Home > Political Animal > The Price of a Stamp…

The Price of a Stamp…

By PA

Fort Wayne Reader

2009-11-24

The contentious dispute between Indiana Michigan Electric Power and the city over the value of Fort Wayne’s electric utility has cost the city around $300,000 in attorney’s fees, and another couple hundred thousand or so in consultants fees.

Now, you can add another $45,000 to the list of expenditures. That was the cost of a letter the mayor sent to over 100,000 city utilities customers, explaining the city’s side of the issue.

The letter controversy isn’t necessarily about the amount of money spent — mass mailings can cost a lot of money, obviously, and as we’ve said, this letter was sent to over 100,000 city utilities customers. And it’s also not about what the letter says — the negotiations between I&M and the City of Fort Wayne are in mediation, and both sides are prevented from talking publicly about it; the letter attempts to explain why so much time, money, and effort has been expended on the issue.

What has raised some eyebrows was that the $45,000 cost was taken from the city utility budget. Speaking to Stephen Parker of the local blog Around Fort Wayne (aroundfortwayne.info/blog/) Council member Tom Smith (R-1) said that it was wrong for the Mayor to dip into the city utility funds.

“City utilities deals with water,” Smith said. “Fixing sewers, cleaning up rivers, combined sewer overflow — that’s what rate payers are paying their money for. That’s where all the money should go. Neither the mayor or anybody else should be dipping into city utilities funds to send out a letter about the Mayor’s ongoing battle with I&M.”

Furthermore, Smith points out that the Mayor Henry’s letter was also published pretty much word-for-word as an editorial piece in The Journal Gazette. Smith goes on to suggest that the Mayor should reimburse city utilities, and instead use whatever “pots of money” the administration has been drawing from to pay for consultants, lobbyists, and attorneys. “That’s how that letter should have been paid for. It shouldn’t be taken out of the pockets of people paying their water bill.”