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, March 3, 2026

9:00 AM

Room 330 City Hall & Court House/Remote

9:00 a.m. Hearings

Special Tax Assessments

RLH TA 26-22

Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 935

CASE AVENUE. (File No. J2601R5, Assessment No. 268606)

Yang

Sponsors:

Delete the assessment. Items in original SAO were removed. Cleanup removed

new/different items.

Celia Cabrera, 4 G Realty Llc, appeared via phone

Aman Geda, 4 G Realty Llc, appeared via phone

[Moermond gives background of appeals process]

Staff report by Supervisor Richard Kedrowski: a Summary Abatement Order was

issued to remove and properly dispose of furniture and trash. Upon reinspection they

hadn’t been removed, and work order was issued. Work was done June 30th, 2025 for

a total assessment of $854.

Moermond: what is your relationship with the property?

Cabrera: Aman is representing 4G and I’m the property manager. Every letter we’ve

received we’ve gone and cleaned up. I’ve gone and done it. This is in a bad area and I

clean it up every couple of weeks and we are constantly dumped on back there. I get it

cleaned up immediately. When they went to re-assess none of what was in the letter

sent originally was in that picture. It was cleaned up and people dumped new things.

Geda: she explained well. City sent it to the wrong address. 2300 Nevada, we moved

like 2 years ago. We didn’t even get notice. Whenever we get notice we clean up.

Moermond: Mr. Geda, the address that the Ramsey County tax office has is 855 Third

St SW Ste 6th in New Brighton. Is that no longer correct?

Geda: no.

Moermond: you need to reach out to Ramsey County and give them your new correct

address. That’s where all your tax documents get sent to. That’s the address the City

legally has to use. It is also sent to occupant. Do you get a copy as well Ms. Cabrera?

Cabrera: I do not. Sometimes there happens to be a letter in unit 8, so sometimes

they give it to me. It is hit or miss.

Moermond: we have photos from June 30th. We’ll get photos from the office and

should be able to delete this. Are you the Responsible Party for the property Ms.

Cabrera?

Cabrera: yes, I am.

Referred to the City Council due back on 3/25/2026

10:00 a.m. Hearings

Special Tax Assessments

RLH TA 25-357

Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 724

CASE AVENUE. (File No. J2512E2, Assessment No. 258327)

Yang

Sponsors:

Continue CPH to October 7, 2026 and if no same or similar violations, delete the

assessment (otherwise approve in full).

Shein Yang, owner, appeared via phone

[Moermond gives background of appeals process]

Staff report by Supervisor Richard Kedrowski: orders were sent for numerous vehicles

not in compliance. Upon reinspection it was still not in compliance so an Excessive

Consumption fee was added for excessive inspections. Total assessment of $169.

Moermond: there was an order to take care of the vehicles, and the deadline for that

was February 18th and it wasn’t done by then so they issued you a bill for the extra

inspection for having to come out when it wasn’t done. Then they issued you new

orders, which you did appeal, and we spoke about that. That happened after this.

[Ms. Yang never replied, so call was disconnected and called again at 9:46 am.]

Yang: why are we getting all these charges? I’ve been living there for 5 years. Nothing

happened like that before. We’re just going through all the vehicles and looking for

documents to make it current and all of a sudden it just started happening. Why can’t

someone let us know ahead of time before it gets us those kind of notices. That’s

what I don’t understand. Even though it’s my property and I can park whatever I want

around my property.

Moermond: we talked about this a fair bit when we had a hearing on the Vehicle

Abatement Order. You got two different kinds of orders. First you got a Correction

Notice asking you to comply by this date. When they came on the February 18th

deadline the vehicles were still there. They sent a different type of letter next, a

Summary Abatement Order, saying the City will charge you if they aren’t removed.

That’s the one you appealed and we talked about and things got taken care of. The

City then sent you a bill because they had to inspect again and send out new orders.

The fact you didn’t get it done on time is why you received this bill. Why do you feel

you shouldn’t have to pay?

Yang: what kind of bill is this for?

Moermond: this is the type the City sends out when you’ve had more than your fair

share of assessments.

Yang: they just want to bill whoever they want. That’s how it sounds!

Moermond: you were given a deadline to take care of the problem. You didn’t’ do it.

They had to send an inspector out because it wasn’t done and they’d have to make

another trip. Are you saying you don’t want to pay because you dealt with it? Is that

what you are saying?

Yang: mhmmm. Someone is going through our property even though it is what we pay

for. Why would someone start billing us when it is our property and we can’t do this and

that and can’t park there even though we pay for our property?

Moermond: yeah.

Yang: we can do what we want with our property.

Moermond: that’s where your mistaken. You can park your car on your property but it

has to be in a legal place and can’t just be wherever. It also has to be licensed and

operable if it is stored outside. That is against City code. Things all needed to be

taken care of. You can have cars, but you can’t just have them everywhere. That’s true

of everyone in the City.

Yang: it just seems right where suddenly they’re just billing people saying this doesn’t

go there. Now it happens out of nowhere. It isn’t necessary. No notification or anything.

Moermond: there was notification.

Yang: there wasn’t at first.

Moermond: a Correction Notice was sent to you.

Yang: that wasn’t before.

Moermond: I’ll see if we can get Department of Safety and Inspections to look for that.

Have there been other problems since Mr. Kedrowski?

Kedrowski: not at this time.

Moermond: you need to keep your property clean with no problems and do that through

October 1 and then this bill will go away.

Yang: what kind of bill? Send me all the documents. And I will just look into it.

Referred to the City Council due back on 3/18/2026

RLH TA 26-43

Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 2385

VALENTINE AVENUE WEST. (File No. 2601T, Assessment No.

269000)

Kim

Sponsors:

Approve and make payable over 10 years.

No one appeared

Moermond: this is for a tree removal of a burr oak and request from property owner was

payment be spread over 10 years. So recommended.

Referred to the City Council due back on 4/15/2026

Special Tax Assessments-ROLLS

RLH AR 26-8

Ratifying the assessment for Removal of Diseased and/or Dangerous

Tree(s) on Private Property during the months of July to October 2025.

(File No. 2601T, Assessment No. 269000)

Noecker

Sponsors:

Referred to the City Council due back on 4/15/2026

RLH AR 26-7

Ratifying the assessment for Removal of Diseased and/or Dangerous

Tree(s) at 837 PEDERSEN STREET. (File No. 2602T, Assessment No.

269001)

Noecker

Sponsors:

Referred to the City Council due back on 4/15/2026

11:00 a.m. Hearings

Summary & Vehicle Abatement Orders

RLH SAO

26-20

Appeal of Hannah Larson to a Summary Abatement Order at 760

COTTAGE AVENUE EAST.

Yang

Sponsors:

Appeal withdrawn by the DSI as orders were issued in error (refund to be given to

appellant).

Moermond: this was a Summary Abatement Order for tires between garages. Since the

order was issued and appeal filed the Department of Safety and Inspections has

withdrawn the order.

Supervisor Kedrowski: after reviewing the file and looking at the aerial photo it was

determined that the driveway of this property is at 764 so the photo doesn’t coincide

with the complaint. Inspector Williams determined it is between 774 and 776 Cottage

and reissuing proper orders to appropriate parties.

Moermond: an appeal was paid for and we will go about the business of refunding the

money.

Referred to the City Council due back on 3/18/2026

RLH SAO 26-21

Appeal of Mark Puchala II to a Summary Abatement Order at 2016

FREMONT AVENUE.

Johnson

Sponsors:

Layover to LH March 24, 2026 at 11 am for further discussion. PO to remove couch

from rear yard prior to LH.

Mark Puchala, owner, appeared via phone

[Moermond gives background of appeals process]

Staff report by Supervisor Richard Kedrowski: a Summary Abatement Order was

issued February 11 which included removing brunch, tree logs, cushions, and other

debris in back yard along with stopping pest feeding because ground feeders are not

allowed.

Puchala: I agree with moving the couch. I can move the squirrel feeder. He guided me

through how I can plant bushes for the brush pile, but my lumber pile under the pine

tree he said the platform has to be visible. I can’t just pile it under my shed. They were

frozen so I needed it to thaw before I could make a presentable platform.

Kedrowski: the ordinance does cover the stacking of firewood off the ground to prevent

rodent harborage.

Moermond: I am seeing sticks and a log and some scrap wood, some firewood near

the big log.

Puchala: the sticks are the firewood. I use them for wattle fences and whittling. Then I

use the shavings.

Moermond: I see a Christmas tree.

Puchala: I got it for the birds, but I’ll be replacing it with live bushes when I can

manage it.

Moermond: for the sticks you aren’t going to be using for art or burning, when do you

picture that project being done?

Puchala: it is a gradual project. I use all of them for both. I made wattle fences, and

then I use the shavings for fires.

Moermond: so undertaken once the ground has thawed?

Puchala: yes.

Moermond: we have scrap boards, building materials.

Puchala: yeah, those I’ve been trying to cut them down into stakes. You can see some

on the east side of the house. I just didn’t finish because I got tired and had a leg

injury during the winter.

Moermond: so you’ll be using those once the ground thaws?

Puchala: yes. Trying to delineate the curbside. We had an issue last year with the lawn

I was trying to use the stakes as what to keep the yard behind and keep things neater.

I was planning to talk to zoning about what is appropriate.

Moermond: no higher than 4’ tall.

Kedrowski: not on the boulevard, you can’t have a 4’ fence.

Moermond: I thought he meant yard.

Puchala: I was hoping to have one in the boulevard.

Moermond: no, no fences on the boulevard.

Puchala: can you get permission to build there?

Moermond: you can have things growing there but you can’t have a fence installed. The

plants can’t exceed 18” within 30 feet of an intersection and 5’ of driveway. Most

modest shrubs are fine; they don’t get that tall. So the couch is going?

Puchala: I’m trying to get it into the shed. Hopefully this week.

Moermond: can we get the logs properly stored or put in shed? I don’t think you wanting

to use the sticks is a bad thing but we need a timeline. I know your appeal says others

have piles of sticks, yeah they sure do. You aren’t supposed to.

Puchala: I was surprised, they’ve been there almost 20 years now. My plan was to build

a platform for them. How high do they need to be elevated?

Moermond: code isn’t super clear. It just says elevated. In practice I’ve said 3 to 4”.

Puchala: that should be fine, but it may take me a month as I’m just starting to try and

find my first job in a few years. I have to move everything aside and fine spare time. I

think I should have it done by end of month to get them on top of planks 3” off the

ground.

Moermond: the brush pile, logs, and branch structure. You’re using shrubs for that

instead?

Puchala: yeah. The birds need something. They used the camper we were forced to

move, so we put the brush up. They even use the lumber pile. I don’t really see what I

can do, it is just asking for grace and it goes against code.

Moermond: let’s give you six weeks for the sticks and branch structure. The feeding

situation sounds like you are feeding them off of the ground?

Puchala: the inspector told me the bird feeders are fine. I put a squirrel feeder on the

maple tree which he said I have to take down. I was putting down corn for ducks but

he said I have to stop because it counts as feeding the squirrels, so I’m not allowed to

feed ducks anymore.

Moermond: I guess they have the same appetite for corn. How else to feed the ducks

would be the question.

Puchala: unfortunately with the ducks they fly around and look for spots and we’re

teaching them our spot is good so if I have to stop feeding the squirrels corn then they

will abandon the site, just like the sparrows and finches are likely to abandon once we

remove the brush.

Moermond: I’m thinking about alternate location than ground. They can fly. An elevated

platform with corn?

Puchala: that would actually serve the squirrels not the ducks.

Moermond: squirrels can be really destructive.

Puchala: we actually developed a very symbiotic relationship with the squirrels since I

don’t rake the leaves and so they build nests in our trees and protect against the

Cooper’s hawks that try to scout our place out. The squirrels help because the blue

jays keep them in line. If I can, the best solution is I can still put corn around the

maple tree, I just don’t leave as much corn because then the squirrels go to other

places when there aren’t heaping piles. Ducks need a water source, which we have,

and then they need corn noticeable from the sky. They have to drink the water to

digest the corn. As long as I don’t have heaping piles the squirrels don’t come as much

so it should be fine. Someone may still try to report me for feeding the squirrels, but it

is for the ducks. I can always confirm and validate. My partner is looking for how to

develop credentials with wildlife habitation. How this does pass for nature conservation.

Moermond: it sounds like a lot of what you are trying to do is permaculture?

Puchala: absolutely. I’m trying to figure out how to build things that last and so when I

die they become part of nature.

Moermond: do you have a long or medium term on how you want to modify the yard.

Puchala: I have ambitions for what I want to do. I’m in the middle of drawing potential

plans but most of it I still need to validate which are smart plans and which will cause

the same trouble I have. I have a lot of rough drafts.

Moermond: I’m comfortable waiting a minute on the feeding and sticks and doing an

extension. I would like a better road map for where we’re going. Does that seem

doable?

Puchala: it does. If I could have an extension with the squirrels I would like to speak to

the MN extension if there’s a way to engage and offer food that does inherently feed the

squirrels but not in the way to pest feed but not in the way it disrupts the birds so

much.

Moermond: and if there isn’t we need to engage that too.

Puchala: right. I’d love to write up the report on that.

Moermond: let’s talk March 24. In the meantime I’d like you to connect on what can be

done with the duck/squirrel/groundfeeding situation. Get the couch moved as good

faith to continued discussion.

Laid Over to the Legislative Hearings due back on 3/24/2026

Making Finding on Nuisance Abatements

RLH SAO 26-19

Making finding on the appealed nuisance abatement ordered for 1377

MINNEHAHA AVENUE EAST in Council File RLH SAO 26-9. (Refer to

March 10, 2026 Legislative Hearing)

Johnson

Sponsors:

Refer back to LH March 10, 2026 at 11 am to set deadlines.

Mary Skweres, owner, appeared via phone

Moermond: it does look like things are better, but still work to do.

Skweres: he got everything he could moved that wasn’t frozen. There is brick out there

but it is going to be used as soon as it thaws. It isn’t in the way of any vehicles. The

other items are still frozen. He’s making calls on removing the vehicles, but he hasn’t

gotten that far yet.

Moermond: the vehicles are very noticeable, obviously. One has a tent covering it.

Skweres: yeah, because of snow.

Moermond: is that the car you use? The other is just stored?

Skweres: yeah, it hasn’t been used for a while. We are getting rid of it. He’s slowly

been removing tools from it. He focused on the other items. Inspector Munos told Joe

everything looked good until everything melted. He even tried moving some with a rake

and it couldn’t.

Moermond: I need to come up with a date.

Skweres: I know he doesn’t want to move the brick because it is heavy and it will be

used soon. It is off to the side, not piled in the driveway.

Moermond: can you write a Vehicle Abatement Order with a one month deadline on it?

Kedrowski: yes.

Moermond: so he will have a month to take care of that.

Skweres: the whole reason there are so many cars parked in the alley is because

when they’re parked in front overnight they get hit because of the bar across the street.

I’ve had 3 hit when parked in front.

Moermond: tomorrow I’ll ask them to refer this back to Legislative Hearing next week

and between now and then get the area by the neighbor’s garage cleaned out. Then we

will set firm deadlines.

Referred to the City Council due back on 3/4/2026

1:00 p.m. Hearings

RLH VBR 26-1

Appeal of Raim Abdurakhimov to a Vacant Building Registration Notice

and a Notice of Condemnation and Order to Vacate at 935 GERANIUM

AVENUE EAST.

Yang

Sponsors:

Make Cat 1 VB and allow permits to be pulled; waive VB fee for 60 days (to April 13) to

have Fire C of O reinstated.

Raim Abdurakhimov appeared

[Moermond gives background of appeals process]

Staff report by Supervisor Keith Demarest: February 13 our Vacant Building team

reached out to our department and asked if we had any open cases/orders. AT the

time we did not. What prompted the request was on their regular patrols one of the

insepctors saw it was boarded up. Normally when a property is boarded it is known to

the Vacant Building team as vacant. I took the referral and reached out to the property

owner to discuss. February 19 I met onsight with the property owner to do a

walkthrough of the building. property owner explained it was boarded proactively to try

and keep squatters out of the 2 story building. Once we gained access maintenance

people took board off and there was a strong smell of gas. I requested Xcel and St.

Paul Fire Department out. Xcel found 5-6 gas leaks in the basement. I completed my

inspection and found gross unsanitary conditions. No smoke or carbon detectors. Due

to the concern about safety I had all utilities shut off and secured up again. A report

was sent to the property owner the next day advising it was condemned and referred to

the Vacant Building team.

Staff report by Supervisor Matt Dornfeld: Hoffman opened a Category 2 Vacant

Building per that referral. As Mr. Demarest stated, Hoffman did note he was the one

who reported it and documented all utilities were shut off and completely boarded.

Abdurakhimov: as I mentioned to the inspector I cant find the logical explanation to

condemn the building. We fully remodeled both units and placed them up for rent.

Squatters came in. We called St. Paul Police Department who removed the squatters

and then advised us to board the building. The squatters were released instead of

being charged with burglary, vandalism and active drug use. Instead of helping us deal

with the squatters, the City condemned the property. Everyone knows the squatters are

coming from the neighboring building, the police even told us. I’m struggling to

understand how this course of action addresses the root problem. We acted

responsibility at every step, renovating, responding immediately to criminal activity, and

acted in accordance with police recommendation. The squatters damaged the smoke

detectors because they were cooking meth. We didn’t have any showings yet because

it was January and the holidays, even though it was up for lease.

Moermond: when you say showings, you mean finding tenants?

Abdurakhimov: yes, showings for lease. New floor, new paint. We put a lot of money

into it. They broke the doors. They damaged the smoke detectors. The gas leaks I

didn’t know about. I don’t know what they did with the furnace. The police were

instructing us what to do, then the day the squatters were released and we are being

punished.

Moermond: I don’t know the situation with the squatters at all. I’m not the St. Paul

Police Department and dealing with any charges. So, setting that aside, what I see is

that this condemnation says it isn’t safe to live in. It isn’t a punishment, more a

statement of conditions. It is unsafe with gas leaks and no detectors. We have some

critical things leading to the condemnation, but what about in terms of a Code

Compliance Inspection?

Demarest: needs new smoke and carbon detectors throughout. Some ceiling damage

in the stairway; it looks to be collapsing. Gross unsanitary, lots of biohazards. Gas

work will need to be done under permit through Xcel to get gas restored.

Moermond: just looking at the structure, before you can put tenants in, what needs to

be done? We also have a Vacant Building registration fee that needs to be dealt with.

For me, this is garden variety unfortunately. What I have to go back to is it is the

owner’s responsibility to maintain the property. Any civil damages would be pursued on

your own. Hopefully you have insurance that will help in this situation. I’d like to help

you get this building back online to rent sooner rather than later.

How quickly can you turn this around?

Abdurakhimov: 10 days. Depends on Xcel. Everything else is done and cleaned up. It

is just the smoke detectors.

Moermond: and the ceiling work?

Abdurakhimov: no, this is the first I’m hearing about it.

Moermond: this was referred to you February 13th?

Dornfeld: yes, right before Valentine’s day.

Moermond: let’s give you 60 days to get the Certificate of Occupancy restored. I’m

trying to include a cushion in there in case Xcel takes a while or something else goes

wrong.

Make sure permits are finaled before you call Supervisor Demarest. Let’s make this a

Category 1 Vacant Building in the meantime.

Referred to the City Council due back on 3/18/2026

1:30 p.m. Hearings

Orders To Vacate - Fire Certificate of Occupancy

RLH VO 26-8

Appeal of Florence Cherry Kimmel Minister Scarlet Rose to a Fire

Inspection Report, which includes condemnation, at 787 HOWELL

STREET NORTH: Final Determination. (Refer to Legislative Hearing

March 3, 2026)

Coleman

Sponsors:

Layover to LH March 24, 2026 at 1:30 pm for update on HVAC repairs.

Florence Cherry Kimmel, owner, appeared

Staff update by Supervisor Keith Demarest: I’ve been in communication with Ko Moua

from CAPRW for an update. They found a contractor however there are additional

repairs required to do the work. Our program can cover the cost of repairing leaks but

not the demolition or patching of the wall once the repairs are done. We’d need a plan

to address that before the contractor can begin. Are there any resources?

Moermond: had you heard that update?

Kimmel: no.

Moermond: I’d called House Calls right before you came in. I’ll reach out to our Building

Official to see if he knows of anything. I’m thinking there may be something like that

to get that part done.

Demarest: they want another 3rd party to do the demo and restoration.

Moermond: and this wouldn’t require a permit?

Demarest: no.

Kimmel: this is all news to me.

Moermond: do you have any thoughts hearing that?

Kimmel: the boiler is on and producing heat. One pipe goes to 2 radiators upstairs.

The two downstairs were the ones broken. It was like no one was comfortable with

exploring it because initial when Energy assistance sent out a tech, that company is

the one that made the one start leaking. I think they all thought all the radiators were

going to do that. Another company came out and got the boiler going right away. They

got replacements for the two radiators, it is already on order. The one from the laundry

room was the one that leaked after EA sent someone, and the one that previously had

an issue are now capped and replacements are on the way. There’s no reason to have

a condemnation still based off the furnace now working.

Moermond: you have a boiler or a forced air furnace?

Kimmel: boiler and radiators. It was drained only because that one radiator was leaking

so they didn’t feel comfortable pressurizing the system. The house was 75 degrees

even with those 3 radiators not even operational. When those 2 on order are in it will be

even better.

Demarest: there is damage to the current heating system as is. It needs to be able to

maintain 68 degrees by itself.

Kimmel: and who determines that? Because it was 5 degrees when I left as it was.

Moermond: I would really like to see this buttoned up and repaired before this is lifted.

Do we convert it to a correction order? I’m hesitant because its already under appeal

and not being enforced. Let’s see if we can’t just get Ko Moua’s team to get this fixed

and see if we can’t just get this done.

[brief recess to take call from Lauren with House Calls]

Moermond: Craig Swalchick is a with QuickTurn. Let’s push this for 3 weeks and see if

we can’t close the file.

Laid Over to the Legislative Hearings due back on 3/24/2026

2:00 p.m. Hearings

Fire Certificates of Occupancy

RLH FCO

26-20

Appeal of Kali Terry to a Fire Inspection Report at 392 EDMUND

AVENUE.

Bowie

Sponsors:

Grant to March 17th, 2026 to have C of O reinstated or recommendation will be to deny

the appeal.

Kali Terry, owner, appeared via phone

Moermond: we’re following up on your appeal.

Terry: I wasn’t expecting this call.

Moermond: you were no show for your inspection yesterday at 11?

Terry: I had some things come up. The contractors were in there finishing up. I did my

best to accommodate but I had a juice emergency.

Moermond: it isn’t great when you don’t call ahead of time, it costs the City money to

send people out.

Terry: I didn’t know who to call and it came up unexpectedly.

Moermond: you get letters in the mail. I understand you have a new appointment for

Friday at 11 am. That’s good. You can have until March 17th to have your Certificate of

Occupancy reinstated and if not, I’ll recommend the Council deny your appeal. If you

have it done, great. No occupancy until you have that Certificate from Fire Inspections.

Terry: there’s no active Certificate of Occupancy?

Moermond: right now, I say no. You have serious orders on it.

Terry: but there was already a Certificate of Occupancy active that hadn’t expired yet.

Moermond: we also talked about getting this taken care of before reoccupancy.

Terry: what takes precedence? The previous valid Certificate of Occupancy or the

complainant that came from someone who didn’t even live in the property and was

squatting.

Moermond: it doesn’t matter. The question is whether or not it is valid. Not about who

complained. We talked about this last time. Whether it’s a neighbor, a tenant, a

squatter, it is all valid and has to be checked out.

Terry: I’m getting held for rescheduling an inspection but let’s also acknowledge that

the inspector stopped over and went inside the premises without anyone’s permission.

Without scheduling an inspection.

Moermond: I don’t believe they went inside. When?

Terry: before I appealed. He stopped by and went inside the building without calling or

getting permission. An unannounced visit.

Moermond: they do that.

Terry: I didn’t even know someone else was on the call!

Moermond: I’m sorry, Keith Demarest is on the call, the same person as last time.

Demarest: our inspectors respond to referrals regardless of who sends them in. If we

are granted access by the person living there we will do the inspection. Your final

inspection is scheduled for Friday at 11 am, if that is unmet motions will be made to

revoke any Certificate of Occupancy.

Terry: what you just stated is incorrect. That’s not the course of events. No one gave

anyone rights to view the property. It was viewed without any permission. The tenant

doesn’t even live there. How can they give permission on a place they don’t live in?

Demarest: if he made it in he would have only gone in with permission.

Terry: state for the record that the inspector DID go in the premises without

permission. He told me he didn’t enter and just knocked on the door but there is

footage that suggests otherwise.

Moermond: was he allowed in by an occupant?