The request is not for Council to accept STLCA's conclusions. The request is for SDCI to provide the structured information Council needs to measure complaint-based housing enforcement itself.
Receipt, classification, first substantive response, physical inspection where applicable, administrative contact where no inspection is needed, enforcement actions, correction deadlines, reinspections, compliance and closure.
Define Closed, Completed and other statuses; distinguish verified compliance, no violation, no contact, lack of access, withdrawal, duplicate, referral, administrative closure and other outcomes.
Provide stable links among complaints, NOVs, citations, emergency orders, tenant-relocation records, RRIO records and repeat-property activity.
Distinguish authorized penalties, amounts assessed, billed, collected, adjusted, waived, referred for collection and still outstanding.
Identify source systems, field definitions, business/technical owners, transformations, QA procedures and a public change history — including the history of the LastInspDate field.
Explain how complaint-based enforcement relates to RRIO, City/private inspections, registrations, certifications and later complaints or enforcement.
Council should not have to decide whether housing enforcement needs more staff, fewer staff, different technology, new fees or new renter protections without being able to measure what happens to the work already entering the system.
The proposed SLI asks for definitions, authoritative dates, closure reasons, property linkage, enforcement outcomes, data ownership and an implementation plan for routine public reporting. It does not presume every complaint requires an inspection, and it does not presume wrongdoing.