Initiative 20-66 protects access to natural gas; panel weighs legal, policy and utility impacts

A KUOW Sound Politics panel on Initiative 20-66 heard competing views Tuesday on whether the voter-approved measure will stand up to court challenges and how it will affect utility planning, local building codes and the state’s path to decarbonization.

Moderator Scott Greenstone opened the discussion by noting the initiative’s late entry on the ballot and that it was the only one of the group to pass. Panelists included Representative Joe Fitzgibbon (D.), Matt Miller, government affairs manager for Puget Sound Energy (PSE); Ashley Penner, general counsel for the Building Industries Association of Washington (BIAW); and State Senator Drew McEwen, ranking member of the Senate Environment, Energy and Technology Committee.

Ashley Penner, who said she helped draft Initiative 20-66, told the panel she was “very confident” the measure would withstand constitutional challenges, including single-subject claims, and emphasized that “it’s all about natural gas and propane.” She argued the initiative was carefully framed to address one area of policy rather than multiple unrelated subjects.

That assurance met skepticism recounted by the moderator: Scott Greenstone cited legal scholar Hugh Spitzer’s view that the initiative might fail a single-subject test. Senator McEwen said the measure appeared "well written" and urged courts to defer to “the intent of the people,” but he also expressed concern that courts sometimes inject politics into rulings.

Representative Joe Fitzgibbon said 20-66 repeals elements of House Bill 1589 that established certain utility planning requirements and preempted state energy code and local building standards. "It preempted the state energy code. It preempts local building standards," Fitzgibbon said, noting the court will have to decide whether utility planning standards, energy codes and local building standards count as a single subject.

From the utility perspective, Matt Miller said the planning provisions in HB 1589 were aimed at integrated resource planning for combined electric and gas systems and were not, by themselves, a rate instrument. He cautioned, however, that a decline in gas use (which PSE cited as roughly an 8% drop in residential use and 3% in commercial last year) could leave fixed costs on a smaller customer base and create upward pressure on rates for remaining gas customers.

Panelists stressed that the state’s major decarbonization laws remain in force. Fitzgibbon noted that the Climate Commitment Act (CCA) and Clean Energy Transformation Act (CETA) goals were not repealed by 20-66 and suggested policymakers would likely "take a breather" on new natural-gas policy while courts consider legal challenges.

The session also focused on local building-code implications. Penner explained that the State Building Code Council sets residential energy codes that function as statewide minimums and maximums; local governments have limited ability to require more stringent residential standards, though they may adopt higher standards for commercial buildings in some circumstances. Penner said 20-66 is aimed at preserving consumer choice and avoiding immediate mandatory conversions that she said would increase homebuilding costs.

That cost argument was echoed by several panelists and illustrated by McEwen, who said electrifying a home could add an estimated $40,000 to $50,000 to retrofit costs in some cases. Penner and McEwen said housing affordability and construction costs were major motivators for the building industry’s support of the initiative.

Panelists also discussed health, incentives and the transition to cleaner energy. An audience question about indoor pollutants from gas appliances prompted a debate: Miller emphasized ventilation as a primary mitigation measure, while Fitzgibbon noted incentives funded by the CCA and federal programs such as the Inflation Reduction Act had aimed to reduce the cost of heat pumps and electrification. Fitzgibbon said 20-66 removes some planning tools and incentives that had been available to utilities and customers.

On supply-side challenges, lawmakers and the utility representative agreed Washington needs more renewable generation, storage and transmission to meet CETA targets; panelists mentioned large proposed projects (including pumped storage and wind farms) and suggested permitting reforms and better community engagement to reduce opposition and accelerate buildout.

The panel concluded with audience questions and a reminder that any legal challenges to the certified results may affect how and when the legislature pursues additional natural-gas policy.

Next steps: opponents have signaled plans to challenge Initiative 20-66 in court after certification; lawmakers said they would await judicial outcomes before advancing major new natural-gas legislation.