BROOKINGS – Amendments to the rental dwelling units ordinance has landlords and property managers up in arms, but the Brookings city staff insists the new wording changes very little.
In the end, the Brookings City Council voted 5-1 last week to approve the new wording of the ordinance. Councilor Leah Brink was the dissenting vote.
Mayor Keith Corbett was absent; Deputy Mayor Patty Bacon presided. Councilor Nick Wendell was present by phone.
Reason for change
“A majority of the recommended changes to the Rental Dwelling Unit ordinance are contained in other sections of the City of Brookings Municipal Code of Ordinances. However, due to the language not being specifically listed in the Rental Dwelling Unit section of the code, staff is unable to withhold a rental license,” wrote Mike Struck, director of Community Development, in a memo attached to the agenda, which is available on the city’s website.
“Compiling the codes and adding them to the Rental Dwelling Unit ordinances re-emphasizes the importance of the code requirements and places a greater emphasis on correcting the violation in a timely manner as the rental license is withheld until such time as the issue is resolved,” he said.
Background
The council has been discussing the topic since at least February. City staff has researched the topic and made changes to the ordinance.
Councilors have been discussing ways to make sure repairs are done in a timely manner and how to hold tenants and landlords accountable for violations.
“Staff held various meetings with interested parties, including a small group meeting in December with property managers, a meeting with international tenants in February, three meetings with tenants in February, and a large group meeting with property managers/owners in early March,” Struck wrote.
“Staff discussed feedback provided at each of the meetings and revised the recommendations based upon the merits of the discussion,” he added.
Public discussion
The only ones to speak during the public hearing last week were property managers or property owners.
Shawn Storhaug with Brookings Property Management pointed out that several property owners/managers spoke out against the changes at previous meetings and no one spoke in favor of it.
“So I think that should tell us something,” he said.
Storhaug said he was under the impression that the suggestions from the study session would come back to the council as another first reading, and he said the landlords were told the council would not be voting on the ordinance at that meeting.
“And here we are on June 11 and the exact same ordinance is up here on the table; there is no clarification and I assume that we intend to vote on this tonight,” Storhaug said.
He had concerns about some aspects of the amendment, particularly in the electric section. He wanted the council to give clarification and then have another first reading in the future.
Storhaug said a common theme in Brookings is affordable housing, and the landlords do their best to provide that. The ordinances require them to make “certain investments … but we never have anything that goes the opposite way that helps us provide more affordable housing,” Storhaug said.
He brought up the rule regarding no more than three non-related people living in a house that has four or five bedrooms and plenty of parking, but Deputy Mayor Patty Bacon interrupted him to say that they were not discussing that in this meeting because it was not part of the ordinance. He would have to bring it up with the Planning Commission, which would then bring it before the council.
Storhaug said some landlords were not there that night because they were under the impression there wouldn’t be a vote and he hoped that was not by design.
Bacon apologized if the landlords thought there would be no vote.
“I don’t remember saying that we would not be voting on this,” she said. “I’m sorry if that’s how you understood that at the study session.”
“If there are indeed changes or amendments tonight, we would do a third reading, which is when a final vote would take place,” said Councilor Dan Hansen.
Kevin Grunewaldt of Grunewaldt Properties said the landlords are concerned and would like to review the ordinance at the next meeting so they could have an open discussion.
“It’s been posted since last Thursday, so it’s been available for you to read,” Bacon said.
Grunewaldt also brought up the cost of making the changes, saying putting in one outlet isn’t much, but to cut into and re-do a wall can be $1,500 to $2,000, and rewiring for a three-wire system could go up to $25,000.
“It’s not a small amount. One thing leads to another, leads to another on your updates,” Grunewaldt said.
Bacon said the council was not asking them to install new outlets and cut holes in the walls, but if an existing outlet was within 5 feet of a sink, then it needs to be changed.
“I’m saying you don’t understand that, that’s not the way it’s written,” Grunewaldt said.
Grunewaldt brought up the three unrelated tenants and Bacon reiterated that they had to take the initiative with the Planning Commission.
Mike McClemans also brought up the three unrelated tenants issue. After some discussion on the process of getting that changed, Bacon said the council didn’t have to address it that night since it isn’t a proposed change to the ordinance, but it could still be brought before the Planning Commission.
Explaining the changes
Struck explained the changes to the ordinance, most of which appear in the “last page or two,” he said. Most of the codes are adopted through national codes, like the mechanical, building, fire, plumbing, electrical and property maintenance.
The gist is if owners make any change or repairs, they have to bring it into compliance with current code, he said.
He said changes can’t be made to the ordinance in a study session but can be made in the regular council session.
In that case, it would have been brought back for another reading at another council meeting.
Clearance zones
Dennis Bielfeldt with Den-Wil Investments asked about storage of combustible materials, like clothes, near hot water heaters. Will the council prohibit clothes near hot water heaters?
Bielfeldt also said he’d like the council to delay the vote on the ordinance so everybody could get on the same page.
Struck said if you meet the clearance zones, it’s acceptable. The reason it’s in code is the tanks get hot, and if they get hot enough, can catch the combustible materials on fire. Tenants cram them full of boxes, clothes, bikes and other items.
The city referenced the fire codes for their wording in the ordinance, he said.
“I applaud you for caring about our residents – we certainly do – but we need to make sure that we don’t, you know, try to fix a problem that doesn’t exist,” Bielfeldt said.
Council speaks
“Personally, I’m still not convinced that the problem that we’re trying to solve is gonna be helped by this particular legislation. If we’re suffering from a lack of compliance with existing legislation, I don’t know how this is gonna fix that,” Brink said.
She said affordable housing is an issue in Brookings.
“I believe passage of this ordinance as written is gonna have a direct negative impact on that affordability for those who need it most,” Brink said.
She said reasonable requests for clarification have been made.
“And to me it’s also very significant that (we) haven’t heard from anyone in the public and there’s no one here tonight speaking for those changes,” Brink said.
She listed her major concerns as lighting and electrical, and the ventilation requirement “as the most onerous for the property owner community.”
Bacon asked if she wanted to make an amendment and Brink suggested striking “both of those sections entirely” and to eliminate the agent being required during inspections.
The motion died for lack of a second.
Brink asked how the council could make the ordinance more intelligible.
Hansen said he was hesitant to add specific things from building codes into the ordinance because it would be redundant, and then when building code is updated, the ordinance would have to change “every single time.”
He pointed out “these are expectations that are already currently in place” and the only real change the council is making is how the licenses are done and the enforcement.
Struck said they can now ask property owners and managers to change things, but the city does not have the ability to withhold the license.
Right now, Hansen said, the city has to go through the legal system to get repairs made, all while the landlord still holds the rental license and continues to rent.
“This allows us to actually prevent that person from continuing to rent when we clearly have seen that their building is not up to code,” Hansen said.
Brink asked when the license would be withheld; would it be for a small infraction?
Some discretion is allowed by the inspector, Struck said. Most infractions would not trigger a license being withheld, but a life-safety issue could.
Brink said that could open the door for inconsistency.
There is subjectivity involved in the inspection process because there are different construction methods utilized to achieve the same result and different ways to reach compliance, Struck explained. That’s where consistent training comes in.
Councilor Holly Tilton Byrne said if you get a traffic ticket, you can appeal it. Is there a process for appealing the inspection infractions?
Struck explained the process which could go as far as the city manager and then to the council.
There would be a judicial review, as well, City Attorney Steve Britzman said.
Having the landlord present and able to have a dialogue with the inspector could head off the need for appeals, Tilton Byrne said.
And lessen the probability of re-inspections, Struck added.
Contact Jodelle Greiner at jgreiner@brookingsregister.com.
