Dear PureBunkum readers,

For the past two weeks I felt like someone cut off my arm, not being able to vent on PureBunkum, especially with all the continuing shenanigans in Wilkes-Barre, the county, the fiscal cliff, you name it.  The site had expired, and it proved a little difficult getting it up and running again.

But I promise you, I will get caught up.  In the meantime, I want to wish all of you a very Happy New Year, filled with the strength to meet the challenges in your life, good health, peace and happiness.

Now I have to decide what topic to tackle first.  I already feel better that I can.

- Betty Roccograndi

 

Share
 

Who in his right mind would enter into a $5.9 million contract without getting other bids?

Who in his right mind would enter into a seemingly one-sided $5.9 million contract?

Government officials spending other people’s money, that’s who.

Wilkes-Barre Mayor Tom Leighton, he of the cash-strapped city, convinced his cronies on the city council in September to go deeper into debt by approving a $5.9 million contract with Johnson Controls to implement measures to improve energy efficiency.  Last week, the council approved an ordinance to float $5 million in general municipal bonds to pay for the project.

We’re told that the city could – big emphasis on could – save about $11 million in energy costs over the next 20 years.  At first glance that sounds like a good deal.  But keep in mind, it was pushed through by a gang who’s proven it sometimes can’t shoot straight.  Who can forget the failed plan to lease the city’s parking assets in exchange for a quick $20 million windfall?  The only ones who got rich there were former city administrator J.J. Murphy, who raked in $300-per-hour consulting fees and his brother’s Philadelphia law firm, which was paid $400 per-hour, until the party ended.

Unfortunately,  it was The Times Leader, and not apparently the city council, which scrutinized this energy plan contract.  The newspaper reported that this company makes no guarantees at all that the city will realize $11 million in savings after spending $6.38 million, which includes paying back the bonds and approximately $1.3 million in interest over the next 13 years.  The company does guarantee the city will save $3.9 million.

What’s wrong with this picture, you might ask?  It sure sounds like Johnson Controls is in the driver’s seat and not the ones paying the bill, which is  you, city taxpayers.

The city did not seek other bids for a very good reason.  It didn’t wanna.  Butch Frati, the city’s director of operations, said the city didn’t believe it was necessary to get any other bids because it has been satisfied with the firm’s past performance.  So there you have it.  Why bother to see if there are any other energy efficiency companies out there who may charge less for the same work?  Because Mr. Frati and Mr. Leighton saw no need.  Just like Mr. Leighton saw no need to inform city taxpayers that a Secret Santa years ago donated $1 million to the city to purchase fire engines.

Even more disturbing, after reading the TL’s two day analysis of this contract, is that officials in York, PA, which is also undergoing energy infrastructure improvements, costing $2.4 million, did get a guarantee from Johnson Controls, that it would end up with a $55,512 surplus at the end of its 15-year bond issue.  That compares to Wilkes-Barre’s $3.9 million guarantee in savings after spending $6.38 million.  But why drive a hard bargain when the company did good work in the past?

The contract, according to the TL’s report, also says that Johnson Controls will monitor and calculate the energy savings it has guaranteed.  No conflict there, said Mr. Frati.  “I’m confident a company like Johnson Controls would be honest, fair and accurate,” he said.  If only we could be so trusting of this administration.

Weighing in, city Administrative Coordinator, Drew Mc-laugh -lin, told The Citizens’ Voice, “We’ve done our homework and looked at this extensively.  We believe that the operational savings we are committed to are not extreme and well within our power to execute.”

Don’t laugh because this isn’t funny.

Those operational savings, $6.9 million, rests with the city once the improvements are made.  The company making the big bucks – $5.9 million – is only guaranteeing $3.9 million in energy cost savings.  Johnson Controls helped the city estimate the projected $11 million in savings but that was it.  It bears no responsibility in making sure those total savings are realized because the company said such savings are “outside of the (company’s) control.”  That means they’re in the city’s control.  UH OH!

You do the math.  The project, including interest, will cost $6.38 million.  The city is guaranteed to save $3.9 million over a 20-year period.  The rest is up to the city.  It may save more, but who knows?

How again is this a good deal?

- Betty Roccograndi  

 

Share
 

Responding as they did when gasoline and diesel fuel went missing from the public trough, Wilkes-Barre City staffers said they’ll look into why city employees are racking up the minutes on taxpayer-funded cell phones.

Duh, we had no idea, but we’re on it.

In a front-page article titled “Talk Isn’t Cheap,” The Times Leader reported Sunday that the city, which is planning to raise taxes by 31-percent, just laid off 11 firefighters and four public works department employees, has been paying an average $35,000 to $40,000 a year for 60 employees to have cell phones.  The paper listed the top 10 users, which revealed that Wilkes-Barre actually employs a bioterrorism coordinator.  Who knew?

So now that the latest cat is out of the bag, city Administrator Marie McCormick and Administrative Coordinator Drew – always good for a laugh – McLaughlin said cell phones are important, but they are planning to reduce the number in use and/or instead give employees a stipend for using their phones strictly for business purposes.  As opposed to allowing them to call the missus to ask what’s for dinner.

The TL learned that dozens of city employees routinely incurred excess usage charges, costing city taxpayers an additional $2,452 in 2011 and $1,560 for the first nine months of this year.  TL Staff Writer Terrie Morgan-Besecker also reported that one phone assigned to a city health inspector, who left in 2010, was not canceled until 2011, which cost an unnecessary $302.  In this case, not talking isn’t cheap.

At least the city has a policy which says that these phones are only to be used for city business.  HaHaHaHaHa.  Wasn’t there also a policy in place for using city-owned fuel?  And where did that get us?  Oh, yeah, a $26,000 state fine for 67,000 gallons of unaccounted for gasoline and diesel fuel.

“Obviously, if there was an abuse of phones for personal use, that’s a concern to us,” said Mr. Mc -laugh -lin. But, he said, “From a strictly fiscal and budget perspective, those issues do not translate into wasted taxpayer funds.”  Drew is paid to utter such inanities.

Drew, forget “if there was an abuse.”  Ms. Besecker has already shown pretty conclusively that there was, including employees using their phones at night and on weekends when they work day shifts.  Drew said employees are told that their phones are for city business but that there is no zero tolerance in force.  That’s rather obvious, wouldn’t you say?

For the record, we have no problem with Mayor Tom Leighton having a cell phone. After all, he is on the job 24 hours a day.  That’s why he said he helped himself to free gas.  It’s surprising he ranks number 9 in top phone usage instead of number 1.  With all the angry taxpayers out there, it’s odd his phone hasn’t been ringing off the hook.  Does everyone have his cell phone number?

You have to give TL photographer Aimee Dilger credit.  She captured a great photo of the mayor either texting someone or checking his messages on his cell phone.

The TL also learned that city mechanic, Kevin Egroff, used the most voice minutes, on average 10 hours a week.  Marie McCormick said he was given a phone so he could call workers on the road and in case he needed to call the public works department while at an auto parts store.   Perhaps it would be cheaper if Mr. Egroff asked what he needed to buy there before leaving the city garage.

City council also has cell phones even though the three newest members never requested them.  Councilman Bill Barrett, who told the TL that he doesn’t  have a personal cellphone (as does the rest of the planet), said the phones are important so constituents can more readily contact their council representatives.  We trust that city residents have those phone numbers.

But at least Barrett said, given the city’s financial woes, he’d be willing to pay for the charges rather than give back the phone.  So what’s he waiting for?

We concede that, all things considered, the cost of all these cellphones, may seem like a drop in the bucket, and some officials should have them, but all these drops, which keep surfacing,  do add up.

Maybe we should be thankful that city employees weren’t also given iPads.  They weren’t, were they?

- Betty Roccograndi

Share
© 2010 PureBunkum Contact Betty Roccograndi / Contact The Plumber Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha