By Tony Wilkinson

“Laws, like sausages, cease to inspire respect in proportion as we know how they are made” wrote American poet and satirist John Godfrey Saxe in 1869. Drafting legislation is just as messy a process today. Thanks to the Los Angeles Neighborhood Council system, everyday Angelinos can be part of that sausage-making process.

The Los Angeles Department of Water and Power is a huge, multi-billion dollar public utility. It is also saddled with city rules and practices that prevent it from being managed as an efficient business. Reforming how DWP is managed will make it more efficient. More efficiency will directly reduce the pressure to raise rates. Today is a unique moment when the city seems willing to reform how DWP operates. In order to do that, the public will need to vote on a DWP Reform measure to change the City Charter.

In December, Controller Ron Galperin released the city’s Industrial, Economic and Administrative Survey of the Department of Water and Power. The City Charter requires this report every five years. The sweeping report of nearly 600 pages recommended that the city form “a committee to examine governance reforms for the Department with the explicit task of reporting its findings and recommending a measure for the 2017 ballot.”

On January 22, Councilmember Felipe Fuentes introduced his own detailed motion calling for a ballot measure “to reform and restructure” the Department of Water and Power. The proposal is Council File 16-0093.

On February 6, the Neighborhood Council – DWP MOU Oversight Committee passed a Resolution calling for the city to follow the IEA recommendation and create a ballot measure committee that includes at least two members of Neighborhood Councils. The resolution called for “a robust and transparent discussion and debate before any measure is placed on the ballot”.

A ballot measure committee was never formed. Instead, both Mayor Eric Garcetti and City Council President Herb Wesson reached out to Neighborhood Councils and invited them, for the first time, to participate in creating fast-track legislation. Today the city is focused on having a DWP Reform measure on the November 2016 ballot. That means Neighborhood Council and public input in April and early May, sausage making in May, and public hearings and a City Council vote on the measure in June. If you want to be part of this sausage-making process, Neighborhood Councils and individuals need to act quickly.

When it became clear that Neighborhood Councils would need a guide to the issues being considered, the members of the NC-DWP MOU committee decided to depart from their usual practice of simply collecting information. They decided to share their own opinions on DWP Reform issues with the Neighborhood Councils that the committee serves.

On April 6, the Lake Balboa Neighborhood Council considered the DWP Reform issue. They voted for a Community Impact Statement that both expresses frustration at the city’s haste and supports the recommendations of the individuals on the NC-DWP MOU committee.
Borrowing the Lake Balboa idea and adding two more items that were not part of the MOU resolution result the following draft CIS. Many Neighborhood Councils may find it adequate for quick action.

The __________________________________

[NC name] believes that DWP Reform is a complex issue that deserves time for a robust public discussion and debate, and it should not appear on the November 2016 ballot. However, if a measure is created for the November 2016 ballot, the council supports the April 2 recommendations of the NC-DWP MOU Oversight Committee. In addition the council supports the freedom of DWP and its Board to hire their own attorneys, and opposes any compromise to the independence of the Ratepayer Advocate. [About 525 characters. CIS maximum is 2000]

April 2 NC-DWP MOU Oversight Committee DWP Reform recommendations motion:
———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————
The members of the NC-DWP MOU Oversight Committee and the DWP (Advocacy) Committee concur on the following recommendations for DWP Reform and urge Neighborhood Councils to consider them when developing their own positions on the proposed ballot measure.

We support a fiduciary Board of Commissioners consisting of seven (7) qualified members appointed by the Mayor and confirmed by the City Council serving staggered terms who may not be removed except for cause.

We oppose a full time paid Board of Commissioners. However, Commissioners would be entitled to reasonable per diem fees.

The Board would appoint the General Manager, determine policy, and establish rates.

The City Council would have the right to assert jurisdiction in certain matters, including rates, only for the purpose of affirming or denying the action by a supermajority vote.

The Board would be assisted by a more robust Ratepayers Advocate.

Contracting and procurement policies would be modified allowing the Department more flexibility.

The Department would be responsible for labor negotiations.

The Department would establish its own Human Resources Department, separate and distinct from the City’s Personnel Department. DWP would not be subject to the City’s civil service rules.

The Transfer Fee would be subject to a City wide vote.
———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————

Please send your questions and comments to dwpmou@EmpowerLA.org. DWP Reform information will be posted regularly at https://empowerla.org/dwpmou. There is additional information at http://dwpreform.lacity.org.

Tony Wilkinson is the Chair of the Neighborhood Council – DWP MOU Oversight Committee. He will be contributing information on the DWP Reform process to the EmpowerLA newsletter each week.