City's CalGreen Tier One ordinance adopted locally but never approved by the state

Larkspur's 2025 attempt to adopt CalGreen Tier One — the state's stretch building code — was not approved by California because the city didn't submit the supporting energy calculations required to go beyond baseline energy provisions. The result, the city manager told the Climate Action Forum, is that the local ordinance is technically adopted but not state-approved, leaving staff in what he described as a weird spot when it comes to enforcement.

“What I'm still not clear on is how does San Francisco do it then? Because San Francisco did it and they sent it to the CDC. Could we piggyback off those studies?”— David Mahler, Climate Action Forum member

The proposed fix follows what Fairfax, San Rafael and the county have done: re-adopt CalGreen Tier One while excluding the energy provisions, and separately embed electrification goals in the General Plan so a local implementing ordinance has a policy foundation. The city manager suggested folding that into the January building code adoption, though he acknowledged it likely won't make the January 7 agenda and may slide to January 21. Staff's stated goal is a policy framework in place by the end of 2026 — before the Larkspur Landing property, with 300-plus units, is built.

Forum members pressed on why other cities have cleared the state's bar. Fairfax's Jody, joining by video, said her town took the same route Larkspur is now considering.

The 2023 Berkeley decision, which made it illegal for jurisdictions to require all-electric construction, hangs over the whole exercise — a point that later drove the Forum's rewrite of its Climate Action Plan language.

Forum settles on eight priority climate actions — and decides not to shy from the hard ones

Working from a quadrant analysis of impact versus effort, built on a survey that drew just five responses, the Forum started with five high-impact/low-effort items for a proposed one-to-two-year plan. It ended with eight, after members argued that the easy wins alone won't close the gap. Added to the list: electric yellow school buses, enforcement of the electric landscape equipment rules, and grid technologies such as microgrids and battery storage.

“I would say let's go for high impact. Even if it's high effort, if it's high impact, the only way we're going to get on track is to do stuff that has high impact.”— David Mahler, Climate Action Forum member

Members also concluded that the 2021 Climate Action Plan's wording is out of date, overtaken by the Berkeley decision and the Air District's new zero-NOx rule. Rather than amend the CAP line by line, David Mahler proposed drafting a standalone statement of reconciled goals cross-referencing the CAP, the County Building Electrification Roadmap and the countywide EV Acceleration Strategy. Staff member Dan suggested a separate internal action document alongside a community-facing version.

A companion one-page dashboard, prepared by Katie and Council Liaison Sarah Margulies, shows emissions falling since 2019 but not fast enough. Mahler read the proposed narrative aloud: "Larkspur's total greenhouse gas emissions are trending downward since 2019, however the most recent available data reveals emissions are not reducing quickly enough year-over-year to reach our 2030 goal" — and asked that it be extended to say what the city will actually do about it.

Mahler and Margulies will draft the updated wording, with delivery to staff for January review, a final Forum review, and a resolution to Council around February or March.

Realtors ask Air District to delay the 2027 zero-NOx water heater rule; committee looks unmoved

Reed Baxter reported back from the Bay Area Air District's Stationary Source Committee, which is weighing amendments to the 2023 zero-NOx rule that takes effect January 1, 2027 and covers water heaters and space heaters — not cooktops. Those two appliance categories, Baxter said, account for more than 90% of the emissions at issue. The amendments address cost burden and exemptions for difficult installations.

“Several commenters said the information the realtors are putting out is misinformation, which is pretty much correct.”— Reed Baxter, reporting to the Climate Action Forum

Baxter estimated 80 to 90 people filled the room and about 40 spoke, nearly all in favor of implementing on schedule; the exception was commenters affiliated with a realtor organization who wanted the deadline deferred.

Of the seven committee board members present, Baxter said six appeared supportive of proceeding and one was undecided. Next up: a public workshop in January, committee review in February, and a possible board vote in March.