This one is BIG:
|
|
Update: We Lost.
The bottom line was simple. The Commission determined that an IOU can create an entity to lobby against Community Choice. We know what this looks like, we've seen it before. But NOW - it's going to happen with all the resources of Sempra behind these actions. Going forward, we must be very attentive to:
- Who's saying What -- All friends of Community Choice must watch very carefully as new messages appear about CCAs. The CPUC declined to mandate any labeling as "funded by Sempra Services Corporation, which is solely responsible for its content".
- "Quid Pro Quos" -- SDED and others have documented examples of SDGE offering funding and/or services on condition that the community refrain from any discussion of Community Choice. The SB 790 Code of Conduct restrains SDGE from doing this. Sempra has no such constraints.
- Facts vs Spin -- Every pronouncement on community choice must be vetted now more carefully than ever. Of course, Sempra's coffers will fund their experts. Will you help fund ours?
- Funds needed -- Sempra's very deep pockets will underwrite their ads. Please join SDED to maintain the public voice!
|
Round Two -- Summer 2016 The CPUC issued a draft decision stating "... SDG&E has decided it wishes to lobby or market against CCAs", and then goes on to approve SDGE's Plan to do so. SDED and many others considered the CPUC's proposed restrictions too weak. We held that those protections were and remain insufficient to protect Community Choice entities from the serious imbalance of market power -- and the threat to "fair competition" -- that is re-enjoined by the Commission's actions.
|
|
The Case CA law (SB 790) gives the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) a clear mandate to "... facilitate the development of community choice aggregation programs, to foster fair competition, and to protect against cross-subsidization paid by ratepayers".
SB 790 also required a CCA Code of Conduct to guide Investor-Owned Utility (IOU) regarding Community Choice. The IOU parent companies, like Sempra Energy, are not so bound. After considerable debate and multiple unacceptable plans submitted by SDGE, ultimately the CPUC allowed SDGE and Sempra Energy to effectively end-run SB 790's rules. The Commission approved Sempra's creation of an "Independent Marketing Division" (IMD) funded 100% by Sempra shareholders.
Sempra's actions and the CPUC's approval sets precedent. In San Diego, we now have the first anti-CCA IMD created in the State. This happens here in San Diego at the same time as Choice advocates confirm that we are alone with this issue. Neither Southern California Edison, which has always been neutral toward Choice, and long-time Choice foe Pacific Gas and Electric, now reformed, have taken or will ever take steps to create an anti-CCA IMD.
SB 790 also required a CCA Code of Conduct to guide Investor-Owned Utility (IOU) regarding Community Choice. The IOU parent companies, like Sempra Energy, are not so bound. After considerable debate and multiple unacceptable plans submitted by SDGE, ultimately the CPUC allowed SDGE and Sempra Energy to effectively end-run SB 790's rules. The Commission approved Sempra's creation of an "Independent Marketing Division" (IMD) funded 100% by Sempra shareholders.
Sempra's actions and the CPUC's approval sets precedent. In San Diego, we now have the first anti-CCA IMD created in the State. This happens here in San Diego at the same time as Choice advocates confirm that we are alone with this issue. Neither Southern California Edison, which has always been neutral toward Choice, and long-time Choice foe Pacific Gas and Electric, now reformed, have taken or will ever take steps to create an anti-CCA IMD.
Round One -- December 2015. Just before Thanksgiving 2015, SDGE announced its intent to form an "Independent Marketing Division" (IMD). Many voices raised a host of issues, causing the CPUC to reconsider its actions through much of 2016. Read more on this history here.