AN ACT Relating to local government hearing examiners; amending RCW 36.70.970, 35.63.130, 35A.63.170, and 58.17.330; adding a new section to chapter 36.70 RCW; adding a new section to chapter 35.63 RCW; adding a new section to chapter 35A.63 RCW; and adding a new section to chapter 58.17 RCW.

(1) As an alternative to those provisions of this chapter relating to powers or duties of the planning commission to hear and issue recommendations on applications for plat approval and applications for amendments to the zoning ordinance, the county legislative authority of a county that does not plan under RCW 36.70A.040 may adopt a hearing examiner system under which a hearing examiner or hearing examiners may hear and issue decisions on proposals for plat approval and for amendments to the zoning ordinance when the amendment which is applied for is not of general applicability. In addition, the legislative authority may vest in a hearing examiner the power to hear and decide those issues it believes should be reviewed and decided by a hearing examiner, including but not limited to:

Any county which vests in a hearing examiner the authority to hear and decide conditional uses and variances shall not be required to have a zoning adjuster or board of adjustment.

(2) Each county legislative authority electing to use a hearing examiner pursuant to this section shall by ordinance specify the legal effect of the decisions made by the examiner and whether, for appeals of administrative permit decisions, substantial weight must be given to the expertise of the administrative decision maker. Such legal effect may vary for the different classes of applications decided by the examiner but shall include one of the following:

(3) Each final decision of a hearing examiner shall be in writing and shall include findings and conclusions, based on the record, to support the decision. Such findings and conclusions shall also set forth the manner in which the decision would carry out and conform to the county's comprehensive plan and the county's development regulations. Each final decision of a hearing examiner, unless a longer period is mutually agreed to in writing by the applicant and the hearing examiner, shall be rendered within ten working days following conclusion of all testimony and hearings.

(1) The county legislative authority of a county fully planning under chapter 36.70A RCW must adopt a hearing examiner system under which a hearing examiner or hearing examiners hear and issue decisions on proposals for plat approval and for quasi-judicial development permit applications subject to the zoning ordinance. In addition, the legislative authority may vest in a hearing examiner the power to hear and decide those issues it believes should be reviewed and decided by a hearing examiner including, but not limited to:

(3) The legislative body shall adopt procedures to be followed by a hearing examiner ensuring all decisions are consistent with the future land use map of adopted comprehensive plans and comply with clear and objective development regulations.

(4) Any county which vests in a hearing examiner the authority to hear and decide conditional uses and variances is not required to have a zoning adjuster or board of adjustment.

(5) A county required to secure the services of a hearing examiner under this chapter may, at its discretion, require applicants to cover reasonable costs associated with the hearing examiner's services through application fees or other cost-recovery mechanisms. Any fees imposed under this subsection must be proportionate to the actual costs incurred and publicly disclosed in the jurisdiction's fee schedule.

(6) To enhance cost-effectiveness and improve operational efficiency, a county may enter into interlocal agreements with other jurisdictions or contract with regional or shared hearing examiners, in accordance with the provisions outlined in chapter 39.34 RCW.

(7) Each final decision of a hearing examiner must be in writing and include findings and conclusions, based on the record, to support the decision. Such findings and conclusions must also set forth the manner in which the decision is consistent with the future land use map of adopted comprehensive plans and complies with clear and objective development regulations. Each final decision of a hearing examiner, unless a longer period is mutually agreed to in writing by the applicant and the hearing examiner, must be rendered within 10 business days following the conclusion of all testimony and hearings.

(8) In the event of the absence or inability of a hearing examiner to act, the county planning director must document efforts to secure a hearing examiner and provide a written determination that no qualified examiner was reasonably available. The county planning director or other qualified planning official of the county may assume the duties and responsibilities designated to the hearing examiner under this chapter until such time that a hearing examiner is appointed and available to perform those duties. The authority of the county planning director or other qualified planning official of the county to assume the hearing examiner's duties is limited to the duration of the vacancy or unavailability of a hearing examiner.

(9) A county may establish a process in which an applicant may elect either legislative review or hearing examiner review for any land use application covered under this chapter.

(10) Counties that are required to submit their next comprehensive plan update in 2027 pursuant to RCW 36.70A.130 must adopt or amend by ordinance, and incorporate into their development regulations, zoning regulations, and other official controls, the requirements of this section in their next comprehensive plan update. All other counties must implement the requirements of this section within two years of the effective date of this section.

(1) As an alternative to those provisions of this chapter relating to powers or duties of the planning commission to hear and report on any proposal to amend a zoning ordinance, the legislative body of a city ((or county))with a population of 2,000 or less or county that does not plan under RCW 36.70A.040 may adopt a hearing examiner system under which a hearing examiner or hearing examiners may hear and decide applications for amending the zoning ordinance when the amendment which is applied for is not of general applicability. In addition, the legislative body may vest in a hearing examiner the power to hear and decide those issues it believes should be reviewed and decided by a hearing examiner, including but not limited to:

(a) Applications for conditional uses, variances, subdivisions, shoreline permits, or any other class of applications for or pertaining to development of land or land use;

(2) Each city or county legislative body electing to use a hearing examiner pursuant to this section shall by ordinance specify the legal effect of the decisions made by the examiner and whether, for appeals of administrative permit decisions, substantial weight must be given to the expertise of the administrative decision maker. The legal effect of such decisions may vary for the different classes of applications decided by the examiner but shall include one of the following:

(3) Each final decision of a hearing examiner shall be in writing and shall include findings and conclusions, based on the record, to support the decision. Such findings and conclusions shall also set forth the manner in which the decision would carry out and conform to the city's or county's comprehensive plan and the city's or county's development regulations. Each final decision of a hearing examiner, unless a longer period is mutually agreed to in writing by the applicant and the hearing examiner, shall be rendered within ((ten))10 working days following conclusion of all testimony and hearings.

(1) The legislative body of a city with a population greater than 2,000 or county fully planning under chapter 36.70A RCW must adopt a hearing examiner system under which a hearing examiner or hearing examiners hear and decide applications for plat approval and for quasi-judicial development permit applications subject to the zoning ordinance. In addition, the legislative body may vest in a hearing examiner the power to hear and decide those issues it believes should be reviewed and decided by a hearing examiner including, but not limited to:

(5) A city or county required to secure the services of a hearing examiner under this chapter may, at its discretion, require applicants to cover reasonable costs associated with the hearing examiner's services through application fees or other cost-recovery mechanisms. Any fees imposed under this subsection must be proportionate to the actual costs incurred and publicly disclosed in the jurisdiction's fee schedule.

(6) To enhance cost-effectiveness and improve operational efficiency, the legislative body may enter into interlocal agreements with other jurisdictions or contract with regional or shared hearing examiners, in accordance with the provisions outlined in chapter 39.34 RCW.

(8) In the event of the absence or inability of a hearing examiner to act, the city or county planning director must document efforts to secure a hearing examiner and provide a written determination that no qualified examiner was reasonably available. The city or county planning director or other qualified planning official of the city or county may assume the duties and responsibilities designated to the hearing examiner under this chapter until such time that a hearing examiner is appointed and available to perform those duties. The authority of the city or county planning director or other qualified planning official of the city or county to assume the hearing examiner's duties is limited to the duration of the vacancy or unavailability of a hearing examiner.

(9) A city or county may establish a process in which an applicant may elect either legislative review or hearing examiner review for any land use application covered under this chapter.

(10) Cities or counties that are required to submit their next comprehensive plan update in 2027 pursuant to RCW 36.70A.130 must adopt or amend by ordinance, and incorporate into their development regulations, zoning regulations, and other official controls, the requirements of this section in their next comprehensive plan update. All other cities and counties must implement the requirements of this section within two years of the effective date of this section.

(1) As an alternative to those provisions of this chapter relating to powers or duties of the planning commission to hear and report on any proposal to amend a zoning ordinance, the legislative body of a city with a population of 2,000 or less may adopt a hearing examiner system under which a hearing examiner or hearing examiners may hear and decide applications for amending the zoning ordinance when the amendment which is applied for is not of general applicability. In addition, the legislative body may vest in a hearing examiner the power to hear and decide those issues it believes should be reviewed and decided by a hearing examiner, including but not limited to:

(a) Applications for conditional uses, variances, subdivisions, shoreline permits, or any other class of applications for or pertaining to development of land or land use;

The legislative body shall prescribe procedures to be followed by a hearing examiner. If the legislative authority vests in a hearing examiner the authority to hear and decide variances, then the provisions of RCW 35A.63.110 shall not apply to the city.

(2) Each city legislative body electing to use a hearing examiner pursuant to this section shall by ordinance specify the legal effect of the decisions made by the examiner and whether, for appeals of administrative permit decisions, substantial weight must be given to the expertise of the administrative decision maker. The legal effect of such decisions may vary for the different classes of applications decided by the examiner but shall include one of the following:

(3) Each final decision of a hearing examiner shall be in writing and shall include findings and conclusions, based on the record, to support the decision. Such findings and conclusions shall also set forth the manner in which the decision would carry out and conform to the city's comprehensive plan and the city's development regulations. Each final decision of a hearing examiner, unless a longer period is mutually agreed to in writing by the applicant and the hearing examiner, shall be rendered within ten working days following conclusion of all testimony and hearings.

(1) The legislative body of a city with a population greater than 2,000 must adopt a hearing examiner system under which a hearing examiner or hearing examiners hear and decide applications for plat approval and for quasi-judicial development permit applications subject to the zoning ordinance. In addition, the legislative body may vest in a hearing examiner the power to hear and decide those issues it believes should be reviewed and decided by a hearing examiner including, but not limited to:

(4) The legislative body shall prescribe procedures to be followed by a hearing examiner. If the legislative authority vests in a hearing examiner the authority to hear and decide variances, then the provisions of RCW 35A.63.110 do not apply to the city.

(5) A city required to secure the services of a hearing examiner under this chapter may, at its discretion, require applicants to cover reasonable costs associated with the hearing examiner's services through application fees or other cost-recovery mechanisms. Any fees imposed under this subsection must be proportionate to the actual costs incurred and publicly disclosed in the jurisdiction's fee schedule.

(7) Each final decision of a hearing examiner must be in writing and include findings and conclusions, based on the record, to support the decision. Such findings and conclusions must also set forth the manner in which the decision is consistent with the future land use map of the city's comprehensive plan and the city's clear and objective development regulations. Each final decision of a hearing examiner, unless a longer period is mutually agreed to in writing by the applicant and the hearing examiner, must be rendered within 10 business days following the conclusion of all testimony and hearings.

(8) In the event of the absence or inability of a hearing examiner to act, the city planning director must document efforts to secure a hearing examiner and provide a written determination that no qualified examiner was reasonably available. The city planning director or other qualified planning official of the city may assume the duties and responsibilities designated to the hearing examiner under this chapter until such time that a hearing examiner is appointed and available to perform those duties. The authority of the city planning director or other qualified planning official of the city to assume the hearing examiner's duties is limited to the duration of the vacancy or unavailability of a hearing examiner.

(9) A city may establish a process in which an applicant may elect either legislative review or hearing examiner review for any land use application covered under this chapter.

(10) Cities that are required to submit their next comprehensive plan update in 2027 pursuant to RCW 36.70A.130 must adopt or amend by ordinance, and incorporate into their development regulations, zoning regulations, and other official controls, the requirements of this section in their next comprehensive plan update. All other cities must implement the requirements of this section within two years of the effective date of this section.

(1) As an alternative to those provisions of this chapter requiring a planning commission to hear and issue recommendations for plat approval, the county ((or city legislative body may adopt a hearing examiner system and shall specify by ordinance the legal effect of the decisions made by the examiner))legislative body of a county that does not plan under RCW 36.70A.040 or the city legislative body of a city with a population of 2,000 or less may adopt a hearing examiner system and shall specify by ordinance the legal effect of the decisions made by the examiner and whether, for appeals of administrative permit decisions, substantial weight must be given to the expertise of the administrative decision maker. The legal effect of such decisions shall include one of the following:

(2) Each final decision of a hearing examiner shall be in writing and shall include findings and conclusions, based on the record, to support the decision. Each final decision of a hearing examiner, unless a longer period is mutually agreed to by the applicant and the hearing examiner, shall be rendered within ((ten))10 working days following conclusion of all testimony and hearings.

(1) The county legislative body of a county fully planning under chapter 36.70A RCW or the city legislative body of a city with a population greater than 2,000 must adopt a hearing examiner system for all quasi-judicial land use decisions including, but not limited to, preliminary plats, planned unit developments, variances, and conditional use approvals.

(2) The decision of the hearing examiner constitutes the final decision on all quasi-judicial permit applications including, but not limited to, preliminary plat, planned unit development, variance, and conditional use applications, subject to appeal under chapter 36.70C RCW.

(5) The legislative authority required to secure the services of a hearing examiner under this chapter may, at its discretion, require applicants to cover reasonable costs associated with the hearing examiner's services through application fees or other cost-recovery mechanisms. Any fees imposed under this subsection must be proportionate to the actual costs incurred and publicly disclosed in the jurisdiction's fee schedule.

(6) To enhance cost-effectiveness and improve operational efficiency, the legislative authority may enter into interlocal agreements with other jurisdictions or contract with regional or shared hearing examiners, in accordance with the provisions outlined in chapter 39.34 RCW.

(7) Each final decision of a hearing examiner must be in writing and include findings and conclusions, based on the record, to support the decision. Each final decision of a hearing examiner, unless a longer period is mutually agreed to by the applicant and the hearing examiner, must be rendered within 10 business days following the conclusion of all testimony and hearings.

(9) A city or county may establish a process in which an applicant may elect either legislative review or hearing examiner review for any land use application covered under this chapter.