Memos
-
news
cocklebur blog
Archives
- December 2008 (6)
- November 2008 (17)
- October 2008 (30)
- September 2008 (21)
- August 2008 (30)
- July 2008 (26)
- June 2008 (24)
- May 2008 (25)
- April 2008 (23)
- March 2008 (26)
- February 2008 (31)
- January 2008 (19)
- December 2007 (1)
- November 2007 (4)
- October 2007 (9)
- September 2007 (7)
- August 2007 (5)
- July 2007 (4)
- June 2007 (14)
- May 2007 (30)
- April 2007 (16)
- March 2007 (12)
- February 2007 (18)
- January 2007 (13)
- December 2006 (13)
- November 2006 (5)
- October 2006 (11)
- September 2006 (6)
- August 2006 (1)
- July 2006 (1)
- June 2006 (9)
- May 2006 (20)
- April 2006 (16)
- March 2006 (12)
- February 2006 (9)
- January 2006 (4)
- December 2005 (4)
- October 2005 (2)
- September 2005 (2)
- August 2005 (1)
- July 2005 (5)
- June 2005 (4)
- May 2005 (1)
- April 2005 (3)
- November 2004 (6)
- May 2003 (1)
- April 2003 (2)
- March 2003 (2)
- 0 (1)
-
Recent Comments
- Palmetto Conservative on the bcs needs to go, but not with gov’t intervention
- your voter on the bcs needs to go, but not with gov’t intervention
- Palmetto Conservative on Are these workers here legally?
- Mike on Are these workers here legally?
- vin b on cockfight, rabies, junk car, frigidaire bust
- Hannah on p&c: Sanford’s plan to kill income taxes
- Palmetto Conservative on p&c: Sanford’s plan to kill income taxes
- John Warner on p&c: Sanford’s plan to kill income taxes
- John Warner on p&c: Sanford’s plan to kill income taxes
- Ted Nugent on p&c: Sanford’s plan to kill income taxes
- Palmetto Conservative on p&c: Sanford’s plan to kill income taxes
- Hannah on p&c: Sanford’s plan to kill income taxes
- Gene on p&c: Sanford’s plan to kill income taxes
- Palmetto Conservative on p&c: Sanford’s plan to kill income taxes
- Gene on p&c: Sanford’s plan to kill income taxes
Pre-filed Bill S. 0085 municipal utilities
This bill will requires any rate increase that a municipal utility would like to impose on customers outside of the municipality’s corporate limits must be approved by the Public Service Commission. This would put all utilities operated by municipalities serving customers outside the boundaries under the jurisdiction of the PSC.
In ‘04 I cosponsored legislation that would guarantee equal rates for all customers. After nearly 2 years of negotiations with city representatives, I decided to try a different angle.
In my district, I have constituents that purchase water from the City of Anderson that live outside the city limits. They are charged higher rates than the residents living within the city limits. Some cry “taxation without representation”. Are these rates justifiable? That’s debatable, but the PSC has a proven record of fairness.
This legislation would apply to all utilities owned by municipalities serving customers outside of the political boundary.http://www.scstatehouse.net/sess117_2007-2008/bills/85.htm
The attached documents reveal a promise made that was not kept. Back in 2001, when the city was trying to purchase the system from Duke power, they gave us the promise that there would be no dual rates.



December 19th, 2006 at 6:51 pm
Senator Bryant — Thank you for taking charge on this. The Anderson paper had an article today of a councilman calling you “gutless.” Please don’t let their immaturity dissuade you from doing what is right for taxpayers. These obscene water bills are definitely “taxation without representation.”
Don — Silver Leaf Resident
December 19th, 2006 at 6:51 pm
Senator Bryant — Thank you for taking charge on this. The Anderson paper had an article today of a councilman calling you “gutless.” Please don’t let their immaturity dissuade you from doing what is right for taxpayers. These obscene water bills are definitely “taxation without representation.”
Don — Silver Leaf Resident
December 20th, 2006 at 1:12 am
Senator,
I’m a city resident and I voted not to aquire the waterworks. I knew it was not sound and that the city only saw a money maker. Can the PSC oversee the entire utility?
December 20th, 2006 at 1:12 am
Senator,
I’m a city resident and I voted not to aquire the waterworks. I knew it was not sound and that the city only saw a money maker. Can the PSC oversee the entire utility?
December 20th, 2006 at 1:46 am
when duke owned the system they would give you an adjustment during the summer when for irrigation. now the city does not, but you can get a 2nd meter. Is it true that the city charges $800 to get a 2nd meter?
December 20th, 2006 at 1:46 am
when duke owned the system they would give you an adjustment during the summer when for irrigation. now the city does not, but you can get a 2nd meter. Is it true that the city charges $800 to get a 2nd meter?
December 20th, 2006 at 1:52 am
you were on the radio this morning. you said you don’t trust government
a politician say “I don’t trust government”? thanks for your stand on principle!
December 20th, 2006 at 1:52 am
you were on the radio this morning. you said you don’t trust government
a politician say “I don’t trust government”? thanks for your stand on principle!
December 20th, 2006 at 12:09 pm
Kevin,
stay the course!
December 20th, 2006 at 12:09 pm
Kevin,
stay the course!
December 20th, 2006 at 3:02 pm
As a City of Anderson resident, I wish you had discussed this matter with local leaders instead of trying to find a solution all by yourself. This problem needs a cure not a band aid. I wish you would devote your leadership to faciliatating an agreement within our county to fix these revenue problems.
As for you not trusting governement, you are right. If leaders continue to act like Mr. Dunaway and don’t negotiate and cooperate like you did, then our government is doomed.
December 20th, 2006 at 3:02 pm
As a City of Anderson resident, I wish you had discussed this matter with local leaders instead of trying to find a solution all by yourself. This problem needs a cure not a band aid. I wish you would devote your leadership to faciliatating an agreement within our county to fix these revenue problems.
As for you not trusting governement, you are right. If leaders continue to act like Mr. Dunaway and don’t negotiate and cooperate like you did, then our government is doomed.
December 20th, 2006 at 4:02 pm
I’ve added some information to this post. I’ve been talking with representatives from the city for awhile. My view on this issue is not new to them.
December 20th, 2006 at 4:02 pm
I’ve added some information to this post. I’ve been talking with representatives from the city for awhile. My view on this issue is not new to them.
December 25th, 2006 at 1:09 am
Our sub-division is charged a monthly fee per hydrant. This fee does not cover cost for insuring hydrants work properly; but is charged in case an auto accident or other accident causes damage to the hydrant.Auto insurance would probably pay for the property damage to the hydrant. As far as being annexed into the city; if I wanted to live inside city limits I would have moved inside the city limits. I just moved in August 2006 and also learned that if I did not sign the “contract” to use Electric City Utilities water, of which I had no choice, they would\ could automatically use power of attorney to sign it anyway; see http://www.citywaterscam.com for additional information. I guess the “poor\less fortunate persons will get it from all levels of government; be it local, state, or federal.I thank Sen. Bryant for helping us attempt to get this and many more “projects” completed.
December 25th, 2006 at 1:09 am
Our sub-division is charged a monthly fee per hydrant. This fee does not cover cost for insuring hydrants work properly; but is charged in case an auto accident or other accident causes damage to the hydrant.Auto insurance would probably pay for the property damage to the hydrant. As far as being annexed into the city; if I wanted to live inside city limits I would have moved inside the city limits. I just moved in August 2006 and also learned that if I did not sign the “contract” to use Electric City Utilities water, of which I had no choice, they would\ could automatically use power of attorney to sign it anyway; see http://www.citywaterscam.com for additional information. I guess the “poor\less fortunate persons will get it from all levels of government; be it local, state, or federal.I thank Sen. Bryant for helping us attempt to get this and many more “projects” completed.
December 23rd, 2007 at 5:59 pm
I realize this bill is about rate increases, but what about those of us that would be happy to be arguing this problem. We have NO water - our well ran dry due to drought conditions, the water company (Homeland Park Water & Sewer) involved has a water line that ends 900 feet from our place and they will not run water for 1 family and if they could it would cost us a fortune. We were told to get up a petition and have it signed by homeowners on the street, they wouldn’t give a price to us and there are only a few owners, because one of them has 5 rental properties and he would rather have his renters live rent free than to pay for a water line.
We were told to drill a deeper well, what good is that if the conditions persist? As of now we have to get water from a car wash just to perform everyday necessities (limited).
What rights do we have?
We can’t be the only family out of water and if the drought persists what about the other families who will be running out, do we all get ignored? Has it come down to survival of the fittest?
Do we wait until a certain percentage of people run out an then hope for help?
We need help, not 6 months from now, not a year from now - but now
Pam - Homeland Park, Anderson County Resident