SENATE BILL REPORT

SB 6566

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 Senate Committee On:

Local Government, February 4, 2020

Title: An act relating to amending the schedule for updates to the comprehensive plan of Kitsap county that are required under the growth management act to match the update schedules of other central Puget Sound counties.

Brief Description: Amending the schedule for updates to the comprehensive plan of Kitsap county that are required under the growth management act to match the update schedules of other central Puget Sound counties.

Sponsors: Senators Randall, Rolfes and Wilson, C.

Committee Activity: Local Government: 1/28/20, 2/04/20 [DPS, DNP].

Brief Summary of First Substitute Bill

Aligns Kitsap County with the Growth Management Act comprehensive plan review schedule of King, Pierce, and Snohomish counties.

SENATE COMMITTEE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT

Majority Report: That Substitute Senate Bill No. 6566 be substituted therefor, and the substitute bill do pass.

Signed by Senators Takko, Chair; Salomon, Vice Chair; Short, Ranking Member; Lovelett.

Minority Report: Do not pass.

Signed by Senator Honeyford.

Staff: Greg Vogel (786-7413)

Background: Growth Management Act. The Growth Management Act (GMA) is the comprehensive land use planning framework for counties and cities in Washington. Originally enacted in 1990 and 1991, the GMA establishes land use designation and environmental protection requirements for all Washington counties and cities. The GMA also establishes a significantly wider array of planning duties for 28 counties, and the cities within those counties, obligated to satisfy all planning requirements of the GMA.

The GMA directs jurisdictions fully planning under the GMA to adopt internally consistent comprehensive land use plans that are generalized, coordinated land use policy statements of the governing body. Comprehensive plans are implemented through locally adopted development regulations, both of which are subject to review and revision requirements prescribed in the GMA.

Counties and cities within those counties must 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 the GMA as follows:

on or before June 30, 2015, and every eight years thereafter, for King, Pierce, and Snohomish counties and the cities within those counties;
on or before June 30, 2016, and every eight years thereafter, for Clallam, Clark, Island, Jefferson, Kitsap, Mason, San Juan, Skagit, Thurston, and Whatcom counties and cities within those counties;
on or before June 30, 2017, and every eight years thereafter, for Benton, Chelan, Cowlitz, Douglas, Kittitas, Lewis, Skamania, Spokane, and Yakima counties and the cities within those counties; and
on or before June 30, 2018, and every eight years thereafter, for Adams, Asotin, Columbia, Ferry, Franklin, Garfield, Grant, Grays Harbor, Klickitat, Lincoln, Okanogan, Pacific, Pend Oreille, Stevens, Wahkiakum, Walla Walla, and Whitman counties and the cities within those counties.

Summary of Bill (First Substitute): Kitsap County is now required 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 the GMA on or before June 30, 2015, and every eight years thereafter, as opposed to on or before June 30, 2016, and every eight years thereafter. For the June 30, 2023 deadline, Kitsap County and the cities within Kitsap County may comply with the deadline any time within the 12 months following the deadline.

EFFECT OF CHANGES MADE BY LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE (First Substitute):

Removes provisions extending the time between comprehensive plan reviews from eight to ten years.
Specifies that for the June 30, 2023 review and revision deadline, Kitsap County and the cities within Kitsap County may comply with the deadline any time within the 12 months following the deadline.

Appropriation: None.

Fiscal Note: Available.

Creates Committee/Commission/Task Force that includes Legislative members: No.

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

Staff Summary of Public Testimony on Original Bill: The committee recommended a different version of the bill than what was heard. PRO: Moving the cycle to ten years would be more efficient and effective. It allows us to focus on building development and permits currently being processed. Aligning Kitsap with other PSRC jurisdictions is logical. Kitsap jurisdictions are putting forth transportation projects for funding that may not conform to the regional growth strategy. The proposed timing solves a big challenge related to census data and timing.

CON: We do believe Kitsap should fall in with the rest of the central Puget Sound counties but are opposed to the ten year planning timeline. In the last five years there has been a 50 percent increase in rent and a lot of population growth, but have seen a drop in people driving in peak hours, so we need to be able to adjust to this data. There also needs to be some manner of check in on meeting the requirements of the housing element.

Persons Testifying: PRO: Rob Putaansuu, Mayor, City of Port Orchard; Paul Jewell, Washington State Association of Counties; Tom McBride, Kitsap County. CON: Bryce Yadon, Futurewise.

Persons Signed In To Testify But Not Testifying: No one.