Local customers take on PG&E's proposed revenue increases
| Thursday, May 27 2010 08:20 PM
Last Updated Thursday, May 27 2010 08:22 PM
Images
Kip Black speaks at a public hearing concerning PG&E's request for a $4.2 billion revenue increase over the next three years. The hearing was held in the Bakersfield City Council Chamber.
Kori Chen, a community organizer with Turn, The Utility Reform Network, addresses the audience at the first of two meetings held so the public could comment on PG&E's request for a $4.2 billion revenue increase over the next three years. The hearing was held in the Bakersfield City Council Chamber.
Administrative law Judge John S. Wong holds a public hearing so members of the public could comment on PG&E's request for a $4.2 billion rate increase over the next three years. The hearing was held in the Bakersfield City Council Chamber.
Bakersfield residents weighed in Thursday on Pacific Gas and Electric Co.'s proposal for a $4.2 billion revenue increase over the next three years, as well as a much smaller rise related to its natural gas system.
At a pair of hearings sponsored by the state Public Utilities Commission, the regulatory body scheduled to vote on PG&E's proposals later this year, locals generally spoke against the company's request, saying the utility should instead tighten its budget.
Some in attendance took issue with the commission for allowing previous increases.
"From a customer point of view, it seems that PG&E is always asking for rate increases and the (commission) is always granting them," Bakersfield resident Kip Black said.
The numbers
The larger of the two proposals discussed Thursday would allow PG&E to collect an additional $4.2 billion over three years to pay for maintenance it says is necessary to ensure that its customers get safe and reliable energy. The increase would raise its spending in this area by 30 percent over the next three years.
PG&E said customers' bills would not rise nearly that steeply. Overall, the utility said, electric customers' bills would rise by only about 7 percent next year, followed by a 1.5 percent increase in 2012 and another 1.8 percent hike in 2013.
Taken together, that would amount to a 10 percent jump in average rates spread over the next three years.
The other proposal at issue Thursday received less attention. It would apply only to PG&E's natural gas customers, who would see a rate increase of less than 1 percent to pay for about $67 million in new spending to cover certain pipeline projects.
Going off topic
Despite the presiding administrative law judge's request that Thursday's speakers generally limit their comments to the proposed increases, several people who came to the podium branched out into other topics.
Some discussed lopsided impacts of the tiered rate structure, established by the state, that forces some customers to pay far more than what it costs PG&E to make and deliver their energy. Others thanked the company for contributing financially to local community programs.
Melissa Iger, executive director of the Tree Foundation of Kern, for example, thanked PG&E for its donations of trees. And the head of the Greater Bakersfield Chamber of Commerce, Debbie Moreno, made note of PG&E's longtime membership and substantial contributions to the local community.
Critical comments
Overall, though, speakers who addressed the proposed increases tended to be critical of PG&E.
Bakersfield resident Jay Gauthier suggested that the commission look for cuts within PG&E's executive compensation packages.
Similarly, Bakersfield resident Wilbur Deimel said the company should cut back everywhere possible in order to save its customers money.
"They need to live on a lean budget like other corporations do," he said.
Another idea, proposed by Steve Townsend of Bakersfield, was for the commission to allow the utility to make greater use of low-cost energy such as nuclear power plants, rather than continue to insist that PG&E expand its use of higher-cost renewables like solar power.
The first of the two hearings began at 2 p.m. at City Hall Council Chambers, and attracted an audience of about three dozen. The second, at 7 p.m., drew some 50 people.
What's next
Commission staff are expected to go through and summarize testimony from Thursday's hearings, along with similar forums across PG&E's territory.
By early next month the utility is scheduled to turn in any rebuttals to statements made at the hearings, followed by three weeks of evidentiary hearings starting June 21.
Then PG&E and consumer advocacy groups would file their respective briefs and reply briefs. After that, a commission administrative law judge is expected to issue a proposed decision that would go back to all sides for final comments. The commission can choose to vote on whether to approve that decision or vote on an alternative proposed by a designated commissioner.
