A DEMOCRACY TOWN HALL: Saint Paul/ Investor's say to hell with Saint Paul.

Hi All,

This isn't the complete deposition. I only posted the meat of the subject. And just for the record, Bill Cullen is a soft spoken political correct kind of guy and would never tell the city to go to hell. I am responsible for the title. The fact is many responsible investors feel badly toward Council member Bostroms shoring up of an already predatory code enforcement, the policy has locked them out of the market of purchasing vacant homes blighting our neighborhoods.

BILL CULLEN having been previously
duly sworn, deposes and says as follows:

Attorny John Shoemaker on behalf of the Fair Housing Lawsuit plaintiffs against the City of Saint Paul. Questioning Bill Cullen of Cullen Homes.

Q How many different properties have you purchased in the City of St. Paul over the period where
you purchased them and whether or not you held them or you sold them off?
A In St. Paul alone, on the order of 30, 20 to 30 maybe.
Q So there's a considerable number there and it
may be difficult for you to remember all the addresses?
A Not just the addresses. I'm not sure I could remember the order or much about them. I do
have -- I could create that if you so care.
Q Let's go back to more generalities here then.
Were most of the other properties that you did
purchase in St. Paul in this similar condition as the property that you believe was at 861
Clark?
A Other than my large apartment buildings, I don't
recall buying any building that was occupiable.
I bought single families that were boarded, condemned duplexes, triplexes and four-plexes.
Q What years did you purchase most of your properties in that particular state of condition?
A Early 2000's. I'd say it was very active from 2000 to 2004.
Q At the height of your acquisitions, how many properties did you have in your ownership
portfolio of any type of properties, whether they were properties that were in the process of being renovated or properties that had been
renovated and were ready for sale or properties that were actually occupied and being rented?
Do you remember a figure on that?
A In St. Paul, the most rental large rentals I had were 14.
Q You're talking about 14 properties?
A Yeah, 14 buildings. And at that same time I probably had three or four rehabs going.
Q That were in addition to the 14 buildings?
A Yes.
Q How about in the city of Minneapolis? Describe over the years that you've been involved there in purchasing, rahabing, and selling and/or managing rental properties, how many buildings
have you bought during that period?
A My strategy changed some. At the beginning in '99, 2000, all the way to 2004, I stayed away
from the city of Minneapolis as a landlord.
Q Why was that?
A I had the perception that they were -- that it
was an unfriendly place to do business.
Q For a landlord?
A Yes.
Q A landlord of residential properties?
A Yes.
Q What years were those again?
A Probably -- again, it was my perception. But from '99 to 2004, during that entire period I
owned a single duplex that I rented. And, again, it was for a short period of time. It
wasn't until 2004 -- in 2004 was when I bought that large building in south Minneapolis, and
that's when my opinion was changing about Minneapolis.
Q Had your opinion changed on the issue of a landlord in the residential rental business in the city of Minneapolis prior to buying that building?
A I don't recall exactly when it changed.
Q So you may have made the decision to purchase
the property and then, during your work with the city of Minneapolis, determined that it was
a more friendly environment for a landlord such as yourself or it could have actually -- your
opinion could have changed prior to purchase. You just don't recall?
A Correct.
Q Tell me a little bit about what was the basis for your thought that during, let's say,
approximately 1999 and 2004, that Minneapolis was not friendly toward rental property owners.
Do you have anything in mind as to what led you to that conclusion?
A Again, perception a lot, John. My perception was that it was unreasonable policies and
procedures from the city government.
Q That applied to rental property owners?
A Yes.
Q Can you recall any particular example of a policy or procedure that you felt was unreasonable as it related to individuals such
as yourself that were attempting to provide housing for people in the city?
A Just about the accountability and what a landlord should do and should be held accountable for. I was under the impression --
some of that was driven from maybe the property rights action group in Minneapolis that was very
aggressive back in that time. And there was a different mayor then. I don't remember when
Sharon Sayles-Belton left. I think during that whole period, they were pretty aggressive. I
think some of that changed. At least my perception, John, is that it's a more reasonable
place to do business now.
Q What you're saying that your perception was is that the city was aggressive against the
landlords. Correct?
A Yes.
Q Was it your perception that the city government in Minneapolis, during that '99 to 2004 time frame, were trying to hold in an unreasonable
fashion the landlords responsible for tenant behavior?
A Yes.
Q You believe that that policy or system has changed to a significant degree in Minneapolis?
A Well, it's better than St. Paul.
Q Can you speak up a little because I know we have
got Cheri at the end of the table here, too.
A I do think it's better. I think it's certainly better than St. Paul.
Q Any other cities, other than Minneapolis or St. Paul, where you have purchased any type of
real estate?
A Not my business.
Q How about individually?
A Only where I live.
Q Now, the rental properties that you've owned in
the city of Minneapolis and St. Paul where you've actually rented the properties out to individuals who are seeking to have rental
units, rental homes, tell me whether or not you have focused at all on low income rentals.
A Absolutely. My buildings were all what you'd call class C buildings.
Q Define the class system with this class C designation for me, if you would.
A Class C are generally older, lower amenity buildings, and therefore lower rent.
Q How many classes are there in the real estate industry, in the use of the jargon of class C,
class A, whatever?
A There's three, class A, class B, and class C.
Q Describe those for me.
A There's no rock solid answer, but it comes down to age and amenity. Generally, a class A
building will be newer, maybe only 15 years old. It will have amenities like underground heated
parking, maybe an indoor swimming pool, but very nice high end amenities. Class B will be older, maybe 15 to 30 or 40 years old, will have some amenities,
maybe a detached garage but unlikely to have underground heated. It might have an outdoor
pool but not indoor pool, and will still have all the amenities inside apartments, maybe a
garbage disposal and a dishwasher.
Class C will generally have off
street parking or maybe no parking offered at all, and very few amenities, seldom a dishwasher, seldom a garbage disposal.
Q And the real estate investor that's seeking to purchase any buildings with any of those
classes, what concerns do they typically have in your role as a realtor for investors as to
whether or not they should pick a class A or a class B or a class C type building to meet their
investor goals?
A It's generally based more -- you can get a
higher return generally on a class C propert than you can on a class A property, and B being
in the middle. What would drive somebody from a class A to a class B to a class C is generally
how willing you are to deal with the tenants.
You can get a higher return on a class C property but you have a much more difficult clientele to deal with. If you aren't careful,
you can actually get a lower return because of the damages and the noncollected rent.
Q Now, is there some correlation between credit history, credit strength of tenants, and their ability to get into, with owners screening and other systems like that, into a class C, class
B, class A type rental property?
A Generally, if you have great credit, you can go anywhere you want. Generally, the class A
buildings will have a higher rental standard than the class B and the class B higher than the
class C, generally speaking.
Q From the standpoint of screening tenants in order to have them successfully apply for a lease with that particular owner of that type of
a class building. Correct?
A Yes.
Q From what you said, my understanding is that your rental properties that you have purchased, renovated, acquired and held onto and rented, you have focused on low income class C type properties and tenants. Correct?
A Correct.
Q Have you had any experience with Section 8 vouchers, now called housing choice voucher
rentals?
A Yes.
Q Tell me a little bit about the history of your involvement with Section 8 rentals or housing
choice vouchers. I will use Section 8 from here on out, but I understand that the official title
is housing choice vouchers. So we will use Section 8 from here on out. Is that okay?
A It would be preferred.
Q Tell me about your history involvement with Section 8 rentals starting when you first got
involved to your current situation.
A I never really rented to section 8 tenants only because I did not know the process and procedure and didn't want to take the time to learn it until I purchased some buildings on the east side of St. Paul. And the buildings at the time
of acquisition had a very large percentages of Section 8 tenants. I'm going to guess here, but
35, maybe 40, percent Section 8 tenants. And ever since, I have had Section 8 tenants. Well,
I just sold those buildings in St. Paul. So I no longer do, but I did.
Q How long of a period did you have that period that had approximately 35 percent Section 8 tenants?
A I bought it in 1999 and I sold it December 5th of 20;,
Q Was that percentage of Section 8 tenants at about 35 percent pretty consistent year after
year?
A There were two buildings in St. Paul. One was called Birmingham Woods. One was called
Flandrau Court. I sold Birmingham Woods in 2003. I'm trying to do this from memory. I believe that's accurate. And that building was a very high percentage, maybe 55 percent
Section 8. Flandrau Court had a large percentage. When I sold Birmingham Woods, my
percent of Section 8 went down. Then sometime later in 2004, Section 8 or PHA revised the
payment schedule for landlords. And at that point I quit taking new Section 8 tenants. So
my percentages continued to decline.
By the time I sold out in December
of last year, I was probably down to 10 percent Section 8.

A Note from Bob- Folks, I edited sentence numbers up until now. I had enough! If you read this far you will be interested enough to get to the end. It is well worth it if you are interested in the housing market in Saint Paul.

7 Q On the buildings that you had in the City of
8 St. Paul, what do you recall during the history
9 of your ownership was the racial and ethnic
10 makeup of your tenant base?
11 A I don't know. I know it was very diverse. I'm
12 quite confident that the entire time I owned the
13 buildings in the City of St. Paul I had more
14 people of color than I had caucasian.
15 Q Across your portfolio in the city?
16 A Of St. Paul, yes.
17 Q How about in Minneapolis, tell me about how
18 that, if any, differed from the makeup of your
19 tenant base in the City of St. Paul.
20 A Probably slightly lower content of people of
21 color in Minneapolis than St. Paul, different
22 neighborhoods, John, different neighborhoods.
23 Q What areas of the City of St. Paul did you have
24 rental properties located in during the time
25 period that you had properties there that you
were renting out?
2 A Almost all of my buildings were in east
3 St. Paul. I had one six-plex, the one I still
4 own, over in west St. Paul.
5 Q Do you understand the phrases low income versus
6 very low income? Is it as it relates to
7 tenant's income in attempting to acquire a
8 rental unit, generally, in the Minnesota market?
9 A I think it means 50 percent of AMI and 30
10 percent of AMI, but I'm not sure. It's not a
11 phrase that I use in my business.
12 Q Do you use AMI as a phrase, however, in the
13 focus you have or have had on tenants?
14 A No.
15 Q What type of rental ranges -- and by rental
16 ranges, I mean per month rental rates -- have
17 you typically had for, let's say, a two bedroom
18 apartment? I'm sure that that's changed as the
19 market has fluctuated. But, generally, do you
20 have some numbers in mind as to how much a
21 tenant would have to pay in a two bedroom unit
22 that you've had in your portfolio?
23 A My rent hasn't changed much in east St. Paul
24 since I purchased the building in 1999. My rent
25 has always been in the mid to upper 600's.
Q How about for a three bedroom apartment? What
2 would be the ranges there for rents? Have they
3 stayed about the same?
4 A My three bedrooms have plummeted. I was getting
5 over $1,100 back in 1999, and I was renting them
6 for $850 when I left.
7 Q Did you have any four bedroom units?
8 A I did.
9 Q What percentage of your total portfolio did you
10 have four bedroom units?
11 A When I first purchased -- I had four bedroom
12 units at Flandrau Court. When I first purchased
13 it, there were 15 four bedroom apartments. Is
14 that your question?
15 Q My question is what type of rents were you able
16 to get initially for the four bedroom units and
17 did that change over time that you held the
18 portfolio?
19 A Again, back in 1999 when I first bought the
20 building, I was getting about $1,300 a month for
21 a four bedroom. And it plummeted to about $950
22 by the time I sold it.
23 Q Do you believe a reason for the reduction in the
24 rents were factors that have led to the
25 reduction in rents for the larger units?
A Section 8 cut it partly. I think it's also due
2 to the building of new units as well as new
3 landlords.
4 Q So the supply has increased from what you've
5 seen?
6 A It's just an opinion. But, yes, that's my
7 opinion.
8 Q Let's talk a little bit about the type of
9 concerns that you've had as a landlord in class
10 C type buildings which you mentioned had an
11 issue about tenant damage or owner had to be at
12 least properly managing the tenant damage issue.
13 What I want to ask you about is tell me a little
14 bit about the concerns that you've had over the
15 years with tenant damage issues in the units
16 that you've rented out.
17 A Tenant damage is a reality of class C property.
18 You know it's there and you have to deal with
19 it. So you end up as a landlord trying to find
20 a way to keep your costs down on those -- when
21 you're restoring properties, as well as trying
22 to build things that are indestructible. Some
23 flooring holds up better to abuse than other
24 flooring, and some fixtures hold up better to
25 abuse than other fixtures. And you tend to
build things not so much for appeal and beauty
2 but more for either affordability or
3 indestructibility or both preferably.
4 Q From an angle of trying to get tenants held
5 accountable for damage that may be caused by
6 themselves or their guests or other third
7 parties that would be under their control, do
8 you try to get higher damage deposits at the
9 start of the lease with tenants?
10 A Yes, I did. When the market changed, you have
11 to compete with the market. And as the market
12 started softening about three or four years ago,
13 you couldn't ask for a higher damage deposit.
14 As well as Ramsey County used to be willing to
15 write a large damage deposit. Now I think they
16 are limited to a one time's months rent.
17 Q So you're talking about Ramsey County that would
18 be supplying rental assistance to certain
19 tenants?
20 A To very low income tenants, yes.
21 Q So that changed, that being the market, the
22 competition, the county changing its willingness
23 to have a higher damage deposit, all that put
24 pressure on you as a landlord from a standpoint
25 of the cost that you would typically have
related to tenant damage?
2 A Yes.
3 Q What type of items have you typically seen
4 damaged within rental units by the tenants in
5 class C buildings?
6 A Carpet is number one. I have had carpet, brand
7 new completely destroyed in nine months.
8 Certainly, appliances is taking incredible
9 abuse. The refrigerators -- kids will try and
10 climb in them somehow. If you break the plastic
11 side moldings or the plastic on the door, it
12 almost totals the refrigerator even though it
13 works fine. Because the cost to replace that
14 plastic framework on the sides is darn near the
15 cost of the refrigerator.
16 Then anything that's not
17 indestructible -- if you have vinyl in there
18 instead of VCT or ceramic tile, the vinyl just
19 doesn't last. It gets torn.
20 Fixtures, I have had children grab
21 a hold of a kitchen faucet and then pull
22 themselves up by the kitchen faucet so they can
23 get themselves a cup of water. And they will
24 pull the faucet -- they will pull the arm of the
25 faucet right out of the base. And water goes
everywhere when that happens. I have had all of
2 those things all the time.
3 Toilets, I have had people flush
4 amazing things down the toilet all the way from
5 kids toys -- we had one where we couldn't get
6 the thing cleaned out. And we were so
7 frustrated about it, we broke the toilet in
8 pieces to find out what was in there. And the
9 tenant had flushed a huge fish down the toilet.
10 I don't know why. The tenant claims they don't
11 know how it got there.
12 Q The flooring issue you talked about, where if
13 you had vinyl in that doesn't have the life span
14 that other types of flooring would have. You
15 mentioned tile and what was the other element
16 that you mentioned?
17 A VCT.
18 Q What is that?
19 A I don't recall what the acronym stands for, but
20 it's a vinyl product. It's the same vinyl
21 product you'll see on the floor of a gymnasium
22 or on the floor of a Target store. It's a one
23 foot square vinyl product and it's rock solid
24 stuff.
25 Q Other types of damage that you have seen, let's
say, from a consistent standpoint in the
2 experience that you've had with class C rentals
3 besides carpet, appliances, the flooring,
4 toilets. You mentioned the faucet on sinks.
5 How about with regard to walls and ceilings,
6 those types of things?
7 A The biggest problem you have with walls is
8 people moving furniture around or putting a
9 doorknob through a wall. Certainly you have
10 some tenants that will put their fists through a
11 wall or their girlfriend through a wall, but
12 that doesn't happen very often.
13 As you were talking, one other came
14 up I'm amazed I forgot. It's windows and
15 screens. We will fix 100 screens every spring
16 and they'll be broke almost instantly.
17 Q What do you attribute that to based on your
18 experience?
19 A Carelessness is all I can say. I don't know.
20 There are certainly cases where individuals are
21 doing things illegally and they remove the
22 screen so they can pass things out the screen.
23 But those are rare. I think it's more common --
24 on top floors they don't have the problems with
25 bugs. So I think they will remove screens.
They tell me they don't need screens. Bugs
2 don't come in the windows. I don't get that but
3 they will remove screens. Other causes of the
4 problem are cats. Cats I think will often go
5 through the screen trying to get out.
6 Q Anything else that comes to mind right now as to
7 portions of the interiors of your rental
8 properties that -- where you see consistent
9 damage by tenants in your class C buildings?
10 A I should mention doors too, especially the
11 hollow doors, end up broken frequently.
12 Q What type of damage do you typically see on
13 doors in the units?
14 A Holes, a hole in the door or ripped off the
15 hinges, one of the two.
16 Q So all of these types of damaged items
17 necessitate you as a landlord to either have
18 yourself or someone that's under your employment
19 try to do repairs on these items. Correct?
20 A Yes.
21 Q Which obviously means you're going to have costs
22 for materials. Correct?
23 A Yes.
24 Q And labor costs as well?
25 A Yes.
Q What other costs have you seen that would be in
2 addition to labor and material costs related to
3 tenant caused damage?
4 A The only other thing I can point to is a real
5 bad tenant can drive some of your good tenants
6 away. So it can become a leasing problem as
7 well. One other tenant damage that I didn't
8 mention is common area doors, windows, laundry
9 equipment that people will intentionally damage.
10 Especially on a security door, they will
11 intentionally damage a security door so that
12 their friends and relatives can get in.
13 Q The damage, does it ever rise to a level where
14 you'd have to obtain a permit from the City of
15 St. Paul in order to complete repairs so that
16 you would have permit fees or permit costs as
17 well?
18 A Sure.
19 Q So that would be an additional cost that you as
20 a landlord with class C properties with tenant
21 damage would see on occasion or on a frequent
22 basis?
23 A It's fairly frequent, especially if it's
24 electric. That's the one that trips you up, but
25 yes.
Q Any other costs that would relate to complying
2 with the city codes from a standpoint of trying
3 to remedy the damage that had been caused by
4 your tenants in addition to labor, material,
5 permit fees, that type of thing? For example,
6 would you have any type of inspection fees or
7 any other type of city fees that may result from
8 your having to deal with tenant damage based on
9 your experience?
10 A Inspection fees, certainly. It takes me longer
11 to get through a fire inspection, a certificate
12 of occupancy inspection, than I'd like it. And
13 every time they come out there's a fee. If
14 tenants create damage and NHPI just happens to
15 drive by, I can get an order to correct. And I
16 will probably get them more frequently than
17 someone without the tougher tenants.
18 Q Have you seen tenants that have had what you
19 believe are maybe poorer housekeeping habits
20 than what you believe you might like to see?
21 A Every day.
22 Q Describe the situation that you typically have
23 to deal with as a landlord when it comes to your
24 class C buildings and tenant housekeeping
25 habits
A I will tell you a couple extreme stories and
2 then I will tell you the average.
3 I had one case where a tenant
4 household was so dirty -- Pat Fish was doing her
5 regular inspection.
6 Q From the Fire Prevention Office of the city?
7 A Correct. Pat told the tenant, you need to clean
8 up this apartment or I'm going to write it up as
9 a violation. And the tenant asked Pat, well,
10 when are you coming back? And Pat said any time
11 in the next three weeks. And the tenant looked
12 at her and said, I've got to keep this clean for
13 three weeks? You're talking about just -- the
14 apartment was so dirty you had to climb over
15 stuff to move from one room to the next.
16 Q Was this in one of your larger apartment
17 buildings?
18 A Four bedroom apartment, yes.
19 Q Which would have been covered by the certificate
20 of occupancy program that Pat Fish from the Fire
21 Prevention Office deals with. Right?
22 A Correct. I have got another case where a
23 tenant -- it was so dirty that the fire
24 inspector -- I have forgotten his name, but he
25 is a gentleman with a bad arm. I wish I could
remember his name. He actually condemned an
2 apartment. It was so dirty from a tenant --
3 from all tenant stuff.
4 Q The apartment that was condemned, was it
5 condemned for gross unsanitary or something
6 similar to that?
7 A Yes. All we had to do to uncondemn it is move
8 the tenant's belongings out. And the fireman
9 came out and said everything is good.
10 Q Did you yourself have to move the tenant's
11 belongings out of the unit?
12 A Of course. The tenant doesn't do it. But yes.
13 Q So the tenant had left the rental property with,
14 apparently, no intention to return?
15 A Well, she took the valuables and then left, yes.
16 Q How often does that happen where a tenant of
17 yours leaves, takes whatever they think is
18 valuable but leaves a lot of belongings behind
19 with no intention of ever coming back for those.
20 And then it requires you to have to take those
21 belongings and deal with those belongings?
22 A On the east side of St. Paul, it happens
23 frequently every other month. With my
24 Minneapolis buildings, seldom.
25 Q I assume that in your rental properties in the
City of St. Paul and elsewhere, that you comply
2 with the codes related to smoke detectors, any
3 type of -- whether they're hard wired or they're
4 battery operated. Is that right?
5 A I do.
6 Q What type of observations have you made about
7 battery operated smoke detectors as it relates
8 to tenant conduct or activity related to those
9 detectors?
10 A Battery as compared to wired in?
11 Q I want you to talk about any tenant type conduct
12 related to the battery operated smoked detectors
13 first, that you've observed in your ownership or
14 rental property that you classify as class C.
15 A Occasionally I have seen some thrown away, just
16 gone. But with all smoke detectors, whether
17 wired in or battery operated, they are
18 frequently disarmed. They will take the wired
19 in one and drop it down and unplug it and screw
20 it back in and leave it there dead.
21 Q So it looks like it's in operation but the fact
22 is it's not in operable form?
23 A There's no power, right.
24 Q How often do you see that?
25 A They will do that both with battery operated and
with wired in.
2 Q How do you deal with that from a standpoint of
3 your obligations to have smoke detectors that
4 operate within the rental units that you own and
5 manage and the tenants' conduct with trying to
6 disarm these particular safety devices?
7 A We would inspect -- we're required to inspect
8 every other year by the fire department, which
9 of course we did. We'd usually inspect more
10 frequently, but I can't say we had a pattern at
11 doing it. Generally, something would alarm us
12 and then we'd go through every apartment.
13 Q From a standpoint of you're doing an inspection
14 and you and others maybe that do the inspections
15 and you go in and see a battery has been taken
16 out, I assume you replace the battery. Correct?
17 A Correct.
18 Q Have you had situations where you learned that
19 the tenant very shortly thereafter took the
20 battery out even though you just replaced it?
21 A Yes.
22 Q How often has that happened?
23 A Frequently. I can't give you details.
24 Q How do you learn about that type of conduct as a
25 landlord? It seems to be pretty difficult
because don't you under your lease give the
2 right of possession to the tenant of the rental
3 unit?
4 A The only way I know, John, is when we have our
5 fire inspection. We know it's coming. So we
6 will go through everybody's apartment and make
7 sure everything works. So then the next day or
8 maybe two or maybe three days later, the fire
9 inspector shows up. We think everything is
10 good. Screens are in place. Smoke alarms work.
11 No dripping faucets. Everything looks good. We
12 walk in and batteries are gone out of the smoke
13 detector, screens are torn. This is a matter of
14 one or two days.
15 I had one situation where -- in
16 fact, that same tenant who had her apartment
17 condemned, the same tenant. She broke her
18 screen so fast I could not fix it fast enough
19 for the fire inspector. We fixed it. I believe
20 it was three different times that the fire
21 inspector came out where we had passed
22 everything except that screen. Fire inspector
23 shows up. Screen is not there. We'd say, we
24 just fixed it yesterday. He'd say, I will come
25 back whenever, a week or two or three. The day
before we'd fix it. The fire inspector would
2 show up. Broke again. Finally, the fire
3 inspector said to me, make the screen, install
4 it when I'm standing here, and we'll call it
5 good. And that's what I did. The next day the
6 screen was gone.
7 Q So was it your sense that the fire inspector was
8 frustrated by the tenant's conduct as well as
9 you?
10 A Well, he condemned the apartment soon after,
11 yes. I think he was very frustrated.
12 Q When he condemned the apartment, this was after
13 he had made the statement to you, bring the
14 screen out when I'm here doing the final
15 inspection?
16 A Yes.
17 Q So he approved the C of O at that point?
18 A Yes.
19 Q But then shortly thereafter he condemned the
20 unit?
21 A Just the unit, yes.
22 Q Tell me a little bit about what you understand
23 was the reasons why that fire inspector
24 condemned that unit.
25 A Just for tenant debris, tenant mess.
Q When the fire inspector had been there the times
2 before that, had he made comments about the
3 tenant debris, tenant sanitation type issues?
4 A Absolutely.
5 Q And had there been any cleanup by the tenant at
6 any of the times that the fire inspector was
7 there leading up to the approval of the C of O?
8 A Not that anyone would notice. Although the
9 tenant claims there was.
10 Q At some point, the fire inspector came back
11 after the renewal of the C of O and then
12 condemned the unit?
13 A Yes.
14 Q Did the fire inspector have an order to vacate
15 on the condemnation?
16 A Yes.
17 Q Do you remember how long the fire inspector gave
18 the tenant to leave the property?
19 A I don't. It was short though.
20 Q Did the tenant leave the property then?
21 A They did.
22 Q Did you have cleanup costs then after the tenant
23 left?
24 A I did.
25 Q Do you remember anything out of the ordinary
about those cleanup costs?
2 A No.
3 Q Were you able to rerent that unit?
4 A Yes.
5 Q How did you get the inspector to place the unit
6 back into legal occupancy after the
7 condemnation?
8 A He just came back to see that the debris, the
9 tenant debris, was gone.
10 Q And then he revoked the condemnation or
11 rescinded the condemnation, did he?
12 A Correct.
13 Q And then was it your understanding that the
14 C of O was still valid or did he have to renew
15 that?
16 A I believe the C of O was never affected. It was
17 a 12 unit building, and it stayed in place.
18 I'm trying desperately to remember
19 the details and the flow here, John. Here's how
20 I remember it happening. Okay? I probably
21 should check my notes because I'm on record
22 here. But here's how I remember it happening.
23 We went through the C of O. We passed it. The
24 screen was a big problem. The tenant, if I
25 recall, had an issue with child social services.
This is also the reason we didn't kick this
2 tenant out. It was a low income single mom, had
3 two kids. She was totally incapable of taking
4 care of those children, but I never kicked her
5 out because, I must admit, I liked her. She was
6 a nice -- not in a weird way. I mean, she was a
7 nice person. I thought I was kind of helping
8 her.
9 But when social services came in,
10 they called the fire department. Then the fire
11 department acted. I don't remember if the
12 apartment got materially worse between the
13 C of O and the report from social services. But
14 I do remember that the apartment was always very
15 bad.
16 The fireman gave this tenant
17 multiple opportunities to clean up the
18 apartment. And the tenant did, as I said
19 earlier, did nothing that you and I could have
20 identified as improving the apartment. The
21 fireman and I agreed to condemn the unit. He
22 asked me if I wanted it condemned. When he said
23 all that meant is the tenant had to leave and I
24 could rerent as soon as we cleaned it out, it
25 was a no-brainer.
Q The social services that came, that was Ramsey
2 County Social Services?
3 A I didn't interact with them, so I don't know.
4 Q How did you learn that social services was
5 concerned about the condition of the unit and
6 the potential health of the children?
7 A Again, I'm trying to do this from memory. This
8 was a few years ago. The fireman was notified
9 by social services, not by myself. Then the
10 fireman talked to me about the situation.
11 MR. SHOEMAKER: Let's take a short
12 break.
13 (Brief recess-10:35-10:50.)
14 Q (Continuing by Mr. Shoemaker) We just had an
15 informal discussion off the record here about
16 some of the documents that Mr. Cullen had
17 brought with him this morning. And what we will
18 do, on agreement with counsel, on the next break
19 is we will make copies of those and distribute
20 them to the attorneys. And then if we so
21 choose, we can maybe cumulatively mark those as
22 an exhibit or else maybe individually depending
23 upon the subject matter of what we determine
24 after our review.
25 Let's go back to this issue about
the class C rental properties that were in your
2 portfolio and the issues related to tenant
3 conduct. We have talked about, at least you've
4 talked about, the damage issues and house
5 cleaning habits and that type of thing that have
6 been a concern with the tenants. Tell me a
7 little bit about whether you've ever experienced
8 situations where tenants are behind in paying
9 their rent.
10 A Frequently.
11 Q Have you had situations where a tenant is behind
12 in paying rent that you've had tenants try to
13 get some leverage with you by contacting certain
14 third parties?
15 A I have.
16 Q Have the third parties that have been contacted
17 been attorneys that you recall?
18 A I have not had that situation.
19 Q How about filing claims in court, whether it
20 would be housing court or in district court,
21 where you believe the motivation was to try to
22 get some leverage related to them being behind
23 in rent?
24 A I do not recall that happening when they have
25 taken the initiation. I do recall it happening when I have brought forward an eviction action
2 and they have tried to claim habitability at an
3 eviction hearing.
Q How many times do you recall that happening in the years you've managed the rental properties
in your portfolio?
A It's fairly common, frankly.
Q The evictions are fairly common?
A That too. But I mean the claim of habitability
is fairly common. I started hiring an attorney to carry the evictions forward many years ago.
So it's not implanted in my brain as well when a tenant claims habitability because the attorney knocks it down. But when I used to do my own evictions, it was quite common.
Q When you used to do your own evictions, eviction actions, against tenants that were behind in their rent, I assume that was a breach of the lease, the actual nonpayment?
A Yes, of course.
Q Which gave you a right to bring an action to
evict the tenant from your rental unit?
A Correct.
Q Was it those situations where you're talking about where the tenant made a counterclaim that
the unit was nonhabitable and, therefore, they shouldn't have had to pay rent in the first
place?
A Or the other way around. But, yes, they would make a statement is the only reason they
wouldn't pay rent is because of this habitability claim.
Q When you were handling those eviction actions,
9 did you ever lose the eviction action based on a
10 tenant's claim of nonhabitability?
11 A No, because a tenant has never been able to put
12 up the rent. I've forgotten the term. I
13 haven't done my open evictions for years. But
14 they can claim habitability. But then they have
15 to put the rent into escrow with the court and
16 they have never been there with the rent.
17 Q Do you believe that there was ever a situation
18 where the tenant -- in your experience, where
19 the tenant had not paid rent, the tenant made
20 the claim of nonhabitability and they actually
21 had a good faith basis for the claim?
22 A That the tenant did?
23 Q Right.
24 A No. All the habitability problems they ever
25 claimed were their own.
Q So the habitability problems were of the
2 tenant's own origin?
3 A Absolutely.
4 Q So a tenant conduct would have created the
5 habitability problems that they were claiming?
6 A Yes.
7 Q How about since you've hired an attorney, have
8 you had any adverse decisions against you as a
9 landlord where you've had to bring eviction
10 actions and a tenant has claimed
11 uninhabitability as a defense to the payment?
12 A It may, John. I just don't go into that detail
13 with my attorney. The only time we would have
14 gone into that detail is if the case either got
15 held over for a hearing or I lost. If it was a
16 victory, I hear just, well, you won, the tenant
17 is going to be out in a day or a week.
18 Q Do you have a manager or have you had a manager
19 that would be more familiar with the tenants and
20 the tenant habitability issues than you
21 yourself?
22 A I do now. But I used to be -- you know, go back
23 a year or two and I was much more hands-on.
24 Q So it's just in the last year or two that you've
25 kind of had less focus on the management?
A Yeah, really since the beginning of 2006.
2 Q How about any experience that you've had during
3 your management of your rental properties where
4 a tenant would call the city code enforcement
5 employees or officials in order to seek some
6 leverage against you in your ownership role on a
7 rental property where they weren't paying rent?
8 A Yes, I had that.
9 Q How often have you experienced that?
10 A Maybe an average of once a year, maybe twice a
11 year.
12 Q Are these on C of O buildings?
13 A Yes.
14 Q How have you observed the fire inspector, that
15 is notified of the particular claim by the
16 tenant, has dealt with those particular claims?
17 A The inspectors all, depending on the
18 circumstances, kind of all deal with it
19 differently and how good a relationship I had
20 with the inspector. Sometimes the inspector
21 would actually call me up and say, what's going
22 on with this tenant, they're making a complaint
23 against you. Other times they would come out
24 and look at it and, actually, write the tenant
25 up for habitability issues. And other times
they would come out and do inspections and then
2 I'd get a letter in the mail without ever
3 knowing anything. So it varied in every case
4 according to the situation and the inspector.
5 Q Did you believe there was any inconsistency
6 there in how the fire prevention office handled
7 those scenarios?
8 A Sure.
9 Q Your answer is sure, there was?
10 A Yes, yes.
11 Q Tell me a little bit about the basis for your
12 saying that there was inconsistencies in how the
13 fire inspectors handled those types of tenant
14 complaints where you believe they were trying to
15 seek leverage on nonpayment of rent.
16 A The way I described them. Sometimes the
17 inspector would call me before they'd come out
18 to look at the building and ask is this tenant
19 being evicted, is this tenant a problem, what's
20 going on, just trying to get all the facts.
21 Q Before the inspector would go out there?
22 A Yeah. They would probably just get the
23 complaint on their desk and say, I'm going to
24 call Bill and find out what's going on. I'm
25 guessing. So I'd get that call sometimes.
Other times, they'd come out -- I
2 can remember times where they'd come out and
3 look at the apartment and go right over to our
4 office and say, well, here's what I found,
5 here's the complaint that came in, you do need
6 to get these things fixed.
7 Q So would not write an order in those situations?
8 A No. If they visited the site, they would write
9 an order, yeah. I don't remember any cases they
10 didn't.
11 Q Then at times you saw the fire inspector
12 actually issuing orders to the occupant, the
13 tenant?
14 A I need to be careful with my words here. I
15 remember orders being written in those
16 circumstances where they would write on the
17 order about cleanliness of the apartment. I
18 don't remember exact words. But where they
19 would address that the tenant needs to clean up
20 their own debris, but the order is sent to me.
21 Q Do you ever see where the order was sent to you
22 as well as the occupant? I have seen that in
23 some situations in my review of Public Housing
24 Agency fire prevention files. Do you ever see
25 that in your C of O properties?
A I don't remember it ever happening, but I'm not
2 sure I would know either. Unless they would
3 tell me they sent it to the tenant as well.
4 Q You don't recall it being a written order from
5 the fire prevention office that had your address
6 as well as the occupant address?
7 A I don't recall seeing that.
8 Q Have you had rental properties in the City of
9 St. Paul that were single family duplexes that
10 would have been covered by the other arm of code
11 enforcement, not the fire prevention office but
12 code enforcement now recently called NHPI?
13 A Only one.
14 Q How long did you own that particular property?
15 A A couple of years.
16 Q Do you remember the period of time that you
17 owned that property?
18 A Somewhere around 2002, 2003, maybe even 2001.
19 Q Did you own it at any time that Andy Dawkins was
20 the director of code enforcement and later NHPI?
21 A Yes.
22 Q About how long of a period did you own that
23 property where Mr. Dawkins was in charge of code
24 enforcement?
25 A At least one year
Q Did you observe any inconsistency between the
2 way the Fire Prevention Office handled code
3 enforcement issues on your C of O buildings and
4 the way Mr. Dawkins' office handled code
5 enforcement on your particular property that you
6 had?
7 A That property was a single family property.
8 And, to the best of my knowledge, NHPI never did
9 anything with that property. I did get -- NHPI
10 did send me some orders to correct for exterior
11 stuff on some of my C of O properties.
12 Q We'll come back to that. From what you've said,
13 it's my understanding that some of the fire
14 inspectors with the Fire Prevention Office at
15 the City of St. Paul would actually call you up
16 about issues at your rental units that were
17 covered by C of O's. Correct?
18 A Yes.
19 Q Other fire inspectors would not call you on
20 every situation but may just go out and inspect
21 on the complaint and then issue a written order?
22 A Yes.
23 Q Did you believe that you had a working
24 relationship with any of the fire prevention
25 inspectors at any time that you held C of O
buildings in the City of St. Paul?
2 A Can you define working relationship?
3 Q Well, that's what I was wondering, if you would
4 be able to understand what that meant. If you
5 don't, let me just try to define it in my way
6 and then you can tell me if you think that there
7 is something else that needs to be added.
8 Did you feel that the inspectors
9 that would call you and try to find out what was
10 going on at the property -- do you feel that
11 that was a fair way for the inspector to handle
12 code enforcement issues on your properties?
13 A Yes.
14 Q Why would you as a landlord want to get a call
15 from an inspector? So that you could give your
16 side of the situation or story?
17 A Well, I think it helps the inspector hear both
18 sides. So in those instances where the
19 inspector would call and say what's going on
20 here, I just got a complaint from the tenant.
21 I'd say, well, the issue is, from my vantage
22 point, they're three months behind on their rent
23 and their kid is dealing drugs or something.
24 But I'd tell them my side. And then the
25 inspector still proceeded with the investigation
per their request.
2 Q So there the inspector got the complaint and saw
3 at least in some format the actual basis for the
4 complaint, and then made contact with you, and
5 then went out and did the investigation to
6 hopefully get an impartial view of actually what
7 is going on to make a determination?
8 A Correct.
9 Q But you didn't see that in every situation with
10 the Fire Prevention Office?
11 A Correct.
12 Q Is there any percentage that you could apply to
13 your experience as to how many times you would
14 get calls versus how many times you'd just get a
15 written order, or can't you make that?
16 A I have no idea. It depended more on who the
17 fire inspector was, I think.
18 Q With the fire inspectors that would call you,
19 did you think that that could qualify as at
20 least some type of a working relationship where
21 they were trying to work with you and work
22 potentially with the tenant too in a fair
23 manner?
24 A Yes.
25 Q You sold your properties that you had in the
City of St. Paul. Do you have any currently
2 over there?
3 A Just those two, that small six-plex on the west
4 side and then managing that one on White Bear
5 Avenue.
6 Q Why did you downsize your rental portfolio of
7 residential properties in the City of
8 St. Paul -- which I believe were all class C
9 properties. Correct?
10 A Correct.
11 Q Tell me why you downsized.
12 A The primary reason is because my brother and I
13 decided to part ways. When we decided to part
14 ways, I needed to raise capital to buy him off,
15 to pay his share. When you look at the assets,
16 I decided to exit out of St. Paul because I'm
17 nervous of the whole city. I think they're a
18 little crazy over there these days.
19 Q There were at least a couple factors. One was
20 you and your brother were no longer going to be
21 in partnership together. Correct?
22 A Well, I had to sell property due to that. And
23 the choice of which property was due to which
24 city is the reasonable city to work in.
25 Q Okay. So you could have sold properties in the
City of Minneapolis in order to buy out your
2 brother's percentage of the business. Correct?
3 A Correct.
4 Q But you're saying that you sold the properties
5 in St. Paul because the way that the city deals
6 with rental property owners makes you nervous?
7 A Primarily, yes.
8 Q Tell me what the basis is for your belief
9 that -- or your nervousness about the City of
10 St. Paul.
11 A It's all the efforts that's been going on with
12 NHPI. If I may refer you to this letter that I
13 sent to Randy Kelly back on June 30.
14 MR. SHOEMAKER: Let's go off the
15 record and I'll make copies. Is that okay?
16 MS. SISK: Absolutely.
17 (Brief recess, 11:05 a.m.)
18 (Deposition Exhibit Nos. 1 & 2 were
19 marked for identification.)
20 Q (Continuing by Mr. Shoemaker) What we have done
21 here is marked as Cullen Exhibit 1 the three
22 pages that you had. I guess you could describe
23 generally what they are, Bill.
24 A These are just notes that I used to carry when I
25 would give community presentations on being a
landlord.
2 Q My understanding is you were president of SPARL
3 for a period of time?
4 A Yes, for three years.
5 Q St. Paul Association for Responsible Landlords
6 is what SPARL refers to?
7 A That is correct.
8 MR. SHOEMAKER: Then we have marked
9 as Exhibit 2 a series of 13 pages, 1 through
10 page 13. It looks like they are not numbered.
11 Is that what you have, Cheri?
12 MS. SISK: Yes, it is.
13 Q (Continuing by Mr. Shoemaker) The first page
14 with the heading SPARL, "For Immediate Release
15 to the Press, Housing Choise Voucher cuts are
16 irresponsible." And it looks like there's a
17 series of SPARL letters, if you will, followed
18 by a number of Cullen Homes, Inc. letters. Is
19 that correct?
20 A Yes.
21 Q I will let you take a look at the exhibit, if
22 you need to. I want to make sure we will stay
23 in the order of the pages. When we refer to
24 them, we will say what page number of the
25 exhibit so that we'll have an accurate record.

68
1 Let's go back to the question that
2 was before you. Do you have the question in
3 mind?
4 A As president of SPARL, I saw a lot of complaints
5 coming into SPARL with regard to the behavior of
6 the city. But I think that the -- I think what
7 brought it all to light to me, as reflected in
8 this letter which is the last letter in this
9 stack of exhibits here. It's addressed to Mayor
10 Randy Kelly.
11 Q That would be the last page of Cullen Exhibit 2?
12 A The last two pages. It's in regard to a
13 correction order that I personally received
14 about tall grass.
15 Q What was the date of your letter to the city
16 officials?
17 A The 30th of June, 2005.
18 Q And you were addressing this to Mayor Randy
19 Kelly and also some councilmember?
20 A Yes. Marcia Moermond and Andy Dawkins are on
21 there as well.
22 Q Summarize for me what your concern was for the
23 basis of you writing to them.
24 A I felt that the entire correction order was mis-
25 handled. And I sent a note about what I thought

69
1 were just very odd behaviors of the city with
2 this correction order. All it was was really
3 confirming for me what many had been saying to
4 SPARL for years. And maybe we at SPARL should
5 have listened to them better, but this just
6 confirmed it for me.
7 Q You're saying that many had made comments to
8 SPARL. You're talking about landlords that were
9 members of SPARL making comments to the
10 leadership of SPARL?
11 A Yes.
12 Q What were the complaints that you recall hearing
13 as a member of the SPARL leadership even as
14 president of the group?
15 A Well, the complaints in specificity varied some
16 but the general point was always the same:
17 Inconsistent processes and procedures and
18 unreasonable treatment. I think everything fell
19 into those two categories.
20 Q Have you got any examples that you could bring
21 to mind of what members of SPARL were concerned
22 about from a standpoint of the inconsistent
23 treatment?
24 A I think my letter kind of sums it up: Not
25 reasonable time for service and mailing, not

70
1 reasonable time to fix a violation, where do
2 they actually send the correction orders to and
3 who are they sending it to. As well as -- I
4 think what disturbs me the most was the
5 legislative hearing and the lack of a true
6 judicial oversight.
7 Q I notice that on the second page there of your
8 March 2nd, 2007 letter to Mayor Kelly that you
9 raise an issue about -- your question, I should
10 say, to the city as to whether or not the
11 legislative hearing officer was an advocate for
12 the city or a nonpartial referee. Is that a
13 fair statement of what you were concerned about
14 there?
15 A Before I answer your question, let me clarify.
16 It does say March 2nd, 2007 at the top of the
17 letter. That is because my printer slid that in
18 when I reprinted it today. The actual date of
19 the letter I believe is the accurate date at the
20 top of the letter. It's the 30th of June, 2005.
21 So that's my printer inserting that, and I
22 apologize. I think you'll see that same dilemma
23 on some of these other letters. That is because
24 I printed them today and I tried to mark it with
25 pen and I obviously missed one.

71
1 This hearing was amazing to me. I
2 don't remember exactly what I said to
3 Ms. Moermond. But I asked her about if she felt
4 that mailing something requiring -- mailing a
5 correction order and requiring it to be complied
6 with three days later was reasonable. I'm
7 trying to do this from memory. It's all
8 recorded. I would like to view the recording
9 again. My recollection is she said she felt it
10 wasn't reasonable. I asked her, then you're the
11 Hearing Officer, why do you let the city do
12 this. And her response was something along the
13 lines of, well, I can't tell the city what to
14 do. Again, I'm paraphrasing. But that's my
15 recollection of the meeting.
16 Q That would have been the basis for your concern
17 that you then set out in your letter to Mayor
18 Kelly of June 30, 2005?
19 A Well, it's that and the other issues. But yes.
20 These are all the same things that SPARL office
21 had heard from many people, including your
22 clients.
23 Q The comments that you heard from your members at
24 SPARL about the hearing process that you're
25 referring to here, which I believe is the

72
1 legislative hearing set up under the legislative
2 code of the City of St. Paul that property
3 owners can utilize for appeals of correction
4 orders, summary abatements, whatever. Correct?
5 A I don't know how it's set up, John. This is
6 where you end up if you appeal any correction
7 order. You end up in front of Marcia Moermond
8 and that body.
9 Q Is it your understanding that she is a member of
10 the city council research staff as well?
11 A I don't know. I know that she seems to report
12 her information back to the city council at the
13 city council hearings.
14 Q What type of response did you get from the city
15 to your question here concerning the legislative
16 hearing officer as either an advocate for the
17 city or a nonpartial referee?
18 A You know, I did get a written response from
19 Mr. Dawkins as well as from Ms. Moermond. And I
20 have been unable to locate the written response
21 from Ms. Moermond.
22 (Deposition Exhibit No. 3 was
23 marked for identification.)
24 Q I'm going to show you what has been marked as
25 Exhibit 3. Just take a look at that and see if

73
1 you can identify that letter from Mr. Dawkins to
2 you.
3 A Yes, I recognize this.
4 Q Can I turn your attention to the second page,
5 number 5 of Exhibit 3? It appears there's a
6 reference there by Mr. Dawkins to your question
7 about the hearing officer, as to whether she was
8 an advocate for the city or a nonpartial
9 referee. And I see that Mr. Dawkins there was
10 deferring this for Ms. Moermond to answer it.
11 She was being copied on the letter. You're
12 saying that Ms. Moermond did respond to you by
13 way of letter to this issue?
14 A Correct.
15 Q Do you remember generally what her response was?
16 I know you said you haven't been able to locate
17 that letter, but do you remember generally what
18 the response was from Ms. Moermond?
19 A Unfortunately, I don't. I apologize for that.
20 I remember being unhappy.
21 Q With the response?
22 A Yes.
23 Q Or with the substance of the response?
24 A The substance, no. I will be happy with anyone
25 responding to my request. I requested that they

74
1 respond. But the substance -- I remember being
2 unhappy with the substance. I don't recall the
3 content.
4 John, what happened here is I moved
5 out of my office over there on White Bear
6 Avenue. I'm confident that it's in a box
7 somewhere between here and White Bear Avenue. I
8 will continue to look for it. When I find it, I
9 will send it to counsel.
10 Q We will make sure we get a copy to Cheri as well
11 and I will get a copy to Matt.
12 Let's go back to this general topic
13 of your concern related to the City of St. Paul
14 as being a basis for selling a number of your
15 rental properties in the city. You've indicated
16 that this letter marked Cullen Exhibit 2, the
17 last two pages of that exhibit, the letter to
18 Mayor Kelly, summarized the basis for your
19 concerns. Can you tell me in number one there
20 that relates to service and mailing, what was
21 the concern there? Was it related to not
22 receiving notices in a timely fashion so that
23 you and other landlords could take appropriate
24 action by deadlines?
25 A Absolutely. If I remember, Andy said mail takes

75
1 one day.
2 Q You're talking about Exhibit 3, Mr. Dawkins'
3 response to you?
4 A Yes. He responded saying it's been my
5 experience that almost all mail postmarked in
6 St. Paul and addresses to St. Paul is delivered
7 in 24 hours. So I think 24 hours is a
8 reasonable time to allow for mail delivery.
9 It's ridiculous, I think. It's just ridiculous.
10 Q What is ridiculous?
11 A One day for mailing? Even within the City of
12 St. Paul -- and maybe that does happen
13 occasionally. But my understanding is that even
14 civil law, civil procedure -- I wrote it in
15 here -- Section 6.0.5 states that you give three
16 days. And yet the City of St. Paul is giving me
17 one. The whole point on a correction order is
18 to try and get me to correct. If I am receiving
19 this letter as I did -- I received it one day
20 after the due date -- there's no way for me to
21 comply.
22 Q What concerns does that raise for you as a
23 property owner who has rental properties when
24 there's such a short mailing period that
25 Mr. Dawkins is talking about and you're not

76
1 getting the order until after the deadline? Is
2 it your understanding that that triggers certain
3 additional costs for you, fees for you?
4 A Oh, yeah. If I hadn't complied -- I mean, the
5 compliance was mow the lawn. During this period
6 of time, it was a very rainy period. It would
7 have been nice to have never been noticed for a
8 lawn mowing. But we had sunshine between the
9 period, so I got the lawn mowed. So I actually
10 complied. But had I not complied, then you
11 start getting into excessive consumption. You
12 start getting into all kinds of problems.
13 Q The excessive consumption is the ordinance in
14 the City of St. Paul whereby if a property owner
15 doesn't comply by the deadline set by the code
16 inspector, that there can be a triggering of
17 excessive consumption fees to the property
18 owner?
19 A Yes. The fees are frightening. But the next
20 step of actually shutting down your property is
21 what is really damaging.
22 Q Tell me about how you believe that's triggered
23 based upon, let's say, not getting a mailing in
24 time under this concern that you had.
25 A Well, as you -- if you start getting many

77
1 correction orders and you do not comply or are
2 unable to comply, the city takes pretty
3 aggressive action against you. It's aggressive
4 enough where they shut down the building. Had
5 the city shut down my building, it would have
6 bankrupt me. It would have turned everything
7 upside down.
8 Q From the standpoint of the rental properties in
9 the City of St. Paul, is it your understanding
10 that the single family duplexes are required
11 under city ordinance to have rental
12 registrations filed by the owner with the city?
13 A It is.
14 Q With the certificate of occupancy buildings,
15 they don't have a similar rental registration
16 system, do they?
17 A No, the certificate of occupancy.
18 Q Right. Which acts as a rental certificate.
19 Correct?
20 A Correct.
21 Q With your property that was a single family
22 property, was that registered by you with the
23 rental registration office under Mr. Dawkins?
24 A It was.
25 Q So your concern about being shut down, would it

78
1 relate only to your single family duplex -- or
2 your single family property that was registered
3 in the rental registration program?
4 A No. But by the time this all happened, this
5 letter, I didn't even own that single family
6 anymore. The reason I owned that is I bought it
7 for my maintenance man and his family. They
8 wanted to have their own home. So I found a
9 home and I bought it for them and I rented it to
10 them while he worked for me. Then after he
11 left, I sold it to him. That's the only reason
12 I even had that property. It was very specific.
13 After I leased it to him, I never
14 went back in the house again because I ended up
15 selling it to him. So I'm talking about just
16 the general movement of the city. Where is the
17 city going? What's the city going to do next?
18 There's a letter in here that I sent to Mayor
19 Chris Coleman as well right when he first got
20 elected. I never heard a response.
21 Q Can we have you identify that, please?
22 A It looks like page 2.
23 Q Of Exhibit 2?
24 A Of Exhibit 2, yes.
25 Q So you sent a letter to Mayor Elect Chris

79
1 Coleman. Do you remember what date that was
2 sent to him?
3 A I don't recall a date. On my computer, the file
4 was saved on the 5th of December, '05.
5 Q That's what you wrote at the top right-hand
6 corner of this page, that information?
7 A Yes.
8 Q Summarize for me what you were attempting to
9 communicate to Mayor Elect Chris Coleman at the
10 time you wrote this letter.
11 A We thanked him for attending our monthly
12 meeting. I sent him -- all I wanted to achieve
13 out of this letter was to say NHPI is a problem.
14 And it's my opinion that St. Paul's Fire
15 Department is not. I have a statement in here
16 that I know many property owners that believe
17 St. Paul Fire Department is the most
18 professional inspections division in the metro
19 area and NHPI is the least professional.
20 What we were concerned about is who
21 is going to become the manager? Who is going to
22 lead the whole thing, and what principals and
23 priorities will they take? Will they adopt NHPI
24 or will they adopt the fire department's?
25 Q Your concern related to some type of a

80
1 centralizing of the code enforcement across the
2 city?
3 A Yes. He was already working -- he already
4 communicated he planned on merging together fire
5 and NHPI and LIEP, which they have done already
6 under Bob Kessler.
7 Q So you were concerned and members were concerned
8 that the city and the mayor here adopt the
9 system that you had believed had been more
10 successful in dealing with the issues you had,
11 and that was this fire prevention system.
12 Correct?
13 A Well, I'm worried about the word successful.
14 That's the definition. I'd say professional. I
15 think that the fire department was, for the most
16 part, a very professional organization.
17 Perfect? No. But I thought they were
18 professional. And NHPI, I have never seen an
19 organization as unprofessional as they are.
20 Q Give me some basis for your opinion that you
21 have just stated. Can you identify anything in
22 particular that would be a foundation for
23 reaching that opinion?
24 A I'd refer you again to that letter I sent to
25 Mayor Kelly, which summarized not only the

81
1 problem I had with them but I think it
2 summarizes the problem that most everybody --
3 this summarizes complaints that had come into
4 the SPARL office for years.
5 Q Had you received complaints by members of the
6 St. Paul Association of Responsible Landlords
7 that they were not receiving correction notices
8 in a timely manner in order to meet the
9 deadlines within the notices?
10 A Oh, yes.
11 Q How frequent, if it was frequent, did you
12 receive those kind of complaints?
13 A I don't know, John. I don't know. I don't
14 answer the phone myself. There were staff that
15 answered the phone, but I know we received those
16 calls frequently.
17 Q How often was SPARL having meetings where
18 members could come and attend and presentations
19 would be made and discussions would be had?
20 A Monthly.
21 Q These issues that you have raised in your letter
22 here back in June of 2005 to Mayor Kelly, were
23 those the type of issues that were being
24 addressed at the meetings of your members?
25 A The purpose of those meetings are, as we call

82
1 it, educational. So we would bring in a speaker
2 and they might be talking about anything from
3 understanding your furnace to lead-based paint
4 to abatement to dealing with the city. So the
5 purpose was not to talk about political or
6 topical issues. It was educational matters.
7 We did bring in both Randy Kelly,
8 Chris Coleman, and Jay Benenav, Pat Fish. There
9 have been many that have come in -- Andy Dawkins
10 as well.
11 Q Let me focus you on a little bit different topic
12 here. I want to talk to you about costs to low
13 income landlords again that you mentioned in a
14 number of responses to my questions.
15 Generally, do you have a concern,
16 as a low income landlord and manager of low
17 income property, that you try to keep your costs
18 down in order to not have to raise rents?
19 A Yeah, the margins are thin.
20 Q How do you attempt to keep your costs of
21 materials down? For example, do you try to buy
22 in bulk if you can?
23 A Sure.
24 Q In other words, if you can get a better deal on
25 light bulbs, for example, would you try to buy a

83
1 larger volume of light bulbs?
2 A Yes.
3 Q Same would go for sheetrock that you may need?
4 A Yes.
5 Q What other types of materials would you try to
6 buy in bulk in order to keep your costs of
7 materials down?
8 A Anything I can store. I bought a semi load of
9 kitchen cabinets, and I just a few days ago
10 bought over 200 doorknobs. If I find a good
11 value, I'll buy it.
12 Q Do you believe that that's essential in order to
13 survive over the long-term as a low income
14 landlord?
15 A Essential. I think cost containment is
16 essential. Bulk purchasing I think is a good
17 way to do it.
18 Q If your costs go up, which would include, let's
19 say, energy costs that maybe you have to pay on
20 a certain number of your rental properties, has
21 that in your experience placed pressure on you
22 having to raise rents?
23 A It's placed a lot of pressure on the financials.
24 Over the past few years, there hasn't been a
25 market that allows raising of rents.

84
1 Q So then your profit margins have been squeezed.
2 Correct?
3 A Very, very squeezed.
4 Q Let's talk a little bit about renovations of
5 properties. You mentioned that you had a
6 significant experience in purchasing what you
7 called distressed properties and then renovating
8 them in order to either sell them or keep them
9 in your portfolio. Correct?
10 A Yes.
11 Q Are you familiar with the phrase used by the
12 City of St. Paul's license inspection
13 environmental protection office called code
14 compliance inspections?
15 A I am.
16 Q What is the basis for you understanding what
17 code compliance inspections mean within the LIEP
18 office?
19 A I have had a few buildings go through code
20 compliance.
21 Q What kind of buildings did you have that had to
22 go through code compliance? Were these single
23 family duplexes?
24 A Only, yes.
25 Q Are you familiar with the term team inspection

85
1 used by fire prevention?
2 A I am. And you know what? I did have a team
3 inspection as well, yes.
4 Q Is it your understanding that the LIEP's code
5 compliance inspection is fairly similar to fire
6 prevention's team inspection from a standpoint
7 that they bring experts out that are employed by
8 the City of St. Paul and they do a comprehensive
9 inspection of the property?
10 A Let me just talk through what I'm struggling
11 with here. I have experienced both. I have
12 seen the team inspection with the fire
13 department. I have walked through with the
14 firemen while they were doing the team
15 inspection.
16 I have never seen -- I don't think
17 I have ever walked through with one of the LIEP
18 inspectors as they do the code compliance
19 inspections. So I don't really know. That's
20 kind of a black box to me. When I'm getting
21 ready to buy a property, I call them up and I
22 say -- I have never had a code compliance put on
23 me. I have only bought properties that were in
24 code compliance or required it. So I contacted
25 the city and said send me what's required. And

86
1 then it becomes an issue of negotiating value.
2 Q In other words, with the LIEP's code compliance
3 inspection process, you're saying that you've
4 got properties where the city LIEP office had
5 already determined that that property needed a
6 code compliance inspection?
7 A Yes.
8 Q And may have already had the inspection
9 completed?
10 A In fact, I insist on it. I don't want to buy it
11 until I know what the city is requiring.
12 Q When you say you insist on it, what do you
13 insist on?
14 A As a buyer, I insist that the inspection is done
15 so I have the list of work orders before I enter
16 into negotiations for the purchase of the
17 building.
18 Q But that's only triggered if you knew that the
19 city was requiring that particular property to
20 go through a LIEP code compliance inspection.
21 Correct?
22 A Yes.
23 Q It's not that when you're not purchasing
24 properties that you're requiring or demanding
25 every property you purchase have a code

87
1 compliance inspection?
2 A Well, no. That's insane.
3 Q Why would that be insane?
4 A Well, the expense is out of control on those
5 things. It's very expensive to do a code
6 compliance.
7 Q How many have you gone through with the LIEP
8 office, do you believe?
9 A I'm scared to count. More than a few.
10 Q What has been the range that you have had to pay
11 for labor, materials, with contractors in order
12 to get a certification by the LIEP office that
13 you have complied with their code compliance
14 inspection requirements?
15 A Well, if it's a code compliance building, I just
16 figure it's going to cost me at least $40,000.
17 Again, it depends on what's written up. But you
18 almost always say electric and plumbing and heat
19 is often. But once you start opening up walls
20 with the electric and plumbing, and then putting
21 it all back together, when I look at those
22 buildings, I immediately deduct about $40,000.
23 I'd say that's what my costs are going to be.
24 Q Have you had lower costs where you've had a code
25 compliance certification process than the

88
1 $40,000 average?
2 A Not that I recall.
3 Q Have you had any code compliances where you had
4 costs that were in excess of $40,000 in order to
5 get the certification from LIEP on the property?
6 A Do you end up on a code compliance on a triplex?
7 Do you know?
8 Q My understanding is that single family duplexes
9 are covered by the LIEP code compliance
10 certification and that the team inspection under
11 the C of O covers the larger properties, but I
12 can't testify to that. That's my understanding
13 from looking at the documents. But if you don't
14 know, that's fine.
15 MR. SHOEMAKER: Let the record
16 reflect Steven Johnson has appeared at the
17 deposition.
18 Q (Continuing by Mr. Shoemaker) Let me ask you
19 this. When you've gone through the code
20 compliance inspection process based on your
21 experience, have you sold any of those
22 properties in the City of St. Paul?
23 A Yes.
24 Q How many percentage-wise of your properties that
25 you sold, that have code compliances, did you

89
1 get more -- a higher price for the property that
2 had the code compliance?
3 A Than if it hadn't been done?
4 Q Than if it hadn't been done, correct.
5 A I'd have to go back and look. The problem with
6 code compliances is generally stuff in the
7 walls. It's electric. It's plumbing. It's
8 heat. And that doesn't -- while it should add
9 value to a home, it doesn't. If an individual
10 comes in and they see a jazzy new kitchen, they
11 are excited and there's value there. But if
12 there is new copper in the walls, the value
13 doesn't change. So my feeling is that it
14 doesn't add economic value to the building. It
15 may, especially in the case of electric, add
16 some safety. But I don't think it adds much
17 value at all.
18 Q And that's based upon your experience as a
19 realtor as well as buying and selling as an
20 investor?
21 A Yes.
22 Q If you were going to sell to someone who is a
23 sophisticated real estate investor and the
24 investor asks you has this building had any
25 mandatory updates or mandatory renovations,

90
1 something that would be similar to a code
2 compliance, would you believe that that would
3 allow you to have a little higher price for a
4 building that had a code compliance?
5 A Never had such a question. I have had does it
6 have a certificate of occupancy, and that's a
7 yes or no. Does it have rental registration.
8 Anyone can register. I have never had a
9 question about a mandatory improvement.
10 Q So you haven't had someone that's tried to buy
11 one of the properties, that was a single family
12 or duplex that was distressed where you had
13 renovated it, and this party that was interested
14 in purchasing your property would have asked you
15 has it had a code compliance through the LIEP
16 office. That question hasn't come up?
17 A Never, never.
18 Q Do you know why that would have been the case?
19 A Again, I don't think that buyers even realize
20 it. I don't think buyers -- it's pipes in the
21 walls. It's electric in the walls. That's what
22 is really affected by the code compliance cost.
23 Certainly there may be fix a toilet or a sink,
24 but that's -- we would have done that anyway in
25 the process of a rehabilitation. The part that

91
1 gets expensive is when I have to rip apart my
2 walls and put in new electric and rip apart my
3 ceilings and put in new electric.
4 Q You've been through this process a number of
5 times as you indicated. Do you believe that the
6 properties that had to go through the code
7 compliance needed to have new electric in all
8 the cases that you had code compliances on?
9 A In all, no, no.
10 Q Have your members at SPARL raised issues related
11 to the code compliances as being unnecessary
12 from a standpoint of expense in their
13 properties?
14 A Certainly.
15 Q What kind of concerns have been raised by your
16 members to yourself and to SPARL about code
17 compliances as we have been talking about them
18 under the LIEP program?
19 A Again, I go back to the earlier statement of a
20 consistent process and procedure and a
21 reasonableness. Lots of stories came into the
22 SPARL office of buildings being condemned due to
23 animal infestation, rodent infestation, or
24 tenant debris. Neither of those really in my
25 mind have anything to do with the quality of the

92
1 building itself. Rodents is a big deal. I'm
2 not downplaying that. But you call a pest
3 company and they get rid of the rodents and
4 maybe you need to seal up the exterior of it.
5 But it's not a reason to require an updated
6 electric, updated plumbing, updated heating.
7 It's nonsensical. And that's the kind of stuff.
8 Again, consistent processes and procedures and
9 the reasonableness.
10 Q Have you ever learned that the City of
11 St. Paul's Public Housing Agency owns a
12 considerable number of single family rental
13 properties in the city?
14 A I'm aware of that.
15 Q You're aware of that? You're also aware that
16 the PHA in the City of St. Paul owns quite a few
17 family townhome type developments that are
18 rental properties as well?
19 A Yeah, I'm aware -- those are large complexes you
20 mean?
21 Q Yeah. You understand that?
22 A I'm aware, yes.
23 Q Are you aware that the PHA also owns a number of
24 highrise rental properties in the city?
25 A Yes.

93
1 Q Have you ever heard of a public housing agency
2 single family home having gone through a code
3 compliance with the LIEP office?
4 A No.
5 Q How many situations do you know of where low
6 income landlords have had to comply with a LIEP
7 code compliance inspection certification
8 process?
9 A You know what? The process goes like this,
10 John. People will call SPARL and say, here's
11 what is going on, can you help? Sometimes in
12 some of those cases the SPARL office would give
13 the individual my phone number and then they'd
14 call me. But those were rare. So occasionally
15 I'd get phone calls from people that would
16 outline horrendous stories of tenant behavior
17 and suddenly the building is boarded up. But I
18 don't have a count.
19 Q How much extra would you pay as a real estate
20 investor for a single family home in the City of
21 St. Paul that had been through a code compliance
22 inspection and certification? Is there a way
23 for you to answer that?
24 A It's a meaningless datapoint to me. There is
25 value to having a 100 amp electric service over

94
1 a 30 amp electric service. There's some value
2 there. But if someone told me it just went
3 through code compliance, it's meaningless to me
4 as an investor.
5 Q What type of user would be able to use the 100
6 amp service versus the 30 amp service?
7 A Many households today use more than a 30 amp
8 electric service.
9 Q Because you have all the electronics that they
10 have plugged into their sockets?
11 A Yes.
12 Q From your understanding, that's why 100 amp
13 service is a standard for new homes?
14 A I don't know if it's standard. But I believe
15 the answer to that question is yes.
16 Q Let's go back to any other examples that you may
17 have of inconsistency between the way that fire
18 prevention deals with property owners compared
19 to the way that NHPI deals with property owners.
20 Would you have to go back to your letter to
21 Mayor Kelly of June of 2005 to highlight more of
22 the examples or do you have something in
23 addition to that?
24 A Again, I think the letter sums it up about
25 giving us time to rectify the situation.

95
1 Actually, sending us a notice to an address that
2 we tell them to send the notice through the
3 rental registration.
4 Q Let me stop you right there. What has been your
5 concern about yourself as a property owner as
6 well, as other property owners, not getting
7 notices because they have been sent to either an
8 old address or the wrong address? Somehow the
9 notice never gets delivered to them?
10 A Again, most of my buildings are large. Right?
11 I have never had that problem with the fire
12 department. With C of O, they've always sent it
13 where I asked them to, which is my P.O. box.
14 With NHPI, I have had two notices from them.
15 Neither of them were sent to my P.O. box in the
16 whole time that I have been with them. Neither
17 were sent to my P.O. box. That's what was given
18 on my rental registration and it's what the fire
19 department has.
20 Q We have got a couple situations here where
21 Plaintiffs have claimed that they did not
22 receive notices sent by NHPI because they were
23 sent to old addresses. Have you heard that from
24 your members?
25 A Yes.

96
1 Q How often have you heard from your members of
2 your SPARL group that NHPI was using outdated
3 addresses for their mailings on any kind of
4 notices?
5 A We just didn't keep count, John. I just don't
6 know but the calls came in.
7 Q But it was significant enough to you in June of
8 '05 that you would place it as an item of
9 concern to you in your letter to the Mayor.
10 Correct?
11 A Yes.
12 Q What were you concerned about in item 4 of page
13 2 of the last letter attached to Exhibit 2
14 related to the excessive consumption fine being
15 triggered by a certain number of inspections?
16 A Give me a moment. John, now that I read what I
17 wrote, I ask you to restate the question.
18 Q What were you concerned about that caused you to
19 add this item 4 on page 2 of your letter to
20 Mayor Kelly and to Mr. Dawkins with a CC as it
21 related to excessive consumption fines?
22 A Excessive consumption ultimately leads to
23 license revocation and fines. So I wanted to
24 know -- at the hearing I asked if this would
25 count towards my excessive consumption, and

97
1 that's the reason why I appealed it. And the
2 staff there said it wouldn't count towards my
3 excessive consumption. But that wasn't what I
4 was hearing through the SPARL office. And that
5 any type of correction order being sent out did
6 count. I was just asking the question what is
7 the policy.
8 Q Let me ask you to focus on this Section 8 rental
9 history that you have. You said you cut back
10 the number of Section 8 rental units you had
11 because there was a reduction in the rental
12 payments that were coming from the government in
13 about 2004. You said you sold a building
14 because of that reduction in payment assistance?
15 A No, no. In 2004, Public Housing announced a
16 7 percent cut in the amount of rent that they'd
17 pay towards vouchers. Now, if you remember back
18 to 2004, it couldn't have been a worse time.
19 Vacancy rates were skyrocketing. Landlords were
20 having a real tough time paying their bills. So
21 PHA then comes out and cuts everybody's rent by
22 7 percent. I did a calculation on that. And I
23 calculated it would cost me almost $18,000 a
24 year. About $1,500 a month was that 7 percent
25 cut.

98
1 Q For the number of units you had that were in the
2 Section 8 program?
3 A That's right. And $18,000 a year, that's almost
4 a staff member for me. So I went and I spoke at
5 a hearing that they had. I think it was at a
6 public housing highrise just north of 94 in the
7 Lexington area, and we also at SPARL issued the
8 press release that was included in this
9 Exhibit 2.
10 Q What page of Exhibit 2 was that press release?
11 A Actually, it's the first page.
12 Q Can you point to the concern that SPARL and
13 members had with regard to what the effect of
14 the cut was going to be on the landlords?
15 A Well, our press release as the gal from PHA
16 said -- I've forgotten her name. It's Rita. As
17 Rita said at PHA, the press release makes in
18 some degrees a political statement as well.
19 Here we have the City of St. Paul who is giving
20 significant subsidies in the Housing 5000
21 program to build our competition at the same
22 time that they were cutting revenue into the
23 public housing program. So we had -- us private
24 landlords were seeing greater competition at the
25 same time that the government was cutting their

99
1 payment to us, and that's what we were trying to
2 say in this press release.
3 Q Are you familiar with the Housing 5000 program
4 over the last four, five years?
5 A I am.
6 Q Have you followed the volume of dollars that
7 have been put into that program?
8 A I have.
9 Q Is it fair to say that there's been hundreds of
10 millions of dollars put into that program?
11 A Through different government subsidies I believe
12 the number is over $300 million.
13 Q Do you know of any comparable type monies that
14 have been available for the low income private
15 landlords in order to comply with mandatory code
16 compliances through the LIEP office?
17 A I'm unaware of any.
18 Q Do you believe that you would be aware of any
19 type of source of monies that would be available
20 to private landlords to meet code compliance
21 inspection costs as a member of SPARL and as a
22 president of SPARL?
23 A I think they would inform us.
24 Q You mentioned that there was a building of
25 competition to the private low income landlord

100
1 base. Describe that for me a little more, would
2 you?
3 A With the Housing 5000.
4 Q Is that what it was?
5 A Primarily, yeah. They're adding 5000 housing
6 units to the market at the same time that we
7 were seeing a decline in demand for the product.
8 Q In other words, a decline in the number of
9 tenants that were looking for rental properties?
10 A Yes.
11 Q So what was the effect that you thought would
12 follow from that?
13 A I think it's rather predictable that what's
14 going to follow from it is first you're going to
15 see a decline in rent, which is what we have
16 generally seen. It's been in the form of either
17 rent decreases or an increase in concessions to
18 try and attract tenants. So it's an increase in
19 bonuses to attract tenants.
20 I wrote a letter to Mayor Kelly on
21 this matter a long time ago, and it's not in my
22 stack and I don't know why. So I will send that
23 to counsel later.
24 But in that letter to him I also
25 argued that it would lead to an increase in

101
1 vacant housing. And I believe that to be the
2 case as well. If you have an oversupply of
3 housing given the demand, you start getting
4 vacant homes.
5 Q Have you followed the number of vacant housing
6 units officially registered with the city over
7 the last four, five years?
8 A From some distance I have.
9 Q Is it your general understanding that the number
10 of vacant buildings is up substantially over the
11 last couple of years?
12 A Yes.
13 Q Have you heard any projections as to where city
14 officials or employees think the number of
15 vacant buildings will go in the next year or
16 two?
17 A I had lunch with Bob Kessler a few months ago,
18 and he was predicting that it would get up to
19 around 1600.
20 Q Within what period of time?
21 A Next year.
22 Q Do you believe that the number of vacant
23 buildings in the City of St. Paul has any
24 correlation to the stricter code enforcement
25 standard and resulting higher costs that were

102
1 implemented and resulted during Mayor Kelly and
2 Andy Dawkins' tenure?
3 A I think it's all coupled together. Yes, I think
4 it's one of the attributes.
5 Q If there is a higher code enforcement standard
6 for a landlord such as yourself, does that mean
7 necessarily that you're going to have higher
8 costs?
9 A Yes.
10 Q How does that then reflect in your decision
11 whether or not to provide low income housing?
12 A Well, that's why I'm not in St. Paul anymore.
13 Q Because the costs went up because of the
14 stricter code enforcement?
15 A Well, the cost as well as -- yes, the cost as
16 well as just a general environment. John, if
17 every day you pick up the newspaper -- not every
18 day. But I don't think I would be exaggerating
19 to say once a week. You pick up the newspaper
20 and you read about how the city is going to
21 crush your industry. Would you want to stay in
22 that city? I mean, that is what I read.
23 That is what Kelly and Dawkins and
24 Benenav and Lantry in particular, those have
25 been saying that. To me, it's an intelligence

103
1 test. If you're going to do business, why would
2 you stay somewhere where the city is
3 specifically saying you're the problem and we
4 are going to get you.
5 Q And landlords like yourself don't believe that
6 the landlords are the problem but some other
7 group or some other individuals are the problem
8 that should be addressed?
9 A John, look, we're not perfect. I'm not perfect.
10 No other landlord I think is perfect. There is
11 no question that I have had problems in my
12 property. When you take it on overall, we need
13 help managing the tenant base that is getting
14 rougher and tougher every year. And they are
15 getting emboldened because nothing happens.
16 I will tell you a story. Fire
17 inspection, normal fire inspection every other
18 year, a fire inspector and I are walking through
19 apartments looking at apartments. One tenant
20 had the nerve to leave her drugs right out there
21 on the table. I walk in. I didn't know the
22 tenant had drugs. I said to the fireman we know
23 what that is. The fireman said, I'm here, I'm a
24 city official, we have to call the police. I
25 said, yeah, I think we should. I call on my

104
1 cell phone. I call the police. Police comes
2 over and said, that's not enough for me to care
3 and he leaves. That's not enough for me to
4 care.
5 Q So you're frustrated by that type of response by
6 certain agencies of the city?
7 A The tenants aren't going to be held accountable.
8 We are not going to have help managing the
9 tenants, but we are going to be crucified for
10 the actions of the tenants. Again, it's an
11 intelligence test to me. Why would I stay in
12 that environment?
13 Q Have other landlords made the choice to reduce
14 the number of Section 8 rental units because of
15 the cuts?
16 A At that public housing building that I was
17 referring to earlier, there were many landlords
18 talking about it. If they did or not, I don't
19 know. I am unaware of any measurement.
20 Certainly I am unaware of any problems with
21 Section 8 tenants finding landlords. I have not
22 read that that's a problem.
23 Q So you believe there is enough landlords out
24 there that actually will accept the vouchers?
25 A Yeah, I think it's temporary, John. I think

105
1 we're all still a little hungry. But as that
2 vacancy rate tightens up, you know -- over the
3 past few years, many landlords have taken
4 Section 8 that didn't take Section 8 before
5 because they've decided I need a tenant, I don't
6 want to be empty, and they took them. But now
7 that the market is tightening up, some of those
8 landlords that have better choices because they
9 are maybe in better neighborhoods, I think they
10 are going to start saying no to Section 8 and
11 where are they going to go?
12 Q Where is what going to --
13 A Where are the Section 8 tenants going to go then
14 if the landlords that entered the Section 8
15 market recently suddenly exit the market because
16 the market gets good enough that they don't need
17 it.
18 Q Let me turn your attention to any discussions
19 you had with Andy Dawkins when he was in charge
20 of code enforcement at the city about concerns
21 you had related to low income rental properties
22 that were being subjected to an increased code
23 enforcement standard. Can you recall any
24 discussions you had with him about that topic?
25 A That's a pretty specific topic, John. I have

106
1 had quite a few discussions with Andy over the
2 years, sometimes at a SPARL event, other times
3 when I've bumped into him.
4 Q Have you had discussions with Mr. Dawkins about
5 the type of tenants that were available in the
6 city for landlords?
7 A Yes.
8 Q Tell me about what you recall of any particular
9 discussion or discussions you've had with
10 Mr. Dawkins about the type of tenants available
11 in the city.
12 A A few years back, one of the leading voices in
13 the City of St. Paul with regard to going after
14 landlords was Leslie McMurray. I believe she is
15 executive director of the Payne/Phalen
16 neighborhood. I think she's still there. I'm
17 not sure. But she was very vocal about getting
18 the landlords. Her phrasing is almost that
19 strong. I contacted Leslie personally. I will
20 come back around to Andy in a minute. I
21 contacted Leslie personally and asked if we
22 could meet and talk about it and talk about how
23 we can really all work together and try to
24 improve the Payne/Phalen neighborhood.
25 She invited me to come to one of

107
1 their meetings, which I went to. But she didn't
2 give me enough time to have the discussion. So
3 we at SPARL decided to have our own discussion
4 on the matter.
5 Q You were going to hold a meeting at a certain
6 office?
7 A Yes.
8 Q Or conference room or what?
9 A We scheduled a meeting and we invited Leslie and
10 we invited Andy Dawkins and we did it at SPARL
11 in cooperation with Ruth Ann Eide of the police
12 department.
13 Q Where was that meeting held?
14 A It was at the East Side Police Department. So
15 Ruth Ann and I worked together to set the
16 meeting up. Leslie and Andy showed up. And we
17 sent letters of invitation to every landlord we
18 could identify in the Payne/Phalen neighborhood.
19 Q Do you remember when that meeting occurred?
20 A I have no idea.
21 Q Was it this last year of '06?
22 A It wasn't in '06.
23 Q It was while Mr. Dawkins was a director of code
24 enforcement?
25 A Oh, yeah. I think it might have been '04. I

108
1 have no idea. But he was director of code
2 enforcement.
3 Q He was there for a period of about the middle of
4 '02 to the end of '05. Do you believe it was
5 sometime in the middle of his tenure?
6 A The easiest way for me to identify the time is
7 to look and see when Leslie McMurray rose to
8 executive director of Payne/Phalen. I do
9 believe it was '03 or '04.
10 Q So Mr. Dawkins and Leslie -- what was her last
11 name?
12 A McMurray, I believe.
13 Q Was anyone else from the neighborhood groups
14 that were present?
15 A I think Leslie brought one gal with her, but I
16 don't remember her name.
17 Q But there were landlords that were present as
18 well?
19 A Quite a few, yes.
20 Q Tell me what the purpose again of the meeting
21 was.
22 A To talk again about what's the problem in
23 Payne/Phalen and how do we raise the whole area
24 up rather than just identify that landlords are
25 the problem, let's get the landlords.

109
1 Q Tell me how the particular meeting started. Do
2 you remember that?
3 A No, I don't. I don't remember all the details
4 of the meeting.
5 Q What do you remember about the meeting?
6 A We had a discussion. Leslie's opinion was
7 clear. If landlords would only screen better
8 and quit renting to these problem tenants, that
9 Payne/Phalen would be better. We had a
10 discussion then about -- I asked the landlords
11 in the room. I said, how many of you have
12 turned down an executive at 3M to rent to a low
13 income housing member? And there was laughter
14 in the room. I said, let's talk about who
15 applies in your buildings. Let's talk about
16 what their attributes are. Let's talk about
17 what their credit score is and what their
18 criminal history is. We went through a
19 discussion about how it's hard to attract an
20 executive from 3M into the Payne/Phalen
21 neighborhood. I made the point and it's on this
22 exhibit because you photocopied it.
23 Q Exhibit 1?
24 A Exhibit 1. If you look right on the front page
25 of it, I drew something to this affect on the

110
1 board. I wish I remembered exactly what it was.
2 But if you think of quality of tenants, I will
3 let you use your imagination as to what that
4 means. But the best tenants are the ones with
5 the most options, with the most income, with the
6 best credit, with the least criminal, et cetera.
7 They will rise to the top of this box. And the
8 ones that have the least credit and maybe a
9 criminal record, et cetera, will probably be at
10 the bottom.
11 My point was that the best tenants
12 are starting to leave our market and go off and
13 purchase their own home. And then the next best
14 are now going to go into Housing 5000. Why not?
15 They are subsidized. They're brand new.
16 They're in the same areas.
17 Q The box you're referring to on Exhibit 1, page
18 1, is the box in the lower right-hand corner
19 just above the exhibit sticker?
20 A Yes.
21 Q Okay. Continue.
22 A The next down for the next set of tenants will
23 go to the better neighborhoods. I wrote, great
24 hoods, but better neighborhoods. Then below
25 that, PHA and subsidized. Why not? You can go

111
1 to PHA. Their townhomes have been remodeled in
2 the past few years. And you can go there and
3 live at an affordable rate.
4 My argument was that the market
5 rate landlord, especially in the area of
6 Payne/Phalen which I have no buildings there,
7 but I said the market rate landlords in
8 Payne/Phalen are getting the applicants from the
9 worse tenants, the worse -- tenants with the
10 worst historical behavioral measurements.
11 Q In other words, the tenants with the poorer
12 credit scores. Correct?
13 A Yes.
14 Q Tenants that have maybe issues in their
15 background where they may have been convicted of
16 a crime and completed their sentence and now
17 they're out but they've got this criminal
18 history?
19 A Yes.
20 Q What other type of tenants?
21 A Lower income.
22 Q Lower income?
23 A As well as maybe a shoddy or spotty rental
24 history.
25 Q So if they had an eviction, that could be on

112
1 their history. Correct?
2 A I think an eviction would be. There's
3 expungement. But yes.
4 Q So it's that group of tenants that you were
5 saying were what was left for the market rate
6 landlords?
7 A Yeah. The argument I was making is if you put
8 yourself in this box, I think those are the
9 decisions that people are making. Again, if
10 they can purchase, they have gone off and
11 purchased. Why not go to the New Housing 5000?
12 Why not go to the better neighborhoods? Why not
13 go to the lower cost buildings? Then at the end
14 you're stuck with the market rate buildings.
15 Q And the market rate tenants that you've
16 described. Correct?
17 A Yes.
18 Q So that was something that you pointed out. Was
19 there any response by either Mr. Dawkins or
20 Ms. McMurray to that particular argument you
21 were making?
22 A I'd say first the landlords in the room seemed
23 to agree. I think maybe -- we talked about
24 which category goes where, whether Housing 5000
25 comes above the greater neighborhoods. The

113
1 landlords in the group seemed to agree. There
2 were two comments that I recall, one from Leslie
3 and one from Andy. Andy asked me, how would we
4 feel if all those tenants that are at the bottom
5 of the box were no longer in St. Paul.
6 Q He asked that question of the group?
7 A Yes.
8 Q Was there any responses to that?
9 A I think we were all dumbfounded. I think the
10 question was how are we going to do that. He
11 talked in general terms about improving the
12 city -- now I'm nervous about trying to quote
13 him. I remember him talking about trying to --
14 the word I would use is gentrify the city.
15 That's what I remember.
16 Q Gentrification?
17 A He did not use that word. I'm translating it.
18 That's how I remember it. Let's gentrify the
19 city to the point that none of these individuals
20 with historical behavioral issues would be in
21 the city at all.
22 Q So was it your understanding what he was
23 suggesting is that try to get rid of the tenants
24 that are at the bottom of the box?
25 A Very clear, yes. He was very clear about that,

114
1 yes.
2 Q You said that the members that were in
3 attendance were dumbfounded by that. What was
4 your personal response? What were you feeling
5 when you heard that?
6 A I felt the same way. The question becomes how
7 do you do that and should you do that.
8 Q Do you believe that someone that has a criminal
9 history who was convicted some time ago who went
10 to jail or prison and completed the time and
11 paid the fine should be allowed to have a second
12 chance?
13 A Yeah, of course, John.
14 Q Do you believe that there are certain
15 individuals with the city council that don't
16 believe that as it relates to wanting them to
17 rent within the city?
18 A Well, they sure stressed -- every city council
19 member that I'm aware of stresses we need to
20 have stronger and more aggressive rental
21 criteria.
22 Q Stronger screening?
23 A Stronger screening, more aggressive screening.
24 The only way that makes sense is if you look at
25 someone and you say, you have poor credit, you

115
1 have criminal history, you don't have enough
2 money, or you have a bad rental history, you
3 shouldn't have a house in St. Paul. That's the
4 only way that can be translated.
5 I have asked recently Daytons Bluff
6 community counsel. Her name is Karen du Paul.
7 This happened just a few months ago. I asked
8 her, because she made that same statement, if
9 landlords would only screen better. I said, if
10 you write a criteria and say this is what you
11 want all landlords to use, I will personally pay
12 to mail it to every St. Paul landlord I know of
13 in the City of St. Paul. And not just off of my
14 spreadsheet. I will do work. I will mail it to
15 thousands of people. So the room then went into
16 a discussion on what should that criteria be.
17 And they couldn't settle on a criteria. What
18 they determined -- well, someone said they
19 shouldn't have a criminal record. Well, do we
20 really think someone with a criminal record
21 should never have housing again? So finally
22 what they settled on was no sex offenders.
23 That's it. That's what their standard was on
24 the criminal record.
25 Q How about with regard to poor credit?

116
1 A Poor credit they felt should not be a criteria
2 at all. This is Karen du Paul at the Daytons
3 Bluff community counsel. She was just
4 representing the group in this room.
5 Q Right. How about on the issue of other
6 behavior, other than criminal behavior, being a
7 criteria for someone such as a district council
8 representative and what they were saying?
9 A I don't understand.
10 Q The criteria that you were talking about when
11 you got to other tenant behavior, other than
12 criminal behavior, what was the general
13 consensus there that you heard from city
14 officials or individuals that are connected to
15 the city?
16 A Are we back at -- I took you to a different
17 meeting.
18 Q We are talking about the screening issue. We'll
19 get back to your box on Exhibit 1 there.
20 A That meeting about the screening issue kind of
21 started to fall apart when they realized they
22 didn't want to write screening criteria, once
23 they went through credit shouldn't be an issue
24 at all, and criminal. The only thing that
25 should matter is whether you're a sex offender

117
1 or not. Gee, there isn't much left. All we've
2 got left then are evictions and low income. Is
3 that how we should base all rental criteria on?
4 And at that time the whole meeting fell apart.
5 Q Let's go back to the meeting that you mentioned
6 you had with landlords, Mr. Dawkins, and with
7 Leslie McMurray where there was a discussion
8 about the type of tenants that were available
9 within the city. Do you remember anything else
10 regarding Mr. Dawkins' discussion about the
11 market rate type tenants that you referred to
12 that had these problems in their background?
13 A No, that's his comment about what if those
14 tenants weren't in St. Paul was the only
15 response I remember from him. I do remember the
16 only comment that came out was from Leslie
17 McMurray. And Leslie disagreed that
18 Payne/Phalen wasn't one of the great
19 neighborhoods of St. Paul. She felt that it
20 would be a great neighborhood in St. Paul if
21 only we chose to rent to better tenants. That
22 was her argument.
23 Q Have you ever heard from any city official as to
24 where these individuals should live other than
25 the City of St. Paul?

118
1 A No.
2 Q Have you ever had a discussion with Mr. Dawkins
3 about the aggressive type code enforcement that
4 was being put in place by Mayor Kelly and
5 Mr. Dawkins and how it would affect the low
6 income rental market?
7 A I have had many discussions with Andy Dawkins
8 about NHPI. I don't believe I have ever
9 specifically drawn out the low income housing
10 market.
11 Q How about with regard to code enforcement being
12 aggressive to the point where the neighborhoods
13 got to a point of abandonment or individuals
14 just left their properties and decided not to
15 continue with ownership or rental of their
16 properties?
17 A I have never discussed that matter with him.
18 Q Mr. Dawkins mentioned he had read a study out of
19 Baltimore about teetering neighborhoods where
20 code enforcement had been ramped up and that
21 there was some result there, he believed, of
22 abandonment of properties. Have you ever looked
23 at that issue yourself in either your role as an
24 investor or manager or owner of rental property
25 or realtor?

119
1 A There's a lot of abandonment of property. There
2 is evidence of that. What is driving it I have
3 never looked at the research.
4 Q Were you a member of the ad hoc committee on
5 code enforcement maybe a year, year-and-a-half
6 back?
7 A I was.
8 Q How long were those meetings taking place in the
9 City of St. Paul?
10 A They went on for a couple of months.
11 Q Did you hear city officials talking about the
12 use of code enforcement to address behavior
13 issues during any of those meetings?
14 A John, it's been a long time since I thought of
15 those meetings. I wrote very detailed summaries
16 of every meeting I attended because I was
17 attending as a representative for SPARL.
18 Q Would those documents be maintained in SPARL
19 records?
20 A They are certainly maintained in mine.
21 MR. SHOEMAKER: I'd like to ask you
22 if you could produce a copy of those documents
23 to my office, and then I can get a copy to the
24 city attorneys office. I will address those to
25 you, Cheri.

120
1 MS. SISK: That's fine.
2 Q (Continuing by Mr. Shoemaker) Do you remember
3 having any discussion with Councilmember Lantry
4 about Mr. Steinhauser as a rental property
5 owner?
6 A Not in particular.
7 Q How about any statement that you recall that
8 would be negative about Mr. Steinhauser that
9 Councilmember Lantry made in your presence?
10 A Yes.
11 Q Tell me about that.
12 A When Andy -- when we were first going through
13 all the changes that Mayor Kelly and Andy
14 Dawkins were bringing to NHPI, Minnesota
15 Multihousing Association and SPARL worked
16 together to try and influence the process. One
17 of the things that we did was myself and their
18 lobbyist -- I believe her name is Deb Moran.
19 She is no longer with MMHA. I believe she has
20 cancer. But she used to be their lobbyist for
21 MMHA. And Deb and I went and sat down with
22 Kathy Lantry. Carol Buche may have been there
23 with us as well. I don't recall. I think that
24 all three of us were there.
25 We were talking about how we wanted

121
1 to be involved, how we wanted to be open, and
2 how we all wanted better neighborhoods, and how
3 we all wanted to work together. Kathy Lantry
4 kept using Frank Steinhauser as an example of a
5 problem landlord.
6 Q Do you remember anything specifically she said
7 about Mr. Steinhauser?
8 A I'm nervous to quote her. I know that if there
9 was a phrase of a slum lord or a landlord not
10 doing their job, she would -- rather than talk
11 about the context of the problem, she would talk
12 about like Frank Steinhauser and the Frank
13 Steinhausers of the world.
14 Q Did she talk about the type of tenants that
15 Mr. Steinhauser rented to?
16 A Yes. Referring to them only as problem tenants.
17 Q So she used Mr. Steinhauser as an example of a
18 problem landlord?
19 A Yeah, because he would rent to anybody or
20 something. I don't remember her exact words,
21 John. That's the impression that I had when I
22 left the meeting. That's the impression I have
23 now.
24 Q Did she seem to be particularly interested in
25 Mr. Steinhauser during this meeting?

122
1 A Yes.
2 Q Did she seem to change in her emotional state at
3 all when she was talking about him?
4 A What kind of -- there was a lot of passion
5 there. Kathy Lantry always has a lot of
6 passion, so I didn't -- except noticing a lot of
7 passion, which is somewhat normal for
8 Councilmember Lantry. I did not notice
9 anything.
10 Q Was it different when she was talking about
11 Mr. Steinhauser?
12 A Correct.
13 Q Other than she repeatedly referred to him?
14 A Correct.
15 Q Anything else you remember from that meeting
16 that would have been of importance to you at the
17 time?
18 A Only an agreement to be reasonable and
19 communicative.
20 Q Was that the agreement that was reached with
21 Councilmember Lantry at the time?
22 A Yeah. Again, it was just a discussion. This
23 wasn't intended to be a contractual agreement.
24 But, yes, that was the purpose of the meeting
25 and that's what we felt we walked away with.

123
1 Q Did you ever have an occasion to observe the
2 interior of one of Mr. Steinhauser's rental
3 properties?
4 A On one occasion I did.
5 Q Mr. Steinhauser seems to think that you saw one
6 of his rental properties that was subject to
7 some city enforcement action. Do you remember a
8 property such as that?
9 A On one occasion Mr. Steinhauser and I went to
10 two properties that he owned.
11 Q Do you remember if that would have been around
12 the time he was having difficulty with the city
13 inspectors?
14 A I believe it was just the start of it, yes.
15 Q Do you recall that address being 1024 Euclid as
16 a duplex?
17 A It was a duplex. I think both were duplexes,
18 and I don't remember the addresses of either of
19 them.
20 Q Do you recall any observations you made about
21 the condition of the interiors of either of
22 those properties?
23 A Dated but functional.
24 Q You said dated but functional?
25 A Yes, sir.

124
1 Q What do you mean by that?
2 A I could say the same about my apartment. The
3 apartment had all the features that one needs to
4 be a class C property, had the appliances, had
5 the kitchen functioned, everything looked like
6 it was functional to me. Things were dated.
7 Things were older. Again, these aren't class A
8 properties. They are class C properties.
9 Q In order to have rentals that are affordable to
10 people that do not have the level of income of
11 class B and A tenants in those types of
12 properties, you've got to be able to have
13 properties that are functional but don't
14 necessarily have all the modern conveniences.
15 Correct?
16 A Can't afford it.
17 Q Without raising the rents. Correct?
18 A That is correct.
19 Q Do you know of a gentleman that goes by the name
20 of RT who owns a duplex on White Bear Avenue?
21 A He owned a duplex on Case Avenue around the
22 corner from White Bear.
23 Q Do you remember that individual talking at all
24 about some benefit that he apparently had
25 received from code enforcement or bragging about

125
1 never getting into trouble with his building
2 because one of the inspectors was his friend?
3 A I don't recall that.
4 Q You don't recall that, huh? The inspector was,
5 apparently, Inspector Mike Kalis. Does that
6 refresh your memory?
7 A No, sir. May I talk about RT for a moment?
8 Q Let me just ask you how often have you had
9 contact with RT?
10 A For a period of time frequently. And before
11 that and since, never.
12 Q Was he an owner of more than one rental
13 property?
14 A I don't know.
15 Q But there was a duplex that was on the corner of
16 White Bear and Case that he owned?
17 A It was not quite on the corner but close.
18 Q What do you recall about RT as a rental property
19 owner on that property?
20 A I haven't seen many properties in that poor
21 condition.
22 Q Had you been inside the rental property at any
23 time?
24 A Yes.
25 Q How often had you been inside that property?

126
1 A I think I was in it twice because I ultimately
2 bought it from him.
3 Q You went in it twice before you purchased the
4 property?
5 A I think once before and once after.
6 Q The second time was before you closed on the
7 property?
8 A I don't think we did a preinspection close.
9 Q So you went through the property once while he
10 owned it?
11 A Yes.
12 Q And then once shortly after you acquired --
13 A Once I got the keys.
14 Q Tell me what you remember about this duplex at
15 the time you inspected it prior to purchasing
16 it.
17 A It was full of debris. I couldn't see most of
18 it, most of the building.
19 Q Was that apartment occupied in either of the two
20 units of the duplex at the time you went through
21 prior to purchasing it?
22 A No, but they were just before that.
23 Q Did he tell you how the tenant had left the
24 property or tenants had left the property?
25 A We didn't talk about that.

127
1 Q What did you observe? You said debris. Can you
2 be more specific?
3 A Unsanitary and unsafe. He had a ledge
4 upstairs -- the whole stairwell from the top
5 down to the bottom had no handrail. It went up
6 and there was a walkway along the top as well,
7 and there was no handrail there either, nothing
8 at all. You take one step and you'd fall a
9 whole story. As well as personal debris all
10 over the place, broken appliances all over the
11 place. The condition of the walls and the
12 ceiling was terrible.
13 My intent -- the reason I viewed
14 the property is it's right next door to Flandrau
15 Court, to the apartment building I was referring
16 to earlier. The building was ugly on the
17 outside and inside. It was very ugly. My
18 intent was to purchase it and rebuild it. I
19 even had visions of putting my office in there.
20 I thought it would be a real nice -- it had some
21 old house character to it. Although none of it
22 really intact, but I felt it could be restored.
23 So I talked with him at one time about buying
24 it. He gave me the tour. We wrote up a
25 purchase agreement. But I ultimately assigned

128
1 the purchase agreement to, I believe, ESNDC.
2 It's the organization Chuck Repke is in. I
3 believe it's ESNDC or is it NENDC. I get those
4 two mixed up.
5 Q Your understanding was this RT as an owner had
6 it occupied with tenants sometime before you
7 observed it?
8 A Just before that, yes.
9 Q How long before?
10 A My recollection is months before, a few months
11 before.
12 Q You don't believe that the condition of the
13 property would have gotten to the point of
14 disrepair and hazard level within just a couple
15 of months?
16 A No.
17 Q But you don't recall any comment by him that he
18 had some type of a special arrangement with code
19 enforcement?
20 A I do not.
21 Q Do you know what type of tenants he had in that
22 property?
23 A Never met them.
24 Q Had you ever made any observations yourself
25 since you owned the property next door?

129
1 A Only that the building had very little traffic.
2 I often wondered if anyone lived there.
3 (Luncheon recess-12:35 to 1:35).
4 Q (Continuing by Mr. Shoemaker) Mr. Cullen, I want
5 to ask you about the Section 8 rental units you
6 had. My understanding from this morning was
7 that you had Section 8 rentals in just your
8 larger units that would have been covered by
9 certificate of occupancy inspections by the fire
10 prevention office. Is that right?
11 A Yes.
12 Q Were those Section 8 units subject to Section 8
13 inspections at any time?
14 A Yes, every year.
15 Q Who would monitor the Section 8 inspection
16 process or at least manage that process, do you
17 know?
18 A Generally, my site manager. There were periods
19 where my site manager -- I was without one or
20 they weren't -- they were new and unable to do
21 it. But generally it was my site manager.
22 Q Were there times when you actually would have a
23 role in those Section 8 inspections?
24 A Frequently.
25 Q What is your understanding as to the standard

130
1 that the Section 8 inspectors would use in order
2 to determine if any of your particular units
3 that in fact had Section 8 tenants in them met
4 the requirements of Section 8?
5 A My understanding of their inspections is it's
6 about safety and about functionality.
7 Q Did you ever have any conversations with any of
8 the inspectors at any time?
9 A Yes.
10 Q I would assume you'd have conversations about
11 items in an apartment that the inspector was
12 inspecting where maybe you were present during
13 that inspection. Correct?
14 A We had discussions.
15 Q Were you ever present during an inspection by a
16 Section 8 inspector?
17 A Multiple times.
18 Q Did you make any observation that they were
19 using some type of a written guideline or
20 standard as they conducted the inspections?
21 A Yes.
22 Q Did you ever learn what that standard was or the
23 basis of that standard was?
24 A No, just philosophically about safety and
25 functionality I think.

131
1 Q What type of concerns would the inspectors
2 typically raise during the Section 8
3 inspections?
4 A Again, safety and functionality. The things
5 that I generally saw were broken screens. That
6 was probably the most common problem I had, from
7 tenants breaking screens. But then there would
8 be other things about -- occasionally a
9 cleanliness would come up as well.
10 Q When you say issues about safety, what do you
11 remember about the Section 8 safety portions of
12 the inspection?
13 A Smoke detectors, fire extinguishers, whatever.
14 Q Did you have situations where you had a Section
15 8 inspection and you received some type of a
16 written notice from the inspector or the Section
17 8 department that you needed to conduct certain
18 repairs or make certain modifications to the
19 rental units?
20 A Most of the time I would.
21 Q Was it your policy to rectify whatever the
22 concern was that was noticed to you by the
23 Section 8 inspection department?
24 A Yes.
25 Q What would happen once you had taken care of the

132
1 issues that were pointed out to you in this
2 inspection report or inspection notice?
3 A We'd call Section 8, set up a reinspection, and
4 if the tenant hadn't broke it again, it would
5 pass.
6 Q Were there times when the tenant had made some
7 further damages to the property following the
8 inspection by the inspector before the
9 reinspection?
10 A Yes.
11 Q What would the Section 8 inspector then -- what
12 would be his or her response to that? Would
13 they set up another inspection for you?
14 A That's what I remember, yes.
15 Q So there might be a subsequent reinspection?
16 A Yes.
17 Q Until you could actually hopefully get the
18 tenant not to continue to damage whatever was
19 there. Right?
20 A Yes.
21 Q Was that frustrating to you?
22 A Horribly. Especially Section 8 has a policy
23 that if you don't pass the inspection in a
24 certain period of time, then you fall into
25 abatement and they quit paying the rent.

133
1 Q So then you'd be in a position where you'd have
2 to move very quickly to get the inspector back
3 and insure that it was going to pass on an
4 issue, for example, such as a tenant-caused
5 damage issue?
6 A Yes.
7 Q Have you had a situation where you passed a
8 Section 8 inspection on a rental unit and then
9 the fire inspection department sent an inspector
10 out who required something higher in level or
11 higher in standard to what the Section 8
12 inspector had required?
13 A Not that I recall.
14 Q Just to be clear, what I'm saying there is if
15 your unit passed the Section 8 inspection and
16 you had a city fire prevention officer coming
17 out a short time thereafter, have you had any
18 situation like that?
19 A Let me be clear also. I'm not saying it hasn't
20 happened. It's just not a continuum that I
21 would have paid attention to. Had something
22 passed a Section 8 inspection and then failed a
23 C of O right afterwards or even in opposite
24 order? I would have just done the work. I
25 don't think I would have put two and two

134
1 together.
2 Q If it would have occurred where you had a
3 Section 8 result where you passed the inspection
4 and fire prevention had come out on a repeated
5 frequency to raise the standard, so to speak, do
6 you think you would have recalled that?
7 A It depends on what that standard raised to. But
8 I think -- I think I would have. Again, if a
9 C of O inspector came out and then said, oh, you
10 have a torn screen, that wouldn't surprise me.
11 I wouldn't pay attention. We'd go and fix the
12 screen like we fix screens all the time. If
13 they come out and suddenly said -- I don't
14 know -- that they want the carpet replaced or
15 something. Then I might say, wait a minute,
16 Section 8 just said it's okay, what's going on
17 here? I may have done that, but I don't
18 remember any instances of that happening.
19 Q Have you ever heard as a SPARL representative
20 any of your members making or raising concerns
21 about the NHPI office raising the bar, raising
22 the standard above what Section 8 had approved
23 in the member's rental units?
24 A Yes, there were calls on that matter.
25 Q What was the general concern that was being

135
1 raised there?
2 A It's just as you stated about the different
3 standards, but I don't have a specific case in
4 mind that I can recall.
5 Q In the low income rental market that you've had
6 as an owner, investor, and manager of rental
7 properties in the City of St. Paul, how would a
8 forced renovation of a rental property have an
9 affect financially on your rental business?
10 A A forced -- the only time I ever saw anything
11 forced would be with a big hammer and it's
12 generally a big project. The reason I left
13 St. Paul is you start to say, gee, wait a
14 minute, if they come in and they pull my C of O
15 on Flandrau Court, I'm bankrupt at that point.
16 I'd give the keys back to the bank and walk
17 away. I couldn't handle that. I didn't have
18 the financial strength to handle that.
19 Q If you were focused -- are most of your members
20 of SPARL the smaller landlords with maybe one
21 rental property, two rental properties, that
22 kind of thing? Do you have that knowledge?
23 A Yeah. The general member had fewer than ten
24 units.
25 Q How do you believe, based on your experience

136
1 with your membership and your experience in the
2 industry, a mandatory, let's say, code
3 compliance certification would be on a smaller
4 landlord that had single family or duplex homes
5 that were older -- had been built many, many
6 years back, let's say, prior to World War II?
7 A It could be financially devastating.
8 Q Why would that be the case? If you had to
9 spend, on your case, an average of $40,000 for
10 code compliances, why would it be devastating
11 for a smaller landlord to come up with that kind
12 of money in very quick fashion with a mandatory
13 code compliance?
14 A It's not just the $40,000. It's the carrying
15 cost of the building as well. Most landlords,
16 smaller landlords, don't have that kind of
17 money. As a realtor when I talk with people
18 about going out and buying a property or
19 expanding their business, they struggle to come
20 up with anything. There's a lot of landlords
21 that bought property, whether it's wise or not,
22 bought property with very minimum down because
23 they just don't have the capital.
24 Q So they'd be in a position where they have
25 minimal equity in the property?

137
1 A Some, yes.
2 Q It would be difficult for them to go out and get
3 a loan using the property for collateral for a
4 second mortgage?
5 A It's almost impossible to get a second mortgage
6 on an investment property unless you're very
7 strong. In that case you don't need a second
8 loan. Second loans are really only given on
9 your principal residence. I don't know of a
10 bank that will give you a second loan on any
11 investment property except for people that are
12 financially strong.
13 Q Again, most of your members would be holding ten
14 or less rental units?
15 A Yes.
16 Q Based on your experience as a realtor and
17 investor and also owner/manager of these type of
18 rental properties, you don't believe those types
19 of landlords in that market would be able to get
20 second loans on those properties in order to
21 come up with the money for a code compliance?
22 A No.
23 Q Do you know where they'd come up with $40,000 to
24 pay for a mandatory code compliance on an older
25 rental property in the City of St. Paul?

138
1 A Again, if they don't have the money. The only
2 place -- everybody would be different. But I
3 would speculate it would be a second mortgage on
4 their own home is the only place they could find
5 easy access to capital.
6 Q Based on your experience with this type of
7 investor that has a small number of rental
8 properties, do they typically have a lot of cash
9 in the bank?
10 A No.
11 Q Have you talked to any of the city employees or
12 officials about this apparent difficulty of
13 smaller landlords to fund the kind of mandatory
14 code compliances that have been required in the
15 last say four or five years?
16 A I have never had that discussion with them.
17 Q Has anybody ever asked you for your input on
18 that issue from the City of St. Paul?
19 A Not that I recall.
20 Q Is that somewhat surprising to you, that the
21 city officials and employees haven't asked you
22 as a representative of rental property
23 landlords, as to what your opinion is on whether
24 or not the landlords, smaller landlords, have
25 enough financial availability to pay for these

139
1 code compliances?
2 A No, it doesn't surprise me. From the
3 interaction or the comments that I see from the
4 officials at the City of St. Paul is they don't
5 care what happens to the landlord in such a
6 matter. They pretty openly talk about we need
7 to force them to sell, we need to force them out
8 of the property. They openly talk about it.
9 It's not a matter of what would happen to the
10 individual that they are forcing out. I have
11 never heard that concern ever come to mind.
12 Q Who could you point to that's talked about
13 forcing landlords out of the City of St. Paul
14 that would be either a city employee or a city
15 official?
16 A Andy Dawkins and Kathy Lantry are the two most
17 frequent.
18 Q Can you remember any specific time that either
19 one of those or both of those officials would
20 have made those comments?
21 A When Andy first got his job and he was still
22 trying to figure it out, he went around and
23 presented -- I don't know if it was in every
24 neighborhood but in many neighborhoods. I went
25 to some of these presentations. And he had made

140
1 a huge white board, a flowchart, what would
2 happen with a code compliance effort. Right in
3 that flowchart, it had forced sale right on it.
4 He talked openly about forcing landlords to
5 sell.
6 Q Did he identify the type of landlords that his
7 new program would force to sell their
8 properties?
9 A Not that I recall.
10 Q Was there any tie-in to tenant behavior at
11 properties where he wanted a forced sale?
12 A I just don't recall, John. He would have been
13 talking about problem properties. He himself
14 defined a problem property as the intersection
15 of code enforcement problems and occupant
16 behavior problems. That's his definition. He
17 defined that when he visited a SPARL meeting.
18 Q So it was your understanding that this forced
19 sale policy that he was going to implement was
20 going to be aimed at problem properties?
21 A Yes. I don't know why he'd force you to sell if
22 he felt that you weren't a problem. I don't
23 remember exactly what he said. But, yes, that's
24 what I'd expect.
25 Q Did you hear him say he'd expand that forced

141
1 sale policy to properties other than problem
2 properties as he defined it?
3 A No.
4 Q Why did you think that this policy of forced
5 sale of problem properties was not a good idea?
6 Or maybe you thought it was a good idea. What
7 was your reaction to that?
8 A When Andy was first talking about it, he was
9 new. And you don't really know what he's
10 talking about, in what context he's talking
11 about it. So we did not really address it much
12 at all.
13 Q When you say we, you mean the landlord group?
14 A Yes.
15 Q When a landlord is forced to -- a landlord is
16 forced to come up with, let's say, $40,000 to do
17 a code compliance, what type of issues are
18 presented to the landlord from a standpoint of
19 financial difficulty other than trying to locate
20 a source of funds to pay the contractors and
21 whoever is going to do the work on the property
22 that would include the labor and the materials?
23 Are there other concerns that a landlord would
24 have besides doing the work to meet the city's
25 requirement?

142
1 A There's certainly an emotional stress as well as
2 a time stress.
3 Q This time stress issue, I would assume that when
4 you had code compliances you were not allowed to
5 have tenants in the units the entire time that
6 you were doing the code compliance. Is that
7 right or not?
8 A That's true.
9 Q If you can't have tenants in the units, then you
10 have some type of effect on the income to the
11 business?
12 A Yes.
13 Q Which would be the loss of rents that the tenant
14 had been paying?
15 A As well as an increase in utility costs that you
16 have to carry because it's vacant.
17 Q In the properties that you had, you had an
18 agreement under the lease for the tenants to
19 actually pay the utilities while they were
20 renting under the lease?
21 A Certainly.
22 Q So if the tenant is now gone from the property,
23 you still have certain utility costs that are
24 going to be a base cost. Correct?
25 A Heat, electric, yes.

143
1 Q In order to maintain the pipes, for example, in
2 the winter so they don't freeze up. Right?
3 A Yes.
4 Q There may be some reduction in the total energy
5 cost to the unit because you don't have a tenant
6 there but there's still going to be a base
7 utility cost that you have to pay?
8 A There's no reduction to landlords. My cost is
9 usually zero on those utilities. It might be
10 lower than an individual living there.
11 Q But the fact is now that you have to pay those
12 utility costs, that's a big increase to you.
13 Correct?
14 A Yes.
15 Q Are there insurance concerns that you know of
16 where you've got a property that's vacant for
17 longer than, say, 30 days where you've got to
18 somehow report to your agent that you've got a
19 building that isn't occupied? I don't know what
20 the insurance phrase for it would be, vacant
21 building, or do you know anything about that?
22 A I have had insurance agencies threaten to drop
23 me due to vacancies.
24 Q How often does something like that happen?
25 A If a building sits vacant for a period of time,

144
1 six months maybe, I have forgotten the time, but
2 once it starts getting to be long, it's quite
3 common -- when I was doing the rehabs and I was
4 buying homes that were distressed, I had to
5 switch to a different insurance model. And I
6 have forgotten the name of it, but it was a
7 company that specialized in insuring vacant
8 distressed buildings.
9 Q It's your understanding that there can be a
10 higher cost to the insurance company because of
11 things like vandalism or maybe fires due to
12 illegal occupancy? Some of the concerns of
13 insurance companies could be those types of
14 issues?
15 A I would suspect so. I know they charged me
16 more.
17 Q Do you know a gentleman by the name of Jeff
18 Bates?
19 A Not that I recall.
20 Q Someone that was involved in a database about
21 identifying problem tenants?
22 A Not that I recall.
23 Q That the city may have been funding a program
24 like that. Do you ever recall that?
25 A I don't.

145
1 Q From your conversations with Councilmember
2 Lantry, Director Dawkins, and others about the
3 problem tenants and the type of tenants that the
4 city had a concern about, do you think it would
5 be fair to say that they had a goal of trying to
6 make it difficult for those type of tenants to
7 live in the City of St. Paul?
8 A Yes.
9 Q Did anyone from the City of St. Paul ever say
10 where they thought those type of tenants should
11 live if St. Paul wasn't a place where they were
12 welcome by city officials and employees? My
13 question is: Did they ever say where they
14 thought those type of individuals, citizens
15 should live?
16 A Not that I recall.
17 Q Do you have a concern that if the City of
18 St. Paul continues its policy of trying to make
19 it difficult for the type of tenants that you've
20 rented to over the years to live in the city,
21 that other cities may take up the same type of
22 policy and make it difficult for those type of
23 individuals to live in their cities as well?
24 A Yes.
25 Q I understand that you ran for the state house

146
1 here in Minnesota at one time?
2 A I did.
3 Q Have you had any discussions with any official
4 on the state level about concerns about the
5 issues that we have talked about here this
6 morning, about selection of tenants and
7 screening of tenants?
8 A Yes.
9 Q Is there someone on the state level that's been
10 concerned about allowing individuals who have
11 paid their fine and done their time and that
12 have a criminal background and not being able to
13 locate housing, that that's a concern to them
14 here in the state of Minnesota?
15 A Not a discussion I have had with somebody.
16 Q Do you know of any group that's concerned about
17 that, that they are concerned that certain
18 people that get out of prison and trying to make
19 a go at it again in an honest fashion, that they
20 are not being able to find places to live?
21 A For sure.
22 Q Tell me about what you know about that
23 particular issue right now.
24 A I can't recall the names of the organizations.
25 But an individual, someone I have worked with a

147
1 lot, Mary Poe -- P-O-E is the last name -- she
2 got involved with some organizations that were
3 trying to place convicted felons that were
4 moving out. She had placed some tenants in my
5 buildings as well as others. So I know it's a
6 huge problem. It's a huge problem. People
7 coming out of jail have a tough time finding a
8 place to reside here in the metro, I think
9 across the whole metro.
10 Q What has been your experience with your tenant
11 base in your class C buildings as far as the mix
12 of people of color that have been applying at
13 your properties over the years? Do you have a
14 sense that people of color are a small
15 percentage of your applicants or a large
16 percentage of your applicants? Do you have any
17 sense as to that?
18 A It's the majority.
19 Q The majority of your applicants?
20 A Are people of color certainly, just like my
21 tenant base. The majority of them are people of
22 color.
23 Q What about the members in SPARL -- I assume that
24 there are landlords that rent to a wide variety
25 of economic status of renters. Is that right?

148
1 A Yes.
2 Q So you don't just have low income landlords in
3 the group?
4 A That is correct.
5 Q Do you know what percentage of your membership
6 have a low income rental focus?
7 A I have no idea.
8 Q You don't think there's ever been a survey of
9 your members on that issue?
10 A Not that I'm aware of.
11 Q How many members do you typically have on a
12 yearly basis in SPARL?
13 A About 400.
14 Q Any of the members of SPARL ever raise the issue
15 about their concern over the city placing
16 buildings into a vacant building status in a
17 fairly quick manner after the rental unit was
18 vacated by a tenant?
19 A Yes, we did get complaints like that. I'm
20 trying to -- an individual showed me his home
21 once. I can't remember who it was now. Yes, we
22 did have complaints of tenant moves out, city
23 comes to the conclusion that it's a vacant
24 building, and they put it on the vacant building
25 list.

149
1 Q Any concern there by the members in those
2 situations that the city, in placing it on the
3 vacant building list, was also then requiring a
4 code compliance before it could be reoccupied?
5 A It's huge. I mean you've got a tenant. Tenants
6 move. It's why they're tenants. If you're
7 going to stay in a place for 10 or 15 years,
8 then generally you're better off to buy.
9 Tenants are transient in nature, generally
10 speaking. So if tenants are moving in and out
11 all the time and we find ourselves between that
12 occupancy period and suddenly the city comes in
13 and identifies it as a vacant building, now it
14 costs us 20, 30, $40,000, again, which is my
15 experience, to get the thing going again. It's
16 huge. It's the most expensive tenant turnover
17 that's ever happened.
18 Q Well, you'd classify that as a tenant turnover.
19 My question was directed more to how many times
20 have you heard a situation from a member of
21 SPARL where they have said that that's been
22 their experience, where they lost a tenant and a
23 short time later the city classified their
24 rental property as a vacant property?
25 A As complaints have come in, not a lot. There

150
1 have been some.
2 Q Have those complaints then also included where
3 the city required a code compliance then in
4 order for them to rerent it?
5 A Yes.
6 Q Have you had a situation like that yourself with
7 any of the properties that you've been renting
8 where the city has classified it at some point
9 as a vacant after you lost a tenant before you
10 could rerent it?
11 A No.
12 Q Do you have an average figure as to how long it
13 takes you to turn over a unit in your portfolio
14 currently?
15 A At the beginning, back in 1999 and 2000 it was
16 almost instant. I seldom had a vacancy. Over
17 the past few years, I have had apartments sit
18 empty for six to eight months sometimes. I
19 would say that the average over the past few
20 years has been probably a three month vacancy
21 between each tenant.
22 Q Are there concerns of yourself and others in
23 SPARL that because of this longer period now of
24 turnover, that those rental properties may be
25 subject to this quick vacant building

151
1 designation by the vacant building employees at
2 NHPI?
3 A We'd certainly be concerned, but I don't know
4 that the discussion has ever come up.
5 Q I think that we got kind of side-tracked on this
6 original question that I had about
7 Mr. Steinhauser's two rental properties. You
8 mentioned that you had at one point been at two
9 of his rental properties, and I think you
10 mentioned that you had -- or that that was
11 during the time Mr. Steinhauser was having some
12 difficulties with the city as far as for code
13 enforcement. Did you go inside either of those
14 two rental properties?
15 A I went in both.
16 Q You said they were dated but functional?
17 A Yes.
18 Q Did you see anything in either of those rental
19 properties that you thought you yourself, based
20 on your experience, would want to change in
21 order to properly rent those properties out to,
22 let's say, class C tenants?
23 A No.
24 Q Now, did you consider those two properties to be
25 class C type properties?

152
1 A Yes.
2 Q Have you had situations where you've had to seek
3 permits from the City of St. Paul for work and
4 repairs that need to be done on your rental
5 properties?
6 A Yes.
7 Q And you've had to pay fees for those permits?
8 A Yes.
9 Q Who do you believe has followed up to make sure
10 that the permit inspections have been done on
11 the work -- under permits that you've had? Have
12 they been contractors that you've employed that
13 called for inspections or have you done it
14 yourself?
15 A It depends on the work being done. If it was
16 mechanical work, it was certainly a contractor.
17 Otherwise, it was ourselves. We have done both.
18 Q When would it be a case where you'd have a
19 contractor calling the inspector at the LIEP
20 office to come out and do the inspection on the
21 permit?
22 A Generally, the stuff I hired out was electric,
23 plumbing, heat, and roofs.
24 Q So if you were going to replace a furnace, for
25 example, you would hire an electrician.

153
1 Correct? Is that primarily who you'd have to
2 hire that would be licensed?
3 A Well, to replace a furnace, I think generally
4 just the furnace -- just a heating/cooling guy
5 would do the whole work.
6 Q I just had one put in and I had to have an
7 electrician come out in addition to people from
8 the furnace company.
9 A It could be. I don't recall.
10 Q But you may have one or two permits in that type
11 of repair. Correct?
12 A Correct.
13 Q Whoever you hired to put in the furnace would be
14 the one that you'd want calling for the
15 inspection?
16 A Yeah, for that kind of stuff. I can't pull a
17 permit in the City of St. Paul. I'm not
18 licensed to put in electric, plumbing, heating,
19 and roofing. We just don't do it. I'm not
20 licensed. So a licensed contractor has to pull
21 those permits and then they close them out as
22 well. So it's just part of the bid.
23 Q Do you have any follow-up in looking to make
24 sure that the inspection has been done by the
25 LIEP office on the permits?

154
1 A We often do.
2 Q How do you do that?
3 A We just contact them and ask if all permits are
4 closed.
5 Q You contact the LIEP office?
6 A Correct.
7 Q Why do you do that? Is that part of your
8 management practice?
9 A No. The only time we'd do it is if it's a
10 property preparing to sell. And I don't want to
11 get it down to the last week of selling it and
12 find out that all the permits haven't been
13 closed. If it's a property I'm holding to rent,
14 I generally wouldn't follow-up to make sure it's
15 signed off.
16 Q Would that be because you would rely on your
17 contractor?
18 A Yes.
19 Q To do that?
20 A Yes.
21 Q Do you know of any situation where the city's
22 pointed out to you that one of your contractors
23 hasn't called for an inspection?
24 A Oh, yes.
25 Q How often does that happen?

155
1 A A lot.
2 Q Who calls you from the city and points that out
3 to you that one of your contractors hasn't
4 called for an inspection and they are calling
5 you to make sure that you provide access to the
6 property so the LIEP inspector can come out and
7 do the inspection?
8 A In all my years, I can only remember that
9 happening once.
10 Q Who did you get a call from then?
11 A From the inspector that the permit was assigned
12 to.
13 Q Someone at the LIEP office?
14 A Yes.
15 Q What did the inspector tell you in that
16 situation?
17 A In that case, the inspector called and asked if
18 the work was done, if it was done satisfactorily
19 and paid. And I said yes. And he said, well,
20 the work hasn't been signed off. Can I come and
21 inspect? And that's what the question was. I
22 said, go back to the -- it was electrical. I
23 said, go back to the electrical contractor and
24 work it out with him.
25 Q Did you understand subsequent to that point that

156
1 the LIEP inspector was able to get access to
2 your property to do the final?
3 A Yeah, he did because I had to let them both back
4 in. But I wanted him to go through the
5 electrical contractor. That was part of what I
6 paid for.
7 Q Do you have any situation where a permit wasn't
8 signed off and the inspector knew about it and
9 didn't ask for an inspection? Did you ever have
10 that happen?
11 A No, not that I'm aware of.
12 Q If a competing landlord with a lot of properties
13 had a situation where furnace permits, roof
14 permits, things of that nature, the permits were
15 being acquired, but the calls weren't being made
16 for sign-off and the inspectors were just
17 closing the file without doing the final
18 inspection, would that concern you?
19 A I don't think that can happen.
20 Q Why do you think that can't happen?
21 A It wouldn't get closed.
22 Q What if you saw evidence that the inspector was
23 just closing the file because the owner of the
24 properties called the inspector and said, I
25 don't think we need an inspection on this gas

157
1 installation?
2 A I don't think that can happen. If it does, I'd
3 be stunned.
4 Q What is your --
5 A Isn't that the whole purpose of the permit
6 process?
7 Q Well, that's what I was going to ask you. What
8 is the reason that you believe there is a permit
9 system set in place by the city?
10 A To certify the work was done and done safely.
11 Q You don't believe it's just a fee generation
12 system?
13 A You want me to be cynical? Part of me believes
14 it's just a fee generation system. Clearly, if
15 they are not doing the final inspection to
16 certify that the work was done and done safely,
17 then obviously it's a fee generation system.
18 Q Do you know of any private landlords that are
19 not being required to have any of their permit
20 type work inspected by the city through the LIEP
21 office?
22 A Like I said, I don't believe that can be done.
23 Q One follow-up here. This RT is a landlord. Do
24 you recall if he purchased a bar from Mike
25 Kalis?

158
1 A Yeah, he did. He sold the duplex through me
2 really to ESNDC. The whole purpose was take
3 that money and then buy Michael's bar from his
4 partner.
5 Q From whose partner?
6 A RT was partners with that individual -- I don't
7 remember his name -- in Michael's bar on East
8 Seventh. And RT used the proceeds from selling
9 that duplex to buy out his partner. That's what
10 RT told me he was doing.
11 Q RT and Mr. Kalis were partners in Michael's bar
12 from what you understood?
13 A I don't know the individual's name. I know he
14 bought out his partner. I do know that his
15 partner in Michael's bar was a city employee of
16 some form. I don't know if that's the
17 individual though.
18 MR. SHOEMAKER: That's all the
19 questions I have at this point.
20
21
22 EXAMINATION
23 BY MR. ENGEL:
24 Q Good morning, Mr. Cullen. My name is Matt
25 Engel. I'm an attorney representing the

159
1 Plaintiffs on one of the three city lawsuits.
2 And I just have a couple questions for you.
3 When you had written a letter to Mayor Kelly and
4 I believe you copied Dawkins and a couple other
5 people on it, you said you were concerned about
6 having the correction order show up on your
7 property. Is that what you had said?
8 A Excessive consumption comes through excessive
9 use of city resources. And that, I thought, was
10 a use of city resources. So, yes, that's right.
11 Q Did they ever give you clarification what
12 happened to that?
13 A Only Andy's letter where he said that it was
14 found to be unfounded and, therefore, depends on
15 whether -- therefore, it shouldn't have counted
16 is what he said. That's Andy's words. I never
17 followed up.
18 Q Have you ever had a situation where you received
19 an order from NHPI and on the reinspection they
20 issued another order for another condition?
21 A No. But I have had only two correction orders
22 come from NHPI. One was for trash and the other
23 one was for tall grass. Both were complied with
24 through the normal process. Trash, well, the
25 garbage man came and the trash went away. And

160
1 the next time we got a sunny day we mowed the
2 lawn. I didn't have many single family and
3 duplexes under their purview.
4 Q In the context of the excessive consumption
5 system, do you think it would be fair for the
6 inspector to write up a different issue upon
7 each reinspection which in turn would increase
8 the numbers of violations and orders on the
9 property, or would you as a property owner
10 expect to get one order with whatever they found
11 at that time?
12 A It doesn't seem right to me. If the problem is
13 there, write it up.
14 Q That's what you'd expect from a fair system?
15 A Correct.
16 Q Have you ever reviewed the city's legislative
17 code?
18 A I have. It's been a few years though. I used
19 to know it very well.
20 Q Do you recall having an impression of the code
21 when you read it or even as of today if it's any
22 different?
23 A I think it's Chapter 34 that covers the
24 maintenance of property. I think I have got the
25 right chapter number. It might be 56, but I

161
1 think it's 34. Only that it was vague. My
2 conclusion after reading it was every property
3 in the City of St. Paul fails to meet this code.
4 I maintain that today. I would challenge
5 anybody to show me a home that I couldn't find a
6 code violation on.
7 Q Did you ever raise that concern with either
8 Dawkins or Lantry or anyone at the city?
9 A I suspected I did, but I don't recall it now.
10 But it is something that I was very candid
11 about.
12 Q Have you ever had any dealings or communications
13 with Steve Magner?
14 A None. He attended the ad hoc meetings. I may
15 have said hello to him a time or two there.
16 But, no, I vaguely remember calling him once to
17 ask the status on a property. But I don't
18 remember the details. And that's all it was.
19 Q Do you remember anything Mr. Magner may have
20 said at these ad hoc meetings?
21 A No. He was not an official participant in the
22 ad hoc meetings. He sat in the back and watched
23 and listened.
24 Q From your recollection, he didn't have that NHPI
25 input or wasn't vocal about anything that was

162
1 going on?
2 A Correct.
3 Q What is your understanding of Mr. Magner's role
4 with the city? Do you know what his job duty or
5 title is?
6 A He is an inspector in NHPI, problem properties
7 are.
8 Q Did you say problem properties are?
9 A I did. I believe he controls the problem
10 property list. Let me say that more
11 efficiently.
12 Q Why would you think that he controls the problem
13 property list? Do you mean vacant building list
14 or do you mean problem property list?
15 A I stand corrected. I believe it is the vacant
16 building list, yes.
17 Q Do you know an individual by the name of Wally
18 Nelson?
19 A I do.
20 Q What do you know about Wally?
21 A He is a rehaber as they are called, an
22 individual that buys distressed property and
23 cleans it up. And I think he generally resells
24 it. I don't think he is a landlord, but I'm not
25 sure.

163
1 Q Do you know Wally personally or just in the
2 context of knowing what he does?
3 A To the best of my knowledge, I have never met
4 him. I know him in the context of what he does.
5 Q How do you know what Wally does?
6 A Again, it's a small community. I know quite a
7 few rehabers either through name or ones that I
8 have met. Also, I had one business transaction
9 with him.
10 (Deposition Exhibit No. 4 was
11 marked for identification.)
12 Q (Continuing by Mr. Engel) Handing you what's
13 been marked as Cullen Exhibit 4, I will give you
14 a minute to look through those documents.
15 For the record, it's a series of
16 ten pages which includes a HUD settlement
17 statement, a warranty deed, it looks like an
18 invoice, a purchase agreement, an as is
19 addendum, and a letter from the City of
20 St. Paul. Is that what you see in your series
21 of documents, Mr. Cullen?
22 A Yes.
23 Q Does this refresh your recollection of a
24 transaction you've done with Mr. Nelson?
25 A Yes.

164
1 Q Can you tell me about that transaction?
2 A It was a single family home on 951 Margaret
3 Street in St. Paul on the east side. We found
4 this home through our investigation looking for
5 distressed property. It was a vacant building.
6 I don't recall if it was condemned or not. We
7 put in a purchase agreement. There's a copy of
8 it here dated 5/30/98 for $30,000. The purchase
9 agreement was accepted. It was bank owned. It
10 was a foreclosure. The bank accepted the
11 purchase agreement, and we started working
12 towards closing.
13 Some period before closing, a few
14 days -- so we were well into the process -- I
15 drove passed the property just to see how it
16 looked. The city was out there preparing to
17 bulldoze it. They had cut the electric to the
18 building already. I believe that they had dug
19 up the potable water line into the building as
20 well, and they were in the process of removing
21 asbestos siding on the side of the building.
22 Q What did you do in response to that?
23 A Well, the city is getting ready to bulldoze it
24 so I didn't want to buy it anymore. I contacted
25 the realtor who was representing me.

165
1 Q Who was that?
2 A Patty Johnson was her name. She's been
3 remarried. It's Patty Kempf now. Patty was a
4 broker for Metro Realty. I contacted her and
5 told her that they're going to bulldoze the
6 house. We tried to stop it at the time. This
7 was before I was president of the landlord
8 association, before I was really doing much
9 activity in the City of St. Paul also. I didn't
10 know anybody there at all. We contacted
11 everyone we could think of to try and stop the
12 bulldozing because it was our intention to
13 rebuild the building. We were unsuccessful. So
14 we filled out a cancellation agreement, which I
15 don't know if that's in here or not. We filled
16 out a cancellation agreement on the purchase
17 agreement. And my realtor sent it in. And we
18 canceled out of the purchase agreement.
19 My realtor at the time -- again,
20 she specialized in these form of housing,
21 distressed housing. She knew Wally. Wally was
22 a client of hers. She contacted Wally. Wally
23 made an agreement. Again, I never met Wally.
24 But the agreement that was passed back to me
25 through my realtor was that Wally would buy the

166
1 building from the bank because I had canceled
2 out. Wally would stop the demolition in the
3 city. He bought the building from the bank for
4 $10,000 as compared to the $30,000 that I had
5 agreed to pay. And then he agreed to sell the
6 building to me for $15,000. And that's what the
7 paperwork you see in front of you is.
8 Q So the HUD statement in here shows your purchase
9 from Renovation, Inc. which you know as being
10 Wally's company?
11 A Wally Nelson, yes.
12 Q For $15,000?
13 A That is correct.
14 Q So it ended up being a pretty good deal for you.
15 Is that right?
16 A Yeah. I had additional costs because I believe
17 at this point the code compliance kicked in
18 because it didn't have electricity. It didn't
19 have water. I had to pay additional fees for
20 the -- as you see the bill here, I had to pay
21 this bill of 2,800 and some dollars to the
22 contractor that was preparing to bulldoze the
23 house.
24 Q Do you know how Mr. Nelson was able to stop the
25 demolition but you weren't?

167
1 A I wish I knew. I have no idea.
2 Q Would it concern you, as a fellow rehaber and as
3 the president of SPARL, to know that Wally
4 Nelson or that Steve Magner testified that he
5 goes out for beers with Wally on a weekly basis?
6 A I don't know that it would concern me. It would
7 concern me if -- I hoped that they keep their
8 business and personal life separate.
9 Q You recognize Wally as being a rehaber in the
10 vacant building market?
11 A Absolutely.
12 Q And you know Mr. Magner as being the head of the
13 vacant building department?
14 A Yes. But Mr. Magner should have no control over
15 who owns the building.
16 Q Do you think Mr. Magner would have any control
17 over whether a demolition goes forward or not?
18 A Wally stopped it. I don't know how he stopped
19 it. I don't know.
20 Q Would it concern you that Mr. Magner testified
21 that Wally's company built a house for
22 Mr. Magner's father?
23 A There's some odd things going on here. I don't
24 know what's going on, Matt. I don't know. I
25 don't know how -- I thought -- when we tried to

168
1 stop this, the city said they can't stop these
2 things once they get going and then they stopped
3 it. There's some odd things going on here. I
4 don't know how Wally did what he did or what his
5 relationship with Mr. Magner is.
6 Q Is it your opinion that there should be some
7 sort of safe distance between the head of the
8 vacant building department and one of the bigger
9 players in the city in the vacant building
10 rehabs?
11 A If you have consistent processes and procedures
12 and a professionalism about you, it shouldn't
13 matter. Because once a house gets into a
14 certain process and a certain procedure, the
15 same results come out the other end. But I
16 don't see consistent processes and procedures
17 coming out of NHPI or the people affiliated with
18 NHPI. And I don't see a real professionalism
19 coming out of them. So, yes, it concerns me.
20 Q So on that consistency type of analysis, do you
21 think it's consistent that Bill Cullen can't
22 stop a demolition but Wally Nelson can stop a
23 demolition and turn around and sell you the
24 property?
25 A It's shocking.

169
1 EXAMINATION
2 BY MS. SISK:
3 Q Mr. Cullen, I first want to take you back to
4 when we were talking about when you had occasion
5 to go to Mr. Steinhauser's two properties. Why
6 did you go to his properties?
7 A He was having trouble with the city. He
8 contacted SPARL and expressed concern, a feeling
9 that he was being unfairly treated. It was
10 referred to me as some of the more serious
11 cases. And in that case, I talked to Frank on
12 the phone and he invited me over.
13 Q So when you were in his two properties, were you
14 looking for anything in particular?
15 A No, just looking to see what the concerns were.
16 I didn't do an inspection. I didn't go in and
17 test furnaces and plumbing systems. I walked
18 through and asked myself what the building looks
19 like, what kind of condition it's in.
20 Q I believe you stated earlier it seemed to you
21 that everything was functioning in the two
22 units. Is that right?
23 A Dated and functional I said, yes.
24 Q But you didn't actually check the actual
25 function of everything in the units. Is that

170
1 right?
2 A That's true.
3 Q What types of concerns did Mr. Steinhauser
4 present to you regarding these two properties?
5 A Only the city targeting. I don't remember a
6 discussion about particular issues.
7 Q But Mr. Steinhauser told you that he thought he
8 was being targeted?
9 A And I don't remember if that's the word he used.
10 But just unfair treatment from the city was what
11 the whole meeting was about.
12 Q Do you remember any specifics that Frank told
13 you about?
14 A No. All the time that we spent together was
15 talking about kind of -- well, what do you think
16 of the condition of the property? I didn't see
17 anything that really concerned me. As you said,
18 I didn't test things either.
19 Q Did you look at the outside of the properties?
20 A Only as an individual would when they walk up to
21 the building. I didn't circle it or look at
22 every crevice and every crack.
23 Q Did you have any reason to go into other of
24 Mr. Steinhauser's property besides those two?
25 A No.

171
1 Q Throughout today when we have been talking about
2 the members of SPARL, I have heard you say that
3 you received many complaints from members. Is
4 that accurate?
5 A Yes.
6 Q Just in general, can you explain to me how SPARL
7 works and how they get complaints from members?
8 A SPARL, again, is St. Paul Association of
9 Responsible Landlords. What the mission of
10 SPARL is is to try and educate landlords and the
11 community about the rental business. We have
12 found over the years that a lot of landlords get
13 into the business or individuals get into the
14 landlording business, I should say, without
15 understanding laws or obligations or things they
16 can or cannot do. So SPARL has classes,
17 Landlord 101 and Landlord 102, to try and teach
18 the basics of how to be a responsible landlord
19 as well as monthly meetings that are topical.
20 But the whole purpose of SPARL is educational in
21 nature.
22 And how do we get the phone call?
23 When landlords feel things are going bad or
24 they're being targeted, people would call us up
25 to either ask for educational help or to find

172
1 out if the city can do what they're doing.
2 Q When you receive calls or calls of concern from
3 the members of SPARL, are these members
4 landlords that just deal with class C
5 properties?
6 A I don't know. We have never kept that kind of
7 data. So I don't know.
8 Q I think you said earlier today that your
9 membership of SPARL covers a wide variety of
10 tenant bases and a wide variety of types of
11 properties. Would that be fair?
12 A Yeah, it's an open membership. Anyone who owns
13 a rental property can join. So landlords in
14 St. Paul represent class A, B, and C properties.
15 So yes.
16 Q Do you know Frank Steinhauser?
17 A I do.
18 Q How long have you known Frank?
19 A I believe since that time we walked through
20 those two duplexes. That's the first time I met
21 him.
22 Q Do you know what year that was in?
23 A I don't. I would guess it was three years ago,
24 maybe more. I'm guessing, Cheri.
25 Q That was the first time you had ever heard from

173
1 Mr. Steinhauser?
2 A Yes.
3 Q Did you ever see Mr. Steinhauser at any of the
4 SPARL meetings?
5 A I did.
6 Q How much do you think Mr. Steinhauser would go
7 to the meetings?
8 A I never kept count. I would say that when I
9 first got involved, he was pretty regular. And
10 then it trailed off after that to a point that
11 at the end I didn't see him a lot.
12 Q What years were you president of SPARL?
13 A 2003, 2004, and 2005.
14 Q I apologize. I'm going to be jumping around a
15 lot to different topics to fill in some of the
16 things you've already discussed earlier today.
17 I want to go back to when you spoke about code
18 compliances. I just want to make sure I heard
19 you correctly earlier; that you have never been
20 involved in a code compliance with a building
21 after you've already rehabed and rented the
22 building. Is that correct?
23 A Yes.
24 Q So your experience with code compliance was
25 strictly when you're in the process of rahabing

174
1 a property. Is that correct?
2 A My only experience with code compliance is in
3 acquisition. I'm looking at a building that has
4 a code compliance issue ordered against it and
5 I'm looking at acquiring that building and then,
6 of course, going through the rehabilitation to
7 satisfy the code compliance.
8 Q So before you purchase a property, you know if
9 it's involved in a code compliance or not.
10 Right?
11 A Yes.
12 Q So you know when you purchase that property
13 you're going to have to spend some money to
14 bring it up to code. Is that correct?
15 A That is correct.
16 Q You said that Dawkins came to a meeting early on
17 in his time as a director of NHPI and brought in
18 a large flowchart. Correct?
19 A He went to community meetings with that
20 flowchart, yes. I remember two of them that I
21 went to. One was held at Metro State University
22 and then the second one was held -- my mind goes
23 blank now. It's those golf courses north of
24 Maryland up there just east of Arcade and north
25 of Maryland. There's a building there that he

175
1 had another one at. I went to both of those
2 community meetings. They were not landlord
3 meetings.
4 Q I know Mr. Shoemaker kept referring to Dawkins
5 as having a forced sale policy. Did you ever
6 hear Dawkins say that he had a forced sale
7 policy?
8 A I'm not comfortable with the word policy. But
9 forcing the landlord to sell, yes, absolutely.
10 He very much said that there comes a point when
11 we'll force a landlord to sell, yes.
12 Q Did he say what point would that come to?
13 A Oh, yes, it was on his flowchart. It was
14 written on there. It was very clear.
15 Q Do you remember in what circumstance he believed
16 that they should force a sale?
17 A I don't. I don't.
18 Q I want to take you back to the comment you said
19 Mr. Dawkins made at the meeting regarding the
20 Payne and Phalen neighborhood. You said that
21 Dawkins posed as a question to the group how
22 would people feel if there were no longer
23 certain tenants in St. Paul. Was that a
24 question that he asked everybody at that
25 meeting?

176
1 A That's what I remember.
2 Q Again, correct me if I'm wrong, but the meeting
3 you had regarding the Payne and Phalen area, was
4 that more of a brainstorming time for everybody
5 to come together and see how they could improve
6 that neighborhood?
7 A That's what I wanted. I'm not sure that I
8 really achieved it. Leslie McMurray is the one
9 that's really driving and Leslie McMurray is so
10 set on blaming the landlord. Every time I see
11 her quote in the paper, she's still saying that
12 same thing. What I wanted to have the
13 discussion on is there are other problems.
14 There are the police that aren't giving us
15 police reports. There are police that aren't
16 writing police reports. There are the Courts
17 that aren't helping us with evictions or helping
18 us with prosecutions and others. There's those
19 things that we want to talk about. I never felt
20 that we got there because we couldn't get passed
21 the biases that people had when Frank entered
22 the room.
23 The whole topic was how do we all
24 work together in improving the Payne/Phalen
25 neighborhood, and I'm not confident that we ever

177
1 got there.
2 Q One of the things that Ms. McMurray was very
3 vocal about was, you said, getting rid of
4 landlords. Is that correct?
5 A I don't know that it's getting rid of landlords
6 as much as it's punishing landlords. She's very
7 focusing on blaming. Blaming is the right word.
8 Blaming landlords for all the ills in the
9 Payne/Phalen neighborhood.
10 Q Did she ever say why she was blaming landlords?
11 What was her reason?
12 A Well, her whole thing comes down to if landlords
13 would screen better, we'd have better tenants
14 and our neighborhoods wouldn't have the problems
15 with the drugs and gangs and whatever that it
16 has in that neighborhood.
17 Q So her opinion was based solely on the way that
18 the landlords were screening tenants?
19 A Again, I encourage you to ask her but that's my
20 impression, yes.
21 Q Did she mention any frustration with the
22 landlords in that Payne and Phalen area because
23 of the way they were maintaining their
24 properties or not maintaining their properties?
25 A I believe that she has, yes.

178
1 Q Did she say that one of the reasons that she was
2 focusing so much on the landlords was not only
3 because of screening tenants but also because of
4 their ability or lack of ability to maintain
5 properties?
6 A It's always secondary when she talks. The
7 primary is all about behavioral issues.
8 Secondary is about the way the buildings look.
9 Q You talked earlier today that Councilmember
10 Lantry used Mr. Steinhauser as an example of a
11 problem landlord. Right?
12 A Yes.
13 Q Did she expand why she thought Mr. Steinhauser
14 was a problem landlord?
15 A No. It was -- you have to think about the
16 context of the entire discussion. The context
17 of the discussion was St. Paul was wrapping
18 up -- wrapping or changing the way they deal
19 with landlords. Andy Dawkins, Mayor Kelly were
20 leading that. At the same time, Jay Benenav was
21 pushing for a bunch of student housing changes
22 going on as well. So all of that was up in play
23 at the same time.
24 So Deb Moran and myself and I think
25 Carol Bucha went in. And all we really wanted

179
1 to achieve was we're good reasonable people,
2 let's work on this together. That's all we
3 wanted to achieve. So we never talked about
4 anything in specific. But Kathy kept --
5 whenever she wanted to make an example of a
6 problem owner, rather than talk about a problem
7 owner or whatever her issues were with the
8 property, she would just say, people like Frank
9 Steinhauser or something to that effect.
10 Q Would you agree with Councilmember Lantry?
11 A About what?
12 Q About her opinion on Mr. Steinhauser?
13 A No, I think he's a fine landlord.
14 Q You said that the city was changing the ways
15 that it dealt with landlords. How are they
16 changing the ways they deal with landlords, in
17 your opinion?
18 A Again, the context back then. Is that what you
19 mean by back then?
20 Q Back then, yes.
21 A Andy Dawkins made significant changes to Chapter
22 34 and 56, significant changes. That's why we
23 got excessive consumption. I don't believe that
24 was part of it until then. That's how we got --
25 I have forgotten many of the changes now. But

180
1 there were all those proposals as well as about
2 regulating student housing as a specialty rental
3 class. That was a Benenav proposal.
4 So those were the changes that were
5 being proposed. And the Andy Dawkins/Mayor
6 Kelly came through in some form or another. It
7 came through. I think it was slightly different
8 from what was initially proposed.
9 Q So the first thing you mentioned was Dawkins
10 made changes to the St. Paul legislative code?
11 A Not -- legislate is state, isn't it?
12 Q I'm sorry. Chapter 34. You said Dawkins made
13 changes to Chapter 34?
14 A Again, only the city council can. But he had
15 proposals for those changes. And the city
16 council adopted them, yes.
17 Q How were those changes directed at the landlord
18 specifically, though, in your opinion?
19 A I'd refer you to Exhibit 2, and I included in
20 here --
21 Q What page are you looking at?
22 A It's the one that has the old fashion type on
23 it. It's the only one -- it doesn't have a
24 header or anything on it. It just has six
25 bullets on it.

181
1 Q It looks like that's page 9 of Exhibit 2.
2 A Those were notes to myself that I just pulled
3 off my computer about issues that we had with
4 his proposal at that time, and the proposal went
5 through multiple iterations. This shows some of
6 the things that were being proposed and how it
7 does affect landlords. I have forgotten my
8 chapters.
9 But Chapter 34, I think, is -- one
10 of them applies only to rental property, and one
11 of them applies to properties in general. I
12 think Chapter 34 is in general and 56 is
13 landlords in specific. I hope I'm right. But,
14 certainly, some of the changes for Chapter 56
15 were targeted at landlords only. I hope that
16 was your question. I have forgotten it because
17 I talked too long.
18 Q I believe earlier Mr. Shoemaker asked you if you
19 ever heard of a PHA property that had gone
20 through a code compliance. Do you remember
21 that?
22 A I do.
23 Q What was your answer?
24 A That I'm unaware of it.
25 Q Would you have any reason to be aware of that?

182
1 A No.
2 Q Is it your understanding that if you were to
3 receive a code compliance letter from NHPI and
4 specifically in the context if you got the mail
5 late, for example, is it your understanding that
6 you could call NHPI and ask for an extension on
7 the date to be in compliance?
8 A You said code compliance letter.
9 Q I'm sorry. I meant a Correction Notice.
10 A A correction order? I don't know. I don't know
11 what the policies are inside of NHPI to know if
12 you could do that or not.
13 Q I'm going to refer you to Cullen Exhibit 3.
14 It's the letter that Andy Dawkins wrote to you
15 in response to your letter to former Mayor
16 Kelly. I'm looking at item 2 when he answered
17 your question. I'm sorry. I apologize. I
18 think I was looking at the wrong thing.
19 A And I just finished reading that, Cheri.
20 Q Does it say anything in there about being able
21 to call and request an extension?
22 A It does.
23 Q Did you ever have any reason to call for an
24 extension?
25 A All the orders I received came after the due

183
1 date. So I never called for an extension. This
2 one here I just appealed.
3 Q Earlier today you talked a little bit about how
4 when fire inspectors would come out and look at
5 some of your buildings, that you felt that the
6 process that different fire inspectors used to
7 investigate concerns was inconsistent. Is that
8 correct?
9 A Correct.
10 Q In your experience with fire inspectors,
11 regardless of how they handled the inspection or
12 the investigation initially, was the end result
13 consistent?
14 A I think so. I believe so, yes.
15 Q Earlier today too I remember you saying that
16 some times it's a reality, being a property
17 owner of class C properties, that you have to
18 deal with certain types of tenants. Is that
19 correct?
20 A As a landlord I deal with all kinds of people.
21 Q That was unclear. I'm sorry. Tell me again,
22 how is it different being a property owner of a
23 class C property compared to a class A or B
24 property?
25 A It's only in the nature of the quality of the

184
1 tenant applicant. A higher -- a class A
2 building and a class B building will generally
3 have a higher quality applicant than a class C
4 building will.
5 Q Tell me what you mean by quality of tenant.
6 A Well, if you're an executive at 3M, you're going
7 to apply at a different building expecting
8 different amenities and different services than
9 if you're a low income individual or, even
10 worse, somebody with a criminal record or maybe
11 horrible credit. There are different
12 expectations by the customer as well as
13 different services provided by the provider.
14 Q What do you think you have to do differently as
15 a landlord when you choose to rent to those --
16 to individuals who rent in class C properties?
17 Would you have to do anything differently as a
18 landlord of a class C property rather than a
19 class A or B property?
20 A There's a lot of things different. With a class
21 A building, I think the customers would demand
22 certain amenities and certain services; wherein
23 class C I don't have dishwashers in almost any
24 of the apartments. It's very seldom an issue.
25 And yet I think I personally -- maybe my wife

185
1 more than me. I don't think I would live in a
2 place without a dishwasher today. But that
3 doesn't make it a bad place. That makes it
4 affordable and it keeps it affordable for the
5 individuals that are more cost conscious. It's
6 very different in the approach.
7 For the class -- if I had a class A
8 building, which I don't right now, I would be
9 very sensitive towards amenities, where the
10 amenities aren't -- it's much more cost
11 sensitive in the class C.
12 Q Do you think your maintenance requirements of a
13 class C building are different than your
14 maintenance requirements of a class A building?
15 A Yeah. I think in a class C building you have
16 dramatically higher maintenance due to damage.
17 In a class A you might have a little bit higher
18 maintenance due to the amenities that you offer.
19 I don't have to fix garage door openers and
20 dishwashers and microwave ovens like you might
21 have in a class A building. But in a class A
22 building, I don't have to fix screens and
23 windows every week and have doors torn off of
24 hinges.
25 Q So you'd anticipate a higher cost for you as the

186
1 landlord when you have a class C building. Is
2 that correct?
3 A Yes, I think you have a higher cost structure.
4 Q Besides the time you went to Mr. Steinhauser's
5 properties, have you talked to Frank any more
6 about this lawsuit?
7 A Yes.
8 Q What have you two talked about?
9 A It generally goes along the lines of how's it
10 going? We just have general discussions. Frank
11 has not given me much for specifics.
12 Q Are you here under a Subpoena today?
13 A I am not.
14 Q How did you become aware of the deposition
15 today?
16 A Just by -- John contacted me and asked me if I
17 would come in and asked if I wanted to be
18 subpoenaed, and I told him I didn't think that
19 was necessary.
20 Q When you say John, you mean John Shoemaker.
21 Correct?
22 A Yes, Cheri.
23 Q Have you spoken to Mr. Shoemaker at all besides
24 when he asked you to come in for this
25 deposition?

187
1 A Only one other time at a meeting with the
2 Minneapolis landlord group.
3 Q When was that?
4 A It's probably been two years.
5 Q Did Mr. Shoemaker tell you what to expect from
6 your deposition today?
7 A No. He said two hours.
8 Q Do you know Steve Johnson?
9 A I have met Steve.
10 Q Is today the first day you met Steve?
11 A No. I met Steve before.
12 Q How long have you known him?
13 A I think I probably met him a couple years ago at
14 a SPARL meeting for the first time.
15 Q Have you talked to Mr. Johnson at all about this
16 litigation?
17 A No.
18 Q Did you go to lunch with Mr. Steinhauser and
19 Mr. Johnson while we were on break?
20 A Yes, I did.
21 Q What did you guys talk about?
22 A Mr. Shoemaker told us we couldn't talk about the
23 case so we talked about all kinds of things
24 other than the case.
25 Q Did you talk about this deposition so far?

188
1 A Or the deposition. We didn't talk about any of
2 it.
3 Q Did Mr. Shoemaker and Mr. Steinhauser ever ask
4 you to present an affidavit to help them in
5 their case?
6 A No.
7 Q You would agree that it's important for the city
8 to ensure that property, especially rental
9 property, is suitable for people to live in.
10 Right?
11 A Why would you single out rental property?
12 Q I'm just curious. I'm asking what you think
13 about rental property.
14 A I think it's important that all property is safe
15 to live in.
16 Q Including rental property. Correct?
17 A Of course, yes.
18 Q Although you feel that or you stated earlier you
19 thought Chapter 34 relating to all properties in
20 general, in their general upkeep, is vague,
21 wouldn't you agree that it's important for the
22 city to still hold all properties in the city to
23 that standard that is set forth within
24 Chapter 34?
25 A I think it's important all property is safe. I

189
1 think the standard in 34 is far beyond safety.
2 So, no, I don't think that Chapter 34 is a good
3 thing.
4 Q When you say it's far beyond safe, what do you
5 mean by that?
6 A I'd have to go back and read it. I know there
7 is a whole lot more in there than about safety.
8 Q Have you ever been inside any of Mr. Johnson's
9 properties?
10 A No.
11 Q Are you familiar with who the other plaintiffs
12 are in this lawsuit?
13 A Some of them.
14 Q Do you know Tom Gallagher?
15 A I do.
16 Q How do you know Tom?
17 A I met Tom -- I think I met him at a SPARL
18 meeting again. I have talked to him on and off
19 over the past few years.
20 Q Have you talked to him about this litigation?
21 A I have recently, but not until recently. I
22 talked to him as a landlord.
23 Q What did you and Tom talk about regarding this
24 litigation?
25 A Just kind of the progress of it and how things

190
1 are going.
2 Q What did Tom tell you?
3 A We just talked -- his statements are general,
4 things are going good. He thinks that they are
5 gathering the evidence that they need, I think.
6 I hate to put words in it because they were
7 general comments.
8 Q Did Tom mention to you what type of evidence
9 that he was looking for in this lawsuit?
10 A Not so much looking for, but that they had and
11 they are gathering.
12 Q How about Troy Allison, do you know Troy
13 Allison?
14 A I don't.
15 Q Joe Collins?
16 A I do know Joe.
17 Q How long have you known Joe?
18 A About the same time I have known Tom because he
19 and Tom work together.
20 Q Did you meet Joe at a SPARL's meeting?
21 A Again, I believe that's the case, yes. I have
22 known who they are for a couple of years.
23 Q Have you talked to Joe Collins about this
24 lawsuit?
25 A No.

191
1 Q How about Sandra Harrilal?
2 A I do not.
3 Q Mark Meysembourg?
4 A I know the name, but I don't know him.
5 Q How about Sara or Jeff Kubitschek?
6 A I don't know them.
7 MR. ENGEL: I don't mean to
8 interrupt, Cheri, but there was one plaintiff
9 that I know you didn't ask him about. And that
10 was Bee Vue. Right?
11 Q (Continuing by Ms. Sisk) That's true.
12 A I do know Bee.
13 Q How do you know Bee?
14 A Bee owned a rental property near mine. That's
15 how I have met him, so I have known him since
16 1999.
17 Q Have you talked to him at all about this
18 lawsuit?
19 A No.
20 Q Earlier today you mentioned that you brought the
21 documents that we have now marked as Cullen
22 Exhibit 2 because you believe they would be
23 relevant. How would you know what documents to
24 bring that would be relevant for today?
25 A Only through the general discussions I have had

192
1 on the case.
2 Q Give me an example.
3 A Well, the case is a RICO Case against the City
4 of St. Paul for, I think, targeting landlords.
5 So these are the issues that have been discussed
6 for years, and they have been discussed through
7 SPARL.
8 Q I was struck by your comment right away in the
9 beginning of your deposition that must be a
10 phrase for Cullen Homes. You said that you buy
11 distressed properties and turn them into good
12 neighbors?
13 A Yes.
14 Q What does that mean?
15 A It is nebulous and it's intentionally nebulous,
16 but that is our goal. When we own a property,
17 we like to be welcomed by the neighborhood.
18 Q What would that mean to you to be welcomed by
19 the neighborhood?
20 A We try and get active in the community and
21 active in the area. I try and attend
22 neighborhood meetings. That's how I was talking
23 about Karen du Paul earlier, in that manner.
24 Q Would being a good neighbor include maintaining
25 your property?

193
1 A Certainly.
2 Q In general. Can I have you look at Cullen
3 Exhibit 2 on the second page? It's your letter
4 to Mayor Elect Chris Coleman. In the second
5 paragraph there is a statement in there that you
6 made that "we are happy with the clear progress
7 that has been made in some neighborhoods in
8 St. Paul." What were you referring to when you
9 wrote that?
10 A I don't recall.
11 Q Then the paragraph following that there is
12 another statement that says that you're happy
13 with the dramatic progress in cleaning up
14 problem properties. Do you remember what you
15 were referring to when you wrote that?
16 A The fire department -- I'd have to back all the
17 way up to a discussion I had with Ruth Ann Eide
18 back in the late '90s when she talked about
19 how -- the properties that had -- the areas that
20 had the most problems were full of large multi-
21 unit buildings. And it was Ruth Ann Eide's
22 belief that some of the fire department's
23 efforts helped improve those large multi-unit
24 buildings. I wasn't real active in the City of
25 St. Paul at that time. So it's hard for me to

194
1 go back to talk about what it was. But that is
2 what I was thinking about when I wrote that.
3 That is the effort, talking about St. Paul Fire
4 Department, making about dramatic progress in
5 cleaning up.
6 Q You were referring to the progress that was made
7 in the early '90s in St. Paul?
8 A Again, it would be really a reference towards
9 what Ruth -- Ruth Ann said in her opinion that
10 the complaints had shifted from large buildings
11 to the small buildings during that period in the
12 late '90s.
13 Q When Andy Dawkins would come to the SPARL
14 meetings, what types of things did he talk
15 about?
16 A I don't recall. Certainly, it was all about
17 code enforcement, NHPI. But the topics I don't
18 recall. I did write in the thank you letter for
19 attending -- which is part of this I think.
20 It's page 10 addressed to Andy Dawkins and Perry
21 DeStefano. I do remember when he came and
22 talked on the definition of a problem property.
23 I do remember that discussion, but that's about
24 all I remember. That was back in 2003, four
25 years ago.

195
1 MS. SISK: Thank you, Mr. Cullen.
2 That's all I have for you.
3
4 EXAMINATION
5 BY MR. SHOEMAKER:
6 Q I have got a few. I'll try to keep this short.
7 Did Mr. Dawkins ever talk to you about code
8 compliances or code compliance inspections?
9 A Not that I recall.
10 Q Did he ever use a phrase code compliance?
11 A Yeah, he talked about code compliance frequently
12 but I don't remember a conversation. I remember
13 him talking about code compliance during
14 presentations that he made.
15 Q Did he ever say that his program included the
16 use of code compliances to force sale of
17 properties?
18 A I don't recall that. It would be on that white
19 board, that thing that he carried around and
20 gave the presentation. I do remember code
21 compliance being on there, but I don't remember
22 where it was on his flowchart.
23 Q Let's go back just for a couple minutes on this
24 meeting that you referred to. You weren't sure
25 when it was, but it was during Mr. Dawkins'

196
1 tenure and it was a meeting you had requested.
2 Mr. Dawkins showed up with, I believe, you said
3 a District 5 representative, Ms. McMurray?
4 A Yes.
5 Q Do you recall if the landlords presented, during
6 that particular meeting, their concerns about
7 issues that they had been experiencing on the
8 east side with the rental properties?
9 A Oh, yes. It was kind of an open mike. There
10 wasn't a leader. We all sat in a big round --
11 it wasn't round but a rectangular setup. We all
12 faced each other and we all talked openly.
13 Q Do you remember any discussion about illegal
14 dumping being a concern to the landlords? Do
15 you know what I mean by illegal dumping?
16 A Yeah. Gosh. Illegal dumping is brought up
17 frequently. I know it was brought up to Andy as
18 well. I don't know if it was at that meeting or
19 at one of the SPARL meetings that he attended.
20 Q Was inability to obtain police reports discussed
21 in that meeting, do you know?
22 A Oh, yes.
23 Q Is that because there was a talk about screening
24 of tenants and the type of tenants that were
25 available to the private market?

197
1 A I don't remember the context. Certainly, if --
2 police reports have two serious ramifications on
3 us. The first is, as you pointed out,
4 screening. We could have an individual that has
5 broke the law and been arrested many times but
6 never convicted, and we have trouble getting
7 that information. The second, though, is if you
8 have an existing tenant that has broke the law,
9 if they don't get arrested or if we don't get
10 access to the police reports, we can't remove
11 them. So here we are being held accountable for
12 the actions of the tenant when the police won't
13 give us information we need to walk into court
14 with and remove the tenant.
15 Q Also, you're saying that there's concerns by the
16 private landlords that when they are trying to
17 determine whether they should take a tenant,
18 they can't get the information other than, for
19 example, conviction records. So they can't get
20 the full information to have a full
21 understanding as to the true quality of an
22 applicant because the police department won't
23 issue police reports that were basically
24 investigation reports?
25 A That's right.

198
1 Q And then once you get the tenant in, if there is
2 some type of conduct that the police are saying
3 is nuisance behavior or a concern at the police
4 department, unless there's a conviction, you
5 can't get the reports that are backing up this
6 particular conduct that's of concern about your
7 tenant. Is that right?
8 A That's absolutely right. There's a letter
9 addressing that in this Exhibit 2. I had sent
10 repeated letters from SPARL; first to Chief
11 Harrington asking for them to make the police
12 reports -- make the public information truly
13 public. And, second, to John Harrington, Chief
14 Harrington, where actually we ended the
15 letter -- we never got a response even from
16 Chief Finney on matter at all, this letter that
17 we sent.
18 With Chief Harrington, we ended it
19 by saying we were going to take the issue to the
20 press if they did not change their ways.
21 They're breaking the law. And the opinion that
22 I had -- and I wrote this letter. In Statute
23 13.82, they have an institutional policy of
24 breaking the law, not giving us -- an
25 investigative report is public information

199
1 according to state law and they were not giving
2 it to us.
3 Q You're talking about the seventh page of Exhibit
4 2, the March 2nd, 2007 letter from Cullen Homes,
5 Inc, yourself, to Chief William Finney, two
6 pages in length?
7 A That's the one that went ignored. If you go two
8 pages before that, you get to the one to Chief
9 Harrington. They're very similar letters, a lot
10 of the same text in it.
11 Q Was that letter ignored as well?
12 A That one was responded to, actually, by the
13 Mayor's office.
14 Q Do you have a copy of that response?
15 A We did not get a written response. We had a
16 meeting at the Mayor's office with Deputy
17 Chief -- I forgot his name now -- but Kelly's
18 deputy chief.
19 Q Let's go back to this meeting with Ms. McMurray
20 and Mr. Dawkins. The purpose of the meeting was
21 to talk about landlord concerns. Is that right?
22 A No. Ms. McMurray -- that meeting was about how
23 we worked together to raise Payne/Phalen, and
24 that it shouldn't just be gunning for the
25 landlords.

200
1 Q Did the landlords there at the meeting point out
2 the market, the oversupply of housing in the
3 market, during that time period?
4 A Oh, yes. That was a discussion surrounding the
5 Housing 5000 that we had.
6 Q So there was a discussion at the meeting about
7 Housing 5000?
8 A Yes.
9 Q How about with regard to public housing and
10 availability of low income housing, both in the
11 new project 5000 but also the public housing, as
12 part of this oversupply problem?
13 A I don't recall the exact term. But, certainly,
14 if you're going to talk about an oversupply, you
15 have to include the housing provided by PHA. I
16 think they're the largest housing provider in
17 the city.
18 Q The landlords at that meeting with
19 Mr. Dawkins and Ms. McMurray, did they indicate
20 that they were experiencing applicants that were
21 maybe rougher in character or less desirable
22 than what they had experienced before because of
23 what they thought was this oversupply?
24 A You're testing my memory here. I know that that
25 discussion has been brought up in many forms. I

201
1 don't know if it was brought up in that
2 particular one. But it was brought up in many
3 forms.
4 Q Did the landlords at that meeting indicate that
5 they thought that the Housing 5000 and the
6 Public Housing Association were skimming off
7 some of the better tenants and leaving the
8 private market with what the city was
9 classifying as less desirable tenants from a
10 standpoint of quality of tenants?
11 A I think just from that chart that I drew, I
12 think in general, people agreed with this and
13 that would -- that implies that they are doing
14 that. I can tell you they are doing it to me.
15 Q That the better quality applicants are on the
16 higher part of your chart on Exhibit 1 at the
17 bottom?
18 A Yes.
19 Q In other words, your box here in Exhibit 1, at
20 the bottom of the page 1 of that exhibit, at the
21 top you've got purchase. Those are higher
22 quality applicants that would have better credit
23 scores, more financial wherewithal, so they
24 would be able to meet mortgage qualifications to
25 purchase homes. Correct?

202
1 A Correct.
2 Q Then the next group down in quality would be the
3 ones that actually could probably qualify for
4 the $330 million portfolio of new housing under
5 the Housing 5000?
6 A Correct.
7 Q Not quite as high of quality of individual that
8 could maybe purchase a home but at least could
9 get into the brand new apartments. Correct?
10 A Correct.
11 Q And so on and so forth down your chart here to
12 where you get to the bottom where maybe you've
13 got these issues about poor credit, poor rental
14 history, poor criminal history, that type of
15 thing?
16 A Correct.
17 Q Did Mr. Dawkins ever say that maybe the solution
18 for the city, including the private landlords,
19 was to try to increase the quality of properties
20 to such a point that this lower group of less
21 qualified tenants would not have a place to
22 rent?
23 A I believe that's what he was implying all along
24 when he asked the question of; how would it be
25 if we just didn't have to deal with the tenants

203
1 that were at the bottom of this market.
2 Q I know that. But was he tying that into the
3 system that he had to have a higher code
4 enforcement standard so that the properties
5 would be at a higher quality level, therefore,
6 these individuals would not have a place to
7 rent, either because of affordability or too
8 high of cost of the properties, that kind of
9 thing?
10 A I believe that's exactly what he said.
11 Q Was that to you concerning that a city official
12 would be voicing that type of a policy or
13 advocating that kind of a policy?
14 A I remember being shocked by Andy's comments,
15 shocked or surprised. I don't know if concern
16 came to mind as much as, wow, that's surprising.
17 Q Theoretically, if the city had a very high code
18 enforcement standard and heavy enforcement
19 activity across the city, they could raise the
20 costs of property owners to such a degree that
21 only people with substantial finances and
22 financial wherewithal could afford to live in
23 the city? Isn't that theoretically true?
24 A I think so.
25 Q Is it your understanding that there's

204
1 significant people in the city that are at a
2 poverty level, based on the census data which I
3 think you indicated earlier that you pulled?
4 A Of course.
5 Q Have you seen any concern by Mr. Dawkins or
6 Mayor Kelly or any other official in the last
7 four, five years about individuals in the city
8 that are at the poverty levels as to how this
9 increased code enforcement is going to affect
10 their ability to stay in the city?
11 A We have never had that kind of discussion.
12 Q Maybe not that discussion, but have you ever
13 heard any comments like that coming from city
14 hall?
15 A No.
16 Q That there's any kind of a concern for the
17 people that don't have money that are living in
18 the city and won't be able to afford the
19 heightened code enforcement?
20 A No.
21 Q Do you know of any elderly individuals that have
22 been subject to aggressive code enforcement
23 where they have lost their homes?
24 A I have heard stories. I do not know of any.
25 Q Is it possible to turn class C property into a

205
1 class B property and do it economically where it
2 would work for a landlord to be able to stay in
3 business?
4 A For some properties, yes. But for most, no.
5 I'd say no.
6 Q Is it because of the dated structure usually of
7 the building from an aesthetic standpoint as
8 well as structural?
9 A There are just different amenities. Take -- I
10 think the community is Ames Lake, the community
11 over there by Phalen Boulevard. The city sunk
12 $100 million into it or something. I don't
13 know. It's a large number. Probably not
14 $100 million but maybe tens of millions of
15 dollars into it. They have taken a class C
16 property and made it a really nice class C
17 property.
18 Even with that kind of expenditure,
19 I don't think you can move most class C
20 properties to a class B or a class A. You just
21 don't have the amenities. You don't have the
22 kitchen size or layout to be able to add the
23 features that are demanded by class B property.
24 You have all kinds of problems with spacing for
25 garages if you're going to add garages, which

206
1 are generally counted as a class A or class B
2 property.
3 Q Are the St. Paul police some of the individuals
4 that have been telling landlords that they need
5 to screen better?
6 A Yes.
7 Q That would include Ruth Ann Eide from the
8 St. Paul Police Department that kind of heads up
9 the screening portion of the efforts by the
10 police department with the landlords. Correct?
11 A I believe she does the crime free prevention.
12 Is that right? Part of her training, I believe,
13 is doing screening.
14 Q I think you referred to when you choose to rent
15 to certain customers. What I want to do is
16 clarify that. You've indicated here that you
17 have class C properties. Do you ever get calls
18 from anyone other than the class C type tenants
19 to rent your properties?
20 A I do, yes.
21 Q Under what circumstance would someone that could
22 qualify for a, let's say, higher type rental
23 property want to apply to a class C property?
24 A You asked if I had calls. I had a lot of calls.
25 I don't think I have had many applicants. I

207
1 advertise my buildings on apartments.com. And
2 apartments.com has some of the finest class A
3 all the way down to class C properties.
4 Generally, when I get a call from a client that
5 I would expect to be heading towards a class A
6 or a class B, when they come look at the
7 properties and amenities that I offer, they
8 don't generally apply.
9 Q You don't necessarily choose your tenants, do
10 you? Isn't it the market that somewhat dictates
11 who your tenants are?
12 A Certainly.
13 Q Because you're in the private rental market.
14 Correct?
15 A Correct.
16 Q Do you recall being at a SPARL meeting a couple
17 years back where Councilmember Benenav and
18 Mayor Kelly at the time made some presentation
19 to members of the SPARL group?
20 A I do.
21 Q Do you remember any comments by landlords
22 present at the meeting about their concern of a
23 police officer working in conjunction with a
24 code inspector to force their way into rental
25 properties?

208
1 A I don't remember that topic in particular.
2 Q Do you remember Mayor Kelly making a statement
3 in response to a landlord's concern that you
4 will comply, referring to you will comply with
5 the code?
6 A The code, I believe, was orders from the city.
7 Yes, I do remember that.
8 Q Do you remember how Mayor Kelly presented that
9 particular response?
10 A Aggressively.
11 Q Aggressively in body language?
12 A And tone.
13 Q Did he raise his voice?
14 A Yes.
15 Q What do you remember him saying? Anything in
16 particular?
17 A On that answer that's all he said was, you will
18 comply, as well as pointed at the individual.
19 Q Do you remember what the concern was that was
20 raised by the particular person that was present
21 that generated that response?
22 A It was about -- I don't is the short answer. My
23 general recollection is that it was about unfair
24 enforcement.
25 Q Do you recall Mayor Kelly -- was he seated in

209
1 the front of the room at that SPARL meeting?
2 A Yes.
3 Q When he made this comment and body language, did
4 he kind of rise up from his chair and pointing
5 his finger?
6 A I don't remember his rising up. I remember him
7 leaving forward. It's as if he was sitting the
8 way I am now and he went like this (indicating),
9 you will comply.
10 Q You just gestured. You leaned forward across
11 the table, toward the table, and pointed?
12 A Yes.
13 Q Have the landlords in your group raised
14 additional issues with city officials such as
15 inability to prosecute the tenants for, let's
16 say, bad checks the tenants give landlords for
17 rent and other obligations under the lease?
18 A Yes.
19 Q Have the landlords addressed with city officials
20 the concern that landlords have had where
21 tenants have damaged properties, damaged the
22 interiors of properties; landlords have made the
23 damage issues known to the police, but the
24 police either don't pursue charges with the
25 prosecutors or it doesn't look like the tenant

210
1 is ever held accountable? Have those issues
2 ever been raised with city officials?
3 A Yes.
4 Q What response have you seen from or heard from
5 the city officials to these issues of non-
6 prosecution of bad checks or nonprosecution of
7 tenant-caused damage to the personal property or
8 the rental property of landlords in the City of
9 St. Paul?
10 A The issues have been brought up to Andy Dawkins;
11 I believe both of them. Again, the context of
12 that issue being brought up to Andy was if a
13 problem property is both the behavioral aspect
14 and the code enforcement, the physical condition
15 of the building, if that's a problem property,
16 then you've got to help us on the other part.
17 And that's when we talked about access to the
18 police reports. We talked about holding tenants
19 accountable for bad checks. And we talked about
20 the -- how do I forget the name of it now?
21 There's a legal name about damage. But we
22 talked to him about that stuff. It never went
23 anywhere, any of it.
24 I also spoke at one of Ruth Ann
25 Eide's Friday meetings that she has. I think

211
1 it's the second or third Friday of every month
2 at the East Side Police Department. She brought
3 in a guest. I think she brought in, on
4 different occasions, both the city attorney and
5 the county attorney. At the county, it's Susan,
6 Susan Gartner. Is that right?
7 MS. SISK: Susan Gartner is the
8 Ramsey County Attorney.
9 A And the gentleman she brought in was of Spanish
10 descent, Alberto. Is that right? Isn't he the
11 city attorney? Isn't there a city attorney
12 named Alberto? Maybe I have got the name wrong.
13 But in both cases, I personally brought up those
14 issues to them. They seemed surprised. Oh,
15 criminal damage to property. That's it. That
16 criminal damage to property and bad checks to
17 landlords were seldom, if ever, prosecuted. In
18 fact, the City of St. Paul has a policy to not
19 prosecute bad checks to landlords. They have a
20 written policy on it.
21 Q (Continuing by Mr. Shoemaker) Do you know how
22 long that policy has been in place?
23 A Ever since I have been there.
24 Q Mr. Dawkins testified in these three cases in a
25 deposition that he did not really know, even as

212
1 he sat there during the deposition, what a code
2 compliance meant. Now you've mentioned that he
3 had it on his chart. Do you believe that, in
4 the discussions that you had with Mr. Dawkins
5 and the times you observed him in the district
6 meetings, that Mr. Dawkins had a full
7 understanding of what a code compliance meant?
8 A Yes.
9 Q So you think that he knew that it involved
10 renovation that was greater than just
11 maintenance issues?
12 A Yes.
13 Q Do you think that his understanding of code
14 compliance was to the degree that he knew it was
15 typically a substantial renovation of an older
16 home?
17 A Yes.
18 Q Do you think that he knew that code compliance,
19 actually, at times would have a significant
20 financial effect in an adverse way on home
21 owners and rental property owners?
22 A Yes.
23 Q Do you think that he understood that the code
24 compliance that he was referring to and that he
25 had in his flowchart was something that at times

213
1 would prohibit individuals from being able to
2 rent out their low income properties to needy
3 families in the city?
4 A I don't know.
5 Q Are you aware of the need in the City of
6 St. Paul for low income rentals for families of
7 color?
8 A Yes.
9 Q How are you aware of that particular need in the
10 city?
11 A It's been a few years since I have been involved
12 with SPARL. When I was involved in SPARL, I
13 constantly read and paid attention to data that
14 came across availability or vacancy rate in
15 housing and there's a need.
16 Q What type of sources or materials were you
17 looking at, as you referred to, when you were in
18 that position where you felt you had a need to
19 keep abreast of those figures?
20 A I read all kinds of sources. But just on those
21 topics, on the topic of affordable housing and
22 the availability of it, anywhere from the
23 Pioneer Press to academic studies on
24 availability of it.
25 Q Do you think that Mr. Dawkins, when he used the

214
1 phrase code compliance, that he knew that there
2 would be increased cost to landlords who had to
3 go through code compliances?
4 A Yes.
5 Q Do you know of Mr. Dawkins' background as a
6 legislator?
7 A A little bit.
8 Q Have you ever seen Mr. Dawkins' property at 767
9 University Avenue?
10 A Actually, I have.
11 Q Tell me the last time you would have driven by
12 there.
13 A It's been years. Well, I drive by it
14 frequently, but it's been years since I noticed
15 it.
16 MR. SHOEMAKER: Let me take one
17 minute and talk with my clients. I think I'm
18 finished here.
19 (Brief recess-3:40.)
20 MR. SHOEMAKER: I don't have any
21 more questions.
22
23
24
25

215
1 EXAMINATION
2 BY MS. SISK:
3 Q I will just briefly follow-up. Mr. Cullen, I
4 just wanted to follow-up on what we just talked
5 about. At the meeting where former Mayor Kelly
6 pointed at one of the landlords and said, you
7 will comply, do you remember the tone of the
8 landlord that asked the question of what would
9 happen if they didn't comply?
10 A The question was also asked aggressive.
11 Q Why would you characterize it as aggressive?
12 A I don't remember exactly what he said. I just
13 know there's a way to phrase a question that's
14 professional and there's a way to phrase a
15 question that's aggressive, almost aggressive.
16 It was phrased a bit aggressively.
17 Q Former Mayor Kelly's response was almost
18 mirroring back the way the question was asked to
19 him?
20 A I think the Mayor took it to another level.
21 Yeah, I think the Mayor took it to another
22 level.
23 Q I hate to keep going back to the meeting
24 regarding the Payne and Phalen neighborhood. I
25 just want to clarify. Did Andy Dawkins ever

216
1 specifically say that he had a plan to get rid
2 of certain tenants in the City of St. Paul?
3 A Plan is a strong word. But intent, yes.
4 Q Did he expressly tell you his intent or was that
5 your impression from what he had said?
6 A I don't remember the exact words. Yeah, he
7 said, that's our intent, that's our goal.
8 MS. SISK: Thank you. Nothing
9 further.
10 MR. ENGEL: Nothing.
11 MR. SHOEMAKER: Thank you,

Bills a stand up guy and would be head of my housing department if I were Mayor.

Bill couldn't afford the cut in pay.

I always felt it was a shame that Bill left SPARL. I thought that Bill was one of the few hopes that we had of being able to get the City and landlords together on the same page but there were a lot of landlords that treated Bill like shit. They were being as obstructionist as possible.

The issues Bill raised were issues that you may have been able to get council support behind if any of them believed that Bill had the wait of the landlords behind them and if SPARL could stand up to the nay sayers.

It would not have been that hard to have developed criteria about notice that if violated the hearing officer would be required to give an additional 30 days before review for council. That isn't a hard thing to get support for. But, there is no reason to do it if there continues to be a large vocal group of landlords who balk at being inspected at all and SPARL either supports them or doesn't recognize the problem they are.

So, we end up where we did.

JMONTOMEPPOF

Chuck Repke

Decedant www.jimcasci.blogspot.com Wrongul Death, his 126 Winnipeg torn down, apparantly the Rice & Winnipeg Units across from SPAR are not rented????????
From the Graves of Fee Owners.

I wasn't aware that landlords were against inspections Chuck. I thought the beef was inspectors that lie about violations to advance the City Council agenda. Ask Lantry, her re-election ws insured by this agenda.

2:50 LMAO - I am sorry but Lantry has never even had anyone challanger her that had two nickles they could rub together, so wake up and smell the coffee.

But, read what I said. One of Cullen's complaints was notice. So, OK you could create a policy where if there was question of notice you would have to give an extention before a push for demo. But, if the person is arguing that they shouldn't be inspected at all or silly BS you just wrote, then why bother to change the policy?

It was nut balls like you that made Bill's job at SPARL impossible.

JMONTOMEPPOF

Chuck Repke

Who has ever said they shouldn't be inspected at all Chuck? The problem people have with the city is that they have an agenda and found some inspectors who are willing to lie about violations so the city could use the court system to persue that agenda. What made Sparls job impossible is that they wanted to play it safe rather than ruffle any feathers.

And where the hell do Lantry's nickles come from? It sure as hell is not the common people. Take a look at her contributor list. Most of the money comes from Unions and people outside of the city. I think the unions wants to keep those code compliances going....it's good for business.

people who work under a collective bargaining unit are not regular or comon people?

who do You think comnom people are?

A DEMOCRACY TOWN HALL

Thursday, February 12, 2009

Saint Paul/ Investor's say to hell with Saint Paul.

10 Comments:

Previous Posts