A parliamentary committee pulled out a controversial provision in a proposed bill Wednesday night to end solar points from 2 million rooftop solar system owners, saying it only applies to those who sell their homes.

Bill 942 proposed by Lisa Calderon (D-Whittier) is aimed at a long-standing program that provides energy credit to Californians who install solar panels by April 15, 2025.

As originally drafted, the bill would limit the benefits currently planned to be within 10 years - the state told roof owners that they would receive half of the 20-year period. The commission cuts the provision, and another person who will cancel the plan to sell the house.

The bill passed 10 to 5, sending it to the Parliamentary Appropriations Committee.

Dozens of rooftop solar owners attended the hearing and asked committee members to vote. Some say that even with an amendment, they believe the measure would reduce the value of the house.

"We just sold the house yesterday," said Dwight James, a Simi Valley resident, who is still paying for the loan he paid for the solar system. “We didn’t expect the country to break our promise.”

Calderon, Former executive Edison, Southern California, said she introduced the bill because the financial credits they send to the grid to rooftop solar owners are raising electricity bills for those who do not own the panel.

Edison and two other large for-profit electric companies in the state, as well as members of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, support the bill.

Major utilities use union labor to build and repair equipment, including routes connecting industrial-scale solar farms in the desert. Companies that install roof panels usually do not use union workers.

The legislation will not affect customers of municipal utility services.

Several members of the General Assembly’s Utilities and Energy Commission said at the hearing that their offices were overwhelmed by phone calls and emails from solar customers.

"I have more objections to this bill than to any other bill than to anyone else," said Congresswoman Pilar Schiavo (D-Santa Clarita).

Before the hearing begins, analysts who review the board’s legislation recommend that the Sunset 10-year rule be removed from the bill. She cited a national requirement that solar owners sign a consumer protection guide that calls the arrangement “contracts” and said the credits would be “guaranteed” for 20 years.

The committee's chief consultant analyst Laura Shybut said retaining the provision could pave the way for legal challenges to legislation.

bill This month prompted protesters to protest Among the rooftop solar panels, they said they invested thousands of dollars in green energy systems under the guarantee that the incentives will last for 20 years.

Also opposed to the bill are schools, businesses, apartment owners and others who install roof panels.

A group of school districts, including Los Angeles Unification, San Diego Unification and Alameda County Office of Education, submitted a letter to the parliamentary committee in an opposition to the proposed legislation.

"The district has made a sincere investment in solar technology in accordance with the state's commitment," the school wrote. "This is unfair and may attract legal attention to retroactively change the rules."

“The state should support investment in rooftop solar to achieve our climate goals and promote affordability for all customers, rather than undermining those who listen to their guidance and authorization to make these investments,” the school wrote.

Committee members said schools will no longer be affected with the amendment.

Also opposing the bill are dozens of environmental groups, consumer organizations and the rooftop solar industry, which believes that electricity bills are rising due to excessive utility spending, rather than from credit granted to owners of green energy systems.

The value of credit (available to group owners at retail electricity prices as the state utility board votes to approve the increase in interest rates demanded by the utility company.

At a press conference Tuesday, Calderon appeared with members of the utility union, saying the credits were transferring billions of dollars in costs without the people who owned the group, which particularly hurt the poor.

"It's about fairness and fairness - that's all."

Rooftop Solar Advocate challenged this claim and quoted From Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory shows that 39% of roof panel owners earn less than $100,000 in 2023. About 12% of revenues are under $50,000.

Several committee members said Wednesday night that they heard all income levels from solar owners.

"I have to reject the narratives of those who are high-income people," Schiavo said.

Some also question whether those measures without solar panels would really reduce electricity bills.

“How many of them will return to consumers?” asked Laurie Davies (D-Laguna Niguel), who voted to deny it. Her question was not answered.