Ridgewood NJ, Just a quick take on last night first council meeting with the new council , if tonight is any indication of things to come, so much is going to be accomplished. Ordinance 3066 is to be repealed.There was real talk about Ridgewood Water,even addressing the law suit.
The parking issues were addressed with real common sense and many new ideas as well as recognition of the immediacy of getting things done quickly. Roberta didn’t run the meeting and actually did what she is supposed to do, inform the council!
Rurik Halaby could not help himself. He had to praise the past council and once again went on and on about how there has never been anyone like Roberta. He gave Susan a mild lecture and talked about his belief that Valley is a done deal and to fight this would be the equivalent of endangering lives( lifes?)He cautioned Susan not to base her decisions on a few disgruntled neighbors and move Ridgewood forward into the future embracing change and growth. I might have made this sound better than it actually did! But she was very polite as usual.
Hopefully we go forward with a suit against Valley. maybe it would tie things up long enough for them to start developing all the other properties they have purchased and their argument that their expansion is for the greater good will not have as much impact in a court of law as it seems to have done with the current judge.
Ground Water Under Direct Influence of Surface Water (GWUDI)
July 14,2016
the staff of the Ridgewood blog
Ridgewood NJ, The term “GWUDI” refers to a groundwater source that is located close enough to nearby surface water (e.g., a river or lake) so as to receive some amount of direct surface water recharge. If a portion of the water source is from surface water, then the groundwater source is considered to be at risk of contamination from pathogens and viruses that are not normally found in true groundwater. Ridgewood completed a screening process of all of its wells in 1994, and the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) found that none of the wells were considered to be under the direct influence of surface water.
More recently, data reviewed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) suggested that five Ridgewood Water wells may be under the direct influence of surface water, and as a result, Ridgewood Water has installed advanced disinfection equipment at four of these locations, and removed the fifth well from service. Ridgewood Water will continue to study the water quality at these wells during the next year to better understand the relationship between surface water and groundwater and determine whether additional treatment steps are necessary.
In light of this information, Ridgewood Water is also performing a study of 33 additional wells in the water supply system that are located near surface water bodies to look for any evidence of surface water influence in these wells. If any evidence is found during the course of this study of such a connection, Ridgewood Water will immediately install advanced disinfection treatment at these locations. It is important to note that routine distribution system monitoring of the Ridgewood Water distribution system since 2005 has never detected any positive samples in the entire system that would indicate a surface water impact on microbiologic quality of water supplied to customers.
Ridgewood Water is beginning a year-long study of its supply well system to evaluate the vulnerability of the wells to microbiological contamination from nearby surface water bodies.
Quarterly progress updates can be found HERE.
ABOUT THE STUDY
Ridgewood will be performing the GWUDI study under a rigorous Source Water Monitoring Plan which has been approved by the EPA. The study involves the collection of water samples from up to 38 wells and three surface water locations on a weekly and biweekly basis. The samples will be analyzed in the laboratory for evidence of microbiologic activity and for other “indicator parameters” that may indicate surface water influence.
All samples will be collected and analyzed by an NJDEP-certified laboratory and will be reported on a quarterly basis to the NJDEP and EPA.
Group 1 Wells (2 locations)
For the two Group 1 wells, EPA has determined that the occasional presence of of e.coli in raw water has occurred and is requiring further assessment to determine whether there is evidence of a direct connection of these sources to surface water. Ridgewood will perform weekly raw water monitoring at the two Group 1 wells for the presence of fecal coliform, e. coli and turbidity.
Group 2 Wells– (3 locations)
For the three Group 2 wells, EPA has determined that the occasional presence of of e.coli in raw water has occurred and is requiring further assessment to determine the degree of influence of nearby surface water on each well and whether there is a need for additional treatment. Ridgewood will perform weekly raw water monitoring at the two Group 2 wells for the presence of fecal coliform, e. coli, aerobic spores, pH, temperature and turbidity. Ridgewood will also perform weekly surface water monitoring at associated surface water bodies for the same parameters. The third well has been shut down and is being reevaluated for reconstruction or permanent closure.
Group 3 Wells – (33 locations)
The 33 Group 3 wells have not exhibited any evidence of being under the influence of surface water. These wells were previously screened by NJDEP and were not found to warrant additional assessment. As such, the NJDEP issued monitoring waivers to Ridgewood for these wells. EPA has determined that a further assessment of these wells is warranted at this time. The monitoring will consist of biweekly raw water sampling and analysis for e.coli bacteria.
Ridgewood has also agreed to perform Hydrogeologic Sensitivity Assessments (HSAs) of all Group 3 wells. These are reviews of the conditions and potential sources of surface contamination at each location to assess their vulnerability to future microbiologic contamination
Ridgewood NJ, for the second year in a row residents report being harassed by the Village of Ridgewood about their sidewalks. This is less than one year the requested repairs were already made.
While some residents contend the Village is just looking for the permit fee others like Barb Ehret Crowe on the “It takes a Village of Ridgewood Facebook page ,”The thing that is crazy to me is in most cases damage is caused by trees planted and maintained by the village yet the cost for the damage they create becomes the burden of the homeowner. Makes no sense”
Amended 9-16-2015 by Ord. No. 3498
A. It shall be the duty of any owner of real property abutting any public street or sidewalk in the Village of Ridgewood, at the owner’s sole cost and expense, to install, construct, repair, alter, relay, reconstruct and maintain the sidewalks in front of or abutting such property whenever such sidewalks are required as hereinafter provided or, being already installed, shall be in such state of deterioration or disrepair as to constitute a hazard to the general public using said sidewalks unless they are repaired, altered, relaid or reconstructed. In addition to the foregoing, it shall also be the duty of the owner, at the owner’s sole cost and expense, to install, construct, repair, alter, relay, or reconstruct curbs where the deterioration or damage to the same has been caused by the actions of such owner. B. It shall be the duty of any owner of real property abutting any public street or sidewalk in the Village of Ridgewood, at the owner’s sole cost and expense, to maintain the interior of the tree wells located in/on the sidewalk in front of or abutting such property each year by weeding, removing debris and maintain the overall clean appearance of the tree wells and the interior of same.
Many residents claim to have already done the repairs .
Maggie Borkowski Neilson ,”It takes a Village of Ridgewood Facebook page,” I replaced last year were due to-their trees. Now they’re back saying they see another. No trees near it, no different than last year. Wasn’t a problem then but is now. Guess they missed it last year while marking up the rest of my sidewalks.”
She went on to say , “We are on Fairfield. Our entire street was done last year this time. I’m angry because I fixed all the ones they marked, plus an extra just to be sure, and now they’re coming back looking for more! Trying to double dip on the permit fees when they haven’t even completed the rest of the town once yet.”
Many felt a call to Village manager Roberta Sonenfeld would end up hearing 30 minutes lecture that how everything she has been doing is great with zero defect rate and ‘you’ the resident must be wrong?
Maggie Borkowski Neilson said after a visit to the engineering department claimed ,” They are blaming the fact that they used temps last year as to why they didn’t catch this one slab. Also said yes, my contractor had a blanket permit to do work but didn’t notify them that they worked at my specific address so that is why they are back at my property one year later.”
Many long time readers remember that following a citizen complaint registered with the Village, all sidewalks on South Irving Street were inspected in late 2010 or early 2011. Notices of violation were subsequently mailed to many property owners and several contractors began work on repairs in the summer of 2011.
Below are two articles, from today’s WSJ and Bergen Record, on Monday’simportant NJ Appeals Court ruling on Affordable Housing (AH) that will: (1) substantially lower the overall number of AH units required by municipalities under AH laws, and (2) may cause further delay in defining the actual obligations of municipalities under AH laws. In the Record article, even Kevin Walsh, the Fair Share Housing advocate (whose threatening of “hearsay” letter was wrongly permitted to be read into the Planning Board’s record by attorney, Gail Price – as if it represented a legal determination – scaring some Board Members and improperly influencing votes) indicated the forthcoming delays from this ruling, saying: “it requires further studies.”
In short, this ruling and these articles support what I, and other members of CBR, tried to convey to the Planning Board and Village Council during the past couple of years of overstated AH ‘threats’ proffered by Mrs. Price: that the Affordable Housing/COAH matter is, despite her puzzling advice, very unsettled and will continue to lack real clarity, potentially for years to come. It’s been that way since the 80s. No Legislature wants to fully effect the laws because they recognize their often impossible demands on NJ’s municipalities. However, conversely, no legislature, or legislator (other than Christie), has effectively sought to rework them or strike them down due to the obvious political implications.
These laws are just too flawed, resulting in the tumult and dysfunction of the past several decades. Fact is: there are no clearly defined AH numbers for Ridgewood right now. And there’s a chance there may never be. Given this, our representatives need to govern planning based on “what is right for Ridgewood now and in the future” and not “what minimizes builder’s remedy lawsuits.”
I firmly believe Mrs. Price wrongly influenced the Planning Board decision on the Multifamily Ordinances by alleging that a “Yes” vote was needed on the Master Plan changes, enabling development at the excessive levels sought by developers, to avoid potential developer lawsuits based on recent AH court rulings. As many anticipated, these rulings have now been lessened, and to some degree, called into question. Unfortunately, Mrs. Price never properly educated the Board on how dysfunctional the AH/COAH laws and politics have been (and very well will be), and that until such time as an unlikely final verdict is delivered, they should be wary reacting too quickly to threats from developers.
The implications of Monday’s ruling serves to underscore the unwise, biased and, unacceptable for Ridgewood, process undertaken by the prior Planning Board and Council. While we can and should promote fitting and proper development (and proper “development process”) in Ridgewood, which does add affordable units to our housing base, we should never have done this in the manner – fraught with bias and influence – that occurred over the past four years.
Beyond this, I believe there are certainly other ways Ridgewood can more properly and proactively plan to meet future AF/COAH requirements. These ways may be more creative and better for both Ridgewood and those truly needing AH than those put forth by the developers. I look forward to discussing my thoughts on them with you. I have been in the multifamily business for two decades, have managed many properties with affordable and moderately priced units, and am happy to share my experience.
Lastly, it is important to note that if members of the prior Planning Board and Village Council voted out of fear of lawsuits, they already got one: and sadly it’s from their own Residents, the very people they were elected or selected to properly represent. It’s a suit that alleges decisions based upon conflict of interest, outside influence, and improper representation and, most importantly, seeks to correct the serious mistakes in planning, representation and judgement made by the prior Council and Planning Board.
While the AH/COAH laws truly lack clarity, what is clear is that Ridgewood’s Residents demand proper planning and process. There is a much better route than the one taken by the prior Planning Board and Council.
Best Regards,
Dave Slomin, Resident
Follow up _________________________________________________________________
July 13,2016
Dear Mayor, Council and Village Attorney Rogers,
My July 12th email provoked feedback from a good number of fellow Residents and representatives various Ridgewood citizen groups, including responses to my letter and the linked articles with concern that pro-development attorneys may contend the appellate decision does not “change anything.” As the agenda indicates tonight’s Council meeting will address litigation in closed session, I wanted to make sure my comments were placed in the proper context, asMonday’s ruling does impact things here in Ridgewood.
My point is that the ruling exemplifies the significant dysfunction and lack of clarity that continues to exist (as it has for several decades) in the Affordable Housing definitions and determinations at the State level. This highlights the Planning Board attorney’s failure to properly advise the Board on how to address these issues. Mrs. Price, as a professional land use attorney, was well aware of this dysfunction and should never have counseled our Planning Board as she did. By proceeding as if the now reversed lower court decision was new “scripture,” and by either misunderstanding and/or misapplying other standards, the Planning Board attorney wrongly influenced the public debate and Board members’ votes. Necessarily, therefore, the Village Council proceeded under a flawed process and construct.
I do understand that whether State rulings ultimately determine that Ridgewood owes 50, or 100, or 500, or 1,000, or 100,000,000 affordable units, we are well short of that number and need to provide some additional AH units. From that singular perspective the ruling has a more limited impact. However, that is not the issue at hand. Rather, the issue is the defective and conflicted process in our municipal governance effecting the passage of recent pro-development ordinances. As such, what the appellate court’s decision signifies to me – as a multifamily real estate professional, with several decades of experience – is that the law has been and will be in a state of flux for some time to come. That no one can predict with certainty what will happen should definitely have been strongly conveyed to the Planning Board and Village Council prior to their votes. It was not. That is why the willingness of the prior majorities on the Council and Planning Board to side with those speculating with our downtown is so particularly egregious. Rather than react and surrender to an imagined obligations, or cave to the potential of developer lawsuits, Ridgewood should have performed correct and proper master planning with proper construct and counsel. There were so many things wrong and biased in their failed excuse for “planning.” You have the opportunity to begin the process of correcting this and protect Ridgewood from reckless overbuilding now and in the future.
Thus, I urge the newly constituted Council to address all pending litigation in view of the voters’ mandate. And you do have a clear cut mandate. Mayor Knudsen and Deputy Mayor Sedon both won their council seats in a landslide two years ago. And in the recent election, not only did Councilmembers Voigt, Hache and Walsh win in another landslide, but they routed the candidates heavily promoted by Aronsohn, Pucciarelli and Hauck to promote furtherance of development at the excessive scale and density recently passed. Then, subsequent to these elections, Residents next defeated the oversized garage by a vote of 2 to 1. These were not just victories. They were repudiations. They represent the voices and the clarity with which Ridgewood Residents speak and vote once we know the truth. Residents have spoken. You know very well what your constituents want. The recent votes leave no questions whatsoever. Your actions need to reflect the mandate we gave you.
Now is the perfect opportunity for the Village to move forward in acknowledgement of the serious issues raised by litigation in the housing and hospital lawsuits. With these suits, along with the garage referendum matter, you need to rectify Ridgewood’s core problems. Let’s show progress by first openly acknowledging that serious mistakes were made by the prior Council and Board Members. We all know it… our votes showed it. A perfect starting point for that is to recognize the legitimacy of the issues raised by our fellow citizens’ lawsuits, and settle those lawsuits as strong representatives of your constituents and not as officials fearful of outside interests. Then, let’s redirect the Village’s resources to focus on the developers with either settlement talks or continuing litigation, whatever is required to do what is truly right for Ridgewood. If you do what’s right, you will have our endless support. If any shortcuts are taken, Ridgewood’s divisions will sadly remain. And it’s time to end our divisions.
Lastly, please note I am including Mayor Knudsen in this email, as I entered her email incorrectly in my email of 7/12.
Ridgewood NJ, The adult male driver of a Ford LTD Crown Victoria jumped a curb, drove down a sidewalk, and sheered off a fire hydrant in front of 160 Highland Avenue, Ridgewood on Tuesday afternoon, 07/12. No injuries were reported by the driver nor his adult male passenger. The vehicle was lifted from the hydrant by a flatbed tow truck and driven away on its own power.
Ridgewood PD issued one (1) summons in connection with the incident. Ridgewood Water Company representatives at the scene estimated that there was approximately $4,000 worth of damage to the hydrant and its associated equipment. The hydrant was placed out of service until repairs could be effected.
Ridgewood NJ, looks like Ridgewood residents who questioned the over development of the central business district proved right all along. A state appeals panel overturned a court order that could have added thousands of units to developers’ plans.
Suburban towns are not required to address the so-called “backlog” of unmet housing needs that supposedly accumulated from 1999-2015. This is a very good development for Ridgewood. The developers have much less leverage than they thought they did. Now we have to press the point that we are fully built-out, have been for decades, and should not be obliged by any court to “build up”, city-style, to accommodate large numbers of new residents.
What a shame for Saraceno, Simoncini, Pucciarelli and all the others that stood to gain big time and pushed so hard to get all that housing into the CBD. Kudos to,the citizens who delayed all the development and stood up to Aronsohn and his horrible reign of terror, and Gwenn with her sparkly eyed talk about COAH.
Ridgewood NJ, Ridgewood is currently in Stage ll water restrictions ,until further notice, Ridgewood Water is not accepting applications or granting any exceptions. All pre-approved waivers are now void.
Stage II (Severe) – Mandatory restriction of irrigation to Tuesdays and Saturdays for properties with odd-numbered addresses and Wednesdays and Sundays for properties with even-numbered addresses. No irrigation shall be allowed on Mondays, Thursdays, or Fridays except for the use of a hand held hose. Irrigation using a hand held hose shall be allowed at any time.
Stage II water restrictions are currently in place for Ridgewood, Glen Rock, Midland Park, and Wyckoff, New Jersey are in effect beginning June 23, 2016 until further notice.
Residents, businesses, governmental agencies, and all other water users must adhere to Stage II of the restrictions shown on our website,water.ridgewoodnj.net.
If your address is an odd number, you may irrigate on Tuesdays and Saturdays only. If your address is an even number, you may irrigate on Wednesdays and Sundays only. A handheld hose may be used at any time including Mondays. No irrigation is allowed on Mondays, Thursdays, or Fridays except the use of a hand held hose.
The restriction level had to be increased to Stage II because water is being consumed at a greater rate than the supply system can sustain, thus reducing the amount of water in reserve for fire fighting and other emergencies.
Compliance with the Stage II restrictions will reduce the likelihood that more severe controls will be needed. Your cooperation is appreciated. Violators will be subject to a fine and court appearance
Leak Detection
A leak can waste large amounts of water; up to 20 gallons a day for slow drips and hundreds of gallons a day for both toilet and faucet leaks. Some leaks are easily detected while others are not so obvious. Any leak, big or small, can be very costly and wasteful and should be repaired as soon as possible.
Water meters are equipped to assist you in leak detection. Turn off all faucets, water-demanding appliances, and outdoor hoses, etc. Be sure no one is using any water. The water meters feature a “leak detector”. To check if the meter detects a leak, shine a light on the top of the meter next to the flashlight icon to activate the display. After a startup sequence, the screen will cycle between the current reading and the current flow rate. As shown in the photo below, the word RATE appears with 3 digits below it. These digits represent the current rate in gallons per minute of water going through the meter. If the leak has been ongoing, the meter will also display a small faucet icon.
If the meter indicates that you have a leak, inspect all fixtures, appliances, and pipes to locate it, keeping in mind that there may be more than one source of leakage. Sometimes a leak may be hidden in the underground piping. If you believe this to be the case, call a plumber for advice. The meter can also provide further assistance in understanding your consumption. By request, Ridgewood Water will download a detailed log of your consumption for the past 96 days. Ridgewood Water needs physical access to the meter to perform this service. Please call our Customer Service department to schedule an appointment.
Summer Water Restrictions
Stage I will be in effect each year starting on June 1st and will continue through August 31st. If conditions warrant, irrigation will be prohibited on additional days of the week up to and including a total ban on irrigation.
Compliance with the initial restrictions will reduce the likelihood that more severe controls will be needed. Your cooperation is appreciated.
Stage I (Moderate) – Mandatory restriction of irrigation to Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays for properties with odd-numbered addresses and Wednesdays, Fridays, and Sundays for properties with even-numbered addresses. Irrigation using a hand-held hose shall be allowed at any time. No irrigation shall be allowed on Mondays except for the use of a hand held hose.
Stage II (Severe) – Mandatory restriction of irrigation to Tuesdays and Saturdays for properties with odd-numbered addresses and Wednesdays and Sundays for properties with even-numbered addresses. No irrigation shall be allowed on Mondays, Thursdays, or Fridays except for the use of a hand held hose. Irrigation using a hand held hose shall be allowed at any time.
Stage III (Pending/Critical) – Mandatory restriction of irrigation to the use of a hand held hose on Tuesdays and Saturdays for properties with odd-numbered addresses and Wednesdays and Sundays for properties with even-numbered addresses. No irrigation of any kind shall be allowed on Mondays, Thursdays, or Fridays.
Stage IV (Critical) – Irrigation is prohibited at any time. Exceptions for irrigation using a hand held hose may be allowed under conditions prescribed by the Village Manager of the Village of Ridgewood.
The summer weather has led to a surge in water use for irrigating. Ridgewood Water implemented Stage II restrictions almost 2 weeks ago. Stage II limits the use of water for irrigation to two days per week. If your street address is an odd number, you may irrigate on Tuesdays and Saturdays only. If your street address is an even number, you may irrigate on Wednesdays and Sundays only. A hand held hose may be used at any time. No irrigation is allowed on Mondays, Thursdays, or Fridays except for a hand held hose.
Many people water their lawns more than necessary for healthy, drought resistant turf. Experts agree that ½ inch of water twice a week will sustain an established lawn within the Stage II limitations. Ridgewood Water technicians can help you reset your automatic irrigation system if needed. Please call our Customer Service Center at 201-670-5520 for assistance.
Our Fire Department is in the process of distributing a Notice of Water Restrictions flyer to every house in the Village. Enforcement has increased significantly. Fines start at $65 for the first offense, and increase for additional offenses. We have a team of personnel who are watching for violations in the act or evidence of violations at various times of day and night. If evidence of watering is found or they respond to a property based on a tip, a notice of non-compliance will be left with the homeowner as a warning. If you have any questions or concerns about watering, you can email it to [email protected]
Your cooperation in observing Stage II restrictions is appreciated and will help us avoid more stringent levels this year.
Best,
Roberta Sonenfeld
Village Manager
201-670-5500, ext. 203
How would a sale work? We would acquire a professional management team but does delivery change?
I doubt that we could physically connect to the water sources for United or another company. Or is this a real possibility.
I know that some feel that we have control over our water, but what are we really controlling? Out water is tested and sometimes the results are concerning. Is the water consumed in other towns in Bergen County more contaminated? I don’t think so. What is it that we are trying to control and what are the real opportunity costs?
Would we benefit from a financial infusion that would bring the necessary upgrades? The new company will still have to battle with Ridgewood residents who live near the water tanks. Would the “greater good” prevail?
Ridgewood NJ, Is there anything more annoying than driving by a house with in-ground sprinklers that are on while it is raining or right after a rain? Why hasn’t the village mandated the use of sensors for new systems? Why hasn’t Ridgewood Water bought, in bulk, sensors and given them away to what would then be non-conforming, pre-existing systems? Why? The continued lack of common and fiscal sense from village hall is appalling. From the Garber Sq $14k sign, to the neglect of the Hudson St lot, to the bike lane to nowhere and now this.
This sensor [the first result on Google] retails for $29: https://store.rainbird.com/timers/rain-moisture-sensors/rsdbex-rain-sensor-with-bracket.html . How much of a bulk discount could you get on a few hundred? How much water does the sensor need to save before it pays for itself over 2 years? In my previous town, same population as Ridgewood, they gave out low-flow shower heads door-to-door because even a low adoption rate saved water.
Very strange town this has become. We reward homeowners for having a nice landscape and keeping their homes looking good. Many homes plant new lawns,scrubs, and flowers every spring requiring frequent watering. We pay high taxes, high utility bills, high maintenance on our homes, with ever increasing prices.
Now some neighbors are looking for more effective ways to report each other. Some very bored or just unhappy souls need a better way to report someone. What a unhappy way to live. A neighbor won’t know if an exception had been granted, or a homeowner has a private well, so perhaps they should just mind their business. I was raised to respect a neighbor, mind my own business, and if I did have a issue take it up directly with the person, never hide behind a phone call Seems a way to destroy a community, when we “report” each other instead of solving the issue together.
We should be pressing the water company to correct the system shortcomings and find a solution to avoid annual restrictions. We should press for more storage tanks, better delivery, and just improvements.
So let me ask a question to all the Private Sector poster on this blog to include Roberta who say that Government should be run like the private sector. Here it goes. What happens in the private sector when you have a supplier or division that cannot meet the supply of the parent company because of inefficiency,incompetence, antiqued infrastructure,or not enough room for that division or supplier to expand? Does the parent company continue to throw money at that division or supplier knowing that it past, record shows that they cannot keep up with the demand. Or does the parent company cut their losses and sell that division or find a new supplier.
Ridgewood NJ, despite two postponements the day of the day of reckoning may be upon Ridgewood Water with the class action lawsuit trial between Glen Rock , Midland Park and Wyckoff customers and Ridgewood Water .
According to the Glen Rock Gazette Glen Rock Mayor Bruce Packer said that the proceeding is scheduled to commence Monday, June 27, and continue on June 28 and 30, and on July 6, 7, 11, 12, 22 and 29.
The case has finally reached the trial docket after failed attempts earlier this year to achieve a mediated settlement between the water utility and its customers in Glen Rock, Midland Park and Wyckoff.
The class action suit, was brought by the three municipalities on behalf of residents, and alleges some $3.3 million in overcharges by the company, and that the Village of Ridgewood NJ improperly commingled water company revenues to other areas of its municipal budget.
According to plaintiffs’ attorney Joseph Fiorenzo of Wyckoff, the towns are seeking a return of the amount officials believe their residents were overcharged – Glen Rock, $1,049,165; Midland Park, $619,635; and Wyckoff, $1,640,492.
Who is the new watering czar? I want to know where to call to report a neighbor’s system that’s watering at illegal times and has done so for years. It has to be anonymous. Is there such a thing?
Water Dept. wants us to approach the neighbor in person. Not gonna happen.
I have suggested a “tip line” before with no result. They’d get a million calls from frustrated neighbors. Last year the schools were watering at the wrong times, it was reported on the blog. They can be fined, too, although they’d pay with our money! But they could get reprimanded.
I’d guess that in 99% of cases, the owners have no idea that there are restrictions (despite the robo-calls, which they either don’t listen to or figure are meant for other people) or don’t think they apply to them…and in addition, have no idea how to reconfigure their sprinkler systems, and won’t pay their suppliers for a house call. People must be told, firmly, that they MUST learn how to reprogram their systems to comply with rules quickly, as they change. Last night’s call had me dashing out to the garage to remove one day–today–from the cycle.
I would give a pass to anyone who was on vacation, until they got home.
