BILL ANALYSIS
Senate Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary
Senator Christine Kehoe, Chair
1184 (Adams)
Hearing Date: 8/24/2009 Amended: 7/15/2009
Consultant: Bob Franzoia Policy Vote: E,U&C 11-0
_________________________________________________________________
____
BILL SUMMARY: AB 1184, an urgency measure, would exempt from the
prohibition on the use of automatic dialing-announcing devices
(ADADs), calls made by a state or local public official for a
governmental purpose. This bill would require the Public
Utilities Commission (PUC) to determine what is not a
governmental purpose.
_________________________________________________________________
____
Fiscal Impact (in thousands)
Major Provisions 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 Fund
PUC proceeding $157 one time; unknown
enforcementSpecial*
costs ongoing
* PUC Utilities Reimbursement Account
_________________________________________________________________
____
STAFF COMMENTS: This bill meets the criteria for referral to the
Suspense File.
Current law restricts the use of ADADs to between 9:00 AM and
9:00 PM and requires that the call begin with a live person
stating the nature of the call, inquiring whether the called
party consents to receiving the call, and disconnects the call
upon request, with specified exceptions. This bill would add
calls made by state and local governmental officials for
governmental purposes to the list of exceptions, as enforced by
the PUC. Those exceptions are:
- Calls by public safety agencies providing information and
warnings regarding emergencies.
- Calls by schools for contacting parents regarding attendance.
- Calls by utilities or cable companies to customers regarding
prearranged customer premise visits.
The PUC would open a rulemaking in order to determine the
definition of "governmental purpose" to be exempted from the
statutory requirements for the use of ADADs. Based on the
public opposition and media attention regarding the use of ADADs
during the election season, it is reasonable to assume that
defining "governmental purpose" will be a difficult task. The
PUC will need to develop the record through public hearings and
ample stakeholder input before making its final decision. PUC
proceedings, which are similar to regulations and end with the
adoption of a decision, typically take one year or more to
complete. Assuming a one-year time frame, this proceeding would
require a one third time Administrative Law Judge, a one third
time staff attorney and a one half time public utilities
regulatory analyst to research the issues and options, hold
workshops, administer the proceeding with possible evidentiary
hearings, develop the record, and write the proposed decision at
an estimated one-time cost of $157,443. There also are
potential enforcement costs that have not been determined at
this time.