Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Cpuc Petition topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
San Francisco city attorney asks CPUC to bar utilities from marketing against CCAs
Summary
The City and County of San Francisco filed a Jan. 11 petition asking the California Public Utilities Commission to bar utilities from anti-CCA marketing, prohibit unsolicited opt-out solicitations, ban deceptive statements about CCAs and provide injunctive relief to stop improper conduct.
Thomas Long, a deputy city attorney, briefed the joint LAFCO-SFPUC meeting on a petition the city filed with the California Public Utilities Commission on Jan. 11 asking the CPUC to clarify and tighten rules governing utility conduct toward community choice aggregations.
"The petition that we filed calls on the CPUC to modify its rules to make clear that utilities like PG and E cannot engage in efforts to interfere with community choice aggregation programs, particularly efforts such as anti community choice aggregation marketing," Long said. He told commissioners the requested changes include: barring utility marketing against CCAs; prohibiting conduct intended to frustrate or impede a CCA; forbidding utilities from soliciting opt-out requests at any time; banning deceptive or misleading statements about CCAs; and clarifying that CCAs can seek injunctive relief from the CPUC.
Long recounted the shift in utility posture since the CCA law's adoption, saying PG&E previously supported CCA but "has reversed its position and now staunchly opposes community choice aggregation." He cited mailers and a website tied to a PG&E-funded coalition as examples and said the city sought expedited CPUC consideration because the behavior was ongoing.
Commissioners and public speakers expressed support for a strong response and cautioned about tactical and legal considerations for how and when to press CPUC remedies. Eric Brooks of the San Francisco Green Party asked whether a favorable CPUC ruling would limit what PG&E could say in the ballot-measure fight; Long said the legal consequences would depend on specifics and tactics and that options would be considered as developments warrant.
Why it matters: the petition seeks administrative rule changes that would affect how incumbent utilities are allowed to communicate with customers and could change the balance of information during opt-out enrollment windows, potentially affecting CCA launch outcomes.
What to watch: CPUC docket activity on the petition and any interim enforcement or emergency relief if the commission accepts the request for expedited consideration.
