Today's topic is Proposition E.
Proposition E is very simple: who should have control over appointments to the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, the Mayor or the Board of Supervisors? In reality, the measure does more than just that. The measure 1) says that all current members of the SF PUC terms will expire on August 1, 2008 and 2) specifies the type of experience that each of the 5 positions shall have. Seat 1 shall have environmental policy and environmental justice experience, Seat 2 shall have ratepayer or consumer advocacy experience, Seat 3 shall have project finance experience, Seat 4 shall have water systems, power systems or public utility management experience and Seat 5 shall be an at-large member. As for appointment to the SF PUC, the measure says that any appointment to the SF PUC by the Mayor will be subject to confirmation by the Board of Supervisors. Currently, anyone appointed by the Mayor takes office immediately and can only be rejected if 3/4 of the Board votes to reject. In essence, the Board of Supervisors wants a larger say in who makes up the SF PUC and what those commissioners will be doing.
As a simple matter of background, the SF PUC is the agency in charge of the city's water system, including the Hetch Hetchy system. The SF PUC is also responsible for various electricity-related projects, such as the various solar-related proposals, as well as the controversial "Combustion Turbine Project" which seeks to shutter the Mirant Potrero power plant and construct a batch of peaker plants to replace the power and reliability of the Potrero plant.
So, with all that going on, should the Board play a larger role in who runs the SF PUC? By specifying what type of background 4 of the 5 commissioners should have does nothing but inject politics into the operation of the SF PUC. If a commissioner is so offensive to the Board, by a 3/4 vote they can reject the appointment. What this measure does is give the Board a chance to hold, and hold, and hold, and hold a nominee for as long as it wants if they do not like a nominee, for whatever reason. Finally, a wholesale firing of the commissioners is the Board's way of wiping the slate clean and enforcing their power right away. This power grab by the Board is unnecessary and would only ensure that the Board's way of thinking prevails.
Vote No on E.
Thursday, May 29, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment