HomeMy WebLinkAbout14-92 RESOLUTIONMawr
•
•
RESOLUTION NO. 14-42
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE PAYMENT TO EDWARD
KNIGHT IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $2,500, TO
INSTALL A BACKFLOW PREVENTER IN MR. KNIGHT'S
LINE, AND TO START AN EDUCATION CAMPAIGN FOR
CITIZENS EXPLAINING WHAT HAPPENS TO THE CITY
SEWER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM WHEN GREASE IS
POURED DOWN THE DRAIN.
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE CITY OF
FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS:
Section 1. That the Board of Directors hereby authorize
payment to Edward Knight in an amount not to exceed $2,500 for
sewer back-up damage to Mr. Knight's property which occurred on
December 9, 1991, to install a backflow preventer in Mr. Knight's
line, and to start an education campaign for citizens explaining
what happens to the city sewer distribution system when grease is
poured down the drain.
PASSED AND APPROVED this 21st day of January , 1992.
ATTEST:
By
APPROVED:
" Maydr
•
CLEANING 8 REPLACEMENT RECEIPTS FCR SEWER BACK -JP AT
734 E. LAKESIDE, FAYETTEVILLE WHICH OCCURED DECEMBER 9, 1991.
1 Carpet $587.C5
Pad 132.75
Install 236.CC
2. Folding Door 54.95
3. Birch H/C door 15.00
4. Particle board 5.95
5. Wall paper 27.96
Total
6. Oriental Carpet 3123.00
7. Twin Mattress 69.95
Total
8. Blow dryer $ 15.96
9. Curling iron 6.93
10. Curlers 19.96
Total
11. Basketball
12. Ironing board
13. Soccer shoes
$ 16.96
8.96
Total
$1113.20
$ 282.38
$ 45.63
$ 27.60
$ 37.26 $ 37.26
14. Beach Towels $ 24.00
15. Sheets 25.00
16. Matress pad 12.99
3- 1' -
$ 66.01
•
13.09
•
•
17. 4 pair leather women's shoes 96.00 $102.24
18. 2 shirts 9.99
19. Socks 6.99
20. Underwear 3.99
21. 4 belts 22.98
22. Phone cord 3.99
23. Vest 22.99
$ 75.54
24. Eating out '4.31 $ 16.31
25. Dry Cleaning damaged clothing
Lek*
r
•
r
t;
A
1., s
13.10
FAY TTEVI LLE
THE CITY OF FAYETTEVIL.E ARKANSAS
DEPARTMENTAL CORRESPONDENCE
•
To: Kevin D. Crosson, Public Works Director
From: Don Cochran, Water and Sewer Maintenance Manager
Data: 12-19-91
Subject: Sewer Back -Up, 734 E. Lakeside
13.07
On Wednesday afternoon, Dec. the 18th, I visited with the Knights,
and discussed their claim for damages due to the recent sewer back-
up.
As you know I was on the scene shortly after the incident occurred
and made arrangements for a cleaning contractor to clean and
disinfect the home that same day.
The total cost of the cleaning came to $ 1,200.
The Knights were not at home when the back-up took place, but they
did give us permission to have the home and furniture cleaned. City
personnel did their best in listing the personal items that were
damaged, without the Knights being present. The Knights assessment
and our employee's assessment differ in some areas, but i do feel
that the Knight's are being truthful in their assessment.
The total of the Knight's claim came to $ 1,734.25
I have reminded the Knight's that the City has a $ 2,500 limit on
such claims. The response was, " the City should consider that this
was the second time this has happen to us and we did most of the
cleaning the first time ourselves." I told them that I would
mention that in my report, but I could not make any guarantees that
the total amount of their claim would be paid. Without using names
I made reference to the Sullins claim. I explained to them that in
this situation City Staff had recommended to the City Board of
Directors, to exceed our limit of reimbursement for damages. I
told them that the Board decided to stay with the limit set by the
policy. I also explained to them that the items the City replaces
will probably have to be turned over to the City, to be sold at the
yearly public auction. They had no problem with doing that.
• 13.08
The total cost of the cleaning of the house, furniture, and the
cost of the Knight's claim is as follows:
Cleaning
Knight's
$ 1,200
1,734.25
Total $ 2,934.25
This is $ 434.25 over the City's limit for such claims.
The City's limit less the $ 1,200 for the cleaning, = $ 1,300.
I do feel that in this case the Knight's would need at least the
$ 1,300 to put the carpet back and replace some of the items that
were badly damaged. Mr. Knight did say that the doors could be
painted and could still be used, even with the damage.
As for the additional $ 434.25 the Knights are requesting. This
blockage was a result of grease in the sewer main, just like in the
Sullins case.
Considering the Board's decision on that case I do not feel it
would be a productive use of our time to take this claim to the
Board. I do not believe they would view this one any differently.
If you have any questions please call, thank you.