Socialism is the government control of the means of production. Communism is the ownership of the means of productive. Looks like the leaders of San Fran have gotten over being Socialists—instead that have decided to be full fledged Marxists.
“City leaders are exploring how San Francisco would create an alternative to PG&E.
A city oversight committee voted Friday to commission a study on Golden State Energy, a state entity that could take control of PG&E’s infrastructure when the investor-owned utility fails or elected leaders consider it necessary.
Of course that would give government total control over pricing and availability. If you are not politically correct they could turn off your utilities. If your business donates to the wrong candidate, you can be closed down. How long will it be before the media finally admits that this is Marxism?
SF officials commission study to explore nonprofit PG&E alternative
By James Salazar, SF Examiner, 9/15/23 https://www.sfexaminer.com/news/climate_change/sf-to-study-replacing-pge-with-nonprofit-electric-utility/article_456af482-540d-11ee-b179-bb7876d3ab9c.html
City leaders are exploring how San Francisco would create an alternative to PG&E.
A city oversight committee voted Friday to commission a study on Golden State Energy, a state entity that could take control of PG&E’s infrastructure when the investor-owned utility fails or elected leaders consider it necessary.
Proponents told the Local Agency Formation Commission that regaining local control over the grid would reduce energy burdens on customers, further tap into renewable energy resources and increase transparency in utility regulation.Preview: Jessie Diggins
Jessie Diggins leads Team USA’s cross country skiing team into the Beijing Olympics after riding the momentum from Digg
They said the move is necessary because PG&E has prioritized putting ratepayer money toward executive bonuses and shareholder profits rather than maintenance and upgrades for a grid that is over 100 years old.
Company representatives were absent from Friday’s commission meeting.
In a statement to The Examiner, PG&E said, “We do not believe that the City and County of San Francisco’s efforts to buy PG&E’s infrastructure would be in the public interest, considering the impacts both on San Francisco residents and on the remainder of PG&E’s customers. Moreover, PG&E believes the City’s petition at the CPUC should not move forward until the environmental review required by state law and CCSF’s own Planning Commission takes place.”
“While CCSF has repeatedly offered to buy PG&E’s infrastructure for pennies on the dollar, PG&E believes this action would have a wide range of negative impacts on safety and reliability of electric service in San Francisco, the quality of CCSF’s existing operations, the commission’s ongoing efforts to address wildfire risk and the economic interests of customers and citizens,” the company added.
Commissioners Jackie Fielder, Hope Williams and Supervisor Dean Preston unanimously supported commissioning a draft study proposal for the public utility. The findings would then be sent to California Gov. Gavin Newsom, as well as state legislators.
“The people of San Francisco and California have suffered long enough from the malfeasance of PG&E. Our communities have known for years — PG&E is a threat to our health, wellbeing, and pocketbooks, and the governor is not doing enough to keep us safe.” said Antonio Diaz, the organizational director of PODER, an organization that aims to address environmental and economic inequities.
