California Air Resources Board

Would have required the Legislature to review a major regulation after it has been reviewed by the Office of Administrative Law (OAL). Once it receives the major regulation, the Legislature has 60-business days to review the regulation, hold an informational hearing about the regulation, and decide whether they will reject the major regulation during this timeframe. If the legislature does not reject a major regulation within the 60-business day timeframe, the major regulation would become effective. The 60-business day review period is paused when the legislature is not in session or in recess. This bill would not have impacted emergency regulation adoption. Was held on suspense in the Senate Appropriations Committee.

View full bill text here

Would have changed the process State agencies use to adopt major regulations. After submitting a standardized regulatory impact assessment (SRIA) to the Department of Finance, a proposal must then go to the Legislature, which would recommend legislation to authorize the adoption of the major regulation. A major regulation cannot be adopted unless a law passes that specifically allows the state agency to adopt that major regulation. State agencies are allowed to adopt major emergency regulations if the regulation is necessary to address an emergency; the regulation is adopted in accordance with subdivisions (a) to (d), inclusive, of California Government Code Section 11346.1; and the regulation is in effect for no more than 180 days. The emergency regulation can be readopted for no more than two 90-day periods, if a SRIA is prepared and submitted to the Department of Finance and a proposal recommending legislation to allow the adoption of the major regulation is submitted to the Legislature. Failed passage in the Senate Committee on Governmental Operations and was granted reconsideration.

View full bill text here

Revokes all CARB authority to adopt, revise, or repeal regulations and declares that any law granting authority to or requiring CARB to adopt, revise, or repeal regulations, or take an action that requires exercising regulatory authority, instead be read as only authorizing CARB to provide advice and propose measures to the Legislature for statutory enactment. The bill requires CARB to provide advice and propose measures to the Legislature for statutory enactment regarding its duties. The bill declares that it does not invalidate or repeal any regulation adopted by CARB before January 1, 2026. Failed passage in the Senate Environmental Quality Committee and was granted reconsideration.

View full bill text here 

Allows any member of the governing board of CARB to be removed from office by the Legislature, by concurrent resolution adopted by a majority vote of all members elected to each house, for dereliction of duty or corruption or incompetency. The bill requires CARB to submit a proposed regulation that has costs exceeding $10 million on California consumers to the Legislative Analyst for an independent economic analysis. The bill requires CARB to prepare and publish on its website a written response to the Legislative Analyst’s report no less than 30 days before adopting the proposed regulation. The bill also requires CARB to publish on its website all final resolutions, supporting documents, and proposed regulations in their complete and final form no less than 72 hours before any CARB vote. Once published, the bill would prohibit amendments, revisions, or alterations to the final resolutions, supporting documents, or proposed regulations before CARB’s vote. Failed passage in the Senate Environmental Quality Committee and was granted reconsideration.

View full bill text here 

Would have created The Delta Levees and Canal Subsidence Fund which may seek out and accept funds from the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF) as well as other sources. The purpose of this fund is for the Department of Water Resources to restore the transport capacity for state water transport systems impacted by land subsidence. The fund also would give money to the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Conservancy for projects in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and Suisun Marsh to improve existing levees, including multi-benefit levee projects that protect, improve, or restore habitat, and improve water quality.

View full bill text here

Governor’s Veto Message

To the Members of the California State Assembly:

I am returning Senate Bill 872 without my signature.

This bill establishes the Delta Levees and Canal Subsidence Fund (Fund) to support multi‑benefit levee projects and capital improvements to water conveyance systems impacted by subsidence in the Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta, and requires the Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta Conservancy (Conservancy) to establish an advisory committee to make recommendations for projects to be supported by the Fund.

In this year's budget, in partnership with the Legislature, we allocated $68 million to mitigate subsidence on the state's aqueducts and canals, $75 million for projects that repair levees and improve flood protection and climate resiliency in the Delta, $20.2 million to the Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta Conservancy to reduce the risks of climate change impacts on communities, fish and wildlife, and natural resources, and $7.9 million to pay for mitigation costs associated with the Delta levee projects.

This bill would establish parameters for spending revenue from a Fund that did not receive resources in this year's budget. While well‑intentioned, this bill is unnecessary.

For these reasons, I cannot sign this bill.

Sincerely,

Gavin Newsom

View Governor’s veto message here

This bill requires CARB to post on its website temperature and monitoring data received about methane emissions from landfills.

View full bill text here

This bill authorizes the Wildlife Conservation Board, the Department of Conservation, and the Department of Fire and Forestry Protection (CalFIRE) Forest Health Grants to award regional landscape block grants to lower wildfire risk. It would also require money given to CalFIRE for landscape scale projects to also be used for activities that improve ecosystem health on chaparral, shrubland, grassland, and coastal sage scrub lands. This bill would also expand the eligible activities for CalFIRE’s local assistance grant program to include vegetation modification and management along roadways.

View full bill text here

Would have established the Public Utilities Public Purpose Programs Fund (PUPPPF) and stated that the Legislature may use funds from the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund for the PUPPPF. The State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission must decide on and publish the amount of money necessary to fund the public purpose programs and programs run by electrical regional energy networks each year. The Commission may consider this amount when deciding how much money to set aside for these programs. The purpose of the PUPPPF is to provide money to energy providers for electrical efficiency, conservation, and renewable energy programs. The PUPPPF also must pay for energy rate assistance programs instead of the programs being paid for by gas and electric customers. Current law requires electrical and gas companies to createa single website that provides up-to-date information about gas and electric customer-funded energy efficiency assistance programs. This bill would have updated these requirements to include changes made to how energy rate assistance programs are paid for. Additionally, this bill would have paid back electrical corporations for their help with home insulation assistance. Held on suspense in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

View full bill text here

Would have required CARB to consider and analyze the financial burden on drivers when creating and changing regulations that would directly impact drivers. Was not heard in the Assembly Committee on Natural Resources.

View full bill text here

Would have required agencies to consider cost-of-living impacts on residents before turning in a proposal to create, change, or undo a regulation. The bill would have added cost-of-living impacts to the list of considerations for an economic impact assessment (EIA) and standardized regulatory impact assessment (SRIA). This bill also would have tasked the Legislative Analyst's Office (LAO) with creating a consistent way to calculate cost-of-living impacts for all agencies. The LAO would have also conducted their own analysis on cost-of-living impacts due to this bill. If they found ways to lower the cost-of-living-impact, they must give that information to the regulating agency for their consideration. Additionally, this bill would have made the Department of Finance create and maintain on their website a tracker to show the total economic impact of all regulations. Held on suspense in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

View full bill text here