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: 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.

Source: KTVU Fox 2 | By Tom Vacar

The Utility Reform Network (TURN) sees the price hike quite differently.  "It may look like [prices are] actually going down slightly, but remember, last year they had six rate increases and that's only half the story. They're asking for 17 pending rate increases and this will offset any slight rate decreases.” TURN argues that even if the California Public Utilities Commission approves only half of those increases, there are still real increases above and beyond this one major rate request. Lee Trotman also added “the real proof if bills stay stable or actually go down will be when customers open their bills and see real changes.”

PG&E is proposing an 8% rate increase, but that would be offset by some cost savings subtracted from customers' bills.  PG&E also says though it is requesting its smallest percentage increase in a decade from 2027 to 2030, customer bills will remain flat and even go down a bit next year. 

Source: Mercury News | By George Avalos

But The Utility Reform Network (TURN) is concerned with these statements.  Lee Trotman, Communications Director for TURN says “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.” He then added “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 will 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 submitted rate proposals for the years 2027-2030, with the primary drivers being wildfire mitigation, transmission and distribution investments and solar incentives. Poppe said it’s an important change.  “It will be the lowest request we’ve made in over a decade,” she said. “It will also interrupt these double-digit increases. That’s not sustainable for our customers. We’ve got to be able to show customers we can do better work at a lower cost.”

Source:The Community Voice| By Staff

The Utility Reform Network (TURN) and the Campaign for Affordable Power (CAP) coalition gathered outside of the Capitol today to urge Governor Newsom and lawmakers to stand up against utility pressure and support the Campaign for Affordable Power (CAP) bill package and the long-promised Senate affordability package, now SB 254. The Utility Reform Network led efforts alongside coalition members AARP, the California Large Energy Consumers Association, the Agricultural Energy Consumers Association, California Farm Bureau, California Metals Coalition, California Community Choice Association, and the Small Business Utility Advocates. “SB 254 and the CAP measures together deliver both the structural reforms we need to rein in runaway utility costs and the immediate bill relief families deserve. We thank Senate leaders for moving SB 254 forward. Now it’s time for Governor Newsom and the Legislature to act so Californians see lower bills this year and beyond,” said Mark Toney, executive director of The Utility Reform Network. 

“Energy affordability isn’t just a concern for households. Farmers and ranchers are feeling the pressure too. Agricultural customers have seen similar rate increases, but with fewer options to manage or reduce those costs,” said Kevin Johnston, Director and Counsel at the California Farm Bureau. “Because farmers and ranchers can’t simply raise prices to cover these expenses, it often leads to consolidation, fewer California-grown products and less investment in on-farm improvements like electrification. That runs counter to California’s climate goals and efforts to strengthen local food security.” “The California Large Energy Consumers Association represents energy intensive industries that produce goods essential for daily life, such as critical infrastructure, oxygen for hospitals, and food distribution. To compete with companies outside California and abroad, power must be affordable; yet California’s soaring electric rates, three times higher than neighboring states, make this increasingly difficult,” said Bruce Magnani with CLECA (California Large Energy Consumers Association). “Failure to enable competitively produced essential manufactured goods in California is an abdication of our state’s leadership as the world’s fifth-largest economy, drives up global emissions due to emissions leakage, and hinders efforts to electrify and decarbonize industrial processes. California’s staggeringly high industrial electricity rates demand urgent action.

Source: ABC 7 KABC, Los Angeles | By Carlos Granda

"This has been a concerted effort on their part to switch people over to other types of services, but the reality is, those services are not as reliable," said Regina Costa with the The Utility Reform Network (TURN). During the January wildfires, there were some cell phone service issues in the affected areas. Costa worries that without landlines in a future emergency, this could be a major issue. "A big earthquake will knock out power for quite a long time, and as cell towers lose power and more traffic is concentrated over the remaining towers, you can't even use them," Costa said.

After our report, more than a dozen people contacted us, saying it also happened to them. All in the South Los Angeles area. Robbie Brown hasn't had home phone service since September of 2024. She suffered a stroke and is paralyzed on one side, which is why she can't use a cell phone and needs an emergency alert system where all she has to do is press a button in an emergency. The problem? It doesn't work without a landline. Mabel Bush also has a medical alert system. She says AT&T offered an internet-based service, but that also doesn't work. "Fix it so we can be safe," Bush said. The company has said it wants to end some of its landline service across the country, though last year, the California Public Utilities Commission voted to not allow that.

Source: Politico | By Blanca Begert

But ratepayer advocacy group The Utility Reform Network, which backs Calderon’s push to slash net metering, wholeheartedly supports Ward’s bill — precisely because it relies on the CPUC’s updated crediting formula and would also give customers a less expensive solar option to buy into. “I wouldn’t be surprised if the Legislature passed that bill all the way through, because this is them clarifying what they had already directed the commission to do,” said Matt Freedman, an attorney at TURN. “Will the governor sign the bill? That’s a different question.”

Assemblymember Lisa Calderon knew she was opening a can of worms when she introduced AB 942, a bill aimed at addressing rising electricity rates by reducing payments to rooftop solar customers. It would cut incentives when paneled homes are sold and would end cap-and-trade rebates for solar customers, saving $3.6 billion between now and 2043, she said. Assemblymember Chris Ward’s AB 1260 builds on his 2022 bill, AB 2316, which directed the CPUC to create a statewide community storage and solar program. 

Source: Politico| By Blanca Begert, Camille Von Kaenel, Alex Nieves

Another big Becker bill — SB 540, to pave the way to California’s participation in a West-wide grid — is also looking good to clear its Judiciary Committee hearing Tuesday. Becker will take amendments to address some of the concerns raised by groups like TURN, including ones to clarify California’s ability to withdraw from the regional energy market if Trump tries to meddle in it, although TURN’s position remains “oppose unless amended.” ON OUR RADAR: Net metering round two: Assemblymember Lisa Calderon has been amassing support from labor groups, electric utilities and TURN for her proposal, AB 942, to limit incentives for some of the state’s earliest rooftop solar owners, a measure she says will spread the costs of maintaining the grid more evenly and save average Californians money on their utility bills. 

The energy affordability bill to rule them all, Sen. Josh Becker’s sweeping SB 254 that he launched last week to tackle skyrocketing electricity rates, will likely get through its hearing Tuesday in the Energy and Utilities Committee, which Becker chairs.

Source: RTO Insider | By Henrik Nilsson

The Utility Reform Network (TURN) is finding some success in getting California state lawmakers to address the group’s concerns about what the Trump administration might do if the Golden State moves forward with plans to hand over control of CAISO’s energy markets to an independent regional organization. Democratic Sen. Josh Becker, who introduced the Pathways bill [SB 540], has said he will convene a group to address the consumer advocacy organization TURN’s concerns with the proposed legislation. In its public comments on the bill, TURN submitted a position of opposition that stands unless the bill is amended. Writing in opposition to the bill, Matthew Freedman, staff attorney for TURN, wrote that handing power over CAISO’s wholesale energy markets to an independent RO while opening the door to other market actors in the West “may expose California customers to new risks that could prove difficult to mitigate.” In an email to RTO Insider, Freedman said: “Our goal is to ensure that the scope and role of Regional Organization is clearly defined in state law and that California has the right to withdraw under a variety of circumstances. We are extremely concerned about the potential for the federal government to make changes to the regional energy markets that would undermine California’s clean energy and decarbonization goals.”

The group asked for amendments to address the following points:

• Ensure the RO’s tariffs permit California to withdraw utilities from the regional market without penalties or need for approval by FERC.

• Clarify that the RO cannot set “any requirements relating to resource adequacy, reserve margins or reliability.” Additionally, the RO should not be allowed to rely on a centralized capacity market or separate markets for dispatchable, firm and intermittent resources. This is to prevent the federal government from intervening in wholesale markets to provide incentives for coal and gas generation.

• Give the California Public Utilities Commission power to direct investor-owned utilities to withdraw from the RO if it violates any of the obligations under SB 540 or implements changes that could harm consumers.

• Require utilities to withdraw from the RO if a court rules that California resource planning policies discriminate against out-of-state resources.

• Similarly, utilities must withdraw if the federal government takes action that would lead to California consumers subsidizing fossil fuels.

• Require utilities to withdraw “if a Joint Concurrent resolution is passed by the State Assembly and State Senate.”

• Clarify that the Renewables Portfolio Standard “requirements relating to energy delivery from resources outside of a California Balancing Authority must satisfy strict standards including the use of dynamic scheduling, pseudo ties or firm transmission rights.”

Source: East Bay Times| By George Avalos

“PG&E’s monthly bills are still way too high,” said Mark Toney, executive director of consumer group The Utility Reform Network. “Monthly bills are up 70% from just a few years ago.” In January 2020, PG&E monthly bills were roughly $175 a month for combined services. Monthly bills this past January for customers who receive combined electricity and gas services from PG&E were $295. Toney argues that consumers experienced huge yearly increases because state regulators allowed PG&E to charge customers too much for wildfire mitigation work that should have been done sooner. “PG&E was allowed to overspend for wildfire mitigation,” he said.

Monthly electric bills for the typical customer averaged about $215 in March, down 3.2% from an average of $222 in March 2024, PG&E reported in a recent post about trends in bills. Despite the slight decline, current bill levels in recent years have soared far higher than customers previously experienced.

Source: Lake County News | By Lake County News Reports

“It is clear from the polling data that California residents expect their elected representatives to take action now, and pass legislation that will limit utility overspending, trim record-breaking corporate profits, support public financing to reduce long-term costs, and provide short-term ratepayer relief,” said Mark Toney, executive director of The Utility Reform Network. The Utility Reform Network, or TURN, and EnviroVoters are supporting the Campaign for Affordable Power bill package:
• AB 1167 (Berman, Addis) Prohibits utility misspending of ratepayer dollars.
• AB 1020 (Schiavo): Prevents double-charging and boosts accountability.
• SB 636 (Menjivar): Provides hardship deferments to vulnerable customers.
• SB 330 (Padilla): Promotes alternative financing for transmission to reduce costs.

California utility consumers are demanding lawmakers rein in skyrocketing rates and hold for-profit investor owned utilities accountable, according to new polling data from David Binder Research released by The Utility Reform Network and California Environmental Voters.

• 82% of California voters are concerned about the cost of their monthly electric bill.
• 79% of California voters agree the government should do more to limit price increases.
• 93% of California voters agree utilities should not charge customers for wasteful spending, including lobbying, PR, and marketing campaigns.

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

The influential consumer advocacy group The Utility Reform Network supports the bill for its combination of long-term cost reductions for ratepayers and immediate relief, executive director Mark Toney said in an email.

The most influential bill introduced so far this session is Becker’s Senate Bill 254, which was released in its expanded form on Tuesday. The bill is intended to give ratepayers relief by paying for some projects with other sources of funds, expand subsidies for low-income residents and provide all customers with credits to use during summer months when bills are priciest. It would also expand oversight and transparency of rate increases and utilities’ profits.

Source: New Project Media | By Michelle France

“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.

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.

Source: GV Wire, Fresno| By Nancy Price

“It is clear from the polling data that California residents expect their elected representatives to take action now, and pass legislation that will limit utility overspending, trim record-breaking corporate profits, support public financing to reduce long-term costs, and provide short-term ratepayer relief,” Mark Toney, executive director of The Utility Reform Network, said in a news release Thursday. The Utility Reform Network, a Bay-Area based advocacy nonprofit, is scheduled to hold a news conference at noon Thursday in front of the state Capitol with a coalition that includes the AARP, California Large Energy Consumers Association, California Farm Bureau, and Small Business Utility Advocate urging California legislators to proceed with affordability legislation.

A new survey of California voters shows that most blame utility company spending and profit-taking for skyrocketing electricity costs. According to the survey results, there was overwhelming agreement on some key issues:

• 93% said wasteful spending by utility companies, including for lobbying, PR, and marketing campaigns, needs to be reined in.

• 90% said AI data centers need to pay their fair share.

• 90% said modernized building codes are needed to ensure energy efficiency.

• 85% supported rejecting rate increases that lead to excessive profit margins for utility companies.

Source: Fox 40, Sacramento | By Noah Anderson

The Utility Reform Network or TURN, and the Campaign for Affordable Power coalition, gathered on the southside lawn of the State Capitol. “By working together, we are convinced we will be able to make the biggest change when it comes to affordability that California has ever seen,” stated Mark Toney, TURN executive director.

The Campaign for Affordable Power coalition assembles advocates from several sectors, all of whom support Senate Bill 254.  SB 254 aims to protect California consumers from high electricity bills by increasing Investor Owned Utility accountability, and restructuring ratepayer obligations. David Azevedo with AARP California says rate increases are hitting older adults particularly hard.  “We don't want older adults looking at their thermostats and saying, if I turn this up, or if I turn this down, am I not going to be able to food on the table, am I not going to be able to pay for my prescriptions, pay for my rent, my mortgage.”