Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Critical Minerals topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Bill to designate strategic geothermal and critical-mineral zones wins support from rural leaders

California State Senate (Energy, Utilities & Communications subcommittee) · June 24, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

AB 2163 would create a state framework to designate strategic clean-energy and critical-mineral development zones to prioritize geothermal and lithium-related projects; Imperial County officials said the policy could unlock jobs and infrastructure investments while senators debated inclusion of diverse technologies.

Assemblymember Gonzales presented AB 2163, which creates criteria to identify regions where geothermal base-load energy and recoverable critical minerals (including lithium from geothermal brines) warrant "strategic development zone" designation. The bill would direct state agencies to give priority consideration to infrastructure and investment projects within those zones.

Gil Reblar, deputy CEO for Imperial County, described local capacity: more than 600 megawatts of operating geothermal generation and permitting activity for lithium projects in the Salton Sea/Lithium Valley area. He told the committee the county has invested in environmental review, workforce development and infrastructure planning and that full development could generate thousands of construction and permanent jobs over decades.

Supporters argued the measure would preserve rural economic opportunity and align state resources with locally developed plans. Several senators pressed the author about whether the bill's definition would include agriculture-related energy uses and carbon-capture/hydrogen technologies; witnesses said agriculture can be included and carbon-capture language was removed after stakeholder concerns.

No lead opposition witnesses appeared during the hearing. The committee moved AB 2163 forward with the intent to take a vote when a quorum was present.