Minutes - Legislative Hearings

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, June 2, 2026

9:00 AM

Room 330 City Hall & Court House/Remote

9:00 a.m. Hearings

Special Tax Assessments - Garbage Hauling

RLH TA 26-118

Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 700

STRYKER AVENUE (File No. CG25Q4B1, Assessment No. 260141)

Noecker

Sponsors:

Reduce the assessment from $195.88 to $113.19.

Voicemail left at 9:23: this is Marcia Moermond from St. Paul City Council calling you

about 700 Stryker after reviewing the file. I’m going to recommend the Council delete

the cost of the extra cart. From $195 minus $82.69 down to $113.19 and you get the

benefit of that money off the bill.

Referred to the City Council due back on 6/17/2026

RLH TA 26-124

Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 258

WYOMING STREET WEST. (File No. CG25Q4B1, Assessment No.

260141)

Noecker

Sponsors:

Delete the assessment.

Denise Karas, owner, appeared via phone

[Moermond gives background of appeals process]

Staff report by Jillian Barden: the property owner denies the presence of a 35 gallon

cart with ever other week service at her property. The property owner has been

consistently charged for 35 gallon every-other-week garbage service. The property

owner states that she requested her account to be cancelled in January 2025 and

Republic removed her cart. However, Republic stated this is not correct information

and that she paid her Quarter 1 2025 invoice. The property owner contacted City in

August 2025 and stated she was over billed and that her family owns Twin City Refuse

and she does not want or have a cart. City staff offered to deliver a cart for her but she

abruptly ended call before the size could be confirmed. A 35-gallon cart with every

other week service was delivered on May 28, 2026. Staff does not recommend

removing or reducing assessment.

Karas: I’ve been being charged for services not provided.

Moermond: I tend to think that that’s the more likely scenario here. I’m going to

recommend the Council deletes this assessment.

Karas: it started at the time the switch changed over. Plus they charged me $40 to

pick up the cart.

Moermond: the assessment will go away.

Karas: what’s an assessment?

Moermond: if a bill goes unpaid it gets put on your property taxes. You won’t get an

invoice to pay this.

Karas: ok, alright.

Referred to the City Council due back on 6/17/2026

10:00 a.m. Hearings

Staff Reports

RLH TA 26-125

Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 720

COTTAGE AVENUE EAST. (File No. 2604T, Assessment No. 269003)

Kim

Sponsors:

Approve the assessment and make payable over 10 years.

No one appeared

Moermond: we have the removal of a green ash tree on February 9, 2026. That is the

correct date. This was a 36” diameter tree. The cost of its removal was $4,709, and the

property owner requested it be made payable over 10 years. I’ll recommend that to

Council and that’s been communicated to the owners.

Referred to the City Council due back on 7/15/2026

SR 26-96

Review Request of Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for

property at 601 ROSE AVENUE EAST adopted by Council on February

18, 2026 under File RLH AR 26-1. (File No. J2602TW, Assessment No.

268702)

Yang

Sponsors:

Delete the assessment.

No one appeared

Moermond: I’ve given this some consideration and the problem with notification going

to the wrong address. That was due to a Ramsey County error between recording the

address and actually having the tax address corrected. This isn’t the fault of the owner

OR the City but because of this error we couldn’t provide proper notice, so I’ll

recommend this is deleted. This has been our practice in the past.

Received and Filed

Special Tax Assessments-ROLLS

RLH AR 26-42

Ratifying the assessment for Removal of Diseased and/or Dangerous

Tree(s) service during February 2026. (File No. 2604T, Assessment No.

269003)

Noecker

Sponsors:

Referred to the City Council due back on 7/15/2026

11:00 a.m. Hearings

Summary & Vehicle Abatement Orders

RLH SAO

26-51

Appeal of Pamela Anderson to a Summary Abatement Order at 948

IDAHO AVENUE WEST.

Kim

Sponsors:

Grant the appeal.

Pamela Anderson, owner, appeared via phone

Staff report by Supervisor Lisa Martin:

Moermond: when I looked at your appeal I thought it made a lot of sense. The

supervisor mentioned if this was a dog house no one would say anything. The area is

very well maintained, and you’re working with a cat rescue. I’ll recommend your appeal

is granted.

Referred to the City Council due back on 6/17/2026

Making Finding on Nuisance Abatements

RLH SAO 26-37

Second Making finding on the appealed nuisance abatement ordered for

1478 AMES AVENUE in Council File RLH SAO 26-32. (Public hearing

continued to June 10, 2026)

Yang

Sponsors:

Continue CPH to June 10th, 2026. Nuisance is not abated.

Mike Corcoran, owner, appeared via phone

Moermond: checking in on where things are at. I see you did send an email today.

We’ll try and cover all of this.

Staff report by Supervisor Lisa Martin: I met with Mr. Corcoran yesterday, all the

vehicles are in compliance. The only issue we have now is the Summary Abatement

Order with all the exterior storage, steel structure is still up, the exterior shed—one by

the rear deck still up with things stored inside, just a lot of stuff everywhere.

Moermond: and I have those photos. Mr. Corcoran, tell me about your ask.

Corcoran: I’m going to be retiring in 2 months and will have more time to be dealing

with my issues. I’m requesting if you could somehow extend longer, until I’m

completed. I asked for November of 2026. I’ve done a good job of staging everything

and being aware of what outside storage means. What can be stored inside and

outside. I’m staging to get it loaded or off the ground, wherever it is supposed to be.

Moermond: we’ve been doing this for 22 months now. I’m not going to recommend any

extensions, I don’t feel like it is promising another extension will make any difference.

Seems there should have been plenty of time to be found to do it so far. I’m going to

recommend the Council find the nuisance is not abated and recommend they authorize

the Department of Safety and Inspections to act to abate the nuisance. Your letter last

week indicated that the Council Public Hearing was tomorrow, so you are more than

welcome to come speak to them about it. Do you want to testify? I could push the

Council Public Hearing to June 10th.

Corcoran: the later the better. I have a special needs grandson and a sick daughter I’m

taking care of.

Moermond: those conditions have been part of the issue the entire time. I’ll ask them

to continue it to Council Public Hearing. Hopefully you can clean up as much as

possible so the cost of cleanup is less.

Referred to the City Council due back on 6/3/2026

RLH SAO 26-45

Making finding on the appeal of Emmett Owens, Jr., to the nuisance

abatement ordered for 233 BATES AVENUE in Council File RLH SAO

26-28. (Public Hearing continued to June 10, 2026)

Johnson

Sponsors:

Refer back to LH Tuesday, June 9th at 11 am. Continue CPH to June 10th, 2026. The

nuisance is not abated.

Voicemail left at 11:57 am: this is Marcia Moermond from St. Paul City Council calling

Emmet Owens. We’ll try back in a little bit to follow up on the orders for your property.

Emmet Owens, owner, appeared via phone

Moermond: we’re following up on the orders on your property. We’re talking today about

things for both 233 and 239 Bates.

Owens: right now I’m at the bank trying to get the funds to get my deck done. I talked

to the inspector and I have a contractor who is going to bring in all the paperwork and

stuff. Trying to get them off my @ss.

Referred to the City Council due back on 6/3/2026

RLH SAO 25-81

Making finding on the appealed nuisance abatement ordered for 239

BATES AVENUE in Council File RLH SAO 25-60. (June 9, 2026

Legislative Hearing)

Johnson

Sponsors:

Layover to LH Tuesday, June 9th at 11 am. The nuisance is not abated.

Voicemail left at 11:57 am: this is Marcia Moermond from St. Paul City Council calling

Emmet Owens. We’ll try back in a little bit to follow up on the orders for your property.

Emmet Owens, owner, appeared via phone

Moermond: we’re following up on the orders on your property. We’re talking today about

things for both 233 and 239 Bates.

Owens: right now I’m at the bank trying to get the funds to get my deck done. I talked

to the inspector and I have a contractor who is going to bring in all the paperwork and

stuff. Trying to get them off my @ss.

Referred to the City Council due back on 6/10/2026

RLH SAO 26-34

Second Making finding on the appealed nuisance abatement ordered for

2016 FREMONT AVENUE in Council File RLH SAO 26-21.

Johnson

Sponsors:

The nuisances are not abated.

Mark Puchala, owner, appeared via phone

Puchala: I did as much as I could Sunday evening, so as long as she was here after

that she should have my most recent progress.

Martin: not a lot of progress. Boulevards are overgrow. He’s added some rock to the

yard. The garage is not done. The pallet with wood still there. For sale sign still there.

The big tree log and brush is still by the shed. Siding not replaced on the garage. It

isn’t in compliance.

Puchala: this is really confusing. The open corner of the garage is sealed. The

boulevard is completely trimmed down. The only thing on the boulevard is the

milkweed and sedge and one section of seed grass with the flag next to them. As well

as the cucumber next to the power line. Did you check when the flags were there? Or

before the flags?

Martin: the photos were taken this morning. I can see all the tall grass and weeds in

the back yard. The entire back yard---

Puchala: I was told to focus on the front yard; we can leave the back and focus on the

front. That was our agreement last month.

Martin: I think that’s a misunderstanding.

Moermond: I think so too.

Puchala: the letter doesn’t say what we agreed upon. That’s what a called about and I

talked with you about that in person. I had a whole new set of orders, and you said to

disregard that and focus on what we talked about in the hearing, not on what was in the

letter.

Moermond: I don’t think I agree with that interpretation, but let me review the minutes.

You got more time on the brush. My statement was you’ve addressed some of the

items in the orders. I’d like to see you focus on the brush. Then I’ll recommend to

June 1, 2026 for the remaining items as well as the tall grass and weeds. You

indicated you were planning on turning over a lot of the yard. I said cut it down, mow it,

turn it over, then you can begin with native plants. You indicated you’ve been trying to

use the long grass as mulch to prevent some weeds, can I get an extension past June

1 so you could deal with the water heater first. I said mow it. You said understood. I

said this isn’t a big commitment of time and energy for the things that aren’t complete,

along with the tall grass and weeds.

There may be some quibbling around the edges about the brush pile. *Maybe.* But, I

don’t understand it the same way you do. The most recent letter you received said

we’re going to check in to review compliance today. At that time all items in your orders

are expected to be completed. June 1 is your last compliance deadline. The May 8th

letter is quite clear on the expectation.

Puchala: the May 8th letter doesn’t agree with what we said and we talked about

focusing on the front yard before.

Moermond: I disagree.

Puchala: Alright, how do I go about disputing this?

Moermond: you go before the City Council.

Puchala: how and when?

Moermond: next Wednesday, June 10th at 3:30. We’ll send a letter confirming that. At

that point I’ll make a finding the orders do not have compliance and authorize the

Department of Safety and Inspections to go ahead and complete the abatement.

Puchala: meaning you’re sending them to mow my lawn?

Moermond: yes.

Puchala: and I need to stop that so I can talk to Council about how I’ve been getting

endlessly harassed. I’ve been putting more work into my yard than my own job now.

Doing everything I can to comply, only to be told I don’t comply and we didn’t agree to

the things we did agree on.

Moermond: I don’t concur, but you can come to the Council with that. What you’ve

wanted to do with your yard isn’t a requirement of the City. The City just wants you to

mow it. You’ve been saying you want to do these native plantings, I want to do these

other things. The argument that the City made you do those things isn’t what it is.

We’ve tried to work with you so you could do that, giving extensions, which is your own

thing you want to do. That is fine. But that’s not on the City.

Puchala: the only thing I’ve been doing is cutting down grass and weeds. I haven’t

been doing any sort of wonderful native planting that I want to do. I only got to put

bricks on the grass to keep it from growing, which we agreed upon me doing. I got to

put bushes on top of grass which you agreed with. Then you’re telling me I made no

progress when all I’ve made is progress. We’re only talking about the boulevard, when

the only boulevard that hasn’t been touched is the protected plants of milkweed and

crown vetch at the front under the gingko tree. That isn’t to be touched. Those are live

native plants. Not tall weeds.

Moermond: you can make that argument to the Council.

Puchala: except you are saying I can’t make that argument until you already send

someone to mow my yard down.

Moermond: that’s not what I’m saying at all. What I am saying is my recommendation

to City Council to be heard June 10th is a finding the work hasn’t been done and

authorize the Department of Safety and Inspections to complete the work. Until they

vote there won’t be a crew out there.

Puchala: so that work order won’t be approved until I talk to them.

Moermond: no, nothing will happen before the Council vote.

Puchala: how can I confirm no one will do that until after Wednesday?

Moermond: that isn’t supposed to happen, and Ms. Martin is on the line and in charge

of the contractor and she knows it shouldn’t happen. I don’t know what other assurance

we can provide. Ms. Martin?

Martin: we don’t send a work order until after the Council signs off on it.

Puchala: nothing done on the garage? The siding?

Martin: still missing siding on the back, which is sitting in your yard.

Puchala: I was told to patch the hole at the front. I wasn’t told about the side and the

back.

Martin: we did talk about the siding because the siding was in the back yard. I told you

all you had to do was pull it out of the tall grass and weeds and put it back up.

Moermond: I do see a piece of wood nailed by the garage door where there was

damage. I don’t see any paint on it. What I will say is that was a correction notice, so it

wouldn’t be an item the City would correct for you. Ms. Martin?

Martin: that is correct.

Puchala: so that’s an FYI. I don’t have to freak out about it not being done.

Moermond: there is a correction order on it, but it isn’t the kind of order we follow up on

because the City won’t go out on the garage. I was hearing that more as an update

from Ms. Martin on the garage. We have the yard cleanup, tall grass and weeds, those

kind of things in front of us.

Puchala: I have buried the brush. Is that compliance?

Moermond: if it is buried we can’t see it.

Puchala: there are spare sticks, but I can’t pick up every little stick but I want to

make sure I picked up enough sticks.

Martin: I think the pile is lower. I still see some with a pallet and the log by the garage.

If the crew comes they will probably get whatever sticks and stuff they need to in order

to prevent damage to the equipment.

Puchala: that is the stuff on the pallet. I moved the log that wasn’t on the pallet to the

pallet. I need to remove that as well?

Moermond: the thing with the big log was it wasn’t turned into firewood. I remember

discussing that. You can’t throw a log that size on a fire; firewood can absolutely be

stored on a pallet.

Puchala: that isn’t firewood. It is to be made into furniture. I need to keep it as is, as

like lumber. So is it still allowed? Or is it only firewood?

Moermond: construction/building materials have to be put to use and if it will be a while

before you make furniture you want to store it elsewhere. The same way you would with

2x4’s or a pile of shingles. Firewood can absolutely be stored outside though.

Puchala: I have to keep it outside in order to weather it. If I build walls around it would

it be in compliance? If I keep the top open?

Moermond: I hadn’t considered building walls. Ms. Martin?

Martin: again, outdoor storage isn’t allowed. You can put it in the garage or the shed.

Building walls, I’m not even sure what you mean by that.

Puchala: I mean literally extending the shed toward the pine tree. Sort of like a tall

compost bin. So it is contained and you can’t see from the sidewalk. Just a six foot

wall, like a fence. Building fencing around it. Can any of my stuff be protected by just

building fencing?

Moermond: it still exists. It may address it somewhat. I’m concerned that we’ve been

working on this---

Puchala: I can get the giant log in my garage until we get everything else calmed down.

I want to still make progress towards everything qualifying. It feels like we are at the

end of a journey and it feels like a judgement whether I win or I lose. Especially when

we are on two different pages. I was working on the front yard and saving the back yard

for later, that was my understanding, as long as the front yard saw progress. But now

we don’t have notes of that and I don’t have access to the minutes.

Moermond: we can definitely send that to you. It also looks like you have a good

amount of “volunteer” trees that may actually be invasive species, like the Siberian

elm and Tree of Heaven. You may want to talk to someone about that.

Puchala: I’ll look into that. I also need to trim one of the trees, I got a note from

Forestry on it. I haven’t reached out to them yet because of these orders.

Moermond: I’ll continue with my recommendation and you can present your information

to the City Council next week. This is the second time I’ve tried to make a finding

about this being complete, and it hasn’t the first nor second time. They really need to

review it if there is any change, which is what they’re there for.

Referred to the City Council due back on 6/10/2026

RLH SAO 25-78

Third Making finding on the appealed nuisance abatement ordered for

1079 WESTERN AVENUE NORTH in Council File RLH SAO 25-71.

Kim

Sponsors:

The nuisance is abated and the matter resolved.

No one appeared

Staff report by Supervisor Lisa Martin: that is in compliance and the file will be closed.

Referred to the City Council due back on 6/10/2026