Source: KGO ABC 7 News | By Lauren Martinez

We spoke with Mark Toney, executive director of The Utility Reform Network.  "We're not talking about a tree falling against the wire, we're not talking about you know, high winds, we're talking about two lines that got so close together that electricity jumped from one to the other and caused a fire," Toney said. The CPUC's report explains that PG&E had evidence of the wires not meeting minimum clearance requirements back in 2016. Yet for nearly six years, no clear action was taken to address the issue. "Inspections are good, it's good PG&E is doing inspections, but they need to follow that up for taking the action for safety," Toney said.  Toney said the $7 million fine will be paid by shareholders, not customers.

PG&E is being fined $7 million and could potentially face criminal penalties. It stems from a fire that broke out in Woodside in San Mateo County in June of 2022.  No structures were damaged, but four firefighters were injured. The California Public Utilities Commission began its investigation the day after it broke out. Through its findings, PG&E is now being cited for 10 violations. The California Public Utilities Commission began its investigation the day after it broke out. Through its findings, PG&E is now being cited for 10 violations.

Source: Legal Planet | By Ruthie Lazenby with Sylvie Ashford, Mohit Chhabra

IOUs exist to make profit first, not to provide cheap, clean, and reliable electricity. An obvious solution then, is to make private utilities public. But will a public buyout of IOUs really buy Californians cheaper, cleaner and more reliable electricity? Well, it’s complicated.

Our new paper tries to shed light on this issue by breaking down the structural characteristics that distinguish IOUs from publicly-owned utilities (POUs). We apply these characteristics, and other necessary contextual details, to help explain differences in IOU and POU performance on affordability, clean energy, and reliability.

Ultimately, the measure of success is not whether utilities are publicly- or privately-owned, but whether Californians receive safe, reliable, affordable, and clean electricity. We hope this paper will enhance public conversations about electric utility reform and ownership to those ends. California should chart a course that maximizes public benefit and prioritizes the outcomes that matter most to its residents and its climate future.

Source: Politico | By Camille Von Kanel & Tyler Katzenberger

 “Will [data centers] use clean generation and battery storage?” Matt Freedman, a staff attorney at The Utility Reform Network, asked at a Senate hearing in April. “The requirements established by the Legislature will largely determine what type of on-site generation is used by these data centers.”

Democrats in Sacramento are taking cues from lawmakers in Indiana, Ohio and West Virginia as they explore special electricity rates for data centers aimed at controlling costs for other customers. But for ratepayer and environmental advocates, it could go either way: Data centers could, if managed properly, bring down the per-customer grid costs that have been dominating the political conversation for months — or they could leave ratepayers with costly stranded assets and even outpace the growth of renewable energy on the grid.

Source: Los Angeles Times | By Melody Peterson

“We think ratepayers have more than done enough,” said Mark Toney, the executive director of The Utility Reform Network, also known as TURN, a consumer group in San Francisco. “My position is that ratepayers should not pay another penny.” Among the consultants is Guggenheim Securities, the investment banking arm of Guggenheim Partners. Another subsidiary of Guggenheim Partners owns stock in the state’s three big utilities. A recommendation to tap utility customers to replenish the fund, instead of the utility companies themselves, would likely have a big impact on company share prices.  “They [Guggenheim] certainly have a vested interest in the financial success of the utilities,” Toney said.

One early estimate places fire losses from the Eaton fire at $24 billion to $45 billion. If Southern California Edison equipment is found to have sparked the blaze on Jan. 7, as dozens of lawsuits allege, the damage claims could quickly exhaust the state’s $21-billion wildfire fund. This year, the electric bill surcharge is expected to add $923 million to the fund, according to California Public Utility Commission records. If the fee were extended an additional 10 years, it would require customers of the three utilities to pay an additional $9 billion into the fund. That doesn’t sit well with consumer advocates, who point out customers are already on the hook to contribute half of the $21-billion fund, while also paying higher bills to cover costs such as undergrounding and insulated electric wires.

Source: KFI AM 640 | By iHeartRadio

An early estimate places fire losses between $24 billion and $45 billion. If the state's wildfire fund is exhausted, officials may consider extending a monthly utility bill surcharge beyond its planned expiration in 2035. This surcharge, known as the non-bypassable charge, currently adds about $3 to the average residential bill. According to the Los Angeles Times, extending the fee by an additional 10 years could require customers to contribute an extra $9 billion to the fund. Consumer advocates, however, argue that ratepayers have already contributed significantly to the fund and should not bear additional costs. Mark Toney, executive director of The Utility Reform Network, stated, "We think ratepayers have more than done enough." The state legislature is considering various options to address the issue, but no solution has been reached yet.

The devastating Eaton fire, which erupted in January, could lead to increased utility bills for over 30 million Californians. If Southern California Edison equipment is found to have sparked the blaze, as alleged in numerous lawsuits, the damage claims could deplete the state's $21-billion wildfire fund. The fire, which caused significant destruction in Altadena, killed 18 people and destroyed more than 9,000 structures.

Source: Cal Matters | By Malena Carollo

“The commission is ready to throw in the towel and say they’re not interested in spending the time and resources on fighting this,” Matthew Freedman, lawyer for The Utility Reform Network, said. “They’re going to let PG&E do what it wants.” But PG&E is only required to report such categories in which the fee is used, preventing regulators from seeing the net effect on shareholders. The net effect is important, the Utility Reform Network said, because PG&E could strategically use it to give shareholders more money overall. And while PG&E would report all of those categories during its general rate case, that case only happens every four years, as opposed to the annual filing for the Diablo Canyon fee.

State utility regulators next week are slated to wrap up a three-year effort to keep open California’s only remaining nuclear plant, Diablo Canyon. One member of the California Public Utilities Commission, critical of the level of scrutiny being given to funds in the case, has twice held the matter back from a vote. Consumer and nuclear safety advocates argue that commissioners will be greenlighting an annual slush fund of hundreds of millions of dollars for the utility that could end up enriching shareholders if they approve it as  proposed.

Source: AP News | By Tran Nguyen

''There are no limits to how much the utilities can ask for in rate increases. There are no limits to how many times a year they can ask,'' said Mark Toney, the group's executive director. ''You can't blame them for asking for the sky.’' Under Becker's proposal, utilities would be required to use public financing to fund the first $15 billion spent on capital investment projects. The option would allow utilities to access funding with lower interest rates, and utilities also would be prohibited from collecting a return on that investment for shareholders. That would save customers $8.8 billion over the next 10 years, Becker said.

While one in every five ratepayers can't pay their power bills, utilities like PG&E raked in record-breaking profits last year, according to The Utility Reform Network, a ratepayer advocacy group. The group supports Becker's measure and has sponsored a similar effort in the Assembly.

Source: San Jose Mercury/Bay Area News Group | By Grant Stringer

The bill is a cornerstone of Democrats’ “affordability” agenda this year. It includes a mix of short-term and long-term benefits for consumers, said Mark Toney, executive director of TURN, which supports the bill. Under the bill, the state would pour more money from its emissions Cap and Trade program into bill relief for customers. Currently, PG&E ratepayers receive $58 twice a year, according to the utilities commission. Plus, low-income customers would also receive bigger subsidies if the bill passes — though it’s unclear how much. The bill also would require utilities to finance $15 billion of spending at lower interest rates and without any profits for investors. And in a major development, the bill would create a public authority to finance transmission projects, instead of private investors. Becker’s office contends that would provide “billions in long term savings to ratepayers.” Utilities were opposed to the bill, and the California Chamber of Commerce condemned it in recent comments to a legislative committee. Toney at TURN, which supports the bills and many others this session, said he’s “feeling optimistic that the Senate and Assembly leadership are going to stand up for ratepayer affordability and will stand strong against PG&E and other utility lobbying.”

After falling short last year, lawmakers in the state Senate are advancing a flurry of bills intended to give customers relief from ever-rising electricity bills and rein in investor-owned utilities like PG&E, which is raking in record profits. The plans are central to the promise of Gov. Gavin Newsom and top Democrats to make California more affordable.

SB 254 would make structural changes to the way the California Public Utilities Commission regulates utilities and the manner of financing for pricey infrastructure projects.

Source: KGO San Francisco | By Mark Thompson

“With us live we have Lee Trotman, Communications Director at The Utility Reform Network or TURN as they are called.  Lee, can you help explain California’s skyrocketing electricity rates?  Seems like they are constant and customers are really frustrated.  And why hasn’t the Governor or CPUC received more blowback since they are supposed to regulate these utilities?”

 “Mark, you are correct that the governor appointed the CPUC commissioners and that the CPUC is ultimately responsible for approving rate increases.  One of the reasons why they haven’t received more blowback from increased rates is that customers blame the utilities but aren’t aware that the CPUC has plenty of say in approving rates.  And with unlimited rate increases from utilities constantly asking for more money, there needs to be common sense legislation like capping rate increases, shifting wildfire efforts away from ratepayers, and exploring public financing options that reduce the utilities rate of return on investments and shareholder profits.  Also, supporting bills like Senator Josh Becker’s SB 254 will go a long way in achieving short and long term rate decreases and all of this information can be found on TURN.org’s website in the Campaign For Affordable Power section.”

Source: In Clear Terms with AARP CA | By Dr. Thyonne Gordon

Mark “The bills have been skyrocketing the past the past several years. You can tell when you open up your bill. We have to fix a broken system.” Mark “WE have to hold utilities accountable to stopping ignitions of wildfires. The question is how to do it, the strategy, and how much it is going to cost. There is a cost effective way for wildfire safety and there is an extremely expensive way” What can we do at home to lower our utility rates? Mark “Pay attention to the time of day that you’re using appliances anything that you can do to shift things like laundry or running the dishwasher in the morning or early afternoon and try to avoid the four o’clock to nine o’clock hours when they charge more for electricity makes a difference.

Utility costs are top of mind for many Californians but there are practical steps being taken to address them. In this episode of In Clear Terms with AARP California, host Dr. Thyonne Gordon speaks with Mark Toney, Executive Director of TURN—The Utility Reform Network. Since 2008, Mark has led TURN’s efforts to advance energy affordability, broadband equity, and consumer protection throughout the state. The conversation covers the key reasons behind California’s rising utility bills, how wildfire mitigation and utility profits intersect, and potential solutions. Mark also outlines actionable tips for lowering costs at home and shares how residents can get involved in pushing for meaningful reform.

Source: LA Times | By Caroline Petrow-Cohen

“All rate increases have a significant effect on consumers because you’re paying more for something that you paid less for before,” said Lee Trotman, spokesman for the Utility Reform Network. “Edison is going to ask for the moon, and we’re going to say, ‘no, dial it back.’”

Southern California Edison is seeking to raise rates by 10% in order to pay for wildfire mitigation and cover “reasonable costs of its operations, facilities [and] infrastructure.”  If approved, the rate hike would mean an $18 average increase in monthly electrical bills for Edison’s 15 million customers.  The proposed rate hike has rankled victims of the Eaton fire that killed at least 18 people and burned more than 14,000 acres. Already this year, the CPUC voted to allow Edison to raise electricity rates to cover $1.6 billion in payments it made to victims of the devastating 2017 Thomas wildfire. Investigators found that the utility’s equipment sparked the blaze, one of the largest in California history.

Source: LA Times | By Melody Peterson

“All these supposed accountability measures that were put into the bill are turning out to be toothless,” said Mark Toney, executive director of The Utility Reform Network, a consumer advocacy group in San Francisco. “If executives aren’t feeling a significant reduction in salary when there is a significant increase in wildfire safety incidents,” Toney said, “then the incentive is gone.” So despite the safety failures, Umanoff received a cash bonus of $717,000, or 19% higher than he was expected to receive. “If you can just make it up somewhere else,” Toney said, “the incentive is gone.” TURN has repeatedly asked regulators not to approve Edison’s compensation plans, detailing how its committee has “undue discretion” in setting goals and then determining whether they have been met.

Edison’s safety record did decline last year. The number of fires sparked by its equipment soared to 178, from 90 the year before and 39% above the five-year average. Serious injuries suffered by employees jumped by 56% over the average. Five contractors working on its electric system died. But cash bonuses for four of Edison’s top five executives actually rose last year, by as much as 17%, according to a separate March report by Edison to federal regulators. Their long-term bonuses of stock and options, which are far more valuable and not tied to safety, also rose. Consumer advocates say the fact that bonuses increased in spite of the decline in safety highlights a flaw in AB 1054, the 2019 law that reduced the liability of for-profit utility companies like Edison for damaging wildfires ignited by their equipment.

Source: Marysville Appeal-Democrat | By The Sacramento Bee (TNS)

“It’s a slight decrease from these inflated rates, but it still does very little to help customers experiencing, you know, an affordability crisis,” said Lee Trotman, communications director for TURN, The Utility Reform Network.

Pacific Gas and Electric Company’s latest filing with California regulators requests an 8% increase in revenue beginning in 2027. The company said it’s their lowest in a decade. Chief Executive Officer Patti Poppe said the General Rate Case, filed every four years to the California Public Utilities Commission, proves they’re “a turnaround story in the making.”

Source: Sacramento Bee | By Kate Wolffe

It’s not much of a boon to average non-subsidized customers who went from paying about $166 for their monthly combined gas and electric bill in 2018 to an average of $300 per month in 2025, according to documents PG&E filed with the CPUC. “It’s a slight decrease from these inflated rates, but it still does very little to help customers experiencing, you know, an affordability crisis,” said Lee Trotman, communications director for TURN, The Utility Reform Network .

Pacific Gas and Electric Company’s latest filing with California regulators requests an 8% increase in revenue beginning in 2027. The company said it’s their lowest in a decade. Chief Executive Officer Patti Poppe said the General Rate Case, filed every four years to the California Public Utilities Commission, proves they’re “a turnaround story in the making.”

Source: CBS News | By Carmela Karcher

According to The Utility Reform Network (TURN), there's more to it. Lee Trotman, the director of communications at TURN, says at least 17 pending rate increases that have been sent to the commission are not included in this General Rate Case. This means your bill could go higher. If they say this is going to happen, wait till you get your bill," Trotman said. "That's the proof, right? Did the rates really stabilize, or did they go up? So, and to be honest, customers don't care about the rates. They care about the bill, the total amount of the bill."

Pacific Gas and Electric has proposed to state regulators another rate increase beginning in 2027 but says customer bills are expected to remain flat. Don King has owned Fat City Brew & BBQ in Stockton for almost 15 years. For his 3,000-square-foot restaurant, he paid about $7,500 in utility bills just this month.

Source: KNCO Radio | By Chris Gilbert

“PG&E has filed for more rate hikes and their CEO claims rates will stable and may even go down in 2027.  Is this right?  With us is Lee Trotman, The Utility Reform Network’s Communications Director and he may be able to shed some light on what’s going on.  How are you today?” “Doing well, thanks.  You are referring to PG&E’s CEO Patti Poppe’s statements, right?  Some of the rate increases will expire this year and next, so technically rates could go down.  But the problem is that what PG&E just filed is called the General Rate Case for 2027 to 2030, and it’s basically scheduled rate increases.  What you don’t see are the rate increases they filed that aren’t part of the GRC, and that’s 50% of the overall picture.  PG&E should tell the entire story, so the proof will be if customers bills decrease.  That’s the proof and I don’t have high hopes for that.  So what customers can do is to go to TURN.org and sign up for our action alerts, because we have solutions to the nonstop rate hikes such as SB 254, a bill that Senator Josh Becker has introduced.  This bill will shift wildfire mitigation efforts away from ratepayers and also create a low cost public financing option that will reduce shareholder profits.  This provides short and long-term rate relief.”

Source: KOGO AM | By Ted and Veronica Show

“Rising rates are here to stay, especially in the San Diego area. Here to talk about increasing rates and what we can do about them is Lee Trotman, Communications Director for The Utility Reform Network or TURN as they are known.  Welcome Lee!” “Hi Ted, hi Veronica, good to be here.  You are correct that rising rates for energy seem to be here to stay, and there are things customers can do to slow down this pace.  The California Public Utilities Commission has to approve these increases so limiting the number of increases or capping them is a common sense solution that we are pushing for.  Also, customers need to get involved and put pressure on legislators to start assisting ratepayers, and one way to get involved is support a bill by Senator Josh Becker called SB 254.  Basically, it shifts wildfire costs from ratepayers and also introduces a lower cost public financing option which would result in lowering shareholder profits and your bills.  You can go to TURN.org for more information and learn various ways to lower your bill.”

Source: KNX News Radio | By Steve Gregory

“Rates keep rising and customers don’t seem to know why or what to do.  Joining me in the studio is The Utility Reform Network’s Communications Director with hopefully some answers.  Lee Trotman, welcome to my studio.” Thanks Steve, good to be hear.  Yes, energy rates are rising, and part of the problem is that the utilities have powerful lobbyists that quietly kill legislation that benefits customers.  For example, last year SB 938 the Utility Accountability Act was quietly killed and this would have stopped utilities from passing political and lobbying expenses on to consumers.  This is why we need to put pressure on legislators to do the right thing and stand up for ratepayers.  

In fact, on June 6^th the House of Origin Floor vote takes place, and it’s the last opportunity in 2025 for lawmakers to pass reforms aimed at curbing utility overreach and shielding consumers from unnecessary rate hikes.  There are things customer can do to hold legislators accountable, such as supporting Senator Josh Becker’s SB 254 bill and also going to TURN.org and signing up for action alerts.  We also have a 2024 Legislative Affordability and Accountability Scorecard that scores legislators on utility affordability issues.  And finally, we tell customers to never give up because they have the power to change things.”

Source: KQED Public Radio | By Laura Klivans

Mark Toney, executive director of TURN, The Utility Reform Network, said touting just a small increase or rates that remain flat is disingenuous. “The rates that are currently being paid are grossly inflated and they’re artificially high because PG&E had such atrocious overspending on wildfire mitigation in 2020 to 2022,” he said. The company spent more than double what they were supposed to on efforts to reduce wildfire risk, Toney said, and customers are bearing the brunt of that. TURN and other consumer representatives argue investor-owned utilities are incentivized to overspend on capital projects, like hardening the grid against wildfires, because that type of investment brings in returns for shareholders. Instead of protecting power lines by insulating them, which is cheaper and faster, a utility may instead underground those wires, a more expensive and more time-consuming option.

On its own, the proposal, submitted to the California Public Utilities Commission, shows an average increase of 3.5% in 2027 combined gas and electric bills, about a $9 monthly jump. But PG&E said that the cost would be offset by deducting other charges from customers’ bills. The plan projects average annual increases of between 3.2% and 3.4% from 2028 to 2030 — about $9 more year-over-year than the current average utility bill. However, PG&E representatives cautioned that those figures could change.

Source: NBC Bay Area| By Alicia Corso

Lee Trotman is the Communications Director of The Utility Reform Network (TURN) and had this to say: “PG&E can claim that customers might see slightly lower bills next year because current bills are artificially inflated due to the six rate increases last year.  One increase was for overspending by double the amount for wildfire mitigation efforts.  So a slight decrease from these inflated rates does little to help customers experiencing an affordability crisis. Only 50% of the revenue requirement  (the amount that PG&E gets to collect from customers) is part of the General Rate Case.  The other 50% of what PG&E collects comes from rate increases outside of the GRC.  Right now, PG&E has 17 rate increase requests pending at the CPUC so we can’t imagine that rates are going down if even half of the 17 increases are approved.  As always, the proof will be if customers’ bills decrease instead of increase.” 

PG&E CEO Patricia Poppe told NBC Bay Area the utility plans to keep rates flat for the next few years after a number of recent rate increases. PG&E rates have gone up 101% between 2015 and 2025, according to the Public Advocates Office of the California Public Utilities Commission. But a downward trend is projected into next year. Poppe explained that the utility is not cutting rates, but as some proposed increases take effect, others are expiring, so they offset, and customers won’t feel them.