|
• MARTIN: The second one is, from what I'm hearing, the politics, and
<br />everybody knows it's not good to lay that billing responsibility with that body because
<br />everybody wants to get re-elected so they're not going to raise the prices, so a
<br />Commission would possibly be in order. But if a Commission were to be brought forth,
<br />now it's back to you, Milton, would you still be willing to undertake the billing, no matter
<br />what the cost would be set forth. In other words, with what you're saying, and I think
<br />that would be the only mechanism that I see to have people pay is, okay, you don't pay
<br />this bill, your water's going to get turned off. It's going to make people think. But, if the
<br />prices were to start going up because a Commission were to set it, and it has to be
<br />realistic to cut the cost and bring costs into a reasonable ballpark, would you still be
<br />willing to help?
<br />PAVAO: Let me understand the question first. You're saying that if the
<br />Sewer Department had a Commission, would we still do the billing?
<br />MARTIN: Would you be willing to help?
<br />PAVAO: Yes, definitely. We already gave our word that we would. We
<br />would do the billing and we'd see what kind changes and modifications to our rules and
<br />regs are necessary to enforce the billing.
<br />• MARTIN: Okay, one last question, I guess, then, and I'll pass it on. As far as
<br />costs to do the billing, would you be willing to assume that, or would you charge
<br />Wastewater, which has no money at this point?
<br />PAVAO: That was discussed between Mr. Boucher and I, and we had left
<br />that kind of open, but the discussion was to, at some point in time, come up with some
<br />equitable reimbursement for our labor.
<br />MARTIN:
<br />RAY:
<br />Thank you, Chair.
<br />Mr. Santangelo.
<br />SANTANGELO: Just a quick observation, you guys. I have a sense that you've
<br />been talking to the Council so much that you're treating us the same way, and we're
<br />totally different. Number one, I don't think it's our job to get involved in a domestic, and
<br />there's a part of this, because I was involved in it before, that is kind of a domestic.
<br />We're about good government, and it's not to convince us on all these little details, and
<br />alts we're going to do is put things before the public. And you put something before the
<br />public that guarantees we're going to get a rate hike, because you took it out of their
<br />hands, and I don't know that you're going to look at something getting passed. So,
<br />we're looking at better government. So, I go back to these pros and cons. Now, one of
<br />the things I'll take, that say, is on my side, is while I was in government, I took a lot of
<br />17
<br />
|