https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/148259/experimentin...
Edit: The gp does mention street lights in the second sentence but that doesn't imply that's all that's done. And hey, no, that's not all the Tucson does.
My experience. Was waking in what I thought was a decent area. As soon as sun dropped sketchy looking character were everywhere. Just standing around doing nothing. I assume selling drugs. When I got back to an area with better lighting they were all gone.
* You don't want your house to be the juiciest target. Having lights prevent it from standing out as a place where someone could just hide in the shadows.
* Lights make your cameras more effective.
I'm not really living in a bad area (town homes go for around $1 million here), but we are close enough to a large unhoused and/or drug-seeking population that we still get a lot of property crime (mainly smash and grab on street-parked cars, but you see people going around looking into houses as well). So while everyone on my street is fairly wealthy (and can be relied on to let you know if something is wrong), we still have to do our due diligence (lights, motion lighting, cameras).
It doesn't ever require passing any legislation for heaven's sake, it's just a Thursday afternoon municipal planning decision with roll-out spread over a four year period or something to keep costs trivially manageable.
They're just saying it might not be significant enough to drastically affect the type of lights used, as GP comment implied.