tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7246307564175102370.post128249534381424326..comments2020-06-25T03:10:22.808-04:00Comments on Cory Storch for Good Government in Plainfield: How My Council Opponent and I DifferCory Storchhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14827700290350107786noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7246307564175102370.post-9274947817429859862015-10-27T17:06:48.475-04:002015-10-27T17:06:48.475-04:00Councilor
Your suggestions as how to reduce rates...Councilor<br /><br />Your suggestions as how to reduce rates is appropriate .However, even if implemented they would not yield a significant reduction. The big ticket item is labor. If the PMUA were a private organization it would be bankrupt in short order. Since we are compelled to accept its existence, we must do the best we can with what we have. We must accept that as a Municipal Authority it is in large part a social service provider. That said, the question is how large should the social service component be? It is my belief that the total number of employees could be reduced in the order of 30%, or some 40 people. It is probable that this could be accomplished over a 5 to 7 year period through attrition and retirement. The second large potential saving is the consolidation of the several locations. An overview of the Rock Avenue site suggests that the entire staff could be accommodated in a trailer park, and the Cottage Place Sewer equipment as well. The former prolific use of outside consultants should be reviewed. My conservative estimate of the savings attributable to these modifications is $3,000,000 per year, or approximately $300 per household per year. Bill Kruse<br /> Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7246307564175102370.post-66077616570121318792015-10-26T09:09:00.802-04:002015-10-26T09:09:00.802-04:00You left out the two primary ways rates can be low...You left out the two primary ways rates can be lowered: eliminate the bureaucracy of PMUA or eliminate the bureaucracy's overstaffing. In fact, PMUA has reduced staffing by about 25% since Eric Watson left in 2011. This has translated, along with furloughs and a wage freeze, into holding rates steady despite the obscene payout of $1 million to Watson and David Ervin when they walked away from their contracts and quit. A third way is for the City to pay the actual cost of common services for public properties that is currently being charged to all ratepayers through the Shared System Service Fee, whether they opt in or out of residential service. There has been no transparency about this charge since it was imposed on customers back in 1998. If the City actually paid the bill there would be some accountability added to the process, and municipal government would be less likely to shirk its responsibility of oversight as it has since PMUA and the McWilliams administration secretly gutted the Inter Local Agreement and defrauded the public. A fourth way would have PMUA credit customers for the full amount, or any portion, of the illegal compensation it awarded commissioners with over the years. PMUA's fifth official action after its creation was to ignore the compensation limits in the Creation Ordinance and provide a regal benefits package, over and above the annual cash payment, in direct violation of the Municipal and Counties Utilities Act which empowered these authorities to be created in the first place. If you want real reform at PMUA, you will have to get into the mud and not be content with simplistic panaceas.Alan Goldsteinnoreply@blogger.com