An act to add Section 748.3 to the Public Utilities Code, relating to electricity.
Summary
AB 99 would add Section 748.3 to the Public Utilities Code to limit how electrical corporations can seek rate increases. As drafted, an electrical corporation could not propose a rate increase above the rate of inflation, measured by the California Consumer Price Index, on a systemwide average for a general rate case cycle. The bill also bars the Public Utilities Commission from approving or modifying such an increase unless customers approve it in a company-run election conducted under specified rules.
The customer-election process would require each customer to receive one ballot and information about the proposal, allow the commission to set additional election procedures, and require shareholders—not ratepayers—to bear the cost of the election. The bill allows an electrical corporation to keep proposing rate plans until one wins majority support, while the commission would set an interim rate plan capped at inflation until approval occurs. The bill also preserves an exception allowing above-inflation increases without customer approval when the commission finds the costs are directly tied to safety enhancements, modernization, or higher commodity or fuel costs.
Impact
AB 99 would significantly constrain the Public Utilities Commission’s existing discretion to approve utility rates by creating a new statutory cap tied to inflation, with a customer-approval requirement for most increases above that cap. It would affect electrical corporations, their customers, and the CPUC by adding a new procedural and substantive hurdle to general rate case approvals. The bill also states that violations of the new prohibition could constitute a crime under the Public Utilities Act framework, which is why the measure is described as creating a state-mandated local program, though it declares no reimbursement is required.
Sentiment
The available vote history suggests the bill received generally favorable committee support, advancing 12-1 on a do-pass-as-amended motion before being re-referred to Appropriations. No committee transcript is available, so there is no recorded debate to show detailed arguments for or against the measure. Based on the bill’s structure, the overall sentiment appears to favor stronger consumer protections and tighter limits on utility rate growth, while still preserving exceptions for safety and fuel-cost-related increases.
Contention
The main point of contention is the bill’s shift of power from the CPUC to utility customers, especially the requirement that rate increases above inflation be approved by a majority of voting customers in an election. Utilities and other opponents could object to the administrative burden, the cost of elections, and the possibility that customer voting could delay needed revenue for infrastructure or operations. Supporters are likely to emphasize affordability, ratepayer control, and limits on above-inflation increases, while the bill’s exceptions for safety, modernization, and commodity or fuel costs appear designed to address concerns that a strict cap could interfere with essential utility investments.
An act to add Section 21689 to the Public Utilities Code, and to add Section 7102.3 to the Revenue and Taxation Code, relating to airports, and making an appropriation therefor.