23. County of Inyo,
26 Cal. 3d 154 (1980), 604 P.2d 566.
In a lengthy opinion examining the constitutional and statutory underpinnings of the Commission’s jurisdiction, the Court affirmed a Commission order dismissing petitioner’s complaint seeking Commission review of rates assessed by the Los Angeles Department of Water & Power. The Court held that that while Article XII, Section 5, of the California Constitution authorized the Legislature to provide the Commission with jurisdiction over municipalities providing water service outside their boundaries, the Legislature had never enacted a statute so providing²³. See PG&E (Para. 10) and Hillsboro Properties, 108 Cal. App. 4^th 246 (2003) for examples of legislative exercise of authority under Article XII Section 5 (the former by implication while the latter by express direction.) See also Independent Energy Producers v. McPherson, 38 Cal. 4^th 1020 (2006) in which the California Supreme Court held that references in the California Constitution to the authority of the Legislature to enact specified legislation also embrace the reserved right of the people to legislate through the initiative power; the Court held that a reference to the Legislature’s plenary power in Cal. Const., Art. XII, § 5, does not preclude the people, through their exercise of the initiative process, from conferring additional powers or authority upon the Commission.