Background on Assembly Bill 942

Assembly Bill 942, introduced by Assemblymember Lisa Calderon (D-Whittier), aims to amend long-standing financial incentives for California residents who have invested in rooftop solar systems. The initial proposal sought to significantly reduce the duration of solar credits from 20 years to just 10 years for installations completed before April 15, 2025.

Key Amendments and Voting Outcomes

During a recent committee meeting, lawmakers voted to remove the controversial provision limiting solar credits to a decade. However, the approved amendment retains a significant change, stating that credits would be rescinded for homeowners who sell their properties. This adjustment allowed the bill to pass with a vote of 10 to 5, moving it to the Assembly Appropriations Committee for further consideration.

Community Reactions

The proposed bill has provoked considerable backlash from rooftop solar owners and environmental advocates. Many attendees of the hearing expressed their concerns, arguing the bill undermines the value of their investments.

“We just put our home up for sale yesterday,” said Dwight James, a Simi Valley resident. “We didn’t expect the state to break its promise to us.”

Rationale Behind the Bill

Calderon defended the legislation citing that the financial credits issued to solar panel owners are contributing to rising electricity costs for non-solar users. Support for the bill has come from major electric utility companies, including Southern California Edison, and labor unions.

According to Calderon, “This is about fairness and equity — nothing more,” referencing the perceived economic burdens being placed on those without solar panels.

Concerns Over Economic Impact

Several committee members reported an overwhelming response from constituents against the bill, with Assemblywoman Pilar Schiavo noting a significant volume of opposition compared to other legislative measures.

In contrast, fiscal analysts highlighted the potential legal challenges that retaining a 10-year credit limit could pose, as current agreements with solar owners frame the credits as guaranteed for 20 years.

Opposition from Various Stakeholders

Opposition to the bill has surfaced from a diverse array of groups, including educational institutions and environmental organizations. School districts argue that retroactively altering financial terms could have unfair consequences for investments they made in good faith.

“It is unfair and could raise legal concerns to retroactively change the rules,” the school districts stated in their correspondence to the Assembly committee.

Current Legislative Status

With the amendment in place, the bill may have alleviated some concerns for educational institutions. However, significant skepticism remains regarding the actual impact on electricity prices for consumers, with lawmakers questioning whether these costs would ultimately be alleviated for those without solar energy systems.