Citrus County’s process of investigating the possibility of privatizing its public utilities drew fire today from a vocal group of opponents in a packed room in the county commission’s chambers.

A number of individuals and community groups told the county commissioners they wanted to be part of the process, and questioned whether the county even needed to privatize.

On Nov. 3, 2009, County Administrator Brad Thorpe discussed county staff’s recommendation to hire Woolpert, Inc., to produce the Request for Quote (RFQ) and to assist staff in ranking and negotiating. The commission approved, and eventually, the final choices came down to two firms, Veolia Water North America -- South, LLC and Woodard and Curran -- both of whom were to present their proposals before the county commission today, and then ranked.

But something happened between the selection of the two firms and today’s meeting, leading to possible legal complications should the county proceed in the privatization process it set for itself. County Attorney Richard Wesch said, “An issue has arisen regarding the function of the Citizen Assessment Team that was put in place as part of this process. We were not able to adequately resolve the scope of their authority and their function in advance of this meeting.”

Wesch said that raises a concern that any legal challenge which, given the magnitude of the RFQ, “undoubtedly will come” and a decision of the county commission could be overturned. Wesch suggested, and commissioners accepted, that the board reschedule the meeting and a third company -- U.S. Water -- be added to the next special meeting of the commission.

The commission agreed, and the next special meeting concerning privatization will be at 9 a.m. on Aug. 31 in the commission’s chambers.

Thorpe said that there was confusion about the purpose of the today’s meeting. “I have read some of the literature out there about this meeting,” Thorpe said. “This meeting was only to select a firm -- it wasn’t over the discussion of the privatization of utilities. The next step in this process would have been to determine whether this firm was capable of doing the work, or the utilities would remain with the county staff.”

Thorpe said this was only one step in the county’s process of deciding whether to privatize utilities system. He added that the “philosophical debate” of privatizing utilities will occur at a future date, once a final firm is selected to compete.

Three of the commissioners today were in favor of moving forward with the process, but two commissioners -- Dennis Damato and Gary Bartell -- were not so inclined, at least at this time.

“From this commissioner’s standpoint,” Bartell said, “I have no interest, and haven’t had an interest in the privatization of our utilities system.” Even so, he said, should the board wish to move forward and reschedule the special commission meeting, that the county attorney’s suggestion was prudent.

Commissioner Damato held his remarks until after public comment, and essentially called for a “time out” from the counthy’s privatization process. “I think what we need to do, after what we’ve heard today, is take a deep breath. I think staff and commissioners need to find a new and different process that addressed all of the issues that we heard today, including the privatization of utility operations,” Damato said.

County Commissioner Joe Meek said the county needed to “look at all of the options” before deciding how to proceed with privatization. Once the firms have come before the commission and ranked, and the winning firm will be compared to the county utilities division, and that’s the time for a debate on privatization.

“Knowledge is power, and when we have the information in front of us, we can make an informed decision,” Meek said.

Commissioner John Thrumston said all the county is trying to do is to look at government and to be as efficient as it can be. “If we don’t at least look at these things, how do we know at the end of the day whether it’s a good decision or a bad decision?”

Commissioner Winn Webb said he, too, needed information to make a decision. “For us to take the approach that, unequivocally, we’re not going to look at them (the firms’ presentations) -- that’s like taking a test without ever looking in the book. We need to have the information.”

During public comment, the common thread of those speaking before the commission was a concern that privatizing might not necessarily be a good thing, and also a concern that the county’s process to consider privatization might lead to an unnecessary burden on county residents in the long run.

Duane Duker, Sugarmill Woods Civic Association, told commissioners the county should quit using the term, “privatization,” since it implied a change of ownership. He also said that taking utilities from the public to private hands wasn’t a good idea. “To my knowledge, there’s no benefit to the county, except to (say) ‘We don’t want to deal with public utilities anymore.’”

Theodora Rusnak, Citrus County Council president, said her group’s research suggested that privatization was a matter of money. “Putting it quite simply gentlemen, the private operator is a for-profit business. The only way it makes more money is by cutting costs and increasing rates,” Rusnak said.

“The primary way of cutting costs, we have found, is to defer maintenance. “

She also said that language used by Wesch and commissioners’s remarks suggested that the commission had already decided to privatize utilities by turning it over to a private contractor. “I hope that is not the case, because that is not the intent of (the) Sunshine (Law). You should be coming into this decision with an entirely open mind.”

Al Grubman, who is affiliated with the Homosassa River Alliance, Citrus County Council and Too Far, said a statement that was made that the county’s reaction was proactive he believed was wrong.

“It was reactive after the citizens were proactive,” Grubman said. He added that the county owed residents an apology. “I suggest you apologize to the people of Citrus County and start over -- with class, transparency, honesty, openness and following the laws.”

Teresa Waldron, Lecanto resident, said the county should keep its money to grow its own economy and jobs instead of privatizing. “With this economy, any business that wants to continue doing a good job does not want to outsource its employees, but wants to hold on to its employees and build from within, ” she said.

“Why don’t we just outsource everything? We wouldn’t need you,” she said. “No insult, but we wouldn’t need any oversight,” she said.

Some of the most poignant remarks at the meeting were made by Citrus Springs resident Millie Sloan. “Who’s going to be monitoring the quality of the water? Are they going to do as good a job as what has been done in the past?” she asked commissioners.

She also had other words for the commissioners. “The people of this county have placed their trust in you to do the best job that you can for the people of Citrus County. In order to do that, we feel that you need to listen to us. When we have concerns, we need to be able to present them to you, and you need to listen to us.”

She reminded commissioners that election day is on Aug. 24, and that some commissioners were up for re-election; other commissioners at some future time. “I challenge you to keep in mind what it is that you are here to do -- and that is to serve the needs of the people of Citrus County.”

 Video: (9 mins, 25 secs.)