My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11/15/76 Board of Public Works Minutes
sbend
>
Public
>
Public Works
>
Minutes
>
1976
>
11/15/76 Board of Public Works Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/15/2024 2:38:26 PM
Creation date
11/17/2016 12:43:42 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board of Public Works
Document Type
Minutes
Document Date
11/15/1976
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
REGULAR MEETING NOVEMBER 15, 1976 <br />5 <br />1 <br />a petition to the Board sigried by property owners and indicating <br />their feelings about the sewer. Mr. Farrand reviewed the petition <br />and those who indicated they were against the construction. Louis <br />Wesszo said that the project includes many vacant lots where the <br />sewer will not be needed. There was a discussion.regarding the <br />costs quoted at the first public hearing and Mr. Farrand said the <br />minutes of that meeting were available for -inspection. Mr. Wesszo <br />asked if the payment for the sewers could be spread out over <br />twenty years instead of five years for those on fixed incomes. <br />Mr. Farrand said the payment plan is specified as five years. <br />Mrs. Wesszo said there are back taxes due on many of the lots. <br />Mr. Farrand said the taxes are not relevant to this discussion. <br />Mr. Wesszo said many of the lots -7ill be turned over to the County <br />for taxes .Mr..Brunner said that the property, owners have -made <br />a persuasive argument for their case and the Board -understands <br />their feelings. The Board must now determine whether more than <br />one-half the property owners are against the project. If that is <br />the case, the project might not go through. HOWever, Mr. Brunner <br />said the property owners should understand that Dr. McCraley, the <br />County Health Officer, has stated in a letter to the Board that <br />any hesitancy on the part of the Board to approve the project might <br />produce a mandate from the Health Department to construct the sewers. <br />Mrs. Wesszo said there are only eleven houses in the area and <br />only two of them need sewers, one on Hillside and one on Highland. <br />Mr. Farrand said a review of the petition indicated that there might <br />be more than fifty per cent of the property owners against the <br />project. Mr. Mullen made a motion that the Board rescind Improvement <br />Resolution No. 3433. Mr. Brunner seconded the motion. The motion <br />carried with Mr. Brunner and Mr —Mullen voting aye and Mr. Farrand <br />voting nay. Robert Gonderman, Attorney for the Health Department, <br />was present and said this action was not going to terminate the <br />project. He said the Health Officer has a responsibility to the <br />community and a determination will have to be made as to what action <br />should be taken. <br />VALLEY CABLEVISION.COMPLAINT <br />Legal Interne Terry Crone reported to the Board that a response from <br />the Federal Communications Commission regarding the complaint about <br />radiation leaks from Valley Cablevision equipment was received. The <br />F.C.C. indicated that they did not have Rules and Regulations <br />available for distribution, but they could be obtained from Washington, <br />D.C. Thee recommended that complaints about radiation leaks be <br />brought directly to the attention of the company and, if unresolved, <br />such cases should be brought to the attention of the community which <br />issued the franchise. They further recommended that unresolved <br />complaints about malfunctions sent to the company could be sent -to <br />them with a history of the complaint and they would try to get greater <br />cooperation fron the company. Mr..Crone said he net with Harry White, <br />Manager of Valley Cablevision, and with Tim Zeak, South Bend Antenna <br />Company. Mr. Zeak has agreed to give the City a list of specific <br />sites where radiation leaks exist to be forwarded to Valley Cablevision. <br />If their response is not favorable or satisfactorIT, the Board could <br />forward the complaints to the F.C.C. for a determination as to whether <br />or not Valley Cablevision is in violation of the Pules and Regulations. <br />Mr. Zeak was present and said he hesitates to submit a list of the <br />radiation leaks because he has forwarded these locations to Valley <br />Cablevision before without success and he did not want to subject his <br />customers to harrassnent or slander. He said he did submit a partial <br />list to Valley Cablevision last Monday and on Tuesday Mr. 11hite stated <br />that he was not aware of any leaks other than in the River Park area. <br />Mr. Zeak said he invited Mr. White to be present this morning to <br />answer questions of the Board. He said some of the problems go back <br />over two years. Mr. Farrand said the Board would find it difficult <br />to deal with this natter unless they had a list of the problems. <br />He said the customers could submit their complaints directly to the <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.