ByActing Sergeant Kristian Palma #6286 Antioch Police Department Investigations Bureau
On Monday, May 20, 2024, at approximately 2:18 AM, Antioch police officers responded to the 2500 block of Somersville Road for the report of an armed robbery.
When officers arrived, they contacted two victims. Officers learned the victims were employees of the Contra Costa County Event Park (Fairgrounds). The Contra Costa County Fair had ended, and two employees were tasked with conducting the night deposit. While conducting the night deposit at the BMO Bank they were approached by an unknown suspect. The suspect robbed the victims of the money and personal belongings at gunpoint.
Other news reports have pegged the amount stolen at $90,000. When asked, a county fair representative offered no comment but didn’t know how that amount was known by other media. Questions were emailed late Wednesday night to Fair CEO Joe Brengle asking if that’s correct, why the deposit was made at that time instead of leaving it in a safe on the fairgrounds and waiting until Monday morning to make the deposit, what is the usual procedure and for any additional information he could share.
We are asking for anyone with information regarding the incident to contact the Antioch Police Department Investigations Bureau. Additional inquiries or information can be directed to Antioch Police Detective Sgt. Palma at (925) 779-6876 or by emailing kpalma@antiochca.gov.
Additional questions were emailed to Brengle Thursday afternoon including:
“Shouldn’t the deposit of such an amount be made with an armed escort, such as staff from the security company, Praetorian hired by the Fair this year or county sheriff’s deputies? Does the Fair have policies and procedures in place for handling deposits? Were they followed? What are they? What amount does the $90,000 (or more) represent of the Fair’s proceeds? Will the Fair’s insurance cover any or all of the loss? What impacts will it have for the Fair’s future?”
Please check back later for any updates to this report.
Antioch Police Sgt. Rob Green shows his motorcycle skills during the Antioch July 4th parade in 2023. Photo by Allen D. Payton, Antioch Herald
Sgt. Rob Green returns to Antioch PD’s Traffic Bureau
Antioch, Calif. — During Motorcycle Safety Awareness Month in May, Antioch Police Department would like to remind drivers to always look twice for motorcycles. By practicing safe driving habits and taking shared responsibility on our roads, we can help everyone arrive at their destination safely.
“Motorcycles may be difficult to spot, so be extra careful before changing lanes,” Sergeant Rob Green said. “A simple double take could mean the difference between a safe journey and a tragic crash. Motorcycle riders do not have the same protections drivers and passengers do. Let’s all do our part to keep each other safe out there.”
According to National Highway Traffic Safety Administration data, there were 6,218 motorcyclists killed in traffic crashes in 2022. Motorcyclists were about 22 times more likely than passenger car occupants to die in a motor vehicle crash and four times more likely to be injured.
To help protect you and your family, keep the following tips in mind while driving or riding:
Drivers
Always check mirrors and blind spots before changing lanes.
Do not follow a motorcycle too closely. Always keep a safe distance.
Lastly, both drivers and riders should never drive/ride distracted or under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs.
Funding for this program is provided by a grant from the California Office of Traffic Safety, through the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
In addition, Antioch Police announced the following on their Facebook page on Sunday, May 19, 2024: “We have an exciting update to share! The Antioch Police Department is bringing back our Traffic Unit. Keeping our roadways safe for our residents is a top priority. Sgt. Rob Green is back in our Traffic Bureau. Officers assigned to the Traffic Unit have specialized training in major collision investigations, DUI investigations, and accident reconstruction. The primary goal of the Traffic Unit is to reduce the number of accidents and to encourage traffic safety on our city streets and in our neighborhoods.”
“…contains challenging financial choices for the Governor and the Legislature…”- Malia Cohen
Fiscal year-to-date revenues still trend below expectations
SACRAMENTO — California State Controller Malia M. Cohen today, Friday, May 10, 2024, issued the following statement in response to Governor Gavin Newsom’s May budget revision:
“This morning, Governor Newsom released the May Revision to his proposed 2024-25 State Budget. The blueprint to address the remaining shortfall contains challenging financial choices for the Governor and the Legislature to maintain the state’s commitment to protecting essential programs and services and continuing critical investments in the state’s future.”
“As the state’s chief fiscal officer, it is my job to ensure the state has sufficient cash to pay our bills and to make certain that expenditures are transparent, accountable, and align with their intended purpose and expected outcomes. My office stands ready to assist both the Governor and the Legislature as they make their final push to finalize and approve the 2024-25 budget.”
In addition, Cohen today released her monthly cash report covering the state’s General Fund revenues, disbursements and actual cash balance for the fiscal year through April 30, 2024. The state ended April with $95.8 billion in unused borrowable resources, while fiscal year-to-date receipts continue below estimates contained in the 2024-25 Governor’s proposed budget.
The Governor’s Budget estimated that the state would collect nearly $16.3 billion in personal income taxes in April. As shown on the State Controller’s Office April 2024 Personal Income Tax Tracker webpage, the state exceeded the revenue target by approximately $150 million.
“With April personal income tax revenues just tracking with the most recent budget estimates, fiscal year-to-date revenues continue at lower-than-expected levels,” said Controller Cohen. “The high level of borrowable resources is due in large part to the $26 billion the state has prudently built up and reserved for rainy days and economic uncertainties. Maintaining enough cash to cushion against economic downturns has been one of California’s strengths in its credit ratings, and ensures the state will continue to meet its payment obligations.”
Fiscal year-to-date receipts through April were $169.8 billion, nearly $4.8 billion below the Governor’s Budget estimates, or 2.7 percent. The state’s cash position is $7.6 billion better than expected with disbursements of $184.9 billion for the fiscal year nearly $12.4 billion, or 6.3 percent, less than proposed budget projections.
As the chief fiscal officer of California, Controller Cohen is responsible for accountability and disbursement of the state’s financial resources. The Controller has independent auditing authority over government agencies that spend state funds. She is a member of numerous financing authorities, and fiscal and financial oversight entities including the Franchise Tax Board. She also serves on the boards for the nation’s two largest public pension funds. Follow the Controller on Twitter at @CAController and on Facebook at California State Controller’s Office.
Students between classes at California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo. Credit: Ashley Bolter / EdSource
Some have been exempt from paying out-of-state tuition since 2001
By Zaidee Stavely, EdSource – Republished with permission
More than 20 years ago, California passed a law allowing some undocumented immigrant students to attend college with in-state tuition, if they meet certain requirements.
But immigrant rights advocates say many students who should have been eligible have been wrongfully denied in-state tuition because of confusion over requirements, misinformation and different interpretations of the law at different college campuses.
“We lose that incredible brain power and colleges are losing enrollment,” said Nancy Jodaitis, director of higher education for Immigrants Rising, a nonprofit organization that advocates for undocumented people to achieve educational and career goals.
Immigrants Rising brought together officials from all three public college systems — California Community Colleges, California State University and University of California — to discuss and agree on answers to frequently-asked questions about the law.
Source: Immigrants Rising
The result is a document called the Systemwide AB 540 FAQ, which all three systems have now signed. The document includes answers to 59 questions, such as:
What if a student graduated from a California high school (completing three years’ worth of high school credits), but did not attend three years at a California high school?
Does a student have to take classes full time for their attendance to count?
Does all their coursework have to be taken at the same school?
Spokespeople from UC, CSU and California Community Colleges all celebrated the document.
Paul Feist, vice chancellor of communications and marketing for the California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office, said the document is particularly important because there are several different laws regarding the nonresident tuition exemption.
The first bill exempting some undocumented immigrants from out-of-state tuition, Assembly Bill 540, was signed into law in 2001. Since then, three other bills have been passed to expand the law, in 2014, 2017 and 2022.
“While the intent was to expand access to AB 540 financial assistance, they had the unintended effect of making it more difficult to navigate,” Feist said. “This FAQ is designed to provide clearer explanations and provide additional resources in advising students.”
Under current California law, students who are undocumented or have temporary protection from deportation such as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), or who are U.S. citizens or permanent residents, are eligible for in-state tuition and state financial aid, if they attended at least three years of high school, adult school or community college in California and obtained a high school diploma or equivalent, an associate degree or fulfilled the minimum requirements to transfer to a UC or CSU.
Access to state financial aid and in-state tuition can be a critical factor for undocumented students, who are barred from receiving federal financial aid. Without the law in place, some of them would be charged tuition rates for international students, often much higher than in-state tuition.
“This is huge,” said Maria Gutierrez, a college counselor at Chabot College in Hayward and a doctoral student at San Francisco State University. “It helps us be aligned and have something in writing.” Before the FAQ document, Gutierrez says college staff in charge of approving exemptions from out-of-state tuition were sometimes afraid to make decisions without written proof of how to interpret the law.
Gutierrez herself has benefited from AB 540. She came to the U.S. when she was 5 years old on a visa, which later expired. She attended elementary, middle and most of high school in California. She also graduated from high school in California. But when she applied to attend community college in California, different campuses disagreed on whether she was eligible for in-state tuition because she had spent two years of high school in Utah. At the time, a second law had recently been passed to allow colleges to consider years of attendance in elementary and middle school for AB 540 eligibility.
“One college that I went to in So Cal, I was approved for AB 540. When I had to go back to the Bay Area, I was not approved for AB 540. So then I was confused that there was this inconsistency,” Gutierrez said.
A few years later, when she applied to transfer to a four-year college, both UC and CSU campuses told her she was not eligible for in-state tuition, even though by then, a law had passed that clarified that attendance at community college could be counted toward the requirements. She spent a semester paying out-of-state tuition at San Jose State University, before the university finally acknowledged she was legally eligible for in-state tuition.
As a college counselor, Gutierrez continues to meet students who have been incorrectly told they are not eligible for in-state tuition.
“It’s crazy because in reality it hasn’t changed much,” she said. However, she said, the financial burden is harder now, because most students graduating from high school cannot apply for work permits under DACA, because the government has not accepted new applications since 2017.
“I see my students now and I see the struggles they’re going through. If I didn’t have DACA, I honestly don’t think I would be where I am now,” Gutierrez said. “There’s no way that I would’ve been able to pay nonresident fees or wait for whoever it is that is determining that to learn what they need to do for me to be able to go to college.”
Advocates say they hope the document will help colleges give correct information and avoid students having to research on their own for information.
California also recently streamlined the process for undocumented students to apply for financial aid and exemption from in-state tuition on the same application when they fill out the California Dream Act application. In the past, students had to both fill out a California Dream Act application and an AB 540 affidavit form for each college. Now, the AB 540 form will be part of the same application.
Diana Aguilar-Cruz said that change is significant. Aguilar-Cruz is currently pursuing a master’s degree in public health at Cal State Fullerton. When she first began her undergraduate education at Cal Poly Pomona, she was charged nonresident tuition, which was almost double the in-state tuition. She had immigrated to the U.S. from Mexico City in 2015, when she was 14 years old, and lived with her grandmother in Baldwin Park while attending high school.
She had completed a California Dream Act application, but no one told her she also had to complete a separate form. After researching it herself online, she found the form and completed it, at which point the university finally changed her tuition to in-state.
“If I didn’t find it in my Google search, would I be paying in-state tuition for my four years of college?” Aguilar-Cruz said. “I always think to myself, what would have happened if I was a more fearful student or a student who did not have a strong support system at home?”
According to the Renewing the Dream page on the California Student Aid Commission’s website, “In 2021-22, only 29% to 30% of undocumented college students who applied for financial aid through the California Dream Act Application (CADAA) ultimately enrolled in school. Moreover, only 14% of California’s estimated undocumented student population in postsecondary education ultimately received state financial aid.”
Former California Supreme Court Chief Justice Rose Bird (Photo: CSCHS) and Senator Steve Glazer. (Official photo)
For reversing death sentences; plaques to be unveiled for Rose Bird at new plaza named for her in Capitol World Peace Rose Garden during Tuesday ceremony
Glazer was her spokesman during her failed 1986 retention campaign
SACRAMENTO – Former California Supreme Court Chief Justice Rose Elizabeth Bird will be recognized Tuesday, May 7, for her trailblazing work as a jurist – the first such public dedication in California.
Current Chief Justice of the California Supreme Court, Patricia Guerrero, and retired Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye, will lead the 10 a.m. unveiling of two plaques at the new Chief Justice Rose Elizabeth Bird Justice For All Plaza at the State Capitol World Peace Rose Garden 25 years after her death in 1999.
Speakers will also include Stephen Buehl, former Justice Bird’s chief of staff, Senator Nancy Skinner, D-Berkeley, the chair of the California Legislative Women’s Caucus, and Kathryn Meola, president of the Women Lawyers of Sacramento.
“Honoring Chief Justice Rose Elizabeth Bird is long overdue,” said Senator Steve Glazer, D-Contra Costa, who authored a resolution, SCR 47 (2023) to create her place of honor in the Capitol Rose Garden. Senator Glazer was Bird’s spokesman during her retention campaign in 1986. “We now have the benefit of time in recognizing her courage and integrity in upholding the Constitution and rule of law – especially in protecting the poor and oppressed.”
Justice Bird was the first woman Chief Justice of California; the first woman Chair of the Judicial Council; the first woman on a California Governor’s Cabinet and the first woman deputy public defender in Santa Clara County. She served as the Chief Justice under Governor Jerry Brown from 1977-1986.
She was also the first and only chief justice in state history to be voted out of office. Bird and three other justices voted to reverse murderers’ sentences, and she, two of her colleagues, Reynoso and Grodin, were subsequently voted off the state supreme court. Bird was overwhelmingly removed in the November 4, 1986, election by a margin of 67% to 33%.
What: The Unveiling of the Chief Justice Rose Elizabeth Bird Justice For All Plaza
When: May 7, 2024, 10 a.m.
Where: State Capitol World Peace Rose Garden
Speakers: Senator Steve Glazer; Patricia Guerrero, Chief Justice of California; Tani Cantil-Sakauye, retired Chief Justice of California; Stephen Buehl, chief of staff to Chief Justice Rose Bird, Senator Nancy Skinner, D-Berkeley, the chair of the California Legislative Women’s Caucus, and Kathryn Meola, president of the Women Lawyers of Sacramento.
Sacramento, CA – March 28, 2024 – After immense pressure from California Senate Republicans, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) has finally listened and is scrapping the income-based utility bill scheme proposed by California’s largest utilities, which came to fruition as a result of Assembly Bill 205 (2022). The non-elective commission released a flat fixed rate proposal, with reduced charges for low-income customers, and is expected to vote on it on May 9, 2024. (See related article)
“I’m cautiously optimistic to see that CPUC’s preliminary decision on a new fixed-rate plan for electrical billing includes a flat rate rather than one of the ludicrous income-based charges that had been proposed,” said Senate Minority Leader Brian W. Jones (R-San Diego). “I’m looking deeper into the proposal and studying how it will affect my constituents and ratepayers across the state. Still, I hope this may be a compromise Californians can live with. At the same time, I anticipate that electricity rates will continue to be a huge affordability issue in California, even under this new flat rate proposal.”
“As vice chair of the Senate Energy, Utility and Communications Committee, l have strongly advocated for affordable and reliable energy for Californians, but the majority party’s misguided approach has been driving up the rates for years,” said Senator Brian Dahle (R-Bieber). “This income-based utility scheme was another disastrous measure. I appreciate the CPUC heeding Republicans’ advice to pause this nonsensical bill, and I will continue to work tirelessly with my colleagues to make energy reform a reality in our state.”
The CPUC’s fixed rate proposal has a 20-day comment period and is eligible for a vote at the next CPUC public meeting on May 9, 2024.
California Senate Republicans have been leading the fight against the income-based electricity charge after Capitol Democrats rammed it through budget trailer bill AB 205 in 2022. In 2023, and as recent as January 2024, Senate Democrats thwarted Senate Republicans’ efforts to provide Californians a lifeline by repealing AB 205. Additionally, this year, Senate Minority Leader Jones and the entire Senate Republican Caucus introduced SB 1326 to repeal the income-based fixed charge mandated by AB 205. Click here to learn more about the caucus’ efforts.
After immense pressure from California Senate Republicans, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) has finally listened and is scrapping the income-based utility bill scheme, which came to fruition as a result of Assembly Bill 205 (2022). The non-elective commission released a flat fixed rate proposal and is expected to vote on it on May 9, 2024.
Over 3.6 million school-aged children across the state qualify for at least $500 in savings with the California Kids Investment and Development Savings program (CalKIDS), a state initiative to help children from low income families save money for college or career.
Just 8.3% of eligible students, or 300,000, have claimed their accounts as many families are unaware of CalKIDS or face challenges accessing the accounts once aware. The money is automatically deposited into the savings account under a student’s name, but families must claim the accounts by registering online.
Here is information you should know about the state-funded accounts:
What is CalKIDS?
The CalKIDS program was created to help students, especially those from underserved communities, gain access to higher education. It helps families save for post high school training by opening a savings account and depositing between $500 and $1,500 for eligible low-income students in the public school system. Gov. Gavin Newsom, who launched the program in August 2022, invested about $1.9 billion in the accounts.
Who qualifies?
Low-income students and all newborns qualify.
According to program details, low-income public school students are awarded $500 if they:
Were in grades 1-12 during the 2021-22 school year
Were enrolled in first grade during the 2022-23 school year, or
Will be in first grade in subsequent school years.
An additional $500 is deposited for students identified as foster youth and another $500 for students classified as homeless.
For newborns,
Children born in California after June 2023, regardless of their parents’ income, are granted $100.
Those born in the state between July 1, 2022, and June 30, 2023, were awarded $25 before the seed deposit increased to $100.
Newborns get an additional $25 when they claim the account and an additional $50 if parents link the CalKIDS account to a new or existing ScholarShare 529 college savings account.
The California Department of Education determines eligibility based on students identified as low income under the state’s Local Control Funding Formula or English language learners. The California Department of Public Health provides information on newborns.
How can students use the money?
The money can be used at eligible higher education institutions across the country, including community colleges, universities, vocational or technical schools and professional schools, according to CalKIDS.
The funds can be used for: tuition and fees, books and supplies, on or off-campus room and board as well as computer or other required equipment, according to the CalKIDS program guide.
Click hereto search for schools that qualify as an eligible higher ed institution.
Does the CalKIDS account have restrictions similar to those for a 529 savings account?
CalKIDS accounts are a part of the ScholarShare 529 program — California’s official tax-advantaged college savings plan — and administered by the state’s ScholarShare Investment Board.
Transportation and travel costs are usually not considered qualified expenses for 529 savings accounts.
According to the guide for CalKIDS, if a student has no account balance with their higher education institution — which receives the CalKIDS distribution check — the institution can pay the funds directly to the student.
Does the money in the CalKIDS accounts earn interest?
The deposits grow over time because CalKIDS accounts are interest-bearing.
How aggressive that growth is depends on the age of the student, said Joe DeAnda, communications director with the California State Treasurer’s Office, which oversees the CalKIDS program.
“If it’s a newborn, (the seed deposits are) invested in a fairly aggressive portfolio that assumes 18 years of investing time,” DeAnda said. “If they are school-aged, they’re invested in a more conservative portfolio that assumes a shorter investing timeline and is a more secure portfolio.”
Even among students, the younger a child is, the more aggressive the savings portfolio will be. The investment provides “opportunity to grow savings while the child is younger and better safeguard savings against market fluctuations when the child nears college age,” according to the CalKIDS program guide.
Specifically, accounts for newborns, each new class of first graders and students in grades 1-5 during the 2021-22 school year are invested in a portfolio that corresponds to the year that they’re expected to enter a program after high school, or at age 18. The portfolio will become more conservative as the child gets older.
For students in grades 6-12 during the 2021-22 school year, the accounts are invested with a guaranteed, or fixed, rate of return on the investment.
Can I add to the account?
No, you cannot add money to the CalKIDS account. Parents or guardians can open a ScholarShare 529 account, which can be linked to the CalKIDS account so they can view the accounts in one place.
In fact, CalKIDS encourages families to open a ScholarShare 529 college savings account, which is a way for families to save even more money for their children, DeAnda said.
What if my student already graduated? What happens to unclaimed money?
The accounts remain active under a student’s name until the student turns 26 years old. Up until that age, students can claim the money.
If the account is not claimed by age 26, the account closes, and the money is reallocated to others in the CalKIDS program, DeAnda said.
What if I’m not sure if my child is considered low income?
CalKIDS has sent notification letters of program enrollment to over 3.3 million eligible students and nearly 270,000 students in last school year’s class of first graders.
Without the letters, to check student eligibility, families must enter students’ Statewide Student Identifier (SSID), a 10-digit number that appears on student transcripts or report cards, according to the CalKIDS website.
The California Department of Education provides CalKIDS with data on first graders in the late spring or early summer and asks parents to wait until then before checking for their child’s eligibility.
How do I access that SSID number to check eligibility or to register the account?
The SSID may be found on the parent’s or student’s school portal, transcript or report card.
The CalKIDS website instructs families to contact their child’s school or school district if they’re unsure of how or unable to locate the number.
How do I access or ‘claim’ the account?
The notification letter that CalKIDS sends families contains a unique CalKIDS Code that can be used to register the accounts. Even without the code, families can register the accounts.
Enter the county where the student was enrolled (for a student in grades 1-12 in the 2021-22 school year; for a first grader, where the student was enrolled in 2022-23 or subsequent years)
Enter student’s date of birth
Enter the SSID or CalKIDS Code from the notification letter
Click Register
Set up the account, either as the child or as the parent/guardian, with a username and password
To claim the newborn account, which should be available about 90 days after birth:
Visit the CalKIDS registration page to claim the account.
Enter the county where the child was born
Enter child’s date of birth
Enter the Local Registration Number on the child’s birth certificate or CalKIDS Code from the notification letter
Click Register
Set up the account, either as the child or as the parent/guardian, with a username and password
I still need help. How do I get additional support?
The CalKIDS team is also hosting an April 17 webinar to outline the program, eligibility, account registration, fund distribution and benefits. To sign up for the webinar, click here.
How does my high school graduate make a withdrawal to use the money?
According to the CalKIDS program guide, to request a distribution, log into the claimed CalKIDS account and request a distribution, which doesn’t have to be for the entire amount. The funds are tax-free for the qualified expenses of tuition, books, fees, computers and equipment.
The student must be at least 17 years old and enrolled at an eligible institution.
The CalKIDS money, which will be sent to the institution, is considered a scholarship from the state of California.
In 2022, the California legislature passed and Governor Gavin Newsom signed AB205 – Energy into law, which requires that the Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) “shall, no later than July 1, 2024, authorize a fixed charge for default residential rates.” As a result, the CPUC is currently reviewing proposals for a tiered, fixed-price structure, as directed by the bill.
According to FOX Business, the state’s three main, investor-owned utilities – Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E), Southern California Edison (SCE) and San Diego Gas and Electric (SDG&E) – proposed a tiered rate plan: “Households earning $28,000-$69,000 would be charged an extra $20 to $34 per month. Those earning $69,000-$180,000 would pay $51 to $73 per month, and those earning more than $180,000 would pay a $85-to-$128 monthly surcharge.”
According to California Energy Markets, “The first version of the income-graduated fixed charge, or IGFC, could be implemented by SDG&E and SCE by 2026, according to Freedman. PG&E is in the process of changing its billing system, he said, so its implementation would likely be in 2027.”
That’s on top of the 13% increase for both electricity and natural gas rates for PG&E customers approved by a unanimous vote of the CPUC last November that went into effect on January 1, 2024. Plus, another vote on March 7 for $4-$6 in additional monthly fees for the typical ratepayer that will take effect in April, was approved for PG&E to recover $516 million in costs for wildfire mitigation, gas safety and electric modernization.
According to a Canary Media report, “The utilities are also proposing to significantly lower the per-kilowatt-hour charges that customers pay to counterbalance the big increase in fixed charges, and to structure both fixed and volumetric charges in a way that allows lower-income customers to save money overall. Still, the proposal, if enacted, would instantly make California the home of the nation’s highest monthly utility fixed fees, according to analysis by clean energy research firm EQ Research.”
The IGFC would require the CPUC to evaluate every ratepayer’s income annually in order to assess the appropriate fee.
Assemblyman Jim Frazier didn’t vote on the bill in 2021 and State Senator Steve Glazer didn’t vote on AB205 during the State Senate’s floor vote in 2022. Newsom signed the bill into law on June 30, 2022.
Details of New Law
As of July 1, 2022, the applicable portion of the law now reads as follows:
“SEC. 10. Section 739.9 of the Public Utilities Code is amended to read:
(d) The commission may adopt new, or expand existing, fixed charges for the purpose of collecting a reasonable portion of the fixed costs of providing electrical service to residential customers. The commission shall ensure that any approved charges do all of the following:
(1) Reasonably reflect an appropriate portion of the different costs of serving small and large customers.
(2) Not unreasonably impair incentives forconservation, energy efficiency, and beneficial electrification and greenhouse gas emissions reduction.
(3) Are set at levels that do not overburden low-income customers.
(e)(1) For the purposes of this section and Section 739.1, the commission may authorize fixed charges for any rate schedule applicable to a residential customer account. The fixed charge shall be established on an income-graduated basis with no fewer than three income thresholds so that a low-income ratepayer in each baseline territory would realize a lower average monthly bill without making any changes in usage. The commission shall, no later than July 1, 2024, authorize a fixed charge for default residential rates.
(2) For purposes of this subdivision, ‘income-graduated’ means that low-income customers pay a smaller fixed charge than high-income customers.”
Source: Energy Sage published 3/10/24
Californians Pay 27% More for Electricity Than National Average
According to Energy Sage, California residents currently pay 31 cents per kilowatt-hour compared to the national average of 18 cents per kilowatt-hour. “On average, California residents spend about $256 per month on electricity. That adds up to $3,072 per year. That’s 27% higher than the national average electric bill of $2,426.”
That same day, Assemblymember Jacqui Irwin, (D-Thousand Oaks) and 10 others introduced a bill to repeal AB205. According to Irwin’s press release about the new bill, “The CPUC has had the authority to implement a fixed rate charge, up to $10, since 2015, but has declined to do so. I see no need to rush now. It’s time to put some reasoning back into how we charge for electricity in California.” Bauer-Kahan is listed as a principal coauthor. It was also introduced in the State Senate.
According to the aforementioned Canary Media report, “The newly introduced bill, AB 1999, would limit the CPUC to adding a fixed charge of no greater than $10 a month on customers’ bills to pay for the rising costs of maintaining the state’s utility grids, regardless of household income.”
The bill is in the committee process, was referred to the Assembly Committee on Utilities and Electricity. If approved it will then head to the floors of both houses of the state legislature for votes and if passed, the bill will head to the governor’s desk for his signature or veto.
3/27/24 UPDATE: According to Sylvie Ashford, Energy & Climate Policy Analyst for The Utility Reform Network (TURN) which supports the implementation of an income-graduated fixed charge, and is one of the authors of the organization’s IGFC proposal,
“The IOUs are no longer proposing the charge levels that you cite (e.g. up to $128 per month). The CPUC has already ruled that the first iteration of the fixed charge will have income tier cut-offs based only on the existing CARE/FERA programs, with no ‘high-income’ tier. The IOUs submitted new proposals in the fall, with a max charge of $51-$73 (page 5 of their brief).
It’s not that utilities will “also” lower $/kWh rates. The fixed charge itself lowers rates, as is comprised only of costs that are included in rates today. It shifts some fixed costs out of electricity rates and into a separate line item.
Thus, your headline that “Californians face higher electricity rates based on income” is incorrect. All customers will pay lower electricity rates (15% lower under TURN’s proposal). Some higher income customers will see higher overall bills only if their assigned fixed charge exceeds their savings from the reduced rates. (For example, TURN’s proposal has a maximum monthly fixed charge of $30, and we estimate those customers will see $3-7 bill increases, depending on their usage).”
Iin addition, she shared, “TURN believes that the fixed charge presents a critical opportunity to reduce low-income energy bills in the state. TURN also believes much more is needed to make bills affordable and intervenes widely at the CPUC to oppose rate increases. A few quick points:
The fixed charge will not increase utility revenue/profits; it removes costs from rates and shifts them to a separate line item on your bill.
This will reduce electricity rates ($/kWh) for all Californians, making it more feasible to operate electric vehicles and appliances.
Because the new line item is based on income, it will also reduce overall bills for low-income Californians (likely to be defined as the low-income CARE/FERA discount programs, which cover 30% of the state) and it will make electricity bills less regressive.
TURN strongly opposes the joint proposal of the utilities for fixed charges, and the CPUC is not considering it. The CPUC has already ruled that the first iteration of the fixed charge will have income tier cut-offs based only on the existing CARE/FERA programs, with no ‘high-income’ tier, so the average fixed charge will be low (TURN proposes an average of $23.50, which is the same charge already offered by the Sacramento Municipal Utility District).
Ashford was asked to explain how, if the cost of providing electricity does not differ from one user to the next in one of the three utility company’s service areas, it’s fair to charge one customer more based on their income. She was also asked weren’t renewals supposed to reduce electricity costs and aren’t we relying more on them, now for electricity generation in California,
Ashford responded, to your questions about the fairness of paying based on income, and why rates have been increasing when generation keeps getting cheaper (thanks to renewables): the problem is that your $/kWh electricity rates today are largely comprised of costs that have nothing to do with your personal usage. They are bloated with the fixed costs of the grid, like the utilities’ wildfire mitigation programs and infrastructure projects.
As a result, a UC Berkeley study found that California’s electric rates are highly regressive; low-income households pay more of their income on shared system costs. Households in hot climates, that need to use more electricity to keep cool, also pay more than their fair share of these costs. On the flipside, solar customers are paying less than their fair share, which has created a ‘cost shift’ that hikes rates for everyone else (source).
TURN is a strong advocate of reducing utility spending, which is the most important step to reduce rates. The fixed charge alone doesn’t address that problem, as it simply shuffles the collection of existing costs, but it will make bills more affordable for those that are disproportionately burdened by shared system costs.”
