Residents urge Roseville to step up code enforcement and press school district over vacant land ahead of May vote

During the meeting's public-comment periods on April 24, several residents urged action on distinct neighborhood and school-property issues.

Randall Rummler said a neighbor has repeatedly created quality-of-life and safety problems at an adjacent rental property, citing tall grass, late-night intoxication and a broken bottle left near his air-conditioning unit. "They're continuously drunk and yelling," Rummler said, describing repeated disturbances and asking what the city could do. Council members advised Rummler to call police for immediate safety concerns and to contact the city's code-enforcement and billing offices so staff can follow up and determine rental status and potential violations.

Later, Jim Madison spoke about long-vacant school district properties and an upcoming ballot question. Madison told council members the school district owns about 22 acres of unused property that have sat vacant for 15'16 years and urged the city to apply pressure on the school board to list and market the land for development. Madison said the May 5 election would ask Roseville taxpayers about a $175,000,000 school bond or loan; he warned idle district land reduces the taxable base and urged collaborative action to spur redevelopment.

Council members acknowledged both concerns. They reiterated procedural avenues: residents should report nuisance or safety issues to police first and then connect with code enforcement for property standards complaints; concerns about school-district property sit outside city authority, but council members said they could communicate expectations or collaborate where appropriate. No formal council action was taken at the meeting to compel the school board to list property.

The clerk reminded residents that absentee-ballot services are available the weekend before the May 5 election and provided a contact phone number for the clerk's office.

Next steps recorded in the public minutes were procedural: staff follow-up on code-enforcement complaints when filed and the council did not schedule any formal hearing or directive to the school board in the public record.