Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Councilmember Jeffrey stated that if only 2 of the 26 jobs have been inspected, he questioned <br />whether the City has an obligation to help people understand the track record of a contractor. He <br />asked how long of a period of time the building permits were issued. <br /> <br />Mr. Hendriksen stated that they were pulled over a period of about 2 years, between the end of <br />2005 and most of 2007. <br /> <br />Councilmember Elvig asked if there was any exposure to the City by participating in this lawsuit. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich stated that there is no liability exposure but there could be expense in <br />drafting the language for the legal brief and reviewing cases. He stated that it is possible the City <br />could do an affidavit and not an Amicus Curae, because the State Building Code already states <br />that inspections are supposed to be set up. <br /> <br />Councilmember Elvig asked where Stock Roofing was located. <br /> <br />Mr. Hendriksen stated that they are based in St. Francis. <br /> <br />Councilmember Dehen stated that the City doesn't want people in the City doing poor work and <br />asked if the City can force businesses to get inspections. He asked if there was anything the City <br />could do to tighten up the controls in this area because he doesn't think the Commerce <br />Department will get involved unless there is a judgment. <br /> <br />Building Official Kaehler stated that the City typically sends out letters about a year after the <br />building permit was issued that no inspection had been called. He stated that to pull a permit, <br />you need to be a licensed contractor, although homeowners can pull a permit and legally do their <br />own work on the property. <br /> <br />Councilmember Jeffrey asked why the City couldn't provide documentation for this case that <br />this business pulled 26 permits and only 2 were inspected, and 1 of them was done by the <br />homeowner. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich stated that this information could be submitted to the Commerce <br />Department, which could help the general public, but would not help Mr. Hendriksen's case <br />because they are not taking new evidence. <br /> <br />Mr. Hendriksen reiterated that he feels this case is not just between him and Stock Roofing <br />. because he feels there is a public interest in having contractors voluntarily comply with <br />inspections. <br /> <br />Councilmember Dehen stated that he is not convinced the Amicus Curae will do anything to <br />enhance Mr. Hendriksen's damage request. <br /> <br />Mr. Hendriksen stated that although he does want to be paid for his damages, the City's <br />involvement would deal with the fact that he feels there has been consumer fraud. He stated that <br /> <br />City Council Work Session /Aprill, 2008 <br />Page 8 of 20 <br />