Imperial County officials are asking Governor Gavin Newsom to veto a bill that would expand the county's air pollution control board from five county supervisors to a larger panel, arguing the state is handing down an unfunded mandate the rural county cannot afford. Newsom must act by the end of September 2026, and if he leaves the bill unsigned after that deadline, it becomes law automatically under the pocket-signature rule in the California Constitution.
Senate Bill 675, introduced by state Senator Steve Padilla, who represents California State Senate District 18, would restructure the Imperial County Air Pollution Control Board. The bill text is tracked by LegiScan. Sources conflict on the proposed panel's size and composition: the Heber support letter describes a 10-member panel consisting of one county supervisor, five city council members representing each supervisorial district, and four public members with expertise in public health, environmental justice, labor, and agriculture, while KESQ reports that SB 675 would create an 11-member panel. The measure passed the California Assembly by a 58-19 vote and the state Senate by a 30-10 vote, and per KESQ, it was formally presented to the governor last week.
Imperial County District 5 Supervisor John Hawk told KESQ that the existing five-supervisor board runs smoothly and that expansion would simply add more government and taxation. Hawk said the county commissioned an independent third-party audit of the proposed changes, and the audit concluded implementing SB 675 would require substantially more financial, administrative and technological resources than the county currently has. He warned that additional funding demands could compete with fire services, public health, roads and other county expenditures, per the same KESQ report.
The Dollar Figures Behind the Veto Request
The county's third-party audit, referenced in a County of Imperial statement dated September 1, 2026 and published September 2, 2026, put the price tag in stark terms: $1.5 million in one-time information technology upgrades, $4.5 million annually in ongoing staffing and administration, and $410,000 annually for expanded air monitoring, according to Imperial County. That works out to nearly $5 million a year in recurring costs on top of more than $1 million in one-time technology spending, figures Hawk cited in urging Newsom to reject the bill, the station's report notes. County officials argue SB 675 includes no funding mechanism to cover any of it, and they say the unfunded mandate could function as a hidden tax on local municipalities, which could face financial obligations of their own if permit fees don't cover the ongoing costs.
Imperial County supervisors frame the bill as a costly mandate placed on a low-income rural county without state dollars to match, and they insist any air district reform should include a realistic timeline and dedicated state funding rather than an immediate, unfunded restructuring. Imperial County officials also argue the existing five-supervisor panel is efficient and inherently diverse, since supervisors represent individual districts with distinct local needs and perspectives.
Padilla Points to a Data Center and a Conflict of Interest
Padilla has dismissed the audit's multimillion-dollar cost estimates and said the expanded board would include members with professional credentials and air-pollution science backgrounds, arguing the new structure increases public transparency and structural diversity. His office has said the current supervisor-only board creates a conflict of interest because the same officials who approve land-use projects also oversee environmental permits, and it pointed to approval by the Imperial County Board of Supervisors of a data center expected to consume double the county's 2024 electricity usage and 750,000 gallons of water daily as evidence of the problem, according to reporting cited by his office. Hoodline has previously covered data center water fears in Patterson.
SB 675 would change Imperial County's air district governance, according to LegiScan. California has 35 local air pollution control and air quality management districts overall, and the Heber Public Utility District notes that larger districts include city representation, according to the Heber Public Utility District.
Local Support Splits From County Leadership
Not every local government in Imperial County lines up with the supervisors' opposition. The Heber Public Utility District board formally endorsed SB 675 in June 2026, stating that giving cities and public health representatives a vote on air regulations is vital for protecting local communities from agricultural dust and toxic Salton Sea emissions. The district's backing reflects the severity of the region's air quality problems: Imperial County received an F grade from the American Lung Association in 2026 for ozone pollution, short-term particle pollution, and year-round particle pollution, placing it among the 20 most polluted counties in the country while it also carries some of California's highest childhood asthma hospitalization rates.
Much of that pollution burden traces to the shrinking Salton Sea, whose receding lakebed kicks up dust storms carrying exposed pesticides, lead, DDT, and chromium into nearby residential areas, per the Heber Public Utility District. Hoodline reported in May on a related air quality alert when dust choked the Imperial Valley during a sudden advisory across Southern California.
Regional Governance Bodies Discuss Air-District Policy
The article includes a link labeled SCAG.
For now, the decision rests with Newsom, who must issue an explicit formal veto to stop SB 675 from taking effect. Imperial County has made its request plain, and bill proponents continue to argue the expansion would deliver more transparency and structural diversity to a board that currently is composed of county supervisors.
