SENATE BILL REPORT
SB 6239


This analysis was prepared by non-partisan legislative staff for the use of legislative members in their deliberations. This analysis is not a part of the legislation nor does it constitute a statement of legislative intent.

As Reported By Senate Committee On:
Government Operations & Elections, January 29, 2008

Title: An act relating to ad hoc review board processes for annexation proposals.

Brief Description: Concerning ad hoc review board processes for annexation proposals.

Sponsors: Senator Fairley.

Brief History:

Committee Activity: Government Operations & Elections:1/28/08, 1/29/08 [DP].


SENATE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS & ELECTIONS

Majority Report: Do pass.Signed by Senators Fairley, Chair; Oemig, Vice Chair; Roach, Ranking Minority Member; Benton, Kline, McDermott, Pridemore and Swecker.

Staff: Cindy Calderon (786-7784)

Background: Current law authorizes multiple methods for municipal annexations. The two most commonly used methods are the election method and petition method. Annexations may be subject to review by a boundary review board (board). Boards are authorized in statute to guide and control the creation and growth of municipalities in metropolitan areas (the statute provides for its establishment in counties with at least 210,000 residents). Current law provides that a board may be created and established in any county by resolution or petition. An ad hoc review board may be used in counties without a board. An ad hoc review board reviews requests involving first and second class cities and towns.

The mayor convenes an ad hoc review board within thirty days of either the filing of an annexation resolution or the filing of a voter petition calling for an election. The ad hoc review board determines if annexation of the proposed property is in the public interest, public welfare, and in the best interest of the city, county, and other political subdivision affected based on several factors. Factors include, but are not limited to: prospects for construction of improvements, the populations of the proposed area, and the present and anticipated need for governmental services. The board files its reasons and findings with the board of county commissioners indicating what factors were considered. The election method requires a favorable determination as an essential condition prior to the annexation.

An annexation review by the ad hoc review board is not required when the proposed area is less than ten acres and less than 800,000 dollars in assessed valuation. An ad hoc review board does not have decision-making authority.

Summary of Bill: Statutes and references related to the ad hoc review board process for non-code cities are repealed.

Appropriation: None.

Fiscal Note: Not requested.

Committee/Commission/Task Force Created: No.

Effective Date: Ninety days after adjournment of session in which bill is passed.

Staff Summary of Public Testimony: PRO: Ad hoc review boards have no authority, and only add costs, time, and false expectations to the process. The Supreme Court struck down provisions in the 1960s, and more changes were made later. The ad hoc review board only applies to counties that do not have a boundary review board; to my knowledge Clark County is the only GMA county without a boundary review board.

Persons Testifying: PRO: Mark Brown, Cities of Vancouver, Battle Ground, and Ridgefield; Dave Williams, Association of Washington Cities.