Ray Krueger turned to the 12 members of St. Paul’s Heritage Preservation Commission and told them he had once advocated for them, but he now feels treated like the bad guy.

“How many of you actually live in a historic home that you own?” said Krueger, owner of Krueger Painting, a handyman service. Four HPC members raised their hands to widespread gasps from the audience. “That explains quite a bit.”

More than 100 residents crammed into a basement hearing room at St. Paul City Hall to discuss proposed changes to the ordinance that created the commission, which oversees St. Paul’s nine historic districts. Over the course of some 90 minutes of testimony, not a single person said they supported those changes in full. Most residents were opposed to the possible $500 review fees and other new rules, and they called themselves victims of over-regulation, micromanagement and arbitrary decision-making.

Matt Layman recalled hiring an attorney and former commission member to help him navigate the process of rebuilding his Summit Avenue garage. Discussions with the commission still took three years, and the commission insisted he build with brick, even though his garage had none, he said. By the time he was done, he said, he was $80,000 over budget.

Several critics had even served on the commission. “I feel that people in the audience are your natural constituency,” said former HPC chair Charles Skrief, a previous director of the State Historic Preservation Office. “How is that we have reached this point where the people are angry at the commission? And what can we do to remedy that?”

REGULATING GARDENS?

Aaron Gjerde, president of the 45-year-old Ramsey Hill Association, said his neighborhood organization was instrumental in advocating for the creation of St. Paul’s first local historic district — the Historic Hill District — in the 1970s.

“Because our organization is so passionate about historic preservation, we would have hoped that someone would have reached out to review some of this stuff, instead of us reading about it through the newspaper,” Gjerde said in an interview.

He noted that in addition to pricey new review and appeal fees, vaguely worded standards would seem to give the commission power to mandate everyday maintenance, including regulating gardens and home interiors.

“There is no intent to expand our authority to interiors of your homes or your gardens,” said George Gause, a City Hall employee who oversees the commission’s staff, before the public testimony began. “We also don’t have the enabling legislation from the state to do that.”

Holly Avenue resident Steven Gordon later pointed out, however, that the new draft rules add authority over any “natural or landscape feature.”

“If you can show me how a garden is not a landscape feature, I would appreciate it,” Gordon said. “It may not be your intent to reach out to interiors and gardens, but I think you have, and that should not be the case.”

1,000 FLYERS, AND A SLOWDOWN

In advance of the public hearing, Gjerde printed out 1,000 flyers asking the city to put the process on hold. On Thursday, staffers agreed to at least slow it down.

Related Articles Trump won’t commit to peaceful transfer of power if he loses

Missouri governor, opponent of mandatory masks, has COVID-19

St. Paul City Council approves $600,000 charge for downtown improvement district

Mike Pence and Ivanka Trump bring law-and-order tour to Minneapolis

To mask or not to mask at MN polling places. Judge hears arguments. Gause acknowledged that outreach about the proposed ordinance amendments could have been more extensive, though he said his staff did contact the city’s district councils, as well as several city council members and historic preservation organizations.

Gause said as a result of the negative feedback, the commission would hold open houses to better educate the public about its proposals and create a committee to review the proposed fee structures. The first open house will be 11 a.m. to 1 p.m. June 5 at the City Hall Annex and will be mostly geared to residents and businesses from the Lowertown historic district.

A second session would focus heavily on “environmental assessment worksheets,” which are required of property owners in federal historic districts.

TECHNICAL OR FUNDAMENTAL CHANGES?

The city organized committees in 2003 and 2009 to propose updating the language in the HPC’s governing ordinance, but nothing came of it, in part because of heavy staff workloads. In an effort to play catch-up, commission staff have been busy since January crafting 17 pages of potential amendments.

In interviews, city council members and officials with St. Paul Mayor Melvin Carter’s office have said they’re still getting up to speed on the proposals. Some council members have said they’ve been told by HPC staff that the changes are mostly technical, such as clarifying that city permits cannot be issued until Heritage Preservation design review is completed.

Even some longstanding fans of the city’s nine historic preservation districts say otherwise. The latest revisions to the amendment proposals were updated online May 17.

Among their concerns, critics say the changes would:

Add $500 review fees for property owners who appear before the HPC, as well as $400 appeal fees. City staff say they need the new fees to cover the mounting costs of reviews, which is stretching manpower thin, and that only 8 percent of building permits in historic districts come before the full commission.

Mandate maintenance. Until now, most residents who appear before the HPC do so after pulling a building or demolition permit within a historic district. Under the proposed amendments, property owners would be required to maintain historic homes or face potential penalties. On Thursday, Gause said language about maintenance has since been removed from the draft in light of public criticism.

Create a new “de facto” historic district within Summit Hill. A portion of Summit Hill sits outside of a local historic district but within a federally designated historic area. Under the proposed amendments, the HPC would oversee environmental assessment worksheet reviews, or EAWs, within that area. Gause said the intent is to simplify the process for homeowners and is not a power grab. Several speakers pointed out, however, that residents in the area were unaware of the potential changes or its implications.

Expand HPC regulatory authority. Under Chapter 73 of city ordinances, heritage preservation sites are defined as any “areas, places, buildings, structures, lands, districts or other objects which have been duly designated heritage preservation sites.” The amendments would add “landscapes,” which critics point out could be interpreted to include driveways, walkways, lawns and gardens.

Create immediate building restrictions in areas that are being reviewed to become possible historic districts. The interim regulations would prevent speedy tear-downs and serve as a bridge until the city certifies the area as a historic district.

Related Articles Several hundred gather at Minnesota Capitol to protest Breonna Taylor developments

Metro Transit workers reject contract offer, vote to authorize strike

St. Paul man charged in connection with gang-related drive-by shooting

St. Paul City Council approves $600,000 charge for downtown improvement district

St. Paul schools superintendent gets high marks, but board wants progress on equity, enrollment, student achievement Several speakers said they were present at the creation of the historic districts in the 1970s and still believed in the intent, though not the execution. Gjerde, of the Ramsey Hill Association, said his nonprofit supports historic preservation, provided it’s done with the interests of everyday people in mind.

“I love the advisory part of it,” said Summit Hill resident Charles Stander, whose remarks were met by widespread clapping. “But somehow they got out of step, and it becomes an adversarial organization for our neighborhood.”