Public Meetings and Comments Regarding 714 Area Code Changes
The California Public Utilities Code requires that NANPA and Commission staff conduct at least one local jurisdiction and three public meetings within nine months from when NANPA informs the Commission of the need for an area code change.7 The statute also requires NANPA and Commission staff to inform the local representatives and the public about the area code change options.8 These meetings allow for the local representatives and the public to voice their opinions and to discuss the possible impacts of the proposed area code change options.9
Accordingly, with NANPA's assistance, the Commission's staff conducted an extensive public comment process beginning with a meeting with officials from various local jurisdictions on January 17, 2007, in Anaheim. Subsequently, NANPA and Commission staff conducted three public meetings: one each in Anaheim, Orange, and Huntington Beach. Of the 64 speakers' comments during these local jurisdiction and public meetings, 27 supported the overlay, 21 supported various splits, and 16 favored no action at all.
The Commission's Public Advisor's Office also accepted written comments via postal and electronic mail subsequent to these local jurisdiction and public meetings. It received 182 written comments of which 94 preferred the overlay, 38 preferred various splits, and 47 favored no area code change. Moreover, Commission staff developed a method for the public to submit their comments and preferences online via the Commission's web site. The Commission received 1,575 comments via this online method of which 718 supported the overlay, 590 favored various splits, and 199 opposed any area code change.
Subsequent to the local jurisdiction and public meetings, NANPA received requests to analyze two additional split alternatives, one proposed by the City of Anaheim and the other from the Orange County Fire Authority. NANPA calculated the projected lives for each of these additional split alternatives, both of which resulted in unbalanced lives, thereby making them infeasible to implement.10
7 Public Utilities Code, Chapter 3.5, Section 7931(e)(2).
8 Id.
9 Id.
10 "Unbalanced lives" for an area code split means that one side will last considerably longer - perhaps years longer - than the other side, which would create an inequity for affected consumers, and would require adding yet another area code prematurely.
