Here's something you might be interested in.
Tomorrow (Feb. 28), the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) votes on whether to permit San Diego Gas & Electric to push ahead with three gas-fired power plants. The most important is Pio Pico in the Otay area. But, it is very clear from evidence, one person who is supposed to be an impartial adjudicator in the decision, Michael Peevey, head of the CPUC, has been secretly pushing for it. San Diego attorney Todd Cardiff, through a document request, learned that Peevey contacted Robert Weissenmiller, head of the California Energy Commission, urging Weissenmiller to write a letter in support of Pio Pico. On December 6, Weissenmiller wrote a letter to a colleague saying "Peevey wants a letter from me" to push Pio Pico while San Onofre is out of commission. The same day, one Kevin Barker said in an email "Bob [Weissenmiller] was asked today to support Pio Pico...."
Cardiff wants Peevey to recuse himself from tomorrow's vote. Says Cardiff, "We find it absolutely outrageous that the president of the CPUC, who is supposed to be sitting in a quasi-judicial manner over the project approvals, has clandestinely requested another agency file a letter in support of the project. This is a very serious violation of due process and brings into question the very integrity of the CPUC board." Cardiff adds, "Peevey's actions were designed to have the maximum influence on not only the public, but on fellow commissioners, because they wouldn't know the source of the letter."
Earlier, I had a blog item showing that CPUC Commissioner Carla Peterman had been a lead author of a report showing that Pio Pico was necessary. Initially, she said she should not vote in the matter because of an obvious conflict. But then she changed her position because of "evolving legal advice."
Cardiff wants both Peevey and Peterman to recuse themselves. I would go further, and stress this is my opinion, not Cardiff's. There is plenty of evidence, revealed many times in the Reader, showing that Peevey should be removed from the CPUC by Governor Brown. Peterman, a new appointee, has time to change her ways. The public is increasingly aware of the CPUC's pro-utility, anti-consumer bias, and deeply inculcated corruption.
Tomorrow (Feb. 28), the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) votes on whether to permit San Diego Gas & Electric to push ahead with three gas-fired power plants. The most important is Pio Pico in the Otay area. But, it is very clear from evidence, one person who is supposed to be an impartial adjudicator in the decision, Michael Peevey, head of the CPUC, has been secretly pushing for it. San Diego attorney Todd Cardiff, through a document request, learned that Peevey contacted Robert Weissenmiller, head of the California Energy Commission, urging Weissenmiller to write a letter in support of Pio Pico. On December 6, Weissenmiller wrote a letter to a colleague saying "Peevey wants a letter from me" to push Pio Pico while San Onofre is out of commission. The same day, one Kevin Barker said in an email "Bob [Weissenmiller] was asked today to support Pio Pico...."
Cardiff wants Peevey to recuse himself from tomorrow's vote. Says Cardiff, "We find it absolutely outrageous that the president of the CPUC, who is supposed to be sitting in a quasi-judicial manner over the project approvals, has clandestinely requested another agency file a letter in support of the project. This is a very serious violation of due process and brings into question the very integrity of the CPUC board." Cardiff adds, "Peevey's actions were designed to have the maximum influence on not only the public, but on fellow commissioners, because they wouldn't know the source of the letter."
Earlier, I had a blog item showing that CPUC Commissioner Carla Peterman had been a lead author of a report showing that Pio Pico was necessary. Initially, she said she should not vote in the matter because of an obvious conflict. But then she changed her position because of "evolving legal advice."
Cardiff wants both Peevey and Peterman to recuse themselves. I would go further, and stress this is my opinion, not Cardiff's. There is plenty of evidence, revealed many times in the Reader, showing that Peevey should be removed from the CPUC by Governor Brown. Peterman, a new appointee, has time to change her ways. The public is increasingly aware of the CPUC's pro-utility, anti-consumer bias, and deeply inculcated corruption.
It looks like Peevey is performing under the table favors to insure he receives a sinecure from Sempra when he completes his government "service." Peevey belongs in a penitentiary with a ball and chain attached to his leg.
Burwell: When he was an executive vice president at Edison, Peevey -- extremely ineptly -- spearheaded the attempted takeover of San Diego Gas & Electric. Edison lost a huge bundle in the failed effort and then promoted Peevey to president, although he was not in the post long. As head of the CPUC, he has schemed to make sure utilities can jack up their earnings per share and ratepayers can get the shaft. He has also taken many trips abroad at the expense of utilities. I don't know why Gov. Brown does not remove him. Best, Don Bauder
" I don't know why Gov. Brown does not remove him." Don Bauder, I would imagine that one of the reasons that Governor Brown doesn't "remove" Peevey is that the Governor does not have the authority to remove any member of the CPUC, be it the President or a commissioner.
But he can replace Peevey, just not remove him from the CPUC altogether.
Duhbya: I think you are right: the governor could remove Peevey as head of the commission, but the legislature would have to remove him from the commission. Best, don Bauder
Can the Governor indeed replace him? I don't know as the Constitution doesn't appear to address the issue either in Article 12 or Article 5. In any event, if such an ability exists, do you really expect him to? Only a year and a half ago, the NTSB ripped the CPUC a a new ass - hole over the San Bruno Explosion. The calls for Peevey's resignation or removal were much louder then than now. Couple that with Peevey's wife being a member of the State Senate, well you probably get the idea of how much I think there is a chance that Brown will do anything, IF he can, which I am not at all sure he can.
tomjohnston: You are absolutely correct that Peevey has clout. His wife is in the state legislature, as you note. Peevey has ins with organized labor, although he clearly favors management. He does all this traveling abroad that is financed by utilities and their lobbyists, and yet few publications call him on it. (The Reader does, and there is also a publication in San Francisco that does.) Peevey is wired. Best, Don Bauder
tomjohnston: The governor appoints the members but the legislature has to remove a commissioner. Mea culpa. In the past, many of us have wondered why Brown reappointed Peevey. I was obviously thinking of that, and was wrong, but the governor, of course, has great sway over the legislature, particularly now, with both branches overwhelmingly Democratic. Best, Don Bauder
Brown didn't reappoint Peavey. He was reappointed in December 2008 by Schwarzenegger and was confirmed by the California Senate for a new six-year term in December of 2009, obviously before Brown was in office. It takes a 2/3 majority in BOTH houses to oust a commissioner. Could he get that in both houses right now? I don't know. I believe in the Senate, with all of the vacancies, Dems would be about 1 vote short, not counting the fact that I'm sure Peevey's wife would not vote for his ouster. In the Assembly, I think it's right about a 2/3 majority. But that said, I think it's a mute point because Brown will do as he has done in the past, which is nothing.
tomjohnston: Mea culpa again. Peevey was appointed in 2002 by Gray Davis and reappointed in 2008 by Schwarzenegger. Best, Don Bauder
Yes, Davis first appointed him to a commissioners post and then later that year as President. He succeeded Loretta Lynch as President who was President during the energy crisis. I remember 2 things about her. First is that she was strongly against deregulation. The other is that she referred to the energy companies as a cartel at one point and that in her opinion, the price of power went thru the roof because those companies withheld power, partly by taking some plants offline. There is no doubt in the minds of many people as to why Davis replaced her as President of the CPUC with Peevey in 2002. I had forgotten about that until just now, which obviously means that a Governor indeed can remove someone as president of the CPUC, just not remove them from the commission entirely.
tomjohnston: Absolutely. Loretta Lynch had it right. She opposed deregulation when most others were championing it. And she saw that prices were being manipulated for power companies' profit, as power was being taken offline deliberately. The word "cartel" was not too strong. She was still another public servant vilified because she was right. Best, Don Bauder
Gov. Brown CAN strip Peevey of the Presidency of the Commission on his own, and appoint another of the 4 CPUCommissioners. As you have pointed out here, it should NOT be Carla Peterman given her failure to stick to her instincts about the conflict of interest inherent in voting on Pio Pico as a CPU Commissioner when she authored a favorable report on the same project as a CA Energy Commissioner.
Public Utilities Code Sec. 305: "The Governor shall designate a president of the commission from among the members of the commission. The president shall direct the executive director, the attorney, and other staff of the commission, except for the staff of the division described in Section 309.5 [NOTE: Division of Ratepayer Advocates], in the performance of their duties, in accordance with commission policies and guidelines. The president shall preside at all meetings and sessions of the commission."
Peevey REALLY MUST GO!
What can you do?
We now have 832 signatures on our petition to Gov. Brown to appoint a new President of the CPUC....Lets get to 1000 signatures! Peevey has got to go!
https://www.change.org/petitions/governor-jerry-brown-appoint-a-new-president-of-cpuc-immediately-2?
CPUC DELAYS DECISION. The CPUC today (Feb. 28) delayed its decision on SDGE's push to get the Pio Pico plant approved. However, the commission turned down Todd Cardiff's attempt to get Peevey and Peterman to recuse themselves from the decision because of blatant bias. Best, Don Bauder
If Brown went to the legislature and asked for Peevey's removal, it would do a couple things. One is that it would signal to the pro-utility commissioners that the political system was no longer to take their bias without some complaint. Second, it would focus attention on the actions of the PUC and keep it under the microscope and in bright light. Even if Brown failed to win his action, he would at least have tried. So, why does he, with his Dem supermajority, not make the attempt? Ahh, that is the question.
Visduh: While the governor may not have the latitude to snap his fingers and fire Peevey, he could certainly use his suasion in getting the overwhelmingly Democratic legislature to do it. Why doesn't Brown do it? Maybe the utilities have Brown in their pockets, as well as Peevey. Money talks. Why must it nauseate? Best, Don Bauder
As of last Friday, the Dems no longer have a supermajority in the Senate. When Michael Rubio resigned, that left the Dems with only 26 seats, one shy. They do hold a 55/25 advantage in the Assembly. Unless Brown could get at least 2 Repugs to roll over, remember Peevey's wife is a Dem in the Senate, AND get every Dem vote, he wouldn't get it done because it takes a 2/3 vote in BOTH chambers. The Dems are likely to gain back one seat relatively soon in one of the special elections to fill the 3 seats they have lost due to resignations. That would give them the supermajority again, but Brown needs 2 more seats, at least, to get rid of Peevey. The CPUC was already under a pretty big spotlight because of San Bruno and Brown did nothing. If Brown took no action then, he won't take it now. Plus, right, wrong or indifferent, absolutely no politician is going to march headlong into that kind of fight unless he knows absolutely, without question that he has the votes. Brown doesn't, he knows it, so I don't think he will touch it.
tomjohnston: You may be right: Brown won't touch it. There is also the possibility that he has bigger fish to fry, and utilities -- despite San Bruno and other outrages -- are not the first thing on his plate. Best, Don Bauder
First, THANK YOU, Don Bauder for this post, and for all the other great investigative journalism work you have done over the years. As someone who worked at the CPUC for 20 years, leaving as the catastrophic Electricity "Restructuring" (Deregulation) Policy was rammed through by then-Governor Pete Wilson's appointed majority on the Commission ... this is the latest in a long, sordid tale of collusion between the regulator and regulatee(s). That disastrous policy was affirmed unanimously by the CA Legislature in an 11th-hour vote; Peevey was originally appointed by the hapless Gray Davis and reappointed by his successor-in-recall $chwarzenegger, and has been shielded in part since by his Assemblymember-now-State-Senator wife, Carol Liu, who up until last year chaired the Senate Appropriations committee responsible for the CPUC's budget. MORE conflict-of-interest.
Gov. Brown CAN strip Peevey of the Presidency of the Commission on his own, and appoint another of the 4 CPUCommissioners. As you have pointed out here, it should NOT be Carla Peterman given her failure to stick to her instincts about the conflict of interest inherent in voting on Pio Pico as a CPU Commissioner when she authored a favorable report on the same project as a CA Energy Commissioner.
Public Utilities Code Sec. 305: "The Governor shall designate a president of the commission from among the members of the commission. The president shall direct the executive director, the attorney, and other staff of the commission, except for the staff of the division described in Section 309.5 [NOTE: Division of Ratepayer Advocates], in the performance of their duties, in accordance with commission policies and guidelines. The president shall preside at all meetings and sessions of the commission."
Of great import to this topic -- this past Monday, State Senator Jerry Hill of San Bruno unveiled Senate Bill 611, reform legislation prompted by the CPUC's decision last October to abruptly suspend public hearings that were to determine how much Pacific Gas & Electric Co. will be fined for the fatal San Bruno gas pipeline explosion.
"The CPUC’s decision to close the curtain on the hearings after two weeks of testimony – and bring in former U.S. Sen. George Mitchell to mediate – was roundly criticized by Hill and Ruane as an affront to transparency and the residents of San Bruno, and Mitchell ultimately stepped aside.
"Hill’s bill would erect an ethical wall, separating the CPUC prosecutorial and judicial functions --just as the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), the CPUC’s federal counterpart, separates these powers. This provision was crafted in response to CPUC President Michael Peevey’s decision to direct the commission’s staff, through the commission’s general counsel, to force the parties in the San Bruno proceedings to settle in private with PG&E. http://sd13.senate.ca.gov/news/2013-02-22-hill-introduces-state-puc-reforms-calls-audit-utility-accounts
sullivanms: You worked for the CPUC for 20 years, and you say the governor CAN dump Peevey. I hope you are right. We in San Diego are getting deceived and defrauded in several ways by CPUC/Peevey duplicity, but we can't top the folks getting fleeced over the San Bruno disaster. Best, Don Bauder
He can't remove him as a Commissioner, but he CAN appoint another CPUCommr as President, which would at least be a start to restoring some level of credibility to the CPUC IF the new President isn't tainted by ethical lapses as well (e.g., Peterman).
sullivanms: If Brown would appoint another commissioner as president, and Peevey would become just another person on the board, that would send a powerful message both to the other commissioners and the public. The message: straighten up! Best, Don Bauder
The CPUC should issue a formal apology to the public for this, force Peevey and Peterman to recuse. The Governor should start an investigation of "insider trading" and for the development of a stronger ethics and transparency code. Thanks for covering this important issue!
Agreed, great comment!
Founder: The CPUC doesn't simply need a stronger ethics code. It needs an ethics code, period. Best, Don Bauder
mdisenhouse. Peevey should not only be forced to recuse. He should be forced out. Peterman, new to the commission, should be given more chances. Best, Don Bauder
Yet another glimpse into the way that ratepayers are being "punked" by those that have sworn to be impartial and look out for the public good, instead we learn that they are far more concerned about what is best for the Utilities (and their shareholders) they are supposed to be regulating!
If this does not get the attention of the CA Attorney General, Kamala D. Harris, then I can't imagine what will!
The CPUC and those that have the ability to Staff it need to review the Ralph M. Brown Act and start cleaning house ASAP.
Founder: Peevey's secret attempt to get the CEC to write a letter for Pio Pico, on which he is supposed to be neutral, is not simply a violation of the Brown Act. It is a gross violation of basic ethics that should apply to commissioners of the CPUC. Best, Don Bauder
Just learned about this from a fellow activist, by the time I RSVP'd, one of the 20-person "Stakeholder Groups" was already full. As Press, Don, you should be able to get in regardless, right?
http://www.cleantechsandiego.org/component/jevents/icalrepeat.detail/2013/03/20/743/-/YTdlOGNmYjA3NDVlNjlkMWQwNDA0N2MxNWE0OGUzZWM=/cpuc-stakeholder-meeting.html
The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) is holding meetings in San Diego in order to provide access to the CPUC Commissioners and staff. There will be a full commission business meeting on March 21. This is a noticed meeting open to all members of the public.
As a member of San Diego's cleantech community, you are invited to a series of stakeholder meetings the day before, on March 20, at the Scripps Seaside Forum. These meetings are less formal working meetings that allow you to bring your policy suggestions or concerns directly to all five Commissioners. This is a chance to discuss State policy—and how it affects our region—directly with the decision makers at the CPUC. To date, the Commissioners have participated in four of these regional stakeholders meetings throughout the state.
Participants will be grouped according to three specific topics: energy efficiency/renewable energy, infrastructure and safety (subject to change). Attendees will be split into three groups of 20. Each group will have a chance to meet with every Commissioner and the directors, advisors and staff of various CPUC divisions. Commissioners will start meetings at 10:00am and will meet with each group for 90 minutes. The commissioners and their staff will then move to the next group, repeating this until each group of Commissioners has met with each group of stakeholders. This is an all-day event and lunch will be provided. Please note all ex parte rules apply and must be observed.
Should you be interested in attending this invitation-only event please email Drew Cheney at [email protected] They can only accommodate 60 participants, so please RSVP to Drew as soon as possible.
What: Stakeholder meeting with CPUC Commissioners and staff
When: Wednesday, March 20th; pre-meetings start at 9:00am, Commissioners arrive at 10:00am
Where: Scripps Seaside Forum, 8610 Kennel Way La Jolla, CA 92037
Parking: About a 3-5 minute walk to the Scripps Forum - Kellogg Park, Free Parking Area. Map - http://goo.gl/maps/Vy1iI
sullivanms: This meeting should be a chance to question the CPUC not only about these gas-fired plants, but also about the ethics of Peevey and Peterman. Possibly the CPUC won't let the second subject come up. Just in case that happens, some picketers should carry signs to remind the commissioners of these ethical lapses. Best, Don Bauder
The 3/20 CPUC Stakeholders Meeting would seem to run afoul of the Bagley-Keene Open Meetings Act, from reading the CA Attorney General's Guide to the same, to wit:
RE Contacts by the Public: "So long as the body does not solicit or orchestrate such contacts, they would not constitute a violation of the Bagley-Keene Act. Whether its good policy for a body to allow these individual contacts to occur is a different issue."
"Conferences and Retreats: Conferences are exempt from the Act’s coverage so long as they are open to the public and involve subject matter of general interest to persons or bodies in a given field. (§ 11122.5(c)(2).) While in attendance at a conference, members of a body should avoid private discussions with other members of their body about subjects that may be on an upcoming agenda. However, if the retreat or conference is designed to focus on the laws or issues of a particular body it would not be exempt under the Act."
VERY IMPORTANT CPUC MEETING 3/21/13 9 AM WITH FULL COMMISSION ACTIVISTS, CONCERNED CITIZENS - UPSET WITH CPUC, SDG&E, SMART METERS, POWER PLANT PLANS, SAN ONOFRE LEAKS AND CORRUPTION? Arrive early to sign up to speak
Attend the CPUC Meeting in San Diego on 3/21/2013
CPUC Voting Meeting - San Diego
When: 9 a.m. Where: Conference Center Hearing Room, San Diego County Operations Center, 5520 Overland Ave., San Diego, CA 92123
More information such as agenda, hold list, presentations, and remote access http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/PUC/aboutus/commmtgs.htm
This pattern of double dealing should be getting attention from the FBI or some other federal agency. We're no longer looking at an unacceptable degree of bias on the part of some of the commissioners, this is outright corruption. Yes, the AG should be all over these Brown Act violations and basic ethical lapses, too. While the best way of insuring that corruption never flourishes is the ballot box, sometimes that takes 'way too long and is far too muddled with other matters. Starting in the late 90's with that idiotic deregulation plan and continuing today, the electrical grid in this state is utterly unregulated and a real free for all. Who will guard the guards? Voters need to awaken, but with the news media as they now are constituted little is likely to happen.
Visduh: California needs somebody like Loretta Lynch to head the CPUC. She headed it once, and utilities successfully pressured to have her removed because she saw the corruption that was going on and wanted to do something about it. Best, Don Bauder
I disagree. I don’t believe at all that it was the utilities pressuring Davis to remove Lynch. I believe he did it all on his own. Lynch took a number of steps that upstaged Davis or down right pissed him off. He was completely surprised when the commission adopted a record electricity rate increase in 2001. In a terse statement, he publicly expressed his frustration that the PUC took months to adopt measures necessary to prepare for the state's energy bond sale, not heeding his call for expediency. And when Davis could not broker a deal, Lynch reached a secret $3.3-billion settlement of a lawsuit by Southern California Edison in 2001 because it was unable to charge its customers the full price of electricity. By ousting Lynch and installing Peevey, Davis was essentially cloning himself at the PUC to make sure he could get whatever he wanted out of the CPUC And not only did Davis yank Lynch as President, he also filled a vacancy on the CPUC with Susan Kenned, who served as Cabinet Secretary and Deputy Chief of Staff in his administration. No, Davis didn’t replace Lynch because he was under pressure from the utilities. He did it as purely a self serving measure.
Perhaps calls to the CA DOJ might prove worthwhile! At least that way, they cannot say they were not aware of this!
The Mar 20 La Jolla "Stakeholders and CPUC" meeting venue should make for very nice PUBLIC PICKETING and free parking too! Wear sun-protective gear.
The next morning, Thurs Mar 21st, a Rally at 8 am, preceding the public CPUC meeting at 9 am will be held in a central and more convenient location:
I just received these interesting details about it: http://us5.campaign-archive2.com/?u=b486808134347bdb57311da16&id=0d89aea049&e=[UNIQID]
Stakeholders and CPUC need to get the message - ratepayers are Stakeholders too!
Stakeholder Definition A person, group or organization that has interest or concern in an organization.
Stakeholders can affect or be affected by the organization's actions, objectives and policies. Some examples of key stakeholders are creditors, directors, employees, government (and its agencies), owners (shareholders), suppliers, unions, and the community from which the business draws its re$ource$.
vitalinfo: There is no excuse for San Diegans not showing up and not raising hell. Best, Don Bauder
We're ON it! Thanks for posting that link, vitalinfo!
sullivanms: The only way the CPUC will be reformed is by citizens rising up. Best, Don Bauder
Anarchy????
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GrSXn3JOvAs
Or maybe this is more to your taste..... http://www.anarchyinajar.com/
or at least: "whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security."
tomjohnston: Not anarchy. House-cleaning. Best, Don Bauder
Don Bauder, Yeah, but when it pertains to the CPUC, the citizenry has not only absolutely no control over what happens, but in reality, no influence on those that have control. Let me put it this way. Name the last time the voters in this state "cleaned house" in the state legislature over any issue that wasn't handled according to their desires. Most people are clueless when it comes to the machinations of state, or even local politics. Here's an example. Sometime last year, a poster on this site, in his complaints about the way the CPUC conducted it's business, repeatedly kept insisting that the Governor fire all of the commissioners and hold elections of some sort to replace them with citizens,people with no agendas, rather than politicos. This was voiced in various threads in various terms over a couple of months. That's how long it took the poster to "get it" in terms of how CPUC board membership worked. And even, that poster still called for the Governor to change the law, in apparent ignorance of the fact that an individual, even the Governor, just can't "change" the state constitution. And I still am not sure if this particular poster really understands. IMO, that is fairly typical of most of the voters in this state. For them to "rise up" and "clean house" just seems why beyond their capabilities. Even more so when you consider how difficult it is for people to agree on much of anything, let alone act on it.
Just my opinion,
Opinions vary
It would appear that Peevey is able to retain his position due to the fact the utilities voluntarily donate funds to the CPUC for distribution to non-profits. These non-profits employ lots of democratic party apparatchik. Peevey has his hand on the spigot and determines who gets watered. If the governor gets rid of Peevey, the voluntary contributions stop and the non-profits don't get any dough.
Burwell: That is a very plausible explanation of what is going on here. Best, Don Bauder
Just like Nuclear Payback*
Those that support nuclear power because nuclear power somehow supports them; no matter what the health implications or other "costs" are for others.
Founder, You're VERY fond of your entries in the urban dictionary, aren't you!! LOL!!!!!!!!!!
tomjohnston: Founder is very creative. Best, Don Bauder
I agree. He is very 'creative". I just like to tease him because to makes all of these references to urban dictionary entrees, comments on other blogs and such and yet he refers to them basically in the 3rd person by avoiding mentioning that they are his. Remember, think global, act local. Don't just think about the big picture, actually get involved and take action.
tomjohnston: He is modest. Best, Don Bauder
Founder: This would certainly apply to the members of the construction in San Diego who were bused up to Orange County to pack a meeting on San Onofre. The union favors the reopening of the facility. Supposedly, it provides jobs. Best, Don Bauder
It is shameful and disgraceful that the corporatist-stranglehold has reduced men and women to prostitute themselves this way. We all are silent accomplices, if not vocal opponents.
vitalinfo: The construction unions will support any project that supplies jobs, however fleetingly, and however deleterious to society. The business establishment exploits the unions to get corporate welfare. The unions are just stalking horses for the greedy corporate mendicants. Best, Don Bauder
Actually, the utilities' donations to non-profits don't flow through the CPUC. Their largesse to nonprofits is above and beyond the ratepayer-funded programs administered by the CPUC, which are assuredly NOT "voluntary" but are mandated by state law and/or CPUC order. But this IS a good explanation for the scripted supporters who show up on-call when the utilities are threatened -- such as the San Onofre Investigation.
sullivanms: Utilities' donations to nonprofits -- and utilities' giving to certain causes in alliance with certain nonprofits -- are often very telling. Best, Don Bauder
Actually, the utilities' donations to non-profits don't flow through the CPUC. Their largesse to nonprofits is above and beyond the ratepayer-funded programs administered by the CPUC,
This is not accurate. Peevey has the authority to decide who gets the donations. In 2011 a bill was introduced in the state legislature to strip him of his authority. He uses his authority to control nonprofits.
http://www.turn.org/issues/energy/item/511-legislature-must-rein-in-cpuc-president.html
Read the story carefully, Burwell. It says nothing about Peevey distributing money donated by the utilities. It refers specifically to ratepayer dollars. "He said he wants a new law that would prohibit the CPUC from doling out hundreds of millions of utility ratepayer dollars to foundations, third-party nonprofits and for-profit organizations, unless first reviewed through the California Energy Commission." Ratepayer money and donations from utilities are not the same thing.
Michael Peevey has shown his incompetence, conflicts of interest, and disdain for people he puts in danger, like those blown to bits in San Bruno in the gas explosion, those harmed by smart meters, those harmed by unnecessary power plants and other projects such as SunRise Powerlink. Peevey needs to be removed by the Governor, immediately, and be replaced by a non-industry protector of the public with a strong track record of this. Peevey is a menace to the public safety and health in California. We need someone who is clearly a champion of the people, such as Ralph Nader or Sandi Maurer of EMF Safety Network. Commissioners from TURN have done nothing but support the status quo, they appear to sell out immediately upon being appointed. To view how, on Thurs. 2/28/13, Peevey yelled "shut up" at people in a CPUC public meeting who were wanting to speak about smart meter injuries, go to CPUC’s Peevey Gets “Peeved” – Yells “Shut Up”, Tries to Stifle Free Speech http://www.electrosmogprevention.org/stop-ca-smart-meter-news/president-peevey-cpuc-yells-shut-up-at-activists-tries-to-stifle-free-speech/. You can watch him do it. He REALLY MUST GO!
You may contact Governor Jerry Brown to request the removal of Michael Peevey as head of the CPUC, and replacement with a true, proven, people's advocate, such as Ralph Nader, at: http://govnews.ca.gov/gov39mail/mail.php by email or:
Mailing address:
Governor Jerry Brown c/o State Capitol, Suite 1173 Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: (916) 445-2841 Fax: (916) 558-3160
Susan, as we have said here, and in previous threads , the President of the CPUC may be removed from that position by the Governor, but he can only be replaced by someone currently on the commission and the Governor can't remove Peevey or anyone else from the commission. Don't get me wrong. Peevey needed to go a long long time ago. But of those on the commission, the only one with anything close to an consumer advocacy experience is Florio but while he was at TURN, he was their senior counsel. Not the pedigree needed to be considered a strong advocate for rate payers. The fact is, there is no strong advocate on the CPUC as none of Brown's first 3 appointees have stepped up to the plate. Will Brown remove Peevey as President? Who knows. But after the San Bruno fiasco, I doubt it. And as I have said before, I don't believe that Brown even bother will take the fight to remove Peevey from the commission to the legislature because he doesn't have the votes in the Senate. Unfortunately, IMO, our best chance is to have Brown NOT reappoint Peevey when his current term is up.