Source: The Los Angeles Times | By Sammy Roth

But under SB 254, shareholders of Edison, PG&E and SDG&E won’t earn a dime on the next $6 billion the utilities spend to reduce the risk of wildfire ignitions from their infrastructure, starting in 2026. That could save customers $3 billion over 10 years, according to the Utility Reform Network, a ratepayer watchdog group.  SB 254 also lays the groundwork for government loans to fund construction of some new power lines. That would be less expensive than utility funding, because ratepayers wouldn’t need to cover shareholder profits.

Last month, I wrote that California is backsliding on climate, and that it’s mostly Gov. Gavin Newsom’s fault. I took him and his appointees to task for undermining rooftop solar, propping up the Aliso Canyon gas field and slowing implementation of a single-use plastics recycling law, among other offenses.  So, it’s only fair that I give him credit for his actions last week, at the close of the legislative session. Legislators passed several bills meant to help reduce the cost of electricity — a top priority for lawmakers looking to tackle the state’s high cost of living, and also a smart move for climate progress. People are more likely to drive electric cars, and install electric heat pumps to warm and cool their homes, if electricity is less expensive.  

Source: Canary Media | By Jeff St. John

“Energy affordability was understood to be one of the top issues the Legislature needed to act on, due to massive rate increases and widespread customer outrage,” said Matthew Freedman, staff attorney at The Utility Reform Network, a consumer advocacy group that supported SB 254.  The amount to be financed through bonds was initially set to be $15 billion for all three utilities. But Freedman suggested that the utilities might have used their political clout last week to negotiate the final securitization requirement down to $6 billion, which is ​“a pretty big reduction,” he said.

California’s Legislature has approved a slate of policies aimed at curbing high and rising electricity costs, involving everything from short-term relief for high summertime utility bills to public financing of transmission grids — a big accomplishment in the waning days of the session.  The affordability measures emerged as part of a sprawling energy and climate package negotiated by legislative leaders and Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office last week and passed by lawmakers Saturday. Newsom, a Democrat, now has until Oct. 12 to sign the bills into law.

Source: Lake County News | By Lake County News Reporters

“Given the utility affordability crisis that residents, agriculture, industrial businesses, small businesses and older customers face, we need to work harder than ever in 2026,” Toney said. “Voters have been crystal clear in demanding that legislators put customer affordability ahead of utility company lobbying, and TURN is expecting lawmakers to roll up their sleeves to make utility affordability a top priority in the next legislative session.”

The California Legislature passed landmark legislation on Saturday that supporters said will save utility customers billions on their electricity bills annually, while ensuring the state’s wildfire fund, an insurance policy for utilities, remains solvent in the wake of claims from the 2025 Eaton Fire.  SB 254 (Becker, D-13) will help stem the tide on electricity rate increases while replenishing the state’s wildfire fund. The legislation was backed by strong support from voters: Recent polling shows 85% of voters say it's important for their representatives to do everything possible to lower electricity bills this year.

Source: Energy and Policy Institute | By Stephanie Chase

AB 1167’s mandatory penalty should deter utilities from trying to include those expenses in the first place, the bill’s sponsors, including Earthjustice and The Utility Reform Network (TURN), have said. 

State lawmakers last week made California the seventh state to pass a bill limiting investor-owned utilities from using customer money to pay for political and lobbying costs. Assembly Bill 1167, the California Ratepayer Protection Act, authored by Assembly Member Marc Berman (D-Menlo Park), passed both chambers of the legislature and now awaits action by Governor Gavin Newsom. AB 1167 includes provisions prohibiting investor-owned utilities from using customer money to support utility political activities, promotional advertising, and dues for trade associations that conduct political activities.

Source: Politico | By Camille Von Kaenel and Alex Nieves

As a result, even champions of the package acknowledged the electricity legislation could do more to stabilize prices than drive them down long term. Mark Toney, the executive director of the Utility Reform Network, a ratepayer advocacy group, called the electricity legislation “a first step in the right direction.”  “Given the utility affordability crisis that residents, agriculture, industrial businesses, small businesses and older customers face, we need lawmakers to work harder than ever in 2026,” he said.

Gov. Gavin Newsom used California’s legislative session to take a big step toward neutralizing a growing problem across the state and one of his biggest political liabilities: high energy costs.  The package of bills lawmakers sent to his desk Saturday includes measures to expand oil drilling and shore up utilities against wildfire costs — all in the hopes of stabilizing spiraling electricity bills and gas prices, which, despite repeated attempts to rein them in, remain among the highest in the nation.

Source: KDR12 ABC | By Jordan Gale

The bill's passage has been met with strong support, with 85% of voters emphasizing the importance of lowering electricity bills. Mark Toney of The Utility Reform Network highlighted the need for continued efforts to prioritize affordability for ratepayers.

 The California Legislature has passed SB 254, a significant piece of legislation aimed at reducing electricity costs and maintaining the state's wildfire fund after the 2025 Eaton Fire. According to the California Legislature, this bill will save utility customers billions of dollars annually. SB 254 introduces public financing for transmission infrastructure, potentially reducing project costs by up to 50%. It also includes securitization of $6 billion in wildfire safety investments, which could save ratepayers $3 billion over the next decade.

Source: Politico | By Camille Von Kaenel & Alex Nieves

As a result, even champions of the package acknowledged the electricity legislation could do more to stabilize prices than drive them down long term. Mark Toney, the executive director of the Utility Reform Network, a ratepayer advocacy group, called the measure on electric bills “a first step in the right direction.”  “Given the utility affordability crisis that residents, agriculture, industrial businesses, small businesses, and older customers face, we need lawmakers to work harder than ever in 2026,” he said.

Gov. Gavin Newsom used California’s legislative session to take a big step toward neutralizing a growing problem across his state and one of his biggest political liabilities: high energy costs.  Lawmakers on Saturday sent apackage of bills to his desk that they hope will stabilize spiraling electricity bills and gas prices, which despite several past efforts to bring them down are still among the highest in the nation. Newsom continues to battle soaring costs of living and other quality of life issues that he’s sought to neutralize. He’s deployed state law enforcement resources to help combat crime, and taken big steps to increase the state’s housing stock — in part by paring back landmark environmental regulations.

Source: CalMatters | By Alejandro Lazo & Jeanne Kuang

Consumer advocates, led by The Utility Reform Network, warned the change could weaken California’s control over its clean energy agenda and hand more power to a federal government under Trump that is siding with fossil fuels. Some environmental and consumer groups shared that concern. The shift is important because California has spent decades building one of the cleanest grids in the world and the move to open up that system to other Western states could reshape how both renewable and fossil power move across the region.

Gov. Gavin Newsom closed out the legislative year with one of the most sweeping overhauls of California’s energy and climate policies in decades — a package that could give him a presidential debate-stage talking point on rising energy costs as the Democratic Party shifts its focus to affordability.  The six-bill deal — passed Saturday after lawmakers extended their session by an extra day because of last-minute dealmaking — was sold as a way to ease gas prices and soaring electricity bills while preserving the state’s signature climate programs. Ratepayers are expected to get some relief through measures to cut the cost of building transmission lines, and an expanded cap-and-trade energy credit aimed at blunting rising energy bills. They also will get some protection from utilities hiking rates based on the cost of wildfire-proofing their infrastructure, such as by putting power lines underground. But they’ll also continue paying $9 billion over the next decade into a fund to compensate wildfire victims.

Source: San Francisco Chronicle | By Julie Johnson

“We’re adding more wildfire expenses,” said Mark Toney, executive director of The Utility Reform Network, or TURN. “We have to have limits, or else we end up worse off than we started.”

Five years ago, Pacific Gas and Electric Co. added a novel line item to utility bills: the wildfire fund charge. It was the start of a new state-run fund to help utilities pay for wildfire damage and avoid bankruptcy — while also protecting Californians from sudden price spikes in the aftermath of powerline-sparked blazes.  The modest charges of about $3 a month are slated to add up to $9 billion by 2036 for the California Wildfire Fund — to be matched by utility shareholders. 

Source: KQED | By Guy Marzorati, Julie Small, and Laura Klivans

Mark Toney, executive director of The Utility Reform Network, said the bill could save Californians billions of dollars over the next decade and was “a small step in the right direction for ratepayer affordability.”

Senate Bill 254, authored by state Sen. Josh Becker, D-San Mateo, and Assemblymember Cottie Petrie-Norris, D-Irvine, tackles several angles of climate and energy.  Among them is a proposal to have the state fund some power-grid investments with revenue bonds.  The state’s three large investor-owned utilities, Pacific Gas & Electric, Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric, typically pay for grid improvements with capital expenditures, which allow them to earn a guaranteed profit for shareholders. Proponents of the bills say financing these improvements publicly, through bonds, would bring down costs to ratepayers.

Source: Public Policy Institute of California | By Stephanie Barton

The cost to increase electrification on the grid goes into the rate base customers pay—”that [base is] the biggest part of lack of affordability,” said Adria Tinnin, director of race, equity, and legislative policy at The Utility Reform Network (TURN). Wildfire mitigation and safety make up a large portion of the base rate, which Tinnin suggested might be lowered through more cost-effective approaches such as insulating conductors rather than burying wires underground.

California has some of the highest energy costs in the nation, with a range of factors driving up utility bills at a faster pace than inflation. In a recent panel moderated by KQED climate reporter Laura Klivans, experts discussed the obstacles and solutions to achieving clean and affordable energy in California. “The primary driver of the increases in electricity bills is, frankly, climate change,” said Alice Reynolds, president of the California Public Utilities Commission, “having to adjust the system to make the infrastructure safer … as well as respond to the impacts of climate change, [which includes] repairs after wildfires, dealing with extreme heat” and providing the supply to meet higher and more volatile demand. Along with higher demand during the day, Siva Gunda, vice chair of the California Energy Commission, observed that demand has lengthened across summer and winter. To meet demand for “the median of the day [and] these long tails happening because of climate change” requires investing in additional capacity. Right now, two systems must be running to maintain reliability on the grid—the legacy oil and gas system alongside the new renewable system. “When you’re paying for two systems, the cost is going to be higher.” Gunda cited an expected rise in electricity use due to building, transportation, and data centers, which will further shift the point in the day when use goes up. That timing and usage “will drive the system you need to build,” Gunda said, and recommended stabilizing regulations as California phases out refineries.

Source: Broadband Breakfast | By Jake Neenan

The Utility Reform Network and the Center for Accessible Technology still oppose the deal, and are asking the CPUC to deny it in the agency’s proceeding on the issue. They are cross examining witnesses from Verizon and Frontier at evidentiary hearings this week.

Verizon and Frontier settled with two opponents to their merger in California, an effort to secure approval from the state’s utility regulator before the end of the year.  The companies agreed, should the state approve the deal, to dedicate $500 million to California-based suppliers, deploy 75,000 fiber passings in the state within five years, deploy 250 cell sites in seven years, and invest $40 million in digital opportunity programs run by the California Emerging Technology Fund. CETF said it didn't oppose the transaction in principle, provided the companies reached an agreement with the group to guarantee public interest benefits.  As part of the settlements, the companies would participate in California’s recently launched $20-per-month broadband subsidy program for low-income households and offer plans for the same price.

Source: LA Times | By Melody Petersen

Mark Toney, executive director of the Utility Reform Network, a consumer group, said he was disappointed that ratepayers — who are already paying the country’s second highest electric rates — would have to pay more. But he pointed to some measures that could help reduce the upward pressure on bills.  For example, utilities would be required to finance some expensive transmission projects through a lower-cost method of public financing that legislators said could save ratepayers billions of dollars.  Toney said after reviewing the bill’s language, his group planned to support it even though it “falls short of addressing the growing affordability crisis.”

California electric customers would pay $9 billion more to shore up the state’s wildfire fund under a last-minute deal reached behind closed doors that was introduced as legislation on Wednesday.  Southern California Edison, and the state’s two other large for-profit electric companies, had been lobbying Gov. Gavin Newsom and legislative leaders, urging them to pass legislation to replenish the state’s $21-billion fund that pays for damages of utility-caused fires. State officials have warned the fund could be wiped out by damages from the Eaton fire, which killed 19 people and destroyed a large swath of Altadena on Jan. 7.  Customers of the three utilities are already on the hook for contributing $10.5 billion to the original fund through a surcharge of about $3 on their monthly bills.

Source: San Francisco Chronicle | By Julie Johnson

Mark Toney, executive director of The Utility Reform Network, or TURN, said the $5 bill reduction was “cold comfort” given the unprecedented bill hikes from last year. In 2024, PG&E residential customers began paying about $440 more annually for gas and electricity compared to 2023, according to a Chronicle analysis of PG&E data. 

Pacific Gas and Electric Co. electricity bills will drop by about $5 for average households this month as charges for wildfire safety upgrades and emergency response are removed.  PG&E spokesperson Lynsey Paulo said the company has no other rate changes — up or down — planned for the rest of 2025. Combined gas and electric bills are expected to decrease again at the start of 2026, she said. That amount will be announced in late December once end-of-the year-calculations are finalized. “We are driving toward reducing prices further, and we’re making progress,” Paulo said. “You’ll see it again in 2026.” PG&E bills have changed only moderately this year, starting with a $1 increase for typical households in January and another $3 added charge to average residential bills that began in March. In both cases, new charges were partly offset by temporary charges that were removed. 

Source: The Mercury News | By Mark Toney & Michael Boccadoro

California is in the midst of a profound utility bill affordability crisis. Over the last decade, PG&E residential customers have watched their monthly electric bills skyrocket — from $88 in January 2015 to $215 a month, (a staggering 250% increase). This additional $1,600 annual burden forces families to make devastating trade-offs between utility bills and groceries, electricity and prescriptions, keeping service and even remaining housed. And it is not just residents teetering on the brink of survival.  Rising utility bills are impacting large industrial companies and local shops across the state. From steel mills and glass factories, to fruit, vegetable and dairy farmers, to neighborhood restaurants and small businesses, escalating utility bills have created an unsustainable burden. The good news is that after months of advocacy driven by a “big tent” of residential, small business, industrial and agricultural supporters, the Legislature has assembled the most significant electricity affordability package in decades. The bad news is that PG&E, SoCal Edison, Sempra, and Wall Street investment firms are actively resisting affordability legislation, because delivering savings to customers could trim utilities’ profits. Their message is clear: protecting shareholder profits is more important than providing relief for California families and businesses. Two major bills would unlock billions in customer savings and prioritize affordability over utility profit margins. State Senator Josh Becker’s SB 254 and Assemblymember Cottie Petrie-Norris’s AB 825 target three key areas where California can significantly reduce costs, while maintaining reliability and safety. Passing these bills would make an enormous difference.  First, they would save customers roughly $7.5 billion over 10 years by eliminating excessive shareholder profits on $15 billion in new grid spending, per analysis by The Utility Reform Network, or TURN. $15 billion in mandated ratepayer-backed bonds carries much lower interest costs than traditional shareholder financing, which includes guaranteed profit margins that force ratepayers to pay financing costs of 14%. Second, they would authorize public financing options for new transmission lines — infrastructure California urgently needs to meet growing electricity demand. By shifting from investor-owned utility financing to public-private partnerships, the state could save ratepayers more than $3 billion annually, totaling approximately $123 billion over 40 years. Third, they would require utilities to submit an inflation–constrained alternative, whenever they submit a rate increase that exceeds the rate of inflation. This will provide the California Public Utilities Commission the opportunity to use inflation as the starting point, placing the burden upon utilities to justify every dollar over inflation, rather than only having a sky-high starting point determined by utilities, that requires ratepayer advocates to whittle down the proposal dollar by dollar. Mark Toney is executive director of The Utility Reform Network (TURN). Michael Boccadoro is executive director of the Agricultural Energy Consumers Association (AECA).

Source: Bay Area News Group/Marin Independent Journal | By George Avalos

The Utility Reform Network consumer group, known as TURN, noted that PG&E’s current reduction in monthly bills compares poorly to the trend of recent years. “PG&E does not deserve credit for a temporary reduction in monthly bills, which is the result of customers finally paying off some of the billions in corporate overspending,” said Mark Toney, TURN’s executive director. “PG&E announcing that electricity bills will be coming down by $5 a month is cold comfort.”

PG&E bills are heading lower this month as some costs related to wildfires and emergency responses start to recede and vanish from the utility’s rate base.  Customers can expect monthly electricity costs to drop by an average of $5 for the typical residential ratepayer who uses 500 kilowatt hours a month and isn’t on a subsidized billing plan. That equates to a 2.1% decrease. Gas bills are slated to drop an average of 39 cents a month for the typical customer, which equates to a decline of 0.4%. These calculations apply to customers who use 31 therms a month.  “These reduced bills are significant because no more rate changes are expected in 2025,” said PG&E spokesperson Mike Gazda. “Bills are expected to go down in 2026.”

Source: SSBCrack News | By News Desk

Mark Toney, executive director of the Utility Reform Network (TURN), criticized PG&E, suggesting that the temporary reduction in monthly bills stems from customers finally absorbing some of the company’s significant overspending. He remarked that the announcement of a $5 decrease in electricity bills feels more like a minimal consolation.

Customers of Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) can look forward to lower utility bills this month as the utility begins to phase out certain costs associated with wildfire management and emergency responses from its rate base. The average residential electricity charge is expected to decrease by approximately $5 for users consuming 500 kilowatt-hours per month, marking a 2.1% reduction. Similarly, gas bills will see an average decline of 39 cents monthly for those using 31 therms. PG&E spokesperson Mike Gazda noted the significance of the changes, indicating that no further rate adjustments are anticipated for 2025, with expectations for continued drops in 2026. In a previous statement in April 2024, PG&E CEO Patricia Poppe expressed optimism for a future where customers might experience declining bills.

Source: KTUV Fox 2 News | By Tom Vacar

"And, the fact is, no one has presented a convincing argument that this is gonna save ratepayers a dime," said Mark Toney of the Utility Reform Network.

Governor Gavin Newsom wants California to join a power grid covering the western states. The governor says, "Over $1 billion in economic benefits to our state is on the line and failure to get this done will mean higher electric bills, more pollution and a less reliable power grid.” Now a bill is being considered called SB 540. But, under the original bill, there were guard rails, built-in protections to forbid price gouging as well as market manipulation by traders. Without guardrails, critics say California would also give up many of its environmental controls, power choices, the requirement that power supplies make maximum supplies and minimized prices, including coal plants of which the western states have many.     

Source: RTO Insider | By David Krause

While PG&E said the increased cost cap would translate into a 1.8% rate increase for an average residential customer, the CPUC countered that the “evidence does not support” this projected amount. The Utility Reform Network (TURN) estimates proposed cost cap increases would cost $72.50/year for a residential customer that uses 500 kWh/month. 

The California Public Utilities Commission approved a plan to increase Pacific Gas and Electric’s cost cap for customer energization projects in 2025 and 2026 by more than $1.5 billion, despite acknowledging the utility did not provide data to support its forecast growth in energization applications during those years.  The increased cap amounts are mountainous: PG&E can now seek to recover costs for up to about $1.1 billion in 2025 and $1.7 billion in 2026 for certain customer energization projects, according to the decision. In a 2024 decision, the CPUC approved cost caps of about $619 million in 2025 and $669 million in 2026 for these types of projects. 

Source: The Sacramento Bee | By Mark Toney and Kat Taylor

Carrier of Last Resort (COLR) obligations are legal requirements that ensure every household and business has access to basic telephone service, regardless of location remoteness, unprofitability or access challenges.