Sunday, January 23, 2005

South San Joaquin Irrigation District Cites IBEW workers as proof of reliability

PG&E frets SSJID may mean higher retail power costs

Thirty years ago, angry PG&E customers throughout the Central Valley were conducting "town hall" meetings.

They were spurred on by groups such as TURN -- Toward Utility Rate Normalization -- who were battling PG&E over ever increasing costs.

Those town hall meetings are coming back on a small scale in the South County this week. But instead of angry residents calling the meeting, it is PG&E.

PG&E is trying to stir up community sentiment against the South San Joaquin Irrigation District proposal that it enter the retail power business in Manteca, Escalon, and Ripon by a hostile takeover of the existing PG&E system.

PG&E contends if SSJID ends up going into the retail business it may cost Manteca, Ripon, and Escalon residents more and that service will be unreliable. Worse yet, PG&E claims, farmers may have to pay the cost of an "ill-advised" SSJID foray into retail power sales though higher irrigation rates.

While SSJID hasn't completed studies necessary to make its final decisions, leaders of the irrigation district contend that PG&E's claims are all "poppycock." The SSJID leadership asserts it is amazing that a utility known for having some of the highest rates in the nation, thanks in part to it selling generating assets to its holding company and then charging itself for higher wholesale electric costs they then passed on to their customers, is making such claims.

SSJID management points to the fact the brochure mailed to district PG&E customers raising a warning about the SSJID proposal is based on one irrigation district's disastrous attempt to enter the power business -- Laugna in South Sacramento County. Unlike SSJID, Laugna did not have its own power generation or major dam system for irrigation water -- two things along with the fact they are in the business to make a profit that make it financially feasible for SSJID to lower rates by as much as 15 percent over what PG&E charges.

SSJID notes there are a slew of successful irrigation districts undercutting PG&E including Modesto Irrigation District. They also note other government agencies providing power -- including the Sacramento Municipal Utility District and the City of Lodi -- do so for substantially less than what PG&E charges.

A typical residential customer with SMUD using 700 kilowatt hours per month pays $45 less than a PG&E customers with the same electrical consumption in Manteca or $540 less per year. Savings skyrocket for larger uses much as small businesses using 2,000 kilowatt hours a month who pay $2,988 less a year for electricity from SSJID than of they were a PG&E customer.

A large supermarket with 250,000 kilowatt hours per month energy consumption pays $166,068 less a month for SMUD power than the same size supermarket pays PG&E in Manteca.

SSJID also points out that up until Dec. 31, PG&E was buying power from SSJID via the Tri-Dam Project for about a half cent a kilowatt and then turning around and charging their PG&E customers in Manteca almost 10 times more for the same electricity.

As for reliability, SSJID said they would use International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers -- the same work force used by PG&E. The SSJID already has a relationship with IBEW through Tri-Dam.

The SSJID also noted that MID volunteered to participate in rolling brownouts created by PG&E's push for deregulation a few years back.

Former Gov. Gray Davis' administration thought it would create problems if non-profit retail power distributors such as MID didn't voluntarily participate in brownouts when PG&E was forced to by limitations on its own supply network that it would create a political liability.

The PG&E town hall meets all start at 7 p.m. and will last about an hour. They are:

# Tuesday at the Escalon Libray.

# Wednesday at the Legion Hall next to the PG&E office in downtown Manteca.

# Thursday at Cups Coffee on Main Street.

By DENNIS WYATT

Managing editor of the

Manteca (Calif.) Bulletin

No comments: