Minutes - Legislative Hearings

15 West Kellogg Blvd.

Saint Paul, MN 55102

City of Saint Paul

Minutes - Final

Legislative Hearings

Marcia Moermond, Chief Legislative Hearing Officer

Joanna Zimny, Deputy Legislative Hearing Officer

Mai Vang, Legislative Hearing Coordinator

legislativehearings@ci.stpaul.mn.us

651-266-8585

Tuesday, September 1, 2026

11:00 AM

Room 330 City Hall & Court House/Remote

11:00 a.m. Hearings

Summary & Vehicle Abatement Orders

RLH SAO 26-82 Appeal of Mary Olson to a Notice to Cut Tall Grass and/or Weeds at

555 ASHLAND AVENUE.

Sponsors:

Bowie

Grant to October 2, 2026 for 1) yard side of sidewalk may continue to be in excess of

8" as it's native planting/garden; 2) reduce blvd planting height to 18" or less within

30' of corner, fire hydrants must remain unobstructed; 3) blvd plants which are

located more than 30' from the corner may be 42" or less.

Mary Olson, owner, appeared via phone

[Moermond gives background of appeals process]

Staff report by Supervisor Lisa Martin: a notice to cut tall grass and weeds went out

and upon inspection it looks like this is tall, but it isn’t grass or weeds. It is boulevard

plantings that are over height. Within 30 feet of any intersection can’t exceed 18”.

There can’t be anything overhanging into the public right-of-way, which is the

sidewalk or street and all fire hydrants need to be cleared. There are photos in the

file.

Olson: we planted pollinator gardens, started it about 25 years ago. We purposely

chose plants at first that were short on the boulevard, but in the yard we did plant

some taller ones like joe pye weed and some goldenrod. Unfortunately, MN natives

don’t stay where you plant, and tend to spread. They are very drought resistant and

create a lot of habitat. Our yard is very popular in our neighborhood. My husband

walks our dog every day and talks to people who say they walk by our yard purposely

to see our garden and enjoy the butterflies and bees and birds. There’s a nursery

school a block away and when they do their unit on pollinators they all come to see

our yard because it is such a great example. We have got these orders a couple of

times in the past, 2 years ago we cut it down to 8” and we had so many people who

were extremely upset. We had neighbors offering to start a petition. At that time I

contacted MPR and the Star Tribune as a PR effort. At that time I suggested that

people work together to create some sort of exceptions for pollinator plants that tend

to be taller than what is allowed. I do have a resolution passed by the Council,

resolution 16-171, which encourages owner in the City to plant more pollinator

friendly plants on their property including MN native perennials. That’s exactly what

we’ve done. Our yard has just become more successful and exuberant than we

originally planned. Trying to keep it down to 30” or whatever is challenging. We

sometimes cut it early and then sometimes will bloom at a lower height but 30” is

really challenging. This is a corner. We’ve been here 52 years. We’re in our mid-70’s

and if we have to keep it to less than 30”, we’ll put our house on the market, which is

sad. We helped restore the Ramsey Hill neighborhood, so it is sad. We’re urban

pioneers who saved some of the most fabulous houses in the city. We love our

neighborhood and our garden. I would be happy to go to a hearing and bring a power

point with all of the information we have gathered and photos of our garden at

different times of the year. As I told someone two years ago in Parks, I would like to

see the City be more proactive in determining---simply saying cut it down to 8” just

isn’t feasible for pollinator plants. It also says we have to cut the yard too. That is

totally unacceptable. Drive throughout the city you see lots of yards with plants more

than 8” tall for heaven’s sake. Those are my thoughts.

Moermond: I think we can clear up a couple of things right away. Once we know what

you are trying to do is a pollinator garden, the first step is looking at state law. Making

sure we’re all operating off the same information. 412.925 is native landscapes,

which applies to both your yard and to some extent the boulevard. It would have

followed any conversation you had in 2016. It gives a lot of latitude for your situation.

Your yard should be fine. I will make sure that it is incorporated into the resolution

your yard is ok under state law. With respect to the boulevard, I do support native

plantings for a number of reasons. This is actually a Public Works code, and their

concern is visibility at the intersection for short people, wheelchairs, we need to make

sure cars approaching the intersection have clear visibility of them as they approach.

I’m going to be more hardcore about that. Within 30’ of the intersection we need to

get it down to 18”. I understand seeds spread, but from a public safety perspective I

need to make sure there’s clear visibility. That I won’t be flexible on. I CAN

recommend a 6” variance, and I’ll ask the Council give you a variance of 42” for the

balance. That means anything outside that 30’. That’s just for visibility of kids and

others. I’ve heard about the Chelsea chop so things come in bushier and lower, but

18”—not 8”--- and then your yard can be as tall as you want. We’ll send a letter and

put in the resolution 1) your yard can be over the 8” BECAUSE it is a native

landscape and 2) within 30’ of the intersection (measured from the street corner) 18”

max, and then a variance up to 42” for anything beyond 30’. I think that will cover you

based on the measuring tape the inspector has out in the photos. Let’s say you

should have that done by October 2. You’ll have someone come out on October 5 to

make sure it is done.

Referred to the City Council due back on 9/16/2026

RLH SAO 26-86 Appeal of Graham Butler to a Notice to Cut Tall Grass and/or Weeds

at 702 AURORA AVENUE.

Sponsors:

Bowie

Deny the appeal, noting the nuisance has been abated.

No one appeared

Moermond: received photos this morning on this tall grass and weeds appeal, Ms.

Martin?

Supervisor Lisa Martin: yes, the grass has been cut so it has been abated.

Moermond: deny the appeal noting that the nuisance is now abated and property is in

compliance.

Referred to the City Council due back on 9/16/2026

RLH SAO 26-88 Appeal of Richard Schoolmeesters to a Summary Abatement Order

and Correction Notice at 1111 FOURTH STREET EAST.

Sponsors:

Johnson

Deny the appeal and grant compliance date of October 16, 2026 for all orders.

(Appellant discontinued call)

Richard Schoolmeesters, owner, appeared via phone

Ricky Schoolmeesters, son of owner, appeared via phone

Taylor Cornelius appeared via phone

[Moermond gives background of appeals process]

Staff report by Supervisor Lisa Martin: August 17, 2026 we issued two orders. One, a

Summary Abatement Order and another a Correction Notice. The Summary

Abatement Order was to remove and disposing of all the auto parts, tires, scrap

metal, building materials, carpeting, appliances and miscellaneous debris from the

entire property. That also includes the boulevard and side-yard, which is falling onto

the neighbor’s property. We have the Correction notice which listed 3 items: 1) zoning

issue regarding vehicle repairs not being allowed on residential property, 2) fence

requirement: fence on side of the property and in front has to be no higher than 4

feet, however on the side within 30’ of the intersection has to be down to 2’ and 3)

vehicles have to be licensed, have current tabs, and be operable. Can’t be parked on

an unapproved surface. Bring all vehicles into compliance or remove from the

property. All of that had a compliance dates of August 26. There are photos in the file.

Schoolmeesters: the fence has been here and was okayed by 2 inspectors in 2009. I

shook his hand. Both of them. You say you don’t have any record of it. It was 16

years ago. That’s the fence as far as I’m concerned. The 2 foot mark—I’m not happy

with that at all. As far as the car stuff? I can’t work on my own car here? Is that what

you’re saying?

Moermond: the orders make it sound like there are multiple vehicles and some are

missing parts and so on. To the inspectors it doesn’t look like a personal vehicle

being worked on, rather there are a ton of vehicles there. That’s the concern.

Schoolmeesters: we’re looking into the car thing and clean it up the best we can. I got

rid of all the tires. I’m going to have Taylor talk to you about something.

Cornelius: regarding the whole situation, the fence has stood on his property exactly

16 years. During this time it has never been an issue. It hasn’t blocked any

sight-lines. It is a safety issue; there’s been a spike in crime on our block. Several

shootings in the last week. The fence has been a barrier---the property is on the

corner. Asking him to remove or do anything with the fence during an active spike of

local violence is like leaving a family without protection. It also creates an unpractical

financial hardship.

I also wanted to address the fees and everything. By his sister getting the mail

instead of him, I did send a letter in as well, his sister isn’t giving the mail to him like

she should have, depriving him of legal notices and rights. He’s just seeing them

now. We request to correct the address and stop any and all legal mail to go to his

sister. Don’t send any mail there, so he’s properly noticed of all of these things. He

wasn’t before. Also, the abatement requesting to be reduced significantly or waived

because he’s on a fixed income. To resolve the violations and reach a professional

resolution we’re requesting an updated mailing record as well as abating the fines

and cease the excessive inspections. The letter also states all of this.

Ricky Schoolmeesters: this is my dad’s property. Ya’ll come here and charge my dad

like $100 here, $300 there. I don’t understand where you get the inconsistent fines. I

don’t know where ya’ll get these numbers, if you could explain that?

Moermond: right now I have the fence, some conversation about the vehicles, and

some questions about Excessive Consumption fees. Your father owns the property?

Ricky Schoolmeesters: yes. His mail isn’t being sent to his own property. It is sent to

his sister’s house.

Moermond: I want to come back to that. What is your father’s name if he’s the one

who owns it? It says Rick Schoolmeesters in the County records.

Ricky Schoolmeesters: yes, that’s his name. Richard Schoolmeesters.

Moermond: is he still around?

Ricky Schoolmeesters: yeah, he’s right here. Listening to the whole thing.

Schoolmeesters: I’m still here.

Moermond: I didn’t hear that.

Schoolmeesters: I said I’M STILL HERE.

Moermond: perfect! I love that. Let’s start with the notice. The notice goes to 1273

Allen Avenue because when the property was purchased in 2006 that was the

address that Ramsey County title was given as the official address of record for the

owner. We’re happy to use a different address, but you need to go to Ramsey County

and tell the tax office the proper address. We use the tax address because if the City

takes action to do the cleanup there’s a charge and that comes forward as a potential

addition to the property taxes. We need to make sure whoever is responsible for

paying the taxes got notice. If there’s a different address it is on you to talk to the

County about.

Schoolmeesters: last year a police officer and a guy with a pig [sic] board asked me

who I was. They wrote it all down. I don’t know what you all are doing with that

information you’re getting, but he came over here with a pig board this guy from the

City and a St. Paul Police Department officer with him. Asked me my name, who I

was, where I lived. I said you know where I live, I’ve always lived here. Now you’re

trying to tell me I didn’t do something right? I went down and changed the property

address last year. I went down to the place on Wabasha street. I’ve done everything

asked of me. You’re charging me $5,100 extra---that’s insane. The house isn’t no

trash heap.

Cornelius: we’re here to formally request a variance for the property since the fence

has stood here for 16 years and is grandfathered in, as well as to change the mailing

addresses you have to his current address. We’ll go down to the tax place and

change it there.

Schoolmeesters: again.

Cornelius: we’d also like to address the extensive amount of—

Moermond: let’s finish the notice conversation first. I think we covered tax owner of

record. You said you went down, I don’t know what happened. But I will say it shows

up with you, Richard Schoolmeesters, on Allen Street in West St. Paul. Call them.

Both the Correction notice AND the Summary Abatement Order were sent to

OCCUPANT at 4th street so, there would have been two notices mailed.

Cornelius: we got the two you’re talking about, but we didn’t get all of them because

they were sent to his sister’s. We got the 2 you’re talking about.

Moermond: I can appreciate the fence has been there a while, but that doesn’t mean

it has been in compliance. It having not been in compliance for a while doesn’t mean

it doesn’t have to be compliant. There is no such thing as “Grandfathering” for this

type of situation.

Cornelius: why?

Ricky Schoolmeesters: it hasn’t been a problem for the last 4 years. Why? There’s

been a guy that just moved up the street calling and harassing me. That’s why the

fence is being messed with. If that dude never moved in it never would have been a

problem.

Cornelius: that doesn’t change anything.

Schoolmeesters: that’s the truth though.

Cornelius: you’re being harassed, yes ok. Forcing them to take down the fence that

has been on their land for 16 years without a complaint until the last 5 years, which

we believe is the neighbor who just moved in, it forces him to remove it and creates

an unfair practical financial hardship. By the City not saying anything about it until

recently it is them waiving the fact it isn’t a problem. I looked up the laws and codes

and everything and it DOES apply. The Grandfather thing DOES apply because it

has been here for 16 years serving as protection to Mr. Schoolmeesters’ property.

There’s been an active spike in crime. Just a shooting yesterday. By this being

reduced it leaves them exposed and his family unsafe. I looked it all up.

Moermond: I am glad you did, but you’re wrong. You can take your case to the City

Council. What I’m telling you is it is NOT in my view, and the safety concern you are

mentioning is not relevant to height of fence. You may feel safer, and I’m glad you do,

but it cannot be that tall in those sections. From the front plane of your house and

back and side it can be as tall as it is now. From the front face of the house forward it

can only be 4 feet tall max. Some people just saw down to the correct height. I’m

sorry if that’s difficult---

Schoolmeesters: it has been here for 16 years! And now you want me to cut it down?

Cornelius: it says right here if the City allows a violation to exist for 16 years without

saying a word the homeowner can argue that the City has waived its right to enforce

the code now, forcing you to cut down the structure that has been part of the

neighborhood’s fabric for nearly 2 decades is unfair and practical and financial

hardship. Several active shootings have occurred on this block within the last few

days. The physical layout of the property leaves his family completely exposed, even

by reducing the height of the fence, since they’re on a corner. Taking down a fence

during an active spike in local violence creates an immediate and severe physical

hazard.

Schoolmeesters: you just said all that.

Cornelius: yeah I know I just said all that but apparently she’s not understanding it.

Moermond: there’s a difference between not understanding and not agreeing.

Cornelius: ok well you’re not agreeing so [muffled].

Ricky Schoolmeesters: why the letters now? Why hasn’t it come 14 years ago?

Moermond: these codes are enforced on a complaint basis. We don’t have inspectors

driving around looking for violations on a property. If someone calls it in and it is

found to be a violation, it is a violation period. The motives of the person calling it in

aren’t considered. It is simply whether or not it is a violation. That’s all they ask

themselves.

Ricky Schoolmeesters: it’s the same person calling over and over again. You all won’t

tell me who. But, the people who just moved in 2 years ago—

Schoolmeesters: they’re a bunch of weirdos.

Ricky Schoolmeesters: they kept calling on us so that is harassment. They’re

harassing us. Also you all are harassing us because you’re giving us so many letters.

Corenius: fines, fees, everything. It is all piled up. It creates health issues as well.

This man is stressed out.

Ricky Schoolmeesters: ya’ll can’t just give me one fine? You have to give me 12? It is

a brand new year, and you already gave me 8 fines.

Cornelius: inconsistent prices as well. $51 in late fees alone.

Schoolmeesters: I only make $1,500 a month. My god.

Corenlius: it is unreasonable. Unfair. Practical amount of money. That he’s just now

finding out about too because he’s been deprived of his legal mail since his sister

hasn’t been giving them to him.

Moermond: I’m afraid that is a problem you folks need to deal with, and isn’t 100%

true because the mail has also been going to occupant.

Cornelius: no. He has all the mail right here. They haven’t been getting sent here.

Just the most recent ones.

Ricky Schoolmeesters: can you tell us the people that are calling on? Their

information?

Schoolmeesters: and we’ll talk with them.

Moermond: that would be a violation of State law. No.

Schoolmeesters: 16 years when I shook the hands of the inspectors myself!

Personally!

Cornelius: we would like to take this to the higher-ups please. Have this be a more

formal hearing.

Moermond: yes.

Cornelius: we’d like to do that, please.

Moermond: ok, do you want to talk anymore today about the other things you brought

up?

Cornelius: no, we’ll just save it for the next formal court hearing.

Moermond: alright. We’ll send you a letter and see you at the Council Public Hearing.

Have a good day.

Referred to the City Council due back on 9/16/2026

RLH SAO 26-89 Making finding on the appeal of Anna Fraser to a nuisance abatement

ordered for 844 STRYKER AVENUE in Council File RLH SAO 26-72.

Sponsors:

Noecker

The nuisance is not abated.

No one appeared

Moermond: we neglected to get a resolution on today’s agenda, making finding about

whether the nuisance was abated. Ms. Martin you do have a report?

Supervisor Lisa Martin: they were to remove all rock and obstructions and cardboard

from the boulevard, that hasn’t been done. Not in compliance and we ask the Council

to authorize the Department of Safety and Inspections to proceed with the

abatement.

Moermond: what I’m wondering, let’s check the letter we sent.

Voicemail left for Anna Fraser: this is Marcia Moermond from St. Paul City Council

calling Anna Fraser after receiving an email from you which is great, I know you want

to change the recommendation and then the Council decision which was voted on

last week. What I’ll say is you’ll need to bring that to the Council at this point. We’ll

send you a letter confirming the time and day of that Council Public Hearing.

Moermond: she doesn’t answer her phone (again), the inspectors took photos this

morning. The nuisance in the boulevard continues to exist. The Council said deny the

appeal, we are looking and it isn’t abated. Talk to the Council next.

Referred to the City Council due back on 9/9/2026

Orders To Vacate - Code Enforcement

RLH VO 26-31

Appeal of Brent Rekstad to a Notice of Condemnation as Unfit for

Human Habitation and Order to Vacate at 1083 BRADLEY STREET.

(To refer to August 18, 2026 Legislative Hearing)

Sponsors:

Kim

Layover to October 6, 2026 Legislative Hearing at 11am for progress report.

No one appeared

Moermond: we have Ms. Martin working with the owner and the only question I had

was do we have fire pathways cleared? It looks like from a couple of photos it was,

but more broadly the sleeping areas you have found good pathways?

Supervisor Lisa Martin: pathways on main floor are clear. He’s cleared the back and

front door areas. He was still working on the egress window. One has the AC, needs

to take it out. I have appointment at 6:30 am to verify that. I also found a couple

extension cords, but other than that he has 7 trash containers from Public Works

outside. He is using them. It may take time, but I don’t want to life the condemnation

or the pressure or he will just stop. I sent a nice email saying the conditions of you

remaining in the home are that you continue to make progress. I’ll continue to go out

every week.

Moermond: that sounds great. I just wanted an update on egress and pathways are

clear except for bedroom window and that’s top of mind for him.

Laid Over to the Legislative Hearings due back on 10/6/2026

1:00 p.m. Hearings

Vacant Building Registrations

RLH VBR 26-18 Appeal of Gomaa Elzamel to a Vacant Building Registration

Requirement at 713 PREBLE STREET.

Sponsors:

Johnson

Layover to LH September 15, 2026 at 1 pm (tech issues with PO).

Voicemail left at 1:16 PM – This is Marcia Moermond from St. Paul City Council

calling you about your appeal for 713 Preble. We have a rescheduled from last time

and will call you in a bit.

Called again at 1:21 PM: no one on the line, unable to leave a message.

Moermond: we tried twice and also called the 612 number as well as Cristavel’s

number. We’ll continue this to Legislative Hearing September 15.

Laid Over to the Legislative Hearings due back on 9/15/2026