Source: Los Angeles Times | By The Times Editorial Board

Ratepayer advocates in California have floated the idea of legislation that would prohibit utilities from increasing their rates faster than inflation. The Utility Reform Network ratepayer advocacy group has suggested tying a cap on rate increases to the Social Security Administration’s annual Cost-of-Living Adjustment, which in 2023 was 8.7%.

Californians pay some of the highest electric rates in the country. In the last decade households have seen their electricity rates nearly double even while their budgets are squeezed by inflation and rising temperatures from climate change mean they have to use more energy to cool their homes. And it’s only going to get worse. State greenhouse gas reduction policies are pushing residents to adopt electric cars and appliances that will only increase their electricity consumption. Rate hikes have become bigger and more frequent, rising even faster than inflation for customers of the big three monopoly utility companies whose rates include costs for expensive wildfire mitigation, grid infrastructure projects and disaster-related payouts.

Source: Politico | By Alex Nieves

It wasn’t a surprise, since the CPUC published its preferred plan in March. But developers — backed by some environmental groups including Environment California and consumer group The Utility Reform Network — had held out hope for a change.

COMMUNITY SOLAR: The California Public Utilities Commission today stamped out the hopes of energy developers who had been pushing for the regulator to change its mind about community solar. In a 3-1 vote, the CPUC adopted a plan developed by one of its agency judges to try to spur development of small-scale solar projects that renters and other electricity customers can subscribe to, buying credits that reduce their electricity bills.

Source: Los Angeles Times | By Sammy Roth

Matt Freedman, an attorney for TURN, said he was “bummed” to see the utilities commission “doubling down” on a bad outcome for community solar, after several weeks during which it looked like Newsom might be hammering out a compromise. Freedman told me he attended several meetings with staffers from the governor’s office, who were “very locked in” on drafting a community solar plan. Unfortunately, he said, the revised incentive program released by the commission two days before the vote included mostly minor changes — nothing that will help community solar gain much of a foothold in California, even as it plays an increasingly important role in helping other states chase their climate and renewable energy targets. The biggest change, Freedman said, involved a provision that would have rejected the incentive program pitched by community solar advocates as illegal under federal law — a bizarre claim that could have been used to undermine existing community solar programs in other states. Under pressure from bipartisan critics — including New York Gov. Kathy Hochul and Neil Chatterjee, a top energy official in the Trump administration — Newsom’s utilities commission struck that provision.

After months of outcry, the California Public Utilities Commission voted Thursday to approve a solar energy program that critics are sure will fail spectacularly, making it impossible for many people to access an innovative global warming solution. The 3-1 vote by Gov. Gavin Newsom’s appointees was the latest stain on the governor’s climate record — and a reminder, as Earth shatters temperature records, that it’s easier to talk about the urgency of the climate crisis than it is to act with urgency.

Source: LAist | By Nereida Moreno

Regina Costa, Telecommunications Policy Director for the advocacy organization, TURN, provided the following comments on our May 10 radio interview.

-I expect the CPUC to approve the proposal to dismiss AT&T's application. AT&T could not show that there are other carriers who will serve everyone and tried to argue that was irrelevant. That doesn't jive with the law or the CPUC rules and is rightfully being rejected.

-We would not be surprised if AT&T goes to the legislature. AT&T is trying to pitch this as an application to promote broadband. It is the opposite. It is a proposal that would allow them to pick and choose who to serve, leaving entire communities and many neighborhoods that they deem undesirable out in the cold. I sent her the April 24 Earnings Call, and the quote from the AT&T Director, CEO, and President.

-The Administrative Law Judge rightly pointed out that nothing is stopping AT&T from deploying its advanced network right now.

-Californians turned out in droves to the public participation hearings, in person and after waiting hours on the phone. They overwhelmingly said that AT&T is wrong, that there are no alternatives in much of AT&T's territory, and the Commission should reject the proposal.

-The new CPUC proceeding will be very, very important, because it is about universal service - how to ensure that every Californian can receive essential communications services, without discrimination. Discrimination isn't just price discrimination, it is what services are available. And what is meant by basic service. And should it incorporate reliability requirements.

Source: Redheaded Blackbelt | By Sarah Reith

“ ‘AT&T is touting this application as pro broadband,’ [Regina Costa] remarked … But as the judge pointed out, nothing in the application actually does that. There is a lot of could, and would.’…”

AT&T will likely have to continue as the carrier of last resort in California, relieving some anxiety about the future of landlines in rural parts of the state.…

Source: Point Reyes Light | By Ben Stocking

““What AT&T really wants is to stop providing essential telecom service to 99 percent of its service area, without providing a shred of evidence that there are real alternatives,” said Regina Costa of The Utility Reform Network, an Oakland-based consumer group. .”

A judge has issued a stinging opinion recommending that the California Public Utilities Commission reject AT&T’s request to end landline service in California—a move that would leave thousands of West Marin customers without reliable service.

Source: Lake County News | By Lake County News Reports

Instead of prioritizing cost-effective solutions, The Utility Report Network, or TURN, said utilities are incentivized to pursue the most expensive option — undergrounding power lines at a cost of up to $6.1 million per mile — because they can earn a lucrative rate of return. TURN said the consequences have been severe rate shocks for Californians. "SB 1003 and AB 2054 emerged from the suspense file today, an important step towards advancing oversight of utility spending in California,” Katy Morsony, legislative and assistant managing attorney at TURN, said Thursday. “For too long, utilities have treated customers like a credit card — passing along budget overruns without regulator approval and choosing the most expensive option for wildfire mitigation to maximize profits. Enough is enough. It's time for lawmakers to prove they're working for utility customers, not executives,” Morsony said.

Two bills that proponents say would move the needle on California's electricity rate crisis by increasing oversight of utility spending on wildfire mitigation and other infrastructure investments emerged from the Senate suspense file on Thursday, a key hurdle. SB 1003 (Dodd) would require utilities to demonstrate their wildfire mitigation plans prioritize affordable, timely solutions proven to effectively reduce risk. AB 2054 (Bauer-Kahan) would prevent utilities from automatically passing excessive project costs on to ratepayers for projects like wildfire mitigation.

Source: Cal Matters | By Khari Johnson

If fiber optic cables that power internet connectivity were like nerves in your body, middle mile broadband is like the spinal column that acts as a central bundle of nerves while the last mile is like the nerves in your fingers or tips of your toes, said Alexandra Green, an attorney for The Utility Reform Network. She follows developments in the middle-mile broadband program as part of her job. Last fall, advocacy groups like the Utility Reform Network criticized state agencies for excluding historically marginalized communities in Oakland and Los Angeles from the statewide middle-mile broadband installation map while keeping projects in more affluent areas. “Now all of a sudden that $1.5 billion he committed to funding the rest of the projects, there’s no longer a guarantee basically,” she said. “That’s one of our concerns generally: Equitable access for low income Black and brown historically redlined communities.” Green said the planned cuts raise her level of concern for how the state will treat broadband installation projects in those communities.

Gov. Gavin Newsom’s newest budget proposal calls for $2 billion in cuts to public broadband projects meant to bring high-speed internet to all Californians and close the digital divide. The reduction is part of Newsom’s updated plan to close a $44.9 billion shortfall.

Source: USA Today | By Betty Lin-Fisher

While the rejection is a proposal and still needs to be approved by the commission, Regina Costa, telecommunications policy director for The Utility Reform Network (TURN) in California, said she fully expects the board to approve it. “What AT&T really wants is to stop providing essential telecom service to 99% of its service area, without providing a shred of evidence that there are real alternatives. This includes many areas threatened by wildfires, earthquakes, floods and power shutoffs," Costa said in a press release. "If AT&T gets its wish, it would significantly jeopardize public safety." In an interview with USA TODAY, Costa, who is also chair of the telecommunications committee for the National Association of State Utility Consumer Advocates, said California's proposed rejection of the landline waiver is on top of a recent rejection in Utah for another utility to waive its obligation to provide landlines. "I think it's very important for consumers nationwide,'' Costa said. "I think that would give other states the impetus to look at the same thing."

California utility regulators are proposing rejecting a request by AT&T to eliminate its responsibility to provide traditional landline phone service. That could have implications nationwide, a consumer advocate said. Fewer telephone companies are offering basic landline phone service as the utilities say the copper-wire infrastructure is old and expensive to maintain, and the demand for landline phone service is low as consumers move to mobile and other services.

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: KCRA TV3 Sacramento | By Lysee Mitri

The regulatory agency that oversees PG&E, the California Public Utilities Commission, has said there are other more affordable ways to mitigate wildfire risk. And consumer advocacy organization, The Utility Reform Network, agrees. "We're trying to balance getting the safest, greenest electricity and gas that we can get to our California customers at the lowest possible price," said Katy Morsony, a legislative and assistant managing attorney at TURN.

PG&E's proposed four-year budget includes spending nearly $6 billion to bury 2,000 miles of power lines by 2026. It would add about $3.40 to a typical residential bill each month. The CPUC is considering two alternatives to PG&E's plan. Instead of burying 2,000 miles of the electric grid, one scaled-back proposal would allow the company to bury 200 miles of lines and another would allow for 973 through 2026.

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: San Francisco Chronicle | By Julie Johnson

“Customers have hit the breaking point and have passed it,” said Matthew Freedman, an attorney for ratepayer advocate group The Utility Reform Network, which supports the fixed charge plan. “People who live in the Central Valley have taken it on the chin as rates have gone up.” “You have to start somewhere,” Freedman said. “Doing nothing is a bad choice.”

California regulators are set to vote Thursday on a major change to utility bills that could raise costs for some residents already burned with soaring rates, while lowering costs for others. The California Public Utilities Commission will decide whether to approve a $24.15 fixed charge on utility bills in exchange for lowering the per-unit price of electricity. The rule would apply to customers of Pacific Gas and Electric Co., San Diego Gas & Electric and Southern California Edison.

Source: Capital & Main | By Aaron Cantu

“Simply requiring that hydrogen be produced using renewable resources, without any additional criteria, will not achieve” statewide decarbonization goals, warned Matthew Freedman, renewables attorney with The Utility Reform Network, who testified about hydrogen before the California Assembly. Even if the electricity used to make hydrogen comes from solar or wind, Freedman said, it could pull clean power that’s now being used elsewhere on the state’s power grid. Without an ample supply of clean energy, power plants burning fossil fuel gas would likely have to make up the shortfall.

A plan by California business groups to accelerate a hydrogen industry has gained ground after two state Senate committees approved legislation to create a renewable energy sector nearly from scratch. Hydrogen associations, including investor-owned gas utilities, car manufacturers and oil conglomerates, are now promoting the bill and weighing what regulations to put in place. As the bill moves through the Legislature, Gov. Gavin Newsom’s administration is lobbying the U.S. Department of the Treasury to get a break from emission restrictions on hydrogen production while state agencies, at times, have echoed the talking points of the hydrogen industry itself. California was selected by the U.S. Department of Energy for a $1.2 billion hydrogen hub investment, and companies could benefit from an additional $10 billion in tax credits, proponents of the measure said.

Source: NPR Marketplace | By Janet Nguyen

“Other than to say untold millions, we don’t know because it’s very hard to document it. Utilities don’t want to let us know,” said Mark Toney, executive director of the California consumer advocacy group The Utility Reform Network.

Late last year, PG&E ran ads about its decision to bury 10,000 miles of power lines underground as a safety measure against wildfires. The company spent up to $6 million on TV ads like these over the past couple of years, The Sacramento Bee reported. PG&E asked the California Public Utilities Commission for a taxpayer-funded “fire risk mitigation account” to cover those costs, The Bee reported. When asked for comment on its advertising practices, a PG&E spokesperson stated that the company advertises to share with its customers what it’s doing “to improve safety and reliability.” “The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) allows the recovery of some costs related to safety communications on television. If not, then the costs are covered by shareholders,” the spokesperson stated. It’s difficult, if not impossible, to determine how much of your money utilities are spending on advertising.

Source: The San Francisco Standard | By Kevin V. Nguyen and Kevin Truong

Mark Toney, executive director of The Utility Reform Network, said just like property taxes and insurance costs, utilities are becoming a more significant part of the operating cost of homeownership. “A mortgage for the most part is predictable over time; you can budget for that,” Toney said. “The one thing you know about a utility bill is that it will escalate year after year.”

An analysis from Redfin found that the salary necessary to afford a median-priced home in the Bay Area is $404,332 a year, a nearly 25% increase from the year before. A scan through Zillow confirms that math—the average price for a single-family home remains stubbornly well over $1 million. Paying for the upfront price of a home is still a buyer’s primary concern. But now, because of factors mostly outside of homeowners’ control, auxiliary costs—like utilities, property taxes, home insurance and maintenance work—are threatening to overtake already hefty monthly mortgage payments.