Recidivism in America...a survey of public opinion.

If the survey below fails to load, please follow this link to take the quick ten question survey.

Create your own user feedback survey

Update: What is your true agenda St Paul City Council?

Update: What is your true agenda St Paul City Council?

Since the post asking "What is your true agenda St Paul City Council?", which received no response from the City Council (hard to believe I know), several things have happened. 

First Mr Adams house was set for demolition, and according to an article in the Lillie Suburban Newspaper titled "Despite pending appeal, 676 Wells goes down" (Larkin, 2015), offers that the demolition would cost someone $9800, adding that Rayco Excavating, the contractor with the winning bid, came in at half the price of all other bidders out of sheer dislike for Mr. Adams. Now, you want to remember that figure because this is where the story gets good...

Second as you may recall, the property that the city had listed as abandoned city property adjacent to Mr. Adams house was transferred to the Department of Parks and Recreation. This property, which contained the legendary work of art known as "The People's Park" was leveled along with Mr Adams home.  

Third is the rezoning of the property.  It seems to me that while the home was razed, the land still remains property and possession of Mr. Arjo Adams.  The city has seen fit to rezone the property as RT2 which according to St Paul Municipal Code 66.214 is designated to residential townhouse districts.  This tells me, that the city has decided that the City of St Paul has an intended purpose for the property that rightfully belongs to Mr. Adams.  I do not recall any portion of this whole scenario to include the forfeiture of the property to the City of St Paul.  Do you?

Fourth and Final is the receipt of the bill for the demolition of Mr. Adams home, and the adjacent art park by Mr. Adams.  Imagine his surprise when he opened a bill from the city to the tune of $18,581.36.  Well, now that is different than the bid they awarded.  Different from the quoted price in the newspaper, and different than the City shows as paid for this demolition.  Where is the $9681 charge in question coming from?

I ask you again...What is your true agenda St Paul City Council.  

I demand transparency

References

City of Saint Paul - Assessments. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://eproperty.logis.org/stpaul/assessments/list?pid=292922420223

City of St Paul Municple Code 66.214 (66.214). (n.d.). Retrieved from City of St Paul website: https://www.municode.com/library/mn/st._paul/codes/code_of_ordinances?searchRequest=%7B%22searchText%22%3A%2266.214%22%2C%22pageNum%22%3A1%2C%22resultsPerPage%22%3A25%2C%22booleanSearch%22%3Afalse%2C%22stemming%22%3Atrue%2C%22fuzzy%22%3Afalse%2C%22synonym%22%3Afalse%2C%22contentTypes%22%3A%5B%22CODES%22%5D%2C%22productIds%22%3A%5B%5D%7D&nodeId=PTIILECO_TITVIIIZOCO_CH66ZOCOONDIUSDEDIST_ARTII66.200.REDI_DIV166.210.IN_S66.214INRTTOREDI

City of St Paul. (2016). Property Information (292922420223). Retrieved from St Paul One Stop website: https://www.stpaulonestop.com/AMANDA5/eNtraprise/StPaul/m3list/e_web_listsubmit.jsp?pagename=a_PickProperty.jsp

Larkin, P. (2015). Despite pending appeal, 676 Wells goes down | Lillie Suburban Newspapers - LillieNews.com. Retrieved from http://www.lillienews.com/articles/2015/04/05/despite-pending-appeal-676-wells-goes-down

Post from August, 2013:

What is your true agenda St Paul City Council?

Tonight's defeat in the hearing of the appeal of Ronald 'Arjo' Adams of both the fencing and the boarding up of the house located at 676 Wells, it was suggested by one brave man in a rather choked up voice (thank you Greg Copeland for your will to come to the aid of Mr. Adams) that there may be another agenda driving the council's vote. I agree.

What is your true agenda St Paul City Council?

Do you wish only to take that property?

I for one demand some clarity.  

The meeting can be seen in video form here:

City Council on 2013-08-21 3:30 PM - Public Hearings at 5:30 p.m. - Aug 21st, 2013

The facts:

1. Mr Adams has had permits for every bit of work that was to be done on that house. What hindered his progress is the condemnation of that property after he purchased those permits.  Because the property was condemned, you refused to inspect those permits.  Mr Adams was not given a refund for the price of those permits.

1. You say this has been going on over a year? You are correct.  Because your inspectors refuse to step foot into his home and inspect the work done under the permits that were pulled over a year ago.

1. You want a $5000.00 deposit to pull a permit for any work done on this 'vacant building'.  The amount of work left to be done on this so called disaster waiting to happen is less than $2500.00

1. The city of St Paul has a project that runs along this property, and the city owns the property to the left and to the right of Mr. Adams. Arjo's home is smack in the middle of a city project.  It is my feeling and that of the nearly 260 people that have signed the petition to save it that you want to demolish this house under the rule of eminent domain.  

1. You say the retaining walls and the steps are dangerous. Is it not true that one of your own inspectors gave that wall and staircase a thumbs up in 2006?  Of course it is.  I offer a copy of email correspondence that you posted on your own site between Dave Thune and Mike Grealish that states clearly that this property's retaining walls are safe and should be left intact as per Tom Riddering - building official, City of St Paul.  This was an in response to a request sent by Dave Thune to Mike Grealish in an attempt to gain clarity to take a position in the matter of condemnation and possible demolition of this home and property in 2006. 

1. In his own words, in 2006 Dave Thune said, "I understand that somehow coincidental with the recent Pioneer Press article about R Joe Adams park and public sculpture the city has leaped into action to save us from something or other, possibly imagined".

So again I ask you..
If you are as outraged as I am email the council members for ward 6.  Tell them we want change!
Marcia Moermond - Legislative hearing officer
Councilmember Amy Brendmoen
Councilmember Nathaniel Khaliq
Councilmember Russ Stark
Councilmember Dave Thune
This could be your mother's home, your daughter's home, your home for that matter.  Don't take this lying down. Stand up for what is right!

I have always been of the belief that what is done in the dark will always come to the light. 

Kudos to you Mr. Dan Bostrom for having the good sense and the strength to vote against both of these motions.

It is unfortunate that the others on your council do not have the same clear conscience tonight.  I hope they sleep well knowing Mr Adams will not.

What is your true agenda St Paul City Council?


marcia.moermond@ci.stpaul.mn.us

Council President Kathy Lantry
kathy.lantry@ci.stpaul.mn.us

Councilmember Dan Bostrom
dan.bostrom@ci.stpaul.mn.us

amy.brendmoen@ci.stpaul.mn.us

nathaniel.khaliq@ci.stpaul.mn.us

russ.stark@ci.stpaul.mn.us

dave.thune@ci.stpaul.mn.us

Councilmember Chris Tolbert
chris.tolbert@ci.stpaul.mn.us

Another St Paul City Administrator Screw-up!

You ever wonder what you'd find if you ran your own name? Well you should try it.  In an effort to obtain the home repair financing offered by the GREAT city of St Paul, the title of the property owned by Arjo Adams was put under the microscope. As he as no real creditors, this should have been a smooth process.

Yes, I said should have been.

It seems that the city of St Paul, in it's infinite wisdom, has seen fit to attach another Ronald Adams judgement in a paternity case to the property owned by none other than our very own Arjo the Artist (see here). The odds on their being more than one Ronald Adams are pretty good.  The odds on their being another Ronald J Adams are just as good.  The funny part is they are 15 years apart in age.

I cant help but wonder which hourly city employee made this huge blunder.

After the long battle to save his house, as if he needed salt rubbed in his freshly healing wound, those whose job theoretically requires a certain level of intellect have seen fit to allow a lien against a home of a person to whom the debt does not even  belong.

Oh how I miss the days when errors like this did not occur.  Remember the days when city officials were officially responsible? When items of this importance were treated as official business? The days when it occurred to someone that there may be two people with the same name in the same city, and for that reason the person checked a little bit deeper into something like-say.....his age.  Well, never mind the fact that they have never had the same address, they are different ages, and well, they are in fact not the same person.

Will it ever end for this man?  The city tears down his house before his appeal is completed, at his expense I am sure, and now this.  Tsk tsk tsk City of St Paul Administrators.   Get it together.

Cooling off...

The long awaited status update to the progress in the battle to save the properties located at 676 and 680 Wells.

For those who have been actively following the issue let me start by thanking you for your support.  Those of you who may be new to this story, let me give you a brief overview...

This is the story of Ronald 'Arjo' Adams and his labor of love known as "The Peoples Park". 

There wasn't always an empty lot next to the house at 676 Wells Street. Located in the Payne/Phalen neighborhood in the 6th Ward, District 5 on the East Side of the city of St. Paul, the lot that has become known as The Peoples Park used to support a home.  That home was purchased by the city of St Paul in 1999, and as you can see by the information provided on the city of St Paul property lookup system as depicted in this picture, a screenshot taken on September 25, 2013:

"Permits Online". Property lookup by address. City of St Paul. stpaulonestop.com, Feb. 2006.
Accessed 25 Sept. 2013. 

the property was considered abandoned as of the year 2000 when the permit for the sewer contract was closed.  Soon after this lot and home were purchased, the home was demolished to allow for development of what was supposed to be either low-income housing, or for the use of by the John A Johnson elementary school (the real reason is not quite known at this point by this blogger, I have heard both versions). 

Ambiguous as the intended purpose may be (see: Proper use of CDBG funds?) the property was purchased and the home demolished for a city project that never came to fruition in the scope that included the use of this property.

NOTE THAT THE PROPERTY INFORMATION ON THE CITY'S OWN WEBSITE STATES THAT THIS PROPERTY IS ABANDONED SINCE 2000!!!

As a byproduct of the demolition, the land began to slide downhill (be mindful that this property is located on a bluff, with an extremely steep grade), which prompted the communication with Mr. Adams and the City of St Paul department of Safety & Inspections (DSI) in 2000.  This communication began with Mr. Adams requesting the city build a retaining system for the newly upturned land on the bluff, land which his home relied on for stabilization on the bluff.  In short, the city said "no way, that costs too much money".  After several letters back and forth, the city agreed that Mr. Adams could build his own retaining system if he chose to do so, to retain their newly purchased and newly upturned land and keep his home from shifting on the bluff.  

In this email from Robert Humphrey, spokesman for St Paul Department of Safety & Inspections to Leslie McMurray, director of the district planning council dated July 16, 2013,  Mr Humphrey states "Prior to Parks and Recreation officially becoming the land owner last month, the materials at 680 Wells were constructed without any permits or authorization from the City on City-owned property. DSI became aware of the materials and inspected them for safety". This is in and of itself a complete untruth. 

Mr. Humphrey is aware of this email as he is the author. Mr Humphrey is also aware of another email, this one dated October 27, 2006, from Bob Kessler to Dave Thune.  In this email Mr Kessler states that according to Thomas Riddering (city building inspector at the time) "most of the retaining walls are soundly built and do not pose a danger and should be allowed to remain in place".  

This is quite the contradiction.  A full seven years before DSI and Parks and Rec have their epiphany that there has been a series of walls built on city property without permission, the city in question ordered an inspection of these yet undiscovered walls, an inspection that the walls built by Mr. Arjo Adams passed. How could Mr. Humphrey and the department of Parks and Recreation not be aware of this record? Simply put, they couldn't. 

This is a permanent part of the property record, one that would have been scrutinized before this parcel of land could be transferred to a different department to ensure that there are no hazards of exactly this type, or other possible hazards such as chemical waste or perhaps a gas leak or sewer issue. It would seem to me that the walls are not the issue as much as the land they retain.  These walls all connect both of the city lots 680 Wells and 674 Wells, via the back of the property at 676 Wells (you guessed it, this is the home of Mr. Adams). 

Since the inception of this blog, discrepancies have been discovered and uncovered.  

Every attempt has been made to bring some clarity to this issue by this blogger. With every new bit of light shed on the issue, another contradiction is discovered.

The powers that be are taking notice. 

In a letter from the  Payne Phalen District Five Planning Council to Marcia Moermond, the legislative hearing officer that has been quick to deny requests for an amicable resolution in the past, the council made the following recommendations:

So to clarify city of St Paul and District 5 Planning Council, this 120 day 'cooling off' period is for the benefit of whom? Mr Adams to organize his duties and post the proper bureaucratic red tape forms and fees? Or is it in fact a time for the city to gather its bearings and further investigate the claims that have been brought forth in these blogs?
Whatever the reason, this blogger agrees that time to 'cool off' would be in order.

• The city Dept of Safety & Inspections did come in guns-a-blazin, ready to tear down the newly labelled incredibly, horribly neglected-death trap of a park and home of the creator of that park Mr. Adams (the perception they imposed upon the mind of those who would believe these allegations sight unseen) when in fact...
• Permits were pulled over a year ago, the work was declined an inspection by DSI.
• The property has not been inspected in over a year by a city official.
• The property has passed an independent inspection by a professional inspector contracted by Mr. Adams to inspect the home and the work done within that home.
• Repeated denials of service, boarding up of the residence, trivial impositions by the city of outrageous requirements such as cash bonds and unrealistic cost estimations for the required repairs which leads me to...
• The gradually inflated abatement order.  The original repair order was a fraction of the size of the abatement order in place today.  Considering that most of the additional items on the current abatement order are merely cost inflating fluff, and NOT NECESSARY TO PASS A CODE COMPLIANCE INSPECTION as per a licensed contractor in the city of St. Paul have all made it nearly impossible for Mr. Adams to make any progress in a positive direction with the code compliance.
• The claims of DSI to be unaware of the retaining wall system erected by Mr Adams are false, as is proven by the email communication between CPED (planning and economic development) and the inspector who ok'd the walls in 2006.
• The stories of other homeowners who have gone through the exact same issue for what seems to be no other reason than the smooth completion of a proposed city project like the story of Mr. Ahrndt, and his 'nuisance house' at 1901 Maryland that was cleared to make room for the "Furness Parkway Project".
• The reasons that this whole situation does not add up to what it should are starting to add up to something they shouldn't.
• According to statute, Mr. Adams had every right had he chose to do so to place a 'caretakers' lien on the property that has come to be known as The Peoples Park for the maintenance he performed on that lot for thirteen years since the city bought it, demolished the structure that stood there for a project they never completed, decided it didn't need after all, then promptly abandoned. 

Where am I going with all this? 

I am not asking for your vote on a poll today. Although, if you choose to, you can vote here: Facebook poll.. where do you stand on this issue?

I am not asking you to sign a petition today.  Although, if you are so inclined you can do so here: Support the Park and the creator Mr. Adams at Change.org.

This is for those who may find themselves in the possession of a 'vacant building' in the City of St Paul.  If and when the city finds a better use for your property... and you get that dreaded abatement order... 

I am suggesting to you, and to you Mr. Adams that you do what any American Citizen has the RIGHT to do.

I am asking you to stick up for yourself residents of the city of St. Paul.  This is a clear violation of your civil rights.  Treat it like the attack that it is. Retaliate. Retaliate with a Federal injunction.  File a case in Federal court against DSI and the City of St Paul for violating your inherent right as a US Citizen to have your civil rights protected. 

Facebook poll enlists your opinion in the matter of the Peoples' Park, and the home of the artist, Arjo Adams.

Take this poll, let your opinion be heard!

St Paul City Council, our view of 676 Wells, and The Peoples Park issue!

I took it!

What exactly qualifies as a condemnable home in the city of St Paul?

What exactly qualifies as a condemnable home in the city of St Paul?

A look inside the home of 'Arjo' Adams, the creator of The Peoples' Park -

in the Payne/Phalen District 5 area of St. Paul, MN.  The Park and the home have been slated for demolition although neither meet the guidelines for demolition under the nuisance law as it reads at the time of this video.  

Update:
A letter to Mr. Adams and his co-owner Ms. Woolsey dated August 30, 2013, the legislative hearing officer has granted a 'stay of execution' if you will and given Mr. Adams until September 10, 2013 stating:  

a $5,000 performance deposit or a bond needs to be posted by September 10 in order for her to recommend that the City Council grant you additional time to develop the following: 

1) provide a work plan including timelines for completing the work (NOTE: City's estimate for rehab exceeds $50,000);

2) must submit bids from a general contractor and subcontractors;

3) must provide financial documentation indicating the funds to do the rehab (line of credit,construction loan, or personal bank account) You may want to seek assistance through your sister, Beth Woolsey, Wells Fargo Mortgage, or Dayton’s Bluff Neighborhood Housing Services);

4) must provide an affidavit indicating the dedication of funds to be used for the project if the money is from a personal account;

5) active permit(s) need to be finaled; and the property must be maintained.

If you wish to appeal further, the City Council Public Hearing is scheduled for Wednesday, September 18, 2013 at 5:30 p.m. in Room 300 Council Chambers, Third Floor.

Note: An independent inspector passed this property and offered his results to the City of St Paul code compliance department who initially did not wish to accept the findings, but I am told, they did acquiesce, and enter the findings into the file to be discussed at the September 10 hearing.

• Will this independent inspector's findings, along with the estimate for plumbing repairs that did not exceed $1200.00 be enough to eliminate the need for a $5000 performance bond? 
• It hardly seems rational to collect a $5000 performance deposit to complete less than $2000 worth of work.
• Has the city decided to honor the permits that were pulled in the past and not honored?
• Will the city see the exact nature of their wrongs?

For the sake of the taxpayer I hope so.  

A study by the University of Minnesota boasts the benefits that can be realized by the city of St Paul for renovating, rather than demolishing so called vacant properties - as they have classified this one (smartgrowthamerica.org).  

The study maintains that while vacant properties negatively affect neighborhood property values, reducing the city's tax base, a renovated property did not affect surrounding property values negatively.  

In fact, demolishing a vacant building as they would do here, and leaving a vacant lot leads to "$26, 397 in lost property tax revenue over a twenty year period".  

I wonder, how many vacant buildings get demolished in the city of St Paul simply because the owners could not afford the repairs.  

Is this not what neighborhood stabilization and community development block grants, along with low interest and no interest home improvement loans are for? 

It would seem to me, powers that be, that

• rather than rack up $27000 in lost tax revenue,
• rather than lowering neighboring property values, 
• rather than adding a nauseating $12ooo to the already destroyed homeowners tax lien, 
• rather than adding insult to injury and devastating lives, some beyond repair, 
• that you would offer some of these funds as a first measure, rather than a hidden resource not discussed or mentioned as an option at the time of condemnation.  

Perhaps this is a call to the granting governmental agencies who have so generously offered these funds to the City of St Paul to audit the use of these funds, and their availability to those who need them.

For those who are unaware of these programs I offer the following links:

City of St Paul Homebuyer & Homeowner Resources

This site has links to citywide programs including: 

City-wide Rehabilitation Loans Emergency Home Loan Fund Saint Paul Rehab Support Program (Frogtown & North End neighborhoods)

The Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG) Program

 Funds for homelessness prevention

And, the following links, taken from the city of St Paul website:

Housing Resources & Links Housing Resources for Homewoners Cityliving Home Programs Home Stretch Program Mortgage Foreclosure Prevention Program Tips for Talking with your Lender Vacant Housing List Key Documents and Initiatives Housing Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan Plan to End Homelessness, Saint Paul Ramsey County, Part 1 Heading Home Minnesota: Business Plan to End Long-Term Homelessness HUD Consolidated Plan 2005-2009   Invest Saint Paul Central Corridor Ford Site Planning Sales Tax Revitalization (STAR) Housing Partners Minnesota Housing Finance Agency (MHFA) Local Initiatives Support Corporation (LISC) Family Housing Fund Metropolitan Council Saint Paul Public Housing Agency (PHA) U.S. Housing and Urban Development Department (HUD) Housing Links Minnesota Home Ownership Center  Emerging Marketg Housing Initiative (EMHI) Corporation for Supportive Housing (CSH) Amherst H. Wilder Foundation Metropolitan Consortium of Community Developers (MCCD) Rondo Community Land Trust EnergySmartsPay.com

Perhaps along with their supply of window stickers declaring properties unfit for human habitation, the inspectors and DSI should carry a list of resources for the homeowners that they are trying to force to comply with their repair demands.  The magnitude of the effect these condemnations have on lives demands some sort of improvement to the process.


Follow this story on the both the Facebook page located here: 
https://www.facebook.com/pages/The-Peoples-Park/588070574550350

and on the official blog of The Peoples' Park and the fight of Arjo Adams located here:
http://laymansplace.blogspot.com

Or sign the petition to save the park at Change.org located here:
http://www.change.org/petitions/city-of-st-paul-and-department-of-safety-and-inspections-preserve-our-artistic-landmark-the-people-s-park-of-680-east-wells-street

"Art Park" creator hospitalized after being removed from boarded home by police.

Ronald 'Arjo' Adams,  of 'The Peoples Park' in East St Paul is currently being held at Regions hospital.  after being physically removed from his boarded up home.  They will not release him without proving he has a 'safe home'.

In a move to remove both Mr. Adams home and the park that he created over 15+ years on a parcel of land that the city had abandoned, the City Council voted to board up Mr. Adams house and erect a fence at the expense of taxpayers to keep Mr. Adams out.  

The St Paul Police department removed Mr. Adams and placed him in Regions Hospital for a psychiatric evaluation, where he has had a hold placed on his release until such time that it can be assured that Mr. Adams has secured new living arrangements, not at his 'condemned' home.

City council has moved up his final appeal in the repair or remove abatement order of his home which was scheduled for September 18, to the first week of September. 

Seems to me like he is being held just long enough for them to destroy his home without offering him the full time he is under appeal, and the chance to make the repairs.  I have a copy of an estimate from a MN licensed master plumber/contractor stating the work left on that house to bring it to code is less than $2000.  The legislative review team would not consider it.  There has also been hired an independent code inspector to inspect the home and testify at the last hearing. I somehow doubt that he will be allowed in this ‘death trap’ of a home for fear of liability from the city. This house, honestly is no more  condemnable than Mr. Humprey's  home, or mine or yours.  I smell a civil rights suit in the air.

Much like the demolition of the home of a man we will simply call 'Sean' to make way for a new business on the opposite end of the very same block, this home will be destroyed for whatever plan the powers that be want to see become a reality. 

My unofficial opinion: Hold on to your lap bars St Paul residents, this is just two out of  many newly discovered efforts by the powers that be to obtain your property for city projects. They have given up the premise of Eminent Domain and have bypassed the offering of fair market value for your home.  They will condemn it and tear it down at your expense.  Well now, that leaves a little more money in the city money pot for hmmmmmm.... development maybe?  It won’t be long until that whole section of land (Payne Avenue to Greenbrier, on the East side of Wells Street, along the Phalen Corridor) is demolished in preparation for whatever the city has up its sleeve.  Hint... I am not exactly GREEN with envy.