I purchase the cable service from the city every month and I am happy with it, but anyone who has had cable service from other companies recently knows that our system isn't up to basic standards. Our city cable system has fallen behind technologically. Part of the trouble is that the system lacks the capacity to expand our offerings both in number of channels and technological enhancements such as High Definition and On Demand. Fixing this would require a significant investment in hardware and infrastructure. Additionally, the rebroadcast fees associated with adding more channels would make it difficult or impossible to maintain the current charges for the service.
As I understand it, the city cable system was created to fill a need for citizens prior to the availability of other options such as Dish Network or DirectTV. Currently we are losing customers each month these other options. As we lose customers, the financial viability of the system begins to unravel. The broadband internet system, which faces capacity and technology challenges of its own, has been used to subsidize the loss of revenue from the cable system. It has been made clear to the council through the budget process that this band-aid solution will not be sustainable. A decision about the future of our cable system needs to be made in the near future.
Another concern is the status of channel 23. It has been celebrated as an important means of communication. It is used to broadcast public announcements as well as public meetings of committees and the city council. As fewer and fewer residents opt for city cable, the effectiveness of channel 23 diminishes.
Should the city be in the cable business? If so, how should we respond to the changing marketplace when our market share degrades monthly? If not, how should we plan for the loss of revenue from our existing system? Are you willing to give up channel 23 if we get out of the cable business? Is it worth subsidizing a diminished system to maintain channel 23? Would you vote for an increase in the cable charges if it meant adding more channels and enhancements? What alternatives do you see for the city in facing this challenge?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Councilman for Cascade Locks
- Lance Masters
- This blog is intended as a way for people interested in Cascade Locks to share ideas and opinions. Posts that are interpreted as hindering the free flow of ideas and opinions may be removed. Please be encouraged to discuss ideas and opinions rather than individuals and names.
35 comments:
No longer forgotten, I see
I've always been a strong advocate of self-sufficiency. Unfortunately, in the tv cable arena, we can't compete with Dish or DirectTV.
I'll admit, I'm a Dish customer now, and I get crystal clear local channels, in HD, and more channels than I know what to do with, mostly trying to sell me something, but they are clear, crisp, and most in HD. Our local cable network can't come close.
I was in preliminary talks with DirectTV about taking over our system prior to not winning an election, so... (raspberry sound here) I didn't follow up on it afterwards. They were interested in taking over our cable head though. They said we could keep Channel 23. So, it is possible to upgrade, sell to someone else and keep what we like. I do miss 23.
I suggest we enter into talks with the satellite providers and see what they can offer. We already get some channels from them, did you miss channel 2 while they were fighting with Dish?
Technology is a very hard thing to keep up with. Water and electricity, now those we can do.
We just need to keep the low cost cable version available so those with limited funds can still get what they need. Latching on to a big provider might give us a much broader selection and if we negotiate right, a good price. After all, they are getting a large group all at once, they can afford to give us a price break. This doesn't have to be a moneymaker, it just needs to serve the needs of the citizens.
How large of a group are we talking about, anyway? Lance, how many customers does the cable system still have? Can we get that figure for this discussion, please.
Lance,
The cable plant goes back a long way, possibly to the 70's, but you can check with Tracy on that. It was an improvement on trying to get a signal with antennas from Portland. It became an internet route in the early 2000's because Sprint wouldn't bring us broadband, back then they were arrogant and hated here in town, notice the name change. Having an alternative also might help keep signal less expensive due to competition. Sprint had laid fiber in C/L earlier but wouldn't lease it or sell it to the city thus preventing the city from bringing in broadband. The city put together the broadband package riding on the tv cable we now have. It never amounted to much due to cost restrictions. Upgrading equipment at the head, putting in fiber, connecting to the POP in Stevenson all being extremely costly back then.
There is another issue which I've never seen resolved, that is the resort/casino, they will want to have broadband, cable TV, especially sports channels, and phone service, unfortunately the City has never tried internet phone service itself although I believe the Port did. Will we provide this or will the resort/casino get it elsewhere. I believe it's spelled out or has been looked into by Bob Willoughby when he was CA, but I don't know what the conclusion to any negotiations were. If they bring it independently will we be able to use it? Or will we provide it for them, thus being able to afford to upgrade and maintain our own system and maintain control? Like Arni, both Bob, Tracy, and myself spent considerable time trying to get signal from the satellite providers but to no avail. They may have had a change of heart and are easier to work with now. There are also many other satellites up there now which are free but have some of the same and different content. Some of us also use the internet to provide us with phone service, the city should have provided citizens with that option years ago, It's been used successfully for over 5 years, and running on dial-up since the 90's. There are many things to look at in terms of what's best for the city, and as the city moves forward and hopefully brings in business, what do we want to provide in terms of service to a "Nestle's" or a Resort/Casino, or any other small or large player who decides to settle here. That's why we had an ad-hoc telecom committee, to plan and strategize a process to move forward. There are also philosophical issues which should be resolved, such as will most content be delivered by cable in the future, what's the future of satellites, do we want to become wireless,can we keep up with changing technology, do we want to expand or close out this era. Another issue is can we get grant money for this type of infrastructure from the federal government? Let me finish by giving a big thanks to Tracy, and John and Phil and who ever else has worked on the cable system. It's not called for in their contract with the city, they've taken it on even though it would not normally be a part of their job skill set (it's telecom not high power and requires heavy customer service contact) and done a great job at no extra charge to the city.
Robb
Lance,
The cable plant goes back a long way, possibly to the 70's, but you can check with Tracy on that. It was an improvement on trying to get a signal with antennas from Portland. It became an internet route in the early 2000's because Sprint wouldn't bring us broadband, back then they were arrogant and hated here in town, notice the name change. Having an alternative also might help keep signal less expensive due to competition. Sprint had laid fiber in C/L earlier but wouldn't lease it or sell it to the city thus preventing the city from bringing in broadband. The city put together the broadband package riding on the tv cable we now have. It never amounted to much due to cost restrictions. Upgrading equipment at the head, putting in fiber, connecting to the POP in Stevenson all being extremely costly back then.
There is another issue which I've never seen resolved, that is the resort/casino, they will want to have broadband, cable TV, especially sports channels, and phone service, unfortunately the City has never tried internet phone service itself although I believe the Port did. Will we provide this or will the resort/casino get it elsewhere. I believe it's spelled out or has been looked into by Bob Willoughby when he was CA, but I don't know what the conclusion to any negotiations were. If they bring it independently will we be able to use it? Or will we provide it for them, thus being able to afford to upgrade and maintain our own system and maintain control? Like Arni, both Bob, Tracy, and myself spent considerable time trying to get signal from the satellite providers but to no avail. They may have had a change of heart and are easier to work with now. There are also many other satellites up there now which are free but have some of the same and different content. Some of us also use the internet to provide us with phone service, the city should have provided citizens with that option years ago, It's been used successfully for over 5 years, and running on dial-up since the 90's. There are many things to look at in terms of what's best for the city, and as the city moves forward and hopefully brings in business, what do we want to provide in terms of service to a "Nestle's" or a Resort/Casino, or any other small or large player who decides to settle here. That's why we had an ad-hoc telecom committee, to plan and strategize a process to move forward. There are also philosophical issues which should be resolved, such as will most content be delivered by cable in the future, what's the future of satellites, do we want to become wireless,can we keep up with changing technology, do we want to expand or close out this era. Another issue is can we get grant money for this type of infrastructure from the federal government? Let me finish by giving a big thanks to Tracy, and John and Phil and who ever else has worked on the cable system. It's not called for in their contract with the city, they've taken it on even though it would not normally be a part of their job skill set (it's telecom not high power and requires heavy customer service contact) and done a great job at no extra charge to the city.
Robb
Lance,
The cable plant goes back a long way, possibly to the 70's, but you can check with Tracy on that. It was an improvement on trying to get a signal with antennas from Portland. It became an internet route in the early 2000's because Sprint wouldn't bring us broadband, back then they were arrogant and hated here in town, notice the name change. Having an alternative also might help keep signal less expensive due to competition. Sprint had laid fiber in C/L earlier but wouldn't lease it or sell it to the city thus preventing the city from bringing in broadband. The city put together the broadband package riding on the tv cable we now have. It never amounted to much due to cost restrictions. Upgrading equipment at the head, putting in fiber, connecting to the POP in Stevenson all being extremely costly back then.
There is another issue which I've never seen resolved, that is the resort/casino, they will want to have broadband, cable TV, especially sports channels, and phone service, unfortunately the City has never tried internet phone service itself although I believe the Port did. Will we provide this or will the resort/casino get it elsewhere. I believe it's spelled out or has been looked into by Bob Willoughby when he was CA, but I don't know what the conclusion to any negotiations were. If they bring it independently will we be able to use it? Or will we provide it for them, thus being able to afford to upgrade and maintain our own system and maintain control? Like Arni, both Bob, Tracy, and myself spent considerable time trying to get signal from the satellite providers but to no avail. They may have had a change of heart and are easier to work with now. There are also many other satellites up there now which are free but have some of the same and different content. Some of us also use the internet to provide us with phone service, the city should have provided citizens with that option years ago, It's been used successfully for over 5 years, and running on dial-up since the 90's. There are many things to look at in terms of what's best for the city, and as the city moves forward and hopefully brings in business, what do we want to provide in terms of service to a "Nestle's" or a Resort/Casino, or any other small or large player who decides to settle here. That's why we had an ad-hoc telecom committee, to plan and strategize a process to move forward. There are also philosophical issues which should be resolved, such as will most content be delivered by cable in the future, what's the future of satellites, do we want to become wireless,can we keep up with changing technology, do we want to expand or close out this era. Another issue is can we get grant money for this type of infrastructure from the federal government? Let me finish by giving a big thanks to Tracy, and John and Phil and who ever else has worked on the cable system. It's not called for in their contract with the city, they've taken it on even though it would not normally be a part of their job skill set (it's telecom not high power and requires heavy customer service contact) and done a great job at no extra charge to the city.
Robb
Lance, pls excuse my sending this multiple times, according to the notice I got, it wasn't being accepted at your end.
Robb
Just ask Lance to remove the extra posts....
Thanks Anon,
Please remove them Lance, no one should have to read all that more than once.
Robb
We need to re-invest some of the operating revenue back into the system, the way private companies do. Using this service to generate general fund dollars instead of maintenance/upgrade is what is causing its steady decline and will eventually lead to its failure.
As reliant as business is on internet anymore, it seems like a poor decision to allow this to happen if we really want to attract companies and jobs to our city.
Take a look at the success that The Dalles was able to achieve with their industrial park. Part of the success was based on an investment (about $1M) in bringing "backbone fiber optic" to the site. This is what led to Google building their server farm in The Dalles.
Seems like we are going in the opposite direction.
Lance "A decision about the future of our cable system needs to be made in the near future."?
I have been asking for that decision for years. Good luck with that!
The city lost me on the TV and I have been requesting the 3 meg internet service the city advertises having for over a year now. How long am I to wait?
I asked for that answer by the first of July from all relevant city officials and workers along with all council and the mayor yet I have not received that answer from any so what’s up?
Is this how the city responds to customers by ignoring them?
Now that is what I call customer service.
The way I look at it is this.
The city did not care about the cable TV or the Internet service when they should have all these years and the city has let it degrade to the point that the city is in way over their heads.
The City it appears does not care about the customers they have or had!
All the city is doing is denying the customers it has of the true benefits of today’s technology by keeping consumers of it's service's in the technology of the mid 70's and late 90's used.
Our TV and Internet is the laughing stock of not only our town but the industry.
The only true monetary value is in the cable infrastructure as it connects to every business and residence in our city which is known as the demarcation point. That network would cost at least a million dollars today to replace.
That in itself has a value in the private sector and it is apparent to me that the private sector can do a better job in this high tech industry than the city has been able to do.
Yet the city does have an asset in the "demarcation" presence citywide.
I would think as a councilor you would want an independent study to find out if the city has the means financially or otherwise to bring both these services technologically up to date snd keep it there or to sell the "demarcation" presence to the private sector.
Then the City will always have the utility pole use fees as well.
We also need to have a real and not virtual internet service providor company as that has been a problem since the late 90's. If not get out of the game!
Regardless something has to be done about it.
Council is the head of the Corporation known as the City of Cascade Locks and these services fall under the jurisdiction of Council to resolve.
I tried long ago and until a few months ago and I am tired of wasting my time and money on your services.
As a citizen and consumer all I can say is fix it, sell it or turn the power off as I lost all faith in this city being able to run these high tech companies long ago!!!
Cody
Cody, you are being too kind. I tell my friends that I have moved to the 1950's...
The city cable system is a joke, and the computer service sucks. I am amazed that so many have put up with such bad service for so long. Perhaps it made sense when first constructed to own our system, but certainly not any longer. There are other options with private companies. Anything we design and construct at this point will still be out-of-date by the time the first customer comes on-line.
I switched my computer service when I found the immense limitations in service. The cable only made sense for as long as it took me to catch up on past episodes of NCIS. My money is better spent on Netflix and Embarq. I can order an adult show like the Daily Show with Jon Stewart, or anything by the BBC network.
On the bright side, if there is no channel 23, no one will be sitting there staring at the screen for an hour waiting for the one missed item to return. No one will be informed of the weather every minute, the same weather that is outside your window. And maybe, just maybe more citizens will attend the Council meetings, and some of the Councillors might stop playing to TV Land.
Arni, just how long ago was it that you were checking with Direct TV? Good idea, but why would they want to take it over? They already have a strong customer base here. It just would not make sense monetarily for them.
What happens to the internal payments otherwise known as in-lieu-of's? lmao
Lance,
As you can see almost nobody is happy with the status quo. I still use our internet service and run my phone on it successfully. I gave up on TV years back and went with satellite service, the picture is crystal clear, the choices many, and for movies I have netflix and also netflix streaming, a free benefit if you make a modest equipment purchase. Cody is correct in that there is value in the cable plant, but it should be updated. There are many other issues looking into the future. By the way, we were the first small standalone community in Oregon with broadband, that shows we can be innovative and do it at an affordable cost.
Robb
Lance,
We have had suggestions on how to use this resource in the past, but it fell on deaf ears. Like putting channel 23 on the net or recording council meetings and putting them on the net. My Dish still comes from the little dish to my tv in a cable. We have the city strung with cable. It is valuable. We just have to decide to do something with it instead of ignore it. I'm all for talking with the satellite providers or anyone else who can do a package for us. We are about to grow, we might as well take advantage of it and find someone who is willing to invest.
Why do we need someone else to "invest". It's our system. Can't we invest in our own future?
Robb you are right the status quo is not going to work any longer.
Arnie and Robb you are also right that we have something that is worth something.
Yet both of you state the fact of how happy you are with the TV service you now have so my question is would you go back if the city resolved the issues they have?
Then would everyone else who has abandoned ship?
I myself am more than happy with the service I now have and yes HDTV is the place to be. TIVO, On Demand, digital, surround sound and the like we all know the bottom line and that is for the city to compete with this at this late stage is going to be expensive and I mean expensive.
Anonymous there are many technical issues to overcome to pull this off. These issues cost money to do and require money on a regular basis to keep up with the private sector are you prepared for that reality?
I would like to see Charter contacted to purchase our cable infrastructure.
Then the TV and the internet could both be addressed in one fail scoop as well as compete with Embarq on the phone side and competition is a good thing.
There are other companies but that is where I would start.
Regardless selling our infrastructure is going to be hard when our local phone company offers the same services and can package deal them.
I myself have lost all faith in the City being able to manage these high tech services.
This City has had decades to resolve the problems yet failed to realize the importance.
Concerning the internet Robb brought up some of the problems we faced in the Telecommunications Committee in the late 90’s which brought the Cities internet to fruition.
But the fact is we are not an internet service provider we are a virtual internet service provider. In name only and that name is being tarnished. It is a pretend company and nothing more than a smokescreen.
This city has farmed out all the internet company to other companies being ZCorum and Sawnet. That is who really owns the internet company. All we are doing is maintaining it for them. Then the city collects the fees with their cut so in reality the city is the middleman we pay addition fees above the norm for a service which I have to agree with Kate about.
So Lance not only you but this entire council must face the problem which is “can we keep cable”?
I find it tragic that such an investment has been allowed to degrade to the point that it has.
This can only happen when businesses such as this are mismanaged.
The problem is this mismanagement has been happening for decades and it boils down to councils and mayors for many decades.
What makes me think that this city can manage an investment of my tax dollars of which the city has failed to maintain and allow it to degrade for another pipe dream when in reality the city cannot manage anything as I see it.
I am curious after last night’s council meeting when my jaw dropped to learn that our Fire Chief/Paramedic has 400 hours of comp time. I find this hard to swallow when his very contract if I remember had provisions where he was not to incur the city in overtime debt and was to adjust his workload accordingly.
That is one heck of a severance package that is being claimed to be owed knowing that contract.
The hits just keep on coming for we the citizens whom are responsible for the actions of our government officials.
Again more mismanagement to deal with and my question is why. I want some answers for this and I want to know how this happened.
Now I want answers to all my concerns starting with can I get a 3 Meg service?
A basic service in the private sector yet it appears Kate was right and I will take it a step further we live in Bedrock and Fred and Barney are running the show.
I would think that Mr. Slate would ask for a study?
Yabba Dabba Do
Cody
The reason for many of the complaints lies in the fact that the system has caretakers who work free gratis, there is no paid/dedicated manager and the telecom committee was deemed unnecessary some time ago. One of the reasons for all this is we are a small town and can't afford large capital expenditures. Looking forward are there stimulus grants available for equipment? Does anyone on the council other than Lance even care? At one point we were considering selling broadband service in the gorge, it would be difficult if not impossible to compete today. First thing is to see if the council has the interest, and in lieu of the council does the public care enough to push the council.
Robb
"work free gratis"
department of repetitive redundancy bureau
Lance,
We are currently telecasting the Planning Commission and the Tourism Committee, other than to spend money I can see no reason to do so. I can't imagine anything more boring to watch, and if someone really has an interest in the proceedings, they can attend and actually hear and see what occurs.
Robb
I agree Robb but if Council does not step up to the plate all will be lost and all the money the taxpayers have paid for this investment will be worthless commodities to degrade on the poles around town.
Now Robb as you were on the telecom committee as well as I, I believe we both know our previous mayor had no concern about these services.
This was at the critical mass point when the technology was changing and the government was enacting laws and setting deadlines for this new digital standard revolution happening.
We had the means in the late 90’s to convert our entire network to digital at a fraction of the cost it will be to do today and the City went against the advice of the professionals and gave it away.
All to become a pretend internet service provider.
This was the time when the satellite providers started eating away at our customer base and then Sprint started making a play because they knew they could bring in a better service than we could offer at a lower price. Had the city kept up this would not have happened because we had the cable not the telephone wire.
Today these companies have the market share and I think you will agree with me here that this attitude and inaction by this previous mayor put the nail in the coffin for these services.
How could it not when every time the cable system was talked about in this committee concerning the dire need to upgrade and our very mayor’s solution was to just buy everyone in town a satellite dish.
I call that blatant mismanagement of the citizen’s tax dollar’s investment in my opinion.
This attitude is what opened the door to these providers and welcomed them in with open arms.
As it is today the citizens can get a far better service for a lower cost and the city cannot fault the citizens for abandoning ship as I have compared both our services to the competition and it is like night and day and ours is in the dark ages.
I cannot see how the stimulus bill is going to help when we are just talking about it now and for that it must have been shovel ready long ago.
Talk needs to start and soon so maybe this new committee that the telecom committee was enjoined with should be more than just enacted by council but actually go from an plan to do, to a reality to start the talks and find the solutions as the budget committee has made it well know that we have a problem lurking and it must be dealt with.
Until this is sorted out though I feel that the city must take off that lighting fast internet speed advertisement on our city web site as that is false advertisement in the real world and an embarrassment to have the name of my city to advertise it as that in the state it is in today.
Now to add to the city embarrassment with a personal note as it seems nothing else works.
I also feel I deserve an answer as to if I can get a 3 meg service the city advertises in the handouts they give new customers as a package option.
It’s been over a year now and all I want is a yes or a no.
I do not want any more excuses and I will get back to you to be forgotten and to ask again to go through the same thing over and over again.
I have had a year of that.
I have gone to the workers and now this is on the council to answer as I have gone up the chain of command so what is the answer.
It is a simple yes or a no.
I am tired of buffering on the technology required today and tired of excuses and council you are now 45 days into my request for that answer.
So someone please step up to the plate here.
Cody
Cody,
As you know the radios in use have only so much through put, maybe three mgs are available under ideal conditions but probably only then. We all have to share what's there, at this time there just is no more.
as to being an internet provider, I've never considered the city to be one, just an orchestrator or several services that make one up. Although the through put leaves much to be desired, the customer service is light years ahead of what I've had elsewhere, and that from guys who are doing it in addition to being linemen, and that being their first obligation to the city. I think that the council should decide if it wants to set a direction or just let this whole thing drift aimlessly until it becomes a beached whale. Personally I think that the most important thing this city could be looking at is the loss of water through leaks in the system, and how to effectively replace an 80+ year old system that's prone to catastrophic breaks, buts that's just my opinion.
Robb
Robb
Yes Robb you are correct about the radios.
It is physics if you do the math and we both know that is one of the problems.
X amount of customers paying for X amount of bandwidth by contract and a bottleneck (the radio) not at the control of the customers to get their money’s worth is not only a customer service problem it is a provider problem being the city in this case as they put their name on it.
This problem has been here since 2000 if I remember when the City changed bandwidth providers from our dedicated T-1 and ZCorum’s equipment to Sawnet and their equipment.
It has plagued this service for years so just when is the city going to address the problem because right now the customers are being fleeced?
Now this setup may have worked well in the beginning but for example with technology today to stream a HDTV video now requires a 3 meg minimum internet connection (the basic standard today) Windows media is now requiring more and more so just how many customers can our 3 Meg network bottleneck support?
Then we have the gamer requirement, the various different formats for streaming, flash, quick time, real, and the like which all require more so how many can our network support for them?
Let’s not forget the peer to peer folks who take all they have and I can go on and on.
Then the question is how many customers at the supposed 1 Meg or whatever service we pay for now all sharing this 3 Meg bottleneck can our system truly support?
Is this fair to the customers who pay above the normal rates for the service to not at least get the contracted service they pay for?
This same type of management led to the sad state our cable TV is in today.
Now I can also feel correct in saying that by asking if I can get an answer and being ignored as I feel I have for over a year now that is not only bad customer service it is a blatant disregard of the customer as well as total disrespect of the customer.
Concerning the linemen I have no complaints with that department and problems I have had with them where not in their control as I know that the City has thrown them to the wolves doing a job not in their job classification because they do not have the formal schooling and training required to be doing these jobs. I cannot fault them in any way. They are not licensed to do this work but I will say at least they try! That is a council problem which was pointed out to the city when this internet was in the planning stage as you know.
I am in full agreement that this is in the hands of council and I have left it there and might I say to no avail.
People are abandoning ship right now and that is why the budget committee came forward on this issue so will council?
The ship is sinking so do we abandon ship?
I thank you Robb for responding to me directly as maybe this kind of discussion hopefully can awaken council to do something finally as we put it on main street and air their dirty laundry in public.
I also agree with you on the water infrastructure issue’s we have. A few years ago one of the major water pipes busted at the end of my street causing a giant sink hole and larger one after the city repaired it in which the city workers were right on it and they followed through with repairing the street and I know firsthand the condition we are in. It is bad.
This problem is no different though than the TV and the Internet. Until council figures out a plan of action and deals with it then we are where we are.
All the citizens can do is to wait for all of it to be sucked into a giant sinkhole unless council starts figuring out that it takes more than three hours every other Monday and a lot of capitol to resolve all the issues the city has.
Looks to me like life preservers might be a citizen plan of action?
Cody
RUTAwKIN2ME? said...
Your observations are spot on, Cody. But let me point out that problems like our failing cable/internet and our crumbling water mains, both vital to our community do not get the attention of our Mayor, CA or CP because there are no GRANTS involved. "Where's the Beef?" is their first question. They would rather be throwing our paltry matching funds at a new PLAN, or ANALYSIS, or STUDY or TOYS for the Fire Chief. These things put jingle in their jeans.
It is a good point. Where do we get the money to pay for these improvements? Hood River did just get a grant for their water system. The grant required that they raise their rates by 17%. Now they may have the highest water rates in the gorge. Would we support that kind of rate hike?
Upgrading the radios isn't going to require a grant. It is a change that can probably fit in the current budget and needs to happen soon. But is it more that just a bandaid? The bigger question is about our capacity to handle new technolgy that Cody mentions and that we have yet to see. System upgrades require an investment in our cable infrastructure. RUTa is right to suggest that grants aren't going to solve this one. Would we agree to a rate hike for cable? If not, where do we get the funds for an upgrade. Is it worth saving the system if private options currently offer a better product at competitive prices?
Lance I suppose that would depend on what the cost and level of service is compared to the private sector.
Then I believe the citizens would have to have assurance that this city is not going to waste their investment again.
The radio issue is just the start of the problem.
I am not so sure that the city does not have the radios already as I was told last summer when the city was working on my 3 meg problem and I pointed out that problem that the city has 2 larger ones but a problem from Sawnet was going to have to be resolved first and I was told that those radios would be put up then.
I am on hold and awaiting an answer on what the city finds out from Sawnet from what I have been told over and over.
What I can only suggest is find out what the problems are and put it out on the table.
Then bring the pros in to see what it is going to cost to pull this whole thing off and see if it is feasible and realistic.
In these financial times I do not see any grants to help unless they are private and floating a bond might be an option which would leave the final decision to the voters but we have to be competitive with the private market and be able to pay for it without effecting our existing services which are in dire needs as well.
I know one thing and I am sure that I am not alone here but this borrowing from Peter's pocket to pay Paul's debt’s has got to end as this is why we are in this boat over and over again. We need to see what these services are doing on their own accord. That is called fiscal responsibility.
What this city needs to do is with exception of the general fund set up separate fund for every service and department we have and attach a statement of intent and purpose and unless that intent and purpose is not a part of that fund that money cannot be spent for any other purpose then maybe next time we will not be in the boat we are in.
It is this type of transferring of funds that has been going on for years that creates these kinds of problems and puts our electric rates at these inflated rates and keeps other services from being able to flourish.
Implement a work order system, a purchase order system, a job/project number system and a inventory system and combine all of these to work in harmony on each and every project in every department and sub department of this city.
Do that and you can track anything down I could give a lecture on the benefits of these simple systems and there will be no more “I cannot tell you what it is going to cost” like I saw at the last meeting for example as at least it can be narrowed down from something like 130k or less and most importantly you get accountability. I am not picking on anyone here but I know these city employees do not have the tools to figure those answers out and I am sick and tired of all these needless studies we pay for because we do not use simple tools taught in business and project management 101.
Senseless fees like this cost services somewhere and I would much rather our tax dollars stay in our city and be put to a better use.
Cody
I feel that our citizens are at what I like to call a Prop 13 stage (in honor of the infamous California Prop 13.)
Overburdened by costs and too many cuts, the average citizen cannot differentiate between them and comes to this stage. It is, "I can't control it, I have no voice in it and all I can do is just say no." And they just say no, again and again. It doesn't matter what it is or how badly we need it. They just see that they have no more money to spare.
I agree with Cody that the most important step is to get a handle on the money. It is criminal that our Fire Chief has run up such a large comp time. It is foolish to not have a work order system in place, even if it means getting a new one, it is asking for trouble. the constant shell game of guess where the money came from that the City Administrator plays has gotten old. Even the Budget Committee and Council members were confused while voting on the new one.
I have said it before, it is not what we do but how we do it that is wrong. It is slowly taking the heart out of all of us.
I'd like to see the entire problem with the network done as a flow chart or possibly boolean, so you could see all the possibilities and where they might lead,there are just to many options to be able to keep it all in your mind. As to the funds, I believe some are dedicated, some are not, keeping them straight is difficult. Arni Kononen always seemed to have a good grasp on this.
Robb
Boolean? Boolean what? Function, logic or networK? Wouldn't a partial differential equation do the same? Yet, I would think think that this is simplistic enough for a simple flow chart. it's not rocket science you know...
I will wager that you will find that the most economic and reasonable response would be to embrace basic capitalistic principles and abandon the system. We just don't have the resources to upgrade to the levels required to compete.
Dang it, you got to quit a usin them there dadgum three dollar words. Us folk here in CL dont know what ya'all is talkin bout. The nearest Boolean alley is up in Hood River and I aint even a gonna talk about no flow chart.
Another capitalist principle would suggest that government shouldn't be competing with private industry. Government in this case is small in comparison to private industry, but it also appears to be less efficient.
One concern might be that without our cable offering, satellite providers could begin to raise their prices. In general the industry seems to be balanced with cable companies competing against satellite systems. If we abandon the system will that adversely affect the customers?
Hello Lance?
Read the previous posts. We have already effected the customers adversely. It is like teaching American capitalism without touching upon Ayn Rand. This is an area in which we have no horse to ride. We are unable to compete with the other satellite and cable systems without infusing a great deal of money and time into a system currently used by how few people?
And Anonymous? Taking pride in ignorance is self-defeating. So, how about a low-flow chart?
What are we trying to do? Who are we competing against, do we want to be all things to all people? Do we just want to serve our town and those businesses who come here? How do you know how much it will cost when you haven't even defined what we want to do?
Robb
Cody has done that already. Really Robb, give it up, admit to yourself that there is a good chance that the casino/resort may not come. Think for just one blessed minute that we are a town of only 1050 and we cannot afford to be all things to all citizens. Just try, do us all the favor of realizing that we just might have to stop accepting welfare give-outs (otherwise known as grants) and accomplish something on our own. And pay for it.
Okay, grants are not welfare give-outs! Much of my education was thus paid for. There is so much money available if we but had a competent grant-writer.
Post a Comment