By ROBERT WELLS, P.E.

1. The Fuller Lodge forum on Oct. 7 regarding the County’s recommended amendment of the Utilities charter provided ample opportunity for proponents and opponents to present their respective views. Robert Gibson was particularly articulate in presenting opposing views; however, his arguments essentially stressed fear that the amendment would enable future County councilors to raid the Utilities Department’s treasury. In effect, Gibson seemed to be saying that, while former County councilors who also served on the Public Utilities Board, such as himself, have been stalwart public servants, future County councilors should not to be trusted to oversee the Utilities Department — even though the County Council is the only governing authority elected by, and thus explicitly responsible to, Los Alamos citizenry.

2. The Charter Review Committee and the County Council have gone to great effort to accommodate the “independence” so valued by the Utilities Board and Department. During the forum, the two opposing speakers argued that a key importance of such independence is a favorable Moody’s bond rating – and strongly implied that their Utilities bonds have had highest ratings. A check of Moody’s website reveals the following: May 28, 2004, Moody assigns LAC Utilities an A3 rating; May 8, 2006, Moody assigns LAC Utilities an A3 rating; Sept. 23, 2008, Moody upgrades LAC Utilities from A3 to A2; Nov. 12, 2013, Moody affirms an A2 rating for LAC Utilities. Not a bad record (Socorro County has a similar rating), but not quite the optimum rating claimed by the Charter Amendment opponents. Significantly, during the past decade, Los Alamos County, itself, has enjoyed an A1 Moody rating, implying that the County, itself, is particularly well managed.

3. The Charter Amendment opponents repeatedly emphasized that, in its decades of existence, the Utilities Board has never had “rogue” behavior – or anything even close. Apparently, they are able to turn a “blind eye” to the performance of the current Utilities Board chair, who this summer presented a recommendation to the County Council that was not in accord with the Board’s majority vote. The consternation of other Board members and County councilors was thoroughly described by articles in the Los Alamos Monitor: “BPU CHAIR DEFIES BOARD DIRECTIVES” (Aug. 16, 2014) and “BPU CHAIR’S ACTIONS RAISE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS” (Aug. 19, 2014).    

4. My subsequent discussions with forum attendees, who typically make a diligent effort to inform themselves about civil matters, suggest that most folks will have a hard time deciding their Utility Charter vote, since the forum debate seemed to end in a “draw”. On one hand, it is imperative that every county function ultimately come under the explicit authority of our elected officials (i.e., the Council — and especially not under the authority of a largely self-selected, unelected Utilities Board; e.g., invariably, two of the three people making new board member recommendations to the Council are “utilities people”). On the other hand, day-to-day Utility Department operations should have a considerable degree of independence. Thus, should the voters reject Utilities Charter Amendment Question 2, consideration should be given in the next election to a Charter Amendment that establishes a five-person Utilities Board by popular vote.  Such an amendment would (a) ensure that the Utilities Board and Department are explicitly responsible to County citizenry and (b) provide a prudent degree of day-to-day independence for Utilities Department operations.