A push to have voters decide if a municipal electric utility should oust San Diego Gas & Electric within the city limits of San Diego has died, after the San Diego City Council on Monday refused in a unanimous vote to put the question on the November ballot.
“I’ve got some significant issues with SDG&E,” said Council President Sean Elo-Rivera but added that “there are far too many questions left unanswered” and joined colleagues in an 8-0 vote turning down the proposal brought forth by a local group that spent months collecting signatures from registered voters around the city.
For the record:
11:07 a.m. June 12, 2024This story has been updated to correct the spelling of the name of Brittany Applestein Syz of SDG&E.
Other council members made similar remarks.
Advertisem*nt
“Something of this magnitude will take time and must be done thoughtfully — not on a soundbite but on a sound plan,” said District 1 Councilmember Joe LaCava, while at the same time saying SDG&E rates “are too high; profits are too high.”
The issue came before the city council due to efforts by the Power San Diego Campaign. The group aimed to eventually establish a municipal utility to handle the electricity distribution responsibilities for customers strictly in the city of San Diego — not in other municipalities in the county.
Made up of members that included longtime critics of SDG&E, Power San Diego cited how municipal power companies such as the Sacramento Municipal Utility District and the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power offer customers lower rates than California’s investor-owned utilities — SDG&E, Pacific Gas & Electric and Southern California Edison.
The debate comes as utility bills keep rising. SDG&E’s rates have consistently been the highest in the state — and are often the most expensive in the U.S., according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Power San Diego launched a signature drive that would directly put the issue onto the November ballot. The group’s original goal was to collect about 80,000 verified signatures from registered San Diego voters but the effort finished well short of that goal.
However, the group managed to collect a little more than 24,000 valid signatures, which was just enough to force the San Diego City Council to make a determination whether to put the question before voters in November.
Power San Diego volunteers deliver boxes of signatures to the San Diego County Registrar of Voters office on May 14.
(Nelvin C. Cepeda/The San Diego Union-Tribune)
During Monday’s meeting, the city attorney’s office voiced concerns that Power San Diego’s proposal, as written, could violate the city charter on multiple levels — including selecting an unelected board of directors to run the proposed municipal utility and the legality of transitioning current SDG&E workers to become municipal employees.
“The legal concerns are significant,” Elo-Rivera said.
Prior to the vote, the public comment period ran almost 90 minutes, with 53 people appearing before the council either in person or by telephone, voicing often passionate support or opposition to the Power San Diego proposal.
“Please reject this proposed ballot (initiative) to force a government takeover of the electric grid,” said Monica Valadez, dispatcher and shop steward at IBEW Local 465, which represents about 1,500 SDG&E employees. “There’s no guarantee in this measure that our jobs will carry over to the city-run utility.”
About a dozen members of IBEW Local 465 demonstrate in February against a proposed ballot measure that would ask voters to create a municipal utility operated within the city limits of San Diego.
(Rob Nikolewski/San Diego Union-Tribune)
Power San Diego supporters insisted union jobs would be protected if a switch was made.
“This is not a government takeover,” said Lawrence Carr. “It is the government, us, the city taxpayers of San Diego, firing a bad employee — SDG&E — because we (the city) can do it better.”
Power San Diego estimated it would cost $3.5 billion to get a municipal power company up and running. That would work out to less than $15 per month per customer, the group said. Backers of the proposal say there would be no incremental cost exposure to city ratepayers.
But released an assessment from an energy consulting firm that predicted the costs will come to much more than that — from $9 billion to as much as $13 billion — and contended when the costs of financing a municipal utility from scratch are factored in, the total grows even higher.
Power San Diego called the estimates inflated.
Before casting her vote, District 2 Councilmember Jennifer Campbell said, “This is a flawed and premature initiative.” But she also made reference to SDG&E making $936 million last year, according to filings by its parent company Sempra. That’s $21 million higher than the utility’s previous all-time high set in 2022.
“I ask SDG&E to look deep into themselves and think about the fact that their corporation is making too much profit,” Campbell said. “They need to get a clue.”
When questioned by District 5 Councilmember Marni von Wilpert, SDG&E’s director of regional public affairs Brittany Applestein Syz said, “Affordability is absolutely important to us and it’s something we want to start talking about how we can manage our bills, work with our customers, while also addressing the needs in our community.”
Von Wilpert criticized the California Public Utilities Commission, which regulates investor-owned utilities, and other state entities.
“What we need to do is make sure that Sacramento is doing better,” she said. “So I don’t want my vote not to put this on the ballot to be in any way an endorsem*nt ... (of) this profit-gouging. But at this time, I don’t think (putting the measure on the ballot is) the most responsible solution.”
Power San Diego chair Bill Powers expressed disappointment in Monday’s vote but said he was “absolutely not” discouraged. He expects the group to take another crack at it in about two years, during the next election cycle.
“I think we want to understand where do we get the resources so that if we’re successful, we can succeed on both ends — getting it on the ballot and passing it into law,” Powers said.
“The dam is breaking,” Elo-Rivera said. “The rates and corporate practices of SDG&E are pushing people to the breaking point, both financially and politically ... People are sick and tired of their rates being so high.”
District 8 Councilmember Vivian Moreno was absent from Monday’s vote.
