2013-05-21_HRA_Agenda_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

HRA Meeting Minutes Tuesday, April 16, 2013 Page 6 1 At the request of Member Willmus, Mr. Trudgeon confirmed that there would be an appeal 2 process built into the ordinance for the benefit of property owners, similar to that currently 3 used in the NEP. 4 5 At the request of Member Willmus, Mr. Trudgeon anticipated some information, similar to that 6 presented to the HRA tonight, to be available for discussion and initial feedback from the City 7 Council in the near future; potential work on language by staff in May/June of 2013, then 8 coming back to the HRA and City Council for additional feedback; followed by public 9 hearings. 10 11 Ms. Kelsey advised that, staff hoped to begin inspections in the fall of 2013 to initially develop 12 grades, and then set the fee schedule and inspection schedule up on an annual basis, but not at 13 the same time as single-family rental registration annually in July, in order for staff to 14 effectively manage their time. 15 Public Comment 16 Lisa Peilen, Director of Municipal Affairs with the Minnesota Multi-Family Housing 17 Association 18 Ms. Peilen noted her familiarity with the Brooklyn Center ordinance, having worked with them 19 during its adoption. In principle, Ms. Peilen advised that the MMFHA liked the tiered system 20 and philosophy behind it, with rewards for well-managed properties and putting the burden on 21 the bad apples. Ms. Peilen advised that the MMFHA also had no problem with a lease 22 addendum to incentivize crime-free and drug-free properties. 23 24 While not having an issue with the general body of the ordinance, Ms. Peilen noted where the 25 City of Roseville parted company with the Brooklyn Center ordinance was in the area of fees. 26 27 While the Brooklyn Center fees covered the cost of inspections, which was also the case she 28 found in almost every other city, Ms. Peilen noted that the fees proposed for Roseville created 29 a huge philosophical issue for MMFHA members who would have to pay for their own 30 inspection fees; and caused the question of what did they get out of it. Ms. Peilen noted that 31 this became an operational cost for property owners/managers, with one of their members, 32 Hyland Apartments/Lexington Apartments/Townhomes, whose representative was unable to 33 result in a significant additional cost of doing 34 business, and ultimately an increase in tenant lease amounts. Ms. Peilen asked that the fees be 35 put in context with other costs of doing business (e.g. property taxes, mandated costs by other 36 37 large properties, the fee structure proposed by Roseville would add up, and used the Cities of 38 West St. Paul and South St. Paul as examples of inspection fees, with those not well-received 39 by property owners either. 40 41 Ms. Peilen asked that the HRA reconsider the fee schedule; and thanked the HRA for their 42 outreach to their industry. 43 44 Brian Kelly, Vice President/CEO of 3,500 units in the Metropolitan area and St. Cloud 45 Owners of Palisades Apartments in Roseville (Highway 36 and Dale Street); Member of 46 MMFHA 47 Mr. Kelly expre 48 reviewed recent improvements made by his firm to Palisades Apartments in Roseville. 49 50 With the assistance of Ms. Kelsey, Mr. Kelly calculated the anticipated additional inspection 51 fee of $10,000 that represented real money to their firm; and expressed his concern about the 52 53 projected that their properties would be classed high and not require subsequent inspections 54 other than a percentage of units as proposed. Mr. Kelly also noted that, if the inspection 55 program was to be implemented in the fall, annual budgets would already have been set for