Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000 01-18 HCM MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE HOUSING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION JANUARY 18, 2000 CONFERENCE ROOM D CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center Housing Commission was called to order by Chairperson Erickson at 7 p.m. ROLL CALL Chairperson Ernie Erickson, Commissioners Muhammed Okoya-Lawal, Lloyd Deuel, Kathleen Carmody, Michael VonDeLinde, Mark Yelich and Donald Arm. Also in attendance were Prosecutor William Clelland and Community �evelopment Specialist 'Tom Bublitz. Coxnmissioner James Lano was absent from the meeting. It was also noted that the City Council was holding a work session this evening and Council Liaison Bob Peppe would not be at the Housing Commission meeting. APPROVAL OF AGENDA There was a motion by Commissioner Arm and seconded by Commissioner Deuel to approve the agenda with the provision that items 7 and 6 be reversed on the agenda. The motion passed. APPROVAL OF MINUTES December 21, 1999 There was a motion by Commissioner Deuel and seconded by Commissioner Carmody to approve the minutes of the December 21, 1999 Housing Commission meeting as submitted. The motion passed. CHAIRPERSONS REPORT Chairperson Erickson dispensed with the Chairperson's report and introduced Mr. Bill Clelland, the City's Prosecutor to address the Commission on code enforcement in the City of Brooklyn Center. Mr. Clelland began his presentation by noting that code enforcement in the City of Brooklyn Center has been made a priority and that by in large the effort has been successful. He noted that there are chronic offenders in the Ciry but that he does not think the ordinance needs to be revised. With regard to Chapter 12, he noted that there may need to be some minor technical modifications. Mr. Clelland noted that he cannot remember the last time the City lost a case involving code 01-18-00 -1- enforcement. He stated he believes the current ordinances provide adequate tools for enforcement and noted that the key to code enforcement is early detection and persistence. It is the current goal of the program to review the exterior of each house in the City at least once a year. Mr. Clelland reviewed the Timber Ridge apartment complex now known as Melrose Gates. He explained that in this enforcement effort all' owners of the original Timber Ridge property were convicted and the City collected $8,000 in fines. He explained the new complex, Melrose Gates, is now a showpiece in the City. Mr. Clelland next addressed the issue of single family code enforcement and explained that the City starts with criminal proceedings relative to enforcement if there is no compliance regarding the citations. In general, he noted that most people have some level of inertia with regard to code enforcement and explained that many people see their junk cars and other debris in the yard as becoming part of the landscape and it is essentially ignored. Again he pointed out that it is important to have a system in place to monitor compliance. Most people do respond to criminal prosecution. With regar� to �i� process of enforcem�nt he explained he asked the City's current Code Enforcement O�cer to detect and send out compliance orders, for junk in the yard including junk cars, with a 14 day compliance period. If there are multiple violations, it is acceptable to give property owners a staggered date of compliance, for example, 14 days to remove the trash, 14 days to remove a junk car, 30 days to paint a building and 60 days to repair or replace a roof. He stated he believes the overall system is flexible however, some people will ignore the notice. At this point the sooner the individual is charged the sooner the court proceedings can begin. The City Prosecutor then reviewed the process used in the courts regarding code enforcement and noted that there is a"payables list" used by the courts. This is a list of routine code enforcement items that are enforced with payment of fines. Mr. Clelland explained that if the City charges the violator criminally, they are always charged with a public nuisance since this requires a court appearance which a junk car violation, for example, does not. With regard to first time offenders, he commented that his standard offer is to allow them to plead guilty pursuant to Statute 609.135, placed on probation with the sentence vacated after one year if there are no violations. Any fine would go directly to the City. Mr. Clelland pointed out he looks for an abatement of the violation with a fixed da.te of compliance with no future violations. He noted that in this process a nusdemeanor with a fine of $700 hangs over the violators head if they do not comply. He noted this technique has been quite successful in obtaining compliance. With regard to communication between his office and the City, Mr. Clelland noted that he sends a letter to the Code Enforcement Officer regarding the courts compliance date, and if the property is not brought back into compliance, the violator is brought back into court under violation of the probation provision. He noted that in the most difficult cases, criminal and civil penalties are both invoked. Mr. Clelland explained that the City can go to court to get the authority to allow the City to clean up a property if the violator does not do it. He explained this is a slower process since people are subject to due process and the owner does have the right to dispute the Ciry ordinance. He also noted that the City can recover attorney fees, contractor fees 01-18-00 -2- y and witness fees in these cases. If the violator does not clean up the property and the City is forced to clean it up, the City Prosecutor prepares a City Council resolution, it is approved by the City Council and the City Manager signs the order. The City must then wait 20 days and then go back to court if the owner objects, the matter goes to trial with priority over other trials except for criminal matters. If the property is cleaned up by the City, the costs are then assessed to the property. Mr. Clelland continued that with long time and chronic offenders with a history of violations, criminal and civil actions are started simultaneously. If individuals do not show up for court appearances, warrants are then issued and this may also delay the process. Under civil law, Mr. Clelland pointed out that the City could do home repairs such as painting etc. but this is a more complex issue and the City is reluctant to undertake home repairs as opposed to clean up of property. Mr. Clelland discussed the issue of emergency situations and cited the example of 7000 Oliver where there was trash in the back yard which was flammable and potentially a serious fire hazard. In this case the City obtained an order to remove the combustible items immediately. He noted that chapters 7, 12 and 19 have criminal penalties a�d also allow civil nroceedings. Next Mr. Clelland cited the example of 6301 Brooklyn Boulevard where an individual has 23 collector cars behind a six foot opaque fence. He apparently is not trading the cars and they remain behind the fence in his yard. He noted that, under City ordinance, the individual is not required to pave the area occupied by the cars if it is in the back yard. He noted the fence is not pleasing to look at but it meets the terms of the ordinance. Mr. Clelland noted that technically this individual is in compliance with the City ordinance. He explained that, as a technical amendment to Chapter 12, it may be appropriate to limit the number of collector cars an individual can have on their property. He added that the City may want to limit this to two to three cars. Mr. Clelland noted that RV, boat and trailer storage is permitted on residential properties but some people complain that RV's, boats, trailers etc. are just as unsightly as junk vehicles. Mr. Clelland discussed a number of miscellaneous items relative to code enforcement including the fact that residents need to know about the code enforcement process and that anonymous complaints are encouraged. He pointed out one thing the City has a difficult time finding out about is a"garbage house" since the City does not have authority to enter into homes without just cause. Mr. Clelland also encouraged a continuation of the block by block inspection of the City pointing out that the 7000 Oliver property went undetected for a considerable time and action was initiated by a complaint from a neighbor. In conclusion, Mr. Clelland stated that he believes the City has adequate laws and a system is in place to process violations. He noted that the City had been moving towards a computer system where the status of each property in violation can be checked. The Community Development Specialist noted that he would follow up on the status of the computer tracking system. 01-18-00 -3- Mr. Clelland acknowledged the problem with repeat offenders but stated he does not think we need a stronger ordinance to deal with chronic violators. He noted violators can now receive up to 90 days in jail for violations and he believes this is enough authority to deal with chronic offenders. Commissioner Deuel addressed the issue of unsightly fences in the City and noted the example of one in the area of 73rd and Humboldt. Mr.:Clelland replied that there is a legal principle called "void for vagueness" which means that the law is not able to be clearly interpreted. He noted this often comes into play when discussions of attractiveness or unattractiveness regarding property is discussed. Commissioner Yelich inquired as to the requirements for ground cover on yards. Mr. Clelland noted that it is his understanding that lawns in the City must have ground cover that meet community standards and that 50 of the front yard area can be paved but that the rest must be planted with appropriate ground cover. He also referred to chapter 19 paragraph 103 subdivision 14A which provides that vehicles must be parked on improved surfaces. He noted that this does not prevent someone from paving their backyard. Commissioner Carmody discussed the issue of planting native grasses and other things versus grass and how to establish a community standard. Mr. Clelland discussed this issue and noted �I that these instances are fairly rare but in most situations unkempt lawns do contain noxious weeds which are required to be removed. He noted this is one approach for dealing with unkempt lawns. Mr. Clelland inquired of the commission members whether there were any situations that he had left unaddressed. Commission Yelich noted that he has seen a couple of places he drives by on occasion that appear to be repeat ofFenders and include junk cars in their yazds. Mr. Clelland noted that in the past a housing target team had been established to keep track of the high priority properties in the City. He explained he had talked recently to the Community Development Director about starting this up again to better track the high priority violators and repeat offenders. He then encouraged Housing Commission members to call either the Code Enforcement Officer or his office at 561-2800 to report any code violations. He noted that he can also be reached at his Internet address which is mishka@isd.net. Chairperson Erickson thanked Mr. Clelland for speaking with the Commission tonight. ELECTION OF CHAIRPERSON AND APPOINTMENT OF VICE CHAIR Chairperson Erickson opened the floor for nominations for chair of the Housing Conunission and tumed the meeting over to Vice Chairperson Lloyd Deuel to complete the election process. There was a motion by Commissioner Arm and seconded by Commissioner Deuel to nominate Ernie Erickson for Chair of the Housing Commission. 01-18-00 -4- I Commissioner Deuel inquired if there were any other nominations. Hearing none, he asked a second and third time and hearing none he entertained a motion for a unanimous ballot to elect Ernie Erickson as Chair of the Housing Commission. There was a motion by Commissioner Arm and seconded by Commissioner Carmody to cast a unanimous ballot for re-election of Ernie Erickson as chair of the Housing Commission. The motion passed unanimously. Chairperson Erickson reappointed Commissioner Lloyd Deuel as Vice Chair for the year 2000 and Commissioner Deuel accepted the position of Vice Chair. REVIEW OF COMMISSIONER YELICH'S MEMO TO CITY COUNCIL Chairperson Erickson referred Commissioners to a memorandum to the City Council from the Housing Conunission written by Commissioner Yelich. He noted this was follow up from the last meeting. The Housing Commission'�riefly reviewed Commissioner Yelich'� z�Lrn� and discussed s�me of the items reviewed by Mr. Clelland and agreed to forward the memo to the City Council for their consideration. There was a motion by Commissioner Carmody and seconded by Commissioner Arm to forward Commissioner Yelich's memorandum regarding Chapter 12 to the City Council for their review and consideration and response to the Commission. The motion passed. OTHER BUSINESS Chairperson Erickson congratulated Muhammed Okoya-Lawal for his reappointment to the Commission. The Community Development Specialist noted he had received an item from the City Manager to distribute to commission members from Ms. Donna Zieska, 5455 Brooklyn Boulevard. He noted it was a copy of an article regarding house inspections passed along from Ms. Zieska. He proceeded to pass out of the article to commission members. ADJOURNMENT There was a motion by Commissioner Arm and seconded by Commissioner Okoya-Lawal to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed. The Brooklyn Center Housing Commission adjourned at 8:45 p.m. Chairperson O1-18-00 -5-