Bill Full Text
Home
-
Bills
-
Bill
-
Authors
-
Dates
-
Locations
-
Analyses
-
Organizations
<?xml version="1.0" ?>
<ns0:MeasureDoc xmlns:html="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xmlns:ns0="http://lc.ca.gov/legalservices/schemas/caml.1#" xmlns:ns3="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" version="1.0" xsi:schemaLocation="http://lc.ca.gov/legalservices/schemas/caml.1# xca.1.xsd">
<ns0:Description>
<ns0:Id>20250SB__087597AMD</ns0:Id>
<ns0:VersionNum>97</ns0:VersionNum>
<ns0:History>
<ns0:Action>
<ns0:ActionText>INTRODUCED</ns0:ActionText>
<ns0:ActionDate>2026-01-06</ns0:ActionDate>
</ns0:Action>
<ns0:Action>
<ns0:ActionText>AMENDED_SENATE</ns0:ActionText>
<ns0:ActionDate>2026-02-24</ns0:ActionDate>
</ns0:Action>
<ns0:Action>
<ns0:ActionText>AMENDED_SENATE</ns0:ActionText>
<ns0:ActionDate>2026-04-06</ns0:ActionDate>
</ns0:Action>
</ns0:History>
<ns0:LegislativeInfo>
<ns0:SessionYear>2025</ns0:SessionYear>
<ns0:SessionNum>0</ns0:SessionNum>
<ns0:MeasureType>SB</ns0:MeasureType>
<ns0:MeasureNum>875</ns0:MeasureNum>
<ns0:MeasureState>AMD</ns0:MeasureState>
</ns0:LegislativeInfo>
<ns0:AuthorText authorType="LEAD_AUTHOR">Introduced by Senator Wiener</ns0:AuthorText>
<ns0:AuthorText authorType="PRINCIPAL_COAUTHOR_OPPOSITE">(Principal coauthors: Assembly Members Haney and Stefani)</ns0:AuthorText>
<ns0:Authors>
<ns0:Legislator>
<ns0:Contribution>LEAD_AUTHOR</ns0:Contribution>
<ns0:House>SENATE</ns0:House>
<ns0:Name>Wiener</ns0:Name>
</ns0:Legislator>
<ns0:Legislator>
<ns0:Contribution>PRINCIPAL_COAUTHOR</ns0:Contribution>
<ns0:House>ASSEMBLY</ns0:House>
<ns0:Name>Haney</ns0:Name>
</ns0:Legislator>
<ns0:Legislator>
<ns0:Contribution>PRINCIPAL_COAUTHOR</ns0:Contribution>
<ns0:House>ASSEMBLY</ns0:House>
<ns0:Name>Stefani</ns0:Name>
</ns0:Legislator>
</ns0:Authors>
<ns0:Title>An act to amend Sections 1240.650 and 1245.250 of the Code of Civil Procedure, and to amend Sections 851 and 1411 of, and to add Sections 1410.5 and 1425 to, the Public Utilities Code, relating to public utilities.</ns0:Title>
<ns0:RelatingClause>public utilities</ns0:RelatingClause>
<ns0:GeneralSubject>
<ns0:Subject>Public utilities: eminent domain: just compensation.</ns0:Subject>
</ns0:GeneralSubject>
<ns0:DigestText>
<html:p>
(1)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
Existing law, the Eminent Domain Law, authorizes a public entity to exercise the power of eminent domain to acquire property for a public use if the use for which the property is sought to be taken is a more necessary public use than the use to which the property is appropriated, as specified. Existing law specifies that if property has been appropriated to public use by any person other than a public entity, the use of the property by a public entity for the same or any other public use is a more necessary use than the current use. Existing law also specifies that if property that has been appropriated to a public use is electrical, gas, or water public utility property, as defined, that the public entity intends to put to the same use, the presumption of a more necessary use is a rebuttable presumption affecting the burden of proof, except as specified.
</html:p>
<html:p>This bill would exempt from that rebuttable presumption property that has been appropriated to a public use that is electrical or gas public utility property within the Pacific Gas and Electric Company service
area.</html:p>
<html:p>
(2)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
Existing law authorizes a public entity to exercise the power of eminent domain only if it has adopted a resolution of necessity, as specified. Under existing law, a resolution of necessity adopted by the governing body of a public entity conclusively establishes that, among other matters, the public interest and necessity require the project. Existing law specifies that, if a taking is by a local public entity and the property is electrical, gas, or water public utility property, the resolution of necessity creates a rebuttable presumption that those matters are true.
</html:p>
<html:p>This bill would provide that, if a taking is by a local public entity within the Pacific Gas and Electric Company service area and the property is
electrical or gas public utility
property, the resolution of necessity instead conclusively establishes those matters.</html:p>
<html:p>
(3)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
Existing law vests the Public Utilities Commission with regulatory authority over public utilities, including electrical corporations and gas corporations. Existing law prohibits public utilities, other than certain common carriers, from selling, leasing, assigning, mortgaging, or otherwise disposing of, or encumbering, its assets that are necessary or useful in the performance of its duties to the public, unless the public utility has secured an order or approval from the commission to do so, as provided. Existing law requires, for any voluntary or
involuntary change in ownership of assets from an electrical corporation or gas corporation to ownership by a public entity, the commission to determine, as part of its review under these provisions, whether the transaction is fair and reasonable to affected public utility employees.
</html:p>
<html:p>This bill would instead require the commission, in its review of a voluntary or involuntary change in ownership of assets from an electrical or gas corporation to a public entity, to limit its review to determining whether the transaction is fair and reasonable to affected public utility employees. The bill would require the review to occur after a change in ownership agreement is made for a voluntary change in ownership, or after the completion of the condemnation proceeding for an involuntary change in ownership.</html:p>
<html:p>
(4)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
Existing law provides procedures for the acquisition under eminent domain proceedings, or otherwise, of lands, property, and rights of a public utility by a political subdivision, and requires the commission to fix the
just compensation to be paid by the political subdivision for the lands, property, and rights, as provided.
</html:p>
<html:p>This bill would require the owner of a public utility, within 90 days of a political subdivision submitting an amount for just compensation or a plan for the separation of the public utility’s assets, to also submit an amount for just compensation or provide a response to the separation plan, as provided. The bill would authorize the commission, if it finds that the total just compensation should include costs for the physical separation of the public utility’s assets, to establish a process for the reimbursement of those costs and to determine the reasonableness of those expenses. The bill would require the commission to make and file its findings regarding just compensation with respect to the public utility within 18 months of the date the petition is filed.</html:p>
<html:p>This bill would prohibit a public utility from recovering from ratepayers any litigation costs associated with a political subdivision’s efforts to acquire utility property, as provided.</html:p>
<html:p>
(5)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for public entities within the Pacific Gas and Electric Company service area.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(6)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
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.
</html:p>
<html:p>Because certain provisions of this bill would be a part of the act and a violation of a commission action implementing the bill’s requirements would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.</html:p>
<html:p>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.</html:p>
<html:p>This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.</html:p>
</ns0:DigestText>
<ns0:DigestKey>
<ns0:VoteRequired>MAJORITY</ns0:VoteRequired>
<ns0:Appropriation>NO</ns0:Appropriation>
<ns0:FiscalCommittee>YES</ns0:FiscalCommittee>
<ns0:LocalProgram>YES</ns0:LocalProgram>
</ns0:DigestKey>
<ns0:MeasureIndicators>
<ns0:ImmediateEffect>NO</ns0:ImmediateEffect>
<ns0:ImmediateEffectFlags>
<ns0:Urgency>NO</ns0:Urgency>
<ns0:TaxLevy>NO</ns0:TaxLevy>
<ns0:Election>NO</ns0:Election>
<ns0:UsualCurrentExpenses>NO</ns0:UsualCurrentExpenses>
<ns0:BudgetBill>NO</ns0:BudgetBill>
<ns0:Prop25TrailerBill>NO</ns0:Prop25TrailerBill>
</ns0:ImmediateEffectFlags>
</ns0:MeasureIndicators>
</ns0:Description>
<ns0:Bill id="bill">
<ns0:Preamble>The people of the State of California do enact as follows:</ns0:Preamble>
<ns0:BillSection id="id_A543E3AD-D476-4ED7-8FB5-1DACF2CDFC85">
<ns0:Num>SECTION 1.</ns0:Num>
<ns0:Content>
<html:p>The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:</html:p>
<html:p>
(a)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
Section 9 of Article XI of the California Constitution authorizes a city to provide its own electrical service or to contract with another utility to provide it.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(b)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
California statutes require public utilities to deliver safe and reliable service to their customers at a reasonable cost.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(c)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
California statutes authorize other public agencies to establish local publicly owned utilities to provide electrical service.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(d)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
Eminent domain is the constitutional right of the people or their government to take private property for public use.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(e)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
Until 1993, Section 1240.650 of the Code of Civil Procedure provided a conclusive presumption that the same use by public entities of the property to be taken is a “more necessary use” than the use for which the property was already being used by the private entity.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(f)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
Investor-owned utilities, like Pacific Gas and Electric Company, were granted special statutory protections in 1992 making it unusually difficult and costly for local governments to exercise their constitutional and statutory authority to acquire utility infrastructure or establish municipal energy services.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(g)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
In 1992, the Legislature passed Senate Bill 1757 (Chapter 812 of the Statutes of 1992) to change the requirements for eminent domain of utility property that has been put to a public use. Senate Bill 1757 removed the conclusive presumption of “public necessity” and “more necessary use” and replaced it with a “rebuttable presumption” for electric, gas, or water public utility property.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(h)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
The Legislature passed, and Governor Wilson signed into law, this change with the express purpose of enabling investor-owned utilities to further challenge eminent domain proceedings initiated by local governments.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(i)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
In a 1992 letter, the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research recommended that Governor Wilson make clear this rationale, arguing, “The reality of this bill is that it would strengthen private utilities’ hand in
negotiating and probably dissuade some public acquisitions. This office believes that would be a good thing. The private sector can provide utility services more efficiently [than] the public sector.”
</html:p>
<html:p>
(j)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
California made this change at a time when it was also broadly deregulating the energy market through bills like Assembly Bill 1890 (Chapter 854 of the Statutes of 1996).
</html:p>
<html:p>
(k)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
The Legislature enacted these changes with the promise that this legislation would lead to lower electricity rates.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(l)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
Instead of lowering electricity rates, the Legislature’s deregulatory efforts led to the Enron crisis.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(m)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
Competition in the energy industry was one of the goals of Assembly Bill 1890 (Chapter 854 of the Statutes of 1996), which would provide better and cheaper
service, and local publicly owned utilities provide one of the few sources of competition with investor-owned utilities in the energy industry.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(n)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
Senate Bill 1757 (Chapter 812 of the Statutes of 1992) helped investor-owned utilities hamstring their main competitor, and, in the years since the passage of Senate Bill 1757 (Chapter 812 of the Statutes of 1992), investor-owned utilities have not proven to more efficiently provide utility services than local publicly owned utilities.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(o)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
Local publicly owned utilities already provide more accountable, reliable, clean, and affordable alternatives to investor-owned utilities throughout California.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(p)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
Unlike investor-owned utilities, which are accountable to private
shareholders and highly paid executives, local publicly owned utilities are uniquely accountable to the ratepayers whom they serve. Local publicly owned utilities understand, and are focused on, the needs of their local communities because they are locally based. Decisions about rates, investments, and priorities are made by and for the communities served, through elected or publicly accountable boards comprising people from that community, not far away shareholders. These decisions are transparent as local publicly owned utilities are subject to public records laws.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(q)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
Local publicly owned electric utilities historically, and repeatedly, deliver superior reliability. The primary measures of utility reliability are System Average Interruption Duration Index (SAIDI) and System Average Interruption Frequency Index (SAIFI). According to the American Public Power Association (APPA), local publicly owned electric utilities across the United States
show superior reliability compared to investor-owned utilities. According to APPA, on average, local publicly owned electric utilities resolve outages 61 percent faster than other utilities.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(r)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
Local publicly owned electric utilities are not-for-profit entities that work everyday to drive down costs and reinvest in their communities. Investor-owned utilities are for-profit entities that aim to maximize profits for private shareholders. Local publicly owned electric utilities can only charge utility customers the actual cost of providing service, and rates paid by customers are reinvested into their communities for programs that enhance efficiency, reliability, and infrastructure, and balance customer costs with meeting climate goals. According to APPA, local publicly owned electric utilities’ direct contributions into the communities they serve are on average 9 percent higher than the amount investor-owned utilities pay in taxes to state and
local governments.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(s)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
Local publicly owned electric utilities are consistently the most affordable energy option for Californians when compared to investor-owned utilities, saving residents and businesses millions of dollars every year. Data on rate comparison information consistently shows local publicly owned electric utilities are, on average, at least 17 percent lower in cost than other alternatives, and often the savings are even higher.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(t)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
According to the APPA 2025 Public Power Statistical Report, residential customers of local publicly owned electric utilities in 34 states including California have the lowest electricity rates of any utility type. According to APPA’s report, local publicly owned electric utility customers in California save an average of between 20 to 30 percent on their electricity bills compared to customers served by other utilities.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(u)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
In local jurisdictions that have adopted aggressive climate goals, local publicly owned electric utilities would improve the ability of municipalities to meet the Senate Bill 100 (Chapter 312 of the Statutes of 2018) clean energy target of 100 percent carbon-free electricity by 2045. For example, whereas Pacific Gas and Electric is a natural gas corporation with a vested interest in the gas distribution system, the City and County of San Francisco’s Climate Action Plan aims for 100 percent renewable energy supply and net-zero emissions citywide by 2040. Acquisition of parts of Pacific Gas and Electric’s energy system would enable municipalities such as San Francisco to exercise greater control over the modernization of their energy systems and to achieve a clean energy future through the electrification of transportation systems, building decarbonization, and the reduction of natural gas use.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(v)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
Acquisition of parts of Pacific Gas and Electric’s energy system by a public entity would address many of the shortcomings of Pacific Gas and Electric’s utility service, including, for example, having a smaller well-defined service area where Pacific Gas and Electric can focus its resources.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(w)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
Acquisition of parts of Pacific Gas and Electric’s energy system by a public entity would also enable a more efficient, cost-effective, and timely energization of new public projects.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(x)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
For example, Pacific Gas and Electric has historically delayed the energization of new projects in the City and County of San Francisco by requiring unnecessary infrastructure investments to be paid for by the City and County of San Francisco’s ratepayers. Since 2018, in publicly available reports to the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, the City and County of San Francisco has reported
on 187 projects, including over 2,000 units of affordable housing, that have experienced delays or obstruction to energization by Pacific Gas and Electric. These delays have resulted in $74,000,000 in additional project costs and lost revenue to the City and County of San Francisco.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(y)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
Since the late 1980s, Californians have paid electricity rates at least 10 percent higher than the country as a whole. But, electricity rates surged dramatically following the passage of Senate Bill 1757 (Chapter 812 of the Statutes of 1992), from about one-third higher than the national average in 2015 to over 80 percent higher in 2024.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(z)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
According to a KQED analysis of Pacific Gas and Electric rates, the average utility bill for Pacific Gas and Electric customers increased by about 67 percent between 2020 and 2025, driven in large part by a steep hike in electricity rates.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(aa)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
These associated increases in rates have not been accompanied by an increase in efficiency or improvements in service, as promised by the supporters of Senate Bill 1757 (Chapter 812 of the Statutes of 1992).
</html:p>
<html:p>
(ab)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
Pacific Gas and Electric’s inability to provide safe service is well documented.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(ac)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
Pacific Gas and Electric customers have endured catastrophic wildfires and mass blackouts caused by utility mismanagement, all while paying the second highest electricity rates in the country.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(ad)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
In 2019, the Public Advocate’s Office of the Public Utilities Commission enumerated that the cumulative impact of Pacific Gas and Electric’s safety failures has “caused over 100 fatalities and has cost tens of billions in direct financial damages to
Californians.”
</html:p>
<html:p>
(ae)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
Pacific Gas and Electric itself has acknowledged that it has had serious safety issues and that it needs to do better to meet its responsibility to provide safe and reliable service.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(af)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
As a result of Pacific Gas and Electric’s dismal safety record, local jurisdictions have attempted to exercise their existing rights to provide electrical service to their constituents.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(ag)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
Proponents of Senate Bill 1757 (Chapter 812 of the Statutes of 1992), at the time of its passage, argued that the bill would allow reasonable challenges to condemnation that may be in the best interest of the ratepayer and would not affect public entities’ eminent domain power over utilities that are not serving the public efficiently.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(ah)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
California has
approximately 45 local publicly owned electric utilities. Of these local publicly owned electric utilities, only eight were formed after 1992.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(ai)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
Of these local publicly owned electric utilities, only two were formed within the Pacific Gas and Electric service territory and remain in service today.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(aj)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
Recognizing the harmful impacts of Senate Bill 1757, the Legislature, through Assembly Bill 47 of the 2001–02 First Extraordinary Session, tried to reverse these changes just nine years later. Although the bill passed by a supermajority vote out of its first committee, the bill did not move forward due to efforts by investor-owned utilities to stymie the bill.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(ak)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
Pacific Gas and Electric has hindered and continues to hinder the municipalization efforts of entities such as the City and County of San Francisco and
South San Joaquin Irrigation District (SSJID). Pacific Gas and Electric has routinely obstructed proceedings through delay tactics and unresponsiveness and efforts to make proceedings as drawn out and costly as possible.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(al)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
For example, in September 2019, after conducting a financial feasibility analysis, the City and County of San Francisco made a $2,500,000,000 offer to Pacific Gas and Electric to own and operate the electricity grid in the City and County of San Francisco.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(am)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
The City and County of San Francisco reiterated the same offer in August 2020.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(an)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
Pacific Gas and Electric rejected the City and County of San Francisco’s offer both times, claiming that the offer was substantially below what Pacific Gas and Electric believed to be the fair market value of its electrical grid assets in the City and
County of San Francisco.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(ao)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
Despite this, Pacific Gas and Electric repeatedly failed to provide any analysis or other evidence to support its claim that the City and County of San Francisco’s offer was too low, nor is Pacific Gas and Electric willing to offer or negotiate a higher value.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(ap)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
On July 27, 2021, the City and County of San Francisco submitted a valuation petition to the Public Utilities Commission that initiated a Public Utilities Commission proceeding to establish the value for Pacific Gas and Electric’s electrical assets that serve the City and County of San Francisco.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(aq)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
Since the start of the valuation proceeding in July 2021, Pacific Gas and Electric has filed over 10 motions that have effectively delayed the utility’s obligation to submit testimony. These include three separate motions to
dismiss the proceeding, four motions to compel discovery, and three procedural motions. Collectively, Pacific Gas and Electric’s motions have extended the proceeding timeline and have caused the City and County of San Francisco to spend additional time relitigating the same arguments.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(ar)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
In addition to filing motions, which have delayed the valuation proceeding, Pacific Gas and Electric has frequently produced nonresponsive or partially responsive data in replying to discovery requests. Pacific Gas and Electric’s reluctance and refusal to provide information necessary to advance the proceeding has led to intervention by the Public Utilities Commission and has further delayed progress in the proceeding.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(as)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
On October 30, 2025, the Public Utilities Commission adopted an interim decision that sets out the fundamental principles for the proceeding and provides guidance regarding
applicable valuation methodologies.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(at)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
On February 18, 2026, the Public Utilities Commission issued a ruling setting a partial schedule for serving testimony in the valuation proceeding. The schedule provides an overview of the next 390 days of testimony.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(au)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
The remainder of the Public Utilities Commission proceeding for the City and County of San Francisco, including, but not limited to, evidentiary hearings, filings of briefs, writing of the proposed decision, and final Public Utilities Commission approval, is to be announced.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(av)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
Over four and one-half years after the City and County of San Francisco filed the petition initiating the proceeding, Pacific Gas and Electric has continued to drag its feet and delay providing testimony on the value of its assets in the City and County of San Francisco, despite
Section 1701.5 of the Public Utilities Code requiring resolution of the proceeding within 18 months.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(aw)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
(1)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
Pacific Gas and Electric’s efforts to delay the City and County of San Francisco and the South San Joaquin Irrigation District have included the misapplication of Section 851 of the Public Utilities Code to argue that the Public Utilities Commission is required to conduct a lengthy review under Section 854 of the Public Utilities Code that is not required for acquisitions by public entities.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(2)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
Assembly Bill 1054 (Chapter 79 of the Statutes of 2019), amended Section 854.2 of the Public Utilities Code to explicitly require the Public Utilities Commission to review impacts of an acquisition on utility workers, including an acquisition by a public entity. Before that, the commission did not review public entity acquisitions under Section 851 of the
Public Utilities Code because public entities already have the constitutional or statutory right to acquire private utility property to provide their own service, and those entities are already committed to the public interest.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(3)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
The legislative intent to adopt this narrow review for public entity acquisitions was further clarified in a letter to the file from the joint authors of Assembly Bill 1054. This intent was further clarified in Senate Bill 550 (Chapter 409 of the Statutes of 2019) a few months later.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(4)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
Further clarification is needed to prevent Pacific Gas and Electric from unnecessarily delaying current and future proceedings and provide a process to reduce excessive delay in just compensation proceedings.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(5)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
The Public Utilities Commission’s ability to protect existing utility ratepayers would not be
changed by this act’s proposed amendment to Section 851 of the Public Utilities Code. The commission has the authority to impose charges on departing ratepayers to ensure they pay their fair share of utility costs, including wildfire and bankruptcy costs paid by ratepayers. The appropriate nonbypassable charges would apply to the City and County of San Francisco’s acquisition.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(ax)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
The people of California deserve lower electricity rates and the provision of clean and reliable energy service by utility providers that are accountable to the public interest.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(ay)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
Consistent with their constitutional and statutory authority, the people of California and the public entities that represent them are entitled to a clear, fair, and timely process to pursue municipalization and sovereignty over their energy system. This includes, but is not limited to, proceedings involving the
determination of the fair value of grid infrastructure, the more necessary public use of that infrastructure by public entities, the transfer or exchange of utility assets, just compensation, and the exercise of the sovereign right of eminent domain.
</html:p>
</ns0:Content>
</ns0:BillSection>
<ns0:BillSection id="id_45FCD973-1EB3-4D96-B66C-61165A05C613">
<ns0:Num>SEC. 2.</ns0:Num>
<ns0:ActionLine action="IS_AMENDED" ns3:href="urn:caml:codes:CCP:caml#xpointer(%2Fcaml%3ALawDoc%2Fcaml%3ACode%2Fcaml%3ALawHeading%5B%40type%3D'PART'%20and%20caml%3ANum%3D'3.'%5D%2Fcaml%3ALawHeading%5B%40type%3D'TITLE'%20and%20caml%3ANum%3D'7.'%5D%2Fcaml%3ALawHeading%5B%40type%3D'CHAPTER'%20and%20caml%3ANum%3D'3.'%5D%2Fcaml%3ALawHeading%5B%40type%3D'ARTICLE'%20and%20caml%3ANum%3D'7.'%5D%2Fcaml%3ALawSection%5Bcaml%3ANum%3D'1240.650.'%5D)" ns3:label="fractionType: LAW_SECTION" ns3:type="locator">
Section 1240.650 of the
<ns0:DocName>Code of Civil Procedure</ns0:DocName>
is amended to read:
</ns0:ActionLine>
<ns0:Fragment>
<ns0:LawSection id="id_9FA613ED-F447-4D2C-9028-BBC3BC6D7943">
<ns0:Num>1240.650.</ns0:Num>
<ns0:LawSectionVersion id="id_C739852C-0617-452C-B319-C4147A02F5EC">
<ns0:Content>
<html:p>
(a)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
If property has been appropriated to public use by any person other than a public entity, the use of the property by a public entity for the same use or any other public use is a more necessary use than the use to which the property has already been appropriated.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(b)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
If property has been appropriated to public use by a public entity, the use of the property by the public entity is a more necessary use than any use to which the property might be put by any person other than a public entity.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(c)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
If
property that has been appropriated to a public use is
electrical, gas, or water public utility property that the public entity intends to put to the same use, the presumption of a more necessary use established by subdivision (a) is a rebuttable presumption affecting the burden of proof, unless either of the following conditions exist:
</html:p>
<html:p>
(1)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
The acquiring public entity is a sanitary district exercising the powers of a county water district pursuant to Section 6512.7 of the Health and Safety Code.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(2)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
The property that has been appropriated to a public use is electrical or gas public utility property within the Pacific Gas and Electric Company service area.
</html:p>
</ns0:Content>
</ns0:LawSectionVersion>
</ns0:LawSection>
</ns0:Fragment>
</ns0:BillSection>
<ns0:BillSection id="id_1F9A5311-5570-43BC-A873-0F5A52D88095">
<ns0:Num>SEC. 3.</ns0:Num>
<ns0:ActionLine action="IS_AMENDED" ns3:href="urn:caml:codes:CCP:caml#xpointer(%2Fcaml%3ALawDoc%2Fcaml%3ACode%2Fcaml%3ALawHeading%5B%40type%3D'PART'%20and%20caml%3ANum%3D'3.'%5D%2Fcaml%3ALawHeading%5B%40type%3D'TITLE'%20and%20caml%3ANum%3D'7.'%5D%2Fcaml%3ALawHeading%5B%40type%3D'CHAPTER'%20and%20caml%3ANum%3D'4.'%5D%2Fcaml%3ALawHeading%5B%40type%3D'ARTICLE'%20and%20caml%3ANum%3D'2.'%5D%2Fcaml%3ALawSection%5Bcaml%3ANum%3D'1245.250.'%5D)" ns3:label="fractionType: LAW_SECTION" ns3:type="locator">
Section 1245.250 of the
<ns0:DocName>Code of Civil Procedure</ns0:DocName>
is amended to read:
</ns0:ActionLine>
<ns0:Fragment>
<ns0:LawSection id="id_E29BB51A-C014-4E34-8EE1-358E88616487">
<ns0:Num>1245.250.</ns0:Num>
<ns0:LawSectionVersion id="id_AA855AC6-5932-42E8-A6BC-79CF484E4F2F">
<ns0:Content>
<html:p>
(a)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
Except as otherwise provided by statute, a resolution of necessity adopted by the governing body of the public entity pursuant to this article conclusively establishes the matters referred to in Section 1240.030.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(b)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
(1)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
Except as otherwise provided in paragraph (2), if the taking is by a local public entity, other than a sanitary district exercising the powers of a county water district pursuant to Section 6512.7 of the Health and Safety Code, and the property is
electrical, gas, or water public utility property, the resolution of necessity creates a rebuttable presumption that the matters referred to in Section 1240.030 are true. This presumption is a presumption affecting the burden of proof.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(2)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
Notwithstanding any other law, if the taking is by a local public entity within the Pacific Gas and Electric Company service area and the property is electrical or gas public utility property, the resolution of necessity
conclusively establishes the matters referred to in Section 1240.030.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(c)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
If the taking is by a local public entity and the property described in the resolution is not located entirely within the boundaries of the local public entity, the resolution of necessity creates a presumption that the matters referred to in Section 1240.030 are true. This presumption is a presumption affecting the burden of
producing evidence.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(d)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
For the purposes of subdivision (b), a taking by the Central Valley Flood Protection Board for the Sacramento and San Joaquin Drainage District is not a taking by a local public entity.
</html:p>
</ns0:Content>
</ns0:LawSectionVersion>
</ns0:LawSection>
</ns0:Fragment>
</ns0:BillSection>
<ns0:BillSection id="id_9680650F-AFF8-49B5-AC36-6982B0EC5E0C">
<ns0:Num>SEC. 4.</ns0:Num>
<ns0:ActionLine action="IS_AMENDED" ns3:href="urn:caml:codes:PUC:caml#xpointer(%2Fcaml%3ALawDoc%2Fcaml%3ACode%2Fcaml%3ALawHeading%5B%40type%3D'DIVISION'%20and%20caml%3ANum%3D'1.'%5D%2Fcaml%3ALawHeading%5B%40type%3D'PART'%20and%20caml%3ANum%3D'1.'%5D%2Fcaml%3ALawHeading%5B%40type%3D'CHAPTER'%20and%20caml%3ANum%3D'4.'%5D%2Fcaml%3ALawHeading%5B%40type%3D'ARTICLE'%20and%20caml%3ANum%3D'6.'%5D%2Fcaml%3ALawSection%5Bcaml%3ANum%3D'851.'%5D)" ns3:label="fractionType: LAW_SECTION" ns3:type="locator">
Section 851 of the
<ns0:DocName>Public Utilities Code</ns0:DocName>
is amended to read:
</ns0:ActionLine>
<ns0:Fragment>
<ns0:LawSection id="id_CEA71D7C-8A1F-4057-9A55-6849D97A6932">
<ns0:Num>851.</ns0:Num>
<ns0:LawSectionVersion id="id_2A2D50F6-5D57-42B4-9279-C91E3AF79A0D">
<ns0:Content>
<html:p>
(a)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
Except as provided in subdivision (c), a public utility, other than a common carrier by railroad subject to Part A of the Interstate Commerce Act (49 U.S.C. Sec. 10101 et seq.), shall not sell, lease, assign, mortgage, or otherwise dispose of, or encumber the whole or any part of, its railroad, street railroad, line, plant, system, or other property necessary or useful in the performance of its duties to the public, or any franchise or permit or any right thereunder, or by any means whatsoever, directly or indirectly, merge or consolidate its railroad, street railroad, line, plant, system, or other property, or franchises or permits or any part thereof, without first having either secured an order from the commission authorizing it to do so
for qualified transactions valued above five million dollars ($5,000,000), or for qualified transactions valued at five million dollars ($5,000,000) or less, filed an advice letter and obtained approval from the commission authorizing it to do so. If the advice letter is uncontested, approval may be given by the executive director or the director of the division of the commission having regulatory jurisdiction over the utility. The commission shall determine the types of transactions valued at five million dollars ($5,000,000) or less, that qualify for advice letter handling. For a qualified transaction valued at five million dollars ($5,000,000) or less, the commission may designate a procedure different than the advice letter procedure if it determines that the transaction warrants a more comprehensive review. Absent protest or incomplete documentation, the commission shall approve or deny
the advice letter within 120 days of its filing by the applicant public utility. The commission shall reject any advice letter that seeks to circumvent the five-million-dollar ($5,000,000) threshold by dividing a single asset with a value of more than five million dollars ($5,000,000) into component parts, each valued at less than five million dollars ($5,000,000). Every sale, lease, assignment, mortgage, disposition, encumbrance, merger, or consolidation made other than in accordance with the advice letter and approval from the commission authorizing it is void. The permission and approval of the commission to the exercise of a franchise or permit under Article 1 (commencing with Section 1001) of Chapter 5, or the sale, lease, assignment, mortgage, or other disposition or encumbrance of a franchise or permit under this article, shall not revive or validate any lapsed or invalid franchise or permit, or
enlarge or add to the powers or privileges contained in the grant of any franchise or permit, or waive any forfeiture.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(b)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
(1)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
Subdivision (a) shall apply to any transaction described in subparagraph (F) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) of Section 854.2.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(2)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
For any transaction described in subparagraph (F) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) of Section 854.2,
the commission’s review pursuant to subdivision (a) shall be limited to determining whether the transaction is fair and reasonable to affected public utility employees, including both union and nonunion employees.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(3)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
For a voluntary change in ownership between an electrical corporation or gas corporation and a public entity, the commission’s review pursuant to subdivision (a) shall occur after an agreement for the change in ownership has been made between the public entity and the electrical corporation or gas corporation.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(4)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
For an involuntary change in ownership between an electrical corporation or gas corporation and a public entity, the commission’s review pursuant to subdivision (a) shall occur after the completion
of the condemnation proceedings.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(c)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
(1)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
Subdivision (a) shall not apply to an easement, or a change to an easement, that has a ratepayer financial impact valued at one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) or less if a public utility that is a party to the qualified transaction has gross annual California revenues of five hundred million dollars ($500,000,000) or more.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(2)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
On January 1, 2030, and every five years thereafter, the threshold values specified in paragraph (1) shall be adjusted to reflect any increase in inflation as measured by the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) published by the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(3)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
Each public
utility shall annually file a Tier 1 advice letter with the commission by April 1, with a report of all transactions performed pursuant to paragraph (1), enumerated by date, value, location, and party.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(d)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
This section does not prevent the sale, lease, encumbrance, or other disposition by any public utility of property that is not necessary or useful in the performance of its duties to the public, and any disposition of property by a public utility shall be conclusively presumed to be of property that is not useful or necessary in the performance of its duties to the public, as to any purchaser, lessee, or encumbrancer dealing with that property in good faith for value, provided that this section does not apply to the interchange of equipment in the regular course of transportation between connecting common
carriers.
</html:p>
</ns0:Content>
</ns0:LawSectionVersion>
</ns0:LawSection>
</ns0:Fragment>
</ns0:BillSection>
<ns0:BillSection id="id_AA7768CA-B31E-43E5-92BD-362883EBF079">
<ns0:Num>SEC. 5.</ns0:Num>
<ns0:ActionLine action="IS_ADDED" ns3:href="urn:caml:codes:PUC:caml#xpointer(%2Fcaml%3ALawDoc%2Fcaml%3ACode%2F%2Fcaml%3ALawSection%5Bcaml%3ANum%3D'1410.5'%5D)" ns3:label="fractionType: LAW_SECTION" ns3:type="locator">
Section 1410.5 is added to the
<ns0:DocName>Public Utilities Code</ns0:DocName>
, to read:
</ns0:ActionLine>
<ns0:Fragment>
<ns0:LawSection id="id_E254C40A-D7A8-4AF9-A305-C076593F0864">
<ns0:Num>1410.5.</ns0:Num>
<ns0:LawSectionVersion id="id_BF893BBA-C8BF-4023-AAAC-C3FF62235190">
<ns0:Content>
<html:p>
(a)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
If a political subdivision, after filing the petition and before the commission makes and files its findings as to just compensation, submits an amount for the just compensation for the lands, property, and rights of any character that the political subdivision identified in the petition, the owner of the public utility shall, within 90 days of the political subdivision’s submission, also submit an amount for the just compensation for the lands, property, and rights of any character that the public utility owns.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(b)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
If the political subdivision, at any time after filing the petition and before the commission makes and files its findings as to just compensation, submits a plan for how the public utility’s assets would be separated for the
purpose of determining a just compensation award, the owner of the public utility shall, within 90 days of the political subdivision’s submission, provide a response to that plan. The response may consist of either, or both, of the following:
</html:p>
<html:p>
(1)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
Agreement with the political subdivision’s plan, in whole or in part.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(2)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
Identification of specific issues of disagreement and an alternative approach to address those specific issues.
</html:p>
</ns0:Content>
</ns0:LawSectionVersion>
</ns0:LawSection>
</ns0:Fragment>
</ns0:BillSection>
<ns0:BillSection id="id_BC4F2D77-DDD8-4FBB-B485-2F128714A99A">
<ns0:Num>SEC. 6.</ns0:Num>
<ns0:ActionLine action="IS_AMENDED" ns3:href="urn:caml:codes:PUC:caml#xpointer(%2Fcaml%3ALawDoc%2Fcaml%3ACode%2Fcaml%3ALawHeading%5B%40type%3D'DIVISION'%20and%20caml%3ANum%3D'1.'%5D%2Fcaml%3ALawHeading%5B%40type%3D'PART'%20and%20caml%3ANum%3D'1.'%5D%2Fcaml%3ALawHeading%5B%40type%3D'CHAPTER'%20and%20caml%3ANum%3D'8.'%5D%2Fcaml%3ALawSection%5Bcaml%3ANum%3D'1411.'%5D)" ns3:label="fractionType: LAW_SECTION" ns3:type="locator">
Section 1411 of the
<ns0:DocName>Public Utilities Code</ns0:DocName>
is amended to read:
</ns0:ActionLine>
<ns0:Fragment>
<ns0:LawSection id="id_C2372BEB-19D5-4596-A053-121425F9BD18">
<ns0:Num>1411.</ns0:Num>
<ns0:LawSectionVersion id="id_2FCB344C-687E-44C7-A0A9-C80A3ECB335F">
<ns0:Content>
<html:p>
(a)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
When the proceeding has been submitted, the commission shall make and file its written finding fixing, in a single sum, the just compensation to be paid by the political subdivision for the lands, property, and rights. If the commission finds that severance damages should be paid, the just compensation for the damages shall be found and stated separately. The just compensation shall be fixed by the commission as of the day on which the petition was filed with the commission.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(b)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
Notwithstanding subdivision (a), if the commission finds that the total just compensation should include costs to be incurred from the physical separation of the public utility’s assets, including the cost of constructing new facilities or relocating or modifying existing facilities, the commission may set forth a process for the reimbursement of those costs and to determine whether those costs are reasonable.
</html:p>
<html:p>
(c)
<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
The commission shall make and file its findings required by subdivision (a) within 18 months of the date the petition is filed.
</html:p>
</ns0:Content>
</ns0:LawSectionVersion>
</ns0:LawSection>
</ns0:Fragment>
</ns0:BillSection>
<ns0:BillSection id="id_9B69F93A-4D8F-4311-9B19-FE362DBE8B57">
<ns0:Num>SEC. 7.</ns0:Num>
<ns0:ActionLine action="IS_ADDED" ns3:href="urn:caml:codes:PUC:caml#xpointer(%2Fcaml%3ALawDoc%2Fcaml%3ACode%2F%2Fcaml%3ALawSection%5Bcaml%3ANum%3D'1425'%5D)" ns3:label="fractionType: LAW_SECTION" ns3:type="locator">
Section 1425 is added to the
<ns0:DocName>Public Utilities Code</ns0:DocName>
, to read:
</ns0:ActionLine>
<ns0:Fragment>
<ns0:LawSection id="id_6B93BEB6-09B5-4C81-83A5-9604457E395D">
<ns0:Num>1425.</ns0:Num>
<ns0:LawSectionVersion id="id_4BEC65EA-7E95-48C6-AB7C-8A2873531002">
<ns0:Content>
<html:p>A public utility shall not recover from ratepayers any litigation costs associated with a political subdivision’s efforts to acquire public utility property, including actions pursuant to this chapter or Article 6 (commencing with Section 851) of Chapter 4 or eminent domain actions.</html:p>
</ns0:Content>
</ns0:LawSectionVersion>
</ns0:LawSection>
</ns0:Fragment>
</ns0:BillSection>
<ns0:BillSection id="id_8BD2B71D-C3BC-4D51-9BB8-79BB6211BAE4">
<ns0:Num>SEC. 8.</ns0:Num>
<ns0:Content>
<html:p>The Legislature finds and declares that a special statute is necessary and that a general statute cannot be made applicable within the meaning of Section 16 of Article IV of the California Constitution because of the unique circumstances pertaining to the Pacific Gas and Electric Company.</html:p>
</ns0:Content>
</ns0:BillSection>
<ns0:BillSection id="id_CAEE2DE0-0581-40D5-847E-E5BE330D9DAA">
<ns0:Num>SEC. 9.</ns0:Num>
<ns0:Content>
<html:p>
No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIII
<html:span class="ThinSpace"/>
B of the California Constitution because the only costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school district will be incurred because this act creates a new crime or infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime within the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIII
<html:span class="ThinSpace"/>
B of the California Constitution.
</html:p>
</ns0:Content>
</ns0:BillSection>
</ns0:Bill>
</ns0:MeasureDoc>