Saint Paul Council Discusses Disputed Cleanup Charges at University Avenue Property

In the heart of St. Paul, the City Council convened to address pressing issues surrounding property safety and community welfare. The meeting, held on August 20, 2025, featured discussions on two significant cases involving property clean-up and fire damage, both highlighting the complexities of city regulations and communication between officials and property owners.

The first case involved a vacant building at 992 Arcade Street, which had suffered a fire suspected to be arson. The fire occurred in January, and by February 21, city officials had boarded up the building to secure it. Marsha Moorman from the Department of Safety and Inspections explained that the police had contacted a boarding contractor after the fire, leading to a total assessment of $654 for the work done. However, the property owner, Neng Hu Mo, contested the charges, claiming he had boarded the building himself after being instructed by an officer that he could do so without incurring costs. This discrepancy raised questions about communication and the clarity of the city’s procedures.

Council members expressed empathy for Mo's situation, acknowledging the potential for misunderstanding, especially given the language barriers that can complicate interactions with city officials. Ms. Yang, a council member, emphasized the need for better communication materials for property owners dealing with emergencies, particularly those involving fires.

The second case discussed involved a property at 815 University Avenue West, where a homeless encampment had been cleared by city contractors. The property owner, who had been informed that the city would handle the cleanup, was later charged for additional cleanup costs that he believed were unnecessary. The council deliberated on the confusion surrounding the cleanup process, with the owner asserting that he was not adequately notified of the charges until after the work was completed.

Both cases underscored the importance of clear communication between city officials and property owners, particularly in emergency situations. The council ultimately decided to lay over the discussions for two weeks to gather more information and ensure that all parties understood the processes involved.

As the meeting concluded, council members reflected on the challenges faced by property owners in maintaining their properties amidst city regulations and the need for a more supportive framework to assist them. The discussions highlighted a commitment to fostering a more transparent and responsive city government, ensuring that residents feel heard and supported in their interactions with city services.