Bloom / Markell backdoor tax transparency coming to your Delmarva bill

From: Kowalko, John (LegHall)

Subject: Important information

Dear all,

I think this info is worth sharing. Please circulate and distribute as you wish.

John Kowalko

I just want to take a moment to wish all of you a happy holiday season.

 I also want to inform you of a small but significant victory for your rights to transparency and open government. The recent affirmative PSC vote, (resulting from Docket No. 13-250), to have your “Bloom” charge explicitly posted on your monthly bill is a victory for you. After 2 ½ years of meetings and workshops since my original petition for billing transparency was accepted by the PSC we now have an official ruling to include it on your bill. Although this action does not mitigate the circumstances of the fact that ratepayers are subsidizing a private business it may encourage you and others to seek relief from your elected representatives and the Administration. For more info or particulars do not hesitate to call me at 302 547 9351,

We, as public officials, owe a complete, open and honest transparency to all Delawareans especially when we are spending their hard-earned money. Transparency and openness guarantees a public awareness to our actions and is arguably one of the most effective ways to gain public confidence in government actions. In June of 2013 I, along with Senators Lawson and Simpson, filed a petition with the Public Service Commission to have DP&L expand their billing transparency by listing more line items on the individual monthly bills. Two and one-half years later I am pleased to inform all of you that certain charges that have not been readily available or easily calculable will appear on the monthly bill of Delmarva electric customers. The additional surcharge for subsidizing the “Bloom” fuel cell business imposed upon the ratepayers will be specifically and individually calculated for DP&L ratepayers and appear on your monthly bill as a line item/amount. This number has grown substantially from what the General Assembly members were initially led to believe and were told would be the maximum monthly cost borne by them. It is in the best interest of the public to be given an unredacted total of the cost imposed on them to support a private business venture that offers no possible return on investment or benefit to those ratepayers. Although the action by the PSC does not cancel the arrangement with Bloom it is a victory, of sorts, for the ratepayers allowing them to see exactly how much money they (and commercial users) are involuntarily sacrificing to benefit a non-public corporation. Transparency and openness are the only true ways to measure government’s effectiveness or lack of effectiveness because the public will be equipped with a certainty of knowledge to judge their leaders. You can visit the PSC website for further details as listed under Docket No. 13-250 and listen to the Jensen show WDEL podcast where I discussed the decision.

Representative John Kowalko


2 responses to “Bloom / Markell backdoor tax transparency coming to your Delmarva bill

  1. lastDEconservative

    It is breathtaking how many times this fellow, who, by all accounts, appears to be one of the elected elites, turns out to be an innocent bystander to the destruction wrought in Dover! And to always, by HIS accounts, turn out to be a caped crusader for we the stupid, unable, unwashed and drooling, well, it’s just mind blowing!

    Huzzah to whoever, though, IF the Bloom charges do show on the bills going forward (anyone want to take a bet on it not being half transparent, let alone obvious? Tell you what, Kwacko’s preening self congratulations notwithstanding, if the line item says “Bloom,” I’ll be Kilroy’s first advertiser. If it says “Bloom Subsidy,” I’ll campaign for JoKo next go ’round). Reason it won’t be? It will be a monthly reminder to the vast majority of boobus Delawareans that ALL the incumbents should be sent packing.

    “It is in the best interest of the public to be given an unredacted total of the cost imposed on them to support a private business venture that offers no possible return on investment or benefit to those ratepayers.”

    Wouldn’t we all like to see the cost of government, A to Z, itemized and rationalized as to return on investment? JoKo? There’s a windmill you can (pretend to) tilt at!


    • Publius e decere

      Let’s start with johnnie’s use of state IT assets. His use is a fact. So now it is a matter of compliance with rules and standards. Setting aside his belligerent statements about it, let’s ask johnnie to save the public some money by not using that state system for personal peccadilloes and perfidies. Conduct his inflammatory rhetoric as Citizen JoKo from his account from is own JoKo-paid broadband account rather than as Rep JK — from a state-paid boadband account. Letting the state pay for his personal vendettas is insulting to the taxpayers.

      Or at least try to save us money by daily cataloging all of JKs email and blog postings through his state account in an easy-to-copy location so that FOIA requests are fulfilled by a mere stroke of the keyboard for $10 (21st century) rather than a massive cascade of printer cartridges for a disrespectful and abusive fee of thousands (so 20th century, like “19thCenturyJohnnie”). And please let’s have him catalog the cost of his IT privileges with the State — broadband at home, IT devices, IT security accounts, etc. Spare us the insults…show us the money and the privilege. We might even accept the privilege if you show it, but if you hide it you are fair game for disrespect.

      ‘Lil KO has complained about FOIA fees. But he has collected more than $1000 ( an abusive amount) from acolytes to pay for a $1800 “abusive” FOIA bill. We will let ‘L-K explain where the $1000 collected-so-far has gone, maybe even ask him for routine contributors-accountability report. But now ‘L-K is complaining about abusive FOIA requests. Really? Kettle = Black. The TinHornDictator of abusive $1800 FOIA requests (along with Brother Kowako) goes nuts. Or is it simply arrogance? Where is the $1000 and what will happen to it .. since it is clear that the %$1800 goal will not be reached.

      As for intelligent queries — they is OK. But to ask for an exhaustive listing of every email ever to exist — and then to call the cost “abusive” — is the height of an exceptional special misunderstanding.

      All of you $1000 contributors … Ask your ‘Lman where the money has gone. Hopefully not to groceries or to Comcast maintenance. Or to blogging fees.