After attending SETD board meetings recently and hearing first-hand the situation the bus service finds itself in I can't help wondering what the real story is here.
We reported last Thursday that the South County Transit Center is a dead deal and we also reported that at this point the transit agency figures it is spending about $70k to $80k more each month than it takes in. It's also reported that the ridership numbers are no where near the estimates used to apply for some grants the agency was seeking up until the board decided to abandon those applications.
My question is: Was there a governing board for this organization before November of 2010? apparently there was because the Executive Director did get some job performance reviews from somebody. According to the paper the reviews were positive with one exception. It's easy to remember the conflict between Cindy Howe and Jim Santee because it was rare for any spate to become as public as that one was. Jim didn't buy in the boards position and frequently asked questions that created unwelcome conflict. This is where I depart from some. Government boards are not formed with the idea that each member must agree on every point of discussion. If you find yourself on the losing end of a vote that doesn't mean you give up your position and support the majority just to appear to be cooperative. Sometimes the majority is wrong and to change one's public position on an issue isn't necessary unless you have been utterly convinced that your position was incorrect. Unfortunately I've seen this question asked: Okay you have voted against the majority of the board but you will support the majority position. Is that correct?". A completely inappropriate question on the part of a board leader whether that be a chairman or a Mayor.
That is how most boards operate Tom, but in here it seems to be different, folks just quit out of frustration, or better yet they do what Rohne does, bring in supports from extreme groups that will get their way no matter what like the River Keepers, not good governing by any stretch and sure is not behavior I remember coming from our elected officials when we had some jobs here, and a real economy. But we have what we have, and honestly it ain't much.
ReplyDeleteTom,
ReplyDeleteYour question about the pressure for public boards to act only in a unified manner relates to a common culture in public entities where either grant funds are a significant source of funding, or where the function isn't essential (compared to police or fire protection), but has gained favor with the "wouldn't it be nice to have" political crowd. And representatives like David Wu are ever so willing to "fight" for his constituents in just these kinds of matters. Here's the press release sent out on Wu's letterhead regarding the ill-fated Seaside transit center. Here's what Wu's appropriation form said:
"Supports the construction of a transit center in southern Clatsop County, Oregon, to address the growing demand for efficient transit, relieve congestion, and support increased service frequency. Currently, southern Clatsop County does not have a transit center, making it difficult for transit users to access available public transportation to needed services or employment."
Note the use of "growing demand," "efficient" and "needed services," typical buzzwords inserted in Wu's lengthy list of Appropriations Requests, which he prominently displays to this day at http://www.house.gov/wu/appropriations_requests_fy11.shtml, which is his website. No wonder Wu has a permanent smile on his face; he has to pose so often at ribbon cutting ceremonies and check presentations where the local media is anxious to plaster it on their front pages as if he were a hero who discovered found money no one knew existed. Earth to Wu and friends: it doesn't exist. Democrat David Wu, along with the the Betsy Johnsons, Brad Witts, and Debbie Boones of our local world, all support, encourage, and blindly seek public funds for entities for which they have no inclination to determine if the recipient entities are efficient, well-run, or for that matter needed. All that matters is they get the credit for "fighting for the people of Clatsop County."
This culture develops governing boards that typically strive to achieve "consensus" decisions, because, I'm opining, it's just so much nicer to have everyone agree on something. Whether the idea or decision makes economic sense is secondary to reaching accord. Which cultural concept fits in with the currently chic discussion of late regarding "civil discourse," where opposing views, or worse--passionate opposition--is just so terrible in the public arena. I'm beginning to think that Rodney King is responsible for teaching the entire West Coast government sector how to operate, when, in 1992 he famously decried, "Can't we all get along?" They all got along so well that many of California's public entities literally gave the store away to their retirees, with over 10,000 public pensioners receiving over $100,000 per year. And Rodney King ultimately walked away with almost $4 million, and married one of the jurors in his civil trial against LA. There just is no end to the money that the public can pay.
So now we see grant-supported Seaport Air, and Sunset Empire Transit, both in trouble, with their combined millions of dollars of public funding ("investments" says our president), never to be seen again. It's an old story, and one that nationally is coming to a screeching halt, but only because the money's gone, not because of any effort by our political enablers. And they wonder why the Tea Parties came to be formed.
Art Hyland
The "Solution" Hyland, we all know the complaint.
ReplyDeleteGot a clue without a bunch of "Generalization"?
Sure, Patrick, the solution is to make private businesses stand on their own feet without grants, loans, minority credits, tax breaks and such. Government can then provide basic essentials like protection and regulation that ensures the people are not cheated by the private sector. The people should provide recreation and everything else they want, outside the public and private sectors. Will that happen? Never, never. The demands to make the public sector operate like the private sector and the need for the private sector to advertise without regard for the truth makes the mess we are not in.
ReplyDeleteBut you're media. I though you would realize this.
Ahhhh!
ReplyDelete"Anonymous Generalization" to compound the political rhetoric.
Very good!
I really hesitate to do this, for it's inviting more of the same from our ubiquitous P. McGee, but really Patrick, take a breath and try once to understand. A free market provides the questions and a free market provides the solutions. But you, and others like you Patrick, seem to demand a simple instruction book from on high to tell you what, where, when and how much. That's the problem with our culture today, especially here in Oregon; we have a dominant political class ready, willing and very able to dictate the what, where, when and how's, and people like you who are eager to see them do so. Adam Smith's invisible hand, explained hundreds of years ago, would be a good first step for you to begin your economic education.
ReplyDeleteThe Board of Commissioners have made a choice in January, 2011 to immediately cease applying for grant funds. The District is funded primarily with grant funds and if the wheel stops turning, the money stops coming in. The District had a positive account balance in November, 2010 and would have ended the year (June, 2011) with a balanced budget. This board spent the last year getting involved in personnel issues, not showing up for meetings (check the minutes for # of absent members) and complaining that they were getting "too much" information. The board was told in June that there was a potential financial shortfall and staff was taking steps to deal with it. By November, most of the issues were dealt with but the board, with the urging of one very vocal board member, reacted to a complaint from an employee they were secretly meeting with for months prior. This is a perfect example of a board that has no clue what is going on and then when faced with a problem, immediately throws the director off the sinking ship. None of this would have had to happen if they would have acted in a reasonable way and would have been engaged as an elected official should be. Shame on you board.
ReplyDeleteIt is so sad "the bus" has taken a turn for the worst.
ReplyDeleteWhere did all the money go?
The director need to answer those questions under oath in a court of law. I don't blame the board, as the problem goes back many-many months or years.
ReplyDelete