Sponsored message
Audience-funded nonprofit news
radio tower icon laist logo
Next Up:
0:00
0:00
Subscribe
  • Listen Now Playing Listen
  • Listen Now Playing Listen

The Brief

The most important stories for you to know today
  • CDC advisers likely to make changes

    Topline:

    Powerful federal advisers this week are expected to make a controversial change to how babies are immunized against hepatitis B, and to question how pediatricians inoculate children against more than a dozen other infectious diseases, including measles, mumps, whooping cough and polio.

    Why now: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) is convening Thursday and Friday for a closely watched meeting to rethink fundamental elements of the childhood vaccination schedule, which has protected children from dangerous diseases for decades.

    Why it matters: The meeting underscores grave concerns among many public health experts, who fear it will further erode childhood vaccinations, leading to a resurgence of preventable infectious diseases.

    Read on... for more about the childhood vaccine schedule and what's expected for changes in the hepatitis B vaccine.

    Powerful federal advisers this week are expected to make a controversial change to how babies are immunized against hepatitis B, and to question how pediatricians inoculate children against more than a dozen other infectious diseases, including measles, mumps, whooping cough and polio.

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) is convening Thursday and Friday for a closely watched meeting to rethink fundamental elements of the childhood vaccination schedule, which has protected children from dangerous diseases for decades.

    The potential changes are welcomed by allies of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who has long questioned the safety and effectiveness of vaccines.

    "We're now starting to see truth telling about vaccines, and needless to say, pharma, medicine, academia, mainstream media are not happy," Mary Holland of Children's Health Defense said in a video posted to the group's social media page. The nonprofit advocates against vaccines and was co-founded by Kennedy.

    The meeting underscores grave concerns among many public health experts, who fear it will further erode childhood vaccinations, leading to a resurgence of preventable infectious diseases.


    "We now seem to have entered a dangerous new phase in Secretary Kennedy's campaign to shut down scientific expertise, silence the best available evidence, and replace it with his own personal agenda," said Dr. Sean O'Leary, a professor of pediatric infectious diseases at the University of Colorado Anschutz who chairs the American Academy of Pediatrics's committee on infectious diseases.

    The CDC's advisory committee, established in 1964, had long been considered a definitive source of information about childhood vaccines. It wields enormous power because its recommendations influence how doctors vaccinate patients and dictate whether insurance companies pay for shots.

    But the committee has lost the trust of most mainstream medical groups since Kennedy replaced its members in June with his own slate. The committee has also abandoned longstanding collaborations with medical groups like the pediatrics academy and draws less on the experience of CDC experts.

    The committee's September meeting devolved into chaos. A scheduled vote on the hepatitis B vaccine was tabled amid confusion. The chairman was replaced this week. The new chair, Dr. Kirk Milhoan, is a pediatric cardiologist and fellow with the Independent Medical Alliance – a group which continues to recommend treating COVID with drugs like ivermectin, even though studies have shown it does not work.

    Confidence in the CDC was further eroded last month when the agency changed its stance on whether vaccines may cause autism, a theory championed by Kennedy and other anti-vaccine activists but long debunked by a large body of high-quality research.

    In response, many independent medical groups, such as the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Academy of Family Physicians and a newly formed effort at the University of Minnesota called the Vaccine Integrity Project, have begun issuing independent recommendations, which some states have begun following instead.

    Vaccine schedule under the microscope

    The vaccine committee is expected to hear the first report by a new working group tasked with scrutinizing the childhood vaccine schedule. The schedule is the finely calibrated timetable pediatricians use to administer the sequence of more than 30 doses to protect against more than a dozen diseases.

    The scrutiny is especially troubling to many public health authorities, coming amid new outbreaks of vaccine preventable diseases, which are on the rise because of falling immunization rates.

    "We have seen more measles cases in our country this year than we have in recent history. In my own community, we're seeing quite significant upticks in pertussis," said Dr. Raynard Washington, director of the Mecklenburg County Public Health Department, based in Charlotte, N.C., "Any barriers [to vaccination] that might be created by bureaucracy or process pose a threat to the public's health."

    Vaccine proponents say every vaccine is carefully evaluated for safety and effectiveness before being added to the schedule. And researchers and regulators monitor all vaccines for safety issues after doctors start using them.

    Children receive the roster of shots at a young age to make sure they don't catch dangerous diseases when they're most vulnerable, experts say.

    "Every vaccine on that schedule and the recommended timing of it exists for a reason," says pediatrician O'Leary. "It's based on the age at which a child's immune system can provide optimal protection after vaccination, balanced with the age when the child is at highest risk for a disease. There's no reason to delay or space out vaccines – doing so just puts children at risk."

    Some who are worried about vaccines argue the number of different antigens and other ingredients could overwhelm a child's immune system. But supporters say children are exposed to far more immune stimulation from naturally occurring microbes than from vaccines. And vaccines have been refined over the decades to minimize the number of ingredients they contain.

    "Imagine saying we can only use medicines now that were developed before 1990," O'Leary says. "Imagine where we would be in medicine today. These newer vaccines are a good thing. They save lives. That's why we give them."

    A change for the hepatitis B vaccine 

    The first concrete step expected from the committee is a vote to change the current recommendation that all babies get vaccinated against hepatitis B within the first 24 hours of life.

    It's unclear what the committee might recommend, but it could include delaying the shot or requiring a detailed discussion with parents before administering the shot.

    Proponents of the change argue universal vaccination at birth is unnecessary because hepatitis B is often spread through sexual contact and drug use. Babies could be protected by increased screening of pregnant women and only inoculating babies of mothers who test positive, some argue. Supporters of the change also point to other countries that don't give newborns the dose.

    But hepatitis B spreads other ways. The virus is highly infectious, and can be transmitted through contact with an infected person's body fluids, such as their blood. People can also get infected by coming into contact with common household objects, such as toothbrushes, and towels, that have been contaminated by another family member.

    A new analysis by researchers who have presented at past ACIP meetings finds that delaying hepatitis B vaccination by just a few months could lead to more than $222 million in excess healthcare costs and hundreds of preventable deaths each year.

    Most babies infected with the virus end up with chronic infections, which increases their risk for liver disease, failure and cancer.

    "Universal vaccination has been the cornerstone of hepatitis B elimination efforts for decades," says Eric Hall, assistant professor of epidemiology at Oregon Health and Science University, and a co-author on the analysis. "It's very important we continue this work and do not undo the important public health achievements of the past 45 years."

    Inoculating all babies at birth has resulted in a dramatic decrease in hepatitis B infections.

    "The hepatitis B vaccine has one of the most well-established safety records of any vaccine, and it's one of our best," O'Leary says. "We've been using it for a long time. It's one of our best tools to protect babies from chronic illness and liver cancer. This is a situation where one missed case is too many."

    He added that pediatricians partner with parents on children's health. "You probably will also hear a lot from individuals in this meeting who claim parents don't get a say in their children's immunizations," he said. "I want to be very clear when I say that's completely false. … We want to make sure we're protecting children from harmful diseases while also making sure the parents are fully informed and involved in the process."

    In addition, proponents of universal hepatitis B vaccination at birth argue there is no evidence the current approach is unsafe. And delaying the first dose would cause major problems because the subsequent two doses are administered as part of combination vaccines.

    Experts are also alarmed that the CDC is investigating splitting up the MMR vaccine, which protects kids against measles, mumps and rubella in one shot. Giving kids three separate shots would mean more trips to the doctor and more needles, vaccine proponents say. They worry that, inevitably, more kids would end up missing vaccines.

    Aluminum ingredients under fire

    The committee is also studying the safety of an ingredient commonly used in vaccines, an additive that contains aluminum. Coming after other recent changes to vaccine policy, many public health experts worry that the administration may now try to remove the ingredient.

    For almost a century, some important vaccines, including shots that protect against diphtheria, tetanus, hepatitis and the flu, have included aluminum salts, compounds that contain small amounts of aluminum. They are used as adjuvants to give the immune system an extra boost to make the shots protective.

    "What aluminum does is it draws the immune system's attention to that particular little protein so that it makes a much more robust immune response that you then are protected by," O'Leary says.

    One question the working group is considering is "do either of the two different aluminum adjuvants increase the risk of asthma?" according to a document outlining the group's mandate.

    Most public health experts say there's no good evidence that aluminum adjuvants are unsafe and ample evidence that they pose no real concern. In fact, a large Danish study recently debunked any danger. People are exposed to far more aluminum on a daily basis from food, consumer products and their surrounding environment than from vaccines.

    In addition to concerns over asthma, critics claim aluminum can also increase the risk for other health problems, including autism and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.

    "Based on large, long-term studies and immunology research, there is no evidence that vaccines cause either allergies or autoimmune disorders e.g., Type 1 diabetes, rheumatoid arthritis, multiple sclerosis, systemic lupus," Dr. Frank Virant, president of the Board of Directors at the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology, wrote in an email to NPR.

    But removing aluminum from vaccines would render them ineffective, and there are no substitute vaccines ready to go. It could take years to develop reformulated replacements.
    Copyright 2025 NPR

  • Dodgers fans grapple with loyalty ahead of it
    A man with medium skin tone, wearing a blue Dodgers shirt, speaks into a microphone standing behind a podium next to others holding up signs that read "No repeat to White House. Legalization for all" and "Stand with you Dodger community." They all stand in front of a blue sign that reads "Welcome to Dodger Stadium."
    Jorge "Coqui" H. Rodriguez speaks at a press conference outside Dodger Stadium on Wednesady to demand the Dodgers not visit the White House following their 2025 World Series win.

    Topline:

    Less than 24 hours before season opener, longtime Dodgers fans demand the team divest from immigration detention centers and decline the White House visit.

    More details: More than 30 people joined Richard Santillan on Wednesday morning for a press conference held near 1000 Vin Scully Drive to convey a message directly to the team. “We are demanding that the Dodgers stop participating in funding of inhumane treatment of families and do not go to the White House to celebrate with the criminal in chief,” Evelyn Escatiola told the crowd. “Together we have the power to make a change.”

    The backstory: The team’s 2025’s visit to the White House drew ire from the largely Latino fan base, citing the Trump administration’s ongoing attacks on immigrants. In June, the team came under further scrutiny when rumors swirled online that federal immigration agents were using the stadium’s parking, which immigration authorities later denied in statements posted on social media accounts.

    Read on ... for more on how some fans are feeling leading up to Opening Day.

    This story first appeared on The LA Local.

    Since 1977, Richard Santillan has been to every Opening Day game at Dodger Stadium. 

    “The tradition goes from my father, to me, to my children and grandchildren. Some of my best memories are with my father and children here at Dodger Stadium,” Santillan told The LA Local, smiling under the shade of palm trees near the entrance to the ballpark Wednesday morning. He was there to protest the team less than 24 hours before Opening Day.

    Santillan, like countless other loyal Dodgers fans, is grappling with his fan identity over the team’s decision to accept an invitation to the White House and owner Mark Walter’s ties to ICE detention facilities.

    More than 30 people joined Santillan on Wednesday morning for a press conference held near 1000 Vin Scully Drive to convey a message directly to the team. 

    “We are demanding the Dodgers stop participating in funding of inhumane treatment of families and do not go to the White House to celebrate with the criminal in chief,” Evelyn Escatiola told the crowd. “Together, we have the power to make a change.”

    Escatiola, a former dean of East Los Angeles College and longtime community organizer, urged fans to flex their economic power by “letting the Dodgers know that we do not support repression.”

    Jorge “Coqui” Rodriguez, a lifelong Dodgers fan, spoke to the crowd and called on Dodgers ownership to divest from immigration detention centers owned and operated by GEO Group and CoreCivic.

    A man with medium skin tone, wearing a blue Dodgers t-shirt, speaks into a microphone behind a podium.
    Jorge Coqui H Rodriguez speaks at a press conference outside Dodger Stadium on March 25, 2026, to demand the Dodgers not to visit the White House following their 2025 World Series win.
    (
    J.W. Hendricks
    /
    The LA Local
    )

    In a phone interview a day before the protest, Rodriguez told The LA Local he did not want the Dodgers using his “cheve” or beer money to fund detention centers. 

    “They can’t take our parking money, our cacahuate money, our cheve money, our Dodger Dog money and invest those funds into corporations that are imprisoning people. It’s wrong,” Rodriguez said. 

    Rodriguez considers the Dodgers one of the most racially diverse teams and said the players need to support fans at a time when heightened immigration enforcement has become more common across L.A.

    The team’s 2025’s visit to the White House drew ire from the largely Latino fan base, citing the Trump administration’s ongoing attacks on immigrants. 

    In June, the team came under further scrutiny when rumors swirled online that federal immigration agents were using the stadium’s parking, which immigration authorities later denied in statements posted on social media accounts.

    The team again came under fire after not releasing a statement on the impacts of ICE raids on its mostly Latino fan base at the height of immigration enforcement last summer. The team later agreed to invest $1 million to support families affected by immigration enforcement.

    When he learned the Dodgers were pledging only $1 million to families in need, Rodriguez called the amount a  “slap in the face.” 

    “These guys just bought the Lakers for billions of dollars and they give a million dollars to fight for legal services? That’s a joke,” Rodriguez said. “They need to have a moral backbone and not be investing in those companies.”

    According to reporting from the Los Angeles Times, former Dodgers pitcher Clayton Kershawsaid last week that he is looking forward to the trip.

    “I went when President [Joe] Biden was in office. I’m going to go when President [Donald] Trump is in office,” Kershaw said. “To me, it’s just about getting to go to the White House. You don’t get that opportunity every day, so I’m excited to go.”

    The Dodgers have yet to announce when their planned visit will take place. 

    Santillan sometimes laments his decision to give up his season tickets in protest of the team. His connection to the stadium and the memories he has made there with family and friends will last a lifetime, he said. On Thursday, he will uphold his tradition and be there for the first pitch of the season, but with a heavy heart.

    “It’s a family tradition, but the Dodgers have a lot of work to do,” he said.

  • Sponsored message
  • Warmer weather has caused more biting flies
    A zoomed in shot of a fuzzy black fly with some white spots.
    The warmer weather and high water flow are causing an early outbreak of black flies in the San Gabriel Valley.

    Topline:

    The warmer weather and high water flow are causing an early outbreak of black flies in the San Gabriel Valley, according to officials.

    What are black flies? Black flies are tiny, pesky insects that often get mistaken for mosquitoes. The biting flies breed near foothill communities like Altadena, Azusa, San Dimas and Glendora. They also thrive near flowing water.

    What you need to know: Black flies fly in large numbers and long distances. When they bite both humans and pets, they aim around the eyes and the neck. While the bites can be painful, they don’t transmit diseases in L.A. County.

    A population spike: Anais Medina Diaz, director of communications at the SGV Mosquito and Vector Control District, told LAist that at this time last year, surveillance traps had single-digit counts of adult black flies, but this year those traps are collecting counts above 500.

    So, why is the population growing? Diaz said the surge is unusual for this time of year.

    “We are experiencing them now because of the warmer temperatures we've been having,” Diaz said. “And of course, all the water that's going down through the river, we have a high flow of water that is not typical for this time of year.”

    What officials are doing: Officials say teams are identifying and treating public sources where black flies can thrive, but that many of these sites are influenced by natural or infrastructure conditions outside their control.

    How to protect yourself: Black flies can be hard to avoid outside in dense vegetation, but you can reduce the chance of a bite by:

    • Wearing loose-fitted clothing that covers the entire body. 
    • Wearing a hat with netting on top. 
    • Spraying on repellent, but check the label. For a repellent to be effective, it needs to have at least 15% DEET, the only active ingredient that works against black flies.
    • Turning off any water features like fountains for at least 24 hours, especially in foothill communities.

    See an uptick in black flies in your area? Here's how to report it

    SGV Mosquito and Vector Control District
    Submit a tip here
    You can also send a tip to district@sgvmosquito.org
    (626) 814-9466

    Greater Los Angeles Vector Control District
    Submit a service request here
    You can also send a service request to info@GLAmosquito.org
    (562) 944-9656

    Orange County Mosquito and Vector Control
    Submit a report here
    You can also send a report to ocvcd@ocvector.org
    (714) 971-2421 or (949) 654-2421

  • Rent hike to blame
    A black and brown dog lays down on a brown sofa on the foreground. In the background, a man wearing a plaid shirt sits.
    Jeremy Kaplan and Florence at READ Books in Eagle Rock.
    Topline:
    Local favorite mom and pop shop READ Books in Eagle Rock is facing displacement due to a steep rent hike. The owners say they’re just one of several small businesses along Eagle Rock Boulevard struggling to keep up with lease increases.

    The backstory: Over the past 19 years, many in the neighborhood have come to love READ Books for its eclectic collection of used titles and their shop dog Florence.

    What happened? The building where Kaplan and his wife Debbie rent was recently sold and the rent increased by more than 130% to $2,805 a month, Kaplan said. He told LAist it was an increase his small business simply could not absorb.

    What's next? While he looks for a new spot, Kaplan says he’s forming a coalition of local businesses and activist groups to see what can be done to help other small businesses facing similar displacement. He wants to address the displacement issue for businesses like his, which have made Eagle Rock the distinctive neighborhood that it is today.

    Read on... for what small businesses can do.

    A local favorite mom-and-pop bookshop in Eagle Rock is facing displacement due to a steep rent hike. The owners say theirs is just one of several small businesses along Eagle Rock Boulevard struggling to keep up with lease increases.

    Over the past 19 years, many in the neighborhood have come to love READ Books for its eclectic collection of used titles and shop dog Florence.

    Co-owner Jeremy Kaplan said it’s been a delight to grow with the community over the years.

    “Like seeing kids come back in, who were in grade school and now they’re in college,” Kaplan said.

    But the building where Kaplan and wife Debbie rent was recently sold, and the rent increased by more than 130% to $2,805 a month, Kaplan said. He told LAist it was an increase his small business simply could not absorb.

    Kaplan said he originally was given 30 days notice of the rent increase. After some research, assistance from Councilmember Ysabel Jurado’s office and some pro-bono legal help, Kaplan said he pushed back and got the 90-day notice he’s afforded by state law.

    California Senate Bill 1103 requires landlords to give businesses with five or less employees 90 days’ notice for rent increases exceeding 10%, among other protections.

    Systems Real Estate, the property management company, did not immediately respond to LAist’s request for comment.

    What can small businesses do? 

    Nadia Segura, directing attorney of the Small Business Program at pro bono legal aid non-profit Bet Tzedek said California law does not currently allow for rent control for commercial tenancies.

    Outside of the protections under SB 1103, Segura said small businesses like READ Books don’t have much other recourse. And even then, commercial landlords are not required to inform their tenants of their protections under the law.

    “There’s still a lot of people that don’t know about SB 1103. And then it’s very sad that they tell them they have these rent increases and within a month they have to leave,” Segura said.

    She said her group is seeing steep rent hikes like this for commercial tenants across the city.

    “We are seeing this even more with the World Cup coming up, the Olympics coming up. And I will say it was very sad to see that also after the wildfires,” Segura said.

    Part of Bet Tzedek’s ongoing work is to advocate for small businesses, working with landlords who are increasing rents to see if they are willing to give business owners longer leases that lock in rents.

    What’s next 

    After READ Books posted about their situation on social media, commenters chimed in to express their outrage and love for the little shop.

    While he looks for a new spot, Kaplan says he’s forming a coalition of local businesses and activist groups to see what can be done to help other small businesses facing similar displacement. He wants to address the displacement issue for businesses like his, which have made Eagle Rock the distinctive neighborhood that it is today.

    Owl Talk, a longtime Eagle Rock staple selling clothing and accessories in a unit in the same building as READ Books, is facing a “more than double” rent increase, according to a post on their Instagram account.

    Kaplan said he’s been in touch with the office of state Assemblywoman Jessica Caloza and wants to explore the possibility of introducing legislation to set up protections for small businesses like his, including rent-control measures or a vacancy tax for landlords. Kaplan said he also reached out to the office of state Sen. Maria Durazo.

    By his count, Kaplan said there are about a dozen businesses within surrounding blocks that are at risk of closing their doors or have shuttered due to rent increases or other struggles.

    When READ Books was founded during the Great Recession, Kaplan said he knew it was a longshot to open a bookstore at the same time so many were struggling to stay in business.

    “It was kind of interesting to be doing something that neighborhoods needed. That was important to me growing up, that was important to my children, that was important to my wife growing up,” Kaplan said.

    “And then somebody comes in and says, ‘We’re gonna over double your rent.”

  • Ballots to be sent out
    A person sits in the carriage of a crane and places solar panels atop a post. The crane is white, and the number 400 is printed on the carriage in red.
    A field team member of the Bureau of Street Lighting installs a solar-powered light in Filipinotown.

    Topline:

    The Los Angeles City Council approved a plan in a 13-1 vote on Tuesday to send ballots to more than half a million property owners asking if they are willing to pay more per year to fortify the city’s streetlight repair budget, most of which has essentially been frozen since the 1990s. The item still requires L.A. Mayor Karen Bass’ signature, but her office confirmed to LAist on Wednesday that she’ll approve it.

    Frozen budget: Most of the city’s Bureau of Street Lighting budget comes from an assessment that people who own property illuminated by lights pay on their county property tax bill. The amount people pay depends on the kind of property they own and how much they benefit from lighting. A typical single-family home currently pays $53 annually, and in total, the assessments bring in about $45 million annually for the city to repair and maintain streetlights. Changing the amount the Bureau of Street Lighting gets from the assessment requires a vote among property owners who benefit from the lights.

    Ballots: L.A. City Council’s vote gives city staff the green light to prepare and send out those ballots. Miguel Sangalang, who oversees the bureau, said at a committee meeting earlier this month that he expects to send out ballots by April 17. Notices about the ballots will be sent out prior to the ballots themselves.

    Near unanimous vote: L.A. City Councilmember Monica Rodriguez was the only “No” vote on Tuesday, saying she wanted to see a more current strategic plan for the bureau. Sangalang said the bureau developed a plan in 2022 that lays out how money will be spent. Councilmember Imelda Padilla was absent for the vote.

    Vote count: Votes will be weighted according to the assessment amount. Basically, the more you’re asked to pay yearly to maintain streetlights, the more your vote will count. Ballots received before June 2 will be tabulated by the L.A. City Clerk.

    How much more money: According to a report, the amount needed in assessments from property owners to meet the repair and maintenance needs of the city’s streetlighting in the next fiscal year is nearly $112 million.

    Use of the money: Sangalang said at a March 11 committee meeting that the extra funds would be used to double the number of staff to handle repairs and procure solar streetlights, which don’t face the threat of copper wire theft. That would all potentially reduce the time it takes to repair simple fixes down to a week. Currently, city residents wait for months to see broken streetlights repaired.The assessment would come with a three-year auditing mechanism.

    Topline:

    The Los Angeles City Council approved a plan in a 13-1 vote Tuesday to send ballots to more than a half-million property owners asking if they are willing to pay more per year to fortify the city’s streetlight repair budget, most of which essentially has been frozen since the 1990s. The item still requires L.A. Mayor Karen Bass’ signature, but her office confirmed to LAist on Wednesday that she’ll approve it.

    Frozen budget: Most of the city’s Bureau of Street Lighting budget comes from an assessment that people who own property illuminated by lights pay on their county property tax bill. The amount people pay depends on the kind of property they own and how much they benefit from lighting. A typical single-family home currently pays $53 annually, and in total, the assessments bring in about $45 million annually for the city to repair and maintain streetlights. Changing the amount the Bureau of Street Lighting gets from the assessment requires a vote among property owners who benefit from the lights.

    Ballots: L.A. City Council’s vote gives city staff the green light to prepare and send out those ballots. Miguel Sangalang, who oversees the bureau, said at a committee meeting earlier this month that he expects to send out ballots by April 17. Notices about the ballots will be sent out prior to the ballots themselves.

    Near unanimous vote: L.A. City Councilmember Monica Rodriguez was the only “No” vote Tuesday, saying she wanted to see a more current strategic plan for the bureau. Sangalang said the bureau developed a plan in 2022 that lays out how money will be spent. Councilmember Imelda Padilla was absent for the vote.

    Vote count: Votes will be weighted according to the assessment amount. Basically, the more you’re asked to pay yearly to maintain streetlights, the more your vote will count. Ballots received before June 2 will be tabulated by the L.A. City Clerk.

    How much more money: According to a report, the amount needed in assessments from property owners to meet the repair and maintenance needs of the city’s streetlighting in the next fiscal year is nearly $112 million.

    Use of the money: Sangalang said at a March 11 committee meeting that the extra funds would be used to double the number of staff to handle repairs and procure solar streetlights, which don’t face the threat of copper wire theft. That would all potentially reduce the time it takes to repair simple fixes down to a week. Currently, city residents wait for months to see broken streetlights repaired. The assessment would come with a three-year auditing mechanism.