OLYMPIA — Of the four initiatives that were on the Washington ballot this year, only one passed, and it’s one that affects housing statewide, including in Grant and Adams counties. 

Initiative 2066 reverses restrictions on natural gas for heating and cooking in new residential construction that the Washington Legislature passed in 2019. It removes requirements in the state building code for the use of electric heat pumps instead of natural gas, propane or electric resistance heating like baseboard heaters.  

“All new construction in Central Washington would have been required to use electric heat pumps, which are often unreliable, especially under very cold temperatures,” said Greg Lane, executive director of the Building Industry Association of Washington. “And they also increase the cost of a home, with the infrastructure and everything, anywhere (from) $15,000 to $25,000 per home, depending on the size of the home.” 

Under the current state building code, an air-source electric heat pump is the required heating option for a new home, although a gas- or propane-powered backup is permissible. At the same time, House Bill 1589, which passed in 2019, prohibits a natural gas provider from supplying natural gas to any building that didn’t already have it before June 30, 2023. The law specifies that only “large gas companies,” defined as companies that serve more than 500,000 natural gas customers, are subject to that restriction. Puget Sound Energy, which operates entirely on the west side, is the only provider of that size, which would suggest that Central Washington isn’t actually affected.  

However, the version of HB 1519 that passed the legislature is markedly different from the originally submitted bill, which would have applied the restrictions to all combination utilities, meaning utilities that provide both electric and gas. Grant PUD does not fall under this category, but Avista, which serves Adams County, does. The amendment to the bill that limits the restriction to Puget Sound Energy was added at the last minute, and Lane said he believes the legislators who sponsored the original bill intend to broaden the restriction down the road. 

However, Caitlin Krenn, climate and clean energy director for Washington Conservation Action, which opposed I-2066, said the initiative has wider effects than merely safeguarding the use of natural gas. 

“It does a lot more than that, including trying to force changes to our statewide energy code, which affects all new buildings built across Washington state, and those the provisions that it seeks to change in the energy code are specifically provisions relating to energy efficiency,” Krenn said. 

BIAW sent a letter recently to the State Building Code Council, which is responsible for building codes statewide, reminding the council of the requirements of the initiative and urging it to make the changes to the building code that would remove restriction on natural gas before Dec. 5. So far, the council has not been cooperative, he said. 

“They’re very easy changes for them to make,” Lane said. “Either they can roll back to a previous energy code that was passed or looking forward, they could even adopt the … model energy code that the International Code Council has put forward for 2024 with some very minor changes to make sure that it does not disincentivize gas use.” 

Krenn said the changes are further reaching than that though. 

“(BIAW is) basically requesting that they roll back energy codes that were recently adopted this year to energy codes that were adopted all the way back in 2015,” she said. “Some independent analysis has shown that if the State Building Code Council were to do that, it would increase annual utility bills by over $200 and would really set us back in terms of energy efficiency.” 

Washington has very strict energy efficiency laws, Krenn said, and builders can receive credits for meeting or exceeding those standards, like the use of electric heat pumps. Changing only a small part of the code could force builders to spend more money meeting other standards, she said. 

“(There are) lots of unknowns, but we’re definitely concerned about the cost to new construction across the state,” Krenn said.  

WCA and other opponents of I-2066 are considering legal action to have the initiative nullified under the state’s single-subject law, Krenn said. The Washington State Constitution, Article II, Section 19 reads: “No bill shall embrace more than one subject and that shall be expressed in the title.” The official title of I-2066 is “An act relating to promoting energy choice by protecting access to gas for Washington homes and businesses.”  

This law has been used in the past to nullify a citizen initiative, notably 1999’s I-675, which would have lowered vehicle registration costs to $30 per year and would also have required a popular vote on any tax increase. The initiative passed but was struck down in court. 

Krenn said opponents of the I-2066 hope to have it thrown out on similar grounds. 

“It was written so broadly that it seeks to basically amend many areas of state law,” Krenn said. “There's HB 1589, that passed. There's several laws having to do with state building codes. It also makes amendments in terms of what local governments, what cities, towns and counties can do in terms of incentivizing higher-efficiency appliances, and it amends our state Clean Air Act. So, it does a lot of things.” 

BIAW is also prepared to fight it out in court, in order to force the Building Code Council to make the changes to the code outlined in I-2066, Lane said. 

“This is the law that people passed,” Lane said. “It goes into effect on Dec. 5, and they need to get the energy codes in compliance … I hate to do (take them to court). I don't want to do that. But … they are accountable to following the law, and we're going to make sure they do that.” 

The full text of Initiative 2066 can be found at https://bit.ly/3OhuBrq. The full text of HB 1519 can be found at https://bit.ly/HB5189.