Started By
Message

re: .

Posted on 7/23/14 at 10:59 am to
Posted by Fun Bunch
New Orleans
Member since May 2008
116642 posts
Posted on 7/23/14 at 10:59 am to
quote:

Cutting off the water to thousands of homes comes across as some sort of battle of attrition.


Detroit allowed the bills to get out of control because they didn't want to cut people off.

Now that it got out of control, what would you have them do?

They can't go back in time and just cut them off after 2 months. They can only do whats in the best interest of the city now.

So again, what would you have them do NOW?
Posted by fleaux
section 0
Member since Aug 2012
8741 posts
Posted on 7/23/14 at 10:59 am to
quote:


Will the water dept get more of their money? Of course, right now, but it's not going to solve anything long-term.


Why the frick is it the water department's job to solve anything long-term?
Posted by BobBoucher
Member since Jan 2008
16845 posts
Posted on 7/23/14 at 11:02 am to
quote:

Public schools should begin separating college bound and trade kids in the 8th grade. Each year trade kids may attempt to test out of trade track and move to college track.



I like a lot of your post, but this is insane.
This post was edited on 7/23/14 at 11:02 am
Posted by Pinecone Repair
Burminham
Member since Nov 2013
7156 posts
Posted on 7/23/14 at 11:04 am to
quote:


I like a lot of your post, but this is insane


Why?
Posted by Korkstand
Member since Nov 2003
28738 posts
Posted on 7/23/14 at 11:05 am to
quote:

Detroit is a poor city that cannot afford to pay for services while not requiring payment for those services
Which is why I said the department should not have let things get to this point. If sending notices, offering assistance, and shutting off delinquents had always been the policy, they wouldn't be at the point where a big cut-off campaign was necessary, and there wouldn't be people with signs in the streets.
quote:

when the water department goes belly up, nobody gets water. how is that fair to those who pay?
Detroit borrowed and borrowed and borrowed to pay for bad business deals and pensions and whatnot, but when the time comes to borrow to keep the water flowing, they can't because the credit is too bad and the water dept looks unprofitable? Terrible government, and the citizens pay for it.
quote:

how is the emigration of people using more than they pay for going to reduce net revenue?

getting those people to move will be positive for the city, i reckon
Water department costs are largely maintenance and operation of the existing infrastructure. Reducing the amount of water they produce will not appreciably reduce costs. They need more people.
Posted by Fun Bunch
New Orleans
Member since May 2008
116642 posts
Posted on 7/23/14 at 11:08 am to
quote:

Which is why I said the department should not have let things get to this point. If sending notices, offering assistance, and shutting off delinquents had always been the policy, they wouldn't be at the point where a big cut-off campaign was necessary, and there wouldn't be people with signs in the streets.


This is completely irrelevant. They did let it get that bad.

So what would you have them do now?
Posted by themunch
Earth. maybe
Member since Jan 2007
64801 posts
Posted on 7/23/14 at 11:10 am to
Being involved with a shelter, i concur with this

quote:
When you're homeless, a minimum wage job and a studio apartment is better than sleeping on a cot at the shelter


you would think, but they dont think like you and me.
Posted by SlowFlowPro
Simple Solutions to Complex Probs
Member since Jan 2004
425498 posts
Posted on 7/23/14 at 11:12 am to
quote:

Detroit borrowed and borrowed and borrowed to pay for bad business deals and pensions and whatnot, but when the time comes to borrow to keep the water flowing, they can't because the credit is too bad and the water dept looks unprofitable?

i don't think they can borrow that much right now b/c their chickens of liberal mismanagement have come home to roost

quote:

Water department costs are largely maintenance and operation of the existing infrastructure. Reducing the amount of water they produce will not appreciably reduce costs. They need more people.

they need more paying people

losing non-paying people will be a net gain, even if it is small.
Posted by Korkstand
Member since Nov 2003
28738 posts
Posted on 7/23/14 at 11:22 am to
quote:

Detroit allowed the bills to get out of control because they didn't want to cut people off.
quote:

Now that it got out of control
It should have been easy to see this coming, right?
quote:

what would you have them do?

They can't go back in time and just cut them off after 2 months. They can only do whats in the best interest of the city now.

So again, what would you have them do NOW?
Do you think what they are doing is in the best interest of the city?

Here is what I would have them do NOW. Tally up delinquent balances, and consider it a monumental frick-up on their part that they will be lucky to collect half of. Provide notice to all customers of when their new policies will go into effect. If customers can keep up with their bills after this date, their water stays on. Their bill will consist of the usual monthly usage charges, plus a portion of their delinquent balance, which would not exceed a certain amount ($10? $20? maybe a %?) per month.

Seem fair?
Posted by Korkstand
Member since Nov 2003
28738 posts
Posted on 7/23/14 at 11:23 am to
quote:

Why the frick is it the water department's job to solve anything long-term?
The water department is controlled by the city.
Posted by BobBoucher
Member since Jan 2008
16845 posts
Posted on 7/23/14 at 11:26 am to
Solution - shut the water off. Offer a public spigot somewhere in town and a 5 gallon bucket.

They can haul their water. They will eventually pay as this is a lot more inconvenient than not having cable TV.
This post was edited on 7/23/14 at 11:29 am
Posted by Fun Bunch
New Orleans
Member since May 2008
116642 posts
Posted on 7/23/14 at 11:32 am to
quote:


Here is what I would have them do NOW. Tally up delinquent balances, and consider it a monumental frick-up on their part that they will be lucky to collect half of. Provide notice to all customers of when their new policies will go into effect. If customers can keep up with their bills after this date, their water stays on. Their bill will consist of the usual monthly usage charges, plus a portion of their delinquent balance, which would not exceed a certain amount ($10? $20? maybe a %?) per month.


That is somewhat reasonable, but these people are arguing that they should not have to pay for water at all, so I doubt your solution would work.
Posted by DawgfaninCa
San Francisco, California
Member since Sep 2012
20092 posts
Posted on 7/23/14 at 11:40 am to
quote:


We process those poors into food for other poors.


Soylent Green anyone?
LINK
Posted by jamboybarry
Member since Feb 2011
32693 posts
Posted on 7/23/14 at 11:40 am to
quote:

Here is what I would have them do NOW. Tally up delinquent balances, and consider it a monumental frick-up on their part that they will be lucky to collect half of. Provide notice to all customers of when their new policies will go into effect. If customers can keep up with their bills after this date, their water stays on. Their bill will consist of the usual monthly usage charges, plus a portion of their delinquent balance, which would not exceed a certain amount ($10? $20? maybe a %?) per month.


The problem with this is a large segment of the population already can't/won't pay their bills. Add on top of that the fact that Detroit has a way above national average service cost for water utilities and not very many of the affected customers will be able to/or want to float this.
Posted by Korkstand
Member since Nov 2003
28738 posts
Posted on 7/23/14 at 11:44 am to
quote:

That is somewhat reasonable, but these people are arguing that they should not have to pay for water at all, so I doubt your solution would work.
There is a very stupid minority arguing that they shouldn't have to pay for water at all.
Posted by real
Dixieland
Member since Oct 2007
14027 posts
Posted on 7/23/14 at 11:47 am to
Give each one a 55 gallon drum and a water hose. Problem sovled.
This post was edited on 7/23/14 at 11:47 am
Posted by Korkstand
Member since Nov 2003
28738 posts
Posted on 7/23/14 at 11:57 am to
quote:

The problem with this is a large segment of the population already can't/won't pay their bills. Add on top of that the fact that Detroit has a way above national average service cost for water utilities and not very many of the affected customers will be able to/or want to float this.
I don't think they want to have their water cut off. Didn't half of them pay up already after being cut off? They city could have saved the $6m they paid the contractor to do this massive round of cut offs by just giving notice that water WILL be turned off for non-payment, and then following through with that going forward.

Some of these people owe more than $1k. Some of those people just won't be able to pay that off, and they need water. I think they would be better with a payment plan rather than a lump sum.
Posted by jamboybarry
Member since Feb 2011
32693 posts
Posted on 7/23/14 at 12:01 pm to
quote:

I don't think they want to have their water cut off. Didn't half of them pay up already after being cut off? They city could have saved the $6m they paid the contractor to do this massive round of cut offs by just giving notice that water WILL be turned off for non-payment, and then following through with that going forward.


WTF? Some of the accounts were in arrears for a year. Almost every functioning adult that I know would reason this was grounds for service disconnection.

Also shut off notices were sent out in May

quote:

Some of these people owe more than $1k. Some of those people just won't be able to pay that off, and they need water. I think they would be better with a payment plan rather than a lump sum.


And my point is that with an already abnormally high service rate, almost all of these folks won't be able to pay their bill let alone an additional back payment.

This post was edited on 7/23/14 at 12:02 pm
Posted by Pinecone Repair
Burminham
Member since Nov 2013
7156 posts
Posted on 7/23/14 at 12:05 pm to
quote:

I don't think they want to have their water cut off. Didn't half of them pay up already after being cut off? They city could have saved the $6m they paid the contractor to do this massive round of cut offs by just giving notice that water WILL be turned off for non-payment, and then following through with that going forward. 


I don't think anyone wanted their water to be shut off either. I just don't think they believed it would happen.

I bet many notices were given. How many notices should be given? Should the 100th say " we're shutting off your water for nonpayment- serious,you guys"?

quote:

Some of these people owe more than $1k. Some of those people just won't be able to pay that off, and they need water. I think they would be better with a payment plan rather than a lump sum.


But they were already on a payment plan....that they totally ignored. Had they adhered to the previous payment plan they would have water.
Posted by jamboybarry
Member since Feb 2011
32693 posts
Posted on 7/23/14 at 12:05 pm to
From the list DWSD released of most delinquent accounts:

quote:

Total balance 8 MILE PROPERTY INVESTMENTS LLC $72,207 ATOM LLC $120,105 BAY LOGISTICS $81,989 CHEYENNE COIN LAUNDRY $58,858 COLONIAL MANOR PROPERTIES LLC $85,587 CROWN ENTERPRISES INC $95,875 CRYSTAL MOTEL $51,926 DANIL NRECAJ $42,364 DISPOSAL & RECYCLING TECH. $107,714 EQ DETROIT, INC $270,914 GREENBRIAR APTS $47,309 HEARTLAND COMMUNITY $217,226 INTEGRATED PACKAGING $61,629 IVEY AND ASSOCIATES $86,780 MATRIX $159,361 METRO BUILDING GROUP, LLC $56,077 METRO LIVERNOIS, LLC $302,845 MICHIGAN WASTE ENERGY INC. $244,473 MT. OLIVET CEMETERY $62,393 RESIDENT (17900 Ryan Rd, LLC) $54,666 RESIDENT (18718 Borman, LLC) $338,359 RESIDENT (address: 5960 Tireman St) $44,683 RESIDENT (Alarayshi, Yahya Zakaria) $37,120 RESIDENT (All American Towing, Inc) $41,654 RESIDENT (Brodhead Armory) $49,961 RESIDENT (G F H Enterpries, Inc) $55,260 RESIDENT (New Fellowship Church) $91,324 RESIDENT (RH & PM Greenfield PD, LLC) $42,876 RESIDENT (West Chicago Development, LLC) $62,055 RUSSELL INDUSTRIAL ASSOCIATES $181,220 SAPERSTEIN ASSOCIATES $75,404 SHELBOURNE SQUARE APTS $263,235 ST. JAMES NURSING CENTER $45,980 STATE OF MICHIGAN-DMB $86,890 VARGO GOLF $109,897 VARGO GOLF $478,208


This post was edited on 7/23/14 at 12:06 pm
first pageprev pagePage 12 of 15Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram