Morris Rental Housing Commission

Meeting Minutes

April 24^th, 2008

Morris City Council Chambers

4:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m.

Present: John Amundson, Cheryl Brevig, Noah Clark, Melanie Fohl, Henry Fulda, Charlie Glasrud, Blaine Hill, Dan Johnson, Alex Murphy, Hilda Parks, Steve Rudney, Melissa Sherod, Greg Thorson.

Call to order

The meeting was called to order at 4:03 p.m.

Approval of the Agenda

Approved as submitted.

Approval of the minutes

Corrected the date from February 28^th to March 27^th. Approved with that correction.

Charles Glasrud on Rental Housing Evaluation System

Greg Thorson posed an open question to Charles Glasrud about whatís permissible in a landlord rating system. Glasrud asked what exactly the Commission was thinking about in terms of a rental evaluation system. Thorson responded that the basic intention was to have a systematized analysis of landlords and housing based on satisfaction. Glasrud asked whether the intention was to rate properties or to rate people. He continued; stating that if properties are being rated, there would be concerns about statements of fact that are potentially untrue. Glasrud noted that itís more legally uncomfortable when rating landlords due to the possibility of personal attacks.

Steve Rudney said he was opposed to rating properties or landlords due to how properties can change over time. He noted that if each of his tenants was asked about him, then each of them would give a different answer. Henry Fulda asked who was intended to be rating. Greg Thorson described the system as being like e-bayís ratings in the sense that the ratings could reward quality. Fulda noted the need for a lot of ratings to reveal a pattern rather than one or two evaluations. He continued that it might take a few years to accumulate the number of ratings necessary to show a pattern. Charles Glasrud brought up that even one rating can be useful to educating a consumer. Glasrud posed the option that landlords could decide whether a rating would be public or not.

Cheryl Brevig described a situation with her landlord who has college students living in other units who described excellent receptiveness from their shared landlord when she has had bad experiences due to the amount of money the landlord receives from larger properties. She noted that there could be widely varying reviews. Melanie Fohl brought up the idea of a stamp of approval for best practices as opposed to the rental housing evaluation. Melissa Sherod said that she thought the best practices would be a more appropriate means of rewarding quality. She said that itís helpful to know facts about a landlord rather than opinions. Hilda Parks agrees that a best practices route could be better. Greg Thorson asked Charles Glasrud what kind of legal issues could come up with a best practices system. Glasrud said the only real issue that could come up would be interpretations of the guidelines for being a landlord who conforms to best practices. Glasrud said that any of these options could feasibly be safe legally if some research was done. Greg Thorson said that it seems like the group is more amenable to the best practices system. Steve Rudney asked what the goal of the rating system would be; would it be to give tenants a place to vent? He asked is it to create an incentive for landlords to improve? He asked, if so, then couldnít landlord education be equally helpful? Glasrud said he thought itíd be to create an incentive to improve, similar to consumer reports. Noah Clark says that the point, to him, is to put out information to consumers to improve the market for rental housing that is ostensibly failing due to a lack of rewards for quality. Greg Thorson said one of the problems that itís meant to remedy is a lack of available information for students who come in and out every year. Cheryl Brevig said she has a big problem with the rating system. If a landlord is failing, word spreads easily due to the town. Thorson likened the ratings to teaching evaluations at the University, which he stated should be public to allow people to make informed decisions.

John Amundson said that neither the tenants nor the landlord seem like theyíd get better from an evaluation system. Amundson continued that the Commission might be better off on the education side. Melissa Sherod agreed with Amundson that landlord education could be very helpful. Sherod wanted something to show landlords that make an effort to create a good environment so they could market themselves. Dan Johnson likened the best practices to a star city system. Charles Glasrud noted that people will usually notice if a house is rundown, but they wonít know how theyíre going to be treated. Melanie Fohl asked Glasrud if the City could offer background check services to landlords. Glasrud said that it might be doable, but he worried that convicts would then be unable to get any housing. Henry Fulda said that landlords would likely be more interested in the damage report from the last property the tenant lived in rather than a criminal report. Melissa Sherod noted that the past few landlords she had asked for references rather than looked into her past. Hilda Parks asked what happened with students whoíve always lived with their parents or in the dorms? Glasrud said that many more aggressive landlords force those students to co-sign with their parents. Glasrud said that usually when he does research on something like this, he tries to find other jurisdictions that have dealt with this.

John Amundson asked if security deposits could be scaled based on a tenantís credit score. Charles Glasrud said he would assume that it could.  Henry Fulda brought up that he thinks the housing situation specifically between landlords and tenants in this community is fairly positive, particularly relative to that near the other institutions he worked with. Fulda said that ORL sees 95% of the students first and the students are great. At other institutions they were far worse. Fulda summed up that the renters and landlords in the community are generally pretty decent and just a small percentage of individuals on each side are problematic.

Charles Glasrud asked if increasing vacancies in rental housing in Morris might be increasing the vacancies in low quality housing. Greg Thorson noted that one might see the exact opposite trend since students might definitely be looking for the cheapest thing possible. Henry Fulda said that ORL has an off-campus housing part of their website. Glasrud proposed having a system where future tenants interview current tenants.

Morris Rental Housing Commission Website

Greg Thorson introduced the website and went through its components. Melanie Fohl asked if a roommate consideration document could be included under tenant resources. Steve Rudney said that the Attorney General had a move-out document. Henry asked if the Commission would be interested in the questions that ORL asks about roommate selection. Melanie Fohl asked if there should be separate pages. Cheryl Brevig wanted to include a move-in, move-out checklist. Steve Rudney brought up a model lease that could be included at the Minnesota state bar association residential lease. Steve also brought up the Minnesota Multi-Housing Association as a good resource for sample documents. It was suggested that the site have links to the UMM Info Desk and other relevant sites.

Rental Housing Commission By-laws

Melanie Fohl brought up whether the focus is on improving the condition of rental housing or on communication and relationships. Greg Thorson responded that the point of those implementations is to improve the quality. John Amundson said that the difference is the definition of quality. Thorson suggested altering the wording to ìexperienceî.

Corrected ìrenterî to ìlandlordî in the Mission statement.  Altered composition to include staff, alter title of City Building Inspector, and correct the number of citizens.

Melanie Fohl asked if the Commission wanted to include something in transparency about notifying the public about meeting times. Greg noted that having that would simply be complying with city law. Melanie Fohl brought up the inclusion of a secretary as an officer position. The Commission approved of that change.

Clarification on the Chairís duty to report to the City Council was asked for. Greg noted that the Chair only needed to report when the Commission or Council desired it.

Cheryl Brevig made a motion to accept the Bylaws with amendments. Hilda Parks seconded. The Commission approved the motion.

Discussion of Future Meetings

Greg brought up how the original conception of the Commission was for it to meet 9 months out of the year starting in September and ending in April. Steve Rudney asked what goals need to be done. Dan Johnson said that education efforts should be continued over the summer. Melanie Fohl said that there may be money in the COPC grant to spend on education left.

Noah brought up the issue of students in the summer and the importance of having tenant representation throughout the year. Henry Fulda brought up the possibility of just meeting once during the summer to discuss having a presence at orientation. Henry said that he would need to start working with David Swenson soon to get a table at the business fair.

Greg Thorson asked when the Commission wanted to meet over the summer. The Commission decided to figure out later when a meeting in May would be necessary.

Adjournment

The meeting was adjourned at approximately 5:10 p.m.