"LOVELY RITA METERMAID" beatles
Last night I found out that our city manager has 10,000 cash registers, I mean water meters that the City of Painesville collects from. Now the plan is a surcharge of $10.00 per month for a total of $120.00 a year per meter. Best guess $1,200,000.00 increased revenue a year for the water department. All for infrastructure improvements. Wait... wasn't that 4% raise every year for 6 years supposed to go for that?
There were two people in the audience that showed me their utility bills; both were around $10.00 a month for the water portion of bill. This will become a 100% increase in their water bill.
Joe Shmo living in a condo by himself will pay the same fee as Fasson, Tri-Point Hospital[yes they still get water from Painesville City.] numerous Laundromats and restaurants as well as homes with many people occupying a single family home.
I will have to watch the council meeting again but I believe the city manager and council members mentioned a rate increase to repair things... 9% was thrown around as an increase to fix things. Look at your bill; would you be better off with a flat $10.00? or a 10% increase in your bill? A $10.00 water bill would become an $11.00 bill. A 35.00 water bill would become a $38.50 water bill but our leader wants $10.00a month from each meter. Water bills should only be based on amount usage, you use more... you pay more. Seems the math favors large commercial users?
The city should at least open its books to council, if not the people. Their math is screwed-up somewhere. Continual 4% increases for the past 3 years with 3 more years of increases and bragging how the water department has saved over $950,000 since 2007.
Watching council, Hach is on board as well as Hada, and Fountain missed his second meeting this month so I'm guessing he'll be on board too.
Council members DiNallo, Fodor, Werner, and Flock must hear how much you are not for this fee. If they don't hear from you it's almost guaranteed to pass on the third reading.
Council approved everything pretty much on the agenda except The rezoning of 720 Mentor Ave. from R-2 to B-1. Along with not having enough votes to pass Amending Chapter 167 to Clerk of Court/Administrator. Councilman Flock cannot vote for raises with the city claiming poor-mouth all the time.
The city has set a whopping $100,000.00 aside for street repaving this year. Nebraska St., also Jefferson St. between Jackson and Mentor Ave. and if they have money left over? Gillette south of Walnut St [don't get excited your driveway is probably longer than that part of Gillette.]
On a side note I wonder if our city and school administrators will some day understand that they must post better results. As an example; our City Manager lives in a beautiful home on Levan Dr. The house next door started out with an asking price of $149,000.00 It just sold for $70,000.00 This sale price comes from the Lake County Auditors site, which has a disclaimer.[wonder if it will become a rental.] Now there are probably many reasons why this home sold for less than half its asking price (the economy being number one) but please don't tell me that bad roads, bad school scores and bad infrastructure didn't play a big part in that.
*************************************************************************************
COUNCIL SEEKS FUNDING FOR PROPOSED WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENT
This article was found on the city web. site today. Telling residents they needed to make 15 million dollars in infrastructure improvements by raising 1.2 million dollars for the next 10 years.
Real nice article although they forgot to mention their way to the 1.2 million was a $10.00 per month surcharge to everyone's water bill.
Can't they even be trusted enough to tell people what this is to cost them?
posted by terminator1 @ 7:04 AM
28 Comments
28 Comments:
Sorry Termie, its on the agenda it will pass. It's a done deal and you should know that by now.
Call whoever you want.
This $10.00 increase is to save commercial users the most. Do you even think Fasson will blink with this increase?
It's the NEIGHBOR........hood.
A $10.00 utility bill?
That's impossible.
To all you people supporting those on Elm St., maybe next time you'll be more careful of what you wish for.
Thanks for making me spend an extra 10 bucks a month now.
Adding $10.00 to your utility bill? We can stop that proposition.
I know the same "people" supporting those on Elm St.
would be supporting you and yours. NO ONE should have to put up with rusty water.
The only way you will have to pay $10.00 extra a month is if you stay silent and follow the herd.
The $10.00 I mention was for the portion of your utility bill that's just for WATER. Sorry if I mislead you.
Yes I was mislead, again.
What you put into writing is WRONG, again. That's a big difference in what you say and what you ment to say.
What a shock.
To 3:19: If you want to blame someone for the half-baked idea of charging everyone an extra 10.00/month on their utility bill, then I suggest you take it up with McMahon, Hada, and the rest of council. Have you not been paying attention to the ridiculous crap that is going on in this city thanks to them? This is only one small example. Go to them and demand to know where all the money is from the last raise in rates that was supposed to be for infrastructure. If all else fails, ask them how they can justify charging EVERYONE 10.00/month, instead of a small raise in rates. First though, I would want to know where all the money from the last raise went. Certainly nobody on this blog is responsible for their mismanagement of this city. And if you think it's okay for someone in this city to have dirty water coming into their home, then maybe you could change places with them, seeing as how it doesn't seem like you think anyone but them should care. I'm sure they would love to have your clean water. Go for it. Really.
You know, they already charge everyone a minimum of "4" (units) for their water bills even if they have only used 1, 2, or 3 (units). I was told that was the minimum charge allowable, so for people who already use less than 4, but get charged for 4, they are already overpaying enough. I can understand that there needs to be a minimum charge just to maintain everything, but then an extra $10.00 on top of it, just because the city is doing one more stupid thing is just too much.
Rather then rezoning of 720 Mentor Ave. for a veteran home. I'm just thinking, but wouldn't the hospital, that is being demolished, had been a better place for the veterans.
5:08 Sorry to have mislead you and putting it in writing, WRONG. Also shocking you. I thought everyone on the site had enough intelligence to realize that I was talking about an "added" $10.00 fee to the water bill. I think its been decades since a Painesville utility bill total has been $10.00.
I'm not going to dumb down this site so you can keep up. That would be SHOCKING.
You should spend more time questioning the people costing you money on your utilities here in town then complaining about this site. Remember their the ones that seem to be unaware on how to run the cities businesses?
So why did you not print my post ?
about LEC
Sorry, I haven't received a comment about LEC for months. Please send it again.
I think the most equitable solution would to be to have a nominal flat rate charge per meter (3 or 4 dollars) AND a percent increase based on volume of use...that way everyone pays their fair share. Each meter is assessed a flat rate (homeowners and businesses alike) and the big users (especially business and other commercial enterprises) pay a bigger proportion based on their larger amounts of water used. This way the city would have a fixed amount they could count on in a repair budget in case water usage doesn't live up to predictions again. A two-tier system has its flaws (more to screw up) but if something has to be done it just seems more fair to me.
Of course this idea is only a suggestion AFTER it is explained in good enough detail just where the earlier increases have gone.
I have really had it with the censorship from city hall. Why is it that there is always technical difficulties only when things start to get interesting? Sure would have liked to hear the rest of the public portion of the meeting. And to Mr Hada....you would probably have been wiser to just let Mr Cimaglio finish whatever it was that he wanted to say instead of standing on archaic rules in order to shut him up. It doesn't play well to the general populance when one of the average joes is treated that way....And speaking of that 3 minute rule...why don't you apply it consistantly? If its a city cheerleader, he/she can take all the time they want. That rule should be changed to 4 or 5 minutes and the public portion should be moved back to the beginning. Seems like you are editing these public comments....hoping no one will watch the whole meeting in order to hear residents' comments and then making the residents that actually try to participate shut up because they went over the egg timer limit. But really I think its because you just don't like what they have to say and use your position to do what you can to keep them quiet and/or from being heard by the residents viewing council meetings. The last I heard...the residents are the ones footing the bill for the whole dog and pony show every two weeks....they should be allowed to be heard without being ridiculed or interrupted.
Yes, one of the first things we need to do when we get new people in office in this city is to abolish, or at least lengthen, that three-minute rule. And I agree, isn't it convenient that everytime they don't want the public to hear what the citizens are saying that there just happens to be interference in the tape at that point? That's been going on for at least a decade. There's just so much shady stuff that goes on in this city that it's unbelievable.
7:33 Lets just say the city runs the camera and sound of the council meetings the way they run the rest of things. Moving the vistors time to the end of the council meetings was a plan to limit comments they didn't want to hear. The next time a council member tells you they want your input tell them to move the visitor time back where it was. As far as the council-president gopes if your a cheerleader or friend you can speak as long as you want.
The finance director made the statement revenue and expenditures were on track for the water department? Really, with a line bleeding rust and no solution in site.
The video of the last council meeting is on the website. All of it.
I think it would be good to have citizen comments at the beginning AND at the end of the meeting. That way if you wanted to comment on something that happened in the meeting, you could do that, too.
It was Abby Delamotte, past councilwoman, who proposed (and then they passed) that three minute rule. They did it to shut Hal Werner (new council person at the time) up, too. If I am remembering this correctly, they limited council peoples' closing comments to three minutes at the same time as the citizens. It was the very last thing she did as a council person, and she did it at the last two, three minutes of the meeting. Then the city meant to play the whole tape EXCEPT for that last couple of minutes on TV, but made a mistake, and for a couple 4:00 a.m. viewings, they played only the last couple minutes that they meant to cut out and not the whole rest of the meeting. That's how I got to see it. Sneaky, creepy people running our city.
I remember that. Now when Councilman Flock wanted to vote on ordinance or resolution for a new waterline, law director Gurley stated it must be put into writing first? Why wasn't Ms. Delamotte's voice vote on 3minute rule?
For that matter how did councilman Hada "forgive" $100,000 on permits owed to the city from the school system? Nothing was written on that resolution, Why?
They do what they want when they want. Because we let them.
Term 1:26: Yes, they do whatever they want to do and have Gurley justify it for them. He'll say whatever he needs to to help them in their sneaky, creepy endeavors. I think if someone went back and watched the meetings and specifically watched the things that Gurley said to be on "their" side, it would be utterly shocking. He just says whatever he needs to say at the time for them, regardless of what is actually right. It IS truly shocking what goes on here in this city.
I heard some council people want to move the meetings to the High School and some don't. I say we we move. It's more handicap friendly. Better parking. The seating is more comfortable. The camera and sound system are state of the art. I mean get real, when the division heads show their presentations they now use use a slide show on the courtroom wall! and half the room can't see or hear.
Just what we need 9 hour meetings
To 7:13...That's assuming that more citizens participate...it would probably add maybe 10-15 minutes to a meeting. Do you have a problem with residents speaking for themselves? Its the least council can do since some members never answer their phone or just give you the run-around when they do.
Who's idea was it to move the visitor's section to the end?
Yes, Harvey makes more sense, and who is against it besiodes the administration?
The $10 water bill surcharge ........
one does wonder if the current administration had been a bit more diligent about keeping the business tax structure here and not letting it move elsewhere we would even be having this conversation.
Face facts when the hospital left it also took $500,000 in tax revenue. Now let's total up Coe, and few others who have moved on and out. Now enter tax abatement and the home owners are going to pick up the tab for water, sewer, street paving and safety services.
I thought all meetings after school had to stop because of finances. Can't keep the buildings open late cause of the lights, water, security and paying of the help to oversee things.
My best guess was since they pulled the levy and according to the state they were getting a 2% increase?
They must have thought it was bad PR to close the buildings, that the "community" payed for.
Call and ask them.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home