EDITORIAL SCOOTER PAYOFF? THE DWP'S MOTIVES FOR ISSUING HIGH-RISK LOANS ARE QUESTIONABLE AT BEST.

AT last we have an answer to the question that has confounded watchers of Los Angeles City Hall for weeks:

Why would the Department of Water and Power pour nearly $2 million worth of high-risk loans into a Hawaiian company that plans to make electric scooters?

Because the union wanted it.

Yes, this is the same union that heartily supported Mayor James Hahn's anti-secession movement. It's also the same union whose members were rewarded for their loyalty with a hefty pay raise valued at twice the rate of inflation.

The International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 18 liked the idea of propping up the unionized Personal Electric Transports, Inc., and thus creating more dues-paying members. To that end, IBEW membership invested about $30,000 into the venture, then let the people of Los Angeles pick up the rest of the tab.

Of course, the IBEW couldn't have done it without the assistance of the DWP's top brass. General Manager David Wiggs, who readily admits that the investment is less than wholly sound, signed on after fellow DWP officials attended a junket in South Africa with PET executives, union big wigs and representatives from Hahn's office.

But not everyone is as impressed with PET's plans for selling electric scooters throughout the Third World. City Councilwoman Ruth Galanter, who was part of the official entourage in South Africa, questions the loan. She is calling on her colleagues on the City Council's Commerce, Energy and Natural Resources Committee to vote Friday to urge the full council to send the loan back to the DWP for reconsideration.

That's what Bill Fujioka, the city's chief administrative officer, has urged the council to do. Fujioka's take has been remarkably common- sensical, highlighting just how much a dose of common sense is needed in the DWP: ``The proposed loan does not appear to meet DWP or state criteria.''

No kidding.

The DWP, lest Wiggs or any other of its officers forget, is a public utility. It enjoys a legally protected monopoly over the Los Angeles utility market that entails a commitment to providing ratepayers with the best possible service at the lowest possible price.

If the DWP has extra millions kicking around, it ought to invest the cash in more power or reduced rates - not sweetheart deals that fatten its union's pocketbook.

As Galanter has noted, the DWP has little business playing venture capitalist, least of all on high-risk investments in out-of-state firms.

Besides, if Wiggs and fellow DWP officers think there's a future in electric scooters, they had a far more obvious investment choice right in their own back yard: Currie Technologies in Van Nuys.

Unlike PET, Currie is producing and selling scooters around the world, and without a penny of public assistance. Currie also happens to be a bona fide L.A. business, and one that dutifully buys its water and power from the DWP.

But then Currie hasn't managed to curry favor with the IBEW.

And it's favorable connections that seem to matter most in L.A. City Hall. Connections were enough for PET to secure a public-sector loan without an open application process.

The question now, is: Will those connections be enough for PET's deal to pass muster with the council?

Galanter has taken her stand against what looks like a naked political payoff to the union. Her colleagues should do the same.