I need to voice my opinion one last time regarding the move of the city to put a $28 dollar fee on the ballot to set up a department to fix broken water and sewer laterals. This issue was inspired by our ultra-liberal mayor, Nickolas Guccione, and it just doesn't make sense that this Board of Aldermen would go along with it. Guccione is clearly setting up the city as an insurance company and the Aldermen are underwriting it because they say; "It will be voted on by the people." If that excuse is acceptable to them, I have a few questions and requests on the subject of Government run insurance.
Regardless of what Alderman Cheryl Kross wants to think about this being OK, it's still another layer of taxes and fees which further burden taxpayers. She has fought fiercely against any additional fees and taxes but this one is perfectly all right with her. What this is, is a liberal plan to take care of those few residents who experience a broken main each year, and bitch about how much it costs, saying "It's connected to the City infrastructure, the City should pay for it." Water and sewer laterals have been the responsibility of the homeowner since the first outhouse became a water-closet, what's changed?
This is a feel-good issue brought forward by a feel-good mayor who otherwise has no idea of what leadership means. I have to ask; what idiot would vote "no" on this issue? It's a no brainer, which seems to fall right in Guccione's wheel-house. But why stop there? Mr. Mayor, when a resident's driveway starts to crack over the years and costs them thousands of dollars to have it replaced, why not set up an insurance policy and department to cover that? After all, it is connected to City streets, why shouldn't the City pay for it? How many voters do you think would vote "no" on that? I fail to see any difference at all.
Alderman Chris Gard said, "I haven't had one resident complaining that the City should pay for broken mains," Guccione rebutted, "I had two complaints just last week," yeah right! There's a right way of doing things and then there's the Guccione way. Getting one or two complaints over the years does not constitute setting up an insurance department for a few instances per year, that everyone else will pay for. I trust the City will publish exactly how many water and sewer laterals break each year. This whole situation stinks, and I'm surprised the Board of Aldermen is going to allow it on the ballot, and give our touchy-feely mayor a bullet point on his campaign literature. "Oh, looky, looky. what I done. I gave you Guccicare."
Alderman Kross has gone off the deep end. She has divided the board. Kross Shyrock, and Gossett in one camp, Stokes, Gard, and so far, Hays, in the other.
ReplyDeleteI'm afraid that if she doesn't give up her agenda, Gossett and Shrock will be out of city hall next year. Guccione is already rounding up opponents for next April.
given gossett and shyrock's record so far, it's not going to take much of an opponent to replace them.
DeleteJust because you don't agree you go off on a melt down about this; if the residents think the same way you do, it will be voted down so let it go to the people or are you saying the residents don't have enough sense to think on their own and figure this out? I would have to disagree with you and say I believe the community is pretty smart so quit making them out as people who cannot figure out ballot issues. WE DO have a right to vote on items that effect us, don't we?
ReplyDeleteI'm sorry that you don't understand what I'm saying. I'm not going off on the voters, I'm going off on the government wanting a BIGGER government. Hell, I understand it, and I'd vote for it too, but it doesn't make it right. This board should never have entertained it. It never has been a government issue and never will, or should be. It's nothing but political, feel-good big-government liberal-crap, and Alderman Kross should know better, there are bigger fish to fry.
DeleteThe Sewer Lateral Program just adds another layer to the city administration and more cost to the taxpayer - forever. Alderman Kross needs to spend more time on the real issues in front of her and the city. Just because O'Fallon, St Peters etc. have it does not mean that we NEED it also. We are copycatting the failures of all our neighboring cities who are just expanding the size of gov't and the cost to the taxpayer. WE will soon have more people on the city payroll than we will have as citizens in the private sector.
ReplyDeleteHey, Alderman Gossett you talk as being the caretaker of the taxpayers money. Now is the time to end this wasteful conversation and get productive on the board. VETO this issue and get on with productive city management.
if this thing is implimented, who pays for the installation of a second water/sewer hook-up on another building, on the same property?
ReplyDeleteCan you tell me how the board voted on this? It sounds like Kross was the only one who voted for this but I do believe 4 votes are needed. Just wondering because I don't have 5 hours to spend watching the meeting. I would rather watch paint dry if you know what I mean!
ReplyDeleteI saw no formal vote, Alderman Kross talked about putting it on the ballot and Mayor Guccione must have seen a concensus. I thought the process rather mysterious. I have asked for a clarification and will get back with the answer.
DeleteThis issue will be brought before the board to have a formal vote. It will be interesting to see which aldermen support it.
Delete