Laserfiche WebLink
204 <br /> <br />be: 1) sponsored and publicized by the City, 2) administered by the <br />Social Services Department, 3) made up from mostly voluntary contribu- <br />tions from utility customers, and 4) assisting gas customers who are <br />financially distressed. The program would have two phases, the first <br />phase to be implemented in the winter of 83-84 to customers whose gas <br />had already been cut off or was about to be cut off. He added that the <br />proposed program differs from the state fuel assistance program in the <br />following ways: l) contained higher income levels of eligibility, <br /> <br />2) customers would have to pay part of their bill, and 39 the customers <br />who had already been cut off, or were about to be cut off would be <br />served. Phase two would be implemented in the spring of 1984, starting <br />customers off with an annual budget pay plan when bills were low and <br />would be an ongoing program with customers being responsible for part <br />of their bill. It was proposed that the City match dollar for dollar <br />contributions up to but not exceeding $10,000. <br /> <br /> Mr. Conover questioned if consideration had been given to person's <br /> regulating their gas usage or possibly insulating their homes. <br /> <br /> Robert Cox, Assistant Director of the Department of Social Services, <br /> responded th. at the committee had not considered that, and mr. Gunter <br /> added that she felt most people in this situation were in rental property <br /> and were not in a position to weatherize their homes. <br /> <br /> In response to a concern by Mr. Conover about gas customers saving <br /> their gas bills to pay last if they thought they would be subsidized, <br /> <br /> Mr. Sheets said the committee had taken that into consideration when they <br /> compared it to the state fuel assistance plan. Mr. Sheets further stated <br /> that what was being proposed was very low cost and that how well the <br /> program works may depend on h~w well it is publicized. <br /> <br /> Mrs. Gleason asked what would eliminating the requirement that the <br /> <br /> gas had already been cut off do to the proposed program, and Joyce Martin <br /> from the Department of Social Services responded that it would greatly <br /> increase the number of people eligible the first year. <br /> <br /> Mr. Buck noted that the contributions made from the public would be <br /> <br /> tax deductible and asked what the committee was looking for from Council <br /> <br /> at the present time. <br /> <br /> Mr. Sheets responded that the committee was looking for Council <br /> approval of the program and an appropriation of $10,000. <br /> <br /> Mr. Hendrix stated that there were no potential grants to fund this <br /> program. <br /> <br /> Mr. Conover suggested the committee look into alternate eligibility <br /> criteria for recipients of the proposed program. <br /> <br /> Mrs. Gleason asked if the program was successful would it curtail <br /> <br /> the number applying for state fuel assistance. She said she felt it <br /> would be good for the Finance Department to avoid having to terminate <br /> customers and that citizens might like seeing money they contribute used <br /> locally. <br /> <br /> Mr. Hendrix stated that the $45,000 hoped for in the first year ($35,000 <br /> in contributions and $10,000 from Council) would not go far but would give <br /> the public an opportunity to participate. <br /> <br /> Mr. Conover questioned whether the money could be used for some <br /> <br /> <br />