Consumer advocates back SB 492; builders and unions voice opposition over affordability and market signals

At the hearing Mark Toney, executive director of TURN, said his group supports SB 492 as an important first step to protect ratepayers and prioritize survivors. "We stand in support of SB492 as an important 1st step to protecting ratepayers for the following reasons," he testified, listing subrogation limits, executive-pay penalties, and statewide planning as key reasons for support.

Opposition testimony came from labor and industry representatives. Scott Wedge, speaking for utility workers, argued the bill did not sufficiently address affordability and warned of market reactions that could shrink workforces and raise financing costs. Dan Dunmoyer of the California Building Industry Association said the bill fails to address the long‑term solvency and investment needs of investor‑owned utilities and could delay turning on service for newly built homes.

Several committee members reflected the split view: members agreed victims must be prioritized but said they were concerned that the bill’s immediate market signal—without broader structural reforms—could have destabilizing effects. The chair and authors urged continued negotiation and more technical analysis before final action.

Public comment was left open on the committee website after the formal hearing was adjourned for floor business.