SEWER CHARGES RAISING A STINK; BILLS DON'T INDICATE ACTUAL WATER USAGE.

Byline: David R. Baker Daily News Staff Writer

When Los Angeles launched its new sewer billing system last summer, it was supposed to protect homeowners from the dramatic overcharges of the past.

Just try telling that to Claud Field and many others who complain to the city that their sewer bills have risen for no apparent reason.

Under the new system, Field regularly gets charged for dumping far more water into the sewer system than he actually uses in his Winnetka home - about 2-1/2 times as much.

``We'd have to truck in a few thousand gallons to dump down the drain to make that work,'' Field said.

As a result, his two-month sewer bill jumped from $17.63 - for mid-February through mid-April 1997 - to $106.22 for the same period this year. This for a modest, one-story house with low-flow toilets.

Many other Valley homeowners say their bills give estimates of sewer use that are wildly different from the amount of water flowing into their homes from city pipes.

The problems arise from the new system's structure, different in several key respects from the way other California cities charge for sewer service. And now many Valley people want the new system changed, even though the city created it to answer their complaints that the previous formula penalized homes with pools and large lawns.

Figuring out a fair formula inevitably runs up against another obstacle: Los Angeles must collect enough sewer revenue to meet a federal edict for expensive environmental changes to the sewerage system.

``The heart of the issue isn't really the fee structure,'' said Los Angeles Councilman Joel Wachs. ``It's the cost to run the system.''

Homeowners argue that the city is paying its bills at their expense.

``It just doesn't seem right to charge people for more than they can use,'' said Gary Weber of Tujunga, whose bills show him putting 40 percent more water into the sewer system than his household consumes.

Although a Los Angeles public works commissioner said there are no plans to change the billing system, several City Council members said they would like to find a better way to charge for sewer services. The council has scheduled a July 21 meeting in Northridge to discuss the costs of operating and maintaining the city's sewer system.

Most of the problems with the new billing method arise from one simple fact: While the charge for water service on a Los Angeles utility bill shows how much was used during the last two months, the sewer charges don't. Instead, they reflect the least amount of water used during the winter that preceded the current billing year, which runs from July 1 to June 30.

City officials adopted the system in response to complaints about the old method of billing, which simply estimated that most households dump 60 percent of their water into the sewer throughout the year.

Under normal conditions, the new system should provide an accurate measure of how much water a household dumps into the sewer, said Diana Scott, senior commercial service representative with the city's Department of Water and Power.

``It's water used just in the household,'' she said. ``They're not watering the lawn and filling the swimming pool.''

But in a relatively dry winter, like the one Southern California experienced between 1996 and 1997, sprinklers keep running. Meanwhile, until the start of this month, homeowners continued paying sewer rates based on that relatively dry winter, even as El Nino pounded Los Angeles with rain.

So many people noticed the disparity that the city's Department of Public Works even mentions it in a brochure on sewer charge questions.

``Due to the very wet weather conditions brought about by the current El Nino condition, many residents have been using less water this year than last year,'' the pamphlet reads.

There are, of course, many ways to charge for sewer service.

Sacramento residential sewer bills are based on the number of rooms in a house. San Francisco officials assume that 90 percent of the water entering a home goes into the sewer, and charge accordingly.

San Diego uses a system similar to that of Los Angeles, basing sewer charges on the amount of water used during winter. But San Diego's system has a key difference: It caps at $66.73 the amount residential customers can be charged.

Wachs said he likes the idea of a cap on sewer bills but wonders if it would work.

``I love that, but will that yield the costs of running the system?'' he said.

Other council members said they liked the idea of a cap, at least in theory.

``That's interesting,'' said Councilwoman Laura Chick, who fought for the last billing revision. ``That may be worth discussing.''

But Public Works Commissioner Maribel Marin doubts that a cap could work in Los Angeles. The federal government, she said, has placed tighter sewage treatment requirements on Los Angeles than on San Diego. If the city capped sewer bills, it might not take in enough money to support its wastewater system.

``We are charging people for what it costs to treat water,'' Marin said. ``That cost is high, and it's high because we have to treat our water to government standards.''

Wachs said the City Council should focus its efforts on the financial health of the overall sewer system rather than tinkering with billing methods. The city, he said, needs to conduct a long-delayed audit of the system and may want to consider letting a private company run the system.

CAPTION(S):

Photo

PHOTO Claud Field of Winnetka is being charged for dumping far more water into the sewer than he uses.

Terri Thuente/Daily News