Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Community Choice Aggregation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission authorizes general manager to sign PG&E service agreement for Clean Power SF, amid unresolved tariff and disclosure issues
Summary
The SFPUC authorized the general manager to finalize and sign a two‑year service agreement with PG&E to support Clean Power SF, while commissioners raised questions about unresolved items (bankruptcy language, nondisclosure and tariff references) and sought city attorney confirmation that no affirmative financial obligation exists if the program does not launch.
The San Francisco Public Utilities Commission voted May 11 to authorize the general manager to complete negotiations and execute a negotiated service agreement with Pacific Gas & Electric Company necessary to implement Clean Power SF, the city’s community choice aggregation (CCA) program.
Barbara Hale, assistant general manager for power, explained the agreement documents the business relationship between PG&E and the city as the CCA administrator and is one of three prerequisite steps required before the PUC can register the program with the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC). "The service agreement is a prerequisite for providing service to customers that we have, in writing, a service agreement that describes the business relationship between PG and E and the city in its capacity as the Community Choice Aggregation Program Administrator," Hale said.
Commissioners probed outstanding items in the draft: several clauses (including references to bankruptcy of the CCA and nondisclosure language) were shown in some printed drafts and staff said they have negotiated strikes or modifications to those provisions. Commissioner Moran asked whether signing the agreement creates city obligations if the CCA never formally enrolls customers; counsel indicated there would be no affirmative financial obligation if the program never enters operation, and staff explained the two‑year term allows the city to continue to press unresolved items with the CPUC while the agreement is in effect.
Commissioners also asked whether signing the service agreement would strengthen the city’s negotiating position with PG&E or whether delaying approval would be preferable; staff said early approval helps keep administrative timelines and avoids avoidable delays in the registration process. Marin’s recent experience launching a CCA was cited as precedent: Marin signed the CPUC template agreement and commenced service to customers while minimizing customization.
The motion to authorize the general manager to finalize and sign the two‑year agreement passed on a voice vote. Staff will continue to negotiate unresolved tariff and disclosure points during the agreement term and may seek CPUC changes where necessary.
