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  
Tuesday, April 11, 2023  
9:00 AM  
Room 330 City Hall & Court House/Remote  
9:00 a.m. Hearings  
Remove/Repair Orders  
Ordering the rehabilitation or razing and removal of the structures at 901  
FULLER AVENUE within fifteen (15) days after the March 22, 2023, City  
Council Public Hearing. (To refer back to April 11, 2023 Legislative  
Layover to LH April 25, 2022 at 9 am. PO to post $5,000 PD by no later than COB  
Friday, April 21, 2023.  
Craig Cooper, potential purchaser, appeared  
Steve Greenfield, attorney, appeared via phone  
Moermond: I wanted to clarify your role with the property Mr. Greenfield. I think I  
understood you to say that you are no longer representing Select Portfolio? Is that  
Greenfield: quite the opposite. My client, SPS, is very interested in this property. We  
are stuck between a rock and a hard place. The loan went into default Nov 18, 2021  
when the borrower died. We’ve been in communication with one son. There is an issue  
over insurance proceeds. None of this is my client’s doing but we’re stuck holding the  
bag. There was a fire in the property. We believe the son is attempting to obtain the  
insurance proceeds. We have a variety of confluence of events, much to the chagrin of  
both you and my client. This went into default when the homeowner died. We lost a  
year during the federal government's moratorium in terms of foreclosing as the first  
mortgagee. The son has said he would like to rehab and use insurance proceeds to do  
so. We provided a work out plan for assumption. He authorized an attorney to talk with  
us but we haven’t had any communication with him since December 30, 2022. My  
client has spent money securing the property. Removing debris. That is as far as we  
can go at this point. We are attempting to sort out some paper snafu with the  
assignment of mortgage to a local firm. They have had it on hold until that assignment  
of mortgage is completed. My client has an interest in keeping it in its current  
situation, and not having it demolished. But they don’t want to spend money on the  
property that they may not end up owning. If someone else buys it at foreclosure they  
are out that money. They are mindful of the obligations and requirements of the  
municipality. They can do securing and removing debris but can’t go much further at  
this point.  
Moermond: who is the local law firm?  
Greenfield: let me look and see if I can pull it up.  
Moermond: your paralegal indicated they tried to find someone local and were  
unsuccessful in finding someone. But if you hired someone that would be great. I don’t  
know why you haven’t filed for foreclosure. That is troubling. It is troubling it also hasn’t  
been maintained. You haven’t participated in the last several hearings so maybe don’t  
have the background the rest of us have. Mr. Yannarelly, can you provide that  
Greenfield: I’d like to clarify there has been a local foreclosure firm retained, they have  
been on hold waiting assignment of mortgage so they can start foreclosure.  
Moermond: what I said is what your paralegal said. If that is different that is great,  
thank you.  
Greenfield: I wasn’t there when my paralegal said something, which is actually double  
hearsay. In addition, I ask you take into considering the fact we are dealing with the  
son of the owner who has been making things more difficult than easy. We have taken  
care of the items required of us which is securing and removing debris. We don’t feel  
there are current safety issues.  
[Supervisor Joe Yannarelly gives summary]  
Greenfield: if I may respond. The taxes paid were advanced by my client as the lender.  
They are very much trying to be a good neighbor. They are out of pocket over$200,000  
on this property. We are stuck with wanting to maintain the collateral. If it is  
demolished it will greatly diminish the collateral. I have been advised by people on the  
ground it isn’t a safety risk to the public.  
Moermond: I don’t have anyone here, a law firm, a contractor on the ground, here  
saying that but I do have DSI staff saying we have a fire damaged structure, broken  
into several times, in poor condition and constitutes a nuisance structure. I hear you  
saying you don’t believe you have the legal authority to enter to do an assessment or  
allow an inspector in to make that assessment. I’m not hearing a plan of action for  
dealing with the assignment of the mortgage. That seems to be tripping you up. Have  
you had any luck finding the local firm?  
Greenfield: the assignment of mortgage was done and is being sent this week so they  
can commence foreclosure.  
Moermond: and that is being sent from whom?  
Greenfield: my client, the servicer, who can then begin the foreclosure.  
Moermond: who is ‘they’?  
Greenfield: still waiting on that information. I don’t have the name of the firm, but I  
wouldn’t make a representation to the court without reason to back it up.  
Moermond: right. In my experience if you are looking at mortgage in excess of  
$200,000, you are in a loss mitigation mode. We do have Mr. Cooper, who has been in  
communication with Mr. Joseph Ray, JR, who I believe is the same person you are  
talking to. I would be looking for, in a timely fashion, foreclosure filing seeking  
expedited forfeiture and motion to allow access for inspection to occur. I would also be  
looking for that Performance Deposit put into place, both conditions for a  
recommendation the Council continue the matter and allow time for plans for  
rehabilitation. I don’t know how that will go in terms of expedited forfeiture.  
Cooper: there are four or five siblings.  
Moermond: so that many inheritors should they go through probate, though John Ray  
Jr seems to be taking lead. Do you know any more on that?  
Cooper: I don’t know, I think they are local.  
Greenfield: we were advised by Ray Tauriette August 2021, then told by son Ray Philip  
in January 2022 worked out a successor and interest review. Unfortunately, all the  
conversations we had, which appeared genuine and promising, appeared fruitless. I  
have questions, you mentioned the $5,000 Performance Deposit be put down. They are  
going to ask what the release or forfeiture of that deposit.  
Moermond: the $5,000 Performance Deposit is returnable under two circumstances: 1)  
the nuisance is abated and 2) it is requested by the person who posted it.  
Yannarelly: they request it back and we would issue it.  
Moermond: for my purposes it is necessary to get a continuance at City Council.  
Greenfield: as a condition, in addition to the other items, you want them to post this  
Performance bond. I am envisioning we get a contract with a person to do the rehab.  
Moermond: your client would get that Performance Deposit back upon performance of  
the rehabilitation. That would be the finish line.  
Greenfield: thinking out loud, we could build that into any contract with a buyer. We  
have to foreclose first. I have to explain to my client in an understandable way while  
also taking what actions I need to preserve the structure. I have no problem with  
anything else you have said. Can I have 48 hours to respond?  
Moermond: of course. Today is April 11. I’ll continue this to April 25 and look for  
someone to be here to talk about where we are at with filing that foreclosure and  
having it expedited. I don’t have contact information for Joseph Ray, JR. He hasn’t  
presented himself here.  
Greenfield: I can promise you without a doubt that by April 25 you’ll have all the  
information you requested.  
Moermond: ultimately I need that Code Compliance Inspection to occur and you’ll need  
to ask the judge to formally allow access to the property to provide for that inspection.  
I think that is a reasonable request that courts have granted in the past. That would  
provide a baseline for us moving forward. So that is something local that is Code  
Greenfield: understood. The local foreclosure firm is Liebo, Weingarden, Dobie &  
Barbee. The attorney is Paul Weingarden.  
Moermond: Mr. Cooper anything to add?  
Cooper: not at this time.  
Moermond: we do need that Performance Deposit posted as an article of good faith.  
Laid Over to the Legislative Hearings due back on 4/25/2023  
Ordering the rehabilitation or razing and removal of the structures at 1117  
JENKS AVENUE within fifteen (15) days after the April 19, 2023, City  
Council Public Hearing. (To refer back to July 11, 2023 Legislative  
Refer back to LH July 11, 2023 at 9 am for discussion of success of nuisance  
mitigation plan.  
Scott Fergus, fund manager representing the owner, CAG National Fund 1 LLC,  
appeared via phone  
Lisa Proechel, Keller Williams real estate agent who manages the property, appeared  
Moermond: we had the requirement of posting the $5,000 Performance Deposit and a  
nuisance mitigation plan. MR. Yannarelly, has that been done?  
Supervisor Yannarelly: yes, that has been posted. I reviewed the plan and I thought we  
had discussed a camera?  
Proechel: we haven’t, the electric hasn’t been on for several years so it would be a  
major investment because then Xcel requires you to bring it up to code.  
Moermond: I am willing to have the Council send this back in 3 months’ time to be  
revaluated. I am not sure how the Councilmember will think, given the length of time.  
That brings us to July 19 to come back and do a status report of where things are at.  
I’d like to touch base on July 11 so we have an update on any nuisances and how  
things have been managed and we can figure out whether this path will work for us or  
we will proceed down another. Any Department concerns, Mr. Yannarelly?  
Yannarelly: the motion sensors should help. Removing the fence should help.  
Transparency is good, especially on a corner.  
Moermond: I’ll recommend that to them next week and will be briefing the Ward 6  
Councilmember ahead of time, which is my practice. The long time-horizon is the only  
difference on this one.  
Proechel: which we don’t have control of.  
Moermond: and we need to address that nuisance, which is what we’re about here. Any  
Proechel: do we come to the hearing on the 19th?  
Moermond: typically, only if people object to the recommendation. If you are getting  
what you want, typically people don’t, If the Councilmember decides differently from my  
recommendation we will certainly inform you so you could attend that Council Public  
Referred to the City Council due back on 4/19/2023  
Ordering the rehabilitation or razing and removal of the structures at 1082  
LOEB STREET within fifteen (15) days after the March 22, 2023, City  
Council Public Hearing. (To refer back to March 28, 2023 Legislative  
Layover to LH April 25, 2022 at 9 am. . Purchasers to submit an updated  
timeline/schedule for demolition and preconstruction of site with more specific  
Heidi Hovis, attorney o/b/o MN Department of Housing, appeared  
Moermond: I see we don’t have the prospective purchasers today?  
Hovis: I thought they would be here, not sure where they are.  
Moermond: the ask is that the City Council continue this for four months before they  
even potentially look at demo of the site, it could be even longer. This is their loose  
plan. That’s a very long time, and that’s essentially so the City could subsidize the  
preconstruction of the site.  
Hovis: I believe they were trying to get it so the utilities would be capped above ground.  
I know four months seems like a long time, but most of that time is reviewing plans  
and moving forward.  
Moermond: do they have all their plans together?  
Hovis: what you have is what I have.  
Moermond: seven lines. Then they are saying two months before they start  
construction. If you have a complete submission walking in, is that a two-month review  
time period if it is all together when they walk in?  
Zane: it can be.  
Hovis: my understanding is the build would not be on the ground up, they would be  
using a prefab building and putting it on. They’re trying to save foundation too. So that  
should save time and construction.  
Moermond: construction document wouldn’t be ready for City review until June 26. If it  
takes the City two months to do it they’re putting it on the City but they haven’t’ even  
got their construction plan together and submitting the same date. You are not them; I  
hear that. But putting out there that isn’t on the City.  
Hovis: absolutely. From the State’s perspective we have a new addendum to the  
purchase agreement because we thought they would rehab the original structure and  
that changed. Hopefully the sale will go through and I can communicate to their  
representative all the information you would like before the next hearing.  
Moermond: I would like these questions answered. I think that some of this could be  
expedited. Is there a survey as part of the sale?  
Hovis: the State was not. The seller would be relied on to do what they need to do.  
Moermond: could they hire someone now?  
Hovis: it is possible.  
Moermond: I don’t understand why we couldn’t move more quickly than the 28th. Is  
closing the 28th?  
Hovis: the State wants this to move to get a family in as quickly as possible. A more  
detailed construction plan with more specific information would be helpful is what I’m  
Moermond: the ask at this point is asking the Council to continue this to allow them  
grace to be able to complete these plans, showing me the money, the different pieces,  
I wouldn’t ask the Council to give 180 days unless those things were in place. Can we  
move this along more. I’m not opposed to what they are trying to accomplish. If the  
City does end up doing the demolition if they fail to get approval on this, the City  
wouldn’t be doing utility cuts in the fashion they would want.  
Hovis: can I have a complete list of what they would need?  
Moermond: I’m willing to take an in between step on this. I’m looking for a more  
aggressive plan to get us to the point where they are submitting plans to the City. I  
don’t think it is going to benefit me or the Council to know who they hire to do a survey.  
If it isn’t possible until the end of May, then I may want to see that. Are they working  
with an architect or general contractor? I’m troubled they’re doing composition of the  
construction document at the same time they are submitting it. I can live with June 26  
but I would like to see a complete plan being submitted at that point so we would  
realistically be looking at construction the end of August at the latest. Then I won’t be  
concerned about weather impacting the work.  
Zane: your concerns are the same as I would have. When they use the language  
composition of plans on the same date as submitting. Composition can take a while.  
Nailing that down would give more comfort as well as getting things done in a period of  
time everyone is comfortable with.  
Moermond: and we do give 180 days in the fall often.  
Moermond: I think final plans to the City by June 6. I think having that in and we can  
talk again in 2 weeks.  
Laid Over to the Legislative Hearings due back on 4/25/2023  
RLH RR 23-9  
Ordering the rehabilitation or razing and removal of the structures at 2120  
ROSE AVENUE EAST within fifteen (15) days after the April 5, 2023,  
City Council Public Hearing. (Amend to grant 180 days)  
Grant 180 days for rehab of the project.  
No one appeared  
Moermond: we’ll have it in front of Council the 26, but since they have their ducks in a  
row they can begin pulling permits.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 4/26/2023  
Ordering the rehabilitation or razing and removal of the structures at 829  
THIRD STREET EAST within fifteen (15) days after the May 17, 2023,  
City Council Public Hearing.  
Layover to LH May 9, 2023 at 9 am. PO to 1) post $5,000 PD, 2) submit work plan  
including bids and schedule, 3) submit proof of financing, 4) submit affidavit  
dedicating funds to the project by COB April 5, 2023. Property must be maintained.  
Doug Grimm, Northern Value Group, LLC, appeared  
Grimm: I’m one of the partners of Northern Value Group, LLC.  
[Moermond gives background of appeals process]  
Staff report by Supervisor Joe Yannarelly: The building is a two-story, wood frame,  
duplex with a detached one-stall garage on a lot of 5,083 square feet. The property  
was condemned and referred to vacant buildings by a fire certificate of occupancy  
inspector on December 27, 2021. Vacant building folders were opened on December  
29, 2021. The building subsequently had a fire on December 31, 2021. The current  
property owner is Northern Value Group LLC, per Amanda and Ramsey County  
Property records.  
On January 11, 2023, an inspection of the building was conducted, a list of  
deficiencies which constitute a nuisance condition was developed and photographs  
were taken. An Order to Abate a Nuisance Building was posted on January 25, 2023,  
with a compliance date of February 24, 2023. As of this date, the property remains in a  
condition which comprises a nuisance as defined by the legislative code. Taxation has  
placed an estimated market value of $11,900 on the land and $130,800 on the  
building. Real estate taxes are current. The vacant building registration fees were paid  
by assessment on February 1, 2023. A Code Compliance Inspection fee was paid on  
February 23, 2023. As of April 10, 2023, the $5,000 performance deposit has not been  
posted. There have been twelve Summary Abatement notices since 2021. There have  
been sixteen work orders issued for: garbage/rubbish, boarding/securing, tall  
grass/weeds and snow/ice. There also are current orders that Parks can’t seem to get  
around too for garbage in the back. Code Enforcement Officers estimate the cost to  
repair this structure exceeds $100,000. The estimated cost to demolish exceeds  
Moermond: I assume you have the reason this entered the program in December 21?  
Yannarelly: Certificate of Occupancy revocation and then immediately after there was a  
Moermond: and it was condemned. The fire records are attached to our records. Mr.  
Grimm, it looks like your acquisition is recent?  
Grimm: January 31, 2023. The little we know about the seller’s situation, sounds like it  
was a rough go for them. Somewhere around the time of the fire there was a mental  
health commitment and a conservator took over. We took title from the County, John  
Raminski’s office was appointed as personal representative. There was no family on  
the seller’s side to be appointed. We acquired, and we’re not quite where we want to  
be. I apologize to Mr. Zane for not having it ready for inspection. We’ll have that done  
in 48 hours. We’ve had our contractor walk through a couple of times already.  
Moermond: what is that looking like?  
Grimm: $140,000. Final details of that number will be informed by the Code  
Compliance Inspection Report. This is the same contractor we are using on two other  
vacant properties in St. Paul. We had some trouble with keeping the property  
accessible and secure. There were a lot of break ins. To give access we had to have it  
secured but we changed locks, hasp locks, reboarding. Now there is some activity the  
break-ins have stopped.  
Moermond: when was that most recent order issued?  
Yannarelly: March 28th. I was out there on the 5th and it was ever-growing.  
Moermond: application for Code Compliance was done the end of February and Mr.  
Zane went out and it wasn’t ready?  
Zane: yes, on the 30th.  
Moermond: and you had the whole team out to try and get it done, high level of  
organization to execute that.  
Zane: that is correct.  
Moermond: and no Performance Deposit done yet?  
Grimm: we are ready to do that.  
Moermond: that’s nice. You are hearing the yard is a disaster, you don’t have your  
Performance Deposit posted, the house wasn’t cleaned out. This is all emblematic of it  
being a nuisance property. The fact it continues to be one doesn’t speak well to your  
managing that now. I know you’ll get your act together because I am going to be  
pushing on that. I have to. That’s my job. This doesn’t go to Council until May 17th.  
There is time to get this sorted. What is your capacity to make it available for  
inspectors to come using the lock box?  
Grimm: after it is cleaned up it should be ready for that. The issue is the doors aren’t  
capable of hinging on the property so it has had to have to boarded. Safest is having is  
show up for inspectors. We haven’t found a way to hinge the door without replacing the  
whole system. I can’t offer that until we have a secure door on the front or back. My  
request is we continue to work out individual times, which we are ready to do now that it  
is cleaned out.  
Moermond: Mr. Zane, your ability to do that?  
Zane: I can do that since there are concerns about it being broken into. Get back in  
touch with me and we’ll get that set up.  
Moermond: Ms. Vang, can you get the police call log on this property starting January  
1, 2020 to present? I’m guessing this had been percolating long before the  
Grimm: one of the police calls were on myself and my contractor. The police came  
because someone in the neighborhood called, which reflects the neighborhood’s  
awareness of the problems.  
Moermond: and that would be reflected that it wasn’t something requiring a police  
report. Similarly, if the door was open and no one was there, it would say gone on  
arrival. So don’t sweat that. Performance Deposit, work plan, evidence of financing,  
schedule. We’ll look for those things to be pulled together. Let’s talk again May 9 and  
you have it all together for review no later than May 5. Do you have a registered Vacant  
Building form completed?  
Grimm: I don’t know if I did.  
Moermond: I don’t think that you did. Vacant Building fee went to assessment  
February 1. That contact information makes all the difference for them. The other thing  
I noticed was when DSI tried to do personal service to Northern Value Group at your  
legal address, 1349 S. Robert they were unable to locate any officers or agent of the  
LLC. Personal service wasn’t executed, so it becomes more important for us to know  
how to get ahold of you.  
Grimm: that is the correct address.  
Moermond: I’ll be asking the parks director to have it done by Monday. If it is as bad  
as I’m hearing it is thousands of dollars. So that gives you a deadline.  
Grimm: there is a dumpster there, we’re on our third dumpster today.  
Laid Over to the Legislative Hearings due back on 5/9/2023  
10:00 a.m. Hearings  
Making Finding on Nuisance Abatements  
Making finding on the appealed substantial abatement ordered for 733  
FAIRVIEW AVENUE NORTH in Council File RLH RR 22-28. (To refer to  
April 25, 2023 Legislative Hearing)  
Refer back to LH April 25, 2023 at 10 am. Inspectors to verify outstanding permit  
status. PO to submit updated schedule and proof of financing.  
Stamate Skliris, owner, appeared  
Herb Smith, contractor, appeared  
Moermond: I understand that we had a hearing March 28 and the day before you  
reached out to Clint Zane indicating you couldn’t attend. The correspondence has  
consistently been from Joanna Zimny, she is the correct contact for anything hearing  
related. At the last hearing MR. Zane had been out and determined the percentage.  
Clint Zane: it was less than 50% unless we can get the building permits---they hadn’t  
had a number of the trade inspections coming into this. It looks like it is probably at  
higher level of inspection, but because there are a number of permits that haven’t had  
any inspections done—the only electrical inspection that was done is for floor heat in  
the basement. There are a lot of other work that has been done, walls covered up. It is  
possible since were at the late state with none of those inspections completed, walls  
may need to be opened up. I’m in a weird spot as far as understanding.  
Moermond: your team’s eyes need to be on before you can determine a percentage.  
Zane: correct.  
Moermond: and the less than 50% is what communicates to me about the $5,000  
Performance Deposit. If its above 50% it is at the Department’s discretion to continue  
that Performance Deposit. After that it is up to the Council. I wanted you to have the  
opportunity to show you are past that 50%.  
Skliris: a couple of things to put out there. My understanding after speaking with Mr.  
Zane is I have numerous different inspectors who are no longer here. There is some  
problem with continuity. I spoke with Mr. Patten and his wife, my HVAC contractor,  
they are incredible. When they were aware there is no record of any permits and  
inspections, they were taken aback. He found all the receipts where it was inspected.  
We had heather who left a tag indicating it was inspected. I will acknowledge I was  
remote which didn’t help. I remember Herb talking to Cyrus, he was there when my  
plumbing passed. So now the onus is on them to produce this, but I have Reid Soley,  
Jim Seeger, Nathan Bruhn who inspected and all the walls were sheetrocked. There  
was cement board in the bathroom removed. Herb has built many homes. The night  
before Mr. Zane came, and he said to me this is the first time I’m in this house, so it is  
hard to see the progress without comparing where it was to now. What does help clarify  
is Mr. Smith said to me I was 90% done. I was flabbergasted to see Mr. Zane said  
less than 50%, then 50%, then back to it. Everything is almost done on this Code  
Compliance Inspection list. You have to go by your eyes on the ground, but I would  
argue it isn’t accurate.  
I do acknowledge again, part of the reason is because it is taken so long. I  
acknowledge that. But there has been significant progress. I’ve tried to be in  
communication. I explained to Mr. Zane how the trials worked. I felt it was important  
enough to be here, 3 hours round trip when I have a grand jury first degree murder  
inditement. We have the back porch and siding on the back, and the plumbing  
inspector can come back to look at the fixtures now the tiling is done.  
Moermond: this has been a Vacant Building since 2014 and you have had Code  
Compliance Inspection reports prior to the one we’re operating off of?  
Skliris: yes, and I wasn’t the homeowner since 2014.  
Moermond: so that’s the Jim Seeger era. He’s way retired. Reid Soley a few months.  
Mr. Zane, Nathan Bruhn is your boss and would be available to consult on this?  
Zane: if I could clarify, 2015 you had a Code Compliance report put together, that’s  
where my change of ownership disconnect came from. Then we have the newer Code  
Compliance report from July of 2021. When I go into the records regarding the permits  
pulled after the 2015 report there was one permit finaled for electric code compliance  
repairs. Other than that, we have a plumbing, 2 mechanical, and a warm air permit all  
which had expired before their inspections were done. Those were not satisfied.  
Moermond: I’m not sure who Heather is. It seems like we could use some more  
specific information from the trades inspectors. It seems to me that we need to figure  
out what our baseline is at this six-month juncture and the plan for getting it across the  
finish line. We need some inspections to occur. I’m hearing that there is agreement  
things have moved forward. We need to figure out those measures and make sure the  
people who pulled the permits---I don’t know their communication with inspectors and  
whether corrections were required. I want the inspectors to address those things. Are  
contractors all paid? Or are there outstanding balances?  
Skliris: there was a rough in plumbing that was passed. The HVAC and warm air is  
Patten heating and cooling and I am optimistic between them and the inspector they  
can show it was done. You said electrical was satisfied. Mr. Smith was there the day  
they did the air test and passed it. Yet there were no records when we spoke of that.  
Patten Heating and Cooling, my new furnace and AC went in, out of the 23,000, I have  
held 12,000. 6,000 is forthcoming tomorrow. Specifically, to clean my air ducts. That’s  
the balance, otherwise no outstanding balance.  
Moermond: and I only ask because in the same way at the beginning we have  
assurance we have plans and bids and money to execute it. At the mid-point we have  
the same thing, so we can show it isn’t lack of funds that has caused it to not be  
across the finish line. It is super common to hold back half, we want affirmation you  
are ready to go on those things.  
Skliris: shouldn’t’ be an issue. Mr. Patten said we won’t be done with the final until they  
can install the vented hood they pulled a permit for. That is still on order, 2 to 3 weeks  
out. That’s already in the bill. That’s what he needs, along with the duct work cleaning.  
Moermond: there needs to be conversations with trade’s inspectors so everyone can  
be on the same page. Those need to happen and get an update before we discuss an  
additional grant of time.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 4/12/2023  
RLH RR 23-15  
Third Making finding on the appealed substantial abatement ordered for  
655 JESSAMINE AVENUE EAST in Council File RLH RR 22-51.  
Grant additional 180 days, pending submission of updated evidence of financing  
($12,000) and updated affidavit.  
Wendy Ray, niece of owner, appeared  
Ray: and I want to state that we’re kind of in the same boat as 733 Fairview as far as  
permits. They are saying that there were no rough ins, yet we have had multiple rough  
ins. Electrical should have closed out last Friday, but didn’t because now they told us  
we had to install outlets in the kitchen. We didn’t make a new kitchen; we just  
replaced the cabinet. March 22 plumbing was closed. HVAC closed 5th. Electrical  
came the 7th and said everything was good except those outlets, and they’re to come  
out last week.  
Moermond: and I can think of a couple reasons with walls being opened up they may  
add that, I do know there is a proviso that work needs to be done to a current  
standard. It doesn’t help we started this conversation the beginning of 2021. Mr. Zane,  
can you summarize the permits?  
Zane: I will say right away it isn’t uncommon for me to hear people say my contractor  
said the inspections were done, when they haven’t. Whether or not their unclear on that  
because of a disconnect between the guy calling for inspections and the person at  
them. That is common, but that being said, plumbing is open for water heater hasn’t  
been inspected. I spoke with the inspector this morning, that was pulled after the Code  
Compliance plumbing repair was finaled. Then the water heater was installed, which  
needs to be inspected. There is also an electric permit pulled for a boiler, that hasn’t  
been inspected from December. Another electrical permit for Code Compliance repairs  
with no inspections. Two electrical permits, one for boiler, one for Code Compliance  
repairs. There hasn’t been a mechanical permit pulled.  
Moermond: I see that two permits were pulled December 1 that were finaled.  
Ray: I have HVAC closed April 5.  
Moermond: while that gets looked up, you provided a timeline for completing the work.  
This timeline has you needing to shell out a bit more money.  
Ray: I’m really looking to get that Performance Deposit released so it can be used—  
Moermond: it can’t. the finish line is the finish line for everyone. It does happen people  
will leave something like carpeting expenses that aren’t covered by the Code  
Compliance so the certificate is issued, but no I couldn’t’ do that. We would need  
demonstration of funds. Pay the contractors or show the funds to complete. $3,500  
Ray: we feel like this is on the contractor’s side, it is listed to remove the moisture and  
dry lock the basement. That may be something I have to address with them. IT is on  
their list and they committed to do this.  
Moermond: and that’s already paid?  
Ray: we owe the final 10%, which they get when they have the final inspection.  
Moermond: what does that 10% look like?  
Ray: $10,000. John has given you the bank statements, as the property manager I was  
trying to save some expenses and stress.  
Moermond: the bank statements are old; we would need fresh. Particularly because it’s  
a checking account, I’d want to see $12,000 to cover any change order.  
Ray: that shouldn’t be a problem  
Moermond: you bring that evidence of financing. We’ll send this to Council April 26. Mr.  
Zane is going to speak to his colleagues and then I’ll recommend that additional times.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 4/26/2023  
RLH RR 23-12  
Third Making finding on the appealed substantial abatement ordered for  
595 PARK STREET in Council File RLH RR 22-40.  
Grant additional 90 days to complete rehab. Continue $10,000 PD.  
Frank Viggiano, owner, appeared  
Hector Flores, contractor, appeared.  
Zane: I did see mechanical permits were pulled 3 days after the last hearing.  
Moermond: we have a $10,000 Performance Deposit hanging here. Your timeline says  
60 days. Hovering around 60% but the next 60 days will get you across the finish line. I  
will recommend the Council grants an additional 90 days to complete the project. We’ll  
send it to Council April 26 which give you to July 26. I’ll follow up on the file July 25.  
That will give me a report for the Council, I’ll be looking at it then and if it isn’t done  
we’ll be looking at forfeiting $5,000. Let’s get this done.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 4/26/2023  
RLH RR 23-18  
Fourth Making finding on the appealed substantial abatement ordered for  
318 EDMUND AVENUE in Council File RLH RR 22-26.  
Layover to LH April 25, 2023. PO must submit updated schedule and proof of financing  
by COB April 21, 2023.  
No one appeared  
Moermond: this is a no show hearing. We do not have an updated work plan, financing,  
anything at all including the Code Compliance certificate. I do have a letter sent  
indicating there is a hearing today to be present at. The letter has highlighted in red to  
call for an inspection. Mr. Zane did she call you?  
Zane: I was just out there with Nathan Bruhn on the 5th. 55%.  
Moermond: this goes to Council April 26 and I’ll ask staff to schedule a hearing April  
25. Otherwise, she needs to make a case to Council to send it back.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 4/26/2023  
RLH RR 23-17  
First Making finding on the appealed substantial abatement ordered for  
39 HILLTOP LANE in Council File RLH RR 22-53.  
Grant additional 180 days pending submission of updated work plan. Continue $5,000  
Tom Distad, owner, appeared via phone  
Zane: 75% progress.  
Moermond: that where you think you are at too Mr. Distad?  
Distad: when he came, but we’ve since closed out electric and mechanical. Hoping to  
have Mr. Zane out next week to close it out.  
Moermond: if you aren’t in that space, we’re looking for a plan to get it done and any  
outstanding money owed to contractors I need to see that available. Then I can ask  
Council to give an extension since you are so far along. This seems pretty straight  
forward. If you have concerns about making the deadline, file that paperwork.  
Distad: have you been notified the HVAC has been cleared out?  
Zane: no, I check on those when you call for final building inspection.  
Moermond: send that plan.  
Distad: no problem.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 4/26/2023  
RLH RR 23-19  
Making finding on the appealed substantial abatement ordered for 1457  
THIRD STREET EAST in Council File RLH RR 22-24. (Legislative  
Hearing on April 25, 2023)  
Layover to LH April 25, 2023 at 10 am. PO to submit updated work plan, updated bids  
if using different contractors, and updated proof of financing.  
No one appeared  
Voicemail left at 11:48 am: good morning this is Marcia Moermond from St. Paul City  
Council calling you about 1457 Third Street East. We are having a hearing on the  
progress to rehabilitate, my understanding is no permits have been pulled which puts  
you at 0% complete and as such I will recommend forfeiture of the Performance  
Deposit for sure. This goes to Council April 26. We’ll send a follow up letter with  
information on the kinds of things we look for in order to possibly get more time to  
complete. It is concerning where we are at with this.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 4/26/2023  
1:00 p.m. Hearings  
Vacant Building Registrations  
Appeal of David Sprangers to a Vacant Building Registration  
Requirement at 1859 GRAND AVENUE.  
Waive VB fee for 90 days (to July 21, 2023).  
David Sprangers, owner, appeared via phone  
[Moermond gives background of appeals process]  
Staff report by Supervisor Matt Dornfeld: made a Category 1 Vacant Building April  
2022 due to a fire. Currently we have active permits on file. The property has been  
maintained. The Vacant Building fee is coming due for the prospective year.  
Moermond: it looks like you’re going to be done next month, is that correct?  
Sprangers: it is about time, yes. That is what my contractor is saying. I believe him.  
This is my second contractor. They were very slow and ignoring a lot of other damage  
in the building and weren’t addressing it. The house has been rewired and replumbed  
and the framing was addressed. My understanding is the cabinets are ordered and  
ready to be picked up.  
Moermond: the most recent entry was March 20 there was a rough in on electrical.  
With respect to the Vacant Building fee, it seems to me that you will likely be done  
within 90 days of your renewal date, April 21. That takes us to July 21. Even with some  
corrections a 90-day waiver of the fee would cover you. Does that sound right?  
Sprangers: yes. I’d love to get back into my house.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 4/26/2023  
Appeal of Naw Reh to a Vacant Building Registration Requirement at  
Deny the appeal.  
Jason Vang, o/b/o owner Nah Reh, appeared via phone  
Vang: I’m representing and speaking for my mother-in-law, Nah Reh.  
[Moermond gives background of appeals process]  
Moermond: is Nah Reh the owner of the Hmong Market, LLC?  
Vang: yes, she is the owner.  
Moermond: she is that LLC?  
Vang: yes.  
Staff report by Supervisor Matt Dornfeld: was opened as a Category 2 Vacant Building  
April 2, 2021. We currently do have a team inspection on file. a building permit was  
issued November 8, 2022 that appears to be active. Unfortunately, we had to do a  
work order to remove snow and ice from the sidewalk on Feb 1, 2023, but other than  
that it has been maintained and secure. The annual Vacant Building fee came due on  
April 2, 2023.  
Moermond: why is Ms. Reh appealing?  
Vang: I just got into this with my current fiancé. Her ex-husband started this process.  
He didn’t pass on the fact that there was any vacant building registration. When I came  
on board I didn’t know we had to register that. I do remember talking to Mitch  
Imbertson. No one mentioned it being a vacant building. It has been a year and we  
haven’t got it up and running. I do know it has been vacant for almost 2 years, we are  
appealing because I wasn’t aware of it and it is a lot of money. We’ve been waiting for  
insurance and City to get the Code Compliance up to par. We are currently waiting for  
insurance to get bids from our contractor.  
Moermond: with respect to the Vacant Building registration, that has been in place  
since April of 2021. The notifications did go to Karen and Hmong Market, LLC. We just  
clarified that owner is Nah Reh. We know that mail has been getting there. No returned  
mail. I do have a couple of assessments that were previously appealed. Bottom line is  
I can see where you would think it would be nice if someone mentioned it, but the  
City’s obligation is with the owner of record, which did happen. The inspection report  
was generated September 1, 2022. That wasn’t even requested for a full year after the  
fire. You mentioned there was issues with insurance and contractors, I don’t know if  
this is useful or not but the building permit was pulled November 8, 2022 by Giertsen  
Company of Minnesota. They pulled a permit for $87,000 worth of work. That is out  
there. I don’t know anything beyond that. No inspection or any other trades permits  
pulled. Where are things at now? This is a long way in to still be talking with insurance.  
Vang: we are still waiting for insurance. They are waiting for some storm damage  
information. The City has requested us to have our Code Compliance up to date. That  
took us a while. When the inspection people came during 2022, right before July 4.  
Moermond: do you have the Code Compliance report from September 1, 2022?  
Vang: I do not.  
Moermond: we have an email address on your appeal. We can email that to you. Some  
people go to their insurance company with these Vacant Building fees, that may be a  
good avenue for your mother-in-law. I am not hearing you are going to be done any time  
soon. I’m sure that is frustrating. Is the insurance hiring the contractor? Or are you?  
Vang: we reached out to contractors. It is frustrating that we still haven’t got it up and  
running after 2 years.  
Moermond: I don’t know if I can do anything helpful besides asking Mr. Dornfeld  
putting a note in to continue to allow permits until the Vacant Building fee is paid. I’m  
thinking it may be useful to talk when this comes forward as a special tax  
assessment. If you can get these contractors going and the work done, I can look at  
prorating this down to something smaller. I strongly recommend going to the insurance  
company and presenting it as part of the damage you’ve experienced from the fire. This  
is triggered because of the fire.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 4/26/2023  
1:30 p.m. Hearings  
Orders To Vacate - Fire Certificate of Occupancy  
Appeal of Warren Enright, Tenant, to a Notice of Condemnation-Unfit for  
Human Habitation-Order to Vacate at 1355 EUSTIS STREET, UNIT #2.  
Recommendation forthcoming.  
Moermond: the inspection is tomorrow, April 12 at 10:30 am. We will wait to hear from  
the inspector about percent complete and amend the resolution with the  
recommendation accordingly and insert a vacate date if necessary and lay it over a  
week for the tenant to participate should he choose to do so.  
4/12/23 Update: Inspector Jack Toeller inspected the property and found that the  
owner has met the 25% on April 11, 2023 by reducing the excess storage. Ms.  
Moermond concurs with this assessment and will grant to May 11, 2023 for further  
reduction of another 25% (totaling 50% from current level).  
Referred to the City Council due back on 4/12/2023  
RLH VO 23-16  
Appeal of Monica Mogren to a Revocation of Fire Certificate of  
Occupancy and Order to Vacate at 1604 MARGARET STREET. (To  
refer to August 1, 2023 Legislative Hearing)  
Refer back to LH August 1, 2023 to check on status of property sale.  
Monica Mogren, owner, appeared  
[Moermond gives background of appeals process]  
Staff report by Supervisor Mitch Imbertson: one-unit residential building in our Fire  
Certificate of Occupancy program. Scheduled for a renewal inspection to get in the  
property. Some back and forth over a number of months, seven appointment letters  
went out. Not clear on what happened each time, at least once was rescheduled by  
staff. Others missed or rescheduled at your request. Eventually in March the inspector  
revoked the Certificate of Occupancy for failure to complete the renewal process and  
provide access for inspection. Comply or vacate date of April 19, to comply with  
allowing access for inspection and having new orders before renewing the Certificate of  
Occupancy. Looks like you were looking at putting the property for sale, if that is the  
case the property wouldn’t’ need a Certificate of Occupancy if it isn’t occupied however  
it wouldn’t meet the definition of owner-occupied to close out the file so the options are  
to close out inspection and issue the certificate or revoke the Certificate of Occupancy  
and then it could remain with a revoked Certificate of Occupancy, the risk would be  
whether the exterior and other conditions are maintained well enough to keep it out of  
the Vacant Building program.  
Mogren: May 31 I will be able to close and put it on the market two weeks from now.  
I’m painting the kitchen and adding trim. I’ve done everything myself. I think I have  
done a good job at being transparent with James Thomas. I’ve even invited him to the  
property; I am there every day working. I saw him sitting in the car one day, but when I  
went to say hello he drove away. I was in my arms waving my arms to talk to him. I  
really only have one point today, there doesn’t seem to be a condition or a space for  
someone to get out of the rental pool and say I’m selling the property and don’t need a  
Certificate of Occupancy. But I don’t want my name misconstrued in the record as  
someone who lost their Certificate of Occupancy when I’m selling and it isn’t  
necessary. I have tools all over. I wouldn’t pass an inspection. But in two weeks I will.  
But I will have a TISH inspection to meet City requirements. It is a double whammy for  
Moermond: I think you are right; this isn’t complicated. What we have is a disconnect  
in how the Fire Certificate of Occupancy program operates and the Vacant Building  
program operates. You want a category where instead of a revocation you’d be looking  
at more of an expiration. That isn’t a category that exists. You know you can’t rent it  
and aren’t intending too. The disconnect between the codes is that if you were to go  
into the Vacant Building program it would be going in without a documented set of  
orders. It would be referred for administrative reasons. The Vacant Building program  
has a distinct definition of what qualifies and without documented qualifications. Then  
it says unoccupied for 365 days.  
Mitchell: six months we’ve been trying to get in, but I don’t think it has been vacant  
that whole time.  
Mogren: November the 1.  
Moermond: it doesn’t matter in that if they don’t issue a Certificate of Occupancy it  
would show up as revoked and referred to a Vacant Building program and then you  
would get your appeal granted unless they documented other code violations. It is an  
in-between space. The computer system keeps us on track 99% of the time and every  
so often we have a square peg in a round hole. Not a great policy fit for your position.  
You’re thinking you’ll put this on the market in a month?  
Margaret: two to three weeks. At that time a nice compromise would be I apply and  
complete the TISH.  
Moermond: you have to do it anyway, so not a compromise.  
Mogren: in a timely way. Not in six months.  
Moermond: and the Certificate of Occupancy substitutes for the TISH. So, you don’t  
have to pay for both. Certificate of Occupancy is typically cheaper. I do hear that the  
traditional real estate market would look more for the TISH report and not be as  
familiar interpreting a Certificate of Occupancy report. You don’t want to do that and I  
respect that. Has your realtor indicated how long it will take to sell?  
Mogren: I sold one on Bush 3 months ago and it took eleven days.  
Imbertson: and you have no intention of renting it again?  
Mogren: no.  
Moermond: enforcement is stayed while this is under appeal. Nothing happens. You  
aren’t revoked. It is in a bubble. I’m going to send this to Council and ask them to  
refer it back to me in 3 months. We can assess at that juncture. If it has been sold  
and someone else is there, great. If they are turning it into a rental it gives us time to  
revisit. By closing the file, I haven’t closed the window on them having to do follow-up. I  
don’t want it lost in their shuffle but I don’t want a revocation while you’re doing this.  
Mogren: what happens to that revocation? Does that follow me as a renter?  
Moermond: no, no. If this comes back and all is squared away your appeal is granted.  
But I want the Fire Certificate of Occupancy folks to be aware. Granting it would mean  
it would be hard to trigger the follow up it needs for them. We’ll set it on the shelf for a  
few months and finish it then. I think this is appeal granted, but it is stayed until it is  
Referred to the City Council due back on 4/26/2023  
Appeal of Curtis Persson to a Fire Certificate of Occupancy Revocation  
and Order to Vacate at 1436 SNELLING AVENUE NORTH.  
Layover to LH April 25, 2023 at 1:30 p.m. PO to submit work plan by no later than  
noon Monday April 24.  
Curtis Persson, owner, appeared via phone  
Voicemail for Bardwell left at 2:44 PM: this is Marcia Moermond trying to reach Peter  
Persson and Melissa Bardwell from St. Paul City Council calling you about orders for  
1436 Snelling Avenue North.  
Moermond: we have your appeal and looked at it. You and your wife are planning on  
hiring some trades people. Then we have some cleaning issues. Have either of you  
been down to visit the property since all of this has been going on?  
Curtis Persson: we haven’t, no. Not for about 6 or 7 years.  
Moermond: we have construction, and electrical things to be dealt with. We have  
cleaning and too much storage. There has been improvement. It says you have  
contractors from up north?  
Curtis Persson: we’re looking into it. Talking to people. It is hard, they want the big  
money up in Brainerd. There was one coming down next week. We did make some  
Moermond: he did come down? Or not yet?  
Curtis Persson: right now, he is coming down next week. He sounded pretty definite.  
Moermond: is there money to pay these contractors needed to do the work?  
Curtis Persson: I can pay them.  
Staff report by Supervisor Mitchel Imbertson: this was referral which we previously  
heard in appeals. We have since had an application for provisional Certificate of  
Occupancy which was revoked for non-compliance. Inspection was done in March and  
the bed was removed from the basement and solid progress towards cleaning and  
reduction of items but not a lot else checked off the report. At that time a new letter  
was sent to comply or vacate by April 24. The primary items discussed previously of  
concern were the cleaning and reduction of the storage, but there are a number of  
other corrections that need to be taken care of. That is what you’re working with the  
contractors on I believe. Some do require licensed contractors like the electrical. I’m a  
little concerned about coming to a plan for ongoing cleaning. I understand there was  
some assistance with House Calls to get the cleaning done initially but with the  
number of animals in the property and ongoing contributing factors, it will be a  
continuing process to keep it clean. Not just a one-time deep clean.  
Curtis Persson: yes.  
Moermond: let’s give another call to the number we have.  
[Voicemail for Bardwell left at 2:52: this is Marcia Moermond again trying to reach  
Peter Persson or Melissa Bardwell. We’ll copy you on the follow-up letter on this]  
Moermond: I talked to your son and his girlfriend and I’m thinking we need a work plan.  
Something specific about when these items will be addressed, and by whom. For  
example, you have an electrical contractor, ABC Electric and there is a timeline on  
when they would do that work. I’m looking for some assurance they will be taken care  
of and the best assurance I have is if someone has through thought the process and  
worked it out versus sorting it through. Is that something you can do with your son and  
Curtis Persson: we’re ready to roll. We have that carpenter coming down.  
Moermond: and we have carpentry, electric. Cleaning.  
Curtis Persson: listen, we started cleaning. The electrician might be harder.  
Moermond: the orders have 33 items on it. What may work is to look at those 33 items  
and write down what you will do to address it, who will do it, and by when. Throw some  
rope around it.  
Curtis Persson: you have to understand—  
Moermond: I think I understand pretty thoroughly. We have to get this under control.  
The City has shown a lot of grace in not ordering this vacated. I need a plan on paper.  
A commitment, a good faith commitment in writing. That will help me immensely in  
helping you. I want to. I wouldn’t have talked to them so long at the Council Public  
Hearing if I didn’t think it was doable. I hear someone is coming down next week, so 2  
weeks at the earliest.  
Curtis Persson: he has the list of 33 items and he has gone through those one at a  
time, I can do this and this. He has looked at it. He has done some of it. Peter has  
done some I believe. You sent pictures before. But he never got them.  
Moermond: Mai Vang mailed those pictures to your son on the date you filed the  
appeal. A large yellow envelope—  
Mai Vang: I sent to Curtis.  
Moermond: Melissa Bardwell got the photos in an email. I do remember talking to your  
son and saying the way to contact him was through her email. It would have come from  
Greg Weiner in our office.  
Curtis Persson: we kept asking Peter and he said he didn’t get them. Maybe he didn’t  
know that.  
Moermond: we’re pretty far afield here. We need you to work with your son and get  
some firm answers on when and whom these items will be dealt with. And things taken  
care of can be noted in that plan. Is that plan something you can tackle?  
Curtis Persson: that would be fine.  
Moermond: you have the March 22 orders. We can email them also to the email  
address so she has them in case they want to write on them and you can coordinate.  
Have a draft plan first thing into our office by Monday April 24 before we talk Tuesday  
afternoon the 25th.  
Laid Over to the Legislative Hearings due back on 4/25/2023