City Council Minutes 02-26-2007 Special
Special Council Minutes: 2/26/07
MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL
Monday February 26, 2006 - 5:30 p.m.
Members Present:
Clint Herbst, Wayne Mayer, Tom Perrault, Brian Stumpf and Susie
Wojchouski.
Members Absent:
None
1. Call to order.
Mayor Herbst called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. and explained that the purpose of the
special meeting was to discuss a proposed ordinance that would govern rental property.
2. Review and discussion of proposed rental ordinance.
City staff reported that the ordinance came about as a result of increased numbers of rental
units in the community that are not being maintained. These rental units are a problem as
they are a source of blight and foster deterioration of the neighborhood they are located in.
Brian Stumpf asked if the problem rental units were apartment complexes or older homes that
had been converted to rental property. Staff explained the problems with the rental units
noting that with the weaker housing market a number of single family homes as well as
townhouse units were being purchased for investment purposes. The rental units that were
not owner occupied tend to generate a more concern since there is a little incentive for the
property owner to maintain the site.
The proposed ordinance would require a license for any rental unit. Prior to issuing a license
the Building Department would conduct an inspection of the unit to verifY that it complies
with all City codes and the International Property Maintenance Code. If the property is in
compliance, a Tier I license would be issued. If the property is not in compliance and the
owner does not bring his property into compliance within a specified time frame, a Tier II
license would be issued.
Brian Stumpf asked about the enforcement of the ordinance. What authority is given by
ordinance to allow for inspection of the premises? Staff indicated that under the proposed
ordinance not allowing inspection of the premises by the appropriate authority is a basis for
revocation ofthe rental license. The owner agrees as part of the license to allow the City to
inspect their rental units. Staff had initially considered that the rental unit inspections would
be done by the Building Department staff in January-February when construction was slower.
Brian Stumpf felt random inspections would be more effective. Otherwise property owners
would have their property in compliance at the beginning of the year when inspection was
likely and then just leave them the rest of the year. Staff indicated that inspection would also
be done based on tenant complaints. If the tenant has notified the property owner in writing
of an item that is not in compliance with the code and the property owner takes no action to
correct the non-compliance, the tenant may request the City to inspect the premises.
1
Special Council Minutes: 2/26/07
There was discussion on the fees proposed to be charged. Staff indicated an inspection fee of
$501hour was being proposed with a minimum of one hour. It was questioned whether this
would adequately cover all costs. Clint Herbst said the City doesn't see these fees as a serious
revenue source but felt the City should break even. Wayne Mayer expressed his concern that
enforcement of this ordinance would tie up the personnel resources of the Building
Department. City Attorney Tom Scott concurred that the initial set up of the ordinance and
the follow up would be labor intensive so it was important that the fees cover the cost ofthe
program.
The impact of the ordinance was discussed. Staff felt that most landlords would require larger
deposits from the renter to protect the landlord from renter activity that would put the property
into non-compliance. City Attorney Tom Scott said the lease should be set up so that if there
is any violation ofthe ordinance the tenant can be evicted. The landlord must be making a
good faith effort to bring tenants into compliance.
The definition of a rental unit was discussed. It was felt that any residential property that was
non-homesteaded should be looked at to determine if it was a rental unit. The Council also
discussed the inspections that the Fire Department are doing and whether there would be any
overlap. It was felt the Fire Department and Building Department should work in
conjunction on the inspections. The inspection by the Fire Department is about fire
pre-planning which gives the Fire Department information about specific structures that may
aid them if a fire breaks out at that structure. Brian Stumpf added that there is no authority
given to the person doing the inspections for the Fire Department for entering the structure.
Susie Wojchouski asked if the City opens itself up to any liability by issuing the license. Tom
Scott said by issuing the license, the City is not insuring that there is no violation of the
ordinance. He believed anyone filing a lawsuit would have to show that the City was
egregious in their behavior or had repeatedly ignored violations. He did add that there are
facilities that house vulnerable adults or day care facilities where there might be some
additional liability for the City.
It was pointed out that the building code only gives the City authority over new construction
or work that is done under permit. The property management code is a uniform code and
goes beyond the building code.
Staff will make revisions to the ordinance which will come back to the Council. The City will
also have an informational meeting with property owners. It was suggested that staff talks to
other communities who have a rental ordinance to find out what features they felt worked and
which didn't. The consensus of the Council is that the ordinance should be enforceable.
\)QJ......;~ ~.J-'05~ ""__
Recording Secretary eJ
2