- Warwick grad producing ‘Million Dollar Quartet’ at Dutch Apple
- Hello (again), Dolly!
- ‘Hello, Dolly!’ opens Thursday at EPAC
- ‘Somewhereville Station’ revisits the 50s and 60s
- St. Patty’s musical at Ephrata Main
- Dance, concert will benefit Jamaica missions
- Happy Anniver5ary, St. Boniface!
- Downtown diversity
- Travelogue will explore Colorado River this Saturday
- Cool lineup!
Ordinance for rent
Ephrata Borough’s solicitor submitted a redraft of a proposed rental ordinance at Monday’s Development Activities Committee meeting.
Solicitor James R. McManus went over some of the major revisions on the controversial document that was first disclosed to the public on Jan. 14.
The proposed ordinance angered some landlords who objected to provisions of a three-strike rule &tstr; counted by police calls for disruptive behavior by tenants or by serious property maintenance violations within a 12 month period.
Fines and penalties assessed for accumulating strikes can lead to an automatic loss of a rental license and eviction for tenants.
Many landlords and tenants responded to the borough’s request to provide feedback during several meetings over the past six months.
McManus’ redraft of the document is based on those public comments. Though he discussed some of the changes to the original ordinance, McManus said the revised document would not be available until after all borough council members view it.
Robert Thompson, borough manager, said the revised ordinance would go on the borough’s website when council was “comfortable” with it and that there would be more time for public comment before an approval vote is taken.
One revision changes a proposed requirement that a landlord hire a local property manager if the landlord lives beyond 15 miles of the rental propertyin the borough.
That was revised to require a landlord to live within 30 miles or “demonstrate” the ability to respond to a rental unit within 45 minutes when called.
“This isn’t a requirement to be at your rental property in 45 minute for peeling paint,” said Nancy Harris, borough zoning officer. “That requirement would be for a serious police issue involving the landlord’s tenant.”
McManus discussed many issues with the appeals process, the appeals board, and what determines a “strike.”
“It does not count as a violation if it has been appealed, if it is abated within the time given within the code enforcement office, if a court finds in favor of the land owner and against the borough, or if an appeal is pending,” McManus said.
He offered a two-page supplement that outlines how council could form a three-member appeals board that is separate from the property and maintenance appeals board.
The proposed board would include one member who is “a landlord or manager or responsible agent.”
“It identifies the scope and jurisdiction of the board and relates to appeals concerning disruptive conduct reports and appeals concerning the issuance or the denial of a residential permit,” McManus said.
“One of the things we tried to make clear in the revised version is the distinction between what we’ll call administrative procedures and remedies and non-administrative procedures and remedies,” he said.
Patrick Burns is senior staff writer for The Ephrata Review. He welcomes your questions and comments and can be reached at email@example.com or at 721-4455.