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, October 3, 2023  
9:00 AM  
Room 330 City Hall & Court House  
9:00 a.m. Hearings  
Special Tax Assessments  
1
RLH TA 23-346  
Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 606  
CHARLES AVENUE. (File No. VB2401, Assessment No. 248800)  
Balenger  
Sponsors:  
Layover to LH December 19, 2023 at 9 am to check status of permits/CC cert.  
[Note: Approve assessment. PO's insurance is agreeing to pay as of 10/17/23. email  
attached - JZ]  
Joe Yannarelly- DSI  
Melissa Do on Behalf/Trieu Ngoc Do- Appellant  
Moermond: Hi am I speaking with Melissa Do?  
Do: Yes.  
Moermond: This is Marcia Moermond at Saint Paul City Council. I am calling about the  
special assessment of your mother-in-law's property at 606 Charles Ave. Also, on the  
phone line with us we have Joe Yannarelly, he's a supervisor over in the City's vacant  
building unit and he's going to be helping us out today. What I like to do in these  
cases is to start out with the staff report and have staff lay the groundwork about what  
the circumstances are, why we're looking at a vacant building fee renewal in this case,  
and just where the departments is at with your case and then talk with you about where  
you're at, actually where your mother-in-law is at, with getting this back in line again in  
kind, sort up a path forward for this looks. It looks like it's scheduled for a public  
hearing, January 10th of 2024. What I'm going to do is start out with that staff report  
from Mr. Yannarelly. We'll be right  
back with you. Is your mother-in-law with you or are you just acting on behalf of her?  
How are you handling that?  
Do: She is not with me. She currently lives with my sister-in-law, her daughter. I am the  
one that is taking care of all the communication from all the paperwork that she  
received and are also dealing with the rest for restoration company.  
Moermond: That’s super helpful. I'll turn it over to Mr. Yannarelly.  
Yannarelly: We have a fire that happened there on April 18th. It automatically rolls into  
the vacant building program after a fire with a 90-day fire exemption. That exemption  
has expired, and it is now subject to the annual vacant building fee of $2,459 and a  
service charge of $157 for a total proposed assessment of $2,616. There are open  
permits on building and electrical.  
Moermond: Ms. Doe, it looks like were in the second year now in the vacant building  
program which isn’t a surprise given that there was a fire. Those cases tend to take  
longer because you're dealing with insurance and the bureaucracy there. Tell me a little  
bit about where you're at with the rehab, when you're going to be wrapping that up and  
what your contractor says and so on.  
Do: Ever since the fire happened, I delt with insurance right away. We were unlucky to  
get an adjuster that was not working with myself nor the restoration company. We  
called her every day and left her messages every day. If she did call us back, we have  
issues with communication, whether it be that we could not hear her or her headset  
was not working, I don't know, we just couldn't communicate with her. It wasn't just  
myself have a hard time reaching her it was the restoration company too. We tried to  
reach out to her management and finally, someone return us back and then they sent  
us to a different adjuster. I am working with a new one right now as we speak, I just  
spoke with her yesterday and everything has been approved. The insurance has agreed  
to everything that we need to get done at the house, so things are moving. Everything  
was moving slow because things weren’t getting approved. We couldn't do anything,  
unless we knew we were able to do it. As of this point, they have demolished  
everything in the home and right now they're waiting to do the back spray is what I  
understand. We are moving forward and I'm pushing them to move forward aggressively  
because we've been delayed so long, and the restoration company also agree with me.  
When we first spoke in April, the plan was to get her back in at least by October, at  
the latest. Right now, we're just moving forward and taking this step because they had  
to apply for some permit. That took a little bit because all the issues that we were  
having, too. But it looks like we're moving forward this week. They're supposed to do  
the back spray and they are already do the ruff, so that is already done. Timeline wise,  
we're trying to shoot before January, but I can't promise that, and I can't control that.  
Moermond: Lot of moving pieces here. I see that it looks like there's an electrical  
permit that got issued back on September 8th. South Side Electric will be going in  
wiring and reaping throughout due to fire damage and install 12 circuits panel,  
miscellaneous wiring, and installations. It also looks like you're also going to probably  
need a plumbing permanent, and you got the building permit pulled. Question, with the  
insurance company, obviously there's the deductible, but for that coverage, are you  
needing 100% of what your available coverage is in order to pay for the restoration of  
the kitchen, or is there still some available? Here's where I'm going with that question  
is that I'm thinking that the insurance company should be covering this vacant building  
fee for you as a part of your claim. Sometimes people have maxed out what their  
insurance coverage is but given that this is a kitchen fire and not a whole house fire it  
may be different for you. What I'm going to say is that I would look at the insurance  
company and check not only this vacant building fee but to talked to them about  
covering thing and see what you can get out of there. If you're going to be done in  
January, that doesn't give me a ton of flexibility. Here is where I'm at with that is that  
we have the ability to prorate vacant building fees when it goes for so long but usually,  
we kind of set the max at 6 months and then after that require the whole fee be paid. If  
we get in the 7 months range I can work with you, but all the way to 9 months which  
would be what January is, that's a pretty long time. But I think that insurance is a  
decent option. If that doesn't work, I can also recommend that it be made payable over  
5 years. If the timing on the financing is bad for it, and then that would be spread like  
over 5 years’ worth of property taxes, so that's much smaller bites. I think that we  
should probably connect in a couple of months and see where things are at. This will  
give you a chance to talk with the insurance company and we can figure out what would  
be most useful for your circumstances right before you head into your public hearing,  
and if you need to talk to the Council, does that sound OK?  
Do: Great. Can I just recap to make sure I understand everything and if I have any  
concern?  
Moermond: Sure, and we can send you an e-mail as well. Go ahead and recap.  
Do: From my understanding is there's the speed because there's a vacant building that  
my mother-in-law who we should have the insurance cover this? I'm going to try to  
shoot for that because obviously this was delayed because of insurance. It's either  
have insurers pay or have her pay over 5 years in her property taxes.  
Moermond: If she wants to do it that way, she can also have it come forward just as  
one assessment and pay up that way. If that's her preference, she doesn't have to pay  
overtime. But if she's feeling strapped because of all of a thing going on financially we  
could do that. What we can send you, just so you have it for talking to the insurance  
company, we'll send you the vacant building registration that went out, so you've got  
the original paperwork and the warning letter and then we can send you the page from  
the City's special tax assessment roll that has the this property listed on it and the  
amount of money so that you can use that as documentation for getting them to pay  
and see if that helps.  
Do: That sounds great. When you say the public hearing on January 10th, is that the  
same day that you want to talk to me talk before that?  
Moermond: Let's talk before that because that's when the City Council looks at that. I  
neglected to say at the beginning that what I'm going to be doing is just giving a  
recommendation, and if you're OK with what that is, they're going to go with it. But if  
you're not okay with what it is, which is fine, there's that public hearing there to give  
you a chance to talk to them by phone, or in person and writing. They may look at it  
differently than I do. I was hoping to have more or less finish with our conversations  
that it would be up to date going in front of them. I'm thinking that we have our tax  
assessment hearings on December 19th, so that's the closest that I can put it on.  
Does that work for you on December 19th at 09:00AM?  
Do: I can make it work.  
Moermond: I'm sorry. It's just another thing and we'll try to be quick about it. We'll put  
that on our calendar, and we'll send you a follow-up e-mail with attachments that will  
help you with the insurance company and you have one last question.  
Do: After I talked to insurance should I be contacting you back to tell you that  
insurance will cover, or should I wait for Dec. 19th?  
Moermond: That is completely with you and the insurance company, if the insurance  
company says that they're going to cover it, then we can skip the hearing. You reply to  
the email that we sent you and just say insurance will be covering this. You can pay it  
with the money that they send you or they can pay it, whatever works best. We have a  
plan you have your hands full helping your mother-in-law. I do hope that things move  
smoothly from out how getting her back in her home. If you have any questions, please  
reach back out.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 1/17/2024  
RLH TA 23-342  
2
Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 276  
EXCHANGE STREET SOUTH. (File No. VB2401, Assessment No.  
248800)  
Noecker  
Sponsors:  
Layover to LH December 5, 2023 at 9 am to check status of permits/CC cert.  
Inda Streed- Appellant  
Joe Yannarelly- DSI  
VM: Moermond: Good morning. I'm trying to reach Inda Streed. This is Marcia  
Moermond at the Saint Paul City Council. I'm calling about the vacant building  
assessment appeal you have for 276 Exchange streets. We will try reaching back to  
you in a few minutes and see if you are available. Thank you.  
Moermond: Good morning, is this Inda Streed? This is Marcia Moermond and I'm  
calling again about that vacant building fee appeal and also the phone line with us we  
have Mr. Joe Yannarelly. He is a supervisor at the vacant building unit over at the  
City's Department of Safety and Inspections and he'll be helping us out today. My job  
is to hear your appeal of this fee, and I need to develop a recommendation for the  
Council to consider. I'm giving them a recommendation, if you're OK with what that is,  
they'll be going with that. But if for any reason you're not okay with what I'm  
recommending to them, you can definitely testify in writing by phone or in person and  
they can look at it differently than I do. What I like to do in this setting is to start out  
with a staff report and have staff put on the record what the conditions are, how we end  
up with the property in the vacant building program and then fee, and then talk with you  
about what you're looking for today in the appeals process and we'll see if we can  
come to a conclusion.  
Yannarelly: Yes, this is just the annual vacant building fee for the property. It is up  
prospective in nature, so it goes forward. It entered the vacant building program in May  
11thof 2021 and the annual fee is $2,459 with a service charge of $157 for a total  
proposed assessment of $2,616.  
Moermond: when you said prospective vacant building fee you mean this vacant  
building fee covers?  
Yannarelly: May 23 to May 24.  
Moermond: Ms. Streed you folks are appealing this vacant building fee. Can you tell  
me why and what you're looking for today?  
Streed: We've been doing some work in the building, and eventually we plan to open it.  
We have started the project around the summer here. We got the approval for the  
exterior from HPC. We had the hearing on the 25th of September, and they approved  
it. We are doing some work.  
Moermond: That's good. When do you anticipate you're going to have that work done?  
Streed: I need to check the timetable with the team, with the contractors. We did see  
the tree removal last week. I cannot give you the details right now. But I can send our  
plans when I have documents from the team who was working on that.  
Moermond: Honestly, I don't I don't need the plan. I was looking at or just kind of a  
general timeline that you are working with. Here's where I'm coming from with the  
question is that right now I've got a vacant building fee that I'm looking at that is for  
that May to May time period, which means that we are pretty much 6 months into the  
year and by the time it hits City Council it's going to look like 7 months in the vacant  
building program, and that's on January 10th, actually 9 months. When do you t think  
you're going to be done is going to inform whether I would recommend that the fee gets  
prorated and if you are going to be done much sooner than later, I could make a  
recommendation that they prorate the fee. Like if you are going to be done next week,  
I could easily recommend that the fee be like 5 out of the 12 months billed our next  
month, 6 out of the 12 months billed. But if looking at it being a lot longer, it gets  
harder and harder for me to prorate generally. I can't do that reasonably if it's like 7 or  
more months. Looking at that, then you're like in for the majority of the year. This is  
not the first time in the vacant building program. I know that you guys have a struggle  
going on. I'm just looking for that kind of endgame on when you're going to have that. I  
think what I should do is check on your situation in like 6 weeks, 8 weeks and see  
how you're doing and see if you're a good candidate to get your fee prorated. I can't see  
where I would recommend that it would go away. Obviously, the council could look at  
that differently but for my purposes, I don't think I can under the code to make that  
recommendation. Anyway, what do you think about a hearing in 8 weeks to kind of see  
where you're at and then based on where you're at, I can make my recommendation.  
Streed: What you're saying is that if it could be prorated so we would need to still pay  
between May of 2023 until we finish the project.  
Moermond: Right now, if you are to finish very, very quickly, like within a month or 6  
weeks, I would say I could recommend that gets cut in half. I could reasonably do that  
up to the point that it's been in the program for 7 months after that, I'm hard pressed to  
recommend that it gets decreased. I was thinking why not look at it at the 7-month  
mark. So, 7 out of 12, the billable months would have happened. I could use that to  
inform my recommendation to the Council about whether it should be prorated, so you  
would have that information in advance of the public hearing. I don't know what your  
company's timeline is, but that would at least give them some information.  
Streed: Even though we're doing some work in the building, you still were charged that.  
Like I inform you before we started in the summer of last year with a plan to open  
before the holiday.  
Moermond: Yeah, it's not based on whether or not you have permits pulled. The vacant  
building fee applies to buildings like yours that are empty and haven't been put to use,  
have some code violations. In your case, it looks like there is a fair number of  
violations in terms of squatters, not shoveling, garbage, getting work orders. Those  
things are not great in terms of saying that you're on top of managing the property.  
What happens is that the vacant building inspectors are observing those things and  
needing to write them up. That's really why we have the vacant building program is to  
make sure that buildings are maintained safely for and the community in general that  
that's what it pays for. It doesn't connect back to the building permit. The building  
permit does say, hey, we're working to get out of it. I would like to use that to inform  
my recommendation. But really I'm looking for those building permits to be final and  
use that as a measure. I'm happy to look at it December 5th and just kind of see  
where you're at. If you are done, and if you are look at prorating it but otherwise, I'm  
going to recommend approval of the whole thing.  
Streed: Okay. So by December 5th what if it’s done?  
Moermond: I would look at it in cutting it in half. If it's not done there is no assistance  
on that matter, and I have no idea whether that is possible. What were you saying?  
Streed: Yeah, because like I said, we had the time but then we need the approval form  
the Historic Home Consul, so it got delay. Sometimes this kind of things happened  
especially since this is a historic building. We're trying to make our timeline but it's  
difficult when it's really out of our control.  
Moermond: I look at what you're saying, and I see that you have a vacant building  
registration back in 2019, and you had one again in 2021. This is not your first rodeo  
trying to deal with this stuff. I'm less inclined to be sympathetic of the bureaucratic  
process that needs to be engaged. This building has been in this situation for a while.  
These bureaucratic necessities like the Heritage Preservation Review shouldn't come  
as a surprise to us. Anyway, that's where I'm at with it the Council could look at it very  
differently than how I am, and that's completely possible. It's hard for me to tell exactly  
where the HPC stuff was at. I can see that there was an approval on September 27th  
but I'm struggling to find the application date for when things went into the program  
when your application is made. It looks like the value of the project you listed was just  
$2500. That's what I know and we will chat with you than in December and see how  
things are looking and hopefully there's been a substantial amount of progress in the  
interim.  
Streed: I don't know how much they file for the HPC, but we did major renovation in the  
building because it was going to take a lot of stuff. I hope by December 5th we see  
the progress. Meanwhile, do you need anything from me?  
Moermond: I don't you don't need to worry about that. We can just check what's in the  
computer system then on December 5th. Don’t feel like you need to update us on that  
in the interim.  
Streed: Okay, and then what happen if we finish before the public date? Is there  
anything that I need to send you to inform you that we are done?  
Moermond: No, we would be able to see in the computer system that the permits have  
been final. That would be the documentation were looking, so that wouldn't be  
something you need to worry about sending us.  
Streed: who will be responsible to supplement that permit? Would that be the  
construction company that we hire?  
Moermond: Whoever is doing the work is responsible for making an application for a  
building permit. I imagine you've hired a professional contractor who is familiar with this  
sort of thing. I can see that you have Reprise Design who were hired to prepare plans  
that went in the front of the HPC. You have an electrical contractor Live Wire Electrical  
Services and they're the ones who applied for the electrical permit. I would look for your  
contractors to do that work.  
Streed: I will talk to our contractors to get it done because otherwise they will miss.  
Moermond: I do wish you well getting this done sooner than later. We will talk again  
and a couple of months.  
Laid Over to the Legislative Hearings due back on 12/5/2023  
3
RLH TA 23-347  
Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 820  
WHITE BEAR AVENUE NORTH. (File No. VB2401, Assessment No.  
248800)  
Prince  
Sponsors:  
Delete the assessment.  
Joe Yannarelly- DSI  
Hamsa Miridi- Appellant  
Moermond: Good morning is this Hamza Muridi? This is Marcia Moermond at the Saint  
Paul City Council.  
Muridi: Yes.  
Moermond: I am calling about the vacant building fee that you've appealed for 820 N  
White Bear Ave, and on the phone line with us we have Joe Yannarelly, he's a  
supervisor in the vacant building unit at City's Department of Safety and Inspections.  
Mr. Muridi, my job is to hear your appeal, and I need to make a recommendation to the  
City Council on it. If you're OK with what it is great, they're going to go with it, and if for  
any reason you’re not okay there is a public hearing you can submit additional  
testimony, testify over the phone or in person and they can take a look at it differently  
than I do. I have to say that City bureaucracy wise you have a complicated situation,  
so that staff report will be super helpful. I have a notion of where we're headed with this  
but really need to talk to you about your plans, but I will have Mr. Yannarelly really give  
us a backwards look, and then I'd love to talk to you about what that forward look.  
Yannarelly: This was in the vacant building program on an annual basis from May 4th  
of this year until July 27thof this year. In the calendar year for this year, it was in the  
program for just under 90 days when all of their permits were finalized. It does appear  
to Inspector Dornfeld that they were moving in and occupying the space. We closed a  
vacant building file and Mr. Dornfeld recommended that Mr. Muridi apply for a  
certificate of occupancy of some sort. The cost of the vacant building fee for a year is  
$2,459 with the service charge of $157 for total proposed assessment of $2,616.  
Moermond: This was confusing, I think in part because the Fire CFO program is  
involved as well. What did we learn from them if anything?  
Yannarelly: Ms. Zimny, do you have something from Mr. Perucca that he's stated  
about this?  
Moermond: I think there's an email on the record saying that an inspector was out  
there, but the space seems to be unoccupied right now.  
Muridi: Yes, I was the one who actually called after we bought the building February  
24th, and when I received the letter finding is when I found out that the building was a  
vacant and that's when I reached out to Matt and Matt connected me with Laura. I was  
the one who actually call to get it out. Even with the fee, I sent it out to the previous  
owners, and I looked at the dates and most of those dates we didn’t own it, so I  
forward the fee right away to the previous owner because we bought the building on a  
contract for Deed. They're fully aware that there was a fee prior to buying it.  
Moermond: When you say the previous owner, do you mean a Shrizad Marimi?  
Muridi: Yes.  
Moermond: Can you tell me where you're at with like what you're going to be doing with  
the building and when you anticipate that's going to be happening?  
Muridi: Yes, I was telling Laura that we have tenants. Downstairs is going to be a print  
shop that we're going to use for, and upstairs is going to be like a African clothing and  
bags store and then we’re going to be using the space on the weekends for like  
birthday parties. They understand because I walked it with Laura about the max  
capacity, and I personally told them there can only be like 40 people in there and Laura  
said that its 49 because there's only one exit, but I would love to just get an occupancy  
for like 40 to 45 max.  
Moermond: So downstairs, you're thinking about print shop, did you say?  
Muridi: Yeah, downstairs is a print shop. There would only be 2 employees.  
Moermond: Upstairs I heard you say African clothing and bags, so like a retail use.  
Muridi: It's more like a galleria. I will say honestly, its like a rare African pictures she  
wants to put in there and all that. It's what she described to us. You know, okay,  
interesting. Almost like a galleria type and wants to use the space to host events. Like  
for people to come and look at the pictures, the custom handmade bags and all that. I  
want to say private but more like a galleria.  
Moermond: When do you have them moving in, these different tenants?  
Muridi: The print shop is owned by a close friend of ours, so, they move in and upstairs  
they haven't moved in fully yet, it’s still empty. We were not aware of the whole vacant  
building. I got a letter and I reached out to Matt right away.  
Moermond: What you're telling me is super useful in trying to problem solve where we  
need to go from here. Let me put your mind at ease, first of all, with the vacant building  
fee. It's our practice to waive them for 90 days, if you would have appeal early on. I'm  
looking at a situation where you were in the program for just under 90 days. You clearly  
have active plans and we're trying to work with fire CFO to get that certificate in place. I  
don't have any qualms at all about recommending to the Council that the fee gets  
deleted. Now, the next thing we're dealing with is getting you that fire CFO, so that you  
can move your tenants in and what I think the best move is, and I say this because  
Laura Husby, who was the inspector, I got hired away from us by the State Fire  
Marshal’s office.  
Muridi: So, Laura is not with you guys no more?  
Moermond: Right, just within the last 60 days, I would say at the most.  
Muridi: I'm so glad you told me that because we were so worried because she said that  
she was going to send an e-mail and a letter and it went ghost.  
Moermond: Right, that’s what happen there. I think that honestly, just with all of the  
files shuffling and everything it got a little bit turned around. Her supervisor, and that's  
who I'm going to suggest to reach out to, is a guy by the name of James Perucca and  
his last name is spelled PERUCCA. We can send you an email with that information.  
He's the supervisor for commercial inspections and he'll be able to either himself or  
sign a different commercial inspector. It sounds like you are ready to go, you have your  
proposed uses. They can inspect based on those uses and that everything seems to  
be in order as it possibly could be at this point, so that's your next stop.  
Muridi: Downstairs, we see the certificate of occupancy, so we're like OK. That's when  
he started moving this stuff and everything in and then that's when we found out about  
the vacant building.  
Moermond: That will be my suggestion there. During the course of today, I'll try to  
reach out to Mr. Perucca and just to let him know that you'll be calling to set  
something up.  
Muridi: Thank you very much. We have both leases in place but they had not moved in  
because we've been trying to get it figured out all the way.  
Moermond: We have a plan the vacant building fee is going away and we are getting  
you connected to the commercial inspection supervisor. I wish you well in getting these  
businesses in and hope everybody thrives, and things go.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 1/10/2024  
10:00 a.m. Hearings  
4
5
6
RLH TA 23-332  
RLH TA 23-333  
RLH TA 23-341  
Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 703  
CASE AVENUE. (File No. J2401E, Assessment No. 248300)  
Yang  
Sponsors:  
Delete the assessment.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 1/10/2024  
Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 703  
CASE AVENUE. (File No. J2402A, Assessment No. 248501)  
Yang  
Sponsors:  
Layover to LH October 17, 2023 at 10 am (hearing was not conducted).  
Laid Over to the Legislative Hearings due back on 10/17/2023  
Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 1406  
CLEVELAND AVENUE SOUTH. (File No. J2401E, Assessment No.  
248300)  
Tolbert  
Sponsors:  
Delete the assessment.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 1/10/2024  
7
RLH TA 23-328  
Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 1937  
LAUREL AVENUE. (File No. J2401E, Assessment No. 248300)  
Jalali  
Sponsors:  
Delete the assessment.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 1/10/2024  
8
RLH TA 23-325  
Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 340  
LAWSON AVENUE EAST. (File No. J2401E, Assessment No. 248300)  
Brendmoen  
Sponsors:  
Delete the assessment.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 1/10/2024  
9
RLH TA 23-350  
Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 1648  
MCLEAN AVENUE. (File No. J2401E, Assessment No. 248300)  
Prince  
Sponsors:  
Approve the assessment.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 1/10/2024  
10  
RLH TA 23-344  
Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 1235  
MINNEHAHA AVENUE EAST. (File No. J2401E, Assessment No.  
248300)  
Yang  
Sponsors:  
Delete the assessment.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 1/10/2024  
RLH TA 23-345  
RLH TA 23-316  
RLH TA 23-315  
11  
12  
13  
Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 1235  
MINNEHAHA AVENUE EAST. (File No. VB2401, Assessment No.  
248800)  
Yang  
Sponsors:  
Layover to LH December 19, 2023 at 9 am to check status of permits/CC cert.  
Laid Over to the Legislative Hearings due back on 12/19/2023  
Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 116  
SYCAMORE STREET EAST. (File No. J2402A, Assessment No.  
248501)  
Brendmoen  
Sponsors:  
Approve the assessment.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 1/17/2024  
Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 556  
WHEELOCK PARKWAY EAST. (File No. CRT2310, Assessment No.  
238209)  
Brendmoen  
Sponsors:  
Reduce assessment from $396 to $324.  
Mitch Imbertson- DSI  
Scott Robertson, Appellant appeared via phone  
Nicole Alli (Wife), Appellant appeared via phone  
Moermond: Good morning, Scott Robertson. This is Marcia Moermond at the Saint  
Paul City Council. I'm calling you about fire Certificate of Occupancy that it looks like  
you're appealing. Does that sound right?  
Robertson: I'm not appealing the certificate of occupancy fee or any of that is just the  
late fee or anything related to that.  
Moermond: We will tackle that in a second. On the phone line with us, we have Mitch  
Imbertson, he is the supervisor at fire inspections and will be helping us out today. I  
should tell you, Mr. Robertson I am the Council's hearing officer and it's my job to  
develop a recommendation on your appeal for Council Consideration. It's a  
recommendation if you're OK with what it is, they're going to go with that without  
discussion. But if for any reason you're not okay with what I'm recommending, you can  
definitely submit additional information, signed up to testify over the phone or come in  
person. Mr. Imbertson I will ask to start us out with the staff report and talk about why  
we're looking at the bill we are today that's turned into an assessment. I just want to  
talk to you more about your appeal. It sounds like you're talking about the service  
charge. We can tackle that after Mr. Imbertson gives us a little bit more background.  
Robertson: Perfect and on the phone with me as well is my wife, Nicole Alli.  
Moermond: Mr. Imbertson, what do you have?  
Imbertson: This is a residential building in our Fire Certificate of Occupancy Program.  
Looks like it was up for a renewal inspection and the inspector had mailed out an  
appointment letter 2/24/2023. She was out there for the inspection 3/13/2023 and was  
able to get into the property and assuming that the letter was received, they had notice  
of the appointment. It appears she was able to get in the property and it would have  
gone to billing after getting approved. It was charged the base fee which covers  
property being approved right away without multiple re-inspections. It looks like at that  
point it goes to billing and it appears that the bills went to the same address we would  
have on filed. But the appointment letter was bounced back to us and unless we're  
notified that there was an address change or get letter bouncing back to us as  
returned mail. We wouldn't have any reason to look into it at that point so it would just  
be an automated billing process.  
Robertson: We had a PO Box up until that time which we canceled in January. I'm  
guessing that was sent to a PO Box and at that time they were still forwarding it,  
because the certificate of occupancy did show up in our physical mailbox at our house  
but that's the last thing we received. I'm not a guy who doesn't pay a bill.  
Imbertson: I believe the certificate would have been addressed to the address we had  
on file at that time, which would have been the PO Box. If you are receiving that at a  
different address, assuming that it was getting forwarded by the Postal Service without  
our knowledge. If we get returned mail, our standard practice would be to look into that  
and try to contact you to see why we're getting them returned. But if there's a new  
address, we need to have on record, and if we're not hearing anything and not getting  
the letters returned, we have no way to know that there's anything to be looking into.  
Alli: Same for us. We didn't receive the letter and we didn't know it was an issue until  
we got the letter. We called right away when we got this and they said that our current  
home address is on file, but that bill went out to the PO Box , which obviously we no  
longer had.  
Moermond: There are two addresses that the City maintains for properties like yours  
that are non-owner occupied, there would be potentially 3 addresses come to think of  
it. The records that Ramsey County maintains, and Ramsey County is going to have  
the tax payer of record and their information. It's going to have the fee owner which may  
or may not be the tax owner. Like if somebody is buying in on the contract for deed.  
The City would also maintain an address and contact information for the Fire  
Certificate of Occupancy, responsible party. That may or may not be the owner could  
be a property manager, so when they do the appointment letters and the bills, they  
send it to who they have as the responsible party, that may or may not be the owner. It  
appears that's where the glitch is. The information was always correct. The  
assessment always goes to the tax owner. I think it was that mismatch that kind of trip  
things up, timing wise.  
Alli: It does because I also made sure to update the property tax form. We just  
assume that our new address was being changed everywhere. I didn't realize that we  
had to update our addresses in different locations for Ramsey County. We weren’t  
made aware until my husband called in and they told us that there's all these different  
places that we have to let them know about the change of address.  
Moermond: It looks like you're 2023 property tax statement did go to your street  
address in Hugo, and you're 2022 property tax statement went to your PO Box in Hugo.  
Alli: When I made the payments, I did the change of address on the back or whatever.  
Moermond: How long have you own this property?  
Alli: Since 2013.  
Moermond: Do you own other properties?  
Alli: Yeah, we own one more at Minnehaha in Saint Paul.  
Moermond: So, the same thing applies to that one. You want to make sure that your  
forms a filled out correctly for the fire inspections, folks.  
Alli: I do think when we called on this, we asked them about this all along. She said  
that she made sure that our address was change in the system. I believe that it did  
because everything has been coming to our home address. We can talk to them again  
to make sure.  
Robertson: We were thinking we were going to have an inspection date somewhere in  
the near future. I haven't received anything.  
Moermond: The address is correct for the fire inspections on Minnehaha, and it does  
indicate that a renewal is due for your property right now and that it was due as of April  
of 23. I'm thinking that. They're probably just backed up on inspections. I know that  
they've had some staff turnover. Is that where you guys are at, Mr. Imbertson?  
Imbertson: Yeah. That would be accurate, the certificates don't necessarily expire like  
a license, or something would expire at a certain date. The renewal date, the earliest  
we can schedule it and depending on staffing for certain areas may be weeks or  
months in some cases after the renewal date before we're getting that schedule.  
Moermond: I'm going to split this down the middle. The City did its best effort and an  
honest effort to send it the Fire Certificate of Occupancy, responsible party. I can  
understand that this has been a learning experience for you. I will split that service  
charge and take you from $396 to $324 for right now. If you want to look for more, the  
Council may look into something different than that but that will be my  
recommendation.  
Robertson: What do you need from me going forward?  
Moermond: Your public hearing looks like it's scheduled for October 11, so this would  
have been kind of a late appeal coming in, and that's next Wednesday. If you're  
wanting to testify, you need to sign up by Tuesday, noon if you want to go by phone.  
You can come in person, you could send an email. If you want to contest, if you're  
going to let it go through then in a week or 2 of that public hearing you will get an  
invoice in the mail and pay it or it will rule onto your 2023 for property taxes. You can  
pay that online or wait for the invoice. The amount won’t change until after the Council  
votes. I'm sorry. I didn't have a better answer for you today.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 10/11/2023  
Special Tax Assessments - ROLLS  
14  
RLH AR 23-84  
Ratifying the assessments for Collection of Vacant Building Registration  
fees billed during July 7, 2022 to April 19, 2023. (File No. VB2401,  
Assessment No. 248800)  
Brendmoen  
Sponsors:  
Referred to the City Council due back on 1/10/2024  
15  
16  
RLH AR 23-85  
RLH AR 23-86  
Ratifying the assessments for Securing and/or Emergency Boarding  
services during May 2023. (File No. J2401B, Assessment No. 248100)  
Brendmoen  
Sponsors:  
Referred to the City Council due back on 1/10/2024  
Ratifying the assessments for Excessive Use of Inspection or Abatement  
services during March 22 to April 21, 2023. (File No. J2401E,  
Assessment No. 248300)  
Brendmoen  
Sponsors:  
Referred to the City Council due back on 1/10/2024  
17  
RLH AR 23-87  
Ratifying the assessments for Graffiti Removal services during May 8 to  
June 8, 2023. (File No. J2401P, Assessment No. 248400)  
Brendmoen  
Sponsors:  
Referred to the City Council due back on 1/10/2024  
11:00 a.m. Hearings  
Summary & Vehicle Abatement Orders  
RLH SAO 23-40  
18  
Appeal of Jesse Rosillo, III to Summary and Vehicle Abatement Orders  
at 0 ISABEL STREET EAST (PIN: 08-28-22-21-0085).  
Noecker  
Sponsors:  
Grant to November 3, 2023 for compliance with both VAO and SAO.  
Jesse Rosillo- Appellant  
Richard Kedrowski- DSI  
Moermond: Is this Mr. Jesse Rosillo? This is Marcia Moermond at Saint Paul City  
Council. I'm calling about your appeal for orders at 0 Isabelle. On the phone line with  
us we have Mr. Richard Kedrowski, he is a supervisor and code enforcement over at  
the City's Department of Safety and Inspections and he'll be helping us out. Mr.  
Rosillo, my job is to hear your appeal and develop a recommendation for the Council to  
consider. It's a recommendation. If you are OK with what it is, they're going to go with  
that without discussion, if for any reason you're not okay with what I'm recommending  
to them you can definitely submit additional information by testifying and they could  
look at it differently than I do. What I like to do in this setting is to start out with the  
staff report. Staff will describe the conditions and why they wrote the orders that they  
did and then talk with you about why you're appealing those orders. What you're  
looking for, the appeals process, and we'll see if we can arrive at a conclusion. With  
your permission, I'll turn it over to Mr. Kedrowski to get us going and we'll be right back  
with you.  
Kedrowski: The Code Enforcement Department received a complaint of a camper, a  
utility trailer with a mower and vehicles as well as debris out of a vacant lot recognized  
as 0 Isabel Street East. I personally went to the site and wrote a vehicle abatement  
order for the camper being the largest object that was on there and for the trash and  
then structure that was forming around the property after writing those orders before  
enforcement can take place and the appeal was file.  
Moermond: We have both a vehicle abatement order and a summary abatement order.  
The vehicle is obviously the trailer and the summery abatement orders covers all the  
other stuff on the parcel, and just to be clear, 0 Isabel as I'm looking at this is sort of  
north of the corner of Isabel and Dunedin Terrace, kind of abutting the Union Pacific  
Railroad tracks.  
Kedrowski: That is correct.  
Moermond: Mr. Rosillo, tell me a little bit about why you're appealing and what you're  
looking for today.  
Rosillo: The trailer that is in there, that is my camper trailer park because I was living  
in Saint Peter Minnesota at the time, and I was coming here. I have my tools in there  
and everything. I was cutting down all the brushes and stuff. I've been trying to clean it  
up as best as I could, so I could put a privacy fence up and do something with the  
property to either put a garage in it or a pole barn. It's on a dead end over here by the  
railroad tracks. There's a lot of homeless people here, and every time I come there, I  
kick homeless people out of there and every time I try to call the cops, they're already  
gone. I had my trailer here, but they stole the tabs. When I came there someone that  
broke in and broke my windows and they were living in the trailer. I got my trailer all my  
windows were broken with graffiti on it. I was just about to move it and saw there were  
2 tires that were punctured and the hitch was broken. I mean, it's my trailer on there  
the tabs were current when I put them on there, however, it looks like someone stole  
them. When I went to the DMV last week, they told me you already have tabs and I  
told them that they are not on my trailer so can I get a duplicate. That's what I did, and  
I put them back on. I need more time to get all the stumps out of here. I did a survey  
and called Gopher State because I wanted to put up a fence Then the snow came in  
last year right away and it was really heavy. I'm trying to improve the property I'm not  
trying to make it look like an eyesore. At the moment, I don't know who was here at  
the time, but they actually help me clean it at the time by cutting the trees down. Every  
time I come here, there's someone there and that's why I need to put a privacy fence  
and I would like to keep the trailer here if I could.  
Moermond: What equipment is on site related to stump and tree removal?  
Rosillo: Well, I had my stump grinder, but I have it at my friend’s house now. I have the  
trailer here so that I could store like chainsaws inside there and all that stuff like that.  
I did a lot of work over here. I mean, I've been doing this over the years but I'm finally  
cleaning it all up because every time I come here there are people throwing trash,  
wood, and other stuff, so I got to put a fence up otherwise, it's going to keep getting  
messy. It's kitty corner from the school, so I don't want it to keep looking bad it looks  
really nice now. I did the best I could all the way up to today I was still tearing stuff  
down and doing whatever. if you come look at it now its improved by about, I would say  
about 85-90%. There's like a more wood back there but I think I can have that burn  
back there. I need more time to get the project that I was doing. I don't want problems  
with the City or nothing. I just need a fence up so I can improve this property. I already  
know the zoning. I did all that before and I need to get it improved and end up selling  
it, because it's an investment. There is a homeless problem and I don't know what to  
do there. Every time I come here there is trash and it's ridiculous. Its kitty corner from  
the schools so I get upset I have to clean it so I do the best I can I've been doing it for  
years.  
Moermond: I'm thinking that cleaning up the trash on the site isn't nearly as important  
being next to school as people breaking into the trailer, living there and setting up  
temporary shelter. That would be a behavioral problem that would be more impactful  
on students then trash. Setting that aside, I'm hearing an argument that you want to  
keep the equipment there to continue to clean up the site. I don't know how we can  
keep some equipment there without having the problem recreate itself. You get rid of  
the tarps and the things that the unsheltered folks are bringing with them are setting  
up there. That trailer is, I guess, what we would call an attractive nuisance. It's been a  
magnet for other kinds of problems. I'm looking for an end game, getting that off the  
property. What is your plan right now in terms of wrapping up on the work you're talking  
about?  
Rosillo: I have a stump grinder. I was going to stump out as much as I could, and then  
I was going to get a bobcat and tear up the ground and kind of level it out. I've been  
doing everything myself, me and my friend. I'm going through a breakup right now, so  
I’m in the city more and I can do all this. I'm trying, but the point is I've had this trailer  
here for 2 years and it just started because these homeless people are getting moved.  
The little kids vandalize and broke the window it wasn’t the homeless people. I caught  
the kids’ breaking windows and I chased them out. Some kids broke the windows and  
I’ve seen them do it and then they try to deny it. It was kids that did it, not the  
homeless people. It has nothing to do with the homeless. The thing is the trailer has  
been here for years and all sudden it's a nuisance, which it really isn’t. It's a piece of  
my property that I bought so I can put my personal property here. Every time the City  
moves the homeless, they go wherever we are. I come and check, and I ask them if  
they can please leave. They do it right away but there's people who throw trash here,  
and that's nothing to do with the trailer. I need the trailer here so I can do what I got to  
do. I plan on paving it out and putting my boat and my trailer here and stuff like that  
and my work equipment.  
Moermond: The zoning is I1-RC4 so could you construct structures under permit on  
that property? Absolutely. Right now, what I'm looking at is a vacant parcel and under  
code I don't have any actual use for that property. If you don't have a primary structure,  
such as a residence or business building, you can't have an accessory structure or  
yse, which a garage, shed or trailer storage would be. It sounds like what you want to  
establish is storage building and storage is an actual use. You could definitely do that  
down the road, but you need to do that by way of first establishing a primary use. I  
need you to find someplace else for storage and want to give you a reasonable length  
of time to find an alternative location to store the equipment. I'm going to recommend  
to the Council that the current situation isn't an acceptable. It is attracting, like you  
mentioned, the homeless and kids, who break in and create nuisances by way of  
trash, throwing things, and behaviors at night, all of these things are not great. It's not  
just the trailer there it's you've got you've got a lot of stuff going on. I'm going to  
recommend that you reach out to the City's Homeless Assistance Response Team  
(HART) and they may have some help. If you're experiencing people coming like if  
there's another location nearby, that there was an encampment and the City is closing  
it down and trying to get people into other kinds of shelter and they come to your spot  
to your parcel instead of going to an actual shelter that might be something that the  
Hart program folks could help with. We can definitely email or share that information  
with you. I don't have updated information from code enforcement on the reported 85%  
improvement. Today is October 3rd and I think it would be reasonable that the items  
listed in the summary abatement order and the vehicle abatement order be removed  
from the lot by November 3rd. I'm looking at November 3rd, giving you a month to deal  
with relocating things and getting the site all cleaned up. I feel like that's a generous  
chunk of time. The Council could look at it and say that you should get more time.  
We'll put this in front of them October 18th and we'll send you a letter confirming that  
date. If you want to present information that they should give you more time, that would  
be something you could do there, or you can go with that date and work with the  
inspectors on that. We'll get you the information on HART, they may be of assistance  
to you and fencing, and putting a structure on there. You need to undertake that before  
you can have the storage happening there.  
Rosillo: What is it November 3rd or October 18th?  
Moermond: November 3rd is what I'm proposing to the City Council as a deadline for  
you finishing the orders, but we'll put it in front of City Council for a public hearing on  
October 18th. That would be your opportunity to ask the City Council for a different  
deadline than November 3rd, if that's what you wanted.  
Rosillo: You can have the inspector come and look and see what I’ve ready, he would  
be impressed. Thing is, my tires are punctured and my trailer is lifted, it's broken now.  
I am tight on money right now, plus I just got a new heart failure, and I've been doing  
this stuff myself, and having high blood pressure and stuff like that. I’ve been going  
through it last month. I always come down and clean up and just clean up, however, I  
have been going through some stuff like that, personal stuff. I've been down here  
doing whatever I can. I have a trailer full of stuff just removed out of here and all that, it  
really looks nice. I'm trying my hardest and right now I have a lot of stuff going on. I am  
doing my best to get that done.  
Moermond: I tell you what, if you decide to come or if the Council decided they want  
more information I'm going to ask if code enforcement can swing by your property on  
October 16th or 17th, so that when the public hearing is on the 18th that they have  
fresh photos to look at and they can see all the work that you've done. Take care of  
yourself  
Referred to the City Council due back on 10/18/2023  
Correction Orders  
RLH CO 23-12  
19  
Appeal of Peyton Hurst to a Correction Notice at 823 ENGLEWOOD  
AVENUE.  
Balenger  
Sponsors:  
Layover to LH October 10, 2023 at 11 am (unable to reach PO).  
Richard Kedrowski- DSI  
Peyton Hurst- Appellant  
Voicemail: Good afternoon Mr. Hurst, Marcia Moermond for orders at 823 Englewood.  
We will try you back in a couple of minutes.  
Voicemail: Good afternoon Mr. Hurst my name is Marcia Moermond here at the City  
Council, calling about your property. What we are going to need to do is move on to our  
next set of cases. I will continue your case for next Tuesday and come to some  
conclusion on your case. If you have any questions, please contact our staff.  
Laid Over to the Legislative Hearings due back on 10/10/2023  
1:00 p.m. Hearings  
Vacant Building Registrations  
RLH VBR 23-56  
20  
Appeal of Stephanie Powers to a Vacant Building Registration  
Requirement at 914 COOK AVENUE EAST.  
Yang  
Sponsors:  
Waive VB fee for 120 days (to December 11, 2023).  
Stephanie Powers, owner, appeared via phone  
Moermond: Good afternoon, Stephanie Powers this is Marcia Moermond at Saint Paul  
City Council. I am calling you about your appeal at 914 Cook. I have on the line two  
other folks: Matt Dornfeld, supervisor in the vacant building at the city's Department of  
Safety and Inspections. We also have Mitch Imbertson, who is a supervisor and Fire  
Inspections over at the department. What my job is going to be today is to hear your  
appeal about this vacant building registration at 914 Cook. I need to develop a  
recommendation for the Council on that. I'm giving them a recommendation, if you're  
OK with what that is, they're going to go with that without discussion. But if for any  
reason, you're not okay with what I'm recommending you can definitely come attend in  
person by phone and asked the council for a different outcome. They could look at the  
matter differently than what I do. What I like to do in these circumstances is to start  
with a staff report and have staff describe the conditions and what's going on and then  
talk to you about why you are appealing and what you're looking for today. I'll turn it  
over to the staff team and have them lay the groundwork about what's going on at the  
City and then talk with you about what you're looking for.  
Dornfeld: 914 Cook Avenue was made a vacant building back in August 11, 2020.  
Moving forward, skipping those next 3 years it appears most recently as of September  
18th, Building Inspector Nathan documented that a new code compliance inspection is  
needed. All current permits are to be canceled and there appears to be zoning issues  
with this property being utilize as a future duplex. Also, inspector Robert Humphrey  
noted that he did speak to the property owner in reference to these issues. He made  
note that she is aware of the next steps and plans to continue to convert into a duplex.  
I am assuming that we are here today to discuss that the vacant building fee that is  
coming to.  
Moermond: Mr. Imbertson, you have anything to add.  
Imbertson: The only thing I have to add is that the property is not currently registered  
for their certificate of occupancy program. Our involvement was just to the fire that  
happened at the property after getting the code compliance inspection completed. If  
they intend for the property to be a rental or an owner occupied, they can apply for a  
certificate of occupancy, concurred with the code compliance approval.  
Moermond: We have a few moving parts here Ms. Powers and the main one for us  
today has to do with the vacant building fee. Can you tell me a little bit about what's  
going on and what you're looking for today?  
Powers: I've been paying the fee every year since in 2020 and that's $7,500, so far. My  
contractor has been working steadily to get the house in habitable state and has many  
delays have happen due to COVID-19 and related problems in the supply chain and  
worker shortage. He says he estimates the house will be completed well, he missed  
that date, but sometime this year. He said September 30th but he missed that. I have  
taken out a mortgage of $234,000 and have been making payments every month in  
property I cannot live in, so I'm paying 2 mortgages. I had no knowledge of the first  
being rolled into my property taxes causing my mortgage to go from $1,350 a month to  
$2,050 a month with no warning. There are also all kinds of fees add it to my property  
taxes at the same time that were probably related to the condemnation of the house. I  
was never able to find out the sources of the charges and there was no way to appeal  
them. I paid the 2021 and the 2022 fees in a timely manner. I was prepared to take  
$2,500 again this August that the fee double with no explanation and being charged for  
water and sewer when the water has been turned off since August 2020 and then being  
charged for garbage collecting and recycling and the cans that have been rolled up  
behind the garage that have not been use since August of 2020. The appeal is very  
late because I was evicted from my Arlington residence in March 2023 and only just  
received a notice from the owner of the house which was in August. I don't know what  
to say please help.  
Moermond: Your contractor is saying that this will be done this year. Is that what you're  
hearing?  
Powers: Yes.  
Moermond: Checking the computer for a couple of things here.  
Powers: Yes, I did ask to have that made it into a duplex but I was told no. I didn't  
realize that was still an option going forward and someone did call me from the City  
and I sent in which was like $600. I send in the fee for all the code compliance  
inspection, and that was maybe 2 weeks ago. I am having all of those redone.  
Moermond: Have you talked to somebody about the zoning application that needs to  
be made? I see that you did make one in the past but that was denied. It looks like  
they were looking for more materials or something. Have you tackled that part of it?  
Powers: No, I just assume that was a no and I wasn’t going forward with it .  
Moermond: Okay. I would say that don't make that assumption.  
Powers: Ideally, I would love to live on the second floor and rent out the first floor.  
Moermond: Okay. I think that maybe it just wasn't filled out in a way that it made  
sense to the reviewer. What I'm looking at is something that says zoning variance  
application case was received citing chapter33 to have 2 electrical meters, which is not  
in the zoning code, rejected application and sent it back along with the check and the  
letter. Were you applying for an electrical permit that would have 2 meters? Is that what  
kind of triggered this thing?  
Powers: I don't I don't know. My contractor said it would be cheaper if he could put the  
2 meters in when he was doing all the electrical.  
Moermond: I'm going to say as it looks to me like your issue is going to be that you  
don't have a lot that is big enough square footage wise under that code to have a  
duplex. You would apply for a variance to that code that would allow you to have a  
duplex. You can't right now but you could ask for a variance and that would be the  
nature of your application. If you get the variance, then you can go ahead and make  
the building changes like having 2 meters. I'm going to ask, Mr. Dornfeld and Mr.  
Imbertson, I can see that David Eide is the one who reviewed this before. Is he a  
person who would be a resource about filling out a form? Is there a different person  
now at DSI? What can you tell us?  
Dornfeld: I'll let Mitch take that one. I don't know.  
Imbertson: I believe he should still be a good contact to start with. If he's not able to  
help, he should be able to direct the call to someone that would be a working with that  
currently, but he’s a good contact to start with.  
Moermond: We will send you a follow-up letter to this hearing and we will include this  
information in there but I would say reach out to him and find out about filling out a  
form and about, I think it's the square footage at the end of the day that is going to be  
the issue. I found that your lot size is 40 wide and 125 deep. Does that sound right?  
Power: That sounds right.  
Moermond: That's 5,000 square feet. I say call him and find out I'm just not 100%  
sure, and find out what he's looking for, and what he would need to allow for  
construction of a duplex. If there's a zoning change necessary, or you need a new  
inspection report. I'm not 100% clear now that I'm looking at it, if it's the zoning or the  
fact that your inspection report is kind of not in sync with what you want to use it for.  
Let me re-say that you've got building code things and you've got zoning things. You  
may need to deal with a zoning variance, and David Eide can help you with that. You  
may already be able to have a legal duplex and the building code list of items that you  
have, that code compliance report, that would have been developed with a single-family  
home in mind. It may be that Nathan Bruhn, who is the assistant building official, he  
might have looked at that and said your inspection report isn't in alignment with the  
kind of permit that you're applying for, so you need a new inspection report that is  
specifically for duplex. I think you're going to be trying to diagnose that with those 2  
guys and we'll get their information.  
Powers: I've got Nathan Bruhn’s information.  
Moermond: Hopefully that at least helps a little bit. What I can tell you about the  
vacant building fee. It looks like we see here August 11th of 2020 as when a file got  
opened, and what that means is that this vacant building fee covers the time period of  
August 20th of 2023 through August 19th of 2024. I can definitely recommend that the  
Council give you a limited term waiver of that fee so that if you get the work done in  
that time period you wouldn't have a vacant building fee. I'm willing to go with what  
would amount to a long waiver for me, and that's 120 days since your fee was due on  
August 11th, so 120 day waiver takes you to December 11th, so if you get your  
certificate of occupancy by that day, you've got no fee. If you miss that deadline and  
you go longer than that, the City will come forward as an assessment. I'd like you to  
appeal that assessment if you end up with it, and in that process if you've already got  
your code compliance, I can help to get that prorated. It can move downward like if you  
are in the vacant building fee for 5 months, we could go with 5/12 of the year, if that  
makes center. I'm sympathetic to that, I have to say that we hear a lot about  
contractors and COVID, but that situation has largely resolved itself. I hope that your  
contractors are able to move forward more quickly than not because this is adding up  
for you.  
Powers: It has been a lot faster lately.  
Moermond: We'll go ahead with that. Those are to contact people one on the building  
side, and one of the zoning sides and hopefully they can help you map a course  
forward, that makes sense for your situation. I'm going to say one more thing, I would  
ask if you need to get a new inspection report, which I suspect that Nathan Bruhn is  
going to want you to do that, ask him if that's okay. If you get a building only or if you  
need a full code compliance, you already signed 2 weeks ago, never mind. We'll send  
you a letter confirming all this that will come out late in the week by email and  
hopefully things move a little bit more smoothly for you moving forward.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 10/18/2023  
RLH VBR 23-60  
21  
Appeal of Kent W. Jefferson to a Vacant Building Registration Fee  
Warning Letter at 2081 LONDIN LANE.  
Prince  
Sponsors:  
Deny the appeal to be released from the VB program but make property a Cat 1 VB.  
Matt Dornfeld and Mitch Imbertson, Staff DSI  
Kent Jerson- Appellant  
Moermond: Good Afternoon Kent Jefferson, this is Marcia Moermond from Saint Paul  
City Council calling you about your appeal for your property at 2081 Londin Ln. Also,  
on the phone line with us, we have two folks. Mr. Matt Dornfeld, from the vacant  
building program he's a supervisor, and also Mr. Mitch Imbertson, supervisor from the  
Fire Inspection program, they will be helping us out today. I'm looking at a vacant  
building registration appeal, and I'm going to I think start with a report from Mr.  
Imbertson. Let's hear from those inspectors and then we'll talk with you about why  
you're appealing and what you're looking for. I'm going to need to make a  
recommendation to the Council on your appeal. It's just that, a recommendation, if  
you're OK with what it is, they're going to go with that. If for any reason you're not okay  
with what I'm recommending, you can definitely submit additional information or testify  
and they could look at it differently than I do. We will follow up with you at the end of  
the week with a letter confirming the details of the hearing so that you have that, as  
well. I think I will just turn it over to Mr. Imbertson and Mr. Dornfeld, and then we will  
come back with you. Mr. Imbertson, we talked about this back in 2020 and revisited  
lately? Can you give a little background on your process over at fire inspections before  
we turn it over to Mr. Dornfeld.  
Imbertson: This property is a one-unit residential building that was in our Fire  
Certificate of Occupancy program. It was up for a renewal inspection in 2020 and at  
that time it ended up getting referred to the vacant building program as a category one  
vacant building and had the certificate of occupancy revoke, and it has not since then  
been reapproved. It has had a revoke fire certificate of occupancy since that happened  
in June of 2020. It looks like in 2023 starting in March, there was the process to try to  
get access to the property to start a new renewal inspection and get the property  
recertified to what the inspector never got in to the property and that ended up getting  
referred back to the vacant building program, as a category 2. A property that would  
now need a code compliance inspection to be set up, and recertified up to the code  
compliance process before it could be it reoccupied. The fire certificate of occupancy  
would be granted upon completing the code compliance approval. The intention is to  
have as a rental property again.  
Moermond: When that referral came to you Mr. Dornfeld in the vacant building  
program, what did you all do?  
Dornfeld: August 22, 2023 I made this property a category 2 vacant building per the  
certificate of occupancy revocation. At the time of inspection, I noted that the property  
was vacant and secure other than the garage surface door, which I was able to close  
at time of inspection. I did photograph some severe damage on the northern side of  
the property. That is the reason why for the declaration of the category 2 status as a  
they there's extensive water damage and possible critter living in that whole.  
Moermond: Mr. Jefferson, can you tell me a little bit about your appeal and what you're  
looking for today?  
Jefferson: I don't think the house is in that bad of shape. I did have some trouble this  
summer where I hire 2 different contractors to mow the grass every few weeks, they  
kind of crept out of me. But I was down there this weekend, and it is not in bad shape,  
I actually clean it up. There is some storm damage on the north side to reconstruct,  
there's no water damage, no damage inside. I did set up for the contractor to take care  
of that in the summer, so I probably made the mistake of telling him to get it when you  
get the chance and that they've been really busy this summer. Like you said, the  
house is secure, there's no broken windows out there, other than the one cracked  
window in the basement. I took that out to get repaired. There are some tree branches  
in the pile in the drive away from the storms again. I am trying to get somebody out  
there to get it cleaned out. No problems or questions with the neighbors. I know both  
of them that both have my phone number and name. I gave it to them if there's any  
questions or problems. The interior of the house has been painted, there really isn't  
much left to do in there. Probably not even a permit required except that it needs a  
new electric service, otherwise wise, the interior is in good shape it has been painted.  
The floor sounders tested some spots in the floor to see if they could sand out the  
high wood. I know that time flies probably acquire that house 14 years ago, and at that  
time it was completely redone sighting, roof, windows, interior, kitchen. I rented it for a  
number of years. The last renter I had was a little difficult getting help but she was a  
woman with children. There is storm damage on the north side, which that's really the  
only thing that you can physically see that needs repair. Gas and electric are on so I  
have to get that shot off before winter. I have never received a call or complaint from  
the neighbors. My neighbor called me this summer and was having a birthday party or  
something and ask if they could park some cars there. He actually got crap all over his  
yard, including upholstered chairs on the curb that have been there all summer. Yes, I  
did contest that it's not that bad. Is it foolish and frustrating that we have not have this  
completed yet, yes. But it really looks fine here. I had one-time last winter that got in  
there, didn’t do any damage they just hung out there. I think that was the former tenant  
because there was no damage, they must have had a key. That's really where it is. I  
mean, the garage has gotten stuff in it from the tenants that moved out that was  
supposed to come back and get it. I have to get it cleanup to get that out but again,  
it's all inside there's nothing outside.  
Moermond: What are you looking for today, Mr. Jefferson?  
Jefferson: Well, I don't really want to go into the vacant program and pay the $2,800.  
I'd like to avoid the cost and time. As far as permits required the only one probably  
has to do with the electric service, which gets its own screw and fuses, you can’t really  
do much with that. There's really no carpentry work to be done next everything inside  
the house is good except for sanding the floors. It is painted cleaned up and ready to  
go.  
Moermond: What are you going to do with the year?  
Jefferson: Well, I had somebody who wanted to rent it, but rental has become a bit of  
a problem with folks, so I'm probably just going to sell it.  
Moermond: I tell you what I'm looking at here. I'm looking at the situation back in 2020  
where your renter left, and you didn't want to renew your Fire C of O. You were not  
going to have this be a rental property. I said, OK, you're revoked you can't rent it, but  
you don't have to be in the vacant building program based on that alone. You didn't  
meet other aspects of the definition for registered vacant building. But you do now, and  
there's two items that I think are important here. I look at the soffits and eaves and I  
think that is a code violation, therefore, most definitely will need a permit to have that  
corrected. It is in excess of a $500 repair for sure. I'm looking at a yard and now yard  
and I'll tell you what the photos taken on August 22nd, sir, it is terribly overgrown. I'm  
looking at trees that are growing in between that storage garage building and house  
maybe into the foundation. The fence is certainly completely obstructed, and the lawn  
hasn't been mowed. We've got a gravel driveway that is more lawn than driveway. It's  
not looking like anybody cares about it. The taxes are being paid and is scheduled for  
forfeiture in 2025, unless the taxes get caught up again. All of these things tell me that  
you're well on your way to abandoning the property, rather than taking control of it. You  
started to interact with it again based on the fact that there's this referral to the vacant  
building program. This is not great. Even if we were to say it doesn't have multiple code  
violations, it has certainly a vacant house for more than 365 days, it's been more than  
3 years at this point. You're in White Bear Lake, according to be the Ramsey County  
record. I'm not sure why it is in such a bad shape. You're so near to be able to  
manage it better.  
Jefferson: That is close to my controller's office, but I live in Osceola, its only an hour  
away. I did contract with a couple different landscape companies to keep the grass  
mowed and everything. This summer was very hard getting people to do things. It's  
mowed up and cleaned up, I should have taken some pictures. Some of the shrubs  
and stuff are overgrown. It's kind of a weird house because there's overgrown shrubs in  
the sides of the house but it also gives a privacy. Some people like I said aside from  
what you see in those topics that is the only thing that would be considered damage on  
the house, which it can be fix in a couple days. It’s probably a 20,250-$40,000 house,  
who knows. There have been things going on with health and family, which I just  
haven't been able to pay attention to some of this staffing. It's been hard to get people  
to do things.  
Moermond: You yourself, have not gone by there to take care of things to make sure  
your contractors were doing what you hired them to do.  
Jefferson: I end up going down there to do the grass and stuff because like I said they  
just kind of crept out on me. I was down there this weekend to cut all the gras and  
trees that have fallen down because of the storm. It is all tidy up, I also trim down  
some shrubs. I never received complaints from neighbors. I go to my neighbor to the  
east, and he has crap all over his place. I think he rents the duplex and has vacant  
cars. But yes, I have not been able to get down as much as I should, yes and it  
doesn't take much to get it put back together and ready to sell. It is secure. The only  
incident that II assume it had to be renters as they had a key, and they didn’t do any  
damage.  
Moermond: I'm shocked that you didn't rekey the place over the course of all these  
years. I'm looking at a singular item if I were to count soffits and eves together as one,  
I'm willing to recommend that the Council make this a Category 1 registered vacant  
building, but I'm also going to say that I do think that this should be in the registered  
vacant building program, so far it has benefited from the City's attention to it and that  
you have been inspired to go take care of business there, where that wasn't happening  
before. Perhaps now would be a good time to motivate to get the inspection reports  
you need to sell it and move on and this place can be occupied by somebody and  
become useful again.  
Jefferson: What is the difference between Category 1 and Category 2?  
Moermond: You wouldn't need to have a code compliance inspection report if you're a  
Category 1, you would if you're a category 2. It's a matter of the repairs required before  
reoccupied. I am saying re-occupancy will get you out of the vacant building program.  
But you are in the vacant building program as a Category 1, so until somebody is living  
in there, that's the situation. That actually wouldn't be you because a construction  
company owns it not a human being, so it would have to be a person to owner occupy  
it.  
Jefferson: I am one in the same.  
Moermond: But you're not it’s a business and not a person. We need an actual person  
owning and occupying the structure. That will be the ticket out of the vacant building  
program.  
Jefferson: Does Category 1 still require the $2500.  
Moermond: Yes, it does.  
Jefferson: Can you get me out of that? Or a time frame?  
Moermond: No. If the fee goes unpaid it will role onto the property taxes, and that would  
be on to probably coming forward actually as an assessment. I don't know a month or  
2 and then it wouldn't be scheduled for hearing until 2024. It would be discussed in  
2024 as an assessment. If that went un pay, that would show up on 2025 taxes.  
Jefferson: Yeah, I'd like to avoid that. I don’t want more problems. Someone called me  
and so I signed in for an inspection on this house and they sent out 4 letters and they  
all come back. What's going am I sending it to an old address? As soon as they got a  
hold of county record they found me and they called me. I talked to them on the  
phone, and I told them I can meet them out there whenever. He was kind of upset and  
I don't blame them but have been there 4 times and nobody responded to the letters,  
and they all came back to his office.  
Moermond: This is my recommendation that the Council, and you can definitely look  
for a different outcome from the City Council. It is a public hearing, and we will follow  
up with a letter with my recommendation to them. That's what I will recommend, and  
you can contest it if you want.  
Jefferson: Is it considered a Category 1 right now?  
Moermond: Not until the Council votes on it, I would think. But let me ask Mr. Dornfeld  
on how his department would handle that.  
Dornfeld: What that means from a Category 2 to a Category 1 on your recommendation  
to mean the appellant was okay with that because most people would be okay with  
that. That's an upgrade.  
Moermond: There you go. He is willing to change his records at this time.  
Jefferson: So that’s the best you will be able to do for me?  
Moermond: That's the best I'm going to recommend for you.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 10/18/2023