BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SB 48
Page 1
SENATE THIRD READING
SB
48 (Hill)
As Amended September 9, 2015
Majority vote
SENATE VOTE: 39-0
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|Committee |Votes|Ayes |Noes |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|----------------+-----+-----------------------+---------------------|
|Utilities |14-0 |Rendon, Patterson, | |
| | |Achadjian, Bonilla, | |
| | |Burke, Dahle, Eggman, | |
| | |Cristina Garcia, | |
| | |Hadley, Obernolte, | |
| | |Quirk, Santiago, Ting, | |
| | |Williams | |
| | | | |
|----------------+-----+-----------------------+---------------------|
|Appropriations |17-0 |Gomez, Bigelow, Bloom, | |
| | |Bonta, Calderon, | |
| | |Chang, Nazarian, | |
| | |Eggman, Gallagher, | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | |Eduardo Garcia, | |
| | |Holden, Jones, Quirk, | |
SB 48
Page 2
| | |Rendon, Wagner, Weber, | |
| | |Wood | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
--------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Proposes a suite of reforms on the governance and
operations of the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC).
Specifically, this bill:
1)Requires the CPUC to hold at least six commission sessions
each year in Sacramento.
2)Requires the CPUC to publish and include all written testimony
in proceeding docket cards. Requires the CPUC to post
information on the Internet regarding how the public can
access the ratemaking process, the role of the Office of the
Public Advisor, and how the Office of the Public Advisor can
be of assistance.
3)Expands reporting requirements to include specified
information regarding the details of CPUC cases and
proceedings, and requires the CPUC president to report on the
timeliness of resolving cases annually before the appropriate
legislative policy committees.
4)Expands the reporting requirements of the CPUC's annual
workplan to include, among other things, performance criteria
for the CPUC and its executive director, as well as an annual
evaluation of the executive director based on the performance
criteria.
5)Subjects the CPUC's adjudication proceedings to the
SB 48
Page 3
Administrative Adjudication Code of Ethics.
6)With the exception of adjudicated proceedings, requires the
CPUC to seek and engage the views of those likely to be
affected by a decision or proceeding, as specified. Requires
the CPUC to annually publish and update its outreach
activities.
7)Provides that actions to enforce the CPUC's process for
handling and determining disclosable public records, as well
as actions to enforce Bagley-Keene Open Meetings Act
requirements, may be taken to the superior court.
8)Makes various legislative findings regarding the judicial
review provisions of the Bagley-Keene Open Meetings Act.
9)Makes other technical and clarifying changes to address
chaptering out conflicts.
FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee, this bill would have the following costs:
1)Significant one-time information technology upgrades,
including contracting, systems development, staffing, and
implementation costs of approximately $7.5 million to fulfill
the public information requirements of the bill.
2)Ongoing annual costs of approximately $1.7 million to maintain
and operate the new information technology systems.
3)One-time costs of $120,000 a year for two years for a
SB 48
Page 4
proceeding to establish rules for outreach, and ongoing costs
of up to $400,000 per year to seek the views of interested
persons.
4)Ongoing annual legal costs of approximately $335,000 for the
workload associated with superior court reviews of
Bagley-Keene Open Meeting and Public Records Acts enforcement
actions.
5)Ongoing annual costs of up to $120,000 to hold at least six
meetings in Sacramento instead of San Francisco. This
includes the costs of meetings sites, equipment, and staff
travel.
6)Potential increased annual costs in the range of tens of
thousands of dollars to the low hundreds of thousands of
dollars for additional meetings in order for the Commission,
rather than the president, to direct the executive director,
attorney, and staff.
7)Ongoing annual costs of $35,000 for increased reporting
requirements.
COMMENTS:
1)Author's Statement: "Recent scandals at the [CPUC] have
highlighted the need for more visibility in the interactions
between Commissioners and regulated utilities, and a series of
embarrassing audits of the CPUC's mismanagement of public
funds and poor safety oversight point toward poor management
of the organization. SB 48 would reform the CPUC's governance
SB 48
Page 5
structure, more clearly outlining the roles and
responsibilities of Commissioners and staff, and require the
CPUC to reach out to communities affected by CPUC decisions
instead of only the regulated utilities."
2)Background: California Constitution Article XII establishes
the CPUC, and grants it the authority to regulate public
utilities. The CPUC is governed by five full-time
commissioners appointed by the Governor and confirmed by the
State Senate. Commissioners are appointed for six-year terms
and can only be removed by the Legislature. Beginning in
2014, Pacific Gas and Electric began releasing over 65,000
emails from a five-year period between utility executives and
CPUC officials. The emails revealed discussions on subjects
the CPUC was deliberating within a number of proceedings, many
of which arguably violated CPUC's rules governing ex parte
communications, including emails pertaining to the selection
of administrative law judges for ratesetting cases.
This bill makes changes to the operation and governance of the
CPUC, including requiring the CPUC to hold at least six
sessions each year in Sacramento.
3)Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act: The CPUC is subject to the
Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act, which requires state entities
take "action" only at a public meeting following public
posting of an agenda describing the item for proposed action.
Any private gathering of a majority of the members of a state
body at the same time and place to hear, discuss, or
deliberate upon any item that is within its jurisdiction is
unlawful.
This bill provides that actions to enforce the Bagley-Keene
Open Meeting Act and the CPUC's process for disclosing public
records may be taken to the superior court. This bill also
makes various legislative findings regarding the judicial
review provisions of the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act.
SB 48
Page 6
4)CPUC's Internal Deficiencies: The CPUC has recently undergone
a number of audits related to its budget, transportation
program, natural gas pipeline safety program, among other
internal functions. The findings of these audits have raised
questions about the CPUC's ability to manage even some of its
core functions. In March 2014, an audit by the State Auditor
found that "the commission lacks adequate process for
sufficient oversight of utility balancing accounts to protect
ratepayers from unfair rate increases."
This bill makes various changes to the CPUC to promote greater
transparency, including expanding reporting requirements
regarding cases, proceedings, and its annual workplan, as
specified. This bill also requires the CPUC to promote
greater public involvement by publishing information online
and engaging in outreach activities, as specified.
Analysis Prepared by:
Edmond Cheung / U. & C. / (916) 319-2083 FN:
0002338