Jan. 31st Hot List - State House

This is the Legislative Hot List for the State House the week of January 31, 2011.

Now is the time to create jobs and rebuild Washington’s infrastructure. This bill will raise significant new revenue for clean water jobs by imposing a pollution fee upon toxic stormwater contaminants.
Toxic runoff from our roads and parking lots is the number one water quality problem. A priority for local governments, labor and environmentalists, this polluter-pays bill will generate millions of dollars to help rebuild local economies and clean up polluted waterways from Puget Sound to the Spokane River.

HOUSE COMMITTEE ACTION

Local Government: Possible Executive Session
POSITION: OPPOSE

There have been two statewide initiatives to effectively repeal the Growth Management Act, both failed with nearly 60% of Washingtonians rejecting the idea. Washingtonians want to protect their quality of the life and know that the GMA does just that.
When the counties opted in to planning under the GMA 20 years ago, they knew that they could not opt out later. Changing the rules now creates a slippery slope that weakens the protections communities have been relying on for the last 20 years.

Agriculture and Natural Resources: Possible Executive Session
POSITION: OPPOSE

Would unreasonably hamstring state authority to take reasonable enforcement action against water quality violators by limiting Ecology’s ability to take preventative action and mandating that in ALL cases violators be offered voluntary compliance opportunities before enforcement occurs.

Environment: Public Hearing
POSITION: SUPPORT

This bill is designed to ensure that the state is well prepared for a major oil spill. Requires oil companies to invest in state-of-art spill response equipment.
Provides training and equipment for commercial fishermen so that they can help respond in the event of a spill.

Environment: Public Hearing
POSITION: OPPOSE

This bill would impose the specter of financial liability on any community group that is not successful in an appeal under SEPA.
Shifting the costs of appeal from the developer to the community would significantly chill the public’s ability to challenge environmentally damaging projects.

Environment: Possible executive action
POSITION: SUPPORT

Lead is just the tip of the toxic iceberg when it comes to toys and children's products. Recently, there has been cadmium in Shrek glasses, formaldehyde in baby blankets, toluene in "slime" toys. The law passed by the legislature in 2008 only gives the state the ability to get information from manufacturers on what harmful chemicals might be lurking in their products, but they won't be able to do anything about it.
The Children's Safe Products bill of 2011 allows the state to ask manufacturers to identify safer alternatives. Once safer alternatives are identified the Department of Ecology would report to the legislature on what further actions may be needed, thus preserving the legislatures authority to restrict or ban chemicals. Finally, this bill gives consumers and the business community certainty as to what the agency will do with the information they receive.

Agriculture and Natural Resources: Public Hearing
POSITION: OPPOSE

The long list of relinquishment exemptions found in RCW 90.14.140 provides flexibility and protection of a water right while also promoting efficient distribution of a finite and precious resource.
This bill is unnecessary, increases confusion in water law, and may undermine the law’s objective of ensuring as many users as possible have a reasonable amount of water for their needs.

Technology, Energy and Communications: Public Hearing
POSITION: OPPOSE

This legislation is not a “delay” - it annuls the statewide energy efficiency code already in effect and overrides more than two years of work by the State Building Code Council and the public. It will impose significant administrative costs on local governments who are responsible for code compliance and just completed the transition to the existing code.
The state energy code is the cheapest, most effective long term way to save energy in buildings cost effectively. This bill means owners and occupants of newly constructed buildings will lose substantial energy and cost savings, which, since these buildings will be with us for 50 to 100 years, is not a one-time issue.

Local Government: Public Hearing & Possible Executive Session
POSITION: OPPOSE

This bill will derail the planned adoption of the Phase II Stormwater Permit which is critical for Puget Sound and other polluted waters across the state.
Last year the legislature delayed the next GMA update for 3 years, with the environmental community's support, in order to help local governments in this economy. This bill, however, will add an extra three years on to every update after this one, starting in 2025. This is unacceptable.

Environment: Public Hearing
POSITION: SUPPORT

Phosphorous from residential lawn fertilizers is a major water quality pollutant that, if not managed, could require local governments to spend millions on wastewater treatment plant upgrades.
This bill manages the sale of lawn fertilizers containing phosphorus and has the support of businesses, local governments, and environmental groups.