Source: Sacramento Bee | By Ari Plachta

“The final budget deal with the Governor represents a total capitulation to PG&E and its shareholders,” Utility Reform Network attorney Matthew Freedman wrote. “This $400 million will never be paid back to the general fund, forcing taxpayers to absorb the costs.”

California lawmakers agreed to loan Pacific Gas & Electric Co. an additional $400 million to extend the life of Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant, ceding to Gov. Gavin Newsom’s push for the loan after initially refusing to pay in a public budget spat. Newsom, who brokered a 2022 deal to extend the nuclear plant’s operations with state loans to be covered by the federal government, has argued that Diablo Canyon is critical to maintaining grid stability as the state transitions to clean energy.

Source: Bay City News | By Ruth Dusseault

“Copper uses electricity. But when the power goes out, the power is provided from the telephone company by very big generators,” said Regina Costa with The Utility Reform Network, a nonprofit watchdog group that advocates for affordable power and phone service. “When an earthquake hits and the power’s out for two or three days, you still have local phone service.”

The California Public Utilities Commission has rejected AT&T’s request to withdraw as a carrier of last resort, or COLR, but it also decided to revisit the rules of determination. Meanwhile, a new bill in the state Legislature would revise the requirements for any company to be designated the COLR. The COLR is a cornerstone of utility regulation. It obligates a carrier to provide basic service to all customers within their territory no matter where they live. It can provide telephone service over any technology, such as copper, fiber, cable, voice over internet protocol (VoIP is a combination of copper and fiber), or wireless cellular. AT&T California has held that designation since 1996. It planted utility poles and strung copper telephone wire throughout the state.

Source: CalMatters | By Khari Johnson

California’s Public Utilities Commission today rejected AT&T’s application to stop providing landlines and other services in areas where there is no other option.

Its 4-0 vote came after a judge determined the application by AT&T California was “fatally flawed.”

Source: SF Chronicle | By Aidin Vaziri

AT&T must continue offering landline telephone service in California, state regulators decided Thursday.

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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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.