St. Paul Racketeering lawsuit #1, Victim Mark Mevsembourg
Plaintiff Mark Mevsembourq
147. Dawkins, Martin, Magner and Koehnen were directly involved in discriminatory
code enforcement and subsequent condemnation of Meysembourg’s property located at 970
Euclid Street during the period of November 2002 through February 2003. Although numerous
other properties in the City had serious code violations, which Defendants’ ignored, Defendants
selectively targeted Meysembourg and his protected class tenants as part of their discriminatory
policy, custom and practice.
148. On or about November 15,2002, Martin and Koehnen, at the direction
of Kelly, Dawkins and Magner, conducted an interior inspection of Meysembourg’s 970 Euclid
41.rental property. Defendants did not have an administrative search warrant or the valid consent of
the tenants or Meysembourg. No emergency existed justifying said Defendants’ entry.
Meysembourg was @ provided notice of this inspection by Defendants.
i
149. During the inspection, Martin and Koehnen, with malicious intent, falsely stated
to the tenants that the “landlord knows about this inspection and it’s ok with him,” or words to
that effect. The tenants were also falsely told by Martin and Koehnen that they were performing
m %nmal inspection.” There is no annual inspection of duplexes required in the City.
150. As a result of this illegal entry and search, Martin and Koehnen prepared and
mailed to Meysembourg a Correction Notice dated November 152002, containing false claims
of code violations. This Correction Order was also mailed to both occupants of the duplex and to
interested parties living in Anchorage, Alaska. Claimed code violation item number 4 (lacking
deadbolt door locks) and item number 7 (leaking plumbing) were false and item number 12 (roof
is deteriorated, defective, or in a state of disrepair) was also false as the roof had been partially
replaced two years before and was not in need of ‘further repair.
151. Meysembourg tiled a legislative appeal detailing the claimed code violations
listed by Martin that were false. At the hearing, Meysembourg’s tenants testified on his behalf.
Police Officer Koehnen appeared at the hearing. Koehnen was initially in a seated position in the
hearing room but vvhen the first of Meysembourg’s tenants started to testify, Koehnen stood up
and stepped into the isle in direct line with the tenant, spread his feet, folded his arms and glared
42.at each tenant, all in an attempt to intimidate the tenant witnesses. Koehnen continued this
intimating conduct through the testimony of Meysembourg’s tenants. Meysembourg’s legislative
appeal was denied.
152. Thereafter, Martin obtained an administrative search warrant and on December
3 1,2002, conducted a second interior inspection of Meysembourg’s 970 Euclid rental property.
Once again, in a second Correction Notice mailed to Meysembourg dated January 2,2003,
Martin again listed the false items from the first Correction Order, including the lack of deadbolt
locks and she restated her false statement of the deteriorating roof. The January 2,203,
Correction Order was also mailed to both occupants of the duplex, and to interested parties in
Anchorage, Alaska.
153. Thereafter, Meysembourg tiled a formal complaint against the City claiming that
his rights had been violated.
154. On or about February 3,2003, Defendants Martin, Koehnen and Steve Magner,
Martin’s and Koehnen’s supervisor, conducted a third inspection of 970 Euclid without advance
notice to Meysembourg, and without a search warrant or.any other valid basis. Meysembourg
was working at the property when Martin, Koehnen and Magner arrived for the inspection.
Meysembourg did not provide his consent to this third search. During this third inspection,
Magner informed Meysembourg that there was a missing safety valve on one of the boilers in the
duplex. Meysembourg pointed out that Magner’s assertion was false as the boilers had been
43.serviced the previous year. After a shouting match ensued, said Defendants left.
155. The next day, Dawkins, Martin, Magner and Koehnen retaliated against
Meysembourg as Dawkins issued a Notice of Condemnation and Order to Vacate dated February
‘3,2003 (listing Martin as the inspector) and mailed this Notice to one of the occupants of 970
Euclid Street and to interested parties in Anchorage, Alaska. Dawkins and Martin claimed in this
written Condemnation Notice that the west side boiler lacked a pressure relief value and as such
this condition constituted “material endangerment” justifying immediate condemnation of the
duplex. This was false and maliciously stated by said Defendants in order to justify the
retaliatory emergency condemnation by Dawkins and Martin of Meysembourg’s building, which
was intended by said Defendants to forcibly remove Meysembourg’s tenants, including his
protected class tenants, all causing damages to Meysembourg’s and his tenants. Dawkins and
Martin also falsely listed in the Notice that the “roof’ was “deteriorated” and the lack of deadbolt
locks.
156. Meysembourg again filed a legislative appeal. During this hearing, Meysembourg
presented evidence that the claim by Dawkins and Martin of the lack of a boiler safety relief
valve was false. The City’s hearing officer refused to look at Meysembourg’s evidence and once
again denied Meysembourg’s appeal.
157. On or about March 13,2003, Assistant City Attorney Dolan, a member of PPU,
prepared a written tenants remedies court Complaint against Meysembourg on behalf of
44.Defendant City. The Complaint included a fact statement that the duplex boiler “lacks a pressure
relief valve.” This false claimed violation was listed first in a,list of items that Martin, Dawkins
and Dollan claimed needed repair. Dawkins provided a sworn verification of the truth of this
Complaint, including the statement about the boiler. The ,Complaint, the sworn kerification and
the attached Correction Orders and Notice of Condemnation contained false statements of fact
made by Dawkins and Martin. The Complaint, sworn Verification and City inspection
documentation were mailed to Meysembourg and filed in Ramsey County District Court.
158. During the court proceeding, Martin and Magner, along with Attorney
Dolan, falsely and maliciously represented to Meysembourg that the “code compliance”
inspection they were demanding as a part of the settlement of the City’s action against
Meysembourg, was to be “as built,” and as such the building would not have to be completely
brought to current code. This false statement was made to fraudulently induce Meysembourg to
settle.
159. Meysembourg, who had never had one of his rental properties condemned before,
rklied on the false representation by Martin, Magner and Dolan to Meysembourg concerning the
“as built” code compliance. Defendants Dawkins, Martin, Magner, Koehnen and Attorney Dolar~
coerced and fraudulently induced Meysembourg to agree to settlement terms related to code
compliance that said Defendants had no intention of honoring.
160. The following week, during Meysembourg’s conversation with the City’s License,
45.Inspection and Environment Protection (“LIE,,‘) office, Meysembourg was informed that once
LIEP was involved, there was no such thing as “as built” code compliance, but rather LIEP only
conducted current “code compliance” inspections, which required all major systems in a rental
‘building to be brought up to current code requirements, thereby removing grand-fathering
protections of state law.
161. Thereafter, said Defendants required that Meysembourg bring his 970 Euclid
building up to current code, eliminating the grand-fathering protection for Meysembourg’s
building under previous building codes, and resulting in tens of thousands of dollars in extra
expense to Meysembourg, as well as loss of rental income from his duplex during the period of
condemnation, all to his financial detriment.
162. As part of LIEP’s full code compliance inspection process on Meysembourg’s
duplex, LIEP did not require repairs to the roof, the deadbolt locks remained on the doors as
before the November 15,2002, inspection, and the boilers’ pressure relief valves that were in
existence at all times during 2002 and 2003 were unmodified by the LIEP inspection process.
163. As a direct result of the discriminatory policy, custom and practice by Dawkins,
Martin, Magner, Koehnen, Dolan and others, as applied to Meysembourg and his tenants, as set
forth herein, Meysembourg has been forced to sell all of his rental properties in the City except
for two properties, and Meysembourg has incurred or will incur increased tax burdens, and has
lost rental income, profits and investments and incurred significant unnecessary expenses related
46.to his property, and incurred attorney’s fees, other fees, and costs in defense against said
Defendants’ discriminatory actions.
147. Dawkins, Martin, Magner and Koehnen were directly involved in discriminatory
code enforcement and subsequent condemnation of Meysembourg’s property located at 970
Euclid Street during the period of November 2002 through February 2003. Although numerous
other properties in the City had serious code violations, which Defendants’ ignored, Defendants
selectively targeted Meysembourg and his protected class tenants as part of their discriminatory
policy, custom and practice.
148. On or about November 15,2002, Martin and Koehnen, at the direction
of Kelly, Dawkins and Magner, conducted an interior inspection of Meysembourg’s 970 Euclid
41.rental property. Defendants did not have an administrative search warrant or the valid consent of
the tenants or Meysembourg. No emergency existed justifying said Defendants’ entry.
Meysembourg was @ provided notice of this inspection by Defendants.
i
149. During the inspection, Martin and Koehnen, with malicious intent, falsely stated
to the tenants that the “landlord knows about this inspection and it’s ok with him,” or words to
that effect. The tenants were also falsely told by Martin and Koehnen that they were performing
m %nmal inspection.” There is no annual inspection of duplexes required in the City.
150. As a result of this illegal entry and search, Martin and Koehnen prepared and
mailed to Meysembourg a Correction Notice dated November 152002, containing false claims
of code violations. This Correction Order was also mailed to both occupants of the duplex and to
interested parties living in Anchorage, Alaska. Claimed code violation item number 4 (lacking
deadbolt door locks) and item number 7 (leaking plumbing) were false and item number 12 (roof
is deteriorated, defective, or in a state of disrepair) was also false as the roof had been partially
replaced two years before and was not in need of ‘further repair.
151. Meysembourg tiled a legislative appeal detailing the claimed code violations
listed by Martin that were false. At the hearing, Meysembourg’s tenants testified on his behalf.
Police Officer Koehnen appeared at the hearing. Koehnen was initially in a seated position in the
hearing room but vvhen the first of Meysembourg’s tenants started to testify, Koehnen stood up
and stepped into the isle in direct line with the tenant, spread his feet, folded his arms and glared
42.at each tenant, all in an attempt to intimidate the tenant witnesses. Koehnen continued this
intimating conduct through the testimony of Meysembourg’s tenants. Meysembourg’s legislative
appeal was denied.
152. Thereafter, Martin obtained an administrative search warrant and on December
3 1,2002, conducted a second interior inspection of Meysembourg’s 970 Euclid rental property.
Once again, in a second Correction Notice mailed to Meysembourg dated January 2,2003,
Martin again listed the false items from the first Correction Order, including the lack of deadbolt
locks and she restated her false statement of the deteriorating roof. The January 2,203,
Correction Order was also mailed to both occupants of the duplex, and to interested parties in
Anchorage, Alaska.
153. Thereafter, Meysembourg tiled a formal complaint against the City claiming that
his rights had been violated.
154. On or about February 3,2003, Defendants Martin, Koehnen and Steve Magner,
Martin’s and Koehnen’s supervisor, conducted a third inspection of 970 Euclid without advance
notice to Meysembourg, and without a search warrant or.any other valid basis. Meysembourg
was working at the property when Martin, Koehnen and Magner arrived for the inspection.
Meysembourg did not provide his consent to this third search. During this third inspection,
Magner informed Meysembourg that there was a missing safety valve on one of the boilers in the
duplex. Meysembourg pointed out that Magner’s assertion was false as the boilers had been
43.serviced the previous year. After a shouting match ensued, said Defendants left.
155. The next day, Dawkins, Martin, Magner and Koehnen retaliated against
Meysembourg as Dawkins issued a Notice of Condemnation and Order to Vacate dated February
‘3,2003 (listing Martin as the inspector) and mailed this Notice to one of the occupants of 970
Euclid Street and to interested parties in Anchorage, Alaska. Dawkins and Martin claimed in this
written Condemnation Notice that the west side boiler lacked a pressure relief value and as such
this condition constituted “material endangerment” justifying immediate condemnation of the
duplex. This was false and maliciously stated by said Defendants in order to justify the
retaliatory emergency condemnation by Dawkins and Martin of Meysembourg’s building, which
was intended by said Defendants to forcibly remove Meysembourg’s tenants, including his
protected class tenants, all causing damages to Meysembourg’s and his tenants. Dawkins and
Martin also falsely listed in the Notice that the “roof’ was “deteriorated” and the lack of deadbolt
locks.
156. Meysembourg again filed a legislative appeal. During this hearing, Meysembourg
presented evidence that the claim by Dawkins and Martin of the lack of a boiler safety relief
valve was false. The City’s hearing officer refused to look at Meysembourg’s evidence and once
again denied Meysembourg’s appeal.
157. On or about March 13,2003, Assistant City Attorney Dolan, a member of PPU,
prepared a written tenants remedies court Complaint against Meysembourg on behalf of
44.Defendant City. The Complaint included a fact statement that the duplex boiler “lacks a pressure
relief valve.” This false claimed violation was listed first in a,list of items that Martin, Dawkins
and Dollan claimed needed repair. Dawkins provided a sworn verification of the truth of this
Complaint, including the statement about the boiler. The ,Complaint, the sworn kerification and
the attached Correction Orders and Notice of Condemnation contained false statements of fact
made by Dawkins and Martin. The Complaint, sworn Verification and City inspection
documentation were mailed to Meysembourg and filed in Ramsey County District Court.
158. During the court proceeding, Martin and Magner, along with Attorney
Dolan, falsely and maliciously represented to Meysembourg that the “code compliance”
inspection they were demanding as a part of the settlement of the City’s action against
Meysembourg, was to be “as built,” and as such the building would not have to be completely
brought to current code. This false statement was made to fraudulently induce Meysembourg to
settle.
159. Meysembourg, who had never had one of his rental properties condemned before,
rklied on the false representation by Martin, Magner and Dolan to Meysembourg concerning the
“as built” code compliance. Defendants Dawkins, Martin, Magner, Koehnen and Attorney Dolar~
coerced and fraudulently induced Meysembourg to agree to settlement terms related to code
compliance that said Defendants had no intention of honoring.
160. The following week, during Meysembourg’s conversation with the City’s License,
45.Inspection and Environment Protection (“LIE,,‘) office, Meysembourg was informed that once
LIEP was involved, there was no such thing as “as built” code compliance, but rather LIEP only
conducted current “code compliance” inspections, which required all major systems in a rental
‘building to be brought up to current code requirements, thereby removing grand-fathering
protections of state law.
161. Thereafter, said Defendants required that Meysembourg bring his 970 Euclid
building up to current code, eliminating the grand-fathering protection for Meysembourg’s
building under previous building codes, and resulting in tens of thousands of dollars in extra
expense to Meysembourg, as well as loss of rental income from his duplex during the period of
condemnation, all to his financial detriment.
162. As part of LIEP’s full code compliance inspection process on Meysembourg’s
duplex, LIEP did not require repairs to the roof, the deadbolt locks remained on the doors as
before the November 15,2002, inspection, and the boilers’ pressure relief valves that were in
existence at all times during 2002 and 2003 were unmodified by the LIEP inspection process.
163. As a direct result of the discriminatory policy, custom and practice by Dawkins,
Martin, Magner, Koehnen, Dolan and others, as applied to Meysembourg and his tenants, as set
forth herein, Meysembourg has been forced to sell all of his rental properties in the City except
for two properties, and Meysembourg has incurred or will incur increased tax burdens, and has
lost rental income, profits and investments and incurred significant unnecessary expenses related
46.to his property, and incurred attorney’s fees, other fees, and costs in defense against said
Defendants’ discriminatory actions.
posted by Bob at Friday, November 03, 2006
9 Comments:
Keep going Bob! We need the truth. When are you distributing your invitation of this site to the many people of st.paul? 2007 should prove to be very interesting! Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again even if it doesn't work and even gets worse, you keep doing it again and again expecting different results.
I'll tell you what the Courts are going to say. I don't think the Court is going to be real keen on presiding over a "political circus," and they'll tell St. Paul to settle the damn thing, and St. Paul will settle it just like they always do. The evidence being what it is, they don't want it to become public and increase the exposure to them, not to mention the political fallout. Only question is if the landlords will want to settle. This case is about a lot more than just money. I've heard that the landlords want the trial more than the money so everyone gets to see what scum we have running the city.
Santa knows whos naughty and nice,,,Don't expect much from Santa boys..
Maybe you could rent appliance boxs to the homeless. lol
We are going to tap into some of that there non profit money that Chuck Repke gets so we can build "hell town." I'm pretty sure he's gonna go for it!
This person who speaks of "hell town" here continuously, musn't have anything better to do other than monitor this blog for unison among the victims and the outrage of the citizens. He's told what to think and what to do and knows no better. Why I bet he is even connected in some way to the corruption and this is the only outlet he has to deal with it. Poor, poor man. Are you scared? Well you better be!
I never hear opposition about any of these allegations being false or these people lying. I've heard whining being used but that's not what I would call it. If you read what has happened, what would you call it? Many of the people were dealt dirt by the city, slapped in the face with the reality of evil people and had to deal with them. They've already been brought down as low as a person can get. So there's nowhere else but up to go now!
No one is calling them liars because everyone and their mother knows the things that are being said are true. They bad mouth the Watchdog and say it is all lies, but I see no one suing them for slander. They say the landlords are greedy and will do anything for money and all I see is a lot of landlords that don't know each other puring a lot of money into a lawsuit that everyone says has no merit. Greedy people don't act in such a manner. If this many people were saying the same thing about any other subject other then the beloved DFL government in St. Paul, everyone would be believing it. Despite numerous statements about this corruption from a completely different group of people that also don't know each other, (Some of them even from the so called victims that the city claims to want to protect) there has been no investigation, no one transferred, no noe fired, NOTHING. Not a damn thing.Not a word from the city. Just stick their heads back in the sand and hope it goes away. Unbelievable!What a bunch of hypocrites! Somewhere here, there is rat in the woodpile.
Yes Bob, I was speaking about the code officials who keep condemning home after home and now have a record number of homelessness, foreclosures, crime, etc,etc. Now that's insane!
I'm the rat in you woodpile and want all your homes condemned because I have no morals and I like coming here and spreading my disease. I have a brown nose becuase I cant figure thingsd out for myslef and want the govnermnet to run my life because I dont know how and am scared of not being able to make my own desiisons. when I come here I want to disrupt and put dissention inot eveyhing, it's what I do best. I am Godless and wan't others to feel as down as I do even thought I think I am better then eveyone, I know Im not! I like to prtect the govemnent and thnk tht they will protent me by getting rid of eveybody who does not look and act liek me and that I dont approve of. I am insane.
To 12:44: You are very good hands here in St. Paul. Our City Council will not diappoint you my good buddy. You sound as though you like pain and misery and I want to assure that you have found the end of rainbow here in St. Paul. Be sure to vote next year so we can continue to spread the misery far and wide.
Post a Comment
<< Home