BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                       


           ------------------------------------------------------------ 
          |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE            |                   SB 118|
          |Office of Senate Floor Analyses   |                         |
          |1020 N Street, Suite 524          |                         |
          |(916) 445-6614         Fax: (916) |                         |
          |327-4478                          |                         |
           ------------------------------------------------------------ 
           
                                         
                              UNFINISHED BUSINESS


          Bill No:  SB 118
          Author:   Bowen (D)
          Amended:  6/19/03
          Vote:     21

           
           SENATE ENERGY, U.&C. COMMITTEE  :  8-0, 4/22/03
          AYES:  Bowen, Morrow, Alarcon, Battin, Dunn, McClintock,  
            Murray, Sher
          NO VOTE RECORDED:  Vasconcellos

           SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE  :  Senate Rule 28.8

           SENATE FLOOR  :  37-0, 5/22/03 (Passed on Consent)
          AYES:  Aanestad, Ackerman, Alarcon, Alpert, Ashburn,  
            Battin, Bowen, Brulte, Burton, Cedillo, Chesbro, Denham,  
            Ducheny, Dunn, Figueroa, Florez, Hollingsworth, Johnson,  
            Karnette, Knight, Kuehl, Machado, Margett, McClintock,  
            McPherson, Morrow, Murray, Oller, Ortiz, Perata,  
            Poochigian, Scott, Sher, Soto, Torlakson, Vasconcellos,  
            Vincent
          NO VOTE RECORDED:  Escutia, Romero, Speier


           SUBJECT  :    Public Utilities Commission:  conflict of  
          interest

           SOURCE  :     Author


          DIGEST  :    This bill clarifies that a California Public  
          Utilities Commission (PUC) commissioner shall forfeit that  
          office in cases where they voluntarily obtain a financial  
          interest, as defined, in a PUC-regulated company.
                                                           CONTINUED





                                                               SB 118
                                                                Page  
          2


           Assembly amendment  adds a definition for "financial  
          interest."

           ANALYSIS  :    Current law:

          1.Bars any California Public Utilities Commission  
            commissioner from having a financial interest in any  
            person or corporation subject to PUC regulation.  The  
            penalty for violation of this provision in cases where  
            the commissioner involuntarily acquired the interest and  
            didn't divest him or herself of the interest within a  
            reasonable period of time is forfeiture of office.

          2.As interpreted by the courts, doesn't require a  
            commissioner to forfeit his or her office in cases where  
            he or she voluntarily acquires a financial interest in  
            company subject to PUC regulation.

          This bill:

          1.Requires a PUC commissioner to forfeit their office in  
            cases where they voluntarily obtain a financial interest,  
            as defined, in any person or corporation that the  
            commissioner knows or should know is subject to PUC  
            regulation.

          2.Requires the PUC to update its conflict of interest code,  
            by February 28, 2004.

           Background
           
          Under California law, it's clear a PUC commissioner cannot  
          have a financial interest in any person or corporation  
          subject to PUC regulation.  However, the penalty for  
          violating this law isn't clear, as the First Appellate  
          District of the California Court of Appeals has recently  
          found.

          If the commissioner obtained the financial interest  
          involuntarily (e.g. through an inheritance, or acquisition  
          of a regulated company by a non-regulated company) the law  
          requires the commissioner to be removed from office if he  
          or she doesn't rid him or herself of the financial interest  







                                                                SB 118
                                                                Page  
          3

          within a reasonable period of time. However, if the  
          financial interest is obtained voluntarily (e.g. direct  
          purchase of utility stock) forfeiture of office isn't  
          required.  

          In April 2002, a San Francisco Superior Court judge fined  
          then-PUC Commissioner Henry Duque $5,000 and ordered him  
          removed from the PUC after finding then-Commissioner Duque  
          invested $27,000 in Nextel, a mobile phone company that's  
          regulated by the PUC.

          On January 3, 2003, the First Appellate District of the  
          California Court of Appeals overturned that order, ruling  
          that because of a "critical gap" in the statute's wording,  
          the law doesn't specify any penalty for commissioners who  
          voluntarily invest in a regulated company .

          On April 9, 2003, the state Supreme Court declined to take  
          review of the decision by the State Appellate Court, thus  
          allowing the Appellate Court decision to stand.

          The bill is intended to address the Appellate Court  
          decision and close the gap in current statute.

           FISCAL EFFECT  :    Appropriation:  No   Fiscal Com.:  Yes    
          Local:  No

          Minor absorbable special fund costs to PUC (Public  
          Utilities Reimbursement Account).

           SUPPORT  :   (Verified  9/4/03)

          Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights
          Utility Consumers Action Network


          NC:nl  9/9/03   Senate Floor Analyses 

                         SUPPORT/OPPOSITION:  SEE ABOVE

                                ****  END  ****