Local opponents of developing a liquefied natural gas project and an ancillary pipeline have found allies in another Bay Area.

San Francisco's Board of Supervisors unanimously passed a resolution this week asking Pacific Gas & Electric Corp. to withdraw from partnership in the Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline. Officials say they are concerned the project will damage the environment and pose safety risks to Coos Bay area residents, as well as increase energy costs for Californians.

A PG&E spokesman said the California city's opposition won't change the company's plans to partner on the natural gas pipeline.

A subsidiary of PG&E, which is the primary electricity provider for San Francisco, holds a one-third interest in the pipeline project. It joined with Williams of Salt Lake City and Fort Chicago Energy Partners of Calgary, Alberta, Canada, on the project in 2006.

Supervisor Chris Daly sponsored the city's resolution after his legislative aide, Tom Jackson, met on July 16 with anti-LNG activist Jody McCaffree of North Bend and other opponents. McCaffree flew to San Francisco to talk to the city officials and to attend a solar energy fair.

McCaffree, who has led local anti-LNG efforts for several years, said the California officials picked right up on her concerns about reliance on foreign energy at the expense of renewable resources. She hadn't expected them to move so quickly on a resolution.

"I was shocked," she said. "They just understand it."

Daly introduced the resolution to board members July 21. They passed it Wednesday.

McCaffree and Rory Cox of Pacific Environment, which supports local environmental struggles, tried  unsuccessfully to schedule a meeting with PG&E executives at the company's San Francisco headquarters. She said PG&E is hypocritical to tout itself as a green company and then partner on an LNG project.

 "Our message to PG&E is to focus on renewable energy," she said.

Developing natural gas supply routes is part of the push for renewal energy, said Jonathan Marshall, a PG&E spokesman. Solar and wind energy can't produce electricity constantly. Natural gas generators can fill the gaps.

"It's an essential partner to renewable energy," he said. "It actually enables the use of renewable energy."

The city resolution says natural gas consumption in California is declining, but Marshall cited a 2008 report that contradicts the assertion. The California Energy Action Plan said natural gas use is "expected to remain relatively flat in the near term." It also suggests prices for natural gas could rise as Canadian imports drop. With that in mind, Marshall said rejecting the cleanest available fossil fuel wouldn't make sense.

"There is no one solution to all our energy problems," he said. "It would be foolhardy to close the door on LNG."

Taking a position on the project made sense for the supervisors because San Francisco would get natural gas from Oregon if the LNG terminal were built, Jackson said. Such a project would contradict the city's goal of reducing its carbon footprint, he said.

"We should be looking for local energy solutions that move away from dependence on foreign energy markets," he said.

San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom has until Aug. 7 to sign the resolution. If he doesn't, the supervisors could enact the resolution on their own by voting unanimously again.