly or device.
Range gas shutoff; connector and gas piping incorrect.
Dryer gas shutoff, gas piping incorrect.No soil stack base cleanout for soil and
waste piping. ,
Un�lugged or open piping on soil and waste piping.
Laiuidry tub unvented in basement.
Waste incorrect in laundry tub in basement.
Water piping incorrect on laundry tub.
First floor bathtub waste is incorrect — replace drain frap.
Install scald gizard faucet an bathtub.
Kitchen sink waste is incorrect — needs to be 1 1/2".
Lavatory on second floor waste is incorrect — trap leaking.
Bathtub on second floor waste is incorrect — replace drain trap.
Install code approved faucet in bathtub on second floor.
Lawn hydrant(s) broken or parts are missing.
Lawn hydrant(s) required backflow assembly or device.
Remove gas grill in basement, cap and plug.
Remove oil tank.
Cap and fill lines outside.
Install conectly sized liner.
Clean and Orsat furnace/boiler burner. Check all controls for proper operation.
Submit report from licensed contractor.
Check fiunace heat exchanger for leaks, provide documentafion.
Install correct size chimney liner.
�7���
Cheryl Mikel
Re: 985 Rice St
Page Four
HEATING
8. Replace fumace/boiler flue venfing and provzde proper pitch for gas appliance
venting.
9. Tie fasnace/boiler and water heater venting into chimney liner.
10. Recommend adequate combusrion air.
11. Provide support for gas lines to code. Plug, cap and/or remove a11 disconnected gas
lines.
12. Provide back flow preventer on city water fill line to hot water/steam heating system.
13. Appropriate Mechanical pernuts aze required for this work.
ZONIl�TG
TYvs propertywas inspected as a single familyhome.
NOTES
'`*See attachment for permit requirements.
Most of the roof covering coutd not be properly inspected from grade. Recommend this be done
before rehabilitation is attempted.
All items noted as recommended do not have to be completed for code compliance but should be
completed at a later date. Possible purchasers of properiy shall be made aware of these items.
**VACANT BTJILDING REGISTRATION FEES MUST BE PAID AT
NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING ANIl PROP�RTY IMPROVEMENT (NHPII ROR
PERMITS TO BE ISSLTED ON THIS PROPERT'Y*". For further information call, NHI'I at
651-266-1900, located at 1600 White Bear Avenue.
Sincerely,
7ames L. Seeger
Code Compliance Officer
JLS:sh
Attachments
CITY OF SA[NT PAUL
Chnsfopher8. Coleman, Mzyor
Bob Kessler, Direc'ror
April 13, 2007
Gien Anderson
985 Rjce St
St Paul MN 55117
= 0 7 ���
NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING AND PROPERTY IMPROVEMENT
Nuisance Building Code Eniorcement
1600Wni'reBearAvenueN TeL 651-266-�950
SaintPaul,MN55106 Far.65i-266-1926
VACAN'P B;J�1i:DING REGIS'1'L�2ATIfJN FEE
WARNING LETTER
The Saint Paul City Council has adopted legislation which requires owners of vacant buildings to pay
an annual fee and submit a registration plan on th� fozms enclosed with this.letter. The fee
is based �pon the number of consecutive years tbis pr9perty has been vacant and is infended
to partially reimburse the City for adYiii�iisfrative costs for regisfering and processing the Vacant
Building Owner Registration forms and for tfie cost of monitoring these properties for
compliance with Saint Paul Legislative Codes.
The fee for the vacant building located at
is now past due.
985 RICE ST
Saint Pau1 Legislative Code, Chapter 43 requires this fee be paid no Iater than
thirty (30) days after fhe bitilding becomes vaoant, and if not paid the owner shall be subject to
prosecufion as prescribed in the Legislative Code Do not maiI cash. '
The owner(s) wi1] be subjecf to a criminal Sununons and Complaint far failure to pay this vacant building
registration fee if�e fee i� �ct rece:ved in u'us effice Sy April 23, 2�u7. TFiis citation will
necessitate a court appearance in Ramsey Couniy District Court, and the owner(s) will be subjectto
penalties provided far by law. The enclosed registraxion form must accompany the fee payment.
If you wish to pay in person, you may do so at:
NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING AND PROPERTY II�7PROVEMENT
1600 White Beaz Ave N.
Saint Pau1, MN 55106-1608
between the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Monday through Friday.
AA-ADA-EEO Employer
lnvoice
�
CITY OF SAtNT PAUL
Deparfinent of Neighborhood Housing
and Property Improvement
1600 White Bear Avenue North
Saint Paul, MN 55106
PHONE: (659) 266-'(900
FAX: (651) 266-'1926
� Cfieck fhis box if making any name, mailing addr'ess
or Phone # correcfions. Please wrife fhe changes on
fhisform.
April 13, 2007
WELLS FARGO BANK N A
3476 STATEVIEW BLVD
FORT MILL SC 29715-7203
Invoice # : 596959
Fo[der # : 07 045003
3YPE: VACANT BUfLDING FEE
`PB Fee
'1JB TYPE: CATEGORY 2 04ZK TYPE: SWGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
Ward 5 Distrid Council 6
- Census Tract 31300 Renewal Due Date March '14, 2008
FEES
VF Annual Fee Year 2007 $250.00
TOTAL $250A0
IF PAYlNG BY CREDIT CARD PLEASE COMPLETE THE FQLlOWING MFORMATfON:
•*` If paying by credit card, you may fiax this invoice to 651-266-1926. You must sign and date this form at the botFOm.*"
❑ American Express ❑ Discover ❑ MasterCard ❑ Visa
EXPIRATfON DATE: ACCOUNT NUMBER:
❑❑l ❑❑ �000-��C�O-�C��C�-❑��❑
Cardholder Signature
Dafe
'Cify� of Saint Paul
3�ieigIiborhood Housing and Propert�� Improvement
D ate
Address afPro
V�CANT &U7LI}I�TG REGISTRATION FOR�l�I
o�-���
Disposit�on of this buiiding (please check one):
_ I plarz to rehabilitate this structure commencing:
_ E P i�7 to demoiish (wreck and remove) this buii_ding by:
_ I am �-�Iling to authorize the City of Saint Paul to demoiish and rzmove this buildin,(s).
_ This buildin� is vacant as a result oi fire damage. The fire occuned on . T, as the
prope�3' owner, want to claim registration and fee exemption status for ninety (40) days from the
date ofthe fire. I intend to repair and reoccupy the building.
Persons who will be respansibte for compliance with the requirements of ordinance:
N�� ADDRESS HOi�SE NO. �i�ORK NO.
Persons, Iiez�hoIders, mortgagees, mortQa�ors and other interested parties know�n to me:
NAME ADDRESS HO�IENO. Wpg���p,
Ptease Print Your Name ,
Please complefe and return fbis form wifh
your check made payable to the "City of
Saint PauI" to:
Cify of Sainf Paui
Vacanf &uildigas De arfinent
S@gn�ture Date ofBirth Division ofNeiahbo hood Housing
and Properh� Improvement
Addrecs 2600 FVfiife Bear Avenue
Sf. Paul,1�71\T 55106
Cit}-
Telephone
State Zig
_ Thank you for your cooperafion.
w�d oi�os
=:��.
� �
� ��
O�-Co25
MINUTES OF THE LEGISLATIVE HEARING
Appeal on 985 Rice Street
Wednesday, June 27, 2007
Room 330 Courthouse, 15 Kellogg Boulevard West
Marcia Moermond, Legislative Hearing Officer
The hearing was called to order at 10:00 a.m.
STAFF PRESENT: Steve Magner and Jim Seeger, Department of Safety and Inspections
The following appeared: Cheryl Mikel, 4550 Helmo Place, Oakdale; Seth Benziger,
SPARC, 843 Rice Street.
Marcia Moermond asked what is being appealed. Mr. Mikel responded that she is
appealing the Vacant Building Registration fee.
Ms. Moermond asked is she appealing that this needs to be registered as a vacant
building. Ms. Mikel responded yes.
Ms. Moermond asked is she appealing the Code Compliance Inspection Report. Ms.
Mikel responded yes. Also, she is appealing the fee of $138, which is the charge of the
code compliance inspection. Plus, she is appealing verbal orders that are not written
here. One order was to replace the whole porch. Ms. Moermond responded that it looks
like she pulled a building permit which included activities on the porch. Presumably
there was an inspection partway through.
Ms. Mikel stated she is appealing the design of the poxch that was inspected by the City
after she was told it was okay to build it with that material and in that manner. After it
was built that way, the inspector said that it was built wrong and it should not have been
stamped. Ms. Moermond responded some of it she can deal with and some she cannot
when it comes to specific things in the field. They will start with the appeal on the
registration
Ms. Mikel explained that she entered into a purchase agreement in March 2007. The
home was purchased in an auction. She closed on May 4, 2007. She had the inspection
done and she paid the fees. Prior to May 4, she had a choice: 1) not close on the
property and lose her earnest money or 2) go ahead with the closing and appeal this.
Most of the repair she would have done anyway. lt does not seem possible that you could
buy a home, have clear title, and have all these orders.
In answer to several questions, Ms. Mikel responded that she has purchased a home
before, which was a vacant house that needed rehab, and she intends to live at 985 Rice.
Ms. Moermond asked is she appealing that it should not have been a vacant building at
the time she purchased it or that it should not have been registered as a vacant building.
Ms. Mikel responded she is appealing that it did not meet the definition. She looked at
the file at Neighborhood Housing on White Beaz. In that file, she found that a letter was
o�-c�Z�
LEGISLATNE HEARING MINUTES FOR 985 RICE STREET Page 2
sent out April 13 to the owner at 985 Rice, which tells her they must have believed he
was living at the house at that time. The mail was not returned. The letter included a list
of how they could appeal.
Ms. Moermond stated she does not have Vacant Building staff here.
(Note: Steve Magner was called to appear at this heazing.)
Mr. Benziger stated that there is no reason to register the building as vacant. He asked
what criteria was met to register this as vacant. Ms. Moermond responded the water was
shut off in February. The lack of a basic utility is grounds for condemnation. With
respect to the mailing, it is incumbent on the CiTy to notify the legal owner of record.
Without the file in front of her, Ms. Moermond is guessing that the legal owner listed 985
Rice Street as the address. The bank may or may not have changed the records in an
expeditious fashion at the County. Also, the County is slow in getting their records up-
to-date. Mr. Mikel added that the home was homesteaded in 2007 by Glen Anderson.
Ms. Moermond responded that means nothing when it has been in foreclosure, and the
homestead status does not speak to vacancy really. Clearly, the owner has not been
living there since the water was shutoff.
Ms. Mikel said Yhat if the house was declared vacanY on March 4, that is not giving it a
year, which is required. Ms. Moermond responded that is one of the ways that it can be
defined, but if there are major and significant code violations or qualified to be
condemned, those things can make that happen more quickly.
Ms. Mikel stated that she is looking at Chapters 34 and 43, which are the minimum
property standards for Saint Paul. In reading that, she cannot come to a reasonable
conclusion of how the house was put in this category. Ms. Moermond responded it looks
like they are referencing 33.02, Item 7e.
Ms. Mikel continued: when she went down to White Bear (a DSI Office), she was
surprised to see that it did not have code violations and did not have orders on it. The first
thing in Che file was that it was Category 2. She asked to speak to them about that. The
bank who owned it since it was in foreclosure, would go out and see if it was painted
within 30 days or how ever long they have. It is in their best interest in getting the
outside repairs fixed. Ms. Moermond responded that there are I,500 foreclosures in the
City. It may be in the bank's best interest, but she has never seen that happen.
(Steve Magner arrived.)
Ms. Moermond asked aboat the multiple code violations, which is a determination that
the inspector makes when he or she goes out. To bring it into the program, they will
assess the building right then and there for how bad it is. It is based on that assessment
and not on an existing set of orders. She is speaking from past testimony that she has
gotten in these hearing about these circumstances. She asked how staff made the
assessment that this is a Category 2 vacant building.
o� ���
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES FOR 985 RICE STREET Page 3
Steve Magner reported that his staff went out there on a refenal from a code enforcement
officer in regards to a utility shutoff. The water, electrical, and gas were all off. There
was a lock box on the front door. There were loose gutters, rotting floor boazds on the
deck, front porch.
Without the basic utilities being present, asked Ms. Moermond, why would the staff not
write a condemnation at that point. Mr. Magner responded that they use the
condemnation process, an Order to Vacate a Property, as a tool if the property is actually
occupied. So, if there was a human being living in there, the building would have been
condemned. An order to vacate would have been instituted and a vacate timeline would
have been set.
What happens if there are not people living there, asked Ms. Moermond. Mr. Magner
responded the building automatically becomes a registered vacant building, so the
occupancy does not become an issue until it meets the criteria to reoccupy it.
Ms. Moermond asked how the inspectors document multiple violations. Mr. Magner
responded they document it based on the initial inspection request form.
Ms. Moermond asked does she have a copy of that document Ms. Mikel responded she
thinks she does if it is dated Mazch 13, 2007. Mr. MagneT responded that it is signed by
Matt Dornfeld.
Ms. Mikel stated it is already in a Category 2 when he goes out. Mr. Magner responded
that the determination is made as he is filling out the form. That is the opening to the
vacant building process. It was probably filled out at the site or when he returned to the
office that day.
Ms. Mikel asked was there a complaint on the house. Mr. Magner responded there was a
complaint by Ed Smith (inspector).
Ms. Mikel asked did Mr. Smith fill out this form. Mr. Magner responded that is Mr.
Domfeld's writing. Ed SmiYb does not fill out inspection requesYs. Only the Vacant
Building staff fill out the inspection request forms.
Ms. Mikel asked is there a paper that Mr. Smith filled out requesting someone to go out.
Mr. Magner responded that he would have had a complaint entered into the system and
he would have sent the paper or verbal referral to the Vacant Building inspector. Ms.
Moermond added that the utility companies do notify the City of a shutoff as it is grounds
for condemnation. It could have been based on a listing received by the City.
Ms. Mikel stated that Mr. Dornfeld went out to the house. The following day, a letter
was sent to 985 Rice saying the house was vacant and the owner can appeal it, but no one
lived there, so no one knew about it. Ms. Moermond asked who the notice was sent to.
Mr. Magner responded he did not bring the file.
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES FOR 985 RICE STREET
o�-�2s
Page 4
Mr. Benziger stated that he is sure the mortgage company received notification because
he got the file. Ms. Mikel responded they did not receive it until April 13. That is
probably because they did not come up in the system in March, added Mr. Magner.
Ms. Moermond asked where the notice was sent to based on the requirements of the code.
Mr. Magner responded the registered fee owner for Ramsey County. His office receives
an automatic down feed everyday from Ramsey County. Every time, they access the
City's computer system, it looks for a fee owner, homesteader, or other ownership.
Ramsey County is the holder of that information. The City is required to provide that
information based on the ordinance. The ordinance says that they need to get the
information based on the County. Ms. Moermond added that the notification was sent to
the owner of record. The owner of record is Glen Anderson, who lists his address as 985
Rice, and he says he is the homesteader. That is the legal requirement incumbent on Mr.
Magner.
Ms. Mikel stated it is required to be sent to the lienholder, also. Ms. Moermond
responded that has not been the interpretation of the City Attorney's Office.
Mr. Benziger asked about the vacant building levels. Ms. Moermond responded the
vacant building code has different requirements based on whether or not they are deemed
to be dangerous structures. Basically, the code distinguishes among those with no
violations, several major violations, and those that are dangerous.
Mr. Benziger stated that on the brief inspection report, there does not seem to be a lot
listed as dangerous outside the chimney. Ms. Moermond responded that dangerous is
something diff'erent. She is seeing major violations, but sbe is not reading dangerous in
this.
Mr. Magner explained that the CiYy has three categories. Category 1 is occupied and
does not meet the criteria of multiple housing code violations. It may have one or two
violations, but there are no dangerous or hazardous conditions assigned to those
conditions. It also would not have conditions that would warrant commendation, other
than strictly a utility shutoff. Category 2 is having hazazdous conditions, multiple
housing code violations, condemnable offenses. Category 3 is a determination that it is a
dangerous structure or nuisance as determined by the Legislative Code, which is
addressing Chapter 33. The property at 985 Rice is clearly a Category 2 from the
identification that the inspector made and the history of the operation. Whenever there is
a condemnable offense, multiple utility shut offs and building violations—rotting on the
floors which could create a hazardous condition—they aze not going to allow people to
readily reoccupy these properties without having the building in code compliance and
stable. The appellant would have known that if she had taken the time to contact the
office prior to purchasing the property.
Ms. Moermond stated the building had a placard on it. Mr. Magner responded that the
appellant told him that she saw the vacant building placard, but she did not take the
opportunity to contact him. Ms. Mikel responded that she thought the sign was to keep
o�- ���
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES FOR 985 RICE STREET Page 5
the trespassers out and that the City wanted to know if someone was living in the house.
Mr. Magner added that the placard cleazly states that the building cannot be occupied
until his office issues a letter saying that it can be re-occupied.
Ms. Moermond stated it appears the lienholder was notified, but not immediately. It was
about three weeks or a month between Mr. Anderson and Wells Fazgo in South Cazolina.
Ms. Moermond asked what code she is quoting. Ms. Mikel responded Chapter 43.03 for
Saint Paul and 463.17 of the Minnesota Statute, which taiks about the lienholder 6eing
notified and having the opportunity to respond. Ms. Moermond responded that 43.03
indicates that registration shall be submitted on forms provided by the enforcement
officer. So, this says it is incumbent on the owner to provide information on the
lienholder; it is not incumbent on the City to provide a lienholder. Ms. Moermond sees a
]etter to Mr. Anderson and Wells Fazgo and asked what she is missing. Mr. Magner
respo�ded there is a March 13 and an April 13 letter.
Ms. Moermond stated that between March and April, the CiYy identified an additional
interested party and copied them on it. She is not understanding how this effects the
appeal on whether or not this should be registered. Ms. Mikel responded that the owner
Mr. Anderson was not around; therefore, the lienholder becomes the owner. Not until it
goes through foredosure proceedings, the sheriffls sale, and the redemption period,
responded Ms. Moermond. She asked is that the circumstance with this property. Ms.
Mikel responded it is.
Ms. Moermond stated again that she does not understand how that changes the
notification piece. They got notified in mid Mazch and the closing was in May. Ms.
Mikel responded that she is claiming that they were not notified until mid March. Ms.
Moermond asked is that a private concern between her and them. Possibly, responded
Ms. Mikel, if there was a copy in the file showing that they sent it, but they do not have a
copy showing that they sent it until mid April. As far as the bank is concerned, they
learned about this property at the end of April. Closing was just a few days later. They
are actually saying they didn't receive the April one. On the register of title to make sure
they have a clear title, there is nothing on there.
Ms. Moermond stated that the City can do an OTA on this. Mr. Magner added that the
City could hire staff to do an OTA on each property, but it would bankrupt the program
based on the cost. Mr. Magner explained that once the property redemption period is up,
it is the responsibility of that owner to record the ownership at the County level, and it is
the County's requirement to have 60% of those completed in 15 days. Far the City to
have that information is good, which is why they post a placazd on the property. It is Mr.
Magner's opinion that the owner needs to go after the mortgage company that sold the
property.
Ms. Mikel stated that she purchased the property and got title insurance. The title
insurance company is saying it is not their problem, and it is between the City and the
homeowner. It does not seem reasonable that she should hire an attorney to take the City,
title company, and the bank to court. The house has rotten floor boards on the porch, but
O� C�2S
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES POR 985 RICE STREET Page 6
it is load bearing and can hold the weight it is intended to hold. Ms. Moermond
responded that she wants to hold off on specific items until they get to the Code
Compliance Report. She does not believe it meets the qualifications of a hazazdous or
dangerous structure. It is the policy of the City to make sure the code violations aze
addressed on vacant buildings before they are reoccupied. Whether or not it should be
City policy, should be brought to the attention of the Councilmembers.
Ms. Mikel questioned the standards for Category 2. Ms. Moermond responded that she
will get her grid.
(Recess from 10:45 to 10:48.)
Ms. Moermond stated her reading of the Code 33.�3 is about when permits are required.
That would strictly be with respect to Category 3. The idea that a building needs to come
into compliance with the need to be reoccupied applies to both Catetories 2 and 3.
Ms. Mikel asked what qualifications the building has to meet in order for it to be
Category 2. Ms. Moermond responded that Category 2 is a building that meets the
definition of vacant building under 1) unoccupied and dangerous structure, 2) unoccupied
and condemned, 3) unoccupied and multiple code violations, or 4) condemned and
illegally occupied. It was the determination of staff that this would be a Category 2.
Ms. Mikel added that the Minnesota Statute states that the lienholder has to be notified
and it has to be filed with the register of the title. The code is 463.17, Subd. 3. That may
be something she would like to hire a lawyer to pursue further, but it has been the
interpretation of the City AYtorney's Office that following the procedure outlined in the
code does meet the requirement of that section of tbe statute. That would be Chapter 43.
Mr. Magner added that ordinances are all reviewed by the City Attorney before going to
City Council for passage. This ardinance has been in this form for 27 years now. This
issue has been brought up in the past.
Ms. Mikel asked where in Chapter 43 it says that she has 120 days or whatever. Mr.
Benziger explained that Ms. Mikel is arguing that any work orders or registering of a
vacant building must be registered under the county registrar in a timely manner.
(Mr. Benziger supplied some paperwork to Ms. Moermond.)
Ms. Moermond stated this has been reviewed in the City Attorney's Office. It is also
how things are handled in 33, 34, and other places. He may want to liYigate this further.
She read the Code Compliance Inspection report, and she wanted to see how far that is
away from the Truth in Sale of Housing report. There were a lot of hazardous listings
and below standard listings in the area of plumbing and electricity. Ms. Moermond is
stunned to see that Ms. Mikel would work on the porch first, rather than the electrical and
the plumbing. Nts. Mikel responded that the logic is that a homeowner can fix her own
plumbing and electrical; however, for an owner that bought a home in Category 2, it has
to be hired out by a licensed contractor. Mr. Seeger responded that is true for plumbing.
o� �2�
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES FOR 985 RICE STREET Page 7
Gas can be done by a homeowner if they are qualified to do it. Ms. Mikel responded that
she is not allowed to do the gas, although that was her plan. Mr. Benziger responded that
the Code Compliance letter she receives stated that it must be a licensed trade person to
get a permit, which was part of the confusion. There is the understanding that these
permits can be pulled by homeowners as long as the work is properly signed off by the
City inspector. Part of the reason the owner has not done any plumbing work is because
it is expensive to hire a plumber.
Ms. Mikel stated her plumbing bids came in at close to $15,000.
Ms. Benziker asked is it okay for the owner to pull permits for the electrical and the
plumbing and get work done signed off by City inspector. Not the plumbing, responded
Mr. Seeger, unless the owner lives there. That is why she started on the porch, said Ms.
Mikel. Mr. Magner added that they can file an affidavit on the electrical.
Ms. Moermond stated she understands that the owner is saying that there were no work
orders on the building at the Yime that the vacant building inspector went out there, and
the inspector making a determination that there were multiple code violations is
inherently invalid. Ms. Moermond does not believe that, but she hears the argument.
Mr. Magner stated that his inYerpretation of the ordinance is that multiple code violations
is more than one. An inspector went out and determined there were multiple code
violations and he categorized it as Category 2. He obtained a code compliance
inspection.
Ms. Moermond asked what is SPARC's position on this. Mr. Benziger responded they
are advocating on behalf of Ms. Mikel who has ten employees. He is in support of her
purchasing a house in an area that needs investment, improving a house that is a good,
sound quality house. To date, she has done much of the work. A lot of the
requirements—trade permits—are economically hard for her. Their hopes are, at a
minimum, to get those requirements waived. She has the connections for getting the
work done by qualified people.
Ms. Moermond asked where she is employed. Mr. Mikel responded on Thomas and
Snelling, Rainbow Child Development Center. Mr. Benziger and SPARC°s construction
manager took a look at the house. The house is in sound condition. SPARC would like
to see it habitable again. She is trying to invest in the neighborhood, and they are trying
to work with her.
Ms. Moermond asked is she a general contractor. Mr. Benziger responded no.
Ms. Mikel stated that Frank (Sprandel from SPARC) could not believe it is a Category 2.
Ms. Moermond asked is SPARC helping her financially. Mr. Benziger responded that
they are not at this time. She has done a lot of wark on her own. The trades permits will
become expensive for her to do work that is relatively minor.
OZ- �2�
LEGISLA"PIVE HEARING MINUTES FOR 985 RICE STREET Page 8
Because he said this is relatively minor, Ms. Moermond asked Mr. Benziger has he read
the Code Compliance for electrical and plumbing. Mr. Benziger responded he read it.
The frustration is that there are rigid walls set and there is no way for the owner to
circumvent it. Ms. Moermond responded there was a misunderstanding about the
electrical, but it is doable with the filing of an affidavit. There isn't a wall there. Ms.
Mikel responded the electrical is done.
Ms. Moermond stated there was no permit pulled for the electrical work. Ms. Mikel
responded they said they pulled the permit. Mr. Seeger added that sometimes contractors
do not pull permits, and sometimes they pull permits after a project is started.
Ms. Moermond stated she would like to do a stipulation or agreement that the owner will
occupy the house under certain conditions so that things are done by a particular day.
Utility shutoffs ofren mean delayed or foregone maintenance and it is an indicator that
other things are going on.
Ms. Moermond asked about the Code Compliance Inspection, as the owner is appealing
the fee and the contents of the report. Mr. Mikel responded that the City does not have
the right to tell the homeowner to fix these items. She should be able to do it at her own
time. It is her home. She had verbal orders about the porch from Mr. Seeger was out.
She replaced the whole deck; she now has to replace the whole stairs.
Mr. Seeger responded there are different rises on the steps. They would like to get the
life safety issues taken care of so that no one gets hurt or injured. That is a big issue with
the City. He has pictures showing the rise on the front steps. The bottom step is about 7-
7!8 inches, the next rise if SY=, the third is roughly 6 The deck got raised a little bit,
and the rise on the top step is about 9. Ms. Mikel responded that is because Mr. Seeger
told her to go to 4 by 8 instead of 4 by 6. Mr. Seeger responded that is no reason to raise
it. �
Ms. Moermond asked did Frank look at it. Mr. Benziger and Mr. Mikel responded that
he looked at them, but they did not go into detail. He thought the stairs were fine and
they do not need to be replaced.
Ms. Moermond asked SPARC's position. Mr. Benziger responded they did not look at
the stairs in a code related situation. They did not take out a tape measure.
(Mr. Seeger and Ms. Mikel discussed the deck a little more and the roof.)
Mr. Seeger listed the critical items on the Code Compliance Inspection Report as follows:
Building #1 — repair top of chimney (brick ]oose) and replace flashing.
Building #4 — Rebuilt front porch floor and framing as needed with framing inspection
before covering.
Building #7 — Install guardrail and handrail on basement stairs
Building #8 — Install tempered glass in attic stair window,
Building #15 — Install tempered glass window on stair landing
o�-��s
LEGISLATNE HEARING MINUTES FOR 985 RICE STREET Page 9
Building #16 — Install tempered glass window over bathtub
Electrical #1 — Ground the electrical service to the water service within 5' of the entrance
point of the water service
Electrical #2 — Bond around water meter with a copper wire sized for the electrical
service per Article 250 of the NEC.
Electrical #4 — Close open knockouts in junction boxes with knockout seals.
Plumbing #1 — Temperature and pressure valve discharge piping incorrect on water
heater.
Plumber #21 — Lawn hydrant(s) required backflow assembly or device.
Heating #4 — Install correctly sized ]iner.
Heating #8 — Replace furnace(boiler flue venting and provide proper pitch for gas
appliance venting.
HeaYing #12 — Provide back flow preventer on city water fill line to hot water/steam
heating system.
Ms. Moermond asked about Heating Item #4. Mr. Seeger responded that refers to the
chimney. There needs to be a liner because gases will eat up the mortar joints in the
chimney.
(Ms. Mikel looked at pictures of the porch. She and Mr. Seeger went over the pictures
and the plan for the porch and steps.)
(Mr. Benziger left for a few minutes.)
Mr. Seeger stated that this is a big issue, but it has to be corrected. It is a liability for the
City and the owner. Ms. Mikel asked how this is a liability for the City. Ms. Moermond
responded the City saw the violation and asked for it to be corrected.
Ms. Mikel asked can she get a variance for the stairs. Ms. Moermond responded it is a
state building code issue. Mr. Seeger added that will never happen. He tries to help, but
he is not supposed to be designing anything in the field. He asked who did the work the
first time. Ms. Mikel responded she did the framing. She has had lots of people helping
and there have been lots of mistakes. She does what she can do. She is fortunate enough
to have ten hours a day to spend at the house and keep her business going with ten people
employed.
Ms. Moermond stated there is a difference of opinion about what was seen in the field,
but she was not there and cannot deal with what it was then. The City is sitting here with
her, SPARC is here. She does not see the seller, the bank, nor the realtor. Perhaps there
are some liability issues in terms of information that should have been shared. She sees
this was a vacant building. It was placarded, Ms. Mikel knew it was placarded, she knew
the requirements, and she chose not to call the City to find out further what was required
in buying a vacant building. There was a sign on the building that could have been read
completely. The City policy is that the property needs to come up to code before it is
occupied. The owner does not want inspectors in the house. There aze a lot of
faredosures right now. Some Councilmembers would say that unless they want to turn
o� -�a�
MEETING MINiJTES
985 Rice Street
Tuesday, 7uly 10, 2007
Room 310 Conference Room, 15 Kellogg Blvd. W.
Present: Seth Benziger, SPARC, 843 Rice Street; Judy Hanson, City Attorney's Office; Cheryl Mikel,
owner, 4550 Helmo, Oakdale; Marcia Moermond, Legislative Hearing Officer; Jim Seeger,
Deparhnent of Safety and Inspections-Licensing
Ms. Moermond stated her proposal is to do a stipulation and agreement. According to Judy Hanson,
that is not the proper tool to use. Ms. Hanson responded she is not positive about that yet and needed
to think about it.
Ms. Moermond stated that what is in front of them is an appeal. The tool she would use to get her
recommendarion in front of the City Council is a resolution. The Council would accept, modify, or
amend it using that resolurion as a tool. If it was not clear at the end of the last heaning, Ms.
Moermond is denying the appeals on a11 accounts. It will be a denial because the property does meet
the definition of vacant building. Ms. Moermond did not find her azgument compelling that there were
not existing orders on the building. The fact that there were multiple utility condemnations and visible
violations met the definition of vacant building.
Restated another way, said Ms. Moermond, it does meet the definition of a vacant building because it
had multiple code violations and it was not occupied. Ms. Mikel asked how it had multiple code
violarions if it does not have orders. Ms. Moermond stated it is required to get a code compliant
inspection because it has multiple violations that aze visible and those included the utility shut offs and
the visible exterior code violations. That is enough to trigger a requirement far Code Compliance
Inspection. That inspection would be the embodiment of the orders that were written on the property.
There were enough things wrong that they needed to do the complete walk through. Ms. Mikel had the
complete walk through, she paid for it, and those orders need to be addressed.
The next question is can the owner occupy the house in part or in whole while these things are
happening, said Ms. Moermond, even though it is a registered vacant building. Ms. Moermond is
willing to talk about some conditions on which she would allow that. She has concerns: 1) the work
would not get done, 2) the quality of the work that would get done, 3) how long it would take to get the
wark done. The life safety issues have to be done before someone can move in.
Ms. Moerxnond asked could Ms. Mikel tackle this list (Code Compliance Inspection Report) before
moving in the property. Ms. Mikel responded that she would like to go back to the original appeal, and
she asked Ms. Moermond to relook at what they said was wrong with the house. Ms. Moermond
responded no because she read through the file carefully.
Ms. Mikel asked did she lrnow the deck does not require handrails so that cannot be a violation. Ms.
Moermond responded that with the multiple utility shut offs and bad floor boards, the owner has
muitiple code violations. She is not relooking at that.
Ms. Mikel stated bad floor boards do not hold normal weight. These floor boards did, and Jim Seeger
will attest to that. There was a littie bit of rotten floor boards at the edges, but it would hold the weight
it was intended to hold.
U� -(�_S
July 10, 2007 Minutes - 985 Rice Street
Mr. Seeger stated that he did not see the old floor underneath until the new ones were in there.
Page 2
Ms. Mikel stated they walked on it. Mr. Seeger responded that is true. The boards were the issue and
not the floor joists.
Ms. Moermond stated that she is comfortable that with the mulriple utility shut offs and the exterior
stuff that the inspector enumerated, the house met the definition of multiple code violarions.
Regazding the notice the State requires that the City give, said Ms. Mikel, and being registered with the
title, Ms. Moermond did not want to address that at the last meeting. Ms. Moermond responded that
she thought Ms. Mikel had misinterpreted that and she could litigate that fiuther if she wants. Ms.
Moermond feels that the City had met its requirement of notifying the owner of record as listed per
Ramsey County and, therefore, had met its requirement. When they became aware of other interested
parties, the lienholder, it notified them immediately and the letter was sent out to them. The building
was also placarded, and that is what the code requirement is. Ms. Moermond knows the owner would
like there to haue been additional notification, but Ms. Mikel herself said that she saw the building was
placazded. Ms. Mikel responded that it read no trespassing and keep out. Ms. Moermond responded
that it had vacant building with phone numbers and so on.
Ms. Mikel stated it is her understanding that the State law is to protect people who buy homes. If a
person wants to buy a home, they go to the title registers, investigate who owns the home, and if work
liens have been put on it. You can look through all the records, and it can take half a day. That is
where it should say the City of Saint Paul has put this house under a code violations or vacant building.
Ms. Moermond responded that she tlunks Ms. Mikel is misreading that. If she would like to pursue
that further, she is welcome to do that.
Ms. Mikel stated that she would like to leave a copy of it, as she did not take it last rime. Ms.
Moermond responded that she wrote the citation down. The State laws are on line and on the book
shelf.
Judy Hanson asked what state law she is referring to. Ms. Mikel responded 463.17, Subdivision 3.
Ms. Hanson stated that when they take action, they are not going under the statute. That status allows
cities to draft their own ordinances. So, they do not follow the state law. The City follows their own
ardinances on that. Also, they are not bound to the State law because there is no conflict between City
ordinance and the State law.
Ms. Mikel stated that 463.21, Enforcement of Judgement, talks about priar to the sell of the house.
Ms. Hanson responded they have their own ordinance, 45, which they follow.
Ms. Mikel stated that when she saw the sigis on the house, they just meant no one is living there.
Ms. Moermond asked did she read them, to which Ms. Mikel answered `Yes." Ms. Moermond asked
why she didn't call the City. Ms. Mikel responded she didn't own the house, so why would she cali
the City. Ms. Moermond responded it says to call the City if you are the owner. Ms. Mikel responded
she was not the owner. Ms. Moermond stated that Ms. Mikel was thiuking about buying it. Ms. Mikel
responded it doesn't say that on the sign.
Ms. Moermond stated that if she is buying the house, it is incumbent on the seller and the mortgage
contract to tell the buyer if there are orders on the property. Ms. Mikel responded she would agree
D�-�a5
Ju1y 10, 2007 Minutes - 985 Rice Street
Page 3
except that there is a box on the Truth-in-Sale of Housing (TISH) that is supposed to be checked if
there is a lien or whatever from the City. Ms. Moermond responded that Bruce Staeheli did not check
that box, but that is a problem with Mr. Staeheli's TISH license, and there should be a complaint on
that.
Ms. Mikel stated that at the bottom of the Truth-in-Sale of Housing, it says that it is good for a year.
Ms. Moermond responded that is a hired inspector. Ms. Hanson responded they are not City
employees, aithough the City licenses them.
Ms. Mikel stated that on the Truth-in-Sale of Housing, it is not that bad. None of the stuff on the Code
Compliance Inspection Report is on the TISH. Ms. Moermond responded she read both repor[s.
Although they are written differently, they do cover similar territory. She is not willing to revisit the
issue that Ms. Mikel was not properly norified. Ms. Moermond asked is she willing to deal with these
principle violations prior to moving in.
Ms. Mikel asked is she aware that the repairs have akeady been completed on the house. Ms.
Moermond responded she does not want to talk about what has been done already unless they are
talking about the principal violations that need to be completed. Seth Benziger responded that they
would be talking about those principals.
Ms. Moermond asked are they willing to address all the principal violations which were outlined
during the last hearing which should be done priar to the occupation of the house and then talking
about a schedule for getting the balance of the items addressed. Ms. Mikel asked is it correct that she
has to appear befare the City Council before she takes this to District Court. Ma Moermond
responded she wouid say so.
Ms. Mikel asked is she giving up her right to do that by taking up this deal. Ms. Moermond responded
she is not her attorney and cannot give advice. This is now on the calendar for the next public hearing
on July 18. The Council could conditionally grant the appeal and then it could be appealed further,
although Ms. Moermond is not her lawyer.
Ms. Mikel stated she is a law abiding citizen, pays her bills, pays her taxes, has never been in jail, and
has never been on probation. Now, Ms. Moermond is accusing her of not doing something. She does
not like it and thinks it as a bad deal. By putting the violations on those houses, the City is making it
impossible for working families to buy them.
Ms. Moermond responded this is about a vacant building and this is not about doing something wrong.
Developers come in everyday to buy vacant buildings. Ms. Mikel responded that they laiow what they
are doing. They know they are buying a vacant building. Ms. Moermond responded that so did Ms.
Mikel. This agreement can be written conditionally so that the owner can do occupation if the life
safety violations are addressed by a time certain.
Ms. Mikel responded that she is not willing to do that. She will haue that house fixed and ready to
move in and pass that compliance by the time Ms. Moermond is done writing it. She will continue this
fight because it is wrong and she does not want it to happen to someone eise that they lose their good
credit because they cannot afford to pay their mortgage and fix their house.
Ms. Mikel requested a copy of the transcript. Ms. Moermond responded they do minutes which is a
suminary of the discussion. Ms. Mikel can get a copy of the tape which costs $7. Ms. Mikel
o i -�5
July 10, 2007 Minutes - 985 Rice Street
Page 4
responded that she would like a transcript. Ms. Moermond responded she can have a transcript made
from the tape. A verbatim of what happened would need to be taken to a court reporter which would
be at Ms. Mikel's expense.
The meeting adjoumed.
Submitted by:
Racquel Naylor, Secretary