SANTA CRUZ — A recent court ruling on the city of Berkeley related to the use of natural gas in building developments is having an impact on policy here in Santa Cruz.
The Santa Cruz City Council on Tuesday voted unanimously to suspend a natural gas prohibition ordinance it passed in 2020 after an April ruling by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals struck down a similar ordinance in Berkeley that was OK’d in 2019.
The Santa Cruz ordinance, which prohibited natural gas infrastructure in new buildings, was modeled after Berkeley’s. The city’s attorney analyzed the ruling and it was determined that, even with some notable differences between the two prohibitions, there was no way to avoid applicability in Santa Cruz.
“Eventually we’ll come back with another ordinance of some kind for changes to our building code that might try to get at some of the same goals that this natural gas prohibition ordinance was getting at,” said Matt VanHua, principal planner in the city’s Planning and Community Development Department, who helped prepare the staff recommendation. “That’s currently being worked on right now but we really don’t have any specific details about what that’s going to look like.”
Berkeley was the first city in the country to adopt a ban of natural gas in new homes when it passed its ordinance in 2019, but it wasn’t the last. In the months and years that followed, similar bans or natural gas curtailing efforts spread to 70 communities in California, including Santa Cruz, and two more states, according to a report from the Associated Press.
However, the California Restaurant Association successfully challenged the ordinance, with the appeals court ruling that it violated federal law that gives the U.S. government authority to set energy-efficiency standards for appliances.
The city of Berkeley filed an appeal to the decision May 31 and VanHua said Santa Cruz staff will be closely following the case as it makes its way through the courts.
A reliance on electric power instead of natural gas, a potent greenhouse gas, is a key component of the city’s Climate Action Program, which aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by about 76,000 metric tons or 40% by 2030 compared to 1990 levels.
According to Tiffany Wise-West, the city’s climate action manager, the natural gas prohibition ordinance was one of two measures related to building electrification that together could account for reducing emissions by almost 20,000 metric tons.
Still, she called the ruling just “a bump in road” and feels confident that there are alternatives, such as an electric-preferred ordinance, that don’t preempt federal law even as the appeals process plays out.
“We are anticipating that most developers will likely continue to pursue electric-only projects,” said Wise-West, noting that the building division has received some inquiries mostly from smaller developments. “The state building code is making it more and more difficult to use natural gas and this is in fact the direction the state is going as well.”
Wise-West said there are numerous state and federal incentive and rebate programs for building with electric power sources along with options from local providers such as Central Coast Community Energy.
“There are a lot more coming with the Inflation Reduction Act,” said Wise-West. “If people are interested in how they can do their part on the climate crisis, electrifying their home if and when they can is a major way to do so and there are a lot of resources available to do that right now.”
Some on the Santa Cruz City Council were glad to vote for the ordinance suspension.
“I don’t think the state is ready to go all electric. I don’t think the grid can handle it,” said Vice Mayor Renee Golder. “There’s radio advertisements telling us when to flex your power, do this, do that. And so I think it’s shortsighted to try to prohibit natural gas before the infrastructure, including the grid is ready for it.”
Golder did vote to approve the natural gas prohibition during her first meeting as a councilmember in 2020, but said she didn’t want to seem disagreeable at the time, attempted to recuse herself, and claims to have not supported the move from the beginning.
She said if the appeal is reversed, she’ll vote against reinstating the ordinance in Santa Cruz.
In a follow-up email to the Sentinel, Wise-West explained that reliability is a concern only during summer peak cooling times and the cooling demand increase is largely due to higher summer temperatures from climate change.
An analysis from the California Energy Commission indicates that aggressive electrification will result in a 20% additional summer peak load through 2030 with matching winter loads. According to Wise-West, the state commission also affirmed electrification as the lower-cost, lower-risk approach to decarbonization.
She added that during a staff report on this topic from January, Pacific Gas and Electric’s Vice President Robert Kenney is quoted as saying, “PG&E fully expects to meet the needs that all-electric buildings will require.”
After confirming with the city attorney, Santa Cruz Mayor Fred Keeley said it’s difficult to speculate what the appeals timeline looks like, but noted that it is possible the issue could escalate to the U.S. Supreme Court. If the appellate panel’s decision is upheld, he explained, it may be at odds with another federal district court ruling in the state of New York that found local government could dictate energy standards. The nation’s highest court could be called upon to decide the issue.
“I don’t think this is the end of that issue,” said Keeley. “At a minimum, it’s a pause in this particular strategic approach.”
Timelines aside, Keeley doesn’t said he doesn’t believe the ruling is “a fatal blow to the city of Santa Cruz’s climate change efforts.”
As the litigation process plays out, he said there’s a multitude of tactics the city will continue to pursue to achieve overall goals of greenhouse gas reduction and climate change mitigation that include replacing a number of water pipelines to reduce wasteful leaks, replacement of outdated equipment in the Graham Hill Water Treatment Plant, solar panel incentives, added electric vehicle charging stations and transition to a zero-emission garbage truck fleet.
“There’s an awful lot out there that can be done,” said Keeley. “At least in our community, there’s an awful lot of community participation and support and participation because we live in a community that is very dialed in to climate change.”
