OK, ok, I'll post something.
Well, GeeGuy is all over the coal plant story. I wasn't going to blog about it, but hey, why not.
City officials said the cancellation (Northwestern contract) cost the city more than $1 million over five years.
And so far, the city, trying to see if they can build a coal plant, has cost$1 million for the water credit and $1.5million for a bunch of studies and stuff they don't even have access to.
Any of you businessmen out there willing to spend $23,000 for a briefing on a feasibility study that says it's ok to spend $130million? No, you don't get the study, but you'll be told what it says.
Lawton said he "absolutely" thinks the city is run well, but he said running a city is different from running a business.
Well, yeah, what else would he say.
In government, there can be extended discussion periods as officials try to discern what the public wants.
Or, you could let the public vote-that might help give you a clue what the public wants!
Are there any other cities you know of trying to buy into coal-burning power plants?
"They're all over the place," Lawton said.
Perhaps this is nitpicky of me, but they are not all over the place, in fact I don't believe there is a single one in this entire state.
( I wrote that yesterday. But, of course, I was right.)
I'm not going to go on, other wiser nutcases can disseminate the Q & (blow smoke up my) A.
I notice others are discussing some of the comments on the Trib Forum. I have been noticing for quite some time, one of the main things I have an issue with over there is the assumption from some of those folks that this power plant will make a difference to the average resident of Great Falls.
It will involve specialized labor. The number of construction jobs touted does not impress me. Joe Bob making minimum wage pouring concrete isn't going to get on up there. Oh, wait, Joe Bob doesn't make minimum wage, and he doesn't need a job.
There are 15 jobs posted on the Job service website since yesterday morning, with an average wage of over $9.00 per hour. Those 300 construction jobs will benefit our economy by the workers (maybe we can get some more Brazilian welders in here, really piss of the local unions! Again.) temporary stay here. Of the long term jobs, maybe 25% local employees. Max. So 15, 16 Joe Bob's get jobs.
It will not affect the price that average resident pays for power, unless the price of the default supply goes up as a result. Which, of course, will not happen. The City said so.
Will it lower our taxes? Schools, City Government, will be paying less so they will have more money, right? And every Great Falls resident who pays taxes should get a break on shipping FedEx. I mean, come on, what other benefit am I going to see?
I am a bit confused about something else. The tax thing. If the plant is not annexed into the City, as it seems will now be the case, will the City be able to collect any taxes? Will the plant sitting up there actually add to the City tax base, or will we be paying to supply municipal services to an entity that does not even bring tax revenue into the City?
The Tribune coverage on this does not impress me much. Follow up! They should do a part Two on the Q & A - Real answers to the questions!
To whom is Electric City Power planning on selling approximately 40 mW of power?
If Electric City Power ends up oweing SME money, isn't it true that the City of Great Falls would ultimately be responsible for repaying that debt?
If not, please explain.
Isn't it true that Tim Gregori, of SME, has stated there are risks involved in building a coal plant?
What are the risk scenarios that the City and SME have outlined, and the planned measures to reduce those risks?
Why did the City repeal Ordinance 2681?
Have the City and SME downplayed the possible risks to paint a rosy picture for the residents of the city?
Has the City enforced the 3 minute comment rule at any time for a discussion not pertaining to the coal plant?
"City officials acknowledge a key moment came in 2003, when NorthWestern Energy unilaterally canceled a power contract with cities and school districts across the state. "
Is it true that City officials and SME were discussing building a coal plant before the summer of 2003?
Etc.
City officials said the cancellation (Northwestern contract) cost the city more than $1 million over five years.
And so far, the city, trying to see if they can build a coal plant, has cost$1 million for the water credit and $1.5million for a bunch of studies and stuff they don't even have access to.
Any of you businessmen out there willing to spend $23,000 for a briefing on a feasibility study that says it's ok to spend $130million? No, you don't get the study, but you'll be told what it says.
Lawton said he "absolutely" thinks the city is run well, but he said running a city is different from running a business.
Well, yeah, what else would he say.
In government, there can be extended discussion periods as officials try to discern what the public wants.
Or, you could let the public vote-that might help give you a clue what the public wants!
Are there any other cities you know of trying to buy into coal-burning power plants?
"They're all over the place," Lawton said.
Perhaps this is nitpicky of me, but they are not all over the place, in fact I don't believe there is a single one in this entire state.
( I wrote that yesterday. But, of course, I was right.)
I'm not going to go on, other wiser nutcases can disseminate the Q & (blow smoke up my) A.
I notice others are discussing some of the comments on the Trib Forum. I have been noticing for quite some time, one of the main things I have an issue with over there is the assumption from some of those folks that this power plant will make a difference to the average resident of Great Falls.
It will involve specialized labor. The number of construction jobs touted does not impress me. Joe Bob making minimum wage pouring concrete isn't going to get on up there. Oh, wait, Joe Bob doesn't make minimum wage, and he doesn't need a job.
There are 15 jobs posted on the Job service website since yesterday morning, with an average wage of over $9.00 per hour. Those 300 construction jobs will benefit our economy by the workers (maybe we can get some more Brazilian welders in here, really piss of the local unions! Again.) temporary stay here. Of the long term jobs, maybe 25% local employees. Max. So 15, 16 Joe Bob's get jobs.
It will not affect the price that average resident pays for power, unless the price of the default supply goes up as a result. Which, of course, will not happen. The City said so.
Will it lower our taxes? Schools, City Government, will be paying less so they will have more money, right? And every Great Falls resident who pays taxes should get a break on shipping FedEx. I mean, come on, what other benefit am I going to see?
I am a bit confused about something else. The tax thing. If the plant is not annexed into the City, as it seems will now be the case, will the City be able to collect any taxes? Will the plant sitting up there actually add to the City tax base, or will we be paying to supply municipal services to an entity that does not even bring tax revenue into the City?
The Tribune coverage on this does not impress me much. Follow up! They should do a part Two on the Q & A - Real answers to the questions!
To whom is Electric City Power planning on selling approximately 40 mW of power?
If Electric City Power ends up oweing SME money, isn't it true that the City of Great Falls would ultimately be responsible for repaying that debt?
If not, please explain.
Isn't it true that Tim Gregori, of SME, has stated there are risks involved in building a coal plant?
What are the risk scenarios that the City and SME have outlined, and the planned measures to reduce those risks?
Why did the City repeal Ordinance 2681?
Have the City and SME downplayed the possible risks to paint a rosy picture for the residents of the city?
Has the City enforced the 3 minute comment rule at any time for a discussion not pertaining to the coal plant?
"City officials acknowledge a key moment came in 2003, when NorthWestern Energy unilaterally canceled a power contract with cities and school districts across the state. "
Is it true that City officials and SME were discussing building a coal plant before the summer of 2003?
Etc.
posted by a-fire-fly at 12:08 PM
<< Home