Memo Second Reading Ordinance 92-179IP
/1
II. Background
CITY OF HOPKINS
MEMORANDUM
DATE: December 30, 1992
TO: Hopkins City Council
FROM: George Magdal, Fire Marshal
SUBJECT: Second reading, Ordinance 92 -719, Fee for Fire
Inspections
I. Staff recommends approval of the second reading of Ordinance
92 -719.
The purpose of the fire inspection fees ordinance is to:
° Raise revenues to offset some of the cost of fire
inspections.
° Develop incentives for people to comply with the fire codes
within a reasonable amount of time.
At the City Council meeting on December 8 several questions came
up regarding "rental registration fees." These questions related
to the amount of the fee, the purpose of the fee and how often
the City inspects apartment units.
The annual cost to apartment owners for rental registration is
$2.50 per rental unit with a $25.00 minimum fee. The purpose of
this fee is to cover the costs of maintaining a list of the
owners of rental housing and persons responsible for repair and
maintenance of these properties. This list is used by not only
the housing inspector to resolve housing code complaints but the
fire and police department to notify owners in case of
emergencies. The money also helps cover part of the cost for the
City to administer the housing code and to follow up on rental
housing complaints. The fee raises about $13,000 each year.
Housing inspections are normally done on a complaint basis.
At the December 8 meeting Steve Schachtman with Barrett
Investment Company proposed that the initial and first
re- inspection be at no charge. He suggested an exorbitant fee for
visits after the second visit. We feel this is inappropriate for
the following reasons:
IP
AP
O we are currently charging a straight $30 per hour for fire
inspections after the first re- inspection. In the last six
months, there have only been two occasions where we've used
this charge. When there's a fee attached most people will do
what's necessary the avoid it.
• An exorbitant fee would be arbitrary, not based on any cost
experienced by the city.
O An exorbitant fee would need a sliding scale to be
appropriate to both large and small businesses.
III. Alternatives
O Approve the second reading of Ordinance 92 -719.
• Do not approve of the second reading of Ordinance 92 -719.
O Approve the second reading of Ordinance 92 -719 with the
stipulation that the first hour of each initial fire
inspection be done at no charge. This would allow smaller
business to avoid the fee by complying during the initial
visit.
IP
IP
November 11, 1992 CR Report 92 -224
Proposed Action
Fees for Fir Inspections
Staff recommends approval of the following motion: Move to accept the
first reading of Ordinance No 92 -719 which authorizes charging fees
for fire inspections.
Overview
Through analysis, the City has recognized fire inspections as an area
where service is provided without fees. The City can recover part of
the cost incurred by charging for this service. Last March the City
Council asked staff to work on implementing a fee schedule relating to
fire inspections.
The Hopkins Business Council was approached with this idea last spring
and voted to support the concept. Staff anticipates undertaking
additional public input measures prior to the second reading.
As an incentive to correct code violations quickly this ordinance
adjusts the rate depending upon the inspection results. If there are
no violations found during the initial inspection or corrections are
made prior to the end of the first re- inspection•, the business would
pay 50% of the normal hourly rate. A business complying by the end of
the second re- inspection would pay the normal hourly rate. A business
not complying by the end of the second re- inspection would pay a fee
of 150% of the normal hourly rate.
Our current Ordinance does not allow fees to be charged for the first
or second visit. Additional visits are currently charged at a flat
rate. The rate that has been set by Council Resolution is $30.00 per
hour with a one hour minimum per visit.
Primary Issues to Consider
O Should businesses be responsible for the cost incurred doing fire
inspections of their premises?
O Is the additional cost this poses for a business operating in
Hopkins reasonable?
O Should the business who abuses the fire inspection process be
penalized financially with the proposed sliding scale?
• What additional public input measures does Staff propose?
Supporting Information
O March 5, 1992 Staff memo to City Council
• Ordinance No.92 -719
George Magdal, Fire Marshal
Ip
10
Primary Issues to Consider.
CR Report 92 -224
Page 2
o Should Business be responsible for the cost incurred doing fire
inspections of their premises?
The benefactors of fire inspections include public visiting the
business, owners, employees, and the City. People shopping and working
in Hopkins expect to be safe. The hazards created are a direct result
of business owners and managers activities. It seems appropriate for
the business to pay for the inspections.
o Is the additional cost this poses for a business operating in
Hopkins reasonable?
A small business that requires two visits by a Fire Inspector would be
billed a total of $30.00. Unless they have some special hazards, it is
likely they will not receive another Fire Inspection for three years.
This breaks down to $10.00 per year. This does not seem excessive.
o Should the business who abuses the fire inspection process be
penalized financially with the proposed sliding scale?
Yes. There are many cases where the business owner doesn't feel it's
necessary to be ready for the Fire Inspector on time. After all, the
violation has been there for months. What's a few more weeks? We don't
want to legally prosecute violators when we know they are going to fix
the hazard. The problem is Fire Inspectors spend a good portion of
their time going back again and again waiting for the violator to
repair the hazard. The sliding scale will cause violators to be
prompt, making the Fire Inspectors time more productive.
o What additional public input measures does Staff. propose?
Due to the time which has elapsed since the Business Councils last
review Staff proposes to undertake the following measures:
• Discussion at November 19th Business Council Meeting
• Article in Twinwest Newsletter
• Article in H.C.P. Newsletter
• Article in Hopkins Sailor
Alternatives.
o Approve Staffs recommendation
o Do not approve Staffs recommendation
o Continue matter for more information
IP
11
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 92 -719
FEE FOR FIRE INSPECTIONS
BE IT ORDAINED By the Council of the City of Hopkins that Section
905.13 of the Hopkins City Code be deleted in its entirety and
replaced with the following:
905.13 Fee for Fire Inspections. A fee shall be charged for fire
inspections. This fee will not apply to complaints on specific
hazards. Such fee shall be collected from either the owner or the
occupant who gets the inspection. The fee shall be in an amount
established by Council Resolution. If there are no violations
found or the violations are corrected by the end of the first
re- inspection the fee shall be 50% of the established rate. If
the violations are corrected by the end of the second
re- inspection the fee shall be 100% of the established rate. If
the violations are not corrected by the end of the second
re- inspection the fee shall be 150% of the established rate.
First Reading: November 10th, 1992
Second Reading: January 5th, 1993
Date of Publication: January 13th, 1993
Date Ordinance Takes Effect: February 2th, 1993
City Clerk
Mayor