Custom Search

Monday, January 29, 2007

City Of Saint Paul Racketeering Lawsuit Part 1 of Andy Dawkins Deposition

Please click onto the comments for part 1 of Andy Dawkins deposition.

posted by Bob at Monday, January 29, 2007

2 Comments:

Blogger Bob said...

DEPOSITION OF
17
ANDREW DAWKINS
18
January 3, 2007
19
9:30 a.m.
20
21
22
23 BRENDA K. FOSS
JENNIFER RYAN COURT REPORTERS
24 2433 IRVING AVE. SO.
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55405
25 (612) 377-6339
EXHIBIT D
Case 0:05-cv-01348-JNE-SRN Document 36 Filed 01/16/2007 Page 30 of 53

67
1 the Burr Street list, the Moermond letter A
2 list, and I think right below it where it got
3 cropped off, Moermond letter B list.
4 Q What did that refer to when you say Moermond
5 letter A and B lists?
6 A I believe that Councilmember Moermond asked the
7 city councilmembers to take the chronic problem
8 property report to their seven city council
9 wards to create lists.
10 Q But you referred to her as a councilmember. You
11 mean as a staff member of the city council?
12 A Moermond worked for the city council.
13 Q You're referring to Marcia Moermond?
14 A Correct.
15 Q So she had two lists. Were these lists of
16 problem properties?
17 A I believe so. I'd have to look. I don't
18 recall.
19 Q Do you know where those lists currently are?
20 A They'd be in the same file box, wherever the
21 Kitchen Cabinet file box is.
22 Q Then it refers to a number 3 DOL something. Do
23 you know what that refers to?
24 A I do not. Yeah, go to the next page. Why it's
25 copied twice is because it got cropped at the
EXHIBIT D
Case 0:05-cv-01348-JNE-SRN Document 36 Filed 01/16/2007 Page 31 of 53

68
1 bottom.
2 Q What would that refer to?
3 A So we're going to take off where we see Moermond
4 letter A list.
5 Q We're on Bates 0034?
6 A We are. "Moermond A list, Moermond B list, no
7 hearbacks yet equals concern. Lantry tour list,
8 my list next Wednesday." And then over on the
9 right written vertically August 15, first
10 CA's -- I don't know what CA's stand for today.
11 "Causes of action, plus Mark investigations."
12 I'm going to refer to Officer Mark Wiegel.
13 Q Do you know during this time if the City
14 Attorneys Office provided your Kitchen Cabinet
15 with any lists of problem properties?
16 A Say that question again.
17 Q On Bates 0033 at the bottom where it says number
18 3 in the far right-hand corner, it says DOL. Do
19 you see that?
20 A No.
21 Q On Bates 0033. There you've got it. I was
22 wondering if that number 3 would refer to
23 Maurine Dolan. It's cut off.
24 A I don't see it and I don't know.
25 Q Do you know if Maurine Dolan ever provided the
EXHIBIT D
Case 0:05-cv-01348-JNE-SRN Document 36 Filed 01/16/2007 Page 32 of 53

116
1 was a policy.
2 A Just so that we can all try to go home at a
3 reasonable hour, I don't believe that that was
4 ever part of any training or anything else that
5 we ever did. But I did tell inspectors that I
6 wanted them to try to get more interior
7 inspecting done, totally separate from the
8 context from what you're talking about now.
9 Q (Continuing by Mr. Shoemaker) I understand it
10 because I have read some of the things that you
11 have written about the interior inspections and
12 questions about interiors.
13 What was Mayor Kelly's standard of
14 code enforcement as it related to properties in
15 the city of St. Paul when you became the aid to
16 the mayor for code enforcement?
17 A His first instruction to me was that we want a
18 misdemeanor charge leveled against every
19 violator on every occasion that a city inspector
20 sees a violation.
21 Q When you're talking about a violation of the
22 city code?
23 A City code.
24 Q Chapter 34, for example?
25 A Correct.
EXHIBIT D
Case 0:05-cv-01348-JNE-SRN Document 36 Filed 01/16/2007 Page 33 of 53

117
1 Q So any time an inspector would see a violation,
2 he wanted the inspector to issue a criminal tag?
3 A That is correct.
4 Q What did you think of that proposal?
5 A He is the mayor, but I don't think the court
6 system is going to like it and the court system
7 didn't.
8 Q Did you tell that to Mayor Kelly?
9 A To Deputy Mayor Flarity ^ SP.
10 Q Did you have a communication with the mayor
11 about that?
12 A Flarity just said do it the way you're
13 suggesting. You don't have to do it the way the
14 mayor suggested.
15 Q I understand that part. But I have seen some
16 written notes about Mayor Kelly's standard and
17 sometimes it's RK's standard. I believe that
18 would be short for Randy Kelly. Correct?
19 A That's right.
20 Q What was the overall standard that the mayor
21 wanted in place for code related issues in the
22 city of St. Paul when you started with the city?
23 MS. SEEBA: Objection, form and
24 foundation. If you have documents talking about
25 handwritten notes, show them to him.
EXHIBIT D
Case 0:05-cv-01348-JNE-SRN Document 36 Filed 01/16/2007 Page 34 of 53

118
1 Q (Continuing by Mr. Shoemaker) That's not part of
2 my question. I'm not incorporating any of that
3 into my question. I just want to know what you
4 recall was his standard of code enforcement.
5 A What I have already said and then secondly and
6 thirdly. Secondly, that no inspectors should
7 drive by a property with a violation without
8 writing it up. Thirdly, that when you got at a
9 property because you had a complaint to go to
10 that property and whatever that complaint was,
11 that you couldn't just look for that violation
12 that the complain was about and leave. That you
13 needed to then -- the example I gave the
14 inspectors was if you got a complaint for
15 graffiti on the garage or garbage in the alley,
16 then take a look at the garage. If the garage
17 has violations, then get out of your car and
18 take a look at the house.
19 Q So do a comprehensive inspection when you're out
20 in the field?
21 A Better said than me.
22 Q Did Mayor Kelly's standard of code enforcement
23 change during the time that you were a director
24 of the code enforcement office of the city?
25 A From the first day I was a director to the last
EXHIBIT D
Case 0:05-cv-01348-JNE-SRN Document 36 Filed 01/16/2007 Page 35 of 53

119
1 day I was a director, he believed that the
2 city's future was dependent upon having an
3 aggressive consistent stepped up code
4 enforcement department.
5 Q So is the answer to my question that in fact the
6 standard did not change?
7 A Mayor Kelly's standard did not change.
8 Q During the time that you were a director?
9 A That's right.
10 Q On the 767 University property, do you recall
11 having difficulty with individuals, unknown
12 individuals, dropping junk and certain debris on
13 the property from time to time?
14 A After the fact.
15 Q After it was dropped you learned of it?
16 A After it was dropped and after the file for
17 University Avenue was taken out of the back room
18 and shown to me.
19 Q What time frame are you talking about that you
20 learned about this?
21 A My first day on the job.
22 Q First day on the job as an aid to the mayor in
23 code enforcement?
24 A Yes.
25 Q Who pointed out to you the 767 University
EXHIBIT D
Case 0:05-cv-01348-JNE-SRN Document 36 Filed 01/16/2007 Page 36 of 53

146
1 of distressed properties?
2 A I don't recall.
3 Q What I mean is context, someone calling you
4 saying they had an interest in purchasing one of
5 these properties?
6 A I don't recall.
7 Q Do you know if any of your inspectors received
8 any calls from any individuals that were
9 interested in purchasing any of the properties?
10 A I doubt it and I don't recall. I don't know.
11 Q Was there any system put in place as part of the
12 distressed property list to track communications
13 about these properties by individuals in the
14 community?
15 A Not that I'm aware of.
16 Q 930 Dutches ^ SP on Bates 40016 was eventually
17 demolished while you were a director. Correct?
18 A I don't recall.
19 Q Do you see the 910 6th Street East at the top of
20 the page?
21 A I do.
22 Q Do you know that was owned by Mr. Steinhauser at
23 the time it was on the distressed list?
24 A It's file number 0201. It was the very first
25 problem property that got on the list and,
EXHIBIT D
Case 0:05-cv-01348-JNE-SRN Document 36 Filed 01/16/2007 Page 37 of 53

147
1 therefore, I recall it very well.
2 Q How did that property get on the problem
3 property list?
4 A Councilmember Lantry walked into my office on
5 the first morning on the job and said, we're
6 going on a tour of problem properties in my
7 neighborhood, how soon can you go.
8 And then we assembled the Commander
9 of the East District, Dennis somebody or other,
10 the Kitchen Cabinet member that was on wherever
11 he was, whatever his name was, Karen Du Paul
12 from the District 4 Planning Council, Officer
13 Mark Wiegel and myself all got in a van that I
14 think that the police department arranged to
15 have. Kathy sat in the front seat.
16 Councilmember Lantry and she took us to 10 or 12
17 properties. One of them was 910 East Sixth
18 Street and said, this is what the neighbors are
19 saying about it.
20 Q What do you recall at the time during this tour
21 that you arrived at the 910 6th Street, what
22 Kathy Lantry said about the property?
23 A She said this block has lots of problems on it.
24 You got Mr. Mozotello^ SP on the left that owns
25 three properties and you got this wonderful
EXHIBIT D
Case 0:05-cv-01348-JNE-SRN Document 36 Filed 01/16/2007 Page 38 of 53

148
1 family names Rodriqueses that are living in the
2 middle of the block, and they're tired of
3 putting up with all the behavior on the block.
4 MS. SEEBA: For the record --
5 MR. SHOEMAKER: For Data
6 Practices -- Louise will affirm this. I just
7 want to remind you that we have to be carful
8 about the issue about complainant's names.
9 THE WITNESS: You don't have to --
10 Ms. Rodriquez is one of the people that I'm
11 confident she's one of the ones that wrote me a
12 letter that said use my name anyway you want. I
13 appreciate that, sir.
14 MS. SEEBA: For the future, if
15 there were complaints made to Kathy Lantry,
16 don't use the complainant's names.
17 MR. SHOEMAKER: Unless it's
18 something like a district councilperson where,
19 obviously, I don't believe the Data Practices
20 applies to them. But if it's a concerned
21 citizen outside of that --
22 THE WITNESS: I agree. I should
23 not have said their name.
24 MR. SHOEMAKER: Enough said.
25 Q (Continuing by Mr. Shoemaker) What else do you
EXHIBIT D
Case 0:05-cv-01348-JNE-SRN Document 36 Filed 01/16/2007 Page 39 of 53

149
1 recall being discussed by Councilmember Lantry
2 about 910 6th Street, in particular?
3 A I don't recall.
4 Q You don't recall anything specific that she
5 mentioned as to Mr. Steinhauser as an owner?
6 A I don't even recall she said his name.
7 Q How long did that tour take place?
8 A It might have been an hour-and-a-half, two
9 hours.
10 Q How many total properties were looked at during
11 that tour?
12 A A dozen, maybe 15.
13 Q How many individuals who were not city employees
14 were on the tour?
15 A Karen du Paul worked for the city and the member
16 of the Kitchen Cabinet whose name I don't
17 recall.
18 Q Karen du Paul ^ SP worked for the city?
19 A Works for the District 4 Planning Council.
20 Q Two individuals that were not city employees
21 were on the tour?
22 A Yes.
23 Q Do you have that previous exhibit of the Kitchen
24 Cabinet members? I will refer you to the last
25 page of that where it was the Kitchen Cabinet
EXHIBIT D
Case 0:05-cv-01348-JNE-SRN Document 36 Filed 01/16/2007 Page 40 of 53

158
1 Q Bates 0039, next page, after where you stopped
2 reading there, it looks like you indicated that
3 you've enclosed a year end assessment that you
4 prepared for the mayor and city council. You
5 were providing that to the cabinet members. Is
6 that correct?
7 A That's right.
8 Q I have seen the year end assessment. You did
9 one for 2002 and 2003 and 2004. Is that right?
10 A That's right.
11 Q Did you ever do one for the end of '05?
12 A No.
13 Q As a director of code enforcement in the city of
14 St. Paul from 2002 to 2005, would you agree that
15 if the department was to enforce every existing
16 code, that many of the owners in the city would
17 not be able to financially comply?
18 MS. SEEBA: Objection, form. Go
19 ahead.
20 A I really don't have any knowledge of that.
21 Q (Continuing by Mr. Shoemaker) Never had any
22 discussion with anyone of any source about
23 concerns that property owners were unable to
24 afford to come into compliance with the new
25 aggressive code enforcement implemented by Mayor
EXHIBIT D
Case 0:05-cv-01348-JNE-SRN Document 36 Filed 01/16/2007 Page 41 of 53

159
1 Kelly and yourself?
2 A No. The only way that came up was inside the
3 court system in terms of the amount of criminal
4 misdemeanor charges that the court system could
5 handle and with the Kitchen Cabinet and others
6 to make sure that the property owners got
7 information about where to access resources to
8 get into compliance.
9 Q But if you had all of the inspectors that were
10 under your control during 2002 to 2005 enforce
11 every single code violation that they observed,
12 do you think that it would have any negative
13 affect on the ability of owners to stay in their
14 properties?
15 MS. SEEBA: Objection, form.
16 A Whether it was part of the Kitchen Cabinet
17 discussions or the city council discussions, I
18 don't remember. But I used the example of
19 Baltimore where the aggressive enforcement had
20 tipped the scale so that there was a start of
21 abandonment of properties more than the city had
22 hoped for in Baltimore. And I wanted to make
23 sure everyone understood that using whatever
24 levers or rules or policies the city has, that
25 we need to make sure that we didn't hit a
EXHIBIT D
Case 0:05-cv-01348-JNE-SRN Document 36 Filed 01/16/2007 Page 42 of 53

160
1 tipping point.
2 Q (Continuing by Mr. Shoemaker) So you were aware
3 that there were concerns of that nature in at
4 least one other city that had stepped up code
5 enforcement?
6 A That is correct.
7 Q What did you learn was the reason that there
8 would be an increase in abandonment if the code
9 enforcement went by -- or passed the tipping
10 scale point?
11 A All I know is that I read a study that was in a
12 journal about stepped up code enforcement in
13 Baltimore and that it had tipped the scales so
14 that there was more abandonment of properties
15 than the city had thought or wanted to have
16 happen.
17 Q Did you know whether or not that study also
18 talked about low income rental housing in an
19 effect of abandonment of those type of
20 properties as well through that stepped up code
21 enforcement^ CH PUNCT?
22 A No, I don't know that.
23 Q We were talking about the meeting that you had
24 with the PHA inspectors at the White Bear Avenue
25 office prior to our break for lunch. That
EXHIBIT D
Case 0:05-cv-01348-JNE-SRN Document 36 Filed 01/16/2007 Page 43 of 53

203
1 Mr. Bowen.
2 Q Do you know what time frame that would have been
3 in?
4 A The late '80s through the late '90s, I think.
5 Q You don't believe that there was anyone using
6 that as a personal place of residence after
7 1999?
8 A I can't be sure of the year, but I don't think
9 that -- I know no one was using it as a
10 residence as of 2002. My guess was that it was
11 earlier than that. Maybe I have to say 2002 for
12 sure because that I know.
13 Q We saw earlier Lantry tour list. This was a
14 reference to Councilmember Lantry's tour of a
15 neighborhood. Do you recall receiving a copy of
16 that list of addresses?
17 A I do.
18 Q Do you know where that -- if that is in fact
19 still in existence?
20 A I believe it is. I think that it was again that
21 predecessor to Jean Piccolo -- who I wish I knew
22 his name. I can't think of it -- had in fact
23 typed up for the Lantry tour a list with a
24 paragraph or two description under each address
25 as to how long district council had been trying
EXHIBIT D
Case 0:05-cv-01348-JNE-SRN Document 36 Filed 01/16/2007 Page 44 of 53

204
1 to get compliance and some satisfaction for
2 neighbors about having to endure for all the
3 dozen or 15 properties that were on that list.

10:28 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

These people all have their lists and their agendas and all they ever want to do is direct everyone to some resource that they never qualify for, and in the mean time people are getting fucked to death and having their lives ruined and these city people never misss a step! None of them live in St. Paul, they all live in expensive houses in the suburbs and come into town every day to pass judgement on people living in the poor neighborhoods.

I remember the house my wife and I raised 3 children in and the thought of even remembering living there compared to where we live now just makes me cringe.

Where do these arrogant city officials get off forcing people put of their homes and onto the street?

Are people safer living on the street or under a bridge than they are in their homes without a smoke detector or running water?

Who are you trying to fool St. Paul? Your code enforcement has nothing to do with making the houses better or the neighborhood safer. If it did you would be working with property owners so they can get the work done instead of creating such an unbearable situation that the owners have to take what they can get and flee the city. It has everything to do with deconcentrating poverty and minorities. You city people seem to be be the last ones to figure this out!

1:37 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home