Laserfiche WebLink
169 required, there was no mandate to do anything at this point, with data being <br />170 gathered on those sump pump connections to the sanitary sewer system. <br />171 <br />172 Member Gjerdingen sought further discussion ensued on the definition of a <br />173 licensed plumber and who issued that license (City of Roseville and/or State of <br />174 MN), and asked that the revised language clarify that definition. <br />175 <br />176 Mr. Culver noted the need to have some level of control in who signs off on that <br />177 inspection, that it be someone licensed and qualified versus a relative or other <br />178 party not having that expertise. Mr. Culver advised that staff was aware of some <br />179 homes having sump pump connections since significant discharge was evidenced <br />180 coming through during annual televising of the system, noting that those areas <br />181 had already been documented. Mr. Culver advised that, to -date, 3,000 automated <br />182 meters had already been installed without the data collected on sump pump <br />183 installations, and some of the proposed ordinance language was attempting to <br />184 determine those connections through following-up, which would be addressed by <br />185 the option to use of certified plumbers in performing those inspections. Mr. <br />186 Culver advised that licensing plumbers was more of a building code functions <br />187 with contractors required to pull certain permits and registering as a way to verify <br />188 licensure and protect residents in hiring work done. <br />189 <br />190 Members Seigler and Cihacek questioned the mandate of the MCES, and whether <br />191 it could be handled at the point of sale for homes rather than at this time or if <br />192 inspections already ocurred on a periodic basis and if so hat triggered <br />193 inspections. <br />194 INh <br />195 Mr. Schwartz responded that other communities have used a variety of ways to <br />196 address this MCES mandate, such as using point of sale programs or others <br />197 inspecting the entire community. Ms. Schwartz advised that this inspection <br />198 program as part of the Ferguson Waterworks contract would provide data on <br />199 6,000 out of 9,000 single-family homes in Roseville, allowing the City to use that <br />200 data to develop a mitigation program. Specific to re -inspections, Mr. Schwartz <br />201 noted that staff may support point of sale inspections after the magnitude of <br />202 illegalNcos <br />mp connections had been determined. However, Mr. Schwartz <br />203 advisee of the main issues is the significant amount of money, in the <br />204 hundrusands of dollars the City of Roseville currently paid for sewer <br />205 treatmfor metered flow, including I/I, and rates paid by utility users for <br />206 that extra and unnecessary treatment. Mr. Schwartz noted that, since the City <br />207 Council had already approved the Ferguson contract at their meeting last night, <br />208 staff was not seeking PWETC debate on the potential inspections, which had <br />209 already been discussed over the years, since it was deemed an important issue to <br />210 the City Council. <br />211 <br />212 Member Felice noted that, since staff was observing additional flow during <br />213 televising, it seems a good idea to have further inspections. <br />214 <br />Page 5 of 14 <br />