I saw in Saturday's paper that the compromise was enacted by the City Council. I applaud them for the new law, which is much more reasonable than the old one was and manages to keep the critical pieces -- issues related to health and safety -- intact and enforceable. Also, switching the responsible party from the seller to the buyer makes a lot of sense, as long as the inspection component is taken as seriously as it was in the previous law.
The one item I would take issue with, at least as I understand it from the paper's account, is that removal of vermin was not included as one of the items required under the new law. Since this is such a health issue, I wonder why? Could someone involved in enacting the new law please enlighten us about the logic behind this? Barbara Nelson Burnsville (Seward for 18 years) -- Barbara Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] "We have to do the best we can. This is our sacred human responsibility." - Albert Einstein, Physicist _______________________________________ 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
