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: 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: 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: 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: 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. 

Source: WAshington Watch | By NECA

TURN said this area of policy has been left to the states and Section 253 delegates to the states the authority to regulate to preserve and advance universal service. 

The Utility Reform Network met with Commissioner Gomez’s advisors on July 16, 2026, regarding AT&T’s petition for a ruling that any California regulation that interferes with its ability to discontinue POTS is preempted by the FCC and petition for forbearance from Section 214(e) ETC requirements in California. 

Source: Washington Watch | By NECA

TURN said this area of policy has been left to the states and Section 253 delegates to the states the authority to regulate to preserve and advance universal service. TURN also said while AT&T Phone- Advanced has been approved in other states, none have a comparable topographical range or similar extreme weather events to California. Additionally, TURN said it had some preliminary concerns about the June 2026 E-Rate NPRM and urged the FCC not to let E-Rate become a victim of its own success.  

The Utility Reform Network met with Commissioner Gomez’s advisors on July 16, 2026, regarding AT&T’s petition for a ruling that any California regulation that interferes with its ability to discontinue POTS is preempted by the FCC and petition for forbearance from Section 214(e) ETC requirements in California. 

Source: Communications Daily | By Matt Daneman

In a docket 22-2 filing last week recapping meetings with the offices of Chairman Brendan Carr and Commissioner Olivia Trusty, the Utility Reform Network said labels will be less effective if the FCC drops the requirement to display them online in full next to a plan that a consumer could purchase. Cutting the machine-readability requirement, meanwhile, hurts people who rely on screen readers and other assistive technologies, the group said. It also urged the commission to keep fees and state and local taxes broken out into their own line items.

Consumer advocacy groups and others are expressing concern that the FCC's proposed changes to its broadband consumer label rules focus heavily on easing the requirements for providers when the greater problem is their widespread lack of compliance.  

Source: Fierce Network | By Linda Hardesty

Johnston said, “There are people that get paid a lot more than me to read those tea leaves, and at this point, it is going to be very difficult to say.” He said the FCC will have to take more comments and write an order and get it published in the Federal Register before it can then be challenged. And the two current lawsuits in California are only just beginning. 

Petitions and appeals are flying between AT&T and government groups as AT&T accelerates its agenda to get out of the landline telephone business in California. But AT&T hasn’t provided data to prove that its alternative connectivity solution will definitely work in the most remote locations of the state, according to a consumer advocacy group.  

Source: ARS Technica | By Jon Brodkin

California told the FCC that AT&T is lying when it claims that state rules prevent it from replacing copper with fiber. The Utility Reform Network, an advocacy group in California, told the FCC that AT&T’s wireless home phone service is “an ill-suited replacement for existing legacy infrastructure.”  

California can keep enforcing rules that require AT&T to offer basic phone service to new customers in its wireline territory, following a federal judge’s ruling last week.  AT&T sued California in May in a bid to end the state’s Carrier of Last Resort (COLR) rules that require it to offer telephone service to any potential customer in its territory. AT&T asked for a preliminary injunction that would prevent California from enforcing the COLR rules while the litigation continues.