California Won’t Cap AI Data Centers’ Water Use — Only Make Them Disclose It
Source: Martin CID Magazine |By Adrian Kessler
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.
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.
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 15th 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.