2007_0129_packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Recommendation #6 —Allocate RHRA resources to create a comprehensive education program associatedwith rental property and city codes. The program would address such topics as the Property Maintenance Code, landlord and tenant rights and responsibilities, rental occupancy limits, and resources available to both property owners and renters etc. The program and materials would be modified to address a range of audiences including realtors, colleges and college students, citizens, all property owners, etc. The program should also include development of an official City pamphlet on the Rental Registration Program, pertinent codes and regulations, and landlords and tenants responsibilities. An investigation should be made into the feasibility of adding to real estate sale closing document cl��c�bo� indicating that the buyer has received and read the City information regarding existing maintenance codes and rental registration. Recommendation #"7 �-- The R.IIRA should create a line item in its budget for a revolving abatement fund that could be used by the City to make emergency repairs that would be billed to the property owner or certified on the property taxes. Recommendation #8 — The Planning Commission or another appropriate body should take up issues related to parking because these are largely zoning matters and are complex and citywide in nature and outside the scope of this Committee. Discussion Item: C� The RHRA should consider cost-sharingihe expense of computer software and data entry so data about parking complaints could be rolled into the review of the proposed rental registrationprogram in two years. Recommendation #9 The HRA and Committee expect clear and accurate performance data at the end of the 2-year period. To do so, the Community Development Department might need resources and/or internal administrativepolicies that improve data collection and analysis across departmental lines. Conclusion: Members of the Citizen Advisory Group have expressed their support for the recommendations. The members are thankful for the respect of each member of the group throughout the process and appreciate all the city staff and citizens who offered comment and support to the Committee during its work. Many members felt that the process was very positive and had changed original positions and attitudes that they held at the first meeting. The CAG appreciated that multiple perspectives were engaged in genuine and respectful dialogue and that by working together they had been able to come to a place of understand and compromise that met everyone's needs. Everyone agreed it had been a respectful and rewarding experience and made them proud of the City and how the process had been designed and carried out.