Federal Judge to Order a New Management System for the Detroit Water & Sewerage Dept.

[Gistok]

OK.... this entire discussion is turing into a "city" vs. "suburb" rant, with lots of slogans [[and crickets) being used to make points. As a suburbanite who really doesn't care who owns or runs the damn thing, as long as a better job is done, let me ask a few things....

1) why are Detroiters so adamant about holding on to the system... control... understandable... you did start and build it... but at some point its' maintenance has become a nightmare.

2) is selling the system for billions such a bad idea? I mean not to the suburbs, but to a private entity... is that really so horrifiic? Wouldn't you rather sell it on "Detroit's own terms", rather than have it taken away.... or to have an EFM say it's on the auction block?

3) it's not exactly Detroit's ace in the hole on stopping "exurban sprawl". If anything Detroit created a monster that helped sprawlsville.

4) why are so many of you using the fallacy of "false dichotomy" in this discussion? It's not an all or nothing argument... and yet many of you sound just like "JoAnn Watson" in your "we ain't selling our crown jewels"... all the way to L. Brooks Patterson's suburban rants. Is there no middle ground on what is best for Detroit?

5) If this discussion is so polarizing [[as it has become)... then there really is little to help this region... because I see this as a litmus test.

As Ben Franklin once said, either we all hang together, or we all hang separately....30+ years is a long time for federal oversight... as the saying goes.... "insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, and expecting a different result"....

[Wesley Mouch]

Brava, English!

Double Brava!

But the answer is obvious -- and desirable to divisionalists amongst us.

Water serves the entire region -- but DPS and transit do not.

However, this of course is also untrue.

Both DPS and Transit in fact fail to serve the entire region -- yet all metro residents whether they know it or now do rely on having everyone educated and able to get around. Unless everyone is educated and able get around, we will find ourselves perpetually supporting those who are uneducated and not able to get to better jobs -- which for now are mostly in the suburbs.

I'm for all regionalization of almost everything. We're all in this together. We all need to work together, ignoring the how we go here's and who owns what. Drop all that crap. The balkanization of metro Detroit only serves to support political power of partisans and bureaucrats.

[Gistok]

I'm for all regionalization of almost everything. We're all in this together. We all need to work together, ignoring the how we go here's and who owns what. Drop all that crap. The balkanization of metro Detroit only serves to support political power of partisans and bureaucrats.

Amen Wesley.... Amen...

Although as a suburbanite... I don't want to own any part of the water department... I would rather have the city sell it privately, and use the billions to help get it back on its' financial feet, and improve the infrastructure and lives of its' citizens, and have water be just another "non-lightning rod" private utility.

[Detroitnerd]

OK.... this entire discussion is turing into a "city" vs. "suburb" rant, with lots of slogans [[and crickets) being used to make points. As a suburbanite who really doesn't care who owns or runs the damn thing, as long as a better job is done, let me ask a few things....

1) why are Detroiters so adamant about holding on to the system... control... understandable... you did start and build it... but at some point its' maintenance has become a nightmare.

Isn't everything like this in metro Detroit? When you have a population that has remained flat that has gobbled up five times as much land in 65 years, when your "solution" to a neighborhood perceived to be "on the way down" is to move out to the next cornfield, there comes a point when maintenance of infrastructure is going to be a major problem. Same with our roads, our transit, our sewers, etc. The real solution is to go through an intelligent process of retrenchment, but that is off the table, as state pols and county officials are all waiting for the growth machine to be turned back on so they can build out into the next cornfields...

2) is selling the system for billions such a bad idea? I mean not to the suburbs, but to a private entity... is that really so horrifiic? Wouldn't you rather sell it on "Detroit's own terms", rather than have it taken away.... or to have an EFM say it's on the auction block?

Yes, it's a very bad idea, especially to a private entity. If you think the system sucks now, wait until you insert a middleman-type business that wants to profit off it. And the idea of selling it vs. having it taken away is a false either-or choice. Anyway, how the hell would the city be "selling it on its own terms" when it has the gun-to-the-head of it being taken away as another choice? Ever hear of an offer you can't refuse?

3) it's not exactly Detroit's ace in the hole on stopping "exurban sprawl". If anything Detroit created a monster that helped sprawlsville.

I don't think anybody is arguing that the water system is Detroit's "ace in the hole on stopping sprawl." But the alternative, of a "regional in name only" or "privatized" system, very well could be "payback time," water wielded as a political weapon to subsidize sprawl on the backs of urban consumers. Don't think so? It has been that way with roads. Remember the fun and games when Novi's Craig DeRoch, as Michigan speaker of the house, wanted to have all these exclusively suburban hearings on where road funding would go? He said, “We need to build roads where people live, work and pay their taxes. Fixing roads where people used to live, or where we want them to live, will only delay projects which will contribute to economic growth and an improved quality of life for Michigan residents.” In other words, infrastructure money would be politically directed, de jure. [[A private company would do it de facto, for profits.)

4) why are so many of you using the fallacy of "false dichotomy" in this discussion? It's not an all or nothing argument... and yet many of you sound just like "JoAnn Watson" in your "we ain't selling our crown jewels"... all the way to L. Brooks Patterson's suburban rants. Is there no middle ground on what is best for Detroit?

The middle ground is something we should all aim for. And the path to it is not through a power grab, or some "deal" struck under intense political pressure. The idea that this is being done under the banner of regionalism is a slick PR trick, not a genuine call for a united metro Detroit.

5) If this discussion is so polarizing [[as it has become)... then there really is little to help this region... because I see this as a litmus test.

You shouldn't see this as a litmus test. It is a power grab, an excess of judicial activism, and people correctly surmise that this is not democratic at all. You don't pick somebody's pocket and then tell them they're polarizing the debate when they complain...

[Scottathew]

Transit and regional water assets should be regional.

Transit divided into Detroit system [[DDOT) and Suburb system [[SMART) just isn't working well enough for people in either area. A regional system should swallow up M1 Rail, People Mover, DDOT, and SMART.

Regional water assets should be PURCHASED by a regional entity from Detroit. Regional assets include anything that serves more than Detroit. So, for example a water treatment or filtration plant in Detroit would be part of the regional system. A massive water main that gets water from the Detroit River to 78 Mile and Orchard Maple Pointe Boulevard Circle would be part of the regional system, even if it were in the city of Detroit.

But local assets, such as smaller mains that serve just Detroit neighborhoods and streets, those would remain as a part of Detroit's system.

The regional authority would be funded by either a separate millage or be funded by municipalities that use it [[so Warren would bill me, and then pay the regional authority for the services).

The regional authority initially would need to take out a very large bond to repay Detroit for the infrastructure that it built and maintained.

This would help solve to problems:

1) Getting regional control of regional assets, because the city of Detroit is an absolute failure at managing anything

2) Giving Detroit a large sum of money to help with its debt issues

[Detroitnerd]

2) Giving Detroit a large sum of money to help with its debt issues

That idea gives me the heebie-jeebies, dude. You want to give billions of dollars to play with to the boatload of borderline convicts that came inside the Bing Trojan horse? Yikes... I'd rather have regional governance first...

[Scottathew]

That idea gives me the heebie-jeebies, dude. You want to give billions of dollars to play with to the boatload of borderline convicts that came inside the Bing Trojan horse? Yikes... I'd rather have regional governance first...

It scares me too, but it would be the right thing to do. The problem is having an administration that wouldn't piss it away [[or steal it away).

Detroit, just like Warren's current mayor probably doesn't even know what a "fund balance" is.

If it were to happen Detroit should do the following:

1) Pay off all debt
2) Build and maintain a large fund balance\rainy day fund
3) Make long-term investments that lead to operational efficiencies and lower annual costs.

[Detroitnerd]

It scares me too, but it would be the right thing to do. The problem is having an administration that wouldn't piss it away [[or steal it away).

Detroit, just like Warren's current mayor probably doesn't even know what a "fund balance" is.

If it were to happen Detroit should do the following:

1) Pay off all debt
2) Build and maintain a large fund balance\rainy day fund
3) Make long-term investments that lead to operational efficiencies and lower annual costs.

I think this brand of "regionalism" puts the cart before the horse. Instead of divvying up the city's assets and calling it regionalism, let's make up a regional government. Let us all be stakeholders. Now is the time, because the region is stagnating. Let's face it: We need a vibrant city center to anchor the region, and it won't happen while it's in the charge of these self-interested ward-heelers. A regional government would give them the boot.

[Scottathew]

I think this brand of "regionalism" puts the cart before the horse. Instead of divvying up the city's assets and calling it regionalism, let's make up a regional government. Let us all be stakeholders. Now is the time, because the region is stagnating. Let's face it: We need a vibrant city center to anchor the region, and it won't happen while it's in the charge of these self-interested ward-heelers. A regional government would give them the boot.

I'm not saying it's not feasible, but there are some complications to that. While I'm for "regional" services, generally the service and other specific factors will define what that region is made up of.

For example, Detroit sewage covers this area: http://www.dwsd.org/pages_n/map_sewer_system.html [[weird exception, Warren does it's own sewage treatment and release)

And here's the water map: http://www.dwsd.org/pages_n/map_water_supply.html [[Interestingly enough, Detroit water serves FLINT, flint suburbs, Mayfield, Greenwood, and something east of Greenwood that I can't read)

If we were to make a regional transit authority, would it have the same scope? I don't think so. It might have a route or line to Flint, but I couldn't picture it running Flint's buses.


DetroitNerd, how would you feel about a regional police force? I'm not saying I'm for or against it, but the thought makes me wonder. I think it would do wonders for Detroit to completely do away with the DPD structure and have a regional force that doesn't see invisible municipal boundaries.

[HistoryNotHisStory]

The system should be regional and then the water should be given to the people without billing.

As the UN stated: Water is a human right and not a commodity for sale.

Access to clean water is the responsibility of the governance to provide to its citizen. I don't pay for air, so why should we pay for water.

Wake up people!

[Detroitnerd]

I'm not saying it's not feasible, but there are some complications to that. While I'm for "regional" services, generally the service and other specific factors will define what that region is made up of.

I keep coming back to a regional government, but only to a chorus of voices that point to its political impossibility. You'd have to change the state constitution, get communities to buy in, and actually be able to unite poor and rich municipalities under one umbrella. Politically, it's perhaps feasible to unite poor and poor or rich and rich communities, but don't let's forget why people moved to the Bloomies to begin with: They wanted to live in a place with low taxes and zero social problems. How can we get them, and folks like them, to buy in again? It's a challenge. But I do hear some voices, among them some plutes like Dan Gilbert, arguing for a reinvestment in the central city. Maybe it's not too far off. But, yeah, right now, there are many, MANY obstacles.

For example, Detroit sewage covers this area: http://www.dwsd.org/pages_n/map_sewer_system.html [[weird exception, Warren does it's own sewage treatment and release)

And here's the water map: http://www.dwsd.org/pages_n/map_water_supply.html [[Interestingly enough, Detroit water serves FLINT, flint suburbs, Mayfield, Greenwood, and something east of Greenwood that I can't read)

If we were to make a regional transit authority, would it have the same scope? I don't think so. It might have a route or line to Flint, but I couldn't picture it running Flint's buses.

You might be surprised! Though it wasn't a city department, the Detroit United Railway had tremendous scope 100 years ago, running electric trains on Detroit city streets, and running lines out as far as Jackson, Pontiac, Port Huron, Toledo, even Cleveland. Due to a boom in road-building subsidies in the 1910s, their profitability declined, but Detroit inherited the city system and ran it for some time. Unfortunately, with the city only running the rail lines within the city, it altered the development of the metroplex forever.

Anyway, let's just say the current, admittedly hit-or-miss water and sewerage systems COULD be a framework to hang sort of regionalism on. But it needs total buy-in from the burbs too, and we may have to wait another 20 years, until the worst of the die-hard city-haters take the one-way subway.

DetroitNerd, how would you feel about a regional police force? I'm not saying I'm for or against it, but the thought makes me wonder. I think it would do wonders for Detroit to completely do away with the DPD structure and have a regional force that doesn't see invisible municipal boundaries.

I live on the edge of Hamtramck, and though I'm not a huge fan of the Hamtramck police force, I think I'd be opposed to merging HPD and DPD. I'm kinda with you: I'd like to see such a dramatic merger that it actually changes the culture of DPD and Detroit City Hall -- for the better. That said, I'd like to see some protections for neighborhoods, so they have representation as well. Districts, small districts where people have representatives they can go to to complain and demand results, do have a positive effect. I think Hamtramck is an example of what happens when local leaders emerge from local people.

I'll say this, though: If we had a regional police force, I'd probably have to clean up my act a little. Haha. Also, maybe we wouldn't have to have 130-odd police forces ticketing every minor infraction to pay for 130-odd duplicated police forces ...

[Detroitnerd]

The system should be regional and then the water should be given to the people without billing.

As the UN stated: Water is a human right and not a commodity for sale.

Access to clean water is the responsibility of the governance to provide to its citizen. I don't pay for air, so why should we pay for water.

Wake up people!

You must be thirsty after all that fist-pumping.

[takascar]

The system should be regional and then the water should be given to the people without billing. As the UN stated: Water is a human right and not a commodity for sale. Access to clean water is the responsibility of the governance to provide to its citizen. I don't pay for air, so why should we pay for water. Wake up people!

We are awake. Sorry, but water may be a human right, but CLEAN water is not free. You are always free to go down to the Detroit river with a bucket and get as much water as you want - no one will stop you. Now, you want the water treated so it doesn't kill you? You want it delivered to your house in water mains? Tell me, HistoryNotHisstory - who is going to pay for the construction and maintenance of those water mains and treatment plants? I'm all for social justice and the like, but it is not helpful to have such unrealistic ideas such as this that ignore practical reality

[Detroitnerd]

It would be nice to have free public drinking fountains and free pools and free public restrooms. If only so people can wash their cats!

[Scottathew]

The system should be regional and then the water should be given to the people without billing.

As the UN stated: Water is a human right and not a commodity for sale.

Access to clean water is the responsibility of the governance to provide to its citizen. I don't pay for air, so why should we pay for water.

Wake up people!

Please tell me you are being very sarcastic, right?

[MikeM]

http://www.freep.com/article/2011110...ter-Department

U.S. District Judge Sean Cox's call for structural changes in the Detroit Water Department [["Judge Sean Cox’s ruling" Nov. 5) came on the heels of the disbanding of the DWSD Engineering Division. It's no coincidence that the decades of struggle with EPA compliance similarly began on the heels of another event involving Engineering.

In 1975, a new Detroit City Charter replaced the tenured chief engineer with a director serving at the pleasure of the mayor and removed the requirement for a Professional Engineer [[PE) license.

With civil service tenure's protection from arbitrary dismissal, the chief engineer could take his objections regarding any ill-conceived policy of the mayor or Board of Water Commissioners to the public without fear of reprisal. A PE license requires an oath to protect the public health and safety, but serving at the pleasure of the mayor, an unlicensed director's loyalty is to the administration before the public.

Prior to 1975, DWSD had a worldwide reputation for its engineering and operational success, and its professionals dominated the committees writing the industry's standards. Then, without the check and balance between public safety concerns represented by a licensed engineer and the politics of the Board of Water Commissioners, it took only two years for the politicians to wreck the nation's most respected water system, provoking acrimony with its customers and the EPA.

U.S. District Judge John Feikens' oversight of DWSD was an abject failure. The billing squabbles between DWSD and its suburban customers festered for years. They eventually ended not because of the negotiating skills of his approved politicians and consultants, but as a result of an in-house engineering breakthrough that restored integrity to the billing process.

After years of failure by outside consultants, the Archer administration listened to me, my staff and people doing the actual work. Just like creating a credible water bill, creating a functional, efficient and maintainable treatment plant also begins as an engineering problem that can't be solved by imposing capricious court-ordered deadlines on politicians who won't or can't comprehend the problem.

If Judge Cox and Mayor Dave Bing want a working sewage treatment plant, they need to do what the proposed and existing charters fail to do: demand a director with a PE license, and make sure that director has sufficient political independence to do the job.

Dennis L. Green, PE
Head Water Systems Engineer DWSD Facilities Design Group [[Retired)

[skyl4rk]

In most cities and regions across the country, water and sewer systems are essentially nonprofit activities [[or losses). Typically, political pressures hold down the water and sewer rates so that there is not enough funding to do adequate capital improvements to infrastructure. In addition, there are frequently long term bonds [[debt) that financed past extensions of the system.

In short, most water and sewer operations are financial liabilities to the cities or authorities that own and control them. At best, they are break even enterprises.

In some areas where there are water shortages, corporations can manage a water utility so that there is room for profit. Generally this is done by securing the only supply of water and acting as a monopoly. This is difficult to do in an area where water is in ample supply.

One strategic reason that the COD should consider transferring ownership to another entity is to shift debt away from city taxpayer responsibility to responsibility of the other entity.

Over the long term, a water and sanitary sewer authority will constantly be trying to finance repair and replacement of aging infrastructure, both in the treatment plant facilities and the underground distribution systems. This is a huge liability that may show up as a depreciation expense in city budgets, but may be hidden. Responsibility for future repair and maintenance is probably the biggest cost facing a water and sewer authority. Transferring this responsibility to another entity would be a very smart move by city officials.

Any transfer should be done as a negotiated sale by agreement, using detailed accounting methods to determine the value of the utility. However, long term debt and the responsibility for future maintenance could mean that the utility has future liabilities in excess of estimated revenues at current water rates [[in other words, it has a negative value). This would be typical for municipal water and sewer operations across the country.

It is possible that giving away water and sewer utilities to other entities would benefit the taxpayers of Detroit. The key is to make sure the new entity has the responsibility for debt and future maintenance of the system.

[Mikeg]

.........One strategic reason that the COD should consider transferring ownership to another entity is to shift debt away from city taxpayer responsibility to responsibility of the other entity.

Over the long term, a water and sanitary sewer authority will constantly be trying to finance repair and replacement of aging infrastructure, both in the treatment plant facilities and the underground distribution systems. This is a huge liability that may show up as a depreciation expense in city budgets, but may be hidden. Responsibility for future repair and maintenance is probably the biggest cost facing a water and sewer authority. Transferring this responsibility to another entity would be a very smart move by city officials.

Any transfer should be done as a negotiated sale by agreement, using detailed accounting methods to determine the value of the utility. However, long term debt and the responsibility for future maintenance could mean that the utility has future liabilities in excess of estimated revenues at current water rates [[in other words, it has a negative value). This would be typical for municipal water and sewer operations across the country.

It is possible that giving away water and sewer utilities to other entities would benefit the taxpayers of Detroit. The key is to make sure the new entity has the responsibility for debt and future maintenance of the system.

You forgot about the DWSD's portion of CoD pension obligations and the associated interest rate swaps which went into default back in 2009 due to the city's credit rating downgrade. The CoD negotiated with the swap holders and pledged their casino tax revenues as collateral to avoid the $400 million default payment that was written into the original interest rate swap agreements.

I think that the DWSD's financial "house of cards" and entanglements with the soon-to-be bankrupt CoD will make it impossible to "give away" the system along with its debts and obligations as you suggest. Additionally, their water system is way over-built and has experienced a long-term decline in demand - while their sewage system is mired in a decades-long Federal court case. I think that the only way the DWSD can ever be "given away" is if some serious cash is added to the deal!

[stasu1213]

Hopefully a regional transit authority will be available for DDOt and SMART