The PG&E rate that is costing households, on average, an additional $32 or more a month that appeared on February bills not be the largest rate hike this year.
A 2022 California Legislature directive could end up costing households using PG&E grossing between $69,000 and $180,000 a year in the Westside — as well as those elsewhere in Northern California — $51 more a month.
The hit for households grossing $28,000 and $68,999 a month will be $20 a month.
And a number of households on the California Alternative Rate for Energy (CARE) program that are essentially the working poor could face a $15 a month charge.
It is part of an effort to soften the impact the high cost of PG&E electricity on the poorest Californians by shifting the burden to those that make more.
It’s basically using the structure of a graduated income tax on utility customers in lieu of a proportionate share to each residential electrical customer to cover the fixed costs of PG&E et al.
As such, it also picks up the tab for mandated green power investments that the California Legislature forced PG&E and other for-profit utilities to do ahead of the curve basically locking in higher than national averages for green initiatives.
Keep in mind between 5 and 10 percent of your fixed power charges already go to help subsidize electricity rates for lower income households and other programs the state has deemed are for “societal good.”
The CPUC has until July to get the new rate structure in place.
That said, some will have it worse than PG&E customers.
San Diego Gas & Electric, using what is basically an income transfer program baked into monthly Utility bills, is proposing even higher rate shifts than PG&E. Instead of $51 a month as PG&E wants to charge those households making between $69,000 and $180,000, SDG&E is proposing $73 a month. For those households making under $28,000, SDG&E wants $34 instead of $20.
Those who have a bit of time to spare from treading water financially — primarily higher income households — have been bombarding their legislators. The result has been a big push to dump the nation’s first-income based electricity rates.
It recently overwhelmingly cleared its first legislative hurdle in Sacramento.
It should be noted most of the votes in Sacramento are being cast by the same people who two years ago pushed for income-based electricity rates.
More than a few politicians via indignant press releases citing the heavy burden of rising energy costs on Californians in announcing their support to block the new rate structure from being implemented fail to mention their role in setting the concept in motion.
Gov. Gavin Newsom om 2022 was at the forefront of pressuring lawmakers to order the CPUC to put the new rate structure in place.
Green initiatives regardless of how rushed, ill-conceived or badly timed that may make them more expensive than they could be good for PG&E’s bottom line. So, is the state’s assistance in imposing a ratepayer-based power line hardening program that gets PG&E off the hook for future wildfire liabilities. That’s because PG&E — and other for-profit utilities — under California law are assured of an 11 percent profit return.
The $13.8 billion rate increase that went into effect Jan. 1 for “hardening lines” to reduce wildfires will translate into more than $1.4 billion in PG&E profits under the state formula.
