|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
Editorials
Kendall should try again on aggregation : Editorials : Oswego Ledger-Sentinel : Hometown Newspaper for Oswego and Montgomery, IllinoisKendall should try again on aggregation
| 1/10/2013
|
Homeowners in unincorporated Kendall County-including the populous Boulder Hill and Shore Heights subdivisions-are paying roughly about $20 more per month or $240 more per year--for their electric service than their neighbors in the county's municipalities.
Why? Because last November voters in the unincorporated areas of the county rejected an electric aggregation referendum placed on the ballot by the county board. The referendum failed by a margin of 1,237 votes out of 10,899 cast.
Had the measure passed, the county would have been able to seek competitive bids from private firms for the electric power portion of residents' monthly ComEd bills.
After aggregation referendums passed in Montgomery and Oswego last spring, the two villages sought competitive bids and secured significantly lower electric power rates for their residents. The story is the same in more than 450 communities across the state that have passed aggregation referendums over the past year.
Unincorporated Kendall residents are not alone in rejecting the chance to save on their electric bills. Residents in unincorporated Kane County also turned down an aggregation referendum last spring by a margin of 207 votes.
Fortunately for unincorporated Kane County residents, county officials are now actively seeking to place another referendum on the April 9 ballot. Under state law the county board has until Jan. 22 to pass a resolution to put an aggregation referendum on the ballot. The effort, however, faces a major obstacle in the form of a state law that prohibits public agencies from placing the identical referendum question back on the ballot after a failed attempt. However, county officials are currently seeking to have the state legislature create an exemption in the law for aggregation referendums.
We believe the Kendall County Board should also be seeking to put an aggregation referendum on the April ballot. The board is scheduled to hold their first regular meeting of the new year next Tuesday, Jan. 16 in Yorkville. They could pass a resolution placing a referendum on the ballot contingent on the state lawmakers amending the election law to permit the placement of the referendum on the April ballot.
To help secure an exemption in state election laws for aggregation referendums, county officials should also immediately attempt to enlist the support of the county's representatives in the General Assembly, including House Republican Leader Tom Cross of Oswego.
It will take some fast footwork over the next several days, but we don't see why it's not possible. Certainly, the chance to secure potential savings of approximately $240 annually for the county's unincorporated residents is worth the effort.
We believe the county's unincorporated residents would have approved an aggregation referendum last November if they had been informed about the issue. Unfortunately, the county took no further action after placing the referendum on the ballot. If the county board does place an aggregation referendum on the April ballot, it should also plan to mail at least one informational letter to county residents explaining aggregation. Yes, state law does prohibit the board from collectively taking a public position on aggregation, but it does not prohibit them from providing taxpayers with position-neutral information. Many municipalities-including Oswego and Montgomery-sent out informational letters to their residents concerning aggregation after placing referendums on the ballot last year.
If the county's unincorporated voters are given information on aggregation, we believe they will decide they want to save money on their electric bills just like their neighbors in Oswego, Montgomery and Yorkville. The county board should work quickly now to give them that opportunity as soon as this spring.
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
