Comments
MY PERSPECTIVE - To err twice is not the mark of a wise man, a Greek proverb says. How true, and yet the Los Angeles City Council continues to repeat mistakes. It keeps tripping over the same stone.
Incapable of doing its job to repair and maintain Los Angeles’ streetlighting system, the Bureau of Streetlighting (BSL) argues that the current system is financially unsustainable. So, it seeks absolution through Proposition 218, the statewide constitutional amendment named, "Right to Vote on Taxes Act" enacted in 1996 and sponsored by the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association.
Prop. 218 is a statewide constitutional constraint imposed on cities. The City Council is bound by it. But it could have avoided holding a Prop. 218 assessment vote by enacting alternative funding strategies or restructuring departments.
I have written in this space that the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP) is also involved in streetlight maintenance, and that a structural revision should be undertaken to merge the two utilities. Services would be upgraded and an effective economic benefit would have been gained. It has been estimated that the move will generate more than $8 million in savings, The city does not need two utilities to perform street light work.
In 1998, Mayor Richard Riordan recommended that LADWP should take over streetlighting work after an extensive study concluded such a proposal conforms with the City Charter, and with the concurrence of the City Attorney. However, the BSL with its lobbying and backdoor political maneuvering kept things as they were.
But deaf ears brought on an unconventional proposition with quirky subtleties.
Prop. 218, through a process that is unusually confounded, lets LA decide if it can update its streetlighting system without major changes to city governance. The June vote differs significantly from a typical election, and it incorporates distinct political dynamics.
For example, only property owners vote, not registered voters, because Prop 218 governs property assessments. Further, votes are weighted by how much each parcel would pay, meaning that large commercial parcels and government parcels have far more influence than small residential parcels.
Confusing as it must be, streetlighting charges are assessments, not taxes.
Prop 218 assessment ballots are mailed to property owners, and the voting process is conducted entirely by mail. Ballots are mailed back, or hand-delivered to City Hall. There is no in‑person voting booth, no early voting, no drop boxes, and no online voting.
Intriguingly, the city owns thousands of parcels with high assessment amounts, and historically they cast a YES vote. If a property owner chooses not to participate, it helps the measure pass because opponents must actively return NO ballots to outweigh the YES ballots. Previously, large commercial parcels often voted YES or did not vote.
We have come to this awkward point in time because the City Council remains unaccountable. It persists in imposing new taxes or fees to fulfill commitments to special interests only, overlooking true public needs. Having overseen a number of public works projects in the city and county over the last thirty years I have witnessed waste and abuse, and fraud. Manipulations and exploitations have been ignored, thus resulting in such things as Prop. 218.
To my knowledge there has never been a forensic audit of a city department to root out waste, fraud and abuse, but instead LA city leaders follow the path of least resistance; new taxes. Alarmingly, Angelenos will be asked to vote on a half dozen new taxes in the June and November elections.
Indeed, special interests who are feeding at the public trough will come out supporting the assessment, as signified by multiple brochures by the Board of Directors, Los Angeles Police Protective League, backing the assessment.
Illustrative example that the city leaders are clueless of the city finances is the following. Last year when the city was facing a $1B budget deficit the chairman of the budget committee was told of the staggering deficit. "I’m shocked,” was the response—a performative outrage analogous to the movie Casablanca with Captain Renault saying he was shocked learning of the gambling he pretends to condemn.
Still, the dichotomy persists; contradictions abound with our city leaders. They preach affordability yet impose new taxes. LA has a housing shortage resulting in homelessness run by the Homeless Industrial Complex, yet the hypocrites who preach affordability deplore, catering to special interests, an increase of $30 per hour wages for hard working people who otherwise will end up homeless. They claim that the increase will result in job losses, which debatable. However, they are ready and willing to impose new taxes that undoubtedly will result in the well documented exodus of businesses.
City Hall should have stopped copper wire thieves who have caused streetlights to go dark instead of punishing law-abiding property owners who are unfairly billed for public safety failures. Besides, the argument for the 120% increase in the property assessment propagated by the supporters "60,000 lights are not working because they are broken and thieves have stolen copper wire" is misleading. BSL`s mismanagement, inefficiency and waste predate the recent copper wire thievery. BSL has a history of not paying LADWP for street lighting electricity, owing over $78 million since 2016. I have personally advised the Bureau over three years ago that the streetlight in front of my residence stays ON ,24/7. No corrective action has been taken so far.
To lessen copper-wire theft, LA is also turning to solar, saying that it does not require expensive trenching and rewiring, and that it can be installed quickly. Solar avoids the grid, so it avoids grid‑repair costs.
However, solar streetlights pose numerous challenges, particularly on a large scale. Each light relies on a lithium or AGM battery that deteriorates in heat, loses capacity over time, and requires replacement every 5–7 years—or sooner in hot climates. In LA, summer pole temperatures over 120°F greatly reduce battery lifespan. While upfront costs are predictable, ongoing Operation & Maintenance and battery replacement remain uncertain.
And there are more issues. Shading kills performance. Even 20–30% shading can cause a light to underperform or fail to charge fully. Even more critical is the output. Most solar streetlights produce 2,000–5,000 lumens, while LA’s standard grid‑tied cobra heads, the workhorse of street and area lighting, produce 8,000–14,000 lumens.
This streetlighting issue is an example of our local government malaise, the slow drift into dysfunction.
Naturally, mistakes are bound to happen in a city as large and intricate as Los Angeles. However, effective leadership is shown not just by preventing errors, but also through solid feedback systems, strong accountability, and an ability to adapt and address issues. Sadly, our cherished city faces stagnation, which causes small missteps to escalate into major crises.
Finally, a word to those who govern our city. Take heed, if we refuse to learn nothing from our mistakes, then we are making a graver mistake.
I will vote NO, along with Monica Rodriguez, the only courageous Councilmember who voted against the Streetlight Maintenance Assessment District.
A recent headline in a major newspaper referring to Los Angeles read: "Wealthy West Coast city in danger of becoming the 'next Detroit"'.
(Nick Patsaouras is an electrical engineer, civic leader, and a longtime public advocate. He ran for Mayor in 1993 with a focus on rebuilding L.A. through transportation after the 1992 civil unrest. He has served on major public boards, including the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, Metro, and the Board of Zoning Appeals, helping guide infrastructure and planning policy in Los Angeles. He is the author of the book "The Making of Modern Los Angeles.")
