November 23, 2019 Breaking News, Latest News, and Videos

Insurance Arrangement Shows PUC Hasn’t Change:

State commissions, like people and corporations, rarely change unless they’re given strong motivation; sometimes change has to be forced on them.

The latest evidence now demonstrates that the California Public Utilities Commission is no different. Gov. Jerry Brown, who appointed all five current members of this scandal-plagued agency, just over a month ago refused to sign a package of bills passed unanimously by the state Legislature – every Democrat, every Republican – that would have compelled the PUC to make a few small changes.

Like keeping records of all contacts between commissioners, their staff and officials of the big utility companies they regulate, including Pacific Gas & Electric, Southern California Edison, Southern California Gas and San Diego Gas & Electric. Like writing decisions in “understandable” language.

No big changes were involved in these bills. Commissioners would still have had six-year terms and still could not be fired even by the governor who appoints them. PUC decisions could still be reversed only by appeals courts – where new evidence can only rarely be presented.

What happens when you tell five powerful commissioners they won’t have to change their behavior, when the governor puts no pressure to resign even on a commissioner who helped PG&E find the most sympathetic judge to hear the case involving its 2010 San Bruno gas pipeline explosion that killed eight persons?

They don’t change. That is nowhere better illustrated than in the first significant decision announced after the Brown vetoes.

This case did not involve billions of dollars as when the commission considers routine rate increase requests from the utilities. The pattern there sees the companies invariably ask more than any reasonable person or agency would think justified. New rates somewhat lower than what was asked are then assigned and the PUC takes credit for “saving” consumers money even though rates here continue at levels that already exceed those in any other of the Lower 48 states.

The latest case involved a mere $400 million insurance settlement agreed to this fall by Southern California Edison, the money to compensate its customers and those of SDG&E for higher rates they paid after the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station suddenly went bust in early 2012 due to a decision Edison knew in advance was flawed.

When a $400 million windfall arrives, the logical thing is to pass it on immediately to consumers, with almost all 8 million or so customers involved getting a lump sum of about $50. But no. As with other settlements the PUC has fostered, this one will be doled out in tiny increments, not amounts that might be meaningful to customers.

The current plan is for a rate reduction of about 2.4 percent on monthly bills as long as the money lasts, which could be anywhere from one to three years. During that time, of course, Edison will likely get a routine rate increase far higher than this, rendering the pittances doled out monthly even less significant.

Plus, the settlement is much smaller than some similar ones over the years in other nuclear power incidents. Edison spokeswoman Maureen Brown (no relation to the governor) would not reveal the maximum possible payout under her company’s policy with Nuclear Electric Insurance Limited. Meanwhile, most media simply accepted Edison press releases calling the settlement a great benefit to consumers, some even borrowing the headline the company suggested.

But the benefit to consumers would only amount to pennies above $2 per month (before the next rate increase) if their bills are about $100.

It’s the same kind of arrangement the PUC okayed after the companies that created the California energy crunch of 2000-2001 were forced to cough up some of their illegal profits. As with this one, payments to consumers were so small most barely noticed them.

At the same time, the utilities made tens of millions of dollars in interest while holding onto the bulk of the settlements until they were gone – pretty much the sort of thing that will happen this time.

The PUC didn’t have to go along with the utility’s plan for handling this money and it can still change the longstanding pattern that favors the big companies over their customers. But as long as no change in its culture is forced on it, don’t expect the agency to change a thing.

in Opinion
Related Posts

The Myth of “Public” Art in Santa Monica

February 8, 2019

February 8, 2019

Over the past few years, the Stanton MacDonald Wright murals at the entrance to Santa Monica City Hall have stirred...

Beausoleil: First Parole Test for Newsom

February 10, 2019

February 10, 2019

Not many Californians under 60 can recall just who is the 71-year-old Bobby Beausoleil and what evils he did back...

AI in the Year 2020… Almost

February 11, 2019

February 11, 2019

By Nektar Baziotis In 1966 Gene Rodenberry’s “Star Trek” made its television debut on NBC. Audiences young and old were captivated...

Is Santa Monica’s Heart for Sale?

February 15, 2019

February 15, 2019

Note from SMa.r.t.: This article, in a longer form, was originally published four years ago but is still as pertinent...

Column: Adapting to Westside Vacancies

February 18, 2019

February 18, 2019

By Avi Sinai We all see the vacant storefronts around the Westside and it begs the question – why are...

SMa.r.t. Column: Gridlocked Best Intentions

February 22, 2019

February 22, 2019

On any given evening (and especially weekends) pay a visit to north-bound 2nd Street between Broadway Avenue and Santa Monica...

No Excuses: Stop the Crime Wave

March 1, 2019

March 1, 2019

My mother turned 91 last Saturday. Happy Birthday, Mom! She has walked the streets of Santa Monica her whole life...

Column: Can we Solve Westside Traffic with more Housing Development?

March 5, 2019

March 5, 2019

About the author: Avi Sinai is the principal of HM Capital, a Los Angeles company specializes in hard money real...

Open Space… Is There Any Left?

March 9, 2019

March 9, 2019

Yes there is. Small as it is, there is about 2.5 acres in the heart of downtown waiting to be...

Letter to Editor: Former Mayor on Voting Rights Case

March 13, 2019

March 13, 2019

By Paul Rosenstein Former Mayor of Santa Monica I hope the judge’s order for district elections is stayed during the...

I Eat, Therefore I Risk:

June 24, 2010

June 24, 2010

Let’s start with the water bottle. Because that’s just such a strange modern mentality to begin with… the notion that...

Hometown Hero: Ted Winterer:

June 24, 2010

June 24, 2010

2010 will be the first time Ted, his wife, the designer Beck Taylor, their children, Eleanor and Steele, and their...

There’s LUCE, and Then There’s “loose”…:

July 2, 2010

July 2, 2010

Class stratification doesn’t have to be part of the dialogue about every single thing in America. Or does it? You...

SMa.r.t. OpEd: A Sense of Place:

September 2, 2016

September 2, 2016

By SMa.r.t In the mid-19th century, America’s West held the promise of cheap land and riches. In some ways, this...

The Kids Are Alright. But How Are We Doing?:

July 9, 2010

July 9, 2010

Near the holiday weekend one of our cable channels offered-up a kind of festival of “Teens-out-of-control!” movies from the 50s...