HOUSE BILL REPORT

SHB 1651

BYHouse Committee on Local Government (originally sponsored by Representatives Baugher, Chandler, McLean, Grant, Kremen, Jesernig, Rayburn, Rasmussen, Nealey, Braddock, Holland, Haugen, Beck, Zellinsky, Schmidt, Dorn, Basich, Raiter, Betrozoff, D. Sommers, Smith, Tate, Gallagher, Silver, Hargrove, Fuhrman, Day, Moyer, Hankins, Wood, Brooks, Walker, R. Meyers, Prince, Prentice, S. Wilson, Ebersole, Crane, Youngsman, May, Ballard, Brumsickle, Bowman, Winsley, Rector, Spanel and Inslee)

Authorizing counties, cities, and towns to elect to participate in state-wide flood plain management.

House Committe on Local Government

Majority Report:  The substitute bill be substituted therefor and the substitute bill do pass.  (14)

      Signed by Representatives Haugen, Chair; Cooper, Vice Chair; Ferguson, Ranking Republican Member; Horn, Nealey, Nelson, Nutley, Phillips, Raiter, Rayburn, Todd, Wolfe, Wood and Zellinsky.

House Staff:Steve Lundin (786-7127)

AS PASSED HOUSE MARCH 14, 1989

BACKGROUND:

The Legislature enacted legislation in 1935 establishing regulations restricting development of floodable areas.  The state regulations include some restrictions that are beyond the federal flood insurance standards.

Congress enacted the National Flood Control Insurance Act of 1968 that permits any county, city or town to participate in a federally insurance program for construction in floodable areas if certain requirements are met.  This program involves flood plain management regulations that are somewhat similar to the state requirements.  Failure to participate in the federal program can result in loss of federal moneys and a prohibition on the federally insured financial institutions lending money within the county, city or town.

SUMMARY:

The state's flood control regulations are the same as the minimum federal requirements under the national flood control insurance program.  However, the Department of Ecology may establish minimum state requirements for specific flood plains that exceed minimum federal requirements under the national flood insurance program if: (1) it certifies that the location of the 100 year flood plain is accurate; (2) negotiations with the affected county, city or town have been held; (3) public input has been obtained; and (4) it makes a finding that the increased requirements are necessary due to local circumstances and general public safety.

Counties, cities, and towns are permitted to adopt their own flood plain management requirements that exceed the minimum federal requirements of the national flood insurance program.

The Department of Ecology may assist local governments to locate the 100 year flood plain and petition the federal government to alter its designation of such an area.

A local flood control ordinance may not be disapproved by the Department of Ecology on the grounds that the ordinance does not require flood proofing or elevating the lower floor levels of residential structures.

The Department of Ecology no longer could review plans for structures to be located in the flood plain areas, other than in the floodway, or on banks, or in channels.

The Department of Ecology must consult with the public before adopting regulations under the state's flood plain management program.

Fiscal Note:      Not Requested.

House Committee ‑ Testified For:    Wes Johnson, Skokomish Flood Control Advisory Committee; Bill Jensen, East Valley Flood Plain Committee; Jim Schumacher, Central Washington Home Builders and East Valley Flood; Robert Larson, City of Stanwood; Larry Lauritzen, City of Aberdeen.

House Committee - Testified Against:      Chuck Steele, Federal Emergency Management Act (FEMA).

House Committee - Testimony For:    Many areas flood in this state.  It is important to have flood plain regulations.  The federal government has suggested that increased flood proofing requirements be adopted.  Some 22 states have adopted these higher standards.  Some 120 local governments have adopted these higher standards.  Millions of state dollars are spent in aiding flooded areas.

House Committee - Testimony Against:      All flood plain regulations are unconstitutional takings of property.  Department of Ecology requirements are resulting in lowered property values.  Why is the state encouraging growth and development if development in some areas is discouraged by these flood proofing requirements?  Let these areas flood, and clean up afterward.  Increased ramps are costly.  Some cities are located entirely within the 100 year flood plain, it is not appropriate to require flood proofing of new construction in such areas.