Laserfiche WebLink
Councilmember Dehen stated he was bothered by the process and that staff took it upon <br />themselves to take additional interviews after the RFP closed. He noted he had received a call <br />from inspector Hagfors who asked for a second chance. He asked if it was appropriate or not to <br />hear Mr. Hagfors. He asked if the City should send this out for RFP again. He believed the <br />issue was customer service related. <br />Councilmember Wise stated there had been complaints received regarding interaction with the <br />citizens with the way they were treated by the inspector. He noted he had not heard of any <br />complaints, but the reason they were doing this was to recover funds leaving the City. He <br />indicated he wanted to see revenue generated for the City and servicing the residents for the City. <br />He stated he was in favor of giving the contract to Mr. Hagfors because he had submitted the <br />lowest RFP and if there were customer service issues with Mr. Hagfors, those could be addressed <br />quickly. <br />Councilmember Look stated he also wanted to see the City generate funds from this. He noted <br />he had been on the receiving end of the customer service issue and he had complaints with the <br />way Mr. Hagfors handled things. He indicated when the law allowed residents to do certain <br />things, then it is not the responsibility of the inspector to hassle the resident because the resident <br />did not use a union electrician, or someone else. He believed there was personality conflicts with <br />Mr. Hagfors. <br />Councilmember Wise stated Mr. Hagfors' job was to inspect under State code and it was not his <br />job to tell the homeowner how to fix their mistakes or lack of knowledge. <br />Councilmember Dehen asked Mr. Hagfors to approach the podium. He asked Mr. Hagfors if he <br />has had complaints before with respect to customer service. <br />Mr. Ted Hagfors stated he has been inspecting in the City for 22 years and he has not had a lot of <br />complaints. He stated he has had a few complaints, but all inspectors receive complaints at one <br />time or another. He indicated he did go farther than he should for homeowners who did their <br />own wiring. He stated he had done thousands of homeowner inspections and there had been a lot <br />of residents who had thanked him. He stated he wanted to make sure things were safe. He stated <br />he has never been in the union and there was no reason for him to tell a resident to hire a union <br />electrician. He stated he has informed homeowners that they should hire an electrical contractor <br />if he believed that homeowner was in over their head. <br />Councilmember McGlone stated his personal experience with Mr. Hagfors was not a good <br />experience when he had an electrical inspection. He noted there was an inherent fear by the <br />public about filing complaints against an electrical inspector when the homeowner was not done <br />with their project. <br />Mayor Ramsey stated Council was not here to cross-examine Mr. Hagfors. <br />Mr. Hagfors agreed when somebody was doing their own work, he did go further than required <br />to ensure the homeowner complied with the Code. He stated he would like to continue doing the <br />City Council /May 11, 2010 <br />Page 6 of 11 <br />