COAST, AFSCME and NAACP join against Water Works sale

COAST joined with AFSCME and the NAACP last week at a public hearing called by City Manager Milton Dohoney on the sale of the Water Works.  The objections:

1)      Ratepayers are being asked to pay $475 million to the City of Cincinnati for assets we already own “because they need the money.”

2)      The new entity created in the transfer would have eminent domain powers

3)      The new entity created in the transfer would have new taxing powers (in unelected officials!)

Once again, COAST has reached across the left-right divide to create powerful coalitions against wasteful spending and excessive taxation.

A copy of the COAST/AFSCME/NAACP brochure is attached.

Would You Pay $475 Million for Assets You Already Own

City Hall Moving to Sell Our Water in 2010

Cincinnati NAACP Media Release

The City of Cincinnati is in the process of selling Cincinnati Waterworks. The Cincinnati NAACP and partners worked to place Issue 8 on the ballot November 2010. Issue 8 passed and does not allow city hall to sell Cincinnati Waterworks without a vote of the people of Cincinnati. The Democrats and some Republicans on Council will vote to place this issue on the ballot for November of 2010. City Council needs 6 votes to place the issue on the ballot. If Issue 8 had failed 5 members of Council could sell Cincinnati Waterworks with no input from the 350,000 citizens that live in Cincinnati. "I am not interested in Cincinnati Waterworks in any shape or form being privatized. I can not imagine a company like BP controlling the water system in Cincinnati," Christopher Smitherman President of the Cincinnati NAACP says.
The city has engaged in the mismanagement of tax payer money for decades. The city leadership has been unwilling to downsize major city departments to bring expenses in line with city revenue. The city leaders are now desperate for money. "Selling off city assets is a bad idea. Selling off our water is criminal," Smitherman says.

NoKY Tea Party for Oppressed CA Farmers

The Situation
In actions that can only be described as lacking the most basic humanity, the U.S. Congress has turned off the water to Central Valley farmers, leaving their land dry, their field's fallow, all in an effort to protect a small 2-inch minnow. You read that right, tens of thousands are now unemployed and waiting in food lines because of the federal government's decision to protect a fish.

The Effect
Not only do we have farmers out of work and on the verge of losing their farms, but this is the 'bread basket of America' and we ALL depend on these farmers for food. Unless legislation changes things in the next few weeks, it will be too late for the Farmers to get water for 2010 and we will begin importing 97% of our food.

In addition, if the environmental policy of the federal government can shut off irrigation water to thousands of acres in California and in so doing eliminate the American dream for tens of thousands of American farmers, what is to stop them from coming to your neighborhood, county or state and doing the same thing to you, your family or neighbors?

How Can We Help
The Tea Party Patriots have decided to take a "Farm Relief and Freedom Rally" road trip to CA and they are visiting Northern Kentucky on the way. Here are the details:

Date: Thursday, November 12, 2009
Time: 3:00pm - 8:00pm, Patriot Bus arriving at 5:00
Location: Richwood Flea Market
Street: 10915 Dixie Hwy
City/Town: Walton, KY

Speakers
Harlene Holland - born in El Progreso, Honduras and now a U.S. citizen, she will address the forms of oppression she is now seeing and feeling in America that she saw in her youth.

Jim Waters - from Freedom Kentucky will address Cap and Trade
Health Care and the Copenhagen Treaty will also be addressed.

http://teapartypatriots.org/FarmReliefFreedomRelay/

NAACP, AFSCME submit City petitions to force water works sale to a vote

Would charge ratepayers $475 million for assets they already own

Would you pay good money to buy something you already own? That’s what the City Manager is proposing with the sale of water works assets to a new public entity. Under the Manager’s proposal, the City of Cincinnati would follow Ohio statutory procedures to form a “Regional Water District.” A Charter Amendment advanced by the NAACP and the labor union AFSCME would force that proposal to a City vote.

Under the Manager’s proposal, after the formation of the new water works entity, the City would enter into an agreement to transfer to it assets of the Cincinnati Water Works in exchange for a payment of $475 million.

Who pays that $475 million under Dohoney’s proposal? The very ratepayers who already own the water works assets. As explained by Dohoney at a June presentation, the sale is proposed “because the City needs the money.” In other words, the sale is a hidden tax increase to feed the City’s unrestrained habit of over-spending.

In response, Cincinnati’s NAACP and AFSCME have circulated a petition requiring that any sale of City waterworks assets be submitted to a public referendum.

“Using the legacy of 100 years of asset purchases by Cincinnati water ratepayers to fund the City’s operating deficit is the height of fiscal irresponsibility,” said Christopher Smitherman, Cincinnati NAACP President. “We cannot allow Council to mortgage our future and our children’s future in this manner to finance nothing other than their open-ended spending addiction.”

COAST will be considering an endorsement of the Waterworks amendment at its September Board meeting.

NAACP, AFSCME Place Waterworks Sale On the Ballot

Why would we pay $475 million for something we already own?

City Council remains coy during this election year
on sale of asset owned by taxpayers

Really, do politicians think we are stupid enough to stand for paying $475 million in higher water rates for assets we already own?

For months now, COAST has been questioning the proposal by City Manager Dohoney to transfer the assets of the Cincinnati Waterworks to a new Regional Water District, and charge the new entity and its ratepayers (that’s us!) $475 million for the asset transfer. City Council members remain coy about whether they will approve the plan.

The NAACP and the municipal workers labor union – AFSCME – have gathered enough signatures to force the asset transfer to a public vote.

COAST has not yet taken a formal position on the Waterworks Petition, but is deeply skeptical of charging ratepayers $475 million for something they already own, and entrusting our entirely untrustworthy Council with that kind of additional money.

City manager Milton Dohoney admitted in a speech in June before the NAACP that the City is pursuing the plan simply “because we need the money.” COAST gently suggests maybe stopping its profligate waste of tax resources might be a better approach.

COAST will take a formal position about endorsing the Waterworks proposal at its September endorsement meeting. All COAST members (paid memberships) will be polled before such endorsement.

NAACP Launches Charter Amendment Campaign Against Water Works Plan

Why would we buy assets we already own for $475 million?

In May, City Manager Milton Dohoney endorsed a plan to transfer the assets of the Cincinnati Water Works to a new regional water authority. From COAST’s perspective, the plan has serious problems, including:

• forcing ratepayers to buy water district assets at a price of $475 million – assets they already own! and
• Giving the Water District the authority to raise property taxes and to take real property by eminent domain.

Read the full COAST analysis here and here. You may read for yourself the Executive Summary of the Advisory Committee report here and the entire report here.

Now, in addition to launching the petition drive to stop Council’s Trolley Folly, Christopher Smitherman and the Cincinnati Chapter of the NAACP have also launched a petition to stop the Water Works plan.

COAST presently is considering endorsing the Water Works petition and helping with the signature gathering effort. E-mail COAST Chairman Jason Gloyd at Jason.Gloyd@cbws.com with your thoughts on the NAACP Water Works petition.

Water Works Deal:

Biggest scam ever or necessary progress?

People that COAST respects have encouraged us to re-think our opposition to the plan to turn the Cincinnati Water Works over to a regional governmental body, controlled by the City. Widely respected corporate executive and attorney Lynn Marmer chaired a panel that drew the plan. Dave Rager, who currently heads the Water Works and is a champion of the plan, is well respected for providing high-quality water at competitive rates. Here, COAST tries to present a more detailed review of the issues presented by the proposal to make the system regional. You may read for yourself the Executive Summary of the report here and the entire Report here.

Major issues presented by proposal:

1. Why would we change now? Currently the Water Works provides some of the best-quality water in the Nation for bargain rates. Why would we change anything? This is an excellent question. Proponents claim that the loss of manufacturing businesses in the region, which use large quantities of water, and the loss of residents, means less utilization and resulting increase in expense for the remaining customers. Because of statutory limitations on geographic growth and uncompetitive City purchasing rules, over time it will not be possible to maintain our quality and competitive rate structure. So, the current good thing may not last and we must change to become competitive. Here, proponents make an excellent point.


2. Why would we pay $475 million for something we already own? The primary objection COAST has to the Water Works proposal is it calls for City Council to sell the plants, pumps, pipes and other capital assets for $475 to the new entity. This is a $475 million windfall for the City of Cincinnati. The new entity will then include the capital payback in its new rate structure. Proponents point out, however, that the ratepayers of the new, expanded system will be a larger group than City ratepayers, or even current ratepayers. Why should the new ratepayers benefit from this asset currently owned by a smaller universe of ratepayers? The logic certainly is fair, but as COAST sees things current ratepayers bought the system once; they should not have to pay for the same asset twice.


3. What about Proponents’ claims rates will still be lower? Because of savings to be had from the efficiencies noted in paragraph 1, above, proponents claim rates will still be lower than they otherwise would be even with the $475 million buy-out of the capital assets. Yes, but COAST is skeptical. The capital pay down will cost close to 15% of current rates. That’s a lot of savings to be attained just to keep rates constant. Moreover, the plan is do-able with zero paid to the City if Council wanted, meaning rates could be even lower.


4. Couldn’t that $475 million windfall be put to good uses? As with so much with government, only half the evil comes from higher taxes (rates). The other half comes from the mis-spending by politicians and bureaucrats. Right now, Council has indicated its support for a wasteful $200 trolley system that will run an annual operating deficit of $5 million – over the objections of a majority of City voters. If Council had $475 million in new dollars, would they spend them on important community priorities like safety, stabilizing the retirement fund, and economic development, or squander them on foolish projects that leave no legacy but debt and operating expenses? COAST posits that the proof is in the puddin’. When Council received $65 million in proceeds from the demutualization of Anthem, it squandered the monies on forgettable projects and now has nothing to show for the unprecedented flood of cash. If Council was forced through the governing documents of the new authority to spend the monies on certain limited uses, is the $475 million price redeemable? COAST is skeptical, but will see how the debate emerges.


5. Why new taxing and eminent domain powers? The proposal calls for the new regional water authority to have the power to place tax levies on the ballot, and eminent domain authority. Councilmember Chris Monzel has declared he opposes the plan for these two reason alone. Moreover, as with the $475 million capital charge, these new powers are entirely optional. The plan can go forward without either. Eminent domain is a tough issue, as utilities need this power to fulfill its statutory duty to provide service to all customers, but why would a water authority need to tax when it can raise funds from water rates? COAST believes planners should eliminate the entirely unnecessary taxing powers.

Many of COAST’s WeDemandAVote.Com partners are adamantly opposed to the Water Works plan. These include the NAACP, Cincinnati Progressive Action, and the Green Party of Southwest Ohio. For example, Josh Krekler from the Green Party wrote this excellent analysis. COAST respects its WeDemand partners and values their opinions. If City Council wants COAST buy-in to the Water Works plan (and we appreciate the dialogue), it will need to substantively address the concerns above and include COAST’s WeDemand partners in the dialogue to make this plan workable.