SACRAMENTO — Californians who cherish their sunny summer evenings need no longer fret about the prospect of losing daylight saving time.

A bill that could have ended the time change, setting the state’s clocks permanently on winter’s standard time, is now pushing in the opposite direction — everlasting daylight saving time.

Related Articles Opinion: In age of quarantine, why isn’t state prioritizing telehealth?

Skelton: How needed police reform bill was quietly killed

Walters: Environmental exemptions yes, but CEQA reform, no

Skelton: California lawmakers need to get their act together

Editorial: Prop. 22 would stop the assault on gig firms and workers New amendments this week to a closely watched bill come as a relief to Little League parents and others who count on the extra hour of sunlight in the evenings to enjoy the outdoors or simply get home from work before dark.

“I can see why people were up in arms, as that definitely cuts into the daylight hours,” said Rue Mapp, founder and CEO of the Oakland-based Outdoor Afro, which organizes after-work hikes and kayaking excursions. “Who wants that?”

The bill is state Assemblyman Kansen Chu’s second attempt to end a time-change ritual that the San Jose Democrat considers a health and safety risk. It would still put a constitutional amendment on a future statewide ballot to repeal California’s 67-year-old Daylight Saving Time Act — but the recent changes to the proposal would allow for only one of two outcomes: keeping the status quo or adopting daylight saving time all year.

So year-round standard time is officially off the table.

Reading this on your phone? Stay up to date with our free mobile app. Get it from the Apple app store or the Google Play store.

“I received a lot of input from the constituents, the Little League groups,” Chu said. “They don’t like switching back and forth, but they would prefer a longer daytime.”

He said that narrowing the possibilities to year-round daylight saving time is a far more popular proposal, which could help the bill clear the state Senate — the chamber that killed his bill last year. The bill, which must clear two Senate committees before getting a floor vote, has a committee hearing set for Monday.

Still, moving to year-round daylight saving time would literally require an act of Congress, as states can’t adopt it without federal authorization. The U.S. Uniform Time Act of 1966 currently allows states only two options: Standard Time all year or “springing forward” for about eight months, starting in March.

Last year, the California Legislature passed a bipartisan resolution asking Congress to approve a third option for states — permanent daylight saving time. South Bay Congressman Ro Khanna is now spearheading that effort in Washington, D.C.



Like our Facebook page for more conversation and news coverage from the Bay Area and beyond.



Until then — even if Chu’s bill passes, voters amend the state constitution and lawmakers later pass a bill to spring forward and never fall back — Californians will just have to continue switching their clocks back and forth twice a year.

That would be fine with Andrea Feathers, a Los Angeles lawyer who created the Facebook group “Save the Light.”

The group’s 300-plus members shared legislative updates and posted photos to bemoan how bright it would be in the early morning hours each summer without daylight saving time,

as Feathers worked with Chu’s office on the amendments. The group is now supporting the measure.

“When it’s daylight savings time and I walk home in the early evening in downtown L.A., I see people in cafes and walking around and shopping — such a nice atmosphere,” Feathers said. “But when it gets dark earlier, it can be a little creepy. It’s a big difference. The feeling of downtown totally changes.”

In Oakland, Mapp said, the after-work hiking, kayaking and camping trips her group organizes in the summer — often starting at 6 p.m. — would simply not be possible without daylight saving time.

“We wouldn’t be able to run that program at all,” she said.

Lara Fernaldo, of Los Gatos, who dislikes driving home from work in the dark during the winter, also hopes Chu and other proponents find a way to make daylight saving time permanent.

“It’s nice to have the sun out later,” she said, “and it would be especially nice during the winter, when it gets dark so soon.”

But critics of the idea say having the most populous state in the union go its own way on daylight saving time would only create confusion. For several months of the year, critics note, Californians would have to reset their watches every time they crossed over the Oregon and Nevada lines.

Jessica Levinson — a Loyola Law School professor and political analyst who opposed the original bill — said she sees the bill’s amendments as a huge victory when it comes to

“blocking bad ideas.” But while she would like to see year-round daylight saving time, she said, going to the voters about a matter beyond the state’s authority strikes her as a waste of time and money.

Congress is busy these days, she said, and tinkering with time is probably not high on its to-do list — or on the list at all.

“I don’t think we’re going to federal daylight saving time” year-round, she said, “so what are we doing here folks? We’re crowding the ballot.”

Staff writer Gillian Brassil contributed to this story.

DAYLIGHT SAVING BILL

What would it do? Assembly Bill 807, by Assemblyman Kansen Chu, D-San Jose, would place a measure on a future statewide ballot to repeal the state’s Daylight Saving Time Act, which voters passed in 1949. A repeal would allow lawmakers to pass a law creating year-round daylight saving time, as we have in the spring, summer and early fall. But such a law could not take effect without authorization from Congress.

What happened this week? Until this week, a voter repeal of the Daylight Saving Time Act would have allowed lawmakers to go in either direction — adopting year-round standard time (which would not need federal authorization) or year-round daylight saving time. Chu amended the bill to take year-round standard time off the table.

What happens next? AB 807 has a Senate committee hearing scheduled for Monday. Before it goes to the floor, it must also clear the Senate Appropriations Committee.