Susie Byrd on Subsidies

Susie Byrd on Subsidies

El Paso City Council Representative Susie Byrd comments on subsidies to new housing developments

Letter to Ms. Byrd November 25, 2008
This is not a country where the government takes money from the poor to subsidize the rich. This country was founded by people who came here to escape that kind of government. There are no laws in this country that would force the poor people in El Paso to subsidize rich developers and home builders. You believe that the PSB is required by law to build facilities and furnish water and sewer services to new housing developments and charge the cost to existing water customers. You promised to obtain a legal opinion to support your position.

EMAIL from Ms. Byrd December 1, 2008
I have spoken with our attorney and he has affirmed that cities and utilities must extend services to any development within their city limits.

EMAIL to Ms. Byrd December 1, 2008
The issue is not weather cities and utilities must extend services to any development within the city limits. The issue is who pays for the extension. Is the PSB required by law to pay for extensions and then collect the money from customers who did not benefit from the extension? Is the PSB required by law to collect money from the poor people in your district to subsidize a high end gated community on the west side or northeast? Is there any equity in a law that forces our government to take money from the poor to subsidize the rich? Is that the freedom that young people from your district are fighting for in Iraq and Afghanistan?

EMAIL from MS Byrd December 1, 2008
State law allows cities, not utilities, to put an impact fee in place in order to recoup those costs. Without the impact fee, the utility still is required to provide service. This is a city decision, not a PSB decision. You can beat up on the PSB all you want but at the end of the day this is a political decision made by elected representatives.
Susie

EMAIL to Ms Byrd December 1, 2008
The PSB makes the following representation in its prospectus to Bond Holders and in each of its annual reports:

" Reporting Entity - El Paso City Ordinance No. 752, adopted May 22, 1952, established a five member board of trustees known as the "Public Service Board" (Board) which was given the complete management and control of the city's water system (System). The board of trustees consists of the Mayor of the City of El Paso and four residents of El Paso County, Texas. With the exception of the Mayor, all other trustees are appointed by the City Council."

You have represented that the PSB does not have complete management and control of the city's water system. The city council can force the PSB to spend any amount of money to extend service to new housing developments and, in so doing; the city council will jeopardize the ability of the PSB to make payments on its bonds. I am a bond holder. It appears that my bonds are not secure and the PSB has misrepresented information in the sales document. Are you sure of what you say.

EMAIL from Ms. Byrd December 1, 2008
Mr. Janacek:
You have misunderstood what I said. The only body with the authority to implement impact fees is the City Council. Without that authorization from the City Council through an impact fee ordinance or a subdivision ordinance requirement, the PSB cannot assess additional fees to recapture the costs associated with building out new infrastructure.
Susie 

Email to Ms. Byrd December 1, 2008
Thank you Ms Byrd. I don't mean to be argumentative but the issue here is not impact fees. The issue is equity in government. You hope that Impact fees will recover some of the money that the PSB gives away but there is no equity in what they give away in the first place. They are robbing the poor to benefit the rich. It simply is not right. They have deceived the citizens and the bond holders. 
Please bear with me on this. I don't pretend to have the superior knowledge. I am an ordinary citizen looking for equity. Please continue the discussion until we find an answer.

EMAIL From MS. Byrd December 1, 2008
I agree with you that it is not fair, but the only way I know to make it fair is to pursue impact fees.
Susie

EMAIL to Ms. Byrd December 1, 2008
You are correct. It is not fair and the only way that you have to make it fair is impact fees. You have no power over the PSB. You are doing your best but your best is not enough.
 
The PSB is robbing the poor to support the rich and you can do nothing about it because Ordinance 752 gives them complete control of the system. They can spend money as they chose and simply raise prices when they run out of money. They admit to spending $200 Million to subsidize rich developers. They gave away $100 Million to the U.S. Army to entice the BRAC commission to send more troops to Fort Bliss. This may be good for the local economy but that is not the purpose of the PSB. They do not have the right to cut off a poor mans water because he can't afford to pay to stimulate the economy. That is not the American Way. 

Email From Ms. Byrd December 1, 2008
My best is enough and it will make a difference. If the PSB had the authority to assess fees for the infrastructure that they provide to new development, they would do it. They have always recommended this option to council. I think you just want to start a war with the PSB. I'm not sure that you really want to solve a problem.
Susie

EMAil to Ms. Byrd December 1, 2008
With all due respect, I think that you have missed the point. The PSB dose not need the authority to assess impact fees. They have the authority to refuse to spend the money in the first place. If they refuse to pay for new development then new development will have to pay for itself. The PSB can make growth pay for growth when ever they want to.

Email From Ms. Byrd December 1, 2008
Mr. Jancek:
I don't think we are going anywhere with this conversation. I agree with your concerns and am addressing in a way I know that will help solve the problem.
Susie

EMAIL to Ms. Byrd December 5, 2008
Your comments have taken on an all to familiar ring. This is the same tactic used by the PSB: doubletalk, baseless accusations and then silence. You are asked to explain how the PSB can tell its bondholders that the PSB is in complete control of the El Paso water system while you maintain that the city council is in control. Someone is not telling the whole truth. I am a bondholder, I have been deceived and I intend to find out the truth. Do you wish to explain or should I look for the truth elsewhere?

EMAIL From Ms. Byrd December 5, 2008
I tried my best to answer your questions. Sorry that you are not satisfied with those questions. I disagree with your assessment of my responses, but I doubt there is much I can do to change that assessment.
Susie

EMAIL To Ms. Byrd December 5, 2008Can you simply give a direct answer to the question of who has complete control of the El Paso water system?

 

Letter from City Manager Joyce Wilson dated January 27, 2009:
"Under the state law, the management and control of the PSB is vested in the board of trustees and neither the Council nor I have any control over their activities."1