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  
651-266-8585  
Tuesday, August 1, 2023  
9:00 AM  
Room 330 City Hall & Court House/Remote  
9:00 a.m. Hearings  
Special Tax Assessments  
1
RLH TA 23-279  
Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 698  
DESOTO STREET. (File No. VB2310 Assessment No. 238113)  
Brendmoen  
Sponsors:  
Delete the assessment.  
No one appeared  
Moermond: this is for a Vacant Building fee, this looks straightforward. Code  
Compliance certificate issued?  
Supervisor Joe Yannarelly: Code Compliance certificate issued less than 7 weeks after  
the anniversary date.  
Moermond: we agree deletion in that situation.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 9/13/2023  
2
RLH TA 23-283  
Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 1762  
ENGLEWOOD AVENUE. (File No. VB2310, Assessment No. 238813)  
Jalali  
Sponsors:  
Approve the assessment.  
Mike Mortimer, owner, appeared via phone  
[Moermond tries to give background and intro]  
Mortimer: the abandoned building thing is a joke, ma’am, I’m there almost every day. I  
pay the water, electric, taxes, and then the City comes along to rip me off for $2,500  
every three months.  
Moermond: it isn’t every three months and it is a registered Vacant Building as a result  
of being condemned from the fire.  
Staff report by Supervisor Joe Yannarelly: this is the annual Vacant Building fee that  
was due on December 2021, next year’s fee will be twice this much.  
Moermond: this is a Category 1 though, because it’s a fire?  
Mortimer: why is it a Category 1? If you go to the Fire Department and get the tapes,  
they put the fire out in 15 minutes. I know no one wants to listen to any of this.  
Moermond: it was originally opened as a Category 1 Vacant Building because all  
buildings that have a fire are, under the presumption that necessary repairs will be  
done under supervision of insurance. That is the simplest, easiest, category for  
someone to have. That’s the one you want to have. You have converted to be a  
Category 2, my question to staff was when did that happen and how? You were a  
Category 1 for a long time. I don’t know it has any functional difference at all from  
where you sit because you’re going to be done with the rehab within the next year, I am  
assuming. Where are things at? We did do a three-month waiver last spring. I know  
you were hopeful you’d be further along. How are your contractors doing?  
Mortimer: we have the lower unit, 20% of the building, is in good shape. It is a  
150-year-old building. As soon as Rest Pro gutted the building—  
Moermond: we’ve been down this road--  
Mortimer: I know you don’t want to hear the truth.  
Moermond: we’ve had this conversation twice before. We told you file a formal  
complaint with Steve Magner and we checked before today’s hearing, you did not do  
that.  
Mortimer: I’ve never gotten anything form the City in the way of help, I’ve only ever  
gotten harassment. I applied for a building permit and got one only because of you. It  
was a year after the demolishing. One of Rest Pro’s syndicates the City has said they  
had to find out if I you need a sprinkler system and when they sent the 7 people out to  
inspect, some were pretty nice, but then the building inspector said you can’t be in  
here working because I didn’t have a permit. I asked if Rest Pro needed a permit to  
demolish? I never signed anything. The morning of the fire my kid died, Rest Pro  
showed up and I signed something and the guy lied to me. Told me they do everything  
to take care of the building. I had two people sleeping in the building, fire alarms never  
even went off. No smoke in the building. The only thing the City is interested in, I don’t  
know, in screwing the people that have buildings in the City. I work there every day and  
no one from the City ever shows up.  
Moermond: you’re yelling at me but I need to know what is happening in terms of  
getting this back online? What is the timeline?  
Mortimer: I had to jack up the building and get the floors straight, put in new floors. It  
is hard to describe. I have a guy that works with me that’s d*mn good and he and I  
jacked the whole basement up. No one from the City comes to see, they just---I’m not  
b*ching at you—but there’s nothing the City does to help out someone that’s---all the  
did is send Rest Pro to destroy the building.  
Moermond: and you didn’t file a complaint. You can still do that. You can sue Rest  
Pro. Steve Magner, we can give you his contact information again. That has nothing to  
do with them being able to represent they can do Rehabs and the City recommends.  
Quite the opposite. If that is what happened, the contract says they can’t do that.  
Mortimer: the contract says they can’t do that the day of the fire.  
Moermond: I am frustrated you keep bringing this up but don’t do things to address it.  
Me hearing your story once again isn’t going to change its path. You need to file a  
complaint if you want to change how this moves forward with Rest Pro. I want you go  
finish the rehab and get to the other side of this. You got a 90-day waiver earlier this  
year, that expired and that’s why we’re talking about the Vacant Building fee this year.  
I’m struggling to find out if you will be done by the time the anniversary comes up again  
the end of December. Will it be done by then? I’m rooting for you to have that be the  
case. I’d like you to have a contact in inspections.  
Mortimer: can you tell me Magner’s cell phone number?  
Moermond: [spells Mr. Magner’s name]. His number is 651-266-1928 and he is at his  
desk every day from 6 am to 9 am. Then he is in the field and works at different places  
throughout the City. He’s hard to reach by phone after 9 am. You’re best trying to get  
him then. If you leave him a Voicemail he will call you back.  
Mortimer: I’ve done all of that. I’ve told him numerous times, but that’s fine.  
Moermond: he says he hasn’t heard from you. You need to say—  
Mortimer: I was on his phone a year ago I bet, never heard from him. Never seen him, I  
know that.  
Moermond: I have this fee that went to assessment, 7 months into the 12-month  
billable year. I’m trying to figure out how we can get you out of the Vacant Building  
program as fast as possible. It may help for you to have a contact in inspections would  
be who?  
Yannarelly: Clint Zane would be a good person to start with.  
Moermond: [gives Clint Zane’s phone number] Jim Perucca is also your contact from  
Fire Inspection.  
Mortimer: do you understand that they gutted the building?  
Moermond: yes, sir.  
Mortimer: then the list they sent was ridiculous. Because they sent a list about  
bathrooms and kitchens. They were gone.  
Moermond: and if that stuff is gone, you have a claim against Rest Pro. You need to  
pursue this against them and look for financial compensation from them through the  
Court system.  
Mortimer: Rest Pro sued me for $78,000 because they wanted the money for  
demolishing the building. They sued me. I got a lawyer and we wrote them a letter and  
told them about a building in Minneapolis they did the same thing too, and they didn’t  
back down at all. They have a big law firm. They wanted that $78,000 and I got a  
lawyer and my lawyer said I have to pay them something. I sent them a check for  
$25,000.  
Moermond: and that’s your lawyer and the way you handle business. That’s a private  
argument. I’m not your lawyer. All the City can do is say “hey, Rest Pro, you may have  
said things that represent us, and our contract says you can’t say that.” Write a letter,  
do something to take steps to make that claim. That still won’t put money in your  
pocket. I can’t get you over the finish line based on the history you’re telling me.  
Mortimer: I signed something saying I said I would never sue them.  
Moermond: I can’t do anything about that, I didn’t have anything to do with that. You  
may want to talk to your attorney before sending a complaint to the City. Run it by your  
attorney to make sure you should even send it. That is a private decision for you to  
make. Get that private advice. I need to come back to the Vacant Building fee. We’ve  
covered this in 3 previous hearings. I’m sorry you’re in it and I’m sorry you had a fire  
and lost your son. I am so sorry that happened. I really want this to be the last time we  
talk about a Vacant Building fee and a story of success in getting this fixed and  
working and generating income. I’m at a loss besides talking to inspectors, getting  
some information from them.  
Mortimer: I sent a letter to the Mayor of St. Paul on the lawyer’s thing, and I never  
heard back from the Mayor or any of his people.  
Moermond: I’m afraid I don’t work for the Mayor’s office, so I can’t speak to that. I have  
no idea how they deal with those types of concerns.  
Mortimer: I called my City Councilperson and got an answering machine and told them  
about it. They never called me back either. Who do I file a complaint with?  
Zimny: a letter was sent July 12, 2022 with contact information for Steve Magner to file  
a formal complaint.  
Mortimer: can you send those again? I don’t have any complaints against you.  
Moermond: and we’re trying to get you to the other side.  
Yannarelly: where are you progress-wise with the rehab?  
Mortimer: we fixed the floors and beams and sistered all the joints on the second floor.  
I worked with an engineer on that. The City never comes.  
Moermond: did you call for an inspection? The guy you can call is Clint Zane. I would  
say that would be a great call to make. We’ll send you a follow up letter with all this  
information and hopefully you can get all this done and start the new year fresh. I’ll  
personally ask Clint Zane if he will visit the property and check in with you about things  
he’s looking for and his thoughts.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 9/13/2023  
10:00 a.m. Hearings  
Special Tax Assessments  
3
RLH TA 23-181  
Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 399  
BLAIR AVENUE. (File No. J2307E3, Assessment No. 238322) (To refer  
to August 1, 2023 Legislative Hearing)  
Balenger  
Sponsors:  
Approve the assessment and make payable over 2 years.  
Ki Ki, interpreter, appeared  
Nyar Pwo, owner, appeared  
[Moermond gives background of appeals process]  
Staff report by Supervisor Lisa Martin: October 12, 2022 a Correction Order was sent  
regarding inoperable and unlicensed vehicles on the property. Compliance date was  
October 26, 2022. This was an Excessive Consumption fine for noncompliance, total  
assessment of $159. Today we have four separate Excessive Consumption fines, for  
noncompliance of the orders, not removing the vehicles from the property. One issued  
November 10, 2022, the next November 28, 2022, another January 6, 2023 and the  
fourth February 6, 2023. We had a lot of fees until the owner finally called Inspector  
Kedrowski and finally resolved the issue.  
Moermond: Chronologically we have bills for noncompliance with the orders for  
inspections occurring November 10, November 28, December 7 and January 6,  
January 24 and February 6. Ms. Martin, if you want to talk about those being bills for  
what exactly?  
Martin: each one of the bills are for Excessive Consumption of City services, where we  
had to go reinspect each time for compliance, and finding noncompliance.  
Moermond: we have orders indicating there are too many vehicles on the property  
lacking current licenses and appear to be in some state of repair. Also, commercial  
vehicles that indicate it was a car repair business.  
Moermond: that is correct, and during the winter he plowed his entire car from snow  
and parked even more vehicles.  
Pwo: I few months ago I started removing the cars that didn’t belong to me. Then  
friends brought a car that wasn’t working. I don’t put the commercial vehicles at the  
house anymore.  
Moermond: and you spoke with the inspector and understood the problem with the car  
repair happening there?  
Pwo: I don’t do car repair; they donated my car to me. I can go to the shop to repair my  
car.  
Moermond: Ms. Martin, do your records indicate when he spoke with the inspector  
about it?  
Martin: it was a couple of months ago. Parking inoperable vehicles throughout the  
yard. Cars were in pieces. Many not registered to the property. Parked on unapproved  
surface. This has been an ongoing issue since 2012 that just recently came into  
compliance.  
Moermond: what were you thinking when you got the letters from the City? The original  
orders saying you can’t have the cars there, that would be last October, then all the  
bills because the cars were still there. Why didn’t you come into compliance earlier, or  
call? Take some action?  
Pwo: it was a lot of work, having to deal and move them in the snow. I couldn’t reach  
anyone. Then I finally went to 375 Jackson.  
Moermond: there wasn’t snow when the original orders were issued back in October.  
Pwo: October I didn’t know I had a letter. After the letter came in November in  
December I got a lot of cars coming to the yard.  
Moermond: in the past, there have been orders to stop doing illegal car repair in the  
yard. You bought your house in 2012 it looks like, and in 2018 there were a lot of  
orders and work with the City around illegal car repair then. I’m thinking this isn’t a new  
issue to you and not new types of orders. You weren’t getting something you weren’t  
familiar with.  
Pwo: I moved in 2013. I worked at a car repair shop in New Brighton, I brought some of  
the cars to my current homes. I tried to find a car repair shop near my house. I started  
repairing cars. I’m getting rid of the cars that don’t belong to me because of the law  
that says you can’t repair cars at your home.  
Moermond: but it happened in 2018 and again in 2022.  
Pwo: I started getting rid of the cars when I got the 2022 notice, but I’m the only one  
who does it so it took a lot of time. Most of the cars that don’t belong to me are gone  
now.  
Moermond: I’m reviewing aerial photos that are taken every couple of years to see if I  
can get any understanding.  
Pwo: before I moved here, one of the auto repair owners owned a house there and kept  
cars there. There wasn’t a problem then, but it became a problem after I moved in.  
The owner left some of his cars there.  
Moermond: I’m looking at Google image photos, and I see cars throughout the years.  
Martin: the inspector did just let me know that during the issuance of these orders  
vehicles continued to be brought onto the property. When he called Inspector  
Kedrowski he spoke very good English and they were able to resolve the issues after  
that.  
Moermond: 2018 shows only 5 cars on the property. I’m assuming that was after you  
talked with the inspector in 2018. 9 vehicles in 2019.  
Pwo: they belonged to the renter who lived with me.  
Moermond: we’ve established a pattern. You’re saying you weren’t operating a  
business, rather your friends are giving you cars to do with them what you want to.  
What are you looking for today, Mr. Pwo?  
Pwo: I just came to hear your opinions and suggestions so I can stop getting letters  
from the City.  
Moermond: honestly the best way to not receive letters from the City is not have a tow  
truck and a ton of cars in your yard.  
Pwo: I got rid of the tow truck and commercial cars, the only cars left are the ones I  
collect for the show for when my kids grow up.  
Moermond: Ms. Martin, any comments on what he can do moving forward to not get  
these bills?  
Martin: make sure they’re parked on an approved surface, parked legally, licensed to  
the home. Keep tow trucks and commercial vehicles off of the property.  
Pwo: after I got the letter I tried to get rid of the cars, but after I parked it I got another  
letter saying it should face the house. While I was doing that I got another letter. I’m  
the only one living there and have no help, so I don’t have enough time to finish  
everything. Is there anything you can do to help with the bill? I am also building a  
fence, there’s been shootings and I want to protect my house and have safety.  
Moermond: that doesn’t sound good. It sounds like building the fence was a good  
choice for your circumstances, pulling the permit is great. I hope it does increase  
safety at your house. It doesn’t impact the situation with the number of vehicles you  
can have or the car repair situation, whether or not there is a fence there. The total  
assessment is $884 between the four different ones. I would be more flexible on  
reducing this except for your experience four years ago. You knew the laws. If the  
Council ratifies these assessments, they would be invoiced within a couple of weeks of  
the Council Public Hearing, you will get a bill then. If it goes unpaid it will be on your  
2024 taxes, so it wouldn’t immediately be due. Because of the history I’m going to  
recommend they approve these assessments. I can request they make it payable over  
two years, that would be half 2024 and half 2025 taxes. I can ask that of them if you  
want me too. If you want it decreased from $884 downward, the Council may disagree  
with me and lower it.  
Pwo: over two years, please.  
Moermond: I can do that. If you want something different you can ask Council for that.  
If it is an email we can have that translated, if you come in person we can have an  
interpreter there.  
Pwo: I will testify in person.  
Moermond: sounds good, we will have an interpreter on September 13th.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 9/13/2023  
4
RLH TA 23-182  
Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 399  
BLAIR AVENUE. (File No. J2308E1, Assessment No. 238323) (To refer  
to August 1, 2023 Legislative Hearing)  
Balenger  
Sponsors:  
Approve the assessment and make payable over 2 years.  
Ki Ki, interpreter, appeared  
Nyar Pwo, owner, appeared  
[Moermond gives background of appeals process]  
Staff report by Supervisor Lisa Martin: October 12, 2022 a Correction Order was sent  
regarding inoperable and unlicensed vehicles on the property. Compliance date was  
October 26, 2022. This was an Excessive Consumption fine for noncompliance, total  
assessment of $159. Today we have four separate Excessive Consumption fines, for  
noncompliance of the orders, not removing the vehicles from the property. One issued  
November 10, 2022, the next November 28, 2022, another January 6, 2023 and the  
fourth February 6, 2023. We had a lot of fees until the owner finally called Inspector  
Kedrowski and finally resolved the issue.  
Moermond: Chronologically we have bills for noncompliance with the orders for  
inspections occurring November 10, November 28, December 7 and January 6,  
January 24 and February 6. Ms. Martin, if you want to talk about those being bills for  
what exactly?  
Martin: each one of the bills are for Excessive Consumption of City services, where we  
had to go reinspect each time for compliance, and finding noncompliance.  
Moermond: we have orders indicating there are too many vehicles on the property  
lacking current licenses and appear to be in some state of repair. Also, commercial  
vehicles that indicate it was a car repair business.  
Moermond: that is correct, and during the winter he plowed his entire car from snow  
and parked even more vehicles.  
Pwo: I few months ago I started removing the cars that didn’t belong to me. Then  
friends brought a car that wasn’t working. I don’t put the commercial vehicles at the  
house anymore.  
Moermond: and you spoke with the inspector and understood the problem with the car  
repair happening there?  
Pwo: I don’t do car repair; they donated my car to me. I can go to the shop to repair my  
car.  
Moermond: Ms. Martin, do your records indicate when he spoke with the inspector  
about it?  
Martin: it was a couple of months ago. Parking inoperable vehicles throughout the  
yard. Cars were in pieces. Many not registered to the property. Parked on unapproved  
surface. This has been an ongoing issue since 2012 that just recently came into  
compliance.  
Moermond: what were you thinking when you got the letters from the City? The original  
orders saying you can’t have the cars there, that would be last October, then all the  
bills because the cars were still there. Why didn’t you come into compliance earlier, or  
call? Take some action?  
Pwo: it was a lot of work, having to deal and move them in the snow. I couldn’t reach  
anyone. Then I finally went to 375 Jackson.  
Moermond: there wasn’t snow when the original orders were issued back in October.  
Pwo: October I didn’t know I had a letter. After the letter came in November in  
December I got a lot of cars coming to the yard.  
Moermond: in the past, there have been orders to stop doing illegal car repair in the  
yard. You bought your house in 2012 it looks like, and in 2018 there were a lot of  
orders and work with the City around illegal car repair then. I’m thinking this isn’t a new  
issue to you and not new types of orders. You weren’t getting something you weren’t  
familiar with.  
Pwo: I moved in 2013. I worked at a car repair shop in New Brighton, I brought some of  
the cars to my current homes. I tried to find a car repair shop near my house. I started  
repairing cars. I’m getting rid of the cars that don’t belong to me because of the law  
that says you can’t repair cars at your home.  
Moermond: but it happened in 2018 and again in 2022.  
Pwo: I started getting rid of the cars when I got the 2022 notice, but I’m the only one  
who does it so it took a lot of time. Most of the cars that don’t belong to me are gone  
now.  
Moermond: I’m reviewing aerial photos that are taken every couple of years to see if I  
can get any understanding.  
Pwo: before I moved here, one of the auto repair owners owned a house there and kept  
cars there. There wasn’t a problem then, but it became a problem after I moved in.  
The owner left some of his cars there.  
Moermond: I’m looking at Google image photos, and I see cars throughout the years.  
Martin: the inspector did just let me know that during the issuance of these orders  
vehicles continued to be brought onto the property. When he called Inspector  
Kedrowski he spoke very good English and they were able to resolve the issues after  
that.  
Moermond: 2018 shows only 5 cars on the property. I’m assuming that was after you  
talked with the inspector in 2018. 9 vehicles in 2019.  
Pwo: they belonged to the renter who lived with me.  
Moermond: we’ve established a pattern. You’re saying you weren’t operating a  
business, rather your friends are giving you cars to do with them what you want to.  
What are you looking for today, Mr. Pwo?  
Pwo: I just came to hear your opinions and suggestions so I can stop getting letters  
from the City.  
Moermond: honestly the best way to not receive letters from the City is not have a tow  
truck and a ton of cars in your yard.  
Pwo: I got rid of the tow truck and commercial cars, the only cars left are the ones I  
collect for the show for when my kids grow up.  
Moermond: Ms. Martin, any comments on what he can do moving forward to not get  
these bills?  
Martin: make sure they’re parked on an approved surface, parked legally, licensed to  
the home. Keep tow trucks and commercial vehicles off of the property.  
Pwo: after I got the letter I tried to get rid of the cars, but after I parked it I got another  
letter saying it should face the house. While I was doing that I got another letter. I’m  
the only one living there and have no help, so I don’t have enough time to finish  
everything. Is there anything you can do to help with the bill? I am also building a  
fence, there’s been shootings and I want to protect my house and have safety.  
Moermond: that doesn’t sound good. It sounds like building the fence was a good  
choice for your circumstances, pulling the permit is great. I hope it does increase  
safety at your house. It doesn’t impact the situation with the number of vehicles you  
can have or the car repair situation, whether or not there is a fence there. The total  
assessment is $884 between the four different ones. I would be more flexible on  
reducing this except for your experience four years ago. You knew the laws. If the  
Council ratifies these assessments, they would be invoiced within a couple of weeks of  
the Council Public Hearing, you will get a bill then. If it goes unpaid it will be on your  
2024 taxes, so it wouldn’t immediately be due. Because of the history I’m going to  
recommend they approve these assessments. I can request they make it payable over  
two years, that would be half 2024 and half 2025 taxes. I can ask that of them if you  
want me too. If you want it decreased from $884 downward, the Council may disagree  
with me and lower it.  
Pwo: over two years, please.  
Moermond: I can do that. If you want something different you can ask Council for that.  
If it is an email we can have that translated, if you come in person we can have an  
interpreter there.  
Pwo: I will testify in person.  
Moermond: sounds good, we will have an interpreter on September 13th.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 9/13/2023  
5
RLH TA 23-183  
Amending the previously ratified assessment to ratify the assessment for  
Excessive Use of Inspection or Abatement services billed during  
December 23, 2022 to January 19, 2023 at 399 BLAIR AVENUE. (File  
No. J2309E, Assessment No. 238311)  
Balenger  
Sponsors:  
Approve the assessment and make payable over 2 years.  
Ki Ki, interpreter, appeared  
Nyar Pwo, owner, appeared  
[Moermond gives background of appeals process]  
Staff report by Supervisor Lisa Martin: October 12, 2022 a Correction Order was sent  
regarding inoperable and unlicensed vehicles on the property. Compliance date was  
October 26, 2022. This was an Excessive Consumption fine for noncompliance, total  
assessment of $159. Today we have four separate Excessive Consumption fines, for  
noncompliance of the orders, not removing the vehicles from the property. One issued  
November 10, 2022, the next November 28, 2022, another January 6, 2023 and the  
fourth February 6, 2023. We had a lot of fees until the owner finally called Inspector  
Kedrowski and finally resolved the issue.  
Moermond: Chronologically we have bills for noncompliance with the orders for  
inspections occurring November 10, November 28, December 7 and January 6,  
January 24 and February 6. Ms. Martin, if you want to talk about those being bills for  
what exactly?  
Martin: each one of the bills are for Excessive Consumption of City services, where we  
had to go reinspect each time for compliance, and finding noncompliance.  
Moermond: we have orders indicating there are too many vehicles on the property  
lacking current licenses and appear to be in some state of repair. Also, commercial  
vehicles that indicate it was a car repair business.  
Moermond: that is correct, and during the winter he plowed his entire car from snow  
and parked even more vehicles.  
Pwo: I few months ago I started removing the cars that didn’t belong to me. Then  
friends brought a car that wasn’t working. I don’t put the commercial vehicles at the  
house anymore.  
Moermond: and you spoke with the inspector and understood the problem with the car  
repair happening there?  
Pwo: I don’t do car repair; they donated my car to me. I can go to the shop to repair my  
car.  
Moermond: Ms. Martin, do your records indicate when he spoke with the inspector  
about it?  
Martin: it was a couple of months ago. Parking inoperable vehicles throughout the  
yard. Cars were in pieces. Many not registered to the property. Parked on unapproved  
surface. This has been an ongoing issue since 2012 that just recently came into  
compliance.  
Moermond: what were you thinking when you got the letters from the City? The original  
orders saying you can’t have the cars there, that would be last October, then all the  
bills because the cars were still there. Why didn’t you come into compliance earlier, or  
call? Take some action?  
Pwo: it was a lot of work, having to deal and move them in the snow. I couldn’t reach  
anyone. Then I finally went to 375 Jackson.  
Moermond: there wasn’t snow when the original orders were issued back in October.  
Pwo: October I didn’t know I had a letter. After the letter came in November in  
December I got a lot of cars coming to the yard.  
Moermond: in the past, there have been orders to stop doing illegal car repair in the  
yard. You bought your house in 2012 it looks like, and in 2018 there were a lot of  
orders and work with the City around illegal car repair then. I’m thinking this isn’t a new  
issue to you and not new types of orders. You weren’t getting something you weren’t  
familiar with.  
Pwo: I moved in 2013. I worked at a car repair shop in New Brighton, I brought some of  
the cars to my current homes. I tried to find a car repair shop near my house. I started  
repairing cars. I’m getting rid of the cars that don’t belong to me because of the law  
that says you can’t repair cars at your home.  
Moermond: but it happened in 2018 and again in 2022.  
Pwo: I started getting rid of the cars when I got the 2022 notice, but I’m the only one  
who does it so it took a lot of time. Most of the cars that don’t belong to me are gone  
now.  
Moermond: I’m reviewing aerial photos that are taken every couple of years to see if I  
can get any understanding.  
Pwo: before I moved here, one of the auto repair owners owned a house there and kept  
cars there. There wasn’t a problem then, but it became a problem after I moved in.  
The owner left some of his cars there.  
Moermond: I’m looking at Google image photos, and I see cars throughout the years.  
Martin: the inspector did just let me know that during the issuance of these orders  
vehicles continued to be brought onto the property. When he called Inspector  
Kedrowski he spoke very good English and they were able to resolve the issues after  
that.  
Moermond: 2018 shows only 5 cars on the property. I’m assuming that was after you  
talked with the inspector in 2018. 9 vehicles in 2019.  
Pwo: they belonged to the renter who lived with me.  
Moermond: we’ve established a pattern. You’re saying you weren’t operating a  
business, rather your friends are giving you cars to do with them what you want to.  
What are you looking for today, Mr. Pwo?  
Pwo: I just came to hear your opinions and suggestions so I can stop getting letters  
from the City.  
Moermond: honestly the best way to not receive letters from the City is not have a tow  
truck and a ton of cars in your yard.  
Pwo: I got rid of the tow truck and commercial cars, the only cars left are the ones I  
collect for the show for when my kids grow up.  
Moermond: Ms. Martin, any comments on what he can do moving forward to not get  
these bills?  
Martin: make sure they’re parked on an approved surface, parked legally, licensed to  
the home. Keep tow trucks and commercial vehicles off of the property.  
Pwo: after I got the letter I tried to get rid of the cars, but after I parked it I got another  
letter saying it should face the house. While I was doing that I got another letter. I’m  
the only one living there and have no help, so I don’t have enough time to finish  
everything. Is there anything you can do to help with the bill? I am also building a  
fence, there’s been shootings and I want to protect my house and have safety.  
Moermond: that doesn’t sound good. It sounds like building the fence was a good  
choice for your circumstances, pulling the permit is great. I hope it does increase  
safety at your house. It doesn’t impact the situation with the number of vehicles you  
can have or the car repair situation, whether or not there is a fence there. The total  
assessment is $884 between the four different ones. I would be more flexible on  
reducing this except for your experience four years ago. You knew the laws. If the  
Council ratifies these assessments, they would be invoiced within a couple of weeks of  
the Council Public Hearing, you will get a bill then. If it goes unpaid it will be on your  
2024 taxes, so it wouldn’t immediately be due. Because of the history I’m going to  
recommend they approve these assessments. I can request they make it payable over  
two years, that would be half 2024 and half 2025 taxes. I can ask that of them if you  
want me too. If you want it decreased from $884 downward, the Council may disagree  
with me and lower it.  
Pwo: over two years, please.  
Moermond: I can do that. If you want something different you can ask Council for that.  
If it is an email we can have that translated, if you come in person we can have an  
interpreter there.  
Pwo: I will testify in person.  
Moermond: sounds good, we will have an interpreter on September 13th.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 9/13/2023  
6
RLH TA 23-184  
Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 399  
BLAIR AVENUE. (File No. J2310E, Assessment No. 238315)  
Balenger  
Sponsors:  
Approve the assessment and make payable over 2 years.  
Ki Ki, interpreter, appeared  
Nyar Pwo, owner, appeared  
[Moermond gives background of appeals process]  
Staff report by Supervisor Lisa Martin: October 12, 2022 a Correction Order was sent  
regarding inoperable and unlicensed vehicles on the property. Compliance date was  
October 26, 2022. This was an Excessive Consumption fine for noncompliance, total  
assessment of $159. Today we have four separate Excessive Consumption fines, for  
noncompliance of the orders, not removing the vehicles from the property. One issued  
November 10, 2022, the next November 28, 2022, another January 6, 2023 and the  
fourth February 6, 2023. We had a lot of fees until the owner finally called Inspector  
Kedrowski and finally resolved the issue.  
Moermond: Chronologically we have bills for noncompliance with the orders for  
inspections occurring November 10, November 28, December 7 and January 6,  
January 24 and February 6. Ms. Martin, if you want to talk about those being bills for  
what exactly?  
Martin: each one of the bills are for Excessive Consumption of City services, where we  
had to go reinspect each time for compliance, and finding noncompliance.  
Moermond: we have orders indicating there are too many vehicles on the property  
lacking current licenses and appear to be in some state of repair. Also, commercial  
vehicles that indicate it was a car repair business.  
Moermond: that is correct, and during the winter he plowed his entire car from snow  
and parked even more vehicles.  
Pwo: I few months ago I started removing the cars that didn’t belong to me. Then  
friends brought a car that wasn’t working. I don’t put the commercial vehicles at the  
house anymore.  
Moermond: and you spoke with the inspector and understood the problem with the car  
repair happening there?  
Pwo: I don’t do car repair; they donated my car to me. I can go to the shop to repair my  
car.  
Moermond: Ms. Martin, do your records indicate when he spoke with the inspector  
about it?  
Martin: it was a couple of months ago. Parking inoperable vehicles throughout the  
yard. Cars were in pieces. Many not registered to the property. Parked on unapproved  
surface. This has been an ongoing issue since 2012 that just recently came into  
compliance.  
Moermond: what were you thinking when you got the letters from the City? The original  
orders saying you can’t have the cars there, that would be last October, then all the  
bills because the cars were still there. Why didn’t you come into compliance earlier, or  
call? Take some action?  
Pwo: it was a lot of work, having to deal and move them in the snow. I couldn’t reach  
anyone. Then I finally went to 375 Jackson.  
Moermond: there wasn’t snow when the original orders were issued back in October.  
Pwo: October I didn’t know I had a letter. After the letter came in November in  
December I got a lot of cars coming to the yard.  
Moermond: in the past, there have been orders to stop doing illegal car repair in the  
yard. You bought your house in 2012 it looks like, and in 2018 there were a lot of  
orders and work with the City around illegal car repair then. I’m thinking this isn’t a new  
issue to you and not new types of orders. You weren’t getting something you weren’t  
familiar with.  
Pwo: I moved in 2013. I worked at a car repair shop in New Brighton, I brought some of  
the cars to my current homes. I tried to find a car repair shop near my house. I started  
repairing cars. I’m getting rid of the cars that don’t belong to me because of the law  
that says you can’t repair cars at your home.  
Moermond: but it happened in 2018 and again in 2022.  
Pwo: I started getting rid of the cars when I got the 2022 notice, but I’m the only one  
who does it so it took a lot of time. Most of the cars that don’t belong to me are gone  
now.  
Moermond: I’m reviewing aerial photos that are taken every couple of years to see if I  
can get any understanding.  
Pwo: before I moved here, one of the auto repair owners owned a house there and kept  
cars there. There wasn’t a problem then, but it became a problem after I moved in.  
The owner left some of his cars there.  
Moermond: I’m looking at Google image photos, and I see cars throughout the years.  
Martin: the inspector did just let me know that during the issuance of these orders  
vehicles continued to be brought onto the property. When he called Inspector  
Kedrowski he spoke very good English and they were able to resolve the issues after  
that.  
Moermond: 2018 shows only 5 cars on the property. I’m assuming that was after you  
talked with the inspector in 2018. 9 vehicles in 2019.  
Pwo: they belonged to the renter who lived with me.  
Moermond: we’ve established a pattern. You’re saying you weren’t operating a  
business, rather your friends are giving you cars to do with them what you want to.  
What are you looking for today, Mr. Pwo?  
Pwo: I just came to hear your opinions and suggestions so I can stop getting letters  
from the City.  
Moermond: honestly the best way to not receive letters from the City is not have a tow  
truck and a ton of cars in your yard.  
Pwo: I got rid of the tow truck and commercial cars, the only cars left are the ones I  
collect for the show for when my kids grow up.  
Moermond: Ms. Martin, any comments on what he can do moving forward to not get  
these bills?  
Martin: make sure they’re parked on an approved surface, parked legally, licensed to  
the home. Keep tow trucks and commercial vehicles off of the property.  
Pwo: after I got the letter I tried to get rid of the cars, but after I parked it I got another  
letter saying it should face the house. While I was doing that I got another letter. I’m  
the only one living there and have no help, so I don’t have enough time to finish  
everything. Is there anything you can do to help with the bill? I am also building a  
fence, there’s been shootings and I want to protect my house and have safety.  
Moermond: that doesn’t sound good. It sounds like building the fence was a good  
choice for your circumstances, pulling the permit is great. I hope it does increase  
safety at your house. It doesn’t impact the situation with the number of vehicles you  
can have or the car repair situation, whether or not there is a fence there. The total  
assessment is $884 between the four different ones. I would be more flexible on  
reducing this except for your experience four years ago. You knew the laws. If the  
Council ratifies these assessments, they would be invoiced within a couple of weeks of  
the Council Public Hearing, you will get a bill then. If it goes unpaid it will be on your  
2024 taxes, so it wouldn’t immediately be due. Because of the history I’m going to  
recommend they approve these assessments. I can request they make it payable over  
two years, that would be half 2024 and half 2025 taxes. I can ask that of them if you  
want me too. If you want it decreased from $884 downward, the Council may disagree  
with me and lower it.  
Pwo: over two years, please.  
Moermond: I can do that. If you want something different you can ask Council for that.  
If it is an email we can have that translated, if you come in person we can have an  
interpreter there.  
Pwo: I will testify in person.  
Moermond: sounds good, we will have an interpreter on September 13th.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 9/13/2023  
7
RLH TA 23-291  
Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 340  
LAWSON AVENUE EAST. (File No. J2310E, Assessment No. 238315)  
Brendmoen  
Sponsors:  
Delete the assessment.  
No one appeared  
Moermond: Lisa, we’ve already had this address in front of us, right?  
Supervisor Lisa Martin: yes.  
Moermond: this is the one where the car hit the deck posts, and they had Excessive  
Consumption bills but they’re working with insurance. We assessed a couple but are  
deleting the balance, and this is one of those?  
Moermond: that is correct. Recommend deletion.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 9/13/2023  
8
RLH TA 23-278  
Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 2255  
MARGARET STREET. (File No. J2310E, Assessment No. 238315)  
Prince  
Sponsors:  
Delete the assessment.  
Mary Staples, owner, appeared via phone  
[Moermond gives background of appeals process]  
Staff report by Supervisor Lisa Martin: January 11, 2023 we issued a notice to remove  
snow and ice from the public sidewalk. Reinspected January 13, wasn’t done. We  
issued an Excessive Consumption letter for noncompliance. Total assessment of  
$159. No returned mail. Previously we have had a garbage order, march of 2022, done  
by owner, and July 2019 tall grass and weeds, done by owner.  
Staples: what wasn’t shoveled is a bike path. You can clearly see on the City’s website  
it is labeled as such, in green. The Q&A says they are maintained by St Paul Park  
and Rec. They turned that sidewalk 10 feet wide versus normal sidewalk width. The  
only time they’ve ever plowed it was when Channel 5 came about a hit and run. As far  
as the tall grass and garbage, my husband died December of 2021 and were emptying  
things out. I had things sitting before the dumpster was delivered in April. I’ve been  
very compliant since then. As far as a sidewalk versus a bike path that is a huge deal.  
Moermond: yes. While you were talking I pulled up an aerial photo and map of your  
property and the intersection at Margaret and McKnight. I notice that in the top of the  
first photo there is a turn lane with an arrow in it. That exists on McKnight, but there is  
no turn lane on Margaret. The bike path is obviously blacktop and along McKnight. It  
isn’t clear to me there is any sidewalk there at all. Some cement between the blacktop  
bike path and the street, but I wouldn’t say that is sidewalk area. I can understand why  
the inspector may think that, but I that isn’t the case and I can see that in the aerial  
photograph. Ms. Martin, I know you have the same photos and information, do you see  
this the same way?  
Martin: I think you are looking at it the correctly. The only concern I have is about any  
potential bus stop on McKnight. The bike path definitely confuses things. It doesn’t  
appear there is an actual sidewalk.  
Moermond: we appreciate you appealing this, and sorry you have this experience. I’ll  
recommend deletion of this assessment.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 9/13/2023  
9
Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 817  
MARSHALL AVENUE. (File No. J2310E, Assessment No. 238315)  
Balenger  
Sponsors:  
Layover to LH August 15, 2023 at 10 am per owner's request.  
Moermond: we have a request for this to be laid over to August 15, the owner sent an  
email. No problem, that will be laid over.  
Laid Over to the Legislative Hearings due back on 8/15/2023  
10  
RLH TA 23-284  
Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 1171  
MINNEHAHA AVENUE EAST. (File No. J2310E, Assessment No.  
238315)  
Yang  
Sponsors:  
Delete the assessment.  
No one appeared  
Moermond: there is a note that no photos were taken?  
Supervisor Lisa Martin: correct.  
Moermond: that’s a deletion then?  
Martin: correct.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 9/13/2023  
11  
RLH TA 23-275  
Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 1348  
MINNEHAHA AVENUE EAST. (File No. J2310E, Assessment No.  
238315)  
Prince  
Sponsors:  
Continue PH to October 4, 2023 and if no same or similar violations, delete the  
assessment.  
Emily McDonald, owner, appeared via phone  
[Moermond gives background of appeals process]  
Staff report by Supervisor Lisa Martin: orders were sent January 10,2 023 with a  
compliance date of 24 hours. Rechecked on January 13. This was for failure to shovel  
the public sidewalk. A work order was sent but it was done by the owner when the crew  
went out February 4. No returned mail. The only history we have are some dumping  
complaints in 2023.  
Moermond: why are you appealing?  
McDonald: no one shoveled it.  
Moermond: that’s what she said. It wasn’t done by the deadline you were given in the  
order, so they want to charge you for the inspection. It is basically for the crew that  
was dispatched—  
McDonald: no one even came onto my property with a shovel or snowblower.  
Moermond: exactly. They drove by, saw it was done, and they’re charging you for the  
trip they made. The inspector came by and saw it wasn’t done, sent the crew. They  
aren’t saying you didn’t do it; they’re saying you did not have it done by deadline so a  
crew was sent.  
McDonald: I didn’t know I had to shovel the corner I have legally no responsibility for. I  
thought the City was supposed to plow the street. I didn’t know I had to snow blow the  
street. I had 3 people helping me, with photos and signatures because I knew I’d  
probably have to have this conversation. Same thing happens with dumping.  
Moermond: I see photos were sent from Mai Vang on July 14. That was a photo  
showing snow and ice buildup and it was taken from the corner looking down the  
sidewalk. It looks like shoveling did occur, but there was 4 or so inches of ice and salt  
had been put down. It wasn’t clear though.  
McDonald: we put salt down, it worked, and then it was cleared. I don’t understand this  
asinine charge when the City drives around all the time. It is so petty. You don’t take  
enough out of my taxes already?  
Moermond: you’re saying you shouldn’t be responsible for shoveling the sidewalk?  
McDonald: no, it isn’t mine.  
Moermond: it is. You own to the curb, what the City has is a right-of-way, an easement,  
from the sidewalk to the curb. That means the public has the ability to cross your  
property through that area. The same is true of an alley. You own to the center of the  
alley, you don’t pay property taxes on it, but you would find on your deed that was  
indeed your property and your responsibility. The City isn’t sending out shoveling crews  
to handle private sidewalks. Corners, I get your argument. Should the City hold you  
accountable if there’s a bunch of snow on the corner and the plow can’t clean it out  
close enough, there shouldn’t be an expectation you shovel into the street. It isn’t safe,  
and I get it. In terms of clearing the sidewalk, that is basic property ownership. People  
have to be able to get to buses.  
McDonald: I never lived in the City before. I guess I wasn’t aware I needed to clean it to  
the concrete every time. As soon as I got the letter I went out and threw salt down and  
took care of it. I shouldn’t have to pay a $200 bill for that. IT is ridiculous, I just wanted  
to voice my opinion on that. if I didn’t take care of it, I understand it. I busted my *ss  
along with 3 other people to make sure it was clear.  
Moermond: you bought in April of 2022. Is this your first property?  
McDonald: yes.  
Moermond: Ms. Martin, any issues after this incident? April 2022 to present?  
Martin: dumping complaints.  
McDonald: I made those complaints, to be fair.  
Moermond: if dumping happens again, I hope it doesn’t, if you reach out to your hauler  
there are a couple of bulky items you get picked up as part of your regular bill. I can  
see you haven’t had issues. I’d like to help you on this, I know you’ve learned this for  
moving forward. On September 13, I will as the Council to continue it to October 4, I’ll  
recommend this is deleted if there are no other issues.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 9/13/2023  
12  
RLH TA 23-285  
Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 1694  
MINNEHAHA AVENUE EAST. (File No. J2310E, Assessment No.  
238315)  
Prince  
Sponsors:  
Delete the assessment.  
No one appeared  
Moermond: no photo on file of the sidewalk. There are a few like this, where there’s a  
photo of the house, not the sidewalk.  
Martin: this is for a PA EC.  
Mai Vang: I confirmed with Sean Westenhofer, there are no other photos, just the  
house.  
Moermond: so that’s maybe a quality control issue for your guys.  
Martin: got it.  
Mai Vang: he’s taking photos of the house number and not the sidewalk.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 9/13/2023  
13  
RLH TA 23-289  
Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 865  
UNIVERSITY AVENUE WEST. (File No. J2310E, Assessment No.  
238315)  
Balenger  
Sponsors:  
Approve the assessment.  
Chris Johnson, o/b/o Meineke, appeared via phone  
[Moermond gives background of appeals process]  
Staff report by Supervisor Lisa Martin: January 6, 2023 a Summary Abatement Order  
was issued, including the corner. Compliance date of 24 hours, rechecked January 9  
and the work was not done. Work order was sent, by the time the crew got there they  
had made an attempt to resolve it. Cost is essentially a trip charge, total assessment  
of $159.  
Moermond: why are you appealing?  
Johnson: that’s more information than I was aware of before. This was an exceptionally  
hard year for ice. It was hard to keep the path clear. I spoke to a City crew about the  
sidewalk and its condition, he gave me the expectations of what was supposed to be  
done. I thought I met them. there was a path cleared, though it wasn’t completely, until  
the ice was soft enough to clear down to the concrete. It was difficult to keep up with  
all the ice. I felt I did my best to keep it clear. It was the worst year I’ve had in 8 years.  
I wasn’t aware of any excessive charge that could be assessed against me. I’m asking  
for that to be waived. I know the expectations; it was a difficult year.  
Moermond: I am looking at a pathway that appears to be maybe 3 feet wide. Not sure  
if it is shoveled or not, it appears to be trampled by heavy foot traffic. So maybe not  
addressed or addressed frequently enough. I am seeing we had significant snow fall  
January 3 and 4, 15”. 5 days after those 15 inches fell, we had compacted and thick  
snow and ice. The high temps between the 4th and the 9th were pretty high, 30, 19, 21,  
35 and 22. All more than adequate for salt to work to loosen the snow and ice. I don’t  
see any evidence of salting. I am not seeing any effort. It is hard, it is University  
Avenue. There is a lot of foot traffic. I can see the Green line right there. There was a  
lot of snow, but this was five days later. It isn’t great. I’m leaning towards  
recommending approval. That is a lot of time to handle it.  
Johnson: I hire someone who takes care of this sidewalk and Best Steak House as  
well. He couldn’t even chop through the ice. He was saying the ice melt, more in  
December when it started, it was difficult to get through until later in January when we  
could finally break it up. I know I hired someone, he couldn’t do it, we finally were able  
to get a bobcat to break it up.  
Moermond: a lot of places did figure it out. In terms of December, the last week of  
December everything was above 20 degrees even some high 30’s. I’m going to  
recommend approval, but the Council could really look at it differently than I do. For  
my piece I will recommend approval.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 9/13/2023  
14  
Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 2417  
UNIVERSITY AVENUE WEST. (File No. J2310E, Assessment No.  
238315)  
Jalali  
Sponsors:  
Layover to LH August 15, 2023 at 10 am (unable to reach Property Rep).  
Voicemail left at 12:16 pm x6897: this is Marcia Moermond from St. Paul City Council  
calling Tim Jordan about your appealed tax assessment for 2417 University Avenue  
West. I’m sorry we are running late this morning and we had a time slot between 10  
and 11:30, we’ll continue this to August 15th and I’m sorry we are behind and we’ll get  
you early on the calendar that day. Reach back to my team if that doesn’t work, Mai  
Vang at 266-8585  
Laid Over to the Legislative Hearings due back on 8/15/2023  
15  
RLH TA 23-292  
Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 863  
JUNO AVENUE. (File No. J2310E, Assessment No. 238315)  
Noecker  
Sponsors:  
Reduce assessment from $159 to $75.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 9/13/2023  
Special Tax Assessments-ROLLS  
16  
RLH AR 23-61  
Ratifying the assessments for Collection of Vacant Building Registration  
fees billed during November 16 to February 22, 2023. (File No. VB2310,  
Assessment No. 238813)  
Brendmoen  
Sponsors:  
Referred to the City Council due back on 9/13/2023  
17  
18  
RLH AR 23-62  
RLH AR 23-63  
Ratifying the assessments for Securing and/or Emergency Boarding  
services during March 2023. (File No. J2310B, Assessment No. 238110)  
Brendmoen  
Sponsors:  
Referred to the City Council due back on 9/13/2023  
Ratifying the assessments for Collection of Fire Certificate of Occupancy  
fees billed during January 23 to March 3, 2023. (File No. CRT2309,  
Assessment No. 238208)  
Brendmoen  
Sponsors:  
Referred to the City Council due back on 9/13/2023  
19  
RLH AR 23-64  
Ratifying the assessments for Excessive Use of Inspection or Abatement  
services billed during January 20 to February 17, 2023. (File No.  
J2310E, Assessment No. 238315)  
Brendmoen  
Sponsors:  
Referred to the City Council due back on 9/13/2023  
20  
21  
RLH AR 23-65  
RLH AR 23-66  
Ratifying the assessments for Graffiti Removal services during January  
27 to March 28, 2023. (File No. J2306P, Assessment No. 238405)  
Brendmoen  
Sponsors:  
Referred to the City Council due back on 9/13/2023  
Ratifying the assessments for Removal of Dangerous and/or Diseased  
Tree(s) services during March 2023. (File No. 2307T, Assessment No.  
239006)  
Brendmoen  
Sponsors:  
Referred to the City Council due back on 9/13/2023  
22  
RLH AR 23-67  
Ratifying the assessments for Removal of Diseased and/or Dangerous  
Tree(s) services during March to April 2023. (File No. 2308T,  
Assessment No. 239007)  
Brendmoen  
Sponsors:  
Referred to the City Council due back on 9/13/2023  
11:00 a.m. Hearings (NONE)  
1:00 p.m. Hearings  
Vacant Building Registrations  
23  
Appeal of Taylor Swartwood to a Vacant Building Registration  
Requirement at 856 EUCLID STREET.  
Prince  
Sponsors:  
Layover to LH August 8, 2023 at 1 pm. Property to be reinspected Tuesday, August 8,  
2023 at 9:30 am.  
Taylor Swartwood, owner, appeared via phone  
[Moermond gives background of appeals process]  
Staff report by Supervisor Leanna Shaff: this is a Fire Certificate of Occupancy with  
Inspector Thomas. The first appointment letter was mailed December 22, 2022 for an  
inspection January 17. We had a no entry then, a no entry February 3, and March 3,  
March 28, and April 19. We got in on May 12, a few deficiencies. No entry June and  
July, resulting in referral to the Vacant Building program for long-term noncompliance.  
Staff report by Supervisor Matt Dornfeld: Inspector Hoffman made this a Category 2  
Vacant Building July 12, 2023 per the Certificate of Occupancy revocation and referral.  
He states it appears occupied, toys in the yard, a Summary Abatement Order issued  
for garbage, but that is now in compliance.  
Moermond: why are you appealing Mr. Swartwood?  
Swartwood: we had a mail error when I got sick in December. My property owner box  
got cancelled. For several months no mail came. I was in contact with Thomas, he  
called and the tenants were there and he wouldn’t go in without me. We walked the  
building on the next occasion, we did the repairs, and were ready for him. I spoke with  
him in emails about setting up a new inspection and then he just sent it to Vacant  
Building. James Thomas has a long-term act to grind with my father, James  
Swartwood. He really doesn’t like him. I don’t understand why when he had email and  
numbers for me, I was willing to fix the problems, but he seems dead set to find a way  
to harm me. I don’t know—I am in compliance. We were working with them. He has  
walked through the building and issued orders. I was in contact with him. He did this  
behind my back. I talked to Leanna Shaff and begged forgiveness. Several thousand  
dollars because he has an axe to grind with my father is a lot of money. I have small  
children to feed. It would be easy to sink my boat, please don’t do that.  
Moermond: I see four appointment letters there was certainly at an attempt to reach  
you at the address given.  
Swartwood: and I appeared, I complied with orders. He is not being honest with you. I  
was in contact with James Thomas. Do you want the emails between me and Thomas  
showing I was in contact?  
Moermond: I’m looking for an inspection.  
Swartwood: the tenants were there for the inspection; they can tell you about it. It isn’t  
vacant.  
Moermond: Ms. Shaff, I do see orders issued May 12 to include interior items—  
Swartwood: James Thomas has---  
Moermond: please let me speak for a second. The May 12 orders include interior  
items, so interior access was given at that time. I’m not seeing any updates to that,  
the same items in those orders are the ones in the June 27th orders.  
Shaff: that is what I am seeing.  
Moermond: with respect to communications between Mr. Swartwood and Mr. Thomas, I  
see a couple of notes in the file here. I imagine you may have better notes.  
Shaff: I see one note.  
Swartwood: that inspector has a lot of complaints against him. I have my father here  
with me.  
Shaff: the note is dated May 12 and it does say spoke with owner, says he’s having  
health problems, paid his box fee after some mail. Says a reinspection February 14,  
not sure what that is about. It doesn’t coincide with any of the dates.  
Swartwood: it isn’t what he says it is.  
Moermond: do you want to provide those emails? They weren’t submitted with the  
appeal.  
Swartwood: how would I do that? I’ve never done an appeal, my father had to take me  
by the hand on this.  
Moermond: they would be emailed into our office.  
Swartwood: I can look for them in Outlook.  
Moermond: the bottom line is the inspection needs to be completed and the items  
checked off. It has been long enough the inspector was punting on it. I am not seeing  
by looking at the paperwork there is anything untoward going on here. I see letters with  
clear dates and expectations. I hear you didn’t pay your property owner box fee. That is  
the address provided to Ramsey County taxation and the Certificate of Occupancy  
program as the contact. You’re not providing the accurate information and not getting  
the letters is on you.  
Swartwood: he was in contact with me by email and phone. I remedied the problem  
with the P.O. box but for several months after that no mail was showing up. I’m not a  
government employee, I can’t solve those problems. I do have email and a phone and  
do respond. I did make the repairs requested. He has a long history of being out to get  
my father, and one way to get someone is to go after their kid.  
Shaff: Mr. Swartwood, when you and I spoke about this I was clear the issue was on  
you for not showing up or getting your mail. You stated you understood.  
Swartwood: I showed up. James Thomas could have gone in on another one of those  
inspections, he refused to go in without me being there even though the tenant would  
have let him in. That is strange. I don’t have to be there. He refused to do his job  
unless I was there. Why? This is a man with an axe to grind. May I have a different  
inspector, someone who doesn’t hate my father. No one in the landlord community  
likes this guy.  
Shaff: that isn’t’ a true statement.  
Swartwood: you don’t hear anyone singing his praises.  
Shaff: I do actually.  
Moermond: we can stop this reputation stuff; we don’t need to go there. We are talking  
about facts about this particular building—  
Swartwood: I have this email; he could have told me he was doing this—  
Moermond: if you want to have a hearing you better let me talk, instead of talking over  
me. I’m kind of over that. You need that Certificate of Occupancy inspection signed off  
to keep out of the Vacant Building program. Right now, your inspector is James  
Thomas, Ms. Shaff is his supervisor, AJ Neis is the manager of the division. I can’t  
give you a different inspector. That’s the structure over there—  
Swartwood: I’ll bring someone to supervise him to make sure he behaves himself.  
Moermond: you’d have to show up there too. I’d like to give Mr. Swartwood one chance  
to get this scheduled and signed off on. Can we get it scheduled right now so we are all  
on the same page.  
Shaff: you stated all the work is completed? Is that correct?  
Swartwood: as far as I know—the tenants are still in there.  
Shaff: the list you were given—  
Swartwood: that list is completed.  
Shaff: and you’ve been though the building to make sure all the life-safety issues were  
done?  
Swartwood: I think the tenants may have broken the windows.  
Shaff: is that done?  
Swartwood: no, I drove by recently.  
Shaff: so it isn’t finished?  
Swartwood: I will finish it within a week. Even less than that.  
Shaff: Can we continue this to next Tuesday? And he needs to be there at 9:30 next  
Tuesday morning. I will meet him there. I won’t be sending a letter.  
Moermond: we will include that in our follow up letter we send out on Friday August 4.  
That inspection is Tuesday, August 8 and 9:30 am. I would encourage you to be there  
15 minutes early and do a walkthrough prior to make sure all standard things are  
addressed from smoke and carbons to windows and screens. Let’s get this off your  
plate.  
Laid Over to the Legislative Hearings due back on 8/8/2023  
24  
Appeal of Ashley DuBose to a Vacant Building Registration Renewal  
Notice at 619 MENDOTA STREET.  
Prince  
Sponsors:  
Layover to LH August 8, 2023 at 1 pm (unable to reach property rep).  
Voicemail left at 1:31 pm: this is Marcia Moermond from St. Paul City Council calling  
you about your appeal of the Vacant Building registration fee for 619 Mendota Street.  
We will try you back in 15 to 30 minutes.  
Voicemail left at 1:51 pm: this is Marcia Moermond from St. Paul City Council trying to  
reach you again about your appeal for Vacant Building registration 619 Mendota Street.  
I’ll continue this case to next Tuesday afternoon between 1:00 and 3:00. You’ll get an  
email confirmation on Friday of this.  
Laid Over to the Legislative Hearings due back on 8/8/2023  
1:30 p.m. Hearings  
Orders To Vacate - Fire Certificate of Occupancy  
25  
RLH VO 23-16  
Appeal of Monica Mogren to a Revocation of Fire Certificate of  
Occupancy and Order to Vacate at 1604 MARGARET STREET.  
Prince  
Sponsors:  
Grant the appeal as property is not a C of O building.  
Monica Mogren, owner, appeared  
Moermond: we’re touching base on where things are at with this property. Checking and  
saw you have a TISH done May 31, 2023. Wondering where you are at with selling it  
and so on. You said you were fixing to sell and we were balancing the whole thing with  
having a Certificate of Occupancy and its necessity if you were selling to an owner  
occupant.  
Mogren: I did put it on the market and then we received three inspections from  
potential buyers. Five people with over full price offers. But every time they inspect  
they highlight something, like mold on insulation in the attic where we couldn’t get. Now  
we have it off the market and have contracted a professional mold company, cut a hole  
through the drywall to remove any potential mold and replace it. Then it will go back on  
the market. Prior to that some inspector found dry rot in the dormers, so replaced  
those completely and put it back on the market. We are committed to selling this  
house in a state that is absolutely safe to purchase. It has been quite some time,  
we’ve had it off the market for 5 weeks, and on the market since the end of May.  
Moermond: you’re close to putting it back on again?  
Mogren: the mold remediation people come August 15; they say it will take 2 days.  
Moermond: I only had to look at whether you needed to go to the Vacant Building  
program. Looking at the TISH report, it certainly doesn’t appear to be in bad shape.  
Shaff: nothing gives me heartburn. Outlets near the sink that need to be rewired.  
Mogren: those were redone. I encourage anyone to come visit the house and look at  
anything you want. It has come a long way since last fall. It is absolutely beautiful. It is  
so gratifying. It was way under rented. We rented to a Latino family for $800 for months  
forever.  
Moermond: you don’t need a Certificate of Occupancy moving forward. I’m going to  
simply say you don’t need it and there is no reason to send to the Vacant Building  
program unless there is a problem like it gets broken into along the way. We don’t  
have that going on right now. Ms. Shaff, can you categorize this somehow in the  
system that it doesn’t need a certificate?  
Shaff: our system is limited.  
Moermond: we’ll have a resolution granting the appeal and releasing the property from  
the Certificate of Occupancy program. That can be attached to your record and have it  
be not a Certificate of Occupancy building for the moment.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 8/16/2023  
2:00 p.m. Hearings  
Fire Certificates of Occupancy  
26  
Appeal of Susan Dunlop to a Fire Inspection Correction Notice at 631  
SNELLING AVENUE SOUTH.  
Tolbert  
Sponsors:  
Layover to LH August 22, 2023 at 2 pm for further discussion.  
Susan Dunlop, o/b/o Joan’s in the Park, appeared via phone  
[Moermond gives background of appeals process]  
Staff report by Supervisor Jim Perucca: The Certificate of Occupancy inspection  
started June 30, 2023 by Inspector Huseby. She did find about 10 deficiencies  
throughout the building. One has been addressed that I’m aware of. Some of the  
deficiencies pertain to repairs for roof, which didn’t have a permit, now one has been  
pulled as of July 26. A leaking interior pipe by the water meter, which may be the  
responsibility of Saint Paul Regional Water Service (SPRWS). We need the annual fire  
extinguisher maintenance done. There are a few items in the kitchen of concern. It is  
more of the type of equipment being used, along with what food items are being  
prepared and having the proper types of ventilation and makeup air to properly remove  
heat and grease laden vapors from the building. A couple of those orders are directed  
toward the kitchen hood ventilation system. There is an order regarding permits for an  
AC mini-split unit that would appear to have been installed July 2019 that permits were  
never closed, neither mechanical nor electrical inspection. We do have some structural  
issues with an exterior south-side wall, some gaps in the wall. It was pulling away from  
the other walls. Making sure the building is not in danger of further deterioration,  
asking for an engineering analysis to determine if there are issues and if there are what  
may be needed to address those concerns. Also removing ceiling tiles that have been  
damaged by either water intrusion near the wait station and also tiles collecting  
deposits of grease materials in the kitchen. We do need to have the existing  
commercial hood system cleaned and there was concern about some material on the  
patio walls, a roof cover and curtain between wait station and bar that needed the  
correct flame spread treatment and rating.  
Moermond: it looks like the building permit has been pulled on the roof, you touched  
on that. Can you expand on the impact on your order?  
Perucca: the correction reads “no building permit was pulled”. As of July 26, the  
building permit for a roof tear off, rubber mill install poly and metal cap has been  
applied for and issued.  
Moermond: and number two we can address easily. To be clear, that means the City is  
incurring the cost of the water that is leaking because it hasn’t passed through the  
meter, but there does need to be a repair made. Would you like us to make the call to  
have the repair people, do you want the contact information?  
Dunlop: I’d love for you to have someone come out.  
Moermond: we will reach out to the supervisor for that area at SPRWS, Joe Tronson,  
not a problem. Mr. Perucca, I think we have a citation that needs to be corrected. I  
know we have a Code problem listed in item 7, but I think the Code reference is  
incorrect. It is out of date. It lists St. Paul Legislative Code § 417.08. It is actually  
related to a parking garage; I think there may be a more pertinent section. It doesn’t  
discount the structural issue; we just need the correct code.  
Perucca: absolutely.  
Moermond: I have the record from our last conversation and think I know where you are  
going. Where are you at, and what are you looking for today?  
Dunlop: everything other than the fire suppression and makeup air, everything else are  
things we can and will take care of. The structure and the crack that is on Bayard. The  
sidewalk is pitched toward my building, which causes water to go under my building  
and the back part with the kitchen is an addition on a slab. The other part has a  
basement. We have called the City numerous times to fix the sidewalk. As soon as I  
saw the crack in the building I saw it. It was winter and they said there was nothing  
they could do until the snow is gone. Joan made these calls. They had to take care of  
potholes until the sidewalk is corrected, that’s what they said when we called again this  
spring. I don’t want to fix anything until the cause of it is fixed.  
The first picture I dropped off is taken from the service station into my kitchen. I have  
three induction burners on the far wall and one to the left when you walk in the kitchen.  
When we bought 12 years ago we painted the ceiling. Two different paints were used, it  
is kind of white, so what looks like grease build up is the paint age differing. I’m not  
saying there is no grease, it isn’t as bad as it looks. Where the induction burners are  
is where it is white. As we talked in 2016, there is no open flame. The hottest it ever  
gets above the oven, in that hood area, is 150 degrees. It is about six feet of space. I  
think this is made into a much bigger—there are better things we could be spending  
our time on. I included a copy of our menu. We have a course menu. We bake the  
bread in the oven. The only other thing in the oven is a filet, rack of lamb, and a fish.  
We also have a copy of our reports. We feed 30 people a day. We don’t have huge  
volumes of food. I get we’re the only restaurant in St. Paul with this system and you  
want everyone on the same page, but you’re asking me to spend $102,000 that I just  
don’t have. That is the quote I received.  
Moermond: I’m struggling with the paint situation. I can see where the inspector is  
coming from. I hear what you are saying. It makes sense both ways.  
Dunlop: I can do a new ceiling, but I can’t do that until the building gets fixed, and I  
can’t fix the building until that sidewalk gets fixed. One thing that strikes me is that it  
is a suspended ceiling. Could you do new tiles?  
Dunlop: I could, but the framework is original and it is rusty. I could, it would be  
temporary. When we called our contractor in February we had Niagara Falls coming in.  
Where the building is sinking, that’s where the rubber was coming away from the side  
of the building, where it was leaking. He thought he pulled a permit; he charged us for  
it. Part of the problem is she sidewalk, we need to get that shored up.  
Moermond: I understand what you’re saying, but I don’t see any photos of the sidewalk.  
Dunlop: Laura took photos of the sidewalk when she was there.  
Moermond: she did? I’ll look more carefully. Oh yes, I see that.  
Dunlop: you can see where it pitches down. It is on a slab.  
Moermond: it does look like some temporary fix will need to be put in there and maybe  
a temporary fix if we can’t get a new tile put in there. I understand the Public Works  
piece. You have a request in with them.  
Dunlop: since February we’ve been asking. No one has even been to look at it.  
Moermond: and you have an engineer?  
Dunlop: no engineer. I’ve been trying to find someone. I’ve reached out but no one will  
inspect and say what they think. They want a description of the work to be done but I  
don’t know what that work is. As far as the fire extinguishers, they’re done. The hood  
cleaning is being done tonight. I had a hard time finding someone to do that too.  
Moermond: I need to find out more from Public Works to find out their schedule to put  
together a decent plan on how to move forward and schedule out some of these  
repairs. I would like to consult with the mechanical inspector. I look at the ceiling it is  
kind of like, some of the photos even you provided, where the caramel-colored paint  
has speckled, is that due to heat and grease? I don’t know.  
Dunlop: that is from water damage. I am not proud of that ceiling. But it isn’t because  
of grease buildup.  
Moermond: we have to pull the threads apart on this situation. Things are not going to  
get worse or better in the next few weeks, I think we can take the time to talk to  
Public Works. Give me a chance to talk to the mechanical inspector, find out the  
correct code citation for the structural piece. We’ll reach out to the SPRWS folks.  
When can they reasonably go out?  
Dunlop: I can be there almost any time. We’re open Wednesday through Saturday, but  
I’m there Monday and Tuesday doing things. I can be available any time.  
Moermond: when do you arrive typically?  
Dunlop: the days were open someone is there at 8 am until 11 pm.  
Moermond: we’ll let them know that and they’ll contact you to figure out a time.  
Dunlop: I have an email from Ross Currier. He’s helping us get a STAR Grant.  
Moermond: we can copy him on our correspondence. We’ll figure out a path forward.  
Last, around the roof leaks, were temporary repairs done? Is it obvious where that was  
done?  
Dunlop: I don’t know. You can see inside, but we had the whole roof replace.  
Moermond: oh, of course.  
Dunlop: you can see it from the bottom.  
Moermond: got it. I will look into this more deeply and see if we can’t take things  
forward another couple of steps to get this solved. We’ll talk in 3 weeks.  
Laid Over to the Legislative Hearings due back on 8/22/2023