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, July 22, 2025  
9:00 AM  
Room 330 City Hall & Court House/Remote  
9:00 a.m. Hearings  
Special Tax Assessments  
RLH TA 25-294  
1
Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 427  
AURORA AVENUE. (File No. J2522R, Assessment No. 258555) (Public  
hearing continued to August 6, 2025)  
Bowie  
Sponsors:  
Approve the assessment. Continue CPH to August 6, 2025.  
Hue Tran, owner, appeared via phone  
Tan Yan Kim, Vietnamese interpreter, appeared  
Moermond: I was looking for an invoice because the photos didn’t look too bad in my  
assessment. I didn’t see work that would have got to a $669 assessment. I do see an  
hour billed out for the cleanup.  
[Hue Tran called into hearing]  
[Moermond gives background of appeals process]  
Tran: as a reviewed the email you sent me with photos, the photos weren’t of my  
property.  
Moermond: what property DO you own in that neighborhood?  
Tran: the address is 432 University Avenue.  
Moermond: this is a parking lot area and I show the owner as Hue Tran at an address  
in Woodbury.  
Tran: that is the correct name.  
Moermond: the orders were for these vacant lot areas.  
Tran: the building next to it, the address is also 427.  
Moermond: do you own the parking lot?  
Tran: yes, I own the parking lot.  
Moermond: Ms. Martin, the address of 427? How did inspectors come up with that as  
the address?  
Martin: when you pull it up under “0” address, it shows 427 Aurora and 429 Aurora,  
which are the parking lots.  
Moermond: when investigating the empty lot that is the address the City has for it.  
Tran: when I received the photos they are the parking lot of that building.  
Moermond: the buildings are all located along University, and each of the buildings has  
a lot on the other side of the alley behind them, it is all parking. We’re only talking  
about the parking lot associated with YOUR University Avenue business.  
[further appeal options and interpretation/translation option discussed]  
Staff report by Supervisor Lisa Martin: March 19, 2025 we issued the Summary  
Abatement Order to clean up the property. The compliance date was March 26, 2025.  
No appeal filed nor returned mail. Total assessment for the cleanup is $669.  
Moermond: were orders issued for just her portion of the parking lot, or the entire  
length of the sidewalk?  
Martin: the other parking lot at 429 Aurora had orders issued as well.  
Moermond: that would be the corner of Aurora and Arundel. Why are you appealing  
today?  
Tran: because it was so cold in March, by April I was the one who went to clean up  
every 2 weeks. I didn’t see the City come out and clean up.  
Moermond: did you receive the photos and packet sent by Joanna Zimny?  
Tran: I did receive that but I didn’t receive the mail.  
Moermond: it was sent to Woodbury.  
Tran: I didn’t check the mail. If I did receive it with that amount I wouldn’t have let it  
happen. That is a large amount. In April I’m the one that cleaned up all the trash.  
Moermond: I have photos from the contractor showing it was a mess when they got  
there and clean when they left.  
Tran: I don’t remember the day or month, but I remember in April I came down to the  
property and cleaned up all the trash.  
Moermond: it must have been different trash because when the crew arrived April 7 it  
was a mess and when they left it was cleaned up.  
Tran: there are homeless people that use my parking lot to stay. The City wasn’t able  
to do anything and there is also a bar and they drink and throw cans over to the  
parking lot.  
Moermond: I don’t understand how that makes a difference in who should rake up the  
branches and the plastic bags and cans. It is still your property.  
Tran: I didn’t see the City clean it up on my behalf, and now you charge me a lot of  
money.  
Moermond: we sent you photos, you don’t have to be present to witness the cleanup.  
You did receive an order in the mail, you said you may or may not have opened it.  
Martin: the City shows there was an unsheltered large encampment on the southeast  
corner of the property on Aurora. The City crew did pick up some mattresses, bedding,  
clothing, bags and other miscellaneous items that they didn’t charge the property  
owner for.  
Tran: what kind of cleanup did you do that you charge me almost $700? Around that  
time, it was still cold but when the weather was wormer I went to the property and  
cleaned it myself.  
Moermond: I appreciate that but we live in Minnesota and we have to keep our property  
clean all 12 months of the year. I am going to recommend this assessment is  
approved, you are more than welcome to appeal further at Council.  
This is our third attempt to have this conversation, June 17, July 8, and today. Your  
Council Public Hearing is scheduled tomorrow, I will ask them to continue this to  
August 6 in case you want to talk to them. Then we will have notice to get an  
interpreter for you. Please let us know by August 1, so we can schedule an interpreter  
for August 6.  
Tran: one question, on August 6 if I come to City Hall will there be a charge for me to  
pay? The almost $700?  
Moermond: there is no charge to talk to City Council.  
Tran: I would like to come to Council August 6.  
Moermond: we will send an email to confirm, would you want that to be in English,  
Vietnamese or both?  
Tran: both. My brother will read.  
Moermond: we’ll go ahead and order an interpreter now for August 6.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 7/23/2025  
2
RLH TA 25-331  
Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 869  
CLARK STREET. (File No. J2524R, Assessment No. 258563)  
Kim  
Sponsors:  
Recommendation forthcoming.  
Thi Thu Ha Phan, owner, appeared  
Tan Yan Kim, Vietnamese interpreter, appeared  
Trang Pham, sister, appeared  
[Moermond gives background of appeals process]  
Staff report by Supervisor by Lisa Martin:  
Kim: the sister is speaking on her behalf.  
Staff report by Supervisor Lisa Martin: on both properties a Summary Abatement Order  
was issued April 10, 2025 to remove tree branches from the vacant lots. Compliance  
date of April 17, we did recheck and the work wasn’t done. We sent a work crew to  
both properties. The total assessments were $2699 for 869 Clark and $2624 for 875  
Clark. We do have a long history at these vacant lots. Orders were sent to owners at  
903 Burr Street and no returned mail.  
Moermond: looking at the photos I do see quite a bit of wood, maybe trees were cut  
down.  
Pham: she just immigrated here from Vietnam 2 years ago. Her son lives in 903. My  
mom had dementia and she normally stayed with her to take care of her so she didn’t  
check the mail. The boy is stupid and didn’t pay attention and check the mail, so we  
didn’t see it. The issue is after the winter came and we were going to clean up the lot  
and hire someone to cut the tree, it is on a high hill so we couldn’t see the issue there.  
The people had time to come cut and maybe got busy and didn’t have time to finish.  
We didn’t see the letter. We tried to clean up the lot and have it hauled away. He was  
just going to come back when he had time, it was still cold in April.  
Moermond: I heard you say the mail DID go to 903 Burr which is the owner’s official  
address with Ramsey County taxation?  
Pham: yes. Only her son lived there at 903 Burr. She stayed with my mom at 923 and  
she didn’t pay attention to the mail at 903 for a while.  
Moermond: I understand. Looking at Ramsey County taxation you bought the  
properties April 12, 2024 and at that time you told Ramsey County to send mail and  
taxes to 903 Burr.  
Ha Phan: what month was that?  
Moermond: there’s a different purchase date for each of the properties.  
Ha Phan: which property was sent to 903 Burr?  
Moermond: both of them. We’re printing out the record for you now. While that’s  
happening, you were talking about hire someone to do the work and going by to check  
to see if it was done or not. I’m confused about what was going on with the top of the  
hill where you said you couldn’t see. Did they not clean that up? Or you later got the  
order and were going to check if it was done? What was happening?  
Pham: we asked my relative to cut the tree when they had time. He did come when he  
had time and cut it down and we think when he finished he still had to come and he  
just cut it and didn’t remove the tree there. We didn’t have any notice. We normally  
walk by that property, but is really a high hill so we don’t see things up there. At the  
time it was still cold so we don’t pay much attention to that lot. We didn’t have time to  
do it in April.  
Moermond: the work wasn’t done, obviously. Looking back, we have talked in the past  
and you’ve got help from Mr. Douglas Anderson. You told us this was a family transfer  
of property and at that point in time the seller, which was family, you purchased from  
didn’t tell you about a pending assessment and there was some confusion around that.  
This was in January about notification issues. 7 months ago. That assessment got  
deleted.  
Pham: we didn’t buy from a relative, we bought from an agent.  
Moermond: from what I was told in the hearing the relative sold to the agent who sold to  
you.  
Pham: no, we only had the agent who sold to us. The relative is the one who went to  
cut the trees. We didn’t buy from a relative.  
Moermond: all the same, we did talk about notification issues in January. Seven  
months ago. That got deleted.  
Pham: my address was 923 and its 923 here, and when I received the letter.  
Moermond: here’s what happened with timing on these. For 869 and 875 Clark when  
the properties were sold the address on the sales record is 923 Burr. Between that sale  
and the present, the address was changed to 903 Burr as the mailing address with the  
County. We didn’t change that. We’ll ask the County when that was changed and by  
whom. You didn’t get notice at 923—  
Pham: my understanding is we contact the mail at 923 but in end of 2024 we  
registered homestead at 903 and we didn’t mention anything about the lot but I think  
the system may have updated everything when we changed the address for 903.  
Moermond: that isn’t likely. I understand that’s your theory but we need to ask the  
County. We are talking about more than $5,000. I can’t work off a theory. Who  
changed it to 903? It belongs to you and it is a legal address information to send mail  
too, and you chose not to open the mail and delegate to your son didn’t open the mail.  
Neither of those are good signs. I’m happy to look more into it to straighten out the  
legal niceties, but this isn’t looking great for you.  
Pham: we know that is our mistake. That’s why we didn’t take care of it properly, but  
last month when I received the mail from the other lot, we tried to check the lot and we  
had to clean up the tall grass and then we just finished cutting it a few days ago.  
Moermond: so you took care of the property the other day. That’s good.  
Pham: we were trying to cut the tree but unfortunately we didn’t do it at the time it was  
cold. He said he’d still come back to work.  
Moermond: I understand, but the City said the work needed to be done, it wasn’t done.  
The City hired a crew to go out and clean it up and it cost the City a lot of money to  
cleanup these properties. What I’m willing to look at is any information about the  
address situation at the County but your inability to open the mail to check on basics  
of the property is not the responsibility of every other taxpayer in the City to cover the  
cost of this work. If you had 923 and it somehow got changed to 903 without your  
knowledge I need to take that into account, but also balance that with the fact the  
other is your property as well.  
What I’m wondering, for what purpose did you buy these empty lots? It seems like  
they’re hard to maintain. Putting in a house? A garden? For what purpose are you  
paying taxes on this property in the long run?  
Pham: she’d just come here and she has two sons and the agent sold both lots at a  
discount, really low compared to the market. We did cut the branches this year to  
maintain it. We didn’t ignore your notice; we didn’t see the mail. We hope you had  
some waiver for us. When we pay taxes it just goes to the address on the plot so we  
didn’t receive the mail for the tax statement. We are thinking to clean the lots or  
maybe sell or sell to my brother who is a builder. From now on we try to check the mail  
frequently. If anything in the past you can give us a waiver for, we really know now we  
need to cleanup and maintain the lot carefully.  
Moermond: a $5,400 waiver is extraordinary for a mistake on your part. But I don’t want  
to recommend this assessment be approved if it wasn’t a mistake on your part. That’s  
why I need to do the research with Ramsey County.  
If I end up asking the Council to approve these I assume making them payable over  
time would be helpful versus one large sum. Perhaps 5 or 7 years?  
Moermond: Ms. Martin has looked into 903 and 923 Burr records and the findings  
weren’t great.  
Martin: 903 Burr we had a complaint regarding the stairs not being to code, dangerous  
entry into building, and building inspector said it was existing property so we wouldn’t  
get involved. 923 Burr doesn’t have a permit either, a garage addition and someone’s  
husband was going to call and get a permit. We need to do some research with the  
building department about the status of those properties.  
Pham: we went to ask about a tag for 923 and we did the permit properly, I don’t know  
how it says no permit.  
Moermond: there is a building permit, the question is whether work was started before  
the permit was pulled. The more important piece is work was done in 2021 without a  
permit and a stop work order was issued. I see a different understanding of the permit  
process between 2021 and 2024 but this is not great.  
Pham: the longer the better.  
Moermond: we’ll find out what the County has to say. We have an email address for  
Doug Anderson, would you like us to use yours as well. Would you like that translated  
into Vietnamese?  
Pham: you can write in English.  
Moermond: your Council Public Hearing is September 3, so won’t rush but have  
something to you by mid-August.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 9/3/2025  
3
RLH TA 25-332  
Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 875  
CLARK STREET. (File No. J2524R, Assessment No. 258563)  
Kim  
Sponsors:  
Recommendation forthcoming.  
Thi Thu Ha Phan, owner, appeared  
Tan Yan Kim, Vietnamese interpreter, appeared  
Trang Pham, sister, appeared  
[Moermond gives background of appeals process]  
Staff report by Supervisor by Lisa Martin:  
Kim: the sister is speaking on her behalf.  
Staff report by Supervisor Lisa Martin: on both properties a Summary Abatement Order  
was issued April 10, 2025 to remove tree branches from the vacant lots. Compliance  
date of April 17, we did recheck and the work wasn’t done. We sent a work crew to  
both properties. The total assessments were $2699 for 869 Clark and $2624 for 875  
Clark. We do have a long history at these vacant lots. Orders were sent to owners at  
903 Burr Street and no returned mail.  
Moermond: looking at the photos I do see quite a bit of wood, maybe trees were cut  
down.  
Pham: she just immigrated here from Vietnam 2 years ago. Her son lives in 903. My  
mom had dementia and she normally stayed with her to take care of her so she didn’t  
check the mail. The boy is stupid and didn’t pay attention and check the mail, so we  
didn’t see it. The issue is after the winter came and we were going to clean up the lot  
and hire someone to cut the tree, it is on a high hill so we couldn’t see the issue there.  
The people had time to come cut and maybe got busy and didn’t have time to finish.  
We didn’t see the letter. We tried to clean up the lot and have it hauled away. He was  
just going to come back when he had time, it was still cold in April.  
Moermond: I heard you say the mail DID go to 903 Burr which is the owner’s official  
address with Ramsey County taxation?  
Pham: yes. Only her son lived there at 903 Burr. She stayed with my mom at 923 and  
she didn’t pay attention to the mail at 903 for a while.  
Moermond: I understand. Looking at Ramsey County taxation you bought the  
properties April 12, 2024 and at that time you told Ramsey County to send mail and  
taxes to 903 Burr.  
Ha Phan: what month was that?  
Moermond: there’s a different purchase date for each of the properties.  
Ha Phan: which property was sent to 903 Burr?  
Moermond: both of them. We’re printing out the record for you now. While that’s  
happening, you were talking about hire someone to do the work and going by to check  
to see if it was done or not. I’m confused about what was going on with the top of the  
hill where you said you couldn’t see. Did they not clean that up? Or you later got the  
order and were going to check if it was done? What was happening?  
Pham: we asked my relative to cut the tree when they had time. He did come when he  
had time and cut it down and we think when he finished he still had to come and he  
just cut it and didn’t remove the tree there. We didn’t have any notice. We normally  
walk by that property, but is really a high hill so we don’t see things up there. At the  
time it was still cold so we don’t pay much attention to that lot. We didn’t have time to  
do it in April.  
Moermond: the work wasn’t done, obviously. Looking back, we have talked in the past  
and you’ve got help from Mr. Douglas Anderson. You told us this was a family transfer  
of property and at that point in time the seller, which was family, you purchased from  
didn’t tell you about a pending assessment and there was some confusion around that.  
This was in January about notification issues. 7 months ago. That assessment got  
deleted.  
Pham: we didn’t buy from a relative, we bought from an agent.  
Moermond: from what I was told in the hearing the relative sold to the agent who sold to  
you.  
Pham: no, we only had the agent who sold to us. The relative is the one who went to  
cut the trees. We didn’t buy from a relative.  
Moermond: all the same, we did talk about notification issues in January. Seven  
months ago. That got deleted.  
Pham: my address was 923 and its 923 here, and when I received the letter.  
Moermond: here’s what happened with timing on these. For 869 and 875 Clark when  
the properties were sold the address on the sales record is 923 Burr. Between that sale  
and the present, the address was changed to 903 Burr as the mailing address with the  
County. We didn’t change that. We’ll ask the County when that was changed and by  
whom. You didn’t get notice at 923—  
Pham: my understanding is we contact the mail at 923 but in end of 2024 we  
registered homestead at 903 and we didn’t mention anything about the lot but I think  
the system may have updated everything when we changed the address for 903.  
Moermond: that isn’t likely. I understand that’s your theory but we need to ask the  
County. We are talking about more than $5,000. I can’t work off a theory. Who  
changed it to 903? It belongs to you and it is a legal address information to send mail  
too, and you chose not to open the mail and delegate to your son didn’t open the mail.  
Neither of those are good signs. I’m happy to look more into it to straighten out the  
legal niceties, but this isn’t looking great for you.  
Pham: we know that is our mistake. That’s why we didn’t take care of it properly, but  
last month when I received the mail from the other lot, we tried to check the lot and we  
had to clean up the tall grass and then we just finished cutting it a few days ago.  
Moermond: so you took care of the property the other day. That’s good.  
Pham: we were trying to cut the tree but unfortunately we didn’t do it at the time it was  
cold. He said he’d still come back to work.  
Moermond: I understand, but the City said the work needed to be done, it wasn’t done.  
The City hired a crew to go out and clean it up and it cost the City a lot of money to  
cleanup these properties. What I’m willing to look at is any information about the  
address situation at the County but your inability to open the mail to check on basics  
of the property is not the responsibility of every other taxpayer in the City to cover the  
cost of this work. If you had 923 and it somehow got changed to 903 without your  
knowledge I need to take that into account, but also balance that with the fact the  
other is your property as well.  
What I’m wondering, for what purpose did you buy these empty lots? It seems like  
they’re hard to maintain. Putting in a house? A garden? For what purpose are you  
paying taxes on this property in the long run?  
Pham: she’d just come here and she has two sons and the agent sold both lots at a  
discount, really low compared to the market. We did cut the branches this year to  
maintain it. We didn’t ignore your notice; we didn’t see the mail. We hope you had  
some waiver for us. When we pay taxes it just goes to the address on the plot so we  
didn’t receive the mail for the tax statement. We are thinking to clean the lots or  
maybe sell or sell to my brother who is a builder. From now on we try to check the mail  
frequently. If anything in the past you can give us a waiver for, we really know now we  
need to cleanup and maintain the lot carefully.  
Moermond: a $5,400 waiver is extraordinary for a mistake on your part. But I don’t want  
to recommend this assessment be approved if it wasn’t a mistake on your part. That’s  
why I need to do the research with Ramsey County.  
If I end up asking the Council to approve these I assume making them payable over  
time would be helpful versus one large sum. Perhaps 5 or 7 years?  
Moermond: Ms. Martin has looked into 903 and 923 Burr records and the findings  
weren’t great.  
Martin: 903 Burr we had a complaint regarding the stairs not being to code, dangerous  
entry into building, and building inspector said it was existing property so we wouldn’t  
get involved. 923 Burr doesn’t have a permit either, a garage addition and someone’s  
husband was going to call and get a permit. We need to do some research with the  
building department about the status of those properties.  
Pham: we went to ask about a tag for 923 and we did the permit properly, I don’t know  
how it says no permit.  
Moermond: there is a building permit, the question is whether work was started before  
the permit was pulled. The more important piece is work was done in 2021 without a  
permit and a stop work order was issued. I see a different understanding of the permit  
process between 2021 and 2024 but this is not great.  
Pham: the longer the better.  
Moermond: we’ll find out what the County has to say. We have an email address for  
Doug Anderson, would you like us to use yours as well. Would you like that translated  
into Vietnamese?  
Pham: you can write in English.  
Moermond: your Council Public Hearing is September 3, so won’t rush but have  
something to you by mid-August.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 9/3/2025  
4
RLH TA 25-314  
Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 1119  
EDGERTON STREET. (File No. J2524R, Assessment No. 258563)  
Kim  
Sponsors:  
Delete the assessment.  
Rachel Tarrats, owner, appeared via phone  
[Moermond gives background of appeals process]  
Staff report by Supervisor Lisa Martin: April 22, 2025 a Summary Abatement Order  
was sent to remove and dispose of tree logs and branches from rear property.  
Compliance date of April 29, reinspected April 29 and it wasn’t done. Work crew went  
out May 2, 2025 and the property owners met Inspector Westenhofer and said they  
were appealing so this is a trip charge only. They filed an appeal May 13 under RLH  
SAO 25-41  
Tarrats: my wife went into the City Council and did the in person application for appeal  
and it is stamped April 25. I actually met with the team that came out and I told them  
I’d submitted a successful appeal, and they didn’t believe me because no one had  
contacted them. We appealed because we needed more time. I don’t think we should  
have to pay for a trip charge due to the miscommunication between the office and the  
driver/work crew.  
I believe it was a Monday because we got it on a Friday and my wife went in right away  
Monday am to file the appeal.  
Moermond: the appeal is date stamped April 28, and in that case the crew should not  
have been deployed. These automatically get sent to Department of Safety &  
Inspections so it was a communication problem between inspector and work crew. I’ll  
recommend this is deleted.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 9/3/2025  
5
RLH TA 25-334  
Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 506  
EDMUND AVENUE. (File No. J2524R, Assessment No. 258563)  
Bowie  
Sponsors:  
Delete the assessment.  
Voicemail left at 9:24 am: this is Marcia Moermond from St. Paul City Council calling  
Deborah Dotson about your appealed tax assessment for 506 Edmund Avenue for  
$389. In reviewing the file I found some missing paperwork so I will recommend the  
City Council delete the assessment, which means when the Council Public Hearing  
happens September 3 they will delete it and no further invoice forthcoming. Any  
questions reach to our office information on how to do that is in your July 17 email.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 9/3/2025  
6
RLH TA 25-311  
Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 694  
WESTERN AVENUE NORTH. (File No. J2523R, Assessment No.  
258557)  
Bowie  
Sponsors:  
Delete the assessment.  
Law Schuelke, owner, appeared via phone  
Moermond: it looks like we have a trip charge for sending a crew out and in reviewing  
your file beforehand it was apparent not all the paperwork was here. I have no photo  
demonstrating the items listed in the Summary Abatement Order was still there before  
the crew went out so I will recommend deletion.  
Scheulke: I accept.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 8/20/2025  
7
RLH TA 25-312  
Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 704  
WESTERN AVENUE NORTH. (File No. J2523R, Assessment No.  
258557)  
Bowie  
Sponsors:  
Delete the assessment.  
Law Schuelke, o/b/o owner, appeared via phone  
Moermond: it looks like we have a trip charge for sending a crew out and in reviewing  
the file beforehand it was apparent not all the paperwork was here. I have no photo  
demonstrating the items listed in the Summary Abatement Order was still there before  
the crew went out so I will recommend deletion.  
Scheulke: I accept.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 8/20/2025  
10:00 a.m. Hearings  
Special Tax Assessments  
8
RLH TA 25-303  
Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 1030  
FREMONT AVENUE. (File No. CRT2510, Assessment No. 258209)  
Johnson  
Sponsors:  
Reduce assessment from $389 to $239.  
Rebecca Nguyen, owner, appeared via phone  
Moermond: this is follow up after our discussion a couple of weeks ago. Due to staff  
error I am going to recommend the service charge is deleted, which brings you down  
from 398, down to $239. We also have an update in case you haven’t been to the  
property recently  
Martin: huge history here with vehicles, dog feces, and we have open complaints about  
vehicles in backyard and growing marijuana in the back yard. These will all be getting  
Excessive Consumption fees for excessive use of City services.  
Moermond: back yard a disaster, and you’ll want to remove those plants.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 8/20/2025  
9
RLH TA 25-313  
Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 1745  
NEVADA AVENUE EAST. (File No. J2502A, Assessment No. 258564)  
Yang  
Sponsors:  
Approve the assessment and make payable over 5 years.  
No one appeared  
Moermond: there’s a note saying they’d like it spread over 5 years and won’t be  
attending the hearing. This is for removal of a dangerous tree. I will recommend the  
Council makes that $6,214 spread over 5 years.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 9/3/2025  
Special Tax Assessments-ROLLS  
10  
11  
RLH AR 25-72  
Ratifying the assessment for Rubbish and Garbage Clean Up services  
during April 15 to May 14, 2025. (File No. J2524R, Assessment No.  
258563)  
Noecker  
Sponsors:  
Referred to the City Council due back on 9/3/2025  
RLH AR 25-73  
Ratifying the assessment for Miscellaneous Abatement services during  
February to May 2025. (File No. J2502A, Assessment No. 258564)  
Noecker  
Sponsors:  
Referred to the City Council due back on 9/3/2025  
11:00 a.m. Hearings  
RLH VO 25-15  
12  
Appeal of Crystal Van Canneyt, Ramsey County Case Manager, on  
behalf of Richard Polly, to a Notice of Condemnation as Unfit for Human  
Habitation & Order to Vacate at 1872 CLEAR AVENUE.  
Yang  
Sponsors:  
Deny the appeal and grant to August 4, 2025 to vacate property.  
Crystal Van Canneyt, Ramsey County Case Manager on behalf of Richard Polly,  
appeared via phone  
Moermond: I understand you have found him some place to go?  
Van Canneyt: I have to get ahold of them again today for an update but he’s been  
looking at Summit Hill Senior Living. They assisted with an MA application last week  
and Carly was going to meet with him Thursday to get a few additional proofs. During  
that process they found out he does have some sort of retirement account, so starting  
as private pay and then go to waiver. He could get moved in as private pay and submit  
his MA application to move to elderly waiver once his other funds are depleted. I  
haven’t connected with her yet today for an update.  
Moermond: I need to put a time certain on when he needs to be out of that house and  
can no longer be living there. I’m thinking Monday August 4.  
Van Canneyt: that should work. I can circle back with Summit about what they were  
waiting on and if they received them. I know they were waiting for medical records. One  
question, once he has out will he still have access to his home to remove items?  
Moermond: he would, if something happens that the building needs to be secured like  
a boarding, he can remove the board. He can’t move back in, but it is his property. I’m  
a little worried due to the gross about taking items with him to Summit.  
Van Canneyt: they provide it furnished so it would just be personal items. We’re trying  
to figure out how to get it cleared out and then maybe sell. Still talking about long-term  
plans.  
Moermond: have him focus on things he wants to keep, it won’t be horribly expensive  
to have it “junked out” and let the rest go.  
Voicemail left for Polly at 11:31 am: this is Marcia Moermond from St. Paul City  
Council calling you about your appeal. I have Crystal Van Canneyt on the line. My  
recommendation is to have you move out no later than August 4. Crystal will be  
following up with you and also Carly with Summit Hill. Hopefully this goes smoothly for  
you. I think Crystal continues to be the best contact if you have questions.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 8/6/2025  
1:00 p.m. Hearings  
Vacant Building Registrations  
RLH VBR 25-29  
13  
Appeal of Zoltan Pusenyak to a Vacant Building Registration Notice at  
1024 MINNEHAHA AVENUE EAST.  
Johnson  
Sponsors:  
Deny the appeal.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 8/6/2025  
1:30 p.m. Hearings  
Orders To Vacate - Fire Certificate of Occupancy  
RLH VO 25-16  
Appeal of James Marshall, tenant, to a Fire Correction Notice, which  
includes Condemnation and Order to Vacate at 740 DAYTON AVENUE,  
UNIT B-4.  
Bowie  
Sponsors:  
Layover to LH August 12, 2025 at 1:30 pm for further discussion after new Fire  
inspection.  
James Marshall, tenant, appeared  
[Moermond gives background of appeals process]  
Moermond: looks like we have a condemnation and order to vacate which is a serious  
matter. It was hard to tell from the photos the situation going on with the ceiling.  
Marshall: that was my first worry, but I’ve been in that room 3 years. I figured out it  
wasn’t as fragile as it looks.  
Staff report by Supervisor Der Vue: this is a multi-unit building with 18 units. March 28,  
2025 our office received a complaint the ceiling had cracks and leaks and there was a  
hole in the roof. The inspector did do an inspection and orders were issued to find the  
source of the leak and to repair the ceiling. It had extensive water damage and the  
exterior roof we could see rotting and deterioration. Based on the photos it looks like  
the sheetrock is also rotting and has visible cracks. That was the end of March. A  
reinspection was done July 8 and there was no changes or repairs done.  
Marshall: and finding of the source of leak?  
Vue: right, we didn’t receive anything from the property owner. The inspector did move  
forward and condemned the unit as uninhabitable with orders to vacate.  
Marshall: I made the call. I probably should have done a rent escrow, but I’m not  
familiar with this situation. I called the inspector he came out and inspected and that’s  
where I told him from what I know it is coming from a hole in the roof somewhere.  
There’s probably more than 1 hole. I went to the building manager, landlord, whoever  
and asked them to stop the leak and they said it wasn’t priority. I didn’t know rent  
escrow would have probably been the more accurate way to do this, that’s when the  
whole process went through with the inspector. I’m in a very uncomfortable position  
myself to the point where I’m almost content with living there because I don’t want to  
be in a shelter. That’s the basis of my staying. As far as repairs, there’s no way to fix  
the ceiling without repairing the cause of the leak. That’s where I was confused about  
the whole process. What is going to happen first? It can’t just be the ceiling coming  
down. That’s just a ploy to get me out of the room, what’s the point when it isn’t even a  
priority? I’m stuck in a catch-22. I never thought I’d be in this position because of  
housing incompetence. I can take blame but I shouldn’t have to suffer at the same  
time. I’m looking for as much mercy as I can get. For the longest time I’ve been  
getting the sh*t end of things. The best thing I can do is try and get the best outcome  
for my situation.  
Moermond: are you paying rent?  
Marshall: as of now, I have stopped due to low income. When I was paying I was  
making steady payments. I’ve spent $14,000 on the 3 years living there. That gives me  
chills. I have to get out of that place so I have a place for my kids to come.  
Moermond: have you talked to SMRLS?  
Marshall: I did, but I was going through the situation where he was trying to take my  
keys from me. He ended up changing the locks on the outside of the building, so I had  
to call SMRLS and enforce my rights. That was just that one situation.  
Moermond: that’s called a lock out and its covered in State law.  
Marshall: after that I didn’t see him around anymore. He disappeared. I honestly hadn’t  
seen him until yesterday. It was like 2 am I left my room to go downstairs to the fridge  
and I heard this door close right when my door did. I saw him, it was just odd. I didn’t  
say anything. Why are you like trolling me or following me. I didn’t understand that.  
Moermond: is this Ken Brown?  
Marshall: yeah. Who is the owner?  
Moermond: Best Personal Care Services, LLC.  
Marshall: Ken must own that?  
Moermond: Maybe. Its an LLC. He could be part owner. It could be an employee. Hard  
to say. We need to get some better information. This letter appears to be  
automatically generated?  
Vue: the inspection in early July which prompted the second letter.  
Moermond: I’d like to see more of what’s going on, maybe see what is going on with  
other parts of the building.  
Marshall: there are units in the place that are missing a ceiling. There is serious stuff  
going on. The room I am in, I don’t understand—there’s the yearly inspection that’s  
supposed to happen I’m assuming? Or is it every other year?  
Moermond: it depends on the building itself. The City gives ratings, so if it had an A  
rating, they will inspect every 6 years. A Bad building would be every year. If someone  
is getting a Section 8 certificate, then they inspect every year on top of what the City  
does. I think we need to look at just more than your unit. You need to be in contact  
with SMRLS. Specifically, if you’re withholding rent, you want the Court to ok that. They  
can give proper legal guidance on that. We’ll see what kinds of orders come out from  
Fire Inspections, because that would be a good basis for tenants of the building to  
show that there IS a problem with the building. You’ll need that. We’ll pause the  
condemnation and give it a couple weeks to get inspectors in. We’ll have fresh orders  
and photos. In the meantime you can stay put. If your unit is condemned, you shouldn’t  
have to pay rent at all. SMRLS can give advice on that as well, but you need to make  
sure you’re taking the proper steps so you don’t get yourself in trouble.  
I don’t know these owners at all. They didn’t pay their property taxes last year. They  
owe $15,000 from last year and haven’t paid their May taxes this year. I don’t know  
what that means for their long-term intent.  
Vue: are you in unit B4?  
Marshall: yes.  
Vue: the inspector will schedule something in a couple weeks, I’ll make sure you get a  
copy of that notice.  
Marshall: via mail? Or email?  
Vue: I can do both. We’ll get fresh eyes and want to see the extent of the ceiling on  
interior and exterior, and do one throughout the building as well.  
Moermond: I’ll continue this to August 12 and hopefully we’ll have more solid  
information to go on.  
Laid Over to the Legislative Hearings due back on 8/12/2025