Public utilities: judicial review.
- Extends the deadline for challenging Public Utilities Commission decisions from 30 to 90 days.
- Prohibits utility companies from charging customers for costs of challenging commission decisions.
- Requires courts to presume commission decisions are unlawful when they deviate from judge recommendations.
- Mandates utility companies to track and report all legal challenge expenses.
Assembly Member Bauer-Kahan's public utilities reform measure reconfigures the judicial review process for California Public Utilities Commission decisions while establishing new cost recovery limitations for utilities. The legislation extends the timeframe for filing petitions for judicial review from 30 to 90 days after commission decisions on rehearings, providing parties additional time to challenge regulatory determinations.
The bill introduces a rebuttable presumption that commission decisions substantially deviating from administrative law judges' proposed decisions are arbitrary and unlawful. Under this provision, the commission must demonstrate that such deviations were necessary for compliance with state or federal law. Additionally, the measure prohibits electrical and gas corporations from recovering costs associated with seeking judicial review of commission decisions through ratepayer fees. Utilities must track these expenses, with the commission reviewing compliance during rate cases or other proceedings.
The legislation maintains existing venue requirements for judicial review, with petitions filed in the court of appeal district where individual petitioners reside or where business petitioners maintain their principal California operations. Cases involving water corporations remain reviewable only by the Supreme Court, except for complaint or enforcement proceedings which may be heard in either the court of appeal or Supreme Court. These modifications preserve the established framework for utility oversight while adjusting procedural timelines and cost allocation rules.
 Joaquin ArambulaD Assemblymember | Committee Member |  Not Contacted | |
 Rebecca Bauer-KahanD Assemblymember | Bill Author | Not Contacted | |
 Buffy WicksD Assemblymember | Committee Member | Not Contacted | |
 Lisa CalderonD Assemblymember | Committee Member | Not Contacted | |
 Mike FongD Assemblymember | Committee Member | Not Contacted |
Email the authors or create an email template to send to all relevant legislators.
Introduced By
Latest Voting History
| Ayes | Noes | NVR | Total | Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 9 | 3 | 0 | 12 | PASS |
- Extends the deadline for challenging Public Utilities Commission decisions from 30 to 90 days.
- Prohibits utility companies from charging customers for costs of challenging commission decisions.
- Requires courts to presume commission decisions are unlawful when they deviate from judge recommendations.
- Mandates utility companies to track and report all legal challenge expenses.
Email the authors or create an email template to send to all relevant legislators.
Introduced By
Assembly Member Bauer-Kahan's public utilities reform measure reconfigures the judicial review process for California Public Utilities Commission decisions while establishing new cost recovery limitations for utilities. The legislation extends the timeframe for filing petitions for judicial review from 30 to 90 days after commission decisions on rehearings, providing parties additional time to challenge regulatory determinations.
The bill introduces a rebuttable presumption that commission decisions substantially deviating from administrative law judges' proposed decisions are arbitrary and unlawful. Under this provision, the commission must demonstrate that such deviations were necessary for compliance with state or federal law. Additionally, the measure prohibits electrical and gas corporations from recovering costs associated with seeking judicial review of commission decisions through ratepayer fees. Utilities must track these expenses, with the commission reviewing compliance during rate cases or other proceedings.
The legislation maintains existing venue requirements for judicial review, with petitions filed in the court of appeal district where individual petitioners reside or where business petitioners maintain their principal California operations. Cases involving water corporations remain reviewable only by the Supreme Court, except for complaint or enforcement proceedings which may be heard in either the court of appeal or Supreme Court. These modifications preserve the established framework for utility oversight while adjusting procedural timelines and cost allocation rules.
Latest Voting History
| Ayes | Noes | NVR | Total | Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 9 | 3 | 0 | 12 | PASS |
Joaquin ArambulaD Assemblymember | Committee Member | Not Contacted | |
Rebecca Bauer-KahanD Assemblymember | Bill Author | Not Contacted | |
Buffy WicksD Assemblymember | Committee Member | Not Contacted | |
Lisa CalderonD Assemblymember | Committee Member | Not Contacted | |
Mike FongD Assemblymember | Committee Member | Not Contacted |