Several Growth Management Act (GMA) bills important to cities have moved out of committee with significant amendments.

AWC would greatly appreciate an updated review from your city to hear your comments on the changes.

Climate change

HB 1099, dealing with new responsibilities for cities to plan for climate change resiliency and emissions reductions, has undergone a significant shift. Rather than providing that the Departments of Ecology and Commerce identify and allocate specific emission reduction targets for every city and county, Commerce instead will create a menu of options from which cities would select, to work towards meeting their obligations and making progress on the issue. Commerce will provide cities with opportunities to submit new approaches to expand the list. Cities can either select from the options or develop different approaches that are equivalent in emission reductions to those found on the preapproved list and are supported by scientifically credible projections.

Salmon recovery

HB 1117 has taken a small step backwards in terms of flexibility and workability for cities. New amendments added a requirement for the state to develop specific targets for ecological gain. The underlying bill was more flexible and expected net gain but did not specify a threshold. The obligation was expanded to achieve gain in each of the state’s watersheds and drainage that flows to marine waters. Finally, the mitigation hierarchy language has been adjusted, in potentially concerning ways. AWC is in discussion with the bill sponsors regarding these changes.

Low-income housing, racial equity review, and homeless shelters

HB 1220 originally required cities to develop inventories of existing and projected needs for housing units at a variety of income levels, and a variety of emergency shelter needs. The amended bill now requires Commerce to provide the inventory and projection of need to cities to inform policymaking. Language around the racial equity review requirement was slightly amended at the request of several cities.

AWC continues to express our concerns about the provisions that require cities to allow emergency shelters anywhere short-term rentals are authorized.

Rural development

SB 5368 has moved out of committee with several provisions that are beneficial to cities. It creates a new method of annexation where a city and county could develop an interlocal agreement to proceed with an annexation. The agreement would need to address a balancing of annexations of residential, commercial, and industrial properties so that revenue gains and losses were distributed fairly. The annexation agreement would also have to consider development, ownership, and maintenance of infrastructure and the potential for revenue sharing. Notably, the annexation method would not be subject to referendum, and would also qualify the city for the annexation sales tax credit. The last provision will likely endure significant scrutiny by budget writers as it would be a new cost. Cities who believe the sales tax credit would be valuable should communicate this to their legislators.

Another positive feature of the bill is a new method for cities and counties to voluntarily submit certain elements of their comprehensive plan to Commerce for a determination of compliance. If a city opted into the process, the opportunity to appeal the plans would be directed to the Commerce approval process, and the state would be party to any disputes.

Finally, the bill authorizes the Growth Management Hearings Board to refer a finding of noncompliance to Commerce, allowing that agency to provide technical assistance to facilitate speedy resolution of the noncompliance.

Dates to remember

HB 1099 & HB 1117 are scheduled for public hearing in the House Appropriations Committee on Tuesday, February 16 at 1:30 pm.