AWC Legislative Bulletin - Volume 29, No. 6
February 10, 2006
(Plain Text Version)
Return to Graphical Version | Search
back issues
In this issue:
From the Director: Property Rights Initiative Filed
Key Issues in This Week's Bulletin
2006 AWC Legislative Priorities
Customized Bill Tracking – A Suggestion from AWC President Pam Carter
Energy & Telecommunications
Environment & Water
General Local Government
Land Use & Housing
Law & Justice
Municipal Finance & Economic Development
Personnel & Labor Relations
Transportation & Infrastructure
Transportation & Infrastructure
Transportation
This is a "stay tuned" week. Most transportation bills in both chambers are expected to see floor action (or not) on Saturday, February 11. We are not expecting a supplemental transportation budget until the middle of next week. As a friendly reminder, bills must be "pulled" twice from the Rules Committee before being allowed to come to the floor for an actual vote. Therefore, bills on "3rd Reading" are considered eligible for a floor vote. Because the Senate and House treat non-controversial bills differently, they are frequently pulled as part of a package and voted on immediately.
The following is a status update of bills profiled last week:
Modifying Transportation Benefit District Provisions (HB 3138)
This bill, which passed out of committee, would allow transportation benefit districts in all counties and cities. It also repeals the current 40 percent limitation of using funds for local purposes. The bill is in the House Rules Committee.
Revising Commute Trip Reduction Provisions (SSB 6566)
The substitute bill would require those jurisdictions that had a certified plan before year 2000 to participate in the program. The bill was placed on Second Reading in the Senate Rules Committee.
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. This bill is in Senate Rules.
Modifying Transportation Accounts and Revenue Distributions (SSB 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. The bill was placed on Second Reading in Senate Rules.
Regulating Train Speeds (SSB 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. This bill is in Senate Rules.
The House Transportation Committee passed SHB 2871 on February 6. The Senate Transportation Committee passed SSB 6599 on February 2. Both bills reduce the local match requirement from one third to 15% (RTID recommendation). Key issues that will play out over the remaining four weeks are:
- SHB 2871’s permissiveness for non-roads vs. SSB 6599’s roads orientation;
- The move to make RTID’s boundaries co-terminus with Sound Transit’s does not necessarily reflect road project needs in Snohomish County;
- Ballot measure to preclude (House bill) or not preclude (Senate bill) a 2006 election;
- The level of detail in which a Commission should review and define a regional transportation network.
Both of these bills are in the Rules Committees of their respective chambers. Please click on this link for a more detailed summary of the two bills.
Public Works
Public Works issues were relatively light this week. SHB 2337 and HB 2544, the bills relating to the fifty-one proposed Public Works Board projects, have already passed the House and are in the Senate Ways and Means Committee.
Remaining bills of note:
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 or other governmental action that restricts new developments from being applied for with the benefit area is implemented. We are expecting a proposed substitute that addresses many of our earlier concerns (such as timely notice, ability to collect fees, etc). The bill was placed on Second Reading in House Rules.
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 over 100,000, and counties with a population over 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. We are continuing to monitor the bill, which is in the Senate Rules Committee.
|