Joint powers agreements: water corporations.
The legislation potentially transforms how water corporations in California manage their operational risks and insurance needs by enabling collaboration with local agencies through joint powers agreements. This could lead to more competitive insurance rates and improved services for consumers. The bill also mandates that any cost savings achieve through these joint powers agreements are to be passed on directly to customers rather than to shareholders, which may foster a more consumer-oriented approach among water corporations.
Assembly Bill 2735, introduced by Assembly Member Blanca Rubio, amends certain sections of the Government Code relating to water corporations and their capacity to enter into joint powers agreements. The bill allows a water corporation to partner with public agencies and mutual water companies to provide insurance and engage in risk pooling, which is intended to enhance operational efficiencies and financial stability. It aims to ensure that such partnerships can result in better protections and services for customers of these water providers, with a focus on reducing costs and enhancing availability of insurance services.
The sentiment surrounding AB 2735 appears largely supportive, especially among advocates for improved management practices within public utilities. Proponents argue that it empowers water entities while simultaneously providing them with the tools to reduce operational costs and liability, thereby benefiting consumers. However, there might be concerns regarding the balance of power between local public agencies and the water corporations involved, particularly related to accountability and the risk-sharing aspects of joint agreements.
However, the bill's introduction could also spark some contention, especially regarding the regulatory frameworks governing California’s water supply. Some stakeholders may perceive the provisions for joint powers agreements as an avenue for larger corporations to consolidate power in ways that could limit local control. Additionally, questions may arise about how effectively these joint agreements can be regulated to ensure they maintain their intended purpose without leading to mismanagement or insufficient coverage for all constituents involved.