Austin City Council wasting your money to support their political agenda (subsidized, cost of)

[veloman777]

I'm happy to pay $5 more per month for our electricity which is Austin Energy Green Choice - TX wind power.

I'm not sorry that I value breathing cleaner air. And my income is in the 'poverty' range.

I call absolute BS on anyone that says $5/month is going to break them.

[Austinite101]

I don't think it's a waste at all, I'm glad our council voted for this.

[Westerner92]

I think I get it. It's only an "agenda" when the democratically elected council does something you don't like.

[TexasHorseLady]

Originally Posted by Westerner92

I think I get it. It's only an "agenda" when the democratically elected council does something you don't like.

But isn't that the case for both sides? Sure seems like it.

[verybadgnome]

What I find interesting is all the focus on COA when Georgetown and Pflugerville have probably larger projects on a per capita basis:

Pflugerville trying to build nation's largest solar farm

Georgetown Goes All In on Renewable Energy | The Texas Tribune

[Roadking2003]

Originally Posted by Westerner92

I think I get it. It's only an "agenda" when the democratically elected council does something you don't like.

It's an agenda when they waste taxpayer money to make the city council look good while achieving their green goals.

[Roadking2003]

Originally Posted by verybadgnome

What I find interesting is all the focus on COA when Georgetown and Pflugerville have probably larger projects on a per capita basis:

Pflugerville trying to build nation's largest solar farm

Georgetown Goes All In on Renewable Energy | The Texas Tribune

I don't buy my high priced electricity from Georgetown or Pflugerville.

[pop251808]

Originally Posted by Roadking2003

It's an agenda when they waste taxpayer money to make the city council look good while achieving their green goals.

Achieving goals to reduce use of fossil fuels is a worthwhile accomplishment and well worth taxpayer support; if that makes the council look good, then so be it. Low priced energy with many of its true costs passed on in the form of air pollution, asthma, cancer and environmental degradation is not the best or highest good. Sometimes low prices are just plain cheap, to our later regret.

[Westerner92]

Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady

But isn't that the case for both sides? Sure seems like it.

I'm not suggesting otherwise. It seems like there's enough support in Austin for this project that you can't try to spin it as if the council is going against the will of the people like the OP suggests.

[Roadking2003]

Originally Posted by pop251808

Achieving goals to reduce use of fossil fuels is a worthwhile accomplishment and well worth taxpayer support;

Not true at all.