PG&E’s misguided proposition

How much does it cost to buy an election in California? Northern California utility Pacific Gas & Electric aims to test that question with Proposition 16, the most odious piece of special-interest electioneering to come around in, oh, a year or so.

PG&E is expected to pour $35 million into its campaign for the measure, which features commercials and glossy mailers so misleading that they could have been written by the Iranian information ministry. Calling the proposition the “Taxpayers Right to Vote” act (though it has little to do with taxpayers), the company’s marketing mavens claim it would give voters a say on risky government decisions to enter the electricity generation business. In reality, it would only cement PG&E’s monopoly — at ratepayers’ expense.

Proposition 16 would change the state Constitution to require approval by two-thirds of voters before a local government could use public funds to form municipal utilities. Existing public utilities, such as L.A.’s Department of Water and Power, would be similarly constrained, needing a two-thirds vote to expand their service areas. Finally, the two-thirds supermajority would also be required before governments could create “community choice aggregation” programs, in which residents team up to buy power wholesale from other providers.

Why is this bad? For one thing, the two-thirds requirement is an extremely high bar — especially because public utilities (unlike private ones such as PG&E) can’t put money into political campaigns. This would effectively shield private utilities from competition, meaning ratepayers would forever have no choice but to pay whatever PG&E charged them. Meanwhile, opponents point out that a poorly worded provision of the proposition might force the L.A. DWP and other public utilities to win a two-thirds vote whenever they wanted to provide service to a new customer within their existing service areas. Utility lawyers will have to fight that out in court if Proposition 16 passes — with ratepayers picking up the legal bill, naturally.

Voters already have ways to stop local leaders from meddling with their electricity systems. San Francisco residents have repeatedly turned down, by simple majority vote, an effort to break away from PG&E. The utility wants to make a breakaway even less likely by letting only a third of local voters block the will of the majority. That’s good for PG&E but not for anybody else, and that’s why this initiative is the very definition of special-interest lawmaking. Vote no on Proposition 16.