After being on the hot seat for seeking contributions from regulated utilities, California Public Utilities Commission member Timothy Simon was unanimously recommended for confirmation February 20. During the Senate Rules Committee hearing, numerous parties, including his mentor, former Speaker of the Assembly Willie Brown, along with the Division of Ratepayer Advocates and representatives from churches, racial justice, and minority organizations, advocated for his confirmation. The Utility Reform Network was the only major opposition. The committee voted 5-0 to recommend that the full Senate confirm Simon after the chair, Senator pro Tem Don Perata (D-Oakland), said he was introducing legislation requiring that regulators disclose any financial contributions they receive. In January, Simon held a “green energy” and jobs summit. Last November, he sought investor-owned utility contributions for the event. A short while later, he voted along with his fellow commissioners to allow Pacific Gas & Electric, Southern California Edison, and San Diego Gas & Electric to reap bonuses even if they fell short of set energy efficiency targets. The Los Angeles Times exposed Simon’s solicitation and the receipt of utility money the day of the committee hearing. “There was no quid pro quo,” Simon insisted. He touted the conference goal of ensuring that low income and minority Californians reap some of the benefits of the expected green energy boom. He apologized for any “appearance of impropriety,” adding that he sought legal advice prior to soliciting funds for the day-long conference. “They should have advised you better,” Perata said. The chair said he was “astounded” Simon wasn’t informed of the potential conflict of interest arising from using agency staff time and use of state emails and phones to raise private funds. “In our business it is illegal.” Perata asked the CPUC to look into the Times’ allegations of impropriety. The Senate is expected to approve the confirmation as early as February 25. Simon also was grilled about his position on key rulings, including the proposal requiring both investor-owned utilities and publicly owned utilities to be subjected to a carbon trading scheme. Simon said he did not support imposing a cap-and-trade market for greenhouse gases on munis, as pitched last week in a draft ruling by CPUC president Mike Peevey. “I see no reason why the CPUC should force a cap-and-trade program on publicly owned utilities,” Simon said in response to concerns raised by Senator Alex Padilla (D-San Fernando). The Los Angeles Department of Water & Power and other munis, which have some dependence on coal-fired power, strenuously object to an electricity sector cap-and-trade market because of what they claim to be an onerous cost. The CPUC has been pushing for a carbon market for months so Perata warned Simon about growing opposition to cap-and-trade by environmental justice groups. (Under a cap-and-trade program, emissions from businesses are put under a limit that gradually declines. If companies keep their emissions under that level, they can sell their unused emissions rights to companies that may need to exceed their limits. Overall emissions from all companies, however, are to remain under the collective emissions cap.) The committee chair also wanted to know why Simon supported Peevey’s proposal using $600 million of ratepayer money to fund climate research at the University of California. “I think it is a singularly bad idea,” Perata said. “It is the industry that should be paying for the impacts of climate change.” Simon defended the December 2007 proposal, saying funding was needed to support climate change research. The regulator insisted his top priority was to protect struggling ratepayers and ensure utility rates are fair and just.