Posted on 06/24/2002 5:21:17 PM PDT by Hunble
CITY OF OLIVIA
ORDINANCE NO. 269
AN ORDINANCE PROHIBITING DISCHARGES INTO THE SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM AND TO PROVIDE FOR INSPECTION OF PROPERTY TO DETERMINE ILLEGAL CONNECTIONS TO THE SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM AND TO PROVIDE A SURCHARGE FOR NON-COMPLIANCE WITH INSPECTION AND CONNECTION REQUIREMENTS.
WHEREAS, the City Council of Olivia, Minnesota finds that the discharge of water from any surface, groundwater sump pump, roofs, yards, lawns, streets, alleys, footing tile, or other natural precipitation into the sanitary sewer contributes to the flooding and overloading of the sanitary sewer system. Such overloading of the sanitary sewer system may result in sewage flowing into basements and/or residences and businesses, creating hazardous public health conditions and significant damage to properties. The City, therefore, determines that this ordinance is necessary to protect the health, safety, and welfare of its citizens through the regulation of connections to the City's sanitary sewer system.
NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of Olivia, Minnesota does ordain:
SECTION I - DISCHARGE PROHIBITED. Except as otherwise expressly authorized in this Section, no ponds, water fountains, water from any roof, surface, groundwater sump pump, swimming pool, or other natural precipitation shall be discharged into the sanitary sewer system. Dwellings and other buildings and structures which require, because of infiltration of water into basements, crawl spaces, and the like, a sump pump discharge system shall have a permanently installed discharge line which shall not at any time discharge water into a sanitary sewer system. A permanent installation shall be one which provides for year round discharge capability to either the outside of the dwelling, building, or structure, or is connected to a storm sewer or discharge through the curb and gutter to the street. Within the home or business, the sump pump discharge pipe shall consist of a rigid discharge line, without valves or quick connections, that would alter the path of discharge. However, if the line is directly connected to a storm sewer line or catch basin a check valve and an air gap are required.
SECTION II - INSPECTIONS. Property owners shall allow an employee of the City or a designated representative of the City to inspect the buildings to confirm that there is no sump pump or other prohibited discharge into the sanitary sewer system. The City may periodically re-inspect any building or premise to determine compliance with the requirements of this ordinance.
SECTION III - REMOVAL OF CONNECTIONS. Any property owner who previously made any connection or installation in violation of this ordinance shall immediately remove such connection or correct such an installation. If not removed or corrected within 30 calendar days after notice of the violation has been delivered personally or by certified mail to the owner, the City may impose a surcharge in the amount provided in Section IV of this Ordinance. Such a surcharge may also be imposed upon any property owner, after a 30 calendar day notice has been delivered, and if the owner refuses to allow their property to be inspected. The owner of a building or premises found to be not in conformance with this ordinance during periodic re-inspections may be subjected to a surcharge as provided in Section IV of this Ordinance.
SECTION IV- FOUNDATION DRAIN TILE
Future Homes and Businesses: Groundwater from foundation drain tile for future homes and businesses shall not discharge to the sanitary sewer system. The groundwater shall flow through the tile and drain to a sump basket and shall then be pumped and discharged to the exterior of the structure with the use of a sump pump.
Existing Homes and Businesses: Some existing homes and businesses may have been constructed with groundwater from foundation drain tile discharging to the sanitary sewer. If the connection of the foundation drain tile to the sanitary sewer pipe is on the exterior of the home, the connection will be considered grand-fathered and disconnection will not be required. If the connection of the foundation drain tile to the sanitary sewer pipe system is on the interior of the home or business, the connection is considered "not in compliance" and the owner is required to correct the improper connection. Any connection considered "not in compliance" shall abide by the sections contained in this ordinance.
SECTION V - SURCHARGE. A surcharge of One Hundred and 00/100 Dollars ($100.00) per month is hereby imposed on every sewer bill to property owners for the following conditions:
1.) not in compliance with this ordinance
2.) refusal of property inspection
SECTION VI - NON-PAYMENT OF SURCHARGE. If the surcharge is not received by the City of Olivia, the City reserves the right to assess the property owner the unpaid balance.
SECTION VII - EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication.
A MOTION WAS PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS _____ day of May, 2002 by the following vote:
YES:
NO:
City SEAL:
_________________________________ _____________________________
Bill Miller, Mayor Michael Funk, City Administrator
But as a good Freeper, I also understand the dangers of allowing government inspectors into your home without a legal search warrant.
If someone had just asked nicely, I probably would not have gotten ticked about this issue. However, that $100 per month if I do not allow them into my home, got me little upset.
A surcharge of One Hundred and 00/100 Dollars ($100.00) per month is hereby imposed on every sewer bill to property owners for the following conditions:
1.) not in compliance with this ordinance
2.) refusal of property inspection
Well my fellow Freepers, should I demand a legal search warrant first?
Not if you want to pay the $100 each month from now on. :)
How many lizard skins are you willing to put up?
That is why I was asking the smart Freepers. Perhaps this is all nice and legal. In a tiny town of 2,500 people, the idea of pissing off the local government is not my idea of fun.
However, we all know how local governments tend to forget about little details such as the Constitution and Laws. Sometime you need to remind them about those.
NOT that I have anything to hide, but as you stated, anything else they find while performing a simple Sump Pump inspections would be admisable.
Today, there was a good posting about vehicle inspection check points and what to do. That got me thinking about this simple inspection of my own home.
Generally, any sump pump, floor drain, etc where there is any (however remote) chance of any pollution source entering that drain or sump, the drain or sump must be discharged to the SANITARY SEWER.
If a toilet ran over, a car leaked oil on the floor, etc., and made it's way to a drain or sump that discharged into the storm sewer you would be in violation of FEDERAL regulations governing stormwater runoff that the EPA initiated in the mid 90's.
Thanks for that wise information. Just out of curiousity, can you cite any legal references? You are probably very correct, but I would like to read the actual text.
Now, should you allow entry to folks whose utilities you are connected to? Most likely - else you might get stuck with the cost of their lawyer to go into court and argue some well settled law.
Alternatively, they could just unplug you at the D-Mark (where your line ends and theirs begins).
I know, this ordinance seems strange to me. With a town of only 2,500 people, they probably only have a large septic tank for the sanitary sewer. I do understand the need for this ordinance, since a flood last year totally saturated the sewer system.
I just question their methods.
If the lagoon were to run over, the city would be in trouble with the EPA
I am a Professional Engineer in Illinois and it would not meet Illinois code, But I have also done some work in small communities in Missouri where their "plumbing code" would not have met Illinois code 40 years ago.
Generally the less populated the area, the more they can get away with.
Their little regulation would not stand up to constitutional muster, but who is going to go to the trouble and expense of fighting it in court?
If I allow them to enter my home, they will find that the basement drains directly into the sewer system. The toilet, shower and any flooding of the basement has a single drain pipe under the floor.
I leaned this the hard way just last week, when that single pipe got clogged. Raw sewage flowed all over the basement floor. After that happened, I wished that I had a sump pump to get the water out of the house and into the street.
Oh well, perhaps I am in the wrong and will just let them inspect the house. What the heck, Laws regulating what the government can or can not do no longer mean anything today.
Just fight the big fights!
Unfortunatly, by the time you need to fight the big fight, you have already lost.
This happened to my grandmother's house last month when we got 10" of rain in 1 week. First time anyone remembers in 30+ years there was water in the basement.
If I was you , I'd find a copy of the state plumbing code & look at it so you know where you stand before the city people come to inspect things. A bigger library might have one, or find a friend of a friend who is a plumber that will let you look at his.
The stupid things cost at least $100 if you buy one from the state.
The key words here are buildings, premis and re-inspect.
SECTION II - INSPECTIONS. Property owners shall allow an employee of the City or a designated representative of the City to inspect the buildings to confirm that there is no sump pump or other prohibited discharge into the sanitary sewer system. The City may periodically re-inspect any building or premise to determine compliance with the requirements of this ordinance.
SECTION III - REMOVAL OF CONNECTIONS. Any property owner who previously made any connection or installation in violation of this ordinance shall immediately remove such connection or correct such an installation. If not removed or corrected within 30 calendar days after notice of the violation has been delivered personally or by certified mail to the owner, the City may impose a surcharge in the amount provided in Section IV of this Ordinance. Such a surcharge may also be imposed upon any property owner, after a 30 calendar day notice has been delivered, and if the owner refuses to allow their property to be inspected. The owner of a building or premises found to be not in conformance with this ordinance during periodic re-inspections may be subjected to a surcharge as provided in Section IV of this Ordinance.
WHY....
Because I still believe in the rule of the law. As I just posted, the actual language of the ordinance does not require an original inspection of a premis.
Thanks to my fellow Freepers tonight, the answer was staring me in the face. Law makers use precise language in their laws, and they will be more than happy to use that language to obtain additional money from average persons who do not read the fine print.
This Freeper has been well trained to actually study the language used, and not the implied meanings.
"I did not have sex with that woman, Monica Lewinsky" is the classic examples. To Bill Clinton, a "blow job" was not having sex. Although he was guilty, the implied meaning was just the opposite.
When a cop stops you and asks: "May I look in your trunk?", all you have to say is NO. However, if you are feeling guilty and want to demonstrate your innocence, then you just gave him full legal rights to do anything he desires. What happens after that point is your own darn fault.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.