Many cities regret privatization of water systems
http://bit.ly/BewarePrivate
https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/im...EeeAoowiYDGsPw
Printable View
Many cities regret privatization of water systems
http://bit.ly/BewarePrivate
https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/im...EeeAoowiYDGsPw
Just now I encountered this factoid buried in a completely unrelated file:
"Nestlé pays Michigan $200/year to pump 150 gallons of H2O/minute."
That comes to 78,840,000 gallons/year. I don't know where that factoid came from but it's not nearly as bad as this:
Nestlé Pays Only $200 to Take 130 Million Gallons of Michigan’s Water
...and wants to increase that water draw by 60% at no extra cost!
For only $200/year? WTF? :confused:
Who do I have to bribe to get a deal like that?
$200/year? I lose that much between my couch cushions. That's not a deal, that's a token payment to solidify a contract. A contract that needs review and I don't care how much water Mi owns.
Private water systems can be FOR-PROFIT systems
managed by investors or shareholders.
Though rates are monitored by a state’s public commission,
private systems are not necessarily subject to this regulating board.
-The Great Lakes Water Authority, corporatizes the system by putting appointed,
unelected officials fully in charge of the big decisions
that determine the cost and quality of service.
-The agreement treats water provision as a business
instead of a public service.
-Corporatization itself is the first step to privatization.
The new authority can privatize the management and operation
of the water and sewer system without real city input or public approval.
They did the same thing in Florida and made it illegal to drink from ,swim or dive in any natural spring on public land in the state.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimaz
If that makes two states it would be interesting to see how many other states they have this deal in.
Tax payers pay for the land to give them water rights so they can sell it back to the taxpayers.
Veolia is poised to run the entire DWSD show
https://redrundrain.wordpress.com/20...-old-partners/
Veolia has a 20-year, $1.5 billion deal to
manage The City of Indianapolis’ water system.
It is Veolia’s largest water contract in the USA.
2nd threat
Manoj Bhargava funds company to invest in water and energy deals
The billionaire behind 5-Hour Energy garnered headlines in May 2011
when Crain’s revealed he was the mystery investor who put in
$100 million of his own money to launch Farmington Hills-based
Stage 2 Innovations LLC, a private equity firm established,
according to its website, “to accelerate the large-scale
commercialization of innovative, patentable technologies
in the global market.”
Monday, it will be announced that Bhargava is
funding another private equity company,
Farmington Hills-based Oakland Energy and Water Ventures LLC,
which will invest up to $100 million in individual deals in
companies around the world that are focused on
energy conservation and water treatment.
Oakland Energy has already signed nondisclosure agreements with
several Michigan companies about possible investments,
according to managing director Chris Brower.
He and the companies’ two other managing directors,
Kevin O’Connell and Rick Manner, all recently left Stage 2.
“We’ll have several big launches this year,
very interesting and large projects,” Bhargava told Crain’s Friday.
He said Oakland Energy doesn’t have a fund with a fixed amount of money.
“Deal by deal, we’ll spend the money,” he said.
Guess no one is scared of the P3 approach
They drill their own wells and pump and filter the water themselves.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimaz
They are paying more than most people who use well water, which is nothing.
You're being disingenuous.Quote:
Originally Posted by JBMcB
Which of "most people" draws 130 million gallons of water [[and wants 60% more) per year?
Why are you being so deceitful, JBMcB?
You are lacking perspective. That is a lot of water being pumped by one source, but not a whole lot in the grand scheme of things. Golf courses alone pump 3.5 million gallons a *day* out of the Kalamazoo basin alone. And that's a fraction of what is used in agriculture.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimaz
Aquifer levels have remained pretty stable even with the Nestle withdrawal. So is there some pressing reason to charge them more?
Many of the "private water systems" shown on the graphic are the original public water systems. Many are the original running water supply to their clientele and their service and pricing are at such a level, there has been no great public call for the gummint to take them over. In other case, like Veolia [[which also runs public transit systems), the gummint has run the system so inefficiently [[DWSD horseshoers?) that the government has contracted the operation [[not the ownership) of the system to a contractor. DTE has certainly provided better service than Detroit Lighting. Many municipalities have found that contracting their trash collection out to companies like Waste Management is more economical [[and provides better service) than municipal employees.
When the entity is driven by profit, it must be scrutinized, and analyzed.
The stockholders and investors are not necessarily the true customers.
The same could be said for the government. It is run for the benefit of the bureaucracy and not for the benefit of the true customers. The larger and more bloated it becomes, the greater the rewards for the managers. If i have three people working for me, I qualify for a certain grade [[and salary). If I have two dozen people working for me, my grade and salary will be much higher. Should I try to get the job done with three people or should I constantly finagle to enlarge the size of my office?Quote:
Originally Posted by O3H
Operation of a water system has to be scrutinized and analyzed, private or public operation.Quote:
Originally Posted by O3H
Whether its privately or publicly operated matters not. Privatization is simply a tool, like a hammer. Its a mistake to condemn efficient private operation. Its a mistake to praise wasteful public operation.
DWSD has for years been operated to the benefit of politicians who paid private individuals and corporations for personal gain. That hasn't served the public.
It is possible to have excellent public systems, and excellent private systems -- both of which can serve the citizens well.
Its is possible to have politicized and corrupt private systems as well, of course.
A small town may find it impossible to keep current with the thousands of regulations at a reasonable cost. They may seek a private operator at a guaranteed cost who can spread that staff training across multiple municipalities. Larger cities might be able to carry, where a larger city like Flint might be able to carry the overhead of proper water systems training, operation, and coordination of proper monitoring of lead levels.
It doesn't matter whether a system is public or private. That's just a choice of about how a city manages its operations. Both can be good or bad. What matters is good governance over whichever you choose -- and which fits your needs.
Many ordinary residents are truly clueless about inbound/outbound water operations to their homes. They take no interest in being informed, okay maybe a tiny bit, now that Flint had "" issues"". Few question operations, supervisory staff, or management. Hell, Marrocco rolled in obscurity for 20 years.