Auburn City Councilor Daniel Herrick should have disclosed his involvement in a project that would be impacted by the elimination of the sprinkler ordinance.

Knowing that Herrick is a contractor, it should be assumed that in some way, at some time, the change would have an impact on a project that he could be involved with. However, he should have disclosed that he was currently working on a project that would be impacted by the change.

As an Auburn citizen, I would like to give Herrick the benefit of the doubt. I am willing to accept that he did not disclose the information because he did not think that it was an issue. It is my hope that he will learn from this issue and that it won’t happen again.

If the sprinkler issue is to be reopened, there needs to be more data brought to the discussion. At the core, the question that needs to be answered is: Does this ordinance unduly impact individuals while delivering little to no value to the community?

What data can be brought to the discussion that would help answer this question?

I have several questions. There should be significant historical data available to provide facts and real numbers to help drive to the correct resolution.

It is my hope that if this issue is reopened, facts and real numbers will factor into the discussion.

Ken Bellefleur, Auburn