Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Air Quality Aqmd topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Redlands council votes to oppose South Coast AQMD proposed rules for gas furnaces and water heaters
Summary
After extensive public comment both supporting and opposing proposed rule changes, the Redlands City Council authorized the mayor to sign a letter opposing South Coast Air Quality Management District proposed amended Rule 111 and proposed amended Rule 1121; the motion passed 4–1.
The Redlands City Council voted to authorize the mayor to sign a letter opposing the South Coast Air Quality Management District’s (AQMD) proposed amended Rule 111 (natural‑gas‑fired furnaces) and proposed amended Rule 1121 (residential natural‑gas water heaters), after a long public comment period that included speakers for and against the proposals.
The council’s action sends a local government letter opposing the AQMD amendments, which would require reduced NOx emissions from certain gas appliances and include incentive and mitigation mechanisms, according to public testimony recorded at the meeting. The motion to authorize the mayor to sign the opposition letter passed with four votes in favor and one opposed.
Community members and environmental advocates testified in support of the AQMD proposals, arguing the rules will improve indoor and outdoor air quality and reduce health harms. Ara Vasquez, who said she coordinates a coalition of more than a dozen organizations in the region, said the rules “save lives” and noted available rebate funding. “It has about $80,000,000 on rebates… people can get up to $4,000,” Vasquez said, urging the council to consider public‑health impacts.
Jennifer Cardenas, a campaign organizer with the Sierra Club, told the council the rules do not ban gas appliances but “ensure manufacturers create more options for the consumer” and that the rules would expand electrification choices. “The cost of the appliance is not comparable to the cost of a life,” Cardenas said.
Other speakers opposed the AQMD proposals on cost and equity grounds. Dale Broom said the rules would be “very financially restrictive for homeowners and businesses,” expressed constitutional concerns, and questioned whether small mitigation fees would cover conversion costs. “We’re talking anywhere from $15,000 to $60,000 per home,” Broom said. Gregory Britton and other commenters argued rebates and fees could shift costs to renters and low‑income households.
Council members heard concerns about grid capacity and program cost. One council member who opposed moving the letter said the city must be confident the electrical grid can handle widespread electrification and worried the policy would increase costs for renters and small landlords; that council member voted against the motion.
The roll call recorded by the city clerk was: Council member Berridge — yes; Council member Tejeda — yes; Council member Davis — no; Mayor Pro Tem Shah — yes; and Mayor Saucedo — yes. The motion passed 4–1.
City staff did not present an evidentiary analysis of local grid capacity at the meeting. Multiple public speakers on both sides referenced rebates, mitigation fees and estimated conversion costs; those figures were presented by commenters and not verified by staff during the meeting. The council did not adopt a local ordinance or regulatory change — the action was limited to authorizing a letter of opposition to the AQMD rule amendments.
