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 22, 2024  
9:00 AM  
Room 330 City Hall & Court House/Remote  
9:00 a.m. Hearings  
Remove/Repair Orders  
RLH RR 23-31  
1
Ordering the rehabilitation or razing and removal of the structures at 455  
ROBERT STREET SOUTH within fifteen (15) days after the August 2,  
2023, City Council Public Hearing. (Amend to remove only)  
Noecker  
Sponsors:  
Remove within 15 days with no option to repair.  
Tom Radio appeared  
Hye Young Shin , potential Purchaser appeared  
Brother of Hye Young Shin appeared to interpret (no name given)  
[Moermond gives background/summary of file]  
Staff update by Supervisor Joe Yannarelly: no calls to the property, and if there were,  
they would be very responsive as they have in the past.  
Moermond: after we talked last there was a follow up letter on September 9. I know we  
had that translated to Korean. The City Council could give more time but they wanted a  
nuisance abatement plan put into place. I did receive a document from Mr. Radio, so  
I’ll turn it over to him to review that.  
Radio: as I set forth in my October 21 letter, after the Council Public Hearing we  
proceeded to put together the nuisance abatement plan. Three bids, one for the  
security fence, second for security and alarm system and third was a temporary  
electrical service bid as well. That’s about $36,000. Another element to negotiate was  
the closing date. This has been going on so long, we had a sixth amendment for a  
closing date. We were talking through brokers about who is going to pay for this.  
Tri-City said they expected the buyers to pay for them, since after they closed it would  
benefit the purchaser. Through negotiations we reduced the price and we’d pay 25% of  
those costs. I’ve talked to their broker and they have refused to make any contribution  
to those improvements. We’re at a juncture where the sale may be falling apart if we  
can’t bridge that gap.  
Hye Young Shin: I disagree on paying any expenses to improve the building because if  
they were taking care of the building prior to this most of the issues never would have  
happened. They have to do the environmental testing and technically the seller has to  
pay for those costs, but I paid for half. I can’t keep paying to improve the building  
before I even purchase it. That’s the reason I don’t want to split the cost of the  
nuisance abatement plan. I think it’s the seller’s responsibility.  
Moermond: looks like your broker was copied on this letter. Where is the purchase  
agreement at now?  
Radio: we have a signed purchase agreement, but the only open item is the closing  
date since we’ve passed the last date. We proposed a quick date within the next  
couple of dates. Originally it was listed for $900,000, reduced to $600,000 for the first  
purchase agreement, we’ve arrived at $300,000 on condition that the buyer has cash to  
close quickly. Significant reduction and we’ve tried for a month to negotiate that sixth  
amendment. I understand holding off to see the bids, but in terms of who should be  
paying it is in the eye of the beholder. The motivations behind it are extraneous to an  
arm’s length transaction like this. I’ve spoken with the broker, it gets translated from  
broker to purchaser’s brother, to purchaser. I’m speaking with a national organization.  
We’re all just exhausted.  
Hye Young Shin: since we met a month ago, everything is on hold because you wanted  
a City inspector to come out to see what needs to be done before it can be used.  
We’re waiting on that, but they never came. We need to know what you guys need in  
order to start construction. We have a company with estimates, but that’s our  
improvements but the City maybe wants more on what she wants.  
Moermond: the City isn’t responsible for the Code Compliance application. Do we have  
a new application for a Code Compliance from anyone?  
Yannarelly: no new application.  
Moermond: the letter says to apply immediately for a team inspection and the  
application was attached in the email. So someone needs to own that.  
Brother: the seller is supposed to do that right?  
Moermond: anyone can do that.  
Brother: we didn’t know that. We were basically waiting on that.  
Moermond: perhaps you didn’t understand the nature of our conversation, installation of  
the items is what it says. Not bids for that. First paragraph in the letter. The  
expectation for me walking in today—I have bids and they aren’t signed—that’s far  
from what the Council is looking for. But that isn’t it being done. Who accepts  
responsibility and at what point? I see buildings on the brink of death and the  
purchaser knows that, but that’s typically where the price reflects that. We wouldn’t be  
having this conversation if the building were in perfect condition.  
Hye Young Shin: we’ve stopped by a few times and nothing was done.  
Moermond: so you disagree with the premise the plan is necessary.  
Brother: we’d like to get it done before we purchase—  
Moermond: but you don’t want to pay for it.  
Brother: of course not.  
Moermond: and I don’t care who pays for it and how its negotiated. The council wants it  
done. You may stop in during that 5 mins a day, but that’s not when the garbage gets  
dumped or things get stolen. We want 24/7.  
I’ll be honest with you; your broker got this letter. You got this letter. It outlines clearly  
what the Council is looking for. I would be remiss in not telling you the Council is ready  
to say they’re done, its been over a year. We haven’t seen you in hearings, and you’ve  
been invited many times but we’ve heard you didn’t want to come.  
Brother: he told us we didn’t have to be here.  
Moermond: and he wasn’t either.  
Brother: we got the update from the seller’s party.  
Brother: the realtor told her she didn’t need to be here.  
Moermond: so the people you hired gave you bad advice.  
Brother: ok.  
Moermond: I need a plan on how this building gets back on its feet. Part of that is the  
inspection report, transferring title, money to do it. It has been communicated that it  
needs to happen.  
Brother: whatever needs to be done now to fix it, fences security camera, etc. As soon  
as she gets the final estimate she’s willing to close and start work. That needs to be  
done before she signs the final paperwork. She doesn’t want to spend any extra money  
on it.  
Hye Young Shin: I’m willing to close right away if the seller takes care of it. I’ve been  
waiting for a year to purchase, but its continually something comes up. That’s why I  
can’t sign. Once I sign I’m responsible for everything to be done, and I don’t want to do  
that.  
Moermond: evidently.  
Brother: the seller has to do everything until she signs something.  
Moermond: I don’t care what you negotiate. I don’t care who pays for it. This building  
can be demolished based on the decisions you are making right now.  
Hye Young Shin: I understand. If it doesn’t work I will walk away.  
Moermond: here’s the thing, I’d like to hear from Mr. Radio on where his client is. They  
have a purchase agreement that stops them from signing something with someone  
else until this is cancelled.  
Radio: we haven’t.  
Moermond: our office has been, and we’re copying them on the correspondence. If it  
can be helped, if it is going to stay standing, there is some moral obligation on your  
part that you’re out of it so they aren’t left holding a bag on a demolished building  
because you haven’t walked away and they can’t negotiate with someone else. You  
know you’re working at the bottom of the real estate building. You know it has flaws  
that needs to be addressed. Hence the discounted price. That’s not my decision, it is  
yours.  
Hye Young Shin: hypothetically if both parties agree on the amount to purchase right  
now, and she starts construction, can the City still be talking about tearing it down?  
Moermond: is closing on the building sufficient? No, what we’ve been looking for all  
along is a new Code Compliance Inspection Report, plans, a schedule for the rehab  
and money to execute that rehab. That and obviously the closing documents. Those  
things together are the things I bring to Council.  
Radio: the City wanted that nuisance abatement plan in place. That all had to be done  
by yesterday. It wasn’t. Closest we got was getting bids. They weren’t willing to execute  
until we agreed upon the price. Then the hearing officer would have asked for an  
extension to December 23 to complete.  
Moermond: Council feels like they are going to give time in exchange for locking it  
down better so it doesn’t have more problems. That was what I was getting from that.  
Mr. Radio, where is your client in all of this?  
Radio: I’m running out of ideas to keep the matter going in its current framework. They  
are so close. This last reasonable request by the Council threw up all sorts of  
emotions and injections and arguments. Those were needed to have in place when the  
remodel starts, because they’d want to lock down any materials. We’re talking another  
27k for the seller to assume. But its something the purchaser would have had to spend  
in any event. I do think the brokers need to get together one more time. They would  
forfeit their earnest money if the deal is cancel. The seller can do what they want, we’re  
all responsible commercial parties making business judgements. No one has been  
hurt or harmed, no bad faith. I still think this is a deal that should go further. It serves  
all the stakeholders, City, neighbors, buyer and seller. The timeclock doesn’t stop.  
The City has been very patient.  
Yannarelly: and the team inspection fee of $524 seems like it could have got going  
immediately.  
Radio: I do think their broker should have been more involved in the deal.  
Brother: Mike tried to contact your broker many times with no reply.  
Moermond: that’s between you guys. What I need to see is what was supposed to  
happen didn’t. Right now, if you want to buy it, you want to sell it, you have to go to  
Council and explain to them why you should get a chance to do that. That’s jumping in  
front a bulldozer to say you want a chance. And if you’re walking away then Mr. Radio  
is there to ask for more time to negotiate with someone else.  
Your broker needs to have a conversation with Mr. Houge today to figure out what kind  
of information you’re going to provide to the Council. Everyone would love that to go in  
there.  
Brother: she’s running out of patience too. She hasn’t been working for nearly a year. I  
didn’t know it was so difficult to purchase. Had no idea.  
Moermond: and that’s why you hire a broker.  
Radio: I understand, it has been a tough property.  
Moermond: if you wish to testify you have to sign up by noon today. Otherwise, we’ll  
see one or both of you tomorrow.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 10/23/2024  
RLH RR 24-44  
2
Ordering the rehabilitation or razing and removal of the structures at 925  
MAGNOLIA AVENUE EAST within fifteen (15) days after the December  
4, 2024, City Council Public Hearing.  
Yang  
Sponsors:  
Layover to LH November 26, 2024 at 9 am. PO to post PD and order (new) CCIR no  
later than COB Friday, November 15, 2024.  
Brian Balsaitis, owner, appeared  
[Moermond gives background of appeals process]  
Moermond: and you are 925 Magnolia?  
Balsaitis: yes.  
Moermond: and the only one?  
Balsaitis: yes.  
Staff report by Supervisor Joe Yannarelly: the building is a one story, wood frame,  
single-family dwelling on a lot of 4,879 square feet. The Fire C of O was revoked on  
June 23, 2010 and the property was referred to Vacant Buildings with files opened on  
June 29, 2010. The current property owner is 925 Magnolia Avenue E LLC, per Amanda  
and Ramsey County Property records. On August 14, 2024, an inspection of the  
building was conducted, a list of deficiencies which constitute a nuisance condition  
was developed and photographs were taken. An Order to Abate a Nuisance Building  
was posted on August 21, 2024, with a compliance date of September 20, 2024. As of  
this date, the property remains in a condition which comprises a nuisance as defined  
by the legislative code.  
Taxation has placed an estimated market value of $25,000 on the land and $171,900  
on the building. Real estate taxes are current. The vacant building registration fees  
were paid by check on June 26, 2024. A Code Compliance Inspection was done on  
August 17, 2021 and has since expired. As of October 21, 2024, the $5,000  
performance deposit has not been posted. There have been thirteen Summary  
Abatement notices since 2010. There have been four work orders issued for:  
Garbage/rubbish and snow/ice. Code Enforcement Officers estimate the cost to repair  
this structure exceeds $75,000. The estimated cost to demolish exceeds $30,000.  
Balsaitis: I bought into this LLC, a David Schmegelhagen owned this and 2 other  
buildings. It’ been a long road and I’m now the sole owner of this property under this  
LLC. This is the only property. I didn’t get full control until about 6 years ago. About  
90% of the stuff on the 2021 list is done. 2 new HVAC units. Upstairs is completely  
sheet rocked. Downstairs we need to pull a permit for the insulation inspection. Then  
all we have left is trim, doors and floors.  
Moermond: you got this notice a while back and all of the Vacant Building registration  
notices say you need this Code Compliance Inspection Report and they are good for a  
year. When it became a Category 3 you had to post the $5,000 Performance Deposit.  
Balsaitis: I’ve had nothing mailed to my house except the normal Vacant Building  
registration, for $4,800. That’s all I got.  
Moermond: does the order to abate a nuisance building not cover this?  
Yannarelly: we did have a conversation covering what he’d need to move forward. The  
Performance Deposit, new Code Compliance Inspection Report, estimates to bring to  
code. We’re basing our estimate on the old Code Compliance Inspection Report. If  
everything is done it should move pretty fast. But he still needs Mr. Zane out to redo it.  
Moermond: I’m perplexed about the order to abate here. You only send those for  
Category 3’s, right? IT does say it, it isn’t emphasized sufficiently.  
Balsaitis: I never got it. My first notice was the posting on the door.  
[Moermond walks through each requirement to receive time to rehab: Performance  
Deposit, work plans, etc]  
Moermond: let’s get the Performance Deposit and Code Compliance Inspection Report  
applied for, that is doable. If they’re done by December 4 I can ask the Council for  
more time to pull the rest together easily. Let’s talk November 26 and check in with  
you. We can figure out how the report goes to Council the next week. We can do that  
by phone, let Ms. Vang know.  
Laid Over to the Legislative Hearings due back on 11/26/2024  
10:00 a.m. Hearings  
Making Finding on Nuisance Abatements  
3
RLH RR 24-43  
Fourth Making finding on the appealed substantial abatement ordered for  
733 FAIRVIEW AVENUE NORTH in Council File RLH RR 24-26.  
Jalali  
Sponsors:  
Recommendation forthcoming.  
Voicemail left at 10:16 am: this is Marcia Moermond from St. Paul City Council calling  
Stamate Skliris about 733 Fairview. I see Mr. Ubl was out there October 7 with an  
8-item punch list. I don’t believe Mr. Ubl has been back out to confirm. That’s what  
we’re looking for before further enforcement.  
Moermond: the owner, Stamate Skliris showed up at 11:26 am, his hearing was  
scheduled for 10 am. Vacant Building staff were already gone, so we were unable to  
conduct a hearing on the matter. We can invite him to provide supplemental materials  
within a week.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 11/13/2024  
11:00 a.m. Hearings  
Correction Orders  
4
RLH CO 24-13  
Appeal of James Dittel to a Correction Notice at 997 SHERBURNE  
AVENUE.  
Bowie  
Sponsors:  
Deny the appeal and grant to March 1, 2025 for compliance.  
James Dittel, owner, appeared  
Michael Dittel, son of owner, appeared  
[Moermond gives background of appeals process]  
Staff report by Supervisor Lisa Martin: September 10, 2024 a Correction Notice was  
issued for the cargo container. Chapter 34.08 specifically does not allow these for  
storage. We asked for it to be removed by October 10. There are photos showing the  
size and also October 10 an Excessive Consumption fee was sent for failure to  
remove.  
Moermond: that was the first order, September 10?  
Martin: yes.  
James Dittel: September 10 I never received the letter. I would have addressed it  
sooner. I got 3 letters October 12. I called that Saturday and left a message, then  
called again Monday and spoke with David and there was also a temporary hockey  
board, I also got rid of. I have a small house and a one car garage and due to his  
needs my son has lots of things like big bikes. I got this container 5 years ago when  
my girlfriend, wife briefly, needed a place to store her stuff. I never had a complaint  
before now. It has been full, empty, when it was empty I thought it makes me feel  
safe. Houses 2 houses down the garage has 3 bullet holes. Michael’s swing set is  
there. It isn’t in the alley; it is up against the fence. I store some of our things since I  
don’t have a bigger garage. I’m on disability and SS disability, he’s on social security. I  
can’t afford to build a new garage, but its more a safety issue for me and Michael.  
People are constantly stealing things and breaking into garages. Even locks don’t stop  
them. My garage has been broken into 10 different times. I also have a jacuzzi for  
medical reasons and I feel safer being able to use it any time. The alley is secluded.  
You can’t see when people are coming down like you can the front. It is a safety issue.  
I would feel unsafe if I had to remove it because bullets could get through easier and  
people could break into my yard or abduct my son. A lot of issues there. I would really  
like to keep it. I pay $100 monthly to rent it. I’d like to buy it there and leave it there for  
protection, and occasional storage. My request is for a variance to keep it there for my  
safety.  
In the news just two days ago Hamline Midway, had a segment on the news about all  
the crime in the area. Hiding in nooks and crannies, drugs and other things. That is  
additional on top of this. I don’t want to have to worry about someone doing that up  
against my garage or in my backyard. It is a whole City issue, not just my issue.  
Martin: we’ve had other residents in the past that have had these and building code  
doesn’t allow them in a residential neighborhood. You have a six-foot fence around the  
back, not sure if that is still there.  
James Dittel: the fence is there. Neighbor across the alley was drunk and tried to run  
over his wife and baby and smashed into my fence, so its broken and I couldn’t afford  
to fix it. Even if I had to get rid of the container, I’d like to build a 10-foot metal wall so  
bullets can’t go through. I don’t want to have to carry a weapon out there. Safety for me  
and Michael. That’s what it is about.  
Moermond: I have a great deal of sympathy from where you come from. We all want to  
feel safe in our own homes. When I hear stories like yours my mind goes to the  
building code says no, the City’s code says no, but the problem you are faced with is  
you want some safety and security you believe the container is providing. My first  
though goes to, would that $100 buy you a repaired fence and perhaps a new fencer.  
You can go up to 7’ and could get a variance for higher.  
James Dittel: I would really appreciate some consideration until I could afford to build  
another garage or something. I shouldn’t have to move because its unsafe, I can’t  
afford too anyway.  
Moermond: how wide is that section?  
James Dittel: 20 feet and 8 or 10 feet tall. Its about 8 feet wide. I have 10 feet from the  
back fence to the alley.  
Moermond: I can’t tell you it is ok to keep it.  
James Dittel: a variance?  
Moermond: I can’t do a variance of the state building code. You should try the building  
official. He’s reviewed a couple and said no.  
James Dittel: in the past, a block off University, I’m constantly concerned about crime.  
If I got a petition from my neighbors would I be able to keep it? Who else is going to  
see it?  
Moermond: its not actually a building and its about safety. It’s a big metal box.  
James Dittel: there are four locks on the doors and it has ventilation.  
Moermond: it still is not a building.  
James Dittel: I did rent a garage for a couple years at my father’s. I had to move it out  
because the guy wanted to park his car there. I rent a storage container in Eagan, and  
I can put most of the stuff in there, but I would still feel very safe in my own back yard.  
And I also couldn’t leave a single thing out there or it would be stolen.  
Moermond: I honestly can’t give you permission on the steel fence, you should be  
talking to Department of Safety & Inspections—  
James Dittel: before I even got it there, I called someone to make sure it was ok, I  
don’t remember their name. It’s been there 5 years.  
Moermond: and it doesn’t matter how long. I want to give you time to have this  
conversation and at the same time say no and give a deadline. I’d like a sense of how  
broken your fence is.  
James Dittel: there’s a double fence that opens like a gate, they broke it completely. I  
have rope around it to keep it together to help it stand. Anyone could cut the rope.  
Moermond: and a chain would do that too.  
James Dittel: they can easily climb over. They’ve bent portions of the fence before to  
get in. Ideally it would be nice if police patrol the alleys too. I just want to be safer in  
my own neighborhood. To build a new fence would be a few thousand dollars, I don’t  
have that money. It is hard to get a loan because I’m on disability.  
Moermond: the two other intermodal cases I’ve had this month I gave a January 1  
deadline and a February 3 deadline. I’m comfortable going to March 1. That may mean  
you have a temporary solution. Ramsey County House Call may have a way to help  
[discussion of what they do].  
Referred to the City Council due back on 11/6/2024  
1:00 p.m. Hearings  
Vacant Building Registrations  
5
RLH VBR  
24-59  
Appeal of Zoltan Pusenyak to a Vacant Building Registration Notice and  
Code Compliance Inspection Letter at 1024 MINNEHAHA AVENUE  
EAST.  
Johnson  
Sponsors:  
Grant appeal and release from VB program and grant to November 8 for all interior  
repairs plus temporary fix for potholes in driveway, and grant to May 1, 2025 for  
balance of orders.  
Zoltan Pusenyak, owner, appeared via phone  
Maria Salas, owner, appeared via phone  
Eric Day, attorney on behalf of owner, appeared via phone  
Romisha Jones, tenant, appeared via phone  
Shaff: last week inspector Chute & I inspected with the property owners and tenant.  
Pretty much everything in the interior was done, we did find a couple additional things  
that were missed, the fridge and range are plugged into an extension cord. The stairs  
from the basement on the side door needs to be sealed. The outside we had better  
clarity with the property owners on things that need to happen. Quite a few shingles on  
the siding that are curling, missing, chipped and peeling paint. The driveway, parking  
surface in back, has pretty deep holes and ruts. Perhaps one of the worst I’ve seen.  
Similar siding issues on the garage. We’re getting to the point in the year where some  
of the exterior things are going to be tough to do. I don’t know it is imperative they’re  
done immediately.  
Moermond: number 12 on the new orders, the note says maintain windows in good  
condition and multiple with broken glass.  
Shaff: a couple cracks, some screens that need attention, a storm window is broken.  
Day: I did also have a question about the windows, as one of the more costly repairs.  
At this point the owners are anticipating doing the repairs but unable to do so quickly.  
Their intent is the tenants move out and they get things repaired. If they don’t sell, then  
it will need to be inspected again, but their intention is to sell and the tenant needs to  
vacate. Per the lease it is month to month, haven’t given notice yet, but it will be  
happening this week. May need some time to work on things but anticipate the tenant  
will be leaving the next couple of months.  
Ideally we’d like to get a plan. Ms. Salas did mention verbally the notice to vacate.  
Written will be done this week. Tenant will be vacated end of November. They’re going  
to need time to complete the work and come up with the funds to address everything  
on the list, weather aside.  
Jones: well, first he just told me the day of the inspection they may be selling the  
place because they didn’t have money or couldn’t get loans. If they knew all this was  
going on, why tell me now when it is getting cold. We’ve been fixing the house  
ourselves, bought a new fridge, spent $600 in July. For him to say they hope we’ll be  
out in 30 days. Where the hell can we go in 30 days? They should have told us in  
March, May when you collected our rent. I’ve been trying to be nice but this is  
ridiculous. Where can I move in 30 days. Having me fix your property. I need more  
time. If he knew this he should have told me in March when he was getting those  
notices and we need to be looking for someone else. He told us this after Leanna left,  
that he was going to sell the house and he doesn’t qualify for loans. I need more time  
for myself and my family.  
Moermond: neither for the owner or tenant can I handle any part of the lease  
agreement, eviction, that is a district court matter. I can only suggest you get  
representation. That’s where I’m at with that part. Honestly when I look at a pile of  
exterior items I’m looking at what is weather sensitive and what isn’t. My initial  
assessment of the orders are the mold in the bathroom window frame and trim, fridge  
plugged into an extension cord, and the stove and fridge plugged into same outlet.  
That may require an electrician and a permit for the work. I consider those interior  
items that can’t be pushed. I’m not a fan of broken glass. A storm window is an easy  
fix at the hardware store. If its an older window with a sash, you may need a glazer. So,  
glass, electrical, and mold be addressed by November 8. That driveway sounds pretty  
bad, but I imagine that’s weather sensitive for a permanent fix. Ms. Shaff a temporary  
fix?  
Shaff: it would be helpful to not park on, but it is deep, it could be filled in with some  
class 5 to help. It is definitely an ankle breaker right now.  
Moermond: that sounds like a good temporary fix on the way to permanent repair or  
replacement. The balance I’d look for a work plan from you folks. It would be  
reasonable to expect that work done by May 1, 2025. If you can’t, put together a plan  
with deadlines you think are doable and I’m happy to respond. I’ll send this to Council  
Public Hearing November 6. I’d like the plan locked in by October 31, close of  
business.  
Day: Ms. Shaff, with regards to the roof, is this a replacement? How much is needed.  
Shaff: of course I wasn’t up there. There’s one damaged shingle and just a little bump.  
Get someone up there to make an assessment, I’m guessing it can be repaired pretty  
easily.  
Day: ok. It wasn’t clear from the language in the letter.  
Shaff: I doubt it needs replacement.  
Salas: I will investigate borrowing opportunities. The program is already closed. I don’t  
want her to have to move but we need to fix these things and its easier without them in  
there.  
Moermond: your appeal is about the Vacant Building status. You don’t want to be in  
the Vacant Building program. I’m letting you do small fixes, repairing windows versus  
requiring new windows. This is to buy you time to figure out financing and the other  
kinds of things you need to consider. I won’t alter any recommended deadlines on  
difficulty getting in. That’s a you problem.  
Jones: you are supposed to let us know 24 hours ahead of time.  
Moermond: that’s about you guys. I’m focusing on the deadlines here. I’ve invited you  
to submit the plan, but if I don’t get one by the 31st I will make one up and share it  
with you.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 11/6/2024  
6
RLH VBR  
24-60  
Appeal of Romisha Jones, Tenant, to a Vacant Building Registration  
Notice and Code Compliance Inspection Letter at 1024 MINNEHAHA  
AVENUE EAST.  
Johnson  
Sponsors:  
Grant appeal and release from VB program and grant to November 8 for all interior  
repairs plus temporary fix for potholes in driveway, and grant to May 1, 2025 for  
balance of orders.  
Zoltan Pusenyak, owner, appeared via phone  
Maria Salas, owner, appeared via phone  
Eric Day, attorney on behalf of owner, appeared via phone  
Romisha Jones, tenant, appeared via phone  
Shaff: last week inspector Chute & I inspected with the property owners and tenant.  
Pretty much everything in the interior was done, we did find a couple additional things  
that were missed, the fridge and range are plugged into an extension cord. The stairs  
from the basement on the side door needs to be sealed. The outside we had better  
clarity with the property owners on things that need to happen. Quite a few shingles on  
the siding that are curling, missing, chipped and peeling paint. The driveway, parking  
surface in back, has pretty deep holes and ruts. Perhaps one of the worst I’ve seen.  
Similar siding issues on the garage. We’re getting to the point in the year where some  
of the exterior things are going to be tough to do. I don’t know it is imperative they’re  
done immediately.  
Moermond: number 12 on the new orders, the note says maintain windows in good  
condition and multiple with broken glass.  
Shaff: a couple cracks, some screens that need attention, a storm window is broken.  
Day: I did also have a question about the windows, as one of the more costly repairs.  
At this point the owners are anticipating doing the repairs but unable to do so quickly.  
Their intent is the tenants move out and they get things repaired. If they don’t sell, then  
it will need to be inspected again, but their intention is to sell and the tenant needs to  
vacate. Per the lease it is month to month, haven’t given notice yet, but it will be  
happening this week. May need some time to work on things but anticipate the tenant  
will be leaving the next couple of months.  
Ideally we’d like to get a plan. Ms. Salas did mention verbally the notice to vacate.  
Written will be done this week. Tenant will be vacated end of November. They’re going  
to need time to complete the work and come up with the funds to address everything  
on the list, weather aside.  
Jones: well, first he just told me the day of the inspection they may be selling the  
place because they didn’t have money or couldn’t get loans. If they knew all this was  
going on, why tell me now when it is getting cold. We’ve been fixing the house  
ourselves, bought a new fridge, spent $600 in July. For him to say they hope we’ll be  
out in 30 days. Where the hell can we go in 30 days? They should have told us in  
March, May when you collected our rent. I’ve been trying to be nice but this is  
ridiculous. Where can I move in 30 days. Having me fix your property. I need more  
time. If he knew this he should have told me in March when he was getting those  
notices and we need to be looking for someone else. He told us this after Leanna left,  
that he was going to sell the house and he doesn’t qualify for loans. I need more time  
for myself and my family.  
Moermond: neither for the owner or tenant can I handle any part of the lease  
agreement, eviction, that is a district court matter. I can only suggest you get  
representation. That’s where I’m at with that part. Honestly when I look at a pile of  
exterior items I’m looking at what is weather sensitive and what isn’t. My initial  
assessment of the orders are the mold in the bathroom window frame and trim, fridge  
plugged into an extension cord, and the stove and fridge plugged into same outlet.  
That may require an electrician and a permit for the work. I consider those interior  
items that can’t be pushed. I’m not a fan of broken glass. A storm window is an easy  
fix at the hardware store. If its an older window with a sash, you may need a glazer. So,  
glass, electrical, and mold be addressed by November 8. That driveway sounds pretty  
bad, but I imagine that’s weather sensitive for a permanent fix. Ms. Shaff a temporary  
fix?  
Shaff: it would be helpful to not park on, but it is deep, it could be filled in with some  
class 5 to help. It is definitely an ankle breaker right now.  
Moermond: that sounds like a good temporary fix on the way to permanent repair or  
replacement. The balance I’d look for a work plan from you folks. It would be  
reasonable to expect that work done by May 1, 2025. If you can’t, put together a plan  
with deadlines you think are doable and I’m happy to respond. I’ll send this to Council  
Public Hearing November 6. I’d like the plan locked in by October 31, close of  
business.  
Day: Ms. Shaff, with regards to the roof, is this a replacement? How much is needed.  
Shaff: of course I wasn’t up there. There’s one damaged shingle and just a little bump.  
Get someone up there to make an assessment, I’m guessing it can be repaired pretty  
easily.  
Day: ok. It wasn’t clear from the language in the letter.  
Shaff: I doubt it needs replacement.  
Salas: I will investigate borrowing opportunities. The program is already closed. I don’t  
want her to have to move but we need to fix these things and its easier without them in  
there.  
Moermond: your appeal is about the Vacant Building status. You don’t want to be in  
the Vacant Building program. I’m letting you do small fixes, repairing windows versus  
requiring new windows. This is to buy you time to figure out financing and the other  
kinds of things you need to consider. I won’t alter any recommended deadlines on  
difficulty getting in. That’s a you problem.  
Jones: you are supposed to let us know 24 hours ahead of time.  
Moermond: that’s about you guys. I’m focusing on the deadlines here. I’ve invited you  
to submit the plan, but if I don’t get one by the 31st I will make one up and share it  
with you.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 11/6/2024  
1:30 p.m. Hearings  
Orders To Vacate - Fire Certificate of Occupancy  
7
RLH VO 24-33  
Appeal of Jerry A. Brashier to a Revocation of Fire Certificate of  
Occupancy and Order to Vacate at 511 MINNEHAHA AVENUE EAST.  
Noecker  
Sponsors:  
Forthcoming recommendation pending inspection (Friday, October 25 at 1 pm.) and  
owner's proposed plan and schedule to come into compliance (submitted no later than  
COB 11/6/24).  
Jerry Brashier, owner, appeared  
[Moermond gives background of appeals process]  
Staff report by Supervisor Leanna Shaff: this is an inspection with Daryl Chute.  
Approval with corrections of Fire Certificate of Occupancy in February. It talked about  
window frames, trim boards that are water damaged, replace missing screens, exterior  
walls. Chipped and peeling paint, trim on fascia. Quite a bit of exterior things, it was  
February so paint wouldn’t stick.  
Moermond: so, approval with corrections say you’re good to go but things that need  
better weather we’re happy to give an extension on.  
Shaff: right, it was given until June. June 12, July 22, and September 16 we still hadn’t  
received anything about improvements to the exterior for the items cited. The inspector  
did talk with me and we make it so we know the weather sensitive items have until  
early summer. I can’t paint my house and you can’t paint when its really wet. This  
should have been taken care of a long time ago. I agree there are some items that  
perhaps appear to be replaced. I drove by this morning and it looks like you’ve opened  
up the exterior walls and put wrap on to replace window wood. But I have noticed there’s  
a lot---not sure why this wasn’t caught by inspector—but there are a lot of tuckpointing  
that needs to be done. We had a fire pit, not sure if that’s removed yet. That window  
work especially, once you open the building envelope we require a permit.  
Moermond: you have notes for the items. Tell me where you are at.  
Brashier: I’m appealing for myself and the tenants that live there. Everyone out by  
November 1 is harsh. I do feel like the goal posts have moved continually. The initial  
orders from December 2023, the items do change. It isn’t the same issues, so it isn’t  
like I haven’t tried to comply. That being said, the cosmetic work on the windows, it is  
indeed cosmetic. I did invite the inspector back to show him I wasn’t replacing  
windows; I have videos so it shows the windows themselves aren’t being done but the  
outside windows are as you requested. I want to comply, I really do. As Ms. Moermond  
can say she heard, I have a construction container out there because I’m trying to get  
work done on the building. If you look at any time in the past through these  
subsequent inspections, lots has been done for each one. I took all the boards off,  
since I wasn’t passing on the trim boards. So, I ripped all the trim boards down, only to  
be told that also wasn’t good enough because the stubs that stuck out I have to paint.  
That’s silly, if I paint the end of a board that’s supposed to breathe. So, I put trim  
boards back on, after I took them off. I put up a big plastic trim board this time. If we  
start with the fire pit, it was a 12” thing a tenant put there. I have a giant pile of dirt on  
that thing, I got rid of it completely. I have photos. It is all gone.  
Moermond: that’s something easily seen on reinspection. Let’s talk more about the  
windows.  
Brashier: when you look at the parapet walls, Bayport, it has been going on forever. I  
gave them a deposit a while ago, hoping to be redone. The repointing of those parapet  
walls, insurance did give me a green light on, and that’s been in limbo because they  
wanted to include the roof. That was done a while ago.  
Initially peeling paint was the problem on all the windows, and the trim boards. The  
inspector wanted all the buckboards around the windows replaced, ground down or  
filled. I informed them it was a Herculean job he was referencing and I did show the  
structural integrity. I was literally kicking the bottom of the windows to show him they’re  
rock solid. They’re in no way impeding the safety of anyone. He told me they all need  
to be replaced, painted, or I could fill them with putty or have them wrapped so he  
didn’t see it because it looked unsightly. I did redo the buckboards so when you look  
you can see the wood, but I can show you the video --- but I’ll finish reading my little  
statement here.  
I again put trim boards along the front skirt board because he came back and said it  
wasn’t good enough after I painted it. Then the paint peeled because its an exterior  
rated board, then I even scraped off one so if you drove by today, I scraped to show its  
marine grade plywood that’s being shown. If you took a photo today, I wanted to  
showcase that. It is impervious, meant for water contact. I did that so it could be seen.  
The integrity is fine on this.  
The hole in the back where the trim boards used to be, they were for cosmetic  
purposes only. Give or not give. However, Bayport asked me to take them down so  
they could see exactly what was below for insurance. I removed them to get  
tuckpointing bids.  
I did fill all the holes back there, the 5 holes that held the trim boards up. They were  
the size of a dime. I filled with white caulking to contrast with the tarred area so they  
can’t be missed. I can show a photo of that. That’s the windows and the trim boards. I  
hope that satiates your concerns. If you drive by right now I specifically peeled all the  
paint off the plywood so it could be seen. I have a photo of that too. It isn’t rotting, I  
took the paint off so it could be seen. I stopped everything so he could look at the  
window inside to outside, see the wood that was replaced, because I’m not redoing  
windows. This is to pretty it up. We’re not removing windows. I left it like that. He in  
turn said I was failing to do anything. I called him and left a message and sent an  
email to ask what was going on here. That’s the end of it and now here we are. I  
haven’t heard back from him, but I’m guessing he did tape to the front door the  
Revocation notice. But that’s the windows and the trim boards. Does that answer every  
concern you have ma’am?  
Shaff: no. It does not. Looking at the photos, even on the 14th and thinking there’s all  
sorts of exterior problems.  
Brashier: can you elaborate, ma’am?  
[Shaff shows a photo]  
Brashier: that’s where I ripped the whole trim board off the front and now it is back on.  
What are your other concerns about the windows?  
Shaff: this one?  
Brashier: that’s the one I have the video of! The one I left undone. But if you drove by  
this morning you saw that’s done now.  
Shaff: it isn’t done because I can’t see what’s underneath it.  
Brashier: ah, but I have a video to show you everything. May I show it to you?  
Moermond: are these the photos you’re looking at?  
Shaff: yes.  
Moermond: we can give him this set.  
Brashier: I have photos and videos to show you what is under it.  
Shaff: I understand that, but the wrap around the windows, is it all taped properly and  
all that kind of stuff too? That’s what you’re saying?  
Brashier: that’s cosmetic.  
Shaff: not necessarily.  
Brashier: I put the barrier up just to put the barrier up. If I peeled it back so you could  
see, it is the old windows. I just put it back the way it was before. This was the  
cosmetic face; this was the old trim that’s like 100 years old still there. I can show you  
inside to the outside. It is rock solid. You could drive a car into it.  
Shaff: how long have you owned this building?  
Brashier: I bought in between deployments, so I want to say 2017 or 2018.  
Shaff: you’ve replaced the windows somewhere along the line.  
Brashier: no, I did not. I was trying to find the historic registry. I found the church  
across the street because I thought it would be super fun to see what I could find, it  
used to have a roof and all this stuff before. It was a master electrician who owned it  
before me, by the name Josh Berbel but I called him twice and for whatever reason he  
let it go to the bank. He owned the entire block. That’s neither here nor there, but no,  
it wasn’t me. He may have, but I couldn’t ever get ahold of him. I was just putting back  
the way things were and replacing the wood because just the wood on the outside I was  
told was in question. I have a whole video showcasing the old trim behind the Tyvek.  
This window has not been replaced.  
Shaff: I’m not doubting that it hasn’t been replaced. Somewhere along the line it has  
been, no permit. That is not a source of contention however I do question integrity  
given the state of the rest of the building, with lots of open joints, missing mortar,  
holes around window frames, etc. I have difficulty with that.  
Brashier: are there holes around window frames?  
Shaff: from what I can see, yes.  
Moermond: October 14 photos show obvious holes.  
Brashier: there are no holes in the windows. There are the drilled-out dots, where the  
old window weights used to be in the walls. That’s in some of them. You can still see  
all those are plugged. Someone probably did that 100 years ago.  
Moermond: probably not. The photos I have are dated October 14, and there’s a  
couple photos—here’s the thing. We’re going around and around. You want to show us  
photos and videos and I’d tell anyone coming in, we have to have inspector eyes on it.  
The last time, from this morning, I see we have—you’re saying it cosmetic—but the  
area underneath the windows are missing.  
Shaff: I’d like to go out myself with the property owner and rewrite the orders with more  
specifics.  
Moermond: that sounds good, then everyone will be on the same exact page. That  
would be really helpful. If there’s a correction and we can get a photo and be dealt with.  
Brashier: I want it clear that I am trying to make this look as good as possible, keep it  
done, have it done right. That mailbox was $5,000, which I only got because my  
tenants were worried about their packages being stolen. I wouldn’t spend $5,000 just  
for a mailbox if I didn’t care. I recognize it needs probably $250,000 in exterior work.  
Moermond: we’re not there. We’re in a space of bringing it into minimum compliance.  
Not replacing windows. We have a supervisor going out.  
Brashier: with your credentials ma’am I’m sure you can see that I didn’t touch it.  
Shaff: no, no don’t presume you’re sure I can see. That’s why we’re going out. Friday at  
1 pm.  
Brashier: I have a job.  
Shaff: what are your hours?  
Brashier: 7 am to 3:30 Monday through Friday.  
Shaff: you’ll need to make some arrangements to meet me out there during the day.  
Brashier: alright.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 11/13/2024  
3:00 p.m. Hearings  
Special Tax Assessments  
8
RLH TA 24-422  
Deleting the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 1225  
EDGERTON STREET. (File No. CG2403A1, Assessment No. 240115)  
Kim  
Sponsors:  
Delete the assessment.  
Moermond: we are recommending deletion because they were being build for both the  
old account and a new account.  
Barden: correct.  
Moermond: was this an issue also for Quarter 1 and Quarter 4?  
Barden: yes.  
Moermond: so, we’ll be going back and doing a resolution for those quarters. And  
you’ve taken care of Quarter 3.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 11/6/2024  
9
RLH TA 24-421  
Deleting the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 75  
MARYLAND AVENUE EAST. (File No. CG2403A1, Assessment No.  
240115)  
Kim  
Sponsors:  
Delete the assessment.  
Staff report by Jillian Barden: Waste Management has been triple billing a  
single-family home with one 64-gallon cart. They were made aware of the triple billing  
Quarter 2, 2022 and requested the assessment then being reduced then. They didn’t  
remedy the mistake in their system, so they’ve continually been assessed for three  
64-gallon carts. Staff recommends reducing to $129.57.  
Moermond: with late fees?  
Barden: yes.  
Moermond: the only way to rectify was by Waste Management fixing it or appealing,  
and Waste Management didn’t do it. What would it be without late fees?  
Barden: $112.57.  
Moermond: I think that’s fair. This is a mess. So, 2022 was fixed, but 2023 we are  
going to do resolutions?  
Mai Vang: yes, 3 resolutions have been sent.  
Barden: I included late fees in the numbers I sent to Mail, do you want those without  
them?  
Referred to the City Council due back on 11/6/2024  
10  
RLH TA 24-428  
Deleting the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 1894  
MECHANIC AVENUE. (File No. CG2403A1, Assessment No. 240115)  
Yang  
Sponsors:  
Delete the assessment.  
No one appeared  
Moermond: owner has proof of payment and its attached. Perfect, delete.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 11/6/2024  
11  
RLH TA 24-429  
Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 1803  
REANEY AVENUE EAST. (File No. CG2403A1, Assessment No.  
240115)  
Johnson  
Sponsors:  
Reduce assessment from $25.34 to $8.60.  
No one appeared  
Moermond: after many gymnastics we went from $25.34 to $15.53.  
Barden: no, reducing by $15.53, to $9.81.  
Moermond: nope, the other way around.  
Barden: $9.80 is the new charge, for the bags and the $1.10, correct? The $13.44 late  
fees were Quarter 1 late fees from the Quarter 2 bill.  
Moermond: down to $8.60. Remove the late charges.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 11/6/2024  
12  
RLH TA 24-427  
Deleting the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 674  
VIRGINIA STREET. (File No. CG2403A2, Assessment No. 240116)  
Bowie  
Sponsors:  
Delete the assessment.  
Moermond: this is a deletion because they had a service hold on one of the units?  
Barden: yes.  
Moermond: recommend deletion.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 11/6/2024