|
REGULAR MEETING NOVEMBER 25, 2013
<br /> II
<br /> We are not a boutique society unless we are trying to put a plan together to push all the people
<br /> who don't have out of the city on all for these faces for people who do have a lot of money. I
<br /> don't know if that is what South Bend is? Maybe that is the new South Bend that you talked
<br /> about when you were being sworn in at your swearing-in ceremony. I'm not sure, I'm just
<br /> really, really, disappointed that we are in a position right now that we are looking at people that
<br /> we serve not having any use to water. It doesn't look good, our senior citizens, I have many of
<br /> them in my district, I feel for them. Now, they probably will be really,really, choosing between
<br /> medications or paying the water bill. That's not what we should be doing and I would hate to
<br /> believe that we are going to be taxing people out of the city. I have heard that before, I didn't
<br /> believe it, never thought it would be true. But things like this and just the lack of or against
<br /> forwardness, or progressive conversation in making sure that we are hitting every point available
<br /> to make sure that this is being decreased it is not being done so I am probably offered to believe
<br /> that we are probably will be taxing people out of the city, they will probably just be moving out.
<br /> That is obviously not good for bringing in new business. I just have some real tough concerns
<br /> and the truth is that it is not anyone's fault in here, I would never place the blame individually on
<br /> anyone,but it is up to us to get it corrected. And I charge your office with that, obviously the
<br /> Council; we are in tuned to it. I just think that as a non-political issue, as a servant issue, as our
<br /> jobs we really, really, really need to look at what's going on out here. And those numbers that I
<br /> just ran off they are not getting corrected overnight and as a matter of fact they are not going to
<br /> get corrected over the next two nights, so we have to pay attention and we have to be very, very
<br /> mindful of the population that we serve.
<br /> Councilmember Schey: Thank you Chair Woman White, no questions.
<br /> Councilmember Ferlic: I don't think at 9% a year even if it decreases after while is sustainable.
<br /> We are all up here wanting to create jobs there is no company that is going to move in here that
<br /> is water dependent that's going to pay those kinds of water rates, when they can get them
<br /> cheaper elsewhere. So if our job is to create jobs, we have a tough road ahead of us, so I think
<br /> that it is mandatory like Henry said that we get together and try to solve this and I think we can.
<br /> Councilmember Dieter: Thank you, again I think that there is a lot of work that needs to be
<br /> done. I appreciate all the work that has gone into it, but there are questions that have come up
<br /> tonight from previous things or in some of the presentations, some of the numbers, again there is
<br /> just a lot more information that this entire Council needs to have and digest. So, hopefully, with
<br /> the questions that were asked and again I appreciate the citizens that came up with some very
<br /> good things that I hadn't thought of before. So again, more information from citizens, more
<br /> information from the Council to get some questions answered would be greatly.
<br /> Councilmember Varner: I think that we are beginning to have the discussion that could have
<br /> been had 8, 10, or 12 years ago, if someone had thought, gee it would be useful to have
<br /> Councilmember's as part of this planning process. I made that objection; I voiced that objection,
<br /> as long as 12 years ago because it is obvious that the Council is not part of it. No one thought it
<br /> was important. Everyone apparently just decided that we can train the Council to do what we
<br /> want them to do by threatening them with large projects and fines. If a Federal Judge sends me a
<br /> written order that says I have to agree to it, then I'll agree to it. I don't think that it has to get that
<br /> far, I think people just have to take it upon themselves to find a way to do this, if it's for new
<br /> technology, then its new technology. When you have a rate, a time and an interest factor and our
<br /> dollar costs are so much greater than everybody else then we either have to have some sort of
<br /> rate break or we have to have some sort of a tie break. If it's a 50 year infrastructure
<br /> improvement financing it for 20 years with cash and financing just doesn't make sense for the
<br /> current rate payers. So I'm not sure if it's financing, I'm not sure what is construction projects,
<br /> I'm not sure if it's just the plan in general. I think we definitely need more information on this
<br /> Michigan deal, because if we are doing something on the basis of a faulty model, it is very
<br /> expensive which amounts apparently to treating any of this (inaudible) I think we are doing a
<br /> tremendous disservice to the community, to saddle people in this community with exorbitant
<br /> rates and extra-ordinary construction project when some of it isn't necessary. So, I will bring
<br /> forth first a resolution next month that so states this and when we are through I would make the
<br /> recommendation that there has to be an increase.
<br /> Chairperson White: Why don't you hold that?
<br /> Councilmember Varner: Ok
<br /> 15
<br />
|