Individual legislator voting records for this vote are not currently available. Includes all politicians who were in office at any point during the 2011-2012 Legislature.

SB 594 - An Act to Amend Sections 2827 and 2827.10 of the Public Utilities Code, Relating to Energy.

Energy: net energy metering. 2011-2012 Legislature. View bill details
Author(s):
Summary:
Existing law relative to private energy producers requires every electric utility, as defined, to make available to an eligible customer‑generator, as defined, a standard contract or tariff for net energy metering on a first-come-first-served basis until the time that the total rated generating capacity used by eligible customer‑generators exceeds 5% of the electric utility’s aggregate… More
Existing law relative to private energy producers requires every electric utility, as defined, to make available to an eligible customer‑generator, as defined, a standard contract or tariff for net energy metering on a first-come-first-served basis until the time that the total rated generating capacity used by eligible customer‑generators exceeds 5% of the electric utility’s aggregate customer peak demand. Existing law requires the electric utility, upon an affirmative election by the eligible customer-generator to receive service pursuant to this contract or tariff, to either: (1) provide net surplus electricity compensation for any net surplus electricity generated in the 12-month period, or (2) allow the eligible customer-generator to apply the net surplus electricity as a credit for kilowatthours subsequently supplied by the electric utility to the surplus customer-generator.

This bill would authorize an eligible customer-generator with multiple meters to elect to aggregate the electrical load of the meters located on the property where the generation facility is located and on all property adjacent or contiguous to the property on which the generation facility is located, if those properties are solely owned, leased, or rented by the eligible customer-generator, as provided. For an electric utility that is an electrical corporation, the bill would condition this authorization upon the commission making a determination that permitting eligible customer-generators to aggregate their load from multiple meters will not result in an increase in the expected revenue obligations of customers who are not eligible customer-generators. For an electric utility that is a local publicly owned electric utility or electrical cooperative, the bill would condition this authorization upon the utility’s ratemaking authority, as defined, making a determination that permitting aggregation will not result in an increase in the expected revenue obligations of customers who are not eligible customer-generators. The bill would prohibit an eligible customer-generator that chooses to aggregate from receiving net surplus electricity compensation and require the electric utility to retain kilowatthours, as prescribed.

Existing law establishes a net energy metering program that is available to an eligible fuel cell customer-generator, as defined. Existing law requires that the net metering calculation be made by measuring the difference between the electricity supplied to the eligible fuel cell customer-generator and the electricity generated by the eligible fuel cell customer-generator and fed back to the electrical grid over a 12-month period. Existing law requires that an electrical corporation determine if the eligible fuel cell customer-generator was a net consumer or producer of electricity during the 12-month period. For purposes of making this determination, existing law requires that the electrical corporation aggregate the electrical load of the eligible fuel cell customer-generator under the same ownership.

This bill would require that in making the determination whether the eligible fuel cell customer-generator is a net consumer or producer of electricity during the 12-month period, the electrical corporation is to aggregate the electrical load of the meters located on the property where the eligible fuel cell electrical generation facility is located and on all property adjacent or contiguous to the property on which the facility is located, if those properties are solely owned, leased, or rented by the eligible fuel cell customer-generator.

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.

Because the bill would require an expansion of the above-described net energy metering programs and would require an order or decision of the commission to implement, a violation of these provisions would impose a state-mandated local program by expanding the definition of a crime.

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.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

This bill would incorporate additional changes in Section 2827.10 of the Public Utilities Code, proposed by AB 2165, to be operative only if AB 2165 and this bill are both chaptered and become effective on or before January 1, 2013, and this bill is chaptered last. Hide
 
Status:
The bill has become law (chaptered). 
Senate Vote: On Passage

PASSED on August 31, 2012.

voted YES: 21 voted NO: 12
7 voted present/not voting

An Act to Amend Sections 2827 and 2827.10 of the Public Utilities Code, Relating to Energy.

SB 594 — 2011-2012 Legislature

Summary
Existing law relative to private energy producers requires every electric utility, as defined, to make available to an eligible customer‑generator, as defined, a standard contract or tariff for net energy metering on a first-come-first-served basis until the time that the total rated generating capacity used by eligible customer‑generators exceeds 5% of the electric utility’s aggregate customer peak demand. Existing law requires the electric utility, upon an affirmative election by the eligible customer-generator to receive service pursuant to this contract or tariff, to either: (1) provide net surplus electricity compensation for any net surplus electricity generated in the 12-month period, or (2) allow the eligible customer-generator to apply the net surplus electricity as a credit for kilowatthours subsequently supplied by the electric utility to the surplus customer-generator.

This bill would authorize an eligible customer-generator with multiple meters to elect to aggregate the electrical load of the meters located on the property where the generation facility is located and on all property adjacent or contiguous to the property on which the generation… More
Existing law relative to private energy producers requires every electric utility, as defined, to make available to an eligible customer‑generator, as defined, a standard contract or tariff for net energy metering on a first-come-first-served basis until the time that the total rated generating capacity used by eligible customer‑generators exceeds 5% of the electric utility’s aggregate customer peak demand. Existing law requires the electric utility, upon an affirmative election by the eligible customer-generator to receive service pursuant to this contract or tariff, to either: (1) provide net surplus electricity compensation for any net surplus electricity generated in the 12-month period, or (2) allow the eligible customer-generator to apply the net surplus electricity as a credit for kilowatthours subsequently supplied by the electric utility to the surplus customer-generator.

This bill would authorize an eligible customer-generator with multiple meters to elect to aggregate the electrical load of the meters located on the property where the generation facility is located and on all property adjacent or contiguous to the property on which the generation facility is located, if those properties are solely owned, leased, or rented by the eligible customer-generator, as provided. For an electric utility that is an electrical corporation, the bill would condition this authorization upon the commission making a determination that permitting eligible customer-generators to aggregate their load from multiple meters will not result in an increase in the expected revenue obligations of customers who are not eligible customer-generators. For an electric utility that is a local publicly owned electric utility or electrical cooperative, the bill would condition this authorization upon the utility’s ratemaking authority, as defined, making a determination that permitting aggregation will not result in an increase in the expected revenue obligations of customers who are not eligible customer-generators. The bill would prohibit an eligible customer-generator that chooses to aggregate from receiving net surplus electricity compensation and require the electric utility to retain kilowatthours, as prescribed.

Existing law establishes a net energy metering program that is available to an eligible fuel cell customer-generator, as defined. Existing law requires that the net metering calculation be made by measuring the difference between the electricity supplied to the eligible fuel cell customer-generator and the electricity generated by the eligible fuel cell customer-generator and fed back to the electrical grid over a 12-month period. Existing law requires that an electrical corporation determine if the eligible fuel cell customer-generator was a net consumer or producer of electricity during the 12-month period. For purposes of making this determination, existing law requires that the electrical corporation aggregate the electrical load of the eligible fuel cell customer-generator under the same ownership.

This bill would require that in making the determination whether the eligible fuel cell customer-generator is a net consumer or producer of electricity during the 12-month period, the electrical corporation is to aggregate the electrical load of the meters located on the property where the eligible fuel cell electrical generation facility is located and on all property adjacent or contiguous to the property on which the facility is located, if those properties are solely owned, leased, or rented by the eligible fuel cell customer-generator.

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.

Because the bill would require an expansion of the above-described net energy metering programs and would require an order or decision of the commission to implement, a violation of these provisions would impose a state-mandated local program by expanding the definition of a crime.

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.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

This bill would incorporate additional changes in Section 2827.10 of the Public Utilities Code, proposed by AB 2165, to be operative only if AB 2165 and this bill are both chaptered and become effective on or before January 1, 2013, and this bill is chaptered last. Hide
Learn More
At LegInfo.ca.gov
Title
An Act to Amend Sections 2827 and 2827.10 of the Public Utilities Code, Relating to Energy.
Author(s)
Lois Wolk, Sam Blakeslee
Co-Authors
Subjects
  • Energy: net energy metering
Major Actions
Introduced2/17/2011
Referred to Committee
Passed Senate Committee on Health5/04/2011
Passed Senate Committee on Appropriations5/23/2011
Passed Senate6/01/2011
Passed Assembly Committee on Rules5/07/2012
Passed Assembly Committee on Utilities and Commerce6/25/2012
Passed Assembly Committee on Appropriations8/08/2012
Passed Assembly8/30/2012
Passed Senate Committee on Appropriations8/31/2012
Passed Senate8/31/2012
Presented to the governor (enrolled)9/11/2012
Became law (chaptered).9/27/2012
Bill History
Chamber/CommitteeMotionDateResult
select this voteSenate Committee on HealthDo pass as amended, and re-refer to the Committee on Appropriations.5/04/2011This motion PASSED the Senate Committee on Health
6 voted YES 3 voted NO 0 voted present/not voting
select this voteSenate Committee on AppropriationsDo pass.5/23/2011This motion PASSED the Senate Committee on Appropriations
6 voted YES 3 voted NO 0 voted present/not voting
select this voteSenateSenate 3rd Reading SB594 Wolk6/01/2011This bill PASSED the Senate
23 voted YES 14 voted NO 3 voted present/not voting
select this voteAssembly Committee on RulesBe referred to Committee on Utilities and Commerce.5/07/2012This motion PASSED the Assembly Committee on Rules
8 voted YES 0 voted NO 3 voted present/not voting
select this voteAssembly Committee on Utilities and CommerceDo pass as amended and be re-referred to the Committee on Appropriations.6/25/2012This motion PASSED the Assembly Committee on Utilities and Commerce
13 voted YES 0 voted NO 2 voted present/not voting
select this voteAssembly Committee on AppropriationsDo pass.8/08/2012This motion PASSED the Assembly Committee on Appropriations
12 voted YES 0 voted NO 5 voted present/not voting
select this voteAssemblySB 594 Wolk Senate Third Reading By WILLIAMS8/30/2012This bill PASSED the Assembly
58 voted YES 10 voted NO 12 voted present/not voting
select this voteSenate Committee on AppropriationsFrom committee: That the Assembly Amendments be concurred in.8/31/2012This motion PASSED the Senate Committee on Appropriations
4 voted YES 2 voted NO 1 voted present/not voting
currently selectedSenateUnfinished Supp 3 SB594 Wolk Concurrence8/31/2012This bill PASSED the Senate
21 voted YES 12 voted NO 7 voted present/not voting
ActionDateDescription
Introduced2/17/2011
2/17/2011Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.
2/18/2011From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 20.
3/03/2011Referred to Com. on HEALTH.
4/15/2011Set for hearing May 4.
4/28/2011From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on HEALTH.
select this voteVote5/04/2011Do pass as amended, and re-refer to the Committee on Appropriations.
5/10/2011From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 6. Noes 3. Page 885.) (May 4).
5/11/2011Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
5/13/2011Set for hearing May 23.
5/23/2011From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 6. Noes 3. Page 1086.) (May 23).
select this voteVote5/23/2011Do pass.
5/24/2011Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
5/25/2011Read third time and amended. Ordered to second reading.
5/26/2011Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
6/01/2011Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 23. Noes 14. Page 1216.) Ordered to the Assembly.
select this voteSenate Vote on Passage6/01/2011Senate 3rd Reading SB594 Wolk
6/02/2011In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.
6/09/2011Referred to Com. on HEALTH.
3/01/2012From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on HEALTH.
3/22/2012Re-referred to Com. on RLS.
select this voteVote5/07/2012Be referred to Committee on Utilities and Commerce.
5/07/2012From committee: Be re-referred to Com. on U. & C. (Ayes 8. Noes 0.) (May 7). Re-referred to Com. on U. & C.
5/15/2012From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on U. & C.
6/18/2012Set, first hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author.
select this voteVote6/25/2012Do pass as amended and be re-referred to the Committee on Appropriations.
7/05/2012From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 13. Noes 0.) (June 25).
8/06/2012Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR. Joint Rule 62(a) file notice suspended. (Page 5751.)
select this voteVote8/08/2012Do pass.
8/09/2012From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 12. Noes 0.) (August 8).
8/13/2012Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
8/23/2012Read third time and amended. (Page 6174.) Ordered to third reading.
8/30/2012Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 58. Noes 10. Page 6667.) Ordered to the Senate.
8/30/2012In Senate. Concurrence in Assembly amendments pending.
select this voteAssembly Vote on Passage8/30/2012SB 594 Wolk Senate Third Reading By WILLIAMS
8/31/2012Re-referred to Com. on RLS. pursuant to Senate Rule 29.10. From committee: Be re-referred to Com. on APPR. pursuant to Senate Rule 29.10. (Ayes 4. Noes 0. Page 5054.) Re-referred to Com. on APPR. From committee: That the Assembly amendments be concurred in. (Ayes 4. Noes 2. Page 5130.) Assembly amendments concurred in. (Ayes 21. Noes 12. Page 5016.) Ordered to engrossing and enrolling.
select this voteVote8/31/2012From committee: That the Assembly Amendments be concurred in.
currently selectedSenate Vote on Passage8/31/2012Unfinished Supp 3 SB594 Wolk Concurrence
9/11/2012Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 4:30 p.m.
9/27/2012Approved by the Governor.
9/27/2012Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 610, Statutes of 2012.

Total contributions given to Senators from interest groups that…

46 Organizations Supported and 4 Opposed; See Which Ones

Organizations that took a position on
An Act to Amend Sections 2827 and 2827.10 of the Public Utilities Code, Relating to Energy.: Unfinished Supp 3 SB594 Wolk Concurrence

46 organizations supported this bill

Ag Biomass Center, Inc.
Senate Rules Committee (2012, August 31). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved September 7, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
Agricultural Energy Consumers Association
Senate Rules Committee (2012, August 31). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved September 7, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
American Farmland Trust
Senate Rules Committee (2012, August 31). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved September 7, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
Btl Enterprises
Senate Rules Committee (2012, August 31). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved September 7, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
California Climate and Agriculture Network
Senate Rules Committee (2012, August 31). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved September 7, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
California Compost Coalition
Senate Rules Committee (2012, August 31). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved September 7, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
California Cotton Ginners and Growers Associations
Senate Rules Committee (2012, August 31). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved September 7, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
California Farm Bureau Federation
Senate Rules Committee (2012, August 31). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved September 7, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
California League of Food Processors
Senate Rules Committee (2012, August 31). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved September 7, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
California Off-Road Vehicle Association
Senate Rules Committee (2012, August 31). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved September 7, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
California Poultry Federation
Senate Rules Committee (2012, August 31). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved September 7, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
City of American Canyon
Senate Rules Committee (2012, August 31). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved September 7, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
Clean World Partners
Senate Rules Committee (2012, August 31). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved September 7, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
Coalition for Adequate School Housing
Senate Rules Committee (2012, August 31). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved September 7, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
Community Alliance with Family Farmers
Senate Rules Committee (2012, August 31). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved September 7, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
Del Mesa Carmel
Senate Rules Committee (2012, August 31). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved September 7, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
Dixon Ridge Farms
Senate Rules Committee (2012, August 31). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved September 7, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
Domaine Carneros Winery
Senate Rules Committee (2012, August 31). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved September 7, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
Environment California
Senate Rules Committee (2012, August 31). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved September 7, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
Far Niente Winery
Senate Rules Committee (2012, August 31). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved September 7, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
First Northern Bank
Senate Rules Committee (2012, August 31). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved September 7, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
Four Winds Grocers
Senate Rules Committee (2012, August 31). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved September 7, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
Full Belly Farm
Senate Rules Committee (2012, August 31). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved September 7, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
Gasser Foundation
Senate Rules Committee (2012, August 31). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved September 7, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
Green Build Energy Group
Senate Rules Committee (2012, August 31). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved September 7, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
Hedgerow Farms
Senate Rules Committee (2012, August 31). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved September 7, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
Lundberg Family Farms
Senate Rules Committee (2012, August 31). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved September 7, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
Mainstream Energy
Senate Rules Committee (2012, August 31). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved September 7, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
Mira International
Senate Rules Committee (2012, August 31). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved September 7, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
Napa County
Senate Rules Committee (2012, August 31). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved September 7, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
Napa Mill
Senate Rules Committee (2012, August 31). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved September 7, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
Napa Valley Vintners
Senate Rules Committee (2012, August 31). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved September 7, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
Quattrocchi Kwok Architects
Senate Rules Committee (2012, August 31). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved September 7, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
Recolte Energy
Senate Rules Committee (2012, August 31). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved September 7, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
Regional Council of Rural Counties
Senate Rules Committee (2012, August 31). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved September 7, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
Ridge Vineyards
Senate Rules Committee (2012, August 31). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved September 7, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
School Energy Coalition
Senate Rules Committee (2012, August 31). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved September 7, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
Solar Energy Industries Association
Senate Rules Committee (2012, August 31). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved September 7, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
Sonoma Valley Unified School District
Senate Rules Committee (2012, August 31). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved September 7, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
Sustainable Agriculture Education
Senate Rules Committee (2012, August 31). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved September 7, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
Swanton Berry Farm
Senate Rules Committee (2012, August 31). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved September 7, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
United Cerebral Palsy Of The North Bay
Senate Rules Committee (2012, August 31). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved September 7, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
Vista Livestock Company
Senate Rules Committee (2012, August 31). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved September 7, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
Vote Solar
Senate Rules Committee (2012, August 31). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved September 7, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
Western Agricultural Processors Association
Senate Rules Committee (2012, August 31). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved September 7, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
Wine Institute
Senate Rules Committee (2012, August 31). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved September 7, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.

4 organizations opposed this bill

California Municipal Utilities Association
Senate Rules Committee (2012, August 31). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved September 7, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
PG&E
Senate Rules Committee (2012, August 31). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved September 7, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
San Diego Gas & Electric
Senate Rules Committee (2012, August 31). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved September 7, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
Southern California Edison
Senate Rules Committee (2012, August 31). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved September 7, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.

Need proof?

View citations of support and opposition

Includes reported contributions to campaigns of Senators in office on day of vote, from interest groups invested in the vote according to MapLight, January 1, 2009 – December 31, 2012.
Contributions data source: FollowTheMoney.org

Contributions by Legislator

Namesort iconPartyDistrict$ From Interest Groups
That Supported
$ From Interest Groups
That Opposed
Vote
Elaine AlquistDCA-13$3,000$0
Joel AndersonRCA-36$45,532$23,600
Tom BerryhillRCA-14$153,168$20,400
Sam BlakesleeRCA-15$0$0
Ron CalderonDCA-30$40,579$20,500
Anthony CannellaRCA-12$136,087$5,000
Ellen CorbettDCA-10$16,400$2,000
Lou CorreaDCA-34$50,363$13,171
Kevin De LeonDCA-22$68,850$21,150
Mark DeSaulnierDCA-7$33,860$13,400
Bob DuttonRCA-31$21,300$7,500
Bill EmmersonRCA-37$66,100$19,100
Noreen EvansDCA-2$57,202$8,400
Jean FullerRCA-18$84,700$30,200
Ted GainesRCA-1$39,021$27,256
Loni HancockDCA-9$24,675$5,000
Tom HarmanRCA-35$32,550$13,100
Ed HernandezDCA-24$72,446$13,800
Bob HuffRCA-29$103,422$21,500
Christine KehoeDCA-39$8,900$12,900
Doug La MalfaRCA-4$33,950$4,500
Mark LenoDCA-3$16,419$3,600
Ted LieuDCA-28$115,971$14,050
Carol LiuDCA-21$22,700$5,925
Alan LowenthalDCA-27$-100$0
Gloria Negrete McLeodDCA-32$41,167$7,100
Alex PadillaDCA-20$87,218$29,050
Fran PavleyDCA-23$45,150$2,650
Curren PriceDCA-26$34,200$13,000
Michael RubioDCA-16$90,987$30,700
Sharon RunnerRCA-17$3,000$2,000
Joe SimitianDCA-11$14,150$4,500
Darrell SteinbergDCA-6$114,232$15,700
Tony StricklandRCA-19$61,940$8,000
Juan VargasDCA-40$54,218$13,900
Mimi WaltersRCA-33$89,850$18,050
Lois WolkDCA-5$34,400$2,500
Rod WrightDCA-25$86,658$29,900
Mark WylandRCA-38$27,549$11,550
Leland YeeDCA-8$52,521$5,900

Add Data Filters:

Legislator Filters
Legislator Filters
Show All
NamePartyDistrict$ From Interest Groups
That Supported
$ From Interest Groups
That Opposed
Vote
Elaine AlquistDCA-13$3,000$0
Joel AndersonRCA-36$45,532$23,600
Tom BerryhillRCA-14$153,168$20,400
Sam BlakesleeRCA-15$0$0
Ron CalderonDCA-30$40,579$20,500
Anthony CannellaRCA-12$136,087$5,000
Ellen CorbettDCA-10$16,400$2,000
Lou CorreaDCA-34$50,363$13,171
Kevin De LeonDCA-22$68,850$21,150
Mark DeSaulnierDCA-7$33,860$13,400
Bob DuttonRCA-31$21,300$7,500
Bill EmmersonRCA-37$66,100$19,100
Noreen EvansDCA-2$57,202$8,400
Jean FullerRCA-18$84,700$30,200
Ted GainesRCA-1$39,021$27,256
Loni HancockDCA-9$24,675$5,000
Tom HarmanRCA-35$32,550$13,100
Ed HernandezDCA-24$72,446$13,800
Bob HuffRCA-29$103,422$21,500
Christine KehoeDCA-39$8,900$12,900
Doug La MalfaRCA-4$33,950$4,500
Mark LenoDCA-3$16,419$3,600
Ted LieuDCA-28$115,971$14,050
Carol LiuDCA-21$22,700$5,925
Alan LowenthalDCA-27$-100$0
Gloria Negrete McLeodDCA-32$41,167$7,100
Alex PadillaDCA-20$87,218$29,050
Fran PavleyDCA-23$45,150$2,650
Curren PriceDCA-26$34,200$13,000
Michael RubioDCA-16$90,987$30,700
Sharon RunnerRCA-17$3,000$2,000
Joe SimitianDCA-11$14,150$4,500
Darrell SteinbergDCA-6$114,232$15,700
Tony StricklandRCA-19$61,940$8,000
Juan VargasDCA-40$54,218$13,900
Mimi WaltersRCA-33$89,850$18,050
Lois WolkDCA-5$34,400$2,500
Rod WrightDCA-25$86,658$29,900
Mark WylandRCA-38$27,549$11,550
Leland YeeDCA-8$52,521$5,900

Interest Groups that supported this bill

$ Donated
Nursing homes$290,523
Wine & distilled spirits manufacturing$287,250
Alternate energy production & services$205,150
Food stores$194,000
Building operators & managers$176,650
Vegetables, fruits & tree nuts$170,832
Education$159,320
Food & beverage products and services$118,754
Poultry & eggs$118,500
Food & kindred products manufacturing$116,600
Farm Bureau/affiliated organizations & PACs$72,913
Livestock$39,200
Environmental policy$35,409
Banks & lending institutions$22,600
Municipal & county government organizations$21,900
Architectural services$19,000
Public school teachers, administrators & officials$18,372
Management consultants & services$16,561
Cotton growers, cotton ginners$8,000
Data processing & computer services$6,500
Environmental services, equipment & consulting$5,450
Nonprofit foundations$2,250
Farmers, crop unspecified$500
Recreational transport$0
Horse breeders$0
Miscellaneous agriculture$0
Human rights$0

Interest Groups that opposed this bill

$ Donated
Gas & electric utilities$296,977
Electric power utilities$203,575
Municipal & county government organizations$21,900
Loading…
Date Range of Contributions
Enter a custom date range