Mud vote: Down to the wire Down to the wire | October 31, 2001 | SFBG News PG is spending a fortune telling you lies about public power. The company has even bought ad space on this site (don't worry -- we've cashed the check). They're obviously desperate. Here's the truth: You wouldn't know it to read the local daily newspapers, but all over the country environmentalists and energy experts are watching San Francisco, awaiting the results of the Nov. 6 election. If San Francisco votes to create a public power agency and passes two major solar power bonds, the city will be vaulted immediately into the forefront of the sustainable energy movement, setting the national agenda and creating tremendous momentum for community control of energy resources all over the United States. Although there are no high-profile state or national races at the top of the ballot, the stakes in the local election could hardly be higher. San Francisco faces a crucial and historic choice: Get rid of Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and give control of the city's power distribution system to an accountable elected board or leave the electrical system in the hands of a bankrupt company whose assets (including, of course, the San Francisco grid) are likely to be sold to some unknown, out-of-town energy conglomerate. Create the infrastructure for a major expansion of solar, wind, and other renewable energy supplies for the city or continue to rely on high-priced, environmentally unsound and politically unstable fuels such as oil and natural gas. Replace a dirty, dangerous power plant that's literally killing people in the Bayview-Hunters Point community or allow PG (and whatever company eventually buys up the utility) to run the Hunters Point plant at full speed, causing maximum pollution and disease. By any rational standards, it's not much of a choice, but as Rachel Brahinsky reports on page 16, the campaign to pass Proposition F (for a water and power agency), Measure I (for a municipal utility district), and Propositions B and H (for renewable energy) is still far too close to call. A sizable number of voters remain undecided, and PG and its allies are spending more than $1.5 million on television and radio ads and slick mailers with misleading information aimed at confusing undecided voters and undermining the public power movement. The PG lies are astonishing: The utility claims that public power is "too risky" (what could be more risky than sticking with a bankrupt company that has no plans to get us out of the energy crisis?) and "too costly" (what could be more costly than ongoing and accelerating rate hikes and deteriorating service that threatens the viability of small business and the local economy?). The ads assert that Measure I will have a price tag of $3 billion (which is ridiculous – the measure will cost the taxpayers nothing and cost ratepayers far less than it would cost to pay PG's rates). In the past PG's money has been able to buy elections routinely. But this time around there's a formidable grassroots campaign lined up on the other side. Organized labor, the Green Party, the MUD Now campaign forces, Sup. Tom Ammiano's volunteer army, backers of the 24 MUD Board candidates, and others are pounding the pavement, knocking on doors, and countering PG's lies with the truth. Ultimately the race will come down to turnout, to convincing progressive and independent-minded voters who are thinking about the war in Afghanistan to pay attention to what's going on at home. This is one of the most important local elections in modern history: On Nov. 6, vote early, vote often, and vote to kick PG out of city hall for good and for Neil Eisenberg as the city attorney most qualified to push public power. Vote yes on F, I, B, and H. P.S. Media monopoly supports utility monopoly Among the more glaring examples of big-money influence on the race: AT has contributed a total of $150,000 in free advertising space for No on I ads on its local cable TV system – on channels from ESPN to A – citing the anti-MUD positions of the San Francisco Chronicle and SF Weekly. In other words, the company with a monopoly city franchise is using its control over local TV to help preserve PG's private power monopoly. And AT has blacked out any real MUD coverage in its programming, particularly on the local public affairs show, City Desk, aptly called the "AT News Hour." Meanwhile City Desk continues to use the City Hall press room as the studio for the show and reporters from KCBS radio and local newspapers as its resources. At the very least, AT ought to publicly disclose, on the show and in a station press release, that it has donated $150,000 worth of free time for attack ads against the MUD. The company should explain how many more ads will be donated by Election Day, the total cost and process by which the PG forces can place those ads on numerous local cable channels, and how AT officials can justify broadcasting a local news program that doesn't even cover the MUD issue or the local election. Perhaps the Board of Supervisors ought to demand full disclosure and hold hearings on why the company that has the city's cable franchise is so damaging to the public interest. P.P.S. The only candidate for Brisbane City Council who supports the MUD is Dana Dillworth, a local environmental and public power activist. We happily and strongly endorse her. [http://www.sfbg.com/searchit.html]