Home / Blogs / Junad Rizki's blog / Greedy council members, uninformed taxpayers and AT&T boxes!
Greedy council members, uninformed taxpayers and AT&T boxes!
Tonight the city council passed their compensation ordinance - being the only citizen to speak against Medical benefits for council members - I was not suprised by the vote.
What was really interesting not one of our "greedy" public officials mentioned the medical benefits- prior to the vote. All they did is talk about the $2,000 raise over four years and how they deserved it.
The bigger issue here beyond their greed to give themselves medical benefits - is they chose to completely not discuss the issue. The did not have the intregrity to claim and justifty that they should get the medical benefits.
This type of by-passing an issue. is a mode of their operation. People ask how for years they did not provide the correct contribution to the pension funds - same approach they knew they were unfunding it - and chose to not discuss it.
The AT&T boxes which many speakers voiced concern for tonight - is similar the council claimed they were helpless to deal with the problem. Doesn't that sound familar - the actuary provide us with the assumptions which we thought OK on the pensions. NO - they could have dealt with the boxes they did not clearly know how to deal with AT&T to correct the problem and create a better solution months ago before this all started. Now they claim they are helpless and point to the state representatives who never represent us anyway.
Anyone for another 13.33% tax increase?
I, for one, find the City's preponderance of telephone poles to be horrifyingly ugly - not to mention dangerous (how many times have the electrical wires come down in a storm, creating a hazard?) I think they should be replaced with much more attractive live Elm Trees.
Michele - good idea - maybe you will come up with away for paying for it?
Can we stay on the topic?
Michele - why don't you tell us your position on medical benefits for council members? Are you Ok with the fact they pay $37 a month for medical benefits and your family pays 4 to 5 times that amount to the city for the same benefits?
PS: Michele - telephone poles wires do not create an electrical hazard. Electrical poles which have the power lines are the problem. If you noticed the phone lines run at a low elevation. Usually they run together but not always.
How do you plan to pay for and implement ANY of the plans you've put forward on this board?
BTW - I agree wholeheartedly with Vito, below - I think we are wasting our effort on discussing current state of the boxes but would like a clearer understanding of how it happened without citizen input in the first place.
Michele,
What Plans, have I suggested? Should we start a new blog to discuss them?
You still have not answer my question about medical benefits?
Do you think it is OK give part-time council members family medical benefits which they pay $37 a month and cost the taxpayers $17,000 per year?
Michele - how did this happen? as with most thing here they move slowly through committees, alderperson are the first to know - about a year or two later - after the fact - the majority of citizens find out.
If people are upset, I have heard council members tell them in the past it was discussed at such and such a meeting.
Junad, if you want to make a difference, make a realistic plan for change. Randomly campaigning against things you don't like is neither planning nor governance but a waste of time. Showing up at Council Chambers to announce you don't like high taxes isn't the same as suggesting how taxes could be lowered - noting again that those suggestions have to be feasible.
City Council shouldn't be making their decisions based on what you want, or on what I want, but on what will be good for Evanston as a whole. It's a complex and difficult job, made no easier by the constant bombardment of "Do it MY way - no, do it THEIR way - no, do it MY way!" While they should depend on citizen feedback, there comes a point where it becomes ear-wringing audio feedback.
Michele - the council does not make any decision based ----on anything I say. Lets get real.
You use the term "goverance" - I am not an elected offical - I have 3 minutes at citizen comment.
If alot more people are there I get less. By the way if you ever bother to time it - friends of the council tend to get more time.
Michele I have lived here longer than you, and I have spoken at the council on many issues - by the way - I have been told privately they agree with me, but they will not make the changes for political reasons.
I have told them many things to cut over the years - actually in the past few years they have starting to cut them - but I told them many years ago. ( so how much money did they waste?)
I suggest you review - the minutes from a few meetings ago when I suggested they eliminate the minority jobs programs and minority contracts which are not helping anyone, but wasting taxpayer money.
The programs are a big joke - and what is more interesting they have no real world clue about how to set them - using hours for a measure is a joke.
Michele maybe this year you should show up at the budget hearing and give your opinion what should be cut?
You still have not answered my question on council medical benefits you are avoiding it!
I spoke with several clients and am familiar with the AT&T issue. AT&T has been at the FCC offices for several years pushing this project which includes the ugly boxes.
What is your solution when the State & Feds say Evaston you'll eat these ugly boxes or be sued? Oh, and if you lose the suit you pay AT&T's legal bills.
What's your solution to that? How are alderman supposed to deal with a bargain like that? Tell me how the City has the authority "to create a better solution" when the State and Federal government say no you don't.
You probably can't even offer a solution becaue you problem don't even know who has regulatory authority over the project...I'll give you a hint the Federal Communication's Communication i.e. the FCC. Notice the word "Evanston" is not in that title.
Here take a look at one statement from AT&T concerning this project back in 2006:
http://www.fcc.gov/realaudio/presentations/2006/021006/champion.pdf
Here is another article for you:
http://www.c3.ucla.edu/newsstand/media/at-t2019s-project-lightspeed2019s-dirty-secret/
You have a right to your opinion but for some one who is going to write an article about it your ignorance is appalling. Though it does generate blog material.
AT&T is doing what it is supposed to do - attempting to make money by entering a non-competitive market. Comcast has the lock on this market and charges outrageous fees, which would drop if there was any effective competition. Comcast has had the advantage of using those ugly telephone/power poles (which it does not own) to string most of its cable at a low cost, because of regulated pole attachment rates. The utilities, who own the poles, cannot charge what they want, the fees are regulated, which is a winner for Comcast.
AT&T was shrewd enough to get a pass at the state level by lobbying to have state laws that superseded any local laws. Hamos and Schoenberg were part of that effort. Now they either communicated with some or all of our Council members, which means that the Council was aware of it, and did not make any public notice -- or they did not inform any of our Council members, to which we should ask why not? It also means that the Council was seemingly unaware of what was going on in Springfield (probably too busy making resolutions about being a Sanctuary City or a Nuclear Free City).
We should ask the Council members if they knew about the proposed legislation.
It is a done deal now and we are stuck with the boxes, great canvas for grafiti and gang symbols. Let us hope that the competition with Comcast will impact the outrageous fees they charge. Let us fervently hope that our Council and State legislators talk to one another before, rather than after.
"AT&T is doing what it is supposed to do - attempting to make money by entering a non-competitive market. Comcast has the lock on this market and charges outrageous fees, which would drop if there was any effective competition."
When the AT&T box was starting to be installed in our neighborhood -- and before we saw what they were really going to look like -- I was harboring that hope. Has anyone got any information or data that indicates what has happened in other states where this has already occurred? I would have thought by now that AT&T could have "suggested" what a package comparable to what I am currently receiving would cost.
I have no knowledge about the technology that AT&T is using. However, an AT&T employee told me that their cable function for computers is slower than Comcast's. Do any of you have an idea?
AT&T is installing what they call Uverse. It is a broadband system using fiber optics to the boxes and then using coax or phone lines for the signal drop to the customer. The signal from the boxes to the customer is slower(less bandwidth) than for cable, but the technology is such that you won't notice it.
For the internet signal, the AT&T system, DSL, is slower, about 1/3 of the cable data rate, but much faster than dial up. Unless you are sending/receiving large amounts of video over the internet you should not notice the difference, for most blogging, e-mail, etc. you should not see any perceptible difference.
Verizon in other parts of the country is using fiber to the customer and it is much faster than cable, but it is a much more expensive system to install.
Mr Fineprintreader - by your statement you must be a lawyer - ( "I spoke with several clients ") the solution is not involving lawyers, The solution was up front and working with AT@T - to get the boxes moved - while some will complain the City did this - Yes it may have at a low level - could Have it been push it higher in the organization? I would think so - The council members dropped the ball - by not working on it in the beginning - while all their supporters will forgive them when the claim they are not responsible - a few of us know better.
One big problem on the council is most of these people are lawyers - they have a certain mind set - and limited ability to solve problems - " let sue "
or create a new law - they do not solve problems in the real world. Those in this town who talk about phony diversity - should take a look at the council - we don't need any more lawyers running for public office here!
One question Mr Fineprintreader - do you think council member should be allowed to cover their families with medical coverage at $37 a month when we taxpayers have to pay almost $17,000 a year for this?
I have done my research on this! Interestly enough few of them or their supporters want to talk about this rip off!
Post new comment