Source: New Project Media | By Michelle France

“We strongly support AB 1260 in order to clean up the mess that the PUC has created in its flawed implementation of AB 2316,” said Matthew Freedman, an attorney for The Utility Reform Network (TURN). “The PUC’s refusal to implement AB 2316 as intended by this legislature represents a huge missed opportunity,” Freedman continued. “As of today, major elements of the PUC’s alternative approach are unclear, require further development and seem highly unlikely to lead to a successful program. AB 1260 would eliminate any ambiguities in current law by requiring all community renewable generation serving subscribers to be compensated using the Commission’s own avoided cost calculator which serves as the primary method for determining the value of exported electricity to the distribution system, and is used already to compensate customers participating in the Net Value Billing Tariff.” AB 1260 would also require all eligible projects to include four hours of energy storage at the same capacity of the renewable energy generation, but the PUC rejected that idea, Freedman said. “We strongly disagree. Energy storage provides significant value to the system—they need to be included in the community program,” Freedman said. Furthermore, Freedman argued that new residential construction must include onsite solar or an alternative compliance through participation in a community program under the Title 24 Building Code. About 400 MW a year of new community solar will be needed to serve as the compliance option. “Installing 1,000 MW of community solar under this proposal would save USD 7bn over 25 years compared to installing that same amount on the rooftop as would be required under Title 24. For those reasons we think this bill makes a lot of sense and will be a ratepayer savings measure,” Freedman said.

The California State Assembly Committee on Utilities and Energy approved a bill that would revise or retract the Community Renewable Energy Program (CREP) adopted by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) last spring. The committee voted by 13-1 in favor of Assembly Bill (AB) 1260 at an April 23 meeting. The legislation, introduced by Assemblymember Christopher Ward, D-78 will now head to the Committee on Appropriations for approval.

Source: Fox 26 News, Fresno| By Fox 26 Newstaff

The director of the Utility Reform Network, tells FOX26 the last thing PG&E customers need is to be charged an additional fee just for paying their bills.

Some PG&E customers will be looking at a new fee next month, just for paying their bills. Starting May 9th, residential customers using a credit card will be charged a flat fee of $6.95.

Source: GV Wire/Fresno| By Nancy Price

Mark Toney, executive director of The Utility Reform Network, an advocacy organization based in the Bay Area, was critical of the new fees. “It is shocking to TURN that PG&E wants to charge a customer fee for paying through a checking account, because the transaction costs are so minimal, as compared to costly credit card transaction fees of 3-5%.” he said in an email Friday. “PG&E should know better than to try to sneak in a brand-new customer fee without first filing a (California Public Utilities) Commission request for a rate increase, so that TURN, business groups, and the public can weigh in. PG&E customers, already facing an affordability crisis, shouldn’t have to pay an additional fee “just for paying their bills,” he said.

PG&E is notifying customers that they’ll have to pay transaction fees starting May 19 if they use a bank account, credit card, or debit card to pay their bills. The fee will be $1.50 for residential customers and $6.95 for business customers. It’s unclear why business customers would pay more than residential customers.

Source: KQED| By Nisa Khan

The Utility Reform Network (TURN), a consumer advocacy group based in Oakland, signed a letter with 220 other groups last week demanding that Congress reinstate the laid-off federal employees. “If there’s no one working the program, then if you apply, there’s no one going to process that application,” said Lee Trotman, a spokesperson for TURN. “This is a crisis at the federal level. And it’s going to affect Californians.”

Bay Area consumer advocates are sounding alarms after the Trump administration this month fired the entire staff running a federal program that helps low-income Americans afford to heat and cool their homes. The Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) distributes federal funds to help households with their energy needs through services such as providing one-time financial assistance to pay bills, offering emergency help when utilities are disconnected or upgrading homes to make them more energy-efficient.

Source: KCBS Radio | By Bret Burkhart

“PG&E wants to add an additional 1100 miles to the wildfire mitigation plan by 2028, but did not attach a price tag.” When asked about PG&E’s plan, Lee Trotman Communications Director with The Utility Reform Network” said “I’m a little suspicious because last year PG&E had six rate hikes.”  He also said “burying the lines is the most expensive option, and we would rather have them insulate the lines.”

Source:Inside Climate News| By Twilight Greenway

Sylvie Ashford at The Utility Reform Network (TURN) said that utilities owned by investors have a history of attempting to make money off behind-the-meter or customer-side investments and padding projects with more capital investments than necessary to increase their profits. She pointed to a recent neighborhood-scale electrification project at Cal State Monterey, where PG&E proposed paying for the retrofits with its capital budget but met resistance and ultimately backed out.

Last year, when Shreyas Sudhakar started a heat pump installation company in the San Francisco Bay Area, he realized he wouldn’t be able to find new customers by promising to bring down their utility bills. Electric heat pumps are around three times more efficient than gas appliances, and Sudhakar’s clients typically use less energy overall after making the switch. But they also use more electricity. And if they live in a part of California serviced by Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) or one of the state’s two other investor-owned utilities (IOUs), the savings they may have come to associate with the technology will likely prove elusive.

Source: KQED | By Matthew Green

But Lee Trotman, with The Utility Reform Network, said PG&E enjoyed record profits last year — of $2.47 billion — and shouldn’t need to raise rates to further satisfy its investors. “The overall message is that rates have gone up without fail,” he said. “They’re doing everything they can to make shareholders happy at the cost of ratepayers.”

The increasingly steep cost of keeping the lights on and the heat flowing comes as PG&E last week asked California regulators if it could increase the rate of return for its investors, to 11.3%, up a percentage point from the current limit — a move that would result in yet another rate hike.

Source: Sacramento Bee| By Stephen Hobbs & Kate Wolffe

“I’m absolutely stunned by the size of the increase they are requesting,” said Mark Toney, executive director of The Utility Reform Network, also known as TURN. “We have an affordability crisis, they reported record-breaking profits two years in a row.”

Pacific Gas and Electric Co. wants to increase the amount of profit its investors can make, a move that could raise bills by roughly $5.50 per month for residential customers starting in 2026. The request is likely to add even more frustration with the company among customers and legislators at the Capitol.

Source: KRON 4 Bay Area| By Rob Nesbitt

On Thursday, PG&E sent a request to California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) asking to increase customers’ bills by $5.50 a month. If approved, the rate hike would take effect in January 2026. That doesn’t sit well with Executive Director of the Utility Reform Network, Mark Toney. “I am absolutely stunned that PG&E would ask for such a huge increase in their profits for shareholders,” Toney told KRON4. Toney says the changes to your electric bills would give PG&E the highest profit rate of any utility company in the country. “The CPUC should reject the increase that PG&E is asking for,” he said. The proposed increase would come on top of the $3 a month increase that customers are experiencing this year. The Utility Reform Network wants to see changes to PG&E equipment, not monthly bills. “Insulate your overhead power lines, because it only costs one fifth of burying them underground and that’s going to save rate payers money,” Toney said. Toney says that this request for a price increase is just one of about 10 that the CPUC has on their desk from PG&E.

Pacific Gas & Electric customers could see their bills increase next year by as much as $5.50. That’s what the utility company sent to the California Utilities Commission for approval yesterday. PG&E says that prices are going up because their investors expect to be compensated when providing the utility company with funding. For many customers however, that’s a less-than-satisfactory reason for raising already high rates.

Source: ABC7 San Francisco| By Suzanne Phan

The Utility Reform Network, or TURN, advocates on behalf of ratepayers. "It's unbelievable. I'm floored that PG&E is asking for such a large increase in their rate of profit, their Cost of Capital application," TURN Executive Director Mark Toney said. "They apply every three years to the California Public Utilities Commission. It has to approve how much profit they can make on investments.” Last year, PG&E increased its rates six times. "There were five electricity increases and one natural gas increase," Toney said. The average residential customers paid about $440 more a year, compared to 2023.

Even though PG&E customers pay some of the highest energy bills in the country, even though PG&E has shattered profit records, the utility is now asking the California Public Utilities Commission to raise rates so it could pay investors more. PG&E is asking for an 11.3% return for investors, up a percentage point from the current limit.

Source: KQED| By Danielle Venton

“Here’s the problem,” said Lee Trotman, a spokesperson for the Utility Reform Network, or TURN, “PG&E also recorded record profits last year. For 2024, they recorded $2.47 billion in profits. That’s a record, and they did it by raising rates six times.” He expects the increase, if approved, will cause further distress for PG&E customers, about 20% of whom are behind on their energy bills, according to the CPUC’s Public Advocates Office (PDF). Trotman said TURN will advocate for a lower increase and ask the company about other ways to save money: “We will intervene, and we’ll say, ‘OK, that’s excessive, that’s not sustainable. So, have you tried this? Will you try that?’”

Utility giant PG&E asked California regulators this week to allow it to increase compensation for its investors, a move that would add yet another rate hike for customers. California’s largest investor-owned utility said raising the allowable rate of return for shareholders by 1 point, to 11.3%, is appropriate because of the risk involved with investing in energy in the state. That return would bring the utility more in line with other comparable energy companies, according to PG&E.

Source: CBS 13 Sacramento| By Brady Halblieb

"They will tell investors, 'Hey if you give us the money for essential energy projects, we will guarantee you a return on equity,'" said Lee Trotman, a spokesperson for The Utility Reform Network, a consumer advocacy group. If approved, the rate hike would add approximately $5.50 more per month to the average PG&E customer's bill. That may not seem like much, but customers are already paying $60 more per month than last year, and PG&E bills have increased 56% over the past three years. “Every rate increase, especially from PG&E, is devastating to customers. You have literally millions of customers, who can’t afford to pay their bills,” said Trotman.

AUBURN – The utility company has announced it is requesting an increase, not for infrastructure or safety improvements, but to boost returns for its investors. Currently, PG&E investors earn a 10.2% return on investment. If approved, the new rate would rise to 11.3%, a 1.1% increase.

Source: Manteca/Ripon Bulletin| By Dennis Wyatt

The Utility Reform Network (TURN) is urging the CPUC to reject the request. “California utilities are driving an affordability crisis, with families paying billions in excessive costs while investor profits soar,” said Lee Trotman, Communications Director of TURN.

PG&E wants yet another rate increase. And this time its to make sure its investors are kept whole against risks the for-profit utility may incur. The filing Thursday with the California Public Utilities Commission pencils out to roughly $5.50 a month or $66 a year for residential customers.

Source: San Joaquin Valley Sun| By Daniel Gligich

The Utility Reform Network (TURN), a consumer advocacy group, is pushing back against PG&E and urging the state to reject the request for an increase. 

TURN is asking the CPUC to decrease the 10.6% rate of profit that California utilities are currently receiving. 

TURN is also asking the CPUC to stop approving costly infrastructure projects that inflate rates and is urging the Legislature to change the system to eliminate profits from essential infrastructure investments. 

“California utilities are driving an affordability crisis, with families paying billions in excessive costs while investor profits soar,” said TURN communications director Lee Trotman. “As PG&E, SoCal Edison, and SDG&E submit their cost of capital proposals today, the California Public Utilities Commission must take bold action to lower bills by tackling the root cause of skyrocketing rates: guaranteed profits that reward utilities for spending more, not spending wisely.” 

Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) is asking California regulators to raise its rates in order to pay more money back to the utility’s investors. PG&E submitted its 2026 Cost of Capital application to the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) on Thursday to raise rates starting next year. PG&E has requested an increase of around $5.50 per month for residential customers. That would set an 11.3% return on equity for investors. 

Source: Los Angeles Times| By Sammy Roth

“Not having any risk from ignition requires an insane amount of spending,” said Matthew Freedman, an attorney for the Utility Reform Network, a ratepayer watchdog group, in an interview.

From 2019 through 2023, Edison, PG&E and SDG&E were collectively authorized to add $27 billion in wildfire-related costs to customer rates, according to the California Public Utilities Commission — 18% of overall system costs for PG&E, 12% for Edison and 9% for SDG&E. And even if state officials want some Californians to pay more for fire prevention, electric rates are a terrible way to divvy up the costs. High utility bills disproportionately burden low-income and middle-class families, eating up a bigger chunk of their monthly budgets

Source: Canary Media | By Jeff St. John

“There’s agreement that record-breaking shareholder earnings make no sense along with skyrocketing costs,” said Mark Toney, executive director of The Utility Reform Network (TURN), a ratepayer advocacy group, and that ​“utilities need to be held more accountable for their spending.” TURN is supporting a list of bills being introduced in this year’s legislative session that take aim at utility costs. Some would increase state regulator oversight on utility grid spending. Others seek to forbid utilities from spending ratepayer funds on lobbying and advertising and strengthen CPUC oversight of potential ​“double recovery,” or utilities collecting funds for projects already financed via other means.

Everyone agrees that California’s major utilities are charging too much for electricity. But as in previous years, state lawmakers, regulators, and consumer advocates are at odds over what to do about it. With the state’s three biggest utilities reporting record profits even as customers’ rates have skyrocketed, critics say the time is right to pass laws that will force regulators to more tightly control key utility costs — or even outright curb utility spending and profits.

Source: Bakersfield Californian| By Mark Toney

Voters living in the districts of Rep. David Valadao and Jim Costa depend on The Utility Reform Network to protect them from getting ripped off by utility corporations. They also depend on the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau to protect themselves from getting ripped off by every other corporation. Their constituents are counting on their vote to support the CPFB, so that they can continue to make mortgage lenders, banks, medical debt collectors, and credit card companies return billions of dollars to customers they have abused.

Source: Canary Media | By Jeff St. John

The CPUC didn’t specify which alternative sources could fill that gap. Prior proposals to use state tax revenues or California’s cap-and-trade program could be part of the mix, said Mark Toney, executive director of The Utility Reform Network, a ratepayer-advocacy group. But even supporters of those concepts like Toney don’t see much hope of lawmakers fielding bills that would ask taxpayers to shoulder costs now borne by ratepayers. ​“It is wishful thinking that we could shift rooftop subsidies to taxpayers,” he said. ​“I’m not holding my breath here.”

The net-billing tariff the CPUC approved in late 2022 to replace its previous net-metering regime offers far lower payments for the electricity that newly installed rooftop solar systems inject onto the grid, except for a few hours per year when peak power is in dire need. That structure rewards customers who add batteries that can store and inject power during those valuable hours — a service that should reduce how much energy utilities need to secure and how much grid infrastructure they need to build to serve those peak moments.

Source: The Cool Down| By Amy Bolyington

"Regulators need to shield residential and small business customers from shouldering the brunt of these new data center costs," Sylvie Ashford, an energy and policy analyst at The Utility Reform Network, told CalMatters.

Data centers and crypto mines demand a lot of energy. A recent report from Energy Futures Group on behalf of Earthjustice revealed how electricity tariffs and contracts for these large facilities can impact the power grid and energy costs. 

Source: San Francisco Chronicle | By Julie Johnson

Mark Toney, executive director of The Utility Reform Network, or TURN, said the commissioners are responsible for protecting utility customers from out-of-control company spending but have failed to do so. “They have more authority than they use,” Toney said. 

The typical household bill is expected to be about $299 for those with both electricity and gas service, PG&E said. That is slightly higher than the average residential bill one year ago of about $296, according to PG&E’s bill averages tracked by the Chronicle. The changes come after a historic year of PG&E bill hikes. In 2024, average residential customers paid about $440 more annually compared with 2023, prompting widespread complaints that rising bills are increasingly hard for Californians to pay.