Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Electric Rates topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Malden council repeals sunset on electric rate surcharges after split votes
Summary
The Malden City Council approved Ordinance No. 3308 to remove a 'sunset' provision that limited collection of certain electric rate surcharges after split first- and second-reading votes; Council members Downs and Jenkins opposed the final vote.
The Malden City Council on March 16 approved ORDINANCE NO. 3308 to repeal a sunset provision governing collection of certain electric rate surcharges, advancing the measure after two separate readings and poll votes.
Mayor Denton Kooyman presided over the meeting where Council Member Beckett moved the first reading and Council Member Coleman seconded. The first-reading poll vote passed 5–3. At the second reading, Beckett again moved the motion and Coleman seconded; the council approved the ordinance in a 6–2 poll vote. Council Members Downs and Jenkins cast the two no votes on the final tally.
The second-reading discussion included an explicit suggestion by Council Member Coleman that the council consider adding an end date for the surcharge collection—an amendment that was discussed on the record but not included in the final motion. Public comment earlier in the meeting included a resident raising concerns about high utility bills; Mayor Kooyman responded that colder weather and household factors such as insulation and use of space heaters can raise bills and said he would review the speaker’s bill individually.
The ordinance language provided on the record repeals the sunset provision and states it supersedes conflicting ordinances. The transcript does not list specific dollar amounts, projected revenue changes, or an effective date for the rate treatment on the public record.
The council proceeded through the ordinance process by recorded poll votes for transparency; the first-reading roll call recorded Dierks, Jones, House, Coleman and Beckett as voting yes and Downs, Grant and Jenkins as voting no. The second-reading roll call recorded Dierks, Jones, House, Coleman, Beckett and Grant as voting yes and Downs and Jenkins as voting no.
Next steps: because the measure passed second reading, the ordinance will take effect according to its stated effective-date provision in the ordinance text (the transcript does not record the specific effective date).
