2. Background

C.00-01-017 was filed by Hambly, against the defendant, Hillsboro Properties (Hillsboro), the owner of the Los Robles Mobilehome Park (Los Robles), and the City of Novato (Novato). Hambly claimed that Hillsboro assessed the Los Robles tenants annual rent increases that, though approved by Novato under its rent control authority, resulted in higher charges for submetered natural gas and electric service than Pub. Util. Code § 739.5(a) permits.²

On May 17, 2000, the assigned Commissioner issued a Scoping Memo. It identified the following issues:

Issue 1. Whether operation of Novato's "Calculation of Net Operating Income" formula (Mobilehome Rent Control Ordinance, 1999, Section 20-12.A.3.) results in higher gas and electricity charges for submetered mobilehome tenants than the rates applicable to mobilehome customers directly served by Pacific Gas and Electric Company;

Issue 2. Whether Hillsboro has improperly included in its rent increase petitions any expenses for maintenance, repair or upgrade of the Los Robles submeter system; and

Issue 3. Whether expenses for installation, maintenance, and upgrade of electric pedestals are included within the master-meter discount.

On June 30, 2000, GSMOL filed a petition to intervene on Issues 1 and 3. On July 13, 2000, the assigned Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) issued a ruling granting the petition. On August 11, 2000, GSMOL filed a notice that it would also be representing Hambly.³ The notice stated that where appropriate or necessary, separate briefs would be submitted on behalf of Hambly and GSMOL to avoid confusion as to which was speaking.

On August 23, 2001, the Commission issued D.01-08-040 in favor of Hambly. Hillsboro was directed to calculate the reimbursements owed its tenants, and to file and serve a report with the calculations. Thereafter, Hambly and Hillsboro were ordered to meet and confer to discuss the calculations in a good faith effort to explore and reconcile any differences between them. Hambly was then required to file a notice of acceptance of the calculations or to file separate calculations performed in accordance with the Commission's determinations. If Hambly filed a notice of acceptance of the calculations, the Commission's Executive Director was to close the proceeding. Otherwise,

additional proceedings were to be held as necessary to resolve the discrepancies between the parties. Once the refunds were quantified, Hillsboro was required to reimburse the tenants. The parties were unable to reach agreement on the refunds at that time.

On September 24, 2001, the Western Manufactured Housing Communities Association (WMA) filed an application for rehearing of D.01-08-040 that was denied by D.02-01-043. On February 11, 2002, Hillsboro and WMA filed for a writ of review and for a writ of mandate. These filings were consolidated and heard by the Court of Appeal, First Appellate District, Division Two (Court). On April 1, 2003, the court issued its opinion upholding D.01-08-040.⁴

On April 7, 2004, Hambly and Hillsboro filed a motion to close C.00-01-017. They stated that they had resolved the issues regarding quantification of the refunds, and that no further Commission action was necessary.⁵ By D.04-06-007, the Commission closed C.00-01-017.

"The commission shall require that, whenever gas or electric service, or both, is provided by a master-meter customer to users who are tenants of a mobilehome park, apartment building, or similar residential complex, the master-meter customer shall charge each user of the service at the same rate which would be applicable if the user were receiving gas or electricity, or both, directly from the gas or electrical corporation."