This is nothing: This is a City where I grew up and have a rental property:
Subd. 2. The city council finds that vacant buildings are a major cause and source of blight in
residential and non-residential neighborhoods, especially when the owner or responsible party of the
building fails to actively maintain and manage the building to ensure it does not become a liability to the
neighborhood. Vacant buildings often attract transients, homeless people, trespassers and criminals,
including drug abusers. Neglect of vacant buildings, as well as use of vacant buildings by transients and
criminals, creates a risk of fire, explosion or flooding for the vacant building and adjacent properties.
Vacant properties often are used as dumping grounds for junk and debris and often are overgrown with
weeds and grass. Vacant buildings that are boarded to prevent entry by transients and other long-term
vacancies discourage economic development and retard appreciation of property values. There is a
substantial cost to the city for monitoring vacant buildings whether or not those buildings are boarded.
This cost should not be borne by the general taxpayers of the community; but, rather, these costs should
be borne by those who choose to leave their buildings vacant.
Sure, that makes sense.
Then, here is the bomb they drop.
The owner or responsible party shall
register a vacant building with the city no later than 30 days after the building becomes vacant.
What? If a place is empty for 30 days its a vacant property? What if you have rental property, and you can't find another tenant right away? Your building is now vacant?
If a building has remained vacant for a period of 365 consecutive
days, and the compliance official has not approved an alternative schedule in the property
plan, the city may declare the building to be a nuisance and direct the owner to demolish
the building and restore the grounds. If the owner does not demolish the building and
thereby eliminate the nuisance conditions, the city may commence abatement and cost
recovery proceedings for the abatement of the violation in accordance with subsection
425.25 of this code and Minnesota Statutes, section 429.101.
Really? So if your place is vacant for 1 year, they are going to demand you demolish your property at your expense what kind of crap is that? I remodeled my rental and I did it by myself. It was vacant for more than 1 year as I was remodeling it. That's not my choice anymore? I have to hire contractors who get the shit done right away?
And then they add this:
Subd. 4. Exemptions.
b) Snowbirds. Those persons who leave their residential buildings on a temporary basis for
vacation purposes or to reside elsewhere during the winter season and have the intent to
return are exempt from the registration requirement. Requests for “snowbird” exemption
will be considered annually with proper verification.
A snow bird exception, provided you provide "proper verification"? It's none of their business where I go and what I do with my time.
What it comes down to is this:
The city is there to serve me and the community. I pay property taxes to keep the bums and drug dealers off the street. My property shouldn't be a burden to the rest of the tax payers? Why should other peoples kids be a burden to me so why am I paying for their public school? That's the purposes of taxes. Everybody pay sand everybody gets services or some sort, even if it doesn't necessarily apply to them.
I should not have to pay extra and buy this permit for them to place a police car in front of my house to monitor it if it was "vacant" (they don't anyways)... If I have overgrown weeds, then fine me. If I have a run down house and is a blight to the community, fine me. If I'm looking for a renter. Why should I have to pay a few extra hundred dollars after 30 days of vacancy? What purpose does it serve?
When it comes down to it. It's just a money grab. That's what happens when the people serve the government rather than the reverse.