Mayor's Weekly Update 2/6/10 Please explain To Me

[Rossc]

I have to agree that it's very disappointing that the present administration is continuing to carry on the actions of past administrations...

I truly felt that that crap was going to end..

I guess that power is power and once obtained, doesn't change, only the players are different..


Ross

[firefighter]

Originally Posted by Luke

I would go a step further and start repealing the taxes that were already voted on. There's no law against repealing the taxes. It is the same principle the city is operating under in that there is no law saying we can't use the electric revenue for city expenses such as traffic signals, waste water, and economic development.

I too will not vote for anymore tax increases. If they aren't worried about cutting the fat (coffee fund) out then I'm not going to vote for any increases on anything, and that includes the schools.

[piratexox]

Again I have to ask:
Why weren't these rebates passed along to the individual consumer?
I realize they were used to fund projects for the City, some good some not so, but were is the law that says that rebates go to the city?

[yowza]

All of you shut up and pay your electric tax, er, ah rather your electric bill.

[Bring me another cup of coffee, sweetheart]

[jpw]

Originally Posted by momathome

They try so hard to make it sound like they are doing us a favor.
One by delaying a rate increase then by splitting it up.
Well I did some math . And this is the true favor that they did for us.

Based on a $100 electric bill

Total rate increase if given at one time is 44% That would have been a bill of $144


this is the split increase they gave us

12% $112
16% $129.92
16% $150.71

We are paying just over $5 more per 100 per month, Than we would have if they had just done the 44% at one time. Now I know that does not sound like that much , but when you look at it like this see what you think.

In one year that is $60 more per $100
Now I dont know the number of households being served so lets just say 2000 homes . That comes to $120,000 a year that the city is getting for doing us a favor. You add that to the rebates they are getting and still will get for awhile even after they switch over to the new provider.
Now those kind of favors I could do with out.

Actually, that should read just over $50 per month, which is a $608.52 increase per year, if your bill was originally $100/month every month

[jpw]

Originally Posted by firefighter

I too will not vote for anymore tax increases. If they aren't worried about cutting the fat (coffee fund) out then I'm not going to vote for any increases on anything, and that includes the schools.

I've been voting for 21 years, and I have never (knowingly) voted for a tax increase, and I never will

[Bill Rook]

Originally Posted by firefighter

I too will not vote for anymore tax increases. If they aren't worried about cutting the fat (coffee fund) out then I'm not going to vote for any increases on anything, and that includes the schools.

Man, don't bring that subject up. Widhalm may be watching.

[charliebird]

in the state of Virginia where it was an electric co op. For many years after moving away, we received checks from the electric reserves and the only reason we do not now is we forgot to forward our last new address. I do not understand why this money here does not go back into the pockets of the citizens.

[Bill Rook]

To address the traffic light expenditure item that is listed in the budget, I did a little research and found an interesting article of case studies done to estimate signal costs. A typical incandescent traffic light at $0.08 per kWh can use as much as $600 worth of electricity in one year. In applying that estimation method, each traffic light in Lebanon costs $50 per month to operate on a 24/7 basis. In addition, that doesn't include the power required to operate the traffic light control systems. I don't know how many individual lights and control systems we have, but that can add up to a large chunk of change. I'm not sure if we also pay for electricity that is used by MoDOT maintained lights and controls, but I expect we do, so don't forget to count those too.

http://www.climatemanual.org/Cities/...astructure.htm

Water and Wastewater infrastructure also requires a great deal of electricity to operate. Pumping, treating, delivering, collecting and cleaning water are significant expenditures. Maybe the budgeted electricity costs for those should be removed from electric and included in each of the respective budget areas. We can either pay for them in one place or divide it up into two separate expenditures. In doing that, the electricity costs still have to be paid from revenue.

Just saying....

[momathome]

Originally Posted by jpw

Actually, that should read just over $50 per month, which is a $608.52 increase per year, if your bill was originally $100/month every month

The five dollars is what they are getting extra on the increase by splitting it up instead of giving it to us all at one time.
Sorry if I did not make that clear