DPW design funds OK’d in lopsided City Council vote

Officials stunned by grim photos of unsafe conditions at the DPW

NORTHAMPTON – The mayor’s slideshow of deteriorated Department of Public Works buildings, jury-rigged electrical wires, cracked and broken windows and walls, cramped offices and maintenance areas, inadequate ventilation fans and expensive trucks parked under crumbling shelters had a visible effect on many councilors Thursday night.

Like many photographs published on NorthamptonMedia.com earlier in the week, the mayor’s visual presentation apparently served as a wake-up call for many councilors, some of whom said they had never toured the DPW property.

Before voting 7-2 to borrow $800,000 for engineering and architectural services – the first step to expand and renovate the sprawling 11-acre Locust Street DPW yard – several councilors said they were stunned, expressing shock and dismay at the conditions.

“I cannot believe what I saw tonight,” Ward 6 Councilor Marianne L. Barge said after viewing the pictures and the accompanying charts and text projected onto a large screen at the front of the council chambers. No employees in the private or public sector should ever have to work in such substandard surroundings, LaBarge said. “These conditions are unbelievable.”

“Why haven’t these buildings been condemned?” Ward 1 Councilor Maureen T. Carney asked. It was not a rhetorical question, and both Mayor Mary Clare Higgins and DPW Director Edward “Ned” Huntley squirmed a bit, skating around the obvious answer that some of the conditions there were indeed substandard and dangerous, if not illegal. The problems, Carney warned, should be fixed as soon as possible to avoid worker injuries or accidents, and the lawsuits that would inevitably result.

The stark and disturbing photos, said Ward 4 Councilor Pamela C. Schwartz, clearly showed the result of decades of “disinvestment” in the city’s infrastructure. While city leaders poured money into the city schools, roads and programs, she said, the DPW – the agency charged with fixing dilapidated parts of the city’s infrastructure – was itself “falling apart under our noses.” Schwartz described the DPW engineering study as “an important start,” but a step that “is way, way too late in the day.”

The vote came on the heels of a unanimous 9-0 council vote Thursday to approve the mayor’s $74.6 million fiscal year 2011 budget, which contains an $800,000 line item for the DPW expenditure. And the DPW vote broke down to the same 7-2 vote as the bill’s first reading June 3, with Ward 3 Councilor Angela D. Plassmann and Ward 7 Councilor Eugene A. Tacy again voting “no.”

As explained by Higgins and City Finance Director Christopher M. Pile, the DPW design will be paid for by funds already set aside as part of a 2.6-percent portion of the FY2011 budget dedicated to capital projects. Half will come from the general fund, with the rest split by the water and sewer enterprise funds. Had the council rejected the DPW bill, Higgins explained, the $800,000 would simply be spent on other capital needs, of which there are many.

The mayor reminded councilors that, before one shovelful of earth is moved for construction, the full council will need to approve spending the rest of the approximately $8 million building project.

Preliminary plans include expanding and modernizing the engineering building, building a new vehicle maintenance facility, bringing the 120-year-old vehicle storage barn up to health and safety codes, relocating the water department from Prospect Street to the Locust Street headquarters, repairing the deteriorated municipal fueling station and numerous other repairs.

During the debate, At-large Councilor Jesse M. Adams said that spending money on roof replacements and emergency repairs was akin to “applying band-aids,” and that the expense of patching failed buildings was adding up.

One councilor who was familiar with the property, but who ultimately voted against funding the design services item, was Councilor Tacy.

“That place is a dump. It needs help. It’s bad,” said Tacy.

Citing figures about the city’s tax rate, and how various overrides – including the proposed new police station – have added to the average tax bill, Tacy was relentless.

Before voting no, he warned about spending on large-scale projects when state officials are saying that next fiscal year’s economy and state aid might be even worse than it is in 2010. “I don’t know what’s going to happen next year, but I’m nervous,” Tacy said.

Earlier Thursday, Tacy, along with his peers on the council’s Finance Committee, recommended placing a $10 million debt exclusion question on the Nov. 2 ballot to partially fund the construction of a new police station on Center Street. The full city council is expected to vote on the ballot question on July 8. Higgins has said the rest of the police station’s approximately $17.6 million costs will be paid for with long-term borrowing under the city’s existing debt cap.

Councilor Plassmann echoed Tacy’s concern about spending and, after acknowledging bad conditions at the DPW yard, issued what has become her stock offering on controversial issues of the day: “Is this really what our constituents want us to take on?”

“I have to live under my budget at my home, and I have to prioritize,” Plassmann said, adding that the city should step back and prioritize capital needs.

Higgins – who had passed the gavel to Council President David J. Narkewicz so she could take an active role in the debate – said she has consistently but gradually increased funds for capital investment from about 1.5 percent of the annual budget to 2.6 percent for FY2011. Municipal finance experts recommend 5 percent as the target percentage, a figure the mayor said would allow the city to tackle more street repairs and building maintenance in the future.

Ward 2 Councilor Paul D. Spector agreed, saying such an investment strategy would allow officials to fix and preserve the city’s infrastructure. Although he did not directly address Plassman, who spoke just before him, Spector urged those who felt queasy about the DPW spending bill to just say no. After observing that councilors were essentially raising the same points they had two weeks ago, he called for a vote.

Huntley, who had spoken during the slide presentation but kept his head low during the political debate, smiled before packing up his paperwork and heading out the door.

After the vote, and while the councilors moved on to other matters, former City Council president Michael Bardsley, who lost to Higgins in a close election for mayor last fall, asked how conditions at the DPW yard had deteriorated so much in the decade or so since he had toured the facility. If things are so bad – and clearly they are – why, Bardsley continued, hadn’t someone in a position of leadership pushed for immediate action before now?

It’s a question others, including several councilors, are likely to pursue in the weeks and months to come.