Source: San Jose Spotlight | By Brandon Pho

Affordable connectivity advocates like Regina Costa don’t buy it. “They have the ability right now to put fiber optic into their network and they have chosen not to. So what does that say?” Costa, telecom policy director for the Oakland-based utility reform group TURN, told San José Spotlight. “In the era of climate change there are going to be more and more problems and that includes fires. If you are in an area that doesn’t have a reliable alternative, which is much of California, and we’re hit by an earthquake or have fires — you cannot rely on being able to call 911 to contact family, friends to let them know you’re okay.” Costa called the bill “cynical.” “It’s a greedy bill and it puts Californians in jeopardy,” Costa said. “It would be a public safety catastrophe.”

After public outcry across the Bay Area, state regulators this week barred AT&T from pulling out of a crucial lifeline for hard-to-reach residents in remote pockets of Santa Clara County: basic landline services. But on the eve of the California Public Utilities Commission’s Thursday decision, a state law proposal about horse racing was gutted and amended to legislation that would give the telecommunications giant another way to phase out its statewide landline duty. The new Assembly Bill 2797 would relieve telephone carriers from their “carrier of last resort” designation if they submit a notice showing a lack of basic customers or that alternative carrier services are available in a given area.

Source: The Mercury News | By Ethan Baron

The Utility Reform Network estimated that hundreds of thousands of households in the Bay Area and millions around California would have lost landline service if the California Public Utilities Commission had approved AT&T’s proposal. “It’s a great victory for Californians,” said Regina Costa, telecommunications policy director for The Utility Reform Network.

State utility regulators Thursday unanimously shot down a massively unpopular proposal by AT&T to scrap landline service for most of the Bay Area and much of California that critics charged would have stripped many older people and rural residents of a communications lifeline in power outages and disasters such as fires and floods.

Source: LAist | By Nereida Moreno

“We're now in fire season and people had better have a way to receive emergency alerts and communicate with each other when the power goes out,” said Regina Costa of the advocacy group TURN. It helped organize residents around the landline issue. “AT&T did not prove its case at the commission … they didn't present any evidence to show that customers would have any real alternatives, and in fact, they admitted that they don't,” Costa said. “In California, we tend to look at things a little more closely, so hopefully [lawmakers] will see through this,” Costa said.

After months of public backlash, California regulators are expected to reject AT&T’s bid to phase out landline service at a meeting on Thursday this week — but the company is still exploring other legal remedies. AT&T is trying to withdraw as a carrier of last resort (COLR) which requires the company to offer basic phone service to anyone who wants it. It’s held that designation since 1996, and remains one of the only companies in the state to offer traditional copper-based landline service.

Source: NBC Bay Area | By Jaxon Van Derbeken

“A significant portion of that loan is going to be turned into a gift to PG&E, funded by the taxpayers,” said Matt Freedman, an attorney with the ratepayer group TURN that has been critical of the deal. Freeman noted that even lawmakers who initially signed off on the loan have recently soured on the deal. Next year, ratepayers will start feeling the pinch of the deal – with a proposed $400 million rate hike. But the hike will not be spent on fixing the aging plant. Instead, Freedman says, the money will begin to pay the utility $2 billion worth of promised profits and other incentives over five years. “We don't understand why you need to bribe PG&E to keep this plant operating,” Freedman said, adding all the money the state is throwing into the plant would be better spent on bringing far cheaper clean energy alternatives on-line.

The cost of keeping the aging Diablo Canyon nuclear plant open five more years could be as much as double what PG&E had first estimated back when a deal was struck two years ago to run it longer to help assure grid reliability, experts say. The deal involved lending the utility $1.4 billion, which the state hoped to get back with a newly available federal grant. But when the grant was issued in January of this year, critics discovered that the amount available could be as little as half the sum originally advertised.

Source: San Francisco Chronicle | By Katy Morsony

Let me be clear — wildfi re mitigation work and ensuring our electric infrastructurecan withstand the challenges of climate change is crucial. PG&E’s utilityequipment has been responsible for some of California’s most destructive fi res.However, California has given the utilities little motivation to keep the costs downfor these initiatives. Utilities benefi t from charging customers as much as possiblefor infrastructure upgrades due to the guaranteed profi ts they earn on this work,known as a rate of return. The higher the total costs, the higher the utilities’ profits.

PG&E rates have increased a staggering 128% over the past decade, leavingCalifornians struggling to keep up with exorbitant utility bills. Part of this increaseis due to management failures by PG&E’s current and past CEOs. But the morealarming portion results from PG&E’s exploitation of the regulatory system tocharge customers for the most expensive infrastructure options, prioritizing utilityprofi ts over aff ordable alternatives , at the expense of your savings account.

Source: Santa Cruz Sentinel | By Editorial Board

Mark Toney, executive director of The Utility Reform Network, recently told CalMatters there not only needs to be a cap placed on utility rate hikes but that regulators should ensure utilities are not given a “credit card with no limit and a guarantee that someone else is going to pay.” TURN is backing the Utility Accountability Act, a bill that would require utilities to document and disclose their spending.

In a previous Editorial, we discussed the challenges PG&E is facing with increased demand for electricity and the cost of undergrounding power lines in fire-prone areas. We also noted recent rate hikes and how they are burdening ratepayers already having to deal with the high cost of living in California. Customers also are facing new fixed monthly fees — part of an energy bill passed by legislators in 2022 with little discussion. This charge is assessed to households each month in exchange for lower rates for every kilowatt hour of electricity they use. The California Public Utilities Commission approved the $24 monthly charge last month.

Source: NBC Bay Area | By Jaxon Van Derbeken

“It’s outrageous to charge customers for promotional advertising that only promotes the utility,” said Katy Morsony, an attorney with the ratepayer advocacy group TURN. “The number one thing that people complain to me about regarding their utility,” she continued, “is that they see all these PG&E advertisements and they assume that they, as customers, are paying for them – and they ask me, are they paying for them?”

PG&E recently acknowledged that it intends to have customers pay for an ongoing $6 million ad campaign, calling it “safety communications.” But critics say the utility shouldn’t be allowed to tap funds earmarked to help prevent wildfires on what they consider blatantly promotional commercials. In the ad campaign that began last year, PG&E’s CEO Patti Poppe says that “to make our power system safer and more reliable…we’re transforming your local utility from the underground up.”

Source: Sacramento Bee | By Ari Plachta

Matt Freedman, staff attorney at The Utility Reform Network, said it’s unclear that the plant is needed to keep the lights on especially as more clean energy sources come online. Yet the state’s bill to keep it open is growing. “Legislators were told that the $1.4 billion would be completely repaid by the federal government. That turned out not to be true, and the delta between the promise and reality is getting larger as time goes on,” he said. He called Newsom’s arrangement with PG&E back in 2022 a “last-second, stinky political deal that provided a series of benefits and protections to PG&E shareholders,” he said, including performance-based disbursements for investors. “Every dollar that goes to Diablo Canyon is a dollar that doesn’t go to some other essential government service.”

California lawmakers rejected Gov. Gavin Newsom’s bid to include another $400 million for Pacific Gas & Electric Co. in the state budget, in a political standoff that began in 2022 with a bargain to keep the Diablo Canyon Power Plant open. The budget process was a far more unworried affair in 2022, when, at Newsom’s urging, the Legislature approved $1.4 billion in loans to keep the Diablo Canyon plant open to help maintain reliability of the state’s power grid. PG&E had been preparing to shutter it in 2025.

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.