A resolution may soon have state Democrats agreeing on energy consumers’ right to choose how they get their power and against a proposed constitutional amendment initiative critics say would make expanding public power in California nearly impossible.
State Sen. Mark Leno (D-San Francisco) will present the resolution to the rules committee at the party’s executive board meeting in San Diego on Nov. 14.
Though Leno said the resolution doesn’t specifically oppose the initiative being funded by Pacific Gas and Electric because it hasn’t yet qualified as a ballot measure, it will put the party on record in support of community choice aggregation (CCA) and against “any efforts to deny ratepayers their choice.”
“PG&E knows that if voters are able to exercise their democratic rights, we will see community choice aggregation in California proliferate,” Leno told the Sun. “This initiative is an aggressive attempt to steal voters’ democratic rights.”
The initiative Leno is referring to is the New Two-Thirds Requirement for Local Electricity Providers Initiative Constitutional Amendment, a PG&E-backed proposal that seeks to require a two-thirds majority before a local government can create a CCA program, use public funds to become a CCA provider, or expand public power to new territories or customers.
“There’s something clearly unfair about a simple majority amending the Constitution in order to require a two-thirds majority to allow people to choose how they want their energy delivered, and what kind of energy they want delivered,” Leno said. “Bottom line is this is a desperate monopoly struggling to hold on to the privilege of their monopoly.”
Not the case, according to Greg Larsen, of the Sacramento public relations firm Larsen Cazanis, a spokesman for the initiative. He argued that a two-thirds majority vote hardly equates to a death sentence for any well-conceived ballot measure.
Larsen also said the initiative doesn’t target CCAs and pointed out that the proposed amendment provides exemptions for programs that are
100 percent renewable.
Larsen’s assertion that the initiative doesn’t target public power was somewhat contradicted by PG&E spokesman Andrew Souvall.
“We believe CCAs create serious financial risks for local entities when local governments are already facing substantial hardship,” Souvall said. “Recent developments show that CCAs don’t have the experience or financial resources to serve electricity customers within their proposed service areas.”
Asked if PG&E was looking to stifle competition with the initiative, Souvall only answered, “PG&E would like to give taxpayers more control over their hard-earned dollars.”
Community choice aggregation was signed into state law through Assembly Bill 117 in 2002. The bill allows local governments to buy blocks of power to sell to residents, enabling communities and municipalities to shop for less expensive alternatives to private companies, such as PG&E, and can favor suppliers who use nonpolluting methods such as wind, solar, geothermal, and hydroelectric generators.
This article appears in Nov 12-19, 2009.