Source: The Mercury News | By George Avalos

“PG&E executives scheduled a private meeting with the commission staff to lobby for an additional $1.8 billion in ratepayer increases,” The Utility Reform Network (TURN), a consumer advocacy group, said in a prepared release. Some of that money might go toward mitigating wildfire risk and some might go toward bolstering the utility’s credit rating. Burying power lines is typically considered far more costly and time-consuming than insulating and covering overhead lines, according to TURN. Mark Toney, executive director of TURN, said in an interview Monday that the PUC shouldn’t allow PG&E to force customers to endure higher bills as a way to bolster its credit rating on Wall Street. “PG&E has to focus on basics, to reduce its wildfire risks as quickly as possible by hardening the lines,” Toney said. “Credit ratings are all about managing risk. PG&E needs to harden the wires rather than use its customers to put more money in the pocket of Wall Street investors and the company’s shareholders.”

The state Public Utilities Commission (PUC) is scheduled to make a final decision on Nov. 16 regarding PG&E’s ability to make changes in customers’ bills. The grim reality: The two main proposals that the PUC is considering lead to big increases in monthly bills.

Source: Palo Alto Online | By Sherry Listgarden

The last proposal I will reference is a joint proposal from NRDC and The Utility Reform Network (TURN), an advocate for ratepayers. They split the difference, coming in between most of the other proposals, making some compromises but achieving the essence of what AB 205 calls for. They advocate for modest fixed charges based on three income levels. Rates go down in their scheme, but not to the degree that they go down for the IOUs. Affordability improves, but not as much as it does with the Sierra Club or CEJA proposals. Bills go up for higher-income customers, but electrification can save them money. “Coastal high tier customers for each IOU generally more than double their savings under our new electrification rate proposal relative to the existing rate.” NRDC and TURN seem to be aiming for something that will make things better, be politically palatable, and not be too hard to implement.

Effective energy pricing is key to transitioning away from fossil fuels. Americans are not always great at following rules but we are excellent at following prices. If we align our pricing with the transition we need to see, then we will see it. If we don’t, we won’t. That is why we must fix California’s electricity pricing.

Source: GV Wire | By Nancy Price

The Utility Reform Network, a Bay Area-based nonprofit that advocates for consumers, says PG&E officials took advantage of delays to lobby for an extra $1.8 billion in revenues over the next four years. And that would be on top of revenue jumps in two rate case proposals totaling billions of dollars in those years. “TURN opposes PG&E proposals to line the furs of Wall Street investors by squeezing an additional $1.8 billion from ratepayers,” executive director Mark Toney said in a news release. “It is time for the CPUC to stand up for customers and choose safety and affordability and vote to adopt the original Proposed Decision at their Nov. 16 meeting.”

Last-minute revisions to two major electricity-cost issues pending before the California Public Utilities Commission could impact how much consumers pay for electricity provided by Pacific Gas & Electric and whether apartment dwellers statewide will continue to get direct use of solar power generated at their sites. A consumer advocacy organization and a solar power association, both battling to halt the rise of electricity costs in California, are raising concerns about revisions in the PG&E general rate case and solar metering for apartments, schools, and farms that the PUC is scheduled to consider at Thursday’s meeting in Southern California.

Source: CBS News | By Tori Apodaca

“TURN is very concerned this gives PG&E more time to lobby the commissioners," said executive director of The Utility Reform Network (TURN) that advocates for ratepayers Mark Toney. Toney said PG&E's plan to use the dollars to underground power lines is more expensive and will take longer than insulating them. TURN thinks there should be a cap on rate increases. "The cap on rate increases should be no more than the cost-of-living adjustments that social security recipients get every year," Toney told CBS 13.

About 16 million people across Northern California will have to wait to see how much more they will be paying for power. The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) postponed its vote on the PG&E rate increase that was supposed to happen on Nov. 2 and said it needs more time to decide.

Source: ABC 7 News | By Cornell Barnard

For decades, The Utility Reform Network, or TURN, has waged a fight nearly single-handedly to oppose rising utility bills delivered by California’s three major utilities, PG&E, Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric. “We need to stop the sky being the limit for PG&E requests for rate increases, and the sky being the limit to how much the CPUC can approve,” said Mark Toney, TURN’s executive director. “What we need is legislation that caps annual rate increases to no more than the cost of living allowance received each year by people on Social Security,” Toney said. “Make PG&E live within a budget like its customers have to.”

The utility is asking the California Public Utilities Commission to approve a rate hike that could increase bills by up to $31 per month. Advocates were demanding 'fair rates' on the steps of California Public Utilities headquarters Wednesday where regulators will soon decide if PG&E will be granted a steep rate hike, which could raise the average monthly gas and electric bill between $25 to $31 dollars, depending how they vote

Source: Fresno Bee | By McClatchy California Opinion Editors

Mark Toney, TURN’s executive director, told McClatchy California opinion editors that Edison has been able to harden power lines for about $800,000 a mile. PG&E’s undergrounding plan would cost $3 million to $4 million per mile, he said. Similar estimates are included in the PUC’s proposed decision. There are other significant advantages with line hardening:

▪ PG&E would be able to conduct the work without having to secure rights-of-way and other approvals.

▪ Since PG&E would follow existing power-line routes, it would not need environmental reviews. With burying, should PG&E encounter an unexpected obstacle and need to burrow around it, added environmental review would be needed, and that would cause delays.

Putting high-voltage electrical lines underground, rather than running them overhead atop power poles, is one way to prevent devastating wildfires. Pacific Gas and Electric Co. would know. The utility’s equipment sparked a series of deadly wildfires in Northern California that scorched hundreds of thousands of acres, cost hundreds of millions in firefighting expenses and caused billions of dollars in damage.

Source: NBC Bay Area | By Ian Cull

“We’re talking [$750 million] people are behind on their bills now and we see profits going higher and higher at PG&E,” said Mark Toney with the Utility Reform Network. The Utility Reform Network advocates for ratepayers. Toney says if the price of electricity keeps rising it won't just affect your monthly budget. It will also mean people won’t be incentivized to trade gas cars for electric ones. “The California Public Utilities Commission needs to make a decision. Is the point of PG&E to provide reliable, clean, safe, and affordable energy? Or is to provide a gravy train for Wall Street investors,” Toney said.

A study by the Public Advocate's Office at the California Public Utilities Commission found monthly electric bills over the past three years have gone up about 38% for PG&E customers. The new report comes ahead of a major decision for PG&E next week.

Source: Utility Dive | By Kavya Balaraman

But Mark Toney, executive director of ratepayer advocacy group The Utility Reform Network, said that the administrative law judge’s proposed decision “got it right in terms of making an evidence-based decision that insulating the overhead power lines is not only faster and cheaper, but when you look at the safety benefit analysis, turns out to be as safe – if not a tiny bit more safe – than burying the lines.” On the broader issue of balancing the safety and affordability of the electric grid, Toney stressed that utilities can’t have a blank check approach to safety. “ You need to figure out how do you get the most safety for the most cost-effectiveness — and the reason is because there’s not unlimited funding,” he said.

This September, the CPUC issued two proposals in response to PG&E’s general rate case request which cover the utility’s operational and infrastructure costs from 2023 through 2026. California utilities file general rate case applications with state regulators every four years, during which regulators scrutinize the revenues the utility will need for that period. PG&E’s latest application sought a $15.41 billion, $16.34 billion, $16.98 billion and $17.43 billion revenue requirement for 2023, 2024, 2025 and 2026, respectively.

Source: KPBS | By Erik Anderson & Bennett Lacy

The Utility Reform Network (TURN) is calling on California’s utilities to do a better job of preparing customers for higher bills if they see a price spike coming. TURN argues San Diego’s fortune 500 energy company could have done much better. “Sempra — the parent company of SDG&E that buys all this gas — did a very poor job,” said Mark Toney, executive director of TURN. “They failed last year to do proper management to keep the prices down. Winter comes every year, and every year there needs to be good management of buying ahead of time, storing the right amount of gas.” Toney gave Pacific Gas and Electric higher marks for minimizing the cost to consumers by buying natural gas in the summer, when prices were cheaper, and by having more of the fuel in storage in the winter.

Utility regulators are already looking ahead to California’s winter in an effort to determine if natural gas prices will spike into record territory like last year. The California Public Utilities Commission gathered with industry officials on Thursday for a briefing on the regional natural gas market.

Source: CNBC | By Katie Brigham

“If we keep pushing up electricity rates, the most vulnerable of us are not going to be able to pay,” says Katy Morsony, a staff attorney with The Utility Reform Network, a consumer advocacy group that supports a more limited approach to undergrounding.

While Martin says moving power lines underground reduces ignition risk by 98%, it comes at a steep cost. Data compiled by the California Public Utilities Commission shows that undergrounding just one mile costs anywhere between $1.85 million and $6.1 million, meaning PG&E’s total plan would likely be in the tens of billions. The bill would be footed by PG&E’s customers, who already face some of the highest rates in the nation.

Source: The Mercury News | By Editorial Board of The Mercury News and The East Bay Times

TURN executive director Mark Toney says that it would be significantly cheaper for PG&E to insulate its power lines, rather than bury them underground, as a way to protect against catastrophic wildfires. The two proposals would have PG&E insulate 1,800 miles of power lines and bury 200 miles of power lines at a cost of $2.1 billion. PG&E proposes insulating 320 miles and burying 2,000 miles of power lines at a cost of $5.9 billion.

Source: 2 News | By Josh Many

"Enough is enough, we need to keep these electricity rates down especially if they're going to push everybody to electricity," said The Utility Reform Network (TURN) Executive Director Mark Toney

TURN is pressuring PG&E, Pacific Gas to keep the cost of electricity down as California aggressively pursues more electrification of the energy system.

"People can adapt to go from gas to electric. They are mad when they're told you have to pay more to cook your food. The winning argument is to say, we want you to switch to electricity and your going to save money," said Toney.

Congressman LaMalfa evoked communities hit hard by power outages last winter in towns like Truckee and South Lake Tahoe.

He contends banning gas engines and appliances in those communities would put residents in dangerous circumstances, particularly because the electricity grid has proven unreliable.

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: Office of Governor Gavin Newsom | Quotes Compiled by Governor’s Staff

Mark W. Toney, Ph.D., Executive Director, TURN—The Utility Reform Network: “TURN has long advocated for a central procurement mechanism to enable coordinated purchases of new, high-value, hard-to-develop resources. TURN welcomes working with legislative leadership and the Governor’s Office to ensure that AB 1373 language limits centralized procurement to Zero GHG renewable projects that are new resources, such as offshore wind, require robust CPUC review and approval of any new commitments, and increase transparency at DWR.”

SACRAMENTO — Last week, Governor Gavin Newsom and the Legislature reached an agreement on the Governor’s package to build more clean energy, faster and make our grid more reliable to help achieve our 100% clean electricity goal.

Since then, environmental, labor and clean energy leaders from across California have echoed their support for the Governor’s package:

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.