Which climate and disaster readiness bills do cities need to know about?

Benjamin Garza, a 2024 Ronald O. Loveridge Summer Fellow, recently graduated with a bachelor’s in political science from the University of California, Riverside. He can be reached via LinkedIn.

Legislators are proposing several major changes that could make it easier or harder for cities to address climate impacts and prepare for future disasters. While many of these bills present promising solutions, some need changes in the final weeks of the Legislative session to fully address the needs of cities.

Organic waste diversion support

California has set aggressive climate goals that would significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions and enhance sustainability by 2045. One component in meeting these goals is the removal of organic waste from landfills, which produces climate-warming methane emissions.

As part of those efforts, Cal Cities is sponsoring SB 972 (Min). The bill would provide cities with clearer guidelines and enhanced technical support from the state, allowing them to resolve challenges and further improve organic waste and composting efforts. It would also require CalRecycle to report back to the Legislature on the progress of organic waste diversion and its alignment with broader climate initiatives.

SB 972 is now on the Assembly Appropriations suspense file, where costly bills are often held. Due to California's budget deficit, lawmakers are more likely to hold bills like SB 972 that rely on state funding.

Improved disaster preparedness and response

With each year, California's swings from one extreme weather event to another grow more intense. Such disasters have become increasingly intense and unpredictable. Earlier this year, atmospheric rivers brought unprecedented rainfall, leading to a surge in landslides and flooding. And now, a massive blaze near Chico has become the state’s fifth-largest wildfire. There is great urgency in the Legislature to help communities better adapt and prepare for these extremes.

AB 2330 (Holden), sponsored by Cal Cities, would create a streamlined process for local vegetative management efforts in fire-prone areas while maintaining environmental safeguards. It would allow cities to gain the necessary environmental permits in a timelier manner, ultimately strengthening their ability to protect communities from the growing threat of wildfires.

SB 610 (Weiner) also aims to address wildfire management challenges but its current language raises some concerns. The bill would eliminate the fire hazard severity zone categories and require the State Fire Marshal to recast statewide regulations that include wildfire mitigation areas. This would create a consistent approach when applying mitigation measures across all fire-prone areas of the state.

The author introduced the measure in mid-June as a ”gut-and-amend” before lawmakers broke for summer break. Cal Cities has requested several changes that would incorporate local agency expertise and help maintain transparency in this regulatory process.

SB 1461 (Allen), supported by Cal Cities, would add landslides to the state definition of a state or local emergency. This measure would help recognize landslides as an emergency to allow state and local governments to gain access to greater resources, funding, and authority to respond swiftly and protect communities.

Density Bonus Law changes would stymie coastal affordable housing

In early July, Cal Cities moved to oppose AB 2560 (Alvarez), which was amended days before the summer recess. The bill would now require all cities and counties to amend their local coastal programs by July 1, 2026, to include the state’s Density Bonus Law. Cal Cities opposes mandated local coastal program updates, which are costly and time-consuming. AB 2560 includes provisions that would create conflicting standards, which would ultimately prevent and delay cities from planning affordable housing and using the Density Bonus law incentives.

AB 2560 would also create duplicative regulatory oversight over housing policy and programs in the coastal zone. The California Department of Housing and Community Development reviews a city’s housing element. But under AB 2560, now the California Coastal Commission could require additional housing policy and program information in local coastal programs, leading to conflicting requirements from two state agencies. This would mire cities in planning and potential litigation, further blocking their ability to plan for affordability housing on the coast.

Cal Cities issued an action alert for coastal cities to oppose AB 2560, which is set to be heard in the Senate Appropriations Committee on Aug. 5.    

Lawmakers return to the Capitol on Monday and have until Aug. 31 to send any remaining bills to Gov. Gavin Newsom for approval. Information about other top pending public safety and homelessness bills is available online.

Additional contributions by Melissa Sparks-Kranz, legislative affairs lobbyist.