Advertisement

Glendale OKs ballot measures for fund transfers, city treasurer post

November 29, 2012|By Brittany Levine, brittany.levine@latimes.com
(Raul Roa/Staff…)

An initiative that would simplify how Glendale transfers tens of millions of dollars from the city-owned utility to pay for general public services is officially going on the April ballot.

City Hall officials say the changes, which the City Council approved Tuesday for the ballot, would update a decades-old practice and bring it in line with modern accounting principles.

Critics, though, contend it will drastically change what city leaders had intended more than 70 years ago, when the revenue transfer was established. Critics also argue the transfer is akin to a back-door tax because the withdrawals artificially inflate customer rates.

Both sides point to old documents and the city’s charter to bolster their positions.

City Manager Scott Ochoa said on Tuesday “there’s no voodoo” involved in the city’s push to streamline the transfer rules.

“At the end of the day, we have a charter that is drafted in a time that does not reflect the current way we do business,” Ochoa said.

Advertisement

City officials agreed to transfer about $21 million from the electricity side of Glendale Water & Power this year. The city once transferred millions from the water utility as well, but stopped the practice as a precaution over uncertainty about how it would stand up if challenged in court.

Retired law professor Harry Zavos — one of the loudest critics of the revenue transfers — at the time had argued that the water revenue transfers were violating state law.

Both sides agree that the city can transfer funds from the utility to the General Fund, but they disagree on where that money should come from, and if it should be curtailed if the utility is in a financially precarious situation.

City officials say it should be taken directly from operating revenues, but Zavos says it should be limited to a percentage of operating revenues available in the utility’s surplus — and only if one exists.

Both the charter, as well as the original resolution from 1941 drafting the transfer, reference taking money from a surplus fund and equate the transfer to a percentage of operating revenues.

“That’s where the problem lies,” said Councilman Rafi Manoukian, a charter critic who also voted for the April ballot initiative in an attempt to “let the community decide.”

Glendale News-Press Articles Glendale News-Press Articles
|
|
|