CC 04-09-2001 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. . . ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - APRIL 9, 2001 8 Councilmember Rem stated she received a letter. She noted her concern is that she was there when the man inspected and he did not fill out the part regarding sump pumps. She added so she filled it out and gave it to Mr. Stafford. She noted the cost ofthe mailings and the fact the records are not complete. She asked how do they know people who passed are in compliance. She stated staff is on record saying they have lost all confidence. She noted 250 letters went out and 150 should not have gone out. She added a first class letter should have been sufficient. She stated they discussed at length the procedure on the water meters. She noted they saw a draft letter. She added after repeated telephone calls and letters, the last resort was to be certified letter. She stated a couple people she spoke to felt harassed. She noted this does not go very far to increase confidence in the city. She added if they think it is going to spend stafftime and city dollars, this may be one way to get an answer. She stated it is not sure it the most efficient way. She noted the ordinance talks about who is going to do it. She asked why the utility crew could not do this. She questioned the use of the building inspector. She noted the follow up letter of apology is the least they can do. Mayor Probst stated it is clear some people are upset. He asked what the Council wanted to do. Councilmember Aplikowski stated when a letter goes out, they do not have to write it. She noted they should see it, so when they get telephone calls they need to know what has been sent. She added this should be done when a mass letter mailing goes out. She stated she gets upset over receiving a certified letter. Mr. Post stated the ordinance states a certified letter is the method of contacting residents. Councilmember Rem stated she believes if people are not in compliance there should be repeated contacts before a certified letter went out. She noted the residents heard nothing after the inspection and six months later they get a certified letter. She added that at the very least they could have saved money to send a first class letter stating the records were unclear. Councilmember Larson stated he concurred with Councilmember Aplikowski. He noted it would be a good idea to have a copy of the letter in the packet. He added he thought a letter of apology should go out to people who did get it in error. He asked for further clarification on the building code. Mr. Post responded the focus in the code is on new construction. He stated this project on pre-existing sump pumps was to determine the level of compliance. He noted the ordinance previously did not have anything to deal with existing sump pump connections. Councilmember Aplikowski stated we should chalk it up as a mistake and should not chew away at it. She noted it happened for many good reasons. She stated a letter of apology should be sent, put the matter aside, and learn from it. Councilmember Rem asked if staff has any plans to do an expanded sump pump inspection program. She questioned whether staff was going to assume they have all the information they need and that it was correct. She asked if they are going to make an effort to find out. She further asked if the radio read meter program is it working as they had discussed. Mr. Post responded they had to relocate some of the transponders, but are very pleased with the results. He stated Public Works' manpower devoted to meter reading has been reduced. He noted they