Telecommunications: universal service programs: California Advanced Services Fund.
Do you support it?
Want to know if it passes?
We'll email you when AB 1299 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 AB 1299.
You're tracking AB 1299
We'll email you the moment it moves.
AB 1299 — Telecommunications: universal service programs: California Advanced Services Fund.
Last action — Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 507, Statutes of 2013.
No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.
-
✓Introduced
-
✓In Committee
-
✓Passed Assembly
-
✓Passed Senate
-
✓To Executive
-
6Enacted
This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced February 22, 2013. Enacted.
Prognosis
Where this bill stands today.
Odds of enactment
HighHow often bills like it became law.
-
Enacted
Current position in the legislative process.
-
1 sponsor
1 primary, 0 co-sponsors signed on.
-
Cleared a recorded vote
Passed 8 recorded votes so far.
Prognosis reads this bill's own signals — stage, sponsorship breadth, committee status, recorded votes and cross-state momentum. Odds come from a model trained on which bills have become law.
Summary
Existing law, the federal Telecommunications Act of 1996, establishes a program of cooperative federalism for the regulation of telecommunications to attain the goal of local competition, while implementing specific, predictable, and sufficient federal and state mechanisms to preserve and advance universal service, consistent with certain universal service principles. The universal service principles include the principle that consumers in all regions of the nation, including low-income consumers and those in rural, insular, and high-cost areas, should have access to telecommunications and information services, including interexchange services and advanced telecommunications and information services, that are reasonably comparable to those services provided in urban areas and that are available at rates that are reasonably comparable to rates charged for similar services in urban areas. The act authorizes each state to adopt regulations to provide for additional definitions and standards to preserve and advance universal service within the state, only to the extent that they adopt additional specific, predictable, and sufficient mechanisms that do not rely on or burden federal universal service support mechanisms. Under existing law, the Public Utilities Commission has regulatory authority over public utilities, including telephone corporations, as defined. Existing law establishes the California Advanced Services Fund (CASF) in the State Treasury and requires that moneys in those funds are the proceeds of rates and are held in trust for the benefit of ratepayers and to compensate telephone corporations for their costs of providing universal service and may be expended only to accomplish specified telecommunications universal service programs, upon appropriation in the annual Budget Act or upon supplemental appropriation. Existing law requires the commission to develop, implement, and administer the CASF to encourage deployment of high-quality advanced communications services to all Californians that will promote economic growth, job creation, and substantial social benefits of advanced information and communications technologies, as provided in specified decisions of the commission and in the CASF statute. Existing law establishes 3 accounts, the Broadband Infrastructure Grant Account, the Rural and Urban Regional Broadband Consortia Grant Account, and the Broadband Infrastructure Revolving Loan Account within the CASF. Existing law prohibits the commission from collecting, before January 1, 2011, more than $100,000,000, for deposit into the CASF through a specified surcharge authorized by the commission. Existing law authorizes the commission to collect an additional sum not to exceed $125,000,000, after January 1, 2011, for a sum total of moneys collected through the surcharge not to exceed $225,000,000. Existing law authorizes the commission to collect the additional sum through the 2015 calendar year. Existing law requires that of the moneys collected after January 1, 2011, $100,000,000 is to be deposited into the Broadband Infrastructure Grant Account, $10,000,000 is to be deposited into the Rural and Urban Regional Broadband Consortia Grant Account and used for specified purposes, and $15,000,000 is to be deposited into the Broadband Infrastructure Revolving Loan Account and used for specified purposes. This bill would establish the Broadband Public Housing Account within the CASF and would authorize the commission to transfer $20,000,000 from the Broadband Infrastructure Grant Account and $5,000,000 from the Broadband Revolving Loan Account to the Broadband Public Housing Account if the commission is otherwise authorized to collect funds for purposes of the CASF in excess of the $225,000,000 the commission is authorized to collect through December 31, 2015, under existing law. The bill would authorize not more than $20,000,000 from the Broadband Public Housing Account be available for grants and loans to a publicly supported community, as defined, to finance a project to connect a broadband network to that publicly supported community. The bill would authorize not more than $5,000,000 from the Broadband Public Housing Account be available for grants and loans to a publicly supported community to support programs designed to increase adoption rates for broadband services for residents of that publicly supported community. The bill would require the commission, in reviewing a project application to consider the availability of other funding sources for that project, any financial contribution from the broadband service provider to the project, the availability of any other public or private broadband adoption or deployment program, including tax credits and other incentives, and whether the applicant has sought funding from, or participated in, any reasonably available program. The bill would authorize the commission to require an applicant to provide match funding, and prohibit the commission from denying funding for a project solely because the applicant is receiving funding from another source. This bill would incorporate additional changes in Section 281 of the Public Utilities Code proposed in SB 740, that would become operative only if SB 740 and this bill are both chaptered and become effective on or before January 1, 2014, and this bill is chaptered last. The provisions of the bill would become operative only if this bill and SB 740 of the 2013–14 Regular Session are both enacted and become effective on or before January 1, 2014.
Bill Text
- Chaptered 10/03/13 - Chaptered Current pdf October 03, 2013
- Enrolled 09/20/13 - Enrolled pdf September 20, 2013
- Amended 09/06/13 - Amended Senate pdf September 06, 2013
- Amended 09/04/13 - Amended Senate pdf September 04, 2013
- Amended 07/10/13 - Amended Senate pdf July 10, 2013
- Amended 04/25/13 - Amended Assembly pdf April 25, 2013
- Introduced 02/22/13 - Introduced pdf February 22, 2013
- AB1299 View text html
Action History
-
Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 507, Statutes of 2013.
-
Approved by the Governor.
-
Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 4:30 p.m.
-
Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 55. Noes 18. Page 3304.).
-
In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending.
-
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 26. Noes 11. Page 2356.).
-
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
-
Read third time and amended. Ordered to second reading.
-
Read second time and amended. Ordered to third reading.
-
From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 5. Noes 2.) (August 30).
-
In committee: Placed on APPR. suspense file.
-
Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
-
From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 8. Noes 2.) (July 2).
-
Referred to Com. on E., U., & C.
-
In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.
-
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 58. Noes 17. Page 1707.)
-
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
-
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 13. Noes 4.) .
-
In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file.
-
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 13. Noes 1.) (April 29). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
-
Re-referred to Com. on U. & C.
-
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on U. & C. Read second time and amended.
-
In committee: Set, second hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author.
-
In committee: Set, first hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author.
-
Referred to Com. on U. & C.
-
Read first time.
-
From printer. May be heard in committee March 26.
-
Introduced. To print.
Sponsors
- Bradford · Primary
Sponsorship breakdown
Export CSV (upgrade) →1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on · 6 voted No
Sponsors (1)
- Bradford
Co-sponsors (0)
None.
Not signed on (121)
121 members have not signed on to this bill.
Show all 121 →"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 | 51 | 15 | 0 | 5 |
| Democratic | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 55 | 18 | 0 | 5 |
| % of votes cast | 71% | 23% | 0% | 6% |
How each member voted (78)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Bradford | — | Yea |
| Brown | — | Yea |
| Jones-Sawyer | — | Yea |
| Logue | — | Nay |
| Maienschein | — | Nay |
| Mansoor | — | Nay |
| Skinner | — | Yea |
| Waldron | — | Nay |
| Gordon | — | Yea |
| Campos | — | Yea |
| Chau | — | Yea |
| Chesbro | — | Yea |
| Chávez | — | Nay |
| Conway | — | Not Voting |
| Cooley | — | Yea |
| Dickinson | — | Yea |
| Bonilla | — | Yea |
| Frazier | — | Not Voting |
| Hall | — | Yea |
| Harkey | — | Nay |
| Bocanegra | — | Yea |
| Levine | — | Yea |
| John A. Pérez | — | Yea |
| Salas | — | Yea |
| Linder | — | Nay |
| Donnelly | — | Nay |
| Medina | — | Yea |
| Allen | — | Nay |
| Melendez | — | Nay |
| Morrell | — | Nay |
| Mullin | — | Yea |
| Nestande | — | Not Voting |
| Olsen | — | Nay |
| Pan | — | Yea |
| Perea | — | Yea |
| Quirk | — | Yea |
| Achadjian | — | Yea |
| Alejo | — | Yea |
| Ammiano | — | Yea |
| Bigelow | — | Not Voting |
| Bloom | — | Yea |
| Rendon | — | Yea |
| Ting | — | Yea |
| Wagner | — | Nay |
| Weber | — | Yea |
| Wieckowski | — | Yea |
| Wilk | — | Not Voting |
| Williams | — | Yea |
| Gorell | — | Yea |
| Lowenthal | — | Yea |
| Holden | — | Yea |
| Garcia | — | Yea |
| Gray | — | Yea |
| Atkins | — | Yea |
| Fong | — | Yea |
| Mitchell | — | Yea |
| Buchanan | — | Yea |
| Daly | — | Yea |
| Nazarian | — | Yea |
| Eggman | — | Yea |
| Fox | — | Yea |
| Gatto | — | Yea |
| Yamada | — | Yea |
| Gomez | — | Yea |
| Hagman | — | Nay |
| Beth Gaines | — | Nay |
| Jim Patterson | — | Yea |
| Lorena Gonzalez | — | Yea |
| Mark Stone | — | Yea |
| Roger Hernández | — | Yea |
| V. Manuel Pérez | — | Yea |
| Bonta, Mia | Democratic | Yea |
| Calderon, Lisa | Democratic | Yea |
| Muratsuchi, Al | Democratic | Yea |
| Quirk-Silva, Sharon | Democratic | Yea |
| Dahle, Megan | Republican | Nay |
| Grove, Shannon | Republican | Nay |
| Jones, Brian W. | Republican | Nay |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 23 | 11 | 0 | 2 |
| Democratic | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 26 | 11 | 0 | 2 |
| % of votes cast | 67% | 28% | 0% | 5% |
How each member voted (39)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Anderson | — | Nay |
| Block | — | Yea |
| Hueso | — | Yea |
| Huff | — | Nay |
| Lara | — | Yea |
| Leno | — | Yea |
| Monning | — | Yea |
| Nielsen | — | Nay |
| Roth | — | Yea |
| Steinberg | — | Yea |
| Torres | — | Yea |
| Wyland | — | Nay |
| Emmerson | — | Nay |
| Correa | — | Not Voting |
| DeSaulnier | — | Yea |
| Hernandez | — | Yea |
| Liu | — | Yea |
| Beall | — | Yea |
| Wright | — | Yea |
| De León | — | Yea |
| Cannella | — | Not Voting |
| Evans | — | Yea |
| Corbett | — | Yea |
| Fuller | — | Nay |
| Galgiani | — | Yea |
| Hill | — | Yea |
| Knight | — | Nay |
| Lieu | — | Yea |
| Pavley | — | Yea |
| Vidak | — | Nay |
| Walters | — | Nay |
| Wolk | — | Yea |
| Yee | — | Yea |
| Hancock | — | Yea |
| Beth Gaines | — | Nay |
| Bill Berryhill | — | Nay |
| Calderon, Lisa | Democratic | Yea |
| Jackson, Corey A. | Democratic | Yea |
| Padilla, Stephen C. | Democratic | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 4 | 2 | 0 | 0 |
| Democratic | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 5 | 2 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 71% | 29% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (7)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Hill | — | Yea |
| Steinberg | — | Yea |
| De León | — | Yea |
| Lara | — | Yea |
| Walters | — | Nay |
| Beth Gaines | — | Nay |
| Padilla, Stephen C. | Democratic | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Democratic | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Total | 6 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 86% | 0% | 0% | 14% |
How each member voted (7)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Hill | — | Yea |
| Lara | — | Yea |
| Steinberg | — | Yea |
| Walters | — | Yea |
| De León | — | Yea |
| Beth Gaines | — | Yea |
| Padilla, Stephen C. | Democratic | Not Voting |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 7 | 2 | 0 | 1 |
| Democratic | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 8 | 2 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 73% | 18% | 0% | 9% |
How each member voted (11)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Wright | — | Yea |
| De León | — | Yea |
| Fuller | — | Nay |
| Cannella | — | Not Voting |
| Hill | — | Yea |
| Knight | — | Nay |
| Corbett | — | Yea |
| DeSaulnier | — | Yea |
| Pavley | — | Yea |
| Wolk | — | Yea |
| Padilla, Stephen C. | Democratic | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 51 | 13 | 0 | 4 |
| Democratic | 6 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 1 | 3 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 58 | 17 | 0 | 4 |
| % of votes cast | 73% | 22% | 0% | 5% |
How each member voted (79)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Alejo | — | Yea |
| Bloom | — | Not Voting |
| Blumenfield | — | Yea |
| Bradford | — | Yea |
| Brown | — | Yea |
| Buchanan | — | Yea |
| Harkey | — | Nay |
| Levine | — | Yea |
| Linder | — | Yea |
| Maienschein | — | Nay |
| Mansoor | — | Nay |
| Nazarian | — | Yea |
| Olsen | — | Nay |
| Perea | — | Yea |
| Rendon | — | Yea |
| Ting | — | Yea |
| Wilk | — | Not Voting |
| Daly | — | Yea |
| Dickinson | — | Yea |
| Gomez | — | Yea |
| Gorell | — | Yea |
| Stone | — | Yea |
| Hagman | — | Yea |
| Lowenthal | — | Yea |
| Gray | — | Yea |
| Atkins | — | Yea |
| Mitchell | — | Yea |
| Skinner | — | Yea |
| Campos | — | Yea |
| Chau | — | Yea |
| Bonilla | — | Yea |
| Gatto | — | Yea |
| Gonzalez | — | Yea |
| Hall | — | Yea |
| Bocanegra | — | Yea |
| Holden | — | Not Voting |
| John A. Pérez | — | Yea |
| Jones-Sawyer | — | Yea |
| Salas | — | Yea |
| Logue | — | Nay |
| Chesbro | — | Yea |
| Medina | — | Yea |
| Melendez | — | Nay |
| Morrell | — | Nay |
| Mullin | — | Yea |
| Nestande | — | Not Voting |
| Pan | — | Yea |
| Quirk | — | Yea |
| Chávez | — | Yea |
| Conway | — | Nay |
| Cooley | — | Yea |
| Achadjian | — | Yea |
| Ammiano | — | Yea |
| Bigelow | — | Nay |
| Donnelly | — | Nay |
| Eggman | — | Yea |
| Wagner | — | Nay |
| Waldron | — | Nay |
| Weber | — | Yea |
| Wieckowski | — | Yea |
| Williams | — | Yea |
| Fox | — | Yea |
| Frazier | — | Yea |
| Yamada | — | Yea |
| Gordon | — | Yea |
| Beth Gaines | — | Nay |
| Roger Hernández | — | Yea |
| V. Manuel Pérez | — | Yea |
| Allen, Benjamin | Democratic | Nay |
| Bonta, Mia | Democratic | Yea |
| Calderon, Lisa | Democratic | Yea |
| Fong, Mike | Democratic | Yea |
| Garcia, Robert | Democratic | Yea |
| Muratsuchi, Al | Democratic | Yea |
| Quirk-Silva, Sharon | Democratic | Yea |
| Dahle, Megan | Republican | Nay |
| Grove, Shannon | Republican | Nay |
| Jones, Brian W. | Republican | Nay |
| Patterson, Joe | Republican | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 12 | 4 | 0 | 0 |
| Democratic | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 13 | 4 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 76% | 24% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (17)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Ammiano | — | Yea |
| Bigelow | — | Nay |
| Bradford | — | Yea |
| Harkey | — | Nay |
| Wagner | — | Nay |
| Gatto | — | Yea |
| Bocanegra | — | Yea |
| Hall | — | Yea |
| Campos | — | Yea |
| Linder | — | Yea |
| Donnelly | — | Nay |
| Pan | — | Yea |
| Quirk | — | Yea |
| Weber | — | Yea |
| Eggman | — | Yea |
| Gomez | — | Yea |
| Calderon, Lisa | Democratic | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 10 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Democratic | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 13 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 87% | 7% | 0% | 7% |
How each member voted (15)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Bradford | — | Yea |
| Buchanan | — | Yea |
| Bonilla | — | Yea |
| Chávez | — | Yea |
| Quirk | — | Yea |
| Rendon | — | Yea |
| Skinner | — | Yea |
| Williams | — | Yea |
| Gorell | — | Yea |
| Beth Gaines | — | Nay |
| Roger Hernández | — | Yea |
| Fong, Mike | Democratic | Yea |
| Garcia, Robert | Democratic | Yea |
| Jones, Brian W. | Republican | Not Voting |
| Patterson, Joe | Republican | Yea |
Subjects
Frequently asked questions
- What does AB 1299 do?
- Existing law, the federal Telecommunications Act of 1996, establishes a program of cooperative federalism for the regulation of telecommunications to attain the goal of local competition, while implementing specific, predictable, and sufficient federal and state mechanisms to preserve and advance universal service, consistent with certain universal service principles. The universal service principles include the principle that consumers in all regions of the nation, including low-income consumers and those in rural, insular, and high-cost areas, should have access to telecommunications and information services, including interexchange services and advanced telecommunications and information services, that are reasonably comparable to those services provided in urban areas and that are available at rates that are reasonably comparable to rates charged for similar services in urban areas. The act authorizes each state to adopt regulations to provide for additional definitions and standards to preserve and advance universal service within the state, only to the extent that they adopt additional specific, predictable, and sufficient mechanisms that do not rely on or burden federal universal service support mechanisms. Under existing law, the Public Utilities Commission has regulatory authority over public utilities, including telephone corporations, as defined. Existing law establishes the California Advanced Services Fund (CASF) in the State Treasury and requires that moneys in those funds are the proceeds of rates and are held in trust for the benefit of ratepayers and to compensate telephone corporations for their costs of providing universal service and may be expended only to accomplish specified telecommunications universal service programs, upon appropriation in the annual Budget Act or upon supplemental appropriation. Existing law requires the commission to develop, implement, and administer the CASF to encourage deployment of high-quality advanced communications services to all Californians that will promote economic growth, job creation, and substantial social benefits of advanced information and communications technologies, as provided in specified decisions of the commission and in the CASF statute. Existing law establishes 3 accounts, the Broadband Infrastructure Grant Account, the Rural and Urban Regional Broadband Consortia Grant Account, and the Broadband Infrastructure Revolving Loan Account within the CASF. Existing law prohibits the commission from collecting, before January 1, 2011, more than $100,000,000, for deposit into the CASF through a specified surcharge authorized by the commission. Existing law authorizes the commission to collect an additional sum not to exceed $125,000,000, after January 1, 2011, for a sum total of moneys collected through the surcharge not to exceed $225,000,000. Existing law authorizes the commission to collect the additional sum through the 2015 calendar year. Existing law requires that of the moneys collected after January 1, 2011, $100,000,000 is to be deposited into the Broadband Infrastructure Grant Account, $10,000,000 is to be deposited into the Rural and Urban Regional Broadband Consortia Grant Account and used for specified purposes, and $15,000,000 is to be deposited into the Broadband Infrastructure Revolving Loan Account and used for specified purposes. This bill would establish the Broadband Public Housing Account within the CASF and would authorize the commission to transfer $20,000,000 from the Broadband Infrastructure Grant Account and $5,000,000 from the Broadband Revolving Loan Account to the Broadband Public Housing Account if the commission is otherwise authorized to collect funds for purposes of the CASF in excess of the $225,000,000 the commission is authorized to collect through December 31, 2015, under existing law. The bill would authorize not more than $20,000,000 from the Broadband Public Housing Account be available for grants and loans to a publicly supported community, as defined, to finance a project to connect a broadband network to that publicly supported community. The bill would authorize not more than $5,000,000 from the Broadband Public Housing Account be available for grants and loans to a publicly supported community to support programs designed to increase adoption rates for broadband services for residents of that publicly supported community. The bill would require the commission, in reviewing a project application to consider the availability of other funding sources for that project, any financial contribution from the broadband service provider to the project, the availability of any other public or private broadband adoption or deployment program, including tax credits and other incentives, and whether the applicant has sought funding from, or participated in, any reasonably available program. The bill would authorize the commission to require an applicant to provide match funding, and prohibit the commission from denying funding for a project solely because the applicant is receiving funding from another source. This bill would incorporate additional changes in Section 281 of the Public Utilities Code proposed in SB 740, that would become operative only if SB 740 and this bill are both chaptered and become effective on or before January 1, 2014, and this bill is chaptered last. The provisions of the bill would become operative only if this bill and SB 740 of the 2013–14 Regular Session are both enacted and become effective on or before January 1, 2014.
- Who sponsors AB 1299?
- AB 1299 is sponsored by Bradford.
- What is the current status of AB 1299?
- This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced February 22, 2013. Enacted.
- Where can I track AB 1299?
- Track AB 1299 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.
Make your voice heard on AB 1299
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 AB 1299
Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously
One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.
Track this bill →