Fountain Valley council adopts resolution opposing proposed South Coast AQMD rules for furnaces and water heaters

The Fountain Valley City Council voted to adopt a resolution opposing proposed amendments to South Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD) Rules 1111 and 1121, which address NOx emissions from residential and commercial furnaces and water heaters. The motion to approve the resolution (Alternative 1) passed 3–1 with one abstention; Councilmember Constantine moved the resolution and Vice Mayor Jim Killeen seconded; Councilmember Patrick Harper recorded an abstention.

Rick Miller introduced the item, summarizing the proposed rulemaking history and staff’s recommendation to consider a resolution of opposition. Miller described the proposal’s timeline and staff’s understanding that several Orange County cities had already expressed opposition. He said the draft would, as originally framed, phase in tighter limits and could require replacement of gas furnaces and water heaters with zero-emission electrical units in certain cases over a multi-year schedule (staff summary cited potential new-construction restrictions effective Jan. 1, 2027, and replacement timing for failing units in later years in older drafts cited during discussion).

Susan Nakamura, chief operating officer at South Coast AQMD, addressed the council and said the current proposal had been substantially revised, that the draft language under consideration is proposed (not adopted) and that there is not a consumer-facing zero-emission mandate in the revised draft. Nakamura described mitigation fees (noted in the meeting as $100 per furnace and $50 per water heater) and said rebates from SoCalGas could exceed the mitigation fee; she also explained the agency’s obligation under federal and state air-quality planning to pursue feasible NOx reductions.

Public commenters urged the council to oppose what they described as state or regional mandates that would remove consumer choice and increase costs. Council debate focused on trade-offs between air-quality benefits and potential cost and outreach shortcomings; some councilmembers favored opposing the proposed rules to preserve local control, while others urged further study or abstained. One substitute motion to table the resolution until the next meeting failed 3–2 before the final approval of the opposition resolution.

The council’s resolution will be transmitted as the city’s formal position on the current AQMD proposal. Several councilmembers requested further engagement with AQMD staff and additional review of the revised draft language before the AQMD governing board takes final action.