The Brief

Solar developers say they’re facing crippling losses and potential bankruptcy amid a stall in a state-funded solar power program.

California’s “self-generation incentive program,” or SGIP, was reworked in 2024 to help low-income households install solar and battery-storage systems for free.

But SGIP has been plagued by delays, bureaucracy, poor communication and stalled payments, according to five developers LAist spoke with. Small developers say they’ve been hit especially hard by a lottery system that they argue favors larger developers.

And customers who stood to benefit the most from free installation of solar and battery storage — low-income households in the hottest and most fire-prone areas of the state — are in limbo, waiting months for the bill savings and energy reliability they were promised ahead of what is expected to be a record-hot summer.

The issue highlights the challenges to expanding access to clean energy as fossil fuel pollution continues to accelerate climate change and is another hit to an industry that has faced significant setbacks in recent years from changes to state-level rooftop solar programs and the Trump administration’s cuts to clean energy incentives.

How we got here 

The state has offered incentives to large electric customers to install generation and backup systems since the energy crisis of the early 2000s. The latest version of the SGIP program aims to prioritize qualifying low-income residents.

In 2024, the state allocated $280 million in state funds to install solar and batteries for free on qualifying homes and apartments. The program is administered through the state’s investor-owned utilities and the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power. It officially launched last summer.

Here’s how it’s supposed to work: Developers identify projects they can take on, then apply for funding via a first-come-first-served reservation system. If requested funds exceed the total funding, then a lottery is triggered. If their project is approved, the developer does the work and covers the upfront costs of the installation with the understanding they’ll get paid back through SGIP within a year.

What’s happening in LADWP territory?

Solar panels dot the parking area at the DWP building in downtown Los Angeles.

(

Lawrence K. Ho

/

Getty Images

)

As soon as the SGIP program launched last June, large developers quickly flooded the application system.

Sunrun, one of the nation’s largest solar developers, submitted applications requesting as much as 97% of the total funds available in Los Angeles Department of Water and Power territory, according to public data reviewed by LAist. (Sunrun declined to be interviewed for this story. LADWP didn’t agree to be interviewed about the breakdown of applications.)

LADWP said it is in the process of reviewing the 451 applications it received. So far, DWP officials have approved one: $28,000 for a single-family home project, the utility told LAist.

Smaller developers told LAist they’re concerned that there is no cap on how much any single developer can receive through the program. General market versions of SGIP not targeted for low-income properties have developer caps of 20% of the incentive funds, according to the program’s handbook.

“The purpose of the program, I believe, is not to just enrich the biggest players or to allow them to have free project financing,” said Aaron Eriksson, owner of Escondido-based Solar Symphony Construction, which applied for projects in LADWP territory. “We all got kind of left out in the cold on that one.”

Robert Cudd, a research analyst with UCLA who has studied SGIP, said the program does incentivize developers lining up as many projects as possible ahead of time to “claim the largest possible share of that rebate pool.”

That’s often the case for similar programs that aim to serve low-income customers.

The state “is agnostic about who is doing this work,” Cudd said. “They just want to accelerate the energy transition.”

Only a few large companies — including Sunrun and GRID Alternatives, as well as growing startup Haven Energy — have developed specialized expertise in these kinds of complex programs that have higher upfront costs.

Small companies on the brink 

Delayed reimbursements have developers worried about projects in the works and about new paperwork requirements.

In February, the California Public Utilities Commission — five governor-appointed regulators who oversee the program — abruptly paused SGIP. In their ruling, they said that projects submitted varied widely in costs, with many exceeding incentives “significantly.”

The ruling flagged discrepancies such as the same wall battery reportedly costing as low as $8,600 and as high as $21,000. So the CPUC decided to require developers to submit additional receipts and documentation of their costs.

But developers LAist spoke with said only a fraction of applications were at the state’s predicted costs. The developers argue costs have gone up due to inflation, tariffs and cuts to clean energy tax credits. Projects serving low-income households also often require upgrades because of the buildings’ age.

Joshua Buswell-Charkow, deputy director of California Solar and Storage Association, a trade organization that represents more than 70 companies that participate in the SGIP program, said work is already underway in some cases.

“Some of our contractors are out literally millions of dollars right now,” he said. “ I'm worried that we're going to have folks go out of business because of this.”

That could be the case for Eriksson’s company, Solar Symphony. More than 100 of the company’s applications to install solar and battery systems at no cost to qualifying customers were approved by Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric. Now, Eriksson said, they don’t know if they’ll be paid for projects they’ve already installed.

“We were very excited by the potential to deliver truly no-cost, home-sited solar and batteries to California ratepayers,” Eriksson wrote in a statement to the public utilities commission. “The regulators effectively induced us to commit under one set of rules; we accepted and delivered — and now the terms are changing.”

Eriksson told LAist he could be out of business by June if the state doesn’t release the payments.

Other companies have indefinitely paused installing systems approved by program administrators.

“We've signed contracts with hundreds of low-income families. We've purchased the equipment,” said Vinnie Campo, co-founder of Haven Energy, one of the state’s largest SGIP installers, at a Public Utilities Commission meeting in late April. “Our crews are ready to install, but systems sold in good faith to customers … are sitting in warehouses instead of on homes.”

Seven representatives of solar companies, including a lawyer representing multiple companies in Southern California, expressed their concerns at that meeting.

Lionel Rodriguez of Glendale-based Solar Optimum was one.

“Many people are hurting,” Rodriguez said, “and it's destroying the integrity of our company and also the customer's trust.”

In early May, in response to such concerns, the Public Utilities Commission released another ruling saying administrators can start paying developers when certain documentation has been submitted but that they still could audit any company that receives funds. Meanwhile, utilities have until the end of June 2028 to spend the funds, or else they’ll be returned to the state’s general fund.

On Sept. 17, 2017, California Highway Patrol officer Nathaniel Partridge checked in his patrol car almost four hours before his shift ended and drove 35 miles home. That day, and on at least two other occasions, he was paid overtime for the hours he didn’t work.

Partridge wasn’t alone. Dozens of CHP officers at an East Los Angeles patrol division routinely did the same while working traffic enforcement details on highway construction sites. On paper, the practice had been forbidden for five years, but no one objected until a 2019 audit.

“I took the chance to go home and would fall on the consequence if I was called back,” Partridge told CHP investigators, according to court documents.

The result was the smallest patrol division in Southern California running up an overtime tab that was three times that of the region’s largest division, according to the internal audit. That finding led CHP to drop the hammer on the East LA station 2020, when it moved to dismiss dozens of officers, including Partridge.

This week, after Partridge’s case lingered for six years through state personnel hearings, a Justice Department investigation and trial court, a California appeals court found that a one-year suspension without pay was appropriate discipline, over the objections of the California Highway Patrol, which wanted him fired.

David Mastagni, Partridge’s lawyer, said the ruling “reflects fundamental fairness.”

“Accountability and second chances are not in conflict,” Mastagni said.

No one — not CHP administration, the personnel board, nor the officer himself — dispute what happened: Partridge was paid $288.98 for three hours and 45 minutes of overtime he didn’t work, which investigators alleged was part of a long-running grift at the East LA station to fabricate overtime hours.

Partridge and dozens of other officers were fired in 2020, according to the appeals court decision.

In February 2022, Attorney General Rob Bonta filed a total of 302 criminal counts against 54 officers, alleging they had collectively defrauded the public of more than $200,000.

Those charges didn’t last long. In December 2022, a Los Angeles Superior Court judge offered the officers a deal: Their charges would be reduced from felonies to misdemeanors and then dismissed if they repaid the money.

Fifty-two officers took that deal, The Sacramento Bee reported at the time.

The Highway Patrol called Partridge's actions “inexcusable neglect of duty, dishonesty (and) misuse of state property” when the organization fired him. When Partridge appealed, the State Personnel Board said it was “self-enrichment at the expense of the public’s trust,” but handed down a one-year suspension instead.

Partridge’s bosses found that discipline insufficient, and the CHP asked a California district court judge to override the suspension and reinstate the firing, saying the personnel board abused its discretion in reducing the penalty. The judge denied that petition, siding with the personnel board.

According to his superiors quoted in court documents, Partridge was a good cop. His evaluations recommended him for promotion and his disciplinary record was clean. But the administration at the California Highway Patrol argued at the State Personnel Board and in court that his conduct compromised his integrity.

This week, California’s 2nd District Court of Appeals agreed with the district court judge: The State Personnel Board didn’t overstep its bounds in handing down a one-year suspension.

“A reasonable decisionmaker could have dismissed Partridge, and a reasonable decisionmaker could have—and did—impose a one-year suspension without pay,” the court found.

This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.

For years, roughly 700 beds at Cal State Los Angeles that could be occupied by students have sat empty, even in what officials call a “highly housing challenged area.” The reason? Officials say lack of funding and deferred maintenance.

The out-of-commission resource has languished despite the California State University 2025 Systemwide Housing plan stating there’s a need for about 500 beds at the campus.

“The deferred maintenance happened over a period of several years, under previous leadership for the university and housing,” Erik Hollins, a spokesperson for the university, told LAist in a statement. “The pandemic certainly appears to have been a factor. Addressing accumulated maintenance and then getting those units back in circulation has been a focus of new leadership.”

Housing and Residence Life (HRL), which is responsible for maintenance, runs independent of university operations but reports to the Division of Student Affairs and Enrollment Management. The department has its own budget with funding coming from the rent and meal plans students pay for.

In the most recent housing budget posted online, from the fiscal year 2024-25, no funds were allocated to maintenance. LAist has requested housing budgets for 2025-26 and 2026-27.

It’s not just the beds out of circulation that need maintenance. Cal State L.A.’s student-run news organization reported earlier this year that “work orders for maintenance by those residents have gone unanswered for months, or even in some cases for several consecutive semesters.”

Hollins told LAist there’s demand for housing on campus in addition to modernizing older facilities. Some of the housing that isn’t being used was built in 1984 to house athletes during the Los Angeles Olympics.

“Under new housing leadership, we are reengaging with our Cal State L.A. students on the benefits of living on campus, resolving perception issues around deferred maintenance, and seeking new partnerships with local colleges, universities, and community organizations,” Hollins wrote.

Hollins added that the university is located in a “highly housing challenged area, while also serving a majority of students who live with their families in the immediate surrounding area.”

Cal State LA’s housing troubles

In 2025, auditors reported years of operating losses at Cal State L.A.’s housing program, leading to reserves being depleted.

Auditors noted that occupancy has dropped to as low as 60% in recent years, and student housing required “unanticipated emergency repairs.” Responding to the audit, Cal State L.A.’s director of housing wrote that the university had taken “sweeping corrective measures.”

“Because its apartment complexes are aging, HRL has also been forced to pay for unanticipated emergency repairs and planned maintenance projects that have challenged its budget,” auditors wrote. “These repairs were partially due to HRL not prioritizing deferred maintenance projects during the COVID-19 recovery. There are also ongoing issues with the water system and fan coil breaks at the newer South Village residence hall.”

At the time, Cal State L.A. said it would address the issues by “implementing short-term strategies to boost occupancy rates, student engagement, and facility upgrades, along with long-term strategies to renovate its older facilities and improve affordability.”

The university also said it would partner with community colleges, expand summer conference programs and require first year students to live on campus. In response to the audit, Cal State L.A. also promised facility renovations.

Westminster City Councilmember Amy Phan West caught a break after she was accused of attempting to bribe parking officers who were about to tow her husband's car: A judge ordered her to take an ethics training course and do 20 hours of community service. In exchange, the charge would be dropped.

One year later, Phan West is poised to run for reelection. But the Orange County District Attorney's Office says she has learned nothing from her brush with the law and is asking the judge to revoke the deal and send the case to trial.

In a recent court filing, Deputy District Attorney Matthew Bradbury gave examples of what he called Phan West’s “repeated and ongoing misuse of her official position” to argue that the councilmember hadn’t accepted responsibility for the alleged crime or taken the mandatory ethics training to heart.

“The Defendant’s actions only serve to undermine the public’s faith in the justice system,” Bradbury wrote, adding that they “warrant no leniency.” In the past, Phan West has denied wrongdoing and said she is being unfairly targeted for for being outspoken.

LAist called and left a text message on Phan West’s phone requesting comment on the DA’s recent filing. LAist also sent an email to Phan West’s defense attorney, Randy Collins. We will update this story if and when we get a response.

What the court records say

In the filing, Bradbury, the deputy district attorney, said that in the year since Phan West was charged with attempted bribery, she appears to have repeatedly violated rules intended to bar local officials from using public resources for campaign activities. She also mocked the case against her, Bradbury said, showing no sense of accountability.

The DA’s examples of Phan West’s alleged continued ethics violations include:

• At Westminster’s annual Tet parade in February, Phan West handed out flyers for her Congressional race — a potential violation of rules against local officials using public resources for campaign activities. (Phan West lost in the June primary.)  
  
• In May, Phan West gave a media interview about her Congressional run from her Westminster City Council office, a potentially similar violation. 
  
• Phan West has repeatedly downplayed the criminal charge against her and disparaged the legal process in public comments and social media posts. In response to a question at a candidate forum, she called it a “jungle-like court” and compared her legal problems to the President’s. “Like how they’re doing it to Donald J. Trump — it’s the same thing they’re doing to take me out,” Phan West said, according to the court filing. 

What happened at city hall?

Phan West has repeatedly clashed with the majority of her council colleagues in recent years. In 2024, the council officially censured Phan West for behavior that allegedly included improperly disclosing confidential information and lying. The city later sued Phan West and allied councilmember NamQuan Nguyen for repeatedly disrupting meetings and creating a “dysfunctional and raucous” atmosphere.

Phan West has accused her opponents on the City Council of violating her right to free speech and waging a personal vendetta against her.

What's next?

Phan West officially filed papers earlier this week to run for re-election to Westminster City Council in November.

A hearing to determine whether Phan West has complied with previous court orders in the case so far is scheduled for Aug. 11 in O.C. Superior Court in Westminster.