Source: New Project Media | By Michelle France
The California State Assembly Committee on Utilities and Energy approved a bill that would revise or retract the Community Renewable Energy Program (CREP) adopted by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) last spring. The committee voted by 13-1 in favor of Assembly Bill (AB) 1260 at an April 23 meeting. The legislation, introduced by Assemblymember Christopher Ward, D-78 will now head to the Committee on Appropriations for approval.
“We strongly support AB 1260 in order to clean up the mess that the PUC has created in its flawed implementation of AB 2316,” said Matthew Freedman, an attorney for The Utility Reform Network (TURN).“The PUC’s refusal to implement AB 2316 as intended by this legislature represents a huge missed opportunity,” Freedman continued. “As of today, major elements of the PUC’s alternative approach are unclear, require further development and seem highly unlikely to lead to a successful program. AB 1260 would eliminate any ambiguities in current law by requiring all community renewable generation serving subscribers to be compensated using the Commission’s own avoided cost calculator which serves as the primary method for determining the value of exported electricity to the distribution system, and is used already to compensate customers participating in the Net Value Billing Tariff.”AB 1260 would also require all eligible projects to include four hours of energy storage at the same capacity of the renewable energy generation, but the PUC rejected that idea, Freedman said. “We strongly disagree. Energy storage provides significant value to the system—they need to be included in the community program,” Freedman said. Furthermore, Freedman argued that new residential construction must include onsite solar or an alternative compliance through participation in a community program under the Title 24 Building Code. About 400 MW a year of new community solar will be needed to serve as the compliance option. “Installing 1,000 MW of community solar under this proposal would save USD 7bn over 25 years compared to installing that same amount on the rooftop as would be required under Title 24. For those reasons we think this bill makes a lot of sense and will be a ratepayer savings measure,” Freedman said.
Source: KQED | By Katherine Monahan
Regina Costa, who directs telecom policy for TURN, lives in rural Sonoma county and says the money the federal government is offering is not worth it. “It’s a bad deal and this is a deliberate effort on the part of the Trump administration to tie our hands. Out of all states in this country, California has the most to lose."
Governor Gavin Newsom has until tomorrow to decide whether California will take $1.42 billion in federal broadband money that comes with a catch: a Trump administration’s provision attached to the funds would bar the state from enforcing many of its own consumer protection rules for about 14 years, including a ban on throttling fire fighters’ data.
Source: Communications Daily |
In a letter Tuesday in docket 26-120, the Rural County Representatives of California, the Utility Reform Network and Communications Workers of America repeated their arguments that AT&T’s wireless service for those customers isn't as reliable as their current service. The groups also said AT&T’s reliance on the national broadband map to prove the reliability of its service ignores flaws in the map.
A coalition of consumer advocacy organizations said this week that the FCC should review its prior automatic decision to approve AT&T’s request to discontinue copper wire service to 184,000 California customers.
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.