The group that wants to oust San Diego Gas & Electric within the city of San Diego and replace it with a municipal utility submitted a sufficient number of signatures to keep its effort alive, though it failed to collect enough to automatically put its proposal on the November ballot.
The San Diego city clerk’s office confirmed June 5 that Power San Diego collected enough valid signatures to pose the question to the City Council.
It hasn’t been determined when the council will vote on potentially placing the proposal on the ballot, according to City Clerk Diana Fuentes.
Newsletter
Get Point Loma-OB Monthly in your inbox every month
News and features about Point Loma and Ocean Beach every month for free
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Point Loma-OB Monthly.
Bill Powers, who helped spearhead the campaign as chairman of Power San Diego, put the news in football terms:
“It isn’t a touchdown; it isn’t directly to the ballot. We’ll call it a field goal. We’ve kept the issue in play.”
The field goal barely made it over the crossbar.
To get the question of creating an electric municipal utility to the city’s elected leaders, Power San Diego needed to collect valid signatures from 3 percent (24,006) of the city’s registered voters.
The group turned in almost 31,000 signatures to the San Diego County registrar of voters office May 14. Per California elections code, a random number of the signatures were examined, and the projected number of valid signatures on the petition came to 24,167 — 161 more than the amount needed to take it to the council.
“Every signature counted,” Powers said. “Every time one of us was thinking about maybe not heading out [on a collection drive], we look back now and go ‘Thank God we did.’”
Under a provision in the San Diego city charter, meeting the signature requirement means the nine members of the City Council have the power to put creation of a municipal utility up for a popular vote this fall.
Power San Diego’s original goal was to collect roughly 80,000 valid signatures (or 10 percent of registered voters in the city), which would have been enough to put the question of a municipal utility directly onto the ballot, according to the San Diego municipal code. But the signature drive fell well short of that threshold.
News
But Power San Diego backers think they got enough valid signatures to put the question of a municipal electric utility before the City Council again.
May 15, 2024
Opponents of the petition pointed to the fact that Power San Diego already has gone to City Hall twice seeking the council’s endorsem*nt of the initiative, only to be turned down — first by the City Council’s Environment Committee in September and then by the Rules Committee in April.
“Bottom line — this initiative is a very bad idea and comes with massive risks to the region,” said Matt Awbrey, spokesman for Responsible Energy San Diego, a political action committee formed by groups opposed to the initiative, including SDG&E. “City officials have already rejected Power San Diego proposals twice before. Now that the proponents have failed to collect enough signatures to place this measure directly on the ballot, we remain hopeful the City Council will reject it yet again.”
The petition also has drawn firm opposition from the labor union that represents about 1,500 SDG&E employees. “It’s going to stick the city or this municipal entity with hundreds of millions of dollars of liability,” IBEW Local 465 business manager Nate Fairman said earlier this year.
Supporters of the Power San Diego campaign say labor contracts will be protected should a municipal utility be created, and that increasingly expensive power bills have led to a groundswell of opposition to SDG&E.
“We did quite well by raising $300,000 and getting more than 30,000 signatures with a team of coordinators and a lot of volunteers,” Power said. “There is a lot of discontent in our community over the behavior of our private, investor-owned utility.”
Under the Power San Diego proposal, the municipal utility would handle the electricity distribution responsibilities for customers within the city limits of San Diego — not in other municipalities in the county.
Petitioners say making the change would result in San Diego customers seeing about a 20 percent reduction in their electricity bills, citing how municipal utilities such as the Sacramento Municipal Utility District and the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power offer customers lower rates than California’s investor-owned utilities SDG&E, Pacific Gas & Electric and Southern California Edison.
Power San Diego estimates it would cost $3.5 billion to get a municipal power company up and running, which would work out to less than $15 per month per customer. Supporters say there would be no incremental cost exposure to city ratepayers.
But SDG&E in March released an assessment from an energy consulting firm that projected the costs would come to much more than that —$11.31 billion to $13.23 billion — and contended that when the costs of financing a municipal utility from scratch are factored in, the total grows even higher.
Power San Diego called the estimates inflated and says the creation of a municipal electric utility could be funded by passing a bond to establish a standalone enterprise fund, with costs amortized over 30 years.
