Pedro Pizarro said last week that the state’s for-profit utilities need action in 2026 as they seek a permanent cap on wildfire liability, a push described in slides reviewed by Los Angeles Times. The proposal would limit corporate exposure when a utility is found to have acted negligently or imprudently.
That fight is unfolding while Southern California Edison faces a criminal investigation over its role before the Eaton fire. For customers, the debate goes to who pays after future fires: utility shareholders, or electricity customers through the rates that help cover the losses.
Pedro Pizarro and 2026
Pizarro, the chief executive of Edison International, told Wall Street analysts, “It is in our customers’ interest to have action in 2026.” He also argued the utilities need protection because wildfire risk has damaged their credit ratings, raising borrowing costs and putting pressure on financing.
Caroline Choi, Edison’s executive vice president of public policy and corporate affairs, said, “Safety is our number one priority,” and said the proposal would not change Edison’s focus on preventing fires. Executives at Edison and PG&E have separately told investors that without liability protection they may cut spending on capital improvements.
Sasha Renée Pérez letter
On Sunday, state Sen. Sasha Renée Pérez sent a letter to the California Public Utilities Commission criticizing the companies for paying millions of dollars in dividends while complaining about wildfire risk. Pérez represents a district that includes Altadena, and she wrote that the Legislature must not be pressured to roll back utilities’ financial accountability for wildfires through threats to withhold the investments needed to serve communities.
Her letter put the dispute into plain terms: the utilities want a shield from future fire costs, but critics say they are still sending money to shareholders. Consumer Watchdog president Jamie Court said, “If ratepayers are forced to pay the lion’s share for fires utilities cause, there is no imperative for the for-profit utilities to take safety and fire mitigation seriously.”
Eaton fire scrutiny
The lobbying campaign dates to early 2025, when videos emerged showing two bright flashes coming from Edison’s transmission lines just before the Eaton fire ignited. New evidence from government investigators and court filings has raised questions about Edison’s claim that it operated its electrical system safely before last year’s deadly fire.
PG&E has also told thousands of its customers that projects could be delayed next year as it defers $2 billion in spending. The utilities have warned investors that the lack of liability protection could affect spending plans, while the proposed cap would shift more of the future cost burden away from shareholders and toward the public that pays utility bills.
The immediate issue now sits with The Legislature, where lawmakers will decide whether a permanent wildfire liability cap advances in 2026. Whether California approves that shield will determine how much of the next catastrophic fire bill lands on utility shareholders and how much is passed through to customers.
