BILL NUMBER: SB 636	AMENDED
	BILL TEXT

	AMENDED IN SENATE  JANUARY 6, 2014

INTRODUCED BY   Senator Hill
    (   Coauthors:  
Senators   Evans,   
 Leno,     Wolk, 
   and Yee   ) 
    (   Coauthors:  
Assembly Members   Gordon,  
  Levine,    
Mullin,     Ting, 
   and Yamada   ) 

                        FEBRUARY 22, 2013

   An act to amend Section  34188 of the Health and Safety
Code, relating to redevelopment   1701.2 of the Public
Utilities Code, relating to the Public Utilities Commission  .


	LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST


   SB 636, as amended, Hill.  Redevelopment Property Tax
Trust Fund allocations: excess Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund
moneys.   Public Utilities Commission: proceedings.
 
   (1) Existing law establishes certain procedures that are
applicable to adjudication, rulemaking, and ratesetting cases of the
Public Utilities Commission.  
   This bill would prohibit an officer, employee, or agent of the
commission that is assigned to assist in the prosecution of, to
testify in, or to supervise the prosecution of an adjudication case
from participating in the decision of the case or in the decision of
any factually related proceeding. The bill would permit an officer,
employee, or agent of the commission that is assigned to assist in
the prosecution of, an adjudication case to participate in reaching a
settlement of the case, but would prohibit the officer, employee, or
agent from participating in the decision of the commission to accept
or reject the settlement, except as a witness or counsel in an open
hearing or a specified closed hearing.  
   (2) The California Constitution authorizes the commission to
establish its own procedures, subject to statutory limitations or
directions and constitutional requirements of due process, and to
establish rules for all public utilities.  
   This bill would correct certain statutory references from the
commission adopting regulations to the commission adopting rules.
 
   Existing law requires the county auditor-controller, in each
fiscal year, to allocate property tax revenue to local jurisdictions
in accordance with specified formulas and procedures, and generally
requires that each jurisdiction be allocated an amount equal to the
total of the amount of revenue allocated to that jurisdiction in the
prior fiscal year, subject to certain modifications, and that
jurisdiction's portion of the annual tax increment, as defined.
Existing law also reduces the amounts of ad valorem property tax
revenue that would otherwise be annually allocated to the county,
cities, and special districts pursuant to these general allocation
requirements by requiring, for purposes of determining property tax
revenue allocations in each county for the 1992-93 and 1993-94 fiscal
years, that the amounts of property tax revenue deemed allocated in
the prior fiscal year to the county, cities, and special districts be
reduced in accordance with certain formulas. Existing law requires
the transfer of the local property tax revenues not allocated to the
county, cities, and special districts as a result of these reductions
to the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund (ERAF) in that county
for allocation to school districts, community college districts, and
the county office of education, with any remaining excess funds
allocated to the county, cities, and special districts. 

   Existing law additionally requires the county auditor-controller
to determine annually the amount of property taxes that would have
been allocated to each redevelopment agency had the agency not been
dissolved and to deposit that amount into the Redevelopment Property
Tax Trust Fund. Existing law requires the county auditor-controller
for each fiscal year to allocate moneys in the Redevelopment Property
Tax Trust Fund for passthrough payment obligations, enforceable
obligations of the dissolved redevelopment agency, and administrative
costs, as specified. Any remaining moneys in the Redevelopment
Property Tax Trust Fund are required to be distributed as local
property tax revenues to local agencies and school entities, which
may include ERAF, as prescribed.  
   This bill would modify the provision of law relating to the
allocation of remaining local property tax revenues in the
Redevelopment Property Tax Trust Fund by deleting language requiring
that the provision be construed in such a manner so as to not
increase any allocations of excess, additional, or remaining ERAF
funds that would otherwise have been allocated to cities, counties,
cities and counties, or special districts pursuant to existing law.

   Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes.
State-mandated local program: no.


THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

   SECTION 1.    Section 1701.2 of the   Public
Utilities Code   is amended to read: 
   1701.2.  (a) If the commission pursuant to Section 1701.1 has
determined that an adjudication case requires a hearing, the
procedures prescribed by this section shall be applicable. The
assigned commissioner or the assigned administrative law judge shall
hear the case in the manner described in the scoping memo. The
scoping memo shall designate whether the assigned commissioner or the
assigned administrative law judge shall preside in the case. The
commission shall provide by  regulation   rule
 for peremptory challenges and challenges for cause of the
administrative law judge. Challenges for cause shall include, but not
be limited to, financial interests and prejudice. The 
regulation   rule  shall provide that all parties
are entitled to one peremptory challenge of the assignment of the
administrative law judge in all cases. All parties are entitled to
unlimited peremptory challenges in any case in which the
administrative law judge has within the previous 12 months served in
any capacity in an advocacy position at the commission, been employed
by a regulated public utility, or has represented a party or has
been a party of interest in the case. The assigned commissioner or
the administrative law judge shall prepare and file a decision
setting forth recommendations, findings, and conclusions. The
decision shall be filed with the commission and served upon all
parties to the action or proceeding without undue delay, not later
than 60 days after the matter has been submitted for decision. The
decision of the assigned commissioner or the administrative law judge
shall become the decision of the commission if no further action is
taken within 30 days. Any interested party may appeal the decision to
the commission, provided that the appeal is made within 30 days of
the issuance of the decision. The commission may itself initiate a
review of the proposed decision on any grounds. The commission
decision shall be based on the record developed by the assigned
commissioner or the administrative law judge. A decision different
from that of the assigned commissioner or the administrative law
judge shall be accompanied by a written explanation of each of the
changes made to the decision. 
   (b) An officer, employee, or agent of the commission that is
assigned to assist in the prosecution of, to testify in, or to
supervise the prosecution of an adjudication case before the
commission shall not participate in the decision of the case, or in
the decision of any factually related proceeding, including
participation in or advising the commission as to findings of fact,
conclusions of law, or orders. An officer, employee, or agent of the
commission that is assigned to assist in the prosecution of an
adjudication case may participate in reaching a settlement of the
case, but shall not participate in the decision of the commission to
accept or reject the settlement, except as a witness or counsel in an
open hearing or a hearing closed pursuant to subdivision (d). The
Legislature finds that the commission performs both prosecutorial and
adjudicatory functions in an adjudication case and declares its
intent that an officer, employee, or agent of the commission,
including its attorneys, may perform only one of those functions in
any adjudication case or factually related proceeding.  

   (b) 
    (c)  Ex parte communications shall be prohibited in
adjudication cases. 
   (c) 
    (d)  Notwithstanding any other  provision of
 law, the commission may meet in a closed hearing to
consider the decision that is being appealed. The vote on the appeal
shall be in a public meeting and shall be accompanied with an
explanation of the appeal decision. 
   (d) 
    (e)  Adjudication cases shall be resolved within 12
months of initiation unless the commission makes findings why that
deadline cannot be met and issues an order extending that deadline.
In the event that a rehearing of an adjudication case is granted the
parties shall have an opportunity for final oral argument. 
   (e) 
    (f)  (1) The commission may determine that the
respondent lacks, or may lack, the ability to pay potential penalties
or fines or to pay restitution that may be ordered by the
commission.
   (2) If the commission determines that a respondent lacks, or may
lack, the ability to pay, the commission may order the respondent to
demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the commission, sufficient
ability to pay potential penalties, fines, or restitution that may be
ordered by the commission. The respondent shall demonstrate the
ability to pay, or make other financial arrangements satisfactory to
the commission, within seven days of the commission commencing an
adjudication case. The commission may delegate to the attorney to the
commission the determination of whether a sufficient showing has
been made by the respondent of an ability to pay.
   (3) Within seven days of the commission's determination of the
respondent's ability to pay potential penalties, fines, or
restitution, the respondent shall be entitled to an impartial review
by an administrative law judge, of the sufficiency of the showing
made by the respondent of the respondent's ability to pay. The review
by an administrative law judge of the ability of the respondent to
pay shall become part of the record of the adjudication and is
subject to the commission's consideration in its order resolving the
adjudication case. The administrative law judge may enter temporary
orders modifying any financial requirement made of the respondent
pending the review by the administrative law judge.
   (4) A respondent that is a public utility regulated under a
 rate-of-return or rate-of-margin   rate of
return or rate of margin  regulatory structure or that has gross
annual revenues of more than one hundred million dollars
($100,000,000) generated within California is presumed to be able to
pay potential penalties or fines or to pay restitution that may be
ordered by the commission, and, therefore, paragraphs (1) to (3),
inclusive, do not apply to that respondent. 
  SECTION 1.    Section 34188 of the Health and
Safety Code is amended to read:
   34188.  For all distributions of property tax revenues and other
moneys pursuant to this part, the distribution to each taxing entity
shall be in an amount proportionate to its share of property tax
revenues in the tax rate area in that fiscal year, as follows:
   (a) (1) For distributions from the Redevelopment Property Tax
Trust Fund, the share of each taxing entity shall be applied to the
amount of property tax available in the Redevelopment Property Tax
Trust Fund after deducting the amount of any distributions under
paragraphs (2) and (3) of subdivision (a) of Section 34183.
   (2) For each taxing entity that receives passthrough payments,
that agency shall receive the amount of any passthrough payments
identified under paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 34183,
in an amount not to exceed the amount that it would receive pursuant
to this section in the absence of the passthrough agreement. However,
to the extent that the passthrough payments received by the taxing
entity are less than the amount that the taxing entity would receive
pursuant to this section in the absence of a passthrough agreement,
the taxing entity shall receive an additional payment that is
equivalent to the difference between those amounts.
   (b) Property tax shares of local agencies shall be determined
based on property tax allocation laws in effect on the date of
distribution, without the revenue exchange amounts allocated pursuant
to Section 97.68 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, and without the
property taxes allocated pursuant to Section 97.70 of the Revenue and
Taxation Code.
   (c) The total school share, including passthroughs, shall be the
share of the property taxes that would have been received by school
entities, as defined in subdivision (f) of Section 95 of the Revenue
and Taxation Code, in the jurisdictional territory of the former
redevelopment agency, including, but not limited to, the amounts
specified in Sections 97.68 and 97.70 of the Revenue and Taxation
Code.