Custom Search

Wednesday, March 05, 2008

Saint Paul RICO Update/ "The filthy bigots and their defenders". Attorney Matt Engel takes swing at City of Saint Paul.

Please click onto the COMMENTS for the story.

210 Comments:

Blogger Bob said...

*
There maybe copy errors.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Frank J. Steinhauser, III, et al., Civil No. 04-2632
JNE/SRN
Plaintiffs,
v. AFFIDAVIT OF
MATTHEW ENGEL
City of St. Paul, et al., IN SUPPORT OF RENEWED MOTION FOR SANCTIONS
Defendants.
Sandra Harrilal, et al., Civil No. 05-461
JNE/SRN
Plaintiffs,
v.
Steve Magner, et al.,
Defendants.
Thomas J. Gallagher, et al., Civil No. 05-1348
JNE/SRN
Plaintiffs,
v.
Steve Magner, et al.,
Defendants.
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
Matthew A. Engel, being duly sworn upon oath, states and deposes as follows:
1
Case 0:04-cv-02632-JNE-SRN Document 184 Filed 03/05/2008 Page 1 of 42
1.
I am an attorney licensed to practice law in the State of Minnesota and admitted to practice in District Court. I am the attorney of record for the Plaintiffs in Thomas J. Gallagher, et. al., v. Magner, et. al. This affidavit is submitted on behalf of all of the Plaintiffs in the above captioned matters in support of Plaintiffs’ Renewed Motion for Sanctions.
2.
Plaintiffs filed a Joint Motion for Sanctions on June 20, 2007, (ECF Doc. No. 102, 04-2632; ECF Doc. No. 79, 05-461; and ECF Doc. No. 73, 05-1348), and the Court heard argument from counsel on August 20, 2007. Pursuant to the Court’s November 13, 2007 Order, Plaintiffs’ filed a Joint Renewed Motion for Sanctions on February 25, 2008 (ECF Doc. No. 161, 04-2632; ECF Doc. No. 138, 05-461; and ECF Doc. No. 132, 05-1348).
3.
In the Court’s November 13, 2007, order denying Plaintiffs’ motion without prejudice, the Court ordered the parties to complete discovery before renewing the issue of sanctions with the Court (ECF Doc. No. 134, 04-2632; ECF Doc. No. 11, 05-461; and ECF Doc. No. 105, 05-1348). In the Order, the Court stated: “to establish prejudice…a movant must generally be able to show the contents of the documents at issue, that is, the substance of the evidence to which they were improperly denied access” (citation omitted), and that “[i]t remains at present undetermined what the missing documents at issue contained…[t]hus any finding of prejudice must await a showing of the contents of any documents that remain missing (or otherwise not produced) once discovery is complete.”
2
Case 0:04-cv-02632-JNE-SRN Document 184 Filed 03/05/2008 Page 2 of 42
4.
I am now submitting this affidavit to supplement the original record Plaintiffs filed with the Court in support of its original motion for sanctions heard on August 20, 2007, and to provide the Court with evidence from Plaintiffs on the issue of prejudice that the Court determined was premature at the stage of the oral argument in August of 2007. I am also requesting leave of the Court to file further supplemental affidavits in support of this renewed motion for sanctions up to 14 days prior to the April 14, 2008, hearing on this renewed motion, for the following reasons: Plaintiffs filed and served their detailed Joint Renewed Motion for Sanctions and Notice of Motion for Sanctions on February 25, 2008, the date of the deadline in the Court’s recent Order. Plaintiffs’ counsel were unable to file these supplemental affidavits in support of sanctions by Monday, February 25, 2008, because Defendants purposefully delayed providing Plaintiffs’ counsel with the “redacted emails” for use in this motion until 4:40 p.m. Friday, February 22, 2008, as detailed further below. We are continuing to review the remaining “email data” provided to us on December 10, 2007 and on January 9, 2008. Due to extremely large volume of this email data with over one-third of the data in unlabeled format, we request the time allowed under the civil rules to file the supplemental affidavits and exhibits up to 14 days prior to the hearing to conduct our review, prepare analysis for written submissions to the Court, select the emails to be redacted, wait for Ms. Seeba and her staff to complete redactions and delivery of the emails for our use and then to process the redacted emails for use in this 3
Case 0:04-cv-02632-JNE-SRN Document 184 Filed 03/05/2008 Page 3 of 42
renewed motion. Defendants delays in providing emails, redacted emails, City documents related to its special relationship with the St. Paul Public Housing Agency (“PHA”), TISH inspection studies, and other delay tactics as more fully set forth below and in the Affidavit of John R. Shoemaker. Defendants recent filing of their Motion to Strike this renewed motion for sanctions after their most recent delay, have required Plaintiffs’ counsel to file these affidavits before the 14 day time period required under Local Rule 7.1
5.
In a telephone conference on December 7, 2007, Counsel for Defendants explained to me, as well as John Shoemaker, that 10 employee email boxes could not be restored by the Defendants’ IT department due to a change in servers in the Police and Fire Departments. Counsel for Defendants provided us with a list of the employee email boxes from the police department (Mike Carroll, Ruth Ann Eide, Joe Johnston, Mark Weigel and Lucia Wroblewski) and fire department (Barb Cummings, Pat Fish, Jaqueline Girling, Lisa Martin and Mike Urmann).
6.
On December 10, 2007, Defendants’ counsel provided me with an external hard drive containing email folders for 68 of the 79 requested email boxes of specific city employees. The combined size of this initial production of email folders was 53.71 Gigabytes (GB). Each of the 68 employee folders was labeled with their name, and each of the sub-folders within the employee email folder also had labels.
4
Case 0:04-cv-02632-JNE-SRN Document 184 Filed 03/05/2008 Page 4 of 42
7.
On January 9, 2008, I was provided with ten (10) DVD’s under cover letter from Defendants’ counsel, Ms. Seeba in which she stated: “Enclosed herewith are all the email files restored by the outside vendor Kroll Ontrack.” See Exhibit # 1 attached hereto. In addition, on the same date, Defendants’ counsel sent hard copies of emails under cover letter that stated: “This completes Defendants email production.” See Exhibit # 2 attached hereto.
8.
The emails produced by Defendants’ counsel on December 10, 2007, (contained on the external hard drive) had the employee names on the folders. In addition, the subfolders had subject labels, and the individual txt., html, Word, Excel, Power Point and other files had subject labels, including the date and a description. The emails contained in the 10 DVD’s produced on January 9, 2008, were not in the same form those emails were originally sent. Paragraph 17 of the Stipulation for Entry of a Protective Order (ECF Doc. No. 116, 05-1348) states: “To the extent possible, the un-redacted e-mails shall be produced in electronic form. The e-mail messages will be produced in either the plain text or html format in which they were originally sent. All attachments will be produced in the format in which they were originally sent.”
9.
The ten (10) DVD’s produced by Defendants’ counsel contained 19 separate file folders with arbitrary numeric labels, such as 00990-01, 01004-01, 01019-01, etc. Inside the 19 folders, there are anywhere between one (1) and eighty-four (84) sub-folders with further generic labels, such as 01, 02, 03, etc. Finally, the files themselves in the sub-folders are in txt. and tif. format (no
5
Case 0:04-cv-02632-JNE-SRN Document 184 Filed 03/05/2008 Page 5 of 42
html., Word, Excel, Power Point, etc.), and also have generic numeric labels such as 01, 02, 03, etc.
10.
Because the 10 DVD’s contained files that were not in their original format, were not labeled with the names of the remaining employees, and had arbitrary and generic numeric labels without date and subject information, Defendants’ production of this remaining data does not meet the requirement of the Stipulation and Court’s Order approving the Stipulation. Under cover letter dated January 22, 2008, I informed Defendants’ counsel of these issues. See Exhibit # 3 attached hereto.
11.
Upon further investigation into the unidentified 19 email folders, I learned that no folder existed for city employee Susan Kimberly. In addition, we were unable to attribute folder 01924-01 to one of the remaining ten (10) employee email boxes to be produced by Defendants. Under cover letter dated February 6, 2008, I informed Defendants’ counsel of these issues. See Exhibit # 4 attached hereto. Defendants’ counsel responded under cover letter dated February 7, 2008, and stated that the unidentified email folder 01924-01 belonged to City Council President Kathy Lantry, and also confirmed that employee Susan Kimberly’s account had in fact been deleted on April 20, 2006. See Exhibit # 5 attached hereto.
12.
Given the above information, Plaintiffs’ counsel question Defendants’ representations and conduct relating to the email production. Defendants represented that they had disaster recovery tapes back to December of 2005. 6
Case 0:04-cv-02632-JNE-SRN Document 184 Filed 03/05/2008 Page 6 of 42
See Exhibit # 6 attached hereto. When Susan Kimberly’s account was deleted on April 20, 2006, there still should have been disaster recovery emails for Susan Kimberly for December 2005, and January, February and March of 2006.
13.
Plaintiffs’ counsel was also misled by Defendants’ counsel through misrepresentations that the emails produced on January 9, 2008, that were restored by Kroll On-Track, were due to a change in police and fire department servers affecting five (5) individuals from the police department, and five (5) individuals from the fire department. However, unidentified email folder 01924-01 belonged to City Council President Kathy Lantry, who was not on Defendants’ counsel list of final ten (10) employees, and Council President Lantry is not a member of the police or fire departments. No explanation has been provided by Defendants why Lantry’s restored emails were not completely provided to Plaintiffs’ counsel on December 10, 2007, instead of the bifurcated production on December 10, 2007 and January 9, 2008. Lantry’s second half of emails certainly were not on police or fire department servers, were they?
14.
In keeping with my duties under the protective order for email production, I provided Defendants’ counsel with a CD with unredacted City emails selected by Plaintiffs’ counsel and labeled STP 211355 – 212928 under cover letter dated January 11, 2008, for redaction by Ms. Seeba and return to Plaintiffs’ counsel for use in this renewed motion. See Exhibit # 7 attached hereto. Just 7
Case 0:04-cv-02632-JNE-SRN Document 184 Filed 03/05/2008 Page 7 of 42
six days later, under cover letter dated January 17, 2008, Ms. Seeba produced the first set of redacted emails stating: “These emails have been reviewed and are herewith produced. There was nothing redacted from any of the emails” (emphasis added). See Exhibit # 8 attached hereto. The primary focus of the protective order was to protect “private data” under the Minnesota Data Practices Act related to individuals, not to protect claimed attorney client privileged information.
15.
On February 1, 2008, I provided Defendants’ counsel with another CD containing selected unredacted City emails labeled STP 212929 – 214916 to be redacted by Ms. Seeba or her staff. On February 11, 2008, I provided Defendants’ counsel with another CD containing unredacted City emails labeled STP 214917 – 216307 to be redacted by Ms. Seeba or her staff. See Exhibit # 9 attached hereto.
16.
On February 19, 2008, while at the document deposition of Al Hester of PHA, more than one month after having produced the first set of redacted emails, Defendants’ counsel stated to me that she and her staff forgot to review the first set of redacted emails for “data privacy” information, and had only reviewed for “attorney/client” privileged material. The review for attorney/client information should have already been conducted prior to December 10, 2007 and prior to January 9, 2008, when the two batches of raw unredacted emails were finally delivered to Plaintiffs’ counsel. See paragraph 15 of the Stipulation for Entry of a Protective Order (ECF Doc. No. 116, 05-
8
Case 0:04-cv-02632-JNE-SRN Document 184 Filed 03/05/2008 Page 8 of 42
1348), which states: “[P]rior to disclosure, Defendants agree to make a reasonable attempt to review all e-mail for privileged information and remove those e-mails identified as privileged.”
17.
In light of the above information, Plaintiffs’ counsel is again forced to question Defendants’ representations and conduct relating to the City email production. Defendants’ counsel repeatedly informed Plaintiffs’ counsel that data privacy review was of utmost importance to her and her clients throughout the discovery delays from close of discovery on March 2, 2007, through the fall of 2007 whenever we discussed the email production issue, yet upon their review of their first set of unredacted emails, they failed to review the documents for data privacy information. This is almost unbelievable except Ms. Seeba stated, “these emails have been reviewed and are herewith produced. There was nothing redacted from any of the emails.” See Para. 14, supra.
18.
Plaintiffs’ counsel requested that Ms. Seeba provide up to date code enforcement documentation from City files on Plaintiffs’ properties. Defendants’ counsel agreed to provide only the updates to the property files, and not the entire property files. I requested that Defendants’ counsel provide the entire files for the Plaintiffs in Gallagher, et al, v. Magner, et al. because the scanned copies of many of the documents from City files did not show the lighter colored handwriting, especially the pink carbonless paper copies of City Summary Abatement Orders, and thus the document production process agreed 9
Case 0:04-cv-02632-JNE-SRN Document 184 Filed 03/05/2008 Page 9 of 42
to by all counsel produced poor copies for all sides to use. I explained to Ms. Seeba that there have been significant advances in technology since I scanned documents from City files almost two years ago, and my scanners are now faster and more efficient, produce better images, and scan in color. I also explained that because the files would need to be pulled anyway due to the need to update since the last review and scanning process, it would take potentially more effort to separate the updates from the files as opposed to just producing the entire file. See Exhibit # 10 attached hereto.
19.
Ms. Seeba responded by requesting $1,100.00 to produce the property files of the Plaintiffs in the Gallagher case. See Exhibit # 5 attached hereto. I provided a check to Defendants’ counsel, payable to the City of St. Paul, in the amount of $1,100.00. Defendants’ counsel agreed to produce the entire property files for the Plaintiffs in the Gallagher case for scanning on February 12, 2008.
20.
On February 12, 2008, Frank Steinhauser and I arrived at Defendants’ counsel’s office to scan the entire property files for the Plaintiffs in the Gallagher case, as well as the updates to the Plaintiffs’ property files in the Steinhauser and Harrilal cases. Many of the photocopies prepared by Defendants also had not copied certain handwriting and thus produced poor copies, just as had happened to some of the Plaintiffs’ property files in the Gallagher case. On February 12, 2008, I discovered that Ms. Seeba and her staff did not have the property files available for scanning for any of the
10
Case 0:04-cv-02632-JNE-SRN Document 184 Filed 03/05/2008 Page 10 of 42
Plaintiffs in the Gallagher case. Defendants’ counsel responded with a letter dated February 12, 2008, and stated: “Paralegal Lynn Knutson checked with DSI and was informed that they did not send the updates for your files because they were under the impression that you would be rescanning all your clients' files, including what has been previously produced. I propose that you scan your clients' entire files at the same time instead of the City separately producing the updated portion of your clients' files (emphasis added). I am sorry for the confusion that this may have caused today.” See Exhibit # 13 attached hereto. This analysis and line of reasoning is what I had tried to explain to Ms. Seeba on several occasions – that if the files need to be pulled anyway for updating since the last scanning two years ago, it would be more efficient and would take little if any additional time should I take the opportunity to obtain better copies of the entire property files with the new scanners. Ms. Seeba finally produced the Plaintiffs’ property files for scanning on Friday, February 22, 2008. Defendants’ counsel has not offered a refund of any pro-rata share of the $1,100.00 paid to the City of St. Paul for the “extra work” required with respect to the Gallagher Plaintiffs’ property files.
21.
On the morning of Friday, February 22, 2008, I arrived at the City Attorney’s Office for further document scanning of Plaintiffs’ property files. Upon speaking with Ms. Seeba, I asked whether I would receive the all of the “redacted emails,” that Plaintiffs’ counsel had been anxiously awaiting; Ms. Seeba responded, “maybe.” I did not receive copies of any redacted emails
11
Case 0:04-cv-02632-JNE-SRN Document 184 Filed 03/05/2008 Page 11 of 42
from Defendants’ counsel until 4:40 p.m that same day. At that time, under cover letter from Defendants’ counsel dated February 22, 2008, I received 314 redacted pages of miscellaneous City emails. See Exhibit # 11 attached hereto. Defendants delayed delivery of the redacted emails interfered with and prohibited Plaintiffs’ ability to file all the supporting documentation with the Court on February 25, 2008.
22.
Based upon my review of the emails produced by Defendants, it is clear that a significant amount of email data was destroyed by Defendants for periods of 2002-2004 and to a considerable extent for 2005.
23.
Attached hereto as Exhibit # 12 is a chart I have prepared from my email review showing a breakdown of the emails contained in email boxes of selected Defendants and officials by year. Few if any emails were produced by Defendants for periods prior to 2005, in many cases no emails were produced for the 2002-2004 period. Because the emails produced by Defendants on January 9, 2008 (on the ten DVD’s) were unlabeled, Plaintiffs’ council cannot assess the breakdown of each of the last 10 employees email boxes without looking through each of the files in the 26 gigabytes of data, representing 1/3 of the total amount of electronic data produced.
24.
Emails from City Council President Lantry’s email box produced on December 10, 2007, contained 360 megabytes of data, which is far less than most other council members: Councilmember Thune, 2.43 gigabytes of data produced; Councilmember Montgomery, 2.22 gigabytes; Councilmember Harris, 1.13
12
Case 0:04-cv-02632-JNE-SRN Document 184 Filed 03/05/2008 Page 12 of 42
gigabytes. It also appears that City Council President Lantry is copied on many of the emails that are sent to other council members, which should have increased her volume of emails rather than reduced her total e-data.
25.
A very disturbing email was located that calls into question not only the size of City Council President Lantry’s email box, but also Defendants’ conduct in failing to place a “litigation hold” on emails, failing to produce relevant evidence related to these lawsuits, and even purposeful destruction or withholding of e-data. In an email about the budget from July of 2007 (Bates No. STP 211756), Council President Lantry states: “I am almost certain that I sent this exact same e-mail last year but due to the Rico lawsuit, digging through my electronic trash would take about 4 days so I am relying on my ever failing memory.” See Exhibit # 16 attached hereto. An examination of the sub-folders contained in Lantry’s email box (See Exhibit # 12 attached hereto), will show that Lantry produced a “Trash Smoke” and “Trash Smoking” folders, but no “Trash Rico” folder, or similar folder was produced to Plaintiffs. Where is that data referred to by Council President Lantry? Why hasn’t she produced that data for Plaintiffs’ inspection?
26.
In review of City employees’ emails, I have been unable to locate City emails that concern Plaintiffs, their tenants or their claims. Plaintiffs were prejudiced by Defendants’ delayed production of emails and failure to produce emails from relevant time periods.
13
Case 0:04-cv-02632-JNE-SRN Document 184 Filed 03/05/2008 Page 13 of 42
27.
Emails that were produced from Dawkins' email box show that he was sending (and should have been receiving) a large volume of emails in corresponding with a multitude of City officials and employees, and many third parties both in Minnesota and from outside Minnesota. However, the City produced a mere 5.69 megabytes of data from Dawkins' email box claiming that was all there was, and Dawkins claiming the small amount of email was because he hardly used email in his position as Department head of the City, a City that was recognized as one of the most technologically advanced cities in the country. It also appears that Dawkins is copied on many of the emails that are sent throughout the city, which should have increased his volume of emails. Even with Council President Lantry’s email production at approximately 1/7 the volume of fellow councilmembers, Dawkins produced emails constituted about 1.58% of Lantry’s emails (5.69 meg. / 360 meg).
28.
In reviewing documents produced by the City in other litigation, Plaintiffs’ counsel have located an email from Connie Sandberg’s emails dated February 13, 2006: this is an email from a member of the City's IT department to NHPI Office manager Pat McGinn and TISH director Connie Sandberg (each of who were employees directly reporting to Dawkins during 2002 to December 31, 2005), just 6 weeks after Dawkins left employment showing that Ms. Sandberg was asked by the IT employee: “[M]ay I delete Andy Dawkins (dawkins) network, groupwise accts and home directory?” (emphasis added). See Exhibit # 18 attached hereto. We have been unable to locate Sandberg’s
14
Case 0:04-cv-02632-JNE-SRN Document 184 Filed 03/05/2008 Page 14 of 42
response to this request. However, considering the recently acquired information from Ms. Seeba that Susan Kimberly’s emails were deleted shortly after her departure from the City in early 2006, and the minuscule size of Dawkins produced emails, someone such as Sandberg, Dawkins or others had incentive to delete those emails.
29.
Pursuant to the Courts’ Order, Plaintiffs will provide the Court below with examples of email evidence showing the nature of what the missing documents at issue contained:
a.
In an email from July of 2006, identified by Bates No. STP 211682, code enforcement officer Jacqueline Girling is writing to police officer Dean Koehnen with respect to his exercising his “size and influence to strong arm the property owner” in relation to code enforcement on one of her property files. Ms. Girling states: “Apparently Pam from Crime Prevention requested that you go out there ‘because of the size and influence that you would have over the owners’ (according to what Betsy told me). There was no reason for Crime Prevention to be involved in this case, as there was no danger of a potential crime taking place over there…Dean, please in the future, if you are going out on a property where I have pending orders, I would appreciate a heads up. There was no need for you to go out there other than (what sounds to me like) Pam from Crime Prevention hoping that you could strong-arm these people with your "size and influence"(emphasis
15
Case 0:04-cv-02632-JNE-SRN Document 184 Filed 03/05/2008 Page 15 of 42
added). See Exhibit # 14 attached hereto. This nature of this disclosure and implications to be drawn there from, are deeply disturbing in a constitutional, democratic free society held together by the rule of law. The shocking nature of this disclosure is consistent with the claims made by many of the Plaintiffs from the first Complaint by the Steinhauser Plaintiffs in May 2004 and thereafter in the Harrilal, Johnson Complaint. Defendant Officer Koehnen is an extremely large man standing close to 6’ 8”and of considerable weight. City police and code officials assigned Koehnen to Dawkins’ code office to gain entry to the interiors of properties where consent could not be obtained. The City employees involved in this particular property where a combination of a large police officer, code inspector, City crime prevention employee and an neighborhood representative working with City officials and employees to “force compliance” outside the boundaries of the law against a property owner, just exactly what Plaintiffs and their tenants have claimed all along. From this email, it is clear that these city employees with the help of certain third parties, have in fact been violating the Fourth Amendment constitutional rights of property owners and their tenants. Dawkins’ numerous personal notes on “problem properties” show that he was intent on gaining entry to the rental units in order to utilize his “code to the max” code enforcement policies and thereby penalize both the owners and their tenants of rental
16
Case 0:04-cv-02632-JNE-SRN Document 184 Filed 03/05/2008 Page 16 of 42
properties that were primarily occupied by “protected class” tenants. The longstanding problem presented to the City Council, Mayor and Dawkins’ was “how do we gain access to the interiors of homes” in the City without consent or administrative search warrants, that apparently they all believed to be to much of an obstacle. The City needed to gain entry to homes in order to apply the zero tolerance code standard (see paragraph (b) below). This email presents direct evidence to support many of the Plaintiffs claims, including Steinhauser, Meysembourg, Brisson, Johnson, and Kubitscheks. But for Defendants failure to place a “litigation hold” on emails from 2002 through 2005, Plaintiffs submit that many more emails of this character would have been available to Plaintiffs for their claims.
b.
In an email from May of 2004, identified by Bates No. STP 211417, Dawkins was replying to a Milwaukee government worker with respect to these lawsuits and the Milwaukee landlord association. Dawkins states: “Of course there is another version. In fact, one city council member (whose district includes many slum properties) thanked me for ensuring her re-election because this demonstrates the City's new zero tolerance approach to slum properties… The law suit is 78 pages in length and accuses me and the Mayor of federal racketeering (using the U.S. mails to deprive Civil Rights). If I thought for one second that my inspectors had exaggerated violations (and couldn't back up their
17
Case 0:04-cv-02632-JNE-SRN Document 184 Filed 03/05/2008 Page 17 of 42
correction notices with photos), or if I thought for one second that me and the Mayor were targeting minority tenants for moves back to Milwaukee (instead of bringing legal actions to improve their conditions), then I'd be worried…As it stands I'm confident that the law of the land is that no Code Enforcement Department has to be 24/7 on every property in the city (Universal Enforcement) and instead can deploy limited resources against the biggest, baddest apples in hopes of a ripple effect.” See Exhibit # 15 attached hereto. This email supports the analysis in paragraph (a) above that the City sought to apply heavy-handed code enforcement policies Dawkins described as “code to the max” standards and his “zero tolerance” code standard to penalize the owners and tenants of rental properties that were primarily occupied by “protected class” tenants. It should also be noted that this is a 2004 email that Dawkins received and responded to, that related directly to the lawsuits before the court, and that Dawkins’ email box shows zero (0) incoming emails for 2004. Dawkins most likely believes that this email exonerates him from any wrongdoing during his term or for any responsibility for the mess the City is currently in with over four times the number of vacant homes in the City from when he showed up to run code enforcement in 2002.
c.
In an email from December of 2005, identified by Bates No. STP 212185-212187, city council aide Jane Prince was replying to an email
18
Case 0:04-cv-02632-JNE-SRN Document 184 Filed 03/05/2008 Page 18 of 42
with respect to the problem that a “complaint-based” code enforcement system unfairly targets people of color. Prince states: “The issue of how a complaint-based system may unfairly target people of color is a huge one, and I'm not sure what we do to get at it. A new mayor and Toni's and Jay's influence in a new administration can sure help” (emphasis added). Furthermore, in the same series of emails, STP 212186, Prince states: “[i]n talking to Tatiana, and looking at the city data on each of her neighboring properties, there are a high number of complaints being called into the city on certain properties…Tatiana is also concerned from the apparent pattern of complaints to CSO that whoever is making these calls is targeting neighbors of color. For that reason, we're thinking it makes sense to invite both Tyrone Terrill from the Human Rights Office and Bob Kessler, the new LIEP/Code Enforcement director, so that they can help us think through the very real possibility that people of color are unfairly targeted by the city's complaint based system” (emphasis added). See Exhibit # 19 attached hereto. City council members and aids were aware that the City's Complaint based code enforcement system was being abused by neighbors targeting "people of color" for code enforcement in order to harass and force those “people of color” from the City. Officials acknowledge that illegal targeting was and is a "huge problem". The City’s Chronic Problem Properties
19
Case 0:04-cv-02632-JNE-SRN Document 184 Filed 03/05/2008 Page 19 of 42
Case Studies report of March 2002, and depositions of inspectors, all support Plaintiffs’ claims that the City’s officials and inspectors assisted the targeting of “people of color.” Emails related to the property at 321 Bates Avenue produced by the City show Councilmember Lantry and her aide carried the water for the White neighbors who were working overtime to drive the African-American owners, caretaker and tenants from the 321 Bates Avenue rental property in 2004 (See Doc. No. 114). The City’s Chronic Problem Properties Case Studies released in March 2002, included four separate notations of racial conflicts involved in properties subject to code enforcement. This email from Jane Prince’s file shows direct evidence to support many of the Plaintiffs’ claims of intentional discrimination in application of heavy-handed code enforcement applied to owners of “low-income” rental properties and their “protected class” tenants. But for Defendants failure to place a “litigation hold” on emails from 2002 through 2005, Plaintiffs submit that many more emails of this character would have been available to Plaintiffs for their claims and would have actually mentioned Plaintiffs and or their tenants by name. Steinhauser was high on Council President Lantry’s list of targeted properties. Between Lantry and Dawkins’s problem properties lists, five of Steinhauser’s low-income rental properties had made their lists. There certainly should have been
20
Case 0:04-cv-02632-JNE-SRN Document 184 Filed 03/05/2008 Page 20 of 42
correspondence including emails between Lantry and Dawkins on Steinhauser, and on certain of the other Plaintiffs as well.
d.
In an email from June of 2005, identified by Bates No. STP 213250-2123251, Council President Lantry is replying to an email from a neighbor with respect to the property at 321 Bates Avenue. In response to the neighbor’s statement that “[G]iven the five-year plus history of problems at 321 Bates, I strongly urge you to pursue condemnation before the situation gets worse. And it seems to get worse with each new tenant that moves in,” Lantry responds: “You have been more than patient- let me see if we can influence the next steps” (emphasis added). See Exhibit # 17 attached hereto. As a City Council member, one of the ward representatives for the East Side, and President of the City Council, Kathy Lantry was using her "influence" on code enforcement personnel at the behest of neighbors, to condemn properties occupied by “people of color.” See Bates Nos. STP 018291-018295 and STP 019888-018892, as exhibits G and H from Plaintiffs’ Response to the City's Motion for a Protective Order, wherein the City was seeking to block Plaintiffs from taking the deposition of Councilmember Lantry. Those exhibits include other shocking emails between Senior Fire Inspector Pat Fish, Councilmember Lantry, her legislative aide Ellen Biales and the white neighbors of 321 Bates, as well as legal aid attorney Perry deStefano's August 2004 letters to the
21
Case 0:04-cv-02632-JNE-SRN Document 184 Filed 03/05/2008 Page 21 of 42
City Council claiming discrimination against the "protected class" tenants. This email shows direct evidence to support many of the Plaintiffs claims of intentional discrimination in application of heavy-handed code enforcement applied to owners of “low-income” rental properties and their “protected class” tenants. But for Defendants failure to place a “litigation hold” on emails from 2002 through 2005, Plaintiffs submit that many more emails of this character would have been available to Plaintiffs for their claims and would have referred to Plaintiffs and/or their tenants by name and revealed their discriminatory intent.
e.
In an email from May of 2005, identified by Bates No. STP 213404, Dean Koehnen was replying to a neighbor with respect to potential drug activity in the neighborhood. Koehnen replied: “I need a little more info. are these blk or white males and have you guys heard or seen any drug activity besides the weird behavior. and is 1350 haha is it a single family or duplex” (emphasis added). See Exhibit # 20 attached hereto. Whether the potential drug perpetrators were black, white, Hispanic, or Asian, or whether the property was single family or duplex should not be of consequence to code enforcement or criminal activity. This email shows direct evidence to support many of the Plaintiffs’ claims of intentional discrimination. But for Defendants failure to place a “litigation hold” on emails from 2002 through 2005, Plaintiffs submit
22
Case 0:04-cv-02632-JNE-SRN Document 184 Filed 03/05/2008 Page 22 of 42
that many more emails of this character would have been available to Plaintiffs for their claims.
f.
In an email from May of 2006, identified by bates no. STP 213425, Councilmember Dave Thune was replying to a neighbor with respect to Crocus Hill mugging in the neighborhood. Thune replied: “we cannot go out and arrest every 22 year old black male who walks thru crocus hill, although that's what some of your neighbors would like” (emphasis added). See Exhibit # 21 attached hereto. This email presents evidence of the racial overtones that pressure Council members and code enforcement officers to target low-income rental property owners such as Plaintiffs and their “protected class” tenants. But for Defendants failure to place a “litigation hold” on emails from 2002 through 2005, Plaintiffs submit that many more emails of this character would have been available to Plaintiffs for their claims.
g.
In an email from April of 2005, identified by Bates No. STP 211467, Councilmember Thune was emailing then city official-employee Susan Kimberly with respect to his wish to condemn and take properties. Thune wrote: “For some time now I've wished we could just condemn and quicktake individual junk properties, problem properties, vacant and boarded properties, etc…I've actually got one in ward 2 that might fit the bill for a test case. I think its rehabable and it likely would never be arguably an expensive property should its owner 23
Case 0:04-cv-02632-JNE-SRN Document 184 Filed 03/05/2008 Page 23 of 42
appear before the judge on the quick take proceedings. I'd appreciate your participation in this one to see if it could become a valuable city policy” (emphasis added). See Exhibit # 22 attached hereto. This email shows the City’s “force sale” policy, the disregard for due process, civil rights, equal protection, and the specific intolerance for the poor (primarily African-Americans) who occupy the types of properties that City officials and employees along with certain influential third parties quickly label as “problem properties,” and following application of the City’s zero tolerance polices, quickly turn into “vacant and boarded properties.” Councilmember Thune is voicing agreement with Dawkins’ statements that he wants to get rid of the bottom tier of tenants and this demonstrates the coordinated policy to get rid of affordable housing for low income and protected class tenants unless run by PHA, or certain non-profit organizations with political connections to policy makers. But for Defendants failure to place a “litigation hold” on emails from 2002 through 2005, Plaintiffs submit that many more emails of this character would have been available to Plaintiffs for their claims that would have directed Defendants’ illegal policies against Plaintiffs and their tenants.
h.
In an email from January of 2004, identified by Bates No. STP 211408, Dawkins was emailing an individual with respect to behavior issues at an apartment building. Dawkins wrote: “I did visit with Fire 24
Case 0:04-cv-02632-JNE-SRN Document 184 Filed 03/05/2008 Page 24 of 42
Prevention (Pat Fish and Steve Zacard) regarding nuisance behavior at nearby apartment buildings and they believe all is quiet. Ditto with the Police Officers assigned to my department. However, the police tell me that the apartments will likely present problems again once warmer weather arrives - it's just a mecca for lots of the down-trodden” (emphasis added). See Exhibit # 23 attached hereto. This email shows the City’s use of code enforcement by both Fire and NHPI to address behavior issues, and it shows Dawkins attitude toward low income and protected class tenants. But for Defendants failure to place a “litigation hold” on emails from 2002 through 2005, Plaintiffs submit that many more emails of this character by him and others he emailed and received emails from would have been available to Plaintiffs for their claims. It should also be noted that this is a 2004 email that Dawkins sent and copied to himself, and that Dawkins email box shows zero (0) incoming emails for 2004.
i.
In an email from September of 2005, identified by bates no. STP 213026, Carol Broermann was emailing Fire Inspector and Defendant Mike Urmann, with a copy to Dawkins, with respect to behavior issues at a property. Broermann wrote: “Could code enforcement look into a problem property at 1641 Dayton Ave. that may have an over-occupancy issue? There has been numerous youth hanging around the properties exchanging vulgarities and being down right 25
Case 0:04-cv-02632-JNE-SRN Document 184 Filed 03/05/2008 Page 25 of 42
intimidating to neighbors. It is not clear if these youths reside at the address being mentioned above. I also have an e-mail into Andy Dawkins to look at property violations and perhaps, bring in the FORCE unit.” In response, councilmember aide Jane Prince responds: “We have since gotten some feedback from the complainant that this is an extended family; so we probably don't have an over-occupancy situation.” However, despite the apparent lack of an over-occupancy issue due to an extended family, and despite no mention of property code violations, Mike Urmann replies: “I would like to stop by this address to find out and make sure we don't have any safety issues” (emphasis added). Again, without mention of over-crowding or property code violations, Jane Prince responds addressing behavior issues: “Your stop will help send the message that the city is paying attention. This household has become the source of a lot of noise and disruption from young people living there. A few weeks ago, two cousins got in a knife fight here. Because no charges were filed, the Police couldn't really do anything” (emphasis added). See Exhibit # 24 attached hereto. This email shows the City’s policy of using housing and fire code inspectors to address behavior issues that the City cannot address through the police force because of due process and constitutional rights of individuals. Defendants’ policies are subverting those constitutional rights of owners and occupants. But for
26
Case 0:04-cv-02632-JNE-SRN Document 184 Filed 03/05/2008 Page 26 of 42
Defendants failure to place a “litigation hold” on emails from 2002 through 2005, Plaintiffs submit that many more emails of this character would have been available to Plaintiffs to support their claims.
j.
The following documents are e-files that were contained in the various city employee email boxes that are not emails, but what are most likely files that were attached to emails. These documents show many of the problems that stem from the use of a complaint based system and the use of code enforcement to address behavior issues, including consistency and fairness, political influence, and affordable housing:
i.
See Exhibit # 25 attached hereto. STP 211845 – 211852: Code Enforcement Situation Assessment from 2006: from page 9: “Some property owners said they felt unfairly treated by code enforcement. Their concerns included: Being held responsible for irresponsible behavior of tenants at the same time as not feeling supported in dealing with tenant problems; Selective and inconsistent enforcement; Appeals process too closely aligned with code enforcement; Communication problems with code enforcement units, including notices sent to old addresses after the property owner had provided a new address, not feeling listened to, or feeling inspectors were “mean spirited”; Overzealous use of nuisance and vacant building statutes, causing landlords to sometimes feel caught between maintaining
27
Case 0:04-cv-02632-JNE-SRN Document 184 Filed 03/05/2008 Page 27 of 42
drug-free, orderly rental situations, and paying high eviction fees and quickly filling vacancies when they take action against unruly tenants” (emphasis added). From page 10: “Perceptions of the role of political influence in code enforcement activities undermines public trust in the city’s efforts.” “In cases where violators are willing to fix problems, but lack the ability or resources, the city could do more to provide help. Many people discussed the need for enhancing the city’s compliance assistance tools in order to help keep landlords from going out of business or tenants losing affordable housing.” “Some stakeholders’ frustration with the city’s enforcement was fueled by their perception that the appeals process usually resulted in a “no” answer from the city. They would like to know the criteria for appeals decisions and to feel that the process was neutral” (emphasis added). From page 11: “Increased use of nuisance statutes for addressing problem properties: The State of Minnesota’s nuisance statutes have given cities a new tool for addressing property-based problems. On one hand this has made it easier to tackle problem properties, but it has heightened perceptions among some stakeholders that the city is heavy handed in its approach to code enforcement. The use of nuisance statutes may need to be factored into possible 28
Case 0:04-cv-02632-JNE-SRN Document 184 Filed 03/05/2008 Page 28 of 42
organization structure options, as this is where the link between police and code enforcement activities most commonly occurs” (emphasis added).
ii.
See Exhibit # 26 attached hereto. STP 211856 – 211860: Evolution of Code Enforcement Timeline from 2006: from page 3: “2002 – Code Enforcement unit (NHPI) created – police attached to them rather than other way around, 2002 – New direction in dealing with problem properties – Behavioral perspective - All 2002 changes” (emphasis added). From page 4: “From 2002 on – Federal lawsuits filed against Code Enforcement because of these strategies, 2005 – Vacancy rate in rentals started to skyrocket and problem properties work increased” (emphasis added).
iii.
See Exhibit # 27 attached hereto. STP 211901 – 211903: Bob’s Blog, July 29, 2007: from page 3: “Be careful....your safety is more important than any violation or complaint. No matter whom the complainant might be” (emphasis added). It is clear that Bob Kessler is referring to influential officials or third parties.
iv.
See Exhibit # 28 attached hereto. STP 215473: Code Enforcement Cheat Sheet: “Civil laws are being used and the preponderance of evidence is lower for proof. Officers can be
29
Case 0:04-cv-02632-JNE-SRN Document 184 Filed 03/05/2008 Page 29 of 42
a huge help by: -making sure behavior is specifically tied to the address. -speaking with neighbors/witnesses to see if they were "bothered or annoyed" by incident, if so, put it in a report. We need documentation, names, and addresses. -there does not need to be a criminal charge for code enforcement to work on a property as we are using civil law, so as already said, documentation of behavioral issues is very helpful. -If officers get inside of a property for whatever reason and see code violations, please call for an inspector. Sweeps of the exteriors are being done by code enforcement, but we don't get interior inspections” (emphasis added). Here it appears that the officials are encouraging everyone to document the complaints on the targeted property in order to ensure that heavy-handed enforcement will be applied to satisfy the neighbors and others. With the acknowledged misuse of the complaint based system to target people of color, it appears that the documentation policy only encourages further targeting. But for Defendants failure to place a “litigation hold” on emails from 2002 through 2005, Plaintiffs submit that many more emails of this character would have been available to Plaintiffs to support the claims related to their properties.
30
Case 0:04-cv-02632-JNE-SRN Document 184 Filed 03/05/2008 Page 30 of 42
k.
In an email from August of 2006, identified by Bates No. STP 213517, Inspector Ed Smith was emailing a neighbor with respect to behavior issues at a property. Smith wrote: “unfortunately, the Code Enforcement Department deals strictly with housing code violations, not behavioral issues. Those are matters that the police Department would need to deal with” (emphasis added). See Exhibit # 29 attached hereto.
l.
In an email from November of 2006, identified by Bates No. STP 215300, Police Officer Mark Weigel was emailing Council President Lantry with respect to behavior issues at a property. Weigel wrote: “I realize that there are too many calls overall to this area but from my jobs perspective I'm stuck. I was even looking for any that could have fallen into excessive consumption for police but none fit that criteria either. I think at least somewhat of a message can be sent through making them register and by code enforcement issuing orders. Good luck with it. I hope all is good on your end” (emphasis added). See Exhibit # 30 attached hereto. This email shows the City’s policy of using housing and fire code inspectors to address behavior issues that the City cannot address through the police force because of due process and constitutional rights of individuals. But for Defendants failure to place a “litigation hold” on emails from 2002 through 2005, Plaintiffs
31
Case 0:04-cv-02632-JNE-SRN Document 184 Filed 03/05/2008 Page 31 of 42
submit that many more emails of this character would have been available to Plaintiffs to support their claims.
m.
In an email from March of 2007, identified by Bates No. STP 215581, Police Officer Weigel was emailing Officer Jamie Sipes with respect to behavior issues at a property. Sipes wrote: “I need to sick you and yours on a property. 1011 Burns is a single family home/owner occupied by Vickie. I am not sure of her last name. The address as been a problem for well over a year but we haven't been able to do much. It is up off of the street and they do not actually sell drugs from there. The problem is more about the conduct at the house and the type of people that visit. Vickie is 19 or 20, owns the home and has a large income from the casino…Vickie is Native American and has had boyfriends arrested off an on…Anyway, the area is predominately owner occupied single family homes. It is a good neighborhood that is frustrated with the issue. Gangs, FORCE and I have all dealt with it to no avail. This has led to more frustration and complaints to Lantry’s office.” Weigel responded: “I am forwarding this to Dean to see if we can get an inspection and have an impact” (emphasis added). See Exhibit # 31 attached hereto. This email shows the City’s policy of using housing and fire code inspectors to address behavior issues, the policy of using Officer Koehnen to force an interior inspection because of his size – “impact”- all in violation of owners,
32
Case 0:04-cv-02632-JNE-SRN Document 184 Filed 03/05/2008 Page 32 of 42
tenants, and occupant’s constitutional rights. But for Defendants failure to place a “litigation hold” on emails from 2002 through 2005, Plaintiffs submit that many more emails of this character would have been available to Plaintiffs for their claims.
n.
In an email from August of 2004, identified by Bates No. STP 215581, Police Officer Weigel was emailing Lisa Martin with respect to behavior issues at a property. Weigel wrote: “Can you check 348 W. Winona. No dangerous police issues and no current open code.” Martin responds: “Sure, but why are we checking it then?” Weigel replies: “It came from a citizen through Thune's office and has some police issues, but not enormous” (emphasis added). See Exhibit # 32 attached hereto This email shows the City’s policy of using housing and fire code inspectors to address behavior issues that the City cannot address through the police force because of due process and constitutional rights of individuals. In addition, this email shows the political influence that can be applied for illegal code enforcement. But for Defendants failure to place a “litigation hold” on emails from 2002 through 2005, Plaintiffs submit that many more emails of this character would have been available to Plaintiffs for their claims.
o.
In an email from January of 2007, identified by Bates No. STP 215699-215700, Council President Lantry was emailing a friend with respect to code enforcement related to rental properties. Lantry’s friend wrote:
33
Case 0:04-cv-02632-JNE-SRN Document 184 Filed 03/05/2008 Page 33 of 42
“Under the new ordinance, how strictly is "owner occupied" defined? For instance, I live in a duplex, where my neighbor on the other side is the owner's daughter, who keeps an eye on things. Are we considered owner occupied?” Lantry responds: “I believe it will be defined as the owner actually occupying the space-not just homesteading it. On the flip side, unless there is a complaint on your duplex, the city would never know that it is anything other than owner occupied due to it's homesteaded status…They haven't homesteaded the property? They should. First because they qualify to homestead it and then because it may stave off the inspectors for a while. If it is a good well-maintained property-that's a good thing. We are going to try to get into the worst of the worst first” (emphasis added). See Exhibit # 33 attached hereto. This email shows the City is still targeting and applying a different code standard to the low-income and rental properties still occupied to this day by “protected class” tenants. Owner’s and renters should not need to worry about homesteading properties to “stave off” inspectors, especially at the advice of the City Council President, if the inspectors are truly applying the code in a consistent and fair manner to all properties. But for Defendants failure to place a “litigation hold” on emails from 2002 through 2005, Plaintiffs submit that many more emails of this character would have been available to Plaintiffs for their claims.
34
Case 0:04-cv-02632-JNE-SRN Document 184 Filed 03/05/2008 Page 34 of 42
p.
In an email from September of 2005, identified by Bates No. STP 211590, Dawkins is responding to an email question about the definition of “legal occupancy” from a resident. The resident writes: “I am looking at the "Vacant Buildings" section of the St. Paul Legislative codes. In Sec. 43.02 Definitions, #(5) it reads: "Unoccupied: A building which is not being used for a legal occupancy as defined in the Saint Paul Legislative Code." Would you please tell me where I can find the definition of "legal occupancy" in the St. Paul Legislative codes? Please let me know ASAP.” Dawkins responds: “I am not sure if it appears anywhere. I would interpret this to mean not over-occupied and not trespassers” (emphasis added). See Exhibit # 34 attached hereto. This email supports Plaintiffs claims in the Gallagher case (specifically paragraph 257 of the Second Amended Complaint which discussed the exact same provision of the legislative code) in that the St. Paul Legislative Code is void for vagueness, in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause, because the legislative code fails adequately to define key terms contained in those code chapters. But for Defendants failure to place a “litigation hold” on emails from 2002 through 2005, Plaintiffs submit that many more emails of this character would have been available to Plaintiffs for their claims.
35
Case 0:04-cv-02632-JNE-SRN Document 184 Filed 03/05/2008 Page 35 of 42
q.
In an email from January of 2007, identified by Bates No. STP 213654 - 213655, councilmember aide Barb Benson is engaging in an email exchange with someone who appears to be a friend with respect to Defendant Steve Schiller. Benson writes: “My name ended up in a deposition in conjunction with Dave Thune about this case where all the slum landlords are suing code inspection and everyone. Steve Schiller (who is certifiable) was the one deposed and I strongly objected to what he said…The City attempted to fire Steve Schiller many years ago, but, unfortunately, was not successful. He should have been canned. I'm just sorry for you that you have to waste your time with this sleazy slimeball City employee. Have a good day." With that, I got up and walked out” (emphasis added). See Exhibit # 35 attached hereto. This email shows the character and reputation of one of the named defendants, Steve Schiller in the Gallagher case, as well as the City’s opinion of the Plaintiff’s in all three cases. But for Defendants failure to place a “litigation hold” on emails from 2002 through 2005, Plaintiffs submit that many more emails of this character would have been available to Plaintiffs for their claims.
r.
In an email from February of 2005, identified by Bates No. STP 211437, Dawkins was exchanging emails with City Council President Lantry with respect to revocation of rental registrations and how to
36
Case 0:04-cv-02632-JNE-SRN Document 184 Filed 03/05/2008 Page 36 of 42
solve problem properties. Lantry wrote: “Thanks and I'll look forward to seeing the report. As an aside-did you talk to Ed Johnson? I left him a message but he has not called me back.” Dawkins responds: “Ed left a message saying he was unaware that steinhauser had sold” (emphasis added). See Exhibit # 36 attached hereto. This email shows that communications were taking place between defendants and the city council with respect to the Plaintiffs, and that the City was actively seeking information about the Plaintiffs’ properties. But for Defendants failure to place a “litigation hold” on emails from 2002 through 2005, Plaintiffs submit that many more emails of this character related specifically to Plaintiffs.
s.
In an email from September of 2005, identified by Bates No. STP 213310, Dawkins received an email from Maynard Vinge with respect to finding property owner information through PHA and Section 8. Vinge wrote: “I called PHA, The Executive Director Jon Gutzmann and was given Al Hester an Exec Assistant voice mail. Basically as in the Dadder's property where we found the new owner because of Sec 8. I thought this would be a good place to call. They have to know who the person is that will get the rent and were to send it” (emphasis added). See Exhibit # 37 attached hereto. This email shows that communications were taking place among defendants, city employees, and PHA with respect to the Plaintiffs, and that the City was actively
37
Case 0:04-cv-02632-JNE-SRN Document 184 Filed 03/05/2008 Page 37 of 42
seeking information about the Plaintiffs’ properties. This email also shows that the City has a working relationship with PHA on several different levels, which supports Plaintiffs’ illegal government monopoly and antitrust claims. But for Defendants failure to place a “litigation hold” on emails from 2002 through 2005, Plaintiffs submit that many more emails of this character would have been available to Plaintiffs to support their claims.
t.
In an email from June of 2005, identified by Bates No. STP 213255 – 213256, Councilmember Lantry exchanged emails with Todd Axtell about exchanging lists of Section 8 problem properties with PHA: Lantry wrote: “After the our neighborhood meeting at Bethlehem Lutheran Church on May 31 one of my assignments was to contact PHA to see if there was some sort of procedure that could be put in place to make sure that PHA was not providing funding to a scofflaw landlord or a misbehaving tenant. So, having seen Al's response I'm wondering if we shouldn't get together to come up with a system to relay our info to PHA” (emphasis added). See Exhibit # 38 attached hereto. This email demonstrates that communications were taking place among city officials and employees and PHA’s officials with respect to “problem properties” that were being targeted by Defendants and that the City wanted PHA to assist the City in shutting down privately owned low-income rental properties that had similar
38
Case 0:04-cv-02632-JNE-SRN Document 184 Filed 03/05/2008 Page 38 of 42
problems as PHA. This email also supports Plaintiffs’ claims that the City has a close working relationship with PHA on several different levels. But for Defendants failure to place a “litigation hold” on emails from 2002 through 2005, Plaintiffs submit that many more emails of this character would have been available to Plaintiffs for their claims.
u.
In a series of emails from June of 2005, identified by Bates No. STP 213259 – 213262, Councilmember Lantry exchanged emails with PHA’s Al Hester regarding exchanging lists of Section 8 problem properties, which then was forwarded from councilmember aide Ellen Bailes to Fire inspector Pat Fish: Lantry wrote: “One of the things we are struggling with on the East Side is some of the dilapidated rental housing and the bad behavior of some residents. Between the FORCE unit of the Police Department, Code Enforcement and my office, all of us has a list of "problem properties" and sometimes the units being rented gain their income from Section 8. Compliance by bad property owners has always been difficult since we don't have enough of a big stick to make them behave. The only thing that seems to work is monetary in nature. Is there a way to coordinate all of the lists to make sure that PHA is not paying an owner, or a tenant if they are considered a problem? Obviously this determination would not be based on conjecture but rather on actual evidence that the tenant or the property owner is delinquent…it doesn't mean that we can't
39
Case 0:04-cv-02632-JNE-SRN Document 184 Filed 03/05/2008 Page 39 of 42
share our lists with you and then you can privately deal with the address or the tenant.” Hester responds: “Since we protect all of the information about Section 8 applicants, participants and addresses as private data under the state law, most of the information out there is probably from word of mouth, and much of it may be incorrect…This reminds me of our long-ago discussions of "graded" C of O inspections. We thought then that a City system that rated marginal properties lower than very good ones would give the PHA more clout to lower voucher rent subsidies under the "rent reasonableness" requirement. I believe Steve Zaccard continued working with you (?) and others on computer software changes for it. Do you know if that is still in the works” (emphasis added). See Exhibit # 39 attached hereto. This email shows that communications were taking place among city employees and PHA and that the City has a working relationship with PHA on several different levels, which supports Plaintiffs’ illegal government monopoly and antitrust claims. It appears from the email that PHA is requesting the City give marginal properties lower grades than very good ones, which would give clout to PHA to lower the Section 8 rents to private landlords, a penalty that would be “monetary in nature” according to Lantry, and would allow her to carry a “big stick” to make them behave. This email also shows direct evidence to support many of the Plaintiffs’ claims of intentional
40
Case 0:04-cv-02632-JNE-SRN Document 184 Filed 03/05/2008 Page 40 of 42
discrimination in application of heavy-handed code enforcement applied to private owners of “low-income” rental properties and their “protected class” tenants, while PHA is allowed to self inspect with much more lenient standards and to “privately deal with” their problem property address or tenant. But for Defendants failure to place a “litigation hold” on emails from 2002 through 2005, Plaintiffs submit that many more emails of this character would have been available to Plaintiffs for their claims.
30.
On February 12, 2008, Defendants’ counsel provided PHA housing crime reports as prepared by the St. Paul Police Department. See Exhibit # 40 attached hereto (sample PHA crime report from 2004). These documents will show the amount of crime present in PHA properties and further support Plaintiffs’ claims that PHA has similar if not more problematic tenants and properties and that the City’s relationship and cooperative agreements are preferential in nature.
31.
Plaintiffs jointly request that the Court order the full array of sanctions against Defendants as originally requested by Plaintiffs in their original motion for sanctions including immediate dismissal of Defendants’ motion for summary judgment, an award of fees and costs, fines against the responsible Defendants, and all other appropriate sanctions.
41
Case 0:04-cv-02632-JNE-SRN Document 184 Filed 03/05/2008 Page 41 of 42
42
32.
Plaintiffs request leave of the Court for an evidentiary hearing on Sanctions that may be appropriate including the taking of testimony to support court findings related to all sanctions.
33.
Given all of the above facts, circumstances, and attached exhibits, Plaintiffs’ counsel submit that all of the Plaintiffs have been prejudiced by Defendants’ failure to place a litigation hold on emails, by the other significant delay tactics detailed by Mr. Shoemaker in his affidavit filed in support of this renewed motion, and that appropriate sanctions should be entered against Defendants herein.

FURTHER YOUR AFFIANT SAYTH NOT.
Dated: 3/5/08 s/ Matthew A. Engel__
Matthew A. Engel
Subscribed and sworn to before me
this 5th day of March, 2008.
s/ Bradley A. Kirscher
Notary Public
Under Seal
Case 0:04-cv-02632-JNE-SRN Document 184 Filed 03/05/2008 Page 42 of 42

9:01 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Council President Lantry states: “I am almost certain that I sent this exact same e-mail last year but due to the Rico lawsuit, digging through my electronic trash would take about 4 days so I am relying on my ever failing memory.” See Exhibit # 16 attached hereto.

9:12 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Were can we get copies of exhibits?

9:13 PM  
Blogger Bob said...

Hi All,

Folks we are going to be reading these emails. Lot's of them. Some really shocking stuff.

I have a good feeling some city officials are going to be disturbed learning how their peers feel about them and speak about them behind their back.

Dean Koehnen, you are a disgusting commie.

From the complaint.


In an email from July of 2006, identified by Bates No. STP 211682, code enforcement officer Jacqueline Girling is writing to police officer Dean Koehnen with respect to his exercising his “size and influence to strong arm the property owner” in relation to code enforcement on one of her property files. Ms. Girling states: “Apparently Pam from Crime Prevention requested that you go out there ‘because of the size and influence that you would have over the owners’ (according to what Betsy told me). There was no reason for Crime Prevention to be involved in this case, as there was no danger of a potential crime taking place over there…Dean, please in the future, if you are going out on a property where I have pending orders, I would appreciate a heads up. There was no need for you to go out there other than (what sounds to me like) Pam from Crime Prevention hoping that you could strong-arm these people with your "size and influence"(emphasis
15
Case 0:04-cv-02632-JNE-SRN Document 184 Filed 03/05/2008 Page 15 of 42
added). See Exhibit # 14 attached hereto. This nature of this disclosure and implications to be drawn there from, are deeply disturbing in a constitutional, democratic free society held together by the rule of law. The shocking nature of this disclosure is consistent with the claims made by many of the Plaintiffs from the first Complaint by the Steinhauser Plaintiffs in May 2004 and thereafter in the Harrilal, Johnson Complaint. Defendant Officer Koehnen is an extremely large man standing close to 6’ 8”and of considerable weight. City police and code officials assigned Koehnen to Dawkins’ code office to gain entry to the interiors of properties where consent could not be obtained. The City employees involved in this particular property where a combination of a large police officer, code inspector, City crime prevention employee and an neighborhood representative working with City officials and employees to “force compliance” outside the boundaries of the law against a property owner, just exactly what Plaintiffs and their tenants have claimed all along.

9:20 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

BIGOT THUNE SPEAKS! from the complaint-

Councilmember Thune is voicing agreement with Dawkins’ statements that he wants to get rid of the bottom tier of tenants and this demonstrates the coordinated policy to get rid of affordable housing for low income and protected class tenants unless run by PHA, or certain non-profit organizations with political connections to policy makers.

9:37 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Do you haver the exhibits Bob? Are you willing to send them to me if I contact you at your email listed on the site here?

9:38 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm overwehlmed ater reading all of this. Does this show the "benifet" you have been tlaking about Chuck?

9:41 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Is this real?



Curt

9:49 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think this might be a record post.Jaw dropping to say the least.Thanks Bob for the heads up.
I kinda feel sorry for this Schiller guy.Maybe he should become an informant.Steve if you out there you should really consider helping the good guys out.



Linda

9:54 PM  
Blogger Bob said...

9:38, you bet I have exhibits. I'm neck deep here in bigoted filthy literature.

Barb Benson

I have an email you are going to regret ever writing.

You should call Miss Flowers NOW and apologise.

This one I am going to dedicate to my friends Rita and Gary, formerly of 785 Butternut.

10:24 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well there it is folks. Don't take the landlords word for it. Forget everything they have to say and call them every name you can think of, but here it is with the city's own paper. They're sitting and scheming about how to take your property and assessing ahead of time what their success might be should you try and assert your rights by challenging them in court. You dirty bastards. Someone should start a recall camapign against every one of these smart ass pricks the same way they did with Randy Kelly.

10:35 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

ricomen come calling. What do you have to say now mr. city employee?

10:43 PM  
Blogger Bob said...

I will start posting exhibits tomorrow.

10:55 PM  
Anonymous Trinh Thi Ngo said...

Seeba, Choi, your defense of these less than honorable people is giving the appearance of criminal compliance. Your careers will be over.

11:07 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bob,

Thank you for posting this information! You again have opened my eyes to the inner workings of our great city.

Bob, you are one great American Hero!

Big Mouth Bass

11:12 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This is what comes out of the bowels of the City of St. Paul. The data requests are merely a suppository.

11:39 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Who wrote this? George, Froggy, Anonymous?

Same shit you read from people here.

11:44 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

So Inspector Steve Schiller is a sleazy slimeball city employee? I'm sure he'll be glad to hear about that! I wonder how many other "slimeballs" work in inspections?

11:47 PM  
Anonymous wanting to talk, but can't said...

I'm numb after reading this.

12:14 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Breaker Breaker-----"dumby blue fox" to city employee----mission completed-----over.

1:59 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'd say this about wraps it up Repke. The conspiracy is obvious and that elusive "benifet" has apparantly surfaced. Anything else we can help you out with?

2:07 AM  
Anonymous Henry said...

Sure is great to see all of this stuff. However, you will all be happy to hear it is only the tip of the iceberg.
Great job Bob.

7:20 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Breaker Breaker Blue Fox-Close the payload and head back to base.Target hit!Great job Sgt.Slaughter.That outta send a message.

Blue Fox look back and see the mushroom cloud.I think you might have took out Private Repke.Over.

7:30 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I don't know what to say.I didn't expect this type of evidence to come out so quick.I am not surprised.I have evidence also that will support these defendants claims and am waiting for the right time to release them.

This is disgusting to say the least.Everybody reading this has a duty to the public.Everybody must email all this evidence to everybody you know or talk to.Friends,relatives,city workers,news,paper,radio,etc.


Get going.



Thanks Bob and these plaintiffs.Folks if we all work together we can make honest change.



Tim Ciani

7:48 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mr.Cullen you being a smart man and former president/landlord in SPARL.How do you feel about the conduct and tone of this city council?




Linda

8:13 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Blue-Fox your clear for take off
on runway 3, find PHA and drop in
behind enemy lines for recon get
us a report.

8:40 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If anyone is interested, Dateline NBC has requested all of the information with the four Federal Lawsuits filed against the City of St Paul.

I can only imagine what this will do to public opinion when this is broadcast on National TV.

I wonder if behavior is going on all over the country???

Jane

8:48 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Two points, because this is a lot of disjointed stuff.

1. Help me again, what is the benefit that PHA gets out of any landlord going out of business? There is no doubt that the City works with PHA, there is no doubt that St Paul Police and PHA have contracts, but the RICO case is that some adverse action against a landlord benefits PHA, how does that work?

2. As to my friend and former co-worker Barb Benson. I have no doubt that Barb can be extremely frank, but Bob you will find by looking through this document concering her opinion of one of the DSI inspectors, she used words in an email that she might also now regret and your side will be quite pleased with.

I have never said that elected officials and City Employees were not extremely frustrated and at wits end about what to do with land lords who would not maintain their properties and would not evict law brakers. You can clearly hear that in their tone.

JMONTOMEPPOF

Chuck Repke

8:50 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ok chuck, so now you finally ADMIT
that this is our side and your on theirs.

As if we didnt know.

What have you got to say about the ADMITTED strong arm tactics as stated by code enforcement officer Girling ? ( see 29. of the affidavit posted here ).

Now you attempt to excuse the cities behavior as FRUSTRATION ?

Sounds like some people down at city hall need to see a shrink and get some meds.

Or, the job of being corrupt is to much of a strain.

The problem Chuck for YOUR SIDE, is that everyone is scrambling because all this stuff is coming out and its to late to cover their tracs.

Better watch date line.

Expect PHA to start getting some heat.

I can tell you that a lawsuit is pending against PHA that will
send alot of those termites running.



Sgt.Slaughter

9:06 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Regardless of what shit you give my friend and former boss Dave Thune, anyone who is concerned about elected officials attitudes about protected class citizens has to be heartened by this (from your document):

"In an email from May of 2006, identified by bates no. STP 213425, Councilmember Dave Thune was replying to a neighbor with respect to Crocus Hill mugging in the neighborhood. Thune replied: “we cannot go out and arrest every 22 year old black male who walks thru crocus hill, although that's what some of your neighbors would like” (emphasis added). "

Sounds to me that Thune is quite aware that there may be those who have issues around race and he refuses to be a part of it and is challenging the person who sent him their issue to check their own self. Few council people would be so willing to confront "Minnesota nice" racism that directly.

JMONTOMEPPOF

Chuck Repke

9:06 AM  
Anonymous henry said...

I think the citizens of St. Paul should " QUICK TAKE " the properties owned by the City Council and City Offficials and sell them to help pay for their wrong doings. I don't think they will be needing them anyway, as hopefully criminal charges will follow and these scum will be in jail.

9:19 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Staying on the line of false attacks, 9:37 said "Bigot Thune Speaks" and then quotes someone elses opinion of what Thune said. Read the entire issue...

"In an email from April of 2005, identified by Bates No. STP 211467, Councilmember Thune was emailing then city official-employee Susan Kimberly with respect to his wish to condemn and take properties. Thune wrote: “For some time now I've wished we could just condemn and quicktake individual junk properties, problem properties, vacant and boarded properties, etc…I've actually got one in ward 2 that might fit the bill for a test case. I think its rehabable and it likely would never be arguably an expensive property should its owner appear before the judge on the quick take proceedings. I'd appreciate your participation in this one to see if it could become a valuable city policy” (emphasis added). See Exhibit # 22 attached hereto. This email shows the City’s “force sale” policy, the disregard for due process, civil rights, equal protection, and the specific intolerance for the poor (primarily African-Americans) who occupy the types of properties that City officials and employees along with certain influential third parties quickly label as “problem properties,” and following application of the City’s zero tolerance polices, quickly turn into “vacant and boarded properties.” Councilmember Thune is voicing agreement with Dawkins’ statements that he wants to get rid of the bottom tier of tenants and this demonstrates the coordinated policy to get rid of affordable housing for low income and protected class tenants unless run by PHA"

...end....

Its the lawyers opinion that Thune's interest in exploring a legal way to do quick takes with the head of the HRA is in some way agreeing to Dawkins desire to get rid of "bottom teir tennents." Thune didn't say that! He was asking the head of the HRA if there was some way that the City could do quick takes of boarded buildings, or blighted buildinds or problem properties.

Who knows if the solution was that you could do that if you paid a big relocation fee to the tennent and locked them in for rent assistance for a few years it might be a great thing for them. All Thune did was ask a question as to how to make the situation better.

9:37 read it again.

JMONTOMEPPOF

Chuck Repke

9:24 AM  
Blogger Bob said...

Chuck, evict LAWBREAKERS? It isn't legal to put somebody on the street who hasn't been convicted of a crime. But you and people like you, are all to quick to insist a landlord commit these civil rights violations on their tenants. How about investigating and arresting criminals?

We have a failed crime strategy and this lawsuit is the proof.

9:27 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

9:37 here, OK Chuck.. My Bad.. However you cannot dispute the over whelming evidence here. Jeesh, Seeba should be jailed for obstruction.

9:32 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Chuck Says,Sounds to me that Thune is quite aware that there may be those who have issues around race and he refuses to be a part of it and is challenging the person who sent him their issue to check their own self. Few council people would be so willing to confront "Minnesota nice" racism "that directly."




Ciani says,"Are you dumb?Why is Thune even exchanging emails with this racist?Why didn't Thune tell this guy its a violation of ones civil rights?Why wouldn't he have to this poor soul that any 22 year old black male has a right to walk through Crocus Hill?And last if Thune knows that there is racism throughout neighborhoods and heard that the complaint based sytem is being used against blacks-SHOW MW WHAT HE DID!"


Chuck I'd watch yourself.You are going to end up distroying your career trying to protect a racist city council member.

And once again Chuck.RICO IS ONLY ONE PART BIRD BRAIN!I see anti-trust ad many other things.How did PHA benefit.Well they didn't get heavy handed enforcement tp put them out of business.WAKE UP CHUCK YOU MAKE SICK!!


Yeah and Barb Bensons a beauty.Maybe she hates Portia because she black and has gotten some place in life.

Portia I do agree with one thing Barb said.I feel sorry that you have to represent these slimball racist.



Tim Ciani

9:34 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Chuck Says,Sounds to me that Thune is quite aware that there may be those who have issues around race and he refuses to be a part of it and is challenging the person who sent him their issue to check their own self. Few council people would be so willing to confront "Minnesota nice" racism "that directly."




Ciani says,"Are you dumb?Why is Thune even exchanging emails with this racist?Why didn't Thune tell this guy its a violation of ones civil rights?Why wouldn't he have to this poor soul that any 22 year old black male has a right to walk through Crocus Hill?And last if Thune knows that there is racism throughout neighborhoods and heard that the complaint based sytem is being used against blacks-SHOW MW WHAT HE DID!"


Chuck I'd watch yourself.You are going to end up distroying your career trying to protect a racist city council member.

And once again Chuck.RICO IS ONLY ONE PART BIRD BRAIN!I see anti-trust ad many other things.How did PHA benefit.Well they didn't get heavy handed enforcement tp put them out of business.WAKE UP CHUCK YOU MAKE SICK!!


Yeah and Barb Bensons a beauty.Maybe she hates Portia because she black and has gotten some place in life.

Portia I do agree with one thing Barb said.I feel sorry that you have to represent these slimball racist.



Tim Ciani

9:35 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Chuck Says,Sounds to me that Thune is quite aware that there may be those who have issues around race and he refuses to be a part of it and is challenging the person who sent him their issue to check their own self. Few council people would be so willing to confront "Minnesota nice" racism "that directly."




Ciani says,"Are you dumb?Why is Thune even exchanging emails with this racist?Why didn't Thune tell this guy its a violation of ones civil rights?Why wouldn't he have to this poor soul that any 22 year old black male has a right to walk through Crocus Hill?And last if Thune knows that there is racism throughout neighborhoods and heard that the complaint based sytem is being used against blacks-SHOW MW WHAT HE DID!"


Chuck I'd watch yourself.You are going to end up distroying your career trying to protect a racist city council member.

And once again Chuck.RICO IS ONLY ONE PART BIRD BRAIN!I see anti-trust ad many other things.How did PHA benefit.Well they didn't get heavy handed enforcement tp put them out of business.WAKE UP CHUCK YOU MAKE SICK!!


Yeah and Barb Bensons a beauty.Maybe she hates Portia because she black and has gotten some place in life.

Portia I do agree with one thing Barb said.I feel sorry that you have to represent these slimball racist.



Tim Ciani

9:35 AM  
Anonymous Sgt.Slaughter said...

We don't give a rats ass about Thune and his pretended empathy
for 22 year old blacks.

We are talking about widespread
corruption.

Stop playing the race card.

If it sympathy you need, go to
E-Democ.

How about addressing my comment on
29. of the affidavit ??

You don't know how to answer it
flee bag.


Sgt.Slaughter

9:36 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

We are paying these "professional" inspectors how much??? Their mentality is still in kindergarten.

I'm interested in learning more about the role of Susan Kimberly. She has the DEEP POLITICAL BACKGROUND to really screw this up, and be a rat in the woodwork.

9:38 AM  
Blogger Bob said...

There maybe copy errors.

Date: 2005-04-07-23-15-04
CC: Swanson_Donna
To: Kimberly_Susan
From: Dave Thune
Subject: development plan for takings
Hi Susan
For some time now I've wished we could just condemn and quicktake individual junk
properties, probl;em propertoes, vacant and boarded properties, etc.
Some years ago I believe someone told me that we couldn't do a quick take because we
didn't have a development plan for the property.
My suggestion is that we adopt a policy that would include a development plan that
would acknowlege
1. the blighting influence of vacant or disrepaired properties
2. a case by case policy that would enable the hra to take and offer for
redevelopment
3. a policy that would require that we attempt to recoup the $ spent in acquisition
4. an assertion that the value of the property is essentially land cost less
demolition and I think we could point to actual demolished structures where that was
the case
I've actually got one in ward 2 that might fit the bill for a test case. i think its
rehabable and it likely would never be arguably an expensive property should its
owner appear before the judge on the quick take proceedings.
I'd appreciate your participation in this one to see if it could become a valuable
city policy
dave
Page

10:06 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

9:37 - thank you for your retraction. I understand that a lot of people have a lot of passion about this stuff (Tim) but I have known Thune for 30 years and he just flat out won't put up with racism. As to Tim, why didn't he yell at the guy or hang up on the guy. Come on, he used some tact. He suggested that other people would be racist to get across that maybe this person should check themselves. If every white guy over 50 years old would do that we'd have a heck of a lot less racism in this country.

And the protected class issue is a part of the suit, so whoever ask why we were talking about racism that is why.

Bob - I sure as heck didn't say that we can not or should not house the exoffender. I worked in corrections from 1974-1989 in halfway houses and had to help exoffenders find places to live. When council members link crime issues to property owners it usually is because there are multiple police calls to the building fights, noise, drugs, warrents... They get upset with those who make no efforts to evict tennents that get multiple police calls.

You know and those on this list that know me know, that there are many good landlords who struggle with getting police support, and getting the court to evict tennents with those issues. I have, and every council member I have worked with tries to support those landlords. That is why the jerks that don't even try tick people off. Because there are good landlords that go through a lot of crap trying to do the right thing.

JMONTOMEPPOF

Chuck Repke

10:10 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bob - I think Thune's proposal would be a good way to deal with the vacant property issue!

He is talking about going out and buying these houses through condemnation and trying to get them rehabbed. What he clearly is concerned about is all of the vacants we have and this was in April of 2005! He was three years smarter than anyone else.

I am guessing that the reason this didn't go anywhere is because if you go through a condemnation proceedure the judge is going to give the owner more money than if the City waits until the property goes back to the bank and sits for a few years.

Find me anyone on the planet that has ever gone through a condemnation where the judge didn't award at least 20% over the tax value of the property.

Also, if Thune's proposal would have been for a house with people living in it they get up to $15,000 for relocation (Federal rule) and two years of rental assistance (city pays the difference between what they pay in the new place and the old one). So, like I said that might have been a nice deal for occupants.

So, here is what happened instead. The owners lost those properties, the residents are gone, the banks have the buildings back and they are on the market for half of what they were valued at when Thune came up with the idea.

Sounds like he was fucking with the poor people and landlords with that idea to bail them out.

JMONTOMEPPOF

Chuck Repke

10:22 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Just one question...

Why would the city not cooperate with discovery? If there is no case, cooperate with discovery and wait for the plaintiffs case to be rejected.

But instead, Lantry turns over ONE e-mail for all of 2003 and writes in another e-mail: “I am almost certain that I sent this exact same e-mail last year but due to the Rico lawsuit, digging through my electronic trash would take about 4 days so I am relying on my ever failing memory.” It sounds like intentionally obstructing the discovery process. I like and respect Council President Lantry, but this is disturbing. Lantry isn’t the only one, but maybe the most flagrant.

Anyone… Chuck? What possible reason could the city have to obstruct the discovery process? This lack of respect for the judicial process can move cases from civil to criminal court.

Bill Cullen.

10:35 AM  
Anonymous Sgt.Slaughter said...

Lantry chooses to forget, just like Ronald Reagen did during
the Oliver North bullshit.

Expect others like her to have failing memories by the time this shit goes to trial.

Sgt.Slaughter

10:39 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Lantry, your failing memory should
have you taken off the council as
UNFIT !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

10:41 AM  
Anonymous Score keeper said...

Outstanding work gentlemen. Couldn't have done better myself! Carry on, there's much left to do.

10:47 AM  
Blogger Bob said...

Date: 2007-07-24-16-18-37
CC: Biales_Ellen
To: Smith_Matt
From: Kathy Lantry
Subject: The Budget
Hi Matt,
I am almost certain that I sent this exact same e-mail last year but due to the Rico
lawsuit, digging through my electronic trash would take about 4 days so I am relying
on my ever failing memory.
Today both Ellen and I received in the mail-separate invitations to the Mayor's
budget address. These cards were sent out 1st class mail at .41 each. Considering
the depth and breadth of our budget debacle I'm sure the savings from skipping Ellen
and I could be trivialized but GEEZ!! When we tell people that every penny counts
and we need to watch every dime we spend then we had better watch every dime we
spend.
As I say, I am almost sure this happened last year and the tenor of my e-mail a year
ago was just as defeated. Let's try to fix the little stuff that ought to be easy.
Kathy
Attached File: Z:\House\Biales\Mailbox1\Text-503.htm

10:56 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

OK "SGT Slaughter" in response to your concern of 29 strong arm tactics.

I'm guessing that someone thought the sending a large person along would have the same effect as picking a pretend name like... Sgt Slaughter!

Its designed to make people believe that you have power, much like sending a large person to somewhere where the person has no respect for the authority, might at least get them to respect them because of their size.

Its not strong arming any more than you pretend name scares me.

And Bill, I have no idea what the attorney did to cherry pick that comment of Lantry's. You would have to ask them what she said and her what she meant. We have already seen this attorney accuse Thune of racism for coming up with a potential way to help the landlords and the tennents.

JMONTOMEPPOF

Chuck Repke

10:56 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Lantry is just a loud mouth bitch and now she's going to preside over her own political demise. Couldn't happen to a nicer person as far as I am concerned.

11:04 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I met with my Attorney this morning Bob and I can tell you one thing, there is going to be another lawsuit agaisnt these jerks. MINE! The Attorney told me not to talk about it but I think you will be pleasently suprised when it become public and you find out what the city did to me.

11:10 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Tea anyone?

11:11 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Check out Minnesota Statute 609.903 Subd. 1(1) Chuck.

See anything that relates here ?

I do.

11:12 AM  
Blogger Bob said...

Folks, innocent citizens (renters)who have committed NO CRIMES were intimidated into illegal searches by this OX of a man who does NOT deserve to wear a police officers badge. He has NO respect for the constitution that protects our liberties as a nation.

11:14 AM  
Anonymous Sgt.Slaughter said...

For real Chuck, my last name is Slaughter and I served in my country in vietnam and got out in
74.

I am a staff seargent and a decorated vet.

Sorry my last name makes you feel so small and powerless.


Sgt.Slaughter

11:19 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Chuck,

I read the court filings and rear and reread your responses.

How can you in good conscience keep defending the city for their discriminatory actions?

Where are your DFL principles?

The DFL is supposed to be a defender of the poor, but Thune and Lantry seem to want to drive these individuals out of St. Paul like the Southern Democrats did to the slaves in 1860s with their "Black Codes."

Lantry's actions along with other city employees are raciest to the core.

This is not the St. Paul that I knew.

11:31 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I was introduced to this blog by a friend a few weeks ago that was aware of my treatment as an investment property owner by the city some years back. However I was fortunate enough to unload the properties before receiving this special type of treatment. The question I have is regarding this guy, Chuck Repke. Most people posting on this blog have smartly decided to remain anonymous for obvious reasons. This guy Chuck has become a whipping boy for just about everyone on the blog, justifiably so. There are very few people in this world outside of my family that I would publicly support with 100% conviction. Chuck you seem like a reasonably intelligent guy and I assume you are in a profession that requires a certain level of credibility. Why would you put your reputation on the line supporting public figures that seem to be sinking deeper and deeper under the weight of increasing evidence? What the hell is in it for you. If anything the recent disclosure of e-mails from the city, should teach you that you should never post anything with an electronic signature that could come back to haunt you in the future. Learn when it's time to shut the f___up!

11:33 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bob

i have a appointment with my attorney at 2 P.m. today. I'll let you know how it goes, but the way I see it, I think I have a claim against the city for their code actions on my property. I've thought so all along, I just didn't relaize anyone had any proof. I thought it was all talk and whinning. Meanwhile, my attorney is getting a hold of the attornies in these lawsuits to talk to them before we meet. I'll let you know how it goes.

11:36 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

11:33 AM,

Well said!

You have to understand, Thune and Chuck are long-time friends. Chuck would die trying to protect Thune.

11:39 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

THANK YOU 11:33 !!!!!!!!!!!!!

From all of us with the landlords.

11:39 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Remember the smoking ban Thune ?

How about that one Chuck ?

11:41 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yes, I know someone whos buisness folded under it.

Run out the landlords and run out the buisnesses.

Guess St.Paul better statr writing alot more parking tickets for revenue .

11:46 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

11:33 - I think for the purposes of debate it is better to be honest about who one is. If you are new here you aren't aware then that people from this list send inspectors to my duplex on a regular basis to get back at me for expressing my opinion. The most recent being to say on the list, "how would you like it if the city walked through your house" and then calling the City and reporting the duplex that 4 people live in for "overcrowding." So, they were right they were able to get an inspector to walk through my house too. There have been a few more but we will let that rest.

As to who I am, I have several jobs but one of them I do is neighborhood development on the East Side. My most recent project is doing the site assembly for the new Cub that will be coming in the Phalen area.

So, I am concerned about vacant and blighted properties and what cities can do to improve neighborhoods. I am well aware of the problems that occur when someone doesn't take care of their properties and I have had great experiences with good owners.

In the past I have worked for elected officials including, Thune. So, I sign my posts:

JMONTOMEPPOF

Just My Oppinion Not Those Of My Employers, Past, Present Or Future

Chuck Repke

PS smoking ban - sounds like that became the law state wide - sounds like Thune won on that one a long time ago. Its called leadership

12:13 PM  
Blogger Bob said...

Date: 2007-01-23-12-34-13
To: Clements_Joanne
From: Barb Benson
Subject: Re: Signs
Hey, JC,
I just value your thoughts so highly. Thank you. I don't hear of any men or an
ex-husband, but she has showed me pictures of two adult sons--one Black and one
Caucasian. So, she must have had some "fun" somewhere along the road.
When I met with that Portia Hampton-Flowers (I didn't believe the name until I saw
it in print!!!, I thought you just gotta be kidding), I had that same feeling about
her as your intuitive little birdie immediately as I walked into her office. My
name ended up in a deposition in conjunction with Dave Thune about this case where
all the slum landlords are suing code inspection and everyone. Steve Schiller (who
is certifiable) was the one deposed and I strongly objected to what he said. She's
talking to me in all this legalese like I don't have a clue. I said to her, "I
understand everything that you are saying about the legal issues. The City
attempted to fire Steve Schiller many years ago, but, unfortunately, was not
successful. He should have been canned. I'm just sorry for you that you have to
waste your time with this sleazy slimeball City employee. Have a good day." With
that, I got up and walked out.
I somehow think I didn't impress her unduly . . . Ya think????
The Ward 2 Slave
>>> Joanne Clements 1/23/2007 11:44 AM >>>
Barb,
You of all people with your intuitive abilities can figure out most people in a
matter of minutes. Trust that and never doubt it. You are never nasty, just tell
it like it is, and always right on. I am taking a wild guess and say she is
divorced or never married, not that it matters, just according to her sign. I have
a friend who is Pisces/Aries cusp and an ex-friend who is a Aries/Taurus, but it
took me a long time to finally get her number, I felt sorry for her because most
people hated her, but then had to find out myself in the long run. Good learning
experience for me though.
On the attorney you asked me about earlier. A little birdie told me, she has
extremely high ego, and could possibly be construed as your back stabbing bitc-. I
cannot attest to this, but my source is quite reliable and very intuitive.
>>> Barb Benson 1/23/2007 10:31 AM >>>
Hey, JC,
I just knew you could help me out. She seems very, very nice, whereas I had ADHD
figured out within one minute of her presence here. This one is very frumpy looking
(I am not being nasty, just giving you an apt description), dumpy figure, sometimes
wears tennis shoes matching her longer skirts, black rimmed glasses, very dark hair
with bangs straight across, hair length about bottom of ear, kind of like a Buster
Brown do. Very political.
Barb
>>> Joanne Clements 1/23/2007 10:10 AM >>>
Hey Barb,
An Aries/Taurus cusp. Wow. Now that can be very, very good and also very, very
bad. There is no in between with this one. I am going to send you something on
that particular cusp sign. I will tell you that she is a very hard worker, success
oriented and compatible with you on the Aries level, and since both you and the
Page 1
EXHIBIT 35 STP 213654
Case 0:04-cv-02632-JNE-SRN Document 184-9 Filed 03/05/2008 Page 4 of 6
2007-01-23-12-34-13-Barb_Benson-Re-_Signs
Taurus portion have the same ruling planet Venus, that should be helpful.
You are a riot Barb. I don't know Portia very well at all. Spoken to her only a
few times, but if she is an attorney, I automatically don't trust, which is a shame,
but an occupational hazard here. She came from the outside and Frank hired her
while he was still here and she moved up to his position, shortly after he left. I
will get more of the scoop on her from others here.
>>> Barb Benson 1/23/2007 9:46 AM >>>
Hey, JC,
We just hired a new Legislative Aide in here to replace ADHD. Totally different
persona--like night and day! Her sign is Aries, her birthday the very last day of
the sign, April 19. Can you tell me what her traits might be, seeing that she is
also very close to Taurus? How about compatibility with Libra?
I had the very distinct pleasure (ha ha) of meeting with that Portia attorney
person. What is HER story?
Thanks, my good friend.
Barb
Attached File: G:\House\Barbb\SentItems5\Text-315.htm

Folks, code enforcement officer Steve Schiller is an HONORABLE MAN for coming clean with his feelings over the early demise of my friends Rita Rodriquez and Gary Tanzer of 785 Butternut over zealous code enforcement actions. I could give Steve Schiller a big bear hug because I feel his pain.

Barb, as Rita and Gary's neighbor, did it bother you Rita and Gary were a racially mixed couple? Did it bother you they had a racially mixed child?

These are the kinds of questions you are going to have to answer in federal court.

I won't be posting anymore today. This post is emotionally painful for me.

12:14 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Tell that to all the buisness owners that went under Chuck !

12:16 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Chuck says,"Also, if Thune's proposal would have been for a house with people living in it they get up to $15,000 for relocation (Federal rule) and two years of rental assistance (city pays the difference between what they pay in the new place and the old one). So, like I said that might have been a nice deal for occupants.


Ciani says,"Since your Thunes punching bag why don't you ask him the address so we can see how the tenants benefited?



Folks do you see how Chuck is protecting Thune by twisting what he said and did.Repke I'm sure theres more evidence out there.KEEP DIGGING!

Chuck this is just evidence for sanctions.I'm sure there will be more dirt for summary judgement.


So Chuck are you defending Lantry,Keonen,Dawkins also?


Tim Ciani

12:18 PM  
Anonymous Code Enforcement Officer Steve Schillers deposition said...

click above

12:19 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey Repke why don't you post this topic on Edemocracy and see if they all agree with you.I DARE YOU BIG SHOT!!



Tim Ciani

12:23 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bob, these morons can't phatom the depth of empathy real people feel for one another.

In my opinion we should put Schiller in Kesslers position.

12:28 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Chuck doesn’t have the GUTS to post this o E-Democracy because this would make his buddy, Thune and fellow DFLers look bad. Forget about the truth or the discriminatory practices of the DFL controlled city council, Chuck will follow the party line at all costs. No honor there, Chuck is just protecting Lantry and Thune and the rest of his DFL buddies.

We need change! Who could we get to run against these bozos?

12:45 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

How about Bob Johnson taking Bob Kessler's position?

Bob Johnson has my vote!

12:47 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey,dont you people have anything to say about the cannon story ?

Lets talk about where thats heading and the signifigance of
what could happen there.

I am sure we have cops like that in St.Paul.

12:59 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bob

So your terrible email that you have on Barb Benson is some girl talk that shouldn't have been going on City time?

Its two girls talking about zodiac signs and being catty. MEOW!

Benson has to meet with the attorney is ticked off at Shiller for putting her in that position and then gets catty about the "frumpy" attorney that quizzed her.

It doesn't prove anything other than that girl talk can be rough. There is no attack on race other than girls being catty that this attorney must have been fooling around out of wedlock, how 1950's of them. The attack if you read it with an open mind isn't over the race of the children it is her questioning that two men would have been interested in her. That is the catty insult.

Bob, your better than that.

And Tim - Thune's proposal never happened. To bad but it didn't occur.

JMONTOMEPPOF

Chuck Repke

1:06 PM  
Anonymous Sgt.Slaughter said...

You only read what you want to read Chuck.(Spinnerman)

1:19 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Chuck this email speaks volumes about the person (Barb Benson) and what they think and say.

You call it "catty", but I call it being discriminatory, making racial judgements about another person.

Your comments just show another DFLer (Chuck Repke) protecting another DFLer. Their behavior on the city dime is shameful.

Steve Shiller should sue Barb Benson for the comments she about Steve Shiller. Defamation of character should cost Barb Benson $50,000.00 and I hope Steve collects. I will throw in the first $100.00 for attorney costs in suing this city council aide, Barb Benson.

This is a mild email, you should see how some city council members really talk about the public.

By the way, Mayor Coleman will deliver the State of the City Address at Wilder Center on March 12th

Maybe a strong showing from A-Democracy at the Mayor’s State of the City Address might be appropriate. Signs, handouts, buttons etc... Next we will have the cops or city council banning or preventing these things to be passed out at the State of the City Address.

1:25 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Chuck said,"And Tim - Thune's proposal never happened. To bad but it didn't occur."


Ciani says,"How do you know?You must be real close to Dav or he's feeding you lines.Well could you atleast give us the address?Let us do the research."



Chuck said,"Sounds to me that Thune is quite aware that there may be those who have issues around race and he refuses to be a part of it and is challenging the person who sent him their issue to check their own self. Few council people would be so willing to confront "Minnesota nice" racism that directly."



Ciani says,"Did you just hear what Chuck said?Kinda sounds like he's saying some council members encourage it.Chuck are you saying some council members allow citizens to be racist why they(council)do the dirty work."



Chuck Thunes political career is over.And I'd say if Barb Benson isn't canned like tomorrow theres a problem.


Tim Ciani

1:35 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ricomen good job.You caught a couple employees with their pants down.To bad you didn't get the juicey stuff.I remember when they tried to fire Dopey Steve Schiller.They should of.Keep up the good work Chuck.

We are immune you fools.Right Chuck?


-City Employee

ps. Come find me Ricomen.

1:56 PM  
Anonymous Sgt.Slaughter said...

We dont need you city employee.
But you can hang around for the bringing down of your friends.

2:05 PM  
Blogger AMANDA said...

Bob, you and the boy's are very nasty today. I think this is an all time low for all of you.

What we see here people is the bad boys side of the story. We never hear from the brilliant city attorney Ms. Seeba or any other city official. Why, because she can't disgust the case. If she could all of you would be sitting in the corner facing the wall.

I can hardly wait for the courts ruling when they hold the plaintiffs responsible for the cost of this frivolous law suit.

2:20 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh Amanda Hug-N-Kiss how great would it be to see sanctions against Ms.Seeba.Shes been doing the dirty work for the gang for some time.Her stall tactics are evident.Decisions will be sooner than later my friend.

Tell your buddy Repke Dumb Da Dumb Dumb Dumb.

2:41 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I was steered to this site by someone I know.I'm an attorney in downtown Minneapolis.I shouldn't comment on ongoing litigation but have to say Saint Paul is in some big trouble.The Judge in this case has her hands tied and will have to sanction.


This is going to be a good case to watch and may end up being great case law.

4:02 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'd say this is where the city pays for trying to rid neighborhoods of crime a different way then using police.

My city officials can you please get alittle smarter then to keep your butt in the air.

I can't believe my eyes.



George

4:23 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Eric Mitchell where are you?

4:34 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Amanda, you and Chuck are dumber than rocks. Downright laughable.

4:43 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Did you people know that amanda works in code enforcement ?

Yes, its true.

5:50 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

5:50 PM

Shocking news this all is.

This does not look good for the city. These emails are an interesting look into thinging of some of our city employees and elected officials. The email Queen, Kathy Lantry send out more emails that five city employees, but only one is located. Seems like the city is trying to hide something.

The leadership of our city needs changing.

6:17 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well Repke, I see your back at it again, but a little outgunned this time aren't you. Terrible when evidence and facts get in the way isn't it Chuck. I'm not going ot go into my usual thing about you being all wahed up up and finished Chuck, that's old news and besides ....you and everyone else knows it. What bothers me Chuck is your contention that people send inspectors to your house on a regular basis. Have you ever thought that maybe the inspectors have you on a regular rotation in their schedule? Maybe they like you for some funny reason. I'd venture to say that they keep coming abck because that fishing shack you call a house is seriouly deficient in meeting all it's codes. Instead of complaining, why don't you fix it up? If you don't, the day will come when they will want to tear it down. Probably not now, but when the council changes to the Fair Party and you don't have your connections, your lucky streak with Dawkins may change, and you kinow what that means Chuck. Your house could become a part of history and when that happens, well....need i say more? Usually I would say this is about the time when we find ourselves on your front doorstep, but now you won't have a front doorstep will you? NO...you'll be living in a tent on Harriet Island and frying burgers at Mickey's Dinner. Your finsihed Repke. There's new things happening in town and I'm afraid your part of them my friend. Their going to put you and all your political hack buddies on a ril and run them out of town mt firend, Time to pack her in Repke. The gig is up.

6:25 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If the city leaders look at this evidence and have the same thoughts as Chuck and Amanda, we are in a lot of trouble. To those who want to reamin on the sidelines, (Eric) because it doesn't affect you, now would be the time to stnad up because you are about to lose everything you have in life if these pigs think this is the type of leadership they are going to assert over the citizens.

7:40 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm also a practicing Attorney. I'm not involved in these cases, but wish I was. I think there's going to be some great case law as a result of these actions.

7:50 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Very chilling that some folks think this behavior is OK. I don't think any jury anywhere in America is going to see it that way.

7:57 PM  
Anonymous Henry said...

To the attorney who wishes he was involved in these cases. There are plenty of people who have been hurt by the City some of whom don't even know they have a claim. I am certain you could contact some of them and get involved. I would start with owners of properties on the vacant building list, available on the city website, and also owners of properties on past problem property lists. GO HELP THEM, I AM CERTAIN THEY WOULD APPRECIATE HEARING FROM YOU.

8:19 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well we see that Repke disappears when the facts come out.What happen Repke did Thune put you on a leash?

Were all waiting on the address of the "test property".Come on Repke you knew a lot about.Cough it up.

Repke send a message to the city for me................The plaintiffs aren't the only ones out to get these bad guys.I will do everything in my power to expose my evidence and recruit more people to put these slimballs out of office.

I see your done.Lets play some more Repke,it was just getting fun!



Tim Ciani

8:23 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

On E-Democracy they are talking about:

- Community Voices for stops at Western, Victoria & Hamline
- [Fwd: Ramsey County Union Depot Update]
- Invitation to view Andrew’s Galley
- Much Ado about Nothing
- Supplemental DEIS for Central Corridor
- The Voices of Communities along Central Corridor
- AN ALTERNATIVE PLAN FOR THE RNC
- LRTCC Analysis
- Mayor Coleman to Deliver State of the City Address at Wilder Center on March 12th

All fluff stuff, but here at A-Democracy you get the real deal.

8:33 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Way to go Bob

9:01 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Amanda,

I agree that anything can happen in a court room. The celebrating on this blog is clearly premature.

However, can you help me with one question? If St. Paul is obviously in the right, why would they not cooperate with discovery? By refusing to abide by a court order for discovery, the city might lose before the trial starts.

Bill Cullen.

9:43 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Timmy - if you read Thune's stuff over again it is clear the house he was thinking of was a vacant building. He was clearly thinking it would be better to buy and rehab than to allow it to be demo'ed.

I love the way you go after Thune but since this site was started I have been asking for the address of one property in Ward 2 that Thune didn't give the owner an extention on to avoid demo when the owner asked for it.

All this BS and ragging on Thune, but nothing. In what 4 years now.

JMONTOMEPPOF

Chuck Repke

9:56 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I do know that Susan Kimberly, formerly known as City Councilman Bob Sylvester, was involved in my property condemnation decisioning. I'll be interested in seeing what her level of involvement was.

10:02 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bill

Cooperate with discovery are you fucking kidding me!!

These ass holes have cost the city tens of thousands of dollars in discovery. That is the biggest bull shit I have ever heard.

They have had to recreate the email records of almost every City employee for the last seven years.

These little pricks have come up with the best get back scheme ever the law suit now is totally about has every email ever created been recovered?

There is no case, no racket, no rico just a massive search to embarass city employees and hurt people reputations and why?

Because these ass holes were being held account for their actions. The City was finally trying to get Saint Paul to hold these guys to the same standard as Hopkins and Minnetonka. But they weren't going to take that shit they have the right to exploit the poor and now they get to destroy City employees lives and trying to make a buck off of the City if all of the emails can't be found.

Not cooperate with discovery, where in the hell do you think all this crap came from?

JMONTOMEPPOF

Chuck Repke

10:11 PM  
Anonymous Sgt.Slaughter said...

Listen here Chucky cheese eater,
What will you be saying when the Judge throws sanctions at them ?

I suppose you will be crying that the Judges are as bad as the landlords ?

I bet if this stuff was in Ramsey District Court you would be jumpimg for joy because you and every other mother Fuc*er in city hall including the Judges in Ramsey County are corrupt.


Cry me a river Chuck that some idiots like your friends are stupid enough to say the things they do in E-mails and not expect that sooner or later what comes around goes around.

Nope Chuck, when the sanctions are handed down what song will you be singing ??

Who will you blame, the Judge ?

See ya later spinner !!!!!!!!!




Sgt.Slaughter

10:27 PM  
Anonymous Sgt.Slaughter said...

P,s. Chuck get down and give me a hundred push-ups and you just got yourself 30 days of KP.


Sgt.Slaughter

10:30 PM  
Blogger AMANDA said...

Well put Chuck!

Bill show me the proof the city has destroyed anything.

The city attorneys have provided the plaintiffs with a mind boggling number of emails. This was no small task. It cost the tax payers a lot of money. Do these guys care? Hell no, they are bent on revenge and frankly as in "Frank Steinhauser" I don't think they care.

I'd like to see Seeba or someone from the city attorneys office here disputing these allegations.
I'll settle for Chuck. He seems to beating these guys up with half his brain tied behind his back.

10:38 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

These emails show that the White Bear Avenue operation is just a Satellite (with TP), to DipShit Central in City Hall. While Chuck's bravado is growing, it's clear that he's scared.

10:39 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Slaughter

The only thing that there could ever be sanctions on is the City's inability to recreate every email ever writen.

The judge could fine them for that.

But it isn't against the law to use bad language and it isn't against the law to be frustrated and it isn't against the law to be tough on crime and it isn't against the law to try and have the same standards on housing in the city that they have in the burbs. None of that is a Federal offence.

It also isn't against the law to work with other government agencies and it isn't against the law to work with nonproffits.

It is against the law to house people in substandard housing and it is against the law to run drug houses and it is against the law violate the housing codes.

JMONTOMEPPOF

Chuck Repke

10:41 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Chuck,

Whenever someone tells you something you don’t want to hear Chuck you start swearing, as evident in your post at 10:11 PM. This is your defensive reaction, we all have them.

You state the city should not cooperate with discovery. Why wouldn’t they cooperate with discovery if they did not have anything to hide. Only when someone has something to hide or they are not doing what they are supposed to be doing, they try and hide and skirt the truth. We see the city trying to hide documents, trying to hide the truth.

Chuck, you are concerned about the tens of thousands of dollars in discovery process. When the first case was filed, there was a litigation hold put on these documents. The city destroyed these documents in violation of a court order. So Chuck, how is this the plaintiff’s fault. The city’s actions have cost not only the city extra money, but have cost the plaintiffs lots of money. Cry all you want to Repke, but the city should have been saving these emails.

You talk about landlord’s little scheme is totally about every email ever created. Chuck this is about getting the facts for a RICO case. Discovery is all about getting the facts out on the table and letting a jury decide if there was any violation of the RICO laws. That is what our justice system is founded upon, getting the facts so a jury of your peers can decide. If one party (city) decides to hide, not produce evidence it does not look good for them. Recently, we just had a case in Ramsey County where the prosecution with held evidence. Guess what the guy got a new trial because of discovery issues.

Chuck it seems that the city had a very cozy relationship with PHA, but the city treated the other landlords differently. Chuck, I still believe in our US Constitution. People have a right not to allow the police to search your home anytime they want without a warrant. As a Democrat, you should know about individual rights and the US Constitution better than anyone. Do these rights not apply then Chuck? What right do you want to do away with next, freedom of speech?

Chuck you talk about the landlords destroying city employees lives, how about the lives of good landlords that the city destroyed? I know firsthand what some inspectors have done. I know this because I have seen it firsthand.

Chuck, I too know a few things going on in our city, as I am a city employee. I agree with the landlords, as their case is based on facts. The city really blew it by playing games with the courts.

Chuck you call these citizens who stood up to the city “ass holes,” but I call them Americans. Average Americans willing to put everything on the line, to fight for what is right.

John Q. Public, City Employee

11:13 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I did not say that the City should not cooperate with discovery. What I am saying is that there is nothing yet that would suggest that they are ever going to find anything that even remotely resembles a RICO case.

Of coure the City has a relationship with PHA it even appoints board members to PHA. But that doesn't show and there will ever be anything that shows how PHA benefits if this small group of land lords goes under.

Almost half of the housing units in the City are rental. There is no logic that would get you to the City being interested in putting all of those landlords out of business and creating one giant PHA funded by pixy dust.

How in the hell is finding copies of every contract that the police department has ever had with PHA going to figure out that great leap of logic?

My point is that the lawyers have a great scheme if you ask for every document ever created you cost the City a fortune (benefit number one to a bunch of fat cat land barons that don't like being held accountable) and if you get lucky the City isn't able to recreate every document it ever made or received in the last seven years and you get money.

That is the deal on the Truth in Housing Reports. They aren't the City's documents. They aren't made by the City, the City doesn't pay for them, but the City gets a copy. So, the City has nothing but paper copies and throws them away after 3 years of sitting on this useless paper; paper they neither created nor paid for nor was the intended recipiant of. But you guessed it these lawyers are demanding that the City should have seven years worth of this trash that it doesn't normally store for that period of time.

The reason that they have them is simply to protect home sellers to show that they had made a copy and it was available to the new buyer. That is all they are used for. They mean nothing to the City.

The City is saying to the plaintiffs ask the guys who made it to find it for you. Nope its the City's job to find this stuff that has nothing to do with nothing and pay for it.

And my friend Bill, this is how they are "not cooperating" trying to not spend a fortune running around on wild goose chases for the plaintiffs.

Sorry for swearing, but when someone I know should know better than to buy this bs joins the fray it ticks me off.

JMONTOMEPPOF

Chuck Repke

12:04 AM  
Anonymous Sgt.Slaughter said...

"Cooperate with discovery, are you
fucking kidding me !! "

Yes Chuck, you did say the city shouldnt comply with discovery, remember what you told Bill at 10:11 ????

You friggin airhead !!!!!!!!


Sgt.Slaughter...


Give me a hundered more and you just got another 30 days KP.

12:39 AM  
Anonymous Sgt.Slaughter said...

When your in my platoon Chuck,you better shape your ass up.

The way your going, you will be in boot camp for a long long long time.

You just might make pv1 in about 3
years.

Dont worry, the landlords will beat you into shape and then you will start to think like a real soldier(boy).



Sgt.Slaughter

12:47 AM  
Anonymous Sgt.Slaughter said...

When the landlords get through with the city clowns, I just might
let them bastards city clowns join my platoon, chances are you will still be in it and you can learn em
how to shine boots and kiss my ass !



Sgt.Slaughter



Good night soldier(boy)

PT is at 04:00 hours.

12:53 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The best way to find out about someones character is to watch them when they think no one is watching. This evidence gives a rare glimpse into the thoughts of some of the people who help and work to formulate and institute the policies, regulations and laws we live under. People have a right to fair and honest government services, They have a reasonable expectation that the law will work for them if they follow the rules as well as against them if they do not follow those rules. Who of all of you feels comfortable with any of these people deciding anything for you? Would you trust them to represent you in a business deal? Would you hire them to sell your house? Would you feel proud walking your daughter down the isle to give away to one of them? Would you trust them for anything?

You're judged by the company you keep and you become what you hang with. Finally we've seen some of the evidence after years of going back and forth. There's plenty of people that constantly stick up for the status quo. They see nothing wrong with the way the city violates civil rights on a wholesale basis. They've been doing it for so long they don't even think they are breaking the law because they all think and spin like Chuck and Amanda.Their response to everything is predictable....first slander the other side and turn people against the ones trying to assert their rights. Then start piling on with the lies. I know some of these landlords and they are not and were not slumlords. They were decent people in a difficult business. A business the city leaders have politicized because they need a scapegoat to hide behind because they have a failed crime control policy. Chuck wants you to belive that they are a small fraction of the total rental units in the city. What he doesn't tell you is that the number of total rental units in the city will not rent to the poor. That leaves the small number of rental units that will rent to the poor, and of those numbers, the city has targeted all of them with their relentless criminal enforcement and political agenda.

No one here has ever said that they didn't think there should be code enforcement or that they didn't want to fix their properites or that they think they should be allowed to exploit people or in the accusations of one poster, "let tenants burn to death in slum properties so the landlord can get the money. The constant message here has always been that people have wanted the city of St Paul to operate their code enforcement department within the law. The city HAS NOT done that. Having known some of these "ricomen" as they have been nicknamed here, I know of most of the evidence they have found and I just gotta tell you, this is just the tip of the iceberg. You haven't seen anything yet and when this goes to trial and it all comes out, I think even the most cynical are going to be overwehlmed with suprise and dis belief. Things exposed here in the past have been no suprise to me. What does suprise me is the people who go crazy over a run down house and the thought of people having to live in it or neighbors who are mad because of behavior issues with tenants, but they turn a blind eye to a crime control strategy that holds innocent people responsible for the criminal actions of thier parties. They have no concern about the fact that code inspectors routinley lie about violations that don't exist so the city can condemn to raise the rents to unaffordable levels to poor people through the expensive and sometimes bankrupting code compliance certification program. Even what were once good inspectors are just as dirty because they help cover it up by just looking the other way so they can keep their jobs and provide for their families while others are thrown into the cold streets and their landlords run out of business. They have no problem with a city that effectively and on purpose rigged the court system in the city's favor. They have no problem with a Legislative Hearing process that's nothing but a sham and a fraud. They have no problem with a city that violates peoples civil rights, even to the point of going after some people with false criminal charges. No problem at all with instructing their inspectors to lie. They have no problem with the city shredding documents and destroying emails and altering inspection reports to cover up their criminal actions.....all in the name of this phoney false saftey issue and the false pretense that they care about anyone that's poor, black or not like them. The only thing they care about is continuing the problem so they can keep the neighborhood dependent on them to fix the problem and get elected again.

I'll make a prediction of how this will end: in the end the landlords are going to win the lawsuit, there will be an avalanche of other lawsuits from propety owners that had similar problems, the city will wind up selling out some of the inspectors on the bottom of the totem pole and blaming them so the city council doesn't look bad, then the Feds are going to come in (probably with a Federal Grand Jury)and some people are going to go to jail, and every other inspector in the city is going to be branded as just as dirty and slimey as the guilty ones because they helped cover it up either by being a liar or remaining quiet and allowing it to go on.

To the city employee who keeps taunting us with his immunity, I have news for you. Your immunity stopped when you participated in criminal activity. You'll be charged and prosecuted just like any other criminal. That's going open up a whole new problem for you asshole cause the city Attorney is not going to represent you. They won't be able to because they'll have a conflict of interest with the same office representing more than one of you jerks so they'll hire outside counsel for all of you and guess what that outside is going to be doing? They'll be pointing fingers at everyone else and the Government will only need to make a deal with one of you. Which one of your slimeballs so you think are going to be the first make a deal?

Keep taunting us, you're so stupid you're pathetic.

4:20 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wouldn't that be just great, a dozen $300.00 an hour lawyers standing around for a couple years trying to stick the blame on each others clients and the taxpayers picking up the tab!

5:52 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

4:20 AM

You hit the nail on the head.

Good post!

John Q. Public, City Employee

7:07 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Come on Amanda.

I admit when I disagree with the landlords out here, but you are so biased that you won't even admit when your gov't friends are clearly wrong. It diminishes your cedibility. There are many discovery violations I could point to in this report, but let me choose just one:

Kathy Lantry claims to have ONE e-mail in all of 2003. I find it preposterous. Do you find that believable?

Bill Cullen.

7:27 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Chuck,

As I understand it, the only reason TIHs are an issue is because the CITY used them to claim the landlords properties are below standard. The response from the landlords (in this lawsuit) was that if the TIHs justify the actions of the city, then present all of the TIHs to prove show that the landlords buildings were in fact really bad – compared to other properties. In otherwords, the city is the party that brought TIHs into this case, not the landlords. The landlords are just trying to defend the cities motions.

As to e-mails… I made my living in high tech for a decade. Computer systems are backed up. All the city should have to do is make a copy of the tapes with the e-mails and deliver it to the plaintiffs. Tapes hang on walls for a long time and the city has known about this case – they have a duty to put a litigation hold on this information.

There is no doubt that meeting discovery requests for a federal case is work – likely hard and expensive. But it doesn’t make sense to me that it is as impossible as the city seems to be acting. The city is in violation of court orders! I cannot believe you (or Amanda) would defend a large private corporation with the same argument.

Bill Cullen.

7:47 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Chuck said,"Timmy - if you read Thune's stuff over again it is clear the house he was thinking of was a vacant building. He was clearly thinking it would be better to buy and rehab than to allow it to be demo'ed."


Ciani said,"Chuck and now you have the address of the test property so tell us.Yep Thunes a great guy.He wants to bypass due process and quick take.Just imagine Chuckie if the government was quick taking property because they didn't like it.And the reason you like that talk is groups like yours would end up with them."



Chuck you and your Buddy Thune are cooked!



Tim Ciani

8:02 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"labour to keep alive that tiny celestial spark called conscience."
This was important to George Washington, and it is important to us.

7:07, it's good to see that you haven't been driven out by what has place. A new direction will come - one of hope and concern. I can only hope that not too much has been damaged or destroyed by the lunacy.

For those who have sold out, or support the sellouts, a day of reconing is coming soon. It will be time to deal with your dead lack of character, and it will be time to deal with the grim reaper.

8:11 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Chuck said,"They have had to recreate the email records of almost every City employee for the last seven years."


Ciani says,"Well then where are they for the last seven years?thats what they are arguing about little wee man."



Chuck said,"There is no case, no racket, no rico just a massive search to embarass city employees and hurt people reputations and why?"


Ciani says,"Rico is only one count wee man.And PHA working to get a grading system to pay less money to landlords is a scheme and a good case for rico."



Chuck said,"It is against the law to house people in substandard housing and it is against the law to run drug houses and it is against the law violate the housing codes."


Ciani says,"Are you talking about PHA?I saw exhibits of PHA having these same problems and no heavy enforcement.Explain that CHUCKIE."





Tim Ciani

8:13 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bill its nice to hear a man of logic.You are unbiased and can come to you own conclusions.

Chuck, Bill hit it on the head.People we must remember these suits are against Chucks friends and gravy train.If they fail he fails.


Linda

8:27 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Chuck the evidence is in plan view.You wanted it and got it.As Barb Benson would say,"a little birdie told me" this is the tip of the iceburg!"This evidence is proof sanctions is a must, not evidence to win the trial.Chuck you can spin all you want but its the public minds that will be reading this evidence.Regular people.

You come here and want us to feel sorry for city officials?What about the innocent citizens?

Chuck you are sad.



Sid

8:50 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Someone tell me if its true that PHAs funding is dependant upon how they rate with inspections of PHA properties ?

We are talking millions of dollars every year from the Federal Government to run PHA .

I have lived in public housing
and have been subject to annual inspections and I can tell you for a fact that St.Paul PHA falsifys inspections reports of tenant units.

Anybody interested ?
I have the proof if anybody wants it.

Maybe this is part of the scheme to get the Federal Dollars and PHA
is greedy and wants to have all the section eight folks in their buildings because PHA can lose Federal Dollars if it doesnt fill its properties with tenants.

Where do they get them ?

From competing landlords who also want to rent to the poor.

8:53 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey Chuck, the poster at 8:53 says he has proof that PHA falsifys inspections reports to gain an unfair advantage in the quest for federal dollars.

You going to speak for PHA to ?


sam

9:10 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Chuck,

This sounds like a RACKET to me.

PHA, city, code inspectors, city attorney all working together to discriminate against private homeowners.

Former St. Paul Police Chiefs, John J. (The Big Fellow) O'Connor, father of the O’Connor System and Thomas A. Brown must be smiling at what is going on in St. Paul today. In their day, they were king, but this new breed down at city hall is doing their best to top O’Connor and Brown.

This morning I had breakfast with several fellow city employees. The Barb Benson emails to Joanne Clements were very interesting and gave an interesting look into her thinking. Joanne Clements worked in the city attorneys office and she is now retired. The Frank that was mentioned was a city attorney. It seems that these email disclosures yesterday made the rounds at the city attorneys office. I don’t think ADHD was too pleased to be called ADHD.

I was told yesterday NOT to put anything in an email that could be said over the phone or in person. It seems some supervisors are a little upset that their emails are out there.

Bob, please post more emails as these emails are very interesting and informative.

9:30 AM  
Blogger Bob said...

Hi All,

After I have gone through some of Matt Engels exhibits on this case I will move on to John Shoemakers exhibits under the title post "Attorney John Shoemaker takes swing at City of Saint Paul".

I will post a notice here when I start posting the exhibits there.

Here is the run down of the city attorney obstructing the discovery process.This exhibit involves both cases.

There is copy errors.

January 22, 2008
Louise Toscano Seeba
Assistant City Attorney
750 City Hall and Courthouse
15 West Kellogg Boulevard
St. Paul, Minnesota 55102
RE: Steinhauser, et al., vs. City of St. Paul, et al;
Harrilal, et al., vs. Magner, et al; and
Gallagher, et aI., vs. Magner, et al.
Dear Louise:
VIA FAX (651-266-8787)
AND HAND DELIVERY
This letter is in response to yourletters ofJanuary 11 th and 17th

The Court's November 13,2007 Order, page 9, provides the procedure for additional discovery
following production of the remaining documents by your clients:
With respect to the ongoing production of documents, either pursuant to the City'S
recovery of deleted e-mails or otherwise, the parties shall meet and confer to establish a
protocol governing the production of evidence that (l) prevents any disclosure of private
data that would violate the Minnesota Data Practices Act, (2) protects claims of privilege
by incorporating a provision on inadvertent production, and (3) designates all e-mails as
"Attorney Eyes Only." Once all of the remaining documents are produced, the parties
shall meet and confer regarding any additional depositions that need to be taken in light
of any such new evidence. If they are unable to agree, the Court will entertain an
appropriate motion.
All of the documents within the four categories of documents subject to the sanction motion
(TISH documents, E-mails, City documents related to PHA, and relevant documents not
disclosed as evidenced by the anonymously disclosed City documents) must be produced by
your clients and your office before the meet and confer should take place.
Due to the short time period left to conduct discovery, we noted the depositions of Mr. Dawkins
and Ms. Sandberg within the discovery period to preserve our right to at a minimum take those
depositions. We fully intend to comply with the Court's order to meet and confer before actually
taking these depositions. We intend to work together with PHA and its counsel on the deposition
we have noted and the subpoena we have served on PHA. If you believe that the PHA document
deposition also fits within the Court's requirement that a meet and confer take place prior to that
"'lIpk g"OI'" otJiu;;
11282 86th Avenue North
Maple Grove, MN 55369-4510
phone: 763 416 9088
fa.>:: 763 416 9089
5t. palf! (jOire
180 East Fifth Street, Suite 255
St. Paul, MN 55101
tho""'- 651 209 6884
lax: 651209 80llg I web: www.aekiawfirm.com
EXHIBIT 3
Case 0:04-cv-02632-JNE-SRN Document 184-2 Filed 03/05/2008 Page 3 of 24
Louise Seeba
January 22, 2008
Page 2 of5
deposition, then we will postpone that deposition as well. Please let us know as the PHA
document deposition is set for this Thursday.
As we shall detail below, your client has violated the Court's November 13, 2007 Order, the
Court's December 10, 2007 Order, the Stipulation for Entry of a Protective Order, and Rules 34
and 37, PRCP. In order for Plaintiffs to seek redress from the Court for these violations and to
force your clients to produce the documents that are subject to production under the Court's
order, we are postponing the depositions of Mr. Dawkins and Ms. Sandberg set for Wednesday
this week. These depositions will need to be rescheduled after both a meet and confer and
further Court Orders.
Below is a summary of what we consider to be the main violations of the Orders, Stipulation and
Rules:
1. Production of the eleven remaining email boxes was 9 days late
The Court Minutes stated: "Defendants shall complete production of e-mails by 12/31/07."
Production was not complete in a timely manner as the remaining emails were delivered to us
under your cover letter on January 9, 2008. At that time, we received ten (10) DVD's, and
approximately 500-600 hard copies that could not be produced electronically.
Plaintiffs were prejudiced by this delay and failure to comply with the Court's Order as this
delay took approximately 30% of our review time in January, the last month to conduct
discovery, including depositions. We intend to seek Rule 37 sanctions for your clients' failure to
comply with the Order.
2. Production of the eleven (II) email boxes in a different format from the 68 email boxes
produced in December 2007.
Paragraph 17 of the Stipulation stated: "To the extent possible, the un-redacted e-mails shall
be produced in electronic form. The e-mail messages will be produced in either the plain
text or html format in which they were originally sent. All attachments will be produced in
the format in which they were originally sent."
The emails contained in the 10 DVD's were not in the same form they were originally sent. The
emails produced by you in December 2007 (contained on an external hard drive) had thc
employee names on the folders. In addition, the subfolders had subject labels, and the individual
txt., html, Word, Excel, Power Point and other files had subject labels, including the date and a
description. This information is key for not only our review of the emails, but also for our
production of the log required under paragraph 19 of the Stipulation, which states: "Counsel for
Plaintiffs will identify their selections to Counsel for Defendants by creating an electronic copy
for each selected email in a separate electronic folder, along with a log containing the name of
the employee in whose mailbox the e-mail was found, the date of the email, and the time of the
e-mail, if such information can be obtained from the email." The emails produced in December
EXHIBIT 3
Case 0:04-cv-02632-JNE-SRN Document 184-2 Filed 03/05/2008 Page 4 of 24
Louise Seeba
Jauuary 22,2008
Page 3 of5
2007, contained the information required to log the data required by the Stipulation without
much difficulty.
However, the DVD's produced by your office on January 9th
, contained 19 separate file folders
with arbitrary numeric labels, such as 00990-01, 01004-01, 01019-01, etc. Inside the 19 folders,
there are anywhere between one (1) and eighty-four (84) sub-folders with further generic labels,
such as 01, 02, 03, etc. Finally, the files themselves in the sub-folders are in txt. and tif. format
(no html., Word, Excel, Power Point, etc.), and also have generic numeric labels such as 01, 02,
03, etc.
The Stipulation required that the e-mail messages be produced in either the plain text or html
format in which they were originally sent, and that all attachments be produced in the format in
which they were originally sent.
Furthermore, Rule 34(E) provides that: (i) A party must produce documents as they are kept in
the usual course of business or must organize and label them to correspond to the categories in
the request; (ii) If a request does not specify a form for producing electronically stored
information, a party must produce it in a form or forms in which it is ordinarily maintained or in
a reasonably usable form or forms ...". Fed.R.Civ.P. 34 (E) (emphasis added).
Because the 10 DVD's contain files that are not in their original format, are not labeled with the
names of the remaining eleven employees, and have arbitrary and generic numeric labels without
date and subject information, Defendants' production of this remaining data does not meet the
requirement ofthe Stipulation or Rule 34(E).
The original batch of 68 email boxes of officials and employees was approximately 53 OB in
size. The second production of emails was approximately 26 OB in size. The initial production
of 68 email boxes represented 86% of the individuals, yet yielded only 67% of the total emails.
The last production of emails on January 9, 2008, actually produced 33% of the total email
production.
In sum, Defendants delay in production of 33% of the subject emails places a significant burden
and expense on Plaintiffs and results in further prejudice to the Plaintiffs in reducing the amount
of time in the last month of discovery to review a large percentage of total emails.This
prejudice is further exacerbated by Defendants' failure to label the email boxes with the
appropriate names of officials and employees and the failure to produce these emails in their
original format with original labels. In effect, Defendants have failed to produce the emails in a
useable format as required by the Stipulation and Rules.
EXHIBIT 3
Case 0:04-cv-02632-JNE-SRN Document 184-2 Filed 03/05/2008 Page 5 of 24
Louise Seeba
January 22, 2008
Page 4 of5
3. Finally, with regard to the production of emails overall, we note that a number of the email
boxes of top City officials are shockingly small in size and but a small fraction of the size of
email boxes of similar officials. Forexample,Mr. Dawkins who was an employee of the
City from 2002 through December 2005, has a mere 5.69 megabytes of emails. Council
members Lantry and Bostrom, both representing the East side, and both in positions as
President of the City Council over the years, have produced email boxes containing 360 and
367 megabytes of data when Councilmember Thune, Montgomery, and Benanav's email
boxes are 2.43 gigabytes, 2.22 gigabytes, and 2.09 gigabytes, respectively. Councilmembers
Harris and Helgin email boxes are 1.13 gigabytes and 1.29 gigabytes, respectively. An
analysis of Dawkins' folder produces disturbing results. Inside Dawkins' folder, there are
subfolders labeled "mailbox" and "sent." Dawkins' "mailbox" contains a total of 146 files,
of which there are only 69 emails, 43 duplicates of those emails, and the remainder being
various files and attachments. The "mailbox" contains one (I) email from 2002, 23 emails
from 2005, 43 emails from 2006, and two (2) emails from 2007. Dawkins' "sent" folder
contains a total of762 files, of which 704 are sent emails. The "sent" folder contains five (5)
sent emails from 2002, 26 sent emails from 2003, 186 sent emails from 2004, 462 sent emails
from 2005, and 25 sent emails from 2006.
4. The Court's November 13, 2007 Order required Defendants to produce the documents in
their possession related to PHA. Even though Mr. Shoemaker repeatedly sent you letters
asking your clients to comply with this provision of Magistrate Nelson's Order, you and your
clients continued to refuse to produce "City documents related to PHA". Mr. Shoemaker's
letter of January 10, 2007, provided you and your client one final opportunity to follow the
Court's Order and provided you and your clients with 16 separate examples of City Council
Minutes that referred to 16 separate Council Resolutions related the City's longstanding cozy
relationship with The Saint Paul Public Housing Agency. We requested copies of those
resolutions and all contracts and agreements expressly referred to in those resolutions, and
for production of all other similar documents. We still have received no response to this
letter ofJanuary 10,2007.
5. You have referred to Mr. Shoemaker's letter of January 11,2007, in your January 11,2007
letter and subsequent letter. Even though Mr. Shoemaker raised four (4) issues with you in
his letter, you chose to only address the last issue, deposition notices. We still have no
response from you to the other three important issues:
a. TISH documents - we have discovered in City emails that in 2006, the head of the
City's TISH office, Connie Sandberg, was directed by the officials of code
enforcement to conduct an evaluation of the 2005 TISH reports by pulling a
representative sampling of TISH reports to determine how many properties in the
City with TISH reports had serious code violations. We understand that hundreds of
TISH reports were pulled for that study and that certain reports and documentation
accompanied the study process and reporting.
b. Our request for updated NHPI, LIEP, Fire Prevention and Vacant Building
files for Plaintiffs' properties.
EXHIBIT 3
Case 0:04-cv-02632-JNE-SRN Document 184-2 Filed 03/05/2008 Page 6 of 24
Louise Seeba
January 22, 2008
Page 5 of5
c. No response to Mr. Shoemaker's request regarding supplementing the expert reports.
6. We have evidence that police officers maintained a list of and reports on problem properties,
yet we have never been provided such lists. See the example attached hereto with Bates
numbers STP 191236 through STP 191249.
7. Finally, the Court's November 13, 2007 Order provided that Plaintiffs could choose to
subpoena the TISH inspectors for copies of their 2001 to 2003 TISH reports. You recently
informed us during a conversation that the City only requires the TISH inspectors to maintain
their TISH reports for 3 years. We request that you confirm in writing to us and provide the
City documents that support your assertion. If in fact the City retention policy applicable to
the TISH inspectors' personal TISH records is limited to a three year period, then certainly it
makes no sense to subpoena 40 TISH inspectors, paying the costs of service and witness fees,
cost of production of copies of 5,000 to 6,000 reports each year for three years, plus the costs
of the deposition transcripts - all costs falling within the Court's Order that the City bear the
costs with subpoenaing the TISH reports.
It is our position that all of these documents must be produced before we can actually have a
meet and confer on the evidence that will be subject to further deposition. As such, we will not
be holding the depositions ofAndy Dawkins and Connie Sandberg on January 23, 2008.
Once again, we ask that you and your clients fully respond to our requests and comply with all
provisions ofthe Court's Orders and Stipulation.
Very truly yours,
AASE, ENGEL & KIRSCHER, PLLC
f ./ /. .:'":'*--''''0/,-'- _~/~;;'
s1Matthew A. Engel t/f(~tlZ1z:~:(~2;~(f/
Matthew A. Engel
SHOEMAKER & SHOEMAKER, PoL.LoCo
sl John R. Shoemaker
John R. Shoemaker, Esq.
EXHIBIT

9:42 AM

10:19 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bob,

Sorry I have not followed this better. Was this Barb Benson (emails) the one who complained about your friend. Was Ms. Benson doing this while employed on the city dime?

10:24 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

How about the fact that Jane Prince aide to Benenav and a neighbor were reconizing the fact that the complaint based system was targeting the people of color.This is what the plaintiff have been saying since Dawkins took office.The fact that it was being used as discrimination and the city being aware of it and doing nothing leaves one to think.

10:36 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Breaker Breaker Blue Fox-Private Repke releasing hostile fire-Are we refueled?Send up the F-16's for escort-The B-52 is ready for take off-Payload full-OVER.


The Enemy didn't get the message we must engage.Over.

10:40 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You have to be nuts Repke. Every landlord knows that PHA ha shad funding cut to the point where they had to lower rents to the private sector lanldords. Now they come along with a scheme so they can lower the money paid out to the private sector? What that meqans to normal people Chuck is that they are hatching a scheme to screw the private lanldord out of money so they the PHA can keep the money....in a time when the PHA is hurting for money. Do you think a private company could get away with this Chuck? The private compnay would be charged with racketeering and fraud just to start the ball rolling.

10:46 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Maybe the city should get better attorneys Repke or hire an outside firm.


One problem outside firms don't take cases they think they would lose.Also they wouldn't have allowed distruction of emails.


Just ask Frank Villume.Maybe he retired because he new the city will lose.Thats what Barb Besons little birdie told me.Also during the trial date Venus will be alligned with Mars and Earth and Seeba is a Pices.You know what that means Repke?

10:50 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I like the analogy of a private fortune 500 company doing what the city did.Anybody remeber Microsoft and the government lawsuit that they lost due to anti-trust?Chuck you might want to google it for a lesson.I'm not being mean Chuck.I think the city and Pha have real big problems here and I didn't think it went that deep.Chuck I don't like landlords just as much as you,but they have some real fire here.

10:56 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The last post was me.sorry Bob.




George

10:56 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I know someone who sends information on this lawsuit every single day to a different news organization in the country hoping that sooner or later someone will have the decency to call attention to what the city is doing to people. Every single day of every single week a new email to a different national news organization. I wonder how long it will take?

11:06 AM  
Anonymous click here said...

I like the title of this post Bob.

Fitting!

11:54 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition. Chuck, the shelling is not letting up.

12:06 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

hey everyone, I went over to "City Hall Scoop" to see if they were saying anything about this and they are GONE.. Looks like they didn't pay their web master.

12:39 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

HEADQUARTERS
7th ST. PAUL, MN ARMY
STPO 9563
S. P. MN. Army
6 March 2008
SUBJECT: Letter of Instruction No. 1
TO: Corps, Division, and Separate Unit Commanders.

1. GENERAL

This letter will orient you, officers of the higher echelons, in the principles of command, combat procedure, and administration which obtain in this Army, and will guide you in the conduct of your several commands.

2. COMMAND

a. Leadership

(1) Full Duty.
Each, in his appropriate sphere, all St. Paul Army personnel will lead in person. Any commander who fails to obtain his objective, and who is not dead or severely wounded, has not done his full duty.

(2) Plans
Plans must be simple and flexible in our attack against currupt St. Paul city employees. They should be made by the people who are going to execute them.

(3) Reconnaissance
You can never have too much reconnaissance. Use every means available before, during, and after battle. Reports must be facts, not opinions; negative as well as positive. Do not believe intercepts blindly, crosscheck -- sometimes messages are sent out to be intercepted.

(4) Formal Orders
Formal orders will be preceded by letters of instruction and by personal conferences. In this way the whole purpose of the operation will be made clear, together with the mission to be accomplished by each major unit. In this way, if communication breaks down during combat, each commander can and must so act as to attain the general objective. The order itself will be short, accompanied by a sketch -- it tells WHAT to do, not HOW. It is really a memorandum and an assumption of responsibility by the issuing commander.

(5) Discipline
1. There is only one kind of discipline; PERFECT DISCIPLINE. If you do not enforce and maintain discipline you are potential murderers. You must set the example.
2. Discipline is based on pride in the profession of arms, on meticulous attention to details, and on mutual respect and confidence. Discipline must be a habit so ingrained that it is stronger than the excitement of battle or the fear of death.

3. The history of our invariably victorious armies demonstrates that we are the best soldiers in the world. This should make your men proud. This should make you proud. This should imbue your units with unconquerable self confidence and pride in demonstrated ability.

4. In the Seventh St. Paul Army, when troops are not in the actual combat zone nor engaged in tactical exercises, or range firing, etc., Corps and separate Division commanders will see:

a. That regular reveille formations be held, in attendance at which there will be a minimum of one officer per company or similar unit, and in addition thereto when practicable, a minimum of one field officer per regiment or separate battalion.

b. That it shall be customary for all organizations to hold formal retreat under arms. Attendance, in addition to the prescribed enlisted men, shall be all officers of company grade. In the case of regiments and separate battalions, a minimum of one field officer.

c. That in the case where music is available and it is practicable from a billeting standpoint, frequent regimental and battalion retreat parades and similar ceremonies will be held.

(6) Court Martial
Cases of misbehavior before the enemy will be brought before General Court Martial and tried under the 75th Article of War. It has been my experience that many Courts Martial are prone to view this most heinous offense, for which the punishment of death may be inflicted, in too lenient a manner. They should realize that the lives of troops are saved by punishment of initial offenders. Cowardice is a disease and must be checked before it becomes epidemic.

T.S. Rosevelt, Jr.
Lt. Gen., U.S. Army
Commanding
DISTRIBUTION:
CG Seventh Saint Paul Army Group
CG Twelfth Army Group
CG XII Corps
CG XV Corps
CG XX Corps
Sgt. Slaughter
Pvt. Repke

12:42 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

A Barack Obama adviser resigned Friday after calling rival Hillary Rodham Clinton "a monster."


Shouldn't Barb Benson do the right thing and resign?Barb Benson called city employees more then monsters.


I'm asking for a resignation Barb.



Tim Ciani

1:20 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Here I am. The longer I stayed the more ridiculous it got.

Bob should change the name of this site to- "Come Take a Dump on the City of Saint Paul".

I have found it not to a site for information but of confirmation of the pre-set belief that:

A. Elected Officials and employees of Saint Paul and Ramsey County are corrupt by virtue of their job.

B. The only kind of discrimination that counts is when its perceived to be against landlords.

C. Any voices disagreeing with the above will be put in category 'A' and continually attacked.

D. Facts be damned.

With that kind of set-up, why bother? Am I really trying to, or going to change minds- no.
So, this is not a discussion or 'truth' seeking missioned site, its a lecture where four people get to heckle every once in a while. I'm bored with heckling.

Somebody wrote that I'd better be concerned. The only thing I'm concerned about is a particular slumlord using his residents to seek financial remedy for a property he was under multiple violations, going through a bankruptcy proceeding on and had tenant complaints piling up (they even took legal action against him). Few of these tenants were white. I heard with my own ears and saw with my own eyes what was accepted. This is one of the guys held up to be someone who was wronged? PFFT! The so-called Freedom Fighters for the poor were no where to be found then. Did any of you say, 'Hey, this jerk-off is giving us landlords a bad name and helping make the case to people that low-income rentals are below par."- Nope. You now hold him up as some kind of victim.

Have we seen one iota of proof of racketeering? Nope. One iota of proof for a conspiracy? Nope. One iota of proof of targeting based on racial make-up of tenants by the city? Nope.

I don't work for the city. I don't contract with the city. I don't make one dime off the city. I could live in Grant Township and the only thing that would change is my address and amount of land I own. I happen to know some of these people you have demonized and those you have held up and we get different views on with whom to have a beer with.

What I'd love to see is this site brought into federal court for evidence. I'd love to see the names listed in the proceeding of the 99% of 'Anonymous' and fake name posters on the public record. I'm pretty sure with a federal warrant, Blogger.com would have to provide that info. So keep typing. If the government is as corrupt as YOU say it is, then you can expect a lot of people to be embarassed real soon.

So, where is Eric?

Eric is out of here.

Eric

1:21 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Eric do you know how to read?Get off your lazy city backing ass and read the proof.Did you not read where a african american neighbor is talking about race and the complaint based sytem.(Racial Discrimination)Did you not see in the evidence where Al Hester of pha is scamming to get a grading system to pay less for rent.(RICO)

Eric I thought you were smarter then this but I guess not.We don't need you here.So see ya later idiot.Someone should meet you in one of your bars and smack you in the head with the evidence.Keep standing by I'm sure theres more.



Sid

1:31 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

And how would the city get a warrant.On whats grounds dumby.
We see this evidence has hit a nerve and why you have been so one sided.Because you have buddies in high places.And Cullen said he respected you.Ha Ha.Read the evidence little man.

1:35 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Eric,

You said, "The only kind of discrimination that counts is when its perceived to be against landlords."

Perceived discrimination you say, I say well-documented discrimination against particular landlords.

You said, "Have we seen one iota of proof of racketeering? Nope. One iota of proof for a conspiracy? Nope. One iota of proof of targeting based on racial make-up of tenants by the city?"

I say, we sure have. I have read the post by Bob and others, actual court filings. If you can't understand Basic English maybe we can get you some extra help in this area

You said, "I'd love to see the names listed in the proceeding of the 99% of 'Anonymous' and fake name posters on the public record. I'm pretty sure with a federal warrant, Blogger.com would have to provide that info."

Eric may I remind you about an important document, the US Constitution where it says, "Freedom of Speech." Not speech approved by the city of St. Paul of speech approved by Eric or Chuck.

Eric this is a blog to discuss issues happening in our city. That is what this blog does, discuss St. Paul issues. Something E-Democracy won't allow. Tim and Rick just won't allow different opinions to be presented.

1:39 PM  
Blogger Bob said...

Eric, I am sorry to say you are wrong!

We are on a truth seeking mission here and it is the few like you, Chuck, and Amanda who attempt to tell the other side of the story.

How do you know the larger percentage of citizens who lurk here and don't post aren't siding with you, Chuck, and Amanda?

My guess is they are! Apparently folks don't mind if the lower rung of the ladder in our society has their rights violated in the name of advancing the quality of life in the city.

But, like I said earlier the big bureaucracy of DSI is going to run out of homes to search, then they will be knocking on your door Eric. I suppose then activist like you and Chuck will lobby to change the rules .

I don't want DSI in my home. I don't know a renter who does unless he hasn't paid his rent and he is trying to cause trouble for his landlord.

"Just my opinion".

1:41 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Isn't it interesting how nervous they get when the truth starts to come out. Go ahead and try to get your warrant and we'll expose that too. What your suggesting is that you want to intimidate us by threatening our right to freedom of speech which is so typical of the city retaliation machine....get rid of everything with a scorched earth policy that will show the truth. Tell your government buddies to get their warrant asshole and see what happens. You'll have a political nightmare spread through the city like wildfire! The evidence is out and the corrupt acts are going to stop.

1:47 PM  
Anonymous Sgt.Slaughter said...

Ah Eric, so you want to join my platoon to ?

Your friend Chuck has and I am doggin him from sun up to sun down.

How could whats being said here be evidence.

Point it out.

Fact is, sounds like your side could use some evidence but you wont find it here.

You might find some though in the gargage dumpsters behind city hall.

Maybe some E-Mails.

When you find them, give them to the RICO attorneys.

And then take a bath because you stink from digging in the garbage.

Second thought, I dont want stinky
garbage diggers in my platoon



Sgt.Slaughter

1:47 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

amen brother..........and please feed me another document.

1:56 PM  
Anonymous Snitch said...

ATTENTION RICOMEN

Search the pioneer press news stories. When Mayor Kelly left office there was a story in the paper that said the whole floor was closed off at Mayor's office and they had big bins out in the hallway and they were shredding documnets. They said it was the first time this had happened in St Paul history.

2:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Guess that where the E-Mails went.
Does Kelly live in St.Paul ?

2:06 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I was told about this site at luch today. I can't believe what I am reading. Is this still America?

2:29 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's pretty obvious to me why they don't want to turn over the emails. This sounds like it's going to be the next "Karen Silkwood" case?

2:31 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Who's this Eric person? I new here and he seems to be retarded or something. WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

2:32 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sid and others,

Nice to see you talking sh!t as I sign out. Your prerogative. Threatening me is not. Knock it off or tell me face to face.

Be civil or be a man, stop being a pansy-assed p@$sy.

Blogger.com is the host site for this blog. It is owned by Google.com. The privacy policy of Google under the Google Privacy Policy and Personal Information and Other Data we collect states:

"Google's servers automatically record information when you visit our website or use some of our products, including the URL, IP address, browser type and language, and the date and time of your request."

So, even signing in as 'Anon' the host know who you are.

Point number 9 under the Google Privacy Center states:
"Google does comply with valid legal process, such as search warrants, court orders, or subpoenas seeking personal information. These same processes apply to all law-abiding companies. As has always been the case, the primary protections you have against intrusions by the government are the laws that apply to where you live."

So, they comply with the law and legal process, like a warrant or court order or subpoena. All it takes is for one of the attorneys to call this blog into the evidence bin. It doesn't matter too much about what (ie blanket request for all emails from the city).

Maybe I'm just unable to read English but, I know how to read court cases and a little research will lead you to a case where a person who commented on a blog was taken to court over the comment. The blogger (ie Bob Johnson) was not the focus.
http://www.searchenginejournal.com/shoemoney-subpoenaed-over-slanderous-blog-comments/4324/

I guess I just don't know what I'm talking about with all of you legal experts here.

It would only take, say a guy like Chuck, to say that the comments on her have slandered his reputation for a judge to court order Google (who owns this site) to turn over the identifying information on these comments, without going through Bob.

Its a good way to bring the cowards into the light. I'm looking forward to it.

Bob. It shouldn't matter what color the people were if they were wronged. In this case most of these tenants are minorities with whom the neighbors don't like for that reason. Hence the calls to the cops. I don't see however where the city conspired to remove these tenants. There should be a uniform standard enforced across the city for housing codes. That's where I stand. You and others stand on the side that these codes are restrictive and keep you from making a living in the rental business.

The city may have targeted these landlords, probably did. Not because of WHO they rented to, but what they were renting. Below grade units that were unsafe. There is a big group of former tenants who's complaints are long and sad. Suing on behalf of them is counter-productive as the tenants will be testifying against the landlord. That will then leave the landlords with explaining their case against the city in the terms of 'over-enforcement'. Good luck.


Do svidanja.
Adjö
Slán agat
Arrivederci

Eric

2:42 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Eric you call Bobs sight a Dumping sight.Hey clueless this is the same
evidence on the Federal Filing site.Bob pretty much took it from there and posted it here.And the problem is?

The people talking in the evidence are your buddies.Maybe they should have shut their mouths.Did anybody here write those emails?Nope.Wake up Wee-Man!

2:43 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

2:32
Eric (me) is by far one the smartest guys to waste his time on here. I've grown tired of shooting fish in a barrel and the above is why.

The retards have learned to file a suit and waste tax dollars.
You and your ilk keep the faith about these suits and remember what Joseph Goebbels wrote(he was a very bad man for those of you who can't recall history):
"Faith moves mountains, but only knowledge moves them to the right place"

2:48 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Eric said,"It would only take, say a guy like Chuck, to say that the comments on her have slandered his reputation for a judge to court order Google (who owns this site) to turn over the identifying information on these comments, without going through Bob."



Ciani says,"Good point Eric.Its not slander either.Its libel.And I remember not long ago you doing that as well against the landlords.And if I remember correctly then Schiller and the landlords sueing should have a claim against the city and Barb Benson for what she said."

What do you do for a living my friend?Are you a boxer?Your always wanting to fight with people.Well I might want to also if I was always wrong!



Have a Great Friday Mr.Michelle


Tim Ciani

2:53 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The tenants are going to testify whichever way they think they can get some money Eric and in the future I would be looking for lawyer to be bringing a class action suit on behalf of all the tenants who have been harmed by the city's actions. They screwed those tenants Eric. They offered a promise of help and then came out and condemned the homes and put them in the street. When the tenants realize they can go after the city and pick the city's pocket like they've had Legal Aid pick the landlords pocket, those tenants will be lined up all the way to Minneapolis trying to get into the courthouse to file lawsuits. Get a life.

3:11 PM  
Blogger Bob said...

Eric said,

Bob. It shouldn't matter what color the people were if they were wronged. In this case most of these tenants are minorities with whom the neighbors don't like for that reason. Hence the calls to the cops. I don't see however where the city conspired to remove these tenants. There should be a uniform standard enforced across the city for housing codes. That's where I stand. You and others stand on the side that these codes are restrictive and keep you from making a living in the rental business.

My response,

I stand with ALL the citizens who have been wronged.

You seem to have forgotten ALL the OTHER stories I have told here for citizens of Saint Paul Eric?

The so called RICOMEN are a dominant force here because NO ONE ELSE seems to find civil rights violations a story as long as it pertains to a certain class of undesirable citizens.

Any citizen can tell a story here. And as I said and as you KNOW, many have. That's my policy and I stick to it.

Eric, my other board forum
A-Democracy.com is a private server and these property rights advocates didn't care for it much even though they were assured any lawsuit would have to go through me. They DIDN'T care they like this forum. SO, you aren't intimidating anyone.

3:18 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Not intimidation Bob, information. Intimidation would be half the responses I get when you're sitting back patting yourself on the rear for the PT Barnum job you're doing here. Only when I speak up, or strike back do you show Orwells face to ask these questions.

I stop reading for a while and notice all bs going back and forth and come back for a couple of posts and suddenly I'm popular.

Tim, I'm not a boxer. I'm a fighter though. Nothing has come easy, and it won't be taken easily and i won't stand to be pushed around easily. I gave the options of being civil-or be a man. I prefer the civil option. However, as the Sicilians say, "Cui scerri cerca, scerri trova".


Civil Rights are violated daily in the twin cities. The shit some people do when they think they won't get caught is incredible. I'm a former Civil Rights Commissioner and read more complaints than we had minutes in a day. These people were not famous, rich, or particularly well-educated. They still have the same rights. I, especially, do not need a lecture on protecting civil rights for you or your brethren. You people who only discovered the phrase when some attorney approached you about your property problems. Save it. If you were genuine, you would have words for 3:11. If they were wronged, why shouldn't their hands be out? Good enough for the landlords, why not the tenants?

Bob this is not a free standing site. In other words, your own server or not, its hosted by Blogger.com, owned by Google.
They don't need your permission to do anything, especially complying with a court order. Read the privacy policy Bob. I'm shocked that someone as careful and truth-seeking as you would make promises impossible to keep as you have no control of it. You even agreed to these policies when you signed up. Go back and read the policy you agreed to.

For the fun of it, maybe Chuck and I should get together and file for defamation. Sure it may get thrown out, not before exposing some of these cowards though.

Now, once again, exit stage Left.

later suckers-maybe not.
Eric

3:40 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

damn. I can never go without leaving a few more clarifications.

Chuck and I haven't been defamed by the plantiffs, so they need not worry about a potential suit interfering with their adventure in dragging on a baseless suit. We have been defamed by other commenter's words on here and have a right to face our accusers!

So, the legal process that is ongoing, would still be ongoing.

Now, exit stage Left.

3:45 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Breaker Breaker----

Blue Fox Leader to Slaughter----

I'm on deck and awaiting your clearance-----

over

4:04 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

more motions will file today.

More damages statements and prof.

The city of st.paul will have a bad day.

chuck did you find a real job yet ??

I call the mayor office today no one wantd to talk about the motions.

4:06 PM  
Anonymous Sgt.Slaughter said...

Eric, you go ahead and file your defamation suit because based upon your postings, any attorney opposing your frivilous lawsuit would get attorneys fees.

As Clint Eastwood said,
MAKE MY DAY! .


Sgt.Slaughter.

4:25 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

HEADQUARTERS
7th ST. PAUL, MN ARMY
STPO 9563
S. P. MN. Army
6 March 2008
SUBJECT: Enemy propaganda

TO: Corps, Division, and Separate Unit Commanders.

General Orders No #1

1. Disregard the enemy talk about legal action for posting on this blog. This is just a ploy to stifle comments and prevent the facts from being spoken.

2. Remember troops are never defeated by casualties but by lack of resolution -- of guts. Battles are won by a few brave men who refuse to fear and who push on. It should be our ambition to be members of this heroic group.

T.S. Roosevelt, Jr.
Lt. Gen., U.S. Army
Commanding
DISTRIBUTION:
CG Seventh Saint Paul Army Group
CG Twelfth Army Group
CG XII Corps
CG XV Corps
CG XX Corps
Sgt. Slaughter
Pvt. Repke

4:36 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Breaker Breaker Blue Fox we got another hostile-Major Ahole Eric is a hostile-Take em out-F-16's in the air-B-52 just left the ground and will circle to reconize all left standing-Stand down until order to drop-open payload.

Sgt.Slaughter these city folks are tougher then the Japanese we might have to drop another big one-OVER.

4:57 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

HEADQUARTERS
7th ST. PAUL, MN ARMY
STPO 9563
S. P. MN. Army
6 March 2008
SUBJECT: Sgt. Slaughter

Keep up the fine work. Soon the city corruption will be defeated. Bravery and guts of dedicated individuals such as your self are the only way this war will be won.

TO: Corps, Division, and Separate Unit Commanders.
T.S. Roosevelt, Jr.
Lt. Gen., U.S. Army
Commanding
DISTRIBUTION:
CG Seventh Saint Paul Army Group
Sgt. Slaughter

5:05 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

So Eric, first you come here and threaten people and when the threats don't work then you want to fight with people and now you're threatening to start suing people here? You're pathetic man. If your understanding of the common meanings of the english language is so bad that you can't read it and figure out that it means the city has done some wrong, why don't you go somewhere else that's easier for you. Your side is getting it's butt kicked and all you can be is a sore loser......after how many months of demanding to see evidence and now with much of thwt evidence here and present, what do you do? You wanna sue! Your attitude is similar to the city....any time anyone wants to assert their rights ro question the city authority, they try to crush you like a bug. Your pathetic Eric.

5:42 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm dizzy and nauseated after reading this.

5:55 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Eric,

You needto chill out. And face the fact that the city is in deep shit. And no one from the city
of st.paul want to me about this stuff.

I live and work in ths city of St.Paul. I will have to pay the landlords to settl this lawsuit in my proprety taxes.

Yes, I am pissed off at the city for all this bull shit.

I warned them back in 2000, that people will filed lawsuits back then.

Because of their actions. I have told them for years that they will lose. And now it time to face the music. And time to get off the pot and pay up. No one wants to faces the facts for years.

Now the proof is coming out and they do not want to talk about it.

I told the pioneer press this stuff in the past too.

No one wants to beleive this stuff. Now, the are coming out.

About your threat of the lawsuit.

Its is baseless and a tracted.

Because you are MAD about the facts.

Be man and face it. Like chuck he
refuse to face it, I asked him on how much money he get from the city.

He refuse to tell me. That is ok I find by asking dave T..

I am taxeprayer in St.Paul.
They have to tell me. And face me
in their offices or will to the state. Start butch at them next.

Just get over. Eric.

Leslie K. Lucht

6:04 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bob,

I don't think Eric, Chuck or Amanda sees the double standard here. Eric, Chuck, Amanda just don't get it that people have been discriminated against, treated differently. They are so consumed in protecting their city buddies they can’t see the truth. These people who have been kicked out into the street are the most needy people in our society. We should be doing everything to help them, not kick them out into the street.

Bob, the work you have done here and in other areas, many people here may never know what you do. You have shed a light on corruption in St. Paul. Chuck, Eric and Amanda feel that it is ok to discriminate by their failure to look at the facts. When they are shown real proof, people like Eric resorts to threatening the list here. Chuck starts swearing and tries to talk all bad. We clearly see where their loyalties rest.

Chuck owes his bread and butter to his friends in the city, that is a documented fact.

As one poster states over and over, "The end is near Repke. The end is near. Do you hear me Repke, the end is near?" This poster is correct the end is near for corrupt city officials.

The battle is not won or over, but the facts are coming out fast. Facts that Chuck dared the landlords to produce. Well Chuck the facts speak for themselves.

Someone suggested that Barb Benson resign, I couldn't agree more. There are also numerous other city employees that need to resign as well.

8:28 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's the sinking of the Bismarck all over again. The greatest gun platform of the Fuerher, shot full of holes.

8:56 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I like Chuck and his spin, even though I often don't agree with him. On a few ocassions though he has made me look at things differently. He has that gift and I for one am always happy to see what he has to say.

9:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Remember Chuck and Eric to read Minnesota Statute 609.903, ok ?

9:08 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Does anybody remember Councilman Zimmerman in Minneapolis and what happened to him.Sounds kinda petty compared to what some of these officials have done.

Chuck,Eric and Amanda there are rats in the city.And the Rats have informed me that this is sending a ripple affect through the city like no other.This issue won't be slid under the rug.These suits are going to pop everyone of these council members and Mayor right in the nose.


Mr.Mayor hows the affordable housing in St.Paul?Its been an issue for 10-14 years.How is it doing now.

Folks lets leave Chuck ,Eric and Amanda alone.You can see right through them.Let them make fools of themselves.



But I will say one thing Chuck!Do you think the Council and Mayor are wearing tin foil hats this weekend?Just like a bake potato in the oven.Can you feel the heat.

Good work Ricomen.Keep up the fight.The good people in this city don't understand the fight you have brought to City Hall.Some day they will understand and appreciate you all!



Tim Ciani

p.s. Repke do you have that address yet of Thunes test case or are you going to continue the question?

9:08 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Het Bob, are you going to edit the blog so we dont get sued by Eric ?

9:09 PM  
Blogger Bob said...

Eric said,

Bob this is not a free standing site. In other words, your own server or not, its hosted by Blogger.com, owned by Google.

My response- Eric you are so angry you aren't even reading my post throughly. I was refering to my (((OTHER))) blog "A-Democracy.com"

It is a private server and GOOGLES HAS NOTHING to do with it. The property rights advocates know the differance between the security of the two blogs and they prefer this one.

For someone who wanted to see the truth Eric, the truth is sure pissing you off. Stay tuned the water runs REAL DEEP and COLD.

9:14 PM  
Blogger Bob said...

Folks, here is some of the evidence Dean Koehnen is considered a strong arm cop by other city official.

There maybe copy errors.

Date: 2006-07-03-07-40-25
To: Magner_Steve
From: Dean Koehnen
Subject: Fwd: 1470 and 1476 Burns Avenue
---------------------------
Attached Message
---------------------------
Date: 6/30/2006 9:05:39 AM
To: Koehnen_Dean
CC: Robinson_Harold
From: Dean Koehnen
Subject: Fwd: 1470 and 1476 Burns Avenue
Dean,
In regards to 1470 and 1476 Burns Avenue, I was unaware that you had anything to do
with this property. I would have appreciated the respect of being made aware that
you were called out to a property that I had pending orders on.
Betsy from Community Council called me wondering why I didn't call her (per your
request) and inform her as to what was going on here. I told her that I had no
knowledge of you being out there. Apparently Pam from Crime Prevention requested
that you go out there "because of the size and influence that you would have over
the owners" (according to what Betsy told me). There was no reason for Crime
Prevention to be involved in this case, as there was no danger of a potential crime
taking place over there.
I received a phone call yesterday from 1470 Burns Avenue wondering about a letter
that they received that Betsy sent out. Obviously I had no idea that Betsy was
there (or you and Pam for that matter either) and couldn't comment about the letter.
Because I had no idea what took place out there between all of you, I went ahead
and made a timeline with them to remove the fence. This morning Betsy called me
(again) and I told her the same thing. She didn't seem very pleased with it, but
there again, I was not notified of any sort of conversation that was had with all of
you. I told her that had I been aware of any of this prior to talking to 1470 Burns
Ave, I may have handled things differently. According to Betsy, you said that you
would talk to me before leaving on vacation, I don't recall any conversation with
you.
Dean, please in the future, if you are going out on a property where I have pending
orders, I would appreciate a heads up. There was no need for you to go out there
other than (what sounds to me like) Pam from Crime Prevention hoping that you could
strong-arm these people with your "size and influence".
Thank you,
Jackie


Jackie Girling
Code Enforcement Inspector
City of Saint Paul
(651) 266-1931
Attached File: G:\House\Smagner\Mailbox\TEXT-11.htm
Attached File: G:\House\Smagner\Mailbox\Jacqueline_Girling.vcf
Page 1

9:46 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

OK - we are somewhere near 175 posts on this thread, so with all of those brilliant comments. Somebody tell me what the suit is about?

We are still saying here that all of the City Council and at least two Mayors and many, many city employees conspired to close down all of the private landlords in the City (with thousands of properties) for the purposes of improving the financial situation of the Public Housing Agency (which houses poor people) that is not funded by City funds.

And, second that all of these people were also attempting to remove all of the minority population from the City of Saint Paul (quite a task considering they account for about 40% of the population). Except for the number one above, they aren't trying to actually get rid of them just give them less expensive housing in PHA.

So, that is the crime and you believe that?

The rest of what we have seen in the post is that the City has spent tens of thousands of dollars creating tons of papers and after all of those are put together the lawyers can determine that more are missing and that they should get money for the City not being able to successfully find every piece of paper that ever had anything to do with a discussion about rental properties and all of the catty emails between secrataries.

Remember this isn't a case about if someone was rude or even if someone was racist or if someone was mean or if someone was threatening or if someone was scarry or even if someone was picked on. Its a RICO case someone has to benefit from someone elses misfortune. There has to be a direct line. The action of the conspirators hurting me must directly benefit you. It can't be that they are mean to me and nice to you, if being mean to me has no benefit to you.

And, in the other charge the City has to be directly going after the protected class. What the land lords haven't shown is the City going after the minority members in a nice house with a code action. The similarity in these cases isn't the color of the tennents skin it is the condition of the houses the were forced to live in.

Again, "evidence" that all docuements haven't been found has nothing to do with the merrits of the case just the insanity of the claim.

JMONTOMEPPOF

Chuck Repke

9:53 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Chuck, I lived in public housing and I can tell you this particular PHA in St.Paul is corrupt.

I have personally been the reciepient of their abuse and corruption.

Examples :

Sanatizing and falsifying tenant unit inspection reports.

Fabricating instances of threats by PHA tenants against PHA employees in retaliation for
filing grievances. Charging the tenants with serious lease infractions and not permitting them to file grievances.
(Violations of federal law)

Having police living on sight (Acop) steal tenant vehicles.


Holding unlawful inspections of tenants apartments.

Look me up in Ramsey District Court and you will see I not afraid of PHA or any body in Government and I am going after them again.

I gone a round or 2 with parking and code enforcement in court also.


PHA is corrupted in concert with the City of St.Paul.


Jeff Matiatos

10:12 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Your all wet Chuck. I heard the landlords hqad some of these buildings inspected by private inpsectors right after the city was done with them. They also had some properties wired with sound and video when the inspectors were there. They also have located some of the tenants from those buildings that are going to testify against the city inspectors. They also had inspectors sending them documents showing the proof of the corruption, including incriminating emails that the city failed to turn over. Those msut be some of the destroyed ones huh Chuck? I think your side is got some explaining to do Chuck. What would you be saying if the city came forwrd with a fourth of this evidence, but it was against a landlord? You'd be screaming blooy murder for someones head!

10:15 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Welcome to the struggle here Jeff! You're in good company.

10:17 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I can't even begin to fathom what I'm reading here. I'm not sure what bother me the most, the apparent corrption or the people that want to enable and ignore it.

10:19 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thanks 10:17.

I told Bob I would like to post a
matter involving the Sheriffs office where a deputy clerk was
demoted for conduct unbecoming of
a county employee involving myself when I had been serving documents through the Sheriffs office.

I am still looking for the original letter from the internal affairs dept. because when I submit the story for posting I want to make sure I get the facts correct.

Its coming Bob.

10:28 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

i think eric pulled a fast one on you. he seems to be teasing you all which goes to his early statement of being bord and tired of the same old stuff. i've learned to read his post twice and close. there is a pattern

chuck gives it to you straight but, eric seems to like to piss everyone off.

i don't see where eric defended the city. he pointed out some good points then went to calling out some of the people on here.

he's right about the website policy.
he was also right about people being discriminated against everyday.
unless you know these people all suing to be chior boys, then he's also right that no solid proof has been brought forward. a lot evidence but still, no solid proof or the settlement offers would have been rolling in. lots more people than you think are waiting for the proof.

he's full of himself and iritating. but i don't see where he is wrong unless he talked to you offline about something else.

that comment to jeff, is wrong. he's not in good company here, this is his home. (didn't eric say this is a blog for dumping on the city? has anyone come here and complained about the city and been set straight by anyone aside from amanda, chuck or eric? then that also makes another one of his points). no wonder he is tired and bord.

10:35 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

10:37 WOULD YOU BE MORE SPECIFIC PLEASE ?

10:43 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Chuck,

For the 1,000,000th time.

The city of St. Paul engaged in unfair code compliance practices.

The city had a different standard of code compliance for PHA properties.

The city engaged in abuse of search of people’s homes with the big cop strong-arming his way into the house.

You had city employees abusing their positions to gain special treatment from code inspection. Hell you friend Dave Thune has been working on his house for over 20 years. Do you want to talk about the "special treatment" he received at his property on W7th. Chuck, I know about the special treatment because I work for the city. Why in the hell are you trying to kid here. Thune is the biggest joke when it comes to code compliance. Talk about all that work that was done to his property WITHOUT permits. If you or I did that we would get our C of O pulled.

Barb Benson should resign ASAP.

For an educated man, you sure do not see what is going on.

Chuck, don't you think this was the talk of the office today. I think Bob's blog had more hits, as I saw several work stations tuned in to Bob's blog.

The city engaged in a practice of discrimination on particular landlords. The city used code enforcement to address behavior problems. Chuck, I have never seen a house mug a person.

You are really transparent, as all here know you are just protecting your buddy Thune. Just like Bill Clinton said he never had sex with that woman, that blue dress she had a stain on it that matched his DNA. Now is oral sex or not. What is the definition of the word, "is?"

The public is now seeing what has been going on for years. It came to light when Bob and the WatchDog newspaper exposed Steve Manger and Nancy's home. You forget Chuck, we all saw the pictures of Steve Manger and the red truck taking stuff from Nancy’s garage. Are you now going to tell us the pictures were doctored?

Come on Chuck, do you need divine intervention to see the light?

Oh by the way have you posted this on E-Democracy yet?

10:52 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I just love the people who come here and bad mouth this blog. Hypocrits...

Their here! I'm here! We're ALL here and we keep coming back!

This saids a lot about this forum.

This damn blog is the Saturday night fights almost everyday. It's great!

Free Speech and Americans doing what they do best. Fighting for what they believe in.

Eric you are a trip..

10:53 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Famous quotes:

Steve Manger, "Would you get the hell out of my office. Who in the hell let you in?"

Barb Benson, "What's your sign. I have to check the charts."

Officer Dean Koehnen, "You don't mind if we just come in and look around." as he pushes his way into the house.

Dave Thune, "Hi, this is Dave Thune, can you give me some extra time to finish." Talking to a Fire Inspector.

11:11 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This is the only blog I know of where it is entertaining yet very informative and some of the time you wind up laughing but wanting to cry at the same time!

12:06 AM  
Anonymous Jeff Matiatos said...

WARNING !!! WARNING !!! WARNING!!!

Chuck, Jeff Matiatos here .

You said Chuck :

"OK- we are somewhere near 175 posts on this thread" (9:53)

You also said Chuck :

"Why not tell num nuts that wants to talk about the sheriff to post a different thread" (12:08a.m.)


Chuck you didnt leave your name on your 12:08am. posting like I couldnt figure it was you because you use the word THREAD in both postings ???

I have no problem with fletcher and I voted for him.

Its the clerk down their that got her ass busted.

Why dont you post on my kock.



Jeff Matiatos

12:58 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Just got home and am going to bed. I'll sleep better tonight knowing that the "Ricomen" are watching the city.

3:48 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey Repke,

Did you and Thune have a nice Dinner together last night??
Do you two "idiots" talk "shop" while sipping on you favorite beverage?

The eye's of St Paul

5:19 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

5:19 AM,

So Thune and Repke are friends. That explains why he is protecting the city like he is.

So what is Amanda's tie into all of this?

To be defending the city to the hilt while talking the abuse what is delt out here, I always wondered is there was another angle to it.

Thanks for the recon.

6:59 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

That last post was great. It is a wonderful example of the great conspiracy theory. Someone just "discovered" that Thune and I are friends! They did "recon" to discover that. That has to prove something in their tin foil hat world.

Let's start with one of the basics of testing your sanity... Just because you were ignorant of something doesn't mean someone was hiding it from you! When you think like that (that people think you are so important they are hiding things from you) it means that you suffer from paranoia and need a shrink.

Bob, how many times on this list has my relationship with Thune been discussed? 500 1000?

Let's start from the begining. I first met Thune at a Ron Maddox fundraiser in 1974. So, I have known Thune for 34 years. In 1981 I worked on Jim Scheibel's campaign against Thune. In 1983 Thune worked for me in Minneapolis. In 1989 I was Thune's campaign manager. From 1/1/90 to 12/31/97 I was Thune's aide.

I have worked for several elected officials, I worked on hundreds of political campaigns. I have a reasonable relationship with most elected officials in Saint Paul, because I work for several community based organizations and represent their interests honestly.

It doesn't make me special or different than anyone else other than that I know these people well enough to know that they aren't crazy. That they would think it was insane to try and put all landlords out of business and they don't care one way or another about the balance sheet at PHA because it is not their problem.

And 5:19 dinner was great I had the lobster tail, and just diet coke for me. Thune and his wife turned in early, his neck still is bothering him from surgery. Thanks for asking.

JMONTOMEPPOF

Chuck Repke

7:44 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Chuck maybe 6:59 is new here.

He or she may not have heard the 500 to 1000 times about your "relationship" with Thune.

Maybe you, like Eric have anger issues when confronted with the truth.

Just an abservation.

8:10 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You had lobster tail, paid for by your non-profet from your connections down at city hall.

8:11 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh, I'm the angry one?

Leslie can't even get a readible sentence out he's so full of rage, Sid resorts to racist remarks and suggestions of violence while I'm having a drink when I don't agree, Froggy goes apeshit Klans-like, George wants all blacks removed from the city and other anonymous commenters have insulted me, threatened me and yet I'm the angry man. Hmmm I wonder why?

In just the last couple of weeks I've been called asshole several times, idiot, a girl, uncle tom, sellout, stupid, corrupt and several other misspelled descriptors. All that, why? Because i refuse to jump n your fantasy bandwagon- like 99.999% of the rest of Saint Paul. So, the ol' stereotypical 'angry black man' with the 'chip on his shoulder' is the characteristic du jour.

I've stop posting (sans the last 24 hours) and grown bored because you can't have a discussion on here. Even ignoring all of the racial issues you people have (who care about civil rights?), you've got the incredible inability of being unable expand a thought beyond what you already believe to be true. Even when facts bring some logical roadblocks to your perception, you ignore it. You cherry-pick what you read (for those that can read) to fit your viewpoint. When presenting with conflicting evidence, or tough questions, the ol' name-calling and all of that begins.

So, as i said before, this is not a place for civil discussion or even heated exchanges of ideas, its a figurative drive by shooting down a one way street. Anyone coming from a different direction, might as well be defending your enemy.

That way of thinking and acting leads to nothing but bitterness. You can see it in every post. "The city this... the city that", "Its over just wait...", "Chuck and all of your buddies are corrupt..." blah, blah, blah. You're a sad bunch. Proof that Darwin was wrong.

Now as I leave again (unless you continue to mis-state what i wrote)I will once again correct the record. Its shame the retardation runs so deep that you can be clear about something and someone regurgitates a dyslexic version of it.

1. The privacy policy was copied word for word. I added nothing. Bob agreed to it when he signed in. So fo future reference, it doesn't take a big deal to subpoena some of you into court, either on this RICO suit or any other the courts (you know the ones you think are so corrupt) deem necessary. If I were you, with the shit said about Magner, Benson Mourmond and others, I would expect it, if they are found to be without fault. Bob said this blog is read by lots of people and throughout city hall. Those people would have real defamation case.

2. I attached the Shoemaker case which was the first to take comments from a public blog and sue the commenters over defamation.

3. For the slow and Sid, here is what I wrote:
"For the fun of it, maybe Chuck and I should get together and file for defamation. Sure it may get thrown out, not before exposing some of these cowards though."

What part of that sounds like I'm serious? Or, did you not even read it? What part is the threat? You assholes are wasting my taxes with the slumlord slide, why shouldn't we think of way to turn the tables?
By the way, the only person that ever threatened to sue this blog (and he had it wrong on whom to sue of course) was Leslie Lucht.

4. Bob seems to be erasing a lot of posts lately. What's creeping you out Bob?

Once again, again- exit stage Left

8:58 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Breaker Breaker Blue Fox to Big Calzone-B52 circling, have target in sites,ready for ok to engage -Over.


My payloads full-Can I engage-recieving hostile fire-Lets drop another-OVER!

9:00 AM  
Blogger Bob said...

Eric and All,

I delete several post that were absolutely meaningless in content. Stupid stuff directed at Chuck and had nothing to do with this thread.

I looked the thread over and really I could delete about 40% of it if I got down to it.

Also, this thread isn't about Fletcher and Finney. This thread isn't about Eric or Chuck.

Who ever is following Chuck around that's sick.

Eric, I want you to know I just mentioned to a regular here yesterday in a private conversation I felt this thread had very little substance from the posters. To many folks expect me to do all the work.

I would have thought SOMEONE would of broken down the city attorneys delays.

This thread has taken on the appearance of Romper room like most topics end up here.

To many folks come here to antagonize and they don't offer anything constructive to add to our truth seeking mission.

10:01 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Eric said,

Bob said this blog is read by lots of people and throughout city hall. Those people would have real defamation case.

Eric they don't have shit for a case. Ya know why. Because everything said here is public information and it is the TRUTH.

10:05 AM  
Blogger Bob said...

10:05, well put. I get all my information from the FEDERAL COURTS! Sue them! lol....

10:08 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bob does make a good point. There are some very serious issues that need peoples attention. Instead, we get military types thinking they are on a bpmbing run in 'Nam or some other fool worried about a clerk at the Sheriffs office. Don't some of you realize what is going on here? With respect to some people this city is being run like Nazi Germany and whatever the outcome, it's going to have serious consequences for many. I would expect a higher level of inteligence toward the subject matter at hand.

10:29 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Would that higher level of intelligence include not using the Nazi word unless you really are talking about party leaders from 1930's and 1940's Germany?

Just asking.

Bob, you either cut them ALL out or leave them all in. I don't see how that guy who thinks he's fighter pilot is allowed to keep his stuff on here and someone with a concern over county employees is deleted. is it cause the Sheriff will rain some whoop-ass on this site? Because, he will.

10:38 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thanks a lot for your work Bob. I've followed this site for a few years and it's now finally getting around to what everyone on both sides has been waiting for......the EVIDENCE! I'm speechless after finally getting through all this new information. I wish I would have had it before the elections. When considering everything in it's totality, I don't know how the city thinks they are going to walk away from this no matter how long they drag it out. In fact, I would think the tactics they are using is just going to make it worse for them in the end. People with nothing to hide are anxious to present their case and get a resoloution. Keep up the good work.

10:44 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Maybe it's because the fighter pilot kind of fits in or around the subject matter and the sheriff deal is a total atempt to hijack the thread to a different subject matter entirely. Maybe it should be in post all by itself. We had another person here who always tried to hijack the subject. Thank god Bob got rid of him.

10:49 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home