[VIDEO] LA 'black ball' reservoir rollout potential 'disaster' in the making, say experts

LA's scheme to cover a reservoir under 96 million "shade balls" may not be all it is touted to be, experts told FoxNews.com, with some critics going so far as to refer to the plan as a "potential disaster."

 The city made national headlines last week when Mayor Eric Garcetti and Department of Water officials dumped $34.5 million worth of the tiny, black plastic balls into the city's 175-acre Van Norman Complex reservoir in the Sylmar section. Garcetti said the balls would create a surface layer that would block 300 million gallons from evaporating amid the state's crippling drought and save taxpayers $250 million.

Experts differed over the best color for the tiny plastic balls, with one telling FoxNews.com they should have been white and another saying a chrome color would be optimal. But all agreed that the worst color for the job is the one LA chose.

"Black spheres resting in the hot sun will form a thermal blanket speeding evaporation as well as providing a huge amount of new surface area for the hot water to breed bacteria," said Matt MacLeod, founder of the California biotech firm Modern Moon Farms. "Disaster. It’s going to be a bacterial nightmare.”

"It’s going to be a bacterial nightmare.”

- Matt MacLeod, Modern Moon Farms

Any color covering will help stop wind-driven evaporation, said Robert Shibatani. principal hydrologist for the Sacramento-based environmental consultant The Shibitani Group. But when it comes to the hot summer sun sucking water out of the reservoir, color is everything, he said.

"Ideally you would want a chrome surface," he said. "The worst would be matte black, which has a reflectivity close to zero."

Biologist Nathan Krekula, a professor of health science at Bryant & Stratton College in Milwaukee, said black balls will absorb heat, transfer it to the water and cause evaporation. And he agreed with MacLeod that the heat will prove hospitable to bacteria.

Via: Fox News

Continue Reading....

[COMMENTARY] Something is missing from Los Angeles’ jobs strategy

Los Angeles City Council President Herb Wesson made headlines earlier this month by declaring that Los Angeles lacks a strategy to attract jobs. He pledged to rectify the situation by creating a special committee focused on job growth — a move applauded by business leaders who frequently find themselves at odds with the council.

Few would find reason to fault an effort to bring more jobs to L.A. But the devil, of course, is in the details — and Wesson would be wise to heed the lessons of the past.

While vows to increase employment are de rigueur for elected officials, the last full-scale attempt to harness the power of local government to create jobs was led by former Mayor Richard Riordan. Far from being a template to replicate, Riordan’s strategy serves more as a cautionary tale.

Riordan, of course, was elected in part on the strength of his free market experience, and his vows to make L.A. friendlier to business. One of his signature initiatives was the Los Angeles Business Team, which was created in 1995 to attract and retain businesses by packaging public subsidies and expediting business permitting. While the LABT, as it was known, succeeded in making the development process more efficient, it failed in what arguably are the most important measures of job growth strategy.

First, Riordan’s team did not make job quality a criteria for the awarding of public subsidies. Many of the firms that received taxpayer dollars as an incentive to expand or locate in L.A. paid wages that left their employees mired in poverty — and often dependent on more taxpayer subsidies in the form of food stamps and other assistance. Rather than encouraging the growth of high-wage jobs, Riordan and his team facilitated the growth of low-wage employers.

Second, the LABT did not give priority to firms operating in poor communities — a key tenant of forward-looking economic development, which seeks to direct subsidies to the neighborhoods and residents with the greatest need. Third, Riordan’s team did not prioritize growth industries. Only a small percentage of taxpayer subsidies went to industries with a strong track record of growth.

All of these findings are documented in an exhaustively researched study released in 2000 by the Los Angeles Alliance for a New Economy. That report should be required reading for Wesson and his council colleagues as they embark on a new effort to attract jobs to L.A.

There will be powerful voices advocating for a jobs strategy that does not take into account job quality or opportunity for disadvantaged communities. Some of these forces will cynically point to L.A.’s recent decision to increase the minimum wage as a reason not to distinguish between employers, arguing that the new wage floor — which many of them fought — ensures that all businesses must provide good jobs.

Via: LA Daily News

Continue Reading....

Walsh hints at deception if LA gets Olympic bid

Boston Mayor Martin J. Walsh said if Los Angeles ends up getting the 2024 Summer Olympic Games bid originally slated for Boston it means “somebody didn’t tell me the truth.”

In an interview today on Boston Herald Radio, Walsh said he is interested to see whether the United States Olympic Committee heads west after ending its pitch to put the games in the Hub.

“I was given a commitment that L.A. was not in the mix, I was given that commitment several times by the chairman of the USOC,” Walsh said. “I’m interested to see what happens.”

Walsh referenced a Boston Herald report on Sunday that quoted Anita L. DeFrantz, a member of both the USOC and the International Olympic Committee, as saying L.A. is “perpetually ready” to host the Olympics.

“It can host with only two years’ notice,” DeFrantz said, adding that much of the infrastructure needed for the Olympics is already in place for the two-time host city. Los Angeles is also the host for this year’s Special Olympics, which are happening this week.

But Walsh said that news comes as a surprise to him.

“I was specifically told that L.A. is not going to be part of this,” he said.

Evan Falchuk, who opposed the Boston bid and was spearheading a ballot question to bar use of taxpayer funds, told Herald Radio the mayor should have expected some deception from the USOC.

“Marty Walsh had so many misrepresentations either made to him, or that he did not question throughout the process that it’s interesting he would be frustrated that they were suddenly not telling the truth about some other city,” he said. “They were telling us lies about our city and our state for months and we needed political leaders to stand up and say no, but we didn’t with very few exceptions.”

The mayor also expressed frustration at a report in which a USOC board member questioned whether he was fully behind the bid.

“If they are questioning my commitment, then they haven’t been following the Olympic bid,” he said, “because I think I was one of the biggest cheerleaders for the Olympics from day one.”

Via: Boston Herald

Continue Reading....

CALIFORNIA: Why Crime Is Up in Los Angeles

The Los Angeles Times reported this week that crime is on the rise in the City of Angels after a 12-year decline. “Crime surged across Los Angeles in the first six months of this year,” the story begins, “despite a campaign by the Los Angeles Police Department to place more officers on the streets and target certain types of offenses.” The only mystery about L.A.’s recent crime spike is why anyone finds it a mystery.

Civic leaders have been at pains to explain the reversal. Mayor Eric Garcetti and Police Chief Charlie Beck have blamed a rise in gang violence and homelessness, along with voter approval in November of Proposition 47, which made many “nonviolent” felonies into misdemeanors. All of these have contributed to the increase, but conspicuously missing from their list is a factor both Mayor Garcetti and Chief Beck are surely aware of but are unlikely to address, at least publicly: officer morale in the LAPD is abysmal.

The death of Michael Brown last year in Ferguson, Missouri, touched off a national wave of anti-police hysteria. This despite the fact that every investigative body that examined the case—including the U.S. Justice Department under Eric Holder—concluded that Darren Wilson, the police officer who tried to detain Brown and a companion as they walked down a Ferguson street, acted in self-defense and well within the law when he shot and killed Brown. Wilson was nonetheless hounded from his job and forced into hiding as the “Hands up, don’t shoot” myth was propagated in the media and exploited by the anti-police industry.

The message was not lost on LAPD officers, who came to realize that, like Wilson, they were just one controversial incident away from potential ruin. Two officers in Los Angeles are currently waiting to learn their fate after their involvement in a shooting that occurred just two days after Brown was killed. Though the incident was not as widely covered as the Brown shooting, the police killing of Ezell Ford, a 25-year-old black man, sparked protests in Los Angeles and brought calls for the involved officers to be fired and imprisoned. To his credit, Chief Beck defied the mob and ruled that the shooting was justified, as forensic evidence proved that Ford had tried to disarm one of the officers as they wrestled on a South Los Angeles sidewalk.

But the laws governing the LAPD are such that the chief doesn’t have the last word on shootings. All he can do is make a recommendation to the five-member police commission—all mayoral appointees—and they come to their own conclusions. In a ruling that was stunning for its legal distortions and intellectual contortions, the commission ruled that one of the officers was justified in shooting Ford but the other was not. And now, almost a year after the incident, both officers are still awaiting a decision by the Los Angeles County district attorney on whether they will face criminal charges.

The rise in crime is easily explainable if you proceed from the assumption that police officers and criminals are rational actors who constantly evaluate the risk-reward ratio of any decisions they make. For the criminals of Los Angeles, a good deal of risk has been removed from their calculations, especially now that so many felony property- and drug-related crimes are misdemeanors and the state’s 2011 “realignment” law has achieved its intended goal of easing overcrowding in the state’s prisons. The result has been fewer criminals behind bars and more on the streets without much in the way of a deterrent under the law.

And not only do L.A.’s criminals face lesser penalties if they are arrested, they know that the city’s police officers are less inclined to arrest them in the first place. For the police officers’ part, they’ve seen only an increase in the risks they face. And in this I’m not referring to the risks to their mortal hides posed by some knife- or gun-wielding thug. Police officers, at least those who choose to work the streets, prepare themselves physically and mentally for these challenges. But while a police officer may keep himself physically fit and practice his marksmanship, there is no amount of training that can prepare him for the dangers that emanate from City Hall, the district attorney’s office, or the Justice Department if he should become involved in some controversial incident that has the mob calling for his head on a pike.

Until Mayor Garcetti and Chief Beck are prepared to defend their police officers from the mob, expect crime in Los Angeles to continue to rise.

(Jack Dunphy (@officerdunphy) is the pseudonym of a police officer in Southern California. Originally posted on City Journal.)

Via: California Political Review

Continue Reading....

CALIFORNIA: LADWP Proposes 30 Percent Utility Rate Increase

Los Angeles Department of Water and Power is proposing a 25% to 30% increase in our utility rates over the next five years.  This $1.2 to $1.4 billion in new revenues will be used to replace aging infrastructure, improve the reliability of service, expand our local water supply, transform our sources of power, improve customer service, and support the Department’s $13 billion, five year capital expenditure program.

This hefty rate hike of 5% a year over five years does not appear to be unreasonable based on presentations by DWP’s senior management.  This is also an improvement over the 8% annual increase that was floated several months ago that would have cost Ratepayers over $2 billion a year.

Over the next four months, DWP management will put on a full court press to sell this substantial rate increase to Ratepayers who have serious doubts about the Department and its domineering union.  But even more so, we have a hard time trusting the Herb Wesson, the City Council, and Mayor Eric Garcetti when it comes to our hard earned cash.

One area of concern is DWP’s Stormwater Capture Master Plan which appears to be an attempt by the Bureau of Sanitation and City Hall to dump a significant chunk of the $8 billion urban runoff program onto the Ratepayers.

Last month, the DWP Board of Commissioners approved a $15 million stormwater plan that will cost Ratepayers an estimated $3,000 an acre foot, a significant premium to the $600 that the Metropolitan Water Department charges for untreated water.  At the same time, Sanitation, which has the primary responsibility for stormwater, is not putting any upfront money into the deal.

The Department must also justify selected pet projects, including the $20 million Griffith Park South Water Recycling Project that will end up costing Ratepayers close to $4,000 an acre foot.  Once again, DWP is financing a project that is the responsibility of another City department, in this case, Recreation and Parks.

There are numerous other pet projects, including, but not limited to, the Los Angeles River, the Arts District Clean Tech campus, fire hydrants, below market leases, and the Silver Lake Reservoir.

There are also questions regarding the local solar programs involving the efficiency of the Feed-in-Tariff program, net metering, and utility built solar.  According to the Ratepayers Advocate, the Feed-in-Tariff program is expected to ding Ratepayers more than $250 million extra over the next twenty years compared to other solar alternatives.  And the DWP built solar facility at the Port of Los Angeles is expected to cost 60 cents per kilowatt hour, four times the retail price of electricity.

This raises serious concerns about the efficacy of Garcetti’s $2.5 to $3 billion proposal to construct over 600 megawatts of DWP built solar power within the City of Los Angeles.

This rate review is also an opportunity to address DWP’s major problem: City Hall and the way it treats the Department as an ATM and a favor bank.

As a result of this interference, the LA 2020 Commission recommended the establishment of The Los Angeles Utility Rate Commission that would have direct authority to determine DWP policy, appoint the General Manager, set rates, and work with the GM and her staff to oversee the operations of the Department.  While this recommendation has yet to see the light of day thanks to City Council President Herb Wesson, we need to have a serious conversation about the governance of this City enterprise that is vital to our local economy.

The Ratepayers will also be hit up for about $200 million in taxes on Power System revenues as a result of the 8% Transfer Fee and the 10% to 12% City Utility Tax.  But rather than pocketing this back door tax increase, the City Council and Mayor Garcetti should reinvest this windfall in the power system’s infrastructure since they are in large part responsible for the deteriorating infrastructure because of their unwillingness to make the tough decision to raise rates.

The economics of the proposed 25% to 30% rate increase do not appear to be unreasonable based on management’s presentations.  Whether DWP is deserving of this $1.2 to $1.4 billion revenue hike depends on the willingness of DWP and City Hall to address the Ratepayers’ concerns, protect our wallets, and reform the governance of our Department of Water and Power.

Via: California Political Review

Continue Reading....

California: In LA, It’s Back to Basics

Despite record revenues that are expected to exceed $5 billion, the City Council is considering a $4.5 billion tax increase over the next 30 years to fund the repair of our lunar cratered streets because of its inability to control ever escalating salaries, benefits, and pension contributions.

But the failure of the City Council to balance the budget despite record revenues is compounded by its unwillingness to endorse Mayor Garcetti’s “Back to Basics” priorities by “making government more efficient and effective.”

For example, if the City were to sell the Convention Center, it would eliminate over $400 million in debt and increase the City’s cash flow by $60 to $80 million a year.  More than likely, the sale price of this 870,000 square foot white elephant would be considerably more than the debt, generating additional cash to reduce the City’s outstanding debt, fund the repair of a portion of our streets, or finance the revitalization of the Los Angeles River.

As part of any sale, the buyer would be required to develop a world class facility that would attract top of the line conventions to the City, generating huge increases in hotel and sales tax revenues for the City’s treasury.

Furthermore, the development of the 54 acre Convention Center site by a well healed buyer would create a boat load of additional revenue for the City through development fees and higher property taxes, and, at the same time, create thousands of construction and full time jobs that would revitalize DTLA and stimulate our lack luster economy.

The City has also given lip service to “performance based budgeting.” However, the administration has not made any effort to “benchmark” its operations or any of it compensation and benefit policies with those of other governments or alternative providers.  This was a key recommendation to our Department of Water and Power by PA Consulting in its August 2012 report.  The City should also consider “outsourcing” noncore services to more efficient vendors, another common sense recommendation of PA Consulting.

Via: California Political Review

Continue Reading....