State lawmakers face opposition from environmental justice groups as they rush to get warehouse bill passed

California lawmakers are rushing to introduce a bill to improve warehouse building standards before the end of this year’s legislative session. The bill is drawing criticism from environmental justice groups across the state, who are opposing it.

Assembly Bill 98, authored by Assemblymember Juan Carrillo (D-Palmdale), would require new warehouses built after 2026 to have a 300-foot buffer from “sensitive receptors” like schools, parks and hospitals. New warehouses constructed in areas rezoned for industrial use would need a 500-foot buffer.

The bill also requires that new and expanding warehouses over 250,000 square feet include electric truck charging stations, rooftop solar panels, and cooling roofs. It mandates separate truck entrances, air pollution monitoring and a 2-to-1 replacement of any demolished housing.

Andrea Vidaurre, a senior policy analyst with the People’s Collective for Environmental Justice (PC4EJ), argues that the bill would enshrine the practice of building warehouses too close to communities already impacted by warehousing. She notes that 25 groups across the state are opposing the bill because they believe it fails to consider the communities most affected by these developments.

“There are some great pieces of the bill, and we appreciate that warehousing has been taken seriously this year, but it is not ready yet,” said Vidaurre. “The process needs to include [environmental justice] communities.”

AB 98's co-author, Assembly Majority Leader Eloise Gomez Reyes (D-Colton), has previously proposed three unsuccessful warehouse setback bills. Her last attempt, AB 1000, would have required a 1,000-foot buffer zone for warehouses, but Reyes withdrew it from the Assembly Local Government Committee after Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas created a warehouse working group earlier this year.

In a statement, Reyes said the goal of the working group was to establish “common sense policies” to address warehousing concerns. She is working with Rivas and Carrillo to move the bill forward.

“Although I believe that this is an important step forward, I also do not believe this bill does everything that is needed to protect our most vulnerable, including a need for a larger setback, and will continue to advocate for one,” Reyes stated.

Ana Gonzalez, the executive director of the Center for Community Action and Environmental Justice (CCAEJ), shares similar concerns with Vidaurre and believes Reyes is committed to opposing the current setback language in the bill. However, Gonzalez warns that her group may also oppose the bill unless the setback provisions are removed.

“If we're really talking about environmental justice, this whole process has been anything but environmentally just,” she said. “But I am confident that [Reyes] will do everything in her power to make these changes, and if that happens, we'll revisit this with our community again.”

The bill’s language must be made public by Wednesday to qualify for a floor vote before the session ends.