HOUSE BILL REPORT
HB 1091
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 House Committee On:
Community & Economic Development & Trade
Title: An act relating to innovation partnership zones.
Brief Description: Promoting innovation partnership zones.
Sponsors: Representatives VanDeWege, Chase, Upthegrove, Miloscia, B. Sullivan, O'Brien, P. Sullivan, Morrell, Sells, Kenney, Rolfes, Kelley, Moeller, Wallace and Eddy; by request of Governor Gregoire.
Brief History:
Community & Economic Development & Trade: 1/24/07, 2/12/07 [DPS].
Brief Summary of Substitute Bill |
|
HOUSE COMMITTEE ON COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT & TRADE
Majority Report: The substitute bill be substituted therefor and the substitute bill do pass. Signed by 9 members: Representatives Kenney, Chair; Pettigrew, Vice Chair; Bailey, Ranking Minority Member; McDonald, Assistant Ranking Minority Member; Chase, Darneille, Haler, Rolfes and P. Sullivan.
Staff: Tracey Taylor (786-7196).
Background:
In 2006, the Governor's Global Competitiveness Council (Council) issued their report
"Rising to the Challenge of Global Competition." The Council's Research and Innovation
Committee (Committee) Report found that research and innovation creates a cycle of
development that yields increased living standards and globally competitive businesses. The
Committee and Council proposed a broad 10-year plan that connects the importance of strong
research and innovation with the creation of jobs, healthy economic growth and a high
standard of living and broad opportunity throughout the state's economy, reaching people of
all backgrounds and in all the state's geographic locations.
Summary of Substitute Bill:
The Director of the Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development (DCTED)
may designate areas in Washington as an "Innovation Partnership Zone" (IPZ).
In order to be designated an IPZ, an area must have three types of institutions within their
boundaries: a university or college fostering commercially valuable research, a nonprofit
institution creating commercially applicable research, or a national laboratory; the dense
proximity of globally competitive firms in a research-based industry or industries, or of
individual firms with innovation strategies linked to a university, community college,
nonprofit institution or national laboratory; and training capacity either within the IPZ or
readily accessible to the IPZ. In addition, the IPZ must have identifiable boundaries that
contain dense concentrations of leading companies, research capacity and skills, or show
evidence of planning and partnerships that will produce such concentrations within an
identifiable period of time. An IPZ must be sufficiently small and distinct so that workers
and companies have a unique affinity for the area with the IPZ. Also, an IPZ must include
unused or otherwise potentially available property to allow for future expansion. Local
zoning and economic conditions must provide evidence that such capacity for expansion
exists. An IPZ must be consistent with the Growth Management Act. The IPZ must be
administered by an Economic Development Council, port, Workforce Development Council,
city or county.
Annually on October 1, the Director of the DCTED (Director) shall designate IPZs based on
a review and evaluation of applications applying the legislative criteria, the estimated
economic impact of the IPZ, and the evidence of forward planning for the IPZ. The Director
shall designate the IPZ Administrator. An IPZ designation shall be for a four-year period,
after which the IPZ must reapply for the designation.
If the IPZ meets the other requirements of the fund source, then the IPZ may be eligible for
the Local Infrastructure Financing Tool Program, the sales and use tax for public facilities in
rural counties, and the Job Skills Program.
The DCTED must convene an annual information sharing event for IPZ Administrators and
other interested parties.
The IPZs are required to provide performance measures as prescribed by the DCTED. These
measures must include, but are not limited to, private investment measures, job creation
measures, and measures of innovation.
Substitute Bill Compared to Original Bill:
The substitute bill allows IPZs based on firms locating in proximity to a university,
community college, or national laboratory in order to link their strategies. The bill allows
IPZs to form around nonprofit institutions engaged in creating commercially viable research.
The IPZs are required to comply with the Growth Management Act.
Appropriation: None.
Fiscal Note: Available.
Effective Date of Substitute Bill: The bill takes effect 90 days after adjournment of session in which bill is passed.
Staff Summary of Public Testimony:
(In support) This bill promotes the growth of businesses around research and to increase
technology-based industries and related jobs. Local governments self-identify and may form
an IPZ to help promote the already occurring natural synergy around research and business.
Several states have similar programs, including North Carolina and New Jersey. The
Governor has funding for grants for some IPZs in her Capital Budget; however, under this
bill, an IPZ designation does not entitle an IPZ to any money.
(In support with amendments) Although implicit within the bill, an amendment to clarify that
the IPZ must fit within GMA and local planning efforts should be added. In addition, the
emphasis on high technology might limit other synergistic opportunities.
(Opposed) None.
Persons Testifying: (In support) Representative Van De Wege, prime sponsor; Marc
Baldwin, Office of the Governor; David Kleitsch, City of Lynnwood; Bart Phillips, Columbia
River Economic Development Council; and T. K. Bentler, Northwest Food Processors
Council.
(In support with amendments) Kaleen Cottingham, Futurewise.