California Assembly Bill 1176: Electrification Act, AB 39, AB 130

California Assembly Bill 1176, introduced by Assemblymember Rick Chavez Zbur in February 2023, was the Local Electrification Planning Act, a measure that would have required cities and counties with more than 75,000 residents to adopt plans for expanding electric vehicle charging, decarbonizing buildings, and deploying renewable energy. The bill stalled in the Senate and Zbur pulled it from committee in July 2024. Its policy framework returned in the next session as AB 39, which the Legislature passed on September 11, 2025, and which took effect on January 1, 2026, codified at Government Code Section 65302.13.¹² The AB 1176 bill number has also been assigned to unrelated measures in earlier sessions, most memorably a 2009 Port of San Francisco financing bill whose veto message by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger contained a hidden expletive.

What AB 1176 Would Have Required

Zbur introduced the bill on February 16, 2023, with Assemblymember Schiavo as principal coauthor.³ Cities and counties above the 75,000-resident threshold would have had to either prepare a standalone electrification plan or incorporate one into their existing general plan. The plans had to identify opportunities to expand EV charging for residents, visitors, and businesses, and to include policies directing investment in zero-emission technologies toward disadvantaged communities, low-income households, and small businesses.⁴ Adoption was to happen between January 1, 2026, and January 1, 2029.

Climate Plan California sponsored the bill. Supporters included California Environmental Voters, the Climate Center, the Sierra Club, California Environment, and IBEW Local Union 569.⁵ Zbur took multiple rounds of amendments to address cost and flexibility concerns raised by the League of Cities, the Rural County Representatives of California, the American Planning Association, and the California Building Industry Association.

Why the Bill Failed

AB 1176 cleared Assembly Appropriations but did not pass the Senate Governance and Finance Committee in 2023, going on pause into the next year.⁶ When it returned in 2024, its second committee hearing was canceled at the author’s request on July 2, 2024, which ended the bill for that session.⁴

AB 39: The Successor That Became Law

Zbur reintroduced the same framework in the 2025–2026 session as AB 39. It applies to the same cities and counties, those with more than 75,000 residents, and shifts the compliance window to January 1, 2027, through January 1, 2030.⁷ A jurisdiction can comply by adopting a standalone plan, folding one into its next general plan update within that window, or designating an existing plan that already meets the statutory criteria.

Plan contents are more detailed than what AB 1176 had required:

Expanding EV charging in residential, retail, commercial, and public locations, including public charging corridors, and removing deployment barriers.
Prioritizing equitable zero-emission investments in disadvantaged communities, low-income households, and small businesses.
Strategies for electrifying new and existing buildings, including potential incentives or subsidies.
Expanding distributed renewable resources such as rooftop solar, community solar, microgrids, and battery storage.
Infrastructure and strategies for medium- and heavy-duty zero-emission vehicle fleets.
Coordination with local utilities to identify grid upgrades needed to support transportation and building electrification.

The Legislature declared the law a matter of statewide concern applicable to charter cities and classified it as a state-mandated local program. AB 39 states that no reimbursement is required for the resulting costs on local governments.⁷ The statute does not specify enforcement mechanisms or penalties for jurisdictions that miss the 2030 deadline.

How AB 130 Limits What Local Plans Can Do

AB 39’s planning mandate arrived alongside a separate law that narrows how cities can act on it. In August 2025, the Legislature adopted AB 130, a budget trailer bill imposing a moratorium from October 1, 2025, through June 1, 2031, on new local residential building standards.⁸ During that period, cities and counties generally cannot adopt new reach codes such as bans on gas hookups in new homes.

A narrow exception allows a local building code amendment that incentivizes all-electric construction, but only if it permits mixed-fuel residential construction consistent with federal law, forms part of an adopted greenhouse gas emissions reduction strategy, and aligns with a general plan approved on or before June 10, 2025. The exception reflects the Ninth Circuit’s 2024 decision in California Restaurant Association v. City of Berkeley, which struck down Berkeley’s ban on gas piping in new construction as preempted by the federal Energy Policy and Conservation Act.

The practical effect is that local governments must still produce comprehensive electrification plans under AB 39, but their ability to carry those plans out through mandatory building standards is limited to incentive-based approaches until the moratorium ends.

Earlier Bills Numbered AB 1176

California reuses bill numbers each session, so AB 1176 has been attached to unrelated measures in earlier years.

2009: Port of San Francisco Infrastructure Financing

Assemblyman Tom Ammiano of San Francisco authored a 2009 AB 1176 that would have let the City and County of San Francisco create infrastructure financing districts along its waterfront to fund redevelopment of aging port properties, including the contaminated 65-acre Pier 70 shipyard site. The Port faced roughly $1.9 billion in capital needs at the time.⁹ At least 20 percent of tax increment revenues would have been set aside for shoreline restoration, bay fill removal, waterfront public access, or environmental remediation, and the districts could have diverted increment for up to 45 years without a public election.¹⁰

The bill passed the Assembly 80-0 and the Senate 40-0.¹¹ Governor Schwarzenegger vetoed it on October 12, 2009, writing that it was “unnecessary to sign this measure at this time” and citing legislative inaction on water, prisons, and health care.¹² Within days, observers noticed that the first letters of successive lines in the veto message body spelled out an expletive. Schwarzenegger’s spokesperson Aaron McLear called it “a weird, strange coincidence.” Five days before the veto, Ammiano had heckled Schwarzenegger at a San Francisco Democratic Party dinner, shouting “You lie!” and telling the governor to “kiss my gay a—.” Ammiano said he planned to resubmit the bill.¹³

2013: Graduate Medical Residency Funding

In the 2013–2014 session, Assembly members Raul Bocanegra and Rob Bonta authored a different AB 1176 that would have created a Graduate Medical Education Fund in the State Treasury, financed by a $5-per-covered-life annual assessment on health insurers and health care service plans. Grants would have supported medical residency training programs, with priority for programs in medically underserved areas and those emphasizing primary care.¹⁴ The bill cleared Assembly Health but was held on the Assembly Appropriations suspense file and never advanced.¹⁵

1
BWS Law. California Enacts AB 39: New Electrification Planning Mandates for Cities and Counties
2
CALSTART. California Passes Bill to Advance Clean Energy Transition Through Cities, Counties
3
California Legislative Information. AB 1176 Bill Navigation
4
CalMatters Digital Democracy. AB 1176 (2023-2024)
5
CalMatters Digital Democracy. Assembly Standing Committee on Appropriations Hearing
6
California Environmental Voters. 2023 State Priority Bills
7
CalMatters Digital Democracy. AB 39 (2025-2026)
8
California Department of General Services. BSC Bulletin 25-03: AB 130
9
California Legislative Information. AB 1176 Amended in Senate
10
California Legislative Information. AB 1176 Assembly Floor Analysis
11
New York Post. Schwarzenegger Drops F-Bomb in Veto Message to Lawmaker
12
California Legislative Information. AB 1176 Veto Message
13
NBC Bay Area. Ammiano Move Forward in F-Bomb Veto
14
Kaiser Family Foundation. AB 1176 Amended in Assembly
15
California Legislative Information. Assembly Appropriations Committee Analysis