California Air Resources Board

Would have required the Bay Area Air Quality Management District and the South Coast Air Quality Management District, by December 31, 2027, to analyze specified policies to determine the cost of compliance, potential costs to consumers, impacts on State and local tax revenue, impacts to refinery employment, and impacts on the State gasoline supply, as provided. The bill would also have required those local air districts, by January 1, 2028, to try, in good faith, to minimize negative impacts found by the above research. For rulemaking related to oil refineries by these local air districts, the bill would have expanded the definition of “socioeconomic impact” to also mean the cost to consumers, impacts on State and local tax revenue, and impacts on the State gasoline supply. The bill would have required those local air districts to consider those additional socioeconomic impacts and try in good faith to minimize any negative impacts, as provided, before adopting a rule or regulation related to oil refineries. Was not voted on in the Assembly Natural Resources Committee.

View full bill text here

Would have required, to the extent that funding is appropriated by the Legislature, each large and medium local air district, by January 1, 2028, to implement and maintain a commercial voucher program to support the transition to zero-emission small off-road equipment consistent with specified requirements. The bill would have provided that a violation of an ordinance adopted by a local government governing the use of any small off-road engine landscaping equipment can only be punishable by a warning or an administrative fine imposed in accordance with specified requirements.

View full bill text here  

Governor’s Veto Message

To the Members of the California State Assembly:

I am returning Assembly Bill 2635 without my signature.

This bill requires local air districts to implement a commercial voucher program to support the transition to zero-emission small off-road equipment.

Small off-road engines are a significant source of harmful air pollution, particularly in communities already burdened by poor air quality. While I share the author's goal of helping marginalized communities transition to zero-emission equipment, this bill duplicates existing state and local air district programs. Under my administration, in partnership with the Legislature, we provided $30 million to incentivize the purchase of nearly 30,000 pieces of zero-emission landscape equipment. Additionally, zero-emission landscape equipment is now widely available from many manufacturers, which will further increase market competition.

For these reasons, I cannot sign this bill.

Sincerely,

Gavin Newsom

View Governor’s veto message here

Would have prohibited CARB from adopting any regulation or rule that would have added more than $0.02 to the cost of a gallon of gasoline or added $2,000 or more to the cost to build any home. The bill would have prohibited the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) from adopting any regulation or rule that would have added more than $0.02 to the cost of a gallon of gasoline, added $2,000 or more to the cost to build any home, or added $5,000 or more to the cost to build a nonresidential building. The bill would have required CARB, as well as SCAQMD, to submit data to the relevant policy committees of the Legislature demonstrating how a proposed regulation is compliant with this prohibition. Was not heard in the Assembly Natural Resources Committee.

View full bill text here 

Would have authorized a local or State law enforcement agency to buy and install an incinerator for destroying seized controlled substances, as provided. The bill would have required the local or State law enforcement agency to follow specified federal regulations and to notify CARB and the local air district of the project, as specified. The bill would have exempted a project to buy and install an incinerator that complies with these requirements from the California Environmental Quality Act. Amended to deal with guidance for management and disposal of controlled substances in the possession of law enforcement.

View full bill text here  

Would have required a State agency providing a grant or contract to a federally recognized tribe or private nonprofit, under certain conditions, to pay a portion of the money to the grantee in advance. The bill would have required State agencies to state the percentage that may be given in advance in the solicitation for the grant or contract. This bill requires, by July 1, 2027, the Strategic Growth Council to develop a Statewide Advance Funds and Reconciliation Guide (Master Guide), as specified. The bill requires every State agency to adopt the Master Guide as its standard operating procedure for the disbursement, tracking, and reconciliation of advance payments, as provided.

View full bill text here  

Governor’s Veto Message

To the Members of the California State Assembly:

I am returning Assembly Bill 1039 without my signature.

This bill would require state agencies to provide advance payments for certain grants and contracts awarded to eligible nonprofit organizations and federally recognized tribes, and establish a statewide3 framework to administer and reconcile those payments.

While I appreciate the author's goal of reducing financial barriers for nonprofits and tribes, imposing a new statewide requirement would severely limit the state's oversight and protection of public funds. I signed AB 590 in 2023 and AB 3017 in 2024, which provided agencies with authority to process advance payments for these entities. It is important to ensure agencies maintain discretion to evaluate the financial and programmatic risks of each request for advance payments. I encourage the author and stakeholders to continue engaging with administering agencies to help ensure they are utilizing the existing authorization to the fullest extent possible when appropriate.

For these reasons, I cannot sign this bill.

Sincerely,

Gavin Newsom

View Governor’s veto message here

Would have provided, during a state of emergency proclaimed by the Governor involving loss of electrical service to any part of the State, that the regulations adopted under statutory direction prohibiting engine exhaust and evaporative emissions from new small off-road engines, and any other regulations adopted by CARB on emissions of portable or emergency backup generators, would not apply to the sale or purchase of portable or emergency backup generators. This bill would have provided, on and after January 1, 2027, and before January 1, 2032, an exemption from taxes imposed by the Sales and Use Tax Law for the gross receipts of a qualified backup electricity generator during the month of May. The exemption would have only applied to generators purchased for non-business use that cost $7,000 or less. Was not heard in the Assembly Natural Resources Committee.

View full bill text here  

Would have required that CARB members from local air districts receive the annual salary provided to other members of CARB. Held on suspense in the Senate Appropriations Committee.

View full bill text here  

Would have required CARB to prepare and publish a supplemental standardized regulatory impact assessment if a proposed regulation is significantly changed between the release of the initial SRIA and regulation adoption. This document would include the changesmade during the rulemaking process in the consumer cost analysis. The bill would have also required CARB to make the supplemental SRIA available for public review. Failed passage in the Senate Committee on Environmental Quality and was granted reconsideration.

View full bill text here

Would have required CARB to include in its economic impact assessment or standardized regulatory impact assessment an analysis of the costs, benefits, and net impacts on personal income across income levels, including on specific groups identified in the bill. Additionally, CARB must publish a plain language summary at the beginning of the economic assessment. This document must consider including the effect of the proposed, changed, or removed regulation on energy, gas, and utility prices. Held on suspense in the Senate Appropriations Committee.

View full bill text here

Would have required economic impact analyses include any direct and indirect offsetting costs associated with adoption, change, or removal of a regulation. Was not heard in the Assembly Committee on Economic Development, Growth, and Household Impact.

View full bill text here