Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Building And Code topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council halves vacant‑building assessment for West Side storefront after DSI processing delays
Summary
Owners of a remodeled West Side storefront won a reduction of an annual vacant‑building assessment after they said the Department of Safety and Inspections misplaced their permit application and delayed review; the council approved a lowered charge of $650.
The Saint Paul City Council reduced a vacant‑building registration assessment for a West Side commercial property after owners said the city’s Department of Safety and Inspections mislaid their permit application and delayed plan review, which they said delayed construction and imposed costs.
Property owners Lee Begno and a business partner told the council they bought the building in February, found it in poor condition and began work to rehabilitate it into a leatherworks shop. They said they were not notified in the transaction that a vacant‑building annual fee applied and that the lost application and other administrative delays — including utility and contractor registration issues — slowed construction during the summer building season. “We were shoveling the snow. We were maintaining it,” Begno said, adding that the assessment felt like “a punch in the gut” because it arrived while they were financing renovations.
Legislative Hearing Officer Marcia Morman and other staff outlined the case history: the city’s vacant‑building fee covers July 8, 2024, through July 8, 2025. The owners’ permit application arrived but was misfiled or delayed in DSI, and staff determined that DSI processing problems and associated delays had lengthened the time required for the property to reach compliance. Morman had recommended reducing the assessment to account for those delays.
Council President Naker proposed, and the council adopted, an amended reduction that lowered the assessment to $650 (from a previously billed amount of roughly $2,618). The owners declined an offered option to pay over five years and accepted the $650 charge. Council members said they were updating the vacant‑building process to give staff more discretion and to prevent future cases of lost applications or undue hardship.
The council adopted the recommendation by voice vote; the public hearing record shows the body accepted Morman’s findings and instructed staff to continue policy work to improve communications and the vacant building program.
