SLO City Council passes energy policy encouraging all-electric new buildings
After two years of planning, meetings and policy draft changes, the San Luis Obispo City Council unanimously passed a new energy framework Tuesday supporting all-electric new buildings.
The council voted 4-0 in favor of “clean energy choice” for new buildings, moving forward with city legislation that encourages all-electric energy use.
Councilwoman Andy Pease recused herself, citing a pending complaint of a conflict of interest accusation from a past vote on the issue, the validity of which she has denied. But it was not resolved as of Tuesday.
Tuesday’s decision furthers an initiative to avoid any new greenhouse gas emissions as the result of energy use in new buildings in SLO.
The council has a target of 2035 carbon neutrality, 10 years ahead of a California net-zero energy goal of reducing as much carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases from the atmosphere as possible, with the overall goal to achieve a zero carbon footprint.
SLO’s controversial vote met with opposition from gas industry union workers, who argued it will create higher building and energy use costs, take away development choice and hurt the economy.
But those in support said at the virtual council meeting that climate action is critical to future generations, and the decision needfully combats global warming.
“At build-out of the city’s General Plan (2035), the Clean Energy Choice Program is anticipated to avoid 6,250 metric tons of (carbon dioxide) equivalence per year,” city officials said in a staff report. “The annual amount of avoided emissions would be equivalent to taking 1,320 passenger vehicles off the road or planting nearly 160,000 trees to sequester carbon.”
Councilman Aaron Gomez, citing the political agenda of the gas industry, said he received calls from workers from out of the area before the meeting who had incorrect information about where the decision was taking place (in San Luis Obispo) and confused about the specific policy details.
“(Callers) were misinformed, and it makes it very difficult to have a real conversation,” Gomez said. “Hopefully, people realize they’re being misled by those who profit most from that misinformation.”
SLO’s new energy policy
The city laid out the various ways that San Luis Obispo will move forward, with two new ordinances on building and incentive plans that need to be formally adopted by law at another meeting in July.
The California Energy Commission also must agree with the city’s amendments to state code, reviewing cost effectiveness and energy use analysis, before the local amendments can go into effect.
If all goes as planned, the program would kick in Sept. 1.
Chris Read, SLO’s sustainability manager, said 29 other communities in California have pursued similar programs.
Under SLO’s framework, single-family homes will need to be built with an all-electric design, or be outfitted to become ready for electric use in the future if they choose to use natural gas.
An exemption applies to commercial kitchens, which may use natural gas.
.jpg "IMG_1163 (1).jpg")
The city’s new policy would increase building emissions performance requirements for some types of new buildings that may use mixed fuel (natural gas and electric), including nonresidential buildings, high-rise hotels and mid- to high-rise residential buildings.
Those types of structures would need incorporate solar panels to use less energy than the state standard requires.
Studies break down cost
Read said numerous studies at the state level have gauged the costs and determined all-electric to be on par or less expensive than buildings using natural gas.
Read said there’s a marginal increase for energy use costs for an all-electric building relative to a mixed-fuel building — but that’s assuming a minimal number of solar panels and presuming older types of appliances.
Adding an extra solar panel or two would bring expenses down, Read said. And using modern, high-efficiency appliances in all-electric buildings also would also bring costs to comparable ranges.
The incoming Avila Ranch and San Luis Ranch developments, approved for the construction of about 1,300 new homes in SLO, incorporated electrification in their development agreements, during their planning approval process.
Community divided over gas, electric energy
The council’s virtual meeting showcased the divide on the issue.
“As currently drafted, this proposed ordinance is misleading,” said Tim Mahoney of the Southern California Gas Co. “It appears to allow developers to build mixed-use buildings but instead introduces a set of byzantine conditions that effectively bans the use of natural gas both in residential and commercial new buildings.”
Mahoney added “it is unclear how this policy will achieve this city’s ambitious energy goals and keep it affordable for working families.”
Read, however, emphasized there’s no ban on natural gas as part of the policy, noting the new city law has nuances that would allow for that type of energy.
Advocates for the environment mobilized to support the initiative, calling it necessary for the planet.
“We’ve learned that with solar panels and new appliances, we can save builders and homeowners money and reduce greenhouse emissions into the atmosphere,” said Justin Bradshaw, a San Luis Obispo resident and SLO Climate Coalition activist. “It’s the right thing for our planet, the right thing for out pocketbooks and the right thing for our city.”
Some opponents criticized the council for not postponing the meeting until it could be held in person.
Eric Hofmann, the Utility Workers Union of America Local 132 president, previously threatened a protest during the early stages of the coronavirus pandemic in March due to a planned vote on the issue. No protest took place Tuesday.
The union also filed the conflict-of-interest complaint against Pease with the Fair Political Practices Commission as well. That complaint still had not yet been decided, as of Tuesday night.
Pease previously responded in September by saying the complaint has no validity, noting she would avoid any perception of self interest and her architecture firm wouldn’t take on any new work triggered by the city’s policy.
Councilwoman Erica Stewart said the city’s staff changed the energy policy from past drafts to better address cost and some of the economic concerns from the business community. She changed her vote from past opposition to support because of that.
“(The policy) has changed a lot from Sept. 3 (2019) because our staff did take in a lot of new knowledge from the community and from developers and others who the policy would be affecting,” Stewart said. “I’ve seen this policy morph quite a bit. I’m very thankful for the incentive focus.”
This story was originally published June 17, 2020 at 6:46 AM.
%20Cropped.jpg)