San Francisco lawmakers propose new path to separate city electric service from PG&E control
Legislation announcement follows December outage and renewed scrutiny of PG&E’s performance
San Francisco state Sen. Scott Wiener and members of the Board of Supervisors are set to unveil legislation aimed at reducing or ending the city’s reliance on Pacific Gas and Electric Co. for electric service infrastructure and operations. The announcement is scheduled for Monday morning at City Hall, with Supervisors Rafael Mandelman, Bilal Mahmood and Alan Wong participating.
The push comes amid heightened local attention to PG&E’s reliability and emergency response after a major San Francisco outage that began on Dec. 20, 2025. The incident originated at a Mission Street-area substation and, over the course of the event, left large sections of the city without power for extended periods. PG&E has said all customers affected by the outage were fully restored by the early morning of Dec. 23, 2025, after repair work proved more complex than initial estimates.
What San Francisco controls today — and what it does not
San Francisco already operates CleanPowerSF, a community choice aggregation program administered by the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission. Under this model, the city procures electricity supply for participating customers, while PG&E continues to own and operate much of the distribution grid, deliver power, handle billing, and respond to most outages. CleanPowerSF began serving customers in May 2016 and functions as an opt-out program under state law.
The legislation being previewed is framed as a step toward greater public control of electric service. While specific bill language was not yet released ahead of the announcement, the stated objective is to create a locally controlled alternative to PG&E’s role in San Francisco’s electric system, a concept often described as municipal utility service or public power.
Recent oversight hearings underscored accountability and communication concerns
On Feb. 12, 2026, supervisors questioned PG&E executives and staff in a public hearing focused on the December outage. The discussion examined restoration timelines, public notifications, coordination with city departments, and equity issues tied to the order and pace of restoration. City officials also sought clarity on the technical failure at the substation and the adequacy of documentation and operational readiness for emergency responders.
The hearing highlighted gaps in estimated restoration times communicated to residents and raised questions about how PG&E prioritizes messaging and support during large-scale disruptions.
A third-party review of the incident has been referenced as part of the post-outage process, with additional hearings anticipated after investigative findings are available.
What would need to happen for a true “break” from PG&E
Any plan that shifts control of distribution infrastructure would require complex valuation, regulatory approvals, and potential litigation over assets and service territory. San Francisco has pursued various public power strategies for decades, and the legal pathway typically involves state oversight and extensive negotiations regarding grid equipment, staffing, and long-term reliability obligations.
Electric supply can be procured locally today through CleanPowerSF, but grid ownership and operations largely remain with PG&E.
Separating from PG&E’s distribution role would likely involve asset valuation and formal proceedings before state regulators.
Transition planning would need to address emergency response, maintenance standards, and customer protections during any changeover.
Monday’s announcement is expected to outline the legislative mechanism and next steps, including how the proposal would interact with existing city power programs and state utility regulation.