Source: KSEE/KGPE| By Rhett Rodriguez

“We have to fix a broken system. There are no limits on how much PG&E can ask for increases and how many times a year they can ask,” said Mark Toney with TURN, the utility reform network. He says he is hopeful that the power dynamic between customers and energy companies is shifting, with the introduction of Senate Bill 332.

There’s a new push to limit just how much and how often utility companies can raise rates in California. This comes after PG&E recorded a record profit in 2024 of $2.47 billion while increasing rates six times in that same amount of time.

Source: Sierra Daily News| By Sierra Daily News

However, critics like Mark Toney from The Utility Reform Network argue that mismanagement has led to these financial burdens, citing overspending in past budgets.

PG&E shattered profit records for the second year in a row. The utility announced Thursday it made $2.47 billion in profits in 2024. Over the same time, California state regulators agreed to six separate rate increases. The recent approval of two additional rate hikes for Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) by the California Public Utilities Commission has sparked significant concern among customers. These increases, which mark the fifth and sixth hikes for the utility in 2024, are intended to support vegetation management and extend the operation of the Diablo Canyon Power Plant. The increases will be gradually implemented on customer bills starting in 2026.

Source: KPFA Radio| By Sabrina Jacobs

“While utility executives and shareholders reap billions from rate hikes, customers are forced to choose between basic necessities and utility bills” said Lee Trotman, TURN’s Communications Director. “Six rate hikes in a year and then PG&E reports record profits?  That is astounding.  Customers need to call their senators and assembly members every time they receive their bill” continued Trotman.

PG&E price hikes in spite of profit increase, their continued grifting and what can be done about it. PG&E reported a record 10% increase in profit over 2023’s earnings while raising rates six times in 2024, and also spent millions lobbying the CPUC.

Source: Bay City News| By Ruth Desseault

“You have to remember that only 50% of the bills are decided in a general rate case,” said Mark Toney, executive director of The Utility Reform Network, a nonprofit consumer advocacy group. Toney said the original purpose of having the general rate case was to have all the revenue requirements, all of the money that the company would collect, decided in one big case. “But now there are so many other rate cases. Energy efficiency is separate. Wildfire spending is separate. Diablo Canyon is separate. And there’s a big, long list of things that are completely separate from the general rate case,” he said. “Electric vehicle charging stations. I mean, I can go on and on. This is what they’ve been approved. There were five other non-general rate case increases approved in 2024.” Toney said that part of the reason the rates are so high is because there are no limits to how much they can request; no limit to how many times a year they can ask for an increase; and there are no limits to how much of a rate increase the CPUC can grant. Whether the rates will decrease in 2026, he said, is a question of what the rate is compared to. “That’s part of what we’re fighting for over with the Legislature. It may be a decrease from 2025, but it’s certainly an increase from where it started before the 12% increase in 2024,” he said.

In 2023, PG&E announced a 2023-2026 General Rate Case, which explained their planned rates for the near future. The California Public Utilities Commission approved the rates that same year. It specified a 12.8% increase in 2024, a 1.6% increase in 2025 and a decrease by 2.8% in 2026.  Have they stuck to the rate hike schedule?

Source: Mercury News/Bay Area News Group | By George Avalos

“This is the second year in a row of record-breaking profits for PG&E,” said Mark Toney, executive director of consumer group The Utility Reform Network. “The shareholders are getting a lot of love. But while PG&E investors are feeling the love, the customers are only feeling the pain.” “When you keep adding to the rate base with higher bills, you keep adding to earnings,” Toney said. “The record-setting profits will give the legislature the incentive to pass bills to control shareholder profits and protect customers.”

PG&E noted multiple benchmarks in its earnings report and in additional information sent to this news organization.

— The utility completed 366 miles of system hardening, consisting of 258 miles of underground power lines and 108 miles of stronger poles and overhead components.

— PG&E connected nearly 14,000 new customers to the electric system, approximately 30% more than the company had expected.

Source: KQED | By Laura Klivans

But the turn came as a “complete surprise,” said Hayley Goodson, a managing attorney at The Utility Reform Network, one of the project stakeholders. “PG&E has been saying for years that it costs less for gas ratepayers to do the electrification project.” Goodson said the reasons PG&E cited for dropping the project have all been known for months and argued it came down to financials. “It’s hard not to think that PG&E just doesn’t want to do the right thing for its ratepayers if they can’t earn a profit from it,” Goodson said.

The lines sprawl below ground unnoticed, starting out large, then branching like limbs of a tree, reaching nearly every home. We pay for them, and we probably never think about them. For most Californians, the maze of gas pipelines beneath our feet allows us to heat our homes and water, dry our clothes and cook our food. But all these functions can be done another way, too: with electricity. And maintaining two systems — gas and electric — is costly and incompatible with California’s climate goals.

Source: San Jose Mercury/ Bay Area News Group | By George Avalos

Mark Toney, executive director of consumer group The Utility Reform Network, or TURN, said “there is a lot to like in this report” for consumers, “particularly in terms of identifying wildfire mitigation as being a major expense.” “The report also talks about the profit motives that the corporate-owned utilities such as PG&E vs. the motives of publicly owned utilities” such as the Sacramento Municipal Utilities District, Toney said. “The publicly owned utilities have an incentive to save money. The corporate utilities have an incentive to maximize profits,” he said. “The state legislature is going to have to develop a spine to say no to Wall Street and big investors and to say yes to safety and defending the ratepayers.”

Soaring monthly electricity bills from the likes of PG&E and its utility siblings could hobble California’s quest for an aspiring green energy future, a disquieting new state report shows.

Source: SF Chronicle | By Kathleen Pender

“The basic idea is, they don’t have control over how much electricity they need, especially in the summertime. When it’s 110 degrees, you have to have some air conditioning,” said Mark Toney, executive director of The Utility Reform Network, which supported the PUC’s decision. “Right now (consumers with solar) are not paying their share of the grid cost. They use it on a daily basis. At night, they need the grid. This makes it a little more fair,” Toney said.

The PUC says the plan “lowers overall electricity bills on average for lower-income households and those living in regions most impacted by extreme weather events.” It predicts that an average customer in Fresno would save $33 a month in the summer. Non-discount customers who are low-usage are the most likely to see bill increases, but they will be small, averaging $1.50 to $3 per month across all utilities, Toney said.

Source: Lake County News | By Lake County News Reports

“With temperatures soaring into the 80s and 90s this week, we are reminded of the importance of affordable electricity for Californians. Households shouldn't face financial strain just to stay cool during hotter days, especially those residing in Inland regions. By lowering the price of electricity for all and incorporating an income-graduated component, the CPUC is modernizing its approach and taking an important step to ensure electricity is affordable for all,” said Sylvie Ashford, energy and climate policy analyst, for The Utility Reform Network, or TURN.

The California Public Utilities Commission on Thursday approved a restructuring of electricity rates aimed at cutting bills for lower-income households and incentivizing the adoption of climate-friendly electric vehicles and heating systems.

Source: Silicon Valley Sun | By Reid Stone

Sylvie Ashford, an Energy and Climate Policy Analyst with The Utility Reform Network, applauded the move. “With temperatures soaring into the 80s and 90s this week, we are reminded of the importance of affordable electricity for Californians,” Ashford said. “Households shouldn’t face financial strain just to stay cool during hotter days, especially those residing in Inland regions. By lowering the price of electricity for all and incorporating an income-graduated component, the CPUC is modernizing its approach and taking an important step to ensure electricity is affordable for all.”

Changes are coming to how some California power companies calculate bills. The decision by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) on Thursday will make it cheaper for people in the summer but increase prices for people who use less energy.

Source: KQED | By Alix Soliman, Guy Marzorati, and Kevin Stark

Right now, in California, if you use a lot of electricity, you pay more. If you live an energy-efficient lifestyle, you pay less. Sylvie Ashford, an energy analyst for The Utility Reform Network, or TURN, said that won’t change. The group supports the new fixed rate, which Ashford said will incentivize people to convert to clean energy. “Consumers report one of the biggest barriers to buying electric vehicles and electric heat pumps to be the high and rising cost of electricity,” Ashford said. “When it becomes 8% to 10% cheaper on each kilowatt hour, your operating costs on your electric vehicle or your electric heat pump become that much more competitive with polluting gas alternatives.” Ashford said that while fixed rates are a good first step, the state must do more to address California’s skyrocketing electricity fees, like keeping utility revenue requirements and shareholder profits in check.

Starting late next year, most California residents will see a new fixed charge of up to $24.15 on their monthly electric bill. In exchange for the new charge, the price of electricity will drop by between 5 cents and 7 cents per kilowatt hour.

Source: NBC Bay Area | By Terry McSweeney

The switch from PG&E could cost lots of time and money, according to Mark Toney, the executive director of the Utility Reform Network or TURN. He thinks it’s unlikely the Richmond City Council’s resolution will snowball statewide. “You have to buy out the investors. You have to pay for the wires, for the poles, for the whole infrastructure. It that's a years-long process,” Toney said. Toney added when the Sacramento Municipal Utility District took over from PG&E, it took decades and cost billions of dollars. He thinks a faster and cheaper fix is right now in the hands of state lawmakers. “We need to hold shareholders responsible for paying 50% of all cost overruns instead of rate payers paying 100%,” he said. Toney told NBC Bay Area that he is calling for a law capping rate hikes and for PG&E to choose the least expensive solution to wildfires, for example, insulating wires instead of burying them. “To put limits on PG&E’s spending ratepayer money for television commercials, for self-promotion,” he said.

The Richmond City Council voted unanimously on Tuesday night to ask California to replace PG&E, which has doubled its rates since 2019, with Golden State Energy, a nonprofit public benefit utility. “We want the needs of the people put first: safety, reliability, affordability, health and climate issues come first for communities and not profits,” said Richmond City Councilmember Gayle McLaughlin.

Source: ABC 10 Sacramento | By Becca Habegger

Sylvie Ashford is an Energy and Climate Policy Analyst at The Utility Reform Network (TURN), a consumer advocacy organization, which often comes out and fights PG&E rate increases. In this case, they’re in favor of the change. “This is revenue neutral; it's not a new fee being added to your bill,” she said. “I think there's a misconception that this will be contributing to the rate increases, and that's incorrect. It's just a bill restructuring.” TURN said “the proposal at the CPUC is a step in the right direction that will make electricity bills more affordable for low-income households, reduce bill volatility and promote beneficial electrification,” Ashford said. “But much more needs to be done to keep California skyrocketing rates in check.” She said, even with paying the proposed $24 per month, the average customer will see their monthly bill increase just $1.50 to $3. And low-income customers are projected to see their bill decrease, on average, $4 to $9 per month.

State regulators are about to make a decision on an important change to many Californians’ electricity bill. Whether the proposed change will raise or lower your monthly bill depends on how much money you make — and who you ask.

Source: Communications Daily | By Adam Bender and Jimm Phillips

Possibly facing the end of the federal affordable connectivity program (ACP), theCalifornia Public Utilities Commission should quickly modify grant rules to ensureservice stays affordable, said The Utility Reform Network in petitions Friday andMonday. “We don’t have the luxury of time here,” said TURN Telecom Policy Analyst LeoFitzpatrick in an interview Monday. TURN sought changes to grant rules for the California Advanced Services Fund (CASF) broadband infrastructure account in a Friday petition in docket R.20-08-021. In a Monday petition (docket R.20-09-001) along similar lines, TURN and the CPUC’s independent Public Advocates Office suggested changes to the CPUC’s federal funding account (FFA), which uses broadband funding from the U.S. government. In both cases, TURN asked the CPUC to pause making awards until it updates rules to account for ACP’s end and to direct applicants to amend already filed applications.

Reprinted with permission of Warren Communications News, Inc. and Communications Daily, 800-771-9202, https://warren-news.com/ and https://communicationsdaily.com/

Source: Marin Independent Journal | By Richard Halstead

Mark Toney, director of the Utility Reform Network, said, “I look forward to working with the author and the committee to discuss the consequences of this bill, particularly for renters and low-income homeowners who aren’t able to have solar.”

Connolly's legislation, Assembly Bill 2619, would repeal the CPUC's decision and require it to create a new rule structure based on the clean energy goals set by Senate Bill 100, which committed the state to achieving 100% clean carbon-free energy by 2045. Severin Borenstein, a business professor at the University of California, Berkeley, said the proposed legislation would subsidize residential solar operators by raising electricity prices on everyone else. "Making other ratepayers pay for it is a hugely regressive tax," Borenstein said. "Those other ratepayers are poorer than the people who are putting in solar.”

Source: CBS News Sacramento | By Tori Apodaca

"This fixed charge would just shift some fixed cost out of electricity rates onto a new line item on customer's bills, a fixed charge," said Sylvie Ashford, energy and climate policy analyst at The Utility Reform Network (TURN), which advocates for ratepayers. TURN supports the fixed rate on customers' bills. Ashford said it would cut down energy use for all customers. “Because the fixed charge is removing costs from usage ($/kWh) rates, usage rates go down for all customers, “ Ashford said. “Thus, the bill impacts from the TURN/NRDC proposal are roughly $8-10 in monthly bill savings for low-income customers, and roughly $3-7 monthly bill increases for other customers, depending on energy usage.”

Low-income customers who are enrolled in the CARE program receive a 30-35% discount on their electric bill and a 20% discount on their natural gas bill and FERA customers receive an 18% discount on their electricity bill. The new tiered system for a fixed rate on your utility bill would be based on how much you make, following the existing CARE and FERA programs. The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) currently has several proposals in front of it that it believes would lower costs for lower-income families. It was passed back in 2022, but now some democratic legislators are pushing back with Assembly Bill 1999.

Source: Canary Media | By Jeff St. John

That’s why the Public Advocates Office, along with key environmental justice and ratepayer advocacy groups, have proposed much lower fixed charges instead. Those include a joint proposal filed by the Natural Resources Defense Council and ratepayer advocacy nonprofit The Utility Reform Network, as well as a compromise proposal from the California Environmental Justice Alliance. While they differ in details, all include much lower monthly fixed charges than what utilities are proposing, as the chart below shows.

Last month, California Assemblymembers Jacqui Irwin (D-Thousand Oaks) and Marc Berman (D-Menlo Park) introduced a bill that would overturn a provision of a state law passed in 2022 that orders the California Public Utilities Commission to study and institute an ​“income-graduated fixed charge” for customers of the state’s three big utilities. The newly introduced bill, AB 1999, would limit the CPUC to adding a fixed charge of no greater than $10 a month on customers’ bills to pay for the rising costs of maintaining the state’s utility grids, regardless of household income. That’s an amount far lower than what’s been proposed under several income-based rate plans.

Source: KTVU | By Tom Vacar

Consumer group, The Utility Reform Network is hotly opposed. "It's gonna be between $12 and $20 additional each month. That's on top of the $33 that's coming January 1," said The Utility Reform Network’s Executive Director Mark Toney. Here's the kicker. "They want them to start collecting in March, even before the CPUC [California Public Utilities Commission] has held a proceeding and decided whether PG&E should get paid back by rate payers; two billion dollars for overspending," said Toney. One more kicker. "Oh, PG&E has several requests for at least another $3 billion," said Toney.

Climate change has aggravated inflation, but nowhere more than with Pacific Gas & Electric, the first major utility to deal with far more effects of extreme weather related to fire and floods. PG&E wants more money on top of the average $33 a month rate increase coming on New Year's Day.

Source: CBS News | By Tori Apodaca

The Utility Reform Network, which advocates on behalf of ratepayers, has argued that a faster and cheaper way to reduce wildfire risk is to insulate power lines instead of burying them.

It appears the commission agrees. Both of its proposals would approve rate increases sufficient to bury less than 1,000 miles (1,600 kilometers) of lines.

Still, "both proposed decisions adopt substantial and painful increases to monthly bills, far beyond the cost of inflation, which (we believe) should be a cap for bill increases," said Mark Toney, executive director of The Utility Reform Network.

Power bills for about 16 million people in Northern California will likely increase after state regulators released two rate proposals for one of the nation's largest utilities Wednesday.

The California Public Utilities Commission is finishing up its once-every-four-years review of Pacific Gas & Electric, the Oakland-based utility that provides electric and gas service to a 70,000-square-mile (181,000-square-kilometer) area in northern and central parts of the state. The commission must approve how much PG&E can charge customers and how it will spend that money.

Source: The San Joaquin Valley Sun | By Daniel Gligich

“[B]oth proposed decisions adopt substantial and painful increases to monthly bills, far beyond the cost of inflation, which (we believe) should be a cap for bill increases,” The Utility Reform Network Executive Director Mark Toney told the Associated Press.

Ratepayer advocate The Utility Reform Network has offered a different solution for PG&E to keep rates from increasing: insulating the power lines instead of moving them underground. Advocates argue that PG&E could save money and protect more lines through insulation.