What Are Your SAn Francisco Priorities?
Should city government focus on fighting property crime, reducing homelessness, and building more affordable housing – or should politicians spend $6 billion buying PG&E and running our local utility?
Should city government focus on fighting property crime, reducing homelessness, and building more affordable housing – or should politicians spend $6 billion buying PG&E and running our local utility?
Choose One:
(With $1.6 Billion Left Over)
Taking over the PG&E system could cost taxpayers $6 billion.
The City will also lose $20 million in annual tax and fee revenue that currently funds parks, libraries, and schools.
Monthly energy rates would increase, and city services will decrease – or taxes will increase – to pay for the takeover.
Most SF residents are happy with their electric service and California is already moving towards 100% renewable energy by 2030 — so the new city-owned service WILL NOT be any ‘greener’ over the near or long term.
Spending $6 billion on infrastructure doesn’t include maintenance, repairs, emergency response, billing and overhead.
If this takeover is approved, our electric utility would be managed by the same City Hall politicians who have chronically underfunded vitally-needed investments in new affordable housing, making our city busses and street cars run on time or cleaning up our dirty streets.