tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3409432869035063001.post1306061825202687991..comments2008-11-23T10:58:49.610-05:00Comments on The Ruins of Trenton: Water deal draws ire of manyGreg Foresterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11832948159087085111noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3409432869035063001.post-41620701714749954032008-07-24T15:35:00.000-04:002008-07-24T15:35:00.000-04:00It was pointed out that, in one year, the 5% statu...It was pointed out that, in one year, the 5% statutory limitation of fund transfers from the Water Utility to the City would have resulted in a transfer of $1.5 million. That would mean that the Water Utility spent about $30 million. At no time has it been noted that the Water Utility is not collecting at least an equal amount. If an equal or greater amount is being collected, that would mean that current rates generate about $30 million.<BR/><BR/>The City's proposed and threatened rate increase would then generate an additional $12 million. As often repeated by Palmer Administration Officials, the primary need of these monies is to cover the borrowing costs for the $80 plus million capital improvement projects. But even if that total approaches $100 million, the annual cost of borrowing the $100 million would only be about $6 million, half of the proposed increase in revenues that a 40% rate increase would generate.<BR/><BR/>There would be a $6 million surplus generated for a number of years from the 40% rate increase. Based upon recent revelations, customers, and especially Township customers, now know what would happen to those funds.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3409432869035063001.post-29005993963876873962008-07-24T15:16:00.000-04:002008-07-24T15:16:00.000-04:00The $9 million is only part of what the City has m...The $9 million is only part of what the City has misappropriated. As noted in Mr. Guhl's 2004 letter to the NJBPU , known and blatant gross misappropriations have occurred as far back as 2002. These include about $1.75 of funds transferred from the Water Utility to the City for services never render to the Water Utility by the Fire Department. A similar transfer occurred one year for non-existent services rendered by the Street Division. These alone total $2 million.<BR/><BR/>While payment for valid services rendered by other City agencies to the Water Utility is allowed by statute, the value or cost of those services should be based upon reasonable and justifiable factors. The City has taken less obvious actions to further drain Water Utility funds for other than Water Utility purposes. The City has done this by disproportionately allocated costs to the Water Utility for various units within City government. Examples of this are the disproportionate amounts paid for the Department of Public Works, the Law Department, the Purchasing Office, and the Division of Information Technology among others.<BR/><BR/>In total these misappropriations could easily equal the more visible $9 million dollars now getting the headlines.<BR/><BR/>As with the $9 million, if these funds were not spent for non-utility purposes the need for a rate increase by the City would be far less likely.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com