DWP Punishes Water Conservers: Ron Nichols Seeks $5 BofA-style Monthly Fee Because Angelenos Saved Too Much Water

• Always happy to expand my mind, but if you are going to give facts as part of your opinion piece then you should give them all, otherwise your no better than Fox News. Also, if as you write, Jack Humphreville "is still the best-informed watchdog over the DWP", than maybe the $5 increase is more than just a "$5 punishment." If the City Council would take responsibility for the City as their job requires, instead of just worrying about their next campaign, we wouldn't be in this position. Make the tough, informed vote, even if it costs some votes or donations. The City has grown by over 1 million people in the last 40 years, because of the Councils inability to say no to developers and the gifts ($) they provide, but the water resources available to the City has not increased in the same way. Water is a finite resource, so conservation makes sense, but there still has to be an infrastructure in place to deliver that water. And while I would certainly agree that there are those associated with the Department (IBEW) that have way more influence in the City than they should, the people who live in LA are complicit in all of this. If less than 12% of the registered voters in this City found the last municipal elections important enough to get out and vote in, then why should the Mayor or City Council do anything but what those who line their pockets want them to do. Mind you, that is less than 12% of registered voters, how many more people who live in this City are eligible to vote and haven't even bothered to do that.

• Thanks for your comment Foundahypocrite. This is Jill Stewart responding, I very much appreciate your comment. But to be clear, the Ratepayer Advocate is opposed by key forces at DWP who have a major affect on what the City Council has the courage to do. As it has always been. As long as DWP internally opposes reform, the Council drags its feet. Second, Jack Humphreville's unfortunate position in favor of the emergency increase aside, he is still the best-informed watchdog over the DWP. His series at CityWatch should be read. Nobody has to agree with his backing of the $5 fee to benefit from his knowledge. Expand your mind, man.

• Wow, what an ill informed article. "CityWatch has run a detailed series on DWP, its failure to hire the Ratepayer Advocate," DWP has nothing to do with hiring the Advocate. That is completely the responsibility of the City Council, who waited months before they put together a committee to choose the advocate. And they did this without giving any scope of work for the position that the committee could work off of. The ballot measure for the advocate passed in March, and the Council didn't get around to doing anything until August. And you bring up Jack Humphreville and his articles against the DWP, but in the Rick Orlov Daily News article you mention it says, "Jack Humphreville, who serves on a citizens committee that looks at DWP issues, said he supports the emergency increase." So congrats on your half ass piece of investigative journalism. Maybe next time try to tell the whole story, and then go ahead with your attack.

• Its time for Occupy DWP (something the 99% of Los Angeles might get behind). Protest for executive paycuts and/or executive firings.

TotalComments: 4