L.A. parks want exemption from citywide drought rules

One month after the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power barred residents from watering on days other than Mondays and Thursdays, city officials are looking at loosening the law for the city’s parks department and other large landowners.

With temperatures topping 100 degrees in the San Fernando Valley, the parks department secured an emergency exemption allowing it to water its parks, golf courses and athletic fields on any day of the week until the law is rewritten, said Jon Kirk Mukri, general manager of the Department of Recreation and Parks.

“All the Valley parks are turning brown,” said Mukri, whose agency received the exemption Monday. “It’s not that one is worse than the other. They’re all showing stress.”

The City Council is scheduled to meet today to discuss the effect of the drought rules on park facilities. Tuesday, the DWP's Board of Commissioners forwarded to the council a proposal to change its watering law to allow cemeteries, colleges, school districts and other larger property owners to irrigate more frequently -- as long as they show they have reduced their water use by 20%.

Mukri said his agency has cut water consumption by 40% over the last two years and will continue installing drought-friendly irrigation systems. Facilities including Griffith Park and five city golf courses already use recycled water and are therefore allowed to water on a daily basis, he said.

Still, the notion of an emergency deal for the parks department drew fire from one outspoken critic of the DWP’s water policies, who complained that the average ratepayer does not get such consideration.

“I think the city needs to follow its own rules,” said David Coffin, a member of the Westchester-Playa del Rey Neighborhood Council.

Last year, the DWP banned watering between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m. and prohibited restaurants from serving water unless a customer specifically asked. On June 1, the DWP also limited outdoor watering to Mondays and Thursdays. The new changes proposed by the DWP would give flexibility to ratepayers with more than three acres of land that need landscaping, said Tom Erb, the DWP's director of water resources.

Although the parks department is now allowed to water its facilities on additional days, that option will not be available to other large property owners until the council approves the changes to the law, Erb said. A council vote is not expected for a few weeks.

Councilman Tom LaBonge, who introduced a motion to allow daily watering at city parks and golf courses, said the existing rules have affected not only the grassy turf but also the health of the city's trees and the greens at its golf courses. If the grass on those greens dies, replacement could be costly, according to park officials.

Councilman Tony Cardenas, who represents part of the Valley, said he had noticed the effect of the drought on Richie Valens Park in Pacoima and Bradford Park in Arleta.

Coffin, who is also a candidate for state Assembly, said the city would take its conservation policies more seriously if it experienced their effects firsthand.

“As much as I hate to say it, the only way to force them to address the overall water situation is to let those things turn brown,” he said.

Mukri disagreed, saying parks deserve special consideration because they are open to anyone to use. “I couldn’t just come up with a picnic basket and jump on your front lawn,” he said.

“As people’s lawns die, they’re going to need a refuge and we can provide that,” he added. “I live in North Hollywood and I adhere to the [water conservation] ordinance. And I can tell you right now, my lawn is dead.”

-- David Zahniser at L.A. City Hall

Comments

[BOB2]

The rules as should only apply to the "little people" not the powerful or important or the lazy parks staff for the City? This is the kind of bull that one comes to expect from the well heeled and the buureaucrats. Everyone should "sacrifice" because there is a drought, just not the well connected and self important who have juice and connections at City Hall?

[Samantha]

Los Angeles and the surrounding area only gets on the average 15 inches of rain per year. When are people going to understand that LA is not supposed to be GREEN?

[Mallory]

Maybe the parks department and the city of LA should realize that they have tried to build a green city in the middle of the desert. If you want enough water you have decide what the most important uses for that is. If people want to live somewhere with rolling green hills they should get out of LA.

[boo boo]

Do as I say NOT as I do!
If the city can water the parks then I'm going to water my lawn!
Politicians crack me up how the can make everything seem like it's o.k if they are behind it, I feel it's usually the opposite.
Water on peeps!

[Roger Pariseau]

It's simple. We live in an essentially desert area so we have three choices: Lotsa people and no grass or water hungry plants or few people and lotsa grass and water hungry plants or few people and native plants only. What do you think would be the best, long-term solution? Won't happen, will it?

[North East Resident]

This is outrageous. The law should be applied equally regardless of who owns the land or how large the space is. If they allow parcels larger than 3 acres to water daily, the largest consumers get to water daily while my garden with vegetables and fruit that I invested thousands of dollars in dies. It's not right and I will vote to throw out my elected city officials. The city should follow it's own rules and let the lawns and golf courses turn brown everywhere. The city puts restrictions on us and does as it pleases. Shame on them.

[christine]

The golf courses need to figure out a way to reclaim their water. They typically have some sort of restaurant at a golf course and I bet they have a lot of dishwater they could use.

[Kristin Sabo]

I find it hard to believe that all of the commenters before me are willing to take on the extra millions of dollars in costs to the City to REPAIR all of the playing fields, park greens, and golf greens that are being damaged by forcing Rec and Parks to adhere to water restrictions.

Seriously people - You all really don't mind the impending tax increases and loss of services that must be coming if this restriction isn't lifted? I most certainly do.

It's also worth pointing out that Los Angeles is the most park poor major city in the United States with what parks we have being concentrated in more affluent areas. Note that quoted dissenter Mr. Coffin lives in Westchester-Playa del Rey, this area is neither low income, park poor, nor subject to the kinds of temperatures that inland areas are subjected to for months on end. The effect of water restrictions on the park facilities we do have will make this inequity far worse than it already is.

The commenters above really should have voted in favor of Valley secession. If they had, they wouldn't have this problem of caring what happens to the rest of the City now.

[RM]

So only people with large properties can water to their heart's content? My 600 square feet of lawn will die or I will get fined for using more water. But the estate with three acres will be lovely & green.
So typical.
Vote everybody out of office. Crooks & morons, the whole lot. Anyone remember the French Revolution? Doesn't look so extreme now, does it?

[Mike]

Los Angeles needs to get going on major recycling of waste water so it can be reused on a wide scale. Right now, most of the treated water is going down the river and out into the ocean; such a waste of a valuable resource. Orange County recently introduced a world-class water treatment center to recycle water and it works great; LA needs to get off the dime and do it now. And for those residents who complained a few years ago about using recycled water, get over yourselves because we live in a semi-arid desert and water is running low. Get real!

[Nicole]

As long as Rec & Parks reduces their consumption by the goal, I believe it's wise to allow them to figure out how to protect our tree canopy and the investments necessary to try to maintain parks for all people.

I ripped out my front lawn completely and converted to drought tolerant/native plants but my house is not a park where people need green (grasses, natives, trees for shade) for both passive and active uses.

I do want DRP to conserve and do their fair and equitable part but it's crazy-making to allow our parks to dye of thirst just because of a bureaucratic rule of "only on Mon & Thurs."

[LuckyInMalibu]

We would actually benefit from the 3 acre exception at our place, but agree that it's totally unfair to have an exemption like this that only benefits a small subset of the population.

However, while two days of watering can work, it needs to allow for deeper watering (20-25 minutes vs. 15), and it's really tough to go from daily watering down to two days without a transition period. The problem is that daily watering that people did previously leads to weak, shallow roots, which then cause the grass to die when it moves to occasional watering. What you need is really deep soaking so the roots can extend more deeply - and you need some time for that to happen. Three days of deep soaking for now, moving to two days after 8-10 weeks would probably keep most lawns looking very good, even in parks and golf courses. We've done that at our place and are using roughly 20% less water with the two-day week watering - while preserving lush green lawns.

Given that, it's probably reasonable to let people pay extra to water on a third day - including golf courses, which can raise their fees to cover the cost of the extra water - and then use this to give people an extra break on costs if they use less, maybe even a rebate that makes it completely free if you use less than a certain amount. That way the people who really conserve get an extra rebate for saving water that's subsidized by the heavier users, the heavier users can transition to less water usage without killing their grass and trees, and net-net you wind up with much less usage and most people being happy.

Parks are really a tough problem - but if we change the rules so that anyone can water 3 days vs. 2 for an incremental charge, it's then reasonable to exempt parks from the fee vs. the over rules.

[MaryB]

Not only is Los Angeles a city with scarce city parks, it is also a city with several families crammed into small, crowded apartment dwellings with virtually no yards or "open space" to call their own. It is our responsibility to try to sustain the parks, and not let the park areas dry up and fade away, so to speak. The notion of allowing the Parks to increaase their water usage is a non-selfish policy of compromise for the greater good of all Angelenos.

[jeff]

I watr my grass daily, anyone that is actually following the law is crazy. How are they going to catch you? They have 32 inspectors for the city of Los Angeles. Just ignore the law and water it and tell them to catch you if they think they can.

[Charly]

I water every day, 2 time a day. Ladwp is welcome to catch me if they actually can. I am not going to follow some stupid law.

[Robert, Los Angeles]

Excuse me but maybe some people need to lighten up and remember that the taxpayers own the public parks, so we should not be so quick to allow these limited park spaces to deteriorate. The city has a dearth of parkland, I'm told, and if the city is going to continue to pursue the devlopment with it's style of "densification" to squeeze more into the city, they will have less parkland to use.

By the way, densification's direct product is to stress all the infrastructure of the city, including increasing water needs where the supply has long been known to be finite and becoming more scarce. So when is the City Council and Tony going to see their own actions worsen the situation?
Probably never, as long as special interests are allowed to make campaign contributions.

And does anyone bother to read the ordinances? You can hand-water with a hose that has an auto shut-off device ANY DAY, just not between 9am and 4pm. It is sprinkler systems that can only be used Mondays and Thursdays. The gardener can keep his/her vegetable garden wartered and the 600 sq.ft. lawn should be manageable, so it comes down to how much water is getting used as the main concern, more the issue than what day it is being applied.

Today's news story had Eric Garcetti and the pinch-hitter, Jan Perry at a press conference where Garcetti said there is "no water supply problem" in L.A., but a "water conservation problem." What a guy, so clever, but there's problems all around, no matter what.

Allowing public parks to wither and suffer damage is not the answer.

[martin]

whats new city hall changes the rules as they go
this is not about the parks or golf courses is about the large homes and staples centers is about there special interest of all those crooks in city hall
we need to begin recall this crooks
sad times in los angeles

[In L.A.]

You CAN water on other than Mon and Thurs if you hand water with a hose and use a auto shut off nozzle.

Is everyone aware of that? And you can water any day as long as it is not between 9 am and 4 pm.

Some comments seem to think "no watering" at all.

And leave the public parks green- with the mayor and cronies pushing the over-development buttons, we are lossing green in the city, both money and spaces.

[Carol Reush]

Screw the parks! We are in a drought for crying out loud! It's either one rule for everyone or no rule at all. No exceptions.