Buena Vista trustees back resolution asking county to pursue ‘electric‑preferred’ building code; public comment shows split

The Board of Trustees of the Town of Buena Vista voted on June 10 to adopt a resolution supporting Chaffee County's effort to pursue model “electric‑preferred” amendments to the 2021 International Energy Conservation Code, a step that would encourage all‑electric construction but still allow mixed‑fuel buildings. The trustees’ vote followed an extended public hearing that included residents, local businesses and housing advocates who urged both support and caution.

Members of the public addressed the trustees during a long public‑comment period. Resident Randy Crane told the board the proposed changes would “represent the removal of the public’s right to choose their preferred energy source.” By contrast, Chaffee County resident Rich Shoemaker urged trustees to support the amendments, saying the approach “encourage[s] high performance buildings” and can reduce greenhouse‑gas emissions over time. Marjo Burgess, interim executive director of the Chaffee Housing Authority, said energy‑efficient construction and electrification can lower operating costs for affordable housing and make developments more competitive for state funding.

Local contractors and energy‑business representatives also spoke. Licensed plumber Jared Coughley said, “The most efficient systems that we can install are natural gas and propane systems” for mountain homes and raised concerns about monthly electric bills for residents without rooftop solar. An Atmos Energy representative, Bristan Jones, said the company supports an “all‑of‑the‑above” approach and offered to provide technical information to the board.

Trustees discussed specifics raised in previous meetings, including the threshold that triggers upgrade requirements for remodels (staff clarified the commonly used 50% existing building alteration threshold from the International Existing Building Code). Staff and trustees noted the county will draft actual code language and that municipal support at this stage does not adopt local code changes; the resolution asks the county to pursue the model rule and follow public review and adoption processes.

Trustee discussion highlighted competing concerns. Supporters said the move is a measured way to encourage energy efficiency, future‑proof buildings, and align with state sustainability goals. Opponents warned of near‑term cost increases for homebuilders and homeowners, uncertainty about grid capacity and reliance on natural‑gas generation for electricity in the short term, and potential impacts on housing affordability. Some trustees also urged that incentives include on‑site solar and other measures to reduce monthly utility costs for residents.

After debate, the trustees approved the resolution to support the county’s exploration and public engagement on electric‑preferred amendments. The resolution does not itself change the town’s building code; the county will draft specific language and the town would review proposed code text through the normal public hearing and adoption process.

The board’s action was procedural: it expressed municipal support for the county to continue work on model amendments, not a final local adoption. Staff said the county process will include drafting, public comment and a return to the municipalities before any locally binding code change.