Verified Just and Reasonable Rates CforAT provided substantial While it does not directly note CforAT’s discussion and legal analysis input on this issue, the Final Decision of the Commission’s ongoing clearly and repeatedly reiterates its obligation to ensure that all recognition of the Commission’s Californians have access to obligation to ensure that rates are just reliable service at just and and reasonable for all customers. See reasonable rates. See e.g. e,g, Final Decision at p. 189, COL 1 and Belser/Kasnitz Testimony at p. 191, COL 17. pp. 7-10 (including proposal to CforAT, along with other consumer create a metric to measure advocates, argued that the Commission “telecommunications should take additional action to ensure burden”); CforAT Opening that rates are just and reasonable. Brief at pp. 9-14; and CforAT While the Final Decision does not cite to Reply Brief at pp. 2-4. CforAT specifically in its discussion of comments received on the PD, CforAT and Greenlining also urged further action to address the concerns identified elsewhere in the decision. See CforAT/Greenlining Comments on PD at pp. 7-11 and Final Decision at pp. 171-173. Whether the Proceeding Verified Should Remain Open In considering further action on the CforAT, along with other issues identified through this consumer advocates, argued investigation, the Final Decision notes that the Commission should the sharp disagreement among parties keep this proceeding open and as to whether the proceeding should initiate a second phase in order remain open. Final Decision at pp. to consider remedies to the 170. While it eventually determines to harms identified through this close the proceeding over the objections first investigatory phase, and of intervenors (including CforAT), the to facilitate data sharing of Final Decision recommits the information that is expected to Commission to ongoing work “to be developed through the gather data about the reporting mechanisms created telecommunications market to enable in the Final Decision. us to perform our obligations under the CforAT/Greenlining Opening law, which include administering Comments on PD at pp. 7-11; public purpose programs, monitoring CforAT Reply Comments on
Just and Reasonable Rates CforAT provided substantial discussion and legal analysis of the Commission’s ongoing obligation to ensure that all Californians have access to reliable service at just and reasonable rates. See e.g. Belser/Kasnitz Testimony at pp. 7-10 (including proposal to create a metric to measure “telecommunications burden”); CforAT Opening Brief at pp. 9-14; and CforAT Reply Brief at pp. 2-4. While it does not directly note CforAT’s input on this issue, the Final Decision clearly and repeatedly reiterates its recognition of the Commission’s obligation to ensure that rates are just and reasonable for all customers. See e,g, Final Decision at p. 189, COL 1 and p. 191, COL 17. CforAT, along with other consumer advocates, argued that the Commission should take additional action to ensure that rates are just and reasonable. While the Final Decision does not cite to CforAT specifically in its discussion of comments received on the PD, CforAT and Greenlining also urged further action to address the concerns identified elsewhere in the decision. See CforAT/Greenlining Comments on PD at pp. 7-11 and Final Decision at pp. 171-173. Verified Whether the Proceeding Should Remain Open CforAT, along with other consumer advocates, argued that the Commission should keep this proceeding open and initiate a second phase in order to consider remedies to the harms identified through this first investigatory phase, and to facilitate data sharing of information that is expected to be developed through the reporting mechanisms created in the Final Decision. CforAT/Greenlining Opening Comments on PD at pp. 7-11; CforAT Reply Comments on In considering further action on the issues identified through this investigation, the Final Decision notes the sharp disagreement among parties as to whether the proceeding should remain open. Final Decision at pp. While it eventually determines to close the proceeding over the objections of intervenors (including CforAT), the Final Decision recommits the Commission to ongoing work “to gather data about the telecommunications market to enable us to perform our obligations under the law, which include administering public purpose programs, monitoring 170. Verified