Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Property Tax topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee pauses enforcement on $7,000 vacant‑building fee for 224 N. 5th Street; refers matter to full council
Summary
After public comment from family members of the owner and discussion of remediation steps and a pending sale, the committee voted to take no action and sent the case on 224 North 5th Street to the full City Council for further consideration of the vacant‑building fee assessed under ordinance 1569.
Brainerd — The Safety and Public Works Committee took no action Tuesday on a pending vacant‑building assessment for 224 North 5th Street and directed staff to bring the matter to the full City Council for consideration.
Community Development Director James Krambeck summarized the case: the property suffered significant fire damage on May 14, 2023; it was sold to Lucille (Lucy) Franz on April 10, 2024; Brainerd enacted ordinance 1569 on July 1, 2024, to assess $7,000 annually on vacant buildings with exterior blight. Staff said the first $7,000 assessment was sent to Ms. Franz on July 29, 2024 and added to 2025 taxes; a subsequent violation letter dated Oct. 7, 2025 proposed an additional $7,000 assessment that remains pending.
Brenda Farrell, who introduced herself as Ms. Franz’s daughter, and Shawn Farrell described remediation work they said had been completed or in progress: asbestos removal, restoration of electricity to an outbuilding, yard clean‑up and removal of debris. They told the committee a sale of the house was scheduled to close April 15 and that the prospective buyers are in construction and intend to restore the property.
“We diligently had different companies come out and look,” Brenda Farrell said, asking the committee for help. The Farrells noted the homeowner was out of state for health reasons and said they were working to find contractors to complete the work.
Committee members discussed options including a development agreement with the incoming owner and whether to waive or reduce past fees. Krambeck reminded the group that assessments are usually due at closing and that the assessment already placed on the property would be the responsibility of the owner of record at the time of closing unless council directs otherwise.
A committee member said staff should work with the prospective buyer on a development agreement and suggested sharing responsibility for past fees could be considered by the full council. The committee voted to take no action and forward the matter to the full City Council; roll call was recorded as Chizak: yes, Yaeger: yes, Erickson: yes.
Chair Erickson asked staff to remain available during the subsequent council meeting in case councilors have questions; the City Council was scheduled to meet at 7:30 p.m.
The committee’s action does not remove the assessment from the tax rolls; any change to the assessment would require council action.
