Another Rubber Stamp Council?

On August 8, the Euclid City Council voted 4-3 to purchase the old Alexander's property in downtown Euclid for $900,000.   This land is needed for Federal mandated improvements to Euclid's sewer system.

Yet, on Monday, August 27, the Council will debate this matter further.  Confused?  Let me explain.

Councilpersons Jones, Scarniench and myself voted against purchasing the land.  While the land is important to the project and needs purchasing,  the Cervenik Administration botched the entire presentation to Council.

When the City purchases property, an appraisal of the property is required.  Normally, that appraisal and, other supporting documentation is presented to City Council for review BEFORE  Council votes on the purchase.

Here examples of how the process should, and, has worked in the recent past

December, 2009 E 248th Street Sewer Project:  A lakefront parcel next to the Normandy was needed for a storm water outfall pipe.  Owned by the K&D Group, the final purchase price was $400K.   Council received both the appraisal and supporting explanations from the Administration well in advance of the meeting, allowing time for ample questions.   This purchase most closely resembles
the Alexander's purchase

June, 2010, St. Roberts Parish Purchase:   Bought for 674K, the City is "landbanking" the property to capitalize on future marina development.  The vote in June was the culmination of two months of CONFIDENTIAL e-mail exchanges between the Administration and City Council.

November,  2010 Lakefront parcel purchase.   The two other lakefront parcels were purchased from the K&D Group for 470K.  This brings the City in control of property between the Normandy and
HarborCrest.  At the same time, K&D donated to the City of Euclid a strip of shore line property that is important for future lakefront development. 

In each case, the Administration provided the Council with appraisal information, include copies of the actual appraisal, and detailed explanations explaining the appraisal, the need for the land, and reasoning behind the price.  With this information, Council can ask questions, and raise concerns
BEFORE voting on the legislation.
 

The Broken Process

 



For the Alexander property purchase, the City Council received zero supporting documentation from the Administration.  No appraisal, no explanation, just the legislation.    Now mind you, we have the same Mayor and Law Director, the same team that did it correctly a few years ago.  They know full well that Council would have questions on the appraisal and the price.

When you are going to spend 900K of the public's money, more information should be provided, not less.  When asked why the appraisal was not provided to Council prior to the meeting, Law Director Frey blustered that "no one on Council asked for it."  This is a very poor excuse for  the unwillingness of the Cervenik Administration to provide basic information, information that was  given in the past. 

Instead, Law Director Frey read certain portions from the appraisal to Council.  Being read too on the floor of City Council prevents any real questioning, and, insight or penetrating. thought: this only leads to poor decision making.

Yet, instead of owning up to the mistake, Mayor Cervenik complained about the Council not communicating with the Administration.  Well, its not like the appraisal information just became available in August.   The appraisals were completed in January. In reviewing communication from the Administration I can find nothing updating the Council on the appraisal process, or, the negotiations to obtain the property.  This was far different, than, say, what occurred when we were looking at the St. Roberts purchase.

The City Council has no obligation to bail out the Administration's poor preparation.   But, perhaps they figured they had the votes and did not have to prepare.   The majority of Caviness, Gail, O'Hare, and Mclaughlin provided the approval based on their trust of the Administration. 

Trusting the Administration  is nice.  Verification of that trust is better for the public!

Notice that I have not mentioned if the price of 900K is a fair one.

Without any supporting documentation, the Council should not even have begun to consider if the purchase price was right, wrong, low, or high.  Given how poorly this process was, my "no" was easy to cast.

So, why the meeting on Monday?  Two days after the vote, Mr. Frey did provide the appraisal of the Alexander property.   That led to many of my colleagues having all sorts of questions.   Imagine that!
I felt that it is important, the the public at least hear the reasoning behind the purchase price:  all of which should have been discussed before any vote was ever taken.

While it is unlikely, there is still time to make your voice heard.  The purchase legislation does not go into effect until 30 days after its August 8th passage.

The meeting is Monday, 8/27, Euclid City Hall, at 7:00pm

Our Euclid Public Schools

Dr. Joffrey Jones has now officially retired as Superintendent of the Euclid Public Schools.  We thank him for his service.  A warm welcome to Keith M. Bell who began his duties as Superintendent August 1st.  He steps into a challenging environment. 

9-mill Levy on the November Ballot.   This tops the list of issues that Superintendent Bell is facing.

Cuts in the Schools budget are planned no matter what happens in November.  The question is the depth of the cuts.  If passed, the 9 mill levy would last ten years and generate 5.4 million dollars annually.   For the owner of a 100K home, the cost would be $275.00 per year.

Perhaps a different way to look at this levy request is to ask your self:  What are we "buying" for our levy money?  In other words, what kind of education philosophy, administration, teachers, are we getting for our money?  What are the results of our dollars spent?

I came across a couple of articles that maps out a way that our money SHOULD be spent to get better results

What is listed below comes from articles published throughout the country by Karin Chenoweth and Kathleen Porter-Magee.  Each takes a little different approach, but the core values are the same.

1)  Set High Standards:  Believe that no matter where children live, they can learn.

2)  Accountability:  Make school Administrators and teachers truly accountable for results in the

     classroom.  This is meaningless without the following:

3) Teacher Autonomy:  If we are to hold schools accountable then, they must have the true ability

    to create the lessons and use the tools to teach the children based the educational needs of the child.

4) Focus on what children need to know:  This means focus on the basics so that children are ready for

    college or vocational training.

5) Create Teaching Teams:  A child's education should not vary from year to year based on the

    quality of the teacher.  Teacher collaboration delivers a better product for children.

6) Asses Frequently:  To see who is learning, who needs extra help, and, to find patterns to improve

    the education product.

7) Build Relationships:  Children must trust the teachers enough to learn.  Therefor, good schools

    build that trust among the Administration and staff, among the staff, and, between the teachers and

    the children.

MS. Chenoweth illustrates the power of the factors above be describing George Hall Elementary School in Mobile, Alabama.  All the children there qualify for the federal student lunch program.   At one time it was one of the worst schools in Mobile.   After adopting the principals above, it is now one of the best schools in the state.

Adopting such changes are not easy, or quick.  I'm hoping Dr. Bell can bring to the Euclid Schools some of the principals above.   The principals above and the results they can produce are worth the investing in.  The very future of our children and City depends on it.

Resources

Karin Chenoweth:  "Tts Being Done: Academic Success in Unexpected Places"  "How Its Being Done: Urgent Lessons From Unexpected Schools"

The Education Trust.

Kathleen Porter-McGee -   Thomas R Fordham Institute 

A New Tool for Niegbhors

Ever yearn for the days when neighbors got to know each other over the backyard fence?  In today's world of odd job schedules, taking the kids to various activities, and, the growth of cyberspace, its hard to get to know your neighbors.

But, there is a 21st Century solution to all this:  Nextdoor.com

You might have seen the June 6th Plain Dealer article about this very site.  

In short, the site is designed as a safe, secure web site for local homeowner groups, or, residents
that are living in a specific geographic areas, such as in an apartment complex.

Members can share information specific to their neighborhood:  from social news, to sharing a favorite recipe, to safety information, to cyberspace garage sales, and, however else you want to use the site for the betterment of your specific area.

From a casual check, it appears to be a wonderful tool to keep connect.  In today's world, it seems at times that we are better connected with folks miles, states, and continents away.  Nextdoor.com offers the chance to reconnect with the folks next door.

Check it out and let me know what you think.

****************************************************************************

2012 Pond and Garden Tour.  Come see some of the best yards in Euclid!  Two chances to tour:  Saturday, June 23
6-10 pm and, Sunday, June 24  1:00pm -6:00pm

For Tickets, call 289-2800, Cost, $5.00, or $20.00 for a tour via Lolly the Trolly (Sunday only).

Blackboard Connect Launch

Euclid Launches Blackboard Connect to Enhance Emergency Preparedness and Communication

City residents can register their contact information and preferences to receive urgent notifications and important updates
The City of Euclid has launched Blackboard Connect, a mass notification system that enhances communication and emergency preparedness. The first community-wide test call will be held on May 8, 2012.

Euclid implemented Blackboard Connect to stay connected to residents and efficiently provide them with direction in the event of severe weather or other urgent situations. Using Blackboard Connect, officials can record and send personalized voice messages to home phones, businesses, local agencies and mobile phones in just minutes. The service also can send email, text messages (SMS) to mobile phones and posts on Facebook, RSS feeds and Twitter channels. Messages can also be sent to TTY/TDD devices for people who are hearing impaired.

“We want to make sure residents receive the information that matters most to them, whether it is an urgent safety notification or an update on a recreation program,” said Bill Cervenik, Mayor of Euclid. “With Blackboard Connect, we have the ability to send important, tailored notifications to residents quickly and efficiently.”

Publicly available primary residential and business phones in Euclid will automatically be included in the system. However, to make sure the city has the most up-to-date contact information, residents should visit the city’s website (www.cityofeuclid.com) and click on the link that says “SIGN UP NOW – SERVICES BY BLACKBOARD CONNECT,” to provide their complete contact information. Users should also manage their message preferences by indicating their preferred mode of contact and outreach message topics. Those without Internet access, or who need assistance, are encouraged to call the Mayor’s office at (216) 289-2751. Residents with call blocking services should add (216) 289-2772 to their approved number list to ensure they receive important notifications from the city.

 

Sewer Rate Increases Pass

Euclid City Council did pass higher sewer and water rates for Euclid customers. Satellite communities will also see increases to help pay for mandated improvements to out sewer system. (see prior posts). On the rate increase for the Waste Water Treatment Plant, that increase passed 5-4.

Everyone on Council and in the Administration understands the need to comply with the Consent Decree that Council approved last year. No one suggests that Euclid should fight the Federal Government. We all know that some additional money was needed now to keep the system from insolvency. And, we reached this point because of inaction from the Administration.

For example:

1) It was recommended that rates to run the plant be raised all the way back in Oct 2010. The Administration wasted all of 2011 doing nothing while the system slipped into insolvency.

2) The Administration knew for years that the Capital Fund (Peterson) Account was running short of money. Again, no action was taken in 2011. That meant critical projects could not be done, raising their ultimate cost.

This inaction backed Council into a corner: either pass some rate increase, or not be able to pay workers and pay back debt.

3) Since January, the Administration has presented different plans to comply with the EPA, and, different cost numbers. The estimates of the compliance plan has gone up 45 million dollars since January alone.

4) The City initially presented to Council 2010 cost estimates instead of the most current figures. In the meetings since, City Council has continue to receive incorrect, or out of date numbers.

5) When Council finally heard a formal presentation on the Membrane Technology on March 12, the representative from CT Consultant (the City Engineering firm) could not answer many questions, and, crafted his presentation in part, from the Wiekipidia entry on the technology.

6) We still don't know if the technology is truly ready for implementation in Euclid as the Council was just told last week that the technology was only now evaluated for readiness to use in a system like Euclid's

7) The Administration will now look at green infrastructure technology. While this is welcomed
this should have been done years ago as part of the overall planing process. There are potentially millions of dollars in savings in such programs.

8) EPA has not approved of any of the plant improvements

This chaotic, piecemeal, helter skelter approach in trying to convince Council to pass the largest rate increase in City history (with more increases to come) was simply inferior. They presented only half a program, a gray infrastructure program. You, as rate payers should truly question how system improvements are planned and, how your money is spent.

Four of us on City Council (Scarniench, Jones, Gilliham, Langman) proposed a compromise: raise the rates enough to keep the plant running, and, do needed (and approved) SSO projects. Delay the rest of the increases until you have; 1) EPA approval; 2) a better plan in place; 3)time to have more meeting with you, the rate payers.

That compromise was rejected. Instead, the Council majority simply rubber stamped the increase. Now that the Administration has the funding in place, Council lost its last chance to effectively monitor and improve the plan. The majority is counting on frequent meetings going forward to monitor progress. I am skeptical of this, as City Council did little in 2011 and has not really done this type of oversight for many years.

The Absurdity of the Majority

In the attempt to justify the rate increase, the Administration and some on Council claim that the increase is not a big deal because natural gas prices have dropped. In other words, it is less painful to you because you are saving money elsewhere. Of course, that argument is absurd. Just drive by any gas station. And with the rise in fuel prices, the cost of food is also rising. But more importantly, we in public service should NEVER presume to know what you can afford, or how you should be spending your money. We must always remember who we work for, and, have some understanding for how tough it is for many of you.

Some Good News

Also, Monday night, a resolution in support of Green infrastructure was unanimously passed by City Council. The Administration will develop a Request for Proposal to ask experienced firms to work with our current consultants to develop a comprehensive green infrastructure program.

While this should have been done years ago, and, the City is far behind, we can catch up. It will require some deliberate, focused action to get this firm on board quickly.

In the meantime you can do your part: If you are a home owner, you can keep water out of the storm system by disconnecting your downspout. For further details, call the City of Euclid Engineering Department at 289-8100 Ask about the downspout disconnect program. Since the City is going green, I'm sure someone at City Hall would be willing to help you.

In the meantime, don't forget to answer the poll questions.

Money Down the Drain - Sewer Rate Update

Since January 18, 2012, the City Administration has presented 4 public meetings on the need for higher sewer rates. To date, this is what we know:

The Federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is demanding that the City of Euclid fix the 17 Combined Sewer Overflows (CSO's) and the 16 Sanitary Sewer Overflows (SSO's). In the simplest terms, any "overflow" means waste, or contaminated, or dirty water that goes directly to Lake Erie. This is a violation of federal law, and, must be fixed.

1) At the end of 2008, Euclid City Council raised the Capital Sewer Rate (the Peterson Fund) to pay for all 17 CSO projects.

2) To date, none of these projects are done. This is because the drop in water consumption
offset the rise in the rate

The January 18, 2012 Euclid City Council Service Committee Meeting

At this meeting we also learned the following:

1) 2010 Estimates for fixing the CSO's and SSO's was 17.6 million dollars, with Waste Water Treatment fixes costing an additional 36 million dollars.

2) Total costs to comply with the Consent Decree was estimated at between 60-95 million dollars. CT Consultants, the City's engineering firm presented this higher range due in part to
the uncertainty in what the EPA will demand.

3) The increase in rates would pay for all of the system improvements

4) The improvements included building 6 large tanks behind the Waste Water Treatment Plant.
This would have required taking homes adjacent to the plant, and would have jeopardized the
Lakefront Community Center.

The Three Public Rate Meetings: Feb 24 - March 1st

1) The plan to take homes and build 6 tanks behind the plant was scraped: a better, newer
technology will allow the treatment of all storm water on the current plant space. It is better because it filters water to a higher standard than the EPA currently requires.

2) This "membrane technology" costs much more though: The first range of cost of improvements jumped up to between 105-135 million dollars. A 45 million dollar jump.

3) By the second rate meeting, the range of costs disappeared, landing at the 136 million dollar amount.

4) The proposed rate increase of approx 70 million dollars is not enough to pay for all the plant improvements. This is only PHASE ONE of the rate increases

What We Don't Know.

1) What the EPA will approve: more than likely, from all the conversations the City may never know exactly what the EPA wants. The City is fairly confident that the EPA will like the membrane technology because it does filter the water better.

2) The City knew about the better technology for at least three years now. Why they unveiled a plan that caused so much resistance and upset for the residents living next to the plant makes little sense.

3) The CSO and SSO fixes have risen in projected cost to about 22 million dollars. According to the Administration, they were using 2010 estimates. Why would they think that City Council was interested in obsolete data?

4) Does the membrane technology account for the rest of the 45 million range of cost increases?

5) What the next phase of rate increases will look like. This is slated for discussion at the end of this year.

As you can see, many questions remain. Monday, March 12th, 6:30 at City Hall, the Council will again meet on the proposed rate increase.

The Way Ahead

No matter what comes out of the meeting on Monday the approach to the problem should be this:

Incorporate Green Infrastructure approaches into the entire plan, both SO/SSO remediation and plant improvements. Keeping water out of the system can reduce overflows during storms, and, brings less water to the plant.

In other words, the current plan is incomplete and requires more work.
Rates should not go up until a more complete plan is developed. No rate increase now is probably not realistic given the many factors.

So, a rate structure should be adopted based on splitting the improvements into two: The CSO/SSO problem and, then, plant improvements.

1) The City must address the CSO's and SSO's. This has held true now for several years no matter what the plant improvements look like. (A green infrastructure program can help with this problem, but, without a thorough study, we don't know by how much)

2) Rates will go up to pay for these improvements. We can consider this "phase one" of the Administration's rate increase: to pay for plant operations, and the CSO/SSO program and, additional planning for future improvements.

Plant Improvements:

We have seen that in less than 1 month, improvements to the plant itself has taken a radical (and better) turn. Those plant improvements have risen in cost by about 45 million dollars.

A green infrastructure plan must be developed, evaluated and incorporated into plant improvements.

As I wrote in the last post, green infrastructure can be far less expensive than using grey infrastructure alone.

Thorough "green" planing is the key here. Perhaps millions and millions of dollars of your money hangs in the balance.

Going Green - A Storm Water Alternative Plan

November, 2, 2009: City Council passed a resolution that read in part "it is the goal of the City of Euclid to support and encourage sustainability in the daily operations and provision of municipal services in order to reduce overall energy consumption,use resources responsibly, be good stewards of the environment, and to save costs."

While the resolution applied to alternative energy, its well beyond time to apply this type of thinking to every aspect of City Government, including our Waste Water Treatment System.

As written in last week's post, the Federal EPA is requiring Euclid to make tens of millions of dollars of improvements to our system. The fees illustrated last week will pay for improved sewer lines, new holding tanks and improved storm water treatment. This type of approach is referred to as "Grey Infrastructure." It does nothing to address the AMOUNT of storm water that enters our system

An Alternative Approach

Keep water out of the system! By doing so, there is less need for more tanks, and greater treatment plant capacity. In other words, it takes the current storm water load off the system meaning fewer costly improvements are needed. Euclid should adopt a "Green Infrastructure" Program.

What is "Green Storm Water Infrastructure?

The Philadelphia Water Department has a great description: "Green storm water infrastructure includes a range of soil-water-plant systems that intercept storm water, infiltrate a portion of it into the ground, evaporate a portion of it into the air, and in some cases release a portion of it slowly back into the sewer system." Tools to intercept storm water run off include: rain barrels, pervious pavement for driveways and parking lots; rain gardens; tree trenches, "green" roofs. Green infrastructure also has the benefit of filtering the storm run off of pollutants such as oils, chemicals and nitrogen. And, that means a cleaner Lake Erie.

The Value of Trees in Storm Water Management

Trees soak up water, primarily through their root system. Tree leaves also prevents rain water from hitting the ground, and is then evaporated back into the air. Tree roots can also improve the soil, allowing the ground to absorb more water. Depending on the variety and size of the tree several hundred gallons can be absorbed each year.

Philadelphia and Lancaster, PA - Case Studies

To comply with Federal EPA regulations, the City of Philadelphia was faced with a 9 billion dollar tab to construct giant tunnels to hold storm water. The City does not have 9 billion. Therefore, Mayor Mike Nutter embarked on a program called Greenworks Philadelphia, a comprehensive green program for everything from energy usage, to recycling to storm water management. The storm water program, administered through the Philadelphia Water Department created new storm water management fees, and incentives to disconnect downspouts, install roof and and rain gardens, rain barrels, etc. Building pervious alleys and roads, urban forests and rain gardens on empty land, is another strategy behind the effort. Mayor Nutter believes that green infrastructure will cost about 7 billion less to comply with the Federal EPA than the proposed cost of the tunnels.

Lancaster is a city in some ways similar to Euclid: Older, smaller lots, a little bit larger than Euclid. They are located in the Delaware River watershed, so, are under EPA mandate to improve their waster water treatment system: Under a traditional approach of new tanks, and pipes and other plant improvements, the price tag was estimated at 300 million dollars. Lancaster City government instead adopted a green infrastructure approach that will cost less than half of that, about 141 million. What is most promising is that by adopting this green approach, Lancaster has won numerous grants to implement their plan.

North East Ohio Regional Sewer District

If we look in our own back yard, we would find that the North East Ohio Regional Sewer District is adopting many of the strategies found in Philadelphia, Lancaster, Chicago and other places: integrating green infrastructure into their sewer system improvements. NEORSD was just given permission by the courts to implement a storm water management fee ALONG WITH INCENTIVES to help keep water out of their system.

And, What of Euclid?

Before moving forward with any new fees, the City of Euclid owes it to our rate payers to evaluate the following:

1) Education: Almost two years ago now, Council passed legislation allowing the disconnect of residential downspouts with approval from the City Engineering Department. To date the City has not had a single request. The City should develop a website tab or a stand alone website dedicated to property owners that want to disconnect downspouts ,install rain gardens and pervious pavement.

2) Demonstration: Two years ago, I convinced the Euclid Schools to do a "test pour" of pervious concrete: the City was not interested. The City must take the lead in disconnecting downspouts, installing pervious pavement, planting rain gardens, trees and green roofs on City property.

3) Evaluation: As far as we can tell, the City's engineering firm has not really explored the green infrastructure approaches. The City must hire an engineering firm with green infrastructure experience to evaluate the current Long Term Control plan, and green alternatives. This firm should also evaluate how the system is managed, the proposed fee increases, and, potential alternative fee structures.

EPA

Will the Courts and the Federal EPA allow Euclid to revamp our storm water control plan? According to the online magazine "Waterworld" the answer seems to be "yes." The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will continue to promote the use of green infrastructure and work to develop an integrated planning process to help local governments manage wastewater discharges and stormwater runoff more efficiently and cost effectively. In commenting on the memo, Deputy Administrator Bob Perciasepe said, "An integrated approach allows communities to prioritize their investments to address the most serious water issues first and provides flexibility to use innovative, cost-effective storm- and wastewater-management solutions -– including green infrastructure."

To review: There are alternative strategies to Euclid's storm water problem, solutions that are better for the environment, and less expensive. So, do we go grayer, or greener? The choice is up to you.

Resources

City of Philadelphia:

http://www.phillywatersheds.org/what_were_doing/green_infrastructure

City of Lancaster:

National Tree Benefit Calculator:

http://www.treebenefits.com/calculator/index.cfm

N.E.Ohio Regional Sewer District: http://www.neorsd.org/stormwaterprogram.php

Rain Garden Manual for Home Owners:

http://www.tinkerscreekwatershed.org/documents/RGManual.pdf

Sewer/Water Rates Set to Rise

Euclid Waste Water Treatment Plant/System

Euclid's Lakeshore Treatment plant is a regional plant, treating flows from Euclid, Willoughby Hills, Willowick, Wickliffe and parts of Richmond Hts and South Euclid.

Euclid's system, like most others throughout the US treats sanitary, and storm water. To keep the treatment plant from flooding in heavy rains, there are relief points called overflows.. In heavy rains, storm and sanitary waters mix and can be discharged directly into Lake Erie. Euclid can minimally treat most storm water, but not to the level mandated by the Federal Clean Water Act.

Since 2005, the City and EPA have engaged in a dialogue on how to bring our Treatment System into compliance.

In 2011, the City of Euclid entered into a Consent Decree in Federal Court to implement improvements to our treatment system.

Why are Rates proposed to increase?

1) To pay for the everyday operations at the plant.

2) To pay for the proposed capital improvements to the plant itself.

Euclid raises money for the system based on water consumed. According to the Administration, water consumption has fallen even though the number of accounts in the service area has stayed about the same. Less water used means less revenue. There are also approximately 4 million dollars in delinquent accounts throughout the system.

What the New Rates will look like.

Your sewer bill is calculated based on consumption (how many MCF's that you use, 1 MCF=7,500 gallons of water). Euclid residents pay $46.17 per MCF. The incremental breakdown of this charge is as follows

Euclid Residents Currently Pay: Rates residents will pay if approved.

Current Total Rates, 2012 = $46.17/MCF

Proposed Total 2012 Rates = $58.17/MCF

(effective April, 2012)

Here is the Breakdown:

Plant Operations: Included in this are salaries, benefits, utility costs, supplies and minor capital items:

2012 Current = $19.60 Proposed 2012 = $24.60

Plant Capital Investment: Major improvements to the Plant itself

2012 Current = $ 4.08 Proposed 2012 = $8.08

Peterson Charge: For new sewer construction

2012 Current = $ 11.88 Proposed 2012 = $13.88

Cleveland meter reading charge:

2012 Current = $1.61 Proposed 2012 = $1.61

Waterline Fund: Used to help replace and repair water lines throughout the city in conjunction with Cleveland Water Department, and, to restore roadways and landscaping affected by such work.

2012 Current = $9.00 Proposed 2012 = $10.00

Currently the proposed legislation to raise rates is on the agenda for City Council review. The proposed final vote is scheduled for Monday, March 6th.