March 21st Hot List - State Senate

SENATE COMMITTEE ACTION

ESHB 1071: Creating a complete streets grant program.

Transportation: Possible Executive Session
POSITION: SUPPORT

• This legislation would position Washington strongly to compete for future federal funds designated for Complete Streets. More than 100 agencies nationwide have implemented Complete Streets policies, including 16 states and six municipalities in Washington.
• Rather than applying a cookie cutter design to every corridor, planners work with communities to develop project that are appropriate for various functions of the roadway. The result is a streetscape that is safer and more accessible for all users that promotes livable communities.

SHB 1186: Concerning requirements under the state's oil spill program.

Natural Resources & Marine Affairs: 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.

ESHB 1478: Delaying or modifying certain regulatory and statutory requirements affecting cities and counties.

Government Operations and Tribal Relations & Elections: Possible Executive Session
POSITION: OPPOSE

• The environmental community understands and appreciates the position our local governments are in. Changes to the bill have addressed our concerns related to stormwater permitting & shoreline approval, but we still oppose the sections related to the updating of the Growth Management Act and Shoreline Management Act.
• This bill makes permanent weakening changes to the SMA and GMA. Sections 2 and 11 should be amended to 8 year update cycles, not 10 -- or the entire bill should have a sunset to expire in a few years.

SHB 1700: Modifying the requirements related to designing various transportation projects.

Transportation: Public Hearing
POSITION: SUPPORT

• This bill simply allows flexibility for cities, counties and developers to use updated guidelines for designing for bike and pedestrian uses.
• This bill will improve public safety, protect our environment, and promote healthy communities.

EHB 1702: Establishing a process for the payment of impact fees through provisions stipulated in recorded covenants.

Financial Institutions and Housing & Insurance Committee: Possible Executive Session
POSITION: OPPOSE

• Impact fees were created to ensure that in many ways, new growth helps pay its way. HB 1702 makes the impact fee process more expensive and less certain. It requires that developers be allowed to shift paying impact fees from when developers obtain their building permits to when the home buyers buy the home.
• This shift in payment gives counties and cities less time to use that impact fee to make the necessary improvements and means that the public facilities needed to reduce the environmental impacts of growth will be delayed until well after the impacts of development occur.

ESHB 1721: Preventing storm water pollution from coal tar sealants.

Environment and Water & Energy: Hearing and Possible Executive Session
POSITION: SUPPORT

• Sealants are used to protect and beautify pavement. Coal tar-based sealants contain chemicals that threaten children's health and the environment -- fortunately, safe and cost-effective alternatives are readily available and widely used in Washington.
• Passed with strong bi-partisan support in the House, this bill will protect public health by banning the use of the highly-toxic coal tar sealants on playgrounds and parking lots.

SB 5862: Regarding the administration of natural resources programs.

Natural Resources & Marine Waters: Possible Executive Session
POSITION: OPPOSE

• This bill reduces environmental protection while combining two types of forestry-related permits and raising fees.
• We are concerned that the agency with the expertise to determine what’s needed to protect fish loses its ability to ensure that protection; four-year logging permits weaken the foundation of the state’s Forests and Fish Habitat Conservation Plan; and permit fee increases are too small to provide sufficient funding for needed state oversight of logging.