|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
Public Participation ConcernsFor Immediate Release Dear Citizen:
You have requested to know what is the difference between a "resolution" and an "ordinance". This information was provided to you verbally; however you have now requested that this same information be provided to you in writing. Attached is Section §8.2 of the City of Inkster Charter, which states the meaning of each.
To put this in practical terms: an Ordinance is the law. Once passed, there is also a punishment for non-compliance in the ordinance. If violated, a city ordinance is an offence that an offender can be charged with violation of this ordinance and be brought to the local court of law. For building code violations – the City of Inkster has chosen to establish an Administrative Hearings Bureau and code violations are processed through this body.
A "resolution" is a form of a City Council action – given that the City of Inkster Charter states that Council’s actions must be taken by a "resolution". Normally, resolutions of Council are routine Council actions to pay bills, adopt budgets, enact city policies and often support City Council resolves to support various city or its citizen’s issues. ________________________________________________________________________
Dear Citizen:
Thank you for your comments at the Inkster City Council Meeting on April 6, 2009. You stated that council approved to open Burton Street for through traffic. What Council approved is Resolution 08-08-181 (which is attached), states that Council authorizes an assessment for the re-opening of Burton Street.
The assessment will be completed by the City of Inkster Police Department and mailed to you and City Council in City Manger’s Items of Interest on April 24th, 2009.
Also, you commented on the paving of Harrison Road. This project is one of the top road re-building priorities for City Council given that City Council has authorized over $300,000 for the study and engineering for this road. These funds were expended in anticipation of federal stimulus money – but after spending the funds to get this project to be "shovel ready" the City was informed by SEMCOG (South Eastern Michigan Council of Governments) which is the federal MPO (Metropolitan Planning Organization) in southeast Michigan – that Harrison Road is a "local road" and does not qualify for federal funding. In order to qualify for federal funding for roads under the new federal stimulus package – a road has to be qualified under the Federal Highway Administration criterion. Harrison Road does not qualify – however, SEMCOG may look at re-evaluating this road after the 2010 Census. ________________________________________________________________________
Dear Citizen:
Thank you for your comments at the Inkster City Council Meeting on April 6, 2009. As previously stated, you will receive a copy of the proposed budget at the time it is presented to City Council at Council meeting on April 20, 2009.
In addition you raised a question regarding the resurfacing of Yale Street. This item has been referred to the City Engineering Department for evaluation. Once this evaluation has been completed a copy will be forwarded to you and City Council. ________________________________________________________________________
Dear Citizen:
Thank you for your comments at the Inkster City Council Meeting on April 6, 2009. I have been advised that after the Council meeting you met Mr. Ralph Welton, Building and Code Enforcement Director, Mr. Fred Hill, Risk Manager and Police Chief Gaskin. In all these meetings it was unclear at each meeting what is the nature of your complaint. On Monday, April 13, 2009 you met with the City Manger at which time you shared with her documents in your possession that spoke to the matter for which you are seeking a resolution as follows: 1. The City of Inkster enforced a property code violation adjacent to your property at _____________ in Inkster. 2. In the process of cleaning up the property adjacent to yours – the crew that was retained by the owner of this property (according to your claim) damaged your fence. 3. You then filed an insurance claim to your insurance company to fix the damaged fence. 4. Your insurance policy has a $500 deductible which you had to pay in order for the insurance company to fix your fence. 5. You then filed a legal action in the 22nd District Court against the property owner next to yours, claiming that in the process of code compliance to clean up the property, the workers damaged your fence thus you claimed damages against the property owner next door for the $500 insurance deductible amount plus associated costs. 6. At the time you filed you claim at the 22nd District Court – you informed the City Manager that you told the Court Clerk that the property owner next to yours against whom this claim was made did not reside at the Norfolk address but someplace in New York City. 7. You showed the City Manager that the 22nd District Court – attempted to serve the claim against this property owner on Norfolk and the case was dismissed given that there was no response from the next door property owner. 8. You then came back to Inkster City Hall and filed Freedom of Information to obtain the next door property owner’s address. You were able to obtain this information. 9. On April 8, 2009 you went back to 22nd District Court and filed another claim against the property owner next to yours with the appropriate addresses of both the Manager of the property and the owner of the property (in New York City). The claim is again in the amount of $500 & associated costs. 10. At this time this item is before the 22nd District Court and the City has no jurisdiction over this matter. It is a private civil matter between two parties. ________________________________________________________________________
Dear Citizen:
Thank you for your comments at the Inkster City Council Meeting on April 6, 2009. It is my understanding that you have met with Mr. Patrick Depa, Director of Planning & Economic Development to discuss the issue of selling cars on your property. As Mr. Depa informed you, your property in question is located in a B-2 zoning district, which does not allow the sale of cars based on the zoning ordinance. Mr. Depa discussed with you the several options that you could undertake to address your entrepreneurship desires of which one is to change the zoning to said property.
The current sale of vehicles on your property is in violation of the City Ordinance and thus you have received citation for this violation.
Community
•
Business
• Government
•
Services
• Reference Send feedback regarding this
website by
clicking here. City of Inkster, Michigan
|
|
||||||||||||||
