Common Cause, a national nonprofit, runs a lookup that takes your street address and lists everyone who represents you, from your city or county up to the President, with how to reach each office.
The lookup runs on Common Cause's site, which holds what you type there; nothing reaches this one. Its local results can leave an office out, so check the lists below for your county supervisor and city council.
- Start with your own officials. Say where you live: your town is enough, and add your street address if you want a reply by mail. Not sure which officials are yours? Look up your address, or use the lookup on each list below.
- Make one ask, and say it plainly. To write to SDG&E and the CPUC, to take part in the CPUC's review once SDG&E files, or to say in public where they stand. On the phone, give your name, your town and that one ask.
- Use your own words. Say what you know that the record does not: your road out in a fire, your well, your land, the wildlife you see. A few sentences is plenty. This page offers no letter to copy, on purpose.
- Stay courteous, with everyone. Staff read the mail, and most of these officials have no public statement on the line yet. No insults, no threats, no capitals for emphasis. Disagree with the line, not the person.
- Keep to the record. Give ranges rather than the largest figure, and link where a fact comes from. Every figure on The project page carries its source.
- Ask for a written reply, and keep it. A written answer is a position. If an office sends you one, you can forward it to us and we will add it here, with its source and without your name.
- Thank the ones already on record, and ask them to stay with it once SDG&E files. Riverside County has directed its staff, and Mt. San Jacinto College its president, to take part in the CPUC proceeding.
Sources: County of Riverside; Mt. San Jacinto Community College District
- Writing to the CPUC itself works differently, and formal comment opens only once SDG&E files: Take action has the steps and a worksheet for your own words.
These officials have spoken or written about the line in public. Their words, with the source, are on each card below.
- Kelly Seyarto, State Senator, District 32
- Kate Sanchez, Assemblymember, District 71
- Laurie Davies, Assemblymember, District 74
- Carl DeMaio, Assemblymember, District 75
- Jim Desmond, Supervisor, District 5
- Karen Spiegel, Supervisor, District 2
- Chuck Washington, Supervisor, District 3
- Jessica Alexander, Mayor, District 2
- Matt Rahn, Mayor Pro Tem, District 1
- Brenden Kalfus, Council Member, District 3
- James “Stew” Stewart, Council Member, District 4
- Zak Schwank, Council Member, District 5
- Jon Levell, Mayor, District 1
“No public statement found” on a card means we searched and found none, not that the official supports the line.
The Governor and California's two U.S. Senators represent everyone on the routes. Below them are the members whose districts take in a community on the routes, each community placed by the Census geocoder at its center. A district line can split a town, so check your own address with the lookup in each list.
Statewide
Governor of California
Gavin Newsom
No public statement found as of November 11, 2026.
U.S. Senator for California
Alex Padilla
No public statement found as of November 11, 2026.
U.S. Senator for California
Adam Schiff
No public statement found as of November 11, 2026.
U.S. House
Today's districts. From noon on January 3, 2027, the districts drawn under Proposition 50 take effect, and three communities change districts: Julian and Santa Ysabel move to the 51st, Valley Center to the 50th and Fallbrook to the 49th. Until then, the members below represent them.
Sources: California Secretary of State; U.S. Census Bureau
U.S. Representative, District 25
Raul Ruiz
District takes in Seeley and Ocotillo.
No public statement found as of November 11, 2026.
U.S. Representative, District 48
Darrell Issa
District takes in Ocotillo Wells, Borrego Springs, Ranchita, Santa Ysabel, Julian, Warner Springs, Palomar Mountain, Pala, Pauma Valley, Valley Center, Rainbow, Fallbrook, Aguanga and Temecula.
No public statement found as of November 11, 2026.
U.S. Representative, District 49
Mike Levin
District takes in De Luz, Camp Pendleton, San Onofre and San Clemente.
No public statement found as of November 11, 2026.
State Senate
Proposition 50 did not change State Senate or Assembly districts.
Source: California Secretary of State
State Senator, District 18
Steve Padilla
District takes in Seeley and Ocotillo.
No public statement found as of November 11, 2026.
State Senator, District 32
Kelly Seyarto
District takes in Ocotillo Wells, Borrego Springs, Ranchita, Santa Ysabel, Julian, Warner Springs, Palomar Mountain, Aguanga and Temecula.
On the record, June 3, 2026
In a joint letter to SDG&E: “we must strongly oppose the project as currently designed.”
Sources: Senator Kelly Seyarto and Assemblymember Kate Sanchez; CBS Los Angeles
State Senator, District 36
Tony Strickland
District takes in San Clemente.
No public statement found as of November 11, 2026.
State Senator, District 38
Catherine S. Blakespear
District takes in De Luz, Camp Pendleton and San Onofre.
No public statement found as of November 11, 2026.
State Senator, District 40
Brian W. Jones
District takes in Pala, Pauma Valley, Valley Center, Rainbow and Fallbrook.
No public statement found as of November 11, 2026.
State Assembly
Assemblymember, District 36
Jeff Gonzalez
District takes in Seeley, Ocotillo and Aguanga.
No public statement found as of November 11, 2026.
Assemblymember, District 71
Kate Sanchez
District takes in Temecula.
On the record, June 3, 2026
In a joint letter to SDG&E: “we must strongly oppose the project as currently designed.”
Sources: Senator Kelly Seyarto and Assemblymember Kate Sanchez; CBS Los Angeles
Assemblymember, District 74
Laurie Davies
District takes in De Luz, Camp Pendleton, San Onofre and San Clemente.
On the record, September 17, 2026
Spoke against the line as proposed at the CPUC's San Marcos session. As quoted by KPBS: “We need to make sure we're getting this right, not simply getting it done.”
Source: KPBS
Assemblymember, District 75
Carl DeMaio
District takes in Ocotillo Wells, Borrego Springs, Ranchita, Santa Ysabel, Julian, Warner Springs, Palomar Mountain, Pala, Pauma Valley, Valley Center, Rainbow and Fallbrook.
On the record, July 10, 2026
In a letter to SDG&E and the CPUC: “I write to express my strongest opposition to the current placement plans of the proposed Golden Pacific Powerlink.” He asks SDG&E to withdraw the preferred route through Anza-Borrego and Borrego Springs, take Palomar Mountain off every route, and find a northern path clear of Temecula.
Source: Assemblymember Carl DeMaio
Each board votes as a whole, so every member is listed, not only the supervisor whose district the line would cross. Outside city limits, the supervisor is the local official.
Imperial County
The line would begin at SDG&E's Imperial Valley Substation. The Board has taken no action on it that we found.
Source: SDG&E
Supervisor, District 1
Jesus Eduardo Escobar
No public statement found as of November 11, 2026.
Supervisor, District 2 (Vice Chair)
Martha Cardenas-Singh
No public statement found as of November 11, 2026.
Supervisor, District 3 (Chair)
Peggy Price
No public statement found as of November 11, 2026.
Supervisor, District 4
Ryan E. Kelley
No public statement found as of November 11, 2026.
Supervisor, District 5
John Hawk
No public statement found as of November 11, 2026.
San Diego County
On August 18 the Board received a presentation on the line's effects on Anza-Borrego, 5-0. It has taken no position.
Source: County of San Diego
Supervisor, District 1
Paloma Aguirre
No public statement found as of November 11, 2026.
Supervisor, District 2
Joel Anderson
No public statement found as of November 11, 2026.
With Supervisor Desmond, asked the Board to receive the August 18 presentation on the line's effects on Anza-Borrego, and seconded the motion.
Source: County of San Diego
Supervisor, District 3
Terra Lawson-Remer
No public statement found as of November 11, 2026.
Supervisor, District 4
Monica Montgomery Steppe
No public statement found as of November 11, 2026.
Supervisor, District 5
Jim Desmond
On the record, August 17, 2026
Opposes the line and hosts a petition against it. In a post quoted by inewsource: “The route runs straight through our backcountry. And the communities that take the hit get no vote on the decision,” and “That is not how this should work. I am going to fight it.”
Sources: inewsource; Supervisor Jim Desmond
Riverside County
On June 23 the Board voted 5-0 for a formal County position of significant concerns about the route through Southwest Riverside County, and directed staff to take part in the CPUC proceeding.
Source: County of Riverside
Supervisor, District 1
Jose Medina
No public statement found as of November 11, 2026.
Voted for the County's position of significant concerns on June 23.
Source: County of Riverside
Supervisor, District 2
Karen Spiegel
On the record, July 6, 2026
Seconded the County position of significant concerns, which she brought to the Board with Supervisor Washington. As quoted by The Riverside Record: “I think standing up and expressing voices in an appropriate manner will get attention that there [are] second thoughts to this,” and “And I'm very glad to see this happening.”
Sources: The Riverside Record; County of Riverside
Supervisor, District 3
Chuck Washington
On the record, June 19, 2026
Brought the County position to the Board with Supervisor Karen Spiegel. In his letter: “I stand with our cities, tribal leaders, community stakeholders, and residents in opposition of the proposed Golden Pacific Powerlink project as currently proposed.”
Sources: Supervisor Chuck Washington, County of Riverside; County of Riverside
Supervisor, District 4
V. Manuel Perez
No public statement found as of November 11, 2026.
Voted for the County's position of significant concerns on June 23.
Source: County of Riverside
Supervisor, District 5
Yxstian Gutierrez
No public statement found as of November 11, 2026.
Voted for the County's position of significant concerns on June 23.
Source: County of Riverside
Orange County
The line would end at a new substation north of San Onofre, near the San Diego-Orange County line. The Board has taken no action on it that we found.
Source: SDG&E
Supervisor, First District
Janet Nguyen
No public statement found as of November 11, 2026.
Supervisor, Second District
Vicente Sarmiento
No public statement found as of November 11, 2026.
Supervisor, Third District
Donald P. Wagner
No public statement found as of November 11, 2026.
Supervisor, Fourth District (Chair)
Doug Chaffee
No public statement found as of November 11, 2026.
Supervisor, Fifth District (Vice Chair)
Katrina Foley
District takes in San Clemente.
No public statement found as of November 11, 2026.
The councils of the cities on or beside the routes. Elsewhere along the line, the county supervisors above are the local officials.
Temecula
In the City's own words, the proposed route “traverses the southern portion of the City of Temecula and Temecula Valley, including the Temecula Creek corridor.” The council adopted Resolution 2026-50 opposing the project on July 14, 5-0.
Source: City of Temecula
Mayor, District 2
Jessica Alexander
On the record, August 20, 2026
Signed the City's resolution opposing the project. As quoted by the OB Rag: “Temecula is not SDG&E’s extension cord.”
Sources: OB Rag; City of Temecula
Mayor Pro Tem, District 1
Matt Rahn
On the record, May 27, 2026
Voted for the City's resolution. To SDG&E at the May 26 council meeting, as quoted by Patch: “I will say you have selected one of the most environmentally, culturally, and community-impactful routes imaginable.”
Sources: Patch; City of Temecula
Council Member, District 3
Brenden Kalfus
On the record, May 12, 2026
Voted for the City's resolution. Patch reported he was the first council member to state his position: “I do not support their plan to bring the Golden Pacific Powerlink project through the Temecula Valley,” and “Temecula is not the right place for this type of infrastructure.”
Sources: Patch; City of Temecula
Council Member, District 4
James “Stew” Stewart
On the record, May 27, 2026
Voted for the City's resolution. At the May 26 council meeting, as quoted by Patch: “Temecula is not the place for this.”
Sources: Patch; City of Temecula
Council Member, District 5
Zak Schwank
On the record, May 27, 2026
Voted for the City's resolution. At the May 26 council meeting, as quoted by Patch: “This is something that most absolutely needs to stop and we are here to stop it.”
Sources: Patch; City of Temecula
Murrieta
The City's letter says the route “may not pass directly through Murrieta,” and opposes it for the harm to Temecula and the region around it.
Source: City of Murrieta
Mayor, District 1
Jon Levell
On the record, August 21, 2026
Signed the City's letter: “the City of Murrieta opposes the current proposed routing of Segment 4 and urges SDG&E to develop an alternative that better protects the residents, businesses, and communities of Southwest Riverside County.”
Source: City of Murrieta
Mayor Pro Tem, District 2
Ron Holliday
No public statement found as of November 11, 2026.
Council Member, District 3
Lisa DeForest
No public statement found as of November 11, 2026.
Council Member, District 4
Lori Stone
No public statement found as of November 11, 2026.
Council Member, District 5
Cindy Warren
No public statement found as of November 11, 2026.
San Clemente
The line would end at a new substation north of San Onofre, near the San Diego-Orange County line, which is San Clemente's southern edge. The council has taken no action on it that we found.
Source: SDG&E
Mayor
Rick Loeffler
No public statement found as of November 11, 2026.
Mayor Pro Tem
Steve Knoblock
No public statement found as of November 11, 2026.
Council Member
Victor Cabral
No public statement found as of November 11, 2026.
Council Member
Mark Enmeier
No public statement found as of November 11, 2026.
Council Member
Zhen Wu
No public statement found as of November 11, 2026.
Seats change
This list names who holds each seat, checked on November 11, 2026. Newly elected officials take office over the coming weeks, and the list will change as they do. Every contact is one the office publishes itself. Know of a statement we missed, or a contact that has changed?
Tell us