Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Clean Buildings topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commerce reports on Clean Buildings implementation: 28,000 covered buildings and nascent compliance costs
Summary
Commerce reported implementation progress on the Clean Buildings Act, noted roughly 28,000 covered buildings statewide, early data on compliance and incentives, and summarized campus-level decarbonization plans and common barriers including grid constraints and data inconsistencies.
Emily Salzberg, managing director for Clean Buildings at the Department of Commerce, briefed the committee on the state's Clean Buildings implementation and progress under recent legislative changes.
Salzberg said Commerce stands up outreach, education and technical assistance for building owners preparing for mandatory compliance dates. "We responded to nearly 5,000 inquiries just in 2025 alone," she said, and added that Commerce has placed 10 fellows who have served over 250 buildings in 16 counties to assist under-resourced owners with compliance documentation.
Commerce identified approximately 28,000 buildings covered by the law (about 10,000 tier 1 buildings required to meet energy-performance targets and 18,000 tier 2 buildings required to benchmark and complete operations-and-maintenance plans). Salzberg said many tier 1 buildings already meet targets and that operations-and-maintenance actions can yield 10% to 15% annual utility savings on average.
On incentives and costs, Salzberg described early-adopter incentive programs funded by utility tax credits (and legislative changes in 2024 that increased available per-square-foot incentives). She said Commerce has reserved funds for both tier 1 and tier 2 incentives and noted a recent payment from Avista to Whitworth University under the tier 1 incentive program.
Salzberg also reviewed campus-level district energy decarbonization plans submitted under HB 1390. Commerce received 27 of 34 expected plans and found a range of common approaches (electrification, heat-pump technology, geothermal, thermal energy storage and phased/nodal implementation) along with data-reporting inconsistencies and challenges aggregating cost estimates across submissions. She emphasized that more consistent cost and greenhouse-gas reduction reporting would improve prioritization and budgeting.
Lawmakers asked whether additional statutory changes are needed; Salzberg pointed to recent rulemaking after HB 1543 and invited continued legislative conversation as the agency collects more implementation experience.
