Affordability & Accountability Bill Package

Source: Communications Daily | By Philip Athey

The Utility Reform Network said the monitoring period in the proposal is too long and could subject California Lifeline customers to two years of price increases before a higher subsidy level is introduced. The group instead recommended an eight-month monitoring period with an updated subsidy level presented in 12 months.

Nearly all industry and public advocacy organizations said they support a proposed decision from the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) to increase the subsidy level and minimum service requirements for the state's Lifeline program, suggesting only minor changes and clarifications. But one, Assurance Wireless, said the changes in the proposal were so significant that they potentially overstep the CPUC’s legislative mandate and raise the question of federal preemption.

Source: Capitol Weekly | By Opinion by Mark Toney, Executive Director of TURN

SB 905 would help ensure utilities don’t get overpaid for work that already benefits the company by requiring the California Public Utilities Commission to examine whether the profit margins utilities earn on wildfire-related spending — like undergrounding power lines — are justified. This work already protects utilities from costly wildfire lawsuits, and that protection shouldn’t come with an extra reward: outsized profit margins billed to customers who are struggling to keep the lights on.

Electricity bills have skyrocketed over the past few years for residential and business customers of Pacific Gas & Electric, SoCal Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric — in large part because of the $40 billion customers have paid to cover California’s wildfire costs.  

Source: Canary Media | By Jeff St. John

Google and PG&E have been tussling with the Sierra Club, The Utility Reform Network, and others over how to allocate the cost of connecting that 250-MW ​“large load” to the utility transmission grid. The big issue? How much of that cost should be borne by PG&E customers at large versus by Google itself.

California has yet to take full advantage of rooftop solar, backup batteries, and other home devices to create virtual power plants (VPPs) that can help its stressed-out grid — even though it has more of those distributed energy resources than any other state.  Earlier this month, utility Pacific Gas & Electric launched its latest effort to improve on that poor record via an ambitious partnership with friendly neighborhood tech giant Google and pro-electrification nonprofit Rewiring America.

Source: Politico | By Tyler Katzenberger, Chase Difeliciantonio, and Christine Mui

Mark Toney, executive director of The Utility Reform Network, a California-based nonprofit, told POLITICO he noticed ”more urgency” and “more positive signals from the governor’s office” to regulate data centers this year. He contrasted it to last year, when he said “there was not a sense that California had to be out front — and in fact, California was at risk of falling behind.” 

What a difference a year makes.  Last year, California Gov. Gavin Newsom vetoed legislation that would have tracked data centers’ water use and signed a pared-back study measure on their electricity rates. Just a few months ago, he was downplaying the importance of the issue altogether.

Source: From the Office of Governor Gavin Newsom |

Mark Toney, Executive Director, TURN: “Collectively these measures protect ratepayers from subsidizing the significant energy consumption of data centers, ensuring that the data centers pay upfront for the extra infrastructure that must be built to operate them, and pay their fair share for wildfire mitigation and other ratepayer-funded programs. We are grateful for the Governor’s leadership to hold these data centers accountable.”

Yesterday, Governor Gavin Newsom signed the most comprehensive data center laws in the nation, providing communities more control on water, electricity, and land use. 

Source: Martin CID Magazine | By Adrian Kessler

What emerged intact was a directive for the California Public Utilities Commission to study data center energy costs by 2027 — a study of a problem regulators already have the authority to investigate. An attorney for The Utility Reform Network called it toothless, and it is hard to read it any other way.

The state was supposed to be capping AI's appetite for power and water. What actually reached the governor's desk asks data centers to open their books — and even that is one veto from vanishing.  The story California has been telling about itself this year is one of a state finally putting limits on the machines eating its power and water. The version that reached the governor is quieter and more revealing: it does not cap what a data center may draw. 

Source: The Los Angeles Times | By Blanca Begert, Dakota Smith, Ian James

“Collectively these measures protect ratepayers from subsidizing the significant energy consumption of data centers, ensuring that the data centers pay upfront for the extra infrastructure that must be built to operate them, and pay their fair share for wildfire mitigation and other ratepayer funded programs,” Mark Toney, executive director of the Utility Reform Network, a ratepayer advocacy group, said.

California just took its first concrete steps toward regulating its growing data center industry as public appetite builds to crack down on the massive facilities.  Amid widespread concerns about environmental and economic impacts of data centers, Gov. Gavin Newsom signed seven bills Monday morning aimed at protecting consumers from growing electricity costs and tracking the centers’ immense energy and water consumption.

Source: Communications Daily | By Philip Athey

Ryan Johnston, a telecom regulatory attorney for TURN, said that beyond the Verizon/Frontier merger requirements, the condition could undermine California’s Lifeline program and possibly even its carrier of last resort (COLR) obligations and minimum service quality requirements for both phone and internet use.  While the state would receive its $1.4 billion in deployment funding, “when you look across at something like the California Lifeline program, saving about 1.7 million people $20 a month for the next 14 years, that comes out to... almost $5 billion itself,” he said. “There is not an equal weight on both sides of the scale here.”

Consumer advocates in California are calling on state officials to fight a provision added to the BEAD program by the Trump administration that would require the state to stop enforcing its net neutrality law and consumer protections on BEAD subgrantees for 14 years.  

Source: Consumers’ Checkbook | By Herb Weisbaum

Ryan Johnston, a lawyer with The Telecom Regulatory Reform Network (TURN), a consumer advocacy group in California, called the original rule “a really good transparency tool” that was working as intended.  “It’s pretty straightforward. We all know how to read food product labels,” Johnston said.

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC), which has become far more business-friendly under the Trump administration, has ordered changes to its broadband label rule. The original rule, approved during the Biden administration, made it more difficult for companies to obscure the full prices of their services.  

Source: Canary Media California Wire | By Jeff St. John

In addition, SB 905 would encourage utilities to measure how efficiently they’re using their existing grids — a precursor to setting up regulations that could steer them toward prioritizing lower-cost solutions over expensive grid upgrades. These aren’t the only affordability proposals on the table. The Utility Reform Network has a list of bills awaiting Newsom’s signature that offer even wonkier ways to ride herd on utility costs.

Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom — who everyone knows is eyeing a run for the White House — has one last chance to show his true colors on energy and climate change. Rising electricity costs are a major issue in California, and Newsom must decide by the end of this month whether to sign a host of bills that could help cut utility rates while also advancing the state’s clean energy transition. 

Source: Bakerfield.com | By John Cox

Executive Director Mark Toney of Oakland-based The Utility Reform Network said by email he was encouraged the CPUC’s new chairman, John Reynolds, is looking at potential improvements such as requiring utilities to include more information in their rate-case applications. “TURN is urging the commission to protect ratepayers and hold utilities accountable to spending within their budgets to provide safe, clean, affordable energy by requiring utilities to: Aspire to limit (general rate case) spending to as close to inflation as possible, rein in overspending in accounts outside of the GRC, and auditing actual shareholder returns versus authorized returns,” Toney wrote.

Work began this month on a regulatory process intended to boost affordability, accountability and transparency in the way California’s investor-owned gas and electric utilities apply for permission to raise their rates.  

Source: Lifeline with Craig Roberts (podcast) KFAX | By Craig Roberts

This podcast featuring Executive Director of TURN Mark Toney aired September 15^th 2026

Craig: I want to get your response  to the failure of the California Legislature to pass SB 492 and PG&E’s answer that their financial risk to harden their infrastructure results is way too much for lenders and investors, so they will hold off on that.

Mark: Just because PG&E can’t get what it wants, they can’t just pick up their toys and go home.  I told their executives that they need to spend less money burying lines underground (which is extremely expensive and takes an extremely amount of time) and do what Edison has done by insulating overhead power lines.  It is just as safe and costs one-fifth, and can be done five times faster than burying the lines.

Craig: why isn’t PG&E insulating the lines and reducing the immediate risk of fires?  There is no sense of urgency.

Mark: Shareholder returns. The more money they invest in capital investments, the more they can get in returns.  Returns is not the only thing; we need safety.  If you don’t have safety, lenders charge a higher interest rate because of the risk, and you and I pay the higher interest rate.  What we are saying is reduce the risk as quickly and inexpensively as possible, so we have less of these shutoffs and wildfire disasters.

Mark: Please ask your listeners to call (916) 445 2841; this is the phone number that the Governor’s office has to make public comments on bills.  Ask your listeners to call this number and urge him to sign SB 905 and the other six TURN affordability bills.  They know what these bills are and we’ve been working with them since January.  The Governor’s office needs to know that your listeners come from all over California.  

Craig: this is a comment line set up with the Governor’s office  and believe it or not, these calls matter.  We have learned that each call represents hundreds of people who want to make a difference.

Source: KTVU Fox 2 | By Tom Vacar and Allie Rasmus

Mark Toney, CEO of The Utility Reform Network, known as TURN, a longtime critic of PG&E, was upset.  "The legislature adopted nothing," he said. Toney said things TURN wanted were also ignored to keep the California Wildfire Fund able to cover liabilities caused by electric utility equipment. "We need a plan that makes the $40 billon last and doesn't get depleted," he said. "That didn't happen.”  TURN's position is that PG&E should live within the money it has and quit the slow, expensive process burying power lines.  "At a cost of $4 million a mile and we're gonna replace those with insulating overhead powerlines, insulated poles, at one-fifth of the cost and it can be done much faster," he said. 

Pacific Gas and Electric Company announced plans on Wednesday to postpone roughly $2 billion in capital investments next year to bolster its finances, aiming to "reinvent" itself and improve its financial outlook.  The reduction in capital spending could impact project timelines for connecting new homes, establishing data centers, and implementing clean energy initiatives.

Source: ABC7 News | By Dryden Quigley

The Utility Reform Network, a consumer advocacy group, said it supports the measure.  "We need a way to basically penalize the utility executives for starting wildfires. And that's never happened before," said Lee Trotman with The Utility Reform Network.  The organization said it supports the bill in its entirety, arguing that it protects ratepayers while prioritizing wildfire survivors through a faster payout process.  "There's no way you can compensate someone for the loss of life, right? Their families, etc.. but you make it financially painful. You make sure that the utility executives have skin in the game," Trotman said.

California lawmakers are a step closer to an agreement on who should be held responsible when a utility causes a wildfire, after the Governor, Senate and Assembly leaders reached a compromise reflected in Senate Bill 492.  According to the California Public Utilities Commission, utilities have caused roughly half of the state's most destructive wildfires.

Source: California Senate Democratic Caucus | By EIN Presswire

“TURN is very pleased to see SB 327 make it to the governor’s desk. Preventing utilities from using ratepayer money to stop municipalization and protecting the Public Advocates Office’s right to investigate utilities for compliance with the law is more important now than ever before. At a time of skyrocketing utility bills, people deserve to choose a lower cost option like a municipal utility,” said Adria Tinnin, director of Race Equity and Legislative Policy for TURN. “We thank Sen. McNerney for this important legislation and urge Governor Newsom to stand with California families and businesses and sign SB 327 into law.” 

The California Legislature today approved Sen. Jerry McNerney’s SB 327, which would protect ratepayers by strengthening oversight of investor-owned utilities (IOUs) and barring IOUs from using ratepayer funds to fight local efforts to create municipal utilities. 

Source: The Sacramento Bee | By Andrew Graham and Stephen Hobbs

Newsom is not alone in his stance, including from people who are not traditionally aligned with utility companies.  Mark Toney, executive director of The Utility Reform Network, an organization that works to protect ratepayers from increased electrical rates, backs the idea of eliminating the ability of insurance companies to recoup money. He sees it as a way to help sustain a state wildfire fund and prevent taxpayers from being asked to keep refilling it.

Gov. Gavin Newsom’s last ditch effort to pressure legislators to change the way the state handles utility-caused wildfires involves an array of measures. But one issue in particular has become a flashpoint in the ongoing negotiations: Whether insurance companies should be able to recoup money from a utility company after a fire.  

Source: Capitol Weekly | By Guest Opinion by Matt Freedman (TURN)

My organization TURN, which represents the interests of residential customers of the utilities, partnered with a diverse coalition to support a community solar program that could help achieve our broad clean energy targets. Due to increasing delays in connecting generation to the state’s high-voltage transmission network and rigid opposition by the Trump administration to placing renewable energy projects on federal land, California needs to deploy community solar and storage projects, which connect to the lower-voltage distribution system and don’t need any approvals from the federal government.

California’s environmental leadership is at risk. Despite the growing demand for clean and cost-effective energy, the state lacks a viable community solar and storage program that allows customers to participate in the development of shared clean generation facilities. 

Source: CBS News | By Steve Large

Mark Toney, executive director of The Utility Reform Network, said lawmakers need to move quickly.  "We are in a race with time," Toney said. "We need to cut out third parties, insurance companies. We need to limit attorneys' fees.”

California lawmakers and Gov. Gavin Newsom are racing to reach a deal on changes to the state's wildfire liability system, with just days remaining before the legislative session ends.  The proposed reforms could affect how wildfire victims are compensated and how much utilities such as PG&E are responsible for paying after fires linked to their equipment.

Source: The Frisc | By Adam Brinklow

There is room for nuance, however, as the Oakland-based environmental group The Utility Reform Network acknowledges. TURN is backing several state bills to regulate data center expansion, including extra company taxes to help reinforce the public electric grid.  TURN spokesperson Lee Trotman says sites already in SF aren’t on their radar: “We don’t have much to say about them other than they use less energy and water than AI data centers.”

Last month Sup. Connie Chan, who’s running for Nancy Pelosi’s congressional seat, released a campaign ad excoriating San Francisco’s AI boom. “AI data centers are driving up our utility costs, displacing our community, and jeopardizing our environment,” she said, standing in front of a public library.  Chan’s not the only one raging against the machines. If elected, she’ll support a moratorium on new AI data centers penned by Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY).

Source: FOX 2 KTVU | By Tom Vacar

"The decision that the CPUC is about to make, PG&E could raise your monthly bill $50 or more a month," said Mark Toney, the executive director of The Utility Reform Network (TURN).  Over the lifetime of the decision —  up to 20 years — TURN calculates that each customer's portion could be around $18,000.

The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) plans to unveil a proposed decision concerning PG&E's requested rate hikes.  The utility company says the increases are crucial as it aims to bury 10,000 miles of power lines as a preventative measure against wildfires in high-risk regions. This increase is substantial.

Source: SF Gate | By Anabel Sosa

Mark Toney, the executive director of the Utility Reform Network, a nonprofit legal advocacy network, told SFGATE in an email that there are still questions about the specifics of Becerra’s plan but that it is “encouraging” to see the candidate’s commitment to bringing down the price of electricity. “While we are unsure how much ratepayers might benefit from two free hours of electricity, we are eager to learn more about the proposal,” Toney said.

During midday in California, the state’s solar grid produces so much energy that, sometimes, it can’t even use it all. It’s a good problem to have, and one that the leading Democratic candidate governor thinks could be a boon to low-income households. At a recent summit hosted by Politico, Xavier Becerra said he wants to offer free electricity from 1 p.m. to 3 p.m. for those who qualify, possibly saving them upward of $1,000 annually.

Source: Communications Daily | By Philip Athey

Alexandra Green, a telecom and regulatory attorney for The Utility Reform Network, told us her organization also favored the Ormond proposal and was disappointed that the CPUC didn't require enough consumer protections in the merger agreement.

The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) unanimously approved the $34.5 billion Charter/Cox merger with some conditions in a Thursday vote, clearing the way for the resulting company to become the largest ISP and cable provider in the nation.  The merger was previously approved by the FCC and DOJ, as well as regulators in New York and Connecticut. California was the final regulatory hurdle.

Source: The Plumas Sun |

If the FCC grants AT&T’s petition, the company could move forward with abandoning universal service obligations that millions of Californians rely on, particularly those living in rural communities.   RCRC joined a coalition of organizations, such as The Utility Reform Network, California Alliance for Digital Equity, California State Association of Counties and the Communications Workers of America, in submitting comments to the FCC on July 7 and July 22.

The Rural County Representatives of California reports that, in coordination with a broad coalition of consumer, local government, labor, agricultural and public interest organizations, it has filed comments with the Federal Communications Commission opposing a threat to universal telephone service protections. 

Source: Canary Media | By Jeff St. John

SB 905 represents an important, if somewhat incremental, next step on those efforts, said Matthew Freedman, senior staff attorney at The Utility Reform Network (TURN), one of the state’s most vocal utility ratepayer advocacy groups and a sponsor of the bill. Among the bill’s provisions, a ​“lower return on equity is a pretty big one,” he said.  Utilities earn guaranteed rates of profit on capital investments, which puts upward pressure on customer rates. Anything that can reduce that rate of ​“return on equity,” or ROE, could help limit those increases, he said. A number of states are targeting utilities’ ROE to combat rising rates — and utilities are, not surprisingly, fighting back against the idea.

California lawmakers are once again contending with how to curb the state’s high energy costs as they hurtle toward the end of this year’s legislative session on Aug. 31. So what’s on the table for utility rate reform in the final stretch?  Enter Senate Bill 905, a complicated package of proposals that are likely to face intense opposition from utilities, which tend to reflexively resist rules that could crimp their profits. 

Source: Yahoo!Finance | By Kim LaCapria

Mark Toney, executive director of nonprofit consumer advocacy group The Utility Reform Network, described electricity bills as having "high volatility," according to the newspaper.

Forecasters expected the Central Valley to get close to 110 degrees and parts of the Bay Area to climb into the low 100s.  In a state that already has some of the highest electricity prices in the country, that kind of heat can make air conditioning a major financial burden for families trying to stay safe.

Source: Broadband Breakfast | By Jake Neenan

The Utility Reform Network, a California advocacy group that did not settle and has opposed the deal, wanted the CPUC to go even further. The group generally supported the agency adopting Ormond’s proposal over Baker’s, as did another set of in-state advocacy groups like Digital Equity Los Angeles.  TURN attorney Alexandra Green wrote that the number appeared to come from a filing in which Charter said there were 6,000 un- or underserved locations in its footprint, but that the number should be increased to account for the addition of Cox locations.

Charter and Cox Communications want California regulators to approve their $34.5 billion merger with fewer strings attached than consumer advocates.  The California Public Utilities Commission is set to vote on approving the deal at its Aug. 13 meeting. Unusually for recent telecom mergers, the agency will have two proposed decisions to choose from.

Source: San Francisco Chronicle | By Jessica Roy

California has the second-highest electricity costs of any state in the U.S. Mark Toney, the executive director of nonprofit consumer advocacy group The Utility Reform Network, said high rates and fluctuating weather patterns can make monthly bills unpredictable.  Electricity bills “have high volatility,” he said. “They can go up very quickly, before you know it, based on the weather that you really have very little control over.”

If you or another full-time resident in your home relies on energy for a medical need — for instance, if you use a respirator, oxygen generator, powered wheelchair, dialysis machine or apnea monitor, or if you need a refrigerator to keep medicine such as insulin cold, or depend on heating or cooling for conditions like multiple sclerosis or scleroderma — you are eligible to receive an extra monthly allotment of energy at the lower baseline price. Eligibility is based on medical need, not income. 

Source: San Francisco Chronicle | By Mark Toney, Executive Director of TURN (contributor)

PG&E is seeking to charge California ratepayers billions for outstanding costs, which will soon show up on our electricity bills. The utility has also requested and is expected to collect on several additional pending proposals to raise rates over the coming years and has $1.05 billion sitting in memorandum accounts that will be billed to ratepayers. This includes billions of dollars for wildfire mitigation, grid upgrades and other investments — as well as the hefty profit margins the utility is allowed to collect.

PG&E claims its rates are stabilizing. The numbers say otherwise.  According to an independent assessment by the California Public Utilities Commission’s Public Advocates Office, the state’s advocate for ratepayers, the average PG&E customer could pay $840 more annually by 2030, on top of the 69% rate increase during the past decade.

Source: Benton Institute for Broadband and Society | By Kevin Taglang

During the 2026 proceeding, AARP and TURN argued that the telephone remains a preferred channel for older adults, lower-income households, and consumers with limited digital literacy—and, as TURN noted, for people who do not yet have broadband and are calling to find out what it costs. TURN cited 2023 American Community Survey data showing that "80 percent of adults with vision difficulty own a smartphone, against 62.7 percent with home broadband service."

If you shop for home internet service in the coming months, something on the screen may look different. For the past two years, providers have had to show you a standardized "broadband label"—a black-and-white box modeled on the nutrition panel on a cereal box, listing the monthly price, what happens when the introductory rate expires, the typical speeds, the latency, the data allowance, and each fee added on top. The label had to sit right next to the advertised plan.

Source: Washington Watch | By NECA

TURN, et al. said comments in this record show AT&T’s application to relinquish its ETC designation will not have positive effects for California consumers. They said if the FCC grants AT&T’s petition before the CPUC can finish its investigation, consumers will be left with inadequate or nonexistent replacement services. all replies available | public notice | order

In addition to reply comments listed in a previous edition of Washington Watch, replies were filed on July 22, 2026, on AT&T’s petition seeking forbearance from Section 214(e) eligible telecommunications carrier requirements within its California service territory.