HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-01-08 Business and Economic Development Committee Minutes
BUSINESS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
Tuesday, January 8, 2013 5:15 PM
City Council Chambers
Minutes
Councilors Present: Sprague, Nealley, Baldacci, Longo, and Civiello
Staff: Conlow, Vanadestine, Wallace
Chair Sprague called the meeting to order at 5:15 p.m.
CONSENT AGENDA
1. Community Development Residential Rehabilitation Loan – 21 Bragg
Street.
Councilor Baldacci moved to approve the Community Development Residential
Rehabilitation Loan at 21 Bragg Street. Councilor Nealley seconded the motion,
which passed unanimously.
REGULAR AGENDA
2. Our Town Grant Application.
Chair Sprague indicated that this item had been removed from the Agenda after
it was printed.
3. REFERRAL – ORDINANCE 13-051, Amending the Code of the City of
Bangor – Adding Chapter 99 - Disruptive Property
Chair Sprague indicated that this item was not for action by the Committee at
this meeting but to solicit public comments. He noted that the Ordinance will be
placed on the next city Council Agenda (January 14, 2012) for a vote.
City Manager Conlow gave a brief history as to how this ordinance has evolved
to date. She indicated that the goal was to come up with a tool to be used to
deal with the chronic properties in the City and this ordinance was crafted to be
such a tool.
City Solicitor Norm Heitmann discussed State laws, the City’s Ordinances and the
proposed Disruptive Property Ordinance explaining various sections. He
indicated that this proposed ordinance is the result of the efforts of many. From
a legal standpoint this is the proper exercise of the municipality’s police power.
Many communities throughout the country and Maine have similar ordinances.
Orono has had its ordinance for 8 years and their problems have diminished and
they have not had to take anyone to court. The goal is to address the problem
2
and not take people to court and to quiet the neighborhood. The landlord will
come up with a plan and the City will work with them. Taking someone to court
doesn’t quiet the neighborhood. This ordinance offers a tool to try to address
some of these issues.
Councilor Baldacci had a question about an internal appeal or review process and
if it would be better to have the City Manager or a City Council Committee review
an appeal rather than forcing people to go to court. He suggested that there be
a provision for review. Going to court will be time consuming and costly for a
landlord. Heitmann indicated that there are other Departments that have appeal
processes such as Code Enforcement’s denial of a building permit that can be
appealed to the Zoning Board of Appeals. The Council once heard General
Assistance appeals. Now there is a staff committee who hears those appeals as
the Council did not wish to continue to do this. Heitmann said that he doesn’t
foresee spending a lot of time in court.
Councilor Nealley noted that while he agreed, as he read the ordinance there is
“mini review” language that indicates that it wouldn’t be just the Police Chief’s
decision but would include the approval of the City Manager. Heitmann gave
examples of other departments such as City Clerk and Code Enforcement that
can go to court. This ordinance language says that if the Chief wants to take
further action it needs to be signed off by the City Manager.
Interim Police Chief Arno indicated that this is another tool that the Police
Department can use. Presently they can enforce disorderly conduct for loud
noise under the provisions of State Statutes but the problem will continue until
the problem goes someplace else. This Ordinance puts the onus on the landlord
to work with the PD and the neighborhood to work this out. This provides relief
when everything else fails.
Council Chair Durgin asked if landlords were being notified presently. Interim
Police Chief Arno explained that presently there is no active program to notify
landlords. However, there have been instances where landlords or their
managers have called the PD to inquire about issues. Councilor Durgin asked if
under this Ordinance there will be a requirement to notify landlords. Heitmann
indicated that there is a provision in the ordinance that says the City will send
notification by mail or if they provide a phone number, they will be called.
Chair Sprague opened the meeting up for public comments.
David Nordsworthy a 20-year landlord said that he felt that Staff has done a
great job. There is going to be a lot of burden put on the Police Department.
He felt this ordinance is just going to move the tenants around. In his mind the
idea is really good but the actual tenant is going to move from spot to spot. He
felt that the problem is the tenant and not the landlord and he did not think that
the landlord would be able to modify the behavior of a tenant.
3
Andrew Farnham indicated that he originally had a number of objections to the
Ordinance and had met with Mr. Heitmann and Councilor Civiello. After that
meeting he said that he removed any objections that he had to this ordinance.
He said that he felt that it should be given a try and if something doesn’t work it
can be fixed.
Susie Capehart felt that more needs to be done to tackle the problem head on.
She suggested that more work could be done such as disqualifying a tenant who
has a pending action against them from applying for General Assistance until
they address the issue. She felt that this would give additional “teeth” to the
Ordinance. She suggested that they meet with members of the DA’s Office.
Chair Sprague indicated that this was beyond the scope of this ordinance.
Heitmann explained that Staff has met with the landlords association, and has
looked at possible amendments to the Land Development Code and Property
Management Code to see if there are other things that could be done.
Gail Hipsky, a 38 year landlord, said that she is in favor of this ordinance. She
said it’s a great start. She said that she is a Greater Bangor Apartment Owners
and Managers Association Member, and while not all of the members are in favor
of this she felt that this will help them in the long run. She noted that in her
leases she has instituted a 9:30 p.m. quiet time. She said that landlords need to
have a good lease and run a tight ship.
Kate Dickerson an Elm Street resident asked for clarification as to what this
meeting is about. City Solicitor Heitmann indicated that because this is an
Ordinance it needs to be on the City Council Agenda twice; once for a first
reading to be referred to committee and a second reading for final consideration.
In this case, it gets referred to the BED Committee for discussion and public
input. It will go back to the City Council on January 14th for final action. At that
meeting the City Council will also have input.
Ms. Dickerson indicated that she felt it is a good tool but would prefer that it
were tougher. She felt that if they work with the State Legislature, the City
could be a leader on this. She also suggested that landlords be offered a sample
lease to use for renting.
Chair Sprague indicated that he knew of a landlord that is starting to write into
her leases that any cost incurred because of a disruptive property issue will be
the responsibility of the tenant.
City Solicitor Heitmann noted that they have already started that process as
Councilor Civiello has shared with landlords a copy of the Bangor Housing
Authority’s application and a sample lease that they could adjust to their needs.
4
Lisa Nordsworthy indicated that she is appreciative of the attention given to the
fact that evicting a tenant is not easy. She asked if the City can go by a property
and determine if it needs to be inspected. She also asked if the Police
Department will do a database of problem tenants/people and if landlords could
look at it as they are trying to rent.
City Solicitor Heitmann said that the City will be looking at different ways through
data bases to compile data that will be of use to landlords. He said that if the
landlords indicate what they need and if the City can reasonably provide it, they
will. The ordinances help the whole community not just landlords or
neighborhoods. Historically, if a landlord has had a problem where an evicted
tenant has damaged the rental out of retribution which results in code violations
the City has not gone into the place and shut it down. The City is there to point
out the issues to the landlord and tell them that they need to take care of. It is
the City’s goal to work with the property owner to get things back to working
order and Code compliant.
Ms. Nordsworthy asked if anything is being done about the vacant boarded-up
houses. Code Officer Jeremy Martin indicated that the City is taking a more
aggressive approach regarding dilapidated properties if occupied or not.
Council Baldacci felt that Ms. Nordsworthy has a good point about a database.
He said that this ordinance will separate the good landlords from the bad ones.
The city is prepared to have a partnership with the good ones and work with the
bad ones. He noted that the District Court has judgments and convictions data.
If the landlords knew who was issued a conviction that would help them.
Councilor Durgin said that in a short time people have come an immense
distance and this speaks very well about the relationship that the City is building
in the community.
Frank Hartnett, thanked the City Manager, City Solicitor and Councilor Civiello.
He noted that there has been some action taken on the 11-unit bungalow (on
Webster Avenue North) which is now empty. He asked if chronic properties
could be taken away from the landlord by eminent domain.
City Solicitor Heitmann indicated that an eminent domain taking is for a public
purpose and not just because someone doesn’t like something. He added that
the City has also been looking at the rules for boarding houses through zoning,
land development, and inspections.
Councilor Baldacci noted the Union Place project where the City acquired
dilapidated properties, demolished them and offered the land for redevelopment.
He said that this has certainly improved that neighborhood. He indicated that he
would be in support of having a discussion about eminent domain regarding the
efficiency apartment building on Hammond Street as it is bringing down property
5
values and breeding other problems in this neighborhood. He would also
support purchasing the property and redeveloping it such as how Union Place
was with CDBG funds. He said that he hopes that the problem can be fixed with
the ordinance but feels that it is a larger issue.
City Solicitor Heitmann said that the City Staff recognizes that even if this
ordinance is passed this is not the end of the discussion. There is a lot to do.
He noted other problem areas in the City (Curve Street and Union Place) that
were acquired and when opportunities like those present themselves again the
City should look at them. City Manager Conlow indicated that during this year’s
budget process this can be discussed as part of the CDBG program.
Dennis Marble, Bangor Area Homeless Shelter asked to keep the support of the
Police Department on the table as you move forward. He said that he felt that a
lot of this is reactive and as this moves forward that there are cost savings in
neighborhood improvements and investing in the community that can be worked
on to lower reactive costs and reinvest in the community. Mr. Mable said that
his staff works with approximately 1000 people a year that most people never
hear about. Not all are disruptive, only a small number are.
Jeremy Martin said that this will allow the City to have a face to face sit down for
the first time with a property owner. There is a direct correlation between
problem people and problem properties. Under this ordinance he could only
think of about three properties and two have been placarded. The City is taking
a more aggressive role than in the past. The goal is to bring them back into
code compliance.
Councilor Nealley indicated that this will make Bangor a less desirable place for
disruptive tenants. He gave special “kudos” to Councilor Civiello for her work on
this. He said that this ordinance will have little to no effect on the majority of
the landlords. He expressed his concern about eminent domain. He said this is
a prime example (Bangor Efficiencies) where it makes sense for neighborhood
stabilization.
Steven Hicks thanked the landlords who came forward as well as Staff. He
indicated his support.
The Committee was provided with written statements from Susan Wellman and
Lisa Boullard in support. Councilor Longo requested that the statements be
entered into the record as if they had been read.
Josh Leno another Bangor landlord expressed his concern that the ordinance is
holding the landlord responsible for the behavior of the tenant. He thought that
the registry was a good step. He asked if this Ordinance could be passed
without punishing the landlords.
6
Chair Sprague explained that the Ordinance is to go after the chronic disruptive
properties. If this ordinance goes too far then it can be amended.
City Solicitor Heitmann indicated that the Ordinance does not punish the
landlords for the behavior of the tenants. It gets the landlords to work to deal
with the issues. If they fail to deal with the issue after it has been brought to
their attention then the landlord will be punished. Heitmann said that he feels
that it will only be a handful of landlords.
Chair Sprague noted that this item is scheduled for next Monday’s City Council
Agenda.
4. Executive Session – Economic Development – Land Disposition – 1
M.R.S.A. § 405(6)(C)
Councilor Nealley moved and Councilor Baldacci seconded the motion to go into
Executive Session under M.R.S.A. § 405(6)(C). The motion passed unanimously.
It was moved, seconded and voted unanimously to exit the Executive Session.
5. Executive Session – Economic Development – Lease Negotiations – 1
M.R.S.A. § 405(6)(C)
Councilor Nealley moved and Councilor Baldacci seconded the motion to go into
Executive Session under M.R.S.A. § 405(g)(C). The motion passed unanimously.
It was moved, seconded and voted unanimously to exit the Executive Session.
6. Committee Action on Above Items
The Committee also voted unanimously to direct Staff to take action on
Item No. 4 and Item No. 5.
The meeting was adjourned by Chair Sprague at 6:45 p.m.