Most Popular

  • The Principal Matter
    Teachers said Principal Gil Cho was dictatorial. Students said he manhandled them. The school district said he was doing a good job.
  • He's No Angel
    They once called him a savior who helped people in need. Today, Edwin Parada is accused of taking money from Latinos unfamiliar with real estate laws.
  • Nonconformity Still Reigns!
    The top eccentrics of San Francisco, and that's saying something.
  • A Time to Kill
    The SPCA is struggling to finance a new hospital, and one way to save money is to speed up euthanasia.
  • State of the Cart
    Join us as we map the street food scene and find out why there aren't more vendors in this most food-involved and temperate of cities.

Recent Articles

Recent Articles by Peter Byrne

  • Politically Inspired: Fiction for Our Time

    A gemlike collection of 30 short stories, ranging from comic and satirical to ironic and sad

  • Surprise!

    If you think S.F. is ready for a terrorist attack – even two years-plus after 9/11 – think again

  • Capital Rap

    From revolutionary rapper to stockbroker to rapper again -- the long, strange trip of Paris, aka Oscar Jackson Jr.

  • Gaffing Gavin

    In which we head into the Tenderloin on a secret nocturnal mission

  • Molotov Mouths: Explosive New Writing

    A verbally incendiary band of activist-poets' fresh, passionate, revolutionary collection

National Features >

  • Houston Press

    A Dirty Picture

    What mainstream publishers don't want you to know about door-to-door magazine sales.

    By Craig Malisow

  • Riverfront Times

    Welcome to Cougar Heaven

    When these huntresses on are on the prowl, the prey very much wants to be caught.

    By Unreal

  • Broward-Palm Beach New Times

    Sweet Deal

    How rumored McCain veep choice Charlie Crist wants to bail out Big Sugar.

    By Bob Norman

  • SF Weekly

    All-American Girls

    Are Asian women getting their jawbones cut to look whiter?

    By Lauren Smiley

Dead Mud Walking

A ballot measure that would create a Municipal Utility District has so many legal flaws, it's all but DOA. In fact, passing the measure might delay the advent of public power here for years.

By Peter Byrne

Published on October 10, 2001

Energy consultant Emmitt James Simpson stood alone in front of the dais at San Francisco City Hall late last month, trying to save his $90,000 contract. Simpson had been hired in August to study the feasibility of public ownership of San Francisco's electric utility and to write an objective report on his findings. Staring down at the hapless consultant were his bosses, Neil Eisenberg and Jake McGoldrick, members of the Local Area Formation Commission, an entity charged with exploring public power options in the city.

Simpson began by apologizing for the poor quality of the draft report he had turned in a few days before. "It was a mishmash," Simpson admitted. "I submitted garbage." He handed his bosses a stack of documents: another draft. He assured them that this version was more competent than the previous ones. "It's not something to be ashamed of," said Simpson softly.

Barely glancing at the paperwork, Eisenberg, the LAFCO chairman, informed Simpson that his services were no longer required, and that he should hand in his bill. Simpson, who charges $150 an hour, agreed to do so. "I am 90 percent done," he said, implying that he would settle for $81,000.

It is unclear how much Simpson might eventually be paid for his work, and Eisenberg, who is running for city attorney in November on a pro-public power platform, characterizes the Simpson hiring and firing as a "glitch" in the movement to turn San Francisco and Brisbane into a single Municipal Utility District that would, among other things, control electrical distribution here. But when it comes to credibility and efficiency of the MUD movement, the bungled contract seems less the exception and more the rule.

The issue of whether or not to set up a MUD comes before local voters on Nov. 6. The LAFCO, composed of Eisenberg and members of the Board of Supervisors, is charged by state law with deciding whether or not a MUD is cost-effective before the matter goes to the voters. In one of its most significant acts, the LAFCO board hired Simpson -- a fervent, public supporter of creating a San Francisco MUD -- to provide an "impartial" evaluation of the risks and benefits of letting a MUD take over San Francisco's electric grid.

But it wasn't just his previously avowed support of the MUD -- Simpson had testified before the LAFCO itself in favor of public power in San Francisco -- that should have given the commission pause. Gloria Young, executive director of the LAFCO and clerk of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, says she advised Eisenberg and McGoldrick not to hire Simpson because she had reviewed his study proposal and, in her opinion, it didn't meet the LAFCO's needs. The commissioners hired him anyway.

After checking up on Simpson's progress in mid-September, Young reported to the LAFCO board in this way: "There is significant information missing ... several statements ... lack any substance or coherency. ... [N]umerous unsubstantiated statements and conclusions, and the overall tone of the analysis, strongly suggest a lack of objectivity." On Sept. 18, Young formally recommended that the LAFCO fire Simpson, and he was eventually discharged.

Before a consultant is hired to replace him, the LAFCO commissioners might consider doing a simple background check on their job applicants. In May 1991, Emmitt James Simpson was convicted in Lassen County of defrauding the Lassen Municipal Utility District. According to court records, Simpson billed the Lassen MUD for work that he did not perform. As punishment, Simpson was put on probation for one year and ordered to pay $3,889 in restitution.

Simpson says he did not disclose this conviction to the LAFCO, nor was he asked about his record. Eisenberg says he was not aware of Simpson's conviction, and that it is not part of his job to do background checks.


The two public power measures on the November ballot would create two very different public power agencies. Measure I establishes a San Francisco-Brisbane Municipal Utility District, which would be operated by a five-member board of directors, also to be elected on Nov. 6. Once created, a MUD would have the authority to take over not just the local electric utility, currently run by the Pacific Gas & Electric Co., but also the water, sewer, telecommunications, gas, and garbage collection utilities. The MUD would be a separate governmental entity, funded by consumer payments for electricity and taxes. Proponents of the MUD have made it clear they would like the agency to seize the distribution lines of PG&E, and perhaps some in-city power plants, and create a MUD-owned utility that would provide electricity to San Franciscans. To date, almost no details on the cost or other impacts of such moves have been put forward.

Show All1   2   3   4   5   Next Page »

SF Weekly Insiders

  • Local food, music and news blasts
  • Free Stuff
Backpage.com