Tell Assemblymember Ting: Vote No on AB 538
Hate the phone? Resistbot is your friend. If you use Resistbot or write an email to your elected officials, make sure to use your own words. In-depth, personal stories are most effective.
Call Script
My name is ____ and I’m a member of Indivisible SF and a resident of AD 19. I’m calling to ask Assemblymember Ting to vote no on AB 538 and prevent it from advancing out of committee. Thank you.
Background
AB 538 is a second attempt at moving California one step closer to giving up full control of its own energy grid, currently managed by CAISO, and instead joining a Regional Transmission Operator, or RTO.
This is a big change with big ramifications. It’s the sort of change where it’s important to know specifically what the change would be, and what the ramifications are.
Unfortunately, the proponents’ case for this bill conflates multiple proposals and cherry-picks the best outcomes of all of them. It’s a load of hand-wavy promises with no clear substance to support them. A change this big requires a stronger case than that.
The status quo
California’s energy grid is physically connected to neighboring states, managed by the California Independent System Operator (CAISO), and regulated by the California Energy Commission (CEC) and California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC).
We trade electricity with our neighbors on a market called the Western Energy Imbalance Market, or WEIM. This is important because different states will have surpluses at different times, due to both production cycles (e.g., solar producing in the daytime) and weather (e.g., heat waves increasing air-conditioning usage); excess energy must go somewhere, and a market like the WEIM helps resolve those imbalances by enabling states that need energy to buy it from states that have too much.
At the same time, it’s also important that California continue to pursue its climate goals—goals that, unfortunately, are not shared by all of our neighboring states. California is continuing to move toward renewable, non-polluting energy sources; not all states are making the same sorts of moves.
The proposals (such as they are)
Broadly speaking, the proponents of AB 538 want to move California’s grid out from under the full control of CAISO and under the management of a Regional Transmission Operator, or RTO, which would be comprised of organizations from multiple states, including CAISO.
It’s not clear how exactly this would be an improvement when we already trade electricity with neighboring states. Moreover, the bill contains some provisions that ostensibly commit California to continuing to pursue its goals, but it’s uncertain what happens if state law compels California to do one thing and the RTO wants California to do something else. Do we get kicked out? What happens then?
AB 538, as written, very specifically allows CAISO to move toward being part of an RTO—but it’s clear from CAISO’s report that they want to do so, so this bill is about legalizing something that CAISO wants to do.
What’s not clear from CAISO’s report is what, specifically, they want to do. The report lays out several paths; which path have they chosen? What’s to be gained—and what’s to be lost?
Moreover, there’s no indication that we could back out if the RTO thing doesn’t work out. We have to assume that if we take this leap, there’s no coming back from it.
Big changes demand specific guarantees, and ideally should be reversible if things don’t work out as promised. We need a more concrete plan before we can accept pulling out the stops to pursue it. Until then, we ask our Assemblymembers to vote NO on AB 538.