Council lays over vacant building fee appeal after owners say staff told them to ignore letters; staff recommended half reduction

The Saint Paul City Council took up an appeal of a $5,075 vacant building assessment tied to a property at 1350 Hague Avenue and laid the matter over to Sept. 10 after hearing testimony from the property owners and staff. City staff recommended a partial reduction to $2,537 to reflect the property’s time in the vacant building program.

City staff (identified in the meeting record as Ms. Moorman/Mormont) summarized a complex timeline: the site had been in the vacant building program in late 2019s, one structure was demolished and an accessory structure remained, and the property was sold on contract for deed in May 2023. Registration notices and an annual vacant building fee ($5,000 plus fees) were mailed; the case later was referred to the city’s real estate office for tax assessment when the fee went unpaid. Staff said the building exited the vacant building program in March 2024 after the owner submitted required materials and permits; the assessment nevertheless was placed on the 2025 property tax bill, producing the dispute.

Owners Bradley and Ashley Taylor testified they received multiple letters in 2023–24 and repeatedly called Department of Safety and Inspections (DSI) staff, including Clint Zane, Nathan Broom and others. The Taylors said they were told by DSI staff that the letters were a mistake and “we were told to ignore the letter.” Bradley Taylor said, “If we had known we could appeal, we absolutely would have done so.” The owners asked the council to remove the assessment.

Staff told the council the file contains four built-in appeal points (registration, warning letter, assessment, and invoice) that were not used by the property owners. Staff also said it contacted utilities and departments, and noted it did not find a record error that would automatically cancel the assessment. However, staff recommended a compromise: reduce the $5,075 assessment by half to $2,537 to reflect that the building was in the vacant building program for roughly half of the year in question.

Council Member Buie asked whether permit reviewers and the vacant building team are separate; staff confirmed they are distinct teams within DSI and the owners had been dealing primarily with building officials rather than the vacant building unit. Council Member Johnson said she would likely oppose a refund and described this case as a matter of miscommunication rather than an administrative error; she voted against the layover.

The council voted to lay the item over to Sept. 10 to give the owners time to submit additional documentary evidence (texts, emails and call logs) to staff for the record. The motion to lay over carried 6–1 with Council Member Johnson recorded as the lone vote in opposition. Staff noted that the $5,075 assessment has already been certified and placed on the 2025 tax roll; any council decision now would result in a refund to the property owner if the assessment is reduced or removed.

Next steps: owners were advised to submit additional documentary evidence to the staff contact and staff will add it to the council record ahead of the Sept. 10 layover.