PMUA: Weather and hearing messy, but Commissioners vote on rates

The weather outside was frightful, but inside, the Plainfield Municipal Utilities Authority's rate hearing Tuesday night was somewhat less than delightful.

Mark Spivey, the Courier's Plainfield beat reporter, sat behind me -- you will want to read his story as soon as it is up; I am going to focus on some issues with the PMUA's argument and the hearing process itself. [12:50 PM: Courier story is up, see here.]

What started out as a seemingly tightly organized presentation became messier as the evening wore on, not entirely because many of the residents in attendance were angry in varying degrees.

The evening got under way with video depicting ILLEGAL DUMPING, evidently from a security camera on a PMUA building and pointed down Cottage Place toward Roosevelt Avenue. It was a vivid visual underscoring the problem the PMUA argued was at the heart of the proposed changes in SHARED SERVICES RATES, which cover (among other things) cleaning up behind illegally dumped items throughout the community.

Unfortunately, the video's impact was mostly lost because it was not well integrated into the meat-and-potatoes of the evening, the presentation on the budget and the proposed adjustments to the schedule of solid waste service charges and fees.

The PowerPoint presentation, honchoed by three PMUA consultants, covered the proposed budget (including both revenues and expenses) and allocations between 'shared services' and 'solid waste services' to billable entities (households, businesses, etc.), as well as testimony that the whole was developed in a way that was both 'necessary and reasonable'.

PMUA counsel Leslie London then opened the hearing for public cross-examination of the testimony from the consultants.

Ratepayer attendees, between 15 and 20, palpably unhappy and with inchoate criticisms, peppered the consultants and senior staff with questions, including --

• How were the changes supposed to curb illegal dumping? (We hope it will encourage ratepayers to use the two free bulk pickups per year instead of illegal dumping.)
• What percentage of illegal dumping is attributed to non-residents vs. residents? (Because the picture is fragmented -- PMUA, police and Publlic Works are separately involved -- there is no complete answer.)
• Was Plainfield compared to other communities with utilities authorities to give some perspective? (No.)
• Would overall costs be lowered if the PMUA got out of its contract with the Union County Utilities Authority? (Yes, but we can't break the long-term contract.)
• Please explain individual expense items such as 'water', 'training', 'employee events', 'wireless services', etc. (Each was explained.)

There were questions for which no ready answers were available, such as explaining the difference (approximately 1,000 units) between billable households last year vs. the proposed budget, and why sewerage units were approximately 3,000 more numerous than solid waste units.

At length, ratepayer questions were exhausted and Counsel signaled the Commissioners were going  into executive session.

This created something of a tumult, with audience members believing the Commissioners meant to vote on the resolution out of public view.

Ms. London quickly retreated and announced the vote on the resolution would proceed.

Before it did, Commission chairperson Harold Mitchell invited commissioners to comment.

This turned out to be unfortunate.

Commissioner Tracey Brown, after getting some clarifications from the consultants, then turned to criticizing the audience, saying that she didn't think they understood the severity of the problem in the 4th Ward as she did, that she felt the audience reaction to the video of illegal dumping was inappropriately lighthearted, and that she had welcomed the opportunity to become a commissioner just because illegal dumping in the 4th Ward was so rampant (including in front of her church on South Second Street).

Then Commissioner Alex Toliver began his comments, which were shortly interrupted by an outburst from ratepayer Bob Chanda. The two got into a shouting match which Mitchell and London finally quelled after threatening to eject Chanda -- but not before he got the last word in.

No other commissioners offered comments and the resolution was read by Ms. London and went to a vote.

The commissioners voted unanimously to adopt the rate change. No surprise to this observer.

If I were a Commissioner or a member of the PMUA's executive staff, I would have expected that the only people who would turn out on such a nasty evening would be those who have an issue with the proposed rate increase. No surprise there.

But the hearing could have benefited from better organization by those who were running it.

Here are some suggestions --

1. Have OUTSIDE EYES Review Everything

• This could have made the meeting much more effective, with less confusion -- and resulting feelings on the part of attendees that the PMUA is not being forthcoming.
• For instance --
• If the video is important, integrate it into the process with a well-scripted voice over.
• Avoid confusion by reviewing, and correcting, vague words, lingo and shop-talk:
• 'water': is that bottled water, or water provided by NJ American Water Co.?
• 'training': for whom? Line workers? Administrative staff? Senior staff? Commissioners?
• 'lot' and 'household' charges: don't assume the audience will understand, illustrate with examples (this was finally done in the process of answering a question)

2. Anticipate Possible Questions

• Of course you're going to be asked if you can peg the percentage of dumping from out-of-towners.
• Of course you're going to be asked to compare the PMUA to other utilities authorities (the PMUA has in the past made such a comparison public).
• Of course someone is liable to ask for year-to-year comparisons on any number of items.
• Be prepared.

3. Drown the Audience in Facts

• Handouts! Handouts! Handouts!
• Nothing makes an audience more suspicious than giving the sense there is information being withheld.
• Preparing handouts of a PowerPoint presentation is best practice, common sense, and an appreciated courtesy. Why not make yourself a hero?
• Put the data on the website just before the meeting and tell the audience how to access it. We are in the digital age, for Pete's sake!

4. Decide Who Is In Charge

• Put one person in charge and stick with the plan.
• Who was in charge, Ms. London or Commissioner Mitchell? It wasn't always clear.
• Control of the meeting should reside in one person, who guides everything along. When he was President of the City Council, Mr. Mitchell would make sure ALL questions were addressed THROUGH HIMSELF to whomever. This way, questioners got the attention they deserved and the proper party was directed to respond, without the meeting devolving into impromptu back-and-forths and becoming unfocused.

5. Train Commissioners to Behave Professionally

• The PMUA Commissioners have a fiduciary responsibility to the ratepayers.
• They also have the responsibility to hear out ratepayers -- no matter how angry or ill-informed -- sorting out kernels of fact from the shells of emotion in which they may be wrapped and addressing the facts only.
• It is not good governance for Commissioners to attack ratepayers or cast aspersions on their motives.
• The Commissioners should be trained in good governance techniques and held to higher standards than were in evidence last night.

Though there are many questions to be asked of the PMUA, I have always thought it has a well-focused mission that needs better tub-thumping.

Absent proof of real misdeeds, there is a reason for it to stay around.

Angry ratepayers notwithstanding.

---

• Websites:  "PMUA" | "DumpPMUA"

-- Dan Damon [follow]

View today's CLIPS here. Not getting your own CLIPS email daily? Click here to subscribe.