2006_0320_Packet_Study - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

� You replied on 1�24f2006 �2:�3 PM. From: Mike Savard � To: Calhy Bennett c c: Subject: Cily Code Sections 907 Attachments: Hi Cathy. Sent: Tue 1/17/2006 ].1;00 PM Page 1 of t I just returned home following the public hearing concerning 907. I'm not much of a public speaker which is why I'm e-mailing you instead of speaking at the meeting. Let me start by saying that I am all for the idea of licensing. I just have concerns about what I'm reading and what i heard at the meeting. My biggest concern is making a copy of the license visable near the front door, not only will it be an eye sore but why does the public need to know that the people living there are renting. If I as a property owner files and receives a license from the city, besides the renter themselves no one else needs to know. If it is escential that it be on the property, why not in the garage where most ofthe building permits are put when the home is being built? Besides do you really think the copies will stay up at the problem properties and need to be constantly put back up---and atthe owners expense. My other concern is the yearly fee to re-apply. I own a duplex on 179711795 Centenial Dr.. we built it in 1997 lived there until Sept. 9 2001. The 1797 unit has only seen two renters since it was built. and 1795 (the unit we lived in) has had the same renters since we moved out, all without 1 complaint. Now after being at the meeting I understand more about what problems the city is having. But I dont understand why a property with no complaints has to be lumped in with all the trouble makers. I thought of and idea on my way home that I hope you ma� consider. Since there is the potential for long term renters,why can't we re-apply when ever there is turnover? This way ifthere is �roblems andlar concerns the orooer actions can be taken between renters. and if caused by the rent, can pc�s��i}' be taken from a damage depositto help with expences. Whereas the problem properties can be put on a type of probation which afterthe intital problems are corrected, they will have to re-apply yearly or more often until the "probation period" has been met and the city is satisfied with the results. Like I said its just an idea I thought I'd put out there. I'm sorry for taking up so much of your time, I know your busy, I just wanted to voice my concerns and idea. Thank-You Michael J. Savard �L��=:_ ""' . .. . - . : :: _-"__ _•—_:_ ....:..:::..: • •- .:•:" .��