Marks May 9, 2009 12:45 p.m.
I, too, am aggravated by a new-minted landlord in the person
an African doctor--of what I am unaware. He's a clueless landlord
levels. He's from a culture so vastly different from ours,
different continent. Dollars to donuts, the city codes of the
city from whence
he came are nothing like what Minneapolis has chosen to enact.
He hired two men
and a chain saw to cut the shrubbery, etc. They accidentally
cut down one tree,
turned two others into something that looks like a Dr. Seuss
all the roses, cut branches off my trees before I finally got
through the noise
to shout stop. They, too were African. They did not seem to
know the difference
between the plants we keep and the plants we eliminate. Previous
already poured bleach on the bushes and killed them, killing
one of my bushes
in the process.
African doctor does not understand, or is not aware of the fact
there are now five guard dogs in his duplex and he does not
have an entirely
fenced yard. These are pit bull mix with the underslung jaws,
They scare the hell out of me and they are in my yard all
the time, claiming my
front and side yards as their territory, guarding it against
me. I asked the
guy next door to leash them and he told me that my landlord
had to fence the
yard. Apparently his plan is to deny all responsibility for
his dogs. Cute,
Graham May 9, 2009 4:30 p.m.
out in your yard and let the dogs bark at you, then immediately
call 911 and
report that there are killer, attack dogs loose in your
neighborhood and they
are threatening to you. Ask that a squad be dispatched
immediately as you are
handicapped and must get out of your house and cannot outrun the dogs.
Hopefully, the police will dispatch a squad who will also feel threatened
will then shoot the dogs. At the least they will dispatch Animal
you give the reports to Animal Control be ABSOLUTELY certain
that the dogs are threatening towards you, and you WANT the owner
That should end the problem. If the police will not do their
duty and remove
or shoot the threatening dogs then simply take some caster bean
seed, chop it
up a little fine (rubber gloves advised), put it in some hamburger
and put it
in the yard. Dogs eat the hamburger, dogs go to puppy heaven.
I honestly do
not know how you get the landlord to have a hamburger:-)
on a more serious note, if you call animal control each and every
with the same report of a threatening dog, and a loose dog, they
ticketing the owners. Very quickly your dog problem will go away.
if you can get the building owner to give you the name of his insurance
for the house (in case the dogs bite someone). Then call or write
insurance company and tell them the situation and inform them that
have contacted both the insured owner and them that you will be seeking
punitive penalties as well as compensation for the bite, if you or
is bitten. That should get his insurance company's attention.
is the reason I have been seeking to have the "Disorderly
legislation changed to include landlords who control housing
or a building
where gang members live or who control a building whose occupants "Continually
and habitually disturb the peace and well-being of a neighborhood
Linda Higgins, Linda Berglin, Karen Clark and a few others who
impacted neighborhoods" represent us perhaps they can be urged to
legislation through. It just returns to what the legislation was
a few years
ago. I had hoped it would be passed this year. Unfortunately, the
a few other things over at the capital have distracted them from
needed legislation this year. Someone allowing their tenants to
dogs threaten neighbors I think of as "Controlling a Disorderly
Another BTW: Drug Dealers and prostitutes are again coming into
neighborhood. Just this morning we had to chase three off of my
were transacting a deal with money and dope changing hands when
yelling at them. Called 911 also, and I started out by saying I
had a drug deal
going down at my address. The 911 operator said just a minute and
put me on
hold where someone rattled at me in Spanish and then hung up. Sorry,
but if I
call 911, I ABSOLUTELY do NOT want to be hung up on. Either there
was so much
crime going on at 9:00 AM to not wait to hear that I was going
to go out and
stop the crime or they really need to train those operators better.
those drug dealing scum had objected to being chased and pulled
a weapon of
some kind. Someone might well have been shot!
McGaughey May 12, 2009 1:06 p.m.
has sprung and some of the old political canards are back. I
have to respond to some of the remarks made by Jim Graham about
fabricating or exaggerating complaints about dogs to put a
the owner and also a proposal for “Disorderly House” legislation,
again targeting the owner or manager. Due to technical problems,
response comes somewhat late in the thread.
first became aware of Mr. Graham back in 1997 when he ran for
Minneapolis City Council in the 6th ward. Minneapolis Property
Action Committee, a landlord group to which I belonged,
established a political committee whose members were, however,
loosely related to our organization. But we raised several
dollars to support “friendly” candidates. Graham, who
was a landlord, wound up receiving a large portion of that money
thanks to a committee member who was excited about his candidacy
although not everyone agreed with the decision.
message advances the general theme that the community
ought to try to punish the owner of dogs or rental properties
someone else - a dog or “gang members” - has caused
there is a responsibility here but not to the degree
suggests. The person most responsible for the gang member’s
is the gang member himself. If someone else is also at fault,
say it is the gang member’s parents or parent. But I
think we all
recognize that in this day and age, parents have a hard
controlling their children’s behavior.
landlord could be blamed, at least in part, if he knowingly admitted
a gang member to be a tenant in a building or if he had
information to have known not to admit the person as
a tenant. In the
real world, that seldom happens. And if Graham has
he would know this.
landlords are blamed for criminal activities of tenants on the
basis of having failed to screen their applicants
properly. I would
therefore ask Jim Graham if he would disclose the
that should be used to keep gang members out of rental
What steps has he taken, for instance?
would also point out that we are not living in a perfect world
mistakes can always be prevented. That being the
case, the judgmental
attitude directed against someone other than the
perpetrator of a
misdeed is not appropriate.
do recall a television-news report several years ago that a small
child, perhaps a toddler, fell out of an upper-storey
window of an
apartment building which Jim Graham managed.
I do not recall the
extent of the injuries. Most people would consider
that someone who
manages a building would have a supervisory responsibility
maintaining safe conditions in the building,
especially with small
children living there, although, admittedly,
one cannot anticipate or
prevent every bad situation. However, that responsibility
landlord’s responsibility for policing tenants’ personal
the landlord, the police, and other interested parties should
work together on problems relating to gangs.
Graham’s finger-pointing approach is unhelpful.
Sullivan May 12, 2009 3:27 p.m.
McGaughey would rather make a personal attack, it seems,
than accept that landlords have any responsibility
for the way his or
her tenants control, their dogs, or not.
had a yellow lab for years a while back. Two houses down, the
renter had a large, aggressove female
dog that he would often tie up
to the front railing. When she was
thus outside, the dog would try to
attack any dog who went by, and one
day broke away and attacked my
dog and me as we were approaching our
house after a long walk. The
dog had decided that the whole street
was hers to defend. I was
complained to the landlord. Landlord told his renter what to
Next day the dog had been shipped
off to a relative's farm. End of
landlord, of course, lived on my block, and was not "absentee,"
but a friend. I'll bet the owner
of the house where the pit bull
lives resides in a suburb some
place, and couldn't care less what
happens in south Minneapolis. If
he/she did care, they'd take action
against the renters of that house
with the scary pitbull.
McGaughey May 12, 2009
what Connie Sullivan’s
pit bull story has to do with
posting or what relevance
of absentee landlords is
Sullivan’s own stereotypes.
Graham May 12, 2009 10:26
Mr. McGaughey has done
who points out that there might be a problem
with a slum
with outright lies
take Bill's one at a time.
Landlords ARE responsible for dangerous animals
they allow to
and attack or threaten
aware of this situation.
Mr. McGaughey is simply lying
about my receiving "Thousands
of dollars" from
group, or who
the money. Only
came from that
Mr. Frank Trisko,
NO other members.
So where ever
friends did with
money I have
The Land Lord I referred to
to the "13" gang
did know what
she was doing.
but she ignored
glad that she
was stuck with
the loss. She
AND YES, Mr.
he or she owns
they do not
smacks of the
Slum Land lords
When a child fell from a
that I had helped
help of Senator
to help create
law is called "Laela's Law" for
the little girl who
be very proud
was not my
to do something
law had even
to put those
While having ANYTHING
Bill's group (I
to do so
for a Landlord's
was a good
me to my
where Bill's "thousands
of dollars" went.
do NOT allow
legitimate "Rental Property Providers".
Such Slumlords hurt our
McGaughey May 13, 2009 1:15 p.m.
me focus on the factual portion of Jim Graham’s argument
I did not say Graham received “thousands of
landlords’ political group. I said we had raised thousands of
and Graham had received “a large portion” of this - it
was well in
excess of $1,000 as I recall. It was from our political committee
rather from the group itself. A former Minneapolis City Council
member, now deceased, was instrumental in the donation. Does this
ring a bell? Also, in my posting I did not accuse anyone of
stealing” the money. It came from the committee.
my knowledge of the accident involving the child comes from a
television news report which I watched several years ago. I have
distinct recollection of Jim Graham being interviewed as a spokesman
for the property management. I don’t know what the organizational
responsibilities were - whether Graham was officially the manager,
some other position with the firm managing the building, or had
in the building’s construction.
I am not making this up. Graham himself was on camera in the role
of speaking on behalf of the property management. I assumed it
significant role if he was the one picked for the television
interview. I don’t know if Graham is now denying that he had
significant role connected to the building or if he believes
subsequent lobbying efforts absolve him of any responsibility
am not in favor of “allowing” drug
dealers to live in rental
properties. My posting said that in the real world it is sometimes
difficult to prevent unsavory characters from getting into
Graham writes that he owns rental property and doesn’t allow
dealers or criminals to live in his units. That’s easy to say.
asked Graham in my posting to identify the screening steps that
takes to make sure that gang members are not admitted to
properties. Graham simply ducked that question. So I ask
What screening techniques should be used to keep gang members
rental properties? What steps has Graham taken, for instance?
Graham accuses me of telling “outright lies” in my
putting out the falsehoods”, or continuing with “false
that I “know to be false”. This is not true. If Graham
that his 1997 campaign got more than $100 from the landlord
committee, I believe I can find a living witness to confirm
got more. Whether or not Graham had a management role
in the building
where the toddler fell out of the window is best known
himself. I am telling what I recall appeared in the television
report. This is not a lie.
you have retained my posting from yesterday (May 12) at 1:09 p.m.
under “Rites of Spring”, you can see for yourself that
assertion that I claimed his campaign had received “thousands
dollars” is itself false. No, Graham did not receive the full
of the money raised but he did receive in excess of
$1000. Also, I
did not say that anyone “stole” money from the committee.
I said some
people disagreed with the decision to give money to
campaign. So Graham appears to be making this up as
do not take kindly to being called a liar repeatedly. Get your
together, Graham. Be careful of your own accusations.
main point of my posting, still unaddressed, is that it is
unhelpful to point the finger of blame at occupational
or other groups
for situations that are largely beyond their control.
Crime is a
difficult situation whose solution will require
people of good will rather than assignment of blame
the frequent use of group epithets such as “slumlord” or “slum
landlord” may win you points in certain circles but it denotes
rather low level of political thinking.
Kahn May 13, 2009 2:06 p.m.
living or dead, are not necessary as Hennepin County
maintains campaign finance records; if
they are from 2002 to the
present, you may access them online.
Jim Graham's 1997 campaign, one would have to visit Downtown and
go to the records department of the Hennepin
County Government Center,
but you can go to http://www.hennepin.us
find the "your county
government" link at the top right, click it and find the "campaign
finance" link on the right of the next
page to get where you need to
be to look up more recent records like
guess that Jim is as sensitive about the window issue or more so
than Bill McGaughey is about folks describing
him and other landlords
as "slumlords." From his posts
over the years, the screen safety issue
is important to Jim, and as is traditional
in the history of our city,
it is often tragedy that leads to greater
safety and welfare of our
citizens of all ages through the actions
of citizens and government in
this sort of exchange is another "Rite of
Tim Bonham May 13, 2009 4:56 p.m.
"First, I did not say Graham received “thousands of dollars” from
landlords’ political group. I said we had raised thousands of dollars
Graham had received “a large portion” of this - it was well in
excess of $1,000
as I recall. It was from our political committee rather from the group itself."
how did your committee get away with violating the Campaign Finance laws
like that? The contribution limit for City Council seats is $500 ($100
non-election years). Or did you have individual landlords write checks
give the bunch of them to him? That's called 'bundling' and is also a
violation of the law.
McGaughey May 13, 2009 6:51 p.m.
It’s a good question whether the political committee
law in 1997 by giving more than $1,000 to the Graham campaign.
not have an answer. The person who gave the money away is
available for questioning.
Graham May 13, 2009 10:55 p.m.
you Bill for your suggestion. I do hope people will look.
thank you John Ferman. I considered your suggestion about
the undies, and
decided you might be correct. So I went in and changed
to some loose boxers,
and suddenly decided to thank Bill Kahn rather than
continue the argument with
the other Bill. Ah yes, loose undies and a cool breeze does reduce
the heat of
thank you Alberto, for your off list post that added perspective.
McGaughey May 14, 2009 2:22 p.m.
further discussion, this will be my last post regarding Jim
Graham’s 1997 campaign for city council and related matters.
Kahn has given helpful links to financing of more recent
campaigns in Hennepin County but the online records do not
go back to
1997. A further complication, brought to light in this
that contributions of $500 or more to city council campaigns
single donor are illegal. It may be that this legal provision was
added after 1997. I don’t know. However, if it did apply then,
would be a question about how a campaign donation of $1,000 or
would have been handled by the Graham campaign.
did check with Charlie Disney yesterday. He was the head of
landlord group in 1997, though not of the political committee that
handled the donations. His recollection was that the Graham campaign
received by far the largest share of the money raised - 80% of
money was his guess - although he had only a vague recollection
actual sum. I remember it being a bit in excess of $1000. About
$2,400 in total was raised for the committee. But this happened
said that he had discussed the matter with Graham on at least
one occasion and that he himself had donated $50 to the Graham
campaign apart from what the political committee had given. Disney’s
beef was that he thought more of the committee’s money should
gone to Barbara Carlson who was running for mayor that year.
topic may be of interest mainly to me because my assertion that
the Graham campaign had received a large campaign donation
landlords was termed “simply lying”. I wish to set the
straight on that point and then, hopefully, leave the subject.