The following is a letter sent to Morrin council and administration in response to statements in the regular meeting of the Village of Morrin council meeting, Sept. 21, 2022, as reported in the Sept. 29, 2022 issue, pg. 2, of the East Central Alberta Review newspaper.
The ECA Review reported on the statement made by the Chief Administrative Officer (CAO) saying Helton never proved to the Village that his sewer line was malfunctioning.
This is so misleading and is unconscionable she would state this publicly, or for that matter, in any other forum.
From the outset, we (the Helton’s) should not have had to prove the Village sewer was malfunctioning as the Village knew of the blockage from their own report September, 2020. This report stated very clearly that the blockage (by the way, a blockage can be an impediment and does not necessarily mean it is only a blockage when sewer backs up into a basement) was in the Village’s line.
We have a followup information package to present to council that will document the contact with the Village when the inevitable backup occurred.
As well, she (CAO) is reported to have stated that Helton did not contact the Village immediately.
Note in a January report on council in the newspaper where CAO states her position in a case where there was no record of the landowner notifying the Village of problems (DOUBLE STANDARD?).
The January report referred to appears in the Jan. 28, 2021 issue of the East Central Alberta Review paper and is as follows:
“Johnsrude noted that past minutes stated that in March, 2020 the village received a $504 bill for repairing a frozen water line, and added that the village has a sewer repair policy which he asked Plachner to summarize.
She stated that if a landowner has a water line problem they shall contact the village before hiring a contractor, and if a contractor is hired, that may release the village from financial responsibility. However, if the water line problem is on the landowner’s property, the landowner is purely responsible.
Plachner clarified that in this instance she could find no record of the landowner notifying the village of the problem. However, the CAO also stated that because of lateral line problems in that neighbourhood, her recommendation was for the village to pay for the repairs. Johnsrude moved and passed a motion for the village to pay the $504 bill.”
Going forward, I suggest that the CAO restrict her remarks to the facts as they are and not as she perceives them or like them to be.
Howard & Lynn Helton,