Senate committee forwards study of investor‑owned utility model and procurement reforms

Senators advanced SB 332, a comprehensive, multi-part bill that requires study of investor‑owned utility (IOU) governance and finance, adds procurement guardrails for infrastructure projects, increases transparency on disconnections and executive compensation, and includes language intended to protect labor pensions and benefits during any transition.

Sen. Wahab, the bill’s author, said California’s current utility model has produced high rates and growing customer financial hardship. "Utilities pass costs through to ratepayers while returning large profits to shareholders," Wahab said, and the bill focuses on improving safety, transparency and cost-effectiveness.

Supporters, including environmental-justice organizations and consumer advocates, emphasized the bill’s study approach. Roger Lynn, senior attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity, said a range of alternative ownership and financing structures deserves a careful state-level analysis and pointed to Golden State Energy and other models. The bill does not mandate a governance outcome; it requires modelling and a feasibility analysis, supporters said.

Opponents — including major utilities and several unions — raised concerns about job losses and pension transfers and said some provisions could chill capital investment. The IBEW and other building trades said some procurement language in earlier drafts could be read to require contracting out in ways that would eliminate union in‑house jobs; the author accepted amendments to clarify protections for collectively bargained work and to pull back several immediate procurement mandates.

Committee amendments removed a proposed CPI cap and tightened language around labor protections and procurement. After discussion and additional negotiations, the committee passed SB 332 to the Senate Judiciary Committee with a 6–4 recorded vote (roll left open for absent members). The author and several senators emphasized ongoing negotiations with labor and utilities ahead of further committee hearings.

Supporters said the measure creates a path to examine root drivers of rate pressure (capital spending, wildfire mitigation costs, net metering cost shifts) and to study whether different ownership or financing structures could reduce costs without weakening reliability. Opponents said the bill in current form still raises significant open questions and called for more targeted fixes to address affordability without destabilizing the system.

The bill now moves to the Judiciary Committee for additional amendment and study.