BILL REQ. #:  H-3991.1 

Prefiled 01/05/10. Read first time 01/11/10.   Referred to Committee on Agriculture & Natural Resources.

     AN ACT Relating to a comparative review of water availability in local governments' land use plans; creating new sections; and providing an expiration date.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON:

NEW SECTION.  Sec. 1   The legislature finds increasing conflicts between planned rural residential growth found in county comprehensive plans and the availability of water to serve those areas of planned growth. The legislature further finds that these conflicts raise questions concerning the implementation of local land use plans. Failure to address these conflicts will negatively impact local government planning and environmental and consumer interests.
     It is the intent of the legislature to obtain a comparative review of local land use plans and water availability, to identify existing and potential conflicts between land use plans and permit decisions and rules, and to identify strategies that will reduce or eliminate those conflicts.
     It is not the intent of the legislature that this comparative review analyze the underlying legal basis or validity of local land use plans, water right permit decisions, or instream flow rules, or that the results of this comparative review, be used in any local land use or water resource planning process or in an administrative or judicial appeal.

NEW SECTION.  Sec. 2   (1) The department of commerce shall contract with a consulting firm qualified in land use and water supply planning to produce a comparative review of local land use plans adopted by local governments and the water availability found in those planning areas. The geographic scope of the comparative review must include the sixteen water resource inventory areas designated by the department of ecology as critical basins in its March 2003 "Washington Water Acquisition Program" report, as well as Clallam, Jefferson, Skagit, Skamania, Kittitas, Whatcom, Thurston, Snohomish, Clark, Cowlitz, Walla Walla, Columbia, Chelan, and Yakima counties.
     (2) The comparative review must investigate the following issues associated with land use plans in rural areas:
     (a) The planned amount of residential development in rural areas of counties that will not be served by existing water purveyors;
     (b) The water demand necessary to serve residential development, including water for both potable and nonpotable uses; and
     (c) Whether the water demand necessary under (b) of this subsection is available based on water right permit decisions or instream flow rules adopted by the department of ecology.
     (3)(a) The comparative review must also identify and report on mechanisms and strategies that could be implemented in rural areas that would assist in providing the water supply necessary to meet planned levels of rural growth.
     (b) The comparative report must also report on how the following mechanisms may be implemented in each geographic area under review:
     (i) Provision of water by water purveyors at rural levels of service that would be consistent with the terms "rural character," "rural development," and "rural governmental services" as defined in RCW 36.70A.030;
     (ii) Water right transfers;
     (iii) A mechanism for banking water;
     (iv) Water exchanges;
     (v) Mitigation for consumptive water uses;
     (vi) Water storage;
     (vii) Purchase or transfer of development rights; and
     (viii) Other programs, mechanisms, and strategies identified in the report.
     (4) In identifying and reporting on mechanisms and strategies to address rural water supply issues, the comparative review must also report on:
     (a) Mechanisms and strategies being implemented in other states to address similar issues; and
     (b) The adequacy of financial resources and technical expertise at the county level to implement the types of programs identified in subsection (3)(b) of this section.
     (5) This section expires July 1, 2012.

NEW SECTION.  Sec. 3   If specific funding for the purposes of this act, referencing this act by bill or chapter number, is not provided by June 30, 2010, in the omnibus appropriations act, this act is null and void.

NEW SECTION.  Sec. 4   The comparative review in section 2 of this act may not be used for any purpose in land use or water resource planning processes, quasi-judicial appeals, or judicial review proceedings.