Minutes · St. Paul City Council
St. Paul City CouncilMinutesTuesday, July 14, 2026
Not yet analyzed
Analyze this document to extract topics and generate news stories.
Minutes Text
---
title: Minutes - Final
---
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
## 9:00 AM
Room TBD in person/Remote
Tuesday, July 14, 2026
9:00 a.m. Hearings
## Remove/Repair Orders
1
## RLH RR 26-12
Ordering the rehabilitation or razing and removal of the structures at
594-596 REANEY AVENUE within fifteen (15) days after the July 15,
2026, City Council Public Hearing. (Continued Public Hearing to August
5, 2026)
## Sponsors:
## Yang
Continue CPH to August 5, 2026 and grant 180 days to rehab the property pending
posting of $5,000 PD & CCIR being completed.
Jay Mitchell, contractor, appeared
Mitchell: Clint said the lock box didn’t work—I did but it was tricky---so I did put a new
one on. I called Clint, but didn’t think to leave the code in my Voicemail. We finally
connected, and he confirmed he’d go out again.
Hoffman: regardless of what the Code Compliance Inspection Report says, he’s putting
in a new everything. I think it looks fine based on the contractors, everything new.
Same with plumbing, heating, cooling, toilets, fixtures. Basically the whole thing.
Electrical panel will be new.
Moermond: you’ll be managing the work on this, not doing it yourself [with your injury].
Mitchell: yes.
Moermond: has the Performance Deposit been posted?
Mitchell: not yet, I’m being honest with you. It will be done today.
Moermond: I’m going to ask the Council to continue this a week on the strength of the
Performance Deposit being posted today. Then I’ll be ready to grant the time. You’re in
communication with Clint.
Referred to the City Council due back on 7/15/2026
Page 1
## City of Saint Paul
July 14, 2026Legislative HearingsMinutes - Final
2
## RLH RR 26-14
Ordering the rehabilitation or razing and removal of the structures at 914
CENTRAL AVENUE WEST within fifteen (15) days after the August 19,
2026, City Council Public Hearing.
## Sponsors:
## Bowie
Layover to LH August 11, 2026 at 9 am for update on plans for the property. (CPH
8/19)
Staff report by Supervisor James Hoffman: The building is a two story, wood frame,
single-family dwelling with a detached one-stall garage and an accessory wooden shed,
on a lot of 4,879 square feet. The property was referred by Code Enforcement to
Vacant Buildings with files opened on April 27, 2023.
The current property owner is Lucille Herring and Maurice L Bellamy (both deceased),
per Paulie and Ramsey County Property records.
On April 8, 2026, 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 April 15, 2026, with a compliance
date of May 15, 2026. As of this date, the property remains in a condition which
comprises a nuisance as defined by the legislative code.
Taxation has placed an estimated market value of $25,300 on the land and $170,500
on the building.
Real estate taxes are delinquent for 2024 and 2025 in the amount of $5,024.61, which
includes penalty and interest. The taxes for the first half of 2026 are due and owing in
the amount of $5,635.30, which includes penalty and interest. The property is
scheduled for tax forfeiture on July 31, 2028.
The vacant building registration fees were paid by assessment on June 2, 2025.
As of July 13, 2026, a Code Compliance Inspection has not been done.
As of July 13, 2026, the $5,000 performance deposit has not been posted.
There have been four Summary Abatement notices since 2023. There have been two
work orders issued for: Garbage/rubbish and to cut vegetation in public right-of-way.
Code Enforcement Officers estimate the cost to repair this structure exceeds
$150,000. The estimated cost to demolish exceeds $30,000.
Moermond: do we know in 2023 what happened that the building ended up in the
Vacant Building program?
Hoffman: I don’t.
Adams: there was a tenant and family in there until sometime in 2023. He died and
then his wife died, and the family moved out I guess. Since that time it has been
vacant to know knowledge.
Moermond: so it was a rental property Ms. Herring and Mr. Bellamy owned, not where
they lived.
Adams: yes. The family who died were the tenants. Family didn’t step up to move in,
Page 2
## City of Saint Paul
July 14, 2026Legislative HearingsMinutes - Final
so it became vacant in 2023.
Moermond: how long ago did they pass?
Adams: Lucille was about 10 years ago. Maurice was in the 1980’s. And that tenant
lived in there a while, and before that family. This is the only time its been unoccupied;
sometime in the last few years.
Moermond: what’s going on?
Adams: I don’t live in St. Paul anymore. I’ve tried to encourage family to moved in as
an asset left to us. No one did. When the notice came a couple of years ago that it
was a Vacant Building, my cousin Layne who lives here, called me. I was unaware the
tenant had expired. I don’t know if my other cousins knew either. We went back and
forth about it, I always wanted to keep it repaired and have family live in it. Covid
stopped a lot of things from happening. We’re trying to get back on track.
Moermond: are you a representative of the estate?
Adams: Mrs. Herring, because she was my mother. The other cousins and I didn’t go
to probate after my mother passed. The reason their still on there is because they
went to probate after my grandfather passed. That could be a problem.
Moermond: their names are on it. What are your plans?
Adams: I’m trying to corral them. I have one cousin saying he’s willing to move in once
it is livable. It is our intention to do the repairs. I was in there yesterday and did a video
walk through and took photos. Everything seems to be related to water damage that I
could see.
Moermond: there appears to be a really large hole in the roof.
Adams: yes. I tarped it a couple years ago. Roofing, gutters, soffits are all
deteriorating, along with foundation issues from the water.
Moermond: I assume electrical was affective. We have a lot of work, and the guess
from staff is over $150,000 to repair. [Moermond explains financial requirements, bids,
schedule, work plan, Performance Deposit, etc]. You also need to square away the
taxes, both for this process and so you can change the title. There are a lot of
expenses going on with this. I’m sure at least $200,000. In conversations with your
family, do they have resources to help fix this?
Adams: my mother was tight-lipped about what all was going on, so I wasn’t able to
move forward some years ago. So, here we are.
Moermond: this has a Council Public Hearing August 19th, and I’m willing to
recommend they give more time to sort things out as long as the Performance Deposit
is posted and the Code Compliance Inspection applied for. That Performance Deposit
is returnable if the property is demoed for some reason.
Hoffman: you also have the option to find your own contractor to demolish it
yourselves.
Moermond: you’re looking at parcel value vs. costs at that point. Getting that Code
Page 3
## City of Saint Paul
July 14, 2026Legislative HearingsMinutes - Final
Compliance Inspection list would be something a contractor can look at to give a
sound bid. I’m thinking you should get that ordered sooner than later.
Adams: is there anything I can do while I’m downtown?
Moermond: Ms. Vang will print out the Performance Deposit and Code Compliance
Inspection application. Any of the family is welcome to come and talk with us. You
seem like you’re the type to be on top of this. Let’s go out 4 weeks, August 11—the
week before the Council Public Hearing August 19—we can touch base then, see what
you’ve learned, if you’re leaning a particular direction. If we are continuing the case we
need those 2 things done.
Laid Over to the Legislative Hearings due back on 8/11/2026
10:00 a.m. Hearings
## Special Tax Assessments
## RLH TA 26-1523
Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 99
## CALIFORNIA AVENUE WEST (AKA 100 CALIFORNIA AVENUE
## WEST). (File No. J2612B, Assessment No. 268118)
## Sponsors:
## Kim
Approve the assessment.
Zach Campbell, owner, appeared via phone
[Moermond gives background of appeals process]
Staff report by Supervisor James Hoffman: Boarding from April 26 around 6 pm the St.
Paul Police Department responded to a call about disorderly conduct. They broke a
window in a door. The police had it secured.
Campbell: we felt like they should have tried calling the emergency line. Right where
they were was both an emergency line and the property owner number, also there’s
typically someone on site past 6 pm who also could have dealt with it. We could have
taken care of it without the cost.
Moermond: I’m sympathetic to your perspective, but also the police are navigating a
particular circumstance and need to get to their next call. While it would have been
ideal they reach out to you, it typically isn’t the case where someone has those
numbers posted. They’re dealing with an emergency situation, and they need to get it
done and quickly. They were in and out in under an hour. I’m thinking my
recommendation will be the assessment is approved, however the Council may look at
this differently. I get where you are coming from but I have to call it in the other
direction due to the exigent circumstances therein.
Campbell: we likely could have had someone there faster than the contractor.
Moermond: they left the scene at 6:06 and contractor arrived at 6:05. So the contractor
arrived and they left. We can send you a packet of what we have again, I think you
already received it.
Page 4
## City of Saint Paul
July 14, 2026Legislative HearingsMinutes - Final
Referred to the City Council due back on 8/19/2026
4
## RLH TA 26-145
Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 2012
## COMO AVENUE. (File No. J2611B, Assessment No. 268116)
## Sponsors:
## Coleman
Layover to LH July 28, 2026 at 10 am (reschedule request by PO).
Laid Over to the Legislative Hearings due back on 7/28/2026
## Special Tax Assessments-Rolls
## RLH AR 26-445
Ratifying the assessment for Securing and/or Emergency Boarding fees
billed during March 2026 on Private Property. (File No. J2611B,
## Assessment No. 268116)
## Sponsors:
## Noecker
Referred to the City Council due back on 8/19/2026
## RLH AR 26-456
Ratifying the assessment for Securing and/or Emergency Boarding fees
billed during November 2025 on Private Property. (File No. J2607B2,
## Assessment No. 268117)
## Sponsors:
## Noecker
Referred to the City Council due back on 8/19/2026
## RLH AR 26-467
Ratifying the assessment for Securing and/or Emergency Boarding fees
billed during April 2026 on Private Property. (File No. J2612B,
## Assessment No. 268118)
## Sponsors:
## Noecker
Referred to the City Council due back on 8/19/2026
11:00 a.m. Hearings
## Making Finding on Nuisance Abatements
8
## RLH SAO 26-41
Second Making finding on the appealed nuisance abatement ordered for
399 BLAIR AVENUE in Council File RLH SAO 26-16.
## Sponsors:
## Bowie
Grant an additional 6 month extension (to January 12, 2027) to have building materials
removed or building permit closed.
Nyar Pwo, owner, appeared via phone
Mitch Hadler, attorney and friend of owner, appeared via phone
Page 5
## City of Saint Paul
July 14, 2026Legislative HearingsMinutes - Final
Staff update by Supervisor Martin: last time I checked planning, Mario had sent out an
email to owner and attorney requesting corrections and wanted an engineer to do the
drawings. They also have added another fence to the property so new orders will be
going out on that.
Moermond: why orders on another fence? Height or what?
Martin: it is over 6’ in height in front of property. It can’t be higher than 4 feet.
Moermond: that’s forthcoming, not in front of me today. Just an FYI. We’re talking
about compliance with the Summary Abatement Order and the building permit which
we had tried to stagger some deadlines. Mario Gonzalez asked for more information.
Hadler: there was review of the building permit by 2 people. The second was Mr.
Gonzalez. They want additional information on the drawings. The structure was
characterized on the application as independent addition and Mr. Gonzalez says it is
an attached addition. The issue with the engineer arose with the issues of footings
having to be added. There also was some issues with the site plan on the percentage
under coding rules. We’re going to have the drawings done, but we haven’t had a
chance yet. That just came to me the 6th of July from the plan reviewers. We send
them off to the “building drawer” who will review the comments and come up with the
adjustments to the plan. Then we’ll submit our replies and try to get variances if
needed. We just don’t know the whole story yet. No permit yet.
Moermond: Ms. Martin, do you have any dates in the system?
Martin: I believe it was June 25th.
Hadler: when we spoke last week we hadn’t received them yet.
Moermond: I see the resolutions say grant to June 1 to have building permit pulled OR
construction materials removed. I don’t have a permit pulled. But I do have it was
delineated as an item to be completed quite a while ago. While I am sympathetic you
are in the process now, I was hoping for an earlier conclusion, hence the earlier
deadline, we’re operating on grace anyway. June 25 was a date Ms. Martin referenced.
Martin: 8 days ago they were asked to resubmit, that was July 6. Keep in mind, most
people get a permit BEFORE they actually build something. This is already almost
completed.
Hadler: we actually opened the file in April.
Moermond: I remember that conversation, it was incomplete and needed more
information and wasn’t continued until after the deadlines has come and gone which
was your responsibility to track.
I’m ready to call it and say it either needs to be completed by permit or deadline for
removing the building materials. Disengage from the permit process entirely. That isn’t
proving to be a helpful thing.
Hadler: you are really being unreasonable. We are not trying to delay. We’re doing the
best we can in the system. It is hard to get people to make drawings. I don’t know if
you have any practical experience doing this yourself. People just don’t do things the
Page 6
## City of Saint Paul
July 14, 2026Legislative HearingsMinutes - Final
same day. We know we’ve had a rough beginning, we’re now in the process and I don’t
think it is fair to be so adamant about these deadlines. No one is being hurt by any of
this. We’re working with the City. This is some type of rule type adamance that is
unreasonable. What’s the purpose of destroying what has been built if we can comply?
What’s the purpose of someone removing the fence? Who is it hurting? It isn’t a
danger that someone is going to walk in and kill themselves. It is unreasonable.
Moermond: the expectation is that permits are pulled prior to a project such as this
being undertaken. We aren’t sure what’s there because no one knows whether the
proper inspections and safety precautions have or haven’t been taken. This is all after
the fact. I’m sorry you feel it is unreasonable and following rules for rules’ sake, I will
say I also have to treat this case fairly and consistently as other similar cases are
treated. We want to have grace and give people a chance. This has been a slow one. I
want to get to a place where it is done, one way or another, and my suggestion now is it
helpful for me to put deadlines within the permitting process when that really isn’t within
a timeline I can manage. I can manage deadlines by which something should be
completed. Looking at that I can set a deadline that would give some flexibility about
when the Department of Safety and Inspections get the permit sorted out with you. It
makes sense to me to be looking at it on a sixth month clock, and if it isn’t then that
is a nuisance the Department of Safety and Inspections would be authorized to abate.
That’s a significant extension for compliance. I don’t know if you think that is still
unreasonable, but that is where I’m at.
Hadler: I don’t understand what you mean by “something you can schedule or fit in a
sixth month schedule.” Why does it have to be six months as long as no one is being
hurt or damage and making good faith progress. What is the purpose on destroying
something someone put money into and not hurting anyone. It just seems like rules for
rules’ sake. Mr. Pwo is trying to work with the City. He has complied with putting
materials away. He is working with a licensed contractor for drawings. The
recharacterization of the structure requires re-drawing. This happens all the time.
There’s a project on Grand and Victoria that’s gone through all sorts of revisions, and
they’re getting TIF money. These plans take time. This is small scale. He started on
something that should have had a permit, okay, so he stopped his construction and is
working on permits. We’re going to get the permit. He wants to finish it too before the
snow flies.
Moermond: Mr. Hadler, your involvement followed the finding the Council made about
this being a nuisance condition. It was after that you came and were talking about
having that bell un-rung. That would be something the Council would have to decide. I
would say it does continue to be a nuisance until the matter is abated one way or
another. I’m trying to work with you in getting us to that place. If you want the Council
to make a different determination about conditions while they’re making a finding you
can do that. I’m not going to recommend that because they’ve already made that
decision. I’m looking at six months from now; I know you feel that is unreasonable. I
need you to take that argument to the Council at this juncture.
Hadler: did you mean six months from NOW? From today? Going forward?
Moermond: yes.
Hadler: oh, I have no problem with six months from today.
Moermond: how refreshing.
Referred to the City Council due back on 7/15/2026
Page 7
## City of Saint Paul
July 14, 2026Legislative HearingsMinutes - Final
9
## RLH SAO 26-50
Making finding on the appealed of Gary Grimes to a nuisance abatement
ordered for 314 WYOMING STREET EAST in Council File RLH SAO
26-46.
## Sponsors:
## Noecker
The nuisance is not abated.
Voicemail left at 11:51 am: this is Marcia Moermond from St. Paul City Council calling
Gary Grimes following up on the extension you received to deal with the vehicles at
your property. They are still there, no change, at this point I’m going to recommend the
Council find noncompliance and authorize the Department of Safety and Inspections to
take action. That will be happening next Wednesday at Council Public Hearing.
Referred to the City Council due back on 7/22/2026
## Correction Orders
## RLH CO 26-310
Appeal of Isaiah Tolo to a Correction Order at 575 BEAUMONT
## STREET.
## Sponsors:
## Noecker
Grant to September 1, 2026 for compliance (approval or removal of raised beds in
boulevard).
Voicemail left at 11:54 am: this is Marcia Moermond from St. Paul City Council calling
Isaiah Tolo about your appeal for 575 Beaumont. We have an order about a raised bed
in the right-of-way. I believe you’ve made application to Public Works and we have no
response from them yet. I’m going to recommend we have approval or removal of the
raised bed by September 1. We’ll send an email to Public Works about this as well
and ask them to expedite their review.
Referred to the City Council due back on 8/5/2026
## Summary & Vehicle Abatement Orders
11
## RLH SAO 26-57
Appeal of Katherine Werner to a Tall Grass and Weeds Order at 2177
## FAIRMOUNT AVENUE.
## Sponsors:
## Coleman
Grant to July 31, 2026 for compliance.
Katherine Werner, owner, appeared via phone
Moermond: we’re doing follow up from last week’s hearing. I’d asked for a plan to be
submitted for the conversion of your yard in a more measured way. I don’t have
anything to respond to, tell me what is going on.
Werner: let me add, I did not understand you were looking for a plan before this
meeting anymore I was before the first meeting. I apologize for any confusion. I’m
totally prepared to talk about it today.
Page 8
## City of Saint Paul
July 14, 2026Legislative HearingsMinutes - Final
Moermond: there was no requirement for a plan before our original hearing, it was
discussed in last week’s hearing and included in the letter that went out Friday. Why
don’t you tell me what is going on. We discussed taking this in steps.
Werner: I purchased a pretty sturdy hedge trimmer and I plan to experiment cutting the
grass back with it. That’s my plan, to use that device to cut everything back so I’m
well within 8” across the front yard and it was intention to share that with you and see if
that is acceptable as a next step. A friend came this morning when it was cooler and
weeded around the bird feeders and cut back the suckers on the City tree. Two small
things are done. The neighborhood boy will be coming today to mow the boulevard.
Moermond: when I look at your property, what do you consider front and side given you
are on a corner?
Werner: whatever is at the front door with my address, I have a walkway to the front
door, land to the west and a larger area to the east. When I say front yard I mean that
area.
Moermond: ok. Where you do draw the line in the sideyard for front.
Werner: the side yard is on Cretin with a side door and garage. I’ve been planting
perennials all summer with clover. That’s just about full bloom.
Moermond: let’s get you through this heat. We don’t want you to mess with any
milkweed, it is monarch season.
Werner; that milkweed grew by itself. This is the third summer I’ve had my front yard in
this condition yet someone decided to call the City.
Moermond: I’ll recommend a deadline of July 31.
Referred to the City Council due back on 7/22/2026
12
## RLH SAO 26-54
Appeal of Jane Foster to a Summary Abatement Order at 1312
## SCHEFFER AVENUE. (July 21, 2026 Legislative Hearing)
## Sponsors:
## Jost
Layover to LH July 21, 2026 at 11 am to discuss work plan and deadline for extension
(CPH July 22).
Voicemail left at 12:15 pm: this is Marcia Moermond from St. Paul City Council calling
Jane Foster calling about the tall grass and weeds at your property at 1312 Scheffer.
You were going to back tackling smaller portions for converting to more a native
planting situation. I’m happy to look at one half or the other so we can get it thoroughly
planted .I don’t have a plan from you in front of me, which would be helpful. We DO
need to get that boulevard height down to 36”. I don’t care how you do it, but it needs
to happen. I’d like to send this to Council next week, July 22. My recommendation will
be the appeal is denied on the boulevard, and granted in part in the front yard based
on a forthcoming plan. I need that plan. You can reply to the email Joanna Zimny sent.
(note: after call it was noted wrong email address was used by staff for PO - JZ)
Referred to the City Council due back on 7/22/2026
Page 9
## City of Saint Paul
July 14, 2026Legislative HearingsMinutes - Final
## RLH SAO
26-58
13
Appeal of Jane Myers to a Summary Abatement Order at 1521 HAGUE
## AVENUE.
## Sponsors:
## Bowie
Grant to September 11, 2026 for compliance.
Jane Myers, owner, appeared
[Moermond gives background of appeals process]
Staff report by Supervisor Lisa Martin: June 5, 2026 a Summary Abatement Order was
issued for overgrown vegetation, to cut and remove all plant growth and vegetation
hanging into sidewalk and street on both sides of property. Fencing and other
structures are not allowed on the boulevard without a permit. We do have current
photos. This has been going on several years with the same issues. We’ve talked
about moving some of the taller plants, but it hasn’t been maintained.
Myers: it isn’t that it hasn’t been maintained. It is that it doesn’t make sense. The
people who live around me are very pleased with the way it is maintained and its safety.
There isn’t any issues unless you look at “nitpicky” things. I do tie back things that are
hanging over. I don’t want any grass, I don’t have any grass. The same thing on the
boulevard. I moved in 1985. There was grass on the boulevard. They redid the streets
and in the process they removed all the boulevard stuff and I requested they didn’t
replace it with sod. They gave me topsoil to plant other things. No top soil showed up. I
turned it all over myself. I planted attractive things. I have a beautiful pile of bee balm.
The bees love it. The other pollinators as well. I have a lot of milkweed. I have
monarchs. I have neighbors who go collect the larvae and keep them inside and
release the butterflies. What I’m doing isn’t negative. It also isn’t a safety hazard. I’d
like some sort of variance so we don’t have to keep doing this.
Moermond: I have the last time we talked being in 2015. Lots has changed since then.
Ms. Martin, could you talk about what the expectations are? We have height in
boulevards.
Martin: she has a corner property. The plants are beautiful, but they don’t meet the
height requirement. There is also raspberry bushes with fencing all around. Around the
fire hydrant. It has to be cut back. It IS a safety issue. There are some 5 foot plants
on the side, randomly throughout. Many of the plants overhand the sidewalk and street.
They just need to be cut back. They are absolutely gorgeous, they just can’t be on the
boulevard due to the height requirements.
Moermond: I don’t feel like anyone has to have a turf lawn. What I do concern myself
with are the public aspects and the right-of-way. The issue of height, especially in
corners, is site lines. There are rules around what that looks like. I like to call it the
tricycle rule. 36” would prevent a driver from seeing a tricycle. We want it lower around
driveways and corners where vehicles need to see with notice. I’m pretty firm on that.
The other piece is access to the right-of-way and the fencing. This is really Public
Works determination. There is provision for raised beds under permit. [Moermond
explains what the right-of-way entails and the different height requirements]
Myers: I have a bit more work to do around the fire hydrant. I had planted some bulbs
around it. I dug most of them out, I have a few left. I won’t put any flowers there
anymore.
Page 10
## City of Saint Paul
July 14, 2026Legislative HearingsMinutes - Final
Moermond: there are plenty of natives that are short in height.
Myers: nothing can be there except dirt.
Moermond: a clearance could be much lower. If a turf lawn can be up to 8”, I’d think
anything under 8” would be more than acceptable?
Martin: there has to be a 3’ clearance around the hydrant. If there are plants.....
Moermond: what about ground cover plants? Some type of ivy or clover, that are low
but not lawn.
Myers: maybe a low growing sedum.
Moermond: if we’re low like that and no barrier, I can live with it, absolutely. But we
need to get the height all the way around down that low.
Myers: understood.
Moermond: we have 18” within 30 feet from corner. We have 36” for the balance. If it
does exceed that you want to replace it with something shorter.
Myers: the raspberries out there are volunteers. Can we leave them for this season? I’ll
take them all back and remove the fence at the end of the season.
Moermond: let’s come back to that.
Myers: I think there are some tall lilies higher than that. I’ve been trimming them back
slowly. They aren’t blocking a line of sight. You can see through and around them
easily. They’re single stems. I’ve cut back the ones in the corner.
Martin: it has to be down to 18” within 5’ of a driveway, and 30’ from the corner. You’d
start measuring at the bottom of the corner walkway.
Myers: I have a wonderful relationship with my neighbors too. If they have a problem
they would tell me and I’d take care of it immediately.
Moermond: I bet you do, but let’s drop that measuring tape and get that clearance. I’m
going to be a stickler about those 18” and 36” heights. I’m going to give you until
September 11 to take care of everything. 18 & 36”, fencing and the raspberries and
dealing with the fire hydrant. The height thing IS in the public interest, same with
installations in the right-of-way, unless you can get a permit from Public Works.
Martin: Richard Kedrowski is the inspector.
Myers: he is rude. Dominating. He’s in the wrong job.
Moermond: Ms. Martin, could she contact you instead?
Martin: absolutely.
Myers: I keep getting letters about wasting taxpayer money, but sending someone out
over one person who keeps complaining is also wasting taxpayer money. If you
Page 11
## City of Saint Paul
July 14, 2026Legislative HearingsMinutes - Final
interview my neighbors, none of them have an issue and they’d also be happy to come
over and help me. Sending someone to show up to mow someone’s yard is also a
waste of resources. I think we should look into the possibility of making it a bit more
reasonable what happens. I am not saying things don’t need to be investigated, or
there are things that are urgent, definitely.
Moermond: I appreciate you sharing those thoughts.
Referred to the City Council due back on 8/5/2026
14
## RLH CO 26-4
Appeal of Kinnell Tackett to a Notice to Cut Tall Grass and/or Weeds at
## 444 JOHNSON PARKWAY.
## Sponsors:
## Johnson
Layover to LH July 28, 2026 at 11 am for review of work plan by PO.
Kinnell Tackett, owner, appeared via phone
[Moermond gives background of appeals process]
Staff report by Supervisor Lisa Martin: July 1, 2026 tall grass and weeds order went out
to cut any tall grass and weeds over 8” height. I can see cone flowers, brown eyed
Susans, maybe some other plants mixed it, but lots of grass.
Tackett: I previously lived on a 10 acre tree farm I was converting to a prairie. I am in
the process of converting to a wildflower/short grass prairie. Since I moved in February
2024 I have been planting and spreading seed mix every fall and spring. I purchased
those through MN Native Landscapes Corporation. You see goldenrod, bee balm, wild
bergamot, asters, I think it is coming along but I also know from working with St. Paul
Natural resources it takes 3 to 5 years. I’d like to make it all wildflowers and short
prairie grasses.
Moermond: are you killing parts with darkness? Turning over the soils? How is this
conversion happening? Tossing seeds into a turf lawn?
Tackett: I’m pulling any noxious weeds. You do see some fescue grass growing taller,
but intermixed is the flowers that will eventually take over.
Moermond: State law is much more permissive than local code. “Managed natural
landscape" means a planned, intentional, and maintained planting of native or
nonnative grasses, wildflowers, forbs, ferns, shrubs, or trees, including but not limited
to rain gardens, meadow vegetation, and ornamental plants. Managed natural
landscapes does not include turf-grass lawns left unattended for the purpose of
returning to a natural state. Managed natural landscapes may include plants and
grasses that are in excess of eight inches in height and have gone to seed, but may
not include any noxious weeds and must be maintained.
(c) Except as part of a managed natural landscape as defined in this section, any
weeds or grasses growing upon any lot or parcel of land in a city to a greater height
than eight inches or that have gone or are about to go to seed are prohibited.
Overgrown turf lawn isn’t counted as a managed natural landscape. I need a quicker
conversion. I’ve had people I’ve been dealing with for 5 years on this, and it isn’t
happening. Getting us away from turf lawn and into the new plants. Not sure how you
want to approach that but it is something I need to work towards. Perhaps it can be
Page 12
## City of Saint Paul
July 14, 2026Legislative HearingsMinutes - Final
phased. Sometimes neighbors think things are just overgrown, so putting up a sign
about conversion to native landscape is helpful. I’m just looking more a more “planful”
approach that doesn’t look simply like overgrown lawn, because State Law doesn’t look
at that as conversion. What about you put together a plan for conversion of the yard,
maybe something in sections. More “bite-sized”?
Tackett: is there someone I can be put in contact with to make sure whatever this plan
I make is acceptable?
Moermond: that would be me. Submit it and I can route it to the people who need to
see it.
Tackett: I’m hoping my clout comes into the mix here, because the last time I was in
City Hall, I was being given the Sustainable Saint Paul award from the Council and
Mayor at that time. I find it ironic I’m here defending it now.
Moermond: and I don’t want to put you in that position defending it. I just want it so
everyone is on the same page. Let’s talk about this 2 weeks from now and give you a
chance to talk to people about things.
Laid Over to the Legislative Hearings due back on 7/28/2026
1:30 p.m. Hearings
## Orders To Vacate - Fire Certificate of Occupancy
15
## RLH VO 26-30
Appeal of Obsa Tahir to a Fire Inspection Report, which includes
condemnation, at 507 UNIVERSITY AVENUE WEST and 509
## UNIVERSITY AVENUE WEST.
## Sponsors:
## Bowie
Layover to LH July 21, 2026 at 1:30 pm to discuss findings of Friday, July 17th 1:00
inspection.
Osba Tahir, tenant, appeared via phone
Staff report by Fire Manager Neis: I received a referral for after hours assembly. It is
currently approved for S1 storage. Currently converted into A2, assembly use. There
are lounge chairs, freshly painted walls, set up for use as a bar/nightclub. These are
very dangerous conditions. This needs a full code analysis, may require full sprinkler
system in addition to building concerns and exiting issues.
Moermond: I wanted to hear more about your observations of conditions. Were you
there in person?
Neis: I was there in person and allowed access by the appellant. He did show
paperwork he was in the process of going through some SAC determinations for
approval of the use. It is my understanding from St. Paul Police Department they’ve
already had at least one event at this location. One person did admit there was some
carryover to this property from a couple other nightclub venues on University which
were also condemned for unapproved use. That’s what triggered the inspection from
Fire Safety.
Page 13
## City of Saint Paul
July 14, 2026Legislative HearingsMinutes - Final
Moermond: the main thing in reviewing this would be egress concerns, sprinklers?
Anything else?
Neis: many tragic fires in venues like this where occupancy was converted to an
unapproved use. No adequate egress, fire protection, emergency lighting.
Tahir: I didn’t know when I rented it I couldn’t use it as an event center. I wasn’t aware
it ws only approved for storage. I do have some ideas of using the space as storage
again. Items, vehicle parts. Until I get the funds to get the codes right, I want to use it
as storage. In order for me to do that I have to appeal to lift the condemnation off the
building.
Moermond: Mr. Neis, in reviewing this I can see there are a couple things that would
apply to both assembly and storage use. One of which are the openings in the ceiling.
Can you talk a bit about using it as storage? Clearly we have assembly items in the
space. What would Department of Safety and Inspections be looking for?
Neis: storage use is certainly possible, however, yes there would be other building
deficiencies that would need to be noted. It lacks some fire separation. It is hard to
determine until there’s a layout submitted, but even if it was approved for storage use
there can absolutely be NO other type of use than storage of goods and materials. It
isn’t a business that can be occupied anytime after hours. Strictly storage use at this
time.
Tahir: yeah, that’s what I was looking to do until I acquired the funds to get the code
analysis for the event space. Where I can charge people to keep whatever they need
to there in a storage unit.
Moermond: I’m not 100 percent sure in terms of rental storage space. Mr. Neis, are
there additional requirements for contracted storage space?
Neis: I’m not an expert in that, you’d want to check with zoning and licensing on that.
Tahir: I spoke with them about that and they said I wouldn’t need anything, I just need
the Fire department’s approval.
Neis: I’d want to confirm that with Yaya Diatta. What type of materials would be the
next question.
Tahir: not things that cost too much, but things people want out of their own spaces
like a refrigerator or tables. Appliance storage.
Neis: if storage is proposed, we’d require everything that made it look like an assembly
occupancy would need to be removed from the property. Tables, chairs, DJ equipment,
all of that. So it can not easily be converted into a venue.
Tahir: when do you want to come by and start to check it out? I have everything
removed that you noted on the condemnation. Since then I was thinking about storage.
It is all cleared out. Speakers, tables, chairs, desks, everything.
Moermond: I also see benches, a couch. Where is that stored?
Tahir: as of right now? It is in Minneapolis. I have an event space licensed there, so I
moved it there.
Page 14
## City of Saint Paul
July 14, 2026Legislative HearingsMinutes - Final
Moermond: alright.
Neis: I did not do a full comprehensive inspection because I was addressing the
immediate life safety concerns, which was the event space. I’d want to talk to the
building owner who would be responsible for some of the deficiencies like the cracked
brick in the walls. We’d want a structural analysis to make sure the building itself is
sound and safe.
Tahir: I’m just the tenant. I took over the lease. That would be up to the building owner.
Moermond: at this point in time the building is not certified because it has been used
for assembly use, although it is approved as storage. Because the Certificate of
Occupancy was revoked, it has to be reinstated as storage, which would require a full
Certificate of Occupancy inspection to confirm that. We could have that list identified
and those items that need to be addressed before reoccupancy can be in there. Mr.
Neis, you would really need to write those orders then and that would be what is in play.
Neis: typically in situations like this when I a building has been condemned this would
be slated to be a Category 2 Vacant Building based on the deficiencies found. Before
reoccupancy my recommendation would be it go through a Code Compliance
Inspection review. Then that list would need to be addressed before it can be
reoccupied.
Moermond: that’s typically the owner, yes?
Neis: correct. The orders are issued to the owner in North Oaks, that would be the
person ultimately responsible for that review.
Moermond: we will send a confirmation letter to you, Mr. Tahir, and also the owner, and
make sure you both have the same information. I’d like it to be certified for use as
storage. The list is essentially the same whether its done via Code Compliance
Inspection Report or Fire Certificate of Occupancy inspection at this point because of
the change in use and the change back. I’m not looking at a Vacant Building
registration at this time yet. Mr. Neis, this is kind of tricky because it is condemned for
its purpose, not for building conditions.
Neis: when we were doing the inspection we were looking at it strictly from immediate
life safety hazards. If this was on a routine inspection, other items would be listed. The
dangers of having a large group in a warehouse like this concern for occupants and
patrons. I’m less concerned about someone’s refrigerator burning up. The human
factor is my concern.
Moermond: Mr. Tahir, what assurance can the City have that this won’t be changed
back to assembly use as fast as it was deconverted and furniture removed.
Tahir: that’s up to you. You’re welcome to do a monthly inspection. However you want
to proceed.
Moermond: I have seen in the past many cases like this and we’ve asked the tenant or
owner to deconvert and it has been rapidly turned back into an assembly space. I
would really want that locked in. Mr. Neis, what I’m left with is you would have to sign
off on it being used for storage at this time. While it’s under appeal and condemned for
its use as an A2, then if the A2 issue has been dealt with satisfactorily, then the
Page 15
## City of Saint Paul
July 14, 2026Legislative HearingsMinutes - Final
condemnation does need to be lifted and were not in the Vacant Building program. If
you could do that follow up inspection, that’s step one. Then based on that inspection
we can make a decision about whether it will need a Code Compliance inspection/code
analysis. Can you get that done in the next week Mr. Neis?
Neis: I could do this Friday at 1:00.
Tahir: that works.
Moermond: we’ll get that inspection and I’ll put this on my calendar again next Tuesday.
Laid Over to the Legislative Hearings due back on 7/21/2026
Page 16
## City of Saint Paul