Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Prop4 Clean Energy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Assembly budget panel hears Prop. 4 allocations for clean energy, offshore wind; transmission financing left pending
Summary
Department of Finance outlined how Proposition 4 bond language would fund clean energy, offshore wind and transmission; analysts urged caution on immediate allocation for some items and noted a July 1, 2025 transmission financing study deadline under AB 3264.
Proposition 4 includes $10,000,000,000 for natural resource, energy and outdoor access projects, and the Department of Finance told the Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 4 that chapter 9 of the bond dedicates $850,000,000 for clean energy projects.
Those figures were presented by David Evans of the Department of Finance, who told the committee: “Proposition 4 included $10,000,000,000 for various natural resource energy, outdoor access, projects and programs to help mitigate the impacts of climate change. Of this amount, chapter 9 of the bond specified, dollars $850,000,000 would be dedicated for clean energy projects.”
The administration’s January budget proposes specific allocations from that $850 million pool. The budget documents include $46,100,000 for the demand‑side grid support program (with $3,400,000 set aside for program delivery costs) and $227,000,000 for offshore wind development in fiscal years shown in the budget. Department of Finance staff also said $325,000,000 is reserved in the bond for public financing of energy transmission projects (bond section 94,520), but the governor’s budget did not include that $325 million because the administration is awaiting the findings of a statutorily required report under AB 3264 before proposing how to allocate those funds.
Legislative Analyst’s Office analyst Helen Kerstein told the committee the LAO sees reasons to consider staging appropriations for some of the new programs. On offshore wind she said the administration’s plan to appropriate nearly all funds in two years “is an instance where this is a new program, so it's one where you could appropriate the money, but you could also wait on some or all of it.” The LAO noted evolving federal activity and outstanding program design questions as reasons to consider phasing appropriations.
Assemblymembers pressed CPUC and administration staff about timing for the AB 3264 transmission financing study. Rachel Peterson, executive director of the California Public Utilities Commission, told the committee, “The law requires us to prepare that transmission financing study by 07/01/2025.” Peterson said CPUC is already working with the state infrastructure bank (IBank), the Energy Commission and the independent system operator on the study’s scope and is on track to meet the July 1 deadline.
Subcommittee members also raised local readiness questions for offshore wind. One Assemblymember who represents Humboldt County urged more technical support for local governments that will host offshore wind–related port and development work, noting limited local staffing capacity.
No formal votes were taken in this informational hearing.
Why it matters: the committee is reviewing how the state will spend bond funds approved by voters to accelerate clean energy and resilience. Decisions about whether to appropriate funds now — particularly large, novel investments such as port upgrades for offshore wind and transmission financing — will shape the pace of private and public projects and which communities receive early benefits.
