City's predicament due in part to poor planning years ago
By
Rory Ryan-hcpress@cinci.rr.com
"We can fix it now, or pass it to the next generation. I know it hurts."
In a nutshell, these words from Hillsboro City Council member Rod Daniels summed up the city's ongoing dilemma regarding wastewater sewerage infrastructure and the required funding thereof.
While it was encouraging to see a good public representation at the Aug. 23 town hall meeting on the city's plan to address the sewerage issue by implementing a 15-percent rate increase over the next three years, perhaps some perspective is in order before we throw out the council with the bath water (or other liquid waste).
Former Highland County Commissioner Russ Newman attempted to provide some historical reference to the city's predicament, from Ohio EPA mandates to funding shortfalls. Mr. Newman concluded that a 5-percent increase may in fact be as good as it gets for city residents.
That prediction did little to appease, however.
One candidate on this November's ballot for mayor of Hillsboro, Drew Hastings, blamed city council for bowing to the EPA. Well, yes, that's a valid point. It's about as valid as blaming a small business owner for bowing to the mandates of the IRS. While one bureaucracy is about as unpleasant as the other, until the laws are rewritten, the risk of criminal prosecution for noncompliance remains imminent.
"The EPA never said 'You have to do this or you won't have a toilet,'" Hastings told city council member and utilities committee chairman Dave Shoemaker.
No, but if the city sewerage system fails, you won't want to flush that toilet, either.
The mayoral candidate also attempted to link his opponent, John Levo, a former councilman, to the current problems. More on that in a moment.
After calling RCAP (the Rural Community Assistance Partnership) an "arm of thug enforcement of the EPA," Hastings was asked by Hillsboro Safety and Service Director Ralph Holt, "Drew, tell me what you know about RCAP."
Hastings bristled at the question.
The safety and service director has a valid point, however. The next mayor of Hillsboro will be required, just as past mayors have been, to work with agencies such as the EPA and RCAP. (Working with other government agencies for funding of his own projects doesn't appear to bother candidate Hastings.)
For the record, RCAP is funded not only through the EPA, but also by the United States Department of Agriculture, the Rural Utilities Service and Department of Health and Human Services. RCAP is a national, nonprofit organization incorporated in 1972 to provides technical assistance to help solve water and wastewater problems for small communities (less than 10,000 population).
Moreover, current city, village and county officials have been complimentary of Ohio RCAP representative Wayne Cannon's assistance.
We can appreciate Hastings' frustration – and candor – regarding these state and federal agencies, but the fact of the matter remains that the current city council and administration have inherited a deteriorated sewerage infrastructure and a mandate to fix it.
Do residents have a right to object to the 15-percent increase? Absolutely.
Does council have a better immediate course of action? Probably not.
Now, let's review, for a moment, the city's recent fiscal history.
As I've pointed out on numerous occasions, the city has squandered any realistic approach to saving tax revenues for infrastructure improvements, particularly in the years 1995-2003.
During this eight-year period, the city's union workers received average increases in salaries of more than 10 percent each year. While average private-sector wages would increase incrementally along the lines of 2 or 3 percent, the city was paying five times as much. Lest we forget, these extravagances occurred during two Republican administrations and a GOP-majority council.
More modest increases in salaries, wages and benefits during the city's Gilded Age would have left some funds available for infrastructure. Of course it didn't happen.
Fast forward a few years, and we see a payroll increase of $200,000 from 2006 to 2007 in just one city department.
The fact of the matter is this: city workers were being paid average wages in excess of $55,000 a year, coupled with tremendous benefits, while private-sector earnings in the city were averaging half that, with not-so-tremendous benefits.
Then, of course, there was the so-called emergency evacuation of the city police and fire building and the many related expenses. Eventually, and perhaps as planned, the city ultimately constructed a new fire station and renovated a building for a virtually new police station. This added more than $2 million in debt service.
In retrospect, given that the once-condemned city building has been sold (to Hastings) and has new private-sector inhabitants, once can surmise that the costly new construction was less of a priority than the crumbling sewerage system.
However, as Commissioner Newman said, "that's water under the bridge now."
So what's the city to do?
Great question.
First, city residents must continue to make their voices heard as many did this week.
Second, residents should hold the current council and future administrations accountable to only that which is justifiable. In other words, do not blame today's council for past transgressions.
Third, and most important, remain vigilant as council considers future spending.
Even though the last increase in the city income tax was in 1987, taxable income has gone up significantly in the past 20 years. So have sales taxes and revenues from the water and sewer funds. Revenues have not been the problem. (Even in today's dismal local economy, permissive sales tax revenues are up 3 percent from a year ago, according to Highland County Auditor Bill Fawley.)
If local residents remain constant in their demand for a more fiscally responsible government, maybe, just maybe, we will realize some positive changes. Concerned citizens also need to look at the revenues and expenses realistically – just as Christine Kerley seems to be doing.
The fact remains that the city has a 20-year, $10 million loan to repay. The proposed 5-percent increase may be justified now to accommodate the new debt. With better management – and more aggressive negotiations with the city employees' respective unions – in the future, it's possible to bring this increase down, thus "relieving" some of the taxpayers' burden.
Citizens would be wise to keep a more watchful eye on their government. Attending a town hall meeting once every five or 10 years is all well and good, but government – on all levels – works best when the taxpayers are keeping close tabs.
Rory Ryan is publisher and editor of The Highland County Press.[[In-content Ad]]
In a nutshell, these words from Hillsboro City Council member Rod Daniels summed up the city's ongoing dilemma regarding wastewater sewerage infrastructure and the required funding thereof.
While it was encouraging to see a good public representation at the Aug. 23 town hall meeting on the city's plan to address the sewerage issue by implementing a 15-percent rate increase over the next three years, perhaps some perspective is in order before we throw out the council with the bath water (or other liquid waste).
Former Highland County Commissioner Russ Newman attempted to provide some historical reference to the city's predicament, from Ohio EPA mandates to funding shortfalls. Mr. Newman concluded that a 5-percent increase may in fact be as good as it gets for city residents.
That prediction did little to appease, however.
One candidate on this November's ballot for mayor of Hillsboro, Drew Hastings, blamed city council for bowing to the EPA. Well, yes, that's a valid point. It's about as valid as blaming a small business owner for bowing to the mandates of the IRS. While one bureaucracy is about as unpleasant as the other, until the laws are rewritten, the risk of criminal prosecution for noncompliance remains imminent.
"The EPA never said 'You have to do this or you won't have a toilet,'" Hastings told city council member and utilities committee chairman Dave Shoemaker.
No, but if the city sewerage system fails, you won't want to flush that toilet, either.
The mayoral candidate also attempted to link his opponent, John Levo, a former councilman, to the current problems. More on that in a moment.
After calling RCAP (the Rural Community Assistance Partnership) an "arm of thug enforcement of the EPA," Hastings was asked by Hillsboro Safety and Service Director Ralph Holt, "Drew, tell me what you know about RCAP."
Hastings bristled at the question.
The safety and service director has a valid point, however. The next mayor of Hillsboro will be required, just as past mayors have been, to work with agencies such as the EPA and RCAP. (Working with other government agencies for funding of his own projects doesn't appear to bother candidate Hastings.)
For the record, RCAP is funded not only through the EPA, but also by the United States Department of Agriculture, the Rural Utilities Service and Department of Health and Human Services. RCAP is a national, nonprofit organization incorporated in 1972 to provides technical assistance to help solve water and wastewater problems for small communities (less than 10,000 population).
Moreover, current city, village and county officials have been complimentary of Ohio RCAP representative Wayne Cannon's assistance.
We can appreciate Hastings' frustration – and candor – regarding these state and federal agencies, but the fact of the matter remains that the current city council and administration have inherited a deteriorated sewerage infrastructure and a mandate to fix it.
Do residents have a right to object to the 15-percent increase? Absolutely.
Does council have a better immediate course of action? Probably not.
Now, let's review, for a moment, the city's recent fiscal history.
As I've pointed out on numerous occasions, the city has squandered any realistic approach to saving tax revenues for infrastructure improvements, particularly in the years 1995-2003.
During this eight-year period, the city's union workers received average increases in salaries of more than 10 percent each year. While average private-sector wages would increase incrementally along the lines of 2 or 3 percent, the city was paying five times as much. Lest we forget, these extravagances occurred during two Republican administrations and a GOP-majority council.
More modest increases in salaries, wages and benefits during the city's Gilded Age would have left some funds available for infrastructure. Of course it didn't happen.
Fast forward a few years, and we see a payroll increase of $200,000 from 2006 to 2007 in just one city department.
The fact of the matter is this: city workers were being paid average wages in excess of $55,000 a year, coupled with tremendous benefits, while private-sector earnings in the city were averaging half that, with not-so-tremendous benefits.
Then, of course, there was the so-called emergency evacuation of the city police and fire building and the many related expenses. Eventually, and perhaps as planned, the city ultimately constructed a new fire station and renovated a building for a virtually new police station. This added more than $2 million in debt service.
In retrospect, given that the once-condemned city building has been sold (to Hastings) and has new private-sector inhabitants, once can surmise that the costly new construction was less of a priority than the crumbling sewerage system.
However, as Commissioner Newman said, "that's water under the bridge now."
So what's the city to do?
Great question.
First, city residents must continue to make their voices heard as many did this week.
Second, residents should hold the current council and future administrations accountable to only that which is justifiable. In other words, do not blame today's council for past transgressions.
Third, and most important, remain vigilant as council considers future spending.
Even though the last increase in the city income tax was in 1987, taxable income has gone up significantly in the past 20 years. So have sales taxes and revenues from the water and sewer funds. Revenues have not been the problem. (Even in today's dismal local economy, permissive sales tax revenues are up 3 percent from a year ago, according to Highland County Auditor Bill Fawley.)
If local residents remain constant in their demand for a more fiscally responsible government, maybe, just maybe, we will realize some positive changes. Concerned citizens also need to look at the revenues and expenses realistically – just as Christine Kerley seems to be doing.
The fact remains that the city has a 20-year, $10 million loan to repay. The proposed 5-percent increase may be justified now to accommodate the new debt. With better management – and more aggressive negotiations with the city employees' respective unions – in the future, it's possible to bring this increase down, thus "relieving" some of the taxpayers' burden.
Citizens would be wise to keep a more watchful eye on their government. Attending a town hall meeting once every five or 10 years is all well and good, but government – on all levels – works best when the taxpayers are keeping close tabs.
Rory Ryan is publisher and editor of The Highland County Press.[[In-content Ad]]