Even though Kingston Mayor Beets originally placed the topic of energy conservation on the City of Kingston Council's agenda, he is opposed to creating a standing energy committee with citizen members.

When the Mayor first raised the subject in our October work session, everyone agreed that we needed to pursue energy conservation. Yet when I suggested a committee to study the issue, the Mayor flatly said, "No" and explained the city employees were doing a good job and thus there was no need for anyone else to work on the matter."

Then Councilwoman DeVall suggested contacting TVA for an energy audit. When the Mayor saw that everyone was enthusiastic about the TVA idea, he agreed to go that route.

I then re-pitched the need to bring in citizens with a fresh point of view who might see what our employees cannot. I again suggested the need for a committee in order to place great emphasize on conservation, making it an on-going, citywide effort, and to create a culture of conservation. The paper quoted me as saying we needed to make a big splash and I meant it.

The Mayor shot the committee idea down and moved to next item on the agenda (as our chairman the Mayor controls the meeting - what is discussed when and for how long).

After the worksession, I went ahead and wrote a motion to form an energy committee. I placed it on our agenda for the next council meeting.

At that council meeting, the majority of council decided to postpone the motion for further discussion at our November work session.

At that work session when the topic came up, Mayor Beets made it clear that he was against a standing committee but would be OK with an ad hoc committee of no permanence(and subsequently of little importance).

Mayor Beets stated that he felt the TVA effort was sufficient for Kingston - eventhough that audit will not address important matters like gasoline and disel useage or light pollution.

Naturally, I re-argued the need for a standing committee with minutes, regular meeting times, etc. as a signal to the world that Kingston's conservation effort was as important as any other city endeavor (like recreation or the old fort).

When I encountered stiff opposition to a standing committee (council said they would be glad to have me chair an ad hoc committee but not a standing committee) I withdrew my offer to volunteer.

For me if energy conservation is worth tackling and if the plan is to be successful then it has got to be a permenant, on-going effort.

Sadly Council made it clear that at this time they have little or no interest in a permenant, on-going energy conservation program, because when I withdrew my support no one else would place the topic on our next council agenda.

However, I will not let this matter die.

I implore each of you to call our City Council members and express your support in making the Energy Conservation Committee a permanent part of our city government.

Energy conservation is not something we can accomplish by a TVA audit once every 50 years and the need for energy conservation will not go away.

A one-time TVA audit will not create a lasting consciousness or culture of energy conservation. An ad hoc approach just won't do to address the the ever-growing need for and importance of an aggressive energy conservation policy.

The only way to do that is to make it part of our culture – in these times energy conservation and energy use policy is simply too important to leave to a hit-or-miss, ad hoc approach.

Given the level of our on-going disagreements, I understand why the Mayor might not want me in particular to be on a committee or board (to date I am the only council member who does not sit on a board or standing committee).

However, I would happily support any other council member who would chair a standing energy committee.

For the life of me, I just don’t understand why Mayor Beets would raise the issue of energy conservation and then thwart efforts to address the matter in a serious, lasting manner.

Explain that to me and I'll buy you lunch!

Brant Williams
Kingston City Council