You're still misreading the law. AB-205 does not require the utilities to have a fixed fee. It simply sets the requirement that if they do introduce a fixed fee

You're still misreading the law. AB-205 does not require the utilities to have a fixed fee. It simply sets the requirement that if they do introduce a fixed fee (which was previously regulated to be capped at $10), it have discounts for lower income customers. The fee structure must be approved by the CPUC, and the $24.15 fee is lower than the $51 fee that PG&E proposed. This matches the previous program, which required that the utilities set a discounted rate for lower income customers. > Either way, the law and it's predecessor require income discrimination by private companies, opposed to subsidizing low incomes from the general fund. The latter would be much more expensive to administer. I don't know why you want to pay higher taxes. > Ironically, this bill was passed as a trailer to the state budget. The bill is about regulation of utilities and includes changes to how utilities can apply for and use assistance due to COVID-related non-payment of bills. That affects the state budget. The fee structure part of the law really isn't that complicated. You should consider whether the news source that you got your information from is reliable.