The authority has had its troubles over the years, but now seems to be hitting an all-time low with the public. This is happening in a state context of suspicion over the utility (pardon the pun) of authorities in general, as several have been exposed lately for wasteful spending and nepotism. So it is not just a PR problem with PMUA, it is a general question about proper stewardship of certain vital services.
At last week's Town Meeting, Councilman Cory Storch and Councilman Adrian Mapp came up with contrasting views on what should be done about the PMUA. Plaintalker's post on the meeting generated many comments that show residents' increasing frustration over having to deal with the authority.
Plainfield is fortunate to be the home to many highly-qualified professionals with expertise in finance and even with authorities and how they should function. Whatever talent base exists within the the PMUA and its board of commissioners, the current impasse almost demands some outside help. The offers given Wednesday should be considered, because it is not evident that the administration or governing body currently has clarity on how to proceed. If things can't be sorted out locally, Gov. Chris Christie may take action.
More later on PMUA. As those monitoring the authority have noted, the PMUA meeting previously scheduled for Tuesday has been moved to Thursday, April 14, 6 p.m. at PMUA headquarters, 127 Roosevelt Ave. The web site as of this moment still has Tuesday's date. Even though the PMUA publishes an annual calendar, it seems to be revised each month. Coupled with the new 6 p.m. meeting time, the frequent date changes leave the impression of making it hard for the public to follow authority business.
--Bernice
It's no secret that New Jersey is riddled with an overwhelming quantity of separate legal entities, from municipalities to school boards, fire districts to a complex web of independent, yet public, agencies and authorities, commissions and so on. Each has its incorporating documents, its legal representation, and its consulting experts. It's confounding that a single municipality couldn't set in place a task force to deal with a mounting pile of illegally dumped refuse and a leaky and creaky sewer system, and felt it necessary to create an entirely new bureaucracy to deal with the problem. There is a cost to this fragmentation only made worse by questions of transparency and accountability.
ReplyDeleteWith the departure soon of its three top executives, one retiring, two tiring of "meddling", we now have an opportunity to reassess the situation and the relationship between the authority and the city. With a host of sub-issues to consider, opting at this point for either keeping PMUA or dissolving it and folding operations into Public Works, would not be credible. Yet the need for reform is clear.
A manpower analysis across all segments of city operations needs to be undertaken so our labor force is used efficiently and fairly. Perhaps the accounting functions of the city and PMUA can be merged so savings are generated and controls improved. Would Information Technology be handled better with more studied cooperation between the city, schools, and PMUA? The list goes on.
As we enter another political season, PMUA is likely to be part of the debate, however there is no debate that actions are required to fix things up. These should be ongoing and not tied to the shifting sands of the electoral scheme.
"I can't think about that right now" said Scarlett O'hara in 'Gone With The Wind', "If I do, I'll go crazy. I'll think about that tomorrow." Can we afford the same?
One thing Plainfield in general does well is state openly, loudly and without shame : "Hey, it's broken and we know it's not working right."
ReplyDeleteThen spend the next 2,5 or 10yrs repeating that but unwilling to change anything because they are looking for the perfect solution.
Local Cable Access Channel as a perfectly good example as well as the PMUA.
The perfect solution never exists. Making changes on the road toward dramatic improvement is the way to do it.
Even the Constituion wasn't created perfect,hence the ability to add amendments.
A concept of change seemingly so simple 200+ yrs ago that our founding fathers "got it"...
Alan,
ReplyDeleteWhat would folding operations into Public Works not be credible?
Bernice,
ReplyDeleteWere there any (original) comments to your article from Sept. 2005? I did not see any.
@10:34 a.m.: I had to look this up. The original blog, Plainfield Plaintalker, had an e-mail address for comments but not a way to leave comments until March 15, 2008.
ReplyDeleteCheck this link for the reason why:
http://plaintalker.blogspot.com/2008/03/plaintalker-takes-comments.html
Anon 10:08- What I mean is that having a firm stand to either maintain PMUA or dissolve it is not yet credible. My feeling is that it should be folded back under Public Works, but at this stage there are a large number of details that need to be analyzed, so making a definitive judgment at this stage would be putting the cart before the horse. The need for change is obvious. How this is done, and to what end, requires more work.
ReplyDeleteThe need for reform in the PMUA couldn't be more clear. Do you think Watson and Ervin are going to retire without collecting their lucrative severance pay? My guess is that the two retirees will take home nearly $175k - only a little less than they took home in 2010.
ReplyDeleteAll of the political heads can bring PMUA up during election season but not one of them does so during the year. Why wouldn't anyone just look at how they handle garbage in South Plainfield? These city services are nothing new. Only in Plainfield could people manage to overcharge and continue to get elected.
@ Alan - The PMUA has approx. 10 people in the finance side and three people in Information Technology. The agency is bloated. On top of all this, they hire numerous attorneys, consultants, and training specialists. Too many people turn a blind eye to this mismanagement. Hopefully Christie and his crew will investigate the PMUA. Recently, Commissioner Brown asked that Christie come in to check. We can only hope she got his attention as a commissioner of the PMUA.
@8:11 pm. Councilmen Reid also spoke out and said that the Governor should investigate and he is a former PMUA Commissioner.
ReplyDeleteIt seems crazy that PMUA Executive Director Watson makes more than the Governor.
@Alan. I do not know you personally but I have had respect for your opinions on the PMUA. They seem fact based and are very well thought out. But now it seems you are back-peddling. Is this because you are on Rucker's team and the candidate is now on Jerry Green's line, meaning that Rucker will not be allowed to campaign for the dismantling of the PMUA ?
I do not mean this as an attack on you Mr, Goldstein. And my wish is for you to continue in the debate on the PMUA, but I do question the conflict of interest that you now find yourself in.
Ega Brag
Ega Brag- I appreciate your respect and I respect your concern. As I mentioned in my reply to Anonymous above, my gut feeling is PMUA should be folded back into Public Works. However, the most important thing is garbage and sewage service, not a posture one takes on something that is nuanced and not a simple binary decision. We all know reform is needed. Let the weight of the evidence determine if we can get the reform we need with an authority or without, and which is the most fiscally prudent way to go, with all due regard for ratepayers and taxpayers.
ReplyDeleteThe city could make a mess of it too if past is any prologue. Anyway, Tony and Cory seem to be on the same line on this, as opposed to Rev. Bush, who has recently spoken of PMUA in fairly glowing terms and hawked her grant-writing credentials in public comment to the commissioners.
As for the party line on the ballot, that's all it is, a spot. It's the same line Cory stood on four years ago, and Rebecca appealed for last year. It's what you make of it and stand for that count. No doubt the committee system should be democratized and the line put up for a vote, but you're no more in Jerry Green's pocket in June than you are in November, unless it's the kind of person you are, which is not the case with Tony Rucker as I'm certain it wasn't with Cory or Rebecca previously.
There are no conflicts of interest because there have been no promises made except to work hard to do the best for the city. It's the bottom-line.
@Alan,
ReplyDeleteYou mentioned "Tony and Cory seem to be on the same line on this", we have seen Cory's opinion, but nothing from Tony. Are you saying Tony does not favor the dismantling of the PMUA?
Tony is learning quickly the ways of a politician as he has not responded to many comments on his blog asking him to take a position. You are also learning fast. We were talking about the PMUA, but you took the opportunity to defend Rucker on his decision to take Mr. Greens line. I must adamantly disagree with your statement that "you're no more in Jerry Green's pocket in June than you are in November". You certainly are in June.
In June Mr. Green chooses who will be on his line. In November the candidate who wins the June primary gets the regular democratic line. Mr. Green has no influence at this juncture. Democracy at it's best.
Though with that said, personally I choose a candidate, not a line.
Ega Brag
Why is it so bad for Tony Rucker to accept Green's offer to run on the Democratic Party line in the primary when Cory did exactly that four years ago and Rebecca asked for the line last year?
ReplyDeleteRucker has not stated his position on many of the issues including the PMUA.
ReplyDelete