The Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Committee meeting on June 30, 2025, featured significant discussions regarding Senate Bill 131, which has drawn strong opposition from environmental advocates. Key concerns were raised about the bill's definitions and exemptions related to natural and protected lands.

Alice Kaufman, representing Green Foothills, expressed deep concern that the bill fails to adequately protect habitats for threatened and endangered species. She emphasized the urgency of addressing both the climate crisis and the ongoing biodiversity crisis, noting that species are disappearing at an alarming rate. Kaufman urged the committee to reject the bill, arguing that California must maintain strong environmental protections, especially as federal regulations are being rolled back.

A major point of contention was the bill's total exemption for advanced manufacturing facilities. Kaufman criticized the broad and vague definition of these facilities, which could encompass industries such as nuclear materials and lithium battery production. She highlighted the specific inclusion of semiconductor manufacturing, pointing out that Silicon Valley has numerous Superfund sites linked to this industry, making Santa Clara County one of the most polluted areas in the United States. Kaufman argued that exempting such a polluting industry from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) is unjustifiable and undermines local zoning decisions.

The discussions at the meeting underscored the tension between economic development and environmental protection, with advocates calling for a more stringent approach to safeguard California's natural resources. The committee's next steps regarding SB 131 remain to be seen, as the debate over balancing industry needs with environmental responsibilities continues.