Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rooftop Solar Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lengthy debate on AB 942: author amends bill but committee advances measure addressing net metering equity
Summary
AB 942 would revise elements of California's rooftop solar compensation rules; the author withdrew a proposal to convert existing NEM customers but retained a provision making the tariff transferable upon property sale and ending the climate credit for NEM customers.
Assemblymember (author, AB 942) presented AB 942 as a bill to revise California's rooftop solar compensation and subsidy rules. The author said the existing net energy metering (NEM) regime, first designed to spur an emerging industry, now results in a cost shift to non-solar customers estimated in testimony at billions of dollars annually.
The bill as amended removed an original provision that would have converted legacy NEM customers into the new net-billing tariff after a set time. The remaining provisions would: (1) require a new homeowner to take service under the current net-billing tariff rather than inheriting the seller's legacy NEM terms, and (2) end the distribution of the "climate credit" to NEM customers beginning 1/1/2026. Supporters, including the Coalition of California Utility Employees (TURN-aligned), community development groups and labor, said the change reduces a cost shift borne by non-solar customers and advances affordability for the most burdened households.
Opponents — including Solar Rights Alliance, the California Solar and Storage Association, Electrify America and many solar owners and local school districts — said the measure would break longstanding expectations and reduce the value of rooftop solar; homeowners and advocacy groups argued the change could depress home sale prices and harm lower-income households who financed solar.
Experts and economists offered differing assessments on the size and direction of the cost shift and payback periods; both sides produced technical estimates. The committee removed the most disruptive provision affecting legacy contracts and agreed to committee amendments; after lengthy public comment and testimony the committee passed AB 942 as amended to appropriations.
Why it matters: The debate in committee reflected a clash between concerns about affordability and equity for non-solar customers and the expectations and investments of millions of solar owners. The committee's amendments attempted to protect existing solar customers while addressing the alleged cost shift.
