Randy Smith boils down his sewer series to talking points ...
To make a long story short
I’ll admit it. I write “long.” I try to be careful with my writing and I try to be complete. When I write about public policy matters, I choose my words carefully, try to address even the most esoteric of possible objections, and strive to accommodate readers who may just now be paying attention.
Accordingly, sharing facts and opinion with a wider audience is often prevented by the sheer length of what I write.
So, let’s try to boil my recent 5-part essay into its essence, shall we? Here are the elements.
... and explains why certain EDIT-based "relief" proposals stem from intended cultural jihads, not the hard facts about the sewer utility.
A sewer fix we can accomplish now
Let’s be clear about one thing right off the bat. I would not fault any city council member for calling “time out” when asked to increase the $5.04 per unit sewer rate by another $1.81. There’s nothing insignificant about that.
But when any council member tries to blind us from the facts with irrelevancies, personal grievances, and boogeymen, I call foul.
Thanks Randy for your perspective.
ReplyDeleteI think that this recent post-To make a long story short-was better. Less demagogy and the like.
I first like to say I agree with you that EDIT should not be used to subsidize sewer rates. Sewer rates need to reflect the actual operational cost.
I would disagree with you that EDIT, TIFF, and grant monies shouldn’t be considered to cover the cost of these most recent EPA mandates.
But before any money is committed I think that the sewer board should present citizens with information on what these updates demand and cover. I would like to see what alternatives did the sewer board look at before they made their conclusion.
You said, “In the past few years and again this year and next, the income tax payers of New Albany will help pay the bills of the largest users of the system. They will prop up the cash flow and profits of practically every commercial, retail, and industrial business on the system. And they’ll pay a portion of the bills of people who live outside the city and who pay no income tax to New Albany.”
This is not entirely true.
There are many more variables.
Your explanation only applies to most franchised business. Franchises have set prices that they charge as instructed by the parent company. So when any tax is levied against these business there is not a direct correlation or effect on local prices but like all business the price you pay is partially a reflection of taxes. There is a saying that business don’t pay taxes people do. Most non-franchised businesses are locally owned and operated. Some but not all operate on low margins of profitability. When a new tax or fee is levied against these locally owned businesses. The business will either liquidate because the market will not bare the increase cost of there product, due to the owner raising prices to cover the new tax or fee increase, or the business will raise prices to cover cost and therefore consumers are paying the fee anyway.
This explanation covers a verity of business types and if you break it down most but not all business don’t really pay taxes consumers and people do.
I think your argument that we are subsidizing business sewer rates is as you say a “straw man”.
Second, the idea that we are subsidizing ratepayers that live outside of city limits isn’t entirely true either. These individuals already pay a higher rate, 50% more than people who live in the city. The reason that they pay a higher rate is because they use a system that was paid for by previous city residents and funding mechanisms like EDIT is used. That is the deal that they have. They pay a higher rate and we use EDIT or TIFF. If you want to make it fair then fringe area residents need to pay the same as we do.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete