The first version created a wildfire safety board to advise the PUC, but shielded communications between the two from public view:https://apnews.com/d9801067600d48ca8bf11136d27651ad …
Show this thread
California Assembly now debating major bill aimed at stabilizing investor-owned utilities in the face of catastrophic wildfires.
@andrewboxford has looked into various aspects of this bill. Here are the main details:https://apnews.com/90276e458d334802a422318df1d89bdf …
-
-
-
Newsom's office said they would change that provision following
@AP questions. The latest version removes the blanket exemption from disclosure, but says the PUC or advisory board can still move to shield specific things as part of the "deliberative process."Show this thread -
Another piece of the bill could make it harder for cities to buy off utility assets, as San Francisco has considered doing with PG&E, by inserting the PUC in any ownership change efforts:https://apnews.com/ed4ad5ff57de4f2eb92c446a620b0c83 …
Show this thread -
A clarification on the shielding things from public view bit: A companion bill, SB111, actually strikes the provisions in the main bill that say communications between the PUC and wildfire board could be shielded under deliberative process exemption.
Show this thread -
So, it's not entirely clear to me if they would still be able to assert that privilege by relying on existing law. But if SB111 passes, any reference to privileged communications would be removed from the law.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.