Bill Text: CA SB611 | 2013-2014 | Regular Session | Amended
NOTE: There are more recent revisions of this legislation. Read Latest Draft
Bill Title: Modified limousines: inspection program: safety requirements.
Spectrum: Partisan Bill (Democrat 1-0)
Status: (Engrossed - Dead) 2014-08-21 - Re-referred to Com. on RLS. pursuant to Senate Rule 29.10. [SB611 Detail]
Download: California-2013-SB611-Amended.html
BILL NUMBER: SB 611 AMENDED
BILL TEXT
AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY SEPTEMBER 6, 2013
AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY SEPTEMBER 3, 2013
AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY AUGUST 6, 2013
AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY JUNE 14, 2013
AMENDED IN SENATE MAY 28, 2013
AMENDED IN SENATE MAY 8, 2013
AMENDED IN SENATE APRIL 15, 2013
INTRODUCED BY Senator Hill
FEBRUARY 22, 2013
An act to amend Sections 309.5, 1731, 1756, 1759,
and 5900 of the Public Utilities Code, relating to the
Public Utilities Commission.
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
SB 611, as amended, Hill. Public Utilities Commission: Division of
Ratepayer Advocates: judicial review of commission decisions.
The California Constitution establishes the Public Utilities
Commission, with jurisdiction over all public utilities, as defined.
Existing law establishes the Division of Ratepayer Advocates within
the commission to represent the interests of public utility customers
and subscribers, with the goal of obtaining the lowest possible rate
for service consistent with reliable and safe service levels.
Existing law requires the division to annually submit specified
information to the Legislature, as prescribed. Existing law requires
the Director of the Division of Ratepayer Advocates to submit an
annual budget to the commission for final approval. Existing law
authorizes the director of the division to appoint a lead attorney to
represent the division and requires all attorneys assigned by the
Public Utilities Commission to perform services for the division to
report to and be directed by the lead attorney for the division.
This bill would rename the Division of Ratepayer Advocates the
Office of Ratepayer Advocates, would authorize the office to seek
rehearings and judicial review of commission decisions, and would
require the office to include information about petitions for writs
of review filed by the office under this authority in the annual
report to the Legislature. The bill would require that the director
of the office develop a budget for the office that would be submitted
to the Department of Finance for final approval. The bill would
require the lead attorney to obtain adequate legal personnel for the
work to be conducted by the office from the Public Utilities
Commission's attorney and requires the Public Utilities Commission's
attorney to timely and appropriately fulfill all requests for legal
personnel made by the lead attorney for the office, provided the
office has sufficient moneys and positions in its budget for the
services requested. The bill would make other conforming changes.
Existing law generally authorizes an aggrieved party to petition
the Supreme Court or a court of appeal for a writ of review of an
order or decision of the Public Utilities Commission within 30 days
after the commission issues its decision denying an application for a
rehearing, or, if the commission grants the application, within 30
days after the commission issues its decision on rehearing. Existing
law provides that no court of the state, except the Supreme Court and
the court of appeal, has jurisdiction to review, reverse, correct,
or annul any order or decision of the commission or to suspend or
delay the execution or operation thereof, or to enjoin, restrain, or
interfere with the commission in the performance of its official
duties. Existing law provides that a writ of mandamus lies from the
Supreme Court and from the court of appeal to the commission in all
proper cases, as prescribed by a specified section in the Code of
Civil Procedure.
This bill would instead provide that a writ of mandamus lies from
the Supreme Court and from the court of appeal to the commission in
all proper cases.
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 309.5 of the Public Utilities Code is amended
to read:
309.5. (a) There is within the commission an independent Office
of Ratepayer Advocates to represent and advocate on behalf of the
interests of public utility customers and subscribers within the
jurisdiction of the commission. The goal of the office shall be to
obtain the lowest possible rate for service consistent with reliable
and safe service levels. For revenue allocation and rate design
matters, the office shall primarily consider the interests of
residential and small commercial customers. The office may seek
rehearing and judicial review of commission decisions pursuant to
Article 2 (commencing with Section 1731) and Article 3 (commencing
with Section 1756) of Chapter 9.
(b) The director of the office shall be appointed by, and serve at
the pleasure of, the Governor, subject to confirmation by the
Senate.
The director shall annually appear before the appropriate policy
committees of the Assembly and the Senate to report on the activities
of the office.
(c) The director shall develop a budget for the office that shall
be subject to final approval of the Department of Finance. As
authorized in the approved budget, the office shall employ personnel
and resources, including attorneys and other legal support staff, at
a level sufficient to ensure that customer and subscriber interests
are effectively represented in all significant proceedings. The
office may employ experts necessary to carry out its functions. The
director may appoint a lead attorney who shall represent the office,
and shall report to and serve at the pleasure of the director. The
lead attorney for the office shall obtain adequate legal personnel
for the work to be conducted by the office from the commission's
attorney appointed pursuant to Section 307. The commission's attorney
shall timely and appropriately fulfill all requests for legal
personnel made by the lead attorney for the office, provided the
office has sufficient moneys and positions in its budget for the
services requested.
(d) The commission shall develop appropriate procedures to ensure
that the existence of the office does not create a conflict of roles
for any employee. The procedures shall include, but shall not be
limited to, the development of a code of conduct and procedures for
ensuring that advocates and their representatives on a particular
case or proceeding are not advising decisionmakers on the same case
or proceeding.
(e) The office may compel the production or disclosure of any
information it deems necessary to perform its duties from any entity
regulated by the commission, provided that any objections to any
request for information shall be decided in writing by the assigned
commissioner or by the president of the commission, if there is no
assigned commissioner.
(f) There is hereby created the Public Utilities Commission
Ratepayer Advocate Account in the General Fund. Moneys from the
Public Utilities Commission Utilities Reimbursement Account in the
General Fund shall be transferred in the annual Budget Act to the
Public Utilities Commission Ratepayer Advocate Account. The funds in
the Public Utilities Commission Ratepayer Advocate Account shall be a
budgetary program fund administered and utilized exclusively by the
office in the performance of its duties as determined by the
director. The director shall annually submit a staffing report
containing a comparison of the staffing levels for each five-year
period.
(g) On or before January 10 of each year, the office shall provide
to the chairperson of the fiscal committee of each house of the
Legislature and to the Joint Legislative Budget Committee all of the
following information:
(1) The number of personnel years utilized during the prior year
by the Office of Ratepayer Advocates.
(2) The total dollars expended by the Office of Ratepayer
Advocates in the prior year, the estimated total dollars expended in
the current year, and the total dollars proposed for appropriation in
the following budget year.
(3) Workload standards and measures for the Office of Ratepayer
Advocates.
(h) The office shall meet and confer in an informal setting with a
regulated entity prior to issuing a report or pleading to the
commission regarding alleged misconduct, or a violation of a law or a
commission rule or order, raised by the office in a complaint. The
meet and confer process shall be utilized in good faith to reach
agreement on issues raised by the office regarding any regulated
entity in the complaint proceeding.
SEC. 2. Section 1731 of the Public Utilities Code is amended to
read:
1731. (a) The commission shall set an effective date when issuing
an order or decision. The commission may set the effective date of
an order or decision prior to the date of issuance of the order or
decision.
(b) (1) After any order or decision has been made by the
commission, any party to the action or proceeding, including the
Office of Ratepayer Advocates, or any stockholder or bondholder or
other party pecuniarily interested in the public utility affected,
may apply for a rehearing in respect to any matters determined in the
action or proceeding and specified in the application for rehearing.
The commission may grant and hold a rehearing on those matters, if
in its judgment sufficient reason is made to appear. No cause of
action arising out of any order or decision of the commission shall
accrue in any court to any corporation or person unless the
corporation or person has filed an application to the commission for
a rehearing within 30 days after the date of issuance or within 10
days after the date of issuance in the case of an order issued
pursuant to either Article 5 (commencing with Section 816) or Article
6 (commencing with Section 851) of Chapter 4 relating to security
transactions and the transfer or encumbrance of utility property.
(2) The commission shall notify the parties of the issuance of an
order or decision by either mail or electronic transmission.
Notification of the parties may be accomplished by one of the
following methods:
(A) Mailing the order or decision to the parties to the action or
proceeding.
(B) If a party to an action or proceeding consents in advance to
receive notice of any order or decision related to the action or
proceeding by electronic mail address, notification of the party may
be accomplished by transmitting an electronic copy of the official
version of the order or decision to the party if the party has
provided an electronic mail address to the commission.
(C) If a party to an action or proceeding consents in advance to
receive notice of any order or decision related to the action or
proceeding by electronic mail address, notification of the party may
be accomplished by transmitting a link to an Internet Web site where
the official version of the order or decision is readily available to
the party if the party has provided an electronic mail address to
the commission.
(3) For the purposes of this article, "date of issuance" means the
mailing or electronic transmission date that is stamped on the
official version of the order or decision.
(c) No cause of action arising out of any order or decision of the
commission construing, applying, or implementing the provisions of
Chapter 4 of the Statutes of the 2001-02 First Extraordinary Session
that (1) relates to the determination or implementation of the
department's revenue requirements, or the establishment or
implementation of bond or power charges necessary to recover those
revenue requirements, or (2) in the sole determination of the
Department of Water Resources, the expedited review of order or
decision of the commission is necessary or desirable, for the
maintenance of any credit ratings on any bonds or notes of the
department issued pursuant to Division 27 (commencing with Section
80000) of the Water Code or for the department to meet its
obligations with respect to any bonds or notes pursuant to that
division, shall accrue in any court to any corporation or person
unless the corporation or person has filed an application with the
commission for a rehearing within 10 days after the date of issuance
of the order or decision. The Department of Water Resources shall
notify the commission of any determination pursuant to paragraph (2)
of this subdivision prior to the issuance by the commission of any
order or decision construing, applying, or implementing the
provisions of Chapter 4 of the Statutes of the 2001-02 First
Extraordinary Session. The commission shall issue its decision and
order on rehearing within 20 days after the filing of the
application.
SEC. 3. Section 1756 of the Public Utilities Code is amended to
read:
1756. (a) Within 30 days after the commission issues its decision
denying the application for a rehearing, or, if the application was
granted, then within 30 days after the commission issues its decision
on rehearing, or at least 120 days after the application is granted
if no decision on rehearing has been issued, any aggrieved party,
including the Office of Ratepayer Advocates, may petition for a writ
of review in the court of appeal or the Supreme Court for the purpose
of having the lawfulness of the original order or decision or of the
order or decision on rehearing inquired into and determined. If the
writ issues, it shall be made returnable at a time and place
specified by court order and shall direct the commission to certify
its record in the case to the court within the time specified.
(b) The petition for review shall be served upon the executive
director and the general counsel of the commission either personally
or by service at the office of the commission.
(c) With regard to petitions for a writ of review filed pursuant
to subdivision (a) by the Office of Ratepayer Advocates, the office
shall include in its annual written report to the chairperson of the
fiscal committee of each house of the Legislature and to the Joint
Legislative Budget Committee, required by subdivision (g) of Section
309.5, all of the following information:
(1) The number of petitions for writs of review the office filed.
(2) The office's rationale for seeking each writ of review.
(3) The amount of ratepayer dollars the office expended on
petitions.
(d) For purposes of this section, the issuance of a decision or
the granting of an application shall be construed to have occurred on
the date of issuance, as defined in paragraph (3) of subdivision (b)
of Section 1731.
(e) The venue of a petition filed in the court of appeal pursuant
to this section shall be in the judicial district in which the
petitioner resides. If the petitioner is a business, venue shall be
in the judicial district in which the petitioner has its principal
place of business in California.
(f) Any party may seek from the Supreme Court, pursuant to
California Rules of Court, an order transferring related actions to a
single appellate district.
(g) For purposes of this section, review of decisions pertaining
solely to water corporations shall only be by petition for writ of
review in the Supreme Court, except that review of complaint or
enforcement proceedings may be in the court of appeal or the Supreme
Court.
(h) No order or decision arising out of a commission proceeding
under Section 854 shall be reviewable in the court of appeal pursuant
to subdivision (a) if the application for commission authority to
complete the merger or acquisition was filed on or before December
31, 1998, by two telecommunications-related corporations including at
least one which provides local telecommunications service to over
one million California customers. These orders or decisions shall be
reviewed pursuant to the Public Utilities Code in existence on
December 31, 1998.
SEC. 4. Section 1759 of the Public Utilities
Code is amended to read:
1759. (a) No court of this state, except the Supreme Court and
the court of appeal, to the extent specified in this article, shall
have jurisdiction to review, reverse, correct, or annul any order or
decision of the commission or to suspend or delay the execution or
operation thereof, or to enjoin, restrain, or interfere with the
commission in the performance of its official duties, as provided by
law and the rules of court.
(b) The writ of mandamus shall lie from the Supreme Court and from
the court of appeal to the commission in all proper cases.
SEC. 5. SEC. 4. Section 5900 of the
Public Utilities Code is amended to read:
5900. (a) The holder of a state franchise shall comply with the
provisions of Sections 53055, 53055.1, 53055.2, and 53088.2 of the
Government Code, and any other customer service standards pertaining
to the provision of video service established by federal law or
regulation or adopted by subsequent enactment of the Legislature. All
customer service and consumer protection standards under this
section shall be interpreted and applied to accommodate newer or
different technologies while meeting or exceeding the goals of the
standards.
(b) The holder of a state franchise shall comply with provisions
of Section 637.5 of the Penal Code and the privacy standards
contained in Section 551 et seq. of Title 47 of the United States
Code.
(c) The local entity shall enforce all of the customer service and
protection standards of this section with respect to complaints
received from residents within the local entity's jurisdiction, but
it may not adopt or seek to enforce any additional or different
customer service or other performance standards under Section 53055.3
or subdivision (q), (r), or (s) of Section 53088.2 of the Government
Code, or any other authority or provision of law.
(d) The local entity shall, by ordinance or resolution, provide a
schedule of penalties for any material breach by a holder of a state
franchise of this section. No monetary penalties shall be assessed
for a material breach if it is out of the reasonable control of the
holder. Further, no monetary penalties may be imposed prior to
January 1, 2007. Any schedule of monetary penalties adopted pursuant
to this section shall in no event exceed five hundred dollars ($500)
for each day of each material breach, not to exceed one thousand five
hundred dollars ($1,500) for each occurrence of a material breach.
However, if a material breach of this section has occurred, and the
local entity has provided notice and a fine or penalty has been
assessed, and if a subsequent material breach of the same nature
occurs within 12 months, the penalties may be increased by the local
entity to a maximum of one thousand dollars ($1,000) for each day of
each material breach, not to exceed three thousand dollars ($3,000)
for each occurrence of the material breach. If a third or further
material breach of the same nature occurs within those same 12
months, and the local entity has provided notice and a fine or
penalty has been assessed, the penalties may be increased to a
maximum of two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500) for each day of
each material breach, not to exceed seven thousand five hundred
dollars ($7,500) for each occurrence of the material breach. With
respect to video providers subject to a franchise or license, any
monetary penalties assessed under this section shall be reduced
dollar-for-dollar to the extent any liquidated damage or penalty
provision of a current cable television ordinance, franchise
contract, or license agreement imposes a monetary obligation upon a
video provider for the same customer service failures, and no other
monetary damages may be assessed.
(e) The local entity shall give the video service provider written
notice of any alleged material breach of the customer service
standards of this division and allow the video provider at least 30
days from receipt of the notice to remedy the specified material
breach.
(f) A material breach for the purposes of assessing penalties
shall be deemed to have occurred for each day within the jurisdiction
of each local entity, following the expiration of the period
specified in subdivision (e), that any material breach has not been
remedied by the video service provider, irrespective of the number of
customers or subscribers affected.
(g) Any penalty assessed pursuant to this section shall be
remitted to the local entity, which shall submit one-half of the
penalty to the Digital Divide Account established in Section 280.5.
(h) Any interested person may seek judicial review of a decision
of the local entity in a court of appropriate jurisdiction. For this
purpose, a court of law shall conduct a de novo review of any issues
presented.
(i) This section shall not preclude a party affected by this
section from utilizing any judicial remedy available to that party
without regard to this section. Actions taken by a local legislative
body, including a local franchising entity, pursuant to this section
shall not be binding upon a court of law. For this purpose, a court
of law shall conduct de novo review of any issues presented.
(j) For purposes of this section, "material breach" means any
substantial and repeated failure of a video service provider to
comply with service quality and other standards specified in
subdivision (a).
(k) The Office of Ratepayer Advocates shall have authority to
advocate on behalf of video subscribers regarding renewal of a
state-issued franchise and enforcement of this section, and Sections
5890 and 5950. For this purpose, the office shall have access to any
information in the possession of the commission subject to all
restrictions on disclosure of that information that are applicable to
the commission.
