![]() ![]() = candidate completed the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection survey. These are not the opinions of our reporting staff members, who strive for neutrality in their reporting.There were no incumbents in this race. Tell ProEnergy you can not be fooled by its misdirection play by voting no on Issue 7.Įditorials are The Dispatch Editorial Board's fact-based assessment of issues of importance to the communities we serve. The group is operating in the shadows and is hoping you do not see its true intentions: taking this city's money and using it as it sees fit. ProEnergy set its sights on the city of Columbus in 2017 and again in 2019.Īfter years of gymnastics, the group out-maneuvered city officials and weaseled its way onto the November ballot. More: Columbus officials reviewing state Supreme Court order to move ahead with clean energy ordinanceĪt their discretion, the investors were to fund private infrastructure, research and development of "clean-energy initiatives." In 2012, the group now known as ProEnergy was panned for its attempts to push approval of a measure to transfer $13 billion in state bond money to a New York bank account controlled by an unknown group of investors. That money would be controlled by a majority of the list of petitioners on the ballot and held in "an entity to be designated" by the group. ► The proposed Energy Conservation and Energy Efficiency Fund, the Clean Energy Education and Training Fund and Minority Business Enterprise Clean Energy Development Fund would get a whopping $10 million each from the general fund. ProEnergy's would have the discretion to decide which customers received the subsidize and how much it would be. ►The city of Columbus would be required to turn over $57 million from its general fund for the so-called Clean Energy Partnership Fund for the stated purpose of subsidizing Columbus electric customers' bills. ►The mysterious and partly cloaked group would be authorized to use "an undetermined portion of the balance" of money received from the city for "the cost of administering distribution of said subsidies." Put plainly, voters are being asked to turn over $87 million without knowing who is really asking for the money, how they will address green energy issues or how much the group will pay itself. "I think the whole thing stinks," he said. Tom Sussi, a former TV reporter and now a city council candidate endorsed by the GOP, said the plan is not in the best interest of Columbus. "It would force the administration and council to make cuts we couldn't just absorb that," City Council President Shannon Hardin told a Dispatch reporter. More: Theodore Decker: Yes, $87 million in taxpayer money is a big ask. They want to distract you with phrases like "energy conservation," "clean energy" and "energy efficiency" to lift money from the city coffers. It is a shameful attempt to confuse well-meaning voters and bilk Columbus out of money that should be used for critical services such as police and fire protection, trash collection, health services, and recreation and parks programs. Make no mistake, green energy is a good thing.Īlso know that this is not about green energy. More: Environmental groups, Columbus Partnership, oppose ProEnergy Ohio green energy initiative They are seemingly hoping that environmentally conscience Columbus voters will be attracted to the shadowy group's stated "purpose of reducing the cost of electricity for customers who live in Columbus with a subsidy to purchase electricity from only wind, solar, fuel cell, geothermal, or hydropower producers." With early voting starting Tuesday, we join a choir that includes environmental groups, city officials and civic and business leaders in warning Columbus residents not to fall in the booby trap that persistent backers of ProEnergy LLC's Issue 7 hope to spring on this community. More: Murky 'green energy' ballot initiative would take millions from Columbus budget 2 ballot, those behind a nearly decade-old grift will wrap themselves in $87 million from blindsided taxpayers robbed of discretion in deciding how the money is spent. If Columbus voters are duped by the "green energy" buzz words they'll find on the Nov. Cons often come dressed in the most alluring ways. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |