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.

Source: Caledonian Record | By Adam Beam

The Utility Reform Network, which advocates on behalf of ratepayers, said one proposal would increase the bill for a typical residential customer by $28 a month by 2026. They estimate the other proposal would increase the typical residential bill by $24 per month.

“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: KCRA | By Adam Beam

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 Mercury News | By George Avalos

“Both proposed decisions adopt painful increases to monthly bills, far beyond the cost of inflation cap for bill increases advocated by TURN,” said Mark Toney, TURN’s executive director. …

“This was a sound rejection of PG&E’s proposal of only insulating 320 miles of power lines and burying 2,000 miles of power lines, which would cost $5.9 billion,” TURN stated.

The proposal from the administrative law judge correlates closely with TURN’s plan to insulate 1,800 miles of power lines and bury 200 miles of power lines, at a total cost of $2.1 billion, according to Toney.

“Both proposed decisions supported TURN’s position that insulating overhead power lines is faster and cheaper for wildfire safety than burying lines,” Toney said.

This week, officials with the state Public Utilities Commission that regulates PG&E issued two proposals that would allow the utility to increase the amount of revenue it can extract from ratepayers in 2023. One proposal was fashioned by one of the five powerful commissioners with the state PUC while a second proposal was crafted by a PUC administrative law judge.

Under one of the proposals issued by state regulators, PG&E customers would face a jump of $28 a month in their utility bills, according to estimates released Thursday by The Utility Reform Network, or TURN, a consumer group.

The other proposal isn’t much better: PG&E customers would face a jump of $24 a month, TURN’s calculations show.

Source: The San Diego Union-Tribune | By Rob Nikolewski

Mark Toney, executive director at The Utility Reform Network (TURN), a ratepayer advocacy group, said the audit raised a number of red flags.

“I think the bottom line is that the utilities are simply not being held accountable by the regulators, and that the regulators need to figure out a way to do a better job,” Toney said. “If they need more resources, if they need more staff, they should ask for it in their budget because everyone who is a (utility) customer is a captive. You can’t go and choose another provider, particularly when it comes to poles and wires.”

A deep dive by the California state auditor did not find any easy fixes for the state’s sky-high utility rates but the auditor concluded the California Public Utilities Commission and its independent consumer division known as Cal Advocates need to do a better job making sure that power companies don’t overstate their costs.

Source: GV Wire | By Nancy Price

But the audit appears to be a clear signal that state officials want the PUC and Cal Advocates to sharpen their focus on how utility companies operate, claim costs, and make profits, said Mark Toney, executive director of The Utility Reform Network — TURN, an advocacy nonprofit.

“What it (the report) shows us is that the PUC has been asleep at the wheel when it comes to looking at the profit rates, when it comes to the question of duplication of costs,” Toney said.

State agencies responsible for approving rate increases for electricity and natural gas providers in California need to do a better job of monitoring utilities’ costs, questioning increases, and communicating with consumers, according to a new report from the state auditor.

Californians are paying some of the highest rates in the nation, the auditor noted.

Source: SiliconValley.com | By George Avalos

“We have a real affordability crisis for utility costs,” Toney said. “One of the biggest cost drivers is this massive expense for burying 10,000 miles of PG&E power lines.” …

Toney thinks the PG&E power line burial program might provide the potential for a higher profit than the less expensive insulation option and ultimately help line the pockets of wealthy investors on Wall Street.

“PG&E’s scheme to underground power lines,” Toney said, “is the most expensive and most costly method of tackling this challenge.”

PG&E bills may hop higher if the utility lands state approval for a rate proposal that includes wide-ranging plans to bury power lines to help ward off catastrophic wildfires.

A hearing officer with the state Public Utilities Commission is expected to issue a proposed decision in the coming days on PG&E’s general rate request that could trigger an array of impacts on monthly customer bills. Among the proposals is a plan that could oblige its customers to foot the bill to bury PG&E power lines.

Source: KTVU Fox 2 | By Tom Vacar

"The decision that the CPUC is about to make, PG&E could raise your monthly bill $50 or more a month," said Mark Toney, the executive director of The Utility Reform Network (TURN).

Over the lifetime of the decision — up to 20 years — TURN calculates that each customer's portion could be around $18,000. …

Over the past decade, TURN says that Southern California Edison has installed 5000 miles of insulated power lines overhead. Thus far, PG&E has buried roughly 300 miles of power lines, incurring a cost of about $3 million per mile.

"The insulating of those lines is way better for consumers. It's way better for wildfire safety, and it's just gonna be done safer and cheaper," said Toney.

The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) plans to unveil a proposed decision concerning PG&E's requested rate hikes.

The utility company says the increases are crucial as it aims to bury 10,000 miles of power lines as a preventative measure against wildfires in high-risk regions. This increase is substantial.