Latest news with #AssemblyBill942
Yahoo
02-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Bill that would cut benefits for California rooftop solar weakened by legislators
California homeowners with rooftop solar panels may see a significant change when trying to sell their homes after the California State Assembly's Utilities & Energy Committee voted to end net metering for homes with solar when the property is sold to new owners. Assembly Bill 942, backed by Lisa Calderon, D-Whittier, a former Southern California Edison executive, reforms utility-offered programs that provide energy credits to Californians who installed solar panels. The bill initially aimed to end net energy metering for homeowners after 10 years instead of the original 20, but was amended to remove that controversial proposal that led to protests by rooftop solar owners outside of Calderon's office. 'I've gotten more opposition to this bill than to any other by eight to tenfold,' Assemblywoman Pilar Schiavo, D-Santa Clarita, who voted no, told the Los Angeles Times. Here's what to know about Assembly Bill 942 and potential California rooftop solar billing changes. More than 2 million homeowners and businesses in California have rooftop solar panels, according to the California Solar and Storage Association . Rooftop solar was estimated to save all California homeowners $1.5 billion in bills in 2024 alone, according to CALSSA. However, the Public Advocates Office of California estimates the NEM program costs customers without solar an estimated $8.5 billion by the end of 2024. Utilities have fixed costs — wildfire safety measures, grid infrastructure, and maintenance —that must be paid regardless of how much electricity is consumed, the Public Advocates Office reported. If rooftop solar customers pay less, these fixed costs must be recovered from all other customers, dramatically increasing rates for non-rooftop solar customers. "As the cost shift grows, it leads to higher retail electricity rates for all customers, which disproportionatelyaffects non-solar customers who are not benefiting from the financial incentives of solar programs," the Public Advocates Office reported in a fact sheet released with the study. CALSSA, though, pushed back on that research with another study that found electricity rates have increased because of unnecessary spending on grid infrastructure. "Rooftop solar keeps demand on the electricity grid from growing, which reduces the need to build grid expansions and saves everyone money," CALSSA said in a press release announcing the study. If Assembly Bill 942 passes in California, homeowners with solar panels could see their monthly electricity bills increase by about $63 or $750 a year, the Center of Community Energy reported. And requiring homes with rooftop solar sold or transferred to end net energy metering plans would hurt property values and break promises with millions of solar users, Brad Heavner, executive director of CALSSA said. 'Messing with home values and the transferability of property has long been considered a dangerous 'third rail' for California politicians, and this interference is no different,' Heavner told PV Magazine. When NEM pricing ends, your utility will switch your account to a new solar billing plan, which will likely have different rate structures and won't have the same level of credit for surplus energy produced by your panels. A workaround for the potential loss of NEM pricing is to install a solar battery at your home, energy consumer advocate website reported. Solar batteries store surplus energy at your house so you can use power generated by solar panels later instead of sending excess energy to your utility company, EnergySage reported. Solar batteries cost about $9,000 to install after tax credits, EnergySage estimated. Assembly Bill 942 is now scheduled for hearings in the Assembly Appropriations Committee. If passed by that committee, it will face a full review by the entire chamber. This article originally appeared on Palm Springs Desert Sun: Assembly Bill 942 would change some of the benefits of rooftop solar
Yahoo
01-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Bill to slash rooftop solar incentives weakened by Assembly committee
An Assembly committee backed away on Wednesday night from a controversial provision in a proposed bill to end solar credits for 2 million owners of rooftop solar systems, saying it would apply only to those who sold their homes. Assembly Bill 942, introduced by Lisa Calderon (D-Whittier), targeted long-standing programs that provide energy credits to Californians who installed solar panels before April 15, 2025. As originally drafted, the bill would have limited the current program's benefits to 10 years — half of the 20-year period the state had told rooftop owners they would receive. The committee nixed that provision, leaving another that would cancel the program for those selling their homes. With the amendment, the bill passed 10 to 5, sending it on to the Assembly Appropriations Committee. Scores of rooftop solar owners attended the hearing, asking the committee members to vote no. Some said that even with the amendment they believed the measure would reduce the value of their home. "We just put our home up for sale yesterday," said Dwight James, a resident of Simi Valley, who is still making payments on a loan he took out to pay for his solar system. "We didn't expect the state to break its promise to us." Calderon, a former executive at Southern California Edison, said she proposed the bill because the financial credits given to rooftop solar owners for excess electricity they send to the grid are raising electric bills for those who don't own the panels. Edison and the state's two other large for-profit electric companies supported the bill, along with members of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers. Major utilities use unionized labor to build and repair equipment, including the lines connecting distant industrial-scale solar farms in the desert. Companies installing rooftop panels generally don't use union workers. Read more: Former Edison executive Calderon, now a lawmaker, seeks to cut rooftop solar credits The legislation doesn't affect customers served by municipal utilities. Several members of the Assembly Utilities & Energy Committee said at the hearing that their offices have been overwhelmed with calls and emails from solar customers. "I've gotten more opposition to this bill than to any other by eight- to tenfold," said Assemblywoman Pilar Schiavo (D-Santa Clarita), who voted no. Before the hearing began, an analyst who reviews legislation for the committee recommended the 10-year sunset provision be removed from the bill. She cited a state requirement that solar owners sign a consumer protection guide that calls the arrangement a "contract" and says the credits are "guaranteed" for 20 years. Keeping that provision, said analyst Laura Shybut, the committee's chief consultant, could pave the way for legal challenges to the legislation. The bill prompted protests this month by owners of the rooftop solar panels, who said they had invested thousands of dollars in the green energy systems based on assurances the incentives would last for 20 years. Also opposing the bill were schools, businesses, apartment owners and others who had installed the rooftop panels. A group of school districts including Los Angeles Unified, San Diego Unified and the Alameda County Office of Education filed a letter to the Assembly committee in opposition to the proposed legislation. "School districts made good faith investments in solar energy technology based on the commitments of the state," the schools wrote. "It is unfair and could raise legal concerns to retroactively change the rules." "The state should be supporting investments in rooftop solar to meet our climate goals and to promote affordability for all customers, not undermining those who heeded its guidance and mandates to make these investments," the schools wrote. Committee members said that with the amendment the schools would no longer be affected. Also opposing the bill were dozens of environmental groups, consumer organizations and the rooftop solar industry, which argued that electric bills are rising because of excessive utility spending — not from credits given to owners of the green energy systems. The value of the credits — provided to panel owners at the retail rate of electricity — has increased rapidly as the state Public Utilities Commission voted to approve rate increases requested by the utility companies. At a news conference on Tuesday, Calderon appeared with members of utility worker unions, saying the credits were shifting billions of dollars in costs to people who did not own the panels, which was especially hurting the poor. 'This is about fairness and equity — nothing more,' she said. Read more: California officials push to cut energy credits to households with rooftop solar panels Rooftop solar advocates have challenged that assertion, citing statistics from the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory that show 39% of the owners of the rooftop panels in 2023 had household incomes of less than $100,000. About 12% had incomes below $50,000. Several committee members said Wednesday night that they had heard from solar owners of all income levels. "I have to push back on the narrative that these are all high-income people," Schiavo said. Some also questioned whether those without solar panels would actually see a reduction in their electric bills if the measure passed. "How much of this will go back to the consumer?" asked Laurie Davies (D-Laguna Niguel), who voted no. Her question wasn't answered. This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
Los Angeles Times
01-05-2025
- Business
- Los Angeles Times
Bill to slash rooftop solar incentives weakened by Assembly committee
An Assembly committee backed away on Wednesday night from a controversial provision in a proposed bill to end solar credits for 2 million owners of rooftop solar systems, saying it would apply only to those who sold their homes. Assembly Bill 942, introduced by Lisa Calderon (D-Whittier), targeted long-standing programs that provide energy credits to Californians who installed solar panels before April 15, 2025. As originally drafted, the bill would have limited the current program's benefits to 10 years — half of the 20-year period the state had told rooftop owners they would receive. The committee nixed that provision, leaving another that would cancel the program for those selling their homes. With the amendment, the bill passed 10 to 5, sending it on to the Assembly Appropriations Committee. Scores of rooftop solar owners attended the hearing, asking the committee members to vote no. Some said that even with the amendment they believed the measure would reduce the value of their home. 'We just put our home up for sale yesterday,' said Dwight James, a resident of Simi Valley, who is still making payments on a loan he took out to pay for his solar system. 'We didn't expect the state to break its promise to us.' Calderon, a former executive at Southern California Edison, said she proposed the bill because the financial credits given to rooftop solar owners for excess electricity they send to the grid are raising electric bills for those who don't own the panels. Edison and the state's two other large for-profit electric companies supported the bill, along with members of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers. Major utilities use unionized labor to build and repair equipment, including the lines connecting distant industrial-scale solar farms in the desert. Companies installing rooftop panels generally don't use union workers. The legislation doesn't affect customers served by municipal utilities. Several members of the Assembly Utilities & Energy Committee said at the hearing that their offices have been overwhelmed with calls and emails from solar customers. 'I've gotten more opposition to this bill than to any other by eight- to tenfold,' said Assemblywoman Pilar Schiavo (D-Santa Clarita), who voted no. Before the hearing began, an analyst who reviews legislation for the committee recommended the 10-year sunset provision be removed from the bill. She cited a state requirement that solar owners sign a consumer protection guide that calls the arrangement a 'contract' and says the credits are 'guaranteed' for 20 years. Keeping that provision, said analyst Laura Shybut, the committee's chief consultant, could pave the way for legal challenges to the legislation. The bill prompted protests this month by owners of the rooftop solar panels, who said they had invested thousands of dollars in the green energy systems based on assurances the incentives would last for 20 years. Also opposing the bill were schools, businesses, apartment owners and others who had installed the rooftop panels. A group of school districts including Los Angeles Unified, San Diego Unified and the Alameda County Office of Education filed a letter to the Assembly committee in opposition to the proposed legislation. 'School districts made good faith investments in solar energy technology based on the commitments of the state,' the schools wrote. 'It is unfair and could raise legal concerns to retroactively change the rules.' 'The state should be supporting investments in rooftop solar to meet our climate goals and to promote affordability for all customers, not undermining those who heeded its guidance and mandates to make these investments,' the schools wrote. Committee members said that with the amendment the schools would no longer be affected. Also opposing the bill were dozens of environmental groups, consumer organizations and the rooftop solar industry, which argued that electric bills are rising because of excessive utility spending — not from credits given to owners of the green energy systems. The value of the credits — provided to panel owners at the retail rate of electricity — has increased rapidly as the state Public Utilities Commission voted to approve rate increases requested by the utility companies. At a news conference on Tuesday, Calderon appeared with members of utility worker unions, saying the credits were shifting billions of dollars in costs to people who did not own the panels, which was especially hurting the poor. 'This is about fairness and equity — nothing more,' she said. Rooftop solar advocates have challenged that assertion, citing statistics from the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory that show 39% of the owners of the rooftop panels in 2023 had household incomes of less than $100,000. About 12% had incomes below $50,000. Several committee members said Wednesday night that they had heard from solar owners of all income levels. 'I have to push back on the narrative that these are all high-income people,' Schiavo said. Some also questioned whether those without solar panels would actually see a reduction in their electric bills if the measure passed. 'How much of this will go back to the consumer?' asked Laurie Davies (D-Laguna Niguel), who voted no. Her question wasn't answered.
Yahoo
29-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Edison disputes ‘executive' label for author of bill to cut solar power benefits
Southern California Edison is claiming the lawmaker who wrote a bill beneficial to the utility was never an executive with them, but a Los Angeles Times report indicates Edison did view her as an executive, at least in some instances. Assemblymember Lisa Calderon (D-Whittier) authored Assembly Bill 942, which would cut credits homeowners receive for installing solar panels on their roofs. After the Times reported Calderon is a former executive with Edison, the utility 'objected to The Times' identifying Calderon as a former executive for the utility, claiming on its website that the news organization is 'choosing sensationalism over facts,'' LAT wrote. 'But in its official reports to the Federal Election Commission, the political action committee for Edison International — the utility's parent company — listed Calderon's occupation as an executive in more than a dozen filings made before she left the company in 2020 to run for office,' the Times report explains. When contacted by the Times, an Edison spokesperson said the 'executive' definition relates to a 'broad class of individuals' as described by the Federal Election Commission, but the utility did not consider her an executive. Calderon's office seconded that belief. 'Due to her professional responsibilities, she was categorized as an executive for FEC filing purposes,' her office told the Times. 'That does not mean that she was an executive at Edison.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
24-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Fight intensifies over bill by former Edison executive to gut rooftop solar credits
A bill to sharply reduce the energy credits given to homeowners with rooftop solar panels is pitting union electrical workers and the state's big utilities against people who benefit from the solar credits — and one of the first skirmishes took place in the City of Industry on Wednesday. Waving signs and blowing whistles, dozens of rooftop solar owners protested outside the office of Assemblymember Lisa Calderon (D-Whittier), who proposed Assembly Bill 942 to slash the credits for people who installed the systems before April 15, 2023. Jim Matthews, one of the rooftop solar owners at the protest, said he doubts he would have purchased the panels if he would have known the state would be reversing the incentives. 'Stuff like this tears my heart,' said Matthews, who lives in Hawthorne. 'I think it's scandalous.' Calderon worked for Southern California Edison and its parent company, Edison International, for 25 years before she was elected in 2020. Her last position included managing the parent company's political action committee. Edison and the state's two other big for-profit utilities have long tried to reduce the energy credits that incentivized Californians to invest in the solar panels. The rooftop systems have reduced the utilities' sales of electricity. 'Calderon: For the People or for Edison?' said one sign waved by protesters outside Calderon's office in the City of Industry. 'Stop SCE's Revolving Door in Sacramento,' said another. Calderon told the Times she introduced the bill because she had learned that 97% of the people in her district were paying higher electric bills because of the solar credits going to the remaining 3% when they sent the unused electricity from their solar panels to the grid. "From an equity standpoint, that's not fair," she said. "I would love for everyone to have solar, but we need to do it in a fair and equitable way." Calderon said Edison, Pacific Gas & Electric and San Diego Gas & Electric have all sent her letters supporting the bill. AB 942 would limit the energy credits provided to those who purchased the systems to 10 years — half the 20-year period the state had told rooftop owners they would receive. It would also end the incentives if the house was sold. Uniting in the effort to oppose the bill are dozens of environmental groups, including the Sierra Club and the Environmental Working Group, which point out that the state has long said the solar contracts would last for 20 years. Also attending the protest were representatives from the California Solar & Storage Assn., a trade group that represents companies selling the rooftop solar systems. The protest was organized by the Solar Rights Alliance, a statewide association of solar users. Read more: Former Edison executive Calderon, now a lawmaker, seeks to cut rooftop solar credits Jeff Monford, a spokesperson for Edison, said the company sent Calderon a letter Wednesday backing the bill. He said the bill has "nothing to do with utility profits. It will result in savings for our customers." The company estimates that those customers who don't have solar would save $500 million by 2030 if AB 942 passed, or about 3% of the average household electric bill. The unions of electrical workers who install and repair equipment built by Edison and other electric companies are lobbying to get the bill passed. In an email, a spokesperson for the California State Assn. of Electrical Workers said the group 'strongly supports' the bill, which it said would 'alleviate the financial burden on non-solar ratepayers.' At a meeting in Sacramento in late March, leaders of the group, which represents 83,000 electrical workers in the state, said a top goal was to reform the rooftop solar incentives. 'It is unjust, unreasonable and unsustainable for Californians to continue shoveling billions of dollars every year to an industry when it is no longer justified nor fair to non-solar customers, particularly when the burden falls hardest on low-income customers,' Scott Wetch, a lobbyist for the electrical workers, wrote in a letter to the chair of the Assembly Utilities and Energy Committee. Calderon and the electrical workers point to an analysis by the state Public Utilities Commission's public advocates office that said the credits given to rooftop owners for the electricity they send to the grid is raising the electric bills of customers who don't own the panels by $8.5 billion a year. The rooftop solar industry and environmental groups disagree with that analysis, saying it was flawed. Read more: California officials push to cut energy credits to households with rooftop solar panels In a recent letter to the Assembly committee, the environmental groups pointed to an analysis that economist Richard McCann performed for the rooftop solar industry that found that electric rates had risen as the utilities spent more on infrastructure. That equipment includes the transmission lines needed to connect industrial-scale solar farms to the grid. Even though homeowners' solar panels helped keep demand for electricity flat for 20 years, the three utilities' spending on transmission and distribution infrastructure had risen by 300%, McCann found. 'To address rising rates, California must focus on what's really wrong with our energy system: uncontrolled utility spending and record utility profits,' the environmental groups wrote. In December 2022, the commission voted to cut incentives for anyone installing the panels after April 15, 2023, by 75% but left the incentives in place for legacy customers. AB 942 would not apply to rooftop solar customers who live in territory served by the state's municipal utilities, including the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power. A hearing on the bill is scheduled for April 30. This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
