Dan McCubbins made a good-faith effort to repair a problem he believed was his when the sewer connection went bad at one of his rental units.
McCubbins went in quickly to repair it then discovered that the broken pipe was a part of the city’s system not his lateral. He completed the repairs while he had the street opened up.
He went to the City of Sweet Home and asked that the city pay for the repairs he had already done.
City staff, following their interpretation of city ordinance, said no. City ordinances are the staff guidebook. They believed that the ordinances indicated the break was McCubbins’ problem.
The City Council, on the other hand, has more options. It can interpret its code differently. Indeed, McCubbins presented a reasonable interpretation of the ordinance to say the repair was the city’s responsibility.
The council didn’t buy that interpretation. The council told McCubbins that the ordinance was clear and it was his problem not the city’s.
Some councilmen were clearly uncomfortable with that ruling, saying that right or wrong the ordinance was clear and that would be the way it would have to rule.
Interpreting its own ordinances is not all the council could have done though. If the rule wasn’t right, the council could have chosen to fix it. It could have chosen to pay for the repair and written cleaner rules.
It did that to an extent with Jeri Reynolds argument on whether she owed transient occupancy taxes just this year. The council cut the amount she owed and rewrote the ordinance so it clearly applied to her campground, the KOA.
The council could have and still can fix this one. In this case, it could cover the repair costs then rewrite its ordinance so the city is responsible for its side of the connection fitting on its sewer lines.
The problem with McCubbins sewer connection is that city’s side of the connection broke. His later fell away from the connection. Unless, somehow, that lateral is the reason the city’s pipe broke, the council should have considered taking responsibility for the repair.
The piece that broke was the end of a “Y” from the sewer main. That “Y” is literally part of the sewer main, which is made of concrete. The fact that it is one with the sewer main, which is the responsibility of the city, lends credibility to McCubbins argument.
The problem will not go away as the city’s sewer system decays. It shouldn’t be surprising when more of these connections break. After all, the city’s pipes are old. They are breaking and causing any number of problems from increasing sewer rates to sewage bypasses during heavy rain.
It may well be that property owners should be responsible for the connection point, including the “Y;” but the city council didn’t even consider the alternative. The council said that as it is written so shall it be, even when at least two councilmen indicated they weren’t sure it was the right thing.