California Senate Bill SB867

California 2023-2024 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/17/23
• Refer: 3/1/23
• Report Pass: 3/28/23
• Refer: 3/28/23
• Refer: 4/19/23
• Report Pass: 4/27/23
• Refer: 4/27/23
• Report Pass: 5/18/23
• Engrossed: 5/31/23
• Refer: 6/15/23
• Report Pass: 6/21/23
• Refer: 6/22/23
• Refer: 6/29/24
• Enrolled: 7/3/24
• Chaptered: 7/3/24
• Passed: 7/3/24

Caption

Safe Drinking Water, Wildfire Prevention, Drought Preparedness, and Clean Air Bond Act of 2024.

Impact

The bill's passage could significantly enhance existing state laws by ensuring that the right to safe and clean drinking water is upheld, as well as enabling substantial investments in infrastructure aimed at wildfire prevention and climate resilience. It places a particular emphasis on supporting disadvantaged communities, who often face the direst consequences of environmental hazards. By funding programs that promote sustainable water management and clean air initiatives, SB 867 is poised to benefit both public health and environmental stability across the state.

Summary

Senate Bill 867, officially titled the Safe Drinking Water, Wildfire Prevention, Drought Preparedness, and Clean Air Bond Act of 2024, aims to address critical environmental and public health concerns in California. If approved by voters, the bill would authorize the issuance of $10 billion in bonds to finance various projects focused on safe drinking water, wildfire risk reduction, drought and flood preparedness, and clean air initiatives. These efforts align with California's broader climate action strategies, which recognize the increasing severity of natural disasters linked to climate change, such as catastrophic wildfires and prolonged droughts.

Sentiment

The general sentiment surrounding SB 867 appears to be largely positive, as it aims to tackle pressing issues that affect many Californians. Supporters highlight the urgency of investing in infrastructure that promotes resilience against climate change and protects vulnerable communities. However, potential opposition could arise from concerns regarding state expenditure and the long-term implications of increased borrowing, especially in light of California's ongoing financial management debates.

Contention

Key points of contention may center around the allocation of funds and the management of projects financed through the bonds. Critics could argue about the efficiency and effectiveness of using state bonds for such extensive initiatives, emphasizing the need for accountability in how these funds are managed and spent. Furthermore, discussions might arise regarding the prioritization of projects, especially in regard to which communities will benefit most directly from the funding.