California lawmakers wrapped up a suspense-day marathon on Friday by stalling one of the session’s most closely watched water bills, advancing a sweeping measure on “forever chemicals” and reshaping several agriculture-related proposals.
The Assembly and Senate Appropriations committees cleared their suspense files, where bills marked as potentially costly to implement were deposited throughout the second half of session. The decisions carry a variety of impacts for farm communities, water managers and rural families and shape up the final two weeks of debate as the Legislature races toward a deadline to send bills to the governor.
Water protections delayed, PFAS bill advances
Senate Bill 601 on “nexus waters” was designated a two-year bill. The measure, by Senator Ben Allen, D-Santa Monica, seeks to restore protections to streams and wetlands that lost federal coverage under the U.S. Supreme Court’s Sackett ruling on the Clean Water Act.
In an earlier policy committee hearing, Allen warned that Sackett stripped many wetlands and streams of long-standing federal protections and argued that state safeguards were needed to prevent pollution discharges from flowing downstream into communities and farmland.
Asm. Lori Wilson, D-Suisun City (Wilson office photo)Amid heavy opposition from agriculture and water districts, Allen in June dropped a contentious provision that would have enabled a private right of action to enforce new water quality protections.
The decision to hold SB 601 until 2026 underscores how the state budget deficit and cost concerns can slow even high-profile environmental priorities.
In contrast, Allen’s SB 682 cleared Appropriations with amendments. The bill targets intentionally added PFAS, or “forever chemicals,” across a wide range of consumer products. Allen has said the bill’s intent is to take a comprehensive, science-based approach to phasing out the unnecessary uses of PFAS, while giving essential uses time and a pathway to safer alternatives.
Environmental health advocates have tied PFAS contamination to soaring costs for small water systems, many of them in rural agricultural regions.
Food, land and biomass proposals
Other agriculture-related measures drew mixed fates. SB 444, a bill by Senate Agriculture Chair Melissa Hurtado, D-Bakersfield, to update California’s statute on a human right to food to explicitly include locally grown and raised food, was held.
“Gov. [Gavin] Newsom highlighted the fact that California's farmers and ranchers face some uncertainty because of what's happening across the country with different types of funding cuts,” said Peter Ansel, a senior policy advocate at the California Farm Bureau, the bill’s sponsor, during an April hearing. “This is just a simple way to acknowledge that the state puts a priority on access to those locally grown foods.”
Don’t miss a beat! It’s easy to sign up for a FREE month of Agri-Pulse news! For the latest on what’s happening in Washington, D.C. and around the country in agriculture, just click here.
The Community Alliance with Family Farmers scored a win for its Assembly Bill 524 clearing the Senate committee after amendments. The bill, by Assemblymember Lori Wilson, D-Suisun City, would establish the Farmland Access and Conservation for Thriving Communities program at the California Department of Conservation to help qualified entities acquire and conserve farmland and then sell or lease it to historically marginalized and beginning farmers under long-term, affordable arrangements.
AB 1156, which would ease permitting for solar projects on fallowed farmland, also cleared its fiscal test. Supporters argue the bill helps farmers adapt to groundwater sustainability requirements while creating new revenue streams through renewable energy, though farm groups remain cautious about balancing energy siting with agricultural preservation.
SB 34, aimed at cutting port emissions through stronger state oversight, likewise survived the suspense file. Growers and exporters reliant on California’s ports have watched the bill closely, given its potential to influence freight costs and supply-chain reliability.
Several bills with ties to agriculture advanced with amendments that address fiscal or technical concerns. SB 224 on water supply forecasting removed a public meeting requirement flagged as duplicative but retained new mandates for improving seasonal and long-range tools used by irrigation districts and water managers.
SB 88 on biomass resources was amended to clarify definitions and streamline reporting timelines, keeping the focus on using crop residues and orchard waste for renewable energy while cutting back administrative costs. For SB 279 on composting operations, the committee broadened the definition of eligible organic material and aligned oversight between CalRecycle and local enforcement, potentially opening more doors for dairies and farms to participate without higher compliance costs.
SB 518, covering low-impact camping on farms, made narrow changes to local government reporting and permitting rules but kept the pilot program intact, which could affect rural landowners looking for diversification opportunities.
The attention now turns to floor sessions as the bills that survived the suspense day will gain further scrutiny ahead of the final votes.
For more news, go to Agri-Pulse.com.
