Custom Search

Thursday, May 08, 2008

Alice Krengal Update/ Alice BEATS Goliath!


Please click onto the COMMENTS for the story.
Photo from Pioneer Press

38 Comments:

Blogger Bob said...

court ruling in her favor
By Nick Ferraro
nferraro@pioneerpress.com
Article Last Updated: 05/08/2008 12:03:53 AM CDT


Alice Krengel, shown outside her West St. Paul home in October 2006, says she has endured "public humiliation" because of her eviction by the city. She may seek damages. (Pioneer Press file photo)For one year, Alice Krengel lived at the Dorothy Day homeless shelter in St. Paul, banned from her West St. Paul home by a district court.

After a series of public-nuisance violations, city officials had obtained an injunction to keep Krengel away.

She's been back home now for 10 months, but on Tuesday the Minnesota Court of Appeals overturned the lower court's decision, concluding she was illegally forced out of her house.

In a 2-1 ruling, the appellate judges determined West St. Paul failed to comply with a state law that requires cities to prove two or more nuisance incidents occurred within 12 months before the injunction hearing.

"I feel vindicated now," Krengel, 57, said Wednesday. "You cannot imagine my losses. This shows I'm a patient person."

The city claims Krengel, then an admitted alcoholic, had used her Allen Avenue home for years as a flophouse for criminals, drunks and drug users. Police went to her house 41 times in 2006 alone.

Krengel's attorney urged the appeals court to interpret the law to require proof that two "behavioral incidents" occurred within 12 months preceding the city's request for a permanent injunction, which was in October 2006. The city had argued the 12-month period should have begun in July 2005, when they served written notice on intent to seek the injunction.

"We thought the clock stopped at that point," City Attorney Kori Land said.

She called the decision a "moral victory" for Krengel.

"You can't change history and the fact she was gone for a year," Land said. "The city won the battle, but she won the war."
According to the city, police had been called to Krengel's home 180 times since 1990. Between September 2004 and July 2005, police were called to Krengel's home 29 times, including when two intoxicated men assaulted each other with hammers and several incidents in which Krengel's guests were drunk and were hauled to detox.

Threatening an injunction, Land in July 2005 notified Krengel she had to stop the nuisance or enter into an abatement plan with the city. Krengel entered into the agreement a month later to stay sober, not permit alcohol in the house and allow police officers inside for random inspections for one year.

After West St. Paul officials said she repeatedly violated the agreement, Krengel was barred from her house in August 2006.

Citing numerous violations of the state's nuisance law, District Court Judge Leslie Metzen followed with the permanent injunction three months later, forcing Krengel to stay out of her house until August 2007.

Krengel and her attorney unsuccessfully appealed three times to stop the injunction.

"The district court erred," Judge Matthew E. Johnson wrote in his decision, "because the city's evidence of nuisance activity consisted solely of incidents occurring 15 or more months before the hearing on the city's request for the permanent injunction."

Land called the decision a "strict interpretation of the law."

"You cannot predict when you're going to get your two nuisance violations," she said.

Land said there have been no police calls to Krengel's home or complaints from neighbors since she moved back in August.

But the fight might not be over.

Land said the attorneys who represented the city could seek to bring the case before the state Supreme Court.

Krengel said she has endured "public humiliation" and will discuss with her attorney whether to seek damages against the city for the eviction.

Nick Ferraro can be reached at 651-228-2173.

7:05 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

And "David" will beat "Goliath" in the city of St Paul. It's just a matter of time.

7:17 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

More scum sucking DFL government violating people's rights, but government does no wrong do they Eric?

8:08 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"A state law that requires cities to prove two or more nuisance incidents occurred within 12 months before the injunction hearing."

"Police went to her house 41 times in 2006 alone."

"police had been called to Krengel's home 180 times since 1990."

"Between September 2004 and July 2005, police were called to Krengel's home 29 times, including when two intoxicated men assaulted each other with hammers and several incidents in which Krengel's guests were drunk and were hauled to detox."
--------------------------

If you think the government made this decision without the neighbors- you're nuts.

Model citizen that Alice is. Sounds like the kind of tenant that Les and Froggy would love to rent to.

This is W St Paul, Swiftee's town- not mine.

Eric

8:19 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

More scum sucking DFL government violating people's rights,Dave Thune and Chuck Repke and the others that run government from behind the scene.
Lets all thank Alice for her battle with the "bulls" that shit on the common people with out the money to buy their way to court.
Thank you Alice.
one of your many friends.

8:24 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I love you Alice!

8:56 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It sounds to me like it's the Police who are the nusiance. If there was a problem they should've arrested someone or issued tags. If not, then the Police were harrassing her and I hope she sues the city. Their bad faith is obvious.

9:04 AM  
Blogger Sharon 4Anderson said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

9:45 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sharron sent me the court stuff on this right when it came out and it sure was interesting.

What happened of course was that the City (in their minds) was trying to not take her house and at first gave her a year to have no new offences. So a bunch more crap happens (that never goes all the way through the nuisance process but violates her probation) and the City takes her back to court for a permanent boot.

The City figures that the time line is from when they first took her to court and now the court says no, you need the one year to be when you bring her back to court.

So, Alice wins! And, everbody else that might have gotten a second chance from any city in Minnesota loses. Because what this ruling means is that cities have been put on notice that you better not put people on any kind of probation for this kind of offence or you will need two covictions to be able to take action.

So, I am guessing that no city cuts anyone else any slack the way they did Alice.

JMONTOMEPPOF

Chuck Repke

11:11 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"So, I am guessing that no city cuts anyone else any slack the way they did Alice."

That would be applying the law equally Chuck and if cities don't want to sued to hell and back, then they better start doing it. Wouldn't it just be easier to enofrce the criminal statutes and ordinances on the books instead of this back door BS?

12:36 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

12:36 - that is your sides arguement. The City should never give anyone a break if it ever intends to enforce the maximum consequence of the law.

No probations...

No second chances...

I don't know. I guess I'm the kind of guy that believes in letting people have a second chance before you kick their ass...

JMONTOMEPPOF

Chuck Repke

1:05 PM  
Blogger Swiftee said...

This shit really burns my ass, and I'll be letting my councilwoman know it tonight.

It sounds like this woman is a drunk that liked company. If she or her drunken friends were making too much noise, or making asses of themselves on the front lawn the police have all the authority they need to fix the problem or haul everyone to jail.

If they have to return to the house every goddamn night to repeat the process, well to quote Chuck's favorite response "tough".

If not, they have no business bothering her while she enjoy's her home any way she fucking well pleases.

This isn't St. Paul, we don't have, or want a Bucky Jr. running around protecting us.

There no law against drinking yourself into a stupor every damn day if that's what spins your beanie. If you have the money to buy a bottle, you have the right to guzzle it in peace in your house.

You can also make as much noise as you want during daytime hours...whoop it up.

To have any government monkey presume to dictate proper behavior in our own homes is intolerable.

"Cut her some slack"??

Leave it to a lefty moron to see it the city's business to even determine what "slack" is, much less believe it has the authority do decide to "cut" some.

Try following the fucking law.

The fact that the city went through this process proves to me that no laws were broken so the city concocted this bullshit scheme to put her on paper.

In my opinion, she was an idiot for signing such an agreement in the first place, but it's hard to make proper decisions when you're three sheets to the wind I guess.

I hope she sues the holy living shit out of the city...I'll recommend that it gets paid out of the salary of what ever moron at the city was responsible.

Maybe Zanmiller can sell his furniture graft.

1:14 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Alice has friends who post here at A Dem.

All of us have been praying for Alice. Our prayers are being answered.

2:24 PM  
Blogger Swiftee said...

If your her friend, you should probably stop wasting your time praying and get her a fifth.

2:35 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

No second chance for renters Repke. If they've evere been in trouble, you're on the "hit list" if you rent to them. Don't believe it, ask comrade Lantry.

2:51 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

West St. Paul did the same thing to a person I know over on Annapolis, but he got the best of them by bringing in the State inspectors. West St. Paul even trumped up a bunch of shit so they could get a restraining order against him so he could not fight them. I alao hope they get sued. Use the Police to enforce the law against criminal offenses not someone enjoying their home that they paid for.

2:59 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

A message to all those here who think the city actions were OK: just remember what you think is OK for the city to do to someone else today is going set a precedent for the city to do it to you or your loved ones tomorrow.

3:12 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Here is the link to what 2:59 was talking about. Bob has the guys website linked under the image of the city of west saint paul on the front page

http://www.wspwatchdogs.com/citycodeviolations.html

3:13 PM  
Anonymous Harold S. said...

Just because the court of appeals reversed the District Court doesn't negate the fact that this woman was a habitual nuisance.
I wonder what the dissenting Appellate Court Judge had to say about it ?
What kind of sentence did ol' Nancy
get ?


Harold S.

3:15 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

No matter what she was alleged to be, she still has civil rights and the city should respect those rights, not violate them. She also has the right to fair and honest services from the government and she didn't get either! I say SUE!!!!!!!!

7:28 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Chuck always has his head were the sun is darkest, you sure can tell he went to Humboldt High School.
Are they all that way from Humboldt Chuck, Maybe sounds right.
West St.Paul Government is as bright as Thune and Repke, Rupke thinks he is the expert on every subject.

9:53 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Just like Eric.

10:07 PM  
Blogger Nancy Lazaryan said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

1:38 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
NO ONE EVER TALKS ABOUT "HOW" West Saint Paul .
Tried over and over to buy Alice's house and the neighbors house on the corner.
WSP.had plans to put in a litter park like thing that would have a big sign that would say WECOME TO WEST ST.PAUL.
Alice didn't want to sell her home, then the city of WSP. condemned her home.
She had to bring it up to code, this sounds like what happens in St.Paul with the code inspectors.
They did that twice, the neighbor on the corner wanted to sell his home.
BUT Alice loved her place and wouldn't sell, the neighbor started to make complaints about anything he could think up.
He was calling the police and making false complaints, so it would look bad for her.
Remember when a city what's a property they go to all means to get it.
When did it become a crime to dink in you own house or yard, or is it only a crime if Alice and her friend do it.
We had many people on the backs of WSP's Government and how crooked they were.
Now we see that the mayors are not on the up and up in WSP, so who is calling the kettle "black"?

"Amen" for Alice

6:50 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

NO ONE EVER TALKS ABOUT "HOW" West Saint Paul .
Tried over and over to buy Alice's house and the neighbors house on the corner.
WSP.had plans to put in a litter park like thing that would have a big sign that would say WECOME TO WEST ST.PAUL.
Alice didn't want to sell her home, then the city of WSP. condemned her home.
She had to bring it up to code, this sounds like what happens in St.Paul with the code inspectors.
They did that twice, the neighbor on the corner wanted to sell his home.
BUT Alice loved her place and wouldn't sell, the neighbor started to make complaints about anything he could think up.
He was calling the police and making false complaints, so it would look bad for her.
Remember when a city what's a property they go to all means to get it.
When did it become a crime to dink in you own house or yard, or is it only a crime if Alice and her friend do it.
We had many people on the backs of WSP's Government and how crooked they were.
Now we see that the mayors are not on the up and up in WSP, so who is calling the kettle "black"?
"Amen" for Alice

7:25 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I hope these lawsuits going on now against the city hurts them so damn bad they'll never ever think about screwing with someones home again. At some point there has to be a stop to this madness and lack of control.

7:33 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Nancy,

I actually believe that "We" you and me and every other citizen are the government. We elect people to represent us.

You have been fed enough BS from the wealthy to believe that "WE" shouldn't be able to govern ourselves. That "We" should have as little power as possible so that those who have the most can get the most and the rights of the public be damned.

JMONTOMEPPOF

Chuck Repke

11:42 AM  
Blogger Nancy Lazaryan said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

1:05 PM  
Anonymous Harold S. said...

Nancy, You tried to settle problems of government by arresting Humphreys .
Look what happened to you !
You call what you did solving the problems of Government ?
So much for solving problems THE PEOPLE WAY.
As a matter of fact, Nancy just cost you taxpaying landlords and everyone else thousands of dollars to prosecute stupid crimes.
If the Judge didn't send you to jail,its because you cost us enough in tax dollars.
Nancy, try being a security guard at some grocery store. You can arrest petty criminals for shoplifting.
I hear you got community service ?
When does it start ?
I know a neighbor down the street that has alot of dogshit in his yard. Go clean that up !
You probably should keep that vaseline incase you violate your probation.








Harold S

1:08 PM  
Blogger Nancy Lazaryan said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

1:40 PM  
Anonymous Harold S. said...

Right, giving seminars for arresting public employees who the courts have said have done nothing wrong ?
My money against yours that you fail in the court of appeals.
you want to make a bet ?
Forget it, you just save your money for fines.
Just what dirt is there that any judge is going to change their minds on your case.
If the citizens don't know their rights by now I feel sorry for them.
Your preachings here convince very few that your philosophys about citizens rights supersede that law for what exists already.
Remember to tell the people at the seminar that your PEOPLE WAY of fighting crime led to convictions.
You are a criminal Nancy and that a fact.






Harold S.

3:03 PM  
Blogger Nancy Lazaryan said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

5:18 PM  
Anonymous city employee said...

The only truth we know is that you were convicted by a jury of your peers.
Until the court says otherwise, you are a convicted criminal.
You lost in court just like the rico babys.





City employee

5:31 PM  
Blogger Nancy Lazaryan said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

6:10 PM  
Anonymous city employee said...

Just misplaced arguments I am sure.






City employee

6:17 PM  
Blogger Swiftee said...

Say, Harold? You're a bit of a jagoff aren't you?

Are you in fact "city employee" without the bananna in your ass?

Just wonderin'.

7:31 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

JMONTOMEPPOF
Chuck Repke 11:42 AM.

Chuck remember that money talks, the DFL Party has more money then we can imagine.
That's why St.Paul has all Democrats running it, but that will stop.
People are looking you way about many things and how you by being Thune's ex aid, got special treatment.

5:42 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hello Nancy L.
The battle looks brighter as others are revealing their cases,
now it looks like we were all right and the government and the courts were the corrupt one.
MN. with its 150 years anniversary of lying to its people, this coming year will show them their rule is over.

My Blessing to Alice

8:10 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home