The online Comment window has expired

Agenda Item

M.1. 21-2534 DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING THE CITY'S PARTICIPATION IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON'S LS-1 OPTION E STREET LIGHT REPLACEMENT PROGRAM

  • Default_avatar
    Alex Wurzel over 3 years ago

    Dear Mayor Brand, City Councilmembers, and City Manager Hoefgen,

    Tanko has reviewed the staff report and comments by SCE and has the following reply:

    - SCE did "close" this program, but the right of cities to buy streetlights has been active and taking place in CA since the 1970s. SCE does not have the ability to cancel the City's rights.
    - Tanko has gathered more than 50 examples of successful court cases of streetlight acquisition through this process and is confident in our success, which is why we are conducting the work on a performance basis. And in fact, Long Beach acquired lights from SCE in 1983.
    - Tanko has multiple clients in the area that are working on this process now. The City will not be alone.  SCE is not aware of them all yet.  In addition, Tanko has more clients under PG&E and SDG&E as well and they are all regulated by the same PUC.
    - Every recent advice letter written to the PUC acknowledged that cities had the right to take the lights via eminent domain. Tanko provided those letters to staff.  This shows that SCE looked at this recently, and knows it can be successful.
    - The City will not have the same type of control over its LED with SCE.  The City will not get to select its manufacturer, specific wattage, or distribution lenses.  Redondo Beach will pay more for a lighting conversion it may not truly be happy with.
    -  Prices of streetlights did vary over SCE's territory when sold in the past.  However, it should be noted that many (Pico Rivera, Tustin, Orange, Santa Ana, etc) paid on average about $482/light. In addition, the distribution lights which make up 73% of SCE's lights will at worst cost about $150/light. This is based on nationwide experience.
     - Tanko has run these legal process costs past local attorney's and they are in agreement with our estimates.

    Tanko knows this process and that we can assist the City in gaining more savings.

    I am happy to answer questions this evening or present at a closed session another time as we have done with others.

    Alex Wurzel
    Senior Energy Advisor
    Tanko Streetlighting

  • Default_avatar
    Mark Nelson over 3 years ago

    If retrofit with greater than 3000K LEDs are part of the program, then I oppose based health damages from peer-reviewed medical journals. Excess nighttime lighting, especially above 3000K in LED, is demonstrated to cause a number of health damages to residents that are subjected to the excess light.

    The negative health impacts of excess light is discussed in peer-reviewed studies. An example is below.
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4863221/
    Title: Artificial Outdoor Nighttime Lights Associate with Altered Sleep Behavior in the American General Population
    Conclusion: Although they improve the overall safety of people and traffic, nighttime lights in our streets and cities are clearly linked with modifications in human sleep behaviors and also impinge on the daytime functioning of individuals living in areas with greater ONL

    AMA guidance also calls for ON/OFF rather than constant light, 3000K or lower light color, and reduced intensity to reduce "prison atmosphere."

  • Default_avatar
    Diane Forte over 3 years ago

    Dear Mayor Brand, City Councilmembers, and City Manager Hoefgen,

    Re: Item M.1

    Southern California Edison supports Staff’s analysis and recommendation to enter into an agreement to participate in Southern California Edison’s LS-1 Option E street light replacement program. Utilizing LS-1 Option E, Redondo Beach will realize immediate cost savings, energy and carbon footprint reductions, and aesthetic benefits.

    Staff has correctly indicated that SCE is opposed to selling street lighting assets and would oppose any eminent domain proceeding that would attempt to force SCE to relinquish SCE owned street lighting infrastructure. SCE also agrees with Staff that the third party’s estimated acquisition costs doesn’t appear to be reliable and underestimate risk as well as regulatory and legal costs.

    SCE looks forward to continuing our positive partnership with the City to bring significant energy savings and cost reductions to your community. We are happy to answer any questions you might have regarding the LS-1 Option E Program or other street light services.

    Thank you.

    Diane Forte
    Government Relations Manager
    Southern California Edison