The delays could affect people expecting service next year, as well as data centers, large housing developments and clean-energy projects that need new electrical connections. PG&E says it is reassessing its business plans because of uncertainty over financing costs and wildfire liability. The company says postponing the spending will help limit future rate increases and keep bills lower for existing customers.

PG&E said it is not postponing safety projects. But consumer advocates questioned whether customers would benefit from the spending cuts, arguing that some of the deferred costs have already been included in electricity rates.

Jamie Court, president of Consumer Watchdog, accused PG&E of using the prospect of delayed connections to push state lawmakers for relief from future wildfire costs. “They’re saying if we don’t get our bailout on wildfire liability, we’re not going to hook up your electricity,” Court said, calling the strategy “pure, pure blackmail.” That is an advocate’s characterization; PG&E says its review is intended to manage financial uncertainty and avoid unnecessary long-term costs for ratepayers.

The dispute comes as California utilities seek legislative action on wildfire liability. In San Francisco, officials have cited delays connecting projects to the grid among their reasons for pursuing a city takeover of PG&E’s electric system.

The financial stakes of that proposal are contested. PG&E has told state regulators a takeover could cost $22.5 billion, including the value of its assets and the cost of separating the city’s infrastructure from its system. San Francisco estimates the utility’s assets are worth $3.4 billion, compared with PG&E’s $13.9 billion valuation, and puts the cost of a separate substation at about $8 billion. City officials dispute PG&E’s estimate; regulators would determine the final purchase price.