My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2005_0718_Packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2005
>
2005_0718_Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/12/2014 10:29:57 AM
Creation date
9/14/2009 10:03:13 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Agenda/Packets
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
249
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
What can the City do to respond to these issues? (Saurce: Large group discussion notes) <br />• Work with pxoperiy owners�znanag��•s to come up with alternative strategies to a license <br />a�1d/or inspection program; hold more meetings on this issue. <br />• Do not duplicate inspection programs by other agencies. <br />• Facilitate co�ziznunzcat�o�1 between �T' �� Police Department and property a�er� z�anaaers, <br />owzlers�man.agers want to wark with the Police Department to ensure everyone's safety. <br />• Support�facilita�e rejuvenation of the Crime Free Multi-familyHousing Coalition. <br />Brooklyn Park is a good example of an effective coalition. <br />• Share long-range planning information about housing development and projections to <br />help inform property owners' decision-making. <br />Provide rY-Lfor�rGation about existing Codes, etc. to new property owners, consider <br />deve�opitlg an education program about Codes and enfarcement. <br />What can citizen do to respond to these issues? (Source:Large group discussion notes) <br />Be responsible property awnez/managers. <br />• Work with Police Department to address problem tenants. <br />What action ideas were participants willing to suppart? (Source: Feedback sheets*) <br />Two (2)persons indicated that they could pexsanally support one ar mare of the issues solution <br />ideas/projects discussed. The solution they would included: <br />• Meeting of Rental Property Owners Coalition. <br />Were participants satisfied with the meeting? (Source: Feedbacksheets*) <br />• Five (5) respondents agreed that they had an opportunity to voice their thoughts during <br />small group discussions. Two (2) respondents did not answer the question. <br />• Five (5) respondents thought that the dialogue was infarmative. 'Two (2) respondents did <br />not answer the question. <br />• Two (2) respondeuts indicated interest in similar dialogues on other citywide topics. The <br />topic they identified was: <br />o Any licensing or inspection program City takes ulta considerai�.on. <br />* It appears as though most non-resident participants did not realize they should answer these <br />questions. 'Therefore, t11e number of responses is very low. <br />Multi-family E�Iousul� Owners f�ialogue Summary p. 3 <br />May 5, 2005 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.