So long as citizens allow it, government will keep intruding on our private lives. Duke Energy does these audits here for free, but I don't like the idea of forcing anything on buyers or sellers.

Lynnea,

I agree with Nina Hollander .  We have enough government telling us how to live what to do.  Some days I am inclined to think that they are just making more jobs.  A

another inspection and report to mucky the waters.... that's what I think as a listing agent!!!!!!!!!!!!

Mandatory home energy labeling is officially part of Canada's  Climate Change Action Plan, and it requires that all homes offered for sale undergo an audit that shows how much energy they consume and where. The requirement for an audit will apply to both new homes and resale homes and will be a required condition of sale, coming in 2017.  In my opinion, a ridiculous idea but I didn't vote for nice hair and smoking weed!

WOW!!!  And I thought California was a nanny state!

I'm reminded of a quote from the great Ronald Reagan:

Obviously I'm against this extra bureaucratic nonsense.  Guess your state association is not very proactive in defending real estate.

More government intervention ... we have something similar happening in CA - not a point of sale - but "low flush toilets will become law."  I get that we are in a drought state ... yet there is no way to manage this law which makes it yet another dumb-ass law. 

If it fails they expert opinion will they give a grant to make it right!

We may elect them but it does not make them an expert in every field.

Way too many regulations to justify more government jobs and spending. IMHO!

This sounds like revenue enhancement and more disclosures.   

I think this is over and above their responsibility and jurisdiction. Since it is a regulation then it will likely pass but if the constituents voice their objections it can be taken done.

Far too much interference by big brother in portland.

Over reach of government authority. Stupid & who is going to do the audit that is credible? Is Portland going to get a kickback or do it 'for the good of the people'?

Lynnea Miller What purpose does this serve? Seems to be unnecessary work for the seller.

Sounds like a lot of hassle and cost to an already complicated process.

More intrusion and hassles for consumers. Someone is making money

I agree with Kenneth J. Jones, SRES, SFR, SCGREA wholeheartedly!  Until we stand up and say ENOUGH IS ENOUGH, this will continue too.  It's a sad state of affairs!

More government BS.

Big brother needs to stay out! I think this is way over the top, even for a liberal city like Portland.

That is an intrusion by a government out of control!

I do not like it.

It sounds expensive....and sometimes to people who can least afford it...is this going to be a new part of what is negotiated in a contract...will the city require minimum standards ?

It's another intrusion, and will make buying and selling of homes more difficult. 

It is another money grab by some power hungry politicians

I can see requiring a history of utility bills, but an energy audit is a little over-reaching.

Sounds like another layer of protocol.

I hate Government, and I hate Government regulations.  It is time for another 4th of July.

We already have it..it's a pain in the butt!

I highly doubt that would ever pass in the Phoenix area.

Portland should meet Montgomery County MD - we have to list utility costs for the past year and do a radon test now 

Sounds like the city needs another source of revenue.  

Not an idea I like.  One person's energy usage can be very unique.  The thermostat, water usage, whether lights are left on, etc, all play a larger role in energy savings than an "audit" could possibly reveal.

If locals do not like the new regulation, they can vote for a new city council with a mandate to remove it.

It would bother me as a Realtor as it puts another step in the way of getting a home on the market but it sounds like it would be great knowledge for a buyer to have up front.

Non-Real Estate folk should stay out of the Real Estate business. There is enough safe-guard, rules, regs, documents and all the rest already. No to this

Oh, good grief.  Portland sounds like Montgomery County, MD in its intrusion into private lives.  NO, not a fan. At all. 

Beyond the scope of their area of concentration!

Wow, Not sure if I would be a fan of it.

Not a fan of one more requirement.  

Lynnea - I think it is, as many others have already said, an over reach of government (a.k.a. the nanny state).  Just another way to create another cottage industry/seller expense in the name of consumer protection, because apparently people can't take care of themselves.  If a buyer wants to do an energy audit; have at it by all means, but to require it on every transaction is bunch of hooey!

I would fight against this. Energy audits can be very subjective.

I think homeowners should have a say whether or not it is done.  Not mandated.

Lynnea Miller - in a way, it's good. Though I do not like too much of interference when the seller is ready to sell home.

Interesting. I think it will be a useful tool for buyers and might lead more homeowners to be conscious of energy efficiency, so I think it's a good, progressive move.

In CA many homes are under insulated. Instead of building new power plants, they try to improve insulation, add more self generating solar panels.

less carbon.

I think it is a good idea.