Supervisor Ronan criticizes PG and E delays on San Francisco public projects

The San Francisco County Board of Supervisors convened on July 4, 2025, to address ongoing issues between the city and Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) regarding the provision of power for municipal projects. The hearing, led by Supervisor Hillary Ronan, focused on the impact of PG&E's requirements on project timelines, budgets, and the overall ability to deliver essential services to residents.

Supervisor Ronan highlighted a long-standing and complicated relationship between San Francisco and PG&E, dating back to the 1913 Federal Raker Act, which allowed the city to create a public power system. Despite the reliability and environmental benefits of the power generated at Hetch Hetchy, PG&E has increasingly imposed costly and unnecessary equipment requirements on city projects, leading to significant delays and increased expenses. Ronan noted that these demands have resulted in an estimated $18 million in additional costs over the past three years, affecting critical projects such as affordable housing, community centers, and infrastructure improvements.

The San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) reported that 68 city projects are currently facing delays due to PG&E's requirements. These include essential facilities like schools and recreation centers, which have been stalled by demands for oversized electrical equipment that is not necessary for their operations. The SFPUC's General Manager, Dennis Herrera, emphasized the need for a reliable partnership with PG&E to ensure the city's energy needs are met without undue obstruction.

A recent ruling from the DC Court of Appeals sided with San Francisco, stating that PG&E's demands lacked sufficient justification and were anti-competitive. This decision has raised hopes for improved cooperation between the city and PG&E, but concerns remain about the utility's ongoing practices and their impact on public projects.

The hearing also featured presentations from various city departments, including the San Francisco Recreation and Park Department and the Municipal Transportation Agency (MTA), both of which detailed how PG&E's requirements have hindered their ability to deliver services and infrastructure improvements. The MTA, in particular, expressed concerns about the electrification of its bus fleet, which is critical for the city's climate goals.

As the meeting concluded, city officials reiterated the importance of addressing these issues collaboratively with PG&E to avoid further delays and costs that ultimately affect San Francisco residents. The board is hopeful that ongoing discussions will lead to a more equitable and efficient energy provision system for the city.