7/16/02

Korrine Land
Levander Law Firm
Attorney for the City of West St. Paul

RE: Attached demand and notice regarding yard and gardening equipment, garden statuary and recently acquired business furniture, and other similar items.

Dear Ms. Larson:
Please take notice that there is no law against having any of the items, many of which were acquired within one week of today’s date on my property, and none of these items are junk, i.e.:
•old filing cabinet: a item recently obtained (7/14/02) for business and in process of being moved into home studio. Replacement value $565.00
•cart/trolley - regularly used to move heavy items for landscaping and moving items in and out of home. Replacement value $165.00. I have a right to use tools such as the cart in my yard, consistent with my rights to quiet use and enjoyment of my property, supported by the balance of tort law, without interference and abuse from Mr. Fackler on behalf of the city.
•leaves - ? not there
•broken pots - (number: 1) either to be used for gardening and in process of being repaired - $115.00
•hobby horse - garden statuary art which will not be removed from yard and which has a replacement value of $2500.00
• wooden box - squirrel feeder. Replacement value $165.00.
• Other items - ? no other items known of
Please be advised that any statuary, art or other items removed will be charged to the city inclusive costs for my time to effect replacement, that I would otherwise have available for my business, OpusArts LLC,.
Issuance of the attached notice action is self evidently retaliatory abuse of power and harassment by the city, motivated by long-standing abusive and dehumanizing attitudes, resulting in behavior in the same ilk, towards me personally. The attitudes and behavior are motivated on the city’s part because I know of felony criminal conduct engaged in by city officials and employees for whom the city is liable. The city have ongoing guilt, and fear of being penalized by the law, regarding City involvement in my mother’s murder; see: www.MurderbyDiabetes.org. There is a willful intent to inflict emotional harm and discriminate against myself on the basis of age, disability and income, and waste my time and thereby harm me professionally.
This action is also a criminal offense, abuse of authority, see Minnesota Statutes:
609.43 Misconduct of public officer or employee.
A public officer or employee who does any of the following,
for which no other sentence is specifically provided by law, may
be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than one year or to
payment of a fine of not more than $3,000, or both:
(1) Intentionally fails or refuses to perform a known
mandatory, nondiscretionary, ministerial duty of the office or
employment within the time or in the manner required by law; or
(2) In the capacity of such officer or employee, does an
act knowing it is in excess of lawful authority or knowing it is
forbidden by law to be done in that capacity; or
(3) Under pretense or color of official authority
intentionally and unlawfully injures another in the other's
person, property, or rights; or
(4) In the capacity of such officer or employee, makes a
return, certificate, official report, or other like document
having knowledge it is false in any material respect.
Mr. Fackler engaged in threatening and abusive conduct, directed at me personally, as a single woman, a senior citizen with a disability. While he was present on my property. In future I require written notice that any person from the city is intending to come to my property and engage himself or herself with me so that I] can arrange to have disability advocate present, additional to taping the conversation. I recorded most of the “conversation” by Mr. Fackler, as I am technically more aware than many residents and have facilities to do so.
The powers to enforce legitimate laws and effect emergency abatements does not allow or extend right to public officers and employees to: engage in theft, abuse of citizen, or infringement on rights to legitimate use of property.
I have a beautiful garden, comparable to other similar gardens in West St. Paul, all being photographed.
In the event that notification that you intend to remedy this harassment is not received by Friday this week, a federal tort law suit against all parties personally and the city will be filed. Criminal charges pursuant to: 609.43 Misconduct of public officer or employee will also be filed with the appropriate authorities, in the event that the criminal conduct is not abated from the current continuing condition and withdrawn. Obviously West St. Paul will be liable for the replacement values inclusive of all costs in effecting replacement, for any items or plants/shrubs or trees removed from my garden, and such removal is felony theft.
This issue and copies of all communications in this respect, and photographs of my yard, are being place online at the Disability Advocate web site, see a link from www.DDAweb.org; so that all members of the public can evaluate these matters,
You will recall that this is not the first of abusive conduct toward me by the city of West St. Paul.
Cordially,

M J Duchene BFA

7/16/02

Korrine Larson
Levander, Gilliland and Anderson
Attorney for the City of West St. Paul

RE: Attached demand and Notice regarding trees, vines and raspberry bushes

Dear Ms. Larson:
Please take notice that there is no law against having growing trees, There is a only law prohibiting weeds. Vines and raspberry bushes on the rear of my property, immediately adjacent to the alley. There are no weeds .
vines and raspberry bushes are planted there to prevent weeds from taking hold and to beautify the premises. There are also small trees growing in the southeast section of the property which I want for shade trees, as I just lost one of my trees. If there is some aesthetic objection by anyone to this landscaping solution, that is too bad, because there are no laws which allow infliction of landscaping esthetics by one party on another. Mr. Fackler made allegations that the city has rights to pick and choose which non weed plants are planted adjacent to alleys, to prevent weeds, and that these must be paid for by the homeowner. There is no city ordnance, known of by me, that gives this discretion to the city and makes such demands on the homeowner. Please send me a copy of any such ordinance. replacement value of the Raspberry bushes and vines is in excess of $1000.00.
In the northeast section of the property adjacent to the alley, a Diseased elm tree, on City Property, removed by the city’s contractor three years ago, at the city’s cost, is sprouting because the contractor did not properly grind out the stump. In the event that the city finds the results of this contractors negligence displeasing, the city will have to make a formal demand of this contractor that he return and complete the grinding out of the stump so other plants can be planted to replace this growth. I demand that a copy of this demand be sent to me. In the event it is not done I will file a lawsuit for negligence against the contractor and the city. Please note that I planted many costly plants such as day lilies in this area after the tree was removed, and these plants have been destroyed because of this negligence, replacement value of these plants is in excess of $1000.00. I reserve rights to make legal claims for compensation from the contractor and the city.
Please be advised that any statuary, art or other items removed from my garden and yard at 1144 Ottawa Avenue will be charged to the city inclusive costs for my time to effect replacement, that I would otherwise have available for my business, OpusArts LLC,.
Issuance of the attached notice action is self evidently retaliatory abuse of power and harassment by the city, motivated by long-standing abusive and dehumanizing attitudes, resulting in behavior in the same ilk, towards me personally. The attitudes and behavior are motivated on the city’s part because I know of felony criminal conduct engaged in by city officials and employees for whom the city is liable. The city have ongoing guilt, and fear of being penalized by the law, regarding City involvement in my mother’s murder; see: www.MurderbyDiabetes.org. There is a willful intent to inflict emotional harm and discriminate against myself on the basis of age, disability and income, and waste my time and thereby harm me professionally.
This action is also a criminal offense, abuse of authority, see Minnesota Statutes:
609.43 Misconduct of public officer or employee.
A public officer or employee who does any of the following,
for which no other sentence is specifically provided by law, may
be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than one year or to
payment of a fine of not more than $3,000, or both:
(1) Intentionally fails or refuses to perform a known
mandatory, nondiscretionary, ministerial duty of the office or
employment within the time or in the manner required by law; or
(2) In the capacity of such officer or employee, does an
act knowing it is in excess of lawful authority or knowing it is
forbidden by law to be done in that capacity; or
(3) Under pretense or color of official authority
intentionally and unlawfully injures another in the other's
person, property, or rights; or
(4) In the capacity of such officer or employee, makes a
return, certificate, official report, or other like document
having knowledge it is false in any material respect.
Mr. Fackler engaged in threatening and abusive conduct, directed at me personally, as a single woman, a senior citizen with a disability. while he was present on my property. In future I require written notice that any person from the city is intending to come to my property and engage himself or herself with me so that I] can arrange to have disability advocate present, additional to taping the conversation. I recorded most of the “conversation” by Mr. Fackler, as I am technically more aware than many residents and have facilities to do so.
The powers to enforce legitimate laws and effect emergency abatements does not allow or extend right to public officers and employees to: engage in theft, abuse of citizen, or infringement on rights to legitimate use of property.
I have a beautiful garden, comparable to other similar gardens in West St. Paul, all being photographed.
In the event that notification that you intend to remedy this harassment is not received by Friday this week, a federal tort law suit against all parties personally and the city will be filed. Criminal charges pursuant to: 609.43 Misconduct of public officer or employee will also be filed with the appropriate authorities, in the event that the criminal conduct is not abated from the current continuing condition and withdrawn. Obviously West St. Paul will be liable for the replacement values inclusive of all costs in effecting replacement, for any items or plants/shrubs or trees removed from my garden, and such removal is felony theft.
This issue and copies of all communications in this respect, and photographs of my yard, are being place online at the Disability Advocate web site, see a link from www.DDAweb.org; so that all members of the public can evaluate these matters,
You will recall that this is not the first of abusive conduct toward me by the city of West St. Paul.
Cordially,

M J Duchene BFA

7/18/02

Korrine Larson
Levander, Gilliland and Anderson
Attorney for the City of West St. Paul

RE: Attached demand and Notice regarding trees, vines and raspberry bushes and your offer for an “appeal” through the executive branch, the WSP City Council.

Dear Ms. Larson:
You are fully aware that there is no law, ordinance, statute or code prohibiting vines, small trees, tree sprouts or raspberries, and that the WSP “code enforcers” cannot enforce does that don’t exist. Presumably you have advised relevant city officials of this fact.
Attempts to effect enforcement of nonexistent codes, under threat of abatement, without due process of law; to engage in activity attempting to inflict personal opinions or views that have no force of law on another; or to engage in theft under color of law are within the following definitions, and obviously so:
• In the capacity of such officer or employee, does an
act knowing it is in excess of lawful authority or knowing it is
forbidden by law to be done in that capacity
• In the capacity of such officer or employee, makes a
return, certificate, official report, or other like document
having knowledge it is false in any material respect
• Under pretense or color of official authority
intentionally and unlawfully injures another in the other's
person, property, or rights
On a without prejudice basis, I accept you offer for an “appeal” - although this is not a lawful appeals process, so you cannot claim any failure on my part, I do not agree to or acknowledge that the City council has the jurisdiction of to adjudicate laws that do not exist, or hear an appeal regarding laws that do not exist.
A criminal complaint will be filed for abuse of authority regarding the above referred matter, by the code officer and city official and employees aiding and abetting after the fact, at noon tomorrow absent your, and the city of West St. Paul’s abutment of this specific criminal conduct. In other words cease and desist. The federal summons and complaint will also proceed tomorrow absent notification that you have agreed to cease and desist.
Please take notice that after noon tomorrow, the value of my time at an hourly rate will be claimed as damaged for ongoing harassment and criminal conduct by all parties in this matter, regarding the above referred matter. I am extremely busy developing my business, OpusArts LLC., and my time has a market rate/value of in excess of $100.00 per hour.

Cordially,

M J Duchene BFA

To: West St. Paul City Council, Mayor, Building Inspector, Community Development and Attorney
Appeal to the Housing Review Board - Notice/“APPEAL”; Ord. 425.25

7/23/02

WITHOUT PREJUDICE

RE: Demand and notice regarding yard and gardening equipment, garden statuary and recently acquired business furniture, and other similar items; and separate notice regarding vines and trees.

Photographs, evidence and and References at:
https://www.angelfire.com/mn3/abuseofpower/index.html

1. Regarding the issue of trees and vines behind Ottawa Avenue on alley Boulevard:
There is no prohibition, federal or state law, state statute, or city ordinance against having the plants that exist behind 1144 Ottawa Avenue, see website for pictures nos. 14, 15 and 16. These plants are common in other alley boulevard planting on the 11 block of Smith and Ottawa and else where in the city, see website for pictures nos. 17, 18 and 19.

City Ordinance decrees that the City is responsible for the costs in removing and replacing plantings:
820.07. Removal of Boulevard Trees.
Subd. 1. City Removal. The City will remove trees that are determined by the Public Works Director to be diseased, dangerous or a public nuisance according to the following rules:
a. Removal of trees will not leave the stump above boulevard level.
b. Removal of any tree is to be approved by the Public Works Director before removal.
c. When the City removes trees in connection with public improvements, new trees may be planted if the City determines it is practical.
Subd. 2. Resident Requests. The owner of property abutting a boulevard may request the removal of a boulevard tree. If deemed necessary by the Public Works Director, the tree will be removed by the City at no cost to the property owner.

The compliance notice issued by Mr. Fackler on 7/15/02 clearly constituted issuance of a false complaint and cause of action.

2. Regarding the issue of alleged junk or offensive items.
There is no prohibition, federal or state law, state statute, or city ordinance against:
• having and using the items in the notice issued by Mr. Fackler, inclusive carts and dollys used for moving items in and out of the home, or serviceable items being brought into the home.
• keeping garden art and sculpture on a property, see pictures nos.: 47, 48., 49, 7 and 8; and federal specifically prevents arbitrary censorship of such art because it violated rights inclusive of first amendment rights. Garden art, in keeping with other modern art, often involves use of various ordinary materials, junk, for creation: see photos nos. 34, 35 and 36.
• keeping garden equipment and supplies on a property, see pictures nos.: 50, 51, 9. and 10.
The city ordinance pertaining to junk defines it to be:
The purpose of this Section is to declare the unsheltered storage of inoperable, abandoned or junked automobiles and any other vehicles, machinery, implements, equipment, junk or personal property of any kind which is no longer used for the purposes for which it was manufactured or made to be a danger to the public health and safety

Please Consider:
1) It is official harassment and abuse of power to endeavor to interfere with normal business and personal activity of the undersigned by coming onto the property of the undersigned and issuing complaints while the undersigned is in the reasonable and timely process of moving office or art equipment to or from the premises at 1144 Ottawa, or when remodeling of the property is being done. Regarding the latter, the city has in the past done such activity to a legally unsuccessful result.
2) It is discrimination on the basis of disability, and sex, to endeavor to prohibit use of equipment used to facilitate transport of items in and out of the property see photos nos. 10, 11, 12 and 13, which a non disabled person, or a man, might easily carry without use of such devices.
3) It is refusal to accommodate the disability of the undersigned for city employs to refrain from engaging personally with the undersigned, who suffers from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder because of past misconduct by city and county employees: in conduct designed to abuse and re-traumatize the undersigned.
4) The city have no authority to harass the undersigned during garden work or prevent the scheduling and effecting of normal garden work, unless there is a severe and persistent degeneration of real property which does not apply regarding the undersigned: see pictures nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 20 through 46.

It is obvious and therefore reasonable to believe that Mr. Fackler knew he was issuing a false complaint and abusing his power and authority under color of law.

Mary Jane Duchene
Disabled Homeowner, 1144 Ottawa Avenue