My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2019_0909
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
201x
>
2019
>
CC_Minutes_2019_0909
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/26/2019 4:35:06 PM
Creation date
9/26/2019 4:35:00 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
9/9/2019
Meeting Type
Regular
Publication Newspaper
Pioneer Press
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
17
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, September 9, 2019 <br /> Page 12 <br /> the process. So, the idea is a voluntary process to register the vacant building so <br /> staff has the correct contact information should an issue arise. That is the inten- <br /> tion and staff expect this to be somewhat voluntary and it will take time to edu- <br /> cate. Staff does not intend to make the process overly burdensome to register. <br /> Councilmember Willmus indicated one issue he has with this is that it seems to be <br /> a little redundant. Anybody has access to accurate information as to property <br /> ownership through the county and through tax records and those records are fairly <br /> timely as well. What he worries about, is creating a secondary database that <br /> somebody may gain access at some point for some other reason down the road. <br /> The city is also going a step further in asking for phone information. He has some <br /> concerns about that. <br /> Councilmember Etten noted under exemptions it talks about snowbirds, which is <br /> certainly a consideration here in Minnesota. It talks about the resident may be ex- <br /> empt from registration requirements with proper verification. He asked what staff <br /> would look at for proper verification. <br /> Ms. Gundlach explained her understanding was snowbirds are generally engaged <br /> with their properties and have people that check on them or stop their mail. The <br /> idea behind that exemption is those are not typically where the problems reside. <br /> She was not sure what the intention was for getting proper verification. The other <br /> exemption not brought up is the partially occupied commercial multi-tenant build- <br /> ings and the same concept is there. People are there and paying attention and if a <br /> problem does arise, in a somewhat quicker fashion there will be notification of it <br /> as opposed to being completely vacant. <br /> Councilmember Etten wondered if staff should remove "proper verification" as a <br /> part of the exemption. He would also like to have the fee removed for snowbirds. <br /> Ms. Gundlach indicated she was not opposed to changing the wording on line 370 <br /> of the bench handout. <br /> Councilmember Willmus asked if every property owner needed to be listed on the <br /> form. <br /> Ms. Gundlach indicated the city would want to have information of who to con- <br /> tact if a problem were to arise. She noted staff can work on the layout of the <br /> form. <br /> Mayor Roe thought the two pieces of information the city wants would be the <br /> owner and who would be responsible, and the owner may be the secondary piece. <br /> City Attorney Gaughan thought it could be changed to "a property owner" rather <br /> than all property owners. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.