Electric Preferred Code: Another Rushed ‘Imperial Decree’ Ignoring Chaffee’s Winters, Outages, and Pocketbooks?

By Vince Phillips

Chaffee County Commissioners are moving fast on Ordinance 2026-01, the so-called “Electric Preferred” amendment to the 2021 International Energy Conservation Code. Second reading and public hearing is set for 9 a.m. Monday, May 19, at the Chaffee County Public Safety Complex in Buena Vista. Here is exactly what the proposal does and does not do, in plain language.

It does not ban natural gas in new homes. It does not change anything for existing homes. It does not require whole-house generators or batteries.

What it does: create a two-tiered system that strongly favors all-electric construction. All-electric homes get an easier path: they must meet an Energy Rating Index (ERI) of 50 or better and receive only 10 energy-efficiency credits. Any new home that wants to install natural gas appliances for space heating, water heating, cooking, or drying is hit with “demerits.” Those mixed-fuel homes must meet a stricter ERI of 54 or better and receive 15 energy-efficiency credits. In plain terms, using gas triggers extra requirements such as added insulation, better windows, or other upgrades to offset the “penalty.” Builders will pass those added costs on to home buyers.

There is no technical, engineering, or building-science logic that requires mixed-fuel homes to have better insulation, windows, or other efficiency upgrades than all-electric homes. 

The stricter standards exist solely to punish the use of natural gas, a fuel choice county officials simply do not like. The result is not that this “may” make housing more expensive. It will make new homes in Chaffee County and heating these homes more expensive for every family that buys one. This goes well beyond the state’s already-required “Electric Ready” code that Chaffee adopted in 2023. It is entirely discretionary local policy, not a state mandate.

First reading passed on April 21. They allowed roughly four weeks for public scrutiny on a change that will affect every new home built in the county. This has all the hallmarks of the same rushed, top-down approach we saw with the recent Land Use Code revisions.

After reviewing the public records, the consultant studies, and the local pushback, here is the bottom line: This looks like another politically motivated, thinly analyzed exercise in climate theater that does little, if anything, to serve the actual citizens of Chaffee County. In fact, it will make housing more expensive and new homes less resilient in the very winters that define life here. Wildfire emissions dwarf those from human power generation. Wildfire mitigation and forest health projects would be a far more fruitful use of the county’s time and resources than the insignificant and unproven emissions gains of this legislation, gains that arguably do more harm than good. Let’s walk through the problems.

The Rush and the Thin Evidence
Four weeks from first to second reading. No Chaffee-specific cost study. No survey of local builders on what this will actually add to a typical 2,000-square-foot home in Buena Vista or Salida. No analysis of how many new homes in the last three years even installed gas versus all-electric. County staff have casually said “a lot more all-electric lately,” but they have not released the numbers.

Instead, commissioners and building officials are leaning heavily on a 2022 study commissioned by Eagle County from Lotus Engineering & Sustainability, a self-described women-owned boutique firm that openly advertises itself as specializing in climate-action planning and decarbonization for governments already leaning hard toward all-electric policies. On their own website, Lotus states: “We make sustainability easier and more transparent by listening to and understanding our clients’ needs and providing data, tools, and analysis.” In plain English, they exist to give paying government clients exactly the “data” and conclusions they want to hear in order to justify predetermined policy goals. On its face, the Lotus study should be discounted as objective science or engineering. That Lotus study is now four years old.

Adding to the rushed nature of this process, Ordinance 2026-01 was assigned the very first ordinance number of the year, signaling it was made a top priority by county staff and commissioners. While the county gave the public only four weeks between first and second reading, a general presentation on the “Electric Preferred” concept was given to Salida City Council in a work session on December 15, 2025. However, that presentation did not include a full draft of the ordinance language for detailed public review.

In the last four years Chaffee County has seen dramatic increases in construction costs, labor shortages, material prices, and supply-chain disruptions. What was “cost-effective” in 2022 is no longer realistic in 2026. Eagle County has a different utility mix (Holy Cross Energy), different resort-driven development patterns, and different micro-climates than our valley floors and 14er-adjacent neighborhoods. Relying on this outdated, out-of-county report is irresponsible.

Skepticism from Buena Vista and Poncha Springs Is Loud
Buena Vista trustees have been openly wary from the beginning. They continued their own public hearing on the proposal to May 26, after the county’s vote, because they want to see the final county language first. Poncha Springs remains a holdout. County staff are already floating the idea of a patchwork rollout: the new rules would apply mainly to unincorporated areas and Salida, while towns that balk get to opt out. That is not coherent governance. That is a mess.

The Outage Reality Chaffee Families Already Live With
Most existing homes in Chaffee use natural gas as primary heat precisely because the electrical grid fails here, often for hours and sometimes for days, during heavy snow, wind, ice loading, or Xcel’s Public Safety Power Shutoffs. Residents rely on gas heat, but keep electric space heaters as backup for a reason. Has the county done any study on how many winter outages we have had in the last five years? Has anyone asked the utilities whether the local grid can handle a big new wave of all-electric heating load during peak cold snaps? From everything on the public record, the answer is no.

We have already seen the deadly human cost of steering people toward all-electric heating in cold climates. During Winter Storm Uri in Texas in February 2021, widespread power outages left millions without heat for days in sub-freezing temperatures. At least 246 people died — 158 of them from hypothermia. Families huddled under blankets in homes that dropped below freezing inside. An 11-year-old boy, an 84-year-old widow, and a 75-year-old veteran were among those who froze to death in their own living rooms. Some desperate residents turned to unsafe alternatives, running ovens, grills, or generators indoors, which caused carbon-monoxide poisonings and fires.

I searched extensively for statements from Texas government officials after the storm expressing regret over those deaths. I found none. Instead, the official response focused almost exclusively on blaming the electrical grid and ERCOT. No one in power wanted to be associated with the deadly consequences of over-reliance on single-source electric heat. Are Chaffee County Commissioners prepared to do the same, deflect blame onto CORE, Xcel, or the grid, if this “Electric Preferred” policy contributes to similar tragedy here?

Dozens of my neighbors in Salida burn firewood as their daily winter heat source. Pushing new homes away from reliable natural-gas heat will only drive more families toward wood stoves and pellet stoves as emergency backups. Even modern EPA-certified wood and pellet stoves produce roughly 100 times more fine particulate matter than a natural gas furnace. Still, tax incentives to help families upgrade from firewood to cleaner-burning pellet stoves would achieve far greater real-world emissions reductions than this push from gas to all-electric. The county’s own actions could backfire, and air quality in the valley would suffer.

Affordability and Energy Choice
Chaffee already struggles with attainable housing. The Lotus study claims all-electric construction can sometimes be cheaper upfront by avoiding gas line hookups. However, local trustees and builders have repeatedly asked the county for real Chaffee-specific cost bids showing the actual added expense of the stricter ERI 54 requirements and extra credits. and those numbers have never been provided. Independent modeling circulated by Atmos Energy and GTI shows that natural gas homes in our climate use about 36 percent less energy and deliver real monthly bill savings under 2025 rates. This new amendment reduces the very energy choice that most Chaffee families value for reliability and affordability. It is ideology dressed up as building science. This is discretionary policy. Commissioners do not have to pass it. They could stick with the state minimums, enforce Electric Ready more aggressively, and wait for the statewide Model Low Energy and Carbon Code coming in July 2026.

Instead, they are choosing to push ahead now. Monday’s hearing is the last realistic chance for citizens to push back. Below is a list of questions every commissioner should have to answer:

Questions for the Commissioners Before They Vote on Ordinance 2026-01

1. What percentage of new single-family homes permitted in Chaffee County in the last 36 months installed natural gas space heating versus all-electric? Please release the raw numbers.
2. Has the county commissioned, or will it commission before Monday’s vote, a true Chaffee-specific cost study using local builder bids and current 2026 material and labor prices instead of relting on the the 2022 Eagle County Lotus study?
3. How many existing homes in unincorporated Chaffee rely on natural gas as primary heat with electric space heaters as backup? Why is the county deliberately steering new construction away from this same reliable, proven combination that current residents depend on for safety during outages?
4. What analysis has been done on winter power outage frequency, duration, and causes in Chaffee County (Xcel Public Safety Power Shutoff events, snow and ice loading on lines, etc.)?
5. Has the county formally consulted with the local electric utilities on whether the grid can handle increased all-electric heating load during peak winter demand? If not, why not?
6. Has the county modeled the likely increase in wood or pellet stove use during outages under a more all-electric new-build stock — and what will be the impact on valley air quality from the much higher particulate emissions these appliances produce?
7. Assuming the goal of this ordinance is meaningful emissions reduction: What size wildfire in or near Chaffee County would release CO2 and particulate emissions comparable to the total lifetime savings this “Electric Preferred” policy is projected to achieve across all new construction? Has the county done any such analysis?
8. If Buena Vista and Poncha Springs remain holdouts after their May 26 hearings, will this ordinance apply only to unincorporated areas and Salida, creating a patchwork of rules for builders and buyers?
9. What are the exact compliance trade-offs for a typical 2,000-square-foot Chaffee home under ERI of 50 or better (all-electric) versus ERI of 54 or better plus extra credits (mixed-fuel with gas)?
10. How much has this entire process cost Chaffee County taxpayers so far (staff time, consultant references, workshops), and what are the projected actual emissions reductions for new construction only, versus the very real increase in housing costs?
11. Given that Colorado’s grid still relies heavily on natural gas and some coal in winter, and the statewide Low Energy and Carbon Code arrives in July 2026, why push this “preferred” layer now instead of waiting?
12. What specific, measurable metrics will the county use to evaluate success or failure of this code three to five years after adoption,  including housing affordability impacts, actual resident energy bills, homeowner satisfaction, and performance during winter outages?
13. If this policy later proves to raise housing costs or create reliability problems, how difficult is it for a future board to repeal or amend the ordinance?
14. How much weight are you actually giving to the serious skepticism already expressed by Buena Vista trustees and local builders, compared to the recommendations of out-of-county sustainability consultants?
15. How many of you commissioners have personally read the questionable 2022 Eagle County Lotus Engineering study to independently verify its relevance to Chaffee County’s dramatically higher 2026 construction costs, frequent winter grid outages, local micro-climates, and utility realities, rather than simply relying on staff summaries or consultant recommendations?
16. Commissioner P.T. Wood is up for reelection: How do you square this new policy with your responsibility to protect affordability and reliability for Chaffee County families who actually live here year-round?

Bonus Question: Are you, as commissioners, willing to publicly accept responsibility if a tragedy similar to Texas, families freezing in their all-electric homes during a multi-day Chaffee County winter outage , occurs here as a result of this policy?

The public comment period is open. Email chaffeeadmin@chaffeecounty.org today. Show up Monday at 9 a.m. This is your county. Make them listen.