An Assembly committee decided to back off on Wednesday night from a controversial move in a bill that would have cut solar credits for 2 million owners of rooftop solar systems. They now say the change will only affect those who sell their homes. The bill, Assembly Bill 942, was brought forward by Lisa Calderon (D-Whittier) and aimed to end programs that give energy credits to Californians who installed solar panels before April 15, 2025. Originally, the bill wanted to limit the benefits of the current program to just 10 years, instead of the 20 years that rooftop owners were promised by the state. However, the committee removed that provision and left in one that would end the program for those selling their homes. The bill passed 10 to 5 after the amendment, and it will now move on to the Assembly Appropriations Committee.
Many rooftop solar owners showed up at the hearing to ask the committee members to vote against the bill. Some of them expressed concerns that the measure could lower the value of their homes, even with the amendment in place. Dwight James, a resident of Simi Valley, mentioned that he had just put his home up for sale and was still paying off a loan he had taken out to install his solar system. He felt blindsided by the state potentially breaking its promise to him.
Calderon, who used to work for Southern California Edison, explained that she introduced the bill because the financial credits given to rooftop solar owners were causing electric bills to rise for those without panels. The major utility companies, including Edison, supported the bill, along with the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers. These companies use unionized labor to work on solar projects, unlike the companies that install rooftop panels.
The legislation does not impact customers served by municipal utilities. However, the bill faced strong opposition from various groups, including schools, businesses, apartment owners, and environmental organizations. These groups argued that utility spending, not the credits given to solar owners, was the main reason for rising electric bills.
During the hearing, committee members mentioned receiving an overwhelming number of calls and emails from solar customers. Assemblywoman Pilar Schiavo (D-Santa Clarita) shared that she had received more opposition to this bill than any other. The pressure from the public led the committee to remove the 10-year sunset provision from the bill, as it could lead to legal challenges due to the state’s previous commitments to solar owners.
Despite the amendments, the bill still faced criticism from various quarters, including environmental groups, consumer organizations, and the rooftop solar industry. These groups believed that the bill would undermine investments in solar energy and hurt efforts to meet climate goals. The schools that had invested in solar technology based on state commitments also expressed their opposition, stating that changing the rules retroactively was unfair and could lead to legal issues.
As the debate continued, questions arose about the impact of the bill on consumers and whether it would actually lead to lower electric bills for those without solar panels. Some committee members expressed doubts about the potential benefits of the bill, with Assemblywoman Laurie Davies (D-Laguna Niguel) questioning how much of the cost savings would be passed on to consumers.
The discussion around Assembly Bill 942 highlighted the complex issues surrounding solar energy policies and the challenges of balancing the interests of different stakeholders. The future of the bill remains uncertain as it moves to the next stage of the legislative process.
