Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />APRIL 9, 2009 <br />The Adminish•ator noted that the City Attorney will be drafting an <br />ordinance outlining hearing procedures for license revocations, etc. This <br />ordinance will apply to the rental license as well as other licenses that the <br />City issues. <br />One property owner asked if past attendance at management training <br />provided by the MN Crime Free Rental Housing Program would be <br />sufficient. The Administrator noted that the ordinance states within 12 <br />months of joining the STAR Program. He indicated that attendance <br />certifications can be reviewed. <br />One property owner asked about the screening of long-term tenants. The <br />Administrator noted that the proposed ordinance asks that screening <br />procedures be submitted to the City, not the actual screenings themselves. <br />Zinner suggested that the specific security requirements for Phase Two of <br />the MN Crime Free Rental-Housing Program should be spelled out in <br />ordinance. The Administrator indicated that he will check with the <br />Ramsey County Sheriff's Department on these requirements. <br />One property owner asked if the City had tenant screening criteria. The <br />Administrator noted that the criteria is outlined in the proposed ordinance. <br />One property manager indicated that they have outside agencies which <br />place tenants and these agencies do the screening. The Administrator <br />suggested that the property manager and the agency discuss the criteria <br />used and come to an agreement on it. Montour suggested that this criteria <br />be submitted to the City for review. <br />With regard to access to units, it was noted that most leases contain a <br />provision fora 24-hour notice to tenants unless emergency access is <br />required. The Administrator felt that the 24-hour notice was reasonable. <br />There was discussion about multi-family complexes having to allow <br />candidates for office entrance into their buildings. It was noted that this is <br />a State Statute over which the City has no control. <br />There was discussion over adoption of the International Property <br />Maintenance Code versus utilization of the State Building Code. It was <br />noted that given recent case law as well as information received from the <br />League of MN Cities, the City cannot be more restrictive than the building <br />code. Therefore, at this time, the Administrator recommended the use of <br />the International Property Maintenance Code be removed from the <br />ordinance. Council agreed. <br />