2011

Water Meeting

Against my better judgement, I agreed to go to a meeting with Theresa Stehly, Kermit Staggers and other concerned citizens at city hall to talk about water rates with Public Works Director, Mark Cotter, Water Super, Greg Anderson and Sewer Super, Trent Lubbers. The meeting ended about 30 minutes ago.

Before I get into the meeting itself, and what I took from it, I first want to talk about meeting with our public officials. In defense of Mr. Cotter, he did tell Theresa we had 30 minutes. Also in Mark’s defense we was very polite about it. But while Mark and Greg were discussing the issues with us, Trent kept writing little notes, fidgeting and making faces. Sorry, Trent, but we pay you, (Almost $94,000 a year) you have to hear us out. I found his behavior unacceptable, but not surprising. Like little kids in a sandbox they like to pout when they don’t get their way. I don’t think we took anything away from them except about 35 minutes that we are ultimately paying them for anyway. The meeting actually cost me 60 cents in parking meter fees.

The MEETING

I actually learned a few things, but mostly some things were confirmed to me that I already knew about;

• There IS a sliding scale on water rates based on conservation (still not sure how it works)

• The philosophy before watering restrictions were put into place was, SELL AS MUCH WATER AS POSSIBLE!

Conservation is a good thing and while the 3 directors bragged about conservation it was confusing because they are charging us higher rates because we need to fix infrastructure? Huh? If we are using less water, shouldn’t our rates be lower because of less stress on infrastructure? Seems like we are paying for the sins of the past.

• As Kermit put it to me after the meeting. “The city is essentially penalizing us for conserving.” See, while Greg bad mouthed the old way of doing things, selling as much water as possible, he was unable to show us that conservation is saving us any money.

• I brought up the 2nd penny and how it should be used for infrastructure. Theresa also brought up several ‘unneeded’ projects in the city that the 2nd penny is paying for, which got an interesting response from both Cotter and Anderson, “You’ll to talk to those departments about that.” So it seems each department fights like a bunch of little kids over rootbeer hard candy thrown from floats at a parade. Shouldn’t these departments be working together on the CIP budget (which they do). So why did they try to make it sound like they don’t?

• Lewis & Clark. According to Greg, L & S has cost us $84 million so far. L & S is their biggest argument as to why our rates need to increase. So as we were getting up to leave I asked them, “When will we use L & S to it’s fullest capacity?” Greg told me that L & S is really expensive and is only for emergency reasons (no kidding it is expensive, we have dumped $84 million into it and haven’t got a drop of water). Mark laid out that they will use more of the water each year gradually, with NO date when we will be using it to full capacity, if ever. And here is the crux of the water rate increase. Our rates are being increased to pay principal and interest on a pipe we don’t have yet, and when we do get it we won’t use. Huh?

I didn’t want to get into the tax shifting and the events center during the meeting, even though Theresa touched on it. I hopefully will get a chance to talk about that at the council meeting tonight. Item #32.

2008 Water Audit

The 2008 Water department audit is very telling on many levels. Ironically, it was the last full audit of the water department. I found the highlighted paragraph below and the expenditures interesting;

We paid for water upgrades using CIP money. Why? Because that is what that money is for INFRASTRUCTURE! Something else you don’t see in this paragraph is any mention of violating state or federal laws by doing this. Why? BECAUSE IT IS NOT ILLEGAL! This sudden shift to pay for upgrades using fee money IMO is an attempt to shift sales tax dollars to help pay down a new Events Center bond. I don’t know about you, but the timing couldn’t be more suspect. While the mayor has been preaching about NO NEW TAXES to pay for a new EC, he fails to mention the fee increases, not just in water and sewer but also in Parks and Rec, and other departments. While he talks about prudence, he is quickly becoming one of the biggest proponents of tax increases of any mayor we have seen in the recent past. I’m sorry mayor, but any fee paid to a governmental agency is something I call a TAX. Water rate increases IS a tax increase.

Private donors or not, SF taxpayers will have to bond for the ENTIRE AMOUNT on the Events Center

A letter to the editor today pointed out something that a lot of taxpayers may not know;

If Huether expects voter support for this project, he must be upfront about all of the financial aspects. He mentions private donors, but if they pledge to cover a portion of the costs but make payments over several years, then bonding will have to cover those dollars in the early years in addition to the dollars not provided by donors.

The letter writer is correct. Even ‘IF’ we secure ‘SOME’ private donors for the EC, we will still have to bond for the full amount and pay for the entire project out of those bonds. The letter writer also points out another kerfuffle on the issue;

Sioux Falls City Council members and all voters need to make clear to Mayor Mike Huether that he will not be able to get by with quoting only the construction cost of the proposed events center.

The full cost of any such project likely will be as much as twice the $100 million cost the mayor constantly quotes.

He has not yet told us what the costs will be to create all that extra parking as well as the legal costs, the costs for creating the bonding arrangements, the interest payments on the bonds and the cost for all the equipment and technology in the building, not to mention all the studies already completed.

Wonder how Mike will weasel out of this one. He could pull a bait and switch. In other words at the time of voting he could tell voters we would be bonding for $110-$120 million. But once the EC is approved, there is really nothing stopping him and the council bonding for more. Why do I suspect he will do this? Because he is constantly changing the price tag and using different excuses as to why. The other day it was because steel costs are going up. I agree with this letter writer. Huether better put all the cards on the table and tell us the true cost before we vote on the issue.

Mayor’s 4th of July Picnic is going to be pretty rockin’

I got this insert in my water bill today and noticed Sioux Falls’ most kickass R & R band will be playing the main stage, The Blues Bashers, or as the city calls them the Blues Basher Band. I asked Rocco if I could write the playlist, but that probably won’t happen. I told him it will probably be the largest SF crowd he has ever played for besides JazzFest. They feed the first 5,000 for free, and the stage will be setup next to the food line. I think they should open with this tune;

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fQ4NFsw4bOU&feature=related[/youtube]