JUNE 14, 2015 LAST UPDATED: SUNDAY, JUNE 14, 2015, 1:21 AM
BY DAVE SHEINGOLD
STAFF WRITER |
THE RECORD
A proposal to raise gas rates more than 11 percent over five years to help pay for $1.6 billion worth of upgrades to the region’s power grid is scheduled for public review Monday in Hackensack.
At 3:30 and 6:30 p.m. in the Bergen County Administration Building, state regulators will take comments on a proposal by Public Service Electric and Gas Co. to raise residential natural gas rates 11.2 percent over five years to replace hundreds of miles of aging, leak-prone gas mains and tens of thousands of gas connections to homes and businesses in its northern and central New Jersey territory, including parts of Bergen and Passaic counties.
For PSE&G, the state’s largest utility, the project would be its second major improvement proposal in the past three years.
The increase would gradually raise the average residential bill by $8.60 a month from 2016 to 2021. Small businesses, such a pizza parlor or a laundry, would see increases of about 8.2 percent, or an average of $13.46 per month, although PSE&G said increases were likely to be offset by continuing drops in the price of natural gas, which makes up the majority of gas bills in New Jersey.
The project would mark the first phase of a 30-year plan, which includes possible additional rate increases beyond the first five years, to make gas distribution safer, more durable, and better able to serve modern residential and commercial needs.
The plan comes fresh on the heels of the state Board of Public Utilities’ approval in 2014 of PSE&G’s Energy Strong program, which uses annual rate increases to help fund $1.2 billion worth of upgrades, mostly to the company’s electric grid, over three years.
https://www.northjersey.com/news/business/hearing-monday-on-hiking-gas-rates-1.1355640
Are the rates going up to pay for all of the extra duty work this will create? Rate payers bear the cost of both grid upgrades, and the hourly rate for extra duty work, plus the fuel & depreciation on the police vehicles and the cellphone bills racked up during all those hours of protecting us from PSE&G employees… No wonder the unions don’t want specials doing this work.
Paying for the installation of the enormous utility poles that were installed.
Still miserable 10:36 ? You know as well as I do your position is BS. Your just jealous and petty because you can’t do it too. If PSEG didn’t hire cops you would not see a decrease in cost, that savings would be passed on to the shareholder as PSEG is a publicly traded company, so take your bleating elsewhere.
I thought these improvements were paid for by the federal stimulus money that PSEG applied for and received? So 8:11 your saying that the utility’s shareholders come before the customer?
I should have gone into the energy supply business…
How can this be possible… I thought all of those ugly utility pole solar panels would significantly feed the grid and reduce our energy costs.
Wait; What; Were we lied to??
8:11 is in the extra duty business and none of us can do it because he’s got a lock on it. Talk about bleating BS.
To Breath of Fresh Air @ 8:11, if it’s good for the union its bad for taxpayers. Specials are good for taxpayers which is why you call them BS. I’m sure you’ll also say specials endanger our public safety. What a crock of BS. Clearly the unions want extra duty, which is bad for taxpayers and ratepayers in the end.
To 11:24 and 8:28 I am not in the extra duty business I am self employed, and republican. How ever specials used as replacements for full time cops undermine the quality of the work force much like replacing RN’s with nurses aids. I live in the town and to put extra cops on the street is a good thing. When I asked the previous village manager about the cops on extra duty he replied they are not on time and a half they are working a contractor rate that is significantly less than time and a half for most cops, their benefits are paid regardless of whether or not they are working for the town or a contractor or sitting at home. Lastly I spoke with a PSEG rep who stated they need the cops in this area because of the entitled arrogance of the motorist’s who just disregard civilian flagmen.
still doesn’t answer why what’s good for taxpayers is bad for the unions who demand the extra duty work in the CBAs…. very dubious comment too that specials “undermine the quality of the work force”. Can you post any evidence of that ?
Having cops work extra duty @ contractor rate instead of time and 1/2 is a good thing for the taxpayers and the duty OT.cops get to work the extra duty jobs. There is nothing dubious about the quality of specials they receive less training, have lower performance expectations, and I’ve been told up until recently they weren’t required to pass psyche exams. Lastly if you talk to the older cops some of who are retired they could tell you about the problems with specials and auxiliary police
6:11, despite claiming you are self-employed, can you please explain why you know so much about the specials now being required to take psyche exams? That’s a union ploy to discredit new ideas by questioning competency even if its just here-say or rumor, i.e. “I’ve been told that…” That’s union 101 to discredit any challenges to the status quo. It’s amazing how anyone questioning the status quo draws out these union-like responses on blogs like this. Of course older cops will tell us of problems with specials – they are a threat to the extra duty work they enjoyed and their sons and nephews enjoy today… it’s called self-interest. The facts are that the extra duty is NOT good for taxpayers when you add in administrative fees for police side jobs, and vehicle fuel, depreciation wear & tear, and cellphone usage while the cops are supposedly “off-duty”. Specials would offer a significant savings given 2015 Police direct salaries and wages are up more than $400K due to contractual obligations and OT. If we have a staffing issue that is leading to excess OT, then why is it good for taxpayers having off-duty cops doing extra duty work when taxpayers also have to pay for OT for regular duty work as well?