Thursday, October 1, 2026
Public input is being sought on a proposed ordinance that would require home sellers to disclose the energy efficiency score of their property in Thurston County.
A public hearing about the proposal is tentatively scheduled before the Thurston County Board of County Commissioners for Feb. 17. Members of the public may also submit comments through an online form.
This update was delivered to the South Thurston Economic Development Initiative during a meeting on Friday, Jan. 16, at the Stone City Event Center in Tenino, where county commissioners and community members heard about the policy.
Thurston County Climate Mitigation Senior Program Manager Rebecca Harvey told attendees the proposed Home Energy Score (HES) ordinance would require home sellers to obtain a standardized energy efficiency assessment and publicly disclose the results when listing a property for sale.
The Home Energy Score is a U.S. Department of Energy standardized rating system that assigns a house a score from 1 to 10 depending on how energy efficient it ranks.
“It's kind of similar to a miles-to-gallon rating that you get for your car … or one of those yellow energy guide labels that you get when you buy an appliance,” Harvey said.
The assessment would also provide an estimate of a home’s annual energy costs and recommend energy saving upgrades, with an emphasis on improvements that could pay for themselves within 10 years.
Harvey said the ordinance intends to help home buyers make better informed decisions by helping them understand the full cost of homeownership, including energy cost, which is information that is not always readily available.
She added home buyers could use information from the assessment to qualify for energy-related financing programs, such as the national ENERGY STAR program, which allows buyers to finance energy upgrades by including the costs of upgrades to their mortgage.
The ordinance would make it mandatory for homeowners to hire a private assessor to perform the assessment. The process typically takes about an hour, and is expected to cost between $150 and $350.
She said research of similar programs in the country found there has not been a good example of a voluntary version of the program.
Voluntary efforts tend to attract only higher-end homes and often require costly subsidies to incentivize participation.
Harvey said though the ordinance would make assessment mandatory, it would not require homeowners to make any upgrades to their properties.
The ordinance would also only apply to single-family residences, detached dwelling units, duplexes and townhomes.
However, at least one attendee expressed concern that the ordinance could be later used to require energy upgrades, which would burden low-income homeowners looking to sell.
Harvey disagreed, saying the county would need to provide subsidies if it were to make such a requirement.
“And the county doesn't have the budget to provide subsidies for home upgrades,” she added.
She noted though that the ordinance would include exemptions or subsidies for low-income households to assist them with assessment.
Harvey said the ordinance went through two years of research and collaboration with the Thurston Climate Mitigation Collaborative.
The group selected the ordinance as a priority to reduce energy use and greenhouse gas emissions from residential buildings, which represent the county’s second-largest source of emissions after transportation.
Harvey said during the early phases of development, focus groups were held to collect local input from realtors, builders, lenders, contractors and housing advocates. The findings of those focus groups can be found here.
More information and frequently asked questions about the proposed ordinance are also available on the county’s website.
12 comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here
CommonScense
Thank you for this informative article.
Friday, January 23 Report this
CommonSenseSenior
Do not pass this. I had one of those energy efficient assessments and it takes more than an hour, and no one low income right now needs a single more requirement to put out more money to put up a home for sale to move. INDEED it will cause homebuyers to 'try to negotiate price down mentioning how much it would cost them to do these things'. We're not all that dumb! Use the money more wisely. We all see and read the energy-wise stuff coming to us FREE in our utility bills and know about the rebates etc. We're just all so lacking discretionary funds right now to do all the things we should do..lord we can barely buy gas and groceries!!! Everything, and I mean, everything has gone up. Don't make it even worse.
Saturday, January 24 Report this
SteveA
This seems like a reasonable idea that clearly is no where near ready for implementation. I wondered about the subjectivity of Home Energy Surveys, evaluator to evaluator. Would five different evaluators rate five different homes similarly? How closely? Then I read the HES Policy Review Memorandum. There was only ONE certified assessor in all of Washington State at the time of the policy proposed (June of ’24). Then I looked at sample reports and noted marginal savings for what would clearly be costly improvements.
As proposed the program seems more aspirational versus practical and seems to add significant costs with the benefits proposed only as hypotheticals. If there are 19 areas around the country with these programs what are the REAL Benefits those programs have demonstrated in a reproducible way?
Is this the best bang for our buck in mitigating climate change? I am not convinced. I hope policy makers like our BOCC will also not act based on hypotheticals and expensive good intentions alone. I think the advocates for this proposal are well intentioned and have more work to do before this is ready for prime time.
Saturday, January 24 Report this
VDRAKE2
I believe that this is a ploy by the electric company to subsidize additional Monies for their coffers. Every month every two months I get information from the electric company telling me that my electric score is not as high as it could be and that other people around me are doing better. They want me to have an assessment and they want me to make improvements to my house. We are two disabled veterans living in a home that's 1600 square feet we keep our thermostat set regularly at 64° even in the winter we have a natural gas fireplace and we keep the window shut unless a door is opening there's no way for air to get in we put in brand new windows and the score didn't go up one iota so to heck with the Energy company asking us to prove that our house is worth living in at a time when we're selling it to someone else if the buyer wants to do that then go ahead and put it on the buyer but is a seller I would not do that unless I was forced to . There are too many expenses that everyone has their hand in when you're trying to sell a house anyway then for the electric company to say oh wait a minute you have to prove your house is worth living in and show us your I mean it's just ludicrous. When you sell a house you have to prove that you have a Year's worth of electric bills to show that you've paid the utilities what is the difference between that and this except that they're asking for a necessor to come in and do it ludicrous the whole thing is just stupid it's a money grab don't pass this.
Saturday, January 24 Report this
JnNwmn
The process left out the most important group, homeowners. Homeowners will be "required" to pay for the energy assessment. This is another hurdle in addtion to the 15 page disclosure document a seller must fill out. A better idea would be for a seller to disclose the last electric/gas bills for January and July. This information does not cost anything for a seller.
Saturday, January 24 Report this
olyhiker
A lot cheaper and more accurate to show energy bills from previous year.
Saturday, January 24 Report this
Johngraver
How is it that the government has limited funds when they spend money on 2 years of discussions to come up with this mandatory requirement idea and right in the comments within minutes, and free, the idea of seeing the electric bill.
I am sorry but government has to much time on their hands
How about things that help us not require more from us
Thank you
Saturday, January 24 Report this
ClownPenis88
Thurston Superior should worry about enforcing the state laws. Because I am suing The county and lack of law enforcement when it comes to state law violations your state is a joke
Sunday, January 25 Report this
mjdonovan
Yet another example of legislative overreach! This regulation is of greater cost to sellers than it is of value to buyers and it adds additional friction and cost to already complex real estate transactions. If an energy usage survey is of great value to a home buyer, they would commission one on a home purchase, much like a home inspection that most buyers already get. But they don’t. Furthermore, energy usage figures are already available from PSE for most properties and that is provided free of charge to buyers. How does this affect an old fashioned “as-is-where-is” sale?
Lastly, who is going to pay for the bureaucracy that is supposed to administer this? The country is already broke and the commissioners haven’t figured out their way of that conundrum! This makes zero sense.
Sunday, January 25 Report this
HappyOlympian
boooooo, that is what inspections are for. Was this suggested by a company that will get to do the inspections? Local bureaucrats need to make better use of their time. Thank you for the link to make a comment on this intrusion. When a person says this information will not be used for anything else, know that they do not control what future officials will do.
Monday, January 26 Report this
2theroots
Despite various stories made up by commenters below this originates out of the Thurston Climate Mitigation Plan (not energy companies who will sell less energy this way) and was one of the things identified to try to bring down our county wide emissions. It does require the homeowner to pay ~$200 for this audit...not a very burdensome amount. This also happens at point of listing for sale. The owner will shortly receive a lot of money for the sale of their home so this is not a hardship. Also by knowing at time of sale there is money available both from equity or from size of bank loan taken to address these heating issues identified by the audit so that the owner will have much less expensive heating bills. This is really one of the only ways we can bring improve our county wide housing stock and reduce climate change. someone said "Just look at past energy bills" that will not help you identify what you need to do to lower the energy bills.
It will not be "subjective" as it based upon a national standard. it is based upon programs in other parts of the country so is not theoretical or aspirational. it also will take a year to go into effect so that more auditors will be trained (which also creates jobs in our community.)
I am saddened that several people on here seem to feel that government trying to address climate change is trying to do some big power play or just wants to control people.
Wednesday, January 28 Report this
curtzt
If you're selling your house for a few hundred thousand bucks (or a lot more) putting up a couple of hundred bucks to get one of these done seems like pretty small potatoes. If you're buying a house this will tell you a lot more about how the house compares with other houses you're looking at than the old owners' energy bills would - who knows how high they set their thermostats and how much hot water they use?
Monday, February 2 Report this