2013_0311_packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

HRA Meeting Minutes – Tuesday, November 20, 2012 Page 9 Ms. Peilen thanked the HRA for this outreach to rental property owners, and advised that through the 1 association’s work with a number of c ities who didn’t attempt such communication efforts, she 2 reiterated her appreciation for Roseville in doing so. 3 4 Mr. Brohman 5 Mr. Brohman, if this is intended as an ongoing process, encouraged the HRA to have a roundtable 6 discussion with members of the Mult i -Family Housing Association and/or investment property owners 7 in the community for brainstorming opportunities and to save time. As a non -Roseville resident, Mr. 8 Brohman opined that the community had a number of good properties and owners in Roseville; a nd by 9 doing preliminary research and communication efforts it may serve to smooth things out overall and 10 moving forward. Mr. Brohman opined that a benefit to property owners directly related to local 11 government would be to minimize their risks. Mr. Brohma n opined that part of reducing that liability is 12 through the City providing a good fire and police service, one of their core responsibilities , and 13 allowing potential reductions in property and liability insurance by acknowledgement that they met City 14 stan dards, allowing all to reap benefits of any potential fees, should the City decide to move forward 15 with rental licensing . 16 17 Chair Maschka thanked everyone for their attendance, and expressed appreciation to those sharing their 18 comments; and encouraged other s to share their concerns and/or comments at any time. 19 20 12. Adjournment 21 The meeting was adjourned at approximately 7:00 p .m. 22 23 Next Regular Meeting: January 15, 2012, City Council Chambers at 6:00 p.m. 24 25 26 27 28 To: Roseville Housing & Redevelopment Authority 29 30 Mr. Maschka, members of the Authority: 31 32 I have just received notice of a meeting to “discuss licensing multi -family rental properties.” After enduring a 33 long season of political messages of how much and how often there is government intervention and rest riction on 34 all types of businesses in this free market system, and how such government actions add to business costs, 35 restrain businesses from expanding and prevent the creation of new jobs in a market that has substantially slowed 36 if not stopped, I am str enuously opposed to further intrusion of government in the free enterprise system. 37 38 I believe there is no need for licensing of multi -family properties for the purposes that are described on the 39 mailer. If there are certain building and safety standards t hat apply to rental properties, such should be posted in 40 each property and it then should be incumbent upon renters to see that they are met, and if not, to report such 41 occurrence to the proper authorities for correction. Government should not unnecessaril y intrude into private 42 properties to become the all -encompassing big daddy or watchdog for every human being within its jurisdiction. 43 That kind of action only induces the public to become ever more dependent upon the government and relieve 44 them of all resp onsibility for their own personal lives. Such action also creates an ever -larger government and 45 expense, which the taxpayers cannot further afford. As I am sure you are aware, such expenses can only be 46 passed on to those who can least afford it, the renter s of such properties. Rental properties try to provide 47 affordable living accommodations within a very competitive market, and further expense damages that effort. 48 49 This argument alone should convince you that government should not inject more unnecessary rules, regulations 50 and expenses on businesses and the public, which can little afford it. 51 52 If however, if it is determined that large multi -family properties are not conforming to existing building or safety 53 standards, then those are the ones that should be inspected, but only upon notification and request by renters. If 54