Ray Rice gets video-taped punching out his wife in an elevator in a casino. Wes Welker gets videotaped at the Kentucky Derby looking like he has imbibed a bit too much. We have couple students that, well, let’s just say those photos won’t help them get jobs. And everyday people are You-tubed doing stupid things they wouldn’t want to get caught doing. And hackers download photos of celebrities in various states of undress that they thought were secure. We do not understand the Cloud and we do not understand all the wires that make the internet a useful and productive tool that houses the cloud. The internet is a great information sharing tool, but almost anything is exchangeable. To date the internet is open to all, but the wires are owned by corporations. If you watched the 60 Minutes episode recently with Michael Lewis as he talked about Wall street brokers gaming the stock market by using internet cabling to accelerate their access to your data (his book is Flash Boys), you should not be surprise if corporations won’t want to restrict those tools that help them, including cables and satellites. Jim Hightower in a recent Lowdown newsletter outlines the reasons we should be watching the mergers of the large entities like Time-Warner who own and therefore control the internet connections. They can and will impose fees for access of certain types. Instead of equal access, those who pay can and will receive preferential connections. They also will get access to data. Wall Street saw the benefit of using the wiring and cloud and data sharing to their advantage, even when it is your data, so certainly these media giants know all about it. It makes sense form a business perspective. It works against you, me and our local water and sewer utilities who do not have the luxury of being able to pay and pay for better access. Keep it on your radar screens – at home and at work. Keep in mind deregulation and merger of the airlines didn’t reduce air fares or make service necessarily better.
innovation
Pyramid Schemes and Pension Plans
A Ponzi scheme is an illegal program whereby investors are promised big return son investments in a short period of time, and where the underlying basis for this return is deliberately mis-stated. We continually find people who perpetrate Ponzi schemes and when they are finally caught, they get put in jail. For those unsure, a Ponzi scheme is defined as a scheme where the scheme operator says they will pay a high return to its investors from their original investment, but instead uses money from new capital paid to the operator by new investors rather than from profit earned by the operator. Hence it is a flow through of money from people putting money in to people who are getting out. To get returns on the investments for the earlier investors, the pool of new people must increase with time, so that there are always more people paying in that there were previously. It that does not occur, then we have a problem.
What is a retirement system? A retirement system is a form of deferred compensation used to attract and keep workers, by deferring a portion of their pay 10, 20 30 or 40 years from now. It is part of the compensation to the employee. With a retirement system, people pay into a program, where their money is invested. A retirement system tends to rely on the fact that the number of people paying in increases exponentially so that the actual invested dollars are never touched, instead the new proceeds exceed the monies paid out. For a pension, plan it assumes your invested dollars remain invested and profitable, and that the revenues from the new people in the system, exceed the monies paid to retirees. What is the difference? Well, the retirement system actually supposedly has assets while Ponzi scheme does not. Otherwise, the systems work similarly – dollars paid in generally go out to others, and there is an assumption that the number or payees increases exponentially (a percentage every year).
So what happens to a pension plan when the number of employees decreases from 6.7 million to 4.4 million over 40 years? Would you expect there to be a pension plan problem? And if so why? And who is at fault? That is exactly what has happened to federal government employees since 1967. And many states have seen reductions in the last 20 years as well. So it is any wonder why these pension systems might be at risk? The push to privatize services ensures that the basic assumption that the number of payees in a pension plan increases exponentially will be violated, which makes the pension plan vulnerable. And ho is at fault. I would suggest the people pushing privatization, who look only at short term consequences as opposed to long-term impacts. Perhaps this needs to be part of any such discussion going forward. Just a thought…
Responsibility, Failure and the Lack of Funds
Public water and sewer systems have the responsibility to protect the health, safety and welfare of the public they serve, just as engineers do. This is includes not just complying with regulatory mandates (they are minimum standards), but enacting such precautions as are needed to address things not included in the regs. Unfortunately we continue to pay too much attention on regulatory compliance and evaluate the condition of the system using unaccounted for water losses or leaks fixed in the system as a measure of condition. That may be an incorrect assumption. The problem is that unless we understand how the system operates, including how it deteriorates with time, the data from the past may well be at odds with the reality of the future. For example, that leak in your roof can be a simple irritation for a long time if you ignore it. But ignoring it creates considerable potential for damage, including roof failure if too much of the structure underneath is damaged. With a water system, pipes will provide good service for many years will minimal indication of deterioration. Then things will happen, but there is little data to indicate a pattern. But like your roof leak, the damage has been done and the leaks are an indication of the potential for failure. Bacteria, color, pressure problems and flow volumes are all indicators of potential problems, but long-term tracking is needed to determine develop statistical tools that can help with identifying end of life events. Basic tools like graphs will not help here.
Construction to repair and replace local water, sewer and stormwater infrastructure is expected to reach $3.2 and $4.8 billion respectively for water and sanitary sewer. The federal SRF programs are only $1.7 Billion in SRF loans, 24% below 2012 and well below the levels identified by the federal government to sustain infrastructure condition. The only reason for the decrease seems to be a demand by Congress to reduce budgets, especially EPA’s budget where this money resides. But the 2008 recession and its lingering effects to date have deferred a significant amount of infrastructure investments, and the forecast does not rectify the past deficits, and likely does not address the current needs either. Few water and sewer systems are flush with funds to update infrastructure and borrowing has become a difficult sell for many public officials. Lake Worth, FL just had a $60 million bond issue for infrastructure redevelopment defeated by voters two weeks ago. The officials know they need this infrastructure, but the public is unconvinced because few serious problems have occurred. We have to get the public past this view so we can improve reliability and public safety. Those are the arguments we need to demonstrate. The question is how.
Risk of Losses for Property In Florida
In my last blog I outlined the 10 states with the greatest losses since 2006. Florida was not among them, yet given our legislature’s on-going discussion and hand-wringing with the state run Citizen’s insurance, you would think we have a major ongoing crisis with insurance here. Maybe we do, but I will provide some facts. Citizens,averaged between 1 and 1.5 million policies over the last 8 years. according the the South Florida SunSentinel, the average person pays $2500 per year for windstorm coverage. Somehow I think I want that bill because my insurance is about $6000 through my private insurer and when I had Citizens it was $5700/yr. But I digress.
Let’s assume there is 1.2 million policies over that time paying the #2500/yr. That totals.$3 billion a year in premiums. That means Citizens should have reserves of $24 billion because they have not paid-out since 2006. They have $11 billion according to the SunSentinel sources. So wher eis the rest of the money? We can assume there are operating expenses. They pay their executives very well for a government organization. I am sure they pay the agents as well. I asked a couple friends in the industry and they indicate that for private companies, about half your premium goes the the agent who writes the policy. That’s only Citizens.
Let’s assume there are conservatively another 8 million policies in Florida and since many of those are inland, let’s day they average $1500/yr. If you have it for less, check out your policy!. That means there is another $12 billion collected each year for a total of $15 billion per year.
Now let’s look at storms. According to Malmstadt, et al 2010, the ten largest storms 1900–2007, corrected for 2005 dollars are as follows:.
Rank Storm Year Loss($bn)
1 Great Miami 1926 129.0
2 Andrew 1992 52.3
3 Storm 1944 35.6
4 Lake Okeechobee 1928 31.8
5 Donna 1960 28.9
6 Wilma 2005 20.6
7 Charlie 2004 16.3
8 Ivan 2004 15.5
9 Storm # 2 1949 13.5
10 Storm # 4 1947 11.6
So for all bu the top 9 storms in a 107 year history,the annual receipts exceed the losses for a storm. The total over the period is $450 billion (adjusted to 2005 dollars) That means an average of $4 billion per year. So what is the issue? Sure a big storm could wipe out the trust fund, but that is what Lloyd;’son London, re-insurers and the ability to borrow funds is all about.
I suggest that the fuzz is really about is this. Most people do not understand the concept of an insurance pool. That includes many public officials. The idea of insurance is to pool resources is to collect huge sums of money so that if something bad occurs, there is the ability to compensate people for their losses. Insurance is a good thing but individually we hope it is never us that needs to be compensated because that means something bad happened. But we expect our premiums to pay into that pool, build large pools of money, and have money when you need it. The more people that pay in, the more the risk is split and lower the likelihood that any individual suffers a loss. Hence the lower risk should lower premiums. And people who live in high risk area should pay more than those who don’t. Flood plains, dry forests, coastal areas, high wind areas, tornado alley, etc are all high risk. Florida is one, but clearly there are many others,
So Citizens has a pile of money. Most private insurance companies should also, although their money is invested and they expect most of that will not be paid out. I suspect the concern is a fear that the pile of cash will create a public furor, but that shows a lack of communication and education. Cash is good. Lots of it is better. It’s like running surpluses in government or in your personal savings account. The idea is to have money when you need it. Running at a point where you never have surpluses guarantees you will have deficits that require cuts in services,and possibly losses of jobs when the economy tanks again. For insurance, those losses occur when big event hit. Fortunately those are infrequent, but they have and will happen. We need the cash pools on hand to protect our citizens just in case. In the meantime we need some leadership and education of the public.
POWER PLAYS – Subsidies and water utilities
So what does this mean for water and sewer utilities. First, we’d love to stay out of the fray. Water and sewer utilities recognize that they are the “peak” power supply for electric utilities. The means to expand power supplies is made difficult by the rules for capital recovery for power utilities that penalizes peak and redundant power supply construction. It must be used and useful to qualify for a return. Hence NextEra builds inexpensive, small increment renewable wind systems to be made whole and encourages residents to reduce demands so they do not need to build more large scale capacity. That works as long as access to renewables or increases in efficiency are available. The use of federal subsidies encourages the used of new technology but without the subsidies, expect the construction to slow.
The European Union is looking to phase out renewable power subsidies by 2017, which may have fairly significant consequences for the European renewable market. The Koch brothers and the Tea Party operatives they fund through many organizations like the Institute for Energy Research, Americans for Prosperity and the Heritage Foundation, are fighting federal tax credits for wind, while backing tax credits for oil and gas. Why do the Koch brothers keep showing up? Because as we noted in a prior blog – they stand to lose profits if the US depends less on oil and gas IT si a problem with big money interests using that money for self preservation as opposed to progression of technology and ideas.
Think what would have happened 100 years ago if big money was allowed to control progress. And I have just the perfect scenario pitting two sides of my family. My mother’s great uncle made Concord coaches. As long as horse drawn carriages and coaches were the primary transportation options, they made money. OF course many cities and towns found that they spend much of their tax money cleaning up after the horses, one of the all-time yuckiest jobs. Tons of horse poop was cleaned up nightly on the streets on many cities. Images are available on line. Of course there was also the stench, disease, vectors, etc associated with all that poop.
Then came Henry Ford. My Dad’s side of the family were Detroiters. They got jobs in the Ford factories, and made money from services to autoworkers as well. The cities loved having cars – less poop. In fact Henry’s cars worked so well, that very quickly cities didn’t have to pick up poop. And the stench and disease decreased. Of course back then, my mothers’ family did not have the same means to buy influence to prevent Henry Ford from producing cars. My uncle went broke, but America and my father’s family in Detroit, benefitted greatly as a result of the new technology. I think we all benefitted from the automobile. Thankfully the coachmakers didn’t have money.
Using politics and influence to resist new technology seems unAmerican. Using subsidies to encourage is seems far more beneficial to society as long as those subsidies actually benefit society. Subsidies have long been a means for governments to alter consumer and corporate behavior and encourage new technologies. Subsidies for recycling steel, aluminum, glass, paper and other materials remained in place until the technology was cost effective to compete with new materials. Now recovered steel is cheaper than new steel materials. The subsidies had their effect. The same is true with aluminum and glass. Subsidies in the form of grants encouraged water and sewer utilities to upgrade treatment and install pipes to serve new customers. Now those are low interest loans because most of the cost effective connections have been made. It benefitted society.
Subsides have been used for years in the US and Europe to encourage renewable power use. The result is a reduction in renewable costs as more people invested in the technology. Greater supply means lower costs (economy of scale, and, theory of economic supply and demand), and subsides are designed to reduce purchase prices sooner than the market might otherwise. Otherwise most of these industries never get off the ground because they cannot get to cost effective production levels. Stay tuned.
Infrastructure Condition
We are all cognizant of the low grades on infrastructure given annually by ASCE and periodically by USEPA. We spend about 1.8% of our GNP on infrastructure. We used to spend twice that much and it is likely that we need to spend upwards of 2.4% to stay even. Much or our infrastructure is “forgotten” because it is buried. American Water Works Association published a book to highlight his problem – Buried No Longer. But is it helping. In a recent Roads & Bridges article, they noted that the bridge system continues to age faster than the repair rate. The states with more than 15% deficient bridges are mostly Great Plains states, and the northeast. The latter is no surprise because the infrastructure is generally much older in the northeast. What was also interesting was that in a recent American City and County magazine, many of the states that have bridge issues, also have below average trust among the public. And most of the areas with the bridge issues are rural states, like North Dakota and West Virginia. This harkens back to a prior couple blogs when it was noted that poorer, less educated people tend to live rural lifestyles, and lobby for less taxes, yet expect government to be there to resolve crises. Interesting….
Sea Level Rise Planning Part 2
In the last blog we discussed 10 planning steps for sea level rises. When planning 50-100 years other factors can come into play as well. As a result, to allow flexibility in the analysis due to the range of increases within the different time periods, an approach that uses incremental increases of 1, 2, and 3 feet of SLR is suggested. Hence infrastructure is built to meet milestones, not arbitrary dates lessening the potential for stranded assets.. The increments can work as threshold values in planning considerations in terms of allowing planners the ability to know ahead of time where the next set of vulnerable areas will be to allow a for proactive response approach that can be matched to the observed future sea levels.
But prior to developing infrastructure plans, the local community needs to define an acceptable level of service (LOS) for the community. A level service would indicate how often it is acceptable for flooding to occur in a community on an annual basis. 1% is 4 days per years and for a place like Miami Beach, this is nearly 2 ft NAVD88, well above the mean high tide. The failure to establish an acceptable LOS is often the cause of failure or loss of confidence in a plan at a later point in time. The effects of SLR of the level of service should be used to update the mapping to demonstrate how the level of service changes, so that a long-term LOS can be defined and used for near-term planning.
With the LOS known, the vulnerability assessment is developed using a GIS based map of topography and the groundwater levels associated with wet and dry season water levels. LiDAR is a useful tool that may be available at very high resolution in coastal areas. Topographic maps must be “ground-truthed” by tying it to local benchmarks and transportation plans. USGS groundwater and NOAA tidal data from local monitoring stations to correlate with the groundwater information. Based on the results of these efforts, the GIS-based mapping will provide areas of likely flooding.
GIS map should be updated with layers of information for water mains, sewer mains, canals, catch basins, weirs and stormwater facilities. Updating with critical infrastructure will provide a view of vulnerability of critical infrastructure that will be funded by the public sector. Ultimately policy makers will need more information to prioritize the needed improvements. For example, a major goal may be to reduce Economic Vulnerability. This means identifying where economic activity occurs and potential jobs. At-risk populations, valuable property (tax base) and emergency response may be drivers, which means data from other sources should be added.
The next step is to analyze vulnerability spatially, by overlaying development priorities with expected climate change on GIS maps to identify hotspots where adaptation activities should be focused. This effort includes identification of the critical data gaps which, when filled, will enable more precise identification of at risk infrastructure and predictions of impacts on physical infrastructure and on communities. The final deliverable will include descriptions of the recommended concepts including schematics, cost estimates, and implementation plan.
So why go through all this. Let’s go back to the beginning. It has to do with community confidence in its leaders. Resident look at whether their property will be protected. Businesses look at long-term viability when making decisions about relocating enterprises. The insurance industry, which has traditionally been focused on a one year vision of risk, is beginning to discuss long-term risks and not insuring property rebuild is risk-prone areas. That will affect how bankers look at lending practices, which likely will decrease property values. Hence it is in the community’s interests to develop a planning framework to adapt to sea level rise and protect vulnerable infrastructure through a long-term plan. Plan or….
BOSTON
Last week I went to Boston for the American Water Works Association Annual Conference and Exposition. It is a gathering of thousands of water industry professionals – from operators to university professors to engineers to manufacturers. It is a good group of people and most know a number of people each year. The industry is smaller than one things despite there being over 50,000 community water systems in the United States. All are there to network, which allows them to discuss their issue, learn new ways to approach things, create new contacts and see new equipment and techniques. Over 11,000 registered. Good job to AWWA staff and the folks in New England that local hosts.
At the conference, one of many tasks, beyond meetings and education, was to do a class for public officials on what water and sewer utilities are, how they operate, how to deal with revenues and expenses and regulations. The idea is to help local officials understand the complex utility issues which are often second fiddle to more “surficial” activities like parks, and economic development. The officials get a certificate from AWWA for 12 hours of class time, but the fact that these folks come, spend the time, get involved and can then experience the rest of the program is to be commended. I have been doing these public officials classes since my book came out in 2009. The first two days are always based on the book, but the third day can vary depending on issues in the news and preferences form the public officials group within AWWA. This year the focus was operations and revenues. The responses were positive, and the interaction was very good. And I had a blast as well.
It had been 40 years since AWWA was in Boston for ACE. I have been twice previously – once when I was 7 and we went to the aquarium and once to catch a baseball game at Fenway, while on a 5 game, 4 city, 3 day baseball trip. Boston led off. This time, I was able to spend a day looking at the City. Thanks to my friend Chi Ho Sham who acted as chauffer and tour guide – I expect to repay the gesture whenever he can spend a couple days in S. Florida. Boston as many of you know is the cradle of the American revolution, and visits to the old North Church, Paul Revere’s house, the USS Constitution, several cemeteries and Faneuil Hall. Fascinating. Another trip to come as there is much more to experience than a day.
The moral to the story is that conferences allow us to accomplish many things. We meet new people, hear new things, and if we spend a little time, we can experience how others live or have lived. The history is valuable to us personally.
Economic Challenges or Challenges to Economics?
As you are aware, I have several hobbies and interest, and economics is one of them. Economics has theorists from many different viewpoints, and the commonality among them is that there is no “school of thought” that explains everything. So new schools get developed to explain the current events, or old ones that were discredits are resuscitated, but unfortunately we too often neglect the past, or at least the examples of the past. Too often the obvious gets ignored. For example, we cave money because we know there will be ups and downs. Individual do it, so why don’t governments? We know that we will pay for a product we need. Demand drives the price. If more people want it, the price goes up. Been that way for…. ever maybe? So in my recent reading I came across several musing that keep getting talked about by political pundits, but may be they are not what they appear to be. So let’s take a look at a couple of these that might just affect us….
Is supply side economics is a myth developed by corporate economists to argue for lower taxes. The concept is to give tax breaks to encourage manufacturers and businesses to produce more product which will reduce costs. You know this is patently false. Try selling your reclaimed water at a discount (or give it away) when it is raining. Demand drives the economy, not supply. Every economics student learns this in economics 101. The supply side economics school developed as a means to explain stagflation in the 1970s. The idea what to give tax cuts to those who invested, so they would invest more to make new products, which would trickle down to the rest of us. Still doesn’t work. Why? What they ignored was that the US industrial sector had saturated the US economy with goods and could not grow without new sectors to sell to. Hence the push on Nixon to open up China to foreign trade and investment. But opening foreign markets was great, except they could not afford our products. So we had to make the products there, increase local wages so they could buy the products, and still shipped products back at a cheaper cost that to build them in America. The idea is not new – recall Henry Ford set up the assembly line to cuts costs to allow him to increase wages so his workers could buy his cars. The obvious question is when we saturate China, then what? Africa? Then what? The economy cannot grow faster than the increase in population. So why does supply side economics keep getting traction? Did we mention those tax cuts….
To the big fashion in Germany and the EU is austerity. Austerity is an economic idea that never seems to die despite very limited success and many, many failures. It sounds great – cut costs and balance the budget while cutting revenues (income). Ok, so let’s see how that works in your household – you quit your middle class job and take a minimum wage job. You cut your expenses. Except you can’t sell your house without a loss (and you do not have the cash to make up the difference) and you need your car to get to your new job. But austerity says that if you eat rice, beans, cereal and Ramen noodles, you will soon be far better off than you are now. No one will suffer. Do you believe it? Do you wonder why the Greeks and Irish are not doing so well today and why people are restless? They used to devalue their currency, but the Euro prevents this. They do not have away out. Meanwhile Iceland devalued currency, let the banks fail, took over the bank assets, and are doing much better. Austerity was not the option…. Just saying… And who suffers the most? Not the high income folks.
Tax cuts stimulate the economy. Sounds great. But, from 1944 to 1963, the income tax rate on the highest earning bracket in 1960 was 90% over $200,000. Yes 90%! The economy was great. The middle class was born. House ownerships jumped. Education was up. The economy in the 1970s stagnated after we cut tax rates. We cut the income tax rate in the 1980s, but raised other taxes, and things improved, but then declined. The economy improved after the Bush tax hike in 1991. It did not improve after the Bush tax cuts in 2001. Interesting in their book Presimetrics, Mike Kimel and Mike Kanell noted that higher taxes seem to correlate with a better economy. Is it because investors can’t sell stock so easily when they made a profit so corporations can count of investments longer? Or is it that the increase in revenues allows the federal government to invest in more research and development that further stimulates the economy? Did we mention the tax cuts favor the wealthy?
The moral of the story is that utility managers cannot ignore the economic realities around them. We cannot be trapped by the musings of people who have hidden agendas, which means that our understanding of the way things are must extend beyond the utility itself. The economy, economics, monetary policy, tax policy, demographics and change are areas that utility managers need to be current on. Engineers and managers often understand these issues easily (most are mathematical) but we tend to focus only in out areas. We need to become educated. Recall the earlier blog where I noted the city manager who realized later that the reason elected officials tended to bad alternatives was they were being lobbied to approve the poorer options because their clients could make money from it. You know many ideas that will be lobbied to elected officials and business people in the future. You need to become educated on these ideas and how they affect your utility. You know that rates that are too low will not increase revenues. You know you need to expand sales when possible, perhaps serving new areas, and making the investments for same. You know that not spending money will only increase the risk of failure in the system. You know that not increasing pay will disenfranchise employees. Prepare for these assaults so you can lead your utility down the proper path.
Leadership Survey – Your response appreciated
Good Day! There are over 350 people that receive this blog via WordPress, Linked and Facebook. Thank you. .
So I want to let you know about a project I am working on to develop some measures to identify leadership perceptions in the industry. So we have created an online survey that I would like to have you participate in. It should take no more than 10 minutes of your time, but will help us formulate a larger survey of the industry. I would love to get 100 responses. I will report the results. Your help is appreciated.
Go To : https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/6BFDMRQ
