Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Building Energy Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council advances first reading of energy‑efficiency ordinance for larger remodels; public debate centers on costs and equity
Summary
The council advanced a first reading of a proposed "FlexPath" ordinance that would require larger single‑family additions or remodels to meet point‑based energy‑efficiency targets or comply via heat‑pump pathways; staff said incentives and staged rollout will be used to reduce upfront burden.
On Aug. 12 the Ojai City Council held the first reading of an ordinance (a so‑called FlexPath) that would require larger single‑family home alterations and additions to meet energy‑efficiency point targets or to take a permitted heat‑pump path. Staff framed the rule as flexible, offering several compliance pathways and exemptions intended to make the requirements cost‑effective and avoid federal preemption of appliance standards.
Key features: the draft ordinance includes two size triggers: projects 300–999 square feet would need to meet an 8‑point target; projects 1,000 square feet or larger would need a 19‑point target. Points are based on state energy‑commission equivalencies for measures such as duct sealing, attic or wall insulation, window upgrades, solar PV, and electric pre‑wiring. The ordinance also lists exemptions (repairs, hardship where compliance costs exceed 20% of project valuation, ADUs, some historical and hazard‑mitigation work) and an administrative hardship appeal process.
Walk‑through presenters said that cost‑effective combinations exist (for example, duct sealing plus weatherization or a heat‑pump water heater) and that incentives and rebates may reduce upfront costs for some homeowners. Staff proposed a staged rollout with an implementation date to give contractors and the public time to prepare.
Public reaction: commenters were split. Supporters urged the council to adopt measures that cut greenhouse-gas emissions and prepare homes for electrification. Opponents — including residents and housing advocates — argued the ordinance could raise renovation costs, slow upgrades and burden low‑income homeowners and renters; one commenter called for incentives and phased approaches instead of mandates. Council voted to move the ordinance forward on first reading (roll‑call recorded).
Next steps: the ordinance advanced on its first reading; staff will prepare the second reading and any refinements related to hardship appeals, fee waivers and implementation timelines.
