Existing law requires a city, county, or city and county to administratively approve an application to install an electric vehicle charging station through the issuance of a building permit or similar nondiscretionary permit, and requires every local government to adopt an ordinance that creates an expedited, streamlined permitting process for electric vehicle charging stations, as provided. Existing law defines electric vehicle charging station to mean any level of electric vehicle supply equipment station that is designed and built in compliance with specified provisions, and delivers electricity from a source outside an electric vehicle into a plug-in electric vehicle.

Existing law requires fees charged by a local agency for specified purposes, including permits, to not exceed the estimated reasonable cost of providing the service for which the fee is charged, unless a question regarding the amount of the fee charged in excess of this cost is submitted to, and approved by, ²/₃ of the electors. Existing law, until January 1, 2034, prohibits a city, county, city or county, or charter city from charging a permit fee for a solar energy system that exceeds the estimated reasonable cost of providing the service for which the fee is charged, which cannot exceed $450 plus $15 per kilowatt for each kilowatt above 15kW for residential solar energy systems, and $1,000 plus $7 per kilowatt for each kilowatt between 51kW and 250kW, plus $5 for every kilowatt above 250kW, for commercial solar energy systems, unless the city, county, city and county, or charter city provides substantial evidence of the reasonable cost to issue the permit as part of a written finding and an adopted resolution or ordinance, as provided.

This bill, until January 1, 2036, would prohibit a city, county, city or county, or charter city from charging a permit fee for an electric vehicle charging station that exceeds the estimated reasonable cost of providing the service for which the fee is charged, which cannot exceed $500 plus $5 per kilowatt for each kilowatt between 51kW and 250kW, plus $2 for every kilowatt above 250kW, for a level 2 electric vehicle charging station installed at a new or existing multifamily housing development, unless the city, county, city and county, or charter city provides substantial evidence of the reasonable cost to issue the permit as part of a written finding and an adopted resolution or ordinance, as provided. The bill would make its provisions operative on July 1, 2027, but for every city, county, city and county, or charter city with a population of fewer than 200,000 residents, the provisions would apply beginning on January 1, 2028. By requiring local agencies to perform additional duties, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

This bill would make related findings and declarations.

The bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Existing law requires a city, county, or city and county to administratively approve an application to install an electric vehicle charging station through the issuance of a building permit or similar nondiscretionary permit, and requires every local government to adopt an ordinance that creates an expedited, streamlined permitting process for electric vehicle charging stations, as provided. Existing law defines electric vehicle charging station to mean any level of electric vehicle supply equipment station that is designed and built in compliance with specified provisions, and delivers electricity from a source outside an electric vehicle into a plug-in electric vehicle.

Existing law requires fees charged by a local agency for specified purposes, including permits, to not exceed the estimated reasonable cost of providing the service for which the fee is charged, unless a question regarding the amount of the fee charged in excess of this cost is submitted to, and approved by, ²/₃ of the electors. Existing law, until January 1, 2034, prohibits a city, county, city or county, or charter city from charging a permit fee for a solar energy system that exceeds the estimated reasonable cost of providing the service for which the fee is charged, which cannot exceed $450 plus $15 per kilowatt for each kilowatt above 15kW for residential solar energy systems, and $1,000 plus $7 per kilowatt for each kilowatt between 51kW and 250kW, plus $5 for every kilowatt above 250kW, for commercial solar energy systems, unless the city, county, city and county, or charter city provides substantial evidence of the reasonable cost to issue the permit as part of a written finding and an adopted resolution or ordinance, as provided.

This bill, until January 1, 2036, would prohibit a city, county, city or county, or charter city from charging a permit fee for an electric vehicle charging station that exceeds the estimated reasonable cost of providing the service for which the fee is charged, which cannot exceed $500 plus $5 per kilowatt for each kilowatt between 51kW and 250kW, plus $2 for every kilowatt above 250kW, for a level 2 electric vehicle charging station installed at a new or existing multifamily housing development, unless the city, county, city and county, or charter city provides substantial evidence of the reasonable cost to issue the permit as part of a written finding and an adopted resolution or ordinance, as provided. The bill would make its provisions operative on July 1, 2027, but for every city, county, city and county, or charter city with a population of fewer than 200,000 residents, the provisions would apply beginning on January 1, 2028. By requiring local agencies to perform additional duties, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

This bill would make related findings and declarations.

The bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Existing law requires a city, county, or city and county to administratively approve an application to install an electric vehicle charging station through the issuance of a building permit or similar nondiscretionary permit, and requires every local government to adopt an ordinance that creates an expedited, streamlined permitting process for electric vehicle charging stations, as provided. Existing law defines electric vehicle charging station to mean any level of electric vehicle supply equipment station that is designed and built in compliance with specified provisions, and delivers electricity from a source outside an electric vehicle into a plug-in electric vehicle.

Existing law requires fees charged by a local agency for specified purposes, including permits, to not exceed the estimated reasonable cost of providing the service for which the fee is charged, unless a question regarding the amount of the fee charged in excess of this cost is submitted to, and approved by, ²/₃ of the electors. Existing law, until January 1, 2034, prohibits a city, county, city or county, or charter city from charging a permit fee for a solar energy system that exceeds the estimated reasonable cost of providing the service for which the fee is charged, which cannot exceed $450 plus $15 per kilowatt for each kilowatt above 15kW for residential solar energy systems, and $1,000 plus $7 per kilowatt for each kilowatt between 51kW and 250kW, plus $5 for every kilowatt above 250kW, for commercial solar energy systems, unless the city, county, city and county, or charter city provides substantial evidence of the reasonable cost to issue the permit as part of a written finding and an adopted resolution or ordinance, as provided.

This bill, until January 1, 2036, would prohibit a city, county, city or county, or charter city from charging a permit fee for an electric vehicle charging station that exceeds the estimated reasonable cost of providing the service for which the fee is charged, which cannot exceed $100 plus $15 per kilowatt for each kilowatt above 15kW for residential electric vehicle charging stations, and $500 plus $5 per kilowatt for each kilowatt between 51kW and 250kW, plus $2 for every kilowatt above 250kW, for commercial a level 2 electric vehicle charging stations, station installed at a new or existing multifamily housing development, unless the city, county, city and county, or charter city provides substantial evidence of the reasonable cost to issue the permit as part of a written finding and an adopted resolution or ordinance, as provided. The bill would make its provisions operative on July 1, 2027, but for every city, county, city and county, or charter city with a population of fewer than 200,000 residents, the provisions would apply beginning on January 1, 2028. By requiring local agencies to perform additional duties, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

This bill would make related findings and declarations.

The bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Existing law requires a city, county, or city and county to administratively approve an application to install an electric vehicle charging station through the issuance of a building permit or similar nondiscretionary permit, and requires every local government to adopt an ordinance that creates an expedited, streamlined permitting process for electric vehicle charging stations, as provided. Existing law defines electric vehicle charging station to mean any level of electric vehicle supply equipment station that is designed and built in compliance with specified provisions, and delivers electricity from a source outside an electric vehicle into a plug-in electric vehicle.

Existing law requires fees charged by a local agency for specified purposes, including permits, to not exceed the estimated reasonable cost of providing the service for which the fee is charged, unless a question regarding the amount of the fee charged in excess of this cost is submitted to, and approved by, ²/₃ of the electors. Existing law, until January 1, 2034, prohibits a city, county, city or county, or charter city from charging a permit fee for a solar energy system that exceeds the estimated reasonable cost of providing the service for which the fee is charged, which cannot exceed $450 plus $15 per kilowatt for each kilowatt above 15kW for residential solar energy systems, and $1,000 plus $7 per kilowatt for each kilowatt between 51kW and 250kW, plus $5 for every kilowatt above 250kW, for commercial solar energy systems, unless the city, county, city and county, or charter city provides substantial evidence of the reasonable cost to issue the permit as part of a written finding and an adopted resolution or ordinance, as provided.

This bill, until January 1, 2036, would prohibit a city, county, city or county, or charter city from charging a permit fee for an electric vehicle charging station that exceeds the estimated reasonable cost of providing the service for which the fee is charged, which cannot exceed $100 plus $15 per kilowatt for each kilowatt above 15kW for residential electric vehicle charging stations, and $500 plus $5 per kilowatt for each kilowatt between 51kW and 250kW, plus $2 for every kilowatt above 250kW, for commercial electric vehicle charging stations, unless the city, county, city and county, or charter city provides substantial evidence of the reasonable cost to issue the permit as part of a written finding and an adopted resolution or ordinance, as provided. The bill would make its provisions operative on July 1, 2027, but for every city, county, city and county, or charter city with a population of fewer than 200,000 residents, the provisions would apply beginning on January 1, 2028. By requiring local agencies to perform additional duties, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

The bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Existing law, until January 1, 2034, prescribes and limits permit fees that a city or county may charge for residential and commercial solar energy systems, as defined. Existing law defines residential permit fee, for purposes of that provision, to mean the sum of all charges levied by a city, county, city and county, or charter city in connection with the application for a solar energy system that is installed on the property of a single- or two-family dwelling.

This bill would make nonsubstantive changes to the definition of residential permit fee.

CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS

CSA1 Bill Id:AB 1820

Author:(Schiavo)

As Amended Ver:July 2, 2026

Majority vote

SUMMARY

Establishes permit fee caps for specified electric vehicle (EV) charging stations until January 1, 2036.

Senate Amendments

1. Revise and recast the bill to set a fee cap of $500 that applies only to level 2 EV charging stations installed at new or existing multifamily housing developments.
2. Provide a delayed operative date of July 1, 2027. This operative date is further delayed to January 1, 2028, for cities and counties with a population of less than 200,000 residents.
3. Specify that this bill applies to all cities, including charter cities.
4. Add a number of findings and declarations.

COMMENTS

The California Energy Commission (CEC) projects California will need one million chargers to support seven million light-duty electric vehicles in 2030 and two million chargers by 2035. Today there are approximately 91,000 publicly available charging stations throughout the state.

In 2019, GO-Biz published the first edition of its EV Charging Station Permitting Guidebook, which generally recommended, as best practices, local agencies determine complete and approve EV charging station applications within specified time frames. In response to the Guidebook′s recommendations, AB 970 (McCarty), Chapter 710, Statutes of 2021, established specific time frames in which local agencies must complete and approve permits for EV charging stations.

AB 2427 (McCarty), Chapter 567, Statutes of 2024, expanded on AB 970 by requiring local agencies to: develop a permitting checklist that includes all information required to permit the installation of EV charging stations in the public right-of-way; identify all applicable fees and charges as part of the permitting process; and, identify criteria of the local agency to determine appropriate locations within the public right-of-way for installation of an EV charging station.

The Legislature has approved a series of bills limiting the fees a city or county may charge for solar energy systems, including SB 1222 (Leno), Chapter 614, Statutes of 2012, that limited permit fees for rooftop solar systems and contained a January 1, 2018, sunset date, and AB 1414 (Friedman), Chapter 849, Statutes of 2017, that reduced the maximum permit fees, applied the caps to a broader range of solar energy systems, and extended the sunset date to January 1, 2025, which was subsequently extended to January 1, 2034. The language in this bill is modeled largely after these laws governing permit fees for solar energy systems.

According to the Author

To achieve a clean transportation transition, California will need to build hundreds of thousands more chargers by 2030. However, the cost to permit chargers can vary wildly county by county, sometimes far above the actual cost to issue the permit. AB 1820 is an important step towards preparing our electrical vehicle infrastructure for the needs of tomorrow This measure will standardize the cost of permit fees for electric vehicle chargers making their development and installation more affordable for the public and more predictable for developers.

Arguments in Support

The Electric Vehicle Charging Association (EVCA), sponsor of this bill, writes, ″The urgency of expanding California′s charging network cannot be overstated. The California Energy Commission (CEC) projects that the state will need 1.01 million public and shared private chargers by 2030 and 2.11 million chargers by 2035. Today, California has approximately 91,000 of these chargers installed. Meeting the state′s climate and clean transportation goals will require deployment at a scale and pace that depends on removing every barrier to installation, including excessive permitting costs.

″Unfortunately, in some jurisdictions, EV charging station permit fees have increased tenfold in only two years, with no corresponding increase in the cost of permit review. These inconsistent fees drive up project costs, reducing the number of chargers that can be economically deployed.

″AB 1820 addresses this problem by establishing a fair permit fee schedule for residential and commercial EV charging stations that caps fees to a reasonable cost of permit processing. The bill preserves appropriate local flexibility: a jurisdiction may exceed the fee schedule if it makes a written finding of the permit′s actual cost. This approach mirrors the structure of AB 1132 (2023), which capped solar permit fees, and extends the same commonsense principle to EV charging infrastructure.

″By ensuring fees reflect true administrative costs, AB 1820 will lower a meaningful deployment barrier and help California maintain its leadership in the clean transportation transition.″

Arguments in Opposition

The League of California Cities, the California State Association of Counties, the Rural County Representatives of California, and the Northern California Power Agency write, ″California′s EV charging network is expanding faster than anywhere else in the nation, driven in part by local governments that have already implemented ministerial and streamlined permitting processes under AB 1236 and AB 970. With more than 200,000 public chargers and nearly one million residential chargers statewide, the record demonstrates that local permitting is facilitating deployment, not obstructing it.

″According to the California Energy Commission, California′s electric vehicle charging network is not just growing, it is outpacing the rest of the nation by wide margins. Recently, California has surged past 200,000 public and shared EV charging ports, with nearly a million more installed in homes, which now accounts for roughly 26% of all EV chargers in the United States. The pace of deployment has been especially striking, California EV chargers growing over 23% (22,631) every six months. Nationally, CA holds six of the top 10 cities with the most EV charging stations (top three are CA cities). These numbers do not appear to paint a picture slow growth, if at all, or any barrier caused by local government permitting.

″However, state officials have repeatedly identified grid capacity, utility interconnection, infrastructure upgrades, and funding availability as the primary barriers to further expansion. Simply put, there is no evidence that local permitting fees are a primary barrier to EVCS deployment. The real bottlenecks are private investments, grid capacity, and infrastructure readiness and cities and counties stand ready to partner with the state to further meet our state′s ZEV′s goals.″ (citations omitted)

FISCAL COMMENTS

According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8, negligible state costs.

VOTES:

ASM LOCAL GOVERNMENT: 6-0-4

YES: Carrillo, Ta, Johnson, Stefani, Ward, Wilson

ABS, ABST OR NV: Pacheco, Ramos, Ransom, Blanca Rubio

ASM APPROPRIATIONS: 13-0-2

YES: Wicks, Hoover, Aguiar-Curry, Caloza, Dixon, Fong, Mark González, Krell, Pellerin, Sharp-Collins, Solache, Ta, Tangipa

ABS, ABST OR NV: Arambula, Pacheco

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 72-0-8

YES: Addis, Aguiar-Curry, Ahrens, Alanis, Alvarez, Arambula, Ávila Farías, Bains, Bauer-Kahan, Bennett, Berman, Boerner, Bonta, Bryan, Caloza, Carrillo, Castillo, Chen, Connolly, Davies, DeMaio, Dixon, Elhawary, Ellis, Flora, Fong, Gabriel, Gallagher, Garcia, Jeff Gonzalez, Mark González, Hadwick, Haney, Harabedian, Hart, Hoover, Irwin, Jackson, Johnson, Kalra, Krell, Lackey, Lee, Lowenthal, Macedo, McKinnor, Nguyen, Ortega, Papan, Patel, Patterson, Pellerin, Petrie-Norris, Quirk-Silva, Michelle Rodriguez, Rogers, Sanchez, Schiavo, Schultz, Sharp-Collins, Solache, Soria, Stefani, Ta, Tangipa, Valencia, Wallis, Ward, Wicks, Wilson, Zbur, Rivas

ABS, ABST OR NV: Calderon, Gipson, Muratsuchi, Pacheco, Ramos, Ransom, Celeste Rodriguez, Blanca Rubio

SENATE FLOOR: 27-10-3

YES: Allen, Archuleta, Arreguín, Ashby, Becker, Blakespear, Cabaldon, Cervantes, Cortese, Durazo, Gonzalez, Grayson, Hurtado, Laird, Limón, McGuire, McNerney, Menjivar, Pérez, Richardson, Rubio, Smallwood-Cuevas, Stern, Umberg, Wahab, Weber Pierson, Wiener

NO: Alvarado-Gil, Choi, Dahle, Grove, Jones, Niello, Ochoa Bogh, Seyarto, Strickland, Valladares

ABS, ABST OR NV: Caballero, Padilla, Reyes

UPDATED

VERSION: July 2, 2026

CONSULTANT: Angela Mapp / L. GOV. / (916) 319-3958 FN: 0003412

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: AB 1820

Author: Schiavo (D)

Amended: 7/2/26 in Senate

Vote: 21

SENATE LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE: 5-2, 7/1/26

AYES: Durazo, Arreguín, Ashby, Cervantes, Laird

NOES: Choi, Seyarto

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: Senate Rule 28.8

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 72-0, 5/26/26 - See last page for vote

SUBJECT: Electric vehicle charging stations: permit fees

SOURCE: Coalition for Clean Air

Electric Vehicle Charging Association

DIGEST:

This bill prohibits, until January 1, 2036, a city or county from charging a permit fee for an EV charging station for a multifamily dwelling that exceeds a specified amount.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Allows a city or county to make and enforce within its limits, all local, police, sanitary, and other ordinances and regulations not in conflict with general laws. This includes land use authority and the power to enact zoning ordinances and specify permitting requirements for development projects within their jurisdiction.
2. When a local agency charges fees for building permits (or other regulatory fees), Article XIIIC, §1 of the California Constitution prohibits those fees from exceeding the estimated reasonable cost of issuing licenses, administrative costs, and enforcement of the program for which the fee is charged. Building permit fees generally pay for the cost of the project plan examination by city and county departments and on-site inspection, but can also include the costs reasonably necessary to prepare and revise the plans and policies that a local agency is required to adopt before it can make any necessary findings and determinations. Fees charged in excess of the estimated reasonable cost of providing the services are taxes and must be approved by a 2/3 vote of the public.
3. Prohibits, under the California Constitution, a local agency from charging fees that exceed the estimated reasonable cost of issuing licenses, administrative costs, and enforcement of the program for which the fee is charged. Fees charged in excess of the estimated reasonable cost of providing the services are taxes and must be approved by a 2/3 vote of the public.
4. Pursuant to AB 1236 (Chiu, Chapter 598, Statutes of 2015) and subsequent legislation:
   1. Requires cities and counties to administratively approve an application to install an EV charging station through the issuance of a building permit or similar nondiscretionary permit.
   2. Limits review of an application is limited to the building official’s review of whether it meets all health and safety requirements of local, state, and federal law.
   3. Allows a county or city may require an applicant to apply for a use permit if the building official makes a finding, based on substantial evidence, that the EV charging station could have a specific, adverse impact upon the public health and safety. The decisions of the building official may be appealed to the planning commission of the local agency.
   4. Requires that EV charging stations meet state and local laws including the state building code, electrical code, energy code, fire code, and any locally adopted building codes that are more restrictive than state standards.
   5. Prohibits a local agency from denying an application for a use permit to install an EV charging station unless it makes written findings based upon substantial evidence in the record that the proposed installation will have a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety, and there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact. The findings must include the basis for the rejection of potential feasible alternatives of preventing the adverse impact. Any conditions imposed on an application to install an EV charging station must be designed to mitigate the specific, adverse impact upon the public health and safety at the lowest cost possible.
   6. Deems an application to install an EV charging station complete if the local building official hasn’t identified deficiencies after:
      1. Five business days for applications to construct at least one and up to 25 charging stations at a single site; or
      2. 10 business days for applications to construct over 25 charging stations at a single site.
   7. Deems approved an application to install an EV charging station 20 business days after the application was deemed complete for an installation of up to 25 charging stations at a single site, or 40 business days for an installation of more than 25 charging stations, if the building official hasn’t acted on the application.
5. Caps, until January 1, 2034, the fees that cities and counties can impose on solar energy systems at $450 (plus $15 per kilowatt [kW] for each kW above 15kW) for a residential system and $1,000 (plus $7 kW for each kW between 51kW and 250 kW, and $5 per kW for each kW above 250 kW) for a commercial system.
6. Allows cities and counties to exceed these caps if they make a written finding and adopt a resolution or ordinance showing substantial evidence of the need to charge more than what the cap allows to issue the permit.

This bill:

1. Prohibits a city or county from charging a permit fee for an EV charging station that exceeds $500 plus $5 per kilowatt for each kW between 51kW and 250kW, plus $2 for every kilowatt above 250kW, for a level 2 EV charging station installed at a new or existing multifamily housing development.
2. Allows a city or county to exceed this cap if it provides substantial evidence of the reasonable cost to issue the permit as part of a written finding and an adopted resolution or ordinance.
3. Applies the bill’s requirements beginning July 1, 2027, but a city or county with a population of fewer than 200,000 residents has an additional six months, until January 1, 2028, to comply.
4. Defines its terms, includes findings and declarations to support its purposes, and sunsets on January 1, 2036.

Background

As an alternative to gasoline-based vehicles, California has more electric vehicles (EVs)—and the charging stations used to fuel them—than any other state in the nation. California has established ambitious EV infrastructure and vehicle targets for the state—250,000 shared EV chargers, including 10,000 direct current fast chargers, by 2025. These targets were set to put California on the path to host 5 million zero emissions vehicles (ZEVs) by 2030.

The state currently has over 1.9 million EVs on the roads and over 200,000 chargers to support them as of September 2025, according to the California Energy Commission. This is more than double the number of chargers statewide in 2022, and nearly five times as many as in 2019.

EV charger streamlining. Responding to the patchwork of California’s EV permitting structure and the uncertainty it posed to installers, in 2015, AB 1236 (Chiu, Low, Chapter 598, Statutes of 2015) placed significant new requirements into law regarding applications to install EV charging stations. AB 1236 requires counties and cities to administratively approve an application to install EV charging stations through the issuance of a building permit or similar nondiscretionary permit. Review of an application is limited to the building official’s review of whether it meets all health and safety requirements of local, state, and federal law.

AB 1236 also requires every local agency to adopt an ordinance that creates an expedited, streamlined permitting process for EV charging stations. Local agencies must adopt a checklist of all requirements with which EV charging stations must comply to be eligible for expedited review. An application that satisfies the information requirements in the checklist is deemed complete. A local agency must approve the application and issue all required permits once the local agency confirms the application and supporting documents are complete and meet the requirements of the checklist. If a local agency receives an incomplete application, it must issue a written correction notice detailing all deficiencies in the application and any additional information required to be eligible for expedited permit issuance.

More recently, AB 970 (McCarty, Chapter 710, Statutes of 2021) updated these requirements to deem an application to install an EV charging station complete if the local building official hasn’t identified deficiencies after:

• Five business days for applications to construct at least one and up to 25 charging stations at a single site; or
• 10 business days for applications to construct over 25 charging stations at a single site.

AB 970 also deems approved an application to install an EV charging station 20 business days after the application was deemed complete for an installation of up to 25 charging stations at a single site, or 40 business days for an installation of more than 25 charging stations, if the building official hasn’t acted on the application.

EV charger permitting costs. Building permit fees generally pay for the cost for city or county departments to review and inspect construction projects, including EV charger stations. According to data provided by the EV charging industry, permits for commercial EV charging installations cost around $120 per charger on average. However, these costs vary widely. Some installations face essentially no permitting costs, while others cost over $1,000 per charger. These costs vary not just across jurisdictions, but within jurisdictions, depending on the installation.

According to some estimates, residential permits in major cities and counties in California range from $75 to $400 or more for coastal jurisdictions that have specific requirements for salt tolerance.^[1]

To encourage the development of solar energy systems (solar photovoltaic panels and other systems that capture solar energy for use), state law caps the fees that cities and counties can impose on these systems. Modeled off the solar energy system permit fee caps, the Electric Vehicle Charging Association and the Coalition for Clean Air want the Legislature to reduce the permit fees that local agencies charge for permitting EV chargers.

Comments

1. Purpose of the bill. According to the author, “To achieve a clean transportation transition, California will need to build hundreds of thousands more chargers by 2030. However, the cost to permit chargers can vary wildly county by county, sometimes far above the actual cost to issue the permit. AB 1820 is an important step towards preparing our electrical vehicle infrastructure for the needs of tomorrow This measure will standardize the cost of permit fees for electric vehicle chargers making their development and installation more affordable for the public and more predictable for developers.”
2. Zero sum game. Under the California Constitution, local governments cannot charge fees that exceed the reasonable cost of issuing a permit. This bill caps fees on EV charger permits, which reduces costs for the installers of EV chargers, which may be homeowners or commercial companies. But it could also limit cost recovery for jurisdictions whose expenses exceed these thresholds. City councils or boards of supervisors in these jurisdictions that face a financial gap as a result of the bill will face three choices: take a potentially unpopular vote to exceed the statewide caps, reducing their reviews of EV charger installations, or divert funds away from other public needs.
3. Law of unintended consequences. The Legislature has enacted numerous measures to address concerns relating to EV charger permitting that have removed local discretion, required local agencies to permit EVs based on checklists, focused reviews exclusively on health and safety, and required expedited permitting. At this point, it is unclear that local permitting rules remain a significant obstacle to EV charger deployment. First, the number of EV chargers in California is already rapidly growing, increasing fivefold in the past seven years (from about 42,000 in 2019 to 201,000 to today). Second, a February 2024 report by Stanford University’s Institute for Economic Policy Research identified local staff capacity as a constraint and recommended alleviating staff shortages as another means to accelerate permitting, along with technical assistance and grant funding to enact ordinances. This bill may result in cuts to the fees that fund local building departments and the staff that permit EV charging stations. To the extent that local agencies scale back permitting efforts to meet the requirements of the bill, this bill may hinder, rather than help, EV charger permitting efforts.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes Local: Yes

SUPPORT: (Verified 8/5/26)

Coalition for Clean Air (co-source)
Electric Vehicle Charging Association (co-source)
Abb E-mobility, INC.
Alliance for Automotive Innovation
American Ev Jobs Alliance; the
American Lung Association of California
Autel
California Apartment Association
California Center for Sustainable Energy
Center for Biological Diversity
Chargepoint, INC
Chargie
Environment California
Epic Charging
Evgo
Evmatch
Green Latinos
Green Water & Power
Green Wealth Energy
Natural Resources Defense Council
Swtch
Terawatt
Tesla
Union of Concerned Scientists
Valley Can (clean Air Now)
Xeal

OPPOSITION: (Verified 8/5/26)

California Building Officials
California Contract Cities Association
California Municipal Utilities Association
California State Association of Counties
City of Camarillo
City of Glendora
City of La Mirada
City of Lakewood
City of Los Alamitos
City of Norwalk
City of Redwood City
City of San Mateo
League of California Cities
Northern California Power Agency
Rural County Representatives of California
Solano County Board of Supervisors

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 72-0, 5/26/26

AYES: Addis, Aguiar-Curry, Ahrens, Alanis, Alvarez, Arambula, Ávila Farías, Bains, Bauer-Kahan, Bennett, Berman, Boerner, Bonta, Bryan, Caloza, Carrillo, Castillo, Chen, Connolly, Davies, DeMaio, Dixon, Elhawary, Ellis, Flora, Fong, Gabriel, Gallagher, Garcia, Jeff Gonzalez, Mark González, Hadwick, Haney, Harabedian, Hart, Hoover, Irwin, Jackson, Johnson, Kalra, Krell, Lackey, Lee, Lowenthal, Macedo, McKinnor, Nguyen, Ortega, Papan, Patel, Patterson, Pellerin, Petrie-Norris, Quirk-Silva, Michelle Rodriguez, Rogers, Sanchez, Schiavo, Schultz, Sharp-Collins, Solache, Soria, Stefani, Ta, Tangipa, Valencia, Wallis, Ward, Wicks, Wilson, Zbur, Rivas

NO VOTE RECORDED: Calderon, Gipson, Muratsuchi, Pacheco, Ramos, Ransom, Celeste Rodriguez, Blanca Rubio

Prepared by: Anton Favorini-Csorba / L. GOV. / (916) 651-4119

8/5/26 15:04:18

**** END ****

1. https://www.leadflowgod.com/resources/costs/ev-charger-cost-orange-county/ ↑

SENATE COMMITTEE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT

Senator María Elena Durazo, Chair

2025 - 2026 Regular

Electric vehicle charging stations: permit fees

Prohibits, until January 1, 2036, a city or county from charging a permit fee for an EV charging station that exceeds specified amounts.

Background

As an alternative to gasoline-based vehicles, California has more electric vehicles (EVs)—and the charging stations used to fuel them—than any other state in the nation. California has established ambitious EV infrastructure and vehicle targets for the state—250,000 shared EV chargers, including 10,000 direct current fast chargers, by 2025. These targets were set to put California on the path to host 5 million zero emissions vehicles (ZEVs) by 2030.

Both EVs and charging stations have grown significantly in recent years, due to a rapidly growing list of state policies that support the adoption of EV technology and infrastructure. Among other steps, the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, now known as the Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation, created several resources to help achieve the goals in the Governor's Executive Order, including a “ZEV guidebook.” The guidebook highlights many aspects of ZEV readiness, including necessary infrastructure, land use permitting guidelines, the need to green local fleets, and options for incentives and outreach to the public. It also offers a number of tools and templates, including a checklist that guides both permit applicants and building department staff through the process of charging station installation.

The state currently has over 1.9 million EVs on the roads and over 200,000 chargers to support them as of September 2025, according to the California Energy Commission. This is more than double the number of chargers statewide in 2022, and nearly five times as many as in 2019.

EV charger streamlining. Responding to the patchwork of California’s EV permitting structure and the uncertainty it posed to installers, AB 1236 (Chiu, 2015) placed significant new requirements into law regarding applications to install EV charging stations. AB 1236 requires counties and cities to administratively approve an application to install EV charging stations through the issuance of a building permit or similar nondiscretionary permit. Review of an application is limited to the building official’s review of whether it meets all health and safety requirements of local, state, and federal law. However, a county or city may require an applicant to apply for a use permit if the building official makes a finding, based on substantial evidence, that the EV charging station could have a specific, adverse impact upon the public health and safety. The decisions of the building official may be appealed to the planning commission of the local agency.

AB 1236 prohibits a local agency from denying an application for a use permit to install an EV charging station unless it makes written findings based upon substantial evidence in the record that the proposed installation will have a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety, and there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact. The findings must include the basis for the rejection of potential feasible alternatives of preventing the adverse impact. Any conditions imposed on an application to install an EV charging station must be designed to mitigate the specific, adverse impact upon the public health and safety at the lowest cost possible. An EV charging station must meet specified applicable health and safety requirements and performance standards.

AB 1236 also requires every local agency to adopt an ordinance that creates an expedited, streamlined permitting process for EV charging stations. Local agencies must adopt a checklist of all requirements with which EV charging stations must comply to be eligible for expedited review. An application that satisfies the information requirements in the checklist is deemed complete. A local agency must approve the application and issue all required permits once the local agency confirms the application and supporting documents are complete and meet the requirements of the checklist. If a local agency receives an incomplete application, it must issue a written correction notice detailing all deficiencies in the application and any additional information required to be eligible for expedited permit issuance.

More recently, AB 970 (McCarty, 2021) updated these requirements to deem an application to install an EV charging station complete if the local building official hasn’t identified deficiencies after:

• Five business days for applications to construct at least one and up to 25 charging stations at a single site; or
• 10 business days for applications to construct over 25 charging stations at a single site.

AB 970 also deems approved an application to install an EV charging station 20 business days after the application was deemed complete for an installation of up to 25 charging stations at a single site, or 40 business days for an installation of more than 25 charging stations, if the building official hasn’t acted on the application.

GO-Biz Guidebook. In July 2019, the Governor’s Office of Business and Economic Development (GO-Biz) published the first edition of its “Electric Vehicle Charging Station Permitting Guidebook.” The GO-Biz Guidebook states, “When AB 1236 was being developed, permitting processes and actual timelines varied widely – in many cases adding considerable delay to the station development process. Delays continue to come from both sides of the equation. Both [local governments] and station developers have reported frustrations with incomplete information…Unfortunately, due to lack of awareness, enforcement, and inconsistent application across the state, a wide variance in permitting processes persists.”

EV charger streamlining compliance. Not all cities and counties have adopted the expedited permitting requirements of AB 1236 and subsequent laws. GO-Biz tracks local compliance with the state’s EV charger streamlining laws through an online tracker and, as of April 10, 2026, 358 cities and counties in the state are fully streamlined, while an additional 77 are partially so. However, the remaining 105 cities and counties are not streamlined.

The EV charging industry reports that local permitting remains a barrier to increasing the number and availability of chargers. The Electric Vehicle Charging Association, which represents charging infrastructure manufacturers, installers, and other companies interested in the successful deployment of EV charging infrastructure, wants the Legislature to further streamline EV charger station development.

Local agency fees. When a local agency charges fees for building permits (or other regulatory fees), Article XIIIC, §1 of the California Constitution prohibits those fees from exceeding the estimated reasonable cost of issuing licenses, administrative costs, and enforcement of the program for which the fee is charged. Building permit fees generally pay for the cost of the project plan examination by city and county departments and on-site inspection, but can also include the costs reasonably necessary to prepare and revise the plans and policies that a local agency is required to adopt before it can make any necessary findings and determinations. Fees charged in excess of the estimated reasonable cost of providing the services are taxes and must be approved by a 2/3 vote of the public.

EV charger permitting costs. According to data provided by the EV charging industry, permits for commercial EV charging installations cost around $120 per charger on average. However, these costs vary widely. Some installations face essentially no permitting costs, while others cost over $1,000 per charger. These costs vary not just across jurisdictions, but within jurisdictions, depending on the installation.

According to some estimates, residential permits in major cities and counties in California range from $75 to $400 or more for coastal jurisdictions that have specific requirements for salt tolerance.^[1]

Other permit fee caps for clean energy. To encourage the development of solar energy systems (solar photovoltaic panels and other systems that capture solar energy for use), state law caps the fees that cities and counties can impose on these systems. Cities and counties may not charge permitting fees that exceed $450 (plus $15 per kilowatt [kW] for each kW above 15kW) for a residential system and $1,000 (plus $7 kW for each kW between 51kW and 250 kW, and $5 per kW for each kW above 250 kW) for a commercial system. However, cities and counties can exceed these caps if they make a written finding and adopt a resolution or ordinance showing substantial evidence of the need to charge more than what the cap allows to issue the permit. These caps have been extended and lowered over the years, and they expire on January 1, 2034.

Modeled off the solar energy system permit fee caps, the Electric Vehicle Charging Association and the Coalition for Clean Air want the Legislature to reduce the permit fees that local agencies charge for permitting EV chargers.

Proposed Law

AB 1820 prohibits a city or county from charging a permit fee for an EV charging station that exceeds:

• $100 plus $15 per kW for each kilowatt above 15kW for residential EV charging stations; and
• $500 plus $5 per kilowatt for each kW between 51kW and 250kW, plus $2 for every kilowatt above 250kW, for commercial EV charging stations.

A city or county may exceed these caps if it provides substantial evidence of the reasonable cost to issue the permit as part of a written finding and an adopted resolution or ordinance. These requirements apply beginning July 1, 2027, but a city or county with a population of fewer than 200,000 residents has an additional six months, until January 1, 2028, to comply. AB 1820 defines its terms, includes findings and declarations to support its purposes, and sunsets on January 1, 2036.

Comments

1. Purpose of the bill. According to the author, “To achieve a clean transportation transition, California will need to build hundreds of thousands more chargers by 2030. However, the cost to permit chargers can vary wildly county by county, sometimes far above the actual cost to issue the permit. AB 1820 is an important step towards preparing our electrical vehicle infrastructure for the needs of tomorrow This measure will standardize the cost of permit fees for electric vehicle chargers making their development and installation more affordable for the public and more predictable for developers.”

2. Zero sum game. Under the California Constitution, local governments cannot charge fees that exceed the reasonable cost of issuing a permit. AB 1820 caps fees on EV charger permits, which reduces costs for the installers of EV chargers, which may be homeowners or commercial companies. But it could also limit cost recovery for jurisdictions whose expenses exceed these thresholds. City councils or boards of supervisors in these jurisdictions that face a financial gap as a result of the bill will face three choices: take a potentially unpopular vote to exceed the statewide caps, reducing their reviews of EV charger installations, or divert funds away from other public needs. Diverting funds hurts the public at large, while EV owners are disproportionately more affluent, highly educated, urban, and likely to own a home when compared to non-EV owners.^[2] The Committee may wish to consider whether the benefits of AB 1820 are distributed equitably.

3. Law of unintended consequences. The Legislature has enacted numerous measures to address concerns relating to EV charger permitting that have removed local discretion, required local agencies to permit EVs based on checklists, focused reviews exclusively on health and safety, and required expedited permitting. At this point, it is unclear that local permitting rules remain a significant obstacle to EV charger deployment. First, the number of EV chargers in California is already rapidly growing, increasing fivefold in the past seven years (from about 42,000 in 2019 to 201,000 to today). Second, other sources of significant delay remain that may have a greater impact on the ability to get chargers up and running. A February 2024 report by Stanford University’s Institute for Economic Policy Research stated, “limits on grid capacity are the most significant source of delay, especially when installing DC fast chargers.”^[3] The report also identified local staff capacity as a constraint and recommended alleviating staff shortages as another means to accelerate permitting, along with technical assistance and grant funding to enact ordinances. AB 1820 does not address these additional challenges. Instead, it cuts the fees that fund local building departments and the staff that permit EV charging stations. To the extent that local agencies scale back permitting efforts to meet the requirements of the bill, AB 1820 may hinder, rather than help, EV charger permitting efforts. To reduce the likelihood that local agencies face negative financial impacts from AB 1820, the Committee may wish to consider loosening the fee caps imposed by the bill.

4. Mandate. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local governments for the costs of new or expanded state mandated local programs. Because AB 1820 expands the duties of local officials, Legislative Counsel says that it imposes a new state mandate. AB 1820 disclaims the state’s responsibility for providing reimbursement by citing local governments’ authority to charge for the costs of implementing the bill’s provisions.

5. Charter city. The California Constitution allows cities that adopt charters to control their own “municipal affairs.” In all other matters, charter cities must follow the general, statewide laws. Because the Constitution doesn’t define “municipal affairs,” the courts determine whether a topic is a municipal affair or whether it’s an issue of statewide concern. AB 1820 says that it applies to all cities, including charter cities. To support this assertion, the bill includes a legislative finding and declaration that establishing consistent standards for local permitting fees on EV charging stations is a matter of statewide concern.

6. Related legislation. SB 1283 (Ashby), which the Committee approved at its April 15^th hearing on a vote of 6-0, expands the requirements for cities and counties to streamline electric vehicle charger permitting by:

• Expanding the eligibility for streamlining to stations that include large canopies, battery storage, and other supporting infrastructure, which exempts these items from local planning requirements and design review;
• Establishing a standardized application for EV charging station developers to use in jurisdictions that are not currently streamlined, which enables them to more easily take advantage of the deemed approved remedy in existing law; and
• Allowing construction to begin without a permit by the local agency if the local agency fails to act on a permit sufficiently quickly.

Assembly Actions

Assembly Local Government Committee: 6-0

Assembly Appropriations Committee: 13-0

Assembly Floor: 72-0

Support and Opposition

(6/26/26)

Support: Electric Vehicle Charging Association (Sponsor)
Abb E-mobility, INC.
Alliance for Automotive Innovation
American Ev Jobs Alliance; the
American Lung Association of California
Autel
California Apartment Association
California Center for Sustainable Energy
Center for Biological Diversity
Chargepoint, INC
Chargie
Coalition for Clean Air
Environment California
Epic Charging
Evgo
Evmatch
Green Latinos
Green Water & Power
Green Wealth Energy
Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC)
Swtch
Terawatt
Tesla
Union of Concerned Scientists
Valley Can (clean Air Now)
Xeal

Opposition: California Building Officials
California Contract Cities Association
California Municipal Utilities Association
California State Association of Counties
City of Camarillo
City of Glendora
City of La Mirada
City of Lakewood
City of Los Alamitos
City of Norwalk
City of Redwood City
City of San Mateo
League of California Cities
Rural County Representatives of California
Solano County Board of Supervisors

-- END --

1. https://www.leadflowgod.com/resources/costs/ev-charger-cost-orange-county/ ↑

2. Jiacheng Wang, Corey D. Harper, and Chris Hendrickson, Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives. “Changing US electric vehicle owner socioeconomic characteristics.” ↑

3. Esther Conrad, Preeti Hehmeyer, and Bruce Cain, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research. “Overcoming roadblocks to California’s public EV charging infrastructure.” ↑

ASSEMBLY THIRD READING

ATR Bill Id:AB 1820

Author:(Schiavo)

As Amended Ver:March 16, 2026

Majority vote

SUMMARY

Establishes permit fee caps for electric vehicle (EV) charging stations until January 1, 2036.

Major Provisions

1. Provides that a city, county, city and county, or charter city (city or county) shall not charge a permit fee for an EV charging station that exceeds the estimated reasonable cost of providing the service for which the fee is charged.
2. Provides that the permit fee for an EV charging station shall not exceed $100 plus $15 per kilowatt for each kilowatt above 15kW for residential EV charging stations,
3. Provides that the permit fee for an EV charging station shall not exceed $500 plus $5 per kilowatt for each kilowatt between 51kW and 250kW, plus $2 for every kilowatt above 250 kW, for commercial EV charging stations.
4. Allows a city or county to charge a permit fee for an EV charging station that exceeds the fees specified above if the city or county, as part of a written finding and an adopted resolution or ordinance, provides substantial evidence of the reasonable cost to issue the permit.
5. Requires a written finding adopted pursuant to 4), above, to include all of the following:
   1. A determination that the municipality has adopted appropriate ordinances, permit fees, and processes to streamline the submittal and approval of permits for EV charging stations pursuant to the practices and policies in state guidelines and model ordinances.
   2. A calculation related to the administrative cost of issuing an EV charging station permit.
   3. A description of how the higher fee will result in a quick and streamlined approval process.
6. Provides the following definitions for the purposes of this bill:
   1. "Administrative costs" means the costs incurred in connection with the review, approval, and issuance of the permit, and the hourly site inspection and follow-up costs, and may also include an amortization of the costs incurred in connection with producing a written finding and adopting an ordinance or resolution pursuant to this bill.
   2. "EV charging station" means any level of electric vehicle supply equipment station that is designed and built in compliance with Article 625 of the California Electrical Code and delivers electricity from a source outside an electric vehicle into a plug-in electric vehicle, as specified.
   3. "Permit fee" means the sum of all charges levied by a city, county, city and county, or charter city in connection with the application for an EV charging station that is installed on the property.
7. Provides that this bill shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2036, and as of that date is repealed.

COMMENTS

The California Energy Commission (CEC) projects California will need one million chargers to support seven million light-duty electric vehicles in 2030 and two million chargers by 2035. Today there are approximately 91,000 publicly available charging stations throughout the state.

In 2019, GO-Biz published the first edition of its EV Charging Station Permitting Guidebook, which generally recommended, as best practices, local agencies determine complete and approve EV charging station applications within specified time frames. In response to the Guidebook's recommendations, AB 970 (McCarty), Chapter 710, Statutes of 2021, established specific time frames in which local agencies must complete and approve permits for EV charging stations.

AB 2427 (McCarty), Chapter 567, Statutes of 2024, expanded on AB 970 by requiring local agencies to: develop a permitting checklist that includes all information required to permit the installation of EV charging stations in the public right-of-way; identify all applicable fees and charges as part of the permitting process; and, identify criteria of the local agency to determine appropriate locations within the public right-of-way for installation of an EV charging station.

The Legislature has approved a series of bills limiting the fees a city or county may charge for solar energy systems, including SB 1222 (Leno), Chapter 614, Statutes of 2012, that limited permit fees for rooftop solar systems and contained a January 1, 2018, sunset date, and AB 1414 (Friedman), Chapter 849, Statutes of 2017, that reduced the maximum permit fees, applied the caps to a broader range of solar energy systems, and extended the sunset date to January 1, 2025, which was subsequently extended to January 1, 2034. The language in this bill is modeled largely after these laws governing permit fees for solar energy systems.

According to the Author

To achieve a clean transportation transition, California will need to build hundreds of thousands more chargers by 2030. However, the cost to permit chargers can vary wildly county by county, sometimes far above the actual cost to issue the permit. AB 1820 is an important step towards preparing our electrical vehicle infrastructure for the needs of tomorrow This measure will standardize the cost of permit fees for electric vehicle chargers making their development and installation more affordable for the public and more predictable for developers.

Arguments in Support

The Electric Vehicle Charging Association (EVCA), sponsor of this bill, writes, "The urgency of expanding California's charging network cannot be overstated. The California Energy Commission (CEC) projects that the state will need 1.01 million public and shared private chargers by 2030 and 2.11 million chargers by 2035. Today, California has approximately 91,000 of these chargers installed. Meeting the state's climate and clean transportation goals will require deployment at a scale and pace that depends on removing every barrier to installation, including excessive permitting costs.

"Unfortunately, in some jurisdictions, EV charging station permit fees have increased tenfold in only two years, with no corresponding increase in the cost of permit review. These inconsistent fees drive up project costs, reducing the number of chargers that can be economically deployed.

"AB 1820 addresses this problem by establishing a fair permit fee schedule for residential and commercial EV charging stations that caps fees to a reasonable cost of permit processing. The bill preserves appropriate local flexibility: a jurisdiction may exceed the fee schedule if it makes a written finding of the permit's actual cost. This approach mirrors the structure of AB 1132 (2023), which capped solar permit fees, and extends the same commonsense principle to EV charging infrastructure.

"By ensuring fees reflect true administrative costs, AB 1820 will lower a meaningful deployment barrier and help California maintain its leadership in the clean transportation transition."

Arguments in Opposition

The League of California Cities, the California State Association of Counties, and the Rural County Representatives of California write in opposition, "Cities and counties are already under strict constitutional limitations on fees. Local governments are already constitutionally required to ensure that permit fees do not exceed the reasonable cost of providing the service. AB 1820 departs from this longstanding principle by establishing fee caps that are frequently below the actual cost of permit processing, plan review, and inspection. For residential EV charging installations, the proposed cap of $100 plus $15 per kilowatt will not cover the staff time required for application intake, plan check, and field inspection, particularly where electrical panel upgrades or load calculations are involved. For commercial and high-capacity installations, including direct current fast chargers, the disparity is even more pronounced. These projects often require multidisciplinary review involving building, fire, and sometimes public works departments, as well as coordination with utilities. The bill's proposed cap of $500 plus limited per-kilowatt adders falls well short of the actual costs cities and counties incur, which can reach several thousand dollars for complex installations.

"By preventing full recovery, AB 1820 effectively shifts the burden of permitting private development onto local taxpayers. Cities and counties would be forced to subsidize EV infrastructure permitting through their general funds, diverting limited resources away from essential public services such as police, fire protection, and parks. Moreover, smaller and rural jurisdictions, where permitting volumes are lower and per-project costs are higher, would be disproportionately impacted by the bill's one-size-fits-all fee caps…

"While the measure allows jurisdictions to exceed the caps upon making written findings supported by substantial evidence, doing so would require the adoption of formal resolutions or ordinances, increasing the administrative burden and exposing cities and counties to potential legal disputes over fee justification. This added process is unnecessary given that existing law already requires fees to reflect actual costs and provides mechanisms for accountability. Constraining fee revenue below cost-recovery levels will limit local governments' ability to maintain adequate staffing and invest in permitting technology, potentially resulting in slower processing times and reduced service quality…

"Simply put, there is no evidence that local permitting fees are a primary barrier to EVCS deployment. The real bottlenecks are private investments, grid capacity, and infrastructure readiness and cities and counties stand ready to partner with the state to further meet our state's ZEV's goals."

FISCAL COMMENTS

No state costs. Local costs to cities and counties to implement the permitting fee caps are not reimbursable by the state because local agencies have general authority to impose fees sufficient to cover administrative costs associated with planning and permitting mandates.

However, to the extent the capped permit fees are insufficient to cover a local agency's costs, local costs would continue to be subsidized, through January 1, 2036, from the local agency's General Fund, unless a city or county provides a written finding and adopts a resolution or ordinance providing substantial evidence the reasonable cost to issue a permit exceeds the statutory cap, in which case a city or county may charge a higher fee sufficient to cover it costs.

VOTES

ASM LOCAL GOVERNMENT: 6-0-4

YES: Carrillo, Ta, Johnson, Stefani, Ward, Wilson

ABS, ABST OR NV: Pacheco, Ramos, Ransom, Blanca Rubio

ASM APPROPRIATIONS: 13-0-2

YES: Wicks, Hoover, Aguiar-Curry, Caloza, Dixon, Fong, Mark González, Krell, Pellerin, Sharp-Collins, Solache, Ta, Tangipa

ABS, ABST OR NV: Arambula, Pacheco

UPDATED

VERSION: March 16, 2026

CONSULTANT: Angela Mapp / L. GOV. / (916) 319-3958 FN: 0002516

Date of Hearing: May 6, 2026

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Buffy Wicks, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 1820

Author:(Schiavo) – As Amended Ver:March 16, 2026

Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: Yes Reimbursable: No

SUMMARY:

This bill caps residential and commercial electric vehicle (EV) charging station permit fees until January 1, 2036.

Specifically, this bill:

1. Prohibits a city, county, city and county, including a charter city, from charging a permit fee for an EV charging station that exceeds the estimated reasonable cost of providing the service for which the fee is charged.
2. Specifies the permit fee for a residential EV charging station may not exceed $100 plus $15 per kilowatt for each kilowatt above 15kW.
3. Specifies the permit fee for a commercial EV charging station may not exceed $500 plus $5 per kilowatt for each kilowatt between 51kW and 250kW, plus $2 for every kilowatt above 250 kW.
4. Allows a city or county to charge a permit fee for an EV charging station that exceeds the fees specified above if the city or county provides substantial evidence of the reasonable cost to issue the permit as part of a written finding and an adopted resolution or ordinance.
5. Sunsets these provisions on January 1, 2036.

FISCAL EFFECT:

No state costs. Local costs to cities and counties to implement the permitting fee caps are not reimbursable by the state because local agencies have general authority to impose fees sufficient to cover administrative costs associated with planning and permitting mandates.

However, to the extent the capped permit fees are insufficient to cover a local agency’s costs, local costs would continue to be subsidized, through January 1, 2036, from the local agency’s General Fund, unless a city or county provides a written finding and adopts a resolution or ordinance providing substantial evidence the reasonable cost to issue a permit exceeds the statutory cap, in which case a city or county may charge a higher fee sufficient to cover it costs.

COMMENTS:

1. Purpose. According to the author:

To achieve a clean transportation transition, California will need to build hundreds of thousands more chargers by 2030. However, the cost to permit chargers can vary wildly county by county, sometimes far above the actual cost to issue the permit. [This bill] is an important step towards preparing our electrical vehicle infrastructure for the needs of tomorrow This measure will standardize the cost of permit fees for electric vehicle chargers making their development and installation more affordable for the public and more predictable for developers.

1. Background. The California Energy Commission (CEC) projects California will need one million chargers to support seven million light-duty electric vehicles in 2030 and two million chargers by 2035. Today there are approximately 91,000 publicly available charging stations throughout the state.

In 2019, GO-Biz published the first edition of its EV Charging Station Permitting Guidebook, which generally recommended, as best practices, local agencies determine complete and approve EV charging station applications within specified time frames. In response to the Guidebook’s recommendations, AB 970 (McCarty), Chapter 710, Statutes of 2021, established specific time frames in which local agencies must complete and approve permits for EV charging stations.

AB 2427 (McCarty), Chapter 567, Statutes of 2024, expanded on AB 970 by requiring local agencies to: develop a permitting checklist that includes all information required to permit the installation of EV charging stations in the public right-of-way; identify all applicable fees and charges as part of the permitting process; and, identify criteria of the local agency to determine appropriate locations within the public right-of-way for installation of an EV charging station.

The Legislature has approved a series of bills limiting the fees a city or county may charge for solar energy systems, including SB 1222 (Leno), Chapter 614, Statutes of 2012, that limited permit fees for rooftop solar systems and contained a January 1, 2018, sunset date, and AB 1414 (Friedman), Chapter 849, Statutes of 2017, that reduced the maximum permit fees, applied the caps to a broader range of solar energy systems, and extended the sunset date to January 1, 2025, which was subsequently extended to January 1, 2034. The language in this bill is modeled largely after these laws governing permit fees for solar energy systems.

1. Arguments in Support. The Electric Vehicle Charging Association (EVCA), sponsor of this bill, asserts:

Meeting the state’s climate and clean transportation goals will require deployment at a scale and pace that depends on removing every barrier to installation, including excessive permitting costs. Unfortunately, in some jurisdictions, EV charging station permit fees have increased tenfold in only two years, with no corresponding increase in the cost of permit review. These inconsistent fees drive up project costs, reducing the number of chargers that can be economically deployed. [This bill] addresses this problem by establishing a fair permit fee schedule for residential and commercial EV charging stations that caps fees to a reasonable cost of permit processing. The bill preserves appropriate local flexibility: a jurisdiction may exceed the fee schedule if it makes a written finding of the permit's actual cost.

1. Arguments in Opposition. The League of California Cities, the California State Association of Counties, and the Rural County Representatives of California assert:

Local governments are already constitutionally required to ensure that permit fees do not exceed the reasonable cost of providing the service. [This bill] departs from this longstanding principle by establishing fee caps that are frequently below the actual cost of permit processing, plan review, and inspection.

By preventing full [cost] recovery, [this bill] effectively shifts the burden of permitting private development onto local taxpayers. Cities and counties would be forced to subsidize EV infrastructure permitting through their general funds, diverting limited resources away from essential public services such as police, fire protection, and parks. Moreover, smaller and rural jurisdictions, where permitting volumes are lower and per-project costs are higher, would be disproportionately impacted by the bill’s one-size-fits-all fee caps.

Analysis Prepared by: Jennifer Swenson / APPR. / (916) 319-2081

Date of Hearing: April 15, 2026

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT

Juan Carrillo, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 1820 (

Author:Schiavo) – As Amended Ver:March 16, 2026

SUBJECT: EV charging stations: permit fees.

SUMMARY: Establishes permit fee caps for electric vehicle (EV) charging stations until January 1, 2036. Specifically, this bill:

1. Provides that a city, county, city and county, or charter city (city or county) shall not charge a permit fee for an EV charging station that exceeds the estimated reasonable cost of providing the service for which the fee is charged.
2. Provides that the permit fee for an EV charging station shall not exceed $100 plus $15 per kilowatt for each kilowatt above 15kW for residential EV charging stations,
3. Provides that the permit fee for an EV charging station shall not exceed $500 plus $5 per kilowatt for each kilowatt between 51kW and 250kW, plus $2 for every kilowatt above 250 kW, for commercial EV charging stations.
4. Allows a city or county to charge a permit fee for an EV charging station that exceeds the fees specified above if the city or county, as part of a written finding and an adopted resolution or ordinance, provides substantial evidence of the reasonable cost to issue the permit.
5. Requires a written finding adopted pursuant to 4), above, to include all of the following:
   1. A determination that the municipality has adopted appropriate ordinances, permit fees, and processes to streamline the submittal and approval of permits for EV charging stations pursuant to the practices and policies in state guidelines and model ordinances.
   2. A calculation related to the administrative cost of issuing an EV charging station permit.
   3. A description of how the higher fee will result in a quick and streamlined approval process.
6. Provides the following definitions for the purposes of this bill:
   1. “Administrative costs” means the costs incurred in connection with the review, approval, and issuance of the permit, and the hourly site inspection and follow-up costs, and may also include an amortization of the costs incurred in connection with producing a written finding and adopting an ordinance or resolution pursuant to this bill.
   2. “EV charging station” means any level of electric vehicle supply equipment station that is designed and built in compliance with Article 625 of the California Electrical Code and delivers electricity from a source outside an electric vehicle into a plug-in electric vehicle, as specified.
   3. “Permit fee” means the sum of all charges levied by a city, county, city and county, or charter city in connection with the application for an EV charging station that is installed on the property.
7. Provides that this bill shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2036, and as of that date is repealed.
8. Finds and declares that establishing consistent standards for local permitting fees on EV charging stations is a matter of statewide concern and is not a municipal affair as that term is used in Section 5 of Article XI of the California Constitution. Therefore, Section 1 of this bill adding Chapter 7.7 (commencing with Section 66015.5) to Division 1 of Title 7 of the Government Code applies to all cities, including charter cities.
9. Provides that no reimbursement is required by this bill pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution because a local agency or school district has the authority to levy service charges, fees, or assessments sufficient to pay for the program or level of service mandated by this bill, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code.

FISCAL EFFECT: This bill is keyed fiscal and contains a state-mandated local program.

COMMENTS:

1. Bill Summary. This bill establishes fee caps that cities or counties can charge for permitting EV charging stations, as follows:
   
   1. For residential EV changing stations, the fee is limited to $100, plus $15 per kilowatt for each kilowatt above 15kW.
   2. For commercial EV changing stations, the fee is limited to $500, plus $5 per kilowatt for each kilowatt between 51kW and 250kW, plus $2 for every kilowatt above 250 kW.

A city or county may charge a permit fee that exceeds these amounts if the city or county provides substantial evidence of the reasonable cost to issue the permit as part of a written finding and an adopted resolution or ordinance. The written findings must include:

• 1. A determination that the municipality has adopted appropriate ordinances, permit fees, and processes to streamline the submittal and approval of permits for EV charging stations pursuant to the practices and policies in state guidelines and model ordinances.
  2. A calculation related to the administrative cost of issuing an EV charging station permit.
  3. A description of how the higher fee will result in a quick and streamlined approval process.

This bill applies to all cities, including charter cities, and remains in effect until January 1, 2036. This bill is sponsored by the Coalition for Clean Air and the Electrical Vehicle Charging Association.

1. Author’s Statement. According to the author, “To achieve a clean transportation transition, California will need to build hundreds of thousands more chargers by 2030. However, the cost to permit chargers can vary wildly county by county, sometimes far above the actual cost to issue the permit. AB 1820 is an important step towards preparing our electrical vehicle infrastructure for the needs of tomorrow This measure will standardize the cost of permit fees for electric vehicle chargers making their development and installation more affordable for the public and more predictable for developers.”
2. Background. California has been steadily expanding its policies supporting the adoption of EV technology and infrastructure, beginning with incentives for purchasing EVs and requirements on automakers to manufacture specified percentages of EVs in relation to their production of conventional cars. This was followed by statutes governing the degree of authority Common Interest Developments (CIDs) can exercise over the installation of EV charging infrastructure, and prohibitions against specified membership and fee requirements for the privilege of using an EV charging station.

In 2012, the Governor issued an Executive Order directing the California Air Resources Board (CARB), the California Energy Commission (CEC), the California Public Utilities Commission (PUC), and other relevant agencies working with the California Plug-In Electric Vehicle Collaborative and the Fuel Cell Partnership to develop benchmarks to help support and facilitate the rapid commercialization of zero emission vehicles (ZEVs). The order directed these agencies to establish benchmarks to help the state's ZEV infrastructure support 1.5 million EVs by 2025. Furthering this goal, the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research and the State Architect published guidelines to address physical accessibility standards and design guidelines for the installation of EV charging stations throughout California.

To further these efforts, at the end of 2020, Governor Newsom issued Executive Order (EO) N-79-20, which required 100% of in-state sales of new passenger cars and trucks to be zero-emission by 2035. This EO tasked CARB with developing and proposing passenger vehicle and truck regulations requiring increasing volumes of new zero-emission vehicles sold in the State towards that goal. The EO also directed the CEC to update the biennial statewide assessment of zero-emission vehicle infrastructure required by AB 2127 (Ting) Chapter 365, Statutes of 2018, to support the level of EV adoption required by the EO.

1. AB 1236 of 2015. Responding to the patchwork of California’s EV permitting structure and the uncertainty it posed to installers, AB 1236 (Chiu), Chapter 598, Statutes of 2015, placed significant new requirements into law regarding applications to install EV charging stations. AB 1236 required counties and cities to administratively approve an application to install EV charging stations through the issuance of a building permit or similar nondiscretionary permit, and limited review of an application to whether it meets all health and safety requirements of local, state, and federal law. Requirements of local law were limited to those standards and regulations necessary to ensure that the EV charging station will not have a specific, adverse impact upon the public’s health or safety. AB 1236 allowed a county or city to require an applicant to apply for a use permit under certain circumstances.

AB 1236 also required local agencies to adopt an ordinance that creates an expedited, streamlined permitting process for EV charging stations. Local agencies must adopt a checklist of all requirements with which EV charging stations must comply to be eligible for expedited review. An application that satisfies the information requirements in the checklist is deemed complete. A local agency must approve the application and issue all required permits once the local agency confirms the application and supporting documents are complete and meet the requirements of the checklist. If a local agency receives an incomplete application, it must issue a written correction notice detailing all deficiencies in the application and any additional information required to be eligible for expedited permit issuance.

1. 2019 GO-Biz Guidebook. GO-Biz in July 2019 published the first edition of its “EV Charging Station Permitting Guidebook.” The 2019 GO-Biz Guidebook noted, “To support California’s ambitious ZEV deployment goals – 5 million ZEVs in California by 2030 – the state is prioritizing the development of infrastructure to support these vehicles, in the form of plug-in EV charging stations and hydrogen fueling stations. At the most fundamental level, infrastructure enables the deployment of ZEVs. When consumers look to buy a new or used car, they need confirmation that it will be able to take them where they want to go. Widespread availability of infrastructure ensures that Californians will have that confidence…Ultimately, a successful transition to zero emissions hinges on success at the local level.”

According to the 2019 GO-Biz Guidebook, “Plug-in EVs (PEVs) as a percentage of new passenger car sales continue to increase. PEV sales exceeded 5% of all new passenger car sales in California in 2017 and comprised approximately 8% of sales in 2018. In total, well over 600,000 PEVs have been sold in California as of the publishing of this document. With the increasing popularity of ZEVs and increasing ZEV sales, the need for ZEV infrastructure is increasingly important.”

The 2019 GO-Biz Guidebook also reported that there were 20,653 public chargers in California as of June 25, 2019. This included:

• 1. Level 1 (4–5 miles of range per hour) – 367 chargers at 169 sites;
  2. Level 2 (12–70 miles of range per hour) – 17,216 chargers at 4,764 sites; and,
  3. DC Fast (3–20 miles of range per minute) – 3,070 chargers at 685 sites.

1. 2019 GO-Biz Guidebook’s Findings and Recommendations on Permitting. The 2019 GO-Biz Guidebook stated, “When AB 1236 was being developed, permitting processes and actual timelines varied widely – in many cases adding considerable delay to the station development process. Delays continue to come from both sides of the equation. Both (local governments) and station developers have reported frustrations with incomplete information…Unfortunately, due to lack of awareness, enforcement, and inconsistent application across the state, a wide variance in permitting processes persists.”

The Guidebook generally recommended as best practices that local agencies determine if an application is complete within five business days, and provide approval to build within 15 business days. It did note, however, that “it is important to consider the unique circumstances of some typical installations.” For fast-charging stations in particular, the Guidebook pointed out some of the additional considerations not associated with single-family residential charging stations, such as potential requirements for more power, a dedicated power drop, and complex trenching and associated rights-of-way issues.

1. AB 970 and AB 2427. In response to the 2019 GO-Biz Guidebook’s recommendations, AB 970 (McCarty), Chapter 710, Statutes of 2021, established specific time frames in which local agencies must complete and approve permits for EV charging stations. Under the bill, an application to install an EV charging station is deemed complete if the building official of the city or county has not either deemed the application complete or written a correction notice detailing the deficiencies in the application within specified time periods. Applications are deemed approved 20 business days after the application was deemed complete for an installation of up to 25 charging stations at a single site, or 40 business days for an installation of more than 25 charging stations, if certain conditions are met.

AB 2427 (McCarty), Chapter 567, Statutes of 2024, expanded on the law enacted via AB 970 by requiring local agencies to: develop a permitting checklist that includes all information required to permit the installation of EV charging stations in the public right-of-way; identify all applicable fees and charges as part of the permitting process; and, identify criteria of the local agency to determine appropriate locations within the public right-of-way for installation of an EV charging station.

1. Solar Energy System Permit Fees. The Legislature has approved a series of bills limiting the fees that a city or county can charge for solar energy systems:
   1. SB 1222 (Leno), Chapter 614, Statutes of 2012. SB 1222 placed caps on the amount of permit fees a city or county can charge for residential or commercial rooftop solar energy systems. For a residential rooftop solar energy system, a city or county was precluded from charging a permit fee that exceeded $500 (plus $15 per kW for each kW above 15kW). SB 1222 bill also prohibited, for a commercial rooftop solar energy system, a city or county from charging a permit fee that exceeded $1,000 for systems up to 50kW (plus $7 kW for each kW between 51kW and 250 kW, and $5 per kW for each kW above 250 kW). These caps were limited specifically to rooftop photovoltaic (PV) systems, and did not apply to PV systems installed elsewhere on a building, or to solar thermal systems.

SB 1222 allowed a city or county to charge permit fees exceeding these caps, provided the city or county made a written finding and adopted a resolution or ordinance showing substantial evidence of the reasonable cost to issue the permit. SB 1222 contained a sunset date of January 1, 2018.

• 1. AB 1414 (Friedman), Chapter 849, Statues of 2017. AB 1414 made a number of additional changes to these permit fee caps. It reduced the fee cap to $450 and applied the cap beyond rooftop solar PV installations only, to include any PV systems and solar thermal systems, with specified size limitations. The bill maintained the permit fee cap of $1,000 on commercial rooftop solar energy systems, but applied the cap beyond rooftop solar PV installations to include PV systems generally and solar thermal systems, also with specified size limitations.

AB 1414 continued to allow a city or a county to charge a permit fee that exceeds the specified caps if the city or county makes a written finding and adopts a resolution or ordinance that provides substantial evidence of the reasonable cost to issue the permit. However, this bill required additional elements in the written finding.

AB 1414 also amended the meaning of “solar energy system” to specify that a solar energy system includes any PV device or technology that is integrated into a building, including, but not limited to, PV windows, siding, and roofing shingles or tiles. The bill also added an explicit cross-reference to this amended definition (which is contained in Civil Code § 801.5) to the code section containing the permit fee caps (Government Code § 66015), thereby explicitly applying the permit fee caps to this expanded definition of “solar energy system.”

AB 1414 extended the sunset date in SB 1222, from January 1, 2018, to January 1, 2025.

• 1. AB 1124 (Friedman), Chapter 235, Statutes of 2021. Among other provisions, this bill again revised the definition of “solar energy system” to additionally include any structural design feature by eliminating the provision that the structural design feature be a feature of a building. The bill added the following structural design features in the definition of “solar energy system,” regardless of whether the feature is on the ground or on a building:
     1. Solar racking.
     2. Solar mounting.
     3. Elevated solar support structures, including, but not limited to, solar carports, shade structures, awnings, canopies, and patio covers. This includes both the aboveground superstructure and associated foundation elements that support solar energy devices or collectors.

AB 1124 specified that a solar energy system must be designed to serve one utility retail customer on the same property, more than one utility retail customer on the same property, one utility retail customer on the same, adjacent, or contiguous properties, or more than one utility retail customer on the same, adjacent or contiguous properties. The solar energy system must not be designed for procurement of electricity by an electric utility.

The bill also revised several additional definitions, including:

• • 1. “Commercial permit fee” to mean the sum of all charges levied by a city or county in connection with the application for a commercial solar energy system, including, but not limited to, a solar energy system that is installed on the property of multifamily housing that has more than two family dwellings.
    2. “Residential permit fee” to mean the sum of all charges levied by a city or county in connection with the application for a solar energy system that is installed on the property of a single- or two-family dwelling.

The language in this bill is modeled largely after these laws governing permit fees for solar energy systems.

1. Previous Legislation. AB 2427 (McCarty), Chapter 567, Statutes of 2024, required local agencies to: develop a permitting checklist that includes all information required to permit the installation of EV charging stations in the public right-of-way; identify all applicable fees and charges as part of the permitting process; and, identify criteria of the local agency to determine appropriate locations within the public right-of-way for installation of an EV charging station.

AB 2559 (Petrie-Norris) of 2024 would have required GO-Biz to create and maintain a publicly accessible internet website to collect information and report delays and denials regarding permitting for zero-emission vehicle (ZEV) infrastructure. AB 2559 was held in the Senate Appropriations Committee.

AB 1132 (Friedman), Chapter 357, Statutes of 2023, extended the sunset date on provisions of law that limit the permit fees a city or county can charge for solar energy systems, from January 1, 2025, to January 1, 2034.

AB 1504 (McCarty) of 2023 would have required cities and counties to complete a plan for the installation of EV charging stations in the public right-of-way, and made changes to the statewide assessment of EV charging infrastructure the CEC must prepare pursuant to existing law. AB 1504 was held in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

SB 507 (Gonzalez) of 2023 would have expanded the scope of information the CEC must consider when assessing the state’s need for EV charging infrastructure. SB 507 was held in the Senate Appropriations Committee.

AB 970 (McCarty), Chapter 710, Statutes of 2021, established specific time frames in which local agencies must approve permits for EV charging stations.

AB 1124 (Friedman), Chapter 235, Statutes of 2021, revised the definition of "solar energy system" as that term is used for the purpose of local permitting of such systems, including the allowable fees a local agency may charge, and clarified the permit fees local agencies may charge for commercial and residential solar energy systems.

AB 2700 (Friedman) of 2020 was substantially similar to AB 1124. AB 2700 was held in this Committee.

AB 1414 (Friedman), Chapter 849, Statutes of 2017, reduced the maximum permit fee a city or a county may charge for residential rooftop solar energy systems, applied these caps and commercial permit fee caps to a broader range of solar energy systems, and made additional changes to existing law governing permit fees for rooftop solar energy systems.

AB 2127 (Ting), Chapter 365, Statutes of 2017, required the CEC to conduct a statewide assessment of the EV charging infrastructure needed to support the levels of EV adoption required for the state to meet its goals of putting at least five million ZEVs on California roads by 2030 and of reducing emissions of GHG to 40% below 1990 levels by 2030.

AB 1236 (Chiu), Chapter 598, Statutes of 2015, required counties and cities to administratively approve applications to install EV charging stations, and create an expedited, streamlined permitting process for EV charging stations.

AB 2188 (Muratsuchi), Chapter 521, Statutes of 2014, required every city and county to adopt an ordinance that creates an expedited, streamlined permitting process for small residential rooftop solar energy systems.

SB 1222 (Leno), Chapter 614, Statues of 2012, limited the fees that cities and counties charge for permits related to the installation of rooftop solar energy systems.

AB 2473 (Wolk), Chapter 789, Statutes of 2004, required cities and counties to permit the installation of solar energy systems by right if the system meets specified requirements, and redefined the term “significantly” in regard to restrictions on solar systems that raise costs or decrease efficiency.

1. Arguments in Support. The Electric Vehicle Charging Association (EVCA), sponsor of this bill, writes, “The urgency of expanding California’s charging network cannot be overstated. The California Energy Commission (CEC) projects that the state will need 1.01 million public and shared private chargers by 2030 and 2.11 million chargers by 2035. Today, California has approximately 91,000 of these chargers installed. Meeting the state’s climate and clean transportation goals will require deployment at a scale and pace that depends on removing every barrier to installation, including excessive permitting costs.

“Unfortunately, in some jurisdictions, EV charging station permit fees have increased tenfold in only two years, with no corresponding increase in the cost of permit review. These inconsistent fees drive up project costs, reducing the number of chargers that can be economically deployed.

“AB 1820 addresses this problem by establishing a fair permit fee schedule for residential and commercial EV charging stations that caps fees to a reasonable cost of permit processing. The bill preserves appropriate local flexibility: a jurisdiction may exceed the fee schedule if it makes a written finding of the permit's actual cost. This approach mirrors the structure of AB 1132 (2023), which capped solar permit fees, and extends the same commonsense principle to EV charging infrastructure.

“By ensuring fees reflect true administrative costs, AB 1820 will lower a meaningful deployment barrier and help California maintain its leadership in the clean transportation transition.”

1. Arguments in Opposition. The League of California Cities, the California State Association of Counties, and the Rural County Representatives of California write in opposition, “Cities and counties are already under strict constitutional limitations on fees. Local governments are already constitutionally required to ensure that permit fees do not exceed the reasonable cost of providing the service. AB 1820 departs from this longstanding principle by establishing fee caps that are frequently below the actual cost of permit processing, plan review, and inspection. For residential EV charging installations, the proposed cap of $100 plus $15 per kilowatt will not cover the staff time required for application intake, plan check, and field inspection, particularly where electrical panel upgrades or load calculations are involved. For commercial and high-capacity installations, including direct current fast chargers, the disparity is even more pronounced. These projects often require multidisciplinary review involving building, fire, and sometimes public works departments, as well as coordination with utilities. The bill’s proposed cap of $500 plus limited per-kilowatt adders falls well short of the actual costs cities and counties incur, which can reach several thousand dollars for complex installations.

“By preventing full recovery, AB 1820 effectively shifts the burden of permitting private development onto local taxpayers. Cities and counties would be forced to subsidize EV infrastructure permitting through their general funds, diverting limited resources away from essential public services such as police, fire protection, and parks. Moreover, smaller and rural jurisdictions, where permitting volumes are lower and per-project costs are higher, would be disproportionately impacted by the bill’s one-size-fits-all fee caps…

“While the measure allows jurisdictions to exceed the caps upon making written findings supported by substantial evidence, doing so would require the adoption of formal resolutions or ordinances, increasing the administrative burden and exposing cities and counties to potential legal disputes over fee justification. This added process is unnecessary given that existing law already requires fees to reflect actual costs and provides mechanisms for accountability. Constraining fee revenue below cost-recovery levels will limit local governments’ ability to maintain adequate staffing and invest in permitting technology, potentially resulting in slower processing times and reduced service quality…

“Simply put, there is no evidence that local permitting fees are a primary barrier to EVCS deployment. The real bottlenecks are private investments, grid capacity, and infrastructure readiness and cities and counties stand ready to partner with the state to further meet our state’s ZEV’s goals.”

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

Coalition for Clean Air [SPONSOR]

Electric Vehicle Charging Association [SPONSOR]

Abb E-mobility, INC.

Alliance for Automotive Innovation

American Ev Jobs Alliance; the

American Lung Association of California

Autel

California Apartment Association

California Center for Sustainable Energy

California Hydrogen Coalition (if amended)

Chargie

Epic Charging

Evgo

Evmatch

Green Latinos

Green Water & Power

Green Wealth Energy

Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC)

Swtch

Terawatt

Union of Concerned Scientists

Xeal

Opposition

California Building Officials

City of San Mateo

California State Association of Counties

League of California Cities

Rural County Representatives of California

Solano County Board of Supervisors (unless amended)

Analysis Prepared by: Angela Mapp / L. GOV. / (916) 319-3958