Senate BillIntroducedCivil Procedure
SB 875: Public utilities: eminent domain: just compensation.
What SB 875 does, verified June 1, 2026
This bill aims to amend laws related to public utilities, specifically in the Pacific Gas and Electric Company service area. It would exempt certain electrical and gas public utility properties from rebuttable presumptions regarding just compensation for eminent domain proceedings. Additionally, it would modify the resolution of necessity process for local public entities within the service area, making it conclusive instead of rebuttable. The bill would also require the Public Utilities Commission to review changes in ownership of electrical and gas corporations more narrowly, focusing on the impact on affected employees. Furthermore, it would establish procedures for reimbursing costs associated with the separation of public utility assets and prohibit public utilities from recovering litigation costs from ratepayers. The bill makes legislative findings on the necessity of special sta…
Bill journey
1IntroducedCurrent
2In CommitteePending
3First Chamber FloorPending
4Second ChamberPending
5GovernorPending
6ChapteredPending
Last action: April 21 set for first hearing. Failed passage in committee. (Ayes 4. Noes 1. Page 3973.) (2026-04-21)Alert me
Author and sponsors
Full contact details, staff, and committees with Connect, $16/moUnlockRecent actions10 total · showing 5
| Apr. 21, 2026 | April 21 set for first hearing. Failed passage in committee. (Ayes 4. Noes 1. Page 3973.) |
| Apr. 16, 2026 | Set for hearing April 21. |
| Apr. 15, 2026 | From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on E., U & C. (Ayes 7. Noes 1. Page 3867.) (April 14). Re-referred to Com. on E., U & C. |
| Apr. 06, 2026 | From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on JUD. |
| Mar. 18, 2026 | Set for hearing April 14. |
Latest bill textAmended version, April 6, 2026 · 1,083 words
| Amended IN Senate April 06, 2026 |
| Amended IN Senate February 24, 2026 |
CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE— 2025–2026 REGULAR SESSION
Senate Bill
No. 875
| Introduced by Senator Wiener (Principal coauthors: Assembly Members Haney and Stefani) |
January 06, 2026 |
An act to amend Sections 1240.650, 1245.250, and 1268.610 1240.650 and 1245.250 of the Code of Civil Procedure, and to amend Section 851 of Sections 851 and 1411 of, and to add Sections 1410.5 and 1425 to, the Public Utilities Code, relating to public utilities.
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
SB 875, as amended, Wiener. Public utilities: eminent domain. domain: just compensation.
(1) 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. Existing law requires a court to award a defendant their litigation expenses if the eminent domain proceeding is dismissed or if there is a final judgment that the plaintiff cannot acquire the property by eminent domain, as provided.
This bill would specify that if exempt from that rebuttable presumption property that has been appropriated to a public use that is electrical, gas, or water electrical or gas public utility property that a public entity within the Pacific Gas and Electric Company service area intends to put to the same use, the presumption of a more necessary use is conclusive and not rebuttable. The bill would specify that the above-described litigation expenses provisions do not apply to those proceedings. area.
(2) 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.
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, gas, or water electrical or gas public utility property, and the local public entity intends to put the property to the same use, property, the resolution of necessity instead creates a conclusive and not rebuttable presumption that those matters are true. conclusively establishes those matters.
(3) 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.
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 within the Pacific Gas and Electric Company service area, 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.
(4) 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.
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.
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.
This
(5) 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.Under
(6) 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 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.
(4)The
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.
Text of SB 875 as amended, from the official record. Connect Plus keeps every version and highlights what changed.Compare versions