New Electric Rates in California: Who Will Pay Just $15?
A new proposal in California could allow some residents pay as little as $15 on their electric bills regardless of how much they use. Here’s a look…
Whenever you contract a service, the most logical thing is to pay for what you consume; however, that could change in the state of California , specifically, that of electrical energy.
In an effort to electrify nearly 14 million homes in the Golden State, the California government is about to launch a new law that will change the way in which the electricity consumed is paid for, since now the payment will depend on the income registered by each household.
As a result, California residents making more than $180,000 a year could end up paying an average of $500 more on their annual electric bills, according to the Washington Post; while lower-income residents would save up to $300 per year.
New Electric Rates in California: Who Will Pay Just $15?
Under the proposal, the lowest rate starts at $15 for residents with annual incomes of $28,000 or less, while customers with incomes of $180,000 or more dollars would get a bill of $128 dollars.
In the words of UC Berkeley economics professor Meredith Fowlie, the real help will go to low-income households, as well as middle-income households who typically spend a considerable part of his salary to pay the electricity bills.
Although there are already proposals on the amount of the rates according to income, the truth is that the Public Service Commission of California, which is in charge of regulating public services in the state; still hasn’t made a final decision. In fact, the Commission has until July to set a fee, so the proposed $15 bill for bottom earners is still up for grabs.
The new law causes backlash
As expected, this new initiative has caused a great deal of backlash, especially in the sector of the population that really takes care to limit its consumption of electrical energy; with several complaints being received in this regard, which call out the new legislation as “unfair”.
“This proposal actually discourages conservation. Those that live without air conditioning and conserve electricity or who use solar energy... will still be required to pay the monthly fees,” Ronald Dawson, a retired data administrator, wrote to the commission.