Correspondence - 2254 Lilac Road - 2/4/2022i
II Offices in 150 South Fifth Street, Suite 700
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Minneapolis (612) 337-9300 telephone
Saint Paul (612) 337-9310 fax
Graven www.kennedy-graven.com
C H A R T E R E D
$t. Cloud Affirmative Action, Equal Opportunity Employer
JOSHUA P. DEVANEY
Attorney at Law
Direct Dial: (612) 337-9285
Email: jdevaney@kennedy-graven.com
February 4, 2022
Mr. Thomas Mason
Ms. Jolene Mason
2254 Lilac Road
Spring Park, MN 55384
Re: City of Spring Park v. Thomas Mason and Jolene Mason
Court File No.: 27-CV-20-360
Dear Mr. Mason and Mrs. Mason:
As noted in my letter dated November 13, 2020, the Court entered an Order (attached) requiring
you to bring your property into compliance with the Spring Park City Code by December 11, 2020.
It is now February 3, 2022, and your property remains out of compliance. The City has been
attempting to gain your voluntary compliance with the Order, however, failing your compliance,
the Order authorizes the City to hire contractors to perform all necessary abatement work to
remove Code violations on your property, and has granted the City and those contractors the right
to enter your property for that purpose. As the date set forth in the Order for voluntary compliance
has passed, the City has the right to have the work done by contractors and assess the cost of the
same against your property.
This letter serves as final notice that the City intends to hire contractors to perform the abatement
work on Friday, February 11, 2022, as authorized by the Court if the property is not brought into
full compliance with the City Code as of that date. If you fail to voluntarily address the issues on
your property and then interfere with the City's contractors' attempts to do the same, the City will
pursue an Order for Contempt of Court for your violation of the Court Order and seek all available
remedies, up to and including a warrant for your arrest. Please also note that the Court Order
prohibits you from using or maintaining your property in the future in a manner inconsistent with
the City Code. Should you allow your property to return to a state that violates the City Code after
it has been remedied, the City will similarly seek to enforce the Court Order through Contempt of
Court proceedings.
Finally, you may retrieve your van from Williams Towing by providing them with payment for
the towing and storage costs. Please note, however, that the release of your van from impound
does not except it from the provisions of the Spring Park City Code. If the van is returned to your
property and found to be in violation of the City Code, the City will proceed as specified above.
Sincerely,
�Od,'C4'a P.. 9&V^*Ve�,
Joshua P. Devaney 0
JPD:r o
Enclosure
27-CV-20-360 Filed in District Court
State of Minnesota
11/12/2020 12:32 PM
STATE OF MINNESOTA DISTRICT COURT
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
Court File No. 27-CV-20-360
City of Spring Park, Case Type: Other Civil
Plaintiff,
VS.
ORDER GRANTING
SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Thomas Mason and Jolene Mason,
Defendant.
This matter came on for hearing before the Honorable Bridget A. Sullivan, on November
9, 2020, on a motion by Plaintiff City of Spring Park (the "City") for summary judgment.
Mary D. Tietjen appeared on behalf of Plaintiff. Thomas and Jolene Mason made no
appearance at the time of the heairng. Based on the pleadings, exhibits, memoranda
submitted in connection with the motion, and oral arguments of the parties, the Court makes the
following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The City is a municipal corporation under the laws of the State of Minnesota located
in Hennepin County, Minnesota.
2. Defendants Thomas Mason and Jolene Mason are the record fee owners of the real
property located at 2254 Lilac Road, Spring Park, Minnesota ("Subject Property") and legally
described as follows:
Lot 13, Subdivision of Lot 12, Skarp and Lindquist's Hazeldell Addition to
Minnetonka, according to the recorded plat thereof on file or of record in the office
of the County Recorder, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
27-CV-20-360
Filed in District Court
State of Minnesota
11/12/2020 12:32 PM
Code.
3. Planning and zoning controls for the Subject Property are governed by the City
4. The Subject Property is zoned "R-l" Single and Two Family Residential District.
5. Observations of the Subject Property have identified numerous prohibited
conditions on the Subject Property in violation of the City Code. Such code violations include: 1)
excessive recreational vehicles and/or trailers stored on the property; 2) derelict vehicles stored on
the property; 3) the storage of items on the adjacent City owned lot or within the street or lot line
setback; and 4) a hoop house on the property that does not meet the City requirements for an
allowed accessory structure.
6. Defendants Thomas Mason and Jolene Mason have been notified of the foregoing
prohibited conditions and violations of the City Code on numerous occasions but they have failed
to eradicate the violations as identified by the City.
7. There is no evidence that the City has committed any wrongful acts in connection
with its enforcement of its City Code.
8. Defendants have continually failed to abate the nuisances and violations that exist
on the Subject Property.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
9. The City has properly brought this motion for summary judgment before this Court
with due notice and the opportunity to respond provided to Defendants.
10. The Court has jurisdiction to grant the relief requested by the City.
11. The zoning violations and nuisance conditions that Defendants maintain on the
Subject Property violate the express and unambiguous provisions of the Spring Park City Code.
12. The City has not waived its right to enforce its Zoning Ordinance on the Subject
Property nor is the City estopped from enforcing its Zoning Ordinance on the Subject Property.
27-CV-20-360
Filed in District Court
State of Minnesota
11/12/2020 12:32 PM
13. Ongoing violations of the Spring Park City Code by Defendants' wrongful use of
the Subject Property and conditions thereon results in irreparable harm to the City which is most
effectively remedied by a permanent injunction.
ORDER FOR JUDGMENT
Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, IT IS HEREBY
ORDERED THAT:
a. The City's Motion for Summary Judgment is granted in its entirety.
b. The zoning violations and nuisance conditions that Defendants maintain on the
Subject Property violate the express and unambiguous provisions of the Spring
Park City Code.
C. Defendants must comply with all applicable provisions of the Spring Park City
Code and abate all nuisance conditions on the Subject Property within 60 days from
the date of this Order.
d. If Defendants fail to abate the nuisance conditions on the Subject Property within
60 days from the date of this Order, the City, or its hired contractors, shall have
authority to enter the property, perform the abatement work, and assess its costs
against the Subject Property.
C. Defendants are hereby permanently enjoined from using or maintaining the Subject
Property in a manner that violates the Spring Park City Code.
f. The City is awarded its costs and disbursements associated with this action.
LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY
Dated: Nov. 12, 2020 BY THE COURT:
Bridget A. Sullivan
Judge of District Court