2013-04-16_HRA_Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

HRA Meeting Minutes Tuesday, April 16, 2013 Page 7 1 that year, and possibly the next year, becoming very problematic. Mr. Kelly expressed his 2 astonishment with the proposed expense, opining that in their dealings with 12-13 different 3 municipalities, they 4 City of Brooklyn Center as a benchmark, rather than cities such as New Hope or Bloomington, 5 that he further opined were far more representative of Roseville. 6 7 Mr. Kelly expressed his support for the tiered approach, and guaranteed that their properties 8 would be classified as type A properties. However, Mr. Kelly expressed his fear that different 9 third-party inspectors would have different interpretations with the same checklist and each has 10 different interpretations. Mr. Kelly anticipated that this would cause some buildings to be 11 12 themselves in Class A based on those interpretations based on the inspector. Mr. Kelly opined 13 that he was dubious that the City would get a level of consistency among those inspectors. 14 Since staff and the HRA had mentioned that they were simply trying to address several 15 problematic properties, Mr. Kelly questioned why it would be necessary to then apply this 16 process to everyone, and asked that they consider the burden this would place on apartment 17 communities. Mr. Kelly further opined that the proposal frightened him; and noted his 18 difficulties in printing out Section 906 online for a more detailed review. 19 20 Mr. Kelly recognized that the City has a stake and desire to ensure the quality of its rental 21 housing stock, he cautioned that, while not the intent, the City would ultimately sock those 22 good properties with additional expense to address a few problem properties. Mr. Kelly 23 opined that the cost of the initial fees were outrageous. Mr. Kelly noted that their firm was 24 doing its best and wanted to do so in this market and provide a good product, not because the 25 City wanted it to do so, but because it was how they succeeded in business. Mr. Kelly spoke 26 in support of the City coming down hard on problem properties, but not everyone else as an 27 unintended consequence. 28 29 In recognizing that the HRA was struggling with how to structure this program, Chair 30 Maschka questioned how Mr. Kelly would address the 10-20% problem properties while 31 meeting equal protection law requirements. 32 33 Mr. Kelly advise that his firm had no problem with the tiered proposal, but noted that their 34 property, as well as others, would require significant additional overhead for them to manage 35 it, suggesting that the proposed re-inspection fees were out of balance and the HRA needed to 36 find a way to identify the problem properties while not forcing the fee on those properties 37 already doing a good job. Mr. Kelly had no ready response for Chair Maschka on how to 38 39 all the time with other municipalities, and understood that the issue was one that every 40 municipality struggled with. However, Mr. Kelly opined that the cost borne by those trying to 41 do a good job seemed excessive to him. Mr. Kelly further opined that the Brooklyn Center was 42 not the only one, even though they liked the tiered part to recognize those properties doing a 43 good job or trying versus those ignorin 44 the annual inspection fees as a good incentive. 45 46 Chair Maschka noted that Mr. Kelly supported tiers, but questioned how he would address and 47 fund a reasonable initial inspection fee. 48 49 Mr. Kelly responded that there was no need for 100% inspections. 50 51 At the request of Member Masche, Mr. Kelly provided the median rent at Palisades for 1-2 52 bedroom apartments at $800 and over $1,000 respectively, which he thought was comparable 53 with other complexes of the 1971 vintage such as the Palisades complex. Mr. Kelly reviewed 54 some of the other recent costs, including updating elevators. At the request of Member 55 Masche, Mr. Kelly also addressed their occupancy rate at approximately less than 3.5%