BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 1550
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB
1550 (Gomez)
As Amended May 31, 2016
Majority vote
------------------------------------------------------------------
|Committee |Votes|Ayes |Noes |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|----------------+-----+----------------------+--------------------|
|Natural |7-0 |Williams, Jones, | |
|Resources | | | |
| | | | |
| | |Cristina Garcia, | |
| | |Gomez, McCarty, Mark | |
| | |Stone, Wood | |
| | | | |
|----------------+-----+----------------------+--------------------|
|Appropriations |15-2 |Gonzalez, Bloom, |Bigelow, Obernolte |
| | |Bonilla, Bonta, | |
| | |Calderon, Daly, | |
| | |Eggman, Gallagher, | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | |Eduardo Garcia, | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | |Roger Hernández, | |
| | |Holden, Quirk, | |
| | |Santiago, Weber, Wood | |
AB 1550
Page 2
| | | | |
| | | | |
------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Requires that 25% of the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund
(GGRF) be spent on projects located within disadvantaged
communities, and requires that an additional 25% be spent on
projects that benefit low-income households. Specifically, this
bill:
1)Revises the requirement that 25% of the GGRF be expended to
benefit disadvantaged communities to require that the funding
be allocated for projects located within the boundaries of,
and benefiting individuals in, disadvantaged communities.
2)Requires that an additional 20% of the GGRF be allocated for
projects that benefit low-income households.
3)Requires that, to the extent feasible, a "fair share" of the
moneys allocated to benefit low-income households target
households with incomes at or below 200% of the federal
poverty level.
FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee, this bill has the following state costs:
1)Increased GGRF expenditures in disadvantaged and low-income
communities. The Governor's budget proposes appropriating
$3.1 billion GGRF funds this year.
2)Increased annual ongoing costs of approximately $600,000
(GGRF) for the California Air Resources Board (ARB) to modify
AB 1550
Page 3
existing guidelines and tracking systems, provide guidance to
state agencies, and conduct outreach.
COMMENTS: According to the author, the best greenhouse gas
(GHG) reduction strategies are those that benefit low-income
households, whether they lie inside or outside
CalEnviroScreen-designated disadvantaged communities.
Low-income Californians often lack adequate transportation
choices, spend a significant percentage of their budgets on
necessities like energy, and are least able to relocate or
afford energy-saving appliances, vehicles, and household
improvements to adapt to our changing climate. This bill is
intended to ensure that the state takes advantage of every
opportunity to lift poor and working Californians out of
poverty, while reducing GHG emissions.
The California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32
(Núñez), Chapter 488, Statutes of 2006) requires ARB to adopt a
statewide GHG emissions limit equivalent to 1990 levels by 2020
and adopt regulations, including market-based compliance
mechanisms, to achieve maximum technologically feasible and
cost-effective GHG emission reductions. As part of the
implementation of AB 32 market-based compliance measures, ARB
adopted a cap-and-trade program that caps the allowable
statewide emissions and provides for the auctioning of emission
credits, the proceeds of which are quarterly deposited into the
GGRF available for appropriation by the Legislature.
The Budget continuously appropriates 35% of cap-and-trade funds
for investments in transit, affordable housing, and sustainable
communities. Twenty-five percent of the revenues are
continuously appropriated to continue the construction of
high-speed rail. The remaining 40% are to be appropriated
annually by the Legislature for investments in programs that
include low-carbon transportation, energy efficiency and
renewable energy, and natural resources and waste diversion. An
AB 1550
Page 4
expenditure plan for the 40% was not included in the 2015-16
Budget Act, with the exception of $227 million appropriated to
continue funding for specified existing programs. The remaining
2015-16 revenues, along with 2016-17 revenues, totaling $3.1
billion are available for appropriation this year.
SB 535 (De León), Chapter 830, Statutes of 2012, requires no
less than 10% of cap-and-trade revenues fund projects located
within disadvantaged communities (DACs), and that 25% of
available revenues fund projects that benefit those communities.
In October 2014, CalEPA released its list of disadvantaged
communities for the purpose of SB 535. CalEPA relied on
CalEnviroScreen to identify the areas disproportionately
burdened by and vulnerable to multiple sources of pollution.
CalEnviroScreen is a tool that assesses all census tracts in
California to identify the areas disproportionally affected and
vulnerable to multiple sources of pollution.
Areas (census tracts) identified as disadvantaged for SB 535's
purposes by CalEnviroScreen include: the majority of the San
Joaquin Valley; much of Los Angeles and the Inland Empire;
pockets of other communities near ports, freeways, and major
industrial facilities such as refineries and power plants; and
large swaths of the Coachella Valley, Imperial Valley and Mojave
Desert.
This bill modifies SB 535 by requiring the entire 25% allocated
to benefit DACs is used to fund projects located within the
communities and establishes a new allocation category to target
low-income households located outside DACs such as rural
communities in northern and southeastern California as well as
urban districts in places like the Bay Area and San Diego
regions. Under this proposal, 50% (rather than 75% under
current law) of all funds would be available for communities and
households other than low-income and those not located in DACs.
AB 1550
Page 5
Analysis Prepared by:
Elizabeth MacMillan / NAT. RES. / (916) 319-2092
FN: 0003333