Sewer Budget Full of Waste, Study Finds

The city of Los Angeles could save at least $20 million out of the sewer budget by reducing wasteful practices, potentially providing savings to hold down rate increases planned for 2002, auditors and state officials said Monday.

Their comments were based on the results of a study released the same day Sanitation Bureau officials said they are considering a sewer-rate increase of about 5% starting in July 2002.

Judith Wilson, bureau chief, said any rate increase might be reduced if the city is able to save more.

“We are doing quite well because we have reduced expenses in the past, but there are still areas in which we can do better,” Wilson said.

The study, which compared Los Angeles operations with those of other cities, was ordered a year ago by the Los Angeles City Council after a group of San Fernando Valley residents sued the city, claiming sewer service fees were excessive.

“It is just proof of what we have claimed all along, that the system is bloated and wasteful and costing the ratepayers more than it should be,” said Councilman Joel Wachs of Studio City, who led the effort to fund the $497,000 study.

Wachs said he thinks $20 million would be the minimum savings possible, and city officials said that greater, unknown savings might be possible on the capital improvement side of the budget.

The issue of sewer costs has been a controversial one for years. Residents of the San Fernando Valley have complained that they are charged too much because the rate is based on water use, and many Valley lots are larger and require more irrigation.

Despite the city’s current use of a revamped rate structure in winter, when irrigation is used less, a group of Valley residents is pressing lawsuits alleging the system is wasteful and rates are excessive.

City officials and the study’s author outlined the study results in interviews, but refused to release the draft document, saying it had not yet gone to the City Council.

In a comparison of the 20 sewer systems nationwide that serve more than 1 million customers, Los Angeles was ranked ninth-best in efficiency of operations.

Los Angeles has improved from a ranking of 15th in 1996, according to Myron Olstein, who wrote the study for Black & Veatch, the consulting firm.

The comparison weighed four factors--operation and maintenance costs, staff levels, average bills and overall system costs.

“There is still room for improvement,” said Olstein.

In particular, Los Angeles lags behind other sewer-systems in automation of sewer treatment plants, the study found. The Sanitation Bureau has just hired a consultant to draft an automation master plan.

The study also found that Los Angeles is spending about twice as much as the average for energy to treat its sewage.

Any new efficiencies would be on top of $20 million in budget cuts approved by the city during the last three years, so efforts to create a lean, effective operation are about halfway complete, officials said.

The study will put additional pressure on the bureau as it considers a rate increase for the year 2002 to help pay for a $600-million program to replace crumbling sewer mains throughout the city.

Wilson said the city has not raised sewer service fees since 1992, while a survey of other major cities found they have averaged yearly increases of 4.5%.