 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
Current Issue Links
Ridgecrest city staffers are still seeking a way to meet the $130,000 cut in the 2010-11 approved budget, a
reduction the council had originally hoped to achieve by reducing street lighting.
As part of a plan to overcome a $2.2-million structural deficit in the budget, former City Manager Harvey
Rose recommended turning off some 70 percent of street lighting as part of a plan to reduce expenditures.
Councilman Jerry Taylor ex-pressed concern that the greatest cost of street lighting was not in electricity
use, but in the tariff — which covers the cost of the actual utility pole and is set by the state.
At the last council meeting ,Southern California Edison representatives explained that SCE did not have a
way to select individual poles for lighting and that the most effective way to reduce lighting was to remove
poles. That removal process in most cases will cost some $9,000, plus a much larger fee if the city decided
to replace a pole.
In addition to the financial and logistical challenges to moving forward with streetlight reduction, many
members of the public objected on the grounds of the safety risk such an act would pose.
But new City Manager Kurt Wilson said that the situation creates a unique problem for the city. “The budget
is fixed. I don’t have the authority to change what has already been passed. And while the council has the
authority to change what they’ve approved, they can’t do that without an alternative.”
So staff is continuing conversations with Edison to look at potential ways of saving money. “We are looking
at other programs and services as well,” he said.
“We understand what a significant move [turning off lights] would be, and we do not take that lightly. The
problem is the council is faced with options that are bad or worse. We’ve run out of good things we can do to
achieve that savings.”
Wilson said that he looks forward to the city’s project to implement solar panels at Hellmers park. He
anticipates a significant general fund savings in electricity use and state incentives.
“The problem is there is a delay between now and the time we can start collecting that. But once we do, I
think the annual savings will be tremendous.”
He said on the flip side of that coin is the unbudgeted expenses the city could face — namely the price of a
special election to recall city councilmen. “It is interesting to consider that almost the same savings we could
achieve by turning off our streetlights is the same amount we would spend on that election.”
(See related story).
reduction the council had originally hoped to achieve by reducing street lighting.
As part of a plan to overcome a $2.2-million structural deficit in the budget, former City Manager Harvey
Rose recommended turning off some 70 percent of street lighting as part of a plan to reduce expenditures.
Councilman Jerry Taylor ex-pressed concern that the greatest cost of street lighting was not in electricity
use, but in the tariff — which covers the cost of the actual utility pole and is set by the state.
At the last council meeting ,Southern California Edison representatives explained that SCE did not have a
way to select individual poles for lighting and that the most effective way to reduce lighting was to remove
poles. That removal process in most cases will cost some $9,000, plus a much larger fee if the city decided
to replace a pole.
In addition to the financial and logistical challenges to moving forward with streetlight reduction, many
members of the public objected on the grounds of the safety risk such an act would pose.
But new City Manager Kurt Wilson said that the situation creates a unique problem for the city. “The budget
is fixed. I don’t have the authority to change what has already been passed. And while the council has the
authority to change what they’ve approved, they can’t do that without an alternative.”
So staff is continuing conversations with Edison to look at potential ways of saving money. “We are looking
at other programs and services as well,” he said.
“We understand what a significant move [turning off lights] would be, and we do not take that lightly. The
problem is the council is faced with options that are bad or worse. We’ve run out of good things we can do to
achieve that savings.”
Wilson said that he looks forward to the city’s project to implement solar panels at Hellmers park. He
anticipates a significant general fund savings in electricity use and state incentives.
“The problem is there is a delay between now and the time we can start collecting that. But once we do, I
think the annual savings will be tremendous.”
He said on the flip side of that coin is the unbudgeted expenses the city could face — namely the price of a
special election to recall city councilmen. “It is interesting to consider that almost the same savings we could
achieve by turning off our streetlights is the same amount we would spend on that election.”
(See related story).
Staff explores options to meet $130K cut
By REBECCA NEIPP,
News Review Staff Writer
News Review Staff Writer
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
