News Article

February 14, 2010
PG&E funding Prop. 16 to keep its stranglehold
By Bill McEwen / The Fresno Bee

People want relief from sky-high utility bills.

The state wants to encourage power-company competition, green energy and lower rates with the Community Choice law.

So, how does Pacific Gas & Electric Co. respond to these threats to its monopoly?

The utility giant bankrolls a deceptive June ballot initiative that seeks to rewrite California's constitution, kill upstarts in their tracks and block the expansion of municipal utility companies such as the one saving money for residents of Sacramento.

PG&E has thousands of conscientious, hard-working employees who contribute positively to the quality of life in their communities. But the company's leadership unquestionably lacks a moral compass.

Seeking to leverage voter mistrust of authority in tough economic times, PG&E is the lone architect of Proposition 16, which is being marketed as the Tax-payers Right to Vote Act.

A more accurate name would be the PG&E Right to Enslavement Act. If passed, the initiative would require two-thirds of the voters in an area to approve an alternative energy option.

It's difficult to get two-thirds approval for anything. Given PG&E's bottomless pockets and penchant for stuffing mailboxes with glossy, distortion-filled brochures, it will be nigh impossible for a nascent community utility company to gain approval.

How badly does PG&E want you and 15 million other Californians as customers?

Not badly enough to roll back its rates — which are among the highest in the nation — by cutting bureaucracy and trimming its chief executive's $5 million annual compensation.

Not badly enough to do something about the frequent blackouts endured by ratepayers.

But PG&E is willing to spend tens of millions of dollars, skirt fair-play regulations and deceive voters. And it created Proposition 16 in the hope of using a constitutional hammer to nail you down once and for all.

Not that PG&E says it this way. The company's justification for Proposition 16 is that it wants voters to have a voice if local jurisdictions decide to get in the power game.

But David Orth, general manager of the Kings River Conservation District, knows the truth behind PG&E's masquerade. He also is top boss of the San Joaquin Power Authority, which sought to provide electricity to customers in Fresno, Kings and Tulare counties before suspending efforts last summer.

Orth says that the recession and the inability to lock in long-term prices from bulk electricity suppliers contributed to the power authority's decision to back off its seven-year, $3 million attempt.

But PG&E also successfully pressured public officials in Fresno and Tulare County to pull out of the authority. In fact, PG&E's tactics were so shady that it agreed to pay $486,000 in legal fees incurred by the authority. The fees arose from a complaint filed by Orth's group with the state Public Utilities Commission against PG&E.

"They continued to pound us down every chance they got," Orth says. "They put up obstacles and challenges every step of the way. It costs a lot of money to take them on."

Orth says the fight isn't over, but more Valley cities would have to sign on before the authority could move forward. Meanwhile, he and other local utility backers in places like the Bay Area are asking the state PUC to level the field by restricting PG&E's attempts to undercut potential competitors.

If Proposition 16 passes, Orth says, "it will be very challenging for local government to offset the campaign funding by PG&E against Community Choice. Going in, knowing that you have to have a two-thirds vote, a lot of people would step back and say this isn't going to work."

According to state records, PG&E contributed $3.5 million in 2009 to Proposition 16. All signs are that the investor-owned utility is prepared to spend many times that amount to keep ratepayers under its thumb.

Think about this when you pay your PG&E bill.

Remember this in June when you come to the big lie that is the Taxpayers Right to Vote Act.