Residents’ frustrations with the Plainfield Municipal Utilities Authority boiled over at the Second Ward Town Meeting Wednesday, with many calling for it to be disbanded.For attorney Bill Michelson the tipping point was a calendar change that left him stuck with bottles and cans, while his paper recyclables carefully placed at the curb Wednesday went untouched.
“I was never an enemy of the PMUA,” he said, “then came the last 24 hours.”
For others, it was the fees, the board holdovers, the failure to produce outside revenues, the costly trips and lunches on the ratepayers’ dime.
The meeting was the one of four scheduled by the governing body to hear citizens’ concerns across the city, whether specific to a ward or general. The PMUA is an autonomous authority created by the City Council in 1995 to provide solid waste and sewer services to all households. Previously, property owners hired private carters for trash and paid sewer taxes to the city.
In 2009, PMUA rate increases of 20 percent for solid waste and 14 percent for sewer services sparked formation of Dump PMUA, a group that uncovered excesses in authority expenditures and protested charges. An additional 61 percent increase in shared services charges this year has prompted calls for Gov. Chris Christie to investigate the authority.
On Wednesday, some residents pledged their professional expertise in law and finance to help reform or dismantle the PMUA and many cited much lower rates in surrounding towns for trash disposal. Many wanted sewer services to be brought back under city control in order to take tax deductions. Speakers also questioned the number of holdovers on the PMUA’s board of commissioners and called for new appointments.
Resident Bill Amirault called PMUA the top issue among members of the Hillside Area Neighborhood Watch. When he called for a show of hands in favor of disbanding the PMUA, arms went up across the Cook School auditorium.
“Do it,” Amirault said, getting a burst of applause.
“Hillside is much too calm about this,” resident Thomas Crownover said a few minutes later, saying property owners are “being gouged.”
“You folks ought to know how easy it is to dissolve” an authority, said Crownover, the executive director of one in Metuchen who has seen another disbanded. “It isn’t that hard, it’s just a matter of desire.”
“You can rid us of this menace,” resident Tom Kaercher said. “We as residents hate this albatross around our necks.”
Councilman William Reid, a former PMUA commissioner and a council liaison to the authority, said state law would have to be changed to allow tax relief to ratepayers. Councilwoman Rebecca Williams noted the council’s subpoena powers to bring PMUA officers before the governing body and said,, “That might be the next step.”
Authority commissioners resisted requests to meet with the governing body last year, asking at one point to do so after the November election and then simply refusing to meet at all.
Councilman Cory Storch said dissolution would bring employees back to the city at undetermined cost and he was not convinced the city could do a better job. As for bringing in outside revenues, he said, “We hoped it (PMUA) would be more entrepreneurial and it hasn’t happened yet.”
Councilman Adrian Mapp drew applause when he said, “I have absolutely no objection to disbanding the PMUA and bringing it in house.”
Mapp said he believes the premise for creation of the authority was false. Besides getting rid of illegal dumping and replacing old sewer lines, he said, “It was also supposed to generate revenue – it will never generate revenue.”
He also dismissed the argument about the city falling heir to PMUA debt: “I don’t think the PMUA won the lottery. Who is paying the debt?”
The audience joined in the answer: “Us!”
By bringing it back to municipal control, Mapp said, the city could “get rid of some of the bloated bureaucracy” and more.
“The reasons for bringing the PMUA in house are tremendous,” he said. “All we are lacking is the will.”
Noting large crowds that came out to put pressure on the council over recreation issues, he called on people to “rise up” and do the same over the PMUA.
Reid demurred, saying “the city does a lousy job in servicing us” and the time was not right to bring PMUA under city control.
Councilwoman Vera Greaves found little fault with PMUA service, but said, “I am for whatever we can do to reduce the bill.”
As liaison to the PMUA, Councilwoman Bridget Rivers offered her phone number to listen to citizen concerns. Council President Annie McWilliams said she was disappointed at the attitude of the commissioners, saying their unwillingness to work with the council “leaves our hands tied.” Dissolving the authority now looms as an option, she said: “They don’t want to work with the people who created them.”
--Bernice Paglia
It was interesting that Corey Storch, of the 2nd Ward, stated he is NOT IN FAVOR of disbanding the PMUA - which is clearly our #1 CONCERN here in the 2nd Ward.
ReplyDeleteWhile all of us residents appreciate the social service and the hiring of many Plainfield residents - the costs to the residents DO NOT MAKE SENSE!!
The meeting a few months ago where the "independent" auditors reviewed the rate increases and declared them sound was based on flawed assumptions. Instead of comparing our rates to OTHER MUNICIPALITIES of similar size and demographics, they compared the rates to the overall COSTS!! So if PMUA decided to buy 7 brand new F150 Trucks to cart their supervisors around, it would show up as a cost, and the auditors would say that if it's a cost, then the rates that residents pay are adequate to cover the costs.
THAT IS RIDICULOUS!!
Cory, as a resident in the second ward, since you feel that you are not ready to disband PMUA, then that is not representative of our community. I opted out of PMUA, and now, my "shared services" rate increased. That is PUNITIVE. The reason? We want to stop illegal dumping and try and tax the businesses that don't use PMUA... What about the RESIDENTS who opt out - WHY ARE THEY PUNISHED???
I am amazed that Corey would not support disbanding the PMUA. That is NOT representative of the people!!!
Clearly, from the 2nd ward's perspective at the meeting last night, we really need to look at PMUA. It's the cost to our residents. That's the bottom line. That's what is important to our residents.
ReplyDeleteI am thinking our representatives need to really look at this. Our costs should not be 3X other cities.
Unfortunately, due to the length of some of the public comments, I didn't get a chance to speak.
My other question is about recreation.
People are not comfortable on how recreation is managed - the mayor seemed not to be comfortable because she elected to appoint a committee, council is not comfortable because they changed how the budget was to be allocated between personnel and programs.
However having said that, how can we elect to put MORE $$ back into recreation?? This is a division that has been a topic of discussion for the last year and a half. Is it responsible to increase funding to a division where there are questions?
I believe in our children - but it isn't just throw more $$ at it. It's figuring out how to reach more kids, it's figuring out how to be efficient with our programs, it's determining the right vehicle to effectively provide more activity for kids.
There are a host of volunteers who want to help. We need engagement and collaboration to solve this very important issue - our children. This isn't a 4th ward problem or a 2nd ward problem, it is a CITY WIDE problem. How do we bring everyone around the table to discuss and more importantly ACT on these issues??
Councilman Reid usually doesn't back the people of Plainfield, but the mayor and Jerry Green. I don't think many put any value on what he says. I hope he's out of office soon and someone who will really take the side of the people and not politicians or special interests.
ReplyDeletePMUA works in theory. In reality, however, it has become an empire, one or two steps removed from accountability.
ReplyDeleteLet the City Council present a written request for the commissioners and executives to appear at the May meeting. If they don't show, subpoena them for a hearing the following week. If they decline at that point, charge them as disorderly persons (per the City Charter) with the threat of a fine and/or imprisonment.
As much as I detest such threats, I didn't write the rules, but I am steadfast against punks running city affairs and those councilors they hide behind who take every opportunity to vote for delay and obstruction on virtually every issue. If you want to know why we have no City Administrator, no full-time CFO, no Director of Public Works and Urban Development, and festering controversies that are never resolved, it's our dysfunction. It's years of permitting ineptitude and profiteers rule the roost.
For the moment, PMUA is a stacked deck, loaded up to be milked by all varieties of attorneys, engineers, auditors, and of course, our esteemed Assemblyman, Jerry Green. Somehow, for someone who claims not to be involved in City affairs (yeah, right!), Chairman Green is right there collecting campaign cash from all varieties of contractors. Around and around it goes. Remington & Vernick, T&M, CME, McManimon & Scotland, Lerch Vinci & Higgins, Ventantonio & Wildenham, Reliance Insurance, even Corporate Counsel Williamson and Public Safety Director Hellwig.
PMUA, like so much else in Plainfield, is all about the money and who gets to dole it out and who gets to pocket the difference. Garbage and sewage are incidental. None of this is buying us good government or responsible leadership. Do we really like being dumped on? It would seem the answer is yes. There's a sucker born every minute, and I think they're all living right here in the Queen City.
Yeah, let the murders continue in the 1st and 4th, let the schools continue to suck, let downtown continue to slide toward little Quito, but let's make dumping PMUA our highest municipal priority. Yea residents!
ReplyDeleteI attended the council meeting on Monday and the Town Hall meeting last night, nothing but chaos and dysfunction for this city and its residents.
ReplyDeleteThere is no sense of priorities, rather it's more of a "what's in it for me", attitude.
Nothing ever seems to get done in Plainfield. Nothing!
Studies here. Studies there. More research here, more research there and everything remains the same. Even those things which can be easily rectified for the benefit of many, remain the same.
Blaming the economy only goes so far.
It's going to take more than a Town Hall Meeting to get those in power to get the message.
PMUA continues to be a hot topic and it bewilders me as to why some of our representatives would deem it appropriate to have their constituents ripped off left and right, why?
On the other side, you have residents complaning about recreation; up in arms about where their children will go. Where or where will my child go??
How about the same place many of us went to when we were kids growing up in this area: to a movie theatre, a pizza shop, a friend's house (or your own house) for a movie night or slumber party, a youth mixer, a church sponsored event, a museum, a nature walk, a park, a beach, New York City (all very low cost options or sometimes free, yes free).
Where are the parents complaining about a better education for their children? or do those parents think that the ability to properly read and write is not as valuable as throwing or hitting a ball; or perhaps it's a much better option to let the government take care of your problems by letting your neighbors pick up the tab with publicly funded activities.
Of course, by letting the government take care of the child, parents are free from the responsibility to actually have to think, plan or even interact with their child!
How about giving the students of this City the opportunity to succeed in the real world, by being able to properly read, write and add?
Why aren't many of the same people outraged that the educational system in Plainfield consistently short changes their children with a failed educational system?
Plainfield's educational systems consistently scores as one of the lowest in the State. Consistently! It's only better than East Orange, Newark, Paterson and Jersey City! That speaks volumes.
It's bad enough when elected officials turn their back on you, but when parents abandon their own children, that's disturbing.
We need to get our priorties in order and regain a sense of integrity, dignity and self-respect!
Tony Rucker will be running on Jerry Green's line. Soon enough he will have to announce that he supports the PMUA.
ReplyDeleteDanielle Bush is being supported by the Mayor and Dave Wynn. She too will have to support the PMUA.
Cory Storch mentioned that keeping the PMUA maybe in the best interest of the residents of the City.
So all three known 2nd ward Council wantabes will be in favor of keeping the PMUA. Lets wait and see what they have to say.
EGA BRAG
Councilman Mapp voted for its creation during his first stint as councilman and Al McWilliams was the Mayor. The problem with this authority is most authorities throughout the state also provide water services. Water services are based upon usage but solid waste and sewer charges are fixed rates. Hence, the yearly increases to keep the authority solvent. Nevertheless, you would probably have to reduce the staff from a 1/3 to 1/4 in order to reduce your biggest expenditure which is personnel.
ReplyDeleteThe problem with the PMUA is not reducing the staff, it's reducing the salaries the top guys are getting and that savings would be passed on to the users!
ReplyDeleteBut the end result should be dismbanding the PMUA and having it absorbed by the Public Works Department or allowing for other private companies to compete in Plainfield.
As a resident stated last night, the PMUA, as it is now, is a monopoly.
It's so obvious that Reid, Rivers and Greaves have friends and/or family members working for the Authority so they will support it without reservation; and Storch, well, he's probably just afraid to go against the grain.
Please e mail or write the Governors office, as well our representing Senator, and let them know you want an investigation into all of this, see how fast it all disbands!
I love (and hate) the fact that you captured the PMUA's street sweepers in your picture. For anyone who goes downtown that is a common scene. Two to three street sweepers with a 200 ft. area. Virtually sweeping nothing. The PMUA is a bloated entity that does not have the residents interests in mind. Disband ASAP!
ReplyDeleteAt anon April 7, 2011 4:03 PM - YOUR information is NOT correct. Check the creation ordinance and you'll see that McWilliams and Mapp weren't around back then! The records are available in City hall or on the DUMPPMUA.com website
ReplyDeleteAnon April 7, 4:03 -- YOUR information is not correct. Al McWilliams cast the deciding vote to set up PMUA when he was on the city council. Never opposed or criticized them while he was mayor. Hope his daughter does better!
ReplyDeleteDuring the past year our Watchung Avenue house has been burglarized twice while we were at home. So yes, rampant crime in Plainfield seems to be a pressing and maybe intractable problem. But it is the PMUA that outrages ratepayers and taxpayers. If the city can't efficiently and economically pick up the garbage and provide sewer, how can it possibly deal with crime, redevelopment or any other more complicated challenges.
ReplyDeleteThe fact that PMUA charges two or three times what neighboring communities pay for trash pickup means it is wasteful, inefficient and not economical. PMUA appears profligate from the top down. Why are there three extra Commissioners? The Authority I work for has had five Commissioners and no extras for the last seven years without missing a quorum. And they are mere voluteers who recieve no compensation.
Health Insurance, pensions, salary and travel perks for PMUA Commissioners must cost a minimum of $15,000.00 to $$20,000.00 a year for each Commissioner. I believe most Commissioners in New Jersey recieve no compensation and rarely work with extra Commissioners. Two years ago PMUA Commissioners spent $250,000.00 for travel, allegedly to learn to be Commissioners. If the people who set policy for the PMUA are so wasteful, it is easy to see why it fails to function economically.
How can Dissolution of PMUA help? The PMUA Director, at a public meeting, stated that the reason their rates are not competitive is due to a 25 year contract with Union County. If that is true, then Dissolution might give the City the power to rescind this contract. Dissolution of an Authority is an easy thing once a municipality decides to do so. A simple application to the State of New Jersey Local Finance Board will dissolve PMUA. The Board will sympathize with the supporters of the Authority and then dissolve it without much ado.
Unfortunately there is no confidence in the Mayor's ability to run a Department of Public Works. It seems to be a City government in paralysis. It is time to determine if the tasks of the PMUA can be more efficiently run as a Department of Public Works by the City. If not, it is time make the Board a great deal more responsible in its financial management of PMUA.
Tom Crownover
Great thoughts Tom. The PMUA has an extremely good contrcat with the UCUA. They have enjoyed disposal rates of $30 less per than most cities. This means that they are overcharging property owners bigtime When will the council step in? Don't hold your breath.
ReplyDelete