$50 Dish Grounding Inspection Fee passed by Omaha, Ne

[Hall]

I could understand the inspection fee, if the city could provide one documented case of where their inspection would have saved a life, prevented an injury, or prevented property damage...oh wait, all they want is to increase revenue.

You're an installer, right ? Do you ground your installations because you have to or because your employer (and their boss and the NEC) says it's advisable ? I've seen plenty of the "good" installers around here (those who take pride in their work, based on their comments here) criticize other installers for doing things like not grounding installs.

That all said, I do think it's completely wrong to single out satellite installs for this and to require re-inspections.

 

[harshness]

That's ridiculous... If someone has electric work done improperly and the inspector cites them, is it then the inspector's job to fix the shoddy work ?

Only if a previous inspection declared the installation correct and a subsequent inspector finds that it wasn't. Inspections are supposed to help the homeowner make sure that their contractor did their job. If the contractor failed and the inspector failed, it really isn't the homeowner's fault.

 

[Hall]

Only if a previous inspection...

Please re-read my post otherwise, I can't get how you made the assumptions you did from it.

 

[Stargazer]

If they start failing a lot of inspections then do you think Dish Network / Directv is going to send someone out free of charge to fix it? Those satellite companies are going to say that it is up to THEIR standards and that someone else's standards is someone else's responsibility. Then customer will say "take my system out NOW, I am switching to cable since it does not require inspections and fees and so forth".

 

[stardust3]

That's ridiculous... If someone has electric work done improperly and the inspector cites them, is it then the inspector's job to fix the shoddy work ? Same with plumbing work.... and roofing.... Narrow-minded thinking like yours is no better than the narrow-minded thinking that got this ordinance passed in the first place.

LOL $50.00 is more than a enough to cover his fee to fix it if he cites it. In a lot of cases that is twice what an installer gets for a service call, which is all this basically is.
My point is if they required these guys to fix it. They would soon find all kinds of reasons installs were not grounded, including some legitimate ones. Then this whole ridiculous inspection fee would fizzle away as quick as it was dreamed up.
Narrow minded huh? Yeah I guess I am. I also believe lobbyist & politicians are hard working honest people....... :haha:haha:haha

 

[Hall]

LOL $50.00 is more than a enough to cover his fee to fix it if he cites it.

Maybe something will sink in..... Driver is pulled over by police because his muffler has rusted off or there's a large crack in the windshield. Using your logic, the policeman should fix it. :up :up :up

 

[stardust3]

Maybe something will sink in..... Driver is pulled over by police because his muffler has rusted off or there's a large crack in the windshield. Using your logic, the policeman should fix it. :up :up :up

I see your point. I'm not comparing it to anything else, you are. With my narrow minded logic, I can't think of anything remotely that evens comes close to compare this to.

 

[Jim5506]

Maybe something will sink in..... Driver is pulled over by police because his muffler has rusted off or there's a large crack in the windshield. Using your logic, the policeman should fix it. :up :up :up

Your analogy is false.

Police do not stop everyone and charge them $50 to inspect their windshield and exhaust.

Perhaps the city should do free inspections and charge those with proven ungrounded dishes $150 - let the litigation begin.

 

[harshness]

Please re-read my post otherwise, I can't get how you made the assumptions you did from it.

You intimated that it couldn't possibly be the fault of an inspector that something was wrong and the contractor got away with it. I gave an example (as opposed to making an assumption) of a situation where a failure on the part of an inspector would cost the customer whom, after years had passed, would have no recourse with the contractor due to a fault with the original inspection.

In major construction there are holdbacks and performance clauses but not so with satellite dish installations.

 

[Stargazer]

How is the city going to raise a lot of money if they are going to have to do this and that in order to get the fee? It just ain't going to happen. I am sure there will be fines and penalties in place as well.

Should those installers or retailers of those installers that put in the satellite systems in Omaha be concerned that the city could go back on them and fine them? How about Dish Network and Directv getting penalized and fined themselves? Sounds like things could get quite harry with this.

 

[Slamminc11]

Both Dish and Direct should have their lawyers show up to the meeting on the 15th and explain what exactly this "idea" that the council has will cost in court costs if the city tries and implement this. I'm guessing a whole lot more than the $2 million they are hoping to collect from this ef'ed up idea!

 

[Tyralak]

Both Dish and Direct should have their lawyers show up to the meeting on the 15th and explain what exactly this "idea" that the council has will cost in court costs if the city tries and implement this. I'm guessing a whole lot more than the $2 million they are hoping to collect from this ef'ed up idea!

Agreed. This so blatantly violates OTARD that just showing up with the lawyers should be more than enough.

 

[gpflepsen]

From Omaha council gets static over dish inspections

By The Associated Press | Posted: Sunday, September 6, 2009 4:15 pm | (4) Comments

Font Size:
Default font size
Larger font size

OMAHA - Omaha City Council members are receiving lots of static about proposed $50 annual inspections for satellite dishes.

The council offered the fee for satellite TV dish inspections as a way to help offset a projected $11 million shortfall in the 2010 budget.

The Satellite Broadcasting and Communications Association wrote a letter to the city that calls the plan an "outrage" and "illegal" and a "battle that is not worth fighting."

The group said federal code bars cities from doing anything that would unreasonably increase the cost of installation, maintenance or use of a dish.

Council members Gerry Gernandt and Jean Stothert said the dish proposal, projected to raise $2 million, also has received a poor reception from constituents.

 

[Slamminc11]

From Omaha council gets static over dish inspections
...Council members Gerry Gernandt and Jean Stothert said the dish proposal, projected to raise $2 million, also has received a poor reception from constituents.

Gee, you think!And they let these idiots breed

 

[webdog]

Ever notice how these cities never decide to cut any of their spending?

A lot of people are losing their jobs or taking pay cuts and have to make adjustments in their budgets, yet government always thinks they are exempt from doing this. "Oh we'll just raise taxes and spend the same amount or even more!"

 

[jrp]

Ever notice how these cities never decide to cut any of their spending?

A lot of people are losing their jobs or taking pay cuts and have to make adjustments in their budgets, yet government always thinks they are exempt from doing this. "Oh we'll just raise taxes and spend the same amount or even more!"

You are using a broad brush. I direct a small county agency and we have left one of our seven positions open for the last year because of the economy and the trouble our constituents are going through. We hope hope to be able to fill it in the next fiscal year, but I anticipate it taking at least one more year. A 14+% decrease in manpower isn't easy to adjust to.

Not every government entity fits in into "always".

That said, this proposal seems whack to me.

 

[Bobby]

You are using a broad brush. I direct a small county agency and we have left one of our seven positions open for the last year because of the economy and the trouble our constituents are going through. We hope hope to be able to fill it in the next fiscal year, but I anticipate it taking at least one more year. A 14+% decrease in manpower isn't easy to adjust to.

Not every government entity fits in into "always".

That said, this proposal seems whack to me.

JRP, I appreciate and respect your agency and your direction. You are correct in the broad brush thought about 'always.' Many agencies around the country are trying to rein in spending because the money simply isn't there. It's a tough time, both individually and well as municipally and we all have to do what is needed to get through it. And yes, this proposal is well out of whack!

 

[8bitbytes]

I didn't read all 11 pages so maybe someone has covered this:

How much will it cost to send inspectors out on this gestapo fund raiser?
- Program management, agency coordination, and external audit controls
- Personnel Salary and inspector payment
- Equipment for inspections including ohm meters, ladders, and weed eaters
- Vehicles
- Insurance - inspector safety and possible property damage from the inspector
- Financial processing and accounting for the fees

Seems to me this program will cost more than it will bring in.

 

[mraudit]

Well, I live in Omaha, and I am so pissed at this. I have called a few times, and sent emails to my city councilman telling him of my displeasure. Living here, I can allready hear rumblings that this will not last. The city didn't put a lot of thought into this, and I am sure this $50 inspection fee will go away.

Oh do I love Omaha politics.

 

[dishcomm]

Ever notice how these cities never decide to cut any of their spending?

A lot of people are losing their jobs or taking pay cuts and have to make adjustments in their budgets, yet government always thinks they are exempt from doing this. "Oh we'll just raise taxes and spend the same amount or even more!"

Of course not..GOvet cannot reduce spending. After allgovet provides "essential public servises"..Ok. I''ll go along with that.
Now on to the incredible waste that occurs whenever government gets it's hands on other people's money. Political patronoge jobs, appointees and uneccessary levels of buracracy contribute vastly to the cost of government.
Not once do we ever hear of government furloughing these administrative positions.
No. When revenues slow, government makes cuts where it hurts the constituency the most.
This is a game. Politicians claim they have to cut services or raise taxes. What they don't tell us is there are many people on the payroll who's postions are non essential.
When faced with a cuts in social services people will opt for tax increases.
It's all a game.