Other People's Money?

As 2015 Perkasie Borough budget discussions continue here are a few things that residents may be interested in:

• There is a $700,000 (or is it $800,000?) surplus in the general fund above and beyond the level that was voted on by a previous council to be in reserves.   This is essentially an "overpayment" that electric customers have paid over the past few years.  The question is will this money be returned to the people who have dealt with the 66% rate increase, or will it be spent?  Every $100K is an opportunity for a 1% reduction in electric rates- so borough residents and businesses could see a 7-8% rate reduction next year in electric costs.
• There are plans to hire 3 more borough employees.  Is this really necessary?
• Borough officials have claimed to have "cut" almost $1,000,000 in spending from the budget so far...but this is mostly the "wishlist" items of department heads and therefore not really cuts.   These include electric "smart meters" and a $275,000 street sweeper- that incidentally is being demonstrated at public works this morning (9/30/14) even though it has been cut from the budget (see below pic)
• The borough trash fee could double next year from $12 to $22 as less bags are sold.  The idea has been floated to give borough residents an option of having a toter but this idea received resistance from councilperson Florence Frei (215-257-7054) and Mayor John Hollenbach (215-257-7617) who prefer things stay as they are and not change with the times.

The next budget meeting is Saturday October 4th at 9am at the Borough building at Chestnut & 7th Street.  Will council treat your electric bill (tax) as they would their own money, or is it simply "Other People's Money"?    Do you want your electric rates to go down, or let the Borough keep spending your hard earned money?  You need to demand it.

The $275,000 street sweeper demonstrated at Public Works- will it stay on the cutting room floor or will it sweep more of your electric bill every month?  

Perkasie 2015 Preliminary budget

To the credit of the finance committee (Ryder chair, Krantz, Aigeldinger, Pizzolo, Stottlar) they began the budget process early this year and have already held 2 public meetings with department heads on July 28 (minutes) & Sept 3rd.

Observations:

• Dept heads were tasked with presenting 3% decreases in their budgets yet still came forth with wishlist items that were given consideration including $550,000 expense on electric "smart meters" and $75,000 replacement of pool slide, and $258,000 street sweeper  These 3 items have since been removed from preliminary budget as part of the claimed "almost $1 million reduction in spending" which is a duplicitous claim. 
• Preliminary 2015 budget is $5,435,934 which is an increase of 3.7% from last year.
• 10% increase in health insurance costs
• 13% increase in pension contributions
• indicated 34% increase in water & sewer rates from PRA

The finance director made it clear that spending had to be lowered because of an anticipated reduction in electric revenue from loss of a major consumer in the borough.  The borough is claiming some offset from new housing developments which may explain the council's vote to approve a zoning change for a new housing development in the face of 50 residents packing a meetings and saying emphatically NO.

At this time there is a surplus estimated for the general fund balance in excess of what is required of $810,041.  A comment by Aigeldinger was that that could be put to work elsewhere in the budget with perhaps a 3-4% decrease in electric rates.   Council members would be wise to realize that this is money that has been paid by electric users, and in the face of a 66% increase in 2008 that money should be returned to ratepayers in a rate decrease.  Every 1% rate reduction across the board is estimated to cost $100,000 so this amount could mean up to an 8% reduction in electric rates.  Borough electric customers should make their voices heard about what they think should be done with that excess!

Budget memo discussed at Sept 3 meeting below:

Note in the below figure that a $20,000 expense for the "economic development consultant" remains, even though no progress report has been given with an explanation of achievement towards goals.

Also of note is that the administration wants to add new employees to give the parks & recreation Director a raise to assist the borough manager.  The borough has functioned effectively without an assistant manager since January 1.

Much work remains and the council is reminded to sharpen their pencils and remember that the Borough operates for the residents of Perkasie.

Perkasie needs a Smart Council, not Smart Meters

A proposal for adding an electric "smart meter" system came up at budget time as a "wishlist" item from the electric department- despite a call to cut budgets by 1-3%.  The number associated with this expense has been cited at $550,000 which seems dubious after the presentation by Elster and GE given at a special electric utility committee meeting held Monday, August 25th. with little notice to the public.  In fact it didn't appear as a notice on the borough website or social media outlets until earlier that day. Link to audio recording of meeting. 

"Smart meters" are cutting edge technology that manufacturers claim will make your electric service more reliable, allow users to track their usage in "real time", reduce costs, and make electric transmission more efficient while making utility workers jobs safer.  They would replace the traditional electric meter usually mounted on the side of your home and act as 2-way radio frequency (RF) mesh network devices that communicate with the utility server as frequently as every minute.  The term "mesh network" refers to the ability for a smart meter located at your home to pass along not only your information but to act as a relay point for other homes as well.  Meaning that RF traffic could potentially occur all the time!

In reality what they do is intrude on the privacy of your home, with the capability to track what appliances you are using, when you are home, and the ability to interact with other RF capable devices in your home allowing a utility to control your usage. A 2012 Congressional Report Service report on smart meters raises serious security and 4th Amendment privacy issues.  Some models of these meters have caused fires. At the meeting a resident reported that a friend had opted in to a program in MD and found that his air conditioning was cut back on one of the hottest days of the summer of 2013.

These meters also cost more for residents (estimated at an additional $30 per meter) and have a lifespan of only 7-10 years as compared with traditional meters at 40-50 years.  Assuming it doesn't catch on fire first, because neither of the meters from the 2 companies that presented to the committee are UL-listed for safety.
So why Perkasie?  With one of the most reliable electric utilities in the county if not the state, what other possible reason could there be for spending more money that residents don't have on this type of program? During the 1 hour+ long presentation Perkasie electric superintendent Harold Stone testified that the line loss (electricity lost due to resistance and equipment not operating at peak efficiency) for Perkasie should be around 4% but is about 5%, inferring that a smart meter system could help them find issues and improve this- but a minute later he explained that the threshold of 10% loss is when you really start looking for problems. He also made the dubious claim that due to currently malfunctioning meters the Borough was losing $100,000 of revenue per year.

Do Perkasie residents really want to be able to track their usage in real-time and give the borough the ability to monitor their usage and more easily shut off their service?  What about the privacy and security concerns? Could smart meters be used as a tool for political retribution? Perhaps what residents really want is their electric rates to return to normal after the 2008 bungled contract that was negotiated under the watch of then Utility Chair Jim Purcell- interestingly the same individual who still holds that position.

Did Perkasie officials consult with neighboring Lansdale about their experience with these smart meters?  In the words of Lansdale councilman:

"Obviously, it's a big expenditure for putting in meters. Did we identify it as an absolute need? Is there a projected life of the meters?" Angelichio said. "In 2006, we spent a boatload of money on new meters. Seven years later, we're spending a lot more on some meters. I want to make sure it's a cost-effective solution."   

The article goes on to claim that employees of the electric company can help residents identify ways to cut their bills.  Is an expensive system really needed for that, or with just a simple device available at most home improvement stores can a homeowner identify appliances that consume more electricity and cut back on their usage?

Will you eventually be forced to have a smart meter installed?  There is pending legislation to allow consumers to "opt-out", make sure to contact your state representatives and let them know how you feel about this before you are forced to adapt this new expensive technology.

Learn more about the potential issues with smart meters here:

http://www.stopsmartmetersnow.com/

http://www.stopsmartmetersinpa.com/

Walnut Street Bridge at "Critical Zero" rating

According to an article published in the Intelligencer on 8/5/14:

Perkasie council revealed Monday night it was urgently seeking the county to repair the Walnut Street Bridge, after Councilman Matt Aigeldinger brought the issue up by saying he had seen the damage to the bridge.

“It’s got a pretty substantial crack that’s opened up on the pedestrian side of the bridge,” Aigeldinger said. “Also, there’s a crack that goes across the road, and three other ones.”

Borough engineer Doug Rossino said the bridge received a 0 out of 100 rating by inspectors in July, triggering a “critical zero” rating and prompting state agencies to send a letter to Bucks County requiring a response within a week about what action it would take.

The county response is required this week, Rossino said. Borough manager Andrea Coaxum added she had sent a letter to the county and spoke to the county’s Director of Operations Gerald Anderson.

“We sent a letter ... about the condition of the bridge and how important it is that we keep the bridge open for emergency services,” Coaxum said.

Council said the bridge is not scheduled to be replaced until 2018, and added that a worst case scenario would shut down the bridge for safety concerns. The Main Street Bridge is also scheduled for replacement in 2018, council members said, adding that a simultaneous closure would have a detrimental effect.

“It would cripple the entire area, not just for emergency services, but businesses and residents in the area,” Coaxum said.

Council Vice President Jim Purcell said he did not believe the repairs would be overly extensive, but that the borough could not fix it without opening itself up to liability.

“It can be fixed fairly easily,” Purcell said. “But we’re not going to touch it because that’s not our responsibility.”

Council members said they had also reached out to local representatives, and urged residents to do the same.

“Residents should please, send an e-mail to their state representative and contact the county commissioners,” said Councilman Justin Stottlar.

Question: if, according to VP Purcell it can be fixed fairly easy- then why hasn't the county started repairs?  Why has the borough waited until it reached a zero rating out of 100 to publicly address this?  Why has the Perkasie Pride majority faction on council failed to address this?  Were they so content being cuddled up with ousted manager Dan Olpere that they failed to see it?  Whose responsibility was it to see that it didn't get this far?

Residents are encouraged to not only call the county and state representatives- but also call President Ryder, VP Purcell, and Perkasie Pride ringleader Matt Aigeldinger and ask them why they failed to address this until now?

What Economic Development?

In January 2013 Perkasie Borough Council approved a $20,000 annual expense for an Economic Development consultant. His task was to bring new businesses to the Borough.  For 2014 this annual expense was again approved with no review or report card given on progress. 

Has this experiment proved a success?  Here are Steve Barth's claims from his Linked In page as of today:

Director of Economic Development (Consultant)Perkasie Olde Towne AssociationJanuary 2013 – Present (1 year 7 months) Perkasie, PA 18944The mission of the Economic Development Program for Perkasie Borough is
to revitalize Perkasie by creating an environment where businesses can grow
and thrive by providing goods and services to the residents of the Borough
and surrounding communities.

$82 million in new commercial and residential development.
Collaborated with Bucks County Planning Commission to finalize new Comprehensive Plan.
Visioned and cultivated developers to rebuild entire Town Center block.
Phase One approved by Council on 7/21/14.
(Includes three new retail and 10 upscale apartments on site dormant for 26 years.)
Phase Two- Pending 15 retail and 42 upscale apartments.
145 Townhouse development on 15 acre empty factory site bordering two parks.
Adaptive re-use of empty factory building into 6 upscale apartments.
73 New Single Family Homes - Cultivated developers for empty residential sites
Opened 12+ new businesses

Borough Council should be requiring an accounting of these claims and verification including a list of the 12+ businesses claimed by Mr Barth.

Of particular note is the claim about being responsible for "145 Townhouse development on 15 acre empty factory site bordering 2 parks".  This is assumed to be the proposed Perkasie Woods development which has not yet received approval from Borough Council for rezoning. At a recent council meeting many neighbors of the proposed development spoke out against the project, including concerns on the density and flooding.  Was Mr Barth part of some backroom deal to rubberstamp this and ignore public input?

A proposal for a Dunkin Donuts never materialized.  Perkasie Borough Authority relocated outside of the Borough.  Secant Medical is leaving town in 2015.  Many storefronts still sit vacant.  What have we received for $40,000 in public money?

Anyone who lives in the Borough or owns a business here knows that the biggest issue - the elephant in the room-  is the high electric rates that increased 66% in 2008 as the result of a bungled electric contract that was urged to be entered into and voted for by none other than current council Vice President Jim Purcell, who oddly is still the chair of the public utility committee.  It was Mr Purcell who, reminiscent of Chicken Little, warned that the sky was falling and that gasoline would reach $8 per gallon that fall. 

Does Steve Barth deserve another $20,000 in public money for 2015?

Demand answers from your elected council representative.  

Menlo Pool Party promoter gets slap on the wrist

Antwan Garfield- the infamous Menlo Pool party promoter - today received a slap on the wrist from Bucks County DA when he accepted ARD and from the docket it appears a whopping financial payment of $7.49  Copy of docket below.

Perkasie Council Member shows unprofessional bully side

Email exchange between Councilperson Matt Aigeldinger (former President) and Councilman Justin Stottlar apparently resulting from an anonymous tweet from "PerkasieWatch"

Aigeldinger:  You talking out of school, Justin? How do you ever except (sic) to earn anyone's respect?  Keep your boy in check....

Stottlar:  To be honest matt i haven't said a word about anything to anyone. Thanks for your continuance of the last 2 years.

Aigeldinger: Bullshit, man.

Stottlar: Think what you want matt. I don't have anything to hide.

Aigeldinger:  Exactly. Piece of shit.

View the email exchange below