Friday, June 4, 2010

Vote No

GUEST BLOGGER: John R. Hamada, DC, LAc
Former Trenton resident and business owner

I ask the people of Trenton to consider the greater significance of selling off the suburban part of their water system resource.  I ask that you look beyond arguments of a one time sale helping balance the City budget, or keeping it as it is one of the few revenue producing resources the City has left.  The April 2010 issue of National Geographic magazine is dedicated to the resource of water on our planet, and in the article they explain that by the year 2025, 1.8 billion people will live where water is scarce. Water is becoming the new oil, except that we are finding alternatives to oil; but there are no alternatives to water - for drinking, washing, cooking, transportation, etc. in our lives.

The City of Trenton cannot solve the big picture of the dwindling availability of clean water around the world, but we can keep ourselves in a position of much better leverage when that day does arrive.  He who has the water resource will be king.  The people from New Jersey American Water Company know this and it is part of why their parent company, American Water, and they continues to gather water resources all over the US, as well as recent ownership of the Thames Water Company of England.  They are smart business people.  I suggest that the good people of Trenton also consider doing good business, and not waste away this valuable resource of their future.


Observer said...

I agree that this sale should be stopped, but Mr. Hamada should concern himself with where he lives. I don't need an outsider to think for me.

Robert Wagner,
Trenton NJ

Chrissy said...

I certainly see your point, and normally would agree. But in this case, if Trenton residents opt to sell the suburban pipes, the suburbs will most likely see increases in a short time. And instead of a civil dialog between municipalities, the suburbs will have to deal with a big, faceless, German corporation, one that has raised rates dramatically for the municipalities they serve. For instance, in 2008, they raised rates by 15.2% for their NJ consumers, and, unbelievably, JUST asked state regulators if they could raise the rates AGAIN by another 13.6%. Read more here: Sure, Trenton will lose revenue with this proposed sale, but it's also a really, really bad deal for the suburbs, as well. If more suburban consumers were aware of what's happening here, they'd be urging us to vote no on June 15.

Anonymous said...

Isn't this the same guy who was arested for peddling dope out of his office at Broad and Beatty?

Anne said...

John Hamada lives in Hopewell and so while he does not have a vote, he has a stake in what happens with this referendum and so I am glad he has posted here. It is my understanding that if the referendum passes, the suburban water customers, then served by a private investor owned company, would be subject to new taxes, specifically a franchise tax, a gross receipts tax, an excise tax which combine to total a 14% increase in cost, even if the rates stay the same!

John is actually addressing an issue that is far more important than water rates and the more that is said in that regard, the better!