pf_03708 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Page 1 of 3 Cathy Bennett From: Dick Houck _ Sent: Thu 1/5/2006 1:42 PM To: Cathy Bennett ,;:�, . �. - <w �y4 Cc: Subject: Residentia! Rental Licensing Attachments: Members Housing & Redevelopment Authority Re: Public Hearing relatingto Residential Rental Licensing to Title Nine of the City Code Since I am unable to attend the above mentioned public hearing, I would make known herein to you these observations and opinions in opposirion to this intrusion into the small Roseville rental market. Section 907.01 states, "The City recognizes a need for an organized inspection program of residential rental property with 1 to 4 units within the City in order to establish an enforce minimum standards for small rental units to meet City and State safety, health, iire, and zoning codes within the City and to provide a more efficient system to ensure that the stock of rental property within the City is properly maintained." I see no evidence and there is none provided from staff that would indicate that there have been numbers of reported violations in this regard that would substantiate this statement. I have asked for and have not received the numbers of such reported violations and so assume that the number, if any, does not coiLStitute such a need. Staff has stated that the purpose and need for this rental ordinance is "the disruption to the peaceful livability of the neighborhood the rental properties SOMETIMES cause". They also state that "the main issues are occupancy loads (overcrowding), parking (more cars that can iit in the driveway resulting in parking on the grass, mud and dead lav�ms, and parking in front of neighbors homes — which results in blocking visibility when they leave their driveways), late evening conduct, outside storage of junk and household items and general exterior lack of maintenance such as home's exterior not kept painted, lawns not mowed, garbage left outside and in disarray, etc". These are all eaterior conditions that can be addressed without entry onto the property with existing code enforcement. As far as the staff's list of potential interior conditions that may_ require attention, tenants already have sufficient recourse against landlords to both county and state agencies and state law to adequately address any such property deficiencies. Renters may also notify the city of any interior deficiencies that may exist for further code violation action. Again, staff has not indicated that there have been any number of interior violations that would warrant general intrusion into the privacy of one's home, and the rental units are to be considered the private home of the renter. Staff states that, "We must be aware of, and act on, the fact that there is absentee siumlords in the community who are only interested in iurning a profit and do not care who they take advantage of or hurt, whether it he their own renters or adjoining property owners." , and yet staff gives no basis for this statement or how many exist in Roseville or even if there is only one. Such a statement without basis in fact to back it up raises great credibility questions of staff. In answering the question of, "How many rentals are problem properties?", staff states that "there is no way to identify this number without making some assumptians." Once again, staff quotes many percentages of problem properties without quoting any firm number on which to base those �