A Democratic lawmaker is pushing a proposal to speed up $10 billion in funding for climate programs more than a year after voters approved Proposition 4, the state’s biggest investment yet to combat climate change.
Assemblymember David A. Alvarez (D-San Diego) introduced Assembly Bill 35 to cut certain regulations tied to Proposition 4 to more quickly disburse the billions of dollars voters approved for water improvements, wildfire and drought preparedness plans.
The bill, which advanced from the Assembly Appropriations Committee on Thursday, would exempt Proposition 4 funding from review under the Administrative Procedure Act, which dictates how state agencies follow rules and regulations and can cause lengthy delays in implementing programs.
California voters have approved a slew of multibillion-dollar bonds over the last two decades, some of which have faced long delays from regulatory obstacles that balloon costs. Voters in 2014 approved Proposition 1, allocating $1 billion for a water storage project in the Sacramento Valley that remains under construction. A proposal to speed up building high-speed rail by streamlining permitting failed in the Legislature last year despite voter approval of the $10-billion bond to construct it nearly two decades ago.
For the environment bond, the largest portion of the money, $3.8 billion, has been approved to go toward updating drinking water systems and drought resistance.
Alvarez has said his bill is a priority for addressing sewage pollution in the Tijuana River, an issue that affects his district along the U.S.-Mexico border, and could provide as much as $30 million for cleanup projects near the river. The legislation could also help speed funding of other climate projects by 12 to 18 months.
“The exemption is not new or unprecedented,” Alvarez said. “The urgency is especially real in my district where communities have endured years of sewage pollution.”
The bill is supported by local governments and environmental groups such as the Wilderness Society and National Audubon Society. There is no formal opposition.
Opponents of the climate bond at the time criticized the amount of debt taxpayers would take on. They also cited likely project delays and a lack of accountability about where the money would go. It is expected to cost taxpayers $16 billion over 40 years to pay off, according to a legislative analysis.
Last year, lawmakers allocated $250 million from the $10-billion bond toward unrelated projects in their districts as the state faced a budget deficit and slashed social services and state positions. Some of those earmarks included $50 million for a redwood trail in the district of former Senate President Pro Tem Mike McGuire (D-Healdsburg) and $1 million for an interactive water exhibit at a Santa Barbara museum in the district of Sen. Monique Limón (D-Goleta), who currently leads the state Senate.
Voters approved Proposition 4 with the expectation it would quickly address climate-related issues and this bill would help accomplish that, Alvarez said at a committee hearing last week.
The Wildlife Conservation Board, one of the state agencies expected to receive funding from Proposition 4, had a quarter of its $339 million allocation go toward additional earmarks for special projects in lawmakers’ districts, such as $16 million to prevent urban development on San Julian Ranch in the district of Santa Barbara Assemblymember Gregg Hart, a Democrat.
AB 35 would not affect the earmarks lawmakers approved from the bond.
Senate Minority Leader Brian W. Jones, a Santee Republican who led the opposition to Proposition 4 in 2024 and criticized its subsequent earmarks, is among 30 co-authors of the bill from both parties.
“AB 35, in my opinion, is good government,” Jones said. “Because its purpose is to eliminate delays and waste in getting these processes removed.”
As many as nine projects could receive expedited funding for the river, where little action has been taken at the state level.
The bill awaits a floor vote in the Assembly next week.
Nadia Lathan writes for CalMatters.
