[Mpls] Getting the numbers wrong on apartments

2003-08-03 Thread mplsgordon2
In a message dated 8/2/2003 1:35:23 AM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 With a total city-wide population of under 400,000, I question your observation that 
 there's well over 100,000 rental units in the city of Minneapolis. 

Dennis busts me here, and he's right. I was thinking of the total number of housing 
units--168,363. The correct number for rental units is 78,860. Quite a bit less than 
100,000, but still a large number for 25 licensing inspectors.

Dennis writes:
However, if your numbers are accurate, and each rental unit 
paid a platry $25/year licensing fee that means you generate $2,500,000 annually with 
which to operate the rental inspection prgram.

The fees are $33 for the first unit in a building and $20 for each additional unit. I 
can't break out the number of single family homes from the census summary, but 
assuming Dennis' $25 figure as an average yields $1,971,500. This is *not* a hard 
budget number, only a guesstimate.

Dennis again:
 That being said, stating that there's only about 25 licensing inspectors to handle 
 that workload somehow doesn't make me feel any better, or less justified in feeling 
 that we're both not looking after the  best interests of our communities housing 
 stock, or the renters on the lower-end of the rental market.

M.G:
I agree with you here. And I'm sure the housing inspections department would like more 
inspectors to get the work done faster.

Dennis concludes:
As a matter of fact, I'd kind of liken it to telling everyone during their monday 
morning commute after a winter snowstorm that we only have enough plow trucks for 
half the roads.  It 
doesn't make sense either.

M.G.:
Well, we kind of do tell folks that when we say we can't get all the roads cleared 
within 24 hours and have to do it over four days.

--M. G. Stinnett
Jordan
TEMPORARY REMINDER:
1. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.
2. If you don't like what's being discussed here, don't complain - change the subject 
(Mpls-specific, of course.)



Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy
Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls


Re: [Mpls] Getting the numbers wrong on apartments

2003-08-03 Thread Dennis Plante
MG:

While I understand the need to be fiscally responsible from a budgetary 
standpoint on issues such as rental property licensing/inspections, I also, 
on the other hand, understand how easy it is to build a case for doing so 
with quantifiable statistics, such as what you've done.

However, the impact of (the City) not requiring a provisional rental 
licensed property to undergo an inspection within a finite period of time 
has both large financial and quality of life implications on many of the 
Citys' poorest neighborhoods.

In the early to mid-90's, during the time when white-flight occurred in 
North Minneapolis, property values tumbled.  Suburban investors with a few 
dollars in their pockets and a desire to improve both their net worth and 
cashflow came into neighborhoods such as Jordan and bought-up single family 
residents as investments.

A good case study for this type of activity would be 3007 Irving Av N.  The 
property was sold by Hud in 1997 for I believe, $37,000.  From 1997 through 
2003, the investor NEVER had a City inspector on the premises, rented it out 
the entire time at a profit, and was able to leverage it for an additional 
$63,000 in liquidity, which was used to purchase additional investments on 
the northside.  Further investigation would reveal that for a majority of 
that period, it was rented w/o having a rental license.  It was recently 
sold (again to an outside, multi-unit investor) and now at least has a 
provisional license.  This outide investor bought and sold roughly two 
dozen properties in my neighborhood over this 10-year period.  The majority 
of which were not operated legally, or in compliance with city ordinances.  
He is one of many still operating on the northside.

But wait a minute you say.  If it (3007 Irving) was recently sold, a truth 
in housing inspection was performed, requiring the new owner to at least 
correct the defects prior to renting it out, yet again.  I haven't checked, 
but I would be willing to bet (giving you very attractive odds) that is not 
the case.  I an aware of instances where properties were bought with truth 
in housing inspections performed that required permits to be pulled, and 
subsequently resold (a chargeable offense I believe), without ever having 
the required work done.  There's no procedure in place to catch these 
infractions.

As a city, we do a disservice to our taxpaying residents by not revamping 
the inspections dept, and closing more of these loopholes.  I don't fault 
the actual inspectors, they're doing the best they can with what they have.  
I do however, question the wisdom (of the City) for continuing to pump 
monies such as NRP dollars into neighborhoods the benefits of which, are 
being realized dissproportinately by outside investors.

There are large social implicactions that affect this activity and allow it 
continue.  I, as a white, middle-class, taxpaying male, even though I live 
in Jordan, only remotely understand.  I will however(not very well I'm 
sure), try to explain them.

While sitting w/ Don Samuels last nite, the final nite of his vigil, we were 
visited (for the second time this week) by a middle-aged African american 
male that came to chat.  He had many things to say regarding our 
neighborhood.  Most of which, Don had to interpret and explain to me 
afterthe resident left.

While he visited, I asked this man if he intended to participate in our 
citizen patrols.  His answer - in his forty-some-odd years, he had seen 
many such actions come down the pike.  Concern by those that really don't 
have a clue as to what the lives of the majority of the residents in Jordan 
- lower-income African Americans, is like.  While he seemed interested in 
what we were doing, he communicated to us that he was going to wait a little 
longer to see how things unfolded, before he became involved.

Having lived a life that's been relatively free of social discrimmination, I 
was, understandably, full of contempt for the visitors' lack of desire to 
become involved.  It was only AFTER hearing that he had served his country 
during the Vietnam Conflict, been involved with the social uprising in the 
south in the late 60's and was still faced with large social injustice 
issues, that I began to understand his position.

How does this relate to the inspections issue?  The majority of our renters 
in Jordan are in fact, African Americans.  Our society has set-up a rental 
inspections system that relies heavily on citizen participation.  In the 
more affluent neighborhoods, where the residents are used to seeing results 
(socially) to their involvement, things work well.  In the more impoverished 
neighborhoods, such as Jordan, where the majority of the residents STILL 
feel disenfranchised, it does NOT.

Continuing on, I have nothing but the utmost respect for Don Samuels and the 
position he's taken on the issue of livabilty in our neighborhood.  I also 
have the utmost fear for him.  He's done the