VOICES - Neighborhood councils have long called for more openness in city government, for more detailed financial information, and for a greater voice in policy making.
There has been a particular focus on the behemoth and historically secretive Department of Water and Power, where, thanks to General Manager Ron Nichols and newly functioning Ratepayers Advocate Fred Pickel, serious problems have begun to be addressed.
In their first weeks in office, Mayor Garcetti and Controller Galperin have meaningfully addressed some of our major concerns.
- A detailed report comparing City salaries, pensions, and pay policies to those of DWP. Seriously ugly. Seriously eye opening.
- Two members from Neighborhood Councils have been appointed to the Department of Water and Power’s Board of Commissioners. This is a big deal, not only for openness, but for fiscal sanity.
- Mayor Garcetti has shown the courage to appoint one of his critics and the fiscally conservative opponent in the recent mayoral race, Kevin James, to head the notoriously inefficient Department of Public Works
- For the first time in Los Angeles history, the City Council last Friday included the public in a 3 ½ hour session of clarification and discussion about the status of the current contract negotiation with the IBEW.
- Unbelievably, the IBEW has offered to waive COLA increases for the next 3 years (a savings everyone agrees to be about $450 million over the period), and has accepted that new DWP hires should receive meaningfully lower pension benefits than current employees as well lower starting salaries, which will be in line with other City workers. IBEW does not want to visit questions related to changes to workplace policies or to healthcare contributions, and, although the current contract does not expire until a year from October, they want agreement now, saying that if the City does not agree to the present proposal shortly, they will take it off the table.
Congratulations are in order to many people for the changes and for the illumination, particularly to the Budget Advocates of the Neighborhood Councils, the men and women who for years have been shunted into a corner and ignored but who have continued to work diligently and without pay to help the City government turn itself around. Their unthanked work is paying off and their increased influence will be hugely beneficial to all of Los Angeles.
But, it’s not all roses. Just because we can now shine a light into the sewer does not change the fact that we’re looking at a sewer. Neither do the victories in exposing the filth mean that the clean up job can be done without the work and good will of all the players: the City, the Neighborhood Councils, and the unions. Joining the parties is the job before us now.
Monday night (August 19), the Budget Advocates held a meeting in City Hall, the purpose of which was to discuss what is known about the contract proposal by the IBEW and to create a position statement to be submitted to the City for consideration in its negotiations. Attending the meeting and speaking were Mayor Garcetti, Controller Galperin, the chief legislative analyst, the chief administrative analyst, the general manager of DWP, and the ratepayers’ advocate. All saw the IBEW proposal as seriously beneficial to the City (in particular to its future negotiations with other unions), although no one pretended it addressed all the sepsis. All feared losing what was on the table, and three proposed somewhat timorous suggestions that it might be tweaked just a little bit more.
There were also twenty five or thirty people from the general public who spoke, mostly to express outrage at the comparatively generous salaries, pensions, and workplace rules of the DWP. The public’s inclination appeared to me to strongly favor rejecting the current proposal. There was anger, but not well targeted anger. There was a passion to stir up the sludge, but few suggestions as to how to clean it up.
At the end of the meeting but still in public view, the committee of Budget Advocates debated among themselves about what they should propose to the City regarding the current union proposal.
Two things seemed clear: 1) that all members were relieved to finally be involved in the manner the City Charter calls for, and 2) the good feelings were offset by the frustration that it was only two weeks ago that were they invited to advise on negotiations which have been going on for more than a year and only a few days ago (thanks to leaks and to the LA Times) that certain material facts became available to them. It seems sort of like “we didn’t want your input on this matter (even though you were created to advise us), but now we would like your approval of what we have done without your advice.” Dismissive. Demeaning. Angering.
The committee’s decision was to write a statement supportive of Mayor Garcetti, but advising the City to insist that healthcare and workplace policies be brought to the table before any deal is inked.
My thoughts: For the first time since I have been following the activities and suggestions of the Budget Advocates, I disagree with their position. (This may be because they have had so little time to arrive at one.)
I believe that there have been significant gains, and that we need to consolidate them before continuing. I believe that when an intransigent partner in business has bent, it is a bad idea to try to break him. I believe that when new and powerful allies have just recently come to your side (compare Mayor Garcetti and Controller Galperin to Mayor Villaraigosa and Controller Greuel) some time is necessary to develop an effective working relationship. I believe that making ourselves into sore winners will snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory and make us unwanted in the upcoming negotiations with the City’s civilian workers, a negotiation which in terms of dollars and cents has much more at stake.
Had I been on the committee I would have supported continuing a gentle pressure by leaving matters of healthcare as they are pending future clarifications about federal policy (something we could then use as a benchmark). I would also have supported the City’s hiring PA Consulting to analyze DWP workplace policies and make recommendations. Only after that report was complete (probably a couple of years) would I suggest workplace policies as a matter for contract negotiation.
It would be good, I think, for the Budget Advocates to change their position.
(Jeff Bruce is a community activist in Los Angeles. He can be reached at: [email protected]) –cw
CityWatch
Vol 11 Issue 68
Pub: Aug 23, 2013
