15 West Kellogg Blvd.

Saint Paul, MN 55102

City of Saint Paul

Minutes - Final

Legislative Hearings

Marcia Moermond, Legislative Hearing Officer

Mai Vang, Hearing Coordinator

Joanna Zimny, Executive Assistant

legislativehearings@ci.stpaul.mn.us

651-266-8585

Tuesday, November 18, 2025

9:00 AM

Room 330 City Hall & Court House/Remote

9:00 a.m. Hearings

Special Tax Assessments

Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 511

BAY STREET. (File No. J2601R, Assessment No. 268601)

RLH TA 25-410

RLH TA 25-415

RLH TA 25-429

SR 25-169

Sponsors:

Noecker

Refer back to LH April 21, 2026 at 9 am.

Referred to the City Council due back on 1/7/2026

Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 476

SHERBURNE AVENUE. (File No. J2601R, Assessment No. 268601)

Sponsors:

Bowie

Refer back to LH April 21, 2026 at 9 am.

Referred to the City Council due back on 1/7/2026

Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 1077

BLAIR AVENUE. (File No. J2526R1, Assessment No. 258591)

Sponsors:

Bowie

Laid over to LH April 21, 2026 at 9 am.

Laid Over to the Legislative Hearings due back on 4/21/2026

Review the Ratifying of the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for

property at 872 RONDO AVENUE. (File No. J2522R, Assessment No.

258555)

Sponsors:

Bowie

Layover to LH April 21, 2026 at 9 am.

Laid Over to the Legislative Hearings due back on 4/21/2026

11:00 a.m. Hearings

Summary & Vehicle Abatement Orders

Appeal of Seth Richardson to a Summary Abatement Order at 2350

BAYLESS PLACE.

RLH SAO 25-56

Sponsors:

Coleman

Grant the appeal allowing plant heights up to 36" (rather than 18") around the bend in

the boulevard.

Seth Richardson, owner, appeared

Pat Thompson, o/b/o District Council, appeared

Moermond: I’d asked Mai to communicate to you yesterday I’m going to recommend

the granting of this appeal based on some comments from Public Works that means

the 18” code doesn’t apply.

Richardson: the original Legislative Hearing we kind of focused on it not being an

intersection, which we appreciated. The 36” rule is what was still a concern to myself

and the contractor who designed it. Does that 36” mean the entire way across?

Moermond: yes.

Richardson: our concerns---the planter list mix that is in the list I sent you, there are

plants that grow higher than 36” especially in a year like this, it is a good thing. We

didn’t know if there was some solution like 36” up to a certain point, then higher

elsewhere. That may be more feasible for both the garden and the plants

themselves. That would involve having to cut July – August which would threaten the

health of the entire ecosystem. I don’t know if that was even considered?

Thompson: I’m speaking o/b/o the District Council and we are urging the Council to

amend the ordinance that takes into consideration the variances of boulevard so in

cases like this. Not specifically about this case, but in general.

Moermond: it is a good time of year to bring those ideas forward.

Richardson: if I may ask, since I obviously have been unable to get my

Councilmember there because it is a conflict of interest if they even spoke with me.

Moermond: it is a quasi-judicial matter, not a conflict of interest which by definition

means there’s a monetary stake involved, which there is not here. It goes to Council

as a whole, not to an individual Councilmember.

Richardson: weren’t they already---we don’t need to argue that. This is treated

differently then than the policy matter where it doesn’t seem to me there is anything in

the code that treats a boulevard like mine, very large, differently, right? That’s the

interpretation? It is the boulevard so 36” applies. For any kind of relief from Council, if

I can’t talk to Council about it—I guess that seems…

Moermond: you CAN talk to Council about it. You can’t talk to Council outside of the

hearing process. You need to talk to all the Councilmembers the same.

Richardson: sure.

Moermond: you clearly don’t get this.

Richardson: I get it is just very confusing thing. I’ve covered municipal government

and cities all over the Country. This is a somewhat strange set-up as far as I’m

aware.

Moermond: no, it isn’t. if you were covering the Board of Zoning appeals, or a

licensing matter and the Council was set up to hear a case, you can’t talk to one

judge in a panel and not to all of them.

Richardson: so, I can talk to the whole Council?

Moermond: the whole Council makes the decision. ONE does not make a decision.

As individuals they have no power.

Richardson: that’s fine. The question is then, the other course of relief would be at

that Council meeting?

Moermond: yes. You can submit things for the record and they go to everyone, and

they may review ahead of time and come to a decision based on the paper, but that

would be something they’d talk about on the record and handle there. Definitely that

is your next stop. That will be December 10th. This is a public right-of-way that

should allow a pass-through of human beings. It is a PUBLIC right of way.

Richardson: that’s why the sidewalk and bluestone was built around it so that there IS

access.

Moermond: I understand but the entire area is public right-of-way. I’m not bringing it

up in this context, I’m saying as we look at policy ideas for the boulevard that is

something that comes up more frequently. A raised garden bed, but other issues on

the boulevard the District Council may want to look at in the process of reviewing

policy the Council may want to do. I can only deal with the policy now. If they amend

it, they do, if they choose to do a variance, they can absolutely do that. Because this

is on what I would call a relatively sharp area—it isn’t a corner---it makes it not a good

candidate for going above 36” inches.

Richardson: not a good candidate as far as current code is concerned?

Moermond: right. My analysis of the current code, yes.

Richardson: are there any analysis from Public Works or whatever about what kind of

curbs or boulevards would be good candidates?

Moermond: not that I’m aware of. The code is the code, they wouldn’t analyze it

differently than what the law is unless they were asked to do a study.

Richardson: the other question I had is because this all stems from a complaint—this

hasn’t been a problem for 5 years of its existence, until someone lodged a complaint.

I was told those aren’t a matter of public record, is that accurate?

Moermond: the fact a complaint has been received is public record, what is described

in the complaint is public record, any identifying information of the complainant is

NOT.

Richardson: could I get a copy of the description of the complaint attached to the

record? I didn’t see it.

Moermond: normally it would be but the timing of this is during the cyber attack

affected information. Your orders were handwritten, so the complaint wouldn’t have

been entered into the standard system. It was offline. I’m not even sure there is a

record of that nature. Right now, it is impossible to know. Once an investigator is

asked to investigate, it is a matter of whether or not it is founded. They make the

determination, not the neighbor.

Richardson: sure, but the complaint is the reason the inspector is out there in the first

place.

Moermond: there are things in the City that have been there for 20 years and haven’t

been called in yet, and that doesn’t change whether or not the law applies.

Richardson: I totally understand. I’m just asking so I have all the information because

I couldn’t even really get what the complaint was about in the first place. I’ve been

told multiple different things.

Martin: from what I recall, the complaint was for an advertising sign in the boulevard.

That’s what the inspector found, but then also wrote up what he found as far as the

height.

Richardson: sure, but the first time I talked to him he told me someone complained

about the height of the rain garden itself. When I called to ask if he’s the one who

took my signs or if it was kids he said the reason he was out was because of the

signs so I’ve never got a clear answer altogether.

Moermond: and for my purposes it doesn’t change the fact that there was a finding.

Richardson: sure, I get that.

Referred to the City Council due back on 12/10/2025

Appeal of Walker Wilkins and Andrea Vercruysse to a Summary

Abatement Order at 1473 FAIRMOUNT AVENUE.

RLH SAO 25-66

Sponsors:

Jost

Grant to January 1, 2026 for compliance via proper storage or removal of wood

(pallets, wood construction materials) from property, and to July 1, 2026 for balance

of the orders.

Walker Wilkins, owner, appeared via phone

[Moermond gives background of appeals process]

Staff report by Supervisor Lisa Martin: November6, 2025 a Summary Abatement

Order was issued regarding properly disposing of large rocks and building material

from boulevard and front of the property. Compliance date of November 13, 2025.

Landscaping project possibly going on. There are also pavers and pallets in the

backyard as well. They were removed from the boulevard.

Moermond: the orders themselves only pertain to the boulevard and front?

Wilkins: this is a large project that I’m doing by hand. It is a drystone wall and I’ve

acquired a level 1 drystone certification to do it. A lot of complications have arisen

due to it being such a busy sidewalk. I made my best effort to comply in the City’s

interest by removing the boulevard rocks immediately. I’d like to point out to some

degree the order gives me license. It allows you to use power tools from 7 am to 10

pm. I have not done that. Most of the tools I use have been between 2 pm to 7 pm.

Given the order, I would very much like to complete this wall. I have hundreds of

hours of work into this. I’d like to finish and put this energy into other projects. I

already planned to recover the boulevard in the spring, along with the front yard.

Moermond: this is a worthwhile project. I’m inclined to have the Council give you an

extension, I did see you moved the boulevard rocks and that was the part I was

concerned about. July 1 does that work?

Walker Wilkins: sure.

Moermond: what about the same deadline for the pavers in the back?

Walker Wilkins: I’m inclined to say yes, but I don’t want to disappoint you or feel like

I’ve been unfair.

Moermond: I’m inclined to split out the wood construction materials from the stone. Is

the wood something you could store in the garage?

Walker Wilkins: I do have good news. I recycled 2 truck beds of pallets since the

order landed. I asked for photos but I don’t have any photos in the backyard.

Moermond: we’re in the same position, I don’t’ have the benefit of back yard photos

as well.

Walker Wilkins: I’ve done a good faith effort to comply.

Moermond: I agree, and I think the boulevard was the largest concern especially with

snow coming up. So pallets are on their way. How about a January 1 deadline on

wood in the back and July 1 on the stone. We can revisit that in July.

Referred to the City Council due back on 12/10/2025

Orders to Vacate Code Enforcement

Appeal of Dennis D. Grahs to a Notice of Condemnation As Unfit for

Human Habitation & Order to Vacate at 555 SMITH AVENUE SOUTH.

RLH VO 25-21

Sponsors:

Noecker

Grant to December 12, 2025 for items 8, 13, 14, 16, 17, 22, 24, 25 & 31; Grant to

February 9, 2026 for items 4, 5, 7, 21, 23 & 29; and to June 8, 2026 for items 3, 9, 10,

12, 19, 20, 28, 30, 32,34 & 36 of the October 16 orders. Noting that items 2, 6, 11,

15, 19, 26, 27 & 33 have already been abated.

Voicemail left at 11:53 am: this is Marcia Moermond from St. Paul City Council calling

you about the work plan for 555 Smith Avenue. I believe you talked to Dick

Kedrowski and Lisa Martin and they wrote the things you were done with and things

done on 3 different deadlines. I’m going to go with that document you all agreed on,

but if that changes let us know. Please call 651-266-8585 if you have questions.

Referred to the City Council due back on 12/10/2025

Making Finding on Nuisance Abatements

RLH SAO 25-58 Making finding on the appealed nuisance abatement ordered for 2016

FREMONT AVENUE in Council File RLH SAO 25-55. (Refer to

November 18, 2025 Legislative Hearing)

Sponsors:

Johnson

Nuisance is not abated but grant through December 12th for compliance.

Mark Puchala, owner, appeared via phone

Moermond: we’re following up on the camper and grass.

Martin: an inspector was there today. The grass and boulevard is not in compliance,

the camper is not in compliance but is now in a stored capacity. Not upright.

Puhala: I don’t understand what isn’t compliant in my yard. I worked with Ramsey

County extension on cutting back my stem plants and I was told I can leave the ones

deeper in the yard. I made sure all of the grass around the sidewalks is trimmed

down and none of the grass is taller than 8 inches. The only large stem plants are my

big bluestem. I can cut it back now if needed. With the camper, I have been having

an issue. I’m low on funds so I can’t just go buy paving stones. I’ve been trying to find

some to install but I am still searching. The best I can do is ask for time to let me find

those. I really don’t understand what isn’t compliance with my plants. Do you need

me just destroying all of my stems because Ramsey County said I shouldn’t have to.

Moermond: it is November 18 so I think you can bite the bullet and mow the yard.

The photos show it isn’t in compliance. There was a fair bit of conversation with you

through this process and also with the Ward office, the finding by the department and

the photos I’ve seen show it isn’t done. I’m not going to review the types of plants in

the yard and figure that out at this point. What we have and what we have discussed

is there is a difference between native plantings and overgrown lawn. You need to

figure that out for next year; we just need to be done for this year.

Puchala: so I have to cut everything down under 18” despite what Ramsey County

extension says?

Moermond: I don’t have any report from them about what is and isn’t native plants in

there. That isn’t part of City code is in terms of asking them anyway. I do know we

have what continues to look like overgrown lawn. I do know City code. I know we’ll be

talking about this again but I think we need to be done this year. I don’t think it will

harm anything. Regarding the camper, you were going to talk to Zoning about a site

plan. They’re the ones who would even say if pavers are acceptable.

Puchala: I went to the office for zoning and they told me that specifically I need to put

paving stones from the driveway to where the tires are and then its done. I just need

to find stones I can afford. Please give me time to find affordable stones.

Martin: usually when you go to site plan they’ll give you a description and showing

you a map of what can be approved from driveway to garage. I have nothing from

them. That’s a camper you can just put in a driveway or into the garage.

Puchala: I’ll admit I haven’t thought about that. There is a car there. Am I allowed to

crowd my cars in front of the garage? Or put it in front of the garage with my car is

currently there.

Martin: as long as you aren’t blocking the public right-of-way.

Puchala: when I do that the current car I fear the tires will be off the driveway on the

ground. I technically will be out of ordinance in the short-term while I’m getting pavers

to put under the tires, but I think I can get that turned around and get the camper in

front of the driveway while working on getting it into the garage.

Martin: you can park on the street too.

Puchala: I’m allowed to park my camper on the street?

Moermond: are you talking about vehicle tires being off the driveway and in your

grass by a foot? Or blocking the right-of-way?

Puchala: off the driveway in grass. The vehicle would have 2 off the driveway in

grass in my yard.

Martin: you can park your vehicles on the street and put the camper in the driveway,

but until you have an approved site plan showing exactly what they approved you

can’t just put pavers in.

Moermond: looking at Google streetview—do you have access off the alley?

Puchala: alley.

Moermond: your camper could be in the garage and I am seeing a silver vehicle with

a white driver’s side door?

Puchala: yes, that is currently in the driveway. That’s where I would rotate that and

put the camper in front of it because there’s another car in the garage.

Martin: you can park the car on the street and put the camper in the driveway.

Puchala: it is an inactive vehicle. It doesn’t have current registration. I’ll do that if I’m

allowed, I just worry I’ll cause another problem.

Moermond: I’m struggling to find where the driveway connects by cement to the alley.

It is rather overgrown.

Puchala: it connects underneath the pine tree. The zoning department had photos

from the fall where you could see it clearly.

Martin: it looks like it hasn’t been maintained.

Puchala: the driveway ends underneath where the current car is, it doesn’t go all the

way to the sidewalk.

Martin: it needs to be operable and licensed.

Moermond: how expired are those tabs?

Puchala: four years. I thought it didn’t need that if it was in my driveway?

Moermond: it does.

Puchala: do I need to store it somewhere else?

Martin: yes, you do.

Puchala: I will get that taken care of, apologies. I didn’t know that.

Moermond: it is good to get it sorted out here. What chance do you have of getting

those tabs squared away?

Puchala: I believe it shouldn’t be a problem, I just didn’t know I needed to. I prefer to

find a place to put the car but if I can’t I’ll get the tabs right away.

Moermond: the tabs are needed even if you are parked on your own property if it isn’t

inside a garage. Four years expired on the street or visible on private property needs

updated tabs. We don’t have orders on that vehicle right now.

Martin: is this vehicle operable?

Puchala: no.

Martin: then it needs to be removed.

Puchala: I can put it in neutral and move it around. I understand.

Moermond: no orders now, but you need to sort it out. There was a deadline for the

trailer by November 14 and we’re checking it now. I’m going to ask Council to grant

through December 12th to deal with the grass. Let’s push the trailer out to January

9th, 2026. You don’t want anything to freeze into the ground so you may want to take

action sooner than later.

Puchala: I do have to make a call but I believe I can bring the camper to my partner’s

aunt’s house. I’ve cut back all of the stem plants while we’re on the call right now so

in all “technicality” you should be able to just have an inspector come by tomorrow to

see if what I cut back qualifies. It is all below 8” right now.

Moermond: let’s do those deadlines we discussed. So it will be checked on or after

December 12th.

Laid Over to the Legislative Hearings due back on 12/16/2025

RLH SAO 25-69 Making finding on the appealed nuisance abatement ordered for 2016

FREMONT AVENUE in Council File RLH SAO 25-55.

Sponsors:

Johnson

The nuisance is not abated but grant to January 9th, 2026 for compliance.