By Hudson Sangree

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — State lawmakers have drafted a spate of bills since early January aimed at correcting perceived wrongs by Pacific Gas and Electric and other investor-owned utilities, and they still have a few days left to offer more.

Friday marks the deadline for introducing legislative proposals in 2020, the second year of a two-year session in the State Capitol.

Many of this year’s bills address the public safety power shutoffs (PSPS) that blacked out much of Northern and Central California last fall. One measure lays the groundwork for the state to take over PG&E and turn it into a public utility.

Another bill would let the California Public Utilities Commission place a public administrator inside an investor-owned utility for at least six months to oversee operations and make safety decisions.

That bill, Assembly Bill 1847, “will help all utilities refocus their priorities on safety and increase needed public confidence in essential electrical utility services,” its author, State Assemblyman Marc Levine (D), said upon its introduction. “California’s economy cannot afford to spend another decade in the dark.”

Some lawmakers had speculated this year could see a legislative free-for-all against PG&E, but the reality has been more restrained. About three dozen bills, of the 753 measures introduced so far this year, have focused on the electric sector, with about half of those geared toward reforming the state’s three big IOUs.

PG&E, the largest and most politically unpopular of the three, is in bankruptcy after two years of catastrophic wildfires ignited by its equipment, including the state’s deadliest blaze, the November 2018 Camp Fire.

The utility came under heavy fire for blacking out hundreds of thousands of customers to prevent more fires in October and November. (See California Officials Hammer PG&E Over Power Shutoffs.)

Taking PG&E Public

The most sweeping of the new bills aimed at PG&E is by State Sen. Scott Wiener (D). Senate Bill 917 outlines a structure for the state to buy PG&E and turn it into a huge public utility, with cities allowed to peel off pieces to create municipal utilities. (See What Spring Could Bring for PG&E.)

“The legislation will fundamentally and structurally reform PG&E, whose faulty power lines have caused deadly wildfires, killing hundreds, incinerating thousands of homes, and destroying an entire community [the town of Paradise in the Camp Fire],” Wiener said in a statement.

The bill doesn’t mention PG&E by name. Instead, it would allow state officials to acquire by eminent domain the assets of an IOU that has been convicted of a felony in the past 10 years preceding its seizure.

Jurors convicted PG&E of six felonies in 2016 related to the San Bruno gas pipeline explosion six years earlier. The explosion killed eight people, injured 58 others and destroyed dozens of homes in a suburban San Francisco neighborhood.

Wiener’s measure would let local governments join in the eminent domain action to acquire portions of PG&E’s territory. Cities including San Francisco and San Jose have expressed interest in taking over PG&E’s local assets and creating municipal utilities. (See PG&E Ends Bond Bid as SF Makes Wires Offer.)

A newly formed public-benefit corporation, the Northern California Energy Utility District, would oversee the process of running and dividing PG&E. Billions of dollars in bonds could be issued to buy the IOU, and elected utility officials, not the CPUC, would set rates and adopt policies.

In recent months, Gov. Gavin Newsom has repeatedly said the state will take over PG&E if it doesn’t comply with his demands for major changes, but he hasn’t indicated whether or not he backs Wiener’s bill. (See Newsom Budget Reiterates PG&E Takeover Threat.)

Installing a Public Administrator

Levine’s proposal could increase state control of an IOU without a takeover. Under his bill, the CPUC could embed a public administrator inside any IOU it finds isn’t complying with state laws or regulations.

Intentional blackouts are singled out in the measure.

“The public administrator shall have oversight authority over an electrical corporation’s activities that impact public safety, including the electrical corporation’s decision to de-energize all or part of its distribution or transmission system to reduce the risk of wildfire ignition,” the bill says.

The administrator could stay for up to 180 days, or longer if the “commission adopts a decision in a proceeding making further findings supporting the continued need for the public administrator,” the bill says.

Limiting Harm from Power Shutoffs

A handful of bills seek to minimize the impacts of the public safety power shutoffs.

One bill requires utilities to compensate business owners for food spoilage during blackouts. Another, AB 1915, establishes new rules for the payment of damage claims from PSPS events.

Lawmakers have been especially concerned about the safety, during blackouts, of low-income rural residents who have limited mobility or rely on medical devices. SB 862, a measure by Sen. Bill Dodd (D), whose Northern California district has been plagued by wildfires and safety blackouts, would require utilities to provide backup power or financial assistance in such cases.

Dodd also co-authored a bill that would prevent schools from losing attendance-based funding during power shutoffs. And he introduced a measure, SB 947, that would require the CPUC to base utility revenues on meeting safety and reliability goals.

“A performance-based model will discourage the type of reckless behavior responsible for devastating wildfires and power outages, while promoting responsible practices that have been sorely lacking,” Dodd said. “We need to be innovative to force accountability and achieve acceptable performance.”

Meeting Climate Goals

Measures focused on climate change and greenhouse gas emissions also will occupy this year’s legislative proceedings.

A proposal by Republican lawmakers would revise the definition of a renewable energy resource under the state’s renewable portfolio standard program to include large hydroelectric facilities and nuclear power plants.

In prior legislation — notably SB 100 passed in 2018 — California established ambitious goals of eliminating fossil fuels and carbon emissions by midcentury. (See Calif. Gov. Signs Clean Energy Act Before Climate Summit.)

A “green new deal” bill was introduced earlier this year by Assemblyman Rob Bonta (D). The measure lays out broad aims of fighting climate change and income inequality while offering few specific proposals for achieving those goals.

When he introduced AB 1839 in January, Bonta said it would get fleshed out over time, which will likely be true of other bills as well.

After the introduction deadline passes, policy committees — including the Senate Energy, Utilities and Communications Committee and the Assembly Utilities and Energy Committee — will begin weighing and helping to shape the proposals.

That process runs through mid-May. The deadline for bills to be passed by the State Legislature is Aug. 31, and the governor has until Sept. 30 to sign or veto the measures.