Utility rate refunds: energy crisis litigation: Public Utilities Commission: judicial review.
Summary
Under existing law, the Public Utilities Commission has regulatory authority over public utilities. Existing law authorizes the commission to fix the rates and charges for every public utility, and requires that those rates and charges be just and reasonable. When the commission orders rate refunds to be distributed, existing law requires the commission to require the public utility to pay refunds to all current utility customers, and, when practicable, to prior customers, on an equitable pro rata basis without regard as to whether or not the customer is classifiable as a residential or commercial tenant, landlord, homeowner, business, industrial, educational, governmental, nonprofit, agricultural, or any other type of entity. Existing law establishes the Ratepayer Relief Fund in the State Treasury to benefit electricity and natural gas ratepayers and to fund investigation and litigation costs of the state in pursuing allegations of overcharges and unfair business practices against generators, suppliers, or marketers of electricity or natural gas arising from the energy crisis of 2000–02. Existing law requires that any energy settlement agreement, as defined, entered into by the Attorney General, after reimbursing the Attorney General's litigation and investigation expenses, direct settlement funds to the following purposes in priority order: (1) to reduce ratepayer costs of those utility ratepayers harmed by the actions of the settling parties; and (2) for deposit in the Ratepayer Relief Fund. Existing law authorizes the moneys deposited in the Ratepayer Relief Fund to be appropriated for certain purposes for the benefit of ratepayers. This bill would require the Attorney General or the Public Utilities Commission to enter into an energy settlement agreement solely on a monetary basis and would prohibit the agreement from including nonmonetary compensation in lieu of monetary compensation. The bill would prohibit the commission from distributing or expending the proceeds of claims in any litigation or settlement to obtain ratepayer recovery for the effects of the 2000–02 energy crisis and would require that the proceeds, after reimbursing the commission's litigation and investigation expenses, be deposited into the Ratepayer Relief Fund. The bill would require the moneys in the fund to be appropriated for those purposes for the benefit of ratepayers. The California Constitution provides that the Legislature has plenary power to establish the manner and scope of review of commission action in a court of record. Existing law provides that only the Supreme Court and the court of appeal 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. This bill would authorize an action to enforce the requirements of the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act or the California Public Records Act to be brought against the commission in the superior court.
Bill status
vetoed
4 of 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2015
Committee Review
Sep 2015
Assembly Passage
Jun 2015
Senate Passage
Sep 2015
Vetoed
Oct 2015
Introduced Feb 26, 2015
Vetoed Oct 9, 2015
Floor votes · Senate Sep 11, 2015 · Assembly Jun 1, 2015
How they voted
34–0
Passed · 1 other
Total votes 35
Sep 11, 2015
D
Democratic24
100% Yea
R
Republican11
90% Yea
Vote distribution
All Yea
All Nay
Mixed
No data
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
24
Key actions
6
Committee
9
Amendments
3
Jan 19, 2016
Vetoed
Consideration of Governor's veto stricken from file.
lower
Oct 9, 2015
Vetoed
Vetoed by Governor.
lower
Sep 11, 2015
Senate · Passed
Senate Vote: pass (34-0-1)
senate
Sep 11, 2015
Lower · Passed
Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 79. Noes 0. Page 3145.).
lower
Sep 10, 2015
Introduced
In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending.
lower
Sep 1, 2015
Upper · Passed
Read second time and amended. Ordered to third reading.
upper
Aug 31, 2015
Introduced
From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended. (Ayes 5. Noes 0.) (August 27).
upper
Jul 13, 2015
Committee
In committee: Referred to suspense file.
upper
Jun 30, 2015
Committee
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 10. Noes 0.) (June 30). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
upper
Jun 11, 2015
Committee
Referred to Com. on E., U., & C.
upper
Jun 1, 2015
Assembly · Passed
Assembly Vote: pass (74-0-1)
assembly
May 28, 2015
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 17. Noes 0.) (May 28).
lower
May 20, 2015
Committee
In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file.
lower
Apr 28, 2015
Committee
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 15. Noes 0.) (April 27). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
lower
Mar 16, 2015
Committee
Referred to Com. on U. & C.
lower
Feb 27, 2015
Lower · Passed
From printer. May be heard in committee March 29.
lower
1 primary · 0 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Role
Legislator
Party
State
District
P
Anthony Rendon
DDemocratic
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about AB 895
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand AB 895. 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