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, May 2, 2023

3:00 PM

Room 330 City Hall & Court House/Remote

Garbage Hearings

3:00 p.m. Hearings

Special Tax Assessments

RLH TA 23-160

Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 114

SNELLING AVENUE NORTH. (File No. CG2301A2, Assessment No.

230106)

Balenger

Sponsors:

Approve the assessment.

John Hageman, owner, appeared via phone

Moermond: we are following up on your property at 114 Snelling. I was going back to

look at the old record of your previous appeal and also reviewing the Unoccupied

Dwelling Registration Form and Service hold forms and how they read and the

expectation around them. Going back to the previous appeal you filed, it would appear

that you had filed for a temporary service hold and the unit was vacant. You had a

neighbor who was willing to say it was vacant. It was earlier on in the garbage hauling

program. We have that hold that expired, and then I’m getting from the record that at

that point it was pretty much that City staff told you needed to fill the form and thought

speaking to staff was enough. I thought at that time city staff did their job and I also

found you were acting in good faith in calling and the thing different here, not that you

aren’t acting in good faith, but that you have better information since you’ve gone

through this in the past and know expectations and the City has a better management

system for tracking calls and emails. I’m struggling with a temp service hold form

having been filed with Waste Management that expired August 14 and you calling to

have another one put in place and they said they couldn’t’ do one that soon and you

should fill out an Unoccupied Dwelling Registration Form. They sent you to the City and

the City has no records of you reaching out and filling out that form.

Hageman: no one ever mentioned a “vacant building” form. I have the form filled out in

front of me doesn’t pertain to any rental property. The building wasn’t vacant, just the

unit was. I was paying for service for that.

Moermond: and I didn’t mean to imply the building was vacant. It does apply also to

units.

Hageman: there was no one on vacation, no one ill, it wasn’t rented. I filled out a form

12/10/21 and end date I said until it is rented. I sent that in. they have all the

information on that form other than the start and end date. Nothing on that form refers

to what I needed and no one ever mentioned anything about this other form you’re

talking about.

Moermond: Waste Management says they did.

Hageman: they didn’t. I’m telling you didn’t. this shouldn’t be this complicated. The

discussion shouldn’t’ be about forms, it should be about whether I owe for a service I

didn’t require or use. Go over there now if you think I am a liar. I worked for the City for

30 years. Is it supposed to be better customer service, this whole deal with trash is

like doing taxes or getting a root canal. It should be simple. In the past all I did was

call my hauler and set up delivery and cancel it when I didn’t need it. Now I get a bill

sometimes and then get another from the City. They were sending the bills to the

wrong address too, just like the notice for this hearing. I shouldn’t owe it. I didn’t

receive the service. That past one I paid $300 or $400 before I even went through this

process for not receiving service. Marcia, do you think I’m lying?

Moermond: if I happen to pay for a parking space at the Victory ramp, if I say I wasn’t

parking there between July and February, I shouldn’t have to pay the bills for that time.

You should refund me. I wasn’t there, I don’t want to pay. The thing is the guy at the

desk is going to tell me he needed to know ahead of time so he could have that space

available for someone else. The same concept applies here in terms of having the

truck do its rounds and expectations for billing. I’m not hearing the paperwork was

filled out correctly, but you are looking for an understanding since no one was living

there and you were trying to communicate that. That is what I’m hearing. I do know that

the information on what needs to be done is available. I’m also hearing you didn’t hear

that from the people you talked to.

Hageman: if the Unoccupied Dwelling Registration Form was available to me I would

have filled it out. I don’t care what the people said. It was never brought up or offered

as an option. The only option was this other one that has nothing that applies to the

unit not being rented. This is off campus student housing.

Moermond: you got a break before; you have some responsibility. I’m reading the

notes from the hearing about the 2 different kinds of forms and you have some

culpability as a professional property manager to manage this situation. No, we aren’t

talking about a ton of money. I know you think this is a customer service problem on

the part of the city. I hear you concerned that the notices going to the wrong place,

they do that because that is the address Ramsey County taxation has for you.

Hageman: they have the right address.

Moermond: so who has the right address?

Hageman: I’ll get them, then the next one I won’t-

[Hageman is disconnected or hung up]

Moermond: the charge was for one unit and a 96-gallon container?

Pillsbury; yes.

Moermond: I think he is responsible for this; I’ll recommend approval.

Referred to the City Council due back on 5/24/2023

RLH TA 23-192

Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 2234

MARGARET STREET. (File No. CG2302A2, Assessment No. )

Prince

Sponsors:

Delete the assessment.

No one appeared

Moermond: this is being deleted why?

Staff report by Lydia Campbell: Property owner stated that they contacted Republic

Services about the assessed late fee. The customer service representative that they

spoke with stated that the late fee may have been a mistake. Hauler records show that

instead of removing the late fee, they had added a credit of $2.70 to the Quarter 1,

2023 invoice. However, the hauler did request that the assessed amount be removed

as a courtesy.

Moermond: so recommended.

Laid Over to the Legislative Hearings due back on 7/6/2023

RLH TA 23-193

Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 1391

PLEASANT AVENUE. (File No. CG2301A1; Assessment No. 230105)

Tolbert

Sponsors:

Reduce assessment from $80.31 to $69.84.

Staff report by Clare Pillsbury: Property owner states that Waste Management cashed

check #11436 for $263.00 back in October that the property owner sent as payment

for her Quarter 4, 2022 invoices for both 1391 Pleasant Ave ($69.84) and 698

Randolph Ave ($196.16). This was indicated by the fact that they included the payment

stubs for both invoices in the same envelope with the check. However, they started to

receive notices of nonpayment for 1391 Pleasant Avenue. The property owner then

called Waste Management and was told that the account for 696 Randolph got credited

for the invoiced amount of $196.16. However, Waste Management stated that they

never received any payments for 1391 Pleasant Ave. Therefore, the property owner

wants to know what happened to the $69.84 that was supposed to cover the invoice for

1391 Pleasant Ave.

Staff confirmed with Waste Management that the $69.84 was applied to a different

account not associated with the property owner. As of April 26, 2023 this amount has

been credited to the property owner's account and will be applied to their next invoice.

While staff cannot recommend removing the assessment in full, they do recommend

removing the late fees $10.47 since the property owner did send the payment on time.

This would reduce the assessment to the original invoiced amount of $69.84.

Moermond: so recommend the reduction.

Referred to the City Council due back on 5/24/2023