Wednesday, August 15, 2012

Sierra Club Says NO to Allentown Water Sale

Allentown blogger Michael Molovinsky, who has followed the possible privatization of Allentown's water supply, has published a Sierra Club news release opposed to the proposal.  The Sierra Club warns that, in addition to doubling the water rates, a private owner will exploit the watershed.

But King Edwin has spoken, and his little rubber stamps must listen.

14 comments:

Anonymous said...

I went to MM meeting today and 6 people showed up.... his little group is a joke. 6 people out of 820,000 in the lehigh valley! That is 7 to the 10 power times 6....

Bernie O'Hare said...

Thanks for telling me that. Now I'll be able to determine who is posting the other defamatory allegations and I'll be coming for you.

Bill said...

This stance of the Sierra Club makes logical sense to me.

Anonymous said...

Your story is wrong... you identify MM as an Allentown blogger... he does not live in the city. He lives in South Whitehall.

Bernie O'Hare said...

FDAA points it our every time she posts a comment. I guess it matters not that MM was born and raised in Allentown, still does business there and remains both active and interested. Yours is a petty remark by a petty person.

Anonymous said...

The most ingenious part of this is Allentown sloughing off a portion of its pension fiasco on the burbs. No matter who leases the system, fees are going up across the board – not just to Allentown residents, but to all the suburban waste water companies that use Kline’s Island for treatment.

Pawlowski fucks over the burbs again.

I thought FDAA was a fictional character under the direction of Jeff Vaughan?

c said...

There is an interesting movie called "Flow" which deals with our water supply and talks specifically about the potential dangers of corporate control of our water.

Guy Williams said...

Aqua penna has been licking its chops for many years to take control of allentowns water system.Allentowns system is considered top notch. Aqua currently controls the water in the phila burbs.They have 400,000 customers compared to our 35000.The investment return ratio for our system is huge.There is an alternative as controversial as it may be to lower our debt long term.That is to change city workers compensation to salary based with neww hires getting smaller pensions.

Anonymous said...

It is a difficult situation politically . While the water/sewer transaction is a controvercial action, no one has come up with another way to offset the $100+ million gap in the pension funds. Cutting a few overhead jobs as many suggest doesn't make a scratch in the shortfall.The staff is largely police, firefighters, and street workers who are needed for essential serices.

Go back to the election in 2001 and replay the vote. The citizens of Allentown chose a popular, but inept, mayor over a highly educated and business savy alternative. A different choice would have avoided this problem.

I hope we don't do it again in November for President. Popular doesn't mean qualified!!!

Anonymous said...

Plenty of options that deal directly with the problem:

1) Change the pensions immediately for new hires, as Mr. Williams suggests. The new hires should be put into a defined contribution plan.

2). Switch CURRENT employees to defined contribution plans effective immediately.

3) Take the illegal pensions (which include overtime in the calculation contrary to state law) to court.

4). If those steps meet resistance from city employees, take the bankruptcy or any other route that undoes all the contracts.

Why won't it happen? Because the mayor and his flunkies on council are more concerned with keeping their union support than screwing over the residents of the city.

Anonymous said...

Panto and Pawlowski are planning to privatize air in their cities to pay for their continued fiscal mismanagement and unwillingness to stand up to unions.

Anonymous said...

Agreed some of the 2:28 ideas are good, but not legal. The courts won't allow any of those. Pa does not allow bankruptcy either.

Anonymous said...

There is a PA Act ( forget the numer) that can be pursued.

Anonymous said...

8:44

I think you mean Act 47. Scranton and several other cities have been in it a long time. It doesn't permit the municipality to void union contracts. Pa is in the dark ages on dealing with unions.

We can't even get rid of the state stores because of them.