Building Inspector Liability (SSB 5892, HB 3272, SSB 6385)

AWC is concerned about SSB 5892, which would hold a county or city liable for damages caused by their gross negligent failure to enforce building codes. The bill has been moved to the Senate floor for consideration. Cities are contacting their Senators to express concern about this proposal.

HB 3272 was the companion bill to SSB 5892, but was held back from a hearing until after the cutoff date of the committee, thereby making the bill ineligible for a vote.

A third bill, SSB 6385, has moved to the House Judiciary Committee. The bill states that construction professionals involved in the construction of improvements for residential real property would have a duty to exercise reasonable care in the construction of the improvement. If a breach of this duty results in damage to the real property, the current owner has a right to recover damages. Building inspectors are considered a part of the broad group of "construction professionals," and therefore would be potentially liable for damages to homeowners. Since this could be very costly to cities and towns, AWC will be opposing the bill in the House.

Exempting Agricultural Structures from Building Code Requirements (SHB 2767/ SSB 6609)

Both of these bills survived the first cutoff date, but each has been amended in different forms. SHB 2767 limits building permit costs for qualifying specialty agricultural buildings to the costs incurred by the local government for processing the permit and performing associated inspections. The bill is currently on the second reading calendar and is eligible for review by the entire House. SSB 6609 would limit the permit fees for agricultural structures to a maximum of $75.00. The bill is in Senate Rules. AWC is concerned about any bill that attempts to specifically restrict local government permit fees via legislative mandate, particularly when those fees would not cover the costs incurred by cities to conduct inspections and pay for staff time.

Prohibiting Discrimination in Community Athletic Programs (SSB 6547/SHB 3001)

As reported in last week’s Bulletin, this legislation would prohibit any city, town, county, or district or third party contractor from discriminating on the basis of sex in the allocation of facilities and resources in administering youth or adult community athletic programs. The bills have been amended to remove much of the reporting requirements proposed in the original bills, but we remain concerned given other provisions.

In the latest Senate version, if cities authorize a third party contractor to use city facilities, those parties would be required to provide evidence of compliance by providing certification of nondiscrimination at the time of contract formation. The bill has been improved but retains language exposing cities to lawsuits. We are working with representatives from the Washington State Association of Municipal Attorneys and park representatives to continue to review and refine the bills. The bills are in the Rules Committee in their respective chambers.

Health Insurance Partnership Act (2SHB 2537)

The Heath Insurance Partnership was established during the 2007 legislative session to serve small employers beginning in September 2008. See the January 18 Legislative Bulletin for more information.

On February 14 the second substitute was introduced, removing the ability of the Health Insurance Partnership to administer the small employer’s group health benefit. The bill also limits the Partnership’s role to offering health care coverage to small employers and their employees.

Concerns have been expressed by association plans, similar to AWC’s Benefit Trust, that some of the proposed changes would allow the Partnership to compete for membership with association plans by subsidizing the rates charged to members and eliminating the requirement that only "eligible" employers could participate. "Eligible" employers were those with at least one low-wage worker. The subsidy issue continues in the current version, but AWC does not believe the issue of competition is a concern.

In anticipation that it will pass the House, 2SHB 2537 is scheduled for public hearing in the Senate Health & Long Term Care Committee on February 20 at 8 am.

Establishing a Citizens’ Work Group on Health Care (2SHB 2536)

This bill would create a citizens’ work group on health care. By April 2008, nine citizen members would be appointed to engage Washingtonians in a public process to examine options for improving access to quality, affordable health care. The group would collect input from citizens from throughout the state and present information about health care proposals. The workgroup would report back to the appropriate committees by December 2008.

This bill was placed on second reading February 11, but it has not yet passed the full House. Though it is simply a study, concern has been expressed that it would be very duplicative of ongoing efforts to study the health care situation in Washington. In anticipation that it will pass the House, it is scheduled for public hearing in the Senate Committee on Health & Long-Term Care on February 21 at 10 am.

Retired Volunteer Medical Worker Licenses (EHB 2518)

This bill expands the criteria of who can obtain a retired volunteer medical worker license to those individuals from other states and territories, or Canada, if that licensing agency has substantially similar licensing standards as Washington State. The volunteer medical worker license is significant for cities in that it allows for additional trained medical workers in the event of an emergency. The current statute provides immunity to local governments who use such workers under certain circumstances. This bill was unanimously passed by the House on February 13.

Authority for the Insurance Commission to Review Individual Health Plans (ESB 5261)

This bill would allow the insurance commission to disapprove rates for the individual market, as the commissioner was able to do prior to 2000. See last week’s Bulletin for more information. On February 12, ESB 5261 was placed on second reading by the Rules Committee. It is expected to have an adverse impact on carrier rates, and may therefore impact the rates we could provide our Benefit Trust members.

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