If you have been following the Bob Kittle editorial controversy on our Web site, you know that Mr. Kittle has made numerous factually deficient statements about UCAN's efforts to fight the construction of the Sunrise Powerlink. Mr. Kittle has attacked UCAN as a "lucrative rip-off" in a recent editorial, while gushing with support for the Sunrise Transmission Project.

Now, a former colleague of Kittle's, Don Bauder, who edited the Union-Tribune's business section for nearly 30 years has exposed Kittle as a "pathetically fatuous" toady for San Diego's power "overlords."

If you are a Union-Tribune subscriber, a UCAN member, or if you are concerned about the negative financial and environmental effects of the Sunrise PowerLink, you must read this article published July 31 in the San Diego Reader.

Here are just a few of the highlights:

"The campaign to ballyhoo the proposed Sunrise Powerlink has one beneficial effect: it is shining light on how San Diego’s overlords try to use misinformation to manipulate public opinion ..."

"... One of the groups battling Sunrise is Utility Consumers’ Action Network (UCAN), a 30,000-member organization that has fought every SDG&E rate-increase attempt since 1984, with many great successes. On Monday, July 14, the Union-Tribune wrote an editorial titled “Lucrative rip-off: SDG&E bills include interest-group costs.” The editorial was inaccurate and pathetically fatuous. The second sentence read, “But what few San Diego Gas & Electric customers know is that their monthly bills are higher because UCAN’s small staff has collected nearly $2 million from SDG&E ratepayers for intervening before the California Public Utilities Commission in opposition to SDG&E projects from 1989 to 2006 ... Think about that nonsense." ...

... The U-T’s editorial did not mention, of course, that on January 26, 2002, another editorial that appeared in the U-T lauded Shames as a “consumers’ hero.” UCAN had challenged a deal cooked up in a back room by Sempra and former governor Gray Davis. UCAN won and saved the ratepayers $363 million, later reduced to $197 million. Said the editorial about UCAN, “Good work, guys.” If the U-T’s statement that UCAN has cost ratepayers $2 million over 17 years were accurate — and it is not accurate — even the U-T might understand that $197 million is a very good return on a $2 million investment. It’s even better on the actual investment: zero.

The July 14 editorial was written by Bob Kittle, the U-T’s editorial page editor. Kittle got information for his piece from SDG&E, says Shames, quoting a phone conversation he had with Kittle.

In an email, I asked Kittle about that. He shot back, “In fact, I received no information from SDG&E.” He explained that the information provided to him was given by Sempra, SDG&E’s parent. Hmmm. This isn’t even hairsplitting. It’s rank deception. ..."

We couldn't have said it better. Again, we urge you to read Don Bauder's Spinrise.

Related articles:

Bob Kittle's hit piece targeting UCAN as a "lucrative rip-off."

Bob Kittle's opinion, lauding UCAN as a "Consumers' Hero" (Mr. Kittle denies running this opinion).

UCAN's rebuttal to Robert A. Kittle's attack. (Mr. Kittle has refused to publish this document).

Bob Kittle's refusal to print UCAN's rebuttal.

Law Professor Robert Fellmeth's letter to the Union, asserting that Kittle's editorial was flawed by "material omissions."

Factual misstatements made by Bob Kittle on KPBS Radio's Editor's Roundtable.