WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

A 6996

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 64

2025 Regular Session Introduced by Mike Tannousis

Prohibits siting and construction of battery energy storage systems and related facilities in Assembly District 64, regardless of scale or storage capacity.

REFERRED TO LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · A 6996

Summary of Assembly Bill A 6996

A 6996 aims to prohibit the siting and construction of battery energy storage systems (BESS) and related facilities within a specific geographic area.

Bill at a glance

  • Bill number: A 6996
  • Title / purpose: 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 64.
  • Sponsor: Michael Tannousis (primary)
  • Status: Referred to Local Governments
  • Introduced: March 18, 2025
  • Version content: Legislative actions show the same action listed twice on March 18, 2025 (REFFERRED TO LOCAL GOVERNMENTS), indicating the initial referral event.
  • Geographic scope: Assembly District 64 (AD 64)

What the bill would do

  • Core prohibition: The bill would bar the siting and construction of battery energy storage systems and any related facilities, systems, infrastructure, or substations within AD 64.
  • Scope of prohibition: The restriction explicitly states “of any scale” and “possessing any storage capacity,” suggesting a broad prohibition regardless of project size or storage capability.
  • Related facilities: The ban appears to extend to structures and infrastructure commonly associated with BESS projects (e.g., substations and supporting systems).

Note: The summary is based on the description provided. The full legislative text would define terms (e.g., what constitutes “related facilities” and “storage capacity”) and establish any exceptions, enforcement mechanisms, or penalties.

Geographic and affected parties

  • Geographic focus: Assembly District 64.
  • Potentially affected actors:
    • Battery energy storage developers and project sponsors
    • Utilities and operators seeking to deploy BESS in AD 64
    • Property owners and developers within AD 64
    • Local governments and agencies in AD 64 responsible for permitting and land use

Procedural and timeline considerations

  • Current stage: The bill has been referred to the Committee on Local Governments. This marks an early stage in the legislative process.
  • Next steps: If advanced, it would typically proceed to hearings, potential amendments, and votes in the Assembly, and possibly the Senate, before any chamber votes. The timeline depends on committee scheduling and legislative priorities.

Potential impact and considerations

  • Policy impact: A 6996 would create a geographic restriction on BESS deployment within AD 64, potentially affecting energy storage development, grid resilience measures, and related economic activity in that district.
  • Reliability and policy trade-offs: Proponents may argue the measure protects local interests or aligns with district planning goals; opponents may raise concerns about hindering energy storage solutions, reliability, and clean energy progress.
  • Legal and operational questions: Details on exemptions, enforcement, grandfathering of existing projects, and how the prohibition interacts with statewide energy or environmental goals would be important to review in the full text.

Sponsor

  • Primary sponsor: Michael Tannousis

If you’d like, I can pull in any available amendments or related bill text to provide a more detailed note on definitions, exceptions, penalties, or implementation timelines.

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

Sign in to ask a question.