A contested bill aimed at improving warehouse building standards and creating buffer zones around new construction awaits a decisive vote on Saturday — the last day of the legislative session.
The California Senate passed AB 98 this afternoon with a narrow 21-17 vote after a lengthy debate. The bill now moves to the Assembly for consideration.
The bill, authored by Assemblymember Juan Carrillo (D-Palmdale), has sparked significant debate, with proponents and critics voicing their opinions at a Senate Local Government Committee hearing on Thursday.
AB 98 would require new warehouses built after 2026 to maintain a 300-foot buffer from sensitive areas like schools and parks, with a 500-foot buffer in newly industrialized zones. Warehouses over 250,000 square feet must include electric truck charging stations, rooftop solar, cooling roofs, while meeting other standards like separate truck entrances, air pollution monitoring and a 2-to-1 replacement of any demolished housing.
Assemblymember Carrillo defended the bill as a fair compromise despite acknowledging there’s opposition from various environmental justice, business groups and cities and counties.
"It’s a sign that we did a pretty good job of finding a fair compromise, that for the first time, has a chance to improve the status quo," Carrillo said.
The Laborers International Union of North America (LiUNA), the California Hospital Association, California State Council of Laborers, United Food and Commercial Workers and the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians are among the bill's supporters.
Joseph Cruz, representing LiUNA, shared that the union supports AB 98 because of the economic benefits and job opportunities provided by warehouses.
“The laborers have spent years organizing the warehouse tilt up industry, especially in the Inland Empire and the Central Valley, areas that have been hardest hit by unemployment,” said Cruz. “So we're providing a really good pathway to the middle class by building these warehouses throughout the state.”
Mark Neuberger, representing the California State Association of Counties, opposes AB 98 due to the lack of local control and the potential conflict with existing Good Neighbor policies.
In a letter addressed to Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas (D-Hollister), the mayors of Chino, Chino Hills, Corona, Fontana, Montclair, Ontario, Rialto and Upland shared that they’re opposing the bill because of unnecessary and burdensome regulations.
“Instead of imposing one-size-fits-all regulations, we urge our local legislators to prioritize more immediate challenges affecting our region, such as addressing homelessness, reducing the cost of living, and increasing funding for affordable housing,” reads the letter.
Andrea Vidaurre with the People’s Collective for Environmental Justice (PC4EJ) urged the committee to vote no and continued to criticize the absence of community voices directly impacted by warehousing. “We believe that ushering in a bill at the 11th hour with no opportunity for community input is the wrong and unjust way of addressing this issue,” she said.
Co-author Assemblymember Eloise Reyes (D-Colton) acknowledged the bill's limitations, particularly with the proposed setbacks.
"I do not believe the sensitive receptor setbacks in this bill adequately protect our most vulnerable communities," Reyes said.
However, Reyes emphasized that the bill is a good first step, noting that it sets minimum standards while allowing cities and advocates to push for stronger local regulations.
“In summary, there is still work to be done, and I believe passing AB 98 is a part of this work. This is a first step, not the last, and I look forward to working with everyone on the work ahead.”
California Environmental Voters is taking a neutral position and shared that they could not comment on the bill. The California Chamber of Commerce is also taking a neutral stance, despite sharing on Wednesday that they thought the bill struck a balanced compromise.
