My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2013-08-13_HRA_Minutes
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Housing Redevelopment Authority
>
Minutes
>
2013
>
2013-08-13_HRA_Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/18/2013 8:45:53 AM
Creation date
9/18/2013 8:45:49 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Housing Redevelopment Authority
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
8/13/2013
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
13
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
HRA Meeting <br />Minutes Tuesday, August 13, 2013 <br />Page 10 <br /> <br />1 <br />Mr. Schlueter referenced issues with a specific rental property in his immediate neighborhood <br />2 <br />and frustrations related when renting from a family versus non-family member. Mr. Schlueter <br />3 <br />sought recourse on whether or not the proposed ordinance spoke to that type of rental. <br />4 <br /> <br />5 <br />Ms. Kelsey clarified that the proposed ordinance, Chapter 908, was related only to rental <br />6 <br />properties of five (5) units or more. <br />7 <br /> <br />8 <br />Michelle Harris, (no street address given) <br />9 <br />Ms. Harris questioned how their neighborhood could review the proposed ordinance to bring <br />10 <br />forward questions. <br />11 <br /> <br />12 <br />Ms. Kelsey noted that the proposed ordinance, Chapter 908, had not yet been adopted or had a <br />13 <br />formal Public Hearing at the City Council level; and was only in initial discussion stages at the <br />14 <br />HRA level prior to recommendation to the City Council for consideration. Ms. Kelsey advised <br />15 <br />that the entire multi- <br />16 <br />her at City Hall. <br />17 <br /> <br />18 <br />Janet Kyser, Asset Manager with Steven Scott Property Management <br />19 <br />With their firm managing 8,000 rental units in the Twin Cities, in ten (10) different cities, Ms. <br />20 <br />Kyser advised that her recent assignment of various properties after working with the firm for <br />21 <br />twenty-eight (28) years now included the Rosetree and Hillsborough properties in Roseville. <br />22 <br />Ms. Kyser referenced her past knowledge in 1985 of the Fire Department performing <br />23 <br />inspections of buildings and individual units. Ms. Kyser advised that their property was the <br />24 <br />first obtain crime-free rental certification, obtained in Coon Rapids, and recommended anyone <br />25 <br />involved with multi-family rental housing to participate in the program. <br />26 <br /> <br />27 <br />Ms. Kyser advised that the requirement for chronological registers would not be problematic <br />28 <br />for them to provide, as all of their work orders and maintenance request records were <br />29 <br />computerized and available as requested. While those records were not a challenge for their <br />30 <br />firm to provide, Ms. Kyser suggested that they may be more challenging or become <br />31 <br />cumbersome for small communities or buildings. <br />32 <br /> <br />33 <br />Ms. Kyser did question the legality and right to copy the registry (rent roll) and why that was a <br />34 <br />requirement. Ms. Kyser opined that her concerns were related to whether or not this could be <br />35 <br />interpreted as an invasion of <br />36 <br />necessary for the City to have. Ms. Kyser <br />37 <br />require that information, even though there were high stakeholders, they only required the <br />38 <br />number of units. Ms. Kyser opined that their firm provided a great tax base in that compact <br />39 <br />area; and while having worked with many communities during her career, including the Cities <br />40 <br />of Brooklyn Park and Brooklyn Center that was the only item she questioned on the proposed <br />41 <br />ordinance. <br />42 <br /> <br />43 <br />Chair Maschka agreed with Ms. Kyser that this appeared to be a logical question. <br />44 <br /> <br />45 <br />remaining in the <br />46 <br /> was not applicable and would <br />47 <br />be removed on the next iteration. <br />48 <br />Maschka me too <br />49 <br /> <br />50 <br />Doug Jones <br />51 <br />Mr. Jones requested further clarification on criminal histories and background checks that his <br />52 <br />firm performed at a minimum of three years back, and questioned what determined whether a <br />53 <br />prospective tenant was disallowed (e.g., felony conviction history). <br />54 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.