Public Watchdog.org

Whose Water Are You Carrying, Ald. Wsol?

01.28.10

Faux fiscal conservative Ald. Frank Wsol (7th Ward) continues to lead the fight to keep Park Ridge water usage rates artificially (and irresponsibly) low by refusing to pass through to water users the full cost the City pays for the water it buys from the City of Chicago.  Wsol wants property taxpayers to continue subsidizing water users, an unsound policy even if judged solely (no pun intended) on economic grounds.

But where it becomes borderline insane is when you actually realize who are the primary beneficiaries of this manipulation of water economics: the City’s Top Ten biggest water users [pdf].

Which means that under Wsol’s subsidy plan, all you senior citizens, all you middle-aged empty nesters, all you single-person households, and all you water conservationists continue to pay a portion of your property taxes so that Lutheran General Hospital, the Park Ridge Park District, School Districts 207 and 64, and Resurrection Nursing Home don’t have to pay the full cost of all the water they use. 

And guess what’s even worse, folks?  Those five entities don’t pay property taxes!

At this past Monday night’s City Council meeting, Wsol smugly questioned whether any previous City Council (including the ones that Wsol has been sitting on since 2005 and which have produced deficit budgets every year except one) “[has] voted on how much of a surplus we should accumulate in the water fund of taxpayer money?” – knowing full well it had not. 

But even if that’s the case, so what, Frankie? 

That question is about as worthless as Ald. Robert Ryan’s customary “What do other municipalities do?” whenever he’s confronted by an issue which brings that quizzical-to-blank expression to his face signaling the same condition as the flashing “vacancy” sign in front of a cheap motel.  Let’s get this straight once and for all: what other municipalities’ collections of plodding bureaucrats and rubber-stamp elected officials do has yet to be proved the “magic bullet” of fiscally-responsible municipal governance. 

While Wsol actually gets something right when he notes that the water fund, an “enterprise” fund which exists to provide a defined payment source for water, currently has an approximately $3 million surplus, that observation deserves another “So what?”  Suggesting that a water fund surplus provides a good reason for not charging water users the full cost of that water is an apples-to-oranges analysis, and one that’s intellectually dishonest to boot.

It also disregards the fact, as reported by former City Finance Director Diane Lembesis on a couple of occasions within the past year, that cash from the water fund has been needed to cover the City’s payroll, thereby saving the City from incurring the cost of having to borrow that money from outside sources.  So depleting the already-dwindling water fund surplus is bad management on yet another level.

Unfortunately, Wsol is not alone in this folly.  Ald. Don Bach (3rd Ward) is so clueless he actually attempted to justify his opposition to full-cost water rates by stating that he “would not like to see the average 65-year-old homeowner have to pay a couple more cents a gallon.”  Hey, Don…wake up!  That’s what’s already happening, except that your average 65-year-old homeowner is also helping pay for the water being used by the likes of Lutheran General, the Park Ridge Country Club, and even Dominick’s. 

At this point, only Mayor Dave Schmidt seems to “get it.”  And he’s not even entitled to vote on the budget, barring the unlikely event of a Council deadlock over its approval.

Try as we might, we can’t see even one good reason why all Park Ridge water users should not pay the full cost to the City of the water they use, or why anybody’s water usage should be subsidized by the City’s property taxpayers.  Such a policy is both penny and pound foolish, with not an ounce of wisdom to be found.

Maybe it’s because we live in the State of Corruption, County of Crook that when we see something as ridiculous as Wsol’s and Bach’s water subsidy, we find ourselves asking whether the motive behind it is stupid or just plain crooked.  

And, in this case, we also find ourselves asking: “Just whose water are you carrying, Ald. Wsol?”

19 comments so far

PDog, I am astounded by this. What idiocy. Between what you and PR underground come up with, we could have this budget crisis managed. Get your voices heard, in the city council. And btw, I didn’t know Lembesis was gone. This is a GREAT opportunity to get someone with financial leadership to steer this group in the right direction. Any word on who will fill her position?

Great column….thank you

This is the same reason why I thought former city treasurer Carl Brauweiller was off his nut when he showed up a a council meeting a month or so ago and wanted the water bill added to our property taxes. What a freakin’ idiot, as is former ald. Frank Bartolone. Were they Wsol plants?

The water subsidy isn’t just ridiculous. It’s offensive. Faux fiscal conservative is right. First Alderman Wsol wants to spend millions for a new police station WE DON’T NEED and now he sounds like the MTA wanting to spend reserves.

Alderman Bach refusing to do the right thing with the water fees by holding the subject hostage until he gets whatever it is he wants from the city staff is offensive. He is willing to hurt us all only because he didn’t get his way from city staff?

I wish we had a recall law on the books.

Like Allegretti with the billboards, it looks like Wsol is definitely “pimping” for somebody, or else he is just really, really stupid.

Bach, on the other hand, is really, really stupid. His linkage of water rate increases to unspecified personnel cuts is a sick joke on the taxpayers of Park Ridge.

I’m a senior citizen and I am willing to pay for the full cost of the water my household uses. So tell me again, Alderman Wsol, why my property taxes should be paying for any part of the water use of Lutheran General, the schools, the country club, Summit Square and Dominick’s?

A few things come to mind:

1. I think that a pass through of the full fees is the only way that it makes sense. It is clean, simple and easy to explain and it is the right thing to do.

2. Looking at the list, the hospital is the one that really confuses me. I must be missing something. Has anyone seen any document related to the economic benefit they provide the community? The decision just does not make sense.

3. It would seem that even with a pass through we would still be paying for almost 1/2. The Park District and the two School districts account for almost half of the usage and we pay for those with taxes already.

4. The list gives you a real view or the industry base of PR. A Dominick’s makes the top ten list of water users!!

anon 9:50 pm:

Answering your question about the hospital:

The hospital is a not for profit by law so I am not sure what decision you are referring to.

The hospital is the largest employer in PR. PR made a large amount of fees on the new construction at the hospital. The hospital spent money to use green technology to try and not add to runoff and flooding problems in the area. PR gets some pretty good taxes from the parking garage at the hospital. The hospital donated the cost of repainting the PR water tower. The hospital also donated money to have some streets in the second ward repaved and curbs installed.

Having said all that, I agree they should have to pay for the water they use because they don’t pay any property taxes.

Everyone should pay the same rate for water. Period. As a homeowner, I’ll be very ticked off if it turns out to be true that I am subsidizing the water used by these other entities.

As for the budget, it is time for some glasnost (openness) and perestroika (restructuring). No more business as usual.

Mr. Schmidt, tear down this wall!

The one (or Two) I REALLY don’t get are the Counrty club and Summit.

The Counry Club is privately owned/operated with private membership. Notice the term “public” is absent particularly in the form of ammenity. So why do they get a break?

Multi unit dwellins, anther head scratcher. More people more consumption, bigger break. I don’t get it.

A8:15,

It’s true. The water fund is being used to subsidize everyone’s usage at the moment, because the rate increases from Chicago were not passed through in full.

The way the water rates are structured, at the high end of the scale, large users get a break from paying; however, I don’t recall the exact scale.

PE8:15,

The Country Club is an amenity based on its being open space. If you look at a map of Park Ridge, you will see the open space of the Country Club alone is nearly equal to all the open space of all our parks, combined. The only area that comes as close to being as expansively green is the forest preserve area bordered by Devon, Western and Dee Rds.

The Country Club gets a break simply due to the way the water rates are structured.

As for multi-unit dwellings; since the water bills are not part of the property tax bills, water is billed separately and to the building(s), and again they get a break by default due to the way the water rates are structured.

Here is the municipal code for water (and sewer) rates.

11-1-9 RATES AND FEES

All properties connecting with the water system of the City or taking and using water from the
City’s system shall pay the following rates and fees established for various water services and sewer services as described:

A. Rates for Water Services and Use in the City, per billing period:

1. Metered construction and regular service to a business unit or single dwelling unit:

a. Up to but not exceeding 5,000 gallons $26.96
(basic rate)

b. Over 5,000 gallons but not exceeding
30,000 gallons $4.17 per 1,000 gallons

c. Over 30,000 gallons $4.65 per 1,000 gallons
(Ord. 2007-33, 4/16/07, S25), (Ord. 2008-25, 4/21/2008)(Ord. 2009-42, 5/18/2009)

2. Where one meter delivers water to more than one dwelling unit or to a combination of
dwelling units and a commercial or business unit, the above rates shall apply to each
unit.

3. The basic rate in subparagraph (1) is applied to all properties, regardless of whether a
water meter is installed, upon transfer of the property or upon issuance of a certificate
of occupancy in the event that a demolition permit was approved by the City for the
property. The basic rate in subparagraph (1) continues to be charged while a property is
vacant, in foreclosure, or the water service has been turned off because the basic rate covers charges for the City’s water system as a whole and includes the infrastructure that serves each property within the City.

B. Rates for Sewer Use in the City, per billing period:

1. Regular service to a business unit or single dwelling unit:

a. Up to but not exceeding 5,000 gallons $3.80
(basic rate)

b. Over 5,000 gallons but not exceeding
30,000 gallons $0.59 per 1,000 gallons

c. Over 30,000 gallons $0.68 per 1,000 gallons

(Ord. 2008-25, 4/21/2008)(Ord. 2009-42, 5/18/2009)

Why isn’t the Country Club public?

A1:35,

Er, because it’s private? I’m not really sure what you are asking.

Here’s a web page link to the Club’s history,

http://www.parkridgecc.org/index.cfm?ID=112

Let’s think about Mr. Wsol and water rates for a minute. What does he stand to gain from keeping rates low from big water users? (And remember, all PW has published is the top 10 users. There may be some other big users from 10-20 who Wsol might be interested in pleasing).

Someone hit on it before. If Wsol really is positioning himself to run for mayor (or at least re-election), then he’ll use this and other issues to establish his populist bona fides. He’ll claim that he worked to keep the big bad mayor from picking the pockets of the common folk, never mimd the fact that he is helping to do permanent damage to the City’s financial health.

I strongly encourage everyone to watch the video (thanks George) of last Monday night’s COW meeting (the second video on Park Ridge Underground) beginning at 22:30. The comments of Wsol, Bach and Allegretti are scary stupid – they don’t seem to get the point, which Carey says ALL of his constituents who have talked to him about the topic understand: that water users should pay the full cost of the price the City pays to Chicago for its water, irrespective of the current balance of the water enterprise fund.

I have to assume Wsol, Bach and Allegretti aren’t truly as stupid as they are acting about this topic, otherwise either their wives run their families’ budgets or they are flirting with bankruptcy. Which means they likely are playing games on this issue to cover for something or somebody else who is making out from the current water pricing.

Oh, I forgot one thing. Bach did get ask two good questions: “Exactly how much do we pay Chicago for a gallon of water?” and “Exactly how much do we charge the users for that same gallon of water?”

So somebody give that blind squirrel an acorn!

Could the citizens organize a class-action lawsuit against the city for something like this? Theoretically, the hospital or country club could bankrupt the city if they used enough water… It would be interesting if someone calculated the usage needed to break the bank… Let’s say the city subsidizes $100 for every 1,000 gallons used, there is a certain mathematical point where the city wouldn’t be able to pay for it… Isn’t this just plain and simple negligence on the part of the city where they are in essence putting the taxpayers at risk? and for no defined benefit???

It’s really frustrating when everyone you talk to about this issue agrees with all of us, EXCEPT for the Aldermen…

Just like the police station referendum came back at over 80% AGAINST, I’d bet that if this went to referenum it would have a similar result… Of course it all depends on how Wsol would word it…

Here’s another idea to ponder: Let’s build a giant flood reservoir and use that water for drinking… we’ll kill 2 birds with one stone, we’ll solve the flooding problem and get rid of the water bills altogether 🙂 or maybe build a pumping station in murphy lake? 🙂



Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

(required)

(optional and not displayed)