Greg Lane, executive vice president of the Building Industry Association of Washington, holds a petition for Initiative 2066, the ballot measure aimed at blocking local and state efforts to transition away from use of natural gas. Anthony Anton, president of the Washington Hospitality Association, and Ryann Blake, owner of Chimney Techniques in Aberdeen, joined a news conference May 15, 2024 in Olympia, Wash. to kick off signature gathering. (Jerry Cornfield/Washington State Standard)
A King County Superior Court judge on Friday invalidated the ballot measure approved by voters in November that seeks to slow Washington’s shift from natural gas toward technology like electric heat pumps.
Superior Court Judge Sandra Widlan ruled that Initiative 2066 is unconstitutional because it runs afoul of a provision limiting citizen initiatives to no more than one subject and requiring them to contain the full text of the portion of state laws they would alter.
In issuing her decision from the bench, Widlan said the purpose of the single subject requirement is to prevent “logrolling”’ or pushing through “undesirable legislation by attaching it to desirable legislation.”
“This is a difficult task in the present case, because the body of the initiative is so broad and free ranging that it makes it hard to say with any precision what the general topic is,” Widlan said, according to a press release from the coalition of groups that filed the lawsuit.
“With 2066 struck down, Washingtonians can get back to work towards a cleaner, healthier, more affordable energy future,” Christina Wong, vice president of programs at Washington Conservation Action, said in a statement. “This is a win for Washingtonians, not the fossil fuel lobby.”
Ben Avery, director of the Washington chapter of the Sierra Club, said the decision sends a “strong message to polluting industries that using unconstitutional and misleading ballot initiatives is a waste of taxpayers’ time and money.”
Sponsors of the controversial measure vowed to take the case to the state Supreme Court.
“We will not back away from the fight to ensure the will of the people who voted to make I-2066 law stands,” Greg Lane, executive vice president of the Building Industry Association of Washington, said in a statement.
“Those who want to ban natural gas are trying to force their minority view on the majority of Washingtonians. I fully expect we will prevail at the Supreme Court,” he said.
Former Gov. Jay Inslee, who campaigned against the measure, attended Friday’s hearing.
Initiative 2066, which voters approved in November, aims to unwind changes to the energy code, approved by the state Building Code Council, that went into effect a year ago. Those rules offer builders of homes and commercial buildings permitting incentives for choosing heat pumps – which provide both heating and cooling in the same unit – instead of natural gas furnaces.
The measure also repealed provisions in a 2024 state law, House Bill 1589, intended to accelerate Puget Sound Energy’s transition away from natural gas. The initiative requires utilities and local governments to provide natural gas to eligible customers and it prevents approval of utility rate plans that end or restrict access to natural gas, or make it too costly.
A coalition including Climate Solutions, Washington Conservation Action, Front and Centered, King County and the city of Seattle sued over the initiative in December. Washington is the primary defendant. The Building Industry Association of Washington was allowed to intervene to defend the measure.
Attorneys for initiative opponents argued in a court filing that the “most obvious constitutional infirmity” of Initiative 2066 is that it combines a popular idea of requiring certain utilities and local governments to provide natural gas to customers with a host of other subjects, such as future planning by Puget Sound Energy and the array of changes to the state energy code.
“By joining all of these distinct policy choices and requiring voters to enact all or none of them, I-2066 violates the Constitution’s prohibition on logrolling,” they wrote in their legal filing.
They also contended the initiative “improperly amends existing laws” by not spelling out the full text of proposed alterations. And a third claim is that the ballot title did not fully describe for voters what the initiative would do.
Lawyers for the state and the Building Industry Association of Washington argued the initiative complied with the constitution. BIAW attorneys emphasized in a court filing that all its provisions relate to preserving energy choice, the subject of the measure.
Since voters passed the initiative, the homebuilding association has pressed the state Building Code Council to move faster in aligning energy rules for new construction with provisions in the natural gas initiative.
Last month, a Thurston County judge dismissed a BIAW lawsuit that sought to force the state panel to act faster.
The Building Industry Association of Washington responded by filing a second suit with a similar purpose. That legal challenge is pending and it was not immediately clear how how Friday’s ruling might affect it.
YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE.