The Plainfield Municipal Utilities Authority expects to ratify another outside contract Tuesday, this time with North Plainfield for "bulky waste," such as household castoffs.
The new contract expands a roster that includes several others for acceptance of vegetative waste at the Rock Avenue transfer station. The outside contracts fulfill the authority's longtime goal of bringing in revenue above what it gets from providing solid waste and sewer services to Plainfield residents.
The meeting, at 6 p.m. on Feb. 11 at 127 Roosevelt Avenue, also includes the annual reorganization at which the board of commissioners will elect a chairman and other officers for 2014. To see the agenda, click here.
The meeting will include passage of the solid waste and sewer budgets as well. At the Jan. 15 meeting, Executive Director Dan Williamson said rates for the first quarter of 2014 will stay the same as those for the last quarter of 2013. Any subsequent increase or decrease will depend on revenues generated, he said.
In January, the commissioners agreed to hire attorneys at $190 per hour to represent themselves in a lawsuit. See details here.
The nature of the litigation was not described, but since then Courier News reporter Sergio Bichao filed a story revealing that former Chief Financial Officer James Perry is suing the commissioners over contractual matters and alleged racial discrimination. Perry, who is white, was offered a 9 percent reduction in his salary even as PMUA commissioners gave two other executives a $725,000 settlement, with Commissioner Cecil Sanders referring to them as family men who "happen to be African-Americans."
Also since January the City Council voted approval for Commissioner Carol Ann Brokaw, a holdover, to succeed herself for a term ending Feb. 1, 2017. The council rejected four other nominees, but the name of one, Charles Tyndale, was brought back and will be up for a vote Monday for a term ending on Feb. 1, 2017, replacing Commissioner Alex Toliver. Commissioner Malcolm Dunn's term expired Feb. 1 and now he is a holdover.
--Bernice
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
At which meeting they will reappoint their auditor and attorney, whose firm's made prohibited campaign contributions in last year's mayoral contest. The City's pay-to-play ordinance is supposed to prevent vendors from making these payoffs during the term of their contracts. Both vendors have played a big role in the continuing Inter Local Agreement contract fraud. However, a spineless, deceitful, and ethically-conflicted City Council showed last week that it is content with the status-quo and the habitual milking of Plainfield residents.
ReplyDeleteAmazing how when you lift the rock, things change.
ReplyDeleteTwo Council meetings ago one the Council members commented that perhaps the Council had been remiss and should investigate PMUA operations. She was promptly reminded that the PMUA is an independent Authority in which the City Council has no position
ReplyDelete( this is tragically true )... At the following meeting the same Council member, posturing her reasons for rejecting Mayor Mapp's nominees, said that she didn't see anything happening in the PMUA that was so terrible as to warrant a change of Commissioners.
Meeting 1 She doesn't know what is happening, suggests the Council investigate.
Meeting 2 She states that she does not know of anything that is happening that warrants change.
She evidently did a whirl wind study during the week.
The obvious conclusion is that the Council member doesn't know what is happening, or in the alternative, if she does she is content to permit it to remain unaltered. More likely it is a combination of these.. .
Is it reasonable to assume that in light of the new contract, and other contracts entered into last year, that this additional work is yielding a profit? And that that profit will enable the PMUA to reduce our rates? The announcement that 2013 was "the best year ever" presents an additional exciting prospect for a rate reduction. That said, it remains a matter of curiosity how the best year ever comports with the necessity for a wage freeze? Bill Kruse
Take a look at the contracts they are entering in with the neighboring communities and you will see that Plainfield residents once again get the shaft. Plainfielders pay over 2.5 times more for the bulk waste as collected in the shared services fee. Just another reason to scratch your head and wonder how they get away with robbing Plainfielders.
ReplyDeleteDo you have any knowledge of the waste flow regulations that govern the three different counties in this area. This is how a rate is determined. Educate yourself and find out that the county has set the highest rate for bulk waste compared to other counties not the PMUA
DeleteI believe you are speaking of Gloria Taylor who said "if it isn't broken, don't fix it." Talk about living on another planet!
ReplyDeleteMr. Kruse
ReplyDeleteYour comments where you pretend to know it all and have all the answers to the PMUA cease to amaze me. How much profit has the PMUA made off of the new contracts and how much should the residents rate be reduced based upon your analysis of this so called profit? PSE&G had a great year also, how much did they reduce your rate? Please answer these questions. Are you a financial expert or a CPA that has analyzed the financials and operations of the PMUA? Stop misleading the public like you know what you are talking about. What a joke you are.
In defense of Mr. Kruse, I don't think he is pretending to know it all, and he is being facetious about profits. In the world of reality, as opposed to the world of PMUA propaganda, is it fair to proclaim "Best Year Ever" when you cut recycling pickups by 50%, force full staff furloughs, and now follow that up with a wage freeze? As for those profits, are they profits that will be split by the City and PMUA according to the Revenue Sharing formula? And why is there never any revenue sharing, and additionally, why does the City call the sewer lease 'revenue sharing' to begin with?
DeleteAs for rate reduction, can the PMUA explain its ultra-high administrative costs? An analysis of nearly 70 MUA budgets throughout the state shows exactly how sky-high PMUA's are. Comparing administrative costs to operating revenues indicates potential savings of nearly $2.5 million annually if PMUA just got to the average.
Another comparison would be growth in PMUA's operating expenses to the Federal Reserve's data set for inflation in the water, sewer, and garbage industry nationwide. By doing so you see exactly how far over trend PMUA became, and is only now taking remedial action to correct. There is also strong evidence that staffing levels are still quite high when comparing headcount to solid waste tonnage and miles of sewers.
I think most residents would prefer if the City paid its fair share of common costs, rather than having most of these costs wrapped up in the enigma of a Shared Service fee. This would provide some tax relief, but it might also expose PMUA's excessive cost structure.
Anonymous' comment is certainly the more misleading and joking. As loyal employees as they may be, none of those who spoke at the recent City Council meeting on behalf of PMUA looked all too happy doing so. I wouldn't be happy offering up propaganda either, not after suffering five furlough days and now being faced with a wage freeze
It isn't Mr. Kruse's job to provide solutions, but it is PMUA's mandate to provide the most efficient service at the lowest cost possible. Only the Joker teamed up with the Riddler, would have us believe it's lived up to this mandate.
Anonymous. It may surprise you to know that I have over the last 5 years OPRA'd significant quantities of PMUA data and studied the replies. In addition I have been permitted to review payroll and expense documents under the watchful eyes of a monitor at the PMUA office. I discovered, among other things, that PMUA executives were being paid not only their base salaries but being paid bonuses. I discovered that in 2008 platoons of executives and the Commissioners attended 5 "conferences" peppered all over the continental United States. I discovered, when one detailed bill was inadvertently left attached to a expense receipt, that one of the executives dined on frogs legs and drank Glen Fidich scotch. In the larger picture these are petty issues vis a vis the costs involved. Also, as a result of the public outcry much, if not all, of this wanton conduct has been corrected. I am not a CPA. However, I have owned and operated a construction company which leased, purchased and operated heavy equipment. We hired and administered managerial, technical and field personnel. We competitively bid, and executed municipal, state and federal projects. As a natural part of all this we administered the finances of the organization. This background may not be everything you desire of a critic, but most of this experience provided a familiarity with the work that the PMUA performs. I don't pretend to know everything. A great deal of what I do not know, and would like to know,
Deletehas not been provided by the PMUA. They have enormous expertise in finding reasons to deny interrogatories the replies to which which one assumes might prove embarrassing. I have offered suggestions as to how they might reduce their costs. I think these ideas are reasonable and constructive.
My efforts are dedicated to the majority of our population who are experiencing hard times and in hopes that economic reforms will inure to the benefit if the front ;line workers.
What are your ideas? Perhaps they are better than those I have suggested.
Bill Kruse
To 9:28PM - Your lack of knowledge and information regarding the PMUA, and your lack of informative content never ceases to amaze me.
ReplyDeleteWhat exacty is your point? That because PMUA made money, we should not expect a reduction because other companies make money and don't reduce our payments? If so, you know nothing about PMUA.
You would be surprised what I know about the PMUA. I expected the other genius (Goldstien) to chime in but I don't know the 3rd genius Anonymous 9:28pm. Are you like Kruse and Goldstien full of pretty words that lack conrete answers and substance? All of the words above and you still didn't answer the questions in my original post. If you have OPRA'ed all this info why can't you answer my question regarding profit from outside contracts and how much the rate should be reduced based upon the profit. Kruse you also tought all this experience in heavy equipment and running a business but what does that have to do with the garbage or sewer business? Why don't you tought your industry specific experience? You don't have any nor does Goldstien. If any of you think you can dissolve the PMUA or bring it under the City and your cost will miraclously decrease you are kidding yourselves. Kruse you refer to info that you OPRA'ed in 2008 and that was 6 years ago. C'mon man, lets talk about current activity. Has there been any progress in the last 3 years? Of course it has but you won't give any credit for that. All 3 of you guys are very critical and funny. I will call you the 3 Genius'. LOL
ReplyDeleteThat is exactly my point Anonymous 3:32pm You are a genius. How many times has PSE&G stabilized rates or had a rate reduction after a good year? The answer is Zero (0). Are you harrassing them like you are the PMUA?
ReplyDeleteTo 7:54PM - PSE&G didn't give one million dollars of my tax money to two guys who retired.
ReplyDeleteThey probably gave a lot more than $1 million. Just because you didn't hear about it doesn't mean it didn't happen:)
DeleteYou should stop with your false comparisons. PMUA is a public entity, not a publicly traded corporation that ultimately has to answer to its shareholders. The history of PMUA is a story filled with official abuse of the public trust. It's not just garbage and sewage, or how dirty the streets were 15 years ago, or how much cheap labor they get through their re-entry program. Your argument, if you can even call it that, is pretty poor.
DeleteCheck the link:http://www.pseg.com/family/leadership/pseang/
Delete