(4/10/2012: See the firing back volley from the City of Aspen's Mitzi Rapkin to Gardner-Smith's report here (and) read how Gardner-Smith handled the "correction needed" here. Excellent job and coverage by Brent Gardner-Smith via the Aspen Daily News)
(4/9/2012: Interestingly enough...see related coverage over on the Aspen Daily that came out this morning. Turns out that once again the City of Aspen has 'misrepresented' their information and now needs to retract. Hmmm....sound anything like PitCo commissioners projections on how much the Droste Property was supposed to cost?)
Maurice Emmer:
"..Or might you consider alternatives? Before spending more on the Castle Creek Energy Center, its financial viability should be proven, especially compared with alternatives. The projected generation cost of 10 to 11 cents per kilowatt-hour (bound to go up), above the market rate for clean electricity and not reflecting risks, will not be competitive.
The city's own numbers offer a solution: Taking the city's word today, half the pipeline cost (half of $3.2 million) isn't part of this project, so the total cost will be $8.9 million (without further overruns). The $3.7 million not spent yet could be avoided, and we could recover, say, $750,000 for the $1.5 million turbine the city has already bought. This would save $4.45 million or 50 percent of the total project cost. Why double down on a bad bet instead of cutting the inevitable loss?
Yes, the city will have to pay the $5.5 million of bonds. Ignoring possible savings of $4.45 million by continuing the Castle Creek Energy Center project will not avoid the obligation to pay the bonds; it will only double the cost of a boondoggle that cannot produce clean electricity competitively. How about we stop the project and use the $4.45 million savings to pay the lion's share of the bond debt?
The article admits that the city “has made mistakes.” You bet. The mistake is the Castle Creek Energy Center. The residents should not make the mistake of permitting the madness to continue...."
(Read more? Click title)
"Unapologetically pursuing and tracking patterns within the news others make since 2010."
Showing posts with label City of Aspen water dept. Show all posts
Showing posts with label City of Aspen water dept. Show all posts
April 9, 2012
March 6, 2012
SandBoxBlogs: Aspen Daily News "Listen, then decide"
Elizabeth Milias:
"It’s hardly a surprise that City Council has already decided to simply rescind Ordinance 30 before hearing a single word from the community on the pros and cons of a public vote. The March 12 public meeting and council vote on the issue are less than a week away, but in their hallmark fashion, our councilmen have already made up their minds. Never mind what the 953 citizens who signed the petition want. Why would council listen to them? The same elected leaders who claimed victory for hydro plant bonds in a 2007 election with notoriously low voter turnout don’t want this issue decided during another off-season election. Somehow potential low voter turnout is a threat to them this time around.
Instead, they want a ballot question on the November ballot when turnout will be much higher given that it’s a presidential election. This is likely, but what is far more uncertain is what the November ballot question will be. It’s up to City Council to write the language. Knowing these guys, they’ll craft some ambiguous non-binding blather where “yes” means “no” and “no” means “yes.” One thing that’s not likely is a clear up-down vote on the completion of the hydro plant. That, after all, is what the community really wants. And it’s exactly what council fears.
Regardless of where you stand on the hydro plant issue, please attend the March 12 council meeting and speak out in favor of a public vote. It’s the only democratic way to express the community’s will. Besides, aren’t you getting tired of these guys ruling instead of governing?...." (Read original letter? Click title)
"Unapologetically pursuing and tracking patterns within the news others make since 2010."
"It’s hardly a surprise that City Council has already decided to simply rescind Ordinance 30 before hearing a single word from the community on the pros and cons of a public vote. The March 12 public meeting and council vote on the issue are less than a week away, but in their hallmark fashion, our councilmen have already made up their minds. Never mind what the 953 citizens who signed the petition want. Why would council listen to them? The same elected leaders who claimed victory for hydro plant bonds in a 2007 election with notoriously low voter turnout don’t want this issue decided during another off-season election. Somehow potential low voter turnout is a threat to them this time around.
Instead, they want a ballot question on the November ballot when turnout will be much higher given that it’s a presidential election. This is likely, but what is far more uncertain is what the November ballot question will be. It’s up to City Council to write the language. Knowing these guys, they’ll craft some ambiguous non-binding blather where “yes” means “no” and “no” means “yes.” One thing that’s not likely is a clear up-down vote on the completion of the hydro plant. That, after all, is what the community really wants. And it’s exactly what council fears.
Regardless of where you stand on the hydro plant issue, please attend the March 12 council meeting and speak out in favor of a public vote. It’s the only democratic way to express the community’s will. Besides, aren’t you getting tired of these guys ruling instead of governing?...." (Read original letter? Click title)
"Unapologetically pursuing and tracking patterns within the news others make since 2010."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)