Author: William Nottingham

Worried about the city’s ability to get through the rest of the fiscal year, a Los Angeles City Council committee recommended Monday that the Los Angeles Police Department immediately stop hiring new officers.

On a 3-1 vote, the Budget and Finance Committee called for a halt to the hiring process, which currently allows the LAPD to replace those who resign or retire. Such a move was designed to keep the number of sworn officers at 9,963 for the fiscal year that ends June 30.

Councilman Bernard C. Parks said the committee made its decision after learning that the LAPD is on track to have 22 more officers than it expected because of lower attrition rates. Parks said the proposal, which comes up for a full council vote Wednesday, also came in response to warnings from City Controller Wendy Greuel about the dangers of dipping too heavily into the city’s reserve to balance the budget.

The budget committee has made recommendations in previous years to halt police hiring, only to have that advice ignored by the full council. But the situation is more dire this year, with a $222-million shortfall and 93 workers who have already been notified that they are being laid off.

“If you keep hiring police officers, you have to lay off other folks," said Parks, a former LAPD chief. "You can’t have them both. So if the council majority decides to keep hiring, the issue that’s going to confront them is, where is the money going to come from?"

This time around, the three votes to halt police hiring were cast by council members Parks, Paul Koretz and Jose Huizar. Although Huizar voted in favor of the halt to police hiring, he is still weighing his options, a spokesman said.

“He wants to wait until it gets to [the] council, where he can look at it more intently,” Huizar spokesman Rick Coca said. “Obviously, the budget situation we’re in is pretty unprecedented.”

Villaraigosa’s office did not have an immediate response to the vote, but in recent days the mayor has repeated his insistence that the LAPD hire enough officers to replace those who resign or retire.

Parks said an immediate halt to police hiring would prevent the recruitment of 80 officers over the next  2 1/2 months. Councilman Bill Rosendahl voted against the motion, saying he still wants more discussion.

“I’m all about process, that’s all,” he said. “I don’t necessarily disagree with this conclusion, but I’m not there yet. I think it’s appropriate to have the discussion with all the council members.”



“This year, all these options are going to be on the table,” he added.



— David Zahniser at Los Angeles City Hall

One of Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa’s former pension board appointees has been named to a key seat overseeing the Department of Water and Power, even as that utility is in the middle of a protracted dispute over electricity rates.



Eric Holoman, president of Magic Johnson Enterprises, was named by the mayor to fill the DWP board seat vacated last month by Edith Ramirez, an attorney who recently joined the Federal Trade Commission.



The nomination of Holoman comes as Villaraigosa and the City Council are in a standoff over utility rates. The DWP announced that it would not transfer $73.5 million to the city’s cash-strapped budget unless it receives the first of four planned rate hikes. In response, council members proposed a ballot measure to reduce the number of DWP board members who can be selected by the mayor.



Villaraigosa said in a statement that Holoman’s arrival would usher in “a new era of accountability and transparency” at the nation’s largest municipal utility. Meanwhile, Holoman promised that he would keep rates as low as possible “while ensuring that the DWP continues to invest in green energy and creates jobs in Los Angeles.”



Some council members, including Richard Alarcon and Paul Koretz, said they want a compromise that would end the rate deadlock, possibly as soon as Tuesday.

Holoman served until last year on the board of the Los Angeles City Employees’ Retirement System, which oversees the pension benefits for 45,000 active and retired civilian employees. He stepped down from that volunteer post after Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signed a law that places new limits on private financial work performed by publicly appointed pension board members.



The law bars pension board members throughout the state from selling, directly or indirectly, investment products to any other public retirement system in California.



Holoman still must be confirmed by the City Council.



— David Zahniser at Los Angeles City Hall

Without a promised transfer of money from the Department of Water and Power, the budget gap for the city of Los Angeles has grown to $222.4 million this fiscal year, even with a brighter forecast for property tax collections.

In a key financial status report released Friday morning, City Administrative Officer Ray Ciranna said the city has collected $26 million more than expected in property tax revenues.

But the deficit means the city will have to dip deeply into its reserves to balance its books to end the fiscal year on June 30 in the black. City Council President Eric Garcetti and Councilman Bernard C. Parks, chairman of the budget committee, stressed that the better than expected revenue collections did not mean the city’s budget crisis has been solved.

“The City Council has been consistent that we are going to work hard to close this year’s budget gap and we have,” Garcetti said. “We’ve tried not to propose anything that scares employees, that does things that are irrational or exuberant. But we are trying to maintain calm and a reasonable budget.”

Earlier this week, Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa surprised council members by threatening to close some city departments two days a week to prevent the city from running out of cash.

Although the mayor has now backed away from that proposal, many council members believed it sent an unnecessary jolt of panic through the city’s workforce. Villaraigosa would have needed council approval for furloughs that would have cut employees’ paychecks by two-fifths.

Before the current stalemate between the DWP board and the council — utility executives refuse to send the city a promised $73.5 million because council members refuse to approve a sweeping electricity rate increase — various budget-balancing moves, in combination with the increased revenue, had reduced the midyear deficit from $212 million to $148.9 million.

The city will save about $6 million this fiscal year due to 100 layoffs processed so far and by transferring 280 employees from jobs supported by the cash-strapped general fund to positions that are paid for through fees and special funds.

Ciranna said he believed that the city’s reserve fund, which is about $207 million, would drop to about $39 million at the end of the fiscal year, far below what bond rating agencies consider to be a healthy threshold.

“Efforts to build the reserve fund balance are critical to maintain sufficient cash flow, to address the current-year revenue shortfall and resulting budget deficit, and to provide an adequate safety net for the 2010-2011 fiscal year,” Ciranna wrote.

— Maeve Reston at Los Angeles City Hall

Photo: Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, left, and City Council President Eric Garcetti, shown in 2009. Credit: Los Angeles Times

A high-speed rail configuration that backers say could save up to $2 billion and greatly reduce demolition of homes and business across the heart of Southern California was revived Thursday by project officials.



In the 6-1 voted at a meeting in San Jose, the California High-Speed Rail Authority agreed to revisit a plan, discarded in 2008, to share existing rail where feasible with commuter and freight services operating along a 34-mile route between Anaheim and downtown’s Union Station.

 

The action came in response to local officials’ concerns that hundreds of private properties would have to be condemned in Anaheim, Buena Park and other cities to accommodate the separate, exclusive tracks being envisioned for high-speed trains. Both alternatives will now be examined.



“It’s a very good sign,” said Richard Katz, a high-speed rail board member who also is a director of the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority.



“It means we have an opportunity to make a change … that is much more neighborhood-friendly, that is cheaper and that will improve rail services between L.A. and Anaheim.”



Opposing the move was board member Quentin Kopp, a former state lawmaker and longtime Bay area transportation leader. Kopp questioned the potential costs of changing course in design at this stage, agency officials said.

With a recent infusion of $2.25 billion in federal stimulus money, officials are racing to break ground by a 2012 deadline.



Previous reviews concluded that the existing Los Angeles-Orange County rail corridor could not accommodate Metrolink, Amtrak and freight service, as well as high-speed trains expected to run every few minutes.



Bullet train board Chairman Curt Pringle, who also is the mayor of Anaheim, supported reexamining the shared track option. He noted that federal officials who regulate and help finance high-speed rail projects have become more open to such track sharing arrangements in recent months, said Jeff Barker, the agency’s deputy executive director.



Project planners and Los Angeles and Orange County transportation officials will begin reviewing the design alternatives immediately. Among the issues likely to be examined are whether bullet trains can operate safely and how they can avoid delays on mixed-use track. A final recommendation could come in several months, Katz said.



The L.A.-to-Anaheim leg of the bullet train is projected to cost about $4.5 billion if separate tracks are laid. It is likely to be the first section constructed of a 500-mile initial phase extending to the Bay Area and carrying a price tag of nearly $45 billion.



— Rich Connell

Efforts to strike back at the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power — at the center of a budget battle between Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and the City Council — were not limited to City Hall on Wednesday.



Hours after council members said they wanted more control over the city utility, one former Villaraigosa appointee filed a ratepayer lawsuit, saying the DWP has an obligation to follow through on its promise to transfer $73.5 million to the city’s general fund.



Former DWP commission President Nick Patsaouras said in his lawsuit that the utility already has an 8% surplus, enough to provide the money. “As a taxpayer, I want to compel them, compel the DWP, to honor their commitment,” said Patsaouras, who stepped down from the commission in October 2008.



Meanwhile, school board member Tamar Galatzan said she would introduce a motion next week calling for the DWP to create a new rate classification for the Los Angeles Unified School District, one that would prevent it from paying the same rate as a large business.



Galatzan, who won her seat in 2007 with $2.2 million in support from the mayor, warned that Villaraigosa’s 12-month rate hike plan opposed by the council would cause the school district – which she described as the DWP’s largest customer – to pay an extra $11.7 million a year. That would lead to a loss of hundreds of jobs at a time when the DWP is failing to make a case for more rate hikes, she said.



“I’m wondering, like many people, how they can simultaneously need a rate increase and … transfer excess money into the general fund,”  she said.



— David Zahniser at Los Angeles City Hall

Los Angeles Controller Wendy Greuel on Wednesday announced that her office would audit the Department of Water and Power fund that is now at the center of L.A.’s budget crisis and a growing political conflict between Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and the City Council.



Utility executives this week took steps to block a promised $73.5 million payment in "surplus" power revenue -– money that comes from ratepayer electric bills — to the city general fund.

 

The action was in response to the council’s rejection of an electricity rate hike that both the DWP and Villaraigosa said was necessary to cover the fluctuating cost of coal and the mayor’s renewable energy program. Without the increase, DWP executives said the utility cannot afford to make the payment and doing so would endanger the utility’s fiscal health.



Greuel said her “quick-and-dirty" audit would include a review of the utility’s books to determine if, in fact, the money can be transferred to the city’s general fund.



Earlier this week, Greuel warned that the city could run out of cash within weeks if the DWP withheld the $73.5 million.

“There’s been a lot of questions and, clearly, the DWP understands there has been a credibility gap with the department," Greuel said. "People have said they have the money… There’s been a lot of political back-and-forth from all sides, and I want to go in and do an independent review."



Greuel said she expects the audit to be completed within a month. Her office also is doing a more in-depth examination of the utility’s renewable energy program, though a completion date on that has not been announced.



Greuel declined to take sides in the political fracas, and would not say whether she supports a rate hike or forcing the DWP to make the $73.5 million payment.



“I deal with the facts," she said.



Villaraigosa suggested Wednesday that he would ask his appointees on the DWP board to transfer at least some money to the struggling general fund.



Appearing on KPCC-FM’s “Airtalk,” Villaraigosa said he would probably not request the full $73.5 million promised by the DWP earlier this year. Instead, the request would likely be in the range of $20 million, he said.



— Phil Willon at Los Angeles City Hall

Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa budged a little Wednesday in the standoff over the budget crisis and electric rate hikes, saying he would ask his appointees on the Department of Water and Power board to transfer some money to the city’s struggling general fund.



Appearing on KPCC-FM’s “Airtalk,” Villaraigosa said he would probably not request the full $73.5 million promised by the DWP earlier this year. Instead, the request would likely be in the range of $20 million, he said.



Villaraigosa warned that his request could be denied by the five-member board, which has voiced concern about its bond ratings. “I’m going to ask the Department of Water and Power for a transfer. But I can’t force them to do something that in their minds would violate their fiduciary responsibility to the ratepayers.”



The mayor said Tuesday that the city would cope with the loss of DWP money by reducing nonessential services, such as libraries and parks, by two days per week.



When the DWP was pushing for the first of four rate hikes planned this year, it had offered to throw in an extra $20 million for the city budget. That would have brought the total contribution from the utility to $93.5 million.

At the time they made that offer, DWP officials said they would come up with the extra money by reducing costs, such as travel not related to water and power operations.



Shortly before Villaraigosa spoke, Council President Eric Garcetti said the council’s proposal for raising rates had the backing of the Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce and would have provided the same amount for the DWP’s financial obligations as Villaraigosa’s.



Garcetti said he believed a compromise would be worked out within the next two weeks.



— David Zahniser at Los Angeles City Hall

Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa on Wednesday said he doesn’t expect his call to shut down nonessential city agencies two days a week, if enacted, would continue more than three months.



“We don’t expect that we would be closing City Hall, if you will, two days a week beyond July," the mayor said during a morning interview on CNN.



Still, he said, Los Angeles residents should expect to see significant cuts to services and the city’s workforce as he and the City Council struggle to close a $212-million budget deficit, predicted to double next year.



He blamed the shortfall on a recession-fed decline in tax revenue and the city’s expanding payroll costs, and again called on city employees to accept a 15% pay cut.



“There’s no scenario where we don’t have to trim our services and the cost of our payroll," Villaraigosa told CNN’s chief business correspondent Ali Velshi.



Some city officials raised doubts about Villaraigosa’s ability to order such a sweeping shutdown. Gerry Miller, the council’s legislative analyst, said the mayor "does not have the unilateral authority to do that" under the city charter.

Villaraigosa has been taking his budget message to the airwaves all day, appearing on national cable news shows and local radio programs.



The media blitz comes amid his escalating political feud with the Council, which last week rejected a Villaraigosa-backed hike in electric bills. In response, the Department of Water and Power is refusing to transfer $73.5 million to the city’s decimated general fund. Utility executives said that without a rate hike, which they said is necessary to cover the fluctuating cost of coal and the mayor’s renewable agenda, the DWP cannot afford to make the payment.



Without the money, City Controller Wendy Greuel has warned that the city could run out of cash within weeks.



Villaraigosa called Tuesday for non-essential services, such as libraries, parks and senior centers, to be shut down twice a week, saying the loss of $73.5 million had forced his hand.



The Coalition of L.A. City Unions, which represents roughly 22,000 city workers, questioned whether the mayor has the authority to carry out the plan and complained that its members — and the public — had become "collateral damage" in a political fight over electric rates. Coalition representatives said their contract prohibits the city from laying off or furloughing members though the end of the fiscal year, June 30.



— Phil Willon at Los Angeles City Hall

With the city’s financial solvency hanging in the balance, the Los Angeles City Council called on Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa on Tuesday to corral his appointees on the board of the city’s public utility and convince them to hand over $73.5 million in “surplus funds” that the city was counting on to balance its books.



In a unanimous vote, council members demanded that the board of the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power “honor their commitment” to transfer the money by mid-April to help counter a $212 million shortfall.

  

City officials are scrambling for a backup plan a day after the head of the utility, S. David Freeman, told council members in a letter that he was urging the DWP board to withhold the money because the agency has no surplus.

 

His recommendation followed a dramatic standoff last week between the council and the DWP over planned electricity rate hikes that officials at the utility, along with outside consultants, said were critical to cover rising coal costs and renewable-energy contracts. Initially, Villaraigosa had pushed for rate hikes that would have ranged from 9% to 28%.

 

Public outcry led council members to reject rate increases of that magnitude. They approved a more modest rate hike of 4.5% last week to help ensure the fiscal strength of the utility. But instead of agreeing  to the council’s more modest action last Wednesday, Villaraigosa’s appointees on the DWP board voted for a 5.7% increase over three months, which was rejected late that night by the council.



During a testy exchange with council members Tuesday, Freeman said the failure to green-light an electricity rate increase had “decimated our financial future.” On Monday, one of the nation’s top bond rating agencies withdrew a “AA-" rating on two DWP bonds worth $720 million.

Freeman said he understood that city officials need every “nickel that you can get,” but added that the utility’s board “has a responsibility for DWP not to get in a situation where we can’t borrow money and our bond rating goes down, down, down.

 

“I think there is unanimity that we need a sizable increase to pay our bills and that hasn’t happened,” Freeman said. “So I don’t see how you can expect the department to declare a surplus when we have a deficit on our hands.”



Council members, however, said the agency’s reversal on this year’s transfer from the utility’s Power Revenue Fund did not make sense. Several noted that when DWP officials promised the $73.5 million transfer as recently as March 1 — as part of a total transfer of $220 million this year — they never linked that move to a rate increase, which would have provided a modest amount of additional revenue.

 

Members asked the mayor to work with the DWP board to find $73.5 million from within the utility’s $1 billion in cash assets.

 

“The people of Los Angeles and the ratepayers deserve better, they deserve more honest analysis and they deserve this being depoliticized,” Council President Eric Garcetti said. “…Something fishy is going on here.”



— Maeve Reston at Los Angeles City Hall

Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa called Tuesday for all city agencies — except for police, other public safety and revenue-generating departments — to close for two days a week starting April 12 because of the city’s continuing budget crisis.

"We have to act, and we have to act quickly," Villaraigosa said at a press conference.



The mayor said he would direct the city’s chief administrative officer to immediately begin planning to set the shutdown in motion.

Villaraigosa’s call comes one day after executives with the city’s Department of Water and Power said they would recommend not sending a promised $73.5-million contribution to the city’s beleaguered treasury because the City Council recently declined to grant a desired electricity rate increase.

That action prompted City Controller Wendy Greuel to warn that Los Angeles could run out of cash to pay employees and business vendors within four weeks.

A full story will follow shortly.

— Phil Willon at Los Angeles City Hall

Photo: L.A. Times

One of the nation’s top bond rating agencies Monday announced it would reassess its bond rating of the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, a move that Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa blamed on the City Council’s failure to approve electricity rate hikes last week.



Fitch Ratings withdrew a “AA-" rating it had given on two DWP bonds worth $720 million. That action can lead to a rating downgrade which, if that occurs, could make it more expensive for the DWP to borrow money.



“Today we are facing the consequences of the city’s failure to enact the necessary rate increases with Fitch Ratings, a major credit rating agency, withdrawing the DWP’s AA- bond rating, thereby costing the ratepayers more in the long run,’’ Villaraigosa said in a statement released Monday evening.



Villaraigosa said the rate hike, which he supported, would have protected the DWP’s credit rating and helped “avoid the very situation in which we now find ourselves." The mayor had pushed for the hike to cover an increase in the cost of coal, and also for his renewable energy agenda.



In a statement, Fitch explained that it withdrew its initial rating because the rating agency had assumed the rate increase would be approved.



Councilwoman Jan Perry said that was an “irresponsible" assumption, since the increase was being reviewed by the council.

Earlier on Monday, City Controller Wendy Greuel declared an “urgent financial crisis” when DWP officials announced that — due to their inability to get higher rates — they would not recommend contributing a promised $73.5 million to the city’s strained general fund. Greuel said that without that money the only way to continue paying bills in the short term was to begin to drain the city’s already limited emergency reserve.



Greuel’s announcement was the latest development in an increasingly bitter standoff between the council and the DWP over how much the municipal utility should charge ratepayers and how much it should contribute to the city’s overall treasury.



DWP officials have proposed rate hikes that would range from roughly 9% for most users to as high as 28% for some. The council has blocked those increases from taking effect, responding to irate reactions from constituents.



Interim DWP General Manager S. David Freeman, in a letter sent to Greuel on Monday morning, said that he would urge the utility’s board of commissioners — all appointed by Villaraigosa — to withhold the $73.5-million payment. Without the rate increase, he said, the DWP would not have “surplus revenue” to contribute to the city while still paying its own bills.



— Phil Willon and Maeve Reston at Los Angeles City Hall

Los Angeles Controller Wendy Greuel on Monday said she expects the city’s general fund “will be out of money" by May 5 and that L.A. will likely deplete its reserve funds and be in the red by June 30.



Greuel alerted Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and the City Council of the city’s dire financial situation after the head of the Department of Water and Power stated he would oppose sending $73.5 million in utility revenue to the city treasury. Interim General Manager S. David Freeman said the council’s vote to block a proposed electricity rate hike last week threatens to put the utility in a deficit.



Greuel urged the council and mayor to immediately tap the city’s reserve funds so that city has enough cash to cover payroll.

“This is the most urgent fiscal crisis that the city has faced in recent history, and it is imperative that you act now. That is why I am asking you to immediately transfer $90 million from the city’s reserve fund to the general fund so I can continue to pay the city’s bills, and to ensure the fiscal solvency of the city,” Greuel said.

Councilman Greig Smith said the decision by the DWP had put the city in a “very risky” situation.

“Our reserve fund was already very marginal to begin with.  This could push it over the edge,” Smith said. “That would mean we would have nothing in the tank on June 30,” at the end of the fiscal year.

 

Smith said he could not envision a scenario in which the city could recoup that much money before July 1. Even additional layoffs could not be processed that quickly.

 

“The question is what are we going to do next? That I don’t know,” Smith said.

[Updated at 2:43 p.m.: An earlier version of this post incorrectly stated that the general fund would be depleted by May 10. The fund is expected to run out by May 5.]

— Phil Willon and Maeve Reston at Los Angeles City Hall

Photo: Los Angeles Times

Engineers and conductors on Southern California’s commuter rail service are threatening a boycott of new personality profiling tests required as a result of the 2008 Chatsworth disaster.

The dispute sets up a potentially major labor-management clash just as the five-county Metrolink system is shifting to a new contractor to provide crews for trains that have nearly 1 million boardings a month.

[Updated at 8:01 p.m. An earlier version of this post said there were nearly 1 million boardings a year.]

The screening tests, frequently used by corporate managers to gauge the suitability of job applicants, are already required by Amtrak, the incoming operating contractor, when it hires engineers and conductors.

But two powerful railroad unions are strongly objecting to a Metrolink-Amtrak agreement finalized last week. It requires experienced crew members on the regional rail service to take and pass the tests to continue working on the system. Some have worked on Metrolink trains for years.

“We are not going to be taking these tests,” said Tim Smith, California legislative chairman of the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen. “That’s it. We’ll see where it ends.”

“We’re all going to stand together,” said Ray Garcia of the United Transportation Union, which represents the conductors.

Union leaders say that, unless the dispute is resolved, Amtrak may not be able to field qualified train crews when it takes over operations this summer. Amtrak is set to assume operation of the 500-mile Metrolink system July 1. Connex Railroad, the current operator, opted not to pursue a contract extension when it’s relationship with Metrolink soured after the Chatsworth crash, which killed 25 and injured 135.

Metrolink board members say safety must come first, but they are likely to revisit the testing issue to ensure it is fair to the approximately 130 engineers and conductors now working on their trains.

The push for psychological screening was prompted by findings that a Metrolink engineer who repeatedly violated safety rules caused the Chatsworth catastrophe. Engineer Robert M. Sanchez, who died in the crash, had sent and received hundreds of text messages while operating trains, including seconds before he ran a red light and hit a freight train head-on, federal investigators concluded. In addition, evidence showed Sanchez sneaked young rail fans onto locomotives and apparently let at least one sit at the train controls. Such conduct was wildly irresponsible, Metrolink officials say, and occurred even though the veteran engineer had received good evaluations.

“You don’t want someone out there who’s having whatever psychological issues they are having that could jeopardize passengers,” said Metrolink board Chairman Keith Millhouse. But he added, “We are going to have to look at this and see if some kind of proper balance can be struck.”

Union leaders say the tests are not valid or relevant measures of a trained and experienced employee’s ability to safely operate trains. They say they do not object to testing of potential hires who are not union members. But forcing existing train crews to pass the tests could arbitrarily cost good workers their jobs, they say.

“I think it’s strictly a witch hunt,” said Smith of the engineers union.

Also, longtime Amtrak employees who’ve never taken the personality tests would be allowed to transfer to Metrolink under the new contract, said conductors’ representative Garcia. “This is something that’s never, ever been required” of seasoned workers moving between operating contractors on railroad’s like Metrolink, he said.

At issue are tests Amtrak has used for several years to screen job applicants. A “personality inventory” for engineers is designed to reveal an applicant’s “work tendencies, habits and personality traits,” according to an Amtrak statement. It specifically seeks out what are labeled “focused introverts” who are good at repetitive tasks and don’t allow themselves to become distracted by such things as cellphones while operating a train, according to descriptions provided by the rail company. The assessment was developed with union assistance and consultants and has been used since 2002, according to Amtrak.

Conductor candidates take two such tests: One is designed to gauge an applicant’s ability to interact with customers and deal with conflicts and emergencies. The other seeks to measure a person’s ethics and attitudes toward theft, drug use and other workplace concerns.

Amtrak declined to provide failure rates for the tests, but Garcia said about 20% of conductor applicants fail the ethics and attitude test.

The written tests are part of an ongoing effort to overhaul Metrolink’s safety culture, agency officials say. Another initiative, last year’s installation of video surveillance cameras in train control cabs, has already sparked a legal battle with the engineers union.

Like the cameras, personality testing of train crews — and particularly locomotive engineers — is prudent because employees are responsible for hundreds of lives, said agency board member Richard Katz. “This is one more tool to help evaluate how an engineer might operate under stress.”

USC professor Robert Gore, a personality testing expert, said such screening can be valuable but might not flag an employee like engineer Sanchez. “These tests are far from perfect,” he said, adding that they should be used with great caution in screening existing workers who have not demonstrated problems.

Katz said he thinks the test results should be part of assessing existing workers but not necessarily a disqualifying factor. But he acknowledged that under the current contract language, Metrolink crew members “run the risk of not being employed” if they don’t agree to take the tests.

— Rich Connell

Photo: Firefighters and others continue rescue efforts after a Metrolink commuter train collides with a freight train in Chatsworth on Sept. 12, 2008. Credit: Francine Orr / Los Angeles Times

Days after City Council members balked at his plan for boosting Department of Water and Power electricity rates, Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa on Monday threw his weight behind Councilman Richard Alarcon’s plan to approve the first of four hikes while putting the next three under greater scrutiny.

With another council vote scheduled for Tuesday, Villaraigosa said Alarcon’s plan was a compromise that would preserve his “lock box” for renewable energy and conservation programs.

Last week, the council rejected the DWP’s March 18 decision to approve the first of the four increases, which would add an estimated 6% to the average residential bill and up to 7% to the average business bill, according to the mayor.

Still, Councilwoman Jan Perry questioned whether there was a substantive difference between the DWP board’s vote and Alarcon’s plan. “I think it’s essentially the same as what the mayor proposed before,” she said.

Alarcon’s proposal asks the DWP board to develop a plan for reducing the financial burden on businesses. Those increases would total 21% to 22% once all are in effect. The councilman also asked the board to consider spreading the four increases, which range from 9% to 28% for residential ratepayers, over two years instead of one.

Villaraigosa agreed, calling on his DWP appointees to consider an extended timetable. "I would urge the board to evaluate that option and implement it if it’s financially feasible,” he said. “If it’s not, we would go back to the council and explain why we cannot do it.”

The mayor has been seeking the additional funds to help the DWP pay for such expenditures as the fluctuating cost of coal, existing renewable energy contracts and new conservation programs.

The first increase would add 0.8 cents to the cost of each kilowatt hour of electricity consumed by ratepayers. Of that total, 0.3 cents would go toward new conservation and renewable energy programs.

Villaraigosa has insisted that the money be preserved so it can eventually be used to help wean the utility off of coal. Some critics say all the money should be used to address the DWP’s finances and keep its credit rating secure.

Over the last week, Villaraigosa has ratcheted up his campaign against resistant council members, saying they have not done their homework on the DWP’s financial situation.

Standing next to Villaraigosa, the head of the powerful county Federation of Labor called out Councilman Ed Reyes specifically, accusing him of branding the mayor’s plan as irresponsible.

“I say it’s irresponsible not to go forward with this plan,” Maria Elena Durazo, the federation’s executive secretary-treasurer, said.

Reyes actually said last week that he believed the mayor was irresponsible for warning that the city would go bankrupt if the rate increases were not approved.

Villaraigosa later disavowed the use of the word “bankruptcy” but continued to warn that the city would run out of money unless the DWP got its rate hike. The extra money would allow the DWP to transfer $73 million to the city’s general fund by June 30, he said.

— David Zahniser at Los Angeles City Hall

Photo: L.A. Times file

With some Los Angeles art centers on the verge of shutting their doors, the City Council agreed Friday to shift money earmarked for public art projects to keep classes and other cultural programs running over the next two years.

City leaders have authorized as many as 4,000 job cuts to address a $485-million budget shortfall next year. Arts supporters pleaded with the council to intervene after some of the first pink slips were issued to employees at the William Grant Still Art Center in West Adams, the Charles Mingus Youth Center in Watts and the Warner Grand Theatre in San Pedro.

Olga Garay, executive director of the Cultural Affairs Department, said the layoffs of art instructors could have forced the department to end classes at some of those facilities. Classes also were at risk at the Barnsdall Park art centers in Hollywood, which already are losing two instructors to the city’s early retirement program.

City officials are seeking private, nonprofit operators for seven city art and theater facilities. In the meantime, Councilmen Ed Reyes and Tom LaBonge said they hoped to keep classes running by dipping into a fund that sets aside 1% of the construction budget for public buildings, such as police and fire stations, for art.

“This gives us a lifeline in the short term,” Reyes said.

Garay said she believes there is at least $500,000 available in the program’s trust, which recently provided money for the cast-bronze sculptures on the Spring Street side of the new Los Angeles Police Department headquarters downtown.

“Right now we’re trying to sustain these cultural centers and theaters that are the lifeblood of many communities,” Garay said. “… These dollars will provide a bridge until private enterprise can come in and partner with us.”

It may be weeks before officials know how many dismissed employees can be rehired under temporary contracts, she said. The proposal also must win approval from the city Cultural Affairs Commission. After the legal issues are vetted, the council will take a final vote on the proposal.

Several members, including Jose Huizar and Richard Alarcon, said they wanted to ensure that officials strike the right balance between saving jobs and enhancing public buildings.

“There’s some public projects that will lose out on an arts component,” Huizar said. “Let’s face it, some of these art projects at these public buildings do a great job to help support the arts and beautify a community and bring arts to some communities that don’t have any.”

–Maeve Reston at Los Angeles City Hall

The Los Angeles City Council on Friday rejected Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa’s plan for boosting electric rates, sending the proposal back to the Department of Water and Power even as members promised to continue working on an alternative plan next week.

The decision, made on a 13-1 vote, was viewed by some as procedural since the council is scheduled to take up the issue of rate hikes again Tuesday — first in a committee and then on the council floor. Several members have already said they think some form of increase is needed to safeguard the municipal utility’s financial health.

Council President Eric Garcetti said he was concerned about the size of the increase planned by Villaraigosa over the next year, and that the fact that the DWP is months away from completing its plan for weaning the utility off coal.

“I’ve never been opposed to a responsible step forward” in increasing electric rates, Garcetti said. “But to take a giant leap in the biggest economic downturn since the Great Depression seems to be rash.”

Villaraigosa’s aides did not immediately have comment on the vote, saying they were still trying to understand what council members were trying to accomplish. But in recent days, Villaraigosa has warned that a rejection of his plan would represent a step backward in the city’s effort to reduce its reliance on fossil fuels.

Both the mayor and the DWP had warned that a “no” vote would undermine the fiscal health of the city’s electrical utility, rendering it incapable of following through on a promise to transfer $73 million to the city’s struggling general fund budget, which pays for basic services.

That, in turn, would cause the city to run out of money before June 30, the mayor said.

Villaraigosa has called for four consecutive rate hikes in order to meet his goal of securing at least 20% of the DWP’s energy from renewable sources, such as wind, solar and geothermal power. Within 12 months, those rate hikes would result in increases to households of 9% to 28%, depending on how much power they use.

The first increase of 0.8 cents per kilowatt hour was approved by the DWP board March 18. Councilman Richard Alarcon has called for the council to approve that proposal while warning that members could veto the remaining three rate hikes if the DWP fails to follow a series of demands.

One of those demands is for the DWP to create a ratepayer advocate. Another is to ask DWP officials to spread the increases out over two years instead of one.

Friday’s vote was a sharp change in plans for the council, which was originally scheduled to decide next week whether to send the proposal back to the DWP. Councilwoman Jan Perry said she accelerated the timetable to let the DWP board know that it should schedule its own meeting on that day.

That meeting would need to occur Tuesday afternoon after the council has conducted a meeting in which  members could offer suggestions on the rate hikes, Perry said.

DWP spokesman Joe Ramallo had no comment after the council cast its vote. DWP Interim General Manager S. David Freeman said last week that his plan for weaning the utility off coal would be ready this summer.

— David Zahniser at Los Angeles City Hall

The Los Angeles City Council voted Friday to provide $5.7 million in financial assistance to a company that is helping a garment factory relocate from South Gate to South Los Angeles.

On a 14-0 vote, the council agreed to provide Pacific Center Place LLC two buildings that were purchased by the city’s redevelopment agency for $2.7 million three years ago. The council also agreed to provide $3 million in loans, some of which would not need to be paid back if the project creates a certain number of jobs.

Officials with Service Employees International Union Local 721 have criticized the deal, saying the city should not subsidize such a project in a time of financial crisis.

“This is not creating new jobs,” said Tim Butcher, a heavy truck operator who frequently testifies for the SEIU at council meetings. “This is moving 30 to 40 jobs from somewhere else up here.”

The project received the support of Councilwoman Jan Perry and Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa’s appointees at the Community Redevelopment Agency commission, which voted 4 to 0 in favor of the plan. In a statement, Perry described the project as a key addition to the city’s apparel industry.

Under the city’s 10-year loan agreement, one of the tenants of the project, D&J Sportswear, would be required to bring 30 full-time jobs to the site in the first and second years of the agreement. That number would need to rise to 40 in the agreement’s third and fourth years and to 74 jobs in the fifth year.

Half of those jobs would need to be paid at the rate of the city’s living wage: $10.30 per hour plus $1.25 per hour in health benefits. If those terms are met, one of the $750,000 loans being provided by the city would be forgiven.

–David Zahniser at Los Angeles City Hall

The top budget analyst for the city of Los Angeles, City Administrative Officer Miguel Santana, was arrested by the California Highway Patrol early Friday for allegedly driving under the influence after attending an L.A. charity event.



Santana, who on Thursday night attended a political roast of Los Angeles County Dist. Atty. Steve Cooley hosted by the American Diabetes Assn. at L.A. Live, was arrested in the San Gabriel Valley around 12:15 a.m. Santana lives in Claremont.

A CHP officer made the traffic stop after observing Santana’s car traveling at a high rate of speed on a surface street, said CHP spokesman Sgt. Mark Garrett. While interviewing Santana, the officer detected "signs and symptoms of intoxication" and placed him under arrest.

[Updated at 2:45 p.m.: CHP spokesman Officer Edmund Zorrilla said Santana was driving a city car at the time of his arrest, a gray Honda Civic. Officers made the arrest in Covina, near Citrus Avenue and Navilla Place, after the car was stopped and Santana failed a field sobriety test, Zorrilla said. Santana was very cooperative, he said.]

Santana, 40, submitted to a blood-alcohol test, but Garrett said CHP does not disclose results of such tests.

Santana issued a public statement Friday afternoon apologizing for the incident and said he would immediately seek counseling and "recommit myself to my family and work."

"I regret to say that last night I was involved in a very serious and irresponsible incident," he said in a written statement released by the mayor’s office. “Driving home from a charity event, I received a DUI. It was a mistake that I deeply regret and I apologize to my family and friends, my staff, the Mayor, the City Council and the entire city family for this indiscretion."

Santana was released from custody Friday morning.

Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa said Santana informed him of the incident this morning. "Mr. Santana is deeply sorry about this incident and recognizes the mistake he made," Villaraigosa said in a written statement. “Mr. Santana has informed me that he is going to immediately seek counseling and refocus on his work and dedication to serving the people of Los Angeles."

Since he took the job last year, Santana has been given the difficult task of addressing the city’s financial crisis. L.A. currently is grappling with a $212-million budget deficit, expected to more than double next budget year. The mayor and council have authorized the elimination of 4,000 city positions to help close the gap.

— Phil Willon at Los Angeles City Hall

Photo: City Administrative Officer Miguel Santana, right, and L.A. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa. Credit: Don Bartletti / Los Angeles Times

Los Angeles’ red-light cameras are stirring new financial concerns at City Hall, just as a police study has concluded the program helps reduce accidents.

With officials scouring expenditures to close a $200-million budget gap, updated estimates from the city’s budget office are painting a sobering picture of the cash generated by the city’s 32 camera-equipped intersections.

The photo enforcement program, which catches tens of thousands of violators annually, appears to be generating about $3.8 million a year in traffic ticket revenue, said Senior Administrative Analyst Matt Crawford. That is millions less than some previous police department estimates, and roughly what the program costs, mostly for fees paid to a private contractor that supplies and operates the camera systems.

Because some red-light ticket income is dedicated to other traffic safety programs, such as school crossing guards and roadside signs, the city’s cash-strapped general fund has been paying an extra $1.6 million a year to keep the camera program going, Crawford said.

That’s a concern when the city is considering laying off up to 4,000 employees, said Councilman Dennis Zine, a member of the Public Safety Committee.

“I don’t think we can afford to take any money out of the general fund” for red-light cameras, Zine said. But he noted redirecting all camera-generated money to support the program would require cutting other services.

“No one’s going to stand up and say, ‘We’re getting rid of crossing guards,’” he said.

The city’s red-light camera program, one of the largest in the nation, has drawn praise from supporters who say it helps efficiently police dangerous intersections, discourages red-light running and frees up patrol officers for other duties. Critics contend the safety benefits are mixed, at best, and the cameras mainly are revenue producing tools for private vendors and state and local governments.

Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa’s office is reviewing the costs and benefits of the program. “We’re looking at our options,” said David Beltran, the mayor’s press secretary. “I don’t think we’re looking at eliminating the program.”

Recent Los Angeles Police Department estimates indicated the cameras produced several million dollars in net revenue in recent years. But those figures were based on the number of citations issued via cameras, multiplied by the city’s potential share of penalties, officials say.

Further analysis has shown the actual revenue the city collects is greatly reduced by, among other things, motorists failing to pay tickets quickly, fines being reduced by judges, and the growing numbers of drivers doing community service in lieu of paying ticket fees that can top $500.

The downsized cash-flow estimates come at a time when the city is considering doubling the number of intersections covered by cameras and putting the program out to a new round of bidding by contractors. How the latest revenue and cost estimates may affect that effort is not yet clear.

Zine, a former LAPD traffic cop, said the cameras cannot add to the city’s budget woes. And, he said, officials need to carefully examine whether the systems are producing significant safety benefits.

A new police department report argues that is the case. Serious injury accidents and potentially dangerous crashes involving red-light running declined at intersections where cameras were activated, the report says. And while five deaths were attributed to red-light violations at the intersections from 2004 through 2006, no such fatalities have been reported since the cameras were activated, the report says.

Photo enforcement “is basically doing what it’s supposed to,” said Lt. Ron Katona.

However, the study’s data presents a complex picture. Comparing the six months before as well as after camera-equipped intersections were activated, total accidents increased 5%. That figure is misleading, the report says, because many incidents were caused by pedestrians, occurred on private property or mid-block or were otherwise not relevant to the photo enforcement program.

Accidents that were deemed to be red-light related dropped 9% across the studied intersections, the report says. Yet at more than a third of the crossings, those accidents increased.

Studies elsewhere have found rear end collisions, which tend to be less serious than broadside collisions caused by red-light violations, increase with photo enforcement because drivers make panic stops to avoid getting tickets.

In Los Angeles, red-light related rear end crashes remained flat at the intersections, the study found, although total rear end accidents rose about 40%.

Zine said his committee would delve deeper into the accident data. But even using the LAPD’s criteria, a 9% reduction in accidents is disappointing, he said. “It doesn’t seem that significant…you should be in the double digits” of 20% to 40% accident reductions, he said.

— Rich Connell

Photo: Marc Martin / L.A. Times

More breaking news in L.A. Now:

With Jack Nicholson looking on, a beaming
Dennis Hopper joins the Hollywood Walk of Fame

Detectives eye serial killer Alcala in 1970s
killing of two Seattle women

Making L.A. greener with ‘seedbombs’

Mary Murguia, former Clinton Justice
Department official, nominated for U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals

Pair use ‘lost cat’ as decoy in Hemet home
burglaries

Big hike in L.A. power bills might just be the
beginning. Are you willing to pay more

Hollywood gang spreading heroin in Glendale,
La Crescenta, police chief says

Los Angeles city libraries will shut their doors on Sundays and curtail hours during the week after a unanimous vote by the board of library commissioners Thursday.



The 1,132-employee library department is facing a vacancy rate of 20% because of a citywide hiring freeze and the exodus of more than 100 employees who are taking the city’s early-retirement deal before the end of this year. Officials said that once those employees leave, it would have been impossible to maintain the current schedule at the Central Library, eight regional libraries and 64 branches across the city.

Branch libraries are already closed on Sundays, but the central and regional libraries will now be added to that list. All of the city’s libraries will also close at 6 p.m. on Mondays and Wednesdays, instead of 8 p.m. And the eight regional libraries will open at noon rather than 10 a.m. on Tuesdays and Thursdays.

One hundred additional library employees have been targeted as part of a plan approved by city leaders to balance the city’s budget gap with as many as 4,000 job cuts. City Librarian Martín J. Gómez told City Council members Wednesday that if those cuts advance, he may only be able to keep the city’s libraries open five days a week.



— Maeve Reston at Los Angeles City Hall