Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Wastewater Study topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council approves operational study of wastewater system amid conflict‑of‑interest questions
Summary
The council approved a forward‑looking best‑practices operational study for the city wastewater system using a consultant identified in the hearing transcript as Black & Beach; council members pressed staff to address potential conflicts of interest and sought a related review of past fund use.
The Los Angeles City Council voted to proceed with a consultant‑led operational best‑practices study of the city wastewater system on May 4 while residents and some council members pressed staff to clarify any conflicts of interest tied to the selected firm.
Speakers including Mr. Shapiro urged caution, noting that the firm identified in the record as Black & Beach has a history of prior design and construction work at the Hyperion treatment plant. "Don't get an outfit that caused you trouble in the past," a public commenter said. Council members on the joint committee — including Mr. Wax and others — told the full council the committee had interviewed candidates and recommended the firm based on unanimous, enthusiastic endorsements, including support from members of the joint labor‑management committee who had reviewed the proposals.
City staff described the contract as a forward‑looking operational and benchmarking study focused on how the system is operated and maintained, not a review of past design work. A staff representative told the council the proposed study would "benchmark best practices" and was not intended to re‑litigate earlier design decisions. Several council members nonetheless pressed for further safeguards: some asked staff to confirm there was no ongoing conflict of interest and to ensure the scope would permit examination of present fund use and operations. One council member moved to add language or pursue a complementary outside audit of past fund usage if appropriate; staff said a separate audit could be scheduled or handled in committee while the forward‑looking study proceeded.
The council approved the contract and asked staff to provide additional conflict‑of‑interest clarifications, and to return with guidance or scheduling for any follow‑up audit work. Council members emphasized the potential for significant ratepayer savings from operational improvements and framed the study as a long‑overdue step to identify efficiencies.
