HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity of SLO Comment Letter Regarding Diablo Canyon Power PlantCity of San Luis Obispo, Office of the City Council, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA, 93401-3249, 805.781.7114,
slocity.org
February 3, 2026
To: Senator John Laird
Assemblymember Dawn Addis
Subject: Request for State Legislation Supporting Coastal Land Conservation and Restoration of
Tax Revenue for Impacted School Districts and Local Government Service Providers Related to
Diablo Canyon Power Plant
Dear Senator Laird and Assemblymember Addis:
On behalf of the City of San Luis Obispo (City), and consistent with our previous advocacy and current
legislative platform, we write today seeking the state legislature’s support for coastal land
conservation and restoration of tax revenue that has been eliminated, despite continued operation
of Diablo Canyon Power Plant (DCPP). We believe these are essential considerations that must be
included in long-term planning during the current extension to 2030 and if continued operation is
contemplated beyond 2030 as well.
The City Council appreciates your leadership on this issue and acknowledges your letters dated
January 30 and February 3, 2026, regarding Diablo Canyon, which are enclosed for reference. The
City shares the concerns raised in your correspondence and supports the goals and processes you
have outlined.
The City has consistently emphasized that any period of continued operation must be accompanied
by strong public safety protections, fiscal certainty for impacted local governments and school
districts, and continued planning for both eventual decommissioning and future land use. Cities,
counties, school districts, and special districts have planned, staffed, and delivered essential public
services based on long-standing fiscal assumptions tied to the facility’s operating timeline. As State
policy related to DCPP continues to evolve, it is critical that the communities bearing these impacts
are treated equitably and not left to absorb the consequences of statewide decisions. As the
Legislature evaluates potential actions related to DCPP, the City respectfully urges consideration of
the following principles:
Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness: The City is located within ten miles from the
DCPP in evacuation or “Protective Action Zone” 8. The safe operation of DCPP must remain
the foremost priority. Continued operation should continue to be subject to rigorous
regulatory oversight and include sustained funding for local and regional emergency
preparedness, spent fuel storage security and ongoing long-term planning, public safety
services, and other coordination activities that protect the City and surrounding
communities. Evacuation planning should be improved, in case of a nuclear disaster.
Fiscal Mitigation: School districts and local governments in the region have experienced
significant fiscal impacts resulting from changes to DCPP’s operating assumptions, including
the loss of historic unitary tax revenues. These revenues, eliminated in 2025, risk causing the
loss of classrooms, student services, public safety, infrastructure maintenance, other core
community services, and also funding for emergency planning and response while the state’s
only nuclear power plant continues to operate. It’s essential that the funding formula used
to pay for these services adjust for the unanticipated, continued operation of DCPP and the
impact that places on local communities. If it is decided that the previous tax structure is no
longer appropriate, we ask that the legislature provide equivalent, reliable fiscal mitigation
for affected jurisdictions for the duration of continued DCPP operations. Any alternative
approach should ensure fiscal equity among impacted agencies and avoid shifting the
financial burden of State policy decisions onto local governments and schools.
Long-Term Planning and Land Conservation: Legislative actions should support continued
regional and local planning for eventual decommissioning, workforce transition, and future
land use. The City also supports the conservation of coastal lands surrounding Diablo Canyon
and the expansion of appropriate public access, in coordination with regulatory agencies,
Tribal communities, and conservation partners, while ensuring that land conservation efforts
benefit local jurisdictions.
The City of San Luis Obispo stands with its neighboring cities, school districts, and regional
partners in urging the Legislature to adopt a balanced approach that protects public safety,
supports education and essential services, and provides fiscal certainty for communities
hosting critical infrastructure on behalf of the State.
We appreciate the Legislature’s continued engagement and look forward to working collaboratively
to advance solutions that are equitable, transparent, and responsive to local impacts.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Erica A. Stewart
Mayor, City of San Luis Obispo
Cc: City of San Luis Obispo City Council
County of San Luis Obispo Board of Supervisors
Cal Cities
Sent via Email
Attachments: Correspondence from Senator Laird and Assemblymember Addis
February 3, 2026
San Luis Obispo City Council
Via emailcouncil@slocity.org
Subject: Diablo Canyon Power Plant Letter - Item No. 5.h, February 3, 2026 SLO City Council
Agenda
Dear Mayor Stewart and Councilmembers:
As the Assemblymember representing California’s 30th Assembly District, a former Morro Bay
City Councilmember, and the only State Legislator living within one of the twelve evacuation /
shelter-in-place zones surrounding the Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) owned Diablo Canyon
Power Plant (DCPP), I write to you with extensive, first-hand experience of the safety, policy,
and fiscal realities of DCPP’s operation.
As a fellow San Luis Obispo (SLO) County resident and former local government
representative, I understand how decisions about DCPP have real consequences to local public
entities’ ability to provide essential services and public education including to residents served
by the seven SLO County cities, the San Luis Coastal Unified School District, the numerous
community service districts, and the County itself. This is why I have been steadfast in
advocating for fair and just mitigation for the 2025–2030 DCPP extension. I believe such
mitigation is urgent and should remain independent of any negotiations regarding potential
DCPP operations beyond 2030. I am glad to read that your position is aligned, and I urge you to
continue advocating for fair and just mitigation.
SLO County residents uniquely shoulder the ongoing burden of preparing for a potential
radioactive disaster. These are risks that no other California community faces. This concern is
not about the dedication or professionalism of DCPP workers, but about the disproportionate
burden placed on the surrounding community.
In 2018, the California Public Utilities Commission approved PG&E’s plan to retire DCPP. That
decision was accompanied by SB 1090 (Monning, Chapter 561, Statutes of 2018), which
established a thoughtful framework for plant retirement and provided essential transition
resources to support local jurisdictions. SB 1090 recognized the value of mitigation for the
health and welfare of our local communities.
Asm Addis, 2/3/26, Diablo Canyon Power Plant Letter - Item No. 5.h 2
In 2022, SB 846 (Dodd, Chapter 239, Statutes of 2022) extended DCPP’s operation through
2030. While I was not serving in the Legislature at that time, I understand that SB 846 dictated a
variety of provisions, including a $1.4 billion taxpayer funded, forgivable state loan to PG&E, as
well as the delay of DCPP’s planned retirement to 2030. Many now recognize that the
provisions of SB 846 significantly benefited the for-profit, investor-owned utility while failing to
provide fair and just mitigation to SLO County communities hosting DCPP during its five-year
extension period.
Such mitigation should have been secured through structured payments, reinstatement of the
unitary tax, or other mechanisms. Now, it has been conveyed both publicly and privately that the
absence of a local mitigation provision was recognized during the SB 846 negotiations, yet that
mitigation was left out of SB 846. I have been clear, publicly and directly with PG&E, that this
omission unfairly burdens local public agencies and constrains your ability to provide essential
services and public education.
To address the lack of 2025-2030 mitigation, I have been actively working to advance multiple
solutions. This includes my 2025 Transitional Kindergarten Access Act (AB 1391) that would
have provided needed funding to our local, public school district, as well as a $10 million budget
proposal that would have helped numerous local entities, including the City of San Luis Obispo.
In 2026, I am focused on delivering concrete solutions through regular collaboration with our
shared constituents and diverse stakeholders.
As public servants, we can all agree that our residents rely on local public entities to provide
safe streets, infrastructure, mental health and homelessness services, and high-quality public
education. Without proper oversight and accountability, the capacity to deliver these core
services is diminished. Additionally, such mitigation should not be viewed as precedent or
justification for decisions regarding DCPP operations beyond 2030.
Now is the time for PG&E to fulfill its promise of partnership with our SLO County communities.
As I continue working toward a fair and just mitigation solution for the 2025–2030 extension, I
welcome your input.
Sincerely,
Dawn Addis
Assemblymember, 30th Assembly District
cc: San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors
Arroyo Grande City Council
Atascadero City Council
Asm Addis, 2/3/26, Diablo Canyon Power Plant Letter - Item No. 5.h 3
Grover Beach City Council
Morro Bay City Council
Paso Robles City Council
Pismo Beach City Council