I've been seeing a lot of TV ads lately, including on shows like Countdown and Rachel Maddow, pushing Pacific Gas & Electric Co's pet political project, Proposition 16, the so-called "Taxpayers Right to Vote Act." It is a proposed amendment to the state constitution that would require a TWO-THIRDS public vote before any state or local government could go into the electricity business, including as a "community choice aggregator." PG&E is trying to muddy the water to permanently block all public power initiatives, thus protecting its own corporate interests, while pretending to protect the public. Their arguments are as slimy as the proposal itself.
PG&E claims in its ads that Prop 16 is about "protecting the taxpayers' right to vote" before their government invests large sums of money (most likely in the form of a bond measure) to begin or expand any publicly owned electric utility. So far, that sounds pretty good. If that were in fact the intent and effect of the measure, I would probably support it, but the truth is right in the headline in the voter information pamphlet. It doesn't impose the requirement of a public vote, it imposes the requirement of a TWO-THIRDS public vote. That's a whole different kettle of fish, or perhaps in this case a whole different kettle of electric eels.
PG&E's mouthpiece in the ads says "Whether government-run electricity is a good idea or not, voters should have the final say." It's clearly an appeal directed at people like me, who generally think public power is a good idea, but who are wary of a mistimed or mismanaged effort by local politicians. San Francisco is by no means unique in having had some whopping boondoggles come out of City Hall over the years. However, I would flip the argument on its back in an appeal to people who aren't convinced one way or the other on the wisdom of publicly run electricity programs. Prop 16 would, by a simple "50% + 1" majority vote, cement a constitutional requirement that public power could only be started by an overwhelming supermajority. That just ain't fair, and it ain't right. The fact that the effort is financed almost entirely by PG&E makes it smell like a kettle of last week's fish.
Currently, 24% of California's electricity is provided by publicly owned electric utilities — at lower prices than PG&E, by the way. (PG&E and other privately owned utility monopolies provide 68%, with the other 8% provided by non-monopoly competitors.) Having worked at PG&E some years ago, I consider it nothing short of a miracle when I flip a switch and the lights actually work. I remain hopeful that San Francisco will try its hand at some public power experiment, most likely in the form of a Community Choice Aggregator. That experiment should go forward when it has the backing of the majority of the people, rather than languishing, waiting to cross the nearly impossible threshold of a two-thirds vote.