Californians Pay Too Much for Electricity. Here are Three Bold Solutions.
Source: Los Angeles Times | By Sammy Roth
AB 1167 from Assemblymember Marc Berman (D-Menlo Park) offers a good starting point for lawmakers looking to address utility profits. The bill would make it harder for utilities to charge customers for advertising campaigns and other political activities that should be funded by shareholders — an area where PG&E has faced criticism. A similar bill failed to pass last year amid opposition from the utilities. Utility executives, to their credit, sound open to the concept. But other proposals to limit electric rates — such as requiring utilities to pay for certain grid investments through securitization, which Newsom had hoped to achieve last summer — have faced stiff opposition from utilities, because they would cut into shareholder profits.
“The people of California deserve better than to have their money used against them, to pay for utility lobbying,” said Mark Toney, executive director of the Utility Reform Network, in a news release supporting the bill. The Utility Reform Network, an Oakland-based consumer watchdog group, also supports SB 330 from Sen. Steve Padilla (D-Chula Vista). The bill aims to lower the cost of expanding the power grid by testing out public financing for new electric lines — instead of utility shareholder financing, with its guaranteed profit margins.
