https://www.sfchronicle.com/california-wildfires/article/Rad...
You provide no evidence of that being the cause of their deferred maintenance, only a news article that critics exist (not even that they are significant in number or political influence) that don't like the way PG&E is handling the catch-up work of maintenance it is now doing because of the liabilities it has incurred through deferred maintenance.
> Cutting down trees is something California went to great lengths to stop doing around 2007 or so, by ending logging and forest brush operations/controlled burns
The extent to which that is a factor in the magnitude of some of the fires is a legitimate issue to discuss, but forest management by other entities is a separate issue from power line safety maintenance by PG&E and it's role in starting fires. The agencies that make those forest management decisions do not govern PG&E's maintenance decisions.
And state agency mismanagement of forests absolutely has literally everything to do with a random power line sparking and causing a small local burn vs burning down a city.
> Pacific Gas & Electric knew for years that dozens of its aging power lines posed a wildfire threat yet failed to replace or repair them, it was reported Wednesday. The company also reportedly spent $5 billion on shareholder dividends despite the need for repairs to decades-old equipment.
https://www.kqed.org/news/11737336/judge-pge-paid-out-stock-...
> At a probation hearing related to the utility’s deadly 2010 gas pipeline explosion in San Bruno, Judge William Alsup said the embattled utility hasn't done enough to prevent wildfires through tree trimming and other maintenance work — even while its shareholders made millions.
> “PG&E pumped out $4.5 billion in dividends and let the tree budget wither,” Alsup said.