Salem wants opinion on drainage problem

By BROOKS TAYLOR

Mt. Pleasant News

SALEM ? Generally city council meetings don?t spark much attendance, unless a hot-button issue is brewing.

Salem, however, had 18 residents and one dog at its regular meeting July 5 without a hot-button item on the agenda.

John Wagner revisited the council but unlike his two previous appearances, was promised action on his drainage dispute.

?I am back here again for the third time,? Wagner said. Wagner indeed had been at the May and June monthly council meetings requesting action on a drainage matter. Wagner contends that the flow of water has been altered or diverted when his neighbor erected a fence and raised his property.

He said he isn?t asking for removal of the fence and also claimed that when the fence was approved by the council, the council said if there are problems, to report back to them. ?A year ago when he did that, the council said that if there are problems, they would address them. I want you to do something about it. I don?t want the fence torn out, but I want you to do whatever you can to restore the normal flow of the water. When we have two or three inches of rain, I have eight to 10 inches of water in my yard.?

Wagner had contended at past meetings that changing or diverting the natural flow of water is a violation of the city ordinance and state law. Tuesday night, City Attorney Dave McCoid of Mt. Pleasant backed Wagner.

?Altering the flow of water violates the city nuisance ordinance,? McCoid began. He said the first step for the city is to identify what the violator must do to comply with the ordinance. The violator must be given a time limit to resolve the problem, McCoid said, and if the problem is not resolved, the city can file court action.

?But prior to doing anything legally, you have to determine if it is in violation of the ordinance and then you must identify what needs to be done (to be in compliance with the city ordinance),? McCoid outlined.

Council member Charles Kramer said he can?t recall making any promises that the council would rectify the problem if one existed. ?I don?t recollect that we said if he puts the fence up and it causes problem, we would fix it.?

Council member Gary Tedrow said he believes a problem exists. ?It has to be corrected because the natural flow of water is being altered.?

When asked how to determine if a problem exists, McCoid said the city would have to see the opinion of someone with draining or tiling expertise, which the council agreed to do.

?You have to get someone with drainage knowledge in there to tell you what has to be done to alleviate the problem. You need proof that the water is being stopped or diverted,? explained McCoid. ?You need that expert?s opinion on what needs to be done to alleviate or abate the ordinance.?

Council members also received presentations on the Aug. 2 special election on supervisor districting.

Retired Henry County Auditor Carol McCulley spoke in favor of retaining the status quo (at-large candidates and at-large voting) while Salem resident Dave Helman lobbied in favor of option three which elects supervisors by district through a vote of the district.

McCulley, who was county auditor for 16 years, said she worked closely with the supervisors during that time and ?I never thought they were unfair to anybody. They were thoroughly fair to everyone.?

She said option one (status quo) has severed the county ?very well,? adding that in the 31-year time period between 1980 and 2011 only since 2005 have all the three supervisors lived in Mt. Pleasant. She said that for 12 of 31 years, all the supervisors lived in rural areas. For the remaining 13 years it was a mixture of rural and Mt. Pleasant residents serving on the board.

If plan three were chosen, she noted that not only might Salem and Winfield residents be in the same district (because new precincts will have to be drafted), but district voters could only vote for one of the three supervisors whereas now they can vote for all three.

Helman noted that in the petition drive ?over 900 residents, representing every precinct in the county said it is time to re-think how we choose our supervisors.? Helman said many of the signatures were from rural residents but 140 were from Mt. Pleasant residents.

?Option three is fair. Mt. Pleasant will always elect one supervisor and another supervisor will always come from the rural area. The third supervisor could be from either Mt. Pleasant or the rural area. The important thing is we are trying to get someone accountable to you. The (supervisor) candidate will have to go and campaign in one third of the county (under plan three),? concluded Helman.

The dog visiting the council was a Rottweiler/pit-bull mix, owned by Scott Morin, a new minister in town. The reason for the dog?s visit was to gauge whether the council had opposition being a new resident. Following a show-and-tell session, the council said the dog could stay.

Finally, the council voted to remove Ken Greer from the zoning board. The council gave three reasons for Greer?s removal:

? Failure to comply with a city ordinance;

? Disagreement and complains on zoning board issues;

? Aggressive and disrespectful behavior toward a city employee.

Salem council members meet a day later next month due to the special election. The council will meet Wednesday, Aug. 3, at 7 p.m. in the Community Bu