Energy: rates.
Do you support it?
Want to know if it passes?
We'll email you when SB 695 moves — a committee vote, a floor vote, or a signature. Nothing else.
Free forever · unsubscribe in one click.
Your answer was recorded either way.
Which district are you in?
Your ZIP is all we need to match you to your own representatives — so we can tell you how they voted on SB 695.
You're tracking SB 695
We'll email you the moment it moves.
SB 695 — Energy: rates.
Last action — Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 337, Statutes of 2009.
No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.
-
✓Introduced
-
✓In Committee
-
✓Passed Senate
-
✓Passed Assembly
-
5To Executive
-
6Enacted
This bill died with 2009-2010 Regular Session. It reached “To Executive” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis. It would have to be reintroduced in the current session to move again.
Summary
(1) Under existing law, the Public Utilities Commission has regulatory authority over public utilities, including electrical corporations and gas corporations, as defined. 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. This bill would prohibit the commission from requiring or permitting an electrical corporation to do any of the following: (A) employ mandatory or default time-variant pricing, as defined, with or without bill protection, as defined, for residential customers prior to January 1, 2013, (B) employ mandatory or default time-variant pricing, without bill protection, for residential customers prior to January 1, 2014, or (C) employ mandatory or default real-time pricing, without bill protection, for residential customers prior to January 1, 2020. The bill would authorize the commission to authorize an electrical corporation to offer residential customers the option of receiving service pursuant to time-variant pricing and to participate in other demand response programs. The bill would require the commission to only approve an electrical corporation's use of default time-variant pricing for residential customers, beginning January 1, 2014, if those residential customers have the option to not receive service pursuant to time-variant pricing and incur no additional charges, as specified, as a result of the exercise of that option. The bill would exempt certain customers from being subject to default time-variant pricing. (2) Existing law requires the commission to establish a program of assistance to low-income electric and gas customers, referred to as the California Alternate Rates for Energy or CARE program, and prohibits the cost to be borne solely by any single class of customer. This bill would require the commission to establish the CARE program to provide assistance to low-income electric and gas customers with annual household incomes that are no greater than 200% of the federal poverty guideline levels, and require that the cost of the program, with respect to electrical corporations, be recovered on an equal cents-per-kilowatthour basis from all classes of customers that were subject to the surcharge that funded the CARE program on January 1, 2008. For a public utility that is both an electrical corporation and a gas corporation, the bill would require that the cost of the program be recovered on an equal cents-per-kilowatthour or per-therm basis from all classes of customers that were subject to the surcharge that funded the CARE program on January 1, 2008. (3) Existing law relative to electrical restructuring requires that the electrical corporations and gas corporations that participate in the CARE program administer low-income energy efficiency and rate assistance programs described in specified statutes, and undertake certain actions in administering specified energy efficiency and weatherization programs. This bill would require that electrical corporations, in administering the specified energy efficiency and weatherization programs, target energy efficiency and solar programs to upper-tier and multifamily customers in a manner that will result in long-term permanent reductions in electricity usage at the dwelling units and develop programs that specifically target nonprofit affordable housing providers, including programs that promote weatherization of existing dwelling units and replacement of inefficient appliances. The bill would require the commission, by not later than December 31, 2020, to ensure that all eligible low-income electricity and gas customers are given the opportunity to participate in low-income energy efficiency programs, including customers occupying apartment houses or similar multiunit residential structures, and would require the commission and electrical corporations and gas corporations to expend all reasonable efforts to coordinate ratepayer-funded programs with other energy conservation and efficiency programs and to obtain additional federal funding to support actions undertaken pursuant to this requirement. (4) Existing law relative to electrical restructuring requires the commission to authorize and facilitate direct transactions between electricity suppliers and retail end-use customers. Existing law requires the commission to designate a baseline quantity of electricity and gas necessary for a significant portion of the reasonable energy needs of the average residential customer, and requires that electrical and gas corporations file rates and charges, to be approved by the commission, providing baseline rates and requires the commission, in establishing baseline rates, to avoid excessive rate increases for residential customers. Existing law, enacted during the energy crisis of 2000–01, authorized the Department of Water Resources, until January 1, 2003, to enter into contracts for the purchase of electricity, and to sell electricity to retail end-use customers and, with specified exceptions, local publicly owned electric utilities, at not more than the department's acquisition costs and to recover those costs through the issuance of bonds to be repaid by ratepayers. That law provides that the department is entitled to recover certain expenses resulting from its purchases and sales of electricity and authorizes the commission to enter into an agreement with the department relative to cost recovery. That law prohibits the commission from increasing the electricity charges in effect on February 1, 2001, for residential customers for existing baseline quantities or usage by those customers of up to 130% of then existing baseline quantities, until the department has recovered the costs of electricity it procured for electrical corporation retail end-use customers. That law also suspends the right of retail end-use customers, other than community choice aggregators and a qualifying direct transaction customer, to acquire service through a direct transaction until the Department of Water Resources no longer supplies electricity under that law. This bill would delete the prohibition that the commission not increase the electricity charges in effect on February 1, 2001, for residential customers for existing baseline quantities or usage by those customers of up to 130% of then existing baseline quantities. The bill would authorize the commission to increase the rates charged residential customers for electricity usage up to 130% of the baseline quantities by the annual percentage change in the Consumer Price Index from the prior year plus 1%, but not less than 3% and not more than 5% per year. This authorization would be subject to the limitation that rates charged residential customers for electricity usage up to the baseline quantities, including any customer charge revenues, not exceed 90% of the system average rate, as defined. The bill would authorize the commission to increase the rates for participants in the CARE program, subject to certain limitations. The bill would delete the existing suspension of direct transactions in the Water Code that was adopted during the energy crisis of 2000–01, and would instead require the commission to authorize direct transactions subject to a reopening schedule that commences immediately and will phase in over a period of not less than 3 years and not more than 5 years, and subject to an annual maximum allowable total kilowatthour limit established, as specified, for each electrical corporation. The bill would continue the suspension of direct transactions except as expressly authorized, until the Legislature, by statute, repeals the suspension or otherwise authorizes direct transactions. (5) Existing law requires the commission to prepare and submit to the Governor and the Legislature a written report on an annual basis before February 1 of each year on the costs of programs and activities conducted by an electrical corporation or gas corporation that has more than a specified number of customers in California. This bill would change the reporting date to April 1 of each year. The bill would require that by May 1, 2010, and by May 1 of each year thereafter, the commission also report to the Governor and Legislature with its recommendations for actions that can be undertaken during the upcoming year to limit utility cost and rate increases, consistent with the state's energy and environmental goals, including the state's goals for reducing emissions of greenhouse gases. The bill would require the commission to annually require electrical and gas corporations to study and report to the commission on measures that they recommend be undertaken to limit costs and rate increases. (6) 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 certain of the provisions of this bill would be a part of the act and because a violation of an order or decision of the commission implementing its requirements would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program by creating a new crime. (7) 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. (8) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Bill Text
- Chaptered 10/11/09 - Chaptered Current pdf October 11, 2009
- Enrolled 09/10/09 - Enrolled pdf September 10, 2009
- Amended 08/17/09 - Amended Assembly pdf August 17, 2009
- Amended 06/24/09 - Amended Assembly pdf June 24, 2009
- Amended 05/28/09 - Amended Senate pdf May 28, 2009
- Amended 04/29/09 - Amended Senate pdf April 29, 2009
- Amended 04/13/09 - Amended Senate pdf April 13, 2009
- Introduced 02/27/09 - Introduced pdf February 27, 2009
- SB695 View text html
Action History
-
Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 337, Statutes of 2009.
-
Approved by Governor.
-
Enrolled. To Governor at 1 p.m.
-
Senate concurs in Assembly amendments. (Ayes 39. Noes 0. Page 2282.) To enrollment.
-
In Senate. To unfinished business.
-
Read third time. Urgency clause adopted. Passed. (Ayes 76. Noes 1. Page 2857.) To Senate.
-
Read second time. To third reading.
-
(Heard in committee on August 19.)
-
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 16. Noes 0.)
-
From committee with author's amendments. Read second time. Amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
-
(Heard in committee on June 29.)
-
From committee: Do pass, but first be re-referred to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 14. Noes 0.) Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
-
(Corrected June 29.)
-
From committee with author's amendments. Read second time. Amended. Re-referred to Com. on U. & C.
-
Set, first hearing. Further hearing to be set.
-
To Com. on U. & C.
-
In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.
-
Read third time. Urgency clause adopted. Passed. (Ayes 37. Noes 0. Page 1103.) To Assembly.
-
Read second time. Amended. To third reading.
-
From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 11. Noes 0. Page 1074.)
-
(Suspense - for vote only.)
-
Set for hearing May 28.
-
Placed on APPR suspense file.
-
Set for hearing May 18.
-
Read second time. Amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
-
From committee: Do pass as amended, but first amend, and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 11. Noes 0. Page 584.)
-
From committee with author's amendments. Read second time. Amended. Re-referred to Com. on E., U., & C.
-
Set for hearing April 21.
-
To Com. on E., U. & C.
-
Read first time.
-
From print. May be acted upon on or after March 30.
-
Introduced. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.
Sponsors
- Kehoe · Primary
- Wright · Cosponsor
Sponsorship breakdown
Export CSV (upgrade) →1 sponsors · 1 co-sponsors · 120 not signed on
Sponsors (1)
- Kehoe
Co-sponsors (1)
- Wright
Not signed on (120)
120 members have not signed on to this bill.
Show all 120 →"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.
Votes
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 37 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Democratic | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 40 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 98% | 0% | 0% | 2% |
How each member voted (41)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Yee | — | Yea |
| Cedillo | — | Yea |
| Cogdill | — | Yea |
| Corbett | — | Yea |
| Ducheny | — | Yea |
| Hancock | — | Yea |
| Hollingsworth | — | Yea |
| Huff | — | Yea |
| Kehoe | — | Yea |
| Leno | — | Yea |
| Liu | — | Yea |
| Lowenthal | — | Yea |
| Negrete | — | Yea |
| Runner | — | Yea |
| McLeod | — | Yea |
| Alquist | — | Yea |
| Ashburn | — | Yea |
| Benoit | — | Yea |
| Dutton | — | Yea |
| Oropeza | — | Yea |
| Pavley | — | Yea |
| Price | — | Yea |
| Romero | — | Yea |
| Steinberg | — | Yea |
| Walters | — | Not Voting |
| Wolk | — | Yea |
| Wright | — | Yea |
| Aanestad | — | Yea |
| Harman | — | Yea |
| Maldonado | — | Yea |
| Simitian | — | Yea |
| Wiggins | — | Yea |
| Wyland | — | Yea |
| Correa | — | Yea |
| Cox | — | Yea |
| DeSaulnier | — | Yea |
| Denham | — | Yea |
| Florez | — | Yea |
| Calderon, Lisa | Democratic | Yea |
| Padilla, Stephen C. | Democratic | Yea |
| Strickland, Tony | Republican | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 82 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| Democratic | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 88 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| % of votes cast | 97% | 1% | 0% | 2% |
How each member voted (91)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Hagman | — | Yea |
| Ammiano | — | Yea |
| Bill | — | Yea |
| Tom | — | Yea |
| Charles | — | Yea |
| Eng | — | Yea |
| Evans | — | Yea |
| Feuer | — | Yea |
| Fuller | — | Yea |
| Furutani | — | Yea |
| De | — | Yea |
| La | — | Yea |
| Torre | — | Yea |
| De | — | Yea |
| Leon | — | Yea |
| Garrick | — | Yea |
| Yamada | — | Yea |
| Fletcher | — | Yea |
| Fong | — | Yea |
| Bonnie | — | Yea |
| Lowenthal | — | Yea |
| V. | — | Yea |
| Manuel | — | Yea |
| Perez | — | Yea |
| John | — | Yea |
| A. | — | Yea |
| Perez | — | Yea |
| Portantino | — | Yea |
| Salas | — | Yea |
| Saldana | — | Yea |
| Audra | — | Yea |
| Carter | — | Yea |
| Gilmore | — | Yea |
| Hall | — | Yea |
| Chesbro | — | Yea |
| Bass | — | Yea |
| Conway | — | Yea |
| Coto | — | Yea |
| Duvall | — | Yea |
| Harkey | — | Not Voting |
| Hernandez | — | Yea |
| Hill | — | Yea |
| Huffman | — | Yea |
| Jeffries | — | Yea |
| Krekorian | — | Yea |
| Lieu | — | Yea |
| Mendoza | — | Yea |
| Miller | — | Yea |
| Monning | — | Yea |
| Nava | — | Yea |
| Ruskin | — | Yea |
| Silva | — | Yea |
| Skinner | — | Yea |
| Solorio | — | Yea |
| Swanson | — | Yea |
| Torres | — | Yea |
| Torrico | — | Yea |
| Villines | — | Yea |
| Adams | — | Yea |
| Anderson | — | Yea |
| Beall | — | Yea |
| Blakeslee | — | Yea |
| Block | — | Yea |
| Blumenfield | — | Yea |
| Brownley | — | Yea |
| Buchanan | — | Not Voting |
| Hayashi | — | Yea |
| Huber | — | Yea |
| Knight | — | Yea |
| Logue | — | Yea |
| Ma | — | Yea |
| Nestande | — | Yea |
| Nielsen | — | Yea |
| Smyth | — | Yea |
| Torlakson | — | Yea |
| Tran | — | Yea |
| Cook | — | Yea |
| Emmerson | — | Yea |
| Davis | — | Yea |
| DeVore | — | Nay |
| Fuentes | — | Yea |
| Galgiani | — | Yea |
| Beth Gaines | — | Yea |
| Bill Berryhill | — | Yea |
| Bill Berryhill | — | Yea |
| Arambula, Joaquin | Democratic | Yea |
| Caballero, Anna M. | Democratic | Yea |
| Calderon, Lisa | Democratic | Yea |
| Jones, Brian W. | Republican | Yea |
| Niello, Roger W. | Republican | Yea |
| Strickland, Tony | Republican | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 19 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Democratic | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 21 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 95% | 0% | 0% | 5% |
How each member voted (22)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Hall | — | Yea |
| Charles | — | Yea |
| De | — | Yea |
| Leon | — | Yea |
| John | — | Yea |
| A. | — | Yea |
| Coto | — | Yea |
| Duvall | — | Yea |
| Perez | — | Yea |
| Audra | — | Yea |
| Harkey | — | Not Voting |
| Skinner | — | Yea |
| Solorio | — | Yea |
| Torlakson | — | Yea |
| Ammiano | — | Yea |
| Hill | — | Yea |
| Miller | — | Yea |
| Conway | — | Yea |
| Davis | — | Yea |
| Fuentes | — | Yea |
| Calderon, Lisa | Democratic | Yea |
| Strickland, Tony | Republican | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 14 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Democratic | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 15 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 94% | 0% | 0% | 6% |
How each member voted (16)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Carter | — | Yea |
| Fuller | — | Yea |
| Tom | — | Yea |
| Fong | — | Yea |
| Krekorian | — | Yea |
| Blumenfield | — | Not Voting |
| Duvall | — | Yea |
| Smyth | — | Yea |
| Swanson | — | Yea |
| Buchanan | — | Yea |
| Huffman | — | Yea |
| Skinner | — | Yea |
| Villines | — | Yea |
| Fuentes | — | Yea |
| Bill Berryhill | — | Yea |
| Caballero, Anna M. | Democratic | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 35 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Democratic | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 38 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| % of votes cast | 95% | 0% | 0% | 5% |
How each member voted (40)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Yee | — | Yea |
| Cedillo | — | Yea |
| Cogdill | — | Yea |
| Hancock | — | Yea |
| Harman | — | Yea |
| Lowenthal | — | Yea |
| Negrete | — | Yea |
| Runner | — | Yea |
| Hollingsworth | — | Yea |
| Huff | — | Yea |
| Ashburn | — | Yea |
| Benoit | — | Yea |
| Ducheny | — | Yea |
| Dutton | — | Yea |
| Liu | — | Yea |
| McLeod | — | Yea |
| Oropeza | — | Yea |
| Romero | — | Yea |
| Steinberg | — | Yea |
| Wiggins | — | Yea |
| Wolk | — | Yea |
| Wright | — | Yea |
| Aanestad | — | Yea |
| Alquist | — | Yea |
| Kehoe | — | Yea |
| Leno | — | Yea |
| Maldonado | — | Yea |
| Pavley | — | Yea |
| Simitian | — | Yea |
| Walters | — | Not Voting |
| Wyland | — | Yea |
| Corbett | — | Yea |
| Correa | — | Yea |
| Cox | — | Yea |
| DeSaulnier | — | Yea |
| Denham | — | Yea |
| Florez | — | Not Voting |
| Calderon, Lisa | Democratic | Yea |
| Padilla, Stephen C. | Democratic | Yea |
| Strickland, Tony | Republican | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 11 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Total | 11 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| % of votes cast | 85% | 0% | 0% | 15% |
How each member voted (13)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Yee | — | Yea |
| Wyland | — | Yea |
| Runner | — | Yea |
| Hancock | — | Yea |
| Corbett | — | Yea |
| Kehoe | — | Yea |
| Leno | — | Yea |
| Oropeza | — | Yea |
| Wolk | — | Not Voting |
| Walters | — | Not Voting |
| Cox | — | Yea |
| DeSaulnier | — | Yea |
| Denham | — | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 13 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 13 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (13)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Yee | — | Yea |
| Wyland | — | Yea |
| Runner | — | Yea |
| Hancock | — | Yea |
| Kehoe | — | Yea |
| Leno | — | Yea |
| Walters | — | Yea |
| Oropeza | — | Yea |
| Wolk | — | Yea |
| Corbett | — | Yea |
| Cox | — | Yea |
| DeSaulnier | — | Yea |
| Denham | — | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Democratic | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Unaffiliated | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 11 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (11)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Kehoe | — | Yea |
| Corbett | — | Yea |
| Wright | — | Yea |
| Benoit | — | Yea |
| Simitian | — | Yea |
| Wiggins | — | Yea |
| Cox | — | Yea |
| Calderon, Lisa | Democratic | Yea |
| Lowenthal, Josh | Democratic | Yea |
| Padilla, Stephen C. | Democratic | Yea |
| Strickland, Tony | Republican | Yea |
Subjects
Frequently asked questions
- What does SB 695 do?
- (1) Under existing law, the Public Utilities Commission has regulatory authority over public utilities, including electrical corporations and gas corporations, as defined. 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. This bill would prohibit the commission from requiring or permitting an electrical corporation to do any of the following: (A) employ mandatory or default time-variant pricing, as defined, with or without bill protection, as defined, for residential customers prior to January 1, 2013, (B) employ mandatory or default time-variant pricing, without bill protection, for residential customers prior to January 1, 2014, or (C) employ mandatory or default real-time pricing, without bill protection, for residential customers prior to January 1, 2020. The bill would authorize the commission to authorize an electrical corporation to offer residential customers the option of receiving service pursuant to time-variant pricing and to participate in other demand response programs. The bill would require the commission to only approve an electrical corporation's use of default time-variant pricing for residential customers, beginning January 1, 2014, if those residential customers have the option to not receive service pursuant to time-variant pricing and incur no additional charges, as specified, as a result of the exercise of that option. The bill would exempt certain customers from being subject to default time-variant pricing. (2) Existing law requires the commission to establish a program of assistance to low-income electric and gas customers, referred to as the California Alternate Rates for Energy or CARE program, and prohibits the cost to be borne solely by any single class of customer. This bill would require the commission to establish the CARE program to provide assistance to low-income electric and gas customers with annual household incomes that are no greater than 200% of the federal poverty guideline levels, and require that the cost of the program, with respect to electrical corporations, be recovered on an equal cents-per-kilowatthour basis from all classes of customers that were subject to the surcharge that funded the CARE program on January 1, 2008. For a public utility that is both an electrical corporation and a gas corporation, the bill would require that the cost of the program be recovered on an equal cents-per-kilowatthour or per-therm basis from all classes of customers that were subject to the surcharge that funded the CARE program on January 1, 2008. (3) Existing law relative to electrical restructuring requires that the electrical corporations and gas corporations that participate in the CARE program administer low-income energy efficiency and rate assistance programs described in specified statutes, and undertake certain actions in administering specified energy efficiency and weatherization programs. This bill would require that electrical corporations, in administering the specified energy efficiency and weatherization programs, target energy efficiency and solar programs to upper-tier and multifamily customers in a manner that will result in long-term permanent reductions in electricity usage at the dwelling units and develop programs that specifically target nonprofit affordable housing providers, including programs that promote weatherization of existing dwelling units and replacement of inefficient appliances. The bill would require the commission, by not later than December 31, 2020, to ensure that all eligible low-income electricity and gas customers are given the opportunity to participate in low-income energy efficiency programs, including customers occupying apartment houses or similar multiunit residential structures, and would require the commission and electrical corporations and gas corporations to expend all reasonable efforts to coordinate ratepayer-funded programs with other energy conservation and efficiency programs and to obtain additional federal funding to support actions undertaken pursuant to this requirement. (4) Existing law relative to electrical restructuring requires the commission to authorize and facilitate direct transactions between electricity suppliers and retail end-use customers. Existing law requires the commission to designate a baseline quantity of electricity and gas necessary for a significant portion of the reasonable energy needs of the average residential customer, and requires that electrical and gas corporations file rates and charges, to be approved by the commission, providing baseline rates and requires the commission, in establishing baseline rates, to avoid excessive rate increases for residential customers. Existing law, enacted during the energy crisis of 2000–01, authorized the Department of Water Resources, until January 1, 2003, to enter into contracts for the purchase of electricity, and to sell electricity to retail end-use customers and, with specified exceptions, local publicly owned electric utilities, at not more than the department's acquisition costs and to recover those costs through the issuance of bonds to be repaid by ratepayers. That law provides that the department is entitled to recover certain expenses resulting from its purchases and sales of electricity and authorizes the commission to enter into an agreement with the department relative to cost recovery. That law prohibits the commission from increasing the electricity charges in effect on February 1, 2001, for residential customers for existing baseline quantities or usage by those customers of up to 130% of then existing baseline quantities, until the department has recovered the costs of electricity it procured for electrical corporation retail end-use customers. That law also suspends the right of retail end-use customers, other than community choice aggregators and a qualifying direct transaction customer, to acquire service through a direct transaction until the Department of Water Resources no longer supplies electricity under that law. This bill would delete the prohibition that the commission not increase the electricity charges in effect on February 1, 2001, for residential customers for existing baseline quantities or usage by those customers of up to 130% of then existing baseline quantities. The bill would authorize the commission to increase the rates charged residential customers for electricity usage up to 130% of the baseline quantities by the annual percentage change in the Consumer Price Index from the prior year plus 1%, but not less than 3% and not more than 5% per year. This authorization would be subject to the limitation that rates charged residential customers for electricity usage up to the baseline quantities, including any customer charge revenues, not exceed 90% of the system average rate, as defined. The bill would authorize the commission to increase the rates for participants in the CARE program, subject to certain limitations. The bill would delete the existing suspension of direct transactions in the Water Code that was adopted during the energy crisis of 2000–01, and would instead require the commission to authorize direct transactions subject to a reopening schedule that commences immediately and will phase in over a period of not less than 3 years and not more than 5 years, and subject to an annual maximum allowable total kilowatthour limit established, as specified, for each electrical corporation. The bill would continue the suspension of direct transactions except as expressly authorized, until the Legislature, by statute, repeals the suspension or otherwise authorizes direct transactions. (5) Existing law requires the commission to prepare and submit to the Governor and the Legislature a written report on an annual basis before February 1 of each year on the costs of programs and activities conducted by an electrical corporation or gas corporation that has more than a specified number of customers in California. This bill would change the reporting date to April 1 of each year. The bill would require that by May 1, 2010, and by May 1 of each year thereafter, the commission also report to the Governor and Legislature with its recommendations for actions that can be undertaken during the upcoming year to limit utility cost and rate increases, consistent with the state's energy and environmental goals, including the state's goals for reducing emissions of greenhouse gases. The bill would require the commission to annually require electrical and gas corporations to study and report to the commission on measures that they recommend be undertaken to limit costs and rate increases. (6) 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 certain of the provisions of this bill would be a part of the act and because a violation of an order or decision of the commission implementing its requirements would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program by creating a new crime. (7) 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. (8) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
- Who sponsors SB 695?
- SB 695 is sponsored by Kehoe and Wright.
- What is the current status of SB 695?
- This bill died with 2009-2010 Regular Session. It reached “To Executive” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
- Where can I track SB 695?
- Track SB 695 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.
Make your voice heard on SB 695
Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.
Stay ahead of SB 695
Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously
One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.
Track this bill →