Legislative Year In Review: How Ava’s Priorities Fared in the 2025 California Legislative Session

Ava Position: Support  |  Result: Similar language signed into law in AB 1207

Currently, California utility customers receive a portion of the revenues generated by the state’s Cap-and-Trade program in the form of the California Climate Credit, which is applied to their energy bills in April and October of each year. AB 729 would have changed the timing of the credit to August and September, the two months of the year when customer electricity bills are typically the most expensive. Although this bill failed to pass the Legislature, similar climate credit language was adopted in a different bill, AB 1207, which extended California’s Cap-and-Trade program through 2045. Under AB 1207, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) now has the authority to reallocate the climate credit to customers on up to four of the most expensive months of the year, providing financial relief for customers when it’s most needed.

Ava Position: Support  |  Result: Signed into law

SB 254 is the Legislature’s comprehensive “energy affordability” package that the Governor signed into law. This bill combines a variety of provisions aimed at lowering customer utility bills, including establishing a “transmission infrastructure accelerator” to facilitate public financing for transmission projects, expediting California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review for clean energy infrastructure projects, and prohibiting investor-owned utilities (IOUs) from earning a profit on the first $6 billion they spend on wildfire mitigation projects starting in 2026. SB 254 is a meaningful first step toward addressing the state’s growing energy affordability crisis and bringing much-needed relief to our customers.

Ava Position: Support  |  Result: Signed into law

AB 39 requires cities and counties with over 75,000 residents to adopt an electrification plan by no later than 2030, aligning with Ava’s local development and sustainability goals. We’re glad the state is continuing to push local leaders to decarbonize their communities through efforts like electrifying new and existing buildings, increasing the adoption of battery storage and renewable distributed energy resources, and expanding access to EV charging.

Ava Position: Support  |  Result: Bill did not advance

This bill would have required cities and counties to streamline and standardize local permitting processes for the installation of residential heat pump water heaters or heat pump HVAC systems. SB 282 failed to advance out of the Legislature this year.

Ava Position: Support if Amended (later Support)  |  Result: Bill amended as requested and signed into law

SB 283 requires battery storage developers to consult with and have their projects inspected by local authorities responsible for fire suppression before applying for state permits or commencing operations. Ava originally took a “Support if Amended” position on this bill with a request that the author amend the language to clarify that these requirements (1) do not apply retroactively to battery storage projects already in operation or in the application process, and (2) apply only to utility-scale battery storage systems. Working alongside our trade association, CalCCA, Ava succeeded in getting these amendments adopted, and thus shifted to a “Support” position prior to the bill being signed into law.

Ava Position: Support  |  Result: Bill did not advance

This bill would have authorized the California Energy Commission (CEC) to establish a list of vetted and approved distributed energy resource equipment, similar to the one it has maintained for solar equipment for nearly two decades, to help inform developers and customers interested in installing such equipment. SB 698 failed to advance out of the Legislature this year.

Ava Position: Support if Amended  |  Result: Bill did not advance but similar language integrated into PG&E Rule 30 regulatory proceeding

AB 222 would have required the operators of large-load data centers to report their Power Usage Effectiveness (PUE), a key energy efficiency metric, to the CEC so that statewide data center load growth and impacts could be assessed in the commission’s 2027 Integrated Energy Policy Report (IEPR). It would have also required the CPUC to evaluate whether new data center loads are shifting costs to other ratepayers. Ava took a “Support if Amended” position and worked with the author on implementing critical data-sharing provisions between data center developers and CCAs serving their load. AB 222 did not advance out of the Legislature.

Ava Position: Support  |  Result: Bill did not advance

SB 314 sought to expedite electric vehicle charger deployment by allowing EV charging stations to operate while awaiting final state inspection, provided installers self-certify compliance with voltage and safety standards. Many EV charging projects experience delays of up to six months before energization under current California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) testing processes. Ava supported SB 314 as a pragmatic approach to accelerate charger availability and improve public access to fast charging infrastructure, although the bill ultimately failed to advance after CDFA cited funding and administrative limitations to developing a statewide device registration system.

Ava Position: Support  |  Result: Passed Legislature but vetoed by Governor

AB 44 would have directed the CPUC, in consultation with load-serving entities (LSEs) – like Ava – to establish “load modification protocols” allowing LSEs to receive credit for verified reductions in their load forecasts achieved through behind-the-meter demand flexibility measures. Ava supported this bill for its recognition of the role CCAs are playing in implementing local load management and demand-side programs. The Governor vetoed AB 44, citing concerns about overlapping with ongoing CPUC and CEC regulatory proceedings and the premature nature of new legislative mandates in this area.

Ava Position: Support if Amended  |  Result: Passed Legislature but vetoed by Governor

SB 541 would have required IOUs to evaluate cost-effective demand flexibility alternatives to traditional grid upgrades and to publish location-specific avoided cost signals as part of their Distribution Planning Process (DPP). Ava took a “Support if Amended” position and sought amendments clarifying implementation timelines and ensuring that LSEs could access the resulting data to inform investments in distributed energy resources. Although not all of our amendments were adopted, we’re grateful for the opportunity to work closely with the author to improve this bill and look forward to collaborating to shape future legislative efforts related to demand flexibility.

Ava Position: Support  |  Result: Bill did not advance but similar language was signed into law as part of SB 707

AB 259 was drafted to update provisions of the Brown Act to clarify public meeting notice requirements and codify certain COVID-19 pandemic-era flexibilities for virtual participation. It also enhances transparency standards for agenda materials and remote access. This bill, like SB 239, was integrated into SB 707 (Durazo), which was signed into law.

Ava Position: Support  |  Result: Bill did not advance but similar language was signed into law as part of SB 707

SB 239 was introduced to extend Brown Act alternative teleconferencing rules for “subsidiary bodies” of local agencies through 2030. Language from this bill was incorporated into a more comprehensive bill, SB 707, which represents the Legislature’s Brown Act “modernization” effort, integrating lessons learned from remote governance during the COVID-19 pandemic. SB 707 expands opportunities for hybrid participation, clarifies technical accessibility standards, and strengthens public engagement requirements.