Letters to the Editor: Edison’s shareholders, not its customers, should be replenishing wildfire fund

To the editor: Let me get this straight: Southern California Edison is opposed to a plan that would reduce the profits its shareholders receive in order to replenish a fund that exists to pay for the fire damage Edison’s equipment may have had a hand in causing (“Newsom’s plan to raise $18 billion for state wildfire fund faces tough opposition,” July 31)? This from a utility whose negligence and mismanagement caused the Thomas and Woolsey disasters and possibly the Eaton fire. I don’t know which is worse: Edison’s unabashed greed or Gov. Gavin Newsom’s idea that customers should pay for Edison’s past and potential misdeeds. The entire proposal should be scrapped.

Bill Waxman, Simi Valley

..

To the editor: Help me understand economics and politics: Southern California Edison profits for 2024 came in at $1.69 billion, an increase of 9.8% from 2023. The total compensation for Steven D. Powell, CEO of SCE, was $3,950,818 in 2024. The total comp for Pedro J. Pizarro, CEO of Edison International, was $13,809,571 for 2024. But they want customers of SCE to help pay for wildfire damage? All through a minimum increase some of us need to help feed our families. Instead, why doesn’t the governor concentrate more on rooftop solar, which would lower those consumers’ monthly costs and help prevent wildfires?

Kenneth Brown, Pasadena

..

To the editor: Newsom’s plan to pay for fire damage is shortsighted because it doesn’t address the root causes of the Eaton and other fires. Had we not dumped tons of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, we wouldn’t be so frequently stuck with billions of dollars in damage.

Looking forward, making electricity more expensive discourages investment in heat pumps, electric vehicles and other clean technologies. The big polluters are all of us with gas cars. But the governor is right in that California needs new revenue to pay for past and future damage.

A better solution is to make polluters pay for the damage they cause, which is right in the name of Senate Bill 684/Assembly Bill 1243, the Polluters Pay Climate Superfund Act of 2025, authored by Sen. Caroline Menjivar (D-Panorama City) and Assemblymember Dawn Addis (D-Morro Bay). Of course, profitable fossil fuel companies will object, but lawmakers with guts should be told to care about those of us who breathe this air — and our grandchildren, who will suffer more if we stay on our same polluting path.

John Schaefer, Santa Rosa