Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Solar Use Easement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Panel advances bill to modernize solar‑use easements on Williamson Act land
Summary
AB 11 56 would update the state’s solar‑use easement statute to let land subject to Williamson Act contracts transfer temporarily to solar use where water constraints make farming unviable; sponsors and counties said the statute needs revision to unlock projects.
The Assembly Committee on Utilities and Energy advanced AB 11 56, a bill to update California’s solar‑use easement statute so certain agriculturally constrained lands subject to Williamson Act contracts can be used for solar development under a temporary easement.
The bill’s author said the statute — created in 2011 to allow solar development on nonviable Williamson Act lands — has produced only three projects and needs modernization to align with current groundwater and clean‑energy goals. The author said the legislation would suspend (not rescind) Williamson Act contracts for the length of a solar project and allow local governments to require community benefits or nonrenewals at the end of a project’s life.
Supporters including trade groups and developers said the approach would provide a voluntary option for landowners whose properties lack water and are no longer viable for agriculture. Shannon Eddy of the Large‑Scale Solar Association and Alex Jackson of the American Clean Power Association said the state needs more sites to meet long‑term grid and transmission planning goals and that many desert and transmission zones are constrained.
Rural counties and farm groups expressed concerns, saying the bill should preserve county mitigation authority and local control over nonrenewal decisions to protect public safety and grazing needs. John Kennedy of the Rural County Representatives of California said removing references to the California Energy Commission in the bill was helpful but asked for continued work on mitigation and nonrenewal provisions so counties can address safety and nuisance issues.
The committee accepted amendments that, among other changes, removed the California Energy Commission from certain roles, clarified CEQA application to projects, allowed local governments to require community benefits and allowed nonrenewals at project end. The bill was advanced to the Assembly Agriculture Committee. The committee vote was recorded as passed (yes: 16; no: 0).
