Saint Paul / NOTICE TO ABATE NUISANCE ACTIVITY
Please click onto the COMMENTS for the story.
posted by Bob at Friday, January 16, 2009
Custom Search
Friday, January 16, 2009
A DEMOCRACY TOWN HALL HOME
Do you have a topic you want to discuss at the Town Hall? Email your request to A_Democracy@yahoo.com
“A DEMOCRACY” Disclaimer- While the administrators and moderators of this forum will attempt to remove or edit any generally objectionable material as quickly as possible, it is impossible to review every message. Therefore you acknowledge that all posts made to this forum express the views and opinions of the author and not the administrators, moderators (except for posts by these people) and hence will not be held liable.
You agree not to post any abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening, sexually-oriented or any other material that may violate any applicable laws. Doing so may lead to you being immediately and permanently banned
THE ROOF GUYS
Mickey's Diner 1950 7th Street West, St Paul, MN
(651) 698-8387
AX-MAN SURPLUS
1639 University Ave.
St. Paul, MN 55104
Tel:(651)646-8653
LANDLORD.COM LINK HERE
SHHHH! While we listen to words of wisdom from a wise man.
Conscience is the light of the Soul that burns within the chambers of our psychological heart. It is as real as life is. It raises the voice in protest whenever anything is thought of or done contrary to the righteousness. Conscience is a form of truth that has been transferred through our genetic stock in the form of the knowledge of our own acts and feelings as right or wrong. A virtuous and courageous person can alone use the instrument of conscience. He or she can alone hear the inner voice of the soul clearly. In a wicked person this faculty is absent. The sensitive nature of his / her conscience has been destroyed by sin or corruption. Hence he or she is unable to discriminate right from wrong. Those who are leading organizations, business enterprises, institutions and governments should develop this virtue of the ability to use their own conscience. This wisdom of using the clean conscience will enable them to enjoy the freedom.
Dr APJ Kalam, President of India given during the inauguration of the seminar on “THE EFFECTS OF CORRUPTION ON GOOD GOVERNANCE AND HUMAN RIGHTS
Previous Posts
- Saint Pauls Blue Bullies
- MEATHEAD, wants another term.
- LIARS!
- St. Paul / City will ask 180 workers to retire
- St. Paul / City goal to curtail vacant properties
- St. Paul crime up; Minneapolis down in first half ...
- Thin blue line appears blurred in biker clubs
- Boyle -vs- United States
- A Democracy Town Hall Guest Speaker Teddy Roosevelt
- Lending program helps homebuyers, neighborhoods
29 Comments:
Hi All,
When it comes to housing and code enforcement in Saint Paul, I just don't understand how our elected officials get away with this stuff.
This story was provided to me by a concerned citizen. If. you have a story you want discussed in A Democracy Town Hall please forward it to me at A_Democracy@yahoo.com
This issue consist of 2 letters. read the letters throughly and you will get the jest of what is going on here.
There maybe copy errors;
Responsible Party:
PRINCETON PLACE APTS
TOM GALLAGHER
461 MARYLAND AVE W
ST PAUL MN 55117
Interested Party:
John Hopkins Jr
**** Selby Ave. Apt., 1 B
St. Paul MN 55 104
December 22,2008
Owner:
DADDERS HOLDINGS LLC
46 1 MARYLAND AVE W APT 203
ST PAUL MN 55117-4756
Dear Property Ownerllnterested Party Responsible Party:
This Notice is to inform you that a nuisance is being maintained or permitted at **** Selby Ave.
The specific nuisance activity being maintained or permitted is SPLC 40 ARREST MADE FOR FELONY
AGGRAVATED DOMESTIC ASSAULT This nuisance activity is based on the following evidence:
Police arrest made, witness present, recovered large pair of scissors
See CN #08261967
You are hereby notified to abate the above described nuisance activity. Under Minn. Stat. $8 617.81 subd. 2,
617.82, and the St. Paul Legislative Code, a public nuisance maintained or permitted in a building may have serious
legal consequences, including recommending the suspension or revocation of the fire certificate of occupancy to tlle
City Council or an injunction against the continued use of the building. This may result in the complete loss of use of'
the property for one (1) year, even if the building is your primary residence.
Failure to abate the conduct constituting the nuisance or to otherwise resolve the matter with the fire marshal by
entering into an agreed upon abatement plan within thirty (30) days of service of this notice will result in either a
recommendation that the City Council suspend or revoke your fire certificate of occupancy or referral of the matter to
the City Attorney's office. This means that an injunction could be sought enjoining the use of the building fbr an!,
purpose for one (1) year or. in the case of a tenant, could result in the cancellation of the lease.
Please be aware that under Minn. Stat. 6 17.85, if the current occupants are tenants, then the property owner Ilas the
option to cancel the lease(s) or otherwise secure restitution of the premises from the tenant or lessee who has
maintained or conducted the nuisance by bringing a motion before a court of proper jurisdiction. The property owner
may, in certain circumstances, assign to the City Attorney's Office the right to file this motion.
Sincerely,
Pat Fish
Fire Inspector
cc: Council President, Kathy Lantry
Councilmember Russ Stark
Councilrnember Dave Thune
Councilmember Melvin Carter I11
Councilmember Dan Bostrom
Councilrnember, Pat Harris
Councilmember, Lee Helgen
Assistant City Attorney, David Palm
There maybe copy errors.
LAW OFFICE OF SOUTHERN MINNESOTA REGIONAL LEGAL SERVICES
January 15,2009
Thomas Oallagher
Dadders Properties, LLC
46 1 W. Maryland Avenue, #203
St. Paul, MN 551 17
Re: John Hopkins, **** Selby Avenue, #1B, Saint Paul, MN 55104
Dear Mr. Gallagher:
Mr. Hopkins contacted our office because he is concerned that he may facs an eviction as
a result of a notice to abate nuisance activity fiom the City of St. Paul Department of
Safety and Inspections. Our office has not fully reviewed Mr. Hopkins' file, and so we
do not how whether we will be able to represent Mr. Hopkins in this matter. However, a
review of the information provided so far suggests that you may not lawfully evict Mr.
Hopkins.
The Department cites Minn. Stat, 8617.81, subd, 2, and Minn, Stat, §617,82, as well as
the St. Paul Legislative Code, as the bases for its notice to you to abate. I am told that the
Department is demanding Mr. Hopkins' removal as a part of abatement.
The St. Paul Legislative Code describes nuisance activities in Chapters 42 and 45 of the
Code. Chapter 42 describes a nuisance dwelling as one in which the applicable safety
code was violated on four separate dates. It does not appear to me that a safety code has
been violated, or that there has been more than one incident involving Mr. Hopkins at the
property in all the years he has lived there. Chapter 45 of the code defines a nuisance as
one involving a substance, matter, emission, or thing, not a person or a behavior, Chapter
45 also defines a nuisance building; however this definition applies only to vacant buildings or portions of vacant buildings. Obviously this is inapplicable to Mr. Hopkins'
situation.
Mim. Stat. 8617.81 describes acts constituting a nuisance, and there is certainly room to
argue that there is no clear and convincing proof that Mr. Hopkins used or possessed a
dangerous weapon, or that he committed any other act that would come within the
statutory definition of nuisance. More importantly, there is a fatal defect in the notice
pvided to you by the Department as it did not come h mth e prosecuting attorney in
Mr. Hopkins' case as required by Minn. Stat. 671.81, subd. 4. Because of the notice
defect, you may not evict Mr. Hopkins under Minn. Stst. 8617.85, or for any other
reason unless you can identify a lease violation. I have reviewed Mr. Hopkins' lease
and I do not find that the acts alleged to have occurred on Decemba 19,2008, constitute
a violation of Mr. Hopkins' lease.
It is also important to remember that significant steps have already been taken to insure
that the events of December 2008 do not repeat themselves. The Court issued an order
forbidding Mr. Hopkins to have any contact with the other party. I am told that the other
party returned to the apartment only days ago, and that Mr. Hopkins properly contacted
the authorities and the other party was removed hm the premises. I can also see that the
events at issue appear to have been fueled by alcohol. Mr. Hopkins was ordered by the
Court to refrain from using alcohol, and must submit to random tests of his blood and
urine. He also must make weekly phone contact with a Project Remand counselor.
I appreciate you consideration of this matter, and please do not hesitate to contact me if
you have any questions or concerns.
Andrea L. Jepson
Attorney at Law
Same old shit Bob......like many of us have thought for a long time, it has nothing to do with safe housing or getting anything fixced up or repaired. It's all about behavior and a predjudice city that doesn't want low incomes living here. As far as I'm concerned, it's pretty obvious from this letter that "the ends justify the means" as far as the political current goes in the city. There are no rights in St. Paul, just an agenda and they're hell bent on getting there no matter who they have to crush doing it.
Bob - Didn't you just a couple of weeks ago post "Saint Paul neighbors from Hell!!!!" You and everybody else here wanted the City to do something about that.
What do you think it has been like for the neighbors where there have been many arrests.
Sounds like they had there one little piece of hell.
As far as the order and the letter goes, if the tenant was the victom of the assaults and now has resolved the situation by getting a restraining order, they should appeal the order to the council.
If there are that many disorderly situations in the house where the police have been called for felony assaults then this order from the council gives the landlord grounds to evict the tenant. He can give notice and when he ends up in court with the tenant have this document to back up his claims.
You are always complaining that the City doesn't do anything to help landlords, WHAT DO YOU THINK THE PURPOSE OF THE LETTER IS? It is there to give the landlord the legal basis to evict someone that he may be unsure if he has grounds to evict.
"the current occupants are tenants, then the property owner has the option to cancel the lease(s) or otherwise secure restitution of the premises from the tenant or lessee who has
maintained or conducted the nuisance by bringing a motion before a court of proper jurisdiction. The property owner
may, in certain circumstances, assign to the City Attorney's Office the right to file this motion."
The City is saying if you are having problems evicting this tenant that is creating multiple problems in your building we will help you!!
Bob what do you want the City to do?
That section of the notice is saying to the landlord when you get the letter from SMRLs turn the eviction over to us...
It sounds like to you as long as the land lord is collecting the rent who cares what happens and the City should shut up.
Sad.
JMONTOMEPPOF
Chuck Repke
Maybe the city should shut the hell up until they can learn to follow the law and give the proper notices and quit violating peoples rights.
what do you want the City to do?
What do I want the city government to do?
1. Wither and die.
2. Get rounded up by the authorities (at gunpoint if necessary) and frogwalked to paddy wagons as we, the people, pelt them with rotten fruit. After brief trials, they are remanded to Devil's Island for life with no parole. Code Enforcement all get cells with big, brawny, lonely Aryan Nations inmates, so they can feel what all of us Saint Paul property owners have felt from them.
3. They actually have to live by their own rules.
Any one or more would be fine.
How is that for a start?
Chuck before you talk, know the facts.This guys black,80 years old,and handicap.Oh the perfect target for the city.Maybe they should be worrying about their budget.What do you think?
Kick him on the streets-where is he going to go?
The guy wasn't even convicted and the city wanted him gone.And if not they were going to kick the rest of the building out(innocent)for 1 year.(vacant-code compliance-money for city-no affordable housing after)
Doesn't part of property taxes go to police services?
Chuck didn't you have st.paul fire out,then NHPI for a burned out car.Why weren't you forced to kick out your tenant?
Chuck if the city doesn't want this gut=y in town why don't they trespass him from the city?Answer that and we'll talk more.
Ron
Isn't SMRLS funded by the city?
If so why are they telling the city they are in the wrong?
Rick
Good advice Chuck.I will recommend Dadders to turn the eviction to the city.It Should be fun to watch SMRL(city funded)Fight the city.Good advice you scholar.
I'm sure we'll see the results.Good case law if the city fails dipshit!
Funny the city went after these guys just days after the denial to summary judgement.Humm not fishy at all.
Thad
Chuck is always talking out his ass, he is one of the 'biggest' kiss asses we ever seen in this town.
What do you get for kissing their hairy asses.
The law is the law Chuck, if I have to obey it so does the police, code pimps,
council smucks, mayor, judges, and so forth.
People like to see slime craw on their belly's, so keep posting you excesses for the Democratic team that run and ruin this city.
You must be the biggest smuck in town.
Definition of smuck asshole fuck shmuck schmuck foreskin smk smack smucked
1. smuck 10 up, 27 down
To win a game with ease and a very high score, almost to the point of embarrassment.
"The score of that game was 80-2. It was a total smuck!"
by Lizzie Feb 25, 2005 share this add comment
2. smuck 36 up, 15 down
A word used in place of 'fuck' by Scott Landon in Lisey's Story, a novel by Stephen King.
"Ninety-eight percent of what goes on in people's heads is non e of their smucking business." -Lisey's Story, pg 318.
stephen king lisey's story fuck scott landon lisey landon
by Laisa Aug 26, 2007 share this add comment
3. smuck 26 up, 3 down
It is a Hebrew Word for the Foreskin that gets chopped off at birth. So when a person that is educated or a Jew calls you a Smuck. He or She is calling you a useless piece of dick.
I.E. a Smuck would go see the 2008 movie "never back down" or do things in attempt to appear "bigger" or manly. But factually a Smuck is weak and lame poser. Not so different from a Bro or a Gangster/Wangster.
dick foreskin bro poser beta-male
by F'ing Rainwater Mar 20, 2008 share this add comment
4. smuck 27 up, 38 down
(adjective) Unbalanced or unfair, especially in playground sports. If one team clearly has the better players, the teams would be considered smuck.
"No way, guys. These are smuck teams. Let's pick again."
by Chester Copperpot Apr 13, 2005 share this add comment
5. smuck 9 up, 23 down
to insert your penis into a can of spam while wearing a dress and listening to "you spin me right round" by billy idol.
bobby invited his friends over to smuck with him
spam fuck fucking penis dress billy idol
by Jason McEnteer Nov 21, 2007 share this add comment
6. smuck 9 up, 23 down
A loud popping sound made by pressing the lips together, creating suction, then separating the lips.
Quit smucking, that's annoying.
by smuck Apr 29, 2005 share this add comment
7. smuck 13 up, 26 down
The combination of garbage and urine fumes that passes for air in New York City in August.
I need to take a shower. I'm completely covered in subway smuck!
If the shoe fits.
By a wisenheimer, that knows you Chuck.
Please watch the Alice Krengel Video in MN Supreme Court 5Jan09
West St. Paul was represented by League of MN Cities (Defunct web site) Susan Tice, and SMRLS by Michael Hagedorn.
Either way he city or SMRLS wants entrance to any/all buildings. Warrantless Search's
Remember W.St.Paul Mayor Zanmiller sits on St.Paul Water Board, Keep the letters flying to build a paper trail against the city.
Lawyers Lie and Liars Figure Court Action Shakespeare Where are you
http://www.tpt.org/courts/MNJudicialBranchvideo_NEW.php?number=A07-310
Legal aid should be the last ones talking about abything. They get funding from the city and instead of going after the city for their illegal acts, they go after landlords! It's an ethics violation and all of them should be in jail and lose their Attorney license.
You are right 1:27! I never thought of them that way, but now that you say it......wow....I think you may be onto something.
Ron because there is no such thing as "tresspass from the City." There is no law like that.
I have no idea about the case, but if the landlord thinks the tenant isn't going to be a problem they should appeal it to the council.
If they think the tenant is a problem but they are concerned about SmlS then they should take the City Attorney up on the offer.
What is the problem?
If there has been enough problems from this unit for the letter to be written I don't care if he is 18 or 80 he has the same rights and the same responsibilities.
JMONTOMEPPOF
Chuck Repke
Chuck says
They should appeal it to the council.
The concil are you friends and they aint worth diddlely-sqwat,
why even tell people that.
Sheep have more cents then St.Paul Government, you mite not have any problem with them.
You Mite Think people are Crazy, but watch and see who ends up without jobs.
Chuck I love how you act as if the city is perfect and when its not you blame Pawlenty and the republicans.
This city is in Shambles due to the fact of its leadership.
Tim Ciani
Chuck I agree such a letter could help when we have problem tenants. But, if St. Paul’s goal is to help landlords, why the threat of nuisance code? The city of Mpls e-mails me police reports that mention any of my tenants. No threats; just very helpful information. St. Paul doesn’t send me police reports, instead we get threatening letters like this from code enforcement. It is hard to see St. Paul’s goal as “helpful.”
A few questions for you…
Is it city policy to jerk a landlords C of O for every ACCUSED domestic assault on rental property? I’d bet it isn’t. Why the heavy hand in this case? I cannot think of any circumstance where an ACCUSATION of Domestic assault on a property should rightfully lead to a landlord losing their rental license. Can you?
Lets assume Dadders holdings removes the tenant. Do you think the tenant should be forever homeless or do you think the tenant will find another home? If he finds another home, what was solved? Didn’t we just move the problem?
Bill Cullen.
BTW, I agree with an earlier poster. Dadders holdings should ask the city of St. Paul to do the eviction.
It would be interesting to watch the city fight a city funded organization over the ACCUSATION of domestic assault.
Bill Cullen.
Chuck by the city using a heavy hand threatening Dadders to evict this guy who are they helping?If they are doing it for the neighbors wouldn't revolking a c of o and creating a vacant building be much worse for the neighborhood as we all can see.And if its for the tenants wouldn't revolking the c of o and forcing them to move be harder on them.
I don't think landlords in general have a problem with what the city is ultimately doing.We have a problem with policy and how they go about it.
They know vacants are bad and they will go through hell an back threatening a landlord when they can be allies.Isn't the democratic party known for peace and dialog?Aren't they known for being passive?
We aren't the problem Chuck and can offer some good solutions.
Brian
Please people read the letter again.
The letter says that if the shit happens again the City will take action. Its a threat not an action.
They are telling them to abate the nuisanse or he could lose his C of O ITS A WARNING.
After a while this place drives me insane. You all are saying you don't want the city to tell you when someone is destroying your property values, you don't want people arrested for running drugs, you are fine with them having fights in your properties.
Its just not your problem.
But, when the tenant trashes your place you sit their like a bunch of dummies with your thumbs up your butt, bitching that the City doesn't do anything.
JMONTOMEPPOF
Chuck Repke
Chuck you have no fucking clue what is going on here.Take the back seat and shut the F up!This guys 80 and was assulted by a 36 year old women who then stole 500 dollars from him.He has also lived here from 5 years without problems.This incident was labeled as a demoestic and last I knew you can't evict for that.Know your laws Chuck!
And another thing yes the city is demanding eviction or they will revoke.So maybe know something before you talk dipshit.
Earl
Chuck wrote:
They are telling them to abate the nuisanse or he could lose his C of O. ITS A WARNING.
My response:
Lets assume you are Dadders property. How would you "abate this nuisance?"
I cannot figure out how a landlord can "abate" domestic assault -- except to evict.
Bill Cullen.
...or Bill run the risk if they believe that the tenant isn't going to be a problem.
Or, as I suggested, turn it over to the City Attorney or appeal to the council.
To Earl - how in the hell am I suppose to know that or how in the heck does DSI know that?
They send out the letter to let the landlord know that shit is going on in his unit. You guys view that as an assault on the landlord when it is designed to give you some back bone if there is an issue. What do you want them to do? Send a freaking social worker out there to investigate before sending the letter? AAAAARRRRRGGGGGG!!!
There are plenty of owners out there that are afraid to evict. Like I said the point of this is to assist in being able to.
An amazing bunch of cry babies on this list.
You'd complain if they hung you with a new rope.
JMONTOMEPPOF
Chuck Repke
Hi bob Johnson, who's side are you on in the gallagher v magner case???? other than the court case against the city of st paul...do you even know the two owners of Dadders...tom gallagher and joe collins?? well i do......i happen to know exactly what kind of people they are and what theyre sole objective is 24 hours a day.....money....swindle.....fraud.....white collar crime!!! gallagher and collins refinanced our mortgage on our house in 2008, these two conspired and committed equity stripping against us...then they tried to force a default on our mortgage in the first 6 months, the case was dismissed due to theyre fraud in theyre claims...even though case was dismissed...they filed the documents for cancellation for cd (in the dismissed case) with the property and records room anyways...they then embezzled our escrow account money of 12,150.00...then they continued to committ fraud in the court at least once a year trying to evict us and claiming debt to them...they would extort free work on theyre buildings from us and threaten to evict if we didnt do what they demanded...they took our 30,000.00 fishing boat for collateral on yet another false claim of debt to them...instead of holding the boat as was agreed to...they sold it the following month...there is sooooooooooooooooooooooo much more....trust me...they do not care about the condition of theyre buildings, nor do they care about the people in theyre buildings...read the blogs and comments on merchantcircle.com....google 'dadders properties' you will see blogs on you tube from tenants of theyres....just read about what they are...theyre case against the city was and is just another way for them to line theyre pockets and i can guarantee if they did get any restitution, they would sell theyre crap buildings and buy nicer ones...theyre suit against the city is total b.s......do not continue to be on theyre side when you have no idea what the people your standing up for are all about...they ended up forcing us our of our home that weve owned for 11 years, with 30 minutes notice...and in order to come back into our home (which they took possession of illegally) they wanted our payed for custom motorcycle and payed for harley davidson as well as 6000.00 worth of craftsman tools and a double wide craftsman tool chest, and 3000.00 cash. on the day they forced us out without food, clothes, and no where to go they owed us roughly 30,000.00 they had stolen from us...and that doesnt even count all of the equity they were involved in stripping from our mortgage/home. do some research on these two...seriously...if you only knew, ive only told you half of the story and just bits and pieces of all theyve done to us...basically theyre being sued by us, and are facing criminal charges for the couple dozen felonys they committed.....educate yourself about Tom Gallagher, Joe Collins, Dadders Properties....they are the biggest liars i have ever met in my entire life! Put the word out there...the city of st paul should know the character of the people theyre dealing with in this lawsuit...the bottom line...look at it this way...these two criminals have been wasting tax payers money since 2004, and have been wasting everyones precious time...the city of st paul and code enforcement are doing theyre goddamn job...these two are just too greedy to fix up theyre bldgs...they just want money...thats it...and also, theyre playing the race/discrimination card to get that money from the city...the whole thing is total bull! in the end, they should both go to prison for all that they do, and all theyve done...believe me, they will!
allow me to also add to my comment...after they forced us from our home of 11 years, they would not allow us to come back to pack and move our own personal property. the home is on acreage, we had a pole building, and i am over 50 years old...as you can imagine...we have alot of personal property...the motorcycles, tools and large tool chest were in the garage...this is what they wanted. they made sure to lock up our garage so we couldnt get in there to get any of our own personal property...meaning the 30,000.00 worth of motorcycles, or the tools and tool chest. they would text us and threaten that if we stepped one foot on OUR land/house to get any clothes, food, or anything else of OURS...that the sheriff would be there to arrest us, they also told our neighbor lies about us, and possibly payed him to call the police if he saw us or our vehicles on the property. they also stated that they had cameras on the property, and verbally threatened to put a bullet in my boyfriends head if he came onto OUR land or went into OUR house...do the math bob!!! Stop helping these two white collar slum lords continue to deceive and swindle everybody they deal with...they are scum!!! if you don't believe me, and/or if you would like...i can supply you with a copy of our lawsuit...and can go as far as to supply you with all of the documents that pertain to dadders, us and our home/mortgage. There is alot of it...theyve spent 49 months committing crimes against us, and in the end they committed acts of genocide on us...we've been displaced from our home since early march 2011.
Clearly you have disdain for Dadders. I don't think you have read the federal fair housing lawsuits or you would agree that although you seem to have issues with them their lawsuit against the city is very important in assuring minorities aren't gentrified from our neighborhoods.
What I support is the fair housing lawsuits. Dadders are 2 investors of 12 who brought the lawsuits against the city. These lawsuits are starting to harvest changes in law that will insure protected classes of people will not be discriminated against. In this regard these guys are hero's in my eyes.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
<< Home