Laserfiche WebLink
2 <br />3 <br />4 <br />5 <br />6 <br />7 <br />8 <br />9 <br />10 <br />11 <br />12 <br />13 <br />14 <br />15 <br />16 <br />17 <br />18 <br />19 <br />20 <br />21 <br />22 <br />23 <br />24 <br />25 <br />26 <br />27 <br />28 <br />29 <br />30 <br />31 <br />32 <br />33 <br />34 <br />35 <br />36 <br />37 <br />38 <br />39 <br />40 <br />41 <br />42 <br />43 <br />44 <br />45 <br />46 <br />47 <br />48 <br />49 <br />50 <br />51 <br />52 <br />53 <br />54 <br />1. <br />1. <br />Cih nf <br />f��� <br />� <br />�r Elinnc.nta, l'ti.a <br />Housing & Redevelopment Authority <br />Roseville City Hall Council Chambers, 2660 Civic Center Drive <br />Minutes — Tuesday, Apri121, 2009 at 6:00 p.m. <br />Call to Order <br />Chair Maschka called to order the regular meeting of the Housing & Redevelopment Authority (HRA) <br />in and for the City of Roseville at 6:00 p.m. <br />Chair Maschka noted that there was a not a quorum present, so opened with a presentation <br />Bubul, Roseville HRA Attorney. <br />Presentations <br />a. Multi-Family Discussion — Steve Bubul, RHRA Attorney <br />Executive Director Patrick Trudgeon introduced Mr. Steve F <br />Mr. Bubul thanked the HRA for retaining them as � <br />role of the HRA and its involvement in multi-family <br />as detailed in a memorandum from the Kennedy & <br />Bubul discussed two (2) concepts: those of a reg�� <br />and the HRA taking direct action on multi-family prc <br />Various topics discussed by Mr. Bubul included specific r <br />including rental license ordinance; tenant remedies actions; <br />.�'� <br />ided an overvi� of the <br />to the City of Roseville, <br />�d April 15, 2009. Mr. <br />ed by the City Council; <br />�dcrions of a City Council <br />ordinance. <br />Mr. Bubul reviewed several options �" nvolvement for eminent domain <br />with the HRA acquiring and later resel g the� il in operating it as housing for low- or <br />moderate-income tenants; and allowing t�'�iuld me�f the authority of the HRA in providing <br />affordable housing options and in prev ng or removing blighted properties; and specific <br />bonding authority for General Obligation onds for such projects. <br />Discussion amc <br />police calls <br />addirional ' <br />tenant <br />buildings in th <br />reticent to call <br />, staff and N�: Bubul included tracking the number and type of <br />��'� to rental �a� provisional licensing (i.e., City of New Brighton); <br />��p��tic��'��ees/unit problems with current limited access to mulri- <br />min� ser�ous issues that may be present, as evidenced with several <br />ty to-date; if there were unintended consequences (i.e., tenants being <br />�e ,pepartment with landlord concerns); and posirive responses if <br />� e that the rental licensing and compliance is too cumbersome and <br />sell the property and eliminate the inirial problem. <br />Further di��:'"� � sion included the City of New Brighton example with a six (6) month <br />provision ' cense for problem properties for compliance; a majority of problems being <br />resolved � landlords; resolution of tenant disputes; nuisance ordinances used as an alternate <br />or suppl�inent for creating an incentive for landlords or resulting assessment, basically for <br />� i,�I items rather than crime-related issues; and civil acrions to remedy tenant issues (i.e., <br />of Brooklyn Park example) <br />Members asked that staff have the Police Department at a meeting in the near future for further <br />discussion of crime-free mulri-housing, with August suggested for this presentation. <br />Additional discussion was held with Mr. Bubul on rarionale in issuing General Obligarion <br />versus Revenue Bonds; availability of TaY Increment Financing (TIF); recognizing that each or <br />any of those oprions would be at the discretion of the City Council. <br />