• CREATE AN ACCOUNT
  • LOG.IN
  • CONTENTS
  • CLASSIFIEDS
  • ARCHIVE
  • INFO | ADVERTISING | CONTACT US

  • Home
  • News
    • News Main Page
  • A&E
    • A&E Main Page
    • Movie Times
    • TV Listings
    • A&E Blog
    • Art Galleries
    • Best Bets
  • Opinion
    • Opinion Main Page
    • Blogs
    • Columns
    • Voices
    • Letters
    • In Memoriam
    • Obituaries
  • Events
    • Today
    • Search
    • Submit
    • Best Bets
  • Living
    • Living Main Page
    • Outdoors
    • Travel
    • Sports
    • Peeps
  • Food & Drink
    • Food & Drink Main Page
    • All Restaurants
    • Delivery
    • All Bars & Clubs
    • Drink Specials
    • Open Now
  • Sports
  • Outdoors
    • Outdoors Main Page
    • Outside Insider
    • Spotlight On
    • Features
  • Classifieds
    • Real Estate
    • Jobs
    • Autos
  • Obits

    No on 16


    Thursday, May 27, 2010
    Article Tools
    Print friendly
    E-mail story
    Tip Us Off
    iPod friendly
    Comments
    Share Article
    Facebook Facebook
    Twitter Twitter
    Google+1 Google+1
    del.icio.us. del.icio.us.
    Digg! Digg!
    Yahoo! Buzz Yahoo! Buzz
    diigo Diigo
    google google
    newsvine newsvine
    reddit reddit
    technorati technorati
    Yahoo! My Web 2.0 Yahoo!
    Share on Myspace Myspace

    In the upcoming June election, you are being asked to vote on an initiative that may seem to honor your right to vote—but it doesn’t mean your vote will make any difference.

    Proposition 16 hands PG&E a monopoly on electricity that will be next to impossible to overcome. It also ensures less renewable energy and higher electricity rates, while setting a dangerous precedent in which big business uses the initiative process for its own gain.

    Specifically, Proposition 16 will change the California Constitution to require a two-thirds super-majority vote before any municipality (city, county, district, etc) could form its own nonprofit public utility, expand an existing publicly owned utility, or buy clean, renewable energy at wholesale prices for their community.

    That last restriction is of particular concern to us because it throws up a major roadblock to something called “community choice,” a little known option whereby any municipality, or group of municipalities, may buy or build electricity generation for their community. This is an intriguing option because with community choice, a municipality can decide the sources of electricity that power our homes: wind, solar, biomass, wave, etc.

    While the investor-owned utilities are supposed to meet statewide goals for renewable energy, they are far behind this year. In fact, coal still accounts for a major portion of California’s electricity generation. Furthermore, the utilities have little hope of meeting the 2020 goals without major changes to the process for reviewing, approving, and building renewable energy.

    That is why community choice is so appealing: It empowers communities to decide their own sources of electricity. Community choice can give us local control and have a huge impact on air pollution, greenhouse gas emissions, and even prices. Importantly, any customer can opt out of a community choice arrangement and decide to stay with their existing utility company. There will be no option to opt out of your current investor-owned utility if Proposition 16 passes.

    One investor-owned utility in particular is fighting hard to convince you that Proposition 16 is a good idea: PG&E.

    PG&E wrote the initiative and is now pouring tens of millions of dollars into the Yes on Proposition 16 campaign to maintain its market share. No other organization has donated to the campaign. The other electric utilities have seen that this proposition is a bad PR move, and no one else has anything to gain. It’s all on PG&E at this point.

    Which brings me to my last point. The California initiative process was created in the early 1900s to empower citizens to enact legislation. At that time, the railroads held tremendous sway at the state capital and the people wanted a more democratic government. Now PG&E is trying to take away taxpayer choice by spending their way to a victory and giving power to a small minority, namely the investor-owned, for-profit electric utilities.

    This is the wrong choice. If PG&E wants to retain its market share, let it do so fair and square: by offering competitive prices and fulfilling its commitments to clean, renewable energy.—Megan Birney (Renewable Energy Specialist at the Community Environmental Council

    Comments

    Independent Discussion Guidelines

    Log in to comment

    Forgotten your password?

    Sign up

    EVENT CALENDAR

    Previous Month | Next Month

    Today's Events Best Bets Submit an Event

    Local Weather

    Click here for current conditions

    Surf Report
    • Specials
    • InPrint
    • Top Emails
    • Summer Adventure Guide 2011
    • Wedding Guide 2011
    • Best Of 2011
    • 2010 Election Coverage
    • Blue Green Guide 2011
    • Local Heroes 2011
    • 2011 Calendar of Fundraisers
    • Local Bands
    • 2011 Foodie Awards
    • Stupid, Inept, or Corrupt?
    • It's My Life
    • Helicopters United
    • What Was Bacara’s Dworman Thinking?
    • White Denim Hits the Road with Wilco
    • Summit for a Cure
    1. S.B. Filmmaker Mike DeGruy Killed in Helicopter Crash
    2. Stupid, Inept, or Corrupt?
    3. New Hospital Helipad Sees Heavy Action
    4. Bye Bye, Redevelopment Agency
    5. S.B. Symphony to Perform Tribute to Ansel Adams
    6. Santa Maria Police Standards' Slippery Slope
    • CREATE AN ACCOUNT
    • LOG.IN
    • CONTENTS
    • CLASSIFIEDS
    • ARCHIVE
    • INFO | ADVERTISING | CONTACT US
    Google
     
    Independent.com Web
    Copyright ©2012 Santa Barbara Independent, Inc. Reproduction of material from any Independent.com pages without written permission is strictly prohibited. If you believe an Independent.com user or any material appearing on Independent.com is copyrighted material used without proper permission, please click here.
    This is our Privacy Policy.