Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Power Acquisition topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
SFPUC urges study of buying PG&E assets as pathway to public control of local grid
Summary
The San Francisco Public Utilities Commission presented a preliminary report recommending study of acquiring PG&E assets serving the city, outlining three options from continued reliance on PG&E to full acquisition; staff estimated acquisition costs in the "few billion" range and recommended accelerated study tied to PG&E's bankruptcy timetable.
The San Francisco Public Utilities Commission on Tuesday presented a preliminary report that recommends focusing study work on acquiring the distribution assets that serve San Francisco from PG&E.
"The report describes 3 options: limited independence, more independence through targeted strategic investment, and then the third option, full independence," Barbara Hale, assistant AGM for the PUC power enterprise, told the committee. "Our initial staff estimates put the acquisition cost in the range of a few billion dollars."
The PUC described the options this way: one, continue to pay PG&E for distribution service while pressing regulators for fair access; two, invest strategically in distribution systems the city would own while paying PG&E where the city does not operate; and three, pay PG&E a fair market value for its facilities and become the owner-operator of the system serving San Francisco.
The presentation said San Francisco currently pays about $300,000,000 a year in distribution fees to PG&E and that potential distribution revenue (if operated by the city) ranges from roughly $100,000,000 to more than $700,000,000 a year across scenarios; estimated capital outlays vary from about $25,000,000 annually to an initial investment in the billions. Hale warned that the condition and value of PG&E's assets are "currently largely unknown" and called for deeper engineering and financial due diligence.
Supervisor Aaron Peskin, chair of the committee, framed the discussion around reliability and long-term climate goals, saying the proposal could help "drive achievement of our climate goals" while keeping accountability local. Supervisor Matt Haney said governance and operational models used by cities such as Los Angeles and Sacramento informed the PUC's approach: "Governance and how to be most effective is certainly on the list of activities that we are investigating further," Hale said.
Public commenters ranged from advocates urging rapid action on public power to retired PG&E employees and engineers who cautioned about cost, workforce transition and economies-of-scale losses. Jed Holtzman of 350 Bay Area urged careful assessment of PG&E's infrastructure quality, saying the city should avoid buying a system that "will immediately require huge capital investments." Robin David, a PG&E retiree, and others urged protections for the PG&E workforce during any transition.
Hale said the PUC plans accelerated work anchored to PG&E's bankruptcy timeline; staff noted PG&E has until Sept. 29 to file a reorganization plan. Next steps the PUC recommended include asset-by-asset valuation, operational-readiness assessment for the commission, workforce transition planning and development of a transition plan and timeline. The committee asked the PUC to continue quarterly reporting on the PUC's red/yellow/green status metrics and signaled broad support to pursue the study.
The hearing was informational; the committee requested follow-up and did not take a formal vote to acquire assets. The committee adjourned after public comment.
