How long before we get the bill?

Back in 2014-2015 many will remember when going to the Borough Hall seeing chunks of the cornice and roof falling onto the sidewalk. At that time a contractor was hired to come in and remove the cornice and assess the situation. Borough council stated at a public meeting that testing was done to determine how severe the damage was. Since that point the building has been sitting. 

Council claims the cornice area was sealed but it has sat through 4 winters now with no repair. So the question is when will we the taxpayers be getting the bill for the costly repairs? Better yet will we foot an even bigger bill for a new building since they seem to be letting this one sit in disrepair? Either way the taxpayer pays. Why has council been silent on this? 

This was brought up in public forum by a resident when they were charging ahead with spending over 200K the first time for a street sweeper and then 80k the most recent time which was a used machine with no maintenance records or warranty??!!! After that they spent 177k last year to redo the concrete retaining wall and parking lot out back of the building but no funds to fix the roof. Keep in mind this building was renovated in 2002-2003. 

Bottom line the residents will foot the bill the question is how much is it going to be? Maybe council should spend less time creating a historic committee to tell people what to do with their buildings and fix their own first. 

Until then we suggest wearing a hardhat when walking around borough hall. 
 

People of Perkasie it's been a while! We have not stopped watching out for the taxpayer even though we have not been very active on the blog. It appears we need citizen involvement again in the decision making and direction of our town. 

We have 4 candidates up for election on Borough council in 2019. Now is the time to start getting involved. If you or anyone you know is interested in serving your community please have them contact us. We have 1 seat that will be up for election in Ward 1, 2 seats in Ward 2 and 1 seat in Ward 3. If you are not sure what ward you are in please see the link below for the Borough voting ward map.

http://perkasieborough.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Perkasie_Voting-Districts-8.5-by-11.pdf 

 

Stay tuned for future blog posting about some of the things we are seeing happen in our town. 

Perkasie Borough starts walking down the same dead end road again

Leaders of 2 borough churches are petitioning Council for special electric rates.  Nonprofits request lower electricity rate in Perkasie Borough

We'll see if Council learned from their previous Sunshine Law violation that it can't discuss giving preferential treatment to any person, business, or organization in private.

Our town churches should allow Jesus to be their Light and not try to use government to force people to subsidize their collection plates.  Next time you attend a service you may consider dropping an LED light bulb in their collection plate.

Perkasie Residents approve increase in fire tax

In a referendum on the Nov 4, 2014 ballot Perkasie residents voted 1449-855 to approve a resolution as follows:

“Shall Perkasie Borough Council levy an additional real estate tax of 0.5 mills for the purpose of funding fire department services in the Borough? YES or NO”

Plain English Statement: The ballot question asks the voters of Perkasie Borough whether the Borough Council should assess an additional tax of 0.5 mills, bringing the total fire services tax to 1.5 mills for the purpose of funding fire and rescue services within Perkasie Borough. 

A vote of YES approves the levying of an additional real estate tax of 0.5 mills for this purpose.

Prior to 2005 there was no fire tax which begs the question "what has changed"?

When the fire company first approached Borough Council it was under the guise of funding a replacement vehicle, when it was pointed out that the current 1 mil of tax was funding a new vehicle that was going to be paid off within the next year a laundry list of "wishes" was produced by the fire company including a $52,000 suspended ceiling for the apparatus room, a $75,000 sprinkler system, a $55,000 walk-in cooler room, a $38,000 electronic entry system, and a $15,000 sign.  How exactly do these items intend to help our fire company protect the community?

The fire company held a public forum on August 14 to talk about the funding needs that was attended by a handful of residents at best.  They then held their annual open house on October 9th which was well attended- without any mention of the tax referendum and no opportunity to donate- not even a bucket!  Then on October 25 they held another open house to answer questions about the fire tax that had exactly 1 person attend- the mayor!  Why they did not take advantage of the traffic on their well-attended annual open house to raise awareness or funds defies logic.

Perkasie First fully supports our all-volunteer fire company.  Sadly, it appears that the "voluntary" portion does not apply to funding, and there is a desperate lack of outside the box thinking.  We encourage community members to get involved to help the fire company provide the outstanding service it does without resorting to more taxes to pay for it.  Educate the community on your needs and ask for help, as the Police Department has proven with their K-9 program the community is more than willing to step forward when asked to help and there are generous people with the means to do so.   After all- who knows how to spend your own money better than you do?

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/