Electrical and gas corporations: political expenditures.
Summary
Under existing law, the Public Utilities Commission has regulatory authority over public utilities, including electrical corporations and gas corporations, as defined. The federal Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 requires every state regulatory authority with respect to each electric utility, as defined, for which it has ratemaking authority, to determine whether to adopt certain federal standards if consistent with otherwise applicable state law. The federal standards prohibit an electric utility from recovering from any person other than the shareholders or other owners of the utility, any direct or indirect expenditure by the electric utility for promotional or political advertising, as defined. This bill would prohibit an electrical and gas corporation that serves more than 3,000,000 customers from spending funds received from ratepayers as authorized revenues on political and public affairs, as defined, related to state or local governments. The bill would require each electrical and gas corporation that serves more than 3,000,000 customers to annually report to the commission all political and public affairs spending for the preceding year and would require the commission to ensure that all political and public affairs spending identified in the annual report is not included in rates paid by the ratepayers of the electrical and gas corporation. Under existing law, a violation of the Public Utilities Act or any order, decision, rule, direction, demand, or requirement of the commission is a crime. Because the provisions of this bill would be a part of the act and require action by the commission to implement its requirements, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program by creating a new crime. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Bill status
failed
3 of 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2010
Committee Review
Jun 2010
Senate Passage
May 2010
Assembly Passage
Governor
Introduced Feb 4, 2010
Last action Nov 30, 2010
Floor votes · Senate May 3, 2010
How they voted
34–0
Passed · 4 other
Total votes 38
May 3, 2010
D
Democratic25
84% Yea
R
Republican13
100% Yea
Vote distribution
All Yea
All Nay
Mixed
No data
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
23
Key actions
4
Committee
7
Jun 28, 2010
Committee
Set, first hearing. Failed passage in committee.
lower
Jun 24, 2010
Lower · Passed
(Heard in committee on June 24.)
lower
Jun 24, 2010
Committee
From committee: Be re-referred to Com. on U. & C. (Ayes 6. Noes 4.) Re-referred to Com. on U. & C.
lower
Jun 17, 2010
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on RULES.
lower
Jun 15, 2010
Lower · Passed
Hearing postponed by committee.
lower
May 3, 2010
Senate · Passed
Senate Vote: pass (34-0-4)
senate
Apr 26, 2010
Upper · Passed
From committee: Be placed on second reading file pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8.
upper
Apr 14, 2010
Committee
From committee: Do pass, but first be re-referred to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 4. Noes 0. Page 3187.) Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
upper
Feb 4, 2010
Introduced
Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.
upper
1 primary · 1 co-sponsor
Sponsors
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about SB 947
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand SB 947. What would you like to know?
Try one of these
i
Maddy answers using official bill text and legislative records. Always verify before sharing.
Sources cited inline