Politics & Government

Measures I and J: An End to Drama at the DWP?

The twin measures would give the City Counci timely information and more oversight about what goes on at the utility and could prevent last-minute price hikes.

Water and power issues are often on the agenda in a municipal election. Tuesday’s is no different, with measures I and J aimed at putting some checks on the mighty Los Angeles Department of Water and Power.  

The measures are partners in fighting recent outcry over the way the DWP has handled its relationship with the City Council—and with consumers and business owners. They aim  to make the quasi-independent utility’s budgeting and operations more transparent and accountable, and to ward off last-minute price hikes.

It’s difficult to find anyone to oppose these measures. City Councilman Eric Garcetti is a leading proponent of the measures, which he believes are good for consumers and business.

Find out what's happening in Eagle Rockwith free, real-time updates from Patch.

Measures I and J come after last spring when the LADWP pulled a last minute switcheroo on the City Council: approve a rate hike—or risk losing the over $73 million dollar surplus the utility was slated to give the city’s General Fund.  The General Fund,  of course, helps pay for services like police, fire and parks.

 The DWP could spring its last minute surprise because it is currently not required to synch its budgeting cycle with the city’s—nor provide important documentation that the city needs to build and manage its own budget.

Find out what's happening in Eagle Rockwith free, real-time updates from Patch.

Measure J, the simpler of the two measures,  would change that. The measure would modify the City Charter to require the DWP to submit a preliminary budget by the end of March, and a final one by the end of May. The Mayor is supposed to submit his budget to the City Council by April 20.

Measure J would also mandate that if the  DWP needed to modify the size of its annual contribution to the General Fund halfway through the fiscal year, it could do so—but by following a defined process that gives adequate notice to city officials.

Meantime, Measure I focuses on the rate hikes themselves. It would create an office of oversight for the DWP, including a taxpayer advocate, who would examine proposed rate hikes and report to neighborhood councils, the DWP board  and the city council about their necessity.

The initial cost would be about a million dollars, funded by DWP revenues.

A recent Los Angeles Times article concluded that the paper would be “a lot happier with the DWP reforms if they included a measure to make the board independent.” It would still be appointed by the mayor, who would also co-confirm the taxpayer advocate, with the city council.

But most seem willing to take what they can get. Council members Jan Perry, Greig Smith, Bernard Parks and José Huizar signed the ballot  argument in favor of Measure I, along with Nick Patsouras, former President of the board of Water and Power commissioners, and Chuck Ray, of the Neighborhood Councils DWP Oversight committee.

Gary Aminoff, the president of the San Fernando Valley Republicans Club, doesn’t like the idea of creating another bureaucracy in the city.

“As in all government bureaucracies people get lazy and tend to become attached to and part of the bureaucratic department,” he said. “But one rate increase could amount to $100 million dollars, according to Kevin James, the radio talk show host who knows the City Charter well. “

“One million dollars in an advocate’s office that communicates with the media could kill an increase and save at least that much,” he added.


Get more local news delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for free Patch newsletters and alerts.

We’ve removed the ability to reply as we work to make improvements. Learn more here

More from Eagle Rock