Custom Search

Friday, January 26, 2007

Saint Paul Racketeering Suit Deposition of Harold Robinson

Please click onto the comments for the deposition.

posted by Bob at Friday, January 26, 2007

7 Comments:

Blogger Bob said...

DEPOSITION OF
18
HAROLD ROBINSON
19
NOVEMBER 29, 2006
20
9:00 A.M.
21
22
23
JENNIFER M. RYAN, Court Reporter
24 2433 IRVING AVE. SO.
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55405
25 (612) 377-6339
FAX (612) 377-2889
EXHIBIT B
Case 0:05-cv-01348-JNE-SRN Document 36 Filed 01/16/2007 Page 9 of 53

80
1 the old map?
2 A. My map?
3 Q. Right.
4 A. Throw it away.
5 Q. Throw it away and use the new map?
6 A. Yes. It's just like this (indicating).
7 Q. You're referring to the exhibit in front of you, an
8 eight-and-a-half by eleven page?
9 A. Correct.
10 Q. The second page, 0649, the first paragraph marked A
11 refers to Mayor Kelly's inspection standard. Can you
12 describe that for me during Mayor Kelly's position as
13 head of the City?
14 A. All I can tell you is that Mayor Kelly was very picky.
15 Q. What do you mean by that?
16 A. He wanted everything done.
17 Q. What do you mean by "everything"?
18 A. Everything. He didn't want nothing to get by you.
19 Q. Are you talking about when you're out as an inspector,
20 call everything?
21 A. Call everything.
22 Q. Across the City?
23 A. Across the City.
24 Q. What else do you recall about Mayor Kelly's inspection
25 standard during that time frame?
EXHIBIT B
Case 0:05-cv-01348-JNE-SRN Document 36 Filed 01/16/2007 Page 10 of 53

81
1 A. That's it. There was no excuse for not call everything.
2 Q. Did you ever meet with the mayor while he was mayor of
3 the City?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. When was that?
6 A. Personally we met a number of times. I don't know which
7 one you're referring to.
8 Q. Any time. What do you remember about when you met with
9 him, whether it was individually or with others?
10 A. What do I remember about him?
11 Q. Tell me the first meeting you recall with Mayor Kelly.
12 A. He came to our office. We did the group picture that's
13 in this --
14 Q. Exhibit 2? It's on the front of Exhibit 2?
15 A. Correct.
16 Q. That's the first meeting with the mayor that you recall?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. What else do you remember about that meeting?
19 A. Nothing.
20 Q. Where was the meeting held?
21 A. White Bear Avenue.
22 Q. In the conference room?
23 A. No. It was the building, though, but the conference
24 room was too small.
25 Q. For all the employees and the mayor and everyone else,
EXHIBIT B
Case 0:05-cv-01348-JNE-SRN Document 36 Filed 01/16/2007 Page 11 of 53

82
1 too?
2 A. Right. There were times when we rented or used part of
3 the bingo hall when it was open. They had a room back
4 there we could use if we let them know a day or two
5 ahead of time.
6 Q. When that first meeting occurred did Mayor Kelly make
7 statements to the employees?
8 A. No.
9 Q. What was the purpose of the meeting besides the
10 photograph?
11 A. Just to meet and greet.
12 Q. How long did that meeting take place?
13 A. Ten minutes.
14 Q. Do you remember any follow-up meetings with the mayor at
15 any time?
16 A. Like I said, in the four years the mayor was there I
17 probably ran into him five times.
18 Q. Did you ever tour the City with the mayor looking at
19 properties?
20 A. I toured a portion of the City with the mayor.
21 Q. What portion?
22 A. The east side.
23 Q. What particular part of the east side?
24 A. Arcade to Payne, Hyacinth to Case. Somewhere in that
25 area.
EXHIBIT B
Case 0:05-cv-01348-JNE-SRN Document 36 Filed 01/16/2007 Page 12 of 53

83
1 Q. Who was on that tour?
2 A. His driver. The mayor's driver.
3 Q. What was his name?
4 A. I'm not sure.
5 Q. Was he a police officer?
6 A. Yes, he was.Mr. Dawkins, myself, Tom Friel, a couple
7 of lady activists from the area.
8 Q. Do you remember their names at all?
9 A. Two of them.
10 Q. What are their names?
11 A. Betty Ravore and Laurel Nelson.
12 Q. Are they members of the district council on the east
13 side or at the time?
14 A. I don't believe so. I believe they are just members of
15 the block clubs and quite active.
16 Q. Do you remember discussions by the activists during that
17 tour?
18 A. Not specifically.
19 Q. Do you remember anything generally about what they were
20 discussing with the group?
21 A. Just what they always discuss. They weren't happy.
22 Q. Was there a focus on rental properties?
23 A. Not specifically.
24 Q. How about generally?
25 A. Not generally. It was particular properties, but not
EXHIBIT B
Case 0:05-cv-01348-JNE-SRN Document 36 Filed 01/16/2007 Page 13 of 53

84
1 rental or homeowner occupied. Just properties.
2 Q. Was there any discussion during that tour about rental
3 properties?
4 A. Not to my knowledge.
5 Q. The focus was certain properties that the activists
6 pointed out to the group during the tour?
7 A. Correct.
8 Q. What type of conditions did you observe on those
9 properties?
10 A. Some were justified. Some were not.
11 Q. By "some were justified" you mean some complaints by the
12 activists were, in fact, code violations?
13 A. Correct.
14 Q. And other complaints that they had about the properties
15 were not code violations?
16 A. Correct.
17 Q. What do you recall were complaints, but did not
18 constitute code violations in your opinion?
19 A. I don't recall specifically. It's five years ago and
20 it's two thousand inspections ago so I honestly don't
21 recall specifically anything.
22 Q. Did you have input at all in response to any of the
23 complaints by the activists?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. What do you recall about that?
EXHIBIT B
Case 0:05-cv-01348-JNE-SRN Document 36 Filed 01/16/2007 Page 14 of 53

85
1 A. We were -- I was allowed -- Tom Friel was the inspector
2 in that area. I was his supervisor. And we brought the
3 mayor up to date on what was going on with the
4 properties that had violations. In other words, whether
5 we already had orders on it, whether we already had
6 violations noted, whether we were waiting for a
7 compliance date, whatever the situation was.
8 Q. Did you get a list of the properties ahead of time so
9 that you could actually get prepared for the meeting as
10 to the properties that were going to be looked at?
11 A. I don't recall specifically.
12 Q. How would you know whether or not there was any orders
13 written up on a property if you didn't know which
14 properties were going to be looked at?
15 A. We recall those things. You know which properties --
16 Q. Were these problem properties officially designated by
17 your department during that tour?
18 A. I don't think any of them that we looked at that day
19 were any problem properties that I can recall.
20 Q. Do you recall that the activists were complaining that
21 there were longstanding problems with the properties?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. So they were complaining that there hadn't been
24 sufficient action by the City on the properties?
25 A. Correct.
EXHIBIT B
Case 0:05-cv-01348-JNE-SRN Document 36 Filed 01/16/2007 Page 15 of 53

86
1 Q. What was the mayor's response to that?
2 A. I'm getting into personalities and I don't want to do
3 that. The reason a lot of those properties didn't have
4 action against them for a long period of time with all
5 of the complaints from the activists was because they
6 didn't warrant action, and the activists thought they
7 did.
8 Q. Did you make any determination during the tour or at any
9 time thereafter that what the activists were complaining
10 about was unfair as far as it related to the homeowner?
11 A. Did I make that determination?
12 Q. Right.
13 A. I always have.
14 Q. Describe that for me.
15 A. Well, these particular ladies are, in my mind and a lot
16 of inspectors' minds, and our directors -- they are
17 unreasonable. Their requests are unreasonable. They
18 want us to enforce things that aren't even violations.
19 And the thing is, they get the ear of the politicians
20 and we have no defense.
21 Q. You get caught in the middle as an inspector and
22 supervisor?
23 A. Correct.
24 Q. Did you participate in an audit that was done of CSO
25 sometime in the late '90s where there was an audit
EXHIBIT B
Case 0:05-cv-01348-JNE-SRN Document 36 Filed 01/16/2007 Page 16 of 53

89
1 interview you as an inspector?
2 A. As I recall they did, yes.
3 Q. Did they give you a survey in written form?
4 A. I'm not real sure about it.
5 Q. Was it an in-person interview?
6 A. It wasn't a big deal to us, and I'm not even sure if we
7 filled out a form or if it was in-person.
8 Q. Do you recall how many inspectors participated in that
9 audit?
10 A. No, I don't.
11 Q. Do you recall generally how many?
12 A. I don't know if they did everybody, or if they just
13 chose at random or what.
14 Q. The audit document talks about the inspectors general
15 feeling, like you've just expressed, that there's
16 political pressures placed on the inspector. Do you
17 recall that discussion during the audit process?
18 MS. HAMPTON-FLOWERS: Objection as to form.
19 THE WITNESS: Not specifically. We've always
20 been political.
21 BY MR. SHOEMAKER:
22 Q. Who would be the political influence on the inspectors
23 during -- based on your experience -- during the
24 Dawkins' directorship?
25 A. Who would --
EXHIBIT B
Case 0:05-cv-01348-JNE-SRN Document 36 Filed 01/16/2007 Page 17 of 53

90
1 Q. Who was exercising political direction other than Mr.
2 Dawkins over what you should be doing as an inspector?
3 A. City council, mayor.
4 Q. Would city council members call up an inspector and ask
5 an inspector to go out on a certain property?
6 MS. HAMPTON-FLOWERS: Objection, calls for
7 speculation.
8 BY MR. SHOEMAKER:
9 Q. Did that ever happen with you?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Which council member or members contacted you directly?
12 A. How many council members are there? I'm serious.
13 Everyone of them. I get calls from all of them.
14 Q. Would this have been the case during Mr. Dawkins'
15 directorship, 2002 through the end of 2005?
16 A. Mr. Dawkins requested to the council that they deal with
17 him personally and not with the inspectors or
18 supervisors.
19 Q. How did you learn that Mr. Dawkins made that request to
20 the city council?
21 A. He told us.
22 Q. Did he ever tell you what happened as a follow-up to
23 that?
24 A. No.
25 Q. Did you continue to get calls from city council members
EXHIBIT B
Case 0:05-cv-01348-JNE-SRN Document 36 Filed 01/16/2007 Page 18 of 53

91
1 directly?
2 A. Some.
3 Q. Do you remember having any determination as to whether
4 that was appropriate for you to be called directly?
5 MS. HAMPTON-FLOWERS: Objection as to form.
6 THE WITNESS: I usually don't question the
7 council.
8 BY MR. SHOEMAKER:
9 Q. Did you ever make a determination that political
10 pressure wasn't for the good of a property owner?
11 A. When I said I got political pressure, I didn't say I
12 always folded to it. We get phone calls all the time.
13 This guy's -- we still have to go out and make a
14 determination whether or not it's valid. And there are
15 times when they're not going to be happy either.
16 Q. Who's they?
17 A. The council people.
18 Q. About your call on the property?
19 A. Correct.
20 Q. Do you remember any specific incident where a city
21 council member called you about a property during
22 Dawkins' directorship where you went out and looked at
23 the complaint and felt it unfounded?
24 A. Specifically, no.
25 Q. How often did that occur with you where a council
EXHIBIT B
Case 0:05-cv-01348-JNE-SRN Document 36 Filed 01/16/2007 Page 19 of 53

92
1 member, during Dawkins' directorship, called you
2 directly? More than ten times?
3 A. Up to ten. Not a lot. It wasn't -- it decreased a lot
4 during his tenure, but it didn't stop. Certain council
5 people -- we are on a first name basis. It's like a
6 friendly -- it's somewhat pressure, but it's friendly
7 pressure. They trust my judgement. They're not out to
8 blast me or anything. They want to get a problem solved
9 and I'm the quickest way to do it.
10 Q. Would they indicate to you -- would city council members
11 indicate to you that they had a complaint from someone,
12 and that was the purpose for their call to you?
13 A. Usually.
14 Q. Do you remember the nature of the -- source of the
15 complaints? Was it primarily from district councils?
16 MS. HAMPTON-FLOWERS: Objection, calls for
17 speculation.
18 BY MR. SHOEMAKER:
19 Q. What do you recall being told as the source of the
20 complaint?
21 MS. HAMPTON-FLOWERS: Objection, hearsay.
22 BY MR. SHOEMAKER:
23 Q. On those up to ten times?
24 MS. HAMPTON-FLOWERS: Objection, calls for
25 hearsay.
EXHIBIT B
Case 0:05-cv-01348-JNE-SRN Document 36 Filed 01/16/2007 Page 20 of 53

93
1 BY MR. SHOEMAKER:
2 Q. Go ahead and answer.
3 A. Neighbors. They don't deal with the councils much
4 either.
5 Q. The district councils?
6 A. No.
7 Q. Once Dawkins left, did the number of complaints coming
8 into your department decrease substantially?
9 A. I wouldn't know.
10 Q. How about your own workload as a supervisor over six
11 inspectors?
12 A. Nothing's decreased.
13 Q. Stay about the same?
14 A. It's gone up.
15 Q. Have you had a larger geographical area assigned to you
16 that would be the basis for the increase?
17 A. No.
18 Q. Why has your workload gone up since Mr. Dawkins left?
19 A. Probably a lot of variables. One thing is we've got
20 more duties now.
21 Q. What are the additional duties?
22 A. We took over some stuff that was done in public works
23 with ordinance enforcement so we have some of those now.
24 We have -- the citizens service office now is located
25 right in our office. The phone calls come in right to
EXHIBIT B
Case 0:05-cv-01348-JNE-SRN Document 36 Filed 01/16/2007 Page 21 of 53

137
1 Coleman was the head of the City? Do you remember
2 anything specific?
3 A. No.
4 Q. You indicated earlier that the mayor wanted to call
5 everything -- Mayor Kelly wanted to call everything.
6 Was Mayor Coleman like that?
7 A. Mayor Coleman didn't have much interaction with our
8 department whatsoever.
9 Q. You indicated earlier you believe based upon your
10 experience that it's fair to say Mayor Kelly had active
11 involvement in your office during his time as mayor?
12 A. He was a micro manager. It wasn't like he was out at
13 our office all the time. He would do it through
14 channels.
15 Q. Do you know of any time that he would meet with Dawkins
16 without the inspectors being present?
17 A. Oh, yes.
18 Q. How often did that happen?
19 A. I'm guessing once a week. I don't know.
20 Q. Did you ever go on any other tour with the mayor other
21 than what you told me about?
22 A. No.
23 Q. Did any of your inspectors go on any tours other than
24 when you and Mr. Friel went that time?
25 A. No.
EXHIBIT B
Case 0:05-cv-01348-JNE-SRN Document 36 Filed 01/16/2007 Page 22 of 53

201
1 A. It was common in Mayor Kelly's tenure. What the paint
2 ordinances intended to do was to protect the wood
3 surfaces of the house. The paint ordinance was not
4 intended as aesthetic -- Mayor Kelly wanted to use it as
5 aesthetics. If he saw a garage with 20 percent of the
6 surface of that garage had peeling paint, he wanted that
7 garage painted. That wasn't the intent or it wasn't the
8 letter of the law. That's what he wanted. That's what
9 the neighbors wanted, but it isn't the ordinance. The
10 ordinance is for protection of wood surfaces from water
11 and weather.
12 (Marked for identification,
13 Deposition Exhibit Nos. 11 and 12.)
14 BY MR. SHOEMAKER:
15 Q. Mr. Robinson, I'm showing you what's been marked as
16 Robinson Exhibit Nos. 11 and 12. If you can look at
17 that. Referring to Deposition Exhibit No. 11, Bate
18 20064, looks like a Ramsey County District Court search
19 warrant. Have you ever looked at search warrants in
20 your occupation?
21 A. Just mine.
22 Q. The administrative search warrant that you talked about?
23 A. Correct.
24 Q. Do you see at the bottom there where it starts with "now
25 therefore, your Investigator Mark Ganley, and officers

8:43 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

So what is the point Bob..

Are you now defending the City?

All this story tells me is the City Council has a working relationship with code enforcement in cleaning up the City.

9:40 AM  
Blogger Sharon4Anderson said...

Thanks Bob: www.sharonanderson.org has the Writ of Prohibition when Harold Robinson "Shut Off my Water", he is also Defendant.
Please read www.pioneerpress.com Water Board pg 5b Dennis Lien and Commerce Fraud pg.1c Jennifer Bjorhus today Fri.26Jan07
Thanks for keeping government accountable

10:03 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

They have a working relationship alright....one that completely blurs the lines of any kind of boundries of any type. Fixing courts, working behind the scenes to make property owners sell their properties, bringing false criminal and civil charges against people and using the code enforcement people to do it is what you call a working relationship? I'd be interested to know what you would think if you were one of the ones who lost their home and all their possessions and had to live on the street or in a car. I'd also be interested in how you justify what was doen to the people who were forced to sell off their business they worked a lifetime trying to build up and now have nothing. I'd be interested to know what you would say if you lost your retirement to this "working relatonship" you speak of.

10:20 AM  
Blogger Bob said...

Wow! I tell ya, I had a fit when they shut off Sharon's water. Sharon is an elderly woman who paid her water bill. The Water Utility claimed her meter wasn't working and the City wanted access to the interior of Sharon's home to repair the meter.

Sharon feared the City would condemn her home because the City has vacated numerous buildings in her neighborhood.

Sharon took a digital picture of the water meter numbers and mailed this in with her payment.The Water Utility claimed this wasn't good enough, they had to come inside.And Sharon refused their entry.

So they shut her water off even though she paid her bill. The next thing they would have done is condemn her home since it had no running water because they shut it off.

It seems this City preys on the vulnerable.

Harold, shame on you!

11:10 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

That is exactly what they did to nancy Osterman. They show up and order the workers to stop working, then they order the utilities disconected, and then they come along later and use the lack of permits and utiities as reasons to declare it a hazard and nusiance, thus justifing tearing down the house.

And just for good measure, Lee Helgen comes onto Edmocracy and proclaims it as "good news."

I'm not sure which is worse....the city acting this way or the people that stick up for them and think it is ok.

2:01 PM  
Blogger Bob said...

HAROLDS DEPOSITION CONTINUED-


A. It was common in Mayor Kelly's tenure. What the paint
2 ordinances intended to do was to protect the wood
3 surfaces of the house. The paint ordinance was not
4 intended as aesthetic -- Mayor Kelly wanted to use it as
5 aesthetics. If he saw a garage with 20 percent of the
6 surface of that garage had peeling paint, he wanted that
7 garage painted. That wasn't the intent or it wasn't the
8 letter of the law. That's what he wanted. That's what
9 the neighbors wanted, but it isn't the ordinance. The
10 ordinance is for protection of wood surfaces from water
11 and weather.
12 (Marked for identification,
13 Deposition Exhibit Nos. 11 and 12.)
14 BY MR. SHOEMAKER:
15 Q. Mr. Robinson, I'm showing you what's been marked as
16 Robinson Exhibit Nos. 11 and 12. If you can look at
17 that. Referring to Deposition Exhibit No. 11, Bate
18 20064, looks like a Ramsey County District Court search
19 warrant. Have you ever looked at search warrants in
20 your occupation?
21 A. Just mine.
22 Q. The administrative search warrant that you talked about?
23 A. Correct.
24 Q. Do you see at the bottom there where it starts with "now
25 therefore, your Investigator Mark Ganley, and officers
EXHIBIT B
Case 0:05-cv-01348-JNE-SRN Document 36 Filed 01/16/2007 Page 23 of 53

6:33 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home