Hensleya1 -- City Question (Columbus: city hall, buying, prices)

[CarpathianPeasant]

Have you explored city hall enough to know something about this? (Check the facebook article with the picture of the pole and wires.)

https://www.facebook.com/cityofdayto...ocation=stream

Governmental Energy Aggregation: Local Community Buying Power - PUCO

[hensleya1]

I recently learned about this myself when researching the ballot issues for the upcoming election.

In theory, I support aggregation in the event it brings lower electric prices for a lot of people. Thing is, unless you choose an electric provider from one of the others (First Energy, Vectren Direct, etc), you'll pay DP&L's standard rate which is something like 9.8 cents per kWh. Funny thing is, DP&L has two tiers of pricing - their default rate of 9.8, and their "DP&L Energy" which is something like 6.9 cents. I'm 99% sure they're both the same company.

They're just charging 30% more to people who don't care/don't know/aren't bothered to choose a provider. In theory, aggregation will leverage the buying power of those people and negotiate a lower rate with the utility. Unfortunately, I don't have much faith that (1) the city government should get involved in this business as they'll probably do a poor job of it and (2) I would assume the only reason why the City Commission did this was because they stand to raise a few dollars for the city.

There's some serious accounting for in the city that needs to be done. Ask why this issue was brought up at the very last second before election day? Do they not want organized opposition for some reason? Is it genuinely a bright idea that nobody thought of until now? These are questions that would need to be answered. Of course, the issue will probably pass anyway as 80% of voters get to the ballot box with no clue of what's going to be on the ballot apart from a party-approved voter checklist.

***

I've done my research, and I'm not voting for anybody for mayor. Esrati and Greer for city commission, even though I only agree with them maybe 15% of the time. I don't have high hopes for the state of politics in this town.

[CarpathianPeasant]

Originally Posted by hensleya1

I recently learned about this myself when researching the ballot issues for the upcoming election.

In theory, I support aggregation in the event it brings lower electric prices for a lot of people. Thing is, unless you choose an electric provider from one of the others (First Energy, Vectren Direct, etc), you'll pay DP&L's standard rate which is something like 9.8 cents per kWh. Funny thing is, DP&L has two tiers of pricing - their default rate of 9.8, and their "DP&L Energy" which is something like 6.9 cents. I'm 99% sure they're both the same company.

They're just charging 30% more to people who don't care/don't know/aren't bothered to choose a provider. In theory, aggregation will leverage the buying power of those people and negotiate a lower rate with the utility. Unfortunately, I don't have much faith that (1) the city government should get involved in this business as they'll probably do a poor job of it and (2) I would assume the only reason why the City Commission did this was because they stand to raise a few dollars for the city.

There's some serious accounting for in the city that needs to be done. Ask why this issue was brought up at the very last second before election day? Do they not want organized opposition for some reason? Is it genuinely a bright idea that nobody thought of until now? These are questions that would need to be answered. Of course, the issue will probably pass anyway as 80% of voters get to the ballot box with no clue of what's going to be on the ballot apart from a party-approved voter checklist.

***

I've done my research, and I'm not voting for anybody for mayor. Esrati and Greer for city commission, even though I only agree with them maybe 15% of the time. I don't have high hopes for the state of politics in this town.

Long before your time DP&L was a respectable company. Still before your time but not so long before, Pete Forster didn't get hauled into court because the company was in good shape, not just otherwise but in regard to how it dealt with customers.

The idea of the city being some kind of a go-between is excellent. Some of those old people and their attitude are still around. The city already handles water distribution (also a utility) and stuff like trash collection. I don't see much reason why it should not be in control of both electric and internet service.

I wasn't looking so much at the cost involved but at the possibility of better service. To take a complaint to Columbus was practically useless due to things like the make-up of the PUCO. The state can force some companies to close up shop, but the state can't close down the electric company.