California lawmakers passed a controversial warehouse bill with minutes to spare on the final day of the session, despite opposition from environmental justice groups, industry leaders and local governments across the state.
The bill's last-minute introduction sparked significant debate. Critics, including environmental justice advocates, industry representatives and lawmakers from both the Senate and Assembly, argued all week that a "one-size-fits-all" approach could disrupt goods movement and manufacturing statewide.
“I ask the authors to hold this bill to ensure that all stakeholders are at the table so we can have a true collaboration on a comprehensive policy that will benefit all of our communities, rather than a gut and amend at the very last minute,” Senator Rosilicie Ochoa-Bogh (R-Yucaipa) said during the bill’s senate floor debate.
AB 98, authored by Assemblymember Juan Carrillo (D-Palmdale), 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, and meet other standards like separate truck entrances, air pollution monitoring and a 2-to-1 replacement of any demolished housing.
Carrillo told lawmakers at a Senate Local Government Committee hearing on Thursday that a solid agreement was reached despite the bill’s rushed vote just before the session ended.
AB 98 co-author Assemblywoman Eloise Gomez Reyes (D-Colton) said in a statement after the bill’s passage on Sunday that the bill is a strong step forward but emphasized the need for cities to improve local warehouse planning.
“I want to be abundantly clear, I do not believe the sensitive receptor setbacks in this bill go far enough to protect our most vulnerable communities,” said Reyes. “The distances outlined in this bill are only a minimum, and cities may adopt more stringent standards than what is outlined in AB 98. I urge cities and counties to expand on the standard set in this bill.”
Lawmakers from the Central Valley and Inland Empire, including Senators from both parties, argued that AB 98's approach would undermine local control over warehouse development that has been crucial to creating jobs and fostering economic prosperity in the state's rural and inland areas.
“It hurt my heart to hear somebody describe that our local government officials in these affected cities have failed their communities,” said Senator Kelly Seyarto (R-Murrietta) on the floor. “Watching this area develop over the last 30 years, there's been a lot done right by the very people being criticized. They have been doing things right.”
Andrea Vidaurre, a senior policy analyst with the People’s Collective for Environmental Justice (PC4EJ), expressed disappointment that their concerns about setbacks and public input were overlooked as both chambers voted to support the bill.
While she acknowledged that Reyes is supportive of environmental justice issues, Vidaurre criticized the lawmaker for not adequately representing the communities most impacted by warehousing during the bill’s drafting process.
“We heard all across the floor [Saturday] that this was negotiated, that this was a compromise, but a compromise for who?” said Vidaurre. “We weren't at the table. It's more about compromising us as communities to settle for business as usual.”
AB 98 now sits on Governor Gavin Newsom’s desk. Newsom has until September 30 to sign or veto the bill.
