.
Feedback

VIDEO: DWP Rate Increases Pitched to Neighborhood Council Leaders

LADWP's proposed electric and water rate increases presented to Neighborhood Council leaders Thursday evening.

The proposed two-year rate increases by the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power were presented by the leader of the department, General Manager Ron Nichols, to the leaders of the Valley's neighborhood councils Thursday evening at the monthly meeting of the Valley Alliance of Neighborhood Councils (VANC).

Representatives of 20 neighborhood councils listened intently as Nichols articulated the various legal mandates and infrastructure replacements necessary to maintain system reliability.  On the power side, LADWP plans to terminate its participation in the Navajo coal project by 2015 through energy efficiency and renewable energy additions such as solar, wind, and geothermal.  Natural gas will also be used.

He noted that the infrastructure of the power system is aging rapidly and needs accelerated repair and replacement, saying that "We have 41,000 fix-it tickets in the queue.  It would take nearly three million work hours to catch up."

Nichols emphasized that local solar programs foster local jobs and the overall economy and provide customers power supply options, reporting that solar incentives and feed-in tariff programs are proposed to funded by at least $67 million during the next two years.

Overall, the power supply replacement program is proposed to be increased over the next two years from $691 million to $745 million, the power reliability program from $707 million to $896 million, and the customer opportunity programs from $135 million to $167 million.

Power rates, Nichols said, have had no base rate or reliability cost adjustment increase since July 2009 nor an energy or fuel cost adjustment since July 2010 and that regulatory mandates and priority programs cannot be completed without a rate increase this year.

Under the proposed rates, a typical residential customer (500 kWh/month) would experience a 2% increase, or $1.35 a month, during the first year and 3%, or $2.00 a month, during the second year.  A high-use single family residential customer (1,000 kWh/month) would have a 6% increase, or $8.10 a month, during the first year and 7%, or $10.05 a month, during the second year.  Actual amounts vary with usage.  Rates for commercial customers would increase approximately 11% over the two years.

Nichols observed that the residential rates, even with the proposed increase, would be below the neighboring cities of Burbank, Glendale, and Pasadena as well as the rates of Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas and Electric, both of which have filed for increases ranging from 10.9 to 14.3%.

On the water side, LADWP plans to reduce its dependence on Metropolitan Water District purchases, which current average 52% of the City's total, by greater use of local sources and conservation. These include recycled water, stormwater capture, customer conservation, and groundwater cleanup and management which would see an increase from $71 million currently to $168 million in two years.

The safe drinking water program includes regulatory compliance, reservoir covers and bypasses, and trunkline replacement proposed to be funded at $308 million in two years compared with $191 million now.

The water system reliability program includes replacing aging pipeline and related infrastructure, including regulator stations, pumping stations, and maintaining the Los Angeles Aqueduct which runs from the Eastern Sierras.  It would be increased from $275 million to $351 million in two years.

The water rate increases, not including the cost of purchased water from the MWD, is proposed to be increased for all customers 0.47% the first year and 4.46% the second year.

All proposed rate increases will be reviewed by Dr. Fred Pickel, the City's new ratepayer advocate, before being considered by the Board of Water and Power Commissioners and the City Council.  Action on the power rates is anticipated by August 2012 with water rates to follow.

Further information on the proposed rate increases is available from the LADWP website:  https://www.ladwp.com/ladwp/faces/wcnav_externalId/a-fr-prop-rates?_adf.ctrl-state=deuuekfbt_4&_afrLoop=154838877129000

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Northridge-Chatsworth Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Jock June 10, 2013 at 09:29 am
We should be spending So Cal money to use the "LA river", diverting some to cisterns andRead More reservoirs. It no longer feeds a delta which must have been a very rich one 200 years ago. You are right, L.A. with it's huge population subsidizes most of State Taxes. That the Oil companies in the Central Valley are sucking up more water is no surprise. If we have several years of drought, we can drink 87 octane. We have been allowing water that falls here in L.A. to run into the ocean, saving little to none. We can go from 25-30" a year to 4. Suddenly on the 4 year we have high rates and rationing. Why ? Because it has always been the quick buck and expediency over thoughtful planning. in Israel, Masada is in one of the driest area's of the world. By channeling droplets of water, they were able to water a community of hundreds for years.
drew June 6, 2013 at 08:13 am
You will not want to miss this exciting band! They were on the cover of Entertainment Magazine inRead More Folsom, California. Awesome talent! Our hats go off to the men in black.
john s. archer May 27, 2013 at 08:23 pm
I don't spell very well...LOL
MICHAEL ZITTERMAN May 28, 2013 at 06:58 am
May 4, 2013 PROBLEM: Illegal immigrants AKA Undocumented workers DEFINITION: Illegal immigrantsRead More are those persons who enter a country without legal authorization. CAUSES, REASONS, AND PROVENANCE: The main reason for legal and illegal immigration is that people want and hope to improve their lives and the lives of their families. DISCUSSION: I think all would stipulate that anyone has the right to attempt to better his or her condition insofar as those efforts do not infringe upon the rights of others. Each country has the right and obligation to establish immigration laws for the orderly and rational assimilation of legal immigrants. Do the following comments provide justification for illegal immigration? 1. Illegal immigrants are looking to better their situations. 2. Illegal immigrants provide inexpensive labor and are hard workers. 3. This Nation was built upon immigrants. 4. It is virtually impossible to find and deport 12,000,000 illegal immigrants. The answers to the above four should be “no”. If anyone disagrees with that, I will appreciate his or her reasoning for a “yes” response. RECOMMENDED “COMPREHENSIVE” SOLUTION TO THIS PROBLEM: 1. A foolproof system must be devised, implemented, with substantial penalties for non-compliance that will verify a person’s legal authorization to work in the United States. 2. The concept of “anchor babies” should be eliminated, either by a pragmatic interpretation of the 14th Amendment (displaced the disputed Civil Rights legislation of 1866, which was passed by Congress over Andrew Johnson’s veto, and which was proposed by Congress six months after the 13th Amendment had been ratified), by Congressional legislation in accordance with Section 5 of the 14th Amendment, or by a Constitutional Amendment, that could and should be passed by the House and Senate and ratified by the requisite 38 states within a year. 3. There should be a $4.00 (arbitrary) per gallon increase in the federal excise tax on gasoline and diesel, at the pump. A tax credit would be allowed any U.S. taxpayer (who possesses a valid driver’s license and submits proof of vehicle registration and proof of insurance) in the amount of $2,000.00 per year (10,000 miles @ 20 MPG = 500 gallons, thus, 500 X $4.00 = $2,000.00). 4. Federal legislation should be passed that would eliminate all minimum wage laws. The “minimum wage” concept should be replaced with a massive expansion of the EITC regulations, which would cover all U.S. taxpayers who are older than 17 years of age. 5. Work with the Mexican and other Central and South America nations to enhance those economies. CONCLUSION: If the above changes were legislated, a substantial number of undocumented individuals would self-deport, since the economics of entering the United States, without authorization, would be substantially diminished. It is logical that a newborn should assume the nationality of the mother, regardless of the venue of the birth, therefore, the strategy of an undocumented mother giving birth in the United States should be of no consequence. NOTE: This will be a process, i.e., not an overnight solution. mz mikiesmoky@aol.com Last modified: July 24, 2010 Last modified - May 4, 2013