Natural Resources committee advances polluters‑pay fund, biomass funding, offshore wind reporting, firefighter hiring pathway and SAF bill

The Assembly Natural Resources Committee advanced a package of climate, forest- and energy-related bills after a multi‑hour hearing that drew hundreds of public speakers and labor witnesses. The panel moved AB 1243, a measure the author described as “the polluters pay climate super fund act of 2025,” along with bills to fund forest biomass reuse, require reporting on developer funding for offshore wind community capacity, create a hiring pathway for formerly incarcerated CAL FIRE hand crew members, and to streamline judicial review for certain sustainable aviation fuel projects.

The measures drew broad public support from environmental and justice groups and organized youth, and broad opposition from many building‑trade unions and business groups who warned of job losses and higher costs. Committee members debated the tradeoffs between creating new revenue for resilience and the bills’ possible effects on in‑state jobs, refinery operations and consumer prices.

AB 1243 — the polluters‑pay bill — would direct CalEPA to (1) identify companies responsible for at least 1 billion metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions between 1990 and 2024, (2) commission a climate‑cost study quantifying damages to California, and (3) assess fees on the largest fossil fuel polluters proportional to their emissions and the state’s damages. “This bill is a reasonable, responsible and revenue‑smart approach to addressing the escalating costs to taxpayers of climate destruction in California,” the author told the committee. Supporters, including Mya Goldin Krasner of the Center for Biological Diversity and Mabel Tsang of the California Environmental Justice Alliance, said the proposal would protect taxpayers and direct funds to resilience projects and communities most affected by pollution. Opponents led by the California Building and Construction Trades Council, the California Chamber of Commerce and the Western States Petroleum Association warned that the bill could drive refinery closures, increase fuel prices and cost thousands of jobs.

Several committee members urged additional analysis. One member noted the recent Valero refinery closure and said that, while the climate rationale is strong, the committee needed greater clarity about whether the assessments would unintentionally accelerate refinery shutdowns before demand and workforce transition plans are in place. The author and supporters pointed to provisions giving affected companies the option to pay over time and to language that would dedicate at least 40% of new funds to disadvantaged communities.

Other bills advanced in the hearing: - AB 706 (bioenergy/biomass): Sponsors said California faces tens of millions of tons of forest biomass from wildfire mitigation and needs ways to convert that material into useful products or energy instead of pile burning. Supporters, including the Bioenergy Association of California, said conversion can cut particulate, methane and carbon monoxide emissions compared with open burning. Environmental groups opposed expedited or expanded incentives without strict CEQA review and raised concerns about promoting unsustainable logging. The committee moved the bill with amendments and a due‑pass recommendation to the Utilities and Energy Committee.

- AB 758 (brush and public‑land assessments): The bill would require strategic assessments and publicly posted brush‑management plans by state and local public land managers, plus two‑year updates, to help prioritize limited mitigation funding. Supporters said the requirement helps target billions in expected spending; some members said it could create new state burdens and cost local governments to prepare parcel‑level assessments.

- AB 1417 (offshore wind community capacity): The author removed a proposed mandatory developer fee and instead made developer reports of direct contributions to local and tribal community capacity building a reporting requirement to the California Energy Commission and allowed capacity building as an eligible use of voluntary offshore funds. Supporters said reporting and eligibility for CEC grants would let tribal and frontline communities participate; offshore wind developers opposed mandated reporting and urged voluntary, confidential arrangements while federal permitting remains uncertain.

- AB 1380 (pathway for incarcerated hand‑crew firefighters): The bill would ensure people who served on CAL FIRE hand crews while incarcerated leave custody with recognized FF‑1 level training or equivalent certification and would reserve up to 15% of vacant seasonal CAL FIRE Firefighter I positions for qualified graduates of the training stream, when qualified applicants exist. Sponsors said the measure gives people who risked their lives fighting fires a clear hiring pathway; CAL FIRE and the state firefighters’ union said expanded training, existing Ventura training center programs, and careful design are preferable to a hard quota and asked to continue negotiations.

- AB 839 (sustainable aviation fuel, SAF): The bill would add defined SAF projects to a list of infrastructure project types eligible for an expedited judicial review period under CEQA (a limited procedural streamlining, not a CEQA exemption), to attract SAF production and investment to California. Airlines and SAF developers supported the bill as a tool to improve permitting certainty for an industry they say is critical to reducing aviation emissions. Environmental justice and environmental groups opposed judicial streamlining for industrial fuel projects and urged rigorous local impact review.

Votes at a glance (committee actions and next committees) - AB 1243 — Polluters Pay Climate Super Fund Act: Motion carried; committee recommended “due pass” to the Judiciary Committee. (Committee roll shows majority support; one member recorded a “no.”) - AB 706 — Biomass/bioenergy program: Motion carried as amended; due pass to Utilities & Energy Committee. - AB 758 — Public lands/brush management assessments: Motion carried as amended; due pass to Emergency Management Committee (roll left open for additional votes). - AB 1417 — Offshore wind community capacity reporting: Motion carried as amended; due pass to Utilities & Energy Committee. - AB 1380 — Formerly incarcerated firefighters pathway: Motion carried; due pass to Public Safety Committee. - AB 839 — Sustainable aviation fuel (procedural streamlining): Motion carried; due pass to Judiciary Committee. - AB 721 — Huron Hawk Conservancy (West Fresno County conservancy): Motion carried; due pass to Appropriations Committee.

What happened in public comment Hundreds of individuals and dozens of organizations registered support for AB 1243 and the broader polluters‑pay concept, including environmental justice groups, labor unions that favor climate jobs, student groups and faith organizations. In opposition, hundreds of building‑trades representatives, business groups, rural business coalitions and local chambers of commerce urged the committee to reject or amend AB 1243 and other measures they said could harm in‑state jobs and increase consumer costs. Testimony on the biomass and SAF bills included both industry supporters and environmental justice and conservation groups urging careful safeguards and full environmental review.

Why it matters Committee members said the hearing showed the depth of public concern over climate impacts, wildfire costs and equitable access to clean‑energy jobs. Sponsors argued that new, predictable funding is needed for local resilience, home hardening, school cooling and workforce development. Opponents urged caution to avoid unintended job losses and urged strengthening existing programs such as cap‑and‑trade or Ventura training and expungement pathways for justice‑involved workers.

What’s next Each bill advanced to the committee listed above for more policy or fiscal review. Several members asked authors to return with additional amendments to address implementation details, workforce requirements, and program design. Sponsors and opponents agreed to continue negotiations on several measures before they reach subsequent committees.

Sources: Committee hearing transcript; witness testimony recorded in the hearing; committee roll calls and staff analysis.