New Washington state ballot initiative would prevent fossil gas bans

In the latest industry-backed effort to stifle the clean energy transition, a Washington state initiative aimed at preventing statewide and local bans on fossil gas is likely to appear on voters’ ballots this November. Last week, supporters dropped off more than 500,000 signatures to the secretary of state’s office. If 324,500 of those signatures are found to be valid, the measure will qualify for a statewide vote.

The initiative arrives as states and cities across the country crack down on fossil gas by introducing outright bans, tweaking building efficiency codes, and tightening air-quality standards for appliances. Environmental advocates say that Washington’s ballot measure is just the latest example of the nationwide backlash from fossil fuel industries and other interests facing an existential threat from the shift to clean energy.

“Special interest groups that have a vested interest in maintaining the gas system see that policies and technologies are moving away from their product,” Caitlin Krenn, climate and clean energy director at the nonprofit Washington Conservation Action, told Canary Media. ​“They’re getting desperate and trying to do whatever they can.”

The ballot initiative, officially named I-2066, primarily seeks to ensure that gas utilities can continue supplying the fossil fuel to Washington residents, in part by weakening existing clean energy laws. The measure is backed by the Building Industry Association of Washington, the Washington Hospitality Association, and Let’s Go Washington, a political action committee led and funded by local hedge fund millionaire Brian Heywood. Let’s Go Washington has spent more than $10 million on a slew of ballot measures across 2023 and 2024, and counts among its donors the state’s Republican Party.

This is the seventh ballot initiative promoted by Heywood’s group this year and would be the fourth to land on the state’s November ballot. Other measures up for a vote include proposals to repeal Washington’s ​“cap and invest” carbon market — its marquee climate law — and the state’s capital gains tax. 

For its part, I-2066 would repeal portions of a law passed by Washington this year to accelerate the transition of the state’s largest utility from gas to clean energy. Among other measures, the law clarifies how Puget Sound Energy can build or purchase more electricity generation and phase out gas infrastructure more quickly. The utility is required to submit its first electrification plan to state regulators in 2027, although it has stated that the law ​“does not change PSE’s obligation to serve natural gas to our customers.” The bill was controversial on both sides of the aisle: Conservative groups decried its attempt to speed up the shift away from gas, while environmental advocates warned it would fail to adequately protect customers from rate hikes.

“People are tired of being gaslit and tired of Olympia imposing arbitrary regulations that make life more expensive and take away consumer choice,” Heywood said of the law.

With its new law and other recent moves, Washington state has joined more than 100 local governments across the country that have taken steps to electrify their buildings. In March, updated building codes that will vastly increase the use of heat pumps over fossil gas took effect across Washington. State lawmakers in California, New York, and Illinois recently introduced laws to put warning labels on gas stoves to inform consumers of their health risks. And in another move targeting gas appliances, the California Air Resources Board voted in 2022 to ban the sale of gas-powered furnaces and water heaters starting in 2030. 

But the movement toward all-electric buildings has faced severe opposition from gas utilities and industry groups, which argue that the fossil fuel remains an important and reliable source of energy for heating and cooking. In January, a legal challenge to Berkeley, California’s first-in-the-nation gas ban, led by the restaurant industry, was upheld by a federal appeals court, casting uncertainty on similar policies. Gas utilities have also funded local campaigns and recruited community members to discourage gas bans. 

In Colorado, a political group funded by the state’s oil and gas industry proposed a ballot initiative late last year similar to the one in Washington state. The measure would have prevented the state or local governments from passing laws to ban or limit gas in homes and buildings. That proposal failed to move forward, but the group is already working on another similar initiative promoting ​“energy choice.” The Colorado group has until early August to gather enough signatures to put the measure on the November ballot.

In Washington, Krenn clarified that despite recent state policies encouraging renewable energy and electric building appliances, there is no current ban on gas. But the new ballot initiative could jeopardize not only Washington’s recent law to more quickly move utilities off of gas, but also other existing policies including building efficiency codes, state and local building performance standards, and even local control of climate and energy policies. That would ultimately lead to higher — not lower — energy bills and greater cost disparities, she says.

“Low- and moderate-income people are going to be left footing the escalating costs of an aging gas system while wealthy individuals increasingly move away to clean energy,” Krenn said.