Passed by the Senate March 8, 2010 YEAS 43   ________________________________________ President of the Senate Passed by the House March 2, 2010 YEAS 68   ________________________________________ Speaker of the House of Representatives | I, Thomas Hoemann, Secretary of the Senate of the State of Washington, do hereby certify that the attached is SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL 6214 as passed by the Senate and the House of Representatives on the dates hereon set forth. ________________________________________ Secretary | |
Approved ________________________________________ Governor of the State of Washington | Secretary of State State of Washington |
State of Washington | 61st Legislature | 2010 Regular Session |
READ FIRST TIME 02/01/10.
AN ACT Relating to restructuring three growth management hearings boards into one board; amending RCW 36.70A.130, 36.70A.172, 36.70A.250, 36.70A.260, 36.70A.270, 36.70A.280, 36.70A.290, 36.70A.295, 36.70A.302, 36.70A.310, 36.70A.3201, 36.70A.345, 90.58.190, 34.05.518, and 34.12.020; reenacting and amending RCW 36.70A.110; creating a new section; and providing an effective date.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON:
Sec. 1 RCW 36.70A.110 and 2009 c 342 s 1 and 2009 c 121 s 1 are
each reenacted and amended to read as follows:
(1) Each county that is required or chooses to plan under RCW
36.70A.040 shall designate an urban growth area or areas within which
urban growth shall be encouraged and outside of which growth can occur
only if it is not urban in nature. Each city that is located in such
a county shall be included within an urban growth area. An urban
growth area may include more than a single city. An urban growth area
may include territory that is located outside of a city only if such
territory already is characterized by urban growth whether or not the
urban growth area includes a city, or is adjacent to territory already
characterized by urban growth, or is a designated new fully contained
community as defined by RCW 36.70A.350.
(2) Based upon the growth management population projection made for
the county by the office of financial management, the county and each
city within the county shall include areas and densities sufficient to
permit the urban growth that is projected to occur in the county or
city for the succeeding twenty-year period, except for those urban
growth areas contained totally within a national historical reserve.
As part of this planning process, each city within the county must
include areas sufficient to accommodate the broad range of needs and
uses that will accompany the projected urban growth including, as
appropriate, medical, governmental, institutional, commercial, service,
retail, and other nonresidential uses.
Each urban growth area shall permit urban densities and shall
include greenbelt and open space areas. In the case of urban growth
areas contained totally within a national historical reserve, the city
may restrict densities, intensities, and forms of urban growth as
determined to be necessary and appropriate to protect the physical,
cultural, or historic integrity of the reserve. An urban growth area
determination may include a reasonable land market supply factor and
shall permit a range of urban densities and uses. In determining this
market factor, cities and counties may consider local circumstances.
Cities and counties have discretion in their comprehensive plans to
make many choices about accommodating growth.
Within one year of July 1, 1990, each county that as of June 1,
1991, was required or chose to plan under RCW 36.70A.040, shall begin
consulting with each city located within its boundaries and each city
shall propose the location of an urban growth area. Within sixty days
of the date the county legislative authority of a county adopts its
resolution of intention or of certification by the office of financial
management, all other counties that are required or choose to plan
under RCW 36.70A.040 shall begin this consultation with each city
located within its boundaries. The county shall attempt to reach
agreement with each city on the location of an urban growth area within
which the city is located. If such an agreement is not reached with
each city located within the urban growth area, the county shall
justify in writing why it so designated the area an urban growth area.
A city may object formally with the department over the designation of
the urban growth area within which it is located. Where appropriate,
the department shall attempt to resolve the conflicts, including the
use of mediation services.
(3) Urban growth should be located first in areas already
characterized by urban growth that have adequate existing public
facility and service capacities to serve such development, second in
areas already characterized by urban growth that will be served
adequately by a combination of both existing public facilities and
services and any additional needed public facilities and services that
are provided by either public or private sources, and third in the
remaining portions of the urban growth areas. Urban growth may also be
located in designated new fully contained communities as defined by RCW
36.70A.350.
(4) In general, cities are the units of local government most
appropriate to provide urban governmental services. In general, it is
not appropriate that urban governmental services be extended to or
expanded in rural areas except in those limited circumstances shown to
be necessary to protect basic public health and safety and the
environment and when such services are financially supportable at rural
densities and do not permit urban development.
(5) On or before October 1, 1993, each county that was initially
required to plan under RCW 36.70A.040(1) shall adopt development
regulations designating interim urban growth areas under this chapter.
Within three years and three months of the date the county legislative
authority of a county adopts its resolution of intention or of
certification by the office of financial management, all other counties
that are required or choose to plan under RCW 36.70A.040 shall adopt
development regulations designating interim urban growth areas under
this chapter. Adoption of the interim urban growth areas may only
occur after public notice; public hearing; and compliance with the
state environmental policy act, chapter 43.21C RCW, and under this
section. Such action may be appealed to the ((appropriate)) growth
management hearings board under RCW 36.70A.280. Final urban growth
areas shall be adopted at the time of comprehensive plan adoption under
this chapter.
(6) Each county shall include designations of urban growth areas in
its comprehensive plan.
(7) An urban growth area designated in accordance with this section
may include within its boundaries urban service areas or potential
annexation areas designated for specific cities or towns within the
county.
(8)(a) Except as provided in (b) of this subsection, the expansion
of an urban growth area is prohibited into the one hundred year
floodplain of any river or river segment that: (i) Is located west of
the crest of the Cascade mountains; and (ii) has a mean annual flow of
one thousand or more cubic feet per second as determined by the
department of ecology.
(b) Subsection (8)(a) of this section does not apply to:
(i) Urban growth areas that are fully contained within a floodplain
and lack adjacent buildable areas outside the floodplain;
(ii) Urban growth areas where expansions are precluded outside
floodplains because:
(A) Urban governmental services cannot be physically provided to
serve areas outside the floodplain; or
(B) Expansions outside the floodplain would require a river or
estuary crossing to access the expansion; or
(iii) Urban growth area expansions where:
(A) Public facilities already exist within the floodplain and the
expansion of an existing public facility is only possible on the land
to be included in the urban growth area and located within the
floodplain; or
(B) Urban development already exists within a floodplain as of July
26, 2009, and is adjacent to, but outside of, the urban growth area,
and the expansion of the urban growth area is necessary to include such
urban development within the urban growth area; or
(C) The land is owned by a jurisdiction planning under this chapter
or the rights to the development of the land have been permanently
extinguished, and the following criteria are met:
(I) The permissible use of the land is limited to one of the
following: Outdoor recreation; environmentally beneficial projects,
including but not limited to habitat enhancement or environmental
restoration; storm water facilities; flood control facilities; or
underground conveyances; and
(II) The development and use of such facilities or projects will
not decrease flood storage, increase storm water runoff, discharge
pollutants to fresh or salt waters during normal operations or floods,
or increase hazards to people and property.
(c) For the purposes of this subsection (8), "one hundred year
floodplain" means the same as "special flood hazard area" as set forth
in WAC 173-158-040 as it exists on July 26, 2009.
Sec. 2 RCW 36.70A.130 and 2009 c 479 s 23 are each amended to
read as follows:
(1)(a) Each comprehensive land use plan and development regulations
shall be subject to continuing review and evaluation by the county or
city that adopted them. Except as otherwise provided, a county or city
shall take legislative action to review and, if needed, revise its
comprehensive land use plan and development regulations to ensure the
plan and regulations comply with the requirements of this chapter
according to the time periods specified in subsection (4) of this
section.
(b) Except as otherwise provided, a county or city not planning
under RCW 36.70A.040 shall take action to review and, if needed, revise
its policies and development regulations regarding critical areas and
natural resource lands adopted according to this chapter to ensure
these policies and regulations comply with the requirements of this
chapter according to the time periods specified in subsection (4) of
this section. Legislative action means the adoption of a resolution or
ordinance following notice and a public hearing indicating at a
minimum, a finding that a review and evaluation has occurred and
identifying the revisions made, or that a revision was not needed and
the reasons therefor.
(c) The review and evaluation required by this subsection may be
combined with the review required by subsection (3) of this section.
The review and evaluation required by this subsection shall include,
but is not limited to, consideration of critical area ordinances and,
if planning under RCW 36.70A.040, an analysis of the population
allocated to a city or county from the most recent ten-year population
forecast by the office of financial management.
(d) Any amendment of or revision to a comprehensive land use plan
shall conform to this chapter. Any amendment of or revision to
development regulations shall be consistent with and implement the
comprehensive plan.
(2)(a) Each county and city shall establish and broadly disseminate
to the public a public participation program consistent with RCW
36.70A.035 and 36.70A.140 that identifies procedures and schedules
whereby updates, proposed amendments, or revisions of the comprehensive
plan are considered by the governing body of the county or city no more
frequently than once every year. "Updates" means to review and revise,
if needed, according to subsection (1) of this section, and the time
periods specified in subsection (4) of this section or in accordance
with the provisions of subsections (5) and (8) of this section.
Amendments may be considered more frequently than once per year under
the following circumstances:
(i) The initial adoption of a subarea plan that does not modify the
comprehensive plan policies and designations applicable to the subarea;
(ii) The adoption or amendment of a shoreline master program under
the procedures set forth in chapter 90.58 RCW;
(iii) The amendment of the capital facilities element of a
comprehensive plan that occurs concurrently with the adoption or
amendment of a county or city budget;
(iv) Until June 30, 2006, the designation of recreational lands
under RCW 36.70A.1701. A county amending its comprehensive plan
pursuant to this subsection (2)(a)(iv) may not do so more frequently
than every eighteen months; and
(v) The adoption of comprehensive plan amendments necessary to
enact a planned action under RCW 43.21C.031(2), provided that
amendments are considered in accordance with the public participation
program established by the county or city under this subsection (2)(a)
and all persons who have requested notice of a comprehensive plan
update are given notice of the amendments and an opportunity to
comment.
(b) Except as otherwise provided in (a) of this subsection, all
proposals shall be considered by the governing body concurrently so the
cumulative effect of the various proposals can be ascertained.
However, after appropriate public participation a county or city may
adopt amendments or revisions to its comprehensive plan that conform
with this chapter whenever an emergency exists or to resolve an appeal
of a comprehensive plan filed with ((a)) the growth management hearings
board or with the court.
(3)(a) Each county that designates urban growth areas under RCW
36.70A.110 shall review, at least every ten years, its designated urban
growth area or areas, and the densities permitted within both the
incorporated and unincorporated portions of each urban growth area. In
conjunction with this review by the county, each city located within an
urban growth area shall review the densities permitted within its
boundaries, and the extent to which the urban growth occurring within
the county has located within each city and the unincorporated portions
of the urban growth areas.
(b) The county comprehensive plan designating urban growth areas,
and the densities permitted in the urban growth areas by the
comprehensive plans of the county and each city located within the
urban growth areas, shall be revised to accommodate the urban growth
projected to occur in the county for the succeeding twenty-year period.
The review required by this subsection may be combined with the review
and evaluation required by RCW 36.70A.215.
(4) The department shall establish a schedule for counties and
cities to take action to review and, if needed, revise their
comprehensive plans and development regulations to ensure the plan and
regulations comply with the requirements of this chapter. Except as
provided in subsections (5) and (8) of this section, the schedule
established by the department shall provide for the reviews and
evaluations to be completed as follows:
(a) On or before December 1, 2004, and every seven years
thereafter, for Clallam, Clark, Jefferson, King, Kitsap, Pierce,
Snohomish, Thurston, and Whatcom counties and the cities within those
counties;
(b) On or before December 1, 2005, and every seven years
thereafter, for Cowlitz, Island, Lewis, Mason, San Juan, Skagit, and
Skamania counties and the cities within those counties;
(c) On or before December 1, 2006, and every seven years
thereafter, for Benton, Chelan, Douglas, Grant, Kittitas, Spokane, and
Yakima counties and the cities within those counties; and
(d) On or before December 1, 2007, and every seven years
thereafter, for Adams, Asotin, Columbia, Ferry, Franklin, Garfield,
Grays Harbor, Klickitat, Lincoln, Okanogan, Pacific, Pend Oreille,
Stevens, Wahkiakum, Walla Walla, and Whitman counties and the cities
within those counties.
(5)(a) Nothing in this section precludes a county or city from
conducting the review and evaluation required by this section before
the time limits established in subsection (4) of this section.
Counties and cities may begin this process early and may be eligible
for grants from the department, subject to available funding, if they
elect to do so.
(b) A county that is subject to a schedule established by the
department under subsection (4)(b) through (d) of this section and
meets the following criteria may comply with the requirements of this
section at any time within the thirty-six months following the date
established in the applicable schedule: The county has a population of
less than fifty thousand and has had its population increase by no more
than seventeen percent in the ten years preceding the date established
in the applicable schedule as of that date.
(c) A city that is subject to a schedule established by the
department under subsection (4)(b) through (d) of this section and
meets the following criteria may comply with the requirements of this
section at any time within the thirty-six months following the date
established in the applicable schedule: The city has a population of
no more than five thousand and has had its population increase by the
greater of either no more than one hundred persons or no more than
seventeen percent in the ten years preceding the date established in
the applicable schedule as of that date.
(d) State agencies are encouraged to provide technical assistance
to the counties and cities in the review of critical area ordinances,
comprehensive plans, and development regulations.
(6) A county or city subject to the time periods in subsection
(4)(a) of this section that, pursuant to an ordinance adopted by the
county or city establishing a schedule for periodic review of its
comprehensive plan and development regulations, has conducted a review
and evaluation of its comprehensive plan and development regulations
and, on or after January 1, 2001, has taken action in response to that
review and evaluation shall be deemed to have conducted the first
review required by subsection (4)(a) of this section. Subsequent
review and evaluation by the county or city of its comprehensive plan
and development regulations shall be conducted in accordance with the
time periods established under subsection (4)(a) of this section.
(7) The requirements imposed on counties and cities under this
section shall be considered "requirements of this chapter" under the
terms of RCW 36.70A.040(1). Only those counties and cities: (a)
Complying with the schedules in this section; (b) demonstrating
substantial progress towards compliance with the schedules in this
section for development regulations that protect critical areas; or (c)
complying with the extension provisions of subsection (5)(b) or (c) of
this section may receive grants, loans, pledges, or financial
guarantees under chapter 43.155 or 70.146 RCW. A county or city that
is fewer than twelve months out of compliance with the schedules in
this section for development regulations that protect critical areas is
making substantial progress towards compliance. Only those counties
and cities in compliance with the schedules in this section may receive
preference for grants or loans subject to the provisions of RCW
43.17.250.
(8) Except as provided in subsection (5)(b) and (c) of this
section:
(a) Counties and cities required to satisfy the requirements of
this section according to the schedule established by subsection (4)(b)
through (d) of this section may comply with the requirements of this
section for development regulations that protect critical areas one
year after the dates established in subsection (4)(b) through (d) of
this section;
(b) Counties and cities complying with the requirements of this
section one year after the dates established in subsection (4)(b)
through (d) of this section for development regulations that protect
critical areas shall be deemed in compliance with the requirements of
this section; and
(c) This subsection (8) applies only to the counties and cities
specified in subsection (4)(b) through (d) of this section, and only to
the requirements of this section for development regulations that
protect critical areas that must be satisfied by December 1, 2005,
December 1, 2006, and December 1, 2007.
(9) Notwithstanding subsection (8) of this section and the
substantial progress provisions of subsections (7) and (10) of this
section, only those counties and cities complying with the schedule in
subsection (4) of this section, or the extension provisions of
subsection (5)(b) or (c) of this section, may receive preferences for
grants, loans, pledges, or financial guarantees under chapter 43.155 or
70.146 RCW.
(10) Until December 1, 2005, and notwithstanding subsection (7) of
this section, a county or city subject to the time periods in
subsection (4)(a) of this section demonstrating substantial progress
towards compliance with the schedules in this section for its
comprehensive land use plan and development regulations may receive
grants, loans, pledges, or financial guarantees under chapter 43.155 or
70.146 RCW. A county or city that is fewer than twelve months out of
compliance with the schedules in this section for its comprehensive
land use plan and development regulations is deemed to be making
substantial progress towards compliance.
Sec. 3 RCW 36.70A.172 and 1995 c 347 s 105 are each amended to
read as follows:
(1) In designating and protecting critical areas under this
chapter, counties and cities shall include the best available science
in developing policies and development regulations to protect the
functions and values of critical areas. In addition, counties and
cities shall give special consideration to conservation or protection
measures necessary to preserve or enhance anadromous fisheries.
(2) If it determines that advice from scientific or other experts
is necessary or will be of substantial assistance in reaching its
decision, ((a)) the growth management hearings board may retain
scientific or other expert advice to assist in reviewing a petition
under RCW 36.70A.290 that involves critical areas.
Sec. 4 RCW 36.70A.250 and 1994 c 249 s 29 are each amended to
read as follows:
(((1) There are hereby created three growth management hearings
boards for the state of Washington. The boards shall be established as
follows:)) (1) A growth
management hearings board for the state of Washington is created. The
board shall consist of seven members qualified by experience or
training in matters pertaining to land use law or land use planning and
who have experience in the practical application of those matters. All
seven board members shall be appointed by the governor, two each
residing respectively in the Central Puget Sound, Eastern Washington,
and Western Washington regions, plus one board member residing within
the state of Washington. At least three members of the board shall be
admitted to practice law in this state, one each residing respectively
in the Central Puget Sound, Eastern Washington, and Western Washington
regions. At least three members of the board shall have been a city or
county elected official, one each residing respectively in the Central
Puget Sound, Eastern Washington, and Western Washington regions. After
expiration of the terms of board members on the previously existing
three growth management hearings boards, no more than four members of
the seven-member board may be members of the same major political
party. No more than two members at the time of their appointment or
during their term may reside in the same county.
(a) An Eastern Washington board with jurisdictional boundaries
including all counties that are required to or choose to plan under RCW
36.70A.040 and are located east of the crest of the Cascade mountains;
(b) A Central Puget Sound board with jurisdictional boundaries
including King, Pierce, Snohomish, and Kitsap counties; and
(c) A Western Washington board with jurisdictional boundaries
including all counties that are required or choose to plan under RCW
36.70A.040 and are located west of the crest of the Cascade mountains
and are not included in the Central Puget Sound board jurisdictional
boundaries. Skamania county, should it be required or choose to plan
under RCW 36.70A.040, may elect to be included within the
jurisdictional boundaries of either the Western or Eastern board.
(2) Each board shall only hear matters pertaining to the cities and
counties located within its jurisdictional boundaries.
(2) Each member of the board shall be appointed for a term of six
years. A vacancy shall be filled by appointment by the governor for
the unexpired portion of the term in which the vacancy occurs. Members
of the previously existing three growth management hearings boards
appointed before the effective date of this section shall complete
their staggered, six-year terms as members of the growth management
hearings board created under subsection (1) of this section. The
reduction from nine board members on the previously existing three
growth management hearings boards to seven total members on the growth
management hearings board shall be made through attrition, voluntary
resignation, or retirement.
Sec. 5 RCW 36.70A.260 and 1994 c 249 s 30 are each amended to
read as follows:
(((1) Each growth management hearings board shall consist of three
members qualified by experience or training in matters pertaining to
land use planning and residing within the jurisdictional boundaries of
the applicable board. At least one member of each board must be
admitted to practice law in this state and at least one member must
have been a city or county elected official. Each board shall be
appointed by the governor and not more than two members at the time of
appointment or during their term shall be members of the same political
party. No more than two members at the time of appointment or during
their term shall reside in the same county.)) (1) Each petition
for review that is filed with the growth management hearings board
shall be heard and decided by a regional panel of growth management
hearings board members. Regional panels shall be constituted as
follows:
(2) Each member of a board shall be appointed for a term of six
years. A vacancy shall be filled by appointment by the governor for
the unexpired portion of the term in which the vacancy occurs. The
terms of the first three members of a board shall be staggered so that
one member is appointed to serve until July 1, 1994, one member until
July 1, 1996, and one member until July 1, 1998.
(a) Central Puget Sound Region. A three-member Central Puget Sound
panel shall be selected to hear matters pertaining to cities and
counties located within the region comprised of King, Pierce,
Snohomish, and Kitsap counties.
(b) Eastern Washington Region. A three-member Eastern Washington
panel shall be selected to hear matters pertaining to cities and
counties that are required or choose to plan under RCW 36.70A.040 and
are located east of the crest of the Cascade mountains.
(c) Western Washington Region. A three-member Western Washington
panel shall be selected to hear matters pertaining to cities and
counties that are required or choose to plan under RCW 36.70A.040, are
located west of the crest of the Cascade mountains, and are not
included in the Central Puget Sound Region. Skamania county, if it is
required or chooses to plan under RCW 36.70A.040, may elect to be
included within either the Western Washington Region or the Eastern
Washington Region.
(2)(a) Each regional panel selected to hear and decide cases shall
consist of three board members, at least a majority of whom shall
reside within the region in which the case arose, unless such members
cannot sit on a particular case because of recusal or disqualification,
or unless the board administrative officer determines that there is an
emergency including, but not limited to, the unavailability of a board
member due to illness, absence, vacancy, or significant workload
imbalance. The presiding officer of each case shall reside within the
region in which the case arose, unless the board administrative officer
determines that there is an emergency.
(b) Except as provided otherwise in this subsection (2)(b), each
regional panel must: (i) Include one member admitted to practice law
in this state; (ii) include one member who has been a city or county
elected official; and (iii) reflect the political composition of the
board. The requirements of this subsection (2)(b) may be waived by the
board administrative officer due to member unavailability, significant
workload imbalances, or other reasons.
Sec. 6 RCW 36.70A.270 and 1997 c 429 s 11 are each amended to
read as follows:
((Each)) The growth management hearings board shall be governed by
the following rules on conduct and procedure:
(1) Any board member may be removed for inefficiency, malfeasance,
and misfeasance in office, under specific written charges filed by the
governor. The governor shall transmit such written charges to the
member accused and the chief justice of the supreme court. The chief
justice shall thereupon designate a tribunal composed of three judges
of the superior court to hear and adjudicate the charges. Removal of
any member of ((a)) the board by the tribunal shall disqualify such
member for reappointment.
(2) Each board member shall receive reimbursement for travel
expenses incurred in the discharge of his or her duties in accordance
with RCW 43.03.050 and 43.03.060. ((If it is determined that the
review boards shall operate on a full-time basis,)) Each member shall
receive an annual salary to be determined by the governor pursuant to
RCW 43.03.040. ((If it is determined that a review board shall operate
on a part-time basis, each member shall receive compensation pursuant
to RCW 43.03.250, provided such amount shall not exceed the amount that
would be set if they were a full-time board member.)) The principal
office of ((each)) the board shall be located ((by the governor within
the jurisdictional boundaries of each board. The boards shall operate
on either a part-time or full-time basis, as determined by the
governor)) in Olympia.
(3) Each board member shall not: (a) Be a candidate for or hold
any other public office or trust; (b) engage in any occupation or
business interfering with or inconsistent with his or her duty as a
board member; and (c) for a period of one year after the termination of
his or her board membership, act in a representative capacity before
the board on any matter.
(4) A majority of ((each)) the board shall constitute a quorum for
((making orders or decisions,)) adopting rules necessary for the
conduct of its powers and duties((,)) or transacting other official
business, and may act even though one position of the board is vacant.
One or more members may hold hearings and take testimony to be reported
for action by the board when authorized by rule or order of the board.
The board shall perform all the powers and duties specified in this
chapter or as otherwise provided by law.
(5) The board may appoint one or more hearing examiners to assist
the board in its hearing function, to make conclusions of law and
findings of fact and, if requested by the board, to make
recommendations to the board for decisions in cases before the board.
Such hearing examiners must have demonstrated knowledge of land use
planning and law. The board((s)) shall specify in ((their joint)) its
rules of practice and procedure, as required by subsection (7) of this
section, the procedure and criteria to be employed for designating
hearing examiners as a presiding officer. Hearing examiners selected
by ((a)) the board shall meet the requirements of subsection (3) of
this section. The findings and conclusions of the hearing examiner
shall not become final until they have been formally approved by the
board. This authorization to use hearing examiners does not waive the
requirement of RCW 36.70A.300 that final orders be issued within one
hundred eighty days of board receipt of a petition.
(6) ((Each)) The board shall make findings of fact and prepare a
written decision in each case decided by it, and such findings and
decision shall be effective upon being signed by two or more members of
the ((board)) regional panel deciding the particular case and upon
being filed at the board's principal office, and shall be open for
public inspection at all reasonable times.
(7) All proceedings before the board, any of its members, or a
hearing examiner appointed by the board shall be conducted in
accordance with such administrative rules of practice and procedure as
the board((s jointly)) prescribes. ((All three)) The board((s)) shall
((jointly meet to)) develop and adopt ((joint)) rules of practice and
procedure, including rules regarding expeditious and summary
disposition of appeals and the assignment of cases to regional panels.
The board((s)) shall publish such rules and decisions ((they)) it
renders and arrange for the reasonable distribution of the rules and
decisions. Except as it conflicts with specific provisions of this
chapter, the administrative procedure act, chapter 34.05 RCW, and
specifically including the provisions of RCW 34.05.455 governing ex
parte communications, shall govern the practice and procedure of the
board((s)).
(8) A board member or hearing examiner is subject to
disqualification under chapter 34.05 RCW. The ((joint)) rules of
practice of the board((s)) shall establish procedures by which a party
to a hearing conducted before the board may file with the board a
motion to disqualify, with supporting affidavit, against a board member
or hearing examiner assigned to preside at the hearing.
(9) ((The)) All members of the board((s)) shall meet ((jointly)) on
at least an annual basis with the objective of sharing information that
promotes the goals and purposes of this chapter.
(10) The board shall annually elect one of its members to be the
board administrative officer. The duties and responsibilities of the
administrative officer include handling day-to-day administrative,
budget, and personnel matters on behalf of the board, together with
making case assignments to board members in accordance with the board's
rules of procedure in order to achieve a fair and balanced workload
among all board members. The administrative officer of the board may
carry a reduced caseload to allow time for performing the
administrative work functions.
Sec. 7 RCW 36.70A.280 and 2008 c 289 s 5 are each amended to read
as follows:
(1) ((A)) The growth management hearings board shall hear and
determine only those petitions alleging either:
(a) That, except as provided otherwise by this subsection, a state
agency, county, or city planning under this chapter is not in
compliance with the requirements of this chapter, chapter 90.58 RCW as
it relates to the adoption of shoreline master programs or amendments
thereto, or chapter 43.21C RCW as it relates to plans, development
regulations, or amendments, adopted under RCW 36.70A.040 or chapter
90.58 RCW. Nothing in this subsection authorizes ((a)) the board to
hear petitions alleging noncompliance with RCW 36.70A.5801; or
(b) That the twenty-year growth management planning population
projections adopted by the office of financial management pursuant to
RCW 43.62.035 should be adjusted.
(2) A petition may be filed only by: (a) The state, or a county or
city that plans under this chapter; (b) a person who has participated
orally or in writing before the county or city regarding the matter on
which a review is being requested; (c) a person who is certified by the
governor within sixty days of filing the request with the board; or (d)
a person qualified pursuant to RCW 34.05.530.
(3) For purposes of this section "person" means any individual,
partnership, corporation, association, state agency, governmental
subdivision or unit thereof, or public or private organization or
entity of any character.
(4) To establish participation standing under subsection (2)(b) of
this section, a person must show that his or her participation before
the county or city was reasonably related to the person's issue as
presented to the board.
(5) When considering a possible adjustment to a growth management
planning population projection prepared by the office of financial
management, ((a)) the board shall consider the implications of any such
adjustment to the population forecast for the entire state.
The rationale for any adjustment that is adopted by ((a)) the board
must be documented and filed with the office of financial management
within ten working days after adoption.
If adjusted by ((a)) the board, a county growth management planning
population projection shall only be used for the planning purposes set
forth in this chapter and shall be known as ((a)) the "board adjusted
population projection." None of these changes shall affect the
official state and county population forecasts prepared by the office
of financial management, which shall continue to be used for state
budget and planning purposes.
Sec. 8 RCW 36.70A.290 and 1997 c 429 s 12 are each amended to
read as follows:
(1) All requests for review to ((a)) the growth management hearings
board shall be initiated by filing a petition that includes a detailed
statement of issues presented for resolution by the board. The board
shall render written decisions articulating the basis for its holdings.
The board shall not issue advisory opinions on issues not presented to
the board in the statement of issues, as modified by any prehearing
order.
(2) All petitions relating to whether or not an adopted
comprehensive plan, development regulation, or permanent amendment
thereto, is in compliance with the goals and requirements of this
chapter or chapter 90.58 or 43.21C RCW must be filed within sixty days
after publication by the legislative bodies of the county or city.
(a) Except as provided in (c) of this subsection, the date of
publication for a city shall be the date the city publishes the
ordinance, or summary of the ordinance, adopting the comprehensive plan
or development regulations, or amendment thereto, as is required to be
published.
(b) Promptly after adoption, a county shall publish a notice that
it has adopted the comprehensive plan or development regulations, or
amendment thereto.
Except as provided in (c) of this subsection, for purposes of this
section the date of publication for a county shall be the date the
county publishes the notice that it has adopted the comprehensive plan
or development regulations, or amendment thereto.
(c) For local governments planning under RCW 36.70A.040, promptly
after approval or disapproval of a local government's shoreline master
program or amendment thereto by the department of ecology as provided
in RCW 90.58.090, the local government shall publish a notice that the
shoreline master program or amendment thereto has been approved or
disapproved by the department of ecology. For purposes of this
section, the date of publication for the adoption or amendment of a
shoreline master program is the date the local government publishes
notice that the shoreline master program or amendment thereto has been
approved or disapproved by the department of ecology.
(3) Unless the board dismisses the petition as frivolous or finds
that the person filing the petition lacks standing, or the parties have
filed an agreement to have the case heard in superior court as provided
in RCW 36.70A.295, the board shall, within ten days of receipt of the
petition, set a time for hearing the matter.
(4) The board shall base its decision on the record developed by
the city, county, or the state and supplemented with additional
evidence if the board determines that such additional evidence would be
necessary or of substantial assistance to the board in reaching its
decision.
(5) The board, shall consolidate, when appropriate, all petitions
involving the review of the same comprehensive plan or the same
development regulation or regulations.
Sec. 9 RCW 36.70A.295 and 1997 c 429 s 13 are each amended to
read as follows:
(1) The superior court may directly review a petition for review
filed under RCW 36.70A.290 if all parties to the proceeding before the
board have agreed to direct review in the superior court. The
agreement of the parties shall be in writing and signed by all of the
parties to the proceeding or their designated representatives. The
agreement shall include the parties' agreement to proper venue as
provided in RCW 36.70A.300(5). The parties shall file their agreement
with the board within ten days after the date the petition is filed, or
if multiple petitions have been filed and the board has consolidated
the petitions pursuant to RCW 36.70A.300, within ten days after the
board serves its order of consolidation.
(2) Within ten days of receiving the timely and complete agreement
of the parties, the board shall file a certificate of agreement with
the designated superior court and shall serve the parties with copies
of the certificate. The superior court shall obtain exclusive
jurisdiction over a petition when it receives the certificate of
agreement. With the certificate of agreement the board shall also file
the petition for review, any orders entered by the board, all other
documents in the board's files regarding the action, and the written
agreement of the parties.
(3) For purposes of a petition that is subject to direct review,
the superior court's subject matter jurisdiction shall be equivalent to
that of the board. Consistent with the requirements of the superior
court civil rules, the superior court may consolidate a petition
subject to direct review under this section with a separate action
filed in the superior court.
(4)(a) Except as otherwise provided in (b) and (c) of this
subsection, the provisions of RCW 36.70A.280 through 36.70A.330, which
specify the nature and extent of board review, shall apply to the
superior court's review.
(b) The superior court:
(i) Shall not have jurisdiction to directly review or modify an
office of financial management population projection;
(ii) Except as otherwise provided in RCW 36.70A.300(2)(b), shall
render its decision on the petition within one hundred eighty days of
receiving the certification of agreement; and
(iii) Shall give a compliance hearing under RCW 36.70A.330(2) the
highest priority of all civil matters before the court.
(c) An aggrieved party may secure appellate review of a final
judgment of the superior court under this section by the supreme court
or the court of appeals. The review shall be secured in the manner
provided by law for review of superior court decisions in other civil
cases.
(5) If, following a compliance hearing, the court finds that the
state agency, county, or city is not in compliance with the court's
prior order, the court may use its remedial and contempt powers to
enforce compliance.
(6) The superior court shall transmit a copy of its decision and
order on direct review to the board, the department, and the governor.
If the court has determined that a county or city is not in compliance
with the provisions of this chapter, the governor may impose sanctions
against the county or city in the same manner as if ((a)) the board had
recommended the imposition of sanctions as provided in RCW 36.70A.330.
(7) After the court has assumed jurisdiction over a petition for
review under this section, the superior court civil rules shall govern
a request for intervention and all other procedural matters not
specifically provided for in this section.
Sec. 10 RCW 36.70A.302 and 1997 c 429 s 16 are each amended to
read as follows:
(1) ((A)) The board may determine that part or all of a
comprehensive plan or development regulations are invalid if the board:
(a) Makes a finding of noncompliance and issues an order of remand
under RCW 36.70A.300;
(b) Includes in the final order a determination, supported by
findings of fact and conclusions of law, that the continued validity of
part or parts of the plan or regulation would substantially interfere
with the fulfillment of the goals of this chapter; and
(c) Specifies in the final order the particular part or parts of
the plan or regulation that are determined to be invalid, and the
reasons for their invalidity.
(2) A determination of invalidity is prospective in effect and does
not extinguish rights that vested under state or local law before
receipt of the board's order by the city or county. The determination
of invalidity does not apply to a completed development permit
application for a project that vested under state or local law before
receipt of the board's order by the county or city or to related
construction permits for that project.
(3)(a) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (2) of this
section and (b) of this subsection, a development permit application
not vested under state or local law before receipt of the board's order
by the county or city vests to the local ordinance or resolution that
is determined by the board not to substantially interfere with the
fulfillment of the goals of this chapter.
(b) Even though the application is not vested under state or local
law before receipt by the county or city of the board's order, a
determination of invalidity does not apply to a development permit
application for:
(i) A permit for construction by any owner, lessee, or contract
purchaser of a single-family residence for his or her own use or for
the use of his or her family on a lot existing before receipt by the
county or city of the board's order, except as otherwise specifically
provided in the board's order to protect the public health and safety;
(ii) A building permit and related construction permits for
remodeling, tenant improvements, or expansion of an existing structure
on a lot existing before receipt of the board's order by the county or
city; and
(iii) A boundary line adjustment or a division of land that does
not increase the number of buildable lots existing before receipt of
the board's order by the county or city.
(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
(1) of this section whether the prior policies or regulations are valid
during the period of remand.
(5) A county or city subject to a determination of invalidity may
adopt interim controls and other measures to be in effect until it
adopts a comprehensive plan and development regulations that comply
with the requirements of this chapter. A development permit
application may vest under an interim control or measure upon
determination by the board that the interim controls and other measures
do not substantially interfere with the fulfillment of the goals of
this chapter.
(6) A county or city subject to a determination of invalidity may
file a motion requesting that the board clarify, modify, or rescind the
order. The board shall expeditiously schedule a hearing on the motion.
At the hearing on the motion, the parties may present information to
the board to clarify the part or parts of the comprehensive plan or
development regulations to which the final order applies. The board
shall issue any supplemental order based on the information provided at
the hearing not later than thirty days after the date of the hearing.
(7)(a) If a determination of invalidity has been made and the
county or city has enacted an ordinance or resolution amending the
invalidated part or parts of the plan or regulation or establishing
interim controls on development affected by the order of invalidity,
after a compliance hearing, the board shall modify or rescind the
determination of invalidity if it determines under the standard in
subsection (1) of this section that the plan or regulation, as amended
or made subject to such interim controls, will no longer substantially
interfere with the fulfillment of the goals of this chapter.
(b) If the board determines that part or parts of the plan or
regulation are no longer invalid as provided in this subsection, but
does not find that the plan or regulation is in compliance with all of
the requirements of this chapter, the board, in its order, may require
periodic reports to the board on the progress the jurisdiction is
making towards compliance.
Sec. 11 RCW 36.70A.310 and 1994 c 249 s 32 are each amended to
read as follows:
A request for review by the state to ((a)) the growth management
hearings board may be made only by the governor, or with the governor's
consent the head of an agency, or by the commissioner of public lands
as relating to state trust lands, for the review of whether: (1) A
county or city that is required or chooses to plan under RCW 36.70A.040
has failed to adopt a comprehensive plan or development regulations, or
county-wide planning policies within the time limits established by
this chapter; or (2) a county or city that is required or chooses to
plan under this chapter has adopted a comprehensive plan, development
regulations, or county-wide planning policies, that are not in
compliance with the requirements of this chapter.
Sec. 12 RCW 36.70A.3201 and 1997 c 429 s 2 are each amended to
read as follows:
((In amending RCW 36.70A.320(3) by section 20(3), chapter 429, Laws
of 1997,)) The legislature intends that the board((s apply)) applies a
more deferential standard of review to actions of counties and cities
than the preponderance of the evidence standard provided for under
existing law. In recognition of the broad range of discretion that may
be exercised by counties and cities consistent with the requirements of
this chapter, the legislature intends for the board((s)) to grant
deference to counties and cities in how they plan for growth,
consistent with the requirements and goals of this chapter. Local
comprehensive plans and development regulations require counties and
cities to balance priorities and options for action in full
consideration of local circumstances. The legislature finds that while
this chapter requires local planning to take place within a framework
of state goals and requirements, the ultimate burden and responsibility
for planning, harmonizing the planning goals of this chapter, and
implementing a county's or city's future rests with that community.
Sec. 13 RCW 36.70A.345 and 1994 c 249 s 33 are each amended to
read as follows:
The governor may impose a sanction or sanctions specified under RCW
36.70A.340 on: (1) A county or city that fails to designate critical
areas, agricultural lands, forest lands, or mineral resource lands
under RCW 36.70A.170 by the date such action was required to have been
taken; (2) a county or city that fails to adopt development regulations
under RCW 36.70A.060 protecting critical areas or conserving
agricultural lands, forest lands, or mineral resource lands by the date
such action was required to have been taken; (3) a county that fails to
designate urban growth areas under RCW 36.70A.110 by the date such
action was required to have been taken; and (4) a county or city that
fails to adopt its comprehensive plan or development regulations when
such actions are required to be taken.
Imposition of a sanction or sanctions under this section shall be
preceded by written findings by the governor, that either the county or
city is not proceeding in good faith to meet the requirements of the
act; or that the county or city has unreasonably delayed taking the
required action. The governor shall consult with and communicate his
or her findings to the ((appropriate)) growth management hearings board
prior to imposing the sanction or sanctions. For those counties or
cities that are not required to plan or have not opted in, the governor
in imposing sanctions shall consider the size of the jurisdiction
relative to the requirements of this chapter and the degree of
technical and financial assistance provided.
Sec. 14 RCW 90.58.190 and 2003 c 321 s 4 are each amended to read
as follows:
(1) The appeal of the department's decision to adopt a master
program or amendment pursuant to RCW 90.58.070(2) or 90.58.090(5) is
governed by RCW 34.05.510 through 34.05.598.
(2)(a) The department's decision to approve, reject, or modify a
proposed master program or amendment adopted by a local government
planning under RCW 36.70A.040 shall be appealed to the growth
management hearings board ((with jurisdiction over the local
government)). The appeal shall be initiated by filing a petition as
provided in RCW 36.70A.250 through 36.70A.320.
(b) If the appeal to the growth management hearings board concerns
shorelines, the growth management hearings board shall review the
proposed master program or amendment solely for compliance with the
requirements of this chapter, the policy of RCW 90.58.020 and the
applicable guidelines, the internal consistency provisions of RCW
36.70A.070, 36.70A.040(4), 35.63.125, and 35A.63.105, and chapter
43.21C RCW as it relates to the adoption of master programs and
amendments under chapter 90.58 RCW.
(c) If the appeal to the growth management hearings board concerns
a shoreline of statewide significance, the board shall uphold the
decision by the department unless the board, by clear and convincing
evidence, determines that the decision of the department is
inconsistent with the policy of RCW 90.58.020 and the applicable
guidelines.
(d) The appellant has the burden of proof in all appeals to the
growth management hearings board under this subsection.
(e) Any party aggrieved by a final decision of ((a)) the growth
management hearings board under this subsection may appeal the decision
to superior court as provided in RCW 36.70A.300.
(3)(a) The department's decision to approve, reject, or modify a
proposed master program or master program amendment by a local
government not planning under RCW 36.70A.040 shall be appealed to the
shorelines hearings board by filing a petition within thirty days of
the date of the department's written notice to the local government of
the department's decision to approve, reject, or modify a proposed
master program or master program amendment as provided in RCW
90.58.090(2).
(b) In an appeal relating to shorelines, the shorelines hearings
board shall review the proposed master program or master program
amendment and, after full consideration of the presentations of the
local government and the department, shall determine the validity of
the local government's master program or amendment in light of the
policy of RCW 90.58.020 and the applicable guidelines.
(c) In an appeal relating to shorelines of statewide significance,
the shorelines hearings board shall uphold the decision by the
department unless the board determines, by clear and convincing
evidence that the decision of the department is inconsistent with the
policy of RCW 90.58.020 and the applicable guidelines.
(d) Review by the shorelines hearings board shall be considered an
adjudicative proceeding under chapter 34.05 RCW, the Administrative
Procedure Act. The aggrieved local government shall have the burden of
proof in all such reviews.
(e) Whenever possible, the review by the shorelines hearings board
shall be heard within the county where the land subject to the proposed
master program or master program amendment is primarily located. The
department and any local government aggrieved by a final decision of
the hearings board may appeal the decision to superior court as
provided in chapter 34.05 RCW.
(4) A master program amendment shall become effective after the
approval of the department or after the decision of the shorelines
hearings board to uphold the master program or master program
amendment, provided that the board may remand the master program or
master program adjustment to the local government or the department for
modification prior to the final adoption of the master program or
master program amendment.
Sec. 15 RCW 34.05.518 and 2003 c 393 s 16 are each amended to
read as follows:
(1) The final decision of an administrative agency in an
adjudicative proceeding under this chapter may, except as otherwise
provided in chapter 43.21L RCW, be directly reviewed by the court of
appeals either (a) upon certification by the superior court pursuant to
this section or (b) if the final decision is from an environmental
board as defined in subsection (3) of this section, upon acceptance by
the court of appeals after a certificate of appealability has been
filed by the environmental board that rendered the final decision.
(2) For direct review upon certification by the superior court, an
application for direct review must be filed with the superior court
within thirty days of the filing of the petition for review in superior
court. The superior court may certify a case for direct review only if
the judicial review is limited to the record of the agency proceeding
and the court finds that:
(a) Fundamental and urgent issues affecting the future
administrative process or the public interest are involved which
require a prompt determination;
(b) Delay in obtaining a final and prompt determination of such
issues would be detrimental to any party or the public interest;
(c) An appeal to the court of appeals would be likely regardless of
the determination in superior court; and
(d) The appellate court's determination in the proceeding would
have significant precedential value.
Procedures for certification shall be established by court rule.
(3)(a) For the purposes of direct review of final decisions of
environmental boards, environmental boards include those boards
identified in RCW 43.21B.005 and the growth management hearings
board((s)) as identified in RCW 36.70A.250.
(b) An environmental board may issue a certificate of appealability
if it finds that delay in obtaining a final and prompt determination of
the issues would be detrimental to any party or the public interest and
either:
(i) Fundamental and urgent statewide or regional issues are raised;
or
(ii) The proceeding is likely to have significant precedential
value.
(4) The environmental board shall state in the certificate of
appealability which criteria it applied, explain how that criteria was
met, and file with the certificate a copy of the final decision.
(5) For an appellate court to accept direct review of a final
decision of an environmental board, it shall consider the same criteria
outlined in subsection (3) of this section, except as otherwise
provided in chapter 43.21L RCW.
(6) The procedures for direct review of final decisions of
environmental boards include:
(a) Within thirty days after filing the petition for review with
the superior court, a party may file an application for direct review
with the superior court and serve the appropriate environmental board
and all parties of record. The application shall request the
environmental board to file a certificate of appealability.
(b) If an issue on review is the jurisdiction of the environmental
board, the board may file an application for direct review on that
issue.
(c) The environmental board shall have thirty days to grant or deny
the request for a certificate of appealability and its decision shall
be filed with the superior court and served on all parties of record.
(d) If a certificate of appealability is issued, the parties shall
have fifteen days from the date of service to file a notice of
discretionary review in the superior court, and the notice shall
include a copy of the certificate of appealability and a copy of the
final decision.
(e) If the appellate court accepts review, the certificate of
appealability shall be transmitted to the court of appeals as part of
the certified record.
(f) If a certificate of appealability is denied, review shall be by
the superior court. The superior court's decision may be appealed to
the court of appeals.
Sec. 16 RCW 34.12.020 and 2002 c 354 s 226 are each amended to
read as follows:
Unless the context clearly requires otherwise, the definitions in
this section apply throughout this chapter.
(1) "Office" means the office of administrative hearings.
(2) "Administrative law judge" means any person appointed by the
chief administrative law judge to conduct or preside over hearings as
provided in this chapter.
(3) "Hearing" means an adjudicative proceeding within the meaning
of RCW 34.05.010(1) conducted by a state agency under RCW 34.05.413
through 34.05.476.
(4) "State agency" means any state board, commission, department,
or officer authorized by law to make rules or to conduct adjudicative
proceedings, except those in the legislative or judicial branches, the
growth management hearings board((s)), the utilities and transportation
commission, the pollution control hearings board, the shorelines
hearings board, the forest practices appeals board, the environmental
hearings office, the board of industrial insurance appeals, the
Washington personnel resources board, the public employment relations
commission, and the board of tax appeals.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 17 (1) The three growth management hearings
boards are abolished and their powers, duties, and functions are
transferred to the growth management hearings board.
(2) All reports, documents, surveys, books, records, files, papers,
or written material in the possession of the three growth management
hearings boards must be delivered to the custody of the growth
management hearings board. All office furnishings, office equipment,
motor vehicles, and other tangible property in the possession of the
three growth management hearings boards must be made available to the
growth management hearings board.
(3) All funds, credits, or other assets held by the three growth
management hearings boards must, on the effective date of this section,
be transferred to the growth management hearings board. Any
appropriations made to the three growth management hearings boards
must, on the effective date of this section, be transferred and
credited to the growth management hearings board. If any question
arises as to the transfer of any personnel, funds, books, documents,
records, papers, files, equipment, or other tangible property used or
held in the exercise of the powers and the performance of the duties
and functions transferred, the director of financial management shall
make a determination as to the proper allocation and certify the same
to the state agencies concerned.
(4) All employees of the three growth management hearings boards
are transferred to the growth management hearings board. All employees
classified under chapter 41.06 RCW, the state civil service law, are
assigned to the growth management hearings board to perform their usual
duties upon the same terms as formerly, without any loss of rights,
subject to any action that may be appropriate thereafter in accordance
with the laws and rules governing state civil service.
(5) This section may not be construed to alter any existing
collective bargaining unit or the provisions of any existing collective
bargaining agreement until the agreement has expired or until the
bargaining unit has been modified by action of the public employment
relations commission as provided by law.
(6) All rules and pending business before the three growth
management hearings boards must be continued and acted upon by the
growth management hearings board. All existing contracts and
obligations remain in full force and must be performed by the growth
management hearings board.
(7) The transfer of the powers, duties, functions, and personnel of
the three growth management hearings boards to the growth management
hearings board does not affect the validity of any act performed before
the effective date of this section.
(8) All cases decided and all orders previously issued by the three
growth management hearings boards remain in full force and effect and
are not affected by this act.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 18 This act takes effect July 1, 2010.