Is There Another WUC Scandal

You tell me after reading this BLOG. I do not know.

However, here is another good reason why Windsor should have an Auditor General. Citizens need an independent voice in this City who can examine controversial matters to find out the real story.

If there is one, then this one was easy to find. It required absolutely no digging whatsoever. It was handed to me and to the subscribers of the Windsor Star on a silver platter.

Did you read the Letter to the Editor of Sylvia De Vries, Corporate Communications Manager of EnWin Utilities Ltd.? Councillor Halberstadt should take great comfort in this letter since he was the one who wanted to look into the relationship between WUC and Enwin as well in the WUC audit that he favoured. This letter proves clearly there is one, a close one.

Here we have Enwin's corporate communications manager speaking on behalf of of WUC. Where was a WUC representative? Where was the WUC Chair, Councillor Lewenza? Remember when the Mayor did his Whiteboard presentation at Council rather than the Chair. Why is it that Councillor Lewenza can't say anything on behalf of the Commission? Is he not allowed to do so because the other members of the Commission do not trust him to put forward their position properly? Are they afraid that he will put his foot in his mouth?

The letter was written to respond to the article that the Star's Monaco Wolfson wrote about WUC.

• WUC to spend $13.5M on watermains in 2008
  Letter, Published: Thursday, December 27, 2007
  
  Re: WUC Work Falls Short Despite Rate Increase, Dec. 18.
  
  We would like to clarify the report in The Windsor Star that "Despite an 87-per-cent rate increase, the Windsor Utilities Commission will probably spend the same amount on watermain replacement projects in 2008 as it did this year."
  
  The article may be interpreted to suggest that despite the recent rate increase WUC will be spending the same on watermain replacement in 2008 as it did in 2007.
  
  In 2007, WUC spent approximately $7.6 million on watermains (approximately $7.3 million of which was collected from watermain levies) and approximately $1.5 million was spent on other capital projects, for a total of $9.1 million.
  
  For 2008, WUC has budgeted $13,519,975 on watermains ($12,582,515 to be collected from watermain levies) and $6,896,220 on other capital projects for a total of $20,416,195 -- a budgeted spending increase of 124.41 per cent over 2007.
  
  Windsor Utilities Commission held the first of several audit and finance committee meetings Dec. 18 to review its 2008 capital and operating budgets. WUC's audit and finance committee will be holding additional meetings in early 2008 to deal with revenues and the entire budget package, which will be put forward to the commission in February or March.
  
  Sylvia De Vries
  
  Corporate Communications Manager
  
  EnWin Utilities Ltd.
  
  Windsor

Now here is what Ms. De Vries did not say:

• 1) in 2007, WUC will spend only about $300,000 of its Budget on watermain replacement since most of the funds to be spent will come from the levies.
• 2) in 2008, WUC will spend only about $1 million of its budget on watermain replacement since most of the funds to be spent will come from the levies.
• 3) to date this amount has only been a budgeted for 2008
• 4) the money to be spent is below the $16 million to $17 million per year recommended by consultants
• 5) she did not deny that "WUC has had to carry over $6 million worth of water main work, representing 46 per cent of what it planned to do."
• 6) the "managed services" fees WUC pays Enwin also shot up by almost $1 million, or 10 per cent. Enwin, the city-owned electricity utility that shares meter reading and billing services with WUC, charges the water utility $8.3 million for its share of the expenses. That cost is rising to $9.3 million"

The big scandal as far as I'm concerned are in points #1 and #2. Watermain Levy funds were not meant to be the only amounts that WUC was to spend on watermain replacement. WUC was supposed to budget millions of dollars in each year and the levies were to be the "top-ups." Back in 2003, it was said as an example:

• "It has been determined a new Capital Levy of 5% of each customers water bill will be required to provide the additional funding ($1.2 to $1.5 million) to allow this program to proceed."

In the 2004 Report, Max Zalev said:

• "We continued to invest in our aging infrastructure. We spent a total of $10.75 million in 2004; $9.5 million in capital improvements for the distribution system...
  
  Our capital expenditure program over the next 5 years is quite intensive. We are scheduled to spend approximately $40 million to improve our distribution system and water treatment facilities..."

However, remember what was said in the WUC Financial Statement in 2005:

• "we’ve spent less money on capital build programs, giving us greater cash flow and allowing us to meet key debt reduction targets. Our focus on debt reduction will help us to sustain financial stability and will allow us to continue to reinvest in our infrastructure and operational programs."

Paying down debt I assume must be more important than being able to drink water or take showers, items that Councillor Lewenza reminded us were so vital to our well-being to justify an 86% increase.

Does Ms. De Vries comment mean that only minimal sums of money were set aside in the WUC budget for watermain improvements in 2007 and 2008? If so that is a shocking indictment against the WUC Commissioners given what we are told is a crisis. If in fact there were capital funds set aside in the budget, what happened to that money? How was it used? Why wasn't it used for the watermains?

I'm sure that taxpayers would like to know the answer to the questions. Of course, with a whitewash audit, we won't get any answers. I guess that CouncillorMarra will have to live up to his word and will have to to ask for another audit so that we can get the proper information. Not only is he a Councillor but he is also on the Commission as well so it should be no problem for him.

In fact, in my opinion he has no choice but to ask for another audit, this time a forensic one by an independent forensic accountant if he has any hope of becoming the next Mayor of Windsor. He cannot back off given his desire to have an Auditor General.