Laserfiche WebLink
number could be assigned and City Staff could charge time expended <br />directly to that project. The Building Official, who would be the Staff <br />person responsible, currently does not charge his time, so the fixed <br />percentage would be administratively easier. Any legal costs, such as court <br />orders to gain access to the property, would be added to the administrative <br />percentage charge. <br /> <br />2) <br /> <br />The City could prosecute the violator in court and have the court order the <br />violator to repair the system. The advantage with this is that the City would <br />not get involved with financing the repair. It would incur legal expenses <br />with the prosecution which may or may not be covered by the fine. The <br />City would also need to monitor for compliance with the court order and <br />return to court if the order was ignored. Another major disadvantage to this <br />alternative is that going to court is not an expedient remedy. This is <br />particularly significant when dealing with a public health hazard. <br /> <br />3) <br /> <br />Order the property condemned as unfit for human habitation until the system <br />is corrected. A major problem with this alternative is that the order to vacate <br />the property will most likely be ignored, since in most cases the property <br />will otherwise be in reasonable repair. The City would then need to resort <br />to a court order to have the property vacated. Since, this is a relatively <br />extreme action, and since the City's ordinance specifies a different, less <br />drastic remedy, the court would probably not issue an order to vacate and <br />would direct the City to follow its ordinance to achieve compliance. <br /> <br />4) <br /> <br />5) <br /> <br />The City could monitor and regularly pump the septic tank. This is an <br />effective short-time solution since it eliminates septage from overflow onto <br />the ground surface. It effectively changes the septic tank operation to a <br />holding tank function. However, the normal septic tank has a capacity of <br />1,500 to 2,000 gallons while the average residential household generates 70 <br />gallons per person per day. With a normal family size, pumping would <br />have to be done every one to two weeks in order for the system to truly <br />function as a holding tank. At a cost of $80 to $100 per pumping, this can <br />quickly become an expensive alternative. Similar to the cost of repairing, <br />this cost Would need to be assessed to the property with an administrative <br />charge. <br /> <br />Do nothing. This alternative violates our City Code and does not address <br />the health hazard or citizen complaints. Pumping the system once or having <br />the occupants reduce water consumption, may remove the immediate source <br />of the complaint, but a failed system will not heal itself. Even if ponding <br />effluent does not reappear, it is highly likely that inadequately treated <br />septage is infiltrating into thegroundwater. <br /> <br />Recommendation: <br /> <br />Revise our procedures upon attempting to investigate so that the City employee does not request <br />permission to enter onto the property, but instead advises the resident of his purpose for the <br />~nspection and that it is lawful. If the employee is directed to leave, he or she will do so, but <br />advise the resident that he will return with a court order, the cost of which will be billed as a special <br />assessment to the property. <br /> <br />- and - <br /> <br /> <br />