ONLY IN L.A.: POOR PAY OTHER BIG CITIES PROVIDE STREET LIGHTS IN ALL NEIGHBORHOODS.

Byline: James Nash Staff Writer

Among the nation's 10 largest cities, only Los Angeles directly bills its residents for street lights - a funding model that virtually guarantees that poorer neighborhoods will be left in the dark.

Nine of the 10 largest U.S. cities pay for street lights totally or partially out of their general fund, the pot of money that also pays for police, street repairs and other basic services.

But in Los Angeles, residents must come up with $1,600 per house to have street lights installed in their neighborhood plus pay $53 a year into a fund for electricity and maintenance. But the money in the fund does not - and under city rules cannot - go to buy street lights for poorer neighborhoods. About one-third of Los Angeles residential areas lack lights, including parts of Chatsworth, Brentwood and other rustic areas where residents don't want them.

A group of Pacoima residents has called for more street lights and more police to help fight crime. The residents said they're the victims of poor city planning decades ago resulting in the unaffordable price tag to install new street lights.

``It might be a good program in other places, but in Pacoima they need to consider our situation,'' Osbaldo Valasquez, a community activist who has been working to get lights in the area, said Wednesday.

``(City officials) know Pacoima residents aren't going to be able to come up with that kind of money or it's going to be difficult,'' Valasquez said.

Los Angeles officials tout the system as fair because people without street lights don't pay for them or the cost of electricity. They said they're being as flexible as they can by allowing the $1,600-per-house installation fee to be spread out over 10 years and mounting outdoor lights to the end of existing utility poles at no cost if residents request them.

``If people want lights, they will pay for them,'' said Stan Horwitz, community services manager for the Los Angeles Bureau of Street Lighting. ``What could be fairer than that?''

But many San Fernando Valley residents, including several candidates for the proposed Valley city's mayor and council, have criticized Los Angeles for spending $8 million to replace all street lights along the 17 miles of Ventura Boulevard with new, uniform lights while some neighborhoods remain unlit.

Other cities pay

Other large U.S. cities - and several other Southland municipalities - pay for street lights out of their operating budgets, so there is no requirement for residents of unlit neighborhoods to front the money for new lights. Officials in those cities say they're able to quickly provide lights for neighborhoods where residents complain about a lack of lighting.

``If anybody wants the street lights, all they've got to do is call us up and we'll put the light in, as long as they meet the minimum requirements,'' said Gary Norman, a spokesman for the Houston public works department.

In Los Angeles, the process is more complicated. Because the city does not pay for street lights from its general fund, residents who want lights must vote to create an assessment district, into which they would pay $1,600 per home for installation and $53 per home per year for maintenance.

Some neighborhoods in Sun Valley and North Hollywood are getting lights through federal grants, said Horwitz of the Bureau of Street Lighting.

Before California voters approved Proposition 218 in 1996, which requires a vote on taxes and fees, the City Council could approve assessment districts without a formal vote. After the 1965 Watts Riots, the city created assessment districts across South Central Los Angeles to pay for 100,000 new street lights there, Horwitz said.

Officials in the other nine largest U.S. cities said only small pockets without street lights remain in their cities, nowhere near the one-third of Los Angeles that is unlit.

Los Angeles officials said several unique factors - including mountains, semirural enclaves and the fact that the city didn't require developers to install lights until the 1950s - account for the relatively large portion of Los Angeles without street lights.

While the other nine largest U.S. cities pay for all or part of their street-light expenses from their general funds, several of the cities subsidize the lights from other revenues.

Detroit uses profits from its municipal electric utility to pay for more than half of its street-lighting expenses. Chicago helps pay its bills with voter-approved bonds. Phoenix applies part of its gasoline tax toward street lights.

Flexible approach needed

Lewis K. Uhler, president of the National Tax Limitation Committee in Roseville, Calif., said Los Angeles needs a similarly flexible approach toward its lower-income neighborhoods.

``Why can't a city that has substantial general revenues install and pay for basic services such as street lights?'' he asked. ``Do they always have to go back to the taxpayers to ask for special funds?''

Los Angeles is unique among large cities in that it has semirural areas such as Brentwood and the Northwest Valley where residents oppose street lights, said Steven B. Frates, senior fellow at the Rose Institute of State and Local Government at Claremont McKenna College. People in those neighborhoods shouldn't be forced to subsidize lighting for areas such as Pacoima, he said.

``When people in those areas bought homes, they probably recognized that there weren't street lights,'' Frates said. ``The fact of the matter is, there must be a vote of the people.''

Even in California, where Proposition 218 requires majority votes for a range of taxes and fees, many cities pay for street lights out of their general funds and therefore don't require special fees or votes.

Burbank uses property taxes to replace about 100 street lights per year, said Ray Hamoui, an engineer in the city's Bureau of Water and Power.

San Diego installs about 1,300 lights a year with money from its general fund, said Mona Favorite-Hill, a spokeswoman for the city of San Diego Street Division. San Diego pays for electricity and maintenance for the city's network of 44,000 street lights, although it has set up assessment districts for areas that want decorative or other special lights.

Los Angeles installs about 6,000 new street lights per year, said Phil Reed, director of the Bureau of Street Lighting.

That isn't enough for residents such as Bernice Blisten, who lives on a quarter-mile stretch of Cohasset Street in Van Nuys that has two street lights. Blisten said her neighborhood includes many senior citizens on fixed incomes who are unable to pay the city assessments.

``(City officials) should put in street lights, just as they fix other things here such as the sidewalks,'' Blisten said. ``I have called the city before and they said we would have to pay thousands of dollars. We already pay property taxes.''

Vulnerable to crime

Blisten and other residents of poorly lit neighborhoods say they feel vulnerable to crime.

The Los Angeles Police Department does not have data showing whether crime is more prevalent in poorly lit areas, but police intuitively know that criminals avoid brightly lit areas, said Officer Jason Lee, an LAPD spokesman.

Horwitz of the Bureau of Street Lighting said residents who want street lights should contact City Hall, which might be able to arrange alternate methods of funding although the full assessment should not be a huge burden for most homeowners.

``If you can go buy a cup of coffee at Starbucks once a month, you can pay for your street-lighting maintenance,'' Horwitz said.

Claire Bartels, chief of staff for 2nd District Councilwoman Wendy Greuel, said proposals to change the city's policy could be studied.

``I don't think we have enough facts to see whether the system is broke and whether we need to fix it,'' said Bartels. ``Wendy Greuel is always open to ways of improving services in the district.''

CAPTION(S):

box

Box:

CITY LIGHTS

SOURCE: Daily News research