To: chance33_98
Does Lisa Simpson live in that town?
2 posted on
01/07/2004 8:59:43 AM PST by
smith288
(Secret member of the VRWC elite forces)
To: chance33_98
$35,000 is about 50% of the salary of one bureaucrat. It's pathetic that these government thugs will put the people of the community at risk rather than terminating one of their own, useless fellow employees.
3 posted on
01/07/2004 9:00:06 AM PST by
jimkress
(America has become Soviet Union Lite)
To: chance33_98
We'll show those arrogant voters who's boss!
To: chance33_98
Wait for the first lawsuit after someone gets mugged or trips and falls on a dark street.
Are all politicians idiots or does it just seem that way?
5 posted on
01/07/2004 9:02:02 AM PST by
Mears
To: chance33_98
Yeah. Punish those mean, stingy taxpayers. That'll teach them.
The last thing a local gov't would consider doing would be downsizing staff (or reducing hours) or cancelling junkets or cushy seminars or morale-building retreats.
6 posted on
01/07/2004 9:02:38 AM PST by
Montfort
To: chance33_98
I wish they'd turn off a few of the streetlights in my neighborhood.
To: chance33_98
Ripon, clap-clap, Rip-off!
A shame that the television station couldn't be bothered to state what the budget was last year, or how energy costs which are much lower than they were in the middle of the GrayOuts are suddenly too much for the budget.
8 posted on
01/07/2004 9:04:56 AM PST by
kingu
To: chance33_98
Interesting scam, streetlights could be a little dimmer, however, they serve another purpose, balancing grid load.
Someone in budget is just trying another creative way to scam gullible taxpayers.
9 posted on
01/07/2004 9:05:49 AM PST by
norraad
("What light!">Blues Brothers)
To: chance33_98
With 400 fewer lights to service, they can probably cut a couple of city employees. And then, with those savings, turn the lights back on.
13 posted on
01/07/2004 9:11:10 AM PST by
kevao
To: chance33_98
Full cutoff fixtures that light the ground rather than the sky allow the use of dimmer bulbs. The retrofit quickly pays for itself and results in long term savings.
So naturally, governments everywhere are opposed to them.
To: chance33_98
Hey why don't they just have rolling street light brownouts? The idea may catch on.
I mean, come on, how much light do we really need? I think we have entirely too much light at night.
15 posted on
01/07/2004 9:12:30 AM PST by
Az Joe
To: chance33_98
This is the classic extortion-by-government ploy.
In another city a few years back, they stopped trash collection in City parks (removed the cans) while the parks department hired two new landscape architects.
To: chance33_98
Yes! A victory for those who don't like the lights shining onto their houses and into their bedroom windows, and a victory for the children who might get to see Mars for themselves and a victory for night watchmen who will not be blinded by the glare.
18 posted on
01/07/2004 9:17:59 AM PST by
RightWhale
(Repeal the Law of the Excluded Middle)
To: chance33_98
Lights don't keep you safe.
Lights show the criminals the way in and out.
Save your money, buy some guns.
19 posted on
01/07/2004 9:23:32 AM PST by
G.Mason
(I won't call them Nazis until the second revolution begins)
To: chance33_98
This reminds me of when the Gingrich Congress wouldn't pass Clinton's budget, and Clinton closed the National Parks and other things that would have the greatest impact on the people.
Cheap move.
20 posted on
01/07/2004 9:25:28 AM PST by
narby
(McGovern lost in 72 - and launched the left's takover of the Dem party)
To: chance33_98
hold for later
To: chance33_98
The city's lighting district faced a budget shortfall of $35,000 last year because of increasing energy costs. Lay off a city employee, all of a sudden there is a surplus.
23 posted on
01/07/2004 9:30:54 AM PST by
hattend
(Mr Bush, the Supremes upheld CFR...what's your plan B? Too late to veto, now)
To: chance33_98
Let's see, $17 extra per houshold goes into $35,000 about 2058.823 times. They intend to turn off around 400 lights and leave some on in other areas. I'm curious about how many lights a town of 2000 homes needs...
28 posted on
01/07/2004 9:53:06 AM PST by
trebb
To: chance33_98
This is ridiculous and clearly illustrates that energy costs in this country are way too high.
33 posted on
01/07/2004 10:55:42 AM PST by
1Old Pro
To: chance33_98
I live part time in Palm Springs. The only street lights are in the downtown shopping district and at major intersections. Otherwise, all streets are dark. Very nice. It makes it much easier to see the stars.
The next town over, Cathedral City, tried to raise the utility tax. When the voters voted NO, the idiots on the city council voted to "save" money by not watering any of the city's parks. Of course, it will cost a few hundred thousand dollars to replace all of the dead grass and shrubs but these jerks didn't give a s--t. They were going to show the taxpayers who was in charge.
This is a city realizing a fortune in sales tax revenues from all of the auto dealerships that have relocated to an auto row over the recent years. They built a huge Taj Mahal of a city hall and entered into agreements to subsidize a multi-screem cinema and an IMAX cinema, all of which are costing a bundle each year.
They don't make them any dumber, unless you consider the Dems in the CA legislature who sat on their hands during Arnold's state of the state speech last night, and then sent their two stooges, Burton and Wesson-oil out to tell everyone how they just wanted to raise taxes and spend more.
35 posted on
01/07/2004 11:16:19 AM PST by
CdMGuy
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson