The Observation Deck

Where do the Mayoral candidates stand on the privatization of water?

Inquiring minds want to know.

Tara Lohan considers the documentary film “Thirstâ€Â￾ and writes in “Fighting the Corporate Theft of Our Water:â€Â￾

“In 2005,"Thirst" reports, 200 mayors of large and small cities said they would consider privatization if it would save money. In addition to lobbyists, publicists and ad campaigns, the corporations have also directly gone after public officials to sell their wares…...â€Â￾

"….The U.S. Conference of Mayors has become an engine of water privatization through its Urban Water Council," they write in "Thirst." "One mayor described a Conference of Mayors session he attended as a kind of feeding frenzy, with companies bidding to take over everything from his city's school-lunch program to its traffic lights and water services. Financed by the private water industry, staffed by former industry officials, the UWC works hard to give its corporate sponsors 'face time' with mayors…."

"….Privatization comes from both Democrats and Republicans. Particularly the Clinton wing of the Democratic Party. Clinton advanced this in a number of areas -- Bush has taken it to the extreme," said Snitow.
And across the country, Democrats are guilty as well as Republicans. "In Lee [Mass.], one of the key people supporting the Veolia privatization is a liberal Democrat. He has a great record with unions, on gay rights. He is a social liberal, but he wants to privatize key public services," said Snitow.â€Â￾

Source: http://www.alternet.org/story/50994/

Kenneth Warren

Ken--- After discussing this with Mayor George it would seem that privatization of water production and service isn't applicable in Lakewood and not really in the region.

Just about all of Northeast Ohio's municipal water starts at the intake crib, 5 miles out in the Lake. It's treated and then re pumped for distribution throughout the area.

Sometimes Cleveland Water handles everything from water lines all the way through billing. Lakewood is a master meter city with all of its water coming in through a line in the Gold Coast area. Lakewood then owns all the distribution lines, maintains them, and handles billing.

It would seem that the system in total is so diffuse with several different patterns of ownership and billing that it isn't amenable for a possible sale.

For instance, in Lakewood, say a private company bought the pipes in the ground, meters, and access to all the accounts. That company would still then have to provide the water to sell. It just wouldn't make commercial sense as it would, for instance in a city with a totally self contained system of water production, distribution, and billing.

Stan Austin

Here's a link that explains some of the concepts involved:

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/co ... _top+story

Stan:

I appreciate your checking in with the Mayor and your presentation of his take on the situation. As the link you supply begins to suggest there is a larger global trend at work here.

Indeed there is a link between regionalization and the privatization of local water supplies that a response focusing only the status quo fails to address. There is a substantial body of literature that addresses infrastructure challenges, regionalization and the privatization of water supplies, challenges Lakewood is definitely facing.

Is the current distributed structure of public water infrastructure in lock-down for the duration?

I am not so certain.

When Councilman Demro announced his run for the Mayor’s office, he issued a vague call for regionalization. I asked him to clarify his vision and intentions.

When I hear Sam Miller speak about eliminating 55 municipalities in Cuyahoga County and professor at the Levin College of Urban Affairs tells me we should eliminate 55 municipalities in Cuyahoga County and goes on to suggest selling water to the West in conjunction with a coal slurry for energy, I begin to sense the lineaments of an asset grab that hinges on the public capitulating control of a resource understood to become more valuable than oil in the 21st century.

I raise these issues not as a conspiracy freak, but as someone who speaks and listens to academics, bankers and economic development types speak about Cleveland selling-off these assets to create an economic development fund.

Make not mistake the privatization of water is the ultimate prize at bottom the regionalization snake oil.

Janice A. Beecher, Ph.D. notes in THE REGIONALIZATION OF WATER UTILITIES: PERSPECTIVES, LITERATURE REVIEW, AND ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY:â€Â￾

“Regionalization constitutes fundamental structural and institutional change in the way water and wastewater utility services are provided. Regionalization reflects structural change in terms of consolidating water utility ownership, operations, or management within a politically geographic or hydrogeologic area.

Regionalization reflects institutional change in terms of establishing public policy and resource planning frameworks that encompass regional considerations. This bibliography provides a contemporary, broad-based, and multidisciplinary collection of works on regionalization in the water sector. Those contemplating regionalization for the first time may be impressed by the extent to which others have contemplated this issue as well.

Many of the authors represented in the bibliography offer definitions of
regionalization:

Regionalization refers to large, physically united systems or the
coordinated management of two or more independent systems
(American Water Works Association, 1979).

Regionalization is the administrative or physical combination of two or
more community water systems for improved planning, operation,
and/or management. Regionalization should be viewed in the context
of a range of possible approaches, from the actual physical
interconnection of systems to an administrative and management
arrangement to provide common technical, operational, or financial
services for two or more systems (SMC Martin, Inc., 1983: III-1).

Regionalization is the integration or coordination of the physical,
economic, social, information, or personnel structure of water resource
projects to better [address] national, regional, and local societal
objectives and constraints (Whitlatch and ReVelle, 1990: 70).

Regionalization is the consolidation of two or more water systems for the
purpose of increased viability (Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission, 1995, as reported in Holland, 1995).

Emerging evidence, reflected in the case study literature, suggests a possible trend toward regionalization in the water industry, both domestically and abroad.

Systematic and conclusive evidence of a trend toward regionalization is not readily available. A trend that is easier to document, however, is the growing literature on regionalization. Although not a new concept, regionalization seems to be getting increasing attention. Rapidly rising water costs have brought water system economies (or diseconomies) into focus. The interest in regional solutions also can be linked to the growing interest in closely related subjects, such as watershed management, integrated resource planning, and privatization.

Regionalization has been studied from theoretical, empirical, practical, and
ideological viewpoints. Some studies of regionalization are highly scientific; others are more subjective. The literature leans heavily in favor of regionalization as the preferred approach to water industry organization.

As a generalization, regionalization is believed to offer substantial economies of scale and scope, yielding efficiency benefits as well as ecological benefits through improved resource management. Support for regionalization comes from many corners."

Source: http://www.nrri.ohio-state.edu/dspace/b ... 621rpt.pdf

Historian Martin Melosi writes in his paper Full Circle: Public Goods versus Privatization of Water Supplies in the United States:

“The 1996 Safe Drinking Water Act and other federal and state laws requiring renovation or improvement of deteriorating water systems place a financial burden on several cities, which are now ready to explore a relationship with a private water company. Also, a 1997 executive order, tax-rule changes by the Internal Revenue Service, and privatization advocates in Congress have opened up the possibility of more shifts from public to private service. Cities such as Indianapolis, Milwaukee, and Gary, Indiana, have contracted with private companies to manage their waterworks.â€Â￾

Source: http://www.ifz.tugraz.at/index_en.php/f ... 202004.pdf.

For more information see also:

http://www.ilo.org/public/english/dialo ... rtners.pdf

Kenneth Warren

"Next time you fellas strike it rich, holler for me, will ya, before you start splashing water around. Water's precious. Sometimes it can be more precious than gold." --Walter Huston in "Treasure of the Sierra Madre"

Ken, Stan and All:

What I find so missing in discussions over privatization is history. Almost all urban services were private at the turn of the 20th century. The ensuing corruption is what led to urban reform movements and a "publicization" of services. The reform was not economic though the use of a professional chief executive, then as well as now, does have such payoffs. The reform was centered on politics, removing opportunities for corruption from municipal contracts and franchises. In addition, the reformers talked about ending "privileges" as those who controlled resources had undue political influence.

Those conditions are still a concern today. Mayoral candidates can narrowly focus on economics and misperceive the consequences of extensive contracting and its political implications. Many professors, often those in Economic Development, see only economics not a political economy that is a city. One has only to study, even casually, the war in Iraq to see how difficult outsourcing of public functions can be and how fraught with possibilities of corruption based on political influence.

Shipping water to the west is unlikely. The main reason is the need to raise the water over the Rockies. Denver, for example, is a mile high municipality. Raising water from about 800 feet to 5,280 feet requires an immense amount of energy. At current costs, it is much more efficient to desalinate sea water than ship water from the Great Lakes west.

Some thoughts for an interesting discussion.

Dr. Larry Keller wrote:...
Shipping water to the west is unlikely. The main reason is the need to raise the water over the Rockies. Denver, for example, is a mile high municipality. Raising water from about 800 feet to 5,280 feet requires an immense amount of energy. At current costs, it is much more efficient to desalinate sea water than ship water from the Great Lakes west.

Some thoughts for an interesting discussion.

Dr. Keller

While it makes no financial sense to ship water to Denver. I am not so sure the problem is the same for shipping it to Tuscon, Vegas, and the southwest that lies at sea level or below, and nothing but flat land between here and there. (Have you been following the water wars in Colorado? Multinational companies buying up farms to obtain their water rights, to bottle and ship elsewhere.)

I am sure you can see that the area around the Great Lakes is in serious financial trouble with cities failing. The exception are service/market areas like Chicago and Toronto. This makes no sense to me. Fresh water makes the Great Lakes Area like the new Kuwait. As oil diminishes the prices for water is skyrocketing. It would make more sense to see businesses and people move to the water not away from the water into the desert.

Throw in the Bush Administration's latest move to grab ALL shorelines, and ALL water rights, and it is enough to make a person like me go hmm.

With projects like CitiStat popping up all over it would seem that this is a first step towards the move to privatization. We cannot run it effectively let's privatize, take the money, lose the employees and overhead and shift the financial number to another group.

While history would show us the problems, I do not know that many people that have the time to look at history anymore. Look at Iraq and Vietnam. No time for history there. I mean the mistake will only cost a trillion or so, why think about it?

Thanks again for jumping in, it is nice to see the name and I know you got the smarts.

.

"With projects like CitiStat popping up all over it would seem that this is a first step towards the move to privatization."

Jim,

What does CitiStat have to do with privitazation?

Suzanne

Suzanne Metelko wrote:"With projects like CitiStat popping up all over it would seem that this is a first step towards the move to privatization."

Jim,

What does CitiStat have to do with privitazation?

Suzanne

Suzanne

Come on, let's be realistic here.

Before a city can privatize a department, it has to prove; it cannot manage it, or cannot afford to manage it, or can make more money not managing it. These are the numbers that CitiStat can generate.

Like the atom bomb, it was designed for peace, however...

I am not saying that LAKEWOOD is using it for that. I am just stating that to make a case for privatization, you would need numbers similar to those generated by CitiStat.


.

Jim O'Bryan wrote:

Dr. Larry Keller wrote:...
Shipping water to the west is unlikely. The main reason is the need to raise the water over the Rockies. Denver, for example, is a mile high municipality. Raising water from about 800 feet to 5,280 feet requires an immense amount of energy. At current costs, it is much more efficient to desalinate sea water than ship water from the Great Lakes west.

Some thoughts for an interesting discussion.

Dr. Keller

While it makes no financial sense to ship water to Denver. I am not so sure the problem is the same for shipping it to Tuscon, Vegas, and the southwest that lies at sea level or below, and nothing but flat land between here and there. (Have you been following the water wars in Colorado? Multinational companies buying up farms to obtain their water rights, to bottle and ship elsewhere.)

I am sure you can see that the area around the Great Lakes is in serious financial trouble with cities failing. The exception are service/market areas like Chicago and Toronto. This makes no sense to me. Fresh water makes the Great Lakes Area like the new Kuwait. As oil diminishes the prices for water is skyrocketing. It would make more sense to see businesses and people move to the water not away from the water into the desert...
.

As I read this, I thought of two concerns. We had a private water provider in a town home community in the mid-eighties in W. Palm Beach, FL. One month, the water bill tripled and stayed that way for about 6 months before the State stepped in and shut them down. At the time, we were not aware that something like water, could even be privatized being so close to a municipality. A class action suit eventually returned some of the money, but most of it was flushed down the drain so to speak.

So to the earlier post about corruption doing away with many privately held utilities, I remember how helpless one can feel on the receiving side of that equation and much like gasoline, one can curb consumption, but hard to go without it.

The second concern, is for shipping the Great Lakes water outward. If it became big business, would Lake Superior dam off the Sault? ...and try to retain the source? Who's water is it anyway? ...Just kidding.

Seriously though, the amount of energy and pipe to pump it and transfer it would be enormous, no?. Even steam energy using the abundance of water, would need to be heated somehow. Interesting idea, but I like the notion of moving businesses to the lakes, rather than the lakes to businesses.

Might consider looking at hosting data centers = http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/arch ... ation.html
They need lots of water.

Jim

Do you remember the movie, "Man Who Fell To Earth"?

We can live without oil. We know that for a fact. Humans exsited before petroleum projects. Alcohol will help with combustion engines, synthetics may help with lubrication. There will still be millions of things we can loose and continue on in a civilzed matter. Lakewood is perfect for this as are many cities built in the early 180-1930. Oil is nice but not neccassary for life.

Some have already come for our water, looks at the laws now in place with what I believe is called the Great Lakes Coalition. One rule forbids boats that can capture water for return to other countries.

Right now Japan is grabbing icebergs for clean water. When the Tsunami hit in Indonesia, I saw everyone drinking bottled water. Much of it from the US. Two years ago Nestle pumped a 2,000+ acre lake dry in Michigan bottling water. The Colorado River is severly hampered by the Multinational farmers grabbing their full allocations.

Drive a car or not, most people can walk.

Drink water or die, that is a whole different problem.


FWIW


.

Suzanne:
Citistat is a city government reform tool that attempts to create a culture of performance. The Baltimore experience under Mayor Martin O’Malley included not only nailing down unacceptably high absenteeism rates in the Public Works Department but also pushing privatization initiatives.

The computerized measurement system does not function in a cultural vacuum. It is part of a complex of neo-liberal trends that push market-based solutions – competition, choice, incentives – into public sector performance where the great sucking sounds can reach such high decibel levels that the discipline of the market and threat of out-sourcing can be the only way to get labor’s attention.

One cannot get to market without the measurements. So I would argue, then, the culture and ideology inform the trend-lines, with the vision thing of how one sees the past, the present and the future not limited to the vacuum.

Within the culture is the struggle between labor and capital, the logics of accumulation and dispossession, as David Harvey might describe it.
Even reading Baltimore’s CitiStat reports will show you that measurements, markets and privatization were part of the mix.

For example:

“CitiStat Report of the Week: This week, the Department of Public Works' General Services Bureau is online. We are tracking the use of CitiTrack to reduce work order backlogs (map). And we continue to track job placement of custodians and guards affected by the privatization of this function.â€Â￾

Source: http://www.ci.baltimore.md.us/business/tcb/011120.html

Kenneth Warren

Jim,

"Oh, come on"? I asked a perfectly legitimate question and your answer to me is to fear measurement as a management tool? Well, we have a multi million dollar deficit due to that type of management strategy.

Your plan is to continue the status quo?

Suzanne

I would ask the candidates again to answer Mr. Warren's questions on this issue as well.

There are clearly strong opinions about this so their positions are quite relevant, IMO.

CHaryn

Ken,

I get that there are aspects of the Citistat model that may not fit into the vision for our community. I'd feel better about the implementation if the city had bothered to ask the community how they felt about privatization, regionalization, taxes, property values and any number of issues that are desperately in need of attention. But they didn't and they're not going to.

As for privatization, my gut is to resist. But I need to look more carefully at the issue. Ok, I hate the idea. Private garbage collection comes to mind. My fear is that the city may be managed into a corner and that the vultures in Cuyahoga County may get their way.

I'm not sure that Citistat "doesn't function in a cultural vacuum", but I'm sure that our leadership continues to make decisions in a management vacuum.

Suzanne