HOUSE BILL REPORT

SHB 2726

As Amended by the Senate

BYHouse Committee on Capital Facilities & Financing (originally sponsored by Representatives Schoon, Cantwell, Brumsickle, Moyer, Raiter, H. Myers, Hargrove, Smith, Nealey, Peery and Cooper)

Raising the debt funding limitation for certain port districts.

House Committe on Trade & Economic Development

Majority Report:  Do pass as amended.  (9)

      Signed by Representatives Cantwell, Chair; Wineberry, Vice Chair; Doty, Ranking Republican Member; Kirby, Moyer, Raiter, Rasmussen, Schoon and Tate.

House Staff:Charlie Gavigan (786-7340)

Rereferred House Committee on Capital Facilities & Financing

Majority Report:  The substitute bill be substituted therefor and the substitute bill do pass.  (11)

      Signed by Representatives H. Sommers, Chair; Rasmussen, Vice Chair; Schoon, Ranking Republican Member; Beck, Betrozoff, Bowman, Jacobsen, Peery, Rector, Wang and Winsley.

Minority Report:  Do not pass.  (1)

      Signed by Representative Heavey.

AS PASSED HOUSE FEBRUARY 12, 1990

BACKGROUND:

The Legislature authorized port districts in 1911.  These port districts are referred to as "special purpose districts" and are governed by elected port commissioners.  Port districts are authorized to develop a variety of facilities and services, primarily related to transportation and economic development.  Examples of transportation facilities developed by port districts include marine terminals, storage facilities, airports, and railroad facilities.  Examples of economic development activities undertaken by ports include industrial development sites, trade centers, and export trading companies.

Port district activities are financed through fees for services, fees for the use of port land and facilities, property tax levies, receipts from the issuance of a variety of municipal bonds, and grants and gifts.  Ports may also issue Industrial Revenue Bonds.

Indebtedness of a port district is not defined specifically in statute.

SUMMARY:

A county wide port district with a population of fewer than 2,500 people may exclude debt on property leased to the federal government from the port debt limit.

EFFECT OF SENATE AMENDMENTS:  A port district that is also an Associate Development Organization (local economic development organization) can spend at least $5,00 on promotional hosting, rather than at least $2,500.

Fiscal Note:      Not Requested.

House Committee ‑ Testified For:    (Trade & Economic Development)  Dave Rogers, Port of Garfield County; and Art Lehman, Port of Centralia.

(Capital Facilities & Financing)  Dave Rogers, Port of Garfield County.

House Committee - Testified Against:      (Trade & Economic Development)  No one.

(Capital Facilities & Financing)  No one.

House Committee - Testimony For:    (Trade & Economic Development)  Ports need more authority to issue general obligation bonds for economic development without having to get approval from voters.  The Port of Centralia has a mortgage on property that is leased to the federal government that should not be considered port debt.

(Capital Facilities & Financing)  The substitute bill resolves the Port of Garfield's problem of using all of its debt capacity on property leased to the federal government.

House Committee - Testimony Against:      (Trade & Economic Development)  None.

(Capital Facilities & Financing)  None.

VOTE ON FINAL PASSAGE:

      Yeas 98