"You are hurting this recovery and you need to stop it"

First, a correction.  Yesterday when we linked to this Advocate story about the dubious claim that Sewerage and Water Board has  $134 million in uncollected bills sitting out there, we mistakenly believed that issue had been raised by S&WB itself.  It turns out the point actually came from Councilman Giarrusso's staff.  We'll get to why that matters in a minute.  But first, there is this other thing that happened.  In an amusing follow-up to yesterday's story, the Advocate has cleverly decided to publish the mayor's feedback. 

Remember, LaToya has been working behind the scenes with the governor and the city's legislative delegation to land a sensitive deal with the city's tourism magnates over tax revenues.  The mayor has, correctly, asserted the money in question could be better applied to shoring up city infrastructure than its current purpose which is, basically, making the tourism magnates richer.

Unfortunately,  the deal currently reported to be in the works only takes the slightest, insufficient step toward that goal while largely preserving the untenable status quo.  It's not a long term solution. But brokering it does present the mayor an opportunity to make a superficial claim on a political "win" which, of course, is all she really cares about.

So she called in to say some things.

Those fragile negotiations could be imperiled if state officials do not believe the S&WB is doing all that it can to properly manage its own finances. That concern was explicitly voiced by an angry Cantrell, who called The Advocate late Tuesday afternoon to complain that reporting on the figures “could kill the deal.” 

 “What do you want to do, screw the city?” Cantrell asked in a phone call hours after the newspaper posted an online story about the questions over unpaid bills. “Is that what you want?”

“Who’s doing the work trying to get the money we need? Me,” she said. “It’s for the city. And it’s just that serious. You can play games if you want, but this is not the one. It’s not it.”

Now it doesn't look like Cantrell threatened to "cold cock" anybody, but plenty people heard some distinct Nagin echoes nonetheless.

Others of us heard some Trump too. But, as we've pointed out previously, Trump and Nagin exist in very much the same genre.  Harboring no true ideology beyond self-aggrandizement, this particular type of pol is always willing to tolerate any injustice and appease any wealthy toad so long as it suits the ego. And, of course, there is the hallmark reflexive lashing out at any and all criticism.  All of which is very much on brand for LaToya as well so it's hardly surprising to see it here. But, as amusing (or disconcerting.. I often confuse the two) as the spectacle is, there are still some questions that haven't been answered.

First, the $134 million clearly is not real. We already know S&WB can't send anyone an accurate bill.  Why assume that they can compile an accurate record of outstanding accounts?  McBride says here that they can't.  (Update:  NOLAdotcom also reports on the" murkiness" of the numbers here) Anyway, given all of this, why would Cantrell not dispute these numbers in her call to the Advocate?

Cantrell did not dispute the numbers — in fact, she credited her administration with already being aware of them — but said reporting on the figures promoted a “false narrative” that the S&WB could do without money she says it needs for the city's very survival.

"Credited her administration with already being aware of.." the numbers but not questioning them?  If the bogus number tells a "false narrative," maybe someone should get on that.  Cantrell sounds like she would prefer to sweep it all under the rug until it's too late for anyone to ask.  It makes sense when you remember this was the mayor who made everyone on her transition team sign non-disclosure agreements. Paranoid behavior just breeds more suspicion, though.  Why not just conduct the public business in public?

Which brings us to the next question.  It's not even the Advocate's reporters who brought this up in the first place. It was Councilman Giarrusso. Give him credit, at least, for asking the question in a public forum.  But, as you can see here, if anyone is promoting the "narrative" Cantrell is concerned about, it is him. 

Under questioning by Giarrusso at a Public Works Committee hearing Tuesday morning, S&WB Executive Director Ghassan Korban said he could not dispute the figures. But Korban added that it would take months to figure out how much was actually owed by customers and how much was the result of billing problems or other errors.

It was unclear how much of that money would turn out to be entirely uncollectable for those and other reasons, he said.

“The numbers that we learned today of $134 million possibly being owed to Sewerage &Water Board are eye-popping,” Giarrusso said after the meeting. “We want them to have the money they need to operate. But they’ve got to collect the money that’s owed to them.”

Did LaToya call up Giarrusso to yell at him too?  Maybe she did. We kind of hope so, anyway, since he does need a talking to. Not so much about the billing stuff but about this. 

Giarrusso said Thursday that rather than shutting off water to those who owe money, the S&WB should consider using devices that would limit the amount of water that could go to a customer. That would limit the water they get to what is needed for essential needs — such as drinking and cooking — while not providing enough for bathing or more extravagant uses like watering lawns.

What is he trying to screw the city?