CCP 08-31-1998 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

DRAFT ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - AUGUST 10, 1998 3 Councilmember Aplikowski asked if the owner is responsible for the costs involved. Mr. John . Miller, City Attorney, said he had been working on tbis matter and the action that is being asked of the Council at the present time is to take the first step and adopt Resolution #98-51. The next step in the process would be for the owner to be served a copy of the order. The owner would then have twenty days in which to answer. If the property owner doesn't answer, he is in default and at that time, the City can get a court order to demolish the building and assess this cost to the property owner. Mr. Miller said it was his intention to "fast track" this issue with the circuit court. If the COlillcil approves the action tonight, it will be filed on August 12. If the owner is out of town, the property will be posted and the owner can be served by publication. In terms of collecting the costs of abatement, Mr. Miller said the City can either impose a lien on the property and collect it as an assessment or by a personal judgment. The cost of a lien would be about $30,000, however, this decision will not have to be made at this time. Once the buildings are demolished, the property will become more saleable. Council member Larson inquired about the last communication with Mr. Anderson (the property owner). Ms. Walsh reported that she called and left a message but there was no response. Councilmember Larson also referred to the various vehicles on the property and asked if they would be removed in the process. Mr. Miller said that at this time the process deals only with the structure; removal of the cars will be done separately under another part of the City Code. Councilmember Larson asked about recovery of costs beyond demolition, such as attorney fees. Mr. Miller said the Statute was broad and allows recovery of other out-of-pocket costs so the . City can recover all reasonable costs in abating the condition. Councilmember Larson asked, given the past performance of the property owner, ifit can be assumed he will move to sell the property, and also, whether it is wise to carry the cost without knowing what his intentions are. Councilmember Larson asked what was involved in a personal judgment. Mr. Miller said that would allow the City to execute garnishment proceedings. In a personal judgment, it becomes a lien on the property so the property can't be sold without satisfying the judgment. But, the advantage of assessments is that Statute allows collection with the next installment of real estate taxes. Mr. Miller said he was not sure the property assets were liquid enough for a personal judgment but a credit check can be done. If the property owner chooses to answer, he will be allowed 20 days after service to comply. MOTION: Council member Aplikowski moved and Councilmember Keim seconded a motion to adopt Resolution #98-51 Authorizing the Commencement of Proceedings under Minnesota Statutes 9463.15, ET SEQ., Relative to 3171 and 3183 Lexington Avenue. The motion carried unanimously (4-0). 2. 1369 Forest Lane It was noted that Steve Nixon had a fire at his residence at 1369 Forest Lane on June 16, 1997. The Fire Marshall is investigating the possibility of arson as a cause for the fire. The City has . had numerous conversations with Mr. Nixon in an attempt to get the house rebuilt or demolished. On October 27, 1997 the City Council adopted Resolution #97 -53 authorizing the commencement of proceedings under Minnesota Statutes 463.15, ET SEQ. relative to 1369 Forest Lane.