SAN LUIS OBISPO, Calif. (AP) - A California city council postponed a vote on an energy code that would encourage construction of all-electric buildings after a union leader representing natural gas workers sent an email warning that hundreds would protest without social distancing amid the coronavirus pandemic, a newspaper reported.
The San Luis Obispo council planned an April 7 vote on the code before receiving a March 16 email from Eric Hoffmann, president of Utility Workers Union of America Local 132, which represents thousands of employees of Southern California Gas Co., the Los Angeles Times reported Wednesday.
“If the city council intends to move forward with another reading on a gas ban I can assure you there will be no social distancing in place,” he wrote.
“I strongly urge the city council to kick this can down the road to adhere to public health safety measures,” said Hoffmann, who also chairs the board of the gas advocacy group Californians for Balanced Energy Solutions.
He went on to say that “for the sake of people’s health,” the council’s efforts would be “better focused on how to better deal with this pandemic than to stir up all the emotions of people losing their jobs along with this disease.”
The vote was canceled and has not been rescheduled.
The email, addressed to city community development director Michael Codron and copied to other officials, was obtained by the Climate Investigations Center, a fossil fuel industry watchdog, under the California Public Records Act, and shared with the Times.
In an interview, Codron attributed the indefinite delay in part to Hofmann’s threat, the Times said.
“There’s no way to know whether it was bluster,” he said.
Efforts to favor all-electric buildings not connected to the gas grid are being eyed by cities seeking to phase out fossil fuels. The gas industry has countered by pushing resolutions calling for “balanced energy solutions.”
San Luis Obispo’s proposal would allow developers to build homes and commercial buildings that use gas but would have to retrofit an existing building or pay a fee to the city to reduce gas consumption somewhere else.
The council gave initial approval to the new code in September but before the council could take a required second vote the gas workers local accused a council member of a conflict of interest. The member denied having a conflict but the vote was delayed for review by the state Fair Political Practices Commission.
While the review was pending, it was decided to redo the first vote with the council member recusing herself, drawing Hoffmann’s email.
Hofmann said in a statement to the Times that the city made an attack on the livelihood of the workers.
“That has stirred vehement reactions from our members, including mass attendance at past City Council meetings,” he wrote. “When the City Council announced that it would re-start its anti-gas effort at the April 7th meeting, we thought it best to both organize our members’ attendance in an orderly way, and at the same time try to persuade the City Council to postpone its anti-gas effort to a more prudent time.”
Hofmann said he did not discuss his protest threat with gas company executives or managers. The company declined to comment on the email, the newspaper said.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.