WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

A 139

Prohibits the siting and construction of battery energy storage systems and related facilities, systems, infrastructure, and substations of any scale and possessing any storage capacity in assembly district 63

2025 Regular Session Introduced by Ari Brown and 5 co-sponsors

Prohibits siting and construction of any battery energy storage systems and related facilities within Assembly District 63.

HELD FOR CONSIDERATION IN LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · A 139

Summary of Bill A 139

Overview

Bill A 139 would prohibit the siting and construction of battery energy storage systems (BESS) and related facilities, systems, infrastructure, and substations of any scale and possessing any storage capacity within Assembly District 63. The measure is currently labeled as HELD FOR CONSIDERATION IN LOCAL GOVERNMENTS.

What the bill would do

  • Prohibit siting and construction of battery energy storage systems in Assembly District 63.
  • Extend the prohibition to related facilities, systems, infrastructure, and substations regardless of scale or storage capacity.
  • Apply specifically to the geographic boundaries of Assembly District 63 (i.e., the restriction is district-specific, not statewide).

Scope and who would be affected

  • Developers and landowners seeking to locate BESS projects within AD 63 would be barred from siting and constructing such facilities there.
  • Local governments within AD 63 would be responsible for enforcing the prohibition and governing any related planning and zoning actions in accordance with the bill.
  • Operators and investors in battery storage projects would be constrained in any potential projects within the district.

Procedural timeline and status

  • Introduced: January 8, 2025.
  • Referred to Local Governments: January 8, 2025.
  • Held for Consideration in Local Governments: May 20, 2025 (listed twice in the record).

Related legislation

  • Related bill from a prior session: A 3297. This indicates there has been prior consideration of district-level restrictions on BESS within similar legislative contexts.

Potential impacts and considerations

  • Localized impact: The ban would restrict BESS development specifically in AD 63, potentially affecting energy storage capacity, grid resilience, and local economic activity tied to energy infrastructure in that district.
  • Policy trade-offs: Proponents may argue the measure preserves local land-use preferences or avoids certain siting conflicts; opponents may note that BESS projects can support grid reliability and renewable energy integration.
  • Implementation: Enforcement would likely fall to local governments in AD 63, with possible need for updates to local zoning and planning codes to reflect the prohibition.

Next steps for stakeholders

  • Monitor the bill’s status in the Local Governments committee and full Assembly to see if the prohibition advances or is amended.
  • If planning BESS projects in or near AD 63, consider engaging with local officials early to understand potential restrictions and the rationale behind the measure.
  • Review related A 3297 from the prior session for context on district-level storage restrictions and policy approaches.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.