Wastewater Loan Information
Here is some information about the wastewater loan. This loan is for two phases of the project that Parkhill, Smith & Cooper (PSC) investigated in 2002 for BECC. This information is derived from a handout from PSC at the council meeting. Phase I is the wastewater treatment plant. This covers a new wastewater treatment plant with aerators and ponds. Phase II is the collection system. This covers replacement of many 4" clay pipes with 6" PVC sewer pipes in the collection system.
Before we get into it, let me clarify something that I was confused about. The four professional services contracts that were to be awarded at the meeting are required before the loan application. The construction would be sent out for bidding after loan approval. According to PSC, professional engineering services cannot be put out for bid in Texas. Bond counsel is required for bonds. None of this was clear from the agenda items as written.
I have rearranged the numbers in the PSC sheet from a one column list to a table that allows easy comparison of the costs for the two different phases of the project. I also corrected a $17,000 error in a subtotal. A footnote on the PSC sheet says that the Phase II Collection project would be postponed if the USDA/RD funding did not come through. None of this information was made public before the meeting as far as I can tell. Even my copy was obtained outside of Sauceda's 14-day open records request delay program. The PSC sheet was given only to council members and the Sentinel during the meeting but not to the public.
Notes:
* Number corrected by $17,408 due to error on original sheet.
I received some information from Mike Pink about the USDA funds, "USDA-RD funding applications are accepted from Oct. 1 to Dec. 31 of each year. Our thoughts were that a grant/loan package somewhere in the 25/75% range would be possible. This was actually the first funding source we recommended that the City pursue. We prepared an application and an engineering contract (req'd by USDA-RD w/ the application) for the City to submit. I believe that Flo intended to present it to council at the next meeting."
The original wastewater treatment plant was estimated to cost $718,833 in 2002. PSC increased this to $954,466 to adjust for inflation for 2006. The idea was to make sure the amount of the loan would cover the actual cost. Here is what Mike Pink has to say on that subject, "Our purpose was to get the application in and to ensure that with increasing construction costs, there was enough money in the request (it is much easier to cut than to add later). The breakdown in the handout is not final. My experience is that this gets modified more than once as we get to working with the agencies and as the project progresses. Our plan was to get funding agency commitment to the project, meet with Marfa stakeholders for project refinement and buy-in, and formally refine the cost opinions as the city moves through the process of securing the grant/loan package."
It was not clear from the agenda that this loan was for two phases of the project. It seems that the improvements to the sewer mains is not an issue with TCEQ at this time. We have not had a discussion of doing just the water treatment plant at this time. A third option has not been discussed. The addition of a less expensive effluent storage pond might eliminate the TCEQ citations without fixing the long-term problems. I am not sure of this. It deserves more discussion. Mr. Pink remains available to present information to the council and the public.
Finally, it seems that there has been no discussion on extending the lease on the treatment plant land. According to Mr. Silva, the 100 year lease was signed on March 17, 1927. The lease ends the same year we pay off the debt if we do this 20 year loan, perhaps a year or two before the loan is paid off.
I will post illustrations of the Phase I and Phase II work if I can get them from the city. This issue deserves a public hearing or council work session to consider all the options and learn as much as possible. The only thing better than 0% loans are grants. Marathon has one for their wastewater plant. Let's learn about that. What are the options for doing the collection system improvements at another time or in another way?
Our wastewater treatment situation deserves serious discussion. The mayor and administrator have failed to communicate the situation clearly to the council and the public. Lanman prefers to go it alone on city business. Sauceda prefers council to rubber stamp things without documentation if possible. Council has sent them a message to slow down and include the entire city in these big projects funded by debts that will last longer then their tenures. The two outdated Imhoff tanks will not last forever and need to be replaced soon, but my bet is that they will outlast the dynamic duo that needs to be replaced even sooner.
Before we get into it, let me clarify something that I was confused about. The four professional services contracts that were to be awarded at the meeting are required before the loan application. The construction would be sent out for bidding after loan approval. According to PSC, professional engineering services cannot be put out for bid in Texas. Bond counsel is required for bonds. None of this was clear from the agenda items as written.
I have rearranged the numbers in the PSC sheet from a one column list to a table that allows easy comparison of the costs for the two different phases of the project. I also corrected a $17,000 error in a subtotal. A footnote on the PSC sheet says that the Phase II Collection project would be postponed if the USDA/RD funding did not come through. None of this information was made public before the meeting as far as I can tell. Even my copy was obtained outside of Sauceda's 14-day open records request delay program. The PSC sheet was given only to council members and the Sentinel during the meeting but not to the public.
| Cost Items | Treatment | Collection | Subtotal |
| Construction | $614,523 | $499,987 | $1,114,510 |
| Construction Contingency | $153,631 | $107,679 | $261,310 |
| Engineering & Project Admin. | $161,312 | $87,498 | $248,810 |
| Legal & Fiscal Costs for Issuance | $25,000 | $23,568 | $48,568 * |
| TWDB Loan Origination Fee 1.85% | $22,975 | ||
| Total Cost | $954,466 | $718,732 | $1,696,173 |
| | |||
| TWDB Loan | $1,265,000 | ||
| Possible USDA/RD Funds | $413,970 | ||
| Total Funds | $1,678,970 |
Notes:
* Number corrected by $17,408 due to error on original sheet.
I received some information from Mike Pink about the USDA funds, "USDA-RD funding applications are accepted from Oct. 1 to Dec. 31 of each year. Our thoughts were that a grant/loan package somewhere in the 25/75% range would be possible. This was actually the first funding source we recommended that the City pursue. We prepared an application and an engineering contract (req'd by USDA-RD w/ the application) for the City to submit. I believe that Flo intended to present it to council at the next meeting."
The original wastewater treatment plant was estimated to cost $718,833 in 2002. PSC increased this to $954,466 to adjust for inflation for 2006. The idea was to make sure the amount of the loan would cover the actual cost. Here is what Mike Pink has to say on that subject, "Our purpose was to get the application in and to ensure that with increasing construction costs, there was enough money in the request (it is much easier to cut than to add later). The breakdown in the handout is not final. My experience is that this gets modified more than once as we get to working with the agencies and as the project progresses. Our plan was to get funding agency commitment to the project, meet with Marfa stakeholders for project refinement and buy-in, and formally refine the cost opinions as the city moves through the process of securing the grant/loan package."
It was not clear from the agenda that this loan was for two phases of the project. It seems that the improvements to the sewer mains is not an issue with TCEQ at this time. We have not had a discussion of doing just the water treatment plant at this time. A third option has not been discussed. The addition of a less expensive effluent storage pond might eliminate the TCEQ citations without fixing the long-term problems. I am not sure of this. It deserves more discussion. Mr. Pink remains available to present information to the council and the public.
Finally, it seems that there has been no discussion on extending the lease on the treatment plant land. According to Mr. Silva, the 100 year lease was signed on March 17, 1927. The lease ends the same year we pay off the debt if we do this 20 year loan, perhaps a year or two before the loan is paid off.
I will post illustrations of the Phase I and Phase II work if I can get them from the city. This issue deserves a public hearing or council work session to consider all the options and learn as much as possible. The only thing better than 0% loans are grants. Marathon has one for their wastewater plant. Let's learn about that. What are the options for doing the collection system improvements at another time or in another way?
Our wastewater treatment situation deserves serious discussion. The mayor and administrator have failed to communicate the situation clearly to the council and the public. Lanman prefers to go it alone on city business. Sauceda prefers council to rubber stamp things without documentation if possible. Council has sent them a message to slow down and include the entire city in these big projects funded by debts that will last longer then their tenures. The two outdated Imhoff tanks will not last forever and need to be replaced soon, but my bet is that they will outlast the dynamic duo that needs to be replaced even sooner.
posted by RobC at 8:06 AM
23 Comments:
Sorry off topic, but...
Voluntary contributions on the water biil to the Fire Dept. also go in to the General Fund. I will have that removed from my water bill too.
Not to muddy the water, but I disagree with PSC. I am attaching TAC 351 that is in the loan application manual. Please refer closely to the definition of construction. It involves feasibility studies, legal expenses, enviromental studies and engineering. This all has to be done for the application, not just for the actual construction phase. I have sent a query to TWDB.
Construction - Any one or more of the following:
(A) preliminary planning to determine the feasibility of a project;
(B) engineering, architectural, environmental, legal, title, fiscal, or economic studies;
(C) the expense of any condemnation or other legal proceeding;
(D) surveys, designs, plans, working drawings, specifications, procedures; and
(E) the building of a project or the inspection or supervision of any of the foregoing items.
§375.81. Awarding Construction Contracts.
(a) The applicant shall be responsible for assuring that every appropriate procedure and incidental legal requirement is observed in advertising for bids and awarding the construction contract. Any submittals waived by §375.71 of this title (relating to Loan Closing) will be submitted to the executive administrator for approval prior to awarding any construction contracts and releasing funds for building purposes. The text of the construction contract shall not vary from the text of the executive administrator-approved pro forma draft submitted by the loan recipient.
(b) Prior to initiation of construction, the applicant shall conduct a preconstruction conference on each significant construction contract to address the contents of the executed contract documents with the project engineer, prime contractor, and other appropriate parties in attendance. The executive administrator shall be given at least five days advance notice of the date, time, and location for the preconstruction conference.
And council was supposed to read and understand all of this in 5 minutes, then ask intelligent questions?
If this loan business was started in 2000, 2027 will be here in the blink of an eye.
Think a few people knew about the end date of the lease, but didn't talk about it. The reasoning was that if it wasn't talked about maybe the State wouldn't notice/ask.
Now, there is a way to do business!
Thanks to Rob for his incisive review of this very complicated process. It is being mailed to the three council members who can read.
I want to examine what the PSC engineer told Rob. "Our purpose was to get the application in....our plan was to get funding agency commitment to the project,
meet with Marfa stakeholders for project refinement and buy-in, and formally refine the cost opinions as the city moves through the process of securing the grant/loan package."
Okay, the city did a preapplication (we don't know the exact date but it was done before the October council meeting where the preapplication was approved by council), got funding agency commitment to the extent the city was ranked by the TWDB and was invited to a preapplication conference with the 1.3 million committed if TWDB approves our application, and was instructed to prepare the application. That is where we are now.
See where Mr. Pink (this sounds like Tarantino's movie, Reservoir Dogs) says "meet with Marfa stakeholders" for buy in? "Our purpose was to get the application in" he sez. Somewhere he got out of sync. Step 1 is preapplication, Step 2 is TWDB ranking and prioritization, Step 3 is the preapplication conference, Step 4 is preparing the application. According to Pink, I would think Step 3 should have been the buy-in. Do we only have two Marfa stakeholers, Flo and Lanman?
They got approval to file the preapplication from Council AFTER they had already filed it. Now we are to Step 4, preparing and filing the application, which according to TWDB, is awarded first come first serve, and the Mayor is outraged that he didn't get his agenda items approved??? Where the hell did the buy-in go?
Last anon, exactamente. Some of you people out there think Flo is very bright, but I don't. He is the master of officious double speak. My opinion is that he is unable to put together and express complex issues (yeah, like the budget). That's why he has to have a battery of professionals at his beck and call. He does not have a sufficient grasp of the subject matter to enlighten anybody. Certainly not the Mayor! I am firmly convinced that his reading comprehension is that of a sixth grader. He doesn't discuss these issues in Council meetings because it would expose his ignorance. When asked questions, Flo almost always does not know the answer. "I'll get back to you on that." Did you notice in the seven reasons Del Rio fired him all the references to his unwillingness to share any kind of information with the Council? Smoke and mirrors have kept him safe in Marfa Texas until now.
I am puzzled. Who owns the land and leases the sewer site to the city? Would it make sense to talk to this owner now about extending the 100 year lease another 100 years? Do we have to wait until the original lease concludes in 2027 to start this process? If this isn't an option shouldn't the city be seriously looking for an alternate site? What am I missing here?
Another digression, but very worthy of mention. Flo has been a big delegator since he got here, having the girls sharpen his pencils and bring him orange juice (Remember those sexual harassment suits in Del Rio), having a city employee check his truck out on city time, trying to get others to do his job for him. Like paying Painter $1,000 to do the Pool ORCA grant budget for him which is the job of the GRANT ADMINISTRATOR.
What he has done now is get Mercer Black, who works for the Chamber, to do ALL the work for a Regional TML meeting to be held in Marfa tonight. That includes doing the invitations, taking the reservations, picking up goody bag stuff and BEING THE KEYNOTE SPEAKER. He did not bother to get permission from the chamber board. As is his practice, he called Mercer up and told her to do it. It was reported to me that one of the TML members asked Mercer why she was doing the work, customarily the City staff takes care of it. This information did not come to me from Mercer. She is a capable diligent person and is not complaining at all. FLO IS NOT DOING HIS JOB. HE DOESN'T EVEN KNOW THE TOWN OF MARFA WELL ENOUGH TO MAKE A WELCOMING SPEECH TO HIS FELLOW TML MEMBERS. WHERE THE HELL IS MR. PERSONALITY, THE MAYOR???
I believe the water treatment plant is on land leased from the MacGuires. I heard that the lease payment was $1.
One of the problems I have with the way this deal is structured is that the payment is a form of regressive taxation. A single grandparent on fixed income will pay the same amount, $5 a month, as Hotel Paisano (assuming they have only one utility account). Do they get equal benefit? Five bucks is nothing to most businesses, and a small thing to many residents, but a big deal to some neighbors.
At least they could scale the rate to the amount of water used, the size of the property, commercial versus residential, etc. We already charge garbage rates depending on residential, small or large business.
The bond requries that they demonstrate how they will pay the money back. $5 a month on 1100 accounts was easy math, but poorly thought out.
We got rushed because we did not hear until mid-October from TWDB that we were in the running. That is no excuse for failing to have a workshop for council and public to learn, comment, and get on board. That was Flave's failure, a wish to push it through alone without input. They gambled, they lost.
I agree with Dawn the first "t" to cross and "i" to dot is the lease issue. The Mayor didn't know this??? But he did know he could go to Austin and gadfly around at our expense.. Amazing that it takes a concerned citizen, Rob Crowley, to find this and numerous other issues, mean while the Mayor is rude, tempromental and gavel happy to all the help Rob has given.
New: The mayor (no longer using upper case) gripes and places blame on the problems are "Malcontents" and lack of quorum, Lupe Devine has been a --no show-- for the most of her tenure yet the major makes no effort to correct the problem, Does he figure if she doesn't show he gets a vote. Well mr. major mayor get off your high horse and solve the Lupe Devine issue. Show us you can do something...
to 10:17 anon, Flo is notorious for not doing any homework. All he had to do was go to the TWDB website and check out the Clean Water and Drinking Water sites that have great summaries of the loan program and copy the material, putting it in the mail to the council members. He should have done that before he filed the preapplication. That should have been done months ago.
I agree with 11:17. Flo is not too bright and extremely lazy. Anybody who works three days a week is simply slothful.
Is the TML meeting open to the public? I would love to hear who the mayor blames for Marfa's fiscal fiasco. What are we getting for our membership in TML? Monte Akers was with TML for ten years and was director of legal services at TML. Here are some fun Monte Akers quotes:
"A number of law firms represent cities," Akers says. "We're the only one that has an all TML staff."
Akers says that Bovey and Bojorquez had a "stable" of clients.
A bill passed by the Legislature in 2001 also has been helpful for the firm, Akers says. Under S.B. 695, a city that does not have an in-house city attorney may consult its outside counsel during a public meeting or an executive session through a teleconference call or the Internet.
The firm represents a number of cities located in distant counties. Because of that change in the law, attorneys at the firm don't have to be present at every city council meeting for a client city, Akers says.
Akers says he and the other TML exes at the firm have a good relationship with the league's staff and aren't seen as competition. "We're here to provide services that the TML staff can't provide," he says.
http://www.zoominfo.com:80/people/akers_monte_18572725.aspx
Dawn, what do want to bet the lease cannot be found. The fire is probably to blame.
Think Rob has a very good point about the per account charges vs the residential,small and large commercial.
Amazing isn't it that so few citizens can totally derail the whole of city government by asking questions.
I would not call it a derail. I would call it an influence. The city is not borrowing a million, the citizens are borrowing it through the city. Ultimately, it was the council who postponed it for more information. They represent the citizens.
A copy of the original lease does exist.
We have one of the most knowledgable and honest men I know on the city payroll....Mr. Robert Silva. With his extensive experience and knowledge base, he should be front and center on the city sewer issue (and anything else pertaining to public works). Mr. Silva is a walking encyclopedia on public works and is a gracious, intelligent, and humble man. I believe he should be our point man and the city should listen very carefully to his recommendations. He can answer most, if not all, questions and he knows exactly what should be done and might have alternative plans. I wonder if he has even be consulted. Would city hall even listen to his expertise?
Ironically, all the services that TML offers member cities, like the TML handbook, run of the mill legal advice that does not involve litigation, budget information, all of this free and online, is never used by Flo and Dave even though the website has been pointed out to them. Instead, Boroquez and crack ex-TML attornies, who used to provide this information free and who know how to access all the TML stuff online, bill the City of Marfa for all the sage legal advice that gets twisted in the interpretation to dovetail with Flo and Dave's latest escapade.
When Monte Akers had to make one of his command performances during the Gracie Parras riots, he publicly announced the City of Marfa needed to get a local attorney. Who picked this loser anyway? Greg Hudson was an Austin attorney who represented Marfa during Fritz's tenure. Greg was excellent. We got what we paid for.
Yeah, teleconferencing is allowed by law but those two clowns down there can't even set up a teleconference.
Dawn, you are right on on Mr. Silva. However, regarding consulting him, Flo treats him like a personal lackey. Flo leaves on his four day weekends and gives Robert all the responsibility that he should be sharing if and when a crisis should occur.
Remember this. During Flo's beginning tenure, Robert Silva and Corina Brijalba were on Flo's hit list. And I gather still are. He has given Robert so much grief over nitpicking stuff like taking the city truck home (when Robert is called out at all hours to tend to City problems, holidays and all) and like letting Robert serve as the County's trained and licensed On site sewage representative for North County, including the City of Marfa. Robert was sent to training and was licensed. The city signed an interlocal agreement with the county allowing Robert to do these inspections. Ruben Carrasco does the same thing for the City of Presidio. By law, Robert was entitled to $200 per inspection. He made one inspection and Flo and the Mayor gave him so much grief that he quit.
Then when the municipal clerk was given an illegal raise, the Public Works guys (who had not had a raise for four years)mutinied. Robert told the Mayor and Flo he was not going to be the one (as he usually is) to try and explain that so the entire Public Works Department, including Robert, showed up at City Hall and confronted Tweedle Dum and Tweedle Dee. They of course promised the guys a raise. Which was another illegality.
No warm and fuzzies for Robert. Only for special pets, and we know who they are. This is a typical Mayor/Flo ego thing. No, no, keep everything close to the vest. Don't risk sharing the glory. Don't risk letting the cat out of the bag to the council.
Flo has used official oppression on repeated occasions, meaning abusing his office. And we have them documented. Well, I mailed in my check with the written request to take the voluntary contribution off on November 8. I doublechecked all my envelopes to make sure stamps and return address labels were affixed. I just got a disconnect notice.
And this is the second disconnect notice I have gotten in the last coupla months. The other time, according to the City staff, it was the fault of the Post Office.
I agree Dawn. I asked Mr. Silva before the meeting. He was quite matter-of-fact that we need to replace the wastewater treatment plant. That is why I encoraged council to reconsider the loan. I still think we could do more searching for grants. Dave and Flo will not do that on their own. If they get a loan, they will call it good enough. If council's action forces somebody to look for more grants, it is a good thing.
And yes i agree that Flo would fire Corina without a second thought. Corina spoke up at a council meeting to say she has trouble with vendors because the city has not paid bills. The funny thing is that her entire salary is equal to Flo's raise for grant-writing...
anon at 1:03PM said: "Amazing isn't it that so few citizens can totally derail the whole of city government by asking questions."
Also amazing that one elected citizen and one administrative non-citizen could almost apply for a million dollar loan on behalf of the city basically by themselves.
As to Marge Hughes' problems with city hall receiving her utility payment.....it would be a privilege and an honor for me if Marge would allow me to hand-deliver her payment to the city office each month, and I would return the payment receipt to her for her records. City hall blaming the Post Office is bogus. It appears to me that something is rotten in Denmark...or should I say something is rotten at C.H.
You're on, Dawn! Maybe we could start a Pony Express type thing, a special service for bloggers.
Post a Comment
<< Home