Slowing Down the CCUA on “Monetizing”
By Albert B. Kelly
I don’t always do it, but I try to give credit where credit is due. In this case I’m referring to the Cumberland County Board of Commissioners and specifically Director Joe Derella and Deputy Director Darlene Barber for their willingness to recommend to Cumberland County Utilities Authority (CCUA) Board Chair Albert Jones that Resolution 3171 which awards a contract to a firm to make recommendations on monetizing the CCUA assets, be removed from the June 17th CCUA agenda.
Beyond just recommending removal of the resolution awarding this contract, Commissioners Derella and Barber were prepared to veto of the minutes of the CCUA’s May 20th meeting, and would recommend to their commission colleagues that they vote to veto the minutes precisely to slow things down on awarding of the project.
I commend both for their willingness to intervene in favor of slowing down the process and taking the time necessary to not only examine the implications of this proposal, but also as an acknowledgment that there is a great concern and anger among officials and residents of Bridgeton, Upper Deerfield, Hopewell, and Fairfield Townships. Some might see this as nothing more than political self-interest avoiding the wrath of voters since CCUA board members are not elected but appointed, but I don’t as both have a genuine concern not only about the process, but about the long term implications.
If we’re looking at “monetizing” with a clear eyes, the reality is that the vast majority of officials and residents in the affected communities are not only extremely concerned about what “monetizing” could mean, but they view the possibility with a great deal of suspicion. What is needed at this point is to slow way down and take the time necessary to not only meet with the elected officials of each community, but also our residents at public forums to discuss the ramifications and motives of such moves so that everything is on the table.
As the Commissioners have pointed out the county, particularly the western side of the county has many infrastructure needs that will be with us long into the future. With that in mind, there is value in discussing our long term needs. Assuming we’ve even identified specific needs, the next question is how best to begin meeting those needs. Should the focus be mostly on new service or on upgrading existing service ahead of expansion?
To meet those needs, do we issue bonds or enter into a financial relationship that will attach us to a specific private equity for many years to come? In light of the fact that the County will receive $29 million in American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) monies and collectively Bridgeton ($8,374,653), Fairfield ($580,650), Hopewell ($427,310) and Upper Deerfield ($714,835) will receive some $10,097,448 do we first stop and examine how the presence of these funds might help us meet our needs before we do anything else?
This is a question worth asking especially since there are only certain things that ARPA funds can be used for, which specifically includes water and sewer infrastructure as well as broadband and the timeframe for using them starts now. These funds must be encumbered by the end of 2024 and spent by the end of 2026. Each community must decide how best to use the funding they will receive as will the county, but we haven’t even had a discussion about whether some of these funds gets us at least part-ways toward whatever it was the CCUA had in mind when they settled on monetizing as the way to get there.
Under most circumstances, this is the type of strategic thinking CCUA Board members are generally tasked with doing on our behalf and we trusted that they’re doing just that, but when serious moves are made quickly without much explanation and without taking the time to engage officials and residents in the impacted communities, that is when concern and outright suspicion crop up and the resting position of voters is a hard “no” because the devil you know is better than the devil you don’t.
From here then, perhaps the CCUA might hold roundtable discussions in each community setting out exactly what the funds would be used for and engaging with local officials and ratepayers on various scenarios such as bonding versus monetizing, how much and on what terms and for how long; and whether ARPA funds could or should be leveraged into the mix.