Laserfiche WebLink
8 <br />1 <br />2 <br />3 <br /> 4 <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 />35 <br />36 <br />37 <br /> 38 <br /> 39 <br />This could be is a component that is eliminated from the ordinance where a <br />duplex is ½ owner occupied or the property owner lives on the adjoining <br />property. <br />17. Why charge the good owners? Why not just punish the bad owners? 5 <br />Burnsville Ordinance as an example. Staff Response - The only effective way 6 <br />to find the bad owners is thru period ic inspections of all rental units. <br />Another case of the few bad apples sp oiling the bunch. Like entering the <br />Dome for a football game, everyone mu st have their purses and backpacks <br />inspected to find the few who bring in contraband. It may seem like a wasted <br />effort on the law abiding citizens, but it is necessary to weed out those few <br />who take advantage of the situation. Also, we must not forget that these <br />rental properties are ‘businesses’ profiting from and operating in a <br />predominately residential area. If one is operating a business it is not <br />unreasonable to expect to pay a small fee ($4 a month is very small compared <br />to typical rents received) so that the city can monitor this business as a <br />group and verify it does not adversely affect other property owners nearby <br />(and who’s homes often represent their largest personal asset/investment). <br />City staff and Attorney will need to re view the ordinance in detail. However, <br />the initial reaction is th at the Burnsville ordinanc e is very limited and would <br />not affectively address current issues. It concentrates on administration of <br />crime related issues. The property owne r must be part of various levels of <br />involvement with housing groups such as the multi-family housing coalition, <br />etc which Roseville does not have a very ac tive participate. There is a group <br />- Crime Free MF housing - but they mostly deal with police issues in larger <br />facilities. Staff would n eed to be assigned to im plement a more proactive <br />crime free multi family program for it to be effective. Who would do that? <br />Police? In Burnsville, there is no insp ection requirement so it is unclear how <br />this would work and how the city would know if there was any violation except <br />related to police calls? The program is costing Burnsville $30,000 to <br />administer, mostly for meetings, mailings and paperwork. It does not cover <br />inspection costs. <br />18. Need to make sure that the inspection report will hold up in court. Staff 34 <br />Response - Staff would propose copyin g others cities forms and procedures <br />that have proven effective and complian t. We want to be consistent with <br />surrounding communities.