I'd like to know a bit more about this consulting firm and about what they were tasked to do before accepting their recommendations as gospel. Have they done this type of analysis for water systems before? What methodology did they use to come up with their suggestions? How did they get the contract to do this? Do they have connections to anyone in the area?

Of course, given the state of our local media, I have no expectation of having these questions answered.

According to a quote from the director, "these changes are needed to slow water rate increases." I'd like to know if that was the focus of the study: Find ways to cut water rate increases. If so, I wonder if the consulting firm took into account the ability of the Water Department to maintain a level of service, provide clean water, and conform to the Clean Water Act after cutting 81% of it's workforce.

I have worked for three consulting companies in my lifetime. I know that with some you can get them to produce a report that says what you want them to say. That is why we had widely diverging reports from firms on the impact of the film industry incentives in the State.

I'll adopt a wait and see attitude before I accept the validity of these conclusion. I will say I find it hard to believe that any organization can cut 81% of it's workforce and still do the job it is tasked to do.

And, just once, I'd like to see an idea for fixing an organization that does not include taking away jobs, income, and benefits from the working class as it's main tactic.