BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                  AB 2758
                                                                  Page  1

          CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
          AB 2758 (Berg)
          As Amended June 30, 2004
          Majority vote
           
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |ASSEMBLY:  |78-0 |(May 25, 2004)  |SENATE: |31-2 |(August 19,    |
          |           |     |                |        |     |2004)          |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
            
           Original Committee Reference:   U. & C.  

           SUMMARY  :

          1)Extends the sunset date to 2009 for the Rural  
            Telecommunication Infrastructure Grant Program (RTIG), AB 140  
            (Strom-Martin), Chapter 903, Statutes of 2001, administered by  
            the California Public Utilities Commission (PUC), funded out  
            of an existing surcharge on telephone services, to extend  
            telecommunications services to specified low income  
            communities.

          2)Specifies that this bill would become inoperative if SB 1276  
            (Bowen) were not enacted.

           The Senate amendments  extend the grant date from 2008 to 2009  
          and specifies that this bill would become inoperative if SB 1276  
          were not enacted.

           AS PASSED BY THE ASSEMBLY  , this bill extended the sunset date  
          from 2006 to 2008 for RTIG, administered by PUC, funded out of  
          an existing surcharge on telephone services, to extend  
          telecommunications services to specified low income communities.

           FISCAL EFFECT  :  According to Senate Appropriations Committee  
          analysis, there could be annual special fund costs of $10  
          million for the RTIG program and annual PUC administrative costs  
          of $200,000.

           COMMENTS  :
           
           The Senate amendments require that this bill is contingent upon  
          the enactment of SB 1276 that reestablishes the High Cost Fund A  
          (HCFA) and High Cost Fund B (HCFB) programs at PUC.  Under  
          existing law HCFA and HCFB authorize PUC to collect surcharges  








                                                                  AB 2758
                                                                  Page  2

          on customers monthly bills to support affordable basic phone  
          service in high cost areas.  RTIG draws its support from the  
          surcharge collected for HCFB program and if they were to go away  
          then the funding stream for RTIG would no longer exist.   
          Furthermore, this bill extends the sunset date of the program by  
          one year.
           
           Background:  AB 140 (Strom-Martin), Chapter 903, Statutes of  
          2001 created the Rural Telecommunication Infrastructure Grant  
          Program administered by PUC with a funding level capped at $10  
          million per year and specifies that only one grant per community  
          may be awarded and no grant my exceed the $2.5 million cap.

          The program authorizes annual expenditures of up to $10 million  
          with the money being taking from either of two state programs  
          which subsidize the cost of telephone service, the California  
          High Cost Fund A and California High Cost Fund B.  These  
          programs are funded by a surcharge on telephone bills.

          The program is needs based in that median income of the  
          community to be served cannot exceed the top level used in the  
          Universal Lifeline Telephone Service Index.  Grant applicants  
          must also seek federal resources.

          The grants are awarded in two rounds before the program sunsets  
          in 2006.  The first round is for 2003 through 2004 and the  
          second round is for 2004 through 2006.

          Why does the program need an extension?  According to the 2002  
          Supplemental Budget Report on Implementation of AB 140, the  
          program was slow to start as a result of the Budget crisis.   
          Funding for the program's first year was eliminated in March  
          2002, and staff resources were reallocated to other active  
          project areas.  When program funding was included in the  
          proposed budget for fiscal year 2003-04 staff resumed work on  
          the program.  Currently, program staff is conducting another  
          round of statewide meetings to inform interested parties of the  
          grant program and application process since the commission  
          approved its rulemaking on September 18, 2003 (D. 03-09-071).
           

          Analysis Prepared by  :    Daniel Kim / U. & C. / (916) 319-2083 











                                                                  AB 2758
                                                                  Page  3

                                                               FN: 0007709