Get Opinion in your inbox -- sign up for our weekly newsletter
Opinion L.A.
Opinion Opinion L.A.

Newton: The tangled web of DWP rate increases

Once the Los Angeles City Council quits its faux hand-wringing and approves AEG's proposal to build a football stadium downtown, it will face the hard and often acrimonious job of deciding whether and how much to raise water and power rates for city residents and businesses. Anyone who follows city government knows how that debate is likely to unfold even before it begins.

Citing the need to address deferred maintenance and increased responsibilities, the Department of Water and Power will argue for rate hikes; the council will feign shock at the proposed increase and accuse the DWP of bad faith; City Hall critics will blame fat pay increases for the DWP's union membership and insist that the public not be forced to pay for the lavish retirements and health benefits of utility workers. Whether or not rates go up, everyone will go away mad.

This time, however, there was supposed to be a new element in the process. In March, city voters overwhelmingly approved the creation of a new entity in city government — a "ratepayer advocate" to serve as the voice of consumers with the utility in negotiations such as those coming up. As a group of UCLA students who examined the department concluded, the ratepayer advocate offers the DWP and the city leadership "a new ally in serving the residents of Los Angeles."

Except for one problem: The ratepayer advocate still doesn't exist. The office doesn't have a staff or organization plan; it's not even clear whether it will have an executive director and a separate ratepayer advocate or whether those will be the same person. A citizens commission will name the office's executive director, but it can't do that yet because the members of that commission still have not been named by the City Council.

In April, soon after voters approved the position, the council acted to begin setting up the office (the charter amendment was scheduled to go into effect July 1). The first step, as called for in the ballot measure, was to appoint a citizens commission. But it was not until June 6 that the city attorney's office supplied the council's Energy and Environment Committee with a primer on how it could proceed to appoint the commission and actually begin work. And only in the last few weeks has the council approved creation of that commission.

Councilwoman Jan Perry, who chairs the committee and is a candidate for mayor, concedes that the drive to create the new office has been slower going than she had hoped, but says she thinks the council's on track now.

Still, the delays have been costly. Ron Nichols, the still relatively new chief of the DWP, has spent the last few months patiently explaining the DWP's financial predicament to the public and its elected leaders. As he notes, the DWP faces formidable legal and technical challenges. It has to upgrade its electrical systems to rely more heavily on renewable sources. It has water mains that date to the early 20th century. And its rates are lower than those of virtually any other California utility.

That adds up, in his estimation, to an urgent need for rate increases, though relatively modest ones this year, with incremental increases over the next two. He's not calling for a specific hike but rather has laid out a series of options so that the council, with input from the public, can determine which it considers most palatable. Importantly, however, the longer the city waits to increase rates, the more pressure it puts on officials to raise the rates further; the city's fiscal year began July 1, so the DWP already is a month into its budget at the existing rates. Nichols has thus argued that the council should take the matter up as soon as it returns from its summer recess, with an eye toward adopting a new rate structure in September.

Will that happen? Perry says she won't approve a rate increase until the ratepayer advocate is in position. She expressed admiration for Nichols and said he's to be commended for his candor. As for his timeline, however, Perry said, "I think that's unrealistic." She predicts no vote until next year.

So it begins.


Copyright © 2015, Los Angeles Times
Related Content
  • 100 years later, the dust settles in the Owens Valley

    100 years later, the dust settles in the Owens Valley

    One hundred and one years after Los Angeles opened the aqueduct to draw water from the Owens Valley, the city has reached a settlement over how it will control dust blowing off the dry Owens Lake bed. The deal will save L.A. hundreds of millions of dollars in the coming years and free up more water...

  • Trading grass for cash: MWD has a winner on its hands

    Trading grass for cash: MWD has a winner on its hands

    The drought warnings have sunk in. So many Southern Californians want to rip out their water-hogging lawns that the Metropolitan Water District nearly ran out of money for turf removal rebates. In the last year, residents, businesses and public agencies filed more than 45,000 applications seeking...

  • If we're going to eat cattle, let them eat grass

    If we're going to eat cattle, let them eat grass

    Stories about impending environmental apocalypse circulate almost daily, especially in drought-ravaged California. Many of these stories tend to blame agriculture — and specifically, beef — for gobbling up our resources. Though numbers vary widely and are hotly contested, some researchers estimate...

  • In the water crisis, it's time to move beyond the farms vs. cities mindset

    In the water crisis, it's time to move beyond the farms vs. cities mindset

    At this point, just about every Californian with a pulse knows that agriculture uses 80% of the state's water, and cities 20%. This talking point is true as far as it goes, but that's not very far. You have to limit your vision to the water consumed by humans, “developed” water. This perspective...

  • John Perry, San Juan Capistrano's water watcher

    John Perry, San Juan Capistrano's water watcher

    It started with a few ticked-off residents of the Orange County town of San Juan Capistrano. The city was charging them too much for water, they argued, in violation of the California Constitution, courtesy of Proposition 218, a taxpayer-revolt law passed in 1996. A state court of appeal agreed...

  • How phantom flushing wastes water, and how to fix it

    How phantom flushing wastes water, and how to fix it

    As California faces unprecedented, mandatory water restrictions, the big question is where, exactly, the cuts should come from. Experts and pundits alike most frequently mention agriculture, because of its disproportionate water usage. They also single out golf courses, cemeteries and other places...

  • If not this California delta plan, then what?

    If not this California delta plan, then what?

    In years of average rainfall, when pumps at the south end of the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta lift water to two parallel aqueducts to begin the journey to Central Valley fields and Southern California households, the suction reverses the flow of the San Joaquin River, one of the state's two...

  • So long, California: The next drought remedy?

    So long, California: The next drought remedy?

    Gov. Jerry Brown is calling for fines of up to $10,000 for the state’s biggest water wasters. "We've done a lot. We have a long way to go," Brown said. "So maybe you want to think of this as just another installment on a long enterprise to live with a changing climate and with a drought of uncertain...