How has life in the Bay Area changed over the last 20 years? These stories straight from our Bay City News archives capture news of the day from 5, 10, and 20 years ago – as originally published at the time. Explore these history snapshots and ponder how today’s news compares to that of years past.
JULY 27, 2021
Public power remains tied to San Francisco’s goals for renewable energy, affordability and reliable connections for public projects. The city’s request for a state valuation shows officials pressing ahead after PG&E rejected two offers for its local electric system.
Bay City News Reported:
“San Francisco Seeks Valuation For Public Power Takeover”
As San Francisco continues its effort to buy PG&E’s electric facilities and transition the city to public power, city officials said on Tuesday they’ve asked the California Public Utilities Commission to determine the value of PG&E’s local electric infrastructure.
The formal request asking the CPUC to determine the value of PG&E’s electric assets serving the city comes after the utility has twice rejected a $2.5 billion offer made by the city to purchase its local assets.
Back in 2019, after PG&E filed for bankruptcy as it faced liabilities for deadly wildfires throughout the state, the city made its initial offer. PG&E rejected a second offer the following year.
City officials allege the utility has also imposed more than $1 billion in new charges for city customers and delayed basic power hookups for public buildings, including schools, affordable housing projects, transit projects and a University of California at San Francisco research facility.
“While I want to work with this company as a partner, it’s been very challenging,” Mayor London Breed said, speaking Tuesday at Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital.
“Just imagine hundreds of potentially affordable housing units that could be made available today to low-income families that can’t open because we can’t connect the power; because of the delays; because of the excuses; because of the expense of providing new equipment that we weren’t even aware that we had to provide in the beginning of the process. The goal post being moved throughout the game; that’s what we’re constantly dealing with,” she said.
“We are more than willing to go before the California Public Utilities Commission and make a clear case as to why we want to acquire these assets and what we believe the value is,” City Attorney Dennis Herrera said.
“The failure of PG&E to come to the table has been compounded by its obstruction,” he said. “This obstruction, this delay needs to stop, and we need get moving forward to make sure that we provide to everyone reliable and affordable public power.”
In response, PG&E said while it prided itself in providing over 85 percent clean energy to San Francisco residents, the city’s request was frivolous because PG&E isn’t looking to sell.
“At the end of the day, PG&E’s assets are not for sale and San Francisco’s request today for a valuation of PG&E’s electric assets by the California Public Utilities Commission is another waste of time and resources,” PG&E officials said in a statement. “While CCSF has repeatedly offered to buy PG&E’s infrastructure for pennies on the dollar, PG&E doesn’t agree that the outcomes of this type of ownership change will benefit customers, taxpayers, other local communities, the state or our economy. For these reasons, and many others, we believe San Francisco’s long-term interest in acquiring PG&E’s facilities does not serve the interests of customers and neighborhoods in San Francisco.”
Breed and Herrera contended that the CPUC request is necessary if the city plans to take ownership of local power utilities and reach its goal of using 100 percent renewable electricity through its public power programs Hetch Hetchy Power and CleanPowerSF by 2025.
Currently both programs provide more than 70 percent of the electricity consumed in the city.
JULY 27, 2016
Independent oversight remains central to Oakland’s efforts to improve police accountability and public trust. The ballot measure proposed a civilian commission with subpoena power, authority over policy and a role in officer discipline.
Bay City News reported:
“Oakland Sends Civilian Police Commission To Voters”
The Oakland City Council has voted unanimously to place a measure on the November ballot that would establish an independent police commission.
The vote took place late Tuesday night after two hours of vigorous debate and an unsuccessful attempt by councilmembers Desley Brooks and Rebecca Kaplan to include an amendment to strip Mayor Libby Schaaf of her right to appoint three of the commission’s seven members.
Brooks and Kaplan proposed to have all seven members chosen by a committee that would be named by the mayor and the City Council.
But the measure that will be placed on the ballot, which was sponsored by councilmen Dan Kalb and Noel Gallo, calls for the mayor to pick three commissioners and the selection committee to pick the other four.
Oakland has had a Citizens’ Police Review Board since 1980, but critics have said it is understaffed and its recommendations are often ignored by city officials.
If the November measure is approved by a majority of the city’s voters, that board would be disbanded and its executive director would become the interim director of the Oakland Police Review Agency, which will work alongside the commission.
A major impetus for creating the independent police commission has been a string of recent police scandals, including sexual misconduct involving several officers and the teenage daughter of a police dispatcher as well as racist text message exchanges.
Kalb said today that if the measure is approved, “Oakland will have an independent body that has real authority over the police chief and police policies in certain areas.”
Kalb said the review agency that would work alongside the commission would have equal standing with the Police Department in imposing discipline on officers who engage in misconduct.
The Oakland Police Officers’ Association, which represents the city’s officers, had threatened to sue over changes to the police discipline process that were defined in the union’s current contract, but amendments that the council made last Friday prompted the union to withdraw its opposition.
Police union president Sgt. Barry Donelan said in a letter to the city, “Oakland’s police officers are open to the concept of a police commission but you can’t create an initiative that substantively changes a binding contract between the city and its police officers.”
The proposal allows the commission to fire a police chief for cause if five members agree to do so. The commission, which is expected to meet twice a month, will also have subpoena power over police records.
No past or present police officers would be allowed to serve on the commission. Members must be at least 18 years old and be Oakland residents.
JULY 27, 2006
LGBTQ+ students continue to press local institutions for equal recognition and protection. The Los Altos campaign shows young organizers, businesses and civil liberties advocates challenging a city policy that had blocked pride proclamations.
Bay City News reported:
“Los Altos Students Renew Push For Gay Pride Recognition”
Students from Los Altos High School’s Gay Straight Alliance have pledged to continue their fight for a citywide Gay Pride Day proclamation next year, following the Los Altos City Council’s recent decision to overturn a ban on resolutions involving sexual orientations.
“We will ask again” said GSA advisor Ruth Gibbs, “It’s the right thing to do. It’s a human rights issue, not a sexual orientation issue. These are kids and they want to be accepted for who they are.”
Gibbs said the students are already planning a second Gay Pride parade for June 3, 2007, regardless of the city’s decision when they appeal for a Gay Pride Day declaration next year.
At its meeting on Tuesday, the city council voted unanimously to overturn a ban it passed in February on any resolution addressing sexual orientation. The GSA has unsuccessfully lobbied the Los Altos City Council to declare a Gay Pride Day since 2003.
The new rule puts proclamations into the mayor’s hands, without required action from the city council unless the mayor requests it, according to the code.
The American Civil Liberties Union cheered Tuesday’s council decision, which it pushed for along with more than 50 local businesses that signed a petition to end the ban. Students and other concerned residents sat in the audience wearing T-shirts that read “Proclaim Equality Los Altos,” according to the ACLU, which also threatened the city with a lawsuit.
The council has consistently denied proclaiming June 7 Gay Pride Day in Los Altos, a decision that strikes Gibbs as odd since the council often designates other various themes, including, Al’s Barbershop Day and Eagle Scout Day.
Ironically, Los Altos Mayor Ron Packard paved the way for this year’s first-ever Gay Pride parade held June 4 when he suggested the GSA could hold a parade instead of a pride day.
Shortly afterward, equal rights groups and neighboring city and county officials came out in support of the group, offering them to join among others the San Francisco and San Jose Gay Pride parades.
“The outpour for our first parade was wonderful,” Gibbs said.
She said a number of individuals within the Los Altos community are already supporting next year’s parade financially and the students will continue fighting for a pride day.
“We can’t just give up,” Gibbs said.
Editor’s Note: All the reporting, writing, and editing of this content was done by human journalists at the time of initial publication. AI tools were used to surface these stories from our internal Bay City News archives and provide the introductory context.