FCL NEWSLETTER -- April, 2001

Only if the answers are generally "yes" can deregulation sometimes work.
The answers are generally no.

Your legislators' votes and Governor Davis’s signature will determine whether or not the almost 200 energy measures currently before the legislature are enacted into law. Here are some suggestions for letters you can write. Please use these for guidance only. The governor and legislators respond best to letters that are not ‘mass-produced.'

Dear Assembly Member; Senator; Governor (all at "State Capitol, Sacra-mento, CA 95814"):

Three of the best ways to address our energy crisis are to save energy, to get more clean renewable power online in California, and to make sure that the health and safety of all Californians is protected. By doing so, we can save consumers money, take pressure off our overloaded energy grid, stabilize power prices and supply, clean up our air and protect public health. Please make energy conservation, renewable energy, and fair treatment of low-income energy consumers your priorities in the coming weeks.

In March, FCL joined with other individuals and organizations from a wide range of beliefs to sign on to the following letter.

We, the undersigned, write to urge you to adopt the following three key principles in your efforts to solve CaliforniaÕs energy crisis. By incorporating these principles, we can conserve and preserve our environment as we develop a long-term, sustainable energy future for California.

1. Conservation and energy efficiency must be the centerpiece of any plan

In the faith community, respecting the natural world means not mistreating it by irresponsibly taking more than we need. Living in community and caring for our neighbors means conserving energy and using it efficiently so that others may have sufficient energy, at a reasonable cost, to meet their basic needs. The faith community is prepared to help with this effort by conserving energy at our places of worship and by distributing information to help congregants conserve at home.

Energy conservation is also the fastest, cheapest, and cleanest solution to California's energy woes. This energy source is a vast reservoir that we can tap into immediately. Cutting back on the energy we use by only two or three percent would mean no more Stage 3 alerts and no more rolling blackouts. Conservation should be the centerpiece of any short-term or long-term energy plan.

We urge a commitment at the state level to conserve at least one kilowatt for every new kilowatt of power generation that is built.

2. Clean renewable power is the long-term solution

The faith community has been working through various programs, such as Episcopal Power and Light, and now the newly formed California Interfaith Power and Light program, sponsored by the California Council of Churches, to support clean, renewable power in the state. We believe the state should make an aggressive effort to develop new renewable energy sources, such as wind and solar power. The current crisis offers us the opportunity to retool our economy to be much more energy efficient and cleanly powered, while cutting greenhouse gases and air pollution.

We must remember that the new power plants we build this year will be with us for decades to come, impacting future generations. We must build only the cleanest new plants. It doesnÕt take any longer to build clean plants than dirty ones. At the very least, we should match, kilowatt for kilowatt, any new fossil fuel-based power plants with an equivalent amount of new solar, wind, and other renewable generation.

3. We must not sacrifice the environment or the health of our families

As the energy crisis has reached an acute level, some are arguing that we need to weaken air quality and other environmental protections in order to get more power on line quickly. However, there is no evidence that clean air standards or the stateÕs recently streamlined power plant siting procedures are the problem. We should not be forced to choose between clean air and reliable electricity. We cannot let an energy crisis become an environmental crisis.

Energy production is the nation's number one source of toxic air pollution, and that pollution disproportionately affects the poor and minority communities who live near power plants. We cannot support sacrificing their health for increased generation capacity. With all the clean technologies available to us today, pitting public health protections against increased energy supply is a false choice, and must be rejected.

Finally, we urge you to protect low-income consumers from rate increases that may result from this energy crisis. This can be done simply through a tiered rate system that both encourages conservation and shields low-income consumers, and by targeted rebates for energy efficiency appliances and home retrofits to low-income families.

By relying on the three principles above, California can solve our energy shortage while at the same time protecting our precious natural environment and the health of our most vulnerable citizens. Thank you for considering our views in this important matter.

Let me get this straight. Some things are provable:
1) Most gamblers go broke.
2) Commodity spot markets are like gambling only harder.
3) While taking advantage of a new commodity market in energy, six companies nearly tripled their annual profits from $1.6 billion in 1999 to $4.7 billion in 2000.
4) Both Republicans and Democrats in Sacramento eagerly put California into this market while Wilson was governor.
5) Retail energy prices are going up drastically no matter what else happens.
6) Few politicians are also good at economics.
7) Generating plants bring down residential property values in their neighborhoods.
8) To be part of our economy takes electricity.
9) If we don't work together, the crisis will get worse.

Other things are matters of opinion, like what to do now that we are firmly in the quicksand, but let's not waste time arguing about whose fault it is while we are sinking - OK? I personally will give up making jokes about Texas if the Dallas people keep the laughter down on their way to the bank. |

A raft of one-time spending items are at risk: $250 million in aid to cities and counties, $100 million to clean up beaches, $100 million to replace higher-polluting diesel engines, $40 million in library improvements at state universities.

The Senate has already cut $1.9 billion from the $102 billion spending plan sent to them by Governor Gray Davis in January.

Davis's budget expected the fiscal year to end with $5.8 billion in reserve. Some $3.7 billion in electricity purchases have cut that reserve to $2.1 billion with another $1 billion in energy buys authorized just for April.

That has led the legislative analyst to recommend that lawmakers take no action on $2.3 billion in one-time spending proposed by the governor.

One-fifth of the state's general fund revenue comes from capital gains and stock options. That won't be happening next April.

In January, Davis predicted state taxes paid on capital gains and stock option income would be 10 percent less next year. And projections now are that it will be even less.

Last year, the state estimated that $84 billion in stock option income was generated in California. Of that, just seven high- tech companies created half of the income. Cisco Systems alone represented nearly 10 percent of the $84 billion. Since November, the Nasdaq has lost 45.5 percent of its value, a huge hit for California, the center of the dot-com high-tech universe.

The state is tearing through $50 million a day to buy power for the cash-poor utilities, with authorization for $4.7 billion in purchases. The economic effect of the energy mess is longer- term. How much will blackouts hurt productivity? Will businesses expand in California or somewhere else with a more reliable supply of energy?

excerpted from the
San Francisco Chronicle, April 2, 2001