Create a Stable and Efficient Water and Sewer Facility for Durham

The following was published in the Durham Herald Sun on Friday, May 30, 2008:

Create a Stable and Efficient Water and Sewer Facility for Durham

By Jack Steer, President of Durham Citizens Coalition

Unfortunately for Durham, the Water Management Department is just that. It is one of many departments run by the city. This means that the Chief Executive Officer is the City Manager. It also means that the Water Management budget is subject to becoming involved in the City Council's annual budget discussion "where do we put the emphasis on capital spending this year?". A couple of years ago it was streets that received the go ahead to spend big bucks, so water department spending was reduced. Now, it is the other way around except that streets are still at the top of the list as well, so we get a proposal to increase the budget to the point of requiring a reported property tax increase of 11%.

If the water system owned by the city were run as a business with a board of directors consisting of 2 outside directors and 3 council persons, this push/pull on the water system budget would be all but eliminated. It would take very little to accomplish this. The Water Management department is already staffed with experts in the field. It has its own borrowing capacity through revenue bonds, It has adopted a new billing system that will allow it to have sound budgetary control over revenues and operating costs, and it is supported with other city's water departments for interaction in dealing with water supply problems. The problem of neglected maintenance will, over time, be steadily reduced and at an accelerated pace because utility long term planning and budgeting includes infrastructure replacement as an integral part of operating an efficient and profitable community service.

In other words, it is like any other utility that supplies services to the city and some county residents. There is only one difference, The Gas, Electricity and communications services are run by private companies. With all that is going for creating a water supply corporation, all that is needed is that the city create a company called, say, Durham Water and Sewer, Inc. (DWSI) Shares can be issued representing the city's ownership of the utility. Then, instead of stuffing or starving this utility through political decisions, when the city needs extra money for some new asset, it can sell shares on the open market thus raising funds while still holding onto a majority of shares, and at the same time not incurring additional debt. Yes, shares will sell because the assets of DWSI will continue to rise. Even though the profits will be small, the DWSI Board will want to see to it that the city has an asset that helps the city's financial stability for Bond ratings.

As a private company, with both bond and share money raising capabilities the DWSI would never have to worry about its capital budget, and would not be treated as the unloved cousin during city budget cycles. Revenue rates would have to be approved by the state Utilities Commission after being approved by the DWSI board of Directors of which 60% are city Council persons. The final result is protection of customers, and a sound business approach to operations as well as long range planning and budgeting.

DCC Name Change - What's In A Name?

The following was published in the "Other Voices" column in the Durham Herald Sun on Monday, March 3, 2008:

WHAT IS IN AN ORGANIZATION NAME?

By Jack Steer, Pres. Durham Citizens Coalition


Those who have created names or titles to describe an organization whether government, corporate, non-profit, club, etc. understand the difficulty of doing so. The basic choices include: who do we represent, what do we do/control/aid, what are the objectives, how specific should the name be and should it be an advertisement, represent a challenge, encourage participation, and so on.

This mini essay is about the Durham Citizens Coalition (DCC), formerly called the Durham Conservative Club. The founders considered other names including Durham Liberal Club. The big problem was that the meanings of words change over time and some are even hi-jacked such as "liberal". In Europe today, "liberal" still means what it did in the 18th century, i.e. open government, free trade, and freedom of individuals to seek their fortune without a maze of regulations restricting opportunity. Even currently in The Netherlands, the Liberal Party is the most conservative of Dutch parties. In England the Liberal party is a moderate conservative group distinguishing its supporters from the Conservative party.

The founders of the DCC originally decided on "conservative" because they were targeting fiscal restraint and accountability in local Durham government budget and investment decisions. They found out that some citizens who could align themselves with that overall objective did not want to be labeled as a conservative. Some thought that word described primarily religious groups. Others were concerned that as environmentalists they would not want to be labeled conservatives. Here again, we have a hi-jacking of the word conservative. How can one who embraces conservation of nature, including entire ecological systems, not be called a conservative?

The result of such considerations led the current Board of DCC to create a name that, while making no strident implications, asserts that we embrace a wide voter spectrum in a coalition focusing on good and accountable local government. DCC members do and will continue to make contributions to that objective by becoming active in one of our local "issues" study groups. These, in turn, lead to documents provided to the media and local government officials, and also lead to participation in local government boards, committees, and commissions.

For additional information go to www.durhamcitizenscoalition.com. You may also leave your message to us on our blog page.

DCC Board members Julie Simons & David Berendsen contributed to this article.

Local Government Priorities (Herald Sun Op-Ed 4/24/2007)

Op-Ed published in the Durham Herald Sun, 4/24/2007. (This is one of several op-ed pieces from 2006 and 2007 being placed into the blog as it is being created in early 2008.)

Local Government Priorities

Several weeks ago a couple of the Durham Conservative Club (DCC) members attended a meeting at which the Durham delegation to the NC Legislature was asked to talk about priorities, and field questions about same. There were few issues regarding increased financing for fighting crime, and increasing crime prevention.

DCC has, as one of its key issues, that of this same subject. While it is clear that the city and county benefit from increased spending on growing a great place for economic development, we feel that the issue of crime prevention needs considerably more attention. Following are several areas of insufficient funding by the state and/or the local governments. The problems have been defined by the Crime Cabinet as:

• too few magistrates
• antiquated computer equipment and systems
• a need for providing magistrates with sworn officer assistance
• foot patrols in high crime areas

The revolving door that has been frequently referred to seems to be primarily a problem of the arrest system itself. The remedies are already known, and all it takes is some funding to get it done. The DCC regards this funding to be essential not just a part of a wish list. Most of our members, as does Mayor Bell, feel safe in our neighborhoods, but a few of us do not.

• It is unacceptable that some Durham residents must put up with hearing gunshots most nights.
• It is unacceptable that some families must keep their children off the sidewalks to feel safe.
• It is unacceptable that elders don't feel safe sitting on their own front porches.

We request urgent action by the County Commissioners to spend money to upgrade computer systems, and add several deputies to operate those systems at the side of the magistrates. We request that the City add security level officers at a cost of about 2/3 that of sworn officers to conduct foot patrols in troubled neighborhoods. And, we request the Commissioners to demand from the NC Legislature the addition of 6 magistrates to the current low number of 13.

Other counties with populations similar to ours have magistrate numbers of 16 in Robeson and 22 in Gaston. It would not take much juggling and no tax increases in either city or county rates to provide the judicial system with the tools to keep those arrested for crimes from being released while out on bail or with existing outstanding warrants. Both local governments are in the final stages of the 2007/2008 budget. Now is the time for action at both local government levels. Stating that the NC state should be paying for some of these requirements is not, to us, a valid reason to abandon them.

The results of providing an adequate magistrate operation will most certainly include:

• fewer parolees released on new crimes
• higher bails for repeat arrests
• increased identification of child support violators
• fewer criminals on the street

We will continue to study the issues of juvenile crime, and to assist organizations that can get results.

Contributed by Ruthy Jones and Jack Steer, members of the Board of the DCC.

Integrity of Durham Bond Spending (Round 1 - 2006 Letter to the Editor)

The following letter was presented to the City Council and published in the Herald-Sun in March 2006. The Council has since begun to address the issues raised here. (This is one of several op-ed pieces from 2006 and 2007 being placed into the blog as it is being created in early 2008.)

TRUTH IN BOND SPENDING

Submitted by Julie Simons and Jack Steer

Durham taxpayers deserve to be reassured on sound spending of the $110,000,000 approved quite reluctantly in Nov. '05. The taxpayers are very much aware that they are paying a second time for maintenance that was originally budgeted in annual operations budgets. Transparency of spending and progress on projects was made a major point in selling the bond issue to the public. Following is a made to order solution for assuring that the transparency promised is, in fact, delivered. Let's face it, too many projects in recent years have had time and/or cost problems.

Moreover, the City Council deserves to have proof of accurate information to backup promises of sound management, provide proof that desired level of transparency is evident, and to protect itself from unwarranted accusations. Finally, contractors need to know that they will be watched by professionals in the fields in which the contractors provide service and operations. We have too many examples of contracts where money disappears, work is not completed, or overruns "suddenly" appear. It is time to make certain that such headlines stop appearing in the local press. Of course, the Council must stop allowing change orders to be made on projects as their contribution to maintaining budgets.

Julie Simons noted that Durham Conservative Club members were quite concerned that the City Council consider a new approach to managing the '05 Bond Issue money. We request that money be put aside at the very time the new City budget is being shaped. The request made on Jan. 19 (see below) has nothing to do with the on-going functions of the Annual Financial Audit or the Citizens Oversight Committee. Rather, it is a reality check on sections of projects on a surprise basis to ensure sound spending and contractual accuracy as projects progress.

By budgeting just 1% of the value of the bonds, and spreading the fund over 5 years the City will have $220,000 per year to use for the spot audits that will keep contractors on their toes as to operations/projects coming in on time and within budget. According to the recent "Annual Numbers Report" by the John Locke Foundation, Durham currently has the 4th highest tax per person in NC. Taxes in Durham are rising faster than inflation and faster than population growth. On passing this budget request, the Budget Director needs to make sure that there is understanding as to which line item in the budget refers to this specific program.

Criteria for who and what is to be audited needs to include total project cost, opportunity for slack accountability, and loose (weasel) wording in contracts.

The results of introducing this program will include:

• public trust in the information on the progress on projects,
  
  
• peace of mind for the City Council that they will not be blind sided by overruns,
  
  
• fulfillment of the promise to the public of transparency on the use of bond money.
  

Additional contributors were Bob Appleby and David Berendsen.

Representative Past Meeting Topics

Sept. 25, 2007

• Tracking Politicians -- Bill Peaslee, former NCGOP Legal Counsel
• Durham County Bonds -- Mike Ruffin, Durham County Manager
• Durham City Bonds -- Jack Steer, DCC Pres.

March 27, 2007

• Discussion on Magistrates Situation in Durham County with Newman Aguiar, of Aguiar Consulting LLC and the Durham Crime Cabinet.
• Introduction of Americans for Prosperity, with Francis DeLuca, Col. USMC and Director of the NC chapter of AFP

January 23, 2007

• Review of issues taken up in 2006
• Explanation of 2 citizens committees on bond spending:

• Capital Program Advisory Committee CPAC
• Citizens Capital Improvement Panel CCIP

November 28, 2006

This meeting features a panel on "Truth in Bond Spending". The speakers are:

• Marc Greenspan, Director, General Services, Durham City:
  Explanation of the "Contractor at Risk" program.
  
  
• Susan Shaw, Chair, Capital Program Advisory Committee (CPAC):
  Explanation of the duty of CPAC in controlling costs of 2005 bond issues.
  
  
• Julie Brenman, Director, Budget and Administration, Durham City, Chair of Citizen Capital Improvement Panel (CCIP):
  Explanation of objectives and approach to future bond spending.
  
  
• Jack Steer, President, DCC. Panel Moderator:
  Explanation of the DCC approach to Truth in Bond Spending.

Welcome to the DCC Blog

Welcome to the DCC Blog.

Future entries will present both news about DCC and editorials and opinion-pieces addressing current issues facing Durham City and County.