A new public power move

EDITORIAL

The public power movement has been fairly quiet of late: As community-choice aggregation moves forward, a lot of folks are waiting to see what happens — and are, frankly, trying to figure out what the next move should be. Sup. Ross Mirkarimi has just introduced legislation that should put the issue back on the political agenda and get activists thinking about how to use the momentum from CCA to finally kick Pacific Gas and Electric Co.'s illegal monopoly out of town.

The ordinance, which will come before the Land Use Committee March 1, would establish as city policy that San Francisco provide electric power to all new city developments, including redevelopment projects and military bases.

The idea, of course, is to require the city to do what the Public Utilities Commission and the Mayor's Office have repeatedly refused to do: establish a public power beachhead at large, city-sponsored projects. That would give the city some direct experience providing retail electricity, would demonstrate that San Francisco is perfectly capable of running a power utility, and would bring in a big chunk of money to the public coffers.

The last time a major public project came up — the conversion of the Presidio from a military base to a national park — San Francisco didn't even bid on providing electric power until activists, led by then-supervisor Angela Alioto, forced the issue. When PG&E won the contract anyway, Alioto forced the City Attorney's Office to sue — but then–city attorney Louise Renne and the supervisors agreed to settle the claim for a piddling $132,000.

If Mirkarimi's ordinance goes through — and the supervisors should approve it without delay — the situation at Treasure Island and Hunters Point will be very different. As part of any city takeover of those sites, San Francisco will be required to provide electricity to the tenants. The same will go, potentially, for big redevelopment projects (like the Hunters Point Redevelopment Area).

In the meantime, CCA is moving forward and will probably come before the supervisors in the next month or so. There are still some dangling issues: Transitioning to a system under which the city will in effect operate a buyers' co-op, selling lower-cost power over PG&E's lines, will cost a few million dollars up front, and it's not clear where that money will come from. But in the end, the start-up costs are so minor compared to the gains that this shouldn't slow the supervisors down. More important: CCA will need a serious marketing campaign to explain what's going on to residents and businesses; to show how consumers (who will have a choice here) can save money by going with the city as an energy provider; and to combat whatever nonsense PG&E employs to try to save its customer base. The supervisors need to be sure that a plan is in place to promote the idea before they sign off on it.

The next step is for public power activists to start meeting again regularly and developing a strategic plan to bring a full-fledged municipal utility — with lower rates, economic benefits, and millions for the public till — to San Francisco. There's no time to waste. *