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  
Tuesday, August 23, 2022  
9:00 AM  
Room 330 City Hall & Court House/Remote  
9:00 a.m. Hearings  
Remove/Repair Orders  
Denying a stay of enforcement of demolition for property at 587 COOK  
AVENUE EAST. (To refer to September 27, 2022 Legislative Hearing)  
If evidence of financing and affidavit are submitted and PD is posted by noon on  
August 23, refer back to LH September 27, 2022 at 9 am to review scope of work,  
schedule and bids.  
Gerald Krippner, owner, appeared  
Heather Mylin, purchaser, appeared  
Moermond: this goes to Council tomorrow. Mr. Magner please update the record.  
Staff update by Manager Steve Magner: a letter went out August 5, 2022 and it is  
expected you will have a signed purchase agreement, a $5,000 Performance Deposit  
posted with DSI, submit evidence of financing to complete the rehab, submit an  
affidavit dedicating funds to the project, submit a work plan including signed bids and  
a schedule and the property must be maintained.  
Moermond: do we have a Performance Deposit posted?  
Krippner: no, you don’t.  
Moermond: tell me what I’m looking at here. I have an agreement.  
Krippner: contract for deed. I didn’t send the financials.  
Mylin: I have them, not in paper form. I can email them.  
Moermond: and have you had someone do a walkthrough based on the Code  
Compliance Inspection Report?  
Mylin: I’ve had my contractor look over the Code Compliance list, but he hasn’t done a  
walk through yet with me. We just started this process a few days ago and he was  
busy over the weekend.  
Moermond: there’s a previous bid he could look at. What are your thoughts Mr.  
Magner? We don’t have a Performance Deposit or any sort of a plan for the rehab. No  
evidence of financing yet.  
Magner: the addendum is sufficient. So we need the items. It goes to Council  
Moermond: yes, this is for a stay. They Council already voted to remove it. That $5,000  
I can’t believe we’ve gone this far without it.  
Mylin: can it be after closing?  
Moermond: no. It has to be before the Council vote tomorrow at 3:30. You have to  
have that posted, one of two basic things. Then the bids and work plans can follow  
those. So we end up in the position where the Council had no option to have it  
removed. Mr. Krippner brought forth a Purchase Agreement and that person backed  
out. I wouldn’t stand in front of Council and ask them to give more time for developing  
plans unless we have that.  
Manger: if for some reason you don’t close or it goes to demo you just ask for it back.  
We don’t keep those funds if this doesn’t move forward. If it does we keep it until the  
Code Compliance certificate is issued, or if after 180 days you don’t perform then they  
could be forfeited. Without a closing I understand you’re assuming some risk but if  
you don’t take that risk there is zero reward at the end. The stay would evaporate and  
our staff would move forward.  
Moermond: so I’m going to look for the $95,000 to purchase plus at least $65,000. A  
total of $160,000 to execute the rehab.  
Mylin: I have $20,0000 for the down payment and the remaining $65,000 for the repairs  
to get it reoccupied.  
Moermond: your thoughts on this Mr. Magner?  
Magner: as long as she submits the bank statement and the affidavit that gets her to  
another hearing to review the work plan and give a final issuance of a stay.  
Moermond: on partial ability to complete the real estate transaction. That seems to be  
bigger carrot than the Performance Deposit.  
Magner: the title isn’t transferring until the project is completed. If that is the case, she  
has time to come up with the rest of the financing if she needs it to make the final  
contract for deed payment and transfer the title. She is putting herself out there on a  
limb by putting money into a property and it would be financially right to come up with  
the money to complete the sale contract. If she doesn’t it is giving Mr. Krippner a  
rehabbed house. I don’t know why she would do that. At the end of the day the City  
only cares the property is rehabbed, not who owns it. If they want to sue each other, it  
is still rehabbed and ready for occupancy. $65,000 to rehab and an affidavit to do that.  
Krippner: we have had that discussion. I don’t want to be that guy in the end. Those  
are the facts. You said 180 days?  
Magner: yes that’s normally the amount of time.  
Krippner: I thought that it was six months?  
Moermond: that is six months.  
Mylin: once we have the Code Compliance we’ll take out a mortgage for the payoff of  
$70,000. The hard part about being a Category 3 is the title transfer until it is lifted.  
Then no lenders will touch it. So I can get a loan once it is not a Category 3.  
Krippner: that is why the other buyer bailed on it.  
Magner: as long as the funds are there to rehab and get it out of the Vacant Building  
program, the transaction after the fact isn’t a concern of the department.  
Moermond: I’ll go with $100,000. That Performance Deposit needs to be done by noon  
tomorrow. So we need the account information. That allows me to stand in front of  
Council tomorrow and say we have a purchaser who has the money and who has  
posted the Performance Deposit. Please send it back to Legislative Hearing so she  
has a chance to develop a sworn construction statement. You show the money and  
you can show the building package after that. You’re new at looking this property. Can  
you have this together in four weeks?  
Mylin: yes.  
Moermond: if you do those things, affidavit, Performance Deposit and showing money  
by noon tomorrow I’ll ask them to send this back to Legislative Hearing September 27  
at which time hopefully we’ll have had time to review the scope of work and bids for the  
work. Any questions?  
Mylin: I need them by the 27th?  
Moermond: I’d like them by close of business on the 23rd so we can review it before  
having a conversation about it. that is helpful for us. Would we take it that day? Yes.  
Is it as easy to work with at that point? No. That extra time helps.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 8/24/2022  
Ordering the rehabilitation or razing and removal of the structures at 781  
COOK AVENUE EAST within fifteen (15) days after the July 13, 2022,  
City Council Public Hearing. (Amend to grant 180 days, pending  
submission of affidavit of financing)  
Grant 180 days, pending affidavit dedicating funds to project.  
Joe Steinmaus, purchaser, appeared via phone  
Staff update by Manager Steve Magner: after reviewing the documents the only item  
outstanding is the affidavit dedicating the funds to the project. If you can submit that it  
can go forward with a recommendation  
Steinmaus: I’ll have it in tomorrow. My assistant has Covid so she’s hiding out for a few  
Moermond: this can go to Council September 7th. By September 2nd?  
Steinmaus: no problem.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 9/7/2022  
Ordering the rehabilitation or razing and removal of the structures at 1803  
IVY AVENUE EAST within fifteen (15) days after the August 10, 2022,  
City Council Public Hearing. (To refer to August 23, 2022 Legislative  
Layover to LH September 27, 2022 at 9 am. Purchaser to submit evidence of  
financing, affidavit, updated work plan based on CCI, and post PD by COB September  
23, 2022.  
Joe Steinmaus, purchaser, appeared via phone  
Staff update by Manager Steve Magner: we reviewed the PA signed between Metro  
Holdings and Timothy Hay. There is a work plan that is acceptable. Now we are  
looking for the other standard items, the Code Compliance, affidavit and the financing  
for this project as well.  
Moermond: do we have a Performance Deposit on Ivy?  
Steinmaus: I can do it today or tomorrow morning.  
Moermond: regarding the work plan you submitted, once you get the Code Compliance  
Inspection the mechanical electrical and plumbing say up to code, the general work  
doesn’t have that statement. So update that once you have the Code Compliance  
Inspection report update that. So financing, affidavit, Performance Deposit and work  
Steinmaus: no problem.  
Moermond: we’ll lay this over to September 27th.  
Laid Over to the Legislative Hearings due back on 9/27/2022  
Ordering the rehabilitation or razing and removal of the structures at 1802  
ROSS AVENUE within fifteen (15) days after the August 10, 2022, City  
Council Public Hearing. (To refer back to August 23, 2022 Legislative  
Layover to LH September 27, 2022 at 9 am. PO to submit evidence of financing,  
affidavit, work plan and schedule and maintain property by COB September 23, 2022  
and submit (new) CCI application by COB Friday August 26, 2022.  
Peter Yahiayan, representative and financial partner, appeared via phone  
Staff update by Manager Steve Magner: a letter was sent July 28 confirming on August  
10 it will be referred back to Legislative Hearing august 23 if a Performance Deposit is  
posted and Code Compliance Inspection applied for.  
Moermond: and we have that Performance Deposit posted. I understand you spoke  
with staff and indicated you made application for Code Compliance August 9 for Code  
Compliance. And that has still not been received by the City. I’m wondering—  
Yahiayan: I can issue another one. I was talking to people, maybe they can bring in  
the paperwork and charge a card. I’m not sure why it didn’t get there. We did send it  
certified mail.  
Moermond: the Performance Deposit was posted August 2 and you mailed the Code  
Compliance application August 9 according to my staff.  
Yahiayan: correct. It was late but I did mail it out certified.  
Moermond: Mr. Yannarelly, if an application is sent in can you let the Front Desk know  
there may be two application coming in and to only charge for one?  
Moermond: before you send in another application, if we have the Front Desk do a  
quick audit of incoming correspondence—  
Yannarelly: did he say certified?  
Yahiayan: we did tracking. Not the green signature required. I’m going to check the  
tracking when I get back.  
Moermond: so we’ll look into that on our end. Mr. Yannarelly can you get back to Ms.  
Zimny on that and if we need another application made?  
Yannarelly: yes.  
Moermond: is the building cleaned out and ready for someone to do a work plan on?  
Yahiayan: I had the contractor walk through and made a scope of work and bid. It is  
cleaned out and ready to go in for the inspection.  
Magner: Mr. Humphrey indicated Ms. Munich said there were 265 applications and they  
were working on August 12. So if it is on the cart it will probably be entered tis week.  
We’ll try and get it done; we’ll send Mr. Humphrey down.  
Moermond: that’s great. Let Ms. Zimny know. Without the Code Compliance Inspection  
it is hard to move forward with a work plan. I’m glad you have a contractor looking at it  
but that prelim plan will need to be updated which is what you were just saying. I’m  
thinking if you have someone on board doing bids we could have another conversation  
in a month and you’d have things together if we can get this Code Compliance  
Inspection expedited.  
Yahiayan: we want to get it done.  
Moermond: the other piece is financing and the affidavit dedicating the funds. Are you  
ready to roll on that? The department indicated in their preliminary review $100,000. If  
your bids come back lower—  
Yahiayan: the bid we have is significantly lower.  
Moermond: we would look over it with a fine tooth comb to make sure everything in the  
Code Compliance is covered in the bid. We need to make sure it is being done  
according to that Code Compliance Inspection so the contractors need to give a high  
level of detail.  
Yahiayan: no problem.  
Moermond: any questions? We’ll look for that Code Compliance Inspection application  
today. When we get that squared away we’ll ask the building inspector to expedite this  
so you have it ready to go sooner versus later. We’ll talk again the 27th and hopefully  
have all the pieces in place.  
[Update 8/24/22: DSI staff looked for Code Compliance application did not find it in  
pending mail; Mr. Yahiayan was emailed and told to submit another ASAP -JZ]  
Laid Over to the Legislative Hearings due back on 9/27/2022  
Ordering the rehabilitation or razing and removal of the structures at 694  
SHERBURNE AVENUE within fifteen (15) days after the May 25, 2022,  
City Council Public Hearing.  
Layover to LH September 27, 2022 at 9 am. PO to provide building and plumbing bid,  
updated financing, affidavit, work plan and schedule, and completed zoning application  
by COB Friday, September 23, 2022.  
Tia Lee, owner, appeared  
Mai Vang interpreted  
Moermond: we’re working on two tracks; one is zoning and the other is getting the work  
plan together.  
Staff update by Manager Steve Magner: a letter was sent confirming on July 12 the  
matter was continued to today. At that time please bring updated evidence of  
financing, affidavit funds to the project, submit work plan and schedule for completing  
the project. The property must be maintained.  
Moermond: in the record I am only seeing in April there was information from a  
checking account and a money market account. No affidavit and only 2 bids, for the  
same thing, back in the spring. Any other bids?  
Lee: I haven’t prepared the updated financials and whatever you have is what I have.  
Moermond: why not?  
Lee: I called and they keep saying they wont give it to me, but I haven’t received them.  
Moermond: who is they?  
Lee: the electrical, heating. I’ve been contacting them but I haven’t heard anything.  
Magner: the latest documents we received, Metro and Lux, metro appears to be the  
mechanical part of it. Lux bid one part is for mechanical and electrical. It is confusing  
because I don’t know if part of it is missing but it says item one: replace painted over  
receptacles, two: up to 2021 code, and then it goes to number 7. So I’m not sure if  
some got cut off or what happened?  
Moermond: the code compliance electrical is pretty short, 3 items and those are  
Magner: so just the numbering is off.  
Moermond: looks like it. It is pretty short. So we have electrical, mechanical and  
furnace so we need plumbing and building. If you are going with Lux mechanical it has  
both parts of the bid: electrical and mechanical. Are you in the same place we are in  
terms of needing the building and plumbing bids? Or do you have other contractors for  
mechanical and electrical  
Lee: he had a bid for metro heating which includes the plumbing and then Lux  
mechanical if I use them I won’t go with Metro.  
Moermond: we don’t have that. Metro Heating and Cooling bid we have dated March 22  
only has one item on it.  
Lee: the ORSAT test?  
Moermond: it doesn’t have anything about plumbing.  
Magner: it is my impression that both Lux and Metro are only addressing the  
mechanical component of the Code Compliance, we don’t have anything addressing  
the plumbing.  
Lee: I thought I submitted the plumbing already.  
Moermond: we don’t have anything.  
Lee: so I need plumbing and building?  
Moermond: yes if you are going with these contractors. Have you been working with  
Tony Peterson in Zoning?  
Lee: I talked to him and he said he is going to get back to me but he hasn’t.  
Moermond: how long ago was that?  
Lee: two or three weeks ago.  
Moermond: you need to reach back to Mr. Peterson and make sure you are on track  
for the zoning change and they have the paperwork they need.  
Lee: ok, I will.  
Moermond: are you going with Lux and Metro for your contractors?  
Lee: yes if I get approved then yes I am taking those bids.  
Moermond: have you had a plumbing contractor through?  
Lee: I did have one through but I don’t remember the name.  
Moermond: so you may need another one.  
Lee: I believe I am going to go through the plumber I had.  
Moermond: and we need a copy of that bid, as well as an affidavit. The zoning piece  
can’t go through until later in September. Today is August 23, I’m going to continue  
this to September 27. At that time you should have a complete application in to  
reestablish the legal nonconforming use with Planning and Economic Development. At  
that time I expect that application to be done or close to it. Any questions?  
Mai Vang: I told him if he doesn’t understand anything to reach out to me because this  
is important.  
Moermond: do you need anything translated? Or is it easier to work with Ms. Vang?  
Lee did not respond (speaking with Mai Vang)  
Moermond: the financial information showing the money to do the work was back in  
April, by the time this hits Council it is six months later so I would like updated  
financial information you have the money to do the work.  
Laid Over to the Legislative Hearings due back on 9/27/2022  
Ordering the rehabilitation or razing and removal of the structures at 1006  
THIRD STREET EAST within fifteen (15) days after the June 22, 2022,  
City Council Public Hearing. (To refer to September 13, 2022  
Legislative Hearing)  
Refer back to LH September 13, 2022 at 9 am. PO to submit work plan, schedule,  
financing and affidavit.  
No one appeared  
Moermond: they made application for Code Compliance Inspection and they just got it  
August 16.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 9/7/2022  
Ordering the rehabilitation or razing and removal of the structures at 132  
WESTERN AVENUE SOUTH within fifteen (15) days after the July 27,  
2022, City Council Public Hearing. (Amend to remove within 15 days)  
Remove within 15 days with no option to repair.  
Alfred Louismet, owner, appeared  
Louismet: my wife and I have decided we can’t rehab. We can’t afford everything on the  
list. I’m here to say to move forward with tearing it down. I’ll keep paying the taxes so  
we keep the parcel.  
Moermond: the cost to rehab was pretty high.  
Louismet: and contractors said it was that plus materials being higher.  
Magner: if the Council passes the resolution to remove the building, we will send out  
for bids which are generally competitive. They have to do an asbestos survey and has  
waste removal. They will work through the City and Ramsey County and any built  
structures. Garages, sidewalks, etc. You have a vacant lot with a sidewalk and curb in  
front. We may leave a retaining wall depending on where it is. We’d leave the current  
curb cut. They are to clear so you can take care of title and sell if you want. The  
assessment for the demo, once you receive that notification you can request it be  
spread over a number of years if you want from the hearing officer. It won’t go on this  
year’s tax rolls; it would be in 2024.  
Moermond: and we can go up to 10 years on this. The last question you may have is,  
we tend to get better bids for demolition, but this is a pretty simple structure. What  
has been your experience of late with bids? Without the potential for hazardous  
Magner: around $20,000. It could be a little less. Then we have the asbestos  
abatement cost, which is a wild card.  
Louismet: one of the reasons we are passing on it is because there is asbestos tile on  
living room, kitchen, and dining room.  
Magner: it is most likely a sand rock sewer too, which is more than a standard demo  
because of its location. You can’t just find the sewer pipe and cap it, you have to go  
into the sand rock tunnel and find the bulkhead and cap it there, as well as the top of  
the pipe. Its about 3 times more than a standard one.  
Moermond: once it comes to assessment, It can be made payable over 10 years. that  
would give you some time to figure out what you want to do with it. so you have some  
breathing room on that.  
Louismet: will I get a notice of the demo? So I can clear stuff out?  
Magner: we’d prefer you to start that now. You’ll get a copy of the resolution which says  
it is 15 days from that date. Anything left in the property becomes the contractor’s  
possession and their problem to get rid of it.  
Moermond: this goes to Council September 7.  
Magner: so 15 days from that.  
Yannarelly: keep maintaining the property. As long as it is yours you are responsible  
for it.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 9/7/2022  
RLH RR 22-48  
Ordering the rehabilitation or razing and removal of the structures at 523  
BEAUMONT STREET within fifteen (15) days after the September 21,  
2022, City Council Public Hearing.  
Refer back to LH October 11, 2022 at 9 am. PO to pay past due taxes, submit  
evidence of financing, affidavit, work plan and schedule and maintain the property by  
COB October 7, 2022.  
Ed Dropps, Greater Midwest Realty o/b/o GITSIT Solutions, appeared via phone  
[Moermond gives background of process]  
Moermond: who are you representing?  
Dropps: I am a real estate agent based in MN and my primary business is handling  
bank-owned properties. This is GITSIT solutions out of California.  
Staff report by Manager Steve Magner: the building is a one-and-one-half story, wood  
frame, single-family dwelling with a detached one-stall garage on a lot of 3,920 square  
feet. According to our files, it has been a vacant building since September 26, 2019.  
The current property owner is Anthony Donald Pilla, per Amanda and Ramsey County  
Property records. On June 2, 2022, 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 June 13, 2022, with  
a compliance date of July 13, 2022. 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 $20,000 on the land and $60,000 on the building.  
Real estate taxes for the first half of 2022 have not been paid. Amount owed is  
$2,292.78, which includes penalty and interest. The vacant building registration fees  
were paid by assessment on November 1, 2021. A Code Compliance Inspection was  
applied for on August 18, 2022 but has not been completed. The $5,000 performance  
deposit was posted on August 18, 2022. There have been eight Summary Abatement  
notices since 2019.There have been eight (8) WORK ORDERS issued for Tall  
grass/weeds and Snow/ice.  
Code Enforcement Officers estimate the cost to repair this structure exceeds  
$100,000. The estimated cost to demolish exceeds $30,000.  
Moermond: Mr. Dropps, your client GITSIT solutions LLC, what are they thinking about  
their intentions? Where are they at with foreclosure?  
Dropps: they are waiting on approval for the shortened redemption. They expect that  
any time, then its five weeks. Then they would like to rehab the property. They are in  
the process of obtaining bids. We do have one for the entire property and two for the  
code violations on the exterior.  
Moermond: the order they received int eh mail was an order to abate a nuisance in  
building and in the meat of it is the characteristics the department uses to define it as  
a nuisance. Then the road to fixing it is not just addressing those items its to bring it  
up to minimum code compliance. That’s why there’s a requirement for that Code  
Compliance application to be made. Those items are what need to be addressed to be  
reoccupied. That is true of both Category 2 and Category 3 Vacant Buildings.  
Magner: the definitive list of repairs is the Code Compliance Inspection which is what  
the contractors need to pull permits and get the Code Compliance certificate. You  
need that document which has the totality of the list of items.  
Dropps: that makes sense. This isn’t the first time I’ve dealt with a Code Compliance  
Inspection in St. Paul. I’m somewhat familiar with the process. It is only the second  
one I’ve had go this far. It wasn’t until last week that GITSIT solutions knew it was  
going to be theirs. That was on August 17th. They were waiting to order and pay for the  
Code Compliance inspection until they knew it would be acquired. So they hurried and  
applied for those things. We are a little behind the ball, they weren’t going to pay for  
those things until they knew it would be acquired.  
Moermond: understandable.  
Dropps: so now we don’t want it demoed. I know rehabbing it will require all those items  
on the Code Compliance Inspection. If we decide not to repair, we would sell the  
property as is and I am familiar with the process of having to meet certain  
qualifications for selling and purchasing.  
Moermond: we want to make sure you know the difference between a Category 2 and  
this, a Category 3. The code is a bit different for transfer of title. If you were decide you  
weren’t going to rehab Mr. Magner will describe.  
Magner: if they chose not to rehab the City would get a contractor and remove the  
structures and return it to predevelopment state.  
Moermond: and if they wanted to transfer the property to someone who does want to  
rehab, the key is the title cant transfer until the Code Compliance certificate is issued.  
That requires a different type of legal agreement?  
Magner: yes, you enter into a contract where a third party enters into the property and  
rehabs it before the title can transfer.  
Moermond: a contract subject to approval by the City Council. I’m glad you pursued the  
shortened redemption period.  
Dropps: you mentioned Code Compliance certificate. Is that curing all the items on the  
inspection we have ordered?  
Moermond: yes, that’s exactly it. Addressing all the items on the Code Compliance  
Inspection Report. Permits pulled would address those items.  
Dropps: when curing all the items on the list, do those inspections typically require full  
rehab or could there be a scenario where we do the items on the list but don’t put in  
flooring and lighting.  
Moermond: the items on the report are pretty clear. Finishing some items would be  
acceptable to get the Code Compliance Inspection, perhaps if there is a basic floor in  
some place vs. carpeting. But I don’t think they would issue Code Compliance  
certificate prior to things being buttoned up, especially in a residential property.  
Magner: in summary that is exactly what the building inspector is looking for. That has  
to meet minimum code. You don’t have to have granite counters. You can have  
Formica. You don’t have to have appliances. You have to have a furnace and water  
heater. You aren’t staging it for sale, just completing to minimum standards. Minimum  
rehab to get a signoff and then do something after that fact that is your business.  
Moermond: the standard conditions we look for to get a grant of time for rehab from  
the City Council of 180 days from their vote. The second piece is the Code Compliance  
Inspection application, which you’ve done. The Performance Deposit was posted, that’s  
been done. The next piece is a contractor would develop bids addressing items in the  
Code Compliance Inspection report itself. That would be the basis for figuring out how  
much money is needed to do the rehab. We would want to see that $100,000 is  
available and has an affidavit dedicating funds to this purpose. We want to make sure  
you are ok with having your taxes caught up and you would want to wait until the  
redemption period has lapsed first I’m sure. I’m good asking Council on September 21  
to continue the matter to give you more time to do the work plans and demonstrate  
financial. The redemption period takes us through September, so let’s talk again  
October 11. At that time have the plans and evidence of financing to get that time.  
Dropps: when we do get the results of the inspections we’ll get 2 bids from two general  
contractors. Absolutely we’d be ready assuming the inspection doesn’t take a month.  
Moermond: we’ll send a follow up letter by email on Friday so you’ll have this in writing  
and you can ask questions if you need to.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 9/21/2022  
10:00 a.m. Hearings  
Making Finding on Nuisance Abatements  
RLH RR 22-49  
First Making finding on the appealed substantial abatement ordered for  
419 FRY STREET in Council File RLH RR 21-75 .  
The nuisance is abated and the matter resolved.  
No one appeared  
Moermond: this is done. It goes to council September 7 and the nuisance has been  
Referred to the City Council due back on 9/7/2022  
RLH RR 22-11  
Third Making finding on the appealed substantial abatement ordered for  
1023 JESSIE STREET in Council File RLH RR 21-25. (To refer back to  
August 23, 2022 Legislative Hearing)  
Recommendation forthcoming pending CC certificate.  
Rosalinda Costilla, owner, appeared  
David Rocha, owner, appeared  
Moermond: we did talk July 26. You were 95% complete.  
Staff update by Manager Steve Magner: a letter was sent referring it back to  
Legislative Hearing to today. At this point there was an extension for 60 days on the  
Performance Deposit.  
Moermond: and you were 95% complete and the part that is the rub is the McQuillan  
part of it. it sounds like from Mr. Bruhn you are still at 95% but tell me what is going  
Rocha: I called Nathan a couple weeks ago and we were going to set up an  
appointment so he could look at the last 5% and he informed me then he wanted all  
the plumbing and HVAC permits closed before he’d sign off. So we finally got  
McQuillan in to show up yesterday. They had a few corrections they still have to make,  
they said Thursday or Friday and they just have to send pictures to Paul Zellmer.  
Nathan also mentioned open permits on HVAC for McQuillan which are 2 or 3 years  
old. That work was done. So we contacted them again and told them Nathan wants  
them to contact him. They have to set up an appointment so one of the inspectors can  
come and verify the corrections were made. As far as I know they were. It was  
something with some duct work and a gas line above ground. The hangers on the  
refrigeration. They didn’t have enough. So that was done as far as I know. I think they  
just need that appointment to have Aaron come to verify that work was done. They  
should be able to close the plumbing permit this week too.  
Moermond: who told them they needed to call on the mechanical?  
Costilla: yes, we let them know they needed to contact Nathan to set that up.  
Moermond: timing on that?  
Costilla: we talked to Katelyn this morning and she was going to contact the inspector  
Moermond: this doesn’t got to Council until September 7.  
Costilla: I’m hoping it can be done next week. May depend on Nathan’s schedule.  
We’re so close.  
Moermond: I’m going to ask them to look at this September 14 to give you a little extra  
Costilla: Amy Brendmoen said she wouldn’t do anything until today if they hadn’t done  
anything. They finally did yesterday.  
Moermond: hopefully we’re done September 14.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 9/14/2022  
11:00 a.m. Hearings  
Correction Orders  
Appeal of Dawn Keller to a Correction Notice at 415 CLARENCE  
Layover to LH September 6, 2022 at 11 am to discuss findings of building inspector.  
Dawn Keller, owner, appeared via phone  
[Moermond gives background of appeals process]  
Staff report by Supervisor Lisa Martin: August 2, 2022 we issued a correction notice.  
The garage roof has a tarp covering the entire thing. We’ve asked for the roof to be  
repaired and tarps removed by September 2nd.  
Moermond: what are you looking for with respect to your garage roof?  
Keller: I know it needs to be fixed. My problem is the property who adjoins mine on the  
back side has a fence and chicken coop that is there that the owner is directing the  
water down my hill causing erosion and damage to my garage for a number of years.  
Moermond: bring this back to your repair of the garage. Your saying it is my neighbor’s  
property directing water flow here. I think we could have someone look at that. You did  
say there was a problem with the fence. There was a fence permit pulled in 2002. If it  
has deteriorated or is in a state of failure since then Code Enforcement could definitely  
look at that. With respect to the coop the coop has a building inspector assigned. Tell  
me what you are wanting for your garage roof repair. I get you are saying it is your  
neighbor’s fault. It is kind of a private matter between you and your neighbor about  
responsibility. The City can say you need to retain waters on your own property, but  
there was a building permit sign-off saying it was constructed in a way that would. How  
does this influence fixing your garage?  
Keller: I fixed it once before I was even the owner of this house. I used to be the  
neighbor, and in 2010 or 2012 the same problem had been going on with the runoff  
from that adjacent property because it is higher than mine. I had to fix the roof then. It  
would be senseless to fix the roof now because the erosion and water runoff continues.  
There is no sense in repairing something that will happen right away again. Until that is  
fixed there is no way I can repair the roof.  
Moermond: you fixed it before you owned it?  
Keller: my neighbor had MS and I lived next door and knew her for over 20 years. I did  
whatever I could to help and the roof had deteriorated back then too because of the  
runoff. It goes through the garage, down the driveway, and into the street. It is extreme.  
It was repaired then and it happened again because of the runoff. If I fix it now the  
same thing will happen in 5 or 10 years.  
Moermond: and you understand a dangerous building situation has arisen on your  
property. You are attributing that condition to runoff from a neighboring property. It  
seems like the City could say, perhaps, something about the runoff. But we are  
looking for it to be rectified. They are just as worried about it not collapsing as they are  
anything else.  
Keller: I understand that but until he removes the plywood or something gets done with  
that there is nothing I can do about it. I could rebuild the whole thing and the same  
thing would happen again.  
Moermond: have you contacted an attorney?  
Keller: no, I haven’t. Is that something you think I should do?  
Moermond: I can’t give legal advice and that is why I’m asking that. If your saying it is  
their responsibility that was the logical extension for me.  
Keller: that is what I’m saying. Between the people that built it and Habitat for  
Humanity and the owner doing this there is no way I can even attempt to fix anything  
until that is taken care of. I’ve done it already once. It would be a waste of money for  
me to fix something knowing it would happen again.  
Moermond: it needs to be taken care of. We need to put a deadline on it and how to  
make the site safe and secure. A roof collapsing is a hazard, regardless of attribution  
of the problem. We can’t allow the hazard to continue. You may have a claim against  
your neighbor, but I’m struggling.  
Keller: it isn’t ready to collapse or anything. That’s why I put tarps on, to minimize  
some of the damage. I don’t know what else to say. I can’t fix it until that is taken care  
Martin: if there is a temporary repair that is fine, but the tarp needs to come off and the  
roof repaired. You can also remove the garage, that is also an option.  
Moermond: why don’t we have this rest for a week and get a building inspector or  
structural engineer out there. Do you give permission for City inspectors to access the  
Keller: I would like to be here when that happens.  
Moermond: I don’t know their schedule, so I can’t commit to that. We would get their  
findings afterwards. I’m a little frustrated with how to manage this. There is no building  
permit pulled so it is hard to get someone on site.  
Keller: I’m usually home after 10:30 every day.  
Martin: I’ll talk to them tomorrow morning and give her a call that works for us.  
Moermond: so let’s talk again in a week. You hear where I’m coming from. This can’t  
stay in a hazardous condition pending resolution of this other issue. The City can look  
at the neighbor for violations. I see a complaint on the fence and there was a permit  
pulled. The question is the coop and what is required there. Ms. Martin, would you also  
have your person look at that property?  
Martin: yes, I will.  
Moermond: we’ll try talking to you a week from now and see if we don’t have better  
information about the situation. You hear where I’m coming from on this, so that’s  
where plans need to be going.  
Laid Over to the Legislative Hearings due back on 9/6/2022  
1:00 p.m. Hearings  
Vacant Building Registrations  
Appeal of Randall E. Mulligan to a Vacant Building Registration Notice at  
Grant the appeal and release the property from the VB program.  
Randall Mulligan appeared via phone  
[Moermond gives background of appeals process]  
Staff report by Supervisor Joe Yannarelly: this was just referred to us as a Vacant  
Building, normally we would just start a preliminary to watch if it is being maintained.  
That is probably what should have happened  
Moermond: because there are no violations?  
Yannarelly: yes. Just being unoccupied.  
Moermond: what are you looking for today?  
Mulligan: my family has owned this for 50-some years. My parents have both passed  
away, there are 50 years’ worth of items we were cleaning out. It took time to go  
through it. I’ve always shoveled it, cut the lawn. I talked to the neighbors, some of  
whom I’ve known for 50 years. It is going to be on the market within the next four  
weeks. I’d just like no fine so I can move forward and get it sold.  
Moermond: the code would allow you to be out of the Vacant Building program based  
on the fact you have no obvious code violations and it is secured by normal means,  
and it hasn’t been empty for 365 days as far as the City knows. It doesn’t qualify as a  
Category 1 Vacant Building. I would recommend the Council grant your appeal to be  
out of the program.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 9/14/2022  
Appeal of Rustam Rustami, Sogdiana Investments, LLC., to a Vacant  
Building Registration Requirement at 1119 REANEY AVENUE.  
Grant the appeal and release the property from the VB program, conditioned upon the  
Fire C of O being reinstated by October 1, 2022.  
Rustam Rustami, property representative, appeared via phone  
[Moermond gives background of appeals process]  
Staff report by Supervisor Mitch Imbertson: this is a duplex residential property in the  
Fire Certificate of Occupancy program. We had sent out an appointment letter for the  
renewal for access for inspection. It was up for renewal in March 2022. First letter was  
sent February 17, 2022 for a March appointment. A number of attempts to get access  
without success. On the fourth attempt the Certificate of Occupancy was revoked for  
failure to provide access to renew. The inspector was also unable to get into the  
property on the follow-up on the revocation notice. It was referred to the Vacant  
Building program.  
Moermond: it looks like the letters went to an address at 7206 27th St W Suite 226,  
which is exactly the neighbor of 7204 Suite 224 which is the address Mr. Rustami  
provided. A close miss.  
I: it is a possibility. I don’t have the records on where the original address was entered  
from, if it was provided by the owner or information from Ramsey County. It looks like  
the letters were not returned nor any other change of Responsible Party notice.  
Moermond: so you sent the letters in good faith to 7204 and none came back, so you  
didn’t know it was possibly incorrect. Mr. Yannarelly, the Certificate of Occupancy got  
Staff report by Supervisor Joe Yannarelly: July 18 we opened a Category 1 Vacant  
Building per that revocation and also issued a Summary Abatement Order to cut the  
grass and remove compost bags. It wasn’t complied with and parks did a work order  
July 26.  
Moermond: and that went to Sogdiana investments, LLC?  
Yannarelly: yes.  
Moermond: tell me what is going on with the LLCs?  
Rustami: Delnosia was the previous property owner’s manager. I took over helping and  
I assumed everything was under their name, because she said so. I haven’t received  
letters. Then I got a call from the inspector saying no one was meeting him. That was  
my first contact. He told me to call the Council, they said to wait and sent in the Fire  
Affidavit. I asked next steps and he told me to change the Responsible Party form.  
Sent that in, and then I called the Council and he told me to call and appeal. We  
weren’t getting any letters.  
[Moermond confirms that the owner and tax owner are Sogdiana Investments at the  
7204 address, and the Responsible Party is AR Management, LLC at 7204 address]  
Rustami: that was changed over recently, yes.  
Moermond: why don’t we try and get a Certificate of Occupancy inspection scheduled  
and start that process. I’m going to release the property from the Vacant Building  
program and grant your appeal, conditioned upon your Fire Certificate of Occupancy is  
reinstated within 60 days. That should be sufficient to have that back in place.  
Rustami: that sounds good to me.  
Moermond: Mr. James Thomas will reach out to you by phone to schedule that  
inspection, typically before 9 am.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 9/14/2022  
1:30 p.m. Hearings  
Orders To Vacate - Fire Certificate of Occupancy  
RLH VO 22-23  
Appeal of Eric and Cassandra Larson to a Fire Correction Notice,  
including Condemnation, at 920 CLARK STREET.  
Grant the appeal on the order to vacate (provisional C of O application made).  
Eric Larson, owner, appeared  
[Moermond gives background of appeals process]  
Staff report by Supervisor Mitch Imbertson: this is a residential property, if it is not  
Owner occupied it needs a Certificate of Occupancy per ordinance. It was referred  
August 5 as a complaint of it being non-owner occupied and not having a Certificate of  
Moermond: when was that referral?  
Imbertson: August 5. The initial orders in response were issued August 12. Inspector  
Thomas was out to investigate and sent a letter August 15. He found it not owner  
occupied and issued it not legally occupied based on it not having its Certificate of  
Occupancy. They typically should have a provisional Certificate of Occupancy until  
there is a full inspection.  
Moermond: so the cure for the order to vacate is to get a Fire Certificate of  
Imbertson: apply for a provisional Certificate of Occupancy, yes.  
Moermond: and then a subsequent inspection.  
Imbertson: correct. Then making arrangements for that further inspection. Occupancy  
is allowed pending that.  
Moermond: the letter the Department sent was addressed to Cassandra Schulz.  
Larson: yes, my wife’s maiden name. We thought we fixed it when we got married.  
Moermond: so you’ve worked with Ramsey County.  
Larson: we did that on the 16th. We made a few trips that day.  
Moermond: are you amenable for having a Certificate of Occupancy?  
Larson: yes. We did that on the 16th. We just found out about it on the 15th. The  
tenants sent us the notice to vacate. We think they wanted out of the lease anyways.  
They told us that and I had two missed calls and voicemail from Mr. Thomas and he  
got ahold of her on the 15th and said he was mailing us a letter. Then the 16th we got  
the provisional permit as well as the upstairs will be a short term rental. We got that  
permit as well. And then filled out this appeal form.  
Moermond: has the Department registered the provisional application?  
Imbertson: I haven’t seen it, but I know our front desk is behind.  
Larson: is there a long term occupancy needed?  
Imbertson: it is just the Fire Certificate of Occupancy from our Division. I can’t answer  
short term rental registration requirements.  
Moermond: Mr. Imbertson, can you confirm there is still an inspection on August 30? It  
should have been stayed since an appeal was filed. Because we’ve received the  
provisional application I’m going to recommend your appeal of the vacate order was  
granted. You simply have a correction notice and expect you’ll get an amended list  
once the inspector is in there.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 9/14/2022  
2:00 p.m. Hearings  
Fire Certificates of Occupancy  
Appeal of Mark Younghans to a Fire Certificate of Occupancy Correction  
Notice at 1191 EARL STREET.  
Grant to August 1, 2023 for compliance.  
Mark Younghans, owner, appeared via phone  
Moermond: I want to let you know we received your engineer’s report and looked it over.  
We have considered it both from the Department perspective and mine and I think hat  
what they are describing is maintenance which is something the City would require  
Supervisor Mitch Imbertson: my point would be it was good news on the report there  
was no structural concerns. Tuckpointing is a recommendation on the engineers report  
we would view as required per City ordinance as exterior maintenance on the building.  
Moermond: are you going to be revising your orders?  
Imbertson: the ordinance cited in the report it is still correct. No need to reissue them.  
Taking into account there are no structural concerns along with the deterioration, it  
affect the timelines we’d be comfortable with.  
Moermond: I’m thinking we give you a new deadline of August 1, 2023 and if there is  
further deterioration or changes that mean more orders need to be written, that could  
happen. As long as it continues like this I’ll recommend that extension. Any  
Younghans: why do engineers charge so much? 2 hours of their time was $875. They  
wanted to charge another $425 for a 2 minute visit. No questions, I’m just joking.  
Moermond: hopefully this gives you some breathing room to deal with extensions and  
grant-seeking you wanted to do.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 9/14/2022  
Appeal of Thomas E. Smith to a Correction Notice-Reinspection  
Complaint at 1322 PACIFIC STREET.  
Grant an extension to October 14, 2022 for compliance.  
Thomas Smith, owner, appeared  
[Moermond gives background of appeals process]  
Staff report by Supervisor Mitch Imbertson: it was inspected for a regular renewal  
inspection starting in May 2022. It was eventually approved with corrections, meaning  
the exterior work and a kitchen floor tile repair to be completed yet. The most recent  
inspection the floor was completed and now we’re down to exterior wall repair. Code  
requires them to be maintained in a professional state of repair. You were looking for  
more time to complete that. Based on what we’re seeing I would not object to a  
reasonable extension to complete.  
Moermond: you have a painting project; I assume you want it done this year?  
Smith: I’m really close. I’ve been working on it all summer. I’d planned to do it before  
the inspection even. I’ve been chipping away on it all summer. I’m 72 and I can’t do 10  
hours a day. I have 3 out of the 4 sides done. Cleaned, patching done, caulking done  
and priming done on the 3 largest sides. The east side is the smallest and I’ll probably  
start tomorrow. The order required the end of the month, with the prep needed I can’t  
do that. I’m looking at the end of September.  
Moermond: in the even there is a hiccup, you get sick, whatever the paint supply is, I’d  
like to give you a deadline of October 14th. That’s pretty much the end of the painting  
season. We’ll send a letter confirming that. It goes to Council September 14, I don’t  
expect there to be an issue whatsoever.  
Referred to the City Council due back on 9/14/2022