Letters to the Editor

Letters to the Editor: On Proposition 16

Prop 16 misleads

Proposition 16 is a blatant attempt by Pacific Gas and Electric Co. to reduce competition in the electricity market and further protect their monopoly on power transmission. 

Proposition 16 would require any municipality endeavoring to generate their own electricity for their residents to get a two-thirds majority popular vote. A two-thirds majority is almost impossible to achieve, so this bill would effectively block any city from generating its own renewable energy from local sources.

PG&E tried to call Proposition 16 the “Taxpayers Right to Vote Act.” Luckily, the State Attorney General changed the name, but PG&E is still using this title for the propaganda they are mailing to every resident of the state. 

It is an outrage that PG&E is using its profits from selling us electricity to get Proposition 16 put on the ballot and to run misleading ad campaigns for Proposition 16. How about we require a two-thirds majority popular vote for PG&E to ever raise their rates? Please don’t be fooled by PG&E. Vote “no” on Proposition 16.

Yarrow Nelson

Atascadero

Reaching all voters

Pacific Gas and Electric Co. has used more than $35 million collected from our utility bills to promote the deceptively written Proposition 16. PG&E’s goal is to stop any competition that might interfere with their monopolization of the utility industry. This proposition is designed to keep communities from developing local, safe, cheap, nonprofit sustainable power that will compete with the highly subsidized, outdated PG&E program.

The League of Women Voters, AARP and groups representing California consumers, taxpayers, environmentalists and farmers all urge us to vote no on Proposition 16.

Lack of funds makes it difficult to fight this obscene PG&E agenda, but the Internet can be a powerful tool. Please take a few minutes and use all methods to contact every reachable California voter.

Try Twitter, Facebook and blogs. Ask them to vote “no” on Proposition 16.

Duane Waddell

Cayucos

Board shows wisdom

The position taken recently by the Board of Supervisors on Proposition 16 is very informative (“Divided board opposes Prop. 16,” May 26). The two-thirds super-majority requirement has become the obstacle to wise decision-making and good government.

Deceptive titles (The Taxpayers Right to Vote Act), lopsided financial support, extreme ideology and selfish interests have rendered what might be a legitimate idea to confusion and has led to bad conclusions.

The Board of Supervisors has shown wisdom in taking a position and informing the public of its concerns.

On the other hand, one can’t help wondering if Supervisor Katcho Achadjian doesn’t see the ramifications of Proposition 16 and endorses, blindly, the principle of the super-majority. Sending him to Sacramento is a vote for continued chaos and a paralyzed state government. We need to get back to the principle of the majority rules.

Clifton Swanson

San Luis Obispo

Propositions hinder

I will be voting “no” on all propositions. Citizens vote for representatives to do their legislative job in Sacramento. Those representatives have staffs that research all the bills that are brought before them and determine how those bills will impact California and its budget.

Then our representatives decide on how to vote based on that knowledge and the input from their constituencies. Propositions have interfered with this process, making our local representatives less accountable.

Furthermore, special interest groups and corporations attempting to micro-manage through propositions are impacting our state’s budget, making it virtually impossible to balance any budget with so many restrictions placed upon it.

It is very tempting to vote on propositions. Many appeal to most of us in one manner or another. However, let’s force our representatives to do the job they are paid to do. Let’s vote “no” on all propositions.

Linda Campeggi

Atascadero

Vote ‘yes’ on Prop 16

In this fiscally challenging environment, our local governments can commit millions of dollars in public money or additional debt to start up a government-run electricity business and they can do it without voter approval. Currently, no public vote is required to start a municipal utility, although California law does require a two-thirds vote of the people to sell or shut down a municipal utility.

Proposition 16 would require local governments to obtain a two-thirds vote of the electorate before spending public money or incurring public debt to start a government-run utility business.

Simply put, Proposition 16 guarantees Californians the right to vote before their local governments can spend public dollars or incur public debt to start a government-run electricity business. And that’s all it does.

It is our democratic tradition to have a voice before our taxes are spent, not afterwards. Indeed, it will be the taxpayer on the hook if a municipal utility fails or if a bailout is needed.

Let local leaders know that you want to keep your voice when it comes to how they spend public money on utility businesses. Vote “yes” on Proposition 16.

Robert M. Jones

Legislative Chairman and Board Director for the Atascadero Chamber of Commerce

Board doesn’t qualify

To the Board of Supervisors:

Please continue on the path of self-destruction.

Oppose Proposition 16.

Show your true colors by supporting bigger government.

Please submit your qualifications as a utility expert. Oh yes, hire more people as staff to assist you so they make the decisions. Increase the cost of government.

You are all such productive members of society.

Joseph J. Laraneta

Templeton

  Comments