Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Rental License Fees topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Resident urges change to rental-license fee structure; council asks staff to return with options

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

A longtime Grand Forks property owner complained that single-family and duplex rental-license fees are unfair compared with larger apartment complexes; councilmembers and staff said they will add the topic for further review and may bring options to a future meeting.

A longtime Grand Forks landlord urged the City Council to change the city’s rental-license fee structure, saying single-family homes and duplexes must pay $35 per unit while larger apartment complexes do not face the same requirement.

Jim Dietz, introduced by the clerk as a long-time Grand Forks resident and property owner, told the council he has pursued the issue with several city offices since last April and called the fee unfair. “Why do I need a license?” Dietz asked, saying he has been charged the fee despite larger complexes operating without the same license requirement.

Council members responded during general comment. Council Member Osofsky said the University Club neighborhood and other constituents have raised the same concern and recommended the item be scheduled for study at a future Committee of the Whole meeting. President Sandy and city staff said the licensing policy dates to a policy adopted about 15 years ago when single-family homes near the university were converting to rentals; at that time the council established a fee and an inspection cycle. City Administrator Poehling said two rental inspectors perform five-year periodic inspections under the existing policy and that staff will bring the matter forward for further discussion.

Council members suggested options that staff could evaluate, including lowering the fee across the board or amending which property types must be licensed. No formal action or ordinance change was taken at the meeting; council members asked staff to return with an agenda item and recommendations for policy options.

The item will return to the council’s work calendar for review and possible future action.