A judge chose not to open the door to competing plans for reorganizing Pacific Gas and Electric Co. on Wednesday, granting a request from state officials who wanted more time to come up with a process they think will help the utility stay on track to resolve its bankruptcy case by the end of June next year.

A group of PG&E bondholders wanted to get PG&E’s exclusive right to file a plan of reorganization — an essential step in the company’s path out of bankruptcy — terminated so they could propose their own. But U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Dennis Montali was persuaded at a hearing by arguments from Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office and state utility regulators as they pressed for a two-week delay.

Attorneys for the state will report back to Montali at a hearing on Aug. 9, when they will update him on their progress in coming up with a different way to evaluate competing PG&E restructuring proposals.

The bondholders want to inject about $30 billion into PG&E and give themselves an 85% to 95% stake in the company’s equity. And they aren’t the only ones with a plan for how PG&E should exit bankruptcy protection: Insurance companies outlined a different plan on Tuesday, and the company is working on its own.

PG&E currently has the sole right to propose a restructuring plan until Sept. 26; it has not yet proposed a plan.

Instead of allowing each plan to work its way through a time-consuming process in court, the state wants to spend two weeks coming up with an alternate method of vetting the different proposals that officials think will be more expedient. They are motivated by a new law that requires PG&E to get its bankruptcy plan approved by June 30, 2020, in order to access a $21 billion fund that will protect it from future wildfire costs.

Alan Kornberg, an attorney representing the California Public Utilities Commission, told Montali that the agency is “keenly interested” in the plan outlined by bondholders.

“We are very hopeful that its emergence will have a positive impact on these cases,” Kornberg said. “But we can’t view that in isolation.”

The commission will have to sign off on the ultimate plan to reorganize PG&E by June 30 as well if the company is to access the new wildfire fund.

Stephen Karotkin, an attorney for PG&E, supported the two-week extension, saying that setting up a more orderly way to evaluate restructuring plans “makes sense.”

But the bondholders opposed the state’s request. Michael Stamer, an attorney for the lenders, said any delay was too long and the process the state wanted to follow could be “an unprecedented, undocumented road to nowhere.”

Ultimately, however, Montali did not believe allowing the state to work on an alternate process for looking at plans would harm the case or imperil PG&E’s ability to meet the June deadline.

After the state reports back on Aug. 9, Montali is scheduled on Aug. 13 to reconsider the bondholder motion to terminate PG&E’s exclusive period. That’s the same day he is currently scheduled to hear a similar motion from the insurance company group.

J.D. Morris is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. Email: jd.morris@sfchronicle.com Twitter: @thejdmorris