The Great Water Debate

The city I live in is currently embroiled in a a debate over the future of water management.  The city council is proposing a Public Private Partnership (P3) to solve some of the long term infrastructure problems we are facing.  A referendum has been called and scheduled for September 25th, 2013 where citizens will vote to determine the future of water management in the city.  I've done some digging and so far I haven't really found enough information to make an informed decision.  Part of the problem here is that there won't be enough information until after the referendum because a contractor has not been selected, a design has not been created and there is no contract to review.  The City has provided an FAQ for residents which can be found here: http://www.regina.ca/residents/water-sewer/learn_about_our_water_system/water-sewer-system/sewage-treatment-plant/qa-public-private-partnerships-p3s/

So, not having any detail on what impact a P3 approach might have I can't support it even though it might be the best option in long run.  Unfortunately I have to go with the facts that I do have in making a decision:

1. Historically private water utilities do not have a good track record - Because they are "for profit" entities they will undoubtedly cut corners at some point in order to ensure a profit.  I know that when corners are cut on managing water and sewage it's going to have an impact on me and everyone else in the city.  Also, for profit companies are not designed for equitable distribution of service.  The service goes to the people who can afford to pay for it.  There are no indications that there will be subsidies available to those who can't afford to pay for the service so I have to assume that a for profit entity will follow the path of greatest profit and if you can't pay, you don't get the service.  Does that mean a further erosion of the quality of certain neighbourhoods?  Does that mean that the poorest areas of the city will suffer even more?  Does that mean that the declining areas of the city will grow and expand despite efforts to improve and transition those areas?  I don't know so I will have to assume yes to all of the above.  To illustrate what I'm talking about here, just do a bit of research on the US in the later part of the 19th century when water management companies were private but just starting to move toward public management and ownership.  At the turn of the century, typhoid rates were twice as high among African Americans as they were among white Americans but this changed as soon as the the water supply became publicly managed because there was equitable distribution of service.
2. The city has extensive expertise and experience in managing a sewage treatment program but we have no experience in managing a sewage treatment contractor.  Wouldn't is seem reasonable that we have a better chance at being successful in an area where we have extensive experience rather than an area where we have no experience.  Keep in mind that we are talking about a 30 year agreement here.  Considering that our council and managers have never managed an agreement like this before, what would make us think that we have such amazing foresight to know how to write the contract in the first place or manage the contract without causing significant damage to citizens?  I would feel much more comfortable in investing in an area where we have experience.  Maybe it's better to spend more money and invest in training for already skilled people so that they can improve those skills and manage the service more efficiently while meeting the public need.

I assess solutions for a living and if someone presented this to me asking if it was a good deal or not I would have to send it back and ask for more details.  If there are no more details to be had I would have to side with what I know rather than the great unknown.  A P3 deal could be great and it could be the best thing for the city but there is so little information available that I can't even make an educated guess about it.