HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 04/27/2004 - NEIGHBORHOOD QUALITY OF LIFE TASK FORCE UPDATE DATE: April 27, 2004 STUDY SESSION ITEM
STAFF: Fischbach/Atteberry/ FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL
Roy
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Neighborhood Quality of Life Task Force Update.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
1. Does Council wish to proceed with Mandatory Rental Registration with Voluntary Certification
(Option 2) or Mandatory Rental Licensing (Option 3)?
2. Does Council wish to include any of the listed"Variables"in addition to Rental Registration or
licensing?
3. Does Council wish to retain any form of an occupancy limit and incorporate it into Rental
Registration or Licensing?
4. What level of community outreach should staff undertake,and what kinds of feedback is Council
seeking?
Background and Work in Progress
At the March 9,2004 City Council Study Session Councilmembers were presented with a framework
of three options designed to address a number of quality of life issues in Fort Collins neighborhoods.
Council provided a range of feedback, including direction to implement Option 1 (policing
strategies,code and system improvements, and marketing strategies)and provide further details on
Option 2 (Rental Registration) and Option 3 (Rental Licensing).
Several of the Option 1 strategies have been implemented and others are in process. On May 4,2004
Council will consider first reading amendments to five ordinances dealing with unreasonable noise,
animals, weeds and rubbish, outdoor storage and public nuisances. All changes are designed to
enhance the City's enforcement of existing Code provisions.
Concurrently, work is progressing to better inform citizens about the City's various codes and
services such as the"Nuisance Hotline". Attachment A summarizes those efforts. Police Services
is also moving forward with the implementation of strategies to increase training and supervision
of officers assigned to party calls, closer tracking of these calls, and a pilot project to increase
response to noisy party complaints during high call-load hours.
Yet another strategy is that of creating a program called Community Party Partners, based on the
existing CSU Party Partners program. This is an educational forum for any community member who
has received a noise citation.
April 27, 2004 Page 2
Finally, staff from Police Services and the City Attorney's Office recently met with Judge Lane to
discuss procedures relating to noise violations. As a result, there is no longer a"standard"penalty
below the maximum of $1,000 and/or six months in jail for an unreasonable noise violation.
However, portions of the fine and/or jail sentence can still be suspended on a case-by-case basis.
These charges also are now considered to be "mandatory court" so defendants must appear for
arraignment. The impact of these changes, along with related internal procedural changes, will be
monitored and reported at a later date.
Rental Regulation: Best Practices and Other Community Programs
As noted earlier,Options 2 and 3 specifically address regulation of rental housing. Staff conducted
research from January—April 2004 by examining programs in other communities, with a focus on
university towns with similar issues to those found in Fort Collins. Data was gathered on numerous
city ordinances found in 15 communities recommended by neighbors, Council and staff (see
Attachment B). Telephone surveys were then conducted with seven communities:
Boulder, CO Iowa City, IA Lawrence, KS
East Lansing, MI Duluth, MN Chapel Hill, NC
Blacksburg, VA
Where possible, City staff talked with a staff person, landlord and resident in each community in
order to gain a variety of perspectives as to each program's effectiveness. Attachment C summarizes
those conversations. Several conclusions can be drawn:
1. Program goals and issues vary greatly from one community to the next. There are no
easy"apples to apples" comparisons that can be quickly drawn.
2. Those communities who had some version of the Public Nuisance Ordinance stated
that it was their most effective tool;staff,landlords and residents generally agreed on
this.
3. Perspectives on program effectiveness varied greatly from city to city and from
person to person. Iowa City, Iowa seemed to have the highest overall marks from
staff, landlords and residents.
Census data indicates there were approximately 19,700 rental units in Fort Collins in 2000. Of these
units, approximately 7,500 are single family detached, attached, and duplex rental units located in
single family zoning districts. Appendix D illustrates the distribution of single family zoning
districts throughout the city. Thus any program implemented in Fort Collins will potentially have
a wide impact on a variety of stakeholders, including tenants, neighbors, property owners and
property managers.
Rental Regulation: Options for Fort Collins
The analysis that follows looks closely at two potential programs for our community: Mandatory
Rental Registration with Voluntary Certification(Option 2)and Mandatory Rental Licensing(Option
3). Within each of these, several "Variations"are listed for Council's consideration. One of these
Variations, that of creating new, more enforceable occupancy limits, is discussed in greater detail
in Attachment E.
April 27, 2004 Page 3
Option 2: Mandatory Rental Registration with Voluntary Certification
Mandatory Rental Registration
1. Results in a data base containing:
Property address
Property owner name and contact information
Local contact information
2. Failure to register is a code violation; penalties include fine and/or jail
3. Minimal registration fee covers cost of administration. Fees in other communities
range from$25-$100/year. Staff anticipates a fee of approximately$25 annually will
be sufficient to cover costs.
4. Additional resources required to cover costs of program:
1 administrative FIE (compensation and benefits) $49,000
Ongoing operating funds $20,000
One time (primarily cost of space fees) $28,000
Total estimate: $69,000 ongoing, $28,000 one time
5. Any inspections are on a complaint basis, as with current practices
Voluntary Certification
1. Landlord provides proof of compliance in order to become certified
- Minimum housing standards met
- City provides lease addendum addressing nuisance issues, neighborhood
courtesies,etc.
- Must have satisfactory history of code compliance
- Acceptable parking provided(e.g.minimum number of spaces per bedroom)
- Owner or manager completes a landlord training class
2. Certified properties:
Can list through CSU Housing Fair and Off Campus Listing Services
Benefit from additional marketing tools
3. Certification recognized and promoted by City of Fort Collins and CSU
4. Additional resources required
Ongoing operating funds for marketing, monitoring and training: $5,000 -
$10,000
Variables to Option 2 for Council Consideration
A. Limit to residential zones,excluding apartment complexes of 4 units and higher
B. Mandatory parking standards
C. Create new, more enforceable occupancy limits
D. Mandatory inspection upon registration, either by the City or private contractor
E. Notify landlords and property managers of all police calls to property(regardless of citation)
April 27, 2004 Page 4
Pros and Cons of Mandatory Rental Registration with Voluntary Certification
Pros Cons
Rental Registration Rental Registration
Creates a standard of accountability for - Unknown what degree of positive
all rental property owners impact Registration alone will provide
- Increases City ability to enforce and track - Will be resisted by some stakeholders
code violations (property owners/managers) and/or not
- Landlords and property managers are seen as enough by others (neighbors)
notified sooner about code violations at - May create a perception of increasing
properties housing costs
Fees cover cost of program
- Low fees won't increase housing costs
- Pairing with Public Nuisance Ordinance
provides dual approach to gaining
compliance
Voluntary Certification Voluntary Certification
- Recognizes and rewards exemplary - Unknown what percentage of property
properties owners will opt for Certification
- Creates and encourages higher standards
- Benefits tenants by ensuring minimal and
higher habitability standards met, and
provides information on those properties
Variable A: Limit to residential zones Variable A: Limit to residential zones
- Lower cost because fewer units - Doesn't address apartments
- Focuses on high-nuisance call areas and - May create perception of unequal
properties treatment (of occupants, landlords or
neighbors)
Variable B: Mandatory parking Variable B: Mandatory parking
- Gets more cars off street - Requires inspections and related costs
- Ensures adequate capacity exists for each (see Inspections, Addendum X)FELIX
unit in neighborhood - May create perception of inequality
because no parking limitations for
owner occupied
Variable C: Create new, more enforceable Variable C: Create new, more enforceable
occupancy limits occupancy limits
Could better address neighborhood - May increase cost of housing
concerns about over-occupancy and - May increase numbers of rentals in
related problems single family neighborhoods as tenants
Could remove unenforceable aspects of are required to find other housing
existing "3-Unrelated" ordinance - Occupancy limits do not necessarily
May stem the transition of single family address behaviors
April 27, 2004 Page 5
owner-occupied homes into rental - May create perception of inequality
properties because no occupancy limits for
May result in migration from single families
family homes into apartments or other - May penalize responsible landlords and
multi-family housing tenants even if no problems exist
- Additional resources required for
investigation and prosecution
- May fall short of neighborhood
expectations if enforcement problems
persist
- Will result in under-utilization of
available housing
Variable D: Mandatory inspection upon Variable D: Mandatory inspection upon
Registration by City or private contractor Registration by City or private contractor
Benefits tenants by ensuring minimal - Higher cost to applicant and the City,
habitability standards met increasing cost of program
Illegal units will be identified and can be - May increase cost of housing
mitigated and/or eliminated - Removes major component of and
incentive for voluntary Certification
Variable E: Notify landlord of police calls Variable E: Notify landlord of police calls
- Landlords and property managers - System not currently in place to address
become aware of criminal activity at confidentiality, legal and logistical
property issues
- Can be designed so that cost of service - Time intensive and costly program to
will be covered by registration fees implement
- Addresses ongoing request by several
landlords and property managers
Option 3: Mandatory Residential Rental Licensing
1. Mandatory inspection upon application for license.
2. Ongoing mandatory inspections required
3. Establishes minimum parking requirements
4. Can be designed to address issues,e.g. occupancy, parking, safety,nuisance behaviors,
etc.
5. Penalties for non-compliance include revocation of license (can no longer use property
for rental)
6. Licensing fee imposed to recover administrative and enforcement costs
7. Additional resources required: estimates range from$280,000(biannual inspections of
rental units in single family zoning districts) to $600,000 (biannual inspections of all
residential rental units).
April 27, 2004 Page 6
Variables to Option 3 for Council Consideration
A. Limit to residential zones,excluding apartment complexes of 4 units and higher
B. Create new, more enforceable occupancy limits
C. Inspections on a complaint basis after licensing
D. Notify landlords and property managers of all police calls to property (regardless of
citation)
Pros and Cons of Mandatory Residential Rental Licensing
Pros Cons
Rental Licensing Rental Licensing
Increases safe housing and control over - Does not in and of itself address issues
nuisance violations surrounding behaviors and/or proof of
- Mandates property owner accountability occupancy
- Acknowledges rental properties as - Strong resistance by some stakeholders
regulated business activity (property owners, property managers,
Can be designed so that fees cover cost ASCSU, etc.)
of program - Could increase cost of housing
- Ensures adequate parking capacity exists - Some properties will not be brought
- Most comprehensive of all options into compliance, forcing tenants to find
alternative housing
- Intensive effort and high cost to design,
operate and enforce
- May create perception of inequality
because no parking limitations,
inspections, etc. for owner occupied
Variable A: Limit to residential zones Variable A: Limit to residential zones
- Lower cost of program because fewer - Doesn't address apartments
units - May create perception of unequal
- Focuses on high-nuisance call areas and treatment (of occupants, landlords or
properties neighbors)
Variable B: Create new, more enforceable Variable B: Create new, more enforceable
occupancy limits occupancy limits
- Could better address neighborhood - May increase cost of housing
concerns about over-occupancy and - May increase numbers of rentals in
related problems single family neighborhoods as tenants
- Could remove unenforceable aspects of are required to find other housing
existing "3-Unrelated"ordinance - Occupancy limits do not necessarily
- May stem the transition of single family address behaviors
owner-occupied homes into rental - May create perception of inequality
properties because no occupancy limits for
- May result in migration from single families
family homes into apartments or other - May penalize responsible landlords and
April 27, 2004 Page 7
Pros and Cons of Mandatory Residential Rental Licensing
Pros Cons
multi-family housing tenants even if no problems exist
- Additional resources required for
investigation and prosecution
- May fall short of neighborhood
expectations if enforcement problems
persist
Will result in under-utilization of
available housing
Variable C: Complaint-based inspections Variable C: Complaint-based inspections
after licensing after licensing
- Decreases cost of program because fewer - Does not address health and safety of
number of units inspected all rental occupants
- Focuses on problem properties rather - Some illegal or problem properties will
than well-managed properties not be identified and mitigated
Variable D: Notify landlord of police calls Variable D: Notify landlord of police calls
- Landlords and property managers - System not currently in place to address
become aware of criminal activity at confidentiality, legal and logistical
property issues
- Can be designed so that cost of service - Time intensive and costly program to
will be covered by registration fees implement
- Addresses ongoing request by several
landlords and property managers
Community Outreach
At the March 2, 2004 Study Session Council directed staff to wait until more information was
gathered before conducting community outreach on this subject. Stakeholder interest is very high,
given the potential impacts of any programs pursued. Thus staff is asking for direction on the level
of outreach Council wants to undertake and the nature of the feedback sought.
At a minimum, staff recommends that any outreach to the community include information on the
option Council has directed staff to further pursue at the April 27,2004 study session. This would
likely be in the form of press releases,fact sheets and meetings held with various stakeholder groups
who express interest. A more intensive outreach would involve seeking out any and all stakeholder
groups who might have an interest in the topic and asking for feedback from those parties using a
variety of methods: surveys, comment forms, one-on-one and group meetings, etc. Stakeholders
could be asked their opinions about various program components, including their perspectives on
how each component could best be implemented.
April 27, 2004 Page 8
A clear message to the community is needed in regards to the input Council is seeking. If a program
idea or course of action has been decided and is not actually"negotiable", it is important that this
be conveyed to the community. If, on the other hand, Council wishes to use community input to
continue to generate program ideas, that message should also be clearly communicated.
Past experience has shown that any outreach on this topic is likely to be fairly time- and staff-
intensive because of the high level of interest and emotion this topic evokes. Thus the greater level
of outreach undertaken,the more time will be needed to effectively conduct that outreach and gather
feedback from community members.
ATTACHMENTS
A. Nuisance Hotline Marketing Proposal
B. Table of Communities with Rental Licensing Programs
C. Survey Regarding Rental Licensing Programs
D. City of Fort Collins Single Family Zone Districts Map
E. Alternative Occupancy Limit Provision
Attachment A: Nuisance Hotline Marketing Proposal
Following is a proposal that includes effective,timely,and cost-efficient options for marketing the Nuisance Hotline
number to Fort Collins citizens.
Medium Cost Time Frame Details
City Cable 27 commercial $800 for production July 1,2004 Airing of spots would be free
ready for airing on Cable 27. Airtime on
additional channels could be
purchased.
City Cable 27"City at a Free June 2004
Glance'
Business card size $650 for 5000 or Late June,ready for Magnets could be distributed
magnets $1,050 for 10,000 summer events in Neighborhood Night Bags,
at Thursday night market,
door to door during
community welcome,and in
various City locations
Coloradoan Soapbox Free Would recommend June Article presented by Mayor,
article submission to coincide City Manager,or Council
with other marketing member
materials
Coloradoan columns by Free Code Enforcement article Neighborhood Resources and
City Employees Code Compliance have
alternating Saturday articles
Neighborhood News Free Could include standing
Newsletter Nuisance Hotline number
reminder in all issues
(quarterly)
City News bulletin Free Currently featured in Large benefit since almost
April 2004 edition will every household receives this
plan follow-up in bulletin
September 2004 edition
Direct link from main Free Already completed
fcgov.com page to
Nuisance Hotline Web
site
Business cards featuring $37.50 per 1000 Late June,ready for Cards could be carried and
the Nuisance Hotline summer events distributed by Council
number and reasons to members,City staff, and
call neighbors.
Radio highlight on KRFC Free June 31d or anytime after New program is reaching a
on a three week cycle large audience
CSU Free Fall semester at the If a contact could be made,
Advertising/journalism earliest. this would be a fun and
class exciting way to involve the
CSU population and to get
new and creative ideas
Page 9 of 16
w
0
_o
p b N O O v. N I"ii O T
bo
O N N = cd
OL Li
U ,e'r60y °O uin p, n Y N
C m O '0 z P i W� O\ 00 IO
pY Y G U
PC z a `o a z fi m z } }Y c
W u N :r V pp 'O e T W P .f a '� Y � N •• O O O W 3 0. 0
GL L O Y Y L m ai V u COO 'O b0 y •j Q ty ^ L N o C, Y pOp
'bo n p N ,Wo, 5t o m .� Y o Y Y Y > 0 Y C o ° ` > 'o >
aoE ._ ..,R A c cL rt .. wL OG �. U a Y a �
O
4-1b W y Y�Y N `• .r r� T W 0. n •• y
y C C TO U y T T N cOi O T 0
a7 O .r �O N .2
T CC F Y Y i O
O Opw
pw
g0' �.Qyf ewqe O C
'd OCD
V7
Eci
ty � 9 v0 .5
b 0 A O 0
'i . N y �. cq Y �. 3 [0C •Nj d 'd9
y qk
.H
..r Y vi ai ai v
rzo r > ra a > r > r >
N
O �'' m•• N y ? 5 '.
y O V C Cc 'p y �• Y � itl .
O
al Qy n V O\ y 0 E O j U C U V y V
Z H P O T Oc ❑ ,C u C
'wr v! b y L
ue v � vo yvi Qv
8 appi
�1ce
q O tFy OGWG O 6zO �jj�iO YO
�1 V U Q� u �` r.JS Ali Q �
0
F ~
o n � �n $ a $ •- � m " ey o o�q
.W. o
V h M owFp b TN N c T m P y N
E
aAn +05mz < AXv� o XWUFviUvi .OiYa �o
O CuC ,Y� CC Cy p
O y p Ci W ttl G m p V
u u y p q Vim.. o
auo !g
awy u E u o" y o � Y 5 y " u
ra0 r •e •e za .�> qF a •o ❑ Ea .a
O �p T '9 F 4 •� o � p T � 6 C ❑� g C 7 C "d 60 �+�c � p W � E $ G y O
WO C L '.p^ '❑O � O
p c m•fig C C {L� �cOj .L ^ O r� y �tl .c. 'F'
'p3p m F y Y m M yy y y y" g .Y `• O
•�' G y `• 9 w ^vyi ?i pp 5O� o V•O 6 yY o Fyp SS .CAD o & Ym •.. ,ry .So
Q > WE x. 3 .c. v `� w ..1 C N a P..« o Gi' 4G C X U v
F9Y °J Tx u � yE oaw •$p
C 3 =2 y
C y Q �•p Y W {l Y � P. Y Y Y E y p
c o m 0 't. cc
n 9
iy C
a •d �; u8, .5ry
ad � OoHma
a p
a g ❑ 3 ,re6avT
a � 0 � 05 � oac� E
C a u y u o �.
r A o y m 0 -
` 0
0
02u
O ,c
•��" u c vi .5 X y •-
m E Y u m ^y
r >
v a 00
0
N
u g W � .�
aim $ a « �. oY � Yu a ° 5o � a3 ,te-oy � 'oo oq,
y myiEj
12
w y C
> es Z y
� o
o
w
0
N
T N
.n O h Npp T YO 20 > N Oq
C �
tl O
d
o "" to CO
O .+ U ❑ U cC xi
ti i O " " o
d U � 0 9 m 0
CY N
0
o b0. o a n iv °'
o o L a 40.
°o h c ^v
de, A a o a arr o o b
N O, (V -00
cl
cl
1.
0 2 b wp, b00
> O
a0 3 a y vo b C _� y o 00 3 °
b ac. � xb w Old
C O Ox .d o m
O �C
a
y 3 cc
w v ° ° a o~on a >
Q
O 06 O y y y py O CO O O W H
ea .a a' pn o Cd 'd ° c
c .a
L % O . ..+ p O , .y C w coi .0 0. ro
a on o 91 p w 3QU) 0 N A = & 0 r.
o
^ b a bn•o �C w K o 0 aai d "tea
Co 0 �, q ci G O y h N
C� C:+ h L ai •> N q b �d N M pq vOi U ai O ,Op p cad
.0�+ w w A N J'.. .o, 0 p .Y. .. 'Cd Q Oq
ca u .Q e a i G c a b4 .> .� "" abi o ai d aTi r " 00 ° ti
L vUi m. GrTWi oc�0 t0�o O o pp „ p ,n o odoFFd".' yaCUi nO .Q8 Wvo
m = 0 fl 'yo v o 4. z ;9 c�i z '- z a p � c� vs
� ': daiUdoa U d 0.1 Udai ti daiUd ai U
w
� � o
C
❑ U o � v 00 > oCL v o z o
N ti vl Cl) O
3 a � o0 C) n o r ^ rl
x ° o
� •4. ..1 M xi h � � (/l � ° .pd Vl � bn 7J l�
O 00 U ctl 00 ro CyC'06
Q ►.I W Vl ti Vl Q i--i xi N N V i7 N
w
°
m
° eo 0 0
wY , �+ o U3 � °
pT "Cl N ,d W
o
enm U C1« N
b
o � zoo axa � = p � °oo
N ; �� O � wmoy o ad N V C C •o
q y U W Y adU . Q 0 Oo U •d ,Q
off . m ° ° � w^ o a0
2
m
� a C) o
p m •d .� U U ti m .. .� vi o a� O
zl
a o
Nr� O °'° o
:tiO3 > rov roO N
0 n . on o
> a
O ^�U
w° o
'o
a � clo
o ° M
Co tV ^O y d r' �U+
U W .> C cd Y w C.
a " ° ° ml °dd a°i °o m ° o 0 o
d ° c c Nn b 3
0 O O o f `g U a o cd
�. Q � W � �'' y .d DO 4.)
R1
N O ram,,d `� '" m ai � 'O � w
C
^a ° G � cq� b S b
�0. v '�
oo 0 a>i Q w >
p ° � °q 4' 1 o
° � te "a ,c
U O O Q .Fti' " f�'
G eb v 3 O r� o 'o 00 w w ° �' "alI{=.� E
y .d Y •Y m � ri 3 N Y Ld f0
'> d. °° Um U o � �'••i ro. ka .•�+•
WO Q �o � >
°° U 3 ° d0 Q0agI 0 c . 3No 0 0o o
C, 006Yo rn z w 'S z z El Lo m z c1 'm ,-. .-.
d W ci daiU d aici d aiU dai U dcgU
5
O e}' �i m 1 N in V' n 6 N 1 0 N
a brn ° oo a� b � Oo�o mU ym aCiv
o C d
�+ °, 3 u vi c v w'0 v 3 0 o o °
l� �1ON J > F- W� � � a' �
w
^�
O
U 0 N p ..+ Op, t0
.d a. bUyry0 c� T N cd 7 3 •� bU0
d 7 N p O ° 7w
0 .- t� J-. b '«v"i o cd .T, w >.
0 o y o Ndv ° 63•Q qu
� a 0 > a��ixa ° �
O U
° a Dti OA o a a o ° pt, Q pp a Y boo o go
kh a"i d ° O O o� A 0. ,, o N
a " x ° 3 ° 6o �p a daa
A .cOua3 � ' daoa.a � � Y0o
O
°
aK
0 b H
° O °
p0 p N
ba b
>, °q a
a
018 `>1 Z
bn bn
OCd
U
y 00 4 C. 1N1yy U v�i C p "0w O
Ci 'C N N N 'O a+ E; N bD N
c 3 p '9 oy ° ti
N [=i 4py .Ni
'° H N C .- b Q >' ,�w U
f0
a ° o en o 3 $ o.
d y
9 N N N y 'd •- O as
N .v N Q ❑U❑y b " •� >r wUC. O mgycd 0.)3 "o
'
w
N t " QOOw' 0 a0 a a7y0 rn 0 ..Q
CLI
oo $ bb w° E E 'y C yvov�
' ' p Gas q G >. �., N y y Y. ... p �.' q 3
3 oA 2, y 02 � � 0 9 y � A
u" ° c a p „ a a�, y .Q w° q away U
3 L' �d .� p O Oi vpi V cp�tl m r.
0 ~ 4-i b0 0 'C 's T
at e G 3 w
o °❑❑ a o " 8 � ° °a ° ° ; o 0
ti
O c' " 0 O O Q' rw-i-i T W y y +=' O O yO
.-. bo W 'O 00 5 .--� �`' �-. 00 .d Z in `p ro p,o w ClcV M
O
m Q v ON E v
a3i ''� w � Nba
ov ° v z d c °7cn � v w° orn
v .dM orn $ rn
.cov '`� ri � o o
[� � M W z W F OV 0U .r-l- M U .aM
Attachment D:
Cijy of Fort Collins Single FamilyZone Districts
HIT
' a COMfY
i
;
' \ W
((
C
l • tI EMMOMRY eT
PnWnECT Mhf' M
ti •
I
I �� N ttYVN RIk .' Qq no `
L
'l -
Jr-,
- ! t ; � � ,• � ;
W YIID �l : _ M,E AIMYR
Legend
Growth Management Area
�,_i City Limits-Area E coo;n
Zoning
UE-Urban Estate
RL-Low Density Residential N
e��+41�MJrm Gyu
-NDL-Neighborhood Conservatbn Low Density
LAN-Low Density Mwed-Use Neighborhood '""''"01
Page 15 of 16
• Attachment E: Alternate Occupancy Limit Provision
1. The occupancy limit provision would be removed from the zoning code and
rewritten in a more straightforward fashion. "Occupied" would be defined, in addition to
defining "dwelling unit' and "family."
2. A violation of this provision would be made a civil infraction punishable by a fine
only, rather than a misdemeanor criminal offense with a possible jail sentence. This
would: (a) lower the burden of proof(from proof beyond a reasonable doubt to proof by a
preponderance of the evidence); (b) allow the prosecution to call the defendant(s) to the
witness stand; (c) relax the rules of evidence; (d) allow cases to be heard by a hearing
officer to avoid a substantial increase in the Municipal Court caseload.
3. Upon receipt of substantiated complaints investigators would: (a) contact the
occupants and inspect the premises, (b) check the license numbers of cars regularly
parked in front of the premises against Department of Motor Vehicles records to see who
owns the vehicles, (c) and/or seek information from the Postal Service as to who receives
mail at the premises in question.
4. If the investigation indicated a violation, then the tenants, owners and property
managers would all be cited for the violation. Upon conviction, fines would be assessed
against each defendant. Fines would increase for subsequent violations.
•
Page 16 of 16