California Air Resources Board

Summary

Would have established a new regulatory structure at the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) for metal shredding facilities. The bill, among other things, would have required that any metal shredding facility permit action taken by DTSC consider the conclusions and recommendations set forth in a community emissions reduction program prepared by a local air district and any other health risk assessment conducted by a local air district pursuant to the Air Toxics “Hot Spots” Information and Assessment Act of 1987 or other applicable law. The bill would have required that, if an air quality health risk assessment had not been conducted, the owner or operator of the facility would have had to conduct an analysis of equivalent scope and depth as approved by the local air district.

View full bill text here  

Governor’s Veto Message

To the Members of the California State Senate:

I am returning Senate Bill 404 without my signature.

The bill would establish a comprehensive regulatory program for metal shredding facilities to be administered by the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) and would require metal shredding facilities to obtain a permit from DTSC.

I support the author's intent to create a uniform structure for permitting metal shredding facilities in California. These facilities are critical to maintaining supply chain stability, recycling millions of end-of-life vehicles, household appliances, and other metallic items produced, used, and discarded annually in California. Unless recycled, these metal materials would overwhelm available landfill capacity, creating a massive accumulation of damaged and abandoned cars, appliances, and other items.

However, this bill lacks clear definitions regarding the materials processed at these facilities, including what "hazardous waste" requirements are applicable. Without this clarity, this bill is not as protective, places a significant burden on DTSC, and cannot be successfully implemented.

I encourage the author to work closely with DTSC and interested parties to remedy this issue, as well as ensure that any future legislation requires metal shredding facilities operate, and be permitted to operate, in a health-protective manner.

For these reasons, I cannot sign this bill.

Sincerely,

Gavin Newsom

View Governor’s veto message here

Would have required State agencies to prioritize strategies to reduce methane emissions, including emissions from imported petroleum and natural gas, where feasible and cost effective and would have required CARB to encourage natural gas procurement on behalf of the State to shift to certified natural gas producing low methane emissions, as verified by "measure, monitor, report, and verify” (MMRV) protocols. The bill also would have authorized CARB, the Public Utilities Commission, and other relevant agencies to assess existing programs and apply MMRV protocols to reduce methane emissions, including emissions from imported petroleum and natural gas procured by utilities and other large gas users, utilizing all relevant sources and standards, including, but not limited to, emissions data, models, or protocols from existing or new regulations.

View full bill text here

Governor’s Veto Message:

To the Members of the California State Senate:

I am returning Senate Bill 613 without my signature.

This bill requires the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), California Air Resources Board (CARB), and other state agencies to prioritize strategies to reduce methane emissions, including from imported fossil natural gas. This bill also authorizes state agencies to apply "measure, monitor, report, and verify" (MMRV) protocols and directs the CPUC to assess whether shifting to certified low-methane natural gas is consistent with the interests of ratepayers.

Fossil natural gas is primarily composed of methane gas, which is a short-lived climate pollutant with a global warming potential more than 80 times greater than carbon dioxide over a 20-year period. The potency of this gas and its climate impact have prompted numerous legislative and regulatory efforts over the years to quantify, identify, and minimize fugitive methane emissions from fossil natural gas infrastructure and to deploy cost-effective leak abatement investments and programs. Currently, our state imports up to 90 percent of its fossil natural gas from out-of-state and relies on this energy source to fuel critical industries and provide essential heating services to many Californians. This demand is expected to decrease in the coming years as we move closer to our 2045 carbon neutrality goal. During this period, we must not lose sight of the state's immediate needs as we continue our collective efforts to transition to clean gaseous fuels and clean electricity.

While well-intended, this bill establishes new requirements that are unclear, duplicative, and risk increasing costs for gas customers in the near term, and could jeopardize fossil natural gas service reliability. I encourage the CPUC, CARB, and other state agencies to continue existing efforts to further minimize methane emissions from the fossil natural gas sector thoughtfully and pragmatically, while continuing to advance the production and use of clean fuels and the clean electrification of many end-uses in the state.

For these reasons, I cannot sign this bill.

Sincerely,

Gavin Newsom

View Governor’s Veto Message Here

Would have requiredCARB, on or before January 1, 2028, to publish on its website an assessment of the life-cycle emissions from alternative uses of forest and agricultural biomass residues. The bill also would have required CARB, on or before January 1, 2028, to complete a comprehensive strategy to support beneficial carbon removal products generated from agricultural or forest biomass resources, including, but not limited to, biochar, as specified. This bill also would have required the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection to require, as feasible, for State-funded forest health projects, a disposal plan describing how much biomass residue should be physically removed versus burned by prescribed burn. The bill also would have required the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission to investigate the use of biomass fuel made from biomass residues, as specified.

View full bill text here

Governor’s Veto Message:

To the Members of the California State Senate:

I am returning Senate Bill 88 without my signature.

This bill would require the California Air Resources Board to develop specified methods and protocols to quantify the avoided emissions and beneficial uses of forest and agricultural biomass. This bill also would direct the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection to require forest health projects to include a resource disposal component, and the California Energy Commission to include biomass-derived low- and negative-carbon fuels in certain reports.

Throughout my Administration, I have been supportive of advancing methods and practices to sustainably address the growing amount of woody biomass waste in the state, primarily due to the risk it presents of exacerbating catastrophic wildfires. This is why my Administration, for years, has recommended and acted on strategies to address this challenge and risk.

While I applaud the authors' desire to further this work, most of the requirements in this bill are duplicative of existing efforts. At the same time, other provisions would trigger new and substantial costs at each of the affected agencies not accounted for in the 2025 Budget Act. In partnership with the Legislature this year, my Administration has enacted a balanced budget that recognizes the challenging fiscal landscape our state faces while maintaining our commitment to working families and our most vulnerable communities. With significant fiscal pressures and the federal government's hostile economic policies, it is vital that we remain disciplined when considering bills with significant fiscal implications that are not included in the budget, such as this measure.

For these reasons, I cannot sign this bill.

Sincerely,

Gavin Newsom

View Governor’s veto message here

Extends a number of timelines in the process of determining regional housing needs, regional housing needs allocations, and housing element revisions, and requires the Department of Housing and Community Development to provide specific analysis or text to local governments to remedy deficiencies in their draft housing element revisions.

View full bill text here

To the Members of the California State Assembly:

I am returning Assembly Bill 650 without my signature.

This bill would require the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD), if it finds that a draft housing element is deficient, to provide the specific analysis and the draft text that should be included in the jurisdiction's housing element.

I share the author's interest in improving the housing element process. In partnership with the Legislature, we have enacted numerous reforms to strengthen this process by demanding more rigorous site inventories, enforceable rezoning, and stronger accountability mechanisms to uphold state law.

Although intended to build on these recent efforts, I am concerned that this bill would inappropriately shift responsibility for preparing housing elements from local jurisdictions to HCD. While HCD provides technical assistance when requested and in response to inadequate housing elements, that support is no substitute to the local government's fundamental responsibility to plan for its share of housing needs. Further, shifting these duties to the state would add at least $11 million in new annual costs.

Housing element law has advanced considerably through recent legislation, much of which is now being implemented in the current planning cycle. As these changes take hold, it is critical to preserve the fundamental structure of local planning responsibility under state oversight. However, I look forward to continuing to work with the Legislature on additional opportunities to further improve this process.

For these reasons, I cannot sign this bill.

Sincerely,

Gavin Newsom

See veto message here

Would have required the California Coastal Commission (Commission) to authorize blue carbon demonstration projects and develop, in consultation with CARB and other parties, a blue carbon demonstration project program. The bill would have allowed the Commission to require an applicant with a nonresidential project that impacts coastal wetland, subtidal, intertidal, or marine habitats or ecosystems to build or contribute to a blue carbon demonstration project as a mitigation measure.

View full bill text here

Governor’s Veto Message

To the Members of the California State Assembly:

I am returning Assembly Bill 399 without my signature.

This bill would authorize the  California Coastal Commission to facilitate the development of blue carbon demonstration projects in certain coastal areas and wetlands.

California is a global leader in advancing nature-based carbon capture and sequestration solutions, having built and expanded our portfolio of actions over decades. In fact, between 2020 and 2024 alone, the state invested approximately $9.6 billion in nature-based solutions. Additionally, my Administration developed and released achievable carbon removal targets for natural and working lands as a result of Assembly Bill 1757 (C. Garcia) in 2022. That same year, the Natural and Working Land Climate Smart Strategy cataloged over 350 efforts across state agencies to deliver meaningful nature-based solutions for climate action.

While I share the author's desire to accelerate novel nature-based climate solutions, this bill creates a new, unfunded program. In partnership with the Legislature this year, my Administration has enacted a balanced budget that recognizes the challenging fiscal landscape our state faces while maintaining our commitment to working families and our most vulnerable communities. With significant fiscal pressures and the federal government's hostile economic policies, it is vital that we remain disciplined when considering bills with significant fiscal implications that are not included in the budget, such as this measure.

For these reasons, I cannot sign this bill.

Sincerely,

Gavin Newsom

See veto message here

Would have required the California Energy Commission (CEC), in coordination with the State Lands Commission, California State Transportation Agency (CalSTA) and CARB, to develop a plan by December 31, 2030, for the alternative fuel needs of oceangoing vessels at seaports that will enable the ports to meet their emission reduction goals. CARB would have been required to provide the CEC with information regarding OGV fuel types that comply with CARB's regulations. The bill also would have required the CEC to convene a working group, including CARB, to assist with the development of the information required by the plan, as specified.

View full bill text here

Governor’s Veto Message

To the Members of the California State Senate:

 I am returning Senate Bill 298 without my signature.

 This bill would require the California Energy Commission (CEC), in coordination with the State Lands Commission, California State Transportation Agency, and the California Air Resources Board (CARB), to develop a plan by December 31, 2030, for the alternative fuel needs of Ocean-Going Vessels (OGVs) at ports that will meet ports' emission reduction goals.

 As the nation's premier gateway for international trade, California's ports are an essential component of the nation's economy. I strongly support efforts to plan and deploy zero-emission infrastructure and technologies at our ports. This is why CARB has already begun the informal rulemaking phase for an OGV In-Transit Regulation to reduce harmful air pollution from OGVs while transiting, maneuvering, and anchoring in waters off the California coastline.

 Though well-intentioned, the plan required by this bill could complicate CARB 's active OGV In-Transit rulemaking and result in costs to the CEC's primary operating fund, which is currently facing an ongoing structural deficit, thus exacerbating the fund's structural imbalance. I encourage the supporters of this measure to work with CARB through its rulemaking process to collaboratively identify solutions for deploying alternative fuels at our ports.

 For these reasons, I cannot sign this bill.

 Sincerely,

Gavin Newsom

View Governor’s veto message here

Would have imposed new requirements on the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) for any adoption or amendment of a rule or regulation that has new or additional emissions reduction requirements on sources of air pollution associated with an operation at the ports, including the proposed Port Indirect Source Rule (ISR), until January 1, 2031. The bill would have prohibited any port-related actions that impose a cap on cargo throughput or cruise ship passengers at the ports or uses public funds to require or incentivize automated or remotely operated equipment or supporting infrastructure.  

View full bill text here

Governor’s Veto Message

To the Members of the California State Senate:

 I am returning Senate Bill 34 without my signature.

 This bill would impose new requirements on the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) for any adoption or amendment of a rule or regulation passed after July 1, 2025 that imposes new or additional emissions reduction requirements on sources of air pollution associated with port operations. The bill also would prohibit any port-related action that imposes a cap on cargo throughput or cruise ship passengers, or uses public funds to require or incentivize the use of automated or remotely operated equipment or supporting infrastructure. All these prohibitions and requirements would remain in effect until January l, 2031.

 California's ports are critical to the stability of our national and global supply chains and ore relied upon by most Americans to meet their everyday needs. Today, our ports handle about 40 percent of the nation's containerized imports and 30 percent of our notion's exports, making them vital points in the flow of goods and commerce. At the same time, ports are also one of the most significant sources of local air pollution due to their reliance on fossil fuels. Over the past several years, our ports have mode tremendous progress in building zero-emission infrastructure to reduce harmful air and climate pollution that benefits not just the ports, but also the surrounding communities.

 With the current federal Administration directly undermining our state and local air and climate pollution reduction strategies, it is imperative that we maintain the tools we have and encourage cooperative action at all levels to avoid the worst health and climate impacts. To that end, I am encouraged by the productive discussions between the SCAQMD and the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach to identify and advance prudent air quality improvement measures and the SCAQMD 's recent unanimous direction to staff to further their efforts to reach a Cooperative Agreement. This locally driven and collaborative approach toward reducing air and climate pollution is the type of consensus that should be supported and encouraged. This bill interferes with this approach, the progress made, and the ongoing good faith efforts made by the SCAQMD and the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach.

 For this reason, I cannot sign this bill.

 Sincerely,

Gavin Newsom

View Governor’s veto message here

Would have required all agencies and departments subject to the Governor’s authority to develop or update their strategic plan to reflect the use of data analysis and inclusive practices to more effectively advance racial equity and to respond to identified disparities with changes to the organization’s policies, programs, and operations. Applicable agencies and departments would have been required to report their progress the Governor and Joint Legislative Budget Committee by April 1, 2026, and each April 1 thereafter. This bill would have also required agencies and departments to engage with and gather input from California communities that have been historically disadvantaged and underserved within the scope of policies or programs administered or implemented.

View full bill text here

Governor’s Veto Message

To the Members of the California State Assembly:

 I am returning Assembly Bill 766 without my signature.

 This bill would require agencies, departments, offices, or commissions under the Governor's authority to develop or update their strategic plans to more effectively advance racial equity and respond to identified disparities with changes to the organization's policies, programs, and operations. This bill would also require each entity to report to the Legislature and Governor, by April 1, 2026, and annually thereafter, on the steps taken to develop and adopt a strategic plan.

 I share the author's goal to ensure equity is embedded within my Administration's actions and plans. In 2022, I signed EO N-16-22, which provided a framework towards helping make the California Dream a reality for every one of us. That EO also created the 11-member Racial Equity Commission to recommend tools, methodologies, and opportunities to address inequities facing historically underserved and marginalized communities across the state.

Unfortunately, the bill's timelines for reporting on strategic plans, along with the additional information entities must include in their plan and uncertainty around which entities are required to comply, are unworkable. Lastly, expanding the reporting requirements to all entities under my purview with these accelerated timelines will lead to significant costs not accounted for in this year's final budget agreement.

 In partnership with the Legislature this year, my Administration has enacted a balanced budget that recognizes the challenging fiscal landscape our state aces while maintaining our commitment to working families and our most vulnerable communities. With significant fiscal pressures and the federal government's hostile economic policies, it is vital that we remain disciplined when considering bills with significant fiscal implications that are not included in the budget, such as this measure.

 For these reasons, I cannot sign this bill.

 Sincerely,

Gavin Newsom

View Governor’s veto message here

Would have required CARB to consider, for any future regulation or amendment regarding the procurement or use of medium- and heavy-duty zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs) by a public or private fleet, that car rental customers are responsible for a car's miles driven and any associated emissions, rather than the rental company. The bill also would have required CARB to “consider” how rentals can help obligated entities comply with regulations in a more cost-effective and flexible manner, as well as a myriad of other perceived benefits.

View full bill text here

Governor’s Veto Message

To the Members of the California State Assembly:

 I am returning Assembly Bill 620 without my signature.

 This bill would require the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to consider, for any future regulation or amendment regarding the procurement or use of medium- and heavy-duty (MD/HD) zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs) by a public or private fleet, that car rental customers are responsible for a car's miles driven and any associated emissions.

 In 2020, I issued Executive Order (EO) N-79-20, which directed CARB, among other things, to develop strategies to transition in-state sales of new passenger vehicles and trucks to 100 percent ZEVs by 2035, where feasible. Following this EO, CARB developed the Advanced Clean Fleets (ACF) regulation. While the United States Environmental Protection Agency did not grant a waiver to authorize the ACF regulation before the climate-change-denying Trump Administration took office, California remains committed to transitioning to zero­-emission transportation. This is why I recently issued EO N-27-25 reaffirming California's leadership in promoting ZEVs to protect our future, health, and economy.

 In my veto message to Assembly Bill 637 (Jackson) last year, I encouraged rental vehicle companies to work with CARB to explore the environmental and economic benefits of MD/HD ZEV rentals through existing regulatory processes. I continue to encourage rental vehicle companies to do so.

 For these reasons, I cannot sign this bill.

 Sincerely,

Gavin Newsom

View Governor’s veto message here

Would have, beginning January 1, 2028, prohibited a person from distributing, selling, or offering for sale a cleaning product, dental floss, juvenile product, food packaging, and ski wax, as specified, and beginning January 1, 2030, cookware, as specified, that contains intentionally added per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), as defined, except for previously used products and as otherwise preempted by federal law.

View full bill text here

Governor’s Veto Message

To the Members of the California State Senate:

I am returning Senate Bill 682 without my signature.

The bill, beginning January 1, 2028, prohibits a person from distributing, selling, or offering for sale a cleaning product, dental floss, juvenile product, food packaging, or ski wax, as specified, that contains intentionally added PFAS. Additionally, this bill, beginning January l, 2030, prohibits a person from distributing, selling, or offering for sale cookware that contains intentionally added PFAS.

I share the author's goal to protect human health and the environment by phasing out the use of PFAS in consumer products. However, the broad range of products that would be impacted by this bill would result in a sizable and rapid shift in cooking products available to Californians. I appreciate efforts to protect the health and safety of consumers, and while this bill is well-intentioned, I am deeply concerned about the impact this bill would have on the availability of affordable options in cooking products. I believe we must carefully consider the consequences that may result from a dramatic shift of products on our shelves.

I encourage the author and stakeholders to continue discussions in this space, while ensuring that we are not sacrificing the ability of Californians to afford household products like cookware with efforts to address the prevalence of PFAS.

For these reasons, I cannot sign this bill.

Sincerely,

Gavin Newsom

View Governor’s veto message here