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, January 27, 2026

9:00 AM

Room 330 City Hall & Court House/Remote

9:00 a.m. Hearings

Remove/Repair Orders

RLH RR 25-28

Ordering the rehabilitation or razing and removal of the structures at 430

DALE STREET NORTH within fifteen (15) days after the October 22,

2025, City Council Public Hearing. (Amend to remove within 15 days)

Bowie

Sponsors:

Remove within 15 days with no option to repair.

Voicemail left at 9:20 am for Dooley: this is Marcia Moermond from St. Paul City

Council calling you about 430 N. Dale. We received an email yesterday from them

indicating they were going to proceed with removal of the building. I was hoping to iron

out some details on that. We don’t have contact information for folks at the center, so

calling you. I’m going to recommend the Council, next Wednesday February 4, they

order it removed within 15 days with no option to rehab. The Performance Deposit will

be returned after requesting it in writing. The lot will need to be maintained regardless.

Everything on the site goes when the building goes, back to predevelopment. We’ll

send a follow-up letter confirming details.

Anita Alexander, appeared

Moermond: so they have an opportunity to demolish?

Hoffman: correct.

Moermond: Mr. Hoffman is ready to go.

Supervisor James Hoffman: I need to reactivate the project, but we have list of bids,

so I can let the award winner on February 24th know they can move forward.

Alex: that will include the parking lot?

Hoffman: yes. They still own the lot.

Moermond: I don’t know if it is zoned for just a parking lot. Right now, you have a

parking lot that supports the building. My guess is someone will pick up the parcel and

want to redevelop it. The City is ready to grant the bid. The owner will have an

opportunity, a 15-day window, during which they would have time to hire a contractor

and pull a permit, then they have a narrow window—typically 30 days---

Hoffman: the contract says 30 days, but things do come up.

Moermond: a narrow length of time. Typically 30 days, if they have the contractor hired,

paid, permits pulled. Then we give time to walk through. If the City does it, what is the

timeline?

Hoffman: typically with commercial buildings things take a bit longer as far as utility

disconnects. Typically within 30 to 60 days from the notice to proceed.

Alexander: and nothing should affect the church property?

Hoffman: it shouldn’t. They’re far enough apart.

Hoffman: for residential they have to be cut at the main, which means the middle of

the road, as opposed to the property line. I’m not sure if it is changed for commercial.

Moermond: it will only affect their property, no matter where it is cut.

Hoffman: so maybe a road disruption during the week.

Alexander: can we see what the Code Compliance Inspection?

Moermond: it doesn’t exist yet. We would attach it as part of the record when we get it.

Alexander: there are also a lot of rodents in there.

Hoffman: they will abate that. It is a 3 or 4 day process. That’s part of the demo.

Alexander: I just want to thank everyone, City staff. I appreciate all the work staff has

done, the communication and everything.

Referred to the City Council due back on 2/4/2026

10:00 a.m. Hearings

Special Tax Assessments

RLH TA 25-423

Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 677

CALIFORNIA AVENUE EAST. (File No. VB2512A, Assessment No.

255834) (Refer to January 27, 2026 Legislative Hearing)

Kim

Sponsors:

Delete the assessment.

Roger Barcus, owner, appeared via phone

[Moermond gives background of appeals process]

Staff report by Supervisor James Hoffman: this is a Category 2 single-family home as

of January 24, 2025 due to condemnation for burst pipe. Vacant Building appeal was

filed February 2025 and Vacant Building fee was waived for 90 days. As of today, it is

still on the Vacant Building list.

Barcus: I will take responsibility for assuming when the Fire Inspector came out and

showed everything he needed fixed was already done and told me the City would taking

from there I’d be hearing from them. I worked like crazy to get it done before he came.

I made a mistake in not calling you myself after that. Not sure if you have that report?

Moermond: not in front of me at the moment, but we can get it.

Barcus: I’m asking for forgiveness in not calling you—I know you had a glitch in the

system in the summer, and I’d like to not have to pay this fee for the Vacant Building

list.

Moermond: I’d like to get the fire inspector’s notes on this. That is important. We’ll do

that and talk with them, and I’ll check permit status if one was needed.

Barcus: I got 2 permits, one for electrical and one for plumbing. He said one I can do

myself, the other I can’t. I paid to get those and those are on record and I have copies.

Then again, it is just me doing the work, he said because I don’t live here I can’t do the

electrical myself, which I didn’t know. They didn’t tell me when I got the permit, it was

the Fire Inspector who told me that was in question.

Moermond: that makes sense. I’ll review that and see if I can get better information to

look at. Let’s talk again February 10th at 10 am.

Barcus: can I tell you a joke? Why does everyone in Athens sleep past noon?

Moermond: I don’t know, why?

Barcus: because Dawn is hard on Greece.

Referred to the City Council due back on 2/11/2026

RLH TA 26-29

Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 1069

CASE AVENUE. (File No. VB2601A, Assessment No. 268902)

Yang

Sponsors:

Approve the assessment.

Saeed Alkhulaidi, former owner, appeared via phone

[Moermond gives background of appeals process]

Staff report by Supervisor James Hoffman: Per Assessment Office, fee was paid at

closing by Watermark Title Agency on December 16, 2025. It must have been sold.

Alkhulaidi: they charged me a lot. It wasn’t really vacant; I was working on it and then I

sold it. We flipped it and sold it, I don’t know how it is considered vacant when you’re

working on it.

Moermond: it went into the Vacant Building program May 16, 2024. It must have met

the definition of a Vacant Building at that time, so Vacant Building fee was in place

2024-2025. It wasn’t appealed. It has already been paid over a month ago.

Alkhulaidi: yes, it was paid at closing and I also paid earlier too. I don’t know why I’m

paying for a ridiculous vacancy tax. I didn’t even get the letter to appeal. Just because

I didn’t appeal—it just isn’t fair.

Moermond: Vacant Building program does mean inspections. An inspector goes by

once every couple of weeks at least. Right now we’re talking about money, not if you

are legitimately in the program. Our records don’t show you paid twice. This wasn’t

attached to the property taxes at time you paid it. You would have put money into

escrow at closing, I’m guessing. It was your title company who paid it. I think it was a

legitimate cost and I’m going to recommend Council approve it. You can certainly talk

to the Council about it, that’s your next stop.

Alkhulaidi: so I don’t get any money back?

Moermond: if you did, it would be through the title company. They’re the one who wrote

the check, that’s between you. As far as it being a legitimate cost, I think it is. Plus, it

is already paid, which makes it that much more difficult because paying it means you

agree with that.

Referred to the City Council due back on 2/11/2026

RLH TA 26-21

Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 1160

CLARENCE STREET. (File No. J2603B, Assessment No. 268102)

Yang

Sponsors:

Layover to February 10th, 2026 at 10 am for further discussion. STaff to confirm with

SPPD on source of bullets and Rest Pro on time of boarding.

Latrice Dasher, property rep, appeared via phone

[Moermond gives background of appeals process]

Staff report by Supervisor James Hoffman: emergency securing of structure with

boards, six large windows secured with 9 boards, plus some debris cleanup. That was

July 12, 2025 at 1:17 am ordered by St. Paul Police Department.

Dasher: July 12th was the date of the incident?

Hoffman: correct.

Dasher: I called when I received Mr. Hoffman’s letter July 16th outlining the incident. I

was able to pull up the footage and track along until the shooting across the street and

it appeared the shots fired inside maybe knocked out those windows while the person

fled. I can’t say for sure, but that’s what it looked like. I’m asking why we’re assessed

with the incident that was perpetrated on our property, and why is this our responsibility

to take care of? We pay plenty of taxes to St. Paul Police Department to respond, and

the BCA responded as well and made the incident more excitable. Why, as owners,

are we responsible for this bill when we would have had our tenant take care of it?

Moermond: with respect to the boarding, it appears this is an emergency boarding, that

would be the reason why the City did it rather than asking the owner or tenant. That’s a

legitimate call in a situation like this, unless someone is present there already to do it.

As far as responsibility, if it were the City who put the bullets through the window, I can

see responsibility for the City. Otherwise, it’s a case of property damage that anyone

could experience and it is a private property owner responsibility to take care of. If

someone drives by my house and puts a bullet through the window, I need to talk to

the insurance company. Since the police were there I would like to double check. The

report doesn’t indicate to me clearly exactly what the situation was. There’s only a

public version since it is still under investigation. I asked police records yesterday if

they could tell me whose bullets went through the window and we haven’t heard back

yet. I’d see it as a legitimate claim on the City if they were St. Paul Police Department

bullets, but I can’t say that currently. Otherwise, you’re stuck with it as a private

property owner.

Dasher: this began on the property behind us. It was a welfare check. They walked to

our lot. Then the police on foot at high noon, when the shooting began. This says they

boarded 1:17 am and it was actually the afternoon.

Hoffman: I believe that was a type. It should be 1:17 pm.

Moermond: let’s confirm with Rest Pro if it is a typo. Let’s get a handle on that. Let’s

talk again February 10th.

Laid Over to the Legislative Hearings due back on 2/10/2026

RLH TA 26-24

Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 1728

CONCORDIA AVENUE (1724 CONCORDIA AVENUE). (File No.

J2603B, Assessment No. 268102)

Coleman

Sponsors:

Layover to LH February 10 at 10 am for further discussion.

Michael Minsberg, B & Z Realty, appeared via phone

Moermond: kind of confusing because the PIN connects to two property numbers with

Ramsey County. [Moermond gives background of appeals process]

Staff report by Supervisor James Hoffman: this is an emergency boarding, 3 doors and

3 windows on July 25, 2025. 8:01 am called in by St. Paul Police Department.

Minsberg: we paid that invoice.

Moermond: I was told by staff that there are 3 boarding incidents that happened during

2025, one March, one July and one November. The one in March got paid. The one in

July is in front of us today, and one pending from November.

Minsberg: what is a boarding incident?

Moermond: boarding or securing. If the door is compromised they may just use a hasp

lock. It could be many things. Someone is called out by the City, the contractor, to do

it. So you paid for the March boarding invoice, and this is 2 of 3.

Minsberg: I got a call on a Friday in July and I thought that’s the one we paid because

the guy came out and I had him board every window. Everything is boarded so I’m not

sure why there would be another in November. There was no window breakage in

March. I thought we paid the July invoice and it has been boarded ever since.

Moermond: what does happen is people remove the boards to get into the building, I’m

not sure if that’s the case here. I don’t have what happened in March in front of me. In

July you would have received a letter in the mail and the approximate cost, but no

invoice is sent. It goes straight to assessment. So this would be the first time billing

was discussed for that incident.

Minsberg; I can certainly check with my brother who manages this. We can certainly

pay it if we haven’t. I check it every day, inside and out. No boards have been removed

since July.

Vang: real estate sent you proof of the March payment January 20th.

Minsberg: that correspondence is what triggered my questioning this.

Moermond: and that’s for a boarding in March of 2025.

Minsberg: you have us showing as not paid the fine for July? I thought I paid the

company directly.

Moermond: no, it goes from through St. Paul Police Department to Department of

Safety & Inspections who manages the contract.

Laid Over to the Legislative Hearings due back on 2/10/2026

RLH TA 26-25

Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 1556

GROTTO STREET NORTH. (File No. J2605B, Assessment No. 268104)

Kim

Sponsors:

Delete the assessment (to be reassessed to 1566 Grotto).

Moermond: this is a boarding assessment for $479.

Hoffman: there was a boarding done at 1566 and it was billed to 1556 Grotto. We will

delete this and reassess to 1556 Grotto.

Moermond: delete this assessment, reassess to neighbor.

Referred to the City Council due back on 3/4/2026

RLH TA 26-20

Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 1201

JACKSON STREET. (File No. J2603B, Assessment No. 268102)

Kim

Sponsors:

Approve the assessment.

Voicemail left at 11:03 AM: this is Marcia Moermond from St. Paul City Council calling

about a tax assessment for boarding/securing at 1201 Jackson. I’m going to

recommend approval of this assessment. We’ll send a follow up email and you are

welcome to respond to that with any info you have that may be relevant.

Referred to the City Council due back on 3/4/2026

RLH TA 25-371

Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 360

KENNARD STREET. (File No. J2512B2, Assessment No. 258118) (To

refer to October 14, 2025 Legislative Hearing)

Johnson

Sponsors:

Recommendation forthcoming.

Richard Mulkern, owner, appeared via phone

[Moermond gives background of appeals process]

Staff report by Supervisor James Hoffman: opening on a fence secured with a board,

March 4 2025 at 5:08 pm. Person was apprehended in the backyard of 360 Kennard.

As far as details on who or why the fence was breached we don’t know.

Mulkern: I got home that evening and police had breached the back yard, the subject

had hopped my fence and resisted arrest. The unusual thing was that my fence and

gates were breached at 3 different locations and caused considerable property

damage. I don’t know why there was so much damage done when it is only bicycle

locks keeping my gates secure. Cutting the locks would have been an expense I could

have covered. The privacy fence was breached via kicking panels out, which was a

couple new pieces of wood and repairing them myself. It seems like an exorbitant fee

to cover up the piece of the fence. They did cut a board, and I still have it if they need

it back. It seems high for cutting a piece of wood and screwing it in. I am obviously

going to file a claim, which the St. Paul Police Department did give me.

Moermond: have you filed one?

Mulkern: I haven’t yet. I don’t know if I can add this to the claim, maybe you can tell

me?

Moermond: as far as the price, the cost of the boarding itself was $60. Because we

were calling them on an emergency basis the contractor can charge $250 for the

emergency call. Then when it goes to assessment it is $163 on top of that. That’s why

this is so high. I’d like to chat more with the St. Paul Police Department attorney on

this. It may be simpler to just delete this rather than you filing a claim. Do you have

other things you’d be filing the claim for, or just this?

Mulkern: unfortunately my ornamental iron fence both gates were broken and

breached, and 2 bids have given me $1500 to $2,000 to fix/replace.

Moermond: so you’re claim will include those gates?

Mulkern: yes.

Moermond: let me talk through with the attorney and see what they think the best

approach is. If I recommend it is approved, if I recommend it is deleted, then you

wouldn’t include it with the claim. In terms of filing, if you have the form, do it and

attach any receipts, invoices, etc. that you’ve done so far and any bids for cost of

gates, submit those as well.

Referred to the City Council due back on 2/11/2026

RLH TA 26-12

Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 606

LAFOND AVENUE (File No. J2602TW, Assessment No. 268702)

Bowie

Sponsors:

Delete the assessment.

Inho Chang, owner, appeared via phone

[Moermond gives background of appeals process]

Staff report by Supervisor James Hoffman: tall grass and weeds Summary Abatement

Order June 27, 2025. Rechecked on or before July 8, 2025. Work was done by

contractor.

Chang: I usually comply very well with Summary Abatement Orders. I’m surprised I

received this Public Hearing notice over not doing the tall grass and weeds. I looked

through my record and all the letters I received from the City and I couldn’t find this

Summary Abatement Order. I don’t know when you sent it to me. Also I requested the

City to send me a copy of the original letter and they said they couldn’t find it. I don’t

remember receiving the Summary Abatement Order.

Moermond: this is a substantial amount of money for a tall grass and weeds case the

City contractor did a ton of work for. I’m thinking it was quite a bad situation. The order

itself, I can’t get it either, this is a record that exists but our system is still switching

and hasn’t been loaded, which is why you can’t get a copy right now. I’m going to

recommend the Council delete this assessment due to that. I won’t be sympathetic in

other cases. This is a lot of money but I take seriously you need notice as well.

Chang: thank you.

Referred to the City Council due back on 2/18/2026

RLH TA 26-28

Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 1324

PAYNE AVENUE. (File No. VB2601C, Assessment No. 268904)

Kim

Sponsors:

Approve the assessment.

No one appeared; tried calling twice

Moermond: call dropped twice, I’ll recommend approval of the assessment. Let’s send

a follow up email to see if they want to add anything to the record before Council

Public Hearing February 11th.

Referred to the City Council due back on 2/11/2026

RLH TA 26-26

Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 1814

PINEHURST AVENUE WEST. (File No. J2603B, Assessment No.

268102)

Jost

Sponsors:

Approve the assessment.

Mike Floyd, owner, appeared via phone

[Moermond gives background of appeals process]

Staff report by Supervisor James Hoffman: emergency boarding and securing July 3,

2025 at 5:31 PM requested by St. Paul Police Department. They used a metal fastener

to secure a functional door.

Moermond: emergency call out, the St. Paul Police Department called the contractor to

come out immediately. The actual cost of the work was $60 but what drives the cost

up is the emergency call out fee.

Floyd: I felt like it was an excessive fee to put to lag bolts on a door. My question is

the timing—it was an emergency because it was 5:30 right before a holiday. They

could have planned a little earlier to avoid that surcharge. The necessity of why it was

put on is the other question. My son had done some bad things I had no idea about at

the time. I was on a plane at the time. The no-knock warrant was issued. They weren’t

heinous crimes. They had a full swat team in and scared the neighborhood very

dramatically. The home was built in 1927. It is a solid oak door. He would have

answered if they knocked. I wasn’t there or I would have let them in. The value of the

door was $10,000. The door knob was $500 to replace and another $500 to replace the

lock, because they’re custom. It was $11,000 so having this $500 on top of it seems

excessive. Bottom line, if we’re going to a commit a crime are we going to send a swat

team in to break down people’s door? I felt like the search was so excessive. Is that

really how we want the City to conduct business? It seems heavy handed.

Moermond: I really don’t have any ability to question what the judge did with the

warrant. That is kind of baked and done. What I have left is the cost of the door and

whether this is something the private property owner should be responsible for or a bill

the general public should cover. The securing prevents hopefully further property

damage from the house being open to entry. No one was there to secure it. It also

creates a public nuisance to the surrounded community. The St. Paul Police

Department and FBI couldn’t leave it open to entry. That is a legitimate charge. If you

think there was damage you should file a claim with the City for the damage they

caused. We can send you that form. I believe this is a private, not a public,

responsibility for repairing it.

Referred to the City Council due back on 3/4/2026

RLH TA 26-30

Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 273

(275) SHERBURNE AVENUE. (File No. J2603B, Assessment No.

268102)

Bowie

Sponsors:

Delete the assessment.

Pat Ware, property rep, appeared via phone

[Moermond gives background of appeals process]

Staff report by Supervisor James Hoffman: Emergency board up service after door was

forced open by medics, opening secured w/ metal fastener, 1 door, ordered by St. Paul

Police Department on July 3, 2025 at 1:27 am.

Ware: this is a four-bedroom duplex and one of the tenants had a stroke and fell down

the stairs, lay at the bottom and called 911. When someone came to help him, and

when he was taken away there were people inside upstairs still. Then the fourth tenant

came home and was able to find out he could pry it out with his fingernails, only to find

there was no damage done to the door and he still had to put the code into the door.

So, I am appealing for multiple reasons, not only was no damage done that it needed

securing but on top of that they should have cleared the property before securing the

door. That’s dangerous and concerning.

Moermond: let’s get that last piece needed in the record, but I am inclined to delete it.

Referred to the City Council due back on 3/4/2026

RLH TA 26-27

Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 847

SEVENTH STREET WEST. (File No. J2603B, Assessment No. 268102)

Noecker

Sponsors:

Delete the assessment (to be reassessed to 847 7th St EAST).

Janet Stadt, property representative, appeared via phone

[Moermond gives background of appeals process]

Staff report by Supervisor James Hoffman: Emergency boarding service call, opening

secured w/ board, 1 door, requested by St. Paul Police Department on July 4, 2025 at

8:18 am.

Moermond: the police report looks like a burglary with a door forced open.

Stadt: if you look at the incident report from the St. Paul Police Department it says the

site is 847th 7th Street East. My property is 847 7th Street WEST. Also the invoice

from Rest Pro it also says East. We are WEST.

Moermond: I think that’s an important distinction and I’ll recommend this is deleted.

Stadt: I did inspect the property and we haven’t had a break in nor a board up.

Moermond: that’s gone for you and East 7th will get a bill incorrectly sent to you.

Referred to the City Council due back on 3/4/2026

Special Tax Assessments-ROLLS

RLH AR 26-5

Ratifying the assessment for Securing and/or Emergency Boarding

services during July 2025. (File No. J2603B, Assessment No. 268102)

Noecker

Sponsors:

Referred to the City Council due back on 3/4/2026

RLH AR 26-6

Ratifying the assessment for Securing and/or Emergency Boarding

services during September 2025. (File No. J2605B, Assessment No.

268104)

Noecker

Sponsors:

Referred to the City Council due back on 3/4/2026

11:00 a.m. Hearings

Summary & Vehicle Abatement Orders

RLH SAO 26-8

Appeal of Armand McCoy, on behalf of Andrew Eisenhart, to a Summary

Abatement Order at 708 HAWTHORNE AVENUE EAST.

Yang

Sponsors:

Layover to LH February 3, 2026 at 11 am (unable to reach PO).

Armand McCoy, occupant, appeared via phone

[tried calling Eisenhart 2x – number was wrong and later confirmed]

Moermond: we’re unable to get through, we’ll handle another case and then call you

back in about 15 minutes.

McCoy: ok.

Called Eisenhart at 12:12: unable to leave message; Voicemail box full.

Voicemail left for MCCoy at 12:14 pm: this is Marcia Moermond from St. Paul City

Council calling you back; we just called Andrew Eisenhart and his Voicemail box was

full. We’ll reschedule this next week, at the same time, hopefully we can connect with

you then otherwise I will recommend the denial of the appeal and put a new deadline in

place.

Laid Over to the Legislative Hearings due back on 2/3/2026

RLH SAO 26-9

Appeal of Joseph Garrick and Mary Skweres to a Summary Abatement

Order at 1377 MINNEHAHA AVENUE EAST.

Johnson

Sponsors:

Grant to February 26, 2026 for compliance.

Mary Skweres, owner, appeared via phone

Joseph Garrick, occupant, appeared via phone

[Moermond gives background of appeals process]

Staff report by Supervisor Richard Kedrowski : January 9 a Summary Abatement Order

was written to remove and dispose of scrap metal, inoperable vehicle, tent-like

structure, and debris from property. Appeal was filed.

Skweres: a lot of the items out back is building material for the spring. The vehicle is

operable, we are going to get rid of it. The main problem is things are now frozen in the

ground. We don’t have a plow service, so everything got wet when it warmed up, and

now it is frozen solid. He’s trying to move things he can. We need to check the car, I

am not sure if that’s stuck in ice. He’s moved some items and sorting through some

others stuff. Once we can get to the brick and stuff we need for the house we can

move it, we just can’t do it now.

Garrick: we had a retaining wall come down right before winter. We had to take

immediate action on that. we were doing some maintenance on the fence and shed,

and in the meantime my trailer was hit with all the wood I was bringing to the dump by

the plow an scattered it all over, so now I don’t have at trailer. We have every intention

of cleaning it up. Just with everything frozen it is hard to do at once. We have been

working on it.

Skweres: the car in the front the alternator went out, and now the water pump needs

replacing.

Garrick; the one in back does work, it has valid tabs and is registered and titled. They

said something about a tent, that is a car port.

Moermond: either one of those words is a generous description.

Garrick: we just need 2 to 4 weeks on getting it cleaned up. Stuff we do have to keep

we’ll keep organized on pallets neatly.

Moermond: I’ll recommend the Council grants through February 26th. Code will come

check it Friday or Monday and see if it has been done as expected. If it isn’t they will

report that back and I’ll tell the Council whether they should or shouldn’t issue orders

for the contractor to go finish the work.

Referred to the City Council due back on 2/11/2026