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, March 7, 2023  
9:00 AM  
Room 330 City Hall & Court House/Remote  
9:00 a.m. Hearings  
Special Tax Assessments  
1
RLH TA 23-72  
Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 1621  
BIRMINGHAM STREET. (File No. J2306B, Assessment No. 238105)  
Yang  
Sponsors:  
Approve the assessment and make payable over 2 years.  
Melissa Suek, niece and guardian ad litem o/b/o owners Maurice & Frances Swenson,  
appeared via phone  
[Moermond gives background of appeals process]  
Staff report by Supervisor Joe Yannarelly: as a result of a fire the St. Paul Fire  
Department called in a contractor to do emergency boarding at the property for a total  
assessment of $969.  
Moermond: why are you appealing?  
Suek: I understand there was a fire and they weren’t at fault. This person has been  
stealing money from them and they basically don’t have anything at all. I’ll be applying  
for medical assistance next month. Back utilities, paying rent on an apartment this guy  
put in their name. I just don’t know how I’m going to pay all of this. I agree it shouldn’t  
be free, but $1,000 for this. They are going to be out of money soon.  
Yannarelly: who is dealing with insurance?  
Suek: they got a check from insurance for $2,000 and Todd stole the money. He’s  
stolen at least 10,000. Using their bank card, having them write checks to cash.  
Moermond: the first question I have is have you filed police reports about this?  
Suek: I have not because I’ve been trying to compile evidence. I recently found out  
about $25,000 from a couple years ago.  
Moermond: call the police. You need to file a police report and they have investigators  
who can get to the bottom of this faster. Second thing is you should be filing a  
Minnesota Adult Abuse Recording Center (MAARC) report. That is a report you file with  
the State of Minnesota to talk to them about Maurice and Frances being vulnerable  
adults being taken advantage of. That will also trigger an investigation. Take that  
approach, that is the responsible thing to do before paying bills or doing anything else.  
File those reports. All suspected abuse, neglect, financial exploitation they will look at  
and make sure they are referred to the correct agencies.  
Second thing is I was looking at Ramsey County’s records to find out if they were  
current on their taxes, which is a good signal about two things, one that there’s a  
mortgage on the property and that they are paying the taxes. Is there a mortgage?  
Suek: they were behind on their taxes; I found a receipt from Maury they paid them  
sometime in December. I believe their mortgage is settled. The loan disappeared from  
the credit union statement. They should own it outright now.  
Moermond: before paying cable and utilities make sure the mortgage situation is up to  
date. If taxes are behind it would be a matter of 3 to 4 years before the property would  
be subject to forfeiture for nonpayment. Some penalty and interest, but you’re not  
going to lose the property for a long period of time, as opposed to nonpayment of the  
mortgage. Find out who the mortgage company is. It is important to initiate that  
conversation.  
This boarding assessment, if that goes unpaid it attaches to the property taxes if they  
aren’t paid. They would be future bills and you want to worry about the current ones.  
You definitely need an attorney. I would call the police, start that process. File the  
MAARC report with the information you have now. You can always file a new report if  
you find out additional information. Start those wheels turning. They are experts in  
these situations. I can make this boarding as payable over 2 years, which means  
they’ll go on 2024 and 2025 property taxes. I assume the property will be liquidated by  
that point. We’re kind of stuck as a City since we already paid the bill for the house to  
be secured and we need to recoup those costs. When you get the letter for the  
assessment to the Vacant Building fee, appeal that as well and we can discuss  
payment arrangements. Do you have the name of the insurance company?  
Suek: State Farm.  
Moermond: perfect, that’s who the police will need to talk to. I would suggest you ask  
to talk to someone in the Community Outreach & Stabilization (COAST) unit. They  
have social workers and deal with mental health issues. I don’t know to what extent  
they deal with situations like this, but they definitely will know who to plug you in with to  
talk more deeply about this. Are the utilities off at the property?  
Suek: my mom and I turned it back on for the generators for the cleanup. It is  
winterized.  
Yannarelly: is there rehab going on?  
Suek: it is being remediated for the fire. State Farm came out last week and they told  
me I had to find someone to repair it. A lot needs to be done and that’s the next step  
with State Farm. Work to make it sellable or livable hasn’t’ started yet.  
Moermond: we’ll send a follow up email to you and include the MAARC contact  
information and if we can find anything about the mortgage holder  
Suek: looks like it was paid off September 2022, it was Ideal Credit Union.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 4/19/2023  
2
RLH TA 23-71  
Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 1621  
BIRMINGHAM STREET. (File No. J2305E, Assessment No. 238304)  
Yang  
Sponsors:  
Delete the assessment.  
Melissa Suek, niece and guardian ad litem o/b/o owners Maurice & Frances Swenson,  
appeared via phone  
[Moermond gives background of appeals process]  
Staff report by Supervisor Joe Yannarelly: this is an Excessive Consumption fee  
stemming from a condemnation to remove illegal bedroom in the basement. That order  
was issued on September 13, 2022, compliance date of Sept 20, rechecked the 20th  
and found not in compliance. A new recheck date was given and on that recheck it  
was removed. Total proposed assessment of $159.  
Moermond: inspector went back a week after the 13, found it not in compliance.  
Yannarelly: correct.  
Moermond: when did they find it in compliance?  
Yannarelly: by September 30th.  
Moermond: why are you appealing Ms. Suek?  
Suek: I’m the same age as their daughter who died a couple of years ago, that’s why  
I’m involved. They both have dementia and there’s no way they would have understood  
what needed to be done and no one in the house to help him. I’m not sure how the  
mattress got moved in the first place. Based on the fire starting in the basement they  
probably put the mattress back down. They were being taken advantage of by both  
their children and a third party. Stealing money from them. I know my aunt; she would  
have complied if she was in her right mind. She’s a good person.  
Moermond: Mr. Yannarelly, the interactions the inspector had with the people present. I  
thought I heard you say—  
Yannarelly: when they did the reinspection September 20 the property owner answered  
the door and said they hadn’t moved the mattress. Not sure who was portraying  
themselves as the property owner but that’s what the notes say.  
Moermond: sounds like we have the son and some hangers on moving into the  
property.  
Suek: exactly.  
Moermond: someone set up a bedroom in the basement. We all understand that  
bedrooms in basement, unless properly set up with egress and fire barriers, are  
unsafe. People die in them. When inspectors see that they do write those types of  
orders. Getting into a property in that situation will be a priority for the inspector  
because they’ve probably heard complaints from others and want to interact to get a  
handle on what is going on. I understand that they themselves may not have  
understood the order.  
Suek: my uncle has full on dementia. There’s no way he knew what was going on. My  
aunt comes and goes but there’s a question mark of whether they knew what was  
going on. Her daughter died February 2021 but no one knew because of Covid, we  
didn’t know how bad it was escalating in their house because hello, fire. My guess is  
someone in the household hid the notice, maybe Todd the hanger on who represented  
himself as the owner in other instances.  
Moermond: this is in the Vacant Building program now. Category 1 Vacant Building and  
we’re just coming out of the waiver period. For this particular one I’m understanding and  
I’ll give you some grace on it. You’ll have other ones that are tougher. I’m gathering no  
one in the family outside the household understood what was going on with Maurice  
and Frances and that only came about after they had the fire in the home, right?  
Suek: correct.  
Moermond: delete the assessment.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 3/22/2023  
3
RLH TA 23-96  
Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 1273  
SARGENT AVENUE. (File No. VB2306, Assessment No. 238805)  
Tolbert  
Sponsors:  
Reduce assessment from $2,616 to $654.  
Ryan Schafer, owner, appeared via phone  
[Moermond gives background of appeals process]  
Staff report by Supervisor Joe Yannarelly: this is a Vacant Building fee for October 10,  
2022 through October 10, 2023. It is a prospective fee. It was rehabbed and the  
Vacant Building file closed January 31, 2023. It was in the program 3 months and 3  
weeks of the year. Total assessment of $2,616.  
Moermond: pretty straightforward. Why are you appealing?  
Schafer: the new owners received the letter for the assessment and they weren’t yet in  
possession of the house. We received an extension of a month but my partner was  
kind of in charge of that and had talked to the inspector and we were fighting to get out  
permits closed and we couldn’t close the property because a couple of the contractors  
weren’t following through. It was ready but it has been a huge mess. I’m hoping to at  
least get the amount reduced or something. I would be paying for it and I did lose  
$35,000 on the job which I know isn’t’ your problem but it has been a hard deal for me.  
Moermond: with respect to the Vacant Building fee, Mr. Yannarelly do you have  
anything in your records about communication with an inspector?  
Yannarelly: there was a conversation October 9, the day before the fee was due and a  
30-day waiver was granted since it was close to completion.  
Moermond: I’d be happy to prorate this fee and get you down to $654, one-fourth the  
full fee. For 3 months in the program. Does that sound better?  
Schafer: yes, that sounds a lot better and would be really appreciated. I just wanted to  
come to this hearing and be accountable for it since I didn’t want the new owners to  
have any issues.  
Moermond: we’ll get that down and I hope things go more smoothly.  
Schafer: will I receive notice with this information?  
Moermond: there’s 2 ways to pay this, right now you could go online to the  
assessments page and you could pay $654. That isn’t the whole amount but the  
system will come back into sync after the Council ratifies this at the lower amount.  
You could also wait until after April 19 and then the lower amount will show. The new  
owner would receive an invoice for the amount so it may be simpler to just pay it before  
that, then the assessment office wouldn’t send an invoice out at all.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 4/19/2023  
4
RLH TA 23-90  
Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 923  
SHERBURNE AVENUE. (File No. J2313A, Assessment No. 238512)  
Balenger  
Sponsors:  
Reduce assessment from $562 to $281.  
Daniel Smith, owner, appeared via phone  
[Moermond gives background of appeals process]  
Staff report by Joe Yannarelly: this is a Summary Abatement Order issued November  
3 to remove wood debris, electronics, construction debris from the property near  
garbage bins and fence. Compliance date of November 10th. It was reinspected  
November 10 and the same situation existed. A work order was sent to the crew and it  
was done for a total proposed assessment of $562.  
Moermond: why are you appealing?  
Smith: I’m just confused on why it is addressed to me. I didn’t purchase it until  
November 4 and I didn’t find out until it had been cleaned up. The lady I bought it from  
I said could live there, she got the letter apparently and never told me until after it was  
cleaned up. I came Nov 14 and by that time everything was gone. I was out at my  
cabin and wasn’t expecting any mail there. I don’t know why it is addressed to me.  
Moermond: when did you close?  
Smith: November 4. I’m not denying it was there, I guess I just—yeah.  
Moermond: yes, Ramsey County has the closing as November 4, 2022. The orders  
were issued the day before closing. That means they legally needed to be addressed  
to Michael Ann Stafford, the legal owner at the time. You closed November 4. She  
wouldn’t have had the letter in her hands until later and she should have told you about  
it. I get she didn’t. It is one of those fuzzy things where shoot, she really should have  
and the City met its legal obligation by sending orders to legal owner at the time.  
You’re saying she didn’t do the cleanup and didn’t let you know about it. I personally  
think she should be responsible for it but there is some gray here. I’m going to cut it in  
half and take into account some of that gray territory. I think the City’s legal threshold  
was met, but the timing is kind of bad. Mail probably would have arrived the day of  
closing, or the next. It is awkward. Is she still living there?  
Smith: she was supposed to be there until March and my roof started leaking so she  
ghosted me. She left all her stuff there too. I haven’t heard from her.  
Moermond: and you’re left holding the bag. Have you consider filing in small claims  
court?  
Smith: I haven’t.  
Moermond: she trashed the place. Was she leaving at the beginning early November?  
Smith: I told her she could stay as long as she wanted, giving her 2 months free rent  
so she could find somewhere else. She told me she was packing.  
Moermond: did you do an inspection the day of the closing?  
Smith: I’d been there earlier. There was some stuff in the yard, some of her kid’s stuff.  
I didn’t know about any of the construction debris.  
Moermond: you didn’t go there the day of the closing? That due diligence piece was  
missing. I see the close passing. You can maybe make an argument with the Council,  
but I’m going to cut it down the middle. It was a substantial cleanup.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 4/5/2023  
10:00 a.m. Hearings  
Special Tax Assessments  
5
RLH TA 23-5  
Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 199  
DUKE STREET. (File No. J2308A, Assessment No. 238507) (To refer to  
March 7, 2023 Legislative Hearing; Public Hearing continued to March  
22, 2023)  
Noecker  
Sponsors:  
Refer back to LH August 15, 2023 at 10 am. If no same or similar violations, delete  
the assessment. New CPH Oct 4, 2023.  
Michelle Dimayuga, owner, appeared  
Moermond: I know we’ve met previously when we came out to come up with a plan  
about the garden and permaculture. So, you have some background of how this works.  
That was a correction order on the property. Today we are talking about a special  
assessment, something a little different.  
[Moermond explains tax assessments and gives background of appeals process]  
Moermond: I know Mai Vang didn’t send you the orders and the videos because there’s  
a note that you can’t read things on screens.  
Dimayuga: yes, I’m on brain rest. I have to have a lot of support if I do things online.  
Moermond: slow us down if you need to.  
Staff report by Supervisor Richard Kedrowski: September 14, 2022 a Summary  
Abatement Order was issued for a mattress on the boulevard at the property.  
Dimayuga: it is a lightweight box spring.  
Kedrowski: compliance date of September 21, 2022. A reinspection was done on that  
date and it wasn’t removed. A work order was issued and that was done Sept 26, 2022.  
Total proposed assessment of $432.  
Moermond: letter was mailed on the 14th; the crew came on the 26th so a period of  
about 12 days. It looks like it was right by the curb cuts for a driveway apron, but no  
driveway. Do you put your garbage there?  
Dimayuga shakes head no.  
Moermond: tell me what is going on with appeal.  
Dimayuga: at one point Racquel took a verbal statement they spent a lot of time on  
and were very understanding and summarized it well. If you can access that and I can  
add more if I need too.  
This statement was given January 17th at 10 am. I was on virtual class online, so from  
8 am until 11:50 am I have virtual Google meets with no breaks. Since I didn’t  
recognize the number I thought it was one of my kids calling from someone else’s  
phone. I told her I was available after 11:50 but that may not be possible. I told her  
writing an email is difficult with my disability. She offered to take a statement. I  
dictated and she wrote it out. She may have read it to someone at that point.  
"Because of a chemical exposure, I was ADA accommodated to work online with  
elementary students as of this fall 2022. My occupational medical doctor referred me in  
late October to see a vision and brain expert for testing because of my extreme  
exhaustion, dizziness, fatigue, memory problems, and inability to perform basic daily  
tasks. I'm a divorced mom of three teenage kids. I do not have an adult partner or  
friend who is able to help me with the new diagnosis of TBI (traumatic brain injury). The  
communication from the City of Saint Paul was open starting winter break for Saint  
Paul schools. I contacted this phone number on  
12/20/2022 and spoke to Polly at the City Clerk's Office. She explained that they would  
not be able to meet with me over the winter break because of their holidays. The  
specific box spring that was removed was on the corner by the alley by my house  
which the neighborhood considers the free tree where people put things out that say  
free. We have been here since 1997 and my children are urban protectors for the  
earth. They want to protect the earth so they are zero wasters. One of the kids on their  
way to school told me about the box spring. They asked if they could put a free sign  
on it. I didn't see the box spring until later. I said we better put a free sign on it. If it is  
not gone by next weekend, we would use Waste Management because we have a large  
item pickup. I recall by the end of the week, the kids said someone picked it up. I  
have documentation of being able to see the doctor, but it was 2 hours of testing late  
Halloween, and the diagnosis was not given until almost Thanksgiving. And so, I  
unfortunately did not get the mail until winter break. I am trying to work from home, and  
I cannot do any more screen time or stand up. By 4:00 I am in bed. I am trying to get a  
leave from work. $500 would mean I can't help my kids pay for art class at St. Paul  
College."  
Now I am on leave with no pay, $500 is a lot.  
Moermond: do you want to see the video of the crew taking it away?  
Dimayuga: I want to see the person who is coming after my kids and me.  
Moermond: this is just the City crew who is picking it up. Not the complainant or  
anything like that.  
[videos are shown]  
Moermond: for clarification about the hearing schedule. You would have gotten a letter  
probably in November about this assessment. The original day was December 20th.  
You must have reached out then. We didn’t have hearings December 27. Back to  
hearings Jan 3 which is when we called. Then January 17. Then we continued it to the  
7th of February. You had a Council Public Hearing on February 15 and that’s usually  
when we close the books, but because we had these issues and other things going on  
I asked them to send it back so we could talk. Nothing was decided February 15 so  
we could have this conversation today.  
I’ll just name that we have a problem with opening mail, especially form the City, in a  
timely fashion. Both the orders and assessment email. You need to get a handle on  
that because it can cost you money.  
[Dimayuga gives description of various services she's contacted]  
Moermond: in spite of the medical difficulties you are facing, as a property owner you  
still have these responsibilities that need to be met. You need to sort out who can help  
you go through your mail. I would say the same thing to someone who doesn’t read  
English. Have someone help, a friend, an adult child. They need to help you if you can’t  
do it on your own. It can cost you money. It is a concern.  
Dimayuga: Thursday the occupational therapist can write in my plan to help with  
paperwork and organizing.  
Moermond: so you have help now, and are taking steps. You may need a different  
long-term plan. I’m willing to work with you but I need two commitments from you. I  
would like you to not have any same or similar violations at your property through now  
and October 18th, 2023. If the City doesn’t’ have to write any letters—I see in the past  
we had a tall grass and weeds with no action. Those letters are automatically  
generated so we don’t know if that is founded until an inspector arrives.  
Dimayuga: can I have a break for a second? I have all the letters and I’m aware of  
that.  
Moermond: let’s just not have any more of these, and I’ll recommend this is deleted. I’d  
like a carrot for that to be dealt with.  
Dimayuga: thank you for the carrot. I’m an integral part of the community I live in. I  
keep my walks immaculate and clean. I saw a little bunny on my walk with my dog this  
morning. I do many things in the neighborhood. I am not in control of someone  
reporting me and not coming to talk to me. My children are multi-racial. My ex-husband  
did and said things and I don’t know who in my neighborhood---I feel like my children  
are targeted. I’ve lived here since 1994. With 3 children it is hard to fine other housing.  
I need to have the roof replaced. I could see whoever has been reporting me would  
report me for noise violations when I’m replacing it.  
Moermond: and that’s not a valid or founded complaint.  
Dimayuga: I would like to know if those complaints have been a consistent person. I  
need to protect myself and my children. It will affect whether myself and my children  
stay living and I stay working in St. Paul. When dogs get loose they come to my  
house. I don’t know who it is, though I have an idea. I feel powerless to be able to  
make that commitment because it is out of my control.  
Moermond: two things. The City is legally prohibited from telling you who the  
complainant is and if it is a repeat complainant. Mr. Kedrowski, your perspective?  
Kedrowski: we receive the complaint and investigate ourselves. When we see  
something at the property we become the complainant because we saw it ourselves.  
Then we write orders.  
Moermond: so if things like box springs land there, put a free sign on it sure, but  
arrange with Waste Management too. If you get orders on something like that, call the  
inspector. That’s why I was talking about managing your mail.  
Kedrowski: yes, if someone calls us and tells us a date we don’t come back until after  
that date. We’d also have contact with the property owner so typically I’d reach out to  
them directly.  
Dimayuga: can someone call me if a letter goes out?  
Kedrowski: it is always challenging with Inspector 1’s since they don’t have the same  
resources.  
Moermond: is there a way to route complaints for a particular property to a higher-level  
inspector or does the computer system simply push it through?  
Kedrowski: it is divided by census tracts, so it picks the area inspector. I try to catch  
thing sin the mornings when I go through them, but there are times things get by me  
but that’s why I say to always call.  
Moermond: you may see it, but you also may not.  
Kedrowski: it goes on their task list, and if they have a slow day they may go in and  
pull new inspections.  
Moermond: so you can try but no way to guarantee it.  
Dimayuga: will my inspector be consistent between now and the fall?  
Kedrowski: typically.  
Moermond: if something comes up and we give contact information to Ms. Dimayuga  
should we give Inspector Munoz’s information or yours. What is your preference?  
Kedrowski: knowing the situation I would handle it differently than him, my contact  
information would be best.  
Moermond: we’ll have a follow up letter with Mr. Kedrowski’s contact information. If  
anything comes up that’s a question mark to you, you can reach out to him. He’ll know  
where you are coming from.  
Dimayuga: that’s part of the reason I took the leave is I do need to take care of my  
health and my home. If I don’t do that the stress of work was making it worse. Part of  
what happened with the garden, was it was healing for me and everyone around. My  
kids do pull carrots. We had zebra caterpillars on a plant. The boy across the street  
got to look for them. The nature part of it helped me get through. I also have my  
23-year-old godson coming into town Wednesday night. He is going to bring some  
tools and do some handyman things and one of them is put up a 3-pocket letter holder  
by the door so when kids come in they can put it in the “in” bin.  
Moermond: I’ll ask the Council to look at this October 18 and I’ll touch base with you a  
month before, on September 19th, and we can cover anything that may have come up  
in the meantime.  
Dimayuga: I’m not sure what my job situation would be if St. Paul Schools would try  
and accommodate me. It is a high stress time for a teacher.  
Moermond: would August 15 be better?  
Dimayuga: sure.  
Moermond: that’s a couple months before the hearing but we can sort through things.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 3/22/2023  
6
RLH TA 23-92  
Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 779  
THOMAS AVENUE. (File No. J2304E3, Assessment No. 238310)  
Balenger  
Sponsors:  
Recommendation forthcoming. Continue PH to April 19, 2023.  
Xu Keng Vue, son of owners, appeared  
Mr. Neng Vue and Ms. Cher Vue, owners, appeared  
Mai Vang interpreted  
[Moermond gives background of appeals process]  
Staff report by Supervisor Richard Kedrowski: 779 Thomas has multiple issues with 3  
open sets of orders for trash and debris around garage and rear yard, a garage had a  
fire and no cleanup has been done on interior contents or garage itself. Also orders on  
vehicles at the property. This assessment is a Summary Abatement Order for trash,  
fridge, chest freezer, tires and miscellaneous debris from driveway area. Summary  
Abatement Order was sent July 28, 2022 with a compliance date of August 4. August  
4 the items had no been removed and an Excessive Consumption fee was issued in  
lieu of a word order for cleanup. The date on that Excessive Consumption fee was  
August 18 and on reinspection the items hadn’t been removed, so an additional  
Excessive Consumption fee was also sent.  
Moermond: so in this first time period there was one issued on the deadline, then 2  
weeks later another inspection and it sill wasn’t done so another Excessive  
Consumption was issued.  
K: correct.  
Moermond: we have six more bills today that are in these assessments related to the  
same thing, but I would like to pause and learn more about what was going on with the  
orders going to your house and understanding. What was happening and why you are  
appealing?  
Cher Vue: we used to own an auto business so the items in the garage are from that,  
along with other items. When the garage started on fire we were told to move it outside.  
We were cleaning it as much as we could, but things kept being added. Each time we  
cleaned more things were added. So each time the inspector comes it looked like a  
mess and more stuff. We didn’t pay any of these bills because we don’t have the  
money. We rely on my husband’s income. That’s why we did not pay.  
Moermond: did you read the orders when they came and understand the expectations  
in terms of cleaning up the yard and removing the items?  
Cher Vue: when the letter came we didn’t understand what it said, but our children read  
it and try to explain it. When we do get them the children explain what needs to be  
removed and we go out and remove it. It also relates to the vehicles, we try to come  
into compliance. As far as the fridge and freezer they were in the garage but due to the  
fire we moved them outside and that is when we got the orders.  
Moermond: so you got the orders and your children read it and help you understand  
what is going on?  
Cher Vue: our children don’t live with us, so if they can they come on weekends to  
explain to us. They do work too, so they aren’t always there to explain to us. When we  
do get it we give it to them to explain.  
Moermond: Mr. Xu Keng Vue, you are one of the children, could you give your  
perspective on how this work son managing mail and deadlines?  
Xu Keng Vue: when we receive mail I bring it inside and try to look over some of it,  
however I don’t understand some of it. A lot of the bigger things like taxes is more my  
sister. She usually comes once or twice a week or so and looks at the mail and helps  
explain to my parents. When the mail came we didn’t really see it until after and then  
my sister explained we have to clean out the back. We have tried to clean it as much  
as possible, but we can only do some much during the weekends, so that’s how that  
happens.  
Moermond: so you are saying there are different things in the backyard over time. So  
some of the things like the chest freezer look the same, but other things move  
around?  
Cher Vue: sometimes my husband has friends over and they bring trash over. We try  
to throw as much as we can, but sometimes my husband doesn’t let the trash go. The  
kids do as much as they can when they come. There are things he wants to keep, so  
it is kind of hard because my husband prevents it. It is hard for the kids to know what  
to throw and what not too.  
Moermond: looking at the original letter on July 28 it is pretty clear what the  
expectation was. Within 2 weeks of that letter I assume you or your sister would have  
explained what was contained. I am wondering why it took months and months to get  
the work done when you new it needed to be done and started to get bills every 2  
weeks when it wasn’t done. That’s a lot of money because you didn’t want to clean it  
up.  
Cher Vue: as a mother I can only do as much as I can. They help me, but then they  
leave things and don’t want to do it. After a few asks if I don’t do it I get upset and I  
just leave it and tell them if you don’t help I will leave it and the City will come back and  
take enforcement.  
Moermond: how many children help?  
Cher Vue: Xu Keng lives with us, the rest are married and live on their own and come  
as needed. Xu Keng helps as much as he can, but he also works too.  
Moermond: what are you looking for today?  
Cher Vue: it is just the two of us and we are trying as hard as we can. We don’t have  
money and are asking for removal of the fee if you can. With the cold weather it is hard  
to cleanup, so we are asking for deletion of the fee.  
Moermond: I’d like Mr. Kedrowski talk about the other assessments before I complete  
that ask.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 3/22/2023  
7
RLH TA 23-93  
Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 779  
THOMAS AVENUE. (File No. J2305E, Assessment No. 238304)  
Balenger  
Sponsors:  
Recommendation forthcoming. Continue PH to April 19, 2023.  
Xu Keng Vue, son of owners, appeared  
Mr. Neng Vue and Ms. Cher Vue, owners, appeared  
Mai Vang interpreted  
[Moermond gives background of appeals process]  
Staff report by Supervisor Richard Kedrowski: this is a continuation of the same  
Summary Abatement Order that also had Excessive Consumption fees sent August  
25, 2022 and September 7, 2022. Two more Excessive Consumption fees sent at that  
time. On the third appeal here we have September 22 vehicles not in compliance,  
Westenhofer took it over as a problem property, so it was put on for vehicles not being  
removed. There were two other Excessive Consumption on 10/6/22 and 10/14/22, two  
sent that day, one for trash and one for vehicle. That totals six  
Moermond: so 4 of the six were trash?  
Kedrowski: one for trash, 3 for vehicles  
Moermond: so 5 are related to the trash and 3 related to the vehicles for the total of 8  
appealed today.  
Kedrowski: there is a fourth file on this property September 8, 2021 and when parks  
couldn’t get in the file wasn’t closed and an additional 10 Excessive Consumption fees  
were sent on that too.  
Cher Vue: yes we continue to clean the garbage as much as we can. We’ve lived here  
for a long time, since 1994. I have an issue with removing the vehicles. They are on my  
property, why can’t I park there? I feel like we are being targeted because we are  
Asian. What do you want us to do with the vehicles, they are on my property?  
Moermond: let’s dispatch with the freezer and cleanup of the backyard. $795 total  
related to this matter. I understand there is a moving target in terms of different things  
being out there, but some items remain from visit to visit. I’m struggling. You said you  
reached out to parks with a work order? When was that?  
Kedrowski: September 15, 2021.  
Moermond: I understood that Parks was asked to do a cleanup here and they declined  
doing it, I wanted to know when that was and the answer is complicated.  
Cher Vue: when they sent the letter to us to move the items we moved them behind  
the garage, so when parks came and asked to clean it up we didn’t let them because  
there were big items like snowplows and lawn mowers we didn’t want them to take so  
we told them they couldn’t do the cleanup.  
Moermond: the family is saying they told them to go away, but it doesn’t sound like  
that’s the same interaction? Parks said what?  
Kedrowski: parks was trying to find a way to get into the back yard with a skid steer. It  
wasn’t the lawnmowers, it was the engines, tires, car parts from the illegal auto repair  
at the property. They were reluctant to get rid of those items, but parks couldn’t get the  
tractor back there so we canceled that work order and we continued with Excessive  
Consumption fees as a means of achieving compliance.  
Moermond: this work order was cancelled because they couldn’t do it with the skid  
steer and declined to do it by manual labor.  
Kedrowski: that is correct.  
Moermond: we have the vehicle situation, fire damaged garage, and a cleaned up  
backyard finally. Are the two issues now the garage and the vehicles?  
Westenhofer: the issue with the vehicle is the tow order was sent for one vehicle that is  
still parked on the property. It doesn’t appear operable and the tabs and plates are  
expired. If they fix that they won’t tow it. It hasn’t’ been towed by now because the truck  
can’t get back there.  
Moermond: so lacking tabs and inoperable?  
Westenhofer: right.  
Moermond: so we have the vehicle situation. what is the situation with the garage?  
Kedrowski: the garage had minor charring on the trusses inside. It was my  
understanding that the insurance was supposed to provide a dumpster to remove the  
garage. At this point if it isn’t going to come down, we could close it because it is  
secure and sound. However, it is the root of a lot of problems because it is full of auto  
things.  
Moermond: is it considered a Vacant Building since there was a fire and secured by  
other than normal means or is there a service door?  
Kedrowski: there is a service door.  
Moermond: ok, so not a Vacant Building because you can get in normally still.  
Inspector Westenhofer: the police were sent the tow orders back in September, they  
wont do it now because of the snow and they can’t get to it. As to why they didn’t’ do it  
sooner I don’t have an answer. I spoke with Anna and they’re backlogged. Once it is  
clear they will start towing again.  
Kedrowski: this most recent Summary Abatement Order didn’t address all the things in  
the backyard, and that backyard is still full. So that is not closed.  
Westenhofer: it is one vehicle, a silver Toyota.  
Moermond: is the backyard clean?  
Xu Keng Vue: it isn’t completely. When its warmer we can do more.  
Moermond: this file opened up in September 2021 due to complaints of illegal auto  
repair. Was that neighbor complaint or observed by inspector?  
Kedrowski: I believe a neighborhood complaint. Otis Warner had the file first and he  
gave it to me and I took over at that point.  
Moermond: were there subsequent neighbor complaints, or was it not resolved and the  
inspector kept writing things because things snowballed?  
Kedrowski: it went through a cycle of Excessive Consumption fees, went to work order  
with parks. They declined to do the work, so there was a lapse there. When it because  
evident they weren’t going to do the work and we went the Excessive Consumption  
route. It had no action until new orders were written to try and give clear direction.  
Moermond: so 3 complaints. Illegal car repair, mess in yard, and the car. In stamp I  
see vehicle complaints consistently over time back a fair number of years. That is not  
good in terms of my expectation there is a clear understanding of what is going on with  
City orders because there have been so many over time. I will look at this more  
carefully. I wanted to be perfectly clear do you have subsequent complaints, or  
additional items triggered every time you went back. Neighbors calling due to racial  
status, are there neighbors calling at all?  
Kedrowski: no.  
Moermond: so an ongoing problem that got more complicated as things went on. We  
have the illegal repair and now we have a mess.  
Kedrowski: correct.  
Moermond: that is how new orders were generated.  
Kedrowski: Excessive Consumption orders don’t give the whole sense of the issue, so  
new orders were issued to make it clear what the issues were.  
Moermond: my comment at this point is I will be reviewing the orders. I won’t come to a  
conclusion today since there are so many assessments. If I do recommend they are  
approved I’ll ask they be made payable over 2 years so they are spread out in a way  
making it easier to manage.  
Cher Vue: I just want to comment I know who is making the complaints. The cars are  
just he kids’ cars. We used to own a business that’s why we have the parts. Why  
doesn’t anyone complain about the park nearby? There is trash there too. We try to  
clean as much as we can.  
Moermond: it has to get better; this will cost a lot of money. We’ll be in touch with the  
recommendation to Council.  
Cher Vue: the freezer and fridge have been removed. When did the inspector come?  
Moermond: I wasn’t hearing the problem was removal of those, I hear the problem is  
the backyard continues to be a big mess.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 3/22/2023  
8
RLH TA 23-94  
Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 779  
THOMAS AVENUE. (File No. J2306E, Assessment No. 238305)  
Balenger  
Sponsors:  
Recommendation forthcoming.  
Xu Keng Vue, son of owners, appeared  
Mr. Neng Vue and Ms. Cher Vue, owners, appeared  
Mai Vang interpreted  
[Moermond gives background of appeals process]  
Staff report by Supervisor Richard Kedrowski: this is a continuation of the same  
Summary Abatement Order that also had Excessive Consumption fees sent August  
25, 2022 and September 7, 2022. Two more Excessive Consumption fees sent at that  
time. On the third appeal here we have September 22 vehicles not in compliance,  
Westenhofer took it over as a problem property, so it was put on for vehicles not being  
removed. There were two other Excessive Consumption on 10/6/22 and 10/14/22, two  
sent that day, one for trash and one for vehicle. That totals six  
Moermond: so 4 of the six were trash?  
Kedrowski: one for trash, 3 for vehicles  
Moermond: so 5 are related to the trash and 3 related to the vehicles for the total of 8  
appealed today.  
Kedrowski: there is a fourth file on this property September 8, 2021 and when parks  
couldn’t get in the file wasn’t closed and an additional 10 Excessive Consumption fees  
were sent on that too.  
Cher Vue: yes we continue to clean the garbage as much as we can. We’ve lived here  
for a long time, since 1994. I have an issue with removing the vehicles. They are on my  
property, why can’t I park there? I feel like we are being targeted because we are  
Asian. What do you want us to do with the vehicles, they are on my property?  
Moermond: let’s dispatch with the freezer and cleanup of the backyard. $795 total  
related to this matter. I understand there is a moving target in terms of different things  
being out there, but some items remain from visit to visit. I’m struggling. You said you  
reached out to parks with a work order? When was that?  
Kedrowski: September 15, 2021.  
Moermond: I understood that Parks was asked to do a cleanup here and they declined  
doing it, I wanted to know when that was and the answer is complicated.  
Cher Vue: when they sent the letter to us to move the items we moved them behind  
the garage, so when parks came and asked to clean it up we didn’t let them because  
there were big items like snowplows and lawn mowers we didn’t want them to take so  
we told them they couldn’t do the cleanup.  
Moermond: the family is saying they told them to go away, but it doesn’t sound like  
that’s the same interaction? Parks said what?  
Kedrowski: parks was trying to find a way to get into the back yard with a skid steer. It  
wasn’t the lawnmowers, it was the engines, tires, car parts from the illegal auto repair  
at the property. They were reluctant to get rid of those items, but parks couldn’t get the  
tractor back there so we canceled that work order and we continued with Excessive  
Consumption fees as a means of achieving compliance.  
Moermond: this work order was cancelled because they couldn’t do it with the skid  
steer and declined to do it by manual labor.  
Kedrowski: that is correct.  
Moermond: we have the vehicle situation, fire damaged garage, and a cleaned up  
backyard finally. Are the two issues now the garage and the vehicles?  
Westenhofer: the issue with the vehicle is the tow order was sent for one vehicle that is  
still parked on the property. It doesn’t appear operable and the tabs and plates are  
expired. If they fix that they won’t tow it. It hasn’t’ been towed by now because the truck  
can’t get back there.  
Moermond: so lacking tabs and inoperable?  
Westenhofer: right.  
Moermond: so we have the vehicle situation. what is the situation with the garage?  
Kedrowski: the garage had minor charring on the trusses inside. It was my  
understanding that the insurance was supposed to provide a dumpster to remove the  
garage. At this point if it isn’t going to come down, we could close it because it is  
secure and sound. However, it is the root of a lot of problems because it is full of auto  
things.  
Moermond: is it considered a Vacant Building since there was a fire and secured by  
other than normal means or is there a service door?  
Kedrowski: there is a service door.  
Moermond: ok, so not a Vacant Building because you can get in normally still.  
Inspector Westenhofer: the police were sent the tow orders back in September, they  
wont do it now because of the snow and they can’t get to it. As to why they didn’t’ do it  
sooner I don’t have an answer. I spoke with Anna and they’re backlogged. Once it is  
clear they will start towing again.  
Kedrowski: this most recent Summary Abatement Order didn’t address all the things in  
the backyard, and that backyard is still full. So that is not closed.  
Westenhofer: it is one vehicle, a silver Toyota.  
Moermond: is the backyard clean?  
Xu Keng Vue: it isn’t completely. When its warmer we can do more.  
Moermond: this file opened up in September 2021 due to complaints of illegal auto  
repair. Was that neighbor complaint or observed by inspector?  
Kedrowski: I believe a neighborhood complaint. Otis Warner had the file first and he  
gave it to me and I took over at that point.  
Moermond: were there subsequent neighbor complaints, or was it not resolved and the  
inspector kept writing things because things snowballed?  
Kedrowski: it went through a cycle of Excessive Consumption fees, went to work order  
with parks. They declined to do the work, so there was a lapse there. When it because  
evident they weren’t going to do the work and we went the Excessive Consumption  
route. It had no action until new orders were written to try and give clear direction.  
Moermond: so 3 complaints. Illegal car repair, mess in yard, and the car. In stamp I  
see vehicle complaints consistently over time back a fair number of years. That is not  
good in terms of my expectation there is a clear understanding of what is going on with  
City orders because there have been so many over time. I will look at this more  
carefully. I wanted to be perfectly clear do you have subsequent complaints, or  
additional items triggered every time you went back. Neighbors calling due to racial  
status, are there neighbors calling at all?  
Kedrowski: no.  
Moermond: so an ongoing problem that got more complicated as things went on. We  
have the illegal repair and now we have a mess.  
Kedrowski: correct.  
Moermond: that is how new orders were generated.  
Kedrowski: Excessive Consumption orders don’t give the whole sense of the issue, so  
new orders were issued to make it clear what the issues were.  
Moermond: my comment at this point is I will be reviewing the orders. I won’t come to a  
conclusion today since there are so many assessments. If I do recommend they are  
approved I’ll ask they be made payable over 2 years so they are spread out in a way  
making it easier to manage.  
Cher Vue: I just want to comment I know who is making the complaints. The cars are  
just he kids’ cars. We used to own a business that’s why we have the parts. Why  
doesn’t anyone complain about the park nearby? There is trash there too. We try to  
clean as much as we can.  
Moermond: it has to get better; this will cost a lot of money. We’ll be in touch with the  
recommendation to Council.  
Cher Vue: the freezer and fridge have been removed. When did the inspector come?  
Moermond: I wasn’t hearing the problem was removal of those, I hear the problem is  
the backyard continues to be a big mess.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 4/19/2023  
9
RLH TA 23-82  
Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 754  
COOK AVENUE EAST. (File No. J2314A, Assessment No. 238513)  
Yang  
Sponsors:  
Approve the assessment.  
Jay Mitchell, o/b/o Quality Residences, appeared via phone  
[Moermond gives background of appeals process]  
Staff report by Supervisor Lisa Martin: Nov 15, 2022 a Summary Abatement Order was  
issued to remove and dispose of a deep freezer by the alley. Compliance date of Nov  
21. Rechecked and work order was sent, the work was done for a total assessment of  
$568. There is history at the property.  
Moermond: I have a note in my paperwork that says there was a question about bulky  
item pickup. We followed up with Waste Management and they have no notes in the  
file about freezer pickup at this property. Mr. Mitchell, why are you appealing?  
Mitchell: I sent in pictures; we did pick up the items. The City came out and someone  
must have dumped on us again. That’s why we showed the pictures. The date was the  
4.  
Moermond: the orders went out November 15. It does show the yard was picked up but  
the freezer was still there. I think we’re talking about different time periods.  
Mitchell: that was maybe my confusion.  
Moermond: the items in your photos weren’t included in the orders at all.  
Mitchell: I don’t even see it in my photos. As long as there isn’t a cover on it then  
recycling picks it up.  
Moermond: it is in the photos between the two garbage cans.  
Mitchell: then I may have missed it. Wouldn’t it still be in recycling if it was in an  
orderly fashion.  
Moermond: you have to call them to do that, and it isn’t recycling it is Waste  
Management.  
Mitchell: we do try to pay attention to it.  
Moermond: I don’t see any orders written on the items in your photos. So yes you did  
clean it up, no there weren’t orders.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 4/5/2023  
10  
RLH TA 23-83  
Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 522  
SHERBURNE AVENUE. (File No. J2314A, Assessment No. 238513)  
Balenger  
Sponsors:  
Approve the assessment.  
Jay Mitchell, o/b/o Quality Residences, appeared via phone  
[Moermond gives background of appeals process]  
Staff report by Supervisor Lisa Martin: Summary Abatement Order November 4 to  
remove the box spring from the boulevard. Compliance date of November 14.  
Rechecked Nov 17 and the work was done November 17 for a total cost of $460.  
Moermond: why are you appealing?  
Mitchell: same thing, the photos show we cleaned up. Maybe someone put something  
extra there. We show the box spring in the pictures before and after. We weren’t aware  
or we would have cleaned it up.  
Moermond: the video, which should have been sent to you, November 17 does show a  
mattress and that same distinct looking table. Sort of cream colored. I see the photos  
the department sent. Your photos appear to be for the Cook address. All four of the  
photos appear to be in the garbage can area, alley part, and the items in question were  
in the front boulevard. Again, if you have photos that would be helpful—  
Mitchell: I think someone got lost in translation, I’m sorry  
Moermond: sorry I couldn’t be more helpful today.  
Mitchell: I understand.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 4/5/2023  
11  
RLH TA 23-42  
Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 905  
MARYLAND AVENUE EAST. (File No. J2310A, Assessment No.  
238509)  
Yang  
Sponsors:  
Approve the assessment.  
Woman [no name given] answered at 12:40: he isn’t here. He’s been trying to reach  
you, they were going to mail him his records. We were supposed to get them  
yesterday. I’ll have him call you.  
Moermond: we have a hearing scheduled so he can’t call in.  
Woman: can you call him at a different number?  
Moermond: sure.  
[alternate number is called]  
Voicemail left at 12:42 PM: this is Marcia Moermond from St. Paul City Council calling  
you about your appealed tax assessment for 905 Maryland. Trying to conclude our  
conversation. We haven’t been able to connect wit you. Looks like we have tried a  
couple of times and not been successful, though we’ve received some communication.  
We’ll send an email with the recommendation to Council and you can add more  
information to the record then.  
Moermond: there was a question about whether the property was entirely fenced in or  
partially open and how that worked out with the crew gaining access to do the work in  
the video. Supervisor Kedrowski went out and indicates the property is entirely fenced  
in but there is a gate. We have no further information about whether that gate was  
open. I do know Parks' practice is to not try to open locks on closed gates, right Ms.  
Martin?  
Martin: that is correct.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 3/22/2023  
12  
RLH TA 23-95  
Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 1070  
ROSS AVENUE. (File No. J2306E, Assessment No. 238305)  
Yang  
Sponsors:  
Approve the assessment.  
No one appeared  
Moermond: we have an appeal for 1070 Ross. He sent an email in about contesting  
this assessment, Mai Vang replied that we did need to get his number to include him  
in the hearing and we never heard back from Mr. Martinez. Lacking that, I’m going to  
recommend approval of the assessment.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 4/19/2023  
13  
RLH TA 23-89  
Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 1150  
SEVENTH STREET EAST (also 1154 Seventh Street East). (File No.  
J2306E, Assessment No. 238305)  
Yang  
Sponsors:  
Delete the assessment.  
Oluwagbenga Ogungbe, o/b/o Christ Miracle Church, appeared via phone  
[Moermond gives background of appeals process]  
Staff report by Supervisor Lisa Martin: September 27, 2022 we issued a Summary  
Abatement Order to the occupant as well as Christ Miracle Church regarding 1154  
Seventh street to remove various garbage from the property. October 4 compliance. It  
was still there when it was rechecked, however when the crew showed up it was done  
by owner. Total assessment of $157 which is the cost of sending the crew out to do  
the work, though no work was done. This has been a great property with no issues.  
Ogungbe: we don’t use the mailbox in the front of the building because people can  
take it. We have a property owner box address, so all our official information goes  
there. We also only go once a week to clean the inside of the church. We couldn’t find  
a contractor to help us clean it out. By the time we checked the church mailbox we  
saw the letter. We then got it cleaned up.  
The reason it wasn’t cleaned before the second team was sent because we didn’t get  
the mail. When we got it we sprung into action. We actually had a contractor; I can  
send you the receipt from the cleanup. I tried to call the inspector and left a message  
a number of times, by the time I spoke with him he said he had already issued the  
fine.  
Moermond: it sounds like you made a good faith effort to address the issue and with  
no code enforcement issues at the property I’ll recommend the Council delete this  
assessment.  
Ogungbe: we appreciate that.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 4/19/2023  
14  
RLH TA 23-79  
Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 820  
WESTERN AVENUE NORTH. (File No. J2305E, Assessment No.  
238304)  
Balenger  
Sponsors:  
Layover LH March 21, 2023 at 10 am (CPH 3/22).  
Prescila Moreno, owner, appeared via phone  
Moermond: we talked February 21 and you asked we called again because you wanted  
your husband present. Is he there? Do we need to call him in?  
Moreno: he’s not here, he had to get to the shop. I thought the call would be around 10.  
I guess I’ll have to do it.  
Moermond: one of these assessments goes to Council April 19. We’ll get you in earlier  
that day, first on the agenda, between 10 and 10:45 March 21.  
Moreno: I have to come to the courthouse?  
Moermond: we will call you March 21, we’ll have this same type of conversation. If you  
disagree with that recommendation you’d want to go to the Council Public Hearing April  
19.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 3/22/2023  
RLH TA 23-91  
15  
Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 820  
WESTERN AVENUE NORTH. (File No. J2306E, Assessment No.  
238305)  
Balenger  
Sponsors:  
Layover LH March 21, 2023 at 10 am.  
Prescila Moreno, owner, appeared via phone  
Moermond: we talked February 21 and you asked we called again because you wanted  
your husband present. Is he there? Do we need to call him in?  
Moreno: he’s not here, he had to get to the shop. I thought the call would be around 10.  
I guess I’ll have to do it.  
Moermond: one of these assessments goes to Council April 19. We’ll get you in earlier  
that day, first on the agenda, between 10 and 10:45 March 21.  
Moreno: I have to come to the courthouse?  
Moermond: we will call you March 21, we’ll have this same type of conversation. If you  
disagree with that recommendation you’d want to go to the Council Public Hearing April  
19.  
Laid Over to the Legislative Hearings due back on 3/21/2023  
Special Tax Assessments-ROLLS  
16  
17  
RLH AR 23-23  
Ratifying the assessments for Collection of Vacant Building Registration  
fees billed during June 1 to October 20, 2022. (File No. VB2306,  
Assessment No. 238805)  
Brendmoen  
Sponsors:  
Referred to the City Council due back on 4/19/2023  
RLH AR 23-24  
Ratifying the assessments for Securing and/or Emergency Boarding  
services during November 2022. (File No. J2306B, Assessment No.  
238105)  
Brendmoen  
Sponsors:  
Referred to the City Council due back on 4/19/2023  
18  
19  
20  
RLH AR 23-25  
RLH AR 23-26  
RLH AR 23-27  
Ratifying the assessments for Collection of Fire Certificate of Occupancy  
fees billed during September 27 to October 24, 2022. (File No.  
CRT2305, Assessment No. 238204)  
Brendmoen  
Sponsors:  
Referred to the City Council due back on 4/19/2023  
Ratifying the assessments for Excessive Use of Inspection or Abatement  
services billed during September 22 to October 21, 2022. (File No.  
J2306E, Assessment No. 238305)  
Brendmoen  
Sponsors:  
Referred to the City Council due back on 4/19/2023  
Ratifying the assessments for Graffiti Removal services during November  
2 to December 1, 2022. (File No. J2304P, Assessment No. 238403)  
Brendmoen  
Sponsors:  
Referred to the City Council due back on 4/19/2023  
11:00 a.m. Hearings  
Summary & Vehicle Abatement Orders  
RLH SAO 23-15  
21  
Making finding on the appealed nuisance abatement ordered for 779  
CENTRAL AVENUE WEST in Council File RLH SAO 23-4. (Amend:  
Nuisance is abated)  
Balenger  
Sponsors:  
The nuisance is abated and the matter resolved.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 3/8/2023  
RLH SAO 23-12  
22  
Making finding on the appealed nuisance abatement ordered for 1384  
REANEY AVENUE in Council File RLH SAO 23-2.  
Prince  
Sponsors:  
Continue PH to March 15, 2023. Nuisance is not currently abated.  
Todd Harper, owner, appeared via phone  
Staff update by Supervisor Lisa Martin: the inspector went for reinspection and said the  
vehicle has not been removed and it is not in compliance.  
Moermond: what is going on Mr. Harper?  
Harper: it has been a kerfuffle. My wife has been on the phone with Ford constantly.  
She needs the lien released, and they haven’t done it. She’s been trying. It is  
frustrating. She works full time and gets put on hold for hours at a time. I don’t know  
what to do. They aren’t taking action.  
Moermond: I don’t know what to tell you. You may need private legal advice, but that  
isn’t something I can help with.  
Harper: we can’t afford that.  
Moermond: the fact you can’t get the lien released is what is keeping you from getting  
the tabs?  
Harper: yes, and from having it towed away.  
Moermond: the whole thing is you want the lien released for whatever value is there, but  
it isn’t functioning.  
Harper: yes, we would just donate it. It doesn’t work.  
Moermond: Ms. Martin, what kind of timing are you looking at on a work order on this?  
Martin: it can be towed within 24 hours at this point.  
[Victor starts barking and is told to ‘hush, please’]  
Moermond: this has been going on for a long time. This goes to Council Public  
Hearing tomorrow. Best I can do is buy you a week. You have to get it towed and  
moved or get a junkyard to take it. Something. I can buy you a week. The Council may  
be willing to give more time. Tomorrow I’ll ask them to continue it to March 15 and at  
that point all I can do is tell then it hasn’t been resolved and the Department needs to  
take action. Seems more affordable for you to do something on your own than the City  
do it.  
Harper: how much does it cost and would there be a payment plan?  
Moermond: it varies.  
Martin: it costs thousands, it is definitely cheaper to do it privately.  
Moermond: as far as a payment plan, technically yes. It would come forward as an  
assessment and could be appealed and made payable over a number of years. It  
would be the cost of the tow, plus the storage fees for 2 weeks at the impound lot,  
maybe more depending on when the next scheduled auction is.  
Harper: it isn’t blocking the alley, is that the problem?  
Moermond: I can’t rehear the case since Council already heard the matter. We’re just  
talking about timing. I’ll buy you the week and you can talk about what avenue you’d  
like to pursue.  
Harper: oh man, this has turned into a real albatross.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 3/8/2023  
1:00 p.m. Hearings  
Vacant Building Registrations  
23  
RLH VBR  
23-10  
Appeal of Mohsen Aghamirzai to a Vacant Building Registration  
Requirement at 834 SEVENTH STREET WEST.  
Tolbert  
Sponsors:  
Grant the appeal.  
No one appeared  
Voicemail left at 1:38 PM: this is Marcia Moermond from St. Paul City Council following  
up with you about the Vacant Building registration requirement. Staff has confirmed the  
business is up and running with vehicles at that location so I’ll recommend your appeal  
is granted. We’ll send another follow-up letter confirming that.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 3/22/2023  
24  
RLH VBR  
23-12  
Appeal of Blai Vang, JB Vang Management LLC, to a Vacant Building  
Registration Notice at 1015 BANDANA BOULEVARD WEST.  
Jalali  
Sponsors:  
Deny the appeal.  
Blai Vang, o/b/o JB Vang Management, LLC, appeared via phone  
[no appeals process given at start of hearing]  
Moermond: we have a Summary Abatement Order to secure the site, a Vacant  
Building registration and Fire orders revoking the certificate for a dangerous structure. I  
had some trouble figuring out what you were looking for in the appeal, you said “a  
structural report is pending.” I do know that after the last hearing I had Matt Dornfeld  
go by the site and noted there was chain link up so you’ve addressed that already.  
Vang: yes, we put up chain link and my guy was supposed to put up no trespassing  
signs but I don’t think he’s done that yet.  
Staff report by Supervisor Jim Perucca: this is a s2 parking garage 2 above ground, 4  
below grade. This process started in August 2022 with Niemeyer doing the Certificate  
of Occupancy inspection. He’s been out four additional times between January 17 and  
August 3. The last date, January 23 Inspector Niemeyer did do a site inspection with  
DSI licensing representatives. Their involvement was due to a pending license approval  
for this ramp. That was part of the conditions May of 2022 to provide a structural  
analysis of current conditions of the ramp. Mr. Vang indicated they had an analysis and  
the conclusion was the ramp has deteriorated to the point of significant structural  
issues and loss of structural capacity and they recommended the ramp not be used.  
Inspector Niemeyer did condemn the ramp at that time.  
Review of the provided analysis and its recommendations from the engineer says “our  
recommendation is the structure is not to be used for any purpose, parking or  
otherwise, and total access to the structure be prohibited.” Having that, we looked to  
senior leadership to decide where this building should be managed and they decided it  
should go to Vacant Building as a Category 2 and be monitored with the  
recommendations from the City structural engineer that a rehabilitation program be  
submitted by an engineer registered with the State for complete repairs under permits.  
Moermond: why are you appealing?  
Vang: they did get a permit and replace all the standpipes. The only thing we request is  
instead of putting it as a Vacant Building give us some time. We aren’t operating at all  
now. We’ve requested multiple engineering firms to give a full assessment and repair  
recommendations and bids. We ask for some time before it is a registered Vacant  
Building. We are ok with shutting it down, we just ask not to register it as a Vacant  
Building.  
Moermond: when do you imagine you’ll have that structural engineering analysis done,  
permit pulled, and work done?  
Vang: the original firm when we purchased the building did the analysis. I would  
imagine by summertime we have a repair and maintenance plan in place. We may  
expand, so ownership will be making a decision on which route they want to go.  
Perucca: is the plan still to build an apartment building on top of the ramp?  
Vang: yes. That’s why we want to evaluate the most cost-effective option.  
Supervisor James Hoffman: what I’m hearing is the intent is to put on a 150-unit  
complex on top of a structure that cannot support its own weight?  
Moermond: that’s what I hear.  
Vang: no, we would have a full analysis done and what needs to be done to reinforce  
so it can use those units.  
Moermond: they want to repair the condemned garage so they can construct an  
apartment on top of it. Here’s what I’m hearing. This is a dangerous structure. It isn’t  
just ordered vacated because of simple concerns that are addressed in a short  
timeline. This is involving safety of the entire structure. That really does push you over  
the line into the Vacant Building program because it is a dangerous building. As such,  
it qualifies for Vacant Building status under the City’s definition. The City made it a  
Category 2, an argument could be made it should be a Category 3. I can see for the  
time being it could work. The normal way to get out of Category 2 status is doing a  
team inspection, but that’s not what they want here. They’d be looking for the same  
thing you’re already doing, that engineering analysis that accompanies the permit to fix  
the structure and stable to support new construction. I’m landing that this is meeting  
the definition of a Vacant Building pretty clearly. I can’t see my way clear to  
recommending the Council let it out of the Vacant Building program.  
Vang: is there any time you would allow us to get us that engineering report and come  
up with a plan to remediate so it can operate in a safe manner.  
Moermond: nothing is stopping you from doing those things, but City code doesn’t  
allow for that kind of grace period. I can do a 90-day waiver on the fee, but you have a  
much longer time horizon than that to come to a conclusion on this. The dangerous  
status of the structure necessitates the quicker action the Department made. The  
Council could look at it differently than I do. They are the final decision-maker. You  
can do those things, but it will be parallel with Vacant Building registration.  
Vang: understood.  
Hoffman: with whatever fees are associated with that status, we just keep an eye on it  
more intently. We’ll be watching out and making sure there aren’t people in there and  
the sidewalks are clear. Things like that. Addressing attractive nuisances. The goal is  
helping you keep an eye on it.  
Vang: and we do go by 3 times a week and check on things.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 3/22/2023