In a sign of deepening recession, state officials report a surge this year in the number of poor families whose power was cut off by Southern California Edison because they didn't pay their bills.
The families, who qualified for reduced-rate bills under an assistance program, were then walloped with high reconnection fees in addition to costs for spoiled food, dislocation and other effects of losing power, said the report by the Division of Ratepayer Advocates, which is part of the California Public Utilities Commission.
Among all of Edison's customers, 8.5 percent, or 329,767 households, were cut off between September 2008 and August, the highest percentage in the state.
And the problem was especially acute among poor families: 10.44 percent of customers were cut off, up 2 percentage points from the previous 12 months, the report said.
That rate of disconnection was higher than both of the other two major state utilities, and higher than the national average.
Although an Edison spokeswoman said the company is already engaged in a vigorous program to get information to its low-income customers, state regulators want the utility to do more.
The report attributes some of the increase to the economic recession and high unemployment.
Edison has had a 9 percent increase in the number of low-income customers, up to 1.14 million.
But the report also blames Edison and its contemporary to the north, Pacific Gas and Electric, for not aggressively seeking out low-income customers and telling them about the numerous public assistance programs and payment plans available to them.
Customers quickly realize the challenges of life without power, the report said.
About 80 percent of customers scrounge up the money to have their electricity turned back on within a few days, the report said. It suggests that if customers were aware of assistance programs before their cutoff, they would use them.
"When faced with the loss of utility service, most disconnected customers find the means to pay their bill, plus reconnection fees and deposits to re–establish credit," the report said.
Utilities spend $66 to switch on and turn off the power, but then charge customers $200 in fees and deposits, the report said.
"Are utilities using disconnection as a convenient revenue collection tool rather than as the last resort?" the report asked.
In an interview, CPUC analysts took a more benign approach.
"We want the utilities to get a lot more aggressive in reaching out to customers," said Setideh Khosrowjah, a policy adviser within the division.
Khosrowjah said that the one problem with all the plans is that they force struggling customers to make the first call. She'd like to see the utilities contact them directly.
A spokeswoman for Edison said it launched a major public outreach to engage low-income customers in January.
"We had a lot of nontraditional ways of going out to our customers," said Linda Yamauchi, manager of consumer affairs for Edison. "A lot of in-language media, in-language materials. The main message was to call us, we can help you. Once they called us, if their service was on, it stayed on."
The report also singled out Pacific Gas & Electric Co., which switched off 8.59 percent of households with low-income customers, a 4 percentage point increase that outpaced the rest of the utilities.
Khasrowjah attributes the increase to the utility's speedy roll-out of computerized smart meters.
These devices allow PG&E to turn off the power from a central location without sending a field crew to the residence.
"Some of these numbers are lower than they should be because (the utilities) don't have the staff to do the shut-off," Khosrowjah said. "If they can just flip a switch, these numbers are going to go a lot higher."
Michael Shames, executive director of the ratepayer advocacy nonprofit the Utility Consumers Action Network, said the low-cost shut-off should also help consumers by allowing low-cost reconnects.
"The reconnection fees are extraordinarily high, but if a remote shut-off is done, they don't have to send a truck out there to turn it back on," Shames said. "The utility has an obligation to reduce the reconnection fees, because they don't have the expenses."
Call staff writer Eric Wolff at 760-740-5412.
