Custom Search

Tuesday, April 15, 2008

Saint Paul RICO update/ Hearing for renewed motion for sanctions.

Please click onto the COMMENTS for the story.

68 Comments:

Blogger Bob said...

Hi All,

As many of you know I was in federal court yesterday to get another scoop on the RICO case against the City of Saint Paul.

There were 3 “motions” before the court, 1 by the landlords to allow them to have new expert reports submitted, 1 by the landlords to punish the city for destroying evidence, and 1 by the city to strike the landlords Motion for Sanctions.

Before anyone could say anything the Judge ruled that the landlords could submit new expert reports and she denied the city's motion to strike. The magistrate went on to let the landlords attorneys present their case about the city destroying and not producing evidence.

The landlords Attorneys seemed very smooth and knew their case well. They detailed a series of things where the city destroyed inspections records, refused to provide other documents that the court had earlier ordered them to produce, and also the destruction of emails by city officials. They seemed very methodical in their presentations, and laid out a road map like presentation of where different exhibits and other things were in the court records for the judge to verify what they were saying.

They also read from some different documents, one of them being an emails from Dave Thune talking about wanting to do a “Quick take” on certain peoples homes. I posted the email they were speaking of here a few weeks ago. There were other mentions of how the city had picked out certain Tish inspection records to use against the landlords and then destroyed all the rest of the inspection records that existed which may have been useful to the landlords.

Of particular interest to me was Mr. Shoemaker telling the Judge about the PHA documents the city refused to produce and still have not produced. Shoemaker went on to talk about how those documents revealed that the city knew full well that PHA owned properties that not only were classified as problem properties, but also were infested with over 30different gangs.

One disturbing part of Shoemaker’s presentation was that there is a “secret call in center” for Police calls for PHA properties and those call statistics are kept separate from the rest of the city Police call service logs.

Attorney Engel presented evidence of how the city had destroyed emails and referred the Judge chart they had made showing the size of the emails boxes which were shockingly low in content.

Another point made was how the city had portrayed to the court that Mr. Dawkins email box did not have anything deleted from it, but it contained almost nothing for emails. The Attorney went on to say how when they looked in others people’s email boxes, they found hundreds of email either to or from Mr. Dawkins.

Mr. Engel also talked about a couple of inspectors that the city said could not have their email boxes restored because of a problem with the Police and Fire servers in the city, but then told the court how these employees did not move to the Fire department until March, 2007 and he questioned why those employees did not have email prior to that time when they were at NHPI.

When it came time for the city Attorney to talk, she did very poorly. She was just dancing around the issues without ever really saying anything to offset what the other side had presented.

At one point she made the outrageous statement that it was no big deal even if the city had destroyed emails because the plaintiffs had found them anyways.

Her arguments seemed as though they were meant more to confuse the court and the issues rather than having a good solid argument based on truth and facts. The Judge asked the city Attorney many direct questions and Ms. Seeba the attorney representing the city refused to answer, choosing instead to just “bob & weave” all over the place with everything but answers for the Judges questions.

The actions of the Judge were interesting as well. When Engel and Shoemaker were presenting their arguments, the Judge looked comfortable and was sitting back in her chair listening and making lots of notes as the Attorneys directed her to what exhibits to look at in support of their arguments. When the city Attorney started talking, the Judge moved foreword on the end of her chair and made almost no notes with regard to what Seeba was saying, but then Seeba wasn’t saying much related to anything other than trying to confuse the court. I don’t think the Judge bought it. Her demeanor when she ended the hearing seemed to indicate she had already made up her mind on how she was going to rule.

It is also important to note, plaintiffs attorney Shoemaker notified the court of another federal suit being filed and more to come.

9:28 AM  
Anonymous Jeff Matiatos said...

Somthing interesting about the secret police call, call in line is that PHA can lose millions of dollars in federal dollars if HUD learns that PHAs become what HUD calls "distressed properties"
24 C.F.R. 941.501, in some cases, HUD can take PHAs over and permit a management company to run it.

Alot of the police calls to PHA are for serious offences and community disturbances.

PHA gets to pick and choose what kinds of police calls are publicized.

The office of Inspector General for HUD would sure be interested in this Secret call in center.

The Inspector General agents have alot of authority and power.

They can shut a PHA down with the
swipe of a pen or a Phone call.




Jeff Matiatos

9:48 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

With time, I've become convinced that this is more than just bureaucrats overstepping their authority. It's too systematic, and there is too much support from the top.

The landlords persevere despite every bureaucratic obstacle thrown at them. Keep it up landlords, you are doing good!

10:50 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

From what I heard is that Ms.Seeba was overmatched and out of her league.Oh well the landlords may win one for now.We the city should have hired a firm like Ciresi.The only way the city can lose this is because the incompetence of our attorneys.Oh well!



City Employee

12:43 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey Repke I don't hear ya clucken big chicken.

1:26 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

To 12:43 P.M.

Typical attitude. You just want to manipulate the courts and do anything you want.

2:12 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

To 10;50

Your mentioning of the government "over stepping their authority" and the word "systematic" and the "support from thre top" starts making it sound more and more like Ravketeering to me.

3:29 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Was anything about this hearing related to summary judgment ?

6:26 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The city lawyer is the only one
that talk about it. In her closing statement.


Leslie K. Lucht

6:48 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

bob ,

You forgot that BoB K. useed the tish report in 2006 for a report to the city council. Then they
(city) destroy them after he did his report in 2006.

Leslie K. Lucht

6:53 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The more time that goes by the more these claims seem to pick up validity. I can't understand how the city could've put themsleves into such a bad position. Eric made a statement that scared the wits out of me when thinking about a trial. He siad he was able to look at the plaintiffs and that they all looked like his neighbors. That's the way the jury will also percieve them, and that would be a great concern to me if I was on the losing side of this lawsuit which I think the city is.

7:57 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

They put themselves there cause their stupid. They should have settled it when they could. If this attorney is right in his remarks about more lawsuits coming in the future, I think the city is screwed.

8:20 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

an other one was file last month.

And ten more are being work on right now.

Maybe a class action will be file in two months.

8:47 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

hey chuck,

What happend to you?? No comment.



Leslie K. Lucht

8:49 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Chuck knows he's whipped so he's in hiding with the Mayor.

9:38 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The recent news on this blog is mind boggling. Lets see if I have this right:

PHA is excused from city code because it will damage their ability to deliver affordable housing. The city holds private entities to this unnecessarily high standard.

PHA has their own police force. Private providers are penalized – sometimes severely – if the police go to their properties.

PHA police reports are not public as they go through a filtering system by their own staff. PHA’s own data shows they have 30+ gangs living in their buildings. Private landlords are considered a problem property if they get too many calls.

Honestly, this is making me angry. I presented at the SPARL monthly meeting today and mentioned these claims. The audience was noticeably pissed off. They should be. I want someone to justify why our government is held to lower standards than the private market while given significant tax benefits (like a personal police force).

10 more lawsuits. Is that speculation?

Bill Cullen.

10:43 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Not a "private police force" Bill.....the St Paul police force, and lots of them....assigned to PHA exclusivly and paid for by the very smae taxpayers they are trying to prosecute for the very same thing the city turns a blind eye to when it happens on their turf.

You want justification as to why the government is held to lower standards that the private market? I can help you out here! The answer is because they can get away with it. They violate the rights of people all the time and act with impunity because they know that people don't have the money to sue them. When they do have the money to sue them, well......you are seeing the results now, stonewalling, lying, destroying evidence, mis-stating and distorting everything they can, and in this case even lying to the court! I thought these guys were slumlords. I've been curious to why the city doesn't want to get to court as soon as they can to show the world their case if they're correct in their assertions. I guess now we're finding out why!

12:21 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You misses a fewe things Bob. I was at the hearing also and there was a point where the Judge has to correct the ciyts Attorney because she was citing some case law that was criminal rather than civil. The Judge quickly let the city Attorney know the difference between civil and criminal and pointed out that the cased the city was talking about did not apply. Then there was another thing.....toward the end, the city Attorney made a pitch to the Judge to dismiss the matter at hand so the city could go ahead with their Summary Judgement hearing. The look on the Judges face was priceless! She looked at the Attorney for St. Paul with a look that as much as said "are you nuts?" It was hard to keep from laughing out loud. So Bob.....do you know how long before we have to wait for the outcome of this hearing?

7:27 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey 12:21, if the city really felt they were wrong, they would not try to delay, they would try to settle. Their actions say they still don't take this case seriously.

I have publicly said out here before that I do not understand the RICO part of this case. Now I am starting to rethink it. For years, I lost my best tenants to PHA. I always knew my tax dollars funded PHA, but I never knew that our city also gave them significant competitive benefits over the private market.

Where did our big gov't contributors go?

Bill Cullen.

7:30 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bill if the city can stonewall and hand over evidence only when the plaintiffs attorneys ask for it making it hard to piece the case together will benefit the city.

It has taken great attorneys to dig and dig to find evidence to support this case.Just think after 3-4 years the city just handed over their files on PHA.They've tried to stall to buy time.This is how the city operates when faced with such a huge case.Bill do some research.I have found this is the biggest case in St.Paul history with staggering amounts of cash to lose.In a nut shell the city picked on the wrong group of landlords and under estimated them.



And last, the city was so hell bent on putting landlords who rent to low income out of business they did anything.They just couldn't do it to PHA do to the money they get from the federal government and the fact they didn't want to bite their own hand.



Ponco

8:05 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anybody know where Chuck is?He must have been filled in by Thune that they got their clocks cleaned.


Wasn't there an e mail Thune wrote about taking properties that was used in court?Bob could you post that again.Maybe we'll lure Chuck back.

8:08 AM  
Blogger Bob said...

Hi All,

Thank you to the posters who filled in the stuff I missed.

I sure wish we could take a tape recorder to these hearings.

I will look for Daves email and post it tonight. I am on my way out the door for a ride on my bike.
I'm riding around lake Pepin on both sides of the river, with stops in Bay City and Red Wing to visit family and friends.

8:29 AM  
Anonymous henry said...

Great news Bob. I'm starting to see stripes again. It must be a vision of the city officials in jail after this lawsuit ends and criminal charges are brought forth.

9:27 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If the city picks on PHA, then they get sued by HUD so they do what all cowards do......pick on the little guy they think can't fight back.

9:39 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bring in the violins boys and let the city cry the victim song for us. St. Paul inspectors have been doing this crap for years, decades even. I know someone who left the business 20 years ago because of it. It's about time someone sued the hell out of them and I can't think of a more fitting city council to be sitting for the lynching that's coming with the jury awards. We'll see how arrogant and elitest they act they are then.

2:16 PM  
Anonymous Jeff Matiatos said...

There has got to be more landlords out there that perhalps dont know much about the RICO action but have been affected.

They could make good material witnesses.

Is there a journal or list perhalps at the property tax division of registered landlords
in St.Paul ?

Could they then be notified ?





Jeff Matiatos

3:13 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Jeff----An aquaintence of mine is one of the people suing the city. They probably have all the names of those people already. The person I know told me that they not only went to PHA with several high speed scanners, but they also went to the code enforcement offices, the fire department and the liep offices and copied every single file they had concerning rental property addresses. If I was the attorney, I'd be using that list to get new business from tenants as well aa landlords as I think they have all the witnesses they need. This is starting to get interesting. I can't wait to see what the court decides on this matter.

3:33 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

They know now because Bill Cullen talked about it at the SPARL meeting last night. Word will spread like "wildfire" now!

3:34 PM  
Anonymous Jeff Matiatos said...

Thank you 3:33




Jeff Matiatos

3:37 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

On Monday I went to district 7
planning council. To let them know
about the hearing.

I meet a lawyer from legal aid.
His name is Zach. We talked little bit. And he said that legal aid get money from the city.

So, its hard to go after them. Because is conflict of interest.

Someone should tell the tenants
that needs to get different lawyers.

And sue the city and legal aid.
And HUD gives money to legal aid too. That why they(legal aid ) do not go after pha.

Maybe us (landlord) should start going after these crooks. Call
State senator And State rep. and tell to stop all this shit or will go after them.

We need to united to flight these crooks.

7:40 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

All landlords must register their properties with the city and that is public information. The fire department or NHPI has the list.

Just call them up.

7:48 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

ATTENTION COMADANTS:

If you do not register your buildings the Socialist city of St Paul is more than willing to cause you a lifetime of never ending terror and anguish.

You must register, you will register. You will do as your told and take what we dish out or we put you on the train we building.

That is all.

8:20 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sorry for not being able to respond sooner, I am swamped with work etc...

Three things: as to the results of the hearing, this is what I have been saying for months, the plaintiffs aren't talking about a case or any RICO activities only missing emails. There must something in them because we don't have them. No proof just an accusation. We shall see if the judge believes that there should be sanctions for not producing them.

As to the issues concerning PHA, what? and so? Who is it that is saying there isn't crimes or gangs in any multifamily building? If PHA has all of these crime problems and if the City hasn't used the code as an assault on crime, you are only making the City's case that it doesn't do that. You are the one's that make the assumption that the elected officials in Saint Paul are trying to benefit PHA, you still haven't answered the question of why would they? What would Kelly or Dawkin's get out of that? PHA's budget has no effect on the City's budget. JUST BECAUSE YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW THE GOVERNMENT OPERATES DOESN'T MEAN THAT THE COURT WILL BE AS CONFUSED.

And on the Thune email. Post it again Bob. Thune was trying to find a way to not have a building knocked down. This is a building that code was trying to demo and Thune was running ideas to the head of the HRA... isn't there someway we could buy the land (condemn it... use eminent domain...?)

So, once again the boobs on this list that hate Thune over the smoking ordinance have it wrong. Thune was once again on your side. He was actually trying to get the City to PAY MONEY for one of these buildings instead of demoing it.

Ask any of the folks that have had their building demo'ed if they would have rather had the City go to condemnation and pay fair market value for their property rather than having it demo'ed.

Give me a break.

JMONTOMEPPOF

Chuck Repke

11:30 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You're way behind the curve Chuck. I feel sorry for you.

1:16 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Chuck did you read the same email we see?Not once did it say pay fair market value.I remember it saying quick take.Take means take.No spinning here Chuck.You can buy something from someone.Borrow from someone.And take which means none of the above.Wake up Chuck your going to look like a complete idiot pretty soon.



Tim Ciani

7:17 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

A few months ago, I publicly posted on this board that I didn’t understand the Rico part of this case. Now I am saying I get it. There is new information. You scratch my back; I scratch yours.

The city implements a code that is so unnecessarily high HUD threatens to sue. The city releases PHA from the code. The city starts shuttering private landlords across the city.

PHA clearly benefits from less competition and a free police force.

St. Paul benefits by asking HUD, the State of Minnesota and other Federal agencies for more money (in the case of Housing 5000, about $350 MILLION DOLLARS) to acquire private property to build new buildings mostly owned by their powerful fundraising, campaign helping buddies that own and operate non-profits across the city.

The Non-profits – who appear non-political to most people -- tell the rest of the world we have a housing shortage/crisis and drum up MORE money for the city of St. Paul to keep the machine going and for their own land acquisition efforts.

What is unclear to me… Must the plaintiffs show a smoke filled room of powerbrokers with *intent* to build this conspiracy? Or can the plaintiffs win by proving that the powerbrokers of St. Paul created an *unfair competitive* advantage by forcing others in the market to abide by rules they exempt themselves from?

If the RICO hurdle is the second version, then it appears to me that the case is already proven.

Bill Cullen.

7:25 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Tim,

I don't remember the Thune e-mail, but "quick take" is a condemnation process that will require the city to pay fair market value for the property. It may ultimately go before a judge to determine value, but the idea is to obtain fair market value.

I believe this is precisely what happened with the land for the Twins stadium.

Bill Cullen.

7:27 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Tim,

I don't remember the Thune e-mail, but "quick take" is a condemnation process that will require the city to pay fair market value for the property. It may ultimately go before a judge to determine value, but the idea is to obtain fair market value.

I believe this is precisely what happened with the land for the Twins stadium.

Bill Cullen.

7:27 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Chuck is the community organizer for the Polluted Land mkt 776 thous, owned by HRA selling to TC Habitat for Humanity, without EAS or EIS Property is at 1611 Case
Shame on the City of St. Paul to sell Polluted Land approved at the Wed 16Apr08 City Council

PS Magner stood in for Marcia o demolish some buildings.

5:53 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wow my buddy Bill has actually drank the kool-aide. The logic you have used reminds me of the reason why there is global warming, it is the lack of pirates in the Carribean that is causing global warming...

A hundred years ago there were pirates in the Carribean since there hasn't been Pirates we have seen an increase in carbon dioxide in the air and the earth's average temperature has been rising every decade. Must be that the pirates were keeping down the carbon dioxide and stopping global warming. Your arguement makes the same sense.

Are you kidding me? Somehow the FEDERAL government is now involved in this conspiracy to get additional dollars from unrelated funding sources to the City in an effort rid the City of a dozen crummy landlords? Are you kidding me?

JUST BECAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE A CLUE HOW THE GOVERNMENT WORKS DOESN'T MEAN THAT IT IS INVOLVED IN A CONSPIRACY...

Bill - who in the FEDERAL government would be there opening up the fountain on these additional dollars that the city didn't get to do these projects as a reward for keeping the waiting lists long for PHA?

Tin foil Bill, I will get you some it will stop these sound waves from giving you secret messages.

And Tim, it now becomes clearer that you aren't someone who has actually owned investment property. A goal of true property rights advocates in police power cases would be to advocate that the City should not be allowed to abate property without doing a taking. Buy a Clue. When you have figured out what I said email back...

JMONTOMEPPOF

chuck Repke

10:27 PM  
Anonymous Jeff Matiatos said...

How about the city of Minneapolis taking 141 properties from a landlord, by the court appointing an administrator to run the property. ( todays minneapolis paper ).

I wonder if St.Paul ever thought about this kind of taking ?




Jeff Matiatos

10:29 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

And that's the problem with corruption Repke, it spread EVERYWHERE like a cnacer. Not to worry, sounds like ricomen are going to snuff it out.

10:32 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

St Paul does try those kind of tactics Jeff. They use the Tenant Remidies laws. They can take you into court with no notice at all and as soon as 24 hours, you cannot get an extension to find a attorney to represent you, you HAVE NO RIGHT to a jury trial, they always want to sieze your property, and to top it off they try the case before one of their bought and paid for judges who they've made arrangements with ahead of time. Sound like NAZI Germany? Now factor in their secret police they have with their secret dispatch center and the statistics they keep seperate. No kool aid here Chuck, just the facts.

10:38 PM  
Anonymous Jeff Matiatos said...

About that Mnlps article today of the 141 rental homes the courts appointed a receiver to manage due to fraud on the part of a firm and its owners, The that the courts can do this is monsterous power.

I just smell a rat when i hear that soon after the taking, the city admits it want to sell the property for its own purposes.

What about giving the citizens a shot at buying the properties ?

Just like Mayor Coleman meeting with 3M on the east side plant to see about how the city can become involved in what will be built there.

You think we citizens could meet with 3M officials for input ? NOT !






Jeff Matiatos

11:02 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Repke will meet with them and then slide one of his shoddy development projects onto the site before anyone knows it. Perhaps another "crack tower" for the elderly.

11:17 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Good place for another PHA development.

11:22 PM  
Blogger Bob said...

Chuck and someone else requested I post this email again.

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

11:46 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Looks like Minneapolis is keeping up with St.Paul .
Now thats what I call a taking
(141 rental homes taken by city of Minneapolis yesterday ).

11:56 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"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."

So it's rehabable and he's worried about the "cost" in his little test case huh?

This is the mindset that got them sued in the first place, just push the envolope as far as you can knowing people don't have the money to sue a major city for their agressions against you and they win by default and think it's the law of the land when they're actually breaking the law.

How about giving the guy the money you intend to spend in court to fix up the property?

1:25 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Tin foil Bill? LOL. Wait a second, my friend.

For months you held to the mantra – no benefit, no RICO. Made sense to me and I publicly stated I agreed with you.

Now the ricomen have shown significant benefit. I just reiterated their points. These benefits appear to weave together a web of cooperation by powerful public interests to benefit themselves at the expense of the private market.

But, now your argument changes… No smoke filled room, no RICO.

I am ahead of you… I asked that question in my “7:25” post. I agree that if RICO must show intentional cooperation (a smoke filled room of conspiring), that a RICO case against the gov’t is hard or impossible to prove. However, if all the ricomen need to show is that powerful entities constructed a market environment that gave them a benefit over the private market, then the case might already exist.

So, I am curious, must a RICO case show power brokers conspiring with the intent to create the unfair market or must they only show it exists?

Bill Cullen.

7:17 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bill you make very good points and tell you are very intellegent.The RICOMEN are jumping all hurdles.They are getting close to the buried treasure and city employees are getting nervous.Many are contacting friends that are attorneys and even talking private attorneys.

Keep your mind open Bill and you will see the trail of corruption.Remember Chuck makes a living off the city and he understands if the giant falls he will too.


Chuck keep spinning and being the citys mouth piece/People like Eric and Bill are seeing the light.You will not be on the jury my friend!



Tim Ciani

8:09 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bob thanks for the Thune post.

If you read that with even a basic understanding of the law concerning takings, Thune is saying to the head of the HRA, ...look the inspectors write these things up, it takes years before they are demo'ed and what we end up with is a vacant lot. Wouldn't it be smarter for us to BUY (take) the property fix it ourselves and sell it...? Maybe we could recover some of the costs.

ASK ANYONE THAT HAD THEIR HOUSE DEMO'ED WHAT THEY THINK OF THAT IDEA...!!!

I am guessing that if the option would have been given to someone with multiple code violations who was facing abatement to go to a "quick take" and let a judge figure out what to award them in value of the property they would have jumped at it in a second.

I am guessing that if they would have done what Thune suggested there wouldn't be any law suits.

The underlying issue in the suit is that the City's abatements leave the property owners with a vacant lot when the property is abated. Anyone who has been through a "taking" knows that there is no way that a court would have ever have given the owner less than what was owed on the property. So, ask Nancy O how she would have felt if at the end of the day everybody walked away even at Jessimine...

But, then again that is why I have always supported Thune. He gets what will work.

JMONTOMEPPOF

Chuck Repke

8:56 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Do oyu think we're crazy Chuck or what? Rather than all the citys fancy court hearing hearings so they can "take" someones property, why don't they send your buddy Thune out with the checkbook. Isn't that a whole lot easier than taking the guy to court? Oh I forgot, they are taking t them to the rigged court they set up ahead of time aren't they? No ownder they want to go to court so bad.

10:46 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh please god help me educate these people to how the real world works....

There are tax advantages to the investors if the properties are "taken" instead of being purchased. Did you ever hear of capital gains taxes? The thinking would be that if you negosiate a price the seller has to be concerned about the capital gain tax that they would pay, whereas if there was a taking and they got the same money there is a two year window that the investor gets to reinvest the money without paying capital gains taxes. So, seeing that Thune would be thinking as to how both sides come ahead in the deal, he would assume that most of these investors would also like the benefit of avoiding a 20% capital gains tax. Using simple math would you rather get $85,000 and pay no taxes or get $100,000 and pay $20,000 to the Fed's? Think about it...

Look it doesn't matter. Thune tried to get the City to look at acquiring instead of demoing and they didn't go for it.

JMONTOMEPPOF

Chuck Repke

11:08 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It does matter Chuck cause you fibbing to us again. First off the capitol gainms tax is 15% thanks to the republicans and secondly, there is a two year period to escape the tax by investing your proceeds of a sale no matter how it sold or how you get the money.

Do oyu think we are that gullible that we are actually going to belive the city of St Paul is actually looking out for the tax situation of the people whose properties they are stealing and demolishing?

11:26 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Chuck,

Are you going to answer Bill Cullens question?

12:59 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"there is a two year period to escape the tax by investing your proceeds of a sale no matter how it sold or how you get the money."

Not as an investor... buy a clue.

Why do you think people do exchanges? Never mind.

Like I said it doesn't matter. Thune wanted to fix things for the owners so that they got something out of the deal other than a demo...

JMONTOMEPPOF

Chuck Repke

1:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sorry, I missed this...

"So, I am curious, must a RICO case show power brokers conspiring with the intent to create the unfair market or must they only show it exists?"

Well that would be the question. In a civil suit does someone actually have to prove something or can they just make it up out of their imagination? The Rico plaintiffs say, we can make it up in our heads and haven't been able to find any evidence to show it, but we are firmly convinced so, it must be so.

Bill would suggest further that their are people in Washington that are in on this conspiracy and if we can get up to a dozen landlords closed we will get "bonus money" from the Fed's for making sure the waiting list is long at PHA. And that conspirator is???? Oh, it doesn't matter Bill was able to imagine that there was someone there with the magical powers to give the City money so it must be so.

JMONTOMEPPOF

Chuck Repke

1:10 PM  
Anonymous Jeff Matiatos said...

Chuck,

If you were an attorney for the city trying to make that argument to a Judge on summary Judgment,you
would be the butt of all Jokes between Judges during their lunch.

You only need to find RICO cases that have been succesful,and there are plenty of cases and if you need an example, just tell me and I will post it here.

It may not have the same issues as what we are dealing with here, but one case I have is against a Florida CITY Police Department found to be a crimminal orginization.

I think you need to look at the Ricomens attorneys briefs to learn of the cases they relied upon to support their positions on summary judgment.

Why do you think this case hasnt been disposed of by now ?

Even if sanctions are not handede down, the case goes forward.




Jeff Matiatos

1:24 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Jeff - the reason why the case hasn't been disposed of is that we can't get through discovery. There hasn't been even any hint of when a trial might start.

In any RICO case you have to have someone who was damaged and someone who benefitted from the damage. So, if enforcing the code as written and waiting years before taking any action on these owners to abide by the code has in someway damaged them, then who benfitted? The plaintiff's contention is that somehow PHA benefitted. Dispite the fact that they already have long lines of people waiting to get section 8 housing or get into PHA owned properties somehow these 6-12 landlords losing their properties benefitted PHA.

And then, what the heck is the motive for the City to put these 6-12 landlords out of business to benefit PHA hmmm, duh oh I get it... somehow by magic there appears to be some magical person in DC that will open the fountain on some source of funding that will come to the City if we have long PHA lines. Sure that works...

Of course in the real world PHA does not benefit by having these 6-12 landlords losing their property, there has not been any increase in funding to the City for other project because of lines at PHA and the only thing these landlords have in common is that they either wouldn't or couldn't maintain their property.

JMONTOMEPPOF

chuck Repke

2:40 PM  
Anonymous Jeff Matiatos said...

Chuck,

My reading of the Rico complaints simply suggests that PHA is one possible motive for the citys agenda.

Am I right in saying that PHA in part benefits through a monopoly in the housing sector in an effort to get maximum Federal dollars ?

Even if the Ricomen cant show signifigant damages other than the attorneys fees they have expended,
which I am sure may surpass any actual damages by the time this suit is done, they can prove the elements necessary and trigger nominal and punitive damages.

Crimminal implications factor in when its all said and done.

I think your argument that the Ricomen cant totally prove how PHA benifited is overstated.









Jeff Matiatos

2:58 PM  
Anonymous Jeff Matiatos said...

Chuck,

I also wanted to address the discovery part of your comment.

I think the plaintiffs have plenty of evidence as evident in the depositions taken of defendants
associates rackeeters.

PHA is not being prosecuted here so the burden of proof doesnt rest on the actions of PHA as an agency although PHAs preferential treatment of not being held to the same standard could help the jury understand that the city and code enforcement have a mutual agenda as they are one in the same when you consider the Mayor gives orders to Dawkins and right on down the line.

As to doscovery ? They have plenty, but I think the e-mail issue needs to be resolved so that the plaintiffs can finish that part of the discovery and evidence plan of attack.

The E-mails issue is an important link because the manner in which E-mails were deleted shows a pattern of covering up, which is an element to proving punitive damages.

A signifigant monetary sum !

Because this is not a crimminal suit, the Jury only need to be properly instructed and rule by a preponderance of the evidence.






Jeff Matiatos

3:20 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Chuck are you really that dumb or what?Maybe if you showed up at the latest hearing (I couldn't) you might know what the hell is going on!If you don't know who has benefited you might as well go back to A democracy and talk about the budding trees and birds.Heres one simple beefit along with some of Bills.At a time when PHA had its monies cut the didn't have the aggressive code applied to them(like code compliances,paiting houses,peeling paint,excessive consumption fees,no condemnation,etc.) while the private market was getting hammered.Allowing them to keep more of their money for general operations and not capital improvemnets to stay in business,isn't that a benefit.


Here Chuck try it like this.If the city targeted yours and Thunes neighbors and left the two of your dumps alone even though you all had the same type of problems because you were both connected with the city.Don't you think that would be a benefit if you could keep more money in your pocket?




Chuck and by the way the cases have been scheduled for August dumbo lips.Tell Dave to tell you the whole picture.




Tim Ciani

7:17 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Another thing-I think Chuck drank the stupid potion.

7:41 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Jeff said...

"Am I right in saying that PHA in part benefits through a monopoly in the housing sector in an effort to get maximum Federal dollars ?"

No you aren't right; if roughly 50% of the City is people in rental properties how is PHA even close to having some kind of monopoly? That is the insanity of these arguements. And, Jeff having the units filled in Saint Paul doesn't open up the fountain to some additional Federal funding. I have no idea where you guys get that from. Just like the basis of a conspiracy you make it up in your minds, so it must be so.

And as I said to Bill's comments having PHA units filled sure in heck doesn't have one damn thing to do with the CDBG funding that the City of Saint Paul gets to do housing projects or MHFA monies they aren't related.

And Tim, I get your point if every housing unit in the City isn't inspected on the same day then the City can't inspect anyone.

Your arguement is a complaint based system is unfair and the city can't prove that it is impartial if anyone says it is partial...

But to claim PHA doesn't take care of its property or spend any money on it is a joke. Saint Paul PHA has a national reputation as some of the best maintained public housing in the country.

Buy a clue Tim, get out of town someday and see what other cities public housing looks like.

JMONTOMEPPOF

Chuck Repke

10:44 PM  
Anonymous Jeff Matiatos said...

I agree with Chuck that St.Paul PHA
maintains most of its propertys as I have seen their inspections ratings and their at 95% whatever that means.

I can tell you though that PHA has a reputation for beating on its tenants and why not, they have line from here to somolia waiting to get in and their was a mandate from the white house that certain cities take in these so called refugees from, well you know, these war ravaged countries that we invaded and occupied.

I dont thing PHAs preferential treatment is the primary focus as much as it is the actions of code enforcement and St.Paul mandates to
harm landlords.

It doesnt hurt to show that PHA has benefited from the indifferent enforcement alleged.

PHA benefits because when its not reported for code defiencies, their
Federal dollars are not threatened as much as it is for landlords who also take in section 8 who also have to meet Federal standards for building upkeep.







Jeff Matiatos

12:49 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

There you go spinning again Chuck. 50% of the city may be renters, but it's not 50% that are the lowest of the low income population that are the customers of the PHA.

1:50 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Chuck said,"And Tim, I get your point if every housing unit in the City isn't inspected on the same day then the City can't inspect anyone."



Chuck NHPI closes files without inspection on PHA and has never condemned or required a code compliance on any of their housing.NOT ONE, NOT ZIP!NADA!And they have gangs and criminal activity happening around the clock.Are you saying no one complains about PHA housing?Are you saying that PHA has slipped by NHPI and Fire do to the fact that their housing is some of the best around the country?What about the behavior aspect then CHUCKIE?

Chuck the fact is people do complain on PHA and they have the same problems as private landlords that rent to low income.The point is that they get treated totally different.Chuck and if you can't see that with the evidence your either stupid or your heads up Daves ass so far you can't see or hear.


Chuck don't you remember PHA president talking about selling 17 of their scattered site properties because each of them needed $40,000 worth of work.Chuck thats more then Dave and you needed on your homes put together.And we all know they looked like shit.Just imagine Chuck $40,000.I'm sure the private guy would get left alone right?


And one last thing Chuckie Cheese your right about 12-15 landlords in the suit.These weren't the only ones hurt by the citys actions.THEY ARE THE BRAVE ONES TO TAKE THEIR LIFE SAVINGS AND FIGHT THIS CITY FOR THEY ONES THAT COULDN'T.There will be more suits.



I commend these landlords.These will catch on like wild fire and the talk around the city is loud!




Tim Ciani

9:12 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home