Your feedback ensures we stay focused on the facts that matter to you most—take our survey.
California Oil and Gas Well Regulations Referendum (2024)
| California Oil and Gas Well Regulations Referendum | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Election date November 5, 2024 | |
| Topic Energy and Business regulation | |
| Status Not on the ballot | |
| Type Referendum | Origin Citizens |
The California Oil and Gas Well Regulations Referendum was not on the ballot in California as a veto referendum on November 5, 2024.[1][2]
A vote to "keep the law" would have upheld Senate Bill 1137 (SB 1137), which prohibits new oil and gas wells within 3,200 feet of homes, schools, nursing homes, and hospitals and require companies to adopt health, safety, and environmental requirements. |
A vote to "overturn the law" would have repealed Senate Bill 1137 (SB 1137), thus keeping the law from taking effect. |
Overview
What did Senate Bill 1137 change about oil and gas well regulations in California?
- See also: Measure design
Senate Bill 1137 (SB 1137), which was passed during the 2022 legislative session, enacted several new regulations on the oil and gas industry in California. The law was on hold until once the veto referendum qualified for the ballot, but after its withdrawal it took effect. SB 1137 required all oil or gas production facilities or wells within a health protection zone to comply with new regulations. Health protection zones are defined in the bill as areas within 3,200 feet of a sensitive receptor. Sensitive receptors included residences, education facilities, daycare centers, colleges and universities, community resource centers, health care facilities, live-in housing, prisons and detention centers, and any building housing a business open to the public.[1]
SB 1137 also required operators with a production facility or well with a wellhead in a health protection zone to develop a leak detection system for certain chemicals and detailed response plans. The law required the Air Resources Board (ARB) and the State Water Board to adopt performance standards for the emissions detection system. The facilities are also required to post contact information to receive complaints, limit sound levels, limit light generation, institute dust prevention measures, abide by vehicle speed limits, comply with air district requirements, and submit a chemical analysis of produced water to California Geologic Energy Management Division (CalGEM).[1]
Who supported and opposed the repeal of Senate Bill 1137?
Campaign for a Safe and Healthy California led the campaign in support of a vote to 'Keep the law.' The campaign reported over $3.3 million in contributions. Supporters included Central California Environmental Justice Network, Earthjustice, Sierra Club California, and Voices in Solidarity Against Oil in Neighborhoods (VISION). Gov. Gavin Newsom (D), who signed the law, said, "I proudly signed SB 1137 last year to stop new oil drilling in our neighborhoods and protect California families. Big Oil knows that California is moving beyond fossil fuels, so on their way out these corporations are doing everything they can to squeeze out profits as they pollute our communities. We’re not standing for it."[3][4]
California Independent Petroleum Association (CIPA) led the Stop the Energy Shutdown campaign, which qualified the veto referendum for the ballot, and supported a 'Overturn the law' vote on the referendum. The committee reported over $20 million in contributions as of March 31, 2023. It received endorsements from the California Independent Petroleum Association (CIPA), E & B Natural Resources Management Corp., Macpherson Oil Company LLC, Sentinel Peak Resources California LLC, Signal Hill Petroleum, Inc., and State Building and Construction Trades Council of California. California Independent Petroleum Association (CIPA) said, "If implemented, SB 1137 would increase CA's already high gas prices by decreasing our energy supply and replacing it with expensive imported foreign oil that tankers must transport from counties that do not uphold the same environmental or labor standards."[5]
How many veto referendums have Californians voted on?
In California, voters have voted on 50 veto referendums, upholding laws 21 times (42%) and repealing laws 29 times (58%). In 1912, Californians voted on a statewide veto referendum for the first time. The most recent veto referendum was on the ballot in 2022.
Measure design
- See also: Text of measure
The veto referendum would have repealed Senate Bill 1137 (SB 1137), which was signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) on September 16, 2022. It was withdrawn by proponents before receiving a vote.[6]
Health protection zones
The law required all oil or gas production facilities or wells within a health protection zone to comply with new regulations. Health protection zones are defined in the bill as areas within 3,200 feet of a sensitive receptor. Sensitive receptors included residences, education facilities, daycare centers, colleges and universities, community resource centers, health care facilities, live-in housing, prisons and detention centers, and any building housing a business open to the public.[1]
The law prohibited the California Geologic Energy Management Division (CalGEM) from approving a notice of intention (NOI) to drill or rework an intercept well within a health protection zone, except for any of the following:[1]
- to prevent or respond to public health, safety, or the environment;
- to comply with a court order finding that the denial of the NOI results in the taking of property; or
- to plug and abandon or reabandon a well.
The new law required the NOI applicant to include a sensitive receptor inventory map of the area within the 3,200-foot radius of the wellhead. CalGEM became required to review at least 30% of the inventories and maps annually for accuracy and make them available to the public. If the NOI is approved, operators would be required to provide an individual indemnity bond to cover the costs of plugging and abandoning the operator's well or wells in the health protection zone. The new regulations do not apply to underground gas storage wells and related production facilities.[1]
Beginning on January 1, 2027, the law requires CalGEM to report to the state legislature on the implementation of health protection zones.[1]
Oil and gas production regulations
Beginning on January 1, 2025, oil and gas production facilities with a wellhead in a health protection zone need to meet local, state, and federal permit requirements. The facilities would also be required to post contact information to receive complaints, limit sound levels, limit light generation, institute dust prevention measures, abide by vehicle speed limits, comply with air district requirements, and submit a chemical analysis of produced water to CalGEM.[1]
SB 1137 also requires operators with a production facility or well with a wellhead in a health protection zone to develop a leak detection system for certain chemicals and detailed response plans. The law also requires the Air Resources Board (ARB) and the State Water Board to adopt performance standards for the emissions detection system. The law also authorized CalGEM, ARB, and State Water Board to adopt regulations under an emergency rulemaking process. Beginning on July 1, 2023, and every six months after, the law requires the State Oil and Gas Supervisor to report to the legislature on the leak detection systems and response plans.[1]
SB 1137 requires operators to submit annual reports to CalGEM beginning on January 1, 2027, that include the amount of time the emissions detection system was not operating; the number of validated alarms; the number of leaks and time to repair; the number of times the surrounding community was notified of a leak that persisted for 48 hours; the amount of time production was suspended due to a leak; and any baseline and postdrilling groundwater testing performed by location.[1]
Text of measure
Ballot title
The official ballot title would have been as follows:[2]
| “ |
Referendum challenging 2022 law prohibiting new oil and gas wells near homes, schools, and hospitals.[7] |
” |
Petition summary
The summary provided for inclusion on signature petition sheets was as follows:[2]
| “ | If the required number of registered voters sign this petition and it is timely filed, a 2022 law will not take effect unless approved at the next statewide general or special election after November 8, 2022. The challenged law:
Requires existing wells in these areas to meet specified health, safety, and environmental requirements by January 1, 2025.[7] |
” |
Full text
The full text of the ballot measure is below:[1]
Support for 'Keep the law' vote
Campaign for a Safe and Healthy California led the campaign in support of a vote to 'Keep the law.' To see a full list of campaign endorsements, click here.[4]
Supporters of SB 1137
Officials
- U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders (Independent)
- Gov. Gavin Newsom (D)
- State Sen. Lena Gonzalez (D)
Political Parties
Unions
Organizations
- California Environmental Voters
- Central California Environmental Justice Network
- Earthjustice
- Greenpeace
- Sierra Club California
- Voices in Solidarity Against Oil in Neighborhoods (VISION)
Arguments
Support for 'Overturn the law' vote
California Independent Petroleum Association (CIPA) filed the veto referendum. CIPA led the Stop the Energy Shutdown campaign in support of a vote to 'Overturn the law.'[8]
Supporters of the veto referendum
Corporations
- E & B Natural Resources Management Corp.
- Macpherson Oil Company LLC
- Sentinel Peak Resources California LLC
- Signal Hill Petroleum, Inc.
Unions
Arguments
Campaign finance
There is one ballot measure committee, Campaign for a Safe and Healthy California, registered in support of a vote to 'Keep the law.' The committee reported over $3.3 million in contributions. There is one ballot measure committee, Stop the Energy Shutdown, registered in support of a vote to 'Overturn the law.' The committee reported over $20.1 million in contributions.[9][10]
| Cash Contributions | In-Kind Contributions | Total Contributions | Cash Expenditures | Total Expenditures | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Support | $3,352,204.77 | $40,345.93 | $3,392,550.70 | $2,281,211.83 | $2,321,557.76 |
| Oppose | $20,130,338.00 | $0.00 | $20,130,338.00 | $19,977,614.54 | $19,977,614.54 |
| Total | $23,482,542.77 | $40,345.93 | $23,522,888.70 | $22,258,826.37 | $22,299,172.30 |
Support to 'Keep the law'
The following table includes contribution and expenditure totals for the committee sponsoring the veto referendum.[11]
| Committees in support of Oil and Gas Well Regulations Referendum | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Committee | Cash Contributions | In-Kind Contributions | Total Contributions | Cash Expenditures | Total Expenditures |
| Campaign for a Safe and Healthy California | $3,352,204.77 | $40,345.93 | $3,392,550.70 | $2,281,211.83 | $2,321,557.76 |
| Total | $3,352,204.77 | $40,345.93 | $3,392,550.70 | $2,281,211.83 | $2,321,557.76 |
Donors
The following table shows the top donors to the committee.[11]
| Donor | Cash Contributions | In-Kind Contributions | Total Contributions |
|---|---|---|---|
| Advocacy Action Fund, Inc. | $1,500,000.00 | $0.00 | $1,500,000.00 |
| Holdfast Trust | $500,000.00 | $0.00 | $500,000.00 |
| Nancy Burnett | $500,000.00 | $0.00 | $500,000.00 |
| Center for Biological Diversity | $300,000.00 | $17,234.69 | $317,234.69 |
| Claire E. Perry | $250,000.00 | $0.00 | $250,000.00 |
Support to 'Overturn the law'
The following table includes contribution and expenditure totals for the committee sponsoring the veto referendum.[11]
| Committees in opposition to Oil and Gas Well Regulations Referendum | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Committee | Cash Contributions | In-Kind Contributions | Total Contributions | Cash Expenditures | Total Expenditures |
| Stop the Energy Shutdown | $20,130,338.00 | $0.00 | $20,130,338.00 | $19,977,614.54 | $19,977,614.54 |
| Total | $20,130,338.00 | $0.00 | $20,130,338.00 | $19,977,614.54 | $19,977,614.54 |
Donors
The following table shows the top donors to the committee.[11]
| Donor | Cash Contributions | In-Kind Contributions | Total Contributions |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sentinel Peak Resources California LLC | $4,500,000.00 | $0.00 | $4,500,000.00 |
| Signal Hill Petroleum, Inc. | $3,200,000.00 | $0.00 | $3,200,000.00 |
| E & B Natural Resources Management Corp. | $2,950,000.00 | $0.00 | $2,950,000.00 |
| Macpherson Oil Company LLC | $1,486,000.00 | $0.00 | $1,486,000.00 |
| California Independent Petroleum Association | $1,000,000.00 | $0.00 | $1,000,000.00 |
Methodology
To read Ballotpedia's methodology for covering ballot measure campaign finance information, click here.
Polls
- See also: 2024 ballot measure polls
- Are you aware of a poll on this ballot measure that should be included below? You can share ballot measure polls, along with source links, with us at editor@ballotpedia.org.
| California Oil and Gas Well Regulations Referendum (2024) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| University of Southern California Dornsife/Price, Center for Urban Politics and Policy, CSU Long Beach, and Cal Poly Pomona | 1/21/2023-1/29/2024 | 1,416 LV | ± 2.6% | 71% | 20% | 9% |
| Question: "There is a ballot initiative that would eliminate an existing state law. This existing state law prohibits new oil and gas wells near schools, homes, or hospitals. Would you vote to get rid of the law prohibiting oil and gas wells near schools, or would you vote to keep the law prohibiting oil and gas wells near schools?" | ||||||
Note: LV is likely voters, RV is registered voters, and EV is eligible voters.
Background
Senate Bill 1137 (2022)
On August 30, 2022, SB 1137 passed the California State Assembly by a vote of 46-24 with 10 not voting. On August 31, it passed the California State Senate by a vote of 25-10 with five not voting. It was signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) on September 16, 2022.[1]
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ventura County 2022 local oil and gas well regulation referendums
- See also: Ventura County Measure A and Measure B
In 2022, Chevron, Aera, and the California Independent Petroleum Association (CIPA) sponsored two veto referendums on ordinances enacted by the county board of supervisors designed to regulate the exploration and production of oil and gas. The referendums asked voters whether they wanted to adopt the county's proposed regulations. Both measures were defeated with about 52% of the vote, meaning the ordinances were not adopted.[8]
California Geologic Energy Management Division (CalGEM)
California law established the state Geologic Energy Management Division within the state Department of Conservation in 1915. As of 2022, CalGEM had jurisdiction over 242,000 wells, including nearly 101,300 defined as active or idle oil producers. Its authority includes onshore and offshore drilling within three miles of the coast.[12]
California veto referendum ballot measures
A veto referendum is a type of citizen-initiated ballot measure that asks voters whether to uphold or repeal a law passed by the state legislature. Opponents of the law collect signatures to place the veto referendum on the ballot, with the aim of voters deciding to repeal the law. In California, voters have voted on 50 veto referendums, upholding laws 21 times (42%) and repealing laws 29 times (58%).
In 1912, Californians voted on a statewide veto referendum for the first time. The most recent veto referendum was on the ballot in 2022.
| Number of California veto referendums | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Total veto referendums | Laws upheld | Laws repealed | Year of last measure |
| 50 | 21 | 29 | 2022 |
The veto referendum ballot measure is also known as a popular referendum, people's veto, or citizen's veto. There are 23 states that have a process for veto referendums. Voters in California approved a constitutional amendment that enacted processes for ballot initiative and veto referendum in 1911.
Path to the ballot
The state process
In California, the number of signatures required for a veto referendum is equal to 5 percent of the votes cast in the preceding gubernatorial election. Petitions are allowed to circulate for 90 days from the date the targeted bill was signed. Signatures for referendums need to be certified at least 31 days before the general election. As the verification process can take multiple months, the secretary of state recommends submitting signatures before the certification deadline.
The requirements to get veto referendums certified for the 2024 ballot:
- Signatures: 623,212 valid signatures
- Deadline: December 15, 2022
Signatures are first filed with local election officials, who determine the total number of signatures submitted. If the total number is equal to at least 100 percent of the required signatures, then local election officials perform a random check of signatures submitted in their counties. If the random sample estimates that more than 110 percent of the required number of signatures are valid, the referendum is eligible for the ballot. If the random sample estimates that between 95 and 110 percent of the required number of signatures are valid, a full check of signatures is done to determine the total number of valid signatures. If less than 95 percent are estimated to be valid, the referendum does not make the ballot.
Details about this initiative
- The referendum was filed on September 19, 2022, by Jerome Reedy.[2]
- On September 29, 2022, the secretary of state cleared the referendum for signature gathering.[2]
- On December 13, 2022, California Independent Petroleum Association (CIPA) announced that over 978,000 voters had signed the referendum petition.[13]
- On February 3, 2023, the secretary of state announced that the initiative had qualified for the ballot. The random sample count found that at least 687,058 of the 978,610 signatures submitted were valid.[14]
- On June 26, 2024, the campaign announced that it would be withdrawing the referendum. The campaign said, "While CIPA is confident in its ability to be successful at the ballot box, we also recognize the likelihood of the Legislature simply introducing other similar bills. Therefore, judicial intervention is necessary to truly resolve this matter."[6]
How to cast a vote
- See also: Voting in California
See below to learn more about current voter registration rules, identification requirements, and poll times in California.
See also
External links
Footnotes
- ↑ 1.00 1.01 1.02 1.03 1.04 1.05 1.06 1.07 1.08 1.09 1.10 1.11 California State Legislature, "SB 1137," accessed September 20, 2022
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 California Secretary of State, "Initiative and Referendum," accessed September 20, 2022
- ↑ California Governor's Office, "Governor Newsom calls out big oil on continued push for drilling in neighborhoods," February 3, 2023
- ↑ 4.0 4.1 Campaign for a Safe and Healthy California, "Home," accessed June 13, 2024
- ↑ Twitter, "CIPAenergy," accessed February 22, 2023
- ↑ 6.0 6.1 Politico, "Oil industry group drops ballot initiative to drill near California homes," June 26, 2024
- ↑ 7.0 7.1 7.2 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
- ↑ 8.0 8.1 CalMatters, "Fossil fuel campaigns subvert democracy by undoing California drilling laws," November 3, 2022
- ↑ Cal-Access, "Campaign for a Safe and Healthy California," accessed June 13, 2024
- ↑ Cal-Access, "Stop the Energy Showdown," accessed December 14, 2022
- ↑ 11.0 11.1 11.2 11.3 Cite error: Invalid
<ref>tag; no text was provided for refs namedfinance - ↑ California Department of Conservation, "Oil and Gas," accessed December 29, 2022
- ↑ Sacramento Bee, "Will oil well setback law be blocked from taking effect? + Remembering a Bay Area labor champion," December 14, 2022
- ↑ California Secretary of State, "Random Sample Count," accessed February 6, 2023
- ↑ California Secretary of State, "Section 3: Polling Place Hours," accessed August 12, 2024
- ↑ California Secretary of State, "Voter Registration," accessed August 13, 2024
- ↑ 17.0 17.1 California Secretary of State, "Registering to Vote," accessed August 13, 2024
- ↑ California Secretary of State, "Same Day Voter Registration (Conditional Voter Registration)," accessed August 13, 2024
- ↑ SF.gov, "Non-citizen voting rights in local Board of Education elections," accessed November 14, 2024
- ↑ Under federal law, the national mail voter registration application (a version of which is in use in all states with voter registration systems) requires applicants to indicate that they are U.S. citizens in order to complete an application to vote in state or federal elections, but does not require voters to provide documentary proof of citizenship. According to the U.S. Department of Justice, the application "may require only the minimum amount of information necessary to prevent duplicate voter registrations and permit State officials both to determine the eligibility of the applicant to vote and to administer the voting process."
- ↑ California Secretary of State, "What to Bring to Your Polling Place," accessed August 12, 2024
- ↑ BARCLAYS OFFICIAL CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS, "Section 20107," accessed August 12, 2024
- ↑ Democracy Docket, "California Governor Signs Law to Ban Local Voter ID Requirements," September 30, 2024
 |
State of California Sacramento (capital) |
|---|---|
| Elections |
What's on my ballot? | Elections in 2025 | How to vote | How to run for office | Ballot measures |
| Government |
Who represents me? | U.S. President | U.S. Congress | Federal courts | State executives | State legislature | State and local courts | Counties | Cities | School districts | Public policy |
