2007-02-20_Agenda - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

4 Member Kelsey asked what role the civil attorney h as in the process. Mr. Munson noted that the civil attorney would review the case prior to having it go to court and if they felt there was not enough evidence then it would not move forward and other a lternatives would be reviewed such as abatement or mediation. Member Maschka wondered how the C AG determined that there was not a large criminal problem in the community. Ms. Raye noted that it was an anecdotal conclusion based upon conversations with the Roseville Police Chief as well as members of th e CAG who represent rental properties. Member Maschka also asked why the CAG did not deal with parking issue. Ms. Raye noted that the CAG felt that the parking issues was not related speci fically to rental property but an overall community problem and that there was not sufficient time to e xplore the issues and possible solutions through this process. Chair Majerus requested comments from the public and requested that each speaker provide their name and address for the record. David Russlor – 2716 Merrill St. lives in Roseville and h as a rental property. He strongly opposes rental registration. He feels that the properties that are a problem would not register anyway. Those that live in the community take care of the property and should not be required to be part of the program. He noted that the program would increase the rental rates whic h may result in difficulty competing for renters. Dick Houck – 1131 Roselawn owns a duplex and lives in one side and rents the other. He was not represented on the committee although he applied. He does not have a problem with exterior requirements but is opposed to any language that woul d give the city or any government access to private homes. The City should only be allowed access thr ough a warrant which is allowed by the constitution. He noted that rental homes are people’s homes and th e government does not have any right to be in those homes. Mr. Houck noted that he heard arguments for the program because rental property is business property and therefore should be monitored. He feels that business property is where people go to purchase services and rental property is not a service purchased. He noted that Roseville should not be implementing programs just because other communities do. He noted that the safety of property should apply to all property not just rental. If a fee is applie d to rental property, then it will show up on the rent and this does not help make housing affordable. He felt that the fee is not necessary. Also, if the problems are a few students living in housing then th is is what should be addressed, not all rental property. Mentioned that he asked at the first mee ting for data on the number of violations and has not seen this documented and have not seen a list of the nu mber of offenses. In conclusion, he does not see a need for such a program or the right given to the ci ty to access people’s property. In addition, landlord and tenant rights and responsibilities are already in la w. There is a booklet that provides tenants with methods to address deficiencies in maintenance issues. Therefore, do not need another agency to provide more oversight. Mike Heffernan – Lives in 2042 Dale and owns 893 C ounty Road C2. He is opposed to license program. He appreciates the study but sounds like there is no problem. Not every idea is a good idea. Would like to see the problems addressed but without a new program since staff is already short handed. The City should provide additional staff to address the problem s instead of creating a new program. Also, should address parking issues instead. He is not in favor of more government. He noted that people who have rental properties know who to contact to get information. Does not believe there is an issue with the lack of information. He does not believe that the City shou ld be telling residents that they need to fix up their home. If people can’t afford to fix up their home, then they should move.