Proposition 16

Two-Thirds Vote Requirement for Local Public Electricity Providers

This initiative is a constitutional amendment and would require local governments to obtain two-thirds voter approval prior to providing electricity service to new customers or expanding such service to new territories using public funds. The vote must be in the jurisdiction of the local government and any new territory to be served. Essentially, if this proposed initiative is passed, it would require a two-thirds majority vote if a local government wants to expand electric service to new territory or new customers, establish a Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) program, or use public funding to implement a plan to become a CCA provider.
 
Currently, there are three types of utility providers in the state: investor-owned utilities, such as PG&E, Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric; Public Owned Utilities, such as the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power; and Electric Service Providers.
 
There are some exceptions in this proposal. A two-thirds vote would not be required if the energy proposed to be used comes from renewable resources such as wind and solar, and the vote is not necessary if the energy is to be used by the local government.
 
The electorate will have to approve the entrance of a public agency into the retail power business. That is why supporters of the initiative call it the “Taxpayer’s Right to Vote.”

Supporting Arguments:

From the Taxpayers Right to Vote – Yes on 16 Campaign: California’s state and local debt exceeds $145 billion. The state has a $20 billion budget deficit and its unemployment rate is now at 12.6%. Nonetheless, several local governments in California are now trying to take over private electric companies and are refusing to let local voters have the final say in the decision — because state law doesn't require it.

Some believe their local government can do a better job providing electricity. Other people think their local government doesn’t have the expertise and doesn’t belong in the electricity business. Proposition 16 simply gives local voters the right to decide this issue for their own area. It is their electric service, their public money and, in the end, their problem if a government-run electricity business fails.

Like almost every other local special tax and bond decisions in California, this measure requires two-thirds voter approval. This threshold of approval is already the standard for local special taxes and non-school infrastructure bonds when taxpayers are on the hook for repayment.

Prop 16 does NOT stop the start-up or expansion of any type of retail electric delivery service program proposed by a local government. It ONLY requires voter approval if public dollars or debt will be utilized for the project. And it does NOT impact the financing of clean, renewable energy by local governments. In fact, clean, renewable energy projects are specifically exempted from the initiative’s provisions.

Supporters of Prop. 16 include: California Taxpayers’ Association, California Chamber of Commerce, California State Conference NAACP, Coalition of Labor, Agriculture & Business, California Alliance For Consumer Protection, The Coalition for Green Jobs, the California Republican Party and The Oakland Jobs and Housing Coalition (A full list is available at http://www.TaxpayersRightToVote.com/Coalition).

Visit http://TaxpayersRightToVote.com/Learn for more info and http://www.TaxpayersRightToVote.com/News to read news articles related to the campaign. You can join the campaign at http://Facebook.com/TaxpayersRightToVote

Opposing Arguments:
Those in opposition of this initiative argue that this does not protect taxpayers but instead protects large for-profit utilities. It limits voter choices on who provides electricity, makes it easier for for-profit utilities to raise rates, and limits green technology implementation. Other arguments against the measure contend that it reduces the ability of people to choose between private and public utility companies, that holding such elections would be expensive, and is anti-competitive if it is made more difficult for municipalities to offer power options as well. They also emphasize that it is not about voter choice but the financial interests of PG&E, which has spent millions of dollars to get the initiative passed.
 
Vocal critics of this proposed initiative include The Utility Reform Network, nine California state senators, and The Palo Alto City Council, among others.
 
The “No on 16” camp has spent a little over $30,000.
 
More info can be found here: www.powergrab.info.
 
 

Start Organizing!

CalProps provides the people, resources and organizing tools to help Californians have a greater say in their state government.

There are dozens of groups formed around different issues on this site.  You can join an existing one or start your own on an issue that’s important to you.  Below are just some of the groups active right now, or you can view the entire CalProps Network here.

Peoples Advocate

Peoples Advocate
"We are dedicated to educating the public regarding issues of taxation, government spending, financing, and local, state and national government structure…"

Join or Learn more!

California Pension Reform

CALIFORNIA PENSION REFORM
"Unless changes are made, pension costs will overwhelm the state's ability to fund higher education, build roads and develop technology."

Join or Learn More!

Young Democrats

"YDA mobilizes young people under the age of 36 to participate in the electoral process, influences the ideals of the Democratic Party, and develops the skills of the youth generation to serve as leaders at the local and national level."

Join or Learn More!