Revisiting rental housing
PROTECTED CONTENT
If you’re a current subscriber, log in below. If you would like to subscribe, please click the subscribe tab above.
Username and Password Help
Please enter your email and we will send you a password reset link.
The City of Mount Ayr held a council work session with the city’s attorney on Wednesday, September 25 to discuss legal questions pertaining to the drafted rental housing ordinance that stalled out at the August 5 council meeting.
Jason Palmer, with Lamson Dugan & Murray LLP and City Administrator Brent Wise attended the work session virtually via Zoom, while Steve Fetty, Dennis Dugan, and council members attended in person.
The council had previously voted not to have a third reading of the proposed rental housing ordinance at their August 5 meeting after it had passed the first and second readings on May 20 and June 5 respectively.
Wise led council members through a review of the rental housing code and helped facilitate a discussion about any lingering questions they had. Council members discussed the legal necessity of specific statements pertaining to the maintenance of rental housing units, and how they would realistically be enforced.
“The inspector can use their discretion on how they want to handle it,” noted Palmer.
Discussion about taking out anything they don’t want in the ordinance up front and whether it was better to make changes before or after an ordinance is adopted then transitioned into a review of the fee structure.
Council members agreed that the fee structure needed to be adjusted to make it as simple as possible for everyone involved.
Council member Chandra Poore suggested that the registration fee be aligned with the cost of a building permit.
“We shouldn’t charge more than a building permit,” stated Poore.
Discussion centered around whether each individual housing unit or building needed to have a registration fee.
“The goal is to get everyone registered,” Wise noted, “so we know where to go inspect.”
Moving on to inspection fees, the council discussed whether to offer a variable fee structure.
“Do we want to give an incentive if they pass inspection,” questioned Jessica Murphy.
The council discussed different ways they could offer a lower inspection fee if a property passed inspection. The council reached consensus on providing an incentive with property owners receiving their certificate of inspection upon payment of the inspection fee.
Lowering re-inspection fees, no-show fees, and tenant complaint inspection fees was also discussed, although council members agreed that those fees should be double the amount of the inspection fee.
The council also discussed adding language that would ensure tenants give their landlord notice of any potential issues prior to making a complaint with the city.
Moving on to the inspection checklist, it was noted that the document was for city staff purposes only, and would not need approval of the council.
“Properties are being inspected based on the code,” stated Palmer, “This is to assist the inspector in adhering to the code.”
The checklist guides the inspector through the property, prompting them on what to look for.
While Palmer did acknowledge the checklist needs to mirror the code and be accurate, it would not be subject to three readings of the city council like the code is. Rental property owners would be expected to review and reference the ordinance in adherence to the new code.
The council is planning to revisit the proposed rental housing ordinance and revised fee structure at their next regular council meeting set for Wednesday, October 16. At this point, the process starts over again, although the ordinance is essentially staying the same.
The city is required to have three readings of any new ordinance and a public hearing before adopting new rules for residents within the city limits of Mount Ayr.
