Olympia City Council votes to oppose energy initiatives on WA ballot, curb misinformation
The Olympia City Council has unanimously opposed two energy-related state ballot initiatives — two of four on the Nov. 5 ballot — but not without hearing from folks why the council should support the initiatives instead.
The council voted to oppose I-2066, which would roll back energy service regulations on natural gas and electrification. Climate Program Director Pamela Braff said the initiative would repeal existing laws and regulations that discourage natural gas use, and/or promote electrification.
But several community members spoke in support of the initiative, which they say is necessary to keep government from banning the use of natural gas and forcing homeowners and developers to switch to electricity, driving up prices and exacerbating the housing crisis.
The council also voted to oppose I-2117, which Braff said would prohibit state agencies from imposing any type of carbon tax and credit trading, and repeal legislation establishing a cap and invest program to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. It would effectively repeal the state’s Climate Commitment Act, also known as the CCA, which was adopted in 2021.
A breakdown of I-2066
Braff said the initiative is largely focused on repealing or amending elements of the Washington Decarbonization Act, which was adopted by the state legislature in 2024.
“This law really focuses on helping Puget Sound Energy to decarbonize and taper its natural gas service to comply with the state’s climate and energy targets,” Braff said. “The Decarbonization Act does not ban natural gas in Washington.”
Braff said the Decarbonization Act consolidates PSE’s numerous reporting and planning requirements into a single plan, which includes forecasting customer energy demand and proposals for reducing greenhouse energy emissions from its operations. The plan does highlight moving away from natural gas to electricity in a cost-effective way, she said, and how to include entire cities in the move.
“This act also prohibits PSE from offering customers rebates or incentives to purchase appliances that use natural gas instead,” she said. “PSE is required to educate its customers about the benefits of transitioning to electricity and the availability of rebates and incentives for energy-efficient electric appliances.”
Braff said if the initiative were approved by voters, it would repeal measures that help PSE transition away from natural gas service. It would repeal PSE’s planning requirements for cost-effective electrification and prohibitions on gas rebates and incentives.
It would also require gas utilities to provide natural gas service to any eligible customer who demands it, even if other energy sources are available.
Lastly, Braff said approval of the initiative would prohibit local governments, the State Building Code Council and air pollution control agencies from prohibiting, penalizing or discouraging the use of natural gas in any way.
Braff said passage of I-2066 would also limit the city’s ability to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and its ability to achieve adopted emissions reduction targets.
“It would also limit the city’s implementation of the Thurston Climate Mitigation Plan, specifically strategy B6, to convert to cleaner fuel sources by prompting local governments from enacting policies to disincentivize the use of natural gas.”
Braff said it would also result in a loss of funding to support cities and residents that want to switch from natural gas to electric appliances. She said this loss of funding would likely have the most significant impact on low- and moderate-income households that may be otherwise unable to afford the upfront costs of electrification retrofits.
“Initiative 2066 would reverse many of the provisions of the decarbonization act that are meant to help PSE assess for and plan for cost effective electrification for natural gas customers,” Braff said. “And this is important because the Washington 2021 State Energy Strategy has identified a combination of energy efficiency and electrification as the most cost-effective strategy to achieve state targets for greenhouse gas emissions reduction.”
Comments for and against I-2066
Resident Corey Gauny said the Seattle Times’ editorial board recommended voters approve I-2066, and he urged the Olympia City Council to do the same. He said the Decarbonization Act ties the city to one energy source instead of diversifying.
“As you diminish the diversification of where we as citizens can purchase our energy from, be it natural gas or be it electric, we will see an increase in the price as consumers,” he said.
Gauny said natural gas can survive emergencies, such as providing heat and the ability to cook during hurricanes on the East Coast.
But resident Alan Hardcastle said he’s a true advocate for the work the city is doing to make the community more climate conscious. He said buildings make up about a quarter of the state’s carbon emissions, second only to transportation. He said half of the building sector’s pollution comes from burning fossil fuels, in particular natural gas, for space and water heating.
Hardcastle said if passed, the initiative would prevent both the City of Olympia and the Washington State Code Council from updating building codes to reflect the most efficient heating and water heating technology.
“Supporters of this initiative will tell you it’s a gas ban. It is not a gas ban,” he said.
He said I-2066 also repeals a requirement that PSE examine whether it’s cost effective to replace leaking gas pipes or if it should instead help customers replace their gas appliances with efficient heat pumps.
“I-2066 would prohibit the city of Olympia from providing grants or incentives to households to install energy- efficient heat pumps,” Hardcastle said. “The existing program has already helped many residents, including many low- and moderate-income families and underrepresented populations, to improve their heating systems and reduce their energy bills. But under I-2066, this would have to stop.”
Resident Donna Patrick said she thinks voting for the initiative would actually diminish choice for people, and costs will go up and not down.
“If you don’t have a movement toward a more efficient system, then how can the cost do anything but go up for people?” she said. “And I think the city does have a stake in both this initiative and 2117 and trying to move the state forward, even though it creates stress for people, and change is difficult, but it’s the only way that we’re going to move forward.”
Resident Dakota King said she wanted to diversify the age group speaking during the public hearing. The 25-year-old said thinking about her future is daunting because these last few warm summers may be some of the coldest of her life if climate change is allowed to continue unchecked.
King said to jump off Gauny’s earlier point, the hurricanes raging on the East Coast are built from the use of fossil fuels and carbon emissions, and the more fossil fuels are used, the worse things will get.
Resident Brad Thompson said he’s been a builder for 15 years and he’s seen a significant transition in gas appliances, to tankless water heaters and heat pumps.
Thompson said he supports I-2066 because going all electric and requiring electric appliances has significantly increased the cost of building, which is adding to rising housing costs.
“While I understand the need for finding alternative fuel methods, I think that taking away the ability to use natural gas doesn’t make sense to me as it stands right now,” he said.
Resident Marianne Hanks said if natural gas is cheaper for her, she’s going to use that over electricity — or vice versa.
“Let them compete, because I’m going to give my money to whoever gives me the best price,” Hanks said.
Mayor Pro Tem Yến Huỳnh said she wanted to dispel some misinformation around the initiative.
“So my understanding, and doing my homework on this, is that it would not ban natural gas,” she said. “And so when I hear about wanting to choose, like, I also like choice. I also like being able to choose what’s going to work for me. And it sounds like there would still be a choice.”
Huỳnh said she believes the initiative would make it so electricity can’t compete with gas.
“I actually feel like this limits choice just by merely prohibiting our city from being able to offer any sorts of discounts or anything in the way of incentives to switch... which would again get to our carbon, our climate goals, and also have a healthier community.”
She said she believes I-2066 has a quick and clever slogan, which is “Vote yes, pay less.” But after digging deeper, she realized I-2066 would go against what the Olympia community has been asking the council to support climate efforts.
“I think that this is a very cleverly worded and kind of disguised initiative, and so for me, I will be opposed to it,” Huỳnh said.
A breakdown of Initiative No. 2117
Braff said Initiative 2117 is aimed at rolling back the CCA, a cap and invest program designed to help Washington meet its goal of reducing carbon emissions 95% by 2050. It sets an annual greenhouse gas emissions limit for major emitters and lowers that limit over time to help achieve statewide emissions reduction goals.
The largest emitting sources and industries are required to purchase allowances for the emissions they produce. Those allowances can be obtained through auctions hosted by the Department of Energy, or they can be purchased on a secondary market.
Braff said the investment portion of cap and invest has to do with the proceeds generated from those CCA auctions. Those proceeds must be invested in climate projects across the state, including projects to help increase climate resiliency, fund alternative transportation, fund grant programs and help Washington transition to a low- carbon economy.
“At least 35% of the auction proceeds must be used for projects that provide a direct benefit to people in communities disproportionately impacted by environmental harms, and at least 10% of auction proceeds must be used for projects with tribal support,” she said.
Braff said Olympia is directly benefiting from programs funded through the CCA.
“In 2024, the city was awarded more than $2.5 million in grant funding made possible by the CCA,” she said. “This includes funding to install EV charging stations at multi-family buildings, city fleet depot sites as well as workplace charging. It includes funding to install solar energy projects at the Olympia fire station as well as the armory, as well as planning grants for our comprehensive plan climate element.”
Comments for and against the initiative
Donna Patrick also weighed in on I-2117, saying said she would vote no because she believes it’s bad for the environment and human health, and it shifts costs to the community.
“Total repeal of everything that’s been worked on to try to move us forward incrementally is just too extreme for this stage,” she said.
Resident Jim Lazar said the CCA is the strongest action the state has taken to address the climate crisis. Passage of I-2117 would halt funding for energy efficient appliance replacements, electric vehicle charging, bicycle and pedestrian improvements and transit agencies, he said.
Lazar said there’s no guarantee that passage of I-2117 would bring down gasoline prices; that would be up to the oil companies.
He referenced a number of projects the city has undertaken that would lose funding if the initiative passes: $9.2 million to Intercity Transit, $8.6 million for local emissions reduction projects, and $7 million toward the Deschutes Estuary restoration project.
“The funding would be lost for all of those,” he said. “The recent hurricane that devastated North Carolina and surrounding states was really evidence that our climate is changing. We need to take steps to reduce our climate carbon pollution that’s contributing to this change.”
Corey Gauny also spoke out on I-2117, saying the cap and trade tax was sold to voters as a gasoline tax that would be pennies on the dollar. Instead, he said there’s been an increase of over 50 cents a gallon in Washington with the cap and trade tax. And the carbon credit aspect is in no way stopping pollution, he argued.
But council member Lisa Parshley said she will vote against I-2117 because the community continues to ask its leaders to do more, and she believes they’re not doing enough.
Parshley urged listeners to go to the initiative campaign websites and see who’s endorsing them.
“There’s a lot of labor endorsing the ‘No’ campaign, a lot of tribes, a lot of cities, a lot of jurisdictions,” she said. “And then go look at the ‘Yes,’ and then ask yourself, where in the language is it going to have the fossil fuel companies drop the price if this passes? There’s nothing that will guarantee that will happen.”
.jpg)