Having just sold a house in Minneapolis I have mixed feelings about the
Truth
in Housing requirements.  The greater percentage of things that I had to
fix
were picayune.  Things like pipes that had been abandoned needing to be
cut
off -- they weren't a hazard and had been there and were okay-fine when
I
bought the house, now suddenly they are a problem?

I don't -- and didn't -- object to fixing things like pinpoint gas
leaks,
enclosing electrical junctions in boxes, etc.  These are all having to
do
with safety, and I agree that it is important to make sure these things
get
fixed at the time a house changes hands, or it is too easy for the new
owner
to agree to fix them, and then let them slide.  This is a large part of
the
reason why housing stock deteriorates and the law makes sure this no
longer
happens.

If they could rewrite the law so that only major safety hazards were
required
to be repaired, I wouldn't mourn it's passing.  But, based on my recent
experience, the law goes far, far beyond that.

Have others on the list had recent experience with this law, and what is
your
impression?
Barbara Nelson
Burnsville
(recently of Minneapolis)



_______________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy
Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more:
http://e-democracy.org/mpls

Reply via email to