H-4842.1 _______________________________________________
SUBSTITUTE HOUSE BILL 2279
_______________________________________________
State of Washington 54th Legislature 1996 Regular Session
By House Committee on Government Operations (originally sponsored by Representatives Hargrove, Chappell, Goldsmith, Hymes, McMahan, Pelesky and Johnson)
Read first time 02/02/96.
AN ACT Relating to review of growth management decisions; and amending RCW 36.70A.300 and 36.70A.330.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON:
Sec. 1. RCW 36.70A.300 and 1995 c 347 s 110 are each amended to read as follows:
(1) The board shall issue a final order within one hundred eighty days of receipt of the petition for review, or, when multiple petitions are filed, within one hundred eighty days of receipt of the last petition that is consolidated. Such a final order shall be based exclusively on whether or not a state agency, county, or city is in compliance with the requirements of this chapter, chapter 90.58 RCW as it relates to adoption or amendment of shoreline master programs, or chapter 43.21C RCW as it relates to plans, development regulations, and amendments thereto, adopted under RCW 36.70A.040 or chapter 90.58 RCW. In the final order, the board shall either: (a) Find that the state agency, county, or city is in compliance with the requirements of this chapter or chapter 90.58 RCW as it relates to the adoption or amendment of shoreline master programs; or (b) find that the state agency, county, or city is not in compliance with the requirements of this chapter or chapter 90.58 RCW as it relates to the adoption or amendment of shoreline master programs, in which case the board shall remand the matter to the affected state agency, county, or city and specify a reasonable time not in excess of one hundred eighty days within which the state agency, county, or city shall comply with the requirements of this chapter.
(2) A finding of
noncompliance and an order of remand shall not affect the validity of
comprehensive plans and development regulations during the period of remand((,
unless the board's final order also:
(a) Includes a
determination, supported by findings of fact and conclusions of law, that the
continued validity of the plan or regulation would substantially interfere with
the fulfillment of the goals of this chapter; and
(b) Specifies the
particular part or parts of the plan or regulation that are determined to be
invalid, and the reasons for their invalidity.
(3) A determination
of invalidity shall:
(a) Be prospective
in effect and shall not extinguish rights that vested under state or local law
before the date of the board's order; and
(b) Subject any
development application that would otherwise vest after the date of the board's
order to the local ordinance or resolution that both is enacted in response to
the order of remand and determined by the board pursuant to RCW 36.70A.330 to
comply with the requirements of this chapter.
(4))). If the ordinance that adopts a plan or
development regulation under this chapter includes a savings clause intended to
revive prior policies or regulations in the event the new plan or regulations
are determined ((to be invalid, the board shall determine under subsection
(2) of this section whether the prior policies or regulations are valid during
the period of remand)) not to be in compliance with this chapter, the prior
policies or regulations shall remain in effect. Otherwise, the comprehensive
plan or development regulations determined by the board not to be in compliance
shall remain in effect and all development permits shall vest under such
comprehensive plan or development regulations until the board adopts a final
order determining that the new comprehensive plan or development regulations
comply with the requirements of this chapter.
(((5))) (3)
Any party aggrieved by a final decision of the hearings board may appeal the
decision to superior court as provided in RCW 34.05.514 or 36.01.050 within
thirty days of the final order of the board.
Sec. 2. RCW 36.70A.330 and 1995 c 347 s 112 are each amended to read as follows:
(1) After the time set
for complying with the requirements of this chapter under RCW 36.70A.300(1)(b)
has expired, ((or at an earlier time upon the motion of a county or city
subject to a determination of invalidity under RCW 36.70A.300,)) the board
shall set a hearing for the purpose of determining whether the state agency,
county, or city is in compliance with the requirements of this chapter.
(2) The board shall conduct a hearing and issue a finding of compliance or noncompliance with the requirements of this chapter. A person with standing to challenge the legislation enacted in response to the board's final order may participate in the hearing along with the petitioner and the state agency, city, or county. A hearing under this subsection shall be given the highest priority of business to be conducted by the board, and a finding shall be issued within forty-five days of the filing of the motion under subsection (1) of this section with the board.
(3) If the board finds that the state agency, county, or city is not in compliance, the board shall transmit its finding to the governor. The board may recommend to the governor that the sanctions authorized by this chapter be imposed.
(((4) The board
shall also reconsider its final order and decide:
(a) If a determination
of invalidity has been made, whether such a determination should be rescinded
or modified under the standards in RCW 36.70A.300(2); or
(b) If no
determination of invalidity has been made, whether one now should be made under
the standards in RCW 36.70A.300(2).
The
board shall schedule additional hearings as appropriate pursuant to subsections
(1) and (2) of this section.))
--- END ---