No, you won’t be experiencing a heart attack when you open your initial 2024 PG&E this month for January service.

That’s when the first monthly average charge of $32 will start appearing to cover the past and future sins for the company convicted of 85 felony counts of manslaughter.

It’s just a heart palpitation.

The real coronary is coming later this year.

And will be courtesy of the California Legislature.

It will cost households grossing between $69,000 and $180,000 a year in Manteca — as well as those in Lathrop and Ripon who haven’t escaped the surly bonds of PG&E via Lathrop Irrigation District and Modesto Irrigation District respectively — $51 a month.

The hit for households grossing $28,000 and $68,999 a month will be $20 a month.

And a number of households on the California Alternative Rate for Energy (CARE) program that are was essentially the working poor could face a $15 a month charge.

It is all part of a brilliant plan approved in 2022 by PG&E’s partner in crime — the California Legislature.

It is an effort to soften the impact of a wealth of bad decisions by PG&E in cahoots with the consumer watchdog in wolf’s clothing known as the California Public Utilities Commission on the poorest Californians by shifting the burden to those that make more.

It’s basically using the structure of a graduated income tax to stick it to utility customers to cover the fixed costs of PG&E et al.

As such, it also picks up the tab for forced green power investments that the California Legislature forced PG&E and other for-profit utilities to do ahead of the curve basically locking in higher than national averages for green initiatives.

Keep in mind between 5 and 10 percent of your fixed power charges already go to help subsidized electricity rates for lower income households and other programs they state has deemed are for “societal good.”

The CPUC has until July to get the new rate structure in place.

Keep in mind, that some will have it worse than PG&E customers.

San Diego Gas & Electric, using what is basically an income transfer program baked into monthly Utility bills, is proposing even higher rate shifts than PG&E,

Instead of $51 a month as PG&E wants to charge those households making between $69,000 and $180,000, SDG&E is proposing $73 a month.

For those households making under $28,000, SDG&E wants $34 instead of $20.

Those who have a bit of time to spare from treading water financially — primarily higher income households — have been bombarding their legislators.

The result has been a big push to dump the nation’s first-income based electricity rates.

It recently overwhelmingly cleared its first legislative hurdle in Sacramento.

It should be noted most of the votes in Sacramento are being cast by the same people who two years ago pushed for income-based electricity rates.

More than a few politicians via indignant press releases citing the heavy burden of rising energy costs on Californians in announcing their support to block the new rate structure from being implemented conveniently fail to mention their role in setting the concept in motion.

And before he does a back flip worthy of an Olympic diving gold medalist, the French Laundry’s most famous customer — Gov. Gavin Newsom — was at the forefront of pressuring lawmakers to order the CPUC to put the new rate structure in place. 

One might ask why there was nary a peep in protest regarding the major alteration to PG&E’s basic business plan from company brass.

The reason is simple.

Green initiatives regardless of how rushed, ill-conceived or badly timed are good for PG&E’s bottom line.

So is the state’s assistance in imposing a ratepayer-based wildfire hardening program that gets PG&E off the hook for past and future sins.

Never forget when PG&E isn’t busy killing off customers, they exist for one reason and one reason only — to make as much money as they can selling energy.

So why would they say one bad thing about being forced to change the way customers are billed?

They have the best business model in the country.

It is clear Sacramento has no stomach to allow PG&E’s misdeeds to force them into insolvency that would trigger parts of the system being sold off or converted into a public benefit utility such as the Sacramento Municipal Utility District.

Only a fool would cross the de facto policy makers for PG&E in the California legislature and jeopardize the state guaranteed 11 percent profit return.

In what other business can you get the state’s help in forcing your customers to pay for operational sins and lapses while being assured of a tidy profit?

There is a misnomer that PG&E paid a price for its wanton disregard of basic maintenance that led to the deadly Camp Fire that destroyed more than 16,000 homes.

Yes, PG&E was forced into bankruptcy.

Yes, PG&E came up with a settlement plan most of which was tied to their stock doing well.

But they are now on the verge of making record profits after virtually wiping the community of Paradise off the face of the earth.

That’s because the first in a wave of “wildfire hardening” rate hikes will generate $13.8 billion.

Of that, at least $1.4 billion will go directly to PG&E’s profit bottom-line.

That means from the business practices related to maintaining its infrastructure, PG&E is essentially profiting $162.5 million for every man, woman, and child they killed.

Whoever said crime doesn’t pay never had the California legislature as a de facto partner.

This column is the opinion of editor, Dennis Wyatt, and does not necessarily represent the opinions of The Bulletin or 209 Multimedia. He can be reached at dwyatt@mantecabulletin.com