Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the State Legislation topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

State update: Alameda County briefed on governor and AG litigation, cap-and-trade timeline and special election

Alameda County Board of Supervisors, Personnel Administration and Legislation Committee · April 21, 2025
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

Fullman Strategies told the committee the governor and Attorney General are pursuing litigation against federal actions, the governor plans cap-and-trade extension language possibly in the May revise (due May 14), and a special election for Assembly District 63 is set for June 24 (runoff August 26 if needed).

Amy Costa of Fullman Strategies gave the state legislative briefing to the Alameda County Personnel Administration and Legislation Committee on April 21, describing several developments the county should monitor.

Costa said the governor and Attorney General Rob Bonta have recently escalated litigation against the federal government, including a challenge to the president’s asserted emergency powers and indications of further suits related to proposed federal funding cuts. She described an AG-led coalition suing the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services over the termination of roughly $11 billion in public health funding.

Costa added that the governor and legislative leaders have discussed extending California’s cap-and-trade program and that language or proposals could appear in the May revise, which must be released by May 14. "They plan to extend the state's cap and trade program and that the proposal will be out in the next couple of weeks," she said.

On elections, Costa reported the governor has set a special election for Assembly District 63, with a primary on June 24 and a runoff on August 26 if no candidate attains a majority.

Supervisors had no substantive questions beyond scheduling implications, and no public speakers addressed the state update. The committee received the report for informational purposes and did not take separate formal action on the state matters.