Source: Public Policy Institute of California | By Stephanie Barton
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.
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.
Source: DigWatch | By Karla Prudencio Ruiz
In a 16 October 2026 statement included in Stanford Law School’s Center for Internet and Society resource collection, the Utility Reform Network (TURN), alongside telecommunications experts, consumer advocates, and labour representatives, urged Newsom not to accept the funding unless the disputed requirement, known as Condition 50, was removed.
California Governor Gavin Newsom is facing renewed calls to reject conditions attached to $1.42 billion inUS federal broadband funding, amid concerns that accepting the money could restrict the state’s ability to enforce net neutrality, affordability, and public-safety protections.
Source: Broadband Breakfast | By Kate Keith
The Utility Reform Network (TURN), joined by telecommunications experts and consumer advocacy groups,said Oct. 21 that California should not accept $1.42 billion in federal Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) funding without removing Condition 50.
Consumer advocates say a federal grant requirement could limit California’s oversight of broadband providers. California consumer advocates are urging Gov. Gavin Newsom to reject a federal broadband funding condition they say could limit the state’s ability to enforce consumer protections for internet and phone service.
Source: PIRG | By Jenn Engstrom
At the very least, the CPUC should reduce PG&E’s gas pipeline replacement spending proposal by 60% as suggested by The Utility Reform Network.
Utility companies should provide us with energy that is clean, safe, and reasonably priced. Yet instead of making it easier for customers to choose safer, cleaner energy, Pacific Gas & Electric, the state’s biggest power company, is proposing to spend more than $3.8 billion on gas pipeline replacement over the next four years—the kind of infrastructure that, if we’re smart, California won’t need for much longer.
Source: KUCOIN |
The Utility Reform Network Executive Director Mark Toney expressed concern that remaining PG&E customers would absorb more grid maintenance costs, particularly wildfire expenses. PG&E distributes wildfire costs, including underground power lines, across the utility's entire customer base regardless of where the work occurs.
San Francisco wants to acquire Pacific Gas & Electric's electricity grid within the city and supply residents directly. PG&E provided the utility's first valuation on Tuesday, seven years after San Francisco initially offered to buy the grid. PG&E valued the assets at $13.9 billion, roughly quadruple the city's $3.4 billion estimate from April. PG&E says San Francisco should pay an additional $8.6 billion for separating the grid and preventing rate increases for customers outside the city. Those estimates would put the total expense of establishing public power above San Francisco's entire annual budget.
Source: Politico | By Noah Baustin
“What I worry about is that the cost of maintaining the grid, particularly the wildfire costs, will be spread to the remaining customers [of PG&E],” said Mark Toney, executive director of The Utility Reform Network, a ratepayer advocacy group. That’s why Toney wants the CPUC, while it’s developing its estimate for San Francisco, to avoid any potential shift of costs onto remaining customers.
San Francisco wants to take control of Pacific Gas & Electric’s power grid in the city. The utility says that’ll cost residents an arm and a leg, and maybe their whole pocketbook too. Seven years after San Francisco first made an offer to PG&E to purchase its electricity grid so it could provide power to residents itself, the utility on Tuesday, for the first time, put a price tag on its electricity equipment and property.
Source: Mercury News | By George Avalos
Mark Toney is on a mission to keep electric and gas bills down. That decades-long goal has made the consumer advocate one of PG&E’s toughest critics and that of its utility siblings. Since 2008, Toney has served as executive director of TURN,The Utility Reform Network. The post has put Toney in a unique position to challenge California’s biggest electric, gas and telephone companies.
Overall, customers are worse off since the bankruptcy. There are upsides and downsides. One upside was AB 1054, which ensured that ratepayers could not be charged for damage from the 2017 and 2018 wildfires. (PG&E caused fatal wildfires in 2017 that destroyed large sections of the California Wine Country and also caused a deadly fire in 2018 known as the Camp Fire in Butte County that destroyed the town of Paradise.)
Source: Spectrum News | By Jamie Kennedy
The power needed for the center, sizeable to say the least, said assistant attorney at The Utility Reform Network, a utility watchdog organization, Elise Torres. “At 250 megawatts, it’s approximately the entire load of Marin County,” Torres said. “So that gives you a sense of the scale of just this one facility.”
The potential impact on electricity rates and who should pay for major grid upgrades are at the center of a California Public Utilities Commission review of an agreement between utility company PG&E and Google to connect a massive 250-megawatt data center in San Jose.
Source: The Cool Down | By Leslie Satler
To consumer advocates, the change appears tied to mounting frustration over utility prices. Mark Toney, executive director of The Utility Reform Network, said, "I'd say we saw today a lot of evidence that Gov. Newsom has really prioritized affordability and accountability to an increased extent.”
California's soaring electricity bills have made affordability a driving force in energy policy. Gov. Gavin Newsom's latest move is a package of electricity-affordability bills built around home batteries and other smart devices that could help lower and reduce the need for gas-fired backup plants.
Source: New York Post | By Maria Pena
“Community solar and storage is a way to increase clean energy generation, and so that would be an example, a very specific example, of something the state could do,” Toney said. A major factor during heat waves is solar power, which not only provides electricity during the day but helps charge batteries that can supply power later, Toney explained.
Gov. Gavin Newsom vetoed AB 1813 on Sept. 30, legislation authored by Assemblymember Christopher Ward that would have created a customer renewable energy subscription program aimed at expanding access to community renewable energy projects. The Utility Reform Network supported the legislation.
Source: The Institute for Energy Research |
According to Mark Toney, Executive Director of the Utility Reform Network, a ratepayer advocacy group, “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.”
On September 21, Governor Gavin Newsom signed seven bills regulating the data center industry in California, imposing new requirements on electricity costs, water use, and local oversight. The legislation requires data centers to provide information on electricity use, water consumption, land use, and workforce needs, giving local communities more information to assess proposed projects.