The following was a letter to the editor in today's AIM
( repeated here for nonsubscribers )
In response to the op-ed piece by Anderson City Manager John Moore (JM) disputing my comments about his letter to state legislators and his justification for dual rates:
JM wrote that the letter never intended to guarantee a single rate.
That is not how the letter read.
The letter thrice unequivocally reiterated the rate for all would be the same.
Nor did JM write legislators that Anderson would break its pledge to 10,000 County residents.
JM also wrote that a year after the purchase a study indicated the system needed $12,000,000 of improvements, which cost would be defrayed by doubling outsiders’ water rate.
The truth is Anderson knew about these improvements before signing the contract.
In 03/25/02 minutes, Councilman Kirven said Duke had mislead them about uncompleted improvements to be part of purchased assets and “These improvements are being paid twice.”
The signing was in April.
Remember Anderson spent $1,000,000 on consultants and lawyers during negotiations.
Isn’t it curious they didn’t contractually require Duke to complete improvements and resolve Kirven”s concern ?
This matter becomes odder. Councilman Dunaway in 10/25/04 minutes said, “Our engineers also told us that we could continue to operate the system as Duke had.”
Why hadn’t the engineers examined and verified Duke’s failure to perform before contract signing?
Negotiations spanned two years, why such a rush to sign?
In 10/25/04 Minutes, JM said“We did not know everything about the system.”
What convoluted mental process turns this apparent ineptness into a justification for making outsiders pay for Duke’s nonperformance ?
Please, Mr. Moore, justify!
Loading
208 views
PLEASE, MR MOORE, JUSTIFY !
Pappy, face these people will never admit wrong doing, they promised one thing and delivered something else. Pappy your best bet is to take this to the courts and see what happens. I know the courts are not much better than politicians but at least you would have a forum to get your message out.
I share your outrage, Pappy, that county residents (who can't vote in city elections) are being forced to pay double water rates to compensate for this. What a scam.
Pappy, I wonder if there are any investigative reporters in this state who would be willing to look into this story? Have you tried contacting media outside Anderson?
Res judicata.- JDTippett
No Roman, I, but this is Google's definition--
The doctrine of res judicata prevents a litigant from getting yet another day in court after the first lawsuit is concluded by giving a different reason.
JD, to my knowledge there never was a first lawsuit. . .
I know, PAPPY. I was referencing a possible "class action" lawsuit on a issue that has already been decided in previous cases.
Courts have expanded the definition in recent years, by the way, as evidenced that one of the arguments against overturning "Roe v. Wade" is the doctrine of res judicata (the issue has already been decided.) I watched the confirmation hearings for Roberts. He was asked repeatedly about his opinions on how it applies to abortion.
Pappy, I wonder if there are any investigative reporters in this state who would be willing to look into this story? Have you tried contacting media outside Anderson?- Ray J
Ray J,
I did send Don K. at AIM this story plus the following two leads for possible investigative reporting, but he never answered.
1. For 2 ½ years the city of Anderson and the Anderson County Water Association (ACWA) negotiated separately to buy the entire Duke operation, which AIM noted had been estimated to be worth about $42,000,000.
In February, 2000 Duke took bids and awarded ACWA for its bid of $76,000,000. Anderson’s losing bid was $46,000,000. Then Duke reneged and decided not to accept the bid because Anderson protested the award.
Why would Duke turn down a lucrative bid just because the losing bidder protested ?
2. After contract tweaking and getting agreement among the nine water companies, four municipalities and Clemson University, members of the new ACJMWS wired $63,500,000 to Duke in payment for the treatment plant and distribution lines and Anderson approved issuing $22,000,000 of bonds to pay ACJMWS $15,580,000 for the retail system and for other associated costs.
Why did Anderson agree to a total system cost that was now $17,500,000 more than they earlier bid ?
As for other media, I am uncertain how to approach them.
Pappy
May I offer a suggestion that I got while reading water rates study posted by Clemson U.
You may have no action in reducing the water rates, so go at it in another direction.
Force the issue of annexation, that would lower your rates and give you a voice in the city elections.
Just a thought.
May I offer a suggestion that I got while reading water rates study posted by Clemson U.
You may have no action in reducing the water rates, so go at it in another direction.
Force the issue of annexation, that would lower your rates and give you a voice in the city elections.
Just a thought.
Pappy
May I offer a suggestion that I got while reading water rates study posted by Clemson U.
You may have no action in reducing the water rates, so go at it in another direction.
Force the issue of annexation, that would lower your rates and give you a voice in the city elections.
Just a thought.
- A Venter
AV
Appreciate the thought.
I have said before that I and probably most of our subdivision would welcome annexation. However there are two major roadblocks"
1. We are not contiguous to a city boundary which legally prevents annexation.
2. The City (at least the prior administration) stated a policy of only annexing residential areas with homes valued at more than $300-325,000.
That leaves us poorer country cousins out.
All I know is, I need to come up with some sweetheart deal to sell to the city like Duke did.
Maybe they'll pay me quadruple the overvalued prices for some beachfront property I have access to in Utah.....It has water!
You "county folks" would sign off on that, wouldn't ya???
Maybe they'll pay me quadruple the overvalued prices for some beachfront property I have access to in Utah.....It has water!
You "county folks" would sign off on that, wouldn't ya???
All I know is, I need to come up with some sweetheart deal to sell to the city like Duke did.
Maybe they'll pay me quadruple the overvalued prices for some beachfront property I have access to in Utah.....It has water!
You "county folks" would sign off on that, wouldn't ya???- wyatt1sc
Puulleeeze, Wyatt, if you make the offer too attractive they will buy it and then quadruple the water rates for non-city residents to pay for it !
Pappy
May I offer a suggestion that I got while reading water rates study posted by Clemson U.
You may have no action in reducing the water rates, so go at it in another direction.
Force the issue of annexation, that would lower your rates and give you a voice in the city elections.
Just a thought.
- A Venter
AV
Appreciate the thought.
I have said before that I and probably most of our subdivision would welcome annexation. However there are two major roadblocks"
1. We are not contiguous to a city boundary which legally prevents annexation.
2. The City (at least the prior administration) stated a policy of only annexing residential areas with homes valued at more than $300-325,000.
That leaves us poorer country cousins out.- PAPPY
Pappy
Take the time to read this artical in ref to the city of Columbia anexing property 10 miles from its city limits.
In this case the city wanted to annex, but the point is borders are not always required.
If your intrested in the process, don't dismiss it because of what you were told years ago by one who may not know all the answers.
The other point I would be outraged by is to have someone to tell me I am not wanted in their Country Club because I am not worth enough, but sell me their beer at double what members pay.
Just a thought.
http://www.ipspr.sc.edu/grs/SCCEP/Articles/Annex2.htm
Pappy
Take the time to read this artical in ref to the city of Columbia anexing property 10 miles from its city limits.
In this case the city wanted to annex, but the point is borders are not always required.
If your intrested in the process, don't dismiss it because of what you were told years ago by one who may not know all the answers.
The other point I would be outraged by is to have someone to tell me I am not wanted in their Country Club because I am not worth enough, but sell me their beer at double what members pay.
Just a thought.
http://www.ipspr.sc.edu/grs/SCCEP/Articles/Annex2.htm- A Venter
AV,
I truly appreciate the research. I printed and read it. It seems to me that Columbia did use contiguity (a 5 mile ‘strip annexation’) to get to a faraway prize.
There is also the question why the feds had jurisdiction in this case.
As for outrage, I have expressed outrage with over two years of monthly newspaper letters, numerous blog postings and a thousand word ‘On My Mind' article.
I have two major personal moral outrage issues:
First, I was getting water from a privately owned utility with my rights as a SC citizen protected by the PSC which holds dual rates as illegal and requires public hearings for rate increases.
Then they sell to Anderson which, being a governmental unit, I ( naively, I guess ) expected more, not less ,protection from monopolistic abuse.
Instead Anderson was only bound by a quickly discarded moral imperative to avoid dual rates, a practice that was illegal for a private owner, and proceeded to raise rates 220% in less than four years, increases the PSC would never approve.
Secondly, as a member of the ‘Greatest Generation’ I thought we won the right to the democratic principle that every citizen had a right to vote for the government that decides how much they will take from my pocket. In this case, obviously I was wrong.
So, if I can be a constant burr in this cockle of a city, then so be it !
Bump--awaiting Mr. Moore's justification.
Pappy I think you might be waiting until there is a Sunday in the middle of the week. After all Moore is a very busy man overseeing 400 employees and working with a 45 million budget. Too bad he can't get the numbers right to answer your questions. Obviously, the man is hoping against hope that your questions will just go away
