My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PL PACKET 07152025
StAnthony
>
Parks & Planning Commission
>
Planning Commission Packets
>
2025
>
PL PACKET 07152025
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/19/2025 12:48:56 PM
Creation date
9/19/2025 12:43:48 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
22
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes <br />June 17, 2025 <br />Page 9 <br />2 Mr. Paul White, 3201 32nd Avenue NE, stated that the State required an affidavit showing who the <br />3 ultimate owners were. <br />4 <br />5 Chair Socha stated there should be a grandfathered exception for this. It would be unduly infringing <br />6 on the owner's property rights. Commissioner Corneille stated there has been a big focus on density in <br />7 rental properties. Corporate ownership has not been discussed previously. He asked what is <br />8 dangerous if someone owns 5 properties. If the purpose is to preserve affordable housing for those <br />9 who can afford it and there is a licensing enforcement in place, is there anything bad about 100% of <br />10 all single-family rentals being owned by one corporation? Chair Socha stated that if one person <br />11 owned all rentals, that would be a monopoly. The solution is high density. Mr. Grittman stated that <br />12 historically, ownership housing has contributed to more stable and long-term occupancies than <br />13 rentals. Owners are typically more involved in the community. <br />14 <br />15 Commissioner Erickson stated he does not know if it is necessary, along with the 10%, and he does <br />16 not know if a fifth or sixth property owned by a single entity would be an issue. <br />17 <br />18 Commissioner Corneille stated that if community ownership were used rather than corporate <br />19 ownership, that would be better. We would be making the rental of single-family homes less <br />20 affordable by doing this. It's a question of it being restricted to the few that can afford it. <br />21 <br />22 Commissioner Erickson stated that doing any sort of restriction makes everything less affordable. He <br />23 is guessing it is cheaper to rent a house rather than purchase a house. This would restrict a person's <br />24 ability to live affordably in St. Anthony. <br />25 <br />26 Chair Socha stated she is still forming her opinion on corporate/community rental ownership. The <br />27 downside, if there is a limit, what happens if the owner needs to leave temporarily for various <br />28 reasons, and the other rentals in the area are owned 9% by corporate/community owners, it may not <br />29 be possible to retain their home for their return. <br />30 <br />31 Commissioner Mayne stated he would not call corporate ownership community ownership. <br />32 Commissioner Corneille stated that LLCs are personal ownership with liability protection. <br />33 Commissioner Mayne is not a fan of any of the languages here. He is supportive of limiting the <br />34 number of properties by owner, and the declarations required are protection against large corporate <br />35 ownership. <br />36 <br />37 Commissioner Corneille stated he would be in favor of the 10% but not with any of the corporate <br />38 language. In the work session, there was a concern that a corporation would come in a buy several <br />39 properties. For people who owned before 2000, their generational wealth is on the other side of the <br />40 coin from new homeowners. Each rental license is registered and enforced on every single property. <br />41 <br />42 Chair Socha said she still has reservations about moving forward on this. This needs to be as sensible <br />43 as possible. She believes there needs to be a grandfather clause. She was happy to see there is an <br />44 exception for 12 months but believes it may need to be longer and be under 10%. She asked why the <br />45 exception is under the number of properties owned and not under Section C. Mr. Grittman stated that <br />46 it was his error, and it should be under Section C. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.