Timing of Accrual of Property Tax Revenues (ESSB 5836/SHB 2031)

These companion bills expedite the transfer of library and fire district property taxes in areas containing these services when annexed to a city. Both bills contain provisions worked out with interested parties.

SHB 2031 passed the House unanimously and awaits scheduling for hearing in the Senate. ESSB 5836 passed the Senate unanimously, but not without a problem. At the last moment, an amendment was offered by Sen. Jim Hargrove (D-Hoquiam) that would prohibit Aberdeen (just outside his district) from annexing any land in the future unless the county commissioners agreed to it.

Sen. Hargrove briefly conferred with AWC staff and shared his concern about a local economic development project involving Aberdeen. AWC expressed our strong opposition to this amendment. While AWC did not try to block this amendment in the Senate, we will strongly oppose it being including in any legislation that ultimately passes.

Refinements to the Land Use and Housing Elements of GMA Plans (ESHB 1727)

This bill was negotiated and AWC is no longer in opposition. As amended and passed unanimously by the House, it now contains a provision (Sec. 4) modeled after some portions of HB 2045, which is an AWC-supported measure that did not pass out of the House Local Government Committee after its final meeting a few weeks ago.

Language in this bill now specifies that in GMA-planning counties of at least 175,000 people, the counties must:

consult and cooperate with each city (within an urban growth area proposed for modification) prior to and concurrent with actions to modify the urban growth area within which the city or cities are located;
consult and cooperate with each city within each urban growth area, to adopt development regulations for unincorporated territory within urban growth areas that are consistent with each applicable city, and;
adopt development regulations, for new development in unincorporated territory within an urban growth area that is (as of the effective date of this act) entirely surrounded by incorporated territory, that are consistent with the city or cities surrounding the unincorporated territory.

AWC strongly supports this language and appreciates it being introduced and promoted by Rep. Larry Springer (D-Kirkland), the sponsor of both HB 1727 and HB 2405. We support language requiring counties to adopt development regulations for new development within "islands" surrounded by existing cities that are consistent with those within the city. Whether or not such "islands" annex to the city, new development should look and feel like that within the surrounding city.

We are encouraging the Senate to hold a hearing on this bill and pass it. Interested cities are encouraged to share your views with your senators.

For more information, please contact Dave Williams, davew@awcnet.org.

Industrial Land Banks (HB 1925, SHB 1965)

AWC is comfortable with both HB 1925, which removes a termination date affecting industrial land banks, and SHB 1965, which authorizes major industrial development within industrial land banks. The bills moved from the House after unanimous passage for consideration in the Senate. HB 1925 is scheduled for consideration before the Senate Government Operations and Elections Committee on Tuesday, March 20 at 1:30 pm.

Eminent Domain (SHB 1458, SB 5444, ESHB 2016)

SHB 1458 and SB 5444 require new notice requirements to property owners before condemnation decisions/action may occur. Both of these bills are supported by AWC and have passed their house of origin and will be considered in the opposite chamber. SHB 1458 is scheduled for consideration before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday, March 20 at 10 am.

ESHB 2016 passed the House and limits the use of eminent domain for economic development purposes. AWC is supportive of provisions allowing for the resale of property back to the original owner if the property is not used for the purpose for which it was intended. We are less comfortable with provisions dealing with changed definitions about what constitutes economic development, which attempt to codify current case law regarding eminent domain.

AWC is evaluating the bill as it passed the House and welcomes input from interested cities. The bill has not yet been scheduled for a hearing in the Senate. For more information, please contact either Sheila Gall, sheilag@awcnet.org, or Dave Williams, davew@awcnet.org.

Creating a Regional Transfer of Development Rights Program (2SHB 1636)

This bill, supported by AWC, is scheduled for a hearing before the Senate Natural Resources, Ocean & Recreation Committee on Thursday, March 22 at 10 am.

Regulating House Banked Social Card Games (ESSB 5558)

As reported in last week’s Bulletin, AWC supports ESSB 5558 as passed by the Senate on March 8. The bill is now scheduled for a hearing by the House Commerce & Labor Committee on Friday, March 23 at 1:30 pm. Please contact Jim Justin, jimj@awcnet.org, if you have any questions or comments on this legislation.

Essential State Community Justice Facilities (E2SHB 1733)

This bill passed the House on March 13 and is now in the Senate Government Operations & Elections Committee. As expected, the bill was amended on the floor to remove the study language and return it to a version more similar to the original bill.

The amended bill requires the Department of Social and Health Services (DSHS) and the Department of Corrections (DOC) to take into consideration equitable distribution in siting for residential or work release facilities in communities for juvenile and adult offenders, based on the relative proportion of offenders that were sent from the community to state facilities.

The bill also contains provisions similar to those for state secure community transition facilities for sex offenders to involve DSHS and DOC in siting decisions by cities and counties for these facilities and to require cities and counties to take into account equitable distribution of these facilities in communities. If a city or county fails to site a facility within one year, the city or county is pre-empted, and the state can site a facility under its essential public facilities authority.

[ previous article ] [ return to top ] [ next article ]