Street light issue discussed by residents, city officials
The city's decision to shut off 70 street lights in order to help save money was discussed at a recent Finance Committee meeting. City officials and residents shared their opinions and both sides were open to suggestions on how to improve poorly lit areas while maintaining cost savings.
City Administrator Lisa Kuss explained that Clintonville operates 712 street lights each night. The city chose to reduce that amount by about 10 percent, shutting off 70 lights, leaving 642 lights in operation each night. The move will save the city about $7,000 annually.
"Light reductions were a joint decision between the following departments: Police, Utility, Public Works and Administration," Kuss explained. "All elected officials were informed prior to the change."
While some lights were turned off, Kuss pointed out that all main streets and intersections remain fully lit. She also presented data showing that Clintonville still has a better street light-to-citizen ration than many like cities. For example, Shawano uses one light per every nine people; Clintonville uses one light per every six people. That breaks down to .156 street lights per citizen-a better ratio than New London (.104), Shawano (.012), Whitehall (.131), Brodhead (.136), and Baron (.153). These cities were chosen for comparison because they are either close neighbors to Clintonville and/or similar in size to the City of Clintonville.
Kuss also explained that cost savings from turning off the lights comes from pole rental expenses-not from electricity usage expenses.
Many residents at the meeting stated that they respected the hard work it takes to balance the budget, but felt that turning off street lights was not a wise decision.
"I keep hearing people say, 'Oh, you don't even miss them', but some also say it's completely black in their neighborhood," said resident Jeremy Durrant. "There are some inconsistencies. At the corner of Eighth Street and Memorial Circle, there are 40 lights within 7/10ths of a mile. That's not needed."
"You've worked hard to create a good budget in bad economic times," said Paul Eberhardt as he addressed the Finance Committee. "Is it perfect? No, but it's workable."
Joy Erdmann said she agreed with Eberhardt, but was not happy with the street lights being reduced. "I'm not sure how you decided which ones to turn off," she said. "I don't feel real safe anymore."
Some residents, like Fred Krueger, asked if some lights by Fleet Farm could be turned off instead of those in residential areas. Kuss explained that the lighting on Hwy. 45 is controlled by the Department of Transportation (DOT). The city has requested that they be given permission to turn some of those lights off, but ultimately the decision is up to the DOT.
Other residents like Carol Metzger felt that safety is a big concern now that the city is darker in some areas. "Our house was broken into years ago," Metzger said. "One feels violated after something like that. The police are plenty busy, and I think turning off these lights was a rash decision; $7,000 is a small price to pay."
Bill Novak, John Moericke, Lucy Putnam, Kris Straumann, and Samantha Werth also expressed their concern over the issue and asked that the lights be turned back on or for another solution to be found.
Timers, LED lighting, and allowing residents to mount their own lights on poles were among ideas discussed, but each of those presents another set of challenges. LED lights are slightly more efficient than the bulbs currently being used, but do not present a significant cost saving if the city were to switch to LED lighting. It was also discussed that LED streetlights are more dim and do not cover as wide of an area as the current lamps. The city had talked about allowing residents to mount their own lights, but that idea grows complicated when considering that one person may want more light and one may want less.
At the City Council meeting on Tuesday, Nov. 8, an 8-2 vote in favor of keeping the lights off was recorded. Alderpersons Jeannie Schley and Gloria Dunlavy voted against the measure. However, the city will continue to look at which lights could be turned back on and which ones could be turned off in order to reach a balance that satisfies residents and results in the same cost saving for the city. The city is committed to seeing a 10 percent reduction in lighting but will review which lights are off or on until an acceptable balance is reached.
City Administrator Lisa Kuss explained that Clintonville operates 712 street lights each night. The city chose to reduce that amount by about 10 percent, shutting off 70 lights, leaving 642 lights in operation each night. The move will save the city about $7,000 annually.
"Light reductions were a joint decision between the following departments: Police, Utility, Public Works and Administration," Kuss explained. "All elected officials were informed prior to the change."
While some lights were turned off, Kuss pointed out that all main streets and intersections remain fully lit. She also presented data showing that Clintonville still has a better street light-to-citizen ration than many like cities. For example, Shawano uses one light per every nine people; Clintonville uses one light per every six people. That breaks down to .156 street lights per citizen-a better ratio than New London (.104), Shawano (.012), Whitehall (.131), Brodhead (.136), and Baron (.153). These cities were chosen for comparison because they are either close neighbors to Clintonville and/or similar in size to the City of Clintonville.
Kuss also explained that cost savings from turning off the lights comes from pole rental expenses-not from electricity usage expenses.
Many residents at the meeting stated that they respected the hard work it takes to balance the budget, but felt that turning off street lights was not a wise decision.
"I keep hearing people say, 'Oh, you don't even miss them', but some also say it's completely black in their neighborhood," said resident Jeremy Durrant. "There are some inconsistencies. At the corner of Eighth Street and Memorial Circle, there are 40 lights within 7/10ths of a mile. That's not needed."
"You've worked hard to create a good budget in bad economic times," said Paul Eberhardt as he addressed the Finance Committee. "Is it perfect? No, but it's workable."
Joy Erdmann said she agreed with Eberhardt, but was not happy with the street lights being reduced. "I'm not sure how you decided which ones to turn off," she said. "I don't feel real safe anymore."
Some residents, like Fred Krueger, asked if some lights by Fleet Farm could be turned off instead of those in residential areas. Kuss explained that the lighting on Hwy. 45 is controlled by the Department of Transportation (DOT). The city has requested that they be given permission to turn some of those lights off, but ultimately the decision is up to the DOT.
Other residents like Carol Metzger felt that safety is a big concern now that the city is darker in some areas. "Our house was broken into years ago," Metzger said. "One feels violated after something like that. The police are plenty busy, and I think turning off these lights was a rash decision; $7,000 is a small price to pay."
Bill Novak, John Moericke, Lucy Putnam, Kris Straumann, and Samantha Werth also expressed their concern over the issue and asked that the lights be turned back on or for another solution to be found.
Timers, LED lighting, and allowing residents to mount their own lights on poles were among ideas discussed, but each of those presents another set of challenges. LED lights are slightly more efficient than the bulbs currently being used, but do not present a significant cost saving if the city were to switch to LED lighting. It was also discussed that LED streetlights are more dim and do not cover as wide of an area as the current lamps. The city had talked about allowing residents to mount their own lights, but that idea grows complicated when considering that one person may want more light and one may want less.
At the City Council meeting on Tuesday, Nov. 8, an 8-2 vote in favor of keeping the lights off was recorded. Alderpersons Jeannie Schley and Gloria Dunlavy voted against the measure. However, the city will continue to look at which lights could be turned back on and which ones could be turned off in order to reach a balance that satisfies residents and results in the same cost saving for the city. The city is committed to seeing a 10 percent reduction in lighting but will review which lights are off or on until an acceptable balance is reached.
More from Community News
- I-S School Board outsources cleaning
- St. Mark’s to hold summer jazz series
- Model train show at Strawberry Fest
- Seniors caught with pot will graduate (16)
- St. Jude Walk slated in Scaninavia
- Spring Cruise Car Show Friday
- Students learn from Food for America
- Main Street options debated (1)
- Vets Home to hold open house
- Tea Party event in New London (2)
1 Comment for "Street light issue discussed by residents, city officials
"
Just one more example of "expert" municipal managers making decisions based on the wrong information.
Street lights do not light "persons", they light linear (or square) feet of streets, sidewalks, and intersections. Calculating [b]streetlights per person[/b] is idiotic.
How many miles of primary streets are in the city? How many of these primary streets intersect? How many (drinking) establishments are open after sundown? How many accidents (or assaults) occur at night on average, and where? Answer those questions, and you know how many street lights you need, and where.
Fact is, you could probably turn off every light and not significantly affect accidents. Everybody has their headlights on, right? But then there will be an accident - and everyone will blame it on the missing lights - even though accidents happen with or without lights.
Bottom line is - the city should have been thinking about the cost benefit of street lights even before there was a fiscal crisis. Waiting for money to get tight makes it look like the city is trading cost savings for accident victims. And, that's their own fault - because they've been [b]WASTING[/b] tax dollars for decades.
lastpercentile Nov 22, 2011 9:45 AM