This is an archive of a past election.
See http://www.smartvoter.org/ca/sac/ for current information.
LWV League of Women Voters of California Education Fund
Smart Voter
Sacramento County, CA June 6, 2006 Election
Measure H
Ordinance Requiring Advisory Votes on Proposals to Expand
Sacramento Municipal Utility District

Advisory Vote Only - Majority Approval Required

Pass: 120,940 / 61.84% Yes votes ...... 74,636 / 38.16% No votes

See Also: Index of all Measures

Results as of Jul 17 11:39am, 100.0% of Precincts Reporting (771/771)
Information shown below: Impartial Analysis | Arguments |

Shall it be the established policy of the Sacramento Municipal Utility District to obtain the opinion of its current voters, through a non-binding advisory vote, on proposals pertaining to expansion of the boundaries of the district by annexation?

Impartial Analysis from Sacramento County Counsel
IMPARTIAL ANALYSIS OF MEASURE H (Ordinance Requiring Advisory Votes on Proposals to Expand the Territory of the Sacramento Municipal Utility District) Prepared by Sacramento County Counsel

If approved by voters, Measure H would adopt an ordinance requiring the Sacramento Municipal Utility District (`SMUD") Board of Directors to submit proposals pertaining to an expansion of SMUD's boundaries by annexation to an advisory vote of the SMUD electorate. This advisory vote would not be binding on the SMUD Board of Directors. Measure H also includes a requirement for the SMUD Board of Directors to hold a minimum of three public hearings on an expansion proposal before submitting the proposal to the voters for the required advisory vote. Measure H contains an exception to the advisory vote requirement under circumstances where the SMUD Board of Directors determines that the proposed expansion is de minimus. "De minimus" is defined in the Measure to mean that the projected increase in the electric load in the proposed area of expansion will not exceed one percent (1%) of SMUD's then current total electrical load. The Measure further includes various administrative procedures for the conduct of required advisory elections relating to ballot headings, ballot questions, impartial analyses, and ballot arguments.

Measure H requires approval by a majority vote of the qualified voters voting in the election on the issue.

 
This election is archived. Any links to sources outside of Smart Voter may no longer be active. No further links will be added to this page.
Links to sources outside of Smart Voter are provided for information only and do not imply endorsement.

Arguments For Measure H Arguments Against Measure H
Before SMUD takes enormous risks with your electric rates, you deserve a voice in the decision. Especially now that SMUDs planning the biggest expansion in its history - taking over service to 70,000 PG&E customers in Yolo County, at a potential cost of over $500 million.

Until forced to do so by angry ratepayers, SMUD directors didn't want to let you vote. That was an outrageous insult to existing cus- tomers who are the ones potentially on the hook for hundreds of millions of dollars to buy PG&E's poles, wires, land and equipment in Yolo County.

Measure H is very simple and reasonable. It requires an advisory vote among existing customers if SMUD wants to expand into new areas.

Vote Yes to ensure SMUD directors cannot ignore your opinion again. Vote Yes to guarantee that existing customers have a voice whenever SMUD wants to expand its territory. Vote Yes to assure all the facts are revealed to SMUD customers before directors risk your ratepayer dollars.

Why is Measure H so important?

SMUD has underestimated the cost of its ventures before. When it annexed Folsom, SMUD estimated it would cost less than $5 million to buy the system from PG&E. The final tally: more than $16 million. Rancho Seco nuclear plant was closed by voters after cost overruns led to hefty electricity rate increases.

SMUD has failed to prove Yolo County expansion provides any benefit to existing customers. Or to explain the risk of having to buy so much more high-priced natural gas in order to supply power to new Yolo County customers. Vote Yes on Measure H to force SMUD to publicly debate the merits of its plan.

Join your neighbors, SMUD customers, homeowners associations, taxpayers and labor organizations. Vote Yes on Measure H.

s/ Grant S. Green, President, Lake Natoma Heights Homeowners Assn.
s/ Ken Payne, President, Sacramento County Taxpayers' League
s/ Aubry L. Stone, President/CEO, California Black Chamber of Commerce
s/ Paul W. Carr, Former SMUD Director
s/Betty Dean Elston, Coalition for Reliable and Affordable Electricity

Rebuttal to Arguments For
History should be remembered, not repeated.

In 1921, the Sacramento Union wrote, "It has been definitely proved that municipalities can provide their own power and light at a cost considerably below the rate charged by private companies."

In 1923, voters approved the creation of SMUD despite what the Sacramento Bee described as a turbulent and bitter campaign waged against it by private power interests.

Even after voters created SMUD, PG&E refused to sell its distri bution system. PG&E continued the battle for the next 20 years until losing in the Supreme Court in March 1946.

After that loss, PG&E's employee in Sacramento still said, "You guys have got the system now, but I guarantee in a year it's going to come back to us."

Much has changed since then. But not everything. PG&E is spending millions to stop SMUD from serving new customers. PG&E wants to weaken SMUD. They want to convince voters that SMUD shouldn't grow... only PG&E should.

Today, PG&E customers are paying some of the highest utility rates in the nation while SMUD's are among the lowest in California. To protect its customers, SMUD is placing a binding vote on the November ballot. You will have the chance to choose who should grow in the Sacramento Valley -- SMUD or PG&E.

PG&E wants to continue to raise rates and weaken SMUD. SMUD wants to keep rates low and continue to clean the air. We want SMUD strong. SMUD -- YES! PG&E -- NO!

s/ Genevieve Shiroma, President, Sacramento Municipal Utility District Board of Directors
s/ Susan Patterson, Vice President, Sacramento Municipal Utility District Board of Directors
s/ Bill Slaton, Director, Sacramento Municipal Utility District Board of Directors
s/ Mariko Yamada, Supervisor, Yolo County Board of Supervisors
s/ Mike McGowan, Supervisor, Yolo County Board of Supervisors

In 1987, PG&E came to Sacramento with a plan to take over SMUD. PG&E eventually abandoned that scheme.

Since then, PG&E (with Enron and other energy companies) nearly bankrupted California. PG&E used bankruptcy laws to win an 11.2% guaranteed rate of return for their shareholders -- every year. Today, PG&E customers are paying some of the highest utility rates in the nation while SMUD's are among the lowest in California. PG&E is afraid of the comparison.

PG&E is at it again. They are spending millions of dollars to stop SMUD from serving new customers. PG&E says there should be an advisory vote on SMUD serving Yolo County. But that's not what they really want. PG&E wants to weaken SMUD. They want to convince voters SMUD shouldn't grow -- only PG&E should.

Unlike PG&E's Board of Directors, the SMUD Board is elected by ratepayers, not corporate shareholders. Unlike PG&E's use of ratepayer funds spent on outrageous corporate salaries and perks, SMUD uses ratepayer money to provide lower rates, cleaner air, and better service.

To protect its customers, SMUD is placing a binding vote on the November ballot. You will have the chance to choose who should grow in the Sacramento Valley -- SMUD or PG&E.

In November, you will have the chance to guarantee that hundreds of millions of dollars PG&E now takes from ratepayers in Yolo County will be used by SMUD to: Keep Sacramento Rates Low; Build Non-Polluting Electricity Generation Facilities for SMUD customers; and Roll Back Rates for Yolo Ratepayers.

PG&E wants to continue to raise rates and keep SMUD weak. SMUD wants to keep rates low and clean the air. We want SMUD strong. We look forward to the real election in November. SMUD
-- Yes! PG&E -- No!

s/ Genevieve Shiroma, President, Sacramento Municipal Utility District Board of Directors
s/ Susan Patterson, Vice President, Sacramento Municipal Utility District Board of Directors
s/Bill Slaton, Director, Sacramento Municipal Utility District Board of Directors
s/Mariko Yamada, Supervisor, Yolo County Board of Supervisors
s/Mike McGowan, Supervisor, Yolo County Board of Supervisors

Rebuttal to Arguments Against
REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT AGAINST MEASURE H

The issue before SMUD voters is very simple. Should existing SMUD customers have the right to vote before SMUD expands its service territory? We believe you should, and here's why.

SMUD's takeover of most of Yolo County's electric service could cost SMUD's existing customers hundreds of millions of dollars.

SMUD is using the eminent domain condemnation process to gain control of this electric system. Nobody knows the real cost of SMUD's takeover in Yolo County because it will be tied up in court for years. Yet, SMUD wants existing customers to write a blank check to cover its Yolo County power grab.

More than 31,000 SMUD customers demanded the right to vote guaranteed by Measure H. It's outrageous that three SMUD directors signed the argument against Measure H. To add insult to injury, they invited two Yolo County supervisors to argue against your right to vote -- when they know Yolo County residents are guaranteed a vote by law!

Do we really want Yolo County deciding the future of our electric service? Existing SMUD customers should have the right to vote before SMUD risks higher electric rates. Protect your right to vote. Yes on Measure H.

s/ Grant S. Green, President, Lake Natoma Heights Homeowners Association
s/ Kenneth J. Payne, President, Sacramento County Taxpayers' League
s/ Paul W. Carr, Former SMUD Director
s/ Betty Dean Elston, Coalition for Reliable and Affordable Electricity


Sacramento Home Page || Statewide Links || About Smart Voter || Feedback
Created: April 4, 2007 10:09 PDT
Smart Voter <http://www.smartvoter.org/>
Copyright © League of Women Voters of California Education Fund   http://www.lwvc.org
The League of Women Voters neither supports nor opposes candidates for public office or political parties.