Op-Ed: Ronald Wastewater District has become an island without any bridges
Saturday, October 22, 2011
By Sis Polin
I retired from the position of General Manager of Ronald Wastewater District in 1990. I was with the District for 25 years; I worked my way up from the lowest ranks to that position. I am proud to say that I played a major role, along with the previous commissioners, in establishing the basic foundation in the financial and maintenance areas that has made the District what it is today.
I was also very community-oriented and was involved with the formation of the City of Shoreline and served on its first Planning Commission. I served on many Boards at King County. I served on a “think tank” whose charge was to come up with a state solution to fund public works projects when federal money dried up. The Public Works Trust Fund was approved by the legislature and the Governor appointed me to the first Board. The City and Ronald benefitted by getting low interest loans.
Why do I tell you all of this about myself and why am I writing this article? Ronald has become an island without any bridges. Since the subject of Ronald’s future has apparently become a campaign issue and since there is a lack of factual content , I thought it was time for me to speak up with my perception of Ronald.
The most obvious to me is the lack of transparency. There is a lot of PR on the Ronald web page but it lacks substantive information. For example:
1. They do not have their proposed or draft budget on line. In fact, I was surprised to see that they announced there would be no increase in the “local” $11.15 rate and on the same site announced a budget hearing on November 22. I don’t know how you can determine a rate, if you haven’t approved a budget yet. Seems a little premature!
2. Along with the announcement about the “local” rate, there was nothing mentioned about the King County Metro portion of the bill, which is substantial. Why not put all the facts out about what the bill will be, especially since the Metro portion is $30+? How involved is the District in the Metro budget process? I saw a reference that said if you had questions, call our King County Councilman for information. Really?
3. Why is the rate resolution not published on the webpage? (I did find the Rules and Regulations on there.)
4. The Web site does not have a standard format to publish monthly agendas, budget proposals, and the budget process schedule. Meeting dates seem to change along with meeting times. I did find quite a bit of information online regarding numerous legal appeals that the District lost over a union issue. It finally ended when the employee withdrew her application. What did that cost?
5. The District contracts with lawyers, engineers, and financial firms. Is there a bidding process for this and why are these contractors not listed on their page? Transparent? Not really!
6. I have a big issue about rental apartments which is too detailed to discuss here, but I’ll raise one question. The District has a low income policy; is it addressed in low income housing that is in our City? This is a whole segment of residents for which there is no transparency .
I am disturbed that scare tactics - of higher utility taxes, sewers overflowing, and raiding the capital improvement fund - without any kind of facts to back up these statements, are irresponsible.
When Shoreline became a City, the District entered into an agreement with the City. From my recollections, the thinking at the time was that Shoreline needed time to get organized, deal with planning, zoning, etc. and after some specific date, which is now approaching, the process would begin to absorb the wastewater district.
I could probably come up with many other questions, because I was fortunate to be on the inside. But the ratepayers are on the outside and there has to be a better method than the District is using to keep them informed and give them an opportunity to be involved in the decision process if they so choose.
Decisions have to be made based on facts, not emotions. That is transparency!
Posts
4 comments:
Scare tactics - no one in the debate has brought up sewers overflowing in the debate, you have, you have deliberately misconstrued the debate.
Transparency, was it transparent for the City of Shoreline to not have an open meeting on legislative priorities for 2010 (it was not on the dinner meeting in which it was discussed and it was never brought to a regular study or business session of the city council for adoption as it was when Cindy Ryu was Mayor), it is serious business to go to Olympia to amend a state law that removes our right to vote.
As for the original city incorporation, let me direct you to this article:
http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19940921&slug=1931917
"A chief impetus for incorporation was to preserve the area's schools. The Shoreline School District has been the area's one unifying entity for years. Incorporation will preserve the boundaries of the school, fire and water districts."
As for bidding by the Sewer District, surely you jest - the city council did not follow their own municipal code in approving the contract for EES in approving a no bid contract for over $100,000 to evaluate the SPU takeover earlier this year.
Thank you so much for your insider insight. I think this is something that every taxpayer in Shoreline should definitely read and think about.
It took you 21 years to become aware of these problems in transparency? What have you been doing all of these years?
Have you gone unaware that Bob Ransom was specifically cited by Washington State Auditor Brian Sonntag for violating the Open Public Meetings Act? Where where you when that happened? I can only imagine, somewhere on vacation or asleep at the wheel.
If you are so concerned about low income householders, why didn't you speak up about the unfair city levy lift in terms of how it burdened the seniors living in Shoreline? Let me give you a clue - go to to City Website agenda and it will tell you that Shoreline is aging at a disproportionate rate compared to the rest of King County and poverty is increasing - to me, as a demographer, tells me that senior citizens can't afford to pay the higher property taxes that Bob Ransom advocated for last fall. What say you to that? Or are you just some has been coming back to grouse after over 20 years?
Your metaphor makes no sense. Did you burn the bridges to the island when you left 20 years ago? I find the sewer district far more responsive and transparent than the City has ever been/
Glad to hear that you've become the champion of transparency in the last 20 years. I must have missed it, but have you written any Op-Eds urging the City to be transparent about (a) the approximate cost of buying the SPU water system--give or take a few million; or (b) as another poster mentioned, having City staff travel to Olympia to urge the Legislature to deny our right to vote?
Post a Comment