Transportation & Infrastructure

Transportation

As we approach bill cut-off, we have had modest success in both transportation committees. The following bills have passed or are expected to pass out of their respective committees in either the House or Senate:

Modifying Transportation Benefit District Provisions (HB 3138)

This bill, which passed, would allow transportation benefit districts in all counties and cities. It also repeals the current 40 percent limitation of using funds for local purposes.

Revising Commute Trip Reduction Provisions (SSB 6566)

The substitute bill, which passed, would require those jurisdictions that had a certified plan before year 2000 to participate in the program.

Revising Admissibility in a Civil Action of Failing to Wear Safety Belts (SB 6563)

This bill, which is expected to pass, passed the Senate Transportation Committee last year as SSB 5856.

Modifying Transportation Accounts and Revenue Distributions (SB 6839)

This bill, which is expected to pass, is considered a "clean-up" bill from last year’s revenue proposal. It clarifies the distribution of local transportation funds for the Transportation Improvement Board, transit grants, and freight mobility.

Regulating Train Speeds (SB 6679)

This bill proposes that before increasing operating speeds, a railroad operator must provide 60 days written notice to the Utilities and Transportation Commission and the applicable local government or road authority. We support this clarifying legislation, and the bill is expected to pass.

Regional Transportation (SSB 6599, HB 2871)

The Regional Transportation policy debate is moving once again. The Senate Transportation Committee passed SSB 6599 on Thursday, February 2. Key features from a city perspective are:

1. It reduces the local match requirement from one-third to 15 percent (RTID recommendation), and
2. It allows Transportation Benefit Districts in King, Pierce, and Snohomish Counties and removes the cap on the amount that can be dedicated for local arterials and highway improvements (similar to HB 3138).

In the House, we are expecting a proposed substitute for HB 2871. Go to www.awcnet.org/documents/regionalbills.pdf for a summary of both bills. These bills should be considered a work in progress. What’s most important is that both chambers have picked up the gauntlet and appear dedicated to resolving a regional transportation bill this session.

Public Works

There were several bills relating to public works or infrastructure this week, including the following:

Limiting the Effect of Construction Contract Provisions (SB 5936/HB 1613)

Introduced last year, this would require Public Owners who wish to deny claims based on procedural defenses (i.e. lack of timely written notice, failure to follow contract claims procedures, etc.) to bear the burden of proving that the Owner has actually been prejudiced.

This legislation is sought by the Associated General Contractors (AGC), who has publicly stated this is a top priority issue. This is their response to the Michael M. Johnson ruling from a few years ago. The cities, ports, and several associations representing public owners testified in opposition to the proposed substitutes.

We were successful in defeating the proposed legislation this year. However, the AGC has presented issues relating to claim denial that have merit. Consequently, the Cities, Ports, and Counties have committed to working with AGC during the interim to see if AGC’s concerns can be resolved while continuing to protect our interests as public owners.

Authorizing a Contract Extension for Reimbursement by Property Owners for Street, Road, and Water Sewer Projects (HB 3192)

This bill would allow for an extension of the current 15 year period if a moratoria, phasing ordinance, or concurrency designation exists that restricts new developments from being applied for with the benefit area. Although the bill passed out of committee, it is considered a work in progress, and we are expecting several amendments before it moves forward.

Modifying the Bid Cancellation Process (SSB 6509)

Originally crafted for state agencies, the substitute bill adds the provision preventing state agencies, cities with a population greater than 100,000, and counties with a population greater than 500,000 from canceling all public works bids after opening unless there is a compelling reason. The amendment to include cities was a last second addition to this bill. This bill passed out of committee. We will meet with the bill sponsor regarding our concerns of inclusion in this bill.

[ previous article ] [ return to top ]