View Mobile Site

Disagrees with Wyatt’s views of LAFCo

Text Size: Small Large Medium
POSTED May 5, 2014 1:18 a.m.

Editor, Manteca Bulletin:

I am writing in response to your column headlined, “San Joaquin agency protecting PG&E profits” published on April 22, 2014. For a number of years, I have worked as an attorney for South San Joaquin Irrigation District assisting in its application to provide retail electric service that is before the San Joaquin Local Agency Formation Commission.

This letter is my personal response to your column. I have been upset, frustrated, and unhappy with the length of time the process has taken and the amount of analysis being demanded. That being said, I cannot agree with some of the characterizations of the motives of the Executive Officer and the Commissioners as illustrated by your ultimate conclusion that the delays are, “.  . . because LAFCo is more intent on protecting annual multi-million dollar bonuses for PG&E’s upper echelon executives than they are about putting an average of $300 a year back into the pockets of typical PG&E customers in Manteca, Ripon, and Escalon.”

While I am discouraged and disappointed with the process, I do not agree with your statements of the motives of the Executive Director or the LAFCo commissioners.

Looking to the future, LAFCo is now deciding how to proceed in finalizing the Municipal Services Review, which is n necessary to set a hearing date on SSJID’s application to provide retail electric service. We would encourage a direct path to a final hearing utilizing the existing experts to complete the task, without further studies.



Dennis Donald Geiger

Stockton

Commenting is not available.

Commenting not available.

Please wait ...