Laserfiche WebLink
City will receive more comments as part of the next phase, which includes reaction to an actual proposal. <br />A copy of the case presented to City Council on October 27, 2015 is attached to this case as background. This <br />attachment provides important background pertinent to this case, such as an outline of our existing program, <br />reasons cities implement such a program, and an evaluation of peer community programs. <br />Notification: <br />Notification is not required at this time. <br />Observations/Alternatives: <br />Observations: <br />Throughout the first phase of public comment (discuss the program with stakeholders; no amendments yet <br />proposed), there appears to be some willingness to consider registration of rental properties that would collect <br />important contact information above and beyond what is available in the County's Tax Database (phone number, <br />email, alternate contact, etc.). That being said, there is still likely to be some resistance to this policy change. <br />Required inspections continue to be the top area of concern amongst owners/landlords. Required inspections are not <br />proposed to be added to the program for single-family homes at this time. <br />Considering the level of opposition to required inspections and the quality of existing housing stock, Staff believes <br />a required inspection may be more tool than needed to solve the desired issue. The goal of the analysis has been <br />prevention, acknowledging a wide spread nuisance or safety issue does not exist. As noted, there are pockets of <br />issues throughout the community, but to blanket an inspection requirement may be more than what is necessary to <br />achieve the desired goal. This issue may present itself in the future, and the City can re-evaluate the inspection <br />requirement in the future. The City can continue to rely on its complaint -based approach for properties of concern. <br />As the number of individual rental properties has increased over the past decade, so has the number and quality of <br />professional property management companies. These management companies help individual property owners with <br />minimal experience to monitor individual properties, draft lease agreements, and provide tenant screening among <br />other benefits. Staff believes that this is an added value to the rental community and aides the community in <br />reaching its goal of minimizing nuisances created by rental properties. If the City Council were inclined to require <br />an inspection, Staff would recommend tapping into this resource and perhaps license and train these companies. <br />The City would then exempt properties working with a licensed property management company from a City <br />inspection. This is similar to the City's septic maintenance program. Note: this is currently not included in Staffs <br />recommended policy direction. Staff does note existing tools the City currently has the following tools at its <br />disposal. <br />• Ramsey Public Nuisance Code <br />• Ramsey Property Maintenance Code (condition of buildings) <br />• Ramsey Off -Street Parking Ordinance <br />• Ramsey Zoning Code <br />• Ramsey Building Code <br />• Anoka County Community Development/Housing and Redevelopment Authority <br />• State of Minnesota Attorney General <br />Alternatives <br />Alternative 1 - Adopt Ordinance #16-09 as proposed. <br />Alternative 2 - Adopt Ordinance # 16-09 with amendments. <br />Alternative 3 - Recommend no amendments to the program. Only apartments and condominiums with shared, <br />internal connections. This would not reduce the cost to apartments and condos as proposed. <br />Funding Source: <br />