My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2016_0509
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
201x
>
2016
>
CC_Minutes_2016_0509
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/27/2016 9:09:00 AM
Creation date
5/24/2016 2:55:09 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
5/9/2016
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
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
Regular City Council Meeting <br />Monday, May 9, 2016 <br />Page 11 <br />enacted. Mr. Trudgeon stated that he heard the concerns from the City Council <br />about potential disconnects beyond the initial checklist for criminal background <br />checks of tenants. <br />Councilmember McGehee stated her acceptance of that suggestion, opining that <br />she would support requiring the owner to provide background checks and assur- <br />ances on tenants and maintenance and others with frequent and regular access. <br />Councilmember McGehee stated this made it clear that the responsibility was on <br />the owner. <br />City Attorney Gaughan referenced line 162 of the draft ordinance, noting it was <br />the original language specific to compliance with background checks (Item 5); at <br />the time of the application for a license by the owner/manager. <br />Councilinember Etten stated his preference of this being reworked before any <br />vote to accept part of the proposed revisions. Councilmember Etten offered an- <br />other option for language for Item B(line 113): "...after access into individual <br />units, excluding periodic service calls by non-affiliated contractors. .." <br />Councilmember Willmus stated his preference to not doing ordinance revisions <br />piecemeal, but to consider all proposed changes at the same time. <br />Mayor Roe offered several minor typographical corrections on Attachment A for <br />the next iteration: line 64 (page 2), line 168 (page 4), and line 198 (page 6). <br />Willmus moved, Laliberte seconded, directing staff to amend the ordinance as <br />guided by this evening's deliberation; and return with a new iteration at a future <br />City Council meeting for consideration. <br />Discussion ensued regarding timing for return with the new iteration, with Interim <br />Community Development Director Kari Collins suggestion approximately one <br />month for staff to complete research, consult with the City Attorney, and rework <br />the document, anticipating a June City Council meeting. <br />Councilmember Laliberte referenced a housing forum she and Councilmember <br />Etten had attended not long ago, sponsored by Metro Cities, with several cities at <br />that meeting outlining their multi-family housing license agreements; and sug- <br />gested staff include those cities in their research. <br />Mayor Roe also suggested continuing to use the Minnesota Multi-Family Asso- <br />ciation as a resource. <br />Roll Call <br />Ayes: Willmus, Etten, Laliberte and Roe. <br />1�1ays: McGehee. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.