Electricity or Gas? That Was the Question
Santa Barbara Supervisors Feud over Unwritten Ordinance
As Planet Earth just concluded yet another “hottest summer” in recorded history, Santa Barbara county supervisors fell to feuding over an as-yet-unwritten ordinance that will encourage — but not mandate — newly built homes and large remodels to utilize electrical energy instead of natural gas. Such bills, known by shorthand as “REACH” legislation, are motivated by concern over climate change and global warming. Nothing is as touchy and contentious, it turns out, as telling someone whether they have to cook with gas or electricity.
Proponents of this legislation — the three South County supervisors — note that natural gas leaves a much larger carbon footprint in its wake and that over time, it’s cheaper and healthier to use electricity for cooking and heating.
But opponents counter that the short-term, up-front costs for new electrical appliances can be significantly higher. Electricity — the two North County supervisors opposing the measure argued — is notoriously unreliable.
One very vocal critic demanded whether the supervisors wanted to “represent” the people or to “rule” over them. If the power went out, as it tends to do, he wouldn’t be able to cook the food rotting in his refrigerator.
Several years ago, the board majority voted for a measure that would require all new housing units and major remodels to have electrical appliances. But a high court ruling deemed such legislation unconstitutional; only the federal government, the appellate judges ruled, could impose such mandates on appliances.
The supervisors debated whether to proceed with a bill that would encourage consumers to make the jump. Exactly what provisions the new ordinance will contain remains to be written. Tuesday’s debate was to determine whether the supervisors wanted to proceed at all.
Supervisor Laura Capps expressed excitement that she could vote yes just two weeks after the supervisors had adopted a climate action plan. Supervisor Bob Nelson was decidedly less excited, objecting that whatever the supervisors finally adopted would bog his constituents down longer in the planning and approval process and cost them more out of pocket.
