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 24, 2023

9:00 AM

Room 330 City Hall & Court House/Remote

9:00 a.m. Hearings

Remove/Repair Orders

RLH RR 22-48

Ordering the rehabilitation or razing and removal of the structures at

523 BEAUMONT STREET within fifteen (15) days after the

September 21, 2022, City Council Public Hearing. (Refer to

Legislative Hearing September 12, 2023)

Sponsors:

Brendmoen

Recommendation is to refer to Legislative Hearing September 12, 2023 to confirm

plans and financing are still in place for Council to consider the matter and grant time.

Ed Dropps, Greater Midwest Realty o/b/o GITSIT Solutions, appeared via phone

Araiza Hargrove, GITSIT Solutions, appeared via phone

Moermond: we’re following up on 523 Beaumont, are we calling in Mr. Hargrove?

Dropps: yes.

Moermond: we are touching base on this to make sure everyone is in sync. We

noticed in reviewing the record that we talked about you having everything together

we need to get 180 days from Council but that time expires before you’re even in

possession of the title. Is that right? That’s August 23rd?

Hargrove: yes, that’s our time frame for rehab, but yes we couldn’t start until we

actually take possession. We were thinking that 180 days is sufficient, but that is the

timeline after we actually have possession. When we’d pull permits.

Moermond: I can’t have the Council give you six months if there is no prospect of you

getting anywhere. I’m going to ask the Councilmember who represents this area,

Council President Brendmoen, I’m going to have her refer it back to discuss this back

to September 12th on the strength of the fact you have this together right now. We

can check in during September to make sure the bids are still good and financing is

still in place and then send to Council to grant the actual time to do the work. It makes

a difference for us legally in how we approach that but that shouldn’t affect your

process. Any questions?

Hargrove: no, that is sufficient. It would allow us the time to gain possession and start

that process in a way that actually gets everything done.

Moermond: I’ll make that recommendation to Ms. Brendmoen. If anything comes up

you need to be aware of to make you testify then we will do that.

Referred to the City Council due back on 1/25/2023

RLH RR 22-63

Ordering the razing and removal of the structures at 1011 BURNS

AVENUE within fifteen (15) days after the December 7, 2022, City

Council Public Hearing.

Sponsors:

Prince

Remove within 15 days with no option to repair.

No one appeared

Voicemail left at 10:05 am: Ms. Cree this is Marcia Moermond from St. Paul City

Council calling you about the order to remove or repair your property at 1011 Burns

Avenue. We’ll try you back in a little bit.

Voicemail left at 10:27 am: this is Marcia Moermond from St. Paul City Council calling

you back to try and reach you about your property at 1011 Burns. Here’s the deal, I

understand that although you applied for the Code Compliance you haven’t made the

property available to the DSI team, you knew what you were to do which was clean

out the property, put a lockbox on the door after you unscrewed it. We started this

conversation in October. I know you broke your leg but this is an unreasonable

amount of time to accomplish what you indicated was a straightforward thing. I’ll put

this in front of Council, and if you don’t have it figured out by February 8 that the order

the property removed. Get that Code Compliance Inspection worked out. I suggest

you not do this on February 7th. You need to be on top of this. Otherwise, again, my

recommendation will be that it be removed.

Referred to the City Council due back on 2/8/2023

Ordering the rehabilitation or razing and removal of the structures at

46 FRONT AVENUE within fifteen (15) days after the February 8,

2023, City Council Public Hearing. (Referral to February 14, 2023

Legislative Hearing pending)

RLH RR 23-1

Sponsors:

Balenger

$5,000 PD to be posted by COB Feb 3, 2023. Refer back to LH February 14, 2023.

Lenna Gnatyk, daughter of owner, appeared

Petr Gnatyk, owner, appeared

Staff update by Supervisor Joe Yannarelly: the last Legislative Hearing it was laid

over to today to post $5,0000 Performance Deposit before it goes to hearing

February 8.

Moermond: and we talked about transfer of the property. I see you have a purchase

agreement here. I just briefly reviewed it. I have a concern with it, point number 2 on

the first page, and point 7 on the last page say kind of the same thing, which is you’re

either going to transfer the property when it gets its Certificate of Occupancy but no

later than June 23 whether or not you have your Certificate of Occupancy which is

how it reads to me. That can’t happen. I don’t know what the magic is with that

particular date. But I can tell you if they start doing the rehab and they get halfway

done, or 70% done---six months from February 8 is August 8th. Then Council would

look like giving additional time as long as its past the halfway mark. The August 8th

would be our very first potential deadline. I’m thinking unless we have our things

together I wouldn’t even ask for a vote February 8th. I need all the items in front of

them.

Lenna Gnatyk: we have been talking about it with him and he’s been sending

contractors to him. He already has a plan put together. He said he has no issues

showing financials. I’d just have to get him to send that information to you.

Moermond: we’re happy to talk to him about that June 23rd date. I imagine he has the

potential to finish by that date.

Lenna Gnatyk: Josh is Eddie’s partner here.

Petr Gnatyk: what happens if the buyer backing out? Is there any consequence for

him?

Moermond: I can’t give legal advice on that. That’s a private legal matter for you.

What I would flag for you for our purposes is if whoever you are working with backs

out to look at the period of time to do so. Do you want them to sign something saying

they’ve backed out, because if you want to work with someone else they may be

worried about that previous contract. Get that person well and completely out and

move on to the next prospect. That’s the only thing I’ve seen slow people down. In

terms of consequences, that would be what your purchase agreement says and what

your own attorney says.

Lenna Gnatyk: he did have a time period to look and once it is signed I don’t think he

can.

Moermond: yeah and I only have the part of the purchase agreement that we really

care about. So Josh is developing here?

Petr Gnatyk: yes. But the guy in Arizona is the guy financing it.

Moermond: and you thought he may have had his things in today, but he doesn’t, but

sounds like he can, based on your conversations. We need those work plans and

bids, evidence of financing, and we also require an affidavit dedicating the funds to

the project. This goes to Council February 8th. We can have them send it back to talk

again on Feb 14th. If they have the remaining items in we can greenlight before

Council even votes.

Lenna Gnatyk: we need to remove the part of the June 23rd language?

Moermond: yes. And the last page I don’t need “Best efforts” to do anything. That

whole number 7 is unnecessary.

Yannarelly: what is the difference, between saying Certificate of Occupancy issued?

If they’re confident they can get it done, what does it matter.

Moermond: I think you’re right. So just remove the language about ‘no later than’.

Lenna Gnatyk: I will give this information to him and have him send it.

Moermond: what was his name again?

Lenna Gnatyk: Heriberto Parra.

Referred to the City Council due back on 2/8/2023

RLH RR 22-56

Ordering the rehabilitation or razing and removal of the structures at

771 IOWA AVENUE WEST within fifteen (15) days after the October

26, 2022, City Council Public Hearing. (To refer to November 22,

2022 Legislative Hearing)

Sponsors:

Brendmoen

Layover to LH February 28, 2023 at 9 am. PO/partner to provide bids, schedule,

proof of financing and affidavit, and purchase agreement (if necessary).

Joseph Yanta, owner, appeared

Moermond: we are making some progress here, that is great.

Staff update by Supervisor Joe Yannarelly: we need to have evidence of financing to

do rehab, estimates are exceeding $75,000, affidavit, and we do have a newly minted

Code Compliance Inspection Report completed a few days ago.

Moermond: you have a copy of that Code Compliance?

Yannarelly: it looks reasonable.

Moermond: you have your Code Compliance Inspection Report and it is cleaned out,

that’s great.

Yanta: there was a comment by Mr. Zane there was still some clutter, but he stopped

before Mr. Yannarelly. I’m not sure what date specifically, but then I cleared out more

items.

Moermond: enough to get the Code Compliance Inspection Report which is the

important thing. Have you talked to a contractor? What is your approach?

Yanta: I have a number of people I am planning to contact this week to set up

inspections and give them copies of the Code Compliance Inspection in the next few

weeks. If possible I’d like to reach an agreement with one of them to rehabilitate the

house. Otherwise, I’d start doing some of the work myself. I have some financial

information here. The first thing to do would be installing the new furnace and rewire

the house so the rest of the work could move forward.

Moermond: sure, it being winter. This sounds reasonable. You just got that Code

Compliance Inspection Report and it will take time to get some bids and work with

them. If the contractors doing the work, are you going to paying them and you are

selling?

Yanta: I’m not sure, it depends on what sort of agreement we would have with the

developer.

Moermond: and we’d need to see the financial wherewithal to the project, whether

that’s from you or the people paying for it. When you say if these other things fail, you

indicated you may start work yourself. We would need to see a whole plan about

doing that work and who you’d hire for your electrical and plumbing and so on. While

I trust you have some skills to do building items, you couldn’t do the other items. It

needs to be a licensed contractor. You would have to hire an electrician to rewire the

house, and that would cost “X”. Installing a new furnace, “X”. That’s part of the money

we would need to see set aside towards getting it done.

Yanta: right, I wasn’t proposing I do the work myself. I have some financials here.

Moermond: ultimately we only look for the amount of money available to match the

bids you’re going with. If those bids total $100,000, we need to see that $100,000.

That’s the target.

Yanta: I can give you that now. I have a printout from the online report from the Ideal

Credit Union, but I copied that and printed those out, the figures are the same. We

should be able to get a secured loan from the Credit Union using those money

market accounts as collateral.

Moermond: we will hold off on putting anything the record until you figure out how you

want to land the plane. There is a bit more than $250,000 in a money market

account. That is what should be noted for the record. I’m good with giving time to talk

to contractors.

Yannarelly: and no problem at the property, it looks good.

Yanta: you said you can’t recommend contractors but you provide a list of contractors

who have done this in the past?

Moermond: sure, we can put together people who have done this in the last six

months. But you have a few people you’re already talking too?

Yannarelly: I thought I was familiar with one of the names.

Yanta: Joe Steinmouse.

Moermond: let’s talk again February 28, give you a chance to talk to these folks. If

you had one of them in the room or on the line so we could start wrapping up. My

target for a Council vote is going to be March 15th. I’d like to see preliminary plans by

February 28th so we have some time to lock it in before Council.

Yanta: there were some items on the Code Compliance Inspection Report that were

maybe boilerplate items that didn’t apply to these items

Moermond: we can copy Clint Zane on the letter Ms. Zimny will send out, and you

can reply to that with those questions so we have a record of that here in the event

you aren’t able to get ahold of them.

Laid Over to the Legislative Hearings due back on 2/28/2023

Ordering the rehabilitation or razing and removal of the structures at

678 SNELLING AVENUE NORTH within fifteen (15) days after the

May 27, 2020 City Council public hearing. (To refer to October 25,

2022 Legislative Hearings, pending roof permit is pulled and finaled)

RLH RR 20-22

Sponsors:

Jalali

Refer back to LH March 28, 2023 at 9 am for update on funding.

Lisa Kugler, consultant, appeared via phone

Gene Gelgelu, AEDS, appeared via phone

Moermond: boy, this summary was just raining good news. Ms. Kugler, tell us where

you are at and walk us through this.

Kugler: we have secured every source of funding that is available to us right now.

The gap we are asking the St. Paul HRA, partly as a loan and partly as a grant. That

application gets submitted this week. I don’t know their timing. There’s a waiting

period even after a decision. We really feel like we have covered the landscape. We

have $750,000 from DEED through the St. Paul Foundation. $103,507 from the

Ramsey County Critical Corridor program to pay for the additional cost of putting in a

new water line. When we wrote that grant we thought we’d be allowed to run a line up

the alley but it turns out that probably isn’t allowed so the cost of running it under

Snelling is $175,000.

Moermond: did they tell you why?

Kugler: Saint Paul water utility said they don’t allow water lines on private property or

in alleys and when we mentioned MNDot wouldn’t be happy about closing Snelling,

they said you can’t talk to MNDot directly you send them a request and answer

comes back yes or no. There is no way to speak with them about it. The other issue

is the old water line has to be closed and that is also under Snelling. The engineers

thought if that was required by the City, or water utility, then it has to be opened at

least as far as that line goes anyway. My argument is that line is already closed

because it is cracked. It was already shut, but no one can hear that. Apparently being

shut and closed are different. The earmark from LISC, one came to LISC Twin Cities

was $215,000, the other 500,000 is in the 2023 and 2024 budget. It is on the list of

projects recommended for funding. WE haven’t heard how we access that but we will

figure that out.

Moermond: what is the gap you’re asking the St. Paul HRA to fill?

Kugler: $2.9 million. 1.5 million in a loan and the rest in a grant. It is a lot of money,

but we think it is available and have set up the project to borrow as much as the

project can afford. We can’t have that discussion until the application goes in.

Moermond: when will you have that application together?

Kugler: hopefully this week. It is almost done.

Moermond: did they give you a timeline on the review of it?

Kugler: no, but I suspect less than a month. There’s a paragraph in there about it

being on the Vacant Building list for a very long period and we won’t be able to keep

getting extensions so there is a matter of urgency.

Moermond: you nailed that. The last question I had is the building design component

the solar panels, and the redesign has negative decisions.

Kugler: we have to restructure the roof and change it to support solar panels. We

don’t have the money for that, so it can’t be done.

Moermond: so negative impact was you wanted to do it but it isn’t possible.

Kugler: right. We can’t afford to do it.

Moermond: the congressional discretionary spending was approved as part of the

2023 - 2024 budget. It is locked in; it is just a matter of how they disperse those

funds?

Kugler: yes, that is my understanding. The first earmark is in the 2022 budget. That

goes through the SBA. Ours goes through HUD.

Moermond: today is January 24. We’ll have more information in early March. Council

hasn’t seen this since this in six months. We’ll send this to Council and have them

send it back to hearing, which gives them a chance to ask questions. Let’s send to

Council February 15 and have them refer to back to me March 28th. I don’t anticipate

anything of note at that, but if we do hear something we will alert you.

Referred to the City Council due back on 2/15/2023

10:00 a.m. Hearings

Making Finding on Substantial Nuisance Abatements

RLH RR 22-39

Second Making finding on the appealed substantial abatement

ordered for 575 PARK STREET in Council File RLH RR 21-71.

Sponsors:

Balenger

Layover to February 14, 2023 at 10 am for update on CC certificate status.

Frank Viggiano, owner, appeared via phone

Moermond: I understand you have a building inspection on Thursday for 575 with

Clint Zane.

Viggiano: correct.

Moermond: and I don’t know we can do anything until he gets out there. I’m going to

lay this over to February 14 so you have time to do any corrections before we talk

and hopefully close the book on this.

Viggiano: the mechanicals did pass last week.

Moermond: I’ve heard everything is finaled except the building permit, so that’s great

news. Let’s get that last assessment done and hopefully we will be there.

Laid Over to the Legislative Hearings due back on 2/14/2023

RLH RR 23-4

First Making finding on the appealed substantial abatement ordered

for 1807 SEVENTH STREET EAST in Council File RLH RR 22-29.

Sponsors:

Prince

The nuisance is abated and the matter resolved.

Supervisor Joe Yannarelly: Code Compliance certificate has been issued

Moermond: nuisance is abated and matter resolved.

Referred to the City Council due back on 2/1/2023

Making finding on the appealed substantial abatement ordered for

1941 UNIVERSITY AVENUE WEST in Council File RLH RR 21-60.

(To refer to February 14, 2023 Legislative Hearing)

RLH RR 23-6

Sponsors:

Jalali

Refer back to LH February 14, 2023 at 10 am for further discussion.

Dawit Solomon, President Eritrean Community Center of MN, appeared via phone

Ruth Ogbaselassie, treasurer Eritrean Community Center of MN, appeared via phone

Essey Asbu, Secretary Eritrean Community Center of MN, appeared via phone

Staff update by Supervisor Joe Yannarelly: it doesn’t look like any work has been

done on the building whatsoever.

Moermond: and property maintenance?

Yannarelly: no problems, and the gate has been shut since it was an issue earlier on.

Moermond: sounds like Mr. Yannarelly has an assessment of no work happening. Is

that correct?

Solomon: no work has been done because we have everything set up to move

forward, we even pulled a permit, and the contractor we were working with withdrew

at the last minute. We have been scrambling to get another contractor. The situation

with the cement work and wanting to start before it got cold. Unfortunately, with the

approval process for the contractors we weren’t able to go through in time to do it

before it got too cold to do cement work, and now we are waiting. Don Steele

contracting, we are trying to get the paperwork through the City. Unfortunately

starting in the middle of the winter isn’t possible, plus we need clearance from the

City STAR program. We wanted to request for an extension to do this work. We have

the funds, just unfortunately the last contractor backed out.

Moermond: right, the City gave you the money.

Asbu: we made sure no one went in the building, but unfortunately like Mr. Solomon

said. He was hoping to do the work without paying prevailing wages and hiring

minorities, so he put the price and it almost doubled. He wanted to back out of that

contract, that’s what prevented us. For us to have a realistic chance of doing the

cement work we had to start by end of the September. We approached a different

contractor and are working with the City STAR program and their confines. I think the

contractor, and I’m speculating, is it is hard to find people to do the cement work. We

are ready to move forward but we’d really appreciate an extension. We did do a lot of

work it just doesn’t show in the physical structure. We have put in a tremendous

amount of work.

Moermond: fencing the property and cleaning it out? That’s the work you are talking

about?

Asbu: yes. We made sure we got dumpsters and all the equipment out so it isn’t

attractive for people to go in. We have do not enter signs and tape up. The snow

makes it difficult to go in, we purposely didn’t shovel the open area. The contractor

that came in said that for the most part what is remaining is structurally sound. For

the most part.

Moermond: fencing the building and removing items was a condition to even get to

the point to get the grant of time to work on this so I don’t count this toward the work

that should have been done. That had to be done whether it was demoed or not. If

you were a for-profit entity or private party there is no question I would ask another

$5,000 Performance Deposit was posted to ensure it is complete. Having 0% done I’d

also ask for the forfeit of the original $5,000. Since you are a nonprofit I am less

inclined to do so. I’d like to get a report from the STAR program to find out where

things are at. You had contracted with someone, if I remember with, the City worked

hard to use the contractor you already selected. You wanted to use them and the City

worked with you, so some of that is on you. I also noticed the building permit wasn’t

pulled until mid-October, and the grant of time was in July. I’m thinking you all could

have done better, but let’s get information from the STAR program. Are you still

working with Claudia Klinkhammer?

Solomon: yes.

Moermond: are you getting new bids? I know cement work is temperature sensitive.

Solomon: yes. Don Steele, he is familiar with the program. I believe he had submitted

the City’s requirements to Claudia.

Ogbaselassie: the first contractor didn’t drop out until September, and everything was

in his hand. By saying we did everything, I had to work with Claudia and go to the St.

Paul License office to inform them. We wanted to start before winter, we were

planning on that.

Moermond: the Council is scheduled to look at this February 1, I’m going to ask them

to send it back to Legislative Hearing February 14 so we can talk more about what

makes sense looking at STAR money and that contract.

Referred to the City Council due back on 2/1/2023

RLH RR 23-5

Third Making finding on the appealed substantial abatement ordered

for 521 YORK AVENUE in Council File RLH RR 22-35.

Sponsors:

Brendmoen

The nuisance is abated and the matter resolved.

Supervisor Joe Yannarelly: Code Compliance was issued December 19, 2022.

Moermond: nuisance is abated and matter is resolved

Referred to the City Council due back on 2/1/2023

11:00 a.m. Hearings

Making Finding on Nuisance Abatements

RLH SAO 23-10 Making finding on the appealed nuisance abatement ordered for 643

EARL STREET in Council File RLH SAO 23-3.

Sponsors:

Prince

The nuisance is abated and matter resolved related to the items next to garage.

Sonya Humes, owner, appeared via phone

Moermond: today we were reviewing whether or not there was compliance with the

first deadline you had to remove the items next to the garage. Ms. Martin will update

the findings.

Supervisor Lisa Martin: the photographs taken this morning the items next to the

garage by the white fence appear to have been moved, however there is now a trailer

full of stuff behind the garage.

Humes: are you talking in the back yard?

Moermond: it looks like you had the buckets and PVC on one side of the garage, and

now on the other side is a trailer with items covered in snow, so we aren’t sure what

is there. That is a new thing and also not in compliance. It may also be on both your

and your neighbor’s property. Ms. Martin?

Martin: that is correct.

Moermond: so we’re looking at what is going on with that trailer situation. Ms. Humes,

can you talk about that?

Humes: your question is kind of vague.

Moermond: there’s a trailer beside the garage—

Humes: that’s not new, it has been there the whole time.

Moermond: this has been there the whole time?

Humes: yes.

Moermond: I’m wondering if we need to write new orders on that to clarify that.

Legally the order does cover it.

Martin: the first order issued December 19 said to remove of scrap wood, PVC, and

buckets from the rear yard and didn’t say anything about a trailer. I can send new

orders. The items from the original Summary Abatement Order have been moved,

but I don’t know whether it is gone from the property or just the location.

Moermond: so for today’s purposes the expectation set for today has been met.

Another order will be sent for the trailer. What kind of a deadline do you usually give

on that?

Martin: 7 days.

Humes: that trailer has always been there. I just have to move the items off the

trailer?

Moermond: the items on there, but whether it’s a legal parking surface and far

enough from the property line. That is hard with the snow cover. Ms. Martin?

Martin: I will have the inspector take a look at it to see if it is an approved parking

spot. It has to be in a driveway or on approved pavement, and a couple feet off the

property line.

Moermond: so that is handled separately and appealed separately. I’ll let the front

desk know if you do appeal that order we’ll accept that without a fee. Today’s item

was gone on deadline, so that matter is closed. You did what you were supposed to

do.

Referred to the City Council due back on 1/25/2023

1:00 p.m. Hearings

Vacant Building Registrations

RLH VBR 23-5

Appeal of David Busch, DRB #24 LLC, to a Vacant Building

Registration Fee at 45 LAWSON AVENUE WEST.

Sponsors:

Brendmoen

Grant the appeal and release the property from the VB program.

David Busch, owner, appeared via phone

Pat Ware appeared via phone

Denise O’Leary appeared via phone

John Gardener, contractor, appeared via phone

[Moermond gives background of appeals process]

Staff report by Supervisor Mitch Imbertson: this is a one-unit residential program in

the Fire Certificate of Occupancy program. It was scheduled for its regular renewal

inspection. Original appointment letter was sent March 2022. At that time the

inspector had been notified it was undergoing renovation and had active permits and

requested an extension on the inspection during the remodel. It may take up to a few

months. The inspector checked in a few times with property management through

2022 to see what the status was. In September and October 2022, he was told

renovation was ongoing. December 6, 2022 there was discussion to refer it to the

Vacant Building program for monitoring as our determination was it would meet the

definition of a registered Vacant Building and it had been holding off on inspection for

over 8 months. Looks like some of the permits have recently been closed. There is

still an open building permit. To be recertified they would need that permit closed out

and a final inspection from the building dept and to arrange a Certificate of

Occupancy inspection to go through the property. We haven’t done that inspection so

we have no list of any required repairs, we are just looking to get access to complete

a standard inspection to send out that report.

Staff report by Supervisor Matt Dornfeld: we opened a Vacant Building file December

8, 2022, a Category 1 per that Fire referral. At this time Inspector Hoffman has noted

no nuisance conditions reported. My guess is we are here to discuss the Vacant

Building fee coming due.

Busch: I’ve been distant from the project other than paying for it. I don’t understand,

we had a property that was vandalized. Someone stole all the wiring so we did a total

renovation. I’m astounded it would be sent to the Vacant Building program when

we’re obviously working and perilously close to completion. I’m astounded, I don’t

know there is much more to add to those reports. That aligns with our understanding

in terms of what happened and when. If you want reasons why it has taken twice as

long as I expected it too, we can talk about it. But we are close to final permit. Hot air

was closed last Friday.

Moermond: yes, two finals on January 20. Everything is done except for the building

permit.

Gardener: we had a follow up inspection today with Virgil. He was here today at

10:30. I had a minor handrail adjustment. He wrote on the permit final pending a

picture. I already sent the picture. I imagine he’s closing them when he gets back

today. He did write final today on the permit.

Moermond: that sounds great. I understand that Pat Ware is the property manager

who handles the Fire Certificate of Occupancy scheduling and interactions, is that

correct?

Ware: for the most part, yes I deal with inspections.

Moermond: you are who would be calling for the Certificate of Occupancy inspection

now the permits are finaled?

Ware: I have never done that. I’ve typically done ones that are up for renewal. Not

one that’s been renovated.

Moermond: we just need that walk-through scheduled. Mr. Imbertson, do you want to

send an appointment letter or have Ms. Ware reach out?

Imbertson: if there’s no time crunch, we would prefer to send a letter. Travis Almsted

is the inspector for this property.

Moermond: do you have his contact information?

Ware: yes, I have sent him a couple emails. He’s never requested access for

inspection. I only ever told him it wasn’t finished.

Moermond: Mr. Busch is showing up as the Fire Responsible Party it would go to

him, but Ms. Ware’s name is showing in some of this.

Busch: Pat should continue communication with Travis. We have no emergency

getting it done.

Moermond: based on the strength of those permits being finaled I’ll recommend you

are released from the Vacant Building program and I’ll let you work through the

Certificate of Occupancy process.

Referred to the City Council due back on 2/8/2023

1:30 p.m. Hearings

Orders To Vacate - Fire Certificate of Occupancy

Appeal of Mary Callander to a Revocation of Fire Certificate of

Occupancy and Order to Vacate at 1378 LINCOLN AVENUE.

RLH VO 23-10

Sponsors:

Tolbert

Grant to March 3, 2023 for compliance.

Mary Callander, owner, appeared via phone

Staff report by Supervisor Mitch Imbertson: this is a one-unit residential property in

the Fire Certificate of Occupancy program. We started the c of O renewal process on

July 21, 2022. That included a number of items, one of which were to secure loose

ceiling beams in the first-floor living room. That is the one order remaining. This has

been previously in appeals and was given an extension on the reinspection deadline

to January 1, 2023. Our inspector was out on January 3 and at that time the work

was not done and since there had been no further approved extension of the

Council’s deadline we moved forward with the pending revocation of the Fire

Certificate of Occupancy which means it needs to be vacated or in compliance by the

next deadline. January 4, 2023 letter has a January 31, 2023 10 am deadline. The

only remaining issue to approve is to secure loose ceiling beams in the living room.

We understand this to be a relatively simple repair requiring any extensive amount of

time for a qualified contractor.

Moermond: Ms. Callander, why are you appealing?

Callander: it is somewhat complicated; you can’t just get anyone to do it. I sent an

email October 22 the contractor was six months out. He is scheduled to come

February 14th. I can’t do it. A painter can’t do it. This guy started because he had a

cancellation and the next time he could come--which he still planning--is February 14.

I need an extension until then.

Moermond: I do see you sent an email October 2 but you didn’t testify at Council

saying you wanted that extension so they passed the resolution with the January 1

deadline. Feb 14 is when your contractor will be out?

Callander: yes. He is planning on coming, I just checked with him.

Moermond: I am thinking we could give you a new deadline, with a little cushion just

in case, and say until March 3. You’ll get an appointment letter for some time the

week of March 6. We’ll push any potential vacate date to April.