AWC Legislative Bulletin - Final Bulletin
2007 Regular Session
61st Legislature
January 8 to April 22, 2007  (Plain Text Version)

Return to Graphical Version | Search back issues

In this issue:
From the Director - 2007 Legislative Session: Productive For Cities
Energy & Telecommunications
Environment & Water
General Local Government
Infrastructure, Transportation, & Economic Development
Land Use & Housing
Law & Justice
Municipal Finance
Personnel & Labor Relations

From the Director - 2007 Legislative Session: Productive For Cities

By Stan Finkelstein, AWC Executive Director
From the standpoint of the state’s 281 cities and towns, it was a very good session during which many of AWC’s priorities were addressed if not entirely in part.

Positive Session with Significant Progress – Work Still to be Done!

On Sunday, April 22, the 2007 session of the Washington State Legislature adjourned “sine die”. From the standpoint of the state’s 281 cities and towns, it was a very good session during which many of AWC’s priorities were addressed if not entirely in part. Other priorities still need to be addressed and there is more work to be done.

This session was substantially different from that of 2005, the last long session. First, the Democrats added to their majority in the 2006 elections, and enjoyed a “strong” majority in both the House and Senate. The majority party was able to move legislation without unanimous caucus support and on many issues did try to reach accommodation with the Republicans.

Secondly, this session it was clear the Governor had “taken hold” of the reins of government, and was exercising strong leadership in advancing her legislative agenda. She was a “presence” throughout the session and often “weighed in” on key issues.

Thirdly, the state’s fiscal condition was significantly improved. The state has enjoyed substantial revenue growth and entered the session with $1.8 billion in revenues in excess of the amount needed to sustain the previous biennium’s budget. The Legislature was mindful of the revenue shortfalls of the previous 5 years and adopted some proposals intended to avoid future shortfalls.

While the session was far less acrimonious than those of recent years, there were still the traditional partisan battles that tend to characterize every session. The Republicans continually railed that the Democrats were being imprudent in proposing an unsustainable budget, and the Democrats countered by suggesting that the Republicans were insensitive to the needs of education, social service dependent citizens, and other priority interests. These criticisms may have “fed” the media’s penchant for controversy but in general the Democrats and Republicans got along. The chemistry of the session was clearly positive and progress was made on a number of key issues including city priorities.

Key City Measures Passed

For AWC this was a good session with a number of positive bills passed and harmful bills defeated. Here are some of the more significant enactments:

  • Streamlined Sales Tax: Conforming Washington’s sales and use tax structure with that of the national agreement and providing mitigation for adversely impacted cities and towns.
  • Transportation Benefit Districts: Allowing cities to impose a vehicle fee of up to $20 annually per vehicle by council-manic action, for transportation purposes.
  • Offender Supervision, Liability: Establishing a gross negligence standard for tortuous acts associated with supervising offenders.
  • Annexation: Timing of Accrual of Library and Fire District Property Tax Levies: This helpful measure speeds up the transfer of these revenues subsequent to an annexation.
  • Clean Up and Protection of the Puget Sound: Intended to initiate state and local efforts to identify and implement actions necessary to begin the task of cleaning up Puget Sound.
  • Scrap Metal Theft: Establishing a series of provisions designed to thwart the theft and resale of scrap metal. This has been an ongoing law enforcement problem.
  • Capital Budget Provisions: This budget includes a number of beneficial provisions for cities, including; funding for the Community Economic Revitalization Board, Washington wildlife and recreation grants, storm water project funding, and a number of city specific allocations.
  • Modification to the Hotel/Motel Tax: Clarifying the authority of cities to use these revenues to support special events and festivals, and to establish facility partnerships with nonprofit organizations.

Although this was a successful session, there are still a number of issues we need to continue to “work”. Amongst those are proposals to mitigate the impact of apportionment for purposes of the municipal business and occupations tax; codify the public duty doctrine; and facilitate annexations. As we’ve acknowledged in the past, many key issues often take a number of years to achieve passage. While we did not succeed on these issues, city officials and our AWC lobbyists made substantial progress in educating our legislators. It is our expectation, that as more legislators recognize the state-local partnership and the needs of our 281 cities and towns; the Legislature will be more responsive to our issues.

The “Killing Grounds”

Traditionally, AWC lobbyists spend a great deal of their time opposing harmful legislation. In that respect, the 2007 session was no different than those of the recent past. We were aided by key committee chairs, Senate Government Operations, House Local Government, House and Senate Transportation Committees as well as Senate Ways and Means and House Appropriations, to name a few, who were sympathetic to city interests and often willing to “kill” bad city legislation without much prodding. Key adverse issues that our lobbyists were able to derail include:

  • Legislation that would have eroded cities’ ability to manage public works contracts
  • Legislation that would have required all municipal court judges to be elected
  • Measures that would have replaced local telecommunications franchising authority with a state-wide franchise process administered by the Utilities and Transportation Commission
  • Proposals to eliminate the authority of cities to assume water-sewer districts

In addition, there were numerous other measures the AWC staff successfully opposed. A large measure of that success was due to those calls from local officials who prevailed on their legislators to oppose such harmful measures. Thanks to your efforts the Legislature has become sensitive to the reality that their local governments don’t have excess resources and need local flexibility. In recent years the Legislature has been more restrained in not imposing unfunded mandates.

A Word of Appreciation

On behalf of the AWC Officers and Board of Directors, I’d like to express my appreciation to the AWC lobbying team. Jim Justin, Assistant Director for Intergovernmental Relations, Tammy Fellin, Victoria Lincoln, Ashley Probart, and Dave Williams, all did a superb job representing city interests throughout the session. Their unparalleled knowledge of city issues, coupled with their persuasiveness contributed immeasurably to the successes of the session.

I would also like to acknowledge the fine support our lobbyists receive from the AWC policy analysts Sheila Gall, Tim Gugerty, Deanna Krell, Alicia Martinelli, and Sheri Sawyer. It is often the responsibility of the analysts to provide the vital research our lobbyists need in preparing testimony and communicating the impact of pending legislation.

City officials should be aware that they’re served by an extraordinarily gifted AWC advocacy team.

In Closing

The 2007 legislative session was truly a positive one for the cities and towns of the state. We succeeded in securing passage of a number of beneficial measures, successfully defeated many harmful ones, and further knitted close relationships with many legislators, both Republicans and Democrats.

Many of our successes are attributable to the hundreds of local officials who went the extra mile, and contacted their legislators to reinforce the AWC message. Those contacts from “home” often were the difference between success and failure. We sincerely appreciate those efforts and acknowledge that they’re important components in our lobbying strategy.

As we look towards the 2008 session and beyond, there is still much to be done. The AWC Legislative Committee will reconvene in the Fall, propose a revised set of AWC priorities for consideration and adoption by the AWC Board of Directors, and we’ll start all over again in January.

City officials can assist in that process by contacting us with suggestions for legislation. Input from city officials is the most important source of proposed legislation for the Association. We cannot respond to city needs if we don’t know what they are. This Fall we will again have a series of regional meetings. Those meetings are designed to encourage an interactive discussion of city concerns. I’d like to encourage all city officials to attend the regional meetings in their area, as well as the upcoming AWC Annual Conference in Tacoma – June 12-15.