CALIFORNIA
FOCUS
FOR RELEASE: TUESDAY, APRIL 21, 2015 OR THEREAFTER
FOR RELEASE: TUESDAY, APRIL 21, 2015 OR THEREAFTER
BY THOMAS D. ELIAS
“SMELL OF FEAR AS UTILITIES COMMISSION LAWYERS UP”
The strong odor surrounding
California’s most powerful regulatory commission this spring stems not only
from corrupt-seeming decisions but also from fear. Fear that past and present
members or top staffers of the state Public Utilities Commission might do jail time.
Fear they could see personal fortunes decimated by legal fees while fending off
state and federal criminal investigations.
How bad have things become at the PUC,
which sets prices for privately-owned utilities like Pacific Gas &
Electric, Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric?
Even the commission’s new president,
Michael Picker, said the other day that when it comes to cleaning up his
agency, “I think we have a long way to go.” Of course, over the last 17 months,
he backed every questionable decision pushed by disgraced former PUC President
Michael Peevey.
Like many outfits overcome by fear,
the PUC has lately tried to cover up by claiming internal documents are
“privileged” and by hiring top defense attorneys. The commission’s first
contract with the SheppardMullin law firm was for $49,000, work to be done at a
“discount” rate of $882 per hour. That deal fell just below the $50,000 level
where state contracts for outside work must be approved by the Department of
General Services.
But the Picker-led PUC has followed up
by awarding SheppardMullin a contract for $5.2 million for the rest of this
year. Both agreements may be illegal, even if the new one is approved by the
DGS.
Still,
there is little doubt of that approval. All present PUC members were appointed
by Gov. Jerry Brown, who also named all top officials of the DGS, so this is
really the right hand approving what the left hand wants. What’s more, Brown’s
chief of staff, Nancy McFadden, was PG&E’s chief lobbyist in Sacramento
before joining him.
Asked under what authority it hired
SheppardMullin, the PUC cited state government code section 995.8. That section
says a public entity can only hire criminal lawyers to defend present or former
officials if “The public entity determines that such defense would be in the
best interests of the public entity…” The PUC would have to hold hearings to
make such a circular determination, but it has not.
This makes the big-buck pacts appear
illegal, no matter what the DGS might rule.
The obvious question here is why state
taxpayers should fund the defense of officials who may have conspired with big
utilities to bilk them via decisions like the one forcing consumers to pay most
costs for retiring the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station.
Commission spokeswoman Terrie Prosper
claims outside lawyers are needed because the PUC “does not have the
expertise…or time to handle…the massive amount of work that needs to be done
to…manage and cooperate with investigations.”
The SheppardMullin contract
suggests that “managing investigations” includes stonewalling requests for
documents while “assisting in public relations.” It says attorneys will also
“develop and manage litigation strategies” and “assist and attend interviews of
commission employees by investigators (including preparing witnesses).”
“This means the $5.2 million is for a
cover-up,” says former San Diego City Attorney Michael Aguirre, who has sued to
block the contracts. “They will restrain and restrict documents and the
testimony of witnesses and use privilege to (try to) conceal crimes.”
Aguirre notes the commission never
formally voted to spend the money, but PUC Executive Director Timothy Sullivan
simply signed the new contract. Because the PUC itself cannot be indicted, it’s
clear the money will be spent to help defend individuals – present or former
commission officials.
Neither
Sullivan nor any other PUC official responds to repeated inquiries about who
SheppardMullin will defend. Nor would the PUC say why those officials should
not fund their own defenses.
Aguirre suggests that if Picker really
favors transparency, as he often claims, he would waive all privilege and open
every commission document to press, public and investigators, saving the $5.2
million in legal fees.
But Picker repeatedly refuses to be
interviewed and by the end of March, the commission had spent more than $2
million on outside lawyers to deny document requests during the last six
months, all without a hearing.
So the smell of fear is plain at the
PUC, and no one can predict the next major errors and cover-up attempts that
might produce.
-30-
Email Thomas Elias at tdelias@aol.com. His book, "The Burzynski Breakthrough: The Most Promising Cancer Treatment and the Government’s Campaign to Squelch It," is now available in a soft cover fourth edition. For more Elias columns, visit www.californiafocus.net
Email Thomas Elias at tdelias@aol.com. His book, "The Burzynski Breakthrough: The Most Promising Cancer Treatment and the Government’s Campaign to Squelch It," is now available in a soft cover fourth edition. For more Elias columns, visit www.californiafocus.net
No comments:
Post a Comment