While WASA proposes a rate increase, some residents do not have pipeborne water and resort to using water from barrels. Photo: Karla Ramoo

BY ASHA JAVEED

ashajaveed@yahoo.com

The possibility of T&T facing a drought in 2008 has abated. But it could face this natural disaster in 2009 or 2010.

This gloomy prediction was given by Prime Minister Patrick Manning at a “thank you” meeting hosted by the ruling People’s National Movement in Tunapuna on January 12.

Ironically, he announced at the very same meeting that the nation should brace for higher water rates.

If the Water and Sewerage Authority (WASA) has its way, it will be a 100 per cent hike.

So has the value of water gone up because of the likelihood of a drought?

Consider this:

n Of the 225 million gallons of water a day produced by WASA, 50 per cent is lost through leaks in old pipelines within the system

n T&T’s consumers pay 46 cents per cubic metre, a rate described by Manning as “a very, very, low water rate”

n The Government is burdened by a huge annual subsidy of $919.5 million

n Rehabilitating and extending the authority’s network will cost $27 billion over 15 years

n WASA’s last rate increase was in 1993

While the decision to increase water rates has not been made pending consultations and recommendations by the Regulated Industries Commission, it is inevitable that rates will be increased for WASA’s 341,000 customers.

Quite simply, WASA’s cost of operations have gone up.

It’s a hard argument to swallow for people in rural and other communities who do not have access to water; WASA services 90 per cent of the population, some frequently and others on a rotating basis.

A tank of water in a rural community could cost between $100 to $160. This compares unfavourably to a bill of roughly $108 every quarter for some customers.

The facts:

n Number of households receiving water fewer than two days a week—37,710

n Number of households outside the distribution network—12,069

That’s a total of 49,779 households, an estimated 184,182 people.

Yet, even those who have access to water have many complaints. They include: leaking pipes, poor/bad or no service at all, overbilling and incorrect billing.

Consumers’ complaints

Angela Fredrick, a Morvant resident, pointed out that the area in which she lives received water only twice a week. WASA’s attempt to upgrade the water supply to Morvant left householders with an irregular and unreliable service and destroyed the main thoroughfare in the area, Lady Young Avenue.

“It has been turned into a jigsaw puzzle of potholes, dirt and dust,” she said.

Kenny Supersad of Cunupia noted there were two major leaks on Bejucal Road, which were promptly reported to WASA.

The response to repair the leaks was slow.

“Did someone say we are trying to achieve first-world status by 2020, and in 2008 we cannot get a basic item like water?” said an irate Supersad.

Natasha Ross of Five Rivers, Arouca, wrote to the editor of the Guardian about her water woes, pointing out that if you have “$350 or you know someone in WASA, then you’ll get a supply, but most of us don’t fall into that category.”

“For every dollar we spend, we collect only 50 cents. We are a deficit-driven organisation,” said Wayne Joseph general manager, operations at WASA, in a Business Guardian interview last July.

The Government’s constant financial injection into the debt-ridden authority has failed to infuse it with any level of efficiency.

As of December 31, 2007, WASA’s receivables stood at $582 million. (See table) Of that figure: $329 million dates back to 2003, and is therefore statute barred, according to the RIC, meaning that the authority will be unable to enforce collection measures to recover that sum.

About 22 per cent of its mailed bills are returned unopened.

An industry source said that WASA should do several things to raise the level of its revenue before raising absolute rates:

n clean up its records

n revalue properties realistically

n meter those customers where it is profitable to do so

n increase the fines to people stealing water, loaning water to customers who have been disconnected or who do not have water

n impose a late payment charge

Billings

The Business Guardian understands that WASA bills its customers in three categories.

A1: Standpipe customers

If you live within 1/4 mile of a standpipe, you pay a standpipe rate.

“Well, over the years, the country got built up. Old wooden houses were replaced by new, larger concrete ones which got their water fed directly into them. WASA never corrected its records as these developments took place. Result? Incorrect billing as people got billed for both standpipe as well as direct supply. So there is over-billings there and since people will not pay for both, there appears to be growing accounts receivables,” said a source.

A2: Customers in the process of building a domestic structure. A customer should not stay for more than six to eight months before moving onto a fully built, internally-plumbed house.

“Again, because of WASA’s slackness, there are thousands of persons in this group for years that should be billed within the A3 class,” a source said.

A3: Domestic customers

“Over the years, WASA has not been doing its work. So properties in the newly developed and developing areas such as Woodbrook, Chaguanas, Maraval, etc, where new homes have replaced the old wooden structures, can still be valued on the books at a couple of hundred dollars.

On at least two occasions in the last 12 years or so, WASA offered the Ministry of Finance funding for an island-wide revaluation exercise. Nothing has come of it,” said a source.

“This is a serious issue. WASA cannot assess, but has to depend on the warden’s office. In T&T, properties have hardly been reassessed. Consequently, a very large house valued in the 1970s (eg Valsayn) may be paying lower rates than a much, smaller house recently built in a rural area,” said another source.

Labour-related

inefficiencies:

WASA’s labour force now exceeds 3,200 while it has an agreement with one of its recognised unions to have a staff of 2,300.

Overtime is a “runaway horse” in the operations division, reaching 33 per cent of straight-time pay. Even the payroll department’s overtime runs high. A payroll employee was paid $130,000 in overtime in 2007.

A knowledgeable source told the Business Guardian that there are “literally hundreds of young people along the corridors and in closed offices in different locations, doing nothing but being paid.”

The source said that some daily-paid workers take home as much as $200,000 a year.

And that there are several incidents of people being fired and re-hired.

The Business Guardian understands that a draughtsman at WASA, a childhood friend of a very senior government official, has been paid (not promoted) as a deputy general manager in charge of special programmes to bring water to people. There has been no board approval for him to receive this category of payment.

Another friend of the same official has been placed in a general manager’s position on at least four occasions and failed.

“She has not been a performer in her substantive job, but is not terminated. She was once recommended for termination by the firm of Pannell-Kerr Forster, but is still there,” said a source familiar with the situation.

Last year, negotiations between the Public Services Association (PSA) and the Public Sector Negotiating Committee were settled—$140 million for monthly-paid workers and $47 million for daily-rated workers (1,200 workers).

A total of $187 million. It will pay close to $3.6 million to facilitate a 15 per cent salary hike for its estate police. The pay-out follows the three-year collective agreement signed between the authority and the Estate Police Association on Wednesday, which covered the 2005 to 2007 period.

Mismanagement

The Business Guardian has been informed that high-ranking officials at WASA are engaged in questionable financial practices.

“There is a politically-tied group and its acolytes in the authority who continue to manage it despite countless negative situations it has created for the authority and the Government,” said a source.

Mismanagement at WASA

Their questionable actions include:

1. The building of an “education centre” which had no board approval and no budget allocation for its construction. The building is at the corner of Farm Road and the Priority Bus Route, St Joseph.

It was originally described as a museum, until a way was suggested for it to be aligned with some new programme. The building remains unused and unoccupied.

2. Repairs and maintenance of wells is a fertile area for fraud. One year, the operations division requested $21 million to pay off well repair contractors who had been asked to do work without approval or budget allocation. The board approved the payment without question. The following year, the division returned with another request $17 million. This was not sent forward.

“In 2005, funds to repair a well in La Fillette was requested by the operations division. Approval was refused because the operations division would not add it to a list that was being developed at the very time for Cabinet budget approval. As it turned out, the well is owned by a private development. The matter was treated nonchalantly, even after being raised with the CEO, with an explanation that WASA could take over the well once it was repaired. He was then told that the authority should first acquire the well and then repair it.The well was repaired by WASA,” said a source.

Then there was the Biwater incident. The Business Guardian learnt that Biwater International made a claim for extra money for the Beetham Sewerage Plant because of the failure of the berms—a mound or wall—to stand up.

The amount claimed went from $7 million to $17 million. Cabinet approved the payment. Following this, another proposal was made to the Government for $70 million. This was declined.

3. Over several years a number of in-house construction jobs were given to one contractor: Edsher Construction of Santa Cruz. There is no tendering for contracts at WASA. The jobs were approved by the board. The cafeteria was built by Edsher Construction without tendering.

4. Evaluation points awarded to bidders by a team used to be changed by senior managers before being sent to the tenders committee of the board for approval. This was stopped when all evaluation team members were asked to initial each page of their evaluation report.

5. One general manager has been able to refurbish his office at a cost in excess of $700,000 without budget approval. The matter was brought to the attention of the CEO, but even then Public Utilities Minister Pennelope Beckles was unable to get the board to take action on the matter. The original amount allocated for the office refurbishment was $450,000.

6. Why have certain managers been allowed to buy houses which were undervalued?

“The argument made was that these persons who resided in these WASA houses should have been allowed to purchase them. In fact, these managers ought not to have been residing in these homes in the first place since they were reserved only for managers of water treatment plants,” said a source.

7. A sexual harassment case was brought against a general manager, but the matter was referred to the PSA who took it directly to the board. The Business Guardian understands that while the board was hearing the matter, the woman dropped the matter and left the authority. The board discontinued the matter despite the evidence which had already been produced.

8. It was learnt that a general manager at different times rented three apartments in Tobago for a woman whom he transferred there as a manager. The apartments were at Rovanelles, Mt Pelier Apartments and Dove Street, all in Tobago.

9. WASA has paid more than $2 million in rent for a San Fernando building which was never occupied. The Business Guardian learnt WASA was paying rent and did not insist that the businessman refurbish the building as should have been done.

“It’s a practice that they do. They occupy buildings that are high-priced rent so they could get a cut,” a source said.

Several attempts to secure responses from WASA’s management or board members were futile. Messages were left for several managers.

Yoland Simmons-Agard, communications manager at WASA, said that the authority would only grant an interview in line with a new campaign it intends to launch in the coming weeks.