It will be some time before state investigators learn the cause of the still-raging Camp and Woolsey fires. But initial incident reports have concerned investigators and investors that the state’s two major utilities, PG&E and Southern California Edison, may face major liabilities associated with the blazes.

If so, it wouldn’t be the first time. State Sen. Jerry Hill, D-San Mateo, is arguing that it should be the last.

“How much of California has to be destroyed and how many lives have to be lost before we look at how we provide utility service in California?” Hill said. “I think it’s time for a conversation about an alternative.”

Hill is looking at legislation that would break up the state’s investor-owned utilities, including PG&E, or eliminate their public license to provide electricity as utilities. (In response, PG&E spokesperson Paul Doherty said: “We’re focused on supporting first responders as they work to contain the fire and keep people safe.”)

Hill has been a vocal critic of PG&E since the 2010 San Bruno pipeline explosion that killed eight people and injured dozens more.

But getting any kind of legislation passed in Sacramento would be a very long shot indeed.

Earlier this year, Gov. Jerry Brown signed wildfire legislation that allowed PG&E and other utilities to issue bonds to pay for their liability costs from the 2017 wildfires and made it possible for those costs to be passed on to ratepayers. Starting next year, the California Public Utilities Commission will be able to consider a range of factors in determining whether liability costs can be passed on to ratepayers.

The new law leaves the matter of utility responsibility for 2018 fires unresolved. But state leadership has been hesitant to stand up to the utilities in the past, and that’s unlikely to change without immense public pressure.

This commentary is from The Chronicle’s editorial board. We invite you to express your views in a letter to the editor. Please submit your letter via our online form: SFChronicle.com/letters.