Slick Salesman
The city manager has been working with Siemens behind the scenes like they are the 2nd coming of Christ, no kidding, and now has them on tonight's agenda under New Business J. City Manager Bornstein has a dream to take Lake Worth into the 21st Century.
The total cost of the project to the City is projected to be $32.5M and the city has to get the approval and closing of a Bank of America equipment lease loan to pay for the equipment and installation costs of $23M. Once funded, the monies will be deposited into an escrow account from which the City will make draws to pay Siemens and make the direct equipment purchases. It seems that the city will be spending nearly $3 million on over 4,000 LED streetlights, $5.5 million on solar panels at our landfill, close to a million on new a/c units, etc. and hold on to your chair, they will be spending right under $13 million for advanced metering infrastructure that includes new smart meters, meters they say aren't really smart meters (that was for the Mayor's benefit) but they are. We just replaced meters.
Siemens wants us to know that the contract does not constitute a debt, liability or obligation?? With Siemens' implementations, such as vending machine sensors at 3 buildings, no kidding, they say we will save money. If the agreed upon energy goals are not met, Siemens pays the shortfall that now will be a 15 year contract. We will have an annual cash flow of $210,666 a year for 15 years on a debt that isn't a debt of $23 million depending on the street light contingency. Wow!
*The City must reasonably permit SIEMENS to control and/or operate all building controls, systems, apparatus, equipment and machinery necessary to perform the Work, subject to CITY operational requirements. In other words, Bornstein wants to turn over the whole enchilada.
This city administration, once again, is going around the people. This time it is $23 million dollars. Have you ever heard of anything quite like it? The city commission can vote you, the taxpayer, into 15 years of commitment by simply voting yea and something that the city manager wants them to do. If they can't get it from a referendum, they will get some of it by at least a 3/2 vote perhaps more. Think about all that power they have over your money on improvements that will be outdated in five years and need constant care and maintenance. We have a big problem just thinking about the word "maintenance."
We have attorneys who really should be advising the city commission on things that could go wrong but the city attorney who is appointed by the commission does what the city manager wants him to do. Do we really need all these "improvements" and spending millions? If anyone on the dais has the slightest doubt tonight, please vote it down. If not, should they all be recalled?
14 comments:
i dont have any idea whats going on here. if the admin wants it, its almost like questionable right off the bat. This needs to be explained better.
@9:46...I'm 100% with you...it needs to be explained.
I can tell you that the previous director before CM & HR Dir forced him to retire was totally against this as the city is not set up like FPL to take advantage of what smart meters can do for a totally equipped utility. What happens to the half million dollars spent on changing out the current analog meters to digital, do we just throw brand new meters away and start all over with no real gain? As rate payer cannot make sense of this and who are we relying on now for expertise internally? Walt Gill, come on he has 0 knowledge and experience. The new director he is brand new on the job so now we rely on external vendors to recommend to us what we need and a CM who does not know. Also where does the money come from as we are lowering rates and don't we have bigger needs as a city for that money like pot holes and water lines than to replace brand new meter?
The former Utility Director, Clay Lindstrom, took an Electric Utility Director job in Ft. Pierce. I believe he resigned. This Siemens thing more than likely facilitated his move--just a guess.
Even if this is the greatest idea in the world with the City's poor record on contracting, who wants to take bets on us getting screwed on this contract. Either we will be paying for years and years for something that turns out to be a dud or the contract will lead to litigation and we will pay out big bucks (b/c we always pay out big bucks when faced with litigation).
Lynn, I think maybe you should get a Pulitzer for at least making this sad state of affairs humorous. I did get a laugh for $32 million.
Seriously though, I do think it is time to think about recall before we are hopelessly bankrupted by these guys who never saw a debt they didn't want for us. Truth is we just can't afford the gang of 3 and Bornstein. Can we start the wheels turning on the grounds of fiduciary irresponsibility? I mean we are told repeatedly we cannot afford our beach while they gaily waste money like it is toilet paper. Without a thought. With one of the last votes, I was surprised to see that Andy did not go in lockstep with them...Maybe he is hearing the bell toll for those who refuse to represent the voters? I believe the grounds of lack of fiduciary responsibility has been used successfully before. I know that was used in the fight to keep both St. Mary's and Good Sam open and ditch Intracoastal. (The group that owned both at the time and claimed they had to close one because they were losing just too much money. Wasn't mentioned that the billing dept often didn't even send out timely bills--a setup to ditch the low income population at St. Mary's. Which is also why the land and hospital was deeded, so that the family's servants would also have health care, not only the very wealthy.)And this also was another bait and switch: free appraisal etc. We only have to pay for what they have already done if we don't come up with the whole enchilada of another $32 million. Doncha see, it's all for free--to save us money. We really need to address the Bornstein problem.
Personally, I question the price tag on this as the data storage is going to cost a fortune.
You are going to lose your ass on the street lights.
RECALL, YEAH!
Lynn,
Easy to call it a resignation when you are told to do so or else. Just saying and if you were to ask around other than down at city hall you would find out.
OK--He didn't admit that to me. He got a job and started working there immediately after he gave his 2 week notice.
What was the "or else?"
It is clear that we need regulations or ordinances that prevent elected officials and board members from working for developers (or any related entity of a developer, since this seems to be one way around it) who is seeking relief or doing business with the City. Why are Szerdi and Wes allowed to lobby for this developer???
Obviously @3:20 is a disgruntled electric employee with incorrect information. The meters are not smart meters that Siemens is recommending but they are digital.
Anonymous 5:44 I am not an disgruntled electric employee (thank god) just a citizen who listens to people and this is what I was told. Maybe you should do some homework on this issues as the meters that are being installed currently are digital meters now as I have one on my home that was just installed. Research smart meters so you know what you are talking about.
Well, perhaps YOU should do some homework, anonymous @3:15. Siemens says that it will be installing Advanced Metering infrastructure. Look on page 768 of the back-up. What AMI is: an integrated system of smart meters, communications networks, and data management systems that enables two-way communication between utilities and customers.
So please do not come over here and be rude. Thanks.
This is why this should have been work-shopped.
Post a Comment