Berkeley Resolves Lawsuit by Temporarily Suspending Natural Gas Ban, Impacting Anti-Fossil Fuel Agenda
The city of Berkeley, known for its progressive stance on environmental issues, has recently agreed to suspend its ban on natural gas hookups in new buildings as part of a lawsuit settlement. This decision has significant implications for the anti-fossil fuel agenda that some lawmakers have been pushing for.
The settlement came after the California Restaurant Association (CRA), representing nearly 22,000 restaurant locations in California, sued Berkeley in 2019 to block the ban. The ban was initially dismissed by a district court, but the case eventually made its way to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which overturned the lower court’s decision. The appeals court ruled that Berkeley’s ban on natural gas appliances was preempted by a federal statute called the Energy Policy Conservation Act (EPCA), which sets national efficiency standards for household and commercial appliances.
The city of Berkeley argued that its ordinance did not regulate “energy use” because it banned natural gas hookups without specifying a specific quantity of energy. However, the appeals court unanimously disagreed, stating that “zero” is indeed a quantity and that Berkeley’s argument defies the ordinary meaning of “quantity.”
Berkeley requested a rehearing before the full appeals court, claiming that the smaller panel’s decision was legally flawed and posed a threat to health, safety, and environmental regulations. Various groups, including the Sierra Club and Earthjustice, filed amicus briefs supporting Berkeley’s position. Despite these efforts, the request for a rehearing was denied by the 9th Circuit.
As a result of the appeals court ruling, Berkeley was required to halt enforcement of its natural gas ban. U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers entered an order pausing litigation until September 10, 2024, to allow Berkeley time to repeal the ordinance. The parties involved in the lawsuit have reached a settlement in principle, in which the city will repeal the ban and file a stipulation of dismissal.
This decision has been met with mixed reactions. The California Restaurant Association and other business groups are pleased with the outcome, as they argued that the ban disregarded available cooking technologies and negatively impacted small businesses that rely on gas-burning equipment. However, dissenting judges and environmental groups express concern that the decision undermines efforts to combat climate change and shows a lack of respect for state and local autonomy.
While the suspension of Berkeley’s natural gas ban is temporary, it highlights the ongoing debate surrounding fossil fuel use and the role of local governments in implementing environmental policies. As the settlement is finalized and the ban is repealed, it remains to be seen how this decision will impact future efforts to transition away from natural gas and towards cleaner energy alternatives.
