HOUSE BILL REPORT

                  HB 1685

             As Reported By House Committee On:

                      Local Government

Title:  An act relating to public facilities grants and loans preferences.

Brief Description:  Clarifying how loan and grant preferences are accorded among local governments planning under the growth management act.

Sponsors:  Representatives McMorris, Romero, Mulliken, Murray, Doumit, DeBolt, Sump, Linville, Crouse, Haigh, Boldt, Delvin, Mielke, Kessler, Clements, Schindler, Cox, Ericksen, Schoesler, Fortunato, B. Chandler, G. Chandler, Wolfe, Cooper, Radcliff, Lisk, Hankins, Skinner, Morris, Hatfield, Koster, Mastin and Parlette.

Brief History:

  Committee Activity:

Local Government:  2/23/99, 3/1/99 [DP].

                 Brief Summary of Bill

$Changes preference standard for public facilities grants and loans from county-wide planning policy participation to comprehensive plan and development regulations adoption.

$Applies preference only to competing requests from Growth Management Act jurisdictions.

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT

Majority Report:  Do pass.  Signed by 8 members:  Representatives Mulliken, Republican Co-Chair; Scott, Democratic Co-Chair; Doumit, Democratic Vice Chair; Mielke, Republican Vice Chair; Edwards; Ericksen; Fisher and Fortunato.

Staff:  Caroleen Dineen (786-7156).

Background:

The Growth Management Act (GMA) establishes certain requirements for all counties in the state and imposes additional requirements for counties, and the cities in those counties, planning under RCW 36.70A.040 (GMA jurisdictions).  The basic GMA planning requirements for GMA jurisdictions are:

-adoption of a county-wide planning policy, a framework from which comprehensive plans are developed which must address, among other items, the siting of public capital facilities of a county-wide or statewide nature;

-designation of urban growth areas;

-adoption of a comprehensive plan; and

-adoption of development regulations implementing the comprehensive plan.

Generally, a GMA jurisdiction is required to adopt a comprehensive plan and implementing development regulations consistent with GMA requirements within four years of the date the GMA jurisdiction became required or chose to plan under the GMA. 

A state agency considering awarding grants or loans to a county or city for financing public facilities must consider whether the county or city is a party to a county-wide planning policy under the GMA relating to the type of public facilities for which the grant or loan is sought.  The agency must give additional preference to the county or city if such a county-wide planning policy exists. When a state agency considers grants or loans to a special district for public facilities, it must also consider whether the county or city in whose planning jurisdiction the special district is located is a party to a county-wide planning policy under the GMA relating to the public facilities for which the grant or loan is sought.

The state public facilities grants and loans to which the statutory preference applies include those from the Interagency Committee for Outdoor Recreation, Centennial Clean Water Fund and Public Works Trust Fund.

Summary of Bill:

The preference for state public facilities grants and loans based on participation in a county-wide planning policy is changed.  A state agency considering a request from a county or city planning under RCW 36.70A.040 (GMA jurisdiction) must consider whether the GMA jurisdiction has adopted a comprehensive plan and implementing development regulations as required by the GMA.

State agencies considering competing requests from GMA jurisdictions must accord additional preference to the GMA jurisdiction(s) that have adopted a comprehensive plan and development regulations as required by RCW 36.70A.040.  For purposes of this section, a GMA jurisdiction is deemed to have satisfied these requirements if the GMA jurisdiction:

-adopted a comprehensive plan and development regulations within statutory time periods;

-did not meet statutory time periods but adopts a comprehensive plan and development regulations before submitting the grant or loan request; or

-demonstrates substantial progress toward adopting a comprehensive plan and development regulations within statutory time periods.

The preference provisions do not apply to requests from counties or cities not planning under RCW 36.70A.040 (non-GMA jurisdictions).  Requests for public facilities grants and loans from special districts  are treated in the same manner as requests from the jurisdictions in which they are located. 

Changes in the preference provisions do not apply to any existing rights, actions, obligations or proceedings.

Appropriation:  None.

Fiscal Note:  Not requested.

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

Testimony For:  This bill replaces and clarifies the existing GMA preference standard and levels the playing field for rural counties.  The current standard discriminates against small rural towns and non-GMA counties.  The current GMA preference standard does not achieve either its original political intent to provide incentives for statewide planning policies at the local level or original practical intent to force counties to plan.  To apply for public facilities grants and loans, jurisdictions have to do GMA-style capital facilities plans.  This bill will assist small jurisdictions which cannot afford sewer and water systems on their own and will help to promote economic development in rural areas.

Testimony Against:  None.

Testified:  Representative McMorris, prime sponsor; William Grimes, Studio Cascade; Jim Potts, rural counties; Bill Garvin, Washington State Farm Bureau; and Mike Alberg, Washington Cattlemen's Association.