May 13, 2003
Statement by State Superintendent Jack O'Connell
on Utility Rate Reductions for Schools
SACRAMENTO — State Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O'Connell today issued the following statement calling on the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) to reduce utility rates for California schools:
"This morning I sent a letter to the Public Utilities Commission asking it to put our students first as it begins the process of reducing utility rates for selected customers in California.
"As you all know, in March of 2001 the PUC imposed a utility rate hike that put a significant burden on ratepayers across the state. Especially hard hit were California schools where many districts, already on tight budgets, were forced to choose between paying for educational needs and keeping the lights on.
"Tomorrow the governor will announce the May revise of the state budget. It is expected the deficit will loom larger than originally predicted. Given our fiscal crisis, deeper cuts to all state programs are inevitable and education will likely suffer part of the burden.
"Now more than ever, we need to look for creative and efficient ways to bring cost savings to our state's number one priority, our schools. Therefore, I have called on the PUC to give our schools priority and return their electric rates to pre-energy crisis levels. If the PUC agrees to put our students first, California schools would realize a savings of more than $200 million a year. That savings could be used for a variety of needed resources, for example the potential to save nearly 3,000 teachers' jobs.
"So I have formally requested that the PUC incorporate rate reductions to schools as part of the current Southern California Edison proceeding and open a new proceeding for other utilities to drop rates for California schools. I urge the PUC to act quickly to ensure that every school in California pays only pre-energy crisis rates by the beginning of the next school year in September 2003. This rate reduction will go along way to ensuring California's students will have a bright future in front of them.
# # # #
Attachment 1:
Attachment 2:
Comparison of Proposed Rate Decreases
Type |
SCE* Proposed Rate Decreases |
O'Connell Proposed Rate Decreases |
|---|---|---|
Residential |
13.7 — 12.7 (7.8%) |
13.7 — 12.7 (7.8%) |
Commercial (GS-1) |
17.5 — 14.3 (18.3%) |
17.5 — 14.5 (17.3%) |
Schools |
15.3 — 13.4 (12.8%) |
15.3 — 10.8 (30%) |
Industrial |
13.1 — 10.6 (18.9%) |
13.1 — 10.7 (17.9%) |
Agricultural |
11.2 — 9.6 (15%) |
11.2 — 9.7 (14%) |
* Southern California Edison
Attachment 3:
Southern California Edison's Proposed Rates
Type |
Cents/KWH |
|---|---|
Industrial |
10.6 |
Agricultural |
9.6 |
Schools |
13.3 |
O'Connell Proposal |
10.8 |
