AHGA Home

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Support Sensible Energy Policy in California


CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMPETITION

A policy movement to deregulate the energy industry began in California in the early 1990’s. State leaders wanted to establish a more competitive energy marketplace and provide the state’s consumers with greater choices. In 1996, the California legislature passed comprehensive legislation to deregulate energy providers by a unanimous vote in the state Senate and House. The law’s intent was to “transition to a more competitive electricity market structure, allow citizens and businesses to achieve the economic benefits of industry restructuring at the earliest possible date, create a new market structure that provides competitive, low-cost and reliable electric service, provide assurances that electricity customers in the new market will have sufficient information and protection, and preserve California's commitment to developing diverse, environmentally sensitive electricity resources.”

Following the enactment of this deregulatory legislation in 1996, California energy consumers began to enjoy the benefits of increased competition. Unfortunately, the move toward a competitive energy market was interrupted by the state’s energy “crisis” in 2000-2001. Several factors contributed to the problems, including Enron’s corporate wrongdoing. The blackouts that were widely reported during that time scared many Californians and their elected officials into thinking that energy competition was a mistake. This fear of blackouts and corporate malfeasance has lead to hasty policies being considered today that would roll back the energy deregulation measures and replace them with overly aggressive government command and control rules.

Since then several steps have been taken to prevent a future energy crisis in California. These include both changes in the state of California, such as the landmark energy efficiency standards adopted by the California Energy Commission (and strongly supported by CalPIRG) last December. At the federal level, the recently enacted comprehensive energy bill will help reduce the risks of recurrence of the previous energy problems.

The result is that in the current energy environment in California, the market has stabilized and choices are available to both large and small customers. Blackouts have not been a problem in recent times. Yet there are still some who advocate rolling back the deregulatory measures and once again allowing monopoly energy providers to dominant the market.

AHGA believes that California energy consumers are best served by a market where suppliers are forced to compete on price for our business and are also encouraged to innovate new energy alternatives and increase reliability. Homeowners can benefit from energy competition through lower monthly energy bills, more choice of energy providers, and the option of receiving energy from green/renewable sources.

PROPOSITION 80
The opponents of energy competition have put re-regulation on the ballot in California’s upcoming special election. Proposition 80 is called the “blackout prevention measure.” In fact, Prop 80 would re-monopolize California’s energy market and take choices away from California homeowners.

Prop 80 proponents discount the steps that have already been taken to prevent the recurrence of the 2000-2001 energy crisis. These include both changes in the state of California, such as the landmark energy efficiency standards adopted by the California Energy Commission (and strongly supported by CalPIRG) last December. (Note: Is there any other post 2001 CA leg addressing this issue that we can cite as reducing the current risks?).At the federal level, the recently enacted comprehensive energy bill will help reduce the risks of recurrence of the previous energy problems. Thus to the extent that wise policy improvements can reduce risks of another energy crisis, positive steps have already been taken.

The poorly written language in Prop 80 creates risky energy policy. This complex subject should not be left to the inflexibility of the ballot initiative process. Instead, Californians should demand that sensible energy policies be constructed through a comprehensive legislative approach that includes a series of public hearings where all sides can be heard.

AHGA opposes proposition 80 because it does not help homeowners address rising energy costs. Instead it takes away the opportunity for California homeowners to choose who delivers their electricity, leaving them subject to a single monopoly provider. In addition, while Proposition 80 supporters claim it will prevent blackouts, there is nothing that this or any other initiative can accomplish that can provide a 100% guarantee against future blackouts.

The provisions in Proposition 80 would swing the pendulum too far towards restrictive regulations. While no one wants a return to the blackouts of 2000-2001, Prop 80 is an overreaction and does not provide California with a roadmap to a more affordable and competitive energy future. There are changes that can be made to California’s energy laws to protect consumers and promote healthy competition, but Proposition 80 does not offer new solutions. It proposes to simply set energy policy back a decade.

And if this approach fails, California will likely be stuck with it. Prop 80 includes language that restricts the state Legislature’s ability to amend the new energy laws. By requiring legislative supermajorities to over-ride its provisions, Prop 80 will make it harder to respond in timely manner to future challenges beyond the imagination of its supporters.

If Prop 80 passes, it will:

· Limit consumer choice and decrease competition for best prices.
· Discourage business investments and limit the creation of future jobs in California.
· Eliminate the consumer’s ability to switch from private utility providers to others electric service providers
· Increase the cost of energy for university systems, hospitals, and local governments, which will end up being paid by taxpayers.
· Lock in limited renewable energy goals, making it harder for the Legislature to pass stronger renewable energy plans in the future.
· Be nearly impossible to change. The proposition states that its provisions can only be amended by a two-thirds vote of the state Legislature.

Proposition 80 will NOT:

· Lower electricity bills.
· Prevent another energy crisis, and in fact, could stall investment in new power plants that California needs to prevent possible future blackouts.

It is no wonder that leading California newspapers oppose the measure. On October 12 the state capitol's Sacramento Bee opposed Proposition 80 in it's strongly worded editorial Lights Out on Prop. 80, which follows next.

Editorial: Lights out on Prop. 80
Initiative a dangerous way to go

Published 2:15 am PDT Wednesday, October 12, 2005
Story appeared in Editorials section, Page B6

Proposition 80, an initiative that would drastically alter the regulation of electricity utilities in California, is a destabilizing force at a time when the system desperately needs stability. The initiative touches on issues that deserve some attention. But voters should be wary of regulating this world themselves, particularly when the assigned regulators seem to have learned from mistakes of the past and generally are heading in the right direction.

This initiative is an aftershock of the seismic electricity uproar of 2000 and 2001 that resulted in rolling blackouts, sky-high spot market prices and bankrupt utilities. The epic mess came after a failed attempt at unleashing certain forces in electricity's wholesale market in the hope of lowering the retail prices for consumers. The investor-owned utilities (Pacific Gas & Electric, Southern California Edison and San Diego's SEMPRA) sold many of their fossil-fuel-burning generators to private firms. They were supposed to compete. Regulators, however, refused to allow the utilities to sign long-term contracts with these private companies. As a consequence, a huge, flawed spot market emerged, and it was easily gamed. PG&E declared bankruptcy, and Edison almost did.

Sell It Yourself
Proposition 80 masquerades as The Solution when it looms as The Problem. The initiative, for example, would essentially prohibit large users of electricity from contracting directly with private generators as opposed to the local investor-owned utility. It would increase regulation of private companies seeking to compete with the utilities as the electricity service providers. And it would prohibit any utility from installing on many homes a "smart" meter that would allow utilities to increase the price on hot summer afternoons and lower the price during off-peak hours.

The theory of Proposition 80 is to empower the utilities to better control the state's electricity future. The problem is that it would accomplish the opposite. First, there would be uncertainty as lawsuits challenge the measure. And then the losers in court would undoubtedly file more initiatives. Utilities and private generating companies would be reluctant to build new generation until the dust settles, which would mean more delays and a greater chance of blackouts resulting from too little supply and too much demand. Beware of the ballot box as a solution.

The California Public Utilities Commission is on a path to requiring utilities to plan for adequate generation and to sign long-term contracts with generators to deliver that power at reasonable prices. Proposition 80 is a path toward a black box of uncertainty. Vote No on Proposition 80.


Click here for the full text of Proposition 80.

TAKE ACTION!
As a homeowner, and a voter in California, there are many things that you can do to make a difference! The following actions can help spread the word about Proposition 80’s bad ideas:

· Send a letter to the editor of your local newspaper. You can copy content from above to use for that purpose if you like, and modify it as you wish. Most newspapers provide an email address to send letters to the editor in their print version of the newspaper as well as in their online version if they have one.
· Call, write, and/or meet with local elected officials and their staff.
· Speak out at public events, including professional, political, and social gatherings.
· Talk to your neighbors about how these strict regulations will impact homeowners and your monthly electricity bill.
· Most importantly, make sure to vote against proposition 80 in the special election on November 8th!
 

AHGA Privacy Policy:  
AHGA does not disclose any information about   it's members or customers to any other party under any circumstances
Copyright AHGA 2008.  Please report any problems with this website, such as broken links, to beth@americanhomeowners.org